575.) proof that the story of the secret article was true.  The passage on which they relied was certainly not written by James, nor under his direction; and the authority of those portions of the Life which were not written by him, or under his direction, is but small.  Moreover, when we examine this passage, we shall find that it not only does not bear out the story of the secret article, but directly contradicts that story.  The compiler of the Life tells us that, after James had declared that he never would consent to purchase the English throne for his posterity by surrendering his own rights, nothing more was said on the subject.  Now it is quite certain that James in his Memorial published in March 1697, a Memorial which will be found both in the Life (ii. 566,) and in the Acts of the Peace of Ryswick, declared to all Europe that he never would stoop to so low and degenerate an action as to permit the Prince of Orange to reign on condition that the Prince of Wales should succeed.  It follows, therefore, that nothing can have been said on this subject after March 1697.  Nothing therefore, can have been said on this subject in the conferences between Boufflers and Portland, which did not begin till late in June.

Was there then absolutely no foundation for the story?  I believe that there was a foundation; and I have already related the facts on which this superstructure of fiction has been reared.  It is quite certain that Lewis, in 1693, intimated to the allies through the government of Sweden, his hope that some expedient might be devised which would reconcile the Princes who laid claim to the English crown.  The expedient at which be hinted was, no doubt, that the Prince of Wales should succeed William and Mary.  It is possible that, as the compiler of the Life of James says, William may have “show’d no great aversness” to this arrangement.  He had no reason, public or private, for preferring his sister in law to his brother in law, if his brother in law were bred a Protestant.  But William could do nothing without the concurrence of the Parliament; and it is in the highest degree improbable that either he or the Parliament would ever have consented to make the settlement of the English crown a matter of stipulation with France.  What he would or would not have done, however, we cannot with certainty pronounce.  For James proved impracticable.  Lewis consequently gave up all thoughts of effecting a compromise and promised, as we have seen, to recognise William as King of England “without any difficulty, restriction, condition, or reserve.”  It seems certain that, after this promise, which was made in December 1696, the Prince of Wales was not again mentioned in the negotiations.

FN 810 Prior Ms.; Williamson to Lexington, July 20/30. 1697; Williamson to Shrewsbury, July 23/Aug 2

FN 811 The note of the French ministers, dated July 10/20 1697, will be found in the Actes et Memoires.

FN 812 Monthly Mercuries for August and September, 1697.