The atrocious forgery of Young, was detected the instant he was confronted with the bishop of Rochester. Accordingly the prelate, and all those implicated in the same charge, except Marlborough, were released without delay. Even the arrested Jacobites were liberated, when the defeat of the french fleet off La Hogue had dissipated the alarm of invasion. But although the guilt of Young and his associate was legally * substantiated, and although they suffered a severe punishment for their offence, Marlborough was detained in custody till the 15th of June, the last day of the term. He was then admitted to bail in the court of King's-bench, on the surety of the earl of Shrewsbury, the marquess of Halifax, the earl of Carbury, and Mr. Boyle.

Still, however, some suspicion was entertained of his fidelity, or his enemies did not deem him sufficiently mortified; for on the 23d of June his own name, and those of his two sureties, the marquess of Halifax and the earl of Shrewsbury, were erased from the list of privy counsellors. Such severe measures created much dissatisfaction. Admiral Russel in particular, who had acquired additional consideration from his recent victory off La Hogue, strongly remonstrated with the king on

* The duchess asserts that when Young was about to suffer death, for another crime, he confessed with great contrition, that he had obtained the earl of Marlborough's seal and signature by writing to him under the name of a country gentleman, requesting the character of a domestic who had lived in his service. Marlborough acknowledged, when the forged papers were shewn him, that the hand-writing was so exactly imitated as to have deceived even himself, had he not been conscious that he had never signed such an association.

the harshness shewn towards a nobleman who had contributed to place the crown on his head.*

At the commencement of Mich elmas term, Marlborough, with his sureties, applied to be discharged from their recognisance. Their demand being rejected, they, on the meeting of parliament, appealed to the house of peers, as well against his detention without any specific charge, as against the subsequent refusal to release his bail. The appeal was warmly supported by Shrewsbury, who represented Marlborough as ungratefully and unjustly treated; and the question gave rise to several vehement debates. At length the king terminated the discussion by discharging the recognisance, and the house of peers vindicated their privileges, by a declaration against such arrests and detention of their members in future. The ministers were exonerated by a bill of indemnity. †

* Burnet-Lediard.

+ Journals and Chandler's Debates for 1692. MS. notes and letters in the Marlborough Papers-Conduct of the duchess of Marlborough, p. 60. Other side of the Question, p. 82. — Lives of Marlborough and Eugene, p.31.- Lediard, vol. i. p. 104. Tindal, vol. xiii. p. 511. Ralph, vol. ii. p. 529. — Burnet, vol. iv. p. 133. 148. 152. -- Dalrymple, vol. iii. p. 234.

CHAPTER 6.

1692-1697.

Offer of his services to

Marlborough continues in disgrace. king William declined. - Death of queen Mary, and reconciliation of the king with the princess of Denmark. — Correspondence of Marlborough with the exiled family. Discloses the intended enterprise against Brest.— Affair of Sir John Fenwick. His charges against Marlborough, Shrewsbury, Godolphin, and Russel. Discussion on the subject in Parliament. — Attainder and execution of Fenwick. Marlborough made governor to the duke of Gloucester. Restored to his military rank, and employments. Supports the preceptor, bishop Burnet, against the attacks of the tories. Death of the duke of Gloucester.

AFTER his liberation, the earl of Marlborough was estranged from the court. His income being reduced by the loss of his lucrative employments, he alternately resided at his mansion of Sandridge, and in the apartments which his lady occupied at Berkley House. The princess, indeed, considered him as the victim of her cause, and proposed to create in her household a new place in his favour, with a salary of £1000 a-year; but the generous offer was respectfully declined.*

* Conduct, p. 285.

Soon after this period, attempts were made to sooth the resentment of the king. The duke of Shrewsbury, who had recently been appointed secretary of state, and placed at the head of a new administration, availed himself of the complaints, arising from the ill success of the war on the continent, to recommend Marlborough to notice. In a letter to the king, dated May 22. 1694, he observes, Writing on this subject, it is impossible to forget what is here become a very general discourse, the popularity and conveniency of receiving lord Marlborough into your favour. He has been with me, since this news, to offer his service, with all the expressions of duty and fidelity imaginable. What I can say by way of persuasion, upon this subject, will signify but little, since I very well remember, when your majesty discoursed with me upon it, in the spring, you were sufficiently convinced of his usefulness. But some points remained of a delicate nature, too tender for me to pretend to advise upon, and of which your majesty is the only judge. If these could be accommodated to your majesty's satisfaction, I cannot but think he is capable of being very serviceable. It is so unquestionably his interest to be faithful, that that single argument makes me not doubt it.”*

The reply of William was cold, but decisive, though it throws no light on the causes of his displeasure.

66

July 16. 1694. In regard to what you wrote in your last concerning lord Marlborough, I can

* Shrewsbury Papers.

say no more, than that I do not think it for the good of my service, to intrust the command of my troops to him."*

Towards the close of the year, a melancholy event occurred, which produced a change in the situation of the royal family. This was, the death of queen Mary, which happened on the 28th of December, 1694.

Since the unfortunate rupture, which followed the disgrace of Marlborough, various attempts had been made to mediate a reconciliation between the queen and princess, but without effect; because the offended dignity of Mary vanquished her affection as a sister, and in her last moments her disorder was too malignant, and her dissolution too sudden, for her to receive the overtures made by the princess.

The death of the queen placed William in a new and critical situation. Many had begun to suggest doubts of his right to the crown; and some even argued, that as the parliament had been summoned in the joint names of the king and queen, it was dissolved by the death of either. Had the princess abetted these objections, she might doubtless have created much confusion in the state, and formed a party dangerous to the authority of the king. But instead of testifying the slightest wish to question his right, she made an affectionate appeal to his feelings, in a letter of condolence, expressing extreme concern at having incurred the displeasure of the deceased queen,

King William to the duke of Shrewsbury. — Shrewsbury Papers.