Tillotson survived his predecessor little more than twelve months. He did not occupy his See long enough to accomplish much either as Bishop or Primate. In neither capacity has he left any memorials. No injunctions from him appear in the Archiepiscopal Register, and his biographer makes no mention of his visitations. We are told that he convened an assembly of Bishops at Lambeth, when they agreed with him upon certain regulations, which remained at his death unpublished, as he preferred they should appear with Royal as well as Episcopal authority, and he had not time to complete arrangements for that purpose. His biographer furnishes a list of his deeds, which form but a meagre total for a primacy of even two years and a half, when so much needed to be done. Le Neve, who is particular in noting archiepiscopal acts, has next to nothing to say of Tillotson’s archiepiscopal career. The most he can do is to supply extracts from a MS. diary, eulogizing the Primate’s eloquence and charities, and stating that William, after his Grace’s death, never mentioned him without some testimony of esteem. He used to say to Mr. Chadwick--son-in-law of the Archbishop--“I loved your father: I never knew an honester man, and I never had a better friend.”[227] [Sidenote: 1694.] From what we know of him, we should judge that the deficiency of results during his episcopate is to be attributed more to the difficulties of the times and the inconvenience of circumstances, than to want of ability or the absence of devotedness. He was seized, in the Chapel at Whitehall, with paralysis on the 18th of November, 1694; and though the fit crept over him slowly, he would not call for assistance, lest he should disturb Divine worship. His death occurred on the 22nd, at the age of 65. His character, as compared with Sancroft’s, has been differently viewed by enemies and friends. Nonjurors said that his predecessor devised no project for revolutionizing the Church, implying that Tillotson did; that his predecessor was no Latitudinarian, more than insinuating that Tillotson was; and when they spoke of Sancroft as a true Father, they meant to affirm that his successor was by no means such. “Intruder,” “thief,” “robber,” “ecclesiastical usurper,” were epithets fastened on the Archbishop of the Revolution. Burnet, on the other hand, extols him as a faithful friend, a gentle enemy, with a clear head and a tender heart, without superstition in his religion, and, as a preacher, the best of his age.[228] In saying so much, Burnet probably went no further than facts warrant. And I would add, that if Sancroft made a sacrifice in renouncing the Archbishopric, Tillotson, according to his private confessions, made scarcely less sacrifice in accepting it. [Sidenote: TILLOTSON.]