It is evident, too, that the qualities for which he was already reviled by extreme partisans on both sides were—in their measure—real qualifications, both for the office of Speaker and for the special task of that day. The party leaders who were then most eagerly followed were men bent on crushing their adversaries as well as conquering them. It was inevitable that by such men HARLEY’S moderation towards opponents should be regarded as more cajolery. And of that unhappy quality he was destined, at a later day, to acquire but too much. [Sidenote: THE SECRETARYSHIP OF STATE, 1704.] On the 27th of April, 1704, Mr. Speaker HARLEY was sworn of the Privy Council. On the 18th of May he received the seals as one of the Principal Secretaries of State. [Sidenote: _Privy Council Register_, Anne, vol. ii, p. 102.] He had scarcely entered on the duties of his office before he was busied with precautionary measures in Scotland against an anticipated Jacobite insurrection, as well as with a large share of the foreign correspondence. But just at that busy time he found means to begin—though he could not then complete—an act of charity which is memorable both on the recipient’s account and on the score of some well-known political consequences which eventually grew thereout. At the time when HARLEY became a member of the GODOLPHIN administration Daniel DE FOE lay in Newgate, under a conviction for seditious libel, committed in the publication of his famous tract, _The Shortest Way with the Dissenters_. [Sidenote: HARLEY’S PROTECTION OF DE FOE, 1704.] The new Secretary sent a confidential person to the prison with instructions to visit DE FOE, and to ask him, in the Minister’s name, ‘What can I do for you?’ DE FOE’S characteristic reply must be given in his own words:—‘In return for this kind and generous message I immediately took pen and ink, and writ the story of the blind man in the Gospel, ... to whom our blessed Lord put the question, “What wilt thou that I should do unto thee?” who—as if he had made it strange that such a question should be asked, or as if he had said, “Lord, dost thou see that I am blind, and yet ask me what thou shalt do for me?”—my answer is plain in my misery, “Lord that I may receive my sight.” I needed not to make the application.’ [Sidenote: De Foe, _Appeal to Honour and Justice_, p. 11.] DE FOE then adds:—‘From this time, as I learned afterwards, this noble person made it his business to have my case represented to Her Majesty, and methods taken for my deliverance.’ But the bigots who had caused a malicious prosecution succeeded in delaying the successful issue of the Secretary’s efforts during four months. With HARLEY the sufferer had had no previous acquaintance. The one designation under which he ever afterwards spoke of him was ‘my first benefactor.’ And the gratitude was lifelong.