Memoirs of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, and of the Court of Queen Anne Vol. 1 (of 2)Thomson, A. T., Mrs.
History
Memoirs of Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, and of the Court of Queen Anne Vol. 1 (of 2)
Thomson, A. T., Mrs.
Great Britain -- Court and courtiers -- Biography; Marlborough, Sarah Jennings Churchill, Duchess of, 1660-1744
Lord Montague’s family.[423]
Upon the return of Lord Marlborough from Holland, the Queen announced to
both Houses of Parliament her intention of declaring war against France,
and this measure being approved, war was proclaimed on the fourth of
May.
The succession was now settled, and the Electress Sophia of Hanover was
ordered to be prayed for by her christian name, indicating that her
title to the throne was by her own blood. Towards this Princess, eminent
for her accomplishments and personal character, Anne evinced throughout
her reign far more jealousy than she ever manifested towards the young
Pretender, lately proclaimed in France, King of Great Britain. It was
reported, immediately after the death of William the Third, that that
monarch had left among his papers a scheme for setting aside his
sister-in-law from the succession, for bringing in the House of Hanover,
and even for imprisoning Anne to effect this purpose. The Tories, in
order to influence the elections, talked loudly and confidently of the
truth of these reports. Five commissioners, namely, the Dukes of
Somerset and Devonshire, the Earls Marlborough, Jersey, and Albemarle,
were empowered to examine his late Majesty’s papers, in order to prove
the truth or falsehood of these rumours. Eventually they were declared
by a vote of the House of Commons to be false and scandalous.[424]
The oath of abjuration, notwithstanding a general expectation to the
contrary, was taken by both Houses of Parliament, with, however, a
mental reservation by many, that the right of the pretended Prince of
Wales, solemnly abjured by them, was a legal, and not a divine right, or
birthright; nor did they consider their abjuration binding in case of a
revolution or a conquest. “This,” says Burnet, “was too dark a thing to
be inquired after, or seen into, in the state matters were then in.” Yet
the lurking spirit of disaffection, like a blight, had its unseen but
perceptible influence upon all classes of society; more especially upon
that which, struggling to hold the reins of empire, was harassed by
party clamour. The well-known, and, it must be acknowledged, excusable
partiality of the Queen for her own family, kept alive the spirit of
Jacobitism in the country. Lady Marlborough fearlessly spoke her
sentiments to the Queen on this subject.
“When I saw,” she observes, “she had such a partiality to those that I
knew to be Jacobites, I asked her one day whether she had a mind to give
up her crown; for if it had been her conscience not to wear it, I do
solemnly protest I would not have disturbed her, or struggled as I did.
But she told me she was not sure the Prince of Wales was her brother,
and that it was not practicable for him to come here, without ruin to
the religion and country.”[425]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account