■WILLIAM AND MAEY.

155

should be fairly represented in 1710 or 1720. The relief ought chap.to be immediate; and the way to give immediate relief was tolimit the duration of Parliaments, and to begin with that Par-liament which, in the opinion of the country, had already heldpower too long.

The forces were so evenly balanced that a very slightaccident might have turned the scale. When the question wasput that the bill do pass, eighty two peers were present. Ofthese forty two were for the bill, and forty against it. Proxieswere then called. There were only two proxies for the bill:there were seven against it; but of the seven three were ques-tioned, and were with difficulty admitted. The result was thatthe bill was lost by three votes.

The majority appears to have been composed of moderateWhigs and moderate Tories. Twenty of the minority proteste d,and among them were the most violent and intolerant membersof both parties, such as Warrington, who had narrowly escapedthe block for conspiring against James, and Aylesbury, whoafterwards narrowly escaped the block for conspiring againstWilliam. Marlborough, who, since his imprisonment, hadgone all lengths in opposition to the government, not only puthis own name to the protest, but made the Prince of Denmarksign what it was altogether beyond the faculties of His ItoyalHighness to comprehend.*

It is a remarkable circumstance that neither Caermarthen,the first in power as well as in abilities of the Tory ministers,nor Shrewsbury, the most distinguished of those Whigs whowere then on bad terms with the Court, was present on this im-portant occasion. Their absence was in all probability theeffect of design; for both of them were in the House no longtime before and no long time after the division.

A few days later Shrewsbury laid on the table of the Lords a Jk® . ,* Lords' Journals, Jan. 3. 169|. ^l 11 *