an ascendant.[44] His great ambition was to be the head of those who were called the Church party; and, indeed, his grave solemn deportment and countenance, seconded by abundance of professions for their service, had given many of them an opinion of his veracity,[45] which he interpreted as their sense of his judgment and wisdom;[46] and this mistake lasted till the time of his defection, of which it was partly the cause; but then it plainly appeared, that he had not credit to bring over one single proselyte, to keep himself in countenance.

[Footnote 38:  See notes in vol. v., pp. 246-248 of present edition. [T.S.]]

[Footnote 39:  P. Fitzgerald says “that stiffness, pride, and formality with which his intractable nature.” [W.S.J.]]

[Footnote 40:  P. Fitzgerald says “to cruelty.” [W.S.J.]]

[Footnote:  41 P. Fitzgerald says “some smattering in the law, which makes it not very safe or easy to deal with him, where property is concerned.” [W.S.J.]]

[Footnote 42:  P. Fitzgerald adds “grafted upon a wrong understanding.” [W.S.J.]]

[Footnote 43:  Heneage Finch was created Lord Guernsey in 1703, and Earl of Aylesford in 1714.  He died in 1719. [W.S.J.]]

[Footnote 44:  P. Fitzgerald adds “I suppose by the right of primogeniture.” [W.S.J.]]

[Footnote 45:  P. Fitzgerald says “of his honesty.” [W.S.J.]]

[Footnote 46:  He acquired, from his solemnity of deportment, the nickname of Diego and from his gravity, that of Dismal. [S.]]

These lineaments, however imperfectly drawn, may help the reader’s imagination to conceive what sort of persons those were, who had the boldness to encounter the Queen and ministry, at the head of a great majority of the landed interest; and this upon a point where the quiet of Her Majesty’s reign, the security, or at least the freedom, of her person, the lives of her most faithful friends, and the settling of the nation by a peace, were, in the consequences, deeply concerned.[47]

[Footnote 47:  It was these “lineaments, imperfectly drawn,” that Erasmus Lewis specially emphasized for omission, in his letter to Swift already referred to.  “Now I have mentioned characters,” wrote Lewis, “I must tell you that they [the friends who had met to read the ‘History’ in manuscript] were clearly of opinion, that if those you have drawn should be published as they now stand, nothing could save the author’s printer and publishers from some grievous punishment.  As we have no traces of liberty now left but the freedom of the press, it is the most earnest desire of your friends that you would strike out all that you have said on that subject” (Sir W. Scott’s edit., vol. xix., pp. 133-136). [T.S.]]