These arguments, though eminently ingenious, and not without real force, failed to convince the Upper House.  The Lords insisted that every peer should be entitled to be a Trier.  The Commons were with difficulty induced to consent that the number of Triers should never be less than thirty-six, and positively refused to make any further concession.  The bill was therefore suffered to drop.184

It is certain that those who in the conference on this bill represented the Commons, did not exaggerate the dangers to which the government was exposed.  While the constitution of the Court which was to try peers for treason was under discussion, a treason planned with rare skill by a peer was all but carried into execution.

Marlborough had never ceased to assure the Court of Saint Germains that the great crime which he had committed was constantly present to his thoughts, and that he lived only for the purpose of repentance and reparation.  Not only had he been himself converted; he had also converted the Princess Anne.  In 1688, the Churchills had, with little difficulty, induced her to fly from her father’s palace.  In 1691, they, with as little difficulty, induced her to copy out and sign a letter expressing her deep concern for his misfortunes and her earnest wish to atone for her breach of duty.185 At the same time Marlborough held out hopes that it might be in his power to effect the restoration of his old master in the best possible way, without the help of a single foreign soldier or sailor, by the votes of the English Lords and Commons, and by the support of the English army.  We are not fully informed as to all the details of his plan.  But the outline is known to us from a most interesting paper written by James, of which one copy is in the Bodleian Library, and another among the archives of the French Foreign Office.

The jealousy with which the English regarded the Dutch was at this time intense.  There had never been a hearty friendship between the nations.  They were indeed near of kin to each other.  They spoke two dialects of one widespread language.  Both boasted of their political freedom.  Both were attached to the reformed faith.  Both were threatened by the same enemy, and would be safe only while they were united.  Yet there was no cordial feeling between them.  They would probably have loved each other more, if they had, in some respects, resembled each other less.  They were the two great commercial nations, the two great maritime nations.  In every sea their flags were found together, in the Baltic and in the Mediterranean, in the Gulf of Mexico and in the Straits of Malacca.  Every where the merchant of London and the merchant of Amsterdam were trying to forestall each other and to undersell each other.  In Europe the contest was not sanguinary.  But too often, in barbarous countries, where there was no law but force, the competitors had met, burning with cupidity, burning with animosity, armed for battle,