he
late king's honour, occasioned many reflections upon the date of this
enquiry, which was to commence with his reign: and the Earl of
Nottingham, who had now flung away the mask which he had lately pulled
off, like one who had no other view but that of vengeance against the
Queen and her friends, acted consistently enough with his design, by
voting as a lord against the Bill, after he had directed his son in the
House of Commons to vote for the tack.

Thus miscarried this popular Bill for appointing commissioners to
examine into royal grants; but whether those chiefly concerned did
rightly consult their own interest, hath been made a question, which
perhaps time will resolve. It was agreed that the Queen, by her own
authority, might have issued out a commission for such an enquiry, and
every body believed, that the intention of the Parliament was only to
tax the grants with about three years' purchase, and at the same time
establish the proprietors in possession of the remainder for ever; so
that, upon the whole, the grantees would have been great gainers by such
an Act, since the titles of those lands, as they stood then, were hardly
of half value with others either for sale or settlement. Besides, the
examples of the Irish forfeitures might have taught these precarious
owners, that when the House of Commons hath once engaged in a pursuit,
which they think is right, although it be stopped or suspended for a
while, they will be sure to renew it upon every opportunity that offers,
and seldom fail of success: for instance, if the resumption should
happen to be made part of a supply, which can be easily done without the
objection of a tack, the grantees might possibly then have much harder
conditions given them; and I do not see how they could prevent it.
Whether the resuming of royal grants be consistent with good policy or
justice, would be too long a disquisition: besides, the profusion of
kings is not like to be a grievance for the future, because there have
been laws since made to provide against that evil, or, indeed, rather
because the crown has nothing left to give away. But the objection made
against the date of the intended enquiry was invidious and trifling; for
King James II. made very few grants: he was a better manager, and
squandering was none of his faults; whereas the late king, who came over
here a perfect stranger to our laws, and to our people, regardless of
posterity, wherein he was not likely to sur