arrangements with a view to transporting troops to England in the event- of Anne’s death. In 1714 he sent an agent to the court of Hanover to counteract Oxford’s mission of his relation, Mr. Harley. His correspondence with the Jacobites so late as 1713 was probably a mere blind; he is said to have refused a loan of 100,000l. asked by the Pretender as a test of his sincerity (Lockhart, i. 461) ; and he was no doubt serious in concerting measures with the supporters of the Hanoverian succession. It is also said that his old friend Bolingbroke endeavoured to obtain his support during the final intrigues against Lord Oxford (Macpherson, History, ii. 619, 621).
On the news of Anne’s last illness he sailed from Ostend. He reached Dover on the day of her death, 1 Aug. 1714. He was mortified bv the omission of his name from the list of lords justices nominated by the new king, who remembered, it is said, the refusal of Marlborough and Eugene to confide to him the scheme of campaign in 1708, or possibly suspected his sincerity. He was induced, however, after a short time (September 1714) to resume the offices of captain-general an master of the ordnance. He took some part in military measures, and pacitied the guards who had grievances as to clothing by ordering a double supply ‘of shirts and jackets of superior quality’ with a ‘liberal donation of beer.' During the Scotch insurrection of 1715 he raised money to support the bank, and gave directions for the movements which ended in the capture of the Jacobite force at Preston. He was saddened by the loss of his third daughter, the Countess of Bridgewater, 22 March 1714, and of his second daughter, the Countess of Sunderland, 15 April 1716. On 28 May 1716 he had a paralytic stroke, followed by another on 10 Nov. Marlborough had been remarkable for his physical as well as his intellectual vigour; but his multitudinous labours and responsibilities had told upon his strength. His letters during his campaigns are full of complaints of severe headaches. ln December 1711 he said in a debate that his ‘great age’ (sixty-one) and ‘numerous fatigues in war’ made him long for repose. He was prematurely broken. Although he recovers the use of his faculties, could attend in parliament, and discharge his politicial duties, he was clearly declining (see the duchess’s account of his state, Coxe, iii. 618). His chief ublic appearance was at the impeachment of Oxford in 1717, when he voted against Orford's friends. A story that he was frightened into helping Oxford’s acquittal hy a threat of the production of some early communications of a Jacobite tendency is given in the ‘Biographia,' but the evidence, though circumstantial, is unsatisfactory and inconsistent. During the South Sea mania he, or the duchess in his name made a judicious speculation, and cleared 100,000l. At some indefinite date we find him troubled by having l50,000l. on his hands and not knowing what to do with it (Thomson, ii, 547). He spent his time at Bleihleim, Windsor, and Holywell; he was fond of riding, amused himself with cards, and was much attached to his grandchildren. Some of them took part in amateur performances of ‘Tamerlane’ and ‘All for Love,’ at Blenheim; Bishop Hoadly wrote a prologue for the last, which the duchess bowdlerised. No kissing was allowed. We hear little more of his domestic life, except occasional anecdote, of his love of petty savings. King (Anecdotes, p. 164) says that he always walked when old and infirm to save sixpence for a chair, He had a fresh stroke of paralysis in June 1722 and died on the 16th. He was buried with great splendour in Westminster Abbey, but the body was afterwards removed to the chapel at Blenheim, where a mausoleum was erected by Rysbrach.
The duchess passed the remainder of her life in a series of deadly quarrels. Her pugnacity was boundless, and, though wrongheaded, she was far too shrewd to be contemptible. The duke left her a jointure of 15,000l. a year. She had also the right to spend 10,000l. a year for five years in completing Blenheim. She received offers of marriage before the end of 1722 from an old friend, Lord Coningsby [q. v.], and a few months later from ‘the proud Duke of Somerset. She declined both, and successfully recommended Lady Charlotte Finch to the duke as a substitute. The completion of Blenheim gave rise to long lawsuits, of which some account is given in Coxe (iii. 633-40) and Thomson (ii. 445-60). An act was passed in the first year of George making the crown responsible for the arrears incurred up to the suspension of the works. Disputes, however, arose, and ultimately it was decided that the duke was responsible for a considerable sum. The duchess took the matter into her own hands after the duke’s death, and finished the house within the five years, and for less than half the sum allowed. The whole sum spent, according to Cole, was 300.000l., of which 60,000l. was spent by the Marlboronghs. The remainder was paid from the civil list (not, of course, from the queen's private purse). In the course of the proceedings the duchess had a long and bitter quarrel with the architect Vanbrugh. He
