Rome? Were he not a sincere worshipper at our increasing altars, would he not reduce rather than multiply[1]? Is not even our gracious sovereign indebted to him, for scattering those persons from about her, whose excessive tyranny strove to ruin all those who aimed to come at the queen but by them? Does he not sacrifice his quiet to the good of his country, without enriching his own family with her treasure, or decking himself with her honours; though she has none but what, with pride and joy, she is ready to bestow upon him? Was not his blood (even now devoted to the restless genius of France) spilt in dread of his pursuits and endeavours to reduce that monarch to humanity and reason? Is not his modesty so excessive, that he conceals, from those persons who have treated him as a traitor, the extent of his power, lest he should seem to insult their disgrace? Free from that false delicacy which so often makes people uneasy at what either the mistaken or our enemies say of us; his actions have their foundation on solid judgment, propped by a most extensive genius, unlimited foresight, and immovable prudence. France records her Richelieu, Mazarin, and Louvois: we talk with veneration of the Cecils. But posterity shall boast of Harley, as a prodigy, in whom the spring is pure as the stream; not troubled by ingratitude or avarice, nor its beauty deformed by the feature of any vice. The coming age will envy ours a minister of such accumulated worth; they will see and know how happy we were. Why then should we ourselves be wilfully blind, or wilfully ignorant of it? Is it not his distress, to be born among a people
- ↑ Alluding to his patronizing the bill for building fifty new churches.
