ned. The commissioners
added, "That no receipt was ever given for this deducted money, nor was
it mentioned in any receipts from the foreign troops, which were always
taken in full. And lastly, That the whole sum, on computation, amounted
to near three hundred thousand pounds."

The House, after a long debate, resolved, "That the taking several sums
from the contractors for bread by the Duke of Marlborough, was
unwarrantable and illegal; and that the two and a half _per cent_,
deducted from the foreign troops, was public money, and ought to be
accounted for:" which resolutions were laid before the Queen by the
whole House, and Her Majesty promised to do her part in redressing what
was complained of. The Duke and his friends had, about the beginning of
the war, by their credit with the Queen, procured a warrant from Her
Majesty for this perquisite of two and a half _per cent_. The warrant
was directed to the Duke of Marlborough, and countersigned by Sir
Charles Hedges, then secretary of state; by virtue of which the
paymaster-general of the army was to pay the said deducted money to the
general, and take a receipt in full from the foreign troops.

It was observed, as very commendable and becoming the dignity of such an
assembly, that this debate was managed with great temper, and with few
personal reflections upon the Duke of Marlborough. They seemed only
desirous to come at the truth, without which they could not answer the
trust reposed in them by those whom they represented, and left the rest
to Her Majesty's prudence. The attorney-general was ordered to commence
an action against the Duke for the subtracted money, which would have
amounted to a great sum, enough to ruin any private person, except
himself. This process is still depending, although very moderately
pursued, either by the Queen's indulgence to one whom she had formerly
so much trusted, or perhaps to be revived or slackened, according to the
future demeanour of the defendant.[4]

[Footnote 4: Marlborough's defence of himself may be found in the
"Parliamentary History," vol. vi., 1079. Writing to the Earl of
Strafford, under date January 27, 1711, Bolingbroke speaking of this
debate on Marlborough says: "What passed on Thursday in the House of
Commons, will, I hope, show people abroad, as well as at home, that no
merit, no grandeur, no riches can excuse, or save any one, who sets
himself up in opposition to the Queen;" and, he might have added, to
Mrs.