and not reveal it?--and it is probable that such a SECRET
CONSPIRACY BY WAY OF STATUTE could pass the houses of commons, and
lords, the privy council, and finally the king, and that it never
should come to the knowledge of a peer of parliament, a favourite
of the court, a resident in Dublin, and every day attendant in his
place in the upper house?"

The intrinsic improbability is well proved here, and would suffice to
show King's falsehood as to the secrecy of the act; but if further
proof were needed, the authorities which prove the authenticity of the
act utterly disprove the secrecy alleged by King. The act is well
described, in the London Gazette of July 1 to 4, 1689, and the names
are given in print, in a pamphlet licensed in London, the 2nd day of
the year 1690 (March 26th, old style).

Jones's statement as to the destruction of all papers relating to that
parliament having been ordered, under a penalty of L500 and incapacity
from office, is certain, and we give the clause in our note;[28] but
this clause was not enacted till 1695, and, therefore, could not have
affected the acts of 1689, when King wrote in 1690.

Moreover, we cannot find any trace of Richard Darling (who professedly
made the "_copia vera_" for King) as clerk in the office of the Master
of the Rolls, or in any office, in 1690. A Richard Darling was
appointed secretary to the commissioners for the inspection of
forfeitures, by patent dated 1st of June, 5 William III. (1693)

There certainly are grounds for supposing that some great jugglery,
either as to the clauses or names in the act, was perpetrated by this
well-paid and unscrupulous Williamite. The temptation to fabricate as
much of the act (clauses or names) as possible was immense. The want of
scruple to commit any fraud is plain upon King's whole book. The
likelihood of discovery alone would deter him. Probably every family
who had a near relative in the "list" would be secured to William's
interest, and no part of King's work could have helped more than this
act to make that book what Burnet called it, "the best fitted to
_settle_ the minds" of the people of England, of any of the books
published on the Revolution.

The preamble states truly the rebellion of the northerns to dethrone
their legitimate king, and bring in the Prince of Orange; and that the
insurgents, though offered full pardon in repeated proclamations, still
continued in rebellion. It enacts th