The problem of this book is important, and the solution given one we are unable to accept. James II, we are told, pursued two aims, the restoration of popular monarchy and toleration. He was defeated by the newly rich. He died virtually a martyr for the faith. With almost the insistence of a litany Mr. Belloc warns us that the ‘academic historians’ have very much erred in their ways. They are not denounced by name—a curious mercy in view of the fact that on this reign both Catholic and Protestant writers are in substantial agreement. Even the psalmist felt it excessive when he said all men are liars.

We learn that in spite of foreign parentage James was intensely national. It is indeed touching to know how much British bravery appealed to him. The sentiment, however, cannot have been overwhelming. It was not sufficiently strong to stay his feverish de money from Louis XIV at the beginning of his reign, on his humble excuses to that monarch for summoning a Parliament, or his resolve to regain his throne with the aid of Frenchmen. It did not preserve him from a ruthless disregard of the law of the land. In the Hales case, for example, he removed four indocile judges and the Solicitor-General. To secure the repeal of the Test Act he obtained the resignation or dismissal of half the Lords Lieutenant and eight hundred magistrates and filled their places with his own nominees.