But if, as the Tories themselves now seemed to confess, that theory was unsound, why treat with the King?
If it was admitted that he might lawfully be excluded till he gave satisfactory guarantees for the security of the constitution in Church and State, it was not easy to deny that he might lawfully be excluded for ever.

For what satisfactory guarantee could he give?
How was it possible to draw up an Act of Parliament in language clearer than the language of the Acts of Parliament which required that the Dean of Christ Church should be a Protestant?
How was it possible to put any promise into words stronger than those in which James had repeatedly declared that he would strictly respect the legal rights of the Anglican clergy?
If law or honour could have bound him, he would never have been forced to fly from his kingdom.

If neither law nor honour could bind him, could he safely be permitted to return?
It is probable, however, that, in spite of these arguments, a motion for opening a negotiation with James would have been made in the Convention, and would have been supported by the great body of Tories, had he not been, on this, as on every other occasion, his own worst enemy.

Every post which arrived from Saint Germains brought intelligence which damped the ardour of his adherents.

He did not think it worth his while to feign regret for his past errors, or to promise amendment.