In this excerpt from Reasons Against the Succession of the House of Hanover, Defoe absurdly allegorises the restoration of a Catholic monarch as a “Vomit of Popery”, claiming that the imbibing of this poison would trigger a cleanse of all Catholic crudity left behind since the English Reformation, and reignite Protestantism in England through popular revolution. In Reasons, Defoe initially appears to argue against the impending accession of the Hanoverian George I, though a closer reading reveals Defoe’s use of satire to undermine the Jacobite position and rally popular and elite support for both Parliament and Protestantism. In ten interwoven arguments, Defoe frames the restoration of the line of Stuart as the only rational choice for any who value hereditary monarchism and peace in the nation. In some, he argues the reinstatement of the Stuarts would safeguard the process of uninterrupted hereditary monarchy and avoid war with France; in others he claims that the inevitable violent revolution upon James’ accession would be good for the health of the nation. Defoe finishes his pamphlet with further corruption of Jacobite logic, accusing any who doubt the voluntary and legal abdication of James II and VII as treasonously questioning the very sanctity of the Crown and nation. 

Daniel Defoe (1661?-1731) Reasons Against the Succession of the House of Hanover, With an Enquiry How Far the Abdication of King James, Supposing It to Be Legal, Ought to Affect the Person of the Pretender. Anonymous. London: J. Baker, 1713. 45 p. 19 cm. Archival & Special Collections, University of Guelph Library (s0469b28)

To view a complete copy of this book, please click here.