: mii mini* f iimm* f nmtiiii it imiimmimmt iimitm 
 ,itmnn i uti it iimiiuiiiiiMiiiiHtmiiiitniiifnimniMMiiiiiliniii, 
 
 4MMMM*
 
 (ttamfcrfogc historical jerries 
 
 EDITED BY G. W. PROTHERO, LlTT.D. 
 
 HONORARY FELLOW OF KING'S COLLEGE, CAMBRIDGE, 
 FORMERLY PROFESSOR OF HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH. 
 
 HISTORY OF SCOTLAND 

 
 Ronton: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, 
 
 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
 
 Ave Maria Lane. 
 
 ©Iassota : 50, WELLINGTON STREET. 
 
 lUipjifl': F. A. BROCKHAUS. 
 
 £fto Ifork: THE MACMILLAN COMPANY. 
 
 Brnnbag ancj Calcutta: MACMILLAN & CO., Ltd. 
 
 [All rights reserved.]
 
 HISTORY 
 
 OF 
 
 SCOTLAND 
 
 VOL. II. 
 
 FROM THE ACCESSION OF MARY STEWART 
 
 TO 
 
 THE REVOLUTION OF 1689 
 
 BY 
 
 P. HUME BROWN, M.A., LL.D., 
 
 FRASEK PROFESSOR OF ANCIENT (SCOTTISH) HISTORY AND 
 PALEOGRAPHY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH. 
 
 WITH FOUR MAPS AND PLAN. 
 
 CAMBRIDGE: 
 
 AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS. 
 
 1902
 
 The author and publishers have to thank Messrs G. P. Putnam's 
 Sons for their courtesy in allowing them to make use of the Plan of 
 the Battle of Dunbar which appears in Mr C. H. Firth's Oliver 
 Cromwell (Heroes of the Nations Series).
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 BOOK V. 
 The Religious Revolution (1542 — 1578). 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 Mary Stewart (Regency of Arran), 1542 — 1554. 
 
 I. The Abortive Marriage Treaty. Position of affairs at the accession 
 of Mary, i — 3. Appointment of the Earl of Arran as Governor, 3 — 4. 
 Henry VIII and Scotland, 4—5. The French and English parties in 
 Scotland, 5—6. Negotiations for the marriage of Mary and Edward, 6 — 7. 
 Struggle between Arran and Cardinal Beaton, 7 — 8. Triumph of Beaton, 
 8 — 9. The treaty of marriage broken off, 10. Beaton's action against 
 heresy, n. Ascendency of the French party, 12 — 13. The Earl of 
 Hertford's invasion, 13. Mary of Lorraine attempts to gain the Regency, 
 14 — 15. English raids into Scotland, 15. Battle of Ancrum, 15 — 17. 
 Henry's overtures to the Scots, 17. Arrival of a French force in Scotland; 
 it accomplishes nothing, 17—18. Second invasion under Hertford, 18 — 19. 
 Action of the English party in Scotland, 19. 
 
 II. George Wishart. His mission and death, 20 — 21. Plots against 
 Beaton, 21 — 23. His assassination; his character, 23 — 25. 
 
 III. The Castle of St Andrews. Beaton's assassins in the Castle of 
 St Andrews, 25 — 26. Ineffectual siege of the Castle, 26 — 28. Arrival of 
 the French fleet and capture of the Castle, 28. Fate of the prisoners ; 
 John Knox, 29. 
 
 IV. Somerset's invasion. Battle of Pinkie, 30. English occupation, 
 
 31. Scottish appeal to France, 32. Seizure of strongholds by the English, 
 
 32. Mary sent to France, 33. French force in Scotland, 34. The English 
 diiven out of Scotland, 34 — 35. Treaty of Boulogne, 35. Mary of 
 Lorraine obtains the Regency, 35 — 38.
 
 vi Contents. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Mary Stewart (Regency of Mary of Lorraine, and the 
 Religious Revolution), 1554 — 1561. 
 
 I. French Domination. Offices in the hands of Frenchmen, 39. 
 Disgrace of the Earl of Huntly, 40. Resistance to the proposal for a 
 standing army, 41. Opposition of the Scots nobles to a war with England, 
 42. Marriage-treaty between Mary and the Dauphin of France, 43. The 
 marriage in Notre Dame, 43 — 44. Mysterious death of three of the Scots 
 Commissioners in France, 44. 
 
 II. The Religious Revolution. Progress of Protestantism, 45 — 47. 
 William Harlow, John Willock, and John Knox, 47 — 48. The first 
 religious "bond,"' 48. Burning of Walter Mill, 49. The Protestant 
 leaders petition the Regent, 49 — 50. Policy of the Regent to secure the 
 domination of France in Scotland, 51. The "Beggars' Summons," 52. 
 State of the national Church, 53 — 54. Breach between the Regent and 
 the Protestant leaders, 54 — 56. John Knox in Perth, 57. Civil war 
 imminent, 58. Negotiations between the Regent and the Protestant 
 leaders in Perth, 59. The two armies in Fife, 59 — 60. Eight days' truce, 
 60. Edinburgh in the hands of the Protestants, 61. Dwindling of their 
 forces, 62. The Regent occupies Edinburgh, 62. Death of Henry II of 
 France; policy of the Guises in Scotland, 63 — 64. The Earl of Arran 
 joins the Protestants, 64. The Protestants occupy Edinburgh, 65. Com- 
 pelled to evacuate it, 66. The Regent in Edinburgh, 66. Her troops 
 under D'Oysel invade Fife, 66. An English squadron in the Firth of 
 Forth, 67. The Treaty of Berwick between Elizabeth and the Scottish 
 Protestants, 67. English army enters Scotland and besieges the French in 
 Leith, 68. Death of Mary of Lorraine, 69. Treaty of Leith, 69 — 70. 
 The French leave Scotland, 70. Meeting of Estates, 70 — 71. Confession 
 of Faith adopted, 71. Roman Catholicism abolished, 71 — 72. Character 
 of the Scottish Reformation, 72. Elizabeth refuses to marry Arran, 74. 
 The Estates reject the Book of Discipline, 74 — 76. Forebodings in view 
 of Mary's return, 76 — 78. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 Mary, 1561 — 1567. 
 
 I. Mary and Elizabeth. European politics at the date of Mary's 
 return, 79 — 82. Circumstances of Mary's return, 82 — 83. Mass celebrated 
 in the private chapel in Holyrood, 83. Interview between Knox and 
 Mary, 84. Mary and the English succession, 84 — 85. Policy of the Lord
 
 Contents. vii 
 
 James Stewart and Maitland of Lethington, 85. Elizabeth refuses to 
 recognise Mary as her successor, 86. Cleavage in the Protestant party, 87. 
 Elizabeth refuses to meet Mary, 88. Arran, Bothvvell, and Knox, 89. 
 Mary's expedition against Huntly, 89—90. Death of Huntly, 91. Knox's 
 proceedings in the south and west, 92—93. Chatelar and Mary, 93 — 94. 
 Interview between Knox and Mary, 94. Meeting of Estates, 95. Pro- 
 posed alliances for Mary, 95 — 96. Contest between Mary and Knox, 96 — 
 97. Elizabeth proposes the Earl of Leicester as a husband for Mary, 97. 
 Dissensions in the Protestant party, 98 — 99. 
 
 II. Darnley and Riccio. The Earl of Lennox comes to Scotland, 99. 
 Is followed by his son Darnley, 100. Marriage of Mary and Darnley, 100. 
 Ruin of the Earl of Moray, 100, 101. Mary's temporary triumph, 101 — 
 103. The Counter-Reformation, 103. David Riccio, 104. Murder of 
 Riccio, 105 — 106. Mary takes Damley with her to Dunbar, 106. Birth of 
 James VI, 107. 
 
 III. Darnley and Bothwell. Breach between Mary and Darnley, 108. 
 James Hepburn, fourth Earl of Bothwell, 108 — 9. Mary visits him at 
 Hermitage Castle, 109. She brings Darnley from Glasgow to the Kirk of 
 Field, Edinburgh, no. Murder of Darnley, no. Bothwell and Mary at 
 Dunbar Castle, in. Their marriage, 112. Carbery Hill, 112. Mary 
 imprisoned in Lochleven, 113. Moray made Regent, 1 13. His difficulties, 
 114. Mary escapes from Lochleven, 115. Battle of Langside, 115. 
 Mary's flight to England, 116. Character of her rule, 1 16. 
 
 IV. General Progress of the Country. Social advance during Mary's 
 reign, 117. The Privy Council, 118 — 119. Courts of law, 119 — 120. 
 State of commerce, 120 — 121. The Universities, 122 — 123. Description 
 of the leading Scottish towns, 123. Literature, 124 — 5. Character of 
 Scottish Protestantism, 126. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 James VI, 1567 — 1578. 
 
 I. Regency of Moray. General state of Christendom, 127. Difficulties 
 of Moray's Regency, 127 — 128. His dealings with his enemies, 128 — 129. 
 Mary in England, 129. Commissioners representing Mary, the Scottish 
 Protestants, and Elizabeth meet at York, Westminster, and Hampton 
 Court, 130— 131. The Casket Letters, 132. Moray returns to Scotland, 
 133. Crushes the Marian party, 134 — 135. Convention at Perth, 136. 
 Maitland of Lethington, 137 — 138. Revolt of the English Earls, 139. 
 Moray captures the Earl of Northumberland, 140. Assassination of 
 Moray, 140 — 141. His character, 142 — 143.
 
 viii Contents. 
 
 II. Regency of Lennox. Position of the king's and queen's parties, 
 ,43—144. Ascendency of the king's party, 145. Lennox made Regent, 
 145. Capture of Dunbarton Castle for the king's party, 146—147. 
 Execution of Archbishop Hamilton, 147. Civil war, 148. Frays in and 
 near Edinburgh, 148—149. The king's party surprised at Stirling, 150. 
 Lennox slarn, 151. 
 
 III. Regency of Mar. Earl of Mar chosen Regent, 151. Besieges 
 Kirkcaldy of Grange, who holds the Castle of Edinburgh for Mary, 152. 
 Is forced to retire, 152. Tidchan bishops, 153—155- The Douglas wars, 
 n ? _ I? 6. Truce, 156. Deaths of the Earl of Mar and John Knox, 
 157. 
 
 IV. Regency of Morton. Morton Regent, 157. Siege of Edinburgh 
 Castle, 158. It is taken with the aid of an English force, 158—159. Fate 
 of Maitland and Kirkcaldy, 159—160. Morton's policy on the Borders, 
 160 — 161. Arrangement for the stipends of ministers, 161 — 162. The 
 fight of the Reidswire, 162. Andrew Melville and Episcopacy, 163 — 164. 
 Fall of Morton, 164—165. Character of his rule, 165. 
 
 BOOK VI. 
 
 The Crown and the Kirk (1578 — 1688). 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 James VI, 1578— 1603. 
 
 I. Recovered Ascendency of Morton. State of opinion in the country, 
 j6- — 168. New Privy Council, 170. Morton regains power, 170 — 173. 
 Proceedings against the House of Hamilton, 173 — 174. Arrival of Esme 
 Stewart, Lord of Aubigny, in Scotland, 174. His influence on James, 175. 
 
 II. Ascendency of Lennox. Morton and Aubigny, 175. General 
 Assemblies and the State, 176. Pretended conversion of Aubigny (now 
 Duke of Lennox) to Protestantism, 177. Ascendency of Lennox, 177. 
 Elizabeth and Lennox, 178. Captain James Stewart, 178, charges Morton 
 with the murder of Darnley, 179. Morton's arrest, 179. The " Negative 
 Confession," 179. Captain Stewart created Earl of Arran, 180. Trial and 
 death of Morton, 180— 181. The Second Book of Discipline, 181 — 183. 
 Jealousies between Lennox and Arran, 183. Philip II of Spain and 
 Scotland, 183. Jesuits in Scotland. Lennox's plot for the restoration of 
 Catholicism, 185. Presbyterian "Ilildebrandism," 185 — 186.
 
 Contents. ix 
 
 III. The Ruthven Raid. Lennox and his plot, 187. The Ruthven 
 Raid, 187 — 188. Arran and James in the hands of the Ruthven Raiders, 
 188. Flight of Lennox from Scotland, 189. The new government, 189 — 
 190. It favours Presbyterianism, 190. French plotting in Scotland, 190. 
 James escapes from the Ruthven Raiders, 191. 
 
 IV. Ascendency of Arran. James's policy, 191 — 193. Ascendency of 
 Arran, 193. His policy, 193. Letter of James to the Pope, 193. James 
 and the ministers — John Durie and Andrew Melville, 194. Ineffectual 
 attempt to displace Arran, 194 — 195. Execution of Gowrie, 195. Tyranny 
 of Arran, 195 — 196. The "Black Acts," [96. Patrick Adamson, Arch- 
 bishop of St Andrews, 197. Arran's negotiations with England, 198. 
 Patrick, Master of Gray, 198. The "Holy League," 199. Lord Russell, 
 son of the Earl of Bedford, slain, 200. Fall of Arran, 200 — 201. 
 
 V. Execution of Mary: Spanish Armada. The new government, 201. 
 Division among the Presbyterian clergy, 202. Execution of Mary Stewart, 
 202 — 203. Public feeling in Scotland, 203. Love-feast in Edinburgh, 204. 
 Acts concerning ecclesiastical property and the smaller barons, 205. The 
 Spanish Armada, 206. 
 
 VI. The Spanish Blanks. Plot of the Roman Catholic nobles, 208. 
 James's marriage with Anne of Denmark, 209. Freaks of Francis Stewart, 
 Earl of Bothwell, 210. Murder of the Earl of Moray by Huntly, 212. 
 Act confirming previous legislation in favour of the Reformed Church, 213. 
 The Earl of Bothwell again, 214. The "Spanish Blanks," 215. Bothwell's 
 continued insubordination, 216. Rising of the Catholic Earls — Battle 
 of Glenlivat, 217. Fight at Dryfe Sands between the Johnstones and 
 Maxwells, 218 — 219. 
 
 VII. The Octavians. Court intrigues, 219. Death of Thirlestane, 
 220. Shooting of Baillie Macmorran by the boys of the High School, 
 Edinburgh, 220. The "Octavians," 221. " Kinmont Willie," 222. 
 Beginning of the "decay" of Presbytery, 223. Contests between James 
 and the ministers, 224. Tumult in Edinburgh — its results, 225. James's 
 triumph over the General Assemblies, 226. Reasons for his success, 227. 
 Continued contests of James with the ministers, 228. Attempt to colonise 
 the island of Lewis, 230. 
 
 VIII. The Gowrie Conspiracy. The House of Ruthven — The young 
 Earl of Gowrie, 231. James's account of the Gowrie Conspiracy, 232 — 
 234. Evidence of Sprott and Logan, 234. Improbability of James's story 
 of the plot, 234. James succeeds in appointing three bishops, 236. James's 
 intrigues to obtain the English throne, 237. "The Conflict of Glenfruin," 
 238. Healing of feuds between Scottish nobles, 238. James succeeds to 
 the English throne, 239.
 
 x Contents. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 James VI, 1603 — 1625. 
 
 I. Establishment of Episcopacy. Effects of the Union of the Crowns, 
 240. James's continued policy of setting up Episcopacy in Scotland, 242. 
 Right of calling General Assemblies — the question at issue between James 
 and the ministers, 242. The Aberdeen Assemblies declared illegal, 243. 
 Trial of thirteen ministers — six found guilty, 244. " Restitution of the 
 Estate of Bishops," 245. Andrew and James Melville and six other ministers 
 summoned to England, 245. Their treatment, 246. James's scheme for 
 uniting the English and Scottish Parliaments, 246. Appointment of 
 " constant moderators," 249. Two Courts of High Commission set up, 
 249. General Assembly at Glasgow — How its votes were secured, 250. 
 It abolishes Presbytery, 251. Parliament at Perth sanctions Episcopacy, 
 251—252. 
 
 II. The Highlands, Islands, and Borders. James's policy in the 
 Highlands, Islands, and Borders, 252. Lawlessness in the country at 
 large, 253. The Clan Gregor, 253. The " gentlemen adventurers " in 
 Lewis, 254. The Clan Donald, 253. Commissions of Lord Scone and 
 Lord Ochiltree, 256. Bishop Knox's stratagem, 257. "Band and Statutes 
 of Icolmkill," 257. The Macdonalds of Islay, 258. Rebellion of Sir James 
 Macdonald, 260. The Orkney Islands — "Earl Pate," 261. Expedition 
 of the Earl of Caithness against the Orkneys, 262. The Borders — Com- 
 missioners of the " Middle Shires," 263. Scottish colony in Ulster, 264. 
 
 III. James's Visit to Scotland. Its objects, 266. Preparation at Holy- 
 rood, 267. The " Five Articles of Perth," 268. Policy against Roman 
 Catholics, 271. Nova Scotia, 272. Death of James — his character and 
 general policy, 274. 
 
 IV. General Progress of the Country. Changes in the Constitution, 
 276. Administration of justice, 277. Development of trade and industry, 
 278. Prominent persons during James's reign, 280. Literature, 281. 
 Education, 282. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 Charles I, 1625 — 1649. 
 
 I. The Act of Revocation. Friction between Charles and his subjects, 
 284. The Commission for Grievances, 285. Previous Acts of Revocation, 
 287. Difference between these and that of Charles, 287. Charles's policy 
 for securing the passing of the Act, 288. General dissatisfaction with the
 
 Contents. xi 
 
 proposal, 288. Commission for the Surrenders of Superiorities and Teinds, 
 289. The " Decreits Arbitral," 290. The " Burning of Frendraught," 291. 
 
 II. Charles's Visit. His coronation in the Chapel of Holyrood, 292. 
 Meeting of Parliament — its Acts, 293. Opposition in Parliament, 294. 
 Charles's unpopularity, 295. 
 
 III. Land's Liturgy. The English Liturgy, 296. Trial of Lord 
 Balmerino, 296 — 298. The Book of Canons, 298. Laud's Liturgy imposed 
 on the Scottish Church, 299. Opposition to its introduction, 300. Scene 
 in St Giles's Church, Edinburgh, 301. Discontent of the country, 301. 
 Organisation of the " Tables," 302. The " Supplication," 302. 
 
 IV. The National Covenant. Charles's answer to the "Supplication," 
 303. The "National League and Covenant," 304. The reign of bishops 
 at an end, 305. Marquis of Hamilton appointed Royal Commissioner, 305. 
 The "King's Covenant," 306. General Assembly at Glasgow, 307. It 
 abolishes Episcopacy, 308. The Earls of Montrose and Argyle, 309. 
 
 V. The First Bishops' War. Charles's plan for the invasion of Scot- 
 land, 310. Preparations of the Covenanters, 310. The "Large Declaration," 
 311. Strongholds secured by the Covenanters, 311. Fleet under Hamilton 
 in the Firth of Forth — its impotence, 312. Alexander Leslie appointed 
 Commander of the Covenanting army, 312. The Covenanters encamp on 
 Dunse Law, 313. Charles and his army at the Birks, near Berwick, 313. 
 The Pacification of Berwick, 314. 
 
 VI. The Second Bishops' War. Mutual distrust of Charles and the 
 Scots, 314. Meeting of General Assembly, 315. Meeting of Parliament, 
 316. Charles refuses to ratify its Acts abolishing Episcopacy, 317. Charles 
 prepares for a second appeal to arms, 317. Parliament meets without 
 Charles's sanction, 318. The Scots prepare for war — Leslie's commission 
 as Commander-in-chief renewed, 318. The Scots march into England, 319; 
 rout the royal forces at Newburn and enter Newcastle, 219. Negotiations 
 at Ripon and London, 320. English Parliament concludes an arrangement 
 with the Scots, 321. 
 
 VII. Charles in Scotland. State of parties in Scotland — the "Incen- 
 diaries" and "Plotters," 322. Charles in Edinburgh, 323. Assignment 
 of public offices, 323. Conduct of Hamilton and his brother, 324. "The 
 Incident," 325. Departure of Charles for England, 326. 
 
 VIII. The Solemn League and Covenant. State of parties in England, 
 326. Cleavage <>f parties in Scotland, 327. Charles and the English 
 Parliament compete for the aid of the Scots, 328. The strength of Scotland 
 thrown on the side of the English Parliament, 328. The " Solemn League 
 and Covenant," 329. A Scottish army enters England, 330. Effect of its
 
 xii Contents. 
 
 presence there, 330. Action of Montrose, 331. Wins six battles in succes- 
 sion, 332. Defeated by David Leslie at Philiphaugh, 334. Results of 
 Montrose's campaigns, 336. 
 
 IX. The Engagement. Unhappy state of the country, 336. Execution 
 of Royalists, 337. Rupture between the Scots army in England and the 
 Independents, 338. Charles rides into the camp of the Scots, 339. He 
 refuses to accept the Solemn League and Covenant, 339. Dilemma of the 
 Scots, 340. They surrender Charles to the English Parliament, 34 r. The 
 Scots army recrosses the Tweed, 341. The Westminster Assembly and 
 Scotland, 341. The "Engagement," 342. Hamilton, as head of the 
 "Engagers," levies an army for the invasion of England, 343. It is 
 destroyed by Cromwell at Preston, Wigan, and Warrington, 344. The 
 Covenanters of the West enter Edinburgh, 344. Alliance between the 
 Covenanters and Cromwell : protest of the Scots against the execution of 
 Charles, 345. Character of Charles's rule, 346. 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 Scotland and the Commonwealth, 1649 — 1651. 
 
 Dunbar and Worcester. Proclamation of Charles II, 349. Opposition 
 of Scottish parties, 349. The " Act of Classes," 350. Negotiations with 
 Charles, 350. Defeat and execution of Montrose, 351. Charles in Scot- 
 land, 352. Difficulties of the political situation, 352. Cromwell invades 
 Scotland, 352. Charles and the Covenants, 353. " Purging" of the Scottish 
 army, 353. Cromwell's overtures to the Scots, 354. His campaign round 
 Edinburgh, 355. Battle of Dunbar, 356. Results of Cromwell's victory, 
 359. State of parties in Scotland, 360. The "Start," 361. Charles 
 crowned at Scone, 362. Battle of Inverkeithing, 362. Charles marches 
 into England — Battle of Worcester, 363. 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 Scotland under the Commonwealth and the Protectorate, 
 
 1 65 1 — 1660. 
 
 Monk's victories in Scotland, 364. Eight English Commissioners 
 appointed for the government of Scotland, 366. " Declaration " by the 
 English Parliament, 366. The Commissioners at Dalkeith, 367. The 
 "tender" of union, 367. Scottish deputies from the burghs and shires in 
 London, 368. Dissolution of the Long Parliament, 369. Scotland under 
 the English Commissioners, 369. Barebones' Parliament and the Union, 
 370. The "Instrument of Covernment," 371. Royalist rising in the
 
 Conte)its. xiii 
 
 Highlands, 372. Monk again in Scotland, 372. Defeat of the Royalists 
 at Dalnaspidal, 373. Parliamentary elections in Scotland, 373. New 
 Commission for the government of Scotland, 374. The second Protectorate 
 Parliament and the Union, 374. Death of Cromwell, 375. Subsequent 
 history of the Union, 375. Fall of the Long Parliament, 376. Monk's 
 doings in Scotland, 377. General character of the Cromwellian rule in 
 Scotland, 378. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 Charles II, 1660— 1685. 
 
 I. Administration of Middleton. — Opposition between the Scottish 
 people and the Stewart kings, 380. Popularity of the Restoration, 381. 
 Appointment of Privy Council, 382. Arrest of Argyle, 382. Meeting of 
 Committee of Estates, 383. Meeting of Parliament — its Acts, 384. The 
 Rescissory Act, 385. Trial and execution of Argyle, 385. Re-establish- 
 ment of Episcopacy, 386. Sharp and Leighton, 386. Act of Privy Council 
 expelling Non-conforming ministers from their charges, 387. Fall of 
 Middleton. 
 
 II. Administration of Rothes. — Lauderdale and Rothes, 389. "The 
 Bishop's Drag-net," 390. Execution of Johnston of Warriston, 390. 
 Struggle between the Privy Council and the religious recusants begins, 391. 
 The "King's Curates," 391. Fining of recusants, 392. Court of High 
 Commission revived by Sharp, 393. Economical condition of the country, 
 394. Origin of conventicles, 394. Doings of Sir James Turner, 394. 
 The Pentland Rising, 396. Defeat of the insurgents at Rullion Green, 397. 
 Treatment of the prisoners, 398. Fall of Rothes, 400. 
 
 III. Administration of Lauderdale. — Milder policy towards the re- 
 cusants, 401. Reversion to former methods, 402. Opposition in Parlia- 
 ment, 403. "Letters of Intercommuning," 405. The Highland Host, 
 405. "Letters of Law-burrows," 406. Trial of James Mitchell, 407. 
 Murder of Archbishop Sharp, 408. Affair of Loudon Hill, 409. Rebellion 
 in the West, 410. Arrival of the Duke of Monmouth, 410. Battle of 
 Bothwell Bridge, 411. Treatment of prisoners, 412. 
 
 IV. Administration of the Duke of York. — State of Presbyterianism, 
 414. The Cameronians — The Sanquhar Declaration, 415. Fight at Aird's 
 Moss : death of Cameron, 416. Capture and death of Donald Cargill, 417. 
 The Duke of York arrives, 418. Meeting of Parliament. — Its Acts, 418. 
 The Test Act, 418. Argyle takes the Test with a qualification, 418. His 
 trial and escape, 419. Operation of the Test Act, 420. The Cameronians, 
 420. The " Apologetical Declaration," 421. Character of Charles's govern- 
 ment, 423. Baillie of Jerviswoode, 423. Death of Charles, 423.
 
 xiv Contents. 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 James VII, 1685 — 1 riSS. 
 
 I. The Dispensing Power.— Act of Indemnity, 425. Increased severity 
 against the recusants, 425. Graham of Claverhouse, 426. Cases of John 
 Brown and Margaret Lauchleson, 427. James's first Parliament — Its 
 Acts, 428. Argyle's invasion, 428. His capture and execution, 432. Im- 
 prisonment of Covenanters in Dunnottar Castle, 432. James's attempts to 
 introduce Roman Catholicism, 433. Letters of Indulgence, 436. Capture 
 and execution of James Renwick, 437. 
 
 II. The Revolution. — Catholic press set up in Holyrood, 438. Birth 
 of the Prince of Wales — Its effect in Scotland, 438. Address to the Scot- 
 tish people by William of Orange, 439. Dilemma of the Episcopalians, 
 439. Tumult in Edinburgh, 440. The "rabbling" of the "King's 
 Curates," 440. Convention in Edinburgh, 441. Duke of Hamilton chosen 
 president, 441. Graham of Claverhouse, 442. James declared to have 
 "forfaulted" the throne, 442. The Crown offered to William of Orange, 443. 
 
 III. Social condition of the country. — Lack of trees and enclosures, 
 444. Crops reared, 445. Houses of the lairds and nobles, 446. Inns, 
 446. Slovenly habits of the people, 446. Dress of the peasantry, their 
 food, and houses, 447. The upper classes, 447. The chief towns and 
 their appearance, 448. State of trade, 448. Witchcraft, 449. Church 
 discipline, 451. Learning and literature, 452. The Universities, 452. 
 Schools, 453. Conclusion, 454. 
 
 Bibliography 455
 
 MAPS AND PLAN. 
 
 I. Map showing the relative Numbers of Protestants 
 
 and Roman Catholics about 1590 . . To face page 208 
 
 II. Map showing the Division of Covenanters and 
 
 Royalists from 1644 ..... ,, 336 
 
 III. Map showing the Campaigns of Montrose, 
 
 Cromwell, and Argyll, with the old 
 
 divisions of the country .... To follow page 430 
 
 IV. Map showing the Highland Clans in the Six- 
 
 teenth Century ,, ,, 464 
 
 Plan. Battle of Dunbar .... page 358
 
 BOOK V. 
 
 The Religious Revolution, 1542 — 1578. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 MARY STEWART (REGENCY OF ARRAN), 1542 — 1 554- 
 
 English Sovereigns. French Kings. 
 
 Henry VIII ... 1509— 1547. Francis I 1515— 1547. 
 
 Edward VI ... 1547 — 1553. Henry II 1 547 — 1559- 
 
 Mary Tudor ... 1553— 1558. 
 
 Emperor: Charles V ... 1 5 19 — 1 555- 
 Popes: Paul III ... 1534— 1549. Julius III ... 1550— 1555. 
 
 I. The Abortive Marriage-treaty. 
 
 In the importance of its political and religious changes the 
 reign of Mary Stewart has its only parallel in the reign of 
 Uavid I. The reign of David saw the definitive establishment 
 of feudalism and the Roman Church ; that of Mary saw the 
 emergence of a middle class and the acceptance of Pro- 
 testantism as a national religion. While the reign of Mary 
 forms an epoch in the internal history of the country, it is 
 likewise the period when Scotland played its greatest part in 
 the commonwealth of nations. From the reign of James III 
 foreign relations had increasingly absorbed the attention of its 
 kings, but international conditions during the reign of Mary 
 
 B. s. 11. 1
 
 2 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 dominated its whole policy and determined its future develop- 
 ment. The Reformation was accepted in Scotland by the 
 highest consciousness of its people ; yet, but for the mutual 
 jealousy of France and Spain, it is probable that the Scottish 
 Reformation might never have become an accomplished fact. 
 Common action on the part of these two powers, supported 
 by the strength of the old religion in Scotland, would have 
 crushed Protestantism in England, with the inevitable result of 
 the universal domination of Rome. It was as the key to 
 England that Scotland attained that degree of importance 
 which makes the reign of Mary Stewart an integral part of the 
 history of Europe. 
 
 The disaster of Solway Moss and the death of James V 
 brought Scotland face to face with a crisis similar to that 
 which had followed Flodden. Again there was the prospect 
 of a long minority, and again Henry VIII was placed in a 
 position that threatened the existence of the nation. In 
 certain respects, indeed, the present case was fraught with 
 even greater peril than that which had been involved in the 
 calamity of Flodden. From the relative circumstances of the 
 two countries Henry was now a more formidable enemy than 
 he had been after that battle. At Flodden the majority of the 
 •natural leaders of the people had fallen, and the conduct of 
 affairs had to be entrusted to men who from youth or in- 
 experience were little fitted to face a juncture of exceptional 
 difficulty and peril. 
 
 In the period that followed the death of James V there 
 was no lack of men who by ability and position were equal 
 to the crisis through which the country was passing ; but 
 — what was more fatal to its well-being — the people and 
 its natural leaders were divided among themselves ' as to the 
 policy which it might prove wisest for them to follow. Was 
 the country to abide by its ancient faith and its traditionary 
 alliance with France ; or was it to adopt the new religion, and, 
 as a necessary consequence, to throw in its lot with the old
 
 Chap. iJ Mary Steivart {Regency of Arran) 3 
 
 enemy, England? Either alternative was one which honest 
 men and patriots could conscientiously adopt as in the interest 
 of their country. The undeniable corruptions of the Roman 
 Church in Scotland, and the contemptible character of the 
 clergy at large, were potent reasons for the trial of a new 
 faith; while for the alliance with England there were reasons, 
 the force of which could not be gainsaid by any intelligent 
 observer. 
 
 From the first the alliance with France had brought little 
 good to the Scots. Flodden had been one of its results ; yet, 
 since the day of Flodden, the foreign policy of the country 
 had been conducted in the interests of France, and Solway 
 Moss had been its similar disastrous consequence. Moreover, 
 it seemed in the nature of things a reasonable policy to seek 
 the friendship of a people, speaking the same language, living 
 in the same island, and possessing the power to harass its 
 weaker neighbours with the constant menace of its extinction 
 as a nation. On the other hand, there was much to be said 
 for the party that wished to follow the ways of its fathers. 
 Wherever the new religion had appeared, chronic strife or 
 actual war had been the consequence. Such also was to be 
 the result in Scotland ; but the strife of Protestant and 
 Romanist was not altogether evil ; and it was precisely out of 
 this conflict that a national consciousness was evolved which 
 has resulted in that type of mind and character universally 
 recognised as distinctively Scottish. As revealed in the 
 abundant documents of the period, the sayings and doings of 
 certain leading personages of the two Scottish parties cast a 
 strange light on the public morality of the time. Yet it would 
 be an error to suppose that in Scotland there was any pre- 
 eminence of wickedness. Sir George Douglas and Cardinal 
 Beaton had their fellows in every European Court ; and cor- 
 ruption, broken pledges, judicial murders, and assassination 
 were not peculiar to Scotland. 
 
 I — 2
 
 4 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 On the death of James V little time was lost in arranging 
 a form of government. Cardinal Beaton produced a will of 
 the late king, appointing himself, the Earls of Argyle, Moray 
 and Huntly to be the governors of the realm. This will, 
 however, was declared to be forged 1 ; and Beaton's scheme came 
 to nothing. The next heir to the Crown after Mary Stewart 
 was James, third Lord Hamilton and second Earl of Arran; 
 and in accordance with the Scottish precedent he was pro- 
 claimed Regent of the Kingdom and tutor to the young 
 queen (January 3, 1543). The position in which Arran found 
 himself would have been a difficult one for the highest political 
 genius, and Arran did not possess even average ability and 
 average force of character. At home he had Beaton and the 
 whole body of the clergy arrayed against him, and in 
 Henry VIII he had a friend or a foe according as he fol- 
 lowed or did not follow his bidding 2 . 
 
 Arran was soon face to face with the difficulties of his 
 position. To Henry VIII it seemed that the 
 victory at Solway Moss and the death of James V 
 must at length have brought Scotland to his feet. He 
 naturally thought that after such a disaster the Scottish people 
 would see the folly of their late king's policy and be prepared 
 to enter into friendly relations with their ancient enemy. The 
 numerous and influential Scottish prisoners now in Henry's 
 hands gave him a further hold on the affairs of Scotland; and 
 now that James V was dead, the Earl of Angus and his brother, 
 Sir George Douglas, might return to their native country and 
 use all their influence in the interests of England. From this 
 
 1 There can be little doubt that Beaton did forge the will. See the 
 Contemporary Jieview (September, 1898), where Dr Hay Fleming has 
 discussed the question, in reply to an article by Mr A. Lang in Blackwood 's 
 Magazine (March, 1898). The forging of documents was a common 
 practice of ecclesiastics all through the Middle Age. It has been said that 
 there was scarcely an abbey that had not at one time or other fabricated 
 charters. Giry, Manuel de Diplomatique (Paris, 1894), p. 874. 
 
 3 Hamilton Papers, I. 360.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart (Regency of Arret}/) 5 
 
 commanding position Henry conceived and carried out a line 
 of policy which for several years to come was still further to 
 embitter the hereditary hate of the two nations. This policy 
 was to unite in marriage the infant Scottish princess and his 
 son Edward, a child of five years, and on terms which only 
 a fortunate issue of events could turn to the advantage of the 
 weaker country. 
 
 Before the close of January Henry's schemes were in full 
 working. Angus and his brother returned to Scotland, and 
 were shortly followed by the Solway prisoners — each and all of 
 them being bound by solemn pledges, made secure by hostages, 
 to further English interests in Scotland. At first, it seemed as 
 if the "English lords," or "assured Scots," as they were called, 
 would be the prevailing party in the kingdom. On the 27th of 
 January Beaton was seized " in the governor's chamber, sitting 
 at Council''; and warded in the Earl of Morton's house at 
 Dalkeith. At a meeting of the Estates on March 12, English 
 interests gained a further victory. Three ambassadors were 
 appointed to treat with Henry regarding the marriage between 
 the Scots princess and his son, and an Act was passed per- 
 mitting the general use of the Bible in the vulgar tongue— 
 a decisive proof of the leanings of Arran and his present 
 advisers. The arrival of Sir Ralph Sadler on the day after 
 the Estates rose brought another addition of strength to the 
 English party; and everything promised the early success of 
 Henry's schemes 1 . 
 
 It soon appeared, however, that the nation at large was as 
 hostile as ever to the English alliance, and there were powerful 
 persons in the country who could give effect to its desires. On 
 the side of Beaton and favourable to France and the existing 
 religion were the Earls of Huntly, Moray, Both well, and 
 Argyle, who now openly opposed the concessions to heresy 
 and demanded the liberation of the Cardinal. But the afrival 
 
 1 Hamilton Papers, I. 367 — 372 ; lb. 397 ; Acts of Pari, of Scotland, 
 11. 411 et seq. ; Sadler, State Papers, I. 65.
 
 6 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 of two persons from France was to give a new turn to the 
 policy of Arran and to lead to the temporary ruin of the 
 English interest in Scotland. The one was the Earl of Lennox, 
 the other the Regent's bastard brother, John Hamilton, now 
 Abbot of Paisley and subsequently the successor of Beaton in 
 the see of St Andrews. It was at the suggestion of Beaton 
 that Lennox had come to Scotland ; and the results that 
 followed his appearance justified the prudence of the step. In 
 himself Lennox possessed no qualities to render him a formid- 
 able person in the country, but by his family claims he could 
 be made a dangerous rival to Arran. Both were descended 
 from the Princess Margaret, the daughter of James III — Arran 
 through the male line, Lennox through the female. As a 
 shadow of illegitimacy hung over Arran, however, the Cardinal, 
 with the powers of the Church at his disposal, had now a 
 weapon in his hands which he could use with deadly effect. 
 For other reasons Abbot Hamilton was likewise a powerful ally. 
 Devoted to Rome and France, he exercised an ascendency 
 over his feeble brother which made him the virtual head of 
 the house of Hamilton and the contriver of all its counsels 1 . 
 
 The negotiations with England went on through the spring 
 and summer; and at Greenwich, on July i, a double treaty 
 was concluded between the two countries. On the conclu- 
 sion of her ioth year Mary Stewart was to marry Edward 
 Tudor ; and from the date of the treaties there was to be 
 inviolable peace till a year after the death of one or other of 
 the parties. The terms of the marriage-treaty were far from 
 meeting Henry's wishes. He had originally insisted that Mary 
 should at once be put in his hands, and that as a condition 
 of the alliance the Scots should break their ancient league 
 with France. The Scots had yielded neither of these two 
 points : Mary was to remain in Scotland till the time of her 
 marriage, and France was to be included in the treaty of 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 27; Laing's Knox, 1. 105—6; Hamilton 
 Papers, I. 419.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart {Regency of Arran) 7 
 
 peace. Nevertheless, in the very fact that a marriage-treaty 
 had been effected, Henry had gained an important point, and 
 with the influence he could exert on the affairs of Scotland, 
 he might hope that sooner or later he would compass the 
 end at which he was aiming 1 . 
 
 While these negotiations had been proceeding, the party 
 favourable to France had not been idle. Before 
 
 s 543 
 
 the close of April, it had been observed that 
 Arran was wavering in his disposition towards England. French 
 gold was being poured into the country as liberally as English, 
 and it was believed that the Duke of Guise, the brother of 
 Mary of Lorraine, was only waiting for a favourable opportunity 
 to sail with a great armament for Scotland. Above all, Beaton 
 was at large in the beginning of April, and speedily had forces 
 at work against which the Governor made head in vain. A 
 great gathering of the clergy which immediately met at St 
 Andrews resolved to devote their own and the Church plate to 
 defeat the objects of Henry ; and the appearance of a French 
 fleet off the east coast at the end of June further strengthened 
 the Cardinal's hands. By a bold and sudden stroke he brought 
 matters to a point between himself and Arran. On the 21st 
 of July, attended by the Earls of Huntly, Lennox, Argyle, 
 and Bothwell, he entered Linlithgow at the head of 6000 or 
 7000 men. In accordance with the time-honoured Scottish 
 precedent his object was to seize the young queen, then residing 
 in the palace of that town, and thus to give his actions the due 
 form of law. The palace was strongly fortified, however, and 
 could not be taken without some delay. But he was now in a 
 position to effect his purpose without recourse to actual fighting. 
 In spite of the counsels and exhortations of Sadler, Arran 
 entered into negotiations with the Cardinal which ended in a 
 decisive triumph for the party of France. The queen was to 
 be taken from his custody and placed in the charge of four 
 persons, two of whom were to be named by himself and two 
 1 Kymer, Focdera, xiv. 786— -796.
 
 8 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 by his opponents ; and for the administration of affairs a 
 council was to be appointed as a check on his future conduct. 
 On the 26th of July the queen was removed from Linlithgow 
 to Stirling, and was thus secured from any desperate expedient 
 on the part of the English king 1 . 
 
 The conduct of Arran might have exasperated a less 
 irascible monarch than Henry. In the late ar- 
 rangement between the two Scottish parties 
 there had been no talk of breaking the English alliance ; and 
 on the very day the queen had been taken to Stirling peace 
 between the two countries had been proclaimed in the High 
 Street of Edinburgh. A month later (August 25), in the 
 Abbey Church of Holyrood, Arran solemnly ratified the 
 Greenwich treaties, though it is to be noted that only those 
 favourable to England put in their appearance. But by the 
 middle of September a succession of events was reported to 
 Henry which awoke in him all the wrath of which he was 
 capable. He had at first been opposed to Arran's appoint- 
 ment as Regent, but he had since done his utmost to secure 
 his support. He had supplied him with money; he had 
 offered his daughter Elizabeth in marriage to his eldest son ; 
 and he had proposed to make him king of Scotland beyond 
 the Forth. But after long wavering Arran at length succumbed 
 to the predominance of the Cardinal. On the 4th of Septem- 
 ber they met at Falkirk, and in the evening of the same day 
 proceeded in company to Stirling, where they were received 
 by Lennox, Huntly, Argyle, and Bothwell. The Cardinal's 
 ' triumph was complete : on the 8th Arran did penance for his 
 apostasy in the Church of the Franciscans in Stirling — Both- 
 well holding the towel over his head as he received the 
 sacraments ; and on the following day the queen was crowned 
 in the chapel of Stirling Castle. As the pledge of Arran's 
 submission, all the strong places in the country were placed in 
 
 1 Hamilton Papers, I. 505; 7o. 384; 512; 590 et seq. ; 597.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart {Regency of Arrah) 9 
 
 Beaton's hands to do with them what he pleased. Arran was 
 still to remain the nominal head of the kingdom, but he was 
 to be directed by a council, of which the Queen-mother and 
 Beaton were to be members, together with certain bishops, the 
 large majority of whom were in the interests of France 1 . 
 
 The late revolution had proved that Beaton was stronger 
 than Arran ; yet there was a powerful party in the country 
 whose interests and whose leanings were all with England. 
 To this party belonged the Earls Angus, Glencairn, Marischal, 
 Cassillis, and Rothes, with a large body of the lesser barons ; 
 and in Sir George Douglas it possessed a representative who 
 was a match for the Cardinal himself in craft and resolu- 
 tion. An important accession to its strength now made the 
 party still more formidable. The Earl of Lennox, having now 
 served Beaton's purpose, was cast aside as no longer of 
 primary importance, and he turned to England at once to 
 find his revenge and to further his interests. On his return 
 to Scotland, he had been led to expect that he might marry 
 the Queen-mother and take the place of Arran as regent. 
 Having been fooled by the Cardinal, he now bethought 
 him that he might attain his ends by a different road. By 
 a marriage with Lady Margaret Douglas, the daughter of the 
 Earl of Angus, and the niece of Henry, he might still outwit 
 the Cardinal and become the first person in the country. 
 In the beginning of October he was able to do a piece of 
 service for Henry which greatly commended him to that king. 
 A fleet of seven French ships arrived at Dumbarton, bringing 
 money and munitions of war and having on board two am- 
 bassadors from France and a papal legate, Marco Grimani, 
 Patriarch of Aquileia. Having received early news of its 
 arrival, Lennox and Glencairn contrived to possess themselves 
 of the money and stores that had been intended to strengthen 
 the French party in Scotland"'. 
 
 1 Hamilton Papers, I. 363; 626; 501; II. 38. 
 - //'. 11. 92—3; 103.
 
 
 IO The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 The drift of events, however, still showed that the advan- 
 tage lay with the friends of France. Lords 
 1543 ° j ... 
 
 Somerville and Maxwell were seized on their 
 way to England with treasonable papers and lodged in 
 Edinburgh Castle. So strong was the feeling of the citizens 
 of Edinburgh against Henry that in the beginning of Novem- 
 ber his ambassador Sadler was forced to seek refuge in 
 Tantallon, the stronghold of the Douglases. Towards the 
 end of the same month Arran and the Cardinal went in com- 
 pany to Dundee and laid hands on three prominent supporters 
 of England — the Earl of Rothes, Lord Gray, and Balnaves — 
 the last well known through his association with John 
 Knox. The Parliament that met on December 3 carried out 
 all the wishes of Beaton and put the seal to his policy. Its 
 most important business was the matter of the late treaties 
 of peace and marriage with England. The course of events 
 had proved that, on the part of the Scots, these treaties had 
 been sanctioned against the will of the nation. In now 
 declaring them null and void, however, a plausible pretext had 
 to be found to place before the world. It was declared that 
 before the treaties were ratified, the king of England had seized 
 certain Scottish ships and had not yet restored them. Other 
 r legislation was all in the same direction. The ancient treaties 
 with France were renewed ; stringent laws against heresy 
 were passed; and Beaton was made Lord Chancellor of the 
 kingdom 1 . 
 
 Having thus made his ground sure, the Cardinal proceeded 
 with his policy of stamping out all novelties in politics and 
 religion. It was the spread of heresy that now received 
 his special attention. During the last years of James V 
 Beaton had already shown what heretics had to expect at 
 his hands; but the burnings of 1534 and 1540 had not 
 checked the progress of the new faith. In Arran's Parlia- 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 29; Hamilton Papers, II. 136 — 7; lb. 187; 
 Acts of Pari, of Scotland.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart {Regency of A r ran) II 
 
 ment of March, 1543, it had been made lawful to translate 
 the Bible into the vulgar tongue ; and the concession re- 
 sponded to a widespread demand. If a cart-load of Bibles 
 were sent to Scotland, the English Privy Council was told 
 " they would be bought every one." Already, also, there were 
 ominous indications that the populace was ripening for that 
 work of spoliation and destruction which they carried out so 
 effectually when the change of religion actually came. In 
 Perth and Dundee sacrilegious hands had been laid on the 
 property of the Church ; and the example set by these towns 
 became an alarming precedent for the rest of the country. The 
 Papal legate, Grimani, who had come to Scotland in October, 
 I 543, bore striking testimony to the alarming religious state of 
 its people. But for the special interposition of God, he 
 declared, Scotland would soon be in as bad a case as England 
 itself. But, as affairs now stood, every deserter from Rome 
 was an accession to the English party. There was, therefore, 
 a double reason why the Cardinal should do his utmost to 
 make an end of all heresy. In the vigorous crusade on which 
 he now entered he was attended by Arran as the secular head 
 of the kingdom — doubtless unwillingly, for whatever his faults 
 or virtues, the unhappy governor had not the soul of an in- 
 quisitor. Dundee and Perth were the two hotbeds of heresy, 
 and thither towards the end of January, 1544, they made 
 their progress. Dundee received the first lesson, but it was 
 at Perth that the terrors of the law were most fully revealed. 
 Three men and one woman were there publicly executed 
 for heretical opinions— with what result was to be seen 
 before many years. In Perth it was that John Knox, on 
 his final return to Scotland in 1559, made that beginning of 
 his work which was to be the end of the ancient Church in 
 Scotland 1 . 
 
 1 Hamilton Papers, I. 445; Stevenson, Mary Stewart : A Narrative of 
 the First Eighteen Years of her Life, p. 51; Diurnal of Occutrents, p. 30; 
 ., Works, I. 117. 

 
 12 The Religions' Revolution [Book v 
 
 The opening of the year 1544 saw the decisive triumph of 
 the new government over its political opponents. 
 The English lords had not acknowledged the 
 late revolution; and, on the 10th of January, Angus, Lennox, 
 Glencairn, and Cassillis brought together a considerable force 
 at the town of Leith. Arran and the Cardinal were then in 
 Edinburgh, and it was the hope of the insurgents to draw them 
 out of the city and to try the issue of a battle. Their hope 
 proved to be vain ; and, as they could not hold their forces 
 together, they were driven to make the best bargain they could. 
 The terms they accepted implied the ruin of their party. 
 They were to abandon the English alliance, and "to take a 
 plain part in defence of Scotland." As a pledge of their good 
 faith, the Douglases were either to give up Tantallon Castle 
 or put the two sons of Sir George Douglas in the hands of the 
 Governor — an undertaking which Sir George eluded by giving 
 up himself. For a time Lennox still continued to give trouble, 
 but by the beginning of April he also was effectually brought 
 to submission. Having fortified himself in the Castle of 
 Glasgow, he was there besieged by Arran, the Cardinal, and the 
 lords of their party, and after a sanguinary siege he was 
 forced to surrender — eighteen of his followers being hanged as 
 traitors 1 . 
 
 The French party now appeared to have the country at 
 their will, but a terrible reckoning was at hand. The "revolt" 
 of Arran, as it was called, threw Henry VIII into a paroxysm 
 of rage ; and Henry's passions were as persistent as they 
 were violent. One of the great objects of his life had been 
 the fusion of the two countries through the means of a 
 marriage settlement; and, at the moment when he seemed 
 within reach of his end, the defection of Arran had ruined 
 all. Moreover, the new turn of affairs in Scotland was 
 specially inopportune. At this moment Henry was at war 
 with France, and again as of old the Scots would be a thorn 
 
 1 Hamilton Papers, 11. 250; Diurnal of Occur rents, \>. 31.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart {Regency of Arniri) 13 
 
 in his side. Revenge and necessity, therefore, alike drove 
 him to seek the chastisement of a people who had given 
 him so much trouble in the past, and who had now added 
 mockery to their refusal of all his overtures. Circumstances 
 did not permit immediate vengeance, but it was never out of 
 his thoughts till the fitting moment came. In December he 
 declared war unless the Greenwich treaties were accepted, yet 
 he still delayed to strike. The Emperor Charles was now his 
 ally against France, and he tried hard but unsuccessfully to 
 persuade Charles to aid him in chastising France's ancient 
 ally. The tidings that the English lords had gone over to the 
 enemy at length determined him to postpone his reckoning no 
 longer. Through the opening months of 1544 he had taken 
 counsel with those experienced in the Scottish wars ; and by 
 the end of April his plans were matured and his means were 
 ready. 
 
 On Sunday, the 4th of May, an English fleet appeared off 
 Newhaven in the Firth of Forth, bringing the 
 
 ■544 
 
 veteran Earl of Hertford at the head of a force 
 equal to the execution of all his master's purposes. The 
 Governor and Beaton, with a hastily gathered army, faced him 
 between Leith and Edinburgh, but after a feeble show of fight 
 they fled together to Linlithgow, leaving Hertford to work his 
 will. Leith was first taken, and the capture of Edinburgh 
 immediately followed. It was Henry's wish that the Castle 
 should be seized and garrisoned with English troops, but 
 Hertford found that this would be a work of time which in 
 the end might turn to his own discomfiture. As far as was in 
 his power, however, he made the weight of his arm felt. 
 Within a circuit of five miles the country was laid waste, and 
 the palace of Holyrood and the town itself given to the flames 
 —the women, he reported, exclaiming as they watched the 
 work of destruction, "Wo worth the Cardinal!" This part of 
 his enterprise accomplished, he took his way home by land, 
 and, as was then the custom in every Christian country, he
 
 1 4 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 visited on the innocent people the sins of their rulers. His 
 line of march was marked by a series of blackened villages. 
 Musselburgh, Preston, Seaton, Haddington, and Dunbar were 
 among the places that suffered ; and on the 18th of May, at the 
 close of his destroying career, he could tell his master " that 
 the like devastation had not been made in Scotland these many 
 years'." 
 
 The country was now at war with England, and only war 
 was wanting to crown its misery. The invasion 
 of Hertford, however, would appear to have had 
 one good result : it reconciled for a time the leaders of the 
 French and English parties. While Hertford was in the 
 country, Angus," the lords Maxwell and Gray, and Sir George 
 Douglas were released from their ward, and so conducted 
 themselves that Henry could only count on Glencairn and 
 Lennox as representing his interests in Scotland. But the 
 healing of this division only issued in another which was 
 equally disastrous to unity of action. Since the death of 
 James V the Queen-mother had played but a secondary part 
 in public affairs ; but, as her subsequent career was to show, 
 she had both the ambition and the capacity to be the head of 
 the State. Apparently she now saw an opportunity of attaining 
 this end, and she entered into an alliance, which in view of the 
 past relations of the two parties is sufficiently startling. In 
 concert with the Douglases she made an attempt to displace 
 the Regent Arran on the ground of his incompetency, and to 
 take his office upon herself. It was at the end of May that 
 the scheme took definite shape ; and for some months the two 
 parties faced each other. So equal were they in strength that 
 each professed to hold a Parliament in November to give 
 effect to their schemes. Supported by Beaton, however, Arran 
 carried the day. At a meeting of Estates on November 6 he 
 was confirmed in his office, the intended Parliament of the 
 Queen-mother was denounced as illegal, and the Douglases 
 1 Hamilton Papers, II. 360 et seq.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stcivart {Regency of A r ran) 15 
 
 were declared guilty of treason. Thus thwarted in her am- 
 bition, Mary of Lorraine had to wait ten years till a more- 
 favourable opportunity came 1 . 
 
 In these distracted counsels it was fortunate that only 
 two of the English lords took up arms against their country — 
 Glencairn and Lennox. In May Glencairn collected a 
 body of his adherents at Glasgow, but was defeated with 
 heavy loss by the Governor. Lennox was now bound to 
 England by his betrothal to Henry's niece, Lady Margaret 
 Douglas, and he was sparing no pains to prove his gratitude. 
 His efforts were as unsuccessful as those of Glencairn. 
 In an attempt which he made in August to capture the 
 Castle of Dumbarton he was repulsed and forced to take 
 refuge in England. It was from Henry's own soldiery, how- 
 ever, that the country had most to fear and most to suffer. 
 A large tract of the Border country was now in the hands of the 
 English, and many of the inhabitants even wore the red cross 
 in token of their changed allegiance. Through the summer 
 and autumn English raids were incessant, and in November 
 the Abbey of Coldingham was captured and garrisoned. On 
 the part of the Scots there was no concerted and vigorous 
 action. In July the Earl of Angus was made lieutenant of the 
 Borders, but he inflicted no check on the invaders, and failed 
 in the attempt to recover Coldingham Abbey 2 . 
 
 The year 1545 was signalized by three events, one of which 
 left an ineffaceable mark on the unfortunate 
 country. From Coldingham and other centres 
 now in their possession, the English border leaders seized 
 every opportunity of working havoc in the neighbouring dis- 
 tricts ; and continued success had made them careless and 
 overweening. It is even said that Sir Ralph Eure, the English 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurren/s, pp. 33 — 36 ; Privy Council Register, 1. 2 
 (note). 
 
 2 Diurnal of Occurrents, pp. 32, 33; Hamilton Papers, II. 4 16; lb. 
 453- 454-
 
 1 6 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 Warden of the Middle March, obtained a grant from Henry of 
 all the lands he could conquer in the Merse and Teviotdale. 
 "If they come to take seisin 1 in my lands," the Earl of Angus 
 is reported to have exclaimed, " I shall bear them witness to it, 
 and perhaps write them an instrument with sharp pens and red 
 ink." The English leaders were indeed to learn that they had 
 presumed too far on the impotence of the Scots. Towards the 
 end of February, the Governor Arran, accompanied by Angus, 
 Bothwell, Glencairn, and other nobles, led a strong force 
 towards the Border with the purpose of chastising their 
 countrymen who had given in their allegiance to England. 
 On receiving the tidings of this expedition, Sir Ralph Eure, 
 with an army of 3000 men, made haste to the protection of 
 his Scottish allies. At Jedburgh he learned that the enemy 
 was lying at Melrose, and he at once set out to meet them. 
 But the Scots had a design of their own, and when Eure 
 arrived no enemy was to be seen. Having given Melrose to 
 the flames, Eure, at nine in the morning of February 27th, 
 began his march back to Jedburgh. It was now that the Scots 
 put in force their ancient tactics. With increasing numbers 
 they waylaid the enemy, and at length on the moor above the 
 village of Ancrum, some three miles from Jedburgh, they 
 forced on a battle in circumstances specially favourable to 
 themselves. The English were at a disadvantage from the 
 outset, and, when in the middle of the fight the English 
 Scots deserted to their countrymen, their discomfiture was 
 complete. The defeat at Ancrum was one of the severest 
 checks the English ever received on the Border. Eure himself, 
 Sir Brian Layton, another notable Border leader, and almost 
 every person of account in the English host, were slain, while 
 the loss of the Scots was trifling alike in number and the 
 importance of those who fell. In their jubilation at their 
 notable victory Angus and Arran fell upon each other's necks, 
 
 1 In mediaeval law seisin or sasine means possession..
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart {Regency of A r ran) \j 
 
 the latter exclaiming that the loyalty of Angus was now beyond 
 suspicion '. 
 
 The disaster of his arms at Ancrum was at this moment 
 specially unpleasant for the English king. His late alliance 
 with the Emperor against Francis I was now at an end, and 
 he was fighting France single-handed. In the spring of 1545 
 there were rumours of a French invasion, which actually took 
 place in July ; and it was further bruited that a great French 
 armament was about to be sent to Scotland. In these 
 circumstances Henry once more made overtures of peace and 
 alliance to the Scots. To a convention held at Edinburgh 
 on the 17 th of April the Earl of Cassillis bore a message 
 from him to the Scottish government. If they would confirm 
 the Greenwich treaties, they were told, Henry was willing 
 to condone their late offences and to treat them as friends 
 and allies. But the French Scots were in no mood to 
 listen to these proposals. They were elated by the success 
 at Ancrum, and they counted on the speedy arrival of a 
 powerful reinforcement from France. Henry's offers were 
 decisively rejected, and at a later convention it was arranged 
 that a Scottish army should assemble on Roslin Moor by 
 the 28th of July to co-operate with the expected auxiliaries 
 from France 2 . 
 
 In the beginning of May the French fleet arrived, bringing 
 men, money, and arms on a scale that promised 
 great achievements. An experienced captain, 
 Lorges de Montgomery, led the French force, which consisted 
 of 3000 foot and 500 horse. On the 9th of August the united 
 armies, to the number of 6000 men, marched towards the 
 Border; but the result was what had invariably happened 
 when Frenchmen had appeared on Scottish soil. Inherent in- 
 compatibility had on previous occasions produced dissensions 
 between the allies; but, as things now stood, there were special 
 
 1 Hamilton Papas, 11. 562 — 569. 
 
 2 Tytler, Vol. ill. p. 31 (Edit. 1873). 
 
 h. s. II. 2
 
 1 8 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 causes of misunderstanding. Alike from interest and con- 
 viction the Scots who were friendly to England could not look 
 with approval on the threatened ascendency of France. How- 
 ever it may have been, the imposing force of the Scots and 
 their allies accomplished no great action. The English Border 
 was crossed, but within four days the combined host retraced 
 its steps, and disbanded without further achievement. The 
 Frenchmen lingered on in Scotland, and their experience 
 was similar to that of all previous bands of their country- 
 men. "That winter following," says Knox, "so nurtured the 
 Frenchmen that they learned to eat (yea, to beg) cakes which 
 at their entry they scorned. Without jesting they were so 
 miserably entreated that few returned to France again with 
 their lives'." 
 
 The clouds that had hung over England in the spring had 
 now cleared away. The threatened French invasion had been 
 attempted and had failed; and the enterprise of De Montgomery 
 had effected little for the Scots. Henry was now at his leisure, 
 therefore, to consider plans of revenge, and he again entrusted 
 their execution to the experienced Hertford. With a motley 
 host of English, Irish, Germans, French, Spanish, Italians, 
 and Greeks, that leader crossed the Border near Wark, and 
 proceeded to the work of destruction. It was the month of 
 September; but the harvest was late, and the time had been 
 deliberately chosen. Hertford's achievements answered all his 
 master's expectations. The Scots themselves testified that they 
 had never before been "so burned, scourged, and punished"; 
 and Hertford's grim catalogue of his own atrocities confirms 
 their testimony. Five market towns, two hundred and forty- 
 three villages, sixteen fortified places made part of the bill of 
 destruction. But he left other marks of his terrible progress 
 which commemorate to the present day the wrath of his master 
 and his own faithful service. As heretics, the English Border 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 39; Acts of Pari, of Scotland, II. 595 — 6; 
 Lemon, State Papers, v. 541; Knox, I. 123.
 
 Chap. iJ Mary Stewart {Regency of Arran) 19 
 
 leaders had ceased to make any distinction between sacred and 
 secular places. The ruin of the Abbeys of Kelso, Melrose, 
 Dryburgh, Roxburgh, and Coldingham was the work of 
 Hertford's miscellaneous host and not of the followers of 
 John Knox, as till recent years was the accepted tradition of 
 Scottish history 1 . 
 
 It is a singular testimony to Scotland's powers of resistance 
 that even in this hour of extremity Henry formed no de- 
 liberate plans for her conquest. His hope was that the 
 nation would at length come to see that there was no alter- 
 native but to throw over France and make the best terms 
 she could with himself. Chastisement and not subjugation 
 was his policy, and he steadily pursued his relentless purpose. 
 Unsatisfied with the late performances of Hertford, he medi- 
 tated further blows, nearer the heart of the country, and he 
 found allies in Scotland itself. Since the death of James V 
 the chiefs of the Western Islands had been in his pay, and 
 at this period it seemed that they were likely to do him 
 effective service. In concert with Lennox and Glencairn 
 they arranged an attack on the west coast with the special 
 object of capturing Dumbarton Castle. But the enterprise 
 miscarried, and the castle, though for a time in the hands of 
 Henry's allies, was speedily recovered by the Scottish Regent. 
 Another Scot, Lord Maxwell, did him a similar abortive 
 service. Maxwell's three great castles of Carlaverock, Loch- 
 maben, and Threave, were special objects of Henry's desire ; 
 and their owner was constrained to place them in his hands. 
 But Arran and his supporters displayed unexpected vigour; 
 and in the month of November all three strongholds were 
 recovered and placed in the keeping of loyal garrisons 2 . 
 
 1 Lemon, State Papers, v. 513 — 529; Haynes, State Papers, pp. 52 — 54; 
 Proceedings of Soc. of An/ii/. of Scot., I. 272 — 276. 
 
 a Gregory, History of the Western Highlands and Isles, pp. 168 et seq. ; 
 Diurnal of ' Occur rents, p. 41. 
 
 2 — 2
 
 
 20 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 II. George Wishart and Cardinal Beaton. 
 
 The year 1546 saw two events through which, in the words 
 of a contemporary, "all things were turned to a 
 new purpose" — the execution of George Wishart 
 and the murder of Cardinal Beaton. In Scotland, as we have 
 seen, many had already suffered for their faith, but the circum- 
 stances of the career and death of Wishart make him an 
 important historical figure. Alike by his training and his 
 associations, he was a person to be reckoned with by the 
 guardians of the old religion. He was educated in all the 
 learning of the time, and was possessed of all the fervour and 
 eloquence of a great popular leader. In 1 5 38 he had been driven 
 from Scotland on account of his heretical opinions, and had 
 subsequently travelled in England, Germany, and Switzerland. 
 He was intimately associated with the leaders of the "assured 
 Scots," and his final return to Scotland was in the company of 
 certain of their number. The boldness with which he pro- 
 ceeded to preach the new doctrine must have satisfied Beaton 
 that he was not a person to be left at large. Stringent laws 
 against heresy, we have seen, had been passed in December," 
 1543, and enough had been done to prove that they were not 
 to be a dead letter. Risking all these terrors, Wishart publicly 
 preached the new doctrines in Montrose, Dundee, and Ayr- 
 shire. The Cardinal, however, was only waiting his opportunity, 
 and it came at length. With the approval of certain gentlemen 
 of East Lothian, all of them bound to England, and supporters 
 of the new faith, Wishart carried his gospel to the town of 
 Haddington, where among his hearers was John Knox, who 
 had the duty of bearing a two-handed sword, "which commonly 
 was carried with the said Master George." As Haddington 
 was in the diocese of St Andrews, Beaton had a special interest 
 in preventing a thief from breaking into his fold, and he found 
 a secular instrument to give effect to his spiritual anxiety. The
 
 Chap. iJ Mary Stewart {Regency of A t rail) 21 
 
 Earl of Bothwell was the great feudal potentate of the district, 
 and on the 16th of January, 1546, he placed Wishart in the 
 Cardinal's hands. His fate was a foregone conclusion, and on 
 the 1st of March he sealed his testimony in front of Beaton's 
 own castle of St Andrews'. 
 
 It was speedily seen that alike in Beaton's own interest and 
 that of his Church the death of Wishart had 
 been a momentous blunder. Within less than 
 three months the fate that had so long been dogging the 
 Cardinal's steps at length came up with him. Assassination as 
 a means of cutting off a troublesome enemy, who could not 
 otherwise be reached, was approved by every Christian Court 
 in Europe throughout the 16th century. The devout Philip II 
 put it in practice as well as the cynical Catherine de Medicis. 
 'Since Beaton had entered public life he had set himself to 
 thwart the plans of Henry VIII, and he had now apparently 
 triumphed in the long contest of force and guile. Even during 
 the reign of James V Henry had employed means to entrap 
 his enemy. At length, in April, 1544, shortly before Hertford's 
 descent on Leith, a proposal was made to him which promised 
 to satisfy his desires. The proposal came from Alexander 
 Crichton, laird of Brunston in Midlothian, a person favourably 
 disposed alike to England and Protestantism. Through the 
 agency of "a Scottish man called W T ysshert" Brunston sent a 
 communication to Hertford, desiring him to procure his agent 
 an interview with Henry. When Hertford was informed of the 
 object of Wysshert's errand, he had no hesitation in bringing 
 about the desired interview. Its object, as Hertford had 
 learned, was two-fold. Sir James Kirkcaldy of Grange, late 
 Treasurer of Scotland, Norman Leslie, son of the Earl of 
 Rothes, and John Charteris, undertook to apprehend or slay 
 the Cardinal if they could count on Henry's approval and 
 support ; and, further, a number of Scots, among whom was 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occur/cuts, p. 41 ; Foxe, Acts and Monuments, II. 1267 — 8 
 (Edit. 1583); Knox, I. 125 el seq.
 
 22 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 the Earl Marischal, were prepared to destroy the Cardinal's 
 abbey and town of Arbroath, and " all the other Bishops' and 
 Abbots' houses'." 
 
 Brunston's plot had the hearty approval of Henry and his 
 Council, but it was a delicate business to carry through, and 
 nothing further came of it. In the following year (May, 1545), 
 a proposal similar to that of Brunston came from a higher 
 quarter. The Earl of Cassillis, who was one of the Solway 
 captives and an "assured Scot," offered to kill the Cardinal if 
 Henry would approve and seal his approval with a reward. 
 Cassillis also received encouragement; but Henry, though he 
 was fully informed of the offer, was scrupulous about showing 
 his hand, and Cassillis seemed to have considered his guarantee 
 unsatisfactory. In July of the same year Brunston again came 
 forward with renewed offers to rid Henry of his great enemy. 
 Sadler was entrusted with the delicate negotiations, and he 
 conducted them with a skill worthy of his experience and 
 reputation. The king's "gracious nature and goodness," he 
 wrote to Brunston, would not permit him to meddle with such 
 a business ; but if he (Sadler) were in Brunston's place the 
 first thing he would earnestly attempt would be to please God 
 and do good to his country by killing the Cardinal. The 
 correspondence was carried on into the autumn ; but it then 
 breaks off, and, as far as is known, these schemes of Cassillis 
 and Brunston had no direct connection with the tragedy of the 
 following year. What is noteworthy in the whole correspon- 
 dence is the fact that King Henry and his Council, composed 
 of the highest temporal and spiritual peers of England, should 
 in cold blood have approved a proposal to murder an enemy 
 who was otherwise beyond their reach' 2 . 
 
 1 Lemon, State Papers, V. 377, 378; Haynes, State Papers, pp. 32, 33. 
 
 2 Lemon, State Papers, v. 449, 466. — The coincidence of the name and 
 the fact that George Wishart was associated with the " assured Scots " 
 has raised the question whether he was not the "Scottish man named 
 Wysshert." So far as the evidence goes, no conclusion can be fairly drawn.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart {Regency of Arraii) 23 
 
 But the Cardinal had made so many enemies that the 
 wonder is that in feudal Scotland of the 16th 
 century he had not been cut off long before. 
 To certain honourable men and patriots he was hateful as the 
 mainstay of a ruinous and impossible public policy; and to 
 those of the new religion he was the incarnation of all that was 
 heinous in the ancient superstition. Others owed him a grudge 
 for his ambition and avarice, which excluded all but himself 
 and his creatures from a due share in place and authority ; and 
 some, the most dangerous of all, he had made personal 
 enemies whose feelings could be satisfied with nothing short of 
 his blood. He was well aware of the risks that beset him, and 
 in his castle of St Andrews he had made himself a home of 
 luxury and security, where he thought he might indulge his 
 tastes in peace. Strong as he had made his place of refuge, 
 however, his enemies at last took him at easy advantage. In 
 the early morning of the 29th of May a band of persons whose 
 numbers are variously stated, succeeded in entering the castle 
 with the deliberate purpose of assassination. In his own bed- 
 chamber they found their victim ; and when the citizens of 
 St Andrews awoke, they saw the lifeless body of the great 
 Cardinal suspended over the walls of his own castle. Of the 
 respective motives of the assassins it is impossible to speak 
 with certainty; but it is clear that reasons at once political, 
 religious, and personal variously prompted them to the barbarous 
 work. Two of the actors call for special note, for their 
 names and character are necessary for the right understanding 
 of their wild deed. Norman Leslie, the eldest son of the 
 Earl of Rothes, was accounted one of the most accomplished 
 of the highborn Scottish youth of his time, and by his subse- 
 
 The character and known actions of Wishart are certainly a strong pre- 
 sumption against his being the person. Moreover, it is difficult to believe 
 that the most eminent professor and preacher of the new faith should have 
 been employed in such a service- -on the ground of mere prudence and 
 policy.
 
 2 4 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 quent career in France approved himself an honourable and 
 gallant soldier. The other was William Kirkcaldy, son of Sir 
 James Kirkcaldy, late Treasurer of the realm, who came to be 
 Scotland's most distinguished soldier and to bear a reputation 
 for loyalty and good faith which give him a place among his 
 country's heroes. In truth, to the feudal barons, to the religious 
 zealots, and the practical politicians of the age, the murder of 
 Beaton was an expedient and justifiable enterprise; but the 
 higher conscience of the country found its expression in the 
 words of one who was no friend to the murdered churchman : 
 
 " But of a truth, the sooth to say. 
 Although the loon was well away. 
 The deed was foully done 1 ." 
 
 Cardinal Beaton was no moral monster such as were certain 
 of the Italian ecclesiastics of the Renaissance, but his pleasures 
 were gross, his ambitions were worldly, and of spiritual feeling 
 in him it is hard to find a trace. No feudal baron of the time 
 pursued his ends with less scrupulous purpose or less noble 
 aims. In his tastes he was magnificent ; he kept such a house, 
 we are told, "as was never holden in Scotland under a king 2 "; 
 but his name is associated with no enlightened and munificent 
 patronage of learning such as partially redeems the character 
 of many contemporary churchmen. To speak of him as a 
 patriot seems a singular misapplication of the word. He 
 placed the interests of his Church before the interests of his 
 country, and he placed his own interests before the interests of 
 his Church, as his forging of James's will signally proves. As 
 events were to show, he was the promoter of a policy which 
 ran counter to the natural development of the country. John 
 Major and Sir David Lyndsay, both adherents of the ancient 
 religion, saw that England and not France was the natural ally 
 of Scotland; but Beaton availed himself of the hereditary 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 42; Knox, 1. 174 and notes. 
 
 2 Hamilton Papers, I. 537.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Sfezvart (Regency of Arraii) 25 
 
 hate of England and continued the evil policy of exasperating 
 a powerful neighbour by that French alliance which had been 
 unfortunate from the beginning. Nor does his career entitle 
 him to the reverence and affection of those of his own religion. 
 As the most various testimony proves, the ancient Church of 
 Scotland died of sheer moral decay through the unfaithfulness 
 of its own ministers. Had Beaton possessed the will and the 
 character needed for her salvation, his life and his policy would 
 have been very different from what they actually were. By 
 precept and example he would have sought to renew her store 
 of moral energy, which, if it had not eventually saved her, 
 would at least have enabled her to die with a more becoming 
 
 III. The Castle of St Andrews. 
 
 If the slayers of Beaton expected an immediate revolution 
 in their favour, they were speedily undeceived. 
 Great as had been the part the Cardinal had I54 
 
 played, his death made no alteration in the two political parties 
 and in the policy they respectively pursued. Personally the 
 Regent Arran must have felt Beaton's removal to be a happy 
 deliverance, and, if he had been free to follow his own interests 
 and desires, he would doubtless have resumed his original 
 policy of seeking an understanding with England. But there 
 were two great obstacles to his adopting this course. As was 
 soon to be proved, the Queen-mother, Mary of Lorraine, was 
 far more powerful in the country than himself; and, moreover, 
 the majority of the Scottish people were as bitterly opposed as 
 ever to any suggestion of an English alliance. There was thus 
 no alternative for Arran but to follow the course to which the 
 Cardinal had committed him ; and the punishment of his 
 murderers, who had made themselves at home in the strong- 
 hold of their victim, was thrust upon him as his immediate 
 duty. Measures were at once taken to bring them to justice
 
 26 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 and to arrange the affairs of the kingdom. On May 23, within 
 a fortnight from Beaton's death, the Privy Council met at Edin- 
 burgh, and was attended by the leaders of both political parties. 
 Its deliberations decisively showed what were for the moment 
 the prevailing counsels in the country : the rejection of the 
 English alliance was unanimously confirmed, and the Earl of 
 Huntly was appointed Chancellor in succession to Beaton. On 
 June 10th the Estates met in Edinburgh, and dealt with the 
 pressing business of St Andrews. All concerned in the slaughter 
 of the Cardinal were declared guilty of treason ; and, to carry 
 the law into effect, the country was divided into four districts, 
 each of which in succession was to provide its contingent of 
 armed men for the siege of the Castle 1 . 
 
 The whole story of the siege is a striking commentary 
 on the impotence of the government. When their numbers 
 were greatest the defenders amounted to only 150 persons, 
 yet there were circumstances which gave considerable advan- 
 tage to this scanty garrison. The Cardinal had made his 
 place of refuge as strong as the military art of the time 
 could make it, and he had left it liberally stored with food 
 and wine. The besieged had also a card in their hands 
 which they could play with much effect. Among those whom 
 they had found in the Castle was the eldest son of the 
 Regent, who had been committed to Beaton as a pledge for 
 his father's good faith. But the main hope of the outlaws 
 was that permanent division of parties which made an effective 
 administration impossible. Ostensibly the Regent, Mary of 
 Lorraine, and the Douglases, were now working in concert; 
 but so radically were all three opposed in their hopes and 
 their aims that there could be no common action among them. 
 The siege began in August, but so feeble were the efforts of 
 the besiegers and so inadequate their means of attack, that 
 it dragged on till the middle of December. On the 21st of 
 that month Arran consented to an arrangement with the de- 
 
 1 Privy Council Register, I. pp. 23 et seq. ; Acts of Pari, of Scot.
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart (Regency of Arrau) 27 
 
 fenders which revealed the weakness of his own position. By 
 this "Appointment," as it was called, the defenders were to 
 retain the Castle till an absolution for the slaughter of the 
 Cardinal should come from Rome ; and no one who had been 
 concerned in the deed was to suffer in person or goods either 
 by spiritual or temporal law 1 . 
 
 On January, 1547, Henry VIII died. He had scourged 
 Scotland as no English king had scourged her 
 since Edward I ; yet his death, like that of I547 
 
 Beaton, effected little change, for better or worse, in the 
 unhappy country. The Earl of Hertford, the merciless agent 
 of his will, took up his policy, and even surpassed his master 
 by the vigour with which he gave it effect. The weight of 
 his hand was soon to be felt; but meanwhile the country N 
 awaited the result of the arrangement with the desperate party 
 in the Castle of St Andrews. In April that party was rein- 
 forced by one who, beyond every Scotsman of his time, was 
 to influence the future of his country. After being hunted 
 from place to place as a heretic and a friend of England, 
 John Knox was driven to seek refuge with the murderers of 
 the Cardinal. In such circumstances and in such singular 
 company he was set apart for that mission of preacher and 
 prophet which he was to fulfil with a combination of prudence 
 and zeal and self-devotion which have given him a place 
 among the religious forces of the world. No apostle ever 
 began his mission under less happy auspices. Of the persons 
 with whom he now found himself he testified that " their 
 corrupt life could not escape punishment of God;" and his 
 prediction was to have notable fulfilment. On the 21st of 
 June, the Castilians, as the garrison of the Castle came to be 
 called, at length received their answer from Rome. In a 
 clause in the Absolution {Remittimus irretnissibile) they de- 
 lected a snare into which they refused to run their heads, 
 and they gave the Regent to understand that without "a 
 
 1 Keith, 1. 124, 127.
 
 28 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 sufficient and assured absolution" they would not "deliver 
 the house." Both parties had doubtless from the beginning 
 expected this result, and had been making their arrangements 
 accordingly. The Castilians had sought and received both 
 money and provisions from England, and looked for still 
 further assistance from the same quarter. On his part, the 
 Regent had made urgent application to France ; and recent 
 changes in that country ensured a ready and effective response. 
 Francis I died on March 31, and his death proved to be a 
 far more important event for Scotland than the death of 
 Henry VIII. Under his successor, Henry II, the two brothers 
 of Mary of Lorraine, Francis, Duke of Guise, and Charles, 
 Cardinal of Lorraine, attained an ascendency which made 
 them the virtual rulers of France. In their niece, Mary Stewart, 
 the two brothers had an instrument which could be used with 
 supreme effect in building up the fortunes of their house. 
 That the Scottish queen should be in their absolute control 
 was of paramount importance to the success of their schemes ; 
 and, as a first step towards this end, a fleet of twenty galleys, 
 under the command of one of the most skilful soldiers of the 
 time, Leo Strozzi, Prior of Capua, was despatched to the 
 assistance of Arran. The Castilians soon found that they had 
 an enemy to deal with more formidable than their ill-equipped 
 and inexperienced countrymen. The French ordnance, di- 
 rected by trained gunners and engineers, played with deadly 
 effect on their defences, and the formidable attack was aggra- 
 vated by plague and famine within. In these straits their case 
 was desperate, and in the space of a month they were driven 
 to accept such terms as were offered (July 21). The lives 
 of all in the Castle were to be spared, and they were to be 
 transported to France, where they were to have the option of 
 accepting service with the French king or of withdrawing to 
 any country except their own. Knox, who had such excellent 
 reason to remember the fact, has told how the French kept 
 their pledge. On the arrival of the whole party in France,
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart (Regency of Arraii) 29 
 
 those who belonged to the rank of gentlemen were deposited 
 in various prisons throughout the country, and the remainder 
 were sent to the galleys. Among the last was Knox himself 
 whose nineteen months' experience as a galley-slave is one 
 of the remarkable chapters in the history of the world's great 
 men. But what is a still more surprising freak of destiny, it 
 was Knox the galley-slave who more than any other man was 
 to destroy the long ascendency of France in the affairs of 
 Scotland 1 . 
 
 IV. Somerset's Invasion. 
 
 The fall of the Castle of St Andrews seemed a decisive 
 triumph for the party of France and the old 
 religion ; and a doggerel couplet of the time gave 
 exulting expression to the general feeling : 
 
 1547 
 
 " Preastes, content yovv now; preastes, content yovv now; 
 
 " For Normond 2 and his cumpany hes filled the gallayis fow 3 ." 
 
 The triumph was short-lived, for the nation was on the eve 
 of one of the great calamities of its history. The late suc- 
 cesses of the French in Scotland only roused England to 
 greater efforts to recover its influence in that country. The 
 Earl of Hertford, now Duke of Somerset and Lord Protector 
 of England, made it his first object to recall the Scots to a 
 sense of their real position. If they chose France as their 
 friend and ally, they must count on England as their foe. 
 The only other alternative was alliance with England on the 
 basis of a marriage between the Scottish queen and Edward 
 VI. To impress these facts on the Scottish people Somerset 
 crossed the Border in the first week of September, at the 
 
 1 Knox, 1. [85, 203, 206; Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 43; Rymer, 
 FaJera, XV. 133, 144. 
 
 2 Norman Leslie. 3 lull.
 
 30 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 head of 18,000 men. He took his march along the east 
 
 coast, attended by a fleet commanded by Lord Clinton, and 
 
 found the Scots awaiting him at Musselburgh, about six miles 
 
 from the capital. On the news of the English invasion the 
 
 Regent had done his utmost to meet the enemy on equal 
 
 terms. The fiery cross had been sent through the country, 
 
 and the summons had brought together a force considerably 
 
 more numerous than that of England. It seemed, also, that 
 
 all feuds and factions were for the time forgotten. Huntly, 
 
 Angus, and Argyle, all three bitter enemies and rivals, brought 
 
 their followings ; and on the side of the Scots it was the versatile 
 
 Angus who won the honours of the day. The Regent had 
 
 chosen an admirable position with the water of Esk in front, 
 
 and the sea at some distance on his left. On Friday, the 
 
 9th of September, Somerset took his ground on the slopes 
 
 of Fawside Hill, the Esk water separating the two hosts. In 
 
 a preliminary skirmish the Scots suffered considerable loss, 
 
 and an important prisoner was taken in the heir of Lord 
 
 Hume. On the morning of the following day, long known 
 
 in Scotland as " Black Saturday," the English were gratified 
 
 by a sight similar to that which gratified Cromwell at Dunbar. 
 
 With inconceivable folly the Scots abandoned their strong 
 
 position, and, crossing the Esk, gave battle to the enemy in 
 
 circumstances that made their defeat certain. On the low 
 
 ground, known as Pinkie Cleuch, between the slopes of 
 
 Fawside and the Firth of Forth, they were between the fires 
 
 from the galleys of Clinton and from Somerset's ordnance on 
 
 Fawside Hill. A slight advantage at first raised the hopes 
 
 of the Scots. At the head of a detachment of cavalry Lord 
 
 Gray dashed on the spearmen of Angus, who " stood as even 
 
 as a wall " and drove back the enemy in headlong rout and 
 
 with considerable loss. But when the battle became general, 
 
 the difficulties of the Scottish position were speedily apparent. 
 
 Harassed between the two fires, their ranks were broken by 
 
 the charges of the English horse, and thrown into irretrievable
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart {Regency of A r ran) 31 
 
 confusion, while their own cavalry were lying inactive on the 
 west bank of the Esk. The rout that followed was one of 
 the most disgraceful in the military annals of the Scots. In 
 one direction they were pursued as far as Dalkeith, in another 
 to the gates of Edinburgh, both places about six miles distant 
 from the field of battle. While the English loss was incon- 
 siderable, that of the Scots was disastrous. Fifteen hundred 
 prisoners, among whom was the Chancellor Huntly, were 
 taken ; and the number of the slain was estimated at about 
 ten thousand 1 . 
 
 The results that followed the battle of Pinkie recalled the 
 times of the War of Independence. The day 
 following the battle, Leith was given to the 
 flames ; and, though pressing affairs called Somerset to England, 
 the commanders he had left behind him had captured, before 
 the end of September, Broughty Castle at the mouth of the 
 Tay, and the islands of Inchcolm and Inchkeith in the Firth 
 of Forth — all important strongholds near the heart of the 
 kingdom. In the same month a formidable force under Lord 
 Wharton and the Earl of Lennox harried the West March; 
 and these leaders were able to report that the whole of Annan- 
 dale would shortly be subject to the English king 2 . 
 
 Yet the main object of Somerset's expedition was as far 
 off as ever. Even after Pinkie the Scots had no thought of 
 seeking peace with England by giving up their queen. Im- 
 mediately after the battle she was sent to a safe asylum on 
 the island of Inchmahome in the Lake of Menteith. Other 
 measures now taken showed that those at the head of affairs 
 were as firmly resolved as ever to follow the traditional policy 
 
 1 English Hist. Review, July, 1898. This article has been embodied 
 by its author, Mr Pollard, in his England tinder the Protector Somerset 
 (1900); Knox, I. 206 — 214; Diurnal of Occur rents, pp. 44 — 45; Accounts 
 of the Lord Treasurer, Aug. 28, 1547; Patten, The Expedition into 
 Scotland; Holinshed, p. 239 ; Leslie, 197. 
 
 2 Diurnal of Occurre fits, p. 45; Leslie, pp. 200, 201; Bain, Calendar 
 of Scottish Papers, 1. 21.
 
 32 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 of the country. Their urgent business now was to drive the 
 English from those strongholds which they had seized after 
 the late disaster, but in their own strength they were unequal 
 to the task. In a Council held at Stirling, attended by Arran, 
 Mary of Lorraine, D'Oysel, the French agent, and the chief 
 nobility, it was resolved to appeal once more to France. 
 Through this appeal and its consequences all the labours of 
 Henry VIII and Somerset were for a time to be undone, and 
 Scotland was to run the risk of becoming a dependency of the 
 French king 1 . 
 
 Meanwhile, the English were making a deliberate attempt 
 
 at the permanent occupation of the country; 
 
 and, with the forces at his disposal, the Regent 
 could offer no effective resistance. An army under Argyle 
 failed to recover Broughty Castle ; and the only advantage 
 gained by the Scots was a reverse inflicted in Dumfriesshire 
 on a marauding expedition under Wharton and Lennox. In 
 April, 1548, the English commander, Lord Gray, took a step 
 which was a serious menace to the independence of the country. 
 Having seized and fortified the town of Haddington, the most 
 important place strategically between Edinburgh and the 
 Border, he made it a centre from which he could carry fire 
 and sword into the surrounding districts. He burnt in suc- 
 cession Dalkeith Castle, Musselburgh, and Dunbar, and he 
 was able to report to Somerset that he had " under assurance 
 the greater part to Edinburgh and beyond 2 ." 
 
 V. French Ascendency. 
 
 Relief came to the Scots in the course of the summer. In 
 June a French fleet appeared in the Firth of 
 Forth bringing a force of 6000 men, commanded 
 
 1 Leslie, pp. aoo, 203. 
 
 2 Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 45 ; Bain, Calendar 0/ Slate Papers, I. 
 111 — 116.
 
 Chap. iJ Mary Stewart {Regency of Arran) 33 
 
 by Andr£ de Montalembert, Sieur d'Esse, and Leo Strozzi, 
 who had distinguished himself by the capture of the Castle of 
 St Andrews. The most pressing business on hand was the 
 recovery of Haddington ; and by the first week of July a com- 
 bined force of Scots and French sat down before it. But 
 ere the siege had well begun a matter of the first moment 
 was settled. The Scots were now to learn that, in coming to 
 their aid, the King of France expected an adequate return. 
 In a meeting of the Scottish Estates held (July 7) in the 
 Abbey of Haddington, about a mile distant from the town, the 
 French Ambassador, D'Oysel, made known his master's de- 
 sires. The young Queen of Scots should be sent for safety 
 to France, there to be married to the Dauphin; and, in the 
 event of his desire being gratified, the French king bound 
 himself to defend Scotland against all her enemies as he would 
 defend France herself. "In ane voice" the Estates accepted 
 the proffered conditions, though on the express condition that 
 the ancient laws and liberties of Scotland should remain intact, 
 whatever might be the future relations of the two countries. 
 Though the assent of the Estates is said to have been given 
 "in ane voice," there were, in truth, many leading persons 
 in the country, and notably the Regent himself, who were 
 strenuously opposed to the new French alliance. But, sup- 
 ported as she was by the formidable force of her countrymen, 
 Mary of Lorraine had for the moment her daughter's destinies 
 in her hands. At the end of July the queen was conveyed 
 from Dumbarton, and on the 13th of August she reached the 
 coast of France, which was to be her home for the next thirteen 
 years. " France and Scotland," exclaimed Henry II, when 
 he heard of her arrival, "are now one country 1 ." 
 
 To drive the English from the country was the next step 
 towards the accomplishment of the designs of France. The 
 
 1 Diurnal of ' Occurrents, p. 46; Lain, I. 134; Acts of Pari, of Scotland, 
 11. 481 ; Philippson, 1. 1 19. 
 
 B. S. II \
 
 34 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 task proved both tedious and hard. As had invariably hap- 
 pened when Frenchmen made a protracted stay in Scotland, 
 the essential incompatibility of the two peoples prevented 
 their acting in hearty concert ; many powerful men in the 
 country were but half-hearted in their approval of the new 
 alliance ; not a few nobles and lairds still continued in the pay 
 of England ; the places in the possession of the English were 
 both strong and well-garrisoned ; and the numbers of the Scots 
 and French combined did not give them an overwhelming 
 advantage. At first, however, it seemed as if Haddington, the 
 chief stronghold of the invader, was to be an easy capture. 
 By the end of July the garrison was in desperation from the 
 lack of food and ammunition, but a daring enterprise on the 
 part of two English captains relieved the besieged with re- 
 inforcements and supplies. This success was followed up by 
 an invasion conducted by the Earl of Shrewsbury, who, entering 
 Scotland with an army of 15,000 men, forced the French to 
 raise the siege and wasted for some weeks the country which 
 he traversed. But the Protector Somerset's troubles at home 
 effectually prevented the steady furtherance of his policy in 
 Scotland; and during the remainder of the war the Scots and 
 their allies gradually drove the invader from one stronghold 
 after another. By the spring of 1549 the chief 
 places held by the English — Hume Castle, Fast 
 Castle, and Broughty Craig — had all been recovered, and 
 Haddington alone remained to be taken. The arrival of 
 fresh reinforcements from France quickened the exertions of 
 the allies, and by the close of the autumn they at length 
 completed their task. Pressed by famine and pestilence, the 
 English force in Haddington evacuated the town (Oct. 14), 
 which they had occupied for more than eighteen months 1 . 
 
 1 Bain, 1. 150 et seq. ; Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 48. A detailed 
 account of the fighting between the English and the French is given in 
 the "Histoire de la Guerre d'Ecosse pendant les Campagnes 1548 et 1549," 
 by Jean de Beaugue. (Maitland Club.)
 
 Chap, i j Mary Stewart {Regency of A r ran) 35 
 
 It was now more than five years since the Earl of Hertford 
 had led his memorable expedition against Leith and Edin- 
 burgh, and during the whole of that period Scotland had been 
 subjected to an ordeal such as she had not known since the 
 War of Independence. Cleft in twain by the dissensions of 
 the English and French parties, she had had to resist, as best 
 she could, all the efforts of Henry VIII and Somerset to bend 
 her to their purpose. That she survived the trial is a striking 
 testimony at once to the high spirit of the people and to the 
 stability of the kingdom. 
 
 In the spring of 1550 Scotland became an assenting party 
 to an arrangement which assured to her a few 
 
 . . . I 55° 
 
 years of comparative tranquillity. By the Treaty 
 of Boulogne, concluded between England and France on the 
 24th of March, she was finally freed from the presence of the 
 invader — the English undertaking to relinquish every strong- 
 hold which still remained in their possession. The course was 
 now open for the further development of French policy in 
 Scotland ; and, as that policy became more clearly revealed, 
 Scotsmen of all parties began to realise that they had only 
 exchanged one formidable enemy for another. In spite of all 
 the efforts of her successive kings, England had never gained 
 such a position in Scotland as was now held by France. 
 A French woman was the most powerful person in the country; 
 the Scottish queen, in spite of the continued protests of 
 England, would soon be the wife of the heir of France ; and 
 the chief strongholds in the country were garrisoned by French 
 soldiery. Inspired by her brothers, the Duke of Guise and the 
 Cardinal of Lorraine, the Queen-mother addressed herself to 
 convert Scotland into a province of France. There were 
 already indications that she would have to walk warily if 
 she was to effect her purpose. The presence of the French 
 soldiery in their country was every day becoming more distasteful 
 to the Scots. The lourth month after the arrival of D'Esse', 
 a light, in which many lives were lost, hud been fought in the
 
 36 The Religious Revohitioji [Book v 
 
 streets of Edinburgh between the citizens and the strangers; 
 and all through the late campaigns the French, as the Scots 
 complained, had wrought as much havoc as the English them- 
 selves. With the objects she had in view, Mary of Lorraine 
 could not wholly dispense with the presence of her country- 
 men, but she now sent home as many of them as she could, 
 retaining only such as were necessary to hold the most im- 
 portant strongholds in the kingdom 1 . 
 
 The next step of the Queen-mother was to make herself in 
 
 name what she was already in fact — the first person in the 
 
 kingdom. We have seen that during the lifetime of Cardinal 
 
 Beaton she had made an unsuccessful attempt to take Arran's 
 
 place. But, as things now stood in Scotland, she could repeat the 
 
 attempt with much greater chance of success. Arran, indeed, 
 
 was still in the way, but late events had shown how little 
 
 power he really possessed. For the strongest family reasons 
 
 he had been opposed to the late alliance with France. It 
 
 had been his desire that his own son and heir might marry the 
 
 Queen of Scots, and thus ensure the Scottish Crown to the 
 
 House of Hamilton ; but through the late French treaty he had 
 
 lost the great opportunity and had to be content with the bribe 
 
 of the Duchy of Chatelherault for himself and the command of 
 
 the Scottish Guard for his son. Nevertheless, the path of the 
 
 Queen-mother's ambition was not quite smooth. There was no 
 
 valid precedent for a woman's assuming the Regency ; there 
 
 were many powerful persons who looked with disfavour on the 
 
 encroaching ascendency of France in the affairs of Scotland ; 
 
 and, in spite of the feebleness of the Regent, the House of 
 
 Hamilton was always a formidable power in the country. As 
 
 the most direct means of attaining her end, Mary proceeded to 
 
 the French Court in September, 1550, taking in 
 
 her train certain of the leading Scottish nobles. 
 
 1 Knox, I. 221 — 224; Teulet, 1. 703; Hamilton Papers, II. 616; Leslie, 
 P- 2 33-
 
 Chap, i] Mary Stewart (Regency of Arran) 37 
 
 Won over by much French gold, these nobles lent her their 
 support in the main object of her visit, which, moreover, was 
 as desirable to Henry II as to herself and her brothers. From 
 France a deputation was sent to Arran to request him to 
 demit the Regency, and to offer him as compensation the 
 French duchy which had already been held out to him. 
 Greatly against his will Arran accepted the proffered con- 
 ditions \ and in November, 155 1, the Queen- 
 mother returned to Scotland, after visiting the 
 court of Edward VI on the way 1 . 
 
 The arrangement made with Arran was that Mary of 
 Lorraine should assume the Regency when her daughter 
 reached the age of twelve. Apparently this delay did not 
 meet her wishes, for immediately after her return she brought 
 further pressure to bear upon Arran. But Arran had now at 
 his side his half-brother, the Archbishop of St Andrews, whom 
 ill-health had for some time prevented from taking an active 
 part in public life, and he refused to be coerced. At length, 
 the Queen-mother brought matters to a point. Summoning 
 a council of the chief nobles, she put this question before 
 them — When did Mary Stewart attain the age of twelve? As 
 Scotland was now virtually a part of France, the same question 
 was laid before the Parliament of Paris. By both bodies it 
 was decided that in the case of princes it was prudent to 
 reckon their years from the earliest date possible. Fortified 
 with this decision the Queen-mother succeeded in bringing 
 Arran to submission, and on the 12th of April, 1554, some 
 seven months before her daughter had attained the age of 
 twelve, she was proclaimed by the Estates to be Regent of 
 Scotland. "A new and till that day unheard-of spectacle," says 
 Buchanan, " was this to the Scottish people : for the first 
 
 1 Leslie, pp. 234 — 8; Register of Privy Council, I. 108, 117; Vene- 
 tian Calendar, v. 361; Journal of Ld ward K/ (Clarendon Hist. Soc), 
 p. 48.
 
 38 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 time was a woman promoted to the government of the 
 kingdom '." 
 
 1 Leslie, pp. 244 — 246; Teulet, 1. 264; Buchanan, p. 305. Knox 
 writes (though the expression was not original) that the Queen-mother's 
 coronation was "als seimlye a sight (yf men had eis) as to putt a sadill 
 upoun the back of ane unrewly kow." — Mary of Gueldres, the mother of 
 James III, was never regent ; and though Margaret Tudor, the widow of 
 James IV, assumed the office, she was not permitted to retain it.
 
 CHAPTER IT. 
 
 REGENCY OF MARY OF LORRAINE, I 554 — I 5 59. 
 
 English Sovereigns. 
 
 
 French Kings. 
 
 
 Mary Tudor ... 1 553— 
 
 -1558 
 
 Henry II 
 
 1547- 
 
 -1559 
 
 Elizabeth 1 558— 
 
 -1603 
 
 Francis II 
 
 1559- 
 
 -1560 
 
 
 
 Charles IX 
 
 1560- 
 
 -1574 
 
 King of Spain. 
 
 
 Popes. 
 
 
 
 Philip 11 1555 — 
 
 -1598 
 
 Julius III 
 
 Marcellus II 
 
 1550- 
 
 1555 
 
 -1555 
 
 
 
 Paul IV 
 
 1555- 
 
 -1559 
 
 
 
 Pius IV 
 
 1559- 
 
 -1566 
 
 I. French Domination. 
 
 The measures taken immediately by the Queen-Regent 
 proved at once her great authority in the country 
 and her steady determination to make Scotland 
 an appanage of France. A redistribution of the great offices 
 of State was her first step ; and it was significant that the most 
 important of these were placed in the hands of Frenchmen. 
 One Bartholomew Villemore was made comptroller; De Roubay 
 was entrusted with the Great Seal and appointed colleague to 
 the Chancellor Huntly ; and at a later date one Bonet was placed 
 over the Orkney Islands. As her chief adviser Mary chose the 
 French ambassador, D'Oysel, who had played such an impor- 
 tant part in the recent transactions between the two countries'. 
 When it is remembered that, with the exception of the Castle 
 
 1 Leslie, 2^0, 251.
 
 4-0 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 of Edinburgh, the chief fortresses of the country were garrisoned 
 by the French soldiery, it will be seen that Mary of Lorraine 
 had a fair prospect of realising all her desires. 
 
 The first year of her rule saw the temporary ruin of the 
 greatest noble and highest official in the country. During 
 the unsettlement that followed the battle of Pinkie there 
 had been the habitual disturbances in the Highlands and 
 the Western Islands. As her conduct of the government 
 was to prove, Mary of Lorraine was not a ruler to be lightly 
 defied ; and she at once took energetic measures to restore 
 order among the offending chiefs. In June the Earls of 
 Argyle and Huntly were respectively entrusted with a fleet and 
 an army to execute the Regent's orders. The task of Argyle 
 was to carry fire and sword against the Clanronald, Donald 
 Gorme, and Macleod of Lewis ; while Huntly was to support 
 him with a force that was to be raised in the country beyond 
 the Dee. Both leaders failed in their attempts ; and the 
 Regent was apparently convinced that in Huntly's case there 
 had been treasonable dealing. Acting on this suspicion, she 
 warded him in the Castle of Edinburgh, stript him of the 
 Earldoms of Moray and Mar, which had been lately added 
 to his domains, and ordered him to retire to France for the 
 next five years. On the payment of a large sum, however, he 
 was permitted to remain in Scotland, and nominally to retain 
 the office of Chancellor ; but the powers and privileges of the 
 office remained in the hands of the Frenchman De Roubay till 
 the close of the regency of Mary of Lorraine 1 . 
 
 Scotsmen of all parties could not fail to see whither the 
 
 Regent's policy was tending; and there were visible signs 
 
 which must have warned her that she was going a dangerous 
 
 way. In a Parliament that met in June, 1555, it was 
 
 found necessary to pass an Act which reveals 
 
 the working of the public mind. The Act was 
 
 1 Leslie, 251 — 2; Register oj Privy Council, XIV. 12, 13.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 41 
 
 entitled "Anent the speaking evil of the Queen's Grace or 
 Frenchmen"; and it threatened severe penalties against all 
 such as sought "to stir the hearts of the subjects to hatred" 
 against France. But it was not till the following year that the 
 
 Regent met the first decided opposition to the 
 
 ,•1 t JL c l & 
 
 policy she was pursuing. In the summer 01 
 
 that year a Parliament 1 met in Edinburgh, one of the measures 
 of which was doubtless a prudent step on the part of the 
 Regent. At the special request of the French king 2 , the 
 Lairds of Brunston, Grange, Ormiston, and others, who had 
 been more or less directly concerned in the murder of Cardinal 
 Beaton, were relieved from their forfeitures, and permitted to 
 return to their own country. If this was a prudent measure in 
 her own interest, a proposal which she made to the same Parlia- 
 ment proves that she never really understood the nation she had 
 been so eager to govern. The proposal was that, for the purpose 
 of national defence, a standing army should be created and 
 maintained by a permanent tax on the property of the country 3 . 
 The manner in which the proposal was received must have 
 convinced the Regent that she had made a false step. Three 
 hundred barons, assembling in the Abbey Church of Holyrood, 
 despatched two of their number, the Lairds of Calder and 
 Wemyss, to represent their objections to her scheme. Their 
 forefathers, they declared, had made good the defence of their 
 native country, and their sons were no whit inferior to them in 
 hardihood. Their kings, moreover, had ever been entitled 
 "kings of Scots" — the title implying that they were the masters 
 of their country but not of their money or substance. With 
 the best grace she could the Regent abandoned her project : 
 
 1 It was known as the "Running Parliament," a name given because 
 it met at intervals. There were several other " Running Parliaments" in 
 ScoitUh history — Leslie, 254. 
 
 2 Leslie, 254. 
 
 3 A standing army had existed in Fiance miicc 1430, when it was cieated 
 by the Ordinance of Orleans.
 
 42 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 but the mere fact that she had entertained it deepened the 
 suspicions that had already taken possession of the public 
 mind'. 
 
 Certain events of the year 1557 brought vividly home to 
 the Scots that there were two sides to the late 
 
 I 557 
 
 compact made with France. Henry II was now 
 at war with Philip of Spain; and Philip, as the husband of 
 Mary Tudor, could reckon on the support of England. To 
 give England occupation, therefore, Henry had recourse to the 
 traditional policy of France : he appealed to Mary of Lorraine 
 to declare war against that country. The appeal was peculiarly 
 inopportune, as at this very moment English and Scottish 
 commissioners were engaged in friendly deliberations at Carlisle. 
 But the main object of the Regent's government was precisely 
 to promote the interests of France, and she made haste to give 
 effect to Henry's appeal. In a council held at Newbattle she 
 urged immediate war with England, but was met by a flat 
 refusal on the part of the lords who were present. Such a war, 
 they declared, might be in the interest of France, but was 
 certainly not in the interest of Scotland. By a dexterous 
 move, however, the Regent attained her end. Contrary to the 
 terms of the late treaty with England, she gave orders to 
 D'Oysel to fortify the village of Eyemouth in the teeth of 
 the English town of Berwick. Hostilities at once began, and 
 the Scottish commissioners at Carlisle were recalled from 
 their deliberations. In October a large army was brought 
 together at Kelso, and the Regent eagerly pressed for the 
 invasion of England. To this step, the leading nobles — 
 Chatelherault, Huntly, Argyle, Cassillis, and others — refused 
 to give their consent. They were willing, they said, to do 
 their utmost in defence of their own country; but an in- 
 vasion of England would involve risks which it would be 
 folly to run. In high indignation the Regent disbanded the 
 
 1 Leslie, 254—5.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 43 
 
 army, and had to content herself with petty hostilities on the 
 Border 1 . 
 
 Meanwhile France had been passing through one of the 
 most serious crises in her history. In the battle of St Quentin 
 (August 10, 1557), fought against Philip II, she had sustained 
 such a crushing defeat that Paris itself was endangered. In 
 these circumstances it became more urgent than ever that 
 Scotland and France should be one country. But recent 
 proceedings had shown that Scotland was not content to be 
 a mere tool of France. It was full time, therefore, to 
 insist on the fulfilment of the main point in the treaty of 
 Haddington — the marriage of the Dauphin and the young 
 Queen of Scots. Accordingly, on the 30th of October, 
 Henry addressed a letter to the Scottish Estates requesting 
 commissioners to be sent to France to make the necessary 
 arrangements for the union. The Estates met in December, 
 and appointed nine of their number to conduct the necessary 
 negotiations. Of the nine it is noteworthy that two — the 
 Lord James Stewart and Erskine of Dun — were already known 
 as supporters of the new religious opinions. In the precise 
 instructions given to the Commission we see the jealous fear of 
 future encroachments on the part of France. The ancient 
 laws, liberties, and privileges of Scotland were to be observed 
 by both princes in every eventuality; and in case of the queen's 
 dying without heirs the Duke of Chatelherault was to be 
 acknowledged as her successor. 
 
 The following year (1558) saw the apparent fulfilment of 
 all the desires of Henry II and the family of 
 Guise. On the 24th of April the Dauphin of 
 Prance and the Queen of Scots were married in the Church of 
 Notre Dame in Paris ; and the unusual splendour of the cere- 
 monial showed the importance that was attached to the event. 
 The treaty had been signed on the 19th of April, and in its 
 
 1 Leslie, 260. — As the devoted adherent of Mary Stewart, Leslie nalurally 
 gives the mo.->t lavourable account he ran ol her mother's government.
 
 44 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 terms the independence of Scotland was as securely guarded 
 as words could effect. But we are now aware of a sinister 
 transaction of which the Scottish commissioners knew nothing. 
 Fifteen days before the signing of the public treaty the Queen 
 of Scots, now in her sixteenth year, became a party to a secret 
 compact which throws an interesting light on the political 
 morality of the time. In three papers, which she was induced 
 to sign, Scotland was made over as a free gift to the French 
 king in the event of her dying without heirs. To ensure the 
 execution of this arrangement, Henry was to be left master of 
 Scotland till the payment of the bill for Mary's maintenance 
 and education in France. The third paper contained the most 
 startling statement of all. It was there written that, whatever 
 treaties had been or should be made, this secret compact 
 should be regarded as the only valid arrangement between the 
 two countries'. Before the commissioners left Paris a demand 
 was made of them which could not fail to raise further suspicions 
 regarding the ultimate aims of Henry and his advisers. They 
 were asked to use their influence to have the Scottish crown 
 sent to France to be placed on the head of the Dauphin. 
 They replied that their instructions contained no hint concern- 
 ing such a demand, which, in their opinion, was fitted to 
 provoke misunderstandings between the two nations. On their 
 way home a singular event formed an ominous close to the 
 joyful errand of the commissioners. Of the nine, who made 
 up their whole number, four died on the way — a coincidence 
 that could not fail to excite suspicions in an age when assassina- 
 tion was one of the recognized resources of diplomacy 2 . 
 
 1 Labanoff, Lettres de Marie Stuart, i. 50 et seq. 
 
 2 The four commissioners who died were all persons of note. They 
 were Reid, Bishop of Orkney, the Earls of Cassillis and Rothes, and Lord 
 Fleming.
 
 Chap. iiJ Regency of Mary of Lorraine 45 
 
 II. The Religious Revolution. 
 
 At the close of 1558 it seemed as if the ascendency of 
 France in Scotland were assured. In a meeting 
 of the Estates held in November it was decreed 
 that the demand which Henry II had made of the Com- 
 missioners should be granted. The Scottish crown was to be 
 sent to France, "to the intent that the most Christian King 
 and King Dauphin her [Mary's] husband may understand with 
 what zeal and affection her subjects are minded to observe and 
 recognise her spouse." To give the better grace to the gift, it 
 was to be conveyed by two persons known for their hostile 
 attitude towards French influence and the ancient religion — 
 the Lord James Stewart and the Earl of Argyle. But in this 
 apparent triumph of her policy Mary of Lorraine had reached 
 the limit of her success. It was now to be seen that all along 
 her action had been opposed to the best intelligence and the 
 deepest conviction of the nation. The year 1559 was to prove 
 the most momentous year in the history of the Scottish people. 
 Through the events of that year Scotland was to make a 
 breach with its past that divides its history in twain. Of 
 the forces that directly issued in this revolution one has been 
 constantly before us in the narrative of the rule of Mary of 
 Lorraine. The dread of France had now become as keen 
 as the traditional dread of England ; and with the ablest of the 
 national leaders it had become a fixed conviction that if the 
 country was not to become a French province the time for 
 action had arrived. As it happened, their patriotism was re- 
 inforced by a spiritual quickening of the best minds of the 
 people which supplied the requisite motive-power for revolu- 
 tion. The teachers of the new religion identified France with 
 Rome, and for the triumph of their opinions they believed it 
 to be the indispensable condition that the country should be 
 Ireed Irom the influence of France. In the events that now
 
 4& The Religious Revolution L BooK v 
 
 followed religion and patriotism went hand in hand; and it was 
 only the exigencies of the moment that determined which 
 should be put before the world as the special ground of 
 action. 
 
 Since the death of Cardinal Beaton the new religious 
 opinions had made steady progress among the Scottish people. 
 The testimony of official records puts the fact beyond ques- 
 tion. In June, 1546, within a fortnight after Beaton's death, 
 the Privy Council found it necessary to pass an Act " against 
 invading, destroying, and withholding of Abbeys 1 .*' In March 
 of the following year a Provincial Council of the Scottish 
 clergy met at Edinburgh, and urgently besought the Regent 
 [Arran] to take steps for the defence of the true religion — 
 their reason being that the land is "now infected with the 
 pestilentious heresies of Luther's sect and followers 2 ." The 
 records of another Provincial Council, which met in 1549, 
 bear the same testimony, and make the candid confession that 
 the root of the evil is the incompetence and vicious lives of the 
 clergy themselves 3 . The burning of Adam Wallace (1550) on 
 the Castle Hill of Edinburgh only served to promote the 
 cause for which he suffered. In 1551 the Estates passed an 
 Act against all who printed " ballads, songs, blasphemous 
 rhymes" against the Church 4 . It is to the credit of a Pro- 
 vincial Council which met in 1552 that it sanctioned the 
 publication of the admirable exposition of Catholic doctrine, 
 known as Archbishop Hamilton's Catechism ; yet the directions 
 given for its use are a striking attestation to the necessity of 
 a vital religious reform. Rectors, vicars, and curates are 
 warned not to read it in church except they can do so without 
 stumbling, as otherwise they might excite the jeers of their 
 congregations ; and they are exhorted to qualify themselves by 
 
 1 Privy Council Reg., 1. 28, 29. 
 
 2 Robertson, Slat. Eccles. Scot., I. CXLVI, note. 
 
 3 Ibid., II. 82—4. 
 * Ibid., II. 136.
 
 Chap. 11] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 47 
 
 daily practice to discharge this office in a manner that will tend 
 to the edification of their flock'. 
 
 A succession of events in England gave a direct impulse to 
 the spread of Protestant opinions in Scotland. In July, 1553, 
 Mary Tudor became Queen of England; and her unsparing 
 action against heresy drove many persons to seek refuge in the 
 northern kingdom. Of these persons two were Scotsmen and 
 noted as specially energetic and successful in gaining adherents 
 to the new faith — William Harlow and John Willock. Harlow, 
 originally a tailor in Edinburgh and subsequently a Protestant 
 preacher under Edward VI, now devoted himself to the 
 spiritual needs of his own countrymen and achieved such success 
 that on the establishment of Protestantism as the national 
 religion he was appointed minister of St Cuthbert's in Edin- 
 burgh. Willock was to play a still more distinguished part. 
 Unlike Harlow, he was a scholar and a trained theologian, and 
 stands next to Knox among the Scottish reformers. Another 
 event in English history bore directly on the religious de- 
 velopment of Scotland. The marriage (July, 1554) of Mary 
 Tudor to Philip of Spain was fraught with serious conse- 
 quences for France. In the prolonged struggle between the 
 two countries Spain could now reckon on the support of 
 England ; and it was now more necessary than ever that 
 France should have their old allies the Scots at their disposal. 
 To alienate any section of her subjects by harsh dealing would 
 at this moment have been peculiarly ill-timed on the part of 
 Mary of Lorraine; and for the next few years the Protestants 
 of Scotland knew little of the terrors of the contemporary 
 Marian persecution and of the chambre ardente of Henry II in 
 France. 
 
 It was during this period of respite to his cause that John 
 Knox paid his first visit to Scotland since his exile. It was in 
 the autumn of 1555 that he came, and during a stay of about 
 
 1 Robertson, ibid., II, 137, 138.
 
 48 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 ten months he at once defined the aims and spread the faith 
 of the Protestant party. In Edinburgh, in Forfarshire, and 
 Ayrshire he found many willing listeners ; and it was not till 
 May 1556 that he was called to account for his defiance of 
 the laws that had been passed against heresy. Summoned to 
 the Blackfriars Church in Edinburgh, he appeared with such 
 a following of Protestant gentlemen that the spiritual authorities 
 deemed it the wiser course to abandon their intended proceed- 
 ings against him. A letter from Geneva relieved them of his 
 presence, and in July (1556) he returned to that city, leaving 
 notable proofs of his mission behind him. Among the chief 
 persons who had more or less ardently supported him were 
 the Lord James Stewart, afterwards the Regent Moray ; Lord 
 Erskine, afterwards the Regent Mar; the Earl Marischal, 
 the Earl of Glencairn, and Erskine of Dun — all of whom 
 were to play more or less important parts in the approaching 
 revolution 1 . 
 
 With every year the party of the new religion grew at 
 once in the number of their adherents and the boldness of 
 their demands. In December 1557 there appeared the first 
 manifesto of Protestantism in Scotland, which is further 
 memorable as the first of those religious "bonds" or "cove- 
 nants " so frequent in the subsequent history of the country. 
 In unambiguous words the signatories (the Earls of Argyle, 
 Glencairn and Morton, Lord Lome and Erskine of Dun) bound 
 themselves never to rest till they had set up as the national 
 religion the faith which they had themselves adopted. When 
 such was the spirit and such the aim of the Lords of the 
 Congregation, as they now began to style themselves, the 
 mortal struggle between the old faith and the new could not 
 8 be long delayed. The events of the year 1558 
 
 brought the two parties face to face with the 
 inevitable issue of their conflict. In the opening of that year 
 
 1 Knox, 1. 245 et seq.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 49 
 
 the Protestant lords presented a petition to the Regent in 
 which they gave sufficiently moderate expression to their 
 demands. They urged the need of an immediate reform "of 
 the wicked, slanderous, and detestable life of Prelates and 
 of the State ecclesiastical;" and for themselves they claimed 
 the right of public and private prayer in the common speech, 
 of explaining and expounding the Scriptures, and of Com- 
 munion in both kinds 1 . They were speedily reminded that 
 they were not yet masters of the country, and that there was a 
 limit to the patience of the existing spiritual authorities. On 
 the 28th of April, Walter Mill, "a man of decrepit age," who 
 had once been a priest, was burnt at St Andrews on a charge 
 of heresy. 
 
 The burning of Walter Mill, like the burning of Patrick 
 Hamilton and George Wishart, was a blunder in the interest of 
 the Church itself. In the case of all three, the sympathies 
 of the people were with the victims rather than with their 
 judges. On the death of Mill the Protestant preachers became 
 more energetic than ever. John Douglas and William Harlow 
 (of whom we have already heard) taught publicly in Leith and 
 Edinburgh, Paul Methven in Dundee, and others in Angus 
 and the Mearns. When summoned to Edinburgh (July 19th) 
 to answer for their defiance of the Church, they appeared with 
 such a following that the authorities deemed it prudent to 
 postpone immediate action against them. An incident which 
 happened a few weeks later in the streets of Edinburgh showed 
 how popular opinion was tending in the capital. As the clergy 
 were bearing in procession the image of St Giles, the patron 
 saint of the capital, they were mobbed by the populace, and 
 the image seized, dashed to the ground, and mutilated - '. 
 
 The year closed with another petition of the Protestant 
 leaders, which they presented to the Regent with the request 
 that she would submit it to the Estates which were to meet in 
 
 ' Knox, Works, 1. 301. 
 2 Ibid. I. 259 — 261. 
 B. S. II.
 
 50 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 November. This she refused to do, and the petitioners drew up 
 another document which they presented in their own persons 
 to the Estates. In this "Protestation" they claimed absolute 
 freedom of worship, and, after denouncing the acknowledged 
 evils in the Church, they made use of words, which, in view 
 of the near future, are charged with special significance. " We 
 protest," they say, "that if any tumult or uproar shall arise 
 among the members of this realm for the diversity of religion, 
 and if it shall chance that abuses be violently reformed, that 
 the crime thereof be not imputed to us, who most humbly do 
 now seek all things to be reformed by an order 1 ." The 
 petitioners desired that their protest should be entered in the 
 proceedings of the Estates; but this was refused, and the protest 
 bore no immediate fruit Yet an event had happened in this 
 same month of November, which — though neither party could 
 then foresee the issue — was to be a turning-point in the history 
 of Christendom, and to determine the future destinies of 
 Scotland. On the 17th of that month the Catholic Mary 
 Tudor died, and was succeeded by her sister, the Protestant 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 It was soon apparent that the accession of Elizabeth and 
 her declared intention of ruling England as a Protestant 
 sovereign involved momentous consequences for the future of 
 Scotland. For the Protestant party it meant that they might 
 now reckon on the support of a power whose interests must 
 henceforth be more or less closely bound up with her own. 
 On the other hand, the new counsels in England wrought an 
 immediate change in the policy of France, in which Scotland 
 was to play a leading part. For the family of Guise, now at 
 the height of its fortunes, the death of Mary Tudor opened up 
 a prospect at once dazzling and alluring. In the eyes of all 
 good Catholics, Elizabeth was the illegitimate daughter of 
 Anne Boleyn and a heretic to boot. On these two grounds 
 
 1 Knox, Works, 7. 314.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 51 
 
 she could not be the lawful sovereign of England; and, her 
 claim set aside, the English Crown was the undoubted right of 
 Mary Stewart, the niece of the Guises, and the future Queen of 
 France. Henry II was as eager to substitute Mary for Elizabeth 
 as the Guises themselves ; and their common aims and desires 
 took immediate and practical shape. The arms of England 
 were quartered with those of Scotland and France; and a policy 
 was adopted which was to make good the assumption. It 
 was indispensable to the success of these schemes that 
 Scotland should be at the absolute bidding of the Guises 
 and the French king ; and in Mary of Lorraine they possessed 
 an admirable agent for the attainment of this end. At the 
 beginning of the year 1559 it might have seemed that she was 
 already in a position to give effect to the ambition of her 
 brothers. At the meeting of Estates in the preceding November 
 she had gained the matrimonial crown for her son-in-law, the 
 Dauphin; the principal offices of State were in the hands of 
 Frenchmen ; and bands of French soldiery occupied the main 
 strongholds of the country Yet she was well aware how much 
 yet remained to be done before the Scottish nation could be 
 bent to the purposes of France; and it was against her own 
 judgment that she proceeded to carry out the policy that was 
 now imposed upon her. 
 
 Two difficulties had to be overcome if the Regent was 
 to compass the end at which her brothers were aiming; and, 
 as matters now stood, either of these difficulties would have 
 taxed the highest qualities of a ruler. She had to soothe the 
 public alarm begotten of the threatened absorption of Scotland 
 by France, and she had to steer such a course between the 
 defenders of the old faith and the champions of the new as 
 to secure the support of both. What increased the difficulty 
 of her task was the fact — which grew more patent every day — 
 that the hatred of France was swelling the ranks of those 
 who were clamouring for a root and branch reform of the 
 ( Ihurch. 
 
 4—2
 
 52 The Religious Revolution [Book, v 
 
 The year 1559 began ominously for the success of the 
 Regent's new policy. To this point it has 
 been mainly on national feeling and religious 
 conviction that we have had to insist as the driving-forces 
 of the coming revolution. But, as is the case in all national 
 upheavals, there were likewise economic forces at work which 
 were none the less potent because they were obscured behind 
 the dramatic development of sensational public events. A 
 remarkable document, the author of which is unknown, gave 
 striking expression to this aspect of the Scottish Reformation. 
 It was entitled the "Beggars' Summons," and purported to 
 come from "all cities, towns, and villages of Scotland." On 
 the first of January, 1559 \ this terrible manifesto, breathing 
 the very spirit of revolution, was found placarded on the gates 
 of every religious establishment in Scotland. The " Summons " 
 begins as follows : " The blind, crooked, lame, widows, orphans, 
 and all other poor visited by the hand of God as may not 
 work, to the flocks of all friars within this realm, we wish 
 restitution of wrongs past, and reformation in times coming, 
 for salutation." It may be sufficient to quote the concluding 
 passage of this extraordinary effusion, and it is a passage 
 which should never be out of mind in any estimate of the 
 forces that were about to effect the great cataclysm in the 
 national life. "Wherefore, seeing our number is so great, so 
 indigent, and so heavily oppressed by your false means that 
 none taketh care of our misery, and that it is better to provide 
 for these our impotent members which God hath given us, 
 to oppose to you in plain controversy than to see you hereafter, 
 as ye have done before, steal from us our lodging, and our- 
 selves in the mean time to perish, and die for want of the 
 same ; we have thought good, therefore, ere we enter in conflict 
 with you to warn you in the name of the great God by this 
 
 1 1558 according to the old reckoning. It was not till 1600 that the 
 year was dated in Scotland from the 1st of January. Previous to 1600 the 
 year began on the 25th of March.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 53 
 
 public writing affixed on your gates where ye now dwell that 
 ye remove forth of our said hospitals, betwixt this and the 
 feast of Whitsunday next, so that we the only lawful pro- 
 prietors thereof may enter thereto, and afterward enjoy the 
 commodities of the Church which ye have heretofore wrongfully 
 holden from us : certifying you if ye fail, we will at the said 
 term, in whole number and with the help of God and assistance 
 of his saints on earth, of whose ready support we doubt not, 
 enter and take possession of our said patrimony, and eject 
 you utterly forth of the same. Let him, therefore, that before 
 hath stolen, steal no more ; but rather let him work with his 
 hands that he may be helpful to the poor 1 ." 
 
 The inflammatory statements of revolutionaries must be 
 taken for what they are worth ; but there is abundant evidence 
 to prove that the above indictment of the national Church 
 was not without foundation in fact. It has been computed 
 that one-half of the wealth of the country was in possession 
 of the clergy ; and we have the testimony of unimpeachable 
 witnesses to the unworthy uses to which it was put. Hector 
 Boece, John Major, and Ninian Winzet, were all three faithful 
 sons of the Church, and all three cried aloud at the venality, 
 avarice, and luxurious living of the higher clergy. "But now 
 for many years," wrote Major, " we have seen shepherds whose 
 only care it is to find pasture for themselves, men neglectful 
 
 of the duties of religion By open flattery do the worthless 
 
 sons of our nobility get the governance of convents in com- 
 mendam..., and they covet these ample revenues, not for 
 the good help that they thence might render to their brethren, 
 but solely for the high position that these places offer 2 ." To 
 the same effect Ninian Winzet wrote after the judgment had 
 come. "The special roots of all mischief," he says, "be 
 the two infernal monsters, Pride and Avarice, of the which 
 unhappily bus upsprung the election of unqualified bishops 
 
 1 i lalderwood, I- 423. 4 ; Knox, Works, I. 320. 
 
 Q Major, Mist, of Greater Britain, pp. ij6, 137 ^Scot. Hist. Soc).
 
 54 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 and other pastors in Scotland." This spectacle of the national 
 Church, with its disproportionate wealth, and its selfish, in- 
 competent, and often degraded officials, could not but be a 
 growing offence to the developing intelligence of the nation ; 
 and to quicken this feeling there were minor grievances which 
 were an ancient ground of complaint on the part of the laity 
 against their spiritual advisers. On every important event 
 of his life the poor man was harassed by exactions which Sir 
 David Lyndsay has so keenly touched in his "Satire of the 
 Three Estates." Says the Pauper in the Interlude : — 
 
 "Quhair will ye find that law, tell gif ye can, 
 "To tak thine ky, fra ane pure husband man? 
 "Ane for my father, and for my wyfe ane uther, 
 "And the third cow, he tuke fra Maid my mother." 
 
 And Diligence replies : — 
 
 "It is thair law, all that they have in use, 
 "Thocht it be cow, sow, ganer, gryse, or guse 1 ." 
 
 If the poor had these grounds of discontent, the rich likewise 
 had theirs ; and they made bitter complaint against the pro- 
 tracted processes in the Consistorial Courts, and the frequent 
 appeals to the Roman Curia, by which both their means and 
 their patience were exhausted 13 . 
 
 It was in the face of feelings such as these that, in the 
 
 spring of 1559, the Queen-Regent entered on 
 
 her new line of policy towards her refractory 
 
 subjects. Her first steps were taken with her usual prudence. 
 
 A Provincial Council of the clergy was summoned to meet 
 
 on the 1st of March for the express purpose of dealing with 
 
 1 The exactions which were most keenly resented are enumerated in 
 the First Book of Discipline — '"the uppermost claith, the corpse-present, the 
 clerk-maill, the Pasche offeringis, teynd aill, and all handelingsupaland.' — 
 Knox, 11. 222. 
 
 2 Cf. Stat. Eccles. Scot., II. 148, [49.
 
 Chap. iiJ Regency of Mary of Lorraine 55 
 
 the religious difficulty. It was the last Provincial Council of 
 the ancient Church that was to meet in Scotland ; and, if 
 the expression of its good intentions could have availed, the 
 Church might yet have been saved. All that its worst enemies 
 had said as to its shortcomings was frankly admitted, and 
 admirable decrees were passed with a view to a speedy and 
 effective reform 1 . But the hour had passed when the mere 
 reform of life and doctrine would have sufficed to meet the 
 desires of the new spiritual teachers. As was speedily to be 
 seen, it was revolution and not reform on which these new 
 teachers were now bent with an ever-growing confidence that 
 their triumph was not far off. A double order issued by the 
 Regent toward the end of March brought her face to face 
 with the consequences of her changed policy. Unauthorised 
 persons were forbidden to preach, and the lieges were com- 
 manded to observe the festival of Easter after the manner 
 ordained by the Church 2 . The preachers disregarded both 
 edicts and were summoned to answer for their disobedience. 
 
 It was now seen that the Regent was no longer in the 
 mood for temporising ; and the Congregation despatched two 
 of their number, the Earl of Glencaim and Sir Hew Campbell, 
 Sheriff of Ayr, to deprecate her wrath. Their reception must 
 have taught them that times were now changed since the 
 days when the Regent deemed it necessary to conciliate their 
 party. " In despite of you and your ministers both," she told 
 the two deputies, "they shall be banished out of Scotland, 
 albeit they preached as truly as ever did St Paul." When they 
 reminded her of her previous promises, she replied in words 
 that were never forgotten, and which her grandson, James VI 
 recalled and laid to heart in his own dealings with his subjects. 
 " It became not subjects," she said, " to burden their princes 
 further than it pleaseth them to keep the same 8 ." For a 
 
 1 Stat. Eccles. Scot., [I. 148, 14'j. 
 
 - Knox, Works, 1. 316. 
 
 3 Hill llurton, Hist, of Scotland, vi. 339 (1H70). Referring to the
 
 56 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 time, however, she consented to stay further action against the 
 preachers. But, if she were to carry out the task she had 
 undertaken, she must sooner or later make trial of her strength 
 against what had now become actual rebellion. In Perth, 
 Dundee, and Montrose, the Protestant preachers, with the 
 approval and countenance of the constituted authorities, openly 
 proceeded with their work of spreading the new opinions. At 
 length, the Regent took the step which was to be the beginning 
 of the end of the Catholic Church in Scotland. She summoned 
 the preachers to appear before her at Stirling on the ioth 
 of May ; and, on this occasion, it was recognised by both 
 parties that the moment for decisive action had come. To 
 be ready for all contingencies, a numerous body of Protestant 
 gentlemen from Angus and the Mearns, all, it is specially 
 noted, "without armour," took up their quarters at Perth, 
 where they were immediately joined by another contingent 
 from Dundee. With this last body came John Knox, who 
 on the 2nd of May had finally returned to his native country 1 . 
 All through their contest with the Regent, the Protestant 
 leaders took up the position that they were acting 
 in strict accordance with the law of the land. 
 With the formidable following now at their back, they might 
 have marched on Stirling, and gained a temporary advantage 
 by their show of strength. What they actually did was to send 
 Erskine of Dun to the Regent to lay their demands once more 
 before her. As she was not yet in a position to enforce her 
 will, she again agreed to postpone action against the preachers. 
 It was the misfortune of her position from the beginning of the 
 struggle that Mary of Lorraine was driven to subterfuges which 
 
 Church policy urged on him by Laud, James VI wrote: "I ken the story 
 of my grandmother, the queen-regent, that after she was inveigled to break 
 her promise to the mutineers at a Perth meeting, she never saw good day, 
 but from thence, having been much beloved before, was despised by her 
 people." 
 
 1 Knox, Works, I. 318.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 57 
 
 made impossible any permanent understanding with her discon- 
 tented subjects ; and it was of evil omen for the success of her 
 present policy that she now allowed herself to commit a serious 
 breach of faith. In the teeth of her promise to Erskine, she 
 proclaimed the preachers as outlaws when they failed to appear 
 at Stirling on the day appointed for their trial. The news of 
 the Regent's breach of faith was the immediate occasion of the 
 first stroke in the Scottish Reformation. The day after the I 
 outlawry John Knox preached a sermon in the parish church 
 of Perth, his theme being the idolatries of Rome and the duty 
 of Christian men to put an end to them. At the close of the 
 sermon, when the majority of the audience had left the church, 
 a priest proceeded to celebrate mass. A forward boy made a 
 protesting remark; the priest struck him; the boy retaliated by 
 throwing a stone which broke an image ; and immediately the 
 church was in an uproar. In a few moments not "a monument 
 of idolatry" was left in the building. The news of these 
 doings spread through the town, and the "rascal multitude 1 " 
 took up the work. There had been old quarrels between the 
 town and the religious orders; and so early as 1543 a violent 
 assault had been made on the Blackfriars' Monastery. But on 
 the present occasion the work done was at once more extensive 
 and more thorough. The main onslaught was directed against 
 the monasteries of the Dominicans and the Franciscans and 
 the Charterhouse Abbey ; and within two days, says Knox, 
 "the walls only did remain of these great edifications 2 ." 
 
 There was now no alternative but the sword ; and both 
 parties at once took action accordingly. In support of the 
 French troops which were at her disposal, the Regent ordered 
 levies from Clydesdale, Stirlingshire, and the Lothians to meet 
 her at Stirling on the 24th of May. On their part, the insur- 
 gents strengthened the defences of Perth -according to 
 
 1 This was the common designation for the mob at that time, though 
 Knox is usually supposed to have invented it. 
 
 2 Knox, Hoi As, I. jjo ct seq.
 
 5 8 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 Buchanan, the only walled town in Scotland — and addressed 
 themselves to their brethren in Ayrshire for instant succour. 
 As they were now engaged in what might be construed as 
 rebellion, they took steps to justify themselves in the eyes of 
 the world. In three manifestoes, probably the work of Knox, 
 they addressed respectively the Regent, D'Oysel the French 
 ambassador, and the whole Scottish nobility. In view of 
 the past history of Scotland the insurgents could present a case 
 which possessed sufficient plausibility It had been the excep- 
 tion for the reign of a Scottish king to pass without some more 
 or less serious revolt on the ground of his alleged misgovern- 
 ment. Even during the reign with which we are dealing there 
 had been a fair precedent for the late proceedings of the Con- 
 gregation. At the outset of the reign, the Earl of Arran had 
 been as constitutionally appointed to the office of Regent as 
 Mary of Lorraine herself; yet on the pretext that Arran was 
 giving away the country to England and to heresy, Beaton and 
 the French party had taken up arms against him and undone 
 all his actions to which they objected. But as Mary of Lorraine 
 was now governing the country, the danger of a French 
 conquest was much more serious than had been the danger of 
 conquest by England. On the ground that the State was in 
 peril, therefore, there was ample justification for the action of 
 the Protestant leaders. With regard to religion, the good of the 
 commonwealth might equally be urged as a plea for the most 
 drastic dealing with the national Church. By the admission 
 of its own officials the Church had become a scandal, alike 
 from the character of the clergy and its general neglect of 
 its duties as a spiritual body. For at least a century the 
 scandal had been growing ; and good citizens had been forced 
 to the conclusion that their accredited spiritual guides were 
 either unable or unwilling to set their house in order. 
 
 But the time demanded deeds more than words. With a 
 force of about 8000 French and Scots, D'Oysel, the Regent's 
 chief adviser, advanced to Auchterarder, some twelve miles
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 59 
 
 from Perth. With this formidable force behind her the Regent 
 naturally expected that her rebellious subjects would be dis- 
 posed to abate their demands. To learn what terms they 
 would now be willing to accept, she sent to Perth the Lord 
 James Stewart, Lord Sempill, and the Earl of Argyle. They 
 were told that the town would be surrendered if assurance were 
 given of freedom of worship and security to the worshippers. 
 As a reply to these demands, the Regent despatched the Lyon 
 King-of-arms to make proclamation that all should " avoid the 
 toune under pane of treasone." At this moment, however, the 
 Earl of Glencairn, at the head of a body of 2500 Ayrshire 
 Protestants, made his way to within six miles of Perth. 
 Thus checkmated, the Regent was again driven to a com- 
 promise ; and on the conditions that she should quarter no 
 French troops in the town and grant perfect freedom of worship, 
 the gates were at length thrown open to her. Thus closed the 
 first act of the drama of the Scottish Reformation 1 . 
 
 This good understanding was of short duration. Again the 
 action of the Regent gave rise to an accusation 
 of broken pledges. She kept to the letter of the 
 late compact, but she evaded its spirit. She did not quarter 
 French troops in the town, but she occupied it with Scottish 
 soldiers in French pay, and in further disregard of her pledges 
 treated the Protestants with a harshness which gave rise to 
 bitter complaint on the part of their leaders. Argyle and the 
 Lord James, the two most prominent of these leaders, had 
 accompanied her into Perth (May 29) ; but, indignant at these 
 proceedings, they secretly quitted the town and at once took 
 action to make good their protests. Summoning the Protestant 
 gentlemen of Angus and the Mearns to meet them in St Andrews 
 on the 3rd of June, they proceeded to that town, as the best 
 centre of action aicer Perth. In St Andrews as in Perth it is 
 John Knox who is again the outstanding figure. Here his 
 
 1 Knox, Works, 1. ,541 etseq.; Wodrow AJisceL, 1. 58 et seq.; Buchanan, 
 P- 3»4-
 
 6o The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 preaching was attended by the same notable results The 
 monasteries of the Dominicans and Franciscans were practically 
 demolished by the mob, and with the approval of the magis- 
 trates every church in the town was stripped of its ornaments. 
 Meanwhile, the Regent had not been idle, and was now at 
 Falkland with a force led by D'Oysel and Chatelherault. Con- 
 fident in their strength, those two leaders marched towards 
 Cupar with the intention of dealing with St Andrews. But 
 again they discovered that they had miscalculated the resources 
 of the insurgents. Issuing from St Andrews, with little over 
 a hundred horse, Argyle and the Lord James were speedily 
 reinforced by contingents from Lothian and Fife, which 
 raised their numbers to above 3000 men. Thus strengthened, 
 they took up their position on Cupar Muir, and awaited the 
 
 , approach of the Regent's forces. But in numbers these forces 
 were now inferior to those of the enemy ; and, as many of the 
 French soldiers were Huguenots and secretly sympathised with 
 their fellow-believers, the issue of a battle could not but be 
 doubtful. Again, therefore, there was no alternative for the 
 Regent but to temporise. It was agreed that there should be 
 a truce of eight days, that the Regent's forces now in Fife 
 should be removed from that county, and that, during the 
 armistice, an attempt should be made to effect some permanent 
 understanding 1 . 
 
 The new arrangement proved as hollow as the first. In 
 
 point of fact, it was borne in on both parties 
 
 1550 that the struggle had but begun, and that the 
 
 ■ sword only could end it. Already, therefore, both were looking 
 for external support wherewith to crush their opponents. The 
 very day after the compact at Cupar, D'Oysel wrote to the 
 French ambassador in London that only a body of French 
 troops could maintain the Regent's authority 2 . On their part, 
 the Protestant leaders now entered on those negotiations with 
 
 1 Knox, Works, 1. 353, 4. 
 
 2 Teulet, I. 311.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 61 
 
 England, which eventually led to results that gave Scotland 
 definitively to Protestantism and united the destinies of the 
 two nations. Meanwhile, however, the Regent and her revolted 
 subjects had to fight their own battles. The truce effected 
 nothing, and it had no sooner expired than hostilities recom- 
 menced. The first object of the leaders of the Congregation 
 was to relieve their brethren in Perth, and on the 24th of June 
 they sat down before that place in such numbers that it im- 
 mediately and unconditionally surrendered. Perth, Dundee, 
 and St Andrews were now in their hands ; but, having gone 
 thus far, their only hope lay in giving still further proof of the 
 strength of their cause. It was reported that the Regent 
 meant to stop their progress southwards at Stirling Bridge; but, 
 before she could effect her object, they entered that town with 
 the consent of the majority of the citizens. By the 29th of 
 June they were in possession of the capital, whence Mary of 
 Lorraine had fled to the Castle of Dunbar 1 . 
 
 The cause of the Congregation now appeared to be trium- 
 phant, but it contained elements of weakness of which every- 
 one was aware and which speedily became manifest. The acts 
 of violence, which had attended the revolt, were filling the 
 law-abiding citizen with dismay. The destruction of Church 
 property in Perth and St Andrews had been followed by similar 
 excesses elsewhere. Especially disquieting had been what had 
 occurred at Scone immediately after the surrender of Perth. 
 In defiance of the protests of Knox, the Lord James, and 
 Argyle, the reformers of Dundee had sacked and burned to 
 the ground the abbey and palace of that village — an outrage 
 which Knox himself regretted in the interest of his own cause 2 . 
 It was a further source of weakness to the Congregation that 
 their actions easily lent themselves to misconstruction and 
 misrepresentation. The Regent industriously spread the 
 plausible report both at home and abroad that their religious 
 
 1 Knox, Works, I. 358 et seq.; Leslie, 274. 
 1 Knox, 1. 359—362.
 
 62 The Religious Revolutio?i [Book v 
 
 professions were a mere pretext, and that their real object was 
 to overthrow herself and to make the Lord James their king. 
 But, above all, the nature of the host that supported them was 
 such that it invariably failed them when their need was the 
 greatest. The men who composed it had to leave their daily 
 business in town and country ; and, as they received no pay 
 and their own affairs demanded their attention, their military 
 service did not extend beyond a few weeks. The Protestant 
 leaders had no sooner taken possession of Edinburgh than their 
 following began to dwindle. During the first week their 
 numbers amounted to over 7000 men by the third week they 
 had diminished to 1500. In these circumstances the Regent 
 had only to bide her time, and her opportunity must come. 
 
 On the 23rd of July,. her troops, led byD'Oysel and Chatel- 
 herault, marched on Leith, which they reached on the morning 
 of the 24th. As had been anticipated, neither that town nor 
 the capital itself was in a position to offer any effectual resist- 
 ance ; and the leaders of the Congregation at once proposed a 
 conference for the discussion of terms. Accordingly, the 
 Duke and the Earl of Huntly, on the one side, and Argyle, the 
 Lord James, and Glencairn, on the other, met on the east 
 slope of the Calton Hill and agreed to the following adjust- 
 ment. The Congregation were to give up the coining-irons, of 
 which they had taken possession, and they were to evacuate 
 Edinburgh within twenty-four hours. The town was to be left 
 free to choose its own religion ; no French troops were to be 
 introduced ; the Protestants were to be allowed complete 
 liberty of worship, but were to abstain from violence against 
 the old religion , and these arrangements were to hold till the 
 10th of the following January 1 . By this concession of liberty 
 to worship according to their own conscience the Protestants 
 had apparently attained the main object for which they had 
 
 1 The terms of this arrangement are given in Knox, Buchanan, the 
 Wodrow Miscellany, Leslie, and Teulet. The last two authorities omit the 
 clause regarding the quartering ot French troops in Edinburgh.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 63 
 
 risen, but they well knew that they would enjoy this liberty 
 only so long as they were strong enough to enforce it. On 
 leaving Edinburgh, therefore, they proceeded to Stirling, where 
 they came to an agreement as to their future plan of action. 
 As a necessary precaution for their immediate security they 
 entered into a bond of mutual defence and concerted counsels. 
 Above all, they determined to spare no pains to win support 
 from England, which, as itself now a Protestant country, could 
 not look on with indifference while they were engaged in a life 
 and death struggle with France and Rome. 
 
 An event that had lately happened gave a new impulse to 
 French action in Scotland. On the 10th of July 
 
 x 559 
 
 Henry II had been accidentally killed in a 
 tournament ; and Mary Stewart, the niece of the Guises, was 
 now Queen of France. It was with greater zeal than ever, 
 therefore, that the Guises sought to direct Scottish affairs 
 according to their own interests. In the beginning of August 
 the Protestant lords took a decided step : they sent John Knox 
 to England with instructions that might serve as a basis of 
 a treaty between England and the Congregation. The in- 
 structions were that if England would assist them against 
 France, the Congregation would agree to a common league 
 against that country. Knox only went as far as Berwick ; but he 
 brought home a letter containing a reply to the Protestant over- 
 tures from Elizabeth's secretary, Sir William Cecil. The reply 
 was discouraging ; but it contained a practical suggestion, by 
 which, however, the Protestant leaders were either unwilling or 
 unable to profit. If it was money they were in need of, 
 Cecil told them, that need present no difficulty ; if they 
 would but do as Henry VIII did with the monasteries, they 
 would have enough money and to spare. The English 
 queen was, in truth, in a position that demanded the wariest 
 going. Two-thirds of her own subjects were Catholics, and it 
 would be an evil example to set them if she were to assist 
 rebels in another country. Moreover, the treaty of Cateau
 
 64 The Religions Revolution [Book, v 
 
 Cambresis, concluded in the previous April, debarred her from 
 hostile demonstration against France. But the peril from 
 French ascendency in Scotland could not be ignored, and 
 by the gradual pressure of events Elizabeth was driven to 
 support a course which in her heart she abhorred. Shortly 
 after Cecil's communication, the veteran diplomatist, Sir Ralph 
 Sadler, came down to Scotland with a commission to effect 
 a secret arrangement with the Protestant leaders, and brought 
 with him ^3000 to distribute to the best of his wisdom 1 . 
 
 What the Guises meant speedily became apparent. About 
 i5sg the middle of August a thousand French soldiers 
 
 landed at Leith ; and, as they were accompanied 
 by their wives and children, the object of their coming could 
 not be misunderstood. If the leaders of the Congregation, 
 therefore, were not to lose all the ground they had lately 
 gained, a time for vigorous action had again come. As had 
 been previously concerted, they met at Stirling on the 10th of 
 September and took counsel as to their further action. Here 
 they were joined by an ally, who by his rank and his claims 
 was of the first importance to their cause. This was the 
 Earl of Arran, the eldest son of the Duke of Chatelherault, 
 who, a few months previously, had been forced to flee from 
 France by reason of his Protestant sympathies. The value of 
 the new confederate was soon realised. Passing to Hamilton 
 Palace, the insurgent leaders there met the Duke himself, to 
 whom they held out such alluring prospects that he openly 
 identified himself with their cause. During these transactions 
 at Hamilton alarming news came of the doings of the Regent. 
 It was reported that she was busily engaged in fortifying Leith 
 — a proceeding, the Congregation maintained, in direct viola- 
 tion of the late treaty. Disregarding their protest, she steadily 
 proceeded with the work ; and, as she was strengthened by 
 a new contingent of 800 French men-at-arms, her position by 
 
 1 Knox, II. 50; VI. 51—55; Sadler, 1. 387 et seq.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 65 
 
 the middle of the autumn was such as to excite alarm alike in 
 Scotland and England. Again there was no arbitrament but 
 the sword. 
 
 On the 1 6th of October the insurgent leaders entered 
 Edinburgh with the intention of laying siege to Leith, where 
 the Regent had taken refuge as the safest place in the kingdom. 
 One of their earliest steps was the most audacious they had 
 yet taken. They formally deposed Mary of Lorraine from the 
 
 •jncy, on the ground that she had ruled as a tyrant and was 
 betraying the country to a foreign enemy. But they soon 
 found that they had undertaken a task beyond their strength. 
 Their force amounted to but Sooo men, most of whom were 
 "cuntrie fellows" with no experience in war, and whose 
 service could not extend beyond a few weeks. To this un- 
 disciplined host was opposed a garrison of 3000 trained soldiers, 
 with the command of the sea, and intrenched in a town 
 fortified after the best military art of the time. Fortune, more- 
 over, was against the Congregation from the first. A new 
 instalment of ^1000, secretly sent by Elizabeth, was cleverly 
 seized by James, Earl of Bothwell, afterwards the notorious 
 helpmate of Mary Stewart. Their arms, also, met with no 
 
 ess. While a detachment of their troops was in pursuit of 
 Bothwell, the enemy found their opportunity and made their 
 way even into the streets of Edinburgh; and on the 25th of 
 November the reformers sustained so severe a reverse that the 
 capital was no longer a safe place for them. They had no money 
 to pay the few mercenaries whom they had hired ; the town 
 was tired of them ; and the Earl Marischal, who had charge of 
 the castle, held resolutely aloof. As at the close of their 
 previous rising, the leaders held a council at Stirling to deter 
 mine their future policy. Before they entered on their de- 
 liberations Knox was called upon to preach a sermon — Knox, 
 of whom it was said, that he "put more life" into those who 
 heard him "than five hundred trumpets continually blustering" 
 in their ears. The deliberations that succeeded took a 
 
 II. r
 
 66 TJic Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 sufficiently practical shape. Young Maitland of Lethington, 
 who had lately deserted the Regent for the Congregation, was 
 despatched to England with offers that might induce Elizabeth 
 to give direct support to the cause of Protestantism in Scotland. 
 As to their own future action, the lords made the following 
 arrangement. Chatelherault, Argyle, Glencairn, and the Lords 
 Boyd and Ochiltree were to make their headquarters in 
 Glasgow ; while Arran, the Lord James, the Lords Rothes 
 and Ruthven, and John Knox were to act from St Andrews 
 as their centre. Their counsels at an end, they separated with 
 the intention of reassembling at Stirling on the 16th of 
 December. They had thus tried two falls with the Regent, 
 and in both they had been worsted : the third trial of strength 
 was to have a different ending 1 . 
 
 The Regent was not slow to follow up her advantage. She 
 took possession of the capital two days after the Congregation 
 had quitted it, and she tried hard, but in vain, to persuade the 
 Earl Marischal to surrender the Castle. The arrival of fresh 
 reinforcements from France at the beginning of December 
 enabled her to abandon her defensive policy and to take 
 decisive measures for the suppression of revolt. On Christmas 
 Day, while the Protestant lords were in council at Stirling, 
 two detachments of her troops, commanded by D'Oysel, drove 
 them precipitately from the town. Pursuing his advantage, 
 D'Oysel despatched his troops across Stirling Bridge into Fife, 
 and he himself with another detachment crossed from Leith — 
 apparently with the object of gaining possession of St Andrews. 
 The task proved a hard one. At every step he was beset by 
 the Scots under Argyle and the Lord James. " The said Earl 
 and Lord James," says Knox, "for twenty and one days 
 they lay in their clothes ; their boots never came off; they 
 had skirmishing almost every day ; yea, some days, from morn 
 to even." Yet in the teeth of all obstacles D'Oysel steadily 
 
 1 Knox, i. 396 et seq. ; VI. 53, 54; Sadler, I. 461 etseq.; Teulet, I. 
 379 et seq.
 
 Chap, n] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 6y 
 
 forced his way to within six miles of St Andrews, where Knox 
 and his friends had all but abandoned hope. But unexpected 
 deliverance was at hand. On the 23rd of January 
 (1560) a fleet of strange vessels appeared at 
 the mouth of the Firth of Forth. As a French fleet had 
 been expected for some weeks, D'Oysel concluded that this 
 armament had come at last. He was soon undeceived. Under 
 his eyes the strangers seized two ships bearing provisions from 
 Leith to his own camp. The strange vessels were the ad- 
 vance squadron of a fleet sent by Elizabeth to block the Firth 
 of Forth against further succours from France. It was now 
 D'Oysel who was in extremities; and before he found himself 
 safe in Linlithgow he had vivid experience at once of the rigours 
 of a Scotch winter and of the savage hate which his country 
 men had come to inspire in the nation which for three centuries 
 had called them friends and allies 1 . 
 
 Meanwhile, the mission of Maitland to the English Court 
 was about to lead to one of the most notable compacts in 
 the national history. At Berwick-on-T\veed the Lord James 
 Stewart, Lord Ruthven, and three other Scottish commis- 
 sioners met the Duke of Norfolk and concluded a treaty 
 >. 27th) which was to ensure the eventual triumph of 
 the Congregation, to make Scotland a Protestant country, 
 and at a later day a constituent part of a Greater Britain. 
 The treaty was in effect a bond of mutual defence against 
 France — Elizabeth having reluctantly consented that an 
 English army should at once enter Scotland and assist the 
 Congregation in driving the French soldiery out of the 
 country". While her revolted subjects were thus making 
 strong their hands against her, fortune was otherwise desert- 
 ing the cause of the Regent. A great French armament, 
 which was to have brought over a force sufficient to crush 
 
 1 Teolet, !. 404 etseq.; Wodrow Miscell, I. 75; Knox, 11. 9; Diurnal 
 of Occurrtnts, p. 55 ; Keith, Affairs of Church and State in Scotland, 1. ,0^. 
 - Wodrow AfiseeU., I. 79; Knox, 11. 45. 
 
 .1 
 
 2
 
 68 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 all opposition, had been driven back by a succession of storms ; 
 and she herself was already stricken with the disease which was 
 soon to carry her off. In these circumstances there was but 
 one course open to her — to fall back on the policy of self- 
 defence and patient waiting on events. After one somewhat 
 wanton expedition against Glasgow and the Hamiltons, her 
 troops finally (March 29th) retired within the fortifications of 
 Leith, and she herself at her special request was received into 
 the Castle of Edinburgh 1 . 
 
 On the 4th of April the English and Scottish hosts 
 joined forces at Prestonpans, and on the 6th they sat down 
 before Leith. The spectacle was one suggestive of many 
 reflections: English and Scots, immemorial foes, were fight- 
 ing side by side against the ancient friend of the one, the 
 ancient enemy of the other : there could not be a more 
 memorable illustration of the saying that "events sometimes 
 mount the saddle and ride men." Even with their united 
 strength the allies had a formidable task before them. At 
 the outset of the siege the English amounted to about 9,000 
 men, the Scots to 10,000; but before many weeks had gone, 
 these numbers had dwindled to a half. With this force the 
 English commander, Lord Gray, had to besiege a town, 
 defended by 4000 trained soldiers and fortified by the most 
 skilful engineers of the time. Two severe reverses sustained 
 by the allies proved that in discipline and skill they were no 
 match for the enemy. On the 14th of April the French 
 sallied from the town, and, breaking through the English 
 trenches, slew 200 men. A combined assault on the town 
 (May 7th) was brilliantly repulsed — the English and Scots 
 leaving 800 dead and wounded in the trenches 2 . It was 
 not long before all three parties were sick of the contest. 
 The Guises had their hands full at home and needed every 
 soldier they had ; Elizabeth heartily disliked the task of assist- 
 
 1 Wodrow Miscell., I. 80, 81; Diurnal of Occurrents, 56, 57. 
 
 2 Ilaynes, State Papers, I. 348; Wodrow Miscell.., I. 83.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 69 
 
 ing rebel subjects and grudged every penny that was spent 
 in it ; and the Congregation had never been in a position to 
 support a protracted war. The death of the Regent on the 
 10th of June must have quickened the desire of the Guises for 
 peace ; for where she had failed to effect their purposes no one 
 else was likely to succeed. Alike by her own character and 
 gifts and by the momentous policy of which she was the 
 agent, Mary of Lorraine is one of the remarkable figures in 
 Scottish history. It was her misfortune — a misfortune due to 
 her birth and connections — that she found herself from the first 
 in direct antagonism to the natural development of the country 
 of her adoption, and that the circumstances in which she 
 ruled were such as to bring into prominence the least worthy 
 traits of the proud race from which she sprang. Yet in 
 personal appearance, as in courage and magnificence, she was 
 the true sister of Henry of Guise and the Cardinal of Lorraine, 
 " the pope and king of France." Construed in a larger and 
 more charitable sense than that in which they were written, the 
 words of Knox fitly enough sum up her career — she was 
 "unhappy... to Scotland from the first day she entered into 
 it unto the day she finished her unhappy life 1 ." 
 
 On the 16th of June Commissioners arrived from England 
 and France with powers to effect an arrangement 
 between the contending parties. From England 
 came Cecil and 1 h Wotton, Dean of Canterbury and York ; 
 and from France, Monluc, Bishop of Valence, and Charles 
 de Rochefoucauld, Sieur de Randan. From the beginning 
 the French representatives gave it to be understood that any 
 treaty that might be made was exclusively between England 
 and France j the Congregation were rebel subjects with whom 
 their prince could in no wise treat. After many difficulties 
 that more than once threatened to put an end to further ne- 
 gotiations, a settlement was at length reached (July 6). The 
 
 1 Knox, !!• 71.
 
 yo The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 final arrangement signally proved how hopeless the Guises 
 were of their immediate prospects in Scotland. Mary and 
 Francis were to desist from using the arms of England ; no 
 Frenchman was henceforth to hold any important office in 
 Scotland, the fortifications of Leith were to be demolished; 
 and the French soldiers, with the exception of 120, were at 
 once to be sent home to their own country. Till the return 
 of Mary the government was to be entrusted to twelve persons, 
 of whom she was to appoint seven, and the Estates five 1 . In 
 the treaty no arrangement was made regarding religion ; but, 
 with the powers now placed at their disposal, there could be 
 little doubt how the Protestant leaders would interpret the 
 omission. Thus had Elizabeth and the Congregation gained 
 every point for which they had striven; and their victory 
 may be said to have determined the future, not only of 
 Britain, but of Protestantism. So far as Scotland is con- 
 cerned, the Treaty of Edinburgh marks the central point of her 
 history. 
 
 It now remained to be seen to what uses the Protestant 
 party would put their victory. The simultaneous departure of 
 the French and English troops relieved them from all re- 
 straint ; and four days later the great deliverance was signalised 
 by a solemn thanksgiving in the Church of St Giles. For the 
 effectual spreading of the Protestant doctrine preachers were 
 planted in various parts of the country — Knox being appointed 
 to the principal charge in Edinburgh. But it was the ap- 
 proaching assembly of the Estates to which all men were 
 looking with hopes or fears according to their desires and 
 interests. The Estates met on the 3rd of August; but it was 
 not till the 8th that the attendance was complete. It was 
 to be the most important national assembly in the history 
 of the Scottish people; and the numbers of the different 
 classes who flocked to it showed that the momentous nature 
 
 1 Keith, 1. 300.
 
 Chap, n] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 71 
 
 of the crisis was fully realised 1 . Specially noteworthy was the 
 crowd of smaller barons from all parts of the country. So 
 unusual was the appearance of these persons that it had almost 
 been forgotten that their right to sit as representatives dated 
 from as far back as the reign of James I. A question raised 
 as to the legality of an assembly, which met independently of 
 the summons or the presence of the sovereign, was decisively 
 set aside; and the House addressed itself to the great issues 
 involved in the late revolution. The question of religion, as 
 at the root of the whole controversy, took precedence of every 
 other. The first proceeding showed the national instinct for 
 the logical conduct of human affairs. The Estates instructed 
 the ministers to draw up a statement of Protestant doctrine, 
 which might serve at once as a chart for their future guidance 
 and a justification for their present and their future action. 
 In four days the task (an easy one for Knox and his brother 
 ministers) was accomplished ; and under twenty-five heads the 
 Estates had before them what was henceforth to be the creed 
 of the majority of the Scottish people. Article by article the 
 Confession was read and considered, and, after a feeble protest 
 by the bishops of St Andrews, Dunkeld, and Dunblane, ap- 
 proved and ratified by an overwhelming majority of the 
 Estates. The way being thus cleared, the next step was the 
 logical conclusion of all the past action of the Protestant 
 leaders. In three successive Acts, all passed in one day, 
 it was decreed that the national Church should cease to exist. 
 The first Act abolished the jurisdiction of the Pope ; the second 
 condemned all doctrines and practices contrary to the new 
 creed ; and the third forbade the celebration of mass within 
 the bounds of Scotland. The penalties attached to the breach 
 of these enactments were those approved and sanctioned by 
 
 1 1 ' (.resent the Duke of Chdtelherault and thirteen earls, the 
 
 Archbishop "f St Andrews and five bishops, nineteen lords, twenty eccle- 
 siastics, twenty-two commi ioners of burghs, a hundred and ten bat 
 a y -.tlicis. Teulet, r. 614 (Instructions to the Lord St John).
 
 72 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 the example of every country in Christendom. Confiscation 
 for the first offence, exile for the second, and death for the 
 third— such were to be the successive punishments for the 
 saying or hearing of mass. 
 
 Thus apparently had Knox and his fellow-workers attained 
 the end of all their labours ; and it is instructive to compare 
 the history of their struggle with the experiences of other 
 countries where the same religious conflicts had successively 
 arisen. In Germany the terrible Peasants' War had been the 
 direct result of Luther's revolt from Rome; and in England 
 the ecclesiastical revolution had been followed by the religious 
 atrocities of Henry VIII, by the anarchy under Edward VI, 
 and by the remorseless fanaticism of Mary Tudor. While the 
 Congregation was in the midst of its struggles with Mary of 
 Lorraine, Philip II was dealing with heresy in Spain. How 
 effectually he dealt with it is one of the notable chapters in 
 the histories of nations. Here it is sufficient to recall a single 
 fact in illustration of the relative experiences of Scotland and 
 Spain. In 1559 Philip and his Court, amid the applause of 
 a crowd of above 200,000 from all parts of Castille, sanctioned 
 with their presence the burning at Valladolid of a band of 
 persons, mostly women, accused of the crime of heresy. In 
 France the appearance of the new religion had evoked 
 passions alike among the people and their rulers, which were 
 to give that country an evil preeminence in the ferocity of 
 national and individual action. The chambre an/cute, the 
 Edict of Chateaubriand (155 1), the massacre of Amboise 
 (1560), the thirty years of intermittent civil war (1562-1592), 
 —these were the successive events of frightful significance that 
 mark the development of the religious conflict in France. 
 Compared with the tale of blood and confusion that has 
 to be told of Germany, France, England, and Spain, the 
 history of the Reformation in Scotland is a record of order 
 and tranquillity. What is thrust upon us by the narrative of 
 events in Scotland is the singular moderation alike of the
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 73 
 
 representatives of the old and the new religion. Heretics 
 had been burned indeed, but the number was inconsiderable 
 compared with that of similar victims in other countries ; and, 
 even in the day of their triumph, the Scottish Protestants, in 
 spite of the stem threat of their legislation, were guiltless of a 
 single execution on the ground of religion. What is still more 
 striking is that difference of faith begot no fanatical hate among 
 the mass of the people. In France and Spain men forgot 
 the ties of blood and country in the blind fury of religious 
 zeal ; but in Scotland we do not find town arrayed against 
 town and neighbour denouncing neighbour on the ground of 
 a different faith. That this tolerance was not due to in- 
 difference the religious history of Scotland abundantly proves. 
 It was in the convulsions attending the change of the national 
 faith that the Scottish nation first attained to a consciousness 
 of itself, and the characteristics it then displayed have remained 
 its distinctive characteristics ever since. It is precisely the 
 combination of a fervid temper with logical thinking and 
 temperate action that have distinguished the Scottish people 
 in all the great crises of their history. 
 
 It soon appeared that the Protestant triumph was not so 
 complete as it might have seemed. Those who ^ 
 
 saw furthest — and none was more keenly alive 
 to the fact than Knox — were well aware that many a battle 
 must yet be fought before the new temple they had built 
 should stand secure against the assault of open enemies and 
 equivocal friends. The inherent difficulties of the situation 
 became speedily manifest. Mary and Francis refused to ratify 
 the late measures — a fact, says Knox, "we little regarded or 
 do regard." What Knox did regard, however, was the con- 
 tinued alliance and support of England ; and he was now to 
 
 :i that, having attained her own objects, Elizabeth was not 
 disposed to be specially cordial in her future relations to the 
 Protestants in Scotland. It had been for some time in the 
 minds oi the Protestant leaders that a marriage between
 
 74 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 Elizabeth and the Earl of Arran would be an excellent 
 
 arrangement for both countries 1 ; and in October a commission 
 
 was actually sent to make the proposal. The reply of Elizabeth 
 
 was that she was "presently not disposed to marry." An 
 
 important event made this rebuff additionally unwelcome : 
 
 on the 5th of December, Francis II, the husband of Mary 
 
 Stewart, unexpectedly died. Had her husband lived, Mary 
 
 might have continued to reside in France, which had been 
 
 so long her home, and Scotland might have been left in 
 
 large degree to settle its own affairs. Now the probability 
 
 was that Mary would return to her own country, and with 
 
 all the authority and prestige of a legitimate sovereign renew 
 
 the battle that had been lost by her mother. It was, therefore, 
 
 with gloomy forebodings that all sincere well-wishers to the 
 
 Reformed Church in Scotland saw the close of this year of 
 
 their apparent triumph. 
 
 If there were these apprehensions from enemies, there 
 
 was likewise a growing; alarm from the attitude 
 1561 . . 
 
 of lukewarm and dubious friends. The sincerity 
 
 and good faith of all who had taken part in the late revolution 
 
 was about to be subjected to the most stringent of tests. By 
 
 the enactments of the preceding year the ancient Church 
 
 had been swept away; but the work of rearing a new edifice 
 
 in its place still remained to be accomplished. With this 
 
 object the Protestant ministers had been entrusted with the 
 
 task of drafting a constitution for a new Church which should 
 
 take the place of the old. The ministers had discharged their 
 
 trust, and the result of their labours was laid before the Estates 
 
 which met in Edinburgh on the 15th of January, 1561. 
 
 The document presented to the Estates was the famous 
 
 "Book of Discipline" — the most interesting and, in many 
 
 respects, the most important of public documents in the 
 
 history of Scotland. If any proof were needed that the revolt 
 
 1 This marriage had been in the mind of Henry VIII. See Froude, 
 Hist, of England, Chap. XXXVII.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine 75 
 
 against the ancient Church was no ill-considered act of irre- 
 sponsible men, we assuredly possess that proof in this extra- 
 ordinary book. Though in its primary intention the scheme 
 of an ecclesiastical polity, it is in fact the draft of a "republic," 
 under which a nation should live its life on earth and prepare 
 itself for heaven. It not only prescribes a creed, and supplies 
 a complete system of Church government: it suggests a scheme 
 of national education, it defines the relation of Church and 
 State, it provides for the poor and unable, it regulates the 
 life of households, it even determines the career of such 
 as by their natural gifts were specially fitted to be of service 
 to Church or State. As we shall see, the suggestions of the 
 book of Discipline were to be but imperfectly realised; yet, 
 by defining the ideals and moulding the temper and culture 
 of the prevailing majority of the Scottish people, it has been 
 one of the great formative influences in the national de- 
 velopment. 
 
 It was on this memorable document that the Estates 
 were now to sit in judgment. In the case of the Confession 
 of Faith they had been practically unanimous; but that had 
 been a mere statement of abstract doctrines which involved 
 no question of worldly interests, and might be subscribed with 
 a light heart and with any degree of spiritual conviction. With 
 the Book of Discipline it was very different. The fundamental 
 question that had to be answered in that Book was the 
 question of the " sustentation " of the new Church. The 
 answer given was the most natural in the world: the reformed 
 Church had an indisputable right to the entire inheritance of 
 the Church it had displaced. There were, however, two for- 
 midable difficulties in the way of this claim. Without manifest 
 injustice the ancient clergy could not be deprived wholesale 
 of their means of subsistence. The second difficulty was also 
 formidable. Of late year.-, a considerable amount of Church 
 property had passed into the hands of the nobles, barons, and 
 gentry. Would these persons now be willing to lay their
 
 y6 The Religious Revolution [Hook v 
 
 possessions at the feet of the ministers from whom they pro- 
 fessed to have received the true gospel ? The proceedings of 
 the Convention left no doubt as to the answer. As in the 
 preceding August, the assembly was a crowded one, but on 
 this occasion there was no such unanimous action. "Some 
 approved it," says Knox, "and willed the same have been 
 set forth by a law. Others, perceiving their carnal liberty and 
 worldly commodity somewhat to be impaired thereby, grudged, 
 insomuch that the name of Book of Discipline became odious 
 unto them. Everything that repugned to their corrupt affections 
 was termed in their mockage 'devout imaginations' 1 ." After 
 long and heated debates no definite conclusion was reached. 
 A large number of the nobles and barons, however, signed the 
 Book as being "good and conform to God's word in all points 2 ;" 
 but they signed it with a qualification that did them credit. 
 The old clergy should be allowed to retain their livings on 
 condition of their maintaining Protestant ministers in their 
 respective districts. The denunciations of Knox have given 
 an evil name to this Convention of the Estates, yet the act 
 of spoliation to which he would have had them put their 
 hands would have done little credit to a religion whose special 
 claim was to have reproduced the purity and simplicity of 
 the primitive gospel. 
 
 While the supporters of the Reformation were thus divided 
 among themselves, the prospect of the queen's 
 approaching return was further confounding their 
 counsels. That she must be their open or their secret 
 foe, they could have no manner of doubt. Her character and 
 opinions had been formed under the immediate supervision 
 of her uncle, the Cardinal of Lorraine ; and to the French 
 Protestants the Cardinal was already known as "le tigre de 
 France." As a Catholic and as a queen, her natural desire 
 must be to undo the work of the late revolution, which she 
 
 1 Knox, II. iiS. 
 - Ibid.
 
 Chap, ii] Regency of Mary of Lorraine jj 
 
 could only regard as the work of rebels and heretics. " When- 
 ever she comes," wrote Randolph, the English resident, " I 
 believe there will be a mad world 1 ." Mary might prove to be 
 as able as her mother, and she would possess many advantages 
 over Mary of Lorraine in any contest with her subjects. She 
 was the legitimate sovereign of the country ; and, now that the 
 immediate danger from France was removed by the death of 
 her husband, there was no reason why the national party, as 
 distinguished alike from Catholic and Protestant, should not 
 return to its natural allegiance. Moreover, though with the 
 help of England Protestantism had triumphed in the late trial 
 of strength, the great majority in the country — nobles, barons, 
 and commons — were still on the side of the old religion. 
 
 Even before her return, Mary had clearly indicated the 
 policy she intended to follow. In February she 
 had sent deputies to the Estates to urge the 
 renewal of the ancient league with France — a step which, at 
 their meeting in May, the Estates decisively refused to take, 
 as being the virtual abandonment of their cause. In view of 
 her imminent return, Mary's supporters began to bestir them- 
 selves in a fashion that boded ill for the future peace of the 
 country. At Stirling the bishops met in council to consider 
 their best policy; and we have it from one of their own number 
 that they were acting in concert with the Earls Huntly, Athole, 
 Crawford, Marischal, Sutherland, Caithness, and Bothwell. 
 As the result of their counsels, a proposal was sent to Mary 
 which she had the prudence to reject in her own interest as 
 well as in the interest of her kingdom. The proposal was 
 that she should land at some point on the northern coast, 
 where the Earls would be ready to support her with 20,000 
 men". As a safer course for the immediate future Mary chose 
 the advice proffered to her by the party for the present in the 
 ascendant. Through the Lord James Stewart as their deputy 
 
 1 Randolph to Cecil, uOth lebruary. 
 ,J Leilie.
 
 78 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 the Protestant leaders urged upon her the necessity of leaving 
 religion as she would find it, and of adopting as her advisers 
 the persons now at the head of affairs'. When at length on 
 the 19th of August, 1 561, Mary landed at Leith, it appeared 
 that at least for the time she was content to take things as 
 she found them. That she would accept them as definitive, 
 no one, and least of all, John Knox, could so far delude him- 
 self as to believe. 
 
 1 Philippson, Histoire du Rtgne de Marie Stuart, Vol. in., Appendix A.
 
 Chap. iiiJ Mary 79 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 MARY, 1561 — 1567. 
 
 English Sovereign. French King. 
 
 Elizabeth 1558 — 1603. Charles IX ... 1560— 1574. 
 
 King of Spain: Philip II. 
 Popes : Pius IV, Pius V. 
 
 I. Mary and Elizabeth. 
 
 During the actual reign of Mary Stewart Scotland occupied 
 the mind of Europe in a greater degree than at any other period 
 of its history. Through a strange combination of persons, 
 events and tendencies, the country found itself in a position 
 that rendered its affairs the concern of Christendom. Of the 
 four chief powers in Europe— England, France, Spain, and 
 the Court of Rome— each had its own interests at stake in 
 the fortunes of Mary Stewart and the political and religious 
 developments of her kingdom. In her own precarious position 
 Elizabeth could never cease to regard with anxiety the re- 
 lations of Mary Stewart and her subjects. In the opinion 
 of Roman Catholic Europe Mary was the rightful queen of 
 England; and Elizabeth was not slow to learn that in Mary 
 she had a rival who would let no occasion slip of making 
 her claims good. France, also, had reasons of its own for 
 maintaining its old ascendency in Scotland. Though by the 
 death of Francis II both the position of the Guises and that 
 ol their niece, Mary Stewart, were no longer what they had
 
 8o The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 been, they fully realised the importance of their near relation 
 to the Queen of Scots and never forgot that a happy turn 
 of fortune might see her the proudest ruler in Europe. More- 
 over, the policy of Elizabeth towards France made the 
 traditional alliance with Scotland as necessary as ever. 
 Elizabeth assisted the French Protestants, and she would have 
 assisted them still more but for the fear of what Scotland 
 might do at the bidding of France. For Spain, also, political 
 and religious considerations alike made Mary Stewart a per- 
 sonage of high importance. To extinguish heresy and to 
 make Spain the first power of Europe were the two great 
 aims of Philip; and for the attainment of these ends the Queen 
 of Scots might seem the providential instrument. If her 
 claim to the throne of England could be made good, and if she 
 were to become the wife of Don Carlos, the son and heir of 
 Philip, the ascendency of Spain and the healing of the Church 
 would alike be happily consummated. Unluckily, however, 
 for his father's ambition, the apparent heir of these great 
 destinies was a moral abortion whom not even the diplomacy 
 of the 1 6th century could turn to account. Scotland being 
 thus important in the eyes of those who governed Europe, 
 the Court of Rome could not in the interests of the Church 
 afford to neglect her. In the great Catholic reaction, known 
 as the Counter-Reformation, it was of the first importance 
 that Mary Stewart should take the place of Elizabeth Tudor ; 
 and we shall see that, at a moment in Mary's career when she 
 had the Protestant chiefs at her feet, Pope Pius IV actually 
 sent money to strengthen her hands in the good cause. 
 
 While the leading powers of Europe were thus so keenly 
 interested in the affairs of Scotland, their action with regard 
 to her never went beyond mere diplomacy. From the date 
 of Mary's return to Scotland till her flight to England after 
 the battle of Langside neither foreign friend nor foreign foe 
 set foot within the country. For this immunity from foreign 
 intervention there was a double reason. Their mutual fears
 
 \p. ml Mary Si 
 
 and jealousies effectually prevented any one of them from 
 adopting a decided policy towards Scotland without anxious 
 consideration of its rivals. Moreover, the internal condition 
 of England, France, and Spain, throughout the whole period 
 of Mary's actual reign, was such as to leave them little oppor- 
 tunity for foreign enterprises on a scale adequate to effect 
 a revolution in Britain. For if the reign of Mary Stewart 
 
 a time of disasters and tragedies in Scotland, it was no 
 less a time of desperate counsels, of popular fury, and im- 
 minent national ruin in other countries of Europe. The 
 uncertainty of the succession and the division of religious 
 opinion rendered the first years of Elizabeth one of the 
 critical periods in English history. In his policy of suppress- 
 ing heresy in the Low Countries, Philip II had undertaken 
 a task which engrossed his main energies, and which was 
 to result in one of the great disasters of the Spanish monarchy. 
 During the period that coincides with the reign of Mary 
 Stewart, it was France, however, that had the pre-eminence 
 in misfortune. In these years occurred the first two of those 
 religious wars, which, unexampled for the ferocity of the 
 combatants, threatened the dismemberment of the kingdom. 
 In these circumstances, therefore, Scotland, on whose action 
 the future of Christendom may be said to have depended, 
 held its own course and wrought out its own destinies. The 
 chief agents of that policy had their eyes constantly fixed on 
 the potentates who swayed Europe, but they acted on their 
 own initiative and relied mainly on their own resources. What 
 is singular is, that, in spite of all the forces that threatened 
 civil convulsions, the first four years after the return of Mary 
 Stewart were among the most tranquil in the annals of the 
 country. It is to the last three years of her reign that those 
 sensational events belong which have made her one of the 
 
 c and interesting figures of history. Yet what has been 
 
 of previous periods in the history of Scotland holds true 
 even of these years of confusion and crime. While Mary and 
 
 l!. S. ii. 6
 
 82 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 her rebellious lords were engaged in a life and death struggle 
 for the direction of the country's destinies, that middle class 
 was definitively formed which was to determine the character 
 and ideals of Scotland for three succeeding centuries. 
 
 It was on the morning of August 19, 1561, that Mary 
 Stewart returned to her native country after an absence of 
 thirteen years. In addition to her personal train she was 
 attended by a following of lords and gentlemen, certain of 
 whose names are alone sufficient to emphasise all the contrasts 
 between the world she had left and the world to which she had 
 come. There were three of her uncles of Guise, all identified 
 with that family policy which had been fraught with such 
 grave consequences to herself and her kingdom ; there was the 
 courtly Brantome, the great literary portrait-painter of his 
 time ; and there was Chatelar, who, in an evil day for himself, 
 had crossed the path of the enchantress. 
 
 As her ship was moored on that morning which first brought 
 her face to face with the burden that had fallen 
 to her as "the daughter of a hundred kings," she 
 must have needed all the encouragement of genuine friends 
 and romantic adorers. She was but in her nineteenth year, 
 and the task that lay before her might have daunted the ablest 
 and most experienced of statesmen. By an untoward coin- 
 cidence, on the August morning on which she arrived, there 
 was so dense a mist that " in the memory of man, that day 
 of the year, was never seen a more dolorous face of the 
 heaven 1 ," — a coincidence which, in the gloomy apprehension 
 of Knox, foreboded all the evils that were to come. Yet, by 
 spontaneous demonstrations of loyalty, her subjects of all 
 classes did their utmost to convince her that she was welcome 
 back to her own country. During her first night in Holyrood 
 bonfires blazed, and she was serenaded with music which 
 sounded somewhat differently in the ears of Knox and 
 
 1 Knox, 11. 269.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary $$ 
 
 Brantome'. On the following Sunday she was banqueted by 
 the Magistrates and Town Council of Edinburgh, and on the 
 22nd she made her solemn entry into the city, attended by 
 the great majority of her nobility — Chatelherault and his son, 
 the Earl of Arran, being the most conspicuous absentees. 
 But even amid the shows which were prepared for her re- 
 ception she was reminded of the change that had come over 
 the spirit of her people : during her progress through the 
 streets she was presented with a Bible and a Psalm-book, and 
 images representing Korah, Dathan, and Abiram were burned 
 on a scaffold as a significant reminder of the fate due to 
 idolaters. 
 
 The difficulties of her position were speedily revealed. On 
 the fust Sunday after her return, mass was cele- 
 brated in her private chapel in Holyrood; and 
 it was only by the special intervention of her half-brother, the 
 Lord James Stewart, that a mob was prevented from interrupting 
 the service. The following day Mary took a step which she 
 repeated on various occasions during the remainder of her 
 reign : she issued a proclamation forbidding any change in 
 tlie exiting religious settlement under pain of death. Even 
 this proclamation, however, did not satisfy the more ardent 
 of the reformers \ and the Earl of Arran publicly protested 
 against the liberty accorded to the queen's servants of directly 
 infringing the laws of the kingdom. But a more formidable 
 adversary than Arran lifted up his voice against all com- 
 promise. John Knox had seen with indignation the conduct 
 of the Lord James in yielding to the religious scruples of his 
 sister, and from his pulpit in St Giles he proclaimed what 
 plagues had overtaken nations that had given themselves to 
 try. One mass, he told his hearers, was more fearful to 
 him than if ten thousand armed enemies were landed in any 
 part of the realm on purpose to suppress the true religion. 
 
 ' Knox, 11. 270, and note.
 
 84 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 Mary was fully aware of the place that Knox already held 
 in the minds of her people ; and it was a step of the highest 
 prudence to silence or gain him over. Whether of her own 
 initiative or at the suggestion of her advisers, therefore, she 
 summoned him to the first of those interviews which are 
 not the least dramatic incidents of her varied career. Con- 
 fident in the spells of rank and youth and beauty, she doubtless 
 reckoned on an easy triumph over the homely man of the 
 people ; and, had Knox been merely a common demagogue, 
 her conquest must have been assured. Her own fascinations 
 were reinforced by the whole weight of court opinion, for 
 the Protestant lords were as eager to silence the preacher as 
 Mary herself. But Knox, with his fixed idea of a predestined 
 function, was steeled alike against the frowns and sneers of 
 men and the flatteries of women. According to Knox's own 
 account of the interview, Mary displayed all that free and 
 confident bearing and readiness of wit which impressed every- 
 one who approached her. She charged him with disloyalty 
 as a subject ; and the conversation turned on the great question 
 that had begun to agitate men's minds — the right of subjects to 
 rebel against a bad ruler. "Think ye," asked Mary, "that 
 subjects having power may resist their Princes?" "If their 
 Princes exceed their bounds," was the hardy reply 1 . 
 
 If there was the religious difficulty at home, there was like- 
 wise a foreign question which involved equally 
 important issues and demanded equally prudent 
 action. This was the question of Mary's right of succession 
 to the English throne. She and her friends had once con- 
 ceived that by policy and arms she might displace the heretic 
 and usurper Elizabeth ; but the opportunity for this enterprise 
 had gone, and she must now be content if she could be ac- 
 knowledged as Elizabeth's immediate heir. To procure this 
 acknowledgment was now her absorbing aim ; and, as it 
 
 1 Knox, li. 277 — 286.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 85 
 
 happened, this aim supplied a bond of common action between 
 her and her councillors. These councillors she chose on the 
 6th of September 1 ; and the variety of opinions which they 
 represented reveals the policy of compromise which was 
 necessitated by the existing state of the country. Among 
 the most notable of them were Chatelherault and his son the 
 Earl di Anan, the Earls of Huntlv, Argyle, Bothwell, Enrol, 
 Morton, Glencairn, Montrose, the Earl Marischal, and the 
 Lord James Stewart and Lord Erskine. But during the first 
 four years of her reign it was by the advice of two men that 
 she was mainly guided Maitland of Lethington and the Lord 
 James Stewart. Of the two, Maitland had the subtler and more 
 cultivated mind, but he was a diplomatist rather than a states- 
 man, and lacked the qualities that inspire confidence in masses 
 of men. The Lord James, on the other hand, was a plain 
 man of affairs, who knew his own mind and whose actions 
 were characterised by a decision and consistency which gave 
 a cumulative force to his public career. Unlike as these men 
 were, they were agreed on two main points touching the future 
 of their country — the necessity of an eventual union of the 
 English and Scottish Crowns, and, as a means to this end, the 
 recognition of Mary as the immediate successor of Elizabeth. 
 It was the desire of both, also, that this settlement should be 
 made on the basis of Protestantism and not on the religion of 
 Rome, for it was the confident anticipation of both that if 
 Mary's ambition were gratified she would not hesitate to take 
 the step which under similar circumstances was afterwards 
 taken by Menry IV of France and sacrifice her faith to tin- 
 interests of herself and her kingdom. 
 
 Even before Mary's return Maitland had written to Cecil 
 and the Lord James to Elizabeth, suggesting the 
 recognition of Mary's claim as in the best in- 
 terest of both countries, but the bare suggestion of such an 
 
 1 /'. C. Register, 1. 157.
 
 86 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 arrangement filled Elizabeth with a nervous dread, which was 
 intensified by the attitude of Mary towards herself. Even 
 while Mary was in France there were strained relations between 
 the two queens. Mary had never signed the Treaty of Edin- 
 burgh, one of the clauses of which involved the abandonment 
 of her immediate claim to the English Crown; and therefore, 
 when she asked permission to pass home by way of England, 
 Elizabeth refused to grant a passport unless Mary agreed to 
 sign the treaty. But it was not in Mary's interest, as her 
 affairs then stood, to be in unfriendly relations with Elizabeth ; 
 and before she had been a fortnight in Scotland she despatched 
 Maitland to the English Court with messages " tending to the 
 conservation of friendship and good neighbourhood 1 ." From 
 her nobility Maitland bore special instructions, of which Mary 
 could not have been ignorant, though she did not identify 
 herself with them. Elizabeth's answer was clear and decided. 
 There could be no real friendship between the two countries 
 till Mary had signed the late treaty. As for naming Mary as 
 her successor, this would be to set her own winding-sheet before 
 her eyes 2 . 
 
 Thus, at the very outset, the prospects of the policy of 
 compromise between Mary and the Protestant lords were 
 not specially encouraging. It was requisite to the success of 
 that policy that Mary's ambition should be gratified; and, as 
 was to be proved, Elizabeth would never consent to name 
 as her successor either the Queen of Scots or anyone else. 
 With regard to the question of religion the difficulty was 
 equally insurmountable. As men thought and felt in the 
 1 6th century, the coexistence of two religions in the same 
 State was a natural impossibility ; and in Scotland as elsewhere 
 this was soon to be shown. During the closing months of 
 1 56 1, a succession of incidents proved that the Protestant 
 lords could not hope to carry with them the bulk of their 
 
 1 P. C. Register, xiv. 173. 
 
 2 Ibid. 174.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 87 
 
 fellow-believers. On the 21st of September the magistrates 
 of Edinburgh, in accordance with ancient custom, ordered 
 the statutes of the town to be publicly proclaimed. Among 
 these statutes was one which ordained that all malefactors 
 should be ejected from the town ; and in that class were now 
 reckoned such as adhered to the old religion. To the indig- 
 nation of Knox, Mary with the approval of Maitland and the 
 Lord James consigned the magistrates to the Tolbooth and 
 ordered the election of a new municipal body. On the 1st of 
 November another incident intensified the growing quarrel 
 between Knox and his former friends. The festival of All 
 Saints was celebrated "with all mischievous solemnity;" and 
 the question was hotly debated whether the queen had a right 
 to set aside the late enactments against the mass. But it was 
 when the General Assembly of the Reformed Church met in 
 December that the breach was fully revealed. On previous 
 occasions, the lords, the lesser barons, gentlemen, and ministers 
 had all met in one place ; but the lords now refused to take 
 part in its proceedings, and it was only by deputy that they 
 consented to communicate with the Assembly. When they 
 were urged to give effect to the Book of Discipline, of which 
 many of them had previously approved, they treated the 
 appeal with contempt. On one matter, however, they were 
 constrained to take action by the dangerous feeling of the 
 main body of the Protestants. The Reformed clergy were 
 still without regular provision and had hitherto lived " upon 
 the benevolence of men." That such provision should at once 
 be made was now the vehement demand of Knox and his 
 brethren. But there were obstacles in the way which only the 
 dread of a Protestant revolt determined "the rulers of the 
 Court "' to face. The majority of the old clergy were still in 
 possession of their incomes; and a large amount of ec< lesiastical 
 property had passed into the hands of the lay Lords, Protestant 
 and Catholic. By a singular compromise the demands of the 
 Jiers were partially met. The Privy Council imposed a
 
 88 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 tax of one-third on all Church property j and, as the queai was 
 likewise in straits for money, this third was to be equally 
 divided between her and the ministers. " I see," was Knox's 
 pithy comment, " I see two parts freely given to the Devil, and 
 the third must be divided betwixt God and the Devil 1 ." 
 
 The year 1562 brought no advantage to the foreign and 
 domestic policy of Mary and her advisers. As a 
 means of establishing better relations between the 
 two queens, it was proposed that they should hold an interview 
 for the friendly discussion of their differences. In January 
 Mary wrote to Elizabeth eagerly pressing for such a meeting, 
 and in May the Privy Council gave its sanction to her desire. 
 Within a week Maitland was despatched to England with the 
 conditions on which Mary would agree to an interview. As 
 part of his instructions it is significant that he was to demand 
 such a safe-conduct for his mistress as would secure her against 
 all contingencies during her sojourn in England. Elizabeth 
 appeared to be as eager as Mary for the meeting She granted 
 the safe-conduct, and it was arranged that the two queens should 
 meet at some date during the autumn. It may be doubted 
 if Elizabeth really desired the interview. The northern counties 
 of England were largely Catholic, and the presence of Mary 
 in the heart of the country might be dangerous. Moreover, 
 from what Elizabeth must have heard of the gifts and graces of 
 Mary, she must have shrunk, vain as she was of her own personal 
 appearance, from challenging the comparison of their respective 
 attractions as women as well as queens. However this may 
 be, to Mary's intense chagrin Elizabeth found a pretext for 
 postponing their meeting. The first religious war had broken 
 out in France; and, as the champion of Protestantism, Elizabeth 
 had a stake in the fortunes of the Huguenots. So long as 
 this crisis in France lasted there could be no meeting, she 
 announced, between herself and the Scottish queen. Mary 
 
 1 Knox, 11. 289—310, vi. 132; Privy Council Register, 1. 201—2.
 
 \p. m] Mary 89 
 
 was thus as far off as ever from the attainment of her desire 
 to be acknowledged as the heir of England ; and the day was 
 sure to come when she would grow weary of deferring to her 
 Protestant counsellors'. 
 
 Of all the Scottish nobles, the Earl of Arran was the only 
 one who had stood by Knox since the return of 
 
 I562 
 
 Mary. We have seen how he had protested 
 against the celebration of Mass in Holyrood Chapel, and he 
 had made himself talked of in other ways. On a Sunday night 
 towards the close of 15 61 a mysterious tumult had arisen in 
 Edinburgh ; and the rumour went that Arran had entered the 
 town with a body of men to carry off the queen. His sub- 
 sequent doings proved at least that he was capable of so wild 
 an action. He had been of late at feud with the Earl of 
 Bothwell, who for some motive unknown sought the good 
 offices of Knox to heal their quarrel. A reconciliation was 
 apparently effected; but a few days later Arran appeared before 
 Knox with a strange story of a plot by Bothwell to have the 
 queen carried off to Dumbarton Castle and to cut off Maitland, 
 the Lord James, and others of her advisers. As time was to 
 show, Bothwell was a person ready for desperate enterprises; 
 but Knox apparently regarded the tale as an hallucination — an 
 opinion eventually confirmed by Arran's actually going mad 
 and remaining so for the rest of his life 2 . 
 
 But the chief event of the year 1562 was the ruin of the 
 powerful Earl of Huntly — of whom Knox savs 
 that "under a prince there was not such a one 
 these three hundred years in tills Realm produced." Of the 
 lents connected with Huntly's fall we have a sufficiently 
 full account ; but its causes are 'involved in some obscurity. 
 On the nth of August Mary set out from Edinburgh on a 
 long-contemplated progress to the northern counties — her sole 
 aim apparently being to make acquaintance with those parts of 
 
 1 P. C. A'., I. 206, XIV. 181; Haynes, State Papers, 391—2. 
 ' J Knox, 11. 322 et seq.
 
 90 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 her kingdom. Before the end of the month she was at Old 
 Aberdeen, attended by the majority of her nobles — Chatel- 
 herault again being the most conspicuous absentee. Within a 
 few days she found herself involved in an affair which turned a 
 royal progress into a civil war. The second son of the Earl of 
 Huntly, Sir John Gordon, laird of Findlater, had broken ward 
 in Edinburgh; and the news reached Mary that he had dis- 
 obeyed her command to surrender himself at Stirling. When 
 Huntly invited her, therefore, to visit him at his castle of 
 Strathbogie on her way to Inverness, she refused and passed 
 on her way. At Inverness she received a further slight : in the 
 name of Lord Gordon the garrison denied her admission into 
 the castle. As the country, however, rose to support the queen, 
 the castle was surrendered the following day, when its captain 
 was hanged and certain of the garrison sent to prison for life. 
 
 Though her journey had thus taken so different a turn from 
 what she had anticipated, Mary was far from repenting her 
 coming. The weather was "extreame fowle and colde," the 
 roads she traversed were cumbersome, and there was actual 
 danger of some sudden attack from the formidable clan whom 
 she had offended. Yet, says Randolph, who accompanied her, 
 " I never saw her merrier, never dismayed," and he heard her 
 exclaim that she longed she were a man " to lie all night in the 
 fields, or to walk upon the causeway with a pack or knapschall 
 [head-piece], a Glasgow buckler and a broadsword." It was 
 the intention of Sir John Gordon to intercept her as she crossed 
 the Spey, but the formidable force by which she was attended 
 deterred him from the attempt. But the Gordons had now 
 gone so far that their only hope was to maintain a show of 
 defiance. Sir John refused to give up his castles of Findlater 
 and Auchindoune, and his father still disobeyed Mary's order 
 summoning him to her presence. An attempt to seize him in 
 his castle of Strathbogie was cleverly eluded, and on October 
 17th he was outlawed. Now rendered desperate, Huntly 
 took the bold decision of trying his strength against the force
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 91 
 
 that Mary had at her disposal, and with a body of 700 or 800 
 men he marched on Aberdeen. Mary and her lords, however, 
 had not been idle and had been reinforced by contingents 
 from Lothian and Fife under the command of the Master of 
 Lindsay and the lairds of Ormiston and Grange. On the 
 news of Huntly's approach, the Lord James Stewart (Earl 
 ol Moray, as he had now become), the Earls of Athole and 
 Morton marched to meet him with 2000 men. They found 
 him at Corrichie, some twenty miles to the west of Aberdeen, 
 strongly posted on the brow of a hill. Huntly's force amounted 
 to but a third of that of his enemies, but he had been led to 
 believe that he had friends in their ranks, and the result of the 
 first onset gave countenance to his belief. The vanguard of 
 the royal army was broken, and the day was saved only by the 
 determined attack of the detachment led by Moray. After a 
 brief struggle Huntly's men were forced down the hill into a 
 morass which lay at its base; many were wounded ; 120 were 
 slain ; and among those taken were Huntly's two sons, Adam 
 and John. From the traitor's death that awaited him Huntly 
 was strangely delivered : on the way to Aberdeen he fell dead 
 from his horse, stricken by some natural disease. A few days 
 later, Sir John Gordon, the chief cause of the trouble, was 
 executed in Aberdeen, his brother Adam being spared on 
 account of his youth. Huntly was beyond the reach of punish- 
 ment, but his body was subjected to the ghastly formalities of 
 the feudal law. Seven months after his death (May 28, 1563) 
 the coffin containing his embalmed body was placed upright, "as 
 if the Earle stoode upon his feet," at the bar of the Scottish 
 Parliament, when sentence of treason was pronounced upon 
 himself, and his posterity declared incapable of office or dignity 
 within the realm 1 . 
 
 In connection with the fall of Huntly the question naturally 
 rises Why should Mary have consented to the ruin of her 
 
 1 Bain, Cat. of Stale Papers minting to Scotland and Mary, Queen of 
 Stots, I. 641; et acq.; Knox, II. 252 et seq.
 
 92 The Religious Revolution [Rook v 
 
 greatest Catholic subject? The character and career of Huntly 
 himself give a tolerably satisfactory answer to the question. 
 He had been punished for treason by Mary's own mother, 
 Mary of Lorraine; as public documents prove 1 , he was in 
 treasonable correspondence with England during the whole 
 term of her regency ; on the establishment of Protestantism he 
 attended the sermons of Knox, though he was a somewhat 
 indecorous listener ; and his whole conduct on the occasion of 
 Mary's progress was such as with her high notions of the royal 
 prerogative she must have keenly resented. In a personage 
 with such a record Mary could have little confidence, for in the 
 event of renewed civil war it was more probable than not that 
 Huntly would, as he had done in the past, give his sword to 
 the stronger party ; and it was the nature of Mary to prefer an 
 open foe to an equivocal friend. With the fall of Huntly is 
 associated the rise of the Lord James Stewart to the place of 
 the most powerful subject in the kingdom. While Mary's other 
 councillor, Maitland, had been attending to her interests 
 abroad, her brother had done her effectual service at home. 
 In addition to his victory at Corrichie, he had on two separate 
 expeditions to the Borders reduced these districts to a tran- 
 quillity which they had not known for many a day. His 
 services were not unrewarded : in February (1562) he had been 
 legitimated and made Earl of Mar, and he returned from the 
 northern expedition with the lands and title of the Earldom of 
 Moray 2 . 
 
 While Mary had been dealing with Huntly in the north, 
 
 John Knox, the other potentate in the country, 
 
 had been on a mission to the south and west. 
 
 So uneasy did he find men there, he tells us, that he had to do 
 
 his utmost to prevent them from open revolt. His mission 
 
 had, at least, one definite result : the Protestant barons and 
 
 1 See Index to Bain's Calendar of State Papers relating to Scotland and 
 Mary, Queen of Scots. 
 
 2 Reg. of Privy Seal, XXXI. 1; Bain, p. 6,55.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 93 
 
 gentlemen of Ayrshire, in view of the late compromise of their 
 leaders, took a bond of mutual defence and for the furtherance 
 of the Reformed religion. By November Knox was again in 
 Edinburgh and in less hopeful mood than ever. Not only was 
 the prospect dark in Scotland, but gloomy news had come 
 regarding the brethren in France. In the late religious struggle 
 in that country the Guises had triumphed; and for the moment 
 the strength of the Huguenots was broken. To exasperate 
 Knox still further, there was unusual festivity in Holyrood, 
 which he associated with the queen's jubilation at the success 
 of her uncles. As usual he gave vent to his feelings from the 
 pulpit, and spoke with such freedom that Mary summoned 
 him to a second interview. She taxed him with speaking 
 irreverently of his sovereign and injuring her in the opinion of 
 her subjects ; but the preacher was as intractable as ever. If 
 her conduct were such as was condemned by Scripture, 
 it was his simple duty, he maintained, to denounce it in the 
 ears of herself and her subjects 1 . 
 
 During the year 1563 there were further developments in 
 the home and foreign policy of Mary and her 
 advisers, but it saw no such stirring event as the 
 revolt and suppression of Huntly 2 . In February one of those 
 incidents befell Mary which render her a figure of special interest 
 to the creative artist. Among the many adorers of the youthful 
 and beautiful sovereign was Chatelar, more lovesick than all 
 the rest. According to Knox and the English agent Randolph — ■ 
 neither a friendly witness — Mary gave him proofs of her favour 
 which were neither prudent nor becoming. However this may 
 be, the conduct of her admirer passed all bounds of decency. 
 On the night of the 12th of February he concealed himself in 
 her bedroom in Holyrood Palace, and two days later again 
 intruded himself upon her at Burntisland. The following week 
 
 1 Knox, 11. 347 et seq. 
 
 '- Knox notes of this year that it was one of "universal dearth in Scot- 
 land. " 11. 369.
 
 94 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 he was executed at St Andrews, in Brantome's happy phrase 
 " par son outrecuidance et non pour crime.'" According to 
 Randolph and Knox, he made an edifying end : according to 
 Brantome, his last companion was a volume of Ronsard, and his 
 latest words an adieu "to the most beautiful and the most cruel 
 princess in the world 1 ." 
 
 At Easter certain proceedings again brought Knox and 
 Mary into collision. In various parts of the country mass 
 was openly said; and in the west, where the Protestants were 
 most numerous and most zealous, decisive action was taken 
 to prevent what was held to be a breach of the law. Certain 
 priests were placed under ward, and others were told that 
 the law would take its course in spite of council and queen. 
 Mary was then at Lochleven, and hither she summoned Knox 
 as the soul of all the opposition. For two hours before supper 
 she pleaded with him to use his influence in favour of the 
 threatened priests. But Knox was immovable ; the mass had 
 been forbidden by the law; and, if rulers would not punish 
 the wicked, it was the duty of their godly subjects to see the 
 law carried into effect. The next morning the conversation 
 was renewed, but on this occasion Mary took a different line. 
 She professed to be convinced by Knox's arguments, and 
 promised to take action against such as broke the law by 
 saying mass 2 . 
 
 Mary kept her promise, but Knox was to find that he 
 had been fairly out-generalled. Though Mary had been nearly 
 two years in the country, the Estates had not yet met. 
 There were good reasons of State for the delay. When 
 the Queen of England demanded of Mary that she should 
 sign the Treaty of Edinburgh, her reply had been that she 
 could not do so without the consent of her Parliament. To 
 delay its meeting, therefore, postponed an awkward dilemma. 
 
 1 Brantome, Dames illustres francaises et itrangeres. — Discours Trou 
 siime] Knox, II. 367 et seq.; Bain, p. 684. 
 
 2 Knox, II. 370 et seq.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 95 
 
 But there was another reason which rendered it impolitic 
 alike for Mary and her Protestant advisers to face a meet- 
 ing of the Estates : should the smaller barons appear in 
 such numbers as at the revolutionary convention of August, 
 1560, the policy of compromise might find short shrift and 
 another revolution be the result. It was now decided, how- 
 ever, that the Estates should meet; but, by a clever stroke 
 of policy, all risks were averted. Hamilton, archbishop of 
 St Andrews, and forty-seven other churchmen were tried 
 before the Court of Justiciary, and found guilty of contra- 
 vening the law against the mass — the majority of them being 
 committed to ward. By this appearance of zeal Mary 
 "obtained of the Protestants whatever she desired;" and, 
 when the Estates met on the 26th of May, Knox and the 
 other preachers found the prospect of a religious settle- 
 ment as far off as ever. The Book of Discipline, they 
 were told, might one day be the law of the land ; but, as 
 things now stood, that time had not yet come. In the depth 
 of his mortification Knox openly quarrelled with Moray, the 
 one man to whom he had looked as the saviour of true religion; 
 and so bitter was their estrangement " that familiarly after that 
 time they spake not together for a year and a half." 
 
 In her foreign relations Mary had not been so fortunate. 
 By the assassination (Feb. 24) of her uncle, the 
 great Duke of Guise, she lost her most powerful 
 friend in France. Elizabeth, also, still refused to acknowledge 
 her as her immediate successor. To bring Elizabeth to terms 
 there was one mode of pressure which Mary and her councillors 
 now diligently applied. By her marriage to a great Catholic 
 potentate England would be seriously threatened ; and this 
 was the weapon that was now held over Elizabeth's head. 
 Thi re were many possible suitors, but the claims of only two 
 were really considered. The one was Charles, Archduke of 
 
 1 Knox, 11. 376 cl seq.
 
 g6 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 Austria, whose suit had the support of Mary's uncle, the 
 Cardinal of Lorraine. But the Archduke was neither rich 
 enough nor powerful enough to serve Mary's purpose, and 
 she set her heart on a far more exalted personage — Don Carlos, 
 the heir of Spain. Convinced Protestants though they were, 
 both Moray and Maitland gave their support to this scheme — 
 assuredly not from a desire that it should ever take effect, 
 but from the hope that the fear of such a contingency would 
 force the hand of Elizabeth 1 . Elizabeth took alarm, but she 
 was not sufficiently frightened to make the desired concession ; 
 and she contented herself with sending Randolph to Scotland 
 in the month of September with the significant message that 
 Mary's union with any of the Emperor's kin would be taken 
 as a breach of friendship with England. Two months later 
 the danger had passed, for in November Philip II definitively 
 announced that the condition of Don Carlos was such that 
 his marriage was impossible 3 . 
 
 The year closed with another trial of strength between 
 Knox and the queen. During the summer Mary had made 
 a progress in the West, and had carried the mass into that 
 stronghold of Protestantism. By the arrangement which had 
 been made with her regarding her religion, it was only in her 
 own presence that mass was to be celebrated; but during her 
 absence the rite was continued in her private chapel in Holy- 
 rood. Two ardent Protestants, Patrick Cranston and Andrew 
 Armstrong, having interrupted one of these services by a pro- 
 test against its illegality, were promptly summoned to answer 
 a charge of invading the queen's palace. It was now that 
 Knox took a step which at length seemed to put him in 
 Mary's power : he wrote a circular letter to the Protestants 
 urging them to appear at the trial of their two champions. 
 On a charge of treason for summoning the queen's lieges he 
 
 1 Cf. Kirkcaldy of Grange's Letter to Randolph. — Knox, VI. 539— 540. 
 
 2 For, Cal. Eliz., VI. 509 — 510; Philippson, II. 229.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 97 
 
 was brought before the Privy Council — Mary herself being 
 present. But his judges were in an awkward predicament : 
 during the late revolt the majority had themselves freely sum- 
 moned the lieges, and in condemning Knox they might register 
 a dangerous precedent against themselves. To the morti- 
 fication of Mary he was dismissed without even a rebuke, and 
 four days later he received the cordial approval of the General 
 Assembly for his offending circular 1 . 
 
 During the year 1564 the question of Mary's marriage still 
 
 absorbed herself and her Council. Elizabeth 
 
 1564 
 
 having objected to a union with any member of 
 the House of Hapsburg, she was asked to say specifically whom 
 she would consider a fitting consort. After long hesitation 
 she suggested her own favourite, Lord Dudley, whom she 
 subsequently created Earl of Leicester, to make him a more 
 suitable mate for a queen. From Don Carlos, the heir of 
 Spain, to Dudley, a mere court minion, was a considerable 
 ent; yet Mary agreed to the alliance on one condition- 
 that with Dudley should go the recognition of her right as 
 Elizabeth's successor. As Dudley professed to be a staunch 
 Protestant, he was acceptable not only to Moray and Maitland, 
 but even to Knox, who rejoiced at the prospect of a king of 
 his own religion. It is probable, however, that Elizabeth was 
 never really in earnest in making her proposal, and that all 
 she had in her mind was to avert as long as she could any 
 alliance of the Queen of Scots which would be dangerous to 
 herself. When in November Maitland and Moray met Ran- 
 dolph and Bedford at Berwick to arrange the terms of union, 
 the condition on which alone Mary would agree to the alliance 
 was decisively rejected by Elizabeth's representatives 2 . It was 
 becoming clear that the Queen of Scots must take her 
 matrimonial ;iffairs into her own hand. 
 
 1 Knox, 11, 391 et sc<(. 
 - For. Cat. /.ii-, nil h* et scc|. 
 11 7
 
 98 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 This was made still more evident from the way things were 
 going at home. The policy of compromise 
 adopted by the Protestant leaders was fast be- 
 coming more and more distasteful to the great majority of 
 their party. It had all along been held out by Moray and 
 Lethington that the queen must marry soon, that she would 
 marry a Protestant 1 , that Elizabeth must in the end recognise 
 her as her successor, and that the two countries would thus 
 be eventually united under one sovereign and bound together 
 by a common religion. Three years had now gone, however, 
 and these desirable ends were as far off as ever; mean- 
 while no satisfactory settlement had been made for the Re 
 formed Church, and the mass was gaining ground every day. 
 Each meeting of the General Assembly, we have seen, had 
 revealed the deep breach in the Protestant ranks; and the 
 Assembly which met in June, 1564, proved that the division 
 must before long result in some resolute action on the part 
 of Knox and the Protestant majority whom he represented. 
 On the first day of its meeting, the "Courtiers," as they were 
 called, remained at home, their object being to effect a split 
 among the preachers themselves. An arrangement was made, 
 however, by which eleven of the ministers, Knox being one 
 of them, should hold a conference with the Protestant lords. 
 The main matter discussed was a curious revelation of "the 
 spirit of the age." From the beginning Knox had entertained 
 but faint hopes of Mary's changing her religion. Now ap- 
 parently he had abandoned all hope, and in his public prayers 
 for her spiritual welfare he implied a grave doubt of her 
 eventual salvation. To one of his expressions — "Illuminat 
 hir hairt, gif thy gud plesour be " — Maitland and his allies 
 objected as an unbecoming petition for a subject to make 
 
 1 During the opening years of Mary's actual reign there was some dread 
 in papal quarters lest she might be "constrained to a heretical marriage "■ — 
 Pollen, Papal Negotiations with Mary (Scottish Historical Society), p. LI.
 
 Chap, in] Mary 99 
 
 regarding his prince. The question was a strange one to be 
 the subject of serious debate between a minister of State and 
 a minister of religion, yet it was the question on which the 
 fate of the country hung. A Catholic sovereign could not 
 rule a Protestant people : this was the conviction of Knox, and 
 the experience of Christendom proved that he was right. 
 Sooner or later the issue must again be tried as to which of 
 the two religions was to prevail in the country 1 . 
 
 II. Darnlev and Riccio. 
 
 A false step on the part of Elizabeth precipitated the crisis 
 which Knox had all along predicted. At the 
 request of Mary, she permitted the exiled Earl 
 of Lennox to return to Scotland. To Mary Lennox was a 
 welcome ally on various grounds. He was of her own religion ; 
 by his connection with the royal house he would be a counter- 
 poise to the Hamiltons, who by their Protestant leanings and 
 their dynastic claims must always be dangerous subjects ; and, 
 finally, Lennox, powerful and in favour, might be a check 
 on the other great nobles of Scotland. On the other hand, 
 the coming of Lennox was equally dreaded by both sections 
 of the Protestant party. As a Catholic he was hateful to the 
 ministers, and to Moray and Lethington he was unwelcome 
 as a probable obstacle to all their counsels. It was with a 
 sure instinct of evils to come that they saw him arrive in the 
 month of September; and their fears were not lessened when 
 in December Mary restored him to all his honours and 
 estat 
 
 But it was not Lennox, always feeble and now prematurely 
 old, that was to be the evil fate dreaded alike 
 by Moray and Knox. In February, 1565, he 
 
 1 Knox, 11. 422 el seq. 
 
 Randolph to Cecil, Dec. 15, 1504; Stevenson, Illustrations of the 
 11 oj Que 11 Mary, p. 1 1 1. 
 
 7—2
 
 ioo The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 was followed to Scotland by his son, Lord Darnley, marked 
 by destiny to be the most pitiful and tragic figure in the 
 national history. Before the two cousins had met many days, 
 it was apparent that a new situation had arisen. By a co- 
 incidence, which is another of the picturesque turns of her 
 fortune, Mary fell madly in love with the man, who to all 
 seeming was the most suitable husband she could have chosen 
 in the interest of the cause with which she was identified. 
 Hitherto events had followed the tedious progress of a tortuous 
 diplomacy, but from this point onwards to the disastrous close 
 at Langside she and her subjects were borne along by a swift 
 succession of wild and tragic events which can scarcely be 
 paralleled in history. In the beginning of April Moray left 
 the Court where his counsels were no longer heeded ; in May 
 Lethington was sent to inform Elizabeth of Mary's intention 
 of marrying Darnley ; at a convention of the nobles in the 
 same month the marriage was formally debated and approved ; 
 and on July 29th Mary and Darnley were married in the 
 Chapel Royal of Holyrood according to the rites of the Church 
 of Rome 1 . 
 
 Thus were fulfilled the endless prophesyings of Knox, and 
 such was the issue of the cautious policy of Moray and 
 Lethington. That policy had been conceived in the true 
 interest of the country ; but its success had depended on 
 two contingencies, on neither of which could confident calcu- 
 lations be made. Elizabeth had refused to acknowledge 
 Mary as her successor; and Mary was as stiff in her own 
 religious opinions as ever. At one time or other, as has 
 been said, there must have come the final trial of strength 
 between the two religions. The Protestants had triumphed 
 over Mary of Lorraine, but it remained to be seen whether 
 
 1 But without the dispensation which was canonically necessary in their 
 case as being "in the second degree from a common stock." — Pollen, pp. 
 xci — xcviii. This is but one proof among others that Mary deferred to 
 the laws of the Church only when they did not clash with her own interests.
 
 Chap, mj Mary 101 
 
 they could also triumph over her daughter, their lawful 
 sovereign. Had Moray, on his sister's return, adopted the 
 policy recommended by Knox, and insisted that she must 
 choose between the Reformed religion and the loss of her 
 Crown, the issue would have been joined at once. He would 
 then have been in a far stronger position than he was now, 
 for he would have had the whole force of Protestantism at 
 his back. As things now stood, however, his position was 
 desperate. There were only two quarters to which he could 
 look for support — to the zealous Protestants led by Knox, and 
 to the English queen. But by his policy during the last four 
 years he had alienated these zealous Protestants, who were 
 no longer the coherent body that had accomplished the revolu- 
 tion of 1560. Elizabeth, who was furious at the Darnley 
 marriage and saw in it a threat and a defiance against herself, 
 would gladly have come to Moray's assistance; but to lend 
 open assistance to a rebel was to point a weapon against 
 herself, and beyond expostulation and warning to Mary she did 
 nothing to restore the late situation in Scotland 1 . 
 
 The Darnley marriage was the one great stroke of policy 
 achieved by Mary. As the grandson of Margaret i g 
 
 Tudor, sister of Henry VIII, Darnley stood next 
 to Mary herself in the English succession; and by the union 
 of their claims they gained a double hold on that Catholic 
 section of Elizabeth's subjects which was a permanent cause of 
 dread to herself and her advisers. The immediate result of 
 the marriage was all that Mary could have desired. She 
 triumphed in Scotland ; she frightened Elizabeth ; and she 
 me once more an important personage in the eyes ol 
 continental potentates. It was in a crisis such as the present 
 that Mary displayed her most brilliant qualities. Her public 
 career conclusively shows that she possessed little of the 
 wisdom or self-restraint indispensable to a successful ruler 
 
 1 For, c'ii.'. Elix-i vu. 40^ -iij.
 
 102 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 or diplomatist; but in the swirl of events in which she was 
 now involved she extorted the admiration of her enemies by 
 her high spirit, her fearlessness, and decision. Her immediate 
 task was to crush the Protestant lords who had opposed her 
 marriage and refused to accept the terms which she had offered 
 to them ; and she performed it with a zest which proved how 
 keenly she resented the restraint of the last four years. 
 
 Passing rapidly from one town of her kingdom to another, 
 she effectually prevented the insurgents from making head 
 against her. She summoned her subjects to meet her in 
 warlike guise in the last week of August, and, to allay the fears 
 of the Protestants, she issued a series of proclamations giving 
 assurance that she intended no change in the existing religious 
 settlement. On the 6th of August the sentence of outlawry, so 
 dreaded by the Scottish nobles, was pronounced on Moray, 
 in spite of Elizabeth's intercession in his favour. Towards the 
 end of that month the insurgent lords took a decided step. 
 In the wars with Mary of Lorraine, the Congregation had often 
 found a welcome reception in the capital; and thither from Ayr, 
 at the head of 1200 horse, now rode Chatelherault, Moray, 
 Glencairn, Rothes, and Boyd— the same leaders in the same 
 cause which had triumphed in Edinburgh in the August of 
 1560. But times were now changed, and so coldly were they 
 received that after a stay of two days they deemed it prudent 
 to retire to Dumfries, where they were conveniently near the 
 Border. Mary was immediately on their track, and but for 
 stress of weather might have enjoyed the hazard of battle 
 for which she was so eager. At Dumfries the insurgents found 
 themselves powerless ; and meanwhile Mary ranged the country, 
 stamping out rebellion and encouraging her loyal subjects. 
 At length, by the 8th of October, she found herself strong 
 enough to deal with the lords at Dumfries ; but two days 
 before her intended march they were in Carlisle, and Mary for 
 the first time was mistress in her own kingdom. Thus ended 
 the Roundabout or Chaseabout Raid, as it was called, the
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 103 
 
 most triumphant passage in her career, when good fortune and 
 her own special gifts brought a gleam of success to a life which 
 thenceforward was to know little but sorrow and disaster'. 
 
 The temporary triumph of Mary was coincident with 
 a great crisis in Christendom which gave it 
 a significance beyond the limits of Scotland. It 
 was in the year 1565 that the great movement, known as the 
 Counter-Reformation, took that definite shape in the minds of 
 the Catholic princes which was to issue in the Massacre of 
 St Bartholomew and the Spanish Armada. To restore the 
 unity of Christendom by the extinction of every form of heresy 
 such in the year 1565 had become the specific object of the 
 Pope and the two Catholic rulers, Philip II of Spain and 
 ("liarles IX of France. It was, therefore, the good fortune and 
 the distinction of Mary that by throwing off her Protestant 
 advisers she had led the way in the great crusade. With 
 Scotland reunited to Rome, England, the stronghold of heresy, 
 would again be open to attack; and, if Mary could but hold her 
 own, and Catholic Europe could but act in concert, the result 
 could hardly be doubtful. With money and fair words, there- 
 fore, Pope Pius IV and King Philip II encouraged Mary in her 
 good work'-' 
 
 The work to which Mary had put her hand, however, 
 demanded qualities which were alien to her 
 whole nature. Her public difficulties would 
 have taxed the most vigorous and capable of rulers, but the 
 difficulties of the queen were in Mary's case fatally cora- 
 plicated by the passions of the woman. Her nobility were 
 divided by their interests and their religion; and, though 
 now deprived of their most influential leaders, the Protestant 
 party composed the most intelligent and the mo^t energetic 
 
 tion ol her subjects. At the half-yearly meeting of the 
 
 1 Rt . <■/ 1'rivy Council, 1 355 el seq. ; For. Cal. Eli-., vil. 437 ct seq. ; 
 Diurnal of Occurrents \ Knox, 11. 500 et seq. 
 - Philipp on, 111. 85— 87.
 
 104 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 General Assembly, which was held in December, 1565, a 
 public fast was boldly proclaimed for the shame and back- 
 sliding of the nation. But it was the very event which had led 
 to Mary's late triumph that was to be the prime cause of the 
 ruin and tragedy of her life. She had hardly married Darnley 
 before it became apparent that they were incapable of joint 
 action in a common cause. Darnley proved to be foolish and 
 vicious ; and Mary was the last woman to bear patiently with 
 an inconsiderate husband. In the first ardours of their attach- 
 ment Mary had promised him the matrimonial crown, but 
 when she became aware of his real character she steadily 
 avoided the fulfilment of her promise. But, with whatever 
 degree of reason, it was the passion of jealousy on the part 
 of Darnley that completed the estrangement between them. 
 Before Mary made Darnley 's acquaintance, she had already 
 given a large place in her counsels to the second of the 
 three men between whom her life was to be wrecked. This 
 was David Riccio, an Italian, who had first attracted her 
 notice by his skill as a musician. Riccio had eagerly pressed 
 the Darnley marriage ; and for a time the two were excellent 
 friends bound by common interests. But as Mary became 
 alienated from her husband, Riccio rose higher and higher in 
 her favour. He virtually filled the place of foreign secretary ; 
 in dress and equipage he outshone the nobles themselves ; 
 and so great became his ascendency that even the exiled 
 Moray is said to have sent him a ring to conciliate his favour 1 . 
 As, in addition to these public honours, Riccio filled a special 
 place in Mary's domestic life, it will be seen that Darnley was 
 not without some show of reason for his jealousy of the Italian 
 adventurer. By the February of 1566 his various passions 
 had carried him so far that he was ready for any scheme to rid 
 himself of the man who thus stood in his way '. 
 
 1 Sir James Melville, Memoirs, p. 147. 
 
 2 Caldeiwood, n. 285; Spottiswoode, II. 37; Melville, Memoirs, pp. 
 1 o * et secj. ; Knox, 11. ?(/>, 7; For. Cal. Eliz., vn. 353 et seq.
 
 Chat, hi] Mary 105 
 
 As it happened, there were other persons in the country 
 
 to whom the removal of Riccio was a matter of 
 
 1566 
 
 the first importance. So extraordinary had the 
 position of Riccio now become that he was believed to be re- 
 sponsible for the whole policy of Mary which had resulted in 
 the overthrow of the exiled Protestant lords. But should that 
 policy continue to prosper, its inevitable development must 
 be the restoration of the old religion in Scotland, which alike 
 on the grounds of her faith and her ambition must be the 
 natural desire of Mary herself. Moreover, there was an im- 
 mediate and special reason for putting out of the way the 
 person on whom these vast issues appeared to depend. At 
 the meeting of the Estates in March formal decree of 
 forfeiture was to be passed on the exiled lords in England. 
 In an age when assassination was calmly discussed in the 
 cabinets of kings, the removal of a base-born foreigner, who 
 held their lives and their fortunes in their hands, did not 
 greatly exercise the consciences of the nobles of Scotland. 
 Before the meeting of the Estates, therefore, effectual measures 
 were taken to avert the event that was to be disastrous to 
 certain of their number. Towards the close of February, 
 Darnley and Lennox, on the one hand, and the Protestant 
 leaders, including the Earls of Moray, Morton, Argyle, Glen- 
 cairn, Rothes, and the lords Boyd, Ruthven, Lindsay, and 
 Ochiltree, on the other, became parties to a plot for the 
 removal of Riccio. If the plot should prove successful, 
 Darnley was to receive the matrimonial crown, and, failing 
 heirs to Mary, to be recognised as her successor; while the 
 exiled lords were to be restored to their titles and estates, 
 and religion was to be left as it had been settled on the return 
 of Mary. The lords would have wished to put their victim 
 through some form of trial, but to Darnley this appeared to be 
 a tedious and unnecessary formality, and it was resolved that 
 the deed should be done in summary fashion. On the night 
 ul Saturday, March 9, Morton, Ruthven, ami Lindsay, on an
 
 106 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 express message from Darnley, beset the Palace of Holyrood 
 with a band of their accomplices. The details of the act 
 that followed are so variously related that a trustworthy account 
 of them is unattainable. Riccio was found at supper with the 
 queen, both alike unconscious of the terrible interruption that 
 was awaiting. A few brief moments of cries for mercy from 
 the doomed wretch himself, and of passionate words between 
 the queen, her husband, and the other conspirators, and 
 the bloody deed was done — in the queen's chamber accord- 
 ing to one account, in its immediate vicinity according to 
 others 1 . 
 
 The crime had hardly been committed before it was dis- 
 covered to have been a blunder. It had been 
 confidently anticipated that if Riccio were out 
 of the way and Darnley were detached from the queen, things 
 would arrange themselves as they had been settled on her 
 return from France. But the promptness and decision of 
 Mary confounded all the plans of the confederates. On the 
 evening of Sunday, the day after the murder, Moray with the 
 other exiled lords rode into Edinburgh, where he was pleasantly 
 received both by Mary and her husband. On the morning of 
 Tuesday it was discovered that the king and queen had fled 
 together and were safe in the castle of Dunbar. This was 
 sufficiently alarming for the confederates, since it meant that 
 Darnley had broken his pledges and was making common 
 cause with the queen. The news that came from Dunbar did 
 not reassure them : nobles such as Huntly, Athole, and Both- 
 well had rallied to her side, and she must soon be at the head 
 of a force with which they would be unable to cope. Edin- 
 burgh was no longer a safe place for them, and on the 17 th of 
 March they quitted it in a body for Linlithgow. On the 
 
 1 For. Cal. Eliz., vm. 23; Maitland Miscellany, in. 110; Diurnal 0/ 
 Occurrenls, p. 85. The various authorities for the murder of Riccio will be 
 found in Hay Fleming's Mary Queen of Scots, p. 387.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 107 
 
 following day Mary re-entered the capital, attended by the lords 
 who had been faithful to her 1 . 
 
 Had it been possible for Mary to act in concert with 
 Darnley she might now have defied her rebel subjects and 
 repeated her triumph in the Roundabout Raid. But in view 
 of his late conduct such common action had been made im- 
 possible. In these circumstances she had but one course open 
 to her — to restore to favour such of the confederates as had 
 no direct part in the murder of Riccio ; and this was the 
 course which she actually followed. Morton, Ruthven, and 
 their fellow-conspirators who had done the deed were outlawed; 
 and by the end of April, Moray, Glencairn, and Argyle were 
 sitting in the Privy Council by the side of Bothwell, Huntly, 
 and Athole 2 . 
 
 To the summer of 1566 belongs an event fraught with far 
 greater consequences to Britain and the world than the suc- 
 cession of horrors, the tale of which is not yet complete. On 
 June 19 Mary gave birth to a son, who as James VI of 
 Scotland and James I of England was to unite the destinies 
 of the two countries. Mary's subjects fully realised what the 
 birth of the prince meant for the future of their country. 
 Their joy was exuberant; five hundred bonfires blazed in Edin- 
 burgh alone, and a national thanksgiving was held in the 
 Church of St Giles. To Elizabeth the event brought other 
 feelings; and in the bitterness of her heart she exclaimed that 
 she was a barren stock and the Queen of Scots was the mother 
 of a fair son". 
 
 III. Darnley and Bothwell. 
 
 The dominant fai ts of the latter half of the year 1566 were 
 
 the continued breach between Mary and her 
 
 1566 
 husband, and the nse into power and favour ol 
 
 1 kutlivcn's Relation ; Keith; Diurnal of Occur rents. 
 
 • Reg. of Priiy Council, r. 4. : -»» 5- 
 
 - Sir James Melville, Memoirs, pp. 158, 159.
 
 io8 The Religious Revolution [Book, v 
 
 the man who was destined to be the evil genius of her life. 
 From his character and present position, Darnley was equally 
 useless to Mary and the Protestant leaders, and to both he had 
 given cause for the bitterest hatred and contempt. Mary 
 could not forgive him for the part he had taken in the murder 
 of Riccio, and the Protestant lords could not forget that he 
 had broken his pledges and betrayed their cause. As the 
 months wore on his position became so intolerable in his own 
 country that he made up his mind to leave it — a step which 
 Mary forbade, unhappily, as events were to prove, for her own 
 good name. Nor was her own situation much more pleasant 
 than that of her husband. Her domestic affections had been 
 blighted; and such was the state of her kingdom that any 
 policy she might choose to adopt was beset by its own special 
 difficulties. She might have changed her religion like Henry IV 
 of France and taken Knox and Moray as her counsellors ; but 
 so equally were the two religions still divided in the country, 
 that for the time at least such a step would not have brought 
 tranquillity. Not before another violent convulsion and not 
 till England again decisively intervened in her affairs did 
 Protestantism become definitively the national religion of Scot- 
 land. As in the case of her marriage with Darnley, passion 
 and policy now drove Mary into the course which was to lead 
 her directly to her ruin. The man to whom she now gave herself 
 both as a woman and a queen was pre-eminent even among 
 the Scottish barons for his daring and unscrupulous character. 
 James Hepburn, fourth Earl of Bothwell, had hitherto 
 played but a subordinate part in the history of his country. He 
 had done service to Mary of Lorraine, he had been accused of 
 a plot for carrying off Mary to Dumbarton Castle, he had been 
 the declared enemy of Moray, and he had given such trouble 
 that during the three years preceding the autumn of 1565 he 
 had spent most of his time either in prison or exile. During 
 her struggle with Moray, when Mary had need of all the 
 support that she could procure, she recalled him from France
 
 Chap. iiiJ Mary 109 
 
 and restored him to his honours and estates. By his extensive 
 lands and his office of Warden of the Borders, Bothwell was 
 one of the most powerful nobles in the country; and his reckless 
 courage and boundless ambition made him specially formidable 
 in a time of revolution. It was to this "glorious, rash, and 
 hazardous young man 1 " that Mary now turned as a champion 
 in her present straits. 
 
 A visit which Mary made to Jedburgh in October, 1566, 
 definitively marks the beginning of the ill-omened alliance. 
 While in that town she received news that Bothwell had been 
 seriously wounded in the course of his duty as Warden of the 
 Borders. To Hermitage Castle, where he lay, the distance 
 was above thirty miles; but, whatever may have been her 
 motive, she rode thither and back in a single day. In the 
 light of subsequent events this extraordinary ride came to 
 bear an evil construction ; yet a freak of this kind was 
 certainly not out of keeping with Mary's impulsive and adven- 
 turous nature. Her visit was followed by an illness so serious 
 that for ten days her life was in danger; and it was not till the 
 beginning of November that she was able to proceed to Craig- 
 millar Castle, then regarded as one of the healthiest spots in 
 the country. Here her health so improved that on December 
 17th she was able to take part in the festivities connected with 
 the baptism of her son in the Castle of Stirling. But in these 
 festivities it was noted that Darnley, though present in the 
 castle, took no share ; while to Bothwell, though a Protestant, 
 was entrusted the arrangement of a ceremony according to the 
 
 s of the Church of Rome 2 . 
 
 On the 24th of December, a week after the baptism of her 
 son, Mary took a remarkable step : she granted pardon to the 
 
 1 So he was described in 1560 by Throgmorton, who met him in France. 
 '•Glorious," ofcour.se, means "boastful." 
 
 1 R'g- 0/ Privy Council, i. 480, 481; Diurnal of Oicurrents, p. 101; 
 Keith, III. 286; Ibid. 11. 469—471; History of James the Sext, p. 5. 
 Bothwell remained outside the chapel while the ceremony of baptism was 
 being performed. — Diurnal of Oecurrenis, p. 104.
 
 I io The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 Earl of Morton and above seventy others who had been more 
 or less directly concerned in the death of Riccio. The return 
 of Morton and his allies early in 1567 was an ominous circum- 
 stance for Darnley, for it was to his playing false 
 that their late exile had been due. At the close of 
 the baptismal festivities Darnley had retired to Glasgow — 
 the object of scorn and detestation equally to Mary and all her 
 advisers. In Glasgow he was seriously ill; and, in spite of their 
 long and bitter estrangement, Mary visited him in the later 
 stage of his sickness and prevailed on him to accompany her 
 to Edinburgh. In view of the tragedy that was so near at 
 hand, this action of Mary has naturally raised a dark suspicion 
 regarding its motive. It may well have been that the illness 
 of her husband may have revived something of her early feeling 
 towards him; but, taken with the chain of events in which it 
 forms a natural link, this action of Mary does not easily lend 
 itself to such a charitable construction. In Edinburgh Darnley 
 was lodged in the Kirk of Field, in a house which stood imme- 
 diately beside the city wall and close by the site of the present 
 university 1 . During the few days he had still to live, the breach 
 between him and Mary appeared to be perfectly healed, and 
 she was assiduous in her attendance on his sick-bed. On the 
 evening of Sunday, February 9th, she had spent several hours 
 by his side, when she suddenly remembered that she had to be 
 present at a masque in Holyrood Palace. About two o'clock 
 next morning the town was alarmed by a loud explosion; and 
 men learned that the house in which the king was lodged had 
 been blown up, and that his dead body had been found in the 
 adjoining garden 2 . 
 
 1 Mr A. Lang in his Mystery of Mary Stuart (pp. 123 etc.) has discussed 
 at length the difficult question of the position of the Kirk of Field with 
 reference to the Town Wall. Cf. Dr Hay Fleming's review of Mr Lang's 
 work in the Bookman for November, 1901. 
 
 2 Diurnal of Occurrents, pp. 105, 106; Anderson's Collections, lv. 
 Part II. p. 166 (Nelson's Deposition).
 
 Chap, in] Mary u I 
 
 The conspirators had chosen their means in the fatuous 
 hope that the explosion would be regarded as the result of 
 accident ; but the relations of the various parties were too 
 well known to permit a moment's illusion on the part of 
 the public. With one voice Bothwell was designated as the 
 murderer of the king; and, with equal spontaneity in Scotland, 
 in England, and in France, the conviction arose that Mary 
 was his accomplice. In the case of Darnley's murder as 
 in the case of Riccio's, forces were let loose on which the 
 conspirators had not reckoned. Public opinion cried aloud 
 that Bothwell should be brought to justice; and at the press- 
 ing instance of Lennox, father of the murdered king, he was 
 actually brought to trial on the 12th of April. But too many 
 great personages had been implicated in the crime — Morton 
 and Maitland among the rest — to make it possible that the 
 proceedings should be other than the merest farce. Bothwell 
 was unanimously acquitted, and he proceeded in his desperate 
 career. To gain support to his schemes, he had recourse 
 to an expedient in keeping with the rest of his actions. He 
 invited the leading nobles, Catholic and Protestant, to a 
 supper 1 , and, having surrounded the house with 200 hag- 
 butters, induced or constrained them to sign a document 
 declaring their belief in his innocence and their willingness to 
 further his marriage with Mary should she agree to accept him 
 as her husband 2 . On the 24th of April he intercepted Mary on 
 her way from Stirling, and they proceeded in company to his 
 castle of Dunbar — whether with or against her will, her subjects, 
 at least, had no hesitation in concluding. During their stay at 
 Dunbar, Bothwell raised proceedings for a divorce from his 
 wife, the sister of the Earl of Huntly; and by the day (May 7th) 
 after their return to Edinburgh the divorce was obtained. All 
 
 1 Known as "Ainslie's Supper" from the tavern where the party met. 
 
 2 It is worth noting that Bothwell's father asserted that Mary's mother, 
 Mary of Lorraine, had twice promised to marry him. — See his letter in 
 Nat. MSS. 0) Scotland, Part III., No. xx iv.
 
 H2 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 obstacles being thus removed, Mary was married to Bothwell 
 on the 15th of May — a little more than three months from the 
 morning of the Kirk of Field '. 
 
 Bothwell had thus attained the end for which he had so 
 desperately gambled, but he was now to learn 
 that there were moral forces in the world which 
 he had left out of his reckoning. The religious revolution that 
 had taken place in Scotland had not left men's minds as it had 
 found them; and there now existed a force of intelligent 
 opinion in the country such as was unknown in previous 
 periods of the national history. In the public indignation 
 aroused by the late events, which had reached their climax in 
 the Bothwell marriage, a group of the leading nobles found 
 the momentum requisite to stay the headlong career of the 
 infatuated pair. From Borthwick Castle, where they were con- 
 strained to seek refuge, they were driven to the safer stronghold 
 of Dunbar during the second week of June. But neither 
 Mary nor Bothwell was the person to yield without a struggle, 
 and having collected a considerable force they marched towards 
 the capital. With an army of nearly equal strength the con- 
 federates met them (June 15) at Carbery Hill, close by the field 
 of Pinkie. Mary was eager for fight; but, while the armies 
 were facing each other, her ranks were thinned by desertion, 
 and there was evident wavering among those who still stood by 
 her. In these circumstances she had no choice but to place 
 herself in the hands of the insurgent lords — Bothwell being 
 permitted to retire from the field. As she rode into Edinburgh 
 that evening, she was received with insulting cries from the 
 
 1 For. Cal. Eliz., vm. 178 et seq. ; Stevenson's Selections, pp. 173—6; 
 Melville, Memoirs, p. 174; Calderwood, 11. 351 — 5; Robertson, History 
 of Scotland, Appendix, No. xx. Pope Pius V. was so indignant at the 
 Bothwell marriage that he refused to hold further communications with 
 Mary till she should mend her ways. — Pollen, p. cxxviii. 
 
 Lady Bothwell also procured a divorce from her husband on the ground 
 of his adultery with one of her servants.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary I 1 
 
 o 
 
 populace which must have painfully reminded her how her 
 actions of the last few months had been interpreted by all 
 ranks of her people. It was but one month since she had 
 married Bothwell in the old chapel of Holyrood 1 . 
 
 If a stable government was to be set up in the country, 
 there was but one course open to the lords who had over- 
 thrown Mary. The experience of the last six years had proved 
 that one or the other religion must be definitively accepted 
 before tranquillity was possible. After the Roundabout Raid 
 it seemed as if the old religion might yet be restored; but 
 through impolicy or ill-fortune its opportunity, as events were 
 to prove, had now gone for ever. To make Protestantism the 
 national religion in reality as well as in name, therefore, 
 became henceforward the definite object of the responsible 
 Protestant leaders; and with decided steps they proceeded to 
 carry out their aim. On June 17th Mary was lodged in Loch- 
 leven Castle, and on July 24th she was induced or constrained 
 to sign three documents by which she conveyed the Crown to 
 her son, appointed Moray to act as Regent, and nominated 
 Chatelherault, Lennox, Argyle, Athole, Morton, Glencairn, 
 and Mar to carry on the government in his absence. Five 
 days later the prince was crowned at Stirling — John Knox 
 preaching the coronation sermon 2 . 
 
 Moray, who had been in France since April, arrived in 
 Edinburgh on the nth of August, and was 
 proclaimed regent on the 22nd. From the 
 beginning his government was beset with grave difficulties. 
 Several of the Protestant nobles — Argyle amongst them — had 
 disapproved of the late proceedings against Mary; the whole 
 Hamilton faction, indignant that the Regency had not been 
 assigned to the head of their House, stood sullenly aloof; and 
 the Queen of England vigorously protested against the pre- 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occur rents, pp. ii3etseq. ; For. Cal. Eliz., VIII. 254 — 6. 
 of l\ul. of Scotland, in. u — 14; Ktg. of Privy Council, 1. 
 537 H-- 
 
 B. s. 11. 8
 
 II 4 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 sumption of subjects in dethroning their lawful monarch. 
 But Moray was a born ruler of men, and, in the words of an 
 English statesman, he " went stoutly to work, resolved rather 
 to imitate those who had led the people of Israel than any 
 captains of that age 1 ." Kirkcaldy of Grange was despatched 
 on an unsuccessful errand to seize Bothwell, who was now in 
 the Shetland Islands crowning his mad career as a corsair — a 
 trade which was to bring him to a fitting end in a Danish 
 prison. By the ist of October the castles of Edinburgh and 
 Dunbar were in Moray's hands, and in November he renewed 
 his former work of restoring order on the Borders. So resolute 
 and successful were all his measures that by the autumn even 
 the Hamiltons and the recalcitrant Protestant leaders deemed 
 it prudent to give in their submission. A convention of the 
 Estates which met in December gave its sanction to the various 
 measures of the confederates. Chatelherault was not present, 
 but the assembly was a numerous one, and included four 
 ' bishops of the old Church, fourteen abbots, twelve earls, sixteen 
 lords and Masters, and twenty-seven commissioners of burghs. 
 Yet, to the delight of Knox, this mixed assembly confirmed all 
 the Acts of 1560 regarding the old and the new religions; 
 and, when the General Assemby met a few days later, it gave 
 jubilant expression to the feelings of all good Protestants. 
 "Our enemies, praised be God," the ministers wrote, "are 
 dashed ; religion established ; sufficient provision made for 
 ministers; order taken, and penalty appointed for all sort 
 of transgression and transgressors"." 
 
 But, in spite of this apparent triumph of his government, 
 
 Moray's position required all his prudence and 
 
 1568 resolution. His most formidable enemies were 
 
 the powerful family of the Hamiltons. Since the death of 
 
 James V the part played by that family had been equally 
 
 feeble and self-seeking. The party of Mary and the party of 
 
 1 Stevenson, Selections, p. 282. 
 
 s Acts of Pari, of Scotland; Calderwood, II. 399.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 1 15 
 
 Moray each represented a great cause, which honest men and 
 patriots could maintain as being in the highest interest of the 
 country ; but the Hamiltons had now supported the one side 
 and now the other, according as the interests of their House 
 had prompted. Chatelherault had been Protestant, Catholic, 
 and Protestant again. He had fought against Mary of Lor- 
 raine, he had thwarted her daughter; and, now that Moray 
 had been preferred to him, he was doing his best to make his 
 government impossible. To effect this end the Hamiltons 
 took the surest way. In collusion with their agents, Mary was 
 let loose from Lochleven Castle on the evening of the 2nd of 
 May, and as fast as her horse could carry her she made for 
 their house at Hamilton 1 . Within a few days she was at the 
 head of a formidable force — nine earls, nine bishops, eighteen 
 lords, twelve abbots and priors, and nearly a hundred barons 
 subscribing a bond to spend their lives in her defence and to 
 replace her on her throne. Moray was in Glasgow when the 
 news of her escape reached him, and he promptly took 
 measures to meet the emergency. The crisis was soon over. 
 It was Mary's wish to retire to Dumbarton Castle as the safest 
 stronghold in her kingdom, and the Dumbarton Road from 
 Hamilton led past Glasgow, where the Regent lay with a force 
 inferior to her own in numbers but superior in its commanders 
 and its discipline. The two forces met at Langside, now a 
 southern suburb of ( ilasgow — Mary looking on from a neigh- 
 bouring hill. The battle was short and decisive : in three- 
 quarters of an hour it was over and the queen's army in 
 irretrievable disaster 2 . With the events of the last twelve 
 months in her mind, Mary had good reason to dread what 
 might be her fate should she again find herself in the power 
 of her victorious enemies, and on veritable wings of fear she 
 
 1 She stopped for a short time at Niddrie on the way. 
 
 3 A detailed account of the Battle of Langside, with an appendix con- 
 taining the original authorities, will lie found in A. M. Scott's Battle of 
 Luu^uJt, (jlai^ow, liuj^h Iloukins, 1683. 
 
 8—2
 
 n6 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 fled south by way of Dumfries to Dundrennan on the shores 
 of the Solway, a distance of more than a hundred miles. On 
 the 1 6th of May she crossed to Workington, in Cumberland, 
 a fugitive and a suppliant in the kingdom which a few years 
 before she had so proudly claimed as her own. 
 
 Mary had but failed where the majority of her predecessors 
 had failed before her. Of all her Stewart ancestors, James II 
 and James IV alone had successfully coped with the insub- 
 ordination of their nobles and left their kingdom in order and 
 tranquillity. But the task of Mary was far more difficult than 
 that of James II or James IV. The inheritance of feudalism 
 was now complicated with the strife of religion, and between 
 them they make the record of the last three years of the reign 
 of Mary. To have been a successful ruler in such circum- 
 stances would have implied a precocity of political genius 
 equal to that of Augustus; but with all her brilliant gifts 
 Mary was not a prodigy of sagacity. Yet she undoubtedly 
 displayed qualities which stamp her as a remarkable woman. 
 A woman of ordinary force would have been effaced or over- 
 borne by such men as Moray and Maitland and Knox; yet 
 in the immediate contact of intelligence and will she held her 
 own with all the three. In action she was as prompt and 
 decided as she was fertile in resource ; and, if her difficulties 
 had only lain with feudal nobles, she might have shown them 
 that a woman was a match for the most intractable baron of 
 them all. Of her grave defects as a woman and as a queen 
 her career can leave us in no manner of doubt. In self-respect, 
 in self-control, in that balance of mind and character which 
 gives weight to judgment and action, Mary was so grievously 
 deficient that we can only regard it as the irony of destiny that 
 so ill-assorted a part was assigned to her in the scheme of 
 things.
 
 Chap. iiiJ Mary \ \j 
 
 IV. Sociai Progress of the Country. 
 
 In spite of the "greit alterations and strange accidentes 1 " 
 of Mary's reign, during no previous period of the national 
 history had the Scottish people taken such a forward stride at 
 once in material well-being and political importance. Mary's 
 reign saw the end of feudalism in Scotland and the appearance 
 of a middle class which was thenceforward to determine the 
 development of the country Writing from Edinburgh in 1572, 
 Killigrew, the English resident in Scotland, has this remarkable 
 sentence : " Methinks I see the noblemen's great credit decay 
 in this country, and the barons, burghs, and such-like take more 
 upon them." It is the sensational events of Mary's reign that 
 have drawn attention to it beyond every reign in Scottish 
 history; but, in truth, its highest interest and importance lie 
 in this transference of moral and political force from the nobles 
 to the people. The main cause of the rapid growth of a 
 powerful middle class was undoubtedly the religious revolution 
 which issued in the overthrow of the ancient Church. In the 
 fierce conflict of opinion the intelligence of the nation was 
 awakened and matured. Nor did this middle class ever again 
 lose its importance. In the period before the reign of Mary 
 the political problem of the country had been the relation of 
 the Crown to the nobles ; in the period to come it was to be 
 the relation between the Crown and the educated opinion of 
 the nation as represented by the merchants in the towns and 
 the smaller landowners in the country. For more than a 
 Century this new controversy was to proceed, but the revolution 
 of 1689 saw the definitive triumph of the political and religious 
 ideals which had sprung from the Scottish Reformation. 
 
 Great as was the turmoil throughout the whole of Mary's 
 reign, at no moment of it was there anything approaching a 
 
 1 This is the phrase used in one of Mary's own proclamations. — Reg. oj 
 Privy Council, i. 514.
 
 1 1 S The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 social cataclysm. On more than one occasion there had been 
 actual civil war, but it had neither been violent nor widespread : 
 and neither government nor trade had been seriously inter- 
 rupted. The reign lasted twenty-five years, and there met in 
 all twenty-two Parliaments or Conventions 1 for the transaction 
 of public business. As we shall see, also, while the nobility 
 and the Crown were in conflict, the mass of the people were 
 living their own lives and holding their own with other con- 
 temporary peoples in the general progress of the time. 
 
 The reign of Mary saw no formal constitutional change. 
 The nobles displaced two regents and dethroned a queen, but 
 in all these actions they were but following the plainest example 
 of their fathers. Even when they set up a new religion they 
 protested that they were acting on strictly constitutional prin- 
 ciples. To maintain a false religion and a rapacious and 
 immoral priesthood, they urged, was the most flagrant mis- 
 government; and to correct misgovernment in their princes 
 had been the immemorial right of their advisers. But though 
 there was no formal constitutional change, powers were as- 
 sumed by a certain body which are without a parallel in 
 previous reigns. This body was the Privy or Secret Council of 
 the sovereign, which dates from the reign of David II, but the 
 character and functions of which were not precisely defined 
 till the beginning of the reign of James IV. In the second 
 year (1489) of that king it was enacted that the Estates 
 should choose a Secret Council " for the ostensioun and forth- 
 putting of the King's autoritie in the administracioun of 
 justice;" and that the Council should consist of two bishops, 
 an abbot or a prior, six barons, the Lord Chancellor, the 
 
 1 "When the Estates were called by the Sovereign, for the particular 
 purpose of imposing a taxation, or upon any special emergency which 
 required immediate deliberation or advice, it got the name of a Con- 
 vention of Estate?." 1 Erskine, Institutes, Book I, tit. III. § 6. This 
 distinction, however, is not very strictly regarded by the older Scottish 
 historians.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 119 
 
 Master of the Household, the Chamberlain, the Privy Seal, the 
 Secretary, Treasurer, and the Clerk of Register. In addition 
 to its original function of administering justice, it came to 
 exercise both legislative and executive powers. Throughout 
 this reign, indeed, the main work of legislation was done not 
 by the Estates but by the Privy Council. Moreover, its pre- 
 dominance was enhanced by the fact that it was virtually 
 self-elected. Thus, immediately after the return of Mary from 
 France, and again after the murder of Riccio, a Privy Council, 
 consisting of the nobles then in the ascendant, was constituted 
 without consultation with the Estates, which on neither occa- 
 sion were in session. The Estates, indeed, were professedly 
 the ultimate source of authority; but, as they met only four 
 times during the actual reign of Mary, their part in the 
 conduct of affairs was strictly subordinate. It will be seen, 
 therefore, that the Council practically corresponded to what is 
 now called the Government of the day, the composition of 
 which depended on the rise and fall of the parties who were 
 contending for the direction of the State 1 . 
 
 The foundation of the College of Justice by James V in 
 1532 had been a great step towards the efficient administration 
 of the law; yet it is evident that the college was far indeed 
 from being the august institution which its designation implied. 
 In a well-known passage of his "Satire of the Three Estates'' 
 Sir David Lyndsay has keenly touched the miscarriage of 
 justice in the secular and Church courts of his time : 
 
 Diligence. Quhair wakl thou be, Carle? The suth to me schaw. 
 Pauper. Sir, evin to Sanct-Androes, for to seik law. 
 Diligence. For to seik law, in Edinburgh was the neirest way. 
 Pauper, I socht law thair this monie deir day; 
 
 I lot I could get nane at Session nor Seinzie [Consistory]; 
 
 Thairfor, the meikle din [dun] Devill drown all the meinzie 
 [crew]. 
 
 1 The Register of the Privy Council dates from [545. The first volume 
 was published in 1877 under the superintendence of Dr Hill Burton,
 
 120 TJie Religious Revolution [Hook v 
 
 At a later day George Buchanan affirmed that the College 
 of Justice had become the instrument of tyrannical oppression 
 from which there was no appeal; and the continuous legislation 
 regarding the administration of justice fully confirms his asser- 
 tion. To allay the universal complaints, Mary and Darnley 
 proclaimed that they would hold Justice Ayres throughout the 
 country for the benefit of the lieges ; in the meeting of Estates 
 convened by the regent Moray in December, 1567, it was 
 enacted that a new " Session " should be set up in Aberdeen 
 or some other suitable town, to consist of six lords and a 
 president ; and a Commission was appointed to codify the 
 civil and municipal law of the country. It was only by the 
 slow growth of public opinion, however, that those evils were 
 to be cured which the legislation of each successive reign was 
 impotent to remove. 
 
 The legislation of Mary's reign proves that the civil com- 
 motions did not interrupt the general progress of the country. 
 In 1545 the old commercial treaty with Flanders was renewed, 
 though it was endangered a few years later by a high-handed 
 proceeding on the part of the Flemings in seizing fourteen 
 Scotch merchant ships 1 . Owing to the alleged negligence of 
 the Conservator of Scots Privileges at Campvere 2 , the trade 
 with Flanders had fallen off; and in 1565 the Privy Council 
 drew up a series of stringent regulations with the object of 
 restoring it 3 . As in previous reigns, the state of the coinage 
 was a frequent subject of legislation — the circulation of foreign 
 money and the " transportation " of silver and gold being the 
 chief source of trouble. In 1545 the Council forbade the 
 circulation of the "new Inglis grote of Ingland, callet the 
 grote with the braid face," and in 1550 put a similar pro- 
 hibition on the "clippit sowsis " [sous] and "clippit carolus " 
 of France 4 . To retain silver in the country not only were 
 
 1 P. C. /?., I. 18, 19. * See ante, Vol. 1. 343. 
 
 * P. C. R., 1. p. 332. 
 
 4 Ibid. pp. 10, 11. — On the other hand, it was enacted in 1550, 1551,
 
 Ch vp. hi] Mary 121 
 
 native traders forbidden to carry it abroad, but foreigners who 
 came to transact business in Scotland were commanded to 
 spend Scottish silver and gold in the purchase of Scottish 
 goods 1 . 
 
 According to Bishop Leslie, who was acquainted both with 
 France and England, the privileges of Scottish merchants were 
 so great that with moderate frugality they could hardly fail to 
 become rich ; and the sumptuary laws of successive reigns 
 would seem to corroborate his statement. By the Parliament 
 <>f December, 1567, it was enacted that no women should 
 dress above their station. But the most remarkable law- was 
 one passed by the Privy Council in 1550 and endorsed by the 
 Estates in the following year. By this law it was decreed that 
 archbishops, bishops, and earls were to limit themselves to 
 eight dishes ; lords, abbots, priors, and deans to six ; barons 
 and freeholders to four; and burgesses to three — one kind of 
 meat only being in every dish 2 . A succession of dearths 
 throughout the reign led to desperate remedial measures. The 
 export of grain was strictly forbidden, and the prices of meat, 
 fowl, and all ordinary provisions determined by law. In 1555 
 the Estates decreed that no lambs should be eaten for the 
 next three years, and in 1562 the Privy Council renewed the 
 enactment ; in 1563 farmers were commanded to thresh all 
 their corn before the 10th of July on pain of its confiscation; 
 and in 1567 the lieges were forbidden to eat meat more than 
 four days a week — though in cases of sickness exemption 
 might be obtained from the magistrate. In the case of wines 
 we have a curious example of class legislation. It was enacted 
 
 that French sous, caroluses, and liards should be accepted as legal tender — 
 an Act meant for the benefit of the French soldiery in Scotland. Ibid. 
 pp. 106, 1 18. 
 
 1 /In,/, pp. 68, 96. 
 
 2 Such a law was, of course, not peculiar to Scotland; but it is in- 
 teresting to find that it was necessary in a country generally considered so 
 poverty-stricken,
 
 122 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 that wines were to be kept for four days in harbour till the 
 queen, prelates, earls, lords, and barons had bought what they 
 wanted, and that after they had been served a fixed price 
 should be set on what remained for sale among the lieges. 
 
 The number of commodities which were forbidden to 
 be exported was considerable. Among them were horses, 
 which had become scarce owing to so many of them having 
 been shipped to France; all kinds of coal except what was 
 used in smithies ; tallow and hides, the export of which last 
 had made boots and shoes exorbitantly dear. In spite of all 
 the past legislation against "sturdy beggars," the profession 
 was as flourishing as ever. From an edict of 1552 we learn 
 that, wherever the Regent and the Court appeared, they were 
 mobbed by crowds of vociferous and importunate mendicants. 
 For the "staunching" of this evil it was enacted that no 
 beggar should pursue his trade out of his own parish; but 
 many a day was to elapse before "the decay of beggars" was 
 to render the class an object of romantic interest. 
 
 The immediate result of the religious revolution was not 
 favourable to the higher studies in Scotland. When the 
 Reformation came, the subjects of study and the methods of 
 teaching in the three Scottish universities were still those of the 
 Middle Age, which in other countries had been so largely 
 modified by the Revival of Learning. Canon Law made the 
 chief part of their curriculum; Greek was unknown even in 
 St Andrews 1 ; and the Latin which was taught was that of 
 the schoolmen and not of Cicero. St Andrews, the oldest 
 university, had specially suffered during the conflict of religious 
 opinion. In 1557 ten students in all attended St Mary's college 
 in that university; ten, St Leonard's; and eleven, St Salvator's; 
 while in 1563 the numbers were respectively fifteen, twelve, 
 and twelve. The University of Glasgow still led a precarious 
 
 1 At least in St Mary's College. — James Melville's Diary, p. 39 (ed. 
 1842). Greek, however, was not unknown in Scotland. See M'Crie's Life 
 of Knox, Period First, Note 6 ; and Grant's Burgh Schools of Scotland.
 
 chap, in] Mary 123 
 
 existence, though a brighter day was awaiting it under the 
 inspiration of Andrew Melville ; and that of Aberdeen, owing 
 to the attachment of its teachers to the old religion, was 
 seriously hampered by the interference of the ministers 1 . That 
 education did not immediately profit by the change in religion 
 was certainly no fault of the Scottish reformers. In the Book 
 of Discipline they drafted a scheme of university, secondary, 
 and elementary education, which, however, like other suggestions 
 in the same book, neither the public means nor the state of 
 the country permitted them to realise. Yet the ideal thus 
 sketched was never lost sight of by their successors, and in 
 due time Scotland was provided with a system of education 
 which placed her at advantage over every country in Europe. 
 
 The evidence of legislation to the comparative prosperity 
 of the country is borne out by the testimony of two French- 
 men who visited Scotland during the reign of Mary. The one 
 was Jean de Beaugue, who took part in the campaigns con- 
 ducted by the French against the English after the battle of 
 Pinkie and wrote their history. In the course of his narrative 
 he gives a brief description of the chief towns of Scotland, 
 which is interesting in the absence of fuller information. 
 St Andrews he describes as "one of the best towns in Scot- 
 land," but with the disadvantage of possessing neither a good 
 harbour nor good roads ; Perth as " a very pretty place, pleasant 
 and well fitted to be the site of a good town " ; Aberdeen as 
 "a rich and handsome town inhabited by an excellent people"; 
 Montrose as "a beautiful town" with "a very good harbour"; 
 Dundee as " one of the finest towns in Scotland "; and Dunbar 
 as "among the most beautiful towns in the isles of the ocean 2 ." 
 The other visitor was a physician named Estienne Perlin, 
 who appears to have been in the country in 1551 or 1552. 
 
 1 Alexander Galloway's visitation <>( Aberdeen University in 1549 
 proves that even by that date it had fallen from its first prosperity. 
 K. S. Knit, The Urtivei ilies of 'Aberdeen , A History, pp. 85 et seq. 
 
 ' Early 'l'mvelltrs in Stot.'aitit { David Douylas), pp. 64 et seq.
 
 124 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 "The country," he says, "is but poor in gold and silver, but 
 plentiful in provisions, which are as cheap as in any part of 
 the world... They [the Scots] have plenty of corn and calves, 
 on which account their flesh is cheap ; and in my time bread 
 was tolerably cheap." And he adds elsewhere "that nothing 
 is scarce here but money." He also notes that the chief crops 
 were barley, peas, and beans. The great number of the 
 churches and monasteries appears to have struck him; and he 
 informs us that the ecclesiastics were richer than the nobles. 
 His final impression was "that from day to day the country 
 strengthens and amends, and is in a daily state of improve- 
 ment 1 ." 
 
 To the reign of Mary belong no such prominent literary 
 figures as Henryson, or Dunbar, or Gavin Douglas ; for the 
 chief work of Sir David Lyndsay was done in the reign of 
 her predecessor. Yet, if men with the requisite gifts had ap- 
 peared, there were themes ready to hand and a national impulse 
 for their inspiration. In the conflict of the two religions a 
 great moral satirist might have found a subject that would 
 have evoked all his powers ; but it was left for one man only, 
 John Knox, to show what in plain prose could be made out 
 of the experience of a nation in the throes of a second birth. 
 Such literature as was actually produced bears the stamp of 
 the absorbing preoccupations of the time. The hatred of 
 England and the predilection for France found expression in 
 the anonymous piece entitled "The Complaynt of Scotland," 
 written during the latter years of the Regency of Arran. To 
 the same period belong the most interesting poetical products 
 of the Reformation movement — "The Gude and Godlie Bal- 
 lates." By their skilful adaptation of popular songs to the 
 double purpose of ridiculing the old Church and of extolling 
 the new, these ballads were among the most potent causes of 
 the Reformation; and the Estates vainly legislated against their 
 
 1 Early Travellers in Scotland, pp. 72 et seq.
 
 Chap, hi] Mary 125 
 
 subtle and pervasive action. The most praiseworthy produc- 
 tion of the dying Church was the well-known Catechism (1552) 
 associated with the name of Archbishop Hamilton. Written 
 in the Scottish dialect, it expounds in simple and attractive 
 fashion the cardinal doctrines of the Catholic Church. Had 
 it appeared half a century earlier, and had its teaching been 
 laid to heart by the clergy themselves, their Church might have 
 had a different fate in Scotland. The Tractates of Ninian 
 Winzet, who crossed swords with Knox in the great controversy 
 of their day, are also the work of a member of the old Church, 
 who by his character and intelligence maintained its best 
 traditions. The national excitement produced by the murder 
 of Darnley and the events that followed found expression in a 
 multitude of satirical poems, written for the most part from the 
 Protestant standpoint; but not one of these attained that 
 measure of force or beauty which lends a permanent interest 
 to the fleeting conditions of the hour. The one great literary 
 monument of the period was the "History of the Reformation" 
 by John Knox, whose singular fortune it was to be at once the 
 hierophant and the interpreter of the religious movement with 
 which his name is identified. The most convincing proof of 
 the greatness of the book is to imagine it unwritten. From 
 State documents and such contemporary historians as Buchanan, 
 Bishop Leslie, and Sir James Melville, the details of the struggle- 
 may be deduced with sufficient clearness and accuracy; but it 
 is the genius of Knox that has transmitted to us the moving 
 lineaments of the time. When the gospel he proclaimed has 
 ceased to be for his countrymen the divine counsel it was for 
 himself, Knox's History must still remain the most interesting 
 record in their national history, since another such moral and 
 intellectual revolution and another individuality like that of 
 Knox can hardly be in the destinies of any people. 
 
 It was with eyes fully open that the Scottish nation made 
 choice of the Calvinistic theology and religion as the highest 
 revelation which had been made to men. The same gospel
 
 126 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 was received in other countries, but in Scotland alone it became 
 the dominating force in moulding the temper and the ideals of 
 the people. In England the Reformation did not preclude 
 the Elizabethan drama nor the perpetuation of the spirit that 
 produced it ; and in France Calvin and Bossuet and F£nelon 
 find their antithesis in Rabelais and Montaigne and Moliere. 
 In Scotland there has been no such equal division of spiritual 
 and intellectual forces and no parallel succession of men of 
 genius representing opposing views of life. To ascribe this 
 to the Reformation, however, is to confound the effect and 
 the cause. It was by natural affinity that Scotland adopted 
 the special form of Christianity which had been formulated 
 by Calvin ; and in adopting it the nation impressed it with its 
 own moral and intellectual characteristics. That for three 
 centuries the Scottish people have clung with such tenacity 
 to this type of religion is conclusive proof that at a particular 
 stage of their development it embodied the highest ideal they 
 could conceive of human life and destiny. It is in the racial 
 tendencies, in the conditions of the national life that we must 
 look for the explanation of that " narrow intensity " which is 
 the special note of the Scottish genius and character. Scotland 
 with its limited area, its niggard soil, and scanty population, 
 could not in the nature of things have evolved a civilisation 
 so rich and various as that of England or France. Yet, if 
 she has not produced a Shakspeare or a Moliere, and has 
 closed her eyes to certain of the richest prospects in human 
 life and experience, the world has recognised that her people 
 have played their own part and taken their own place among 
 the nations, and that among her sons are not a few who have 
 contributed to the highest pleasure and the highest profit of 
 the race.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 127 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 JAMES VI, 1567 — 1625. 
 
 English Sovereign. French King. 
 
 Elizabeth 1558— 1603. Charles IX ... 1560 — 1574. 
 
 Pope: Pius V ... 1566— 1572. 
 
 I. Regency of Moray. 
 
 The brief regency of Moray was a period of special trial 
 in Christendom. In England the long-dreaded revolt of the 
 Catholics of the North at length came to a head under the 
 Earls of Northumberland and Westmorland; in France the 
 nation passed through the ordeal of a third war of religion ; 
 and in the Low Countries the Duke of Alva carried out his 
 master's will against heretics through the agency of his re- 
 morseless "Tribunal of Blood." Scotland had its own troubles 
 during the same period, yet her lot was happy compared 
 with that of the Low Countries or France. 
 
 Decisive as had been his victory at Langside, Moray soon 
 
 had occasion to know that the strength of his 
 
 1568 
 
 enemies was far from being broken. Indeed, 
 if they could have combined their forces, his chances of 
 another victory would have been precarious; for with the 
 Hamiltons were arrayed against him the Protestant Earl of 
 Argyle and the Catholic Earl of Huntly— both bound to the 
 Duke of Chatelherault by ties of blood. Except by com- 
 pulsion, the duke, it was certain, would never acknowledge
 
 128 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 the government of Moray. The regency, he maintained, was 
 his by right of blood ; and there was, moreover, a special 
 reason for his refusing to recognise James VI as a lawful 
 king. The duke was the heir of Mary, but not the heir of 
 her son. Should Janies die a lawful king, Charles, the brother 
 of Darnley, would be his lineal successor on the throne of 
 Scotland 1 . It was the House of Hamilton, therefore, that 
 Moray had mainly to fear throughout his brief rule; and they 
 were to compass his destruction in the end, though with little 
 honour and as little profit to themselves. 
 
 Though the majority of the nobles were against him, the 
 government of Moray possessed elements of strength that 
 eventually ensured the triumph of the party of the young king. 
 In its triple aim of maintaining James on the throne, of 
 alliance with England, and of the establishment of Protestant- 
 ism, it had the earnest support of the chief towns in the 
 kingdom. Sooner or later, also, Elizabeth, however much 
 against her will, was bound to give her support to that party 
 in Scotland, the interests of which were identical with her 
 own. Moreover, of all the nobles in Scotland, Moray and his 
 ally, Morton, were the only two who possessed the vigour and 
 the capacity to conduct the affairs of a nation. 
 
 With a small but compact Council, of which the chief 
 members were the Earls of Morton, Mar, Glencairn, and 
 Menteith, and the Lords Semple, Ruthven and Ochiltree, 
 Moray took decisive measures to improve his late victory. 
 Those who still held strongholds for the queen were peremp- 
 torily commanded to surrender them, and prominent persons 
 who refused allegiance to the king were outlawed and 
 forfeited — Hamilton, Archbishop of St Andrews, among the 
 rest. In June an expedition, headed by Moray, Morton, 
 and Lord Hume, pacified Dumfries and Galloway — districts 
 
 1 Arabella Stewart, in whose favour a conspiracy was formed on the 
 accession of Janies VI to the English throne, was the daughter of this 
 Charles.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 129 
 
 ever ready to profit by the relaxation of authority, and at 
 this time specially troublesome as being mainly devoted to 
 the exiled queen. But the Regent, with characteristic resolution, 
 prepared to deal a decisive blow at the whole formidable array 
 of his enemies. He issued orders for a Convention of Estates 
 on the 1 6th of August, in order to condemn as traitors every 
 noble who should refuse to acknowledge the existing govern- 
 ment. To avert the dreaded sentence, Huntly and Argyle 
 took up arms with the intention of uniting their forces and 
 marching against Edinburgh, where the Estates were to meet. 
 Civil war would have been the immediate result; but, for reasons 
 to be immediately explained, Elizabeth intervened and effected 
 a temporary arrangement between the contending parties. 
 Huntly and Argyle agreed to lay down their arms, and Moray 
 to postpone the decree of forfeiture till certain matters were 
 settled on which the fate of the kingdom was depending. 
 Therefore, when the Estates met in August, Argyle and 
 Huntly were spared, but the full sentence of outlawry was 
 pronounced on a long list of persons, chiefly of the stock of 
 the Hamiltons ; and a few days later the same sentence was 
 passed on the Earls of Eglinton and Cassillis, and the Lords 
 Fleming and Herries — the last, one of the most notable of the 
 champions of the exiled queen 1 . 
 
 When Mary sought an asylum in England after the over- 
 throw of her hopes at Langside, it was against x 
 the advice of her truest friends ; and their 
 forebodings were speedily fulfilled. The arrival of Mary in 
 her kingdom placed Elizabeth in the most embarrassing of 
 political dilemmas. To restore the Scottish queen to her 
 throne would have meant the ruin of Moray; and the govern- 
 ment of Moray, as events were to show, was bound up with 
 the interests of England. On the other hand, as events were 
 also to show, the presence of Mary in England was a standing 
 
 1 Reg. of Privy Council, I. 616 et seq.; Pan. Miscell., Vol. II. ; 
 Diurnal of Occui rent* , u. 131; Spottiswoodc, II. 90; Calderwood, 11. 417. 
 B. S. II. 9
 
 1 30 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 danger at once to the life and the government of Elizabeth. 
 In these circumstances, therefore, reasons of State overbore 
 whatever natural feelings Elizabeth may have entertained to- 
 wards the unhappy fugitive. In alarm and indignation Mary 
 prayed that at least her complaints against her rebellious 
 subjects might be heard. Mary had made a false move, and 
 Elizabeth grasped at the advantage. The request was granted, 
 but in a form that led to results far different from Mary's 
 anticipations As matters were arranged by Elizabeth, she 
 herself, Mary, and the Regent Moray were to send Com- 
 missioners to York to discuss the questions at issue between 
 the Scottish queen and her subjects. Though both Mary and 
 Moray professed to regard Elizabeth merely as a friendly 
 arbiter, in point of fact Elizabeth virtually constituted herself 
 a judge between two unwilling litigants. 
 
 On October 8 the whole body of Commissioners met at 
 
 York. For Elizabeth came the Duke of Norfolk, 
 1568 , » 
 
 the Earl of Sussex, and Sir Ralph Sadler ; for 
 Mary, the Lords Boyd, Herries, and Livingstone, the Abbot 
 of Kilwinning, Sir John Gordon of Lochinvar, Sir James 
 Cockburn of Skirving, and John Leslie, Bishop of Ross ; and 
 for James VI, Moray, Morton, Adam Bothwell, Bishop of 
 Orkney, the Abbot of Dunfermline, and Lord Lyndsay, with 
 Lethington, George Buchanan, James Makgill, and Henry 
 Balnaves as assistants. The ostensible object of the con- 
 ference was to hear Mary's charges against her subjects and 
 the justification which these subjects had to offer for their 
 conduct in dethroning their queen. The line taken by the 
 representatives of Mary was one which could not but commend 
 itself to every crowned head in Europe ; they accused the 
 supporters of the Regency of flat rebellion against their lawful 
 sovereign. The rejoinder of Moray and his fellow-com- 
 missioners was that Mary had broken the laws of the kingdom, 
 and generally proved herself incapable of ruling her people. 
 But they had a weapon in their hands, which they fully
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 131 
 
 intended to use if circumstances should make it necessary. 
 Immediately after the affair of Carbery Hill there had come 
 into the hands of Morton a silver casket which had originally 
 belonged to Mary's first husband, Francis II, and which she 
 had presented to her third husband, Bothwell. In this casket, 
 as was alleged by Morton, were found certain letters and 
 so-called sonnets, which proved Mary to have aided and 
 abetted in the murder of Darnley 1 . But the representatives 
 of all three parties now met at York were as far as possible 
 from composing a disinterested tribunal bent on discovering 
 and revealing the truth of the matters before them. For 
 Elizabeth the one question to be considered was how to end 
 the controversy between Mary and her subjects with the 
 greatest advantage to England. As for Mary, she had too 
 good reason to shrink from a curious scrutiny into her relations 
 with Bothwell and Darnley. Nor were the allies of Moray 
 in a position to be specially eager for the revelation of the 
 whole truth, since two of their number — Morton and Lething- 
 ton — had been directly concerned in Darnley's murder. 
 
 In these circumstances, the conduct and result of the con- 
 ference were precisely what was to be expected. Since it was 
 the interest of none of the parties to expose the whole truth, 
 futile recrimination and diplomatic evasion could be their only 
 resource. Even the exhibition of the Casket Letters, to which 
 Moray at length consented, only led to fresh charges and 
 counter-charges between the two Scottish parties. From York, 
 by Elizabeth's order, the Commissioners removed to West- 
 minster and thence to Hampton Court, where at length 
 (January 10, 1569) her Secretary, Sir William Cecil, produced 
 her final deliverance. Lame and impotent as this deliverance 
 was, it explains the main object of Elizabeth throughout the 
 whole proceedings. Moray and his allies were told that nothing 
 had been alleged against them which might "impair their 
 
 1 The Earl of .Morion's Declaration. — Henderson, Casket Letters, 
 pp. 113-116. 
 
 9 — 2
 
 132 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 honour or allegiance"; and, on the other hand, Mary was 
 given to understand that nothing had been produced against 
 her "whereby the Queen of England should conceive or take 
 any evil opinion" of her. With such meaningless words the 
 conference closed; but its practical conclusion was of mo- 
 mentous consequence for the future of Scotland. Mary was 
 retained a prisoner in England, and Moray was sent home 
 with hands strengthened to administer the government in the 
 name of James VI 1 . 
 
 1 If the Casket Letters had never existed, it would not appreciably 
 have affected the course of Scottish history. The majority of Mary's 
 subjects were convinced of Mary's connivance at Darnley's murder, and, 
 supported by public opinion, the insurgent lords were enabled to make 
 themselves masters of the country. Mary's imprisonment in Lochleven, 
 her dethronement, the battle of Langside, her flight to England, and her 
 subsequent imprisonment must all have resulted even if the famous Casket 
 had never been discovered. Whether Mary wrote the Casket Letters, 
 therefore, can hardly be considered a historical question. But further — 
 the Casket documents hold but a subordinate place in the evidence that 
 goes to prove that she was privy to the crime of the Kirk of Field. 
 It is from Mary's relations to the various parties, and from her conduct 
 before and after the deed that we are justified in concluding her guilty. 
 
 Three conclusions have been held regarding the Letters — that they are 
 wholly genuine, that they are wholly forged, that they are partly genuine 
 and partly forged. From the data at present before us I believe that none 
 of these conclusions is clearly deducible. The usual methods of detecting 
 forgery fail us completely in the case of these documents. We do not possess 
 the originals, so that no inference can be drawn from handwriting. In regard 
 to their contents we are equally at fault. They give information which we 
 do not find elsewhere, but we are unable to decide whether that information 
 be true or false. They also contradict statements found in other sources, but 
 we cannot say with which the verity lies. That the problem of the Letters 
 is insoluble is virtually the conclusion of Mr A. Lang in his Mystery of 
 Mary Stuart. Mr Lang's examination appears to me the most dispassionate 
 and most ingenious to which the Letters have been subjected. With 
 Mr Lang's book may be read that of Mr T. F. Henderson (The Casket 
 Letters and Mary Queen of Scots, and Ed., 1890). Mr Henderson declares 
 for the genuineness of the Letters. The literature on <,)ueen Mary will be 
 found in the Bibliography at the end of this volume.
 
 Chap, i v] James VI 133 
 
 After a journey of some risk, owing to the hostility of the 
 Catholics of the North of England, Moray found 
 himself at home in the beginning of February, 
 1569. Immediately on his arrival he held a Convention at 
 Stirling, in which he gave an account of his late mission to 
 England. More than ever he needed the support of all 
 who were friendly to his government. His enemies had not 
 been idle during his absence. They had circulated all manner 
 of reports to discredit his authority. They said that he had 
 sold his country to England, that he had offered to put James 
 in the hands of Elizabeth, and to receive English garrisons 
 into the castles of Edinburgh and Stirling. Many strong 
 places, the castles of Draffan and Roslin among others, had 
 been taken, and were being held for Mary. But it was in 
 the West, which was dominated by Argyle and the Hamiltons, 
 that the Regent had to look for the most formidable oppo- 
 sition ; and he at once took measures to deal with his enemies 
 in their own strongholds. He issued an order requiring the 
 lieges to meet him at Glasgow on the 10th of March, in warlike 
 guise and with twenty days' provisions 1 . 
 
 Meanwhile the supporters of Mary were also bestirring 
 themselves. While Moray was in England, the 
 Duke of Chatelherault had arrived from France, 
 and had besought Elizabeth to support him in his claim to the 
 Regency. Elizabeth had refused his request; but Mary had 
 sent him down to Scotland with a commission as her deputy- 
 lieutenant, and with similar commissions for Huntly and Argyle 
 to serve under him, the one to the north, the other to the south 
 of the river Forth. The Duke arrived on the 17th of February, 
 and on the 27th he addressed a letter to the General Assembly, 
 then in session at Edinburgh, in which he protested against the 
 muster of the lieges at Glasgow as being mainly directed against 
 himself. The task of answering the Duke was entrusted to 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, \>. 139 et seq. ; Calderwood, II. 477 et seq.
 
 i 34 The Religious Revolution L^ OOK v 
 
 Knox, who in his usual vigorous style justified the action of 
 Moray as at once in the interest of the State and of religion. 
 Again, when it came to an actual trial of strength, the Regent 
 proved too strong for his adversaries. On the ioth of March 
 he was in Glasgow attended by Morton and Hume and by a 
 considerable force which he had taken care to strengthen with 
 five pieces of ordnance. Should it prove necessary, he was 
 ready to march on Hamilton and try conclusions with the Duke. 
 But the Duke was in no position to oppose such a force as was 
 now at the Regent's command, and together with the Earl of 
 Cassillis and Lord Hemes he presented himself at Glasgow, 
 and offered to come to terms. He agreed to acknowledge the 
 king's authority and to give hostages for his good faith ; and for 
 the better understanding of all parties it was arranged that a 
 Convention should be held in Edinburgh in the following month 
 of April 1 . 
 
 Meanwhile, the Regent employed his time in the work 
 which he had always specially at heart — the furthering of law 
 and justice on the Borders. The Convention met on the 14th 
 of April ; and the Duke, Cassillis, and Hemes duly appeared 
 in accordance with their pledges. But one circumstance made 
 any understanding between the two parties impossible : Argyle 
 and Huntly still held aloof and were actually in arms for Mary. 
 With regard to the three nobles who had appeared, the Regent 
 was in a dilemma from which there was only one escape. 
 Should he leave them at large, they would join forces with 
 Huntly and Argyle, and he would have to face their united 
 strength. As Herries and the Duke failed to give satisfactory 
 pledges for their future conduct, they were committed to the 
 Castle of Edinburgh, while Cassillis, who proved more pliable, 
 was permitted to go at large 2 . 
 
 Huntly and Argyle remained to be dealt with, and the 
 
 1 Calderwood, 11. 477 et seq. ; Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 139 et seq. ; 
 Spottiswoode, II. no et seq. 
 
 2 Diurnal of Occurrents, pp. 1^2, 3; Calderwood, II. 4S7.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 135 
 
 Regent at once let them both know where they stood. If 
 they did not appear at St Andrews by the 10th of May, they 
 were told, they would be counted rebels against the king's 
 authority and be treated as such. Argyle was the first to 
 appear, and, as his offences had not been so serious as those 
 of Huntly, he had no difficulty in making his peace with the 
 Regent, with whom in former days he had been so closely 
 associated. With Huntly, who appeared later 1 , there was 
 more difficulty. In Aberdeenshire, Angus, and the Mearns, 
 he had borne himself like a king, and made free with the 
 goods of all those who acknowledged the Regency. But 
 moderation was the governing principle of Moray's policy; and 
 even Huntly, whom he now had at his mercy, was let off on 
 easy terms. All his misdemeanours were pardoned on con- 
 dition that he should acknowledge the king's authority, that he 
 should make restitution to all whom he had spoiled, and that 
 he should be responsible for the future conduct of his immediate 
 followers. Having thus disposed of Huntly and Argyle, Moray, 
 in the beginning of June, at the head of a strong force, marched 
 through the counties of Aberdeen, Elgin, and Inverness. There 
 was no force to oppose him, and his visit was confined to the 
 work of imposing heavy fines on those who had taken part in 
 the late disorders. So thoroughly did he accomplish the object 
 of his expedition that, in the words of a contemporary chronicler, 
 "there was none within the bounds of the north but they were 
 subdued to the king's authority 2 ." 
 
 While at Elgin, on his northern expedition, Moray received 
 
 two communications which involved the future 
 
 1569 
 
 of Scotland. They came from Elizabeth and 
 
 Mary respectively, and each contained proposals and demands 
 
 which could be considered only by the assembled councillors 
 
 1 According to Calderwood, Huntly did not appear at St Andrews. — 
 II. 487, 8. 
 
 2 Calderwood, 11. 487 et seq. ; Diurnal of Occwrents, pp. 144, 5; 
 Spottiswoode, II. 1 12.
 
 1 36 Tlie Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 of the country. To answer the two queens, therefore, a Con- 
 vention was ordered to assemble at Perth on July 25 th. The 
 importance of the business in hand was proved by the numerous 
 attendance of all classes in the country. Besides the Regent, 
 there were present nine earls, five bishops, eight abbots and 
 priors, fifteen lords, and twenty commissioners of burghs. The 
 communication of Elizabeth was first considered. It contained 
 three proposals regarding the exiled queen, the significance of 
 which, as coming from Elizabeth, it is difficult to understand. 
 Mary should either be restored to her throne, or should be 
 made joint ruler with her son, or should be maintained as a 
 private person. The majority of the Convention had little 
 difficulty in deciding between these alternatives. Under no 
 conditions would they have Mary again to rule over them : if, 
 however, she were willing to settle among them as a private 
 person, they would consider its advisability in the interests of 
 the country. With respect to Mary's own communication, the 
 keenest feelings were aroused. Its purport was that measures 
 should be taken to procure her divorce from Both well 1 . But 
 the divorce from Bothwell, as everybody knew, was to be the 
 first step in a scheme of far-reaching importance. During the 
 late Conference in England there had been much secret 
 negotiation for a marriage between Mary and the Duke of 
 Norfolk, who, though nominally a Protestant, was regarded as the 
 head of the Catholic party in England. The scheme had the 
 approval of many of the leading English nobles, Protestant as 
 well as Catholic, and in Scotland it had the powerful support 
 of Maitland of Lethington. So long, however, as Moray stood 
 in the way, the chances of its success were not promising; 
 and by threats and inducements Moray had been industriously 
 assailed. In his own interests, he was told, it was expedient 
 
 1 According to George Sand, a peculiarly interesting critic in this 
 connection, there are three great blots on Mary's character — her allowing 
 Chatclar to be executed, her feigned caresses of Darnley, and her abandon- 
 ment of Bothwell. — Sainte-Beuve, Causiries du Lundi, \\ aout, 1851.
 
 Chap, iv] James ] r I 137 
 
 that he should lend his influence to secure the Norfolk marriage 
 and the restoration of Mary to her kingdom. Beset as he was 
 by so many difficulties, he could not hope to maintain his 
 present position, while by restoring Mary he would become the 
 first subject in the country. But Moray, with his sober judg- 
 ment, saw the hollowness of the whole Norfolk project. He 
 knew the feebleness of Norfolk's own character ; he knew that 
 Elizabeth would never consent to the proposed union ; and he 
 knew that the restoration of Mary would mean but the con- 
 tinued postponement of the two great objects which it had been 
 the endeavour of his life to promote — the establishment of 
 Protestantism and the English alliance. Moray, therefore, was 
 immoveable, and after heated discussion he carried the Con- 
 vention with him in decisively refusing to further Mary's 
 divorce 1 . 
 
 In the open trial of strength, Moray had proved too strong 
 for Chatelherault, Huntly, and Argyle combined. 
 But the greatest danger from the Marian party 
 lay in the support it received from the Catholics of England. 
 That section of Elizabeth's subjects were at length about to 
 make the attempt which she had so long dreaded. Supported by 
 the Pope and Philip of Spain, and making common cause with 
 the supporters of Mary in Scotland, they might look with some 
 confidence to the result of an appeal to open force. Through 
 the summer and autumn of 1569 the train was being laid for 
 the revolt of the Northern Earls, which broke out in November. 
 In the widespread conspiracy no one was more deeply engaged 
 than Maitland, whose abilities and influence made him the 
 most dangerous enemy of the Regent. As things now stood, 
 it was clear that if Maitland were left at large the existing 
 government was impossible. In August or the beginning of 
 September there was a gathering of the Marian chiefs at 
 
 1 Reg. 0/ Privy Council, II. pp. r — 6; Spottisvvoode, II. iij — u6; 
 Calderwood, n. 4X9, 90; Diurnal of Occurretits, p. 145.
 
 138 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 Dunkeld, among whom Maitland and the Earl of Athol were the 
 most prominent. Such a meeting could have but one object, 
 and it may have prompted Moray and Morton to a decided 
 step. A Convention had been appointed to meet at Stirling 
 on the 3rd of September for the purpose of considering the 
 reply of Elizabeth to the communication which had been sent 
 to her from Perth. This Convention Maitland was invited to 
 attend, and, as refusal would have meant defiance, he duly 
 made his appearance. Doubtless with the approval of Moray, 
 and certainly at the instance of Morton, one Thomas Crawford, 
 a retainer of Lennox, of whom we shall hear again, accused 
 him before the assembly of being implicated in the murder of 
 Darnley We know that Maitland had been an aider and abettor 
 of Bothwell ; but he was charged with the crime at this par- 
 ticular moment for the double reason that he was the personal 
 enemy of Morton and that his seclusion was a political 
 necessity. It was accordingly decreed that he should be tried 
 on the 21st of December, and that meanwhile he should be 
 placed in ward. Ever fertile in expedients, however, Maitland 
 cleverly eluded his enemies. He was warded in a private 
 house in Edinburgh ; but Kirkcaldy of Grange, by means of a 
 forged letter, contrived to convey the prisoner to the Castle 
 of Edinburgh, of which Moray had made him commander 1 . 
 
 In the interval before the day of Maitland's trial, Moray 
 performed his last great service to his country. In spite of 
 all his previous efforts, the Border districts still continued to 
 give trouble. We have seen that for successive centuries every 
 King of Scots had experienced his own difficulties with these 
 parts of his kingdom ; but at this juncture there were special 
 reasons for unusual insubordination. Many of the great families 
 of the south were keen supporters of Mary, and on the English 
 border they had the countenance of the great Earls of North- 
 
 1 Spottiswoode, n. 118; Diurnal of Oi currents, 147- -y; Calderwood, 
 II. 5 o 4 .
 
 Chap, i v] James VI 139 
 
 umberland and Westmorland. Of all Moray's expeditions to 
 these districts, this was the most memorable. In the words 
 of a contemporary, "there was such obedience made by the 
 said thieves to the said regent, as the like was never done to 
 no king in no man's days of before 1 ." 
 
 As the day of Maitland's trial drew near, it became appa- 
 rent that it could not take place without a civil war. Athole, 
 Huntly, and the Hamiltons appeared at Linlithgow, and were 
 stayed from coming to Edinburgh only by the express com- 
 mand of the Regent. In Edinburgh itself the friends of 
 Maitland were in such numbers that the common talk was that 
 the Regent dared not proceed with the trial ; yet if he had 
 chosen, he might have crushed his enemies once for all. At 
 Dalkeith, six miles off, Morton lay with 3000 men, and only 
 waited the signal to march on Edinburgh. Moray, however, 
 was no remorseless soldier, and to prevent inevitable bloodshed 
 he postponed a trial, which he himself, bound as he was by old 
 ties to Maitland, had probably never desired 2 . 
 
 But there were other reasons why Moray should at this 
 moment desire to avoid a civil war. News had 
 reached him that the Earls of Northumberland 
 and Westmorland were in rebellion; and the success of that 
 rebellion, he knew, would mean the restoration of Mary and 
 the end of the government of James VI 3 . To prevent the 
 Marian faction in Scotland, and especially on the Borders, 
 from assisting the English earls, was thus his immediate duty; 
 and he issued a proclamation ordering the lieges to meet him 
 in arms at Perth, on the 20th of December. But by that date 
 the English revolt was at an end, and the two earls were 
 
 1 Ibid. It was Moray who began that policy towards the Borders, 
 which was systematically carried out by James VI. That policy was 
 simply to exterminate or drive from the country every person who was not 
 content to be a law-abiding citizen. 
 
 s Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 151; Calderwood, II. 506, 7. 
 
 3 The Duke of Norfolk, whose practices had been discovered, was com- 
 mitted to the Towel on the nth of October.
 
 140 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 fugitives in Scotland. By the unwritten law of the Borders 
 they were safe from extradition ; and to break this law was to 
 defy the public opinion not only of the Borders but of the 
 whole country. With his ideas of public order, however, 
 Moray was not the man to defer to a prescription which 
 virtually meant that the welfare of the country was to be sacri- 
 ficed to the interest of a body of outlaws. In this particular 
 case, moreover, the rank and the late conduct of the fugitives 
 rendered it an absolute necessity of State that they should be 
 prevented from making mischief in Scotland. In the teeth of 
 public opinion, therefore, and even against the will of his co- 
 adjutor Morton, Moray took steps for the capture of the two 
 earls. About the 20th of December he was at Peebles, and on 
 the 30th he was back in Edinburgh with the Earl of Northum- 
 berland in his keeping. Westmorland eluded his efforts, 
 however, and by his subsequent conduct in Scotland fully 
 justified Moray's defiance of public opinion 1 . 
 
 Every attempt to overthrow the government of Moray had 
 failed; and the miscarriage of the English revolt had cut off the 
 hope of a possible restoration of Mary. But there still re- 
 mained one means to be tried, which in the 16th century was 
 the last resort for the removal of a troublesome enemy; and 
 for the application of this means the Hamiltons found a 
 serviceable tool. On the 2nd of January, 1570, Moray left 
 
 Edinburgh, and crossed the Queen's Ferry in 
 1570 . . 
 
 company with the captive Northumberland, whom 
 
 he placed for greater security in the Castle of Lochleven. The 
 object of his journey was to obtain possession of Dumbarton 
 Castle — the only strong place still held for Mary. Its com- 
 mander, Lord Fleming, had led him to believe that he would 
 surrender it on certain conditions ; but when Moray appeared 
 before the place, he found that he had been mocked. Leaving 
 a force to continue the siege, he retraced his steps towards 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 153; Calderwood, II. 509.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 141 
 
 Edinburgh by way of Glasgow and Stirling. He reached 
 Linlithgow on the 22 nd, with the intention of proceeding to 
 Edinburgh on the following day. But this journey he was not 
 to accomplish. From Glasgow his steps had been dogged by 
 James Hamilton of Bothwellhaugh, a nephew of Archbishop 
 Hamilton, who had been saved after the battle of Langside by 
 Moray's own order. Moray had been warned that Hamilton 
 was on his track and had chosen the morrow to strike his 
 blow. But Moray's life had already been sought more than 
 once , and, though the offer was even made to bring the intend- 
 ing assassin before him, he refused to consider the proposal. 
 One precaution, however, he agreed to take — to ride out of the 
 town by the way he had come. But so great was the crowd 
 next day that this was found to be impossible, and through a 
 closely pressing throng the Regent slowly rode past the window 
 where Hamilton was awaiting him. The assassin had taken 
 every precaution to make sure of his victim and to provide for 
 his own safety. The house where he took his stand belonged 
 to his uncle the archbishop; sheets to hide the smoke from his 
 hackbut were hung round the window whence he was to fire 
 the fatal shot; and a horse at a postern gate was ready to bear 
 him to his kinsmen at Hamilton. His measures were taken 
 with a precaution that precluded failure: Moray was shot 
 through the body, and his murderer was safe that night among 
 his jubilant friends. At first, it was supposed that the Regent's 
 wound was not mortal. He felt no pain, and he alighted from 
 his horse, and walked to the house which he had just left. He 
 lived till about an hour before midnight, evincing during his 
 last hours that calmness and magnanimity which belonged to 
 him by nature, and which profound religious convictions had 
 transmuted into Christian faith and hope. Three weeks later 
 (February 14) the Regent's body was borne from Holyrood to 
 the Church of St Giles, when John Knox preached a sermon 
 from the text, "Blessed are those which die in the Lord." So 
 great was the eloquence of the preacher and so sympathetic
 
 142 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 was the response of his audience that "he made three thousand 
 persons to shed tears for the loss of such a good and godly 
 governor 1 ." 
 
 The work accomplished by Moray has in large degree been 
 overshadowed by the work of Knox, whose character and 
 achievement were of a kind to make a wider appeal to the 
 popular imagination. Yet of the two men it was Moray who 
 indubitably did the most to ensure the success of the Scottish 
 Reformation. This was fully perceived by Knox himself, and it 
 was as clearly perceived by Mary of Lorraine and her daughter. 
 It was the work of Knox to proclaim the new faith with pro- 
 phetic power and zeal, but he never failed to recognise that it 
 was only with Moray's aid that the immediate and final triumph 
 of Protestantism was possible. From the beginning of his 
 public career, there were two aims to which all Moray's action 
 had been directed — the establishment of Protestantism and the 
 alliance with England, and Knox himself was not more 
 steadily consistent in the pursuit of them. When he embraced 
 the new faith, it was at a time when its prospects gave but 
 uncertain promise of its future triumph, and when worldly 
 interest would have prompted him to throw himself on 
 the side of Mary of Lorraine and of France. His conduct 
 towards his sister was all that could have been demanded of a 
 brother and a patriot. Against the desire of the main body of 
 the Protestants, he secured to her the private exercise of her 
 own religion, and he used all the influence at his disposal to 
 persuade Elizabeth to grant to her the reversion of the English 
 Crown. When Mary married Darnley, he refused to take part 
 in her councils; and the immediate consequences of that union 
 were the complete justification of his conduct. By her 
 marriage with Bothwell Mary made her continuance on the 
 throne impossible ; and her subsequent scheme of a marriage 
 with Norfolk would, if carried out, have plunged England and 
 
 1 Calderwood, II. 510, 11; Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 156; Spottis- 
 woode, II. 119 — 121.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 143 
 
 Scotland in an internecine war. When Moray assumed the 
 Regency, he was in simple truth the only person capable of 
 saving his country ; and the office fell to him as a natural 
 function to which he was summoned alike by the call of public 
 duty and the consciousness of his own capacity. For political 
 or personal reasons he was unacceptable to the majority of the 
 nobles ; but the people honoured and loved him as no ruler in 
 Scotland had been honoured or loved before. In the words 
 of a contemporary chronicler "he was the defender of the 
 widow and the fatherless 1 "; and a historian of the succeeding 
 generation put his seal to this high eulogy. "A man truly 
 good," says Spottiswoode, "and worthy to be ranked among 
 the best governors that this kingdom hath enjoyed, and 
 therefore to this day honoured with the title of The Good 
 Regent 2 ." 
 
 II. Regency of Lennox. 
 
 The loss of Moray was immediately and lamentably felt. 
 
 Within three weeks of his death a Convention 
 
 1570 
 
 met in Edinburgh to arrange the future ad- 
 ministration of the government. As, however, both the king's 
 and the queen's parties were represented in this assembly, no 
 combined action was possible; and its members could not even 
 agree regarding the punishment of those concerned in the 
 assassination of the late Regent. Its first duty should have 
 been to appoint his successor ; but, on the ground that the 
 Convention was not sufficiently representative, the election 
 was postponed till a new Convention should be called ; and for 
 five months the kingdom was to be without a recognised head. 
 On this occasion the only important business transacted was 
 the acquittal of Maitland from the charge of being privy to 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occur/ em's, p. 156. 
 
 2 Spottiswoode, 11. 121.
 
 144 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 the murder of Darnley, and his liberation from his nominal 
 ward in Edinburgh Castle 1 . 
 
 It had tasked all the energies of Moray to maintain public 
 order in the presence of the powerful party which demanded 
 the restoration of the queen ; and, now that he was removed, 
 that party became more dangerous than ever. It was sup- 
 ported by the great majority of the nobility, and it possessed 
 two of the ablest men in the country for its leaders — Maitland 
 and John Hamilton, Archbishop of St Andrews, the virtual 
 head of his clan. The strength of the king's party lay in the 
 Protestant clergy and the mass of the Commons ; but its only 
 capable chief was the Earl of Morton, formidable by his 
 capacity and courage, but totally devoid of the moral qualities 
 that inspire the confidence of a people. In the beginning of 
 May the Marian lords took a decided step. At a great meeting 
 of their supporters in Linlithgow they proclaimed Mary as their 
 queen, and summoned all the lieges to hold themselves ready 
 on pain of death to defend the cause against all her enemies. 
 Their further plans, however, were rudely interrupted. On the 
 night after the death of Moray, two notable Border lairds, Ferni- 
 herst and Buccleuch, in company with the exiled Westmorland, 
 had burst into England and harried the lands of such as had 
 remained loyal in the rebellion of the North. Elizabeth took 
 a speedy and effective revenge. On the 17th of April the Earl 
 of Sussex crossed the Border at the head of a strong force, 
 ravaged Teviotdale and the Merse, and demolished the strong- 
 holds of Ferniherst and Buccleuch. But it was the Hamiltons, 
 Elizabeth knew, who had been the promoters of all the mischief 
 on the Borders, and it further excited her wrath that Westmor- 
 land and Lord Dacres were now taking a prominent part in 
 the counsels of the Marian party at Linlithgow. She deter- 
 mined, therefore, that the Hamiltons also should feel the 
 weight of her arm. Accordingly, on the 12th of May, Sir 
 
 1 Calderwood, 11. 526 — 528; Diurnal of Occurrents, 156 — 158.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 145 
 
 William Drury, Governor of Berwick, accompanied by the 
 Earl of Lennox, and at the head of 1000 foot and 300 horse, 
 marched towards Edinburgh, where he was awaited by the 
 chiefs of the king's party — the Earls of Morton, Glencairn, and 
 Mar, and the Lords Ruthven, Lyndsay, Glamis, and Ochiltree. 
 On the news of Dairy's coming the queen's lords dispersed 
 to their various homes, ignorant where he would strike. They 
 were not left long in doubt. On the 16th of May, the English 
 force, strengthened by that of Morton and his allies, took its 
 march westwards, and within four days were back in Edin- 
 burgh, having utterly destroyed the palace, castle, and town 
 of Hamilton 1 . 
 
 The party of the king was now in the ascendant, and they 
 availed themselves of their temporary advantage. 
 On the 1 6th of June Lennox was made lieu- 
 tenant-general of the kingdom, and about a month later 2 , with 
 the consent of Elizabeth, he was promoted to the Regency. 
 Personally Lennox was little fitted to govern a country in a 
 state of revolution. His character was naturally weak ; he 
 was in his 55th year, then considered an advanced age, and 
 in feeble health, but he was the grandfather of the king and 
 by his own descent he stood close to the throne. Either he 
 or his advisers, however, gave proof that they meant to act 
 with vigour. It was the intention of the Marian lords to 
 hold a rival Convention at Linlithgow on the 7th of August ; 
 but Lennox effectually prevented its assembly. In the North 
 Morton inflicted a severe check on the Earl of Huntly. It 
 had been reported that Huntly, supported by Lord Ogilvy and 
 the Earl of Crawford, was about to make an attempt to seize 
 the rich Abbey of Arbroath ; but, by the capture of the town 
 of Brechin, held by certain of Huntly's followers, Morton 
 inflicted such a blow that they were forced to desist from their 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, 16S — 177; Calderwood, 11. 544—565. 
 
 2 Authorities differ as to the exact date when Lennox was appointed 
 Regent. 
 
 B. s. 11. 10
 
 146 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 enterprise. In the same month of August the taking of the 
 Castle of Doune on the banks of the Teith, and another raid 
 of the Earl of Sussex on the lands of the Marian lords in 
 Dumfries, brought further prestige to Lennox's rule 1 . 
 
 Thus far things had gone so ill with the party of the queen 
 that its leaders were driven to seek some way 
 out of their distress. They appealed to Eliza- 
 beth to effect some arrangement by which Mary and her son 
 might divide the government between them and thus bring 
 peace to the unhappy kingdom. Triumphant as he now was, 
 Lennox was loth to throw away his present advantage ; but 
 Elizabeth wished that an attempt at a compromise should 
 be made, and he could not afford to defy her. Accordingly 
 while the necessary negotiations proceeded, he agreed to an 
 1 Abstinence ' of two months dating from the 3rd of September. 
 Instead of two months, the negotiations were prolonged for 
 nearly seven ; and the result was as abortive as that of the 
 famous commission which had been headed by Moray. Nomi- 
 nally the Abstinence had existed throughout the whole of that 
 period, but in point of fact it was seriously regarded by neither 
 party. In December, Kirkcaldy of Grange broke open the 
 door of the Tolbooth prison in Edinburgh, and carried off a 
 prisoner who had been placed there on a charge of man- 
 slaughter. In the game of retaliation, however, the king's 
 party still maintained their advantage. In February, 15 71, 
 the Castle of Paisley was recovered from the Hamiltons, and 
 on the 2nd of April that of Dumbarton was taken by one of 
 the boldest feats of arms recorded in Scottish history 2 . 
 
 The hero of the enterprise was that Captain Thomas 
 Crawford who had charged Lethington with 
 being a party to the murder of Darnley. The 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occtirrents, 181; Calderwood, II. 568; III. 11; History of 
 fames the Sext, pp. 58 et seq. 
 
 2 Spottiswoode, II. 133 — 136; Diurnal of Occurrents, 194 — 200; Calder- 
 wood, III. 31, 32.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 147 
 
 castle had for the last four years been in the keeping of Lord 
 Fleming, whose boast it was that in holding it he held "the 
 fetters of Scotland." A treacherous sentry offered to show 
 how the walls could be scaled and its defenders surprised. 
 The offer was accepted, and at one o'clock in the morning 
 Crawford began the ascent on the east side of the castle. 
 The ladders proved to be too short; and Crawford and the 
 sentry, who acted as his guide, had to climb from the highest 
 step of the ladder to an ash tree some twenty feet up the rock. 
 The ladders, having been pulled up to the tree, were again 
 planted ; and under cover of a mist the whole party reached 
 the summit of the wall. The surprise was complete, and in a 
 few minutes the castle was in the hands of the assailants. 'An 
 unexpected prize further rewarded the victors : among the 
 captives was Archbishop Hamilton, who as the head and coun- 
 sellor of his powerful family was the most formidable enemy of the 
 king's party in the country. As the times were, his fate was not 
 long in suspense. Within a week after his capture (April 7) 
 he was put through the form of a trial on the charge of having 
 been party to the murder of Darnley and Moray, and of having 
 conspired to seize Lennox and the king. The same day saw his 
 trial and his death. "As the bell struck six hours to even," he 
 was hanged on a gibbet at the market-cross of Stirling — "the 
 first bishop that suffered by form of justice in this kingdom 1 ." 
 
 With the collapse of the late negotiations and the return of 
 Morton (April 19) from England, whither he 
 had been sent as chief commissioner of the king's 
 party', civil war began in earnest. Hitherto there had been 
 occasional frays, but both parties now fully realised that the 
 controversy between them could be settled by the sword alone. 
 Owing to the relative position of the parties, it was the capital 
 itself that was to be the battle-ground where the struggle 
 
 1 Calderwood, III. 54 — 59; Bannatync, Memoriales, 196; Diurnal of 
 Occurrents, 202—204; Spottiswoode, II. 155; Buchanan, 394. 
 - Morton had gone to England on February 4. 
 
 10—2
 
 148 The Religious Revolution [Book, v 
 
 was to be decided. The Castle of Edinburgh was the only 
 
 strong place now held by the Marians; but the possession of 
 
 the castle implied the command of the main part of the town. 
 
 Supplied with money and ammunition from France, Kirkcaldy 
 
 of Grange strengthened both the castle and the town with all 
 
 the devices that his military experience could suggest. On 
 
 the last day of April he issued a proclamation commanding 
 
 all the inhabitants unfavourable to Mary to retire from the 
 
 town. The majority of the citizens were on the side of the 
 
 king, and many left the town and took up their residence in 
 
 JLeith — among those who withdrew, sorely against his will, being 
 
 John Knox, who found a temporary home in St Andrews. 
 
 By the beginning of May, Grange had made all his preparations 
 
 for any attack on the part of his enemies ; and his position 
 
 was strengthened by the arrival of Chatelherault, his son, Lord 
 
 Claud Hamilton, and the Earl of Argyle 1 . 
 
 The first blood was drawn on Sunday, the 29th of April, 
 
 when a fray occurred during the time of sermon. 
 1571 ... . 
 
 But it was with the coming of Lennox to Leith, 
 
 which he was to make the basis of his operations, that the 
 contest really began. By way of asserting his authority, Lennox 
 determined to hold a Parliament in the capital; but at the 
 present juncture this was a matter of some difficulty, as the 
 usual place of meeting was within Grange's defences. On legal 
 authority, however, Lennox was assured that, if it met within 
 the municipal bounds, the conditions of the law would be ful- 
 filled. On the 14th of May, therefore, the Parliament duly 
 met in a private house in the Canongate, while the guns from 
 the castle played all the time it sat. Having held his Parlia- 
 ment, the only business of which was to pronounce sentence of 
 outlawry on certain of the queen's party, Lennox retired to 
 Stirling, leaving the prosecution of the war in the hands of 
 Morton". 
 
 1 Calderwood, III. 70 — 87; Diurnal of Occurrents, 212 — 215. 
 8 Calderwood, III. 17; Diurnal of Occurrents, 215.
 
 Chap, ivj James VI 149 
 
 Anions; the numberless skirmishes in this war between 
 Leith and Edinburgh, as it was called, two were 
 specially remembered by those who lived through 
 the deplorable strife. On the 2nd of June, a band of horse 
 and foot sallied from Edinburgh with the object of setting 
 fire to Dalkeith, a dependency of Morton's. Espied on their 
 approach, however, a body of Morton's men issued from the 
 town and drove them back towards Edinburgh. It was an 
 accident that happened during their retreat that made their 
 expedition memorable. As their captain was opening a barrel 
 of gunpowder, a lighted match dropped into the barrel, when 
 two men were killed and sixteen rendered helpless. In as 
 good array as they could, their companions held on their flight, 
 pursued to the very precincts of the capital 1 . 
 
 The other affair was of greater consequence, and was long 
 remembered as "The Black Saturday." On Saturday, the 16th 
 of June, Sir William Drury, who had come on the vain errand 
 of effecting an understanding between the two factions, was to 
 take his departure for England; and, by way of doing him 
 honour, the queen's party issued in great strength from the 
 town, and took up their position on the north-east side of the 
 Calton Hill. Morton, we are told, had been ill of a colic, but 
 on hearing of this display he led forth all the men at his dis- 
 posal, and arrayed them half a mile to the north of the enemy. 
 Drury persuaded the respective leaders to abstain from fighting 
 for one day, but the question arose which of the two parties 
 should first retire. When the queen's men, however, were 
 seen to produce two pieces of ordnance, Morton was no longer 
 to be restrained, and he fiercely threw himself on the enemy. 
 His victory was complete — the enemy being driven in confusion 
 within the walls of the town, and sustaining a heavy loss both 
 in captives and slain-'. 
 
 1 This affair was known as the " I.unt [match] Fight." 
 
 1 Calderwood, ill. 89; Diurnal oj Occurreiits, 124; History of James
 
 1 50 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 The summer wore oway in petty encounters which could 
 
 lead to nothing so long as the castle was held 
 1571 
 
 for the queen. Equally futile were the rival 
 
 assemblies in which each party denounced the other as rebels 
 
 and outlaws. Yet it was one of these Conventions that was to 
 
 be the occasion of an enterprise which might have changed the 
 
 course of Scottish history. On the 28th of August Lennox 
 
 held a Convention in Stirling, which bore a closer semblance to 
 
 a Parliament than any assembly that had met for some time. 
 
 In addition to the nobles who had hitherto followed him, he 
 
 had lately been joined by the Earls of Argyle, Cassillis, Angus, 
 
 Eglinton, and Lord Boyd. To give lustre and authority to the 
 
 assembly, the king, now in his sixth year, was arrayed in royal 
 
 robes, and conducted in state to the place of meeting — a sword, 
 
 sceptre, and crown 1 being borne before him by Glencairn, 
 
 Crawford, and Angus. Even a short speech was prepared for 
 
 him, which he duly delivered. But of his own initiative the 
 
 youthful sovereign uttered an oracular remark, which in view 
 
 of the event that was to follow came to be deemed prophetic. 
 
 Spying a gap in the roof of the chamber, he exclaimed : "There 
 
 is a hole in this Parliament 2 ! " 
 
 The enemy being thus in one place, it occurred to Grange, 
 
 or Lethington, or both, that by one bold stroke the long contest 
 
 might be ended. On the 3rd of September, at six o'clock in 
 
 the evening, a body of horse and foot issued from Edinburgh 
 
 under the command of Huntly and the stirring lairds of Ferni- 
 
 herst and Buccleuch. It had been given out that Jedburgh 
 
 was their destination, but between three and four next morning 
 
 they were in the streets of Stirling. So complete was the 
 
 surprise that in a few minutes Lennox, Morton, Glencairn, and 
 
 the Sext, 80 — 83. This last authority gives June 26 as the date ot "The 
 Black Saturday." 
 
 1 The regalia were in the Castle of Edinburgh. 
 
 2 According to another account, it was a hole in the tablecloth that 
 suggested James's remark. Hist, of James the Sext, 88.
 
 Chap, iv] Janus VI 151 
 
 Ruthven were in the hands of the enterprising party. The fate 
 of Scotland was in the balance. But while the victors gave 
 themselves up to spoil, the Earl of Mar, at the head of a band 
 of arquebusiers, descended from the castle, and the state of 
 affairs was speedily reversed. The enemy were driven in con- 
 fusion from the town, the captive lords rescued, and what had 
 promised to be a brilliant feat of arms turned into a disastrous 
 defeat. Lennox, however, did not share in the triumph of his 
 friends. Before he could be rescued he received a pistol-shot 
 of which he died in the course of the day. His regency had 
 lasted less than fourteen months ; yet in the long rivalry of his 
 House with that of the Hamiltons he had triumphed, for he gave 
 to Britain a line of kiniis 1 . 
 
 III. Regency of Mar. 
 
 But for the conviction that the nation was with them the 
 chiefs of the king's party could hardly have held 
 together under these repeated disasters. Two 
 Regents had now been cut off; the great majority of the nobles 
 still maintained the cause of the queen • .and Elizabeth still 
 withheld such assistance as would have decided the struggle 
 between the two parties. But the death of Lennox seemed 
 only to stimulate the king's supporters to more resolute effort. 
 The Parliament, which had been sitting at Stirling, at once 
 proceeded to the election of Lennox's successor. From a ' leet ' 
 of three — Argyle, Morton, and Mar — the last received the 
 majority of votes. Mar was not remarkable for ability or vigour, 
 but he bore a character for moderation and honest dealing 
 which won him the respect of both the contending parties. 
 
 The pressing duty for the new Regent, as it had been for his 
 predecessor, was the recovery of the Castle of 
 Edinburgh. Before the renewal of the contest 
 
 1 Calderwood, III. 136 — 141 ; Diurnal of Occurrents, i\i — 249; Hist, 
 of James the Sext, 88—93; Spottiswoode, II. 163 — 166.
 
 152 The Religions Revolution [Book v 
 
 a further appeal was addressed to the queen's lords, summoning 
 them once more to surrender the castle and to acknowledge the 
 king's authority. This appeal was followed up by strenuous 
 preparations for the renewal of the siege. On the 4th of 
 October Mar entered Leith with a force of 4000 men, and on 
 the 8th he began to dig his trenches in the Canongate and at 
 the West Port. Grange, it is to be remembered, was master 
 both of the city and the castle. The first business of Mar, 
 therefore, was to break through the town wall which had been 
 so hastily built by the citizens after Flodden. But with the 
 men and the means at his disposal this proved to be a task 
 beyond his strength. His trenches were commanded by 
 Grange's ordnance in the churchyard of St Giles and the 
 Kirk of Field, and shot was even sent through his own tent. 
 Though he succeeded in breaking down forty feet of the south 
 wall, it was repaired in the course of the following night. With- 
 in three weeks Mar discovered the futility of further effort, and 
 on the 2 1 st he retired to Leith 1 . 
 
 The fortunes of the king's party were not more prosperous 
 in other parts of the country, and in the north 
 especially they suffered a severe reverse. The 
 king's deputy in these parts was the Master of Forbes, known 
 as Black Arthur ; and the chief enemy with whom he had to 
 deal was Sir Adam Gordon of Auchindoune, who had for 
 some time past been setting the king's authority at defiance. 
 In two encounters between them Forbes was worsted — the last, 
 which occurred at the Crabstane near Aberdeen, being specially 
 decisive, Forbes himself being taken with 200 horsemen 
 A deed which followed was regarded as an unparalleled atrocity 
 even in that time of blood. A band of the Gordons beset the 
 Castle of Towie, then in the charge of its mistress during the 
 absence of her husband. On her refusal to surrender fire was 
 
 1 Calderwood, III. 141 — 153; Diurnal of Occurre/its, 249, 50 ; Spottis- 
 woode, II. 168, 9; Hist, oj James the Sext, 94.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 153 
 
 applied to the place, and every inmate destroyed 1 . As the 
 result of these victories of the Gordons, the country to the north 
 of the Forth was for some months at the discretion of the party 
 of the queen 2 . 
 
 It was in the midst of this pitiful strife that Morton took 
 a step that was to have momentous results for 
 
 1572 
 
 the future of Scotland. The crying need of the 
 king's party was money, and Morton fell upon a scheme, which 
 in part doubtless was prompted by his own rapacity, but which 
 also had its roots in public policy. Much of the immense 
 wealth of the ancient Church still remained in the hands of 
 surviving ecclesiastics, but these men were gradually dying off; 
 and the very practical question arose — into whose hands was 
 their wealth to pass ? The Protestant ministers loudly asserted 
 that they were the rightful legatees of the Church which they had 
 displaced. But to this demand Morton was strenuously opposed 
 alike on public and private grounds. His own appetite for 
 riches was unbounded, and from the mine before his eyes he 
 was not the man to withhold his hand ; but, as the course of 
 his policy shows, he was also guided by higher motives than 
 merely selfish ends. Like Maitland and Moray, he steadily 
 looked to the eventual union of the Crowns of England and 
 Scotland ; and, as a necessary step towards this union, and a 
 condition of its realisation, he regarded it as indispensable that 
 the Churches of the two countries should be one in polity and 
 doctrine. By word and deed, therefore, he impressed on the 
 Protestant ministers that their assemblies were mere convoca- 
 tions of his Majesty's lieges, and that they must humbly accept 
 whatever settlement the Crown might choose to arrange for 
 them. 
 
 In the crisis through which the country was now passing, 
 Morton found the opportunity of making a beginning of that 
 
 1 This atrocious deed is commemorated with some poetic licence in the 
 pathetic ballad of Edom 0' Gordon. 
 
 1 History oj James the Sext, 95—97; Spoltiswoode, II. 169, 170.
 
 154 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 policy towards the Church, which, continued by James VI and 
 his successors, was for a full century to divide the country 
 against itself. The ministers disliked Morton equally on the 
 grounds of his profligacy and his simony; but for the moment 
 he was their master, since the cause of the king was the cause 
 of Protestantism, and without the support of Morton both 
 causes were hopeless. At the instance of Morton a Convention 
 of the Church was held in Leith on January 12, the chief 
 business of which was to appoint a commission, consisting of 
 six ministers and six Privy Councillors, to devise some arrange- 
 ment for the peace and order of the spiritual estate. Within 
 a week the commission produced the result of its deliberations, 
 which received the approval of the Convention. They are 
 summed up under seven heads, but here we are only concerned 
 with the fact that the titles of archbishop, bishop, abbot, and 
 prior were to be preserved — all of which, it is to be noted, had 
 been abolished by the First Book of Discipline. The powers 
 and privileges that were to go with these titles fell far short of 
 what had gone with them in the ancient Church, but the mere 
 existence of these dignities sufficed for Morton's purpose. He 
 at once gave a practical illustration as to how he meant to 
 utilise the new arrangement. On the death of Archbishop 
 Hamilton he had received the benefice of St Andrews 1 ; and no 
 successor to Hamilton had yet been appointed. He had now 
 the means, however, of putting a gloss on the scandal. He 
 appointed an aged and infirm minister, named John Douglas, 
 to perform the duties of the office, but kept in his own hands 
 the main part of its income. To see his nominee inducted he 
 crossed to St Andrews, and desired Knox to perform the 
 ceremony ; but Knox " in open audience of many [Morton 
 among others] then present, denounced anathema to the giver, 
 anathema to the receiver"; and the unscrupulous simonist 
 had to find a more pliant instrument. Such was the origin 
 
 1 Caldeiwood, ill. 68.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 155 
 
 of the pseudo-bishops, known as Tulchans 1 , and the beginning 
 likewise of that struggle between Episcopacy and Presbytery, 
 which was to fill so large a space in the ecclesiastical history of 
 Scotland 2 . 
 
 The struggle between the two parties in the State dragged 
 on through the winter and spring, and with in- 
 creasing ferocity in the adherents of both. His 
 attempt at storming the capital having failed, Mar tried the 
 effect of a blockade; but even an adequate blockade was 
 beyond his powers. Yet he succeeded in making the besieged 
 feel the discomfort of their position. He destroyed all the 
 surrounding mills, he threatened with death all who should 
 be found conveying provisions into the town, and he stopped 
 the working of all the neighbouring coal-pits. The want of 
 fuel drove Grange to an expedient which was remembered 
 against him when the day of reckoning came. He dismantled 
 the houses of the citizens who had left the town in the 
 interest of the king, and sold the rafters for firewood in open 
 market 3 . From the 16th of April till the 8th of June no 
 quarter was given or taken by either side — the result, it was 
 believed, of Morton's vindictive ferocity. It is to this period 
 of the "Douglas Wars," as they were called from the merciless 
 Morton, that Spottiswoode's description may be referred, though 
 it is probably exaggerated even as regards this period. " You 
 should have seen fathers against their sons, sons against their 
 fathers, brother fighting against brother, nigh kinsmen and 
 others allied together as enemies seeking one the destruction 
 of the other.... The very young ones scarce taught to speak 
 had these words in their mouths, and were sometimes ob- 
 
 1 «'A Tulchan is a calve's skinne stuffed with straw to caus the kow 
 give milk." — Calderwood, III. 207. 
 
 a Calderwood, III. 168—208; Spottiswoodc, II. 170—172. 
 
 3 The functionary who superintended the sale of the wood was known 
 as "the Captain ol the Chimneys."
 
 156 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 served to divide and have childish conflicts in that quarrel 1 ." 
 Yet, in this dark time, and in Edinburgh where the suffering 
 was greatest, we are told by a contemporary that in May 
 the inhabitants "used all pleasures which were wont to be 
 used in the said month of May, viz. Robin Hood and Little 
 John 2 ." 
 
 The summer at length brought a cessation of hostilities. 
 Through the good offices of England and France 
 an Abstinence was accepted by both parties, 
 which was to last for only two months from the 1st of August, 
 but which was subsequently prolonged till the last day of 
 December. This truce was a turning-point in the long conflict, 
 involving as it did a decisive advantage for the party of the 
 king. The queen's lords, Chatelherault, his son Lord Claud 
 Hamilton, Huntly, and Seton, with their respective followings, 
 immediately left the capital, which was at once occupied by 
 Mar and his supporters. The exiled citizens, who had settled 
 in Leith and elsewhere, returned to their homes, and among 
 them, John Knox, who was soon to find a theme with which to 
 rouse his countrymen to a last effort in the cause of Protestant- 
 ism. On the 27th of August occurred the bloodiest crime 
 of the century — the Massacre of St Bartholomew. In Scotland 
 the tidings of the crime were received with mingled terror and 
 indignation, and Knox with his dying voice drove home the 
 terrible lesson to the hearts of his countrymen. Mainly 
 through his efforts, a Convention met in Edinburgh on the 
 20th of October, which resolved that a defensive alliance 
 should be sought with all Protestant countries " to be ready 
 at all occasions for resisting" the action of Rome 3 . The crime 
 of St Bartholomew cut off all hope for Mary Stewart in Scot- 
 land ; it consolidated the ranks of her enemies, and it decided 
 
 1 Spottiswoode, II. 158. 
 
 2 Diitrtial of Occurrenis, 263. 
 
 3 Calderwood, in. 2/5; Spottiswoode, 11. 174; Diurnal of Occunents, 
 257—307.
 
 Chap, ivj James VI 157 
 
 the wavering to have done with a cause which was opposed to 
 the wishes of the majority of the nation'. 
 
 In the month of October 2 the Regent Mar died — "the maist 
 cause " of his death being " that he loved peace 
 and could not have it." On the 24th of the same 
 month John Knox also passed away — his last public counsel 
 being a warning message to Kirkcaldy of Grange that he 
 should return to the way he had abandoned and surrender 
 the castle. He had lived to see the triumph of the cause to 
 which he had given himself with such incomparable devotion 
 and power : on the day of his death Morton was proclaimed 
 Regent, and with Morton Protestantism at least was safe. Yet, 
 when Morton pronounced the memorable eulogy at the great 
 preacher's grave, "Here lies one who neither flattered nor feared 
 any flesh," his respect was doubtless mingled with a sense of 
 relief that the formidable monitor would no longer meet him 
 in the way 3 . 
 
 IV. Regency of Morton. 
 
 On the 1 st of January, in a spirit of ill-timed bravado, 
 Grange fired a shot from the castle as an intima- 
 
 1573 
 
 tion that the Abstinence was at an end, and that 
 he and his allies did not shrink from a renewal ot the contest. 
 But the toils were fast closing round him. The town was now 
 in the possession of the enemy, the castle could easily be 
 blockaded, and the only important person now at his side was 
 Maitland of Lethington. A Convention held in Edinburgh 
 on the 1 6th of January showed, by the number of lords who 
 were present, that the king's party was now the real power in 
 
 1 Calderwood, in. -215—230; Diurnal of OccurmUs, 307—316; Spottis- 
 woode, 11. 176 — 179. 
 
 ' l Authorities dilTer as to the precise date. 
 6 Calderwood, ill. 230 242.
 
 158 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 the country; and on the 3rd of the following month a trans- 
 action took place which sealed the fate of the castle. At 
 Perth on that day, Huntly and Lord George Hamilton, as 
 representing their respective kin, met certain of the king's 
 lords, and signed a pacification, by which they agreed to 
 recognise the authority of the king and of Morton as his 
 Regent. Though his position was now desperate, Grange still 
 refused to surrender, and in an unhappy hour for himself he 
 was guilty of a " causeless cruelty," which alienated his friends 
 and exasperated his enemies. On a night in February, a band 
 of his soldiery issued from the castle, and set fire to certain 
 thatched houses. He had chosen the opportunity of a tempest 
 of wind for his exploit ; and the flames spread with alarming 
 rapidity. To add to the wantonness of the act his cannon 
 played on those who attempted to stay the progress of the fire, 
 which was left to run its disastrous course 1 . 
 
 It was the last notable action performed by Grange. 
 Morton, in his own strength, had done what he 
 could to bring him to terms. He threw three 
 earthen ramparts across the street leading from the castle, he 
 poisoned St Margaret's well, which had afforded the main 
 supply of water to its inmates, and he cut off all possibility of 
 external communication. Without the means of conducting 
 a siege, however, he could hope to reduce the place only by 
 the slow process of famine. But he at length received that 
 aid for which he had been looking from the beginning of the 
 contest. Elizabeth had at last decided that it was in the 
 interest of England that James and not Mary should reign- in 
 Scotland. By the end of April Sir William Drury was in 
 Edinburgh in command of a force equipped with all the 
 necessaries for an effectual siege. In the face of a heavy fire 
 from the castle, batteries were erected in front of its main 
 entrance, on the ground where Heriot's hospital now stands, 
 
 ] Diitj-nal of Occurrents, 323; Caldcrwood, III. 242 — 261.
 
 Chap, ivj James VI 159 
 
 on the further bank of the Nor Loch, and on a spur of the 
 Calton Hill, known as the Dhu Craig. Buoyed up by the 
 hope that a French fleet would yet appear in the Firth of 
 Forth, Grange still continued stubborn, and hung out a red 
 banner " denouncing war and defiance," from St David's tower, 
 the highest point in the castle. The assault began on the 21st 
 of May, and, when for the first time the terrors of a siege were 
 realised, the shrieks of the women rose from the doomed 
 stronghold. The batteries told with deadly effect : St David's 
 tower fell, the Wallace tower followed, and before many days 
 the prediction of Knox was fulfilled that the castle walls would 
 run down " like a sandy brae." The position of the besieged 
 was now desperate : the wells within the castle were choked, 
 provisions failed, and mutiny at length drove Grange to sue for 
 terms. From Morton he knew that he had no mercy to 
 expect, but from Drury he might look for more consideration. 
 On the 28th a parley was demanded and granted, when Grange 
 and two others were lowered from the castle, and held an 
 interview with the English leader. Grange demanded that he 
 and all the besieged might be allowed to depart with the 
 honours of war. Drury would not act except along with 
 Morton; and Morton's reply was that all would be allowed to 
 go free save Maitland, Grange, and six other persons. In- 
 formed of these terms, the soldiers refused to continue the 
 struggle; and by sunset the castle was in the hands of Morton, 
 and the cause of Mary Stewart was lost for ever in Scot- 
 land. 
 
 The fate of Grange and Maitland could not be doubtful. 
 They above all others had been responsible for 
 the late bloodshed and suffering; and people and 
 ministers alike clamoured for their death. Both made pitiful 
 appeals to Elizabeth to intervene in their favour, but she waived 
 all responsibility, and left them at the discretion of Morton. 
 Maitland escaped the ignominy of a traitor's death. He died 
 on the 9th of July — by his own hand, it was rumoured, though
 
 160 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 the state of his health made a natural cause probable. Among 
 all the public men of Scotland his is the most singular figure; 
 and it was with mingled fear and wonder that his countrymen 
 had regarded his tortuous career and his strange ascendency 
 over his fellows. On the 3rd of August Grange was publicly 
 executed in Edinburgh, lamenting with his latest breath that he 
 had neglected the dying counsel of Knox. Before his deser- 
 tion of the king's cause he had been regarded with affection 
 and esteem by all sections of his countrymen, and even his 
 enemies never ceased to bewail his apostasy. He was Scot- 
 land's most gallant and chivalrous soldier, yet an evil fate had 
 decreed that the first and last of his public actions should 
 leave deep stains on his scutcheon. He began his career by a 
 cruel deed of violence, and he ended it by playing false to a 
 friend and confederate who had placed in him as great a trust 
 as one man can place in another'. 
 
 Morton, as vicegerent of the king, was now master of the 
 country. From foreign enemies he had nothing 
 
 '573 . 
 
 to fear, as neither England nor France was hence- 
 forward to menace Scottish independence ; nor during the first 
 years of his government had he any formidable rivals at home. 
 The leaders who had taken part in the Reformation struggle 
 had almost all gone. Moray, Maitland, and Knox were dead : 
 Argyle was soon to follow, and Chatelherault was no longer 
 heard of. To the vigour and ability of Morton's rule even his 
 enemies bore witness ; and the best proof of its success is that 
 during the whole tenure of his office there is hardly an impor- 
 tant event to chronicle. 
 
 The first duty to which he was called was the restoration of 
 
 law on the Borders, which during the late com- 
 
 motions had partially forgotten the visitations 
 
 of Moray. Proceeding to Jedburgh at the head of a host 
 
 1 Diurnal of Occurrents, 328 — 335; Calderwood, III. 281 — 287; Spottis- 
 woode, 11. 190 — 194; History of James the Sext, 140 — 1-45.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 16 1 
 
 more than 4000 strong, he met with Sir John Forster, the 
 English Warden, when he took such order that law was effec- 
 tually restored for the time. Two other proceedings of the 
 same year proved at once the vigour of Morton's rule and his 
 disregard of popular feeling. During the late civil war, as has 
 been seen, a considerable number of the citizens of Edinburgh 
 had taken part with the queen's lords and supported them both 
 with their swords and their goods. As in most of Morton's 
 public actions, he contrived to combine justice with his own 
 interest. On the double ground of being proved traitors and 
 having despoiled their loyal fellow-citizens who had quitted the 
 town, they were forced to pay heavy fines in proportion to 
 their means — the bulk of which, however, found its way into 
 his own private purse. As a further penalty, the unfortunate 
 citizens had to exhibit themselves at church, clad in black 
 gowns, which, after they had done this service, were decreed to 
 the poor of the town. 
 
 The other proceeding was on a larger scale and excited still 
 stronger feeling against the Regent. By the arrangement made 
 in 1561 one-third of the property of the ancient Church was to 
 be equally divided between the Crown and the Protestant 
 ministers. From the beginning, however, the ministers had 
 profited little by that settlement ; and during the Douglas wars 
 their position had become desperate. Not a penny of their 
 stipends was forthcoming; they subsisted only by borrowing 
 and charity; and some of them, it was said, had died in the 
 streets of hunger and cold. To remedy the evil Morton hit 
 on a notable remedy: to ensure the gathering in of the thirds 
 he had himself constituted their collector. The unfortunate 
 clergy had little reason to rejoice in the new arrangement. In 
 this case, also, Morton contrived to veil his rapacity under the 
 guise of law and justice. After retaining the proportion of the 
 third that was due to the Crown he professed that the re- 
 mainder was inadequate to maintain a minister for every 
 church, and to meet the exigencies of the case he devised an 
 11. 11
 
 102 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 ingenious expedient. He appointed one minister to do the 
 work of two, three, or four, as the case might be; and even this 
 overtasked official had little certainty that his stipend would 
 eventually be paid 1 . 
 
 The year 1575 was a memorable one, not only in the 
 government of Morton, but for the whole future of the country. 
 It saw the last notable encounter between English and Scots on 
 the Borders, the beginning of a new policy in these districts, and 
 a turning-point in the ecclesiastical development of Scotland. 
 
 In the summer of this year (July 7), the English Warden, 
 Sir John Forster, met the Scottish Warden, Sir 
 
 1575 
 
 John Carmichael, on one of those monthly days 
 of truce, appointed for the settling of disputes which had 
 arisen during the interval. The place of meeting on this 
 occasion was the Reidswire, the pass leading into Redesdale 
 from the northern slopes of the Carter Fell, in the range of the 
 Cheviots. Everything passed off well till near the close of the 
 conference, when Carmichael demanded that a certain English- 
 man should be placed in his hands till he made restitution to a 
 Scot whom he had injured. Forster refused ; high words 
 arose ; and a fray began by a flight of arrows from the English 
 bowmen. The Scots being outnumbered were forced to give 
 ground, but being joined by a detachment from Jedburgh they 
 renewed the fight with such effect that they drove the enemy 
 across the march, slew many, and took captive several of the 
 English leaders. Though the victory was flattering to Scottish 
 pride, it placed Morton in an embarrassing position with 
 Elizabeth, whose favour it was always his object to cultivate. 
 By his dexterous dealing, however, he contrived to make the 
 untoward event the means of drawing closer the bonds between 
 himself and the English queen 2 . 
 
 1 Spottiswoode, 11. 194—196; Hist, of James the Sext, 146—148. 
 
 2 Caldervvood, in. -547; Hist, of James the Sext, 146; Spottiswoode, 
 11. 198; Diurnal of Occurrents, 348, 9. This fray is celebrated in the 
 Ballad of The Raid of the Reidsivire.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 163 
 
 The affair of the Reidswire doubtless quickened the 
 energetic action which Morton now took with regard to 
 the whole government of the Scottish Border. The policy 
 he adopted implied the extermination or exile of every. 
 Borderer who was not content to be a law-abiding subject. 
 The means he took to effect these ends, though not imme- 
 diately attended with complete success, were eventually to 
 make the Border as peaceful as the neighbourhood of the 
 capital. The difficulty of dealing with the Borderers had been 
 that when they took refuge in their swires or passes they could 
 safely defy the terrors of the law. By the systematic exaction 
 of hostages, however, and the imposition of heavy fines, 
 Morton put a bridle on the Border chieftains against which 
 they chafed in vain. Experience had also shown that inter- 
 mittent expeditions, even when as formidable as those of the 
 Regent Moray, were insufficient to establish lasting order in 
 the unruly districts. With the consent of the Privy Council, 
 therefore, Morton established a standing force which should be 
 kept together as long as it was necessary and be maintained by 
 the contributions of the tax-paying subjects of the realm. 
 Continued and developed by James VI, this policy at length 
 accomplished the work which had proved a task beyond the 
 power of Morton's most vigorous predecessors 1 . 
 
 "In the Church this year [1575J," says Archbishop 
 Spottiswoode, "began the innovations to break forth that 
 to this day have kept it in a continual unquietness 2 ." 
 Since the Convention at Leith in 1572, when a pseudo- 
 Episcopacy received the sanction of the State, the ministers 
 had displayed a growing discontent with the results of 
 that settlement. It had made their incomes neither more 
 secure nor more liberal, and above all it was surely tending 
 towards the subordination of the Church to the State. As it 
 happened, they now found a leader who by his vigour and 
 
 1 J'ii:y Council Register, II. pp. ix. <.:i seq. 
 8 Spottiswoode, II. 200. 
 
 1 1 —2
 
 164 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 ability was to prove no unworthy successor of Knox. This 
 was the famous Andrew Melville, who in various continental 
 schools had acquired all the learning of the time, and had 
 returned to Scotland in 1574 with a prestige that at once gave 
 him a commanding position in the Church. In a General 
 Assembly held in August, 1575, chiefly through the action of 
 Melville, the question whether Episcopacy has the authority of 
 Scripture was raised and discussed. The decision was post- 
 poned till a future meeting; but the controversy had begun 
 which was to divide Protestantism in Scotland, and was to be 
 the main preoccupation of the country for more than a century 
 to come 1 . 
 
 The government of Morton had been unpopular from the 
 beginning; and, as the years proceeded, there 
 was not a class in the country which had not its 
 special grievance against him. The people bitterly complained 
 at his excessive exactions, and the ministers detested him alike 
 for his preference for Episcopacy and his niggardly and con- 
 temptuous dealings with themselves. To the majority of the 
 nobles he was equally distasteful. He suffered none of them 
 to be rapacious but himself, and he sternly restrained them 
 within the limits of the law. Two of them — the Earl of 
 Athole, and Colin, 6th Earl of Argyle, brother of the con- 
 federate of Moray — were the chief instruments of his fall. 
 In the course of a clan dispute, these nobles had threatened the 
 peace of the country; and Morton prepared to deal with his 
 usual vigour in the case of both. Having learned his intention 
 the two patched up their quarrel, and concerted a course of 
 action that should put it out of his power to do them harm. 
 As it happened, the young king was in the hands of those who 
 detested Morton, and were eager for his dismissal from power. 
 James was not yet thirteen and could only be a tool of those 
 who had charge of him. Two men, his custodian, Alexander 
 
 1 Calderwood, ill. 3+7-355; Spottiswoode, II. 200, 201.
 
 Chap, iv] James VI 165 
 
 Erskine, and his teacher, George Buchanan, are named as his 
 chief prompters in the action that was now taken. Against 
 the formidable array of his enemies Morton found that resist- 
 ance was vain, and he took the most dignified course that was 
 open to him : he sent in his resignation to the king. The 
 offer was promptly accepted, and on the 12th of March, 1578, 
 proclamation was made at Edinburgh that Morton was no 
 longer Regent 1 . 
 
 According to a contemporary, Morton "had bent his mind 
 upon two purposes : the one was to administer justice to all 
 men, and to punish the trespasser rather by his goods than by 
 death ; the other was to heap up a great treasure, however it 
 might be obtained." His rule had covered one of the most 
 calamitous periods of the national history, yet we have conclu- 
 sive testimony that neither civil war nor private feuds had 
 checked the general development of the country. Killigrew, 
 the English agent, twice visited Scotland during the regency 
 of Morton — in November, 1572, and in June, 1574. At the 
 time of his first visit the Castle of Edinburgh had not yet 
 surrendered, and the king's and queen's parties still divided 
 the country ; yet even in these circumstances he was struck by 
 the indications of a prosperous and energetic people. On his 
 second visit these signs of prosperity were still more manifest : 
 the people, he says, had forgotten their late miseries, they had 
 become "lusty and independent," and boasted that their 
 friendship had been courted by so many foreign countries. 
 
 Of legislation during the period there is nothing important to 
 relate. We have the records of four Parliaments or Conven- 
 tions that met during Morton's regency ; but their Acts, like 
 those of the Privy Council during the same period, were chiefly 
 confined to questions bearing directly on the strife between 
 the two parties that had distracted the kingdom. The main 
 interest of Morton's regency lies in the fact that it closes one 
 
 1 Spottiswoofle, 11. 205 208; ( alderwoodi ill. 418 4:6; Sir James 
 Melville, Memoirs,
 
 1 66 The Religious Revolution [Book v 
 
 period of Scottish history and opens another. The Protestant 
 revolution was now an accomplished fact, and the country had 
 entered on a new phase of the national development. The 
 struggle that was in the future lay between the Crown on the 
 one hand, and the Kirk supported by the majority of the 
 people on the other; and it was to be a struggle more pro- 
 tracted, more bitter, and attended by greater public calamities 
 than even that which had involved the fall of the ancient 
 national Church.
 
 1 6/ 
 
 BOOK VI. 
 
 The Crown and the Kirk. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 JAMES VI {continued), 1578—1603. 
 
 English Sovereign. French Kings. 
 
 Elizabeth 1558 — 1603. Charles IX 1560 — 1574. 
 
 Henry III 1574 — 1589. 
 
 Henry IV 1589 — 1610. 
 
 Spanish Kings. 
 Philip II ... 1556—1598. 
 Philip III ... 1598 — 1621. 
 
 I. Recovered Ascendency of Morton. 
 
 The actual reign of James VI in Scotland (1578 — 1603) is 
 one of the most critical periods in the national history. At no 
 previous time — not even during the reign of Mary Stewart — had 
 the country been so alive to its own destinies, and possessed 
 with such a haunting dread lest it should be prevented from 
 fulfilling them. With little exaggeration it might be said that 
 these twenty-five years were an actual reign of terror for that 
 majority of the nation which had cast off Rome and thrown in 
 its lot with Protestantism. The cause of this terror was two- 
 fold — a threatened danger alike from without and within. It
 
 1 68 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 was during these last years of the 16th century that the decisive 
 struggle between the two religions was fought and decided ; and 
 in this struggle it was once more the fate of Scotland to be the 
 common field of action between the contending parties. Im- 
 mediately after James's assumption of the government, Philip II, 
 the champion of Catholicism, at length found himself in a 
 position to strike that blow at England which should restore 
 the unity of Christendom. By his ascendency in the counsels 
 of France, due to the religious and dynastic wars in that 
 country, and by the extension of his dominion through the 
 acquisition of Portugal (1580) he became the master of re- 
 sources before which, as it seemed, England must inevitably 
 succumb and Protestantism along with her. As in the reign of 
 Mary Stewart, England was most vulnerable on the side of Scot- 
 land ; and, to prepare the ground for his great enterprise, Philip, 
 by spies and bribes and plots, sought to gain to his interest all 
 that in Scotland was discontented with the Protestant settle- 
 ment. The Spanish Armada failed; by the accession of 
 Henry IV Philip lost his hold of France ; the Low Countries 
 succeeded in casting off his authority ; and the decay of Spain 
 began even under his own eyes. Yet, down to the close of the 
 century, his power and his ambition were a source of alarm to 
 every Protestant power. Through all the years covered by 
 James's reign in Scotland there was a sleepless dread on the 
 part of the Protestant section of the nation lest Spanish arms 
 and Spanish policy should yet undo the work which had been 
 achieved at such a cost of confusion and strife. 
 
 This dread of a foreign enemy was intensified by the state 
 of things at home. So formidable was the party of the old 
 religion that a handful of invaders would have turned the scale 
 in their favour. Till past the year 1590, one-third of the 
 Scottish nobility were Roman Catholic, as were the majority of 
 the people in the counties of Inverness, Caithness, Sutherland, 
 Aberdeen, Moray, in Nithsdale and Wigtown. What made this 
 state of things the more alarming was the equivocal policy of
 
 Chap, i] James VI 169 
 
 the king himself. As soon as he came to the years of dis- 
 cretion, the absorbing aim of James was to be the successor of t 
 Elizabeth on the throne of England. His policy plainly showed 
 that, whichever religion could assure him of this result, to that 
 he was willing to give his adhesion. James, said a Catholic 
 spy who had been a busy agent in Scotland, would have taken 
 the Endish Crown from the hand of the devil himself. 
 
 This two-fold dread, at once of a foreign and a domestic foe, 
 bore notable results in the development of the country. To 
 this fever of apprehension was largely due that extreme assertion 
 of ecclesiastical authority which characterised the establish- 
 ment of the Presbyterian polity in Scotland. As will be seen, 
 the function that came to be discharged by the new clergy was 
 at once that of the modern press and a House of Commons. 
 To avert the danger that threatened their religion, they were 
 driven by the indifference of James to assert a power in the 
 State, of which the crisis through which the country was passing 
 is the explanation and justification. With the history of the 
 time before us, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that, if 
 Protestantism was to be saved in Scotland, it was only the 
 revolutionary fervour of men like Andrew Melville that could 
 have saved it. On the other hand, the extreme claims of the 
 ministers begot a corresponding strength of antagonism in 
 those who were opposed to them. By his own instincts and 
 the counsels of his earliest advisers, James was disposed from 
 the beginning to that ideal of kingly authority to which he 
 eventually gave such signal effect and which he bequeathed as 
 a disastrous heritage to his immediate successors. But these 
 tendencies of James received their strongest propulsion from 
 his very subjects who were most opposed to them. The ab- 
 solutism of James was forced upon him in large degree by 
 the excessive claims of the Presbyterian clergy. From the 
 antagonism which thus arose between James and the main 
 body of his people— an antagonism that rendered a settled 
 government impossible— were to follow with inevitable sequence
 
 170 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 all the memorable events of the succeeding century — the long 
 
 religious struggle in Scotland, the Civil War and Revolution in 
 
 England, and the final casting forth of the House of Stewart 
 
 by the deliberate action of the two kingdoms 1 . 
 
 Morton's resignation of the regency was proclaimed on the 
 
 1 2th of March, 1=578; and those who had dis- 
 1578 J 
 
 placed him at once took steps to secure their 
 
 victory. A new Council was formed, the membership of 
 
 which, however, did not recommend it to the strong Protestant 
 
 feeling of the country. Chief among the new Councillors were 
 
 the Earls of Argyle, Montrose, Glencairn, Athole, Eglinton, 
 
 and Caithness, the last three of whom were known to be 
 
 favourable to the old religion. Its first act was an open bid 
 
 for popular support. As the country had been suffering from 
 
 a severe dearth, it was ordained that all grain should be 
 
 threshed by the 10th of June, and that none of the lieges 
 
 should hold back more victual than would serve his family for 
 
 the space of three months. Stirling had been the head-quarters 
 
 of Morton's enemies, but after some delay the Castle of 
 
 Edinburgh, Holyrood Palace, and the Mint likewise fell into 
 
 their hands (April 1). 
 
 The relaxation from the stern rule of Morton had made 
 
 itself speedily felt. On the 17 th of March there 
 
 had been a bloody encounter in Stirling, such as 
 
 would have been visited by Morton with the severest measure of 
 
 justice. The followers of the Earl of Crawford and the Lord 
 
 Chancellor Glamis (enemies of long standing) met in one of 
 
 the narrow wynds of that town ; and in the fray that followed 
 
 1 The two chief authorities for the reign of James VI are Calderwood 
 (1575 — 1650) and Archbishop Spottiswoode (1565 — 1639) — the one repre- 
 senting the Presbyterian, the other the Episcopalian point of view. The 
 successive volumes of the Privy Council Register, enriched by Professor 
 Masson's invaluable Introductions, have thrown much fresh light on the 
 personal character and domestic policy of James. Regarding his foreign 
 negotiations and intrigues startling revelations are to be found in the two 
 volumes of Spanish State Papers (1580 — 1603), edited by Major Martin Hume.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 171 
 
 the Chancellor received a pistol-shot through the head. Men 
 began to realise that great as were the deposed Regent's faults, 
 the country had perhaps fallen into worse hands than his. 
 Morton himself, moreover, was not slow to see that, with such 
 an array of enemies in power, it was not likely that he would 
 be allowed to live and die in peace when so many old scores 
 had to be settled. His measures were soon taken, and he 
 acted with his wonted vigour and decision. In the Earl of 
 Mar, a youth of sixteen, he found a convenient instrument of 
 his purposes. The king was in Stirling in the keeping of Mar's 
 uncle, Alexander Erskine, who had been one of the chief 
 agents in effecting Morton's overthrow; but the young Earl 
 now claimed his hereditary post of guardian of the royal person. 
 On the morning of the 26th of April he ejected his uncle and 
 his following from the castle, and awaited the events that had 
 been arranged to follow. Morton, in his dying confession, 
 denied that Mar had acted at his prompting : he at least drew 
 his own profit from the opportunity now offered to him. 
 Emerging from his " Lion's Den," as his place of retirement 
 was significantly called, he appeared at Stirling on the 24th of 
 May, and with a band of supporters took up his abode in the 
 castle 1 . 
 
 With the king in his power Morton was thus once more at 
 the centre of authority, and the course of events 
 now showed that he was again the most formid- 
 able person in the country. Under the king's seal the nobility 
 were summoned to meet at Stirling on the 10th of June to 
 deliberate on the changed situation. With their respective 
 followings, all in arms, the friends and foes of Morton appeared 
 on the appointed day ; and it was only their equal strength that 
 prevented them from deciding their quarrel by the sword. Safe 
 in the possession of the king and the castle, however, the 
 advantage lay with Morton, and he was able to gain two points 
 
 1 Calderwood, m. 395 409; Spottiswoode, II. 219— 223.
 
 172 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 which placed the executive in his hands : the Privy Council 
 was to be reconstructed, and the next Parliament was to be 
 held at Stirling instead of in Edinburgh, where it had been 
 originally ordered to meet, and where for excellent reasons 
 Morton was held in special detestation. But the opposing 
 faction was numerous and powerful, and had for its leaders the 
 chief of the nobility — Athole (who had succeeded Glamis 
 as Chancellor), Argyle and Montrose, and the Lords Lindsay, 
 Maxwell, Ogilvie and Herries. From Edinburgh as their 
 stronghold these lords denounced the late proceedings of 
 Morton, and in a set proclamation declared that they would 
 take no part in a Parliament while their king was held in 
 durance and when everything was ruled at the dictation of his 
 gaoler. As neither party would give way, both prepared to try 
 the issue in the field ; and each in the name of the king 
 ordered a muster of the lieges on the 10th of March in the 
 immediate neighbourhood of Stirling. On the 12th of March 
 the two forces came face to face between Falkirk and Stirling ; 
 and the country was on the brink of another civil war. So 
 equally matched were the opposing armies, however, that 
 neither side could confidently reckon on a decisive victory ; and 
 both probably welcomed an attempt that was now made to 
 reconcile their differences. Through the good offices of two 
 leading ministers, James Lawson and David Lindsay, and the 
 English ambassador, Bowes, a compromise was effected which 
 in reality left Morton the master of the situation. Mar, the 
 tool of Morton, was continued in his charge of the king; 
 Montrose and Lindsay were to be admitted to the Privy 
 Council ; and four persons were to be chosen from either party, 
 who should seek to compose all quarrels before the 1st of May 
 in the following year. "No stir in our memory," says Arch- 
 bishop Spottiswoode, "was more happily pacified 1 ." 
 
 1 Calderwood, III. 410 — 426; Spottiswoode, II. 223 — 229; The Cor- 
 respondence of Robert Bowes (Surtees Society), pp. 6 — 8.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 173 
 
 But, in spite of their compromise, the two parties were as far 
 
 off as ever from harmonious action. In accord- 
 
 1578 
 
 ance with the late arrangement, James, or rather 
 Morton who directed him, desired the party of Athole to choose 
 their four Commissioners and to arrange for their meeting at 
 Stirling on the 20th of September. The reply amounted to a 
 defiance. They would not come to Stirling, they said, and the 
 20th of September was too early a date for the Commissioners 
 to meet. On three conditions, however, they were willing to 
 take action : if the place of meeting were Edinburgh, if they 
 were permitted to select four Commissioners out of ten nomin- 
 ated by themselves 1 , and, finally, if they were allowed to send an 
 agent to England as a representative of their interests. No 
 attention was paid to these demands; and on the 20th of 
 October Athole, Argyle, and most of their chief supporters 
 appeared at Stirling and stated their grievances. But, as 
 things now stood, their party was no longer what it had been ; 
 and they were forced to accept such terms as Morton was 
 pleased to offer. A few months later (April, 1579) an op- 
 portune event rid Morton of his most formidable enemy. 
 Immediately after a banquet at Morton's own table in Stirling, 
 the Chancellor Athole died of an illness which rumour did 
 not fail to attribute to foul play 2 . 
 
 A notable action of Morton signally proved his recovered 
 ascendency in the country — the temporary ruin 
 of the great House of Hamilton. Of the members 
 of the family who had figured in the reign of Mary, the Duke 
 of Chatelherault was dead, and his son, the Earl of Arran, 
 was incurably insane; and their House was now represented 
 by two younger brothers, Lord John Hamilton, Commendator 
 of Arbroath, and Lord Claud Hamilton, Commendator of 
 Paisley. There were various reasons why Morton should 
 desire the destruction of the family. They were dangerous 
 
 1 The len having been approved by Morton. 
 - Calderwood, III. 442; Spottiswoode, II. 263.
 
 174 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 by the greatness of their power and possessions; they were 
 obnoxious to Elizabeth, whom it was his special interest to 
 conciliate ; and their estates might enrich both himself and 
 those by whose support he maintained his authority. A 
 sufficient pretext for proceeding against them was ready to 
 hand. In the Pacification of Perth (February, 1573), to which 
 the Hamiltons had been parties, it had been expressly stated 
 that in the case of the two brothers only the general pardon 
 applied. A special charge hung over their heads which the 
 Pacification did not cover — the charge of having been parties 
 to the death of the regents Moray and Lennox. On the 
 ground that the king was now governing in his own person, 
 the Privy Council decreed (April 30) that action should be 
 taken to carry out the law against the accused brothers. By 
 the end of May the ruin of their House was complete — their 
 castles seized, their estates forfeited, and Lord John and Lord 
 Claud fugitives respectively in England and France 1 . 
 
 But this triumph was destined to be of short duration. 
 In the autumn (Sept. 8th) of 1579, a personage arrived 
 in Scotland, who was to be the evil genius of 
 Morton, and who, during the few years he was 
 to spend in the country, was to play a part which gives him a 
 place among the remarkable figures in the national history 3 . 
 This was Esme Stewart, Lord of Aubigny in Berri, son of John 
 Stewart, and nephew of the regent Lennox, the king's grand- 
 father. By his character and the special mission on which he 
 came, DAubigny exerted an influence both on James and on 
 Scotland which was to have important results for the general 
 history of Great Britain. As he is described by a contemporary 
 diarist, " He was a man of comely proportion, civil behaviour, 
 red-bearded, honest in conversation 3 ." Of middle age and 
 
 1 Privy Council Register, in. 115 et seq. 
 
 a Me came by James's own imitation. — Korbes-Luith, Narratives of 
 Catholics, pp. 134 — 140. 
 
 3 Moysie's Memoirs (Maitland Club), p. 25.
 
 Chap, ij James VI 175 
 
 graced with all the accomplishments of the Court of France, 
 he at once gained an ascendency over his youthful kinsman 
 which grew with every year of his sojourn. On James, both 
 as a man and as a king, his influence was of equally evil effect. 
 D'Aubigny came from the Court of Henry III, the most 
 depraved of all the Valois, and he and his train together made 
 James as precocious in vice as he was in intelligence and 
 attainments. Beyond all his predecessors Henry III was 
 seeking to be an absolute king; and D'Aubigny had little 
 difficulty in convincing James how excellent an example this 
 was to follow. But D'Aubigny came on a more specific 
 mission than merely to advance his own fortunes by debauching 
 the mind of James. He came, as we shall see, as the ex 
 press emissary of the Guises to work by all the means in his 
 power for the restoration of Mary Stewart and of the ancient 
 religion 1 . 
 
 II. Ascendency of Lennox. 
 
 For the next three years the interest of Scottish history ' 
 
 mainly centres in D'Aubigny. He had come at 
 
 */ ■, , , • 1580 
 
 an opportune moment. Morton regarded him 
 
 at first with suspicion and afterwards with detestation, but 
 
 Morton had many enemies who gladly welcomed his formidable 
 
 rival ; and by the liberal distribution of French gold D'Aubigny 
 
 speedily secured a powerful following. But the strength of his 
 
 position lay in his ascendency over the king, whose good will 
 
 towards his kinsman apparently knew no bounds. Within a 
 
 year after his coming, D'Aubigny received the rich abbacy of 
 
 Arbroath, the Earldom of Lennox, and the custodianship of 
 
 1 Calderwood, nr. 456; Spottiswoode, 11. 266. — D'Aubigny spoke no 
 language but French. — Letters and Memorials oj Cardinal Allen (Nutt, 
 P- ' '7-
 
 176 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Dumbarton Castle, "the fetters of Scotland," as one of its 
 keepers had called it. But Lennox, as he is now to be styled, 
 had to reckon with two hostile forces, which eventually proved 
 too strong for him, and which were to ruin himself and bring 
 to naught all his schemes. The one was the Scottish Reformed 
 Clergy and the other the Queen of England. 
 
 For more than two centuries the Kings of Scotland had to 
 fight for their prerogatives against a turbulent 
 nobility : they had now to face another power 
 equally formidable and equally persistent, and which in the 
 end was to triumph over them in the long struggle. The new 
 enemy was the Scottish nation itself, led and directed by their 
 spiritual teachers. Unlike the old Church, the Protestant 
 ministers refused to take a direct part in the deliberations of 
 the Estates ; but this was from no conviction that secular affairs 
 were not their concern. In point of fact, throughout the period 
 ■ with which we are dealing, they exercised an influence in public 
 affairs as great as had ever been exercised by the Church of 
 Rome. They exerted their influence through those General 
 Assemblies which, in far greater degree than the Estates, 
 expressed the mind and will of the most strenuous section 
 of the people. There were many reasons for the extraordinary 
 authority that came to be wielded by these Assemblies of the 
 Church. Laymen of all ranks sat in them and in greater 
 numbers than the ministers themselves : in the first General 
 Assembly, that of 1560, out of 41 members 35 were laymen. 
 They met several times a year and always on the same occasion 
 as the Conventions of the Estates, the Acts of which they 
 freely criticised, frequently making suggestions which were 
 but veiled commands. By two privileges of their order, also, 
 the ministers were enabled to enforce their desires with con- 
 vincing effect : they possessed the power of excommunication, 
 which was dreaded by the greatest nobles in the country, and 
 from their pulpits they had the opportunity of reminding their 
 congregations of their duties as citizens as well as Christians.
 
 Chap, i] James VI \yy 
 
 It was with this formidable body that Lennox had to 
 reckon in the furtherance of the ends for which 
 he had come. What these ends were the 
 ministers were not slow to discover. Where we now have 
 full knowledge, they could only suspect ; but they knew enough 
 to be aware that if the fascinating stranger had his way, their 
 religion and all they had most at heart would not long have 
 a place in Scotland. So freely did they express their opinions 
 both as to his religion and his influence over the king that he 
 speedily found it necessary to come to an understanding with 
 them. There was but one way of laying their suspicions 
 asleep — to abjure the faith in which he had been reared, and 
 to let the world know that he had done so. He played the 
 part of the penitent convert with much thoroughness. He 
 openly declared his "calling" in the church of St Giles, he 
 wrote a public letter to the General Assembly offering to 
 perform any duty it might prescribe, and finally requested that 
 a minister might be placed in his house to devote himself 
 wholly to his spiritual needs. His professions were taken for 
 what they were worth, and it was with ever-growing suspicion 
 and dread that the ministers followed the gradual development 
 of his schemes'. 
 
 The ascendency of Lennox in the councils of James was 
 hardly less dreaded by Elizabeth than by the 
 Scottish clergy. If Lennox should prevail in 
 Scotland, there would be an open door for any enemy who 
 might choose to enter England. To counteract Lennox, 
 therefore, she sent down Robert Bowes as her open repre- 
 sentative, and as a secret agent, Captain Errington, both of 
 whom set themselves industriously to work in the interest of 
 England. A rumoured plot of Lennox threatened to bring the 
 worst to pass. This plot was to decoy James to Dumbarton 
 Castle and thence to ship him to France, where a French 
 
 1 Calderwood, in. 468, 477. 
 
 B. S. II. 12
 
 178 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 marriage and a French education should repeat the history of 
 his mother. As a counterplot, Elizabeth conceived the scheme 
 of cutting off Lennox or conveying James to England. There 
 was but one man in Scotland who could successfully carry out 
 this scheme — her faithful ally, the Earl of Morton. But 
 Morton's power was no longer what it had been in the country. 
 Lennox had displaced him at the Court, and, on the other 
 hand, he had not the support of the ministers, who should 
 have now been his natural allies. On one condition only he 
 agreed to undertake the work which Elizabeth suggested to 
 him — that she should support his action with an adequate 
 armed force from England. After long delay she committed 
 herself to this condition, though with no intention of fulfilling 
 it ; and in an evil day for himself, Morton undertook to carry 
 out his part in the compact. His treasonable dealings came 
 to the knowledge of Lennox, who straightway had him at his 
 mercy. Lennox's fortunes were now higher than ever. Dum- 
 barton Castle had been placed in his keeping, and that of 
 Edinburgh was now in the hands of one of his creatures. In 
 September a new office was created for him, which made him 
 virtually supreme at the Court. The office was that of High 
 Chamberlain and First Gentleman of the Chamber ; and there 
 went with it the command of thirty gentlemen, all devoted to 
 himself, who were to form a standing guard of the king's 
 person. Among these gentlemen was one, who, first as the 
 tool of Lennox and afterwards as his rival and successor in 
 James's favour, was to play a part as mischievous as his own. 
 This was Captain James Stewart of Bothwellmuir, second son 
 of Andrew, Lord Ochiltree, and brother-in-law of John Knox. 
 He had received a learned education, had served as a soldier 
 of fortune in Sweden, and was in all respects a person fitted 
 for desperate courses. Of "princely presence," he possessed 
 an audacity and a fertility of device which admirably comple- 
 mented the smoother methods of the plausible Lennox. It
 
 Chap, i] James VI 179 
 
 was with the aid of this man that Lennox now set himself to 
 work the ruin of Morton 1 . 
 
 On the last day of December, 1580, Captain Stewart 
 appeared before the Privy Council, then sitting i 
 
 in Holyrood Palace, and throwing himself on 
 his knees before the king, charged Morton to his face with 
 foreknowledge of the murder of Darnley. Morton haughtily 
 replied that he was ready to answer the charge before any 
 Court his Majesty might appoint. That night and the next 
 day, Morton was warded in his own apartment ; on the 2nd of 
 January he was lodged in Edinburgh Castle, and on the 18th 
 he was conveyed to the still safer hold of Dumbarton. It was 
 a dangerous game that Lennox and Stewart were playing, as 
 they were soon made aware. The Earl of Angus, Morton's 
 nephew, gathered a force of 2000 men, and it was only at 
 the special request of Morton that he abstained from attempt- 
 ing his rescue. The ministers, also, now remembered that 
 Morton had after all been one of the chief instruments in 
 securing the establishment of their religion, and freely de- 
 nounced the doings of James and his advisers. Rumours of 
 Jesuit priests moving about the country filled them with a 
 vague alarm, which was partially allayed by an audacious step, 
 doubtless prompted by Lennox himself. A new confession of 
 faith, known as the " Negative Confession/' and to become 
 famous at a later day, was ordered to be drawn up ; and the 
 king and the courtiers set the example of publicly sub- 
 scribing it. 
 
 But the quarter from which Lennox had most to fear was 
 England, since the fall of Morton must mean „ 
 
 the triumph in Scotland of all that Elizabeth 
 dreaded 2 . Elizabeth was furious at the proceedings of the 
 
 1 Howes, pp. 22 et seq. ; Spottiswoode, II. 268 ; Reg. of Privy Council, 
 Vol. 111. pp. 316— 323. 
 
 3 Bowes, pp. 158 et seq.; Calderwood, III. 481 — 483; Sputtiswon>lc, 
 11. 271, 2. 
 
 1 2 —2
 
 180 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Scottish Court ; she sent down Randolph to threaten or flatter 
 James out of his present policy, and she gave orders that an 
 English force should be ready to enter Scotland if her de- 
 mands were rejected. As her past relations to Scotland had 
 shown, however, it was improbable that she would carry out 
 her threats ; and Lennox steadily went on his way. Under the 
 pretext of quieting the Borders, but really of providing for 
 eventualities against England, all the lieges between sixteen 
 and sixty were charged to be ready (February u) to follow the 
 king on six days' warning. A shameless proceeding of the 
 Court showed how entirely James was in the hands of Lennox. 
 Captain James Stewart, on the ground that he was a kinsman 
 to the insane Earl of Arran, had been appointed his tutor or 
 guardian, and in April, on the monstrous pretext that he was 
 the rightful heir of the House of Hamilton, he was put in full 
 possession of the title and estates of the unhappy Earl. In 
 these circumstances, the fate of Morton could not be long in 
 suspense 1 . 
 
 On the 27th of May he was brought from Dumbarton to 
 8l Edinburgh; and four days later his trial took 
 
 place in the Tolbooth. Among his judges were 
 the Earls of Argyle, Montrose, Sutherland, Rothes, and the 
 Lords Ogilvy, Maxwell and Seton— most of whom were his 
 deadly enemies. The crime with which he was charged 
 showed that his death was but a part of Lennox's conspiracy 
 for the restoration of Mary and Catholicism. The charge 
 which lay readiest to hand and which could have been con- 
 clusively proved against him was his late treasonable dealings 
 with England ; but the actual ground of his condemnation was 
 that he had been "art and part" in the murder of Darnley. 
 By condemning him on this ground, however, a clever stroke 
 was done in the interests of Mary : the world was thus in- 
 formed that one of her chief accusers was himself guilty of the 
 
 1 Calderwooil, ill. 487, 555.
 
 Chap, i] James VI iS i 
 
 crime he had laid to her charge. His trial was an idle form ; 
 but he had himself been a man of blood, and there was 
 a certain retributive justice in all the circumstances of his 
 death. He met his end with the resolution that had distin- 
 guished all the actions of his life. During his last night he 
 was visited by two ministers, who drew from him a confession 
 regarding the various charges which had been alleged against 
 him. Of the special charge on which he was condemned he 
 solemnly declared his innocence ; he had known of the plot 
 for Darnley's murder, but he had been neither art nor part in 
 the deed. The day following his trial he was executed at the 
 market-cross, and his head stuck on the highest point of the 
 Tolbooth, where it remained till another revolution avenged 
 him on his principal enemy. He is one of the grimmest 
 figures even of the grim race from which he sprang — profligate, 
 merciless, unscrupulous, yet he was not a mere lawless despe- 
 rado. His conduct of the regency proved that he had the 
 capacity and aims of a statesman, and his lifelong fidelity to 
 Protestantism and the English alliance gives him a place next 
 to Moray and Knox among the moving forces of his time 1 . 
 The year of Morton's death was a memorable one in the 
 
 history of the Scottish Church. We have seen 
 
 1581 
 that in the year 1575 Andrew Melville had 
 
 raised the question of the Scriptural authority for Episcopacy. 
 Since that date the question had not been allowed to sleep. 
 In successive Assemblies the subject had come up for debate, 
 and at Dundee, in July 1580, Episcopacy was formally con- 
 demned — all who held the office of bishop being ordered at 
 once to demit it. But this was only the beginning of the work 
 that the ministers had taken in hand. Two things yet remained 
 to be done before the Church could discharge its trust to the 
 nation ■ an efficient polity and an adequate patrimony were 
 still things to seek, in spite of all the labours of Knox and his 
 
 1 Calderwood, in. 557 et scq.; SpoUiswoode, II. 276—279; Rtg. oj 
 Privy Council, Vol. in. 387, 8.
 
 1 82 The Crown and the Kirk |_Book vi 
 
 fellow-workers. It is in connection with the attainment of 
 these ends that the Assembly which met in Glasgow in April, 
 1 58 1, is memorable in Scottish Church history. In accordance 
 with a letter from the king, it established those Courts, known 
 as Presbyteries, which have given its distinctive name to the 
 Protestantism of Scotland. Equally important was another 
 Act of the same Assembly : it gave its definitive sanction to 
 the famous Second Book of Discipline, the consideration of 
 which had long occupied the leaders of the Church. 
 
 As was to be expected from the conditions in which it origin- 
 ated, the Second Book of Discipline has a specific character 
 of its own. The First Book is an ideal sketch of a Christian 
 Commonwealth such as commended itself to Knox and his 
 brethren in the first zeal of the Reformation ; the Second is 
 the draft of a practical polity which to the mind of its authors 
 was at once a logical deduction from the teaching of Scripture 
 and the most efficient machinery for combating the evils and 
 dangers which beset the Reformed Church. But it is only 
 so far as it bears on secular affairs that we are here concerned 
 with its contents. By their insistence on two points, the authors 
 of the Book threw down a challenge which James was not slow 
 to take up, and which was to evoke that long controversy 
 between Church and State, which is the beginning and end of 
 Scottish ecclesiastical history. They condemned Episcopacy, 
 on which James had already set his heart ; and they laid down 
 what they deemed an axiom — that to Church and State belong 
 distinct jurisdictions within which neither may invade the other. 
 Within four months of the Assembly's sanction of the Book, 
 the first of these affirmations was contested by the king. In 
 June, James Boyd, archbishop of Glasgow, died ; and Lennox, 
 following the example of Morton, presented the benefice to 
 James Montgomery, minister of Stirling — the arrangement 
 being that out of the emoluments of the see Montgomery 
 should annually receive "one thousand pounds Scots with 
 some horse, corn, and poultry." The simony was unblushing
 
 Chap, i] James Vf 183 
 
 and the presentee was contemptible ; and James and the 
 ministers were at once involved in a quarrel which was to have 
 its ludicrous as well as its serious aspects 1 . 
 
 The death of Morton left Lennox and Arran supreme in 
 the councils of the country. In the case of 
 
 i*>8i 
 
 each a further addition was made to his private 
 fortune. Lennox was promoted to a dukedom ; and Arran, 
 by a scandalous union, was married to the Countess of March, 
 who had been divorced from her husband for misconduct with 
 her new husband. The two allies, however, did not work in 
 perfect harmony. Arran was not the man to play a secondary 
 part, and on the ground of his descent from James II he 
 haughtily claimed precedence of his former patron. Fortu- 
 nately for the country there was a deeper ground of dissension 
 between them : Arran was a Protestant and favourable to 
 England, while Lennox was a Catholic and looked to a Catholic 
 power for support against all his enemies in Scotland. It was 
 independently of Arran, therefore, that Lennox now threw 
 himself into his great scheme for restoring Mary Stewart and 
 the Catholic religion. As his conspiracy is now revealed by 
 certain recent publications, we see at once the explanation and 
 the justification of the revolution which overthrew him. 
 
 During the year 1581, Scotland became a special object 
 of attention on the part of the King of Spain. 
 It had been borne in upon him that if he were 
 to reach the heart of England, the blow must be struck through 
 Scotland. About this period Philip had attained the height of 
 his predominance in Europe. In 1580 he had acquired Portugal; 
 his great general Parma was steadily making way in the Low 
 Countries ; and through the religious and dynastic dissensions 
 in France he had acquired an ascendency in that country by 
 an alliance with the family of Guise. It was in concert with 
 the Duke of Guise, the patron of Lennox, that Philip, in the 
 
 1 < alderwood, m. 467,. 515, 577; Spottiswoode, 11. 272, 281, a.
 
 184 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 autumn of 1581, began operations in Scotland through the 
 agency of Mendoza, his ambassador in London \ In September 
 a secular priest, named William Watts, was despatched to Scot- 
 land to feel the mind of the country. The report returned by 
 Watts was highly encouraging. He had a secret interview with 
 the king, and at Seton House he met a number of nobles, all 
 of whom expressed themselves favourable to Mary and the 
 Pope. The list he gave of these nobles was formidable : they 
 were Lennox himself, the Earls of Huntly, Eglinton and 
 Caithness, and Lords Seton, Hume, Ogilvy and Ker of 
 Fernihurst. 
 
 A Jesuit priest, Father William Holt, sent northward 
 later in the year, was able to give a still more encouraging 
 statement regarding Catholic prospects in -Scotland. He had 
 interviews with the lords named above, who unanimously 
 pledged themselves to work for the following objects — the 
 conversion of the king, or, failing his conversion, his deposition 
 or forcible conveyance from the country. With the assistance 
 of 2000 foreign troops they undertook to arrange all matters 
 happily for the head of the Church. A still more important 
 mission (Feb 1582) was that of two Scottish Jesuits, Fathers 
 William Crichton and Edmund Hay, sent by the Pope and the 
 General of the Society of Jesuits. Crichton, we are told, was 
 smuggled into the king's palace, and lay for three days con- 
 cealed in a secret chamber. But the chief result of Crichton's 
 mission was a letter he bore from Lennox, containing a definite 
 pledge to the Pope, Philip, and Guise. On condition that 
 20,000 men should be landed in Scotland in the autumn, and 
 an adequate sum paid for their support, Lennox undertook to 
 do his utmost to effect the desired, revolution 2 . 
 
 1 In two articles in the Edinburgh Review (Oct. 1893 and April, 1898) 
 will be found the fullest account we possess regarding the Catholic intrigues 
 in Scotland. 
 
 2 Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, pp. xxxiii. et seq., 114 et 
 seq.; Spanish State Papers, Vol. III. (Elizabeth), pp. 256 et seq.
 
 Chap. iJ James VI 185 
 
 The ministers could not know the details of these machina- 
 tions, but they were fully aware that such 
 machinations were in progress. They knew that 
 Romish emissaries were in the country j they suspected that 
 James had dealings with them ; and they were certain that 
 Lennox was the centre of a great Catholic conspiracy. The 
 alarm excited by this knowledge was intensified by the general 
 tendency of affairs in the country. The great controversy 
 between James and the ministers had already begun. James 
 now took up the ground from which he never, with his own 
 consent, receded— that the Church should be ruled by bishops, 
 and that it belonged to him to appoint them. With equal 
 stubbornness the majority of the ministers declared that there 
 should be no bishops, and that the king had no right to 
 interfere with spiritual affairs. The question at issue took 
 practical shape in the case of Montgomery, Lennox's presentee 
 to the archbishopric of Glasgow. In spite of the threats of 
 Lennox and his council, the Church refused to acknowledge 
 Montgomery's appointment. While James threatened the 
 ministers, the ministers threatened Montgomery ; and the issue 
 was that the Council assigned him the emoluments of the see 
 while he was still under sentence of excommunication. Other 
 proceedings of the Court confirmed the fears of all who ap- 
 proved the Protestant settlement. Especial favour was being 
 shown to the old supporters of Mary : Lord Maxwell was made 
 Warden of the West March, and promoted to the Earldom of 
 Morton ; Lords Doune, Ogilvie and Seton were admitted to 
 the Privy Council ; and Ker of Fernihurst and Sir James Balfour 
 of Pittendreich, both notorious adherents of Mary, were per- 
 mitted to return from exile 1 . 
 
 It was during these last months of the ascendency of 
 Lennox that the Stewart absolutism and Presby- 
 terian Hildebrandism alike took that definite 
 
 1 Register oj Privy Council, Vol. ill. \>. xli.
 
 A 
 
 f 
 
 1 86 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 form by which they are known in history. Andrew Melville 
 doubtless returned from Geneva with high notions of spiritual 
 authority ; but it is in the special circumstances in which he 
 found the country that we have the explanation of those 
 extreme claims which he and his fellow-ministers put forward 
 in regard to the mutual relations of Church and State. James 
 under the direction of his present advisers was assuming 
 powers which had never been exercised by his predecessors. 
 By open policy and secret intrigue he appeared to be steadily 
 working for the overthrow of the existing religious settlement. 
 The methods he was pursuing in the setting up of Episcopacy 
 were such as of themselves discredited that form of Church 
 polity, and drove the ministers into stronger and stronger 
 assertions regarding its iniquity and inexpediency. Mont- 
 gomery, as his career showed, was unworthy to be the minister 
 of any Church ; and Lennox's appropriation of the fruits of 
 his see was a scandal that shocked the conscience of the 
 country. Moreover, by the whole course of James's present 
 and subsequent conduct it was evident that his preference for 
 Episcopacy was mainly dictated by the fact that, through the 
 agency of bishops of his own choosing, he would be materially 
 assisted towards the attainment of that extended prerogative 
 which was his persistent aim from the moment he began to 
 think for himself. In the twofold dread of Rome and "the 
 bloody guillie 1 of absolute authority," Presbyterianism came to 
 birth in Scotland and took the stern lineaments with which the 
 world is familiar. Calvinism by the characters which it formed 
 saved Protestantism in Europe ; and with equal truth it may 
 be said that Presbyterianism saved it in Scotland. 
 
 i A large knife. — This is Andrew Melville's famous phrase. (Calder- 
 wood, in. 622.)
 
 Chap, ij James VI 187 
 
 III. The Ruthven Raid. 
 
 Had Lennox been as resolute as he was astute, he might 
 have maintained his position for at least a few 
 years longer ; but it was now to be proved that 
 he had not the nerve to face a revolution. He had the king 
 in his power — which, as had so often been proved in the past, 
 made him the most important person in the country — and he 
 had the support of the majority of the nobles, both Catholic 
 and Protestant. On the other hand, public opinion directed 
 by the ministers was growing more and more exasperated at his 
 courses ; and he had made a deadly enemy of the Earl of 
 Gowrie, who had been one of his chief instruments in effecting 
 the fall of Morton. Elizabeth, also, was intriguing with the 
 exiled Earl of Angus with the object of overthrowing Lennox, 
 though as usual she avoided committing herself to a definite 
 line of action. By the close of summer the relations of the 
 two parties were such that some bold stroke was needed to 
 settle which of the two was to have the direction of affairs. 
 Such a stroke Lennox now prepared to strike. It was in 
 Edinburgh that he had met with the strongest opposition ; and 
 he conceived a scheme which, if successfully carried out, would 
 have made him master of the city. On the 27th of August, a 
 strong force was to seize the gates and to hold the streets, 
 when he would demand the surrender of his most formidable 
 enemies among the citizens and the ministers. Before this 
 plan could be effected, however, a revolution had taken place 
 which cut short his career in Scotland 1 . 
 
 In the beginning of August James had been pursuing his 
 favourite amusement of hunting in the district 
 of Athole, and on the 22nd he had returned to 
 the town of Perth. Here he was visited by the Earls of Mar 
 and Gowrie, the Lords Lindsay, Boyd, and others, who by 
 
 1 Calderwood, ill, O35, 6; Bowes, 177.
 
 1 88 The Crown and tJte Kirk [Book vi 
 
 constraint or persuasion induced him to accompany them to 
 the Castle of Ruthven or Huntingtower, about three miles to 
 the north-west of Perth. A few days earlier, they had been 
 informed through the English agent Bowes that Lennox meant 
 to place them in ward and to bring them to trial for their share 
 in the murder of Riccio, and they had determined to anticipate 
 him. When the next morning James was about to step out of 
 doors, he was told that this would not be permitted ; and 
 when he began to cry in his alarm and vexation, the Master of 
 Glamis is reported to have exclaimed : " Better bairns greet 
 [cry] than bearded men" — words which James is said never to 
 have forgotten or forgiven. Such was the famous Raid of 
 Ruthven, which for the next ten -months was to place the chief 
 power in the hands of those who had effected it 1 . 
 
 An unguarded step of Arran rid the insurgents of their 
 most formidable enemy. Trusting to his old 
 alliance with Gowrie, who had worked with him 
 for the destruction of Morton, he presented himself at Ruthven 
 Castle with only two attendants, when he found that he had 
 walked into the lion's mouth. Gowrie and his friends had now 
 only Lennox to reckon with, and they proceeded to take the 
 invariable measures in such junctures. They issued two 
 proclamations, in one of which James was made to declare 
 himself a perfectly free agent, while in the other were set forth 
 all the enormities of the late government. By a letter from 
 the king's own hand Lennox was peremptorily told that he 
 must leave the country before the 20th of September. At 
 first, it appeared as if Lennox would make the attempt to 
 reinstate himself by force. Many barons, with their respective 
 followings, gathered round him in Edinburgh; and civil war 
 was imminent. But his courage failed him, and he became an 
 object of contempt to his closest adherents. Public opinion in 
 the chief towns was unmistakeably with the revolutionary party. 
 
 1 Bowes, 1 78; Calderwood, III. 637; Spottiswoodc, 11. 290, r , Spanish 
 State Papers, m. 506 et seq.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 189 
 
 John Duric, a minister who had been expelled from Edinburgh 
 for his frank criticism of the late government, was recalled and 
 escorted through the town by a crowd of 2000 persons, singing 
 in four parts the 124th Psalm — an event which specially dis- 
 concerted the duke. A General Assembly which met in Edin- 
 burgh on the 9th of October gave its sanction and approval to 
 the Raid, describing it as "the late action of reformation." 
 Still Lennox lingered on, and from Dumbarton Castle, whither 
 he had retired for safety, he strove to recover his position in 
 the country. The failure of a desperate plot to seize the king 
 and cut off the Earl of Mar and others convinced him at last 
 that his fortunes in Scotland were desperate; and on the 20th 
 of December he withdrew by way of England to Erance, 
 where he died in the following May. His great conspiracy 
 had utterly failed, but he left an evil legacy behind him. He 
 had given a direction to James's character and policy of which 
 the House of Stewart and the peoples of two kingdoms were to 
 know the disastrous results 1 . 
 
 Lennox having gone, the new government was relieved 
 from immediate and pressing danger. Its policy, 
 both in domestic and foreign affairs, was the 
 exact reverse of that of its predecessors in authority. The 
 Earl of Morton (Lord Maxwell) was removed from the Warden- 
 ship of the West Borders, and the laird of Johnston put in his 
 place. Friendship with England was assiduously cultivated ; 
 and ambassadors were sent to effect a permanent understanding 
 between the two countries. James had hitherto besought 
 Elizabeth in vain to put him in possession of his grandfather's 
 lands in England. The demand was now renewed ; but she 
 
 1 Calderwood, HI. 637—693; Spottiswoode, II. 290—7; Bowes, 180 
 etseq.— Lennox's own account of the Ruthven Raid and its sequel will be 
 found in the Spanish State Papas (ill. 438). From this account we learn 
 that James was in secret communication with Lennox till the moment of 
 his departure. There is also revealed a desperate plot on the part of 
 Lennox to recover James from the hands of the Ruthven Raiders,
 
 190 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 still refused to give them up, and the negotiations led to no 
 definite result. Gowrie and his coadjutors, in their policy 
 towards the Church, displayed their gratitude for the support 
 of the ministers : no previous government, indeed, had shown 
 such favour to the Protestant cause. The thirds of benefices, 
 with which the regent Morton had played fast and loose, were 
 restored to the Church ; the laws against Papists were renewed ; 
 and perfect liberty was granted to the ministers to speak their 
 minds freely on public affairs. In these altered circumstances, 
 the recalcitrant Montgomery made penitent confession of his 
 offences and sought to effect his peace with his brethren. Had 
 the government of the Ruthven Raid maintained its authority 
 for ten years instead of ten months, Church and State in 
 Scotland would have had a different history ; but from the 
 beginning, as we shall see, it had rested on a foundation of 
 sand. 
 
 Before Lennox had left Scotland, a plan was secretly 
 arranged by which James should rid himself of 
 his gaolers, and Lennox be recalled. To work 
 towards this end two French ambassadors, La Mothe Fenelon 
 and De Maineville, appeared in succession at the Scottish 
 Court in January of 1583. The ministers, who knew that the 
 presence of these strangers could bode them no good, inveighed 
 against their reception ; and their indignation rose to its height 
 when a public banquet was given to Fenelon on the eve of his 
 departure. As we are now aware, they were justified to the 
 full in their suspicion and alarm. Fe'nelon brought an offer of 
 an annual pension to James, and on leaving Scotland he went 
 direct to Mary in her English prison. But it was De Maineville 
 who most efficiently prepared the ground for the new revolution 
 that was imminent. He remained in Scotland till the 20th of 
 April, and, though he was vigilantly looked after by the English 
 agent Bowes, he employed his time to such good purpose that 
 he left all things ripe for the moment when James should find 
 himself free. The opportunity was not long in coming. James,
 
 Chap. iJ James VI 191 
 
 whose slippery ways were already the admiration of veteran 
 diplomatists, gradually led his guardians to believe that he was 
 perfectly satisfied with his present position ; and they ceased to 
 watch him with the same jealous care. On the 27th of June, 
 as the king was walking in the park at Falkland, a letter from 
 his grand-uncle, the Earl of March, was put into his hands. It 
 told him that everything was now ready at St Andrews, and 
 that he might come when he chose. Summoning Colonel 
 Stewart, the captain of his guard, and others in attendance on 
 him, James at once rode to St Andrews, and that night was 
 safe in its castle. The next morning he was surrounded by 
 the Earls of Huntly, Crawford, Montrose, Rothes and Marischal; 
 and, of the authors of the Ruthven Raid, only the Earl of 
 Cowrie was admitted to his presence 1 . 
 
 IV. Ascendency of Arran. 
 James had now completed his eighteenth year, and his 
 
 1583 
 
 natural precocity had been quickened by all the 
 conditions of his upbringing. From this period, 
 if not earlier, he had a perfectly clear conception of the main 
 object of his desire and of the methods by which it might be 
 attained ; and that object was to be the successor of Elizabeth 
 on the throne of England. To explain his devious courses 
 towards this end, it has to be remembered that, till the moment 
 of Elizabeth's death, it was still uncertain whether he would 
 come after her. She refused to name him as her successor; 
 dynastic and religious difficulties divided English public opinion ; 
 and at one time Philip II put himself forward as his formidable 
 rival. The key to James's policy both at home and abroad is 
 to be found in the uncertainty whether Protestantism or 
 
 1 Calderwood, Hi. 698—716; Spottiswoode, II. 297—301; Bowes, 
 312 etseq.; Letters and Papers of Cardinal Allen, pp. liii. 4 14; Spanish 
 State Papers, ill. 4 1 2 et seq.
 
 192 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Catholicism was eventually to prevail in England. To make 
 sure of his mark he had to prepare for either contingency, and 
 so adroitly did he steer his course that neither Catholic nor 
 Protestant could at any moment be certain that he belonged to 
 his party. In Scotland the nation was as yet very far from 
 being completely won to Protestantism ; and if a foreign force 
 were once landed on its shores, the result could hardly have 
 been doubtful. But the probability of such an event possessed 
 the minds of Catholic and Protestant alike till the very moment 
 of James's final departure for England. In Scotland, there- 
 fore, James held the balance between the two religions as 
 evenly as lay in his power. The ministers perfectly understood 
 that James was ready to change his faith the moment he should 
 find it expedient ; and it was this knowledge that drove them to 
 that interference in public affairs which was forced upon them 
 by the constant peril of their faith. James never really broke 
 with Protestantism, even when he was deepest in the plots of 
 the Catholic powers ; but his policy of the middle course would 
 have been impossible if he had put himself in the hands of 
 Andrew Melville and his brother ministers. In his foreign 
 relations James was guided by the same motives and the same 
 principles. At this period there was a great scheme afoot in 
 which he was playing so clever a part that he won the admiration 
 of its principal promoters. The Duke of Guise or his brother, 
 the Duke of Mayenne, was to land a strong force on the coast 
 of Lancashire ; English and Scottish Catholics were to join 
 them , Elizabeth was to be put out of the way, and James and 
 his mother were to be made joint sovereigns of the two 
 countries 1 . James was well informed regarding this plot, and 
 wrote to Guise to express his good wishes for its success, yet he 
 at the same time took care that its failure should in no wise 
 compromise his chances with Elizabeth and Protestantism. It 
 was with such aims and such policy in his mind that James 
 
 1 Teulet, v. 281 et seq.; Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, pp. 
 iv. et seq. ; Spanish Slate Papers, 111. 455 et seq.
 
 Chap. iJ James VI 193 
 
 found himself his own master on his escape from the men of 
 the Ruthven Raid. 
 
 At first it seemed as if James meant to deal in a forgiving 
 spirit with all who had been connected with the ^ 
 
 Raid. On July 30 a proclamation was issued 
 offering full pardon to all who were truly penitent for their late 
 conduct. Forgetfulness of injuries, however, was not one of 
 James's virtues ; and it was not long before his real feeling was 
 unmistakeably disclosed. On the 5th of August, Arran appeared 
 at Court, and on the 23rd he took his place in the new Privy 
 Council. During the next two years he was to dominate 
 Scotland as Lennox had done before him, and his policy was 
 in almost every point the reversal of that of the late Govern- 
 ment. To crush the leaders of the Raid was the most pressing 
 business of James and his minister. This was a task, however, 
 which could not be performed at one stroke. Elizabeth was so 
 alarmed at the turn which things had taken in Scotland that 
 she even sent down her Secretary, Walsingham, to threaten or 
 cajole James into a reconciliation with the Scottish party 
 favourable to England. After a week's stay, Walsingham 
 returned with a very bad opinion of James and of the state 
 of his feelings towards England. The ministers, also, did what 
 they could to bring James and the leaders of the Raid into 
 friendly relations; but neither James nor Arran was in a humour 
 to listen to them, and all their efforts were ineffectual 1 . 
 
 An astounding document, written or authorised by James, 
 reveals at once the deep game he was playing 
 and the difficulties with which he felt himself 
 surrounded. This was a letter to the Pope himself dated from 
 Holyrood, 19th February, 1584. In this letter James thanks 
 his Holiness for all his goodness to his mother, begs his assist- 
 ance in putting down his enemies, as without assistance he 
 must otherwise be forced to second their designs, and adds 
 
 1 Calderwood, ill. 7iyetseq. ; Spottiswoode, II. 301 3. 
 
 B. S. 11. 13
 
 194 
 
 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 these remarkable words: "I hope to be able to satisfy your 
 Holiness on all other points, especially if I am aided in my 
 great need by your Holiness 1 ." v 
 
 Well aware of James's trafhclcings with Rome and with 
 
 Guise, the Protestant leaders were leaving no 
 
 stone unturned to effect another revolution. With 
 
 more disinterested zeal, the ministers, in spite of the threaten- 
 
 ings of the Court, had never ceased to express their approval 
 
 of the Ruthven Raid and to denounce the doings of the new 
 
 Government. They were now to learn that the day of their 
 
 power was for the moment gone by. John Durie, the leading 
 
 minister in Edinburgh, had been banished to Montrose for 
 
 daring to speak well of the Raid ; and now James struck at a 
 
 more important person than Durie. Andrew Melville, before 
 
 whom even the formidable Arran quailed, was charged with 
 
 treason for comparing Mary Stewart to Nebuchadnezzar, and 
 
 summoned before the Privy Council. He denied having 
 
 uttered the words as they had been reported, refused to 
 
 acknowledge the jurisdiction of the Court, and flinging his 
 
 Hebrew Bible on the Council table — " There," said he, " are 
 
 my instructions and warrant." It was only by a secret flight to 
 
 Berwick-on-Tweed that Melville escaped being made fast in 
 
 the Castle of Blackness 2 . 
 
 Public opinion was with the Protestant lords ; and if Arran 
 were removed and James again in their hands 
 they might reckon on a new lease of power. 
 With the connivance of the ministers and with the approval 
 but not the support of Elizabeth, they prepared to attempt this 
 new enterprise. By the beginning of April all their plans were 
 ready. The Earls of Mar and Angus and the Master of 
 Glamis were the moving spirits ; and joined with these were 
 Lords Claud and John Hamilton, who, though both Catholics, 
 detested the common enemy, Arran, as the upstart who held 
 
 1 Spanish State Papers, in. 518, 9. 
 
 " Calderwood, m. 764, iv. 5— 14; Spottiswoode, n. 308, 9.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 195 
 
 the titles and estates of their House. Gowrie, also, who had 
 come to be despised by both parties, threw himself into the 
 conspiracy and was to be its principal victim. James had 
 ordered him to quit the country, but while he lingered at 
 Dundee he was seized by Colonel Stewart and brought to 
 Holyrood with his fate in the balance. A few days later (April 
 17) Mar and Glamis gained possession of Stirling Castle, 
 and despatched the news to all the friends on whom they 
 reckoned. But the activity of James disconcerted all their 
 plans. By the 27th of April he was before Stirling with a 
 force which rendered resistance impossible. Mar and Glamis 
 had already fled, and the castle was at once surrendered — 
 its captain and three of his men being summarily hanged. 
 With the failure of the conspiracy Cowrie's fate was sealed, 
 and on the 2nd of May he was beheaded in Stirling, after 
 a trial in which he made full confession of his guilt 1 . 
 
 The triumph of Arran was complete. The barons who 
 had planned the late conspiracy, and the chief 
 ministers who had abetted him, fled precipitately 
 across the Border; and his power was now greater than that 
 of Lennox had ever been. The manner in which Arran used 
 this power made his name detested by men of all shades of 
 opinion. By his proceedings against all who had the remotest 
 connection with the conspirators he gratified at once his ra- 
 pacity and his revenge. " To breed a terror in people," says 
 Spottiswoode, "and cause them abstain from communicating 
 in any sort with the exiled lords, a proclamation was made 
 'That whosoever should discover any person offending in that 
 kind should, besides his own pardon, receive a special reward'." 
 Describing the effects of Arran's policy, the same historian 
 adds :—" These cruel and rigorous proceedings caused such 
 a general fear, as all familiar society and intercourse of 
 humanity was in a manner lost, no man knowing to whom 
 
 1 Calderwood, iv. 20 — 35; Spottiswoode, 11. 309 .514. 
 
 13—2
 
 196 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 he might safely speak or open his mind 1 ." For the space of 
 fourteen months Scotland was thus ruled by the desperado 
 whom James had deliberately chosen as his chief councillor ; 
 and the reasons for the choice are to be found in James's 
 absorbing desire to be Elizabeth's successor. Arran's ascend- 
 ency was signalised by two courses of action, both of which 
 were necessary to the attainment of James's object — the one 
 directed to curtailing the privileges of the Protestant Church, 
 and the other to establishing friendly relations with England. 
 As a professed Protestant, Arran was a useful instrument in 
 compassing both these ends. 
 
 The -year 1584 is reckoned among the disastrous years in 
 8 the annals of Scottish Presbytery. In a Parlia- 
 
 ment which met in May a series of Acts were 
 passed, which rendered James the absolute monarch of the 
 bodies and souls of his subjects By these " Black Acts," as 
 they came to be called, it was declared that the king was head 
 of the Church as well as of the State ; that no Assemblies 
 of the Church should be held without his sanction ; that 
 bishops should be appointed, and that he should have the 
 appointment of them ; and that no minister should express his 
 opinion on public affairs under pain of treason. Weakened 
 though they were by the exile of the Protestant nobles, the 
 ministers did not surrender without a struggle , but in Arran they 
 had to deal with an enemy equally audacious and unscrupulous. 
 When James Lawson, one of the Edinburgh ministers, pro- 
 tested against the " Black Acts," Arran swore that though his 
 head were as big as a hay-stack, he would make it leap from 
 his shoulders. By the close of August almost all the leading 
 ministers had to seek refuge in England, and at Berwick-on- 
 Tweed they formed a considerable community. More deadly 
 than the detested Acts was a policy upon which James was 
 resolved, and which was eventually attended with disastrous 
 
 1 Spottiswoode, II. 302, 3.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 197 
 
 results to Presbyterianism. This policy was to divide the 
 ranks of the ministers themselves. In Patrick Adamson, 
 Archbishop of St Andrews, a person of considerable learning 
 but of questionable character, James found a useful instrument 
 for effecting his purpose. In the preceding year he had sent 
 Adamson to England to enquire into the working of Episcopacy, 
 and with Adamson's assistance and counsel he now prepared 
 to set up that system in Scotland. After endless wrangling 
 and recrimination, James on the 2nd of December took a 
 decisive step. He announced that every minister between 
 Stirling and Berwick must appear on the 16th of that month 
 before Adamson or his representatives, and subscribe the Acts 
 of May under the penalty of being deprived of his benefice. 
 This bold stroke effected the desired end of dividing the 
 ranks of the ministers; and a breach was now made which 
 was never perfectly healed. Yet James's triumph was more 
 apparent than real. His whole action was in the teeth of 
 public opinion, and by his high-handed measures he was 
 effectually discrediting the ecclesiastical system which he was 
 so unwisely pressing on an unwilling people. The bishops 
 were hooted in the streets ; the ministers whom James ap- 
 pointed were left without flocks ; and, when Adamson appeared 
 in an Edinburgh pulpit, the majority of the congregation quitted 
 the church 1 . The country was ready for another revolution, 
 and the occasion tor it was not long in coming 8 . 
 
 The other policy of Arran and his master was to effect 
 a better understanding with England; and in ^ 5 
 
 the case of both there were special reasons for 
 adopting it. Arran, as a professed Protestant, could not be 
 acceptable to Philip or Guise or Mary, and among foreign 
 powers it was to England alone that he could reasonably look 
 
 1 Leopold von Wcdel, a Pomeranian who visited Scotland in 1584, 
 refers to this scene in church at which lie was himself present. 
 
 2 Calderwood, IV. 62—73, 209—211; Spottiswoode, II. 314— 3 l8 > 
 History of James the Sext, 205.
 
 198 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 for support. His past conduct, indeed, had not commended 
 him to Elizabeth ; but, if he could detach James from France, 
 this would be a service which she could not overlook; and this 
 was the bid which he was now prepared to make for her favour. 
 James, on his side, had likewise his reasons for desiring 
 Elizabeth's friendship. If she should finally triumph over all 
 her enemies, it would seriously imperil his claims to the 
 succession should it come to be known that he had been 
 identified with the attempts to destroy her. Moreover, if the 
 schemes of Philip and Guise should prevail and they should 
 ever have England at their disposal, James was by no means 
 assured that, heretic as he was, they would keep to their 
 compact and make him joint ruler of England with his 
 mother. 
 
 The negotiations opened in the second week of August, 
 when Arran met Lord Hunsdon at Foulden, 
 near Berwick-on-Tweed. As the main result of 
 their conference, it was arranged that an ambassador should be 
 sent from Scotland to discuss the questions at issue between 
 the two countries. The agent chosen for this purpose is the 
 third in succession of those adventurers who played such a 
 notable part in the opening years of the reign of James VI. 
 He was Patrick, Master of Gray, who in the preceding No- 
 vember had returned to Scotland in company with the eldest 
 son of the Duke of Lennox. He had been reared a Protestant, 
 but in France he had changed his religion, and become a 
 trusted tool of Guise and the Queen of Scots, in whose 
 interests it was that he had returned to his native country. 
 Handsome, accomplished, daring, and with a special genius 
 for intrigue, Gray speedily won the favour of James, and was 
 to prove the dangerous rival of Arran. His mission was a 
 difficult one, for besides his accredited instructions, he had 
 a game of his own to play which would have taxed the most 
 consummate trickster. As the representative of Arran and 
 Tames, his main business was to persuade Elizabeth that by
 
 Chap. iJ James 1 7 199 
 
 expelling the banished Scottish lords from her kingdom she 
 would make a better bargain with Scotland than by enter- 
 taining them. For his own private reasons, however, it was 
 precisely the object of Gray to procure the restoration of these 
 lords, and by their means to effect the overthrow of Arran. 
 As he was still in the pay of Guise, he thus had three parties to 
 satisfy that he was honestly working in their interests — Mary, 
 Elizabeth, and Arran. For his own purpose, however, it was 
 Elizabeth whom he was mainly concerned to convince of his 
 good faith ; and, by revealing certain secrets of Guise and the 
 Queen of Scots, he persuaded her to trust him. When in 
 January 1585 he returned to Scotland, it was on the secret 
 understanding that, when the fitting moment came, Elizabeth 
 should permit the banished lords to seek their own country 1 . 
 
 At the same time, an important event in European politics 
 drew James and Elizabeth together by a bond 
 of common interest. In March 1585 the Holy 
 League was proclaimed in France ; and the Duke of Guise, 
 abetted by Philip of Spain, drew the sword to exclude the 
 heretic Henry of Navarre from the succession, and to gain the 
 throne of France for his own House of Lorraine. Should the 
 enterprise succeed, the fate of Protestantism was assured ; and 
 it was the pressing necessity of all Protestant princes to present 
 a united front against the common enemy. With this object 
 Elizabeth, at the close of May, sent Edward Wotton to Scotland 
 to negotiate a counter-league to that of Philip and Guise. To 
 enforce his mission, Wotton brought a gift of hunting-horses 
 and hounds, and the offer of an annual pension of ^5000. 
 By the aid of these inducements and supported by the in- 
 fluence of the Master of Gray, Wotton successfully accom- 
 plished his errand; and on the 31st of July, a Convention held 
 at St Andrews gave its sanction to a religious league between 
 
 1 Calderwood, iv. 171 — 191, 253; Spottiswoode, n. 3:3, 4; Papers 
 Relating to the Master of Gray (Bannatyne Club), pp. 1 — 44.
 
 200 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the two countries. But the league was only part of Wotton's 
 errand in Scotland. His other object was to undermine the 
 influence of Arran and thus effect the return of the banished 
 lords. 
 
 An incident which happened a few days before the conclu- 
 sion of the league was made an occasion for bringing about 
 both these ends. On a day of truce, when Sir John Foster 
 and Ker of Fernihurst, the respective wardens of the Scotch 
 and English Borders, had met to transact the usual business 
 on such occasions, a fray suddenly arose in which Lord Russell, 
 the son of Lord Bedford, was slain. It was alleged, rightly 
 or wrongly, that the affair had been arranged by Arran ; and 
 Elizabeth through Wotton imperiously demanded his surrender. 
 James yielded so far that he placed Arran in ward in the Castle 
 of St Andrews, but he refused to give him up in spite of 
 Elizabeth's persistent solicitations. In the beginning of Sep- 
 tember commissioners from the two countries met at Berwick 
 to discuss the question of redress for the slaughter of Russell ; 
 but the discussion led to no result, and Elizabeth at length 
 determined to take the decisive step. On the 13th of October, 
 without giving any notice of his intention, Wotton secretly 
 withdrew from the Court at Stirling; he reached Berwick on 
 the 1 6th. The meaning of this move was speedily seen. The 
 day after his arrival at Berwick, the banished lords — the Earls 
 of Angus and Mar, the Master of Glamis and others — ap- 
 peared in that town ; within a fortnight they were across the 
 Border. At Jedburgh and Kelso they met with their friends, 
 and it was arranged that their united forces should be at 
 Falkirk by the 1st of November. Arran had made attempts to 
 draw together an army, and was now in Stirling with the king 
 and the chief lords who had supported him. When on the 
 2nd of November, however, the enemy appeared before the 
 town, he saw that resistance was hopeless, and, knowing well 
 what would be his fate should he fall into their hands, he made 
 his escape with a single attendant. After a feeble show of
 
 Chap. iJ James VI 201 
 
 fight on the part of his friends, town and castle were both 
 surrendered ; and the public career of Arran was at an 
 end'. 
 
 V. Execution of Mary: The Spanish Armada. 
 
 In the new Government no single person dominated the 
 
 king's counsels in the same degree as Lennox 
 
 1586 
 and Arran. Between the restored lords and 
 
 those who had lately been in authority a compromise was 
 adopted, which was apparent at once in the composition of the 
 new Privy Council and in the general policy which it followed. 
 The Earls of Angus and Mar and the Master of Glamis sat 
 side by side in it with the Earls of Huntly, Montrose, Craw- 
 ford, and the Earl Marischal. In the relations of the country 
 to England it was the party of the restored lords that prevailed ; 
 and on the 5th of July the treaty of the preceding year was 
 finally concluded at Berwick. It bound the two countries to 
 an offensive and defensive alliance — Elizabeth agreeing to pay 
 the King of Scots an annual sum of ^4000, partly as a bribe 
 and partly as a remittance for his paternal estates in England. 
 Before the year was out it was to be seen how many forces 
 were still at work to hold the two nations apart 2 . 
 
 If the restored lords carried their point with regard to 
 England, it was far otherwise at home. In his 
 
 i- I 5 86 
 
 policy towards the Church James proved to be 
 inexorable. The exiled ministers, Andrew Melville and the 
 rest, had returned with the lords from England, and securely 
 reckoned that another day had dawned for the cause of true 
 religion. They speedily discovered their delusion. No move- 
 ment was made to cancel the detested "Black Acts;" and, in a 
 
 1 Calderwood, iv. 372—390; Spottiswoode, u. 327 — 332. 
 
 2 Register oj Privy Council, Vol. iv. pp. x. — xiii. j Calduwood, IV. 
 5S7 ; Spottiswoode, II. ^46 — 8.
 
 202 The Croivn and the Kirk [Book. V1 
 
 trial of strength between the king and Melville's party, it was 
 seen that the ministers were no longer a united body. The 
 Synod of Fife, directed by Melville and his nephew, the diarist 
 James, passed sentence of excommunication on Adamson, 
 Archbishop of St Andrews. In a General Assembly which 
 met in May, James brought all his influence to bear toward 
 the revoking of the sentence, and by threats and promises he 
 attained his end. "In this Assembly," says Calderwood, "was 
 first perceived what fear and flattery of Court could work among 
 weak and inconsiderate ministers." In truth, there was a party 
 among the ministers, represented by such men as Erskine of 
 Dun and Craig, the successor of Knox in the church of 
 St Giles, to whom the extremes both of Melville and the 
 king were equally distasteful, and who would have preferred 
 a middle way between highflying Episcopacy and extreme 
 Presby tenanism 1 . 
 
 Towards the close of the year 1586 Christendom was stirred 
 by an event in which the Scottish people had the 
 first and pre-eminent interest. On the ground 
 of her alleged complicity in Babington's plot for the assassina- 
 tion of Elizabeth, Mary Stewart was put upon trial in her prison 
 at Fotheringay. The position of James with regard to the 
 trial of his mother was one that would have tried a stronger 
 and nobler nature than his. He could have little personal 
 affection for her, since he was hardly two years old when she 
 had fled to England after Langside. On the other hand, filial 
 obligation and the pride of race and country were sufficiently 
 powerful motives for the most strenuous endeavours to avert 
 a national and dynastic disgrace. Certain of James's ancestors 
 would not have counted the cost, and would have staked their 
 lives and their kingdoms in a quarrel which involved the honour 
 of both. But James was neither courageous nor chivalrous ; 
 and, moreover, there were weighty reasons which counselled 
 
 1 Calderwood, iv. 583.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 203 
 
 prudence. He was himself without experience of war ; he 
 was poor; and his subjects were so much divided with regard 
 to his mother that he could not reckon on their hearty and 
 collective support. Besides these cogent reasons for shrinking 
 from a conflict with England, there were others less worthy 
 which undoubtedly influenced James's decision. The removal 
 of his mother would leave him the sole representative of his 
 and her claims to the Crowns of the two countries ; and a war 
 with Elizabeth would finally decide her never to yield that 
 recognition of his claims which he was so eager to extort. 
 Out of mere decency, however, he was bound to lodge a 
 protest against proceedings which all the world knew would 
 end but in one way ; and two embassies in succession were 
 sent on this errand. In the latter of these embassies was the 
 Master of Gray, who, as on his mission of the previous year, 
 took the opportunity of pressing his private opinion on Eliza- 
 beth and her ministers. Mary, as he knew, held his life in 
 her hands ; and for him, at least, it was necessary that she 
 should be out of the way. Mortui non mordent— the dead 
 don't bite — is reported to have been the burden of his advice 
 to Elizabeth ; and the saying is in perfect accordance with 
 everything that is known of him 1 . 
 
 The execution of Mary (February 8, 1587) strained the 
 relations between the two countries, but pro- 
 duced no serious crisis. The Earl of Both well 
 probably expressed the feeling of the majority of the Scottish 
 nobles when he exclaimed that a coat of mail would be the 
 best suit of mourning. But this attitude was far from being 
 that of the whole nation. The ministers had refused to pray 
 for her in terms dictated by James, which implied her innocence 
 of the charges on which she was condemned ; and there was a 
 minority of the nobles who could not afford to quarrel with 
 
 1 Extracts from the Despatches of M. Courcelles, French Ambassador at 
 the Court of Scotland (Ban. Club), p. 55; Calderwood, iv. 602, 5; Letters 
 and J'tipers of the Mmler of Gray ', pp. 120 et seq.
 
 204 The Crown and tJie Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Elizabeth. The immediate result of Mary's death was a 
 
 temporary weakening of the English party in Scotland and 
 
 increased tension between the two sovereigns. Reckoning on 
 
 this state of things, the disgraced Arran made a bold attempt 
 
 to avenge himself on his enemies and to recover his power. 
 
 He accused Angus, Mar and Glamis, of treasonable dealings 
 
 with England, the object of which was to kidnap James and 
 
 place him in the hands of Elizabeth. The attempt came to 
 
 nothing ; but he struck more successfully at one to whom 
 
 more than any other his ruin had been due. His brother, 
 
 Sir William Stewart, revealed the secret doings of the Master of 
 
 Gray, with the result that that youthful schemer was sentenced 
 
 to death, and escaped his fate only on the urgent intercession 
 
 of Lord Hamilton. Though banished from Scotland for a 
 
 time, he was eventually to reappear, and even to resume his 
 
 seat at the Privy Council board 1 . 
 
 The Convention which condemned the Master of Gray 
 
 closed with a singular event which none of the 
 1587 . ° . 
 
 contemporary historians have failed to chronicle. 
 As the Convention was numerously attended by the nobility, 
 James conceived the original idea of ending all their feuds by 
 one happy stroke. On the 14th of May he entertained them 
 at a banquet in Holyrood and, after thrice drinking their health, 
 called on them to enter into a bond of brotherly affection, 
 vowing that he would be the mortal enemy of him who first 
 broke the pledge. The following night he marched at their 
 head from Holyrood to the castle, demolishing the gibbets, 
 and releasing from the Tolbooth such as were imprisoned for 
 debt. At the Market Cross a table had been spread with 
 wine, bread, and sweetmeats ; here the whole company pledged 
 each other in a cup of kindness in the presence of the as- 
 sembled multitude — the ceremony being accompanied by singing 
 and the sound of trumpets and the roar of the cannon from 
 
 1 Caldeiwood, IV. 612, 3; Spottiswoode, II. 372 - 4.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 205 
 
 the castle. Only one person, we are told, refused to take the 
 
 hand of his enemy — William, Lord Yester, who was straightway 
 
 consigned to the castle and kept there till he attained to a 
 
 more Christian frame of mind 1 . 
 
 But the year 1587 is memorable for a more important 
 
 achievement than this whimsical love-feast of 
 
 1587 
 King James. In a Parliament which met in 
 
 July two Acts were passed — one of which was to determine 
 the future ecclesiastical development of Scotland. On the 
 ground that the Crown had been impoverished by its gifts 
 to the pre-Reformation Church, and was thus constrained to 
 undue taxation of the people, all ecclesiastical property was 
 declared thenceforth to belong to the king — provision being 
 made for the sustenance and housing of the clergy in all their 
 degrees. By this Act, as was fully understood at the time, 
 Episcopacy as it had been established in England was once 
 for all made impossible in Scotland. That James should have 
 consented to such an Act is decisive proof that his preference 
 for bishops was due to mere reasons of State, and that he had 
 no earnest conviction of their divine appointment for the 
 guidance of the Church. The other Act passed by this Parlia- 
 ment marks one of the few definite steps in the constitutional 
 history of the country. By an Act of James I the smaller 
 barons had been empowered to choose Commissioners to 
 represent them in Parliament. So little use, however, did 
 they make of the privilege, that when their representatives ap- 
 peared in the revolutionary Parliament of 1560 the question 
 was raised whether they had the right to sit. By this Parlia- 
 ment of 1587, therefore, the privilege of the smaller barons 
 was re-affirmed, but only on the condition that they paid 40,000 
 merks to the Exchequer 3 . 
 
 1 Calderwood, iv. 613, 4; Spottiswoode, II. 374; Moysie's Memoirs 
 (Maitland Club), p. 63; The Historie of King James the Sext, pp. 228, 9. 
 
 2 Acts of Pari, of Scot., III. 431 — 437, 509.
 
 206 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 "This," says Spottiswoode of the year 1588, "was the 
 marvellous year talked of so long by the astrolo- 
 gers." All through the winter, we are told, King 
 James was occupied in the study of the Apocalypse with 
 special reference to the signs of the times. But no portents 
 from heaven were needed to inform men that a great crisis in 
 their destinies was at hand. During the last three years Philip 
 of Spain had been preparing his mighty armament for the 
 extinction of heresy in its stronghold, and the world now 
 learned that the hour had come for striking the blow. 
 
 In Scotland the divided state of religious beliefs intensified 
 the feelings with which the coming of the 
 Armada was awaited. As has been said, at least 
 one-third of the nobility were Catholics ; and in the counties 
 of Angus, Aberdeen, Inverness, Moray, Sutherland, Caithness, 
 with Wigton and Nithsdale, the large majority of the people 
 were of the same religion 1 . The king himself was not whole- 
 hearted for either faith. During the ascendency of Lennox, 
 as we have seen, he had himself been deep in a plot for the 
 Catholic invasion of England. Since that date, however, he 
 had good reason to suspect that Philip's triumph over Elizabeth 
 would not necessarily mean that the heretic King of Scots 
 would take her place. Recently, indeed, Philip had boldly 
 claimed, in virtue of his descent from the House of Lancaster, 
 that he was himself the rightful King of England. James, 
 therefore, decided that his safer course lay in opposing Philip 
 to the best of his ability. Yet the degree of zeal which he 
 displayed did not satisfy the more ardent of the ministers. A 
 General Assembly which met in February urged him, in view 
 of the threatened danger, to take more strenuous action against 
 all suspected Papists ; and they unflinchingly named the most 
 
 1 These facts are contained in a document which had been drawn up 
 for Elizabeth's minister, Lord Burleigh, in 1589. Its contents are given by 
 Tytler.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 207 
 
 conspicuous of them. Though disposed to resent this interfer- 
 ence with his affairs, James made a civil response, and promised 
 that he would not fail in his duty against the common enemy. 
 An expedition which he made in May proved the sincerity of 
 his intentions. Lord Maxwell, who had been deprived of the 
 earldom of Morton in favour of the Earl of Angus, was believed 
 to be holding himself in readiness to join the Spaniard at the 
 first signal ; and to disable him James led a strong force into 
 Dumfriesshire. The expedition was completely successful, 
 Maxwell being put to flight and afterwards caught by Sir 
 William Stewart, the brother of the disgraced Arran 1 . 
 
 The Armada sailed in July ; and, as it was rumoured that 
 the northern coast of Scotland was its probable destination, 
 all preparations were made for the national defence. The 
 inevitable bond of religion was again renewed ; balefires were 
 set on the hills; and the lieges were commanded to be ready in 
 arms at the first intimation of danger. Luckily for Scotland, 
 it had no occasion to try its strength against the veterans of 
 Spain ; and its only experience of the great Armada was the 
 presence of a few shipwrecked crews cast on its shores by those 
 autumnal gales which finished the work so well begun by 
 Howard and Drake. At the close of the year that had opened 
 with such gloomy omens, the nation, according to Spottiswoode, 
 could reckon but one disaster that it had sustained — the death 
 of the Earl of Angus, whose high character for genuine religious 
 feeling had gained for him the esteem of all parties, and whose 
 place, as the ministers were not slow to find, was to be filled 
 by no successor 2 . 
 
 1 Calderwood, iv. 678, 9; Spottiswoode, II. 383, 4. 
 
 2 Calderwood, IV. 681; SpuUijsvoode, II. 589, <jO.
 
 2oS The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 VI. The Spanish Blanks. 
 
 The failure of the Armada did not relieve the country from 
 its terror of a great Papist conspiracy 1 . The 
 events of 1589, indeed, proved how well ground- 
 ed had been the apprehension of a Catholic rising in concert 
 with the invader. In February a revelation was made which 
 brought home to every Protestant the greatness of the danger 
 he had escaped. There fell into Elizabeth's hands a packet of 
 letters, which she had the mischievous satisfaction of sending 
 to James for his inspection. The letters were from the Earls 
 of Huntly and Errol to Philip of Spain and the Duke of Parma, 
 his general in the Low Countries ; and their purport could not 
 be mistaken. Both writers expressed their great sorrow at the 
 miscarriage of the late enterprise, and promised their ready 
 assistance when his attempt should be renewed. "Good 
 Lord," wrote Elizabeth in her letter which accompanied the 
 packet, "methinks I do but dream: no king a week would bear 
 this." But James saw the matter in a different light from 
 Elizabeth. It has been already said more than once that it 
 was the policy of James to hold the balance between the two 
 religions as evenly as public opinion would permit, and it was 
 this policy that now directed his proceedings against the popish 
 earls. The clamours of the ministers would not permit him to 
 ignore their treason ; and both Errol and Huntly were put 
 through the form of an examination — the latter being imprisoned 
 in the Castle of Edinburgh. Within a few days Huntly was 
 set at liberty; and in the beginning of April, together with 
 Errol, Crawford, Bothwell and Montrose, he was at the head 
 of a force of 3000 men, bidding defiance to the royal authority. 
 But neither Huntly nor his brother earls were men to head a 
 
 1 An admirable account of the events recorded in this section will be 
 found in an article entitled, "The Spanish Blanks and the Caiholic Earls ' : 
 by Dr T. G. Law {Scottish Review, July, 1893). 

 
 Map Showing The Relative Numbers of Protestants and Roman Catholics 
 
 about 1590 
 
 Plate 1 
 
 J fi*nLolom*w Edm* 
 
 Shires mainly Protestant coloured blue 
 
 „ „ Roman Catholic coloured red |
 
 Chap, i] James VI 209 
 
 revolution. They made a show of encountering the royal 
 army at the Bridge of Dee near Aberdeen, but, when they 
 learned that James had taken the field in person, their courage 
 forsook them and they disbanded their forces. One after the 
 other the rebel earls gave themselves up, and in May they 
 were tried by the Privy Council in Edinburgh. For less 
 crimes than theirs many nobles in Scotland had lost their 
 heads ; but, in consistency with his policy towards his Catholic 
 subjects of rank, James took care that the punishment of the 
 earls should be as light as with decency it could be made. 
 Huntly, Crawford, and Bothwell were committed to different 
 prisons, from which all of them were released before the close 
 of September 1 . 
 
 During the latter half of the year the thoughts of the nation 
 were occupied with happier events. After some- 
 what protracted negotiations, a marriage had at 
 last been arranged between the King of Scots and Anne, the 
 second daughter of Frederick II of Denmark. On the 20th 
 of August the marriage had been transacted by proxy — the 
 Earl Marischal taking the place of James ; and the bride was 
 expected to arrive in September. By stress of weather, how- 
 ever, she was prevented from accomplishing the voyage ; and 
 James conceived the heroic resolution of fetching his bride 
 home under his own protection. Accordingly, having made 
 provision for the government of the country during his absence, 
 James, on the 22nd of October, sailed for Norway with a train 
 of three hundred persons. His intention was to be at home 
 again within twenty days, but his absence actually extended to 
 six months — and, says Calderwood, "the country was never in 
 greater peace 2 " than during this period. 
 
 On the first of May, 1590, James arrived at Leith, and on 
 Sunday the 17th the queen was crowned in the 
 Abbey Kirk of Holyrood — Robert Bruce, the 
 
 1 1 ulderwood, v. 6 — 55; Spottiswoode, II. 390 — 6. 
 
 2 Calderwood, v. 59 — 67; Spottiswoode, II. 396 404. 
 
 B. • M. 14
 
 210 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 most distinguished of the Edinburgh ministers, performing the 
 
 ceremony of anointing'. Anne was only in her sixteenth year 
 
 and was in no way a remarkable woman ; yet, as she was not 
 
 always of the same mind as her consort, she did not promote 
 
 the harmony of his Court. James's principal councillor for the 
 
 last three years had been Sir John Maitland of Thirlestane, a 
 
 younger brother of the famous secretary of Mary Stewart. 
 
 Thirlestane was a person of a different stamp from James's two 
 
 previous advisers, Lennox and Arran. "The wisest man in 
 
 Scotland," Lord Burghley called him; and the history of his 
 
 administration proves that he had the views and the capacity of 
 
 a statesman. But he was acceptable to neither the extreme 
 
 Protestants nor the extreme Catholics. He was a Protestant 
 
 by conviction, but his moderate and often self-seeking policy did 
 
 not wholly commend him to the most influential ministers. It 
 
 was in the face of many enemies, therefore, that he had retained 
 
 his position as Lord Chancellor, and directed the councils of 
 
 James; and now in the young queen he had to reckon with 
 
 another adversary, who never forgot that he had endeavoured 
 
 to persuade James to seek a better match than the second 
 
 daughter of the King of Denmark. 
 
 The most deadly enemy of Thirlestane was Francis Stewart, 
 
 Earl of Bothwell; and the story of Bothwell's 
 1591 . 
 
 attempts to avenge himself on that statesman 
 
 throws a vivid light on the degree of law and order that pre- 
 vailed in the country. Bothwell's grandfather was an illegiti- 
 mate son of James V, and his mother was a sister of Mary 
 Stewart's Bothwell — facts which partly explain James's ill-judged 
 lenity towards one who set at defiance the first principles of 
 civil order. " Many enormities," says Calderwood, speaking of 
 this year, "were committed, as if there had been no king in 
 
 1 Certain of the ministers objected to the anointing on the ground that 
 it was "a superstitious rite among Christians, borrowed from the Jews." 
 They likewise protested against the choice of Sunday as the Coronation- 
 day. — Calderwood, v. 95.
 
 Chap, lj James VI 211 
 
 Israel ; so contemptible was the king's authority, and that 
 through his own default, wanting due care and courage to 
 minister justice." Throughout the year 159 1 the escapades of 
 Bothwell were in all men's mouths. In January he broke into 
 the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, carried off a prisoner who was a 
 witness against one of his clients, and, having lodged him in 
 his own castle of Crichton, threatened to hang him on the 
 gallows of that keep. His next adventure was not of his own 
 seeking. In April he was summoned before the Privy Council 
 on an amazing charge: he was accused of employing witches 
 to raise storms to prevent the king's return from Norway. 
 Though he stoutly denied the charge, he was shut up in the 
 Castle of Edinburgh, and his servants forbidden to come 
 within ten miles of the king. On the 21st of June, at two in 
 the morning, he made his escape from the castle ; and in the 
 beginning of July James rode to the Borders in search of him, 
 but had to return with his hands empty after an eight days' 
 pursuit. On the 23rd of July Bothwell was denounced as an 
 outlaw at the Town Cross of Edinburgh. Three days later, 
 after a quiet supper in Leith, he proceeded to the Netherbow, 
 cast a forty-shilling piece on the causeway, and defied the 
 chancellor to lay hands on him. Outlaw though he was, 
 Bothwell continued to make light of all the threats uttered 
 against him. In October he again appeared in Leith, though 
 it was only after the loss of his best horse that he made good 
 his escape from the pursuit of James. But his masterpiece of 
 audacity occurred on the night of the 27 th of December. 
 About the time of supper he secretly entered Holyrood with a 
 considerable following, and made a simultaneous onslaught on 
 the doors of the king, the queen, and the chancellor. A 
 message was carried to the Provost, and the city was roused by 
 the ringing of the common bell ; but, before assistance could 
 be brought, tin- desperado had made his escape. Some eight of 
 his followers, however, were taken and hanged at the City Cross 1 . 
 
 1 Calderwood, v. 116 — 143; Spottiswoodc, 11. 411 —419. 
 
 14 — 2
 
 2 1 2 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 But the pranks of Bothwell were overshadowed by a sensa- 
 tional crime which has remained in the memory 
 of the Scottish people. In its origin and its 
 results, this crime is a signal proof of the impotence of James's 
 rule, and is the fullest justification of the impatience of the 
 ministers with a king who was unable or unwilling to discharge 
 the first duties of his office. On the death in 1584 of Colin, 
 sixth Earl of Argyle, a dispute arose among the guardians of 
 his son and heir, which ended in the predominance of John 
 Campbell of Cawdor. At the period of which we are speaking, 
 the hereditary feud between the Earls of Moray and Huntly 
 was in its acutest stage ; and each chief was seeking the 
 support of all the allies he could command. By kinship and 
 common interest the Earls of Argyle were bound to the House 
 of Moray, and Cawdor took the side of Moray in his present 
 quarrel with Huntly. But there were many persons who were 
 eager to profit by the minority of the heir of Argyle, and with 
 certain of these persons Huntly concocted a plot for the 
 destruction at once of the young earl, of his guardian Cawdor, 
 and of the Earl of Moray. Chief among the conspirators was 
 Thirlestane, the Lord Chancellor, who was to receive for his 
 services a slice of the Argyle lands in Stirlingshire. The 
 original plan was to cut off all three victims by assassination ; 
 but in the case of Moray the chancellor thought to effect his 
 ends under form of law. James hated Moray both as a 
 popular favourite and as the son-in-law of the Regent who had 
 taken the place of his mother. Whatever may have been his 
 motive, James now exercised his authority in a manner as 
 impolitic as it was reprehensible. Moray had been charged 
 with abetting the sedition of Bothwell; and James entrusted 
 Huntly with the duty of apprehending the man who was his 
 mortal enemy. In accordance with a royal injunction, Moray 
 had left the Highlands and taken up his residence at his house 
 of Donnibristle near Aberdour on the coast of Plfe. Here, on 
 the night of the 8th of February, he was beset by Huntly with
 
 C h \p. i] James VI 213 
 
 a band of his followers. On his refusal to surrender, the house 
 was given to the flames ; and, bursting through his enemies, 
 Moray made his way to the shore. Discovered by the burning 
 tassels of his helmet, he was butchered on the spot — Huntly 
 himself, it is said, inflicting one of his wounds, and his 
 murdered enemy exclaiming, "You have spoilt a better face 
 than your own 1 ." 
 
 By his personal beauty and accomplishments and his family 
 connection with the "Good Regent," Moray had 
 been the most popular noble of his time ; and 
 the circumstances of his death gave rise to a panic of terror 
 and indignation. It was the leading Papist in the country who 
 had done the deed, and it was rightly believed that the 
 chancellor had abetted him. Nor did James himself escape 
 suspicion of being party to the crime — a suspicion which was 
 confirmed by his conduct toward the accused. After a short 
 nominal imprisonment in the Castle of Blackness, Huntly was 
 permitted to go free, and in spite of the pertinacious clamours 
 of the ministers and the people, he was never seriously tried 
 for his crime. Yet according to the historian of the Kirk, it 
 was through the obloquy which followed the unpunished crimes 
 of Huntly and Bothwell that James and Thirlestane were con- 
 strained to make a memorable concession to the Presbyterian 
 party. On the last day of March, partly through the intrigues 
 of the queen and partly through popular odium, Thirlestane 
 was driven from the Court. But there was an opportunity at 
 hand for his recovering his lost popularity. After an interval 
 of nearly five years a Parliament was to meet in May. When 
 it met, James and his chancellor gave their sanction to the 
 Act which has been called the "Magna Charta of the Church 
 of Scotland." By this Act all previous legislation in favour of 
 
 1 Gregory, History of the Western Highlands and Islands, pp. 244 
 154; Calderwood, v. 144, 5; Spotliswoode, 11. 419, 20. The ballad, 
 entitled "The Bonny Karl o' Murray," expresses the popular feeling of the 
 time regarding the earl and bis murderer.
 
 214 The Crozun and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the Reformed Church was ratified, Presbytery was formally 
 sanctioned, and the severest measures against the old religion 
 confirmed. The ministers were fully aware that nothing short 
 of absolute compulsion had constrained James to give his 
 consent to such an Act; but they had at length obtained the 
 object for which they had so long been striving, and thence- 
 forward they could appeal to this Act as the muniment of their 
 spiritual liberties'. 
 
 But the excitements of this remarkable year were not yet 
 
 over. In June the madcap Bothwell, with a 
 1592 
 
 band of more than a hundred men, beset the 
 
 Palace of Falkland, and, but for the gathering of the country 
 people, would have secured the person of the king. So great 
 was the terror and helplessness of James that he dared not 
 remain in one spot lest his terrible subject should find him out. 
 Another sensation of the year was the temporary reappearance 
 of the disgraced Earl of Arran. At the command of James, he 
 came to lodge certain accusations against the Chancellor 
 Thirlestane, who was still in retirement in his family house of 
 Lethington. Whatever may have been James's motive in 
 recalling his old favourite, public opinion would not permit 
 that Arran should have a chance of ever being what he once 
 had been ; and he was driven back to his retreat, to the heart- 
 felt relief of all parties in the State 2 . 
 
 The next two years saw the final attempt and failure of 
 
 the Catholic party to overthrow the Protestant 
 1593 L J 
 
 settlement in Scotland. We have seen that they 
 had never ceased to hope that with the help of France or 
 Spain this end might yet be accomplished. Had such help 
 come, Scotland and England both would have been involved 
 in a struggle, the result of which could hardly have been 
 doubtful. But the promised foreign auxiliaries never came; 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., in. 541; Calderwood, v. 162; Spottiswoode, 
 11. 420, 1. 
 
 2 Calderwood, v. 168, 172, 186; Spottiswoode, II. 421, 2.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 215 
 
 and the Scottish Catholics were to learn that in their own 
 
 strength they were unequal to the enterprise. 
 
 In the last week of 1592 a discovery was made which 
 
 revived all the Protestant terrors that followed 
 
 1593 
 
 the Spanish Armada. Upon information sup- 
 plied by the English agent in Scotland, George Ker, brother 
 of Lord Newbattle, was seized in the island of Cumbrae in the 
 Firth of Clyde ; and on his person were found certain letters 
 and blank papers which told a remarkable story. The blanks, 
 eight in number, bore the signatures of the Earls of Huntly, 
 Angus, Errol, and Sir Patrick Gordon of Auchindoune, and 
 were to be filled up by the bearer with a message orally 
 entrusted to him by the signatories. The main purport of the 
 correspondence was a request to Philip that a Spanish army 
 should be sent to Scotland, with which the Catholics of that 
 country would be ready to act in concert. When the facts of 
 the conspiracy became known, the ministers loudly demanded 
 the immediate arrest and punishment of the principal traitors. 
 But James had his own reasons for proceeding more circum- 
 spectly with his dangerous subjects. To the indignation of the 
 ministers, the Catholic earls were not brought to trial ; and the 
 only person who suffered was Graham of Fintry, one of their 
 subordinate agents. In the circumstances, the old suspicion 
 was confirmed that James himself was privy to the Catholic 
 plot ; and the recent publication of a remarkable document 
 from James's own hand conclusively proves that the suspicion 
 was justified. From this document it appears that, so early as 
 the summer of 1592, James was privy to the scheme of a 
 Spanish invasion of England through his own kingdom, and that 
 he was deliberately weighing its probable results for himself 1 . 
 
 1 Hist. J/.V.S'. Commission — Calendar of the Manuscripts of the Marquis 
 of Salisbury, 1892, Part IV. p. 214. In this document James, after the 
 manner of Burleigh, weighs the advantages and disadvantages of support- 
 ing the Spanish invasion that had been planned to take place in the summer 
 oi 1592.
 
 2 1 6 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 From other recent publications we also know that all through 
 the events that followed the discovery of the Spanish Blanks, 
 James had a secret understanding with the Catholic earls, 
 and that to the extent of his ability, he endeavoured to shield 
 them from the extreme penalty of the law 1 . 
 
 But public opinion and the pressure of events forced James 
 to renounce that temporising policy which he had hitherto 
 followed towards the two religious parties. The pertinacious 
 demands of the ministers for the punishment of the Catholic 
 leaders were urgently supported by Elizabeth, whom, in view 
 of the English succession, he could not afford to ignore. But 
 it was the conduct of the irrepressible Bothwell that became 
 the direct occasion of the suppression of the northern earls. 
 On the 24th of July he surprised James in Holyrood Palace ; 
 and so powerful was his following that he was able to dictate 
 his own terms. Remission was granted for all past offences of 
 himself and his supporters; he was reinstated in all his pos- 
 sessions ; and James consented to remove from the Court the 
 Chancellor Thirlestane and others whom Bothwell alleged to 
 have been the cause of all his misdemeanours. It was only 
 James's temporary weakness that had constrained him to this 
 humiliating agreement, and he seized the first occasion of 
 repudiating it. In a Convention held at Stirling in September, 
 he revoked the late concessions on the ground that they had 
 been extorted from him by force 2 . 
 
 But James's troubles with Bothwell were not yet at an end. 
 Desperado though he was, Bothwell had the sup- 
 port of many Protestants, who were indignant at 
 James's unsatisfactory dealings with the Catholic conspirators. 
 
 1 Spanish State Papers, Vol. iv. 603. — "Statement of what happened in 
 Scotland in the month of December last year, 1592, in consequence of the 
 Embassy which the Catholic lords of that country wished to send to His 
 Mnjesty." In this document there is new and interesting matter regarding 
 the affair of the Spanish Blanks. 
 
 2 Calderwood, v. 214 — 261; Spottiswoode, II. 433 — 436.
 
 Chap, i] James VI. 217 
 
 In another and the last of his harebrained enterprises, known as 
 the " Raid of Leith," he attempted to seize the king's person, 
 and narrowly failed in accomplishing his purpose. Foiled in 
 this attempt, he fell on another device for gratifying his revenge ; 
 and it is here that his story links itself on to that of the 
 Catholic earls. In the month of August he formed a secret 
 league with these earls, with the double object of mutual 
 defence and of overthrowing the existing religion 1 . Since the 
 discovery of the Spanish Blanks, Huntly and his confederates 
 had bade defiance to the Government, and in the preceding 
 month (July) they had been guilty of an act which amounted 
 to open rebellion. A Spanish ship, bearing letters and money 
 from Pope Clement VIII to the king, had arrived at Aberdeen; 
 and the magistrates of the town had promptly seized the envoy 
 and three English priests who accompanied him*. On hearing 
 this news, Huntly and his friends threatened the town with fire 
 and sword if the prisoners were not instantly released — a threat 
 which the magistrates were not in a position to defy. 
 
 In the face of such a proceeding, James was constrained to 
 take the step which he had used every shift to avoid : in the 
 month of September he summoned the lieges to attend him on 
 an expedition against his rebel subjects. Indignant at his 
 delay, however, the ministers had persuaded the young Earl of 
 Argyle to take the field in advance of him. Before the arrival 
 of James in the north, Argyle had met Huntly and Errol at 
 Glenlivat in Banffshire (Oct. 3). Argyle's army was greatly 
 superior in numbers, but to his Highland infantry in their 
 plaids and bonnets were opposed a strong body of cavalry 
 armed with lances and clothed in mail. Treachery in Argyle's 
 ranks gave another advantage to the enemy ; and, though the 
 accounts of the action are somewhat conllicting, Argyle appears 
 
 1 Register of I 'ri- < un< il, V. 173-5. 
 
 2 Spanish state Papers, iv. 590. From tin- document here referred to 
 it appears thai both the letter and tin: money were addressed to James by 
 
 ment VIII.
 
 2 1 8 TJie Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 to have sustained a severe defeat 1 . The day following the 
 battle of Glenlivat, James took his march northward, attended 
 at his express desire by Andrew and James Melville and other 
 ministers, that they might be eyewitnesses to his zeal against 
 the Papist rebels. In spite of their late victory, the Catholic 
 earls shrank from a further trial of strength; and, after destroying 
 Strathbogie and Slaines, the chief houses of Huntly and Errol, 
 James returned to Edinburgh without having met an enemy. 
 The young Duke of Lennox, whom he left behind him as his 
 lieutenant, completed the work of the expedition by extorting 
 the consent of the two earls to quit the country. The failure 
 of the northern rebellion wrought the ruin of Bothwell, dis- 
 credited by his late conduct alike with Elizabeth and the 
 Scottish ministers. Driven from Scotland, he was not more 
 welcome in England ; and his last days were spent in Naples in 
 indigence and obscurity 2 . 
 
 Crushed in the north, the Catholic cause had in the pre- 
 ceding year received another blow by the slaughter of Lord 
 Maxwell, its most powerful representative on the Borders. 
 Maxwell, it will be remembered, had been one of the Scottish 
 nobles who was prepared to co-operate with the Spanish 
 Armada, and had been attacked in his own stronghold by James 
 himself and made prisoner by Sir William Stewart. Since that 
 time, however, he had made his peace with James and been 
 appointed Warden of the West Marches. It was in the discharge 
 of his duty as Warden that he was to meet his end. Between 
 the clans of Maxwell and Johnstone there had long been a 
 deadly feud ; but their quarrel had been recently patched up, 
 and bonds of alliance had passed between their respective 
 chiefs. Trusting, doubtless, to the goodwill of the Warden, 
 one Johnstone in 1593 made a profitable raid on the lands of 
 
 1 Spanish State Papers, iv. 590, 1 ; Calderwood, V. 348 — 353 ; Spottis- 
 woode, n. 458 — 60; Moysie's Memoirs, 120; Historie 0/ James the Sext, 
 33 g — 4*- 
 
 - Calderwood, V. 353—57; Spottiswoode, II. 460, I,
 
 Chap, i] James VI 219 
 
 the Lairds of Crichton, Sanquhar, and Drumlanrig. Despite 
 his bond with the Johnstones, Maxwell determined, not without 
 personal motives, to discharge the duties of his office; and the 
 result was the last memorable clan-battle on the Scottish Border. 
 The two forces met at Dryfe Sands, near Lockerby ; and 
 though greatly inferior in numbers, the Johnstones gained a 
 decisive victory. Before the battle both chieftains had offered 
 a reward for the head or hand of the other. The prize fell to 
 Johnstone — the hand of Maxwell being severed as he held it 
 out for quarter, and his head carried off by the savage victor. 
 From the number of face-wounds given in the battle, a " Locker- 
 by lick " passed into the common speech of the country. The 
 death of Maxwell and the fall of the northern earls cut off the 
 last hope of the Catholic cause in Scotland 1 . Catholic emis- 
 saries still continued to plot, and the ministers did not cease 
 from their terrors, but henceforward Catholicism was not a 
 formidable danjjer. 
 
 '&*■ 
 
 VII. The Octavians. 
 
 With the suppression of the chief troublers of the public 
 peace begins a new period in the reign of James 
 VI. Court intrigues now take the place of open 
 sedition ; and it is the queen who is more or less their moving 
 spirit. Prince Henry, the heir to the Crown, was, in accord- 
 ance with Scottish custom, in the keeping of his hereditary 
 custodier, the Earl of Mar ; and the queen desired to have him 
 in her own hands. In order to effect her purpose she had 
 gained over a considerable party, chief among whom was her 
 old enemy, the Lord Chancellor Thirlestane, with whom she 
 
 1 The feud between the Johnstones and the Maxwells is commemorated 
 in the ballads— "Lord Maxwell's Good Night" and "The Lads of Wam- 
 phray." In his introduction to the former of these ballads, Scott in his 
 Border Minstrelsy gives a detailed account of the light at Dryfe Sands and 
 ol the circumstances that led to it.
 
 220 The Crown and the Kirk L BooK VI 
 
 had long made her peace. The enterprise was on the eve of 
 accomplishment, when the king, who had learned the secret 
 from the Earl of Mar, effectually intervened, and prevented 
 further proceedings. The failure of the queen's scheme is 
 memorable for its results on the fortunes of Thirlestane. 
 Driven from the Court in disgrace, he took the king's dis- 
 pleasure so much to heart that, according to the contemporary 
 historian, he fell into a mortal sickness of which he died in the 
 space of two months (October 3). He was not a high-minded 
 public servant, but he had been the most sagacious adviser 
 who had yet directed James's counsels ; and his great measure 
 in favour of Presbytery has given him a notable place in 
 Scottish ecclesiastical history. His master had appreciated 
 his services, and in a poetical epitaph he at once bewailed his 
 loss and let the world know his own cleverness l . 
 
 Another incident of the same year has a place in every 
 
 history of the City of Edinburgh— the tragic 
 
 barring-out by the boys of the High School. 
 
 Defrauded in part of their usual autumn holiday, sixteen of 
 
 them, all armed, took possession of the school on a Sunday 
 
 evening, and refused all the terms that were offered to them. 
 
 1 Calderwood, v. $65, 6, 382 ; Spottiswoode, II. 462—5. James's 
 composition is as follows : — 
 
 "Thou passenger, that spies with gazing eyes 
 This sad trophie of Death's triumphant dart, 
 Consider, when this outward tomb thou sees [ftV], 
 How rare a man leaves here his earthly part : 
 His wisdom and his uprightness of heart, 
 His piety, his practice of our state, 
 His quick ingine so verst in every art, 
 As equally not all were in debate. 
 Thus justly hath his death brought forth of late 
 An heavy grief in Prince and subjects all 
 That virtue love and vice do bear at hate, 
 Though vicious men rejoices at his fall, 
 As for himself, most happy doth he die 
 Though for his Prince it most unhappy be."
 
 Chap, i] James VI 221 
 
 At length, a baillie named Macmorran, reputed the richest 
 man of his time, headed a band of town-officials and presented 
 himself before the youthful garrison. He was received with 
 flouts and jeers and the firing of blank-shot, and on his 
 attempting to break in the door he was shot through the head 
 by the son of the Chancellor of Caithness. The outcry was 
 great ; Macmorran's friends were rich j and the boys were all 
 the sons of barons and gentlemen. Seven of the ringleaders 
 were thrown into prison ; but after two months the case was 
 tried before the Privy Council, when their youth and family 
 connections secured the pardon of all the culprits 1 . 
 
 The year 1596 is one of the most memorable years of the 
 reign of James VI. It was the year of that ^ 
 
 singular administrative body, known in Scottish 
 history as the Octavians ; and it was distinguished by the last, 
 and not the least brilliant, deed of Border daring. According 
 to Calderwood, also, the opening of this year saw the Kirk 
 attain " its greatest purity," while its end saw the beginning 
 of its " doleful decay." 
 
 On the death of Chancellor Thirlestane, James is reported 
 to have said that he would appoint none to suc- 
 ceed him but " such as he could correct or were 
 hangable." Though he had determined to be his own chief 
 minister, there was, however, one department in which he 
 appears to have felt himself helpless. From the beginning of 
 his reign he had been in constant straits for money, and his 
 necessities had never been greater than now. To set his 
 finances in order, therefore, he took an important step : he ap- 
 pointed (Jan. 9) eight Commissioners of the Exchequer, known 
 to the country as the "Octavians," to whom he entrusted 
 absolute power of collecting and administering the royal 
 revenue. The "Octavians" were all men of note in their 
 time, but three of them rank among the most distinguished 
 
 1 History of Jama Die Sext, pp. 352 — 4 ; Reg. of Privy Council, V. 
 236-8.
 
 222 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 of their countrymen — Alexander Seton, Lord Urquhart, after- 
 wards Earl of Dunfermline ; Thomas Hamilton of Drumcairn, 
 afterwards Earl of Haddington, and known by the sobriquet 
 of "Tam o' the Cowgate;" and Sir John Skene, the famous 
 compiler of the Scottish Statutes. The whole body held office 
 for a year, and they discharged their trust with excellent results 
 for the royal purse. But, great as may have been their services 
 in restoring order to the Exchequer, it is in another connection, 
 as we shall see, that they gained notoriety among the people 1 . 
 It was in the month of April that a deed of Border daring 
 was done, with which all Scotland rang, and 
 which in other days would have involved a 
 national war. On a day of truce held on the Keirhope Water 
 on the Border line, the English, in defiance of a customary law, 
 seized a notorious cateran, William Armstrong of Kinmont, 
 the "Kinmont Willie" of the stirring ballad which com- 
 memorates the proceedings that followed. Sir Walter Scott 
 of Buccleuch, the Scottish Warden, vehemently demanded his 
 surrender. His demand was unheeded, and he determined 
 to take the affair into his own hands. With a band of 200 
 horsemen, amply supplied with ladders and forcing tools, he 
 crossed the Border and made for the Castle of Carlisle, 
 where Armstrong had been secured. It was before daybreak 
 on a misty morning that he arrived before the walls, and 
 everything had been arranged with perfect precision. Without 
 a life lost or injury done save the breach of the wall and 
 the prison door, the captive was rescued and borne off 
 triumphantly in the face of the awakened and astonished foe. 
 "The like of sic ane vassalage," exclaims a contemporary 
 diarist, "was never done since the memory of man, no, not 
 in Wallace dayis." Elizabeth was indignant, and threatened 
 James with the loss of his pension if the " bold Buccleugh " 
 were not at once put into her hands ; but the Scots maintained 
 
 1 Calderwood, V. 393, 4; Spottiswoode, II. 466, 7; Reg. of Privy 
 Council, V. 757 — 61.
 
 Chap. iJ James VI 223 
 
 that, if reparation were to be made, it was the English who, as 
 breakers of the peace, should make it first. After angry re- 
 criminations, Elizabeth receded from her demands ; and, after 
 a brief confinement in the Castle of St Andrews, Buccleuch 
 was allowed at large, only to make fresh trouble for the angry 
 queen 1 . 
 
 Since the passing of Thirlestane's great measure in favour 
 of Presbytery in 1592, the condition of public 
 affairs had constrained James to temporise with 
 the Kirk. But to the Presbyterian form of Church government 
 and the liberty of speech demanded by the ministers he was 
 opposed by all his instincts both as a man and as a king, and 
 he only waited a favourable opportunity of cancelling the con- 
 cessions which circumstances had wrung from him. The 
 opportunity had now come ; and, in a decisive trial of strength 
 with the leaders of the Kirk, he achieved a triumph which, in 
 Calderwood's words, began " the doleful decay " of Presbytery 
 in Scotland. The occasion of the conflict was the old ground 
 of James's suspected leanings towards Rome. It had been 
 contrary to his consistent policy that the Catholic earls had 
 been driven from the country ; and his regret for the necessity 
 had been quickened by the fact that the Catholics of England 
 were indignant at his treatment of their brethren in Scotland. 
 Now that Bothwell was no longer a thorn in his side, he 
 determined to recall the exiled earls, and he found ready 
 support from certain of the Octavians who themselves were 
 Catholics at heart, and were suspected to have been chosen 
 for this very reason. When his intention became known, the 
 ministers at once took their usual measures to defeat it : they 
 summoned a General Assembly in March — the last Assembly, 
 says Calderwood, which enjoyed "the liberty of the Gospel 
 
 1 History of James the Sext, 366—71; Spottiswoode, III, 1 — 5; Binel's 
 Diary, April 6, 1596; Acts of Pari, of Scot., IV. 99, ioo; Cat. of English 
 State Papers, pp. 712 — 15; Reg. of Privy Council, Vol. v. sub voce 
 Armstrong, William.
 
 224 The Crozvn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 under the free government of Christ." Never, indeed, had an 
 Assembly spoken its mind more plainly : it denounced all 
 temporising with Papists, chid the king for his bad habit of 
 swearing, and rebuked the queen for her neglect of divine 
 ordinances and the general frivolity of her conduct. James, 
 however, went steadily on his way : Huntly was permitted to 
 return in June, and he was followed by Errol a few months 
 later. 
 
 In the following September, at a meeting in Falkland Palace, 
 Andrew Melville spoke those famous words which give point to 
 Hallam's phrase "Presbyterian Hildebrandism." Telling James 
 that he was " but God's sillie (feeble) vassal," he seized him by 
 the sleeve and added : " Sir, as diverse tymes before, so now 
 again I must tell you, there are two Kings and two Kingdomes 
 in Scotland ; there is Christ Jesus and his Kingdome the Kirk, 
 whose subject King James the sixth is, and of whose Kingdome 
 not a King, nor a head, nor a Lord, but a member." But it 
 was not Andrew Melville who was to bring matters to a crisis. 
 David Black, minister of St Andrews, had uttered words from 
 the pulpit, for which James resolved to call him to account. 
 The question at issue between the Crown and the Kirk was 
 thus definitely raised — was a minister subject to civil juris- 
 diction for what he might utter from the pulpit ? Directed by 
 a permanent council of ministers expressly constituted to meet 
 the crisis, Black denied the competency of any but a spiritual 
 court to try him. The answer of the king was an Act of Privy 
 Council dissolving the standing council of ministers, ordering 
 the departure of sixteen of their leaders from the town, and 
 the removal of Black beyond the river Forth. By an unhappy 
 chance for the Kirk, there were other persons besides the 
 ministers who were interested in the issue of their conflict. 
 The rigid economies of the Octavians had touched the pockets 
 of the courtiers — " cubiculars," as they were called — and they 
 saw in the present strife an opportunity of effecting the ruin 
 of these officials. By spreading the rumour of a great Popish
 
 Chap ij James VI 225 
 
 plot they raised the wildest apprehension among the ministers 
 and such oi the citizens as were devoted to their cause. The 
 panic came to a head on the 17th of December — "that ac- 
 cursed wrathful day to the Kirk and Commonweal of Scotland." 
 While the king and the Lords of Session were sitting in the 
 Tolbooth, and the ministers in a neighbouring church, a cry 
 arose that the Papists were up, and that the king and the 
 ministers were about to be massacred. The tumult was at 
 length stayed, but it had supplied James with precisely the 
 weapon he needed to deal a deadly blow at his adversaries. 
 On the ground that the ministers and citizens were responsible 
 for the riot he quitted Edinburgh the next day, after launching 
 an Act of Council, declaring that the town should cease to be 
 the seat of law and, in effect, that it was no longer the capital 
 of his kingdom 1 . 
 
 The 17th of December, 1596, marks a turning-point in 
 the reign of James VI. By his astuteness and pertinacity he 
 turned the tumult of that day to so good account that he 
 gradually attained to a degree of authority over all classes of 
 his subjects such as had been acquired by no previous ruler 
 in Scotland. From the Catholic earls he had no longer any- 
 thing to fear; there was no longer a Bothwell to rally round 
 him the disaffected elements in the country ; the only section 
 of his people who remained to be humbled were the ministers, 
 and to this task he now addressed himself with triumphant 
 success. 
 
 The Octavians, having served the double purpose of setting 
 the national accounts in order, and of strength- 
 
 . J 597 
 
 ening James's hands in his policy towards the 
 Catholic earls, ceased to exist as a separate body. It was 
 soon to appear that he no longer needed their assistance. It 
 gave him at once an advantage that Edinburgh, which had 
 been the stronghold of extreme Protestant opinion, was forced 
 to accept the most humiliating conditions before it was restored 
 1 Spottiswoode, III. 5—34; Caklerwood, v. 387—5 
 II. [J
 
 226 The Crozvn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 to the royal favour; and that henceforward its citizens, though 
 always in sympathy with their ministers, were careful not to 
 hazard the privileges which they had once so nearly lost. But 
 it was James's policy to carry war into the enemy's own country. 
 In successive General Assemblies, all summoned at his own 
 dictation, he at once undermined the Presbyterian system and 
 broke the power of the ministers. The first of these Assemblies 
 met at Perth on the last day of February 1597 — a Convention 
 of Estates being deliberately arranged to meet at the same 
 date and place. It was in vain that the stauncher of the 
 ministers protested against an Assembly of the Kirk which 
 had not been summoned by itself. By two skilful artifices 
 James bent the Assembly to his purpose. Before it met he 
 had circulated a paper containing fifty-five questions, all dealing 
 with points on which the ministers were divided among them- 
 selves. Of a permanent division in the Church he also cleverly 
 availed himself. The ministers of the northern counties held 
 less extreme views on the subject of spiritual jurisdiction than 
 their brethren of the south, and had hitherto taken little part 
 in the affairs of the Kirk : these ministers James had beaten up, 
 and their presence in large numbers materially affected the tone 
 of the Perth Assembly. The result of his strategy was that 
 the Assembly was declared to have been lawfully summoned, 
 and that by his further mandate another was summoned to 
 meet in Dundee in the month of May. In the Dundee 
 Assembly James gained a still more decisive advantage : the 
 Catholic earls were absolved from the censure of the Kirk, 
 and a standing Committee of ministers was appointed to 
 transact ecclesiastical affairs with the king. The significance 
 of this last arrangement was seen before the year closed. 
 When Parliament met in December, after an interval of more 
 than three years, the Church Commissioners, "the King's led 
 horse," as Calderwood calls them, presented a notable petition. 
 They demanded that ministers should have a seat and a vote 
 in the National Assembly. The result of the petition was an
 
 Chap, i] James VI 
 
 Act which declared that "all ministers provided to prelacies 
 should have a vote in Parliament." Thus in the course of a 
 single year had James dealt a death-blow to Presbytery and 
 prepared the way for that type of bishop, without which, as 
 he maintained, a king was but a king in name 1 . 
 
 The question naturally rises — how was it that James at this 
 particular period was enabled to bring such pressure to bear on 
 the Kirk ? From the time when he became an actual king, he 
 had been endeavouring to accomplish what he now effected 
 with such apparent ease. By the overthrow of Bothwell and 
 the Catholic earls he had doubtless greatly strengthened his 
 authority, while, in the divisions of the ministers themselves, 
 he found the means of weakening their ranks. But there was 
 another cause which receives the most cogent illustration from 
 all the critical periods of Scottish ecclesiastical history. Alike 
 in its beginnings and in its later developments, Protestantism 
 in Scotland held its ground and made its way by the combined 
 action of the clergy and the nobles. But precisely at this 
 moment there was not a single noble of ability and authority 
 who took his stand on the side of the Presbyterian party. 
 From the death in 1588 of Archibald, Earl of Angus ("the 
 ministers' king," as James called him), James Melville declared 
 that there was not a Scottish noble with whom he could hold 
 friendly converse on religion 2 . The explanation of this defec- 
 tion is not far to seek. In 1587, it will be remembered, an 
 Act of Parliament had been passed for the annexation to the 
 Crown of the temporalities of benefices. What became of 
 those temporalities Archbishop Spottiswoode tells us plainly: 
 they were begged from the king, and given to the followers 
 of the Court 3 . A half century later the nobles once more 
 
 < ilderwood, v. 606—73; Spottiswoode, Hi. 41 — 68; Acts of Pari, of 
 Scot., IV. 123 — 57; Keg. oj Privy Council, Vol. V. pp. lx. et seq. 
 - James Melville, Diary (Ban. Club), p. an. 
 
 iode, 11. 376, 7. Professor Masson has given a list of the grants 
 of these temporalities. — Reg. of Privy Council, Vol. xv. pp. cxliv. — cxlvii. 
 
 '5—2
 
 
 228 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 rallied to the side of the Kirk for motives not unmixed with 
 those which had led them to desert it. 
 
 The continued dealings of James with the Church are the 
 most important part of his policy during his 
 remaining years in Scotland, for on the success 
 or failure of that policy depended the future of Scotland and 
 England alike. The year 1598 saw a still further advance 
 towards the ends at which he was aiming. By the Act of the 
 previous December it had been decreed that ministers ap- 
 pointed to bishoprics should have the right to vote in Parlia- 
 ment ; and an Assembly that met in March at Dundee gave 
 its sanction to the decree. By a majority of ten it decided 
 that ministers should sit in Parliament, but that their number 
 should be about fifty-one, and that they should be chosen 
 partly by the king and partly by the Kirk. An extraordinary 
 Ecclesiastical Convention that met at Falkland in the month 
 of July took one step further. It was agreed that, when a 
 Prelacy fell vacant, the Kirk should name six, or, if necessary, 
 twelve persons, as might be found necessary, and that the final 
 election should lie with the king. Yet so formidable was the 
 opposition to the manifest intentions of James that he had 
 still to pick his steps warily. The title of bishop was carefully 
 avoided, that of commissioner taking its place ; and the office 
 was hedged round by so many conditions that it seemed hardly 
 incompatible with the idea of Presbytery 1 . 
 
 On the death of Chancellor Thirlestane James had declared 
 that he would appoint to his office only such a 
 1599 person as he could conveniently hang. After an 
 
 interval of more than three years (Jan. 1599) he chose as 
 Thirlestane's successor, John Graham, third Earl of Montrose, 
 grandfather of the great Marquis. As Graham's chancellorship 
 suggested the application of the line "Et Bibulo memini 
 consule nil fieri," it would seem that James had kept his word. 
 The resuscitation of the Chancellorship at least made no 
 
 1 Calderwood, v. 682—709; Spottiswoode, ill. 68—75.
 
 Chap, i] James VI 229 
 
 change in any part of his policy. As Montrose had leanings 
 towards Rome, he was in full sympathy with his master's 
 dealings with the Kirk. During the year 1599 the great 
 conflict between Presbytery and Episcopacy was allowed to 
 slumber ; but on minor matters there was no abatement of the 
 friction between the king and the ministers. James's well- 
 known book, the "Basilicon Doron," in which we have the 
 full-blown Stewart conception of the royal prerogative in Church 
 and State, was on the eve of publication, and an early copy 
 had been seen by one of the ministers. When he reported its 
 contents to certain of his brethren, they extracted some of its 
 propositions, sent them to the king, and requested his opinion 
 of them. James's reply was an order for the arrest of the 
 minister who had surreptitiously possessed himself of his book. 
 In the month of September the king and the ministers were 
 pitted against each other in an interesting case. A company 
 of English actors, of whom it has been conjectured that 
 Shakespeare may have been one, appeared in Edinburgh, and 
 received such countenance from the king that he set apart a 
 special house for their performances. Great was the commo- 
 tion among the ministers ; and, though their authority was not 
 what it had been, they could not remain passive in the presence 
 of such a visitation. At a meeting of the four Kirk sessions 
 of the town, on the triple ground that the plays performed were 
 indecent, that they were given on the Sabbath, and that the 
 acting of such plays was condemned by Act of Parliament, 
 they forbade the citizens to frequent them. But it was now 
 brought home to them on what evil days they had fallen : on a 
 peremptory order of the king they were forced to rescind their 
 decree. A few years earlier they would have had the city at 
 their back, but since the tumult of the 17 th of December the 
 citizens were in no humour to try conclusions with the king 1 . 
 
 1 Reg. of Privy Council, v. pp. lxxxii. 516; Caldcrwood, V. 744 — 67; 
 Spottiswoode, III. 80, 81. Pascal has exactly expressed the views of the 
 ministers with regard to th a, " Tous les yrands divertissements soul
 
 230 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 A novel enterprise which belongs to the autumn of the 
 same year brings once more before us the con- 
 1599 dition of the Western Highlands and Islands. 
 
 Since the expedition of James V in 1540, which had resulted 
 in the annexation of the Lordship of the Isles to the Crown, 
 there had been no great combined movement in these districts 
 such as had alarmed so many successive kings of Scotland. 
 The final alienation of the Island Lordship deprived the clans 
 of the one common object which could unite them in common 
 action ; and thenceforward their history is confined to petty 
 conflicts between rival chieftains which never affected the 
 national security. It is to the credit of James that he took 
 up the task of restoring order in the Highlands and Islands 
 to which James IV and James V had addressed themselves 
 with such energy and success. In his dealings with the in- 
 habitants there was much impolicy and much injustice ; but 
 by the close of his reign they had been reduced to a state 
 of obedience and tranquillity unknown at any previous time. 
 By several Acts of Parliament James had already taken steps 
 towards this end. In 1587 an Act, known as the "General Bond," 
 had decreed that chieftains and others in authority should find 
 security for the peaceable behaviour of those for whom they were 
 responsible; and in 1598 it was enacted that all landowners 
 should produce their title-deeds, and that three royal burghs 
 should be erected in Cantire, Lochaber, and the island of Lewis 
 respectively. The Macleods of Lewis apparently failed to pro- 
 duce their title-deeds; and in the most high-handed fashion the 
 island was taken over by the king, who had a novel scheme in 
 his head for civilising these parts of his dominions. He 
 granted the island to a number of persons, known as "the 
 gentlemen adventurers of Fife," who were to hold it rent-free 
 
 dangereux pour la vie chretienne; mais, entre tous ceux que le monde a 
 inventes, il n'y en a point qui soit plus a craindre que la comedie. C'est 
 une representation si naturelle et si delicate des passions, qu'elle les emeute 
 et les fait nattre dans notre coeur."
 
 Chap. iJ Ja)>ics VI 231 
 
 for the first seven years. The adventurers proceeded to their 
 destination in October 1599; but their enterprise was unhappy 
 in its beginnings and disastrous in its close. Soon after their 
 arrival many died from disease and the rigour of the winter; 
 and one of them, Learmonth of Balcomy, while approaching 
 the Orkneys on his voyage home, was himself taken prisoner 
 and several of his crew butchered. Tor a time, however, the 
 colonists were fairly prosperous : they came to a temporary 
 understanding with the natives, and they built what was 
 described as "a pretty town ;" but the sequel of the enterprise 
 belongs to a later period of James's reign, and there the story 
 will be more fitly told 1 
 
 VIII. The Cowrie Conspiracy. 
 
 The outstanding event of the year 1600 was the sensa- 
 tional incident known as the "Cowrie Con- 
 spiracy," which resulted in the temporary ruin of 
 the powerful House of Ruthven and a still further increase of 
 James's authority. The House of Ruthven had already played 
 a notable part in Scottish history: the grandfather of the 
 living earl was Patrick, Lord Ruthven, notorious as one of 
 the assassins of Riccio ; and his father was that first Earl of 
 Gowrie who had been the main author of the Ruthven Raid, 
 which had eventually brought him to the scaffold. The young 
 Earl of Gowrie possessed all the attributes of a hero of 
 romance. He was about twenty-two years old, stately in 
 manner, handsome in person and disposed to solitude and 
 meditation. He had studied at Padua and at Geneva, and 
 had returned with a reputation for learning, which, associated 
 with his secluded habits and the traditionary repute of his 
 House, had already marked him as a trafficker in forbidden 
 
 1600 
 
 1 Acti of Pari, oj Scot., ill. 4(1:, iv. 138, 9; Caldcrwood, v. 7^6; Keg. 
 of Privy Council, V. 467, 8, 489; Birrel's Diary.
 
 232 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 arts. He had not been three months in Scotland before the 
 event took place which resulted in the tragic end of himself and 
 his brother, Alexander, the Master of Ruthven. For the details 
 of the story we have only the narrative which James gave to the 
 world and pertinaciously insisted on his subjects accepting. 
 
 According to that narrative, James was in the Park of 
 Falkland between six and seven in the morning of the 5th of 
 March and on the point of mounting his horse for a day's 
 hunting, when he was accosted by Gowrie's brother, the Master 
 of Ruthven. The evening before, Ruthven told him, he had 
 met a man in Perth with a pot of gold under his cloak, and 
 deeming him a suspicious person, had placed him in ward in a 
 private house, without the knowledge of his brother, the earl ; 
 and his errand to James was that he should come to Perth at 
 once and investigate the affair. At the close of the hunt, about 
 eleven in the forenoon, James, without returning to the Palace, 
 rode to Perth accompanied by Ruthven and a small body of 
 attendants, among whom were the Duke of Lennox and the Earl 
 of Mar. When within a mile of the town, Ruthven went on 
 ahead to inform his brother of his Majesty's coming ; and at 
 the extremity of the Inch the earl appeared at the head of 
 some sixty or eighty men. Apparently the royal visit was un- 
 expected, as the dinner provided was both poor and late. The 
 meal over, the master conducted the king up a stair, and 
 passing through several apartments, the doors of which he 
 carefully locked, he at length led him into a "little study," the 
 door of which was also locked on their entry. Here James 
 found himself face to face with a man not in bonds as he had 
 expected, but one with his limbs free and a dagger at his 
 girdle, though with "a very abased countenance." Seizing the 
 man's dagger, Ruthven held it to the king's breast, threatening 
 that if he uttered a cry or offered to open the window he 
 would stab him to the heart, and adding that James had now 
 occasion to remember the murder of his captor's lather. On 
 "his majesty's persuasive language," however, Ruthven changed
 
 Chap i] James VI 233 
 
 his tone, declared that his life would be safe if he would but 
 conduct himself quietly, and that for the moment he would 
 leave him and call his brother the earl. As he quitted the 
 apartment, he charged the man at his peril to keep his prisoner 
 safe. The man, however, was more frightened than his 
 Majesty, and "became a slave to his presence." After a brief 
 absence Ruthven returned in great agitation, and declared 
 there was no help for it and that James must die. On his 
 attempting to bind the king's hands a struggle ensued, in which 
 James dragged his antagonist to the window, which had been 
 opened by the man during Ruthven's absence, and from which 
 he now shouted for help. At this very moment James's 
 followers were leaving the house on the earl's allegation that 
 their master had already gone, but on hearing his cries they 
 rushed back to his assistance. Sir John Ramsay, finding his 
 way into the "little study," slew the Master of Ruthven while 
 still struggling with the king, and a few moments later the earl 
 met the same fate. The citizens of Perth, learning the death 
 of the earl, who was the provost of their town, were disposed 
 to take strong measures for his revenge, but after repeated 
 explanations of the king from the window they were at length 
 persuaded to return to their homes. 
 
 Such was the singular story which James gave to the world, 
 and which he insisted that his subjects should believe on the 
 penalty of high treason. It was received with a smile of in- 
 credulity alike in Scotland, England and on the Continent. 
 In his own kingdom, however, he took effectual means to 
 check all expression of scepticism. The ministers of Edin- 
 burgh were ordered to declare from their pulpits their belief 
 in the king's story ; and such pressure was brought to bear 
 upon them that, with the exception of one, they were con- 
 strained to bear their unwilling testimony. The exception was 
 Robert Bruce, after Andrew Melville the most influential 
 minister in the Kirk, who for his conscientious scruples was 
 pursued by James with a petty and persistent malice which
 
 234 T/ic Crown and the Kirk L B oo K V1 
 
 revealed the most contemptible traits in his character. But 
 the full brunt of his vengeance fell on the family of the alleged 
 conspirators. By an Act of Parliament, passed in December, 
 it was declared that the name of Ruthven was henceforth 
 abolished, that the family arms were cancelled and their lands 
 confiscated to the Crown 1 . 
 
 To complete the story of the so-called Gowrie Plot' we 
 have to pass to the year 1608, when the world was led to 
 believe that the mystery was at length to be made clear, and 
 the king's good faith established. There was then produced 
 a notary of Eyemouth, by name George Sprott, who was 
 alleged to have been privy to a treasonable conspiracy between 
 the Earl of Gowrie and Robert Logan of Restalrig. Sprott 
 was found guilty and condemned to death, but his examination 
 left the mystery as dark as ever. A letter from Logan to 
 Gowrie, which was not produced at the trial, is so vague in 
 its terms that no definite meaning can be attached to it. What 
 seemed more conclusive was the fact that Sprott when on the 
 scaffold confessed his guilt in concealing the Gowrie Con- 
 spiracy. Yet of the worth of Sprott's testimony Archbishop 
 Spottiswoode, who was one of his judges and highly favourable 
 to the king, could write as follows : " Whether or not I should 
 mention the arraignment and execution of George Sprott, 
 Notary in Eyemouth, who suffered in August, I am doubtful ; 
 his confession, though voluntary and constant, carrying small 
 probability 2 ." 
 
 From the evidence that has come down to us there emerges 
 only a balance of probabilities regarding the motives and in- 
 tentions of the chief actors in the tragedy of Gowrie House. 
 On the one hand it is alleged that the object of the two 
 brothers in decoying the king to Perth was to get possession of 
 
 1 CalHervvood, vi. 27 — 98; Spottiswoode, III. 84 — 91; Acts oj Pari, of 
 Scot., IV. 199. 
 
 2 Calderwood, VI. 778 — 80; Spottiswoode, III. 199, 200.
 
 Chap, i] 'James VI 235 
 
 his person and overturn the Government, as their father had 
 done in the affair of the Ruthven Raid. In support of this 
 view it may be contended that there was a hereditary feud 
 between James and the Ruthven family : Patrick, Lord 
 Ruthven, was one of the murderers of Riccio and the enemy 
 of James's mother ; and James had sent the first Earl of Gowrie 
 to the scaffold as a traitor. On the other hand, it may be 
 urged that James lied so copiously at every period of his life 
 that no asseveration on his own part can be accepted as 
 a guarantee for his veracity. The position of affairs in the 
 country renders it highly improbable that the two youths, the 
 eldest only twenty-two, should have conceived the wild scheme 
 which James attributed to them. In effecting the Ruthven 
 Raid their father had the support of many of the most powerful 
 nobles; but the two brothers could reckon on no such support, 
 for, as the history of the last few years had shown, James was 
 now all but absolute master of his kingdom. Moreover, in 
 James's own story, and in the accounts of the criminal pro- 
 ceedings that followed, there are at once improbabilities, 
 discrepancies and proved falsehoods which raise the gravest 
 suspicion. That James was false and cruel and vindictive 
 many actions of his life place beyond doubt ; and it is to be 
 noted that he had special reasons besides traditional hatred 
 for seeking the ruin of Gowrie. On an important occasion he 
 had been withstood by Gowrie in the Privy Council — a kind 
 of offence which James never forgave; and he was in Cowrie's 
 debt to the extent of ^80,000, a sum which in the state of his 
 Exchequer must grow more onerous with every year of his 
 reign 1 . 
 
 ' Cal. of State Papers, 783 ; Reg. of Privy Council, Vol. VI. sub voce 
 Gowrie; Arnot, Criminal Trials (1785). Mr Louis A. Barbe has given an 
 admirable account of the whole Gowrie affair in his Tragedy of Gowrie 
 House (Gardner, 1HN7). Mr Barbd considers James's published storj "I 
 what took place at Gowrie House to have been largely the producl oi his 
 own invention.
 
 < 
 
 236 The Croivn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 The year 1600 was memorable for other things beside the 
 Gowrie Conspiracy, for it saw the final triumph 
 of James over the Kirk. A General Assembly 
 that met at Montrose in March gave its sanction to the 
 arrangement by which certain ministers, to be known as Com- 
 missioners, were to have a seat and a vote in Parliament. The 
 affair of Gowrie, like the tumult of the 17th of December, had 
 the most important results in increasing James's ascendency 
 over the ministers. In spite of their vehement protests he 
 had compelled them, with the exception of Bruce, to make 
 public statement of their belief in his story of the conspiracy. 
 He was not slow to make use of his victory. In October the 
 standing Ecclesiastical Commission met in Holyrood, and at 
 James's dictation took the definitive step of appointing three 
 diocesan bishops to the sees of Ross, Aberdeen and Caithness 
 — the only three of the ancient sees the temporalities of which 
 were not in the hands of laymen. When, less than three years 
 later, James left his native country, he could boast that Pres- 
 bytery was at an end in Scotland — its forms abolished and the 
 spirit of its champions crushed. It was to be seen at a later 
 day how lamentably he had misunderstood his countrymen, and 
 what an evil heritage he had bequeathed to his successors and 
 / to their subjects 1 . 
 
 The absorbing preoccupation of James during his last 
 
 years in Scotland was the question of his acces- 
 1600 — 1603 J i 
 
 sion to the English throne. The death of Eliza- 
 beth could not now be far off, and still she had not designated 
 him as her successor. We have seen how in the early years 
 of his reign he had sought to ensure his election in every 
 contingency — how he had intrigued with his mother, with 
 Philip II, with Guise, with the Pope, with the Catholics of 
 England, and with the Catholics of Scotland. It may be said, 
 indeed, that till the day when he received the intimation of 
 
 1 Caldeiwood, VI. 96.
 
 Chap. iJ James VI 237 
 
 his recognition by the English Privy Council as their king, 
 his public policy and his private intrigues were unremittingly 
 directed towards the one end. In his own kingdom he had 
 made the ground perfectly secure. He had conciliated his 
 Catholic nobles, he had mastered the Presbyterian clergy, while, 
 as the result of his victory, he had, in a large degree, assimi- 
 lated the Church of Scotland to the Church of England, and 
 had made his powers as a King of Scots commensurate with 
 those of the Tudor monarchy. Should he attain his desire, 
 therefore, he would be the ruler of two kingdoms which might 
 be readily cast into a homogeneous whole. In England itself 
 he had a difficult game to play, for he had to secure at once 
 the support of Elizabeth's Catholic and Protestant subjects. 
 In the case of the former he followed the same tactics as in 
 the earlier period of his reign ; he amused the Catholic powers 
 with the hope that, when the fitting occasion came, he would 
 show himself to be a true son of the Church. In 1595 he sent one 
 of his Catholic subjects, John Ogilvie of Powry, with instructions 
 to effect an understanding with Philip of Spain 1 ; and in 1598 
 he wrote a letter to the Pope accompanied with instructions 
 to his agent to make such advances as policy might dictate 2 . 
 As the result of this manoeuvring, James, when he actually 
 became ruler of England, found his Catholic subjects disposed 
 to welcome his accession as a propitious day for their Church. 
 With the leading Protestants in England James was in assiduous 
 communication, and by bribes and promises left no means 
 untried to assure himself of their support. When the Earl of 
 
 1 Miscellany oj the Scottish History Society, Vol. I. Documents Illus- 
 trating Catholic Policy in the Reign of James VI, edited by Thomas 
 Graves Law. 
 
 2 Calderwood, V. 740--), VI. 7S1; et seq. James disclaimed the 
 authorship oi this letter, and Sir James Elphinstone, his Secretary of 
 State, assumed the responsibility for it — thereby entailing his own ruin. 
 There can be little doubt that James wrote the letter. As we have seen 
 (ante pp. 193-4), il was not lnc Mrst l ' mc lnal James had written to the Pope.
 
 238 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Essex was in the ascendant, James took care to conciliate him 
 by friendly though cautious overtures ; and on Essex's fall he 
 made sure of the younger Cecil, whom as Elizabeth's most 
 powerful minister it was his special interest to gain over. As 
 Elizabeth's end drew near, the world gradually realised that 
 by the converging force of things the King of Scots was 
 marked as her inevitable successor 1 . 
 
 Two events of the time immediately preceding James's 
 accession in England deserve a passing mention — both of them 
 characteristic of so much of Scottish history. On the 7th of 
 February, 1603, occurred "The Slaughter in the Lennox," or as 
 it is otherwise known, "The Conflict of Glenfruin," one of the 
 most atrocious incidents even in the records of the Highlands. 
 Some four hundred of the Macgregors and other clans burst 
 into the Lennox, and after a desperate contest, in which about 
 eighty of the Lennox men fell, made off with six hundred 
 cattle, eight hundred sheep, two hundred and eighty horses, 
 together with such other booty as they could transport. It 
 was an evil day for the Clan Gregor. They had already given 
 much trouble in the past, but their slaughter in the Lennox 
 was never forgiven by James. Henceforward he pursued them 
 with a relentless hostility and with the result that they became 
 "the Clan that has a name that is nameless by day 2 ." The 
 other event was of happier omen. It is to James's credit that 
 he had all along endeavoured to heal those feuds between his 
 great nobles which had wrought such lamentable results in the 
 past history of his kingdom. Between several of his lords 
 he now effected a reconciliation which occasioned general re- 
 joicing among his subjects. The long quarrel between Huntly 
 and Argyle was made up by the betrothal of the son of the 
 
 1 The Secret Correspondence of Sir Robert Cecil with James VI of 
 Scot/and, Edin. 1 766 ; Letters and Stale Papers during the reign of James 
 the Sixth (Abbotsford Club). 
 
 2 Calderwood, VI. 204; Pitcairn, Criminal Trials, 11. 432; Reg. of 
 Privy Council, Vol. vi. sub voce Glenfruin.
 
 Chap. iJ James VI 239 
 
 one to the daughter of the other. In the queen's attempts to 
 obtain the custody of the heir of the Crown from the Earl of 
 Mar, she had had the support of the Duke of Lennox, but 
 Lennox and Mar were now induced to lay aside their differences. 
 Happiest of all, however, was the reconciliation of Moray and 
 Huntly, whose feuds had more than once brought the country 
 to the brink of civil war 1 . 
 
 The prize at which James had so long grasped at length 
 dropped into his hands. On the night of Saturday, March 24, 
 1 603, Sir Robert Carey, having ridden from London in less than 
 three days, brought the news to Holyrood that the Queen of 
 England was dead; and two days later came an official an- 
 nouncement from the Privy Council that James had been 
 declared her successor. On Sunday, the 3rd of April, he 
 bade a characteristic farewell to his subjects at the close of the 
 preacher's discourse. "Think not of me," he said, "as of 
 a King going from one part to another ; but as a King lawfully 
 called, going from one part of the isle to the other, that so 
 your comfort may be greater. And where I thought to have 
 employed you with some armour, now I employ only your 
 hearts to the good prospering of me in my success and 
 journey." On the 5th of April he took his journey south- 
 wards, arriving at Berwick the following day. He left his 
 ancient kingdom under a promise to revisit it every three 
 years : in point of fact, during the twenty-two years he was still 
 to reign, he was only once to see it again 2 . 
 
 1 Calderwood, vi. 205. 
 
 8 Calderwood, vi. 215—2.3; Spottiswoode, 111. 1 3+ — 9.
 
 240 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 JAMES VI {continued), 1603 — 1625. 
 
 I. Establishment of Episcopacy : Negotiations for 
 Parliamentary Union. 
 
 The accession of James VI to the throne of England is far 
 more than a mere chronological landmark in Scottish history : 
 in the two main concerns of a nation it effected a decisive 
 breach with the past. Scotland ceased at once to have inde- 
 pendent relations with any foreign country, and to possess an 
 independent legislature at home. Throughout the 16th century 
 foreign relations had made up a large part of the national 
 history : to understand the reigns of James IV and his im- 
 mediate successors the movements of the great continental 
 nations must always be before our eyes. But from the Union 
 of the Crowns the sole business of Scotland with foreign 
 countries was to contribute men and money towards whatever 
 policy her predominant partner might choose to adopt 1 . In 
 her constitutional history the removal of James to England 
 marks an equally decisive change. In the 15th century Sir 
 John Fortescue could write of the King of Scots that he " may 
 not rule his people by other laws than such as they assent 
 unto." About four years after James had left Scotland he 
 could use these words in addressing the English Parliament : 
 " This I must say for Scotland, and may truly vaunt it : here I 
 sit and govern it with my pen : I write and it is done ; and by 
 a Clerk of the Council I govern Scotland now, — which others 
 
 1 Hence there is no further need for giving lists of contemporary foreign 
 princes at the beginning of each reign.
 
 Chap, iij James VI 241 
 
 could not do by the sword." That this was not an idle boast 
 the record of his reign conclusively shows. His successive 
 Parliaments were packed with persons of his own choice; they 
 were managed by officials removeable at his will ; and their 
 function was in large degree but to register his commands. 
 The Assemblies of the Church, which had once so efficiently- 
 discharged the duties of a Parliament, were similarly convened 
 at his pleasure ; and their work was prescribed and determined 
 before they met. It was through the Scottish Privy Council 
 that James exercised those powers, which made him all but 
 absolute master of the country. The Privy Council had come 
 to be at once a legislative, an executive, and a judicial body; 
 and as its various officials were the mere nominees of the king, 
 all its powers were at his unlimited disposal. But not only the 
 Parliament, the Privy Council, and the General Assembly were 
 the instruments of his pleasure : the leading Scottish Burghs 
 had to take their commands from him, and to appoint their 
 civic rulers at his simple bidding. The cause of this domination 
 of the Crown has already been noted : for the first time in the 
 national history the baronage as a whole was acting in concert 
 with the king. The reason for this common action has also 
 been stated : by the lavish distribution of the property of the 
 ancient Church James had bound the most powerful nobles by 
 ties which they were not likely soon to break. The gifts of 
 Church lands' increased rather than diminished after James's 
 removal to England ; and it was through this wholesale bribery, 
 rather than through the increased resources which came to him 
 from that country, that he was enabled to rule Scotland as no 
 king had ruled it before him. 
 
 In James's policy for the amalgamation of his two king- 
 doms the assimilation of the English and Scottish Churches 
 still held the first place in his thoughts. Before he left Scotland 
 he had already made great way towards this end; but much 
 
 1 For a list of these gifts see Profes Introduction to the 
 
 Privy Council Register, Vol. I. (Second Scrie.-.), pp. cxliv — cxlvii. 
 
 1; II. ,r>
 
 242 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 still remained to be done before the Scottish people and their 
 ministers were fitted to the precise ecclesiastical pattern he had 
 devised for them. The history of the twenty-two years during 
 which James was still to govern Scotland is mainly the history 
 of his pertinacious endeavour to accomplish this object. 
 Through the agency of successive Parliaments and General 
 Assemblies he all but attained his purpose, though before the 
 close of his reign he was taught by unmistakeable signs that 
 the edifice he had reared rested on sand. 
 
 The history of the ecclesiastical policy of James subsequent 
 to 1603 is divisible into two well-defined periods. Till 161 2 
 his governing aim was the establishment of diocesan episcopacy, 
 a result which that year saw definitely attained. From 161 2 
 till his death his insistence on the acceptance of certain rites 
 and doctrines by the Scottish Church was his absorbing interest 
 in his ancient kingdom. It is with the first of these periods 
 that we have to deal in the present section. 
 
 At the famous Hampton Court Conference held in January, 
 1604, James left his subjects of both kingdoms 
 in no doubt as to his ecclesiastical predilections. 
 When the word Presbytery was mentioned in the course of the 
 conference, he testily exclaimed that Presbytery "agreeth as 
 well with a monarchy as God and the devil." The Presbyterians 
 of Scotland were soon to learn that James's removal to England 
 had not weakened his determination to make as short work as 
 possible of their ecclesiastical system. So long, however, as 
 the Scottish Church retained the privilege of calling its own 
 Assemblies, it was secure against every assault. This privilege 
 had been guaranteed by the Act of 1592, and we have seen 
 that James had already had some success in setting it aside. 
 But to make that Act a dead letter was absolutely necessary 
 for the success of his whole Church policy in Scotland. On 
 this point the main battle was now fought between James 
 and the ministers. As in previous contests between the same 
 parties, it was the Synod of Fife that stood forward as the
 
 Chap. 11] James VI 243 
 
 boldest asserter of the Church's right. A Parliament had 
 been appointed to meet in April ; and the Synod craved that in 
 accordance with ancient custom a General Assembly should 
 meet before it. The answer was that on the present occasion 
 a General Assembly would not be necessary, as the coming 
 Parliament would deal with nothing in which the Church had 
 any interest 1 . James's intentions were speedily revealed. In 
 the last General Assembly that had met before his departure 
 (Nov. 1602) it had been arranged that its next meeting should 
 be held at Aberdeen in July, 1604. When July came, it 
 brought the announcement that it was the king's will that 
 there should be no meeting of Assembly at that time. On the 
 day appointed for the Aberdeen Assembly three ministers from 
 the Presbytery of St Andrews appeared in the town and lodged 
 a protest against the wrong done to the Church ; and in the 
 following months the general dissatisfaction was loudly ex- 
 pressed alike in ordinary and extraordinary meetings of the 
 ministers. A peremptory order from James in September 
 forbade such meetings as against the laws of the kingdom 2 . 
 Thus for more than two years no General Assembly 
 
 met — a circumstance unprecedented since the 
 
 r . 1605— 1606 
 
 Reformation. In July 1605, however, it was 
 understood that the long-deferred Assembly would at length 
 meet. Great, therefore, was the general dismay, when in June 
 the Privy Council passed an Act declaring every person an 
 outlaw who should appear in such an Assembly. Undeterred 
 by this threat, nineteen ministers appeared at Aberdeen on the 
 appointed day and formally constituted themselves the highest 
 court of the Church. On the same day, Andrew Straiton, 
 laird of Lauriston, read a letter from the Privy Council con- 
 veying from James the double command that the meeting 
 should at once dissolve, and that it should not take upon itself 
 to appoint a General Assembly without his concurrence. The 
 
 1 Calderwood, VI. 257. 
 
 * I hid. 764 — 7; P. C. Register, VI I. 13, 14. 
 
 1 6 — 2
 
 
 244 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 devoted nineteen agreed to disperse ; but they had at least had 
 the satisfaction of maintaining their testimony : they had con- 
 stituted themselves an Assembly, and they had fixed the last 
 Tuesday of September as the meeting-day of the next. A few 
 days later ten other ministers, who had been delayed by stress 
 of weather, appeared in the town, and publicly identified them- 
 selves with the action of their brethren 1 . 
 
 Left to itself, the Scottish Privy Council would have pre- 
 ferred that no further proceedings should be taken against the 
 offending ministers. The members of the Council knew that 
 the feeling of the country was against the king, and they had 
 a well-grounded apprehension as to the possible results of the 
 royal action. James, however, thwarted in schemes which were 
 so dear to him, was furious at the defiant ministers and deter- 
 mined that they should feel the weight of his hand. Their 
 trial and chastisement were entrusted to the Privy Council, — 
 Sir Thomas Hope, King's Advocate, taking on himself the 
 burden of the business. Of the twenty-nine ministers who had 
 appeared at Aberdeen only thirteen 2 stood to their protest, and 
 these flatly denied the competency of the Council to try them 
 in a spiritual matter. The trial began in October (1605)" — 
 the ministers being brought to Edinburgh from the respective 
 prisons to which they had been consigned. Their condemnation 
 was a foregone conclusion, and they were sent back to their 
 confinement to await the sentence which his Majesty should 
 be pleased to award them. To the dismay of the Council, an 
 order came from James enjoining a new trial of the prisoners 
 on a charge of high treason for their refusal to recognise the 
 competency of the Civil Court. In point of fact only six of 
 their number were brought to the bar. To secure a verdict in 
 accordance with the king's desire, no pains were spared. The 
 place of trial was removed to Linlithgow, as the sympathies of 
 
 1 Calderwood, vi. 279 — 84; P. C. Reg., VII. 62. 
 
 2 A fourteenth, Mr Robert Youngson of Clatt, subsequently took his 
 place with them. Calderwood, VI. 284.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 245 
 
 Edinburgh might have proved dangerous; Dunbar, the High 
 
 Treasurer, was sent down from London, to use all his abilities 
 
 and influence ; and the fifteen jurors who were to deal with the 
 
 case were subjected to threats and bribes which made their 
 
 office a mockery. The trial took place on the 10th of January, 
 
 1606, and the six were found guilty, though in spite of the 
 
 influence of the Crown, only nine of the jurors concurred in 
 
 the verdict. The proceedings had been scandalous throughout, 
 
 and it was doubtless with heartfelt disgust that the Lord 
 
 Advocate prayed his Majesty to try his Council "with as few 
 
 essayes in the lyke caisses as may possiblie stand with the 
 
 weill" of his " Maiesties service 1 ." 
 
 While the ministers were thus proving so intractable, James 
 
 had found the Scottish Estates somewhat more 
 
 1606 
 
 ready to give effect to his wishes. In July, 1606, 
 a Parliament had met at Perth 2 , the performances of which 
 gave him special satisfaction. By one of its Acts it declared 
 that his prerogative extended "over all estates, persons, and 
 causes whatsoever " — an admission which James did not fail to 
 flourish in the face of his subjects. Another Act, entitled the 
 Restitution of the Estate of Bishops, rescinded the measure of 
 1587, fatal to Episcopacy in Scotland, which had annexed all 
 ecclesiastical property to the Crown. But till the clergy as a 
 whole were bent to his will, James's schemes could not come 
 to their full fruition. It was by striking at their leaders that he 
 sought to effect this end. We have seen how he dealt with the 
 ministers who had appeared at Aberdeen : another proceeding 
 was to the full as high-handed and unjust. On the pretext that 
 he wished to confer with them on the affairs of the Church he 
 summoned eight of the leading ministers — Andrew and James 
 Melville being among them— to England. The eight went 
 
 1 Calderwood, vi. 374 — 91; P. C. Reg., vn. 82 et seq. ; Original 
 Letters Relating to the Ecclesiastieal Affairs of Scotland, p. 33. 
 
 '-' Known as the "Red Parliament," because, in accordance with James's 
 order, the nobles appeared in scarlet robes.
 
 246 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 south in August, when James's real intentions were soon re- 
 vealed. None of their number gave satisfaction on the points 
 he had most at heart, but the two Melvilles were specially 
 distasteful by reason of their great influence among their 
 brethren. While, after a delay of some eight months, six of 
 the ministers were allowed to return to Scotland, the two 
 Melvilles were more strictly dealt with. James was permitted 
 to reside in the north of England, but forbidden to cross the 
 Border, and remained an exile till his death. To the offence 
 of dissenting from the king on points of Church government 
 Andrew Melville had added the iniquity of a stinging epigram 
 on the papistical tendencies of the English Church. For three 
 years, by a monstrous stretch of the prerogative, he was kept in 
 the Tower; and, when at length he was set at liberty, it was to 
 live in exile as a professor in the Protestant college of Sedan in 
 France. While the eight ministers were passing through these 
 experiences in London, the fate of their six brethren who were 
 under sentence of high treason had likewise been determined. 
 At two o'clock on a stormy October morning, accompanied 
 to the shore by their friends and relatives singing the 23rd 
 
 X Psalm, they were put aboard a ship at Leith, which was to bear 
 them to lifelong exile 1 . 
 
 While James had thus been engaged in these dealings with 
 
 the Church, he had been simultaneously pressing 
 
 1604— 1607 , ',.,... .. , • , , 
 
 a scheme which did greater credit to his head 
 
 and heart. This- was a scheme for an incorporating union of 
 
 the two countries which would have anticipated by a century 
 
 the great measure of Queen Anne. Neither English nor Scots 
 
 responded very cordially to their king's desire for such fraternal 
 
 co-operation. Enemies for centuries, their closer acquaintance 
 
 with each other had not heightened their mutual affection. 
 
 The spectacle of needy Scots flocking southward, appropriating 
 
 wealth and capturing lucrative offices, had stirred the jealousy 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, IV. 281 — 4; Calderwood, VI. 589 et seq., 
 Orig. Letters, 368*.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 247 
 
 and wrath of all Englishmen ; and the Scots on their side 
 keenly resented the gibes freely passed on their national pride 
 and poverty. Regardless of these antagonisms, James gave 
 orders to the Parliaments of both countries to address them- 
 selves to the measure. In 1604 the first step was taken — the 
 English Parliament appointing forty-four Commissioners, and 
 the Scottish thirty-one, to draw up the terms of union. Apart 
 from the action of the Parliaments, James did what he thought 
 lay in his own power to hasten the consummation of his great 
 scheme. For the name of the " Borders," which implied sepa- 
 ration, he substituted that of the " Middle Shires " ; England 
 and Scotland were thenceforward to be "Great Britain"; coins 
 were to be struck in commemoration of the happy union ; 
 and one flag quartered with the crosses of St Andrew and 
 St George was to be the symbol of both countries. 
 
 In October (1604), the Commissioners met, and entrusted 
 Bacon and Lord Advocate Hamilton with the task of embodying 
 their conclusions. Of these conclusions the most important 
 were the abrogation of mutually hostile laws, including those 
 of the Borders ; free trade between both countries ; and the 
 satisfactory arrangement of foreign commercial relations. It 
 now remained for the two Parliaments to deal with the report 
 of their Commissioners, but it was not till the year 1607 that 
 they addressed themselves seriously to their task. The report 
 fared badly at the hands of the English Parliament. The 
 opposition was all but universal — the members who represented 
 commercial communities being specially hostile. Hard things 
 were said of Scotland and its people : England was a rich 
 pasture, threatened by an invasion of famished cattle — the 
 famished cattle being the needy Scots : these same Scots were 
 murderers, thieves, and rogues, who had allowed but two of 
 their kings to die in their beds during the last two hundred 
 years. When in July the English Parliament had done its 
 work, the proposal for the abrogation of "hostile laws" alone 
 had received its sanction. In August of the same year (1607)
 
 / 
 
 248 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the Scottish Parliament took up the report in a more amicable 
 spirit : if England would meet them half-way they were willing 
 to accept it in its entirety. At the same time they gave James 
 to understand that it was more to please him than themselves 
 that they had adopted this conclusion. England being un- 
 willing to meet the Scots half-way, James's scheme of an 
 incorporating union fell to the ground. The abrogation of 
 the hostile laws, common citizenship for Scottish and English 
 subjects born after the Union of the Crowns 1 ; and the appoint- 
 ment of a Commissioner to represent the king in Scotland — 
 such were the only definite results of the long negotiations. 
 James's scheme had been conceived with the best intentions, 
 and it had the cordial support of the greatest intellect of the 
 age, Sir Francis Bacon; yet it is open to doubt whether the 
 time was ripe for such a coalescence of the two peoples. Such 
 was their mutual repugnance that, had the union been achieved, 
 it might have led to a degree of international friction that 
 would have delayed the Act of Queen Anne for more centuries 
 than one 2 . 
 
 In the matter of the Union James could not compel the 
 English Parliament to do his bidding : with his 
 ecclesiastical policy in Scotland his task was 
 easier, and he had it mainly in his own hands. We have seen 
 how sorely stricken Presbyterianism was by the autumn of 
 1606. Six of the leading ministers were in exile; the two 
 Melvilles and their six brethren were under James's eye in. 
 England ; and over twenty, who were allowed to remain in 
 Scotland, were either under suspicion or sequestered from their 
 parishes. Before the close of the year James struck another 
 heavy blow. In December a convention of ministers, desig- 
 
 1 These persons were known as the "Post-nati." Colvill's case (1607) 
 settled the question in English Law : see Gardiner, Hist, of England, 
 
 i- 355- 
 
 2 Acts of Pari. «j Scotland, IV. 263, 280, 285, 366 ; P. C. Reg., Vol. 
 VII..; Parliamentary History of England, I. 1081 — 98.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 249 
 
 nated by James himself, met at Linlithgow and gave birth to 
 a notable scheme. Over the fifty-three Presbyteries into which 
 the country was subdivided " constant moderators " were to be 
 appointed — for the good order of the Church, as James main- 
 tained ; to be his ready tools, in the opinion of the country. 
 The year 1607 was devoted to the execution of the new 
 scheme, and with an addition that showed the ardour of the 
 king's zeal. In April it was announced to the astonished 
 nation that the Linlithgow General Assembly, as James uni- 
 formly styled it, had ordained that there should be constant 
 moderators not only of Presbyteries but of Synods as well. 
 Constant moderators of synods virtually meant diocesan 
 episcopacy ; and the opposition, which had been active before, 
 now became so vehement that James's lay advisers were gravely 
 alarmed 1 . 
 
 It is not till June 1609 that we note another decisive 
 
 step towards the advancement of Prelacy. In 
 
 . . 1609 — 1610 
 
 a Parliament which met at Perth in that month 
 the bishops were clothed with further powers 2 . By one Act 
 they were empowered to return an annual list of the ex- 
 communicated persons within their respective dioceses to 
 the Treasurer and Director of the Chancellory — an inquisition 
 susceptible of the most dangerous abuse; and by another 
 they received complete jurisdiction in cases of wills and 
 divorces. But it was the year 16 10 that saw James's boldest 
 advance towards the end at which he was so pertinaciously 
 aiming. In February of that year, by a stroke of his pen he 
 imposed upon Scotland two Courts of High Commission for 
 the punishment of ecclesiastical offences 3 . The history of the 
 similar institution in England might have shown James the 
 dangerous path he was treading. This very year the English 
 
 1 Calderwood, VI. 604—29; P. C. Reg., Vol. vn. 
 
 2 It is to be noted that there were now eleven bishops and two arch- 
 bishops in Scotland — precisely the number in the pre- Reformation Church. 
 
 3 They were united in 1615. Calderwood, vn. 204 — 10.
 
 250 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Parliament keenly protested against the intolerable grievance 
 of such a Court ; and its continued existence, it has been said, 
 was " among the most efficient causes of the quarrel between 
 the monarchy and the nation 1 ." The powers assigned to the 
 Scottish Courts were as comprehensive and as galling as those 
 of England. Each of them was to have an Archbishop for 
 its president and was to consist of clergy and laity — five con- 
 stituting a quorum. All the lieges were to be subject to its 
 jurisdiction ; offences " in life or religion " were to be its 
 special province ; and fines and imprisonment the means of 
 enforcing its authority. As in England, it was the arbitrary 
 action, the vaguely defined powers, the undue severity of these 
 Courts that came to make them a byword for tyrannous op- 
 pression with the Scottish people 2 . 
 
 It had always been James's policy to make it appear that 
 his ecclesiastical action had the approval of the Church itself; 
 and he now issued his orders that a General Assembly should 
 meet at Glasgow in the month of June. We have seen how 
 the clerical convention at Linlithgow was manipulated to his 
 purposes ; but the forthcoming meeting at Glasgow required 
 still more careful coaxing. " By fair means " or " by threaten- 
 ings " the refractory ministers were to be brought to their duty. 
 The means taken towards this end were sufficiently persuasive. 
 The two archbishops were charged to specify to each Presbytery 
 the persons whom they were to send as their representatives 
 to Glasgow. Even this seemingly adequate arrangement was 
 deemed insufficient to make things secure. " It is our pleasure," 
 wrote James to his commissioner, the Earl of Dunbar, "that 
 against this ensuing Assembly to be kept at our city of Glasgow 
 you shall have in readiness the sum of ten thousand merks 
 Scottish money to be divided and dealt among such persons 
 as you shall hold fitting by the advice of the Archbishop of 
 
 1 Prothero, Select Statutes and Documents illustrative of the Reigns of 
 Elizabeth and James /, pp. xli, xliii, 302. 
 
 2 Calderwood, VII. 57 — 62.
 
 Chap, n] James VI 251 
 
 St Andrews and Glasgow 1 ." These various inducements had 
 the desired results : by this Glasgow Assembly it has been 
 said, " Presbytery, thing and name," was " voted to be at an 
 end in Scotland 2 ." General Assemblies, it was concluded, were 
 to be summoned at the king's pleasure ; and the machinery of 
 the Church was so adjusted that the bishops should have full 
 diocesan powers— the bishops themselves being the nominees 
 of the king. In this last circumstance James was aware of a 
 flaw, which he also set himself to remedy. He had clothed 
 his Scottish bishops with all the external requisites of their 
 office, but he could not supply the virtue necessary to con- 
 stitute them the accredited successors of Christ and the 
 apostles. Unfortunately this virtue had been forfeited by the 
 principles on which the Scottish Reformation had been carried 
 out. The ingenious mind of James, however, hit upon a 
 happy expedient. Archbishop Spottiswoode and two 01 his 
 colleagues were summoned to England, and there received 
 the necessary spiritual touch from three English bishops 3 , 
 which in due course they imparted to their brethren in 
 Scotland*. 
 
 Still another step remained to be taken before Episcopacy 
 could be recognised as the legalised polity of the 
 national Church. By its Act of 1592 Parliament 
 had declared Presbyterianism to be the polity of the Scottish 
 Church : by Parliament, therefore, this sanction must be un- 
 done. But, as things now went in Scotland, this was of easy 
 attainment. To pack the Estates was a simpler matter than 
 to pack a General Assembly. The Parliament which met in 
 October, 161 2, readily did the work for which it had been 
 specially summoned : it ratified the Acts of the Glasgow 
 
 1 P. C. Reg., vm. 8 44 . 
 
 - Professor Masson, P. C. R?g., Vol. VIII., p- xxviii. 
 3 Not from the Archbishops of York or Canterbury, as this might have 
 implied their superiority over the Scottish Church. 
 * Calderwood, VII. 150; Spottiswoode, III. 20%, 9.
 
 252 TJie Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Assembly in favour of Episcopacy, and even contrived to 
 extend the episcopal jurisdiction in the process 1 . Thus, by 
 the close of 161 2, had James succeeded in fashioning the 
 ecclesiastical polity of Scotland to the only pattern which 
 was consistent with his notion of the royal prerogative. Yet, as 
 time was to show, the work had been unwisely done, and rested 
 on no stable basis of national conviction. His own tyranny 
 and the ambition of worldly ecclesiastics had made the very 
 name of bishop a byword among the masses of the people. 
 There were many thoughtful men who were convinced that 
 the episcopal system was the natural framework of a society 
 still essentially feudal , and the present alienation of the Scottish 
 nobility and gentry from the Presbyterian Church is a striking 
 commentary on the amount of truth in their conviction. Had 
 the advice of these men been followed the future of Presbytery 
 and Episcopacy in Scotland would have been widely different 
 from what it has actually been. 
 
 II. The Highlands, Islands, and Borders. 
 
 His ecclesiastical policy and his abortive scheme of union 
 had not wholly absorbed the energies of James and his Scottish 
 Privy Council. To establish peace and order in every corner 
 of his ancient kingdom was an object which he never lost sight 
 of from the day he crossed the Border. How much remained 
 to be done before this end was accomplished the foregoing 
 narrative will have made sufficiently plain. It was not only 
 in the outlying parts of the country — the Highlands, Islands 
 and Borders — that the law was openly defied. Even in the 
 streets of the principal towns the barons and gentlemen still as 
 in the old days occasionally settled their disputes at the sword's 
 point. In 1605 the Lairds of Edzell and Pittarrow fought in 
 the High Street of Edinburgh "from 9 in the night till almost 
 
 1 Acts of J'arl. of Scotland, iv. 46^.
 
 Chap. iiJ James Vf 253 
 
 2 in the morning." Two years later in the same street of 
 Edinburgh the same Laird of Edzell occasioned the death of 
 his own uncle, Lord Spynie, in a fray which he had deliberately 
 raised for the destruction of his personal enemy, the Master of 
 Crawford. In 1606, on the day of the opening of the Red 
 Parliament at Perth, "there fell out a great stir betwixt the 
 Earls of Eglinton and Glencairn" (hereditary enemies), in 
 which one of their retainers was slain and many wounded 1 . 
 To put an end to this time-honoured custom, James now took 
 the most effective means at his disposal. Hitherto the sole 
 check on the parties at feud had been the taking of bands of 
 mutual assurance. By the new method fines proportioned to 
 the resources of the parties were to be imposed ; and, these 
 failing to effect the desired end, the chastening of a prison was 
 to follow 2 . 
 
 But it was the Highlands and Islands and Borders — those 
 "peccant parts" of the kingdom, as they are called in the 
 documents of the time — that demanded the chief exertions of 
 James and his councillors ; and it is to the credit of James's 
 Government that by the close of his reign their exertions were 
 in a large degree crowned with success. In effecting this 
 beneficent result it is to be noted that the Privy Council and 
 not the Parliament was the instrument with which he mainly 
 worked 3 . 
 
 In the case of the Highlands it was "the wicked and un- 
 happy race of the Clan Gregor" that chiefly occupied James's 
 attention during the remainder of his reign. We have seen 
 how the iniquities of that clan had reached their height in 
 the "Slaughter of the Lennox," a few months before his de- 
 parture for England. Thenceforward James was to be satisfied 
 with nothing short of the extinction, root and branch, of the 
 
 1 Balfour, Annates, II. 7, 16, 28. 
 
 2 P. C. Reg.,\u 594—6- 
 
 8 The account of the Isles which follows is based on Vols. vn. — XIII. of 
 the P. C. Register.
 
 254 Th e Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 race of the Macgregors. Two days before his departure the 
 Privy Council passed an Act ordaining the abolition of their 
 name'; and to the Earl of Argyle was entrusted the task of 
 punishing the chief offenders of the clan. With such a race 
 it was believed by James and his councillors that it was 
 folly to observe the common rules of humanity. To secure 
 the chief of the clan, Alexander Macgregor of Menstrie, 
 Argyle had recourse to a device in keeping with the usages of 
 the Highlands themselves. Under the protection of a safe- 
 conduct granted to him by Argyle, Macgregor had crossed the 
 Border on his way to put his case before James. On the plea 
 that the safe-conduct applied only to Scotland, Argyle had him 
 seized in England, conveyed to Edinburgh, and there hanged 
 with several hostages from his clan. Through successive years 
 the remorseless policy was pursued. In 1610 commission of 
 fire and sword was granted to the surrounding nobles and lairds 
 against the doomed race; and finally in 161 7, on the occasion 
 of James's visit to Scotland, the Parliament put its seal to all 
 previous legislation against them. Yet a miserable remnant 
 survived the fire, and the genius of Scott has made the Mac- 
 gregors the most widely known of Highland clans. 
 
 The last mention of the Western Islands was in connection 
 with the enterprise of the "gentlemen adventurers" in the 
 island of Lewis in 1599. In 1601 they had been forced to 
 quit the island, but in 1605, with renewed powers from the 
 Privy Council, they made a fresh attempt to regain possession 2 . 
 Landing with a considerable force, they succeeded in estab- 
 lishing themselves in the islands, and began their work of 
 colonisation — building houses and manuring the land. For 
 two years they persevered with their labours, but circumstances 
 were as adverse as before. Some of their number died, some 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, iv. 550. The Act of Council has not been 
 preserved, but it is cited in the Act of Parliament noted. — P. C. P., vi. 
 558 note. 
 
 3 P. C Reg., VII. 204, 5.
 
 Chap. 11] James VI 255 
 
 lost heart in the enterprise, money failed, and all along they 
 were harassed by the attacks of the Islesmen 1 . In 1607 they 
 finally quitted the island, when James made a fresh grant of it 
 to Lord Balmerino, Secretary of State, and two others. In 
 
 1609 Balmerino was convicted of high treason, but his two 
 partners renewed the attempt of the "gentlemen adventurers." 
 They were even less successful than their predecessors, and in 
 
 1610 they sold their claim to the Mackenzies of Kintail, in 
 whose hands the island has since remained 2 . 
 
 But it was with the southern section of the Hebrides, and 
 specially with the island of Islay and the peninsula of Cantyre, 
 that the Government experienced its greatest difficulties. By 
 successive steps, however, extending over the remainder of 
 James's reign, those unruly parts of his kingdom were at length 
 reduced to such peace and order as they had never known be- 
 fore. It was with the Clan Donald, from time immemorial the 
 possessors of Islay, that the chief trouble arose. At this time 
 the most important personages of the clan were its chief, Angus 
 Macdonald, and his son, Sir James. The father and son were 
 not on the best of terms. With a view of overreaching the 
 Government, Angus had nominally granted his lands to his son, 
 who had made himself considerable interest at Court. So far 
 from keeping terms with his father, Sir James played into the 
 hands of the Government, and on being sent down to Islay for 
 the purpose of effecting an arrangement with him, took the 
 opportunity of doing business for himself. He made war on 
 all who opposed him, set fire to a house, knowing that it con- 
 tained both his father and mother, and having made the former 
 his prisoner, established himself as chief in his place. At the 
 moment when we take up the story, however, Angus had con- 
 trived to make his escape and to secure the apprehension of 
 Sir James, who was now lying in Edinburgh Castle. 
 
 1 Spottiswoode, III. 165. 
 
 1 Gregory, History of the Western Highlands and Isles, Chap. VI.
 
 256 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 In the summer of 1605 the Government took steps to restore 
 igo _ j6 order throughout the Southern Islands. Lord 
 
 Scone, Comptroller of Scotland, was the person 
 chosen to effect this desirable object. In September of that 
 year Lord Scone appeared in Cantyre with instructions to exact 
 all rents due to the Crown, to require the production of title- 
 deeds, and, in case of refusal on the part of the chiefs, to 
 enforce his commission with fire and sword. But the force that 
 had accompanied him was insufficient to work on the fears of 
 the more distant Islesmen ; few chiefs put in an appearance, 
 and the main object of his mission was unaccomplished. The 
 old story was again repeated. Unable in its own strength, to 
 make good its authority, the Government struck a bargain with 
 the Earl of Argyle, as it had more than once done with his 
 ancestors. He was appointed Justiciary and Lieutenant of the 
 South Isles, for the good order of which he became responsible, 
 and in return he received the Crown lands in Cantyre and the 
 Isles on condition of paying a stipulated rent. Such was the 
 first attempt of James to deal with the Islands after his 
 removal to England. His next attempt was attended with 
 greater success. 
 
 The period of Argyle's Justiciarship extended only to six 
 months ; and with the means at his disposal he 
 was unable or unwilling to make good the powers 
 that had been entrusted to him. In the summer of 1608, 
 therefore, James prepared to put forth a mighty effort that once 
 tor all should tame "the wicked blood of the Isles." An arma- 
 ment composed of the fencible men of all the Lowlands, 
 reinforced by soldiery from the garrisons of Ireland, appeared 
 in the island of Mull towards the end of August. Its military 
 head was Andrew, Lord Stewart of Ochiltree ; and, as an indi- 
 cation of the virtuous intentions of the Government, he was 
 accompanied by Andrew Knox, Bishop of the Isles, one of 
 the notable Scotsmen of his day. Before the arrival of the 
 armament, proclamation had been made that the chiefs of the
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 257 
 
 Isles should appear at the Castle of Aros in Mull to hold con- 
 ference with the king's commissioner. On this occasion they 
 appear to have been impressed by the display of the royal 
 authority, and presented themselves in great numbers at the 
 commissioner's levee. According to his own report, also, they 
 came without exacting any pledge as to their possible treat- 
 ment. It was now that Lord Ochiltree found a valuable ally 
 in his colleague, the bishop. By that prelate's advice the 
 chieftains were invited on board the king's ship to hear a 
 sermon from himself. They came, heard the sermon, were 
 entertained to dinner, and then were told that they must 
 remain where they were. With his precious freight on board, 
 Ochiltree sailed for Ayr, and the entrapped chieftains were 
 consigned to the strongholds of Dumbarton, Edinburgh, and 
 Blackness. It was a stroke perfectly in keeping with James's 
 character, and it had placed the game in his hands. 
 
 The next year saw the result of Ochiltree's clever stroke. 
 In the month of August the principal chiefs met 
 Bishop Knox in the island of Iona and agreed 
 to certain conditions, known as the "Band and Statutes of 
 Icolmkill," which decisively mark a new departure in the 
 history of the Western Isles. The Statutes were nine in 
 number, and vividly reveal the state of things with which the 
 Government had to deal. (1) Churches were to be repaired, 
 a parochial ministry was to be established, and temporary 
 marriages were declared illegal; (2) inns were to be set up in 
 convenient places, at once for the accommodation of travellers 
 and for the relief of private persons who had hitherto been at 
 the mercy of "idle men without any calling or vocation to win 
 their living"; (3) masterless vagabonds were to be cleared out 
 of the islands; (4) beggars and sorners were to be dealt with 
 as thieves and oppressors; (5) the importation of wine and aqua 
 vitae was forbidden on the ground that the excessive drinking 
 of these was the main cause of the poverty and barbarity of 
 tin inlands: (6) every yeoman or gentleman was to send his 
 B. s 11. i;
 
 258 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 eldest son (or daughter if he had no sons) to school in the 
 Lowlands, where he was to remain till he could speak, read, 
 and write English; (7) the carrying of fire-arms, even for the 
 shooting of game, was strictly proscribed ; (8) vagabonds and 
 bards, who had been one of the abuses that had "defylit the 
 haill lies," were first to be placed in the stocks, and thereafter 
 "with all guidly expeditioun" expelled from the country; 
 (9) and finally, to ensure the execution of the Statutes, every 
 chief was to possess the power of apprehending such as broke 
 them and of proceeding against the offenders by due course of 
 law 1 . The following year (16 10) a further arrangement was 
 made to ensure the operation of these Statutes. The principal 
 chieftains became bound to appear before the Council at stated 
 intervals ; and Bishop Knox received a life-commission as 
 Steward and Justice of all the North and West Isles of 
 Scotland. The Statutes of Icolmkill eventually ensured a 
 steady improvement in the social condition of the Islands; 
 and to one of them a specific result has been traced. The 
 chieftains' sons, through their education in the Lowlands, ac- 
 quired that loyalty and devotion to the House of Stewart which 
 was to be so strikingly displayed in the subsequent history of 
 Scotland 2 . 
 
 For a few years there was comparative tranquillity in the 
 
 islands, but in 16 14 fresh troubles arose, and 
 1614 . 
 
 again with the Macdonalds of Islay. Old Angus 
 
 Macdonald was dead, and his son Sir James was still secure in 
 
 Edinburgh Castle; but there were other members of the family 
 
 who were dissatisfied with the late arrangements made by the 
 
 Government. In the disturbances that now followed there is 
 
 some reason to believe that the Earl of Argyle had a secret 
 
 hand; but it was two of the Macdonalds who did the open work 
 
 of the rebellion. In March 16 14 Ranald Oig, a natural son of 
 
 Angus, surprised the Castle of Dunivaig, the stronghold of the 
 
 1 P. C. Reg., ix. 24—30. 
 
 2 Gregory, p. 333.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 259 
 
 Macdonalds of Islay, doubtless as a first step towards the 
 recovery of the hereditary lands of his family. He had hardly 
 made himself master of the place, however, before he was 
 attacked and dispossessed by Angus Oig, the second legitimate 
 son of the late chief. Angus Oig had given out that he was 
 acting in the interest of the Crown, but when summoned to 
 surrender the castle he resolutely refused. In September, 
 Bishop Knox appeared in Islay with the object of bringing 
 Angus to terms ; but on this occasion it was the bishop who 
 found himself the entrapped party. His force was inadequate, 
 he was amid a hostile population, and the Macdonald had little 
 difficulty in cutting off his retreat by the destruction of his 
 boats. With the bishop in his hands, Angus was now in 
 a position to extort an excellent bargain. He was to receive 
 the Crown lands in Islay, together with the Castle of Dunivaig 
 on a nineteen years' lease — the rent to be 8000 merles a year. 
 On condition that he would do his best to persuade the king 
 to sanction this arrangement the bishop was allowed to go free, 
 leaving his son and nephew as pledges for his good faith. All 
 that had been done before the transaction of Iona had thus to 
 be done over again ; and again, in its weakness, the Government 
 had to make terms with a rival chieftain. The Islay lands, 
 greatly against the advice of Knox, were rented to Sir John 
 Campbell of Cawdor on condition that he should put down the 
 rebels at his own cost ; and in the course of the year Campbell, 
 in conjunction with a force from Ireland, prepared to make 
 good his pledge. But at this point another and powertul 
 agent intervened. The Chancellor of Scotland, the Earl of 
 Dunfermline, conceived a scheme of effecting the end of the 
 Government and probably of advancing his own interests at the 
 same time. He dispatched to Angus Oig a secret agent named 
 Graham, on a mission which was more creditable to the 
 chancellor's astuteness than to his honour. On the strength 
 of the promises of Graham, Angus was persuaded to deliver up 
 Bishop Knox's hostages, but not on any account to surrender 
 
 17 — 2
 
 260 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the castle except by the direct instructions of the chancellor. 
 The deluded Angus discovered to his cost how completely he 
 had been befooled. When Dunivaig was beset by the forces 
 of Campbell of Cawdor, he presented a warrant which forbade 
 him to surrender the castle except on direct instructions from 
 the chancellor. Cawdor had heard of no such warrant, and 
 proceeded with the work of the siege. With the force at his 
 disposal the work was easy. The castle surrendered uncon- 
 ditionally, twenty of the defenders were hanged, and Angus Oig 
 and others of the ringleaders dispatched to Edinburgh to be 
 dealt with by the Privy Council. Some six months later Angus 
 and five others of the Clan Donald were hanged at the Market - 
 cross of Edinburgh. 
 
 The rebellion of Angus had hardly been crushed when the 
 
 Council had to face a still more formidable 
 1615 
 
 danger. Within a few hours of the arrival of 
 Angus in Edinburgh, the redoubtable Sir James Macdonald 
 escaped from the castle, and arriving among his own people 
 was received with the utmost enthusiasm. The Council fully 
 realized that in Sir James they had a much more powerful 
 enemy than in Angus Oig. He was the legitimate head of his 
 clan, on whom his long imprisonment gave him a special claim, 
 and he possessed abilities and experience which would enable 
 him to make full use of his resources. In their straits the 
 Council turned to the Earl of Argyle as the person specially 
 fitted to deal with the emergency. It had been the grant 
 of their lands to the Clan Campbell that had made all the 
 difficulty with the Macdonalds ; and it lay with Argyle, there- 
 fore, to answer for the maintenance of the public peace. At 
 this time, however, Argyle was in England, a fugitive from his 
 creditors ; and it was not till near the close of August that he 
 was able to move against the rebels. Meanwhile Sir James 
 had not been idle. Landing in his native Islay, he collected 
 a force that speedily put him in possession of Dunivaig ; and 
 when Argyle appeared he was at the head of 1000 men and
 
 Chap, nj James VI 261 
 
 master of all the strongholds of the South Isles. The struggle 
 lasted through the greater part of September ; but by the first 
 week of October the rebellion was at an end, though not 
 entirely to the satisfaction of the Council, as Sir James had 
 made his escape to Ireland, and others of the ringleaders took 
 to piracy in the islands. But it was the last effort of the 
 Macdonalds to recover their hereditary domains ; and with the 
 suppression of that formidable clan peace was at length assured 
 in their distracted community. By insisting on the responsi- 
 bility of each chief for the good conduct of his clan, and on his 
 appearance at stated intervals before the Council, the Crown 
 gradually attained a control over the whole of the isles such as 
 had never been exercised by any of James's predecessors. 
 
 Simultaneously with these doings in the Western Islands 
 
 the Orkneys and Shetlands had been engaging 
 
 . , „ . 1609—1615 
 
 a large share of James s attention, ror the 
 
 last forty years these islands had been ruled by Patrick Stewart, 
 a cousin of the king, and known to his contemporaries as 
 " Earl Pate." He was the last of those feudal barons who had 
 given so much trouble to successive Kings 01 Scots, and one of 
 the worst of the type. So persistent and grievous were the 
 complaints against his tyrannous oppression that at length (July 
 1 609) he was lodged in the Castle of Edinburgh to await what 
 proceedings might be deemed necessary lor the better govern- 
 ment of the islands. For upwards of five years he was retained 
 a prisoner, partly in the Castle of Edinburgh and partly in that 
 of Dumbarton ; and meanwhile James and his Council made 
 various attempts to effect for those northern isles what the 
 Band of Icolmkill had effected for those of the south. James 
 Law, Bishop of the Orkneys and Shetlands, was commissioned 
 to do for his diocese what Bishop Knox had done for the 
 Hebrides ; but Law did not possess the vigour and capacity 
 of Knox. Moreover, even from his prison Earl Patrick was 
 
 1 The history of James's dealings with the Orkneys and Shetlands is to 
 be traced in Vols, vn., VHI. and IX. uf the P. C. Register.
 
 262 The Crozvn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 able to thwart the efforts of the Government. His brother, 
 James Stewart, and still more his natural son, Robert Stewart, 
 a youth not yet twenty years of age, were the instruments 
 through whom he worked. In 161 1 Robert Stewart raised 
 a commotion in the islands which led to a decisive step on 
 the part of James: in 161 2 the Orkneys and Shetlands were 
 permanently annexed to the Scottish Crown 1 . But Earl 
 Patrick's resources were not yet exhausted. In 1614 his 
 natural son, Robert, made a last desperate attempt in the 
 interests of his father. With a band of associates he fortified 
 the Castle and Cathedral of Kirkwall, and bade defiance to the 
 Crown. The Earl of Caithness, himself an unruly subject, 
 was entrusted with the task of bringing him to account, and in 
 the month of August sailed for Kirkwall with two ships of war. 
 By the end of September his work was accomplished, and 
 Robert Stewart on his way to his doom in Edinburgh. On 
 the 6th of January, 1615, he' was hanged at the Market-cross, 
 "pitied of the people for his tall stature and comlie countenance." 
 Precisely a month later, his father, Earl Patrick, met the same 
 fate, though against the wish of "the wiser and elder sort of the 
 nobilitie," and only at the command of the inexorable James. 
 Of the earl it is related that his ignorance was such " that he 
 could scarse rehearse the Lord's Prayer 2 ." 
 
 The other " peccant part " of the country was the Border ; 
 and here also James was able to effect what had 
 defied all the efforts of his predecessors. Even 
 at the time of the Union of the Crowns the Borders were 
 hardly an integral part of the kingdom. Their inhabitants 
 had been forbidden by statute to settle in districts beyond their 
 own bounds 3 ; and to a Borderer the King of Scots was still but 
 the "King of Fife and Lothian." In spite of all that had been 
 done from the time of James IV onwards, the Middle and West 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, iv. 481. 
 
 2 Calderwood, VII. 194, 5. 
 
 3 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, in. 461—5.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 263 
 
 Marches were as liable to outbursts of lawlessness as the islands 
 themselves. In 1600 Sir John Carmichael, Warden of the West 
 March, was murdered by the Armstrongs while on his way to 
 hold one of his periodical courts. The very week that James 
 took his journey to London the same clan signalised itself by 
 one of its most brilliant achievements. Bursting into England, 
 they harried the country as far south as Penrith. It was the 
 last performance of the kind by that intractable clan. James 
 had been prepared for some troubles on the Borders; and 
 Sir William Selby, Captain of Berwick, was despatched to the 
 country of the Armstrongs with a combined force of English 
 and Scots. So thoroughly did Selby do his work that the very 
 name of Armstrong became comparatively rare in their own 
 district of Liddesdale. 
 
 Such was the state of affairs with which James and his 
 
 Council had to deal. The methods they adopted were those 
 
 of a military occupation. In 1605 an arrangement was made 
 
 which was to prove the most effective means that had yet been 
 
 hit upon for taming the wild spirits of the Border. This 
 
 was the appointment of a conjunct body of five English and 
 
 five Scottish Commissioners, whose duty it should be to prevent 
 
 and punish the special crimes of the Borders of both countries. 
 
 This commission might have been as ineffectual as any of its 
 
 predecessors, but a formidable weapon was placed in its 
 
 hands 1 . To execute its behests a company of twenty-five 
 
 mounted police was placed at its command — its first captain 
 
 being Sir William Cranstoun. For successive years Cranstoun 
 
 was a name of terror throughout the Borders. In association 
 
 with the Earl of Dunbar, who in 1606 was appointed chief 
 
 Commissioner, he plied his task so effectually that in 1609 
 
 James was informed that the "Middle Shires" were "as lawful, 
 
 as peaceable, and as quiet as any part in any civil kingdom in 
 
 Christianity." With what little scruple they accomplished their 
 
 1 F. c. Reg., mi. 702—9.
 
 264 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 work is significantly commemorated in the Border phrase 
 
 " Jeddart Justice " — hang first and try afterwards. While crime 
 
 was thus so mercilessly visited, special enactments were passed 
 
 to prevent its recurrence. The carrying of offensive weapons 
 
 was strictly forbidden ; none save nobles and gentlemen were 
 
 permitted to possess a house valued above 50^. sterling; and 
 
 the iron gates which defended the Border strongholds were 
 
 ordered to be beaten into useful implements. Of the changed 
 
 days on the Borders we have signal proof in the action taken 
 
 by certain influential lairds in 161 2. They gave their pledge 
 
 to the Government that they would deliver up every criminal 
 
 found on their lands, and dismiss every lawless person among 
 
 their own retainers. Service in foreign war was another means 
 
 of ridding the country of the more desperate spirits. Thus we 
 
 read that in 1620, one hundred and twenty "broken men" 
 
 were transported for service in the wars of James's son-in-law, 
 
 the King of Bohemia. As the result of all these endeavours, 
 
 the Border counties at the close of James's reign had fairly 
 
 entered the paths of peace, though like every other part of the 
 
 country they could still on occasion give convincing proof that 
 
 the days of feudalism in Scotland were not yet over. 
 
 Notable among the events of James's reign was the famous 
 
 " plantation of Ulster," in which Scotland played 
 1608-1610 *\ -. T T / 
 
 so large and important a part. In June, 1607, 
 
 the Irish rebellion under Sir Cahir O'Dogherty had been 
 
 effectually put down ; and for the future peace of the country 
 
 James adopted the experiment which on a smaller scale he had 
 
 tried in the Island of Lewis. The Province of Ulster was to 
 
 be subdivided into lots and offered on certain conditions to 
 
 colonists from Scotland and England. In March, 1609, there 
 
 came a letter to the Scottish Privy Council announcing the 
 
 offer which His Majesty "out of his unspeakable love and 
 
 tender affection " now made to his Scottish subjects 1 . Seventy - 
 
 1 P. C. Reg., via. 267, 8. 

 
 Chap, ii] James VI 265 
 
 seven Scots came forward as purchasers ; and, if their offer 
 had been accepted, they would have possessed among them 
 147,000 acres of Irish land. A rearrangement which was made 
 the following year, however, diminished the number of candi- 
 dates./ - When in the autumn of 1610 the Plantation actually 
 began, fifty-nine was the number of the favoured Scots, and 
 81,000 acres were to be at their disposal. Of the fifty-nine, 
 five were nobles — the Duke of Lennox, the Earl of Abercorn, 
 Lord d'Aubigny, the Lord of Burley, and Lord Ochiltree^ 
 The colonists did not at once proceed in a body to their 
 possessions, and it was only gradually that the enterprise bore 
 its full effect. But the connection between the two countries 
 was established ; and the condition of Ulster to-day, with its 
 material prosperity and its leaven of Scottish blood, is in large 
 degree its direct and notable result 1 . 
 
 III. James's Visit to Scotland. The Five Articles 
 
 of Perth. 
 
 By his effectual measures for the preservation of law and 
 order James did much to advance the interests of his northern 
 kingdom. On these measures, however, he set little store in 
 comparison with his work of regulating the consciences of his 
 subjects in the matter of religion. We have seen that by the 
 close of 161 2 he had at length succeeded in his persistent 
 endeavour to substitute Episcopacy for Presbytery. Had he 
 rested here, the future of Scotland and the House of Stewart 
 would have been different from what it has actually been; 
 but, having succeeded in fashioning the machinery of the 
 Church to his mind, he now turned with equal pertinacity to 
 the improvement of its forms of worship. Throughout the 
 
 1 In 1640 there were .^aid to be 40,000 able-bodied Scots in the north 
 of Ireland. -Gardiner, Hist, of England, ix. a 13. 
 
 %
 
 266 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 remainder of his reign this was his main concern in his deal- 
 ings with Scotland. 
 
 For six years there was no General Assembly in Scotland — 
 a pregnant commentary on the revolution that 
 had been wrought since Andrew Melville in- 
 formed James that he was " God's sillie vassal." At length 
 it was announced by royal proclamation that an Assembly 
 would be held at Aberdeen on the 13th of August, 16 16. 
 The fact that Aberdeen was appointed as the place of meeting 
 was itself an intimation that James had some further novelties 
 in his mind. A new Confession of Faith, a new Catechism, a 
 new Liturgy — such were some of its achievements. But this 
 result did not satisfy James ; and, in a communication which 
 he made at the conclusion of the Assembly, he clearly indicated 
 what further improvements he wished to see introduced. They 
 were five in number — kneeling at Communion, Private Com- 
 munion in cases of necessity, Private Baptism in like cases, 
 observance of the great annual festivals of the Christian 
 Church, and of Confirmation by the bishops. His chief adviser 
 in ecclesiastical matters, Archbishop Spottiswoode, warned 
 him that the country was not ripe for these innovations ; but 
 the very fact that opposition might be offered was only a 
 further provocative for James to insist on the country's accept- 
 ing them. 
 
 In England and Scotland there was but one opinion 
 regarding the main object of the single visit 
 which James paid to his native country ; it 
 was to complete his work of assimilating the Churches of the 
 two kingdoms 1 . He had formally intimated, indeed, that he 
 intended no alterations, civil or political, except such as would 
 be acceptable to the Scottish people 2 . How far he meant 
 to keep his word was significantly indicated by certain pre- 
 
 1 Calendar of State Papers (Domestn, James VI, 1611 — 18), y. 424. 
 3 P. C. Reg., x. 684—6.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 267 
 
 parations made for his visit. Under the direction of Inigo 
 
 Jones, skilled English workmen were employed to fit up 
 
 Holyrood Chapel for the reception of organs, a band of 
 
 choristers, and statues of the patriarchs and apostles. Against 
 
 this last improvement, however, popular opinion declared itself 
 
 so strongly that James was forced to give way, though not 
 
 without a sneer of pity at the backward condition of his 
 
 Scottish bishops. 
 
 On the 13th of May, 161 7, James crossed the Border, and 
 
 his visit extended till the 4th of August follow- 
 
 . 1617 
 
 ing. Hunting and feasting filled up a large 
 proportion of his sojourn, but business of the most serious 
 import was not neglected. He was received by all classes 
 with every demonstration of loyalty, yet from the first he 
 ostentatiously displayed his contempt for the deepest feelings 
 of his people. In his train he had brought a number of 
 English Church dignitaries (the famous Laud among them), 
 and in Holyrood Chapel he flaunted the English service " with 
 singing of quiristours, surplices, and playing on organes 1 ." 
 He gave still greater offence by insisting on all the great 
 Scottish officials partaking of the Communion in the posture 
 of kneeling — not without demur on the part of certain of 
 them. It was after the pattern thus set in Holyrood Chapel 
 that James wished to see the service of the Scottish Church 
 remodelled in all points ; and to effect this end was his main 
 object in coming to Scotland. At a meeting of the Estates, 
 which began on July 17, he plainly showed his hand. The 
 most important Bill which he meant them to sanction was one 
 which staggered even his clerical advisers. Its purport was 
 that in external matters of Church policy his decisions, taken 
 in counsel with the bishops, should have the full force of law, 
 though by the advice of the bishops themselves a clause was 
 added to the effect that " a competent number of the Ministry " 
 
 1 Caldeiwood, vn. 246.
 
 268 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 should also be consulted. The rumour of the proposed Bill 
 raised a storm among the ministers, which recalled the old 
 days before James's migration to England ; and fifty-five of 
 them were found bold enough to draw up a protest against 
 the dreaded Bill. The protest found its way into James's 
 hands, and prudently recognising that he was on dangerous 
 ground he gave way with his usual bad grace. But before his 
 departure he determined to make another attempt to set in 
 motion his scheme for a reformed Church service in Scotland. 
 He had failed with the Estates, but he might find the clergy 
 more pliable if taken by themselves. At St Andrews, there- 
 fore, on the 13th of July, he held a Clerical Convention, at 
 which the archbishops, bishops, and twenty-six ministers were 
 present. He then submitted to them precisely those five 
 articles regarding which Spottiswoode had already given him 
 warning. The answer he now received was that these questions 
 were too high for them to settle on their own responsibility and 
 that only a General Assembly was competent to deal with them. 
 When on the 4th of August James recrossed the Border 1 , it 
 was with some chagrin at the failure of the chief object of his 
 visit. But his Scottish subjects knew him too well to imagine 
 that they had heard the last of the five articles. 
 
 Apart from the resistance offered to his ecclesiastical policy, 
 James had no reason to grumble with his reception in his 
 ancient kingdom. He had visited most of its chief towns — 
 Edinburgh, St Andrews, Stirling, Glasgow and Dumfries, and 
 in all of them he had been entertained at an expense beyond 
 their means. He had had his fill of his favourite pastime of 
 hunting ; he had been celebrated in poems in Latin and Greek, 
 and in Scots ; and he had been told in all forms of speech that 
 he was the wisest and best of kings that ever sat on a throne. 
 At Dumfries, a farewell sermon was preached by the Bishop of 
 Galloway, " which made the hearers to burst out in many 
 
 1 Calderwood, vn. 271, 2; Spottiswoode, III. 245 — 7.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 269 
 
 tears 1 ." Yet, indubitably, the collective prayer of the nation 
 was that the royal visit might not soon be repeated. 
 
 The Clerical Convention at St Andrews had told James ./ 
 that only a General Assembly was competent 
 
 ' J . * 1617— 1631 
 
 to deal with the five articles which he had 
 proposed for acceptance by the Church. By an Assembly, 
 therefore, James determined that his articles should be sanc- 
 tioned. His first attempt miscarried. In November an 
 Assembly met at St Andrews ; but the usual care had not been 
 taken to make the way smooth. The attendance was scanty ; 
 those present were faint-hearted or scrupulous ; and the result 
 was a petty concession which drew from James such threats 
 and sarcasms as produced their desired effect. In August of 
 the following year (16 18) the experiment was again made, and 
 on this occasion with triumphant success. At Perth there met 
 by James's command an Assembly, which from the results 
 that followed it may be regarded as one of the most important 
 General Assemblies of the Scottish Church. As in the case 
 of the Glasgow Assembly of 16 10, threats and bribes were 
 freely employed to influence the votes of its members; and 
 the great business in hand was carried through in flagrant 
 disregard of the traditional forms of the House 2 . The Five 
 Articles — thenceforward to be known as the " Five Articles of 
 Perth " — were imposed upon the nation by the will of the king 
 through the agency of a pseudo-General Assembly, and the 
 controversy began which was to assume such vast proportions 
 in the reign of his son and successor. It now remained to be 
 seen how the nation would accept the articles which had thus 
 received the sanction of the highest court of the Church. 
 
 As Spottiswoode had foretold, the opposition was as wide- 
 spread as it was persistent. To the article which enjoined 
 
 1 Spottiswoode, III. 247, 8. — For a glowing account of the benefits 
 that Scotland received lroni James's visit, see the letter of the Earl of 
 Dunicrmlinc, Metros Papers, p. ig6. 
 
 • Orig. LelUts, 573 <>. 
 
 >*• 
 
 f z k
 
 270 The Croivn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 kneeling at Communion the resistance was specially fierce and 
 obstinate. For the great majority of Scottish Communicants to 
 kneel at Communion was to recognise that supernatural change 
 in the elements which was the grossest superstition in the teach- 
 ing of Rome. It was against this "gesture" that Knox had 
 fought so strenuously while acting as one of the preachers of 
 Edward VI ; and it was mainly through his insistence that the 
 "Black Rubric" had been inserted in the Second English Prayer- 
 Book as a corrective of the rubric that prescribed the posture 
 of kneeling at Communion 1 . From the greatest of its apostles, 
 therefore, the Scottish Reformed Church had inherited its 
 repugnance to the article in question. It was in Edinburgh 
 that the resistance to James's innovations was boldest and 
 most general. The town churches were deserted; the citizens 
 assembled in conventicles, and flocked to ministers in the 
 neighbourhood who were of their own way of thinking. The 
 great instrument of coercion was the Court of High Com- 
 mission (it had now become one Court); but though it strained 
 its powers to the utmost, it was unequal to the task which 
 James had laid upon it 2 . Still, though even the bishops were 
 lukewarm with regard to the detested articles, James went 
 on his way. When it was announced that a Parliament was 
 to meet in July 162 1, there was a hope among the protesters 
 that it might take their side in the great dispute. By bringing 
 the usual influences to bear, however, James made sure of the 
 result ; and by a majority of 85 to 59 the Five Articles received 
 the sanction of the Estates. The day of ratification (Saturday 3 , 
 August 4th) was a memorable one in Scottish history, and, 
 as it happened, there were accompanying circumstances which 
 stamped it on the national memory. As the Commissioner 
 
 1 The Black Rubric was removed from the Prayer-Book at the accession 
 of Elizabeth, but was restored in 1662, and has remained there ever since. 
 
 2 Striking proof of the activity of the Court will be found in Vols. XI 
 and xii of the P. C. Register. 
 
 3 Known as "Black Saturday."
 
 Chap. 11] James VI 271 
 
 touched the acts with the sceptre three flashes of lightning, 
 each followed by a terrific peal of thunder, lit up the chamber, 
 which had been in darkness before and was presently in 
 darkness again. There followed such rain and hail that " the 
 lords were imprisoned about the space of an houre and a 
 halfe," and the gutters ran " like little brooks." In these 
 manifestations the one side saw the plain expression of the 
 wrath of Heaven ; but their opponents construed them differ- 
 ently — "as the law was given with fire from Mount Sinai," 
 these said, "so did these fires confirme their lawes 1 ." But 
 not even the twofold sanction of Parliament and Assembly 
 could reconcile the mass of the people to James's ecclesiastical 
 novelties; and to the close of his reign all the efforts of himself 
 and his advisers were ineffectual to make them kneel at Com- 
 munion or pay deference to the great festivals of the Church. 
 "And for our Church matters," wrote Spottiswoode in May, 
 1623, "they are gone unless another course be taken 2 ." Such 
 was the conclusion of James's dealings with religion in Scot- 
 land. By means which cannot be justified on the most 
 generous construction he had extinguished Presbytery and set 
 up Episcopacy in its place, but in insisting on changes of 
 ritual as well as polity he had unwittingly evoked forces 
 which imperilled that very work which he deemed his main 
 achievement as a King of Scots. 
 
 A parallel chapter of the ecclesiastical history of the period 
 still remains to be noted. Since James's removal to England 
 the Scottish Roman Catholics had received no little share of 
 his attention. Before the Union his policy had been to deal 
 as tenderly with his Catholic subjects as his circumstances 
 would permit. The Gunpowder Plot, however, gave another 
 turn to his mind ; and thenceforward, till near the close of his 
 reign, the most ardent Presbyterian had little to complain of 
 his zeal lor the suppression of Popery. In the furtherance of 
 
 1 Calderwood, VII. 505. 
 a Orig. Letters, p. 713.
 
 272 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 this end all religious parties in Scotland were agreed — each 
 indeed considering its zeal for this object as the most convincing 
 proof of its orthodoxy. Now and for many years to come the 
 terror of a Catholic reaction still haunted the minds of all 
 , Scottish Protestants. The number of Catholics in the country, 
 it is to be remembered, was still very great. They abounded 
 in the shires of Aberdeen, Dumfries and Kirkcudbright ; and 
 such a town as Paisley was a "nest of Papists." Among 
 Catholic nobles were Huntly, Errol, Hume, Herries, and 
 even Dunfermline, the Lord High Chancellor of Scotland. 
 What further excited disquiet was the swarm of Jesuits and 
 seminary priests who flitted through the country under the 
 protection of Catholics of position and influence. Parliaments 
 and General Assemblies alike dealt with the common enemy — 
 fines and imprisonment being the usual penalties inflicted; 
 yet, if we may judge from the constant repetition of the same 
 repressive legislation, their efforts were of little avail. The 
 Catholic nobles gave special trouble, as James could never 
 make up his mind to treat them like common recusants and 
 unbelievers. But the most notable incident in the pursuit of 
 Papists was the case of the Jesuit, Ogilvie— the only member 
 of his communion who in Scotland suffered death for his faith 
 after formal trial. Apprehended in Glasgow in December, 
 16 1 5, he was afterwards conveyed to Edinburgh and tried 
 before the Privy Council. For the guidance of his judges 
 James sent down a series of questions, telling them at the same 
 time that if Ogilvie were a fomenter of rebellion as well as a 
 Jesuit he should suffer the last penalty of the law. That he 
 was a rebel and an abettor of rebels his judges, Spottiswoode 
 among them, were apparently satisfied; and Ogilvie attained 
 the martyrdom which he had carefully sought 1 . 
 
 The story of James's last years is diversified by a pleasanter 
 theme than his interminable difficulties with 
 1624 the scrupulous consciences of his Scottish sub- 
 
 1 Spottiswoode, hi. 222—6; Orig. Letters, 385-7, 389, 424.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 273 
 
 jects. This was the great scheme for founding a Scottish 
 colony " between New England and Newfoundland." Its 
 originator was Sir William Alexander of Menstrie, poet, states- 
 man, and traveller — a kind of Scottish Raleigh in his com- 
 bination of practical talent with imaginative ingenuity. The 
 scheme was one after James's own heart, as in the planting 
 of Lewis and Ulster he had shown, and he readily granted 
 to Sir William a patent for the colonisation of the vaguely 
 defined territory — henceforth to be known as A T ova Scotia. 
 He even came to his aid with an ingenious suggestion. To 
 attract candidates for the future colony a new title — that of 
 Nova Scotia baronet — was to be offered on the fulfilment of 
 certain conditions. By paying six thousand merks, or, as an 
 alternative, on sending out six skilled workmen and maintaining 
 them for two years, the candidate was to receive his baronetcy 
 and 30,000 acres of land. It might have been expected that 
 there would be a ready response to these alluring offers. 
 Scotsmen had already given ample proof of their readiness to 
 seek their fortunes in foreign lands. In Poland, Russia, and 
 Sweden' flocks of them had settled and shown the national 
 aptitude for making themselves at home among strangers. 
 But it was to one class of Scotsmen that James hoped the 
 Nova Scotia colony would be specially acceptable. In the 
 proclamation of the scheme (Nov. 30, 1624), special reference 
 is made to "younger brether and meane gentlemen quhois 
 moyens ar short of thair birth, worth or myndis, who other- 
 wayes most be troublesome to the houssis and freinds from 
 whence they ar descendit 2 ." But from no class of Scotsmen 
 was there any enthusiastic response. In 162 1 a few farm 
 labourers, accompanied by a preacher and one skilled artisan, 
 had gone forth to the wilderness ; but their example was not 
 strenuously followed up. In the baronetcies a livelier interest 
 
 1 And even in Finland. — See A Brief Sketch of the Scottish Families 
 in Finland and Sweden, by Otto Donner (HeUingiors, 1884). 
 a P. C. Keg., xiii. 649. 
 
 b. 3. II. 18
 
 274 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 was taken. By the end of October, 1625, there were as many 
 as seventeen Scots who were going about with the title, and by 
 the end of June 1627 they numbered thirty-five 1 . Of his meri- 
 torious project, therefore, James saw little fruit; and, though 
 his successor entered into it as heartily as himself, the venture 
 must be reckoned with certain others in which the national 
 ambition outran the national sufficiency. 
 
 It was on the 23rd of March, 1625, that James despatched 
 his last letter regarding Nova Scotia : four days later he was 
 dead. For fifty-eight years he had reigned over Scotland; and, 
 whatever were his faults or virtues, his subjects could not com- 
 plain that he had neglected the affairs of his kingdom. From 
 first to last there was little, great or small, that bore on the 
 national interests in which he had not had a busy hand ; and 
 his removal to England had quickened rather than diminished 
 his buzzing assiduity. The Register of the Scottish Privy 
 Council, which has recently been published, and which covers 
 the entire period of his reign, has for the first time revealed 
 the full scope of his activity in the administration of his king- 
 dom. In one respect the record emphasises the grave defects 
 of his character; in another it certainly raises our estimate of 
 his capacity and of his sense of the responsibilities of his 
 office. In his dealings alike with Highland chiefs and Presby- 
 terian clergy he so often displayed a petty malice, a malignity, 
 and a deliberate cruelty, that we are bound to conclude that 
 these vices were of the essence of his nature. His many 
 letters" to individuals and corporate bodies, which appear in 
 the Register, throw light on his character as a man as well as a 
 
 1 P. C. Reg. 1. (Second Series), pp. xix., cm. — Sir William Alexander 
 has himself given an interesting account of his scheme. See the Reprint in 
 Laing's Royal Letters, Charters and Tracts, relating to the Colonization of 
 New Scotland, etc. 
 
 3 On one of these, that addressed by James to his subjects on the 
 occasion of his sailing for Norway to bring home his bride, Sir Walter 
 Scott doubtless based his conception of James's character and style of con- 
 versation, as he has portrayed them in his Fortunes of Nigel. Scott
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 275 
 
 king. Self-complacency is their prevailing note; and it was 
 this self-complacency rather than good humour that prompted 
 those familiarities in social intercourse which made him so 
 grotesque a figure. Exaggerated as Weldon's famous portrait 
 of him undoubtedly is, the outer man he describes seems 
 but the appropriate incarnation of that strange compound of 
 shrewdness, tactlessness, mental awkwardness, and conceit 
 which James's reported sayings and doings inevitably convey. 
 " He was of a middle stature, more corpulent through his 
 clothes than in his body, yet fat enough, his clothes ever being 
 made large and easy, the doublets quilted for stiletto proof, his 
 breeches in great plaits and full stuffed ; he was naturally of a 
 timorous disposition, which was the reason of his quilted 
 doublets ; his eyes large, ever rolling after any stranger that 
 came in his presence, insomuch, as many for shame have left 
 the room, as being out of countenance ; his beard was very 
 thin; his tongue too large for his mouth, which ever made him 
 speak full in the mouth, and made him drink very uncomely, 
 as if eating his drink, which came out into the cup of each 
 side of his mouth ; his skin was as soft as taffeta sarsnet, which 
 felt so, because he never washed his hands, only rubbed his 
 finger ends slightly with the wet end of a napkin; his legs 
 were very weak, having had (as was thought) some foul play in 
 his youth, or rather before he was born, that he was not able 
 to stand at seven years of age ; that weakness made him ever 
 leaning on other men's shoulders 1 ." 
 
 James's government of Scotland after the union of the 
 Crowns may fairly be called a despotism, but it was neither a 
 capricious nor a malevolent despotism. He undoubtedly meant 
 well by his native country, and he carried out his good inten- 
 
 quotes the letter in a note to his edition of the Secret History of the Court 
 0/ James I (Vol. II. p. 331), 1811. It may be said that in his portrait of 
 James, Scott does more than justice to the man and less than justice to the 
 king. 
 
 1 Secret History oj the Court of James I, II. 1, 3. 
 
 l8—2
 
 276 TJie Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 tions with a shrewdness and consistency which prove that he 
 fully understood the objects at which he was aiming. That 
 policy was undoubtedly conceived in the interests of the Scottish 
 people, but its primary reference was the interest of himself 
 and his descendants. England and Scotland were to be made 
 one in Church and law and State, that the House of Stewart, as 
 the vicegerents of heaven, might execute their divinely-appointed 
 mission in both countries. 
 
 IV. General Progress of the Country. 
 
 The outstanding fact of James's reign was the transforma- 
 tion which he wrought in the Scottish constitution. He found 
 it a monarchy strictly limited, and he left it all but a pure 
 despotism. As in the. case of the Tudors in England, it was 
 through his Privy Council that he effected this revolution, and 
 through which he nominally governed the country. Chosen by 
 himself and dismissible at his pleasure, its members had no 
 choice but to be the docile instruments of his will 1 . The 
 number of councillors was over thirty, but the attendance of 
 many of them was nominal ; and the business was mainly in 
 the hands of the great officials, the chief of whom were the 
 Chancellor, Treasurer, Secretary, Clerk-Register, Comptroller, 
 Justice-Clerk, Advocate, and Privy Seal. What has been said 
 of the jurisdiction of the English Privy Council strictly applies 
 to that of Scotland — "it supervised the administration of the 
 laws, regulated trade and wages, banished rogues, dealt with 
 obstinate recusants, granted licences to travel, restricted the 
 press, administered oaths of allegiance, reprimanded juries, 
 kept an eye on the law-courts, the justices of the peace..., <and 
 even to some extent controlled the Church. It deliberated on 
 
 1 In the early part of his reign the Parliament retained the right of 
 electing the Councillors.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 277 
 
 all affairs of State, searched out plots, called out the national 
 forces and directed the movements of the fleet 1 ." 
 
 The reign of James VI marks an epoch in the history of 
 the administration of justice in Scotland. Apart from the 
 Courts of the Burghs and those that pertained to the heritable 
 jurisdictions of the barons, the Justice Ayres and the Court of 
 Session, founded by James V, had hitherto composed the 
 judicial system of the country. As has been already said, the 
 Court of Session had not quite fulfilled the intentions of its 
 founder. It remained both inefficient and corrupt; but its 
 machinery was excellent, and only a higher standard of public 
 opinion was necessary to convert it into a worthy tribunal. 
 During the reign of Mary and the early years of James, the 
 Justice-Ayres had ceased to be regularly held, with the result 
 that, while the "special and highest crimes" might be dealt 
 with by the Court of Session in Edinburgh, the lesser offences 
 committed throughout the country were left unpunished. By 
 an Act of 1587, therefore, it was ordained that Justice-Ayres 
 should be held twice a year in every shire, and that eight 
 persons should be specially commissioned to conduct them 2 . 
 Even this provision, however, was found inadequate ; and in 
 1609, James took a further step which must be reckoned 
 among his good deeds to his native kingdom. In England he 
 had seen in full working the system of Justices of the Peace 3 , 
 and, in this case wise, he determined to try its efficacy in Scot- 
 land. By an Act of the Estates passed in 1609, followed up 
 by the energetic proceeding of the Privy Council, Justices of the 
 Peace were appointed for every shire, the number assigned to 
 each being dependent on its relative extent and importance 4 . 
 Every Justice other than a nobleman, prelate, Privy Councillor, 
 or Lord of Session, was to receive 405. Scots a day for his 
 
 1 Prothero, Select Statutes, 6fc, pp. ci, cii. 
 
 2 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, III. 458, 9. 
 Prothero, Select Statutes, &C, pp. cxiii. et seq. 
 
 4 Ads of rail, of Scotland, iv. 434; P. C. Reg., Vol. IX. s.v.
 
 278 The Crown and tJu Kirk [Book vi 
 
 attendance on the Court — this emolument to come from the 
 fines imposed in the district. To give effect to the new tri- 
 bunals, two constables were to be sworn in for each parish — the 
 term of service being six months, and the acceptance of the 
 office compulsory. The powers assigned to the justices were 
 sufficiently extensive. "Generally," it has been said, "the 
 justices in each shire were charged with all the duties of 
 magistracy in that shire, except that they were to refer all 
 matters capital, and the cases of all offenders of high rank, to 
 the Council, and also that they were to avoid interference with 
 the powers of provosts and bailies of burghs, and with other 
 constituted jurisdictions 1 ." 
 
 In no previous reign had so much been done for the com- 
 mercial development of the country. The introduction of new 
 manufactures was encouraged by the liberal grant of patents, 
 with the result that such commodities as glass, soap and leather 
 were now for the first time produced at home. The making 
 of woollen cloth, which was to become so important an industry 
 of Scotland, specially exercised James and his Council ; and a 
 Commission on Manufactures was appointed with full powers 
 to determine how it might best be carried on in the interest of 
 the country. An Act imposing a new tariff and another for 
 securing a uniformity of weights and measures were likewise 
 the result of a comprehensive enquiry into the commercial 
 conditions of the time. Legislation regarding foreign trade 
 was continued in the same spirit as in all previous reigns. 
 Certain home products, wool and grain above all, were strictly 
 forbidden to be sent out of the country, though the prohibi- 
 tion of their export to England ceased with the repeal of the 
 mutually hostile laws that followed the Union. One new 
 departure in commercial legislation deserves to be specially 
 noted. In the preamble to an Act of 1597 it is stated that 
 Scotland, alone of all countries, had never imposed duties on 
 
 1 Proiessor Masson, P. C. Reg., Vol. ix., p. lxii.
 
 Chap, ii] James VI 279 
 
 imported goods. Thenceforward, however, Scotland was to 
 follow the example of other nations ; and a duty of twelve 
 pennies was to be imposed on every pound's worth of all im- 
 ported commodities'. 
 
 An intelligent English traveller who visited Scotland in 
 1598 has given the following account of the foreign trade of 
 Scotland. "The inhabitants of the western parts of Scotland 
 carry into Ireland and neighbouring places red and pickled 
 herrings, sea-coal, and aquavitae, with like commodities, and 
 bring out of Ireland yarn and cows' hides or silver. The 
 eastern Scots carry into France coarse cloths, both linen and 
 woollen, which be narrow and shrink in the wetting. They 
 also carry thither wool, skins of goats, wethers, and of conies, 
 and divers kinds of fishes taken in the Scottish sea and near 
 other northern islands, and after smoked or otherwise dried 
 and salted ; and they bring from thence salt and wines. But 
 the chief traffic of the Scots is in four places; namely, at 
 Camphere in Zeeland, whither they carry salt, the skins of 
 wethers, otters, badgers, and martens, and bring from thence 
 corn. And at Bordeaux in France, whither they carry cloths 
 and the same skins, and bring from thence wines, prunes, 
 walnuts, and chestnuts. Thirdly, within the Baltic Sea, whither 
 they carry the said cloths and skins, and bring thence flax, 
 hemp, iron, pitch, and tar. And, lastly, in England, whither 
 they carry linen cloths, yarn, and salt, and bring thence wheat, 
 oats, beans, and like things"." 
 
 In previous Scottish reigns, the king was only one of many 
 great personages almost as powerful as himself. In the early 
 years of James's own reign, it is of Lennox and Arran that we 
 have to take account far more than of himself. From a few 
 years before his removal to England, however, all this was 
 
 1 Acts vj Pari. o/ScollanJ, iv. 135-6. 
 
 2 Fynca Moryson. — In his Introduction to Vol. IX. of the P. C. 
 Register, Professor Masson has given a list of Scottish exports and imports 
 at this period.
 
 280 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 changed. Thenceforward, he is the one figure who fills the 
 stage, and the proudest Scottish potentates become the mere 
 instruments of his will. Several of his State officials were men 
 of high ability, but from the position they occupied they are 
 not figures in Scottish history. The name of Thirlestane is 
 associated with the Act that is known as the Great Charter of 
 Presbyterianism, but there were others as famous in their day 
 as Thirlestane. There was the Earl of Dunbar, who succes- 
 sively filled the offices of Treasurer, Comptroller, and King's 
 Commissioner — the terror of the Borders, as we have seen, but 
 no less detested as James's principal agent in the overthrow of 
 the Kirk. Another great personage was Sir Alexander Seton, 
 better known as the Earl of Dunfermline, who for eighteen 
 years held the office of Chancellor. Though known to be an 
 adherent of the Church of Rome, he was not unacceptable to 
 the Presbyterian party. "He was a good Justicier," says 
 Calderwood, "courteous and humane both to strangers and to 
 his owne countrie people, but noe good friend to the bishops '." 
 Lastly there was Thomas Hamilton, Earl of Haddington, 
 dubbed by James "Tarn o' the Cowgate," from his residence 
 in that part of Edinburgh. Hamilton filled many offices, but 
 it was as Lord Advocate and the pursuer of the banished 
 ministers that he earned the favour of James and the detesta- 
 tion of the Kirk 2 . 
 
 Though himself a lover of learning and in his own way a 
 man of letters, the reign of James was not a blossoming period 
 in Scottish literature. At the beginning of the 16th century 
 Scotland could more than hold its own with England in the 
 number and quality of its men of literary genius. At the 
 
 1 Calderwood, VII. 549. 
 
 2 Hamilton's Correspondence, published by the Bannatyne Club under 
 the title of State Papers and Miscellaneous Correspondence of Thomas, Earl 
 of Melros, is one of the most valuable authorities we possess regarding 
 James's reign. He was Earl of Melros before he became Earl of Had- 
 dington.
 
 Chap, nj James VI 281 
 
 close of the 16th and the opening of the 17th century this 
 relation was signally reversed. Against the marvellous succes- 
 sion of poets and thinkers who make the glory of England 
 during that period, Scotland can point to but one writer who 
 holds a respectable place in British literature — Drummond of 
 Hawthornden. It may be said that the turmoil in which the 
 nation lived, the constant preoccupation of men's minds with 
 the burning questions of the hour, and the narrow view of life 
 involved in the prevailing type of religion, may account for this 
 failure of great creative genius. But Scotsmen did not all 
 accept the theology of Knox; and times of revolution have not 
 invariably checked the production of works of imagination. 
 For the century and a half that followed the death of Chaucer 
 England failed to produce one literary genius of a high order ; 
 and a similar period of impotency and of equal duration was 
 now to be in the destinies of Scotland. Yet there were two 
 Scottish subjects of James whose achievement added lustre to 
 his northern kingdom — his tutor George Buchanan and Napier 
 of Merchiston. In the opinion of learned Europe, Buchanan 
 was the first Latin poet of his age ; and, as Latin was still the 
 common language of educated Europe, this implied a contem- 
 porary reputation more extensive than that of any other writer 
 then living in the British Islands. By his invention of log- 
 arithms and hardly less by his opening up of the Apocalypse 1 
 Napier of Merchiston attained a cosmopolitan reputation little 
 below that of Buchanan. 
 
 In education the most noteworthy act of James was the 
 foundation of the College of Edinburgh in 1582. Scotland 
 had now four universities, but it was open to grave doubt 
 whether this number were not beyond her resources. That of 
 Glasgow had received a temporary impetus from Andrew 
 Melville, but those of St Andrews and Aberdeen were in 
 equally low estate both as regards their incomes and their 
 
 1 Napier's Plaine Discovery of the whole Revelation of Saint John went 
 through numerous editions in English, Dutch, French and German.
 
 282 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 provision for instruction. In his zeal for the assimilation of 
 Scottish institutions to those of England, James conceived a 
 plan for which much could be said at the time. As England 
 had but two universities, Scotland should also have but two — 
 at St Andrews and Glasgow, the seats of the two Archbishops. 
 On the occasion of his visit in 1617 there was serious alarm in 
 the colleges of Edinburgh and Aberdeen lest this fate should 
 be in store for them ; but their professors made such a display 
 of learning before his Majesty and so softened his heart by 
 their poetical effusions that he was diverted from his purpose, 
 if he ever seriously entertained it. In spite of all the efforts 
 of Knox and his fellow-reformers there was still no adequate 
 provision for elementary education. Their ideal of a school 
 for every parish was, however, never lost sight of; and in 16 16 
 an Act of Privy Council ordained that such provision should 
 be made. But the day was yet distant when such an Act 
 could take effect throughout the length and breadth of 
 Scotland. 
 
 In a letter 1 written to James in 161 7, the Earl of Hadding- 
 ton (then Lord Binning) describes in glowing terms the vast 
 amelioration that had been wrought in the country under 
 James's guidance. Formerly, he says, Islander oppressed 
 Highlander; Highlander tyrannised over Lowlander; all kinds 
 of enormities were practised in every part of the country — 
 "Edinburgh being the ordinary place of butchery, revenge, and 
 daily fights:" churches and churchyards were more frequented 
 foi malice and mischief than for God's service ; and, in brief, 
 no person, merchant or minister, was safe in the discharge Of 
 his duty. Thanks, however, to his Majesty's "wisdom, power, 
 care, and expenses," all this was at an end; and "no nation on 
 earth could now compare with our prosperities." This picture 
 of Scotland, both as James had found it and as he had made 
 it, was doubtless overcharged ; yet it is but simple truth to say 
 
 1 Melros Papers, p. 273.
 
 Chap, ti] James VI 2S3 
 
 that in no previous reign was so notable an advance made along 
 every line of national prosperity. Yet the inevitable abatement 
 has to be made from James's claims to be regarded as a 
 beneficent ruler, that he inaugurated and transmitted a policy 
 in Church and State which could issue only in revolution and 
 disaster.
 
 284 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 CHARLES I, 1625 — 1649. 
 I. The Act of Revocation. 
 
 It was the boast of James VI that " he knew the stomach " 
 of his Scottish subjects : the same boast assuredly could not 
 be made by his son and successor, Charles I. By his train- 
 ing, temperament, and lifelong convictions regarding religion 
 and his kingly function, Charles was incapable of sympathetic 
 understanding alike of the national character and the national 
 aspirations. Born in 1600, he had not completed his third 
 year when he was removed to England; and, though his 
 dominions in Scotland were sufficiently important to have 
 induced him to visit his native country, it was not till his 
 thirty-third year that he was to set foot in it. 
 
 The circumstances in which he came to the Scottish throne 
 
 were far less formidable than those which at- 
 1625 — 1629 
 
 tended the accession of his grandmother, Mary 
 Stewart, yet he failed even more signally to cope with them. 
 He had hardly assumed the government when that misunder- 
 standing began between him and his northern subjects which 
 the incompatibility of their respective aims and desires was to 
 aggravate in every successive year of his reign. His marriage 
 to the Catholic princess, Henrietta Maria, raised a suspicion 
 of the soundness of his Protestantism, which led to the worst 
 construction of every act of his religious policy. Nor from
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 285 
 
 the beginning was that policy calculated to allay a suspicion 
 which we know to have been unjust. By one act only could 
 Charles have regained the confidence of Presbyterian Scotland 
 — the annulling of the detested Five Articles of Perth. Though 
 he made a show of concession, however, the country was given 
 clearly to understand that in the king's eyes no Church could 
 be satisfactory in which these Articles were not accepted by its 
 members'. It soon appeared, also, that he was to go even 
 beyond his father in extending the power and importance of 
 the bishops in the affairs of the country. He made Arch- 
 bishop Spottiswoode President of the Exchequer, and intimated 
 to the Privy Council, that, as Primate of Scotland, he should 
 take precedence of every subject. Of the predominance Charles 
 meant to assign to the Episcopate he gave further unmistakeable 
 proof: in reconstructing his Scottish Privy Council he gave a 
 place to five bishops — the name of Spottiswoode heading the 
 list of its members 2 . 
 
 The ecclesiastical policy of Charles was not reassuring, and 
 there were others of his actions which raised murmurs among 
 all ranks of the people. Thus he sought to revive an institution 
 of James known as the Commission for Grievances, but would 
 have enlarged its powers to a degree that would have virtually 
 made it a Scottish Star-Chamber. So strenuous, however, 
 was the opposition raised against the proposed institution that 
 Charles found it prudent to abandon his scheme 3 . It was 
 further unfortunate for Charles that his difficulties as King 
 of England forced him into an unpopular policy in Scotland. 
 From his father he had inherited his part in the Thirty Years' 
 War, and his own action led him subsequently into hostilities 
 with France as well. Denied the means of carrying on his 
 various wars by the English Parliament, he turned to Scotland 
 as being more amenable to his will. From Scotland he had 
 
 1 Row, Historic of the Kirk of Scotland, p. 340; Balfour, 11. 142. 
 '-' P. C. Reg-, 1. (Second Series), p. 248. 
 * Ibid. 237 — 33; Balfour, II, 131.
 
 2 86 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 two demands to make, neither of which was acceptable to its 
 people, indifferent as they were to the foreign policy of himself 
 and his minister, Buckingham. As a part of the United King- 
 dom, Scotland would have to make its proportional contribution 
 to the support of the foreign levies ; and, as liable to invasion 
 by the enemy, it would have to put itself in a state of effective 
 defence. In a Convention which met in October, 1625, a 
 grant of ,£400,000 was voted; but, when Charles suggested 
 that instead of this grant a defensive force of 2000 men, main- 
 tained with the necessary shipping for the next three years, 
 would be more acceptable, he was met with a flat refusal 1 . 
 In its own interest, however, the country was forced to make 
 provision against possible attack ; and during the years that 
 followed Charles's accession much of the business of the 
 Privy Council consisted in its endeavours to meet the threat- 
 ened danger. Above 20,000 men were raised for foreign 
 service, many of whom were one day to turn their weapons 
 against Charles's own breast; 'wapinschawins' were energetically 
 revived; and every weak point on the coast sedulously forti- 
 fied and guarded 2 . But, indifferent as they were to Charles's 
 foreign policy, it was only with grumbling reluctance that 
 the Scots put forth even these efforts for their own security. 
 
 But the great Act of the opening years of Charles's reign 
 was one which was to have the most momentous results not 
 only for Scotland but for his larger kingdom. This was the 
 Act of Revocation, annexing all the Church and Crown lands 
 that had been alienated since the accession of Mary Stewart 
 in 1542. The political significance of this step was that it 
 threw the majority of the nobles on the side of the Presby- 
 terian clergy, and thus renewed the alliance which in the 
 period of the Reformation had been so disastrous to the 
 Crown. The successful rebellion of Scotland in large degree 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., v. 167. 
 
 2 The volumes of the P. C Reg. covering these years abound with 
 entries regarding these preparations.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 287 
 
 contributed to the successful rebellion of England ; and, as it 
 seemed to contemporaries, Charles's Act of Revocation was 
 " the ground stone of all the mischief that followed after, both j 
 to this king's government and family 1 ." 
 
 An Act of Revocation, as Charles took care to inform his 
 subjects, was not a new thing in Scotland. From Robert I 
 onward almost every Scottish sovereign had passed such an 
 Act on the attainment of his majority. What distinguished 
 Charles's Act from all others was the extent of its application. 
 Previous revocations had only touched alienations made during 
 the king's minority : that of Charles was to have force not only 
 in the case of his own minority but of the complete reigns of 
 his two predecessors. When it is said that the bulk of the 
 property of the pre- Reformation Church was involved in 
 Charles's Act, it will be seen how wide a net he was casting 
 over Scotland. It will be remembered that by the Act of 
 1587 all ecclesiastical property, with some important excep- 
 tions, had been annexed to the Crown 2 . Whither the bulk of 
 this property went, we have also seen. By lavish grants to 
 the greater and lesser barons James had secured the support 
 of their order in the maintenance of his prerogative. To 
 what extent these grants were made a single sentence may 
 show: between 1587 and 1625 there were erected into tem- 
 poral lordships twenty-one abbeys, seven priories, six nunneries, 
 two preceptories, and two ministries 3 . When it is noted, also, 
 that Charles's Act reached forty-five years beyond 1587, it is 
 evident that there must have been few families of any con- 
 sequence in Scotland whom it did not materially affect. 
 
 Charles was well aware of the opposition on which he must 
 reckon from the most powerful persons in the country, and he 
 laid his plans accordingly. It was from the Lords of Privy 
 
 1 Balfour, 11. 128. 
 9 See ante, p. 205. 
 
 * These numbers are taken from Professor Masson's invaluable Intro- 
 duction to Vol. 1. (Second Series) of the P. C. Register.
 
 288 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Council and the Court of Session that he had to expect the 
 most formidable resistance to his scheme, and he took effective 
 measures to meet it. Hitherto the Lords of Session had 
 formed an important element in the Council, but this arrange- 
 ment would have materially increased the difficulties which he 
 had to anticipate, and in reconstructing the Council (March, 
 1626) he deliberately excluded every judge of the Court of 
 Session 1 . As his own nominees, the Privy Councillors were 
 now at his beck ; but it was further necessary that the various 
 tribunals of the country should also be under his control. In 
 the Court of Session, therefore, and in the various provincial 
 Courts he made his influence so felt that he had little to fear 
 from any obstacles these tribunals might put in his way 2 . 
 
 On the 1 2th of October, 1625, the Revocation passed the 
 Privy Seal ; and its drift was no sooner known than the oppo- 
 sition began. As the new Council was not yet formed, there 
 were vehement protests on the part of the councillors 3 . In two 
 successive letters Charles endeavoured to soothe their alarm ; 
 but when the Council was reconstructed in March, 1626, 
 there was no further need for temporising. In August of 
 that year he began the legal process known in Scotland as 
 a "summons of reduction 4 ," by which a person maintains 
 that his property is wrongfully held by another — the Crown 
 in this case being the claimant against the Lords of Erections. 
 Now that the deluge was fairly upon them, the nobles, lairds, 
 and even the leaders of the clergy (whose interests were also 
 involved) anxiously despatched deputations to Charles in the 
 hope of effecting some compromise. The answer of Charles 
 came in January, 1627, in the shape of a "Commission for 
 
 1 P. C. Register, Vol. I. (Second Series) pp. 248 — 52. 
 
 2 The Earl of Stirling's Register of Royal Letters, &c. t edited by 
 Charles Rogers, LL.D., 1. pp. liv — lvi. 
 
 3 P. C. Reg., 1. (Second Series), pp. 193 — 5. 
 
 4 The writ of summons is given in Connell, Treatise on Tithes, 11. 
 67-71.
 
 Chap, m] Charles I 289 
 
 Surrenders of Superiorities and Teinds," which was empowered 
 to sit till the close of July 1 . 
 
 The great business now being in train, Charles, with the 
 powers at his disposal, successfully carried it through, though 
 in the teeth of opposition at every step. So far as its large 
 political results were concerned, the main work oi the Com- 
 mission was the settlement of a composition by which the 
 lands of the Lords of Erections should be transferred to the 
 Crown. But the Commission had another work of national 
 importance to perform ; and this was the praiseworthy part 
 of Charles's scheme, which he never ceased to put in the 
 forefront as the chief ground of his action. This was the 
 placing on a new basis of the whole system of teinds or tithes, 
 which were the recognised patrimony of the Kirk. In the 
 scramble for Church property which had ensued on the 
 Reformation, the teinds had iallen promiscuously into the 
 hands of multitudes of persons other than the owners of the 
 lands from which they were drawn. As was inevitable, this 
 system had been fraught with grievous injustice alike to the 
 landowners or heritors and the parish clergy. The " titulars 
 of tithes," as their holders were called, extorted their dues 
 with a rapacity which made men think with regret of the days 
 when the tithes were in the hands of the clergy of the ancient 
 Church. The tacksman or middleman had been called into 
 existence, with all the evils that come in his train ; and every 
 harvest 2 obliged clergy and heritor and teind-holder to go 
 through the dismal repetition of extortionate exactions, on the 
 one side, and bitter complaints, on the other. The plan devised 
 by Charles for the remedy of the evil was simple and effective : 
 every heritor was to have the power, if he chose to use it, of 
 purchasing his own tithes from the titulars 3 . 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., v. 189. 
 - The teinds were mostly raised in kind. 
 
 3 By this arrangement the stipends of the ministers of the Church of 
 S( "Hand came to be put on a secure basis. 
 
 I . II. 19 
 
 \
 
 290 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 The Commission did not settle the composition which 
 Charles was prepared to offer for the erected lands, but it 
 advanced the great transaction one stage further: it found 
 that all the erections in question should be resigned into the 
 king's hands, and that their owners should accept the com- 
 position which he might be pleased to offer 1 . The parties 
 interested were four in number — the Lords of Erections, the 
 Burghs which had received grants of Church lands, the 
 Bishops and Clergy, and the Tacksmen of the Teinds ; and 
 before his Majesty's final judgment should be given, each of 
 these parties had, in the phrase of the time, to give in their 
 Submission, or, in other words, to express their willingness to 
 accept the bargain which was offered to them. The Sub- 
 missions came in slowly and reluctantly ; but at length, in 
 September, 1629, Charles was in a position to pronounce his 
 final deliverance. This he accomplished in four " Determina- 
 tiouns " or " Decreits Arbitral," addressed to the four parties 
 whose interests were involved. The value of the teinds he 
 declared to be one-fifth of the constant rents of the lands from 
 which they were drawn, and their heritable value to be nine 
 years' purchase. For the erected lands ten years' purchase 
 was declared to be a just equivalent 2 . 
 
 Such was the greatest economic revolution recorded in 
 Scottish history 3 . Like many of Charles's actions it was a 
 proceeding in which justice was largely mingled with injustice, 
 and folly with wisdom. By his violent overriding of rights 
 which had become prescriptive he alienated the class by whose 
 influence his authority could be upheld ; and the time was not 
 long in coming before his fatal error was brought home to him. 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., v. 189—91. 
 
 2 Ibid. 197 — 207. A thousand merks Scots is declared to be "a com- 
 petent and reasonable satisfaction " for an estate, the annual rent of which 
 is 100 merks. — Ibid. 198. 
 
 8 The protracted and tedious process of the valuation may be followed 
 in the successive volumes of the P. C. Register.
 
 Ckap. hi] Charles I 291 
 
 What might have been safely done by politic dealing in the 
 course of a long reign, he had with ill-judged haste impetuously 
 hurried through in the space of a few years. On the other 
 hand, the national Church of Scotland has not failed to ac- 
 knowledge the beneficence of the great Act which secured an 
 adequate and permanent provision for its ministers. 
 
 During the opening years of Charles's reign there are but 
 two events that call for special notice, and both belong to the 
 history of the Highlands. Throughout the April and May that 
 followed his accession a formidable rebellion of the Clan Ian 
 in North Argyleshire seriously engaged the attention of the 
 Council, and was crushed by the energy of Lord Lorn, soon to 
 be known in a wider sphere as the great Earl and Marquis of 
 Argyle 1 . Far more memorable in Scottish tradition is the 
 tragedy of the Burning of Frendraught. On the night of the 
 8th of October, 1630, the Viscount of Aboyne, son of the 
 Marquis of Huntly, Gordon of Rothiemay, and certain of their 
 friends and attendants, were hospitably entertained by Crichton, 
 the laird of Frendraught. About midnight, when all had 
 retired, lire broke out in the tower, Aboyne and Rothiemay 
 perishing in the flames — while all belonging to Crichton suc- 
 ceeded in making their escape. As there was a feud between 
 the Houses of Rothiemay and Frendraught there was a natural 
 suspicion that there had been foul play. But though one of 
 Crichton's adherents was executed on the charge of raising the 
 fire, no evidence was forthcoming to prove his own guilt 2 . The 
 Burning of Frendraught has dwelt in the popular memory; but, 
 if it is to be regarded as a crime, the records of the period 
 amply prove that it does not stand alone. 
 
 1 /'. C. Reg., 1. (Sec. Series), pp. 18 — 4 i. 
 
 a Spakiing, History of the Troubles in Scotland and England (Ban. 
 Club), I. 5 -8. 
 
 19
 
 292 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 II. Charles's Visit. 
 
 Every year since his accession Charles had promised to 
 visit Scotland, but it was not till June, 1633, that he actually 
 crossed the Border. On the 15 th of that month he entered 
 Edinburgh amid a display such as the kingdom had not seen 
 "for many ages 1 ." Like that of his father in 161 7, however, 
 the visit of Charles was not one of mere pleasure and ceremony. 
 Like James he came with his mind bent on changes in Church 
 and State, which for a time at least a more prudent ruler would 
 have preferred to postpone. 
 
 It was with Charles's ecclesiastical policy that the hopes 
 and fears of his Scottish subjects were mainly bound up. Of 
 his preferences regarding the externals of public worship he 
 left them in no doubt. At the coronation of James VI John 
 Knox had preached the sermon, and it was in the teeth of the 
 preacher and his brother ministers that even the ceremony of 
 anointing was performed. At the coronation of Charles it was 
 seen how far these notions had been left behind. In the 
 Chapel of Holyrood, when Charles received the Crown, there 
 was not only anointing, but the officiating bishops performed 
 the ceremony in "white rochets" and "white sleeves " (Papist 
 rags, Knox called them); there was the semblance of an altar; 
 there were candles ; and there was a crucifix, before which the 
 bishops bowed as they passed 3 . In the kirk of St Giles on 
 the following Sunday two English chaplains, we are told by the 
 Presbyterian Row, "acted their English service"; and, the 
 sermon over, a banquet followed in the neighbouring house 
 whence there proceeded such a din from " men, musical in- 
 struments, trumpets, playing, singing, also shooting of cannons, 
 that no service was had in the afternoon 3 ." In themselves 
 these doings were sufficiently distasteful to the majority of the 
 
 1 Balfour, II. iy6. 2 Spalding, I. 17. 3 Row, 363.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 293 
 
 nation, but there was a circumstance that made them doubly 
 galling. In the train of Charles had come Bishop Laud, whose 
 hand had already been busy in Scottish affairs, and who was 
 now making himself offensively prominent throughout the 
 royal visit. Like his ancestress, Mary of Lorraine, Charles 
 was knitting the formidable bond of religious scruples and 
 national feeling which was to overthrow him as it had over- 
 thrown her. 
 
 The Estates met on June iSth, and their proceedings did 
 not tend to reassure the country. A Scottish Parliament 
 Charles found much easier to manage than an English one. 
 Long before his coming, his officials had been making sure of 
 the vote of the commissioners for the shires and burghs'. On 
 the bishops, now important members of the House, he could 
 securely count ; and the nobles were not as yet united in their 
 opposition to the Crown. He had impressed his will on the 
 Privy Council and the various judicial tribunals, and he now 
 had his way with the High Court of Parliament. The arrange- 
 ment known as the " Committee of the Lords of the Articles " J 
 made this a comparatively easy matter. On his accession 
 Charles had told his Scottish subjects that he meant to follow 
 in the footsteps of his father ; and it cannot be said that in his 
 present action he was unfaithful to his pledge. Till the Par- 
 liament held by James in 1609, each of the three Estates had 
 chosen its own Lords of the Articles 2 ; but in that Parliament 
 a new method had been initiated by James, which his son now 
 faithfully followed. The nobles chose the necessary eight from 
 the bishops ; the eight bishops chose eight of the nobles ; and 
 the sixteen together chose eight from the commissioners for 
 the barons and burghs. Though seemingly an equitable 
 
 1 This appears from the P. C. Register. 
 
 '* This was the averment of the protesting nobles and other Com- 
 missioners in the Parliament of 1633 (Cobbett, Collection of State Trials, 
 in. 606, 7), and it is borne out by the history of James Vl's Parliaments. 
 See Acts of Pari, of Scot., IV. Gy.
 
 294 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 arrangement, it in reality placed the control of the Parliament's 
 
 taction entirely in the hands of the king. The bishops to a 
 man were on his side ; they chose such of the nobles as were 
 of their own way of thinking ; and these complaisant nobles 
 and bishops chose such commissioners from the Third Estate 
 as would work comfortably with themselves. The method of 
 procedure followed by the Committee, also, fairly placed the 
 reins in Charles's hands. The Lords of the Articles drew up 
 
 I their Bills, submitted them in a body to the House, and, with- 
 out debate on each particular Bill, the vote was taken on the 
 mass'. In this dealing, also, Charles only followed the example 
 of his father, but, lacking alike the shrewdness and the timidity 
 of James, he did not see that it was now inopportune. 
 
 A more industrious Parliament had never sat in Scotland. 
 When it rose on June 28th, it had put its seal to no fewer than 
 one hundred and sixty-eight Acts. Of this multitude a few 
 were important and some were ominous. The great Act of 
 Revocation was sanctioned ; an Act of the Privy Council 
 regarding Parish Schools was ratified ; and, what the con- 
 ditional generosity of his English Parliaments rendered very 
 acceptable, an unusually heavy grant was placed at the king's 
 
 I disposal. But it was the Acts that related to religion that 
 excited the greatest interest and the greatest hostility. These 
 
 i were two in number — one confirming all the Acts of James 
 touching religion, and the other approving the Act of 1609 
 which conferred on the king the right of determining ''the 
 apparel of Kirkmen." What this apparel was meant to be was 
 clearly specified : during divine service and sermon the bishops 
 were to array themselves in "whites," and the inferior clergy in 
 their surplices 2 . While the various Bills were in course of 
 preparation, a general protest was drawn up by the opposition 
 on the ground that they could not be expected to approve 
 blindfold whatever Bills might be submitted to them. Before 
 
 1 Row, 366. 
 
 2 Acts of Pari, of Scot., V. 6—162.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 295 
 
 all the protesters had signed, however, Parliament had risen ; 
 and they had to be satisfied without recording their votes. As 
 the votes were being taken, Charles, with a touch of character 
 that reminds us that he was his father's son, openly wrote down 
 the names of the dissentients. Yet with all these checks and 
 precautions, his majority must have been a narrow one, and it 
 was even believed at the time that there had been tampering 
 with the votes'. Charles had certainly received unmistakeable 
 warning that a Scottish Parliament might one day be as trouble- 
 some as an English one. 
 
 He left Edinburgh for England on the 18th of June. With 
 the minority of his subjects who supported him, he had been 
 sufficiently gracious. To the bishops he had given such im- 
 portance as they had never enjoyed even in the best days of 
 king James, and he had left behind him one new marquis, ten 
 new earls, two viscounts, eight lords, and fifty-four knights 2 . 
 But neither as a man nor as a king had he made a favourable 
 impression on his subjects in general. His cold and stately 
 demeanour was contrasted with the easy familiarity of his 
 father, and — a sure sign of unpopularity — his personal peculiari- 
 ties were petulantly criticised. So far as the public results of 
 his visit were concerned, he had materially increased the dis- 
 satisfaction which had been growing before he came. His 
 ecclesiastical legislation had decisively shown that he would 
 not be content till the Church of Scotland were fashioned after 
 the pattern of the Church of England as conceived in the mind 
 of Laud. He had refused even to look at a petition from the 
 ministers concerning what they called "the disordered estate of 
 the Reformed Kirk 3 ." He could at this moment afford to pass 
 the ministers by, but he had left behind him a state of things 
 which was one day to change their relative positions. By the 
 Act of Revocation he had alienated many of the Scottish 
 nobles, and he had now denuded them of political influence 
 
 1 Row, 364 — 7. * Balfour, 11. :o2. a Row, 362.
 
 296 T/ie Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 by the position he had assigned to the bishops in the three 
 Estates. No order could rest quiescent under such a deadly 
 assault on its privileges, and the Scottish nobles began to realise 
 that their interests were bound up with that Presbyterian party 
 which they had been the main instruments of reducing to its 
 present low estate. 
 
 III. Laud's Liturgy. 
 
 Charles's visit made no change in his general policy 
 j6 towards Scotland. More persistently than ever 
 
 he pursued his aim of increasing the political 
 importance of the bishops, and of assimilating the Scottish 
 and English Churches. In the September that followed his de- 
 parture he added to the list of bishops by establishing a 
 diocese of Edinburgh ; in October, under the powers that had 
 r been confirmed by the late Parliament, he sent down orders 
 regarding the apparel of the clergy ; and in the same month he 
 directed that the English liturgy should be used in the Chapel 
 Royal at Holyrood and in the University of St Andrews l . 
 
 During the late meeting of Estates it had been made clear 
 
 tb« c t0 Charles that he must henceforth reckon 
 
 1034—5 . . 
 
 on the opposition of a section of the Scottish 
 
 nobles. To what such opposition might lead he convincingly 
 
 showed them by a proceeding directly connected with the 
 
 same meeting of Estates. This was the trial of Lord Bal merino 
 
 for high treason, one of the most famous State prosecutions in 
 
 the history of Scotland. On the part of the protesting nobles 
 
 a " Supplication " had been drawn up in which they sought to 
 
 justify their opposition. Understanding the nature of this 
 
 document, Charles had refused to receive it ; but an interlined 
 
 copy in the possession of Balmerino had fallen into the hands 
 
 of Archbishop Spottiswoode, who at once despatched it to 
 
 1 Rogers, Keg. of Royal Letters, II. 679, 80.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles 1 297 
 
 Charles. It could not have been pleasant reading, as it told 
 him in plain terms that, alike in his Church policy and in his 
 conduct of the late Parliament, he had been acting directly 
 contrary to the constitution. Of treason in it, however, only 
 the exigencies of Charles's position and the bad advice of 
 those at his ear could have led him to find a trace. Yet it was 
 on the ground of possessing a treasonable document without 
 communicating it to his Majesty that Balmerino was thrown 
 into prison and made the victim of a harassing trial which 
 lasted from June 1634 till July 1635. Balmerino was the 
 son of Sir James Elphinston, first Lord Balmerino, who in the 
 preceding reign had been tried for treasonably concocting 
 a letter to the Pope in the name of his master. Till the 
 meeting of the Estates in 1633 Balmerino had taken no part 
 in public affairs, but on that occasion he had made himself 
 prominent among the dissenting nobles. In the end his 
 judges found him guilty by a majority of eight to seven ; but 
 at the suggestion, it is said, of Laud himself, Charles was 
 induced to receive him to mercy. But the injudicious pro- 
 ceeding had done its work. With the exception of the higher 
 clergy, no persons of influence had viewed it with approval. 
 It was Spottiswoode who had originated the prosecution, and 
 it was he and his colleagues who had persistently pushed it to 
 the end. By the mass of the people the trial was regarded 
 with fear and indignation. " In all these days," we are told, 
 "the common people avowedlie, with loud and high lifted up 
 voices, were praying for my Lord Balmerino, and for all those 
 that loved him and his cause." As for the nobles, they saw in 
 Charles's treatment of Balmerino only another instance of his 
 determination to break the power of their order, and to sub- 
 ordinate them to the new episcopate 1 . The best friends of 
 the Crown, moreover, had followed the proceeding with 
 dismay. Drummond of Hawthornden, by all his instincts a 
 
 1 Row, 375 — 389, Balfour, II. 216—20; Slate Trials, III. 591— 711.
 
 298 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 zealous upholder of the prerogative, in language more out- 
 spoken than the Supplication itself protested against the folly 
 of the prosecution of Balmerino on such insufficient grounds, 
 and gave advice to Charles which he would have been wise to 
 follow 1 . 
 
 Unconscious or heedless of the general opposition to his 
 policy, Charles went headlong on his way. In 
 January, 1635, ne niade Spottiswoode Lord 
 Chancellor of Scotland— the son of that prelate, Sir Robert 
 Spottiswoode, being already President of the Court of Session. 
 The same year saw decisive proof that Charles would be 
 content with nothing less than the moulding of the Scottish 
 Church after the idea that had shaped itself in the mind of 
 Laud, now primate of England. Before this end could be 
 attained, there was much in the discipline and ritual of the 
 Scottish Kirk that would have to be fundamentally altered. 
 In spite of all the changes effected by James, the Second Book 
 of Discipline and Knox's Book of Common Order still held 
 their ground ; and these had to be displaced before Laud and 
 Charles could have their way. It was decided that the Book 
 of Discipline should give place first. In May, 1635, Charles 
 appended his warrant to a Book of Canons, which duly found 
 its way into Scotland in the following year. Imposed on the 
 country without reference to General Assembly or Parliament, 
 the new book was received with an indignation which its 
 contents were not likely to mitigate. It designated the king 
 as the absolute Head of the Church ; it commanded the ac- 
 ceptance of a new Service-Book which was in course of 
 preparation ; and it prescribed observances and rites to which 
 the immense majority of Scotsmen had shown their uncon- 
 querable aversion. But to ensure the operation of the new 
 canons Charles had taken the most effectual means at his 
 disposal : in October, 1634, he had established a new Court of 
 
 1 Professor Masson, Drummotid of Hawlhorndeii, 236-41.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 299 
 
 High Commission and clothed it with powers beyond even 
 
 those of thauXZourt in the time of his father 1 . 
 
 The promised Service-Book was not long in coming, and 
 
 under the name of Laud's Liturgy was to be one 
 
 • • 1636— 1637 
 
 of the portentous facts in the national history. 
 
 In this fatal action, also, Charles could truly say that he was 
 but carrying out the intention of his father. It had been 
 a strong desire of James to supplant Knox's Service-Book by 
 one more to his mind, but he had seen the risks in the way 
 and had prudently shrunk from giving it effect. Encouraged 
 by the younger Scottish bishops, and prompted by Laud and 
 his own unhesitating convictions, Charles took the step which 
 had been too bold for his father. It cannot be said that in 
 this matter he proceeded with undue haste. As early as 1629 
 he had been in communication with the Scottish bishops 
 regarding a new Liturgy 2 ; and the nation had become aware 
 that the dreaded innovation must come sooner or later. On 
 the 20th of December, 1636, the Privy Council, by Charles's 
 order, passed an Act declaring that the forthcoming Liturgy 
 was the only form which would thenceforth be allowed in the 
 Scottish Church, and enjoining every minister to procure two 
 copies for his parish under pain of outlawry 3 . In May of the 
 following year the long-threatened volume at last made its 
 appearance. How it would be received was a foregone con- 
 clusion. In the description of the book by the Presbyterian 
 Row we have in the most condensed form all the reasons for 
 the commotion that was to ensue: it was a "Popish-English- 
 Scottish-Mass-Service-Book 4 ." Though the term Liturgy was 
 new in Scotland, it is to be remembered that since the day it 
 came into existence the Scottish Reformed Kirk had never 
 
 1 See n)itv, p. 249. 
 
 1 Sprott, Scottish Liturgies of the Reign of James VI, pp. xxxviii., 
 xxxix. 
 
 1 Baillie, Letters and Journals (Ban. Club), I. 440-1. 
 * Row, 398.
 
 300 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 ceased to make use of a Service-Book in public worship. The 
 Second Prayer-Book of Edward VI had first been generally 
 adopted, but its place had been taken by Knox's Book of 
 Common Order, which, as we have seen, had held its ground 
 till the period at which we have arrived. The objection to 
 Charles's Liturgy was simply that it was Popish, that it came 
 from England, and that it was imposed on the country by the 
 mere fiat of the king. If anything further were needed to 
 make the gift more detested, it was the universal conviction 
 that one man, Laud — an Englishman and an archbishop — was 
 at once the cause of the book's appearance and of its special 
 character. 
 
 The 23rd of August, 1637, ranks with "that accursed 
 wrathful day," the 17th of December, 1596, as 
 one of the memorable dates in the history of 
 Scotland. The riot of that 17th of December placed James VI 
 in a position which enabled him to break the power of the 
 Presbyterian clergy and to change the ecclesiastical policy of 
 the country: the events of Sunday, the 23rd of August, were to 
 have a precisely contrary result. 
 
 Since the days of John Knox the citizens of Edinburgh 
 had been noted for their stubborn adhesion to 
 
 1637 • • 
 
 Presbyterian doctrine and polity. With no other 
 section of his subjects had James VI found greater difficulty in 
 enforcing the Articles of Perth. In 1584, Bishop Adamson, 
 as the representative of Episcopacy, had been violently inter- 
 rupted while conducting service in the church of St Giles. 
 If, therefore, Edinburgh should patiently endure the new 
 Liturgy, its example could not fail to have a good effect 
 on the rest of the country. It was in the same church of 
 St Giles that the experiment with the new Service-Book was 
 now made ; and, unluckily for its promoters, Edinburgh even 
 surpassed its evil record. Every precaution was taken to en- 
 sure the decorous behaviour of the congregation. The two 
 archbishops with several of their suffragans, the Lords of Privy
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 3 01 
 
 Council, and the Lords of Session, were present to give 
 solemnity to the occasion. No sooner, however, had the dean 
 opened the new Liturgy than the tumult began. There arose 
 "such an uncouth noise and hubbub in the Church that not 
 any one could either hear or be heard. The gentlewomen did 
 fall a tearing and crying that the Masse was entered among 
 them and Baal in the Church. There was a gentleman who 
 standing behind a pew and answering Amen to what the Dean 
 was reading, a she zealot hearing him starts up in choler, 
 ' Traitor (says she), dost thou say Mass at my ear,' and with 
 that struck him on the face with her bible in great indignation 
 and fury 1 ." It was in vain that Archbishop Spottiswoode 
 endeavoured to allay the tumult, and the service closed amid 
 uproar and confusion — the bishop being pursued to his 
 residence with volleys of stones and imprecations. Such was 
 the discouraging reception of Laud's Service-Book in the leading 
 church of Scotland. 
 
 The ferment in Edinburgh represented the general state 
 of the nation. At no period of their history — 
 neither during the war of Independence nor at the 
 Reformation — had the Scottish people, in all ranks and degrees, 
 been so completely of one mind. In earlier times the great 
 controversy would have been speedily settled. A few of the 
 great nobles would have put themselves at the head of all who 
 chose to join them, and dictated terms to their sovereign. But 
 during the reigns of James and Charles nobles and people 
 had passed through a new discipline ; and the days of the 
 Boyds and the Douglases had long gone by. Moreover, the 
 King of Scots had now another kingdom at his back; and it 
 was still uncertain what side that kingdom would take in the 
 event of a struggle between Charles and his northern subjects. 
 
 There was but one legal course open to the malcontents — 
 
 1 Gordon, Hist, of Scots' Affairs (Spalding Club), I. 7. This is the 
 episode which tradition has associated with the name of Jenny Geddes, who 
 is said to have flung her stool at the dean's head.
 
 302 TJie Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 petition to the Privy Council as the body that represented the 
 royal authority. Never was there a more distracted body than 
 the Scottish Privy Council during the months that followed the 
 doings in the church of St Giles. Composed of lay and 
 clerical members, it was hopelessly divided against itself — the 
 majority of the lay lords being in more or less avowed sym- 
 pathy with the tide of national feeling. Petitions or supplica- 
 tions, as they were called, poured in through the autumn and 
 the first months of winter, but the Privy Councillors could only 
 communicate with the king and await his bidding. The 
 supplications came from nobles, lairds, ministers and burghs, 
 and bore but one burden — the prayer that Charles would 
 graciously relieve them from the obnoxious Liturgy. Charles 
 was immoveable : he demanded the punishment of the ring- 
 leaders of the riots, he insisted on the acceptance of the 
 Liturgy, and, when on the 18th of October a fresh riot 
 occurred in Edinburgh, he ordered the Council to remove 
 to Linlithgow. By this last threat James VI had brought the 
 capital to his feet; but on the previous occasion the Church 
 was divided and the nobility were bound to the Crown. The 
 situation was now widely different, and the withdrawal of the 
 Council left matters precisely as they were. Two important 
 steps on the part of the " supplicants " at length brought all 
 issues to a point. It was impossible for the Council to 
 transact business with the multitudes of all ranks who swarmed 
 to the capital ; and' the suggestion was made that each of the 
 four orders — the nobles, lairds, burghers, and ministers — should 
 choose permanent commissioners to represent their desires. 
 It was in November that these "Tables" or Committees (each 
 consisting of four members) were appointed 1 ; and on the 
 2 1 st of December they presented to the Council, then sitting 
 at Dalkeith, a collective " Supplication " which went a step 
 beyond all their previous petitions. Hitherto they had only 
 
 1 Row, 485, 6.
 
 Chap, in] Charles I 3°3 
 
 requested the recall of the new Liturgy : now they demanded 
 the removal of the bishops from the Council on the ground 
 that they should not at once be parties and judges in the 
 issues before the country 1 . With this demand the eventful year 
 closed. 
 
 IV. The National Covenant. 
 
 Charles's answer to the general "Supplication" was pro- 
 claimed at the town-cross of Stirling on February 
 19th, 1638. The recent decision of the judges 
 in favour of the legality of ship-money had strengthened his 
 position in England ; and his Scottish subjects were now to 
 feel the result. The Proclamation bore that the Service-Book 
 would be maintained, that all the late supplications and con- 
 vocations were illegal, and that all such things in future would 
 be visited as treason. The royal message had been expected 
 for some time ; and in Stirling, at the moment of its arrival, 
 there were assembled about two thousand of the supplicants, 
 headed by a few of the nobility. The nature of the message 
 had likewise been anticipated, and an answer been deliberately 
 prepared. The Proclamation had no sooner been read, there- 
 fore, than the Earl of Home and Lord Lindsay lodged a 
 formal protestation in the name of the four orders of the 
 petitioners. Within the next few days the same form was gone 
 through in Linlithgow and Edinburgh. 
 
 By this public challenge the Four Tables had virtually 
 
 constituted themselves co-ordinate with the Privy 
 
 1638 
 
 Council ; and their only hope of making good 
 their position was to prove to Charles that they had the nation 
 at their back. An old Scottish custom supplied them with the 
 most effectual machinery for accomplishing this end. In all 
 their enterprises against the Crown the Scottish nobles and 
 lairds had entered into a Bond or Covenant of mutual defence 
 
 1 Balfour, 11. 244, 5.
 
 304 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 and common aims. Such a Covenant it was now proposed to 
 adopt, but on a scale that had been known at no previous 
 time. Into this Covenant, not a. group of refractory barons, 
 but the entire nation was to be invited to enter. The docu- 
 ments that had hitherto issued from the Supplicants had been 
 drafted by the two most distinguished lawyers of the time, Sir 
 Thomas Hope, the King's Advocate, and Archibald Johnston of 
 Warriston ; and to them was now entrusted the preparation of 
 the "National League and Covenant." The result did credit 
 to their ingenuity and skill. The basis of the document was 
 that Negative Confession of Faith, which had been drawn up 
 by the order of James VI in 1581, at a time when there was 
 a specially acute alarm at the activity of Papists. The choice 
 of this Confession, rather than that of Knox and the first 
 Reformers, was a dexterous stroke of policy. What his father 
 had approved and signed Charles could not with a good grace 
 regard with disfavour. But it served another important pur- 
 pose. Many of the parish ministers would have objected to 
 subscribe the Confession of Knox, but the Negative Con- 
 fession, which consisted merely of a condemnation of the chief 
 tenets of the Church of Rome, they could not refuse to sign 
 without incurring the terrible charge of Papistical sympathies. 
 Following on the Confession comes an enumeration of the 
 successive Acts of Parliament by which it had been confirmed ; 
 next a solemn averment of the inconsistency of the late changes 
 with its affirmations ; and finally the oath of mutual defence 
 in support of the Crown and of true religion. The document 
 was ready by the 1st of March, and on that day the signing 
 began in the Greyfriars Church in Edinburgh. If Charles 
 really fancied that his late troubles with his subjects had been 
 the work of a few factious nobles, his eyes were now fully 
 opened. By a large majority of the nobility, by every town of 
 note except Aberdeen, by the mass of the people of rank in all 
 parts of the country, the Covenant was signed with an en- 
 thusiasm such as had never before swept over the Scottish
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 305 
 
 people. Now, if ever, was realised Milton's vision of a nation 
 "rousing herself like a strong man after sleep, and shaking her 
 invincible locks." On all sides it was recognised that the 
 reign of bishops was at an end. "Now," Archbishop Spot- 
 tiswoode is reported to have exclaimed, "now all that we have 
 been doing these thirty years past is thrown down at once;" 
 and he proved the reality of his conviction by an immediate 
 flight to England— an example which was followed by all his 
 colleagues except four, of whom three, however, made "solemn 
 recantations '." 
 
 As king and people now stood, civil war might well seem 
 inevitable ; and on both sides there was a growing 
 conviction that only the sword could settle the 
 controversy. For thirty years this issue had been involved in 
 the policy of Charles and his father, but the evil day was to be 
 postponed for still a little while. In the late communications 
 between Charles and his subjects, the Privy Council had proved 
 impotent ; and, if any settlement were to be effected, another 
 intermediary was needed. The person on whom Charles 
 imposed this charge was James, Marquis of Hamilton, who in 
 the beginning of June appeared in Scotland in the capacity of 
 Royal Commissioner. Probably the person never lived who 
 could have reconciled two parties so disposed to each other as 
 Charles and the Covenanters, as they have now to be styled ; 
 but by the testimony of both sides Hamilton did not perform 
 his task well. The part he played, and the qualities he showed 
 were precisely those of his ancestor, the Duke of Chatelherault, 
 in the troubles of the reign of Mary. His indecision and lack 
 of candour inspired distrust in either party; and, like his 
 ancestor the duke, he was even suspected of seeking to create 
 a situation which might bring the Crown within his own grasp. 
 Twice he came and went between the two countries ; yet at 
 the end of August the situation remained practically unchanged. 
 From the signing of the Covenant, however, the demands of the 
 
 1 Memoirs of Bis hop Guthrie (Edit. 1758), p. 35. 
 li. S. II. 20
 
 306 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 banded nation had become more precise and peremptory. To 
 the recall of the Service-Book and the elimination of the 
 bishops from the Privy Council was now added the cry for 
 a free Parliament and a free General Assembly which might 
 settle all disputes. At length, on the 20th of September, 
 Hamilton appeared for the third time in Edinburgh, and with 
 instructions which seemed to imply an unconditional surrender 
 on the part of Charles. There was to be a free Assembly, 
 there was to be a free Parliament (the very dates of both being 
 fixed), and the Court of High Commission was to be abolished 1 . 
 To these concessions, however, a condition was attached, which 
 at once marred the gift and brought little advantage to the 
 giver. So long as the National Covenant existed, Charles 
 believed that " he had no more power [in Scotland] than the 
 Duke of Venice 2 ;" and by a skilful stroke he proposed to 
 extinguish that detested bond. Along with his other instruc- 
 tions Hamilton brought a Covenant made to Charles's own 
 order, and thenceforth to be known as the "King's Covenant." 
 Like that of the nation, the King's Covenant took the Negative 
 Confession as its basis ; but the bond that was superadded 
 implied the reprobation and the annulment of the other. ' For 
 some time, therefore, the singular spectacle was seen of the two 
 Covenants in rivalry for the suffrages of the people. The 
 object of Charles had been to divide the ranks of the Cove- 
 nanters ; but, skilfully devised as his stratagem had been, it 
 signally failed. Outside of Aberdeen his Covenant received 
 little support, and it only kept alive the suspicions which his 
 tardy concessions might have done something to allay 3 . 
 
 After many fears lest Charles should withdraw his conces- 
 sion, the long-desired Assembly met in Glasgow 
 on November 21. In the eyes of Charles it was 
 a revolutionary body whose proceedings could possess no legal 
 
 1 Baillie, I. 103. 
 
 2 Burnet, Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton (Oxford, 1852), p. 59. 
 8 Baillie, I. 106, 7.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 307 
 
 authority either for himself or his subjects. As he had been 
 taught by the precept and example of his father, a General 
 Assembly must meet by his order and give effect to his 
 dictates. It was the contention of the Covenanters, on the 
 other hand, that the right of summoning Assemblies belonged 
 to the Church itself, and that they had enjoyed this right till 
 James had unconstitutionally taken it from them. In the 
 Assemblies that had met in the years succeeding the Refor- 
 mation, the nobles and lairds, present in the capacity of elders, 
 had outnumbered the ministers themselves ; but, in the times 
 that followed, the nobles as a body had broken with the Church 
 and had ceased to frequent its Assemblies. At the present 
 moment, however, ministers and nobility were united as they 
 had been in the fervour of the Reformation ; and it was in the 
 interest of both parties that they should act in common. As 
 arranged by the Tables, therefore, each Presbytery sent two or 
 three ministers and one elder as their representatives in the 
 Assembly — the elders consisting mainly of nobles or other 
 persons of good estate in the country. That a certain amount 
 of coercion, direct and indirect, was used in manning the 
 Assembly was inevitable in the state of public opinion. But, 
 in truth, no pressure was needed to effect the ends for which, 
 in the intention of the Covenanters, the Assembly had been 
 called. As Commissioner of the King, the duty of presiding 
 over its meetings devolved upon Hamilton. His part had 
 been pre-arranged, and it was one as imprudent as it was 
 feeble. From the first it was seen that the House meant to 
 take its own way. The Rev. Alexander Henderson, a worthy 
 successor of Knox and Andrew Melville 1 , was chosen as 
 Moderator, and the great lawyer, Johnston of Warriston, as 
 Clerk. As the representative of Charles, Hamilton was bound 
 to disapprove of every proceeding of the Assembly, but he 
 chose to oppose his authority to one particular action. Before 
 
 1 " Incomparably the ablest man of us all for all things," Baillie says of 
 Henderson. — I. 131. 
 
 20 — 2
 
 308 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the Assembly met, the whole bench of bishops had been 
 summoned to appear before its tribunal at once in their 
 private and their official character. They had refused to 
 acknowledge the competency of the Court; but, in spite of their 
 absence and the protest of the Commissioners, the Assembly 
 proceeded to deal with each and all of them. On the ground 
 that this was a direct defiance of the Crown, Hamilton 
 formally dissolved the Assembly under penalty of treason. 
 This proceeding had doubtless been anticipated, and the 
 Assembly steadily went through its self-imposed task. By the 
 20th of December, when it rose, it had deposed all the 
 bishops and excommunicated certain of them besides; had 
 nullified the Book of Canons, the new Liturgy, and the Five 
 Articles of Perth ; abolished the High Court of Commission ; 
 and in fine, swept away the whole ecclesiastical edifice which 
 had been reared with such expenditure of time and pains by 
 Charles and his father. The opportunity had been lost of esta- 
 blishing a moderate Episcopacy, which would have embraced 
 all ranks of the people to an extent which Presbyterianism 
 has failed to achieve. 
 
 In the great Scottish revolt individuals play a much less 
 important part than in the contemporary uprising in England. 
 Before the arrival of Hamilton, the Earl of Traquair, Lord 
 High Treasurer, had been the most prominent personage in 
 Scotland ; and it could be said of him that for forty years there 
 had been no subject with so much power in his hands'. He 
 was still to be a conspicuous figure in the country, but he had 
 neither the strength of conviction nor the force of character to 
 make him a leader in a time of revolution. Other peers who 
 had taken a more or less notable part in the late agitations were 
 Loudon, Rothes 2 , Cassillis, and Balmerino; but the two nobles 
 
 1 Baillie, I. 6. 
 
 2 Rothes has left a valuable contribution to the history of his times in 
 his Relation of Proceedings concerning the Affairs of the Kirk in Scotland 
 
 from August 1637 to July 1638 (Ban. Club, 1830).
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 309 
 
 who were to stand forth in the history of the time, and in 
 large degree to represent its opposing issues, were the young 
 earls of Montrose and Argyle 1 . Like the majority of his order, 
 Montrose had resented Charles's advancement of the bishops 
 at the expense of the nobility ; and, with the impetuosity which 
 was his leading characteristic, he had thrown himself into 
 the revolutionary movement, and had outdone all others in 
 securing subscriptions to the Covenant in Aberdeen. Yet it 
 was but the accident of his position that for a time identified 
 him with the cause of the Covenant. As has been said of him, 
 he drew the inspiration of his life from Plutarch's Lives and 
 Pagan poetry rather than from Calvin's Institutes*. Glory was 
 his lode-star ; and, as the record of his brilliant career amply 
 proves, the cause or the means by which glory was to be won 
 were his secondary consideration. As a member of the Privy 
 Council, Argyle had been restrained from overt action against 
 the king; but at the Glasgow Assembly he had publicly j 
 announced his acceptance of the Covenant, and thenceforward; 
 he never wavered in his devotion to its cause. Alike by his 
 influence and his character his accession was of the first 
 importance to his party. He could bring 5000 men into the 
 field, and his power in his own wide dominions was that of an 
 absolute monarch. To his type of mind and character the 
 Calvinistic scheme of thought and rule of life presented a 
 natural affinity which permitted him to embrace it with genuine 
 conviction. He was the one Scotsman of his time who can be 
 regarded as a statesman ; and to him more than any other was 
 it due that the main body of the Covenanters maintained 
 a united front against their successive adversaries. But the 
 eareers of Montrose and Argyle were to prove that both fell 
 short of that standard of greatness which is required of men 
 who would lead a revolution. 
 
 1 Montrose was about twenty-seven, and Argyle thirty years of age. 
 Argyle had just succeeded to his title. 
 
 - Professor Masson, Drummond of Hawtkornden, p. 344.
 
 310 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 V. The First Bishops' War. 
 
 In granting his late concessions, Charles had merely meant 
 to bide his time. On December 7, 1638, he had written to 
 Hamilton that by February or March following he would be 
 in a position to reassert his authority 1 . As the Covenanters 
 were perfectly well aware of Charles's ultimate intentions, both 
 parties had long been preparing for the inevitable trial of 
 strength. By the opening of 1639 Charles's plan of invasion, 
 partly suggested by his minister, Wentworth 2 , had taken definite 
 shape. An army of 30,000 men, to be led by himself, was 
 to be ready by the 1st of April ; Carlisle and Berwick were 
 to be garrisoned ; a fleet was to be sent into the Firth of 
 Forth ; a force under Hamilton was to co-operate with Huntly 
 in the north; the Earl of Antrim was to make a diversion in 
 Argyleshire ; and a body of Irish troops under Wentworth 
 was to enter the Firth of Clyde 3 . But for this formidable 
 undertaking Charles's resources were totally inadequate. His 
 English subjects were more disposed to sympathise with the 
 Scottish rebels than with himself; and it was with grudging 
 reluctance on the part of commons and nobility alike that 
 money and men were forthcoming at his call. When the 
 time to strike came, he could reckon on little more than a 
 third of the strength he had deemed necessary for his 
 enterprise. 
 
 With his revolted subjects it was far different. Gu-'ded by 
 men who had their confidence, they made their preparations 
 with a prudence and deliberation quickened by the enthusiasm 
 of a great cause. In March, 1638, effective measures had been 
 taken to ensure the means for national defence. Eight col- 
 lectors were appointed to levy contributions in each shire; 
 and, when war became inevitable, committees of officers who 
 
 1 Burnet, Lives of the Dukes of Hamilton, p. 136. 
 
 2 Gardiner, Hist, of England, VIII. 354, 5. 
 
 3 Burnet, p. 143.
 
 Chap, in] CJiarlcs I 31 1 
 
 had been trained in the German wars were distributed through 
 the country to drill every man capable of bearing arms 1 . Of 
 special importance to the Covenanters was it that the numerous 
 bodies of their countrymen who had served abroad chose to 
 take their side rather than that of the king. Chief among 
 them was Alexander Leslie, who had returned to Scotland in 
 the autumn of 1638, and had been active ever since in the 
 cause of the Covenant. 
 
 Before the outbreak of hostilities there was the unfailing 
 interchange of proclamations and counter-proclamations be- 
 tween the two parties. It was the interest of Charles to 
 persuade his English subjects that the Scots, their hereditary 
 enemies, were about to repeat one of their ancient invasions 
 of England; but, in a document, entitled "An Information for 
 all good Christians within the Kingdome of England," the 
 Covenanters did their best to show that the two peoples had 
 a common enemy in their king 3 . By one publication, author- 
 ised by himself, Charles seriously aggravated his quarrel with 
 the Scots. This was the famous "Large Declaration," mainly 
 the work of Dr Balcanquhal, a Scottish ecclesiastic of rabid 
 Laudian sympathies, in which the story of the troubles is told 
 from the beginning with an obliquity of statement which passes 
 the licence even of the theological polemic. 
 
 In March, words had to give place to deeds. The Castle 
 
 of Edinburgh, which had been fortified for the 
 
 1639 
 
 king, was taken by the art of Leslie; and in the 
 same month, those of Dumbarton, Douglas, and Dalkeith fell 
 into the hands of the Covenanters. In view of a hostile fleet 
 entering the Firth of Forth, Leith was sedulously fortified — 
 "none busier in bearing the rubbish than ladies of honour 3 ." \ 
 It was from Aberdeenshire, however, where Huntly's power 
 prevailed, that most had to be feared; and to Montrose, the 
 
 1 Rothes, Relation, So; Baillie, 1. 194. 
 1 Row, 508, 9. 
 ' Guthrie, 54.
 
 3 1 2 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Earl Marischal, and Alexander Leslie the charge of that district 
 was entrusted 1 . Thrice in the course of the spring and summer 
 Montrose was called to fulfil the task that had been laid upon 
 him, with the result that he effectually broke the power of 
 Huntly and prevented his co-operation with the king. In 
 April, Huntly and his eldest son, by an act of questionable 
 honour, were kidnapped and conveyed to Edinburgh Castle 2 ; 
 and in June, Lord Aboyne, Huntly's second son, was beaten 
 at Stonehaven and the Bridge of Dee at Aberdeen. 
 
 By the date when Montrose had completed his work in the 
 north, the first Bishops' war was at an end. On the ist of 
 May, Hamilton's fleet sailed into the Firth of Forth, but his 
 impotence was manifest from the first. To his command that 
 the magistrates should publish a message from Charles a fiat 
 refusal was returned. As he lingered in the Firth, his men 
 sickened with small-pox, while around him was an armed 
 coast against which he was helpless 3 . Meanwhile, the main 
 forces of the King and the Covenant were preparing for the 
 decision of the great quarrel. On the 9th of May Leslie 
 was appointed commander-in-chief of the Scottish army — the 
 choice being dictated at once by a regard to his skill and 
 experience, and with the view of preventing rivalry among the 
 nobles. Assembling his forces on the Links of Leith, he led 
 them byway of Dunglass and Kelso, and on tho 5th of June sat 
 down on Dunse Law, some twelve miles north of the Border. 
 This presence of a Scottish army on Dunse Law, and the 
 occasion that brought it, might well point the moral of the 
 mutability of human affairs. Many a time had a Scottish army 
 been led to the Border, but its errand had ever been revenge 
 
 1 The first blood drawn in the Civil War was at the affair known as 
 the "Trot of Turriff," in which a few Covenanters were routed by Huntly's 
 men (May 14). 
 
 2 Mr Gardiner says that Montrose, in this affair, "played but a mean 
 and shabby part."— Hist, of England, ix. 5. 
 
 3 Burnet, 156, 7.
 
 Chap, hi] Cliarles I 313 
 
 on the " old enemy " of England. The army on Dunse Law 
 had come to fight against its own prince, now the sovereign of 
 that very country to which his ancestors had for centuries 
 been in mortal antagonism. Nor had it come filled with the 
 old spirit or animated by the old battle-cry. Its sympathies 
 were with the English nation rather than with its own king ; 
 and in England itself it was to find the support that brought 
 victory to its cause. Yet never had a Scottish king led an 
 army against England more united in mind, in equipment 
 and discipline better fitted to give an account of a foe. There 
 were but 20,000 men ; but, in the words of one who was in 
 their ranks, there would have been no terrors though all' 
 Europe had been arrayed against them. 
 
 Charles was at the head of no such enthusiastic and devoted 
 host. When he reached Berwick on the 28th of May, he had 
 but 8000 men, though by the date when he was face to face 
 with Leslie he was able to muster 18,000 foot and 3000 horse. 
 In numbers he had a slight advantage, but his troops were 
 ill-disciplined, ill-furnished, and half-hearted in the cause for 
 which they were expected to fight 1 . On the 30th of May 
 Charles took up his position at the Birks, a piece of flat 
 ground about three miles from Berwick on the south bank 
 of the Tweed, and some twelve miles from Dunse Law, which 
 Leslie occupied six days later. 
 
 A few hours' march would have brought either army to the 
 lines of the other, and the last die might have been cast. But 
 there were important considerations that restrained both parties 
 from being the first to take the decisive step. It would not 
 have been for the first time that Scottish subjects had drawn 
 the sword against their king, and on this occasion the odds 
 were many that victory would incline to their side. But even 
 the most decisive victory would open up possibilities which it 
 would be hazardous to face except in the last extremity. They 
 
 1 Gardiner, ix. j8, 24, 30.
 
 314 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 could not as yet reckon on the course that affairs were to take 
 in England, nor in Scotland could they be certain that the 
 nation would retain its present enthusiasm for the Covenant. 
 Moreover, without the trial of battle they had proved to 
 Charles that at the present moment they had a power behind 
 them more formidable than his own 1 . Moved by such con- 
 siderations, the Covenanting leaders were fully disposed to 
 come to terms with him if he would but grant the liberties 
 for which they were willing to spend their lives. On his part, 
 Charles had stronger reasons for shunning battle than his 
 enemies. On the one side of the Tweed was a disaffected 
 nation ; on the other, a nation in arms. At the present 
 moment he was the weaker party, and it was more than 
 doubtful if time would tell in his favour. The Scots, as 
 became subjects, were the first to make overtures; and at 
 Charles's suggestion, six Commissioners on each side were 
 appointed to arrange an agreement. The negotiations began 
 on June 6th, and were brought to a close by the Pacification of 
 Berwick on the 18th 2 . By one Article of the Treaty Charles 
 practically granted every demand of the Covenanters : a General 
 Assembly was to meet on the 6th of August following, and a 
 Parliament on the 20th of the same month. As to how that 
 Assembly and Parliament would be composed and what would 
 be their acts, both parties to the Treaty were fully aware ; and 
 in this one fact lay the hollowness and futility of the compact 
 of Berwick. 
 
 VI. The Second Bishops' War. 
 
 The Treaty of Berwick had hardly been signed before 
 
 i6 recriminations recommenced, each party charging 
 
 the other with the breach of its terms. To the 
 
 complaint of Charles that the Covenanters had not disbanded 
 
 1 Cf. Baillie, 1. 218, 9. 
 
 2 The Treaty will be found in Burnet (pp. 178, 9).
 
 Chap, in] Charles I 3 ! 5 
 
 their forces or recalled Leslie's commission, their retort was 
 
 that he had not removed his garrisons from Berwick and 
 
 other places on the Borders'. When Charles desired fourteen 
 
 of the Scottish leaders to come to him at Berwick, only six 
 
 appeared — Argyle being among those who refused, and Montrose 
 
 among those who went 9 . It had been the avowed intention of 
 
 the king to be present at the coming General Assembly and 
 
 Parliament; but for reasons which are easily understood he 
 
 changed his mind, and on July 29th left Berwick for London. 
 
 A riot in the streets of Edinburgh, in which the Lord Treasurer 
 
 Traquair had received some rough treatment, was a plausible 
 
 pretext for his not risking his person in that city. 
 
 The Assembly met on the 12th of August, six days later 
 
 than the date fixed at Berwick. What its action 
 
 1039 
 
 would be was a foregone conclusion. In the 
 late arrangement Charles had declared that he would not 
 ratify the Acts of the Glasgow Assembly, but in consenting 
 to a free Assembly he had virtually nullified this condition. 
 Without naming the Glasgow Assembly, the Court which now 
 met sanctioned all its acts by which Presbytery displaced 
 Episcopacy as the ecclesiastical polity of the country. But it 
 took a step beyond the Glasgow Assembly, which marks a 
 turning-point in the controversy between Charles and his 
 subjects. At its request, the Privy Council passed an Act 
 making the subscription of the Covenant compulsory on the 
 whole nation 3 . By this momentous Act the Covenanters arro- 
 gated to themselves the very power which they had denied to 
 the king and against which they had protested by defying him 
 in open war. If the king had no right to impose his faith 
 upon his people, had the majority a right to impose theirs 
 on a protesting minority? How the minority answered the 
 question was to be seen in the near future. Meanwhile, through 
 
 1 Balfour, 11. 334—43- 
 
 1 ( liitliric, 6li 
 
 * Peterkin, Records, p. 207.
 
 3 16 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 his Commissioner Traquair, who had taken the place of Hamil- 
 ton, Charles ratified every Act of the Assembly, including that 
 which enforced the subscription of the Covenant. With what 
 intentions he did so he had clearly explained to Archbishop 
 Spottiswoode six days before the Assembly met. "You may 
 rest secure," he wrote, " that, though perhaps we may give way 
 for the present to that which will be prejudicial both to the 
 church and our own government, yet we shall not leave think- 
 ing in time how to remedy both 1 ." 
 
 The day after the Assembly rose, the Estates met (August 
 31), and remained in session till the 14th of 
 November. The main business of their meeting 
 was to ratify the Acts of the Assembly ; and, in spite of Traquair's 
 protest in the name of the king, they with practical unanimity 
 accomplished their task. But there were other questions con- 
 nected with the meeting of this Parliament which made it 
 interesting in the constitutional history of the country. The 
 absence of bishops raised a difficulty regarding the election of 
 the Lords of the Articles. On the present occasion it mattered 
 little to the insurgent party how these Lords should be chosen, 
 as in any case their overwhelming majority made them masters 
 of the House. As the election was arranged, Traquair nomi- 
 nated eight of the nobles, who in their turn chose eight of the 
 barons and eight of the Commissioners of the burghs. As, how- 
 ever, this mode of election might become a dangerous precedent 
 in the future, formal protests were made in the name of the 
 nobles, barons, and burghs — Argyle, on the part of the nobles, 
 demanding that an Act should be passed affirming the consti- 
 tutional method of election by which each order should choose 
 its own Lords of the Articles \ The Parliament closed amid the 
 profound dissatisfaction of both parties. Traquair, acting on 
 the instructions of his master, refused to rescind any previous 
 
 1 Burnet, 195. 
 
 2 Acts of Pari, of Scot., v. 252 et seq.
 
 Chap, in] Charles I 317 
 
 Acts that had been passed in favour of episcopacy 1 , and by 
 a commission under the Privy Seal dissolved the Parliament 
 without requiring its own consent — " the like," says Sir James 
 Balfour — "never being practised in this nation 2 ." 
 
 Till Charles ratified these Acts of Parliament against Epis- 
 copacy the Covenanters could have no security for 
 the future. Twice in the course of the winter, 
 therefore, the Lords Loudoun and Dunfermline were sent to 
 London to desire his assent. On their first visit he refused to 
 hold communication with them, on the ground that Traquair was 
 his representative in Scotland, and that they did not bear his 
 commission; and, on the second, Loudoun was thrown into the 
 Tower on the charge of his connivance with a treasonable 
 correspondence with France 3 . By the spring of 1640 the 
 Scots had convincing proofs that Charles was once more bent 
 on an appeal to arms. At the urgent instance of Wentworth, 
 now Earl of Strafford, he summoned the "Short Parliament" 
 with the express purpose of obtaining subsidies for a Scottish 
 war. On their part, the Scots had no reason to shrink from 
 the challenge. Certain of the Covenanting lords had begun to 
 show signs of restiveness, but the defection was not sufficiently 
 great to affect the strength of their cause. Moreover, it was 
 every day becoming more evident that England was less willing 
 than ever to support Charles in coercing his Scottish subjects. 
 With as steady purpose as in the first Bishops' War, the Scots 
 set about preparing for this new encounter with their king. 
 
 When Traquair dissolved the Estates in the preceding 
 November, he had declared that the date of 
 their next meeting should be the 2nd of June, l64 ° 
 
 1640. There came an order from Charles, however, post- 
 poning their meeting for a month. Regarding this postpone- 
 ment as a mere subterfuge to gain time, the Estates duly 
 met on the day originally appointed. By Charles and his 
 
 1 Burnet, 200. ■ Ballour, II. 361. 
 
 3 Burnet, 202 — 4.
 
 3 1 8 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 supporters this action was regarded as a serious breach of the 
 constitution ; yet, when Charles in his own authority dissolved 
 the Parliament of 1639, he was himself guilty of a similar 
 offence. If the appeal were made to the past history of the 
 country, the Covenanters had the firmest ground on which to 
 take their stand. In the words of Sir John Fortescue already 
 quoted, the Kings of Scots might not rule their people "by 
 other laws than such as they assent unto"; and on numerous 
 occasions they had been forcibly reminded that such was the 
 condition under which they held their crown. When Charles 
 and his father set up what was a practical despotism in their 
 Scottish kingdom, it was they, therefore, who were the first 
 infringers of the constitution. It was mainly for one important 
 object that the Parliament now met without the authority of 
 the king — the appointment of a Committee of Estates for the 
 conduct of the war that was imminent. The appointment of 
 such a committee had been the constant practice of the Scottish 
 Parliament, but in this case the peculiarity was that the main 
 business of the Committee was to make war with the king. 
 Since the beginning of the year both Charles and the Scots 
 had been preparing for the coming struggle. 
 On April 17, Leslie's commission as Commander- 
 in-Chief has been renewed 1 , and now the War Committee 
 vigorously exerted itself to place an adequate force at his 
 disposal. For the raising of money a device was adopted 
 which tested the loyalty of the Covenanters to their cause. 
 All who possessed silver plate and ornaments were urged to 
 send them in to be coined into money — the nobles and others 
 becoming surety for repayment. So successful were the efforts 
 of the committee that by the beginning of July Leslie was in 
 command of an effective force of some 20,000 men 8 , well-stored, 
 well equipped, and enthusiastic in the cause for which they were 
 to fight. Again, as in the previous war, there was danger from 
 
 1 Sanford Terry, Life and Campaigns of Alexander Leslie, p. 90. 
 
 2 The numbers are variously given.
 
 Chap, in] Charles I 319 
 
 enemies who might operate in Charles's favour while he 
 engaged the main army of the Scots. To Argyle, therefore, 
 was entrusted the charge of defending the west coast against 
 an expected invasion from Ireland, as likewise of imposing 
 the Covenant in the districts of Lochaber and Athole; and to 
 Colonel Munro and the Earl Marischal was given the task of 
 similarly dealing with the loyalists of Aberdeen. 
 
 Meanwhile, Charles had been disappointed in his hopes of 
 a subsidy from the Parliament which he had 
 summoned in April. Far from responding to his * 4 ° 
 
 demand for support against the Scots, it gave him clearly to 
 understand that its sympathies were more with the Scots 
 than himself. Dissolving the last Parliament it was to be 
 in his power to dissolve, he brought together such an army 
 as his means could command, and appeared at York on the 
 22nd of August. Alike in number and quality his force could 
 not bear comparison with that of the Scots; and it was 
 gradually brought home to him that this second war was likely 
 to have the same ending as the first. On the 20th of August, 
 Leslie had crossed the Tweed — the lot falling to Montrose to 
 be the first to make the passage. The last time a Scottish 
 army had entered England was the day of Solway Moss, nearly 
 a century before ; but on this occasion it came with far different 
 ends. It came neither to plunder nor to do battle with the 
 English people, but with the approval of their own repre- 
 sentatives to defend a cause which had now become common 
 to both kingdoms. Driving before him a force which opposed 
 him at Newburn on Tyne, Leslie entered Newcastle on the 
 tenth day after crossing the Border. Masters of the situation, 
 the Scots followed the course they had taken at Dunse Law. 
 They submitted a series of demands to Charles which should be 
 made the basis of a lasting settlement 1 . The demands involved 
 the surrender of every object on which Charles had set his heart 
 
 1 Rushworlh, Part II., Vol. II. 1255—8.
 
 320 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 — the abolition of Episcopacy and the sanction of the Covenant: 
 but he was in the grasp of a fate which left him no alternative. 
 Simultaneously with the demands of the Scots had come the 
 Petition of the Twelve Peers for the summoning of a new 
 Parliament for the redress of the grievances of England 1 . 
 Yielding to the inevitable, Charles agreed to the appointment 
 of commissioners who should meet at Ripon on the 2nd of 
 October, and arrange the terms of a new treaty between him- 
 self and his Scottish subjects. But there was an indispensable 
 condition on which the Scots insisted before the negotiations 
 should begin. The money they had brought with them was 
 already exhausted ; and, if they were forced to live at free 
 quarters, they would speedily alienate the sympathies of the 
 English people. Therefore, since Charles would not come to 
 terms at once, they insisted that he should provide for their 
 subsistence as long as he chose to protract the negotiations. 
 On the 1 6th of October their demand was granted — the arrange- 
 ment being that the county of Northumberland, the bishopric 
 of Durham, and the town of Newcastle should between them 
 contribute ^850 a day for the maintenance of the Scottish 
 army during its sojourn in England 2 . 
 
 The negotiations begun at Ripon had to be continued and 
 concluded elsewhere. On November 3, 1640, met 
 the Long Parliament, which from the day of its 
 assembly brought home to Charles that he was no longer 
 master of England. It was in London and with the English 
 House of Commons, therefore, that the Scottish Commissioners 
 had henceforth to do their business. For excellent reasons 
 the leaders of the English Parliament were in no haste to 
 conclude a treaty with the Scots. The Scottish army was 
 "their own 3 ," and its continued presence in England gave them 
 precisely that hold on Charles which was necessary for the 
 
 2 Gardiner, ix. 201. 
 
 2 Rushworth, Part 11. , Vol. II. 1295. 
 
 a Baillie, 1. 280.
 
 Chap, ml Charles I 
 
 321 
 
 accomplishment of their ends. Through the winter of 1640 
 till August of the following year the Scottish Commissioners 
 lingered on, witnessing events as startling and memorable as 
 were in the record of Scotland itself in her conflict with her 
 king — the abolition of the Star- Chamber, the Court of High 
 Commission, and the Council of the North ; the impeachment 
 and doom of Strafford; and the fall of the man who, more than 
 any other individual, had been the cause of the uprising of 
 the Commons of both kingdoms, Archbishop Laud. The final 
 settlement with the Scots was concluded on the 10th of August, 
 1 64 1 ; and they could boast that the Second Bishops' War had 
 ended even more triumphantly for them than the first. Every 
 demand they made had been granted; they had been main- 
 tained for the space of a year at the expense of a friendly 
 nation; and they recrossed the Border with the handsome sum 
 of ^200,000 to their credit. 
 
 VII. Charles in Scotland — The Incident. 
 
 Shortly before the conclusion of the Treaty of Ripon, Charles 
 made an announcement which was received with 
 dubious feelings alike by the Scottish Cove- 
 nanters and the English Commons : he had determined to visit 
 Scotland and preside over the Parliament which was now 
 sitting in that country. In the gyration of events, he had 
 been driven to look to Scotland rather than England for the 
 recovery of the powers which had, in truth, passed for ever 
 from his hands. Grievous as had been the offences of the 
 Scots, they had done nothing so heinous as the execution of 
 Strafford and the imprisonment of Laud. Moreover, as he 
 had been led to believe, there had of late been developments 
 in Scottish affairs which, if skilfully directed, might be turned 
 to good account; and it was, indeed, at the suggestion of 
 
 1. j. ii. 21
 
 322 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 certain persons in Scotland that he had resolved to carry out 
 his visit in spite of the protest of the leaders of the English 
 Parliament. 
 
 There were now two well-marked groups in Scotland who 
 were recognised as the enemies of the Covenant and designated 
 by names which had passed into the language of the time. 
 The one was that of the " Incendiaries," to whose evil counsels, 
 it was believed, was mainly due the original quarrel between 
 Charles and his Scottish subjects. They were five in number 
 — Traquair, the late Commissioner, Sir Robert Spottiswoode, 
 son of the Archbishop, and formerly President of the Court 
 of Session, Maxwell, ex-Bishop of Ross, Dr Balcanquhal, the 
 author of the " Large Declaration," and Sir John Hay. More 
 dangerous was the other group known as the " Plotters " or 
 " Banders," both by reason of its declared intentions and the 
 character of its leader, the Earl of Montrose. To all appear- 
 ance, there had been no more ardent Covenanter than Montrose. 
 With sword and purse he had been equally prompt, and no 
 one had been more energetic in coercing the lieges to the 
 subscription of the Covenant. From the day when he was 
 with Charles after the Treaty of Berwick, however, his gradual 
 defection had been observable. As things had gone, they had 
 not been entirely according to his own ideas of his importance 
 to the cause : in council he had been overshadowed by Argyle, 
 and in war by Leslie. Of his determination to break with the 
 Covenant he had already given the most decisive proof. On 
 the eve of Leslie's army entering England, it was discovered 
 that he was in secret communication with Charles— a distinct 
 breach of his Covenanting oath. He had become party to a 
 bond drawn up at Cumbernauld, the mere fact of which, apart 
 from its contents, was deemed an offence against the National 
 Covenant; and in June, 1641, together with Napier of Mer- 
 chiston, Stirling of Keir, and Stewart of Blackhall, he had been 
 committed to Edinburgh Castle on a charge of treason against 
 the existing constitution. As "incendiaries" and "plotters" 

 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 323 
 
 had their respective fallowings among nobles, lairds, and com- 
 mons, it will be seen that there was material in Scotland which 
 might be wrought to Charles's own ends. 
 
 On the 14th of August Charles entered Edinburgh, after 
 an encouraging reception by the army of the 
 Scots which was still at Newcastle. The con- 
 trast between his present visit and that of 1633 was a pregnant 
 commentary on all that had happened in the intervening years. 
 Then he had come as a virtual autocrat to impose his will 
 on the nation now, in his own words, he had come to give 
 his people " content and a general satisfaction." He showed, 
 indeed, even undue eagerness to give them satisfaction. The 
 Scottish Parliament had been sitting since the 15th of July, 
 busily engaged in preparing the business which was to occupy 
 it when Charles should arrive. The chief ground of the late 
 war had been his refusal to ratify the Acts passed against 
 Episcopacy by the Parliament of August, 1639. Now he 
 proposed to give the desired ratification without even waiting 
 for the usual " orders of the house." But there were still 
 harder demands in store for him. It will be remembered 
 that among the first actions of his reign had been his deliberate 
 reconstruction of the Privy Council and the Court of Session 
 by the simple exercise of his own prerogative. For this pro- 
 ceeding he had doubtless the example of his father; but it 
 was justly maintained that this had been in flagrant breach 
 of the original constitution of both Courts. The present 
 demand, therefore, was that officers of State, 1'rivy Councillors, 
 and Lords of Session should be chosen by the king " with 
 the advice and approbation" of Parliament. After a "tough 
 dispute " Charles gave way, yet in making the concession he 
 gained a temporary advantage, which was doubtless in his 
 mind when he made it. A scramble immediately ensued for 
 the various vacant offices, which seriously affected the union of 
 the Covenanting leaders. Specially keen was the competition 
 for the Treasurerbhip, which had been held by the "incendiary," 
 
 21 — 2
 
 324 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Traquair. The majority of the House were in favour of Argyle; 
 but so strenuous was the opposition that the office was finally 
 entrusted to a committee of four — Argyle, Lothian, Glencairn, 
 and Lindsay. 
 
 But Charles had not come to Scotland to give all and 
 receive nothing. He had come with the intention of creating 
 a reaction or forming a party which he might use with effect 
 against the Parliament of England. As it happened, the 
 moment of his arrival was singularly inopportune for the 
 accomplishment of his purpose. The Incendiaries and the 
 Plotters, on whose support he had mainly to reckon, had been 
 effectually taken in hand by the Covenanters — the chiefs of 
 the latter party, with Montrose among them, being safely 
 bestowed in the Castle of Edinburgh. Against him, also, 
 was arrayed the solid body of the Covenanters, with Argyle as 
 their leader in council and Leslie in war. The conduct of 
 the Marquis of Hamilton may be regarded as a sure proof 
 of the weakness of Charles's cause, and of its unpromising 
 future. As Hamilton and his brother, the Earl of Lanark, 
 might justly be regarded as Incendiaries of the deepest dye, 
 it was possible that the Scottish Estates might choose to send 
 them the way that the English Parliament had sent Strafford 
 and was soon to send Laud. To the indignation of Charles, 
 and, in special degree, of Montrose, Hamilton entered into the 
 closest alliance with Argyle, while ostensibly maintaining friendly 
 relations with the king. The weeks of Charles's visit thus 
 wore on, and he made no visible progress in consolidating 
 the party for which he had hoped. The more violent of his 
 supporters grew desperate; and certain of their proceedings 
 showed that for the removal of Hamilton and Argyle they 
 were ready to take the most effective weapons that came to 
 their hands. The minds of the various chiefs were in this 
 temper, when there happened the affair known as "The 
 Incident," which is another of the many mysteries in Scottish 
 history.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 325 
 
 On the nth of October General Leslie sent a message to 
 Argyle and Hamilton desiring them to come to him with all 
 possible secrecy. They found him closeted with a Colonel 
 Hurry, who was the authority for the story he now told them. 
 They and Lanark were to be invited that night to Holyrood 
 House ; seized by a party of some two or three hundred men, 
 headed by two nobles ; and conveyed on board the king's 
 ship, then anchored in the road of Leith. If they offered 
 any resistance their throats were to be cut. On this informa- 
 tion the intended victims retired to their homes, where they 
 made themselves safe for the night. In the morning they 
 wrote to the king, telling the story they had heard as an 
 explanation of their absence, and asking what he would have 
 them do. That afternoon, when the king drove to the Par- 
 liament House, he was followed by some five or six hundred 
 men, among whom were all the persons who were to have 
 taken part in the affair of the preceding night. Fearing that 
 their presence in the city might lead to a tumult, the three 
 nobles proceeded to Kinneil House, a residence of Hamilton's 
 on the coast of Linlithgowshire. Such is the story told by 
 Lanark himself. By another authority we are informed that on 
 the removal of the three nobles, the castle was to be put in 
 possession of Montrose, and that the garrison of Berwick and 
 a formidable force of Borderers were to march on the city. 
 As such a plot could have been formed only in the interests 
 of the king, the story threw him into the deepest agitation. 
 With tears in his eyes he demanded that the whole affair 
 should be investigated in open Parliament. To this the 
 House objected, and only after vehement discussion agreed 
 to the appointment of a special committee. But if the plot 
 had a real existence, there were too many interests involved 
 to make it safe that it should be probed to the bottom. 
 With Montrose among others it would have gone hard, since 
 the chief actors were men who were his known associates and 
 instruments. The form of an examination was eonducted for
 
 326 The Crown and the Kirk L^ook vi 
 
 a few weeks, but it was apparent that it was meant to lead to 
 nothing j and, when the end of Charles's visit came, its result 
 was an apparent compromise which left the Covenanting 
 leaders more completely the masters of the situation than at 
 the moment of his coming. Argyle and Hamilton returned to 
 Edinburgh — the former to be more powerful than ever. Leslie 
 and Loudoun were made earls and Argyle a marquis ; and, by 
 way of compensation, Montrose and his brother plotters were 
 relieved from their durance in the castle. 
 
 On the 28th of October Charles announced to the Estates 
 that he had just received news which might prove to be of 
 grave importance. It was the first announcement in Scotland 
 of the Irish Rebellion and Massacre, which was to assume 
 such portentous proportions in the imaginations of Charles's 
 Protestant subjects, and to add its own chapter of horrors to 
 the impending civil strife. The Parliament rose on the 17th 
 of November, and in the evening Charles entertained his 
 nobility in the banqueting-room of Holyrood. The next day 
 he took his way southward, never again to set foot in the 
 capital of his ancient kingdom. 
 
 VIII. — The Solemn League and Covenant. 
 
 Charles went south to even more untoward fates than he 
 1642 haci encount ered in Scotland. On broader, if 
 
 not on deeper, grounds, and in more irreconcil- 
 able antagonism, Charles found himself face to face with the 
 defiant Long Parliament. On January 4, 1642, he made 
 his abortive attempt on the five members; on April 23, he 
 summoned Hull ; and on August 22 he reared his standard at 
 Nottingham. Civil war being now inevitable, one of the 
 supreme questions lor Parliament and King was — on which 
 side would Scotland cast its sword ? Twice Scotland had led
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 327 
 
 an army into the field, and brought the king to its feet; and it 
 might be anticipated that a third such army would give victory 
 to the cause it should adopt. From the first threatenings of 
 strife, therefore, Charles and the Long Parliament were in 
 eager rivalry for the support of the Scots, which, from the 
 existing relations of the two countries, must be thrown on the 
 one side or the other. 
 
 It was with the gravest fears that all thoughtful Scotsmen 
 had followed the growing breach between Charles 
 and his English subjects. Scotland, already so 
 greatly divided against itself, must be divided still further by 
 the decision that had now to be made. The Scottish people 
 preferred monarchy to any other form of government, and, in 
 spite of past quarrels, were still devoted to the king whom 
 they had given to England. Many, therefore, who had hitherto 
 been faithful to the Covenant, would certainly take his side in 
 his conflict with his English Parliament, on the reasonable 
 ground that he had granted to Scotland at least all that she 
 had asked. Yet from the beginning it was never doubtful 
 which side the main body of the nation would take in the 
 coming struggle. It was their immoveable conviction — en- 
 gendered by Charles's own unsatisfactory dealings — that all 
 the concessions he had made had been wrung from him by 
 sheer compulsion 1 , and that, in the event of his triumph in 
 England, his first act would be to recommence the old struggle 
 in Scotland. 
 
 From the beginning of the English quarrel it was evident •. 
 that the Scots would be fatally divided in their sympathies. To 
 prepare for the great decision which must sooner or later be 
 made, a General Assembly sat in July and August, 1642, and 
 took its usual step in times of crisis : it appointed a standing 
 Commission to represent its desires to his Majesty and the 
 Parliament of England 8 , liy this Commission, together with 
 
 1 Baillie, II. 34. 
 
 2 Peterkin, Records, I. 330.
 
 32<S The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the standing committee of the Estates (known as the Con- 
 servators of Peace) and the Privy Council, the affairs of the 
 country were to be directed through the troubled times that 
 were ahead. In November the issue was definitely placed 
 before the country. By that date the first battle of the Civil 
 War had been fought (Oct. 23); and, so far as the war had gone, 
 the Parliament had come by the worst. In November, there- 
 fore, it made a direct appeal to the Scots on the ground of 
 common religion and common dangers; and in December came 
 a similar appeal from Charles. After a vehement debate in 
 the Privy Council, it was decided by a vote of eleven to nine 
 that only the king's communication should be published'. As 
 the immediate result of this decision there followed a time of 
 public excitement that recalled the days of the National Cove- 
 nant. The Commission of the General Assembly and the 
 Conservators of the Peace at once took steps to prove to the 
 Privy Council that it did not represent the feeling of the 
 country. In the beginning of the year (1643) a petition was 
 laid before the Council demanding that the message of the 
 English Parliament should likewise be published, and that it 
 should be made clear that in publishing the king's declaration 
 the Council had not meant to stamp it with their approval. In 
 spite of a cross-petition from the Royalists, Malignants, or 
 Banders, as they were variously called, the Council yielded 
 both points to the favourers of the Parliament*. 
 
 It was now evident on what side the strength of Scotland 
 i6 would be thrown ; and the Royalist and Par- 
 
 liamentary parties began to lay their plans 
 accordingly. Montrose offered to raise a Scottish force for 
 Charles on receiving a commission for that object, but by the 
 English Royalists Montrose was regarded as an adventurer 3 ; 
 and Charles preferred to follow the peaceful counsels of 
 
 J Burnet, 262. 
 
 8 Ibid.; Guthrie, 124, 5. 
 
 8 Gardiner, Hist, of the Great Civil War, 1. 298.
 
 Chap, hi J Charles 1 329 
 
 Hamilton, who with dubious faith had been representing his 
 interests in Scotland since the preceding July 1 . Fully aware 
 of Montrose's plot and confident in their strength, the leaders 
 of the Parliamentary party determined to hold a Convention of 
 Estates which should authorise their future proceedings. With- 
 out warrant from the king, the Convention met on June 22nd, 
 and took the decisive step of associating itself with the cause of 
 the English Parliament. On July 14 there was read to the 
 House a formal proposal of alliance on the part of that body, 
 containing the alluring announcement that an assembly of 
 divines was now sitting at Westminster with the express object 
 of considering a "reformation in church discipline and cere- 
 monies 2 ." On August 2 the General Assembly met and, in 
 concert with the Convention, gave its memorable answer to the 
 Parliament of England. In keeping with the invariable Scottish 
 practice, a bond of mutual defence and common action was 
 drawn up, subscribed by both Houses, and offered as the basis 
 of an alliance with the English Parliament. It was the famous 
 "Solemn League and Covenant" that was to have as notable 
 results as the National Covenant of 1639. A Confession of 
 Faith was not made the basis of the new Covenant, yet 
 religion was to be the essential bond and object of the con- 
 senting parties. Of the six heads of the League, the first was 
 that for which it was to exist — the reformation of religion in 
 the British Isles "according to the word of God," and the 
 nearest approach possible to uniformity in doctrine and polity. 
 It was not the kind of treaty the English Commons would have 
 desired, had they been in a position to dictate terms. Civil 
 liberty and not religion had thus far been the principle of their 
 rebellion; but at the moment they could not afford to raise 
 difficulties and delays, and on September 25 they formally 
 accepted the Covenant after some slight modification of its 
 terms. 
 
 J Burnet, 271. 
 
 2 Acts of Purl, of Scol., Vol. VI. Tart 1. \>. 14
 
 33° The Croivu and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 The ground being now cleared, it lay with the Scots to do 
 what they could for their new allies. In the present cause 
 there was not the universal enthusiasm that had produced the 
 National Covenant and the serried ranks at Dunse Law. The 
 mass of the country, however, was on the one side ; and, but 
 for a few nobles, there would have been little demonstration in 
 favour of the king. By the conditions of the English treaty 
 the Scots were to raise an army of 18,000 foot, 2000 horse, 
 1000 dragoons, and a train of artillery — their allies to pay 
 ^30,000 a month for its maintenance. In the beginning of 
 January, 1644, the army was ready, and under the command 
 of Leslie, now Earl of Leven, who had been recalled from 
 Ireland, whither he had been sent the preceding year at the 
 head of a Scottish contingent for the suppression of the re- 
 bellion. On the 19th of January, Leven led his army across 
 the Tweed, and for three years it was to remain within English 
 ground. Its presence at this moment had decisive results on 
 the fortune of the war. The North of England was strongly 
 Royalist, and was now held for Charles by an army under the 
 Marquis of Newcastle. Driving Newcastle gradually before 
 him, Leven forced on the battle of Marston Moor (July 2), in 
 which his nephew, David Leslie, so materially helped to give 
 the victory to the Parliament 1 ; and by the close of the autumn, 
 mainly through the action of the Scots, all England from the 
 Humber to the Tweed was lost to the king. Thenceforward, 
 for reasons which will afterwards appear, their efforts grew less 
 energetic, yet it may be said that their intervention had turned 
 the scale in favour of the cause they had adopted. Had they 
 cast in their lot with the king, Cromwell could not have had 
 his full opportunity, and his destiny might have been unful- 
 filled. 
 
 1 Sanford Terry, pp. 250 et seq. — For the part taken by the Scots at 
 Marston Moor see also Mr C. II. Firth's remarks in his paper on Marston 
 Moor, pp. 57 et seq. {Transactions of the Royal Hist. Society, Nov. 8, 
 1899).
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 331 
 
 While Leslie was fighting the battles of the Parliament in 
 England, his employers in Scotland had excellent ig 
 
 reasons for wishing that he were at home. On 
 February 1, 1644, Montrose received the Commission which 
 he had so ardently desired — his rival and enemy, Hamilton, 
 having been placed in an English prison a few weeks before by 
 Charles's command 1 . Montrose's first attempt to serve his 
 master was not encouraging. Crossing the Border at the head 
 of a small body of horse and foot, he made his way to Dumfries, 
 but was forced to beat a hasty retreat to Carlisle 2 . Three 
 months later (Aug. 18) he entered on the career which was to 
 make him one of the equivocal heroes of his country. Dis- 
 guised as a groom and attended by only two companions, he 
 traversed the Scottish Lowlands, and reached the house of a 
 friend near the town of Perth. Since the beginning of the 
 Civil War, Charles had been in communication with the 
 Marquis of Antrim for the landing of an Irish army on the 
 west coast of Scotland; and it was to take command of this 
 army that Montrose was now in Scotland. The Irish con- 
 tingent appeared, but instead of 10,000 men as had originally 
 been expected, it amounted only to about 1600. They con- 
 sisted of Irish and Scoto-Celts, and were led by a gigantic and 
 ferocious Highland chieftain, Alastair Macdonald, whose name 
 is embalmed in the sonnet of Milton. To have led such a 
 band against his Lowland countrymen is an indelible stain on 
 the character of Montrose, and is palliated only by the fact that 
 it was with Charles's connivance and approval that he did so. 
 Since the Irish rebellion and massacre, Irish Celts had come to 
 be regarded as mere brute beasts who neither gave nor expected 
 quarter 8 . In the cause for which Montrose was to fight, these 
 
 1 Burnt 1. 346. 
 
 -' Wishart, Memoirs of Montrose (1819), pp. 55 — 7. 
 
 1 Patrick Gordon {Britain's Distemper, 161), a Royalist writer of the 
 period, says of the Irish that "to them there was no distinction between a 
 man and a bcaat."
 
 332 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 auxiliaries had no interest whatever, and their sole motives 
 were simple plunder or revenge. Yet as warriors they possessed 
 qualities which rendered them formidable in the field. They 
 were capable of a rapidity of movement impossible for regular 
 troops, and of a barbaric fury of onset against which untrained 
 levies were helpless. To command such a host the impetuous 
 Montrose was the natural leader. 
 
 It was the opinion of the more sagacious of the leaders of 
 the Scots that Montrose would be most effectually 
 met by a purely defensive campaign. When 
 gorged with booty, his barbaric hordes would after their usual 
 fashion desert his standard or fall out among themselves. 
 Urged on by the ministers, however, they chose to send against 
 him successive bodies of raw levies, led by generals either in- 
 capable or hampered by meddling war-committees. Their first 
 experience of Montrose's prowess might have taught them 
 a wiser policy. On the ist of September he put to rout at 
 Tippermuir a body of burghers more than twice his own force 
 in strength. A fortnight later (September 13) the same story 
 was repeated at Aberdeen, where a few years before Montrose 
 had so greatly distinguished himself as champion of the Cove- 
 nant. The scenes of horror that followed this action sent 
 a shudder through Scotland at the possible triumph of the 
 destroying host. But it was fatal to Montrose's enterprise 
 that Huntly, the great potentate of the North, who had such 
 good reason to distrust and hate him, stood coldly aloof, and 
 pursued his usual course of playing with both parties. It was 
 at the man whom above all others Montrose most bitterly 
 detested, the Marquis of Argyle, that he dealt his next blow. 
 In December he laid waste the Argyle country, including its 
 chief head-quarters, Inverary ; and at Inverlochy on February 2 
 of the following year, inflicted a decisive defeat on Argyle 
 himself, who, though great in council, was not great in war. 
 Dundee next (April 4) saw the conqueror, but, when beginning 
 a sack that was to be a repetition of that of Aberdeen, he was
 
 Chap, mj diaries 1 333 
 
 surprised by the enemy, and escaped only by the agility that 
 was the distinguishing characteristic of his host. Two generals, 
 Baillie and Hurry, were now upon his track ; but, their forces 
 having been divided, Hurry was humiliated at Auldearn, near 
 Inverness (May 9). Baillie's turn came next. Baillie was an 
 officer of experience and judgment, but the Committee of 
 Estates would not let him fight in his own way. At Alford on 
 the Don (July 2), he experienced the same fate as his prede- 
 cessors ; and no army was left to oppose the all-conquering 
 general. Within a month, however, another force was raised 
 and placed under the command of Baillie, who now had not to 
 go far in search of the enemy. Emboldened by his unbroken 
 success, Montrose crossed the Forth, and the two armies met 
 at Kilsyth in Stirlingshire. Again Baillie was driven to act 
 against his better judgment, and with the result that Kilsyth 
 was the most brilliant of Montrose's triumphs and the most 
 disastrous for the vanquished (August 15). For the moment it 
 seemed as if Scotland were at his feet. Glasgow surrendered 
 at his summons, and gave in its submission; the Royalist 
 prisoners in Edinburgh were liberated at his mandate; a few 
 inconspicuous nobles drew to his side ; and in his Majesty's 
 name he summoned a Parliament to meet at Glasgow on the 
 20th of October 1 . 
 
 But Montrose had reached the term of his triumphs, and 
 disaster was now to add its crowning touch to 
 the romance of his career. In the preceding 
 June the cause of the king had been lost on the field of 
 Naseby, and it was beyond the power of Montrose to redress 
 the balance in Scotland. His motley following, glutted with 
 booty and carnage and with no attachment to the cause of 
 their leader, deserted him in troops in spite of prayers and 
 promises and threats. By the entire population of the Low- 
 
 1 Wishart, Montrose's chaplain, who wrote his Memoirs, is our main 
 authority for the details of Montrose's campaigns.
 
 334 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 lands he and his host were regarded as instruments of Satan 
 whom it behoved all God's people to fight to the death alike 
 with the sword of the flesh and the spirit 1 ; and great nobles 
 with Royalist sympathies, such as Roxburgh, Home, and 
 Traquair, were not prepared to risk their lives and estates for 
 a falling cause. In a final field Montrose was for the first time 
 to meet a body of trained troops, led by a general with the 
 skill and the freedom to direct them. In the beginning of 
 September David Leslie crossed the Tweed at the head of 
 4000 horse and a detachment of infantry on the express 
 mission of dealing with the unconquered enemy. Montrose 
 had advanced towards the Borders in the vain hope of some 
 substantial addition to his diminished band, and it was Leslie's 
 object to cut him off from the Highlands. At Gladsmuir in 
 Haddingtonshire, however, Leslie ascertained that Montrose 
 was lying at Selkirk, and marching down the Gala Water came 
 within four miles of his camp on the night of the 12th of 
 September Montrose had taken up an apparently strong 
 position at Philiphaugh on the left bank of the Ettrick, nearly 
 opposite the town of Selkirk. His left was defended by 
 a steep declivity, and his right by the Ettrick, the further 
 bank of which rendered it impassable at that particular point. 
 Dykes and hedges protected other parts of his line, and, where 
 these were insufficient, ditches had been dug as a further 
 defence. By these obstacles as well as the nature of the 
 ground a large body of cavalry would be prevented from acting 
 with full effect. 
 
 According to one account, Montrose spent the night of the 
 1 2th in writing despatches, totally unaware of Leslie's proximity; 
 if we are to accept another, both camps lay under arms, in 
 readiness for attack. The next morning was foggy, and Leslie, 
 marching up the left bank of the Ettrick, came within half-a- 
 mile of the enemy before he was observed. On hearing of 
 his approach, Montrose galloped down the steep incline lead- 
 
 1 Montrose had long been excommunicated.
 
 Chap, iii] Charles I 335 
 
 ing from Selkirk, and joined his men on the opposite side of 
 the river. The battle began with a cavalry skirmish which led 
 to no decisive result, and it was followed by Montrose's order- 
 ing the advance of a band of musketeers, who were beaten 
 back with loss. Between eleven and twelve o'clock Leslie 
 made a general attack, but he was met with such resolution 
 that he was unable to break the enemy's line. But Leslie 
 had a surprise in reserve which assured to him the fortune of 
 the day. Before the action began, he had despatched a body 
 of foot round a hill on his right 1 , which at a given moment 
 could fall on Montrose's left flank and rear. When the 
 moment came, Leslie led a charge at the head of his own 
 regiment; and, attacked in front and rear, the army of Montrose 
 was thrown into hopeless confusion and for the first time he 
 knew defeat. Attended by a few friends, he made his way 
 over the neighbouring hills to Peebles, and thence with all 
 expedition sought the depths of the Highlands, where alone his 
 head was safe. The victory was followed by a hideous crime, 
 for which Montrose himself was primarily responsible. By the 
 nature of the forces he had chosen to lead against his own 
 countrymen he had made the civil war internecine. Of his 
 followers it was said by a contemporary Royalist historian that 
 "they killed men ordinarily with no more feeling of compassion 
 and with the same careless neglect that they kill a hen or a 
 capon for supper 2 ." Of such foes it might be said that they 
 were without the pale of humanity; and in this conviction every 
 prisoner at Philiphaugh was put to the sword— not even the 
 female camp-followers, it is said, being spared 3 . 
 
 The only visible result of Montrose's year of victories was 
 that it imparted into the strife of parties a spirit of vindictive 
 
 1 Linglee Hill. This fact is recorded in the contemporary ballad on 
 the battle of Philiphaugh. 
 
 2 Gordon, Britain's Distemper, 161. 
 
 3 After the battle of Naseby the female camp-followers of the Royalist 
 army were similarly butchered.
 
 336 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 ferocity of which the coming years were to see the lamentable 
 effects. Thenceforward, the deterioriation of Royalists and 
 insurgents alike becomes every day more visible. Principles 
 are lost in passion, the moral sense of the nation is distorted 
 and seared by disingenuous pleadings and repeated acts of 
 cruelty; and victory at all costs becomes the aim of each 
 faction. To this debasement of the national character nothing 
 contributed more than the futile and ill-judged enterprise of 
 Montrose. 
 
 IX. The Engagement. Death of Charles. 
 
 "Our shame and skaith," writes the Covenanter Baillie, 
 "was not so great these six hundred years as this last year" 
 (1645). The destroying career of Montrose had occasioned 
 sufficient misery and dismay ; but, in addition to pitiless civil 
 war, pestilence had raged in the land and wrought more havoc 
 than plundering hosts. Worse than all, in the eyes of good 
 Covenanters, the great hopes that had been entertained of the 
 alliance with the English Parliament, had, as we shall see, 
 been hopelessly blasted; and the army of the Scots had crossed 
 the Border in vain. The defeat of Montrose at Philiphaugh 
 had relieved the Covenanting party from immediate danger; 
 but, as long as such a formidable enemy was in the country, 
 there could be no security for the public peace. Hardly a 
 month after Philiphaugh, indeed, Montrose was in the Lennox 
 at the head of another force and threatening Glasgow. As, 
 however, his conqueror, David Leslie, was in the city, he was 
 forced to withdraw to the north, where the opposition of his 
 enemy, the Earl of Huntly, effectually prevented him from 
 renewing his actions of the previous year. By the close of the 
 autumn the country was deemed so secure that Leslie was 
 permitted to return to England.
 
 Map Showing The Division of Covenanters and Royalists 
 from 1644 
 
 Plate 2 
 
 N G L A N D 
 
 .T (*» Tl«rtl>pLjBi.»w. £dia r 
 
 Shires mainly Covenanting- coloured blue 
 ,, ,, Royalist coloured red 
 
 In other Shirrs the two parties were mixed in various proportions
 
 Chap, in] Charles I y^j 
 
 The terrors of the last year, however, had gone deep into 
 
 the public mind, and for the first time since the 
 
 . , , , , , , 1645— 1646 
 
 outbreak ot the national quarrel there rose a 
 
 clamour for the blood of political and religious opponents. 
 As is usual in times of public excitement, it was certain of the 
 clergy who pressed for the extremest measures 1 . Besides the 
 rank and file of the captives at Philiphaugh, there were several 
 persons of distinction taken who had played an active part in the 
 campaigns of Montrose. At the end of October three of these 
 were executed in Glasgow — David Dickson, once a moderator 
 of the General Assembly, exclaiming in words that ran through 
 the country, "The work goes bonnily on 2 ." The fate of still 
 more distinguished victims was decided by the Parliament 
 which met in November, 1645; and in January of the follow- 
 ing year three of them suffered death at St Andrews, where the 
 Parliament was sitting— among the three being Sir Robert 
 Spottiswoode, once President of the Court of Session and 
 son of the Archbishop. Since the beginning of the troubles, 
 Spottiswoode had been a steady adversary of the insurgent 
 party. He had abetted Charles's high-handed dealings with 
 Balmerino, and by his efforts to embroil the king with his 
 subjects he had been noted as one of the band of the detested 
 "Incendiaries." It was on two main charges, however, that 
 he received his sentence: he had signed the king's com 
 mission to Montrose, and after the battle of Kilsyth he 
 had joined that leader and followed him till the day of 
 Philiphaugh'. The English Parliament, by the execution of 
 Strafford and Laud, had set the example how to deal 
 with political adversaries, and the Scots were energetically 
 emulating it. 
 
 1 Acts of Pail, of Scot., VI. Part I. p. 498. 
 
 2 S<>, at lea Guthrie (Memoirs., 108), though he is hardly a fair 
 witness where a Covenanter is concerned. 
 
 * Act* of /'art. of Scot., v. Pari 1. pp. 53a, .?. 
 
 B. S. II. 22
 
 338 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 If the Scots were thus unhappy at home, the course of 
 events in England did not promise a more 
 cheering future. When in 1644 their army had 
 crossed the Border to the aid of the English Parliament, it was 
 with the glorious prospect that on the basis of the Solemn 
 League and Covenant Presbyterianism would become the 
 faith and polity of the two nations. That the Scots should 
 ever have entertained such a hope showed a pious simplicity 
 which at least avouched the honesty of their convictions. 
 A less ardent faith and a more adequate acquaintance with the 
 national character and the religious history of the English 
 people might have convinced them that in the nature of things 
 the unity which they craved could only be a dream. To 
 their unspeakable disillusion, they gradually learned how far 
 their hopes had led them astray. By the defeat of Charles at 
 Naseby (June 14, 1645) ^ e English Parliament was assured of 
 final victory ; and the Scots, whose alliance it had so eagerly 
 sought, became an incumbrance rather than welcome auxiliaries. 
 The Scottish army had entered England on the express con- 
 dition that it should be maintained at the expense of their 
 allies ; but, when their services became no longer necessary, 
 their pay was more grudgingly given and finally stopped. 
 Recriminations began on both sides — the English taunting the 
 Scots with their inefficiency, and the Scots retorting that their 
 army was left unclothed and unfed. The quarrel was mainly 
 due to the growing predominance of the sect of Independents 
 of whom Cromwell was the great representative and leader. 
 Alike by their ideas of doctrine and Church government, 
 Independents and Presbyterians could only be irreconcileable 
 enemies. The creed of Presbyterianism was a body of abso- 
 lute divinity to which all its supporters must give in their 
 unconditional adherence; while Independency left the indi- 
 vidual to his own construction of the Bible and to his own 
 spiritual affinities. In its machinery of Kirk-sessions, Pres- 
 byteries, Synods, and General Assemblies, Presbyterianism
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 339 
 
 possessed a system of Church polity which subordinated 
 every part to the whole and effectually checked individual 
 eccentricity, whereas each congregation of Independents was 
 a separate unit, related to its neighbours only as far as it 
 might choose. To natural antagonism was added a cause of 
 misunderstanding which every day made the breach wider. 
 Charles, seeing his cause hopeless, had to choose between the 
 Scots and the English Parliament with whom to risk his person 
 and retrieve his fallen fortunes. To hustle the Scots out of 
 England, therefore, became the paramount desire of all 
 England that had been in arms against the king — the Inde- 
 pendents being the most eager of all for this result. To the 
 indignation of the English parties, the event which they dreaded 
 took place: on the 5th of May, 1646, Charles rode into the 
 Scottish camp at Southwell, near Newark, in Nottinghamshire ; 
 and with their precious charge the Scottish army withdrew to 
 Newcastle as a safer vantage-ground from which to treat with 
 the English Parliament. 
 
 The negotiations which had preceded Charles's surrender 
 to the Scots had turned on one fundamental 
 point: would he accept the Solemn League and 
 Covenant or not? On the sole condition that he would, the 
 Scots had declared their willingness to receive him and to 
 do their utmost to reinstate him on the thrones of both king- 
 doms. Yet, when he put himself in their hands, no definite: 
 agreement had been made between the two parties'. The 
 Scots might well hope that in the desperate state of his affairs 
 Charles would at length with honest purpose accept the con- 
 dition which they offered him. But Charles likewise had 
 hopes of his own. Erom the relations of the Scots and the 
 English parties there was every likelihood that their present 
 quarrel would end in a war which would rally round him 
 a powerful party in both kingdoms, and enable him to renew 
 
 1 This follows from the subsequent relations between Charles and the 
 Scou— Monireuil Correspondence [Scot. Hist. Soc), 1. nj:. 
 
 22 — 2
 
 340 The Croivn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the late struggle under far more favourable conditions. As 
 the event proved, both Charles and the Scots were equally 
 deceived. To every entreaty to accept the Covenant Charles 
 turned a deaf ear; and, on their part, the Scots were as im- 
 moveable in their resolution to make no terms with him save 
 as a Covenanted king. Meanwhile, the English Parliament 
 were more bent than ever on ridding the country of the Scots 
 and on gaining possession of the king. To effect the first 
 object it at length reluctantly agreed to pay a proportion of 
 the formidable arrears due to the Scots. The bill presented 
 amounted to nearly ^2,000,000, but the Scots had to be 
 satisfied with ^400,000, of which they were to receive half 
 before they quitted the country. 
 
 With regard to the person of the king the Scots had three 
 alternatives before them. They might put him at liberty to go 
 abroad ; they might carry him with them to Scotland ; and 
 they might surrender him to the English Parliament. To 
 have permitted him to go abroad would in all probability have 
 involved the renewal of civil war at no distant date, as Charles 
 had already been long in negotiation for the assistance of 
 foreign powers. To have introduced him to Scotland would 
 have been an act of madness on the part of the Scots, which 
 would have endangered every advantage they had gained at 
 such expense of treasure and blood. Charles, had refused to 
 accept the one condition on which they would have him as 
 their king ; and his presence in Scotland, as the past had 
 already proved, would have been a source of disturbance 
 which would have been fatal to the existing settlement. The 
 alternative of handing him over to his English subjects was, in 
 truth, the course which the interests of both kingdoms per- 
 emptorily demanded. The English Parliament had given the 
 Scots clearly to understand that their refusal to put the king 
 in their hands would be regarded as a declaration of war. The 
 Scots had let Charles know that they would gladly abide this 
 threat, if he were willing to accept their terms ; but to fight
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 341 
 
 for Charles on his own conditions would have been to stultify 
 and undo all their action of the last ten years. The late 
 civil war had been the result of a quarrel between Charles and 
 his English subjects ; and it was reasonable and fitting that 
 they should be left to settle their differences as best they 
 might. The tragedy at Whitehall, which was to close the great 
 controversy as far as Charles was concerned, was a contingency 
 which no one could foresee in the transaction of his sur- 
 render. That the coincidence of the payment of arrears and 
 the handing over of Charles should be malevolently construed 
 by party-feeling was in the nature of things : calmly viewed 
 in the light of actual facts the conduct of the Scots bears 
 no such construction. 
 
 When in the beginning of February, 1647, the Scottish 
 army finally recrossed the Tweed, it was, as we have seen, 
 with its main object unaccomplished and with no prospect of 
 its ever being so. But though a Presbyterian Britain had 
 proved a dream, the Scots had not allied themselves with the 
 English Parliament in vain. From the Assembly of divines 
 at Westminster 1 , which had been held out to them as such a 
 strong inducement to accept the English alliance, they derived 
 a bequest that makes that Assembly one of the notable factors 
 in Scottish history. The existing Confession of Faith of all 
 the Presbyterian Churches of Scotland ; the version of the 
 Psalms, intertwined with the most sacred feelings of the Scot- 
 tish people; the Larger and Shorter Catechisms, which have 
 made them a nation of theologians — all came from the West- 
 minster Assembly, and produced that astonishing precision of 
 thought regarding the mysteries of human destiny which has 
 
 r since been one of the national characteristics. 
 
 The Scottish army was immediately disbanded on its return 
 — 6000 foot and 1200 horse being kept together for service 
 
 1 It met on the r^th of June, [643, and continued its sittings till the 
 irw\ of February, 1649.
 
 34 2 The Crown arid the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 against the Gordons in the North and the Macdonalds in 
 Canty re 1 . Both Gordons and Macdonalds were suppressed 
 by David Leslie ; but far more formidable to the public peace 
 was the fatal cleavage which now began to appear in the nation 
 at large. The revolt against the royal authority in Scotland 
 had succeeded through the common action of the nobility 
 and the Church, which ensured the support of the immense 
 majority of the people. The main reasons for the action of 
 the Scottish nobles had been their alarm at the possible results 
 of the Act of Revocation, and their jealousy of the new 
 powers of the bishops. But they were still in possession of 
 their estates, and bishops had ceased to exist. To the feudal 
 instinct for a sovereign lord, therefore, they could now safely 
 yield, since, whatever Charles might do if restored to power, 
 he would at least avoid his former blunder of alienating his 
 nobility. To foster these tendencies was the work of Hamilton 
 and his brother, Lanark, now both freed from their English 
 prison and in the thick of affairs in Scotland. All negotiations 
 between Charles and the English parties had failed, but he at 
 length succeeded in the game which he had all along sought 
 to play. He divided his enemies among themselves and was 
 beguiled by a momentary hope that he might yet have them 
 all under his feet. At his prison in Carisbrooke Castle, in 
 the Isle of Wight, three Scottish Commissioners, — the Lord 
 Chancellor Loudoun, and the Earls of Lanark and Lauderdale, 
 — made a secret treaty with him (Dec. 27, 1647), by which 
 they engaged to put the arms of Scotland at his disposal. By 
 this treaty, known as the "Engagement," Charles agreed, in 
 the event of his restoration to power, to establish Presby- 
 terianism in England for three years and to suppress the 
 Independents and all other sectaries. The Covenant he 
 refused to make compulsory, but undertook to have it con- 
 firmed by Act of Parliament. As the publication of the 
 Engagement would have meant the immediate invasion of 
 
 1 Guthrie, 240-3.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 343 
 
 Scotland by an English army, it was wrapped in lead and 
 buried in the garden of the castle. 
 
 To make their pledge good was now the object of the 
 Hamiltonian party in Scotland. On the 2nd of March, 1648, 
 the Estates met in Edinburgh — their principal business being 
 to take measures for immediate action against England. The 
 composition of the Estates showed how vast a change had 
 come over the spirit of the nation since the year of the Solemn 
 League and Covenant. Out of more than fifty nobles only 
 nine or ten were for the Covenant, of the barons less than 
 half; while almost all the Commissioners of the larger towns 
 went with Hamilton 1 . With this commanding majority the 
 party of the king had little difficulty in carrying things to their 
 own mind. On April 1 1 they sent what was virtually an 
 ultimatum to the English Parliament, in which they demanded 
 the liberation of the king, the disbanding of the army and the 
 establishment of Presbyterianism in accordance with the Solemn 
 League and Covenant"; and further Acts were passed for the 
 raising of forces for the immediate invasion of England. It 
 was by the show of insisting on the Covenant that Hamilton 
 had gained such large support throughout the country ; but 
 there was still a formidable section who were not beguiled by 
 his specious promises. The majority of the Covenanting clergy 
 were immoveably convinced that, if Charles were once securely 
 on his throne, the Covenant would receive short shrift at his 
 hands To the Engagement they objected that it bound the 
 king to no definite pledge regarding religion, and that the 
 party by whose side they were expected to fight in England 
 were those very Malignants who had been the mortal enemies 
 of the Covenant 8 . The ministers found strenuous support in 
 
 1 Baillie gives the names of the lords. They were Argyle, Eglinton, 
 Cassillis, Lothian, Arbuthnot, Torphichen, Ross, Balmerino, Cupar, ami 
 Barley.— ill. 35. 
 
 2 Ac/i vf I'a>l. 0/ Scot., vi. Part u. pp. 23 et seq. 
 Baillie, III. 42.
 
 344 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 various parts of the country : supplications against the levy 
 poured into the Parliament; the women of Edinburgh, ever 
 demonstrative, stoned the Provost and Hamilton himself; and 
 in the west, the feeling was so strong that an actual rising took 
 place on Mauchline Moor, which had to be crushed by military 
 force. It was in the teeth of this opposition that Hamilton 
 raised his army ; and its character was what might have been 
 expected. Its numbers were between ten and eleven thousand ; 
 the cavalry were raw and undisciplined; not one man in five 
 could handle pike or musket ; and not a single field-piece was 
 forthcoming 1 . Nor did enthusiasm make up for lack of equip- 
 ments and discipline, since the majority of the troops had 
 been impressed into a service which they abhorred. As 
 Hamilton himself was to be the leader of this hopeless host, 
 its fate was a foregone conclusion. On July 8 the Scots 
 crossed the Border, and in three days' fighting (August 17-19) 
 were cut to pieces by Cromwell at Preston, Wigan, and War- 
 rington. On the 25 th Hamilton surrendered at Uttoxeter, 
 where he had taken refuge with a handful of his followers ; 
 and the disastrous enterprise was at an end. 
 
 The destruction of Hamilton's army once more changed 
 the situation in Scotland. On the news of his defeat, the 
 Chancellor Loudoun and the Earl of Eglinton marched on 
 Edinburgh at the head of 6000 men, drawn from the shires 
 of Ayr, Renfrew, and Lanark 2 . Edinburgh received them with 
 open arms, and they were supported in other parts of the 
 country by forces led by Argyle and Cassillis. The Earl of 
 Lanark, now the head of the Engagers, made a feeble struggle, 
 hut was forced to accept conditions which gave to Argyle and 
 the Protesters or Anti-Engagers the direction of affairs. Next 
 wa.s seen another strange turn in this surprising time. On the 
 5th of October, Cromwell appeared in Edinburgh, and had a 
 
 1 Burnet, 450. 
 
 2 This expedition was known as the "Whiggaraore's Raid." "Whig- 
 gam" was the word used in the West in urging horses.
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 345 
 
 friendly supper with Argyle and Johnston of Warriston at 
 Moray House in the Canongate; and the result of his visit 
 was an agreement between the Anti-Engaging Covenanters 
 and Independents to make common action against all forms 
 of Malignancy. 
 
 The unnatural alliance between Covenanters and Indepen- 
 dents was soon put to a test which proved that it had only 
 been the exigencies of the moment that had made it possible. 
 On the 5th of December Pride's Purge put an end to the 
 power of the Long Parliament; and the army, swayed solely 
 by the Independents, demanded the trial of the king as the 
 prime cause of all the nation's misfortunes. Against this action 
 Scotsmen of every type of opinion were united alike in fear 
 and indignation. Monarchy they all regarded as the natural 
 form of government, sanctioned by Heaven and consecrated 
 by immemorial custom. Charles, as every Scot believed, 
 was the 107th in the line of their kings. It was as the 
 representatives of the national feeling, therefore, that Com- 
 missioners, despatched by the Estates to London, lodged a 
 vehement protest against the intended act of the Indepen- 
 dent leaders. When the Scots had placed Charles in then- 
 hands, they had declared that it was on the express condition 
 that he should suffer no harm in his person 1 ; and they now 
 added a solemn warning regarding what was likely to ensue 
 on the removal of the king 2 . A time had been when a protest 
 of the Scots might not have been ineffectual with the leaders 
 of the English revolt; but that time was now past. Late 
 events had revealed the impotence of Scotland through its 
 opposing factions; and the chiefs of the Independents were 
 bent on courses which nothing hut superior force could arrest. 
 On the 30th of January, 1649, Charles was executed hefore 
 the banqueting House of Whitehall — the second Scottish 
 
 1 This was true.— Acts of Pari, of Scot., VI. I'art I. p. 658. 
 * Ibid. vi. Pari 11. pp. 129, 30.
 
 346 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 prince of the Stewart House to die a public death by English 
 hands. 
 
 Since Scotland had embraced the Reformation, it had 
 been her perverse destiny to be ruled in succession by three 
 sovereigns, all of whom were in antagonism to the deepest 
 convictions and aspirations of her people. Of all the rulers of 
 his race, Charles had most hopelessly failed in his kingly office. 
 It may be said that he was wrecked by a theory of that office 
 which made him impossible as a ruler of men. In his own 
 eyes he was simply the vicegerent of Heaven, whose will his 
 subjects could legitimately challenge under no conceivable 
 circumstances. But that in the 17th century he could con- 
 ceive and act on such a theory in so rigid and fanatical 
 a fashion, is conclusive proof of the essential narrowness 
 of his mind and nature. In other times and in other circum- 
 stances he might have found a people who might have taken 
 him at his own estimate and whom he might even have ruled 
 with beneficence. But it was his unhappy fate to rule a people, 
 the majority of whom were convinced that the counsels of 
 Heaven had been committed to themselves. They believed 
 that the Calvinistic creed and the Presbyterian polity were divine 
 in their origin and obligatory alike on individuals and nations. 
 In this opposition of absolute sanctions the ordinary relations 
 of prince and subject were impossible. But it is to be noted 
 that it was the impracticability of Charles that had produced 
 the deadlock. It is certain that, had he been content to leave 
 things as he found them when he came to the throne, the 
 ecclesiastical development of Scotland would have followed a 
 different course. By his policy with regard .to the Liturgy he 
 revived the spirit of Andrew Melville, and drove the majority 
 of the clergy to the conviction that the only safety of the 
 Church lay in the affirmation of the absolute sanction that 
 belonged to their own system of faith and doctrine. When he 
 was worsted in the quarrel he had provoked, his personal 
 character made reconciliation impossible. While ostensibly
 
 Chap, hi] Charles I 347 
 
 yielding to the demands of his subjects, he hardly concealed 
 the fact that his concessions would stand only till the first op- 
 portunity of recalling them. If he had failed in his government 
 of Scotland and succeeded in England, it might have been said 
 that the Scots had always been a difficult people to govern, as 
 so many of his predecessors had known to their cost. But it 
 is a further grave indictment against Charles that he failed as 
 signally in his government of a people so widely different in 
 their character and history as the English from the Scots. In 
 England the grounds of quarrel were different; but it was by 
 the action of the same qualities — imprudent assertion of his 
 prerogative in his time of power and duplicity in defeat — that 
 he forfeited the allegiance of its people, and moved with 
 fatal steps to the tragic close at Westminster and Whitehall. 
 
 The constitutional changes of Charles's reign are so es- 
 sentially bound up with the national quarrel that they have 
 necessarily made part of the foregoing narrative. The revival 
 of the influence of the General Assemblies is the most notable 
 fact of the period. From 1639 onwards this influence was so 
 great that Parliament found its strength only in deferring to 
 their expressed wishes. The casting out of the bishops, the 
 revival of the ancient method of electing the Lords of the 
 Articles, and the triennial Parliaments, were the constitutional 
 changes by which the revolutionary party sought to undo the 
 work of Charles and his father. In the opening years of his 
 reign Charles had shown that, when the question of his pre- 
 rogative was not at stake, he was seriously interested in the 
 well-being of his northern kingdom. In 1628 he revived the 
 Commission for the Middle Shires, which, originally created 
 by his father, had been in abeyance since Charles's own 
 accession. The same year saw his revival of an institution 
 with wider action for good. This was the system of Justice- 
 Ayres, which he was the first to place upon a solid and effective 
 basis. By the arrangement which he made there were to be 
 eight itinerary justices — two for each quarter of the kingdom ;
 
 34-8 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 and the month of October was fixed for the annual circuit'. 
 These same opening years in Scotland raised another question 
 regarding the possible development of Charles's reign. By the 
 year 1628 the country was virtually in a state of bankruptcy. 
 In February of that year his Privy Council wrote to him that 
 the exchequer was empty and that public business had come 
 to a deadlock. In 1625 a grant had been made of the 
 twentieth penny of all annual rents ; but so great had been the 
 opposition to the tax that it had been found impossible to 
 raise it in anything like full measure. A few more burdens of 
 this kind, and Charles would have had to face in Scotland the 
 same difficulties that led to his breach with the Parliament of 
 England. But in Scotland the controversy was to rest on 
 other grounds. Before his financial straits could produce 
 what appeared to be an inevitable crisis, the ecclesiastical 
 question arose and absorbed the public mind to the exclusion 
 of every other. 
 
 1 P. C. Reg., Vol. II. (Second Series), Index, s.v.
 
 Chap, ivj Scotland and the Commonwealth 349 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 SCOTLAND AND THE COMMONWEALTH. DUNBAR 
 AND WORCESTER, 1649 — 1651. 
 
 On February 5, six clays after the execution of Charles I, the 
 
 Scottish Estates proclaimed his son King of Great 
 
 • • ... 1649 
 
 Britain, France, and Ireland . This was a direct 
 
 challenge to the revolutionary party in England, and as such it 
 was regarded. Three weeks later the Scottish Commissioners 
 in London were dismissed in a fashion that proved how keenly 
 the proceeding of the Estates had been resented. 
 
 The proclamation of Charles II was necessitated by the 
 force of national feeling, but it placed the country 
 in a position which revealed all its weakness and 
 could issue only in disaster. We have seen how the "Engage- 
 ment" had cleft the nation in twain: the recognition of 
 Charles II was to make the confusion worse confounded. The 
 chief men responsible for the conduct of affairs — Argyle, the 
 < luincellor Loudoun, and Johnston of Warriston 2 — were in a 
 predicament from which no peaceful statesmanship could have 
 extricated them. In the autumn of 164S they had struck a 
 bargain with Cromwell, and in January 1649 the Estates had 
 passed an Act which declared irreconcileable war with every 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, vi. Part 11. p. 157- 
 
 2 A:-, will afterwards be .seen, Warriston eventually deserted the party of 
 
 A 1 gyle.
 
 350 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 form of Malignancy. This was the famous Act of Classes which 
 distinguished four degrees of atrocity among those who had 
 scorned the Covenants, and disabled all of them thenceforth 
 from holding military or civil office till they had proved their 
 faithful repentance 1 . Yet, in the mutation of events, the 
 understanding with Cromwell and the Act of Classes were 
 followed by the offer of the Crown to " the greatest malignant 
 of all." The offer, indeed, was clogged with an important 
 condition : Charles was to be acknowledged king of all his 
 dominions only after he had pledged himself to the two Cove- 
 nants which his father had so steadfastly rejected. Whether 
 the son would prove more accommodating than his father had 
 now to be tried. In March negotiations were opened with the 
 youthful prince, then at the Hague ; and the difficulties of the 
 transaction immediately appeared. For Charles Scotland was 
 but a stepping-stone to England, but his acceptance of the 
 Solemn League and Covenant would have closed the door to 
 England in his face. As it happened, there were two other 
 possibilities before him at this moment, which induced him to 
 postpone a definitive arrangement with the Scottish Com- 
 missioners. In Ireland the Marquis of Ormond was exerting 
 himself to restore the Royalist cause, and the sanguine Montrose 
 was holding out hopes that Scotland might be won in the teeth 
 of Argyle and his fellow-Covenanters. By September the 
 sword of Cromwell had cut off Charles's hopes in Ireland, and 
 he found himself driven to make what bargain he could with 
 the Scots. On May i, 1650, he signed the draft of an agree- 
 ment 2 at Breda, and at Heligoland (June 11), when on the 
 point of sailing for Scotland, he put his name to the final form 
 of the treaty. He was now what his father had never been — 
 a covenanted King of Scots. 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, VI. Part II. pp. 143 — 147. 
 
 2 At this period the term "treaty" meant the negotiations that led up 
 to the final arrangement. — Gardiner, Charles II and Scotland in 1650 
 (Scot. Hist. Soc.) p. xx.
 
 Chap, iv] Scotland and the Commonwealth 351 
 
 Before Charles sailed for Scotland Montrose had once 
 more tempted fortune and had closed his adven- 
 turous career. Publicly disowned, but privately 
 encouraged' by Charles, he landed at Kirkwall in Orkney, in 
 the month of March, and in April began his enterprise in 
 Caithness at the head of some 1200 men. A year earlier he 
 would have found the nucleus of a Royalist host which might 
 have materially strengthened his arms, but at Balveny on Spey 
 David Leslie (May 2, 1649) had crushed the force that would 
 have joined the invader 2 . To Leslie was now committed the 
 task of dealing with the enemy of whom he had given such 
 good account at Philiphaugh. His success on the present 
 occasion was even more swift and decisive. At Carbisdale, by 
 the Kyle of Sutherland (April 27), Montrose's band was cut to 
 pieces by Lieutenant-Colonel Strachan at the head of a body 
 of cavalry ; and a few days later Montrose himself was at the 
 mercy of his enemies. He knew that he had taken his life in 
 his hands, and that there could be but one fate in store for him. 
 A year before the Marquis of Huntly had suffered death as a 
 traitor to the Covenant, and Huntly's offences were not to be 
 weighed in the balance with those of Montrose. As his doom 
 as a traitor had already been pronounced, no form of trial was 
 needed ; and on May 21st he was hanged at the Market-Cross 
 of Edinburgh — his body being afterwards dismembered, and 
 his limbs publicly displayed in Glasgow, Stirling, Perth, and 
 Aberdeen. Such a close, marked as it was by his own soaring 
 courage and the unholy exultation of his enemies, was perhaps 
 needed to balance accounts in a career in which the adven- 
 turer had been so largely mingled with the hero. 
 
 On June 23rd, Charles appeared at the mouth of the Spey, 
 and before he landed 3 signed the two Covenants, 
 an act of supererogation which had not been l6 s° 
 
 1 Wilton Papers (Ban. Club), pp. met seq. 
 
 2 Balfour, III, 40^, 7. 
 
 ■ Wodrow, Select Bio^rapliies (Liic of John Livingstone), 1. 181 — 3.
 
 352 
 
 The Crown and the Kirk 
 
 [Book vi 
 
 demanded of him. Now that they had him in their midst, 
 Argyle and his colleagues realized all the difficulties which his 
 presence entailed. From three quarters they had to look for 
 opposition which might endanger the existing government. 
 There might be a Royalist reaction in favour of Charles— a 
 possibility which was eventually realised ; in the ranks of the 
 Covenanting party itself there were already ominous indications 
 of that fatal division which was to prove its ruin ; and, finally, 
 England had already made it clear that it regarded the accept- 
 ance of Charles by the Scots as a declaration of war. To meet 
 these various dangers the Estates now addressed themselves 
 under the direction of Loudoun and Argyle. The leading 
 Royalists, Scots and English, who had come in Charles's train, 
 were ordered to quit the kingdom ; and proclamations were 
 issued for the levying of forces to meet the impending English 
 invasion 1 . On the 5th of July the Estates rose, after appoint- 
 ing the usual Committee for the conduct of affairs till their next 
 meeting. On this Committee, in conjunction with the standing 
 Commission of the Kirk, devolved the heavy task of piloting 
 the country through the desperate crisis that was near at hand. 
 On the 22nd of July Cromwell entered Scotland by the 
 order of the English Commonwealth, assuring 
 "his brethren in evil," says Baillie, "of a more 
 easy conquest of that kingdom than all the English kings 
 ever had 2 ." The incurable divisions of the nation might well 
 give him this confidence, yet he was to find his task less easy 
 than he anticipated and to run the nearest risk of disaster that 
 ever befell his arms. From the Tweed to Edinburgh the 
 country had been made a desert; and in a strong position 
 between Leith and that town the experienced Leslie had drawn 
 up an army of some 26,000 men. Unhappily, the skill of Leslie 
 was rendered futile by the strangest policy ever pursued by the 
 leaders of a people. To single-minded men for whom the 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scotland, vi. Part 11. pp. 603 el seq. 
 
 2 Baillie, ill. 68. 
 
 1650
 
 Chap, iv] Scotland and the Commonwealth 353 
 
 Covenants were the express will of Heaven the late transaction 
 with Charles had seemed a mockery of their most sacred hopes 
 and prayers. For Charles, both as a man and as a king, they 
 knew, the Covenants were a jest and a bugbear, which on the 
 first opportunity he would toss to the winds. To the feelings 
 of this class of men Argyle and his brother politicians were 
 constrained to make concessions which took a peculiar form. 
 If Charles gave no inward consent to the Covenants, he was at 
 least to be made to know that his consent was no mere idle 
 form. He was kept severely apart from the army which was to 
 fight the battles of Heaven, and he was constrained to subscribe 
 a fresh declaration (August 16) which filled the cup of his 
 humiliation. Among other things in this extraordinary docu- 
 ment he was made to say that he was " deeply humbled and 
 afflicted in spirit before God because of his father's opposition 
 to the work of God 1 ." Truly he might exclaim that after this 
 he could never look his mother in the face 2 . But this dealing 
 with the chief malignant was only part of the hollow proceed- 
 ings to which the Government was constrained by the impos- 
 sible policy to which it had committed itself. If the cause of 
 the Covenant were to be maintained with clean hands, its hosts 
 must be purified from every taint of Malignancy. With this 
 object, therefore, the Estates had appointed a special Commis- 
 sion, whose duty should be to weed out every person, officer, and 
 private soldier who might bring the judgment of Achan on the 
 host. So zealously did the Commission perform its task that 
 by the end of August, and in face of the formidable enemy, 
 from three to four thousand men were cashiered ; and, in the 
 words of a Royalist historian, the army was mainly left in 
 charge of "ministers' sons, clerks, and such other sanctified 
 creatures, who hardly ever saw or heard of any sword but that 
 of the Spirit 3 ." 
 
 ' Peterkin, Records, p. 599. 
 
 2 Bumeti Hist, of his Own Time (Edit. 1823, Oxford), I. 97. 
 
 3 sir Edward Walker, Historical Discourses (Peterkin, p. 623). 
 
 11. 23
 
 354 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 On July 28 Cromwell reached Musselburgh by way of 
 Mordington, Cockburnspath, and Dunbar 1 His army con- 
 sisted of 16,000 men, of whom above 5000 were cavalry. 
 Fleetwood and Lambert were with him, and he had also found 
 a regiment for Monk, who was to play so great a part in 
 Scottish affairs. Cromwell found the people through whom he 
 marched as resolutely hostile as their forefathers had been to 
 any English invader. Terrible stories had been circulated as 
 to the treatment they had to expect from the dreaded Indepen- 
 dent leader. He was "to put all men to the sword, and to 
 thrust hot irons through the women's breasts." To assure the 
 Scots of the beneficent intentions of its general the English 
 Parliament had prepared an express Declaration which was 
 sent across the Border before him. The army, also, on its 
 own account made an express appeal to all "God's elect in 
 Scotland" to join hands with their fellow-elect in England. 
 To the Scottish clergy, who were mainly responsible for the 
 stubborn hostility of their parishioners, Cromwell made a per- 
 sonal appeal in which he besought them to look at the situation 
 jn its true light. "I beseech you in the bowels of Christ," he 
 wrote, "think it possible you may be mistaken." If the 
 ministers could have admitted such a possibility, an Indepen- 
 dent and republican was the last person in the world who 
 was likely to convince them of error. What Cromwell must 
 have expected from the beginning was gradually brought home 
 to him ; if the English Parliament was to work its will in 
 Scotland it was the sword alone that must enforce it. 
 
 It was apparently Cromwell's intention to gain possession of 
 Leith, whence with the support of his fleet he could continue 
 further operations at his leisure. More than once this strategy 
 had been successfully tried in the past, but Cromwell had to do 
 with a general who understood the details of war better than 
 himself. When he advanced from Musselburgh he found the 
 
 1 An able and thorough account of Cromwell's movements in Scotland 
 is given by W. S. Douglas in his Cromwell's Scotch Campaigns (1 Sy8).
 
 Chap, i v] Scotland and the Commonwealth 355 
 
 enemy entrenched between Leith and Edinburgh in a position 
 which secured the defence of both towns. After some desul- 
 tory lighting, which led to no result, he fell back on Musselburgh, 
 hotly pursued by the Scottish horse, who even succeeded in 
 capturing Lambert, though he was immediately rescued. In 
 Musselburgh Cromwell still found himself uncomfortable. He 
 was still exposed to the attacks of the Scots, and, what embar- 
 rassed him still more, stores could not be landed from his ships 
 on account of the stormy weather and the difficulties of the 
 harbourage. On August 6 he retired to Dunbar, where he was 
 relieved from both of these inconveniences. 
 
 It was evident that Leslie had no intention of seeking a 
 pitched battle. On August n, therefore, Cromwell returned 
 to Musselburgh, and two days later took up his position on the 
 Braid Hills immediately to the south of Edinburgh. Having 
 found it impossible to make his way to Leith, he had con- 
 ceived another plan which, if successfully executed, might be 
 turned to equally good account. This was to take possession 
 of Queensferry on the Forth, where he would be in contact 
 with his fleet, and where he would also be in a position to cut 
 off Leslie's communications with the north. Abortive nego- 
 tiations with the leaders of the Kirk held him inactive for two 
 days, and on the 15th he had again to withdraw to Mussel- 
 burgh to procure supplies. On the 18th he returned to his 
 former position on the Braids, but to find that Leslie had antici- 
 pated his intended march on Queensferry. The main body 
 of the Scots was now drawn up on the south side of 
 Edinburgh and directly facing the English army, while a 
 detachment with two guns had been stationed on Corstorphine 
 Hill between two and three miles to the west of the capital. 
 By making a detuur to the south-west Cromwell might have 
 come upon Queensferry, but he could not afford to quit the 
 coast, where alone he could be secure of supplies. To reach 
 Queensferry, therefore, he had to make for the Firth of Forth 
 by passing between Corstorphine Hill and Edinburgh, where 
 
 23—2
 
 356 The Crozvn cwid the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 he would be exposed to the double fire of the Scots. Thus 
 checkmated, Cromwell moved to Colinton, to which Leslie 
 responded by marching his entire army to Corstorphine Hill 
 After storming the house of Redhall near Colinton Cromwell 
 crossed the Water of Leith and pursued his march towards 
 Queensferry. Again he was outmanoeuvred by the skilful 
 Leslie, who proceeding in front of him occupied the high 
 ground behind Gogar between two and three miles to the 
 west of Colinton and barred the further march of the 
 English leader. On Corstorphine Hill the Scots had held a 
 secure position, and at Gogar the ground was still more in 
 their favour Foiled in all his attempts to force on an 
 engagement, Cromwell was likewise disappointed in his hope 
 that their own difficulties would constrain the Scots to seek an 
 accommodation. They were in desperate straits for provisions, 
 and their leaders were divided alike as to their present and 
 their future plans of action. But the hatred of the common 
 enemy sufficed to hold them together, and the danger of his 
 position and the plight of his troops left Cromwell no choice 
 but to abandon his intention of reaching Queensferry. On the 
 28th of August he began his retreat to Dunbar, where he arrived 
 on the 1st of September. His month's experience had told 
 heavily on the fine army with which he had crossed the Border. 
 Of his 16,000 men, 5,000 had been lost, mainly through disease 
 induced by scarcity of food and exposure. 
 
 With his discouraged host Cromwell found himself in as 
 strait a predicament at Dunbar as in any of his previous 
 positions. In his retreat he had been closely followed by 
 Leslie, a detachment of whose horse had even engaged him at 
 Haddington. On the very day that the English leader entered 
 Dunbar the pertinacious enemy settled on Doon Hill, a neigh- 
 bouring eminence that overlooked the town. With a view to 
 further contingencies, also, Leslie had despatched a force to 
 the Pease Bridge, a gorge beyond Cockburnspath which com- 
 manded the line of march to Berwick. To all appearance the
 
 Chap, iv] Scotland and the Commonwealth 357 
 
 unconquered Cromwell was at last caught in a trap from which 
 any attempt to extricate himself must end in disaster. If he 
 continued his march southwards he would have to fight at a 
 disadvantage to which even his veterans must succumb. An 
 attempt to escape by sea would be attended by even greater 
 risks. The ships at his command would not afford accom- 
 modation for all his troops, and embarkation in the face of a 
 watchful enemy could not have been effected without heavy 
 loss. Cromwell fully realized the strait in which he found 
 himself. " We are upon an engagement very difficult," he 
 
 wrote, " our lying here daily consumeth our men"; but, 
 
 he characteristically adds, "we have much hope in the Lord, of 
 Whose mercy we have had large experience." 
 
 On the ground where Leslie had encamped he was secure 
 from attack. The steep hill slope on which he lay formed of 
 itself a strong position, and he had a further defence in the 
 deep ravine of the Brock Burn which runs between the base of 
 the Doon Hill and the town of Dunbar. But the Scots had 
 their own difficulties as well as the enemy. The weather still 
 continued cold and wet, and in their exposed position they had 
 to bear the full brunt of it. Lack of provisions, also, rendered 
 it impossible for them to wait on Cromwell's movements as 
 they had hitherto done. On the second day of their encamp- 
 ment a council of war decided that the attempt should be 
 made to bring matters to an issue. There is good reason to 
 believe that this decision was taken against the judgment of 
 Leslie and his uncle, the veteran Leven, who was also in the 
 camp. However this may be, to the ecstatic delight of 
 Cromwell the Scots on the night of Monday, the 2nd of 
 September, were seen to descend from the hill and to take up 
 a position which left them open to the attack of a resolute 
 enemy'. They were now on comparatively even ground; 
 
 1 In this account of the Battle of Dunbar I have followed Mr C. II. Firth. 
 According to the received account, as it is found in Carlyle and Mr Gardiner, 
 the main battle took place when CromweU attempted to cross the JJrock
 
 358 
 
 The Crown and the Kirk 
 
 [Book vi 
 
 and, though the Brock Burn still separated them from the 
 English, its banks at that point were comparatively level and 
 offered no great impediment either to foot or horse. As the 
 Scots now lay they had the Brock Burn on their left, their 
 foot forming their centre, and the bulk of their cavalry their 
 right wing. They had placed themselves in a position where 
 
 c-RKlHAVtN ni\ 
 
 toUNBAR- 
 
 V 
 
 The Battle of 
 
 DUNBAR. „,, 
 
 ftorsf Foot 
 
 Royalilll H EJ 
 
 Farhamtntariant pij QB 
 
 ^ 
 
 \6d"" % 
 
 .-' >J '-' 
 
 ttt **. 
 
 \ '■-- 
 
 jaaciB 
 
 ttr. 
 
 J o^. 
 
 ,.-•">/' 
 
 '//■#/' V t .' $%■;'?*? Qooji Hill "*', \ C-. ~-Meikft-Pjnifrion'f5^ 
 
 .'■>.-';■-:& 
 
 '''/,' afeun^HiH. 1 ,*V\=- 
 
 '200 *J ,. . 
 
 
 L 
 
 defeat must involve irretrievable ruin. The Brock Burn cut off 
 retreat to the west, and the steep hill behind them stood in the 
 
 Burn. According to Mr Firth this was only a preliminary skirmish, and 
 the chief fighting took place after Cromwell had crossed the Burn and 
 when the two armies were face to face on the same side of it.— Mr Firth's 
 paper will be found in the Transactions of the Royal Hist. Soc, New 
 Series, Vol. xiv.
 
 Chap iy] Scotland and the Commonwealth 359 
 
 way of easy escape to the south It was at the sight of this 
 spectacle that Cromwell uttered the fervent ejaculation which 
 tradition has attributed to him, "The Lord hath delivered 
 them into our hands." 
 
 On Tuesday morning shortly before sunrise the English 
 began the attack by an attempt to cross the stream where it 
 approaches Broxmouth House. Under a plashing rain the Scots 
 had spent an anxious and miserable night, having twice been 
 disturbed by a false alarm that the enemy was upon them. 
 Towards daybreak the rain ceased, and as the English came 
 on the two opposing hosts were able to mark each other's 
 movements. A detachment of English horse, supported by 
 two regiments of foot, succeeded after a brief struggle in securing 
 the passage of the Burn, and Cromwell was thus enabled to 
 transport his entire force and place it in front of the Scots, 
 wedged between the hill and the Burn. After a month's 
 manoeuvring in sight of each other the two armies at length 
 stood face to face. The chances of the battle that was now 
 inevitable were decidedly against the Scots. In his cramped 
 position Leslie had no scope to make such dispositions as his 
 skill and experience might have suggested. His army was 
 nearly double that of the enemy, but by successive "purgings," 
 the last of which had been effected the very night before the 
 battle 1 , it had been drained of much of its best blood. 
 Drenched and hungry, moreover, the Scots were not in the 
 temper of men who win battles. Yet, under these disadvan- 
 tages certain regiments made a stand that might have given a 
 different turn to the day had all fought like them. Lambert 
 attacking the Scottish horse was beaten back, and Monk had 
 the same experience with the Scottish infantry. It was only 
 when Cromwell himself came up at the head of three regiments 
 of foot and one of cavalry that the line of the Scots was 
 broken. Two regiments of their foot "fought it out manfully," 
 and "were all killed as they stood." But the majority did not 
 1 Nicoll's Diary (Ban. Club), p. 28.
 
 360 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 behave so heroically; many of them surrendered, and still 
 more fled, casting away their weapons before they had well 
 begun to use them. It was as the sun broke on the hopeless 
 rout that Cromwell took up the Psalmist's pious exclamation, 
 " Let God arise, let His enemies be scattered." His veterans, 
 remembering the tedium of the last month, were nothing loth 
 to execute the injunction. It was in their headlong race from 
 the field that the Scots received their deadliest punishment. 
 By the close of the day between three and four thousand of 
 them had fallen, and about ten thousand were prisoners \ Of 
 these last half were sent to their homes in such a condition 
 of body that they were never likely to fight again. The other 
 half were conveyed to Durham and Newcastle, thence to be 
 shipped to New England. Half-starved by the way, while 
 penned in a garden at Morpeth, they ravenously devoured cab- 
 bages to appease their hunger, with the result that they died by 
 scores. During the voyage to New England scurvy wrought 
 further havoc among the miserable band, and it was but a 
 remnant that reached the Puritan settlement. 
 
 The disaster at Dunbar was the ruin of the Argyle Govern- 
 ment, and the ruin, also, of that national party which had 
 brought forth the Covenants of 1638 and 1643. Cromwell's 
 victory gave him the immediate possession of Edinburgh and 
 Leith and a permanent footing in the country. Often in the 
 past the stubborn resolution of the Scots had prevailed against 
 their old enemy in even greater extremities ; but, as the nation 
 now stood, successful resistance was impossible. By the over- 
 throw at Dunbar that party among the ministers and the people 
 at large who had denounced the acceptance of a malignant 
 king grew at once in vehemence and numbers. As leaders 
 they had Johnston of Warriston, the most rigid of lay Cove- 
 nanters, and two fiery ministers, James Guthrie of Stirling and 
 Patrick Gillespie of Glasgow. In a document entitled "Causes 
 of a solemn publick humiliation upon the defeat of the army," 
 1 Cromwell stated that he lost only twenty men.
 
 Chap, iv] Scotland and the Commonwealth 361 
 
 they enumerated under thirteen heads the various national 
 offences, adjuring the people to lay to heart their late chasten- 
 ing 1 . Still more notable, as opening a new chapter in Scottish 
 ecclesiastical history, was the " Remonstrance" presented 
 (October 30) to the Committee of Estates, then sitting at 
 Perth. After an unflinching arraignment of the whole policy 
 of the Government, the "Remonstrants" or "Protesters," as 
 they were thenceforward to be called, rejected Charles as their 
 king till he had given satisfactory evidence " of the reality of 
 his profession 2 ." Nor was this manifesto a mere idle threat. 
 The Remonstrants had behind them all the south-western 
 shires, and an armed force besides under the command of 
 Colonel Gilbert Ker and that Colonel Strachan who had made 
 such speedy work of Montrose. 
 
 Between the Remonstrants, on the one side, and the party 
 of the king, on the other, Argyle thus found 
 himself in a dilemma with which his character 
 and his methods were but ill-fitted to cope. By a further purg- 
 ing of the king's household (Sept. 27) the Committee of Estates 
 had sought to conciliate the extremists, but the Remonstrance 
 had been the answer to the concession. The Remonstrants 
 being thus irreconcilable and thus formidable, there was but 
 one course open to Argyle and his supporters — to identify them- 
 selves with the king's party and make common head against 
 Cromwell and Remonstrants alike. To secure the firm alliance 
 of Argyle, Charles had made sufficiently alluring offers : lie had 
 promised to make him a duke and a Knight of the Garter, 
 and had even held out the inducement that he would make one 
 of Argyle's daughters his queen. Support was lent to these 
 advances by the fact that in the Highlands there was a con- 
 siderable body of Royalists under the command of Major 
 Middleton, who were ready at the fitting moment to strike for 
 their king. A singular escapade on the part of Charles was the 
 immediate cause of Argyle's decisively breaking with the 
 1 Pelerkin, Records, pp. 600-1. '-' Ibid. pp. 604 608.
 
 362 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Remonstrants and identifying himself with the Royalist party. 
 Disgusted with the renewed purging of his household, Charles . 
 rode off from Perth on the afternoon of the 4th of October with 
 the intention of joining his friends. A ride of forty-two miles 
 found him at night-fall "in a nasty room, on an old bolster above 
 a mat of sedges and rushes, overwearied and very fearful 1 " 
 The affair had, in fact, been misarranged ; and Charles on the 
 third day was induced to reappear in Perth, where the Com- 
 mittee of Estates was now sitting. The "Start," as this 
 adventure was quaintly called, precipitated the unhallowed 
 union between Malignant and Covenanter. On November 4th 
 an arrangement was made at Strathbogie with the Royalists of 
 the north; and on the 25th the Committee of Estates passed a 
 resolution condemning the Remonstrance — a resolution 3 which 
 received the approval of the Committee of the Kirk. The 
 Estates, which met on the 26th, completed the strange amal- 
 gamation. The Act of Classes was practically abolished, the 
 door was thrown wide open to every type of Malignant, and it 
 was resolved that Charles should receive his crown on the 1st 
 of January, 1651. 
 
 On the 1st of January, 165 1, Charles was duly crowned at 
 Scone 3 , and thus, by the strangest irony of destiny, 
 1651 a people which had embraced Calvinism as its 
 
 national religion and regarded John Knox as its national hero 
 received as its king a born cynic, sceptic, and voluptuary, to 
 whom duty and religion were inconceivable ideas, and whose 
 sole aim was to make life a pleasant promenade, with as little 
 detriment to the happiness of others as was consistent with his 
 own. Nor, as the events of the ensuing months proved, was 
 Charles to be any longer a mere king of straw. It was Argyle 
 who had placed the crown on the king's head; but by the 
 
 1 Balfour, IV. 112-5. 
 
 2 Hence the name " Resolutioners,"the party opposed to the " Protesters" 
 
 or " Remonstrants." 
 
 3 There was no anointing, but Charles had once more to subscribe the 
 
 Covenants.
 
 Chap, iv] Scotland and the Commonwealth 363 
 
 relaxation of the Act of Classes Charles received such an 
 accession of Royalist supporters that the power of Argyle was 
 in large measure gone. A Parliament which sat in May 
 formally rescinded the Act of Classes, and ordered the levy of 
 an army of which David Leslie was to be commander-in-chief, 
 and the Royalist Middleton his master of horse. 
 
 The only open enemy whom Charles had to encounter was 
 Cromwell, for on December 1st of the preceding 
 year the forces of the Remonstrants under 
 Colonel Ker had been crushed at Hamilton by Major-General 
 Lambert. In the course of the past year, however, Cromwell 
 had materially strengthened his position, and was now master 
 of the whole country to the south of the Forth. In June he 
 began operations against Leslie, who had taken up his position 
 near Stirling, but again that wary leader foiled all his attempts 
 to force on an engagement. At length, by the end of July, 
 Cromwell directly brought on the issue which was to decide 
 the fate of the two kingdoms. A force despatched by him to 
 Fife routed a body of Scots at Inverkeithing, and he himself 
 crossing to Burntisland made his way to Perth. The enemy 
 being now behind them, Charles and his advisers took a 
 desperate resolution, which yet may have been the most 
 prudent in the circumstances. On the 31st of July the 
 Scottish army began its march southwards with the hope, 
 forlorn, as it proved, that in England the Royalists would flock 
 to the side of their king. Cromwell had anticipated the move- 
 ment and swiftly made his arrangements to meet it. Monk 
 was left to take care of Scotland ; Lambert was despatched on 
 the track of the enemy ; and he himself followed with the 
 remainder of his army. Exactly one year from the day of 
 Dunbar Drove (September 3rd), Cromwell finished the work 
 of which that day had been the beginning. His overwhelm- 
 ing victory at Worcester, his " crowning mercy," laid Scotland 
 at his feet, and shortened the reign of Charles by other nine 
 years.
 
 3 04 The Crown and the Kirk (Book vi 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 SCOTLAND UNDER THE COMMONWEALTH AND 
 PROTECTORATE, 1651 — 1660. 
 
 The losses which Scotland had sustained at Worcester 
 would effectually have prevented her from inter- 
 
 1651-1 52 f er f n g i n the affairs of England for many years to 
 come ; but, hostile as all her parties were towards the victors, 
 the chiefs of the Commonwealth deemed it politic to take 
 measures against every possible contingency. They determined 
 that by force or brotherly kindness Scotland should become an 
 integral part of the Commonwealth of England. At no period 
 of her history had the country presented an easier prey to 
 conquest. Her two armies had been annihilated at Dunbar 
 and Worcester, and the three parties— Royalists, Resolutioners, 
 and Protesters — into which her people was divided, were more 
 disposed to fly at each other's throats than to make common 
 cause against the invader. Even before the news of Worcester 
 reached him, Monk, whom Cromwell had left behind him in 
 Scotland, had made considerable progress with the work of 
 subjugation. On August 14 he had taken Stirling, where he 
 found the Chair of State, the royal robes and public records, 
 all of which symbols of independence, he, like Edward I, 
 despatched at once to London. A fortnight later, while he 
 was engaged in storming Dundee, a detachment of his cavalry
 
 Chap, v] The Commonwealth and Protectorate 365 
 
 swooped on the Committee of Estates, then sitting at Alyth in 
 Angus, and thus at one stroke deprived the country of its 
 nominal government. On September 1st Dundee was captured 
 after a massacre of the citizens which recalls the exploit of 
 Edward I at Berwick-on-Tweed. By the close of the year, 
 St Andrews, Montrose, Aberdeen, and Inverness had opened 
 their gates, and in February, 1652, even the far Orkneys were 
 in possession of the conqueror. Monk being forced to leave 
 the country on account of ill-health, Major-General Richard 
 Deane was charged with the completion of his task. By the 
 month of May the only stronghold that held out for Charles 
 was Dunottar Castle on the coast of Kincardine. Here for 
 safety had been conveyed the last symbols of independence — 
 the Regalia of Scotland, consisting of crown, sceptre, and 
 sword of State. On the 25th Dunottar also surrendered, 
 though by the courage and ingenuity of two women the 
 precious symbols were saved. Only one prominent personage 
 maintained a show of independence in the country — the 
 Marquis of Argyle; but the invasion of his territory by Colonel 
 Lilburne, an officer of Deane's, brought him also to terms. By 
 an agreement signed between him and Deane on August 19 
 he became at least a nominal supporter of the English su- 
 premacy'. 
 
 Simultaneously with the work of conquest, measures were 
 being taken for the government of the country 2 . 
 In the spring of 165 1 the English Council of 
 
 1 Firth, Scotland and (he Commonwealth (Scot. Hist. Soc), pp. xx 
 xxiii. 
 
 - For the following account (in great part new) of the Cromwellian Union 
 I am indebted to the great kindness of Mr C. Sanford Terry, Lecturer on 
 History at the University of Aberdeen. Mr Terry placed at my disposal 
 his Introduction to a volume on the Cromwellian Union which he is 
 engaged in editing for the Scottish History Society, and it is from this 
 Introduction that 1 have drawn the narrative in the text. The documents 
 about to be published l>y Mr Terry are mainly from manuscripts in the 
 possession of his Grace the Duke of port land.
 
 366 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 State appointed four Commissioners to proceed to Scotland to 
 administer that part of the country which had been secured by 
 Cromwell after the battle of Dunbar. The disastrous defeat of 
 the Scots at Worcester necessitated a more comprehensive 
 arrangement. As the result of that defeat all Scotland came 
 under the power of the English Parliament. Any arrangement 
 that might be made, therefore, must be such as would be 
 adequate to the needs of the whole nation. 
 
 In October a new body of Commissioners, eight in number, 
 was entrusted with the task of carrying out the wishes of the 
 Parliament with regard to the conquered country. Among the 
 eight were Monk, Lambert, Deane, Sir Harry Vane, and the 
 Chief Justice, Oliver St John. After Worcester the first idea 
 of the Parliament was to convert Scotland into a province of 
 England, but in a formal Declaration, in which the scope of 
 the Commission was defined, it announced a more generous 
 policy. The first place in the Declaration was given to religion. 
 It was to be the prime task of the Commissioners to see that 
 the Gospel was preached, and that liberty of worship should 
 be secured to the whole people. As to the form of government 
 that was to be set up, it was to be understood that Scotland 
 and England were to be made into one Commonwealth with 
 all convenient speed. In consideration of the "vast expenses 
 and damages " which the Commonwealth of England had in- 
 curred through the action of Scotland, the Commissioners were 
 empowered to exact an adequate compensation. The estates 
 of those who had taken part in the Duke of Hamilton's expe- 
 dition into England, or who had in any way assisted Charles II, 
 were to be confiscated — an exception being made in favour of 
 such as had not borne arms against the Commonwealth. In 
 the case of the nation at large, all were to enjoy the privileges 
 of English subjects who would accept the government about to 
 be imposed on them. Finally, a special inducement was offered 
 to all vassals who would give their submission to the new 
 authority. If they would accept the protection of the Com-
 
 Chap, v] The Commonwealth and Protectorate 367 
 
 monwealth they should be allowed to retain their lands on 
 conditions that would enable them " to live with a more com- 
 fortable subsistence than formerly." Such were the general 
 conditions on which the Commonwealth proposed to settle the 
 government of the country that was now at their feet. 
 
 On January 15th, 1652, the Commissioners took up their 
 quarters at Dalkeith and at once proceeded to 
 carry out their private instructions. Their first 
 step was to issue a proclamation annulling the authority of 
 Charles, and to order the destruction of all the insignia of 
 royalty in the public places in Edinburgh. The " Declaration" 
 of the English Parliament was next laid before the country. It 
 was coupled with an order that revealed the intentions of those 
 who had drafted it. The burghs and shires were charged to 
 elect representatives with powers to signify their assent to a 
 union between the two countries. Left to its own free will, 
 the country would assuredly have rejected the overtures of the 
 Commonwealth with indignation. But, as things now stood, it 
 was the least evil alternative to accept conditions which could 
 not make worse the existing situation. In January an assess- 
 ment was imposed on every county for the maintenance of the 
 English soldiery, and the tax was to be levied so long as 
 resistance should continue In these circumstances it was 
 highly desirable that a firm and settled government should be 
 established which would relieve the nation from an intolerable 
 burden. It was doubtless in this hope that the constituencies 
 responded to the charge to send representatives who might 
 have the opportunity of asserting their grievances as well as of 
 stating their opinion regarding the " tender " of union. On the 
 appearance of the Deputies in the beginning of February, three 
 conditions were laid before them. They must accept the 
 tender of union ; they must give in their submission to the 
 Commonwealth ; and they must pledge themselves to assist in 
 giving effect to its scheme for amalgamating the two countries. 
 The unanimity with which the conditions were accepted was so
 
 368 The Crown mid the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 far encouraging to the promoters of union. Forty-four burghs 
 out of fifty-eight, and twenty-eight shires expressed their assent 
 to the Commonwealth's proposal. 
 
 These preliminaries settled, two of the English Com- 
 missioners, Vane and Fenwick, carried their 
 
 1652— 1653 ' ' 
 
 report to the Parliament in London. A new 
 "Declaration" was the result. On April 21 the Scottish 
 burghs and shires were called upon to re-elect representatives 
 who should choose twenty-one Deputies to discuss the terms 
 of the proposed union in London. Out of eighty-five con- 
 stituencies sixty sent representatives, who duly chose the 
 twenty Deputies. The Deputies arrived in London in the 
 first week of October, and conferences at once began regarding 
 the Bill for union which had already made some progress 
 through the House. It was the conviction of the statesmen 
 of the Commonwealth that in offering union at all they were 
 conferring an undeserved favour on an insignificant and un- 
 grateful nation. In summoning Deputies from Scotland, 
 therefore, they had no intention of allowing them a determining 
 voice on the conditions of union which they were prepared to 
 offer. The Deputies had in fact been summoned simply to 
 supply information which might be necessary in constructing 
 the Act. The most important question connected with the 
 proposed union of the Scottish and English Parliaments was 
 the relative representation of the two countries. The Deputies, 
 when asked for their opinion, suggested that Scotland should 
 be assigned the same number of representatives as it sent to its 
 own Parliament. In support of this demand they pointed out 
 the great service that Scotland had done to the English Par- 
 liament in its conflict with Charles I. But for that service, 
 they justly urged, victory must have gone to the king in the 
 late civil war. Their demand was rejected as preposterous, 
 and they were requested to state what representatives they were 
 prepared to accept. Thus browbeaten the Deputies abated 
 their demands. England and Wales, they said, sent four
 
 Chap, vj The Commonwealth and Protectorate 369 
 
 hundred members to the English Parliament, and as Scotland 
 sent one hundred and twenty to hers, they could not ask less 
 than a representation of sixty in the united Parliament. This 
 demand was likewise considered exorbitant : in England, they 
 were told, representation was based on population and taxable 
 values, and on these principles Scotland could not be allowed 
 more than thirty members. It was now the beginning of April, 
 1653, and more than six months had elapsed since the Scottish 
 Deputies had come to London on their futile errand. Through- 
 out the whole period there had been increasing friction between 
 Cromwell and the Long Parliament, and on April 20 occurred 
 the famous scene of its dissolution. Meanwhile, therefore, the 
 business of the union had to wait till the new Parliament could 
 take up the work of its predecessor. 
 
 While the Long Parliament had been considering the 
 scheme of union, it had taken efficient measures for the 
 government of the conquered country. For the maintenance 
 of public order the English garrison was the sufficient instru- 
 ment , but the administation of justice was the crying need of 
 the people. Since Cromwell's invasion in July, 1650, the Privy 
 Council and the Court of Session had ceased to discharge their 
 judicial functions 1 . The manner in which the government of 
 the Commonwealth remedied this evil is its chief glory in its 
 dealings with Scotland. Seven Commissioners, four English 
 and three Scots, were charged with the double function of 
 administering justice and of visiting the universities. The 
 efficiency and impartiality of these judges was a new experience 
 in a country where the delay and miscarriage of justice had 
 come to be accepted as inherent in the nature of things; and it 
 was a Scottish judge of the following century who denied them 
 any credit for virtue on the ground that they were "kinless 
 loons." By these seven Commissioners, supported by an 
 armed force of less than 10,000 men, the government of the 
 country was administered till July, 1655. 
 
 1 Nicoll's Diary, 
 b. S. 11. 24
 
 370 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 The Commonwealth had thus accomplished whot had 
 
 baffled two of the most powerful of English 
 1652— 1653 . x ° 
 
 kings — Edward I and Henry VIII. Scotland 
 was at length under English domination — subjugated, pacified, 
 and submissive. Weary of the unrest of recent years, the 
 Scottish Commons showed little or no restiveness under the 
 yoke of their ancient enemies. This acquiescence was doubt- 
 less partly due to the fact that the chiefs of the nobility were 
 either in exile or in the hands of the English; and that the 
 clergy, their other leaders in the past, were at furious strife 
 among themselves. Since the battle of Worcester, Resolution- 
 ers and Protesters, in spite of the disappearance of the king, 
 who had been the original cause of their quarrel, had been 
 carrying on their battles with increasing bitterness and in- 
 tolerance — each claiming to be the true inheritors of the two 
 historic Covenants. From a Church so divided the invaders 
 had little to fear, but to prevent all possibility of mischief they 
 took the most effectual means in their power: on July 20th, 
 1653, they broke up a General Assembly which had met in 
 Edinburgh, and forbade all such assemblies in future — a pro- 
 ceeding, says a contemporary Presbyterian historian, in which 
 "they did no bad office 1 ." 
 
 On the meeting of Barebones' Parliament in July, 1653, 
 the consideration of the union was again re- 
 sumed. It was the first Parliament in which 
 English, Scotch, and Irish members sat side by side. But if it 
 was an unsatisfactory body as representative of England, it 
 was ludicrous so far as it concerned Scotland. Out of its one 
 hundred and forty members five only were Scotch, and these 
 were simply the nominees of Cromwell and his supporters. In 
 the midst of its bickerings with its chief, however, it found 
 time to carry the business of the union one step further. On 
 
 1 Kirkton, The Secret mid True History 0/ the Church of Scotland 
 (edited by C. Kirkpatrick Sharpe), p. 54.
 
 Chap, v] The Commonwealth and Protectorate 371 
 
 October 4 there was laid before the House, " An Act of the 
 Parliament of the Commonwealth of England for the Uniting 
 and Incorporating of Scotland into one free State and Com- 
 monwealth with England." A week later the Act was read a 
 second time, but its further progress was summarily cut short. 
 On December 12, Barebones' Parliament came to an end, and 
 on the 1 6th Cromwell was declared Lord Protector. 
 
 No one had been more set upon union than Cromwell, and 
 
 it was to be the work of his Protectorate to carry 
 
 1654 
 
 it into effect. In the "Instrument of Govern- 
 ment," by which he had been appointed Protector, definite 
 arrangements were made for the representation of Scotland in 
 his first Parliament. It was to be represented by thirty mem- 
 bers, the distribution of w T hose seats was to be determined by 
 the Protector and a majority of his Council. In view of the 
 approaching Parliament the Council of State now addressed 
 itself to the task of finally settling the terms on which England 
 and Scotland were to be made one State. On April 12, 1654, 
 the Council produced the famous " Ordinance of Union " in 
 which it defined the relations which were thenceforth to hold 
 between the two countries. Scotland, the ordinance declared, 
 was to make one Commonwealth with England, and was to be 
 represented in the common Parliament by thirty members. 
 The Scottish arms were to be quartered with those of the 
 English Commonwealth, and the seals of all public bodies 
 were to be engraved accordingly. 
 
 Between the passing of the Ordinance of Union and the 
 meeting of the Union Parliament important events took place 
 in Scotland. Since the summer of 1652 the Royalists had been 
 endeavouring to effect a rising in favour of Charles. In the 
 Lowlands this party could reckon on no very wide and ardent 
 support, but in the Highlands the standard could always be 
 raised for the king. The war of the Commonwealth with 
 Holland in 1653 created a favourable opportunity for a rising, 
 and throughout that year there were gatherings in the Western 
 
 24 2
 
 372 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Highlands which gradually grew more formidable. The Earl 
 of Glencairn, supported by Lord Kenmure, was the principal 
 leader, and he was joined by Lord Lome in spite of the 
 denunciation of his father, the Marquis of Argyle. While the 
 bands in the Highlands raided the neighbouring Lowlands, 
 mounted men, known as " moss-troopers 1 ," gave serious an- 
 noyance to the Government in almost every part of the 
 country. But the efforts of the Royalist leaders were crippled 
 by their own dissensions, and it was not till the arrival of 
 Middleton (February, 1654) with a Commander-in-chief's com- 
 mission from Charles, that decisive and vigorous action became 
 possible. Meanwhile the Government had realized the extent 
 of its danger. In April Colonel Lilburne, who had succeeded 
 Deane in the command of the English forces, was displaced by 
 Monk, who was charged with the task of repeating the work he 
 had so effectually accomplished three years before. 
 
 The first act of Monk was to announce the elevation of 
 Cromwell to the Protectorate of England, Scotland, and 
 Ireland, and to declare that thenceforward there was to be 
 one Parliament for the three countries in which Scotland was 
 to be represented by thirty members. Alluring promises fol- 
 lowed regarding the happy conditions that were to attend 
 the new order. There was to be free trade between the two 
 countries; taxation was to be strictly proportional to the 
 comparative resources of Scotland; heritable jurisdictions 
 were to be abolished and baron courts were to be set up ; 
 and, as a proof of the benevolent intentions of the new 
 Government, free grace and pardon were offered to the whole 
 people except in the case of the most heinous offenders. 
 Monk then turned to the main business on which he had 
 come, and within little more than three months he had 
 accomplished it. Cutting off Middleton's communications 
 with the Lowlands, he sought him in the fastnesses of the 
 Highlands, and by unsparing destruction of every means of 
 1 They were also known as "Tories."
 
 Chap. yJ The Commonwealth and Protectorate 373 
 
 sustenance, strove to force him either to fight or disperse 
 his following. One brief encounter brought the war to an 
 end. At Dalnaspidal, at the head of Loch Garry, Middleton 
 was caught by Colonel Morgan, one of Monk's most capable 
 officers, and received so severe a check that he could not 
 again make head against the forces of the Government. 
 Thenceforward, till the close of the second Protectorate, no 
 serious revolt disturbed the peace of the country. By means 
 of important forts erected at Leith, Perth, Inverness, Inver- 
 lochy, and Ayr, and over twenty smaller ones in different parts 
 of the country, by an extensive system of spies and by a 
 strict police, any attempt at a rising could be suppressed 
 with a swiftness and precision which left little chance of a 
 successful issue. 
 
 Before the defeat of Dalnaspidal the machinery for the 
 election of Scottish members for the common 
 Parliament had already been set in motion. ' 54 
 
 So little interest was taken in the elections that nine out of 
 the thirty constituencies which had received the privilege of 
 representation failed to return a member. Moreover, of the 
 twenty-one members elected a large number were civil or 
 military officials in the service of the Commonwealth. The 
 Parliament met on September 3, but it found more pressing 
 business to occupy it than the question of Union ; and it was 
 not till the 22nd of December that an Act was introduced 
 confirming the ordinance of the Council of State. Within 
 less than a month the Parliament was dissolved, and thus 
 for the third time the Act of Union had failed to secure the 
 sanction of the State. 
 
 The second Protectorate Parliament did not meet till 
 September, 1656, but in the interval a new 
 arrangement was made for the government of 
 Scotland, which remained in force till the close of the Pro- 
 tectorate. In place of the eight Commissioners who had 
 hitherto directed affairs a Council of State was appointed to
 
 374 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 sit in Edinburgh. It was to consist of eight members (of 
 whom two were Scots) with a President and a chief clerk, 
 and its function was to attend exclusively to affairs of State. 
 Seven Commissioners (of whom three were Scots) were likewise 
 appointed to superintend the administration of justice. The 
 duties of the Council were to be sufficiently onerous. They 
 were not merely to do their best to promote good government 
 and to conserve the union : they were to see that the Gospel 
 was freely preached, that schools and universities were put on 
 a satisfactory basis, that disaffected magistrates were removed 
 from their offices, that justice was righteously administered, 
 and that trade was encouraged and the revenue carefully 
 fostered. The Council arrived in Edinburgh on September 
 12, 1655. By its first actions it sought to conciliate the 
 goodwill of the country. Since 1652 the burghs had been 
 practically debarred from electing their own magistrates, but 
 the privilege was now restored on the condition that the 
 persons elected should swear allegiance to the Protector. 
 Hitherto, also, persons who prayed publicly for Charles had 
 been subjected to pains and penalties. The prohibition was 
 now tentatively removed, and apparently with the result that 
 except by ingenious circumlocution the exiled king was left 
 unprayed for in public. 
 
 The second Protectorate Parliament met on September, 
 1656. On this occasion Scotland sent its full 
 complement of thirty members, but again the 
 majority were English officials or Scotsmen bound by ties of 
 interest to the Protector. In the new Parliament the question 
 of the union received more attention than in any of its pre- 
 decessors ; and on April 28, 1657, the Ordinance of April, 
 1654, was converted into an Act by the sanction of the 
 House. It was five years since the Long Parliament had 
 formulated its " Declaration concerning the Settlement of 
 Scotland," and four Parliaments in succession had dealt with 
 the question.
 
 Chap, v] The Commonwealth ami Protectorate 375 
 
 The Parliament that passed the Act of Union was dissolved 
 in February, 165S; and Cromwell died in the 
 following September. In the Parliament sum- 
 moned by his son Richard Scotland was again represented, 
 but on this occasion by only twenty-one members instead of 
 its prescribed thirty 1 . If Scotland showed itself indifferent 
 to the union, the treatment which its representatives received 
 in London was not fitted to increase their enthusiasm for it. 
 The House had scarcely sat before the question was raised 
 whether the Scottish members had any right to be there. The 
 objection raised was not on the ground of the illegality of the 
 union but on the plea that they were the nominees of the 
 Government. The debate continued for several days, and 
 lively speeches were made by both parties in the House. " The 
 Scottish members," said one speaker, are "a wooden leg tied 
 to a natural body." When the vote was at length taken, the 
 Government carried the day ; by two hundred and eleven to 
 one hundred and twenty it was decided that Scotland was 
 legally represented by its existing members. One month later 
 the last Protectorate Parliament was dissolved, and the return 
 of the Long Parliament reopened the whole question of the 
 union. 
 
 The attention of the resuscitated Parliament was called to 
 the question by a special petition from certain of the Scottish 
 Deputies. It was under the auspices of the Long Parliament 
 that the policy of union had been organised, and it was quite 
 prepared to resume that policy at the point where it had left off. 
 The petition of the Scottish Deputies was remitted to the Council 
 of State, which on July 27, 1659, produced a "Bill of Union 
 of Scotland with England." It was twice read in the House in 
 the course of one week, but the passing of the Bill was delayed 
 by a difficulty which had all along been the chief hindrance 
 to effectual union. In the arrangements hitherto made for 
 
 1 In the House of Peers, Scotland was repn sented l>y ih<_- Earl *>f 
 CassillU, Sir William Lockart of Lee, and Warriston.
 
 376 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 uniting the two countries it had been expressly provided that 
 there should be liberty of conscience and freedom of worship. 
 To Presbyterians of every shade of opinion such toleration 
 was a mere device of Satan for the destruction of true religion. 
 There could be but one true creed and one divinely-sanctioned 
 Church polity, and to allow other creeds and other polities was 
 to open the flood-gates to infidelity and antinomianism. From 
 the first, therefore, the Presbyterians had been hostile to the 
 union mainly because it was identified with the detested 
 principle of toleration. But, as the complaints of the Pres- 
 byterians themselves testify, there were numerous sectaries 
 in the country who had profited by the immunity from perse- 
 cution which the union had brought to them. It was now 
 the dread of these sectaries that the clamours of the Pres- 
 byterians might induce the Long Parliament to withhold 
 the toleration in its impending Act of Union. The delay 
 occasioned by this difficulty was fatal to the Bill. On October 
 13, 1659, the Long Parliament was dissolved, and the Bill 
 never reached its third reading. 
 
 During nine years the Commonwealth and the Protectorate 
 had successively attempted to effect that union between the 
 two countries which for more than a century far-seeing men 
 had declared to be in the best interests of both. The circum- 
 stances in which the attempt had been made were singularly 
 unfavourable to its successful consummation. A subjugated 
 country was not likely to respond to the most generous dictates 
 of its conqueror, and the conditions of union proffered by 
 Commonwealth and Protectorate were not generous. More- 
 over, the state of men's minds in both countries was not such 
 as to dispose them to look to those wider national interests, 
 the consideration of which eventually produced the union of 
 1707. The dominating ideas in the minds of the leaders of 
 both nations were such as bore on Church and religion ; and, 
 while these ideas held the first place, a union between Scotland 
 and England was impossible. It was through the gradual
 
 Chap, v] The CommojiivealtJi and Protectorate 377 
 
 growth of the secular spirit, evolved from irreconcilable con- 
 tradictions, that the two nations came to realise that their 
 destinies lay together. Nevertheless, abortive as were the 
 Cromwellian attempts at union, they were at least of good 
 augury for the future, and they were not without determining 
 influence on the day when the two nations finally joined hands 
 and accepted common burdens. 
 
 The fall of the Long Parliament involved a revolution in 
 Scotland. On November 15 representatives from the burghs 
 and shires assembled in Edinburgh at the summons of Monk ; 
 and it was significant of the change that was coming that one 
 of their two presidents was that Earl of Glencairn whose 
 rising in favour of Charles it had been Monk's task to sup- 
 press. The representatives were told by Monk that he was 
 about to march into England with the intention of restoring 
 the liberties of the three nations, and that it would be their 
 duty to maintain public order during his absence. On December 
 13 the Commissioners of the Shires had a last meeting with 
 him at Berwick, when they besought him to make provision 
 for the preservation of peace till a settled Government should 
 be established in the country, now without a head. It is 
 noteworthy that even now there were many in Scotland who 
 were still desirous of a union, though on conditions more 
 favourable to the poorer nation. In February, 1660, the 
 Conventions of the Shires and Burghs met in Edinburgh and 
 appointed a joint commission to represent them in their future 
 dealings with England. In a petition sent to Monk by the 
 Committee they suggested the desirability of union, but a 
 union on terms which would bring equal advantages and 
 privileges to both countries. The course taken by Monk, 
 however, was to lead to far other issues than those contem- 
 plated by the petitioners. The restoration of Charles not only 
 cut off all prospects of immediate union, but deprived Scotland 
 of those privileges of trade of which it had complained as 
 insignificant, but which it was so bitterly to regret in the years
 
 378 The Crozvn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 that were coming. Scotland was now to have Parliaments of 
 its own, but Parliaments which met only to register the decrees 
 of its restored king. With what feelings the English domina- 
 tion had been regarded by the body of the people it would be 
 hard to say. One fact, however, is certain — never under any of 
 her kings had peace and order and justice been so successfully 
 maintained in Scotland as under Cromwell's Protectorate. The 
 saying of one of his officials may be a slight exaggeration, yet 
 it could not have been far from the truth. "A man may ride 
 over all Scotland with a switch in his hand and a hundred 
 pounds in his pocket, which he could not have done these five 
 hundred years." The well-known words of Burnet may also 
 go beyond the mark, yet they are in a large degree borne out 
 by actual facts. "There was good justice done," he says, 
 "and vice was suppressed and punished; so that we always 
 reckon those eight years of usurpation a time of great peace 
 and prosperity 1 ." What is singular is that the spiritual con- 
 dition of the country gave profound satisfaction to the straitest 
 of Scottish Presbyterians. All through these years Protester 
 and Resolutioner never ceased from their futile strife, and even 
 carried their mutual recriminations to Cromwell in London ; 
 yet of this period a contemporary Presbyterian historian could 
 write as follows. " I verily believe there were more souls 
 converted to Christ in that short period of time, than in any 
 season since the Reformation, though of triple its duration. 
 Nor was there ever greater purity and plenty of the means of 
 grace than was in their time 2 ." 
 
 From this pleasant picture of material and spiritual pros- 
 perity one serious abatement has to be made. In spite of the 
 promises of the Protectorate Government, the exactions requisite 
 to support it were specially distasteful to a people who had 
 never paid taxes without grudging even to the most popular 
 
 1 Burnet, Hist, of His Own Time, I. 104-5. 
 
 2 Kirkton, pp. 54-5.
 
 Chap, vj The Commonwealth and Protectorate $79 
 
 of their native princes. Nevertheless, in the days that were 
 coming the Scottish people with few exceptions were to have 
 ample cause to look back with regret to the rule of Cromwell's 
 military saints. When, on the ist of January, 1660, Monk 
 crossed the Border to accomplish the restoration of the House 
 of Stewart, it was the opening of the most pitiful chapter of 
 the national history.
 
 3 8o The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 CHARLES II, l660— 1685. 
 
 I. Administration of Middleton — The Re- 
 establishment of Episcopacy. 
 
 At the restoration of Charles II in 1660 exactly a hundred 
 years had elapsed since Protestantism had displaced Roman 
 Catholicism as the national religion of Scotland. During that 
 period the country had been ruled by three sovereigns, all of 
 whom had placed themselves in direct opposition to the type of 
 doctrine and Church government which had the approval of the 
 most energetic and most intelligent part of the nation ; and to 
 this opposition it was mainly due that two of these sovereigns 
 had lost their thrones and their lives. During the same period 
 there had been radical changes in Church and State, and there 
 had been more than one civil war and more than one revo- 
 lution. The last development in this eventful history had been 
 the loss of national independence, the disappearance of the 
 native line of princes, and the domination of a foreign power. 
 Of these momentous results there had been one efficient cause : 
 people and prince respectively held convictions regarding their 
 mutual relations which rendered a common understanding
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 381 
 
 impossible. On the one hand, the ruler held that he had 
 a divine right to impose his will on the subject ■ on the other, 
 the majority of the people held as immoveably that there was 
 but one religious creed and polity which had the sanction of 
 Heaven, and which, therefore, they had the indefeasible right 
 to impose both on their rulers and the whole of the nation. 
 Before a stable Government was possible, therefore, it was in 
 the nature of things that one party or the other must give way, 
 or that there should be such a compromise on both sides as to 
 afford a common ground of harmonious action. Had the 
 contentions of a hundred years brought home this conviction 
 to the Scottish people and to the king who was now about to 
 resume the throne of his fathers? The course of the new 
 reign was to prove that neither had yet learned the lesson, 
 and that one more stage of national development was necessary 
 before the long travail should end. 
 
 According to the testimony of all contemporary historians, 
 the great majority of the Scottish nation sincerely 
 rejoiced in the restoration of Charles II. The 
 nobles and gentry had certainly excellent reason to be gratified 
 at his return. During the English domination they had been 
 effaced, proscribed, and heavily burdened; and they testified 
 their joy and confidence by flocking to the king's feet to 
 proclaim their privations and sue for his favours. Of the two 
 sections which divided the Church — the Resolutioners and the 
 Protesters — the former, who composed the majority, hoped the 
 best of a king who had sworn to both Covenants, while the 
 latter made no pretence of looking for redemption from one 
 whom they had distrusted from the first. For the mass of the 
 people, who cared little for the Covenants or divine right, 
 the Restoration, with its promise of happier days for the natural 
 man, appears to have been an unmingled joy. 
 
 The first act of Charles in his government of Scotland 
 showed that he meant to follow in the footsteps of his father 
 and grandfather : he nominated his l'rivy Council before calling
 
 382 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 a meeting of Parliament, which had a constitutional claim to be 
 heard in the election of the great officers of State. Some 
 of the councillors chosen had once been on the side of the 
 Covenant, but none were admitted who had not given proof of 
 their attachment to the Crown. The Earl of Glencairn, who 
 had raised the standard for Charles during the Protectorate, 
 was appointed to the Chancellorship. The Presidency was 
 given to the Earl of Rothes, whose father had been one of the 
 leaders of the revolt against Charles I, but who himself, as we 
 shall see, was of another mould and held very different opinions. 
 Following the precedent set by James VI, Charles arranged 
 that a section of the Council should sit in London in immediate 
 communication with himself, and that a part of this section 
 should consist of Englishmen, of whom the most notable chosen 
 was Edward Hyde, soon to be Earl of Clarendon. Specially 
 to be remarked among the councillors, however, was the Earl 
 of Lauderdale, who had been a champion of the Covenant and 
 one of its lay representatives in the Westminster Assembly, 
 but had done ample atonement by his nine years' imprison- 
 ment since his capture at Worcester. The post that Lauderdale 
 chose for himself was that of Secretary to the Council, the 
 importance of which had been shown in the case of the Earl 
 of Stirling during the reign of Charles I. The advantage the 
 post brought to its holder was that it at all times gave him the 
 king's ear. How Lauderdale used the advantage, the next 
 seven years were to show. 
 
 Charles's choice of his Privy Councillors showed that he 
 meant to make no compromise with the Cove- 
 nanters ; and a decisive action that followed 
 proved this still more plainly. On July 8, the Marquis of 
 Argyle, who had gone to London to seek an interview with the 
 king, was arrested in the presence-chamber and committed to 
 the Tower. A few days later an order went down to Scotland 
 for the apprehension of Johnston of Warriston, who postponed 
 his fate for three years by escaping to France.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 383 
 
 At the close of July there was as yet no ostensible Govern- 
 ment in Scotland. The new Privy Council was 
 still with the king, and a meeting of the Scottish 
 Parliament had not even been summoned. As a substitute for 
 these two bodies a curious arrangement was made. That 
 unfortunate Committee of Estates, which Monk had so adroitly 
 kidnapped at Alyth in 1651 1 , was ordered to meet in Edin- 
 burgh and to transact such business as demanded immediate 
 attention. The Committee sat on the 23rd of August with 
 Glencairn as president, and speedily found work to its hands. 
 On the very day on which they themselves met, and in a house 
 almost next door to their own place of meeting, a small 
 body of Protesters had assembled with the object of drafting 
 a document for the perusal of Charles. The Committee well 
 knew that nothing that might come from Protesters would be 
 acceptable to Charles, and they acted promptly. They at once 
 gave orders that the whole party should be seized and consigned 
 to the castle. One only escaped, and among the prisoners 
 was Mr James Guthrie, minister of Stirling, the most ardent of 
 the Protesters and the most honest though most impracticable 
 of men. The next day the Committee issued the first of the 
 endless proclamations that were to follow against "all unlawful 
 and unwarrantable meetings and conventicles... without his 
 Majesty's special authority." These proceedings were disquiet- 
 ing to Resolutioners and Protesters alike, but the former were 
 reassured by a letter from his Majesty which reached the 
 Presbytery of Edinburgh on September 3rd. In this letter 
 occurred an oracular sentence which men construed according 
 to their hopes and fears : " We do also resolve to protect and 
 preserve the government of the Church of Scotland, as it is 
 settled by law, without violation 2 ." The events of the next 
 
 1 S< C IXJl/Cy PP. .',64-S. 
 
 '-' Wodrow, Sufferings of the Church </ Sco//a/t<i, 1. 65—81, where the 
 original documents are given.
 
 3S4 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 twelve months were fully to elucidate the import of these 
 words'. 
 
 On January 1, 1661, a Scottish Parliament met after an 
 interval of nine years. "Never any Parliament," 
 we are told by a contemporary loyalist, " was so 
 obsequious to all that was proposed to them,"and for the sufficient 
 reason, that after the methods devised by James VI a careful 
 process of selection had been applied to all its members 2 . The 
 person chosen to represent his Majesty was that John Middleton, 
 now Earl of Middleton, who had once been a Covenanter, but 
 had subsequently done good service for Charles at Worcester 
 and in the Highland rising against the Government of Cromwell. 
 Under his presidency this famous Parliament diligently sat 
 till the 1 2th of July, producing a tale of no fewer than three 
 hundred and ninety-three Acts. Of these Acts several were 
 well calculated to give satisfaction to the country at large. 
 The privileges of numerous burghs were confirmed ; an issue 
 of copper coins for the benefit of the poor was ordained; 
 and Acts were passed against the profanation of the Sabbath 
 I and against swearing and excessive drinking. But it was not 
 such legislation that made this Parliament memorable in the 
 national history: it was the succession of Acts which in the 
 course of a single session restored that absolute monarchy 
 which James VI had bequeathed to his successor as his un- 
 happy legacy. With the king, it was enacted, lay "the sole 
 choice and appointment " of all the great officers of State, the 
 right of summoning and dissolving Parliaments at his pleasure, 
 of making war and peace and concluding leagues and treaties. 
 
 1 In December of 1660 "107 hogsheads, 12 chests, 5 trunks and 4 
 barrels" of Scottish documents, which had been sent to London by Monk 
 in 1651, were shipped for Scotland. On the way 85 hogsheads were lost 
 by the wreck of the ship that bore them. 
 
 2 Mackenzie, Memoirs of the Affairs of Scotland (edit. 1821), pp. 12, 
 19. This, it is to be noted, is the "Bluidy Mackenzie" of Covenanting 
 tradition. 

 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 385 
 
 In the oath of allegiance that was to be exacted from all 
 persons in offices of trust all these Acts were summarily com- 
 prehended : the king, it was declared, is " supreme Governor 
 of this Kingdom over all persons and in all causes." All had 
 now been done that could secure to the new king the absolute 
 control over the goods, bodies, and souls of his subjects ; but 
 the most sweeping Act of all was yet to come. By a general 
 Rescissory Act the proceedings of every Parliament since 1633 
 were at one stroke declared null and void — those of 1641, in 
 which Charles I was present, along with the rest. To put the 
 seal to its enthusiastic loyalty, this remarkable Parliament voted 
 an annual grant of ,£40,000 sterling to his Majesty — a burst of 
 generosity "which became the ruin of this Kingdom 1 ." 
 
 Before the Parliament rose, the great Marquis of Argyle 
 had been sent to his account. He had been brought down 
 from London in the preceding December in company with 
 Sir John Swinton, who had been conspicuous as one of Crom- 
 well's judges. Swinton made his peace with the authorities ; 
 but from February to May Argyle had to face a trial before 
 judges who meant that it should have but one issue. The 
 charge on which he was condemned was his compliance with 
 the Government of Cromwell; and the proof of this compliance 
 was supplied by Cromwell's own representative in Scotland, 
 Monk — an example of baseness which staggered even the 
 public men of that day. " It was not thought safe he should 
 live," says Baillie ; and what Argyle had been in the past and 
 might still be in the future might well give some disquiet to 
 a Government which had no root in the best feelings of the 
 people. He had been his country's sagest statesman in the 
 time when it most needed guidance, but by the part he played 
 
 1 It was known as the "Drunken Parliament." The correspondence in 
 
 laderdale Papers proves that the Scottish statesmen of the Restoration 
 
 drank to excels. Thus, we find Lauderdale reproving Rothes for his 
 
 drinking habits, and Richard Uaxter rebuking Lauderdale for the same 
 
 vice.— I. 319, in. 235. 
 
 B. S. II. 
 
 25
 
 386 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 in the controversy between Protesters and Resolutioners he had 
 forfeited the respect of both, and it was only by the manner of 
 his death that he recovered it. In his life he had shown him- 
 self lacking in moral as well as physical courage, but at the 
 last (May 24) his religion and his sense of personal dignity 
 nobly sustained him. " I could die as a Roman," he said as 
 he was led to the scaffold, "but choose rather to die as a 
 Christian." Four days later he was followed by two Protesters, 
 James Guthrie and Captain William Govan. 
 
 The ground having been cleared by Parliament, the Privy 
 Council now addressed itself to the completion 
 of the work that had been so energetically begun. 
 It met at Holyrood on July 13th, and on September 6th made 
 a notable announcement to the country. In the previous 
 September, we have seen, Charles had told his Scottish subjects 
 that he meant to preserve the Church as it was "settled by 
 law." What that phrase meant could no longer be doubtful : 
 the Rescissory Act had effaced the last twenty-eight years ; and 
 the Church "settled by law" could mean only the Church as 
 established by James VI and confirmed by his son. This, 
 therefore, was the announcement now made by the Privy 
 Council ; and no time was lost in giving it effect 1 . In December 
 four bishops were sent up to England to receive consecration, 
 that they might communicate this virtue to their brethren in 
 Scotland. Among the four were two men who might fitly 
 symbolise the mixture of the earthly and the divine that has 
 ever mingled in the Christian Church — James Sharp and 
 Robert Leighton— the one the most worldly of ecclesiastics, 
 the other rather a Christianised philosopher than a Christian 
 theologian. In the ecclesiastical revolution Sharp had been 
 a principal agent 2 . Minister of Craill in Fife, he had identified 
 himself with the Resolutioners, and had successively repre- 
 
 1 Wodrow, I. 230, where Charles's letter directing the Council is given. 
 
 2 This is proved by Sharp's letter to Middleton [Land. Papers, 11., 
 App. f>).
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 387 
 
 sented their interests with Cromwell, Monk, and Charles. In 
 March, 1661, he had written: "But if a change (of Church 
 government) come, I make no question it will be grievous and 
 bring on suffering upon many honest men, in which I would be 
 very loath to have any hand 1 ," but by December he was Arch- 
 bishop of St Andrews and Primate of Scotland. A more 
 unfortunate instrument to commend bishops to reluctant Pres- 
 byters could not well have been chosen. 
 
 It only remained for the Parliament to ratify the work of 
 the Council, and this it duly accomplished in 
 the course of its second session (May 8 — 
 September 9, 1662). Its first Act re-admitted the bishops to 
 its sittings, and its third restored them to their "accustomed 
 dignities, privileges and jurisdictions 2 ." To another Act may 
 be definitely traced the beginning of those religious troubles 
 that give its character to Charles's reign. The Parliament of 
 1649 had abolished lay patronage; and many of the existing 
 ministers now held their charges direct from their congre- 
 gations and presbyteries. It was now enacted (June n) that 
 all such persons should before the 20th of September receive 
 presentation from their lawful patrons and collation from their 
 bishops, or demit their cures'. It was left to the Privy Council 
 to outrun the Parliament. By the 20th of September few or 
 none of the ministers in the diocese of Glasgow had sought 
 their patrons and their bishops. To bring these persons to 
 reason, therefore, the Council, sitting in Glasgow on the 1st of 
 October, ordained that, if the recalcitrant ministers did not 
 conform to the law by the 1st of November, their parishioners 
 should cease to acknowledge their ministers, and refuse to pay 
 them their stipends 4 . The councillors had been led to believe 
 
 1 ib. 1. 89. ■ Acts of Pari, of Scot., VII. 370, 372. 8 id. 376. 
 
 4 Wodrow, 1. 2S2-2S.'„ where the Act is given. The Act was procured 
 by Alexander Burnet, Archbishop of Glasgow [Laud. Papers, ill. 51). 
 The majority of the Council are said to have been drunk when it was 
 passed. 
 
 25—2
 
 388 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 that some few ministers might be found to sacrifice their livings : 
 in point of fact between two and three hundred, or about 
 a third of the whole ministry, chose to follow their consciences. 
 Convinced of its folly, the Council subsequently extended the 
 day of grace till the ist of February, 1663. 
 
 Meanwhile the legislators were falling out among them- 
 selves — Middleton heading one party, and Lauderdale the other. 
 From the beginning there had been a" struggle between these 
 two men for the first place in the conduct of Scottish affairs ; 
 and by two Acts passed in the late session of Parliament 
 Middleton had sought to effect the ruin of his rival. By one of 
 these Acts it was made compulsory for every person holding 
 office to declare that the two Covenants were unlawful and 
 seditious 1 . Lauderdale had been a Covenanter and was known 
 still to have Presbyterian leanings, but he cynically exclaimed 
 that he would sign a cartful of such oaths before he would lose 
 his place 2 . The other Act recoiled on its author and proved 
 his own ruin. From an Act of Indemnity, passed in the same 
 session, Middleton proposed to exclude twelve persons, who 
 should be incapable of holding public office— the twelve to be 
 determined by a ballot of the House. As the business was 
 managed by Middleton, Lauderdale was to be one of those 
 proscribed, but Lauderdale was too quick for his enemy. 
 Before the Act had reached the king, Lauderdale had con- 
 vinced him of the absurdity and enormity of Middleton's 
 proceeding. In December Middleton found it necessary to 
 proceed to London "to maintain his own declining interest 3 " 
 
 an errand which his rival was also to defeat. So far as 
 
 Scotland was concerned, his career was at an end; and the 
 management of the country passed into other hands. 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., VII. 406. 
 
 2 Mackenzie, 65. 
 
 3 j p , 75-77. Mackenzie was one of Middleton's agents in the business.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 389 
 
 II. Administration of Rothes — The Pentland 
 
 Rising. 
 
 So far as legislation could make him, Charles was now 
 
 absolute master of his northern kingdom. Par- 
 
 . . 1663 
 
 liament, in the words of a loyalist historian of 
 
 the period, was " his baron court " ; and the Privy Council, 
 together with the bench of bishops, was solely made up of his 
 nominees, bound to do his bidding or to give way to others 
 more compliant. It remained to be seen how such a Government 
 would be received by the people at large. The chief person 
 who was to be responsible for its administration was the 
 secretary, Lauderdale, who by the part he played in the last 
 years of his life stands forth as one of the most singular per- 
 sonages in the national history. Huge in bulk, with red hair 
 and bloated face, and a tongue too big for his mouth, he 
 possessed a mind and character in keeping with his external 
 appearance. With brutal force, unblushing cynicism, and great 
 capacity for affairs, he combined a passion for learning that did 
 not desert him in the most critical periods of his public life 1 . 
 Middleton being gone, Lauderdale came down to Scotland in 
 May to direct the business of the third and last session of the 
 Restoration Parliament. Though he was its moving spirit, 
 however, the commissionership was assigned to a tool of his 
 own, the Earl of Rothes, an illiterate debauchee, but, by the 
 admission of Burnet, of "quick apprehension, with a clear 
 judgment*." In the eyes of both, the summoning of Parlia- 
 ment was a pure matter of form, as its only function would 
 be to confirm any measures that might be laid before it. It 
 met on June 18th, and its first Act restored the method of 
 electing the Lords of the Articles which had been introduced 
 
 1 "Send with him [Dunfermline]," he writes (10th July, 1663), "my 
 little octavo Hebrew Bible without points." Land. Papers^ I. 157. 
 
 2 Burnet, 1. 175-
 
 390 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 by James VI. An Act for a national synod of the Church and 
 another for the raising of a militia of 20,000 foot and 2,000 horse 
 then followed ; but the former of these never took effect, and 
 for excellent reasons. Far otherwise was it to be with the Act 
 "against separation and disobedience to ecclesiastical authority," 
 which imposed heavy fines on absentees from the parish 
 churches, and which came to be known by the significant 
 name of the "Bishops' Drag-net 1 ." The history of the re- 
 mainder of Charles's reign is in large degree the history of the 
 attempts of the Government to enforce this Act. 
 
 While Parliament was still sitting, Johnston of Warriston 
 was sent the way of Argyle and Guthrie and Govan (July 22). 
 Kidnapped in France by the emissaries of Charles, he was 
 brought to Scotland and put through the form of a trial. On 
 the principles of the Restoration no one deserved death more 
 than he, since among all the leaders who had defied Charles I no 
 one had been more uncompromising or more eminent by word 
 and deed. But he was now a wreck in body and mind, and 
 his execution was justified by no such apprehensions as made 
 the removal of Argyle an act of policy. He was the fourth and 
 last victim of the Restoration in Scotland: in England the 
 number of victims was fourteen. 
 
 Parliament was dissolved on October 9th ; and Charles and 
 his advisers meant that it should not soon have 
 a successor. It was fitting, Lauderdale (speaking 
 through Rothes) suggested, " that this Kingdom return to the 
 good old form of government by his Majesty's Privy Council 2 " ; 
 and, in point of fact, from 1662 onwards it was the Privy 
 Council that conducted the business of the country. Now, as 
 in the years that were to follow, that business mainly consisted 
 in drafting and enforcing penal statutes of progressive severity 
 against religious recusants. In the beginning of 1663 the Council 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., VII. 449, 4^5) 480, 455- 
 
 2 Laud. Papers, 1. 172.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 391 
 
 dealt with a matter which had been the source of mingled 
 satisfaction and chagrin to Charles's servants in Scotland. In 
 the session of 1662 the Parliament had passed an Act of 
 Indemnity from which three classes of persons had been ex- 
 cluded. There were those such as Argyle and Warriston, whose 
 exclusion meant death ; and there were those twelve persons 
 noted above, who were to be incapacitated from holding offices 
 of trust. But there was a third and larger class, amounting to 
 between eight and nine hundred, who were to benefit by the 
 Act of Indemnity only on paying fines proportioned to their 
 rank and estate. In the imposition and exaction of these fines 
 Middleton and his friends had so directly consulted their own 
 interests that it was one of the main causes of the change of 
 Government which had been effected by Lauderdale. In these 
 circumstances, and while Middleton was still fighting with 
 Lauderdale's interest in London, the Council saw fit to delay 
 the further exaction of the fines till a more convenient season. 
 In this year, also, began that struggle between the Privy 
 
 Council and the religious recusants which with 
 
 . 1663 
 
 little intermission was to last through the reign 
 
 of Charles and his successor. The struggle had begun with 
 the ejection of those ministers who held their charges without 
 presentation from lay patrons. It was mainly in the south- 
 western counties that these ejections had been found necessary ; 
 and it was with these counties, from the first, that the Govern- 
 ment had its principal difficulties. The loss of their ministers 
 roused the deepest feeling on the part of the great majority of 
 their parishioners ; and a proceeding that was forced on the 
 Government by its own policy intensified this feeling to 
 exasperation. To supply the places of the ejected ministers, 
 strangers were thrust on the congregations, to whom they could 
 only be a laughing-stock when they were not the objects of bitter 
 dislike. It is not necessary to believe all the contemporary 
 stories of these "King's Curates," as they came to be called ; 
 but, in the case of such a large body of men suddenly enlisted
 
 392 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 as divines, it is certain that many must have been ludicrously 
 unfit for their new functions'. From the past history of the 
 western counties, the Council had good reason to anticipate 
 that its edicts would not be received with exemplary submission. 
 It was in these counties that the opposition to the " Engage- 
 ment" had issued in the open rebellion which had been crushed 
 at Mauchline; and it was here, also, that the Protesters had 
 been able to raise a formidable force to dispute the policy of 
 Argyle and the Resolutioners. So little obedience did they 
 now show to the ban laid on their ministers that in August the 
 Council passed an Act with such precipitation that they over- 
 looked the geographical limits of the country. Under the 
 penalty of sedition the ejected ministers were forbidden to 
 reside within twenty miles of their parishes, six miles of Edin- 
 burgh or any cathedral church, or three miles of any royal 
 burgh 2 — conditions, says Wodrow, which "the nicest geo- 
 grapher " would have found it hard to satisfy. 
 
 It was by the imposition of fines that the Council sought 
 to break the spirit of the recusants, and it had an instrument 
 ready to hand for giving effect to its policy. We have seen that 
 an Act had been passed by the late Parliament for the raising 
 of a force of 22,000 foot and 2,000 horse. This complement 
 was not raised, but a sufficient number were levied for the im- 
 mediate purposes of the Government. Wherever special trouble 
 arose, a detachment of these troops was promptly quartered, 
 and carried out its orders with thoroughness and precision. 
 The curate supplied the commanding officer with the names of 
 the absentees, who were straightway mulcted in proportion to 
 their condition and estate. When the fines were not forth- 
 coming, the soldiers were quartered on the delinquents at the 
 pleasure of their commander and till other parts of the country 
 required their presence. Of the money thus raised it is sufficient 
 
 1 The Earl of Tweeddale, writing to Lauderdale, describes them as 
 "insufficient, scandalous, imprudent fellows." — Laud. Papers, II. 207. 
 
 2 Act in Wodrow, 1. 340-1.
 
 Chap. viJ Charles II 393 
 
 to say that it paid the expenses of the troops and was a con- 
 siderable source of income to impecunious Royalists. 
 
 According to a statesman of the time, two-thirds of the 
 business of the country now related to the affairs 
 of the Church. To relieve the Council of some x 4 
 
 of its duties, therefore, the Primate Sharp made an unhappy 
 suggestion : this was to revive the Court of High Commission, 
 which had been one of the devices of James VI to enforce his 
 ecclesiastical notions on his reluctant subjects. The history 
 of that institution, both in Scotland and England, might have 
 warned Sharp that he was furbishing a rusty and dangerous 
 weapon. With the approval of king and Council, however, 
 the Commission was established on January 16, 1664, to 
 continue during his Majesty's pleasure 1 . Like the previous 
 Court under James VI, it failed to effect the end for which it 
 had been created : its petty oppressions only steeled the hearts 
 of the recusants, and, detested even by the law-abiding subjects, 
 it fell into abeyance within less than two years. 
 
 The Court of High Commission was directed against existing 
 offenders, but the old offenders during the great revolt were 
 also made to feel that their offences were not forgotten. We 
 have seen that the mulcting of those excluded from the Act of 
 Indemnity had been postponed during his Majesty's pleasure. 
 At length, in September, 1664, it was announced to the denoted 
 persons, between eight and nine hundred in all, that their 
 prescribed fines must be forthcoming by a given date under the 
 pain of sequestration and imprisonment The returns from 
 these fines, it was declared, were to be devoted to the relief of 
 reduced loyalists who had suffered during the pre-Restoration 
 troubles — a promise somewhat imperfectly fulfilled 8 . 
 
 These repressive measures affected only a minority, though 
 a resolute and formidable minority of the people. 
 But since the Restoration there had supervened x 5 
 
 1 Act in Wodrow, 384 5. 
 
 - ib, 3<^y 9, where the warrant is given.
 
 394 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 a state of things in which every section of the community had 
 to bear its own burden. The annual grant of ,£40,000 to the 
 Crown would have been a heavy drain on the resources of the 
 country at the most flourishing period of its history; but 
 circumstances at this time made the burden intolerable. The 
 abolition of free trade with England had closed the market for 
 Scottish corn and cattle ; but far more deadly to Scotland was 
 Charles's war with Holland, which, beginning in 1664, lasted 
 with little intermission for the following ten years. For 
 centuries Holland had been the main outlet for Scottish 
 exports, and the closing of the Dutch ports was a calamity 
 of national magnitude. So vehement was the general feeling 
 against the Dutch War that the Government found it necessary 
 to take a novel step. The malcontents of the south and 
 west, it was feared, would seize the opportunity of effecting 
 a rising in connection with a Dutch invasion ; and to prevent 
 such a disaster the Council issued an order for the disarming 
 of the discontented districts. 
 
 The anticipated rising came at last, but neither in concert 
 
 1666 w * th the Dutch > nor on a scale sufficiently for- 
 
 midable to be a serious danger to the Govern- 
 ment. Through the spring and summer of 1666 the severities 
 exercised against the malcontents surpassed the record of all 
 previous years. For the exaction of the indemnity fines, soldiers 
 were quartered in the houses of the denoted parties till the 
 last penny was paid. A new occupation, moreover, was found 
 for the military, which was to make them an increasing terror in 
 the years that were to come. On the ejection of the ministers, 
 the more devoted of their flocks had at first met in private 
 houses to hear the words which were forbidden in church. 
 But with spies on every hand no roof was safe; and now 
 began those gatherings, known as field-meetings or conventicles, 
 the story of which is one of the great traditions of the Scottish 
 people. In a letter to Lauderdale, Rothes himself describes 
 how these conventicles were held. The audience, composed
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 395 
 
 of men and women, met by the side of a morass or a river 
 remote from their homes. The preachers were disguised, some 
 of them, he says, even wearing masks ; and all around watchers 
 were placed to give warning of the approaching enemy. So 
 secretly were the gatherings held, he adds, that it was difficult 
 to hear anything of them till all was over 1 . To prevent 
 such meetings — schools of sedition as the Government con- 
 sidered them — now became the special work of a soldiery who 
 had their own share of the fines imposed on such persons as were 
 taken 2 . On the temper produced by these dealings we have 
 a significant commentary by Burnet, Archbishop of Glasgow. 
 "The least commotion in England or Ireland, or encouragement 
 from foreigners abroad," he says, " would certainly engage us 
 in a new rebellion 3 ." 
 
 Among the military commanders who had carried out the 
 
 edicts of the Government, Sir James Turner had 
 
 . . 1666 
 
 been the most conspicuous. Thrice he had 
 
 visited the disturbed districts and on each occasion had made 
 his visit memorable 4 . On November 15, 1666, he was in 
 Dumfries on the third of his errands, when a party of Galloway 
 men surprised the town and made him their prisoner. That 
 they spared his life is proof that they were not a gang of 
 desperadoes. Having gone thus far, however, they could not 
 turn back. In the hope of gathering strength they marched 
 into Ayrshire, and finally at Lanark took the desperate reso- 
 lution of marching on Edinburgh. Their numbers amounted to 
 about 3000, but "neither armed nor ordered 3 ." The conditions 
 of their march were fitted to damp the most ardent zeal. It 
 
 1 Laud. Papers, I. 233-4. 
 
 2 The soldiers' share of the fines was known as "riding-money."— 
 Wodrow, 11. 1 :• 
 
 3 Laud. L'afxrs, I. 215, note. 
 
 * A specimen of Turner's methods will be found in the Laud. Papers, 
 11. 8:. 
 
 3 Wodiuw, 11. 26.
 
 396 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 was winter, it rained incessantly, and the roads were all but 
 impassable. On their track were the troops of the Govern- 
 ment, led by Sir Thomas Dalziel, a name of horror to Pres- 
 byterian Scotland. They received no accessions by the way, 
 and there was frequent defection. Thrice they were offered 
 a vague promise of pardon if they would lay down their arms, 
 but they resolutely held on their way. They had been led to 
 believe that Edinburgh was favourably disposed to them, and 
 it was not till they reached Colinton, about three miles west of 
 the capital, that they were convinced of the hopelessness of 
 their errand. 
 
 Dalziel was now close upon them, and their own safety lay 
 in swift retreat. As their safest and most direct route to the 
 west they took their way across the Pentland Hills, and en- 
 camped near Rullion Green on their southern slopes (Nov. 28). 
 There had come a sudden change in the weather; it was 
 " a fair and frosty day," and the hills were covered with snow 
 which had fallen thickly during the preceding night. Their 
 commander, Colonel Wallace, was an officer of skill and ex- 
 perience, and he disposed his men, now under 900, with an 
 eye to the attack that might come at any moment. On his 
 right and left wings he stationed his horse, the left under 
 Major Learmont being greatly the stronger. Between the 
 wings he placed his unarmed foot, who could be of no service 
 in the event of a battle. 
 
 These arrangements had hardly been made when a body 
 of horse was seen approaching across the hills from the 
 north. It was the van of DalziePs army, which was speedily 
 joined by the main body. As the two hosts first came face 
 to face, they were separated by a hollow which necessitated 
 a change of position before the action could commence. 
 DalziePs first movement was to despatch a body of horse 
 against the enemy's left wing. This was the strongest part of 
 the insurgent army, and the attack was stoutly met. Both sides 
 having discharged their pieces, they closed at the sword's point,
 
 Chap. viJ Charles II 397 
 
 with the result that the Royalists gave way, and escaped heavy 
 loss only because the ground did not permit effective pursuit. 
 Encouraged by this advantage, Wallace, with such foot as were 
 at his disposal, marched against the main body of Dalziel's 
 horse, who withdrew to a neighbouring ridge, awaiting the 
 arrival of their infantry. As the two armies now stood, 
 Wallace, retaining his original arrangement, occupied the ridge 
 known as Rullion Green, and Dalziel the skirts of the same 
 rising ground. Dalziel was the first to begin the attack. Twice 
 he despatched a body of horse against Wallace's left wing, and 
 twice the attack was repulsed. A third attempt was more 
 successful, and while Learmouth was yielding ground a simul- 
 taneous onset on Wallace's right decided the fate of the day. 
 Their left wing hopelessly broken, the main body of the 
 insurgents were swept away by a general charge of the Royalists. 
 It was already nightfall, and in the darkness most of the 
 fugitives made good their escape. On neither side had the 
 loss been heavy. Of the insurgents some fifty had fallen, and 
 about the same number had been taken. The loss of the 
 Royalists was even less. 
 
 The severities that followed the Pentland Rising form one 
 of the blackest chapters in the national history. Again it was 
 the Privy Council that was responsible for the atrocious policy 
 which was adopted, and which within a few months was con- 
 demned in the interests of the Crown itself. In the case of 
 certain members of the Council, genuine terror may have been 
 the motive of their callousness. The success of the great 
 rebellion against Charles I was a terrible precedent which 
 could never be forgotten ; and, in the estimation of these 
 councillors, any policy was justifiable that might avert such 
 another calamity. But in the case of such men as the Com- 
 missioner Rothes, if we are to judge them by their own words, 
 it was in sheer levity of heart that they addressed themselves 
 to their revolting task. 
 
 in addition to the fifty prisoners taken on the field of
 
 s. 
 
 398 The Crown and tJic Kirk [Book vi 
 
 battle some thirty more were given in by the people of the 
 neighbourhood, who showed little sympathy for their unhappy 
 countrymen. The majority of the prisoners were huddled 
 into the " Haddock's Hole," a part of the High Church of 
 Edinburgh, those of higher rank being bestowed in the 
 Tolbooth. Their fate was in the hands of the Council, the 
 proceedings of which showed that it would have no leanings 
 to lenity. It was an unhappy fate that at such a crisis its 
 President should be the chief ecclesiastic in Scotland, the 
 Primate Sharp. Of all the members of the Council it was 
 believed that none was more eager for rigorous measures than 
 he. He was even accused of an action which would make 
 him responsible for the severest measures of the Council. 
 Charles, it was said, had written expressly to the Council 
 desiring that no blood should be shed on account of the 
 Pentland Rising, and Sharp had kept back the letter 1 . 
 
 Out of seventy prisoners, ten of the most conspicuous were 
 selected for immediate trial, the Council charging the Lord 
 Advocate, Sir George Mackenzie, to prosecute for the Crown. 
 Their trial raised a question which Mackenzie has noted as 
 one of curious interest in his time. For the accused it was 
 argued that they had surrendered to quarter ; that the officers 
 to whom they surrendered represented the Crown ; that in the 
 time of Charles I quarter was recognized as safeguarding life ; 
 and finally that, if the accused had not surrendered, it would 
 have gone worse with the king's own soldiers. The argument 
 for the Crown was simple and decisive ; the prisoners had 
 been taken in the act of rebellion, and the quarter granted to 
 them only applied to the moment. The trial had been but 
 a necessary form, and all ten were hanged — each bearing his 
 own testimony to the justice of his cause. A week later 
 (December 14) another band of five underwent the same fate. 
 
 1 The main authority for this story is Burnet, who is pot a satisfactory 
 witness when Sharp is concerned.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 399 
 
 Even more odious than the executions was the application 
 of torture, which became the frequent practice of the successive 
 Governments of Charles II. The application of torture was 
 a perfectly legal proceeding, but since the Union of the Crowns 
 it had been seldom put in practice and only in extraordinary 
 cases. The Privy Council claimed the sole right of applying 
 it 1 , and it was its unwritten law that all its members should 
 be present when it was applied. It was significant of the 
 temper of the Restoration statesmen, therefore, that they so 
 lightly enforced a practice which their predecessors abhorred. 
 The special form of torture applied was the Boot — a wooden 
 frame fitted with iron spikes which were driven into the victim's 
 foot by successive blows of a hammer 2 . It was professedly 
 the conviction of the Council that the Pentland Rising was 
 the result of a deliberate conspiracy to overthrow the Govern- 
 ment ; and they selected two victims whom they believed to be 
 among its prime movers. One of those victims, Hugh M'Kail, 
 holds a high place in the martyrology of Scotland. He was 
 a youth of attractive appearance, of high attainments, and 
 a born apostle. He underwent the torture with rapturous 
 courage, and when he stood on the scaffold there was not 
 a dry eye in the crowd. 
 
 The bloody assize was not confined to Edinburgh. At 
 Glasgow four persons were executed for having taken part 
 in the Pentland Rising, and at Ayr a much larger number 
 were condemned to the same fate. Simultaneously with the 
 executions, fines and confiscations were rigorously enforced 
 on all who were proved or suspected to have abetted the 
 insurgents. It was these exactions, even more than the public 
 
 1 On one occasion Charles I proposed to grant the right of torture to 
 another body, when the Council protested that it was their peculiar privi- 
 lege, and that it would he imprudent to extend it. 
 
 2 The thuinh-screw was another favourite instrument of torture. It did 
 not come into use, however, till 1684. — Note to Hay Fleming's edition of 
 1'atrick Walker's Six Saints of (he Covenant (Lond. 1901), II. 130.
 
 400 The Croivn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 executions, that embittered the men of the west against the 
 Government. In many cases the money and lands extorted 
 from suspected persons went to civil and military officials, who 
 had thus an evil interest in raising ill-founded accusations. 
 A brutal levity characterised the actions of the highest and 
 the lowest officers of State. None went with more zest into 
 the work of hanging, fining, and banishing " such rebellious 
 traitors " than the Commissioner Rothes. " This day in 
 Council," he wrote to Lauderdale, " there is [sic] nine more of 
 the rebels that we have ordained immediately to go to trial, so 
 that next week they go to pot 1 ." 
 
 During the opening months of 1667 Sir Thomas Dalziel, 
 the hero of Rullion Green, was entrusted with 
 the task of extinguishing the spirit that had 
 prompted the Pentland Rising. The Government was happy 
 in the choice of its instrument. Dalziel had seen service in 
 Muscovy and had a simple belief in the Divine right of kings. 
 He even surpassed the expectations of his employers. His 
 instructions were to fine every suspected person, and, if the 
 fines were not forthcoming, to quarter his soldiers on the 
 parties till they were "eaten up." So thoroughly did Dalziel 
 accomplish this task and so convincing were his methods, that 
 the people of the west began to think kindly of his predecessor, 
 Sir James Turner. But the same year saw a decisive change 
 in the policy of the Government; and again the change was 
 due to the rivalries of statesmen. In the previous year Rothes 
 and Sharp had caballed against Lauderdale, their former patron, 
 with the object of securing the direction of affairs to them- 
 selves. The cabal had a temporary success, and during the 
 closing months of 1666 Sharp was the most powerful person 
 in the country. But, by the fall of Clarendon, Sharp lost his 
 main supporter at the English Court, and the Pentland Rising 
 did not commend his administration to Charles. Lauderdale 
 
 1 Lauderdale Papers, I. 254 et seq. A very necessary change is made 
 in Rothes' spelling.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 401 
 
 again triumphed, and his influence was immediately seen in 
 a more conciliatory policy towards the religious recusants. In 
 August the army was disbanded ; in September Rothes ceased 
 to be Commissioner '; and in October came a proclamation of 
 indemnity for the I'entland Rising. As a security that these 
 concessions would not be abused, a " bond of peace," which 
 virtually implied the utmost limit of passive obedience, was 
 to be exacted from all who had been accessory to the late 
 revolt. 
 
 III. Administration of Lauderdale. — Bothwell 
 
 Bridge. 
 
 During the next twelve years Lauderdale was the person 
 mainly responsible for the government of the country. What 
 his grand aim in that government was, we have already seen : 
 it was, in his own words, to make Charles master "in all causes 
 and over all persons." In what spirit he carried out his work 
 he has likewise told us in one of his letters to Charles: "The 
 whole course of my life," he wrote, "shall be to obey you in 
 your own way 2 ." Yet, in point of fact, throughout the whole 
 term of his administration, Lauderdale was virtually his own 
 master, and his powers were those of a satrap rather than those 
 of a constitutional minister. 
 
 The 1'entland Rising had proved that the severities of 
 Rothes and Sharp had been a blunder, and 
 Lauderdale began his administration with milder _ 
 
 methods. Sir James Turner and Sir William Bellenden, the 
 two military agents of the late Government, were disgraced; 
 and on June 7, 1669, was issued what is known as the First 
 Letter of Indulgence; allowing such ejected ministers as had 
 
 1 Rothes was made Chancellor to the chagrin of Sharp, who desired 
 the office that hud been held by his predecessor Spottiswoode. 
 
 2 Laud. Papers, 11. 158, in. 3. 
 
 u. S. 11. 26
 
 402 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 lived "peaceably and orderly" to reoccupy their churches if 
 they happened to be vacant 1 . The acceptance of the In- 
 dulgence meant the acceptance of Episcopacy and the 
 ecclesiastical supremacy of the Crown ; and only about forty- 
 two of the ejected ministers succumbed to the temptation, 
 while those who stood fast were only hardened in their re- 
 cusancy. To what the reconciled ministers had committed 
 themselves was seen in a measure of the Parliament that met 
 in October, with Lauderdale as king's commissioner. By 
 an Act of November 16, it once more declared in set terms 
 that the king possessed "supreme authority and supremacy 
 over all persons and in all causes ecclesiastical 2 ." To the 
 consternation and indignation of Lauderdale and Charles the 
 Government now received a rude blow from the house of its 
 friends. In a document, authorised by the Episcopal Synod 
 of Glasgow, and drafted by Archbishop Burnet, it was roundly 
 affirmed that the late Indulgence had been granted against the 
 interests and desires of the Church, and that as a result of the 
 Government policy the religious condition of the country was 
 more unsatisfactory than ever 3 . The Episcopal remonstrants 
 were as summarily dealt with as their Presbyterian brethren : 
 before the close of the year Archbishop Burnet was removed 
 from his see by the express command of the king. 
 
 Lauderdale's experiment of a milder policy was not of long 
 
 duration. Between the Government and the re- 
 '670 
 
 cusant minority, in truth, no compromise was 
 possible. On the day when Charles should abolish bishops 
 and permit free General Assemblies, the western Whigs would 
 become his law-abiding subjects, but till that day they would 
 be irreconcileable. The result of the late Indulgence had 
 been that conventicles had become more numerous than ever \ 
 and, what was specially ominous, those who attended them 
 
 1 Wodrow, II. 130. 
 
 2 Acts of Pari, of Scot., VII. 554. 
 
 a The "Remonstrance" is given in the Laud. Pagers, II App. p. lxiv.
 
 Chap. viJ Charles II 403 
 
 began to carry weapons together with their Bibles. By what 
 he called "a clanking Act " against conventicles, passed in the 
 second session of the new Parliament, Lauderdale definitely 
 announced that he had reverted to the policy of Rothes ; and 
 thenceforward every year of his administration was marked by 
 increasing severity. An attempt made by Leighton, now 
 Commendator of the see of Glasgow, to reconcile all parties 
 only served to reveal their hopeless differences. To Leighton 
 these differences seemed only "a drunken scuffle in the dark 1 "; 
 but though this might be the view of a saint, the man who 
 held it could only beget impatience in those who deemed that 
 the battle they were fighting was the supreme struggle between 
 God and Satan. To Presbyterian and Episcopalian alike, 
 therefore, his proposed "accommodation," as it was called, 
 was a miserable compromise which would give away the 
 essential principles for which they existed. 
 
 An event in Lauderdale's private life had an important 
 influence on his public career. In 1672 he 
 married as his second wife Lady Dysart, widow 
 of Sir Lionel Talmash, a woman of domineering character, 
 ambitious, able, and fond of display. If Lauderdale ruled 
 Scotland, it came to be said, his duchess (for in the year of 
 his marriage he was made a duke) ruled him. The immediate 
 result of the union was a breach with the most active of his 
 supporters and the consequent strengthening of the hands of 
 his enemies. This was notably proved in the fourth session 
 of Parliament in November, 1673, when, for the first time 
 since the Restoration, opposition was raised to the proposals 
 of the Governments When Lauderdale called for the usual 
 grant to the Crown, the Duke of Hamilton proposed that 
 before the grant was voted the grievances of the country should 
 be made known to the king. Supported by Charles, howev< r, 
 Lauderdale proved too strong for his opponents. The special 
 
 1 These are his OWO uuids {Laud. Papers, in. 76). 
 
 <:0 - 2
 
 404 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 grievances complained of were monopolies on salt, tobacco, 
 and brandy ; and these with Charles's consent were removed. 
 Further opposition he summarily cut short by dissolving the 
 Parliament in the teeth of vehement protests against his 
 unconstitutional procedure. As no other Parliament was 
 summoned during the remainder of his administration, the 
 only means of redress left open to his opponents was to send 
 unavailing deputations to Charles, whose sympathies were 
 wholly with Lauderdale as the unflinching champion of his 
 prerogative. 
 
 In the mind of Charles and his advisers there was a haunt- 
 ing dread of a second Pentland Rising on a more formidable 
 scale, which might issue in a popular revolt such as had pro- 
 duced the two Covenants 1 . The armed conventicles had given 
 grounds for this apprehension ; and the opposition now led by 
 Hamilton and other nobles supplied fresh cause for alarm to 
 a Government conscious that it had no hold on popular 
 feeling. On the principles of Lauderdale and his master there 
 was but one course open to them for the maintenance of the 
 existing Church and State — systematic coercion applied to 
 every subject who would not accept them. As it happened, 
 there was a whole armoury of weapons ready to hand for the 
 carrying out of such a policy. Since the Reformation, Pres- 
 byterians and Episcopalians between them had produced a 
 body of penal statutes against Roman Catholics which were 
 now directed with deadly effect against the Presbyterian 
 recusants 2 . What was novel in the application of these statutes 
 was the fact that they were directed against Protestants ; and 
 that they were applied on a scale that converted Government 
 into an Inquisition. 
 
 1 This clearly appears from the Lauderdale Papers. 
 
 2 For the penal statutes against Catholics, see under Papist the Indexes 
 to the Aets of Pari, of Scot, and to the P. C. Register, as far as it is 
 published.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles IF 405 
 
 A second Indulgence in 1672 had only further divided the 
 Presbyterian party, and rendered more irrecon- 
 cilable those who refused to profit by it. In 
 1674 heritors and masters were declared to be responsible for 
 the religious conformity of their tenants and servants — an 
 obligation which had frequently been imposed on Scottish 
 Roman Catholics. The following year another penal statute, 
 which had also been enforced against Catholics, was directed 
 against more than a hundred persons, of whom about eighteen 
 were ministers. This was the Scottish form of the "boycott," 
 known as " Letters of Intercommuning," which forbade all 
 subjects to hold intercourse with the persons denoted under 
 the penalty of being treated as guilty of their crimes. The 
 result of Lauderdale's vigorous policy was thus described to 
 him by one of his correspondents. " But it is not to be imagined 
 to what a height of malice and discontent people's spirits are 
 raised not only amongst the foolish fanatic party, but even 
 amongst all sorts of people, and they know not for what 1 ." As 
 things were going, it was evident that sooner or later the policy 
 of Lauderdale would issue in the same result as that of his 
 predecessor Rothes ; and to many observers it seemed as if 
 this result were precisely what he desired. So tar as Scotland 
 was concerned, the greatest service he could do to his master 
 was to supply him with an army which could be of use in 
 the event of troubles arising in England ; and the discontent 
 in Scotland afforded a pretext for maintaining a standing force 
 in that country. 
 
 We come now to the crowning act of Lauderdale's coercive 
 policy — the chief measure associated with his 
 administration of Scottish affairs. In 1674 all 
 heritors and masters had been declared responsible for their 
 tenants and servants; but even this sweeping obligation was 
 found to be inadequate, and by an Act of Council in 1677 l ' lc y 
 were required to bign a bond for the loyal behaviour of all 
 
 1 Laud. Papers, in. fi.
 
 406 The Crozvn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 persons whatever residing on their lands. Many nobles and 
 gentlemen in the discontented shires refused to come under an 
 obligation which it was beyond their powers to fulfil ; and their 
 refusal was held to be a conclusive proof that the country was 
 ripe for rebellion. To prevent another rising such as that 
 of Pentland, therefore, was the justification alleged by the 
 Government for the remarkable step that followed. In February, 
 1678, a host of 6000 Highlanders and 3000 of the Lowland 
 militia were introduced into Ayrshire with instructions to take 
 up free quarters wherever they might find it convenient'. 
 While taking their ease, the errand of the host was to disarm 
 the country and to exact the bond of all who had hitherto 
 refused it. But the armoury of the Government was not yet 
 exhausted. When any Scottish subject had reason to fear 
 violence at the hand of another, he could procure what were 
 known as " letters of law-burrows," by which the party com- 
 plained of became bound to keep the peace. By a novel and 
 ingenious application of this system the Government demanded 
 security by law-burrows from those of the king's subjects who 
 still refused to take the bond. But not even the devouring 
 host availed to persuade the majority to incur the impossible 
 obligation ; and when, after a month's luxurious quarters, it took 
 its way homewards, laden with the spoils of the Lowlander, the 
 Government had reaped nothing but a harvest of fines and 
 intensified dissatisfaction with the existing order of things. To 
 certain of Lauderdale's supporters the result brought another dis- 
 appointment. Under the galling oppression of the Highland Host 
 it had been confidently expected that the people would be goaded 
 to rebellion, when forfeitures would follow and estates would 
 be seeking new owners. On St Valentine's Day, we are told, 
 the hangers-on of Lauderdale drew estates instead of mistresses 2 . 
 
 1 With the exception of persons whom the Privy Council might indi- 
 cate. — Wodrow, 11. 386. The visitation of the Highland Host had the 
 approval of the bishops {Laud. Pagers, ill. 93 et seq.). 
 
 2 Burnet, II. 135.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 407 
 
 In the case of the Highland Host we have a specimen of 
 the wisdom with which the Privy Council dis- i& „ 
 
 charged its executive functions, and in a famous 
 incident we have an illustration of its methods as a judicial 
 body. In 1668 one James Mitchell made an ineffectual 
 attempt to shoot Archbishop Sharp while driving in his coach 
 in the streets of Edinburgh. The intending assassin escaped, 
 but six years later he was recognised by Sharp and arrested 
 by his order. Brought before the Privy Council, he was 
 induced to confess his crime under a promise that his life 
 should be spared. The Council's hands were thus tied, and 
 his case was transferred to the Court of Justiciary. Before 
 this Court he denied the charge of having fired the shot, and, 
 as no evidence could be produced against him, he was sent 
 to the Bass Rock for safe keeping. He was not forgotten : 
 in 1676 he was again brought before the Court of Justiciary — 
 on this occasion on the charge of having been in the Pentland 
 Rising, but, though he was plied with the torture of the boot, 
 he made no admission that could incriminate him, and his 
 judges had to be content with sending him back to his prison. 
 Two years later (January 1678) he was once more tried by 
 the Justiciary Court on the original charge of his attempt on 
 Sharp. He was defended by Sir George Lockhart, one of 
 the leading advocates of the day, who pleaded that Mitchell 
 had made his confession to the Privy Council under the pledge 
 that his life would be safe. Four Privy Councillors, Lauder- 
 dale, Rothes, Archbishop Sharp, and Lauderdale's brother, 
 Lord Halton, deponed on oath that the pledge had not been 
 given, and Lauderdale refused to allow the Register of the 
 Council to be produced. Lauderdale would have spared their 
 victim, but Sharp was inexorable, and Mitchell was sent, in 
 Lauderdale's words, "to glorify God at the Grassmarket." 
 
 The year 1679 was a year of tragic events that made a 
 dismal close to the period of Lauderdale's domination in 
 Scotland. The murder of Archbishop Sharp, the revolt of
 
 408 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 the religious recusants, the battles of Drumclog and Bothwell 
 Bridge, and the terrible retribution that followed, render this 
 year one of the most memorable in Scottish history. 
 
 In the person of the Primate Sharp was incarnated for 
 the extreme Presbyterians all that was impious 
 against heaven and detestable in the sight of man. 
 Once a Resolutioner and therefore bound to the Covenants, 
 he had betrayed the cause which he had been expressly chosen 
 to represent, and had been the prime agent not only in the 
 setting up of Erastian Episcopacy but in all the severities 
 which for eighteen years had been directed against those whom 
 he had formerly counted his brethren. The cruel fear which 
 had led him to seek the death of Mitchell at the cost of his 
 honour had added the finishing touch to his career of apostasy ; 
 and, at a time when passions were inspired and distorted by 
 religious exaltation, it was in the nature of things that some 
 wilder spirits should deem his destruction to be but the just 
 judgment of heaven. Yet in this case it was not as in that 
 of Cardinal Beaton : his death was not the result of careful 
 premeditation but of convenient opportunity interpreted as 
 a divine sanction by religious frenzy and the bitterness of hate. 
 On the 3rd of May Sharp was returning from Edinburgh and, 
 seated in his coach with his daughter, had reached Magus Muir, 
 some two miles from St Andrews. That day twelve men, 
 including David Hackston of Rathillet and John Balfour of 
 Kinloch, all outlawed for their religion, had been diligently 
 seeking one Carmichael, an agent of Sharp's who had made 
 himself peculiarly obnoxious in Fife. Carmichael had received 
 a hint of their intentions and had bestowed himself safely ; but, 
 just when the twelve began to despair of finding their victim, 
 they received information that the arch-enemy himself was at 
 hand. With one mind they hailed his appearance as a divine 
 interposition. They came up with the coach, and made their 
 work more ghastly by the very frenzy of their ecstasy. Suc- 
 cessive shots fired into the carriage failed to execute their
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 409 
 
 purpose, and at length dragging him forth, amid the pitiful 
 outcries of himself and his daughter, they cut at him with their 
 swords and finished their work of pious atrocity. 
 
 The open slaughter of the Primate of Scotland could not 
 but embitter the feelings of both parties. On 
 
 1 I "79 
 
 the one side the inquisition became more relent- 
 less, on the other the sense of oppression more desperate. 
 Events rapidly followed that form the darkest and sublimest 
 passages of the national history. On the 29th of May, the 
 anniversary of the Restoration, which it had been made penal 
 not to observe 1 , a band of eighty armed recusants entered the 
 village of Rutherglen, about three miles to the east of Glasgow. 
 Extinguishing the bonfires that had been kindled in honour of 
 the day, they proceeded to the market-cross and there publicly 
 burned all the Acts of the Government which had overthrown 
 the Church of the Covenants. From such an action there was 
 no retreat ; and the devoted band remained under arms, receiv- 
 ing fresh accessions of kindred spirits. Three days later, on a 
 Sabbath morning, they were encamped on Loudon Hill, near 
 the village of Strathaven, engaged in the religious services for 
 the right of which they were now in arms, when their watchers 
 announced that the troopers were at hand. They were led by 
 John Graham of Claverhouse, of whom we now first hear in 
 connection with the work for which he seems to have been a 
 chosen instrument. The insurgents had about forty horse and 
 two hundred foot, and as they had taken their lives in their 
 hands they had no alternative but to fight. Proceeding to an 
 advantageous position at Drumclog about two miles off, they 
 waited the attack. The engagement was short and sharp, and 
 its result the total rout of the royal troops. Reinforced by 
 fresh accessions, the victors next day marched on Glasgow, 
 where they had many sympathisers ; but the city was garrisoned 
 
 1 Two Acts had been passed (1662, 1672), enjoining the observance of 
 the anniversary of the Restoration. The second had made its non-observance 
 penal. Acts of Pari, of Scot., VII. 376; VIII. 73.
 
 410 The Crozvn and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 by a considerable force, and after a fruitless assault they 
 retreated to the town of Hamilton. 
 
 The preparations of the Government to quell the revolt 
 
 showed that they were seriously alarmed. The 
 
 fencible men of the eastern and loyal counties 
 
 were summoned to arms — fifteen thousand being the number 
 
 deemed necessary to ensure success. To command the host 
 
 the king's natural son, the Duke of Monmouth, was sent down 
 
 from England. Monmouth had married the heiress of Buc- 
 
 cleuch, was acquainted with the state of Scottish parties, and 
 
 was known to disapprove of the policy of Lauderdale. By the 
 
 third week of June the two armies were facing each other at 
 
 Hamilton, where the insurgents had lain since their retreat 
 
 from Glasgow. Their numbers had swelled in the interval, 
 
 but they were no longer a united body with one soul and mind. 
 
 It was now seen what a fatal cleavage the late Indulgence had 
 
 made in the Presbyterian ranks. When the attempt was made 
 
 to draw up a declaration of their grievances, one party insisted 
 
 that the Indulgence should be included in the list ; the other, 
 
 consisting of those who had accepted it, refused to subscribe such 
 
 a testimony. On June 22, the two armies fronted each other 
 
 at a bridge that spanned the Clyde at the village of Bothwell — 
 
 the insurgents on the south, and the royal troops on the north 
 
 bank of the river. Before the engagement began, a deputation 
 
 was sent to Monmouth with the offer of submission if a promise 
 
 were given of a free Parliament and a free General Assembly. 
 
 As public opinion then stood in Scotland, a free Parliament 
 
 and a free General Assembly would have meant the end of the 
 
 existing Government ; and the deputation was told that any 
 
 demands they had to make would be heard only when they 
 
 had laid down their arms. The insurgents were strongly 
 
 posted, and, had they been of one mind, their enthusiasm might 
 
 well have turned the day in their favour. But even while their 
 
 fate was hanging in the balance, the ministers in their camp 
 
 "preached and prayed against one another 1 ." 
 
 1 Wodrow, in. 92.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 411 
 
 Unprepared, divided, and with no definite plan of action, 
 the insurgents had further the disadvantage of being led by an 
 incapable commander. This was Robert Hamilton, son of Sir 
 James Hamilton of Preston, who was a steady, though enlight- 
 ened Royalist. Robert Hamilton had identified himself with 
 the extremest section of the recusants, and by his conduct at 
 Drumclog had given proof of his zeal and courage. Since that 
 day he had claimed the leadership of the host in military affairs, 
 though he had no more experience of war than any peasant in 
 his following. With an army such as has been described even 
 the greatest of generals might have been helpless, but Hamilton 
 showed himself as irrational in council as feeble in action ; and 
 the question was afterwards asked whether he had behaved 
 "most like a traitor, coward, or fool 1 ." 
 
 The only chance for the insurgents was to hold Bothwell 
 Bridge against the enemy, and some two or three hundred 
 Galloway men were entrusted with the duty of securing it — 
 one of their leaders being Hackston of Rathillet, who had 
 been among the assassins of the Primate Sharp. As all his 
 actions proved, Hackston was a man of the most determined 
 resolution. Under him and other leaders the little band 
 made a gallant resistance, and for an hour they maintained 
 their position against the royal troops. Their ammunition fail- 
 ing, they besought their incompetent general either to send them 
 a fresh supply, or to relieve them with a new detachment. 
 Hamilton's reply was that they should abandon the bridge and 
 join the main body. The insensate order was obeyed, with 
 the immediate result which Hamilton's best officers had fore- 
 seen. Monmouth's cannon, having been transported across 
 the open passage, at once began to play with deadly effect on 
 the disheartened Whigs. The cavalry that formed their left 
 offered a special mark to the Royalist fire, and they made an 
 attempt to take up a safer position on some higher ground; but 
 their untrained horses would not again lace the cannonade, 
 
 1 Wodrow, ill. 107.
 
 412 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 and the riders losing control of them they broke among the 
 foot, creating a confusion which affected the whole army. Flight 
 at once became general, Hamilton himself being one of the 
 first to quit the field. Though Monmouth gave orders that 
 mercy should be shown to the fugitives, the loss of the insurgents 
 was heavy in proportion to their numbers — about 400 being 
 slain, and 1200 taken. Beyond a few killed at the bridge, the 
 Royalists hardly lost a man. It added bitterness to the defeat 
 of the Whigs that but for their own folly Bothwell Bridge 
 might have had the same ending as Drumclog. "Never," 
 says Wodrow, "was a good cause and a gallant army, generally 
 speaking hearty and bold, worse managed; and never will a 
 cause, though never so good, be better managed when divi- 
 sions, disjointings, and self creep in among the managers 1 ." 
 
 The proceedings of the Government in connection with 
 Bothwell Bridge showed as cruel folly as the proceedings that 
 followed the Pentland Rising. Of executions there were fewer 
 than in the case of the first rebellion. Two ministers, named 
 John King and John Kidd, were hanged at the Market-cross of 
 Edinburgh, and five suffered the same fate at Magus Muir, the 
 scene of Sharp's murder, though with that business they had no 
 concern. But it was in its treatment of the rank and file of 
 the prisoners that the Council showed its ineptitude. The 
 prisoners, over 1000 in number, were bound two and two and 
 led to Edinburgh. It was one of the difficulties into which 
 the Government was led by its own policy that it had no 
 adequate provision for the numerous prisoners who fell into 
 its hands : where to bestow a thousand men must have been 
 a curious problem for the Scottish Privy Council. Its decision 
 was that they should be enclosed in Greyfriars' churchyard 
 till such time as their fate should be determined. A batch of 
 200 more prisoners from Stirling were lodged in the same 
 place ; and for nearly five months the majority of them — half- 
 clad, ill-fed, exposed day and night to the weather — were kept 
 
 1 Wodrow, 111. 107.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 413 
 
 in their strange prison 1 . By the end of July 400 had taken a 
 bond that they would not again rise in arms, and were allowed 
 to return home. Over two hundred and fifty refused to accept 
 the terms which the Government was prepared to offer them ; 
 and, as the expense of maintaining them was a severe drain on 
 a scanty exchequer, the Council at length determined to be rid 
 of them once for all. Early in a morning of November the 
 devoted band were conveyed to Leith, where a ship lay ready 
 to convey them to the Barbados 3 . But the majority of them 
 were doomed never to reach their destination. Off the Orkney 
 Islands a storm drove the vessel on a rock which split her in 
 twain. The captain and crew contrived to save their own lives, 
 but some two hundred of the prisoners, who had been secured 
 under the hatches, went down with the ship. 
 
 Monmouth in his dealings with the Presbyterians had dis- 
 played a mildness and sympathy which had long 
 been absent from the councils of the Government, 
 and on his return to London he procured an Act of Indemnity 
 and a third Act of Indulgence, as futile as they were well 
 meant. Again there was to be a new departure in Scottish 
 affairs, and a hand heavier than that of Rothes and of Lauder- 
 dale was to be laid on the unhappy devotees of Presbytery. 
 Bothwell Bridge closed the career of Lauderdale as Rullion 1 
 Green had closed the domination of Rothes. In England he 
 had as deadly enemies as in Scotland, and both had done their 
 utmost to discredit him with Charles. The English Commons 
 petitioned for his removal from the king's councils on the 
 ground that he had attacked the liberties of both countries; 
 and the party of Hamilton presented a formidable indictment 
 
 1 On the approach of winter some wooden huts were erected, "which 
 was mightily boasted as a great favour." — Wodrow, in. 124. 
 
 a Such Scotsmen as were at various times sent to the Barbados were 
 found to be excellent servants. The Governor of the Island thus writes to 
 Lauderdale: "Some of your nation I find here, and those good subjects. 
 I wish there were more of them." — Laud, /'afers, II. 27.
 
 4 14 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 regarding his misgovernment in Scotland. Charles still stood 
 by the man who had scrupled at no policy that might serve the 
 interests of the Crown; but when in December, 1679, James, 
 Uuke of York, took his place at the board of the Scottish Privy 
 Council in Edinburgh, the satrapy of Lauderdale was at an 
 end 1 . 
 
 IV. Administration of the Duke of York. — The 
 
 Cameronians. 
 
 By concession and repression the once mighty force of 
 Scottish Presbyterianism had at length been broken. Most 
 deadly of the weapons in the accomplishment of this result 
 had been the three Acts of Indulgence which had successively 
 cut so deep into the ranks of Nonconformity. In succumbing 
 to the threats and promises of the Government, the Indulged 
 ministers had undoubtedly compromised the fundamental 
 principles of Presbyterianism. Christ the Head of the Church, 
 and free General Assemblies— these had been for Knox and 
 Andrew Melville and Alexander Henderson the indispensable 
 conditions of a Church founded on the rock of Scripture 
 and alone sanctioned by Heaven. The Indulged ministers 
 therefore had not been faithful unto death ; but it is not by 
 men born to be heroes and martyrs that well-ordered states are 
 founded and maintained; and the compliance of these ministers 
 was, in truth, the first and necessary step towards that religious 
 and political compromise which the force of circumstances was 
 gradually imposing on the Scottish people. When the abso- 
 lutism of the Stewarts was succeeded by a more rational Govern- 
 ment, the example of the Indulged ministers, who composed 
 
 1 It is worth noting that the Presbyterian annalists, Kirkton, Wodrow, 
 and Law, each representing different shades of opinion, all speak kindly of 
 Lauderdale. They attribute his severities against the Covenanters to the 
 influence of his second wife.
 
 Chap, vi j Charles II 415 
 
 the great mass of the Presbyterian clergy, was of the most 
 potent effect in substituting the idea of toleration for that of 
 the religious absolutism of Knox and Melville. 
 
 But it was not these Indulged ministers and the parish- 
 ioners who followed their leading who gave its 
 
 . ° ° 1680 
 
 character to the period at which we have now 
 
 arrived. The blackest and most impressive page in the national 
 history, this period owes its character to that indomitable section 
 of the Presbyterians whom neither concession nor relentless 
 pursuit could persuade to palter with their consciences and 
 accept a Government which, in their conception, existed to 
 destroy every belief which they held most sacred. As things 
 now stood, these men had ceased to possess the rights of 
 subjects, and under the highest penalties every man's hand was 
 against them. To hold converse with them, to harbour them, 
 to supply them with the necessaries of life — meant death or 
 outlawry. It was as the immediate result of Bothwell Bridge 
 and the atrocities that followed that the "Society People," as 
 they styled themselves, became a distinct body with recognised 
 leaders and a definite programme of action. Their leaders 
 were Donald Cargill and Richard Cameron, from whom they 
 came to be known as "Cameronians" ; their principles they 
 now announced to the world in language that could not be 
 misunderstood. On the 22nd of June, 1680, some twenty of 
 them entered the burgh of Sanquhar in Dumfriesshire and 
 affixed to the market-cross a formal Declaration in which they 
 disowned Charles Stewart as their king on the ground of "his 
 perjury and breach of covenant to God and His Kirk 1 ." The 
 doctrine of the Declaration, it need not be said, was not a 
 novelty in the history of the Christian Church. Theologians 
 Roman Catholic, Anglican, Episcopalian, and Presbyterian, all 
 at one time or other have taught or enforced the right of sub- 
 jects to cast off rulers accused of seeking to destroy the true 
 
 1 Wodrow, in. 213, note. Another manifesto, known as the "Queens- 
 ferry Paper," had not the formal sanction of the party, lb. 207 et seq.
 
 416 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 religion. The daring challenge, however, supplied the Govern- 
 ment with cogent reasons for the extirpation of a sect which had 
 thus declared open war against the existing order; and a month 
 later a heavy blow was struck at the devoted band. 
 
 On the 22nd of July (1680) a body of the "Wanderers," 
 
 headed by Cameron and Hackston of Rathillet, 
 1680 J . 
 
 were in the parish of Auchinleck in Kyle, a 
 
 district of Ayrshire. They had lain on the moorside all the 
 night, when about ten in the morning they were suddenly sur- 
 prised by the approach of a party of dragoons who had been 
 on their track. These were led by Bruce of Earlshall, a noted 
 hunter of conventiclers, and were little more than a hundred 
 in number. The Cameronians counted only twenty-three horse 
 and forty poorly armed foot. Were they willing to fight, Hack- 
 ston demanded? All agreed to see the business to the end. 
 Airds Moss was behind them, but there were passages through 
 it by which it was possible to escape if the day went against 
 them. While the foot retained their position, Hackston at, the 
 head of his small band of horse made a desperate charge on 
 the Royalist troop. They were at once overpowered, but Hack- 
 ston, extricating himself from the fray, made off through the 
 bog. He had not ridden far before his horse was mired, and, . 
 while engaged in single combat with one of his pursuers, /ivas Lq 
 at length overpowered by numbers. Few of the foot fell, as 
 swift pursuit was impossible through the adjoining bog, but 
 Cameron was slain fighting to the last. By his fervency of 
 conviction and his commanding character he was a man born 
 to head a desperate cause, and his memory remained an inspi- 
 ration to the sect to which he gave his name. His severed 
 head and hands were presented to the Council in Edinburgh, 
 and in accordance with the custom of the time were stuck on 
 the post of the Netherbow. The fate of Hackston could not be 
 doubtful ; as one of the assassins of Sharp and a rebel taken 
 in arms, he had incurred the utmost penalty of the law. Un- 
 shaken in the conviction of the righteousness of his aims and
 
 Chap, vij Charles II 
 
 417 
 
 actions, he met his end with the resolution of a soldier and a 
 martyr 1 . 
 
 Cargill was now the only prominent leader left to the 
 extreme Presbyterian party, and he undismayed took the one 
 further step which the Sanquhar Declaration had involved. At 
 a conventicle which he held at the Torwood in Stirlingshire he 
 solemnly excommunicated the king, the Duke of York, Mon- 
 mouth, Lauderdale, Rothes, General Dalziel, and the Lord 
 Advocate, Sir George Mackenzie. This proceeding at once 
 excited the mirth of the Royalists and the displeasure of the 
 moderate Presbyterians. "This step of his," says Wodrow, 
 " was approven by none that I know of but his own followers 2 ." 
 It, in fact, made the final cleavage in the Presbyterian party; 
 henceforward the followers of Cargill refused "to partake in 
 ordinances dispensed by any Presbyterian minister 3 " till 
 another religious teacher took the place of Cargill, whose doom 
 was close upon him. 
 
 In the eyes of the Government Cargill was now the most 
 dangerous rebel at large. He and his followers 
 had solemnly renounced their allegiance, and 
 they had shown that they were prepared to meet the sword 
 with the sword in the defence of their lives and their cause. 
 With a price of 5000 marks on his head, Cargill sought safety 
 in the wildest districts of the west country, preaching wherever 
 he could gather together a faithful few. On an evening in 
 May, 1 68 1, he had preached on the common of Dunsyre, in the 
 Upper Ward of Lanarkshire, and after the sermon had sought 
 hiding in a mill in the neighbouring hamlet of Covington. An 
 officer of dragoons, Irvine of Bonshaw, had been upon his 
 track, and before the day broke he had the hunted preacher in 
 his hands. Brought before the Privy Council in Edinburgh, 
 Cargill bore himself in keeping with the gospel he had taught : 
 he acknowledged and justified all his public actions, and 
 denied at once the authority of the Government, and of the 
 
 1 Wodrow, 111. 2Kj et seq. a lb. 234. 3 lb. 224-5. 
 
 B. S. II. 27
 
 4t 8 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 king who was its head. "This is the most joyful day that 
 ever I saw in my pilgrimage on earth," he wrote immediately 
 before his execution. Four of his followers suffered along with 
 him, and within a few months five others similarly sealed their 
 testimony 1 . 
 
 It was in the midst of such scenes that in July, 1681, the 
 king's brother, James, Duke of York, appeared as Royal Com- 
 missioner in succession to Lauderdale and Rothes. He had 
 already paid two visits to Scotland and had made himself gene- 
 rally acceptable to the ruling classes in the country, and 
 specially to the more powerful among the chieftains of the 
 Highlanders. It was now, however, that he began that policy 
 by which, first as commissioner and afterwards as king, he 
 eventually alienated Scotland from its ancient race of princes. 
 On the 28th of July he opened a Parliament, the first that had 
 met for nine years, from which he extorted two Acts that 
 staggered even the staunchest upholders of the prerogative. 
 By the first, the Act of Succession, it was declared "that no 
 difference in religion can alter or divert the right of succes- 
 sion and lineal descent of the Crown"." As the duke was a 
 declared Catholic and the presumptive heir to the throne, 
 the precise object of this Act could not be mistaken. But it 
 was the other Act that put the greatest strain on the supporters 
 of the Crown. This was a test that was henceforward to be 
 taken by all persons holding offices of trust in Church and 
 State. The terms of this test were so self-contradictory that it 
 became the standing jest of the time. He who signed it com- 
 mitted himself to being at once a Presbyterian, an Episcopalian, 
 and a Roman Catholic. Sir James Dalrymple, President of 
 the Court of Session, resigned his office rather than come 
 under an impossible obligation ; and eighty of the Episcopal 
 clergy followed the same course. One exalted person, however, 
 Archibald, Earl of Argyle, son of the great marquis, was 
 marked for special dealing. 
 
 1 Wodrow, ill. 279. 2 Ads of Pad. of Scot. , Vin. 39.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 419 
 
 The family antecedents of Argyle rendered him a suspicious 
 person to the Duke of York ; and such an occasion for getting 
 rid of one who might prove at least an inconvenient opponent 
 was not to be let slip. The proceedings that followed dis- 
 quieted all but the most fanatical supporters of the Government. 
 When asked to take the oath, Argyle agreed to take it " as far 
 as it was consistent with itself." But this reservation did not 
 satisfy the Council or the duke, whose tool it was, and he was 
 lodged in the Castle of Edinburgh. This misconstruing of the 
 king's laws, it was held, constituted the crime of treason, and 
 on this charge Argyle was tried before the Court of Justiciary. 
 By a majority of one he was found guilty and secured in the 
 castle. What the sentence might be was uncertain, but he 
 had little reason to trust to the tender mercies of James. He 
 was to have been removed from the castle to the common 
 prison for criminals, but before this was effected his friends 
 came to his rescue. Disguised as a page, and holding up the 
 train of his step-daughter, Lady Sophia Lindsay, he eluded his 
 guards, and after various adventures succeeded in escaping to 
 Holland. At a later day he was again to fall into the hands 
 of his persecutors, and in circumstances that sealed the fate 
 which he had for that time avoided 1 . 
 
 No other Parliament met during the remainder of Charles's 
 reign; and it was through the agency of the 
 Privy Council that the duke henceforward gave 
 effect to his Scottish policy. This policy was, in brief, to have 
 Scotland at his will on the day of his accession to his brother's 
 throne. By the Act of Succession he had sought to make 
 himself secure of the Scottish Crown, but it was further neces- 
 sary that no formidable elements of opposition should be left 
 
 1 In mockery of Argyle's trial the boys of Heriot's Hospital, Edinburgh, 
 hanged their watch-dog, because he refused to swallow the test paper 
 which they had smeared with butter to make the process of gulping it 
 more easy. — Fountainball, Historical Observes (Ban. Club), pp. 55 — 6; 
 
 27 — 2
 
 420 
 
 The Crown and the Kirk 
 
 [Book vi 
 
 in the country to occasion future trouble. The Test Act was 
 the effectual instrument by which Jarnes could hope to effect 
 this end 1 . Applied in every case where it was found expedient, 
 it bound not only every State official, clergyman, judge, and 
 magistrate, but every dangerous or suspected subject. Signs 
 were not wanting to prove, however, that the country suspected 
 where the duke's policy must end, and that the event was 
 regarded with equal dread and disapproval. The students of 
 the College of Edinburgh burned the pope in effigy, and those 
 at Glasgow ostentatiously wore the blue riband of the Cove- 
 nant (1680). A moderate Loyalist thus noted his impression of 
 the new administration : " Though we change the governors, 
 yet we find no change in the arbitrary government. For we 
 are brought to that pass we must defend and court the Chan- 
 cellor, Treasurer, and a few other great men and their servants, 
 else we shall have difficulty to get either justice or dispatch in 
 our actions, or to save ourselves from skaith 2 ." 
 
 The main concern of the Government was still the suppres- 
 sion of that intractable remnant which defied 
 every engine of authority that had been directed 
 against them. Though they had now lost their second great 
 leader, Cargill, they still met in the moors and mosses and 
 hills to pray and preach and to denounce woes to their idola- 
 trous rulers. Like their fellow-Protestants under the dragon- 
 nades of Louis XIV, they now came to regard themselves as 
 the special objects of the ' contendings ' of heaven and hell. 
 Their enemies were the commissioned agents of the powers of 
 darkness; and natural phenomena were interpreted as manifes- 
 tations directly bearing on the daily events of their lives. 
 
 1684 
 
 1 Fines were still reckoned on as an ordinary source of revenue. The 
 Duke of York thus writes to the Marquis of Queensberry: "I am glad to 
 find you think you may raise considerable fines from Galloway and other 
 disaffected shires." — Buccleuch and Queensberry Tapers, Hist. A/SS. Com- 
 mission (1897), p. 179. 
 
 3 Fouutainball, p. 87.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 421 
 
 Prophetism and illuminism were the natural result — in some 
 cases passing into mere religious frenzy, in others into a 
 reasoned exaltation of feeling nourished by Hebrew prophecy 
 and intensified by their modes of life and the hourly presence 
 of danger 1 . Outlaws by their own choice, they were now 
 hunted, in their own phrase, like partridges on the mountains. 
 Hitherto they had professed to defend themselves only when 
 attacked, but goaded to desperation they at length declared 
 open war against their enemies. In their "Apologetical Decla- 
 ration 2 " (1684), they solemnly warned every agent of the 
 Government who in field or justice-court should seek their lives 
 that he would do so at his own peril. The Government took 
 up the challenge, and after its long experience it had effective 
 weapons at its disposal. In Sir George Mackenzie (the "Bluidy 
 Mackenzie" of Covenanting tradition) the Lord Advocate of 
 the day, it possessed a public prosecutor as fanatical for the 
 prerogative as any western Whig for the Covenant 3 . But after 
 the "Apologetical Declaration" courts of justice were dis- 
 pensed with, and the execution of the law was placed in the 
 hands of those military leaders whose soldiery garrisoned the 
 disaffected districts. Conspicuous among these leaders were 
 two of whom we have already heard, General Dalziel and 
 Graham of Claverhouse. Their instructions were short and 
 
 1 The extraordinary literature produced by the persecution is the per- 
 manent psychological record of the time. The titles of the books that 
 compose it are usually so lengthy that they cannot be given here. A 
 partial list will be found in Hill Burton, VII. 274 (1873). As illustrating 
 the religious vagaries of the time, cf. Wodrow's account of John Gib and 
 his followers (ill. 348 — 356). Wodrow speaks in the severest terms of the 
 Gibhites. 
 
 2 Wodrow, IV. 148. It was drawn up by James Renwick. 
 
 3 "There is no need for nice scruples in Stale affairs," so writes 
 Mackenzie to the Earl of Balcarras. Writing as a philosopher and not as 
 an advocate, Mackenzie could say "that to punish the body for that which 
 is a guilt of the soul is as unjust as to punish one relation for another." — 
 ' The Religious Stoic,' Works, Vol. 1. 41 (1716).
 
 422 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 precise. When a suspected person was taken, he was simply 
 asked if he abjured the " Apologetical Declaration." If he 
 answered "Yes," he was retained for further examination, if he 
 answered "No," the dragoons did their duty. At this very 
 period (1684 — 1685) Louis XIV began his dragonnades for the 
 extinction of Protestantism in France, and with the approval, 
 be it remembered, equally of Madame de Sevigne and the 
 saintly Fe'nelon. Cruel as was the procedure of the Government 
 of Charles II against the Cameronians, it was humane in com- 
 parison with that of Louis against the Camisards. 
 
 The political system of Charles II had now lasted for 
 twenty-four years, and had been maintained from the first only 
 by the uniform repression of public opinion and by the removal 
 of all dangerous opponents. A free General Assembly and a 
 free Parliament would have overthrown it in a single day. 
 Moderate Episcopalians and moderate Presbyterians had in 
 different degrees their special grounds for dissatisfaction with 
 the existing system. As Episcopacy had been established and 
 maintained since the Restoration, its clergy possessed no initia- 
 tive for the better ordering of their Church, and were merely 
 the salaried officials of the State. But it was the Presbyterians 
 who had the deepest sense of the injustice of the ecclesiastical 
 settlement effected at the Restoration. As was to be proved a 
 few years later, the preponderance of national sentiment was 
 decisively in their favour ; and their ideals of Church polity 
 had been set aside simply because they were deemed incom- 
 patible with the Stewart conception of monarchy. In the exist- 
 ing circumstances the prospect of a revolution in their favour 
 was further off than ever. To Charles would succeed his 
 brother, whose present policy and methods augured a future 
 still more disastrous to Protestantism. So hopeless did the 
 outlook appear that in 1682 some thirty-six nobles and gentle- 
 men revived a scheme for settling in Carolina which had been 
 first conceived during the administration of Lauderdale 1 . The 
 
 1 Wodrow, in. 368.
 
 Chap, vi] Charles II 423 
 
 scheme proved fatal to one of the intending emigrants. 
 While in London in 1683 in connection with their scheme 
 certain of them became involved in the Rye-House Plot for 
 the exclusion of the Duke of York from the throne. Among 
 these was Robert Baillie of Jerviswoode, a Scottish gentleman 
 of the highest character and accomplishments. Sent down to 
 Edinburgh as a prisoner, he was tried for high treason under 
 conditions which prove that revenge rather than justice was 
 the object of his judges. He was an old man, known to be 
 dying and incapable of mischief, yet he was subjected to a 
 protracted examination, conducted with flagrant disregard of 
 all fair dealing. He was executed at the market-cross of Edin- 
 burgh (December 24, 1684) — one more victim of the political 
 necessities of the Restoration. 
 
 Charles II died on February 2, 1685. As a man he 
 could not be much lamented by a people who 
 had never seen his face since he had become 
 their king. As a king he had been swayed by but two 
 motives — the maintenance of his prerogative and the supply 
 of his purse. It is a mistake, however, to suppose that he 
 increased the powers of the Crown which he had inherited 
 from his two immediate predecessors. James VI in the last 
 years of his reign and Charles I till the great revolt of 1638 
 governed Scotland with as absolute sway as Charles II through 
 the agency of Rothes and Lauderdale and the Duke of York. 
 For almost every act of his reign he could allege a precedent 
 in those of his father and grandfather. In subjecting Parlia- 
 ment,n } rivy Council, the Church, Courts of Justice, and munici- 
 palities to his personal will he could truly maintain that he 
 was but acting in accordance with the constitution he had 
 inherited. Even in the case of his harshest measures against 
 the religious recusants, the penal laws against Roman Catholics 
 as enemies of the State supplied him with precedents which 
 could not be disputed, except on the ground that he was a 
 professed Protestant persecuting Protestants. By the circum-
 
 424 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 stances of his position, however, the political system he had 
 inherited assumed a character which had not belonged to it 
 under James VI and Charles I. The haunting dread of 
 another such rebellion as had cast down his father was ever 
 before the minds of himself and his advisers ; and, on the prin- 
 ciples on which he chose to govern, there was no alternative 
 but relentless suppression of every recalcitrant element in the 
 State. James VI had to exercise much pressure before he 
 succeeded in displacing Presbytery by Episcopacy, but the 
 subjects of Charles II had the memory of the triumphant 
 Covenants in their minds and of twelve years' successful revolt 
 against the royal authority. To coerce a nation that had thus 
 known liberty and had become conscious of its powers was the 
 task of Charles and his ministers. How they accomplished 
 their task is fitly described when it is said that it was by the 
 methods of an Inquisition rather than by forms of government 1 . 
 His reign, like those of his two predecessors, had proved that, 
 at the stage of development the country had now attained, a 
 ruler who differed from the majority of his subjects on the 
 fundamental principles of national well-being had ceased to be 
 a possibility. 
 
 1 The "Letters illustrative of Public Affairs in Scotland addressed by 
 Contemporary Statesmen to George, Earl of Aberdeen, Lord High 
 Chancellor of Scotland, 1681 — 1684" (Spalding Club, 1851), vividly 
 illustrate the methods ol Charles's government.
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 425 
 
 CHAPTER VII. 
 
 JAMES VII, 1685 — 1688. 
 I. The Dispensing Power. 
 
 On February 10th, 1685, James, Duke of York, was pro- 
 claimed King of Scots at the Market-Cross of 
 Edinburgh. In ascending the throne he was 
 guilty of a grave omission which was carefully remembered 
 against him when his day of reckoning came : he did not take 
 the Coronation oath which bound the Scottish kings to defend 
 the Protestant religion. He signalised his accession by an Act 
 of Indemnity, which, as it expressly excluded every recusant, 
 left things precisely as they were 1 . In point of fact, the open- 
 ing year of James's reign was marked by greater severities 
 against every form of Nonconformity than any period of the 
 reign of Charles II. It was peculiarly "the black year, the 
 killing time." For this increased severity there was an 
 immediate reason. The "Apologetical Declaration" had not 
 remained a dead letter : in consistency with its threats the 
 Cameronians had given emphatic proofs that they would no 
 longer be molested with impunity. They rescued their friends, 
 attacked and slew dragoons, and chastised such of the esta- 
 blished clergy as they suspected of being informers. The 
 
 1 Wodrow, iv. 205, note.
 
 426 TJic Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 Government made a distinction between two classes of the 
 recusants. There were those who failed to give a general 
 satisfaction as to their consistent loyalty, and there were those 
 who refused to abjure the Apologetical Declaration. The 
 former class were dealt with by the itinerary Courts of Justi- 
 ciary, and their punishment was to have one ear amputated 
 and to be shipped to the American Plantations '. Those wha 
 were thus punished have to be reckoned by hundreds. The 
 second class were dealt with in more summary fashion, their 
 fate being placed at the disposal of the military officer into 
 whose hands they fell. Among the commanders to whom this 
 work was entrusted John Graham of Claverhouse has easily 
 the pre-eminence. According to the testimony of his inti- 
 mates Claverhouse was of "a high, proud, and peremptory 
 humour, and was known for his great hatred to fanatics 3 ." As 
 the kinsman of Montrose and a born Cavalier he detested the 
 Covenant and all its memories; but he was no mere mercenary 
 soldier like Turner and Bellenden. He kept strictly within 
 the limits of his commission, and he carried out his orders 
 with the distinct aim of saving bloodshed in the end. To 
 those who he thought had been led astray, it was his policy 
 not to be unmerciful ; for (in his own words) "it renders three 
 desperate where it gains one 3 ." On the other hand, in the case 
 of the obdurate, he showed a relentless precision, which gained 
 for him his evil name of the "Bloody Clavers," the commis- 
 sioned servant of the powers of darkness. Of his methods of 
 proceeding we have a description from his own hand ; and the 
 special case to which it refers is one of the best known in the 
 Covenanting martyrology. In the beginning of May, 1685, he 
 
 1 MSS. of the Duke of Buccleugh and Queensberry, Hist. Man. Com., 
 Report xv., Part vin., p. 105. 
 
 2 Napier, Memorials of the Viscount of Dundee, III. 437 (the Earl of 
 Moray to Queensberry) ; Balcarras, " Account of the affairs of Scotland 
 relating to the Revolution" (Somers Tracts, XI. 517). 
 
 3 Claverhouse to Queensberry (Buccl. and Quce/isb. MSS., p. 268). 

 
 Chap, vn] James VII 427 
 
 and his dragoons were scouring the hills to the west of Douglas 
 in Lanarkshire in search of one John Brown and his nephew. 
 After a long march through the mosses the two men were at 
 length taken. They were without arms and they declared that 
 they possessed none. The usual questions were then put : did 
 they abjure the Apologetical Declaration, and would they 
 swear not to rise in arms against the king? The nephew took 
 the required bonds, but Brown refused, declaring that "he 
 knew no king." Bullets, match and treasonable papers being 
 found in Brown's house, the evidence against him was deemed 
 conclusive; "Whereupon," adds Claverhouse, "I caused shoot 
 him dead, which he suffered very unconcernedly." The case 
 of the nephew lying beyond his commission, he passed him on 
 to the proper authorities 1 . With another deplorable incident of 
 the "killing time" Claverhouse had no connection. In the week 
 following the death of John Brown of Priesthill two women, 
 Margaret Lauchleson and Margaret Wilson, the one over sixty 
 and the other under twenty, were drowned at Wigtown for 
 refusing to take the oath of abjuration 2 . In this same year, it 
 will be remembered, Alice Lisle was condemned to death by 
 Judge Jeffreys for harbouring two fugitives from the field of 
 Sedgemoor. 
 
 James's first Scottish Parliament met on April 23rd, 
 William, Duke of Queensberry, acting as Royal 
 Commissioner. In a letter addressed to the 
 assembled Estates he informed them of his chief reason in 
 calling them together : it was, he told them, that they might 
 
 1 Buccl. and Queen sb. A/SS., 292. In the accounts of Brown's death by 
 Wodrow and Patrick Walker there are details which exhibit Claverhouse 
 in even less pleasant colours than his own narrative. According to Wodrow 
 (IV. 244 — 5), Claverhouse's dragoons refused to shoot Brown, and he had 
 "to turn executioner himself." 
 
 ' That they were drowned has been proved by the Rev. Archibald 
 Stewart (History Vindicated in the case of the Wigtown Martyrs, 2nd edit., 
 1869).
 
 428 The Crown and the Kirk [Rook vi 
 
 have an opportunity "of being exemplary to others" — the 
 others being the English Parliament, then on the point of meet- 
 ing. The Estates were as exemplary as he could have desired, 
 They offered their "lives and fortunes" in his defence, and they 
 pledged themselves to provide a national army whenever and 
 wherever he should require it. As an expressive proof of their 
 loyalty, they attached the excise in perpetuity to the Crown — a 
 grant which had only been made temporarily to his prede- 
 cessor. Their attitude towards religious recusants was also 
 highly satisfactory. The taking of the Covenants was once 
 more declared to be treason, and another Act was added which 
 ' went a step beyond all previous Acts against Nonconformity. 
 All persons, preachers or hearers, proved to have been present 
 at a conventicle were henceforth to be punished by death and 
 confiscation. The usual Act passed at the beginning of each 
 reign "for security of the Protestant religion" had a special 
 significance in view of the fact that the new king was an openly 
 professed Roman Catholic 1 . 
 
 While the Estates were sitting, a serious attempt was made 
 to overthrow the new king. During the course 
 1685 of the late reign many Scotsmen of rank and 
 
 influence had been driven to take refuge in Holland — the most 
 notable among them being the Earl of Argyle, Sir Patrick 
 Hume of Polwarth, and Sir John Cochrane of Ochiltree. In 
 the same country were gathered those English exiles who had 
 identified themselves with the Duke of Monmouth in his plots 
 to oust James from the succession. Between the two sets of 
 exiles it was now arranged that a double attempt should be 
 made on James's kingdom — Argyle to deal with Scotland and 
 Monmouth with England. Argyle sailed on the 2nd of May 
 on the understanding that Monmouth was to land in England 
 within less than a fortnight— an engagement which Monmouth 
 was unable to keep. 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., Vlll. 455—461. 

 
 Chap, vii] James VII 4 2 9 
 
 From the first, ill-fortune and ill-management doomed 
 Argyle's enterprise to failure. The Government 
 had been aware of the impending invasion and 
 had made its preparations to meet it. To prevent a rising in 
 Argyle's own country, the Marquis of Athole, the hereditary 
 enemy of his house, was quartered there with 500 of his High- 
 landers. For the national defence the militia, both to the 
 north and the south of the Tay, were ordered to join the king's 
 host by a certain date, and all persons suspected of disaffection 
 were commanded to place themselves in ward. By the date 
 when the ill-fated expedition was ready to sail every precaution 
 had been taken ro render it abortive. 
 
 A needless delay at the Orkney Islands was the first folly 
 committed by the invaders. At Tobermory in Mull three days 
 more were lost, though from that island they drew a contingent 
 of 300 men. From Campbelton in Cantyre Argyle issued a 
 lengthy Declaration, in which he stated the reasons which had 
 led him to seek the overthrow of the Government. The reasons 
 were the same which three years later William of Orange 
 alleged in justification of his enterprise; but neither the hour nor 
 the man had yet come for a successful revolution. The event 
 of the expedition depended on Argyle's raising his own clans- 
 men, but when his son appeared among them not more than 
 300 rallied to his call. The other main support on which the 
 invaders reckoned was the discontented West, but there also 
 they found that their cause was coldly regarded. The majority 
 of the refractory ministers were in exile; the spirit of their 
 followers had been broken by the failure of the two previous 
 risings; and Argyle as an uncovenanted person was not accept- 
 able to those recusants who would have been readiest to take 
 up arms against the Government. 
 
 With this unpromising prospect before him Argyle still 
 lingered in Cantyre, though every day diminished his chance 
 of success. He was joined by Sir Duncan Campbell of 
 Auchinbreck at the head of some 800 men, but when lie pro-
 
 430 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 posed to utilise his new auxiliaries he encountered a difficulty 
 which eventually proved fatal to his undertaking. There was 
 lying near Inverary a small Royalist force, waiting the arrival 
 of a stronger body led by the Marquis of Athole ; and it was 
 Argyle's plan to surprise this detachment before the junction 
 could be effected. But, as the enterprise had been organised, 
 Argyle had not the sole control of its conduct. He was, in 
 fact, but one member of a Committee of War, in which Sir John 
 Cochrane of Ochiltree and Sir Patrick Hume of Polwarth 
 claimed coequal authority. Cochrane had received encourag- 
 ing news respecting the disposition of the men of Ayrshire, and 
 he now insisted that in that district and not in Argyleshire the 
 most effective blow could be struck. On the vote being taken 
 it was found that the majority were of the opinion of Cochrane, 
 that in the Lowlands the first attempt should be made. 
 Cochrane had his will, but he soon discovered how far he 
 had been led astray. Government ships were cruising on the 
 coast, and it was with difficulty that he effected a landing at 
 Greenock. Though he made himself master of the town, 
 the inhabitants showed no disposition to rise ; and, as the 
 adjoining country was effectually guarded by the royal forces, 
 there was no alternative but to retreat and to join the main 
 body under Argyle. 
 
 It now remained to be seen what Argyle could effect in his 
 own country He resumed his original plan of marching on 
 Inverary, the chief place of his hereditary dominions ; but the 
 same chances of success no longer existed, as Athole had now 
 concentrated his forces and occupied the town. Despatching a 
 small body of his troops by land to distract the attention of 
 Athole, he himself prepared to sail up Loch Fyne to Inverary. 
 Again fortune proved adverse. The king's cruisers were on his 
 track ; contrary winds delayed him for eight days, and he was 
 forced to take shelter under the Castle of Eilean Dearg, in 
 the Kyles of Bute. Leaving his ships in this shelter, Argyle 
 now marched along the south coast of Loch Fyne, and gained
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 43 1 
 
 the only advantage of his disastrous enterprise. The contingent 
 which he had sent on before him seized the Castle of Ardkin- 
 glass at the head of Loch Fyne, and Athole made an attempt 
 to recover it. The united forces of the invaders inflicted a 
 check on the Royalists; and, encouraged by this success, Argyle 
 determined to attack Inverary on the following day. But 
 precisely at this juncture tidings were brought that the ships 
 left at Eilean Dearg were being seriously menaced by the 
 Government cruisers. If the ships were lost, the cause was 
 lost ; and a swift retreat was necessary to save them. 
 
 At Eilean Dearg Argyle proposed the bold course of attack- 
 ing the English squadron, but he was again overborne, and 
 the desperate resolution was taken of marching into the Low- 
 lands. A garrison was left in charge of the ships, which 
 they deserted after two days, when every vessel fell into the 
 hands of the enemy. Hopeless of any support from the 
 country at large, and at bitter strife among themselves, Argyle 
 and his confederates pursued their march to the low country. 
 Rounding the Gare-loch, they forded the river Leven above 
 Dun barton, pursued by the enemy twice as numerous as 
 themselves. Their object was to make for Glasgow, but, misled 
 by their guides, they found themselves in Kilpatrick, where 
 their dissensions came to a head. Personal safety now became 
 the sole consideration, and the leaders took their several ways 1 . 
 Argyle, almost unattended, pursued the road to Glasgow, near 
 which an ancient servant of his family refused him hospitality. 
 With but one companion, Major Fullarton, he crossed the 
 Clyde, and had reached Inchinnan on the Cart when they 
 
 1 Sir John Cochrane and Sir Patrick Hume crossed the Clyde at the 
 head of a small troop, which was defeated and dispersed at Muhdykes in 
 the parish of Lochwinnoch. Cochrane and Hume both made their escape. 
 Another prominent person in Argyle's enterprise was Colonel Rumbold, 
 an Englishman, who had been deeply engaged in the Newmarket Plot 
 against Charles II. Rumbold stood by Argyle in his differences with 
 Cochrane and Hume, and it was he who captured the Castle of Ardkinglass. 
 He was taken shortly after Argyle and was executed at Edinburgh.
 
 43 2 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 were stopped by a party of countrymen. While Fullarton 
 engaged them in talk, Argyle, who was in disguise, rode up 
 the stream, and had succeeded in crossing it when he was 
 overtaken. His pistol, his only weapon, was useless from 
 wet, and he was at once overpowered, exclaiming as he fell, 
 " Unfortunate Argyle 1 ! " 
 
 He was at once conveyed to Edinburgh and lodged in the 
 castle, but on this occasion made secure in irons. A trial 
 was deemed unnecessary, for by a perverse consistency it was 
 decided that he already lay under sentence of death on the 
 iniquitous charge on which he had been condemned in the 
 previous reign. Like his father, the marquis, he never showed 
 to greater advantage than in the closing scenes of his life. 
 Without bravado, but with perfect serenity and dignity, he 
 made his account with the world, and with those dearest to 
 him. The day before his death, like other illustrious sufferers, 
 he composed his own epitaph, in which, after touching on his 
 own misfortunes, he expressed the conviction that another 
 hand than his would yet accomplish his country's deliverance. 
 The day of his death found him equally unshaken. It had 
 been his habit to take sleep after his midday meal, and on this 
 his last day he " slept as sweetly and pleasantly as ever he had 
 done." On the scaffold he made the usual address to the 
 assembled multitude, and when he was led to the instrument 
 of death, he exclaimed that it was "the sweetest maiden 2 that he 
 had ever kissed." 
 
 Connected with Argyle's invasion is one of the most 
 revolting incidents of the period. In view of his coming it 
 was deemed necessary to lodge in a secure place all persons 
 who were in ward for religious offences. It was decided that 
 Dunnottar Castle, near Stonehaven, was the safest place where 
 they could be bestowed. Accordingly, about 200 of them, 
 
 1 Wodrow, iv. 283 — 297. 
 
 2 The maiden was the name of the instrument of execution. It was a 
 rude kind of guillotine.
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 433 
 
 mainly from the south and west, were first brought to Edin- 
 burgh and thence conveyed through Fife to their destination. 
 On their journey they were treated more like cattle than human 
 beings ; and the place that was prepared for them clenches the 
 comparison. About a hundred men and women were shut up 
 in a vault of the castle where they had space neither to lie nor 
 sit. The floor was ankle-deep with mire, and there was but 
 one window for the admittance of air. After some days forty 
 of the men were removed to another vault where the only 
 ventilation was from a chink in the vault, of which they 
 availed themselves by turns. At the instance of the governor's 
 wife, who had caught a sight of the huddled wretches, the 
 women were separated from the men, and the whole party 
 were distributed among the other vaults of the castle. The 
 castle stands on a steep cliff overhanging the sea, and twenty- 
 five of the prisoners made an attempt to escape by the window 
 of the larger vault. Ten succeeded in eluding capture, but those 
 who failed had reason to regret their attempt. Bound and laid 
 upon their backs for the space of three hours, burning matches 
 were placed between their fingers — one of the approved forms 
 of torture of the time. After two months the Council ordered 
 the survivors to be brought to Leith, and offered the alternative 
 of swearing allegiance or being banished to the Plantations. 
 The majority chose the latter alternative 1 . 
 
 With the year 1686 began James's misunderstandings with 
 
 his Scottish subjects, which were to end in their 
 
 1686 
 decisive rejection of him as their king. It had 
 
 been with grave misgivings that they had seen a Roman 
 
 Catholic sovereign mount the throne, and it was not long 
 
 before these misgivings were convincingly justified. Various 
 
 indications clearly showed that it was James's deliberate policy 
 
 to change the religion of the country. It was an ominous sign 
 
 1 Wodrow, IV. 322 — 328. The Register of the Privy Council proves 
 that Wodrow does not exaggerate the barbarities exercised towards the 
 Dunnottar prisoners! 
 
 B. S. II. 28
 
 434 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 that the Lord Chancellor James, fourth Earl of Perth, his 
 brother, Viscount Melfort 1 , and Alexander, fourth Earl of 
 .Moray, the two Secretaries of State, had openly declared them- 
 selves converts to the king's religion. As usual, the populace 
 of Edinburgh led the way in testifying its disapproval of 
 religious innovations. On Sunday, the 31st January, there 
 was a rising against the Catholic priests, who now openly held 
 their services, in the course of which the Lord Chancelloi was 
 personally insulted 2 . James sent down an indignant letter on 
 the occasion, and a decisive action which he now took proved 
 that he was not to be turned aside from his purpose. On the 
 29th of April the Parliament began its second session by his 
 express command. Queensberry, the Commissioner of the 
 previous year, had refused to change his religion ; and his 
 office had been conferred on the Secretary Melfort, who had 
 been more compliant. In a letter of the king to the Parliament 
 and in the Parliament's reply we have all that is significant 
 in the proceedings that followed. James in his letter announced 
 that he was doing his utmost to bring about free trade between 
 the two countries — a privilege eagerly desired by the Scots, 
 who remembered their brief spell of prosperity under the 
 arrangements made by Cromwell. Immediately following this 
 announcement came the significant part of his letter, to give 
 effect to which the Estates had been expressly summoned. It 
 was a recommendation that the penal laws against his "innocent 
 subjects, those of the Roman Catholic Religion," should be 
 repealed by the sitting Parliament. The reply of the Parlia- 
 ment was that they would take his recommendation into their 
 "serious and dutiful consideration," and "go as great lengths 
 therein " as their consciences would allow, not doubting at the 
 same time that "his Majesty will be careful to secure the 
 
 1 He was created Earl of Melfort in 1686. 
 
 2 Fountainball, Hist. Observes, 243. The priests " were beginning 
 openly to keep their meetings."
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 435 
 
 Protestant religion established by law'." It was now that 
 James took the step which was to lead straight to his ruin in 
 both kingdoms. With Parliaments he would have no more to 
 do, and henceforward he contented himself with issuing his 
 commands to his Privy Council. In August this body received 
 a royal letter which implied his power to dispense with all laws 
 by the simple assertion of his prerogative. He had asked 
 Parliament, he wrote, to abolish the penal laws against 
 Catholics, but this had been a mere act of courtesy on his 
 part, and was wholly unnecessary. He now charged the 
 Council, therefore, to rescind these laws, to permit Catholics 
 the free practice of their religion, and to set apart the Chapel 
 Royal of Holyrood for their special use 2 . As even the Council 
 was recalcitrant, its members required vigorous pruning : eleven 
 Protestants were removed, and Catholics, among whom were 
 the Duke of Gordon and the Earls of Traquair and Seaforth, 
 put in their places 1 . 
 
 It was an unfortunate juncture at which James was seek- 
 ing to convert his two kingdoms to Roman 
 Catholicism. In 1685 the Revocation of the 
 Edict of Nantes had driven to their shores thousands of 
 French Protestants who had strange stories to tell of the 
 tender mercies of a Catholic king 4 . In Scotland, however, 
 the hatred of Rome needed no quickening. The creed adopted 
 by Scotland at the Reformation went further in its divergence 
 from the teaching of Rome than that of any other form of 
 Protestantism. It was, moreover, only after a life and death 
 struggle that the new Church had succeeded in establishing 
 itself as the Church of the nation, and it had ever since been 
 haunted by a dread of a renewal of the battle. The hatred 
 
 1 Ads 0/ Pari, of Scot., vm. 579—580, 581. 
 
 2 The letter is given by Wodrow (iv. 389 — 90). 
 8 Fountainball, Hist. Notices, 750. 
 
 * A number of French refugees from Picardy gave their name to a 
 suburb of Edinburgh. Hence the modern Picardy Place. 
 
 28—2
 
 436 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 of the Pope was not confined to the Presbyterians : it was 
 fully shared by the great majority of the Episcopalians. When 
 James proposed to abolish the penal laws against Catholics, 
 the clergy of the diocese of Aberdeen, the most intensely 
 Episcopal part of the kingdom, represented to their bishop the 
 heinousness of such a proceeding; and by the beginning of 1686 
 the Bishop of Dunkeld and the Archbishop of Glasgow had been 
 deprived for their unsatisfactory attitude towards the king's 
 religion. James could not ignore the alarm he had created 
 among all ranks and all religious classes of his Scottish sub- 
 jects. In Scotland, therefore, he followed the same policy 
 which he had found necessary in England. The liberty of 
 worship which he was granting to Catholics in the teeth of the 
 law, he now offered to his subjects at large. In three suc- 
 cessive Letters of Indulgence he proclaimed his desire that 
 Catholic and Protestant Nonconformists should have an equal 
 measure of liberty to follow their respective modes of worship. 
 The first two letters prescribed conditions which the main body 
 of Presbyterians refused to accept. The last letter met their 
 wishes, though its concessions were clogged by the painful 
 concomitant that they were shared by their Catholic fellow- 
 subjects They were now allowed " to serve God after their 
 own way and manner,'' provided only that nothing was taught 
 "to alienate the hearts" of subjects from their prince. In 
 a letter, which must have been dictated with conflicting feel- 
 ings, they thanked the king for his "gracious and surprising 
 favour," though with a subserviency which showed how sorely 
 broken was the ancient Presbyterian spirit 1 . The Indulgence 
 had results of which James little dreamed when he granted it. 
 It brought home the majority of the exiled Presbyterian 
 ministers, and it enabled them to put their Church on a 
 footing which gave it a commanding influence in the coming 
 Revolution. To the followers of Cameron and Renwick the 
 Indulgence could bring no immunities : for them James was 
 
 1 Wodrow, iv. 428, note.
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 437 
 
 no king, and they could make no terms with him short of his 
 demitting the Crown or accepting the Covenants. Conventicles 
 were still under the ban, and the pursuit of those who fre- 
 quented them was as assiduous as ever. But the day of deliver- 
 ance was approaching, though one more eminent victim, the last 
 of the long succession, was to avouch his faith on the scaffold. 
 This last confessor was James Renwick, who had succeeded 
 
 Richard Cameron as the leader of the remnant 
 
 1688 
 
 who had sworn to the Sanquhar Declaration. He 
 was now only in his twenty-sixth year, but by word and deed 
 he had approved himself worthy of the mantle of Cameron. 
 It was he who had drafted the Apologetical Declaration in 
 which the gauntlet had been thrown down to the Government, 
 and since Cameron's death he had been the only preacher 
 who had continued to defy authority by holding conventicles. 
 A price had long been on his head, but he ventured too boldly 
 at last. At the close of January, 1688, he crossed from Fife 
 to Edinburgh, where he found quarters with a friend who 
 traded in English goods. It was a dangerous corner for an 
 outlaw, as the customs officers were in the habit of visiting it 
 in search of contraband articles. It had come to the ears of 
 one of these officers that a suspicious stranger was in the house; 
 and, guessing who the stranger was, he entered the house early 
 next morning on the pretext of an official visit. Disturbed by 
 the noise, Renwick opened his door and was immediately 
 recognised. On attempting to escape by another egress he 
 found the way blocked, when he drew a pistol and fired. 
 The shot took no effect, but it cleared the way, and he broke 
 through his assailants, sustaining a severe blow as he passed 
 them. Though crippled by the blow he rushed down the 
 street, falling several times as he went. But bareheaded as he 
 was, he was a marked figure, and he was speedily surrounded 
 and overpowered. He had been a desperate offender against 
 the constituted authorities, but the more moderate of the 
 Council were sick of blood, and he was offered his life if he
 
 438 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 would acknowledge the Government. To have accepted life 
 on such conditions would have made him contemptible for 
 ever in the eyes of those to whom he had been a revered 
 apostle; and, though he showed signs that life was not in- 
 different to him, he firmly stood by his testimony. Scotland 
 "must be rid of Scotland before the delivery come" were 
 among his last words from the scaffold. A deliverance was 
 indeed at hand, but it was a deliverance which the followers 
 of Renwick did not find it in their consciences to accept 1 , 
 
 II. The Revolution. 
 
 The process of de-Protestantising the country went on 
 apace and in the eyes of all men. The number 
 and character of the converts to Catholicism 
 gave both alarm and diversion to the sound Protestants in 
 Edinburgh. The baptism of a mountebank, named Reid, and 
 of one of his blackamoor troupe, excited the ridicule of the 
 town 2 . It was no matter of amusement, however, that the 
 Privy Council was gradually being manned with Catholics, that 
 a Catholic press was set up in Holyrood under the manage- 
 ment of the pamphleteer Sir Roger l'Estrange, and that 
 Protestant publishers were systematically prosecuted if they 
 ventured to print a word against the king's religion 3 . 
 
 The birth of the Prince of Wales on June 30, 1688, created 
 the same alarm in Scotland as in England. Presbyterians and 
 Episcopalians alike realised that the fate of Protestantism 
 was no longer doubtful if some unforeseen event did not 
 intervene 4 . A Catholic father succeeded by a Catholic son 
 could, as things were going, have but one result. For a suit- 
 able deliverer, therefore, Scotland was as ready as England. 
 
 1 Wodrow, iv. 445 — 454. 
 
 2 Fountainball, Hist. Notices, 774. 
 
 3 lb. 816; Wodrow, 371. 
 
 4 Balcarras (Somers Tracts, XI. 49 1 )- Balcarras's narrative was written 
 expressly for James after the Revolution.
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 439 
 
 It was on September 18th that the country received its first 
 public intimation of the enterprise of William of Orange. On 
 that day the Privy Council published a proclamation calling 
 on all the eastern counties as far north as Forfar to be in arms 
 by the 25th, and ordering beacons to be set on all prominent 
 places along the east coast. By an order of James, which filled 
 his supporters with dismay and the country at large with 
 sanguine hopes, the most effective portion of the forces raised 
 were summoned to England in the beginning of October 1 . 
 On the 10th of the same month William issued a special 
 address to the people of Scotland in which he offered himself 
 as their deliverer from all the tyrannies of their present ruler 2 . 
 The Council forbade its publication, but in the intractable 
 west it was widely disseminated. As one man, the Presby- 
 terians welcomed the promised deliverance, and their ministers 
 were now at their back to stimulate their zeal. The Episco- 
 palians, on the other hand, were in a painful dilemma. William 
 was not a champion after their heart. In his manifesto he 
 had not committed himself to the approval of any form of 
 Church government, but he came from Holland, where there 
 were no bishops, and where the Presbyterian exiles had found a 
 hospitable home. On the whole, between William and James, 
 both loyalty and interest disposed them to choose the latter. 
 The terror of the invasion might have taught James a lesson 
 which he would thenceforth lay to heart. When the news 
 came, therefore, that William's first attempt to reach England 
 had failed, the Scottish bishops sent a letter of enthusiastic 
 loyalty to James in which they told him among other things 
 that he was "the darling of heaven 3 ." 
 
 But on the 18th of December William took possession of 
 Whitehall, and on the 23rd James quitted En- 
 gland for ever. In Scotland events kept equal 
 pace with their progress in England. The Privy Council 
 
 1 Balcarras (Sowers Tracts, XI. 495). 
 
 2 Wodrow, iv. 470. 3 //'. 468, note.
 
 440 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 alone represented authority in the country, but with James's 
 falling fortunes it was terrorised from without and hopelessly 
 divided within. By the beginning of December Edinburgh 
 was swarming with supporters of William, who openly de- 
 liberated "as if they had been allowed by authority 1 ." As 
 in England, James's special supporters made no serious effort 
 to retrieve the cause of their master. A tumult on the ioth 
 of December frightened the Lord Chancellor Perth from the 
 city 2 . It was to be expected that in the existing anarchy the 
 Catholic Chapel at Holyrood would have the special attention 
 of the Edinburgh populace. Holyrood was guarded by a few 
 soldiers under Captain Wallace ; but aided by the train-bands 
 the mob put them to rout, and straightway made havoc of 
 everything that pertained to the idolatrous service. To the 
 Presbyterians of the west, likewise, the fall of the Government 
 brought their hour of triumph. Their enemies were those 
 curates who, as the official clergy, were identified in their 
 minds with all their sufferings of the last twenty-six years. 
 Christmas Day was chosen for the beginning of the visitation. 
 From their manses and churches and parishes the curates 
 were unceremoniously ejected, with the strict injunction never 
 to appear ,in their respective neighbourhoods. No blood was 
 shed, but it was the dead of winter, and, as above two hundred 
 households were evicted, there were many cases of privation 
 and actual misery. That the Cameronians were content with 
 mere "rabbling" and eviction, however, proves that their words 
 were fiercer than their deeds. 
 
 As soon as it was known that James had left the country 
 
 there was a rush to London of all ranks and 
 1689 
 
 classes, Episcopalian and Presbyterian alike 3 . At 
 the request of some thirty nobles and eighty gentlemen, William 
 
 1 Balcarras (Somers Tracts, XI. 495). 
 
 2 He was taken in the attempt to escape to the Continent, and kept a 
 prisoner for four years. 
 
 3 Balcarras, 501.
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 441 
 
 agreed to summon a meeting of the Scottish Estates which 
 might give expression to the mind of the country. Since the 
 Restoration the elections to the Parliament had been so 
 manipulated that the Government could always reckon on an 
 overwhelming majority. On the present occasion both the 
 supporters of James and of William brought their influence 
 to bear on the choice of representatives ; but, as things now 
 stood, the advantage lay decisively with the latter. The Con- 
 vention (the name was familiar in Scotland) met on March 14th, 
 1689, and in circumstances that for a time left it doubtful 
 which party should prevail. The Castle of Edinburgh was 
 held for James by the Duke of Gordon, and could effectually 
 have stopped the Convention had its keeper been so minded. 
 More formidable to the cause of William was Graham of 
 Claverhouse, created Viscount Dundee by James immediately 
 before his flight. Dundee had held intercourse with William 
 in London 1 , but so notable an instrument of the late Govern- 
 ment could hardly have felt himself comfortable under the new. 
 He had been allowed to come down to Scotland with a troop 
 of some sixty horse, and his presence in Edinburgh was a serious 
 menace to the opposite party. On their part, the thorough- 
 going supporters of William had secretly introduced bodies of 
 armed men from the west who might be ready for action if 
 occasion should arise. 
 
 The first business of the Convention was the choice of a Pre- 
 sident, as William, not yet acknowledged as king, 
 could not appoint a Commissioner. It was felt 
 by both sides that the choice would decide the future proceed- 
 ings of the assembly. The Duke of Athole as a neutral person 
 was put up by the Jacobites, and the Duke of Hamilton by the 
 supporters of William. Hamilton was elected only by a majo- 
 rity of fifteen, but the result took the heart out of the friends 
 of the late king. Two days later the relative confidence and 
 strength of the two parties was again put to the test. Both 
 
 1 Napier, Memorials, III. 496; Burnet, IV. 39.
 
 44 2 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 William and James had addressed letters to the Convention, 
 but while William's was at once read without demur, it was 
 voted that before James's was opened it should be declared 
 that nothing it contained should invalidate the legality of the 
 Convention. To this declaration even Dundee agreed — a 
 stain on his scutcheon, which his own signature avouches 1 . 
 Dundee, however, had resolved to have no further part in 
 proceedings which could only end in conclusions as disastrous 
 to his own fortunes as to those of his late master. He told 
 the Convention what was extremely probable, that he was 
 threatened with assassination; and, as he thought his complaint 
 was slighted, he rode out of the town at the head of his troop. 
 As he passed the castle he had an interview with Gordon 
 which alarmed the majority of the Convention. Thinking the 
 crisis had come, they called forth the armed partisans who had 
 been hidden in the town ; but Dundee went on his way, and 
 civil war was averted for the time. It had been proposed that a 
 rival Convention should be held at Stirling; but of the Jacobite 
 nobles then assembled in the capital only one accompanied 
 Dundee. 
 
 On the nth of April, nearly a month after its sitting, the 
 Convention made a formal "Declaration" regarding the vacant 
 throne. It consisted of two parts, a Claim of Right and an 
 offer of the Crown to William and Mary. The right that was 
 claimed was the constitutional power of the Estates to dethrone 
 a ruler who had violated the laws of his kingdom. Fifteen 
 cases were adduced in which James was alleged to have broken 
 the constitution — the head and front of his offending being 
 that he had assumed the regal power without taking the Coro- 
 nation oath. On these grounds it was declared that he had 
 " forefaulted " the Crown, and that the throne was now vacant. 
 Formal offer of the Crown was then made to William and 
 Mary, and the succession settled upon the heirs of Mary, the 
 Princess Anne of Denmark and her heirs, and, failing all these, 
 
 1 Acts of Pari, of Scot., IX. 8.
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 443 
 
 the heirs of William. To convey the offer of the Estates 
 to the two sovereigns commission was given to the Earl of 
 Argyle, Sir James Montgomery of Skelmorlie, and Sir John 
 Dalrymple, as representatives of the peers, barons, and burghs 
 respectively. The ceremony took place at Whitehall on the 
 nth of May. According to the Scottish fashion William and 
 Mary repeated the words of the Coronation oath 1 after Argyle, 
 who recited them. At the clause which bound the sovereign 
 to be "careful to root out all heretics," William paused and 
 declared that he would not come under an obligation to be a 
 persecutor. The words having been explained to his satisfac- 
 tion, he took the oath, and called on those standing by to 
 witness that he had done so. 
 
 Scotland had thus cast out its ancient line of princes, 
 though without the example and aid of England the task would 
 have been beyond her strength. On the other hand, but for 
 the resources of England behind them, James VI and his three 
 successors could not have maintained a rule in Scotland, which 
 virtually made it a dependency of the larger kingdom. With 
 the exception of the twelve years' triumph of the Covenants, 
 Scotland since the union of the Crowns had, in James VTs 
 words, been governed with the king's pen. Throughout the 
 whole period, however, there had been a continuous protest on 
 the part of the Presbyterian clergy. To the divine right of 
 kings they had steadfastly opposed the divine origin of Presby- 
 tery ; and it had been proved by the experience of a century 
 that political equilibrium was impossible while these two 
 notions divided the mind of the country. The main result of 
 the Revolution for Scotland was that it annihilated these hope- 
 less antinomies ; and it effected this result in the only way that 
 was possible — by the gradual substitution of the secular for the 
 theological spirit in the conduct of public affairs. 
 
 1 The oath will be found in Vol. IX. (App. p. 12;) of the Acts of Pari, 
 of Scotland.
 
 444 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 III. Social Condition of the Country, 1625— 1689. 
 
 The political conditions of the last three reigns had not 
 been conducive to the general development of the country. 
 Even before Charles I's open breach with his subjects in 1638, 
 Scotland as well as England had suffered from his conflict with 
 France and Spain and his entanglements with the Thirty 
 Years' War. By the year 1630 the Scottish Privy Council had 
 to report that the Exchequer was empty and that public busi- 
 ness had come to a deadlock for want of money to carry it on. 
 During the twelve years' ascendency of the Presbyterians the 
 state of affairs was not more favourable to the growth of trade 
 and industry. There were indications of returning prosperity 
 during the Government of the Commonwealth and Protectorate 
 that brought free trade with England and general quietude to 
 the country, but to this promising new departure the Restora- 
 tion gave a fatal check. The exorbitant grant made to the 
 Crown by the first Restoration Parliament was an incubus on 
 the nation till the Revolution, while the wars of Charles II 
 with Holland and the abolition of free trade with England cut 
 off the chief outlets for the most important of Scottish home 
 products. 
 
 During the period from the accession of Charles I to the 
 Revolution Scotland was visited by a succession of English 
 travellers who supply us with some interesting notes of their 
 impressions of the country. In estimating the value of their 
 testimony, however, a reserve must be made : these travellers 
 naturally tested everything they saw by the standard of things 
 English, a criterion manifestly unjust to the poorer country, 
 What struck them all in the general aspect of Scotland was the 
 absence of trees and the absence of enclosures. In the Low- 
 lands, says one, you may travel a hundred miles and not meet 
 with a single tree. This was an exaggeration, but the lack of 
 timber had long taxed the ingenuity of the Legislature.
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 445 
 
 James VI had sagely proposed to stop the exportation of 
 Scottish timber; and the Privy Council had to remind him 
 that within the memory of men no timber had been exported 
 from Scotland, and that if foreign countries were to adopt a 
 retaliatory policy, Scotland would have the worst of the bargain. 
 For the absence of all manner of fences we have a simple 
 explanation in the fact that the universal system of short leases 
 made it no interest of the tenant to erect them. 
 
 Another circumstance that struck the Southron was the 
 diligence with which all arable land had been utilised : Scot- 
 land appeared to them emphatically a "corn-growing" country. 
 On the other hand, little pasture was grown, and the general 
 want of hay called forth frequent maledictions on Scotsmen 
 and their land. Then, as to-day, it was Galloway and the/ 
 Highlands that largely supplied the Lowlands with cattle and 
 sheep. Oats and barley were the chief crops, but peas, beans, 
 and wheat, in small quantities, were also grown. According 
 to the most intelligent of all these 17th century travellers, how- 
 ever, the chief agricultural industry was hemp, of which, he 
 says, the Scots "have a mighty burden," and produce from it 
 "the most noted and beneficial manufacture of the kingdom." 
 The only manures in use were lime and sea-weed, the latter 
 of which excited the ridicule of the strangers. The most fertile 
 and highly cultivated parts of the country were those which 
 maintain the same reputation at the present day. Moray was 
 regarded as the garden of Scotland, and slightly behind it came 
 Angus, the Carse of Gowrie, the banks of the Forth, parts of 
 Fife, Lothian, Clydesdale, and the Merse. In the neighbour- 
 hood of towns, also, it was noted that the ground was assidu- 
 ously cultivated. The general bareness of the country was 
 relieved by the frequency of gentlemen's seats, which were 
 specially numerous near the capital and some other large 
 towns. It was only in connection with these country-houses 
 that fruits were reared, though orchards were to be met with in 
 different parts of the country. From gentlemen's gardens
 
 446 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 gooseberries, currants, and strawberries occasionally found 
 their way to the public markets. 
 
 The houses of the lairds and nobles gave the impression of 
 having been built for security rather than comfort, though such 
 as were of more recent date gave indications of taste both in 
 their architecture and furnishings. The public roads, it would 
 seem, were no worse than those of England ; at least, it is the 
 testimony of the most splenetic of all the tourists that the state 
 of the highways was "the greatest comfort" the country had to 
 afford. On the other hand, in spite of all the efforts of the 
 executive for centuries past, a comfortable inn was hardly to be 
 found. At such inns as there were there was no accommoda- 
 tion for horses, which had to be bestowed with some neigh- 
 bouring stabler. As we learn from Acts of Parliament, 
 the lack of provision for travellers was due to the fact that 
 when the Scottish gentry had occasion to make lengthened 
 journeys they found hospitality with kinsmen and friends by 
 the way. In 1689 the only horse-posts were those that ran 
 from Edinburgh to Berwick and Portpatrick in connection 
 with England and Ireland. There were no stage-coaches, but 
 a horse and man could be hired for two English pennies a 
 mile 1 . Only a few of the higher nobles and bishops had 
 coaches of their own. 
 
 The slovenly habits of the Scots evoked the most biting 
 sarcasms from their English visitors. "The sluttishness and 
 nastiness of this people is such," writes one, who is otherwise 
 not an unfriendly critic, " that I cannot omit the particularising 
 thereof, though I have more than sufficiently often touched 
 upon the same : their houses, and halls, and kitchens have 
 such a noisome taste, a savour, and that so strong, as it doth 
 offend you so soon as you come within their wall 3 ." The 
 houses of the peasantry were such as may still be seen in out- 
 
 1 During the Protectorate stage-coaches ran regularly between Edin- 
 burgh and London. 
 
 2 Sir William Brereton (1636).
 
 Chap, vn] James VII 447 
 
 lying parts of Scotland — mere mud cabins, thatched with turf, 
 without window or chimney, the door alone admitting light and 
 air. As distinguished from the same class in England, the 
 Scottish peasantry wore bonnets (generally blue) instead of 
 hats, and plaids instead of cloaks. When the women went to 
 church or market they covered their heads and shoulders with 
 a plaid — a garb also worn by ladies when they did not wish to 
 be recognised. Beer was the general drink of the poorer classes; 
 broth and bannocks made of oatmeal their principal diet. 
 Of these necessaries there was a rough abundance, which, 
 if common in England, was assuredly not common in con- 
 temporary France. Among the upper classes the dress and style 
 of living did not greatly differ from the standard of England 1 . 
 With what luxury and elegance a Scottish noble could surround 
 himself was to be seen in Leslie House, built by the Com- 
 missioner Rothes in the reign of Charles II. Within and 
 without its equipments excited the admiration even of the 
 captious Englishman already quoted. As for the lairds or 
 lesser barons, here is the bill of fare presented to one of our 
 travellers by Sir James Pringle of Gala House : barley broth, 
 powdered beef, mutton roasted and boiled, venison pie, goose, 
 and cheese, with beer during the feast and " hot waters " at its 
 close. Though beer is specified as the drink on this occasion, 
 French wines were the common beverage of the well-to-do 
 classes, and all the English visitors testify that they found them 
 better and cheaper than in their own country. 
 
 The two leading towns were Edinburgh and Glasgow, with 
 populations of 60,000 and 30,000 respectively. In Edinburgh 
 what impressed all visitors, alike from England and the Con- 
 tinent, was the length and spaciousness of the High Street. 
 It greatly detracted from its effect, however, that there were 
 few or no glazed windows, and that the houses were faced 
 with wooden boards perforated with holes through which the 
 
 1 A large proportion of the Scottish nobility went to France and even 
 to Italy to complete their education.
 
 448 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 inmates thrust their heads in unseemly fashion. The con- 
 current testimony gave Glasgow the first place among Scottish 
 towns for beauty and attractiveness. With its four streets in 
 the form of a cross, its cathedral and tolbooth (both the finest 
 in the country), and its noble river spanned by a bridge of 
 many arches and as yet uncontaminated, it reminded fastidious 
 Englishmen of the pleasantest sights of their own land. Among 
 other towns noted for their attractiveness were Hamilton, Perth, 
 Dumfries, and Dundee, though the last long bore the marks of 
 General Monk's rough handling. 
 
 Regarding the trade of Scotland we have a precise state- 
 ment by Thomas Tucker, a Commissioner sent down by the 
 Protectorate in 1655 to report on the excise and customs. 
 He found the trade of the country almost exclusively confined 
 to the seaports, of which he enumerates only eight as being of 
 any account — Glasgow and Ayr on the west coast; Leith, 
 Borrowstoneness, Burntisland, Dundee, Aberdeen, and Inver- 
 ness on the east. Leith came first in importance, and Glasgow 
 second — the chief commodities exported being salt, coal, plaid- 
 ing, and salmon. The countries with which trade was mainly 
 carried on were Holland, Denmark, Norway, and France. Before 
 Tucker's visit Glasgow had made ventures as far as the Barbados, 
 but the result had not been encouraging, and she was now re- 
 stricting herself to less costly enterprises. The seaports along 
 the coast of Fife are described as "pitiful small towns," Dundee 
 as " not contemptible," and New Aberdeen as " no despicable 
 burgh." Connected with the backwardness of trade was the 
 unsatisfactory state of the currency. The coins in common 
 circulation were mostly foreign — various kinds of dollars being 
 specially numerous. During the last three reigns Parliament 
 and Privy Council had passed fruitless laws against the im- 
 portation of foreign coins, and at the date of the Revolution 
 the evil seems to have been greater than ever. " Money of 
 their own coining they have little for want of bullion," writes 
 one in 1689. Trade both on a large and a small scale was
 
 Chap, vn] James I'll 449 
 
 seriously affected by the existing abuses : from the lack of 
 small coins the poorer classes found it difficult to carry on 
 their marketing, while in larger transactions the passing of 
 the foreign money at a rate far above its intrinsic value gave 
 rise to an amount of dishonest dealing which turned trade into 
 a game of sharp practice. 
 
 The frightful nightmare of witchcraft which had ridden 
 Scotland since the Reformation could not escape the notice of 
 the most casual foreign observer. "At the time we were in Scot- 
 land"(i662), writes an English visitor, "divers women were burnt 
 for witches; they reported to the number of about one hundred 
 and twenty." At the establishment of Protestantism in 1560 
 death and confiscation of goods had been adjudged as the penalty 
 of saying and hearing mass; but in point of fact only one Roman 
 Catholic, the Jesuit Ogilvie 1 , had actually been awarded the 
 crown of martyrdom. This is a pleasing record compared 
 with that of every other Christian country, but if Scottish 
 Protestants were thus merciful towards those whom they con- 
 sidered idolaters, they showed no such relentings towards those 
 whom they deemed direct traffickers with the powers of darkness. 
 It was three years after the change of the national religion 
 that an Act was passed ordaining the penalty of death for "any 
 manner of witchcraft, sorcery, or necromancy 2 "; and of all 
 Acts ever sanctioned by the Scottish Legislature this was the 
 one which received the most exemplary obedience from all 
 parties responsible for its execution. Of all these parties, how- 
 ever, it was the ministers, Presbyterian and Episcopalian alike, 
 who laboured most faithfully that the law should not remain 
 a dead letter. With the terrible literalism of their Biblical 
 exegesis they read the text "Thou shalt not suffer a witch to 
 live," and with holy horror and unflinching conviction they 
 carried out the Divine command. The atrocious enactment 
 
 1 Regarding Ogilvie see ante, p. 272. 
 
 2 Acts of Pari, of Scot., II. 539. The year before a similar Act ha<l 
 been passed in England. 
 
 B. s 11. 29
 
 450 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 kept its place in the statute-book till 1 736 ; of its victims it is 
 impossible to fix the number even approximately, but it is by 
 thousands and not by hundreds that they must be reckoned. 
 The method of procedure against the persons accused proves 
 that all ranks and classes in the country were equally involved 
 in the monstrous delusion. When anyone (the great majority 
 were women) was suspected of devilish practices, he was 
 'delated' to the minister and Kirk Session of his parish, who 
 subjected him to a searching examination. If his guilt ap- 
 peared probable, application was made to the Privy Council for 
 a special commission to try the case. Usually the Council 
 made no difficulty about granting the desired commission, which 
 was chosen from the leading gentlemen of the neighbourhood. 
 In the great majority of cases the verdict was "guilty," and 
 this for sufficiently cogent reasons. If the jury themselves 
 were not predisposed to assume guilt, their zeal was quickened 
 by public opinion, and specially by the ministers who had 
 committed themselves to a judgement by the application for 
 a commission. By the appliance of torture, moreover, the 
 accused was forced into confessions, the grotesque absurdity of 
 which was interpreted as the most convincing evidence of their 
 reality. The punishment of the condemned was to be strangled 
 at the stake and burned. Not unfrequently the victims brought 
 accusations against other persons in the neighbourhood, who 
 as often as not shared the fate of their accusers. Occasionally, 
 also, unscrupulous persons to revenge themselves on their 
 enemies would bring against them the dreaded charge with 
 the certainty that they would suffer either in life or reputation. 
 It was one of the many good fruits of the Protectorate in 
 Scotland that it brought a slackening in the pursuit and punish- 
 ment of witches. At no period, however, were the wretches 
 sought out and visited so mercilessly as in the years that 
 followed the Restoration— the result, it was said, of the mis- 
 taken mercy of the Cromwellian judges. After the Revolution 
 the number of victims gradually diminished, and the last
 
 Chap, vii] James VII 451 
 
 execution for witchcraft in Scotland is usually said to have been 
 that of an old woman in Dornoch in Sutherland in 172a 1 . 
 
 The assiduity of the Church in the suppression of witch- 
 craft is only one instance of its strenuous supervision of the 
 life of the nation. It was from the close of the Second Bishops' 
 War till the invasion of Cromwell that the Presbyterian system 
 was in its fullest development and its most vigorous force. As 
 the political as well as the spiritual masters of the situation, 
 the ministers could now bring the complete machinery of the 
 Church to bear upon the nation with an efficiency for which 
 they had hitherto vainly striven even in the years that followed 
 the Reformation. Surrounded by his deacons and his elders, 
 the minister of the parish discharged the functions of religious 
 teacher and censor of manners which were inherent in his 
 office. It was the duty of the deacons to look after the 
 interests of the poor, for whom a collection was made each 
 Sunday before the sermon. The obligations of the elders were 
 more exacting : to each of them was assigned a special part of 
 the parish, for the exemplary behaviour of which he was held 
 responsible. In the list of offences which he had to report 
 were drunkenness, profane language, slander, fornication, 
 adultery, and general neglect of Church ordinances. The 
 penalties inflicted on offenders were on the ascending scale of 
 private and public reprimands, pillory or " the stool of repent- 
 ance " in a public part of the church, and finally, in desperate 
 cases, excommunication. The records of various Presbyteries 
 that have been preserved afford lively evidence that the duties 
 of the Scottish elder of the 17th century must have been 
 onerous. 
 
 The civil and religious troubles in England did not prevent 
 the production of works of literary genius by both Puritans 
 and Cavaliers. To similar troubles, therefore, it cannot be 
 
 1 Captain Burt, however, notes a case in 1727. The last trial for 
 witchcraft in England took place at Hereford in 1712. The person accused, 
 Jane Wenham, was convicted, but the law did not tnke its full course. 
 
 29 — 2
 
 452 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 due that no such works were forthcoming in Scotland. Learned 
 men she possessed in abundance, but no poet or prose-writer 
 whose works have taken their place among British classics. In 
 the Letters and Journals of Robert Baillie there are passages 
 which for vividness and insight may compare with anything in 
 Clarendon; but, invaluable though his three volumes are for the 
 history of his time, their general quality has not preserved 
 them as literature. The religious writings of Samuel Ruther- 
 ford and Archbishop Leighton still appeal to a certain class of 
 readers, but they do not rank with the great English divines in 
 uniform beauty of style and sanity and depth of thought. In 
 the field of pure literature, the translation of the first three 
 books of Rabelais by the fantastic Sir Thomas Urquhart is the 
 only production of the period that has attracted the attention 
 of the modern student. 
 
 In Scotland as in England the development of the Univer- 
 sities was seriously retarded by the prolonged national quarrel. 
 In all of them the two great parties in the quarrel had their 
 representatives, whose dissensions distracted them from their 
 duties as teachers and organisers. Covenanters and Loyalists 
 alike showed a laudable desire for the advance of higher 
 studies ; but, even if they could have worked in harmony, the 
 economic condition of the country hardly permitted the liberal 
 endowment of the Universities. Wkh such means as were at 
 their disposal, however, the four Universities kept well abreast 
 of the learning of the time, for in the 17th as in the 16th 
 century Scotsmen did not consider their education finished till 
 they had sat at the feet of the most distinguished continental 
 scholars. The " Aberdeen doctors " extended the fame of 
 their University beyond the limits of Scotland : to Glasgow 
 came crowds of the sons of English Nonconformists who were 
 debarred from Oxford and Cambridge; and Edinburgh saw 
 the beginning of its famous medical school in the establishment 
 of a Physic Garden (1675) and the foundation of the College 
 of Physicians (1685).
 
 Char vii] James VII 453 
 
 The establishment of a school in every parish, which had 
 been the aim of Knox and his brother reformers, had not been 
 fully realised even at the date of the Revolution. The ideal, 
 however, had never been lost sight of; and probably there was 
 no peasantry in Europe more generally intelligent than the 
 peasantry of Scotland. In the case of the western population 
 we have a striking testimony from the historian Burnet, who 
 with five other Episcopal divines was commissioned to preach in 
 the vacant churches. "We were indeed amazed," he says, " to 
 see a poor commonalty so capable to argue upon points of 
 government, and on the bounds to be set to the power of 
 princes in matters of religion : upon all these topics they had 
 texts of Scripture at hand; and were ready with their answers to 
 anything that was said to them. This measure of knowledge 
 was spread even among the meanest of them, their cottagers, 
 and their servants'." To this religious discipline as much as 
 to the parish school has been due that 
 
 Stately speech, 
 Such as grave livers do in Scotland use, 
 Religious men, who give to God and Man their dues 2 . 
 
 In the foregoing narrative we have traversed a period 
 covering nearly a century and a half of the history of the 
 Scottish people. It is a period clearly distinguishable alike 
 from the time that went before and the time that was to come 
 after. Its essential characteristic was that, from first to last, \ 
 
 1 Burnet, I. 507-8. — The contemporary testimony of Defoe is to the I 
 same effect : "in a whole chinch full of people," he says, "not one shall he 
 seen without a Bible, a custom almost forgotten in England : on the other 
 hand, in a church in Scotland, if you shut your eyes when the minister 
 names any text of Scripture, you shall hear a little rustling noise over the 
 whole place, made by turning the leaves of the Bible." — Memoirs of lite 
 Church of Scotland (17 17), p. 332. 
 
 2 Sir Walter Scott, speaking of the Scottish peasantry, whom he knew 
 so well, has the following passage in his Introduction to the Antiquary: 
 "The antique force and simplicity of their language, often tincture'd with 
 the Oriental eloquence of Scripture, in the mouths of those of an elevated 
 understanding, give pathos to their grief and dignity to their resentment."
 
 454 The Crown and the Kirk [Book vi 
 
 ,. 
 
 religion was the dominating force in determining the national 
 development. But this period is itself divisible into two 
 distinct stages. During the first stage the country was mainly 
 occupied in deciding whether Protestantism or Roman Catho- 
 licism was to be the national religion ; and the victory of 
 Protestantism was not finally assured till the capture of 
 Edinburgh Castle by the Regent Morton in 1573 cut off all 
 hopes of Mary's return to Scotland. Under Mary's four imme- 
 diate successors on the throne, and under the Commonwealth, 
 the nation had another problem to solve, another struggle to 
 fight through to the end. In this stage, also, religion was 
 at the root of the great controversy which was carried on for 
 a full century between the nation and its rulers. If Presby- 
 terian Scotland believed that its creed and polity were alike of 
 Divine origin, its rulers, with no less strength of conviction, 
 claimed a similar origin for the regal authority — positions, be it 
 noted, which were incompatible, nay, mutually destructive. In 
 such conditions, as has been more than once said, the normal 
 relations of prince and subject were impossible. Nor was it 
 the mere expulsion of James VII that rescued the nation from 
 its dilemma. Had the majority of the Scottish people re- 
 mained bound to the traditions of Knox and Andrew Melville, 
 as did the followers of Cameron and Cargill, the long struggle 
 would only have been renewed under William of Orange. 
 But, in point of fact, when the Revolution came, the spirit 
 that had produced the two Covenants was no longer the 
 prevailing force in the country. The experience which the 
 nation had undergone since the Restoration had engendered 
 a spirit of compromise which reduced religious considerations 
 to a secondary place in the Revolution settlement. The 
 Revolution, in truth, marks the definitive triumph of the secular 
 over the theological spirit in the conduct of public affairs; 
 and, so far as Scotland is concerned, in this fact lies its main 
 significance in the national history.
 
 455 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 A. General. 
 
 Acts of Parliament of Scotland (to 1707), Record Series. 
 
 National MSS. of Scotland (to 1707), Record Series. 
 
 Register of the Privy Council of Scotland (to 1707 — published to 
 
 1630), Record Series. 
 Exchequer Rolls of Scotland (published to 1588), Record Series. 
 Register of the Great Seal of Scotland (published to 165 1), Record 
 
 Series. 
 Publications of the Scottish Burgh Record Society. 
 Rymer, Foedera, 10 vols., 1745; new edition, 18 16 — 1830. 
 Fraser Tytler, The History of Scotland from the Accession of 
 
 Alexander III to the Union (1828 — 1843). 
 Ranke, A History of England, principally in the \jth century, 
 
 Oxford, 1875. 
 Hill Burton, The History of Scotland from the Invasion of Agricola, 
 
 new edit., 8 vols., 1873. 
 John Mackintosh, History of Civilization in Scotland, 4 vols., 
 
 Aberdeen, 1878— 1888. 
 Chambers, Domestic Annals of Scotland from the Reformation to 
 
 the Revolution, 2 vols., 1858. 
 Charles Rogers, Social Life in Scotland from Early to Recent 
 
 Times, 3 vols., Grampian Club. 
 County Histories of Scotland (Blackwood and Sons, 1896— in 
 
 progress). 
 F. H. Groome, Ordnance Gazetteer of Scotland, new edit., igor. 
 The New Statistical Account of Scotland, 15 vols., Edinburgh, 
 
 1845- 
 
 John Cunningham, The Church History of Scotland from the Com- 
 mencement of the Christian Era to the Present Century, 2 vols., 
 Edinb. 1859. 
 
 Grub, An Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, 4 vols., 1861. 
 
 Bellesheim, History of the Catholic Church in Scotland, S-v., trans- 
 lated by Hunter Blair, 4 vols., Edinb. 1887—1890.
 
 456 Bibliography 
 
 Stephen, History of the Scottish Church, 2 vols. (1894—6). 
 R. S. Rait, Outline of the Relations between England and Scotland 
 (500 — 1707), Lond. 1901. 
 „ The Scottish Parliament before the Union of the Crowns, 
 Lond. 1901. 
 Articles on public men of the period in Dictionary of National 
 
 Biography. 
 Sir William Eraser's series of Scottish Family Histories. 
 
 B. Special. 
 
 I. (1542-157S.) 
 
 Ecclesiae Scoticanae Statuta (1225 — 1559), 1866, ed. Joseph 
 
 Robertson. 
 Haynes, State Papers of Lord Burghley (1542 — 1570), 1740. 
 A. Clifford, State Papers and Letters of Ralph Sadler, 2 vols., 
 
 Edinburgh, 1809. 
 T. Wright, Queen Elisabeth and her Times: original letters, 2 vols., 
 
 1838. 
 Lord Hardwicke, State Papers (1501 — 1726), 2 vols., 1778. 
 E. Lodge, Illustrations of British History (Henry VIII — James I), 
 
 3 vols., 1791. 
 J. Stevenson, Selections &>c. illustrating the reign of Alary, 
 
 Maitland Club, 1837. 
 Miscellaneous Papers illustrating the reigns of Mary and James VI, 
 
 Maitland Club, 1834. 
 Thorpe, Calendar of State Papers, Scottish Series (1509— 1603), 
 
 2 vols., 1858. 
 Bain, Calendar of Stale Papers relating to Scotland (1547 — 1603), 
 1898. 
 „ Hamilton Papers: relations of England and Scotland in 
 
 1 6th century, vols. I and II, 1890—92. 
 „ Calendar of Papers relating to the Borders of England and 
 
 Scotland (vol. I, 1560 — 1594), 1894. 
 „ Calendar of Papers relating to Scotland and Mary Queen of 
 Scots (1547— 1603). 
 Calendar of State Papers, Foreign Series, Eliz. (1558— 1577), 
 11 vols.— vols. 1—7, ed. J. Stevenson; vols. 8— 11, ed. A.J. 
 Crosby, 1863 — 1880.
 
 Bibliography 457 
 
 Calendar of MSS. preserved at Hatfield House (Parts I — 3), 
 
 1863— 89. 
 Martin Hume, Calendar of State Papers in the archives of Simancas 
 
 (vols. 1—4, 1558— 1603), 1892 — 1899. 
 Rawdon Brown, Calendar of State Papers in the archives of Venice 
 
 (vols. VII— VIII), 1890. 
 J. Stevenson, Correspondence of Robert Bowes, Surtees Society, 1842. 
 Howell, State Trials. 
 J. H. Pollen, Despatches of Papal Envoys to Queen Mary, Scot. 
 
 Hist. Soc, 1901. 
 Thomson, Booke of the Universal Kirk (3 vols, from 1560), 
 
 1839—45. 
 Teulet, Papiers d'Etat relatifs a VHistoire de I'Ecosse au XVI"" 
 
 Steele (3 vols., Ban. Club), 1852 — 60. 
 Pitcairn, Criminal Trials in Scotland from 1488 to 1624 (Maitland 
 
 Club). 
 Labanoff, Recucil des Lctires de Marie Stuart, 7 vols., 1 844. 
 J. Anderson, Collections relating to the history of Mary Queen of 
 
 Scots, 4 vols., 1727 — 8. 
 A. Strickland, Letters of Mary Queen of Scots, 3 vols., 1842 — 3; 
 
 new edit., 1864. 
 Bishop Keith, Affairs of Church and State in Scotland, 1st edit., 
 
 1734; ed. J. P. Lawson, Spottiswoode Soc, 3 vols., 1844, 1845. 
 John Knox, History of the Reformation in Scotland {vols. 1 — 2 of 
 
 Works, ed. David Laing), 1846 — 1848. 
 Bannatyne, Memorials of Transactions in Scotland (1569 — 1573), 
 
 Ban. Club, 1836. 
 Sir James Melville, Memoirs of his own Life (1 549 — 93), Ban. Club, 
 
 1827. 
 Diurnal of Remarkable Occurrents (15 14 — 1575), Maitland Club, 
 
 1883. 
 R. Bind, Diary (1532 — 1605), 1798. 
 Lyndsay of Pitscottie, Historie of Scotland (1436— 1 575), ed. M. J. G. 
 
 Mackay (Scot. Text Soc), 1899. 
 John, Lord Herries, historical Memoirs (Abbotsford Club), ed. 
 
 R. Pitcairn, 1836. 
 M. de Castelnau, Memoires &>c. (Reigns of Francis II, Charles IX, 
 
 and Henry III), ed. Le Labourcur, 3 vols., 1731 ; English 
 
 translation, 1724.
 
 458 Bibliography 
 
 G. Buchanan, Return Scoticarum Historia, 1582. 
 
 C. Nau, History of Mary Stewart from the murder of Rice io to her 
 
 flight into England, ed. J. Stevenson, 1883. 
 J. Lesley, Defense of the honour of Marie etc., 1571. 
 
 „ De titulo et jure S. principis Mariae, 1580; English 
 translation, 1584. 
 
 „ De Origiue, moribus et rebus gestis Scotorum, 1578. 
 
 „ History of Scotland (1436 — 1561), Ban. Club, 1830. 
 S. Jebb, De Vita et rebus gestis Mariae... quce scriptis tradidere 
 
 auc tores sedecim, 2 vols., 1725. 
 Kervyn de Lettenhove, Documents Inedits relatifs a V Histoire du 
 
 xvi' Siecle, Brussels, 1883. 
 W. Robertson, History of Scotland (1 542—1603), 1st edit., 1759. 
 Goodall, Examination of the Letters said to be written by Mary 
 
 Queen of Scots to fames Earl of Bothwell, 2 vols., Edinb. 1754. 
 Chalmers, Life of Mary Queen of Scots, 2nd edit., 3 vols., London, 
 
 1822. 
 Raumer, Die Koniginnen Elisabeth und Maria Stuart, Leipzig, 
 
 1836. 
 Petrick, Die Briefe der Konigin Maria Stuart an den Grafen 
 
 Bothwell und deren Unechtheit auf Grund neuer Beweisc, 
 
 St Petersburg, 1873. 
 Hosack, Mary Queen of Scots and her Accusers, 2nd edit., 2 vols., 
 1870 — 1874. 
 „ Mary Stewart, A Brief Statement of the principal charges 
 brought against her, &*c. } Edinb. 1888. 
 Mignet, Marie Stuart, 2 vols., 185 1. 
 Froude, History of England from the Fall of Wolsey to the Defeat 
 
 of the Spanish Armada. 
 Agnes Strickland, Life of Mary Queen of Scots, 1873. 
 Skelton, Maitland of Lethington, 1877. 
 
 Wiesener, Marie Stuart et le Comte de Bothwell, Paris, 1863. 
 Che"ruel, Marie Stuart et Catherine de MMicis, Paris, 1858. 
 Oncken, Bcitrage zur neueren Geschichte, &*c, Giessen, 1885. 
 B. Sepp, Die Kassetten-briefe Maries Stuart, Munich, 1884. 
 T. H. Henderson, The Casket Letters and Mary Queen of Scots, 
 
 2nd edit., Edinb. 1890. 
 Ruble, La Premiere feunesse de Marie Stuart, Paris, 1891. 
 Philippson, Histoire du Regne de Marie Stuart, 3 vols., 1891, 1892.
 
 Bibliograpliy 459 
 
 Bekker, Maria Stuart, Darn ley, Bothwell, Giessen, 188 1. 
 
 H. Forst, Maria Stuart unci der Tod Darnleys, Bonn, 1894. 
 
 Rait, Mary Queen of Scots (1542 — 1587), 2nd edit., Lond. 190c 
 
 (Scottish History from Contemporary Writers). 
 D. Hay Fleming, Mary Queen of Scots from her birth to her flight 
 
 into England, vol. I, Lond. 1897. 
 A. Lang, The Mystery of Mary Stuart, 2nd edit., Lond. 1901. 
 
 II. (1578-1625.) 
 
 William Murdin, State Papers of Lord Burgh ley (1571 — 1596), 1740. 
 Correspondence of Robert Bowes, ed. Rev. J. Stevenson, 1842 
 
 (Surtees Society). 
 Registrum Honoris de Morton, Ban. Club, 1853. 
 Letters and Memorials of Cardinal Allen, Lond. 1882, 
 Letters and Papers relating to Patrick, Master of Gray, Ban. Club, 
 
 1836. 
 Extracts from the Despatches of M. Courcelles, French Ambassador 
 
 at the Court of Scotland (1586— 1587), Ban. Club, 1828. 
 The Register of the Kirk-Session of St Andrews, 2 Parts (1559 — 
 
 1600), ed. D. Hay Fleming, Scot. Hist. Soc. 1889, 1890. 
 Court-Book of the Barony of Urie (1604 — 1707), ed. D. G. Barron, 
 
 Scot. Hist. Soc. 1892. 
 Miscellany of the Scot. Hist. Soc, vol. 1, 1893. 
 Letters and State Papers during the Reign of James VI, Abbots- 
 ford Club, 1838. 
 Original Letters relating to the Ecclesiastical Affairs of Scotland, 
 
 Ban. Club, 185 1. 
 State Papers of Thomas, Earl of Melros, Abbotsford Club, 1837. 
 Calendar of State Papers, Domestic, ed. M. A. E. Green, vols. 
 
 vii— XI (1566 — 1625). 
 Correspondence of James VI with Sir Robert Cecil and others, 
 
 Camden Soc. 1861. 
 Papers relative to the marriage of King James VI of Scotland with 
 
 the Princess Anne of Denmark, Ban. Club, 1828. 
 Moysie, Memoirs of the Affairs of Scotland (1577 — 1603), Maitland 
 
 Club, 1830. 
 History of James the Scxt, Ban. Club, 1825. 
 Bannatyne Miscellany, 3 vols., 1827, 1836, 1855.
 
 460 Bibliography 
 
 D. Calderwood, The History of the Kirk of Scotland, 8 vols. (1514— 
 
 1625), ed. Rev. Thomas Thompson, 1842—1849. 
 Robert Birrel, Diary (1532— 1605), Dalzell's Fragments of Scottish 
 
 History, Edinb. 1798. 
 Spottiswoode, History of the Church of Scotland (A.D. 203—1625), 
 
 ed. Russell, Spottiswoode Society, 1847— 1851. 
 Camden, Annals (1603— 1623), translated in Rennet's Hist, of 
 
 England. 
 James Melville, Diary (1555— 160 1), Ban. Club, 1836. 
 Malcolm Laing, Hist, of Scotland (1603^ 1607), Lond. 1800. 
 T. M'Crie, Life of Andrew Melville, 2 vols., first ed., 18 19. 
 Louis Barbe, Tragedy of Gowrie House, Paisley, 1887. 
 S. R. Gardiner, History of England (1603— 1659). 
 
 III. (1625 — 1649.) 
 
 Earl of Stirling's Register of Royal Letters (161 5— 1635), 2 vols., 
 
 ed. Charles Rogers, 1885. 
 Hamilton Papers (1638— 1650), ed. S. R. Gardiner, Camden 
 
 Society, 1880. 
 Rushworth, Historical Collections (161 8— 1648), 8 vols., Lond. 
 
 1682 — 1701. 
 Correspondence of the Earls of Ancrum and Lothian (1616 — 1667), 
 
 ed. D. Lans, 2 vols., Edinb. 1875. 
 Earl of Rothes, Relation of Proceedings concerning the Affairs of the 
 
 Kirk of Scotland from August, 1637, to July, 1638, Ban. Club, 
 
 1830. 
 Alexander Peterkin, Records of the Kirk of Scotland (from 1638), 
 
 i837- 
 Records of the Commissions of the General Assemblies of the 
 
 Church of Scotland (1646—9), ed. A. F. Mitchell, 2 vols., Scot. 
 
 Hist. Society, 1892, 1896. 
 Warriston's Diary and other Papers, Scot. Hist. Soc. 1896. 
 The Compt Buik of David Wedderburne, Merchant of Dundee 
 
 (1587— 1630), ed. A. H. Millar, Scot. Hist. Soc. 1898. 
 Tbe Correspondence of De Montereuil, &c. (1645 — 1648), ed. J. G. 
 
 Fotheringham, 2 vols., Scut. Hist. Soc. 1897. 
 Row, Hist, of the Kirk of Scotland (1558 — 1637), Wodrow Society, 
 
 1842.
 
 Bibliography 46 1 
 
 Sir James Balfour, Annals of Scotland (to 1652), 4 vols., ed. 1824. 
 
 Clarendon, History of the Rebellion, 6 vols., Oxford, 17 17. 
 
 Robert Baillie, Letters and Journals (1637 — 1662), 3 vols., 1841 — 
 
 1842, Ban. Club. 
 Spalding, History of the Troubles in England and Scotland (1624 — 
 
 1645), 2 vols., 1828— 1829, Ban. Club. 
 James Gordon, History of Scots Affairs from 1637 to 1641, 3 vols., 
 
 1 84 1, Spalding Club. 
 Henry Guthrie, Bishop of Dunkeld, Memoirs (1637— 1649), Glas- 
 gow, 1748. 
 George Wishart, The Memoirs of James Marquis of Montrose 
 
 (1639 — 1650), ed. Simpson and Murdoch, Lond. 1893. 
 Robert Monteith, History of the Troubles of Great Britain and 
 
 particularly in Scotland (1633 — 1650), translated from the 
 
 French by Captain James Ogilvie, Lond. 1735. 
 Lord Hailes, Memorials and Letters in the Reign of Charles I, 
 
 Glasgow, 1766. 
 Bishop Burnet, Lives of James and William, Dukes of Hamilton, 
 
 Oxford, 1852. 
 Connell, Treatise on Tithes, 2nd edit., 2 vols., Edinb. 1830. 
 David Masson, The Life of John Milton, in connection with the 
 History of his Time, 6 vols., Lond. 1859 — 1880. 
 „ Drummond of Hawihomden, Lond. 1873. 
 
 George Sprott, Scottish Liturgies of the Reign of James VI, new 
 
 edit., 1901, Church Service Society, Blackwood and Sons. 
 Sanford Terry, The Life and Campaigns of Alexander Leslie, 
 
 Lond. 1899. 
 Aiton, Life and Times of Alexander Henderson (1583 — 1646), 
 
 Edinb. 1836. 
 M'Crie, Lives of Alexander Henderson and James Guthrie, Edinb. 
 
 1846. 
 Mark Napier, The Life and Times of Montrose. Edinb. 1840. 
 
 „ Memoirs of the Marquis of Montrose, 2 vols., Edinb. 
 
 1856. 
 „ Memorials of Montrose, and his Times, 2 vols., 
 
 1850. 
 Mowbray Morris, Montrose (English Men of Action), Lond. 1892.
 
 462 Bibliography 
 
 IV. (1649— 1660.) 
 
 John Nicoll, Diary (1650— 1667), Ban. Club, 1836. 
 
 John Lamont of Newton, Diary (1649— 1672), Maitland Club, 1830. 
 
 Wigton Papers, Miscell. of Maitland Club, vol. II. 1840. 
 
 John Thurloe, A Collection of State Papers (1638 — 1660), 7 vols., 
 
 Lond. 1742. 
 Letters from Roundhead Officers written from Scotland (1650 — 
 
 1660), Ban. Club, 1856. 
 Letters and Papers illustrating the Relations between Charles II 
 
 and Scotland in 1650, ed. S. R. Gardiner, Scot. Hist. Soc. 1893. 
 Scotland and the Commonwealth, Letters and Papers relating to 
 
 the Military Government of Scotland (1651 — 1653), ed. C. H. 
 
 Firth, 1894, Scot. Hist. Soc. 
 Scotland and the Protectorate, Letters and Papers relating to the 
 
 Military Government of Scotland (1654— 1659), ed. C. H. 
 
 Firth, 1898, Scot. Hist. Soc. 
 The Clarke Papers, vol. iv, ed. C. H. Firth, Royal Hist. Soc. 1901. 
 Extracts from the Presbytery Records of Inverness and Dingwall 
 
 (1638— 1688), ed. William Mackay, 1896, Scot. Hist. Soc. 
 The Diary of Andrew Hay of Craignethan (1659 — 1660), ed. A. G. 
 
 Reid, 1 901, Scot. Hist. Soc. 
 The Cromwellian Union, Papers relating to the Negotiations for 
 
 an incorporating union between England and Scotland (1651 — 
 
 1652), ed. C. Sanford Terry, 1902, Scot. Hist. Soc. 
 Sir James Turner, Memoirs of His Own Time (1632— 1670), 
 
 Edinb. 1829. 
 Wodrow, Select Biographies, ed. W. K. Tweedie, 2 vols., Edinb. 
 
 1845—1847- 
 Sir Edmund Walker, Historical Discourses, Lond. 1705. 
 John Kirkton, The Secret and True History of the Church of 
 
 Scotland, ed. Charles Kirkpatrick Sharpe, Edinb. 1817. 
 Bishop Burnet, History of His Own Time,ed. Osmund Airy, 1897. 
 Captain Hodgson, Memoirs, ed. Sir Walter Scott, Edinb. 1806. 
 T. Carlyle, Cromwell' 1 s Letters and Speeches, Lond. 1845. 
 Speeches of Oliver Cromwell (1644 — 1658), ed. Stainer, Lond. 1901.
 
 Bibliography 463 
 
 V. (1660— 1689.) 
 
 Lauderdale Papers(i639 — 1679), e d- Osmund Airy, 3 vols., Camden 
 
 Society, 1884—5. 
 Wodrow, The History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scot/and 
 
 from the Restoration to the Revolution, ed. Rev. Robert Burns, 
 
 Glasgow, 1830. 
 Robert Law, Memorials, or the memorable things that fell out 
 
 within the Island of Britain from 1638 to 1684, ed. C. Kirk- 
 
 patrick Sharpe, Edinb. 1818. 
 Sir George Mackenzie, Memoirs of the Affairs of Scotland from the 
 
 Restoration of Charles II (1660 — 1771), Edinb. 1818. 
 Letters illustrative of public affairs in Scotland addressed to 
 
 George, Earl of Aberdeen, Lord High Chancellor of Scotland 
 
 (1681 — 1684), Spalding Club, 1S51. 
 Sir John Lauder of Fountainhall, Historical Observes of Memorable 
 Occurrents in Church and State (1680 — 1686), 
 Ban. Club, 1840. 
 
 „ „ Chronological Notices of Scottish Affairs (1680— 
 1 701), ed. Sir Walter Scott, Edinb. 1822. 
 
 „ ,, Historical Notices of Scottish Affairs (1661 — 1688), 
 2 vols., Ban. Club, 1848. 
 
 „ „ Journals, with his observations on public affairs, 
 &*c. (1665 — 1676), ed. Donald Crawford, Scot. 
 Hist. Soc. 1900. 
 Diary of General Expenditure Book of William Cunningham of 
 
 Craigends (1673 — 1680), ed. Rev. James Dodds, D.D., Scot. 
 
 Hist. Soc. 1887. 
 Narrative of Mr James Nimmo, a Covenanter (1654 — 1709), ed. 
 
 W. G. Scott- Moncrieff, Scot. Hist. Soc. 1889. 
 Account Book of Sir John Foulis of Ravelston (1671 — 1707), ed. 
 
 Rev. A. W. C. H alien, Scot. Hist. Soc. 1894. 
 Defoe, Memoirs of the Church of Scotland, 17 1 7, Reprinted, 
 
 Edinb. 1844. 
 A. C. Biscoe, The Earls of Middleton, Lords of Clermont, and of 
 
 Fettercairn, Lond. 1876. 
 /Eneas J. G. Mackay, Memoir of Sir James Dalrymple, first 
 
 Viscount Stair, Edinb. 1873.
 
 464 Bibliography 
 
 Mark Napier, Memorials and Letters illustrative of the Life and 
 
 Times of fohn Graham of Claverhouse, 3 vols., Edinb. 1859 — 
 
 1862. 
 John Murray Graham, Annals and Correspondence of the Viscount 
 
 and the first and second Earls of Stair, 2 vols., Edinb. 1875. 
 Manuscripts of the Duke of Buccleugh and Queensberry, Hist. 
 
 MSS. Com., Fifteenth Report, Part vm, 1897. 
 James Macpherson, Original Papers containing the secret History 
 
 of Great Britain (1660— 1714), 2 vols., Lond. 1775. 
 State Papers and Letters addressed to William Carstares, ed. 
 
 Joseph M'Cormick, Edinb. 1774. 
 Colin, Earl of Balcarras, Memoirs touching the Revolution in Scot- 
 land, Presented to King fames II at St Germains, Ban. Club, 
 
 1 841. 
 Sir John Dalrymple, Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland (168 1 — 
 
 1702), Lond. 1790. 
 Charles James Fox, History of the Early Part of the Reign of fames 
 
 the Second, Lond. 1808. 
 Macaulay, History of England, vols. I, II. 
 R. H. Story, William Carstares, A Character and Career of the 
 
 Revolutionary Epoch, Lond. 1874. 
 
 Cambridge: printed by j. A c. f. ci.av, at the university press.

 
 (Camhritrgc ll)tstorical Series 
 
 Edited by G. W. Prothero, Litt.D., LL.D., Honorary Fellow 
 of King's College, Cambridge, and formerly Professor of 
 History in the University of Edinburgh. 
 
 The Series will include the following works, the prices are 
 attached to those already published. 
 
 1. The French Monarchy, 1483-1789. By A. J. 
 
 Grant, M.A., Professor of History in the Yorkshire College, Leeds. 
 With 4 Maps. Crown Svo. In 2 vols. 9.?. 
 
 2. Germany and the Empire, 1493 — 1792. 
 
 3. Italy in disunion, 1494 — 1792. 
 
 4. Spain; its greatness and decay, 1479—1788. 
 
 By Major Martin Hume. With an Introduction by E. Armstrong, 
 M.A. With Maps. Crown 8vo. Second Edition, revised and cor- 
 rected. 6s. 
 
 5. Eastern Europe, 1453—1792. 
 
 6. The Revolutionary and Napoleonic Era, 1 7 89 — 
 
 1815. By J. H. Rose, M.A. With Maps and Plans. Crown Svo. 
 Third Impression. 4J. 6d. 
 
 7. France, 1815—1889. By W. A. J. Archbold, M.A. 
 
 8. Germany, 1815—1890. By J. W. Headlam, M.A. 
 In 2 vols. 
 
 9. The Union of Italy, 1815—1895. By W. J. 
 Stillman, L.H.D., formerly "Times" correspondent in Rome. 
 With 4 Maps. Crown 8vo. Second Edition. 6s, 
 
 10. Spain, 1815—1898. 
 
 11. The Expansion of Russia, 1815 1894. 
 
 I Turn over
 
 Cambridge Historical Series. 
 
 12. Scotland. By P. Hume Brown, M.A., LL.D. In 
 
 three vols. Crown 8vo. 
 Vol. I. To the Accession of Mary Stewart. With 7 Maps. 6s. 
 Vol. II. To 1578. Crown 8vo. With 4 Maps and Plan. 6.f. 
 
 13. Ireland, 1494—1868. With Two Introductory 
 Chapters. By W. O'Connor Morris. With Map. Crown 8vo. 
 Second Edition. 6s. 
 
 14. The United States of America, 1765—1865. 
 
 By Edward Channing, M.A., Assistant Professor of History in 
 Harvard University. With Maps. 6s. 
 
 15. Canada under British Rule, 1760-1900. By 
 
 Sir J. G. Bourinot, LL.D., K.C.M.G. With 8 Maps. 6s. 
 
 16. The South American Colonies. By E.J. Payne, M. A./ 
 
 17. British India. By G. W. Forrest, M.A. 
 
 18. The Australasian Colonies, from their foundation 
 
 to the year 1893. By E. Jenks, M.A., Reader in English Law in 
 the University of Oxford. With Maps. Crown 8vo. Second Edition. 
 
 19. A History of the Colonization of Africa by 
 
 Alien Races. By Sir H. H. Johnston, K.C.B. With 8 Maps. 
 Crown 8vo. Second Edition. 6s. 
 
 20. Outlines of English Industrial History. By W. 
 
 Cunningham, D.D., and E. A. M c Arthur. Crown 8vo. Second 
 Edition. 45. 
 
 21. An Essay on Western Civilization in its Eco- 
 nomic Aspects. By W. Cunningham, D.D. Crown 8vo. Vol. I. 
 Ancient Times. 4*. 6d. Vol. II. Mediaeval and Modern Times. 
 45. 6d. 
 
 ItonDon: C. J. CLAY AND SONS, 
 
 CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS WAREHOUSE, 
 AVE MARIA LANE. 
 
 ffilassoto: 50, WELLINGTON STREET.
 
 . 
 
 
 H 
 
 
 THE LIBRARY 
 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA 
 
 Santa Barbara 
 
 THIS BOOK IS DUE ON THE LAST DATE 
 STAMPED BELOW. 
 
 NOUS OCT 7 1996 
 
 50w 9482
 
 * 
 
 AA 000 239 340 3 
 
 3 1205 00200 1301 
 
 '"'ill
 
 1 r