This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project to make the world’s books discoverable online.
Ithas survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain, A public domain book is one that was never subject to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired, Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover,
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the publisher to a library and finally to you,
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible, Public domain books belong to the publi prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
‘We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find additional materials through Google Book Search, Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a books appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful, Google Book Search helps readers discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web atfhttp: //books . google.com,
.vw-
GoW Meili fr his sence frame iy A Chopr~? On bat Caving Elen Lhectionr (P52
by koh hepeer, ot he haus. cue » Seine confer whe ts senuice sot Jam muck ki pine of it 7 i th rap 4 Lentini Y pour appurtenct, fo th of cfirn run briny ek. wll muck phe. more ensbl gon LL ihn. fom wellpbad wih gwar ropagre encl vere reapb. of. your good. ‘endhau (oaucury for mytert AL hall ‘Gow
euby
fatal Chariink
Ti he Lore taper
MONTROSE
AND
THE COVENANTERS,
THEIR CHARACTERS AND CONDUCT,
ILLUSTRATED FROM PRIVATE LETTERS AND OTHER ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS
HITHERTO UNPUBLISHED,
EMBRACING THE TIMES OF CHARLES THE FIRST, FROM THE RISE OF THE TROUBLES IN SCOTLAND, TO THE DEATH OF MONTROSE.
BY
MARK NAPIER, Ese.
4 ATE. VOLUME FIRST.
LONDON: JAMES DUNCAN, 37, PATERNOSTER-ROW.
M.DCCC.XXXVIIL.
ee
Aces”
Di goz,)
‘PRuNTen BY JOMM STARE, EDINAUROM.
iv PREFACE.
from abroad. Napier’s eldest son, the first Lord Na- pier, a sincere disciple of his father’s in those rigid Protestant doctrines, became the personal friend both of James VI. and Charles 1, and, moreover, a second pa- rent to Montrose. But, in the progress of events, all that was honest and sincere of the anti-papistical party in Scotland was superseded by an insidious democratic clique, who, disguised for a time under the mantles of such enthusiasts as Knox and Napier, and pretending to identify Episcopacy with Popery, pressed onwards, through thelr various stages of duplicity and crime, until an ephemeral throne, born of their anarchy, was reared upon the prostrate necks of RELIGION and Lr- uERTY, whose sacred names they had taken in vain. Hence it bappened that the immediate representative of the great Napier, and his illustrious pupil Montrose, were covenanting at first, and, without the saerifice of ‘a principle, martyrs to their loyalty in the end,
But, even in our own enlightened times, there is a disposition to confound the cause of truth with that career of democracy, and to claim for the fac- tious Covenanter of Argyle’s Dictatorship,—as vicious a compound as ever agitated under a veil of sanctity,— the respect due to the stern virtues of some of our early reformers, and also that admiring sympathy which the violentand impolitic retaliation of the Government of the second James has rendered no less due to the wrapt he- roism of the Cameronian peasant, Some, indeed, carry their vague ideas, of the political sobriquet “ Covenant- ers,” so far as to consider the term sacred, to identify
=
vi PREFACE,
world, his exquisite, but unfortunately too meagre, “ Legend of Montrose,” might have expanded in a work of yet greater interest and effect; combining, too, the truth and importance of historical discovery, with some domestic matters of unquestionable fact, that beggar even his powers of romantic fiction. The devotion, to Montrose, of his nephew, who was so dearly beloved in return, and who preserved that devotion to his uncle in the face of the most powerful entreaties and tempta- tions to forsake, or at least to quit him,—the no less heroic adherence, to Montrose and his cause, displayed by his nieces, who on his account suffered the impri- sonment of malefactors, and were reduced from the af- fluence and luxuries of their Ligh station to discomfort and poverty,—the * well known token,” sent by them to guide the hero to his career of ill-fated victories, — —the abstracting of his heart from his mutilated tranle beneath the gibbet,—and, above all, the extraordinary progress of that romantic relic, through perils by land and sea, even into the possession, and among the bar- barie treasures of an Indian chief,—bimself an heroic sufferer, whom we must not call savage,—these ave in= cidents which ought to have been introduced to the world by no other pen than Sir Walter Scott's; but which, it may be hoped, will cause, even by this hum- ler record of them, the Legend of Montrose itself to be perused with additional interest.
‘The most important new matter, however, contained in these volumes, are the historical fragments obtained from the ives of the Napier family, with
viii PREPACE.
with a perusal of these volumes before they were pub- Ushed,)—of having committed a false step in joining at their outset the covenanting clique in Scotland,—a word I'do not shrink from using, as being truly de scriptive of a party who arrogated to themselves the character of a whole nation’s generous voice,—of having acted inconsistently with the dictates of his reason, and his maturer principles of action, by having carried, what he fondly considered the arms of “the Covenant,” against the last hope of true Religion and Liberty in the north,—from these charges Montrose can never be ex- onerated. But the moral, and, when we remember his expiatory struggle and death, it may be added, the grandeur, of his heroic character and career, cannot, by such defeets, lose their value and interest. The documents referred to must carry an irresistible con- viction, at least to every unbiassed mind commencing its study of the times past, that, even in his first error and inconsistency, Montrose was humane and honest, was no far-sighted and selfish factionist, no blood- thirsty destroyer, but a youthful and mistaken en- thusiast. If the sudden and violent excitement of the period, and Montrose’s age of four-and-twenty, will not suffice to reconcile such political inconsistency as can be proved against him, with the character of an honest statesman, and a glorious hero, we may close the annals of human virtue.
J am induced to notice still further in this place the manuscripts which prove Montrose to have exercised, in his later patriotic struggle, the ratiocination of an
\
x PREFACE.
gine that those powerful passages were composed un- der the direct influence of a recollection of the times of Charles L., or with an immediate reference to Mons trose and the Covenanters. Certainly Professor Sedg- wick had never seen the fragments of papers which have preserved to us the reasonings of Montrose, and of his preceptor, Napier, on the subject of Sovereign power, and Rebellion, Yet, notwithstanding all that has come and gone, since about the year 1641, when those frag-
given to the inspired Apostles, must, on that uccount, adopt lows exalt: ed maxime us thelr rules of life: we may tate In gencral terma (with- out loading this discussion with extreme camex which lend to no practi« ‘enl good in moral speculation), that where the Christian rehgion prevails in his purity, iti» impomsible there shonld ever exist an aoinitigated dese potivm : and whore the powor of the exucutive ix limited (ia however
where bya moral and logal resistance. aban proscribed by human law, a a Oye er ot Cot Buta moral opposition to the ‘executive, condacted on constitutional grounds, is proseribed by no law, either of God or man : and if it be wisely and virtuously curried on, it has in its own oature the elements of increasing strength, nnd must at be It, however, during the progress of a state, the ‘authorities be in open wurfuro with each other ; a good man at longth be compelled to take a side, und reluctantly to draw his fovea dokeace of the bert Lnhcttanos of hs coontry. “Sock an Op peal, to be just, must be made on principle; and after all other honest ‘means have heen tried in vxin.
Eee SURE Spiel ee be ‘bas too often boon contmonced by selfish mon for baw purposes Tne wrend of taking their stand in Scovel il coon lial sarees 7b tend of trying, by every human means, to concentrate all the might of Ee Bes aetna thei sido, they have broken the laws of their coantry, dipped their hands in blood, Bd oedlasaly brecght Tee on thewselver wud their party. The vives of the subject arv not anly the doapor's plou, but the daxpot’s atreugeh. Whury the virtuous vlemunts of social order ure wanting in the state, whether men be willing slaves ‘or not, they nro unfit for treedom."— Discourse, fe. by Adam Sedgwick, M, Ay PTS. $e. Woodwardian Professor and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge, Fourth Bdition, Vii, pe V8T=130.
xii PREFACE.
peatedly enjoins it ;" and he refers us to the example of the apostles of religion, who “ resisted not the powers of the world by bodily force, but by patient endurance, and by heroic self-devotion.” Finally he telly us, in the concluding passage of the pages we have quoted from him, a passage singularly applicable to the con- duct of the covenanting rulers, that “ unfortunately, the opposition to the encroachments of arbitrary power has too often been commenced by selfish men for base purposes,” who, he adds, “ have broken the Jaws of their country, dipped their hands in blood, and need- lessly brought ruin on themselves and their party.” This is an unpremeditated and unconscious echo of what the murdered Montrose, and his Mentor, inculeated two hundred years ago, before the great civil war, and its fearful results, bad verified their worst anticipations, “ Civil socictics, (said they) so pleasing to Almighty God, cannot subsist with out government, nor government without a sove- reign power to force obedience to laws and just commands. ® * * This sovereignty is, @ power over the people, above which power there is none upon earth, whose acts cannot be rescinded by any other, instituted by God for his glory, and the temporal and eternal happiness of men. * * * Patience in the sub- ject is the best remedy agninst the effects of a prince's power too far extended, * * * But there is a fair and justifiable way for subjects to procure a moderate go- vermment, incumbent to them in duty, which is, to en- tour the security of Religion and just Liberties, (the
Ex
ae oe we
erste ve Jeane aad wer. newed of mg AG ae oremene Vi in agneniix. De owe 9A wy on. ball hone 4 add mM Ame Tae Saots, sah Tne watered, vi cae mont amen? ered of Vor tad, sae, 208, tate xl, shail mn any degos wend tty weheoee tere, vacercok chicagey one Tmoscicas vie- tein A Sy per tuen’s hemenraes, I am secsied to Ere up wy (rn bnentaativnn in these volames to whatever cri- tistases they taay eail bath.
St mly semaita ws be added, that I was nt so far wanting ty my wibject, nor in duty to the noble family whine. priasd diatinetion it is to represent the Hero, as ty snnit sn application in the proper quarter for any oniginal materials, in possession of the family, which might WMustrate the lifeof Montrose. But that no such materinis exint, J learn, with great regret, from his Grace the present Duke of Montrose, who, in a polite com- munication on the subject, informs me,—* I am sorry ta may that we cannot give you any assistance in the porformunce of the task you are preparing to undertake, tn thors aro no papers whatever existing, and in our powenion, which can throw light upon the subject.”
V1, Mafford Ntreat, Aprit 1838.
xiv PREEACE.
ment it required. If, however, the various original do- cuments now produced, and which, instead of consign- ing to the retirement of an appendix, I have interwoven with my text, shall be found to add any thing to the facts, and the interest of the most instructive period of British history, and, above all, shall in any degree tend to redeem from unmerited obloquy one illustrious vic~ tim of hypocritical democracy, I am satisfied to give up my own lucubrations in these volumes to whatever cri- ticism they may call forth.
Tt ouly remains to be added, that I was not so far wanting to my subject, nor in duty to the noble family whose proud distinction it is to represent the Hero, as to omit an application in the proper quarter for any original materials, in possession of the family, which might illustrate the life of Montrose. But that no such materials exist, I learn, with greatregret, from his Grace the present Duke of Montrose, who, in a polite com- munication on the subject, informs me,—* I am sorry to say that we cannot give you any assistance in the performance of the task you are preparing to undertake, as there are no papers whatever existing, and in our possession, which can throw light upon the subject,”
11, Stafford Street, April 1838,
ai
xvi CONTENTS,
Archer Guand of France—Contemy of his ‘rival the Marguis of Hamilton. arises! Leeper, ‘of Montroso—Anocdoto of Hamilton's double Sed nnd treachery to Montrose at Court—Archibald Lord Lorn— Montrose's contempt for him—The old ae of Argyle’s chumeter of his son, 6s + Page 114 CHAPTER IL. e 1636-1697. ‘When and why Moutrose joined the Covenanters—Seditious ‘and secret agitation in Scotland, betwixt the periods of the promulgation of the Canons in 1696, and the appointment of the now Liturgy in 1637—Popalar tamult against the Jiturgy in Edinburgh Istigated by the ministers from the [Seo ai ‘by Balmerino and the Advocate Uo seevantmaids on the 22d of July Sar eaaeectenian to Archibald Johnston of Was tiston, to organise a popular insurrection against the Bishop of St Andrews should é appear in public—Montrowe no
petitions against the Bishops, and the manner of his own conversion to it—Result of tho agitation in the great con- vention held at Edinburgh, 15th November 1637—Mon- rok fitet joins the insurrection against the Bishops at this convention—Indvced to join by the persuasions of Rothes und thé Minister of Methven; und not through dis HUslets Lote ol ‘him at Court—Constitation of
nd overthrown, and the Tubles erected, under the ae of the ney pe ikape or the po ou. thority, . 1a
CHAPTER IL 1637-1638.
‘The Covenant—Its insidious nature and fale pretensions— Concocted by w few factionists—Dr Cook's contmdictory ‘views of it a yroof of its indefensible character—M# Bro- dics enlogy of the Coyonunt—Contemporary account of
pte of James Gordon, parvon of Rotemay
xx CONTENTS.
der which be met the King—New sgitation and fresh im- palse to the morement—When and why Montrose turned from the Covenanters and tried to save the King—Cove- nanting calumnies—Revolutionary Parliament in Sootland, held in June 1640—The treasonable propositions af the democratic leaders there urged, and Montrose’s opposition to them proved—James Gordon's manuscript account of the constitution of the Committee of Estates 1640—Con- servative members of that Committee—Causes of Mon- trose’s conservative conduct at this crisit—First invasion of England by the corenanting army under Alexander Les- lie—Aneodote of Montrose’s showing them the way across the Tweed—Paseage of the Tyne—The Covenanters ov- cupy Newcastle, - - - Page CHAPTER X. 1640-1641.
Fate of Montrose’s first conservative attempts in support of the King’s authority —His correspondence with the King, how discovered by the Corenanter—Montrose fearlessly justies himeelf—His conservative Association—Copy of the Cumbernauld bond, from the manuscripts of the Ad- vocates’ Library—Its fate—Original manuscript of Co- opel Cochrane's declaration—Corenanting notions of tres- ‘son illustrated from original manuscripts, -
CHAPTER XJ. 1641.
‘A view behind the cartain of the Covenant—Architald Johnston of Warirton—A covenanting antiquary—A co- venanting patriot—Covenanting reformers—Covenanting justice—Secret machinery of the Covenant—Original let- tera of Archibald Jobneton, hitherto unprinted, exposing the prof'igacy of himself and party—Original letter from. Sir Thomas Hope, secretly informing Wariston of the cap- sore of Walter Stewart, on bie journey, bearing = later from the King to Montrose,
CHAPTER XII. 1641.
‘The reasunn of Montrose’s conservative bond, and the grounds
3
297
g INTRODUCTIOS.
sination, or by suddenly raising a faction in the hour of unsuspecting security, to perpetrate an indiscrimi- nate slaughter upon all the leading men of the party. Detected in his wickedness, and ufferly cast off by the whole body as bloated with iniquity, he allowed the tumultuous fary of wounded pride and disappointed ambition to assume the semblance of principle, and look- ed towards the ruin of the political franchises and the religion of bis country, which he bad so sworn to main- tain, as to the necessary removal of standing reproach- es of his apostacy, and barriers to his aggrandizement. Hence there was xo scheme so desperate that he hesi- tated to recommend, none so wicked that he declined to execute.” *
There is no character, in ancient or modern times, more atrocious than what is here described. Nor is our historian contented with this concentration of his indig- nant feelings against Montrose. Throughout various passages of the work in question, he has exhausted the powers of his language to paint that nobleman a mon- ster. He calls him a “ nobleman destitute of either public or private principle ;” and, while revelling in the barbarous details of his execution, speaks of him as “the blackest criminal,”—of “ his manifold enormities,” his “ breach of the Covenant,”—his “ assassinations and massacres,”—his “ cold-blooded, indiscriminate, un- manly vengeance,’—his “horrid devastations,”—his “ infamous end,”—and, finally, his “ poetry, no less exe- erable than his actions had been as a member of socie- ty.”+ Mr Brodie is an author of laborious research, and it were not impossible that he had brought facts to light
© A History of the British Empire, by George Brodie, Esq. Advocate,
Vol. 404. + Vol. iv. pp. 270, 271, 272.
4 INTRODUCTION.
the modern historian, could be to the extent of the dif. ference betwixt these two portraits. There was, besides, another keen observer of human nature, the celebrated Canpinat ve Rerz, personally acquainted with our hero; and he pronounced the memorable opinion, that the only being who had ever realized his idea of a chass of heroes no longer living save in the pages of Plutarch, was Montrose, who had sustained the cause of the King of England with a greatness of soul unparalleled in that age.* What has our modern historian established to excuse his own unmeasured condemnation of Montrose in the faceof such contemporary opinions? In vain have ‘we searched through his laboursto find proof for any one of those flagrant acts upon which his delineation of Mon- trose’s character appears to be founded. We obtain from him, indeed, a new and most portraiture of Montrose, but no new illustration of the obscurer passages of his history,—not a single addi- tional fact on the subject. The value of the vitupe- rative censure in question is, in our humble opinion, about equal to that of the contemporary abuse which Mr Brodie, in his turn, might quote against our re- liance upon Clarendon and De Retz, and which was invariably expressed, and proved, thus :—* That erwel Murtherer, and bloody excommunicated Traitor, James Graham, sometime called Earl of Montrose!" The Presbyterian democracy to which Montrose fell n vie~ tim, because he detected and opposed the designs of a faction against the throne, systematically originated that * Le Comte de Moutross, Ecomais, vt chef de In maison de Graham, Je wou Kiomme du monde qui m’ait jamais rupellé Vidéo de certains he ros que Vou nv voit plus quo dans ios view do Plutarque, avvit soOtenir Jo parti Slerlfigtae S eterembemecegy siesisls poles do periait ce sidele."— Mémoires de de
b
6 INTRODUCTION.
we find gathered together, and assumed as facts, vari- ous obscure points which we mean to elucidate. The object of the following pages is to supply an im- portant and interesting chapter of history, no less than to do justice to Montrose himeelf, by illustrating, frequent- ly from original manuscripts, those circumstances of his Ifo that have been least investigated, and most violent- ly axaumed to his disadvantage. More moderate and less prejudiced historianshavealso assumed what Mr Brodie culln the “ bitterness of spirit,” the stinging of “ morti- ficntion and revenge,” for “real or supposed neglect from the court,” a8 the state of mind with which Mon- troxe Joined the Covenanters. But evenin this false step of hia early career, it may be shown that his motives and feelings have been misunderstood or misrepresent- vd, Hix separation from the Covenanters can be ac- counted for by circumstances that must redeem his cha- racter trom those vague and passing calumnies of the lay; his alleged jealousy of Argyle in council, and Les- Ve in the field “on the one hand,” and the allurements tof tempting offers “on the other hand,"—so undoubt- ingly recounted by Mr Brodie as the sole motives of his change. With the aid of original manuscripts, we Will warwvel much af the secret history of those mys- ferlons ceeurreuces au which our historian, totally Waiutuomed as ty the details founds his accusation agmiet Montiven, of having * conspired by perjury against the lies aad honour of ube individuals with wha be Rat acted in concert.” We will prove that Ure well.keow avecdhite faved i Lond Clarendon’s ma- weer. Unat Mowtrose mate aun odfer to Ciarkes I. we assassinate Naaailtea and Angvie.—an elfen, as the SAY ges, Dedignantly giected be the Mu aarch,—did eh, a COM ed por went: sind Ghat the gwent his .
8 DSTEODCCTios.
extricating himself from the movement party, about the close of the year 1639 It is principally a history of bin woaderfal efforts in support of the falling cause of Monarchy,—an enthusiastic appeal in his favour to honour and high feeling abroad, from the barbarous anarchy of “ the cload in the north” then expanding over Britain. There is a domestic circumstance, how- ever, incidentally mentioned by Wishart, which of iteelf affords some contradiction to the extraordmary theory that Montrose was 2 monster of malevolent impulses, with whom no one of Christian feelings could have endsred to be familiar. Immediately after the de- feat at Philiphaugh, be is disclosed to us mourning over the grave of his brother-imlaw, Lord Napier, @ nobleman many years his senior, and one of the most pious and irreproachable statesmen of bis day.* Montrose, deprived of his own parent in early life, was reared with parental affection by this Lord Na- pier, who was one of his curators and married to his elder sister. But, moreover, it was in councilship and in company with this nobleman, who had also sub- seribed the Covenant, that Montrose paseed through that revulsion of political feeling which some would have us believe to have been solely caused, in his breast, by an aptitude to betray, and a propensity to shed blood. The passage in Wishart is remarkable, and we shall quote it from a translation published two years before the death of Montrose. “ About this time (1645,) the Lord Napier of Merchiston depart- ed this life in Atholl,—a man of a most innocent life and happy parts, a truly noble gentleman and chief of an ancient family ; one who equalled his father and
© Archibald first Lord Napier, (eldest son of the Inventor of Loga- ms) married Lady Margaret Graham, second danghter of John fourth of Montrose.
ree yl ee ier trose’s career when he was becoming sensible of his false position, and of the insidious approaches ofan unprinei- pled faction against the throne. They afford, in the most convincing manner, a complete exposure of the baseless calumnies upon which Montrese, Napier, and a few others were so virulently pursued by the Committee of Estates, on the pretext of what was termed “ the Plot,” in the year 1641, and out of which arose * the Inci- dent”—the shadow of a shade. This plot, the unravel- ling of which will open up the whole merits of Mon- trose’s separation from the Covenanters, we are now
12 INTRODUCTION.
‘Time, (the whole malice of which has only of late years ‘become known to the world by the restoration of the suppressed passages in the Oxford edition,) attributes the ruin of the King entirely to the successes of Mon- trose, “ The Marquis of Montrose’s success,” says the Bishop, “ was very mischievous, and proved the ruin of the King’s affairs ;" and, after amusing the reader with some of his fascinating gossip, he adds,—“ his (the King’s) affairs declined totally in England that sum- mer, and Lord Hollis said to me all was owing to Lord Montrose's unhappy successes.” This paradoxical as- sertion is the finishing touch to a sketch, composed of various sly and malicious notices of Montrose, by the right reverend artist, in which he would persuade us that the predominant features of that nobleman's mind were a mischievous spirit of enterprize arising from a weak superstition, and a vain affectation of heroism checked and. paralyzed by his personal timidity in the field! Well might filial piety, more tender of the Bishop's reputation than he was of that of others, suppress such a sentence as the following :—Mon- trose “ in his detent took too much care of
for beiwas never willing to-eapoee hinesl/ toolwuche = Was Montrose a coward ? We will believe all that the Bishop tells us of Ais own moral courage—how he, Gilbert Burnet, stood serene amid the convulsions of faction, and, whether by the side of his friends perishing on the scaffold, or in the presence of frown-
* In the original edition, by the Bishop's son, this seandalous: pare ;
might have been an indiicemont for the Bishop to give so mulicious a0 account of the Marquis of Montrose’s transactions,”
4 iwrropuerron.
of the Rye-house plot, when, after the suicide of Essex, Lord Russell is under condemnation, and on the eve of ascending the scaffold. It is addressed, “ For John Bris- bane, Esquire,” (Seeretary of the Admiralty.) and with- in the cover there is written,—
“Dear Sir,
“ T have writ the inclosed paper with as much order as the confusion Iam under can allow. I leave it to you to shew it tomy Lord Halifax, or the King, as you think fit, only I beg you will do it as soon as may be, that inease my Lord Russel sends for me, the King may
_ not be provoked against me by that. So, Dear Sir, adieu.
“ Memorandum for Mr Brisbane.
“To let my L. Privy Seal know that out of respect to him, I doe not come to him.* That I look on it as agreat favour, that when so many houses were searched mine was not, in which tho’ nothing eould have been found, yet it would have marked me as a suspected per- son, That I never was in my whole life under so ter- rible 1 surprise and so deep a melancholy + as the dis- mall things these last two or three days has brought forth spreads over my mind ;} for God knows I never so much as suspected any such thing ; all I fear’d was only some rising if the King should happen to die ; and that I only collected out of the obvious things that every
* Lord Halifex, If Burnet, ns he tells us in his History, was in the habit, before and after the date of this letter, of bearding in their dens both the King and the heir presumptive, why so coremonious with the PL Pe ise-eurproeand-co Jeep acusdancbaly.™ iad Swift seen this letter he would haye noted that here was a Seotch word signifying 1 ee Sit would have bis nl fing ihe Bishop's style— “dari monnonse’’—M Scotch trnsh.”
.
—
|
the like, for I think he will believe me.* I ask nor ing ern, 1 rok ee resolved against it,
thoughts ; tho I could obtain it;+ but 1 beg not to be more under hard thoughts, especially since in all this disco very there has not been so much occasion to name me as to give a rise for a search, and the friendship I had with these two,} and their confidence in me in all other things, may show that they know I was not fo be to in any thing against my duty to the King.§ I doe beg of you that no discourse may be made of this, for it would look like a sneaking for somewhat, and you in . particular know how farre that is from my heart ; * How well the Bishop (no Bishop then) kept his ward ! Hore Swift TANT goes Wa Wr bc bd Sorel ts Seti as —" Scotch dog, rogue, aes Leer reeera as
§ Bot see the History of his own Time! “ Lord Reser, the country, Lwent to him to warn him of tho danger 1 feared
constitution defend themselves; but I thought wasive and fears, and
it, did eet them at liberty to look to themselves, yet he confemed were not ripe enough yet, and that an ill-aid, and rie
‘ing would be our ruin, Twos thes serfs came tom wel my ‘of the Reformation, and did so evidently noe thnt the struggle for Lady: sey ore ‘abd Wyat's rising, wos that which ebrew the nation s0 quiche Popery after King Rdward's days, that I was now very appre= opie gee '—Vol. ii Manpars hem hewn othr pmmags ofa Hatoy tad Bo.
18 INTRODUCTION,
the light I can give them. Adieu, my-dear friend, _ and keep this as a witnesse against me if I ever fail in
the performance of it, 1 am, you know, with all the
zeal and fidelity possible, your most faithful and most humble Servant,”
“ Sunday Morning, “G, BURNET”
190A July 1083,"
Burnet's abject letter did not succeed. He was dis- graced, and obliged to go abroad. He became the most active agent of the Revolution, and obtained a mitre from King William. Lord Dartmouth says, “ Mr Se- cretary Johnston, who was his intimate friend and near relation, told me, that, after a debate in the House of Lords, he (Burnet) usually went home, and altered every body's charueter, as they had pleased or displeased him that day.” ‘This remark has been considered ca- lumnious, but something worse is proved against Bur- net by his own letter. In his Life, prefixed to the His- tory of hisown Time, it is said, His behaviour at the trial of the Lord Russell, his attendance on him in prison, and afterwards upon the scaffold, the examination heun- derwent before the council, in relation to that Lord's dying speech, and the boldness with which he there undertook two vindicate his memory, as also the indig- nation the court expressed against him upon that occa sion, ave all fully set forth in the history.” But it is im- possible to credit that history, in such matters, after reading the above letter, which, be it observed, was to be made known to the King. Where had Burnet miraculously found the courage which, as the danger thickened around him, made him so collected and dar- ing, before that very King and his Council, as to en-
— [aa 20 imraodverions
suade the world of his own supereminent moral cous rage, if he can. For our part, after reading the above letter, we do not believe one malicious word of what Bur- net has uttered, in the History of his own Tine, against Charles I-and Montrose,—and he has therein said nothing about them that is not malicious. We donotbelieve that the apology for Hamilton, which he has given to the world in the Memoirs of that house, is by any meansso truthful anexposition of the character of Marquis, as the letters and papers entrusted to the Bi- shop, for the purpose of compiling the Memoirs, enabled him togive. We feel thoroughly persuaded that Bishop Burnet in that work, as well as in the History of his own Time, reversed the goklen maxim of Cicero, me quid falsi dicere andeat, ne quid veri non audeat. The marvellous of himself,* and the malicious of others, we henceforth altogether disbelieve when resting om the sole authority of the Bishop's historical record, and will never listen to when retailed traditionally and at se cond-hand from him.+ Finally, we do believe the truth of that anecdote, that the Bishop, “ after a debate | # Be, gr. Burnet tolls not a very credible story of bis earliest intere viows with Chacles [1° He says the King road in his presence part of ‘the Memoirs of the Hamitons in MS—wax much pleased with thom, and more with the author; and, further, thut,* in a loug privates that lasted nbove an hour, I took all the frevdor with hina tht I ‘became my profesdon,” Ce St heparan to him, and whut he sald to the ing sol seer ae
in which never King was bearded by a bolder sutject. Then Mee cceieca ot paises tetra eaga wne cho nia eee we ho aly lectores most severely,
+ Br, gr. The coclound-ball story (said to hare heen derived. from
Brodie, Vol-ti.p.515—and well ied ny ot in resistant Vols iv. CF
L
. a
as the prime minister of the Covennnt, collecting round the devoted monarch the toils of the great Rebellion— scenting, not afar off, his blood in the blood of Straf- ford, and howling like a savage, for the rewatds that were to satiate the malice and the avarice of Seotland.* ‘The blood of Strafford and of Laud, the Genevean ban- ier planted in England, the murder of the King, the pena Se = ep sree tee fae ee NANT.
Yet how mean is the origin 06 thal rovOH HE faction in Seotland, and how fallacious those views of «it that represent its leaders in bright relief, of holy and patriotic zeal, against the tyrannical enormities of the monarch! Let us examine the seeds from which the Scottish commotions sprung into thnt v= volution which has been called “our second and glo- rious Reformation in 1638, when this church was again settled upon her own base, and the rights she claimed from the time of the Reformation were restored, so that she became fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and ter+ ible as an army with banners,”+ Was Charles I. real- ly an oppressor amid religiously and patriotically dis+ posed chiefs of Scotland? Must we indeed concede to the Historiographer for Scotland that the monarch was worthy of thedeath hedied?} And will we discover,inthe impenetrable mists of faction that surrounded his throne
* Archibald Johnston, of whom anon,
t Wodrow’s Latroduction, p. 2 ‘This historian of the Church of Soot. land adds, somewhat in the style of the Rey. Robert Baillie's contr yey oa a eo te
‘upon me to defend every step in that happy ‘That task was ree Seve fr Mr Bro who has fatllf Wied i .
wealth and the long Parliament”
ES
from the first moment of his reign, and the abandoned treachery that dogged his person through life, no ex- euse for the worst steps of his policy in the govern- ment of Seotland ?
—-, 5 iRing James being dead (coys Lord Nopler) and his
son King Charles: succeeding to him in his kingdom,
with some want of ex- periente, which is only got with time, all the turbulent and discontented humours of the former time were up, x is usnal in these great transitions, and plied his Ma-
wanted not matter, and their endeavours had deserved praise, if spleen to the persons of men, and their own private interest, had not given life and motion to their proceedings, rather than the service of the King and the good of the state. Then was there nothing but factions, and factions consultations, of the one, to hold that place and power they possessed before,—of the other, to wrest ‘i out of their hands, and to invest themselves ; and no ‘dream or phantasy of innovation came in any body's head, but presently he durst vent it to the King; and ‘still the most ignorant were boldest, Neither wanted there some honest and wise men who gave their advice ‘out of mere affection to his Majesty and the public; but ‘wanting that bold forwardness, and factious assistance, which the other had in prosecuting of their private ends, no great hold was taken of them.”* Charles, not yet crowned King of Scotland, received sundry mysterious hints, that, if he did not conduct
pertain artes ce vin oon obleman’s connexion vith the court,
a
—_
—
ties |
24 INTRODUCTION,
himself in a manner that seemed fully to recognize the Independency of his ancient kingdom, the erawn might ‘be bestowed somewhere else; and most anxious was Charles to avoid the imputation of intending to * re- duce Scotland to a province.” Thus the affairs of that country became to him # separate burden of a difficult and irksome nature. For his privy-couneil of England were not suffered to be cognisant of the affairs of the other kingdom, which the King managed, through the reports of his privy-council there, with the aid (if aid it could be called) of his Seoteh favourites, ‘or such of the council as he summoned from Scotland for special consultation. Indeed at this time there ap- peared to be no connexion or sympathy betwixt the kingdoms, The English nation, we are informed by Clarendon, knew und cared less about Scotland than they did about Poland or Germany ;—“ no man ever in- quired what was doing in Scotland, nor had that king- dom a place or mention in one page of any Gazette,” But it was not the privilege of Charles to be able to forget his ancient independent kingdom ; and certainly his attention to the affairs of Scotland was kept alive in a inanner most disagreeable to himself, and most dis- creditable to his native country. Lord Napier, a Privy- councillor, and Treasurer-Depute, under the Earl of Mar, who held the white staff, mentions in his Rela- tion, that Mar was not free from that storm of faction, the great object of which was to wrest place and power from each other, “ but was charged home by his ene- mies with some abuses, in the King’s presence, which they were not well able to make appear ; therefore, there was a gentleman directed to me, desiring me to give them intelligence upon what points my Lord might be charged ; with assurance from them that it should never
earn that it was with the view of recon: M that he did aot omit the Lords in the commission of surrenders.
(a
ee |
26 INTRODUCTION,
the King, in presence of the Lords of Exchequer, and whose answers were so poor, and excuses so frivolous, ag made even those present, who set him on, to be ashamed.”
The absence of every principle of honour and hones- ty, anong the leading Scotch factionists who beset the King, is further illustrated by the following very euri- ous scene, and by-play of Scottish councils in which cannot be given more graphically than in Lord Napier’s own words; “ Sir Alexander Strachan and some others, his partners, (of whom the Secretary* wus one, for nothing passed whereon Ae was not a sharer, and then nothing was so hurtful to the King oF coun- try which was not delivered under the title of good ser- vice,) had projected to the King great profit to arise out of the wards of marriage and nonentries, which, being most pernicious to his majesty and the best of his sub- jects, I mainly opposed here in Scotland, and with much ado got the passing of it delayed (so strongly had they made their party in our exchequer) till it should be debated before the King, who had sent for all his offi cinrs to court, to have their opinion concerning the business of the tithes. These and such like matters increased their spleen against me, who still upon all oc-
* ‘This was Sir William Alexander of Menstrie, created Kart of ‘by Charles 1, and celebrated both as u poet and « courtior. “He rough
Ho oe erat ea a tous cotebrat beet on ore
Ion ting they» cn ne et value of the weight of copper, which brought great prejadice to the Kingdom ; at which time he built his great lodging in Stirling, and put ‘on tho gute thorvol Per mare, per eras, which » merry man changed,
per metre, per turners, meaning that he nd attained to his extate by Foor ond fiat gh of taee move "—Scot of Scotarnet’s Manuscript, Advocates! Library.
move him to be my accuser upon their former informa- tion; aman, es much as I, hated by them, especially by the chancellor,* whom he hnd acensed the year before of bribery, to his face before the King, which he pressed #0 hard upon him, that, to save his reputation and his place, James Douglas, deputy-secretaryy—a man religi- ‘ous and honest, but too, too simple, who hardly could ‘be induced totake the ordinary benefit of his placey—was persuaded to take the fault upon him, and thereby lost his place. Sir Alexander perceiving their drift and spleen against me, made his advantage of it, promising, if he might have a commission to bring in concealments ‘and omissions of the treasury, (which he afterwards got to his great profit,) he should have matter enough ‘against me, and would charge me. When the exche- ‘quer met, 1 opposed Sir Alexander's project for the wards, and found no resistance, but excusing himself, that he thought it was for the good of the King and oo ylaeledonne it were found not so, he relinquish his suit, but said withal (ac- Gor ets plot) that the King’s profit was neglected ‘by the officiars, and that he would give twenty. thousand * Kinoul, of whom afterwards,
— {
a8 INTRODUCTION.
pounds for the omissions of the treasury, if he might have commission to bring them in ; as indeed there was something in that kind through no fault of mine, I answered, that there were some omissions, which was not altogether my Lord treasurer's fault or mine, but partly theirs who served before us, and that we intend- ed to bring them in; neither was there such perfection among men to omit nothing ; and for my part, I would not only not oppose him, but be a means to move the King to grant him commission, and aceept the condi- tion; but that he had not done amiss to have inform- ed the officiars of these concealments, who would have had a care to see his pains recompensed ; wherens now this offer of his was of the nature of an accusation and imputation to us. Those who were of the party, fear~ ing that I would hold him to bis word, and engage him, brought him off with this motion, that he should have the commission, and of what should be thereby brought in, the King to have the one-half, and Sir Alexander the other; to which they all assented but myself, (who now began to smell the drift of it,) and the Bishop of Ross, * whose opinion was, that the officiars should bring. in these omissions, and Sir Alexander be consi< dered for the discovery, The report was made to the King, by the chancellor and secretary, that Sir Alex- ander's project of the wards was disallowed, but that ‘he had undertaken to bring into his Majesty's: great profit out of concealments, an excellent piece of service, and that none of the number was against it but I, for my own ends. The commission was drawn up in
* Patrick Lindsay, Bishop of Ross from 1618 to 1633, when he was translated to the Archiopiveopal aco of Glaygow. Ho fell a victim to coyenanting) persecution, and died in 1644, under the excommuntoation of the kirk.
- | wo INTRODUCTION, ©
Hamuron. “My Lord, how can there be such neglect as you speak of, since I know they had almost pat my mother * to the horn for forty shillings Scots?
“ Whereat the King smiled, and, rising up, said to Sir Alexander Strachan,—
Tux KinG, “ You have said to me that there are many omissions and faults, and that you will do me good service. You shall have the commission, but, if you be not as good as your word, I shall find a fault somewhere,
“ All this while my Lord Erskine, ¢ the treasurer's son, stood by mute, as if the matter had no way eon- cerned his father, for the chancellor had blocked up his mouth, by a promise that not his father, but I only should be charged with these omissions, and that he should be free from any such imputation; which he performed, saying he was a nobleman now inage, and could not take care of the King's affairs, nor his own, but all was my fault, excusing him so, to his disadvan. tage, from, particular omission, by disabling bim of the care of all. When we came from the King, the chan- cellor toldSir William Balfour} how much he had been
. ibeteabtn etd Eile Glencairn, was the celebrat. ehurchemilitant of
od lender of the ‘Scotland, who commenced the tupults ugainst the Service Book.
+ Joho Lon! Erskine, th Earl of Mar. When this was written Lord Napier knew not the interesting ties that were to vunite the fails. daughter of this Earl, be-
panion heart of Montrose was stolen (from under the gibbet where pipes ‘buriod,) dat she might preserve it eunbalmed. ‘The sur ly, upan whou Churles conferred the
icine Tawa ew ot nce ta So
of Strafford incxoribly wovere, and resisted tho most considerable bribe ever offered to 4 governor to cconnive at the of a state prisoner, Hat hs maniissted han. nolf to be worthy of the confidence of the party, he became one of their Palleh SoMaANrs eal ib Inna the satisfaction of encountering hie royal master in arms.” —D" Ieraeti
al
(CHARLES I. AND SCOTCH COUNCILLORS. 31
gh Ihad moved the King to take Ork+ : got nlease of it myself. I desired Sit f ‘tell him that he had exprest himself my ies wih in at eh . And withall tell him (said I) that I ‘go ill a servant to my master, as to advise thirteen thousand pounds Sterling for re- grant of Orkney, for the which he would SRS a ties oasda BUSrtngs os tog
| whom he employed to procure it, this my persecutors changed their mind, and it fit that my name should be to the commis who opposed it, to make it the more effectual £ ‘the secretary delivered mo a command pto subscribe it. To which I replyed, to the commission of exchequer, which ordains us to subscribe all signatours judicially, but if manded me to subseribe it in particular, I would obey ; ‘but the next day he brouglit me a warrant under the King’s hand to subscribe. I finding that my opposi- 1 upon me no small suspicion of fear and gullies, having received this warrant, did subscribe willingly, defying Sir Alexander and all the world oidharge ran with any fault or malversation ' office, in presence of the Bishop of Ross, Sir Alex- and divers others, This confidence and did make the chancellor fear that the commis- sion would not work the effect against me that he wish- and then he began to peruse it more seriously, that himself might come within the com- ‘poss of it, being a collector of taxation, did delay his ‘subscription, finding some faults and informalities in it, and being further pressed, did pretend the gout in his
—
32 INTRODUCTION. _
hand, which was in his feet, not subscribing twenty days after me, till the Earl of Nithisdale, Sir T friend and none of his, told his Majesty that the chan- cellor only did hinder the service himself had so much commended in his presence. He then subseribed it, But Sir Alexander could not have way for it through the seals till he gave assurance to the chancellor and treasurer, to meddle with nothing whereinto they had interest. When it was past the seals they pressed him to accuse me. He told them he had made diligent search of the registers, and could find no matter; ifany of them would inform him against me, and set their hands to the information, he would acense me as he promised: otherwise to misinform the King without a ier and succumb in the probation, he thought it neither part of a wise nor honest man. They being disappoint- ed of the pleasure they conceived, to see the one of us ruin the other, whom they equally hated, were so far incensed against him, that at a convention of the estates, which was shortly thereafter, they stirred up some of the estates to complain upon him for purchasing a com- mission to execute penal statutes, and made him so odious that he was forced to give it over; yet, by the help of his good friends, he got good satisfaction from his Majesty.”
Lord Napier records another curious anecdote of the dishonesty of Scotch factionists, and of the effrant- ery with which they harassed and deceived the King. “ His Majesty (he says)—being possessed that the lease of Orkney was given to me upon trust, not only to pay: the whole rent to the King, but also all benefit that should accress to me as taksman,—while I was at court, had given command to one (whom, I do not know, nor could ever learn, although I used extraordinary impor-
ot INTRODUCTION,
times to come, to which I putto my hand. ‘This 7000 marks was given to Annandale, who, not content there- with, foisted into his grant a term’s duty of the same before my surrender. Then did they begin their calum- nies afresh, without regard of truth or honour! And to countenance the matter the better, the Lord Treasurer was sent for by them, (a man of great age, and lame of his leg, and went upon crutches,) pi him that they had prepared the King so, and given him such im- pressions of me, that there needed no more but his pre- sence to turn me out. Mar was not slow to undertake such a journey to that end, and in the midst of his journey got so shrewd a fall, that for many days he was not able to stir; yet at last went forward, so impla- cable and malicious he was of nature. Tn the meantime all the terrors of the world were given me,—that the King would send me home to be tried where my ene- mies were to be my judges,—that I should not only want my fees, pension, and place, but the King’s fa- your, and my own honour also,—and, as a delinquent and criminal, be warded in the Castle of Edinburgh, and deeply fined ! Neither did they stick to lay this im- putation on the King’s justice, that the King was resoly- ed to dispossess me of that place, and a fault must be found, though there were none, to excuse the King in ‘that point, Upon no condition could I be induced to hear so much as an offer, till my reputation were clean- sed from all their foul aspersions.” Napier adds, that Sir James Baillie left no means untried to obtain the place of treasurer-depute, and made interest with Lord Loudon, (here characterized as “ my friend, a wise
® Sir Jolin Murry, of the bed-ehamberof Junes VI, by whom he
was crested Viscount of Anoand, and Lord Murray of Lochmaben, and afterwards Earl of Annandale, He died in 1610,
A
.
Tue Kine. “ No? Did not you refuse to surrender your lease of Orkney to one who had commission from me to demand it to my use?
Narien. “Truly, Sir, navermau demented if GEmm neither did I know that such was your pleasure till J heard in Scotland of your Majesty's anger for my re-
Tue Kise, “ Did not you say to him that you would stand out in law against me, which is also under your hand ?
Narzer. “ Do me the favour, Sir, toletiee keorgtia whom your Majesty gave that commission, andconfront us before you, and I doubt not to make him confess that he has abused your Majesty with an untruth; and if any such thing can be shown under my hand, I will not only give the hand, but the head also to be stricke en off.
“Then did I press with importunity to know this fine commissioner ; but His Majesty by no means would do it.
Tue Kina. “ It is enough, I am satisfied, and do not believe it,
“Then did I tell His Majesty what storm was pre- pared against me at my Lord of Mar's upcoming, that I desired no more but impartial hearing, and protection if my cause were honest, which he graciously promis- ed, and thereupon gave me a kiss of bis hand.
“Some two or three days after my Lord of Mar’s ar- riving at court, they altogether, and singly when they had opportunity, vexed the King with their calumnies, urging him to send me home to be judged, a point whieh they laboured hy all means, * so that the King, for his
* This we shall find was also at all times a great ohjeat of the cove~ estig Cocos Same aNiee ee ne peree Oa ak ensed into thelr merciless hands ia Seotlans
and your subjects, and for your Majesty's service and my undertakings in it. But, Sir, I desire no more bat the most rigorous and exact trial that can be desired, 80 it be just, and your Majesty my judge, and that I ‘be not remitted to Scotland, where my enemies are to be my judges, and where, if I were as innocent as Jesus Christ, I should be condemned. For the more exact the trial be, the more shall my faithfulness and integrity appear to your Majesty ; and I will not only answer for my own actions, but if wife, friend, or servant (who, by corrupt officiars, usually are set out to be bawds to their bribery) have done wrong, 1 am content it be imputed to me, If I had cozened your Ma- jesty, and oppressed your people, and then made some men sharers in the prey, your majesty had not been troubled now, nor I thus persecuted, but had been de= livered to your Majesty for a good and faithful servant.
“ Then his Majesty promised that he would hear all himself, which was a point I desired much to gain, and did serve me afterwards to purpose.
Narien. “ Then, Sir, be pleased to make these in- formers set down their informations in writing, and set their hands to it, and within three hours after I shall either give a punctual and satisfactory answer, or other- ways your Majesty may dispose of meat your pleasure.
“ His Majesty was pleased with the course, and I took my leave. Immediately thereafter the Earl of Mar and the whole troop of my adversaries (who were waiting in the Earl's chamber till I should come from the King,) expected a surrender of place and all to the King, be- cause of the word satisfaction that I used to Sir Archi- bald Acheson. As they came down stairs slowly, be- cause of my Lord’s lameness, * one said, this is like the
* Of this John eayenth Burl of Mar, Scotstarvet suys,—* His chief dex
h
38 INTRODUCTION,
40 INTRODUCTION,
‘Ta Kina. “ My Lord, 1 woul do you any, favors but I cannot do injustice for you.
toc tha apaosink ight kone eoieee their persuit, so long as the King remained in Hamptou Court, for the command to set down in writing under their hands did much amaze them. Butevery day they had their meetings and consultations how to overthrow me, and being ignorant of the King’s promise to bear all himself, all their endeavours tended to get me ne- mitted to Scotland, and then they were sure of their desire. His Majesty, having removed to Theoball’s, asked the secretary if the informations in writing were delivered to me, and commanded it to be done instant~ ly. This put them in some fear that the Lord of Tra- quair® and his friends bad procured this, (who was one expecting the place if I should have been put out of it, and a man of another faction than Menteith and the seeretary,) and, therefore, by the Earl of Carrick they most earnestly dealt with me afresh to treat with Sir James Baillie, adding great promises, but with the like success as before. The secretary then sent ame the informations, inclosed within a letter of his own to me, shewing that it was his Majesty's pleasure that 1 should send the answers to him to be delivered by him , to the King: but I would not do so. When I opened the articles of accusation I found no hand at them, but written on a little piece of paper, so near the end there- of as nob one letter could be written more, of purpose that, if the King should urge them to set to their hands upon a sudden, they might gain sometime, in writing them over, to consult upon the matter. I presently drew ‘up the answers, and on the morraw I told his Majesty
* The same who was afterwards tronsurvr, and fell a victim to eo» ‘renanting, persecution, 4
;
42 INTRODUCTION.
Napier, however, put in writing an articulate reply to each charge, and after explaining in the most satis- factory manner every circumstance upon which a ca- lumny could possibly be founded, thus concludes,—*Nei- ther hath there any thing been done by me but that for which I have your Majesty's warrant, your father’s, the council's warrant, or that which by the duty of my place I ought todo. My humble suit, therefore, is, that your majesty will be pleased to judge of peters by your own wisdom and justice, to which, only, I ap- peal; or otherwise to free me of these calumnies by your majesty’s declaration of my honest and faithful bee haviour, as your Majesty hath already done by your gracious letter to the exchequer, that I may be the bet- ter encouraged to do you service.” This defence he presented to Charles, and the result is curiously cha- racteristic of the times and the actors. ‘* My enemies,” says Lord Napier, “ refusing to subscribe the informa- tions given by themselves, both by word and writ, to his Majesty, gave me a great deal of advantage in the King’s and all other men’s opinion. Yet ceased they not still to persecute me. So bold were they in their ace cusations because no man was punished for any calum- ny, or the worse liked, out of a bad impression given” to the King that, if he punished any such, he should not get knowledge of the estate of his affairs, no roan daring to do it unless they were able to prove it clearly, which, although true, could not always be done. My adversaries, being ignorant of his majesty’s promise to hear all himself, and being oft refused, when they de- sired him to remit my trial to Scotland, without know- ing the cause, drew up a letter commanding me to be tried before the Council of Scotland, which letter they foisted in among other letters, and stole the King’s hand
‘4
“” aNTRODUCTION. but because I saw the King’s hand, I refused to riveit, and he did it, And because I would not seem to avoid trial, I drew my letter thus: ‘ Whereas divers infor- mations have been made to us against the Lord Napier, it is our pleasure that you receive any thing concerning them that shall be given in to you, and thereafter send up the Lord Napier, together with his accusers, to us, to reccive our determination, and that this letter be regis- tered ; in the meantime, the Lord Napier to enjoy his fees, pensions, and full exercise of his place’ My ene- mies speeding no better ut court, gave out that what- ever warrant I gave out should not be answered, as in- deed I found by proof: I asked my arcars,—I could have no part of them, the treasurer had forbidden the receivers to pay me; I asked an account of their de- bursing the King’s money in my absence,—that was denied me, and all theuse of the King’s favourable letter wns this, thatit was registered not without difficulty, not- withstanding the King’s command. Then the chancellor asked for the articles of accusation, as if he hadnever seen them, which being produced he commanded to be putin the public register, (without any warrant from the King or council, and would not by any means register my an- swers to them,) there to remain for a dishonour and a stain to me, my house and posterity, to after ages who should not know that they were shamefully disavowed by the informers themselves, nor [that they were] an- swered by me,—an act of superlative malice! I made an offer of the aecount of the fines received by me-—they would not hear it, nor yet give me out instruments of my offer when J asked them, which the clerk durst not give out according to my words, but framed in such terms as they set down to him.
“ At this time Annandale came to Scotland, and brought with him a letter from the King to the exche-
&
; i | 46 INTRODUCTION,
fer af it before the exchequer, and did give direction and a discharge to William Dick to pay it to Annan- dale. The offer was refused, and the discharge sent back by William Dick, who now had left me, and bad with them. They would not suffer Amnandale to take ft, but would needs go on with pure suit against me for all I had received before my sur~ render, which they ought to bave done (by the King’s letter,) only in case of my refusal to pay the term in question, The King’s Advocate—a base follower of greatness, and maliciously eloquent—pursued me hard, alleging the lease was given me in trust, to bring in improvement to the King, and that I had confessed it; and he took out my answers to their informations, to prove his alledgeance, and read these words,— I never denied it, for I took it on condition,—and there most unfaithfully would have staid, but I made him read out all, to his shame,* whereby the few indiffer- ent Lords that were, did detest his dishonest dealings. I was forced to answer for myself, for, by no means, could 1 procure an advocate to be admitted to plead for ‘me, although by our law it is not denied in any case, even in treason, to any. So long as he kept off the point of law I answered sufficiently; but when heeame to dispute in law, I would not answer, but would be absent, against a professed lawyer. Whereupon at * The clause in Lord Napier’s answers, alluded to, is as follows 1 * Tt is alleged thnt the Touse was entrusted to me—I never denied It, for L took it upan condition to surrender when, and upon what terms, your nusjesty should be pleased, and that then the improvement might come into the exchequer. But that Ishould advance great sums of money, and be lluble to the yearly payment of 45,000 marke, (enough to have uns done my estate, If one evil year bad come, or if my subtaxsnuan hud eskseetet wichauesl is owl fotingy ox rsoomponts—T-wllbefer “drat pasa ea hl nothing can harbour con. Amury to justice and equity," Be.
more desired in my secretest thoughts than to be fairs ly rid of that place, long before my trouble, for after my wife died, (a woman religious, chaste, and beautiful, and my chief joyin this world,)* I had no pleasure to re- main in Scotland, having had experience of the ehief of [the Lords of] Council and Session,t and of their man- ners, to which I could never fashion myself, and con- sidering the place I held could never be profitable to a man that had resolved fair and honourable dealing.”
‘That the King’s Advocate could countenance se- cret meetings for organizing sedition,—that the gentle men of the King’s bed-chamber were capnble of picking his Majesty’s pockets, in order to make themselves mas- ter of his private correspondence,—that the nobleman whom Charles trusted above all others was constantly betraying him to his enemies,—these, and other myste= rious anecdotes of the rise and progress of the covenant ing faction, do not appear so incredible after reading what we have extracted from Lord Napier’s manu- scripts, and still less so when we find, by the following, how very low Scottish noblemen could stoop, in false~ hood and treachery, to attain their private ends.
“ At court, Morton, Roxburgh, and the secretary made up a faction and agreement, wherein the Karl of Menteith and the chancellor were comprised, whereby they, who had wont to cross other, should now serve others turns, and monopolize to themselves the King’s favor, to his and his subjects’ heavy detriment, nobody
# There iaan original pleture by Jameson, of Lady Graham, idbosalen otters uaa Toles he dnoepoa a teas ot sequently whe must have died betwixt that your and 1680, the year of
bore. + ‘had been privy-councillor ince 1615; in 1623, he was Justion Olerk, and an Ordinary Loed of Session ; in 1626, an Bxtraordie nary Lord of Sesion
(adding many oaths,
Starke ipising:) Wliereol T-wistmcet tin contrary Co my ends, who lay in wait ion to leave the place, yet seemed to be proof of him. When he came to
wD INTLODUCTION.
then was moved to make a promise of it to Traquair, by this new faction of which he was one. And Menteith coming to Scotland, a letter was purchased from the King, after the wauel obscure style, whereby he would have made me believe that it was the King’s pleasure that I should give way to Traquair, and, to that pur- pose, that I should transact with Menteith, although the letter in my understanding contained no such mat- ter, but was his Majesty's answer to a suit of mine, wherein his Majesty wrote that he had imparted his pleasure, concerning my desire, to the Earl of Menteith. ‘This letter was kept up long, of purpose, till the new treasurer, Morton, should come home, who was upon his journey ; but Menteith would have had me take his word upon it. But I desiring nothing more (althongh T pretended the contrary) than that the King would have expressed his desire to be that I should leave the place, (forthen with honour, profit, and the King’s good will, I might treat with them,) made Menteith this an- swer, that the letter contained no such thing as he gave ont, and that [ would not treat with him, nor no man else, till from his Majesty's own mouth his pleasure were delivered to me to that effect, At this answer he was extremely moved, and being immoderately earnest with me afterwards, and, nevertheless, not being able to effectuate any thing whereof he had made so large promises to them at Court, gave them advertisement, and they dealt earnestly with the King. For this com- bination had now undertaken the whole government here,* under the King, and grent hopes given, and great promises made of excellent service, only, they told the King, that his service would be still hindered by my
* Le OF Scotland,
——
CHARLES I. AND SCOTCH COUNCILLORS. BL E~ llasetrpatita to think it expedient
eres ‘was not to with, the chancellor, Menteith, and he, to make me loath the service, (which in my secretest thoughts I did long ago,) business no way honourable for them, and prove dangerous if any of them should happen to fall een th the King’s favour. There was, after the death of King James, a commission of Exebequer sent down by his Majesty now reigning, un- der bis hand (for by the death of his father all former commissions expired) and left undated, to those who erate ren’ the manner of which commission is this : The King signs a commission in paper, which thereafter is ingrossed in parchment, translated in Las tin, and the King’s Great Seal appended to it, and the paper under the King’s hand is kept for a warrant ta the Great Seal. This commission in paper under the King’s hand being sent down, and being defective, or at least the King’s Advocate would have it to seem 80; because it was not drawn up by him, was not passed kept by him, the chancellor, or seeretary, esent up of the Advocate's penning, which being sent down again signed by the King, was passed )was the warrant of all the Exchequer's proceedings six years after. The old unpassed sig- nature of commission they took, and where these words “treasurer or treasurer-depute’ occurred, {ax they did through the body of the signature) they made Mr William Chamber, in a chamber of Holy- roodhouse, put a mark betwixt treasurer and treasurer-
Le a rl the margin write these words so that it was to be read * treasurer,
/
ll _
52 INTRODUCTION.
or, in his absence, treasurer-ilepute, and the word in the margin about five or six several times subscribed by Morton and Menteith. Besides, they inserted the date, ‘ White-hall, 28th June, 1630,’ with new black ink, where all the rest was worn whitish, and it was torn in the foldings, which ocular inspection bewrayed the antiquity and falsehood of the same. So by this commission I was to do nothing, (directly contrary to my patent, and the purpose of the institution of that office) the treasurer being present. About twelve o'clock I got intelligence that there was a new commission brought down by the treasurer, Morton, and was at the seals, I presently went to the director of the Chancery’s chamber,* who showed it to me, and said he mar- velled much how the chancellor durst append the Great Seal upon such a warrant. I viewed it as well as I could in so short a space. At two o'clock thereafter, the Exchequer convened, where, before the chancellor, lay this signature of commission, and the double in parch- ment in Latiu, with the Great Seal thereat, together with two letters of the King’s. We being all set, the chancellor gave the signature in paper to the clerk to be read, and the double in Latin with the seal, in parch- ment, to the King’s Advocate to be collationed. The clerk had much ado to read it, it was so worn, being now made use of six years after it was signed by the King. But I, seeing two of the King’s letters unbro- ken up, took no exceptions at the signature, (suspecting that they did contain something to supply the defects and informality of the signature,) till the letters were read, which contained nothing of that purpose. Then I rose up and said,—
* Sir John Scot of Scotstarvet, whose curious though maliclons ma-
nuscript, entitled the * Tho Staggering State of the Scots Statexmen,” in preserved in the Advocates’ Library,
oF * INTRODUCTION.
My Lord, (turning towards Marton,) your Lordship is very hot with me, but be assured there is nothing done amiss which concernseither the King’s service, or mein my particular, that I will stand in awe of any man to question.
Moron, “ This was done by the King’s direc tion, and we will answer it.
Menverrn. “ My Lord Napier, you are so passion- ate in your own particular, that you will not forbear to question what the King commanded! For his Mar jesty stood by while it waa done, and we will answer it.
Narien. “If it had been the King’s direction, why would you not bestow upon him a clean sheet of paper, and ingrossed these marginal notes of yours in the body of the signature, rather than made use of this old torn thing ? Then needed not the signature, with the King’s hand at it, receive validity from yours upon the mar= gin.
“ But he, that never was ashamed to do or say any thing, still affirmed that his Majesty stood by till he saw them subscribe, and that it was his direction!
Napiex. “ My Lord, I marvel that you are not ashamed to say so. Let the Lords look the date with a blacker ink than the rest, ‘at White-hall the 28th of June, 1630 ;—then you were there, you say, with the King? Your Lordship has ridden fast, for you were here, and presided in council, the 29th of June 1680, to verity which, I desire that the clerk of Council's book of sederunt may be produced, and, my Lord Marton, your Lordship set out of London before him.
“ Menteith, being convinced of a manifest untruth in presence of all the Lords, was so confounded and sur- prised with it, that he made this answer, nothing to ‘the purpose,—
1
own profit,) that he was content to take no notice of it.
“ T resolved then to go to court, and, some days be- fore I went, Menteith sent up his man, Mr Henry Drammond, with a letter, drawn up by himself and the secretary, and sent up to the secretary’s son, who wait- ed there in absence of his father, who was in Scotland, the contents whereof were to stay me by the way, or to command me to return again into Scotland, This letter was to be signed by the King, and Mr Henry was to meet me upon the way, and to deliver it to me. T rode on my own horses to Berwick, and purposed to send them back, and take post there, where the post~ master told me, (having asked who rode last,) that Mr Henry was gone up post, and told him he was to ride night and day, and was very shortly to come back. Upon which I conjectured that he was sent up to pro» eure my stay or return, (as indeed he was,) upon some misinformation. Therefore, to prevent their purpose, I changed mine, and upon my own horses rode on the western way, where no post lyeth.
“ The secretary's son having presented this letter for amy stay, forthe King’s hand, his majesty threw it away, saying, this man hath suffered enough already ; and in place thereof made him write another to me, most gra- cious and favourable, which he signed. ‘This letter was given to Mr Hary Drummond to be given to me, but he gave it to his master, (who then was on his journey,) with the copy thereof sent down by the secretary's son, which by no means I could ever come to the sight of; although I got knowledge of the tenor afterwards. How soon I came to Court [ had speech with his Ma- jesty concerning these businesses, who said, that he ‘could not but acknowledge my good service, my honesty, and integrity, but that he was informed that the prin-
56 IntRODUCTION,
i
58 INTRODUCTION,
It was amid such an atmosphere of petty but dis- tracting factions, that Charles the First passed the shart period of his reign which, at the time, was the admira- tion and envy of Europe for its apparent prosperity and repose. Even the few pages of secret history we have quoted, besides affording some instructive views of the characters of Seoteh councillors and courtiers, suggest reflections not unfavourable to the King. The scenes are during those few years immediately preced- ing the revolt of Scotland, when, says Clarendon, “ Bri- tain enjoyed the greatest culm and the fullest measure of felicity that any people in any age for so long time to- gether havebeen blessed with.” But wesee how sinall was
‘yaineglorious than they both, but different in the ‘of that bo- mour. Her the rely mes cgpoe ond lowes a ae Baa and drow all discourses from their proper subject to Ais own prates. Monteith did the eame, but, as he Hought, more subvtily, but ‘idlioulousl y negave mintter of mirth to all thoww to whom it waa — Lord Nopier’s MS, Theso portraits are worthy of the pen of Clarendon Destine riaerpeypet ioe would have bevn the Scottish Clarendon. Hix kinsrnan Seat comiean soa serooee person, Sele om he was lnvestal wit the ofits of facto gece! of Scotland, prosi- dent of the privy-council, and ee eerie Ea oC aes He ‘was William Grobam seventh Earl of Monteith, wna from Robert IL, to whose eldest son hy Euphemia Ross, David Earl of Strathern, Menteith wan rerved heir, which service was ratified by the acevo See 1631, authorizing bim to assume the tithe of Barl
1 Mentuith. ie athe le ae Bom ye tert se of Robert AL (and not Elizaboth More, xubee quently ascertained to haye been s0,) und the pretension to the
+ crown ‘sectand, tavolved {a this service, wae suggested 10 Charles, especinlly by Drummond of Hawthornden, nx dangerous to his crown, Seotatarvet says that when Menteith renounced his claim to the Crown he did so under reservation of his right of blood, and boasted that he had the reddest blood in Scotland, Accordingly bis tithes wore all sot auido in 146343, and he deprived of his oflices and confined for w time to hin own islo of Monteith, But when divested of his other titles, the ‘Karldom of Airth was conferred upon him. ft wos his eldest son, Lord Kilpontgwho wax so basely murdered in Montrose's camp, insnedintely after the battle of Tipperrauir, by Stewart of Ardvoirlich,
60 INTRODUCTION.
tertained and practised, factions in Court and state a-foot, accusations, calunmies, and aspersions ordinary, and, which was worse, combinations, and hopes given thereby of great service to the King, without any perfor- mance, but, by the contrary, his Majesty's just and gra- cious inclination abused by misinformations, his ears blocked up and so straightly beleagured that truth could not approach them,—and all for their own profit and prejudice of the King and State,—the presence of ho- nest men, who could not comply with them in their ob- lique courses, so hateful that they could not endure it, and so bold, in consideration of the strength of their leagues, that they did not stick to falsify the King's hand, surreptitiously to steal his majesty's superscrip- tions, and to frame letters contrary to his meaning, and many other things of this kind?* So wuch for Charles's enjoyment of the repose of this pastoral period of his reign. In illustration of his share of its affiuence, let ‘us cull another story from Lord Napier’s manuseript. “His Majesty intended a journey into Scotland, but no money being in his coffers there, Chancellor Hay made offer of ten thousand pounds Sterling, for his Majesty's entertainment during the time of his abode there, upon condition he might have the collection of the taxation, at which he ever aimed most earnestly for the hid pro- fit that was therein, especially the extraordinary, an im- position of his own invention. This galled Menteith, Nithisdale, and that faction, who left no means unat- tempted to cross the same. But it was still entertain- ed, no other appearing to offer a better expedient. They dealt earnestly with me to make offer of money, and + Sir Philip Warwick (p. 146,) also alludes to this method of deeciv-
ing the King, during the correspondence betwixt ix Majesty and the Marquis of Halton, when with his eet in the Frith of Forth, in 1690,
A SS ee ae ae
62 INTRODUCTION.
his journey till the next spring.* He went a progress, and I took my leave for Scotland. But, while his Ma jesty was at Beaulie the answer of his letter came up, not only refusing his desire, but advising him to call « convention, and impose (I use their very words) a tax= ation : and, if his Majesty would need have them levy money, they thought it reasonable that every man bay- ing warrants, fees, or pensions out of the exchequer, (who, indeed, for the most part are poor, and have no other means to live) should bind with them for the money. At which his Majesty was much offended, as he had good reason, and did suspect that they had no mind to see him there. At this time Archibald Campbell. being at Court was told of the letter by the secretary, who asked him where I was, and if I would yet un- dertake to furnish the King money for his journey. He answered that I was still in London, and was assured that I would do any thing I was able for the King’s ser- vicet This being reported to the King, Archibald Campbell was presently dispatched away with a letter tome. When I came, his Majesty told me that he re- ceived a most shameful refusal, and asked me what I would do for him. Nothing, Sir, (said I) less than Iam able, and, if my friends who are to engage themselves. for me shall see a sure way of relief, if ye want money ye shall blame me, but I will desire your Majesty to give commission to your officiars to order your enfer-
* This was the memorable coronation visit to Scotland, which, after many delays, the King effected in 1093, It was only lex fatul to lian than the next vinit in 1041, when, in spite, ax we shall Gnd, of the meal ous exertions of Montrose nnd Napier to save him, his Majeaty wns vir- tually dethroned in Scotland,
t “Archibald Campbell was n brother of ir James Campbell of Laws
ers He figures during the troubles as the confidential agent af the sie
nister Angyle. r
6s INTRODUCTION,
Tn consequence of this mean intriguing of the Scotch factionists,—not for the “ good of the state,” but out of “ spleen to the persons of men, and their own private interest,”—this scheme, to assist the King with money for his long projected visit to Scotland, was frustrated, and the royal warrants which Lord Napier Scotland were actually refused to be received. “ Upon which,” says he, “ 1 resolved to go up to show his Ma- Jjesty what rabs his service had got in my person, that hig service might not be disappointed, but that he might remove them, or take some other course in due time,” On his journey, however, Napier was encountered at “ Cobbrandspath," by Roxburgh, Archibald Camp- bell, and Sir James Baillie, who persuaded him to pause eight days on the road, until they should communicate with the Earl of Mar, with a view of accommodating matters. Then they brought the draught of letter to the King, for Napier to sign, so worded as to imply a voluntary resignation by him, in favour of Mar, of the employment for which Napier had obtained the royal ware rant to himself. " This (says he) not giving satisfaction, they persuaded me to goto Tuninghame to the Earl of Haddington, * who undoubtedly would find a temper of
* This wns the celebrated Thomas Hamilton of Priextfield, (a younger ranch of Hamilton of Innerwick,) who wus Lord Advoeste in 1590, wud Presidant of the Court of Session in 1614, having been previously suis st the preg i ile of Lard Blaniog end Bret I ali ‘wns created Enrl of Melrose, and some years afterwards Earl ington. Upon ano oceasion, when presiding, ts te Donne Ralls “in an improtntion of a writ, which the Lords wery convinced was ed, but puziled for want of clear proof, Lord Binning toking up: writ in hig band, and holding it betwixt him and the light, discovered the forgery by the stamp of the paper, the first paper of wuch » stamp
posterior to the date of the writ quarrelled. At another thue a re mises a snipe Xe atom rd sotto ea Siero: "« interrogatories, meoting an rhlandor who came to depoue: in thvour of the some party, advised him to bewnee of the man with the partridge eye."—Prefuce to Forbes's Collection of Decisions. Among Sle
68 INTRODUCTION.
‘excessive donations of princes were the first causes of corruption in the Roman church, the taste whereof did ‘so inflame the avarice and ambition of the successors, that they have raised themselves above all secular and sovereign power, and to maintain the same have ob- tended to the world certain devices of thelr own for mat- ters of faith. Not to Kings, nor states, for histories witness what troubles have been raised to Kings, what tragedies among subjects, in all places where ehureh- men were great. Our reformed churches having re- duced religion to the ancient primitive trath and sim- plicity, ought to beware that corruption enter not in their church at the same gate, which already is open with store of attendant thereat to welcome it with pomp and ceremony. +e
“9, Tutors and counsellors to young princes, next under God, have the fate of after-times in their hands, For according as the first impressions and maxims of government, wherewith these new vessels are seasoned, eee Sed eee happy or miserable.
“3. To know men, their abilities, dispositions, and affections, is the proper art of princes, their most pro- fitable study, the abridgement of all good government. For, there being uo public business which falleth not
nage of Clureadon's, written ut a tutor period. Laud “did really beliere that nothing more contributed to the benefit and advancement of the church, than the promotion of ehnrchmen to places of the greatest ho- nour, and offices of the highest trust, ‘This opinion, and the promewe Hen of (though bls intgey wae soweonae, nd bi oa for ¢he good and honour of the state os for the udvancement of the church,) wa tho akingy /wadalar 4p ha son Projudice towards, mai malice agarast, aud almost destruction of the church. —Hint. Vol. i. p, 192—The date of Lord Napler’s MS. is probably soon after the coronation visit to Scotland, and when Charles imprudently raised so many churchmen to hix councils, and invested Archbinop Hpotawood with the eal of tht Wogdom,
:
i, prince, never let the reins and rud~
il warrant of justice betwixt ‘they obliged to [be just]
_eghsalc hmeangrerreia ie Shak neo ereresiey reckeu are here spledeonjcturaly, the aa
(2)
7 INTRODUCTION.
heart; wicked are those who move them to it,—like Dalila they cut their hair when they are asleep, and ee ee telnet ee
ee 6 ee well, good counsel and careers tion are requisite; this is the ground of that, for no good advice can be given if the estate of the matter be mistaken, Of the two, ¢rue information is the most ne- cessary for the affairs of remote kingdoms; for those businesses which require deep advice are managed there where the person of the prince resideth; seldom do great matters occur in remote places, and where they do, the nature of the thing alloweth time of deliberation, (for great bodies have slow motions ;) there, if matters go in the ordinary way, all is well; but, without true information, a prince can neither order things, com- mand, sign, nor direct anything aright.
“7. ‘Phisis good for the King, ill for the people, good for the people, ill for the King, and contrarily, are in- congruities in speech, impossibilities in nature, and can- not be instanced ; they divide things indivisible, and separate what God bas conjoined, and have wrought bad opinions in the minds of princes and their subjects in-some parts of the world; they are false though fre- quent, and are the eruptions and sallies from the minds of those evil spirits who walk betwixt a King and his people. Fora King and his people make up one poli- tie body, whereof the King is the head. In a politic as ina natural body what is good or ill for one is so for both, neither can the one subsist without the other, but must go to ruin with the other.
“8, Princes’ letters and laws ought to be clear and per- spicuous, without equivocal or perplexed sense, admit- ting no construction but one. . For an obscure law alleged in any cause, gives occasion of more process,
7 INTRODUCTION.
ought to be punished by [the prince] himself, So shall justice be satisfied, the honour-of the King’s a and his prerogative remain inviolated.
“ Those councils (with the ike ofthat kind,) wherein the prince’s good is pretended, the private ends of these bad councillors only intended, hath been the efficient causes of the ruin of kings, kingdoms and estates— which Almighty God ean only remead. And therefore, let all good subjects who love their prince and country. pray with Solomon, Lorp remove THE WICKED* from the King, and his throne shall be established in rightcousness.”
‘Such were the reflections, on the prospects of King and country, noted in the privacy of his closet, and ere the great Rebellion had commenced, by one who may be said to have reared that “ bloody murtherer and ex- communicated traitor Montrose, and whom we shall presently discover sharing and approving every step of his calumniated pupil's career, from his early and mis- taken support of the Covenant, to his raising the roy- al banner in Seotland. Had Napier, like Clarendon, lived to know the fate of Charles, and to trace his history back from its bloody close through all the ma- zes of faction and faithlessness that destroyed him, he would have needed not to depart from or alter a single sentence of his painful meditations. There is a melancholy interest in redeeming from its lurking place of many generations, so prophetic a manu- script, on such a subject, to contrast it with the vo- Jumes that have been published since, and especially with the too perfect fulfilment as recorded in the
+ Those words ure writton emphatically in large lotiers in the mune script.
m4 INTRODUCTION.
the fatal effeet of those mists of ignorance and “ mis- takings,” as to the affairs of Scotland, in which the King was continually enveloped, by those who, for the suke of petty and private interests, so treacherously practis- ed upon the facilities of his disposition.
“ Offers of usaful service to your Majesty, some few propositions Lye Hanke adc whereby the use of that sereice may be better known.
“ That the state of business is oftimes disguised to princes, for private ends.
“ That the truth of business is hardly to be expected from the relations® of great men, whose friendships and dependencies extend far,—or from men ,fuctions,—or from such servants as endeavour to build up their for-~ tunes with their own hands, not leaving to their masters to do it upon their good deserving,—or from parties.
“That from misinformation, all errors, in matters of estate, and mistaking of the true means, whereby th Jost end gresiowepeerceetnteineomieas to be do proceed.
“That it is not easy to distinguish truth from false- hood, seconded by friends, and supported by reasons probable.
“ That it is impossible to do any thing conveniently or rightly, or to determine any thing de jure, if first it be not known how it is de facto.
“That the justest and wisest princes must err in their directions given upon sinister information of the state of the business in hand,
“ That it is an easy matter to a just prince, by fol- lowing only the bent of his own inclination, to give
* &¢ Tnfirmation,”
=
76 INTRODUCTION.
and to give me some place of access to your Majesty's ha nate etibeebis iostberesra™ =! unuseful,) and a reasonable means that I be not forced to undo my estate, and instead of a useful servant be- come a troublesome suitor, (whereby there shall be more by many degrees brought in, and saved in your Ma- jesty’s coffers,) then Ido humbly offer and undertake,— “ To establish such correspondence in most parts of Scotland, and in all the courts and judicatures thereof, with men honest and judicious, not interested in affains, and not knowing one of another, who shall give me sure intelligence of the state of every business which shall occur; and if any of them shall chance to be par- tinlly affected, the relation of the others shall control what is amiss in his. Which relations shall be made known to your Majesty by me, without passion or af- fection, and without respect to any end of my own or of ‘others, as I shall answer to God in conscience, to your Majesty upon my alledgeance, and under pain of your highest displeasure. Whereby your Majesty shall reap these commodities following, and many more. “1. As the clouds which obseure and darken the ‘sun are dispersed by the heat of the same, so shall the cloud of factions, compacted to no other end but to mis-
which never bore fruit.” A few yours afterwards, however, the King: made a point, against very opposition, of preferring bed the place Ck tanaurordepoln, “and (Pe 808) alittle before his death he recommended mie, T being then in Scotland, to his son King Charles, as hin majonty (Charles) himself was pleased tovell me, than which a greater tostimony of a nuuster's favour to an absent servant, at such timo, could not be expressed.” [find from a letter of Napict’s, (while _gontleman
tava een well for he monarch but Napier ben In she glace of Hite Wall Murray of the bedchnaiber,’
78 INTRODUCTION,
“ These commodities, and many more, shall redound to your Majesty by knowledge of the true estate of busi« ness, which I do humbly offer to procure, if your Ma- jesty do think that I can be faithful, But if it shall not please your Majesty to embrace or like of these of- fers, I shall pray Almighty God, who hath the hearts of princes in his hand, to direct your Majesty to a bet- ter course than this, for your Majesty's own good and that of your subjects.”
‘The endeavours of Charles I. to relieve the Scottish nation from the oppression of the aristocratic tithe- holders, and the state prosecution of Lord Balmerino for a seditious libel, aproseeution which wrose out of the circumstances of the King’s coronation visit to Scotland: in 1633, may be termed the seeds of the Covenant, and of that revolt in the north which sogreatly aided, if it did not bring about, the subsequent Rebellion. With regard tothe important subject of the tithe policy of Charles I. Lord Napier’s manuscripts afforda more authentic and interesting elucidation, especially as regards the King’s motivesand intentions, than has hitherto been recorded.* Malcolm Laing observes, that “ a general revocation of the tithes and benefices usurped by the laity had been projected by James, but deferred from the unexpected
* Mr Connell (Treatise on Tithes, Vol. i. p.¥80,) of the tem introduced by Charles 1, observes,—" The events which led to
k
turns that found it their private prejudice (interest) to render the business intricate, longsome, and difficult, ‘upon hope his Majesty would relinquish the same ; neither was this form of proceeding displeasing to some most intrusted, for by the difficulty they did indear their services, and in the mean time, giving his Majes- ty hopes of great matters, they drew from him present and certain benefits, above the proportion of their merit, or of his Majesty’s ability.”
The design of recovering the tithes from the hands of those grasping und factious barans who had made the reformation of the church in Scotland an excuse for ap- propriating that property to themselves, was thus pro- tracted through a number of years from the commence- ment of the reign; and Charles himself refers to the un- just discontent of the nobles, whose power was to suf- fer from this salutary restriction, the murmurs and heart-burnings which founda vent in the insurrection against Episcopacy. When the general revocation was first proposed, the King met with a violent opposition from interested noblemen, several of whom were at the very time disgusting his Majesty with those petty face tions at court, of which Lord Napier hasleft so curious a record. Mar, Haddington, Roxburgh, Morton, and the violent old gouty chancellor, Sir George Hay (Kinuoul) were, from personal interest, among the lead- ers of that opposition, which, we are told by Burnet, very nearly brought on an extraordinary scene of assas- sination and massacre when Nithisdale came to Scot- land commissioned by the King to make good the revo- cation. It was after this failure that the famous “Com~- mission of Surrenders of Superiorities and ‘Tithes” was issued in the year 1627, the following illustration of which, from a manuscript in Lord Napicr’s handwrit-
bk
a |
Be INTRODUCTION,
causes to deeper judgments. Neither will I meddle with the Commission,* nor the tenor of it, But that I may in some measure give satisfaction to your desire, I will only set down the known effects, and then deliver my opinion of the nearest cause of these effects.
“ The effects are these: A tedious in= superable difficulties, and a general complaint of all par- ties,—evident arguments of a business ill managed and miscarried, and giving just cause of fear that the event shall not answer his Majesty's expectation in honour nor profit. That it is longsome, and like to be so still, and that it is intricate und dificile, these three years’ en- deavours, with so small advancement, gives evident de- monstration, where difficulties, like the heads of Hydra, ‘no sooner one cut off but another arises. That the com- plaint and discontent is general the induction of parti« culars will best shew. .
“ The CLency complain that they are not only de= frauded, by this course, of the tithes the true patrimony of the church, but of all hope of recovering the same in any time coming,—that the constitutions of men are preferred to the law of God, not only by derogating from it, but by utterly abolishing the same,—that sa- erilege is allowed by public authority, and brought in- to the King’s house.
“ The Trrotars +} complain that their infeftments, and ratifications of the same in Parliament, (the funda- , mental law whereby the subjects possess any thing in
* “Commission granted by King Charles te the clergy, nobility, try, and barghs of Scotland to treat anent his revocation, Talves otthe Court
4 Anglice, impropriators,—the nobles and barons, numely, whe after tho Reformation, obtained to themselves gifts from the Crown of theso tithes, burdened with the support of the clergy.
‘84 INTRODUCTION.
frustrated and disappointed, and that whieh his Majes- ty intended for the general good, to give general dis- contentment, through the ill carriage of the business, whereby his Majesty is defrauded of thehonour due to his virtuous and good designs, than which never prince intended more just, more gracious, nor more truly ho= nourable; and in the end it.is most likely that his pro- fit shall be much diminished, unless some better course be taken, For after the valuations be made, whieh some of good judgment think will come short of that which was made when the thirds of benefices were as- summed, and after that the ministers have procured aug~ mentations of stipend, which indeed is expedient, and of number, which is more necessary for the serviee of God, and after that maintenance for hospitals and schools, and other means, be deducted off the tithes, and after that the titulars, cither out of favour, ar out of consideration of the loss, and the just and meritori- ous causes of their acquisition of the said tithes, get sa- tisfaction, which undoubtedly all will pretend to, all demand, and most of them likely enough receive from 80 bountiful a disposition—the remainder is not likely to prove so great as is given out.
“ As to that other way invented to raise profit to his
of church property made within eighty yenurs, comprehending thus all tho lavish and profuse grants of James VEL ‘The threats of a proceeding thus began excited great alarm and the King was foreed to lawor his
pro
vision for the clergy, and for education j and,2. ‘The freeing of owners of
Iand fromthe oppression suffered in the drawing and levying of tithes”—
P.908. Hot all themanuycripts of Lard Napier on the subject—written, be
‘it remembered, long previous to those troubles which arose out of the : 3 :
toy mismanagement ofthe King’s pious \emer—aiford a view, af the purity of is intentions, from one so long ‘anil intimately acquainted harles, that hie toatimony eannot be
86 INTRODUCTION,
endenvour to establish a general quota upon which me- the valuation of all the lands in
Scotland. Indeed if the Commission had been given:
‘to this end, to establish a certain tithe in some new found land, where never any was before, this had been the only way; but in Scotland, where there has ever been a known, or easily to be known, tithe of every parcel of ground, since first it received the Christian re- ligiow, according to which tacks bave been set, fines raised, and bargains of salé made, to induce a new quo- - ta, and fit it to all parts af the kingdom alike, were, in my opinion, the way to disturb and confound the whole business, and no more a means to facilitate the sale, ad- anitting that sale had been the true means, than if a ‘merchant, to the effect his cloth might sell the better, would sell none with the old received yard, but stay till a new one were made by Act of Parliament.
“ Butit may besaid, ant ne carpasalienc, vel ede tua® ‘The first whereof I would not do, if I did not think there were a way (if I be not mistaken) to perform the King’s gracious intention, in short time, with ease, con« veniency, contentment and profit to all, or the most part, without any considerable innovation (which, though to the better, is ever of dangerous consequence ina settled state,)} and, what is no little ease to his Majesty, by which no man, of what quality soever, can have any the least pretext to demand satisfaction, or to diminish his Majesty's profit, But neither is this time fit for any such proposition,—when his Majesty ix made so hopeful of the course in hand, and so well conceited of the abilities and the affection of the instruments employ- ed and entrusted,—neither am I a fit man to do it in the
* Biuher do not carp at the plane of others, oF publish your own. + This was prophetic.
i |
88 INTRODUCTION.
had,—to be seen riding so near the Pope and in speech with him,—and he rests ay well satisfied as if the truth had been exactly told him?
“ And truly, if ever any King, our Sovereign, in 60 far as concerneth Scottish business, may justly make: Dioelesian’s complaint, —Colliguat se quatuor aut quin-
non sinunt—Svv BONUS, SAPIENS, CAUTUS, DECIPITOR IMPERATOR.”*
From these, and other fragments of his reflections we shall yet have to quote, it might almost seem that the preceptor of Montrose had been gifted with the second sight of his country, and that to him the * coming events cast their shadows before.” It is in~ teresting to connect the above manuscript, upon one of the most influential and least elucidated events of the times, with a passage in Heylyn’s Life of Laud. That contemporary writer narrates, that, in the minority of
oe sk ae oreo ensayo hs cee It is & speech put in the mouth of the Emporor Dioeletinn, after
Jontary abdication of the throne, when on Pieseche Be the difficulty of a prince. El mage. “How often ls it the interest of four or five ministers to together to ir Sovorelgn | ‘mankind ty his ex. alted dignity, the truth is concealed from his knowledgo,—he can see only with their eyes, he hears nothing but their miarepresentations, confers important offices upon vice and weukness, the most virtuous and deserving among his subjects. By such infamous ‘arta the best snd wivoxt prinoos are sold to the venal corruptions of courtiors.” The quotation in. manuscript ts from Vise aw, a learned Syracwan, reckoned the Coryphanat song She six ope entled Historie Ay ‘His otyleis
Auguste Seriptores, considered more leant uod pure than that of any of the others, and Gibbon iss particue lar sete yreat store by him.
|
90 INTRODUCTION.
mission, matters were in the state commented upon by Lord Re see eee ee eee it appears, however, that, shortly after Sania nel ek aly bea eaten oa vour, but obtained an opportunity of com: all his views on the subject of the tithe policy to the King himself. “ In the year 1630,” says Heylyn, “com- missioners (from the tithe-holders) are sent to the Court ‘of England, and amongst others, the learned and right noble Lord of Merchiston (Napier) srom whose mouth I had all this relation ; who, after a long treaty with the King, did at last agree that the said Commission should proceed as formerly, and that all such superio- rities and tithes as had been, or should be surrendered, should be regranted by the King on these conditions: 1. That all such as held hereditary sheriffdoms, or had the power of life and death over such as lived within their jurisdiction, should quit those royalties to the King. 2 That they should make unto their tenants in their several Jands, some permanent estates, either for their lives, or one-and-twenty years, or some such like term, that so the tenants might be encouraged to build and plant, and improve the patrimony of that kingdom. 3, That some provisions should be made for augmenting the stipends of the clergy. 4. That they should double the yearly rents which were reserved unto the crown by their former grants. 5. That these conditions being performed on their parts, the King should settle their estates by act of Parliament, Home went the commissioners with joy for their good success, jing to be entertained with bells and bonfires, But they found the contrary, the proud Scots being ge- nerally resolved rather to put all to hazard, than to quit that power and tyranny which they had over their poor
=
ie | 92 INTRODUCTION.
more deadly promoter of the Rebellion, assisted to bear the train. 2
The factious insolency of his Scotch nobles which Charles had experienced in England, he now met with, in more dangerous and personal collision, “ at home.” No sooner had he set his foot in Scotland than he cre- ated the chancellor Earl of Kinnoul, a favour whieh had litte effect in molifying the temper of that states- aman. Charles had always wished that the primate of Scotland should have precedence of the chancellor; “ which,” (says Sir James Balfour)“ the Lord Chancel- lor Hay, « gallant stout man, would never condescend to, nor ever suffer him to have place of him, do what he could, all the days of his lifetime.” Once again Charles endeavoured to effect this. It was when ar- ranging the pageantry of his coronation with Sir James Balfour, the Lord Lyon, in whose own graphic words we must give the anecdote. “ I remember that King Charles sent me to the Lord Chancellor, being then Earl of Kinnoul, the day of his own coronation, in the morning, to shew him that it was his will and pleasure, but only for that day, that he would cede and give place to the Archbishop; but he returned by me to his Ma- jasty a very brusk answer, which was, that since his ‘Majesty had been pleased to continue him in that office of chancellor, which, by his means, his worthy father, of happy memory, had bestowed upon him, he was ready in all humility to lay it down at his Majesty's feet; but since it was his royal will he should enjoy it with the known privileges of the same, never a stol'd priest in Scotland should set a foot before him so long as his blood was hot. When I had related his answer to the King, he said, * Weel, Lyon, let's go to business ; I will not meddle further with that old cankered, gouty man,
a
ee |
94 INTRODUCTION.
expose to the hunter's fury, to save their own careases, So he dismissed them to a conference with his secre- tary, Sir Alexander Stirling, and the nobleman who had interceded for them, namely, the Earl of Menteith. ‘These stricken does, however, did not retire to weep. When Charles took his seat in the Scotch Parlia- ment of 1633, Rothes and Loudon proved to be leaders of the very dangerous herd he there brought to bay. ‘The King had paused in his favourite and pious scheme, of arranging a uniformity of worship throughout his kingdoms, and now determined to conquer more gradu. ally, and with as little violence as possible, the selfish obstinacy of the tithe-holders, which, he had every rea- son to believe, was the only obstacle to his ameliora- tions of the Episcopal church of Scotland. But he had no idea of giving up to this faction Religion and the Church as already established. Unconscious of Papis- tical inclinations, and too enlightened himself not to perceive, in the rising murmurs aguinst popery, either an irrational or a treacherous opposition, he determin+ ed to assert in his own name what had been peacefully established by his immediate predecessor. That the King could take his seat in this Parliament, (at a time, too, when prerogative and privilege were all undefine ed,) with calm and prudential feelings towards such an opposition, was not to be expected. To adopt his own account of the matter,—which, from its truth, became 80 hateful to the Covenanters. —" we (says the King,) undertook a journey to them, and, according to our ex- peetation, were most joyfully received by them. But immediately before, and at the sitting down of our Par- liament there, we quickly found that the very same persons who since were the contrivers of, and still con- tinue the sticklers for, their now pretended Covenant,
=
96 INTRODUCTION. Seoasedinlgsy without om ee
oe noblemen who led this factious ovat and the manner in which they did so, were calculated to throw the hasty King off his this unhappy collision with a, Patooan cease
Par- liament, that the ordering of the apparel of churchmen should appertain to him. Charles, consistently with his object of uniformity in chureh matters, was amx- Jous not to lose sight of this act, and the Lords of the articles had included it in the general act of his prero- gative. The opposition seized upon this as the most favourable subject for popular agitation, it being easy, with the aid of a fanatical clergy, to excite the people into irrational violence against thesurplice, and through that perverted medium to poison their minds with false ideas of the King's intentions. From Sanderson's con- temporary history ,wederivethe following quaint andcir- curnstantial deseription of the style of a debate that was in fact pregnant with the fate of England. “ The first that opposed this act was the Lord Loudon,abold young man ofva broken estate, lately come from school (their college) and a Master of Arts. A deft Lord he was, who missing of the Court to civilize his studies, must needs want morality to bring him to manners, and being besides of a cavilling contradictory nature, nothing would seem to him so positive in reason as his own opi- nion; and therefore now, as heretofore at school, he argu ed with his distinctions—duplici querstioni non potest dari unaresponsio ; itaest sic probo,—and after his syllo-
SE ea oe Ne oad laad il sunanecamee
i
4
98 INTRODUCTION.
remarked that at this time Rothes and his party en- deavoured “ to make themselves popular by speaking in Parliament against those things which were most grateful to his Majesty, and which still passed notwith~ standing their contradiction, and he thoughta little dis countenance upon those persons would either suppress. that spirit within themselves, or make the poison of it less operative upon others.” That great historian aids, that of the Earl of Rothes, and others, the King had the worst opinion, and purposely withheld from them any grace by never speaking to them, or taking notice of them in the Court. Yet such was their ef- frontery, and determination to attain their ends, that “when the King was abroad in the fields, or passing through villages, when the greatest crowds of people flocked to see him, those men would still be next him, and entertain him with some discourse and pleasant rela- fions, which the King’s gentle disposition could not avoid, and which made those persons to be generally believed to be most acceptable to his Majesty,"—a cha- racteristic demeanour of ambitious democracy, upon which Clarendon passes the shrewd reflection, that “let ‘the proudest or most formal man resolve to keep what distance he will towards others, a bold and confident man instantly demolishes that whole machine, and gets within him, and even obliges him to his own laws of conversation.” Such wax the faction with whom Charles came into collision in the Scotch Parliament of 1633, and to whose bitter disappointment the King’s preraga- tive was saved, for the time, by his still commanding a majority of that Parliament against the rising tide of disloyalty and disorder. * But it was not merely to ac-
* Dr Cook Has been misled into « most mlstaken history of this mat- tor, by Bishop Barnet, to whose mallee the Reverond author woul pro-
‘ing the royal signature to a letter to the Pope. Ki cleat rage epee en could not redeem it from its inherent vice. son was of the keenest of the cabal against Charles I, and to this nobleman it was that Haig first submitted his scheme of a revolution, which he called “a fit. cation to be presented to his Majesty.” Lord
‘83 appears from his own depositions, dl
ried it to Lord Rothes, and further * declares, thnt the Earl of Rothes, and the deponer, having read the sup- plication, thought it no ways ft to be presented to his Majesty, but to be absolutely suppressed.” It is not surprising that even their effrontery, who at the very time were forcing themselves upon thé’ King in his progresses, was unequal to the task of pre- senting this petition; for a more purely insulting document, if offered to the King, and, if circulated among the people, a more insidiously seditious one, could not have been framed. Tt began by accusing the King of asserting in the recent Parliament, “a s
‘to innovate the order and government long continued in the reformed church of Scotland,"—it referred to the known wish of Charles to have a litnegy’ propared for 1 See Lond Balmerino's depositions in the record of his State Trial,
artic ioe he reenter, Re Cook he ot coset eh etna Ta
\
5
104 INTRODECTION.
man copy oue of them for him, and that he returned the draft to its notable contriver. The other copy Bale vino delivered to Rothes, who, “ sworn upon his great oath,” declared he read part of it, when going with the Earl of Cassils and Lord Yester (dissenting Lords) in coach to the King at Dalkeith, and that, “ finding it of such a strain, and having told them that his Majesty had given him an express command to suppress all that was of that nature, the deponer and they, al? in one voice, thought it should be suppressed; and the de poner did put it in his pocket.” That same day, the King having taxed Rothes at Dalkeith with certain information laid against him, “he purged himself clear- ly to his Majesty,” taking great credit to himself with the King “ for suppressing all petitions of the nature of that which was moved in the time of the Parlia- ment,” and then, with ludicrous effrontery, added, that he had one of these suppressed petitions in his pocket, * if your Majesty be pleased to look upon it." ‘The King replied, “ It is no matter, I have no leisure, Tam going to the park,” where, of course, this pertina- cious factionist pursued the unfortunate monarch with patronizing attentions, and jesting conversation, The petition remained in Rothes’s pocket for eight days “ un looked upon by him ;” but, most probably, for the in- spection of the valet who dusted his clothes. He then “ caused copy it by his own servant,” and returned the original to Balmerino. Yet be swears that “he ever thought it fit to be supprest,” and most earnestly dis claims having any concern with Mr William Haig, “of whom he had ever suspicion, because he has ever been busy upon such idle and foolish toys.”
Balmerino obviously intended to make some use of the copy he had retained, for it was slightly interlined
SEEDS OF THE COVENANT. 107
ought never to lose sight of the state of the times, or of ‘the fact that secret combinations were then rife, and were well known to be the means constantly employ- ed by such intriguers, whether the object was to ad- ‘Vance some petty interests by the ruin of an individual, designs of a political clique by the ruin of j—we must keep in mind, (to recur to the ex- of Lord Napier,) “ the iniquity of those times, for bribery, concussion of the people, and abus- inig of the King, no age can parallel," and which were Haunted by the “ evil spirits who walk betwixt a King and his ” . Charles, then, was advised, to make an example of ‘Balmerino, the factious and ungrateful, son of a traito- rous father—an advice fully justified by the results of the excitement at Inst triumphantly effected by ‘the very came party, whose Covenant swept all before it, inchiding the Throne. Balmerino received every “advantage that equity could demand. He was remit- ted to ajnty of his own countrymen, to be tried in his ‘own country, on the statutes against leasing-making. It was ever the demand of the factious in Scotland, that their enemies should be sent home to be dealt with ; ‘and it was/a friend and leader of faction that now ‘acquired what to him was an advantage, and very nearly equivalent to an acquittal. He was indicted by ‘Sir Thomas Hope, and the libel presents a curious con- trast to the opinion delivered a few: years afterwards by that distinguished legal adviser of the Crown, that the Covenant, (of whieh the Balmerino petition was but a type or | .) with all its machinery of sedi- tion; was a legal and constitutional act. The Balme- ino petition, however, this indictment characterizes, in
o
—
108 INTRODUCTION.
the name of the King, as “a most scandalous, reproach-— ful, odious, infamous, and seditious libel ;"—speaks of the “curious and furious brain of the cursed and un- happy libeller,” who, it adds, “ not content with these reproaches, most villanously and despitefully beleht and vamited forth against our sacred person, proceeds to a most fearful and dangerous undermining of our honour, credit, and greatest happiness, in affirming that there is now a general fear of some innovation intend- ed in essential points of religion ; albeit, blessed be God, it be certainly known to all our good subjects that we are, and in all our actings have shown ourselves to be, a most devout and religious prince, hating and abhorring, in heart and affection, all papistical super- stition and idolatry.” Strange to say, the Lord Ad- yocate, who did his duty con amore upon this occasion, was the same who, about two years afterwards, so effectually, though secretly, aided and abetted the most seditious plot (being the same plot, and the same actors) that ever brought a country to disgrace and ruin. -Eyery art of sedition was exerted to turn the trial of Balmerino into the triumph of democracy. The
were excited into a state of frenzy, and the lives of the judgesand the jury werethreatened, if they should dare to condemn the accused. It was falsely asserted against the King and his advisers, that the noblemen and gentlemen composing the assize had been secretly influenced, and packed for the purpose of securing a con- viction. Besides all this tremendous machinery of fac~ tion to averawe the proceedings, Balmerino was de- fended by the whole strength of the bar, and the rele- vancy was attacked by volumes of elaborate and intri- catearguments from the civil law, enough tohave turned
it; it was a matter of blood, and
ght of that as long as they liv-
been drawn in to shed blood,
pardon, but it cost: him
pardon ; it had given him many
day and night; and as he spoke
over his face ; this struck a damp on
of Traquair took up the argument,”
was nota murderer, Upon his
such awful weight of recollections,
}as clear as his conscience. The dri- p uated murderer,—for what else
1. ipresion to the effect, at least,
hae
cn aia
10 INTRODUCTION,
only a majority of one, ‘That nobleman had been in« dicted as “ airt and part of the penning and forming of the said infamous libel, at the least concealer and not revealer thereof ;” also, “ of the dispersing and ing of the snid infamous libel ;” also, “of the not ap- prehending of Mr William Haig, whom: he affirmed to be the author.” The verdict was far more restricted than what the proof might have sustained, and it little justified the accusution against the jury of being subservient and yenal. They only found him guilty “ of the hearing of the said infamous libel, concealing and not revealing of the said Mr William Haig, af- firmed by him to:be the author thereof." | The Lord Justice-General (Errol) declared, “ that the said John Lord Balmerino bas there-through. incurred, the pain of death contained in the acts of Parliament; sus- always the execution thereof, until the time bis Majesty's will and pleasure beshown and declared there- anent; to whose sacred Majesty the manner, time, and place of the execution of the said sentence is remitted.” To overawe the justice of the King, or to rob him of ‘the attribute of his merey, the senseless mob had been agitated throughout to a pitch of audacity, that now threatened the lives both of the judges and the jury. But the desire of Charles, at no time, was the death of a human being. Into this present prosecution his nce had been foreed by the political iniqui- ty of Scotland, and the selection made was indicative of a lofty sense of justice, but at the same time an extreme moderation in the desire of examples. Had he been the King to carry that example to extremity,—the justice of which must have been acknowledged by civi- lized Ewrope,—it could not have been his fate to have been led to the block by his own subjects, who usurp- a
k
liz INTRODUCTION.
cunning ofdemocracy? If Charles had beenthe ’
claim the head of the justly condemned Balmerino, the menaces of a faction would have been powerless against his justice, nor could so stern and determined a disposi~ tion ever have been compelled, by that very faction, to ‘sign the death warrant of his greatest statesman. But he exercised the mercy so honourable to his nature,— mercy which Batmerino himself, among others, would not suffer the King to extend to Strafford. From his Majesty's own account we shall now quote the result of Balmerino’s trial. “ Notwithstanding the head of this family, which was first raised by our father, and then be- ing fallen, yet raised by him again, and now relapsed, ‘was once again brought under our axe, as it had been before brought under the axe of our royal father, we, desirous to shew ourself the true heir of none of our blessed father’s virtues more than of his mercy and cle- mency, were contented, upon his deep protestations of loyalty for the time to come, to grant him under our great seal for that our kingdom, not only a pardon of that crime of which he stood convicted, but also his liberty and enlargement ; which gracious pardon of ours, when it was delivered to him by our council, who sent for him, being then prisoner in the Castle of Edin- burgh, he did before that table receive on his knees, with the highest magnifying of our mercy, with the humblest acknowledgments of those infinite obligations, by which he and his family stood for ever engaged in the service of us and our crown, with the deepest pro- testations of all loyal, quict, and peaceable deportment of himself even hereafter, and of bending all his endea- vours to attend upon all our loyal courses and com- mandments, sothat our conneil remonstrated unto usthat we had bestowed ourmercy andgraceuponaman, of whom
SEEDS OF THE COVENANT. 113
there could not be the least suspicion of his averseness from our service at any time hereafter, but of whom they might safely promise all forwardness and alacrity in all our just courses, whensoever it should please us touse him. And now this same pardoned Lord Bal- merino, being one of the chief contrivers and most ma- licious prosecutors of this wicked Covenantmade against us and our authority, how he can be able to answer it to God, us, and our crown, his own conscience, or to the world, even in the point of honour and reputation, it must be left to the world to judge.”
The history of “this wicked Covenant,”—and if law- less designs, and cruel deeds, perpetrated under a false though specious exterior of religion and patriotism, be sins, the Covenant was indeed very wicked,—we shall have to trace in recording the life and death of MONTROSE.
VOL. 1. H
14 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
CHAPTER I.
MONTROSE —HUNTLY —MASILTOR—ARGYEAG
Monrtrosk was not more than fourteen years of age, when his father, John third Earl of Montrose, died un~ expectedly upon the 24th of November 1626.* It must have been from this date to the time of his first going abroad, about the commencement of the year 1633, that the young Earl found in Lord Napier “ a most tender father ;"t and, if we may judge from the intellectual ac- complishments which not even his stormy destiny could altogether suppress or conceal, and of which we shall be able to afford proofs hitherto unnoticed, there can be no doubt that the greatest pains had been bestowed upon his education. It is said that, being an only son, he was advised to marry at a very early period of his life, and that he did so is apparent from the fact of his eldest son being sixteen years old, when, to the great grief of Mon- trose, he died at Gordon Castle early in 1645. The lady whom Montrose married was Magdalene, a daughter of
* Wo are told by Dr Wishnrt that Montrose was in hin thirty-fourth, yeur whon he quitted Seotland for Norway, in the month of September 1646; nnd from other expressions in the same work it would appene that ho was born about the close of 161¥, or the commencement of the fl lowing year.
+ Wishart.
£ “Gth March 1643. Yeheir how Montrois cumin to the Bog (of Gieicht, now Gordon Custle,) His eldest son, the Lord Graham, wes in bis come Baar. proner Tout, eboot 10 yi ol od of sloguldr exposition.
‘takis seikness, deix in the Bog in a few dayis, and ix bureit in the ue of Belle, to father ryt grei"— Spalding,
several of his expeditions,*—gives “In bis younger days he Italy, where he made it his work
of their qualities necessary for a javing rendered himself perfect in ‘next delight was to improve his in- did by allotting a proportionable cand conversing with learned men, yet used his exercise as he might not forget das much of the mathematies as is re- Idier, but his great atudy waa to read c men. Thus he spent three -and Italy, and had surveyed the rari- st, if his domestic affairs had not obliged
s True Funoruls ofthe great Lord Marquet Mon. tot oe Warts Lata Hist, eon 1720"
{
116 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
his return home, which chanced at that time the late Rebellion began to peep out.” ‘This is a more pleasing picture, of the manner in which Montrose was occupi-
ed when abroad, than we obtain from Dileep Bees who corroborates, however, the account both of our he- ro's learning and his travels. He says that the Earl of Montrose was “a young man well learned, who bad tra- velled, but had taken upon him the part of a hero too much, and lived as in a romance, for his whole manner was stately to affectation.” As this portrait, how~ ever, might convey a more favourable opinion than the malicious Bishop intended, he qualifies it by the infor= mation, that, “ when Montrose was beyond sea he tra- velled with the Harl of Denbigh, and they consulted all the astrologers they could hear of; I plainly saw the Earl of Denbigh relied on what had been told him to his dying day, and the rather because the Earl of Mon- trove was promised a glorions fortune for some time, but all was to be overthrown in conclusion.” ‘The al- leged accuracy of this prediction is not bad evidence that it never occurred, and there is probably more of malicious detraction in the spirit with whieh Burnet retails it, than superstitions reliance on the truth of his anecdote. The difficulty of discovering any prominent vices in the character of Montrose has rendered his political enemies, of all eras, vaguely extravagant in theif terms of abuse, and somewhat pucrile in theiranec- dotes of detraction. Conscious that the unprejudiced would still be apt to admire him as a generous hero, though designed a“ bloody murdererand excommunicat- ed traitor,” such writers have laboured to trace his best qualities from impure sources, and to annihilate the ab-
* Burnet’s Iistory ofhis own Timos p51, Oxford edition, 1823, with the suppressed pawaygen.
i. |
118 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
It would be a fact of greater interest to establish that ‘Montrose, when in France, “ became passionately attached to the military profession, and accepted a commission of captain of the Royal Guand of Louis XII." Several modern writers have recorded with- out expressing any doubt as to this interesting circum- stance, That Montrose’s innate love of arms and heroic adventure had been first stirred by visiting the war- like nations of the continent, in the age too of Gustavus Adolphus, may readily be believed; and the manly accomplishments, and military capacities, which so soon distinguished him at home, indicate that when abroad he had studied to perfect himself for the field. But he could not have been much more than twenty- two years of age when he returned to Scotland, about the commencement of the year 1636 ; he was only three years abroad, during which time he was travelling, and” it seems that he meant to have visited the cast, had his presence not been required in Scotland. Yet some contemporary historians have even asserted that Mon- trose commanded the Scottish Guard in France. San« derson, in his Life of Charles L, (printed only eight years after the death of Montrose,) speaks of that no- bleman’s “ return from his travels in France, where he had command of the Scots Guard.” Heylyn in his eu- rious remarks (printed two years earlier than Sander- son'swork) upon Hammond L’Estrange’s History of the Reign of Charles I., also records Montrose’s “return from the court of France, where he was captain, as I take it, of the Scottish Guard.” The command alluded to must have been of that illustrious body, so famous in the romance of history, sometimes called the Com-
* Lodge. Dame, lao, rocords the same as 8 certain fact.
EE
YOUTH OF MONTROSE. lg
pany of Scottish Archers, whose high privilege it was to guard the person of the King of France. Arising
‘in his eloquent funeral oration over Henrietta Maria,
identifies the Archer Guard with Scotland, in a remark,
So 2 ee alae is certainly not applicable to
Montrose. The Scotch, he says, in whose hands the
Lc ed England placed himself, gave him up to the
un and thus the faithful guards of our Kings betrayed their own! *
‘There is a circumstance in the history of the Scottish ‘Guard which may account for Heylyn’s surmise, and at the same time afford the most probable theory of Mon- ‘trose’sfirst departure from his native country. Before the timeof Louis XIII. the guard had lost much of itsScottish ‘exelusiveness, with the concomitant honourand privileges to that nation, and French noblemen aspired to, and ob- tained, the distinctions that still nominally belonged to Scotland. From some original papers on the subject it appears that James VI. was induced to interpose his personal demand to have the guard restored to its pris- tine ; in France, or that it should no longer be
| with his kingdom. ‘This happened in the
years 1611 and 1612, when Mary de Medicis was Re- gent of France. In 1624, her son, Louis XIII. ap- pears to have been very anxious to derive this aid en Ritmo Parliamentaires
fidelles de nos Rois, trahissent le leur."— Orairon he Henr- Marie de Prance.
120 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
from Scotland upon its original footing. He granted his patent, dated 19th April in that year, of the“ com- and of company of seated 6 A by the death of its former commander
Lennox,” to George Lord Gordon, wher Marquis of Huntly. This Lord Gordon was the noble- man to whom Montrose, when first in arms for the Covenant, was opposed in the north of Scotland, who was said to have afterwards entertained a fatal jealousy of Montrose in their loyal career, and who finally suffered death in the same cause, about the same time, It appears by various letters, from about the date of this patent to the year 1637 inclusive, that the King of Frunce had long ardently desired the presence of Lord Gordon and his company, which was
land, Hitherto it has been recorded that this noble- man passed over to France, with his brilliant cortege, in 1624, the date of his commission, in which ease Montrose was too young. to have accompanied him. But that he did not do so until the year 1633 is prov- ed from the tenor of the correspondence alluded to, and the occasion was after Louis had resolved to aid, the united princes of Germany against the house of Austria. A contemporary manuscript history of the family of Gor- don says, that young Huntly “ conducted with him from Scotland the bravest company of Scotch gens d'armes that ever had been seen in France, all of them gentle- men, and the Baron Gray, one of the most ancient barons in Scotland, for their lieutenant,”* ‘The letter of Louis, in which he appoints Lord Gray to be Lieutenant, in consequence of the demise * du feu Sieur de Gourdon,” is preserved with the rest,
* Manuscript History of the Family of Gordon. Advocates’ Library.
192 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
over till the city surrendered.”* This was the same gallant youth who commanded the left wing of the loy- al army at the battle of Alford, and whose death there so sadly clouded the success of Montrose.
‘The “ thirty years war,” then, was the school of arms, and its heroes the chivalry, by whose fame at least, if not in actual service with them, Montrose first felt awakened within him the lofty and warlike longings which, Burnet tells us, made him “ take upon him the part of a hero too much,” though the Bishop will allow no purer source of that demeanour than the fact of hav- ing hunted astrologers with the Earl of Denbigh. Mon- troge returned to Scotland about the close of 1635, or the commencement of the following year, when he met with a reception from Charles I. to which alone has been generally ascribed the most mistaken step of our hero's subsequent career. But before narrating this anecdote, we must notice another nobleman, whose character and conduct exercised a fatal influence in all that befel the King, Huntly, and Montrose,
‘The excellent Sir Philip Warwick, speaking of that prudent Marquis of Hamilton who was the minister of King James, adds, “ he had two sons, James aud Wil- liam, neither of them so graceful persons as himself, and both of some hard visage, the elder of a neater shape and gracefuller motion than his brother; how- ever, 1 was in the presence-chamber at Whitehall, when, after his father’s death, he (the elder) returned from his travels, and waiting on the King from chapel with great observance, and the King using him with great kind- ness, the eyes of the whole Court were upon the young man. His hair was short, and he wore a little black
* Wis, of the Family of Gordon,
call, Pigeeenieweho usually at Court put the arising man, generally agreed in
Sees esr be evinces had such a cloud ‘seems to have impressed aliquid in-
me, which I often reflected on when his future ac-
first to be suspected, then to be declaimed
against. I have lately seen the memoirs of a countryman of his,* who is master ofa very good pen, and who hath represented this great man by a light which few others, either of his own nation or ours, discovered him by. ;1 would sully no man's fame, especially 30 eminent a person's, for to write invectives is more cri- nifnal than to err in eulogies. As for myself I was known unto him and ever civilly treated [by?] him; however, I must concur in that general opinion, that naturally he loved to gain his point rather by some ser- pentine winding, than by a direct path, which was to the nature of his younger brother (La-
nerick) of whom that gallant, loyal peer, the Earl of Montrose, was wont to say, that even when this gentle- man was his enemy, and in arms against the King, he did it open-faced, and without the least freachery, ei- ther to his Majesty, or any of his ministers,—a charac- ter worthy of a great man, though deflecting from
eles pamyes of Hamilton has already been af- forded, exciting a smile from his admiring master dur- ing an angry discussion at the councils of Scotland,— “ My Lord Chancellor, how can there be such neglect ‘as you speak of, since I know they had almost put my
* Bishop Burnet's Memoirs of tho House of Hamilton. + Sie Philip Warwick's Memoirs of the Reign of Charles I. p. 111.
124 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
mother to the horn for forty shillings Scots! whereat the King smiled."* His mother was the noted Lady Ann Cunningham, of the right covenanting breed, being a daughter of the Earl of Glencairn. This lady was the unrivalled leader of the female church-militant in Scotland. Her officers were the Nicholas Balfours, Eupham Hendersons, Bethia and Elpsa Craigs, and other “ godly matrons” of the Covenant. Her veteran. guards were such as the stool- propelling Jenny Geddes, and her light troops, the “ recorded so
exultingly by Robert Baillie as the first victors agninst Episcopacy. The Marquiswasaboutten years older than Montrose, and from boyhood had obtained that ascen- dency over the affections and judgment of Charles which enters so deeply into the history of the times. The eon- trol exercised by the mysterious “serpentine” Hamilton, was not legs pernicious to the country and the King, than had been the influence of Buckingham. In secret, and while, perhaps, only contemplating petty and sel~ fish results, his deceptive and wavering conduct sapped the foyndations of the throne itself. Burnet has most artfully laboured to gain for him greater favour with posterity than he deserves. But Clarendon, ina single sentence, throws more light upon the Marquis's charae- ter: “ His natural darkness (he says) and reservation in discourse, made him be thought a wise man, and his having been in command under the King of Sweden, and his continual discourse of battles aud fortifications, made him be thought a soldier; and both these mistakes were the cause that made him be looked upon as a worse and more dangerous man, than, in truth, he deserved to be.” He has, indeed, been suspected of designs in his
* Introtuctory Chapter, p80.
Sibasith beliarodl Adee'ta bw at Moda ght his brother (the Marquis) had .
‘the Incident, 1641, by Lord Lanerick, Hardwicke’
=
1296 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS-
self, having followed him several years in his expedi- tions, and what I have learned from others of good narne and credit. He was of a middle stature, and most exquisitely proportioned limbs, his hair of a light chest- nut, his complexion betwixt pale and ruddy, his eye most penetrating, though inclining to gray, his nose ra- ther aquiline than otherwise. As he was strong of body and limbs, so he was most agile, which made him excel most of others in those exercises where these two are required. In riding the great horse, and malsing use of his arms, he came short of none. J never heard much of his delight in dancing, though his countenanee and other his bodily endowments were equally fitting the court as the camp.” *
Montrose’s father had been president of the council ; his grandfather high treasurer, chancellor, and finally viceroy of Scotland; his ancestors, of royal descent, were distinguished by every circumstance most likely to recommend their representative to the King; and his own personal accomplishments were such as to plead yet more powerfully in his favour. ‘T’o ingratiate him- self with such a monarch as Charles, could not fail to be Montrose’s first desire on returning from his travels, and he was well entitled to expect to succeed by no
* Dr Wishart describes Montrose in similar terms: “ He wns not pak tabs a much exceeding a middle stature, but af an exceeding:
pri enact fino features. His hui was of w dutk-brown eo
spirit, which began to appear in hia, to the wonder and expectation of all men, even in his childhood.”
ys Heylyn) of James Earl of Mon- he Covenanters, as he afterwards was briefly this: At his return where he was captain (as I Guard, he had a mind to put service, and was advised tomake
quis of Hamilton, who, knowing the and fearing a competitor in his cunningly told him that he would do
which the King intended to reduce
w of a province, he could not suffer the indig- putupon him. This done he repairs
tells him of the Earl's return from purpose to attend him at the time
ol plead ace fe aie mong the Scots, by reason of an old de-
he royal family, that, if he were not nipped
128 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
in the bud, as we used to say, he might endanger the King’s interests and affairs in Scotland. The Earl be- ing brought unto'the King, with great demonstration of affection on the Marquis’s part, the King, without taking any great notice of him, gave him his hand to kiss, and so turned aside; which so confirmed the truth of that false report which Hamilton had de- livered to him, that in geeat displeasure and disdain be makes for Scotland, where he found who knew how to work on such humours as he brought along with him, till, by seconding the information which he had from Hamilton, they had fashioned him wholly to their will.”"*
‘The disgust which Charles had conceived at the Rothes party in Scotland, and the circumstances which occasioned that disgust, have been noticed in our intro- ductory chapter. Most probably Hamilton had taken advantage, of the King’sdisposition to evince upon every opportunity a marked discountenance of all who adher= ed to that faction, to persuade Charles that Montrose was to be a leader among those turbulent-nobles, Be this as it may, such a reception of a young nobleman, as yet only distinguished for every personal attraction, must have been as remarkable, as itwas mortifying to its object. Sir Philip Warwick tells us, that Charles * with any artist or good mechanic, traveller, or scholar would discourse freely ;" and he also records this trait of the King’s affectionatecharacter, that“ whenever any young nobleman, or gentleman of quality, who was going to travel, came to kiss his hand, he cheerfully would give
* This is from Heyl upon L'Estrange, Life of Laud he i lee oat eal ciMontoaes “ the Guard of Franco. It will be observed, as noticed in ‘our introductory chapter, that Heylyn obtained some materials for his
Life of Land from Lord Napier. and Whitelock both allude to the circumstance narrated by Hoylys.
i
o say, that they were like Caesar and
endure no superior, and the
equal." De Retz confirms the
Montrose,—the parallel be- r
ee. |
132 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
of the country were about to be infringed, and the Pro- testant religion on the eve of being forcibly supplanted by Popery,—the same false view of the King’s inten- tions, that, for a like factions purpose, had been gated against the tithe policy. The scheme mity in the Protestant worship of the kingdom was, in itvelf, rational and praiseworthy, not originating with, but inherited by, Charles. The attempt, how- ever, was ill timed, and worse conducted, and resistance to it in Scotland might have claimed some admiration, as well as sympathy, had that resistance been the na+ tural and unanimous expression of « rational feeling, or had it possessed one feature which deserves to be re- garded with other sentiments than disgust. The peo- ple of Scotland, though, as Maleolm Laing well ob- serves, “ seldom distinguished for loyalty,” were not, ge nerally speaking, anti-monarchical, nor were they dis- posed, says Clarendon, to enter into “a bare-faced rebel- lion against their King, whose person they loved, and reverenced his government ;" nor, he adds, “ would they _ have been wrought upon towards the lessening the one or the other, by any other suggestions or infusions, than such as should make them jealous, or apprehensive ofa design to introduce Popery, their whole religion consist- ing in an entire detestation of Popery, in believing the Pope to be antichrist, and hating perfectly the persons ofall Papists.” A false alarm of Popery was, indeed, the great lever of insurgency in Scotland, and the bet- ter suited for the purposes of those who used it, that the enlightened monarch was capable of regarding the time, as nothing else than what the Church iss Jand herself uow admits it to have been,* namely,
* Seo" Popular Reflections on the progress of the Principles of Tate mtion, and the rensonablenew of the Catholic claims, by a Protestatt,”
;
a. | 134 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
poses his church is about to be divided, are to blame; “the one putsidolatry, Popery, superstition, in sundry things whieh are innocent of these faults 5 pete of the persons and actions of men
comes," * * the other seems ert flame, to command upon sole authority, without ever craving the advice of any, so faras we can hear, ifsuch things be expedient, yea if they be lawful,"—a view of | the whole matter which happens precisely to coincide with Clarendon's statement of the seditious fanaticism of the Covenanters, and the overbearing Episcopal po- licy of Laud. The contents of “the Boole" we letra from the same covenanting source, are canvassed before they are known or understood, and pronounced to be a popish ceremonial illegally imposed, —* in a word, that it was nought but the mass in English, brought im by the | craft and violence of the bishops, against the mind of all the rest, both of church and statesmen." It is re- markable, considering the previous history of the Church of Scotland, how much laborious agitation it cost the Rothes faction, and the clergy, their instra- ments, to rouse the tumultuous portion of the commu- nity, even with all the advantage obtained from Laud's mismanagement. The violent burst against the ser- vice-book was far from being a spontaneous or general impulse of the people,—* these things (that the liturgy was just the muss in English, &e.) sounded from puede pits, were carried from hand to hand in papers, were the table-talk and open discourse of high and low."* With all this preparatory agitation, when the royal order, for reading the new service, on Sunday 23d July 1637, was attempted to be fulfilled, in St Giles’ Church by the Bishop and Dean of Edinburgh, and in the
136 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
ness out of their hands,’—which, accordingly, the ma- trons undertook todo, Some haye affected to treat this ‘story as a gratuitous invention by Bishop Guthrie. Dr Cook attributes the riots, (which, however, he cannot re-
strain himself from calling“ atrocities from which men not destitute of religious impressions, would naturally have shrank,”) to a conscientious: “that they were engaged in the cause of religion, and were contributing to purify those temples which apparently they profaned.”* Bishop Guthrie, however, is not only generally corrobo- _ rated by the admissions of Baillie as to the systematic outrages committed by the women, but the fact that the ebullitions of popular fury were arranged before-hand by the /eaders of the faction, who pretended to disclaim the riots, is sufficiently proved by an original and anony- mous letter, to that noted character Mr Archibald John- ston, the son of Mlspa Craig,—the clerk of the Assem- bly—the procurator of the church,—the feamer of the Cevenant—the pillar of the cause—and, finally, ereated a Peer by Cromwell !
“ Dear Christian brother, and courageous ‘Protes- tant,” says this worthy’s anonymous correspondent, “upon some rumour of the Prelate of St Andrews coming over the water, finding it altogether éncomee- nient that he or any of that kind, should’ show them- selves peaceably in public, some course was taken howhe might be entertained in such places as he should come unto. Weare now informed that he will not come, but that Brechin is in Edinburgh or thereabout. It is the advice of your friends there, that, in a private way, some course may be taken for his terror and if he offer to show /imself publicly. Think upon the
* Dr Cook's Mistory of the Church, Vol ti p. 97%
k
bapa elie ncy
termed, to suspend the imposition of the service-book. ‘The 20th September 1637, a convention was assem- bled, at which noblemen and gentlemen now ventured
Ree designation of sup plicants. “The oracle,” says Bishop Guthrie, “ whom the supplicants consulted anent the legality of their proceeding was Sir Thomas Hope, his Majesty's advo- cate, who, though he professed to have no hand in the business, being the King’s servant, yet, in the mean- time, privately Inid down the grounds and ways where- by they were to proceed ; and that he might not be re- marked, pitched upon Balmerino and Mr Henderson to be the men who, from time to time, should come to him and receive his overtures.” First and foremost to this convention came the needy and dissolute Earl of Rothes. With him came Cassils, Eglington, Home, Lo- thian, and Wemyss, Lindsay, Yester, Balmerino, Cran- ston, and Loudon, accompanied by ministers and bur- gesses from Fife and the western shires. Their sup- plications were too respectfully received by the privy- council; and the excellent Duke of Lennox, who had just arrived in Scotland to attend his mother’s funeral, was burdened with the odious task of representing the business fully to his Majesty. The council dissolved, ‘but the supplicants still held mectings for the purpose of organizing sedition, not being quite satisfied with their numerical demonstration. Various districts were al- lotted to the most active of the ministers attached to ‘the faction, in which they were enjoined, not to preach Christianity, but to agitate—agitate—agitate.*
* “Tt wns laid upon Mr Henry Pollock to deal with those of Lothian,
Le
We MOUTROSE SSD THE COVESASTERS.
supper in Balmerino's lodging, where the whole nobi- ity I think supped, some commissioners, from the gen- try, town, and ministers, met, where I was among the rest : there it was resolved to meet against the 15th of November, in as great numbers as possibly could be had, to wait on the answer of their prior supplication, and to get their complaint once tabled and received.” At this covenanting conviviality, the learned but somewhat incoherent and bewildered Baillie, sat in wondrous ad- miration of those long headed arch-insurgents, Balme- rino and Loudon. He “ thought them the best spokes- men that ever he heard open a mouth.” He says it was“ a meeting of harmony, and mutual love, zeal, and gravity beyond what had occurred even in a meeting composed solely of churchmen for forty years.” When taking leave of the nobles, however, one of the ministers lectured their Lordships upon the “reformation of their persons, and using the exercise of piety in their fami- lies; which all took well, and promised fair.” The ministers returned to their respective districts of agita- tion, to raise, from their preverted pulpits, the seditious criew that were to bring the people to the meeting of the 15th of November. “ The fame of that 15th day spread at once far and broad, even to the King’s ear, and all were in great suspense what it might produce.”* So closed the second scene.
‘Thus by the arts of a desperate faction,—working in Scotland, under the leadership of the Earl of Rothes, ever since the period when Charles attempted to ame- liorate the country at the expense of the tithe-holders, —was the community wrought up to its highest pitch of excitement before Montrose became in any way con- nected with these proceedings. It was at the great
* Baillie,
| MONTROSE GAINED oven, 143 eonvention of the 15th of November 1637, which had
that Montrose first ap- aap cette (ope step cats who had not been formerly there, came at that diet the Earl of Montrose, which was most faken notice of; yea, when the bishops heard that he was come there to join, they were somewhat affrighted, having that es- we cao that they they thought it time to prepare he engaged.” And why had he ap-
pot eared ‘Was it that, like Argyle, he hurk- ‘ed bebind the scenes until he saw the safest moment for declaring himself,—or was it the spontaneous impulse ‘of patriotic alarm,—or was it, as Dr Wishart says, that™ ® the tales they mude, they never wanted fitting instru- ‘ments to tell and spread,” and that his youthful and ar- dent mind bad been worked upon by the faction? Bail. Tie has answered the question in a few expressive words, — the canniness* of Rothes brought in Montrose to 7 y.”" But it can be shewn that even Rothes is not entitled to the sole merit of this conquest. In an ori- | ginal manuscript deposition, (taken during that perse- ‘cution of Montrose and his friends, in 1641, which will ‘be the subject of a future chapter,) I find, what had hitherto escaped observation, that Montrose himself names a minister as having laboured to convert him. “ Thereafter my Lord (Montrose) says to the deponer, ‘you were an instrument of bringing me to this cause ; ‘Tam calumniated and slandered as a backslider in this cause, and am desirous to give you and all honest men satisfaction?” Now this deponer is Mr Robert Mur- ‘ray, minister of Methven,—the very clergyman upon whom (preparatory to the grand agitation for this meet-
* Canniness, &. ¢ Scotch cunmmg,
i {
14s MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
ing of the 15th of November) “ it was laid, to traeail with them of Perth and Stirlingshire,"—the districts in which lay the estates of Montrose, and his relatives, Lord Napier, and Sir George Stirling of Keir.
At this grand convention the treasurer Traquair, one of the most able and eloquent of the privy-couneil, and well disposed towards the King’s interests, though ad- verse to the civil aggrandizement of the bishops, ebal- lenged their proceedings, says Baillie, “ with great ad- miration to some of his wisdom and faculty of speech.” But, he adds, “ the advocate, after some little displea- ‘sure at the treasurer for his motion, resolved, that they might meet in law to chuse commissioners to Parlia- ment, to convention of estates, or any public business.” It was then determined to appoint acommittee of twelve, representing as many several estates as in their wis- dom this convention saw fit, that the new constitution should embrace. Rothes, Loudon, Montrose, and Lind- say, were the four noblemen selected; and Sir Stirling of Keir, (Montrose’s nephew by marriage with Lord Napier’s daughter,) was one of those chosen to re- present the lesser barons. ‘Thus originated that scourge of the kingdom, factiously appointed committees, usurp- ing the whole functions of government in Scotland. So artfully was the matter managed as to seem # cons servative act of the privy-council itself, fortified by the Jegal opinion of the first law officer of the crown. It was, however, a8 Baillie assures us,a deliberate plan of the faction to constitute a new and irresponsible go- vernment of their own, at which their contemplated
of the bishops might be received, and “ tabled,” a phrase which afforded a vulgar nomencla- ture to a lawless and tyrannical constitution, * ** Tho Tublen"*
MONTROSE GAINED OVER. 145
Yet the day was not far distant when Montrose was to learn to appreciate a covenanting committee of estates ! when his horror of such tribunals was even to mingle with the gentlest effusions of his accomplished mind,—
My dear and only love, I pray, ‘This noble world of thee ‘Be governed by no other sway But purest monarchy. Por if confusion have a part, Which virtuous souls abhor, . And hold a synod in thy heart, Til never love thee more. eoeeee If in the empire of thy heart Where I should solely be, ‘Another do pretend a part, ‘And dare to vie with me, Or if committees thou erect, ‘And goes on such a score, Tl sing and laugh at thy neglect, ‘And never love thee more.
VOL. 1. x
146 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
CHAPTER III.
‘THE COVENANT CONTRADICTORY VIEMs OP 1t ALAR YINWS GP IT=ERGS VIRWS OF IT —HUNTLY'S REIECTION OF IT.
‘Tux constitution of Scotland being thus overturned, the destructive party instantly proceeded to the eontri~ vance of theirmemorable charter. The COVENANT, that bond of faction and banner of rebellion, is inseparable from the name of Montrose, not only because eventual- ly he fell a sacrifice in the vain attempt to save his King and country from its desolating effects, but be- cause he was amongst the foremost to sign it, and, for a brief space, supported itin council and enforced itin the field. Some of the original editions of the Covenant are yet preserved in the Advocates’ Library, and among the crowded signatures attached to these sad memorials of national turbulence, and human vanity and folly, ap- pears the name of Montrose, conspicuous both from its foremost place, and the characteristic boldness of the autograph. Were this bond what some have imagin- ed it to be, a patriotic and holy expression of unanimous feeling in all who signed it,—a feeling for the preserva- tion of their Religion and Liberties,—had Charles I. veally entertained the determined purpose, agai “ Independency" of Scotland, which the Covenant is by some supposed to have met, then, however illegal in it- self, and though leading to worse evils thun it professed to cure, all who signed it in that good faith and feeling might well be excused. If Montrose, who we shall find only abjured the Covenant after he distinctly saw that
ee
THE COVENANT. ur
it was made to serve the ruinous purposes of a revolu- tionary movement, had reallysigned it under cireumstan-
ces which necessarily impelled every Christian patriot so to do, his political character would be blameless. It is to be feared, however, that the martyr of loyalty stands not so well excused in his early career. He appears to have taken that step, as many others did, with but confused ideas of its propriety. The best ca ofthe Church of Scotland now admit, ox but feehly veil the fat, that the Covenant, as disho-
politicians. But Montrose was naturally
le of conceiving #0 profound ao plot, as he
the scope and tendency of the
the time when he signed it. He was
me of the intriguers who so artfully contriv-
successful scheme ngainst established or-
der. Rothes, Loudon, and Balmerino, with their
a Archibald Johnston of Wariston,
a apostle Alexander Henderson,—
‘these five are immortalized as its able, though disinge-
The scheme of the Covenant is well
edie Po to adopt that Confession of Faith—
d against Popery at a time when the popish plots
and a less enlightened era, rendered the fer-
ore excusable and sincere—whieh King James
th had signed along with the nation. There
added to this protestant confession a bond
or obligation for maintenance of the true religion, and
f the King’s person. Some years afterwards James
upon his constitution of the church, the
five articles of Perth, and thus, with the acquiescence of
is people, introduced that Episcopal imparity of church government, which was virtually the scheme of Kur
:
es |
150 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
of the life and actions of Montrose, that we should ob- tain a juster view, of the principles and history of theCo- venant of 1638, than is usually presented to us, even by the most conscientious covenanting historians of the Church of Scotland. Those who glorify the Covenant in vagueterms of admiration, without venturing into minute details, are the most aptto record that Montrose only join- ed itfrom motives of selfish pique, and quitted it fromyet more selfish feclings of disappointment. But if it be the case that every art of insurgency had been employed, by a political clique, to rouse the passions and blind the un- derstanding of all classes of the community, and that thereafter they proceeded in a more reckless and head- Jongcourse of democracy,—if such, in few words, be the history of the Covenant, it is not difficult to understand how the young and ardent Montrose came tojoin it with thoughtless zeal, and to quit itso soon with disgust and indignation, The movement, however, La ete oee wise characterized, and by none more it
by thelearned author of a History ofthe Bh pe The Covenant, according to this writer, was “ agrand national movementagainstarbitrary power, civiland re- ligious,"—it was “not merely # cool assent of the under- standing, but of the heart, heated to an enthusiasm, of which a faint conception, only, can be formed by those who have lived in quiet times ;* the Covenant was embra- ced with tears of penitence for past dyfection, and shouts
'* Some are apt to consider the asvent of a cool trunt-worthy und laudable, than the assunt ofa heated heurt, to pitch {ts thermometer may rise. As for our “quiet times" heing fineapa- ble of appreciating the enthusiasm of demoerncy, they nro at least mend. 4 ing, Mr Brodic's History wae printed in 1823, since when Bristol has been burt by a reforming mob, and many other eireumatances have oceutted to remind us of the rise of the troubles in Scotland, and the subsequent fate of tho British Monarchy.
THE COVENANT. 151
of unutierable joy for the hoped-for fruits,’—not of busy Siar” ier "Yet neither will this historian suffer the
‘roused rebellion while professing loyalty, and effected a secret combination against the person and. authority of the King while it took God to witness a determination to defend both, but because of its “ into- or ae eben “ Men," adds our historiographer, “ who were themselves smarting un- der the effects of intolerance, might have had pie ‘with the feelings of those who also adhered to their own notions of worshipping their Maker,”*—meaning theres Church of England, which the Co- ‘yenanters 50 intolerantly and inconsistently assailed, but the worshippers of the Pope. How incongruous is this idea, | for Roman Catholic worship being ‘an ingredient in the composition of the Covenant! so much so, indeed, that we must altogether distrust the vision with which our wrapt historian had contemplated. the great presbyterian crisis. For that eloquent page thenof Mr Brodie’s constitutional history, we would sub- ‘stitute the following details, afforded by the manuscript ‘account of James Gordon, parson of Rothemay-+ _ “ The Covenant was no sooner agreed upon, but in- stantly it was begun to be subscribed, in Edinburgh first, and the church chosen out for that solemnity was =. church, where, after it had been read
¢ Brodi’s History of the British Empire, Vol. th p. 471, 472. Gordon was the son ofa conspicuous actor in the troubles of » Robert Gordon of Straloch, Some account of James Gor- curious and valuable contemporary history, which has nevor sand from which wo shall frequently have ceoasion to ex
‘be found in & note at the end of this volume, i
152 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
over publicly, and a long speech bad been made by the Lord Loudon in commendation thereof, Mr Alexander Henderson seconded him with a prayer, and then all fell a swearing and subscribing, some of the nobility leading the way. The first, as I am credibly informed, was John Gordon, Earl of Sutherland, and the next was Sir Andrew Murray, Lord Balvaird, minister at Abdie in Fife, two noblemen who, out of zeal to their profes- sion, without any by-ends, thought it a happiness to be among the first subscribents and swearers to the Covenant. After them, all that were present ran to the subscription of it, aud then through the rest of the city it went, every one contesting who might be first, and others, without further examination, or question- ing the articles thereof, following their example. Wo- men, young people, and servant-maids, did swear and hold up their hands to the Covenant. All who were present at Edinburgh at that meeting in the month of February, subscribed and swore to the Covenant be- fore they went from thence, and at their parting, ministers, and noblemen, and gentlemen, who were well affected to the cause, carried copies thereof along with them, or caused them to be written out after their return to their several parishes and counties of Scot- land, which copies were ordinarily written upon great skins of parchment, for which cause, at that time, ina written pasquil, the Covenant was termed the conalel- lation upon the back of Aries. And suchas took copies along with them to be subscribed, caused ordinarily such as had sworn, or underwritten their names al- ready, if they were noblemen or ministers of note, to set to their hands anew to the several copies, that, where themselves could not be present to invite others, their handwriting might be their proxy. The months
»
of many to injuries and and some were threatened and beaten who dlurst refuse, especially in greatest cities, (as likewise in
sedpoblerens carried copies of it about in their port Geet tees aati sreith thele friends ours wi wir in private to subscribe. It was subscribed publicly in churches, ministers exhorting their people thereto; it was subseribed and sworn privately ; all had power to take the oath, and were licensed and weleome to come in; and any that pleased had power and license to carry the Covenant about with him, and give the oath to such as were willing to subscribe and swear. And such was the zeal of many subscribents, that, for a while, many subscribed with fears on their cheeks, and it is constantly reported that some did draw their own Wood, and wsed it in place of ink to underwrite their ames, Such ministers as spoke most for it were heard #0 passionately, and with such frequency, that church- ‘es could not contain their hearers in cities, some keep- from Friday to Sunday to get the com- them sitting,—some of the devouter sex, tata sitting all night before such sermons in the churches, for fear of losing a room or Bees ror te least, some of their hand- maids sitting constantly there all night, till “7 .
a
154 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
tresses came to take up their places and to relieve them, ‘so that several, as I had it from very sober and credi- ble men, under that religious confinement, were forced to give way to those natural necessities which they could no longer contain, These things will scarce be believed, but I relate them upon the credit of such as knew this to be truth. Nor were they serupulous to give the Covenant, to such as startled at any point thereof, with such protestations as in some measure were destructive to the sense thereof, as was seen in several instances, so that they got subscriptions
_thereto, and it came to that height, indeed, that such as refused to subscribe were accounted no better than Pa~ pists. Such ministers as dissuaded their people from ‘subscription, either had enough ado to maintain them- selves in their parishes, (and though afterwards they did subscribe, yet other quarrels were found to drive them from their stations,) or, if not that, do or say what they pleased, they were held in suspicion and not trust~ ed, Although it be true that some ministers, who were recusants at first, did afterwards vie for zeal and ac- tivity with the first subscribents,—by this means both redeeming their delay of time, and rubbing off all sus- picion from themselves,—others were forced to flee and desert their stations and places, being persecuted by their parishioners, especially such as had been active for the bishops, and had been hasty to read or commend the Service-Book, or Book of Canons. Many ministers at first not being well satisfied, refused to subscribe, pretending seruple ‘of conscience, and some few, as we shall hear, were scrupled indeed. Other ministers, as other men likewise, hopeful that the cause would not prevail, refused to swear, fearing that the King and bishops would in the end be masters, and question all
the effects not agreeable to their expectation of what was promised, became cold, and remitted of their for- mer zeal, and not a few turned as bitter enemies to the Covenant as they were at first forward friends to ‘it, and died fighting against it, or suffered exemplary deaths upon scaffolds for opposing that which once vo- Juntarily they did engage themselves to maintain. All noblemen and gentlemen and others who were wearied ‘of the present government, and maligned the Episcopal greatness, readily embraced it, and most part or all their followers by their example. Ministers who had ever been opposite to the bishops, and such ceremonies as King James had established, subscribed with the first, and by their examples drew either most part of their parishes, or all of them after them. Such minis- ters as refused, they took pains to win over to their side eee anil dispute,—if they were men otherwise
in their calling, orlearned,—but if they knew them to be faulty, then they were brought over with threats, and terror of church censures. Such mi- nisters for a while stood out till they saw no shelter else- where, and then there were of them who were glad to flee into the Covenant as a sanctuary ; (instances of such might be given, but I forbear to rub upon the crimes of such who are removed, and goue to their place,) some yet living, and known to have come over upon that ac- count, Finally the fears of the more zealous professarr
i |
156 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS-
that religion was in hazard, the factious spirits of others, example, allurements, threats, terrors, brought over the multitude. The nom-subseribents on the other part might be reduced either to, 1. Papists, for it was de- structive to their profession; 2. such as would not en- gage for displeasing the King, as holding their places of him, or those who by their refusal of the Covenant thought one day to plead merit and reward at the King’s hand, without any farther aim or reason, being otherways not concerned in the matter of religion ; others were non-subscribents, as being unsatisfied that the ceremonies of the church of England, Perth arti- cles, and Episcopacy, should be abjured as popery, they being already established ; others quarrelled both with the abjuring of these things for their matter, as also for the formality of the oath, and refused to accept of it,— as pressed without and contrary to authority, without necessity,—or for all these causes together. Albeit the subscription of the Covenant was carried on, as to the multitude, in short space, yet this was but a declar- ing of men’s party who before were practised upon, or had fully discovered themselves, nor were they so in- considerate as to fall a subscribing it publicly till they were sure, underhand, of the greatest part of the king- dom, who, for their power and number, might be able to bear down all their opposers. Nor were underhand as- strances wanting from England, for without that, there had been as many opposers as might have rendered the game hazardous and desperate enough. As they did encourage them to declare themselves, so it did quick~ Jy let all be seen who were either against them upon their own private account, (these were all the Papists,) or such as would own the King’s authority, which was now beginning to reel in Scotland. So that now they
—
THE COVENANT. 157
‘began to be distinguished by divers names, as well ux factions,—Protestants and Papists, who were non-sub- seribents, were put all in one predicament, and called anti or non-Covenanters, and all the subscribents were called Covenanrens, which names afterward changed into others equivalent, as the face of affairs altered.” ——— °
This minute contemporary account, of the machinery of the Covenant, is more worthy of eredit than the many vague encomiums bestowed upon it by those wri- tery who are anxious fo invest a democratical revolu- tion with a sacred character. The following sentences of a letter from Mr David Mitchell, one of the perse- ented ministers of Edinburgh, to Dr John Lesly, Bishop
R: ‘a curious confirmation of the record of the parson of Rothemay, “The greater part of the i subscribed, and the rest are daily sub- scribing a covenamt. It is the oath of the King’s house 1580, with strange additions, 1 mutual combination nee of all novations in religion, doctrine, and
and rites of worship that have been
in since that time; so 08 if the least of the subscribers
there be some of them not en years of
‘some not worth twopence,*—that all shall con~
‘their defence, and for the expulsion of all Pa- Jversaries, (that is, ald that will not subscribe,
and kingdom, according to the laws, lwndred are cited in the charter. This The frue pastors are brought into Edin-
ingh to ery out against ws wolees, and they, with our 2 the universal fooling ngainst the liturgy, the potition of oo eenphlaatherdapca pe broke rac red
a |
158 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
brethren here, Mr Andrew Ramsay, Mr Henry Pol- lock, and your whileome friend the Principal, [Adam- son] crying out that they are neither good Christians, nor good subjects, that do not subscribe, nay, nor in covenant with God, have made us so odious that we dare not go on the streets. 1 have been dogged by some gentlemen, and followed with many mumbled threatnings behind my back, and then when in stairs, swords drawn, and‘ if they had the Papist villain, oh!* Yet I thank God I am living to serve God and the King, and the church, and your Lordship. Your chief [Rothes] is chief in this business. There is no- thing expected here but civil war.”
These are not the only contemporary sources from which it can be proved that the views of thase writers who maintain that a unanimous, spontancous, pious and patriotic impulse gave birth to the Covenant, are baseless and rhapsodical.+ But even had that political
* Compare this with the acerot letter to Archibald Jobnston, quoted.
supra, p. 196. Robert Buillie, though he sometimes condemned the system, hus expressed bis senve of the value of strokes in 9 Covenanter,
“D, Monto (he auys) since his strokes, is amongst the in our "Monro had been nearly stoned to death, by tho women of Kinghorn, for his supposed affection towards the
4p There re some very curious and amusing letters written in 1638, during the covenanting tumult, by one signing himself "Jean do Max rin," (and obviously addressed to the Duke of Leanox in England from
on Ms
one in Scotland, printed by Lord Hailes, iu hix Eiistorl- cal Collections, from the origimals proswrved in the Advocates" ‘They are vory long in tho writer great
form, than “Jenn da Maria's” exposé of the arts of that bogot the Covenant, He snys that the King’s bickwnrdness to take strong measures against the Covenanting combination, “makes mmny
scribed the same, who otherwise had undoubtedly stood outy* and, * if ‘
THE COVENANT. 159
been characterized by the lawless plot- 9 concuss and terrify the lieges into it would still have been but a gigantic in- stance of that fallacious harmony of patriotic feeling which is so graphically exposed by Dr Johnson, in tra~ -cing the rise and progress of a factious petition multitu- Ainoualy signed.” In the course of his admirable illustra-
jamesareeasily collected ; one mansigns beeause he hates the Papists, another because it will vex the parson, one because he is rich, another because he is poor, one to show that he is not afraid, and an- other to shew that he can write.” And such, on a larger scale, was the patriotism of the Covenant. The grand national movement, the penitent embraces, the tears, the shouts of joy unuéterable, the promised hopes, all that Mr Brodie has so imposingly crowded into his bean ideal of that revolutionary charter, was but the
, the false excitement, the senseless clamour, and the lawless violence, of its day. “The passage, however,” continues Dr Johnson, in the ce- lebrated political essay to which we have referred,— * is not always smooth. Those who collect contribu-
aleeury =
-hat odd, uncouth and ridiculons courses they nse to draw
instructive: 7 2 Yon may Judge Roel vp nbs rhavs aot txicrtind ‘are in {a good} taking, when an insolent elavering puppy, whore wife ix asister of our Sheriff's, (whose deportment for Anegret most of any man’s in thix county,)and who qua. ‘a his joint commissioner for this shire, dared be so pert sto our church, and there, svcing how fow werv like to ) them, say, that he desired but the names of thoww who should to subseribe, with « note of their worths in means or otherwise, them alone fo take order with them."—Original MS, Advocates’
| # “The False Alarin.” 1770.
i. |
160 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
tions to sedition sometimes apply toa man of higher rank, and more enlightened mind, who, instead of lend- ing them his name, calmly reproves them for being se- ducers of the people.” Would, that, in parallel, we might claim this lofty position for Mon- traxe. But, although certainly not of the faction who secretly organized and propelled the movement, Mon- trose was carried by the arts of insurgency, and, for a time, deluded like many others, ‘There is one no- bleman, however, in whom the parallel is sustained. He, who “ instead of lending them his name, calmly reproved them for being seducers of the people,” was George Gordon, Marquis of Huntly, the solitary noble- man who, from the first moment of the covenanting excitement, never hesitated in his determined loyalty, although, unfortunately, his means of assisting the King were not in proportion to his inclination. Huntly, whose early distinction in France we have already noticed, had been reared at the Court of Eng- land with Prince Henry, and Charles then Duke of York, and, under the superintendence of King James, (who had found the task of protecting his father, the popish Enrl, neither easy nor sufe,) was instructed in the protestant doctrines of the church of England. ‘Thus the reputation of the old Earl, and his own epis- copal education, made it easy forthe presbyterian party to denounce Huntly as a papist, whenever be presum- ed to evinee his loyalty. This nobleman was, more- over, much embarrassed in his cirenmstances, having contracted debts, to the amount of about a hundred thousand pounds Sterling, in keeping up his military state abroad during the lifetime of his father. The Covenanters made one attempt to bring over Huntly, by mercenary offers, before it fell to the lot of Montrose
EEE
“HUNTLY REJECTS THE COVENANT. 161
to endeavour the conversion of the north vel arte vel arte. ‘There had lately returned from the German wars Colonel Robert Monro, afterwards conspicu- ous as a covenanting commander, who had served under Gustavus Adolphus. He is described as a fear- less and free spoken soldier, of some powers of ad- drest, who had been at the Court of England, where, he was slighted and had retired in dis- suggested to the Earl of Rothes the great advantage of acquiring Huntly for a military lea- <email eae Mptamehone Charged accordingly with a commission ‘that effeet, Colonel Monroset out for Huntly’s place where the Earl reeeived him as an old companion in arms,and presently, while they were walk- ing together in bis garden, was insulted by his guest, with the temptation in these terms : “ It is," said the Colonel,“ my love and duty towards you and your house, that have induced me to come with a proposal which Lintreat you to take under your serious consideration. There is now so strong a party combined against the King, that whoever shall attempt to raise a party in his favour will find themselves in the proportion of one to a hundred. Iam commissioned, on the other hand, to offer you the Covenant, and to say that, if it please you to give in your adherence to that party, you will be chosen for its leader, and your fortunes restored ; but if you de- termine to adhere to the King, and oppose the Cove- want, means will be taken to render your assistance to his Majesty totally ineffectual, yourself will be ruined, and your house sink under its load of a hundred thou. sand pounds of debt."* The manuscript from which this anecdote is derived, does not proceed to say that * James Gordon's MS.
VOL. T. L
(ai
- —— el
ingly, when Loudon and Lindsay met him with excuses from the rest of the aristocracy, he was so highly of fended as to be on the point of turning bis horses heads back again to Court. But Rothes,—the canny Rothes,— “having communed some two or three hours with him in Dalkeith, appeased and removed his mistakings.”* It was on the 8th of June 1638, that Hamilton made his vi from Dalkeith to a Hoos ty teen and Leith. “In fiat think at Leith (says Baillie) as much honour was done unto him, as ever toa King in our country. Huge multitudes, as ever was gathered on that field, set them- selves in hisway. Nobles, gentry of all shires, women, awworld ! the town of Edinburgh all at the Watergate. But we were most conspicuous in our black cloaks, above five hundred on a brae-side, in the links alone, ~~ for his sight ; we had appointed Mr William Living- ston, the strongest in voice and awsterest in connte- nance of us all, to make him a short welcome.” ‘This ~last compliment, however, the Commissioner, whe had obtained a timely hint of the probable nature of such covenanting welcome, begged to decline, and it was be- stowed upon him afterwards in private. Already did Hamilton adopt that system of duplicity, in negotiat~ ing betwixt the King and his rebellious ‘ eventually paralyzed the loyal struggles both of Huntly and Montrose. “The Marquis, in the way, was much moved to pity, even to tears; he professed thereafter his desire to have had King Charles present at that sight of the whole country so earnestly and Aumbly ery- ing for the safety of their liberties and religion." One of the most characteristic anecdotes, however, of that cele=
* Baillie. + Tid,
re
the Commissioner and the ministers, there passed « rencounter, which, though related upon the by, may give matter of laughter to some in a serious business. ‘The Commissioner, passing by the crowd of the mini- stry, who were there waiting on his entry, did re-salute them in a very respectful manner, who were all mak- ing curtsies to his grace. At this time he, looking upon them with a smiling countenance, repeated the words of Matthew v.13,* in Latin, vos estis sal terre. A minister, not far distant, who could not distinctly hear whut the Commissioner spoke, questions another minister, who was nearer, upon the Commissioner's words, who, wittingly, instead of what the Commission er had spoken, told him, * Brother, the Commissioner said, it ix we who make all the kail salt, alluding to a Scottish proverb, which is usually spoken when any: thing is said to mar or undo an action, or to make mis~ takes, There was so much of salt ¢ruth in the jest that ‘it was by many taken notice of, though what sense the ‘Commissioner spoke it in is uninown.” hid Hamilton been a month in Scotland, when an incident occurred which first awakened the suspicions of Montrose that the exeitemerit of the times, on the subject of Religion and Liberties, was taken ad- Se Bement eatooe se wear te throne, Montrose had been selected, along with Rothes and Loudon, to treat, on the part of the Covenanters, ermal during that revolution~ y of protestationagainst proclamation, which, © = Vo aro the wilt ofthe garth: but if tho mlt have lost his vour
wherewith shall it be ralted 7 it is thonoeforth good for nothing, but to ‘be cast out and to be trodden under foot of men.”
166 MONTROSE AND THR COVENANTERS.
owing to the peculiar management of Hamilton, now raged as fiercely as ever. After one of these disgrace- ful scenes it was, that Montrose, Rothes, and Loudon,
Commissioner, in presence of the Privy-Couneil, his Grace, at the close of their conference, requesting the councillors to remain in the audience chamber, accom- panied the deputation through the reyal apartments in Holyroodhouse, till they arrived at the great gallery, where, leading them into a corner, he addressed them confidentially in these remarkable words: “ My Lords and Gentlemen, I spoke to you before those Lords of Council ax the King’s Commissioner; now there being none present but yourselves, I speak to you as a kindly Scotsman. If you go on with cowrage and resolution you will carry what you please, but if you faint, and give ground in the least, you are undone,—a word ix enough to wise men.” ‘This story, if it be true, is deci- sive of the character of Hamilton, and that it is true, neither the direct evidence offered in support of it, nor the remarkable confirmation afforded by every thing that can be ascertained of the conduct and character of that statesman, permit us to doubt.* It is recorded by Bishop Guthrie (then minister of Stirling) who, after narrating thus circumstantially the time, place, and oc- casion, with the particular words uttered, proceeds to support his statement by what he calls,“ my warrants for what I have set down.” 1, On the same day that
* Dr Cook bas only noticed thls anecdote in u note, ax follows m= * Guthrie, in his Memoirs p. 34, 33, records speech us made
ton, which, if genuine, would placo his treachery beyond doubt ; bat the
wvidenco of hix having spoken it la not conclusive, and Barnet li sntie-
Suctorily established his loyalty." —Vol. ii. p. 446,
— ;
ster at Coupar, Mr Robert Knox, minister at Kelso, and to Henry Guthrie himself. 2 On the evening of the day that Guthrie heard this from Dr Guild, “ the said Henry (says the Bishop of himself) being that night with the Barl of
drew him to a window, and there told him, in the very same terms Dr Guild had reported it to him, adding, that it wrought an impression, that my Lord Hamilton by this business to advance his design,*
Id suspend his judgment until he saw
farther, and in the meantime look more narrow to his walking.” The cnemies of Montrose are precluded from the argument that Bishop Guthrie had been imposed of that nobleman to prejudice
his rival, for Mr Cant, also present when Hamilton, as alleged, so addressed the deputation, had made the very same narration previously to Dr Guild. It remains then to defend Hamilton by supposing that his words |, or that the whole story, with
its alleged proofs, is a circuimstantial falsehood, delibe-
rately recorded in his closet by Bishop Guthrie, + Such violent suppositions, however, are rendered desperate wenc.,. of Hamilton himself, as subsequently
the Crown of Scotland. ‘notices this anecdote ngninst Hamilton, and adopts it, this ruxnnrkable
168 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
disclosed. Whatever might be his ulterior objects, and whether he was swayed at the time | by selfish and vas a sae wines pers
no was acting a his King and country, and most discreditable to him- self. We learn from Baillie, that Hamilton met the sedi- tiousdemonstration of the Covenanters with affectionate sympathy, that even showed itself in tears, and that he Jamented the King himself was not thereto be edified and subdued in heart, by the “ humble crying” of the pa- triotic multitude. His Grace's countenance and care riage,” says Baillie, “ was #0 courteous, and his private speeches so fair, that wewere ingood hopes for some days afterwards, the
to obtain all our desires.” A few months same chronicler, in his account of the memorable as- sembly of 1638, favours us with this portrait of the Commissioner: “I take the man to be of a sharp, ready, solid, clear wit—of a brave and masterly expression,— loud, distinct, slow, full, yet concise, modest, yet simple and natural language. If the King have many such men he is a well served prince. My thoughts of the man were hard and base, But a day - or two's audience wrought my mind to a great change towards him, which yet remains, and ever will, till his deeds be notoriously evil." So writes our penetrating Covenanter in 1638; but in the following year, at the treaty of Berwick, we find him again at fault in his at tempts to fathom the serpentine favourite : “ The Mar- quis’s ways were so ambiguous that no man understood him, only bis absolute power with the King was oft there clearly seen.” Now at the very period when Hamilton felt, or affected, such melting sympathy for his seditious countrymen, he was corresponding with his royal master, in terms inevitably calculated to impel
"HAMILTON'S DOUBLE-DEALING. 169
‘the peaceful and generous, but hasty monarch, into hostile expressions and projects, which Hamilton him- self had pre-determined should proceed no farther than just to compromise the honour of the King, and aggra- ‘vate the disaffection of Scotland. Burnet tells us in page without producing the letters, that, soon after his Grace bad arrived in Scotland, he transmitted detailed account of the state of affairs ; he advised him to garrison Berwick with 1500 men, and ‘Carlisle with 500, and to follow up these orders vigo- rously in person, at the head of a brave army, which, if the matterwere well managed, would be crowned with victory. Hamilton added, however, a caution, calculated to mingle doubt and wenkness with the vigorous mea- “he represented withal, (says Bur- ‘net) that bis Majesty would consider how far in his wisdom he would connive at the madness of his own poor people, or how far in justice he would punish their folly, assuring him their present madness was such that ‘nothing but force would make them quit their Cove- nant, and that they would all lay down their lives eer they would give itup.” That, notwithstanding his cro- codile tears, and “ his private speeches so fair” in Scot- land, Hamilton, while he acted so equivocally there, had done his utmost to inflame the King, and that hav- ‘ing done this, he continually checked the spirit he had roused, and thus occasioned that contradictory policy which has been solely attributed to want of sincerity in ‘Charles,—all this may be gathered even from the very partial view of the correspondence with which Burnet chose to favour the public. It is impossible, then, un- der all the circumstances, to doubt the truth of the anecdote which Bishop Guthrie has recorded. ‘That at this, the second meeting of Hamilton and Mon-
170 MONTROSE AND THR COVENANTERS.
trose, another instance of the duplicity of the former should have occurred, sosimilar tothat which had driven Montrose from Court, is somewhat remarkable, and raises our curiosity to know in what manner the wily commis. sioner was at this same time speaking of Montrose to the King. Now of this we happen to be informed by a letter from the Marquisto his sovereign, dated 17th November 1638, which, though suppressed by Burnet, has been presented to the world in that very valuable collection, the Hardwicke State Papers.* In this letter, his Grace comments upon the Covenanters in a manner that would have petrified their deluded chronicler Baillie, “ It is more than probable,” he says, “ that these people have somewhat else in their thought than religion; but that must serve for a cloak to rebellion, wherein for a time they may prevail, but to make them miserable, and bring them again to a dutiful obedience, [am confident your Majesty will not find it a work of long time, nor of great difficulty as they have foolishly fancied to them- selves,” And of the leading Covenanters he thus speaks ; “ Now, for the Covenanters, I shall only say this, in ge- neral they may all be placed in one roll, as they now stand, But certainly, Sir, those that have both broach. ed the business, and still hold it aloft, are Rothes, Bal- merino, Lindsay, Lothian, Loudon, Yester, Cranston. ‘There are many others as forward in show, amongst whom none more vainly foolish than Montrose. But the above-mentioned are the main contriyers.” Here we obtain another curious confirmation of the trath of Bishop Guthrie's ancedote, for, taking that anecdote in connexion with the above letter, it brings out a game of double-dealing, forming a perfect pendant to what Hamond L'Estrange has recorded against Hamilton on
* Vol fi, p. 418.
sonia tha dcp conizivers of the opeae but asan enthusiastic adherent, generally intoxicated witha vain
such a character, in short, as he had pre- dicted of him before to induce the King to exclude Mon- ‘trose from Court.
‘Hamilton, having managed matters in Scotland so ‘as to satisfy the leaders of the Covenant that they had the ball at their foot, returned in the month of July,to report progress to his Majesty, and to obtain instruc- tions as to the demand for an Assembly and Parliament. ‘In the interval, the Covenanters were most anxious to bring under subjection the loyalists in the north, that
when the Commissioner returned it might be said that the whole of Scotland was within the pale of the Cove- nant. Montrose was the leader entrusted with this im- portant, and it might be perilous, expedition to seduce or concuss the learned and loyal Aberdonians. [t ‘was not a warlike expedition, however, but rather a erusnde of itinerant agitators, taking advantage of a vacation at the main scene of action, to stir up dis- affection in quict districts, and, by threatening the respectable and haranguing the vulgar, to create that false excitement upon which a vicious revolution de- pends. There can be little doubt, however, that Rothes
the scheme, and influenced Montrose in the conduct of it. ‘This appears to be proved by the fol Jowing letter, addressed by the former to his cousin, Pa- trick Leslie, and dated 13th July 1638, shortly before Montrose and his party arrived at Aberdeen.
a
I MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
“ Loving Cousty, “ Because [your dowal of Atsardesariaerer tite only burgh in Scotland that hath not subscribed the Confession of Faith, and all the good they can obtain
miny, and the doctors that are unsound punished by the Assembly ; and if things go to extremity because they refuse, and, in hopes of the Marquis Huntly’s help, the King will perhaps send in some ship or ships and men there, asa sure place, and if that be good for the coun- try, judge ye of it. It is but a fighting against the High God to resist this course, and it is se, far adean- ced already, that, on my honour, we could obtain with consent, 1. Bishops limited by all the strait caveats; 2 To be yearly censurable by assemblies ; 3. Articles of Perth discharged ; 4. Entry of ministers free; 5.Bishops and doctors censured for bygone usurpation, either in teaching false doctrine or oppressing their brethren. But God hath a great work to do here, 03 will be short- ly seen, and men be judged by what is past. Do ye all the good yecanin that town and in the country about,— ye will not repent it,—and attend my Lord Montrose, who is a noble and true-hearted cavalier. 1 remit to my brother Arthur to tell you how reasonable the Mar- quis Huntly was being here away; he was but slight- ed by the Commisnioner, and not of his: privy-council. No further. Iam your friend and cousin, “ Rornes.”* * ie, Tho Corynunt, ‘This first sentence of Rothey’s letter does infl>
Tetter is printed from the (which Ts in pelvate hasida) arid ‘Cluby in the pa spretat ke al
apostles of the Covenant,” viz. Henderson, Dickson, and Cant. The district to be honoured with this special visitation was an oasis in the desert. The arts of insurgency had been so successful throughout the rest of Scotland, as to create a specious, but false, appear. ance of national feeling in favour of the Covenant. Here, however, all that was rational, well-ordered, and estimable, was yet actually predominant. Blasphemy did not pass current for piety, nor the darkling and destructive ravings of fanaticism, for the ont-pour- ings of gifted and enlightened minds, ‘The towns and College of Aberdeen were at this time rich in divines and professors eminently distinguished for their learn- ing, integrity, and good sense. The celebrated Dr John Forbes of Corse was Professor of Divinity in old Aber. deen, Dr William Lesly, Principal of the King’s Col- lege, and Dr Alexander Scroggie, minister. In new Aberdeen, Dr Robert Baron was Professor of Divinity, and Drs James Sibbald and Alexander Ross were mini- ster. The characters and habits of these highly gift- ed, and sorely persecuted, clergymen of the north, were ieeettngy pictured about a century ago, by a townsman of theirown. “ These,” he says, speaking of the divines whom we have enumerated, were then the ministers of Aberdeen, frmous then, yet, and ever will be, for their ‘eminent learning, loyalty, and piety. While they were allowed to live there, there was no such ery heard in ‘the streets of that then loyal city, fo your tents, O Ts-
—
m4 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
rael, the common cant then of the Covenanters. They were faithful pastors,—they led their flocks to quiet wa- ters—they fed them with wholesome food, brought from the Scriptures, and the practice of the primitive Christ- jans. They had read most exactly the writings of the ancient fathers, in their own language, because unknown to the present teachers in that city. They knew the practice of the primitive Christians, in the time of their hottest persecutions by the heathen emperors. They taught their people to obey the King as supreme, and those subordinate to him, for conseience sake, and not to rise up in arms and rebel for conscience sake, a8 the Covenanters did. They were affectionate fathers to their flocks,—they taught them, in the words of the wise man, My son, fear God, and honour the King, and meddle not with those who are given to change, and as they taught so did they practise. In fine, the learned works they left behind them, will con- tinue their fame all the learned world over, ax long as learning is in any esteem.” Such were the champions who, when they heard of the approaching visitation by Montrose and his party, cheerfully made ready to do intellectual battle with the “ three apostles of the Co« venant.”* - The town-council of Aberdeen, informed of the honour that awaited them, had met upon the 16th
* Ms Brodla ovelochings whole Aare propled with thw wi tertained independent, rational, and conscientious feelings in
‘ofthe jesuitien! Covenant,—nnd in the face ot the fact that Huntly imal Mamet soplers i bape be Ee nies ee in support of tho Episcopal w cause—thus shortly disposes of the exeuptian of Aberdven : “ In about two months the Covenant id Covenant obtained ‘the assunt of almost every quarter of Scotland, with the exception of Aberdeen, which wns withheld through the infuence of the Marquis of ‘Huntly, ite patron.” —Vol. ii. 471.
——
MONTROSK'S MISSION TOABERDEEN, 175
of July, and resolved to persist in their refusal of the Covenant, and to remain firm in their obedience to the King.* But with the most cordial and Christian feel- e admirable royalists inclined to meet the disturbers of their peace, and future perseeutors, No sooner did the commissioners arrive than the provost and bailies sent one of theirnumber to compliment them, and to offer what was called the courtesy of the town, being a collation of wine and confectionary. “ But,” says honest Spalding, “ this their courteous offer was refused, saying, they would drink none with them until first the Covenant was subscribed, whereat the provost and bailies were sormewhat offend- ed, took their leave suddenly, and caused deal the wine in the bead-house, amongst the poor men, which they so disdainfully had refused, whereof the like was never done to Aberdeen in no man’s memory.” It was not alone with food for their bodies that Montrose and his party were greeted at Aberdeen ; there was at the same time tendered to their excited minds, the whole- some sedative of certain rational queries and doubts con- cerning the merits of the Covenant. These were pre- sented to the Commissioners, soon after they bad alight- ed from their horses, in a paper drawn up by the pro- fessors and divines of Aberdeen, in which they also de- clared, that, if Montrose and his compatriots would re- move these doubts, the propounders would join in that Covenant with them, from which they had hitherto ab- stained not without many and weighty reasons, though, they were most willing and anxious to be convinced, There can be no question that even the three apostles of the Covenant were powerless, in all save the arts of insurgency, before the wisdom, the learn- ing, and the Christian integrity of these northern divines. * Town Records of Aberdeen,
176 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
So to the arts of insurgency they instantly betook them- selves. The request they preferred, in reply to the challenge of the doctors, was no less than to be permit- ted to occupy the pulpits on the following Sunday, when they engaged to convert the people, and to satisfy the doctors themselves. To this modest demand it wasan- swered by the champions of Aberdeen, that, although they were willing to yield to any rational proposition, yet they must be excused from admitting to their pulpits ~ those who were anxious to contradict the established doctrines, taught there by clergymen who ought first to be convinced that those doctrines were erroneous, Thus the ministers of Aberdecn were so unreasonable, according to Baillie’s view of their conduct, as to insist upon preaching in their own pulpite to their own flocks. ‘The result we may give in the words of Spalding, who was present in Aberdeen at the time: “Upon the morn, being Sunday, thir three covenanting ministers intended to preach, but the town's ministers -keeped ‘them therefrae, and would give them no entrance, but preached themselves in their own pulpits. They, see ing themselves so disappointed, go to the Earl Maris- chall’s Close, where the Lady Pitsligo, his sister, was then dwelling, a rank puritan, and the said Mr Alex- ander Henderson preached first, next Mr David Dick- son, and lastly Mr Andrew Cant, all on the suid Sun- day, and divers people flocked in within the said close to hear thir preachers, and see this novelty. It is said this Mr Henderson read out, after his sermon, certain articles proponed by the divines of Aberdeen, amongst which was alleged, they could not subscribe this Cove- nant without the King’s command, whereunto he made such answers as pleased him best.” From James Gor- don's manuscript it also appears, that this was one of
—
178 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
and of some others the week following, whe were thought by many to have either delayed, or been pur- posely kept off till that solemnity, both for the credit of the speakers, and that they might be a ‘prepa- rative and example to others.” But the prize gained by Montrose and his party upon this occasion was Dr Guild, though the terms of his submission scarcely justify their exultation. That clergyman, along with Mr Robert Reid, minister at Resbeenly ee these express conditions, to wit, that we not, nor yet condemn, the Articles of Perth to be lawfal, or heads of popery, but only promise, for the peace of the church, and other reasons, to forbear the practice thereof for a time. 2. That we condemn no Episcopal government, excepting the personal abuse thereof, 8, That we still retain, and shall retain, all loyal and dutiful subjection and obedience unto our dread Sovereign the King's Majesty, and that in this ‘sense, and no otherways, we have put our hands tothe foresaid Covenant. At Aberdeen, 30th July 1638,"* Having thus distinguished themselves in Aberdeen, Montrose and his party, about thirty on horsebaek, vi- sited various districts of the north, holding meetings with ministers and presbyteries, and picking up signa- tures to the Covenant, from all whom fear, fanaticisin, or ignorance characterized, rather than enlightened re- flection. Within the presbytery of Strathbogie, how= ever, the perambulators did not venture, for the heart of that was the residence of Huntly. Daring this exeur-
* This important qualification wns attested by the signatures of the Commissioners themaelven, in. those words: * Likens, we under sube scribing do declare that they neither had, nor havo, any intention batof loyalty to his Majesty, as the said Covenant bears." —(Signed,) Montrese, Couper, Forbes, Morphie, Leyes, Honderson, Dickson, Cant.
\ P
MONTROBE’S MISSION TO ABERDEEN. 179
sion from Aberdeen, the doctors prepared and printed a reply to the feeble answer their adversaries had put forth to the queries and doubts presented on their arri- val; and when Montrose and his cavalcade returned to Aberdeen, a paper war awaited them on the subject of a mission that was incapable of a rational defence. Each party claimed the victory upon the whole result of this crusade, though it was not much to boast of on either side. Montrose returned to Edinburgh with a parchment full of signatures, too contemptible for his- tory to record, and which he himself was ere long to despise. The doctors of Aberdeen remained in pos- session of a field of reason, in which their antagonists had been Henderson, Dickson, and Cant.
| omvnnan, assewaiy, 1638. 181
| when last it Scotland, Hamilton had so impressed the: | Covenanters with the idea of his inclination towards ‘them, that even Henderson, their most honest and able apostle, ventured to print, as an argument in his con- ‘troversy with the doctors of Aberdeen, that the com« ‘was favourable to the Covenant, and,
in regard toall their proceedings,—an as~ that nobleman, with real alarm, but af-
fected indignation, now took the utmost pains to con
vehemently resisted by the Tables, whose So esegegera such control over the returns as would insure to them the power of packing their con- ‘ventions ; in other words, of retaining the Tables, under adifferent denomination, Hamilton had also suggested tothe King # method of superseding the Covenant itself, — the Confession of Falt, esta
clear hitvelf, upon which it the
182 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
Dlished by various statutes in the previous century, (of which statutes the Covenant professed to be simply 3
construed an innovation upon the Religion, Laws, and -
Liberties of Scotland, might well have satisfied the peo- ple, and would, in fact, have done so, had it not been the interest of a faction to meet as usual the gracious com- conten oe testation. ‘The insatiable demands of the Covenanters, wa thelr cuiet devooteut tC Laat mented upon, and by none with more effective severity than by Dr Cook. Speaking of the crisis to whieh we allude, that historian observes—“ The various acts of concession were regularly proclaimed, and it was with much reason hoped that moderate men would be contented, and would resist any endeavours to thwart the intentions of the King. A
replete with the most disingenuous reasoning, and evin- cing the determination of the leading Covenanters to re- sist all terms, was read,” and the Earl of Montrose ap- peared, upon this occasion, in name of the discontented nobility. This conduct of the Presbyterians cavaot be justified + i
Ityas read by Archibald Johnstan, and moxt probably: wa Speer
not justify them upon some * J" ne inthe inxtance we ea afore 140.” Perapa the fact of Montrose
minent upon thix occasion rendered a justification lo tom historian of the kirk.
out of which three were to be chosen, itis.
that all the six ministers. must be removed tion, and have no voice themselves, so that undoubt- edly the ruling-elders behoved for to over-rule the election of the three ministers to be chosen ; or if in any presbytery the six ministers gave their voices be- fore their removal, yet, no man being able togive voice | to himself, of necessity the number (ifthey were unanimous,) must exceed the number of the mini-
fim "
. Norecan the answer that is given satisfy,—viz. that ministers are
a negative to a mo-
the King’s negative hindered, which ever after the Assembly at Glasgow was denied to him,) for their instructions ordered noblemen to be chosen rul- ing elders where they were, and all such have vote in Parliament. Next, that, for want ofnoblemen, the chief gentlemen should be chosen commissioners to the as- sembly, who probably likewise (or someof them,) would ‘be chosen commissioners to the Parliament. For the ‘barons the like may be said, and was scen of the burghs their commissioners, and they were sure what such thad voted in an Assembly they would vote over again jn s Parliament. This made the Tables so contest to- haye the Asserably meet before the Parliament should ‘sitdown, that so the acts of Parliament might depend on the General Assembly, the members of the Ge- neral Assembly depend on the Tables, or be the very members of the Tables, but neither Parliament nor Assembly any. more to depend on the King, but in effect upon themselves, as it appeared in the fol- lowing years after they took the power in their hands, ‘Lastly, by this means the laics excused themselves from the power, and from all fear of the clergy, and this was the temper that the noblemen did find out for to curb the untowardliness of the former presbyterian “power, which the ministry had exercised in the mino-
his epistolary history of that As- remarkable expressions,—* thirty~
iy have chosen their commis-
by the Tables in Edin-
rds he affords, unwittingly, a valu-
o the superiority which the mind of d, even in the moment of his most over the meanness of his early political anecdote now alluded to we proceed
tions had been sent tothe Presbytery
ct them in the choice of a representa-
ne of Dun was first elected, as their ruling- of one minister, and some lay elders,
ery met in agrenter number, and,
| the other ministers and elders, Lord
t son of the Earl of Southesk, and
i
‘publicly by the clerk of the Asserably, Baillie says, “ the clerk, I think unadvisedly, rend in public, not only the commission, but also the Tables’ subscribed appro- bation on the back.” This clerk was the notorious Ar- chibald Johnston, and it was not from manliness that he had read aloud what Baillie wished Had been kept out of view. The account in the King’s Declaration is, that the clerk read out various reasons written on the back of Erskine's commission in support of it, “in which, amongst other things, it was objected against the Lord Carnegie’s election that it was made contrary to the directions of the Tables at Edinburgh, which the clerk perceiving stopped, and would read no further.” But the Commissioner instantly caught at the advan- tage; and demanded a copy of that commission, with the deliverance on the back, and the names of those who had subscribed it. ‘The earnestness with whieh the Marquis of Hamilton pressed this demand in the name of the King, and the severity of his animad- versions upon the proceedings of the Covenanters, present one of those contradictory views of his own policy which sometimes raise a doubt whether his object was to support the King or the Covenant.
the ne
Jen ondent, Mr William Spang, the matter: “ Our synod in Glas~
rs, commanding me, upon my cano~
o preach on Wednesday betore the sy- the matter of my sermon to my own ‘Thad but two free days, yet I than to hazard myself in needless
196 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
as I might, on 2d Tim. iv.1.% J charge thee before God to preach in season and out of season.” * ; Now, in hese letters at least, we can discover none of the “ manliness of spirit” to which our historian re- fers; that to the bishop is tinged with want of courage, and that to his friend, with i very like want of truth. But this is not all. In the following year this very bishop, whom Baillie knew to be an excellent man, and a valuable pastor, upon whose presence in the diocese Baillie admitted that the pence and happiness of “ many thousands” depended, was stimmoncd as a delinquent, along with all the other bi- shops, to answer (at the bar of an Assembly where they ought to have sat as judges,) to what those prelates justly called “ a most infamous and scurrile libel,” charging them, indiscriminately, with simony, incest, fornication, adultery, Sabbath-breaking, drunkenness, and gaming. Had Baillie possessed one spark of mantiness of spirit, he would have raised his voice, at least in defence of that bishop to whom he had writ~ ten, but the year before, the letter we have quoted. On the contrary, he joined in the inhuman persecution by which this excellent prelate was ruined—driven from the flock whose peace and happiness depended up- on him—ecommunicaled—and all because he declined the authority of an unconstitutional and lawless conven- tion! It adds to the meanness of Baillie’s conduct that he retained his good opinion of the bishop, and did not desire his destruction, though he thus comments upon it: —* Since his sentence of excommunication he bane Hist
+ Dalle contrived to skulle ovt of tho duty, a did not prone fier ai. ”Me John Linde, the elargyman who dl the duty, wa very wet women, hho apprebonudod froet
Probably the ‘theso faries had moro weight with Baillic then his conscience hnde=Jour> ats and Letters, Vol. i pp % 8
“CHARACTERISTICS OF BAILLIE, 199 that reason, ought to be remov- ed? Baillie was: to feel in his
honest. He had brought his mind to accede to the re- ‘moval of Episcopacy from the Covenanting church, “but withal,” besays, “I heartily wished in the act of removal of it, no clause might be put which might oblige us in conscience to count that for wicked and unlawful in itself, which the whole reformed churches this day, and, s0 far as I know, all the famous and elas- ‘sic divines that ever put pen to paper, either of old or of late, absolved of unlawfilness.” Again,—* The qnes- tion was formed, about the abjuration of all kind of Episcopacy, in such terms as I profess I did not well, in the time, understand, and thought them so cunningly intricate that hardly could I give anyanswer, either ia or mon.” The determination he came to was to make: no speech on the subject, but when his vote was called words in qualification thereof ; for, he says, “to make any public dispute I thought it not safe, be- ing myself alone, and fearing, above all evils, to be the occasion of any division, which was our certain wreck, So when all men were called to propone what doubts ae voicing, I, with all the rest, was ” When it came to his vote he attempt- | onetaendeerma but was easily silenced by Loudon and Argyle. On the last day of the Ax. sembly, the proposition, that Episcopacy had been total- ly abjured in the Confession of Faith in 1580, was again before them, and an act was proposed for ordaining the signing of the Covenant over again, under this new in- terpretation of the negative confession. To this Bail- lie was decidedly opposed, and, in the shape of a letter
200 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
- to the clerk, drew out his reasons of dissent, to be eom- municated to the Moderntor and Lord Loudon. The Jatter knew well how to manage the conscience of hit reverend friend, whohimself informs us that, “ this act, whereunto all yielded, I was ready~to have dissented, which, soc ny pool lenny (ogc alone should go oft be found icting the synod,
A young Baillie, though shocked by his! having fearlomly expres sed opinions condemning the resistance to the service book, loved and admired, was deposed upon a Libel which accused him of calling the Covenant seditions, treasonable, jesuitic, to which charge was added such sundries asthese, that,—“ he gave money at his entry for his place, and struck a beggar on the Sabbath day; a number of such things were libelled, and urged hotly against him.” Baillie’s heart told him that injustice was about to be done,— the Moderator and others, for his sister's sake, had a great mind to have delayed him, but, no man speaking for him, he was deposed. I re- pented of my silence ; but the reason of it was, both my lothness to be heard often in one day to conteadict the whole synod, as also my fear and xuspicion of further ills in the youth than yet was spoken of !"
So much (and a great deal more might be added,) for the cnlightened mind, manly spirit, and sensitive conscience of the Reverend Robert Baillie, among the
* This war worthy of tho party that accused Charles the First of ine acag alee ret ofthe vtein the Prtament of 183 The King’s Large ‘narmtes the fact of the euppression of Baillic's vote,
a pean or a with merited severity, —See Note in illustration of the Large Deckiration at the end of this volume.
4 i_ =
aE
- SHARACTRINSTICS OF BAILLIE. 201
‘dest of the covenanting clergy. He was learned, in the sense of having acquired (it is said) a knowledge of thirteen languages—he had a conscience, for it cost hin eae eee ewes cnighiened Per he was sensible of the snered and constitutional cha- racter of the episcopal order, with whose irrational de- stroyers he nevertheless continued to make common canse—nay he was loyal, for he posseased a secret ad~ miration,and sneaking kindness, for the monarch whose rain he ardently aided toaccomplish. But neither the learning, nor the conscience of Baillie, were such as to save him from becoming a blind instrument in the ‘hands of unprincipled democratic spirits, and thus it is, that the voluminous record he has left of his feelings, (se near loosed Whatever judgment he possessed was: iat ereesiclaed ty tex ot vine fanaticism, a of meekness, modesty, aud
venant. And this is the man who, in his correspond ‘rice with the reverend friend whom he was furnishing with materials for a history of the times, did not scru-
‘the high-minded ‘man's departure from the covenanting faction,
‘The Marquis of Hamilton, too, affected to treat the conduct and character of Montrose with contempt. Let ‘as consider his own at this juncture. The persecution ‘of the non-covenanting clergy, and the nnprincipled de- struction of Episcopacy, took place in a convention
i {
eon |
202 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,
which had previously been dissolved, under pain of eat by the royal Commissioner, who having done’ much, by his “ serpentine" policy, to ruin the King’s affairs in Scotland, and work up the revolt to its pre- sent pitch of ungovernable frenzy, suddenly “ turned his back upon them,” to use Buillie’s phrase, when he knew that the Assembly would sit without him, and act more outrageously in his absence. Upon Wednes- day, the 28th of November, he announced his determi- nations to leave them to themselves. “ When the Mo- derator,” says Baillie, “ pressed the voicing if we were the bishops’ judges, there fell asad, grave, and sor rowful discourse. This was the Commissioner's last passage ; he acted it with tears, anddrew, by his speech, water from many eyes, as I think,—well I wot much from mine, for then I apprehended the vitable of these tragedies which now are in doing. Much was said of his sincere endeavours to serve the King, and his country; of his grief, yet necessity to depart. The cause he alleged was the spoil the Assembly, which he had obtained most free, by our most partial directions from our Tables at ‘The letter in which Hamilton tells the King, that of all the promoters of the Covenant, none was “ more vainly foolish than Montrose," is dated on the day previous to this scene That characteristicully fearless by which Montrose announced his determination, and. the determination of hix party, as he supposed, to “ ace knowledge the least jot of what was writ" by the Tables to the presbyteries, had been so interpreted by Hamil- ton. Was it his earnest desire for the purity of the Assembly, or his jealousy of Montrase,
* Soe before, p: 170,
| the part of Bishop Burnet, as were the rs poured out by Hamilton upon his Where are these letters by which
in the Hardwicke Collection ; and in
ee
that letter his love for his native country, and his tear ful tenderness of heart, are manifested in expressions that amount to execration of Scotland.* But of Ha- milton’s duplicity we shall have too many instances to notice in the progress of our illustrations.
As the favourite glided back to the bosom of his mas-
fatigable chronicler, and the naivefé of Baillie’s record is not less amusing than instructive. “ Before his Grace's departure, Argyle craved leave to speak, and that time we did not well understand him ; si but hia ae? fions since have made his somewhat. plain.” When the Commissioner left them, the As sembly were in a state of confusion and perplexity, and “some three or four Angussmen, with the laird of Aithie, departed, alleging their commission had an express clause of the King’s countenaneing of the As- sembly.” The Moderator, Loudon, and some others, © harangued them on the propriety of against the Commissioner’s departure, and of their continuing to sit. Tothis all agreed, but, adds Baillie, “it was good we were all put to it presently, for if it had been delayed till the morrow, it is feared many would have slipt away.” On the morrow, however, “ Argyle came back tous. The Moderator earnestly entreated him, that though he was xo member of the Assembly, yet, for the common interest he had in the Chureh, he would be * "If Tkeop my fe (though next Tell 1 hate this place,) if you think mo worthy of employment, F shall not woury till the government ee aaa er na teh ts Rapa * #8 Tw Pressing vere isd
——
| CHARACTERISTICS OF ARGYLE. 205
pleased to countenance our meetings, and bear witness of the righteousness of all our proceedings. This, to all our great joy, he promised to do, and truly perform- ed his promise, No one thing did confirm us so much : presence, not only as he was by fir the most in the kingdom, but also at this time
in good grace with the King and the Commissioner ; we could not conceive but his staying was with the al- lowance of both, permitting him to be amongst us to keep matters in some temper, and hold us from despe- rate extremities.” The fact was, however, that Argyle | opportunity of unmasking himself, and of us-
his kind—the government of Scotland.
Mie Ming Sal honoured and trusted Argyle, notwith- ‘standing the solemn declarations of the old Earl, that ,nor truth, nor social feeling would be found in bis son Lorn. This prophecy was now to be fulfilled. The revolutionary convocation, assembled in that noblernan’s patrimonial kingdom of the west, and, suddenly left without a head, was now ripe for his lurk- How accurately had the old Earl pre-
dicted in thatsolemn warning to Charles! A few years from the time it was uttered, and disregarded, the King himself was constrained to publish the commentary we now quote upon the conduct and character of Argyle in
_* Towards the end of their Assembly, they divided themselves into several commitiees, which should, after their rising, see all their acts put in execution, a thing never heard of before in that church, The Moderator concluded with thunks to God for their good success, and then to the nobility and the rest for their great pains, and, last of all, with a speech to the Earl of Ar- gyle, giving him thanks for his presence, and counsel:
| CHARACTERISTICS OF ARGYLE. 207
the indifferent reader. But for this revolted Lord, who amade this speech, and professcth in it, that, if he had ‘BOW not adjoined himself to them, he should have prov- eda knave, We can give this testimony of him, that at his last being here with Us in England, at which time we had good renson to misdoubt him, he gave us as surance that he would rest fully satisfied if we would Perform those things which we have made good, by
‘declaration, in which we have grant- éd more than we did at that time promise, so that we had little reason to expect his adjoining himself to them, who had given us so great assurance to the cons trary, besides that assurance which he gave to our Com- imissioner when he was in Scotland ; and now, if by his own confession he carried things closely for the Cave- nanters’ advantage, being then one of the Lords of our secret council, and that in the end he must openly join with them or be a knave, what he hath proved himself to be, by his close and false carriage, let the world judge”*
When Montrose crossed Tweed with the rebels in 1640, and, as democracy became developed from under the disguise of patriotism, bethought himself of secret-
the omnipotent faction that had de- ceived him and others, he was only struggling to save the King, from whose councils he was exeluded, and acting a part, which, however derogatory and uncon- genial to his open character, was perilous to his per- son, and sufficiently justified by the necessity of the ease, That of Argyle is the converse of this, The anomalous position he avowed—of a concealed patriot,
* King’s Large Declaration, 1639, p. 325.
208 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.,
professing loyalty, and promising aid to his sovereign, yet lurking in his councils only to betray him,—can admit of no excuse. To be a privy-councillor was Ar- gyle’s hereditary and constitutional position ; and that he continued to be a privy-councillor for the alleged purpose of playing into the hands of bolder patriots, iu- stead of patriotically joining them in their open revolt, can be classed under no category of virtue, enterprise, or necessity, but was simply a safe and cowardly per- version of a sacred constitutional trust. The difference between the two cases is the difference betwen the cha- racters of Argyle and Montrose.
EE
_ POLICY OF HAMILTON. 209°
CHAPTER VI.
now TRE LOYALTY OF THE NORTH WAS PARALYZED NY HAMILTON, AND. ROW HENTLY WAS MADE PRISONKK AY MONTROSE AND THK COVENANTRAS.
Havin, in the last chapter, contemplated Montrose asa leader in the Assembly of 1638, wherein he shewed somewhat too honest for the councils of the Covenant- evs, we have now to follow him in expeditions where he likewise proved himself to be too humane for their arms, namely, against Huntly, and the ever-memorable loyal- ists of the north. But, in the first place, w must consider the position in which Huntly was placed by Hamilton. ;
Even after certain individuals in Scotland, among whom we must reckon Montrose, had brought that un- Lappy country into the predicament which might have excused a little “fire and sword” to check the progress of anarchy, Charles invariably proved himself more apt to yield than to resist, and, as we have seen, instead of leading an army against them, devolved the task of set- tling Scotland upon a “ kindly Scotchman,” the “ ambi- guous” son of a covenanting mother, When that Com- missioner, after apparently exertinghimself,and in vain, tokeep the armed convention of 1638 within the bounds of constitutional and Christian order, wrote to Charles, — it is more than probable that these people have somewhat else in their thoughts than religion ; but that must serve for a cloak to rebellion, wherein for a time they may prevail; but to make them miserable, and bring them again to a dutiful obedience, I am con-
VOL, 1. °
Fla wskcewa ton more Uae a generals
EE
POLICY OF HAMILTON. 213
and also to visit the College of Old Aberdeen, and “‘re- " Upon Huntly's expressing
pair the faults thereof. ‘ of this plan, as contrary to the Pie ‘the peace of the country, Bir “My Lord, I fear these things will be | ores eepean In vain the gallant Huntly took up his abode in Aberdeon, (his person guarded night gentlemenof rank and con- | dition) and, from thence cast many a longing look to | the sea-port for his promised succours from England. *"Phecomission Huntly reecived,—the nid of men was came to him, after much ex- pectation, but arms for three thousand foot and a bandred horse, which came not to him till that year in March, and were sent upon the charges of Dr Mor- ton, Bishop of Durham. As for the soldiers who should ‘have landed at Aberdeen, or elsewhere, it is true that promised Huntly assistance of men, but the Marquis of Hamilton,—who always looked upon ‘Huntly with an evil eye, as the emulator of his great- pes, and withal was a sceret friend to the Covenans ters—dissuaded the King from sending men, alleging that, if the King did so, it would turn all the burden of the war upon the King. How truly this leave to the readers. One thing certainly is true, that, by this counsel, the King’s hopes that hehad conceived from his friends in Scotland were blasted; for the noblemen and Highlanders, who stood for the King in Scotland, promised their concurrence upon that ‘express condition, that they might have a considerable ‘of trained soldiers to join with, who never ap- ‘those who had undertaken to do much either could not, or made that their pre- feisty te would not stir. It was by this means
26 MONTOSE AND THE COVENANTERS. of the cavalry of the Mearns and Angus gentryas were
sctorspanted with te mm bis ofdeanfoea Eadraalia lant gentlemen, having first not neglected to bid the Forbeses and Frazers, and all whom the shortness of the time could permit them to convene, to be there
timeously upon the day appointed, which they failed not todo." By means of this forced march, Montrose reached Turreff before Huntly arrived, and mustering, with his own followers and friends who had joined him, to the number, says Spalding, of *
well-horsed, well-armed gentlemen, and foot:
with buff coats, swords, corslets, jacks, Pistols, carbines,
Turreff, and busked (arr: |) very advantageously their muskets round about the dykes of the kirk-yard, and sat within the kirk thereof, such as were of the committee, viz. Montrose, Kinghorn, Cooper, Frazer, and Forbes.” — No sooner were they thus established, than the van of Huntly’s army arrived, and, finding the village so formidably occupied, drew off to the fields in the neigh- bourhood. Huntly was accompanied by a gallant host of “gentlemen and others, about 2500, all mounted on horse, though all the horse not fit for service, nor all the men fit to serve on horse.” For his council of war he had his gallant sons, the Lords Gordon and Aboyne, who, with the loyal lairds, Drum, Banff, Gight, Haddo, Pitfoddels, Foveran, Newtoun, and Udny, urged their commander to fall on the Covenanters at once, and crush rebellion at its first appearance. The King's Lieutenant, they said, would do no more than bis dnty
fighting, passed over, of his own accord, to Montrose, to deprecate a rencounter. Montrose sent back this message to Huntly, that he and his party had no inten- tion of breaking the public peace, or molesting any one, but would not submit to injury, if they could help it; adding, that, if Huntly and his friends had business to transact in the town of Turreff, they might betake themselves to any part of it except that occupied by the Covenanters. So ended a meeting from which much was expected and little came to pass. Huntly his rendezvous before sunset, and sent the most of his own followers back to Strathbogie, under the command of his second son, the Viscount of Aboyne, directing his own course towards Forglen, the house of ‘Ogilvy of Banif, accompanied by the brave barans whose blood was upin vain. They dashed their steeds through ‘the village of Turreff, riding under the walls of the Kirk-yard, and within two pikes’ length of Montrose and his comrades. But not a word was interchanged, and no salutation, or sign of courtesy, past betwixt the
EV ALEXANDER LESLIE. 221 " Ithappened, accordingly, that
Al eo _“ Now about this time, (January 1639,] or a Jit- m1 re came out of Germany, from the wars,
home to Scotland, ane gentleman of base birth,* born in ‘Balveny, who had served long and fortunately in the German wars, and called to his name Felt Marshall Excellence. His name, indeed, was [Alex-
ander] Leslie, but, by his valour and good luck, attain- ed to this title, Ais Excellence, inferior to none but to the King of Sweden, under whom he served amongst * all his cavallirie. Weill,—this Felt Marshall Leslie, having conquest, frae nought, honour, and wealth, in resolved to come home to his native
Scotland, and settle besides his chief, the
as he did indeed, and coft fair lands in
Fife. But this Earl, foreseeing the troubles, whereof himself was one of the principal beginners, took hold of this Leslie, who was both wise and stout, acquaints him with this plot, and had his advice for furthering thereof to his power. And first, he advises cannon to be cast in the Potter-row, by one Captnit Hamilton, ¢ ‘he began to drill the Barl’s men in Fife; he caused send to Holland for ammunition, powder and ball, mus+ Kets, carbines, pistols, pikes, swords, cannon, cartill, and EEE ext of neceeenty rma, 8¢ for ‘old and young
‘mean base by comparison with his riso, and not in ee iat alata ts came nek xn Bi
h was much pressed upon Mon-
he would only reply, that,
aul act of the last Assembly, he was bound ge of Aberdeen, but that he and his for whatever they took, and be acts of violence. The result of these ll give in the precise words of the un-
n they returned from Montrose to Aber- ted their answer, which was nothing pleas- Huntly began to rendezvous his men, and ith of March, had about two thousand two | horse well-armed at Iuverury, but all and though none wanted good
none were amongst them who had skill pra ier been upon any considerable
, who neither bad orders to fight, nor in the skill of his commanders, resolves face upon the matter, and to keep till he might see the utmost of it.
Pr
a
_ taken so little notice of their last coming as that he 4 did not pause nor delay his rendezvous one hour, nor a his march anywhile, upon that account.
I _ “ Great was the trepidation that was amongst them ; and whatever might be the General Montrose's confi- dence, yet the mixed multitude, his followers, either wanted stomach to the service, or were fearful of the event; and albeit they saw no enemy as yet, they went hot about theirbusiness with confidenceenough. Hither- to they had assisted the reading of protestations, or sit-
tenin Assembly, ortakensome empty or disarmed castles} now they supposed they were to dispute it with their enemy in the fields ; and whatever means was used by the nobility, or their ministry, to persuade the vulgar sort of the justness of their quarrel, yet the most part of them, who had been born and bred up under a long peace, could hardly distinguish it from rebellion against their King. This abstracted confidence from many of the meaner sort, and bred trepidation in them at the hearing of their own drums, trumpets, and shots.
* At this time likewise, the Covenanters began to wear and take for their colours blew ribbons, which they carried about them scarf-wise, or as some orders of knighthood wear their ribbons. This was Mon- trose’s whimsies. To these ribbons ordinarily the ca- valry did append their spanuers for their firelocks, and the foot had them stuck up in bushes in their blue caps, which dovice seemed so plausible, that when the army marched towards the border,someshort timeafterwards, many of the gentry threw away their hats, and would carry nothing but bonnets, and bushes of blew ribbons or pannashes therein, in contempt of the Englishers who disdainfully called them blew caps and jockeys. *
* Spalding thus notices * Montroso's whimsies.” “2 nt
-MONTROSH'S WHTMSTES. 227
-
rs, a little after sun rising, as they
rds the mouth of the north-water, which miles distant from the town of Montrose, eir waiters did espy the sun shining in a
L yet could they discern no vapour
jically occasion the change of his co-
ined at some distance above the sea, and rd by the shore. The difference betwixt when his colour is obfuscated by va-
hat at other times, at his rise and set, his i dreggy, and inclines to brown; but that # colour looked like to fresh blood, whereof a lit- tity is poured into a bright silver bason; or | rose, or like that blood in the cheek which 8 call sanguis floridus. A second great dif- in the duration and continuance of that
olour, for, whereas at other times the keep away the sun's bright colour but space after his rise or before his sett, it
—_ :
i ie 5k ae SA ely rsp Mf Stealoch, (t
bk
SS
MONTROSE AND LESLIE, 231
his rendezvons at Inverury, March 18th,* the King’s household entered their , towards York, and the journey towards York till March
after Huntly’s disbanding some days.”
have been in strict compliance with
t of many of his gallant followers, Huntly
portion of his army, and retired to his own ogic, where he took up a defensive po- = erreereap cad ‘retained about his person.} ‘The retreat of the King’s lieutenant enabled the north- era Covenanters, with the Lord Frazer and the Master of Forbes at their head, to march without molestation to Aberdeen, there to join Montrose, who entered it, says James Gordon, “on Palm Sunday, 30th March, with a veni vidi vic.” By his side there appeared the veteran of many a desperate field in the land of battles. Well had Rothes catered for rebellion, when he “ took hold” of Leslie. Montrose was instructed to give im- plicit attention to the advice of this experienced leader, and to consider him as his military tutor. Even the pad and imperious Montrose submitted, it seems, to / “ We were feared," says Baillie, in » “that emulation among our no-
‘says, that Huntly held his rendezvous at Invernry oa the and Simolved show on tho 20th, "Those dates av pro- than Jamox Gordon's.
Speen yd dbs soanend wt ie Rep sas tha sn ne bor this he reared by
homely d
advices of their pelgshonneeive eval 4,
crooked familiar, who now so
‘trose’s side, was he who had been greatly 0 Gustavus Adolphus, his instructor in battle. But Leslie degraded himself too long under the impious banner of the Covenant, and even learnt to become coward 5 for this same little old fighting Mentor was in
the head of * all his cavallirie,” from the battle of Mars- ton-moor, some twenty miles homewards, when over- taken by the news that the battle was their own. Shade of the immortal Gustavus! *
* Tho reverend Mr Aiton, = le en a ductory to hie Life and Times of
seen of Meraronsnnd oe cles aden Cove. nanters. This wary General, &x.’p, 76, The mmates ‘companionship would have been ied an re ish mt ho under the clroumstancos,
‘Mr Aiton, | hie work, line fled to dintinguish betwixt these two mercenaries of extra ondinary fortune.
EE
It must have been a sore sight, to those who remained in Aberdeen to see it, when the combined forces of the , thousand strong, paraded upon the
‘Mentor,
. He says, that the noble burgh of Aberdeen, being “ daily deaved" ‘with the news of the coming of an army, and their own Marquis having dissolved his host at Inverury, and ap- parently deserted them in the hour of need, and no help arriving from the King, they began to be heartless and comfortless, and entirely to despair, not knowng what course to take. Hitherto there had been brave mus- terings and drillings, casting of trenches, watches and eathands in the streets, pieces of ordnance in the cause- ways, and fortifications in every direction; moreover, every man carried at least a sword by his side. But ‘when Huntly seemed to desert them, they held mourn- ful consultations together, and agreed, that, as all seemed lest, they should cast their weapons away, forbear all their warlike preparations, and open wide their gates to the approaching Covenanters. Then every man, his community, began to shift for him-
, Some removed their goods, and some fled with from the town. Amongst others, there
fled by ses about sixty of the bravest men and youths well armed with sword, musket, and
handilier. They took one of the town's colours, and John Poak, their drummer, with them, and resolve to go to the King. And with them were the
and the ferocious,
to how! and hammer out uncouth sedition to the terri- fied and bewildered people.“ There they ery victory! and begin to sing a song to the townsmen of a far other tune than they had learned from their own ministers and doctors, crying down that doctrine which the town's doctors, they knew, were not now in equal terms with them to maintain any more, without bana
persons.” +
Loree remaining a few days ta Aberdaeny ple completely disarmed, and having done as little violence to persons and property, but as much to conscience and Christianity, as circumstances admitted of, Montrose
+ Sce at the end of this volume, some extructs of this date, from the
‘Town-Council hooks of Aberdeen. + James Gordon, who add>—" all their success was imputed to the of the cause, to which God began to shew himself so fhvourable, |
days of Murch, commonly called borrowing days, that tsne, to sniracl, [rT bences proached before many witeens
SS
DEAR SANDIE’S STOUPS. 235
and Leslie marched their host to Inverury, to discuss Huntly, leaving behind them the Earl of Kinghorn, as Governor of Aberdeen. “ They did lie down at Inver- ury with open leaguer, having drawn along with them some short field picces of three feet long, or thereby, which, for all that, were of an indifferent wideness, and did shoot an indifferent great ball. These pieces,—com- monly nick-named Dear Sandie’s Stoups,as being the invention, or so thought, of Colonel Alexander Hamilton, master of their artillery, who himself was nick-named wards, for some time, were made use of by the Cove- nanters.”"* Huntly in the meantime had retired to the Bog of Gicht (Gordon Castle); and, anxious to re- lieve the north from the plundering and oppressive vi- sitation of the eovenanting army, he wrote to Robert Gordon of Straloch, once more to become a mediator betwixt them. Straloch immediately proceeded to Mon- trose’s quarters at Kintore, and urged a treaty, Mon- trose showed himself well inclined to bring matters to that pass ; and it was finally arranged that Huntly and Montrose, each accompanied by eleven of their friends, should meet a few days afterwards, at Lowess, a country
about nine miles south of Strathbogie, and five miles north of the Covenanters’ camp. The respective parties met at the appointed place and time, (Lords Oli- phant and Aboyne being with Huntly, Lords Elcho and Couper with Montrose,) armed only with walking- swords, and such was the mutual jealousy or formality of the meeting, that a gentleman from either party wus appointed to search the other, for fear of hidden arms, Huntly and Montrose then respectfully saluted each
* James Gordon's MS, See before, p. 221.
|
936 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
other, and, after interchanging some expressions of courtesy, they stepped aside and held together m lang private conversation, to which the rest were merely spec+ tators. Huntly's friends were somewhat offended at the privacy of this conference, and James Gordon adds, that he never could learn what were the particulars of the private conversation betwixt Huntly and Montrose, which did not transpire. The immediate effect, how- ever, was an agreement quite unlooked for. After a few hours occupied in this manner at Lowess, Huntly mounted his horse, and, without a reason assigned, rode forward with Montrose and his friends to the leaguer at Tuverury, where, their appearance being as welcome as it was unexpected, Huntly and his astonished compa nions, among whom was Robert Gordon of Straloch, ‘were entertained by the Covenanters with great respect and forbearance. ‘I'he result was, that Huntly signed « paper, the precise terms of which are not known, but which soems to have been some qualified version of one or other of the Covenants, amounting to no more than a declaration in favour of the national Religion, and Li- berties—probably something similar to what Mon- trose had been satisfied with (on his previous reform- ing expedition) from Dr Guild and others at Aber- deen.
Montrose, being no party to the covert deaigus of the faction, was but a blundering Covenanter, and, being ‘upon this occasion left very much to his own devices in furthering the cause, was not only willing to accept of very equivocal converts, but, totally forgetting the importance of the Magua Charta of his party, now ate tempted to make Covenanters of Papists, by the in- genious device of waiving the Covenant itself,—as the Play of Hamlet was tnolited by the itinerant manager.
, and such of them as would as they were invited to it, so t them advise upon it, and not
d; as also what assurance might
To this purpose there was a with all such, that they should be they subscribing a declaration
to coneur with the Covenanters in and Liberties of thekingdam and,
tht be encouraged into the subsign- ion and bond, there was a decla-
8 POLICY CONTROLLED, 239
| seit heetet we oaszni sini, and withal told Montrose, that if an attempt were made to take south with them as a prisoner, the country A ‘not so quietly submit to the outrage as Huntly’s ji Montrose replied, that very pro- hably these people bore Huntly no good will, and that, indeed, he knew as much from themselves, but, for his
; part, was willing to do for Huntly all the good
he could, and would fail in no promise to him 5
‘only,’ added Montrose, ‘ there is this difficulty, that bu- oad eter transneted Jy vote and a committee, nor ee ine mye * You have done
so much by yourself already, rejoined Straloch, ‘ why
not the whole ? If you be so inclined, of which I make
‘no doubt, then being General here, and the prineipal per-
son upon this expedition, when you stand to your point,
Huntly's enemies must yield.’ To which Montrose an-
‘swered, ‘I shall do my utmost for Huntly's satisfaction,
—and with this answer, says James Gordon, who nar-
rates the above, his father was dismissed ; nor, he adds,
| Montrase “fail of the performance of his promise ;
‘that night, after Huntly had subscribed the paper
agroed upon, Montrose was content that he should re-
turn peaceably to his own house, which he did accord-
_ ingly, not without the great miscontent of those who would have had him detained.” *
wing thus discussed Huntly, Montrose broke up
Joao account by James Gordon, whose <0 tht the meeting ut Lowoos
the second day, Huntly went not near the eunp, bea boad sient ea in which he appears to have been misinformed, und pres
\
=
‘MONTROSE'S POLICY CONTROLLED. 241
councils of this expedition, and was overborne in commit- tee, now became verified. Huntly. was again requested to meet the Covenanters, with which request he reluct- autly complied, upon receiving assurance from Montrose, and the other leaders, that he would not be detained prisoner. No sooner had he arrived, however, than the Forbeses and Frazers, and more especially Crich~ ton of Frendraught, the sworn foe of Huntly, began to urge his detention in the most vehement manner, and the result was very discreditable to theparty that effected it, Various obligations and new terms were attempted to be imposed upon Huntly, who indignantly demanded ‘that the bond of maintenance he had signed at Inver- ury should, in the first instance, be restored to him. Then, (says Spalding) the bond being immediately de- livered to the Marquis, he asked, ‘ Whether will ye take me south with you as a captive, or shall I go vo- untarily ?) Montrose answered, ‘ Make your choice.’ *Then, said the other, ‘I will not go as a captive, ‘but as a volunteer. Upon this affair, James Gordon ‘thus comments; “ Whether Montrose was content to be overborne by votes, that so it might be his greater glory to Jead Huntly to Edinburgh as a trophy of his conquest, or if, indeed, Montrose was overpowered, and ‘constrained to yield to the clamours of the northern ‘Covenanters, who had drawn the south country men their way, it is uncertain; but, however, it was con- ‘eluded that Huntly must go along with them to Edin- bargh under a guard, though not disarmed as a pri- ‘soner, which was accordingly performed. So Montrose and his party, within less thana fortnight aftertheircom- ing, marched south again, establishing a committee of es ne ere, ond thele associates, to guard L a
—
— ae
MONTROSE'S POLICY CONTROLLED. 245
Such is an unfavourable account of this matter for Montrose, recorded by a particular friend and follower of Huntly. Menteith, whose history of the troubles ‘was written in French, and printed at Paris in the year 1661, states positively, that when Huntly made his ap- pearance, under promise of safety, at Aberdeen, “ im- mediately they commenced to solicit Montrose not to suffer him to remain in his own country, whatever pro- mise he had made him to the contrary, and although Montrose opposed them to his utmost (s'opposast de tout son pouuoir) to prevent their breaking the parole that had been given, nevertheless his single authority being insufficient to prevent it, Huntly and his eldest son were carried prisoners to the Castle of Edinburgh, from whence they were not liberated till the peace of
~ Berwick." Both Wishart and Guthrie exonerate Mon- trose, but are neither precise nor accurate in the few details they afford, in which they appear too much pre- Judiced against Huntly. From all the accounts, how- ever, it is obvious that this disereditable proceeding was not the policy of Montrose, and hud been carried into execution contrary to his remonstrance and plans, for, when acting for himself, Montrose had actually dis- inissed Huntly upon the most favourable terms; and if Huntly was of a disposition to cherish, even to the min Of his King and country, the remembrance of that wrong in after years, the fact of Montrose having com- manded various covenanting expeditions in arms against the loyalty of Huntly’s district, is sufficient to account for that fatal “ distaste,” without the necessity of sup- posing that Montrose was a willing party to the dis- honourable act.* Indeed, it appears to be obvious, from oe spirited reply to the noblemen, gentlemen, wad mini- ‘on the part of the Covenanters, Karo tis the option of joln-
—
CC
GENEROSITY OP MONTROSE. 245
not abundance of bensts, mutton, and good fare for little pay,) in order of battle, with bagpipes and Highland five hundred men, They went about the cross in rank, and being viewed, the General (Montrose) commanded tiem to go to their lodgings, which were prepared within the town for them; and that ¢hey should do no wrong, which they carefully obeyed, and for the which the town gave them five hundred merks in money when they removed with the foot army.” It is mani- fest, therefore, that Montrose had been exerting bim- self, and successfully, on all hands to relieve, as far as possible, town and country from the burdens and ex- cesses of war. Again, James Gordon notes, that,— “ April 12th, General Leslie marched out of Aberdeen, southward, compelling the town to pay him ten thou- sand merks, as a great courtesy to him.” The fact was, however, that Montrose’s instructions were to exact a hundred thousand merks, and to visit the recusant north, and especially Aberdeen, with the greatest seve- rity in every respect. Had he carried fire and sword through the whole district, he would have done no more than what the Tubles,.and especially the cove- nanting clergy, wished and expected him todo. It was through Montrose’s leniency, as Spalding expressly ad- ‘mits, that the fine upon Aberdeen was reduced to ten thousand merks; and Baillie, after shortly narrating the subjugation of Aberdeen by Montrose, adds these expressions of disappointment : “The dis.
cretion of that generous and noble youth (Montrose) was but foo great. A great sum was named as a fine to that unnatural city, but all was forgiven ;" and, speaking of the free quarters upon Drum and Pitfod- ~ dels —“ This was inuch eried out upon by our enemies, as cruel and barbarous plunderings, but a little time
=
SS
HAMILTON IN THE FIRTH. 247
CHAPTER VIL.
PHEW LNS HOW MAOILTON BETRAYED THE LOYAL BARONS OF THK NORTH, AND HOW MONTROSE SUBDUKD THEA,
Tr was about the middle of the month of April 1639, that Montrose and Leslie returned in triumph from the north with Huntly a prisoner. This was the period of the most general and sincere excitement, throughout Scotland, against the measures of the Court, for the real secret, and the actual temper of the present threat- ening attitude of the King, was understood only by a few. His Majesty had reached York with an inefficient ‘but most imposing array, and bis evil genius, Hamil- ton, “ must,” says Sir Philip Warwick, “ be a distinct General both by sea and land, and with a good fleet must block up the Scotch seas, and, fo my knowledge, he promised so to visit his countrymen on their coasts, as that they should find little ease or security in their habitations.” Hamilton's own letter, which time has disclosed, verifies the ubove, for therein, when planning this very expedition, he advises the King to “ curb the insolency of this rebellious nation,” and to “‘ make them miserable,” with “ assistance from England.” This, be adds, “ will certainly so trritate them, as all those who within this country’stand for your Majesty will be in great and imminent danger."* Five months from the date of this letter had scarcely elapsed, when
* Letter in the Hantwicke Collection, alroady referred to, dated Nov. Ti, 163M.
a
or the land soldiers to sicken,
to die; otherwise the fleet did more 2 ei than to the enemy. (pk ios ae es
smd worthless country | Billie nddsy— ‘il ocenion of boglnning the war he ai rehore with w shot." “
= ‘ COVENANTING ARMY. 253
might not be sufficiently efficacious, it was articled— “ When any march is to be made, every man that is sworn shall follow his colours; whosoever presumes without leave to stay behind shall be punished. If any upon mutiny be found to do it, be they many or be they few, they shall die for it." The first article of the code, however, is titled “ Ecclesiastical Discipline,” ‘and commences with the provision—* That in every regiment under a colonel, there be an ecclesiastical el~ dership, or kirk-session," &e. Nor must we forget their celebrated banner, in which a worldly craving for ‘regal power, so characteristic of the Kirk, was thus im~ piously typified, —* the Scottish arms, and this motto, Jor Christ's crown and Covenant, in golden letters.” ‘The policy of all this, in the little old crooked friend ‘of Gustavus Adolphus, may be gathered from the ac- count of Baillie, who, more than half-crazed with ex- ‘citement on the occasion,® favours us with the follow- ‘ing exquisite portrait of himself; “1 furnished to half- ‘a-lozen of good fellows, muskets and pikes, and to my ‘boy a broad-sword. I carried myself, as the fashion “was, a sword, and a couple of Duteh pistols at my sad- dle, but, I promise, for the offence of no man, except a
ae Hie sey,“ [was as a man who had taken my leave from the workd,
and was resolved to die in that service, without return, found the fa- “your of God shining upon papi pyc ads Riiubla; yot strong
Seaete cacao the bands of churchmen, who kept BURRESS ca phat eau tcdiess yao und Seaaaa. grip of some of these who lad first kind-
Sesitlnee fea iit cas ry ree could east them in the it, to taste if that heat wus plewant when it came near their
~
STATE OF THE NORTH. 255
opening scene of that civil strife which ceased not until after the national honour had received an indelible stain, and the throne itself was swept away. ‘This was the vital quarter at present of the royal cause; and Ha- milton, accordingly, there left it to its fate, while Mon- trose displayed a corresponding degree of activity on the side of the Covenanters. The Viscount of Aboyne, second son, a mere boy, was now looked to
by the loyal barons as their leader, the Lord Gordon being at this time with his father in the hands of the enemy, But even of this youthful leader the north was deprived at a most critical juncture; for, on the dd of May, he had suddenly taken his depar- ture by sea, in order to claim succours in person from his Majesty. Aboyne succeeded in obtaining the King’s ear, the favourite being absent; and he implored his Majesty to grant him an order upon the Marquis of Hamilton for some of the English troops, to aid the ris- ing in the shires of Aberdeen and Banff, Charles in- vested the young nobleman with the lieutenancy of ‘the north, and, at the same time, sent a letter by-bim to Hamilton, in which his Majesty told the latter not to involve him in money expense, his Exchequer being ‘drained, but “ as for what assistance you can spare hizn (Aboyne) out of the forces that are with you, I leave gosto judes, and 1 shall be glad of it if you find it may * and again,—* if, with the countenance and Galas of what force you have, you may uphold my party in the north, and the rest of those noblemen Beereecat te yc, L chal eceem ita wery great ser- tice."* So the fate of the north, and of the monarchy, was again cast upon the will of Hamilton, whose extra- "# Thialetter, which In printed by Burnt in bls Mem. of the Dukes of
Harallton, p. 155, is dated Newcastle, 13th May 1639. “os
a
, that there should the same was done, first, in
r ‘in the cause he was supporting. 6 eval. to, restrain the lawlessness of a them to musters and
, and then ordering them to their
a peremptory was he nda rations and defences of the town, and bitants, that when the drum beat
d Town of Aberdeen, commanding them,
b, to deliver up their whole arms to the
sievar, “ the Old Town people, trembling thi [Eo aeae aateheeency
_- HAMILTON’s HOSTILITIES. oT
you can do upon the rebels, for my service, with those men you have, for you cannot have one man from hence.” The story which Bishop Burnet relates, as the immediate consequence of the above letter from the King, if it be a fact, places Hamilton in the most ridi- culous and contemptible point of view. “ The Mar+ quis,” says Burnet, “no sooner got this, but he pre+ sently sef fo work, resolving neither to spare Burrough+ stowness, which was his own town, nor Prestonpans, which was his cousin's. But a strange accident befel him the wext day, for as he went out in a small ves- ‘scl, with a drake on her, and sixty soldiers, to view the ‘Queensferry, and burn the ships that lay in the har- ‘bour, he saw a merchant-barque coming down towards him, and he caused row up fo her ; but she, perceiving her danger, run herself aground upon the sands of Barnbougle ; the tide falling apace, and he following » run himself likewise on ground, where he was like to have been very quickly taken by ‘the men on the shore, who were playing upon him, and some vollies passed upon both hands, But they on the land were waiting till the water should fall, reck- | ening him their prey already, which had been inevi- table, had not the seamen got out, and, being almost to the middle in water, with great tugging set them ‘afloat, and so he returned safe to the fleet; and this was all the ground for that calumny of his making ap- pointments on the sands of Barnbougle with the Cove- a9,
CHARLES DECEIVED AND BETRAYED. 277%
= fleet, not as their enemy, but as nd and mediator with the King. The ‘quoted, when contrasted with Hamil- theme the King, as found in the ‘Hardwicke collection, and in Burnet's Memoirs of his
of itself to prove that the favourite was not merely a vacillating, but a deceptive and traitorous part. Indeed when we attend, chronologi-
tally, to the events crowded within the space of about six months, and which were decisive of the fate of the King, it is impossible to doubt that he was betrayed evil genins Hamilton.
letter to Charles, dated 27th November 1638,
1 speaks of Scotland as a rebellious nation, a s country, a people having other thoughts than , which they used as acloak to rebellion, Then the plan of a most effective invasion, to : this people to dutiful obedience, to irritate them, miserable, and he suggests the Marquis
to be his Majesty's lieutenant in the north, = himself entirely into the hands of the favourite, Huntly is appointed, the invasion proceeds, and, by the first of May, Hamilton anchors in the Firth, and the King is with the army on his way to Berwick. same instant, Huntly is taken prisoner—a Sle les dee Rea ees could have prevented. Hamilton withholds from Aboyne, though that young nobleman en to obtain them, and manifestly ought
with a vigour and activity in ‘ay Joss sustained by the captivity of his ‘Between the 8th and the 29th of May, Charles
oa various letters to Hamilton, evineing the utmost desire that Aboyne should obtain the aid he demanded,
correspondence) et you loose to do what mischief you can for my service” On the 4th of June, afterwards, Henry Vane writes to Majesty doth now clearly see, and d in his own judgment, that what pas~ ry betwixt his Majesty, your Lord-
with them, but to settle things with
good posture, and yourself to come to consult what counsels are fit to be
i ll
_ -PACIFICATION OF BERWICK, 281 Berwick, in the summer of 1639, has been represented by several historians as
a measure equally ruinous and 7 itwas ruinous, thatis, thatitformed one link in the chain that dragged the King to destrue- 1 ; but it was both inevitable and "And one reason of its necessity | aire by this able writer is, that “ the Scots were en~ | ‘unanimous, and entire masters of their The value of covenanting enthusiasm and Eoiemdlniy,prdixationsl charscteritio, sud principe of action, we have already had occasion to consider, ‘That the Covenanting faction were now entire masters of their country, and that, again to use the words of Mr Hallam,— the terms of Charles's treaty with his re- volted subjects were unsatisfactory and indefinite, enor- some Falconcesslon, and: yet affording a pretext for new ” are fatal truths, involving a nation’s
ad disgrace, for which Hamilton is deeply re- sponsible, who at this time so meanly betrayed his too confiding master, And now the crisis was at hand, when Montrose, awakening to a sense of the monarchy in danger, and becoming gradually confirmed in the con- viction that Charles was betrayed by those he trusted, paused in the delusive excitement of eovenanting patrio~ tism, whilehis heart yearned to tell his Sovereign of “the ‘serpent in his bosom.” Meanwhile we must follow Mon- trose through his last covenanting triumph in the north.
ri It was upon Friday the 14th of June 1639, that Aboyne, despairing of the promised assistance from Hamilton, and not in the secret of the transac tions we have noticed, commenced his march from Aberdeen towards Angus. His hope was, with the aid of the gallant “eile ale desis
— a
, that Aboyne, when his party had towards Stonehaven, came himself, foistknoe! ad:dent then a letter, which
Eid good aler than solyabie
Bee before, p, 257,
_ Young and inexperienced Pete ae whos the adic tne crcl of wer ‘he licensed all the foot to depart home, and with the horse returns to Aberdeen. And now Gun, having acted the first essay of his treachery, he could not hope ) enemy, seeing so fair an advantage offered, ‘qrould be sure-to take the occasion, as indeed they did.” ‘The account in James Gordon's manuscript is sub- stantially the same, though it varies in some particulars. ‘a little skirmishing, in which Aboyne’s havea an back, Montrose sent a few cannon ‘bullets among Aboyne’s brigades, which so alarmed the ‘Highlanders that they wheeled about and fled in con fusion, nor ever looked behind them, (although Aboyne ‘himself made every exertion to rally the fugitives) until they reached a morass about half a mile distant.* This
iewe:
Is seems, wore wally unprparad forthe ext ‘a dear Sandy's stovp,” They had nnother name
party ‘wore coming ‘to have clean defeat un; fo een owt al st a kes tha
rnd A
‘MONTROSE MARCHES | UPON ABERDEEN. = 287
| Montrose, with the prompt energy to which he owed:
his future successes, instantly determined to march once
| more upon Aberdeen, and when within six miles of
‘that devoted town, an advanced patty of his cavaley
| encountered an equal number of the Gordons, whom
Aboyne had dispatched to watch the motions of the
Covenanters. Being only seven on each side, there was
something knightly and romantic in this encounter,
im which the Gordons were victors, for after several
| wounds | and received, Montrose’s seven horsemen the laird of Powrie Fotheringhame ~
eer Gordon of Fechill, and Ogilvy of
Powrie, younger, wounded and taken by Nathaniel
Gordon, best and bravest of loyalists, the future com-
panion, and fellow martyr, of Montrose. Aboyne’s par-
ty was led upon this occasion by the gullant Colonel
Jobuston, who was most anxious to have returned to
a whole chivalry of the Gordons,
would utterly rout the combined
eee wt Marischal. he result of his
spirited councils, and of his obstinate defence of the
bridge of Dee, all rendered abortive by traitor Gun,
we cannot do better than present to our readers in the
precise words of the manuscript accounts left by Patrick
r Gordon.
aio says Patrick Gordon, “a new oceasion of jealousy towards Gun; for my Lord (Aboyne) had commanded Johnston to take some horsemen with him, -wnd go forth to view the enemy, which he did very exactly, and, when he returned, assures my Lord that if he would give him out an hundred borse, and fifty ‘commanded musketeers, he was sure to give them such as should bring them all to confusion, and
| seconded with the rest of the horsemen,
‘BATTLE OF THE BRIDGE OF DER. 293
fusal of his to charge was so ill taken, that the company ‘began to tell Aboyne that Gun had betrayed bim, and Arradoul, in a great chafe, told him to his face that he wasa villain, and on arrant traitor, all which Colonel Gun swallowed quietly. Half-an-hour after the foot had left the bridge, the Covenanters’ fore-party entered the port, and marched alongst it, keeping their journey towards Aberdeen, for it was late in the afternoon, without offering to pursue any of Aboyne’s party, who had got time to retire.” *
Thus was Aberdeen once more in the power of the yet covenanting Montrose. In the next chapter we will have occasion to advert to an assertion of Robert Baillie’s, that Montrose, because he had not been ap- pointed in place of Leslie to the command of the cove nanting army at the borders, was doing his utmost at this very time to ruin the Covenanters, and would ac- tually have placed the whole of the north in the hands of the King, upon the present occasion, had he not been prevented by the “ honesty and courage” of Marischal. Such was Baillic's theory of Montrose's motives and actions, when the spleen of the reverend partisan had been etirred by the subsequent career of our hero. Yet, at the time, Baillie expresses the highest admiration of Montrose, and condemns nothing but his lenity—* At
rate, From Baillie's own excited re- to gather thus much. But inthe Gordon we find the facts more ex=
s warrant for that effect. He
best to advise a night upon it,
n was the London of the north, and the prejudice themselves. It was taken
drew up @ paper, signed with both their ring that they had hindered it, and pro- ‘pose with the Committce of Hstates for ‘year, when he was made prisoner
was objected to Montrose, that he had
Guthrie records that Montrose disbanded his * Angus, and retired to his own house, expect-
at Leslie and his council would have sent for him
ind take command of his regiment, and that, as
slected to do so, he remained at Old Montrose ‘return of the army. This account, however,
be inaccurate, for, as Baillie himself was with
army, it may be presumed that he
not be mistaken in what he writes to Spang up-
0 namely, that “ Montrose and Marischal ‘did post to Dunse to have their part of the joy, as wel!
ul el
296 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS
they did deserve, in the common peace, where they were made most welcome both to their comrades and to their King.”*
* Aboyne took ship to,Berwick on the 26th of June, but had nearly been killed by the “rascal multitude,” in his coach in Edinburgh James Gordon's MS. The particulars are thus given by Baillie in his letter to Spang, September 28, 1639: “ The people of Edinburgh, being provoked by the insolent and triumphant behaviour of that unhappy spark, Aboyne, who yet recking from our blood in the north, would rat te in his open coach through their causey, made an onset upon him, and well near had done him violeuce.” So Baillie, who condemned Mon trose for not having given up Aberdeen to fire and sword, speaks of the conquered Aboyne as one “ reeking from our blood in the north,” and justifies the attempt upon his life by what he calls the provocation of ‘Aboyne’s travelling in his own carriage through the streets of Edis burgh, ten days after the pacification had been signed at Berwick! This was the time when the treasurer, Traquair, was also nearly ma- dered. This breach of the pacification appears to have been the result of some plan, “that in a private way some course may be taken fit their terror and disgrace, if they offer to show themselves publicly.”— Letter to Wariston.
Gun went to Berwick at the same time as Aboyne, but we hear of to assault upon him. “ But shortly afterwards Johnston coming to cour, his leg being cured, accused him as a traitor, and challenged him to single combat. But Hamilton conveyed Gun away to Holland, who, the while that he staid at court, traduced Huntly’s followers as boldly ‘as they confidently accused him, so that hardly knew the King whom to believe amongst them.”—James Gordon's MS.
ll
" PRESHt IMPULSE To ‘THE MOVEMENT. 299
ut wives who at first put life in the cause,” ‘were so conspicuous, and which unquestionably were secretly instigated by the principal agents of the faction, in ‘upon the 2d of July 1689, eae Lord eae ghrambes was so brutally assaulted, Bishop Guthrie declares that there were few who doubted that this breach of the pacification * had private allowance,” but that Lord Loudon was dis- patched on the 4th tothe King at Berwick, to excuse returned with an order from his Majesty re~ quiring fourteen of the covenanting leaders to attend him at his conrt there, in order to arrange his progress to Scotland, where he meant to hold an Assembly and Parliament in person. Only three of the noblemen obeyed this.summons, namely, Montrose, Rothes, and Lothian, and his Majesty was so disgusted by the in- excuses sent by the rest, as to return to London on the 29th, and forego his intention of trusting him- self in the hands of this faithless and unprincipled faction. *
Dr Cook, in his History of the Church, has adopted, without sufficient examination, the popular theory of Montrose’s Joyalty. Speaking of the occasion, when Montrose was one of the three noblemen who dared to
to-come to us to Terwick, by which disobedience they manifestly their of us; and it cannot be thought reasonable that eee ee eee ees —— "—Declara-
ie A
{mlssfoner, brought. the country: and the King. The ‘crisis was so abrupt and violent, that it could not fail eee. For, besides all this, a most determined attack was now made upon the prerogatives . ‘The control of the Mint,—the com- ee ees ae
2S a jurisdictions,—the regulating pre- eedency,—these were all demanded to be transferred, eerie © Parliament. Here were ianova- | fious infinitely beyond any thing attempted by the King, “and which must have convinced all who retained the | power of calm reflection, that the design was to abro-
tions concerning the constitution of Parliaments, and eeeee things never treated on before, whereanent the | Commissioner told them he had no instructions, Mon- | trose argued somewhat against those motions, for which | the zenlots became suspicious of him, that the King | had turned him at his being with his Majesty at Ber- Beaten ort teed 10 cake Nite. nadics therm | only the vulgar, whom they used to hound out, whis- | pered im the streets to his prejudice, and the next [feeenatea Bs Sena efx epon his chamber door. x pa
{ te aA
eS
_ COVENANTING CALUMNIES. 805
to fall foul upon the question of our new private mect- ings.” We find, too, in the correspondence of this re- ‘verend partisan, another version of Montrose’s defection, somewhat different from that of the Berwick seduction. Ina letter, dated in 1645, to which we have elsewhere alluded, when most violently excited against Mon- trose, Buillie writes," Our present posture is this; when the canniness of Rothes had brought in Montrose to our party, his more than ordinary and ‘evil pride made him very hard to be guided ; his first voyage to Aberdeen made him swallow the certain hopes of a te over all our armies ; when that honour was Leite n Leslie, he incontinent began to. deal with King, and, when we were at Dunse-law, had given assurance, and was in a fair way of performance had~ ‘not the honesty and courage of Marischal prevented it, to have given over the whole north to the enemy; when our voyage to Newcastle came in hand, by his damnable band he thought to have sold sus to the enemy ; thereafter he was ever on correspondence for our ruin.” From such vague calumnies,—the prejudiced assumptions of the moment, by narrow and clouded minds judging characters they were incapable of ap- preciating,—a certain class of writers concoct pages of ‘positive assertion against Montrose, and call it history. Temay be seen, from the history we have already traced, is the assertion that jealousy of Leslie’s to command the rebellious army of 1639, induced Montrose, at this time, to turn against the Cove- nanters. Baillic's theory in 1645 is totally at variance with the facts he himself records in 1639. Besides, ‘Marischal, a youth of about three-and-twenty, was obviously swayed by Montrose, and we shall find that ‘the very first signature to what Baillie calls Montrose's ‘VOL. 1 uv
ee
PARLIAMENT OF JUNE 1640. 307
such risks, but transmitted a command to the Justice- | Clerk to take the Advocate along with him, and proro- gate the Parliament in virtue of the sub-commission. says that the Lord Ad “was glad both of being delivered from his disgrace, and for being honoured ‘with the employment,” and that when the Parliament | ‘met, he moved Lord Elphinstone, as first named in the © commission, to go up with them to the throne and | execute the King’scommand. That nobleman required to see Traqunir's order. Hope urged the King’s com- mand as paramount, but Elphinston would not depart from the letter of his commission. The Advocate then turned to Lord Napier, who was much too precise and punetilious in all such matters to be guided by any thing but the express terms of the Royal Commission, aud he, too, declined to act. Nevertheless the Cove- nanting Parliament determined to sit, and elected Lord Burleigh as their President.
The only nobleman who appears to have opposed with spirit and determination the assumed powers of this extraordinary Parliament was Montrose himself. Bishop Guthrie has told us that, in the democratical proceedings of 1639, Montrose first incurred the dis- pleasure of the faction by arguing against their revolu- onary propositions. What we are about to narrate corroborates that statement, and from a quarter that is nottobe doubted. It will be manifest, when we come to record the history of Montrose's first conservative attempts to countermine the leading Covenanters, that inthese Parliaments, and elsewhere, he had been startled and shocked by the treasonable manner in which the
authority, or the necessity of having a King at ail, began to be spoken of ; and he had even gathered expressions, and rumours of expressions, from Argyle
a
——
- COMMITTER OF ESTATES 1640. 309
“had occurred at this lawless convention, * whereof” (says honest Spalding) the like was never seen in the ‘Christian world, where any King ruled and rang.” The ‘whole revolutionary plan of the previous Parliament was here effected, and various acts were passed and forced upon all, the manifest object of which was to fortify the faction in the approaching rebellion. The ‘conservative feelings of Montrose, and a few others in ‘were powerless to arrest the develope- ‘ment of the“ cloud in the north.” They were induced, ‘or rather compelled, to subscribe with the rest its law- less proceedings, in the vain hope that here was the ‘utmost limit of the movement, and that by giving way to the pressure now, they were preserving themselves to be of use to the King in future. Nay, by a master stroke of policy on the part of the faction, they were ‘even put upon the monstrous committee to which this Parliament gave birth. _ Fromm James Gordon's manuscript we shall now ex- ‘tract a very distinct and curious account of the new go- yernment, constituted by this revolutionary convention of June 1640. “It will not be amiss to give some account of the Committee of Estates, and their power, as it was spe- cified in this Parliament, because in the following year ‘this new representative had the power of kings and parliaiients engrossed in their persons und judicatories. ‘The members of it were noblemen, Rothes, Montrose, Cassits, Wigton, Dumfermline, Lothian, Karls; for Lords were, Lindsay, Balmerino, Couper, Burleigh, , Lower ; Lords of Session were, Lord Dury, Lord Craighall, Lord Scotstarvet ; then followed Sir ‘Thomas Nicholson of Carnock, lawyer, Sir Patrick Hepburn of Wachtov, Sir David Hume of Wedderburn,
C—_—
‘POWER AND CUNNING OF AROYLE, sll
yened @ foul rupture and schism amongst the principal members of this committee. One thing was much re- marked here by all men, that it shewed much modesty and sejf-denial in Argyle to be contented not to be preferred to this high honour. But all saw he was major potestas, and though not formally a member, yet all knew that it was his influence that gave being, life, and motion to these new-modelled governors ; and not a few thought that this junto was his invention, If it were so or not, I determine not. A reason why he was not nominated was his absence at this time in the Highlands, and his being employed much of this sum- mer in waiting upon the supposed invasion of Strat- ford's army. Yet there was a door left open for him to enter the committee whenever be pleased, both as an officer of the army, and upon the call of the committee; for they had power to call any they pleased to assist them, so, albeit he was not nominated, yet he was in- cluded in the state committee.”
‘That the above is a true account of this committee, which usurped every function of government, and by means of the lurking power of Argyle, and the factious abilities of a few leading Covenanters, commanded the Parliament of which they professed to be the organ, will beamply proved even by the history of their proceedings against Montrose, to be presently unfolded. The re- volt of Scotland was manifestly progressing (from the tithe agitation of Rothes, who was now compara- tively insignificant,) to be under the dictatorship of Argyle, whose “ great power and following,” und vi- cous ability, rendered him, notwithstanding his con- stitational nervousness, without a competitor in such a pretension. Argyle was sent, both in 1639 and 1640,
i
=
‘MONTROSE’S MOTIVES AND OnJECTS, 313
Argyle’s own tent, at the Ford of Lyon, where, as cir- cumstantinlly reported to Montrose by John Stewart, certain expressions:
worthy of remark, too, that, according to Stewart's ‘story, this conversation had reference to that very de- bate mysteriously alluded to in the passage we have quoted from the secret correspondence of Archibald Johnston. The history of this charge of high treason against Argyle (which became the means of destroy- ing the conservative party in Scotland) will appear in a subsequent chapter.
Thus it happened that Montrose, (independently of the circumstances already detailed as having opened his eyes to the danger of the country, and caused him in the parliaments of 1639 and 1640, to “ dispute” ngainst such statesmen as Argyle, Rothes, Balmerino, and Archibald Johnston,) shortly after the Inst convention of the Estates in June, had become impressed with the belief that n plot really existed to dethrone the King in Scotland, and to place the Earl of Argyle as dictator over the distracted country. This had been pressed ‘upon his attention by various circumstances occurring about the same time, and which were sufficiently con- vincing, though it was not so easy to bring home an accusation of the sort against the wily and powerful
potentate, who rejoiced in a supreme eriti- nal jurisdiction as his own appanage, and lorded it over hosts of “ uncanny trewsmen,"—as Baillie culls them with mingled fear and admiration,—“ these supple fel- Jows with their plaids, targes, and dorlachs,"— memories and consciences were as supple as their limbs. Montrose determined, however, to unravel the treason and denonnee the traitors, and he was most anxious
“ a
‘MONTROSE’S MOTIVES AND OBJECTS. 815
could prevail, that army should not rob the King of his
To the bond above-mentioned he had obtained, among other important signatures, that of the Lieutenant-Genera) himself, Lord Amond, who was second in command under Leslie. Thus Montrose hoped to have saved the King from any desperate de- signs of this invasion, and also to have bound together a party to support his undisguised opposition in the ensuing Parliament. This measure of necessity, the true history and details of which have never been re- corded, is vaguely referred to by those inimical to the fame of Montrose, in order to prove mean duplicity against @ character naturully as truthful and fearless as ever fell a victim to faction. Compelled as he was to ananeeuvre for his King, in times when loyalty scarce- Ty dared to manifest itself in Scotland, we will find that for the successful conduct even of this stratagem his nature was totally unsuited. The terms of this bond, and the reasons for it assigned by Montrose himself, will be Jnid before the reader, when we arrive at the circumstances which brought the matter prematurely to light. In the meantime we must follow him with the invading army to Newcastle,
Argyle acted as whipper-in to the Scotch army, but always found an excuse for not joining it in person.®
® Baillie gives a most amusing account of Argyle’s campaigns with
however, was “ to lie about Stirling, in the heart to be always ready in subsidies for unexpected accidents, fo our neutralists, |\, 6 all peaceably inclined and weil dix Jor butmanted frien! (4, ¢. all conservative Covenanters),
le
_ ENGLAND IxvaDen, 1640, 317
land, “ from whence,” adds their too honest chronicler, “there was no expectation of money till we went to fetch it’ Vt was sometime during this pause, betwixt the mustering of the army and its crossing the borders, ‘that Montrose framed and obtained signatures to his conservative bond.*
‘The little crooked Felt-Marshal, engaged to fight in the leading strings of a covenanting committee, now again saw himself surrounded by that motley host of black gowns and blue bonnets which composed the fan- tastical ranks of the kirk-militant, and not a man of them with a certain or sane view of their precise plan and purpose. Seizing that attitude of mingled doubt,
and fear, and bravado, some wag of the
day has embalmed the Scots invading army of 1640 in an immortal ballad, most descriptive of its extravagant Sieieesescanconth:acay:
‘March! March |
| Why the devil do yo nn march ?
‘Stand to your arms, my Inds,
Fight in good order ;
Front about ye musketyers all
‘ill ye come to the English border ;
+ De Wishart states, that Montrose was absent when the rebel ‘came to the determination to cross the borders ; and he odda,—" Which resolution of theirs the chief of the Covenanters bud taken up in their ieee six weeks bofore, and to that purpove bad in through all Great Britain thelr apologeti pam
‘not hinder, would not seem to disapprove. Montrose com- Senate yy tnd ut lr and oe
him to the King, or at lenst hod broken tho neck of the Covenanters’ design”
OO
SCOTS ARMY AT NEWCASTLE, 319
passed and repassed, “ boots and all,” the whole army prepared to incur once the risk he thus in- curred thrice: “ And so,” says Baillie, “we passed Tweed the 20th of August with great courage, our horse troops standing in the water, our foot all wading in order about their middle.” The miserable affair of Newbury, where Lord Conway scarcely disputed the passage of the Tyne, enabled the Scots to fasten with impunity upon Newcastle, and afforded them the pre- tensions of a great victory. Sir James Turner (appa- rently the prototype of Rit-master Dugald Dalgetty) happened at this time to be returning from mercenary service abroad, and was roving anywhere for a new commander. So he stumbled upon the victorious Scots ‘at Neweastle, where, he says, “1 found this success had elevated the minds of my countrymen to such a height of vanity that most of them thought, and many ‘said, they should quickly make a full conquest of Eng- Jand ; but time hath shewn them since that they made their reckoning without their host." *
Tn none of the accounts of this passuge of the Tyne do we find any mention of Montrose. The affair ap- pears to have been decided by Leslie's judicious ma- ak of bis “ dear Sandie’s stoups.”+ It was to
Bs fing cans actly to renllze the fruits of their ndventures,
wa teed ‘the least worldly, the most conscientious, and the
‘disinterested patriot of the faction, thus gloats over thelr extmor-
Slory god run the esp th tse of cnt
Sterling —5,408,000 morks Scots! isa pretly sum in our land,
tele the 1,800,000 merks for our army these last four months, and
1.25000 for the fifth month coming! Yet the heurty giving of it to usyne to their brethren, refreshed un ua much as the money itself” ~
—Letiers avid Journals, They bad certainly * gone to fetch it” to some
a
TRACTORS IN THE WEO-CHAMBER. 3@L
CHAPTER X.
FATE OF MONTHOSR'S TERST CONSERVATIVE ATTEMPTS IN SUPFONT OF ‘THE KING'S AUTHORITY.
Towanps the end of the month of September 1640, ‘Montrose contrived to transmit a letter to the King. “In the time of the truce (says Dr Wishart) Montrose had sent letters unto the King, professing his fidelity, and most dutiful and ready obedience to his Majesty, nor did the letters contain any thing else. These being stolen away in the night, and copied out by the King’s own bed-chamber men,—men most endeared to the King of all the world—were sent back by them to the Covenanters at Neweastle ; and it was the fashion with those very men to communicate unto the Covenanters, from day to day, the King’s most secret councils, of which they themselves only were either authors or par- takers.”* According to Sanderson, this treachery had
produced a copy of the letter he said he had
x
EE
considered the enemy, and a loyal correspondence with the Sovereign, apart from the faction, was treason by their code. But when Montrose boldly justified the act, it was impossible to gainsay him, For these same articles of war, true to the system of the Covenanters, who never struck a rebellious blow without first pro- claiming God save the King, contained this provision ; “Ifany man shall open his mouth against the King’s Ma- Jesty’s person, or authority, or shall presume to touch his sacred person, he shail be punished as a traiter !" So the matter ended for the time. _ But the Earl of Argyle was not to be out-manosivred by such a character as Montrose. The private bond, which the latter no doubt flattered himself would be the means of saving the country, was also speedily dis- covered, and brought before the Committee at Edin- burgh by Argyle himself. One of the peers who signed it was young Lord Boyd, Montrose’s “ ally,” aud the ‘son-inaw of the Earl of Wigton. Lord Boyd died about the 24th year of his age (necording to Sir James Balfour in consequence of a “ burning fever,") on the 19th November 1640. Shortly before his death be had uttered some expressions which made known that such a bond existed. Argyle, with characteristic sagacity, discovered the whole secret. He paid a visit at Cal- Tendar, (where Lord Amond had arrived for a time from his command at Neweastle,) nor did he depart without btaining all the information of which he was in quest, e before his subservient Committee at who immediately summoned Montrose, otland, and the rest of the noblemen impli- within their reach, to appear and answer to accusation of treason agairist the faction of
==
‘MONTROSE’S CONSERVATIVE BOND, 325
sthe lawless arm of # tyrannical Committee could not band, by which he thought ‘to have sold us to the enemy.” 1am not aware that a topy of this bond was hitherto known to exist. It is frequently alluded to in history, but the terms of it are no where quoted. Among the manuscripts of Sir James Balfour, however, I have been so fortunate as to diseover of the bond, and of the subsequent de- elaration mentioned by Guthrie. These shall now be | nid before the reader, that he may judge how fur the | violent expressions of the reverend Covenanter were justified. “The copy of the bond subscribed by Montrose and the rest of these noblemen,
“ Whereas we under-subscribers, out of our duty to Religion, King, and Country, were forced to join our- selves in a Covenant for the maintenance and defence of eithers, and every one of other in that behalf, Now finding how that, by the particular and indirect prac ve. the country, and cause now depending,
much suffer, do heartily, hereby, bind and oblige
‘ ourselves, out of our duty to all these respects above mentioned, but chiefly and namely that Covenant al- Sneed to wed and study all public ends which to the safety both of Religion, Laws, and
of this poor kingdom ; and, a8 we are to make
an account before that Great Judge at the last day, that re contribute one with another, in a unanimous nt way, in whatsomever may concern the public, cause, to the hazard of our lives, fortunes and of us doing, consulting, nor eondeseend- point, without the consent and approbation
: that power in support of the King’s inst a democratic faction, he would only the Covenant from the abuse of it by a
smal," subversive of the Covenant. But : consisted his crime, for the Cove- duced the country to this, that might was the
Socivts. We all embniced ffartane a Unie conve meteors
=
Colonel declared, that when he was last in Holland the ‘Palsgrave sent for the deponer to the Breill, where he, entering in discourse anent his Highness's own affairs, ‘desired the Colonel to represent his condition to the Ex- tates of Scotland, and named some of the Scots noble- ‘men whom he knew, and named the Earl of Montrose as one of whom he had much heard, and desired be might have the opportunity to speak with bim. There- after the deponer coming to Newcastle had not occa. sion to speak with the Earl of Montrose for a reason- able time. The first time they met nothing past betwixt them but general discourse. ‘The next time the Earl told he was desirous to follow the wars abroad, and wished that things were settled at home that he might employ his talents that way. Whereupon the deponer told the Earl of Montrose the desire the Pals- grave had to meet with him, who willed the deponer to write a letter to the Palsgrave, that he might call the Earl of Montrose to court, where they might meet, which accordingly he did, and within a while there- after, the General (Leslic) taxed the deponer for writ- ing that letter in such a private way, whereunto he answered that he did not apprehend any fault in it; and so it was passed over at that time. Thereafter he told the Earl of Montrose that the General had
‘him, and,as he apprehended, the letter was intercepted. The Enrl of Montrose answered, that if
* 1k was passed aver (as Montrone's lettor wns) becanse there was outing to lay hold of. ‘The letter had been intercepted, and this shows
vany means break through that mugie cirele which Hiamiltou, thelr as wells his own, bad draws round tho King toexclude Montrose, and every other bold and upright adviser.
eadaeretiterertcee oe war we find ‘ excessively Joyal provision already quoted, und which, it might be have prevented an officer of that army ing 80 much alarm, as Colonel Cocheran have done, when Montrose declared that he liad detueted high treason, But after that clause in King’s authority, and in the same article, immediately,—* he that shall speak evil of the
‘cause which we defend, or of the kingdom and coun- try in the defence thereof, or shall use any words ten- ding to the dishonour of the Lord General, he shall be
” Now, the manner in which ull
such clauses, in the Covenanting statutes and articles of war, were practically interpreted, was this: Any ‘ope attempting to establish a treasonable purpose on the part of Argyle, or of the few who, with the aid of his power, now monopolized the government of Scot- tand, was closely watched, and detected before his proofs could be irresistibly fortified, and that person, be his station oF credit in the country what it might, was im- mediately persecuted, to the extent of liberty and life, esan incendiary, or a bander, or a plotter, or an evit speaker ogainst the cause: On the other hand, treason against the King himself might be darkly spoken by the privileged Covenanters with impunity, notwith- stamling the profuse loyalty of their declarations ; stich Jangaage was in them protected from prosecutions, oF finpeacksnent, in the manner above stated, the King being iu reality considered “ the enemy” so long as he
—
Balmerino, the following sentence occurs: “ There is some word here of Sir Thomas Hope's
at Neweastle, since our way coming, that the King himself might be cited to the Parliament, as well as the Earl of Strafford; but Sir Thomas wrote to ‘me what he spoke, and from whom he thinks that calumny comes. Some of us here [the Seotch commis- ‘sioners] strive to shew the King’s-danger in bring- img any such things to question, whereby both the re- levaney of such a libel may be quarrelled [disputed,] and Ais actions called in doubt as the ground there- of* In other words, this arch traitor is offended at the idea of the King’s protecting his crown from treasonable ‘expressions and propositions, and he hints that the at- tempt would only recoil upon himself. Now there is another secret letter, signed A. B,, but unquestionably from this same Sir Thomas Hope (the Lord Advocate's second son, who commanded the “ College of Justice ‘Troop,”) to Archibald Johnston, and dated from Edin- burgh, 7th June 1641, wherein is the following post- ‘weript, clearly referring to the incident mentioned in the former letter. “ Walter Stewart has craved a par- don for the wrong he did me, and has set down the words, which past betwixt us, under his hand, whereof Thave sent the authentic copy to my brother, which yemay have from him, if ye desire to see it."| Among the voluminous collection of manuscripts in the Advo- eates’ Librury, I have also discovered the original re-
(i gafiatedaeredr pet clit eral the resenrch,
Neither bed Lord Hailes observed this letter, which will be found wt the conclusion of next Chapter,
Ai i
COVENANTING NOTIONS OF TREASON, 335
i torote that? To the which Sir Thomas did not remember their names for to his memory, Kenneth the Secoud, the Third, was one of them. And so they ing upon that particular. The deponer ‘none were present at the words speaking General alone, and that those were the words, c¢ in substance, which the deponer did relate
Sheriff of Teviotdale, and that he did not speak an ontofany il intention, and declares, that he never heard Sir Thomas speak any other words of this kind | —
Dieter au. this, (perhaps a little more) may have been | paid very innocently by Sir Thomas Hope, as Walter Stewart in this second version of his story asserts, but ‘any thing as suspicious pointed ogainst the de furcto King of Scotland, Argyle, would have met with a more | Aaborate scrutiny, the object of which would have teen to ruin, and not to screen the accuser. This ‘conversation, however, even a8 given, cannot fail to re- mind us of the debate at the opening of the Scotch Parliament of June 1640, and, by a singular coinci- donee, it occurred at the very crisis when the King’s een person began to be mysteriously spoken MS. Ad. Lid, See Ta erg been ‘to diepose of such ‘a matter, We shall have ocension to shew after= Walter Stewart wus eusily frightened into giving any tos Ieee tho ticve whan tle declaration wus elllted to white. wash Sir Thomas Hope, Walter Stewurt hod just been seized by tho al lied dat the King to Mon
=
COVENANTING NOTIONS OF TREASON. 337
“ the particular practising of afew,” was early suspected, and immediately provided against, by the demagogue, Archibald Johnston, who, we shall find, was but too triumphant in his scheme of destroying Montrose’s conservative efforts, by bringing him under the lawless tyranny of the Scotch Directory, in 1641, immediately before the King arrived in Scotland.
In the following chapter shail be disclosed the pri- vate practising of this Archibald Jolinston, which we have it in our power to illustrate by some curious ori- ginal manuscripts not hitherto published.
VOL. 1. ¥
ee
ARCHIBALD JOHNSTON. 3389
Devil xwell thee, Deuth, | And burst thee, like a tun, | ‘That took away good Elspet Craig, And left the knave her son,
ly "This worthy appears to have been very soon singled
among his learned brethren, as a fitting in=
of faetion, and Baillie destinguishes him as
only advocate who in this business is trusted.”
‘soon as “the cause” commenced, he became its and was eer long Secretary of State to the Co- ‘The prominent part be acted in framing that | chorta is well known. The following anecdote, manuscript of James Gordon, I have not met with elsewhere. “ The penner of all the Covenanters’ protestations, and their public papers, mostly, was Mr Jobnston, afterwards Lord Wariston, who is likewise said to have been the chief contriver of the ‘frame of the Covenant, and to this purpose did make use of the History of the Civil Wars of France, whence he took his model for these public papers This was related to me by him who at that time lent him the three volumes of that history, who is a near relation of his.” When the * free Assembly” of 1648 was convok- ed, next to the appointment of Alexander Henderson, ‘as their moderator, that of Archibald Johnston, ax their clerk, was felt to be equivalent to transferring the whole spirit of the Tables into the Assembly, and a great struggle was made to gain that point. A most Cate scene, narrated by Baillie, then occurred,
‘The only reeords of the kirk in possession of the for- mer clerk of the Assembly, and delivered to Johnston upon his election, were two registers containing the acts of Assembly since 1590. The Moderator said, that the loss of such @ treasure was pitiful, and earnestly en-
“A COVENANTING ANTIQUARY, B41
terizes as an “ imposition,” and Dr Cook as“ a picee of i We will presently find this same mi- of the Covenant threatening to look over
old practiques against the Monarchy, if his Majesty ‘continued to be troublesome in taking cognizance of the wrouches of democracy. Archibald Johnston appears been particularly fortunate in his discovery of ancient records, which he kept secret for his own con- ‘stitutional purposes. Wodrow has left an anecdote in mnuseript, relating to the period of Charles's visit to ‘Scotland in 1641, which we may here anticipate. He tmentions that some person who was employed by Ar- chibal Johnston's son, to put his father's papers in order, discovered a voluminous dinry which had been Kept by the demagogue, of his own times. ‘“ My in- former finds likewise in that diary that after the treaty, [of London in 1640 and 1641,] when the King came a little into Scotland, there were many con- ferences among the prime of the Covenanters and the ‘King, at all which Waristoun was, The Scots Lords insisted much that the King would allow them the li- ering ea the officers of state’ in the Parliament. The King was very peremptory against it. They pleaded that it had been auciently allowed by the Kings of Scotland, and alleged the records. The King de- nied there was any such thing, and told them he knew in his father’s time any thing with relation to these was lost. After their insisting, the King required to see the records, They told him they were yet extant, ‘not among the records of the nation, After
had given his oath that he would not call for int of his hands, some two or three on the King’s side, and as many on the other side, all upon oath, were let into the secret, and the King and they went over to
{=
==
A COVESANTING Parntor, S43
the Parliament of June 1640, he was ordained to attend General Leslie in the camp, to be present on all ocea- sions with the war committee, and to superintend what- ever treaties, consultations, or public declarations, might arise. When the treaty at Rippon was removed to ‘London, he was specially added to the number of the ioners, for the purpose of watching the interests of the Church, ‘Then it was that his secret with Balmerino, and a select few of the | Committee in Scotland, which we are about to disclose, | geeurred. It may be necessary, however, in order fully to understand and appreciate some of his allusions, to ‘illustrate, from other sources, his particular objects,
‘To effect the destruction of Strafford and Laud—to root out Episcopacy even in England—to reduce the ‘King’s authority to a shadow—to trample on the neck ‘of every statesman who dared to impede the revolution- ary movement, were the avowed objects of the Procu- rator of the Kirk. To be Clerk-Register, as the next step in bis own political aggrandizement, was his secret object, and therefore his chief aim was to de- prive the King of his prerogative of choosing his own officers of State. And what a deplorable picture of ‘the inconsistency, avarice, and ruflian democracy of sige faction, presented itself, under these
at the treaty of London! Among the manu-
the Advocates’ Library, there ix a volume Poataiaing- couvemporary transcripts of the various ne- gociations and correspondence connected with this xeaty. Among other papers is that of the demands, phyla ecovenanting commissioners, upon England, in satisfaction of their “ brotherly assistance.” “That they should have demanded three hundred thousand
(
EVE
« COVENANTING REFORMERS, B45
Having, as they conceive, saved, by this disclaimer, the ee ee rene oo ee proceed to show cause for, nevertheless,
Genevean forms upon England :—
they say,“ yet charity is no presump-
eee y, they santa to be their
‘duty, both as Christians and commissioners, that England should become Presbyterian ! They ereeely announce, “we love not to be curious ‘in any other commonwealth, or to play the Bishop in another man’s diocese,’—and yet they add, “in the paradise of nature, the diversity of flawers and herbs are useful, but in the paradise of the Church, different religions are unpleasant and hurtful; it
is therefore to be wished that there were one Confes- sion of Faith, one form of Catechism, one Directory for ‘the parts and public worship of God, as prayer, pray- ‘ing, administration of the sacrament, &c. and one form of church government in all the churches of his Ma-
‘y's dominions.” *
To the prolix reasons added in support of this de- mand, England, verging to its ruin, but not yet a prey to the puritanical party, returned the following answer, which the same contemporary transcriber entitles, “The Peers’ answer to our Commissioners’ demand concern-
eta AGH), completely juctivion the penitent ‘Charles's in- ‘Oe Boba i church goverament of Scotland, and leav-
this:—Charles endeavoured to improve ee of Sapnisganhies had alrwady, for thirty
ftutionally established there, ‘The Cowenantersy=that ie ‘agitators und factionists who badd usurped the functions it to be their duty to overthrow Kpiscopacy
it hud ulways been established, nod aguinst the seuse
n to plant Presbytery there, where it had nevur boon wdsnit
SS —
COVENANTING JUSTICE. 387
peace. The prosecution of Balmerino in 1634 was ‘one of the strongest roots of the Covenant, and the fac~ ‘tion raised a terrible outcry against Charles for the ‘tyminny and injustice, as they termed it, of this criminal process, Yet in the very outset of their career they esta- blished the most powerful engine of their revolt, name- Jy, criminal processes, devoid of every shadow of right, and principle of justice, concocted and matured, per fis et nefar, by their own committees, and brought before ‘their own lawless conventions, ‘The pursuit of “ In- cendinries” quickly succeeded the hue and ery after Bishops, and the very term jncendiary was one of the ‘arts of insurgency to prejudge individuals obnoxious to them, but against whom there was in reality no case. All men of any weight in the country, who would not bow to the Covenant, every servant of the King enjoying place, and not of the faction, were liable to be denounced as incendiaries, their persons de- mazded in Scotland, to be tried there, by the covenant- ing Parliament, where the secret influence of Argyle ‘was omnipotent, while, at the same time, the King’s prerogative of mercy wax excluded, and his prerogative of filling up the vacancies occasioned by such disqua- lifications, demanded us the privilege of that same de- ‘mocratical tribunal. Among the many mischievous acts passed in the Parliament of June 1640, there was ‘one, of whose real object we are informed by Sir James Balfour, at that time (though he afterwards saw reason ‘to change bis views) a keen Covenanter. “Seventeenth act against Jeasing-makers, of whatzomever quality, office, place, or dignity; this act was made purposely fo catch Traquair, the Treasurer; Sir John Hay, Clerk- Register ; Sir Robert Spottiswood, President of the Session; Maxwell, Bishop of Ross ; and others who.
= —
SECKET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 349
on bis part, would except some of themselves, the faction, conscious upon whom such exception ought to fall, ex-
equivalent as injustice and tyranny ! ‘Let us now turn to the secret correspondence of Mr Archibald Johnston, and observe low he worked the machinery of this revolution.
‘The following letter is dated from Loudon, 2d Decem- ber 1640, and addressed, “ For my Noble Lord my Lord Balmerino at Neweastle.”
“ My Noble Lord,—I received your's of the 20th November by the public letter. Ye know all the pa- pers that have past. The King, since the last answer of ours on Monday, scems not well pleased. It may be if that day of before we had not gotten a kiss of the Queen's hand we would not get it in haste. He would have the acts that import the authority of the Parliament suppressed, at the least us to undertake to recommend the same to the Parliament, for the which ye might justly hang us all, beside our perjury and the ruin of the kingdom's liberty. Business [é. ¢. democracy] makes slow progress here. The Lieutenant, albeit he lies in the Tower, has the King’s heart.* The lower House men get liberty to be at the examination of the witnesses, even at the councillors upon oath, who dispute hotly they could not depone against their fellow-councillors for any thing spoken or done in council. Burton and Prynnet on Saturday were brought in with a hundred coaches, and great multitudes of people on horse and foot. The Londoners’ petition is not given in yet till a fit opportunity. There is a remonstrance, against
* Strafford, the persecution of whom had just commenced.
+ The scurrilous libellers, whose severe andimpolitic but aot unprovoke- ‘ed patiahiment was now made the handle of agitation,
| al
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 351
and God knows if that will either be to the honour or pence of the kingdom.* Let not this meet me here again, The disputes that arose by the King’s ques- tions, and our answers, are ordained to be suppressed, for the English} thought shame that ever the King should have proposed them, Let none retire home as if all were concluded, } for I profess the King’s quar- relling of the Parliament shews what he grants one day he recals the next aguin.§ The Committee should be desired at home not to cause print the late acts now without the King, seeing he is in the way of publishing them in his own name. I wayte not what to say anent this money which has been so delayed. I know not how, and dare vot say but, they mean reality. The Lord direct us all, Your humble Servant, A. J.” “This letter has lain these two days beside me. The King since has granted the acts. The L.20,000 is sent away. We have renewed the treaty. Give us strict directions anent demanding Traquair and Ba- cangquel,|| (whom the Estates in the narrative of their acts have specified, and in ¢fect condemned with Clerk- Register and President,) to be sent home to prison to suffer justice, A direction of this kind would keep ‘us in peace amongst ourselves, while some would either
. ea certainly not have beet to the profit of the covenanting
Pe reaalig Wltaicea a tcoa fa England. Reng he Kg de to the King’s disclaiming the Scots Purlianont of June had never granted « right to that Purtiament to pass
Imalcoqial'e mont le offence was his having compiled i Seta his M pime, ‘That unanswernble appeal, from sedition snd hy-
to. ‘sod Cheistinn feeling, contained the truth, and se the gers reviled it,
—_
ee
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT, $53
over House citing their partial favour to him, more than to the lower House itself, persewing him for treason, and thereby premonstrating their inclinations tw clenge (acquit) him, made on a suddenty all the lower House to shout with a terrible noise, withdra, withdraw, which many mistook for draw, draw,* made the King and Queen, and Lords, presently retire, this being very like our Glasgow Assembly on the Com- inissioner's removal. The lower House sat (in the) afternoon—received the witnesses whom the Lords had refused—rend their bill of attayndre, by way of act of Parliament, declaring Strafford a traitor, which, after twice reading, they will present on Tuesday to the higher House, whereof many will join to them, and if, it stick at the King’s refusal, they are to make a de- ‘aration of all to the Commoners of England.” +
Another letter we must quote at some length, as il- Justrating the real spirit of the criminal processes in Scotland, raised in the name of the Covenanting Par- Hament under whose lawless persecution we shall pre- sently discover Montrose.
“ My Noble Lord,—Albeit I have written with this same bearer, Merschal, two letters to Humbie, to be sent to your Lordship, yet for fear of delay or miscar- tying, I add the third, to shew your Lordship how the
This curious fhet [ have not found mentioned elsewhere. Dalllie in eis jomenal of Strnfford’s trial, states it thus :—* The Commons on both House rose in fury with » shout of withdraw! withdraw | wt got ull to their fest, on with their hats, cocked their beavers ts ea ‘We all feared it should go to = present tumult, away in confusion. Strafford slipt away to as ae
fhe Torre» by n hs vr pe
ft Original MS. Not priatod by Hailes. ‘VOL, b %
—
| eel
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 355
a thing withia the power of the Committee, let be of ours, and for the which ye might all be censured. I them so really to be incendiaries, a8 (that) ye should ing intended peace, he would not stand
om this, and from which it is likeliest that he intends war 5 whether we yielded in that or not war would we have. [think Ibe one man as sure ta be pursued by Traquair; and so is yourself thought one of those whom the King would reserve on Zvaguair’s informa- tion, who professed to sundry his having challenges of ftrenson against so many of us. My Lord Kothes is certainly one, as Traquair oft has vented himself. Argyle is suspected to be another. Except the fear of your own hazurd from Zraquair's boasts move you to send we instructions to pass from him, 1 think nei- ther Aonowr, nor conscience, nor duty can move any,and I believe ye love not lo be so boasted. Fye on us, that any we sh be on these devices for to save the honour oe the prejudice of the honour of i dying under the blame of treason reorder (unless) He be brought to an acknow- Command us to be resolved, in this pursuit,
all bonsts and threatenings—be diligent with
eyers, I think the Parliament should, by way
of injunction, lay a necessity on Sir Thomas Nicholson to plead that cause for the Commonwealih. I would request you, with the greatest secrecy that can be, to cause fry if all the honours and registers were left in the castle that ever had been in it, or, if any of them be if Traquairand the Clerk-Registerhave taken
them away. This were a fact of clear treasan® in the
* Very clear treason, truly, that the High Treasurer and Clork-Re-
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 957
to his army, to whom there is some new vath, of abso- lute following him, sent down. The lower House would not condescend that the officers should go down. This day the Parliament is to fall to our demands, and to get wx money. God is going on in some hid way Sor his son's crown. Yt will break forth. I thank God that keeps my spirit far above all fears, either national ‘or personal." The Lord direct you to be preparing fora storm. 22d April, (1641,) Your Lordship’s real servant, A. J.
_ “My Lord Dumfermling has been oft with the King, ‘and is suspected to have been on this plot of the King professing his intention to come to Scotland.
“ Isend you the copy of our information to some Parliament men, whieh we read also to the King, bué whereat some of our number were mightily offended. Thope they will let you see reason for their standing toitalso. I t{rust you] will make as much, of this letter and information, ax (that) I may be confident that we shall have no directions from the Committee at all emer mi srceniiiarsee +
This was the third letter which Archibald Johnston had written that day, to Balmerino and Adam Hep- burn, full of the most violent malignity against the King, Traquair, Strafford, and other “ incendiaries,”
‘Yer this letter is deeply imbued with his personal fears, which whet the edge of hix malignity. A aentonce to be hanged never rung upon = more cownnily heart than Wariston's, as we shall find in the sequel
+ Original ATS. ‘This is one of the letters selected by Lord Hailes. Bat the edition of it in his collections is most inaccurate, and in some places quite unintelligible. The two last clauses aro, in the original,
‘notes. In the Hailes’ Collection they are introduced into the body of the letter, and in the middle of u sentence, so us to divide and destroy the sense,
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT, 359
And this was the man who first directed the storm ‘of covenanting persecution against Montrose, because be suspected that nobleman of the unpardonable offence of privately corresponding with the Earl,ofjTraquair, ‘on the subject of supporting the King in‘his constitue tional prerogatives. The Procurator,of the Kirk, it seems, might indulge to any extent in a secret corre- spondence, selecting whom he pleased of the,faction!as parties to that confidence, and yet be responsible to no one for the most malicious expressions against indivi- duals, and the most inflammatory and treasonable propo- sitions against the King and constitution. We must now quote some other passages from his secret corre- spondence, which indicate this demagogue’s suspicions of the conservative party in Scotland, and his desire to everwhelm them in the ruin he so savagely decreed against ‘Traquair.
“20th April ‘The greatest opposition by the King is made against the Act of Oblivion, which he will ei- ther have to be universal or none at all, or will reserve an many among us [a3] we reserve of those that are cited. The Duke of Lennox, in the higher House, made a large discourse on all these three members. It és easily known from whom it comes,—my Lord Tra- qvair—as he professed once to myself, and another time to Mr Henderson, that he could challenge the Earl of Rothes of treason; and he both saidfonce to me, and, as my Lord Rothes knows from others, he said it also to the King, that before he perished, he
- tuleroad or misprinted it thus,—" who was aye said to,be}blythe, ax J ee ‘both the sense, and Wariston’s chaneter-
=
—
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. $61
King to accuse any of us of treason will not counsel him also to lay us fast, as pledges of the Scots army re- maining quiet. Neither do I sce, if any of us be once accused of treason, how the persons accused can go on ‘im the treaty, but should go home, and let your Com- mittee send in their stead whom they please, or do otherwise as they think fit. Those of us who favoured ‘Traquair may sleep sound and fear no danger, but God help them that are counted his enemies for sticking steve by Meir inetructions.* Ihave made a fair offer for myself ‘that I shall be heartily content to be yoked in one chain with the Earl of Traquair, | and sent to Scotland, and Jet him aceuse me, and me accuse him, and let the in- mocent. go free, and the nocent suffer. We have writ ten information for some Lords, and some of the lower House, and as I have said to them, so I say and write to you from the bottom of my heart, that before the Parliament of Scotland were thus scqffed and boasted from their pursuit of incendiaries, (whom now, if ever they may see to be incendiaries,)t I would rather be con- tent for myself this night to be laid fast in the Gate-house, and letthem do with me to-morrow what they pleased. I will say no more, but that it isa shame that any, let be so many of us, should yet be pleading for them, and whereas I was never for their blood, but only for their confession, (fo save the King and kingdom's honour,)
* Which instractions, however, were Wariston's own prompting and
insisting upon.
Sf There Sesotho a the expromlon ‘The boast was & safe one, for two reasons: 1st, Johnaton knew there was no chance of belng iaken at his word. 2d, Keven if he had, there was no question how the secumation would have been determined in Scotland,
This wes Jolnston's mode of lashing others into bis own malevolent _ Se me Position, that, if pexce wus to be settled betwixt the ‘gtoundices und lawloss prrocomes should be departed from.
a :
=
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 368
lower House that they saw the
in the Parliament, council, &. to
‘be unlawful, and their sole power of ordination and ju- tindiction, which is intended to be voiced to-morrow, and
toon thereat; for: removal of Episcopacy out of all his Majesty's dominions.”
_* 10th March. My Noble Lord,—These are only to shew. you, besides my letter yesterday with merchant post, that this day the whole lower House unanimous- ly, but with four or five contrary voices, has declared
should have no civil places. And then again,that they shouldhave no voice in Parliament. The
Earl of Cork has proven some foul points of new against »
the lieutenant. There is some commissioners come from Ireland with report of * © " or protestations there against the prelates; and at night we gave in our large demand for unity in religion and govern- went, all which coming on the King together, and on asuddainty, you may guess what a mood they would put him in, I wish his confidence of standing out have no ground from some at home. We are discharged to give copies out of our long paper against Episco- pacy, but receive the other papers with the order of the lower House. Tell this good news to the honest man and good, Mr Hery.} Truly, I thiuk them worth ‘$alladiog ‘Montrose and his conservative friends. ive 3 Relioc, the ninloter who took. charge of the miracle ot Manyara and who, whoo desired by the spectators to her,
Pome King Pe fof the Almighty in these lotters is most impious. Referring ta: the {prompect of the Scotch Commissioners, and thearmy, being able to leave
A
fi
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 365
SOMME Miia cities cea tayinc ie,
wealth as in private processes of well-paying clients, request your Lordship to pay them before-hand large- dy, and to remember we have to do with a man who will muke no conscience, but think it good policy in such a streight, by large bucdes (bribes) to lay law- yers bye, and cause their servants reveal all the secret- est articles which are against him. Fye on them that will not be diligent in this. Were not that I must be one of the primest witnesses in many points laid to his charge, and 30 cannot be his pursuer, if I were in their ease, I would have thought it a notable occasion to caite (manifest) both affection to the cause and country. But, however,* if [ can win down, I shall do my utmost to help to prepare things.”
| We shall conclude our extracts from the secret let- ters of this disgusting demagogue, by quoting a scene in which he comes in contact with Charles I, It ‘was more than sufficient penance for all the sins, mo- ral and political, ever proved against that Christian monarch, that he should have to endure for a moment the presence and the insolence of Archibald Johnston.
The following is addressed,—* To my loving brother, Mr Adam Hebrone of Humbie, or to Mr Robert Mel- drum in his absence.”
“ @ist April [1641.] Loving brother,—Since my writing my last with this same bearer, and closing it
Thad occasion this morning to speak with M.,f and after, by Ais advice, with the King, to whom * Tho farce of this “ however” appt
‘all law, and the most essential principles of ; Sporialiyptor wander tar Rcaate Fenton and this notice
= -«.-
SECRET MACHINERY OF THK COVENANT. 367. Cheaper oo much of our money,*
prorogue
met “agai, which he is confident they will do, he will assuredly go home himself,and settle the business. He bas said this, and sworn it too, unto us, except some
occur that he knows not of as yet, that he hopes to get his business ended here. Then he fell on the act of oblivion. We read the information whieh I sent to you within a letter to Mr Alexander Colvin. He raged nt it, and called us jesuitical ; then he cried and swore, that if we excepted [from the act of oblivion) any, he would except some also; and this he declared over and over aguin, and professed his hope that the Parliament would be of the same judgment. We answered in reason from our iaadility to pass from what the Parliament had appointed, and from his granting of the same already in the treaty.+ I must
sive aa rmch alte pile to yet and be King and, fo tho ake, ‘of preserving the peace of my Reains, 1 have yielded more than Tought.” pete dormant wae te Bes Comic of 150,000
Tiament says that you must depend upon <b ayo peel grate w35, foe emake of earn, T lhe whae can do myself. 1 have no exchequer—my porso ix empty—but [have still «
SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 369
spoken by the Earl of Argyle at his expedition in Athol, of no less moment than the deposing of the ing? He confessed he gave # copy of his relation to the Earl of Montrose, and another to Walter Stewart, (my man.) to be given to the Earl of Traquair. Wal- ter was happily rancountered, upon Friday, betwixt Cokburn'spath and Haddington, by one was sent ex- pressly to meet him, aud conveyed to Balmerino’s lodg- ings, at nine o'clock at night, where I was the first man that came in after him, about some other business with my Lord. After he denied he had any more papers than wege in his cloth-bag, there was a leather bag found in the pannel of his saddle, wherein was a letter Jrom the King to Montrose, a letter to himself (Stewart) written from Colonel Cochrane at Neweastle, to Lon- don, and a signature of the Chamberlanrie of the Bi- shop of Dunkeld to Mr John Stewart, with a blank for ‘a pension, but not signed by the King’s hand. After many shifts, being convinced by some notes under his own hand, which were found in his pocket, (and which ‘with astonishment he swore he thought had not been in the world,) he was brought to promise plain dealing, and deponed, as ye will find in the papers sent to Humby. But I believe he has not dealt truly in all the points, Specially I doubt the interpretation of A. B. Pe aed he says are meant the Banders,? and of the viper in the King’s bosom, by which he means Canterbury, which J deliece not, 1 will not touch any more of the particulars, because you will find them in ‘copies of the papers. Mr John Stewart has since confessed his knavery in the general, but has not * 4 & Montrose and those who signed the conservative bond. Aa
Mie <“/
CHAPTER XII
‘OF MOSTROSE'S CONSERYATITE BOND, AND THE GROUXDS ALARM FOR THE MONARCHY, ILLUVTRATED YROM ORIGINGL
MANUSCRITTA.
~~
We must now shift the scene to Scotland, and de- velope the details of a lawless persecution of Montrose, and other conservative Covenanters there, of which history only affords a partial and inaccurate view. Fortunately it happens, that most of the original pa- pers, relating to the events mentioned in the letter with which our Jast chapter concludes, have also been pre~ served among the manuscripts of the Advocates’ Li- brary. They have not hitherto been printed, and his- torians, who slightly notice the extraordinary scenes to which they relate, appear never to have consulted the documents themselves. These shall now be laid before the reader, with the exception only of the antiquated
“ May 27, 1641.—Mr Robert Murray, minister at Methven, being come to Edinburgh upon Wednesday Tast, at night, upon other occasions, was called off the streets upon Thursday, the 27th day of Muay, instant, to compear before the Committee of Estates, and hav- ing before them, was told by their Lordships, that MrJobn Graham, minister of Auchterarder, being examined by their Lordships upon the author of his speeches which he spake before the Presbytery of Auchterarder, gave up the snid Mr Robert as his au-
|
‘MR ROBERT MURRAY'S DEPOSITION. 378
his Lordship at Perth, or any other place he pleased, but could not go to Scoon that night. And so the said Earl came to Margaret Donaldson's in Perth, where the deponer came to his Lordship, being advertised to come there to his Lordship. At the first meeting with his Lordship, my Lord challenged the deponer for his long absence from him, who excused bimself by reason his Lordship was taken up with many others that were in his Lordship’s company, and that he was loath to come ‘except to meet his Lordship in private. Thereafter my ‘Lied says to the deponer, * you were an instrument of bringing me to this cause, 1 ain calumniated, and slan- dered as a backslider in this cause, and am desirous to give you and all honest men satisfaction anent my carriage therein.’ The deponer then asked his Lordship why he subscribed the bond that was contrary to the Covenant. The Earl answered, it was not contrary to the Covenant, but for the Covenant. The deponer asked the reason, and why it was done in private, seeing: any bond that had been for the Covenant might have beenavowed. About this time Mr Johu Robert- ‘son, minister at Perth, being sent for by the Earl, came im to them, and then the Earl continuing his dis- course in presence of the said Mr John, answered, ‘that they saw some few particular men taking same + particular courses contrary to the cause and Covenant, and therefore they behoved to strengthen themselves, for the maintenance of the cause and Covenant by that bond. The deponer answered, * how does that appear ?” ‘The Earl answered, * there were some few upon courses for change of the Government, * for there has been a motion for deposing of the King, and next for, setling erage and, that failing, there was another s seiting a General within the country, as
ae
* ie The monarchwal form of government. s
“MR ROBERT MURRAY'S DEPOSITION, 875
sired the Parliament to have sitten, but not for that end, but only to have added some to the Committee, because many able men were left out, who might strengthen the Committee if they were at it. And the Earl, being ask- ed again whether or no he had purpose to question these acts, answered, he had not, because he had sub- scribed them, and would maintain them with his blood. ‘The deponer remembered little more of any thing pns- sed that night, but only that the Earl desired the de- poner might go to Scoon that night, who promised to be there to-morrow. On the morrow, being Tuesday, the deponer came to Scoon, and waiting on awhile, i respect the Earl was speaking with the Earl of Athol and Mr John Stewart, some of his friends attending beside, one told the Earl that the deponer was there. So the Earl cume himself, and entered on the same dis- course that he and the deponer were on before. The deponer showed that God had put in his heart a just auswer thereto. The Earl repeated what he had said the night before anent the change of Government, where- tunito the deponer gave this answer, that, ‘ howsoever I elieve not any such motions to have been, yet I think if any such has been, they have been conditional, and not absolute, but only in case of unavoidableextremities, looking to the weal of the country, and government thereof in causes of necessity, and that their practice proves that it was but conditional, if any such was, be- cause that now, when the King ix content to go on with them to the treaty, they go on sweetly seeking peace.*
+ This & to wy, the revolutionary party of the Scotch Commission. ens In London, which was the predominant purty, required the King to give up all bis royal prerogutives, otherwise Architald Johnwtou would ferret ut “ old prectiques,” a» a ground for taking them. “ Dethrone yourself by concomions,” was virtually thelr language, * or we will de-
fa d
gi
Sr ie al
=
=
ee.
‘Mi ROBERT MURRAY'S DEPOSITION. 37
or no peace, in token whereof, the Commissioners had written that their mame would stink if they sought them, aml the commitice had written back, they should not pass from them without their advice.* The depon- er answered, that these might well stand with the con- dition, because if they found they coufd not obtain them, then they would pass from them. Then the deponer demanded the Earl how he could think that his bond was for the Covenant, since upon the hearing of it the King had made a halt with the Commissioners of the treaty. The Earl answered, ‘ the King had got knowledge of the bond by some speeches of the late Lord Boyd, which were reported to the Commission. ers, and by them to the English, and so it came to his Majesty's cars’ ‘The Earl was desired to come to his dinner. Then the deponer entreated his Lordship to nity.| The Earl answered, he loved unity, aud would clear himself before the Parliament and General As- sembly. ‘The deponer alleged it would hinder the set- Hing of the common cause. He answered, he should do it in such a way as could not wrong the public, because he would not make bis challenge till the public business were settled, and then he should put it off himself, and lay it on those who had calumniated him.t The depon« er declares that the Earl of Montrose named the Earl
* The committee had written back, in terms of Archibald Johnstan's setrot orders to thew, for inatructions. By unity, the Covenanters invariably meant, no opposition to the ‘Movement. ‘Thus welear from Haillie’s own confortions, ‘that ot the commencument of the busines, that Covenanter got the letter of hls conscience, for the ake of unity. Thus the too open Montrose had prematurely disclosed his whole plan to 4 creature of the fiction, who took good care to provent its
=
MONTROSE’S DECLARATION, 379
Further the deponer, being interrogated if he knew of any other authors of Mr John’s speeches than himself, answered, that he had heard, from Mr James Forsyth, that Mr John had said to Mr James, and Mr John Fyfe, minister at Fowles, that there were five gentle- men and a minister whom Mr Joha could make his authors of his speeches to the Presbytery, and declares that the names of the gentlemen and ministers were not told to the deponer.
“ ‘This deposition being read to the depouer, he de- clares the same to be of verity.
“ The last of May 1641. ‘This day the foresnid de- position being again read to the depouer, and he having given his oath, declares the same to be true, and of ve~ ‘ity in substance and sense, according to his memory, es he shall answer to God. (Signed) Mr Robert Mur- ray. Sr. A. Gibsone, I. P.D.”*
On the same day, Montrose himself was subjected to the interrogatories of this Committee, and his own statements shall now be laid before the reader, from the original manuscript.
“The Earl of Montrose being desired to shew what had passed betwixt his Lordship and Mr Robert Mur ray, in the speeches had at Perth and Scoon, in the common business, his Lordship told, that he had said to Mr Robert that he was wronged by the scandal raised upon the bond, which was not against the Co- venant or country. As likewise told Mr Robert that
* Original MS, indorwd, “#7 May. Mr Robert Murry, ble de- pore se specches hetwist the Earl of Montrose and him, Swoen and subscribed last May 1661."
EE
“MONTROSR’s DECLARATION. 381
would lay it down at the right door. Being question- ‘ed anent the sixteen who were witnesses to it as good as himself, declares his Lordship had said there were some of the particulars to his own knowledge, and that there were ten or twelve others who would bear him witness, aud that to them all, some one or other would be gotten to take them off his hand, or prove them. ‘The Committee appointed the Earl of Montrose to show his author. Being desired to do it, the Earl of Mon- trose desired that since the Earl of Argyle was named by him, which he was forced to do, (he) might express his knowledge in this business. The Earl of Argyle answered, that he thought it incumbent to him to clear himself, and would do it (imme]difately if] the Com- mittee would oppoint him. ‘The Earl of Argyle, by his oath wmreguired, declared that [he had never) heard ‘of such a matter, and would make it good that [the man] who would say that he was the man spoke of de- posi[ng the King, or] of his knowledge of these bonds, owas nlinr and a base * * * * * * +
“Phe Earl of Montrose declared that there were four [reasons for the bond he] had spoken of. The Jirat, a Dictator, the second, four bonds, the third, can- toning the country, and the fourth, deposfing the King.) ‘He was loath to speak of the first, because the author
4g, The manuscript is destroyed by dcp in thone places where I have anjecrurally rppled the ‘vooancies, The lust epithet applied by Are pyle muse be loft to the imaginution of the reader, The contrast be "po anarapdeptensengd of Montrow,and the violence of Argyle, rand reminds ns of what Clarendon says of the batter ‘was a ian endued with all the faculties of eraft and dissimulation Salsas ocentty vo oe ore ietgss to wffeet, und bad, in respect of hile extate and authority, a very great interest in Scotlwnd; yet he had ‘no rmartin! qualities, vor the reputation of more courage thin Yarolent ‘and imperious persons, whilst they meet with no opposition, ure used to haves”— Mist, ¥. 92.
MONTROSE AND 1OKD LINDSAY, 385
indeed obeyed the charge, aud compeared, and did abide bby the speeches, saying to Argyle, My Lord, I heard ‘you speak these words in Athol, in presence of a great many people, whereof you are in good memory, Argyle auswers, saying, while he was in Athol. he found the ‘Stewarts there against the subscribing of the Covenant, to whom he said, this covenant was not against the King, but for Religion and Liberties of the kingdom, and if they would not subscribe the same, it might breed themselves both peril and skaith ; for if the body of the country would not go one way, but be divided agninst themselves, it were an highway to bring in the English- ‘man into the land, to dethrone the King. and bring the fobles under servitude und slavery. ‘This he remem- bered to have said, but denied any further.”
However apt the covenanting committee were to adopt rumours and private conversations as grounds of criminal process against any who opposed them, and
their articles of war inade it death to speak against the King or his authority, their inquisitorial Figour seems not for an instant to have been directed against Argyle. No sooner, however, had John Stew- art put his hand to the information he gave Montrose, than he, Stewart, was sent to prison. There we1ustleave that unfortunate gentleman until we develope another scene in this drama of covenanting justice.
Lord Lindsay was placed in an awkward predica- ment. Montrose had affirmed that he named the Earl of Argyle as the person who was to be Dictator, and Argyle had volunteered bis great oath that allthis was a foul calumny. The covenanting committee were per- plexed and armoyed, for Lindsay was a leader of the fac- tion.” Yet Montross was not to be easily discredited ;
* This was John tenth Lord Lindsay of Byres, His patent ax Earl
VoL. I. ab
=. i.
—
MONTROSE AND LORD LINDSAY. 387
nferred as much as the Earl of Argyle was the man ‘meant by (him:) but because, in the circumstance of the discourse, there may be other men concerned whom the Earl Montrose was loath to name, he desired uot to speak any further in it.*
“ The Earl of Montrose declared that the Lord Lind- ‘say, [he Montrose] falling with him upona regret of the course of business in this country, and that some were crying up the Earl of Argyle too much, whereupon the ‘Lord Lindsay auswered, that such a man speaking to the same purpose, told that the Romans, when their affairs ‘were at a low ebb, made choice of one to be a Dictator, that the command should be in one man’s person, such aman as had following and power, and to his Lord- ‘ship's memory the Lord Lindsay named the Eurl of Argyle to be the man pointed at, and that the discourse inferred so much ; and withal extreated the Lord Lind» say would not think any thing of it, because it was but ‘upon suspicions and jealousies.
“The Lord Lindsay asked the Earl of Montrose, whether or not he said there was any such intention to make a Dictator, who answered, that he does not say that the Lord Lindsay said it positive, but recitative, or
“ The Earl Montrose and Lord Lindsay being re- moved, the Earl of Argyle desired to speak, who told, that since his Lordship’s name was mentioned in the sane, he desired that he might be made clear of any thing may reflect upon him ; and, next, he thought it fittest that each of the noblemen should set down the discourse (that) passed, and then the Committee might
# Montrose, howurer, proceeds in his declaration, probably from haw ing bees unged.
“MONTROSE AND LORD LINDSAY. 389
that, to his bert memory, the Lord Lindsay named the Earl of Argyle to be the man pointed at; but howso- ever, the whole drift of the discourse did infer s0 much, as the Earl of Montrose did conceive the same.”*
Lord Lindsay's declaration appears to have been as follows :
“4th June 1641, ‘The Lord Lindsay dtclares, that at Edinburgh, in a discourse betwixt the Earl of Mon- trose and him, the Eurl of Montrose asked how busi- ness went, For answer whereunto, the Lord Lindsay sald, he had entered upon no business since he came, nor had not spoke with any particulars since his Lord- ship's coming to Edinburgh ; but did relate some dis« course made to him by some persons, which was in sub- stance as follows. One grief was a regret of the divi- sions and jealowsies of this country ; another was that it was a pity that we who are Christian, and have not only our liberties, lands, wives and children, but also our religion in question, cannot agree amongst our selves, whilst the Romans, who are but Ethnic, when their affairs came in hazard, they would agree among themselves, and so fur yield one to another, that they would make one of themselves to be Dictator, to have the sole power over them; yea, private enemics, when they were employed in public affairs, did lay down their private quarrels, and join in hearty union so long as the public was in question. And declares that neither the man, who made this discourse, named the Earl of Argyle, or any other man ; neither does the deponer re= member that ever he named the Earl of Argyle, or
© Original MS. Signed,“ Montrose.—Camailis, Balmerino, Nuper.*
MONTROSE’S PRINCIPLES. 391
CHAPTER XIII.
IN WHICH MONTROSE SPEAKS FOR HIMSELF.
Tue original documents contained in the last three chapters were unknown to Clarendon and Hume. Con- sequently these great historians had not the means of protecting Montrose against the calumnies of subse- quent writers, who, in equal ignorance of the details now disclosed, have assumed to his prejudice a very different theory, from what is suggested by these do- cuments, of the motives and circumstances which in- fluenced his defection from the Covenanters. The se- cret correspondence, in 1640-41, betwixt the Procura- tor of the Church, and the clique (for it was no more) of covenanting lords, lairds, and lawyers, who held sway in Edinburgh under the command of Argyle, to- gether with the private records of their inquisitorial examinations, tell thus much of the story so minutely and curiously, and bring so completely under our view the dramatis persone of that hitherto darkling chap- ter of Montrose’s career, that instead of weaving a nar= rative from such materials, and consigning the graphic originals to the obscurity of an appendix, I have thought it best to give them verbatim in the text. Indeed it is the principal plan and object, throughout these Illus- trations of Montrose and the Covenanters, to produce the hitherto hidden details and narrative, contained in the private records of the Covenanting Goverument, in VOL. I.
-—
MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES, 393
and his present critical position. We have seen how, at the close of the year 1637, he was persuaded, by Rothes and his clerical agitators, to take a public and prominent part against the policy of Laud. Iu the year 1638, we find him conspicuous in the memorable As- sembly which destroyed the hierarchy, and usurped the functions of Government in Scotland. The year 1639 discovers Montrose at the head of a convenanting force, opposed in arms to the anti-covenanters in Scotland, carried by the military excitement so congenial to his disposition, but, withal, merciful in his use of fire and sword against bis loyal countrymen, even to a degree that called forth the murmurs and disapprobation of the ‘most conscientious, civilized, and accomplished of the covenanting clergy. ‘The anti-monarchical propositions pressed in the General Assembly held that same year, immediately after the treaty of Berwick, seem first to have awakened Montrose to the important question, what was to be the limit of this revolution in Scotland, and where the precise point at which covenanting de+ mands were to cease, and the spirit of loyalty and obedience to the monarchical government, to revive. Accordingly, in this Assembly, Montrose argued against the new impetus, proposed in the demands that the most important prerogatives of the Crown should be transferred to the Parliament, From the principle of this opposition he never swerved. Archibald Jobn- ston himself tells us that, in the Parliament of 1640,— “ Montrose did dispute against Argyle, Rothes, Bal- merino, and myself; because some urged, that, as long. as we had a King, we could not sit without him; and it was answered, that to do the less was more lawful _ than to do the greater.” In that same year, Montrose .
few alarmists of the year 1637, zeal for
been untainted by one anti-monarchi-
» and the dismay of such, on discovering may be better understood than deseribed.
n was Lord Napier. That excellent
ee eaaniad been renred by his father,
nti-p cal writer of his day, (who con-
his Parortall discovery of the Logarithms
ag in comparison with his exposition of the
) in all due abhorrence of the Pope, and
in more than due dislike of prelatic digni- power,* but at the same time so loyally
y be consigned while yet a youth into the hands of
VL, who, on bis deathbed, recommended him to Charles," as one “ free of partiality or any fuc-
"And accordingly we find that Napier,
J and after the excited period when he too in covenant with a masked faction, was busied with his favourite subject, and one which we are now j ieaealier ies) the, very entipades of covenanting namely, “ elaborate discourses” to prove the saaaaes Binge. Montrose, again, was educated
a Napa» views onthe sult of plate wer ia i MS. Tntroduetion, p, 07. Montrow's
the effects of both. Thirdly, I ne arguments and false positions main~
» to dispose and direct private endea- ends, and to unite and incorporate the into one body politic, that with joint
ind abilities they may the better advance d. ‘This sovereignty is a power over the
———
MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES. 399
in any man’s conecit that hath common sense; in speech it is incongruity, and to attempt it in act is pernicious.
“ Having in some measure expressed the nature of supreme power, it shall be better known by the actual practice of all nations, in all the several sorts of govern~ ment, as well Republics as Monarchies.
“ The people of Rome, (who were masters of policy, gud war too, and to this day are made patterns of both,) being an Estate popular, did exercise withont controul- ment or opposition all the fore-named points essential to supreme power. No law was made but by the people ; and though the Senate did propone and advise a law to be made, it was the people that gave it sanc- tion, and it received the force of Jaw from their com- mand and authority, as may appear by the respective phrases of the propounder,—quod faustum feliaque sit, cobis populoque Romano velitis jubeatis. The people used these imperative words, esto sunéo ; and if it were refused, the Tribune of the people expressed it with a vefo. The propounder or adviser of the law was said rogare legem, and the people jubere legem. The elec~ tion of officers was only made by the people, as appears by the ambitious buying and begging of suffrages, so frequent among them upon the occasions. War and peace was ever concluded by them, and never denoun- ced but by their Fecidles with commission from them, They, only, gave grace and pardon, and for the last refuge, delinquents, and they who were wronged by the sentence of judges and officers, provocabant ad pa-
“So it was in Avuens, and to this day among the Swissens and Grissons, the Estate of HoLtanb, and all Estates popular. In Vewice, which is a pure Aris- tocracy, laws, war, peace, election of officers, pardon
MONTROSH'S PIUNCIPLES, sor
persuade the arbitrary with reflexion on their knowing that the exercise thereof shall be them, whereby they shall be able quickly to theie ends, robbing thereby the people of their I King of the people's love due to him, and honour and reputation of wisdom.* The effects government are religion, justice, and love of the subjects towards their in whose hearts he reigns,—durableness and ) against foreign invasions and intestine sedi- andsecurity to King and people. Theef- at prince's power too far extended is tyranny, from if he be ill, if he be good, tyranny or a fear of it from them to whom he hath intrusted the manag- _ ing of public affairs. The effect of the royal power re~ | strained is the oppression and tyranny of subjects— ] | the most fierce, insatiable, and insupportable tyranny i the world—where every man of power oppresseth | thie neighbour, withoutany hope of redress from a prince despoiled of his power to punish oppressors. The people under an extended power are miserable, but most miser= able under the restrained power. The effects of the former may be cured by good advice, satiety in the Prinee, or fear of infamy, or the pains of writers, or by | some event which may bring a prince to the sense of ‘his errors, and when nothing else can do it, seeing the prince is mortal, patience in the subject is a sovereign and danyeriess remedy, who in wisdom and duty is a: liged to tollerate the vices of his prince. as they do ‘storms and tempests, and other natural evils which are +.°
— MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES. 403
| on ecesamnamdl “But there is a fair and justifi- ‘subjects to procure a moderate, govern-
“Befat, incumbent to them in duty, which is to endea- and just Liberties, (the mat-
ter on which the exorbitancy of « prince's power doth
| work) which being secured, his power must needs be | temperate and run in the even channel. * But, it may ‘be demanded, * how shall the people's just liberties be preserved if they be not known, and how known if they -
_ be not determined to be such 2° It is answered, the laws contain them, and the Parliaments (whieh ever have been ‘the bulwarks of subjects’ liberties in monarchies) may advise new laws, against emergent occasions which pre- judge their liberties ; and so leave it to occasion, and ‘not prevent it by foolish haste in Parliaments, which breeds contention, and disturbance to the quiet of the state. Aud if Parliaments be frequent, and rightly what favourile councillor or statesman dare
or mislead a King to the prejudice of a sub-
jeet’s liberty, knowing he must answer it upon the peril ‘of his head and estate at the next ensuing Parliament,t
temperate historians huve indulged in the gros calumny, that tuicomeciove that humanity fs the moxt distinguished
strribute ofan herolcal chameter.” Malcotm Laing, We belieww that ja more than the truth of himself, when he sald—In
we here from an unpublished manuseript of his owt hie wurderers on the eve of bis exccntion= lay it ane to keop my soldiors buck frow spoiling and the country; and for bloodshed, if it could have teen: there
‘authority, Baillie, ‘very expedi= stele humanity) of that generows Eadie coe ‘has clearly a reference to the constitution and proceed.
{
‘the hed and 0 far are they from contre otions, that there is nothing good or is not just so for the other;® if their rs be divers, and never so little ec king inclineth to tyranny, or that ity.—if they be contrary, it is mere loyalty. To the 4th: The King’s the subjects’ privilege are so far from that the one can never stand unless sup= er. For the Sovereign being strong,
a of his lawful power and preroga- to protect his subjects from once a Seagal dag oS os
--MONTROSE’s PRINCIPLES, 407
lity; your houses decayed, either by merit or his grace aud favour are repaired, without which you full in con- tempt; the people, jealous of their liberty, when ye deserve best, to shelter themselves, will make you shorter by the head, or serve you with an ostracism. If thelr first act be against kingly power, their next act will be against you ; for if the people be of a fierce nature, they will cut your throats, (as the Switzers did of old), you shall be contemptible, (as some of antient houses are in Holland, their very burgomaster is the bet= ter man ;) your honours—life—fortunes stand at the discretion of a seditious preacher. And you, ye meancr people of Seotland, who are not capable of a republic, for many grave reasons, why are you induced by spe- cious pretexts, to your own heavy prejudice and detri- ment, to be instruments of other's ambition ? Do ye ‘not know, when the monarchical government is shaken, the great ones strive for the garland with your blood and your fortunes ? whereby you gain nothing, but, in- stead of a race of kings who have governed you two thousand years with peace and justice, and have pre- served your liberties against all domineering nations, shall purchase to yourselves vultures and tigers to relgn over your posterity, and yourselves shall endure all those miseries, massacres, and proscriptions of the tri- mimvirate oF Rome—the kingdom fall again into the hands of one, who of necessity must, and for reason of ‘state will, tyrannize over you. For kingdoms acquired by blood and violence nre by the same means enter- tained. And you great men, (if any such be among you so blinded with ambition), who aim so high as the crown, do you think we are so for degenerate from the virtue, valour, and fidelity to our true and lawful Sovereign,
Ee
| -MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES, 440
“ Now, Sir, you have my opinion concerning your desire, and that which I esteem truth set down nakedly for your use, not adorned for public view. And if zeal for my Sovereign, and Country, have transported me a little too far, I hope you will excuse the errors pro- ceeding from so good a cause of
Your humble servant,
“ Monrose.”
‘This is a remarkable letter to have been written by one recorded in our modern histories as “ destitute of either public or private principle.” If the sentiments of Montrose, at that critical period before the King’s visit to Scotland in 1641, were such as are recorded in the foregoing private letter, can it be true that the advice he was constrained to offer secretly to his sovereign Was unprincipled, violent, and unpatriotic ? That the letter was written by Montrose, we have on the authority of a transcript (hitherto unpublished and un- noticed) in the handwriting of Wodrow himself, the well known champion of the Church of Scotland. The transeript is not addressed, nor dated, but the tenor
*MrBrodio, Thissuthor, in the prefice to his History, bos many severe comments upon Me Hume, for his predisposition unfuyourahle to a calm inguiry after truth, and being impatient of that unwearied research, which, never satisfied while any source of infurmation remains wnex= plored, oF probubility not my ‘weighed, with unremitting industry sift ‘said collates,”—and. for allowing " his narrative to be directed by his preditections, und overlooking the materials from whieh it oughe wo have bees constructed.” Tn a corresponding degree, our Historiographer pax srades his own researches" in the Advocates’ Library at Edinburgh,” te. fe. Why, then, did Mr Brodie not coustract his character of Montrose from such materials ns the above lotter, and various origival zmanuvcripts weave yet to produce, of which Mr Brodie would seem co have been ‘in total ignorunce,although they were equally open to his resvarches in the collection of Manuseripts in the Advocates’ Library ?
410 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
proves that the letter must have been written before the great civil war broke out in 1642, and indeed before ‘Montrose’s imprisonment and persecution by the Co venanters, during thelast seven months of the year, 1641. The letter is also curiously identified by the fact, thit some of the sentences are the very same as some that occur in Lord Napier’s manuscripts, now first produced from the Napier charter-chest. Its most probable date is the close of the year 1640, before the conclusion of the Treaty of London, the very period when Montrose and his conservative friends held those private consul- tations, on the state of the times and the perilous posi- tion of the monarchy, which will be disclosed in the following chapter.
_
‘THE CONSERVATIVES oF 1640, 411
CHAPTER XIV. ‘THE CONSERVATIVES OF 1040,
OF Montrose’s domestic life and habits few or no anecdotes are to be discovered. Indeed it is very plain, from the transactions we have illustrated, that since his return from his youthful travels, he could have enjoyed very little peace and quiet as a private individual.*
* In the Napier charter-cheat there ix mdeod which bears that— * We, James Erle of Montrois, Lord Graeme and Mogdok, for the special love and favour qubilk we haitf und bear to Beatrix Greme, our lawful sister, and for the better advancing ‘sald Lady Bentslx to une honorable maronge, according to and fe’ —obligon himself and his heirs to secure to the aiid Beatrix the sum of thousand marks, far tochor. This con- dition, however, is added: * always, likens we ballf gevin tod grantit thir presenta npan this special provision and condition, and. Bentrixy—as God
forbid, —to dafyle her body, or join herself in roareage with any person. ‘without our special adyyse and consent, then and in those cases, or uther of them, thir prewnts to be null.” ‘This deed ix xigned by Montrose himself, “at Auld Montrols, the 27th day of Morche 1639,"—the very Hime when ho wns in all the bustle and cxeltement of preparing for his march upon Aberdoen.—<Sve befire, p. 22.
‘of her illustrious brother’s solicitnde, Lady Beatrix, became the wife of Dwrid, third Lord Maierty, and fairly won her twenty thou aund tnathe
‘The following letter was kindly communicated to me by Mies Graham ‘of Fintry, who in in possession of the original. Its date rofers to « sub= ‘sequent period of Montrose’s history, but we may give it hero; it is wd- dressed to James Graham of Crago, younger ta iat Graham of
peepee
be so much niniss, and s0 many abuses committed, touching my
Old Monitrois, (ax Robert Grwme in the same will show ngth,) as Emust intreat you to take the pains to zoe and
‘in auch ane way ns you shall think most Gt. For
his Majesty to go into Scotland ; and, ac~ ajesty went into that kingdom, and
of him; amongst whom the Marquis ‘made Duke.”*
‘peut to have entertained no doubt whatever
Wey continue in them. Your part uth been such as you
—
THE CONSERVATIVES OF 1640, 415
‘to transpire, and, consequently, we may be certain that they were such as by no arts of democratical iniseon- struction could be made a handle of public agitation, ‘tither against the King or his loyal adherents. What renders thy scene still more singular is, that, Sir Tho- ‘tas Hope was the son of his Majesty's Advocate ; and Balmerino was the very man whom that same Lord Advocate had brought under the King’s mercy a few years before. To assist these midnight inquisitors, a third is sent for, one Edward Edgar, who, from a bur= gess and bailie of Edinburgh, had been elevated into 2 committee-man, and who appears to have been one of those subservient cyphers, the use of which were to give numerical value to such committee digitals as ‘Balmerino and Hope. ‘This upon the present, as upon various other occasions, was the whole representation of the Parliament, Government, Religion, Libertics, Laws, and unanimous covenanting zeal, of Scotland.
All the arts of intimidation, or persuasion, employed to obtain such information from Walter Stewart as best suited their purpose, it is of course impossible to koow. But even in their own secret records of the mat- ter, which shall presently be laid before the reader, une- “quivocal symptoms may be detected af the working of such arts upon the weak mind of Walter Stewart, Who seems to have unbosomed himself, both of teuth and falsehood, under the influence of no. slight alarm for his personal safety. After all, however, his infor- mation only amounted to this, that he had been occa- siounlly at supper, sometimes in Montrose’s house, and sometimes in Napier’s, in company with Sir Stirling and Sir Archibald Stewart, and that he had, upon those oceasions, been intrusted with some instruce tions to Traquair at Court, the object of whieh was to induce the King to come in person to Scotland, and,
| THE CONSERVATIVES oF 1640. “7
rent, a containing all the facts and the real state of the ease. I shall quote the entire passage, that it may be eamede rey te nee details with yotiicts we are fortunately enabled to illustrate the subject of Mon- neta defection from “ the Cause.”
_“ The Scots,” says Mr Laing, “ in consequence of a solemn, obligation inserted in their covenant, to abstain from separate, or divisice measures, had hitherto pre- served a degree of union perhaps unexampled, to which they were principally indebted for their past success. But for an opportune discovery that union was almost dissolved. Impatient of a superior, and conscious of military talents unmarked by his countrymen, Montrose was unable to brook the pre-eminence of Argyle in the senate, or of Lesly in the field. His expectations of the supreme command were disappointed ; and, at Berwick, the returning favour of his sovereign had regained a nobleman, originally estranged from the Court by neglect, and detached from the Covenant by secret disgust. His correspondence with Charles was detected during the treaty of Rippon ; and a bond, or counter association, was discovered, to which he had procured the subscription of nineteen peers. The Committee of Estates were averse to division, and dis- posed to rest satisfied with the surrender and formal renunciation of the bond ; conciliatory measures were disappointed by a report, which Montrose had propa- gated, injurious to Argyle. Stewart, commissary or judge of the consistorial court of Dunkeld, was pro- duced as his author, according to whose information, Argyle, in the presence of the Earl of Athol, and eight others his prisoners, declared that the Estates had con- sulted divines and lawyers, and intended to proceed to the deposition of the King. An allegation so little re- concileable with his characteristical prudence was sus-
.
=.
eV"
THE CONSERVATIVES OF 1640. 419
glossing over the fact that Argyle and his subservient ‘agitators would brook no independent, enlightened, or in their councils, The terms of Mon-
‘trose's bond, which this author had not seen, would have informed him that it was caused by the divisive taeasures of the “ prime Covenanters” themselves, act- img against the professed spirit and objects of that anomalous deed of national obligation, out of which they were carving their fortunes to the ruin of their country. Moreover, Mr Laing has assumed the mean- ‘est motives, for Montrose’s opposition, which he could pot prove, and, in reference to the leasing-making of the unfortunate Commissary, und the whole merits of the case against “ the Plotters,” he appears to have een totally uninformed in point of fact. The true version of all these matters, which the documents ale ready produced have in some degree elucidated, we proceed still further to develope from original manu- scripts. It will be found that the secret history of the fate of Stewart of Ladywell leaves no stain upon ‘the character of Montrose, but casts a dark shadow upon that of Argyle; that the evidence extorted from Walter Stewart, in so far ax it was made the pretext for sending Montrose and his friends to pri- son, were falsehoods of the most pucrile nature, and moreover, were completely refuted, and sifted from the truth, by the separate depositions upon oath of Montrose, Napier, Keir, and Blackhall, even before their incarceration; that, nevertheless, in the pro- section of their design agalnst Montrose, the co- government proceeded upon the single tes-
timony of Walter Stewart, a man neither of honesty nor courage, while they treated with contempt theconcurring testimony of four of the most honourable and highest
.
—
‘It will be observed that some of the expres- are the same with some used by Montrose in hig
MONTROSE'S ADVICE TO CHARLES, 493.
was that Montrose and his friends were sent to prison, solong. Yet we are told, by the noble
of * Some Memorials of Jolin Hampden,” in re- tothia very imprisonment,—* Montrose had been confinement, by the Parliament of Scotland, complication of proved offences of the highest tort,”—such is Lord Nugent's fiat on the subject: t zi had been corresponding with an unprincipled _ violent faction in Scotland,—a strange letter from the _ Earl of Montrose, whose ambitious designs were now generally had been discovered,"—such is
| Mr Brodie's, But what if this letter, here so con- | -veniently characterized as “ strange,” contained the | purest and soundest advice, conveyed in the noblest expressions? Mr Brodie intimates that the disco- very of this strange letter was a cause why the Com- mons of England so vehemently resisted the sudden resolution formed by Charles of visiting Scotland in the year 1641. We know not precisely to what let- ter our historiographer refers, and doubt much if he himself had any precise knowledge on the subject. But are we to believe the simple statement, of the mo- tives and objects of Montrose and his friends, left by ‘Lord Napier in his private notes, or the wild and vio- ent theories of modern party writers? Was the secret correspondence, of “ the Plotters” with their Sovereign, unprincipled, violent, and strange, or did it breathe the very soul of lofty integrityand disinterested patriotiam? Let the original draft, also in the handwriting of this Lord Napier, of a letter,—now for the first time brought ‘to light—and which we may well believe influeneed that sudden and hitherto unaccountable determina- tion of Charles, against every remonstrance of the Lords and Commons of England, to place himself in the hands
=
to any other. If you send
MONTROSE’S ADVICE TO CHARLES I 427
estate, and stirs up troubles : The people of the western parts of the world could never endure it any long time, and they of Scotland less than any.* Hearken not to Rehoboam's councillors,—they are flatterers, and there- fore cannot be friends,—they follow your fortune, and Jove not your person,—pretend what they will, their hasty ambition and avarice make them persuade au absolute government, that the exercise of the same [may ‘be put up] on them, and then they know how to get wealth, — +
wprereereerr eee eeeeeeee
“ Practice, Sir, the temperate government. It fit- teth the humour and disposition of the nation best. It ‘is most strong, most powerful, and most durable of any. It gladdeth the heart of your subjects, and then they erect a throne there for you to reign,—jirmissimum imperium quo obedientes gaudent, Let your last act there be the settling the Offices of State upon men of known integrity and suflficiency.} Take them not upon
* Compare with Hamilton's letter, p. 247, + There is here w hiatus of ubout two linos in the manuscript, which appears to have suffered from fire. The blank may bo thus supplied from carrespoading in the letter of Montrose, given in Chapter XIT—" robbing thereby the people of their wealth, the King af the peo- ple lowe sue to him, am of the honour and reputation of windom.” at ‘The Scotch Commisiouers of the treaty in London wore at this time making the most outrageous and insulting demands upon the ‘King’s prorogutive and personal freedom. ‘They demanded that be Heat We Pies Wold frequraty tel foride i Sobtad, and chat about their persons and the Queen's should be placed snch as were not ‘obnasious to the faction. In the King's answers, which ‘are exceudingly temperate und dignifivd, there is a coincidence of ‘expression with see shove letier, His Majesty most justly observes,
|
===
‘MONTROSE'S ADVICE TO CHARLES 1. 42g
both. Nor by love or virtue, most men being wicked and inclined to hate. There must be a eoactive power to force obedience to laws and just commandements. To weaken then this power is to dissolve society, over- throw government, and introduce confusion and dis- order.
“ 3. It is made weak when it is restrained too far within, and, it is weak also when it is extended be- yond, the true bounds: (like a strong signet of gold, which may be extended to a great length and breadth, to almost an airy thinness, but thereby is extremely weakened.) It is onlystrongand durable when it is tem-
“ 4 The extent of kingly power is the step next to tyranny, if the prince be bad,—if good, to the tyramy of courtiers,—the restraint to anarchy, (whether he be good or bad,) and the ¢yranny and oppression of men of power in the kingdom. The tyranny of subjects,— being the most fierce, insatiable, and unsupportable ty- ranny,—procureth that solecism of state, a miserable people under a good and just king.
“ 5. Sovereign power is a sacred thing,—not to be defined, bounded, nor disputed of by subjects,—indeed not to be meddled with at all by them—they wound it though they touch it fever so tenderly.
"6G. Subjects ought only to endeavour the security of their own Laws and Liberties, whereby the sovereign power, without their endeavours, by necessary conse quence, must run in its own true and natural channel, and keep a temperate course, wherein consisteth the joint happiness of King and subject. If it be short and restrained, it is good for both that it be enlarged till it meet with the subjects liberties and privilege, and there it ought to sist, for that is the true limits of it;
=
LETTER FROM CHARLES I, TO NAPERK. 431
memorable occasion,* are very remarkable, and tend to confirm the idea that his Majesty had received the let- ter, and that its contents had made a powerful impres- sion on bis mind. It would have rendered our evi- dence, of the nature and principles of Montrose and Na- pier's plotting, very complete, could the letter have been. discovered which Walter Stewart was bringing from Charles to Montrose, on the 4th of June 1641. Another letter, however, from his Majesty to Lord Napier, dated only about a fortnight earlier than the day on which Walter Stewart was seized, had reached its destination in safety, and probably without the knowledge of the tyrannical Committee. ‘This appears from the original, which has been preserved with the other manuscripts in the Napier charter-chest. Let us see then in what dark terms Charles I. “ tampered” with this “ wnprincipled violent faction in Scotland,”
“To our right trusty and well beloved Councillor, the Lord Naper.
“Crarces R.
“ Right trusty and well beloved, We greet you well. Having fully resolved to repair unto that our kingdom, for holding of the parliament the 15th of July next— that we may satisfy our good subjects of our real in- tentions to settle all matters in a peaceable manner, as may most conduce for the weal of our kingdom,—so, having of late written unto our council there to meet and attend at Edinburgh to receive our further diree- tions, we have likewise, out of the former experience
* The King’s speech will be found im Rushworth, Franklin, and in ‘Balfour's Annals,
COVENANTING TACTICS, 433
CHAPTER XV.
‘THE CARE AGAINST THE PLOTTENS,
ThovaH some of our modern historians sneer at the authority of Dr Wishart, while they rely upon contem- poraries infinitely more questionable, that loyal clergy- aman was perfectly accurate in saying, that what- ever tales the Covenanters framed to answer their si- nister purposes, they wanted not proper instruments, always at hand, to spread them among the people. The noble author who, in our own times, so sententiously remarks, that prudential motives alone prevented * the Scots from publickly arraigning Montrose, is only right in sense he did not intend, namely, that the faction having no case, in law or equity, against him whom they found 50 “ very hard to be guided,” pru- dently betook themselves to the meanest arta of tyran- nical democracy. The same syste: of unprincipled agi-
Lond Nugent, in bis work entitled, “ Some Memorials of Johm Usa Pa Fn (n charactoriatic of which ix this cha- St Shenoy howe rodiow opt was neve stayed by oy ements he Reverted i. jos eftatgun orchaens: ‘any man wh ix objvets of ‘or obstruc-
ted the views of his high-rcaching umbition,”)—records, ns matter of ‘been thrown into confinement by the eae uaiacibcateds kr + svepiianbn ot preanh epee ine highest wnt. He had the year befare engaged himself in a slot to be: texy the covenanting army, with whon he was serving, because he had
il i i
left i, sain
+ MONTROSE 281 TH OTEK aSTiRS
me memsmapo of arrve mmc Hamizea was cha- ess ¢ Mame * Fur ve sini now dragto SSE oem we wes ee = emating faction * Seni gen secre ame emt acme modern histo- SR eemseres on ce research, have $ eur sven dunweme. We will prove that == * ossmce cocrsseemeser nx crue. the faction et ae sxesien: remem u snow. wae the abcurd in- eons. c Vian Seswar. wor wind Montrose had AME 2 mk TG Be int ~ eemeral alarm,” mem = = aan to uae ~ Soe” ct wae purpoly Smee wos Gemaees are of nse Cavemanters, who, see comeemex Te: Tom amc al that was illus SSF € + = De asec ney chemecives extorted, ms am cues al tt wa erscical inflam 2. mm mae
sure wna we gree Som che original ma-
te lames cE ste Lord Balme-
i Wi FR Is cegudation at 2 Secon auc. chur his errand S mcier-nsuws Lami w a petition. Ly ibcmrse a Broxmoath with ~ ster: answers. that he spake wt Auucene 1 msmcombic space. but spoke Lia: ait Sumy 2segt aews af court, A paper “= bau Vniss Gley Were m2 examination, written wt ue Leunnanc-Ccimels se head, containing let- ee “Ue Sams WR Je Wis desired to explain. De-
Mesum Lamy.
SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT, 441
-elares, that by the D, in the second line, is understood Duke of Lennox.* Being asked bow he came to | this paper, declares, he got [it] at London. ng interrogated who gave him the purposes con- therein, answered, he behoved to have time to his memory. Being inquired anent a letter 4 to him by Colonel Cochrane, who was the thereof to him, answers, it was Major Cun<
i Major to Dundas’s regiment. Being likewise _ interrogated what was the purpose meant in the letter _ which was mystical, answered that it was something concerning the Palsgrave, and that it was that if the Earl of Montrose should not be gotten written for by his Majesty to come up, (which is understood by the jewell,) that the Colonel himself may be written for, and did expone the letter at the foot thereof under his hand. Being examined upon another paper, written with his own hand, wherein there are the letters M, whereby he declares is meant the Earl of Montrose, by ‘the letter L, is meant the King’s Majesty, by the letter 1, is meant the Earl of Traquair, and by the letter K,
| # Thix must be the paper alluded to by Sir Thomas Hope, aud which he ta AA Ae esi a ‘manuscripts. Spalding, however, eays,that among Stewart's oa there was n curious obscure ploce written after the form follow- + * Toll Lif G and Bho disbanded, the Parliament may be holden, ‘Aund Rminy be cut off by A, B,C) and by these means other mat= ‘yet known may take effect, and Dand T may effectuate what Lao ipermereg ey M relies upon L, K looks
he weans
Rem beiet Eanes paper quoted fn the {it wae found in separate sermps,
SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. aacd
_ “They parted at that time, and met thereafter, at which “meeting the Earl of Montrose gave the deponer some - directions to draw up instructions, which the deponer did write with his own hand, and did shew them to the Earl of Montrose, Lord Napier, Lairds of Keirand Black- hall, at their next meeting. Any thing which was amiss was helped by them at the Lord Napier’s house. ‘The substance whereof,—that if the King would bepleased to securethemintheir Religionand Liberties,grant theman act of oblivion for all bygones, and do everything which ‘might secure Religion and Liberties of the country, they would stand for the King against all men who will op- ‘pose him, provided that he come down to the Parlin- “ment himself, and keep up the offices of state undis- rnd till his Majesty saw who should deserve them
Bae erti acts dopo went to court. Declares, that he carried no letters from the Earl of Montrose, neither did hé subscribe the instructions lest they should be intercepted. The deponer had directions to the Earl of Traquair to the same purpose, and to impart these instructions to him. The deponer made his ad- ‘dress first to the Earl of Traquair, and told him his instrnctions, who answered, that, for what concerned the King, be thought these might be easily granted, as well anent the granting the securing of Religion and Liberties, as of his down coming, and keeping up of the - Offices of State. The deponer was desired to speak
ee 27 the excoption of the word “ provided,” which
swered, these were not words becoming a subject. ‘The deponer?next asked if the Lord Balmerino would see him get no wrong. Whereunto the Lord Balme- fino answered, that he wished any wrong that should oe, the Earl of Traquair by his deed might
ight upon himself,* and that in the Earl of Traquair’s ‘own particular he was to do him any service he could, ‘but what he was to be challenged by the Estate that differenced the case, and desired the Licutenant-Colonel to remember these same words, and he did report the same to the Earl of Traquair, who gave no further di- rection to answer at all, Declares likewise, that the de- poner hearing the Lord Angus was not well affected to the Earl of Traquair, desired Archibald Stewart to try my Lord's mind in it. Declares also, that the Earl of ‘Traquair desired to know how the town of Glasgow was affected towards him in his particular, when it Should occur in a public way. As also the Earl of ‘Traquair desired to know how the Earl Marishall was affected towards him. The like anent Ardincapell. ‘The Earl of Traquair discoursed with the deponer anent the two commissions for demolishing the King’s houses, whereupon he set down in his memorandum to get the double of them, but never did it. The Earl of Tra- quair asked the deponer whether or not there was a commission for commanding all men beyond the water of Forth, who answered he knew not, but set it down in his memorandum to seek it out, but never sought the same.
‘The Earl Montrose gave directions to the deponer to
© As Walter Stowart was making his deposition in presence of Balincrine himself it is to be supposed that the lutter hud really use Meer ietreslica Siy me cates wad coviastsd wilh Archibald Johnston's violent and viralunt feelings against Traquair expromed to Balmerino himself at this very time. See before, ps ii,
va
)
"
upon the bailzerie. He desired him a respect Sir Thomas had a mind to it,
i fevheid vt recibir uf Bua eet thrice or four times spoken to the de-
eof Tragunir) eve he id ink it ot r es sv apr ce
| SECRET HISTORY OF THe FLoT, Ho
peses of the Argyle faction. It was agreeable to their desires that Montrose should seem to be detected in a plot with Traquair, for these were the two noble- men who had ineurred their most deadly batred. ‘The mysterious terms, too, in which the correspon- dence appeared, were invaluable, ad eaplandum vulgus, in a prosecution the object of which was to be attained in defiance of every enlightened principle of truth, jus- tice, and common sense. But it was not so convenient to have it established, that the letters A, B, C, stood for those who had subscribed the bond, or that these were the parties who were involved in the terrible plot for being preferred to vacant places. To send 80
to prison upon such a charge, was a step for which the faction was not prepared. The charge, however, was rendered more manageable aftere wards by declarations whieh approached nearer to the simple truth, though they still left the evidence of Walter Stewart substantially false, On the 9th ‘of Tune be was again examined by the same members of the Committee, when he added to, and modified his
testimony ax follows:
© Lieutenant-Colonel Walter Stewart declares, that after Yule (Christmas) last, having occasion to visit Sir Archibald Stewart of Blackhall in his chamber in Edinburgh, where, they entering in a discourse, uc- cording to the deponer’s metnory, anent his going to Court, Blackhall desired bim to speak with the Earl of Montrose, which the deponer yielded to, and wont the next night to supper at the Earl of Montrose’s where were present the said Earl, the Lord ‘the Laird of Keir, Blackhall, the deponer, and Lieutenant-Colonel Sibbald. one supper the you. 1. ¥
SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 451
nothing spoken of those who had subscribed the bond, but that the deponer understood them to be included under the name of these three, and their friends. De- clares, that the deponer means by his paper anent the managing of affairs by A, B, C, that the foresaid three, and their friends, should have the rule, but does not remember that any of them desired the deponer to propose so much.
Being interrogated what the deponer meant by the word serpent in his paper, declares, it is the Marquis of Hamilton,* and that the meaning of these words came from the foresaid four persons, who thought that the Marquis of Hamilton and Earl of Argyle might have strange intentions. Declares, that the in- structions, dictated by the Earl of Montrose in presence of the Lord Napier, Lairds of Keir and Blackhall, be- fore-mentioned, were written in a covert way of letters for names, and not in cyphers, and that the paper was a little piece narrow paper. Declares, that the Earl of Traquair curried the heads of his instructions to the King, and got particular answers to them.t The prin- cipal papers being shewn to the deponer, he acknow- ledges them to be the self-same papers mentiondd by him, and that they were all written with his own hand, and in testification thereof, he has declared the same upon the back of the said papers, the one whereof is his first instructions given him by the Earl of Mon- trose, Lord Napier, Keir, and Blackhall, and the other paper is the paper given by him to the Earl of Tra- quair, and his Majesty's answer reported by the Earl of Traquair to the deponer. And that the meaning of the instructions may be known, the deponer has ex-
* Sir Thomas Hope, in his letter to A. Johnstone, mentions that W.
Stewart at first said it was Laud who was so figured. + Contradicted, both by the King and Trag
being that referred to in the
SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 455
“Upon the 10th of Junc, Walter Stewart was again _ examined by Balmerino, Hope, and Edgar. “ He was questioned upon the word Jlephant, contained in his with the letters. Declares, that thereby was meant the Marquis of Hamilton, and all others who would oppose the King, and not rest satis- fied when Religion and Liberty should be granted. De- dares, that the note was drewn up at their directions, and the next night revised, and what was wanting or @mixs was mended, Declares, that at his coming back from court the Earl of Montrose was not at Newcastle, and that he desires his former deposition to be helped in that point where he says the Karl of Montrose re- ceived the Duke of Leunox’s letter at Newcastle, because be now remeinbers that he delivered it to the Laird of Keir, to whom he guve n double of the paper brought along with him," &c.
‘Upon the 15th of June, * Lieutenant-Colonel Walter Stewart was examined upon oath, who declared that the first words of his first deposition, 6th June instant, may be helped, where he says that his crrand was to his brother-in-law, in respect be now declares that he came to give an account of the former instructions, which he had from the Earl of Montrose, Lord Napier, Lairds of Keirand Blackhall, and declares, that Black- hall was present, but had little hand in the business. Declares that the deponer had intention to go to court about bis own business, and his brother-indaw’s busi-
ed under hls hand, thot ‘Traquair carried them to the King and came Iackand reported thoanswer to hia, Walter Stowart. This, thore is every reason to boliere, wus false testimony, for the sake of pleasing the Come nee ie knie i tuplicatiog Traquair, The King’s nuswer, if mot m ‘was probably reported through the Duke of Lenvox,
Ina te Da say onr y propositions duit wore
rnade from * the Plotters” to his Majesty.
—
| SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT, $59
MDuff; or any other there in these parts wherein
iteno and some of the Redshank's friends can best inform and instruct. To assure Siguion Pa ritano that he will get satisfaction anent the ward and marriage he desired, but that now it is nota fit time to do it for him, or any others so disposed as he is. To tell Genero that so soon as Dick comes to the school, who is daily looked for, he will by him hear from L.* To kt... know how well L takes their care, and in the diseretest way to inform yourself of their desires, and particularly jf reik aims upwards.+ ‘To try the suramons ngainst T, and to send up a double ‘thathe may compare them with that which he has gotten, and to assure. . . and all others, that he shall clear himself of all these, us clear us day light. { ‘That by all meanstheylabourwith the P’antations §toletthem know, the Tablet being filled up and made good, how much it concerns them to show themselves affectionate (to) L.”
| While the examinations of Walter Stewart were in progress, Montrose, Napier, Keir, and Blackhall, were
* + Dromedary—Argyle. MDuff—Athol. Signior Puritano—B. Seaforth, Redshanks—M‘Donwld. Dich—Sir Richard Graham. School
f reik aime upwards,” in explained, both in the 8. and in the by “if business goes aright.” It wauld appear, however, by = Mtatetnent of Lord Napicr’s, to be afterwards quoted, that Walter ‘Stem
ly referring to the malicious and savage persecution of ay ih ehiefly instigated by Archibald Johnston, ‘of Pertiament.”*
Sitters ection some om the margin, and some abory the mystical terme in the munuscript, The rare pamphlet alluded to before (p. 452, note,) has obviously bea hurriedly printed Palaver dage for somo of those explanations have heen mistaken
for interlincations, and printed ncebrdingly, and there are other mistakow ‘Jn the pamphlet, evidently in consequence of a mixrvading of the intrix ‘ate MS.
—-
SECRET HisTORY oY THE PLOT. 461
into particulars with him of this nature, seeing his name at that some time was called iu question for the private bond contraverted. That the deponer was in- duced by the Laird of Keir to enter with them, where they four, with Lieutenant-Colonel Walter Stewart, entered in discourse anent the King’s down-coming, as the fittest menns for settling of business, which was approven by them all. Thereafter they fell upon dis- ‘course anent the disbanding the armies, which probably might interrupt his Majesty’s journey, and could not stand with his Majesty's honour to have the armies on foot and he coming down in a peaceable way for set- thing of all jars and questions ; whereunto they all four agreed, (but doex not remember who proposed the same first,) and therefore thought fitto recommend to the said Lieutenant-Colouel Stewart that he might propone the same to the Duke of Lennox, the Enrl of Traquair,* and his friends and acquaintance about court, to enter+ tain that motion with the King. And they thought it fit his Majesty should be pleased to keep up the Offices of State undisposed of till his own down-coming. And these three particulars they gave to the Lieutenant-
© In his previons declaration of tho 7th of June, Blackhall declared in more general terms, « that tho Earl of Tmquait, to his memory, was
lnlly with rand Blackdiall upoo this point ia ix eub- by which, however, he explained away his former evidence. On the 4th of ‘Binckhall being interrognted, * whe-
‘or nequaint the Parl of Traquair with their direc ton, hodesires that this nay be udded,—that at the naming of the Bart of ‘Traquair, it was opposed by the Lord Napier, and assented unto by the sont part of the rest.” The result was, however, we shall find, that ‘Stewart wns directed by this couservutive party to move bis Majesty through Lennox, and not Traquair.
{|
| SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 463
Lientenant-Colonel, agreed amongst themselves, that, if hedid write any to them, it would be under these terms
eeeeesesieionn down-coming. Denies, that he thing more of Walter Stewart's nego- did see any of his papers, neither did ever, after their meeting at the Lord Napier’s house, meet with the Earl of Montrose, or Laird of Keir, till they met at Edinburgh in the beginning of June instant, when the Laird of Keir desired the deponer to dine with him ; and, thereafter, met with the Earl of Mon- trose, Lord Napier, and Laird of Keir, at supper, after the deponer had made his first deposition,® to whom he told what he had deponed. Deelares that at their first meeting, either in the Earl Montrose’s house, or in the Lord Napier’s, they all promised secrecy. And also depones, that the bond and reasons of the bond, whieh was the indirect practising of a few, were spoken of in the Earl of Montrose’s house at supper, but denies that any of these few were particularly named. Declares, that he received a Jetter from the said Lieutenant-Co- Jonel, dated at Glasgow, under the former dark terms, and to the same purpose, with some remembrance of commendations from the Duke of Lennox, and Earl of ‘Traquair, and a request to speak to the Commissioners of Parliament, with the sheriffdom of Renfrew and Dumbartane, in favour of the Earl of Traquair, and, namely, Ardincaple." +
‘This account, it will be observed, differs in some es- ‘sential particulars from that of Walter Stewart. The
* Which is dated 7th June 1641, Te was on the L1th of that month ‘thit Montrosy and his friends were went to the castle,
+ Originnl manuscripts eigoed, * $e A. S. Blackhull,—Balmerino, Sr. Thomas Hop, Bilvard Pagar," td dated at Er. 26 June toe.
SECHEY HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 405
my judgement. I questioned the Earl of Montrose upon ly after my first examination, who ‘assured me he did never hear of such a motion till Lieutenant-Colonel Stewart, in the passing, came to Neweastle, and pressed his Lordship with (for?) an answer, if his Lordship would join in the foresaid bond, which (answer) was delivered in these terms to (the) Lieutenant-Colonel:— That bonds were now of so dangerous consequence that his Lordship would not Join in any, which, if the Duke of Lennox should move Gt) at his coming to Scotland, he would declare to himself)” “ Sr A. S. Blackhall.”
Walter Stewart being thus positively contradict- ed, was, on the last day of June, again brought before the Inquisitors, when “ he declares that he did not motion a bond to be made with the Duke, and his noble friends, but that he had instructions to speak with the Duke and Traquair for joining in friendship with these three, viz. the Earl of Moutrose, Lord Napier, and Laird of Keir, and their friends ; and being confronted with Blackhall, depones, as is before written, and Black- hall affirms in his presence as is set down in Blackhall’s former depositions. Declares, that when he eame back from court, the Earl of Montrose and the deponer en-
in a discourse anent a solid friendship to be be- twixt the Duke of Lennox and his noble friends, and the Earl of Moutrose and those who were joined with him, and their friends, the Earl said that any tic of friendship of that kind will be best gotten done when the Duke should come to Scotland.” *
‘Walter Stewart was also positively contradicted by Sir George Stirling. * Orig. MS Signed, “ W. Stowart—Balimerino, LP. D." vou. 1. Gg
SECKIED HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 467
| being interrogated whether or not he had ever seen the
said paper, or taken a copy thereof, declares that, so faras he remembers, he never did see it, or take a copy thereof.” * _ Upon comparing the terms of their respective depo- sitions, it is impossible not to be convinced that Black- hall and Keir deponed truly, and that Walter Stewart's deposition was false: + and of this we will be thos roughly persuaded when we come in the sequel to con- ‘sider other unpublished manuscripts which we have yet to produce. If the covenanting government of Scotland had been actuated by principles of ho= ‘nour, honesty, and common sense, not to say pa- friotism, Walter Stewart's deposition (which proved nothing criminal against Montrose and his friends, even had it been all true,) would, upon # comparison of the statements of Montrose, Napier, Keir, and Black- “hall, have been rejected with contempt. Although Walter Stewart's depositions were not finally arranged
from Traquair, and the
‘SECKET MISTORY OF THE PLOT, 469
CHAPTER XVI.
NOW DICTATON CAMPBELL, ADMINISTERED INJUSTICE, AND DID NOT PEMPER IT WITH stEWOY.
Wuewn Montrose and his friends were sent to the Castle, both they and the community at large were kept in total igtiorance of the details of the evidence that had been obtained against them. The“ private practis- ing” of the covenanting faction had also deprived Mon- trose’s contemporary biographer of the means of expos- ing, in detail, proceedings of which we have already disclosed enough to prove that Dr Wishart was, never- theless, perfectly well founded in the following general observations which occur in the opening chapter of his celebrated History : “ They (the Covenanters) seriously consult how they should take Montrose out of the way, whose heroic spirit, being fixed on high and honourable, however difficult achievements, they could not endure, To make their way, therefore, into so villainous an act, by the assistance of some courtiers * whom with gifts and promises they had corrupted, they understood that the King had written letters to Montrose, and that they were quilted in the saddle of the bearer, one Stew~ art belonging to the Earl of Traquair. The bearer
* This ls vory likely. Hamilton's creature, that worthless Willisas Murray, of tho Bed-chamber, was the nephew of that sue Robert Murmy with whose doposition this fracas commenced,
JOHN STEWART'S LuLTER TO ARGYLE. 471
‘Bishop Guthrie narrates, that after John Stewart was ‘sommitted to prison, “my Lord Balmerino and my Lord Durie being sent from the Committee to the Cas- He to examine him, they did try another way with him, and dealt with him that he would rather take a tache ‘upon himself than Jet Argyle lie under such a blunder ;" and he adds that “ both being profound men they knew well what arguments to use for that effect ;" and, accord~ ingly persuaded Stewart to write a letter to the Earl of Argyle, “ wherein he cleared him of those speeches, and acknowledged that himself had forged them out of innlice against his Lordship.” This contemporary chro- vicler, rejected by covenanting authors, is, though not always accurate in his details, nevertheless substantially confirmed, in what we have quoted, by the manuscripts we now bring to light. The following is from the ori- ginal letter written by John Stewart to Argyle, with the deliverance upon it by the President of the Com- mittee of Estates.
© For the Right Honourable and Noble Lord, the Larl of Argyle, these. 2
“ Right Honourable and Noble Lord,
“ In respect it hath pleased your Lordship to admit ‘of my former, I have therefore taken boldness by these to beg that favour from your Lordship to admit me to your Lordship’s presence, before I be further heard in public, hoping to yive your Lordship satisfaction, pro- mising to conceal nothing that I know to your Lord- ship's prejudiceand harm, or of the public's, Considering your Lordship's generous disposition, I will hope for ‘no Jess than that you will requite evil with good, which ‘will contribute more for your Lordship’s honour and
SS i
_ JOHN STEWant's CONFESSIONS, ~ 473 nye Raa Lordships’ pardon, especially those
“here, in that I could not give at that present, in respect of | weakness of my body and spirit, and g dashed (abashed) with such a number, t for satisfaction, now I declare, ne, Ibeing desired by the Earls of Montrose, and Athol, present at Scoon, to try what bonds were pressed, either by the Earl of Argyle himself, or his friends, or subscribed to him in Athol or elsewhere; secondly, to try what presumptions there might be had that he was the acquirer of his late commission him- self, and how he carried himself therein ; thirdly, what presumptions might be had that he did aspire for su- premacy above his equals, with that caveat given me by Montrose thot I should rather keep me within bounds nor (than) exceed; yet, notwithstanding, by that odious paper, I have abused his Lordship’s, and Athol’s, trust in me, wronged the Earl of Argyle, and disere- dited myself, conceiving all things with a prejudicat opinion and unjust malice against the Earl of Argyle, all things to sinister senses, contrary either to his Lordship's words or actions, for which doings I crave his Lordship’s mercy, and pleads only now guilty, beseeching his Lordship to have compassion upon my wretched estate; being only desirous to have pleasured the receiver thereby, imagining never to have been brought to answer for them thereafter, as now I am, to my great grief and late repentance. And how. soever Ihave condescended upon a number of witnesses, upon weak grounds of some of their discourses, as will be found after trial, I declare there is never one of them accessory to this my malicious and calumnious pamphlet and paper, nor had hand therein, except
— - 4
deposition 1 cannot discover among the other MSS.
JOHN STEWART’S CONFESSIONS. aT
ifthe said Archibald had eight days time, he would get as much against the Earl of Athol as might endanger his life and estate, which the Earl of Argyle had in bis pocket.” *
_ Now it was on the day following that on which the above deposition of John Stewart was emitted, that ‘Montrose and his friends were taken by surprise, and gent with public ignominy to the castle. Yet so far was that evidence from fortifying the wretched trash previously extorted from Walter Stewart, that it only tended to confirm the fact of Montrose and his friends being innocent of the shadow of a public crime, The miserable state of body and mind to which John Stewart had been reduced, and his terror at the prospect of his fate, cannot be doubted after the documents now pro= duced. Had he, under these circumstances, cast all the edium of his alleged false testimony (as Lord Nugent and Mr Brodie have done) upon Montrose, had he ac- cused that nobleman of instigating him to raise a cas Tmony agninst Argyle, for factious purposes, however eagerly such a declaration would have been seized and acted upon by Argyle, and his subservient Committee, ‘most unquestionably it would have been totally unwor- thy of credit, But, in his utmost misery, John Stewart said nothing of the kind. His confessions absolutely refute the assertion that Montrose incited or suborned him to accuse Argyle. Taking those confessions as they stand, (though clearly Montrose is not to be
- judged by them, }) no more is brouglit out than that
* Original M.& signed “John Stowart—Balmerino, Thomas Hop, Bdward Ragas.”
iiaairasté ore ecovent of tbe voniter Will be plrencta sn bite quent chapter, from the origival manuscript.
7 be i
asec te Bin ieee ree Nei ae ee
nt of the Committee. w a'kt Balaburgh, 224 June 1641. ‘The Committee
“MONTROSE AND THE COMMITTEE, 481
ing about four hundred men." The same chronicler re- cords that, to the Committee's interrogatories, Montrose “ would give no answer, nor solution, saying, he would answer in Parliament before his Peers, and Was fio more obliged.” But let us again bring to light the best evi- dence in| favour of Montrose, namely, that of his ene- mies, as afforded by their original draft of the pro- ‘coudings.
| “ At Edinburgh, 234 June 1641. The Earl of Mon- “trose being appointed to appear before the Committee, was brought down, who being desired to answer to some interrogatories, which he shunned in a fair way of dis- course, but would not say positively he would refuse to answer, The Committee appointed him to declare in direct terms, yea or not, who, being thereafter call- ed, still put off with generals, and would not con- descend, at least expressly yea or not, and still adher- ‘ed to his paper before written. The Committee de- clared they would take his answer for a denial, which being intimated to his Lordship, and one of the inter- asked, he continued still in his former refus- al, which the Committee taking to their consideration, after the asking of opinions of all the noblemen, and considerable gentlemen, and others present, they all found that the Earl of Montrose is hereby disobedient and contumacious to the Committee, in refusing to an- swer to their interrogatories, which they desired the President yet again to intimate to the said Earl, that if he pleased he might yet reeall his former denial, and obey the Committee, since he. is so obliged by oath, sub- “i a eran ‘This was intimated, the said Earl continued in his former denial."* Ms. * PD
% * Original MS. signed “Crlgiat
i
—
| KEIR AND THE COMMITTEE. 483
™ The Laird of Keir being likewise desired, the said ‘Pst June, did refuse to answer to any interrogatories, and being called this 23d June, before the whole Com- mittee, was interrogated whether he would answer to the said interrogatories, who answered, that he had answered already, and put the same in ‘writing, where- ‘unto he adhered, and since the matter for which he was ealled in question was concerning the public, ke desir- ed he might be tried publickly, and therefore desired to be spared. The President oft prest him to tell whether be would answer, yea or not, whereunto he still re- plied, that as oft as the President would demand him, he would nx oft desire to be excused. The Committee after voting, found that he ought to answer, and not to stand to a refusal, and therefore appointed the Presi- dent yet again to require; which being accordingly done, he still refused to answer. The President told him that the Committee would declare him obstinate and coutumacious, whose answer was, that he should be content “they should add that to the rest, and cen sure him for altogether, if he, in any of his carriage or has misbehaved himself, for the which he ought or should bs declared obstinate and contuma- cious."
‘Lord Napier’s deposition of the 23d of June is not to be found among the manuscripts of the Advocates’ Library. Fortunately, however, we are not left in doubt: as to the nature ofhis “ ingenuous answering;” for in the charter-chest of his family, notes of it, in his own hand-
+ Original M3, “Craighall, LP.D,," and endorsed, “E. Mone trose, La Nupler, Laird of Keir, anont their carriage in the nneworing to interrogatories, ist and 23d Juno 1641."
‘all the mystical torms in this MS, Lord Nae
fai ey eed Celts tip mira and Jay down their arms at his +
let me go, which, if 1 did accept, was a certain
houg atacit confession of guiltiness. It was auswer- it was not only favour, but out of considera- ibe) ie ps eae To which
d A knew I was as guilty as any of the rest,
OE a ib acs ven wore nauanee
ee a mates ‘This fhlse alarm of whe part of Haxnil= i mre a tah ie FB Josie tu be considered after-
—— -
a FATE OF JOUN STEWART. 491
trial coricerned not his, Argyle’s, credit and ho- ‘nour alone, but that of the whole House ; in the face of _ the public he declared that he did uot bear malice ‘against any man’s person, but what the sequel of this | “affair might prove he remitted to the wise consideration | of the House ; lest, however, it should be thought that the judges favoured him in any thing, he humbly de- ‘sired that the House would be pleased to appoint some ‘of their number to be assessors to the Justice-Deputes, that by their help and advice, these things might be decided by law. Accordingly, Lord Baleomey,* Lord Elphinston, Rigg of Ederney, and John Semple (pro- ‘vost of Dumbartane, a most violent factionist,) were ap- pointed to assist the judges. Lord Elphinston petitioned the House ‘ that his conscience would not suffer him to sit as judge to Mr John Stewart, in respect he him= self was within degrees descended to my Lord Argyle ; the House ordains the said Lord Elphinston and his colleagues’ assessors to proceed and do justice.”
And yet before this farce occurred, an act and decree, dated 6th July 1641, had been passed by the Committee of Estates, by which the doom of John Stewart was sealed. ‘I'he Committee had already entered into the whole merits of the case, expressly exonerated Argyle,. and, declaring that all Stewart's informations were ma- licious lies, remitted him to be tried accordingly.
Once again were the old statutes against leasing~ making recapitulated in a libel of Sir Thomas Hope's, —the statutes which had been so scorned and rejected
* Sie James Learmonth, a Lord of Session, of whom Nicol, in bis MS. Diary, says that he was a man ** very painfal in his offoo," wud that hho died suddenly in his seat on the Bench, 1637, * which was eetowmed to be a natioual judgment.” €
+ Balfour's Journal of the Parl, 1061.
Le sail
FATE OF JOHN STEWART,
“aati records he never saw, and, desperate and triumphant plunge into the
nny, pronounces for history —* no- remained for Montrose, but to denounce
having been suborned to forge this confes- hs emoing he eee stneaaes
oak have glanced at the col-
‘of the Angyle Committee, really said to of bs ends Gotathes, thin Srould aod bate boon « pertinseta
teak Rar Keir. Upon the 21st of Jaly, the new constable ‘to Parliament to know if be might #0 fur relax the confinement
THE CASE FOR ARGYLE. 497
recantation, where he, Stewart, states the interpola- tion of which he accused himself, and in which be draws the distinction betwixt a discourse of Kings fn general, and the King in particular. Now, adds Mr Laing, —* that this confession was strictly true appears from Sir Thomas Stewart's original declaration,”—al- Tuding toa more cautious version of the matter, as refer- ring to Kinga ia general, which Sir Thomasdeclared he wrote out for Walter Stewart, * But so hurriedly, in his anxiety to controvert “the royalists,” had our historian examined the matter, as not to perceive that, in reference to the character of Argyle, the assumption ‘of the truth of John Stowart’s recantation is equally dangerous as to suppose that it was fictitious, If Sir ‘Thomas Stewart's attestation proves that John Stew- art's confession was “ strictly true,” what does it prove of Argyle's declaration ? That nobleman, with passionate oaths, “ denied the whole and every part thereof, whereat many wondered.” Nor is this
- a mis-statement or mistake on the part of Bishop
Guthrie. Although John Stewart was condemned. upon the confessions obtained from him, and although, —when at his trial he desired to adduce certain witnesses in support of his information as to the trea- sonable bonds,—he was peremptorily met with his own plea of guilty, yet Argyle thought it necessary to prove that the recantation as it stood was still essentially false. He produced certain depositions, of his own clansmen and followers, who were about him at the ford of Lyon,—those “ supple fellows, with their plaids, targes, and dorlachs,"—in order to prove that not one
* Sir Thomas Stewart's (younger of Grantully) share in those trans ‘ctions wil be discloned in the chapter of Traqrusirs defines. VOL. I. “Ti
THE CASE POR ARGYLE. 99
tent, when the Earl of Athol and gentlemen of Athol came there; and staid there all the time, exeept (whereof he does not fully remember) he went out and came in presently again, and that he did hear all the discourse passed betwixt the said Earls and others; and declares, he remembers not of any discourse had by the Earl of Argyle anent the prorogation of the Parliament, or of the reasons or ground for deposing of Kings in ge- neral or particular, ax witness these presents sworn and subscribed in presence foresaid.”
3, “Alexander Menzies of Weeme, being sworn solemnly, deponed, that he was in the Earl of Argyle’s tent when the Earl of Athol and gentlemen of Athol that were prisoners, came there; and that the deponer staid there until they condescended on the sending out of the fourth man, * and the chusing of the Captain ; and does not remember that the Earl of Argyle dis- coursed to them anent the deposing of Kings in gene- ral or particular, or of prorogation of the Parliament, whilst the deponer was there, as witness these sub- scribed in presence foresaid.”
4.“ Sir Duncan Campbell, of Auchinbreck, (on the 15th of June,) being examined upon onth, declares, that he had the charge of the guard the day that the Earl of Athol came to the ford of Lyon, which occasioned him to conduct the Earl of Athol aud rest of the pri« soners to the Earl of Argyle’s tent, where, for the most part, he remained all the while the Athol-men were within the same, except at such times as his charge did draw him out, and so was still coming in and out,
* This must allude to thot notable illustration and evidence of the
ccorenanting unanimity of focling throughout Scotland, which consisted in the conscription of every fourth man to serve in arms for the Co- ‘renant.
(a i
‘THE CASE POK ARGYLE. Sol
‘to peruse the manuscripts we have being satisfied that Argyle attempted what he knew to be false. That John guilty of exaggeration, by asserting “the express and particular application of what the wily Earl had put in more guarded terms, is possible. But _ Stewart never could have imagined the insane project of entirely inventing a conversation, as having pas-
| sed in a crowd of witnesses, naming the particular men “who had heard it, had the fact been that not one word ofthe kind ever passed. ‘The hopeless scheme of ruin- ing, by a falsehood utterly baseless, and certain of de- tection, the most powerful, the most vindictive, and ‘one of the most able men in the kingdom, could never have entered a human brain. This circumstance, moreover, renders Argyle’s defence incredible, name- ly, that Johu Stewart wrote to him, on the Sth of June, the letter we have quoted, and which, in the most abject terms of broken-hearted terror, offers a complete recantation, Now, upon the 7th and the 10th of the same month, we have the confessions and both contain the modified version
of the discourse, as applied to Kings in general, to which he also adhered on his trial, Is it possible, wader the circumstances, that John Stewart would have still adhered to so much, vay, the essential part of his falsehood, supposing the fact to have been that nothing was said of Kings in general or particular? On the other hand, the idea of some such discourse having pas= sed, is powerfully corroborated by its alleged relation to that debate in the Scots Parliament of June 1640; a debate which (as we now know, from the admission contained in Archibald Johnston's secret letter,) Argyle *and the faction had maintained against the King’s in-
—— re hl
THE CASE FOR ARGYLE, 503
“Majesty as “ the enemy ;” and it is easy to under- dangerous might be the treason- effeet of such bonds from the Earl of that nobleman’s constitutional caution so far forsaken him,as to allow such designs to very expressly on the face of the bonds. Menzies, son to the Laird of Weeme, was al- go examined on the subject of the bond said to have been shewn to his father, and he “ declares that there ‘was & copy of a bond shewn by Glenlyon, which was for maintenance of the Religion, Laws, and Liberties of the Kingdom: and declares he never saw any bond wherein the Earl of Argyle is named without relation ‘to the public, neither is he assured whether the Earl of Argyle’s name was in it or uot, but he thinks it owas” But what better right had the Earl of Argyle to be“ pressing” such bonds without the knowledge of Montrose, and the conservative noblemen, than Montrose had to get up his bond, for the mainte. nance of the Religion, Laws, Liberties and Throne of the kingdom, without the knowledge of Argyle and his fuction? The Committee, however, on the production of these Argyle bonds, pronounce, at Ar+ Byle’s express desire, a decree, dated 17th June 1641, approving of them all, and finding “ the taking of them to be good service to the public, and ordains an ‘act to be granted to the said Karl thereupon.”*
How completely is the ground of Montrose’s bond, * the private and indirect practising of a few,” justified
© The bonds themselves I cannot discover among these manuscripts ;
‘but their dates are mentioned in the act and instrument of approval, an
seme a oni and Sd July 1640, that is, ahortly bofore Montrose got wp ‘his conservative bond at Cumbernauld.
a i
“THE TYRANNY oF SUBJECTS, 505
critical writer has said that “ when
“subtle to press that which their English friends did “not wish, and too prudent to refrain from the chance of partaking of those royal favours which they were sensible were ready to be showered on them.”* But ‘the true key to their demeanour is to be found in the ‘seeret machinations of the Procurator of the covenant~ ‘The first rumour of the King’s intention to go to Scotland had given him great alarm, and his let- ters are full of violent scoffing on the subject. When he found that the King had indeed so determined, his object was to turn that scheme to account. Johnston knew that if any thing impeded the movement, if such an irresistible impulse were not now given to the machi- nery against the Throne as would enable him to say, “ T think it is now over in God's own hand to do for himeelf,” then his, this impious demagogue's, occupa. tion was gone. He was aware that the royal visit in- volved the ruin of the faction, or would crown its tri- umph, according to circumstances. If Montrose, and every determined and upright adviser who might in- fluence the King, could be kept from him during his presence in Scotland, the faction would triumph even upon that point of the treaty which now formed the death-struggle betwixt Monarchy and Democracy, namely, whether the King or the Argyle-ridden Par- Hament should appoint the Oficers of State and judi- ‘cial functionaries there, But so far was this from being a national feeling, that its agitation appears — © Dilosulis Commontaries, \ ol iv, p. 307.
i
=
,7 ‘THE TYRANNY OF SUBJECTS. 507
_ written that “their name would stink if they sought them,” and that the Committee had written back orders to press the demand, Now it was one and the same individual who kept up the agitation ou the subject both “among the Commissioners and the Committee. Archi- bald Johnston, in a letter dated the 3d of March 1641, which we had not quoted before, thus informs Balme- ¥ino:—" The Sheriff-clerk and Riccartoun this day with ‘great heat, hath disputed against our seeking the King’s chusing the Councillors and Sessioners by advice of the Estates, alleging that our first instructions therefore were taken away by that instruction sent up with Mait- land, for seeing honest men provided to places of State and Session, &. Lord Rothes, Loudon, and myself steivly byde by it, and shewed there was neither any contrariety, nor, albeit there were, could we but obey the first, which was subscribed by both quorums, and declared unrepealable by any one of the quorums. So that changing only some few words we have forced aid to keep the article."* It is the cousin and corre
. Oe ie epetiony a ‘This letter had buen so ill tran Lord Hailos, ax utterly to destroy the sense of it in hixeollec= mule iti very nest ihe wks fi serapoiack i ‘which thut great historiea! antiquary had published some ‘no innceurately as to bo quite unworthy of his subsequent fare. 4 ‘material to know this, for the fragments of Johnston’ letters are refer= ‘red to by Mr Hallam and other distinguished English authors, under the SS = Derma Momma of Jones eal Chas. ka ha acne and Ztieourton,
PIOUS MOTIVES OF THE KINO. 509
‘the fair working even of thecovenant~ . It wos the private and indirect prace "a few, for their own ends, and by means that involved ‘the downfal of the monarehy, precisely a8 complained. We find, moreover, « curious “letter from the Scotch Commissioners to the Committee in Edinburgh, which places the conduct of the faction | im a most extraordinary point of view, and we have | prefixed it to this volume, that the reader may be still better enabled to form his judgment of the secret ma- chinations of the Procurator of the Church in 1641. Let us turn from him to one who, however defi- cient in some of the essentials of the kingly character, ‘was a gentleman and a Christian.
In the very interesting charter-room, of that orna- ment of the north, Fyvie Castle—a scene of Mon- trose’s bravery and Argyle's disgrace,—we find a do- cument which cannot be regarded without emotion. Tt is the original manuscript, with interlineations by the King himself, of the Instructions he framed for the Earls of Dunfermline and Loudon, to pre- sent at the meeting of the Scotch Parliament in 1641. It was on the 20th of May that Charles an- nounced his intention to Napier in the letter we have given. About ten days afterwards he had written to Montrose the letter found in Walter Stewart's saddle, where, most probably, it had not been secreted at the desire of the King, or any friend of his. Before the 30th of June, however, the date of the Instructions to which» we allude, his Majesty had become aware of the imprisonment of Montrose, and his friends, and was also vaguely informed of the falsehoods by which Walter
dase ait April 104, ix given, Thero isa clerical ilstake in line of p. 306, vis, “any answer” ought to be “any accuser.”
;
ADDITIONAL NOTES
AND
ILLUSTRATIONS.
Nora I. p. 138.—Bishop Burnet's Letters in the Nopier charter.cheat. ‘Tax history of the very curious letter from Bishop Burnet, now: first published in our introductory chapter, being among the Napier papers, ix this: Archibald the second Lord Napier, Montrose’s ne= 7, and devoted companion-in-arms, wa», eventually, succeeded im the honours of Napier by his second daughter, Margaret. ‘Thin Jady was murried to John Brisbane, Exq. whose vpitaph, in St George's Chapel at Windsor, refers shortly to bis many distinguish: ed public services. “ Here lies the body of John Brisbane, Ea- quire, who served King Charles the Second in many honourable ex and died Eavoy Extraordinary for Portugal in the year 1684, aged 46 yeurs.” Ho was a friend and patron of the Bishop, sod, when Burnet wrote to him the abject letter which thus came to be preserved in the Napier charter-chest, Brisbane held the office ‘af Secretary to the Admirulty. It is curious to compare the style of the letter in question with the following, written by Burnet to the Baroness Napier in her widowhood, and when ho, Brisbane's + poor melancholy friend,” had attained the eourtly distinction und ‘state influence of his latter days. ‘The sufferings of tho Napier fae mily in the couse of royalty were more handsomely acknowledged csicspost il sine th eshonatoal eal ake SWaples aoe a Saran dealer reece ed ment. The following letter to her from Bishop Burnet, of which the original is in the Napier chartor-chest, pegs eeian = consequence of some statement of her claims made through the
Vole te * kk —
i ) aes
ABD ILLUSTRATIONS, 515
Ls BBB 20-— Arh fir | Lond Napier Core . ‘pondence with James VI TtuSOd GG iti ba tid ct, Se gga ens
in-law and tutor, But there has been recently printed,
to the Abbotsford Club by John Hope, Enq. Dean of
, 4 State Papors and Miscellaneous Correspondence of Thomas Earl of Melrose,” and for several of the documents to which T allude,
Tneed only now refer the reader to the index of that magnificent col- lection, expecially in reference to Napier’s appointment to the office of | Fustice-Clerk, which he held for a short period before he waa rained te the peerage. Bur the following letter from him to James VI. ras not been printed.
| © To the King’s most excellent Majesty,”
‘© Mosr Sacunp Sovention,
* Being by your Majosty’s favour admitted in the place of Justice Olerk, I think it my duty to give your Majesty information of the extate of it at my entry. I find great confusion and disorder in the pleco, and, next, many principal parte of that office exerood by coi ‘missions, and by other judges not competent, through former negli- gence, whereby that judicature, where the chief point of your Mas
sovereign power ought to be exerced, has now lost much of ‘the antient power and dignity. For the disorder, it may be much amended by my care, which ahsll not be wanting, ‘The other losses ‘or abuses will require your Majesty's special directions to the coun~ ‘cil, by your Majesty's letter, requiring them to see all matters bee Tonging to that judicature returned again to it, to be handled there ee ought to be, and ux was wont to be. The partioulurs (if a0 it Please your Majesty) to be reformed, for avoiding your Majesty's ‘trouble [ have sent up to James Douglas, that, when your Majesty shall be plessed to write to the council for this purpose, be may show your Majesty these articles, and receive your Majesty's direc» ton, either conform to them, or otherwise, ax your Majesty, in your great wisdom, whall think expedient, to which I most bumbly sub+ mit myself, with most ready mind to perform your Majesty’s ples |
{
AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 517
‘This Lord Napler's manuscripts in the Napier churter-chest also afford » curious portraitury of Jumes Vi., drawn from the life, for Napier was a gentleman of his privy-chamber for seventeen years. “No man," says Nupier, “had the art to kaow men more
than he; yet still importunity provailed with him againat
his own choice —for it was his manner to give way to strong op~ position, or his favourite’s intreatios, yet never to give over his pur- cepa ae yee ee
, ‘when Sir Gideon Murray left by his death the place of Trea+ wurer-Depute vacant, his Majesty determined tbat with this office the long and faithful wervices of Napier should be rewarded : “ Every ‘man who had power put in for his friend, without respect of his eee sit, eho: an ool be pepe nese ae his Majesty did not take some exception ; which being perceived
by the lote Marquis of Hamilton, [father of the fatitess Murquls] wise nobleman, in whom thure was no virtue wanting, befitting ‘his place and quality, and judging that the King had made some ‘secret election in his own mind, desired to know who it was, His Majesty having named me, the Murquis did not only approve his “Majesty's judgment, but also procured a warrant for my admission,
Napier adds, that “ from the King’s own mouth, who knew the cute tom of the court, and could never endure to be robbed of his thanks, the whole curriage of that business was delivered unto me, together with a commond to me to serve him faithfully, not to be factions, nor to comply with any to his prejudicc, or the country’s, of to wrong any private man for favour of another.” At the same time James wrote to the Earl of Mar that letter (soe p. 39, note,) in ‘which he declares Napier to be “ free of partiality, or any factious Jnsnour.”
Bat Lord Napier was no sycophant, and never hesitated togive the ‘most fearless advice, both to James V1. and Charles I., upon the most delicate subjects. The fullowing, which is from the original draft in his Lordship’s handwriting, will afford another illustration ef the fuet. The tenor proves it to have been advice to James VI. ‘on the subject of the propriety of carrying the centence of death nto execution upon the favorite Somerset, whom James eventually pardoned. Those who are curious as to the historical problem of ‘the guilt of that unhappy nobleman, and of the King’s participa» tion therein, will read this with considerable interest. It seems to Prove that the writer hnd not the slightest idea of James being
-
| ii AND ILLUSTILATIONS, 519
graces ought to be bestowed at several times—punishments and exex — If his Majesty give way to the execution of these * after vo long a pause, men will think thut thesw ipeetens oa never end, since neither time nor satisfied justice cam mitigato tho rigor ; and that ho is framing a precodent and a reason, by the Sater ‘one in so greot favour with him, and. his countryman, + he may be excused to use the noblemen ‘and gentlemen of England with tho like or greater rigor upon o¢- casion. ‘The noblemen, and theve of great trust and place about ‘him, will never more, after this man’s destruction, trust to his good- ‘nes, his favour, or their own merit, but will seek to strengthen themselves with friendship, (a way much neglected by Snenay ‘and will secretly Ieague, and bind themselves together, aguinat the power, whereby he shall not only not be able to punish thom if they deserve, but also he shall find great difficulty to manage any Jusinest tn hia mind that concerns any of them, so that he shall gerurn precario, upon courtesy.
Since, therefore, it is neither for the King’s honouy, nor his hyactheliaaee extremity being guilty, when there is no- thing but presumption against him, } which may fall upon the most Annocent, it is far less profitablo or honourable for his Majesty to suffer sich extreme persecution, or to deny hin tho ordinury favours, ‘nd meuns to clear himself, that wre granted to men in like ease, or to expose him and his life to the acarch of his enemics, or to give them liberty to shift their accusations, and seek now and crimes, when the old will not serve their turus ; these are infallible arguments and demonstrations to the world that justice fs but pre- tended, and the overthrow of the pervon, pero mas oprah or wrong, intended. In the course thot is kept his nour suffers extremely, for the people at first admlred the Stare Justice—detested the pervon of the malefactar ; but now the note ix
* Somerwe and his Countem ‘The favourite, Somerset, was Hobert Carre, a Seoccliman. hdl ee To # AM! the agcomplices In Ovorbury's murder reesived the punishment due to thele probe grep earn ppl vt eects =
persons ‘whom he bad once fovroured with his most tener affections" —His. Vol, vi pT Mut the above pleading of Lord Napier, anid not want of fortitude in the Kings say Ihave saved Somerset.
AND ILLUSTRATIONS, Sal
made betwixt us of the date, the 12th day of September, anno | Dowink 1628, is contained. Notwithstanding, for the benefit L am te reap for the said employment, I qm content to be bound, ener ee a sen my eins executors, and as oa Weasecinenten ha alld toed ‘that | See eed tslewa asl sor adeed coee with 4s. 6d. per pound for natural dried of all sorts; and with I te pia pea pectoral grenereen and for Savoy amber, ‘Savoy pistacho amber, and Savoy fennell amber, 10s. per pound ; and for pound of ordinary confects, Is. 2d.; and that of theso eon~ ections as shall bespent for his Majesty's own use only, and fur sueh ‘confections as shall be vonded by me for the uso of the country, I SEEM Kal ap Geeta, chat vive peion T wuallecatve es 5s. fur the naturals, 3s. for tho pastes and preserves, and for Savoy Savoy pistache amber, and Savoy fennell amber, above 10s, per pound, and for the ordinary confects above Is. 2d. the pound, Seats sally shared betwisi me ond any the Tac Naper shall appoint. In witnows whereof, I have subscribed those presents with my land, before these witnesses, Archibald Campbell, brother ta ‘Sir James Campbell of Lawers, Alexander Naper, brother to the said Lord Naper, and Alexander Naper, burgess of Edinburgh. At ‘Westminster the 12th day of September 1628."
This ix obviously the contract referred to in our note to p. 53, and of which Lord Napier snys,—« Then said I, 1 acquainted the King,—as indeed J did, and his Majesty remembered it—with the manner and matter of this bargain.” On the back of the bond ix noted :—'"24 Decr. 1620. Ihave this day received this back bond from the Lard Naper to be delivered up to his Majesty.”
Nore II. pp. 00-102 —Charles 1. and the Scotch Parliament 1633. Dr Cock, in hi History of the Church of Scien, and when narrating the proceedings of the Seotch Parliament 1633, at which
King took into his own hand a Tist of the members, and marked their votes. The majority was hostile to the Court, and Charles could not fail to know, from the paper which be held, that this was the case. The clerk of Parliament, however, whose otlice it was to
expected even from the humblest individual, gave his sanction to
4|
_
AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 523
Gt being, ax our Chancellor's office to ask the voices, s0 our Clerk of Rogister's office to take them and record them, and according to his ‘ows, and his clerks’ notes who wssist bim, to pronounce the act pas ed or stopt ; In which it in impossible he should dent but with sine
‘Tt is not casy to understand by whut process of reasoning Dr Cook Jud brought himself to take this most natural, and unanswerable statement, as evidence against the King; or how he makes out ‘that * the anxiety shown to refate the charge, proves that it was ge erally believed, and had deeply impressed the public mind !” ‘The King was aware that bis throne was attacked by the calumnions whisperings and secret machinations of a powerful demperatic fac tion in Scotland ; therefare he published this unanswerable defetice, for the benofit of the public, as well as for his own ; ond to cast it aside, os Dr Cook hus done, (while be takes as unquestionable the posthumous calumny of Burnet,) or toadopt it as proving the charge ‘to have been true, indicutes ant opinion formed upon no just or weien= tiffe consideration of the evidence. But let us seo if De Couk's other authorities bear him out, 1. ‘The entire pasage from Row's ‘MS. is as follows: But the nogative votes were thought by some to have equalled the affirmative; and a worthy gentleman stood up and quarrelled the Clork-Register for not marking tho votes
‘pon man sat down and was silent."—Jtow's MS, Advocates’ Library. An ‘on dit in the chronicle of u factious Scotch clergyman of the times is not the moet trustworthy evidence, in mich a matter, ageinet
King’s enemies, contradict Burnet. Compare him
and Whitelock, all of whom Dr Cook has so
‘support of Burnet! But there is another re
which tho Bishop, and which, unhappily, Dr Cook ‘omitted to consult, namely, the state trinl of Balmerino, Bur- sequel of the passage we have quoted, connects the Bul~
(the seditious libel framed by Haig,) with the ale
of the vote in Parliament, which dishonest act of ‘states to have been a principal ground of that petition,
petition itself is printed in that record. It commences humble remonstrance that his Majesty had not
of the opinions of a number of your supplicants
im voting about these acts,” and that he had put notes against their mames, &c., and then it goes on to say, thit " they that have been mind toa resolution carried by the plurality of votes have
never hitherto been censured by prince of so much justice and goodness as your Majesty.” Thus even that notorious paper which Haig confessed that he had “ made out af some callections, which he had gathered upon some conferences which be hod with sundry persons the time of the Parliament,”"—andin which, had there ‘been a shadow of truth in the subsequently whispered calumny, that calumny would have been most prominent,—affords not a bint of the kind, but absolutely states, as a matter not disputed or doubt- ‘ed, that the aotsin queation were curried by the plurality of votes."* ‘That Dr Cook had not consulted this record appears from the fact, ‘Vhat throughout his most mistaken veraion of the matter he continu« ally speaks of the author of the libel os being Hayne, his Majesty’s
—
AND ILLUSTRATIONS. aT
nnd make extricts frum a manuscript, the history of which is in- scribed upon it, as follows :
“ Written on the first leaf of the manuscript, in Mr T, Roddie man’s handwriting, from which this copy was taken in the years 1788 and 1789.
History of Scots affairs from the your 1687 to the year 1641, in five books, but the first wanting, und probably never written, being designed only as an introduction to the rext,
“ This was written either as is supposed by the famous Robert Gordon of Straloch, oz by James Gordon, parson of Rothiemay, his wn”
‘That this MS. History, however, was not compiled by Robert, Gordon of Straloch himaclt is manifest by that extract we have quoted from it, (sve p, 230,) im which the writer, after enumerating Straloch among the Commissioners sent by Huntly to Montrose, adds that he, the writer, was.“ myself in company with the Com= missioners from Huntly.” This is most likely to have been James Gordon, Stralvch's sou. It is known that this James Gordon eue- ceeded Mr Alexander Innes as parson at Rothiemay, and there ix ‘a passage in the manuscript history obviously referring to the fact : “ Mr Alexander Lanes, minister at Rothiemay, was brothervinslaw to Mr John Maxwell, Bishop of Ross,—that was enough ; but he res fused to take the Covenant, and anno 1639, had gone to Berwick to the King ; therefore, July Ist, be was tarned out of hix place, and in tho following years exposed to many more sufferings, yet happler therein than Mr John Forbes, that bis cbureh the very next year, 1641, was planted with another whom himself had named, and to whote entry he gave his express consent ; one who was willing to ‘obseree to Mr Alexander Innes the common rule of equity of quod 4ibi eri non vis—and ane who, in the following years, upon that relf-samo very account which had turned out Mr Alexander Innes, did run the hazard, oftener than once, of being turned out of that place, as well ns his predecessor had been.”
Another evidence, that Jumes Gordon was the author, in derived from 6 very rare printed fragment, (for the use of which, and also for introductions to the various gentlemen who enabled me to inspect the MS. of the King’s College, and the Records of Aberdeen, 1 ‘am indebted to tho kindnoss of Joseph Robertson, Esq.) being the Introduction to Memoirs of Scottish affairs from 1624 to 1653," which were never published or completed, a work projected, and wr fax composed, by an industrious and somewhat learned person, of
AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 529
friends of Hamilton and Montrose speak not over fax al Di eealipirlendetearan es truse's merle, every where extolling him as a hero, and giving a bet~
a to the future part of it.” James Gordon's original MS. hax been again lost sight of, but ‘the separate transcripts at Aberdeen, and in Man's MS. supply ita Of Patrick Gordon's MS., however, I have not been able ‘to discover that either the original or a transcript is known to exe ist. Hence those extracts, marked “ P. G." in what is inaccurate. ly called tho Straloch MS. in the Advocates’ Library, and of which we have thus afforded the explanation, are the more valuable, from being all that has been preserved of this contemporary chronicler, ‘the loxa of whose history of Montrose's progress ix much to be re~ gFetted. Nore V. p.200.—The Large Declaration, Margaret Mitchelson, Many of Dr Bulcanqual’s original MSS. of the Large Declaration, which he compiled under the sanction of Charles I., arc preserved in the Advocates’ Library. No statement or argument of those excited and ‘times will bear a closer examination than this
des and imitates the tone, Speaking of the Rev. Robert Baillie, he says. “The Targe Declarution this writer pronounces ‘ an unexs ampled manifesto, heaping up » rabble of the foulest columnies that ‘ever were put into any one discourse thut he had read.’ Hence (adds Mr Brodie) little reliance can be placed on it ; and Z suspect that the story of Mitchelsan, the prophetess, is one of the forgeries of Baleanqual, Ress, and olhors, Burnet gives no authority, and Bail- lie and others never allude to it.” Hise Val 3h. p- 608, But, we sail el ie tee sted Sete el aes By * and others to forge and publish a story of the very day, the al- leged witnesses being the public itself! Mr Brodie does not reflect that the allegation to the public of a fact as being notorious to that public, cannot well be a forgery.
‘But we can sffard, in corroboration of the account given in the Sla{oDeserachny wcontemnporary anthony ban fom the ejehaod
Pk,
AND ILLUSTRATIOSS. 331
The other authority is « contemporary MS. im the Advocates’ Li- trary, entitled, “A Tree Relation of the Bishops im intreducing of the Service Book,” &c. and im which eccars the following pacenge :
\« Margeret Mitchelsen's gracieas replurcs.
« About this time sles, in Edinburgh, ene Margaret Mitchelon, ‘good religions damecl, being semewhat treubled in spirit, fell into ‘trance, and was so ravished with heavenly and divine speeches and praises to Christ, that her bodily sences almest failed her ; and im the time of those raptures, which took her often, and sometimes keeped her lang, she might take no mest ner drink, nor did nothing but bursted out in admirable divine speeches, expressing her love and joy in Christ, and her assurance of blessedness in him, as the like speeches never proceeded of flesh and blood ; mapy of the nobility and ministry, and well-affected Christians, thronging to hear her, being wonderfully moved with her speeches.”
Note V1. p. 234—Towa-Coancil Books of Aberdeen. ‘The following extracts, from the Town-Council books of Aber- deen, prove that Montrose exercised no unnecessary tyranny of harshness towards the town when occupying it for the Covenanters. ‘Nor can I find any entry in thoee records at all corroborative of the accusation of cruelty brought against Montrose, by modern writers. I must acknowledge my obligation to Mr Hardy, the town-clerk of Aberdeen, for the facilities afforded me there, of inspecting and making extracts from these original records.
«95th March 1639.—The quhilk day, in respect that Doctor William Johnston, and George Morison, who were directed com- missioners from this burgh to the Earl of Montrose, upon the 20th day of March instant, with Mr Robert Gordon of Straloch, and Doctor William Gordon, commissioners likewise to his Lordship from the Marquis of Huntly, did receive a delaying answer at that time from the said Earl of Montrose to such propositions as they did remonstrate to his Lordship. Therefore the provost, bailies, and council, think it expedient to direct the same commi new again to the said Earl of Montrose, aud to propone to his Lord- ship, and others of the nobility there present with him, the articles following, and to crave their answer thereupon ; of the qubilk ur- ticles the tenor follows :
AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 533, Mar, ond Buchan, come to the town of —
hundred men, to lie in the town till their back-cotning ; and before: they marched out of the links the noblemen sent for our provost and
‘again, under the pain of and rasing our town, qubille obeyed.” Nore VIL p.312.—dnecdotes of Argyle.
Bishop Guthrie records that, in the year 1640, Argyle persisted im destroying the house of Airly, (with whom he was at personal feud,) although Montrose had put a garrison into it, under command ‘of Colonel Sibbald, and had written to Argyle to that effect. James Gordon in his MS. hes this account :
“1 have seen some memorials, of the proceedingn of these times, which do refer tho demolishing of Aitly Castle to this expedition, though I made mention of it the last year (1639,) Sure it is that in anno 1630 it. was burnt by Argyle; therefore what more’ he did there at this time 1 cannot peremptorily determine. ‘This far is cer- tuin that (if you abstenct from the time) Montrose with a party was the first who besieged Airly, and left. the prosecution of it to Ar= syle, who at the demolishing thereof is said to have shewed himself so extremely earnest, that he was seen taking a hammer in bis hand, and knocking down the hewed work of the doors aud windows till he did ewent for heat ut his work. There was likewise another dwelling, belonging to Aisly’s eldest sou, the Lord Ogilvy, called Forthar, where bis lady sqjourned for the time, ‘This house, though no strength, behoved to be slighted ; and although the Lady Ogilvy, being yreat with child at the time, asked licence of to stay in her own house till she were brought to bed, that could not be ob«
Douglos, ' Kelly, hearing tell what extremity her grandchild, Ogilry, Lal aspen
y ESN i
to move her Majesty to do all the respect and kindness she can do to that nation,
There are dayly arguments and reasons given in, in his Majes=
that the act of oblivion may be general, without reserva=
mor exception of any person whomvoever, which we do alwnys
‘Yet wo cannot but shew your Lordships, that youi have laid.
‘es very hard und difficult charge upon us, in commanding ns to main=
tain thot none cited to the Parliament can be passed from, but that
‘the act of oblivion be general for all mon and all faults upon the
one side, and that the noblemen, and considerable gentlemen who
HareiAdiered tobe King, shall be under the lank and hazard of the
Parliament's censure, But we are revolved closely to adhere to
your directions and instructions, and maintain them with the best reasons we can.
“ We have, and shall with all instancy urge the removing of the Incendiaries from the King and Court ; and we did yesterday make une of the information sont to us, concerning the discovery ‘of the Eorl of Traquair's plots, as an argument to the English ‘Commissioners, and the Committee of both Houses of Parlin« ment, (who did then convene with us,) to move them to intercede with the King that he might be removed from his Majesty, and from Court, and sent home to abide his trial, which we shall still press, whether the same be obtained or not ; and shall make the beat ‘se me can of any further infarmations or discovery your Lordships shall be pleased (o send us. The King denies his knowledge of these plots betwixt the Earls of Montrose and Traquair; and we heard that Traquair doth likewine pertinaciously deny that wherewith he isecharged. But it is not likely that Licutenant-Colonel Walter Stewart, his relation to the Enrl of Trnquair being considered, would, to his prejudice, have invented them, and we hope that God, who has begun to discover these mischievous plots, will at last bring the samme to light.
+ Mr Archibald Johaston le to take journey from huneo one of ‘these two days; nor could the condition of our affsirs and spare him sooner, The dehates we have about the act of oblivion
as
a
AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 53T «4, Coneorning the presentations of ministers to the kirks where» ‘of we are patron, we intend to take such arder by the advice of the
General Assembly, and our Council, ax men of best gifts, ond quali- fications, may be presented to there churches.
“6. To show that we intend to grant some supply, out of tho rents of the Inte bishops, to the colleges, which are the eeminuries of learn ing, the better to enable them to breed men of suck virtue and en- dowments, as may be fit for the service both of Church and State.
“6, Concerning the Government civil, you shall declare that it is ‘our royal resolution to govern our people according to the funda- mental laws of that kingdom, and to minister justice equally to all men, and that all matters ecelesiastic be judged by the General As- ‘semblies, and other subordinate assemblies of the church, and that ‘all mattera civil hall be judged by the Parliment, and other in« ferior Courts of Justice established by the laws of that kingdom.
"7. To show that we shall ratify the treaty of peace in the Par~ Viament of England before our parting from hence, and shall like» wise ratify the same in the Parliament of Scotland at the next Sea- ion thereof.
+B, Seeing we conceive that there is nothing which can conduce ‘more for establishing our authority, and procure the obedience of ‘our subjects more, than the administration of justice, to show that wwe intend, at our being in Scotland, to command the Council and Session, and other Courts of Justice, to be patent, und. to proceed in the administration of justice.
“9. As concerning the selection and appointing of our Officers of ‘State, Counwollory, und Seesioners, we desire you to be most care~ fal ond earnest in endeavouring all ye can, and using of your best means, to make the articles that we already deew up typan that pro- position to be condescended unto, and accepted, as fittest for our honour, and the just sutisfuction of our subjects.
10. We having most clearly expressed ovr former resolution to ‘establish a durable pence, in the Church and State, in that our an- cient and native kingdom of Scotland, and for that effect to be pre= ‘sent at the Parlinment shortly to bold there, and being most desir= ous to prevent all impediments that may eross or hinder cordinl unity, 90 really intended by ux with our native subjects, we earnest= Iy recommend to your care, that the Earl of Traquair, making hum- ble submission to us and tho Parliament, you try the minds of the Committee, and deal effectually with them to intercede with the Parliament, to accept of his humble sulmiasdon, and the same
VOR. 1 um
i
ai