Skip to main content

Full text of "Alexander Henderson, Churchman and Statesman"

See other formats 


ilLEXANDER  HENDERSON 


CHURCHMAN  and  STATESMAN 


PtceentcD  to 

^be  Xtbrarp 

of  tbc 

•Univerett^  of  ZToronto 


Digitized  by  tine  Internet  Arcinive 

in  2007  witin  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


http://www.arcliive.org/details/alexanderliendersOOorrruoft 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


TO 
MY    WIFE 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


FROM  THE  PORTRAIT  AT  YESTER 
ATTRIBUTED  TO  VAN  DYCK 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

CHURCHMAN  AND  STATESMAN 


BY 

rSHERIFFl 
ROBERT    LOW    ORR 

K.C,  M.A.,  LL.B. 


HODDER   AND    STOUGHTON 

LONDON   NEW  YORK  TORONTO 


i 


PREFACE 

Professor  Masson  placed  on  record  his  con- 
viction that  Alexander  Henderson  was  '  all  in  all 
one  of  the  ablest  and  best  men  of  his  age  in  Britain, 
and  the  greatest,  the  wisest  and  most  liberal  of  the 
Scottish  Presbyterians.  They  had  all  to  consult  him : 
in  every  strait  and  conflict  he  had  to  be  appealed 
to.  Although  the  Scottish  Presbyterian  rule  was 
that  no  churchman  should  have  authority  in  State 
affairs,  it  had  to  be  practically  waived  in  his  case  : 
he  was  a  Cabinet  Minister  without  office.'  But  he 
adds,  '  He  has  never  received  justice  in  general 
British  history.' 

Henderson's  title  to  live  in  history  is  the  National 
Covenant  of  1638,  a  conspicuous  landmark  in  the 
history  of  Liberty.  The  discovery  a  few  years 
ago  by  the  late  Mr.  Fitzroy  Bell,  advocate,  and 
Dr.  Hay  Fleming  of  a  portion  of  Wariston's  Diary ^ 
now  admirably  edited  for  the  Scottish  History 
Society  by  Sir  George  M.  Paul,  LL.D.,  Deputy 
Keeper  of  the  Signet,  is  a  fortunate  one.  It  em- 
braces the  years  1637-8,  and  adds  much  to  our 
knowledge  of  those  times.  But  it  has  brought 
us  loss  as  well  as  gain.  It  has  torn  out  of  the 
history  of  Scotland  one  of  its  most  picturesque 
pages.  Every  Scotsman  must  regret  that  the 
story  of  the  signing  of  the  National  Covenant  by 
*  weeping  multitudes  '  in  Greyfriars  churchyard — 
a  story  celebrated  in  Scottish  art  and  letters — turns 
out  to  be  fiction  not  fact. 


vi  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

It  seems  desirable  in  the  interest  of  the  general 
reader  to  attempt,  with  the  aid  of  light  from  the 
som'ces  now  accessible,  to  revise  the  famous  chapter 
in  our  annals  of  which  it  might  have  been  said  at 
any  time  before  August  1914  that  the  Scottish 
nation  then  rose  to  its  highest. 

The  years  that  lie  between  1638  and  the  end  of 
Henderson's  life  belong  to  an  age  which  forms 
one  of  the  great  watersheds  of  history.  The  part 
played  by  the  small  nation  north  of  the  Tweed 
produced  an  immediate  and  decisive  effect  in 
England,  and  in  all  that  crowded  hour  of  Scotland's 
life  Henderson  was  a  central  figure.  He  is  an 
attractive  figure  too,  a  personality  uniting  in  un- 
common degree  strength  and  charm,  a  man  of 
whom  we  would  gladly  know  more  than  has  come 
down  to  us.  We  must  still  be  content  in  the  main 
with  what  we  see  of  him  in  the  public  events  of 
his  career. 

The  Life  by  Aiton,  published  in  1836,  is  scarcely 
known  to  readers  of  the  present  day.  The  work  of 
the  late  Mr.  Pringle  Thomson,  whose  promising 
career  has  unhappily  been  cut  short  by  the  war, 
does  not  profess  to  be  more  than  a  short  sketch. 

It  is  a  pleasure  to  acknowledge  much  valued 
help  received  :  my  chief  indebtedness  is  recorded 
at  appropriate  pages  in  the  book. 

R.  L.  O. 

EniNBUROH; 

July  1919. 


CONTENTS 


I 

FAOK 

HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS        ....  1 


II 
THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT 

1.  James's  Church  Policy  ....         17 

2.  Scotland  Under  Charles    .  .  .  .  .47 

III 
THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND 

1.  The  Service  Book  :  July — August  1637    •  .  .67 

2.  Henderson's  Challenge  :   The  '  Combustion  ' :   August — 

November  1637      .  •  .  .  .81 

3.  The  Green  Tables  :  November  1637 — February  1638    .         96 

4.  A    Nation's    Soul   Awake  :    Henderson    and    Wariston 

frame  THE  National  Covenant  :  February — April  1638       113 

6.  Hamilton  as  Kino's  Managing  Man  :  May — November  1638       136 

6.  A    Revolutionary   Gathering  :    Henderson    Leads    the 

Gr^soow  Assembly  :  November — December  1638  .       166 

7.  Defence    in    Arms  :     A     Pacification    without     Peace  : 

Thb  King  and  Henderson  Meet  :   March — June  1639        190 

8.  Assembly  and  Parliament,  1639  :  August — November  215 

9.  Blue  Bonnets  Over  the  Border  :  August — October  1640      227 

10.  Henderson  in  London  :  The  Treaty  :  Castell's  Petition  : 

November  1640— July  1641  .  .240 

11.  The    Revolution   Triumphant:    Charles    in    Scotland: 

August — November  1641  .  .271 


Vlll 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


IV 

THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND 

1.  Is  ScoTi^ND  TO  Remain  Nbvtral? 

2.  A  'Hard  Morsel':  The  Solemn  Leaoue  and  Covenant 

3.  Uniformity  a  Failure         ..... 

4.  Henderson  in  the  Westminster  Assembly 

5.  UxBRiDOE  :  A  Round  Table  Conkerenck  . 

6.  Charles  and  Henderson  :  The  Newcastle  Discussion 


PAOR 

281 
298 
319 
337 
361 
361 


THE  END 


371 


VI 

HENDERSONS  WORK  FOR  EDUCATION 


382 


VII 


WRITINGS— PORTRAITS 
CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE 
INDEX 


391 
397 
401 


ILLUSTRATIONS 

ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

From  the  portrait  at  Yester  attributed  to  Van  Dyck. 

ALEXANDER  HENDERSON       . 

From,  the  etching  by  W.  Hollar,  1641. 


Frontispiece 


PAOE 

244 


HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS 

It  rarely  happens  that  a  man's  working  Hfe  is  so 
sharply  bisected  into  two  parts  of  widely  different 
character  as  was  the  life  of  Alexander  Henderson. 

The  first  and  longer  stretches  for  twenty-five 
years  from  1612,  when  he  settled  at  Leuchars,  till 
1637 ;  the  second  and  shorter  lies  in  the  nine 
years  from  1637  to  1646.  The  first  part  was 
spent  in  the  seclusion  of  a  rural  parish  :  in  the 
notable  year,  1637,  he  steps  forward  at  once  into 
the  full  glare  of  public  affairs,  and  from  that 
time  the  light  beats  on  him  without  a  break  till 
the  end. 

The  information  which  has  come  down  to  us 
about   Henderson   is   provokingly   meagre ;    for   a 
man  who  filled  so  great  a  role  in  the  making  of 
history  the    meagreness    is    exceptional.     He   was 
unmarried  and  therefore  left  no  family  to  preserve 
his  memory  ;   if  he  was  a  letter-writer,  few  of  his 
letters  have  survived ;    he  wrote  no  books,   and 
left  little  record  of  himself  in  print.     Our  know- 
ledge of  his  great  predecessor,  John  Knox,  owes 
much  of  its  vividness  and  reality  to  the  fact  that 
he  wrote  a  History  of  the  Reformation,  disclosing 
his  mind  with  all  its  strength  and  failings,   and 
supplying  intimate  touches  which  make  the  pic- 
tiu-e  still  live  on  the  canvas.     How  much  would 
we  not  give  to  have  the  story  of  the  Revolution 


2  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

from  the  hand  of  Henderson,  to  read  his  account 
of  those  marvellous  days  in  February  and  March 
1638  when  the  heart  of  a  whole  nation  was  melted, 
to  have  a  graphic  report  of  his  discussions  with 
Charles  i.  and  his  impressions  of  that  strange 
character,  '  so  far  stranger  than  fiction,'  as  we 
have  Knox's  of  Mary.  He  moves  through  great 
events  on  the  page  of  history,  a  central  and  com- 
manding figure,  but  the  story  lacks  the  sense  of 
nearness,  the  tone  and  colour  which  a  personal 
narrative  or  private  letters  would  supply. 

His  friend  Principal  Baillie  of  Glasgow  Univer- 
sity, a  racy  and  entertaining  letter  writer,  is  an 
excellent  second-best.  Had  he  carried  out  his  in- 
tention he  would  doubtless  have  given  us  a  full- 
length  portrait  of  the  man.  Writing  in  1661  to 
the  Earl  of  Glencaim,  Baillie  spoke  of  a  '  true 
account  I  may  readily  give  to  the  world  and  pos- 
terity of  what  is  passed  among  us  these  thirty-six 
years,'  but  Baillie  died  in  1662,  and  the  true 
account  was  never  written.  A  few  years  earlier 
(in  1653)  the  Rev.  Samuel  Clarke,  a  London 
minister  who  published,  in  1650,  a  collection  of 
biographies  under  the  title  The  Marrow  of  Ecclesi- 
astical History,  seems  to  have  tried  to  gather 
information  about  Henderson  for  a  new  edition 
which  appeared  in  1654.  He  applied  to  Baillie, 
who  sent  the  disappointing  reply,  *  I  wish  we  had 
a  narrative  of  another  of  ours  also  to  send  to  you, 
I  mean  your  sometime  good  friend  Mr.  Henderson, 
a  truly  heroic  divine  for  piety,  learning,  wisdom, 
eloquence,  humility,  single  life  and  every  good 
part,  for  some  years  the  most-eyed  man  in  the 
three  kingdoms.' 

For  many  years  after  Henderson  died  the  land 


HENDERSON'S  PRR^ATE  YEARS  3 

was  filled  with  the  din  of  controversy  and  the 
clash  of  arms.  Not  till  quieter  days  came  long 
after  did  men  have  leisure  and  inclination  to  write. 
It  was  then  that  the  industrious  Wodrow,  in  his 
manse  at  Eastwood  near  Glasgow,  tried  to  gather 
materials  for  a  life  of  Henderson.  In  1723  he  told 
a  correspondent  that  he  knew  little  or  nothing 
about  his  family  or  younger  years,  but  was  en- 
deavouring to  collect  information  in  Edinburgh 
and  Fife.  By  that  time  all  those  who  might  have 
had  first-hand  knowledge  had  died  out,  and  little 
more  remained  than  a  few  traditions.  '  I  am 
ashamed,'  he  wrote,  '  to  give  so  lame  an  account 
of  this  extraordinary  person.' 

There  is,  in  fact,  very  little  to  record.  Alexander 
Henderson,  who  also  spelt  his  name  Henryson, 
was  born  in  the  year  1583,  in  the  parish  of  Creich, 
in  the  north-east,  corner  of  Fifeshire,  and  probably 
in  the  village  of  Luthrie  in  that  parish.  It  has 
been  said  his  father  was  a  feuar  and  that  he  was 
born  of  parents  of  good  esteem,  but  beyond  that 
we  know  nothing  of  his  parents  or  of  the  home  in 
which  he  was  born  and  reared.  Tradition  says  he 
was  related  to  the  Hendersons  of  Fordel,  an  old 
Scottish  family,  and  tradition  is  supported  by  the 
fact  that  his  remains  were  laid  in  the  burial-ground 
of  that  family  in  Greyfriars  Churchyard,  Edin- 
burgh. He  very  early  discovered,  says  Wodrow, 
his  inclination  to  learning  and  uncommon  ability 
for  it,  and  was  sent  to  college  at  the  age  of  sixteen, 
matriculating  on  19th  December  1599  at  St. 
Salvator's  College,  St.  Andrews.  In  1603  he  took 
his  degree  of  M.A.,  and  shortly  thereafter  was 
appointed  a  regent  or  teacher  of  philosophy,  '  a 
pedagogue    who    read    logic    and    rhetoric   to    his 


4  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

scholars,'  as  he  afterwards  said  of  himself  at 
Uxbridge.  He  filled  the  office  of  regent  in  1611 
when  he  is  found  subscribing  the  accounts  of  the 
Faculty  of  Arts  as  Quaestor.  In  March  1611,  and 
again  in  February  1612,  he  was  elected  one  of  the 
Procurators  of  the  Fife  Nation  for  the  election  of 
a  Rector,  and  in  1613  one  of  the  three  assessors 
to  the  Rector  of  the  Fife  Nation.  He  never  ceased 
to  cherish  an  affection  for  his  alma  maier,  and 
took  occasion  later  in  life  to  prove  his  interest  in 
her  welfare  and  in  the  cause  of  higher  education. 

It  is  interesting  to  reflect  that  in  his  earlier 
years  at  St.  Andrews  young  Henderson  must  often 
have  seen  and  probably  often  heard  the  great 
Andrew  Melville.  Those  were  the  days  when  the 
hand  of  King  James  lay  heavy  on  the  Church  of 
Scotland,  and  his  blows  fell  with  calculated  severity 
on  its  Presbyterian  champion.  In  July  1602  he 
was  ordered  by  a  royal  edict  to  remain  in  ward  in 
St.  Andrews,  being  allowed  liberty  of  movement  on 
the  queen's  intercession  within  six  miles  of  it,  a 
species  of  imprisonment '  which  severely  crippled 
his  power  of  serving  the  Church.  After  the  criminal 
trials  arising  out  of  the  attempted  Aberdeen  As- 
sembly of  1605,  letters  came  from  James  sum- 
moning Melville  and  others  to  London  to  consult 
with  His  Majesty  on  the  state  of  the  kirk.  In 
August  1606  he  reluctantly  quitted  Scotland  and 
never  set  foot  in  it  again.  The  conferences  at 
Hampton  Court  proved  to  be  simply  a  device  to 
lure  the  most  powerful  Presbyterian  leaders  into 
England  ;  Melville  soon  found  himself  a  prisoner 
in  the  Towfer,  and  left  it  to  go  into  exile  for  the 
rest  of  his  days. 

The  man  of  the  hour  at  St.  Andrews  was  George 


HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS  5 

Gledstanes,  formerly  parish  minister  there,  after- 
wards Bishop  of  Caithness,  and  now,  from  1605, 
Archbishop  of  St.  Andrews.  He  had  been  brought 
there  at  first,  says  an  old  writer  who  was  no  ad- 
mirer of  Melville,  '  from  being  minister  of  Ardbirlett 
of  purpose  to  balance  and  poize  Mr.  Andrew 
Melvill,  and  to  guard  the  University  students 
against  his  principles  and  to  fence  them  from  being 
tinged  with  his  seditious  and  turbulent  way  ;  and 
many  a  hot  bickering  there  was  betwixt  them 
thereupon.'  ^  Certainly  there  is  no  trace  of  Mel- 
ville's influence  on  the  young  divinity  student. 
He  was  bred  in  the  episcopal  party  at  the  Univer- 
sity, and  courted  and  won  the  favour  of  the  primate 
who,  as  patron  of  the  living,  presented  him  to  the 
parish  of  Leuchars,  some  five  miles  north  of  St. 
Andrews.  It  is  said  to  have  been  the  practice  that, 
after  eight  years  of  teaching,  a  regent  of  philosophy 
was  licensed  if  found  qualified  to  preach  the 
Gospel.  Henderson  was  licensed  probably  in  1611, 
and  settled  at  Leuchars  in  the  spring  of  1612.  It 
is  an  interesting  fact  that  the  earliest  letter  we 
possess  of  Henderson  testifies  to  his  friendship 
with  Gledstanes  and  his  love  of  learning.  It  is 
dated  May  4th,  1611,  and  in  it  he  joins  with  the 
Rector,  Deans  of  Faculties,  and  remanent  Masters 
of  the  University  (seventeen  in  all)  in  thanking 
King  James  vi.  for  the  dedication  of  a  University 
Library  described  as  '  a  common  Bibliotheque,' 
*  the  most  reverend  father  in  God  the  Archbishop 
of  St.  Andrews,  our  very  prudent  Chancellor, 
having  informed  us,  whereby  learning  (through 
bypast  penury  of  books  somewhat  decaying)  may 
be  to  the  benefit  of  the  kirk  and  commonweal 

*  Martine's  Reliquiae  Divi  Andreae,  p.  261. 


6  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

resuscitated.'  ^  The  records  of  the  Synod  of 
Fife  show  that  Henderson  was  an  '  expectant '  in 
September  1611,  and  was  admitted  to  Leuchars 
in  1612.2  On  26th  January  1614  he  figures  as  a 
member  of  presbytery  signing  a  certificate  in 
favour  of  Mr.  John  Strang,  afterwards  Principal 
of  the  College  of  Glasgow. 

But  episcopal  favour,  though  it  secured  for 
Henderson  the  parish,  could  not  win  for  him  the 
goodwill  of  the  parishioners  of  Leuchars.  Indeed 
it  had  exactly  the  opposite  effect,  for  the  men  of 
Fife  were  noted  for  their  strong  anti-episcopal 
sentiments.  Of  this  the  young  presentee  had 
immediate  and  very  practical  demonstration  when 
he  arrived  at  the  church  for  the  induction  cere- 
mony. The  parish  church  of  Leuchars  still  stands 
where  it  stood  then,  its  chancel  and  semicircular 
apse  of  pure  Norman  work,  grey  and  weathered, 
looking  across  the  bay  to  the  towers  of  St.  Andrews. 
The  doors  were  found  to  be  effectually  secured, 
and  no  entrance  could  be  gained  by  them.  Then 
followed  a  scene  not  without  parallel  in  the  later 
days  of  Moderate  rule  :  Henderson  and  his  friends 
forced  an  entry  into  the  church  by  breaking  one 
of  the  windows. 

Whatever  his  thoughts  at  the  time  may  have 
been,  the  day  came  when  he  reflected  sadly  enough 
upon  his  manner  of  entrance  on  a  sacred  office. 
There  can  be  no  mistaking  the  personal  reference 
in  his  words  spoken  as  Moderator  of  the  Glasgow 
Assembly  of  1638  :  '  There  are  divines  among  us 

*  Letters  and  State  Papers  during  the  Reign  of  James  VI.,  Abbotsford 
Club,  p.  200. 

2  Selectiom  from  the  Minutes  of  the  Synod  of  Fife,  Abbotsford  Club, 
pp.  39,  210. 


HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS  7 

that  have  had  no  such  warrant  for  our  entry  to 
the  ministry  as  were  to  be  wished.  Alas,  how 
many  of  us  have  rather  sought  the  kirk  than  the 
kirk  sought  us.  How  many  have  rather  gotten 
the  kirk  given  to  them  than  they  have  been  given 
to  the  kirk  for  the  good  thereof.  And  yet  there 
must  be  a  great  difference  put  between  those  who 
have  hved  many  years  in  an  unlawful  office  with- 
out warrant  of  God  and  therefore  must  be  abomin- 
able in  the  sight  of  God,  and  those  who,  in  some 
respects,  have  entered  unlawfully  and  with  an  ill 
conscience  and  afterwards  have  come  to  see  the 
evil  of  this  and  to  do  what  in  them  lies  to  repair 
the  injury.  If  there  were  any  faults  or  wrong 
steps  in  our  entry  (as  who  of  us  are  free),  acknow- 
ledge the  Lord's  calling  of  us  if  we  have  since 
got  a  seal  from  heaven  of  our  ministry,  and  let 
us  labour  with  diligence  and  faithfulness  in  our 
office.' 

For  some  years  after  his  settlement  at  Leuchars 
our  knowledge  of  him  is  very  dim  :  we  know  no- 
thing of  his  relations  with  his  parishioners,  his 
interests,  occupations,  or  mode  of  life.  But  out 
of  the  dimness  one  great  fact  shines  like  a  star. 
An  event  occurred  which  proved  the  turning-point 
of  his  life.  On  a  memorable  Sunday — the  date  is 
not  known  further  than  that  it  was  probably  before 
1615 — Robert  Bruce  of  Kinnaird  preached  in  the 
parish  church  of  Forgan,  a  neighbouring  parish  to 
Leuchars.  Bruce  was  a  man  of  note  in  Scotland 
then,  the  most  outstanding  figure  in  the  Church 
since  Melville.  Formerly  one  of  the  ministers  of 
Edinburgh  and  a  friend  of  King  James,  he  had 
incurred  the  King's  enmity  owing  to  his  attitude 
in  regard  to  the  Gowrie  conspiracy  in  1600.     Exiled 


8  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

from  Scotland,  then  permitted  to  return  but  for- 
bidden to  resume  his  office  and  still  pursued  by 
the  king's  inveterate  animosity,  he  was  for  some 
years  in  banishment  at  Inverness.  In  1613  he 
received  a  licence  to  come  south  and  live  in  his 
own  house  at  Kinnaird.  He  employed  his  leisure 
in  preaching  for  brethren  of  his  acquaintance,  and 
as  a  preacher  was  a  great  favourite  with  the 
people  of  Scotland.  His  enemies  traduced  him 
'  for  behaving  himself  hke  a  general  bishop,'  but 
it  was  they  who  drove  him  from  place  to  place. 
Led  probably  by  curiosity,  Henderson  betook 
himself  that  Sunday  morning  to  Forgan  Church 
and  seated  himself  in  the  darkest  corner.  The 
seat  was  '  in  the  north  corner  under  the  west 
loft.  It  was  so  dark  that  in  comparatively  recent 
times  a  window  was  made  in  the  wall  behind  it 
so  that  the  occupant  might  see  to  read.'  ^  Bruce, 
stately  and  dignified,  appeared  in  the  pulpit,  and 
in  slow  impressive  manner  announced  his  text, 
'  He  that  entereth  not  by  the  door  into  the  sheep- 
fold  but  climbeth  up  some  other  way  the  same  is 
a  thief  and  a  robber.'  The  words  pierced  like  an 
arrow  the  heart  of  the  man  trying  to  hide  in  the 
dark  corner.  The  text  and  the  sermon  that  fol- 
lowed it  perturbed  and  convicted  him.  From  that 
hour  he  dated  his  first  serious  thoughts  on  religion  ; 
he  spoke  of  it  afterwards  as  the  occasion  of  his 
conversion  to  God.  It  was  the  occasion  also  of 
his  conversion  to  Presbyterianism ;  at  once  he 
threw  in  his  lot  with  the  party  in  the  Church  whose 
fortunes  were  low  and  apparently  lost.  Bruce's 
wandering  ministry  was  a  very  fruitful  one,  but 

*  Hay  Fleming,  Handbook  of  St.  Andrews  and  Neighbourhood,  p.  113. 
Fleming's  Fulfilling  of  the  Scriptures  (1671),  pp.  430,  431. 


HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS  9 

judged  by  subsequent  events  that  Sunday  morning 
in  Forgan  Church  was  his  greatest  hour.  He  won 
Alexander  Henderson,  '  one  of  the  greatest  fishes 
caught  in  his  net.' 

Henderson  became  known  and  trusted  in  his 
own  district  by  the  party  whose  cause  he  had  now 
espoused,  and  was  soon  on  terms  of  warm  friend- 
ship with  surviving  veterans  such  as  Wilham  Scott 
of  Cupar,  who  had  received  the  dubious  honour  of 
a  summons  to  London  along  with  Melville.  James 
had  succeeded  in  engrafting  Episcopacy  on  to  the 
Presbyterian  system.  But  he  was  not  yet  satis- 
fied, he  was  bent  on  introducing  into  Scotland 
the  ritual  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church  of  England. 
His  policy  and  methods  will  be  considered  in  a 
later  chapter ;  it  is  sufficient  here  to  note  Hender- 
son's connection  with  James's  proceedings.  As  one 
of  the  younger  men  he  took  naturally  a  subordinate 
position,  but  it  is  interesting  to  find  him  present 
on  three  notable  occasions.  The  first  was  a 
General  Assembly  summoned  by  the  king  at 
Aberdeen  in  1616  :  it  sat  from  13th  to  18th  August 
and  resolved  upon  several  constitutional  changes 
— a  new  Confession,  Catechism  and  Liturgy.  But 
the  Assembly,  albeit  managed  by  the  Moderator, 
Archbishop  Spottiswoode,  who  had  succeeded  Gled- 
stanes  in  May  1615,  was  not  courageous  enough 
for  the  king.  He  said  they  had  made  a  '  mere 
hotch-potch  '  of  some  matters  ;  what  he  desired 
was  the  introduction  of  the  practices  which  came 
later  to  be  known  as  the  Perth  Articles,  and  it 
was  only  on  the  advice  of  the  cautious  Spottis- 
woode that  he  waived  the  matter  for  the  present. 
Henderson  seems  to  have  been  present  both  at 
the  pubhc  diets  and  at  private  conferences  where 


10  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

much   of  the   business   was   transacted.^     Of  the 
famous   Perth  Assembly  of  1618   he  was  also  a 
member.     It  sat  only  three  days,  from  25th  till 
27th  August,  but  it  set  in  motion  controversies 
which  did  not  end  till  James's  laboriously  reared 
ecclesiastical  structure  was  thrown  to  the  ground. 
Its  work  was  the  passing  of  the  Five  Articles  of 
Perth :     kneeling   at    Communion,    private    Com- 
munion in  urgent  cases,  private  Baptism  in  similar 
cases.  Episcopal  Confirmation,  and  observance  of 
the  Holy  Days.     Its  members  included  represen- 
tatives, summoned  by  the   king,  of  the  nobility, 
lesser  barons  and  burgesses,  as  well  as  bishops  and 
parish    ministers.     These    last,    it    appears,    were 
treated  with  scant  courtesy,  no  seats  being   pro- 
vided  for  them ;    '  they  were,'   says   Calderwood, 
'  left  to  stand  behind  as  if  their  place  and  part 
had  been  only  to  behold.'     Spottiswoode  was  again 
Moderator,  taking  the  chair  without  election ;    in 
order  to  overcome  opposition  private  conferences 
were  held,  at  which  threats  and  intimidation  were 
resorted  to.     In  the  end  the  Articles  were  carried 
by  a  majority,  forty-five  ministers  voting  a  direct 
negative.     Scott    of    Cupar,    Carmichael    of    Kil- 
conquhar,  and  Henderson  were  the  chief  opponents. 
The  proposal  was  made  that  Scott  and  Henderson 
should  be  translated  to  Edinburgh,^     The  capital 
of  Scotland  was  a  stronghold  of  pronounced  presby- 
terian    sentiment,    and    it    indicates    Henderson's 
prominence  at  this  early  period  as  a  champion  of 
that   cause   that   the   town   council   should   have 
nominated  him  for  a  vacancy.     Nothing  was  done 
in  the  matter,  but  the  council  did  not  let  it  rest. 

'  Peterkin,  Records  of  the  Kirk,  p.  139. 

'  Book  of  the  Universal  Kirk,  Baunatyne  Club,  iii.  p.  1167. 


HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS        11 

Two  months  later,  on  21st  October  1618,  they 
approached  the  king  by  letter.  *  The  necessity,' 
they  said,  '  we  stand  in  at  this  present  of  some 
ministers  .  .  .  moved  us  to  suite  at  the  late 
Assembly  which  your  Majesty  called  at  Perth  the 
planting  of  Mr.  William  Scott,  Mr.  John  Forbes, 
and  Mr.  Alexander  Henrysone  with  us.  Wherein 
we  obtained  nothing  but  a  commission  to  certain  of 
that  number  to  concur  with  the  Archbishop  of  St. 
Andrews  for  their  transport  to  us,  in  case  your 
Majesty's  consent  were  procured,  which  we  are 
now  humbly  to  entreat  at  your  Majesty's  hands  : 
And  that  your  Highness  will  be  graciously  pleased 
to  command  the  Archbishop  to  convene  the  rest 
and  end  that  business  to  our  desires,  which  we  trust 
shall  be  to  your  Majesty's  contentment  and  the 
weal  of  our  church.'  ^  The  Archbishop  took  care 
that  nothing  came  of  the  proposal. 

The  Perth  Articles  began  to  cause  trouble  at 
once.  Already  in  the  spring  of  1619  there  was 
much  non-conforming  in  Fife  and  elsewhere.  At 
the  meeting  of  Synod  in  St.  Andrews  on  6th  April 
it  was  reported  that  Henderson  had  not  given  the 
communion  according  to  the  prescribed  order. 
This  was  '  not  of  contempt,  as  he  deponed  solemnly, 
but  because  he  is  not  as  yet  fully  persuaded  of  the 
lawfulness  thereof.  He  is  exhorted  to  strive  to 
obedience  and  conformity.'  ^  But  he  was  a  marked 
man,  and  in  August  of  the  same  year  he  was  called, 
along  with  William  Scott  and  John  Carmichael, 
before    the    Court    of    High    Commission    at    St. 

'  Original  Lettem  relating  to  the  Ecclesiastical  Affair*  of  Scotland,  Banna, 
tyne  Club,  ii.  p.  684. 

'  Selections  from  the  Minutes  of  the  Synod  of  Fife,  Abbotsford  Club, 
p.  88. 


12  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Andrews  on  the  charge  of  writing  and  pubhshing 
a  book  entitled  Perth  Assemhlyy  adversely  criticis- 
ing the  proceedings  of  that  body.  The  offensive 
book  was  not  their  work,  nothing  could  be  made 
of  the  charge,  and  they  were  dismissed.  Other  and 
quieter  methods  were  also  tried  to  win  men  over. 
Spottiswoode,  it  is  said,  instead  of  using  the 
common  seal  of  his  chapter,  as  he  might  have  done, 
on  documents  requiring  their  consent,  very  often 
adopted  the  '  canny  '  device  of  having  the  chapter 
subscribe  with  him  in  charters  and  tacks.  '  The 
reason  is  said  to  be  that  Mr.  William  Scott  and 
Mr.  Alexander  Henderson  being  two  of  the  chapter 
of  St.  Andrews  he  took  the  advantage  to  get  them 
conforming  in  tantum  '  I  ^  Things  were  not  going 
well  for  the  king's  policy ;  they  were  going  so 
badly  that  the  bishops  were  constrained  to  enter 
into  conference  with  representatives  of  the  clergy 
who  refused  to  conform  to  the  Perth  Articles. 
The  Conference  met  at  St.  Andrews  for  three  days, 
November  23-25,  1619.  Two  archbishops  and 
nine  bishops  were  present  with  Lord  Scone,  who 
brought  a  letter  from  the  king;  the  leading  man 
on  the  other  side  was  Henderson.  The  Conference 
broke  up  without  result.  It  was  an  attempt  to 
coerce,  not  to  concihate.  The  king's  instructions 
were  to  depose  all,  without  respect  of  persons,  who 
refused  to  conform.  The  prelates  declared  that 
they  had  no  great  love  for  the  changes  proposed, 
and  would  have  been  content  if  the  Church  of 
Scotland  had  been  without  them,  or  if  they  had  been 
left  optional.  But  the  command  of  the  king  must 
be  obeyed,  that  was  an  end  of  the  matter.  Argu- 
ments of  that  sort,  whether  urged  in  the  passionate 

*  Martine's  Reliquiae  Divi  Andreae,  p.  130. 


HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS        13 

language  of  Spottiswoode  or  the  kindlier  pleadings 
of  Patrick  Forbes  Bishop  of  Aberdeen,  were  not  likely 
to  move  men  who  believed  in  a  self-governing  Church. 
Lord  Scone  broke  out  into  threats  about  reporting 
them  to  the  king  as  refractory;  that  simply  made 
matters  worse.  There  was  no  real  freedom  of 
debate,  the  minority  could  only  respectfully  plead 
their  convictions  and  state  that  they  were  pre- 
pared to  abide  the  issue.  The  unhappy  bishops 
let  Scone  see  that  they  did  not  like  the  work  nor 
admire  his  methods.  They  told  him  the  brethren 
were  quiet,  honest  and  modest  men,  and  they 
would  ask  the  king  to  have  patience.^  The  Con- 
ference was  not  followed  by  any  of  the  dire  results 
which  the  king  had  threatened,  and  things  con- 
tinued very  much  as  before.  On  the  whole 
the  bishops,  though  they  talked  loudly  about  con- 
formity and  occasionally  took  some  steps,  shrank 
from  adopting  a  policy  of  extreme  measures,  and 
what  measures  they  took  met  with  very  meagre 
success. 

It  does  not  appear  that  Henderson  was  further 
molested.  We  may  think  of  him  working  in  his 
quiet  parish,  cultivating  his  gifts,  storing  his  mind 
with  the  learning  of  the  day,  and  meeting  brethren 
at  fasts  and  communions  and  at  conferences  winked 
at  by  the  bishops.  We  may  be  sure  he  was  a 
kindly  father  to  his  people,  caring  about  their 
worldly  affairs  too.  That  he  interested  himself 
in  one  bit  of  parish  business,  quite  important  in 
its  way  to  the  worthy  folks  of  Leuchars  (for  roads 
and  bridges  are  essentials  of  civilisation),  we  know 
from  an  entry  which  can  still  be  read  in  the 
Treasurer's  book  in  St.  Andrews  town  safe.     '  Item 

'  Calderwood's  History  of  the  Kirk  0/ Scotland,  Wodrow  Soc,  vii.  p.  407. 


14  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

given  to  Mr.  Alexr.  Hendersone  at  direction  of  the 
Council  for  reparation  of  the  Inner  Bridge,  conform 
to  an  act  of  Council  according  to  his  discharge 
xl  lib.'  The  Minute-books  of  St.  Andrews  town 
council  go  back  no  further  than  1656,  but  the 
Treasurer's  book  in  which  this  appears  covers  only 
the  year  1624.  We  have,  therefore,  no  further 
knowledge  of  the  matter,  but  it  apparently  refers 
to  repairs  of  the  bridge  over  the  Moiitry  Burn 
between  Guardbridge  and  Leuchars.  Henderson 
and  his  parishioners  were  directly  concerned  be- 
cause the  bridge  is  in  Leuchars  parish.  The 
Moutry  Bum  flows  into  the  estuary  of  the  Eden, 
and  the  road  between  St.  Andrews  and  Leuchars 
crosses  both  it  and  the  river  Eden. 

Repeated  efforts,  all  of  them  unsuccessful,  were 
made  to  induce  him  to  move  from  Leuchars.  In 
view  of  his  subsequent  relations  with  Aberdeen  it 
is  noteworthy  that  in  April  1623  the  town  council 
of  that  burgh  appointed  a  commissioner  to  plead 
for  his  translation  to  one  of  the  churches  of  Aber- 
deen.^ It  is  said  that  in  1631  he  was  called  to 
Stirling,  in  1632  to  Dumbarton.  Authentic  evi- 
dence survives  of  one  such  effort  in  two  letters 
written  by  him  about  this  time  to  Marie,  Countess 
of  Mar.  She  had  apparently  proposed  to  him 
translation  to  another  parish  of  which  Lord  Mar 
was  patron;  both  letters  refer  to  this  subject. 
There  is  no  further  clue  as  to  the  place  nor  as  to 
the  nature  of  the  objection  raised.  The  earlier 
letter  is  in  these  terms  : 

Madame,— I  doubt  not  but  before  this  time  the  causes  of 
my  resolution  and  the  impediments  of  my  transportation 

'  Extracts  from  the  Council  Register  of  Aberdeen  (1670-1626),  Spaldintr 
Club,  ii.  p.  384.  /i    t~       B 


HENDERSON'S  PRIVATE  YEARS         15 

are  made  known  unto  your  Ladyship  by  them  who  can 
dilate  them  more  impartially  than  it  may  be  your  Ladyship 
thinks  I  could  do  myself.  They  can  tell  your  Ladyship 
and  I  think  I  have  declared  ere  now  how  willing  I  was, 
and  not  only  how  willing  but  how  desirous  I  was  to  have 
given  way  to  your  Ladyship's  so  earnest  desire  and  dealing 
if  one  only  objection  could  have  been  answered  which 
myself  neither  did  make  nor  beseemed  it  me  to  make,  but 
they  meeting  the  objection  and  when  they  had  long  thought 
upon  it  finding  no  way  how  to  answer  it,  did  resolve  that 
whatsoever  was  my  particular  desire  and  inclination,  yet 
it  was  nearest  the  will  of  God  and  most  for  the  well  of  the 
kirk  that  I  should  not  remove,  wherein  I  behooved  to  rest 
and  must  intreat  your  Ladyship  to  do  the  like.  If  my 
lord  and  your  Ladyship  had  been  in  any  other  place  than 
Stirling  I  had  come  and  made  my  excuse  myself,  which 
I  might  have  done  confidently  because  I  have  an  inward 
testimony  how  willing  I  was  to  have  done  all  that  lay  in 
my  power  to  give  his  lordship  and  your  ladyship  satisfaction, 
and  shall  while  I  live  remember  with  humble  gratitude  and 
with  my  prayers  to  God  the  respect  and  favour  I  have 
experienced.  The  most  high  God  bless  you  and  yours, 
and  give  unto  you  your  heart's  desire  : — Your  Ladyship's 
servant, 

Alexr.  Henryson. 
Leuchars,  June  26,  1631. 

The  truly  noble  and  most  Christian  lady,  my  lady  the 
Countess  of  Mar,  these. 

The  second  letter  is  as  follows  : — 

Madame, — I  have  delayed  this  time  past  to  write  an  answer 
to  your  Ladyship's  letter,  thinking  to  have  sent  one  to  my 
Lord  and  your  Ladyship,  for  whom  it  had  been  more 
proper  than  for  me  to  have  dilated  the  causes  of  the  in- 
expediency of  my  removal  from  this  part  of  the  country 
where  I  now  serve.  But  now  having  this  occasion  I  have 
thought  fit,  till  your  Ladyship  receive  information,  to 
intreat  your  Ladyship  to  acquiesce  concerning  this  par- 
ticular in  God's  good  providence  and  in  the  resolution  of 
such  as  can  judge  best  what  is  most  behooveful  for  the  good 
of  the  whole,  which  should  be  preferred  to  the  benefit  of 
any  particular   congregation.     Madame,  I  were   the  un- 


16  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

worthiest  of  all  men  if  I  should  be  led  in  this  by  mine  own 
respects,  and  God  knows  how  willingly  I  would  nm  to 
please  my  Lord  and  your  Ladyship  in  everything  wherein 
God  is  not  displeased,  neither  do  I  doubt,  when  your 
Ladyship  thinks  upon  it,  but  your  Ladyship  will  find  others 
more  meet  for  that  charge  that  I  can  be  ;  and  therefore 
most  humbly  beseeching  your  Ladyship  to  bear  with  me 
and  to  use  me  as  before  in  what  I  can  be  serviceable,  I 
recommend  my  Lord,  your  Ladyship,  and  this  whole 
purpose  to  the  Lord's  care,  and  shall  ever  continue, — Your 
Ladyship's  true  Servant 

Alexk.  Henryson. 
Cupar,  June  l6,  l6S2.» 


The  truth  is  he  was  not  ambitious  and  he  loved 
his  country  parish.  It  was  of  those  quiet  and 
fruitful  years  at  Leuchars  he  was  thinking,  when 
long  afterwards  he  wrote  in  the  dedication  of  the 
sermon  preached  before  the  Lords  and  Commons 
in  St.  Margaret's  Church,  Westminster,  on  18th 
July  1644 — one  of  the  few  glimpses  he  gives  us  of 
his  inner  self—'  When  from  my  sense  of  myself 
and  of  my  own  thoughts  and  ways  ...  I  begin 
to  remember  how  men  who  love  to  live  obscurely 
and  in  the  shadow  are  brought  to  light,  to  the 
view  and  talking  of  the  world,  how  men  that  love 
quietness  are  made  to  stir  and  to  have  a  hand  in 
public  business,  how  men  that  love  soliloquies  and 
contemplations  are  brought  upon  debates  and  con- 
troversies .  .  .  the  words  of  the  prophet  Jeremiah 
come  to  my  remembrance,  '  O  Lord,  I  know  that 
the  way  of  man  is  not  in  himself.' 

When  the  hour  of  destiny  struck  it  found  him 
a  man  of  fifty-four,  mature  in  powers  and  strong 
in  conviction  on  the  questions  which  were  soon  to 
stir  Scotland  to  its  depths. 

1  Fourth  Report  of  the  Royal  Commission  on  Historical  MSS. ,  pp.  627-8. 


II 

THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT 

1.  James's  church  policy 

Episcopacy  in  the  Protestant  Church  of  Scotland 
was  suspect  from  its  birth.     Its  introduction  had 
nothing  to  do  with  the  interests  of  reHgion  or  with 
the  well-being  of  the  Church.^     The  Church  herself 
did  not  desire  it,  it  was  brought  in  by  pressure 
from  without  for  political  and  financial  reasons. 
The  ideal  constitution  of  the  reformed  kirk  outlined 
in  the  First  Book  of  Discipline  and  presented  to 
the  State  in  1560  assumed  that  the  patrimony  of 
the  old  Church  would  be  made  available  for  the 
support  of  the  ministers,  maintenance  of  schools, 
and  relief  of  the  poor.     But  this  ideal  was  never 
realised.     The  Scottish  nobles  had  other  and  more 
selfish  views  as  to  the  disposal  of  the  revenues, 
and  the  best  that  could  be  got  was  an  arrangement 
in  1561,  by  which  one-third  of  those  revenues  was 
to  be  used  for  providing  stipends  for  the  ministers 
and  for  general  Crown   purposes,  the  other  two- 
thirds  to  remain  in  the  hands  of  the  old  possessors. 
The  bishops  and  other  dignitaries  of  the  old  Church, 
though  without  spiritual  jurisdiction,  still  continued 
to  be  known  by  their  old  titles  and  to  enjoy  much 
of  their  old   wealth.     As  time   passed   and  they 

'    Cp.    Wishart's   Deed*    of   Montrose,    ed.    Murdoch    and    Simpson, 
xxzviii.  note. 


18  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

began  to  die  off  the  question  arose  what  was  to  be 
done  with  their  revenues.     The  bishops  were  also 
one  of  the  Estates  of  the  realm  sitting  and  voting 
in  Parliament ;    how  was  their  place  in  the  con- 
stitution to  be  filled  ?     It  was  urged  that  if  Church 
and  State  could  agree  the  spiritual  Estate  might  be 
maintained  in  Parliament,  a  closer  conformity  to 
the  Church  of  England  would  be  secured,  and  the 
episcopal  revenues,  or  what  remained  of  them,  might 
be  saved  to  the  Church.     In  January  1572,  when 
Mar  was  regent,  an  ingenious  scheme  was  devised 
by  Morton.     A   Church  convention   was  held   at 
Leith ;   it  appointed  commissioners  to   meet  with 
others  named  by  the  regent  to  treat   *  anent  all 
matters  tending  to  the  ordering  and  establishing  of 
the  policy  of  the  kirk.'     In  the  result  the  com- 
missioners advised  and  the  convention  approved, 
among  other  things,  that  '  in  consideration  of  the 
present  state '  the  names  and  titles  of  archbishops 
and  bishops  were  not  to  be  altered,  but  were  '  to 
stand  and  continue  in  time  coming  as  they  did 
before  the  reformation  of  rehgion.'     It  is  worthy 
of  note,  however,  that  all  archbishops  and  bishops 
were  'to    be    subject   to    the    kirk    and    General 
Assembly.'     The    new    polity    was    repugnant    to 
Knox.     He  was  no  believer  in  the  divine  right  of 
Presbytery,  but  he  feared  that  the  bishops  might 
become    creatures    of    the    State.      He    however 
advised  the  Assembly  to  accept  the  bargain  ad 
interim,  much  as  he  disliked  it.     Very  soon  his 
worst  fears  were  realised,  and  a  long  and  troublous 
chapter  for  Church  and  State  was  opened.     Morton 
immediately  put  the  new  polity  to  the  use  for  which 
he    intended    it.      Notorious    for    greed,    he    had 
obtained  the  benefice  of  St.  Andrews,  vacant  by 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        19 

the  execution  of  Hamilton  the  late  archbishop, 
and  he  at  once  nominated  John  Douglas,  Provost 
of  St.  Mary's  and  Rector  of  the  University,  his 
successor  in  the  See  under  a  compact  which  gave 
him  only  a  small  part  of  the  revenues.  On  10th 
February  1572  Knox  preached  at  St.  Andrews,  and 
Morton  who  was  present  asked  him  to  inaugurate 
the  new  prelate.  Knox  refused.  He  was  within 
a  few  months  of  his  end,  but  his  old  fire  blazed  up, 
'  in  open  audience  of  many  then  present  he  de- 
nounced anathema  to  the  giver,  anathema  to  the 
receiver.'  The  device  which  so  aroused  his  in- 
dignation was  a  fraud  under  the  thinnest  disguise. 
'  My  lord  getteth  the  benefice  and  the  bishop 
serveth  for  a  portion  out  of  the  benefice  to  make 
my  lord's  title  sure.'  The  better  sort  of  ministers 
would  have  nothing  to  do  with  such  a  thing,  only 
weak  or  ambitious  men  were  willing  to  become 
instruments  of  so  dishonest  a  policy.  As  for  the 
laity,  they  dubbed  it  with  a  nickname  humorous 
and  contemptuous  which  every  peasant  in  Scotland 
understood.  The  bishops  were  immortalised  as 
tulchan  bishops.  '  A  tulchan  is  a  calf's  skin 
stuffed  with  straw  to  cause  the  cow  give  milk.' 

Episcopacy  had  made  a  bad  beginning ;  its 
second  phase  was  scarcely  an  improvement.  James, 
born  in  1566,  was  still  a  child,  but  as  he  grew  to 
manhood  there  grew  up  in  his  mind  that  concep- 
tion of  absolute  monarchy  which  it  became  the 
persistent  aim  of  his  life  to  realise.  Another 
conviction  which  strengthened  within  him  was 
that  episcopacy,  government  of  the  Church  by 
bishops  chosen  by  himself,  would  enable  him  to 
realise  that  kind  of  kingship  better  than  presbytery. 
It    became    a    rooted    principle    with    him    that 


20  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

presbytery  '  agreeth  as  well  with  monarchy  as 
God  with  the  devil.'  As  a  matter  therefore  of 
State  poHcy  and  not  from  any  belief  in  the  divine 
right  of  bishops,  James  early  set  himself  to  weaken 
and  destroy  the  presbyterian  system ;  if  he  could 
not  do  that  completely  he  would  at  least  see  that 
what  remained  was  controlled  and  kept  in  subjection 
by  bishops  subservient  to  his  will.  It  cannot  be 
said  that  this  aim  was  pursued  without  deviation ; 
at  times  he  was  diverted  from  it  by  the  stormy 
current  of  events,  but  he  returned  to  it  again,  and 
it  remained  a  ruling  passion  to  the  end. 

We  have  to  remember  that  when  James  set 
about  playing  the  autocrat  the  only  barrier  in  his 
way  was  the  Presbyterian  Church.  This  is  the 
reason  why  the  struggle  in  Scotland  against 
arbitrary  power  was  in  the  main  a  struggle  between 
king  and  Church  not  between  king  and  Parliament. 
In  England  Parliament  was  the  guardian  and 
champion  of  popular  liberty.  But  the  Scottish 
Parliament  filled  no  such  role,  it  played  a  sub- 
ordinate part  in  Scottish  history.  Its  constitution 
was  mainly  feudal ;  from  the  fourteenth  century 
royal  burghs  were  represented  in  it,  but  their 
commissioners  often  absented  themselves,  finding 
attendance  to  be  a  burden,  and  in  the  committees 
where  much  of  the  business  was  done  they  had 
little  real  influence.  Supreme  power  was  some- 
times in  the  hands  of  a  strong  king,  sometimes  of 
a  powerful  noble  or  group  of  nobles,  sometimes  of 
the  General  Assembly,  but  Parliament  was  sub- 
servient to  the  ruler  for  the  time  being,  it  followed 
but  did  not  lead.  It  performed  useful  administra- 
tive functions,  but  it  did  not  govern  or  guide  the 
country. 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        21 

The  Reformed  Parliament  of  1560  may  indeed 
claim  to  have  shown  real  power  and  leadership. 
It  passed  acts  abolishing  the  papal  supremacy 
and  the  mass.  But  even  then  it  was  following, 
not  leading.  It  was  from  Knox  and  his  fellow 
reformers  that  the  request  came  to  Parliament 
to  recognise  by  its  legislation  the  change  which 
had  already  in  fact  taken  place.  A  new  power 
had  arisen  in  the  land.  The  reformed  faith  had 
awakened  the  nation  into  a  new  life.  An  influential 
part  of  the  nobles  had  accepted  it,  the  smaller 
barons  and  the  townspeople  had  heartily  embraced 
it.  These  all  were  represented  in  the  General 
Assembly,  where  the  life  of  the  new  Church  in  an 
organised  form  found  expression.  The  General 
Assembly  stepped  into  the  first  place  in  the 
national  life.  It  was  not  a  gathering  of  ecclesiastics 
alone.  Its  strength  lay  in  the  fact  that  it  contained 
clergy  and  laity,  peers,  smaller  barons,  burgesses, 
all  of  them  popularly  chosen  office-bearers.  It  was 
representative  of  the  whole  Christian  life  of  the 
nation  and  it  was  democratic  in  a  very  real  sense. 
In  it  Scotsmen  learned  the  value  of  debate,  and  by 
its  means  a  public  opinion  was  made  possible. 
The  reformed  faith  created  a  middle  class,  drawing 
together  in  common  sympathy  the  smaller  barons 
and  the  burgesses.  In  1560  those  classes  claimed 
the  right  to  which  they  had  previously  been  in- 
different to  sit  and  vote  in  Parliament,  and  under 
their  influence  the  Parliament  of  that  year  re- 
sponded to  Knox's  request  and  gave  effect  to 
popular  opinion.  The  Church  did  for  Scotland 
what  the  Parliament  did  for  England.  From  the 
Reformation  to  the  Revolution  the  General 
Assembly  largely  moulded  her  history  so  long  as 


22  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

it  was  permitted  to  meet.^     In  the  time  of  Mary 
and  James  and  in  the  early  part  of  Charles  I's 
reign  Parliament  fell  practically  into  the  hands  of 
the  Crown.     It  was  controlled  by  the  Lords  of  the 
Articles,  a  committee  which  drew  up  the  *  articles ' 
or  bills  to  be  laid  before  Parliament :    that  com- 
mittee, owing  to  the  peculiar  mode  of  its  election, 
was  easily  filled  with  men  willing  to  oblige  the  king. 
James  revived  a  former  practice  by  which  it  super- 
seded Parliament,  which  met  only  on  the  first  day 
of  the  session  to  choose  the  committee,  and  on  the 
last  to  pass  its  Articles  into  Acts.     He  bought  off 
the   opposition  of  the  nobles  by  large  grants  of 
Church  lands  and  they  gave  no  trouble  in  his  time. 
The  General  Assembly  alone  offered  resistance  to 
his  measures,  and  the  history  of  his  reign  in  Scotland 
is  largely  the  story  of  the  struggle  between  the 
king  and  the  Assembly.     If  the  king  put  forward 
high    claims    to    supremacy    the    Church    under 
Melville,  repudiating  the  experiment  of  1572,  made 
large  claims  in  the  name  of  spiritual  freedom  and 
interpreted    her    claims    widely.     He    taught    the 
divine  right  of  Presb}i:ery,  and  in  1581  the  Assembly 
adopted   the    Second    Book   of   Discipline,    which 
sharply  differentiated  the  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
bestowed  on  the  Church  directly  by  her  Divine 
Head   from  the   civil   power.     The   Church   court 
known  as  the  presbytery  was  fully  developed,  and 
when  the  hierarchy  of  her  courts  was  completed 
the  Church  both  claimed  and  wielded  great  power 
in  the  land.     The  principle  of  spiritual  independence 
is  a  great  and  vital  one,  but  in  the  conflicts  which 
arose  the  Church  often  pleaded  her  case  too  high. 

1  Rait,  The  Scottvth  Parliament,  p.  98,     Terry,  The  Scottish  Parliament 
(1603-1707),  pp.  106-7. 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        23 

It  maintained,  when  a  minister  was  called  to 
account  before  the  Privy  Council  for  words  spoken 
in  the  pulpit  alleged  to  be  of  a  seditious  or  treason- 
able nature,  that  the  Church  courts  were  the  proper 
tribunal  in  the  first  instance  for  trying  the  case, 
and  it  declined  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Council 
until  the  matter  had  been  remitted  to  them.  Such 
a  plea  would  not  be  made  to-day,  and  if  made 
would  not  be  listened  to.  If  a  preacher  in  the 
pulpit  uses  treasonable  language  or  if  he  slanders 
an  individual,  he  is  answerable  directly  in  the 
criminal  or  civil  courts  like  any  other  citizen 
without  regard  to  the  action  of  Church  courts. 
No  fair  analogy,  however,  can  be  drawn  between 
Melville's  day  and  ours.  The  Church  had  much 
justification  then  for  taking  action  which  would 
be  absurd  and  indefensible  to-day.  Religious 
questions  entered  deeply  into  the  politics  of  the 
time,  and  the  Church  was  entitled  to  express  its 
opinion  and  guide  its  people  on  these.  Scotland 
was  overwhelmingly  Protestant  but  the  reformed 
faith  and  Church  were  not  yet  safe  from  attack. 
The  vast  power  of  Spain  lay  like  a  shadow  over 
the  land,  popish  plots  were  frequently  hatched, 
and  James's  Protestantism  was  suspected  (and 
justly  suspected)  to  be  little  more  than  skin-deep. 
There  was  no  press  to  give  voice  to  public  opinion 
and  no  discussion  in  Parliament.  The  Church 
often  rendered  great  service  on  public  questions, 
and  her  leaders  deserve  admiration  and  gratitude 
for  their  fearless  courage.  They  spoke  out  as  they 
did,  not  as  Buckle  suggests  to  cover  with  con- 
tempt the  great  ones  of  the  earth,  but  to  safeguard 
the  liberties,  religious  and  civil,  which  they  held 
dear.      History    shows    too    many    examples    of 


24  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

servility  to  the  civil  power  on  the  part  of  churchmen 
and  the  ruinous  consequences  which  follow  to 
religion  and  to  the  State.  The  persistent  assertions 
of  royal  absolutism  had  to  be  met  with  a  rugged  and 
even  pugnacious  spirit  of  independence  if  it  was  to 
make  any  impression.  Melville  might  be  choleric 
and  impulsive,  but  '  his  stout  words  in  defence  of 
his  convictions  and  in  defiance  of  authority  arbi- 
trarily used  have  in  them  the  ring  of  a  powerful 
individuality  which  impressed  itself  on  his  country- 
men, and  bequeathed  its  inspiration  to  their  resist- 
ance to  coercive  methods  in  Church  and  State.'  * 

One  of  the  earhest  struggles  was  over  the  case 
of  Montgomery,  tulchan  Archbishop  of  Glasgow, 
in  1581.  In  May  1584  came  a  series  of  Acts, 
popularly  nicknamed  the  '  Black  Acts,'  aimed 
at  the  destruction  of  the  Church's  liberties.  They 
declared  the  king  head  of  the  Church  as  well  as  of 
the  State,  and  forbade  General  AssembUes  to  meet 
without  his  sanction.  Though  the  Black  Acts 
remained  unrepealed  time  brought  its  revenge  to 
the  humiliated  kirk.  In  1592  it  obtained  what 
it  regarded  as  its  Magna  Charta,  an  Act  ratify- 
ing all  previous  legislation  in  its  favour,  and 
formally  sanctioning  its  presbyterian  constitution. 
The  king  had  not  become  a  convert,  it  was  only 
under  the  compulsion  of  circumstances  that  he 
agreed  to  this.  Scotland  was  in  a  state  of  wild 
excitement  and  confusion.  The  Earl  of  Moray— 
'  the  bonny  earl ' — had  been  murdered  at  Donibristle 
and  his  house  burned  by  his  enemy  Huntly,  the 
leading  papist  in  the  country.  The  king  and  his 
chancellor,  Sir  John  Maitland  of  Thirlstane,  were 
suspected  of  having  abetted  the  outrage.     It  was 

1  Mackinnon,  A  History  of  Modern  Liberty,  iii.  p.  211. 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        25 

at  that  juncture  that  James  was  advised  by 
Maitland  to  consent  to  the  passing  of  the  memorable 
Act,  either  as  an  attempt  to  allay  suspicion  against 
himself  or  because  Maitland,  a  sagacious  minister, 
had  become  satisfied  that  a  presbyterian  settlement 
was  in  the  real  interest  of  the  country.  Probably 
both  motives  played  their  part.^ 

'  This  Act,  1592,  cap.  8,  possesses  more  than  historical  importance ; 
a  material  portion  of  it,  and  of  the  earlier  Acts,  1567,  cap.  12,  and  1579, 
cap.  69,  still  remain  on  the  statute  book  and  form  part  of  the  present 
constitution  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  They  illustrate  sixteenth- 
century  notions  of  tlie  relation  between  Church  and  State.  The  State 
was  supposed  to  be  able  and  to  have  a  duty  to  distinguish  between  'the 
true  kirk'  and  others.  To  the  favoured  Church,  'the  true  and  holy 
kirk,'  the  State  'declared  and  granted  jurisdiction.'  Its  action  was 
frankly  intolerant.  It  roundly  declared  there  was  '  no  other  face  of 
kirk  or  other  face  of  religion '  within  the  realm  of  Scotland,  and  '  no 
other  jurisdiction  ecclesiastical  acknowledged  within  this  realm  other 
than  that  which  is  and  shall  be  within  the  said  kirk.'  The  Act  of  1592 
was  an  immense  improvement  on  the  treatment  which  the  Church  had 
previously  been  receiving  at  the  hands  of  the  State,  and  the  Church  was 
deeply  grateful  for  the  boon.  It  was  not  till  the  middle  of  last  century 
that  it  was  judicially  interpreted  and  expounded.  It  was  then  held  that 
the  Act  ratified  the  liberties  of  the  Church,  '  not  as  inherent  in  it  by  any 
divine  right,  but  as  given  and  granted  by  the  king  and  his  predecessors 
and  declared  by  Acts  of  Parliament.'  'The  statute  gives  the  Church 
a  power  of  deposing  for  good  and  just  cause  deserving  deprivation,  and 
they  may  pronounce  censures  specially  grounded  and  warranted  in  the 
Word  of  God.'  'Statute  has  specially  described  the  species  of  authority 
given  to  the  Established  Church.  In  these  statutes  I  find  no  legislative 
power  granted  to  the  Church  placing  any  changes  within  their  com- 
petency.' 'The  Church  court  cannot  go  one  inch  beyond  the  limits 
which  the  law  has  assigned  to  them.'  'Neither  is  there  any  one 
expression  which  vests  in  the  Church  any  legislative  authority  what- 
ever by  which  any  changes  can  be  made  in  discipline,  government, 
doctrine  or  constitution,  or  by  which  any  alterations  whatever  can  be 
introduced  different  from  the  nature  and  elements  of  the  Fistahlishment 
as  originally  created  and  as  it  is  known  to  the  Courts  of  I^w.  .  .  .  The 
statutes  are  framed  with  most  jealous  and  deliberate  caution,  and  I  tliink 
they  settle  and  establish  the  Church  of  Scotland  within  limits  the  most 
precise  and  with  authority  expressly  limited  to  purposes  therein  set 
forth.' 

Did    Henderson   and   his   contemporaries   so   conceive    the  Church's 
liberties?     An  answer  is  suggested  by  the  significant  fact  that  in  1647 


26  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

The  year  1596  marks  another  turning-point  in 
James's  church  pohcy.  He  was  now  thirty  years 
old.  Full  of  self-confidence,  he  was  resolved  to  be 
his  own  minister.  Thirlstane  had  disappeared 
and  there  was  to  be  no  successor,  only  *  such  as 
he  could  correct  or  were  hangable.'  For  four 
years  he  had  suffered  Presbyterian  Church  govern- 
ment and  freedom  of  speech  ;  he  was  now  resolved 
to  undo  the  legislation  of  1592  and  reintroduce  the 
episcopacy  on  which  his  heart  was  set.  He  did 
not  openly  avow  this  policy.  On  the  contrary 
his  methods  were  cautious  and  gradual,  he  took 
skilful  advantage  of  every  opportunity  that  pre- 
sented itself  and  was  content  to  gain  a  step  at  a 
time.  His  moves  were  wary  and  diplomatic, 
betraying  throughout  a  knowledge  of  the  difficulty 
of  the  task,  and  of  the  toughness  of  the  people  he 
had  to  deal  with.  It  became  known  that  he  meant 
to  recall  two  lords,  Huntly  and  Errol,  who  had 
been  exiled  for  complicity  in  a  popish  plot.  The 
General  Assembly  of  March  1596  thundered  its 
denunciations,  and  a  minister  of  St.  Andrews, 
David  Black,  used  highly  reprehensible  language 
from  the  pulpit.  On  30th  November  he  was 
prosecuted  before  the  Privy  Council  for  seditious 
utterances,  and  tendered  a  plea  declining  the 
jurisdiction  of  the  Council  as  incompetent  in  the 
first  instance.  The  plea  was  a  bold  one ;  it  raised 
the  whole  question  of  jurisdiction  between  the 
Crown  and  the  kirk.     The  answer  was  prompt : 

the  General  Assembly^  at  its  own  hand,  set  aside  the  Church's  Confession 
and  adopted  another  newly  made  at  Westminster.  Signs  are  not  awaut- 
ing  to-day,  both  in  Scotland  and  England,  that  union  among  Churches 
and  a  satisfactory  relation  between  Church  and  State  will  depend 
largely  upon  the  recognition  of  the  right  of  self-government  in  all 
Churches. 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        27 

two  Acts  of  Council,  one  dissolving  the  Commission 
of  Assembly  then  sitting  and  ordering  sixteen  of 
the  clerical  leaders  to  leave  the  town,  the  other 
forbidding  all  future  convocations  of  the  clergy 
by  private  or  presbyterial  authority.  Popular 
sympathy  was  with  Black.  On  17th  December 
the  excitement  reached  a  climax  :  a  foolish  tumult 
broke  out  in  Edinburgh  on  the  rumour  of  a  popish 
plot,  the  cry  was  raised  that  the  king  and  judges 
who  were  sitting  in  the  Tolbooth  and  the  pres- 
byterian  leaders  in  the  neighbouring  East  Kirk 
were  to  be  massacred.  This  tumult  gave  the 
king  his  opening ;  he  issued  an  Act  of  Council 
removing  the  law  courts  from  Edinburgh,  degrad- 
ing it  in  fact  from  the  position  of  capital  of 
the  kingdom.  In  a  fortnight  he  returned  from 
Linlithgow,  to  which  he  had  retired,  but  only 
after  forcing  the  city,  which  had  begged  for  peace, 
to  agree  to  humiliating  conditions  before  he  restored 
it  to  royal  favour.  Some  of  the  clerical  chiefs 
fled  to  England;  the  whole  body  was  thoroughly 
cast  down  and  disheartened. 

The  king  took  care  to  follow  up  his  advantage. 
In  1597  he  dealt  the  Church  two  blows  which 
broke  her  power.  On  his  own  authority  he  sum- 
moned two  Assemblies,  the  first  at  Perth  in  Feb- 
ruary, the  second  in  May  at  Dundee,  arranging 
to  have  an  unusual  number  of  northern  brethren 
present,  less  ardent  in  their  presbyterianism  and 
more  amenable  to  royal  management.  The  upshot 
of  these  two  Assemblies  was  the  appointment  of 
a  standing  committee  of  fourteen  ministers  to 
advise  the  king  generally  on  all  matters  concerning 
the  welfare  of  the  kirk.  The  fourteen  chosen 
were  of  course  most  of  them  men  of  the  less  extreme 


28  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

and  more  courtly  type.  Their  appointment  was 
rightly  regarded  as  a  matter  of  first  importance  ; 
it  really  subverted  the  presbyterian  system  and, 
in  the  words  of  James  Melville,  '  devolved  and 
transferred  the  whole  power  of  the  General  Assembly 
in  the  hands  of  the  king  and  his  ecclesiastical 
council.'  The  results  were  soon  apparent.  They 
presented  to  the  Parliament  which  met  in  December 
1597  a  petition  asking  that  ministers  should  have 
a  seat  and  vote  in  Parliament.  Wliat  they  had 
in  view  was  a  parliamentary  representation  of  the 
whole  of  the  clergy  by  «ommissioners  either  all 
clerical  or  partly  lay  elders,  so  that  the  affairs  of 
the  kirk  might  thereby  receive  more  attention 
from  Parliament.  This  was  a  dangerous  step  for 
the  Church  and  it  was  resisted  by  the  stricter  and 
more  clear-sighted  presbyterians.  Advantage  was 
taken  of  it  by  the  king  to  induce  Parliament  to  pass 
an  Act  of  a  wholly  different  kind,  declaring  that 
'  all  ministers  provided  to  prelacies  should  have 
a  vote  in  Parliament.'  It  was  plain  from  this 
that  he  meant  to  bring  bishops  back  to  their  old 
pre-eminence  and  power,  but  to  make  matters 
more  palatable  it  was  added  that  presentees  to 
bishoprics  were  to  continue  to  act  as  pastors,  and 
that  there  should  be  no  prejudice  to  the  existing 
system  of  Church  judicatories. 

The  following  year,  1598,  saw  a  further  advance 
along  the  same  road.  An  Assembly  held  at  Dundee 
in  March  decided  by  a  majority  of  ten  that  it  was 
expedient  for  the  welfare  of  the  kirk  as  Third 
Estate  of  the  realm  that  the  ministry  should  sit 
and  vote  in  Parliament,  that  their  number  should 
be  fifty-one  or  thereby,  according  to  the  number 
of  the  bishops,  abbots  and  priors  '  in  the  time  of 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        29 

the  papistical  kirk.'  Then  in  July  came  an  ex- 
traordinary ecclesiastical  Convention  at  Falkland 
for  the  purpose  of  completing  the  arrangements  for 
the  representation  of  the  clergy  in  Parliament. 
It  agreed  to  recommend  to  the  next  General 
Assembly  that  when  a  prelacy  fell  vacant  the  kirk 
should  name  six,  of  whom  the  king  should  appoint 
one.  Then  followed  a  variety  of  '  cautions  '  and 
restrictions  intended  to  preserve  as  much  as 
possible  of  presbyterian  parity  and  of  the  power 
of  the  kirk.  Most  significant  of  all  is  the  careful 
avoidance  of  the  term  '  bishop '  :  the  person 
elected  is  simply  '  commissioner '  for  a  certain 
district ;  he  is  to  propose  nothing  in  Parliament 
without  express  direction  from  the  Church,  and  is 
to  give  an  account  of  his  proceedings  to  the  General 
Assembly  ;  he  is  to  fulfil  all  the  duties  of  the 
pastoral  office  and  be  subject  like  other  ministers 
to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Church  courts.  The 
Church  was  fighting  a  losing  battle.  Meanwhile 
she  saved  her  face  by  paper  conditions  which 
she  knew  could  not  long  stand  and  which  the 
king  intended  should  shortly  disappear.  '  To 
have  matters  peaceably  ended,'  says  Spottis- 
woode,  'the  king  gave  way  to  these  conceits, 
knowing  that  with  time  the  utility  of  the  govern- 
ment which  he  purposed  to  have  established 
would  appear.' 

The  Assembly  following  the  Falkland  Con- 
vention did  not  meet  until  March  1600  at  Montrose. 
In  the  interval  the  king  summoned  a  conference 
of  leading  clergy  at  Holy  rood  in  November  1599. 
He  was  partial  to  meetings  of  this  smaller  kind 
called  by  himself ;  they  enabled  him  to  take 
soundings    of    clerical    opinion    and    possibly    to 


30  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

manage  men  more  conveniently  than  could  be 
done  in  the  larger  assembUes.  His  purpose  in  the 
present  case  was  to  discuss  in  an  informal  way 
some  important  matters  preparatory  to  the  ensuing 
Assembly.  He  himself  took  a  leading  part  in  the 
discussion.  The  main  questions  were  whether  it 
was  consistent  with  the  clerical  office  that  ministers 
should  undertake  positions  of  civil  authority, 
whether  if  there  should  be  prelates  or  parliamentary 
clergy  they  should  be  elected  annually  or  ad  vitam 
aut  culpam,  whether  such  clergy  should  have  the 
name  of  bishops  or  some  other  name.  It  is  said 
there  was  a  disposition  to  acquiesce  in  the  king's 
views,  but  the  redoubtable  Andrew  Melville  was 
present  and  his  influence  on  the  other  side  was 
strong.  The  Montrose  Assembly,  when  it  met  in 
the  following  March  1600,  adopted  the  recommenda- 
tions of  the  Falkland  Convention.  James  went  to 
Montrose  and  used  his  influence  especially  over  the 
northern  ministers  :  Melville  was  there  too,  equally 
active  no  doubt,  though  not  a  member.  The 
Assembly  also  considered  the  question  of  the 
tenure  of  office  of  the  kirk  commissioners  in  Parlia- 
ment, and  decided  by  a  small  majority  that  it 
should  be  from  year  to  year  only.  This  was  still 
a  long  way  from  the  episcopal  government  for 
which  the  king  was  working,  yet  it  is  true  that  the 
Trojan  horse  had  been  brought  in — '  busked,'  says 
Calderwood,  '  and  covered  with  caveats  that  the 
danger  and  deformity  might  not  be  seen.' 

In  August  of  this  year,  1600,  there  happened 
the  mysterious  affair  known  in  Scottish  history  as 
the  Gowrie  Conspiracy,  and  James  very  skilfully 
utihsed  it  as  a  new  instrument  for  the  subjection  of 
the   clergy   and  the   advancement   of  his   church 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        31 

policy.^  There  was  in  various  quarters  considerable 
scepticism  as  to  the  version  of  that  affair  pubUshed 
by  the  king,  but  he  strangely  enough  insisted  that 
the  clergy  must  believe  in  the  conspiracy,  and  also 
must  make  public  profession  of  that  belief.  Within 
a  week  the  five  ministers  of  Edinburgh,  being 
among  the  doubters,  were  suspended  from  their 
charges  and  banished  from  the  town,  and  shortly 
thereafter  five  others,  more  sound  or  compliant  on 
the  question,  were  appointed  to  officiate  in  their 
places  till  other  arrangements  were  made.  In 
October  another  Convention  was  summoned  to 
meet  at  Holyrood,  consisting  of  the  Church  com- 
missioners appointed  by  the  last  Assembly 
together  with  delegates  from  the  different  Synods. 
It  was  called  to  advise  the  king  on  various  Church 
matters  but  chiefly  as  to  what  should  be  done  with 
the  five  offending  ministers.  Four  of  the  five 
had  already  submitted,  the  fifth,  Robert  Bruce 
whose  acquaintance  we  have  made,  stood  out  and 
was  under  sentence  of  banishment  from  Scotland. 
The  fate  of  the  other  four  was  discussed,  and  a 
deputation  was  sent  to  them  to  ascertain  whether 
they  would  gratify  the  king  by  consenting  to  accept 
charges  out  of  Edinburgh.  The  deputies  sent  were 
three  men  all  belonging  to  the  staunch  Presbyterian 
party.  It  was  while  these  stalwarts  were  absent  on 
this  errand  that  the  king  carried  his  great  coup. 
A  proposal  was  brought  forward  and  rapidly  agreed 
to  nominating  three  parish  ministers  as  diocesan 
bishops.  David  Lindsay  of  Leith,  Peter  Blackburn 
of  Aberdeen,  and  George  Gledstanes  of  St.  Andrews, 
were  to  be  respectively  bishops  of  Ross,  Aberdeen 
and  Caithness,  the  only  three  sees  the  temporalities 

'  Register  0/ Privy  Council,  vol.  vi.  pp.  xxiv.-xxv.  (Introd.). 


32  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

of  which  were  not  then  in  the  hands  of  laymen.  It 
was  by  this  discreditable  manceuvro  that  diocesan 
episcopacy  was  brought  in.  No  long  time  passed 
before  two  of  the  new  bishops  were  appointed  to 
offices  of  civil  authority  in  addition  to  their  seat  in 
Parliament  :  Lindsay  was  admitted  to  the  Privy 
Council  in  December  1600,  Gledstanes  in  November 
1602. 

When  James  migrated  to  England  in  1603  he 
did  not  forget  the  Church  of  Scotland.  His  ex- 
perience of  an  Anglican  atmosphere  was  so  agreeable 
that  he  became  if  possible  the  more  determined  to 
carry  on  and  complete  the  assimilation  of  the 
smaller  Church  to  the  larger,  and  his  enhanced 
power  and  dignity  enabled  him  to  do  this  with 
vastly  greater  effect.  The  Scottish  Church  still 
retained  her  hierarchy  of  Church  courts.  If  he 
could  crush  the  General  Assemblies  he  believed  the 
whole  system  would  fall  to  pieces.  He  resolved 
therefore  to  strike  a  blow  at  this  vital  spot.  The 
next  Assembly  had  already  been  appointed  to 
meet  at  Aberdeen  in  July  1604.  When  that  time 
approached  it  was  announced  that  by  royal  in- 
structions the  Assembly  was  not  to  be  held.  Three 
ministers  put  in  an  appearance  and  lodged  a 
protest,  and  very  soon  excitement  spread  through 
the  presbyteries  and  synods.  James  answered 
by  a  proclamation  forbidding  extraordinary  meet- 
ings of  the  ministry ;  in  reality  he  was  asserting 
his  right  to  postpone  General  Assemblies  as  he 
pleased.  The  first  Tuesday  of  July  1605  was 
then  fixed  as  the  date  of  meeting.  Again  it 
became  known  that  the  king  had  countermanded 
the  meeting  and  the  excitement  was  greater 
than    before.     A    number    of    presbyteries    had 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        33 

appointed  their  representatives,  and  this  time  they 
intended  to  go  at  all  hazards  and  assert  their 
rights  by  constituting  the  Assembly.  An  act  of 
Privy  Council  ordered  a  charge  to  be  given  to  all 
such  to  desist  from  the  attempt  under  pain  of 
horning,  in  other  words  being  denounced  as  rebels. 
On  the  2nd  of  July  nineteen  parish  ministers  met 
in  Aberdeen  as  representatives  from  their  pres- 
byteries, constituted  themselves  an  Assembly, 
appointed  a  moderator  and  clerk,  drafted  a  reply 
to  the  Privy  Council's  letter,  named  a  date  for 
an  adjourned  Assembly  in  September  and  then 
dissolved.  Three  days  later  ten  more  arrived 
who  had  been  delayed  by  stress  of  weather.  They 
adhered  to  all  that  had  already  been  done  by  their 
brethren,  and  had  their  adhesion  formally  wit- 
nessed and  registered. 

James  was  furious,  and  ordered  the  offenders  to 
be  proceeded  against  for  '  rebellion.'  Fourteen 
of  them  stood  their  ground  and  were  tried  in 
October  before  the  Privy  Council.  They  took  the 
bold  plea  that  the  Privy  Council  was  incompetent 
to  try  them  for  their  conduct  in  so  purely  an 
ecclesiastical  matter  as  the  holding  of  a  General 
Assembly.  They  were  of  course  condemned  and 
sent  to  prison  to  await  the  king's  pleasure.  But 
worse  remained.  The  king  resolved  to  treat  the 
declinator  given  in  by  the  fourteen  as  high  treason, 
and  now  ordered  them  to  be  tried  on  the  capital 
charge.  In  January  1606  six  were  brought  to 
trial  before  an  assize  court  at  Linlithgow,  and  by 
means  of  prodigious  efforts  on  the  part  of  the 
Earl  of  Dunbar,  who  came  down  from  England  to 
manage  the  matter,  nine  out  of  fifteen  jurymen 
were  induced  to  return  a  verdict  of  guilty.     The 


84  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

next  stroke  in  the  policy  of  terror  was  to  summon 
eight  of  the  leading  ministers  to  appear  in  London 
in  September  1606,  ostensibly  for  the  purpose  of 
conference  on  the  affairs  of  the  Church.  The  real 
purpose  was  to  entrap  the  two  Melvilles,  who  had 
supported  by  their  presence  and  advice  their  six 
brethren  on  their  trial  for  treason,  and  to  clear  them 
off  the  field.  James  Melville  was  forbidden  to 
set  foot  in  Scotland  again,  Andrew  was  kept  in 
prison  for  some  years  and  then  driven  out  of  the 
kingdom.  On  6th  November  1606  the  six  who  had 
been  capitally  condemned  were  put  on  board  a 
ship  at  Leith  and  sent,  like  Melville,  into  lifelong 
exile.  One  of  the  six  was  John  Welsh  of  Ayr, 
Knox's  son-in-law. 

By  these  blows  James  had  now,  as  he  thought, 
effectually  quelled  the  spirit  of  the  Church.  He 
would  be  plagued  no  more  by  the  voice  of  General 
Assemblies  proclaiming  their  inherent  jurisdiction 
and  refusing  to  acknowledge  his  supremacy  in 
matters  ecclesiastical.  With  an  easier  mind  and 
with  less  disguise  he  might  proceed  to  complete 
the  diocesan  episcopacy  which  had  been  so  cautiously 
begun.  In  July  1606  Parliament  had  passed 
two  Acts  which  advanced  this  policy.  The  first 
extended  the  royal  prerogative  over  all  estates, 
persons,  and  causes  whatsoever.  The  second  re- 
pealed an  Act  of  1587  annexing  ecclesiastical 
property  to  the  Crown,  and  restored  the  estate  of 
bishops  to  their  ancient  honours  and  dignities. 
This  legislation  did  much  to  enhance  the  social 
importance  of  the  titular  Scottish  bishops,  who  by 
this  time  had  increased  in  number  to  ten.  But 
it  was  an  essential  part  of  James's  modtcs  operandi 
to  use  the  kirk  itself  to  carry  out  his  plans  :    he 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        35 

had  the  wit  to  clothe  his  proceedings,  however 
autocratic  they  might  be,  with  at  least  a  decent 
semblance  of  legality.  He  employed  again  his 
favourite  device  of  a  clerical  Convention  nominated 
by  himself.  It  met  at  Linlithgow  in  December 
1606,  and  contained  one  hundred  and  thirty-six 
of  the  clergy,  with  members  of  the  nobility  and 
Privy  Council.  It  adopted  a  new  scheme  of 
the  king  for  Constant  Moderatorships.  Pres- 
byteries were  to  be  presided  over  not  as  hitherto 
by  a  member  elected  for  a  certain  period,  but  by 
a  bishop  or  some  other  minister  as  perpetual 
president.  The  scheme  of  course  struck  at  the 
principle  of  presbyterian  parity,  it  was  chosen 
for  that  reason.  The  fifty- three  presbyteries  were 
provided  with  as  many  constant  moderators  who 
were  thereby  raised  to  a  certain  position  of  pre- 
eminence among  their  brethren,  and  the  king  was 
careful  to  refer  in  future  to  the  Convention  by  the 
glorified  title  of  the  General  Assembly  at  Linlithgow. 
The  records  of  the  Prfvy  Council  reveal  considerable 
conflict  in  the  Church  over  this  new  bone  of  con- 
tention, but  the  conflict  grew  sharper  when  it 
appeared,  as  early  as  April  1607,  that  the  king 
meant  to  stretch  the  act  of  the  Linlithgow  Con- 
vention to  cover  Constant  Moderatorships  in  the 
Provincial  Synods.  The  Constant  Moderator  of  a 
Synod  was  to  be  a  bishop  wherever  there  was  one, 
and  this  meant  nothing  less  than  a  reintroduction 
of  diocesan  episcopacy.  By  October  1607  James 
had  increased  the  episcopate  to  the  full  pre- 
Reformation  number :  the  bishops  were  now 
members  of  the  Privy  Council,  and  in  State  gather- 
ings and  public  documents  they  ranked  with  the 
highest  of  the  nobility.      In  1610  two  Courts  of 


86  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

High  Commission  were  established  (consohdated 
in  1615  into  one)  to  try  all  sorts  of  ecclesiastical 
offences.  An  archbishop  and  any  four  of  the 
clergymen  or  laymen  named  in  the  Act  were  to 
constitute  a  court.  They  could  suspend,  deprive, 
fine,  and  imprison  '  offenders  either  in  life  or  re- 
ligion whom  they  hold  any  way  to  be  scandalous.' 

In  June  of  the  same  year,  1610,  a  General 
Assembly  was  at  length  held  after  repeated  pro- 
rogations. It  sat  in  Glasgow,  and  the  results  were 
a  triumph  of  skilful  management  on  the  part  of 
the  Earl  of  Dunbar,  the  king's  commissioner,  aided 
by  the  prelates.  The  acts  passed  acknowledged 
the  right  of  calling  General  Assemblies  as  belonging 
wholly  to  the  king's  prerogative,  converted  the 
Provincial  Synods  into  Diocesan  Synods  with  the 
bishops  as  moderators  ex  officio,  bound  the  clergy 
to  take  an  oath  on  admission  to  livings  acknowledg- 
ing the  royal  supremacy  in  Church  as  well  as  in 
State,  and  defined  and  secured  the  powers  of  the 
bishops  within  their  dioceses  by  various  regulations. 
It  is  true  presbyteries  were  not  actually  abolished, 
but  in  the  language  of  the  Assembly's  acts  the 
word  presbytery  was  carefully  avoided  and  men 
were  discouraged  even  to  use  the  name.  The 
effort  so  made  to  '  erase  the  word  presbjrtery  from 
the  Scottish  vocabulary '  marks  the  extreme 
historical  importance  of  the  Glasgow  Assembly 
of  June  1610.1 

So  remarkable  a  harvest  was  not  reaped  even  in 
the  then  enfeebled  condition  of  presbyterian  senti- 
ment without  the  most  careful  preparation  of  the 
ground.  The  Assembly  was  called  on  the  short 
notice  of  a  fortnight,  the  clerical  members  were 

'  Register  of  Privy  Council,  viii.  pp.  47^-5  {note). 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        37 

nominees  of  the  king  through  the  bishops,  and  the 
lay  members  were  also  appointed  by  the  king. 
The  business  was  so  managed  as  to  prevent  any 
small  amount  of  presbyterian  opinion  from  finding 
expression,  and  money  was  freely  used  to  secure 
the  concurrence  of  the  clergy.  '  It  is  our  pleasure,' 
so  runs  the  royal  letter  to  the  Earl  of  Dunbar, 
'  that  against  this  ensuing  Assembly  to  be  kept 
in  our  city  of  Glasgow  you  shall  have  in  readiness 
the  sum  of  ten  thousand  merks,  Scottish  money, 
to  be  divided  and  dealt  among  such  persons  as  you 
shall  hold  fitting  by  the  advice  of  the  Archbishops 
of  St.  Andrews  and  Glasgow.'  ^ 

The  episcopacy  thus  set  up  could  not  claim 
after  all  to  be  more  than  a  sort  of  parliamentary 
episcopacy.  Whether  or  not  it  would  have  satisfied 
the  earlier  divines  of  the  Church  of  England,  it 
did  not  square  with  the  High  Anglican  theory  now 
coming  into  vogue.  James  desired  the  finishing 
touch  put  to  his  handiwork,  and  to  that  end 
Archbishop  Spottiswoode  and  two  bishops  were 
summoned  to  London  in  September  1610  to  receive 
episcopal  confirmation  at  the  hands  of  three 
English  bishops  :  they  in  turn  transmitted  the 
virtue  of  the  episcopal  touch  to  their  Scottish 
colleagues.  The  Parliament  of  1612  formally 
ratified  the  acts  of  the  Glasgow  Assembly  of  1610 
establishing  episcopacy,  and  repealed  the  presby- 
terian Magna  Charta  of  1592. 

Thus  was  completed  in  1612  King  James's  work 
of  remodelling  the  ecclesiastical  polity  of  Scotland 
to  this  extent  that  he  had  grafted  the  office  of 
bishop  on  to  the  presbyterian  system.  For  four 
years  thereafter  no  General  Assembly  was  held. 

'  Hegitter  of  Privy  Council,  viii.  p.  844. 


38  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

But  the  inferior  Church  courts,  the  kirk- sessions, 
presbyteries,  and  synods,  still  continued  to  meet. 
And — what  touched  the  laity  most  closely— the 
presbyterian  mode  of  conducting  public  worship, 
the  use  of  Knox's  Book  of  Common  Order  and  of 
the  black  Geneva  gown  remained  unchanged. 

But  the  king  was  not  content  to  leave  well  alone. 
Had  he  stopped  at  this  point  it  is  possible  the 
future  history  of  Scotland  and  England  might  have 
been  very  different.  Now  he  opened  a  new 
chapter,  miconscious  of  the  dangers  ahead.  He 
dreamed  of  introducing  into  the  simple  Scottish 
worship,  which  gave  prominence  to  the  preaching 
and  teaching  function  of  the  Church  as  represented 
by  the  sermon,  the  elaborate  ritual  and  ceremonial 
of  the  Church  of  England.  His  first  move  was 
to  call  an  Assembly  at  Aberdeen  in  1616.  We 
have  already  seen  what  changes  it  proposed  and 
how  displeased  the  king  was  with  its  faintheartedness. 
In  the  following  year,  1617,  James  visited  Scotland 
for  the  first  time  since  he  had  left  it  in  1603.  What- 
ever the  professed  object  of  the  visit  it  soon  became 
plain  to  every  one  that  his  true  object  was  to 
advance  his  new  Church  policy.  Services  in  the 
royal  chapel  at  Holyrood — especially  fitted  up  for 
the  occasion — were  conducted  by  English  ecclesi- 
astics whom  he  had  brought  with  him  (Laud 
among  the  number),  and  were  meant  as  a  lesson 
to  the  Scottish  people  how  divine  service  should 
be  conducted.  The  next  move  was  made  when 
Parliament  met  on  17th  June.  A  bill  was  pre- 
pared which  provided  that  whatever  conclusion 
should  be  taken  by  the  king  with  the  advice  of 
the  archbishops  and  bishops  in  external  matters 
of  Church  policy  would  have  the  force  of  law.     The 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        39 

prelates  themselves  were  alarmed  at  the  boldness 
of  this  proposal :  they  told  the  king  that  Scottish 
precedent  required  the  consent  of  the  body  of 
presbyters  met  in  General  Assembly,  and  he  agreed 
to  add  that  the  advice  of  'a  competent  number 
of  the  ministry  '  should  also  be  required.  Even 
this  was  vague  and  unsatisfactory,  and  when 
rumour  spread  of  the  proposed  statute  an  ex- 
plosion among  the  clergy  took  place,  and  a  protest 
was  drawn  up  for  presentation  to  the  king.  James 
recognised  that  his  proposed  act  was  highly  un- 
popular and  quietly  dropped  it.  But  he  was 
determined  to  achieve  his  purpose,  and  if  one 
means  failed  he  would  try  another.  He  summoned 
a  clerical  Conference  at  St.  Andrews  for  13th  July. 
It  was  in  fact  just  such  a  gathering  as  hisHlraft  bill 
contemplated.  Some  thirty-six  parish  clergy  were 
present  in  addition  to  the  archbishops  and  bishops. 
James  brought  forward  the  same  five  articles 
about  which  Spottiswoode  had  warned  him  in 
1616,  and  asked  whether  the  Conference  would 
agree  that  they  were  desirable  and  should  be  in- 
troduced. He  was  told  the  articles  proposed  were 
of  too  high  and  grave  a  nature  to  be  decided  in  any 
other  way  than  by  the  consent  of  a  General 
Assembly.  He  took  the  rebuff  with  what  grace 
he  could  and  quitted  Scotland  in  August  far  from 
pleased  at  his  repeated  failures. 

Very  unwillingly  the  king  agreed  to  the  calling 
of  a  General  Assembly.  The  bishops  promised 
to  see  that  the  men  who  composed  it  would  be  safe 
for  the  purpose  in  hand.  It  met  on  25th  November 
at  St.  Andrews,  and  proved  a  failure.  The  Com- 
missioner was  ill,  seven  of  the  bishops  were  absent, 
the  attendance  of  the  clergy  was  disappointingly 


40  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

small,  and  their  courage  was  correspondingly 
feeble.  The  next  attempt  met  with  greater  success. 
This  was  the  famous  Perth  Assembly  which  sat 
from  25th  till  27th  August  1618.  The  royal 
proclamation  described  it  as  *  A  National  Assembly  ' 
and  the  title  was  significant.  It  was  not  an 
Assembly  composed  of  members  elected  as  re- 
presentatives of  the  kirk  itself;  it  consisted  of 
nobles,  barons,  and  burgesses,  nominated  by  the 
king,  and  many  of  the  clerical  members  were 
selected  by  careful  manipulation  on  the  part  of  the 
bishops,  who  were  resolved  that  there  should  be  no 
failure  this  time  to  secure  a  majority  in  favour  of 
the  king's  proposals.  The  result  was  a  triumph 
for  the  king,  who  by  letter  to  the  Privy  Council 
ratified  the  acts  of  the  Perth  Assembly  and  ordered 
a  proclamation  to  that  effect  to  be  made  by  them. 
This  was  done  on  21st  October  1618,  and  on  4th 
August  1621  the  Five  Articles  were  ratified  by  a 
majority  in  Parliament. 

This  review  of  King  James's  ecclesiastical  policy 
in  Scotland  leaves  on  the  mind  the  impression  of 
a  man  very  different  from  the  traditional  picture 
of  him.  He  is  by  no  means  the  weakling  of 
Macaulay's  pages,  least  of  all  is  he  a  weakling  in 
the  government  of  Scotland.  His  Church  policy 
there  proves  that  he  possessed  strength  of  will, 
adroitness  of  method,  and  skill  in  managing  men. 
He  broke  down  the  resistance  of  strong  and  deter- 
mined opponents,  he  imposed  his  will  upon  the 
Scottish  Privy  Council  which  counted  among  its 
members  many  able  administrators  who  in  various 
matters  differed  from  the  king,  but  were  reduced 
to  humble  submissiveness  by  a  character  and  a 
will  stronger  than  their  own.     Nor  was  this  the 


THE  CxROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        41 

case  only  in  regard  to  ecclesiastical  matters,  it 
was  the  same  over  the  whole  field  of  government. 
After  1603  still  more  than  before  it,  he  ruled  Scot- 
land as  absolute  monarch.  He  expressed  no  more 
than  the  literal  truth  when  he  told  an  English 
Parliament  in  1607  :  *  This  I  must  say  for  Scot- 
land, and  I  may  truly  vaunt  it :  here  I  sit  and 
govern  it  with  my  pen  ;  I  write  and  it  is  done  ; 
and  by  a  Clerk  of  the  Council  I  govern  Scotland 
now,  which  others  could  not  do  by  the  sword.' 

Yet  his  policy  was  by  no  means  so  successful 
as  he  imagined.  He  flattered  himself  he  knew 
'  the  stomach  of  that  people,'  but  he  had  in  truth 
little  understanding  of  their  deeper  religious  feel- 
ings. Time  was  to  show,  though  he  would  not  live 
to  see  it,  that  the  ecclesiastical  structure  he  reared 
so  laboriously  was  built  on  sand.  His  bishops 
failed  to  win  the  confidence  of  the  Scottish  people. 
The  Earl  of  Rothes  records  a  conversation  with 
Spottiswoode  their  leader  touching  King  Charles's 
Service  Book.  The  prelate  treated  Rothes's  objec- 
tions to  the  doctrine  of  the  book  as  a  matter 
for  laughter.  '  What  needed  this  resistance  ?  '  he 
asked.  '  If  the  king  would  turn  papist  we  behoved 
to  obey  :  who  could  resist  princes  ?  When  King 
Edward  was  a  Protestant  and  made  a  reformation 
Queen  Mary  changed  it,  and  Queen  Elizabeth 
altered  it  again  ;  and  so  there  was  no  resisting  of 
princes,  and  there  was  no  kirk  without  troubles.' 
It  was  the  same  Spottiswoode  who,  sitting  in  the 
court  of  High  Commission  at  the  trial  of  a  minister 
for  refusing  the  Perth  Articles,  admitted  that  the 
Church  was  well  before  they  were  introduced  and 
would  still  be  well  if  they  were  withdrawn,  but 
added  cynically,  '  I  tell  you,  Mr.  John,  the  king 


42  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

is  pope  now  and  so  will  be.'  Moderate  church- 
men who  carried  their  moderation  to  such  a  pitch 
of  indifferentism,  who  in  matters  of  religion  took 
their  opinions  or  their  orders  from  a  king,  were 
not  likely  to  stand  well  in  the  eyes  of  their  country- 
men. Those  seventeenth-century  Moderates  have 
been  called  men  of  peace.  They  certainly  deserve 
to  be  credited  with  advising  the  king  to  moderate 
courses,  and  with  an  unwillingness  to  stir  up  strife 
with  their  brethren  over  the  unpopular  Perth 
Articles.  Some  of  them  were  amiable  and  learned 
men,  one,  Patrick  Forbes  Bishop  of  Aberdeen, 
was  a  patron  of  learning  and  as  a  pastor  able, 
earnest,  and  devoted.  But  it  remains  true  that 
James  was  the  champion  of  absolutism  in  Church 
and  State,  and  that  the  presbyterian  Church  leaders 
of  his  day,  alone  in  Scotland,  were  the  opponents 
of  arbitrary  power.  Freedom's  battle  is  not  won 
by  men,  however  excellent  their  character  or  en- 
lightened their  sentiments,  who  take  sides  with 
the  tyrant  and  become  his  agents,  willing  or  un- 
willing. In  the  struggle  for  civil  or  religious 
liberty  men  may  say  harsh  things  of  their  opponents 
or  take  up  too  extreme  positions.  A  later  age  will 
make  allowance  for  such  failings,  as  it  will  be 
ready  also  to  see  the  good  in  men  of  opposite 
sides.  But  we  cannot  in  fairness  forget  that  it 
was  by  the  efforts  and  sacrifices  of  the  men  who 
resisted  James's  policy  and  of  those  who  inherited 
their  principles  that  arbitrary  power  in  our  land 
was  finally  broken. 

Meanwhile  discontent  grew  deep  and  strong. 
Of  this  there  could  be  no  more  striking  evidence 
than  the  remarkable  letters  which  passed  between 
the  king  and  Privy  Council  in  1606,  in  regard  to 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        43 

the  prosecution  of  the  six  ministers  for  treason. 
How  disagreeable  and  difficult  a  business  that  trial 
and  conviction  had  been  the  Secretary  Balmerino, 
writing  in  January  1606  immediately  after  the 
trial,  labours  to  make  the  king  understand.^ 
'  Wherein  if  these,  upon  whom  your  Majesty  re- 
poses the  trust  of  your  service  here,  had  any  diffi- 
culty God  knows,  and  oft  they  wished,  if  so  it 
might  have  been  your  Majesty's  good  pleasure, 
that  your  Majesty  might  have  seen  the  innumer- 
able straits  whereunto  they  were  drawn.'  Indeed 
but  for  a  straining  of  the  law  the  verdict  would 
not  have  been  got.  '  And  to  dissemble  nothing, 
if  the  Earl  of  Dunbar  had  not  been  with  us  and 
partly  by  his  dexterity  in  advising  what  was 
fittest  to  be  done  in  everything,  and  partly  by  the 
authority  he  had  over  his  friends,  of  whom  a 
great  many  passed  upon  the  assize,  and  partly  for 
that  some  stood  in  awe  of  his  presence,  knowing 
that  he  would  make  faithful  relation  to  your 
Majesty  of  every  man's  part,  the  turn  had  not 
passed  so  well  as,  blessed  be  God,  it  has.' 

The  king's  reply  amazed  and  alarmed  the  Council. 
They  were  commanded  to  bring  to  trial,  on  the 
same  charge  of  treason,  the  remaining  eight  of 
the  fourteen  lying  in  prison  for  their  conduct  in 
the  matter  of  the  Aberdeen  Assembly.  The  reply 
was  a  warm  remonstrance,  in  which  the  king  was 

'  Register  of  Privy  Council,  vol.  vii.  p.  478.  'I'his  correspondence 
furnishes  valuable  confirmntion  of  the  Lonl  Advocate  Hamilton's  letter 
of  11th  Jatiuary,  on  tlie  morrow  of  the  trial,  tellinjf  tlie  scandalous  story 
of  the  threatening!^  of  the  jnd^es,  packing  of  the  jury,  and  treating^  the 
packed  jury  without  scruple  or  ceremony.  Even  the  obsequious  law 
officer  could  not  conceal  his  dislike  of  the  work  {Original  letters  refuting 
to  the  EcrleKinstical  Affairn  of  Scotland,  i.  pp.  .32-3.3).  The  Privy  Council 
speaks  out  with  less  reserve. 


44  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

told  of  the  discontent  and  excitement  in  the  pubhc 
mind,  and  warned  as  to  the  certain  eiffects  of  pro- 
ceeding further  with  violent  measures.  The  diffi- 
culties of  the  late  trial  were  recalled.  '  With  what 
difficulty  and  discontentment  of  your  Majesty's  sub- 
jects of  all  degrees  we  have  effected  your  Majesty's 
service  we  wish  that  your  Majesty  clearly  under- 
stood :  and  .  .  .  the  renewing  of  a  panel  unneces- 
sarily against  them  (i.e.  the  remaining  eight)  first 
renews  the  discontentment  of  the  people,  and  next 
will  have  greater  difficulty  than  your  Majesty  is 
aware  of.  For  had  all  that  were  of  the  Council 
there  known  the  errand,  some  had  been  absent ; 
and  had  not  some  shown  themselves  more  forward 
than  becomes  the  modesty  of  judges,  there  had  been 
greater  contradiction.  And  as  for  the  jury,  they 
that  were  upon  the  last  find  themselves  so  many 
ways  pursued  by  common  and  particular  ex- 
clamations and  outcrying  of  the  people  that  hardly 
will  they  essay  it  again  ;  and  although  they  would, 
it  should  increase  the  slander  that  they  were  kept 
as  a  company  of  led  men  to  pass  upon  ministers' 
juries  and  so  be  a  scandal  to  your  Majesty's  judg- 
ment and  our  lawful  proceedings.  .  .  .  We  must,  even 
with  the  hazard  of  our  credit,  which  is  dearer  to 
us  than  our  life,  certify  your  Majesty  that  we  find 
this  fire  kindled  amongst  a  few  number  so  over- 
spreading all  the  whole  country  that,  except  it  be 
wisely  prevented,  greater  inconveniences  will  fol- 
low.' The  Secretary  indicates  not  obscurely  that 
if  His  Majesty  persists  the  members  of  Council 
will  resign  office  and  he  must  find  other  Councillors 
more  able  and  more  experienced. 

But   for   the   most   part   the   public   discontent 
smouldered  beneath  the  surface.     The  laity  were 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        45 

warmly  attached  to  the  Reformation  faith  and 
worship,  and  these  were  still  unchanged.  The 
local  Church  courts  remained,  and  bishops  did  not 
trouble  them  in  ordinary  life.  Writing  of  the  year 
1616,  a  staunch  presbyterian  was  able  to  say,  '  At 
that  time  I  observed  little  controversy  in  religion 
in  the  kirk  of  Scotland,  for  though  there  were 
bishops  yet  they  took  little  upon  them,  and  so  were 
very  little  opposed  until  Perth  Assembly.'  ^  It 
was  only  after  the  passing  of  the  Perth  Articles, 
which  directly  touched  the  laity  as  well  as  the 
clergy,  that  discontent  began  to  flame  out  in  open 
and  general  disobedience.  The  Article  against 
which  most  repugnance  was  felt  was  that  which 
enjoined  the  kneeling  posture  at  Communion. 
To  do  this  savoured  of  superstition,  it  was  to 
recognise  a  supernatural  change  in  the  elements, 
which  Rome  taught  but  which  Knox  and  the  body 
of  Scottish  Christians  vehemently  repudiated.  The 
observance  of  the  Holy  Days  had  been  rejected 
at  the  Reformation,  and  the  people  of  Scotland 
desired  no  change. 

From  1618  till  the  end  of  James's  reign  com- 
motions and  disturbances  continued  over  the  Perth 
Articles.  Edinburgh  was  the  centre  of  the  opposi- 
tion, but  the  same  spirit  prevailed  in  Glasgow  and 
over  the  Lowlands  generally.  The  laity  absented 
themselves  from  church  at  Christmas  and  Easter ; 
where  a  minister  conformed  and  administered 
Communion  in  the  new  form  his  congregation  for 
the  most  part  refused  to  attend.  We  read  that 
at  Easter  1619  the  Edinburgh  churches  were 
almost  deserted,  the  people  were  out  at  the  gates 
in  crowds  to  churches  in  the  neighbourhood  where 

•  Blair's  Life,  Wotlrow  Society,  p.  12. 


46  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

the  old  form  was  observed.  Clamours  and  dis- 
turbances broke  out  in  different  places.  To  add  to 
the  worries  of  the  bishops  pamphlets  began  to  be 
circulated  denouncing  the  innovations.  Calder- 
wood  the  sturdy  presbyterian  historian  was  the 
author  of  an  outspoken  attack  entitled  Perth 
Assembly,  published  in  1619,  which  proved  such 
a  thorn  in  the  side  of  the  authorities  that  a  pro- 
clamation was  issued  calling  in  and  burning  all 
the  copies  that  could  be  found.  So  widespread 
was  the  disobedience  that  Spottiswoode  went  up 
to  Court  to  consult  with  the  king.  James  was 
more  eager  than  his  bishops  to  enforce  the  Articles. 
An  Order  in  June  1619  commanded  universal 
obedience  to  the  Articles,  threatening  punishment 
for  absence  of  persons  from  their  own  parish 
churches  and  for  the  issuing  of  pamphlets. 
Special  commands  were  given  that  privy  councillors 
and  judges  should  take  the  Communion  kneeling, 
and  sharp  measures  were  used  against  Sir  James 
Skene  of  Curriehill,  a  privy  councillor  who  was  an 
absentee  without  excuse.  The  Court  of  High 
Commission  was  the  favourite  instrument  employed 
for  punishing  offenders.  The  Privy  Council  records 
during  the  years  in  question  abound  with  reports 
of  trials  of  ministers  for  contumacy  :  they  were 
deposed,  suspended,  banished,  or  put  in  ward ; 
prominent  laymen  were  also  proceeded  against, 
and  sentences  of  fine  and  banishment  were  pro- 
nounced against  them. 

So  strong  was  the  opposition  that  little  im- 
pression was  made  by  such  proceedings.  Some- 
times the  prelates  tried  conferences  with  non- 
conforming ministers  ;  these  also  proved  of  little 
effect.     We  have  already  noted  the  three  days' 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        47 

conference  which  Henderson  attended  in  1619. 
In  1620  it  began  to  be  conceded  that  kneeling  at 
Communion  was  optional :  in  one  church  out  of 
1600  communicants  only  20  knelt.  The  bishops 
had  little  heart  in  the  work  of  enforcing  the  law 
by  punishment.  Spottiswoode  in  the  Court  of 
High  Commission  in  Edinburgh  and  Law  in  Glasgow 
were  fain  to  resort  to  leniency  and  friendly  re- 
monstrance. The  general  result  was  that  only 
a  small  minority,  and  these  chiefly  official  persons, 
kneeled  at  Communion  or  observed  Easter  or 
Christmas ;  even  this  was  done  simply  out  of 
deference  to  the  king's  wishes.  On  the  other  hand 
the  irritation  and  disturbances  caused  did  much 
to  re-awaken  the  old  controversy  between 
Episcopacy  and  Presbytery,  and  thereby  to  imperil 
the  episcopal  establishment  which  James  had 
reared.  The  spirit  of  discontent  and  defiance  was 
deep  and  widespread.  Even  before  the  end  of  his 
own  life  King  James's  policy  was  a  proved  failure. 

2.    SCOTLAND    UNDER   CHARLES 

Charles  i.  began  to  reign  in  March  1625.  The 
accident  of  birth  enabled  him  to  claim  Scotland 
as  his  native  country,  but  he  was  singularly  ill- 
fitted  to  rule  Scotsmen.  Born  at  Dunfermline 
in  1600  he  was  taken  as  a  child  to  England  in  1603, 
and  he  was  never  in  Scotland  again  until  1633 
when  he  came  north  to  be  crowned,  no  fewer  than 
eight  years  after  his  accession  to  the  throne.  Since 
the  death  of  his  elder  brother  Henry  he  had  some 
titular  connection  with  his  native  country,  and 
possessed  some  Scottish  estates  which  were  managed 
for  him  by  a  body  known  as  the  Prince's  Council, 


48  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

but  his  education  and  associations  had  been 
entirely  English.  His  instructors  had  not  deemed 
it  part  of  their  duty  to  let  the  young  prince  see 
anything  of  Scotland  for  himself,  nor  to  take  care 
that  he  understood  something  of  Scottish  character 
and  aspirations.  Charles  grew  up  with  little  know- 
ledge of  human  nature,  and  in  complete  ignorance 
of  Scottish  human  nature.  The  great  lesson  which 
had  been  carefully  instilled  into  him  was  the 
Stewart  doctrine  of  the  divine  right  of  kings  and 
the  duty  of  passive  obedience  by  subjects,  and  that 
lesson  he  had  mastered  only  too  well.  In  many 
ways  superior  to  his  father,  he  lacked  James's 
strength  and  self-reliance.  He  needed  the  support 
of  a  stronger  nature  on  which  he  could  lean.  Un- 
fortunately for  himself  he  had  before  he  reached 
the  throne  already  fallen  under  the  spell  of  Laud. 
His  father  had  discernment  enough  to  distrust 
Laud  ;  Charles  took  him  to  his  heart.  '  He  more 
than  any  other  nursed  Charles  in  that  worship  of 
his  kingly  office  and  of  himself  which  was  his 
ruin.'  ^  Of  Scotland  and  its  people  Laud  was, 
if  possible,  more  ignorant  than  Charles  himself; 
yet  Laud  became  Charles's  chief  adviser  in  Scottish 
ecclesiastical  affairs. 

The  government  of  Scotland,  during  the  first 
twelve  years  of  Charles's  reign,  had  as  its  general 
effect  to  create  uneasiness  and  distrust,  deepening 
into  opposition  far  more  widespread  and  dangerous 
than  anything  that  had  existed  under  James. 
One  of  the  chief  causes  of  this  was  the  famous 
Act  of  Revocation,  which  became  law  on  12th 
October  1625.  It  revoked  and  annulled  all  grants 
of  Church  and  Crown  lands  which  had  been  made 

^  Bayne^  Chief  Acton  in  the  Puritan  Revolution,  p.  96. 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        49 

since  the  accession  of  Queen  Mary  in  1542.  So 
tremendous  was  the  effect  of  this  measure  that 
Sir  James  Balfour  describes  it  as  '  the  groundstone 
of  all  the  mischief  that  followed  after  both  to 
this  king's  government  and  family.'  ^  Charles's 
ecclesiastical  policy  was  the  root  of  his  troubles 
more  than  the  Act  of  Revocation,  but  it  was  these 
two  causes  operating  together  that  mainly  gave 
the  Revolution  in  Scotland  its  strength  and  national 
character.  Revocations  of  grants  made  during 
the  minority  of  a  king  were  not  unknown  in  the 
history  of  Scotland  :  what  was  startling  in  Charles's 
proposals  was  their  sweep  and  range. 

The  pre-Reformation  Church  in  Scotland  had 
grown  enormously  rich,  a  very  large  proportion  of 
the  whole  lands  of  Scotland  was  in  its  possession, 
and  since  the  Reformation  much  of  this  had  found 
its  way  into  the  hands  of  the  powerful  Scottish 
families.  The  greater  part  of  that  vast  mass  of 
property  was  involved  in  Charles's  Act,  since  the 
object  was  nothing  less  than  to  recover  to  the  Crown 
as  much  as  was  possible  of  the  alienated  revenues 
and  property  of  the  old  Church.  So  violent  an 
interference  with  rights  protected  by  prescription 
was  both  impolitic  and  indefensible.  The  only 
reasonable  and  sound  part  of  the  scheme  was  the 
part  which  placed  on  a  new  and  better  basis  the 
system  of  teinds  and  secured  a  living  wage  to  the 
ministers.  Charles  is  entitled  to  credit  for  this 
undoubted  boon,  but  the  gift  was  unfortunately 
wrapped  up  with  other  things  that  excited  the 
alarm  of  the  influential  landed  classes.  Ultimately 
a  compromise  was  reached  which  does  not  concern  us 
here.     The  nobles  probably  had  not  much  to  com- 

•  Ui*torical  Works,  ii.  p.  128. 


50  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

plain  of  in  the  result,  but  their  nerves  had  been 
badly  shaken  by  the  prospect  of  an  inquisition  into 
their  charters  and  titles,  and  distrust  and  suspicion 
of  Charles  had  been  aroused  in  their  minds.  This  dis- 
trust led  to  important  political  results.  It  alienated 
from  the  king  the  most  powerful  class  in  Scotland, 
the  class  which  his  father  had  conciliated  and  by 
whose  support  he  had  been  able  to  wage  his  long 
war  with  the  Church.  Now  the  influence  of  the 
nobility  was  thrown  on  the  side  of  Church  and 
people,  and  it  was  not  long  before  the  meaning  and 
effects  of  that  fatal  change  became  apparent. 

Why  was  so  unpopular  and  ruinous  a  policy 
adopted  ?  Events  in  Scotland  and  England 
throughout  this  reign  reacted  intimately  on  one 
another,  and  we  have  here  the  earliest  illustration 
of  that  reaction.  Charles  met  his  first  English 
Parliament  on  18th  June  1625.  He  had  inherited 
from  his  father  a  policy  of  foreign  wars  for  which 
as  for  other  expenses  of  his  own  he  needed  money. 
He  needed  at  least  a  million,  Parliament  granted 
him  £140,000  and  would  grant  him  no  more. 
Rightly  or  wrongly  it  insisted  on  discussing  the 
condition  of  the  nation,  and  it  wanted  to  know 
what  had  become  of  the  money  last  voted  to  King 
James.  No  progress  could  be  made  :  the  king 
dissolved  Parliament  on  12th  August,  and  thus 
early  in  his  career  began  his  ill-omened  attempts  to 
govern  without  a  Parliament  and  to  raise  money  by 
such  other  expedients  as  his  ministers  could  devise. 
He  turned  to  Scotland.  The  Convention  of  Estates, 
it  is  true,  voted  him  some  taxes  but  these  were  not 
sufficient,  and  the  next  device  was  the  Act  of 
Revocation  of  October. 

The  king's  visit  to  Scotland   in   1633   revealed 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        51 

the  existence  for  the  first  time  of  a  constitutional 
opposition  in  ParHament.  The  bills  to  be  sub- 
mitted were  prepared  by  the  Lords  of  the  Articles 
chosen  according  to  the  method  in  use  since  1612, 
the  members  were  all  of  them  men  willing  to  do 
the  king's  bidding,  and  the  king  sat  daily  with  them 
at  their  work.^  When  prepared  the  bills  were 
simply  submitted  in  a  body  to  Parliament,  and  the 
vote  was  taken  on  the  whole  number  as  if  they 
had  been  one  measure,  without  debate  on  the 
individual  bills,  and  without  any  opportunity  of 
moving  amendments.  No  fewer  than  168  Acts 
were  thus  submitted  and  passed  although  the 
Estates  sat  only  ten  days.  They  dealt  with  all 
manner  of  subjects,  but  two  in  particular  excited 
suspicion  and  opposition.  One  of  these  confirmed 
all  the  Acts  of  James  touching  religion,  the  other 
approved  an  Act  of  1609,  which  gave  the  king  power 
to  settle  '  the  apparel  of  kirkmen.'  The  opposition 
got  wind  of  what  was  in  preparation,  and  drew  up 
a  petition  for  presentation  to  the  king,  complaining 
that  they  could  not  consent  to  the  measures  of 
which  they  had  heard  relating  to  the  Church  and 
to  certain  proposals  for  new  taxation.  Parliament 
rose  before  this  petition  was  signed  by  all  who 
wished  to  do  so,  but  the  objectors  found  their 
opportunity  when  the  vote  was  taken  in  the  House. 
Objection  was  then  made  to  the  slumping  of  all 
the  bills  together  on  the  ground  that  some  members 
desired  to  oppose  one  or  other  of  the  proposed 
measures.  All  objections  however  were  summarily 
overruled  by  the  king,  who  insisted  on  the  vote 
being  taken  without  discussion,  and  tried  to  in- 
timidate members  by  openly  noting  their  names 

*  Row,  Hittory  of  the  Kirk  0/  Scotland,  Wodrow  Society,  p.  364. 


52         Alexander  Henderson 

as  they  voted.  He  obtained  a  narrow  majority, 
many  believed  at  the  time  it  was  secured  only  by 
tampering  with  the  votes,  but  more  significant  than 
the  actual  vote  was  the  warning  it  conveyed  that 
further  trouble  was  in  store. 

The  unfortunate  effects  of  the  royal  visit  were 
not  confined  to  Parliament ;  Charles  succeeded 
in  irritating  the  susceptibilities  of  all  classes.  He 
brought  north  in  his  train  Laud,  now  Bishop  of 
London,  and  it  was  soon  evident  that  Laud  was 
the  king's  adviser  in  chief.  In  the  ceremonies 
at  the  Abbey  Church  of  Holyrood  when  Charles 
was  crowned  his  master-hand  was  seen.  There  was 
'  a  manner  of  an  altar  standing  within  the  kirk,' 
and  *  at  the  back  of  this  altar  (covered  with  tapestry) 
there  was  a  rich  tapestry  wherein  the  crucifix 
was  curiously  wrought,  and  as  those  bishops  who 
were  in  service  passed  by  this  crucifix  they  were 
seen  to  bow  their  knee  and  beck.'  ^  Some  will 
have  it  that  the  unhappy  Archbishop  of  Glasgow 
was  pushed  by  Laud  from  the  king's  left  hand 
because  he  was  not  wearing  the  proper  garments. 
On  the  following  Sunday  in  the  presbyterian  St. 
Giles  two  English  chaplains,  clad  in  surplices,  with 
the  help  of  other  chaplains  and  bishops  there 
present,  '  acted  the  English  service,'  says  Row. 
It  does  not  seem  to  have  occurred  to  Charles  that 
such  proceedings  offended  the  feelings  of  his  subjects, 
not  only  as  presbyterians  but  also  as  Scotsmen. 

At  his  coronation  in  England,  Laud  had  addressed 
to  him  these  words,  '  Stand  and  hold  fast  from 
henceforth  the  place  to  which  you  have  been  put 
by  the  succession  of  your  forefathers,  being  now 
delivered  to  you  by  Almighty  God  and  by  the 

'  Spalding,  Memorials  of  the  Troubles,  Spalding  Club,  i.  p.  36. 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        53 

hands  of  us  the  bishops  and  servants  of  God  ;  and 
as  you  see  the  clergy  to  come  nearer  to  the  altar 
than  others,  so  remember  that  in  all  places  con- 
venient you  give  them  greater  honour.'  Charles 
believed  what  Laud  told  him  of  the  superiority  of 
the  clergy  over  the  laity,  and  put  the  teaching  into 
operation  both  in  England  and  Scotland  with 
disastrous  effects  to  himself.  Churchmen  were 
advanced  to  political  posts  in  the  Government. 
In  forming  his  new  Scottish  Privy  Council  he  put 
Spottiswoode  in  the  first  place,  taking  precedence 
of  the  Chancellor  and  of  every  other  official  in 
Scotland,  and  when  Hay,  Earl  of  Kinnoul,  died  in 
the  end  of  1634  Spottiswoode  was  appointed 
Chancellor  in  his  place — the  first  churchman  to  hold 
the  office  since  the  Reformation.  Laud  became 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  in  August  1633  :  from 
that  date  his  influence  was  supreme  in  shaping 
ecclesiastical  policy  in  Scotland,  and  he  lost  no 
time  in  making  it  felt.  In  September  a  new 
bishopric  of  Edinburgh  was  created.  In  October 
official  instructions  came  to  Bellenden,  Bishop  of 
Dunblane,  who  was  also  Dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal 
at  Holyrood,  that  the  English  liturgy  was  to  be 
used  in  the  chapel  twice  a  day  ;  the  dean  was  to 
appear  *  in  his  whites  '  ;  there  was  to  be  a  sacrament 
once  a  month  administered  to  all  kneeling,  and  the 
Privy  Council  and  all  other  official  persons  in 
Edinburgh  were  to  attend  the  Communion  at  least 
once  a  year.  The  other  letter  gave  directions  as 
to  the  apparel  which  bishops  and  other  clergy  were 
to  wear  :  the  bishops  were  to  '  be  in  whites  '  at 
divine  service,  those  of  them  who  were  members  of 
Privy  Council  were  to  sit  '  in  their  whites  '  there, 
and  inferior  clergy  were  to  wear  surplices  over  their 


54  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

black  gowns.  A  year  later,  in  October  1634, 
came  a  royal  warrant  establishing  a  new  court  of 
High  Commission  in  Scotland  with  enlarged  powers 
intended  to  strengthen  the  hands  of  the  bishops. 
The  policy  was  pursued  of  increasing  the  number 
of  bishops  in  the  Privy  Council  :  seven  had  now 
been  admitted  in  addition  to  Spottiswoode.  This 
promotion  of  churchmen  to  political  rank  and 
office  widened  the  gulf  between  the  king  and  his 
nobles ;  it  created  two  parties  in  the  Council, 
watchful  and  jealous  of  each  other.  Even  Lord 
Napier,  a  privy  councillor  who  was  a  friend  of 
Charles,  held  that  to  invest  churchmen  '  into  great 
estates  and  principal  offices  of  the  State  is  neither 
convenient  for  the  Church,  for  the  king,  nor  for  the 
State.'  Tlie  Privy  Council  was  the  king's  Scottish 
cabinet,  and  Charles  was  soon  to  find  that  a  divided 
cabinet  was  a  feeble  and  dangerous  instrument  of 
government  in  the  storms  of  revolution. 

While  the  king  was  thus  busy  laying  up  trouble 
for  himself  among  the  governing  classes  the  great 
body  of  the  people  went  perversely  on  their  way 
in  active  defiance  of  the  laws  which  commanded 
them  how  they  were  to  worship  God.  Matters 
had  not  improved  since  James  and  his  bishops 
had  tried  to  secure  observance  of  the  Perth 
Articles;  they  had  rather  grown  worse.  A  single 
entry  in  the  Privy  Council  record,  of  date  25th 
November  1634,  affords  an  instructive  glimpse  of 
the  forces  and  spirit  at  work  which  were  before  long 
to  burst  forth  into  violent  explosion.  Charles 
writes  to  his  Council  pointing  out  to  them  that  the 
law  commanded  all  subjects  to  communicate  at 
least  once  a  year  in  their  own  parish  churches. 
But  he  has  heard  that  a  great  abuse  has  of  late 


THE  GROWTH  OF  DISCONTENT        55 

years  prevailed  '  by  the  disorderly  behaviour  of 
some  disobedient  people '  who  when  the  Com- 
munion is  administered  in  their  parishes  '  and  at 
all  other  times  when  their  occasions  and  their 
humour  serves  them,  not  only  leave  their  own 
parish  kirks  but  run  to  seek  the  Communion  at  the 
hands  of  such  ministers  as  they  know  to  be  dis- 
conform  to  all  good  order.'  The  Council  is  com- 
manded to  put  a  stop  to  '  all  such  wanderings  of 
the  people  from  their  own  teachers  and  parish  kirks 
under  the  pain  of  His  Majesty's  high  displeasure.'  ^ 
But  one  thing  overshadowed  every  other  in 
Scotland  in  the  year  1634-5,  that  was  the  trial 
of  Lord  Balmerino  for  high  treason.  In  the  long 
history  of  State  prosecutions  it  would  not  be 
easy  to  find  one  more  fatuous  than  this :  nor 
would  it  be  possible  to  find  one  which  proved 
more  ruinous  to  its  authors.  A  temperate,  re- 
spectful, and  loyal  letter  addressed  to  the  king 
setting  forth  reasons  for  opposing  the  Acts  of 
Parliament  recently  passed  was  twisted  into  a 
'  seditious  libel.'  The  address  had  in  fact  not 
been  presented,  but  Balmerino,  one  of  the  Opposi- 
tion lords,  had  a  copy  of  it  in  his  house  at  Barnton 
near  Edinburgh.  He  showed  it  there  to  a  notary, 
who  without  his  knowledge  took  a  copy  of  it ;  a 
copy  of  this  copy  ultimately  found  its  way  into 
the  hands  of  Spottiswoode,  and  the  archbishop 
lost  no  time  in  sending  it  to  the  king.  An  Act  of 
James  vi.  declared  '  That  if  any  subject  shall  speak 
against  the  king  or  his  council  or  nobility  or  have 
any  infamous  libels  or  writs  against  them  tending 
to  their  dishonour  they  shall  incur  the  pain  of 
death.'     On  this  Act  a  prosecution  for  treason  was 

•  Register  of  Privy  Council,  v,  (2nd  aeriea),  p.  421. 


56  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

based.  It  was  a  long-drawn-out  affair,  lasting 
from  June  1634  till  the  following  March,  when 
the  trial  took  place.  By  a  majority  of  one  the 
fifteen  jurors  found  the  accused  guilty  only  of 
concealing  the  letter  or  *  supplication  '  as  it  was 
called,  in  other  words  of  keeping  a  copy  of  it  in  his 
library.  In  July  Balmerino  was  pardoned ;  it 
was  felt  to  be  impossible  to  send  a  man  to  the 
scaffold  after  such  a  verdict,  even  Laud  so  advised 
the  king.  The  origin  of  the  prosecution  was 
Spottiswoode's  doing ;  it  was  '  procured  by  the 
dealing  of  the  bishops,'  and  they  were  the  only 
party  who  zealously  pushed  it  on.  Row  states 
that  Maxwell,  Bishop  of  Ross,  in  special  was 
very  vehement  in  his  speeches  against  Balmerino.* 
Drummond  of  Hawthornden,  a  sympathiser  with 
episcopacy  rather  than  with  presbytery,  moved 
to  indignation  by  the  iniquity  of  the  proceed- 
ing, wrote  a  manly  letter  before  the  trial — far 
more  outspoken  than  the  supplication — intended 
to  be  shown  to  the  king,  remonstrating  against 
its  folly.2  The  trial  of  Balmerino  sank  deep  into 
the  Scottish  mind.  It  was  never  forgotten  nor 
forgiven.  It  undermined  the  confidence  of  the 
people  of  Scotland  in  Charles  and  his  Government ; 
the  nobles  regarded  it  as  a  blow  aimed  at  their 
order,  and  the  Opposition,  instead  of  weakening, 
grew  stronger  and  more  determined.  As  for 
Charles's  bishops,  nothing  could  have  shown  more 
clearly  their  blindness  and  incapacity  as  advisers  ; 
dislike  and  distrust  of  them  on  the  part  of  their 
countrymen  were  hardening  into  utter  alienation. 

^  Row,  History  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland,  Wodrow  Society,  p.  383. 
*  Maason's  Drummond  of  Hawthornden,  p.  237. 


Ill 

THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND 

1.    THE    SERVICE    BOOK 

July — August  1637 

The  Service  Book  was  introduced  in  the  ever- 
memorable  year  1637,  but  long  before  then  Laud 
had  his  eye  on  Scotland  as  a  field  greatly  in  need 
of  his  attention.  His  supreme  aim  was  to  bring 
about  in  the  three  kingdoms  '  one  form  of  God's 
worship,'  '  a  uniformity  in  their  public  devotions.' 
Uniformity  in  religion  or  at  least  in  worship  and 
Church  government  was  the  dream  that  floated 
before  the  mind  of  every  churchman  in  the  seven- 
teenth century.  Laud's  uniformity  was  to  be 
after  the  type  of  the  worship  which  he  had  striven 
to  introduce  into  England.  Step  by  step  the  very 
face  of  religion  there  had  been  altered.  Ceremony 
and  ritual  had  increased  in  divine  sei-vice,  many 
of  the  ornaments  of  the  pre-Reformation  period 
had  reappeared  in  the  churches,  sacerdotalism  was 
revived  and  the  usages  which  spring  out  of  it  were 
coming  into  vogue.  Plain  people  said  that  Laud 
was  bringing  back  popery.  He  certainly  was  no 
believer  in  the  Reformation,  '  deformation '  he 
called  it.  But  he  denied  that  he  was  a  papist. 
His  theology  might  be  Roman,  his  ritual  might 
to   the   untrained   eye    be    indistinguishable   from 

67 


58  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

that  of  the  Roman  Church,  but  at  any  rate  the 
Pope  must  be  in  Canterbury  not  in  Rome.  Under 
Laud  the  Ehzabethan  Church  of  England  was 
suppressed.  Those  who  refused  to  conform  to 
his  innovations  were  dealt  with  by  the  court  of 
High  Commission  ;  they  were  fined  or  imprisoned  ; 
if  they  were  rash  enough  to  write  against  him  they 
were  whipped,  set  in  the  pillory,  or  branded  with 
a  red-hot  iron.  Most  Englishmen  were  proud  to 
think  of  their  Church  as  identified  with  the  main- 
tenance of  Protestantism,  cultivating  friendly  re- 
lations with  all  the  Churches  of  the  Reformation, 
as  indeed  the  head  of  the  whole  Protestant  interest. 
On  all  this  Laud  turned  his  back.  He  would  not 
tolerate  even  the  worship  of  foreign  Protestants 
resident  in  London.  The  English  ambassador  at 
the  court  of  France  was  ordered  to  withdraw  from 
fellowship  with  the  Huguenots,  the  struggling 
Protestant  Churches  on  the  Continent  were  deserted. 
Laud's  Anghcanism  was  the  Anglicanism  of  the  via 
media.  It  has  been  said  that  the  via  media  has 
always  been  thronged  with  proselytes  from  the 
Church  of  England  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  There 
were  many  such  at  that  time,  and  good  Catholics 
thought  that  Laud  himself  was  hastening  in  the 
same  direction.  Charles's  Roman  Catholic  Queen 
Henrietta  said  he  was  '  a  very  good  Catholic,'  and 
the  Pope  offered  him  a  cardinal's  hat.  But 
common-sense  Englishmen  demanded  that  their 
Church  should  cast  in  her  lot  frankly  with  the 
Churches  of  the  Reformation,  and  their  deepest 
feelings  were  outraged  by  Laud's  proceedings.  He 
came  to  be  perhaps  the  most  hated  man  in  England. 
Meanwhile  he  had  made  two  visits  to  Scotland  : 
one  in  1617  with  James,  when  he  was  but  a  sub- 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       59 

ordinate  figure,  the  other  in  1633  with  Charles 
when  he  was  all  powerful.  He  found  Scotland 
a  barbarous  country,  with  '  no  religion  at  all.'  He 
and  his  master  were  at  one  in  regarding  the  puritans 
in  England  as  being,  to  use  Clarendon's  words, 
'  a  very  dangerous  and  seditious  people.'  But 
alas  !  here  in  Scotland  puritanism  '  covered  the 
whole  nation,  so  that  though  there  were  bishops 
in  name,  the  whole  jurisdiction  and  they  themselves 
were  subject  to  an  Assembly  which  was  purely 
presbyterian  :  no  form  of  religion  in  practice,  no 
liturgy,  nor  the  least  appearance  of  any  beauty 
of  holiness.'  Laud  made  up  his  mind  that  as  soon 
as  he  found  leisure  he  would  put  an  end  to  this 
deplorable  state  of  things,  and  teach  the  barbarous 
Scots  '  religion.'  He  found  willing  instruments  in 
the  younger  Scottish  bishops.  These  men  were  of 
a  different  type  from  the  cautious  Moderates  of 
James's  time.  Pushing  and  ambitious  churchmen 
who  went  up  to  Court  soon  found  that  Laud  was 
the  rising  ecclesiastic  there,  and  they  had  wit 
enough  to  see  that  if  they  were  to  secure  promotion 
they  must  attach  themselves  to  his  party.  They 
adopted  his  Arminian  theology  and  his  high 
church  practices.  Laud  preached  the  highest 
doctrine  of  the  royal  prerogative  and  passive 
obedience,  and  their  political  views  took  on  the 
same  colour.  They  were  worldly-minded  and  self- 
seeking,  hunting  for  preferment  in  the  Church, 
and  ambitious  for  office  in  the  State.  James's  bishops 
counselled  him  to  take  the  *  Church  way  '  in  advanc- 
ing his  schemes  for  uniformity,  to  get  the  consent 
of  General  Assemblies  or  other  Church  courts  : 
Laud  and  the  Laudian  bishops  were  absolutists  in 
Church   and   State,   they   despised   Spottiswoode's 


60  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

timid  counsels  and  chose  the  '  kingly  way '  of 
enforcing  their  designs  by  royal  authority  alone. 
Before  1637  several  men  of  this  stamp — rash, 
foolish,  vain — had  become  bishops  and  formed  a 
party  in  the  episcopate  distinct  from  the  older  and 
more  cautious  men.  The  most  prominent  among 
them  were  Maxwell,  Bishop  of  Ross ;  Sydserff, 
Bishop  of  Galloway ;  Wedderbum,  Bishop  of 
Dunblane,  and  Whitfoord,  Bishop  of  Brechin. 
This  was  the  party  among  whom  Laud  found  his 
most  zealous  supporters  in  introducing  the  Book 
of  Canons  and  the  Service  Book.  The  others  seem 
to  have  allowed  themselves  to  be  overborne  and 
more  or  less  unwillingly  fell  in  with  Laud's  policy. 
Burnet's  statement  is  that  the  bishops  were  not  all 
cordially  for  introducing  the  books,  '  for  the  Arch- 
bishop of  St.  Andrews  from  the  beginning  had 
withstood  these  designs,  foreseeing  how  full  of 
danger  the  executing  of  them  might  prove.  The 
Archbishop  of  Glasgow  was  worse  pleased  ;  but 
the  Bishops  of  Ross,  Dunblane,  Brechin,  and 
Galloway  were  the  great  advancers  of  them.'  ^ 

Early  in  his  reign  Charles  had  made  it  known 
that  he  insisted  on  full  conformity,  and  both  he  and 
Laud  desired  the  introduction  of  the  English 
Prayer  Book  into  Scotland.  When  Charles  was 
in  Scotland  in  1633  the  question  was  again  dis- 
cussed. The  king  and  Laud  were  supported  by 
the  younger  bishops  who  saw  no  danger  in  the 
attempt,  the  others  apparently  objected  and  pointed 
out  the  unwisdom  of  the  proposal.  In  the  end  it 
was  agreed  that  some  of  the  Scottish  bishops 
should  prepare  a  new  book  of  Canons  and  a  new 
Service  Book  '  as  near  that  of  England  as  might 

'  Memoirs  of  the  Dukes  0/ Hamilton  (1677),  p.  33, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       61 

be.'  They  were  to  be  revised  by  Laud,  who  was 
made  a  member  of  the  Scottish  Privy  Council, 
Juxon,  Bishop  of  London,  and  Wren,  Bishop  of 
Norwich,  and  imposed  by  royal  authority  alone. 

In  May  1635  a  royal  warrant  was  granted, 
authorising  and  enjoining  the  new  book  of  Canons 
and  Constitutions  Ecclesiastical  for  the  government 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland.  The  book  was  published 
in  the  beginning  of  1636.  It  declared  the  royal 
supremacy  over  the  Church  ;  ordination  to  be  by 
bishops  only ;  divine  service  to  be  celebrated 
according  to  the  book  of  Common  Prayer  (which 
had  not  yet  seen  the  light) ;  diocesan  synods  to  be 
held  twice  a  year ;  all  conventicles  and  secret 
meetings  of  churchmen  forbidden  ;  national  synods 
to  be  called  by  the  king's  authority  ;  all  were  to 
kneel  when  prayers  were  read,  and  no  one  was 
to  conceive  prayers  extempore,  or  use  any 
other  form  than  that  prescribed  under  pain  of 
deprivation ;  the  sacrament  was  to  be  received 
kneeling  ;  instructions  were  given  about  confession, 
and  orders  for  the  placing  of  fonts,  table  for  Holy 
Communion,  basins,  cups,  chalices  and  so  on. 
These  Canons,  imposed  as  they  were  without 
authority  from  General  Assembly  or  Parliament, 
sweeping  away  what  remained  of  the  framework 
of  a  presbyterian  Church  and  laying  the  Church 
completely  at  the  feet  of  the  bishops,  were  received 
in  Scotland  with  indignation  and  amazement. 
But  there  was  no  public  outcry  or  demonstration. 
They  were  as  yet  mere  written  rules  not  practically 
enforced  in  any  way.^  That  may  explain  Baillie's 
remark  in  January  1637,  '  We  were  beginning  to 
forget  the  book  of  our  Canons  '  when  a  proclama- 

'  Grub,  Eccle*i<utical  Hutory  of  Scotland,  ii,  p.  368. 


62  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

tion  was  made  by  an  act  of  Council  to  receive  the 
Service  Book. 

The  first  reference  to  the  Service  Book  is  in  a 
letter  from  the  king  to  the  Privy  Council,  under 
date  15th  November  1636,  *  commanding  the 
publication,  use  and  practice  of  the  Book  of  Public 
Service,'  and  ordaining  proclamation  to  be  made 
commanding  every  parish  to  provide  themselves 
with  two  copies  of  the  book  by  the  following 
Easter.^ 

Apparently  it  was  expected  that  the  book  would 
immediately  be  ready,  but  December  came  and 
brought  no  Service  Book.  It  brought,  however, 
still  another  charge  from  Charles  to  his  Privy 
Council,  repeating  in  more  anxious  and  emphatic 
terms  his  previous  command.  '  Whereas  since 
our  entry  to  the  Crown,  especially  since  our  late 
being  in  that  kingdom,  we  have  divers  times  re- 
commended to  the  archbishops  and  bishops  there 
the  publishing  of  a  public  form  of  service  in  the 
worship  of  God  which  we  would  have  uniformly 
observed  therein,  and  the  same  being  now  con- 
descended upon,  though  we  doubt  not  but  all  our 
subjects,  both  clergy  and  others,  will  receive  the 
same  with  such  reverence  as  appertaineth,  yet 
thinking  it  necessary  to  make  our  pleasure  known 
touching  the  authorising  of  the  book  thereof,  we 
require  you  to  command,  by  open  proclamation, 
all  our  subjects,  both  ecclesiastical  and  civil,  to 
conform  themselves  to  the  practice  thereof,  it 
being  the  only  form  which  we  (having  taken  the 
counsel  of  our  clergy)  think  fit  to  be  used  in  God's 
public  worship  there  :  as  also  we  require  you  to 
enjoin  all  archbishops  and  bishops  and  other  pres- 

*  Register  of  Privy  Council,  ri.  (2nd  series),  p.  336. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       63 

bjrters  and  churchmen  to  take  care  that  the  same 
be  duly  obeyed  and  the  contraveners  thereof 
condignly  censured  and  punished,  and  to  take 
order  that  every  parish  procure  to  themselves, 
within  such  space  as  you  shall  think  fit  to  appoint, 
two  at  least  of  the  said  books  of  common  prayer 
for  the  use  of  the  parish.'  This  letter  bears  date 
18th  October ;  it  was  brought  down  by  the  zealous 
Maxwell,  Bishop  of  Ross.  The  act  of  Privy 
Council  is  dated  20th  December  1636 :  ^  proclamation 
was  made  on  the  following  day  at  the  cross  of 
Edinburgh,  and  it  enjoined  that  at  least  two  copies 
were  to  be  procured  by  every  parish  before  the 
following  Easter.  But  Easter  came  and  went,  and 
still  no  Service  Book  appeared.  Evidently  there 
were  unexpected  difficulties  and  delays,  the  proofs 
were  doubtless  passing  and  repassing  between  the 
Scottish  bishops  and  Laud.  That  Charles  himself 
revised  them  with  care  appears  from  a  letter  written 
by  Laud  to  Traquair.  The  king,  he  says,  '  to  my 
knowledge  hath  carefully  looked  over  and  approved 
every  word  in  this  liturgy.'  One  edition  at  least, 
says  Baillie,  was  destroyed,  and  it  was  not  until 
May  1637  that  the  book  was  printed  and  published. 
Before  that  time,  however,  Traquair,  the  Lord 
Treasurer,  had  brought  home  a  copy  from  London. ^ 
He  was  the  most  influential  layman  then  in  the 
Privy  Council,  and  the  king  communicated  privately 
with  him  on  important  matters  before  they  came 
to  the  Council  table.  The  Council  records  of  17th 
November  1636  contain  a  letter  from  Charles, 
stating  that  he  had  imparted  his  pleasure  to 
Traquair    '  touching    diverse    things    whereof   the 

'  Register  of  Privy  Council,  vi.  (2tid  series),  p.  363. 
-  Bailhe'i  Letters (Lsking  a  ed.),  i.  p.  4. 


64  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

ready  dispatch  will  exceedingly  conduce  to  the  good 
and  advancement  of  our  service.' 

The  '  diverse  things '  probably  included  the 
Service  Book,  and  it  may  have  been  then  that 
Traquair  became  possessed  of  the  copy  to  which 
Baillie  refers.  At  all  events  the  contents  soon 
became  known  to  many  persons  in  Scotland,  and 
their  verdict  upon  the  book  was  not  doubtful. 
'  They  find,'  says  Baillie,  '  no  difference  betwixt  it 
and  the  English  Service  save  in  one,  to  wit,  in 
addition  of  sundry  more  Popish  rites.'  ^  That 
the  book  was  ill  received  from  the  first  is  apparent 
from  another  proclamation,  couched  in  stern 
language,  which  Charles  thought  it  necessary  to 
issue  in  June.  Referring  to  the  proclamation  of 
the  previous  December  he  states,  *  Although  great 
numbers  of  the  ministry  of  best  learning  and 
soundest  judgment  and  gifts  have  given  dutiful 
obedience  and  have  conformed  themselves  to  His 
Majesty's  royal  will  and  pleasure  in  this  point, 
yet  there  is  some  others  of  the  ministry  who  out 
of  curiosity  and  singularity  refuse  to  receive  and 
embrace  the  said  book,  and  does  what  in  them  lies 
to  foster  and  entertain  distractions  and  troubles 
in  the  kirk,  to  the  disturbing  of  the  public  peace 
thereof  unless  remedy  be  provided.'  He  therefore 
orders  that  '  the  whole  presbyters  and  ministers 
within  this  kingdom,  they  and  every  one  of  them 
provide  and  furnish  themselves  for  the  use  of  their 
parishes  with  two  of  the  said  books  of  public  service 
or  common  prayer  within  fifteen  days  next  after  the 
charge,  under  pain  of  rebellion  and  putting  of  them 
to  the  horn.'  ^     In  these  words  we  hear  the  echoes 

^  Baillie's  Letters  (Laiug's  ed.),  i.  p.  4. 

*  Register  of  Privy  Council,  vi.  (2nd  series),  pp.  448,  449. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       65 

of  controversies  and  discussions  that  were  already 
raging  up  and  down  Scotland  :  '  sounding  from 
pulpits,  carried  from  hand  to  hand  in  papers,  the 
table  talk  and  open  discourse  of  high  and  low.' 
Sagacious  men  already  saw  that  trouble  was 
brewing.  '  I  am  afraid  sore,'  wrote  Baillie, 
*  that  there  is  a  storm  raised  which  will  not  calm 
in  my  days.' 

It  was  decided  to  proceed  without  further  delay 
with  the  introduction  of  the  liturgy  ;  the  Arch- 
bishop of  St.  Andrews  ordered  intimation  to  be 
made  in  all  the  Edinburgh  churches  on  16th  July 
that  the  Scottish  liturgy  would  be  read  on  the  follow- 
ing Sunday.  The  intention  was  that  the  digni- 
taries and  state  officials  present  on  the  memorable 
occasion  would  carry  with  them  when  they  separated 
for  the  autumn  vacation  a  favourable  report  to 
their  various  districts,  and  so  prepare  the  way  for 
the  Service  Book  in  the  country.  The  week 
between  the  16th  and  the  23rd  was  a  lively  one 
in  Edinburgh.  '  The  whole  body  of  the  town 
murmurs  and  grudges  all  the  week  exceedingly.' 
'  Discourses,  declamations,  pamphlets  everywhere 
against  this  course.'  The  current  seems  to  have 
run  all  the  one  way  :  '  no  word  of  Information  in 
public  or  private,  by  any  to  account  of,  used  for 
the  clearing  of  it.'  When  the  23rd  arrived  the 
occasion  proved  memorable,  but  in  a  very  different 
sense  from  that  intended.  The  scene  in  St.  Giles 
on  that  day  has  become  historic.  It  has  often 
been  described  :  the  contemporary  accounts  on 
both  sides  differ  little  on  material  points. 

Wariston  condenses  the  amazing  story  into  one 
grim  sentence.  *  At  the  beginning  thereof  there 
rose   such   a  tumult   such  an  outcrying  what  by 

£ 


66  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

the  people's  murmuring,  mourning,  railing,  stool- 
casting  as  the  like  was  never  seen  in  Scotland  : 
the  bishop  both  after  the  forenoon  sermon  was 
almost  trampled  under  foot,  and  afternoon  being 
coached  with  Roxburghe  was  almost  stoned  to 
dead ;  the  dean  was  forced  to  cage  himself  in  the 
steeple.'  ^ 

Next    day,    Monday    24th,    the    Privy    Council 
hastened   to    deal    with    the    alarming    situation. 
Almost    daily    during    that    week    their    records 
bubble  over  with  anxious  meetings  and  consulta- 
tions ;     indeed    for    nearly    three    weeks,    up    till 
Thursday  10th  August  they  were  distracted  over 
the  business.^    The  line  they  took  was  to  throw 
upon  the  unhappy  magistrates  the  responsibility 
for  keeping  the  peace  as  well  as  for  punishing  the 
authors  of  the  late  uproar,  and  they  also  ordered 
them  to  take  measures  to  secure  the  reading  of  the 
Service   Book.     The   magistrates   were   willing   to 
do  their  best,  but  it  is  evident  they  were  soon  at 
their  wits'  end.       The  public  temper  was  such  that 
nobody  could  be  got  to  undertake  to  read  the 
service.    On  Monday  the  Council  began  courageously 
with  a  proclamation  in  sufficiently  strong  language. 
It  set  out  with  a  reference  to  '  the  late  turbulent 
and  mutinous  carriage  of  a  number  of  base  people, 
who  upon  the  Lord's  day  and  in  the  Lord's  house  in 
a  rude,  barbarous  and  seditious  way,  and  with  foul 
mouths  and  impious  hands  oppose  themselves  to 
His  divine  service,  to  the  dishonour  of  God,  disgrace 
of  His  Majesty's  Government  and  disturbance  of 
the  public  peace  of  this  city  of  Edinburgh.'     Then 
the  inhabitants  were   enjoined  to  contain  them- 

»  Diary,  1632-9,  p.  265. 

*  Register  of  Privy  Council,  vi.  (2nd  series). 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       G7 

selves  in  peace  and  quietness  and  avoid  gatherings 
upon  the  street  or  tumults  in  churches,  not  to 
revile  or  belch  forth  contumelious  speeches  or 
imprecations  against  any  of  His  Majesty's  servants 
ecclesiastical  or  civil,  and  not  to  rail  or  speak 
against  the  Service  Book,  '  certifying  all  and  sundry 
who  shall  do  or  attempt  anything  in  the  contrary 
that  the  pain  of  death  shall  be  executed  upon  them 
without  favour  or  mercy.'  The  provost  and 
magistrates  are  declared  liable  for  whatever  riot, 
trouble  or  wrong  shall  be  committed,  and  they 
are  commanded  to  have  a  special  care  to  '  appre- 
hend and  commit  to  ward  all  persons  whom  they 
shall  learn  to  have  been  or  who  hereafter  shall  be 
guilty  of  the  byegone  tumult  or  after  disorder.' 

On  Wednesday  26th  two  bailies  and  the  town 
clerk  were  ordered  to  convene  the  town  council  on 
the  following  day  at  8  in  the  morning,  and  to  report 
at  2  P.M.  what  course  they  think  fittest  for  trying 
and  punishing  the  authors  of  the  late  uproar,  and 
securing  the  reading  of  the  Service  Book.  Next 
day,  Thursday  27th,  the  three  were  personally 
present  at  the  meeting  of  Privy  Council,  presumably 
to  make  their  report. 

They  were  commanded  to  go  back  to  the  town 
council  and  consult  them  anent  the  surety  which 
they  would  give  for  the  safe  reading  of  the  Service 
Book.  The  matter  was  urgent  and  their  report  must 
be  made  '  to-morrow  at  nine  of  the  clock.'  The 
record  of  Friday's  meeting  (28th)  is  curiously  vague, 
it  suggests  that  the  town  council  found  they  were 
treading  on  dangerous  ground  and  were  chary  about 
giving  sureties.  It  states  simply  that  having  heard 
the  report  from  the  provost  and  bailies,  the  Lords 
of  the  Privy  Council  ordain  them  '  to  advise  among 


68  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

themselves  anent  an  obligatory  act  to  be  given  by 
the  town  for  the  real  performance  of  what  they 
shall  undertake  in  the  business  above  mentioned.' 
This  impression  grows  to  a  certainty  when  wc  find 
that  on  Saturday  29th  all  thought  of  reading  the 
Service  Book  on  the  following  day  was  frankly 
abandoned.  The  archbishop  reported  that  *  in 
regard  of  the  late  trouble  and  insurrection  raised 
upon  Sunday  last  for  opposing  the  Service  Book 
and  upon  new  emergent  occasions  and  consider- 
able respects  it  was  thought  fit  and  expedient 
by  them  (the  bishops)  that  there  should  be  a 
surcease  of  the  Service  Book  until  His  Majesty 
should  signify  his  pleasure  touching  the  redress 
and  punishment  of  the  authors  and  actors  of  that 
disorderly  tumult.'  In  the  meantime,  order  was 
given  that  at  the  services  in  the  city  churches 
'  a  prayer  shall  be  made  before  and  after  sermon 
and  that  neither  the  old  service  nor  the  new 
established  service  be  used  in  this  interim.'  The 
Privy  Council  having  heard  this  report  from  the 
clerical  members  remitted  to  them  to  give  effect  to 
it,  no  doubt  greatly  relieved  to  enjoy  at  least  a 
breathing  space. 

In  the  following  week  Charles  broke  silence.  A 
letter  written  on  Sunday  30th  July  was  received 
by  the  Council  on  Friday  4th  August.  He  said 
he  understood  '  that  in  the  Church  upon  Sunday 
last  a  number  of  rude  and  base  people  did  rise  and 
behave  themselves  in  a  most  tumultuarv  manner, 
both  within  and  without  the  Church,'  and  told 
them  to  '  use  your  best  endeavours  to  examine 
who  are  authors  or  actors  in  that  mutiny,  and  that 
you  fail  not  to  punish  any  that  shall  be  found 
guilty  thereof  as  you  shall  find  them  to  deserve.' 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       69 

The  proceedings  of  the  next  day,  Saturday 
5th,  show  that  no  real  progress  had  been  made. 
Readers  of  the  Service  Book  could  not  be  got, 
apparently  the  town  council  could  give  no  assurance 
as  to  their  safety.  The  clergy  brought  up  the 
matter  in  the  Privy  Council,  and  asked  that  the 
town  council  should  confer  with  the  Bishop  of 
Edinburgh  '  anent  the  convenience  of  time  when  the 
service  shall  begin  and  of  the  assurance  to  be  given 
by  them  for  the  indemnity  of  those  who  shall  be 
employed  in  the  service.' 

In  the  meantime  they  recommended  that  the 
ministers  should  preach  in  the  subsequent  week 
upon  the  ordinary  days  without  service.  The 
clergy  also  reported  that  the  Service  Book  coiild 
not  be  read  next  day  '  for  want  of  a  sufficient 
number  of  readers  to  officiate  the  same  and  other 
difficulties  occurring  therein,'  but  they  '  have 
resolved  that  the  said  service  shall  begin  upon 
Sunday  come  eight  days  and  from  thenceforth 
continue,'  and  they  desired  that  the  town  council 
be  called  and  order  given  to  them  for  the  peaceable 
exercise  of  the  said  Service  Book.  This  was  agreed 
to,  and  the  order,  so  much  easier  to  give  than  to 
obey,  was  duly  passed  on  to  the  unhappy  town 
council.  At  the  same  meeting,  however,  something 
was  done  to  give  effect  to  the  king's  command  that 
the  Privy  Council  should  themselves  take  up  the 
matter  of  inquiring  into  the  recent  tumult  and 
punishing  the  guilty.  A  strong  committee  was 
appointed,  including  the  Bishops  of  Edinburgh  and 
Galloway,  to  call  before  them  '  all  and  sundry 
persons  suspect  guilty  to  have  been  actors,  authors, 
and  abettors  of  the  late  mutiny  and  insurrection 
committed  within  the  kirks  and  town  of  Edinburgh.* 


70  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

In  the  middle  of  the  following  week,  Wednesday 
9th,  the  Council,  mindful  that  the  Sunday  was 
approaching  when  the  bishops  had  boldly  '  resolved ' 
that  the  reading  of  the  service  should  begin,  called 
before  them  three  bailies  and  the  town  clerk  and 
demanded  whether  they  had  provided  readers  for 
Sunday  next,  and  if  they  were  ready  to  give 
assurance  for  the  indemnity  of  the  bishop, 
ministers  and  readers.  The  reply  must  have  been 
disappointing.  They  humbly  declared  '  that  they 
were  most  willing  to  obtemper  the  Council's 
ordinance,  but  that  they  could  not  upon  so  short 
a  time  provide  understanding  and  sufficient  clerks 
and  readers,  there  being  none  within  the  city,  but 
vulgar  schoolmasters  by  whom  the  service  might 
be  disgraced  and  His  Majesty's  authority  upon 
their  employment  receive  opposition,'  but  they 
added  in  cautious  and  general  phrase  '  that  they 
were  content  to  secure  the  clergy  in  such  legal  way 
as  the  laws  of  the  kingdom  in  such  a  case  will  allow.' 
The  Privy  Council,  seeing  how  thorny  a  business 
this  was,  refused  with  equal  caution  to  commit 
themselves  further ;  they  preferred  to  roll  the 
matter  back  upon  the  bishop  and  the  town  council, 
and  let  them  worry  it  out  between  them.  '  They 
forbear  to  meddle  with  or  make  any  change  of 
innovation  of  the  acts  formerly  made  upon  re- 
monstrance from  the  clergy  touching  the  settling 
and  beginning  of  the  Service  Book  upon  Sunday 
next,  and  remits  to  the  Bishop  of  Edinburgh  to 
confer  with  the  ministers  and  bailies  of  Edinburgh 
anent  the  orderly  performance  of  the  same  in  a 
peaceable  and  decent  manner,  and  that  these  who 
are  to  be  employed  therein  be  provided  of  sufficient 
maintenance    for   their    better    encouragement   to 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       71 

undergo  the  service.'  The  baihes  were  ordered 
to  set  down  in  writing  the  '  obhgatory  act '  for  the 
indemnity  of  the  bishops  and  ministers,  and  to 
exhibit  the  same  to  the  Council  '  at  four  of  the 
clock  in  the  afternoon.' 

If  the  Privy  Council  were  shy  at  taking  re- 
sponsibility, the  ministers  displayed  equally  little 
desire  to  take  the  burden  on  themselves.  At  the 
afternoon  sederunt,  Mr.  Alexander  Thomson,  one 
of  the  ministers  of  Edinburgh,  for  himself  and  in 
name  and  behalf  of  the  others,  compeared  and  made 
humble  remonstrance  and  '  craved  that  they  might 
not  be  burdened  to  read  the  service  until  such 
time  as  the  town  of  Edinburgh  shall  furnish  readers 
and  clerks  for  officiating  the  same  and  they  be 
provided  of  a  competent  maintenance,  for  their 
better  enducement  to  undergo  the  charge.'  Under 
this  stimulus  the  Council,  apparently  by  way  of 
doing  something,  called  for  the  Lord  Advocate 
and  required  him  with  their  clerk  to  draw  up  an 
'  obligatory  act '  against  the  provost  and  town 
council  '  for  securing  of  the  ministers  and  providing 
for  their  indemnity,  so  far  as  the  law,  custom  and 
practice  of  the  kingdom  in  such  a  kind  may  warrant 
and  allow.'     Paper  securities  were  easy  to  provide  : 

*  the  obligatory  act '  was  framed  and  passed  the 
next  day,  Thursday  the  10th,  but  the  Privy  Council 
were  soon  to  find  that  the  time  for  such  measures 
had  gone  by.  A  letter  from  the  magistrates  to 
Laud,  dated  the  19th,  reports  the  humiliating 
failure    of    all    their    efforts.     They    had    spared 

*  neither  pains  nor  attendance  to  bring  that  purpose 
to  a  good  conclusion.'  In  spite  of  the  poverty  of 
the  city  they  had  offered  money  '  above  our  power 
to  such  as  should  undertake  that  service.'     But 


72  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

no  one  was  bold  enough  to  accept  their  offer. 
Equally  fruitless  were  the  efforts  made  to  discover 
and  punish  the  persons  responsible  for  the  tumult 
in  St.  Giles.  The  strong  committee  appointed  on 
the  5th  to  deal  with  this  matter  seem  to  have  made 
no  report  of  their  diligence.  It  is  surprising  to 
find  the  Privy  Council  on  the  10th  feebly  falling 
back  again  on  the  harassed  bailies  and  town  clerk  : 
on  that  day  these  unhappy  men  were  charged  *  for 
satisfaction  and  expiation  of  the  former  uproar 
and  insurrection  within  their  city,  to  make  diligent 
inquiry  anent  the  authors,  actors,  and  abettors  of 
that  mutiny.' 

The  magistrates  seem  to  have  apprehended  and 
examined  some  suspected  persons,^  but  beyond 
that  nothing  was  done.  They  probably  found 
that  the  rioters  were  people  of  the  meaner  sort, 
that  nothing  was  to  be  gained  by  proceeding 
against  them,  and  that  they  had  behind  them  the 
sympathy  and  support  of  the  inhabitants  generally. 
They  were  glad  to  let  the  matter  drop,  comforting 
themselves  with  the  observation  that  the  late 
tumult  might  safely  be  '  fathered  upon  the  scum 
and  dregs  of  the  people,'  and  that  all  men  either 
of  place  or  quality  were  agreed  in  crying  it  down.^ 

Bishop  Guthry  has  a  circumstantial  story  ^  that 
the  tumult  in  St.  Giles  was  the  result  of  a  deliberate 
plot  by  Henderson  and  David  Dickson  the  well- 
known  minister  at  Irvine.  They  met,  he  says,  in 
Edinburgh  in  April,  and  having  taken  counsel 
with  Balmerino  and  Sir  Thomas  Hope,  and  secured 
their  approval  of  their  plans,  afterwards  met  at  a 
house   in   the  Cowgate  certain   matrons,  three  of 

*  The  Large  Declaration,  p.  26.  *  Ibid.,  p.  27. 

3  Memoirs  (ed.  1748),  p.  23. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       73 

whom  he  names,  and  recommended  them  that  they 
and  their  adherents  might  give  the  first  affront  to 
the  book,  assuring  them  that  men  would  afterwards 
take  the  business  out  of  their  hands.  A  story  of 
this  kind,  brought  forward  many  years  after  the 
alleged  event  by  one  who  bore  no  good  will  to 
Henderson's  party,  and  involving  so  many  pro- 
minent names,  is  open  to  grave  suspicion.  Had 
it  been  true  it  must  have  been  known  at  the  time 
to  many  persons,  and  could  scarcely  have  been 
kept  private.  Inquiry,  as  we  have  seen,  was 
ordered  from  the  highest  quarters,  and  was  set  on 
foot  at  once  to  discover  all  suspected  of  having 
liad  anything  to  do  with  the  tumult,  and  the 
authorities  were  satisfied  that  the  riot  was  simply 
the  work  of  an  angry  crowd.  The  names  mentioned 
by  Guthry  are  sufficient  to  discredit  the  tale.  Hope 
was  a  strong  Presbyterian,  whom  neither  court 
frowns  nor  favours  could  induce  to  conceal  or 
compromise  his  principles.  But  as  Lord  Advocate 
then  and  till  near  the  end  of  his  life  he  was  a  faithful 
servant  of  the  Crown,  and  nothing  is  more  incredible 
than  that  a  man  of  honour  and  integrity  holding 
that  position  should  have  been  a  party  to  a  clan- 
destine scheme  to  foment  a  disorderly  riot.  For 
Henderson  too  such  a  step  would  have  been  the 
height  of  folly.  The  man  of  greatest  mark  in  the 
Presbyterian  party  of  the  Church,  he  was  the  object 
of  close  and  jealous  observation  by  those  in  authority. 
Only  a  few  weeks  before,  on  9th  March,  Rutherfurd 
from  his  exile  in  Aberdeen  had  sent  him  a  friendly 
warning  that  he  was  no  mere  private  person,  and 
that  his  enemies  were  eager  to  fasten  upon  his 
slightest  mistake  in  order  to  damage  the  cause. 
*  As  for  your  cause  ye  are  the  talk  of  north  and 


74  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

south,  and  looked  to  so  as  if  ye  were  all  crystal 
glass.  Your  motes  and  dust  would  soon  be  pro- 
claimed and  trumpets  blown  at  your  slips.'  Every- 
thinor  that  is  known  of  his  character  and  conduct 
contradicts  the  notion  that  he  would  choose  such 
methods  to  further  his  ends.  He  was  to  be  the 
leader  of  the  fight  against  the  Service  Book,  but 
he  came  forward  openly  and  courageously  in  his 
own  name  and  fought  with  very  different  weapons 
than  riot  and  tumult.  The  story  proceeds  upon  a 
misreading  of  the  whole  situation.  Nothing  could 
be  further  from  the  truth  than  to  suppose  that 
secret  incitement  by  some  discontented  ministers 
was  needed  to  stir  the  feelings  of  Edinburgh  ladies 
into  an  open  display  against  the  Service  Book. 
Scotland  high  and  low  was  already  aflame  with 
indignation  at  the  insult  both  to  Church  and  nation, 
and  every  class  was  ready,  as  events  very  soon  made 
plain,  to  display  that  indignation  in  its  own  way  : 
an  angry  crowd  of  common  people  would  not  be 
too  nice  in  giving  vent  to  its  anger  in  the  way  such 
crowds  always  do.  It  scarcely  needed  that  Dr. 
M'Crie  should  point  out  a  fact  which  discredits  the 
whole  story.^  Dickson,  says  Guthry,  went  home 
by  way  of  Stirling,  giving  out  that  his  errand  was 
to  convoy  his  friend  Mr.  Robert  Blair  to  a  ship 
which  was  to  carry  him  to  Germany.  But  Blair's 
design  of  going  abroad  was  formed  at  a  later  date, 
a  considerable  time  after  the  tumult,  and  when  the 
opposition  to  the  innovations  had  little  appearance 
of  being  successful.  ^ 

Did  the  Scottish  people  exaggerate  the  dangers 
to  their  religion  and  liberty  involved  in  the  policy 

1  Life  of  Henderson  (ed.  1846),  p.  13. 
'  Life  of  Blair,  Wodrow  Society,  p.  151. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       75 

of  1637  ?  If  we  try  to  put  ourselves  in  their 
position  it  will  be  difficult  to  say  that  they  did. 
The  Canons  displaced  at  one  stroke  the  Second 
Book  of  Discipline  in  which  the  Church  had  em- 
bodied her  Presbyterian  constitution.  But  it  was 
round  the  Service  Book  that  the  storm  raged.  Yet 
the  Church  had  a  Service  Book  of  her  own,  the 
Book  of  Common  Order,  since  the  days  of  Knox. 
In  it  were  set  down  '  the  form  of  prayers,  admini- 
stration of  the  sacraments,  admission  of  ministers, 
excommunication,  solemnizing  of  marriage,  visita- 
tion of  the  sick,  etc.,  to  which  the  ministers  are  to 
conform  themselves  :  for  although  they  be  not 
tied  to  set  forms  and  words  yet  they  are  not  left 
at  random,  but  for  testifying  their  consent  and 
keeping  unity  they  have  their  directory  and 
prescribed  order.'  ^  But  the  new  Service  Book 
drew  upon  itself  every  sort  of  illwill. 

First  and  foremost,  the  imposing  of  it  was  the 
act  of  an  autocrat.  It  had  no  pretence  of  sanction 
ecclesiastic  or  civil,  from  Church  court  or  Parlia- 
ment. It  was  oppression,  and  that  roused  the  old 
Scottish  spirit  of  resistance.  So  imsparing  a  critic 
of  the  Church  as  Andrew  Lang  describes  it  as  *  an 
act  of  sheer  royal  autocratic  papacy.'  ^  Scotsmen 
were  not  ignorant  that  across  the  Border  absolutism 
was  then  triumphant.  They  knew  that  since  1629 
Charles  had  governed  England  without  a  Parlia- 
ment, that  illegal  exactions  of  various  kinds  had 
been  imposed,  that  judges  of  independent  mind 
had  been  dismissed.  They  knew  that  in  this  very 
year  Hampden  was  making  a  stand  against  arbitrary 

'  The  Government  and  Order  of  the  Church  of  Scot/and,   written  by 
Henderson,  1641. 

'  History  of  Scotland,  iii.  p.  25. 


76  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

rule  in  the  case  of  ship-money,  and  that  in  his 
person  he  embodied  the  rising  spirit  of  resistanee 
in  England.  They  saw  in  Charles's  act  a  similar 
attempt  to  override  their  own  liberties.  But  this 
was  in  their  eyes  no  solitary  act :  it  was  the  cul- 
mination of  a  long  series  of  acts  by  which  Charles 
and  his  father  before  him  liad  sought  to  destroy 
the  system  of  Church  government  and  worship 
to  which  they  were  devotedly  attached. 

But  there  was  more.  The  king,  they  believed, 
had  done  this  on  the  advice  of  Laud.  The  im- 
position of  the  book  was  therefore  the  work  of  an 
Englishman,  and  he  an  English  priest  who  had 
for  years  been  doing  his  utmost  to  romanise  the 
Church  of  England.  He  was  now  seeking  to 
romanise  the  Church  of  Scotland,  to  introduce 
into  it  the  English  liturgy,  with  changes  in  it 
indicating  a  nearer  approach  to  Rome.  The  book 
insulted  both  Scottish  national  sentiment  and 
Scottish  Protestantism. 

But  was  the  Service  Book  in  fact  Laud's  work, 
and  did  it  in  fact  show  a  nearer  approach  to  Rome  ? 
It  is  easy  to  show  that  there  is  a  sense  in  which  the 
so-called  *  Laud's  Liturgy '  was  not  Laud's  work 
but  the  work  of  other  men.  He  did  not  compose 
it ;  it  was  the  work  of  Scottish  bishops.  In  1629, 
when  the  question  of  a  liturgy  for  Scotland  was 
considered,  and  in  1633  when  the  matter  was 
again  discussed,  Laud  had  urged  the  use  of  the 
English  liturgy  in  Scotland,  and  in  this  the  king 
agreed  with  him.  It  was  Scottish  bishops  who 
wished  a  Scottish  liturgy.  At  last  Charles  deferred 
to  them,  either  in  Edinburgh  or  shortly  after  he 
returned  home  in  1633,  and  in  1634  he  gave  his 
authority  for  its  preparation.     That  was  done  by 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       77 

Scottish  bishops,  probably  Maxwell  and  Wedder- 
bum  ;  Laud's  share  of  the  work  was  in  revising  it. 
But  how  important  his  revision  was  appears  from 
Dr.  Sprott's  careful  investigation.  '  It  is  evident 
that  the  Scottish  Prayer  Book  was  virtually  settled 
in  April  1636  by  Laud  and  Wren  writing  into  an 
English  liturgy  the  few  changes  suggested  in  Scot- 
land which  they  were  willing  to  admit,  and  such 
other  alterations,  mostly  in  an  opposite  direction, 
as  seemed  good  to  them.'  Again :  '  The  book  as 
finally  adopted  was  mainly  the  work  of  Laud  and 
the  English  divines  of  his  school,  while  only  a 
portion  of  the  Scottish  bishops  concurred  in  it 
and  that  not  without  much  pressure.'  And  again  : 
*  The  alterations  can  scarcely  fail  to  make  the  im- 
pression that  Laud  and  his  school  took  advantage 
of  the  Scottish  wish  for  a  separate  liturgy  to 
prepare  a  version  of  the  English  Prayer  Book, 
amended  as  far  as  possible  in  accordance  with 
their  own  views.'  ^  Laud  was  indeed  not  the  only 
reviser ;  King  Charles  was  another.  It  is  said 
that  in  1634  the  changes  approved  by  him  were 
written  in  an  English  Prayer  Book  as  a  guide  or 
rule  to  the  Scottish  bishops.  Further  the  copy  of 
the  English  Prayer  Book  in  the  possession  of  the 
Earl  of  Roscbery  bearing  the  date  of  1637  shows 
in  the  king's  handwriting  the  latest  alterations  and 
additions  approved  by  him.^ 

Next  as  to  the  approximation  to  Rome  indicated 
by  the  changes  made.  We  are  not  likely  to  ex- 
aggerate these  if  we  follow  Dr.  Sprott.  Yet  he 
says  '  It  was  substantially  a  revision  of  the  English 

*  Sprott,  Scottish  Liturgies  of  the  Iteigii  of  Jamet  VI.  (1871),  Introd. 
Ixiii-lxvi. 

'  Cooper,  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  Introd.  xxi. 


78  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Prayer  Book  in  a  ritualistic  direction.'  *  The  great 
objection  to  the  Book  of  1637  was  its  departure 
from  the  English  liturgy  in  an  alleged  Romish 
direction.  It  was  the  question  of  doctrine  as 
affected  by  the  Canons  and  the  liturgy  and  the 
fear  of  a  design  to  undermine  the  Protestant 
religion,  of  which  this  was  thought  the  first  step, 
that  led  men  like  Baillie,  Ramsay  and  Rollock  to 
swell  the  ranks  of  the  Covenant.  Their  fears  were 
somewhat  exaggerated  ;  still  the  rubric  as  to  the 
baptismal  water,  the  direction  to  have  the  holy 
table  at  the  uppermost  end  of  the  chancel  (not  in 
the  English  book),  the  commendation  of  wafer 
bread,  the  retaining  of  the  word  '  corporal  '  for  a 
fair  linen  cloth,  the  attitude  of  the  officiating 
minister,  and  other  changes  in  the  Communion 
service  were  certainly  fitted  to  startle  the  most 
Protestant  Church  in  Christendom.'  ^  If  these 
views  be  well  founded  the  Scottish  Presbyterians 
of  1637  were  not  far  wrong  when  they  spoke  of 
Laud's  Liturgy  and  when  they  ascribed  to  it 
romanising  tendencies. ^ 

It  was  part  of  a  deliberate  scheme,  as  they 
believed,  to  undo  the  work  of  the  Reformation. 
To  the  Reformation  the  people  of  Scotland  owed, 
they  knew,  a  deep  debt.  '  It  was  a  call  to  the 
common  Scottish  man  and  to  every  man  to  go 
to  God  direct  without  any  intermediation  except 
God's  open  word.  .  .  .  The  reception  of  a  divine 
message   direct   to   the   individual   in   the    newly 

1  Sprott,  Scottish  Liturgies  of  the  Reign  of  James  VL  (1871),  Introd. 
Ixvi-lxviii. 

2  'The  last  copy,  still  in  the  Lambeth  Library,  received  the  final 
annotations  of  Laud.  His  additions  are  even  more  pronounced  than 
those  of  the  English  ritual :  e.g.  he  reinstated  the  Eastward  position.' 
— A.  C.  Benson,  Archbishop  Laud:  A  Study,  p.  115. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       79 

opened  Scriptures  was  a  source  of  incomparable 
energy  and  exhilaration  alike  to  men  and  women,  to 
the  simple  and  the  learned,  to  the  young,  and  stranger 
still,  to  the  old.  ...  It  was  the  birthday  of  a  people. 
Everywhere  the  Scottish  burgess  and  the  Scottish 
peasant  felt  himself  called  to  deal  individually 
with  Christianity  and  the  divine,  and  everywhere 
the  contact  was  ennobling.'  ^ 

The  greatest  part  of  Scotland's  debt  to  the 
Reformation,  it  has  been  well  said  by  a  recent 
writer,  2  was  the  formation  of  a  thoughtful  and 
reverent  people  accustomed  to  great  themes  and 
serious  reflection  upon  them  by  the  ministrations  of 
an  educated  clergy,  whose  first  vocation  has  always 
been  held  to  be  the  preaching  of  the  Gospel  in  its 
fulness  and  the  elucidation  of  the  mind  of  the  Spirit 
in  the  Word  of  God.  That  kind  of  training  did 
much  to  open  and  strengthen  the  mind  even  where 
there  was  little  book  learning.  Bishop  Burnet, 
no  friendly  witness,  confesses  '  We  were  indeed 
amazed  to  see  a  poor  commonalty  so  capable  to 
argue  upon  points  of  Government  and  on  the  bounds 
to  be  set  to  the  power  of  princes  in  matters  of 
religion  :  upon  all  these  topics  they  had  texts 
of  Scripture  at  hand  and  were  ready  with  their 
answers  to  anything  that  was  said  to  them.  This 
measure  of  knowledge  was  spread  even  among 
the  meanest  of  them,  their  cottagers  and  their 
servants.'  ^  Sir  Walter  Scott  was  no  indiscrimi- 
nate admirer  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  and 
its  teaching,  but  he  knew  his  countrymen  well, 
and  he  knew  how  much  '  education  of  the  heart ' 
their    religion    brought    them.     Writing    to    Miss 

'  Taylor  Innes,  John  Knox,  pp.  43,  44,  94. 

'  Lord  Balfour  of  Burleigh,  Rise  of  Preshyterianism,  pp.  1G3-4. 

'  History  of  His  Own  Time  (ed.  1823),  i.  pp.  607-8. 


80  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Edgeworth  he  said,  '  I  have  read  books  enough 
and  observed  and  conversed  with  enough  of  eminent 
and  splendidly  cultivated  minds  too  in  my  time, 
but  I  assure  you  I  have  heard  higher  sentiments 
from  the  lips  of  poor  uneducated  men  and  women 
when  exerting  the  spirit  of  severe  yet  gentle 
heroism  under  difficulties  and  afflictions,  or  speak- 
ing their  simple  thoughts  as  to  circumstances  in 
the  lot  of  their  friends  and  neighbours  than  I  ever 
yet  met  with  out  of  the  pages  of  the  Bible.  We 
shall  never  learn  to  feel  and  respect  our  real  calling 
and  destiny  unless  we  have  taught  ourselves  to 
consider  everything  as  moonshine  compared  with 
the  education  of  the  heart.'  It  was  in  Scottish 
humble  life  that  he  found  such  natures  as  those 
of  Jeanie  Deans  or  Edic  Ochiltree,  and  he  de- 
lighted in  them  '  because  they  had  this  refinement 
of  the  heart  without  a  trace  of  anything  that  could 
be  called  intellectual  polish.'  ^ 

There  was  still  another  and  more  bitter  in- 
gredient in  the  cup  of  national  indignation.  What- 
ever Scotsmen  thought  of  Charles  and  of  Laud,  their 
deepest  feelings  were  directed  against  their  own 
bishops.  These  men  knew  the  people  and  the 
Church  of  Scotland  :  they  ought  to  have  advised 
the  king  aright  and  opposed  the  meddling  inter- 
ference of  outsiders.  Instead  of  this  they  had 
betrayed  the  Church  for  worldly  and  personal  ends. 
The  diluted  episcopacy  of  James  had  been  accepted 
by  the  bulk  of  the  clergy,  and  in  time  a  mixed 
Episcopalian  and  Presbyterian  system  might  have 
been  accepted  by  the  laity  had  the  bishops  been 
prudent  and  faithful.  But  its  chances  of  success 
were  ruined  by  them.     To  such  a  pass  had  they 

*  See  Spectator,  31  st  December  1892. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND      81 

brought  matters  that  in  the  words  of  an  Anghcan 
writer  '  the  cause  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in 
Scotland  had  scarce  a  real  friend  among  the  laity.'  * 
Baillie  expressed  the  views  of  a  large  body  of 
moderate  opinion  when  he  wrote :  *  Bishops  I 
love ;  but  pride,  greed,  luxury,  oppression,  im- 
mersion in  secular  affairs  was  the  bane  of  the 
Romish  prelates,  and  cannot  have  long  good 
success  in  the  Reformed.'  ^  The  bishops'  conduct 
was  not  made  matter  of  complaint  at  the  outset, 
but  as  the  conflict  developed  and  it  was  seen  that 
they  urged  the  king  to  refuse  the  withdrawal  of 
the  Service  Book,^  they  themselves  became  the 
objects  of  attack,  and  in  the  end  the  ecclesiastical 
system  which  they  had  discredited  fell  with  them 
in  a  common  ruin. 

2.  Henderson's  challenge  :  the  '  combustion  ' 

August — November  1637 

If  the  Privy  Council  thought  they  had  to  deal 
only  with  a  riotous  Edinburgh  mob  they  were 
speedily  undeceived.  About  the  10th  of  August 
the  authorities,  putting  on  a  bold  front,  charged 
some  of  their  clergy  in  Fife  and  in  the  West  to 
purchase  their  two  copies  of  the  Service  Book. 
Letters  of  horning  were  raised  by  the  archbishop 
against  Henderson  and  two  others.  The  result 
was  that  on  23rd  August  the  three  Fife  ministers 
presented  a  petition,  in  proper  legal  phraseology 
a  Bill  of  Suspension,  to  the  Privy  Council  craving 
the   Council  to   suspend   the   charge.     Henderson 

'  Perry,  History  of  the  Church  of  England  from  the  Death  of  EUsaheth, 
i.  p.  542. 
*  Lettera,  2nd  January  1637.  '  Ibid. ,  -Ith  October  1637. 

F 


82  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

was  the  leading  petitioner,  the  others  being  younger 
men,  James  Bruce  and  George  Hamilton.     It  was 
by  this  memorable  act  that  Henderson  stepped  on 
to  the  public  stage,  openly  challenged  the  king's 
action,   and  became  from  that  day  forward  the 
central  figure  in  the  long  struggle  now  commencing. 
We  remember  Knox's  dramatic  call  in  the  Parish 
Church  of  St.  Andrews  in  1547,  addressed  to  him 
pubhcly  by  friar  John  Rough,  to  come  forward 
and     preach     openly     the     Reformed     doctrines. 
Nothing  could  well  have  been  less  dramatic  than 
this  first  public  appearance  of  Henderson.     Yet 
the  action  of  each  man  suited  well  his  character 
and  the  need  of  the  hour.     Knox's  task  was  to 
attack  :    dauntless  courage  and  fiery  enthusiasm 
like  his  were  needed  to  pull  down  the  stronghold 
of   the    Roman   Church.      Henderson's   task   was 
to  defend  :   the  government  and  doctrine  of  the 
Church  were  assailed  by  Charles,  skill  and  coolness 
as  well  as  courage  were  needed  to  repel  that  attack. 
His  first  move  took  the  form  of  a  step  in  a  legal 
process  brought  before  the  Privy  Council,  not  as 
the  king's  executive  in  Scotland  but  in  its  separate 
capacity  as  a  judicial  body  exercising  the  functions 
of  a  court  of  law.     And  nothing  could  have  been 
less  violent  or  more  sober  than  the  language  used. 
They  said  that  on  being  charged  to  buy  the  books 
each  had  stated  his  willingness  to  do  so  and  to  read 
them   that   he   might   see   what   they   contained, 
'  alleging  that  in  matters  of  God's  worship  we  are 
not  bound  to  blind  obedience.'     This  permission, 
they  said,  was  not  granted,  '  and  yet  we  are  now 
charged  with  letters  of  horning  directed  by  your 
lordships  upon  a  narrative  that  we  refused  the 
said   books,   out   of  curiosity   and   singularity   to 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       83 

provide  each  one  of  us  two  of  the  said  books  for 
the  use  of  our  parishes.'  The  real  question  there- 
fore was,  were  they  bound  to  use  the  Service  Book 
in  their  parishes  ?  The  petitioners  set  fortli 
temperately  but  distinctly  their  reasons  for  answer- 
ing that  in  the  negative.  These  reasons  are  five 
in  number,  and  as  they  were  without  doubt  drawn 
by  Henderson,  and  as  the  document  has  become 
of  historical  importance,  they  may  be  given  in 
his  own  words. 

'  First,  because  the  said  Service  Book  is  not 
warranted  by  general  assemblies,  which  is  the  re- 
presentative kirk  of  this  kingdom,  and  hath  ever 
since  the  reformation  given  direction  in  matters 
of  God's  worship,  nor  by  any  act  of  parliament 
which  in  things  of  this  kind  hath  ever  been  thought 
necessary  by  His  Majesty  and  estates. 

'  Secondly,  because  the  liberties  of  the  true  kirk 
and  the  form  of  worship  and  religion  received  at 
the  reformation  and  universally  practised  since 
then  are  warranted  by  acts  of  general  assemblies, 
and  divers  acts  of  parliament  1567,  and  of  the  late 
parliament  1633. 

*  Thirdly,  the  kirk  of  Scotland  is  an  independent 
kirk,  and  her  own  pastors  should  be  most  able  to 
decern  and  direct  what  do  best  seem  our  measure 
of  reformation,  and  what  may  serve  most  for  the 
good  of  the  people. 

'  Fourthly,  it  is  not  unknown  to  your  Lordships 
what  disputing  division  and  trouble  hath  been  in 
this  kirk  about  some  few  of  the  many  ceremonies 
contained  in  this  book,  which  being  examined, 
as  we  shall  be  ready  at  a  competent  time  assigned 
by  your  Lordships  to  show,  will  be  found  to  depart 
far  from  the  worship  and  reformation  of  this  kirk, 


84  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

and  in  points  most  material  for  the  kirk  of  Rome, 
for  her  hierarchy  and  doctrine,  superstition  and 
idolatry  in  worship,  tyranny  in  government  and 
in  wickedness,  every  way  as  anti-christian  now  as 
when  it  came  out  of  her. 

'  Fifthly,  the  people  hath  been  otherwise  taught 
by  us  and  our  predecessors  in  our  places  ever  since 
the  reformation ;  and  so  it  is  likely  they  will  be 
found  unwilling  to  the  change  whenever  they  be 
essayed,  even  when  their  pastors  are  willing ;  in 
respect  whereof  the  said  letters  of  horning,  whole 
effect  and  execution,  ought  to  be  simpliciter 
suspended  in  time  coming.' 

The  petitioners  did  not  lack  courage,  they  tabled 
for  debate  the  whole  questions  at  issue  between 
king  and  Church.  The  Church  is  self-governing  ; 
whatever  changes  are  to  be  made  in  her  worship 
or  doctrine  must  be  made  by  herself  acting  through 
her  General  Assembly  and  sanctioned  by  Parlia- 
ment. That  is  the  broad  position  :  changes  cannot 
be  brought  in  simply  at  the  king's  pleasure.  As  to 
the  proposed  changes  the  Church  adheres  to  the 
Reformation  ground ;  it  is  the  king  who  is  the 
innovator ;  the  changes  are  in  the  direction  of 
Rome,  and  they  are  rejected  by  the  reformed 
Church.  The  reasoning  lifts  the  question  out  of 
the  atmosphere  of  clamour  and  excitement ;  it  is 
calm  and  clear,  and  bases  itself  on  principle. 

Most  contested  cases  involve  small  points  as  well 
as  large,  and  judges  are  prone  to  dispose  of  a  case 
on  a  small  issue,  if  that  will  suffice,  leaving  the  larger 
questions  discreetly  alone.  But  the  Privy  Council's 
decision  in  the  present  instance  raises  a  smile.  It 
was  plain  beyond  controversy  that  their  Act  of 
December  1636  meant  that  the  books  were  to  be 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND      85 

bought  for  use  in  the  parish,  not  for  the  minister's 
private  reading,  yet  after  two  days'  dehberation 
their  solemn  dehverance  on  25th  August  was  to 
the  effect  that  '  understanding  that  there  has  been 
a  great  mistaking  in  the  letters  and  charges  given 
out  upon  the  Act  of  Council  made  anent  the  buying 
of  Service  Books,  the  said  Lords  for  removing  and 
clearing  of  all  such  scruple  declares  that  the  said 
Act  and  letters  extends  allenarly  to  the  buying  of 
the  said  books  and  no  further.'  ^  The  draft  of  the 
Council's  deliverance  has  been  preserved, ^  and  in 
its  ampler  form  expresses  their  meaning  more 
fully  :  '  Declares  that  the  said  Act  of  Council  and 
letters  raised  thereupon  does  only  comprehend  the 
buying  of  the  said  Service  Book  by  the  ministers, 
and  that  they  had  and  have  no  purpose  nor  in- 
tention to  extend  the  same  to  the  practice  thereof.' 
What  a  senseless  proceeding  was  the  Act  if  that 
was  all  it  meant !  The  truth  is  the  Privy  Council 
simply  turned  tail  and  fled  from  its  own  order. 
What  was  the  explanation  ?  From  the  day  of  the 
St.  Giles  riot  it  was  openly  divided  into  two  opposing 
camps  :  the  clergy  in  one,  most  of  the  lay  members 
in  the  other.  Divided  counsels  produced  feeble 
action.  Coloured  and  distorted  accounts  were  sent 
up  to  Court  by  both  parties,  each  side  apparently 
throwing  blame  on  the  other.  As  early  as  7th 
August  Laud  was  censuring  the  Council  in  strong 
language.  '  His  Majesty,'  he  writes  to  Traquair, 
'  takes  it  very  ill  that  the  business  concerning  the 
stablishment  of  the  Service  Book  hath  been  so 
weakly  carried,  and  hath  great  reason  to  think 
himself  and  his  Government  dishonoured  by  the 

'  Register  of  Pri\yy  Council,  vi.  (2nd  series),  p.  621. 
«  Ibid.,  p.  694. 


86  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

late  tumult  in  Edinburgh,  23rd  July.  Neither 
was  this  the  best  Act  that  ever  they  [the  clergy] 
did,  to  send  away  their  letters  apart  without 
acquainting  the  Council,  that  their  advertisements 
might  have  come  by  the  same  messenger,  together 
with  their  joint  advice  which  way  was  best  to 
punish  the  offenders.  Of  all  the  rest  the  weakest 
part  was  the  interdicting  of  all  Divine  Service  till 
His  Majesty's  pleasure  was  further  known  .  .  .  for 
that  were  in  effect  as  much  as  to  disclaim  the  work 
or  to  give  way  to  the  insolency  of  the  baser 
multitude.  The  disclaiming  the  book  as  an  act 
of  theirs,  but  as  it  was  His  Majesty's  command 
was  most  unworthy.'  But  what  would  Laud  say 
to  the  marvellous  deliverance  of  25th  August  ? 

The  truth  is  that  by  that  time  the  '  combustion  ' 
was  already  breaking  out  over  Scotland,  and  the 
majority  in  the  Privy  Council  had  taken  alarm. 
Henderson  and  his  two  friends  did  not  appear 
alone  before  them  on  the  23rd.  The  advance 
guard  of  a  great  host  was  with  them.  '  A  number 
of  letters  were  written  by  noblemen  and  gentlemen 
to  the  Lords  of  Council  wherein  they  remonstrated 
both  the  evils  in  the  book  and  the  illegal  introduc- 
tion thereof.'  The  letters  desired  the  Council 
to  stay  any  further  action  or  any  execution  upon 
the  charges  given  to  ministers,  indicating  that  if 
this  were  not  done  all  would  generally  refuse  the 
book,  and  numerous  petitions  would  be  presented 
to  the  king.^  Some  noblemen  were  present  in 
town  on  the  day  of  the  Council  meeting  and  added 
their  voices  to  the  testimony  of  the  letters.  The 
bishops  were  for  brushing  aside  all  protests.  The 
Chancellor  contemptuously  observed  :    '  There  was 

'  Rothes's  Relation,  pp.  6,  6. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND      87 

only  some  few  ministers  and  two  or  three  Fife 
gentlemen  in  town,  and  what  needed  all  that  stir? '  ^ 
The  gi-uff  reply  by  some  of  the  noblemen  was  that 
*  if  their  pockets  were  well  ryped  it  would  be  found 
that  a  great  many  of  the  best  of  the  country  resented 
these  matters.' 

Having  disposed  of  the  petition  the  Council 
sat  down  to  pen  a  report  to  the  king.  They  began 
in  the  approved  manner  by  the  customary  reference 
to  '  tliat  barbarous  tumult  occasioned  allenarly 
(for  anything  we  can  learn  as  yet)  by  a  number  of 
base  and  rascally  people.'  Then  they  went  on  to 
say  that  they  found  themselves  '  far  surprised  by 
[contrary  to]  our  expectation  with  the  clamour 
and  fears  of  your  Majesty's  subjects  from  diverse 
parts  and  corners  of  the  kingdom,  and  that  even 
from  these  who  have  heretofore  otherwise  lived  in 
obedience  and  conformity  to  your  Majesty's  laws 
both  in  ecclesiastical  and  civil  business.'  They 
dare  not  conceal  it  from  the  king :  '  this  we  found 
to  be  a  matter  of  so  high  a  consequence  in  respect 
of  the  general  grudge  and  murmur  of  all  sorts 
of  people  ...  as  the  like  has  not  been  heard  at 
any  time  .  .  .  not  knowing  whereunto  the  same 
may  tend  and  what  effect  it  may  produce.'  They 
refer  the  matter  to  the  king's  wisdom  with  the 
suggestion  that  he  would  call  some  of  the  Council 
or  lords  of  the  clergy  to  His  Majesty's  own  presence.^ 
A  private  letter  from  Traquair  to  the  Maixjuis  of 
Hamilton  two  days  later  is  interesting  chiefly  as 
showing  the  alarm  of  the  Council  at  the  state  of 
the  country,  and  as  a  sidelight  upon  his  clerical 
colleagues.     *  We   found   so   much   appearance   of 

•  Rothes's  Relation,  p.  7. 

'  Balfour's  Ui$toricai  Works,  ii.  pp.  229,  230. 


88  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

trouble  and  stir  like  to  be  amongst  people  of  all 
qualities  and  degrees  upon  the  urging  of  this  new 
Service  Book  that  we  durst  no  longer  forbear  to 
acquaint  His  Majesty  therewith  and  humbly  to 
represent  both  our  fears  and  our  opinions  how  to 
prevent  the  danger.'  As  to  the  bishops  he  says  : 
'  Some  of  the  leading  men  amongst  them  are  so 
violent  and  forward,  and  many  times  without 
ground  or  true  judgment  that  their  want  of  right 
understanding  how  to  compass  business  of  this 
nature  and  weight  does  often  breed  among  us  many 
difficulties,  and  their  rash  and  foolish  expressions 
and  sometimes  attempts  both  in  private  and 
public  have  bred  such  a  fear  and  jealousy  in  the 
hearts  of  many  that  I  am  confident  if  His  Majesty 
were  rightly  informed  thereof  he  would  blame 
them,  and  justly  think  that  from  this  and  the  like 
proceedings  arises  the  ground  of  many  mistakes 
amongst  us.'  He  adds  that  *  this  business  is  by 
the  folly  and  misgovernment  of  some  of  our  clergy- 
men come  to  that  height  that  the  like  has  not 
been  seen  in  this  kingdom  for  a  long  time.'  ^ 

Charles's  reply  to  the  letter  of  25th  August  is 
dated  10th  September,  it  was  read  at  the  meeting 
of  Council  on  20th  September.  He  took  the 
Council's  letter  very  badly  :  he  disapproved  of 
their  action  in  stopping  the  reading  of  the  Service 
Book  and  failing  to  punish  delinquents  ;  '  either 
we  have  a  very  slack  Council  or  very  bad  subjects.' 
Their  suggestion  of  giving  audience  to  some  of 
their  number  was  loftily  and  summarily  rejected — 
that  expedient  '  we  conceive  not  to  be  fit.'  He 
ignored  the  hints  of  widespread  dissatisfaction  and 
persisted  in  treating  the  matter  as  merely  a  local 

1  Burnet's  Memoirs  of  the  Dukes  of  Hamilton  (1677),  pp.  31,  32. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       89 

disturbance  in  Edinburgh.  He  repeated  his  com- 
mand that  every  bishop  was  to  cause  the  service  to 
be  read  within  his  own  diocese,  and  instructed  that 
burghs  should  be  warned  to  choose  as  magistrates 
only  those  who  could  be  relied  upon  in  this  matter. 
The  record  of  the  meeting  shows  the  desperate 
plight  in  which  the  Council  found  themselves. 
Petitions  poured  in  upon  them  from  '  noblemen, 
barons,  ministers  and  community  against  the 
Service  Book,'  ^  and  a  crowd  of  some  twenty 
noblemen  and  a  great  many  of  the  adjacent  gentry, 
with  about  four  or  five  score  of  ministers  resorted 
to  Edinburgh  to  present  the  petitions.^  Under 
this  pressure  in  two  opposite  directions  the  hapless 
Council  took  refuge  in  the  admirable  device  of 
appointing  a  committee  '  to  attend  and  reside 
here  in  this  vacation  time  for  performance  of  what 
His  Majesty  by  his  letter  has  committed  to  their 
care,'  and  they  superseded  answering  the  petitioners 
till  His  Majesty  should  signify  his  pleasure  there- 
anent.  To  make  sure  that  the  king  could  not 
fail  to  get  first-hand  information  they  commissioned 
the  Duke  of  Lennox,  who  was  present,  '  to  re- 
monstrate to  His  Majesty  the  true  state  of  the 
business  with  the  many  pressing  difficulties  occur- 
ring therein,'  and  they  sent  with  him  three  of  the 
petitions  with  a  list  of  sixty-five  more  which  had 
been  presented  that  day.  They  also  wrote  to  the 
king  reminding  him  of  their  previous  letter  in 
which  they  had  indicated  '  the  general  dislike  and 
prejudice  conceived  against  the  Service  Book,'  and 
went  on  to  show  that  matters  had  now  developed 
into  a  much  more  serious  position.     The  general 

'   liegitter  of  Privy  Council,  vi.  (2nd  series),  p.  529. 
*  Rothes's  Relation,  p.  7, 


90  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

dislike  '  at  this  Council  day  has  been  more  fully 
evidenced  by  the  numerous  confluence  of  all  degrees 
and  ranks  of  persons  who  were  earnest  and  humble 
supplicants  for  opposing  the  acceptation  of  the 
Service  Book  as  by  their  petitions  extending  to  the 
number  of  three  score  and  eight  may  more  clearly 
appear,  whereof  we  have  sent  to  your  Majesty 
three  copies.'  A  strong  attempt  was  made  on  the 
command  of  Charles  to  keep  the  capital  of  Scotland 
on  the  proper  lines.  A  partisan  of  the  king,  Sir 
John  Hay  the  Clerk  Register  was  made  provost, 
and  he  endeavoured  to  prevent  the  town  from 
petitioning  the  Council.^  This  merely  led  to 
another  violent  outbreak  :  the  provost  and  those 
magistrates  who  sided  with  him  were  defeated, 
and  Edinburgh  took  her  place  alongside  of  Glasgow 
and  the  other  petitioning  burghs. 

Charles  could  no  longer  pretend  ignorance  of  the 
state  of  matters  in  Scotland.  He  had  now  been 
fully  informed  of  the  widespread  and  growing 
opposition  among  all  classes  to  his  ecclesiastical 
policy,  and  he  had  been  warned  of  the  rashness  and 
want  of  judgment  of  the  leading  Scottish  clergy. 
His  decision  at  this  juncture  was  of  the  highest 
possible  moment.  A  prudent  ruler  would  have 
withdrawn  the  book  with  the  best  grace  he  could, 
and  the  whole  turmoil  might  have  ended  there. 
But  if  he  had  any  inclination  or  received  any 
advice  to  conciliate  his  subjects  by  taking  this 
commonsense  line,  the  opinion  of  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury  unhappily  carried  the  day  in  the 
opposite  sense.  There  were  better  informed 
people  than  Laud  at  Court.  Even  the  Court 
awaited   the    issue    with   anxiety,    many    persons 

^  BaUlie's  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  pp.  22-3. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       91 

being  of  opinion  that  the  Scots  would  not  easily 
submit.^  Charles's  answer  came  promptly  after 
he  had  taken  his  decision,  in  a  letter  of  9th  October 
to  the  Council ;  it  reached  Edinburgh  on  the  17th. 
News  that  it  was  on  the  way  came  to  Wariston's 
ears  and  he  lost  no  time  in  notifying  his  friends. 
Immediately  crowds  of  all  ranks  flocked  to  Edin- 
burgh. The  answer,  alas  !  was  not  peace  but  a 
sword.  The  same  evening  three  proclamations 
were  read  from  the  market  cross.  The  first 
announced  that  so  far  as  the  affairs  of  the  Church 
were  concerned  that  day's  meeting  of  Council  was 
dissolved,  and  commanded  that  every  one  who  had 
come  to  attend  that  business  should  return  home 
within  twenty-four  hours  under  pain  of  outlawry. 
The  second  declared  that  His  Majesty  had  resolved 
that  the  Council  and  Court  of  Session  should  remove 
from  Edinburgh  to  Linlithgow,  and  after  the  vaca- 
tion to  Dundee.  The  third  denounced  a  book 
entitled  A  Dispute  against  the  English  Popish 
Ceremonies  obtruded  upon  the  Kirk  of  Scotland, 
written  by  George  Gillespie,  and  ordered  all  copies 
to  be  seized  and  publicly  burned. 

The  degradation  of  Edinburgh  was  evidently 
meant  to  be  a  copy  of  King  James's  action  in  1596, 
but  it  was  a  stupid  copy,  and  it  had  disastrous 
results  for  Charles  and  his  friends  the  bishops. 
James  acted  in  hot  blood  after  a  foolish  and  alarm- 
ing riot  :  Charles  had  ample  time  for  reflection  and 
he  had  not  the  same  excuse.  Edinburgh's  only 
offence  now  was  that  it  had  ranged  itself  alongside 
other  towns  in  petitioning  for  the  withdrawal  of 
the  Service  Book.  Reflection  had  not  suggested 
to  Charles  the  vital  difference  in  the  two  cases, 

'  Calendar  of  State  Paptrt  (Dom.),  1637,  p.  408. 


92  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

in  that  now  the  nobihty  were  making  common 
cause  with  the  people.  It  is  doubtless  the  per- 
emptory refusal  of  all  the  petitions,  combined  with 
the  insulting  treatment  of  Edinburgh,  that  explains 
the  fury  of  the  riot  that  swept  through  the  town 
on  the  18th.  '  On  Wednesday  18,'  says  Wariston 
tersely,  '  the  Bishop  of  Galloway  twice  was  on 
hazard  of  his  life  :  the  provost  of  Edinburgh  and 
town  council  was  imprisoned  in  Gourlay's  house 
till  they  subscribed  an  Act,  which  the  people 
craved,  for  abolishing  the  Service  Book,  restoring 
the  prayers,  and  their  pastors  ;  the  nobility  apart, 
the  gentry  apart,  the  burghs  apart,  the  ministry 
apart,  met,  advised  and  consulted,  and  at  the  last 
subscribed  every  one  the  supplication  against  the 
Service  Book,  canons  and  bishops  themselves,  and 
presented  it  to  the  Council.'  ^  He  does  not  mention 
that  Traquair  also,  who  hurried  into  the  street  to 
restore  quiet,  was  hustled  and  knocked  about,  and 
that  the  privy  councillors  as  well  as  the  provost, 
not  to  mention  the  poor  bishop  '  the  main  object 
of  hatred,'  needed  the  intervention  of  the  noblemen 
who  had  been  ordered  to  quit  the  town  to  enable 
them  to  reach  their  homes  in  safety.  All  that  the 
Council  could  do  to  assert  their  authority  was  to 
issue  still  another  feeble  proclamation,  bemoaning 
the  fact  that  they  had  been  '  most  rudely  inter- 
rupted in  the  course  of  their  proceedings  by  a 
tumultuous  gathering  of  the  promiscuous  and 
vulgar  multitude  by  whom  they  in  an  open  way 
were  shamefully  environed,'  and  forbidding  public 
gatherings  and  convocations  and  all  private  meet- 
ings tending  to  faction  and  tumult. 

But   the   king's   foolish   action   had   permanent 

>  Diary,  pp.  270-71, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND      93 

and  unexpected  results  much  more  serious  than  a 
day's    rioting    in    the    streets    of   Edinburgh.     It 
called  forth  the  general  petition  or  supplication 
mentioned  by  Wariston,  and  it  led  to  the  formation 
of  The   Tables.     The   supplication   is  noteworthy 
because  in  it  all  classes  joined,  '  noblemen,  gentry, 
ministers,  burgesses  and  commons,'  because  it  was 
directed  against  the   book  of  Canons  as  well  as 
the  Service  Book,  and  because  in  it  for  the  first 
time  the  bishops  were  singled  out  for  attack.     The 
petitioners  *  are  constrained  out  of  the  deep  grief 
of  our  hearts  humbly  to  remonstrate  that  whereas 
the  archbishops  and  bishops  of  this  realm,  being 
inti-usted    by  His    Majesty  with  the  government 
of  the   affairs   of  the   Church   of  Scotland,   have 
drawn  up  and  set  forth  and  caused  to  be  drawn  up 
and  set  forth  and  enjoined  upon  the  subjects  two 
Books.'     The  grounds  of  objection  to  the  Books 
are  stated  and  the  petitioners  proceed  :    '  Where- 
fore we  being  persuaded  that  these  their  proceed- 
ings are  contrary  to  our  gracious  Sovereign's  pious 
intention  .  .  .  the   Prelates   have    so    far   abused 
their  credit  with  so  good  a  king  as  thus  to  insnare 
his  subjects,  rend  our  Church,  undermine  religion 
in  doctrine,  sacraments,  and  discipline,  move  dis- 
content between  the  king  and  his  subjects,   and 
discord    between    subject    and    subject '  :    '  they 
humbly  crave  that  this  matter  may  be  put  to  trial, 
and  these  our  parties  taken  order  with  according 
to  the  laws  of  the  realm  ;    and  that  they  be  not 
suffered  to  sit  any  more  as  judges  until  the  cause 
be  tried  and  decided  according  to  justice.'     They 
conclude  by  craving  that  if  the  Council  think  this 
too  high  a  matter  to  deal  with  themselves  they  shall 
fully  represent  it  to  the  king  for  redress.     This 


&4  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Supplication  was  drawn  up  by  David  Dickson 
and  revised  by  Lord  Loudoun ;  the  same  night 
500  had  signed  it.^  When  it  was  presented  to  tlie 
Council  at  Holyrood-house  the  members  demurred 
to  receiving  it  when  they  saw  it  referred  to  kirk 
matters,  and  professed  they  would  read  none  of  it. 
Some  hot  words  followed  between  the  petitioners 
and  the  members  of  Council,  the  former  urging 
the  importance  of  the  matter  and  the  need  for 
speedy  remedy,  the  latter  complaining  of  the 
crowds  that  waited  upon  them.  The  Bishop  of 
Galloway  and  the  Clerk  Register,  who  had  both 
of  them  lately  had  unfortunate  experience  of 
crowds,  threw  out  the  suggestion  that  instead  of 
the  whole  of  the  petitioners  coming  in  person  a  few 
commissioners  might  represent  them.  This  sug- 
gestion was  at  once  acted  upon ;  '  many  of  the 
petitioners  meeting  after  supper  did  resolve  to 
meet  again  the  15th  November  there  and  choose 
their  commissioners  in  a  quiet  manner.'  ^  Out  of 
this  casual  remark  grew  the  famous  body  known 
as  The  Tables. 

Three  months  had  now  passed  since  trouble 
began  in  Edinburgh  with  the  reading  of  the  Service 
Book,  and  in  that  time  the  '  combustion '  had 
burst  forth  now  here  now  there  until  in  October 
the  whole  of  the  lowlands  were  aflame  with  open 
discontent,  expressing  itself  in  the  menacing 
language  of  the  Supplication  and  widening  out 
already  far  beyond  the  Service  Book.  Plainly 
the  situation  needed  firm  and  wise  handling,  but 
it  was  receiving  none  at  all.  The  Council  were 
waiting  on  the  king,  and  the  king  could  think  of 
nothing   better   than   the   issuing   of  foolish   and 

1  Rothes's  Relation,  p.  19.  '  Ibid.,  p,  17. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       95 

irritating  proclamations.  One  statesman  at  least 
saw  the  growing  danger,  and  did  not  fail  to  warn 
his  master.  On  the  morrow  of  the  riot  {19tli 
October)  Traquair  wrote  to  the  Marquis  of  Hamilton 
these  grave  and  earnest  words  :  ^  '  My  Lord, 
believe  that  the  delay  in  taking  some  certain  and 
resolved  course  in  this  business  has  brought  business 
to  such  a  height  and  bred  such  a  looseness  in  this 
kingdom  that  I  daresay  was  never  since  His 
Majesty's  father's  going  into  England.  The  king 
is  not  pleased  to  allow  any  of  us  to  come  to  inform 
him  ;  and  after  debating  with  himself  his  com- 
mandments may  be  according  to  the  necessity 
of  the  time.  No  man  stays  here  to  attend  or  assist 
the  service  ;  and  those  on  whom  he  lays  or  seems 
to  entrust  his  commandments  in  this  business,  most 
turn  back  upon  it  whenever  any  difficulties  appear. 
I  am  in  all  these  things  left  alone,  and,  God  is  my 
witness,  never  so  perplexed  what  to  do.  Shall  I 
give  way  to  this  people's  fury,  which  without  force 
and  the  strong  hand  cannot  be  opposed  ? 

*  I  am  calumniated  as  an  underhand  conniver. 
Shall  I  oppose  it  with  that  resolution  and  power 
of  assistance  that  such  a  business  requires  ?  It 
may  breed  censure  and  more  danger  than  I  dare 
adventure  upon  without  His  Majesty's  warrant 
under  his  own  hand  or  from  his  own  mouth.  My 
Lord,  it  becomes  none  better  to  represent  these 
things  to  our  master  than  yourself,  for  God's  cause 
therefore  do  it.  And  seeing  he  will  not  give  me 
leave  to  wait  upon  himself,  let  him  be  graciously 
pleased  seriously  and  timely  to  consider  what  is 
best  for  his  own  honour  and  the  good  of  this  poor 
kingdom,  and  direct  me  clearly  what  I  shall  do.' 

'  Hardwicke,  State  Papcrt,  ii.  pp.  96,  97. 


96  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

3.    THE   GREEN   TABLES 

November  1637 — February  1638 

If  there  was  no  strong  hand  at  the  helm  of  the 
Government  in  Scotland,  things  were  very  different 
on  the  part  of  the  petitioners.  They  at  least  knew 
their  own  minds  and  showed  a  firm  determination 
to  reach  their  ends.  From  the  outset  they  wisely 
chose  the  path  of  legal  and  constitutional  action  by 
petitioning  the  king  through  his  Privy  Council. 
The  proclamations  of  17th  October  made  it  evident 
that  the  king's  advisers  hoped  to  defeat  their 
movement  by  delay,  by  preventing  the  petitioners 
meeting  for  combined  action,  and  by  detaching 
the  town  of  Edinburgh.  The  immediate  answer 
was  the  counterstroke  of  the  General  Supplication. 
This  is  said  to  have  been  suggested  by  Henderson. 
It  was  certainly  both  sagacious  and  courageous. 
By  combining  all  the  separate  classes  into  one 
solid  and  impressive  mass  it  gave  the  petitioners 
themselves  additional  cohesion  and  confidence, 
and  made  it  more  difficult  for  the  adversary  to 
play  upon  the  weakness  or  prejudice  of  any  one 
class.  But  the  attack  on  the  bishops  was  novel 
and  daring.  The  king's  sharp  answer  had  caused 
'  astonishment  and  rage  ' ;  ^  it  was  believed  to 
have  been  inspired  by  the  bishops,  and  to  portend 
'  a  more  severe  and  strict  course  of  proceeding  ' 
against  the  petitioners.  The  General  Supplication 
carried  the  war  into  the  bishops'  camp,  they  were 
themselves  to  be  put  on  trial,  and  were  no  longer 
to  sit  as  judges  on  the  petitioners.     Nothing  but 

*  Baillie's  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  35. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       97 

the  blundering  policy  of  the  king's  advisers  could 
have  induced  the  large  number  of  the  clergy  who 
like  Baillie  were  not  unfriendly  to  bishops  to  sign 
such  a  petition.  He  says  expressly  '  At  the  first 
forming  [of  the  Covenant]  any  design  or  hope  to 
have  gotten  down  the  bishops  altogether  did  appear 
in  no  man  to  my  knowledge.'  Their  action  met 
with  a  piece  of  unexpected  good  fortune  in  the 
suggestion  from  the  other  side  that  commissioners 
should  be  chosen  to  act  in  their  name.  Accord- 
ingly November  15th  saw  a  great  gathering  of  the 
petitioners  again  in  Edinburgh.  The  business 
that  brought  them  together  was  to  elect  com- 
missioners, and  this  was  duly  carried  out.  There 
were  chosen  six  nobles,  two  of  the  gentry  for  each 
county,  one  minister  for  each  presbytery,  and  one 
commissioner  for  each  burgh,  '  these  to  attend  His 
Majesty's  answer  to  the  supplications.'  The  Privy 
Council  then  sitting  at  Linlithgow  were  still  without 
an  answer  from  the  king.  Anxious  above  all  things 
for  delay  and  quiet,  they  opened  communications 
with  some  of  the  noblemen.  The  commissioners 
who  had  just  been  chosen  met  Traquair,  Lauderdale 
and  Lome  as  representing  the  Council.  The  latter 
urged  that  so  great  a  gathering  in  Edinburgh  was 
unnecessary  and  unseemly,  that  it  had  the  appear- 
ance of  trying  to  force  an  answer  from  the  king, 
that  this  could  only  cause  irritation  instead  of 
advancing  a  settlement.  The  reply  was  that  the 
matters  in  hand  were  important  and  urgent,  and 
that  their  present  gathering  was  to  appoint  com- 
missioners to  attend  the  business  in  accordance 
with  the  hint  given  by  two  of  their  own  members 
in  October.  After  some  discussion  the  conference 
was  adjourned  till  next  day.     On  the  afternoon  of 


98  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

the  16th  thirteen  of  the  petitioners — four  nobles, 
three  barons,  three  burgesses,  and  three  ministers — 
waited  on  the  Council  at  Holy  rood.  One  of  the 
points  then  raised  was  the  lawfulness  of  the  peti- 
tioners choosing  commissioners  to  act  in  their 
name.  The  Lord  Advocate  was  consulted  and 
gave  it  as  his  opinion  that  there  was  no  objection 
in  law  to  that  course.  This  satisfied  both  parties  ; 
and  as  the  Earl  of  Roxburghe  was  expected  in 
Edinburgh  in  a  few  days  with  the  king's  answer 
the  Council  promised  to  communicate  it  to  the 
commissioners.  On  that  understanding  the  con- 
vention dissolved,  leaving  behind  them  in  town 
some  of  their  number :  these  were  apparently 
two  nobles,  Sutherland  and  Balmerino,  six  of 
the  gentry,  and  some  representatives  of  the 
burghs. 

This  three  days'  gathering  in  November  1637 
yielded  results  of  the  highest  importance. 
Wariston's  record  of  it  may  be  quoted  :  '  On 
Wednesday,  the  15th,  the  convention  of  the 
nobility,  gentry,  burghs,  ministry,  in  effect  the 
whole  Estates  held  in  Edinburgh  in  a  fair,  calm, 
peaceable,  orderly  manner,  and  did  capitulate 
with  the  councillors  anent  choosing  of  commissioners 
for  shires  and  presbyteries,  anent  the  diet  of  the 
king's  answer,  anent  the  pardoning  the  tumult 
of  Edinburgh,  the  staying  all  further  episcopal 
proceeding,  and  restoring  deposed  ministers.  They 
chose  their  commissioners  to  attend,  and  on  Friday 
night,  after  hearty  prayer  and  thanksgiving,  they 
did  dissolve.' 

Well  might  the  petitioners  be  filled  with  thanks- 
giving at  the  result  of  their  labours.  They  had 
become   a  recognised   power   in   the   State.     The 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND       99 

shrewd  Baillie  remarks  that  the  great  advantage 
they  won  '  was  the  settHng  of  an  advised  and 
constant  order  by  commissioners  countenanced  by 
the  Council ;  that  we  may  pursue  and  defend  our 
cause  against  the  bishops  no  more  by  a  tumultuary 
conference,  but  by  the  stayed  resolution  of  a  great 
number  of  the  choicest  heads  in  the  kingdom.'  ^ 
If  the  Privy  Council  was  the  Scottish  cabinet,  there 
was  now  also  an  organised  Opposition.  It  too,  if 
we  are  to  believe  Baillie,  had  already  an  informal 
cabinet  of  its  own,  consisting  of  Henderson  and 
Dickson  with  three  or  four  of  the  noblemen.  The 
two  named  he  calls  '  the  two  archbishops.'  The 
Council  was  in  office,  but  the  Opposition  cabinet 
was  in  possession  of  real  power.  The  great  mass 
of  Scottish  opinion  was  behind  it,  and  the  fact 
that  that  opinion  was  so  far  organised  added 
enormously  to  its  influence.  It  astonishes  us  that 
such  a  blunder  should  have  been  committed  by 
the  Privy  Council  as  to  allow  this  body  of  accredited 
representatives  to  come  into  existence  and  them- 
selves to  give  it  official  recognition,  until  we  re- 
member that  the  Council  was  drifting  without 
guidance  and  without  a  policy  of  its  own,  that  the 
Opposition  had  already  secret  friends  among  its 
members,  and  that  it  was  distracted  by  internal 
division. 

There  were  other  noteworthy  features  of  the 
November  meetings.  The  town  of  Edinburgh  cast 
in  its  lot  definitely  with  the  other  burghs  on  the 
petitioners'  side  despite  the  efforts  of  its  provost. 
And  it  was  then  for  the  first  time  that  the  young 
Montrose  appeared  among  the  nobles  supporting 
the  same  cause.     But  whatever  troubles  the  future 

'  Lettert  (Luiug':»  ed.),  i.  p.  42. 


100     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

might  bring,  it  is  clear  that  for  the  moment  the 
Council  breathed  more  freely  when  the  petitioners 
quitted  Edinburgh.  Their  account  of  the  proceed- 
ings sent  to  the  Court  reflects  both  their  anxieties 
and  their  relief.  The  people's  humours,  they  say, 
were  still  '  boiling  and  aloft,'  but  they  had  taken 
the  judicious  course  of  quiet  negotiation  with  their 
leading  men  ;  the  petitioners  meant  nothing  more 
than  humbly  to  crave  redress  for  their  grievances 
(which  now  by  the  way  included  '  the  vast  and  un- 
bounded power  of  the  High  Commission ') ;  by 
dexterous  management  they  had  secured  that  there 
would  be  no  more  public  convocations,  only  the 
Council  had  to  yield  so  far  as  to  give  way  to  their 
particular  desire  that  whenever  His  Majesty's 
pleasure  concerning  the  Service  Book  should  be 
returned  '  they  might  be  allowed  by  the  com- 
missioners of  the  shires  or  by  one  or  two  discreet 
men  from  a  shire  or  a  burgh  to  represent  their 
grievances  and  receive  His  Majesty's  or  his  Council's 
answer  thereto.'  They  concluded  by  boldly  assur- 
ing the  king  '  that  this  meeting  whereof  the  con- 
sequences was  so  much  feared  is  now  dissolved 
without  any  harm  or  noise.' 

The  popular  name  of  The  Tables  or  The  Green 
Tables  arose  some  time  afterwards.  It  was  most 
probably  applied  to  the  committee  of  sixteen  or 
thereby  which  was  formed  in  February  1638.  This 
committee,  says  Rothes,^  was  then  chosen  of  four 
barons,  four  burgh  representatives,  and  four 
ministers  to  join  with  the  noblemen.  It  did  not 
consist  of  the  same  sixteen  men  throughout :  the 
actual  members  were  changed  from  time  to  time, 
so  that  attendance  in  Edinburgh  might  not  be 

'  Relation,  p.  69. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     101 

burdensome  on  any  one,  and  the  committee  might 
be  thoroughly  representative.  It  was  always  in 
close  touch  with  its  supporters  throughout  the 
country.  In  February  the  king  announced  his 
final  rejection  of  all  their  supplications,  matters 
were  reaching  a  crisis,  and  the  great  movement 
which  took  shape  shortly  after  in  the  National 
Covenant  was  in  contemplation.  A  smaller  body 
was  needed  as  the  central  authority  to  direct 
such  a  movement.  The  four  groups  sat  at  four 
separate  tables  in  the  Parliament  House,  Edin- 
burgh. It  is  probably  true  that  even  this  com- 
mittee of  sixteen  was  found  too  large  for  many 
purposes,  and  that  decisions  were  frequently 
taken  by  a  smaller  body  of  four — a  kind  of 
inner  cabinet.  It  was  intended  that  it  should 
contain  one  member  from  each  of  the  tables,  but 
as  matter  of  fact  the  direction  of  affairs  was  mainly 
in  the  hands  of  Henderson,  Rothes,  Loudoun  and 
Wariston. 

The  Earl  of  Roxburghe  arrived  in  Scotland  early 
in  December,  bringing  the  long-looked-for  reply 
from  the  king.  It  was  read  at  the  meeting  of  Privy 
Council  in  Linlithgow  on  7th  December.  Mean- 
while the  noblemen  among  the  petitioners,  anti- 
cipating trouble,  had  taken  the  precaution  to  retain 
counsel  to  give  them  legal  advice.  On  5th 
December,  Johnston  of  Wariston  was  informed 
by  Loudoun  that  he  himself  along  with  Roger 
Mowat  of  Balquhollie,  Thomas  Nicolson,  after- 
wards Sir  Thomas  Nicolson,  John  Nisbet  and 
James  Baird  were  the  counsel  chosen.^  The  name 
of  Alexander  Pearson,  who  had  been  one  of 
Balmerino's  counsel,  is  also  mentioned  at  a  later 

'  Wariston,  Diary,  p.  280. 


102     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

date.  The  king's  reply  turned  out  to  be  another 
evasion.  He  was  so  incensed  at  the  tumults  in 
Edinburgh  in  October  that  he  delayed  signifying 
his  pleasure  in  the  matter  of  the  petitions,  but 
in  the  meantime  he  was  good  enough  to  declare 
that  he  abhorred  the  superstition  of  popery,  that 
nothing  would  be  allowed  but  what  would  tend 
to  the  advancement  of  true  religion  as  presently 
professed,  and  that  nothing  was  intended  against 
the  laudable  laws  of  His  Majesty's  native  kingdom. 
The  petitioners  had  asked  for  bread,  they  received 
what  looked  very  like  a  stone.  But  Traquair 
made  the  best  of  a  bad  case,  he  pressed  them  to 
rest  satisfied  with  the  king's  gracious  assurances, 
in  particular  he  urged  that  the  town  of  Edinburgh 
should  gratify  the  king  by  some  public  acknow- 
ledgement of  its  wrongdoing.  On  9th  December 
he  interviewed  five  of  the  commissioners  at  Holy- 
rood.  They  told  him  that  they  did  not  doubt  the 
king's  love  to  religion,  but  that  the  laws  had  already 
been  broken  by  the  introduction  of  the  books 
without  authority.  Traquair  urged  them  to  re- 
consider their  position  and  consult  with  their 
colleagues ;  he  would  take  their  answer  on  Monday, 
11th.  From  Saturday  till  Monday  matters  were 
fully  and  anxiously  discussed.  Traquair  and  his 
master  had  by  this  time  discovered  the  mistake 
made  by  the  Council  in  permitting  the  petitioners 
to  combine  in  one  body  acting  through  accredited 
representatives.  The  Treasurer  had  asked  on  the 
9th  that  they  should  present  their  petitions  severally 
by  provinces,  because  the  king  took  their  manner 
of  supplicating  together  to  be  'a  combining  and 
mutinous  form.'  On  the  11th  he  received  the 
reply  that  the  cause  was  one  common  to  all,  and 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     103 

they  could  not  divide.  We  learn  from  Wariston 
that  another  subject  occupied  the  attention  of 
the  commissioners  at  the  same  time.  They  were 
resolved  not  to  relax  the  pressure  on  the  Council 
for  a  reply  to  the  unanswered  supplications,  and 
failing  a  reply  to  insist  that  their  desires  be  fully 
represented  to  His  Majesty.  They  decided  also 
to  lodge  a  formal  Declinator  of  the  prelates  as  their 
judges  in  the  answers  to  be  given  by  the  Council. 
They  felt  it  was  necessary  to  take  strong  ground  in 
their  dealings  with  the  Council,  who  were  obviously 
playing  for  delay.  '  On  Monday  forenoon  before 
all  the  noblemen,'  says  Wariston,  '  I  had  a  long 
dispute  with  Rothes  and  Loudoun  about  the 
Declinator ;  afternoon  with  Balmerino  about  the 
conclusion  of  the  new  Bill '  (that  is  a  fresh  peti- 
tion for  an  answer  to  the  supplications). 

Tuesday,  the  12th,  saw  twelve  commissioners 
appointed  for  the  purpose  of  repairing  to  Dalkeith, 
whither  the  Council  had  removed.  Their  errand 
was  to  present  their  new  Bill  or  demand  for  an 
answer  to  the  supplications,  and  they  were  careful 
to  take  with  them  also  the  Declinator  in  case  it 
should  be  needed.  Then  followed  a  scene  of  highly 
undignified  twisting  and  wriggling  on  the  part  of 
the  Council.  First  they  sent  out  their  clerk,  de- 
siring the  commissioners  to  send  in  their  Bill. 
This  was  suspected  to  be  a  device  to  get  rid  of  the 
Declinator,  and  they  refused  to  hand  the  Bill  to 
the  clerk,  saying  they  had  come  to  present  it  them- 
selves and  had  something  further  to  say.  A  second 
time  the  clerk  appeared  ;  this  time  his  request 
was  that  the  noblemen  should  present  their  Bill, 
the  barons  theirs,  and  so  on,  each  Estate  separately. 
Again  they  refused,  saying  they  were  directed  to 


104     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

present  one  for  all.  A  third  time  the  clerk  was 
sent  out ;  he  asked  that  seven  or  eight  of  them 
might  come  in  and  present  their  Bill  without  dis- 
tinction of  estate.  The  answer  was  that  the  twelve 
were  already  few  enough  and  were  appointed  by 
the  commissioners  who  represented  the  body  of  the 
supplicants  of  every  estate.  Completely  baffled  the 
Council  abruptly  dissolved,  but  Traquair  and  some 
other  members  approaching  the  commissioners 
asked  to  see  the  Bill  so  that  the  Council  might 
consult  on  the  matter  the  same  evening  and  be 
better  prepared  against  the  next  day.  Once  more 
there  was  a  refusal :  they  had  been  ordered  to 
present  it  to  the  Council,  not  to  councillors,  and 
they  had  something  to  add  which  required  a 
judicial  presentation  of  it.  There  was  nothing  for 
it  but  to  adjourn  the  hearing  till  Thursday,  the 
14th. 

Wariston  disposes  of  the  episode  by  the  curt 
entry  :  '  On  Tuesday  the  noblemen  was  jampfed 
[trifled  with]  in  Dalkeith.'  ^  Two  further  meetings 
followed,  one  on  Thursday  the  14th,  the  other 
on  Tuesday  the  19th  when  the  proceedings  de- 
scended to  the  level  of  farce.  On  Thursday  new 
tactics  were  adopted.  Two  of  the  councillors  came 
out  to  the  waiting  twelve,  and  solemnly  informed 
them  that  they  would  receive  neither  their  former 
supplications  nor  their  present  Bill  until  the  word- 
ing of  some  passages  in  the  petitions  was  changed. 
Once  more  the  twelve  were  immovable ;  they 
would  alter  nothing  in  the  Supplication.  '  After 
some  treaty  to  and  fro  to  this  end,  the  Lords  of 
Council  rose  abruptly  and  departed  by  another 
door  than  where  the  commissioners  were  waiting.'  ^ 

*  Diary,  p^  284.  *  Rothes's  Relation,  pp.  37-8. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     105 

It  is  not  surprising  that  after  being  twice  refused 
a  hearing  the  commissioners  resolved,  on  legal 
advice,  to  draw  a  protestation  against  the  next 
Council  day,  protesting  for  an  immediate  recourse 
to  the  sovereign  for  a  redress  of  their  grievances, 
*  and  in  a  legal  way  and  manner  to  prosecute  their 
pursuits  before  the  ordinary  competent  judges, 
civil  or  ecclesiastical,  against  the  persons  and 
crimes  as  they  complained  upon  seeing  the  Lords 
refused  them  hearing.'  Next  day  Wariston  pre- 
pared the  document.  On  Tuesday  the  19th  the 
twelve  were  again  at  Dalkeith.  They  took  their 
protestation  with  them ;  still  better,  they  took 
a  second  copy  of  it,  and  to  make  sure  their  victims 
would  not  again  elude  their  grasp,  they  posted 
some  of  their  number  armed  with  a  copy  at  each 
door.  Fabian  tactics  were  again  employed  by 
the  Council ;  if  the  commissioners  would  only 
keep  back  their  protestation  that  day  they  would 
promise  them  a  full  hearing  on  Thursday.  All 
in  vain,  the  Privy  Council  was  at  last  run  to  earth  : 
the  twelve  meant  to  protest  now,  and  they  were 
blockading  each  of  the  two  doors  of  the  Council 
room.  The  Council  saw  they  had  to  deal  with 
men  who  could  not  be  shaken  off,  and  they  made 
no  further  attempt  at  evasion  or  delay.  On 
Thursday  21st,  the  commissioners  had  a  full 
hearing  before  the  Council,  no  bishop  being  present, 
when  Loudoun  presented  the  supplicants'  case. 
He  tabled  the  Bill  with  a  copy  of  the  former 
supplications,  and  he  also  *  proponed  the  Declinator 
and  took  instruments  in  the  clerk's  hands.'  The 
Council  informed  the  petitioners  that  the  matter 
was  of  such  weight  and  importance  that  they 
could  not  determine  it  till  they  knew  the  king's 


106     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

pleasure,  and  declared  that  they  would  present 
the  petitions  for  his  consideration. 

The  supplicants  had  carried  their  point  thus 
far ;  the  whole  matter  was  referred  anew  to  the 
king,  and  Scotland  settled  down  to  await  the 
issue.  This  time  the  king  had  the  benefit  of  con- 
sulting with  his  Scottish  ministers.  Traquair  was 
summoned  to  London,  and  went  up  about  the 
middle  of  January  accompanied  by  Sir  John 
Hamilton,  the  Justice  Clerk.  At  Court  he  met  the 
Marquis  of  Hamilton  who  was  soon  to  play  a  pro- 
minent part,  one  of  the  only  two  men  in  England 
whom  the  king  consulted  on  Scottish  business. 
It  can  hardly  be  doubted  what  the  tenor  of  the 
advice  was  which  Traquair  gave.  After  his  return 
home  and  the  issue  of  the  king's  proclamation  he 
wrote  on  5th  March  to  Hamilton,  '  Your  Lordship 
can  best  witness  how  unwilling  I  was  that  our 
master  should  have  directed  such  a  proclamation, 
and  I  had  too  just  grounds  to  foretell  the  danger 
and  inconveniences  which  are  now  like  to  ensue 
thereupon.'  ^  What  Hamilton's  advice  was  we 
do  not  know,  but  it  is  easy  to  divine  what  the 
other  adviser  Laud  recommended.  Scottish  affairs 
were  carefully  kept  from  the  knowledge  of  the 
English  Privy  Council ;  when  tidings  came  from 
Edinburgh  only  those  two  men  were  admitted  to 
the  king's  closet.  When  Hamilton  was  absent  in 
Scotland  Laud  was  his  onLy  counsellor,  the  blind 
leader  of  the  blind.^ 

Rothes  gives  more  than  a  hint  that  from  Scotland 
also  bad  advice  was  poisoning  Charles's  mind. 
On  December  22nd,  the  very  day  after  the  hearing 

'  Hardwicke,  State  Papers,  ii.  p.  101. 

2  Calendar  of  State  Papers  (Dom.),  1637-8,  pp.  624-6. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     107 

before  the  Council,  the  President  of  the  Court  of 
Session,  Sir  Robert  Spottiswoode  the  son  of  the 
Chancellor  who  was  hostile  to  the  petitioners' 
cause,  posted  off  to  London.  He  carried,  says 
Rothes,  pestiferous  directions  and  wrong  informa- 
tions concerning  the  whole  proceedings  of  the 
supplicants.  Traquair  found  a  few  weeks  later, 
greatly  to  his  surprise  and  annoyance,  that  the 
king  was  already  fully  and  minutely  informed  of 
the  whole  of  the  petitioners'  proceedings,  and 
what  part  every  man  had  played.  Much  of  the 
information  was  erroneous  and  to  the  prejudice 
of  their  cause.  He  believed  he  had  been  treacher- 
ously used  by  some  of  his  colleagues,  indicating 
two  of  them,  the  Chancellor  and  Hay  the  Clerk 
Register. 

About  the  middle  of  February  Traquair  was 
back  in  Scotland  bringing  with  him  the  king's 
answer.  It  took  the  form  of  a  proclamation.  On 
the  16th  Wariston  received  private  intelligence  of 
its  main  contents  and  circulated  them  among  the 
leaders.  On  Monday  19th  the  Proclamation  was 
read  at  the  cross  of  Stirling  where  the  Privy 
Council  then  met,  on  Wednesday  21st  at  the  cross 
of  Linlithgow,  and  on  Thursday  22nd  it  was  read 
at  the  cross  of  Edinburgh. 

The  Proclamation  was  a  matter  of  the  utmost 
moment  for  Scotland  ;  it  closed  one  chapter  of  the 
stniggle,  but  it  opened  another  and  a  far  graver. 
The  king  declared  that  the  introduction  of  the 
Service  Book  was  his  own  doing,  that  he  had 
seen  and  approved  of  it  before  it  was  divulged  or 
printed  :  as  for  the  petitions,  he  found  his  royal 
authority  much  injured  thereby  ;  those  who  had 
any  hand  in  framing  them  were  liable  to  his  high 


108     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

censure,  but  as  he  believed  they  had  acted  out  of 
'  a  preposterous  zeal  and  not  out  of  any  disloyalty 
or  disaffection,'  he  would  overlook  the  past ;  but 
all  such  convocations  and  meetings  in  time  coming 
were  forbidden  under  pain  of  treason.  Further  no 
one  was  to  repair  to  Stirling  or  any  other  burgh 
where  the  Council  was  sitting  without  warrant  to 
that  effect,  and  all  persons  in  Stirling  not  dwellers 
there  nor  members  of  the  Council  were  to  remove 
within  six  hours  after  the  Proclamation  was  pub- 
lished, also  under  pain  of  treason. 

The  Opposition  leaders  realised  at  once  the 
gravity  of  the  position,  and  they  saw  that  no  time 
was  to  be  lost.  On  Friday  night,  the  16th,  they 
gathered  for  consultation,  and  it  was  decided  that 
a  few  of  their  number  should  go  to  Stirling,  where 
it  was  expected  the  Proclamation  would  be  read 
on  the  following  Tuesday.  When  fuller  informa- 
tion reached  them  at  a  later  hour  the  same  night, 
it  was  resolved  to  prepare  an  Information  against 
the  Proclamation  for  the  members  of  the  Privy 
Council.  On  Saturday  the  17th  this  was  done  by 
Wariston;  queries  were  also  submitted  to  counsel, 
and  on  their  advice  every  weapon  in  the  legal 
armoury  was  furbished  up. 

A  fresh  Declinator  was  framed  against  prelates 
sitting  in  the  Privy  Council  as  judges,  and  in  case 
the  Declinator  were  refused  a  Protestation  was 
prepared.  Wariston  tells  us  he  sat  up  till  two  on 
Sunday  morning  writing  these  papers  ;  he  slept 
little,  for  before  six  that  morning  he  learned  from 
some  private  source  that  it  was  intended  to  seize 
the  few  supplicants  who  might  appear  at  Stirling. 
Rothes  and  Lindsay  were  at  once  informed  :  a 
full  meeting  was  held  ;    the  Declinator  and  Pro- 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     109 

testation  were  adopted,  and  it  was  further  agreed, 
in  view  of  the  danger  to  which  a  few  representatives 
would  be  exposed,  that  all  should  go  to  Stirling.^ 
That    this    was    no    groundless    apprehension    is 
evident    from    a    contemporary    account    supplied 
from  the  other  side.     On  this  very  Friday,  Traquair 
wrote   from   Edinburgh   to   Hamilton   telling   him 
that  as  he  was  ready  to  leave  for  Stirling  he  heard 
of  some  meetings  of  noblemen   and  others  in  the 
city  who,  as  he  was  informed,  intended  to  follow 
them    to    Stirling.     He    conceived    this    to    be    so 
important   that   he   had   delayed   his   journey   till 
Monday,  and  resolved  '  not  only  to  try  the  reasons 
and   occasions   of  their   meeting   but   also   by   all 
possible  means  to  dissolve  the  same.'  ^      Second 
thoughts   suggested   to   Traquair   that   he   should 
not   wait   for   daylight    on    Monday  :    he    decided 
to   post   off   in   the  darkness,   elude  the  grasp  of 
his  tormentors,  reach  Stirling  on  Monday  morn- 
ing and  have  the  Proclamation  read  before  they 
could    arrive.      An   excellent    plan  :    he    and   the 
Privy  Seal  (Earl  of  Haddington)  were  on  horseback 
at  two  on  that  cold  February  morning,  and  reached 
Stirling  at  eight  o'clock.     But  the  foe  were  sleep- 
less too.     Traquair's   servant  dropped   into  John 
Eliot's  tavern  for  a  tankard  of  ale  after  his  master 
had  gone  and  babbled  over  his  glass,  letting  slip 
the  word  that  his  master  was  off  for  Stirling  at 
that  strange  hour.     The  ears  that  heard  it  belonged 
to  a  servant  of  Lord  Lindsay,  and  in  less  than  no 
time    Lindsay    had    the    news.     He    roused    Earl 
Home  and  some  of  the  other  nobles  from  sleep, 
and  by  four  o'clock  they  too  were  in  the  saddle 
and  off  on  that  forty  mile  ride,  outrode  the  first 

'  Diary,  p.  317.  '  Hardwicke,  State  Papert,  ii.  p.  98. 


110     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

horsemen  and  reached  StirHng  in  advance  of  them. 
Only  six  members  of  Council  could  be  got  together 
that  morning — less  than  a  quorum  ;  but  in  such 
haste  were  they  to  have  their  business  done  before 
their  opponents  arrived  that  they  repaired  to  the 
cross  at  ten  o'clock  and  there  read  the  Proclamation. 
At  the  cross  they  found  awaiting  them  Home  and 
Lindsay,  who  duly  produced  and  read  the  dreaded 
Protestation  and  took  instruments  in  the  hands 
of  notaries.  By  Tuesday  morning  there  were  in 
Stirling  some  seven  or  eight  hundred  supplicants, 
gathered  as  if  by  magic  from  Fife,  the  Lothians 
and  the  West. 

They  asked  and  were  refused  a  sight  of  the  Pro- 
clamation, which  had  not  yet  been  ratified  by  the 
Council.  They  objected  to  that  being  done,  and 
were  unwilling  to  return  home  until  explicitly 
assured  there  would  be  no  ratification.  Despite 
this  undertaking  the  Council  met  the  same  night 
(Tuesday  20th)  in  the  Castle  and  ratified  the  Pro- 
clamation. Two  of  the  supplicants  who  had  re- 
mained behind  gave  in  the  Declinator  and  made 
the  Protestation :  the  Lord  Advocate  alone  of 
the  Council  refused  to  sign  the  Act  allowing  and 
approving  the  Proclamation.^  On  Thursday  22nd 
at  eleven  o'clock  when  the  Proclamation  was  made 
at  the  cross  of  Edinburgh,  Wariston  at  once  read 
the  Protestation,  '  surrounded  by  a  great  many 
noblemen,  barons,  ministers  standing  within  and 
about  the  cross,  and  instruments  were  taken  in  the 
hands  of  notaries.' 

What  was  this  Protestation  about  which  the  sup- 
plicants were  so  punctilious,  and  which  the  Privy 
Council   strove   so  hard  to  evade  ?     Had   it  any 

'  llothes's  Relation,  pp.  (54-5. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     111 

effect  in  law  or  otherwise  ?  It  may  appear  to  us 
a  technical  and  archaic  formahty,  but  it  was  re- 
garded at  the  time  as  a  highly  important  State 
paper.  The  legal  advisers  of  the  supplicants,  some 
of  the  ablest  lawyers  in  Scotland,  were  unanimous 
in  their  opinion  that  it  should  be  prepared  and 
presented,  and  they  revised  its  language  with  care.^ 
After  narrating  the  previous  proceedings  they 
protested  that  they  might  have  immediate  recourse 
to  their  sacred  sovereign  to  present  their  grievances, 
and  in  a  legal  way  to  prosecute  the  same  before  the 
ordinary  competent  judges,  civil  or  ecclesiastical  : 
that  the  prelates,  the  parties  complained  against, 
could  not  be  reputed  or  esteemed  lawful  judges  to 
sit  in  any  judicatory  upon  any  of  the  supplicants 
until  after  lawful  trial  judicially  they  purged  them- 
selves of  such  crimes  as  had  already  been  laid  to 
their  charge,  offering  to  prove  the  same  whenever 
the  king  was  pleased  to  give  them  audience  :  that 
no  Act  or  Proclamation  passed  in  presence  of  the 
prelates  should  any  way  prejudice  them,  their 
persons,  estates,  lawful  meetings,  proceedings  or 
pursuits  :  that  they  should  not  incur  any  danger 
for  not  observing  such  Acts,  Books,  Canons,  etc., 
introduced  without  or  against  the  Acts  of  General 
Assemblies  or  Acts  of  Parliament,  but  that  it 
should  be  lawful  for  them  to  adhere  in  matters  of 
religion  to  the  external  worship  of  God  and  policy 
of  the  Church  according  to  the  Word  of  God 
and  laudable  constitutions  of  this  Church  and 
kingdom. 

This  procedure  shows  the  desire  to  act  in  a  law- 
abiding  spirit  and  in  accordance  with  the  principles 
and  precedents  of  Scottish  Government.     It  was 

»  Waristou'a  Diary,  p.  317. 


112     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

apparently  borrowed  from  tlie  legal  practice  of  the 
day,  when  a  litigant  who  thought  he  had  not  re- 
ceived justice  '  took  protestation  for  remeid  of  law,' 
appealing  to  the  king  and  Parliament  for  remedy. 
In  effect  the  protestors  declared  that  the  proceed- 
ings complained  of  were  not  in  accordance  with  the 
law  of  the  land  and  had  therefore  no  legal  effect, 
that  they  declined  to  regard  them  as  closing  the 
controversy,  and  that  they  appealed  past  the  king 
misinformed  by  bad  advisers  to  the  king  as  dispenser 
of  justice,  and  to  the  law  of  the  land  itself.     That 
the  Protestation  was  believed  to  produce  a  profound 
effect  on  the  minds  of  the  people  is  evident  not 
merely  from  the  supplicants'  persistence  in  making 
it  but  from  the  nervous  anxiety  on  the  other  side 
to  evade  it.     It  fortified  their  position  to  make  it 
appear  that  their  claim  was  not  something  novel 
or  arbitrary  but  oiily  what  the  law  entitled  them 
to;    it  took  off  the  weight  and  edge  of  the  royal 
proclamation  when  it  was  instantly  and  formally 
challenged  before  the  world  as  violating  laws  which 
the  sovereign  had  sworn  to  uphold.    Their  own  view 
was  expressed  in  a  statement  issued  by  the  Tables 
to  their  supporters   in  the   country.     In   it  they 
declared  the  Proclamation  to  be  the  work  of  the 
prelates  '  procured  after  their  accustomed  manner 
by    misinformation    of   the    king's    Majesty,'    and 
proceeded  to  say  they  '  have  legally  obviated  the 
publication    and    ratification   thereof   by   timeous 
Protestation  and  Declinator  of  the  common  ad- 
versaries the  bishops,  wherethrough  in  the  judgment 
of  such  as  understand  best  their  proclamations  and 
proceedings  are  made  of  no  legal  force,  to  hinder 
the  absolutely  necessary  meetings  of  all  that  have 
interest  in  this  common  cause  and  extraordinary 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     113 

exigency.'  At  a  later  date  they  told  the  Marquis 
of  Hamilton  that  '  a  Protestation  is  the  most 
ordinary  humble  and  legal  way  for  obviating  any 
prejudice  that  may  redound  to  any  legal  act,  and 
of  preserving  our  right,  permitted  to  the  meanest 
subjects  in  the  highest  courts  of  Assembly  and 
Parhament,  whenever  they  are  not  fully  heard  or 
being  heard  are  grieved  by  any  iniquity  in  the 
sentence,  which  is  grounded  on  the  law  of  nature 
and  nations  :  that  it  is  the  perpetual  custom  of 
this  kingdom  even  upon  this  reason  to  protest,  as 
it  were  in  favour  of  all  persons  interested  and  not 
heard  by  any  express  act  salvo  jure  cujuslibet,  even 
against  all  Acts  of  Parliament.' 


4.  A  nation's  soul  a^ake  :    Henderson  and 

WARISTON    FRAME   THE    NATIONAL   COVENANT 
February — April  1688 

The  Protestation  was  in  fact  a  declaration  of 
war.  Although  in  form  it  was  directed  against 
the  bishops,  the  supplicants  could  no  longer  conceal 
from  themselves  that  the  king  was  the  enemy. 
To  continue  their  agitation  was  declared  to  be 
treason ;  they  must  therefore  either  submit  or 
organise  the  movement  on  a  national  scale  adequate 
to  cope  with  the  whole  force  which  the  Crown 
could  bring  into  play  to  crush  them.  It  was  a  high 
and  perilous  enterprise,  but  the  great  qualities  of 
their  leaders — their  courage,  insight,  and  political 
sagacity — proved  equal  to  the  new  demands.  With- 
out delay  Rothes  issued  a  ringing  appeal  which 
showed  true  appreciation  of  the  crisis  to  noblemen, 
barons,  and  others  not  yet  identified  with  the  cause. 

H 


114     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

'  We  have  here  in  present  consideration,'  he  wrote, 
'  the  most  important  business  that  ever  concerned 
this  nation,  both  in  respect  of  the  dangerous  estate 
wherein  our  rehgion,  our  kirk,  hberties,  Hves  and 
fortunes  presently  stand  by  tliese  innovations  of  the 
Service  Book,  Book  of  Canons,  and  High  Commis- 
sion, and  divers  Proclamations,  and  other  courses 
daily  intended  and  plotted  by  our  adversaries, 
not  only  to  restrain  our  liberty  but  also  to  take 
from  us  all  means  of  ordinary  and  lawful  remedy.' 
In  order  to  consult  together  '  for  taking  a  general 
course  for  preventing  the  imminent  evils  that  con- 
cern all  the  subjects,'  the  persons  addressed  were 
urged  to  hasten  to  Edinburgh. 

At  the  same  time  a  document  called  an  Informa- 
tion was  issued  to  the  general  body  of  supporters 
narrating  the  recent  events,  and  requesting  as 
many  as  possible  to  repair  with  all  diligence  '  to  this 
solemn  meeting  which  is  now  at  Edinburgh.'  ^ 

It  was  at  this  time,  according  to  Rothes,  that  the 
organisation  of  the  Tables  was  completed  by  four 
representatives  of  the  barons,  burghs  and  ministry 
respectively  being  conjoined  with  the  noblemen 
in  a  committee. 

Already  on  Friday,  23rd  February,  their  numbers 
were  largely  increased.  The  chief  danger  at  the 
moment  was  the  danger  of  division  in  their  own 
ranks.  Almost  every  shade  of  opinion  was  repre- 
sented among  them.  There  were  high  Presbyterians 
who  objected  to  Episcopacy  out  and  out :  others 
who  acquiesced  in  a  modified  Episcopacy  but 
refused  the  Articles  of  Perth  :  others  again  who 
were  not  troubled  by  these  things  and  whose 
objections  were  only  against  the  doctrinal  errors 

^  Rothes's  Relation,  pp.  67-8. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     115 

and  dangers  of  the  Service  Book.  Insidious 
attempts  were  made  by  the  Council  and  the  friends 
of  the  bishops  to  sow  among  them  the  seeds  of 
disunion.  Their  emissaries  suggested  that  in  the 
interests  of  peace  they  sliould  plead  with  the  king 
for  the  removal  of  the  Service  Book  and  Canons  and 
for  restraining  the  High  Commission ;  they  went  so 
far  as  to  undertake  that  these  concessions  would 
be  obtained. 

To  Scotsmen  in  so  grave  a  situation  it  was  almost 
inevitable  that  the  idea  of  a  '  band  '  or  covenant 
should  suggest  itself,  as  so  often  before  in  their 
nation's  history.  It  probably  occurred  to  several 
minds,  it  certainly  occurred  to  Henderson,  the 
ablest  and  clearest-headed  among  them.  '  The 
noblemen  with  Mr.  Alexr.  Henderson  and  Mr.  D. 
Dickson  resolve  the  renewing  of  the  old  Covenant 
for  religion,'  says  Baillie.^  It  was  a  masterly  stroke 
for  uniting  the  whole  body  on  a  common  ground  to 
renew  the  old  Confession  of  1580-81  against  Popery, 
subscribed  then  by  King  James  and  his  household, 
again  in  1581  by  persons  of  all  ranks,  again  in  1590 
by  a  new  Ordinance  of  Council  '  with  a  general 
band  for  maintenance  of  the  true  religion  and  the 
king's  person  ' ;  and  taking  this  as  a  basis  to  bring 
it  down  to  date  by  making  '  such  additions  as  the 
corruptions  of  this  time  necessarily  required  to  be 
joined,  and  such  Acts  of  Parliament  as  were  against 
Popery  and  in  favour  of  the  tme  religion.'  It  was 
on  Friday,  23rd,  that  this  momentous  decision  was 
taken  by  *  a  conjunct  motion  from  the  nobility, 
gentry,  burgesses  and  ministers.'  *  On  the  same 
day  the  task  was  begun.  It  was  laid  upon  two  men, 
Archibald  Johnston   of  Wariston   and   Alexander 

'  Le tte rt  {L»xug'%  ed.),  i.  p.  52.  *  Rotliek't  lUlation,  p.  70. 


116     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Henderson.^    Johnston's    work    was    the    setting 
down  of  the  earlier  Confession  and  bond  and  the 
recitation   of  the   statutes    chiefly    of  James  vi's 
reign  dealing  with  religion,  which  form  the  first 
and  second  portions  of  the  Covenant ;  Henderson's 
was  the  third  and  vital  portion  dealing  with  the  new 
situation.     Since  the  recovery  of  Wariston's  Diary 
for  this  period  we  are  now  happily  in  possession 
of  first-hand  evidence  which,  taken  with  Rothes's 
narrative,  enables  us  to  trace  the  proceedings  from 
day  to  day,  from  23rd  February  till  the  end  of  the 
first  week  in  March,  and  follow  in  detail  the  pre- 
paration, promulgation,  swearing,   and  signing  of 
this   historic   document,   the   National   Covenant. 
Round  the  events   of  those   days,   so  fateful  for 
Scotland,  tradition  and  imagination  have  fondly 
dwelt  and  woven  a  spell ;    we  have  now  for  our 
guide  the  clearer  if  soberer  light  of  fact.     The  two 
men  whose  names  are  identified  with  the  National 
Covenant  were  remarkably  unlike.     Johnston,  the 
young    advocate,    was    then    only    twenty-seven, 
Henderson  was  already  fifty-five  years  old.    John- 
ston was  one  of  the  counsel  chosen  by  the  noblemen 
to  advise  them  on  legal  matters,  the  youngest  of  the 
group,  but  heart  and  soul  in  the  cause — '  the  only 
advocate  who  in  this  cause  is  trusted,'  says  Baillie. 
He  was  an  acute  and  able  lawyer,  devout,  highly 
strung  and  excitable,  given  to  extreme  opinions  and 
courses.    His  devotion  to  the  cause  was  already  rais- 
ing apprehensions  in  the  minds  of  some  of  his  friends, 
they  feared  he  might  make  shipwreck  of  his  profes- 
sional career.     His  brother-in-law,  Robert  Burnet, 
advocate,  father  of  Bishop  Burnet,  warned  him  in 
January  1638  that  '  this  business  would  not  only 

*  Rothes's  i2e/a/t on,  p.  71. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLANT)     117 

crush  all  my  hopes  of  profit,  credit,  ease,  respect, 
payment  of  debt,  provision  for  my  children  by  my 
calling,  but  also  endanger  my  present  estate, 
calling,  means,  yea  my  life  and  person.'  ^  But 
he  was  resolved  not  to  enter  on  this  *  combat  for 
maintenance  of  the  truth  without  an  absolute,  free, 
unreserved,  undaunted  resolution  to  take  my  life 
and  all  in  my  hand,  to  lay  them  down  at  the  feet 
of  God,  and  under  Him  of  man  for  the  cause  in 
hand  ' :  he  acknowledged  it  to  be  *  the  honourablest 
cause,  condition,  and  charge '  that  ever  he  could  be 
in,  and  he  wished  *  that  the  Lord  would  even  honour 
His  unworthy  servant  with  the  crown  of  martyr- 
dom.' These  words  remind  us  of  another  Scottish 
lawyer  who,  in  a  crisis  of  the  Church  of  Scotland 
two  hundred  years  later,  though  wholly  unlike  in 
temperament,  was  animated  by  and  served  her  with 
a  like  ardent  (but  wiser)  devotion  at  the  cost  of  his 
worldly  prospects.  Of  Alexander  Murray  Dunlop, 
the  legal  adviser  of  the  non-intrusion  party  in  the 
conflict  which  issued  in  the  Disruption  of  1843, 
Lord  Cockbum  wrote  :  '  Dunlop  is  the  purest  of 
enthusiasts.  The  generous  devotion  with  which  he 
has  given  himself  to  this  cause  has  retarded  and  will 
probably  arrest  tlic  success  of  his  very  considerable 
professional  talent  and  learning.  But  a  crust  of 
bread  and  a  cup  of  cold  water  would  satisfy  all  the 
worldly  desires  of  this  most  disinterested  person. 
His  luxury  would  be  in  his  obtaining  justice  for 
liis  favourite  and  oppressed  Church,  which  he 
espouses  from  no  love  of  power  or  any  other  ecclesi- 
astical object,  but  solely  from  piety  and  love  of  the 
people.'  2 
Henderson    was    not    inferior    to    Wariston    in 

>  JMary,  pp.  306,  307.  *  Journal,  i.  p.  32G. 


118     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

courage  and  devotion,  but  he  was  calm  and  dis- 
passionate in  judgment,  statesmanlike  in  grasp, 
moderate  and  conciliatory  in  the  expression  of  his 
views,  and  endowed  with  the  happy  gift  of  winning 
the  esteem  of  men  who  disliked  his  opinions.  And 
events  were  soon  to  show  that  in  managing  difficult 
affairs  he  was  a  wise  and  capable  leader. 

On  Friday,  23rd,  it  was  agreed  that  the  solemn 
occasion  should  be  observed  by  fasting  and  prayer 
upon  Sunday,  and  ministers  were  appointed  to 
officiate  in  the  Edinburgh  churches.  Wariston 
notes  that  '  thereafter  Mr.  Air.  Henderson,  having 
said  a  pithy  short  prayer  for  God's  direction,  and  I 
fell  to  the  Band  whereof  we  scrolled  the  narrative.'^ 
On  Saturday,  24th,  Wariston  spent  two  hours  in 
'  drawing  out  the  main  points  out  of  the  Acts  of 
Pari,  to  be  put  in  the  Band.'  On  the  same  day 
at  a  meeting  of  the  noblemen  a  committee  was 
appointed,  consisting  of  Rothes,  Loudoun  and 
Balmerino,  to  revise  the  draft,  and  Wariston  read 
to  them  the  portion  he  had  written.  At  the  same 
meeting  we  have  a  hint  of  the  subtle  influences 
which  were  at  work  to  undermine  the  movement. 
The  cautious  Loudoun  impressed  on  them  that  the 
secret  efforts  of  the  bishops  and  Traquair  were 
mere  traps  to  catch  unwary  supplicants,  and 
desired  that  none  of  the  noblemen  should  have 
any  dealing  with  the  other  side  without  the  know- 
ledge and  consent  of  the  rest.  Nor  were  these  men 
unmindful  that  money  was  needed  to  carry  on  the 
stern  work  on  which  they  were  entering.  Rothes 
proposed  that  they  should  all  lay  a  voluntary 
assessment — a  '  stent ' — ^upon  themselves,  nobles, 
barons,   burghs,   according  to  their  abilities,   and 

»  Diary,  p.  319, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     119 

this  was  done.  On  Monday,  26th,  Wariston  gave 
nine  hours  to  the  work,  but  Henderson  and  he 
found  it  heavier  than  they  had  expected,  and  at  a 
meeting  with  the  noblemen  in  John  Galloway's 
house  told  them  it  was  impossible  to  have  the  draft 
ready  that  day,  but  they  would  use  all  expedition 
to  have  it  prepared  against  Tuesday  morning. 
On  Tuesday,  27th,  the  noblemen  met  in  the  same 
house  which  stood,  as  the  Town  Records  show,^  in 
Niddry*s  Wynd,  running  between  High  Street  and 
Cowgate,  represented  by  the  Niddry  Street  of  the 
present  day.  The  draft  of  the  Covenant  was  then 
read,  certain  objections  were  raised  and  discussed, 
and  a  few  verbal  changes  made.  Rothes  and 
Loudoun  were  appointed  to  meet  the  ministers  on 
the  same  afternoon.  The  meeting  took  place  in 
the  Tailors'  Hall,  which  then  stood  in  the  Cow- 
gate.  The  two  noblemen  were  accompanied  by 
the  two  authors  of  the  draft.  First  they  had  a 
private  meeting  with  the  commissioners  of  pres- 
byteries in  the  summer-house  in  the  yard,  then  with 
the  whole  of  the  ministers,  between  two  and  three 
hundred,  in  the  hall.  It  was  known  that  the 
ministers  felt  greater  difficulties  about  the  Covenant 
than  the  laity,  and  this  meeting  was  the  critical 
one.  '  Afternoon,  with  great  fears  we  went  to  the 
ministry,'  says  Wariston.  When  at  length  the 
difficulties  were  surmounted  and  their  adhesion 
secured  by  alterations  and  concessions,  every  heart 
overflowed  with  joy.  *  My  heart  did  leap  within 
for  joy,'  says  Johnston.  *  My  Lord  Rothes,'  writes 
Baillie,  *  finding  our  great  harmony,  departed  with 
the  profession  of  great  joy,  for  this  union  was  the 
great  pillar  of  the  cause.'     But  the  harmony  was 

•  A.  Guthrie's  Protocol,  vol.  6,  fol.  270. 


120     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

not  secured  until  the  draft  had  been  subjected  to 
careful  criticism  and  considerable  change.     What 
the  nature  of  the  criticism  was  we  learn  from  Baillie. 
His  attitude  was  conservative  ;  he  had  no  objections 
to  Episcopacy,  he  had  accepted  the  Perth  Articles, 
and   he   represented   a  large   body   of  ministerial 
opinion.     He  had  already  indicated  his  difficulties 
in  private  as  soon  as  he  learned  that  it  was  proposed 
in  the  Covenant  to  declare  against  bishops  and 
ceremonies.     He  had  been  reassured,  but  whether 
his  objections  were  given  effect  to  before  the  meet- 
ing on  Tuesday  afternoon  or  at  the  meeting  is  not 
clear.    It  is  clear,  however,  that  there  was  both  dis- 
cussion and  amendment  then  :  '  the  draft  was  again 
read  before  all  as  it  was  mended,  and  no  objection 
was  made  against  it.'  ^     The  difficulties  all  arose  in 
the  third  part  of  the  document.     It  contains  the 
following  clause  :   '  With  our  whole  hearts  we  agree 
and  resolve  all  the  days  of  our  life  constantly  to 
adhere  unto  and  to  defend  the  foresaid  true  Religion, 
and  forbearing  the  practice  of  all  novations  already 
introduced  in  the  matters  of  the  worship  of  God, 
or  approbation  of  the  corruptions   of  the  public 
government  of  the  kirk,  or  civil  places  and  power  of 
kirkmen,   till  they   be  tried   and   allowed   in  free 
Assemblies  and  in  Parliaments,  to  labour  by  all 
lawful  means  to  recover  the  purity  and  liberty  of  the 
gospel  as  it  was  established  and  professed  before 
the  foresaid  novations.'     These  words  give  effect 
to  the  views  of  Baillie  and  his  friends.     They  were 
willing  to  '  forbear  the  practice  '  of  the  ceremonies 
already  introduced,  but  they  declined  to  disapprove 
them ;    they  were  ready  to  disapprove  '  the  cor- 
ruptions '  of  the  bishops'  government,  but  not  to 

*  Rothes's  Relation,  p.  74. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     121 

condemn  that  form  of  government  itself.  Then 
there  were  other  clauses  which  appeared  to  import 

*  a  defence  in  arms  against  the  king.'  This  was 
strenuously  objected  to  :  men  like  Baillie  and  Lord 
Cassillis,  who  had  imbibed  the  teaching  of  Cameron 
at  the  University  of  Glasgow,  held  at  that  time 
strong  views  on  the  duty  of  obedience  to  kings. 
Charles  was  by  and  by  to  complete  their  education 
on  that  point ;  meantime  the  document  was 
changed  '  so  that  no  word  I  hope  remains  in  this 
writ  which  can  be  drawn  against  the  prince,  but 
many  sentences  are  expressly  to  the  contrary.' 

Wednesday,  28th  February,  was  the  great  day.^ 
At  8.30  in  the  morning  Rothes  and  Loudoun  met 
the  commissioners  of  the  barons  or  gentry  at  John 
Galloway's  house.  The  forenoon  was  spent  over 
'  long  reasoning  upon  Perth  Articles,'  ^  says 
Johnston.  Loudoun  explained  that  the  document 
had  been  previously  submitted  to  the  ministers 
because  much  of  it  was  theological,  and  that  they 

*  though  much  suspected  before  had  freely  assented 
thereto.'  He  invited  the  statement  of  objections 
and  difficulties,  but  urged  there  should  be  no 
wranglings  of  words  about  things  that  were  not  of 
moment,  reminding  them  of  the  vital  importance 
of  keeping  together  in  the  common  cause  in  which 
all  were  deeply  interested.  When  it  came  to 
voting,  all  assented  except  a  Forfarshire  laird,  who 
preferred  to  wait  till  the  others  came  up.  At  the 
close  of  this  forenoon  sederunt  it  was  agreed  that 

*  all  the  rest  of  the  barons  and  gentlemen  that  were 
in  town  '  or,  as  Wariston  expresses  it,  '  the  body 
of  the  gentry  '  should  assemble  at  two  o'clock  the 
same  afternoon   in   Greyfriars  kirk.     Rothes  and 

•  Wariston'n  Diaiy,  p.  322 ;   Rothes,  pp.  76V. 


122     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Loudoun  were  to  meet  them  there :  the  purpose 
was  '  to  hear  but  copies  of  it  read  and  to  answer 
objections.' 

This  forenoon  meeting  of  commissioners  of  barons 
was  followed  by  another  with  commissioners  of 
burghs  :  they  too  approved  the  draft.  The  eager 
Wariston  was  not  content  with  a  copy  or  draft  for 
the  great  afternoon  meeting,  he  would  help  to 
expedite  matters.  '  I  propone  and  resolve  to  have 
the  principal  ready  in  parchment  in  all  hazards, 
that  in  case  of  approbation  it  might  be  presently 
subscribed.'  He  used  the  interval  well,  and 
before  two  o'clock  arrived  the  Covenant  was 
written  out  on  '  a  fair  parchment  above  an  ell  in 
square.'  The  meeting  with  the  '  barons  and  gentle- 
men '  in  the  Greyfriars  church  lasted  from  two 
till  four  o'clock.  '  I  met,'  says  Wariston,  '  all  the 
gentlemen  in  a  troop  going  up  the  causeway  to  the 
kirk.'  The  meeting  was  opened  with  prayer  by 
Henderson,  '  very  powerfully  and  pertinently  to 
the  purpose  in  hand  of  renewing  the  Covenant,' 
says  Rothes.  Then  Loudoun  spoke,  stating  that 
the  nobility,  ministers,  and  commissioners  of  shires 
and  burghs  had  agreed  to  this  form  which  was  to 
be  read  to  them,  wherein  they  took  God  to  witness 
they  intended  nothing  to  the  dishonour  of  God  or 
diminution  of  the  king's  honour,  and  wished  they 
might  perish  who  minded  other  ways.  Wariston 
then  read  the  deed  from  his  parchment,  and  Rothes 
desired  those  who  had  any  doubts,  if  they  were 
from  the  south  and  west  country,  to  go  to  the  west 
end  of  the  kirk,  where  Loudoun  and  Dickson  would 
attend  them ;  if  they  were  of  the  Lothians  and  the 
north  side  of  Forth,  to  go  to  the  east  end  of  the  kirk, 
where  he  and  Henderson  would  attend  them,    '  Few 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     123 

came,  and  those  few  proponed  a  few  doubts  which 
were  resolved.'  Then  at  four  o'clock  the  noblemen 
came  and  subscribed  the  Covenant ;  after  them  the 
barons  subscribed,  'so  many  as  could  subscribe 
that  night  till  it  was  near  eight.'  That  is  the 
statement  of  both  Johnston  and  Rothes. 

To  complete  the  narrative.  During  the  night 
Wariston  caused  '  four  principal  copies  in  parch- 
ment '  to  be  written.  Next  day,  Thursday,  the 
1st  of  March,  at  nine  o'clock,  Rothes,  Lindsay  and 
Loudoun  went  down  to  the  Tailors'  Hall  where  the 
ministers  met.  There  towards  three  hundred  of  them 
subscribed.  Some  had  come  to  town  since  the 
Tuesday  ;  for  their  benefit  a  private  conference 
was  held  with  the  noblemen  in  the  yard.  On  the 
same  day  at  two  o'clock  the  commissioners  of  burghs 
also  subscribed. 

On  Friday,  2nd  March,  it  was  resolved  that  a 
copy  of  the  Covenant  should  be  provided  for  each 
shire,  stewardry  or  distinct  judicatory,  for  the 
principal  persons  there,  and  one  for  each  parish, 
to  be  signed  by  all  persons  in  the  parish  who  were 
admitted  to  the  Sacrament.  It  is  on  this  day, 
2nd  March,  that  we  find  the  first  mention  made 
of  the  Covenant  being  signed  by  the  people  at 
large.  On  Friday  in  the  College  kirk — Trinity 
kirk,  which  stood  at  the  foot  of  Leith  Wynd — after 
an  exhortation  by  Henry  RoUock,  Wariston  '  read 
it  publicly  before  the  people  of  Edinburgh,  who 
presently  fell  to  the  subscribing  of  it  all  that  day 
and  the  morrow.'  *  But  Sunday,  1st  April,  was 
Covenant  Sunday  in  Edinburgh.  On  that  day 
Henry  Rollock  preached  (probably  in  the  same 
Trinity  College  church),  and  thereafter  desired  the 

•  Diary,  p.  323. 


124     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

nobles  and  all  the  people  to  stand  up.  He  asked 
the  noblemen  first — Montrose,  Boyd,  Loudoun, 
Balmerino — to  hold  up  their  hands  and  swear  by 
the  name  of  the  Hving  God,  and  desired  all  the 
people  to  hold  up  theirs  in  the  like  manner.  At  the 
instant  of  rising  up  and  holding  up  their  hands 
there  burst  forth,  says  Wariston,  such  an  abundance 
of  tears,  sighs,  and  sobs  through  all  the  corners  of 
the  church  'as  the  like  was  never  seen  or  heard 
of.'  In  Greyfriars  church  on  the  same  day  the 
Covenant  was  sworn,  both  at  forenoon  and  after- 
noon service,  amid  similar  scenes  of  profound 
emotion. 

Throughout  all  the  detailed  descriptions  of  these 
events  there  is  from  first  to  last  no  mention  what- 
ever of  Greyfriars  churchyard.  There  is  no  mention 
of  weeping  multitudes,  too  great  to  find  room  in  any 
building,  pressing  round  a  flat  tombstone  in  the 
churchyard  on  which  the  parchment  was  spread, 
and  signing  it  there.  ^  That  is  a  picturesque  and 
dramatic  story,  but  in  point  of  fact  no  such  thing 
occurred.  It  was  only  nobles  and  barons  who 
signed  on  that  great  Wednesday,  the  28th;  the 
signing  went  on  till  near  eight  o'clock  that  Febniary 
night,  and  it  went  on  in  the  church. 

The  popular  story  seems  to  owe  its  origin  to  a 
statement  in  Bishop  Guthry's  Memoirs,  first  written 
down  many  years  after  and  not  published  till  1702. 
It  is  not  known  whether  or  not  Guthry  was  present ; 
in  any  event  Wariston  and  Rothes  were  in  the 
heart  of  these  transactions,  and  their  accounts 
were  committed  to  writing  at  the  time.  One  copy 
of  Guthry's  manuscript  speaks  of  certain  persons 
assembled  '  in  the  Greyfriars  church  and  church- 

*  Gardiner,  History  of  England,  viii.  p.  333, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     125 

yard,'  the  other  drops  out  the  church  and  mentions 
only  *  the  Grey  friars  ciiurchyard.'  ^  On  this 
slender  foundation,  if  it  can  be  called  a  foundation, 
the  popular  story  was  built  up.  In  the  hands  of 
George  Crawford,  who  wrote  in  1726,  it  grew  into 
a  definite  statement  that  '  the  Covenant  .  .  .  was 
first  publicly  read  and  subscribed  in  the  Gray-friars 
Church  and  churchyard  at  Edinburgh,  the  1st  of 
March  1638,  by  a  numerous  assembly  with  great 
joy  and  shouting.'  ^  The  only  authority  cited  is 
Guthry,  but  his  statement  merely  is  that  the  Cove- 
nanters '  being  all  assembled  in  the  church  and 
churchyard,  the  Covenant  was  publicly  read  and  sub- 
scribed by  them  all  with  much  joy  and  shouting';^ 
he  docs  not  say  that  it  was  subscribed  in  the  church- 
yard. And,  according  to  Guthry,  the  persons  who  so 
subscribed  were  not  the  populace  generally,  but  the 
noblemen  and  others  who  had  ridden  from  Stirling 
to  Edinburgh.  Robert  Chambers,  writing  in  1828, 
is  the  first  to  introduce  the  tombstone.  He  speaks 
of  an  '  immense  multitude  which  had  collected  in 
the  churchyard,'  and  goes  on  to  say  the  Covenant 
after  being  signed  in  the  church '  was  handed  out .  .  . 
and  laid  upon  one  of  the  flat  monuments  so  thickly 
scattered  around,  and  subscribed  by  all  who  could 
get  near  it.'  He  adds  that  a  contemporary  writer 
describes  it  as  a  most  impressive  sight  when  the 
Covenant  was  read  to  this  vast  crowd,  *to  see 
thousands  of  faces  and  hands  at  once  held  up  to 
heaven  in  token  of  assent,  while  devout  aspirations 
burst  from  every  lip  and  tears  of  holy  joy  distilled 

'  Moir  Bryce,  History  of  the  Old  Greiifriars  Church,  cap.  8,  by  Hay 
Fleming :  a  learned  and  exhaustive  discussion  from  which  I  have  drawn 
the  narrative  in  the  text. 

'  Lu-^»  find  Characters  of  thr  Offirfr*  of  the  Crown  and  of  the  State  in 
SeoUand,  i.  p.  186.  ^  Memoirs  (ed.  1702),  p.  30. 


126     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

from  every  eye.'  ^  For  this  statement  he  names 
no  authority.  He  may  possibly  have  had  in  mind 
the  language  of  John  Livingstone,  a  Presbyterian 
minister,  who  says  he  had  *  seen  above  a  thousand 
persons  all  at  once  lifting  up  their  hands  and  the 
tears  dropping  down  from  their  eyes'  when  the 
Covenant  was  read  and  sworn,  but  that  was  at 
Lanark  on  a  Sabbath,  after  the  forenoon  sermon. ^ 
Another  writer  then  living  was  Gordon,  parson  of 
Rothiemay.  His  statement  is  that  in  the  Grey- 
friars  church  the  Covenant  was  first  read  oyer  and 
then  subscribed  '  by  all  that  were  present  .  .  .  and 
then  through  the  rest  of  the  city  it  went.'  ^  About 
the  churchyard  he  says  not  a  word. 

It  is  easy  to  see  how  one  touch  after  another  was 
added  to  the  picture.  A  story  so  moving  and 
graphic,  once  put  in  circulation,  made  an  irresistible 
appeal  to  the  popular  imagination.  To  the  mass 
of  Scotsmen  the  hunted  Covenanters  of  the  killing 
time  were  heroes  and  martyrs,  and  such  a  scene 
enacted  in  Greyfriars  churchyard,  under  the  shadow 
of  the  romantic  Castle  rock,  would  appear  to  them 
a  natural  and  fitting  prelude  to  a  great  chapter  in 
the  nation's  history.* 

But  though  we  regretfully  part  with  this  tradi- 
tion, it  remains  true  that  the  heart  of  Scotland  was 
profoundly  moved.  Scenes  such  as  that  above  de- 
scribed occurred  over  the  country  when  the  Covenant 

*  History  of  the  Rebellion*  in  Scotland  under  the  Marquis  of  Montrose 
and  Other*,  i.  p.  93. 

2  Life  of  Livingstone,  Select  Biographies,  Wodrow  Society,  i.  p.  160. 
•''  History  of  Scots  Affairs,  Spalding  Club,  i.  pp.  43-4. 

*  Here  is  an  amusing  story  of  the  growth  of  another  Covenant  legend. 
That  John  Gordon,  Earl  of  Sutherland,  was  the  first  to  sign  the  Covenant 
in  Greyfriars  church  is  stated  by  the  parson  of  Rothiemay,  who  says  he 
was  credibly  informed  of  this  (Gordon,  History  of  Scots  Affairs,  i.  p.  43). 
R.  Chambers  (1828)  adds  'a  nobleman,  venerable  for  his  excellent 
domestic    character.'      Aiton   (1836)  is   content    to    say    simply   'the 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     127 

was  sworn  in  churches.     At  Currie,  on  18th  March, 
Wariston  was  present  and  describes  what  he  saw. 
At  the  congregation  standing  up  and  Hfting  up  their 
hands,  *  in  the  twinkling  of  an  eye  there  fell  such  an 
extraordinary  influence  of  God's  spirit  upon  the 
whole  congregation,   melting   their   frozen  hearts, 
watering   their   dry   cheeks,    changing   their   very 
countenances,  as  it  was  a  wonder  to  see  so  visible, 
sensible,  instantaneous  a  change  upon  all,  man  and 
woman,  lass  and  lad,  pastor  and  people,  that  Mr. 
John  (Chartcris),  being  suffocated  almost  with  his 
own  tears  and  astonished  at  the   motion  of  the 
whole  people,  sat  down  in  the  pulpit  in  an  amaze- 
ment, but  presently  rose  again  when  he  saw  all 
the  people  falling  down  on  their  knees  to  mourn 
and  pray,  and  he  and  they  for  a  quarter  of  an  hour 
prayed  very  sensibly  with  many  sobs,  tears,  promises 
and  vows.'  ^     In  cities  the  churches  could  not  con- 
tain all  who  crowded  to  hear  the  preachers,  and  some 
drew  their  own  blood  and  used  it  to  sign  their  names. ^ 
The   deepest   note   in  the  great  Covenant,   the 
note  which  alone  explains  such  scenes  occurring 
among  a  people  habitually  reticent  and  unemotional, 
is  the  note  of  religion,  of  personal  and  national 
dedication   to   God.     '  From    the    knowledge    and 
conscience  of  our  duty  to  God,  to  our  king  and 
country,    so   far   as   human    infirmity   will   suffer, 
wishing  a  further  measure  of  the  grace  of  God  for 
this  effect.  We  promise  and  swear  by  the  Great 

venerable  Earl  of  Sutherland.'  In  the  hands  of  Hetherington  (History 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland  (1842  ed.  p.  27^)  this  blossoms  out  into  'an 
»(fed  nobleman,  the  venerable  Karl  of  Sutherland/  steppinfif  'slowly 
and  reverentially  forward  '  and  subscribini;  '  with  throbhin>f  heart  and 
trembling  hand.'  In  point  of  fact  the  Earl  of  Sutherland  was  at  the 
time  about  twenty-nine  years  old,  having;  been  bom  on  9th  March  1609. 
See  Moir  Bryce,  History  of  the  Old  Grenfriars  Church,  p.  62  ;  Sir  W . 
Frater,  The  ^ufAer/u;lrf  Book,  i.  p.  209,  •  Diary,  pp.  327-8. 

*  History  qf  Scots  Affairs,  Spaldinj?  Club,  i.  p.  45. 


128     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Name  of  the  Lord  our  God  to  continue  in  the 
Profession  and  Obedience  of  the  foresaid  ReHgion. 
.  .  .  And  because  we  cannot  look  for  a  blessing 
from  God  upon  our  proceedings  except  with  our 
profession  and  subscription,  we  join  such  a  life  and 
conversation  as  beseemeth  Christians  who  have 
renewed  their  covenant  with  God  :  We  therefore 
faithfully  promise  for  ourselves,  our  followers, 
and  all  others  under  us,  both  in  public,  in  our 
particular  families,  and  personal  carriage  to  en- 
deavour to  keep  ourselves  within  the  bounds  of 
Christian  liberty,  and  to  be  good  examples  to  others 
in  all  godliness,  soberness  and  righteousness,  and 
of  every  duty  we  owe  to  God  and  man.  And  that 
this  our  Union  and  Conjunction  may  be  observed 
without  violation  we  call  the  living  God,  the 
Searcher  of  our  hearts,  to  witness,  who  knoweth 
this  to  be  our  sincere  desire  and  unfeigned  resolu- 
tion, as  we  shall  answer  to  Jesus  Christ  in  the 
great  day,  and  under  the  pain  of  God's  everlasting 
wrath,  and  of  infamy  and  loss  of  all  honour  and 
respect  in  this  world.  Most  humbly  beseeching  the 
Lord  to  strengthen  us  by  his  Holy  Spirit  for  this  end, 
and  to  bless  our  desires  and  proceedings  with  a 
happy  success,  that  Religion  and  Righteousness  may 
flourish  in  the  land,  to  the  glory  of  God,  the  honour 
of  our  king,  and  peace  and  comfort  to  us  all.' 

On  5th  April,  Baillie  was  able  to  report :  '  The 
great  business  among  us  since  that  time  {i.e.  the 
first  signing  of  the  Covenant)  has  been  to  have 
that  Confession  subscribed  by  all  hands,  and 
through  all  hands  almost  has  it  gone.  *  Of  noble- 
men at  home  who  are  not  Councillors  or  papists, 
unto  whom  it  was  not  offered,  I  think  they 
be  within  four  or  five  who  have  not  subscribed. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     129 

All  the  shires  have  subscribed  by  their  commis- 
sioners ;  all  the  towns  except  Aberdeen,  St. 
Andrews  and  Crail ;  yea  the  particular  gentlemen, 
burgesses  and  ministers  have  put  to  their  hands, 
and  the  parishes  throughout  the  whole  country, 
where  the  ministers  could  be  persuaded,  on  a 
Sabbath  day  have  all  publicly  with  an  uplifted 
hand,  man  and  woman,  sworn  it.' 

The  Earl  of  Sutherland,  Master  of  Berriedale, 
and  other  north  country  supporters  undertook  to 
carry  the  flag  into  the  north  and  north-east  of 
Scotland.  At  Inverness  large  gatherings  were 
held  on  April  25th  and  26th.  Noblemen  and 
gentlemen  attended  from  Caithness,  Sutherland, 
Ross,  as  well  as  from  parts  of  Inverness  and  Moray. 
In  the  parish  church  the  Covenant  was  read  and 
explained,  and  subscribed  by  '  first  the  noblemen 
and  special  gentlemen,  then  the  gentry  of  each 
shire.'  Ministers  of  the  various  northern  pres- 
byteries also  signed  in  large  numbers.  '  It  was 
professed  by  all  that  it  was  the  joy  fullest  day  that 
ever  they  saw  or  ever  was  seen  in  the  north  ;  and 
it  was  marked  as  a  special  mark  of  God's  goodness 
towards  these  parts,  that  so  many  different  clans 
and  names  among  whom  was  nothing  before  but 
hostility  and  blood  were  met  together  in  one  place 
for  such  a  good  cause  and  in  so  peaceable  a  manner 
as  that  nothing  was  to  be  seen  and  heard  but 
mutual  embracements  with  hearty  praise  to  God 
for  so  happy  a  union.'  ^  At  Forres  on  28th  April, 
and  at  Elgin  on  the  30th,  similar  gatherings  were 
held  and  the  Covenant  signed  by  many  of  all 
classes.  In  the  north-eastern  parts  the  bishops 
had  considerable  following,  and  the  great  Gordon 

■   Ruthes's  Relation,  p.  lOG. 
I 


130     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

clan  threw  its  weight  on  their  side.  '  All  the 
gentry,'  says  Rothes,  '  in  these  parts  (Moray) 
subscribed  except  some  few  who  were  kept  back  by 
the  bishops'  deahng,  or  had  special  interest  to  the 
bishops  or  Gordons.' 

The  Universities  on  the  whole  were  hostile, 
notably  Aberdeen,  but  that  practically  the  move- 
ment was  a  national  one  is  clear  on  the  evidence 
both  of  friend  and  foe.  As  early  as  5th  March, 
Traquair,  who  had  every  desire  to  minimise  it, 
reported  '  the  band  is  subscribed  by  many  ;  and 
all  qualities  of  people  from  all  towns  of  the  kingdom 
are  coming  in  daily  to  subscribe.'  ^ 

Interest  and  enthusiasm  in  the  cause  overflowed 
the  bounds  of  Scotland.  John  Livingstone  was 
immediately  sent  to  London  '  with  several  copies 
of  the  Covenant  and  letters  to  friends  at  Court  of 
both  nations.'  ^  He  rode  disguised,  and  met  with 
an  accident  which  kept  him  indoors  in  London. 
Eleazar  Borthwick,  who  was  the  chief  medium 
there  of  communication  between  the  friends  of  the 
cause  at  Court  and  those  in  Scotland,  delivered 
the  letters  for  him.  '  Some  friends  and  some  of 
the  English  nobility  came  to  my  chamber  to  be 
informed  how  matters  went.  I  had  been  but  a 
few  days  there  when  Mr.  Borthwick  came  to  me 
and  told  me  that  the  Marquis  of  Hamilton  had  sent 
him  to  me  to  show  he  had  overheard  the  king 
saying  I  was  come,  but  he  would  endeavour  to 
put  a  pair  of  fetters  about  my  feet.  Wherefore 
fearing  to  be  waylaid  on  the  post-way  I  bought  a 
horse  and  came  home  by  St.  Albans.' 

^  Hardwicke,  State  Papers,  ii.  p.  101. 

2  Life    of   Livingstone,    Select    Biographies,    Wodrow    Society,    i. 
pp.  159,  160. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     131 

More  remarkable  still,  the  Covenant  found  its 
way  to  wandering  Scots  far  off  on  the  continent  of 
Europe.  Leslie  signed  it,  and  fellow  officers  and 
soldiers  of  all  degrees  fighting  in  the  foreign  wars. 
The  Earl  of  Strafford,  writing  to  Laud  some  months 
later,  tells  him  he  had  sent  from  Ireland  into  Scot- 
land an  ensign  of  his  army  to  glean  what  informa- 
tion he  could  about  the  Scots  and  their  '  conspiracy.' 
*  One  thing  more  this  gentleman  informs  me  very 
material,  which  is  that  they  have  sent  their  Covenant 
to  their  countrymen  in  foreign  parts,  and  that  all 
the  Scottish  in  the  service  of  the  crown  of  Sweden 
to  a  man  have  sworn  their  Covenant ;  so  as  it  is 
overplain  how  they  draw  to  them  on  all  sides, 
and  remove  every  stone  to  their  advantage.'  ^ 

It  was  a  supreme  moment  in  the  nation's  history. 
'  In  the  thrill  that  went  through  Scotland  the 
bulk  of  the  nation  felt  itself  one  as  it  perhaps  never 
did  before  or  since.'  ^  The  faded  old  parchment 
which  once  expressed  the  awakened  soul  of  a  nation 
seems  still  to  breathe  forth  something  of  that  strong 
emotion,  as  we  read  on  one  of  Wariston's  '  principal 
copies  '  extant  to-day  in  the  Edinburgh  Municipal 
Museum,  '  John  Cunynghame  till  daith ' ;  *  E. 
Johnestoun  with  my  ^  ' ;  or  this,  '  Exurgat  Deus 
et  dissipcntur  omnes  inimici  ejus  Johannes  Paulicius 
manu  propria.'  Here  we  can  trace  the  names  of  Mont- 
rose, Rothes,  Cassillis,  Loudoun,  Alexander  Hender- 
son Leuchars,  Johnstone  of  Wariston  :  on  the  front 
and  back  4150  or  thereby  crowded  together.^ 

When  feeling  was  so  widely  and  deeply  stirred 
it  was  inevitable  that  many  unworthy  and  unkind 

•  Strafford  Letteri,  ii.  p.  271 . 

-   Raiuy,  Three  Lecture$  on  the  Chnrrti  of  .•^cotmnd,  p.  38  (ed.  1872). 

^  .Moir  Bryce,  History  of  the  Old  Greyjriars  Church,  p.  85. 


132     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

things  would  be  said  and  done.  The  minority — 
for  there  was  a  minority — had  a  hard  and  difficult 
lot.  We  can  believe  that  they  were  equally  true 
to  conscience,  and  to  be  on  the  unpopular  side 
needed  no  little  courage.  Many  of  them  were 
exposed  to  injury  and  reproach,  some  to  boycot- 
ting, threats  and  coercion.^  An  anonymous  corre- 
spondent says,  '  In  the  west  country  they  will  give 
no  passenger  either  meat,  drink,  or  lodging  for  his 
money  until  he  first  give  them  assurance  that  he 
is  a  member  of  this  unchristian  Covenant.'  ^  But  it 
was  so  well  known  a  man  as  David  Mitchell,  one  of 
the  ministers  of  Edinburgh,  who  complained  that  he 
had  been  made  so  odious  that  he  dared  not  go  on  the 
streets.  '  I  have  been  dogged  by  some  gentlemen, 
and  followed  with  many  mumbled  threatenings 
behind  my  back,  and  then  when  in  stairs  swords 
drawn  and  '  if  they  had  the  papist  villain.'  ^ 
Many  unworthy  elements  and  unworthy  motives 
gather  round  good  causes  :  it  does  not  follow  that 
the  leaders  either  knew  of  or  encouraged  such 
conduct ;  and  it  is  satisfactory  to  know  that  if 
threats  were  sometimes  uttered  no  blood  was 
shed. 

The  National  Covenant  has  caused  from  that 
day  to  this  the  most  acute  differences  of  opinion. 
These  have  ranged  from  the  '  damnable  Covenant ' 
—the  phrase  in  which  Charles  spat  out  his  anger — 
to  the  language  of  a  modern  writer,  who  says,  '  The 
signing  of  the  Covenant  in  Edinburgh  on  March  "2, 
1638,  was  perhaps  the  most  remarkable  scene  in 
Scotland's     remarkable     history.'  ^     The     leading 

1  Gordon's  Scots  Affairs,  Spalding  Club,  i.  p.  45. 

2  Hailes's  Memorials  :  Beign  of  Charles  the  First,  p.  26. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  37.  *  Edinburgh  Review,  October  1882. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     133 

purpose  of  the  Covenant  undoubtedly  was  the 
defence  of  the  reformed  Protestant  rehgion  and 
of  civil  liberty  :  *  Because  we  plainly  perceive 
that  the  Innovations  ...  do  sensibly  tend  to 
the  re-establishing  of  the  popish  Religion  and 
tyrannies  and  to  the  subversion  and  ruin  of  the 
true  Reformed  Religion  and  of  our  Liberties,  Laws 
and  Estates  .  .  .  therefore  we  promise  and  swear 
by  the  great  Name  of  the  Lord  our  God  to  con- 
tinue in  the  Profession  and  Obedience  of  the  fore- 
said Religion  :  that  we  shall  defend  the  same  and 
resist  all  these  contrary  errors  and  corruptions.' 
In  the  next  place  the  Covenanters  proclaimed 
with  equal  emphasis  their  loyalty  to  the  king : 
'  We  promise  and  swear  that  we  shall  to  the  utter- 
most of  our  power  with  our  means  and  lives  stand 
to  the  defence  of  our  dread  sovereign  the  king's 
Majesty,  his  person  and  authority,  in  the  defence 
and  preservation  of  the  foresaid  true  Religion, 
Liberties  and  Laws  of  the  kingdom.'  And  again  : 
'  We  declare  before  God  and  men  that  we  have  no 
intention  nor  desire  to  attempt  anything  that  may 
turn  to  the  dishonour  of  God,  or  to  the  diminution 
of  the  king's  greatness  and  authority.' 

But  to  all  this  is  added  a  resolve  to  stand  by  each 
other :  *  We  promise  and  swear  that  we  shall  stand 
...  to  the  mutual  defence  and  assistance  every  one 
of  us  of  another  in  the  same  cause  of  maintaining  the 
true  Religion  and  his  Majesty's  authority  with  our 
bd^t  counsel,  our  bodies,  means  and  whole  power 
against  all  sorts  of  persons  whatsoever.'  This 
was  the  clause  that  offended  Charles,  and  on  the 
face  of  it  there  was  something  to  be  said  for  his 
view  that  this  was  an  illegal  combination.  It  was 
one  thing  for  subjects  to  sign  a  Covenant  which  the 


134     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

king  himself  had  signed  ;  it  was  another  and  very 
different  thing  to  sign  a  Covenant  which  bound  the 
signatories  to  defend  and  assist  one  another 
'  against  all  sorts  of  persons  whatsoever,'  and 
therefore  it  might  be  against  their  own  king. 
Undoubtedly  the  Covenant  was  an  unlawful  com- 
bination if  the  king  was  acting  within  the  con- 
stitution in  imposing  the  Service  Book  and  the 
Canons.  But  if  the  king  was  violating  the  con- 
stitution, was  acting  beyond  the  law,  were  his 
subjects  not  thereby  set  free  from  the  duty  of 
obedience,  and  entitled  to  resist  such  lawless  action 
and  to  combine  together  in  resisting  it  ?  The 
king  claimed  the  right  to  do  what  he  had  done 
without  authority  from  Parliament  or  Assembly, 
but  simply  because  he  thought  fit.  Thereby  he 
wrote  his  own  condemnation.  Because  his  power 
as  king  was  limited  by  laws  and  constitution, 
and  not  controlled  simply  by  his  personal  will, 
the  verdict  of  history  condemns  his  action  and 
approves  the  reply  which  Scotland  gave.^ 

The  Covenant  made  Henderson  the  first  man  in 
Scotland.  Quiet  days  in  a  country  parish  were 
over  for  him  now  ;  despite  his  love  of  retirement 
and  lack  of  ambition,  he  was  from  this  time  on- 
wards prominent  and  active  in  national  affairs. 
The  town  of  Dundee  hastened  to  confer  upon  him 
its  highest  honour  by  making  him  a  burgess,  on  the 

*  To  a  Scots  lawyer  it  is  a  peculiar  satisfaction  to  be  able  to  cite  *the 
opinion  of  the  late  Lord  President  Inglis  in  support  of  the  view  that  the 
National  Covenant  was  lawful  and  justifiable  {Blackwood's  Magazine, 
November  1887).  As  to  the  authorship  of  the  anonymous  article,  see 
Hepburn  Millar,  A  Literary  History  of  Scotland,  p.  243  note.  Professor 
Rait  finds  the  Covenant  'a  comparatively  moderate  document,'  which 
'could  be  signed  by  many  who  had  been  content  with  the  settlement  of 
James  vi.'  {'Scotland,'  p.  202,  The  Making  of  the  Nations). 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     135 

ground  of  '  distinguished  services  to  the  State.' 
Tlie  burgess  ticket  is  preserved  in  the  Laing 
collection  in  the  library  of  Edinburgh  University. 
It  is  dated  28th  May  1638,  and  bears  the  names  of 
James  Fletcher,  provost,  and  Alexander  Wedder- 
bum,  town  clerk. ^  Edinburgh  made  another  attempt 
to  bring  him  to  the  capital.  On  4th  May  1638 
the  Town  Council  elected  him  to  the  second  charge 
of  Greyfriars,  or  the  south-west  parish  of  the  city, 
as  ministerial  colleague  to  the  well-known  Andrew 
Ramsay.2  That  place  had  been  vacant  since  the 
previous  July,  when  James  Fairlie  had  demitted 
office  on  being  appointed,  at  an  unlucky  moment 
for  himself,  Bishop  of  Argyll.  He  was  unwilling 
even  now  to  quit  his  country  manse,  and  declined 
to  move.  Yet  nothing  save  his  own  modesty 
kept  him  anchored  to  Leuchars,  which  was  at  that 
very  time  a  singularly  unattractive  spot  to  a 
churchman.  The  church  building  had  fallen  into 
a  condition  badly  in  need  of  repair,  and  the  heritors 
were  unwilling  to  tax  themselves  to  put  it  right.  A 
legal  process  had  to  be  resorted  to,  an  application 
to  the  Privy  Council  sitting  at  Stirling  in  name  of 
'  Mr.  Robert  Craig,  advocate,  procurator  for  the 
kirk,  and  Master  Alexander  Henderson,  minister 
at  the  kirk  of  Leuchars,  for  his  interest.'  On  28th 
June  1638  a  warrant  was  granted  on  this  peti- 
tion. A  copy  of  this  warrant,  dated  2nd  July  1638,^ 
tells  the  tale  that  the  kirk  of  Leuchars  and  choir 

'  Dundee  warmly  espou.sed  the  national  cause.  Fletcher  was  one  of 
the  protester*  at  the  Market  Cross  of  Edinhurj^h,  on  4th  .Fuly  16.*{8, 
against  the  kinff's  proclamation.  Wedderburn  was  a  Treaty  (om- 
niiflsioner,  first  at  Hi]>on  and  afterwards  at  London. 

-  Town  Council  Records,  4th  May  1(538. 

^  The  doc(|uet  on  it  shows  it  was  registered  at  Cupar  on  2i^th 
October  16.39. 


136     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

thereof  and  kirkyard  dykes  were  found  to  be 
'  altogether  ruinous  and  decayed  in  many  places  so 
that  there  is  no  convenient  place  for  preaching, 
prayer  or  administration  of  the  sacraments  at  the 
said  kirk,  which  being  intolerable  nevertheless  the 
parishioners  will  in  no  ways  convene  themselves 
for  remeid  thereof  nor  to  contribute  thereto  with- 
out they  be  compelled.'  Then  follows  the  usual 
warrant  to  charge  the  parishioners  to  meet  within 
the  parish  church  of  Leuchars  '  for  beitting  and 
repairing  of  the  kirk  and  choir  thereof  and  kirk- 
yard dykes,'  and  to  prepare  a  stent  roll  and  proceed 
with  the  stenting  and  taxation  of  the  heritors, 
feuars,  etc.,  for  '  such  sums  of  money  as  shall  be 
thought  necessary  for  beitting,  mending  and  re- 
pairing '  of  the  kirk  and  choir  and  kirkyard 
dykes.^ 

May  and  June  1638  were  days  of  high- wrought 
expectation  and  excitement  in  Scotland.  The 
Marquis  of  Hamilton  was  fighting  Charles's  battle 
as  best  he  could  with  the  Church,  and  Henderson 
was  in  the  thick  of  the  fray.  And  all  the  time  this 
man  with  a  nation's  burdens  on  his  shoulders  was 
struggling  for  decent  church  buildings  at  Leuchars. 


5.    HAMILTON    AS   KING's   MANAGING   MAN 

May — November  1638 

Where  were  the  king's  ministers  during  those 
fateful  days  in  Scotland  ?  What  were  they  saying 
or  doing  in  face  of  this  national  uprising  ?     There 

*  I  am  indebted  to  the  kindness  of  Dr.  Hay  Fleming  for  a  copy  of 
this  interesting  document ;  also  for  placing  at  my  disposal  his  copy  of 
Castell's  Petition,  and  for  much  valuable  help  otherwise. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     137 

can  be  no  more  striking  evidence  of  the  profound 
and  immediate  effect  of  the  Covenant  than  the 
action  of  the  Privy  Council.  On  the  1st  of  Marcli 
it  met  at  Stirhng,  and  it  sat  continuously  for  three 
days,  and  all  day  long.  It  made  no  attempt  to 
minimise  the  new  and  alarming  situation  that  had 
now  arisen.  Consternation  and  alarm  had  seized 
both  the  lay  and  the  clerical  members.  The 
member  who  of  all  others  ought  to  have  been 
present  in  such  a  crisis  did  not  find  it  convenient 
to  attend.  The  Chancellor  Spottiswoode  was 
'  hindered  by  diverse  urgent  occasions.'  When 
he  first  heard  of  the  signing  of  the  Covenant,  he 
cried  out  in  despair  that  all  they  had  been  attempt- 
ing to  build  up  during  the  last  thirty  years  was  now 
at  once  thrown  down.  He  was  too  busy  making 
preparations — as  were  most  of  his  colleagues — to 
flee  from  Scotland,  but  he  wrote  to  say  that  his 
mind  was  *  to  lay  aside  the  book  and  not  to  press 
the  subjects  with  it  any  more,  rather  than  to  bring 
it  in  with  such  trouble  of  the  church  and  kingdoms 
as  we  see.'  On  the  2nd  the  Council  sat  from  eight  till 
twelve,  and  from  two  till  six ;  and  the  result  of  the  long 
day's  deliberation  was  that,  '  having  entered  upon 
consideration  of  the  present  state  of  the  country 
and  causes  of  the  general  combustion  within  the 
same,  they  all  in  one  voice  conceive  that  the  fears 
apprehended  by  the  subjects  of  innovation  of 
religion  and  discipline  of  the  kirk  established  by 
the  laws  of  this  kingdom,  upon  occasion  of  the 
Service  Book,  Book  of  Canons  and  High  Com- 
mission, and  the  form  of  introduction  thereof 
contrary  or  without  warrant  of  the  laws  of  this 
kingdom,  arc  the  causes  of  this  combustion.'  The 
Bishop  of  Brechin,  one  of  the  hottest  supporters 


138     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

of  the  Service  Book,  was  a  party  to  this  declaration. 
The  following  day,  the  3rd,  was  spent  in  consider- 
ing what  more  could  be  done  '  for  composing  and 
settling  of  the  present  combustion  and  dissipating 
of  the  convocations  and  gatherings  within  the  same,' 
only  to  end  in  the  impotent  conclusion  that,  '  seeing 
proclamations  are  already  made  and  published 
discharging  of  such  convocations  and  unlawful 
meetings,  the  Lords  after  voting  find  they  can  do 
no  farther  than  is  already  done  herein.'  In  the 
end  they  resolved  to  send  up  the  Justice  Clerk, 
Sir  John  Hamilton  of  Orbiston,  to  the  king  to 
represent  to  him  the  true  state  of  matters  in  Scot- 
land. His  written  Instructions  added  that  the 
Council  thought  it  expedient  that  the  king  would 
take  trial  of  his  subjects'  grievances  and  the 
reasons  thereof,  that  in  the  meantime  he  should 
declare  that  he  would  not  enforce  the  book,  and 
in  any  event  that  he  would  decide  nothing  without 
consulting  some  members  of  the  Council.  In  order 
to  add  weight  to  their  advice  they  requested 
Spottiswoode  to  sign  Hamilton's  Instructions  and 
ask  other  bishops  to  do  the  same.  They  also 
wrote  to  the  Earl  of  Morton  in  London,  asking  him 
to  give  his  concurrence  '  because  the  business  is  so 
weighty  and  important  that  to  our  opinion  the  peace 
of  the  country  was  never  in  so  great  a  hazard.'  ^ 
On  the  same  date  as  these  documents  bore,  5th 
March,  Traquair,  the  most  influential  and  responsible 
layman  in  the  Council,  reinforced  them  by  a  letter 
to  the  Marquis  of  Hamilton  in  language  even  more 
plain  and  serious  :  '  If  his  Majesty  may  be  pleased 
to  free  them,  or  give  them  any  assurance  that  no 
novelty  of  religion  shall  be  brought  upon  them, 

*  Register  of  Privy  Council,  vii.  (2nd  series),  p.  456. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     139 

it  is  like  the  most  part  of  the  wisest  sort  will  be 
quiet ;  but  without  this  there  is  no  obedience 
to  be  expected  in  this  part  of  the  world,  and  in 
my  judgment  no  assurance  can  be  given  them 
hereof  but  by  freeing  them  of  the  Service  Book  and 
Book  of  Canons  .  .  .  but  except  something  of  this 
kind  be  granted  I  know  not  what  farther  can  be 
done,  except  to  oppose  force  to  force,  wherein 
whoever  gain  his  Majesty  shall  be  a  loser.'  ^ 

At  last  Charles  was  aroused  to  some  sense  of  the 
danger.  He  sent  Orbiston  back  to  call  up  Traquair 
and  Roxburghe  for  further  consultation.  In  the 
Instructions  of  the  two  delegates  the  Council  took 
occasion  to  tell  the  king  that  the  country  was  '  in 
so  pitiful  an  estate  that  we  humbly  entreat  your 
Majesty  to  commiserate  the  same.'  A  long  time 
elapsed  before  any  decision  was  announced.  Not 
till  16th  May  did  Traquair  appear  before  the 
Council  at  Dalkeith,  with  a  missive  from  the  king, 
informing  them  that  the  Marquis  of  Hamilton  was 
appointed  royal  commissioner,  and  would  produce 
his  credentials  at  a  solemn  meeting  of  Council  to 
be  held  on  6th  June.  It  appears  that  in  addition 
to  Traquair  and  Roxburghe  the  king  had  summoned 
another  member  of  Council,  Lord  Lome,  soon  to  be 
known  as  Earl  of  Argyll. ^  And  he  had  also  other 
advisers  at  his  side :  according  to  Burnet  he  called 
into  consultation  Laud  and  Spottiswoode,  and  the 
bishops  of  Galloway,  Brechin  and  Ross. 

During  those  critical  weeks  of  March  and  April, 
one  of  the  first  questions  discussed  was  whether 
the  Covenant  was  or  was  not  an  illegal  combination. 
It  would  have  been  of  the  utmost  moment  for 

'  Hardwicke,  State  Pupera,  ii.  p.  101. 
*  Warinton's  IHary,  p.  329. 


140  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Charles  to  be  able  to  strike  down  the  popular 
leaders,  as  James  had  done  after  the  attempted 
Aberdeen  Assembly.  If  it  were  possible  to  have 
them  convicted  and  punished,  the  movement,  he 
might  well  think,  would  speedily  collapse.  The 
man  who  had  put  Balmerino  on  trial  for  his  life 
on  an  infinitely  less  grave  matter  could  not  be 
averse  to  set  the  criminal  law  in  motion  to  crush 
a  combination  which  had  already  paralysed  his 
authority  in  Scotland.  In  England  at  this  very 
time  he  had  appealed  to  his  judges  with  success 
in  the  affair  of  Hampden  and  ship-money.  Accord- 
ingly he  turned,  in  the  first  place,  to  his  legal  advisers 
to  find  what  they  had  to  say  on  this  all-important 
question.  The  answer  forms  an  interesting  chapter 
of  Covenant  history.  In  March  interrogatories 
were  prepared  and  submitted  to  Sir  Thomas  Hope, 
Lord  Advocate,  and  two  other  leading  counsel 
who  held  no  office— Sir  Thomas  Nicolson,  who  was 
a  supporter  of  the  Covenant,  and  Sir  Lewis  Stewart, 
who  was  of  the  episcopal  party.  All  three  agreed 
in  opinions  adverse  to  the  king's  wishes  :  none  of 
them  would  pronounce  the  Covenant  treasonable 
or  unlawful.  The  only  one  who  advised  any  step 
being  taken  was  Hope  ;  he  seems  to  have  suggested 
a  precognition — in  other  words,  an  examination  of 
witnesses  on  oath  preparatory  to  a  charge.  So 
much  we  learn  from  two  letters  of  Traquair  to 
Hamilton.  They  are  undated,  but  must  have  been 
written  in  March  or  early  in  April.  In  the  first 
he  says,  '  I  have  sent  Sir  Thos.  Hope's,  Sir  Thomas 
Nicolson's  and  Sir  Lewis  Stewart's  answers  and 
resolutions  to  his  Majesty's  Interrogatories,  sent 
down  by  me,  together  with  a  joint  letter  from  the 
Earl  of  Roxburghe  and  myself,  wherein  we  touch 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     141 

no  particulars  except  that  we  tell  his  Majesty 
the  true  cause  of  the  advocates'  long  delaying  of 
their  answers  .  .  .  they  do  not  much  differ  in 
their  opinions,  neither  know  I  which  of  the  three 
are  most  confident  of  their  own  judgments,  and  yet 
I  must  confess  to  your  liOrdship  freely  I  can  hardly 
agree  in  their  opinions  in  some  things,  neither 
can  I  think  the  soundest  and  most  understanding 
judges  will  in  all  particulars  be  of  their  mind.'  In 
the  second  letter  he  writes,  '  The  three  advocates' 
opinions  give  me  no  new  grounds  to  think  upon  : 
I  find  them  all  three  much  of  one  mind,  but  of  them 
all  the  king's  advocate  is  most  obscure,  and  his 
advice  of  a  precognition  in  my  judgment  is  dangerous 
both  for  the  business  itself  and  for  our  Master's 
honour  :  and  my  simple  opinion  is  that  his  Majesty 
shall  never  show  himself  in  this  business,  or  any 
particulars  that  have  relation  thereto,  but  upon 
such  sure  and  certain  grounds  as  he  shall  be  able 
to  carry  whatever  he  intends  or  goes  about.'  ^  In 
fewer  words  Baillie  records,  on  5th  April  :  *  We 
are  informed  that  the  best  lawyers,  both  Hope, 
Nicolson  and  Stewart,  being  consulted  by  the  king, 
does  declare  all  our  bypast  proceedings  to  be  legal.' 
With  this  advice  the  king  was  deeply  dissatisfied. 
We  know  from  his  correspondence  with  Hamilton 
that  he  regarded  the  Covenant  as  treasonable,  and 
he  instructed  him,  after  he  went  down  to  Scotland 
as  commissioner,  to  endeavour  to  obtain  opinions 
from  judges  or  counsel  to  support  that  view.  On 
13th  June  he  wrote  to  Hamilton  :  '  One  of  the 
chief  things  you  are  to  labour  now  is  to  get  a  con- 
siderable number  of  Sessioners  and  Advocates  to 
give  their  opinion  that  the  Covenant  is  at  least 

»  Hardwicke,  State  Paper*,  ii.  pp.  103-4. 


142     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

against  law,  if  not  treasonable.'  ^  But  the  royal 
commissioner  found  the  task  beyond  his  power. 
'  I  find  by  your  Advocate  that  he  conceiveth  it 
[the  Covenant]  may  be  justified  by  law,  and  the 
most  of  the  lawyers  in  the  town  are  of  the  same 
opinion.  The  greatest  number  of  the  Session  are 
of  the  same  mind,  but  I  shall  leave  nothing  undone 
that  can  be  thought,  be  it  either  by  threats  or 
bribes.'  ^  It  is  a  remarkable  fact  that  no  Scottish 
lawyer  could  be  induced  to  side  with  the  king  on 
this  question.  Promotion  doubtless  awaited  any 
man  who  would  declare  for  the  king's  view.  And 
it  will  not  do  to  suggest  cowardice  on  the  part  of 
Sir  Lewis  Stewart,  as  Burnet  does  :  '  Sir  Lewis 
Stewart  promised  private  assistance,  but  said  that 
if  he  appeared  in  public  in  that  matter  he  was 
ruined.'  ^  As  matter  of  fact  he  did  appear  in  public 
very  soon  after,  as  legal  adviser  to  the  royal  com- 
missioner at  the  Glasgow  Assembly,  when  Hope 
refused  to  go.  This  may  be  at  least  one  explana- 
tion of  the  singular  fact  that  Hope  was  retained 
in  his  post  as  Lord  Advocate  throughout  this 
period  although  avowedly  out  of  sympathy  with 
the  king's  policy.  Stewart  would  have  been  ap- 
pointed had  Hope  been  dismissed.  '  The  Advocate 
should  be  removed,'  wrote  Hamilton.  '  I  know 
none  so  fit  for  his  place  as  Sir  Lewis  Stewart.'  Yet 
not  even  he  would  advise  a  prosecution  of  the 
Covenant  leaders.  Legal  opinion  in  Scotland  was 
unanimous  against  it,  and  much  to  Charles's  chagrin 
the  matter  had  to  be  dropped.  When  we  remember 
that  rulers  bent  on  arbitrary  courses  have  rarely 

^  Burnet,  Memoirg  of  the  Dukes  of  Hamilton  (1677),  p.  57. 

2  Hamilton  Papers,  Camden  Society,  p.  8. 

3  Memoirs  of  the  Dukes  of  Hamilton,  p.  53. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     1 1.3 

failed  to  secure  the  services  of  subservient  lawyers 
prepared  to  find  or  to  make  law  to  suit  the  occasion, 
we  shall  be  ready  to  give  due  credit  to  the  courage 
and  independence  of  the  Scottish  bar  at  this  time. 
Every  one  will  recall  by  way  of  contrast  the  con- 
temporary case  in  England  of  Finch  appointed 
Chief  Justice  of  the  Court  of  Common  Pleas  because 
Charles  found  in  him  an  unscrupulous  tool,  and  the 
equally  notorious  cases  in  a  later  generation  of 
Jeffreys  in  England  and  Sir  George  Mackenzie  in 
Scotland. 

If  the  Covenant  could  not  be  crushed  by  invoking 
the  criminal  law,  there  remained  only  two  other 
methods  of  handling  the  situation.  The  king  must 
either  come  to  terms  with  the  Covenanters  or  he 
must  fight  them.  Some  of  the  bishops  are  said 
to  have  advised  measures  of  violence,  but  it  was 
resolved  to  have  recourse  to  negotiation.  Tlie 
progress  of  the  cause  in  the  north,  as  shown  by 
the  great  gatherings  and  numerous  adhesions  at 
Inverness  and  other  places  in  April,  was  not  without 
its  effect  in  leading  to  this  decision.  But  the 
sequel  was  to  show  that  Charles  knew  neither  how 
to  negotiate  nor  how  to  fight. 

It  was  no  fault  of  the  opposite  party  if  he  did 
not  now  clearly  understand  what  their  position 
and  demands  were.  After  the  Covenant  was 
signed  they  made  every  possible  endeavour  to 
inform  him  fully  by  communicating,  not  through 
the  Privy  Council  but  more  directly.  This  they 
did  with  the  aid  of  three  Scottish  noblemen 
then  at  Court — Lennox,  Hamilton  and  Morton. 
Two  impoi-tant  documents  were  prepared  and 
issued,  both  of  them  the  work  of  Henderson  with 
the    assistance    of   Wariston.     The    first    was    for 


144     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

general  circulation.  It  bore  the  uncompromising 
title,  '  The  Least  that  can  be  asked  to  settle  this 
church  and  kingdom  in  a  solid  and  durable  Peace,' 
and  was  intended  to  prevent  people  being  led  away 
by  suggestions  from  the  bishops'  party  of  a  specious 
but  unsatisfactory  character.  The  second  was  a 
carefully  considered  paper  intended  for  the  king  ; 
its  title  bore  '  Articles  for  the  present  Peace  of  the 
kirk  and  kingdom  of  Scotland.'  They  wished  to 
make  sure  that  Charles  should  know  direct  from 
themselves  what  their  desires  were  '  before  he  gave 
out  any  further  declaration  of  his  mind.'  They 
were  haunted  by  misgivings  whether  even  yet  the 
king  was  fully  informed  as  to  their  position,  and 
they  spared  no  pains,  by  entrusting  their  documents 
to  special  messengers  and  by  seeking  the  inter- 
vention of  influential  Scotsmen  at  Court,  to  secure 
that  their  case  should  be  stated  to  the  king  in  their 
own  words. 

These  two  documents  are  conspicuous  milestones 
on  the  road  which  the  Church  and  kingdom  of 
Scotland  were  now  travelling.  They  cover  the 
same  ground,  and  are  noteworthy  as  showing  how 
far  the  controversy  had  broadened  and  deepened 
in  the  few  months  which  had  passed  since  Henderson 
tabled  his  petition  to  the  Privy  Council  in  August 
of  the  previous  year.  It  had  now  passed  beyond 
the  mere  matter  of  the  Service  Book,  indeed  it  had 
gone  beyond  the  limits  of  a  controversy  relating 
merely  to  Church  matters  ;  '  kirk  and  kingdom  ' 
were  now  both  involved.  Both  documents  put 
firmly  in  the  forefront  the  proposition  that  the 
discharge  of  the  Service  Book,  Book  of  Canons  and 
High  Commission  '  may  be  a  part  of  the  satisfaction 
of  our  just   complaints   which  therefore   we   still 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     145 

humbly  desire  ;  but  that  can  neither  be  a  perfect 
cure  of  the  present  evils  nor  can  it  be  a  preservative 
in  times  to  come.'  Then  they  go  on  to  deal  with  the 
larger  issues  which  had  emerged.  The  Court  of 
High  Commission  must  be  abolished.  It  endangered 
the  consciences,  liberties,  estates  and  persons  of  all 
the  lieges.  It  was  introduced  not  only  without 
law  of  kirk  and  kingdom  but  against  the  express 
acts  of  both  ;  it  proved  prejudicial  to  the  lawful 
judicatories,  it  was  a  yoke  and  burden  which  they 
felt  and  feared  to  be  more  heavy  than  they  should 
ever  be  able  to  bear.  The  urging  of  the  Articles 
of  Perth  must  cease.  They  had  been  '  introductory 
to  the  Service  Book  and  in  their  nature  make  way 
for  Popery,  and  withal  have  caused  troubles  and 
divisions  these  twenty  years,  and  jealousies  betwixt 
the  king  and  his  subjects  without  any  spiritual 
profit  or  edification.'  As  to  civil  places  and  offices 
of  kirkmen  and  the  vote  of  ministers  in  Parliament 
the  position  taken  is  that  the  Church  by  various 
caveats  and  canons  agreed  upon  in  General  Assem- 
blies had  limited  the  ministers  who  were  to  vote  in 
Parliament ;  that  it  had  lamentable  experience  of 
the  evils  which  had  arisen  from  these  limits  being 
disregarded  ;  so  long  as  ministers  voted  absolutely, 
without  the  limitations  of  these  canons,  they  could 
not  be  thought  to  vote  in  name  of  the  kirk.  The  next 
topic  dealt  with  is  the  entry  of  minister  to  their 
office  :  a  proposal  is  made  of  a  thoroughgoing 
change  incompatible  with  the  existing  episcopal 
constitution.  The  proposal  is  to  go  back  to  the 
Act  of  1592,  the  great  presbyterian  charter.  That 
Act  declared  that  God  had  given  to  the  spiritual 
office-bearers  of  the  kirk  collation  and  deprivation 
of  ministers,  that  the  power  granted  to  bishops  in 

K 


146    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

1584  to  receive  the  presentation  to  benefices  was 
to  be  null  in  time  coming,  and  it  ordained  that  all 
presentation  to  benefices  be  directed  to  particular 
presbyteries  with  full  power  to  give  collation  there- 
upon, they  being  the  lawful  office-bearers  of  the 
kirk  to  whom  God  had  given  that  right.     Beyond 
this  ministers  are  not  to  be  burdened  by  unlawful 
oaths.     '  We   have   no   grievance,'  it   is   declared, 
'  more  universal  or  more  pressing  than  that  worthy 
men  who  have  the  testimonies  of  their  learning 
from   universities,    are   tried   by   the   presbyteries 
to  be  qualified  for  the  work  of  the  ministry,  and 
for  their  life  and  gifts  are  earnestly  desired  by  the 
whole  people,  are  notwithstanding  rejected  because 
they  cannot  be  persuaded  to  subscribe  and  swear 
such  unlawful  articles  and  oaths  as  have  neither 
warrant  in  the  acts  of  the  kirk  nor  laws  of  the 
kingdom,  and  others  of  less  worth  and  ready  to 
swear  (as  for  base  respects  unworthy  to  be  mentioned) 
obtruded  upon  the  people,   and  admitted  to  the 
most  eminent  places  of  the  kirk  and  schools  of 
divinity.     The  next  article  touched  bedrock.     It 
demanded  that  General  Assemblies  be  revived  by 
the  king's  authority  and  appointed  to  be  kept  at 
the    ordinary    times.     The    Assemblies    must    be 
'  lawful  and  free  national  Assemblies  ' ;   in  them 
kirkmen   might   be   tried    in   their   life,    office    or 
benefice.     In   the   first   document    '  for   informing 
the  people  '  this  subject  is  explained  more  fully. 
It  is  recalled  that  even  the  Glasgow  Assembly  of 
1610  gave  the  General  Assemblies  the  power  of 
trying  prelates  in  regard  to  their  life,  office  and 
benefice,   and  it  is  pointed  out  that  one  of  the 
urgent  duties  of  a  free  Assembly  now  will  be  the 
trying  and  censuring  of  the  present  archbishops  and 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     147 

bishops  '  tlic  authors  and  causes  of  all  innovations 
complained  upon ' ;  without  that  they  declare  there 
is  '  no  appearance  of  laying  the  present  commotions 
and  combustions  in  this  kingdom.'  But  the 
Articles  submitted  to  the  king  arc  no  less  outspoken. 
Kirkmen  are  to  be  subject  to  the  General  Assembly 
which  he  is  asked  to  summon  *  at  His  Majesty's 
firet  opportunity  and  as  soon  as  may  be  conveni- 
ently '  :  that  course  alone  offers  any  prospect  of 
'  helping  the  present  evils '  and  preserving  the 
peace  of  the  kirk.  In  its  8th  and  last  article  the 
document  craved  the  king  for  the  summoning  of  a 
Parliament  '  for  the  timeous  hearing  and  redress- 
ing the  just  grievances  of  his  subjects,  for  removing 
their  common  fears,  and  for  renewing  and  establish- 
ing such  laws  as  in  time  coming  may  prevent  both 
the  one  and  the  other,  and  may  serve  the  good 
of  the  kirk  and  kingdom.' 

Had  the  Service  Book  been  withdrawn  in  the 
previous  year  it  is  probable  that  Scotland  would 
have  asked  nothing  further,  but  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  Henderson's  petition,  based  as  it  was  on  the 
fact  that  the  innovations  were  not  warranted  by 
Assembly  or  Parliament,  contained  by  implication 
all  that  is  set  forth  in  the  Eight  Articles.  The 
refusal  of  the  limited  request  and  the  king's  tem- 
porising conduct  had  brought  home  to  the  pres- 
byterian  party  the  danger  of  being  content  to  rest 
merely  on  his  forbearance,  and  liad  forced  them 
back  on  a  demand  for  the  restoration  of  that  Church 
government  in  which  they  saw  the  only  security  for 
their  religion. 

Plainly  those  men  knew  tin  ji  own  minds  and  were 
in  earnest.  If  King  Charles  was  now  to  negotiate 
with  them  to  any  effect  he  must  needs  understand 


148    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

them  and  he  must  know  his  own  mind.  But 
Charles  did  not  understand  them  and  he  did  not 
know  his  own  mind.  His  idea  was  to  send  out 
proclamations  couched  in  vague  and  pompous 
language  which  might  mean  anything  or  nothing. 
If  that  failed,  as  it  was  bound  to  fail,  he  had  no 
plan  as  to  what  his  next  step  was  to  be.  His 
letters  to  Hamilton,  it  is  true,  are  full  of  strong 
language  about  his  military  preparations,  and  about 
flattering  the  Covenanters  with  hopes  so  as  to  '  win 
time  '  till  he  is  ready  to  strike.  But  it  would  be 
giving  Charles  too  much  credit  to  suppose  that, 
like  a  deep  and  wily  diplomatist,  he  was  really 
keeping  his  victims  in  play  while  he  gathered  his 
forces  to  crush  them.  Of  such  prompt  and  resolute 
action  he  was  quite  incapable.  His  talk  about 
fighting  was  largely  talk  and  nothing  more,  and 
when  the  time  did  come  for  fighting  it  turned  out 
that  his  opponents  were  far  more  ready  than  he. 
He  was  simply  drifting  along  without  a  definite 
policy,  unless  it  were — as  it  was  irreverently  de- 
scribed by  an  onlooker  at  the  time — ^the  policy  of 
'  boggling  and  irresolution.'  ^  The  result  was  what 
might  have  been  foreseen.  In  the  three  and  a  half 
months,  from  the  beginning  of  June  till  the  middle 
of  September,  Hamilton  was  hustled  along  from 
one  position  to  another  till  he  had  abandoned  all 
his  original  grounds  and  conceded  a  General 
Assembly  and  a  Parliament.  He  did  not  even 
'  win  time '  for  his  master,  and  he  certainly  did  not 
win  the  respect  of  his  opponents.  They  learned 
to  read  Charles  like  an  open  book  and  to  entertain 
for  his  policy  only  contempt.  '  It  seemed  to 
many,'   says  Baillie,   '  that  his  instructions  were 

^  Hailes's  Memorials  :  Reign  of  Charles  the  First,  p.  25. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     149 

of  so  many  parts,  that  he  had  warrant  to  press 
every,  piece  to  the  utmost,  and  then  to  pass  from 
it,  if  no  better  might  be,  to  the  next.  This  seemed 
to  some  of  us  the  beholders  but  little  policy  :  we 
thought  it  liad  been  more  expedient  for  our  division, 
their  main  end  as  was  thought  by  some,  to  have 
at  the  very  first  granted  frankly  all  they  could  be 
brought  to,  than  to  offer  some  few  things  which 
could  content  none,  and  to  enter  upon  second 
offers  after  the  resolute  rejection  of  the  first.  This 
did  bind  us  all  the  faster,  made  us  the  more  bold 
in  pressing  our  full  desires.'  ^ 

Hamilton  reached  Edinburgh  on  the  7th  of  June. 
He  had  a  great  reception,  a  vast  concourse  of 
60,000  of  all  ranks  and  classes  meeting  him  on  the 
sands  between  Musselburgh  and  Leith,  on  Leith 
Links,  and  all  the  way  up  to  the  Canongate.  At 
once  he  learned  enough  to  show  him  that  the 
state  of  matters  was  worse  than  his  worst  fears. 
'  What  was  but  surmises  when  I  wrote  to  your 
Majesty  from  Berwick  I  find  now  to  be  true,  to 
the  unspeakable  grief  of  all  your  faithful  servants 
and  loyal  subjects,  to  see  the  hearts  of  almost  every 
one  of  this  kingdom  alienated  from  their  so ve reign. '^ 
He  had  private  interviews  with  members  of  the 
Privy  Council  and  with  leaders  of  the  Covenanters. 
In  his  earlier  letters  he  refers  to  these  last  as 
'  Combiners.*  The  historic  name  of  '  Covenanters  * 
was  only  coming  into  use  ;  it  was  fastened  on  them 
apparently  by  opponents,  but  they  were  not 
ashamed  of  it :  not  for  the  first  time  in  history  a 
name   of  reproach   became   a   badge   of  honour.* 

'   l^tleri  (Laui^'h  ed.),  i.  p.  SH. 

•  Hamilton  Pnpem,  Camden  Society,  p.  3. 

'  Hailen's  Memorials  :  Reign  of  ChaHes  the  Firat,  p.  70. 


150  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Hamilton  brought  down  with  him  two  proclama- 
tions in  which  the  king  promised  that  he  would 
not  press  the  Canons  and  Service  Book  '  except 
in  such  a  fair  and  legal  way  as  shall  satisfy  all  our 
loving  subjects.'  One  of  them  demanded  that 
all  copies  of  the  Covenant  should  be  delivered  into 
the  hands  of  the  Privy  Council.  He  was  to  use 
one  form  or  the  other  according  to  circumstances. 
Traquair  and  Roxburghe  told  him  at  once  that  to 
demand  the  giving  up  of  the  Covenant  would  ruin 
his  mission.  The  tenor  of  the  proclamations 
became  known  to  the  other  side  and  created  an 
immense  stir.  They  soon  made  it  plain  to  Hamilton 
that  they  would  listen  to  no  such  terms ;  ^  that 
they  meant  to  have  just  what  their  Articles  de- 
clared ;  '  that  they  would  sooner  lose  their  lives 
than  leave  the  Covenant ' ;  that  of  the  two  pro- 
clamations in  his  pocket  neither  the  milder  nor  the 
sharper  one  would  meet  the  situation,  and  if  he 
ventured  to  put  forth  either  of  them  it  would  im- 
mediately be  checkmated  by  a  protestation.  His 
letters  to  the  king  are  a  kind  of  barometer  showing 
the  political  weather  in  which  he  found  himself. 
At  the  outset  he  is  in  the  depths  of  despair,  telling 
the  king  as  early  as  7th  June  to  hasten  on  the  pre- 
paration of  his  forces  by  land  and  sea  ;  he  is  sure 
of  victory,  though  it  is  little  consolation  to  know 
that  '  when  it  is  obtained  it  is  but  over  your  own 
poor  people.'  Meanwhile  he  continues  his  '  private 
dealing '  with  the  leading  men,  and  reports  a  few 
days  later  that  the  omens  were  more  favourable, 
and  that  all  the  talk  about  using  force  had  better 
be  dropped.  On  15th  June  he  is  again  in  distress, 
his  fair  hopes  are  quite  vanished,  he  is  harping  on 

'  Baillie,  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  84. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     151 

the  string  that  force  is  the  only  means  left  to  teach 
these    people    obedience.     He    is    '  forced    almost 
to  take  new  resolutions  every  day  to  keep  them 
quiet.'     They  are  pressing  him  for  the  calling  of  a 
General  Assembly,  and  the  distracted  Commissioner 
can  only  plead  that  that  is  beyond  his  mandate, 
but  he  will  go  back  to  the  king  for  fresli  instructions. 
Wariston  tells  the  same  story  from  the  other  side. 
Under  date  13th  June  he  notes:    'xhis  day  we 
trysted   on   all   day   with   the   Commissioner   but 
could  settle  nothing.'  ^     On  the  14.th  :    '  First  the 
advocates,  then  the  nobility  and  gentry  resolved  all 
una  voce  the  absolute  necessity  of  protesting,  for 
the  which  my  heart  blessed  the  name  of  God  who 
drew  so  great  unity  out  of  appearances  of  division 
amongst  us,  so  that  the  Commissioner  put  off  that 
day  in  his  irresolutions  ;   but  at  night  we  sent  away 
to  all  the  burghs  in  Scotland  a  draft  of  a  Protesta- 
tion to  meet  the  Proclamation  wheresoever  it  was 
proclaimed,  either  before  or  after  the  proclaiming 
of  it  here  in  Edinburgh.'     One  of  the  expedients 
that  occurred  to  Hamilton  was  to  get  a  document 
from  the  Covenanters  explaining  away  the  clause 
of  mutual  defence  in  the  Covenant.     The  Tables 
were  suspicious  ;   they  scented  '  delays  and  snares,' 
but  in  the  end  an  Explanation  was  drawn  up.     If 
Hamilton  thought  this  would  ease  his  path  he  was 
mistaken  ;    Charles  would  listen  to  no  explanation. 
*  So  long,'  he  wrote,  '  as  this  Covenant  is  in  force 
(whether   it   be   with   or   without   Explanation)    I 
have  no  more  power  in  Scotland  than  as  a  Duke 
of  Venice,   which   I   will   rather   die   than  suffer.' 
The  demand  for  a  free  General  Assembly  and  a 
Parliament  was  daily  growing  louder,  the  alarming 

»   iJiary,  p.  351. 


/ 


152     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

suggestion  was  even  made  whether  an  Assembly  or 
Parliament  might  not  be  called  without  the  king's 
leave,  and  only  by  promising  to  be  back  in  Edin- 
burgh with  fuller  instructions  by  the  5th  of  August 
did  Hamilton  secure  a  few  weeks'  respite.  Hardly 
had  he  left  town  when  Charles's  command  reached 
him  to  publish  the  Proclamation  before  coming 
away.  The  harassed  Commissioner  turned  back 
at  Seton,  and  the  Proclamation  was  made  at  the 
market  cross  on  4th  July.  Its  terms  had  been 
altered  at  Hamilton's  suggestion  :  in  addition 
to  assuring  his  subjects  that  he  would  not  press 
the  Canons  and  Service  Book,  but  '  in  a  fair  and 
legal  way,'  and  would  '  rectify  '  the  High  Com- 
mission, he  promised  a  free  Assembly  and  Parlia- 
ment '  which  shall  be  indicted  and  called  with  our 
best  convenience.'  This  Proclamation,  says 
Baillie,  was  heard  by  a  world  of  people  with  great 
indignation ;  '  we  all  do  mai'vel  that  ever  the 
Commissioner  could  think  to  give  satisfaction  to  any 
living  soul  by  such  a  declaration.'  Johnston  calls 
it  bluntly  '  a  damnable  piece  ' ;  ^  he  at  once  read  a 
Protestation,  surrounded  by  a  crowd  of  supporters. 
It  pointed  out  that  none  of  their  requests  had  been 
satisfied,  but  had  in  effect  been  refused  by  delay, 
declared  their  adherence  to  the  Covenant  and  the 
late  Articles,  and  boldly  appealed  to  a  free  General 
Assembly  of  the  Church  and  Parliament  of  the 
Estates  as  '  the  only  proper  judges  to  national 
causes  and  proceedings.'  Hamilton's  troubles  that 
day  did  not  end  at  the  market  cross,  there  was  a 
more  painful  sequel  in  private.  He  induced  a 
number  of  the  Council  to  sign  an  Act  ratify- 
ing   the     Proclamation,      but      a      remonstrance 

1  Diary^  p.  360, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     153 

by  the  Covenanters  brought  them  to  another 
mind,  and  they  compelled  him  to  tear  up  the 
paper  containing  the  Act  which  had  not  yet  been 
registered. 

While  the  Commissioner  was  absent  the  Tables 
thought  it  well  to  make  an  effort  to  win  over 
Aberdeen  and  the  Gordon  country  to  their  side. 
This  was  the  only  part  of  the  country  that  was  now 
in  serious  opposition.  The  air  was  thick  with 
rumours  of  an  impending  attack  on  Scotland  both 
by  sea  and  land.  It  was  believed  to  be  part  of  the 
king's  plan  to  send  troops  north  to  join  Huntly's 
forces,  and  then  to  march  south  and  attack  the 
Covenanters  in  the  rear  while  he  himself  moved  up 
with  a  force  from  the  south.  Of  the  deputies  sent 
north  on  this  propagandist  work  the  chief  were 
Montrose,  Henderson,  Dickson,  and  Cant,  who 
was  minister  at  Pitsligo.  There  was  a  curiously 
similar  affair  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  At 
the  General  Assembly  of  January  1561,  Knox  and 
other  reformers  had  a  disputation  with  the  sub- 
Principal  and  the  Canonist  of  King's  College. 
Nothing  resulted  from  the  conference — at  least 
nothing  but  mutual  exasperation.^  The  present 
visit  lasted  from  20th  till  28th  July.  The  visitors 
did  not  convert  the  Aberdeen  doctors,  but  they 
seem  to  have  won  over  many  of  the  citizens,  and 
to  have  had  very  considerable  success  in  the 
neighbouring  districts.-  Montrose  in  his  fervour 
started  badly  by  refusing  the  hospitality  of  the 
burgh  when  the  magistrates  came  to  offer  them 
'  the  cup  of  Bon  Accord,'  imless  they  first  signed 
the    Covenant.       When    Henderson    and    his   col- 

'  See  Cosmo  In  lies,  Sketche*  of  Early  Scotch  History,  p.  276. 
"  Guthry'u  Mfmoiri  (ed.  1702),  p.  33. 


154  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

leagues  asked  leave  to  preach  in  the  Churches 
on  Sunday  the  22nd,  the  clergy  refused  the  re- 
quest. The  Aberdeen  doctors  have  been  described 
as  'upholding  the  noble  banner  of  intellectual 
freedom,'  ^  but  they  did  not  choose  that  their 
people  should  hear  doctrines  different  from  those 
taught  by  their  own  pastors.^  Great  crowds, 
however,  listened  in  the  open  air  to  the  case  for 
the  Covenant,  the  ministers  speaking  from  a 
gallery  in  the  court  of  the  Earl  Marischal's  house 
in  the  Castlegate,  then  occupied  by  Lady  Pitsligo. 
An  argumentative  warfare  was  carried  on  between 
the  opposing  clergy  in  writing.  The  doctors  first 
presented  fourteen  Demands  ;  to  these  Answers 
were  sent ;  Replies  to  these  were  handed  to  the 
delegates  when  they  returned  to  Aberdeen  at  the 
end  of  the  week's  campaign  in  the  country. 

In  the  following  week  Henderson  and  the  others 
left  Aberdeen,  and  shortly  afterwards  sent  Answers 
to  the  Replies.  Lastly  came  Duplies  sent  by  the 
six  doctors.  There  was  room  for  endless  con- 
troversy, and  each  side  as  usual  claimed  the  victory. 
Patrick  Forbes  was  now  dead,  but  the  scholars 
chosen  by  him  filled  the  pulpits  and  chairs  in 
Church  and  University.  Aberdeen  academic  learn- 
ing had  more  than  a  flavour  of  episcopacy  and  ultra 
loyalty.  The  doctors  were  royalists  before  every- 
thing else.  They  would  not  condemn  episcopacy 
nor  abjure  the  Perth  Articles.  They  adhered  to 
the  discipline  of  the  Reformed  kirk  of  Scotland, 
and  confessed  their  '  obedience  to  the  kirk  of 
Scotland  in  all  her  lawful  constitutions,'  though 
they  did  not  believe  '  in  any  immutability  of  that 

1  Gardiner's  History  of  England,  viii.  p.  359. 

2  Grubj  Ecclesiastical  History,  iii.  p.  13. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     155 

presbyterial  government.'  ^  They  had  no  objec- 
tions to  the  ecclesiastical  policy  either  of  James  or 
Charles,  and  it  followed  that  they  could  not  look 
with  favom*  on  the  Covenant,  which  was  without 
authority  from  king  or  council.  All  covenants  of 
mutual  defence  by  force  of  arms  without  the  king's 
consent  were  forbidden  by  Act  of  Parliament, 
and  therefore  this  one  was  illegal.  Henderson 
argued  the  other  side.  He  stated  more  than  once 
that  Hamilton  had  expressed  himself  as  satisfied 
with  the  Covenanters'  explanation  of  the  Covenant 
to  the  effect  that  they  would  stand  to  the  defence 
of  the  king  to  the  uttermost  of  their  power  with 
their  means  and  lives,  also  that  the  Privy  Council 
had  cancelled  the  Act  ratifying  the  proclamation 
of  4th  July.  Hamilton  challenged  Henderson's 
veracity  on  these  two  points  :  he  denied  that  he 
had  ever  approved  or  accepted  the  explanation, 
and  he  asserted  that  the  Act  of  the  Council  remained 
as  it  was.  In  all  controversies  Henderson  bore 
himself  by  universal  testimony  with  marked  courtesy 
and  highmindedness,  and  this  impeachment  of  his 
honour  caused  him  much  pain.  That  he  should 
not  lie  under  any  imputation  the  noblemen  con- 
nected with  the  Tables  publicly  identified  them- 
selves with  him  and  vindicated  his  conduct. 
Hamilton  played  a  strange  part.  He  seems  to 
have  been  sincerely  desirous  to  serve  the  king, 
but  there  was  a  widespread  feeling  that  he  wished 
at  the  same  time  to  stand  well  with  his  own 
countrymen.  Charles's  expression  '  I  commend 
the  giving  ear  to  the  Explanation  or  anything  to 
win  time '  suggests  an  attitude  on  Hamilton's 
part  that  may  well  have  seemed  to  the  other  side 

•  Buruet,  Memoirs  of  Dukts  of  Hamilton  (1077),  p.  8C. 


156     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

to  mean  acceptance  of  it.  If  there  be  truth  in 
the  story  which  Guthry  tells  ^  that  Hamilton 
encouraged  the  Covenanting  leaders  to  persevere 
in  their  policy,  speaking  to  them  as  a  '  kindly 
Scotsman,'  then  there  is  more  than  ample  ground 
for  the  general  belief  in  Scotland  that  he  was 
throughout  playing  a  double  game.  A  man  who 
could  so  act  will  not  be  believed  against  the  un- 
sullied name  of  Henderson. 

The  Commissioner  returned  to  Edinburgh  on 
10th  August  with  fresh  instructions.  Charles  had 
yielded  under  pressure  so  far  as  to  authorise  the 
calling  of  an  Assembly  and  Parliament,  but  the 
concession  was  robbed  of  its  value  by  the  conditions 
which  accompanied  it.  The  Assembly  was  to  have 
its  hands  tied  in  advance  by  all  sorts  of  '  pre- 
limitations,'  as  they  were  called  in  the  language 
of  the  day,  safeguarding  the  position  of  bishops. 
All  subjects  were  to  sign  the  Confession  of  Faith 
of  1567,  with  a  bond  appended  to  it  requiring  them 
to  defend  the  king's  person  and  authority,  and  the 
laws  and  liberties  of  the  country  under  his  Majesty's 
sovereign  power.-  This  Confession  with  the  new 
bond,  which  Charles  himself  apparently  signed, 
was  to  take  the  place  of  the  National  Covenant. 
Hamilton  spent  a  distracting  fortnight  in 
Edinburgh,  and  it  does  not  appear  that  he  ever 
produced  these  instructions  to  the  Council  or  made 
them  known  to  the  Covenanters,  who  would  not 
hear  of  limiting  the  freedom  of  the  Assembly. 
He  saw  the  hopelessness  of  the  position,  and  after 
struggling  for  fifteen  days  dropped  negotiations  and 
craved  leave  to  go  back  to  the  king  once  more.     On 

1  Memoirs  (ed.  ]  702),  pp.  34-5. 

2  Burnet^  Memoin  of  Dukes  of  Hamilton  (1677)^  p.  68. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    157 

'25tli  August  he  set  out  again  to  Court,  having  secured 
from  the  other  side  delay  till  20th  September. 

But  the  time  for  compromise  was  rapidly  slipping 
away.  The  king's  refusal  to  grant  a  free  Assembly 
had  the  effect  of  bringing  the  other  party  to  the 
resolution  that  with  or  without  his  autliority  the 
Assembly  must  be  called.  Had  the  Church  an 
inherent  right  in  such  circumstances  '  to  keep  an 
Assembly  ?  '  that  was  the  question  churchmen 
were  being  forced  to  answer.  It  troubled  the 
cautious  Baillie.  '  At  my  first  hearing  of  it  I  was 
much  amazed  :  I  was  utterly  averse  from  thinking 
of  any  such  proposition.'  But  further  considera- 
tion and  discussion  cleared  his  mind.  Before  long 
all  parties  were  united  in  the  view  that  an  Assembly 
would  be  held  '  forbid  it  who  would.'  Unanimity 
was  growing  up  on  another  matter  of  first  im- 
portance. According  to  Burnet,^  Hamilton  found 
in  August  that  things  were  in  a  much  worse  posture 
than  he  had  left  them.  '  They  were  resolved  to 
abolish  episcopacy  and  to  declare  it  unlawful, 
and  excommunicate  if  not  all  yet  most  of  the 
bishops.'  Hamilton  himself  reported  to  the  king 
on  11th  August,  the  day  after  his  return  to  Edin- 
burgh, '  I  find  no  change  in  this  people  except  it 
be  to  worse  (if  that  could  be).' 

On  one  question  only  was  there  any  threatening 
of  disunion  in  the  ranks  of  the  Covenanters.  The 
king's  demand  was  that  commissioners  to  the 
Assembly  from  presbyteries  must  be  chosen  by 
ministers  only  ;  no  lay  pei*son  was  to  meddle  in 
the  choice.  The  Tables  replied  that,  according 
to  the  order  of  their  Church  discipline,  ministers 
and  elders  ought  both  to  have  a  voice  in  choosing 

>  Mrmoirt  of  Duket  of  Hamilton  (1677),  p.  ^/J. 


158    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

commissioners  from  presbyteries.  The  right  of 
lay  elders  to  sit  in  presbyteries  had  undoubtedly 
been  allowed  and  practised  in  the  days  of  pres- 
byterian  government,  but  under  the  episcopal 
regime  the  practice  had  disappeared  and  was 
unknown  to  most  of  the  clergy.  Their  Table  ob- 
jected to  the  position  taken  up  by  the  other  Tables 
representing  the  laity,  '  alleging,'  says  Baillie, 
'  that  this  answer  did  import  the  ordinary  sitting 
of  laick  elders  not  only  in  sessions  but  also  in 
presbyteries,  their  voting  there  in  the  election  of 
ministers  to  bear  commission  :  this  they  took  to 
be  a  novation  and  of  great  and  dangerous  con- 
sequences.' He  takes  credit  to  himself  that  he 
had  studied  the  question  and  '  was  satisfied  of  the 
lawfulness  and  expediency  of  our  old  practice  and 
standing  law.'  ^  But  the  matter  caused  a  great 
stir  at  the  Tables.  Many  of  the  clergy  were 
jealous  of  the  growing  power  of  the  laity,  but  the 
laymen  made  it  plain  that  the  right  must  be  con- 
ceded as  a  condition  of  their  continued  support  of 
the  Church's  cause.  The  king  was  alive  to  the 
possibilities  of  a  split  among  his  opponents  over 
this  question.  It  offered  a  promising  field  for  his 
diplomacy,  and  he  was  careful  to  instruct  Hamilton 
how  to  foment  the  trouble.  His  insti-uctions  are 
worth  quoting  as  an  example  of  Charles's  char- 
acteristic duplicity.  '  You  must  by  all  means 
possible  you  can  think  of  be  infusing  into  the 
ministers  what  a  wrong  it  will  be  unto  them,  and 
what  an  oppression  upon  the  freedom  of  their 
judgments,  if  there  must  be  such  a  number  of 
Laics  to  overbear  them,  both  in  their  elections 
for  the  General  Assembly  and  afterwards.     Like- 

'  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  99. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     159 

wise  you  must  infuse  into  the  Lay-Lords  and  gentle- 
men with  art  and  industry,  how  manifestly  they 
will  suffer,  if  they  let  the  presbyters  get  head  upon 
them.'  These  cynical  tactics  met  with  the  success 
they  deserved.  Wariston  came  to  the  rescue. 
*  On  Saturday  morning  the  minister's  Table  and  the 
other  three  Tables  differing  about  elders'  choosing 
of  commissioners  from  presbyteries,  Rothes  and 
Loudoun  with  some  barons  and  burghs  went  to 
the  ministers,  where  the  Lords  moved  and  enabled 
me  to  clear  the  question  from  the  Second  Book  of 
Discipline  and  Act  of  Parliament  1592,  which  did 
much  good  and  settled  us  all  in  unity.'  ^  The 
clergy  yielded,  for  all  of  them  realised  in  that 
crisis  of  the  Church's  fate  that  '  of  all  evils  division 
was  incomparably  the  worst.' 

On  September  15th  Hamilton  was  back  in 
Dalkeith.  His  instructions  now  were  distinctly 
in  advance  of  anything  that  had  hitherto  been 
conceded.  The  Service  Book,  Book  of  Canons, 
and  Court  of  High  Commission  were  *  discharged,' 
and  all  acts  of  Council,  proclamations  and  other 
acts  or  deeds  published  for  establishing  them 
annulled  and  rescinded.  As  to  the  Five  Articles 
of  Perth  the  king  dispensed  with  the  practice  of 
them.  All  persons,  civil  or  ecclesiastical  of  what- 
ever title  or  degree,  who  should  presume  to  exercise 
unwarranted  power  were  to  be  liable  to  trial  and 
censure  by  Parliament,  General  Assembly,  or 
other  competent  judicatory.  For  the  free  entry 
of  ministers  to  their  office  no  other  oath  was  to  be 
administered  than  what  was  prescribed  by  the 
Parliament  of  1580,  that  is  to  say,  before  the 
innovations  of  King  James.     So  far  admirable  ; 

'   Dinry,  pp.  374-/5. 


160    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

but  then  came  the  new  condition  which  was  to 
wreck  everything.  To  assure  his  subjects  that  he 
intended  no  change  in  the  estabhshed  rehgion  he 
commanded  all  to  renew  the  Confession  of  Faith 
of  1580  with  the  general  bond  signed  in  1590 — the 
same  Confession  which  formed  the  basis  of  the 
National  Covenant,  but  without  the  additions  by 
Henderson  dealing  with  the  later  innovations  of 
James  and  Charles.  Finally,  warrant  was  granted 
to  indict  a  free  General  Assembly  to  be  held  at 
Glasgow  on  21st  November,  and  a  Parliament  at 
Edinburgh  on  15th  May  1639.  It  may  appear  to 
us  now  a  weak  policy  on  the  part  of  the  king 
to  insist  on  having  some  document  signed  by 
his  people,  weak  because  an  obvious  imitation  of 
his  opponents,  but  this  king's  Confession,  as  it  was 
called,  was  plainly  considered  at  the  moment  to 
be  a  clever  stroke  to  supersede  the  National 
Covenant  and  to  divide  the  Covenanters.  The 
news  of  it  caused  no  little  anxiety  in  their  ranks. 
Public  proclamation  was  to  be  made  on  Saturday, 
22nd  September,  but  they  were  eager  to  learn  its 
contents  beforehand.  The  hopes  and  fears  of  both 
sides  are  reflected  in  an  unusually  long  and  graphic 
letter  from  Hamilton  to  the  king  on  the  24th,  and 
by  Wariston  in  his  diary.  On  Friday,  the  21st, 
the  contents  of  the  king's  message  were  communi- 
cated to  the  Covenanting  leaders,  and  they  were 
not  a  little  upset  by  them.  '  Upon  Friday  morning 
I  was  advertised  by  Lome  of  the  particulars  and 
was  dashed  therewith,  thinking  that  they  had 
never  lighted  on  so  apparent  a  means  to  divide 
and  ruin  us.  Forenoon  I  got  with  Rothes,  Loudoun, 
Air.  Henderson  a  sight  of  the  whole,  and  opposed 
many  particulars  therein,   especially  that  of  the 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     161 

subscribing  the  old  Confession,  and  afternoon 
Mr.  Air.  and  I  drew  up  some  reasons  against  the 
same.'  ^  They  tried  to  dissuade  Hamilton  from 
renewing  the  Confession,  but  the  more  they  argued 
the  more  bent  was  he  on  proceeding,  '  knowing 
well  (he  wrote  to  the  king)  that  to  be  the  only 
means  either  to  work  a  division  amongst  them 
or  to  satisfy  your  Majesty's  subjects.'  Mean- 
while the  commissioner  had  to  secure  the  support 
of  his  own  Council,  and  he  felt  by  no  means  sure  of 
his  ground.  On  Friday  afternoon  it  met,  and  the 
king's  letter  was  read.  '  This  being  done  there  was 
a  general  silence  amongst  us.  I  thought  not  fit 
long  to  suffer  this,  nor  yet  to  let  ill-affected  ones 
begin,'  ^  so  he  called  on  some  safe  men  first  to  ex- 
press their  opinions.  But  the  Council  would  not 
be  hurried  ;  *  since  a  confession  of  faith  was  to 
be  signed,  many  desired  that  there  might  be  one 
night  given  them  to  think  of  it.'  They  sat  till 
ten  at  night,  and  rose  to  meet  at  seven  next  morn- 
ing. It  was  no  time  to  sleep,  says  the  anxious 
commissioner ;  a  little  after  six  next  morning 
Rothes  and  Montrose  were  on  the  scene,  attended 
by  noblemen  and  others,  and  desired  to  speak  with 
him.  Their  purpose  was  delay,  '  to  no  other  end 
than  to  divide  us  of  the  Council.'  At  least  four 
hours'  anxious  debate  was  needed  before  the 
Council  could  agree  to  go  on  with  the  proclama- 
tion that  day,  the  22nd.  After  other  three  hours' 
debate  the  councillors  consented  to  sign  the  con- 
fession and  bond  themselves.  Further  scrutiny 
of  the  king's  language  and  a  night's  reflection  had 
deepened   the    dissatisfaction   of  the   Covenanters 

»  Wariston'*  Diary,  p.  391. 

*  Hamilton  Paper*,  Camden  Society,  p.  28. 


162     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

with    this    new    policy.     Saturday    morning    saw 
Johnston  and  Henderson  early  at  work  framing 
a  protestation  against  the  proclamation  which  was 
expected  that  day.     Professor  Masson's  conjecture 
that  the  protestation  was  the  work  of  Henderson  ^ 
turns  out  to  be  well  founded,  to  this  extent  that 
the  reasons  which  are  set  forth  in  weighty  and 
dignified  language  are  from  his  pen.     '  On  Saturday 
morning  I  rose  soon,  prayed  earnestly  for  the  Lord's 
direction  to  me  in  the  Protestation  and  to  Mr. 
Alxr.  in  the  Reasons,  whom   again  and    again  I 
pray  the  Lord  to  assist,  for  it  is  a  weighty  business.'  * 
At  four  in  the  afternoon,  Johnston  at  the  Cross 
read  the  Protestation  :    the  common  people  joined 
in   the   protest   crying   '  God   save  the   king,   but 
away  with  bishops,  these  traitors  to  God  and  man, 
or  any  other  covenant  but  our  own.' 

The  Protestation  is  a  powerful  State  paper.     Its 

impressive    reasoning   so   satisfied   the    people    of 

Scotland    that    the    attempt    to    obtain    general 

support  for  the  king's  Confession  as  a  rival  to  the 

National  Covenant,  carried  out  though  it  was  by 

influential  commissioners  appointed  for  the  purpose 

all  over  the  country,  proved  a  complete  failure. 

Hamilton   had   to   confess   that    '  in   general   the 

whole   Covenanters    adhere    to    it    (the    National 

Covenant),  except  only  such  as  have  subscribed 

this  last  Confession,  your  Majesty's  Covenant,  whose 

number    is    not    considerable.'     The    Protestation 

made  it  plain  that  when  the  king  spoke  of  a  free 

General   Assembly   he   meant   something   entirely 

different  from  what  the  protesters  meant.     They 

meant  an  Assembly  without  prelimitation  either 

'  Life  of  Milton,  ii.  p.  33. 
*  Wariston's  Diary,  p.  392. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     163 

as  to  members,  order  of  proceeding,  or  matters  to 
be  treated,  and  if  any  question  arose  the  Assembly 
itself  was  the  only  competent  judge.  In  particular 
the  proclamation  assumed  the  office  of  bishop  as 
a  thing  not  to  be  questioned,  and  declared  the 
king's  intention  to  admit  no  innovation  therein. 
In  the  indicting  of  Assembly  and  Parliament 
prelates  were  summoned,  as  having  place  and  voice 
there.  The  other  party,  on  the  contrary,  maintained 
that  prelates  ought  not  to  be  present  in  the  Assembly 
except  to  undergo  trial  and  censure.  The  new 
Confession  meant  that  their  own  Covenant  would 
be  buried  in  oblivion,  it  would  in  fact  prove 
equivalent  to  a  giving  up  of  their  Covenant.  *  If 
we  should  now  enter  upon  this  new  subscription  we 
would  think  ourselves  guilty  of  mocking  God  and 
taking  His  name  in  vain,  for  the  tears  that  began 
to  be  poured  forth  at  the  solemnizing  of  the  Covenant 
are  not  yet  dried  up  and  wiped  away,  and  the 
joyful  noise  which  then  began  to  sound  hath  not 
yet  ceased,  and  there  can  be  no  new  necessity  from 
us  and  upon  our  part  pretended  for  a  ground  of 
urging  this  new  subscription.  .  .  .  We  ought  not 
to  multiply  solemn  oaths  and  covenants  upon  our 
part  and  thus  to  play  with  oaths,  as  children  do 
with  their  toys,  without  necessity.' 

The  Protestation  incensed  Charles  beyond 
measure.  *  In  my  mind  this  last  Protestation 
deserves  more  than  anything  they  have  yet  done, 
for  if  raising  of  sedition  be  treason  this  can  be 
judged  no  less.'  He  seems  to  have  had  some  hope 
that  the  judges  might  be  got  to  declare  it  treasonable, 
and  suggested  to  Hamilton  that  '  it  were  no  im- 
possible thing  to  get  them  to  do  me  justice  in  this 
particular.'     Hamilton's    reply    was    in    the    last 


164     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

degree  discouraging.  Nothing  can  more  strikingly 
show  to  what  a  low  ebb  the  royal  cause  had  sunk 
than  the  fact  that  official  persons,  bound  to  the  king 
by  every  tie  of  loyalty  and  interest,  hesitated  or 
refused  to  support  him.  The  Privy  Council  were 
not  to  be  trusted — *  too  great  reason  have  I  to  fear 
that  all  their  hearts  are  not  as  they  ought  to  be.' 
As  for  having  those  who  adhere  to  the  Protestation 
declared  traitors,  '  there  is,  alas !  no  hope  of  that  at 
this  time.'  In  regard  to  the  judges  he  acted  on  the 
king's  suggestion,  with  results  deeply  mortifying 
to  Charles.  He  '  laboured  each  of  them  a  part  of 
these  four  days  preceding '  ;  they  were  profuse 
in  expressions  of  loyal  obedience,  but  most  of  them 
'  craved  a  delay.'  Hamilton  had  learned  that 
delays  were  dangerous,  so  he  '  resolved  not  to 
condescend  thereto,  but  after  three  hours  disputing 
I  pressed  and  required  them,  in  your  Majesty's 
name,  to  subscribe  at  once.'  The  result  was  that 
only  nine  signed  ;  two  were  sick  ;  four — it  is  amus- 
ing to  read — '  craved  time  to  advise,'  a  polite 
fiction  for  a  refusal. 

In  writing  to  the  king  he  relieved  his  feelings 
about  the  four.^  Two  acted  not  out  of  conscience 
but,  he  is  sure,  '  knowing  their  own  guiltiness  in 
corruptions,'  which  the  Covenanters  would  reveal — 
a  story  not  incredible  in  those  days  :  ^  of  the  other 
two,  one  was  '  an  old  doting  fool,'  and  the  second 
*  a  bigot  puritanical  fellow.'  ^  At  the  Council 
table  too  he  had  a  humiliating  rebuff.  He  pro- 
duced a  letter  from  the  king  declaring  it  was  his 

*  Hamilton  Papers,  ('amden  Society,  pp.  52-3. 

2  One  of  the  two,  Scot  of  Scotstarvet,  is  pungently  described  by  Sir 
James  Balfour  as  '  a  busy  man  in  foul  weather,  and  one  whose  covetous- 
ness  far  exceeded  his  honesty'  {Historical  Works,  ii.  p.  147). 

3  This  was  Sir  John  Hope,  a  son  of  the  Lord  Advocate. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     165 

pleasure  that  episcopacy  might  be  limited  but  not 
abolished,  commanding  the  councillors  to  accompany 
him  to  Glasgow,  and  requiring  the  Lord  Advocate 
to  defend  episcopacy  before  the  Assembly.  Hope, 
however,  '  clearly  declared  himself  against  that 
Government,  and  hath  plainly  told  me  that  he 
neither  can  nor  will  argue  nor  defend  their  (the 
bishops')  continuance  in  Council  nor  Assembly.' 
Over  the  country  at  large  men  fought  shy  of  the 
king's  Confession  ;  even  the  councillors  entrusted 
with  the  work  of  procuring  signatures  were  said  to 
be  slack  in  their  efforts.  On  the  13th  of  November, 
the  last  day  when  all  signatures  were  to  be  reported, 
it  was  found  that  only  28,000  had  been  induced  to 
sign  in  all  Scotland ;  of  these  12,000  were  procured 
by  Huntly  in  and  about  Aberdeen.  Oddly  enough 
it  was  the  adhesion  of  the  Aberdeen  doctors  that 
sealed  the  fate  of  the  document.  They  signed 
subject  to  an  explanation  which  stated  that  they 
in  no  way  abjured  or  condemned  episcopal  govern- 
ment or  the  Perth  Articles.^  That  meant  that  the 
king's  Confession  was  no  security  for  presbyterian 
government,  and  no  security  against  the  very 
innovations  which  were  causing  all  the  trouble. 
The  privy  councillors  themselves  had  signed  it  only 
after  adding  the  words  *  according  as  it  was  then 
[1580]  professed  within  this  kingdom,'  to  make  it 
quite  clear  that  they  read  it  as  excluding  bishops 
and  all  the  other  innovations.  A  document  which 
could  be  signed  by  different  people  in  opposite 
senses  was  plainly  worthless,  and  ordinary  men 
might  be  excused  for  suspecting  it  was  a  trap. 

'  Burnet,  Mnnoirt  of  the  Duke*  qf  Hamilton  (1677),  p.  86. 


166     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

6.    A   REVOLUTIONARY   GATHERING  :     HENDERSON 
LEADS    THE    GLASGOW    ASSEMBLY 

November  —December  1638 

No  General  Assembly  had  met  for  twenty  long 
years.  It  was  recognised  on  all  hands  that  the 
Assembly  to  meet  at  Glasgow  in  November  1638 
would  mark  a  life  -  and  -  death  struggle.  Never 
bad  issues  so  great  hung  on  the  decisions  of  any 
such  gathering,  issues  not  for  the  Church  only  but 
for  the  nation.  For  two  months  and  more  before 
it  met  both  sides  were  occupied  with  their  pre- 
parations :  no  other  subject  was  discussed  in 
Scotland.  The  hopes  of  the  commissioner  and  the 
episcopal  party  lay  in  having  the  king's  Confession 
universally  signed.  That  was  their  great  stroke 
of  policy  ;  they  intended  to  have  it  ratified  in  the 
Assembly,  and  thereby  to  suppress  and  bury  the 
National  Covenant  without  directly  condemning 
it.^  Both  sides  also  put  forth  every  effort  to  secure 
the  election  to  the  Assembly  of  men  of  their  own 
party.  The  Tables  were  early  in  the  field  with 
Directions  to  presbyteries  prepared  on  27th  August.^ 
The  point  chiefly  urged  was  the  election  of  lay 
elders  as  commissioners,  in  terms  of  the  Act  of 
Assembly  passed  at  Dundee  in  1597.  It  directed 
that  three  ministers  at  the  most  be  sent  from  every 
presbytery,  and  one  elder :  one  commissioner 
also  was  to  be  appointed  by  every  burgh  except 
Edinburgh,  which  had  power  to  send  two.  Every 
kirk  session  was  enjoined  to  send  an  elder  to  the 
presbytery  on  the  day  of  choosing  commissioners 
to  the  Assembly,  so  that  by  consent  of  the  ministers 

^  Baillie's  Xe^<er«  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  119. 
'  Wariston's  Diary,  p.  377. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     167 

and  eldei-s  present  there  might  be  chosen  both 
the  ministerial  commissioners  and  also  *  some 
well-affected  and  qualified  nobleman  or  special 
gentleman  being  an  elder  of  some  particular 
church  session  within  that  presbytery.'  The 
Directions  emphasised  that  '  this  is  the  constitution 
of  the  presbyteries  appointed  by  the  Church  in 
the  books  of  discipline,  Acts  of  General  Assembly 
practised  for  many  years  after  the  Reformation, 
and  ratified  in  the  Parliament  12th  of  James  vi. 
and  never  since  altered  or  rescinded.'  ^  Wariston 
states  that  in  addition  to  these  public  Directions 
for  presbyteries  others  were  at  the  same  time 
drawn  up  *  private  for  trusty  persons.'  These 
were  apparently  the  two  papers  produced  by 
Hamilton  at  the  Assembly.  One  was  directed  to 
*  one  lay  elder  of  every  presbytery,  some  special 
confidant,'  the  other  to  some  minister  of  every 
presbytery  in  whom  they  put  most  special  trust, 
and  entitled  '  Private  Instructions,  August  27, 
1638.'  ^  The  first  of  these  private  documents 
stated,  '  We  hear  our  adversaries  are  busy  ...  it 
were  meet  that  as  far  as  may  be  a  new  warning 
should  be  given  to  stir  up  the  best  affected.'  It 
then  urged  that  the  laymen  be  diligent  to  stir  up 
their  friends  among  both  ministers  and  laity  : 
that  one  minister  and  gentleman  in  every  pres- 
bytery meet  often  together  to  resolve  upon  the 
particular  commissioners  to  be  chosen,  and  use 
all  diligence  with  the  rest  of  the  ministers  and 
gentlemen  that  such  may  be  chosen  :  where 
ministers  were  slow  or  disaffected  nothing  would 
so  much  avail  for  their  purpose  as  that  the  elders 
should    be    present    to    vote    on    presbyteries.     A 

'   The  Large  Declaration,  p.  130.  »  Ibid.,  pp.  281-3. 


168     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

warning  was  given  not  to  listen  to  what  the  ad- 
versary might  urge,  but  '  without  respect  to  any 
person  to  do  what  may  most  conduce  for  our  good 
ends.'  The  other  private  paper  set  out  by  stating 
'  These  private  Instructions  shall  be  discovered  to 
none  but  to  brethren  well  affected  to  the  cause.' 
The  purport  of  it  was  that  order  was  to  be  taken 
that  none  be  chosen  ruling  elders  but  Covenanters 
and  '  those  well  affected  to  the  cause  '  :  ministers 
chosen  are  to  be  Covenanters,  and  even  they  are 
not  to  be  chosen  if  they  hold  certain  offices  '  except 
they  have  publicly  renounced  or  declared  the  un- 
lawfulness of  their  places.'  The  last  Instruction 
was  to  the  effect  that  the  ablest  men  in  each 
presbytery  be  provided  to  dispute  *  de  Episcopatu, 
de  Senioribus,  de  potestate  supremi  magistratus 
in  ecclesiasticis,'  etc. 

The  public  Directions  were  admittedly  sent  out 
by  the  Tables ;  as  to  the  private  Directions, 
Hamilton  did  not  allege  that  the  Tables  were 
responsible  for  issuing  them  ;  they  had  been  sent, 
he  said,  by  direction  of  some  of  the  principal  rulers 
of  the  Tables.  Rothes  denied  all  knowledge  of 
them  on  behalf  of  the  Tables  :  if  they  had  been  sent 
out  they  were  only  the  advice  of  private  men  to 
their  private  friends.  The  real  controversy  was 
as  to  the  right  of  lay  elders  to  sit  as  members 
of  Assembly.  On  this  the  contention  of  the 
Covenanters  was  undoubtedly  sound  :  it  was  in 
accordance  with  the  early  practice  and  legislation 
of  the  Reformation  Church.  That  legislation  had 
never  been  repealed,  but  the  practice  had  fallen 
into  abeyance  under  the  episcopal  regime  ;  they 
proposed  now  to  restore  the  earlier  and  better 
practice.     Their  main  reason  at  the  time  doubtless 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     169 

was  that  the  lay  elders  were  for  the  most  part  on 
their  side,  but  they  are  not  to  be  blamed  for 
seeking  their  support  in  a  critical  conflict  if  the 
law  of  the  Church  entitled  them  to  do  so.  It 
would  have  been  better  if  the  elections  had  taken 
place  without  any  private  wire-pulling  on  either 
side,  but  even  in  this  enlightened  age  human 
nature  has  not  risen  above  the  temptation  to  adopt 
such  tactics  either  in  political  or  ecclesiastical 
conflicts.  As  the  currents  of  opinion  in  Scotland 
then  ran,  an  anti-episcopal  majority  in  the  Assembly 
was  inevitable.  The  Assembly  was  not  packed 
as  King  James's  Assemblies  were,  by  outsiders 
appointed  on  the  nomination  or  dictation  of  the 
king.  It  was  an  Assembly  elected  by  presbyters, 
and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that  it  reflected 
fairly  the  opinions  of  churchmen  on  the  great 
questions  of  the  hour. 

The  predominant  party  took  another  step  pre- 
paratory to  the  Assembly  which  is  open  to  comment 
of  a  different  kind.  They  meant  to  put  the  pre- 
lates on  their  trial ;  how  were  they  to  libel  them 
and  summon  them  before  the  Assembly  ?  They 
applied  to  the  commissioner  for  a  warrant,  but  he 
refused  it.  Wariston's  legal  ingenuity  was  equal 
to  the  occasion.  '  On  the  5th  and  6th  of  October 
I  was  confounded  with  the  very  thought  and  fear 
of  drawing  up  the  bishops'  summons  which  I  could 
not  see  through  and  through,'  *  but  after  much 
labour  he  produced  the  libel  which  was  presented 
to  the  presbytery  of  Edinburgh  on  24th  October.'* 
It  nms  in  the  name  of  noblemen,  barons,  ministers, 
and  burgesses  not  members  of  Assembly,  and  it  is 
directed  against  the  whole  of  the  fourteen  arch- 

"  Diary,  p.  393.  »  The  Largt  Declaration,  p.  208. 


iro    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

bishops  and  bishops.  A  libel  in  identical  terms 
was  presented  to  the  presbytery  of  Glasgow  and 
to  other  presbyteries  within  whose  bounds  the 
bishops  respectively  had  their  residences.  In  each 
case  the  presbytery  referred  the  libel  to  the 
Assembly  to  dispose  of.  The  libel  was  a  legal 
monstrosity.  It  slumped  together  an  appalling 
catalogue  of  ecclesiastical  faults,  doctrinal  errors, 
moral  and  criminal  offences,  and  without  further 
specification  charged  the  whole  of  the  prelates  of 
being  guilty  respective  of  every  one  of  them.  The 
matter  was  made  worse  by  the  way  in  which  the 
presbytery  acted.  The  presbytery  of  Edinburgh 
had  no  shadow  of  right  to  entertain  and  deal  with  a 
libel  against  any  bishop  outside  its  own  bounds, 
but  it  ordered  the  whole  libel  to  be  read  in  every 
church  within  its  bounds  on  the  following  Sunday, 
and  the  other  presbyteries  did  the  same.  That 
could  never  be  a  legal  citation  of  the  accused  men, 
and  it  was  certain  to  create  a  further  prejudice 
against  them  in  the  public  mind.  The  bishops 
no  doubt  declined  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Assembly 
— a  formal  declinator  was  lodged  on  their  behalf— but 
that  made  it  only  the  more  necessary  that  in  a  legal 
process  involving  consequences  so  grave  care  should 
have  been  taken  at  every  step  to  ensure  correctness 
of  procedure  and  the  fullest  justice  to  the  accused. 
As  the  weeks  wore  on  it  became  evident  that  the 
signing  of  the  king's  Confession  was  proving  a 
failure,  and  that  the  composition  of  the  Assembly 
would  be  overwhelmingly  hostile  to  the  king.  Feel- 
ing grew  more  embittered,  the  air  was  filled  with 
rumours  that  after  all  the  Assembly  would  never 
be  allowed  to  meet :  it  was  believed  that  the 
bishops  were  working  behind  the  scenes  for  that 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     171 

object.  *  Our  hopes  were  but  slender  ever  to  see  the 
downsitting  of  our  passionately  desired  Assembly 
with  the  commissioner's  consent,  for  daily  he  found 
himself  more  and  more  disappointed  in  his  ex- 
pectation to  obtain  these  things  which  it  seems 
he  put  the  king  in  hope  might  be  gotten.'  ^  The 
Covenanters  prepared  for  the  worst:  they  made 
their  plans  to  hold  the  Assembly  on  the  appointed 
day  with  or  without  the  commissioner.  '  We  are 
resolved  to  keep  the  21st  day  of  November  in 
Glasgow,  and  to  go  on  by  God's  grace,  as  we 
shall  be  answerable  to  God,  oppose  who  will.'  ^ 
Hamilton's  correspondence  with  Charles  shows 
that  rumour  was  not  far  wrong.  On  24th  September 
he  wrote  :  '  My  chief  and  next  endeavour  must  be 
to  preserve  episcopacy,  which  is  a  task  of  greater 
difficulty  than  can  be  imagined,  for  the  most  rigid 
and  worst  affected  persons  in  the  kingdom  are 
either  already  chosen  commissioners  or  will  be, 
nor  can  the  wit  of  man  find  now  a  remedy  for  that.'  ^ 
He  reports,  a  month  later  (22nd  October),  that  the 
opinion  of  the  bishops  whom  he  has  seen  is  *  that 
it  is  fitter  for  your  Majesty  to  prorogue  this  Assembly 
than  keep  it.'  This  course  he  thought  would 
simply  play  into  the  hands  of  the  enemy,  the 
people  would  conclude  that  the  king  never  intended 
to  keep  his  word  '  nor  that  ever  any  of  those  things 
should  be  really  performed  which  were  offered  in 
your  proclamations  and  declarations.'  He  advised, 
therefore,  that  the  Assembly  should  be  allowed  to 
meet,  although  that  course  was  also  attended  with 
danger.  '  It  will  then  appear  to  the  world  that 
your   Majesty    is   willing   to   perform   whatsoever 

'  BRillie'i  Lftttrt  (Lainff'n  ed.),  i.  p.  118.  »  Ibid.,  p.  112. 

'  HamUton  Papers,  Camden  Society,  p.  31. 


172  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

you  have  graciously  promised,  though  you  will 
not  allow  of  such  an  Assembly  as  (by  their  dis- 
orders) this  is  likely  to  prove.  It  is  true  this  way 
will  be  more  dangerous  for  the  dissolvers  of  it,  but 
if  your  Majesty  shall  be  pleased  to  take  this  course 
I  shall  not  fear  to  do  it,  though  the  Council  refuse  to 
concur  with  me  in  it  (as  I  am  sure  many  of  them 
will),  and  command  them  to  desist  in  your  Majesty's 
name,  under  the  pain  of  treason,  from  proceeding 
further  therein,  and  so  leave  them,  if  they  will  not 
obey,  tainted  by  your  Majesty's  commissioner 
with  the  name  of  traitors.  Obedience  is  not  to  be 
expected  from  them,  for  I  do  believe  they  will  not 
desist  from  proceeding  at  my  command.'  ^  As 
another  reason  for  taking  this  course  he  adds  that 
he  is  most  certainly  persuaded  that  if  the  king 
prorogued  the  Assembly  '  they  will  none  the  less 
go  on  with  the  same.' 

If  the  Assembly  could  not  be  prevented  from 
meeting,  Hamilton  determined  to  do  what  he  could 
to  hamper  his  opponents  by  forcing  as  many  of  them 
as  possible  to  remain  at  home.  For  this  purpose 
two  orders  were  issued.  The  first  was  a  proclama- 
tion by  the  Privy  Council,  forbidding  all  persons  to 
go  to  Glasgow  during  the  meeting  of  the  Assembly 
who  were  not  members,  except  such  as  reported 
their  presence  to  the  commissioner,  and  order- 
ing that  those  who  were  officially  present  were  to 
come  accompanied  only  by  their  household  servants, 
without  unlawful  weapons,  and  were  to  behave  in 
a  peaceable  manner. ^  The  ostensible  reason  was 
that  it  was  feared  some  restless  persons  '  out  of 
their  idle  humours   and   needless  curiosity  might 

'  Hamilton  Papers,  Camden  Society,  p.  48. 

2  Register  of  Privy  Council  (2nd  seriee),  vii.  p.  82. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     173 

disturb  the  peaceable  proceedings.*  The  Cove- 
nanters saw  in  the  order  simply  an  attempt  to 
cripple  them,  and  they  paid  no  heed  to  it.  They 
protested  that  '  all  might  come  who  had  entry  as 
party,  witness,  voters,  assessors,  complainer,  or 
whatever  way,  and  that  every  man  might  come 
with  such  a  retinue  and  equipage  as  the  Lords  of 
Council  should  give  example.'  ^  Wariston's  note 
reminds  us  that  weapons  might  have  other  uses 
than  the  commissioner  hinted  at :  '  Upon  Friday 
we  got  a  proclamation  discharging  numbers,  troops, 
and  weapons,  albeit  there  were  great  rumours 
of  John  du  Gar's  company  by  the  way,  and  we 
protested  at  the  Cross.'  -  John  Dugar  (an  Irish 
nickname  for  a  highlander,  John  Macgregor)  was  a 
notorious  robber,  much  feared  especially  in  the 
north-eastern  counties  ;  he  gave  himself  out  to  be 
a  king's  man,  and  so  likely  to  seize  Covenanters  and 
their  goods  at  his  pleasure.  The  other  order  to 
which  the  king's  party  stooped  was  nothing  but  a 
display  of  feeble  spite.  It  was  to  the  effect  that  all 
commissioners  to  the  Assembly  who  could  be  '  put 
to  the  horn '  for  non-payment  of  taxes  or  debts  would 
be  prevented  from  taking  their  seats.  This  was  so 
high-handed  a  proceeding  that  it  had  to  be  dropped. 
At  last  on  Wednesday,  21st  November,  the 
passionately  desired  Assembly  met  in  the  High 
Church,  the  old  Cathedral  of  Glasgow.  The  popula- 
tion of  Glasgow  in  those  days  numbered  only  about 
12,000,  and  so  great  was  the  influx  of  members 
and  others  attracted  by  the  notable  occasion  that 
it  was  with  difficulty  that  accommodation  could  be 
found  for  all.  '  Monday  all  day  I  went  from  house 
to   house  seeking  lodging  to  Mr.  Air.  Henderson, 

'  Baillie's  Letttrt  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  120.  *  Diary,  p.  399. 


174     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Mr.  David  Calderwood,  and  myself,  which  I  got 
after  a  day's  travel,'  says  Wariston.     The  thrifty 
folks  of  Glasgow  were  not  unwilling  to  improve 
the  occasion  in  a  pecuniary  sense.     '  The  town  did 
expect  and  provide  for  huge  multitudes  of  people, 
and  put  on  their  houses  and  beds  excessive  prices  ; 
but    the    diligence    of    the    magistrates    and    the 
vacancy  of  many  rooms  did  quickly  moderate  that 
excess.'  ^     The   members   of  Assembly   numbered 
about  260,  but  they  were  accompanied  by  assessors, 
two,  three,  or  four;   then  there  were  the  members 
of  Privy  Council  and  crowds  of  others — ministers, 
nobles,  barons,  and  common  people,  not  to  speak  of 
retainers  and  servants.     During  the  previous  week 
members  had  gathered  from  every  quarter,   and 
numerous  were  the  private  consultations  held  for 
exchanging   of  views,   ripening   and   preparing   of 
matters  to  come  before  the  Assembly.     When  the 
great  day  arrived   so  dense  and  eager  were  the 
crowds    that    the    magistrates    had    the    utmost 
difficulty,  with  the  aid   of  their  town   guard,   in 
forcing  a  way  for  members  to  their  places.     The 
commissioner  sat  in  a  chair  of  state  ;    at  his  feet, 
in  front  and  on  both  sides,  the  privy  councillors, 
thirty  in  number.     Before  the  commissioner's  chair 
a  little  table  was  set  for  the  Moderator,  and  another 
for  the  clerk ;    then  a  long  table  in  the  centre  for 
noblemen  and  barons,  elders  with  their  assessors. 
Rising  from  this  low  table  were  five  or  six  tiers  of 
seats  all  round  for  the  other  members  of  Assembly 
with  their  assessors.     The  lay  members  were  ninety- 
six  in  all :   the  flower  of  the  Scottish  nobility  were 
there,  '  few  barons  in  Scotland  of  note  but  were 
either  members  or  assessors.'     A  high  room  at  the 

^  Baillie's  Letters  (LtLing's  ed.),  i.  p.  121. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     175 

end  was  prepared  for  noblemen's  sons,  and  there 
were  '  huge  numbers  of  people,  ladies  and  some 
gentlewomen  in  the  vaults  above.' 

The  commissioner  surveyed  this   strange   scene 
with  a  troubled  and  bitter  spirit.     '  I  came  to  this 
town,'  he  wrote  to  the  king,  *  on  Saturday  the  17th, 
where  there  are  such  a  crew  assembled  together  and 
that  in  such  equipage  as  I  dare  boldly  affirm  never 
met  since  Christianity  was  professed,  to  treat  in 
ecclesiastic  affairs.     Yesterday,  the  21st,  was  the 
day  appointed  for  the  downsitting  of  the  Assembly. 
Accordingly  we  met,  and  truly,  Sir,  my  soul  was 
never  sadder  than  to  see  such  a  sight,   not  one 
gown  amongst  a  whole  company,   many  swords, 
but  more  daggers  (most  of  them  having  left  the 
guns    and    pistols    in    their    lodgings).  .  .  .  The 
number  of  the  pretended  members  is  about  260, 
each  one  of  this  hath  two,  some  three,  some  four 
assessors  who  pretend  not  to  have  voice,  but  only 
are  come  to  argue  and  assist  the  commissioners, 
but  the  true  reason  is  to  make  up  a  great  and  con- 
fused multitude.  .  .  .  What  can  be  expected  but 
a  total  disobedience  to  authority,  if  not  a  present 
rebellion  ?  '     He  felt  this  was  no  mere  ecclesiastic 
assembly,  it  was  something  more  ominous — a  nation 
gathered  in  council,  with  revolution  in  its  heart. 

In  his  bitterness  he  flung  out  an  unworthy 
taunt  against  his  countrymen.  He  described  the 
Assembly  as  *  a  most  ignorant  multitude,  for  some 
commissioners  there  are  who  can  neither  read  nor 
write,  the  most  part  being  totally  void  of  learning.' 
This  was  a  favourite  gibe  of  the  episcopal  party 
against  lay  elders,  and  displayed  as  much  ignorance 
as  did  the  other  charge  that  the  introduction  of 
elders  into  the  General  Assembly  was  a  new  thing. 


176     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

A  careful  analysis  of  the  membersliip  proves  that 
the  gibe  was  wholly  untrue.  *  There  were  in  it  140 
ministers,  2  professors  not  being  ministers,  and  98 
ruling  elders  from  presbyteries  and  burghs.  Of  these 
ruling  elders,  17  were  noblemen  of  high  rank,  9  were 
knights,  25  were  landed  proprietors  or  lesser  barons 
of  such  station  as  entitled  them  to  sit  in  ParUament ; 
and  47  were  burgesses,  generally  holding  the  princi- 
pal offices  of  authority  in  their  respective  towns — 
men  who  were  capable  of  representing  their  com- 
munities in  the  Parliament.  There  was  not  a 
peasant,  as  has  been  insinuated,  or  even  a  farmer 
or  yeoman  in  the  mmtiber.  From  what  I  know 
of  the  personal  history  of  many  of  these  men 
and  from  documents  which  I  have  seen  and  now 
possess  I  could  undertake  to  prove  that  not  one 
was  illiterate.'  ^ 

After  a  week  in  the  Assembly,  Hamilton  reported 
on  the  27th  :  '  This  wicked  people's  hearts  are  so 
seared  that  they  are  altogether  void  of  reason. 
Five  days  we  have  spent  wherein  I  daresay  there 
has  never  been  since  the  beginning  of  the  world 
greater  partiality  shown.  Divers  protestations  I 
have  made  which  will  be  thus  far  useful  as  suffi- 

1  Rev.  Dr.  Lee;  see  Peterkin's  Recordu  of  the  Kirk,  p.  111.  It  is  not 
necessary  to-day  to  vindicate  the  abilities  and  learning  of  the  Covenant- 
ing party  :  these  are  now  generally  admitted.  But  prejudice  died  hard. 
Writing  as  late  as  1R17,  Bower  in  his  Hiitory  of  the  University  of  Edin- 
burgh (i.  p.  186)  thought  it  necessary  to  say :  '  It  is  a  gross  mistake,  which 
has  been  studiously  propagated,  that  talents  and  learning  were  confined  to 
those  who  opposed  the  Covenant.  The  truth  is  the  clergy  who  coalesced 
with  the  measures  approved  of  by  the  bishops  were  far  inferior  in  point  of 
literary  acquirements  to  many  of  the  members  of  this  Assembly  (76,'^8). 
Ramsay,  Rollock,  Colvine,  Henderson  and  Baillie,  besides  many  others, 
were  an  honour  to  any  church,  and  were  the  first  to  declare  their  firm 
adherence  to  those  liberal  principles  which  constitute  the  best  vindication 
of  the  revolution  of  1688,  and  to  which  we  are  indebted  for  our  invaluable 
civil  privileges. ' 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTL.\ND     177 

ciently  by  them  shall  be  demonstrated  to  the 
world  the  unjust  proceedings  of  this  Assembly. 
This  day  I  intend  to  make  your  Majesty's  pleasure 
known,  it  not  being  possible  for  me  longer  to  keep 
them  in  any  temper,  having  gained  both  Saturday 
and  yesterday  merely  by  shifts.'  Then  he  proceeds 
to  tell  the  king  what  is  about  to  happen :  *  Re- 
solved they  are  not  to  obey  any  command  that 
shall  be  laid  upon  them  for  the  discharging  of  this 
Assembly  :  in  it  they  will  proceed  to  the  censuring 
of  my  lords  the  clergy,  though  all  absent,  and 
notwithstanding  of  their  declinature;  Episcopacy 
they  will  declare  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God, 
and  never  to  have  been  lawfully  established  in  this 
kingdom,  the  Service  Book  and  Book  of  Canons 
they  will  condemn  as  popish  and  thousand  mad- 
nesses more.' 

The  first  business  of  the  Assembly  was  to  ap- 
point its  Moderator.  It  insisted  that  this  should 
be  done  before  any  other  business,  and  after  a 
hot  debate  Hamilton  yielded.  The  choice  of  a 
Moderator  was  a  matter  of  the  highest  importance. 
There  never  was  any  doubt  who  should  fill  that 
post ;  in  the  minds  of  all  there  was  only  one 
possible  man.  '  I  took  such  an  impression,'  says 
Wariston,  '  of  God's  will  in  pointing  out  that  man 
(meaning  Henderson)  as  the  man  whose  hand  He 
had  blessed  hitherto  and  would  bless  chiefly  in 
that  main  work  that  I  went  through  the  noblemen 
and  barons  and  made  every  one  sensible  of  that 
impression.'  ^  *  He  was  incomparably  the  ablest 
man  of  us  all  for  all  things,'  says  Baillie  ;  the  only 
difficulty  was  whether  the  Moderator  might  be  a 
disputer,   for   much   disputing   was   expected   and 

•  Diary,  p.  400. 
M 


178     ALEXANDER  HENDERSGN 

they  could  not  afford  to  close  Henderson's  mouth. 
But  there  was  no  other  who  had  the  parts  needed, 
and  Henderson  was  elected.  With  equal  un- 
animity Wariston  was  chosen  clerk. 

On  the  29th  the  commissioner  rose  and  quitted 
the  Assembly,  declaring  that  nothing  done  there 
should  be  of  any  force  to  bind  any  subject,  and 
discharging  the  court  from  proceeding  further  on 
pain  of  treason.  The  point  at  which  the  rupture 
occurred  was  when  the  Moderator  put  the  question 
whether  the  Assembly  found  themselves  competent 
judges  of  the  pretended  bishops  notwithstanding 
their  declinator  ?  Hamilton  then  asked  the  clerk 
to  read  the  king's  message  promising  the  various 
reforms,  and  went  on  to  say  he  had  full  commission 
for  the  rectifying  of  all  the  abuse  of  the  bishop's 
office  '  so  far  as  that  sort  of  government  may  still 
remain  in  the  kirk  as  government  not  contrary 
to  the  word  of  God.'  But  he  could  give  no  consent 
to  anything  that  was  there  done,  alleging  as  his 
reason  that  the  two  papers  of  private  Instructions, 
which  he  there  and  then  produced,  showed  that 
only  Covenanters  had  been  chosen  members,  that 
lay  elders  had  been  chosen,  and  that  ministers  had 
been  chosen  by  the  votes  of  lay  elders  '  contrary  to 
the  practice  of  all  former  times  and  positive  laws 
of  this  kingdom,  therefore  I  can  acknowledge 
nothing  to  be  here  done  by  the  vote  of  such  men.' 
The  critical  moment  had  come  and  Henderson  rose 
to  the  great  occasion.  He  answered  in  language 
which  drew  from  the  commissioner  himself  the 
words,  '  Sir,  ye  have  spoken  as  a  good  Christian 
and  dutiful  subject.'  '  It  hath  been,'  he  said, 
'  the  glory  of  the  Reformed  Churches,  and  we 
account  it  our  glory  after  a  special  manner  to  give 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     179 

unto  kings  and  Christian  magistrates  what  belongs 
unto  their  places  ;  next  to  piety  towards  God  we 
are  obliged  unto  loyalty  and  obedience  to  our  king. 
There  is  nothing  due  unto  kings  and  princes  in 
matter  ecclesiastical  which  I  trust  by  this  Assembly 
shall  be  denied  unto  our  king.'  He  then 
enumerated  the  powers  of  Christian  kings  in 
relation  to  the  Church,  and  concluded  thus  :  *  The 
Christian  magistrate  hath  power  to  convoke 
Assemblies  when  they  find  that  the  urgent  affairs 
of  the  kirk  do  call  for  them  ;  and  in  Assemblies 
when  they  are  convened  his  power  is  great  and  his 
power  ought  to  be  heard  .  .  .  and  we  heartily 
acknowledge  that  your  Grace,  as  his  Majesty's 
high  commissioner  and  representing  his  Majesty's 
royal  person,  has  a  chief  place  in  this  reverend 
and  honourable  Assembly.  What  is  Caesar's  and 
what  is  ours  let  it  be  given  to  Caesar,  but  let  the 
God  by  whom  kings  reign  have  His  own  place  and 
prerogative.'  As  to  Hamilton's  objections  against 
the  mode  of  election  and  against  lay  elders, 
Henderson  replied  that  '  the  Assembly  was  indicted 
by  his  Majesty  and  consisted  of  such  members 
regularly  authorised  as  by  the  acts  and  practice  in 
former  times  had  right  to  represent  the  Church.' 
He  held  it  therefore  to  be  a  free  Assembly,  and  he 
trusted  that  everything  in  it  would  be  conducted 
according  to  the  law  of  God  and  the  light  of  reason. 
When  the  commissioner  had  retired  he  continued 
in  these  words  :  '  All  that  are  here  know  the 
reasons  of  the  meeting  of  this  Assembly,  and  albeit 
we  have  acknowledged  the  power  of  Christian  kings 
for  convening  of  Assemblies  and  their  power  in 
Assemblies,  yet  that  may  not  derogate  from  Christ's 
right ;  for  He  has  given  divine  warrants  to  convoke 


180     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Assemblies  whether  magistrates  consent  or  not ; 
therefore  seeing  we  perceive  men  to  be  so  zealous 
of  their  masters'  commands,  have  we  not  also  good 
reason  to  be  zealous  toward  our  Lord  and  to 
maintain  the  liberties  and  privileges  of  His  kingdom  ? 
Ye  all  know  that  the  work  in  hand  has  had  many 
difficulties,  and  God  has  borne  us  through  them 
all  to  this  day  ;  therefore  it  becometh  us  not  to  be 
discouraged  by  anything  that  has  intervened,  but 
rather  to  double  our  courage  when  we  seem  to  be 
deprived  of  human  authority.' 

It  has  been  said,  and  it  is  true  in  a  sense,  that 
when  the  final  break  came  the  two  parties  had 
approached  very  near  each  other.  Before  the 
Assembly  met,  Charles  had  surrendered  all  the 
original  objects  of  contention.  Liturgy  and  Canons, 
Articles  of  Perth,  and  irresponsible  episcopacy  had 
been  given  up.  Between  moderate  episcopacy 
responsible  to  Assemblies  and  direct  government 
by  the  Assemblies  themselves  the  difference  may 
be  thought  not  to  have  been  very  great.  ^  But 
both  sides  felt  that  beneath  and  behind  these 
there  were  greater  matters  on  which  they  were  far 
apart.  Charles  believed  that  monarchy  itself  as 
he  understood  it  was  challenged.  '  I  know  well,' 
said  Hamilton,  expressing  the  view  they  both  held, 
'  it  is  chiefly  monarchy  which  is  intended  by  them 
to  be  destroyed.'  And  he  described  his  task  as 
being  '  to  defend  royal  authority  and  monarchical 
government  already  established,  under  which  I 
do  conceive  episcopacy  to  be  comprehended.' 
Here  is  James's  absurd  doctrine,  '  No  bishop  no 
king,'  already  costing  his  son  dear.  Hamilton's 
language  to  the  Assembly  was  :    '  I  stand  to  the 

1  Gardiuer,  History  of  England,  viii.  p.  375. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     181 

king's  prerogative  as  supreme  judge  over  all  causes 
civil  and  ecclesiastical.'  Confronting  this  claim 
Henderson  claimed  for  the  Church  the  right  to 
have  a  mind  of  her  own  and  freedom  to  follow  her 
own  will  in  the  ordering  of  her  own  affairs.  That 
this  was  the  crux  in  this  very  matter  of  the  bishops 
is  clear  :  the  Church's  real  complaint  was  not  so 
much  that  Charles  had  appointed  bishops,  but  that 
he  had  chosen  as  bishops  men  who  had  served  and 
who  would  serve  as  instruments  in  imposing  his 
will  and  his  religious  practices  upon  an  unwilling 
Church.  And  so  Henderson  refused  to  dissolve  the 
Assembly  at  the  royal  command;  he  disregarded 
the  charge  of  treason,  and  the  Assembly  proceeded 
with  its  work  in  virtue  of  its  own  inherent  right. 

That  was  one  of  the  great  moments  of  history. 
'  The  moment  at  which  Henderson  refused  to 
dissolve  the  Assembly  at  the  demand  of  the  king's 
Commissary,'  says  Leopold  von  Ranke,  '  however 
widely  the  circumstances  may  differ  in  other 
respects,  may  well  be  compared  with  the  first 
steps  by  which  a  century  and  a  half  later  the 
newly-created  French  National  Assembly  for  the 
first  time  withstood  the  commands  of  its  king.'  ^ 
And  it  was  a  supremely  testing  moment  for 
Henderson.  The  eyes  of  the  great  assemblage 
were  fixed  upon  him  as  he  confronted  the  represen- 
tative of  royal  power,  knowing  well  what  his  refusal 
might  cost.  There  he  stood,  a  man  not  imposing 
in  outward  appearance,  his  stature  under  middle 
height,  his  countenance  pensive  and  careworn ; 
dignified,  courteous,  courageous.  And  there  he 
stands  in  history,  with  the  eyes  upon  him  of  all 
men  who  love  liberty,  honouring  him  for  the  blow 

'  Hi^ory  of  England,  ii.  p.  IIQ. 


182     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

he  struck  in  its  cause,  and  recognising  that  in  this 
man  there  is  something  of  heroic  strain. 

Henderson's  act  spelt  revolution.  The  revolution 
took  the  form  it  did  because  religion  was  the  central 
force  in  the  national  life,  and  because  the  attack 
was  made  on  religion.  To  preserve  her  Reforma- 
tion faith  and  worship,  Scotland  had  to  use  the 
rough  methods  of  revolution.  The  Assembly  sat 
till  20th  December.  It  passed  Acts  declaring  the 
six  Assemblies  from  1606  till  1618  unlawful ;  con- 
demning the  Sei-vice  Book,  Book  of  Canons,  and 
Court  of  High  Commission ;  declaring  episcopacy 
to  be  abjured  and  removed  out  of  the  kirk  ;  annul- 
ling the  Five  Articles  of  Perth;  restoring  Presby- 
terian government  and  dealing  with  a  variety  of 
matters  under  the  Presbyterian  constitution  thus 
restored.  These  were  undoubtedly  the  acts  of  a 
revolutionary  Assembly.  Episcopacy  had  been 
set  up  in  James's  time  by  Acts  of  Parliament 
ratifying  Acts  of  Assembly,  the  Perth  Articles 
also  had  been  ratified  by  Parliament.  This 
Assembly  therefore  claimed  to  overturn  the  law  of 
the  land  as  if  it  were  itself  a  sovereign  parliament. 
Its  justification — its  sole  but  sufficient  justification 
— was  that  if  Scotland  were  to  preserve  her  liberties 
in  Church  or  in  State,  invaded  by  two  arbitrary 
kings,  there  was  no  other  way  open  but  the  way  of 
revolution :  every  other  had  been  tried,  and  failed. 
But  a  revolutionary  spirit  once  awakened  generally 
carries  men  further  than  they  foresee  or  at  first 
intend.  Not  only  was  the  ecclesiastical  fabric 
reared  by  the  absolutism  of  James  and  Charles 
swept  away,  the  movement  passed  on  into  the 
political  sphere  and  produced  highly  important 
changes  there.     It  did  not  spend  itself  even  in 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     183 

Scotland.  It  kindled  into  flame  the  smouldering 
fires  of  discontent  in  England,  and  the  revolution 
in  England  destroyed  absolute  monarchy. 

A  revolution,  however,  though  it  may  be  amply 
justified,  is  not  the  time  when  individual  rights  are 
tenderly  considered  or  nicely  adjusted.     There  is 
some  reason  to  think  that  the  bishops  themselves 
received    less    than    justice    from    the    Assembly. 
Eight  prelates  were  deposed  and  excommunicated, 
the  other  six  were  deposed.     All  that  might  have 
been    perfectly   fair   had   it   proceeded   on   proper 
gromids.     But  the   sentences   pronounced  against 
them   show  that  they   were  found  guilty  among 
other  things  '  specially  for  receiving  consecration 
to  the  office  of  episcopacy.'     Episcopacy,  however, 
had  been  established  by  the  law  of  the  land  since 
1612,  and  not  only  the  bishops  but  many  of  the 
ministers  in  that  Assembly  had  accepted  office  and 
been  ordained  in  the  Church  so  constituted.     To 
sentence  her  ministers  for  contumacy,   erroneous 
doctrine,  or  immoral  life  was  entirely  within  the 
competence  of  the  Assembly  ;    but  to  punish  and 
degrade  men  for  accepting  the  office  of  bishop  in 
such   circumstances   was   beyond   its   competence. 
Even  in   regard  to   the  charges  of  immorality  it 
is  impossible  to  feel  sure  that  any  fair  and  judicial 
inquiry  was  made.     The  evidence  available  does 
not  enable  us  to  speak  with  certainty.     Henderson's 
statement  from  the  chair  undoubtedly  was,  *  Neither 
have  they  judged  according  to  rumours  or  reports 
nor    yet    by   their   private    knowledge,    but    have 
proceeded    according    to    things    that    have    been 
clearly    proved.'     And   Hamilton's   admissions   in 
his  well-known  letter  to  the  king  go  a  long  way  to 
show  that  the  offences  charged  against  the  prelates 


184     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

were  notorious.  On  the  other  hand,  Baillie's 
narrative  strongly  suggests  the  opposite.  He 
admits  some  charges  were  '  not  sufficiently  proven,' 
others  were  only  '  very  probable.'  Yet  deposition 
was  the  fate  of  every  one,  in  many  cases  followed 
by  the  terrible  sentence  of  excommunication.  It 
was  on  13th  December  that  the  proceedings  of  the 
Assembly  reached  their  most  solemn  moment. 
The  dread  sentences  of  deposition  and  excommunica- 
tion were  pronounced,  in  presence  of  a  hushed 
multitude,  by  Henderson  after  a  sermon  still  known 
as  '  The  Bishops'  Doom.'  The  act  cannot  be 
defended  as  a  piece  of  ecclesiastical  discipline,  at 
least  on  all  the  grounds  on  which  it  professed  to  be 
based,  but  it  justified  itself  to  the  people  of  Scotland 
as  a  well-deserved  punishment  on  a  body  of  men 
who  had  proved  traitors  to  the  highest  interests 
of  the  national  Church.  Along  with  the  bishops 
many  clerical  offenders  of  humbler  rank  were  also 
dealt  with.  The  liberty  of  the  press  received  short 
shrift  from  the  Assembly.  As  if  it  were  a  parlia- 
ment charged  with  the  defence  of  the  realm,  it 
inhibited  '  all  printers  within  this  kingdom  '  from 
printing  any  of  the  Acts  or  proceedings  of  the 
Assembly,  any  confession  of  faith,  any  protesta- 
tions, '  or  any  other  treatise  whatsoever  which 
may  concern  the  kirk  of  Scotland,  without  warrant 
from  the  Clerk  of  the  Assembly.'  '  Whereunto 
also,'  the  Act  modestly  concludes,  *  we  are  con- 
fident the  honourable  judges  of  this  land  will  con- 
tribute their  civil  authority ' ! 

There  is  one  singular  omission  in  the  doings  of 
this  Assembly.  It  cast  out  episcopacy  from  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  and  it  was  allowed  to  do  that 
without  a  single  word  from  any  champion  of  the 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     185 

system   of   church   government    which    had    been 
estabhshed  for  nearly  a  generation.     The  case  for 
episcopacy   was   allowed   to  go   by   default.     The 
fortress  fell  without  one  blow  struck  in  its  defence. 
That  was  not  the  intention  of  the  king  or  his  party. 
The  commissioner  ordered  the  Lord  Advocate  to 
attend  him  at  Glasgow  to  defend  episcopacy  in  the 
Assembly,  and  high  words  passed  between  them 
when  Hope  refused.     Sir  Lewis  Stewart  went  in 
Hope's  place.     Hamilton  told  the  king  his  chief 
purpose    would     be    to    endeavour    to     preserve 
episcopacy.     Tliere  were  champions  who  were  or 
who,  if  they  chose,  might  be  members  of  Assembly 
and  to  whom  the  commissioner  looked  to  fight  his 
battle.     The   Aberdeen   doctors   were   among   the 
most  learned  men  in  the  Church,  and  they  had 
recently,  as  they  believed,  vanquished  Henderson 
in  argument.     Hamilton,  we  are  told,^  *  was  very 
earnest  with  them  to  have  come  to  Glasgow  to  the 
Assembly,  finding  them  the  only  persons  then  in 
Scotland  fit  for  undertaking  the  defence  of  episco- 
pacy ' :   he  was  to  have  sent  one  of  his  coaches  to 
the  north  for  them.     The  other  side  also  expected 
serious  debates  and  prepared  for  them.     We  have 
seen  that  they  requested  their  friends  in  the  pres- 
byteries to  send  their  ablest  men  to  argue  the 
question.      Their  Protestation  of  18th  December 
expressly  states  this  was  to  meet  '  the  doctors  of 
Aberdeen  who  were  expected  there.'     It  is  amazing 
to  read  that  the  Aberdeen  doctors  were  extremely 
averse  to  going  :    the  road,  it  seems,  always  bad 
for  a  coach,  was  not  passable  in  winter !     It  is  little 
to  the  point  that  they  may  have  believed  the  cause 
was  already  lost,  and  they  would  find  themselves  a 

'  Burnet,  Memoirt  of  the  Duket  of  Hamilton  (1677),  p.  84, 


186     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

hopeless  minority  in  the  Assembly.     All  the  more 
need  for  courageous  men  not  afraid  to  argue  their 
case    before    their    countrymen.     That    case    had 
never    yet    been    argued.     Episcopacy    had    been 
imposed   on   Scotland   by   force,    manoeuvre   and 
bribe,  and  that  policy  had  failed  :    if  an  attempt 
were  now  made  to  present  the  case  for  the  moderate 
episcopacy   Charles   was   offering,   who   could   tell 
what  the  result  might  even  yet  be  ?     The  Assembly 
expected   them ;    '  if  he   (the   commissioner)    had 
brought    his    divines    to    dispute,'    says    Baillie,^ 
'and  upholden  their  courage  by  his  countenance, 
readily  the  most  part  might  have  been  moved  to 
use  a  greater  temper  than  ever  thereafter  can  be 
hoped  for ;    or  if  in  this  his  hopes  had  miscarried 
he  might  have  protested  or  risen  when  that  occasion 
offered.'     In  other  words,  the  last  hope— if  there 
was  still  hope — of  a  compromise  was  extinguished 
by  their  failure  to  appear  and  support  their  cause. 
To  shirk  the  Assembly  and  keep  silent  when  events 
so  tremendous  were  afoot  says  little  for  the  zeal 
of   the   episcopal  party  for  king  or  church,  and 
contrasts    poorly   with   the    fearless    courage    and 
unremitting  labours  of  the  leaders  on  the  other  side. 
Since  the  beginning  of  this  business  Charles's  cause 
had  not  found  either  statesmen  or  churchmen  who 
could  handle  it  with  the  skill  or  serve  it  with  the 
devotion  which  the  hour  demanded. 

The  dissolution  of  the  Assembly  by  Hamilton 
left  its  ranks  unthinned.  Only  three  elders  and 
two  ministers  withdrew;  on  the  other  hand  it 
received  notable  accessions.  Argyll  and  seven 
other  privy  councillors  refused  to  follow  Hamilton, 
and    threw    in    their   lot    with    the    Church.     On 

I  lijtillie's  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  143. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     187 

28th  November,  the  day  before  the  commissioner 
quitted  the  Assembly,  a  letter  was  sent  to  the  king 
in  the  name  of  the  Council,  approving  of  the  manner 
in    which    he    had    discharged    his    duties    at    the 
Assembly.     The  letter  was  not  so  spontaneous  a 
document   as    it   appears   to    be.     Hamilton   was 
anxious  to  stand  well  with  the  king,  and  himself 
suggested    it.     '  With   some   art   I   procured   this 
letter  from  them,'  he  aximits.     In  anticipation  of 
what  was  soon  to  happen,  he  told  the  Council  a 
Proclamation  would  be  made  next  day  dissolving 
the  Assembly.     He  did  not  produce  and  read  it. 
*  I  durst  not  present  it  to  them  for  fear  of  a  refusal,' 
he  told  the  king  :    next  morning  he  got  a  number 
of  them  to  sign  it,  and  it  was  read  at  the  Cross. 
On  18th  December  the  Council  issued  fromHolyrood 
another    Proclamation    declaring    null    and    void 
the  whole  Acts  of  the  Assembly.     But  the  most 
valuable  piece  of  evidence  we  have  of  those  days  is 
a  private   and   extraordinarily  candid  letter  from 
Hamilton  to  Charles  written  on  27th  November. 
It  is  an  outburst  of  strong  feeling  :    he  is  in  the 
depths    of   depression.     His    mission    in    Scotland 
has  proved  a  failure — '  all  hath  been  to  no  purpose, 
I  have  missed  my  end.'     He  had  been  set  an  im- 
possible task  with  authority  so  limited  and  opponents 
so  unbending.     But  he  was  no  great  diplomatist, 
and  the  sequel  was  soon  to  show  he  was  no  greater 
a  soldier.     Meantime  in  the  first  bitterness  of  his 
defeat  he  blames  everybody  for  the  debacle.     First 
he  lashes  the  bishops  :    *  The  truth  is  this  action 
of  theirs  is   not   justifiable    by   the   laws   of  this 
kingdom  :    their  pride   was  great  but  their  folly 
greater ;    for  if  they   had  gone   right  about  this 
work  nothing  was  more  easy  than  to  have  effected 


188     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

what  was  aimed  at.'  But  worse  follows  :  '  Some 
of  them  have  not  been  of  the  best  lives,'  and  he 
names  four ;  '  too  many  of  them  inclined  to 
simony ' ;  as  for  Ross,  *  the  most  hated  of  all  and 
generally  by  all  there  are  few  personal  faults  laid 
to  his  charge  more  than  ambition.'  Then  he 
turns  to  the  Privy  Council,  praising  and  blaming 
in  turn.  Argyll's  career  he  shrewdly  enough  fore- 
casts ;  '  Truly,  Sir,  he  takes  it  upon  him  :  he  must 
be  well  looked  to,  for  it  fears  me  he  will  prove  the 
dangerousest  man  in  this  State.'  The  Covenanters 
he  disposes  of  at  a  stroke.  '  I  shall  say  only  this 
in  general,  they  may  all  be  placed  in  one  roll  as 
they  now  stand  .  .  .  none  more  vainly  foolish  than 
Montrose.' 

Having  failed  in  diplomacy,  Hamilton  char- 
acteristically rushes  off  to  war — ^that  is  the  way, 
he  cries,  to  crush  these  insolent  people.  It  is  not 
only  the  real  way  but  it  will  be  easy  ;  '  I  am 
confident  your  Majesty  will  not  find  it  a  work  of 
long  time  nor  of  great  difficulty.'  Alas  !  Hamilton 
had  not  long  tried  his  hand  at  fighting  these 
insolent  people  when  he  found  that  also  a  tough 
business,  and  was  crying  out  that  diplomacy  was 
the  true  way. 

Up  till  this  time  Henderson  was  still  minister 
at  Leuchars.  His  name  appears  as  such  in  the  list 
of  members  of  the  Glasgow  Assembly.  But  he  had 
now  become  too  great  a  power  in  Church  and  in 
State  to  be  permitted  any  longer  to  live  in  that 
comer  of  the  land.  St.  Andrews  and  Edinburgh 
both  applied  to  the  Assembly  to  have  him  appointed 
one  of  their  ministers.  He  was  no  ambitious 
churchman,  he  suffered  from  a  '  bashfulness  which 
he  found  in  himself,'  and  pleaded  to  be  allowed 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     189 

to  remain  at  Leuchars.  The  Assembly  decided 
to  remove  him  to  the  High  Church  of  Edinburgh.^ 
He  bowed  to  the  decision,  but  craved  that  if  ill- 
health  should  come,  as  he  appears  to  have  expected, 
he  might  have  liberty  to  return  to  some  private 
place.'  2  The  sequel  is  told  in  the  words  of  the 
Edinburgh  Town  Council  Records  of  2nd  January 
1639  :  '  Whereas  the  Council  having  divers  times 
before  aimed  to  have  Mr.  Alexr.  Henryson  presently 
minister  at  Leuchars  in  Fife  transplanted  to  the 
cure  of  a  church  within  this  burgh,  and  the  com- 
missioners of  last  General  Assembly  held  at  Glasgow 
in  their  24th  session  the  18th  of  December  last, 
having  not  only  thought  it  necessary  to  transplant 
him  to  the  church  of  Edinburgh  but  also  did  by 
virtue  of  an  act  of  the  date  foresaid  transplant  the 
said  Mr.  Alexr.  from  the  said  church  of  Leuchars 
to  the  said  church  of  Edinburgh.  ...  In  con- 
sideration of  all  which  the  said  provost,  baillies  and 
council,  finding  both  the  places  of  the  church  of 
this  burgh  to  be  vacant  by  deprivation  of  Mr. 
James  Hanna  and  Mr.  Alexander  Thomson,  as  an 

'  The  Minutes  of  the  Synod  of  Fife  (Seleetioru,  Abbotsford  Club, 
p.  210)  bear  that  he  was  '  tr.  to  Edinburgh,  Nov.  1638.'  This  evidently 
refers  to  the  action  of  the  Glasgow  Assembly,  but  the  decision  was  not 
taken  till  18th  December. 

'  It  is  only  too  evident  from  repeated  references  to  the  subject  that 
for  many  years  Henderson  suffered  from  poor  health.  This  was  not 
improbably  a  result  of  his  long  residence  at  Leuchars.  The  name 
Leucharx  is  ominous :  it  is  said  to  be  a  Celtic  word  meaning  rushes  or  a 
wet  flat  abounding  with  rushes.  Owing  to  the  windings  of  the  river 
Eden,  many  acres  were  in  Henderson's  time  covered  with  coarse  grass 
and  rushes,  and  other  parts  with  stagnant  water  which  even  in  summer 
never  dried  up.  Families  living  in  the  neighbourhood  were  subject  in 
■pring  and  autumn  to  intermitting  fevers.  Many  years  later  a  long 
drain  was  cut  which  carried  off  the  water  from  the  flat  ground,  with  the 
result  that  the  old  diseases  with  their  said  train  of  ailments  completely 
disappeared.     See  old  Statistical  Account  of  Scotland,  vol.  xviii.  p.  585. 


190  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

act  of  their  deprivation  produced  this  day  and 
dated  the  first  of  this  instant  at  more  length  bears, 
And  understanding  of  the  Hterature,  abihty  and 
quahfications  of  the  said  Mr.  Alexander,  all  in  one 
voice  Elected,  nominated  and  presented.  And  by 
these  presents  elect,  nominate  and  present  the  said 
Mr.  Alexr.  to  one  of  the  said  vacant  places  of  the 
said  great  church  and  to  the  stipend  appointed 
thereto.'  ^ 

From  this  time  onwards  Henderson  was  minister 
of  the  great  church  of  St.  Giles. 

7.    DEFENCE   IN    ARMS  :    A    PACIFICATION    WITHOUT 
PEACE  :    THE    KING   AND   HENDERSON    MEET 

March — June  1689 
War  was  now  expected  by  both  sides  ;  to  that 
tragical  pass  had  things  come.  Scarcely  eighteen 
months  before  some  '  serving  maids  '  had  raised 
an  outcry  in  a  church,  and  now  king  and  subjects 
were  standing  on  the  brink  of  civil  war.  Charles 
thought  his  task  would  be  an  easy  one.  Wentworth 
in  July  and  Hamilton  in  November  had  both  told 
him  so.  They  both  underestimated  the  Scottish 
power  of  resistance,  but  their  advice  chimed  with 
the  king's  feelings  and  was  greedily  accepted.  He 
persisted  in  hugging  the  illusion  that  he  had  only 
to  crush  a  group  of  ill-conditioned  mutinous  nobles 
and  ministers,  and  that  behind  them  he  would  find 
the  real  Scottish  people  profoundly  attached  to  his 
person  and  his  policy.  Laud,  as  a  pattern  of 
moderation,    was    shocked     at     the    violence    of 

*  I  am  indebted  for  access  to  the  Town  Records  to  the  courtesy  of 
Sir  Thomas  Hunter,  lately  Town  Clerk  of  Edinburgh,  and  to  Mr. 
Jarvis  of  the  Town  Clerk's  department  for  willing  help  in  making 
searches. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     191 

Henderson  and  the  Assembly.  '  I  find  in  the 
dean's  (Balcanqual's)  letter,'  he  wrote  to  Hamilton, 
'  that  Mr.  Alexr.  Henderson,  who  went  all  this 
while  for  a  quiet  and  well-spirited  man,  hath 
showed  himself  a  most  violent  and  most  passionate 
man  and  a  moderator  without  moderation.  Truly, 
my  Lord,  never  did  I  see  any  man  of  that  humour 
yet,  but  he  was  deep  dyed  in  some  violence  or  other, 
and  it  would  have  been  a  wonder  to  me  if  Henderson 
had  held  free.'  Both  he  and  Went  worth  thought 
the  example  of  these  insolent  Scots  would  be  bad 
for  England,  and  nothing  was  to  be  thought  of  but 
crushing  them  without  more  ado.  '  Should  these 
rude  spirits,'  wrote  Went  worth  to  Laud,  '  carry  it 
thus  from  the  king's  humour  to  their  own  churlish 
wills  it  would  have  a  most  fearful  operation,  I  fear, 
as  well  upon  England  as  themselves  .  .  .  for  if  he 
master  not  them,  and  this  affair  tending  so  much 
and  visibly  to  the  tranquillity  and  peace  of  his 
kingdoms,  to  the  honour  of  Almighty  God,  I  shall 
be  to  seek  for  any  probable  judgment  what  is 
next  like  to  befall  us.'  ^  Laud  of  course  agreed  : 
what  Scotland  needed  was  a  taste  of  the  policy  of 
Thorough.  '  I  wholly  agree  with  you  that  since  it  is 
come  to  this  height,  if  his  Majesty  do  not  master 
them  and  bring  them  under  obedience,  the  first 
error  will  be  so  far  seconded  with  a  greater  as  that 
the  consequences  may  be  God  knows  what,  such  I 
am  sure  as  I  hold  not  fit  to  prognosticate.'  ^ 

Accordingly  when  the  Church's  Supplication 
was  presented  to  the  king  in  January,  craving  his 
ratification  of  the  Acts  of  Assembly,  the  king's 
answer  was  a  letter  to  his  English  nobles  on  the 
26th  of.  that  month,  requiring  them  to  attend  his 

»  Strafford  LetUrt,  ii.  p.  250.  «  Ibid.,  p.  2«6. 


192     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

royal  standard  at  York  on  1st  April.  He  informed 
them  that  there  were  a  '  few  ill  and  traitorously 
affected  persons  '  in  Scotland  whose  aim  was  '  to 
shake  off  all  monarchical  government ' ;  they  had 
raised  considerable  forces,  and  he  was  resolved  to 
make  '  resistance  against  any  invasion  that  might 
happen.' 

He  directed  that  an  army  of  horse  and  foot 
be  forthwith  levied,  and  requested  the  nobles  to 
certify  within  fifteen  days  what  assistance  he  might 
expect  from  them.  Three  days  later  (29th  January) 
the  Privy  Council  at  Edinburgh  received  a  letter 
in  which  the  king  significantly  stated,  *  We 
intend  to  repair  in  person  to  York  about  Easter 
next  that  we  may  be  the  more  near  to  that 
our  kingdom  for  accommodating  our  affairs  there 
in  a  fair  manner.'  Whatever  advice  Charles  re- 
ceived elsewhere,  his  Scottish  people,  official  and 
unofficial,  spoke  with  one  voice  imploring  him  not  to 
plunge  into  civil  war.  On  1st  March  the  Council 
forwarded  to  him  a  petition  from  many  noblemen, 
barons  and  others  offering  to  justify  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  insurgent  party,  and  at  the  same  time 
they  entreated  him  to  resolve  upon  some  such 
course  as  without  force  of  arms  would  lead  to  a 
settlement.^  The  king  replied  in  language  of 
ominous  vagueness,  '  We  expect  that  you,  as  you 
are  honoured  by  us  to  be  first  in  place,  will  strive 
to  go  before  others  by  your  good  example  in 
advancing  of  our  service.'  Preparations  for  war 
went  on  upon  both  sides  of  the  border,  but  the 
Council  made  one  more  very  earnest  attempt  to 
intervene.  War  had  indeed  already  begun  when 
on  11th  April  the  Privy  Council  and  the  judges 

^  Register  of  Privy  Council  {2nd  series),  vii.  p.  116. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     193 

of  the  Court  of  Session  joined  in  this  resolution  : 
Having  taken  to  their  consideration  the  deplorable 
and  calamitous  estate  of  this  kirk  and  kingdom, 
and  understanding  that  one  of  the  greatest  causes 
thereof  arises  from  His  Majesty's  offence  taken 
against  the  later  proceedings  within  the  same, 
and  they  being  fully  persuaded  that  His  Majesty 
will  be  pleased  to  hear  of  them  the  simple  ti-uth  .  .  . 
therefore  they  think  it  necessary  and  incumbent 
to  them  .  .  .  for  preventing  the  imminent  dangers 
hanging  over  this  kingdom  that  they  all  unani- 
mously should  present  themselves  to  his  sacred 
Majesty  and  falling  down  at  his  royal  feet  deprecate 
His  Majesty's  wrath  against  his  subjects. 

In  the  previous  month  of  March  the  judges 
themselves  wrote  a  letter  which  ought  by  its  grave 
words  to  have  brought  reflection  to  the  mind  even 
of  so  foolish  a  man  as  Charles.  They  said  they 
were  overjoyed  in  expectation  that  the  doubts  in 
religious  worship  and  kirk  government  should  have 
l)een  clearly  settled,  and  '  although  the  greater 
part  of  your  people  be  well  pleased  with  the  con- 
stitutions therein  concluded,  yet  your  Majesty's 
displeasure  against  that  Assembly  and  the  pro- 
ceedings thereof,  and  your  expressed  dislike  of 
those  who  adhere  to  the  same,  and  the  fearful 
consequences  therefrom  likely  to  ensue  have  turned 
all  the  hopes  of  comfort  which  we  expected  into 
sorrows  and  tears.  .  .  .  Your  Majesty  may  be 
pleased  to  pardon  us  to  aver  that  in  this  they  are 
but  bad  counsellors  and  no  better  patriots  who  will 
advise  your  Majesty  to  add  oil  and  fuel  to  the  fire. 
Violence  and  arms  are  placed  among  desperate 
remedies  proving  oftener  worse  than  the  disease. 
We  must  on  the  knees  of  our  hearts  supplicate  your 

N 


194     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

sacred  Majesty  to  be  pleased  to  forbear  all  purpose 
of  war.' 

The  Covenanters  themselves  had  lost  no  time 
after  the  king's  summons  to  his  nobles  on  26th 
January  in  carrying  their  appeal  from  the  king  to 
the  people  of  England.  They  published  on  4th 
February  '  An  Information  to  all  good  Christians 
within  the  kingdom  of  England  from  the  noblemen, 
barons,  burghs,  ministers  and  commons  of  the 
kingdom  of  Scotland,  for  vindication  of  their 
intentions  and  actions  from  the  imjust  calumnies 
of  their  enemies.'  This  was  a  skilful  document,  and 
was  widely  circulated  in  England.  It  declared  that 
they  had  never  had  the  least  intention  to  cast  off 
their  dutiful  obedience  to  the  king's  lawful  authority, 
nor  had  they  any  design  to  invade  England.  The 
innovations  in  religion  that  had  caused  all  the 
trouble  were  the  work  of  churchmen  of  the  greatest 
power  in  England,  who  had  tried  to  bring  about 
conformity  with  Rome,  first  in  the  Church  of 
England  and  then  in  that  of  Scotland.  Professed 
papists  had  been  intrusted  with  the  chief  posts 
in  the  armies  now  preparing  to  invade  Scotland. 
(The  Earl  of  Arundel,  who  had  been  appointed  to 
the  chief  command,  was  the  person  here  meant.) 
They  regretted  this  attempt  to  raise  up  the  old 
national  bloodshed  and  quarrels  which  had  happily 
passed  away — all  about  a  matter  of  Church  govern- 
ment. Their  Church  at  the  Reformation  had 
abjured  episcopacy,  but  that  '  cannot  reasonably 
offend  any  other  State  or  Church  who  may  be  ruled 
by  their  own  laws  and  warrant.'  Finally  they 
suggested  that  if  the  English  Parliament  were 
convened  and  the  matter  faithfully  represented  to 
them,  they  would  without  doubt  approve  of  all 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     195 

their  proceedings.  It  was  a  bold  thing  to  use 
language  which  seemed  to  interfere  in  the  internal 
affairs  of  another  nation,  but  the  Scots  knew  their 
ground.  The  English  people,  who  had  for  years 
been  restive  under  Laud's  tyranny  and  had  not  seen 
a  Parliament  of  their  own  since  1629,  did  not  resent 
this  appeal,  on  the  contrary  it  made  a  deep  and 
favourable  impression  on  them.  Charles  was 
annoyed  beyond  measure.  On  27th  February  he 
issued  a  reply  to  the  '  seditious  pamphlet '  :  a 
proclamation  in  which  he  foolishly  railed  at  the 
Covenanters  as  being  *  many  of  them  men  of 
broken  fortunes.'  The  question  now,  he  said,  was 
not  whether  episcopacy  should  continue  but 
'  whether  he  were  king  or  not.'  This  in  turn  was 
answered  by  a  Remonstrance  sent  out  on  22nd 
March,  written  by  Henderson,  the  statesman  of  the 
party  and  the  author  in  whole  or  in  part  of  all  their 
public  documents.  His  pen  was  also  invoked  at 
this  time  to  argue  the  question  of  the  lawfulness 
of  taking  up  arms  against  the  king.  Charles  was 
never  weary  of  denouncing  the  Covenanters  as 
deep-dyed  traitors  and  rebels  :  his  proclamation 
was  speedily  followed  by  an  elaborate  document 
called  The  Large  Declaration,  intended  to  show  his 
own  clemency  and  their  hypocrisy  and  depravity. 
The  writer  of  it  was  a  Scotsman,  Dr.  Balcanquhal, 
who  acted  as  Hamilton's  chaplain  at  Glasgow  and 
was  shortly  afterwards  appointed  Dean  of  Durham. 
He  tells  the  story  of  the  recent  events  '  with  an 
obliquity  of  statement  which  passes  the  licence  even 
of  the  theological  polemic'  ^  Yet  it  is  the  fact  that 
those  so-called  traitors  were  at  that  very  time,  many 
of  them,  in  the  gravest  doubt  whether  it  was  lawful 

'  Hume  Brown,  History  0/  Scot f and,  ii.  p.  311. 


196     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

for  subjects  in  any  circumstances  to  take  up  arms 
against  their  king.  '  No  man,'  says  Baillie, '  doubted 
more  of  this  than  myself ;  yea,  at  my  subscribing 
of  the  Covenant  I  did  not  dissemble  my  contrary 
resolution.'  ^  Charles's  conduct  compelled  them 
to  re-examine  the  question.  '  It  was  laid  on  Mr. 
Henderson,  our  best  penman,  to  draw  up  somewhat 
for  the  common  view.'  The  result  was  a  paper 
entitled  '  Instructions  for  Defensive  Arms.' 
Henderson's  creed  was  a  more  robust  and  en- 
lightened one  than  Baillie's,  and  he  did  not  shrink 
from  applying  it  in  the  crisis  that  had  now  arisen. 
His  arguments  show  that  he  had  sat  at  the  feet  of 
a  much  greater  teacher  than  Baillie's,  the  celebrated 
George  Buchanan.  Buchanan's  tract  De  Jure 
Regni  was  familiar  to  educated  men  in  Scotland 
and  all  over  Europe,  and  had  exercised  great 
influence  in  the  development  of  political  thought. 
But  Henderson's  views  were  in  agreement  not  only 
with  those  of  Buchanan  and  Knox,  but  with  other 
Protestant  teachers  like  Calvin,  and  with  many 
distinguished  schoolmen  and  doctors  of  the  old 
Church  through  the  Middle  Ages.  He  emphasises 
that  he  is  speaking  not  of  '  subjects  rising  or  stand- 
ing out  against  law  and  reason  that  they  may  be 
freed  from  the  yoke  of  their  obedience,  but  of  a 
people  holding  fast  their  allegiance  to  their  sovereign 
and  in  all  humility  supplicating  for  religion  and 
justice.'  '  A  difference  would  be  put,'  he  says 
(thinking  perhaps  of  Calvin  who  draws  some  such 
distinction),  '  between  some  private  persons  taking 
arms  of  resistance,  and  councillors,  barons,  nobles, 
peers  of  the  land.  Parliament- men,  and  the  whole 
body  of  the  kingdom  (except  some  few  courtiers, 

^  Letters  {L%ing'»  ed.),  i.  p.  189. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     197 

statesmen,  papists  and  popishly-affected  and  their 
adherents),  standing  to  their  own  defence.'  In 
such  a  case  as  the  present  is  a  defensive  war  lawful  ? 

*  Ought  the  people  to  defend  themselves  against 
extreme  violence  and  oppression  bringing  utter 
ruin  and  desolation  on  the  kirk  and  kingdom,  upon 
themselves  and  their  posterity  ?  '  His  answer 
is  that  it  is  lawful,  and  that  for  various  reasons. 

*  First,  from  the  unreasonableness  and  absurdity 
of  such  court  parasites  as  for  their  own  base  ends 
maintain  the  absolute  sovereignty  and  unlimited 
authority  of  princes,  to  the  great  hurt  both  of 
princes  and  people,  by  loosing  all  the  bonds  of 
civil  society,  that  princes  against  the  strongest 
bonds  of  oaths  and  laws  may  do  what  they  please 
to  the  ruin  of  religion,  the  kirk,  the  kingdom,  the 
lives  and  liberties  of  some  or  of  all  the  subjects,  and 
that  the  people  shall  do  nothing  but  either  flee, 
which  is  impossible,  or  suffer  themselves  to  be 
massacred  and  cut  to  pieces.'  '  Second,  from  the 
line  and  order  of  subordination  wherein  both 
magistrates  and  people  are  placed.  The  magistrate 
is  placed  under  God,  the  subjects  under  God  and 
under  the  magistrate.  When  the  magistrate  com- 
mands contrary  to  God  and  goeth  out  of  his  order 
and  line,  especially  so  far  as  to  invade  by  arms,  if 
they  obey  not,  the  subjects  keeping  their  own  line 
and  ordering  and  defending  themselves  is  no  dis- 
obedience to  the  magistrate  but  obedience  to 
God.'  '  Tyranny  and  unjust  violence  is  not  the 
ordinance  of  God.  He  that  resists  it  resistcth  not 
the  ordinance  of  God.'  Henderson's  third  reason 
beai*s  distinct  evidence  of  Buchanan's  teaching. 
His  doctrine  was  that  kings  exist  by  tlic  will  and  for 
the  good  of  the  people,  they  may  be  brought  to 


198     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

account  for  misgovernment,  if  necessary  force 
should  be  applied,  nay,  under  certain  circumstances 
tyrannicide  is  justifiable.  Henderson  writes  thus  : 
'  The  Lord  hath  ordained  magistrates  to  be  his 
ministers  for  the  good  of  his  people  and  their 
defence,  whence  have  proceeded  these  common 
principles  of  policy  :  Princes  principally  are  for 
the  people  and  their  defence,  and  not  the  people 
principally  for  them.  The  safety  and  good  of  the 
people  is  the  supreme  law.  The  people  make 
the  magistrate,  but  the  magistrate  maketh  not 
the  people.  The  people  may  be  without  the 
magistrate,  but  the  magistrate  cannot  be  with- 
out the  people.  The  body  of  the  magistrate  is 
mortal,  but  the  people  as  a  society  is  immortal. 
Therefore  it  were  a  direct  overturning  of  all  the 
foundations  of  policy  and  government  to  pre- 
fer subjection  to  the  prince  to  the  preserva- 
tion of  the  commonwealth ;  or  to  expose  the 
public,  wherein  every  man's  person,  family  and 
private  estate  are  contained,  to  be  a  prey  to  the 
fury  of  the  prince,  rather  than  by  all  our  power  to 
defend  and  preserve  the  commonwealth.'  In  the 
law  of  nature  Henderson  finds  another  reason. 
'  If  a  private  man  by  the  law  of  nature  may  be 
found  entitled  to  defend  himself  against  the  prince 
or  judge  as  a  private  man  invading  him  by  violence, 
and  may  repel  violence  by  violence ;  if  children 
may  resist  the  violent  invasion  of  their  parents 
against  themselves,  their  mother,  or  the  family, 
notwithstanding  the  strait  obligation  between 
parents  and  children  ;  if  servants  may  hold  the 
hands  of  their  masters  seeking  to  kill  them  in  a 
rage  :  then  much  more  may  the  whole  body  defend 
themselves  against  all  invasions  whatsoever.'     That 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     199 

is  in  effect  and  almost  in  the  same  language  what 
Knox  told  Queen  Mary  in  their  celebrated  inter- 
view. 

Again,  Henderson  founds  on  '  the  mutual  con- 
tract between  the  king  and  the  people,  as  may 
be  seen  in  the  Acts  of  Parliament  and  order  of  the 
coronation.'  ^  Here  again  he  follows  Buchanan, 
who  points  to  the  coronation  oath  of  Scottish 
kings  as  clearly  proving  the  limited  nature  of  their 
authority.  In  support  of  his  own  teaching, 
Henderson  refers  to  '  the  testimonies  not  only  of 
popish  writers,  but  of  divines  of  the  reformed 
Churches  even  such  as  be  strong  pleaders  for 
monarchy.'  John  Major  had  taught  the  same 
doctrine.  He  had  learned  it  in  France,  probably 
from  such  men  as  Gerson,  Chancellor  of  the  Uni- 
versity of  Paris,  who  taught  that  if  kings  conducted 
themselves  unjustly,  above  all,  if  they  persisted  in 
their  misgovernment,  that  was  exactly  a  case  for 
applying  the  law  of  justice  and  repelling  force  by 
force. '^ 

Buchanan  had  learned  in  the  same  school.  It  is 
interesting  to  trace  the  development  of  such  views, 
to  which  the  world's  liberties  owe  so  much,  through 
France  to  Scotland,  wliere  the  reformers  were  com- 
pelled, owing  to  the  hostility  of  the  State,  to  think 
out  the  question  of  the  relations  of  king  and 
subject,  and  to  define  their  own  attitude.  Nor  is 
it  less  instructive  to  note  that  in  Germany  the  new 
Church,  growing  up  from  the  beginning  under  the 
protection  of  the  civil  powers,  had  no  such  need  to 
face  that  question — an  apparent  advantage  at  the 
outset,  but  leading  in  time  to  an  attitude  of  subser- 

'  Stevenson's  Hixtorti  of  Church  and  State  in  Scotland,  ii.  p.  680. 
'  See  Prof.  Hume  Brown's  George  Huchnnnu,  chap.  .wii. 


200     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

viency  on  the  part  of  the  Church  to  the  State,  to 
the  deadly  injury  both  of  Church  and  State. 

The  time  had  now  come  in  Scotland  to  trans- 
late Buchanan's  doctrines  into  deeds,  and  the 
Covenanters  did  not  flinch.  Henderson's  paper 
therefore  possesses  political  and  historical  im- 
portance. His  arguments  completed  the  con- 
version of  the  conservative  wing  ;  the  Covenanters 
closed  their  ranks,  and  entered  on  a  conflict  against 
arbitrary  power  which  went  on  with  varying 
fortune  till  1688,  when  a  whole  nation  put 
Buchanan's  doctrines  into  practice,  and  the  long 
struggles  of  the  Covenanters  were  rewarded.  But 
though  driven  in  self-defence  to  arm,  those  men 
whom  Charles  so  miserably  misunderstood  and 
flouted  remained  '  the  most  loyal  and  faithful 
subjects  that  ever  a  prince  had.'  They  took  up 
arms  unwillingly  and  would  have  laid  them  down 
joyfully  ;  '  yea,  had  we  been  ten  times  victorious 
in  set  battles,'  cries  Baillie,  warming  into  a  glow 
of  rugged  eloquence  as  he  writes,  '  it  was  our  con- 
clusion to  have  laid  down  our  arms  at  his  feet,  and 
on  our  knees  presented  nought  but  our  first  sup- 
plications. We  had  no  other  end  of  our  wars  ;  we 
aimed  not  at  lands  and  honours  ;  we  desired  but  to 
keep  our  own  in  the  service  of  our  prince,  as  our 
ancestors  had  done  ;  we  loved  no  new  masters. 
Had  our  throne  been  void  and  our  voices  sought 
for  the  filling  of  Fergus's  chair,  we  would  have  died 
ere  any  other  had  sitten  down  on  that  fatal  marble 
but  Charles  alone.'  ^  Their  loyalty,  it  is  true,  was 
no  blind  obedience,  but  for  a  prince  who  observed 
the  limits  of  law  and  constitution  or  for  one  whom 
they  believed  to  be  such,  they  were  prepared  to 

*  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  215. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    201 

risk  all  they  possessed.  The  fields  of  Dunbar  and 
Worcester  were  in  later  days  to  attest  their  too 
generous  loyalty  to  a  royal  house  totally  unworthy 
of  such  devotion. 

The  month  of  March,  which  saw  the  end  of  the 
pamphlet  war,  saw  the  beginning  of  military 
operations.  The  popular  voice  called  it  '  the 
bishops'  war.'  It  was  believed  to  be  a  war  to  force 
bishops  on  the  Scots  who  did  not  want  them.  That 
was  enough  for  men  on  both  sides  of  the  Border. 
The  Scots  were  unanimous  and  determined  to 
resist,  the  English  had  no  heart  to  fight.  Indeed 
to  call  it  a  war  is  almost  a  misnomer  :  it  was  a  war 
in  which  the  main  armies  never  met  and  never 
fought,  and  it  ended  in  a  treaty  which  settled 
nothing. 

On  their  side  the  Scots  prepared  for  the  worst. 
They  set  up  a  General  Committee  in  Edinburgh, 
and  in  every  county  a  committee  to  look  after  the 
raising  and  drilling  of  men,  provision  of  arms, 
collecting  of  money.  Scots  officers  serving  abroad 
in  the  Thirty  Years'  War  were  called  home  to  drill 
recruits.  Alexander  Leslie,  who  had  been  trained 
under  Gustavus  Adolphus,  and  had  risen  to  the  rank 
of  Field-Marshal  in  the  Army  of  Sweden,  had 
returned  to  his  native  Scotland  in  October  1688 
after  thirty  years'  campaigning  abroad.  A 
successful  soldier  of  fortune,  he  brought  home  a 
great  reputation  and  ample  wealth,  and  probably 
expected  to  settle  down  and  live  in  peace  for  the 
rest  of  his  days.^  But  he  responded  promptly 
to  the  call  of  the  Covenant,  and  now  sat  daily  with 
the  General  Committee,  though  as  yet  holding  no 

'  See  Prof.  Terry'*  Life  q/*  Alexander   f^iMlie  and   The  Army  of  the 
Covenant  {1643-1647). 


202    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

appointment,  directing  and  advising.  In  March  the 
Scots  promptly  seized  Edinburgh  Castle,  and  after 
it  the  castles  of  Dumbarton,  Douglas  and  Dalkeith. 
In  the  same  month  Montrose  was  sent  to  deal  with 
Huntly.  Huntly  was  at  Inverurie  with  5000  men, 
but  he  fled  before  Montrose,  who  was  in  greater 
strength  and  entered  Aberdeen,  his  men  wearing 
bunches  of  blue  ribbon  tied  to  their  bonnets. 
Then  Montrose  by  a  trick  kidnapped  Huntly  and  his 
eldest  son,  and  had  them  shut  up  in  Edinburgh 
castle.  Lord  Aboyne,  the  second  son,  escaped, 
but  he  too  was  defeated  :  on  30th  March  Montrose 
was  again  master  of  Aberdeen,  and  the  king's 
cause  was  dead  in  the  north. 

Charles  had  an  excellent  plan  of  campaign — on 
paper.  An  important  part  of  it  was  that  Hamilton 
was  to  sail  north  in  command  of  a  fleet  carrying 
5000  men  ;  with  these  he  was  to  join  Huntly  at 
Aberdeen  and  march  south  in  triumph.  But  so 
leisurely  were  Hamilton's  movements  that  when 
he  reached  the  Firth  of  Forth  it  was  already  the 
1st  of  May,  and  Huntly  was  safely  under  lock  and 
key.  Had  Montrose  been  on  the  king's  side  in 
those  early  days  how  different  a  part  would  he 
have  played  from  either  Huntly  or  Hamilton,  and 
how  different  might  the  results  have  been ! 
Hamilton,  who  was  all  for  war  when  war  was  still 
in  the  distance,  was  by  no  means  happy  when  he 
got  his  command.  Of  the  5000  men  on  whom  so 
much  depended,  he  wrote  from  Yarmouth  Roads 
on  15th  April  to  tell  the  king  '  there  will  not  be 
200  that  ever  had  a  musket  in  their  hand.'  On 
7th  May,  when  he  had  been  only  a  week  in  the 
Forth,  he  was  already  crying  out,  '  Your  Majesty's 
affairs  are  in  a  desperate  condition.     The  enraged 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    203 

people  here  run  in  to  the  height  of  rebeUion  and 
^valk  with  a  bhnd  obedience  as  by  their  traitrous 
leaders  they  are  commanded.  You  will  find  it  a 
work  of  great  difficulty  and  of  vast  expense  to  curb 
them  by  force,  their  power  being  greater,  their 
combination  stronger  than  can  be  imagined.'  He 
goes  so  far  as  to  suggest  feebly  whether  the  king 
'  may  not  think  of  some  way  of  patching  it  up.' 
As  matter  of  fact  he  frittered  away  five  or  six 
weeks  in  the  Firth  of  Forth  without  striking  a  blow. 
Both  shores  were  fortified  and  guarded  by  the 
Covenanters  and  he  was  unable  to  land  troops,  he 
was  not  even  permitted  to  publish  a  proclamation 
from  Charles  ;  his  men  sickened  and  died,  and  he 
was  fain  to  make  his  way  back  to  the  king's  camp 
early  in  June.  He  was  then  as  strong  for  peace 
by  negotiation  as  he  had  previously  been  for  war. 

Charles  himself  had  reached  York  on  30th  March 
and  spent  a  month  there.  The  English  trained 
bands,  hastily  gathered,  were  never  more  than  an 
undisciplined  mob,  but  they  had  the  outward 
show  and  semblance  of  an  army,  and  that  was 
enough  for  the  king.  He  had  no  eye  for  realities  ; 
he  regarded,  says  Clarendon,  '  the  pomp  of  his 
preparations  more  than  their  strength.'  And  he 
had  boundless  faith  in  the  awe  and  reverence  that 
the  name  of  a  king  would  inspire  :  he  expected  that 
as  he  approached  the  borders  in  person  the  Scots 
would  immediately  yield  to  the  mere  show  of  force. 

On  1st  May,  when  the  army  had  reached  Durham, 
Sir  Edmund  Vemey,  whose  letters  shed  a  flood  of 
light  on  the  expedition,  writes,  *  Our  army  is  but 
weak,  our  purse  is  weaker,  and  if  wc  fight  with 
these  forces  and  early  in  the  year  we  shall  have  our 
throats   cut.  ...  I   daresay   there   was   never   so 


204     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

raw,  so  unskilful,  and  so  unwilling  an  army  brought 
to  fight.'  1  A  week  later,  '  Our  men  are  very  raw, 
our  arms  of  all  sorts  nought,  our  victual  scarce, 
and  provision  for  horses  worse.'  And  as  late  as 
5th  June  when  they  were  in  camp  at  Birks  near 
Berwick,  '  Our  army  is  very  weak  and  our  supplies 
come  slowly  to  us,  neither  are  those  men  we  have 
well  ordered.  The  small-pox  is  much  in  our  army, 
there  is  a  hundred  sick  of  it  in  one  regiment.  .  .  .  We 
are  entrenched,  and  must  only  stand  upon  our 
defence,  for  I  conceive  we  are  not  able  to  hurt 
them.'  If  the  common  soldiers  were  ill-fed,  un- 
disciplined, and  without  heart,  the  nobles  who  had 
reluctantly  answered  Charles's  call  were  disaffected 
to  the  cause.  Among  them  the  war  was  thoroughly 
unpopular.  Their  sympathies  indeed  were  with  the 
Scots.  They  had  no  mind  to  force  on  them  an 
ecclesiastical  system  which  they  rejected,  and 
which  even  in  England  had  come  to  be  regarded 
with  distaste.  They  did  not  fail  to  see  that  the 
defeat  of  the  Covenanters  would  mean  the  riveting 
of  absolutism  in  Church  and  State  more  firmly  upon 
themselves.  Disorder  and  confusion  prevailed 
everywhere  in  the  camp.  Scouting  was  bad,  con- 
fidence was  completely  undermined. 

Meanwhile  Leslie,  who  in  the  beginning  of  May 
had  been  appointed  to  the  chief  command  of  the 
Scottish  army,  had  about  this  time,  5th  June, 
taken  up  a  position  on  Dunse  Law,  twelve  miles 
from  the  Border.  His  force  consisted  probably 
of  about  20,000  ;  Charles's  at  the  best  of  some- 
where about  18,000  foot  and  3000  horse.  The 
Covenanters,  inferior  in  numbers  but  stronger  in 
everything  else  that  made  a  fighting  force,  were 

*  The  Verney  Papen  (1852),  Camden  Society,  pp.  228,  233,  246. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     205 

very  unwilling  to  shed  blood  in  a  contest  with  their 
king.  They  had  made  various  attempts  at  peaceful 
negotiation  during  April  and  May.  They  wrote 
to  Essex  and  then  to  Holland,  both  in  the  king's 
army,  explaining  in  moderate  and  respectful 
language  that  they  had  no  thought  of  casting  off 
their  obedience  to  the  king  or  of  invading  England, 
all  they  wanted  was  peaceably  to  enjoy  their 
religion  and  the  liberties  of  their  country  according 
to  their  laws  ;  for  these  things  no  quarrel  could 
justly  arise  between  the  nations.  There  had 
already  been  negotiations  with  Hamilton,  who  on 
2Tst  May  reported  to  the  king  :  '  So  soon  as  the 
rebels  come  near  your  sacred  person  they  intend  to 
present  a  petition  to  the  same  effect  which  that  was 
which  was  last  sent  to  London  signed  by  Henderson, 
and  in  case  of  your  refusal,  to  proceed  in  their 
damnable  designs  against  your  person,  army  and 
kingdom.  Give  me  leave  humbly  to  say  that  a 
present  encounter  is  to  be  shunned,  for  whilst  they 
are  in  this  madness  I  know  not  what  the  event  of  a 
battle  may  prove.'  ^  Nothing  came  of  these  over- 
tures at  the  time,  but  Leslie's  appearance  on  Dunse 
Law  on  5th  June  hastened  matters.  Charles 
was  then  at  Birks  some  twelve  miles  off  and  could 
catch  sight  of  the  Scottish  tents.  One  day  a 
Scottish  page  of  the  king  appeared  in  their  camp 
and  suggested,  '  as  it  were  out  of  his  own  head,' 
that  his  countrymen  might  open  negotiations. 
They  accordingly  sent  over  the  young  Earl  of 
Dunftrmline  ;  he  was  well  received,  Sir  Edmund 
Verney  came  back  with  an  answer,  and  so  at  last 
negotiations  were  opened.  The  first  conference 
took  place  on  11th  June,  between  four  commis- 

'   Hamilton  Fapen,  Cmmden  Society,  p.  B4. 


206     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

sioners  from  the  Scots  and  six  from  the  king  : 
on  the  18th  the  treaty  was  signed.  There  were 
in  all  five  meetings,  on  Tuesday  11th,  Thursday 
13th,  Saturday  15th,  Monday  17th,  and  Tuesday 
18th,  all  in  the  tent  of  the  English  general,  Lord 
Arundel,  Charles  himself  being  present  at  most  of 
the  discussions. 

Two  matters  are  of  outstanding  interest  in 
connection  with  the  so-called  Pacification.  The 
first  of  these  is  personal  to  Henderson  and  alto- 
gether pleasant.  It  is  the  liking  which  the  king 
conceived  for  him,  and  not  the  king  only  but  all  the 
English  courtiers.  At  the  first  meeting  on  the 
11th  Henderson  was  not  present;  the  Scots  com- 
missioners were  Rothes,  Loudoun,  Dunfermline 
and  Sir  William  Douglas,  Sheriff  of  Teviotdale. 
Charles  came  into  the  tent  shortly  after  the  dis- 
cussion opened ;  he  missed  Henderson  and  Johnston, 
and  on  his  mentioning  this  they  attended  the 
subsequent  meetings  along  with  the  others.  Baillie 
gives  a  gossipy  account,  evidently  from  reports 
brought  back  by  the  commissioners.  '  On  the 
Wednesday  or  Thursday  the  king  was  much 
delighted  with  Henderson's  discourse,  but  not  so 
with  Johnston's.  Saturday  was  the  third  day 
of  meeting,  where  the  most  free  communing 
went  on.  His  Majesty  was  ever  the  longer  the 
better  loved  of  all  that  heard  him,  as  one  of  the 
most  just,  reasonable,  sweet  persons  they  had  ever 
seen,  and  he  likewise  was  the  more  enamoured  with 
us,  especially  with  Henderson  and  Loudoun.  Their 
conferences  purchased  to  us  a  great  deal  of  reputa- 
tion for  wisdom,  eloquence,  gravity,  loyalty  and 
all  other  good  parts  with  the  English  councillors 
who  all  the  time  did  speak  little,  but  suffered  the 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     207 

speech  to  pass  betwixt  us  and  the  king.'  ^  It 
must  be  added  that  the  notes  of  the  discussion  on 
the  11th  show  Charles's  skill  and  ingenuity  in  de- 
bate. ^  Honest  Baillie  might  be  thought  to  be 
painting  too  rose-coloured  a  picture,  but  that 
oddly  enough  there  is  confirmation  of  his  statements 
about  both  Henderson  and  Johnston.  Edward 
Norgate  (Secretary  to  Coke)  sent  on  the  19th  a 
long  letter  to  his  cousin,  Robert  Reid  (Secretary  to 
Windebanke)  in  London,  giving  the  news  of  the 
camp  in  the  previous  week.^  The  Earl  of  Stam- 
ford had  dined  with  Leslie,  he  says,  on  Saturday 
last;  he  had  brought  back  all  sorts  of  news  from 
the  Scottish  army.  As  to  the  disposition  of  the 
Scots,  he  said,  '  he  would  justify  with  his  life  that 
no  people  could  show  or  make  greater  demonstra- 
tions of  duty  and  obedience  to  their  sovereign 
and  affection  to  the  English  than  they  :  and  that 
their  presbyters  Henderson  and  others,  defamed 
among  us  for  so  many  incendiaries  and  boutefeus, 
are  every  mother's  son  holy  and  blessed  men  of 
admirable  transcendent  and  seraphic  learning.  My 
lord  at  his  return  acquainted  the  king  with  his 
journey  and  craved  pardon  that  he  went  without 
leave,  but  protested  that  he  was  of  opinion  that  no 
prince  in  the  world  could  be  more  happy  in  the 
love  of  his  people  than  His  Majesty  in  these  of 
Scotland.  And  now,'  Norgate  goes  on,  *  you  can 
go  nowhere  but  the  Covenanters  are  commended 
and  the  Scotch  bishops  blessed  backwards  ;  indeed, 
for  Henderson,  he  is  so  highly  commended  for  a 
grave,  pious  and  learned  man,  he  has  made  one  at 

'   Letters  (lAiiDg'i  e(\.),  i.  p.  217. 

'  Hardwicke,  State  Papers,  ii.  pp.  132-4. 

3  Calendar  of  State  Papers  (Dom.),  1039,  pp.  330-2. 


208     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

every  conference  ;  and  Mr.  Secretary  (Coke)  tells 
me  that  in  all  his  speeches  you  may  find  as  much 
devotion,  wisdom,  humility  and  obedience  as  can  be 
wished  for  in  an  honest  man  and  a  good  subject.' 
Johnston  made  a  very  different  impression  on  the 
king,  and  we  owe  our  knowledge  of  this  to  his  own 
candour  in  setting  the  incidents  down  in  his  diary. 
At  the  meeting  on  Saturday  he  criticised  some 
words  of  the  king,  probably  with  uncourtier-like 
vehemence,  when  Charles  broke  out  '  that  the 
devil  himself  could  not  make  a  more  uncharitable 
construction  or  give  a  more  bitter  expression.'  ^ 
After  that  everything  that  poor  Wariston  said 
seems  to  have  ruffled  Charles  :  twice  over  at  the 
same  meeting  he  '  commanded  me  silence  '  and  said 
curtly,  '  he  would  speak  to  more  reasonable  men.' 
On  Monday,  Johnston  fared  still  worse,  the  king 
apparently  would  have  none  of  him  :  '  this  forenoon 
at  two  several  times  when  I  began  to  speak  the 
king  absolutely  commanded  me  silence.' 

But  the  Pacification  of  Birks  was  itself  a  fiasco. 
It  was  a  treaty  which  not  only  settled  nothing  but 
deepened  the  distrust  of  Scotland  towards  Charles, 
and  altered  the  relations  between  king  and  people 
for  the  worse.  A  preliminary  discussion  took  place 
which  gave  the  Church  an  opportunity  to  put  on 
record  her  view  of  her  powers  in  the  matter  of 
General  Assemblies.  This  was  doubtless  the  work 
of  Henderson,  and  was  a  carefully  considered  and 
authoritative  statement.  It  may  therefore  be  well 
to  set  it  down  here.  The  king  proposed  three 
queries  :  (1)  Whether  he  had  the  power  of  the  sole 
calling  of  the  General  Assembly ;  (2)  Whether  he 
had  a  negative  voice  in  Assemblies ;    (3)  Whether 

»  Wariston's  Diary,  1639-40,  pp.  85,  87. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     209 

the  Assembly  may  sit  after  His  Majesty  by  his 
authority  has  discliarged  it  to  sit.^  To  these 
queries  the  answer  given  was  as  follows  : 

We  humbly  acknowledge  that  the  king's  Majesty 
hath  power  to  indict  the  Assemblies  of  the  Church, 
and  whensoever  in  his  wisdom  he  thinketh  con- 
venient  he   may   use   his  authority   in   convening 
Assemblies  of  all  sorts  whether  general  or  particular. 
We  acknowledge  also  that  the  solemn  and  public 
indiction  by  way  of  proclamation  and  compulsion 
doth  belong  properly  to  the  magistrate,  and  can 
neither  be  given  to  the  pope  nor  to  any  foreign 
power,  nor  can  it  without  usurpation  be  claimed  by 
any  of  His  Majesty's  subjects  ;    but  we  will  never 
think    but   that   in   case   of  urgent   and   extreme 
necessity    the    Church    may    by    herself   convene, 
continue,  and  give  out  her  own  constitutions  for 
the    preservation    of    religion.     God    hath    given 
power  to  the  Church  to  convene  ;    the  love  of  God 
hath  promised  His  assistance  to  them  being  con- 
vened, and  the  Christian  Church  has  in  all  ages 
used  this  as  the  ordinary  and  necessary  means  for 
establishing  of  religion  and  piety  and  for  removing 
of  the  evils  of  heresy,  scandals,  and  other  things 
of  that  kind.     According  to  this  divine  right  the 
Church     of    Scotland     hath     kept     her     General 
Assemblies  with  a  blessing  from  heaven,  for  while 
our  Assembly  hath  continued  in  her  strength  the 
unity  and  peace  of  the  Church  continued  in  vigour, 
piety  and  learning  were  advanced,  and  profancness 
and  idleness  were  censured. 

The  Church  of  Scotland  hath  declared  that  all 
ecclesiastical  Assemblies  have  power  to  convene 
lawfully    for    treating    of   things    concerning    the 

'   Peterkin,  Records  of  the  Kirk,  p.  228. 
O 


210     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Church  and  pertaining  to  their  charge,  and  to 
appoint  times  and  places  for  that  effect. 

The  hberties  of  this  Church  for  holding  Assemblies 
are  acknowledged  by  Parliament  and  ratified  anno 
1592. 

There  is  no  ground  either  by  act  of  Assembly 
or  Parliament  or  any  preceding  practice,  neither 
in  the  Church  of  old  nor  yet  in  our  own  Church 
since  the  Reformation,  whereby  the  king's  Majesty 
may  dissolve  the  General  Assembly  or  assume  unto 
himself  a  negative  voice,  but  upon  the  contrary 
His  Majesty's  prerogative  is  declared  by  Act  of 
Parliament  to  be  no  ways  prejudicial  to  the 
privileges  and  liberties  which  God  hath  granted  to 
the  spiritual  office-bearers  of  his  Church.  By  this 
means  the  whole  frame  of  religion  and  Church 
jurisdiction  shall  depend  absolutely  upon  the 
pleasure  of  the  prince,  whereas  His  Majesty  has 
publicly  declared  by  public  proclamation  in  England 
that  the  jurisdiction  of  the  churchmen  in  their 
meetings  and  courts  holden  by  them  do  not  flow 
from  His  Majesty's  authority,  notwithstanding 
any  Acts  of  Parliament  which  have  been  made  to 
the  contrary,  but  from  themselves  in  their  own 
power,  and  that  they  hold  their  courts  and  meeting 
in  their  own  name. 

The  Pacification  in  form  consisted  of  two  docu- 
ments, a  Declaration  by  the  king,  and  certain 
Articles  which  were  signed  by  the  Scottish  com- 
missioners, both  dated  18th  June.  The  vice  lay 
in  the  general  language  used  in  the  Declaration. 
In  it  the  king  stated  '  That  though  we  cannot 
condescend  to  ratify  and  approve  the  acts  of  the 
pretended  General  Assembly  at  Glasgow,  we  are 
pleased  to  declare  and  assure  that,  according  to 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     211 

the  Petitioners'  humble  desires,  all  matters  ecclesi- 
astical shall  be  determined  by  the  Assembly  of  the 
kirk,  and  matters  civil  by  the  Parliament,  and 
Assemblies  accordingly  shall  be  kept  once  a  year 
or  as  shall  be  agreed  upon  at  the  next  General 
Assembly.'  He  further  stated  :  *  For  settling  the 
general  distractions  of  that  our  ancient  kingdom, 
Our  Will  and  Pleasure  is  that  a  Free  General 
Assembly  be  kept  at  Edinburgh  the  6th  day  of 
August  next,  and  thereafter  a  Parliament  to  be 
holden  at  Edinburgh  the  20th  day  of  August  next 
ensuing,  for  ratifying  of  what  shall  be  concluded 
in  the  said  Assembly.'  The  chief  requests  made 
by  the  commissioners  in  the  discussions  had  been 
(1)  that  the  king  would  assure  them  that  the  acts 
of  the  Glasgow  Assembly  would  be  ratified  in  the 
ensuing  Parliament,  and  (2)  that  the  king  would 
declare  it  his  will  that  all  matters  ecclesiastical  be 
determined  by  the  Assemblies  of  the  kirk  and 
matters  civil  by  Parliament.  Charles  made  it  a 
point  of  honour  to  refuse  to  ratify  the  acts  of  the 
last  Assembly,  which  he  persisted  in  describing  as 
'  a  pretended  Assembly,'  but  he  granted  in  terms  the 
second  request.  Though  using  the  very  words  of 
the  Scots  he  did  not  mean  the  same  thing  as  they 
meant.  He  understood  perfectly  what  they  meant, 
viz.,  that  they  stood  firmly  by  the  lawfulness  of  the 
Glasgow  Assembly,  that  they  held  all  the  matters 
there  discussed  and  decided  to  be  '  matters  ecclesi- 
{istical  '  as  to  which  the  Assembly  was  the  com- 
petent tribunal.  He  knew  that  by  a  free  Assembly 
they  meant  an  Assembly  composed  of  members 
elected  by  presbyteries,  and  did  not  include  prelates 
appointed  by  the  king.  To  consent  to  *  a  free 
General    Assembly '    was    simply   to   juggle    with 


212  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

words  if  all  the  time  Charles  meant  (as  he  did  mean) 
to  retain   episcopacy.     Whether  the   Covenanters 
were  right  or  wrong  they  had  at  least  disclosed 
fully  the  meaning  of  their  request ;    it  ought  to 
have  been  openly  granted  or  refused.     The  natural 
meaning  of  the  Declaration  was  that  though  he 
declared  he  would  not  ratify  the  acts  of  the  Glasgow 
Assembly,  Charles  in  consenting  to  a  free  Assembly 
virtually  nullified  this  condition,^  and  the  Scots 
so   understood    it.     It    was   unfortunate    that    in 
dealing  with  a  man  like  Charles  they  accepted  a 
Declaration   couched   in  general  language.     They 
seem  to  have  been  satisfied  with  his  fuller  explana- 
tions given  in  the  course  of  the  discussions.     These 
they  took  care  to  preserve  in  a  narrative  written 
down  at  the  time.     '  The  king's  own  exposition,' 
Baillie  calls  it,  '  declared  to  us  by  all  the  communers 
and  taken  first  at  their  mouth  by  many  extemporary 
pens  and  then  set  down  by  themselves  to  be  com- 
municated to  all.'  2    Charles  afterwards  challenged 
the    correctness    of  the   Narrative  :    he   found   it 
circulating  in  England,  and  was  so  angry  that  he 
caused  it  to  be  burned  by  the  common  hangman. 
But  the  probabilities  all  point  to  its  substantial 
correctness.     The  paper  shows  that  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  Assembly  was  discussed,  and  that  the  king 
made  it  clear  that  the  expression  '  free  Assembly  ' 
in   his   Declaration   '  did   import  the   freedom   in 
judging  all  questions  arising  there  anent  constitu- 
tions, members  or  matters.'^    Further,  the  paper 
states   that   when   the   king   was   pressed   at   the 
meeting  on  Saturday  15th,  and  again  on  Monday 

'  Hume  Brown,  History  of  Scotland,  ii.  p.  315. 

2  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  i.  p.  218. 

'  Peterkin,  Records  of  the  Kirk,  p.  230. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     213 

17th,  '  to  give  some  specification  of  quitting  epis- 
copacy '  his  reply  was  '  he  would  not  preiimit  or 
forestall  his  voice,  but  he  had  appointed  a  free 
Assembly  which  might  judge  of  ecclesiastical 
matters,  the  constitutions  whereof  he  would  ratify 
in  the  ensuing  Parliament.'  The  duplicity  of  the 
king  is  clear.  The  first  thing  that  made  men  doubt 
his  good  faith  was  the  terms  of  the  Proclamation. 
On  1st  July,  proclamation  of  the  new  Assembly 
was  made  for  12th  August — a  postponed  date,  and 
it  invited  archbishops  and  bishops  to  take  their 
places  there  as  members.  This  was  met  with  a 
protestation,  on  the  very  natural  ground  that  it 
went,  or  seemed  to  go,  in  the  teeth  of  the  king's 
solemn  promise  of  a  '  free  Assembly.'  Charles's 
private  reply,  dated  6th  August,  to  the  bishops 
through  Spottiswoode,  who  wanted  the  Assembly 
and  Parliament  prorogued,  makes  it  plain  that  his 
apparent  concession  to  the  Scots  was  a  mere  pre- 
tence :  it  is  not  surprising  to  learn  that  Laud  had  a 
hand  in  it.^  *  We  do  hereby  assure  you,'  he  wrote, 
'  that  it  shall  be  still  one  of  our  chiefest  studies 
how  to  rectify  and  establish  the  government  of  that 
Church  aright  and  to  repair  your  losses,  which  we 
desire  you  to  be  most  confident  of.'  *  You  may 
rest  secure  that  though  perhaps  we  may  give  way 
for  the  present  to  that  which  will  be  prejudicial 
both  to  the  Church  and  to  our  Government,  yet  we 
shall  not  leave  thinking  in  time  how  to  remedy 
both.'  He  commanded  the  prelates  to  absent  them- 
selves, but  to  lodge  exceptions  against  Assembly  and 
Parliament  privately  with  the  Commissioner ;  '  we 
would  not  have  it  to  be  either  read  or  argued  in 
this  meeting  but  to  be  represented  to  Us  by  him.' 

I  Burnet,  Memoir*  of  the  Duket  0/ Hamilton  (1677),  p.  U4. 


214     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

In  his  Instructions  to  Traquair,  who  was  sent  as 
Commissioner,  he  said  if  the  Assembly  required 
episcopacy  to  be  abjured  '  as  contrary  to  the  con- 
stitution of  the  kirk  of  Scotland  '  he  was  to  agree. 
The  Instructions  are  careful  to  lay  down  that  the 
abolishing  of  episcopacy  is  not  to  be  made  in  pre- 
judice of  that  form  of  government  as  unlawful  but 
only  in  satisfaction  to  the  people,  for  settling  the 
present  disorders,  and  such  other  reasons  of 
State ;  adding  the  singular  words,  '  but  herein 
you  must  be  careful  that  our  Intentions  appear 
not  to  any.'  If  Burnet  is  right  ^  that  Traquair 
advised  the  king  that  in  the  absence  of  the  bishops 
the  proceedings  in  Parliament  would  be  null  and 
void,  and  that  he  would  therefore  be  able  without 
violating  the  law  to  bring  back  episcopacy  when 
he  felt  able  to  carry  it,  Charles's  '  intentions  '  and 
the  method  of  giving  effect  to  them  become  doubly 
clear. 

Henderson  was  one  of  the  six  Scottish  com- 
missioners who  signed  the  Articles  of  the  Pacifica- 
tion. The  Articles  dealt  with  other  matters  besides 
the  Church,  and  the  opportunity  for  a  gibe  at 
Henderson  is  too  tempting  for  Bishop  Burnet  to 
miss.^  We  are  reminded  that  '  it  was  strange  to 
see  a  churchman  who  had  acted  so  vigorously 
against  bishops  for  their  meddling  in  civil  affairs, 
made  a  commissioner  for  this  treaty  and  sign  a 
Paper  so  purely  civil ;  so  strongly  does  passion 
and  interest  bias  and  turn  men.'  The  bishop 
forgets  that  the  Pacification  dealt  mainly  with  the 
affairs  of  the  Church,  that  it  was  to  discuss  these 
that  Henderson  had  been  summoned  into  conference. 

1  Burnet,  Memoirs  oj  the  Dukes  of  Hamilton  (1677),  p.  149. 
'  And  NiUsoQ  in  more  bitter  language,  Collection,  i.  p.  241. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     215 

On  such  matters  he  spoke  with  greater  authority 
than  any  other.  However  averse  he  was  to  take  a 
part  in  public  affairs  the  history  of  Church  and 
State  had  for  the  time  being  become  one,  a  great 
national  drama  was  being  enacted  in  which  the 
Church  played  the  foremost  part,  and  the  leading 
churchman  became  by  force  of  circumstances  a 
leader  also  in  affairs  of  State. 


8.    ASSEMBLY    AND    PARLIAMENT,    1689 

A  ugust — November 
The  Assembly  sat  at  Edinburgh  on  12th  August  : 
David  Dickson  was  Moderator  :  the  place  of  meet- 
ing was  the  east  kirk  of  St.  Giles.  In  the  weeks  that 
had  elapsed  since  the  signing  of  the  treaty  recrim- 
inations had  arisen,  each  side  alleging  with  some 
truth  that  the  other  had  broken  its  terms.  Peace 
was  ostensibly  restored,  but  neither  side  trusted 
the  other  and  public  opinion  was  in  an  excited 
and  suspicious  state.  The  king  did  not  stir  from 
Berwick,  and  many  of  his  troops  remained  billeted 
in  the  neighbourhood.  On  22nd  June  the  castle 
of  Edinburgh  was  surrendered  to  Hamilton,  but 
General  Leslie's  commission  was  not  withdrawn, 
and  the  officers  who  had  come  from  abroad  to  serve 
in  the  Scots  army  were  still  kept  at  home.  The 
proclamation  of  the  Assembly  for  a  date  later  than 
that  agreed  on  and  the  inclusion  of  tlie  prelates  in 
it,  followed  as  this  was  by  the  protestation,  did  not 
tend  to  smooth  public  feeling ;  and  next  day  (2nd 
July)  the  people  of  Edinburgh,  annoyed  to  see  the 
castle  in  the  hands  of  their  enemy  Ruthven,  made 
an  onset  on  him  and  Traquair  in  the  streets.  But 
something   more   serious   followed.     Loudoun   was 


216     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

dispatched  to  Berwick  to  apologise  to  the  king  for 
this  disturbance,  but  was  sent  back  with  an  order 
requiring  fourteen  of  the  leaders  to  come  to  the 
Court.  The  ostensible  reason  was  that  the  king 
had  '  business  of  great  consequence  concerning 
the  peace  of  his  kingdoms  to  advise  with  them.' 
Argyll,  Montrose,  Rothes  and  Henderson  were 
among  those  summoned.  Only  six  obeyed  the 
summons,  and  the  king  commanded  them  to  send 
for  the  rest.  The  public  belief  in  Scotland  was 
that  there  was  a  design  to  entrap  the  leaders  of 
the  Covenant,  and  Sir  James  Balfour  plainly  says, 
*  While  the  Court  remained  at  Berwick  there  was 
a  court  trap  laid  to  catch  some  of  the  prime 
Covenanters.'  ^  The  matter  is  not  made  the  less 
mysterious  by  the  terms  of  a  private  warrant  from 
Charles  to  Hamilton  'to  converse  with  the  Cove- 
nanters,' dated  17th  July  1639.^  The  object  was 
to  find  out  what  their  intentions  were,  '  for  which 
end  you  will  be  necessitated  to  speak  that  language 
which  if  you  were  called  to  an  account  for  by  us, 
you  might  suffer  for  it.  These  are  therefore  to 
assure  you,  and  if  need  be  hereafter  to  testify  to 
others,  that  whatsoever  you  shall  say  to  them  to 
discover  their  intentions  in  these  particulars  you 
shall  neither  be  called  in  question  for  the  same,  nor 
yet  it  prove  any  ways  prejudicial  to  you,  nay, 
though  you  should  be  accused  by  any  thereupon.' 
Suspicion  of  danger  was  enough  for  the  populace  : 
when  Henderson  and  the  others  were  leaving 
Edinburgh  by  the  Watergate  near  the  Abbey 
crowds  gathered  to  stop  their  horses.^ 

1  Historical  Works,  ii.  pp.  333-4, 

*  Hardwicke,  State  Paper* ,  ii.  pp.  141-2. 

5  Guthry's  Memoir*  (1748),  p.  61, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     217 

Within  the  Assembly  the  atmosphere  was  quiet. 
The  first  business  was  to  pass  an  Act  '  containing 
the  Causes  and  Remedy  of  the  byegone  Evils  of 
this  kirk.'  This  Act  gathered  up  into  one  the 
various  matters  of  which  the  Church  had  com- 
plained and  dealt  with  them  all.  In  effect  it  re- 
enacted  what  the  Glasgow  Assembly  had  done, 
but  carefully  avoiding  any  reference  to  that 
Assembly.  The  Service  Book  and  Canons  were 
rejected  ;  the  Articles  of  Perth  were  to  be  no  more 
practised ;  episcopal  government  and  the  civil 
places  and  powei-s  of  kirkmen  were  to  '  be  holden 
still  as  unlawful  in  this  kirk  ' ;  the  Assemblies  from 
1606  to  1618  were  '  accounted  as  null  and  of  none 
effect.'  Then  there  followed  the  important  pro- 
vision that  for  preventing  all  such  evils  in  time 
coming  General  Assemblies  '  rightly  constituted  as 
the  proper  and  competent  judge  of  all  matters 
ecclesiastical  '  were  to  be  held  yearly  or  oftener 
as  occasion  required ;  also  that  kirk  sessions, 
presbyteries  and  synods  be  constituted  and  observed 
according  to  the  order  of  the  kirk.  It  is  to  be 
noticed  that  the  Assembly  refused  by  word  or  act 
to  throw  any  doubt  upon  the  lawfulness  of  the 
proceedings  in  the  Glasgow  Assembly ;  the 
sentences  against  the  bishops  were  not  cancelled, 
and  no  fresh  proceedings  were  taken  against  them. 
Traquair  intimated  his  assent  to  this  very  important 
Act  and  his  intention  to  ratify  it  in  the  ensuing 
Parliament,  and  the  Assembly,  believing  that 
the  king  meant  what  the  Commissioner  expressed, 
burst  forth  into  expressions  of  gratitude  and  joy. 
Henderson  who  was  leader  of  the  house  declared 
that  that  memorable  day,  Saturday  17th  August, 
was  '  as  joyful  a  day  as  ever  I  was  witness  unto, 


218  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

and  I  hope  we  shall  feed  upon  the  sweet  fruits 
hereafter.'  Some  of  the  aged  members,  who  re- 
called the  state  of  the  Church  before  the  innova- 
tions, were  hardly  able  to  give  expression  to  their 
emotions.  One  of  these  '  Mr.  John  Wemyss,  called 
on,  could  scarce  get  a  word  spoken  for  tears  trick- 
ling down  along  his  gray  hairs,  like  drops  of  rain 
or  dew  upon  the  top  of  the  tender  grass,  yet  withal 
smiling  for  joy  said  :  I  do  remember  when  the  kirk 
of  Scotland  had  a  beautiful  face,  I  remember  since 
there  was  a  great  power  and  life  accompanying 
the  ordinances  of  God,  and  a  wonderful  work  of 
operation  upon  the  hearts  of  people.  This  my 
eyes  did  see — a  fearful  defection  after  procured 
by  our  sins ;  and  no  more  did  I  wish  before  my 
eyes  were  closed  but  to  have  seen  such  a  beautiful 
day,  and  that  under  the  conduct  and  favour  of  our 
king's  Majesty.  Blessed  for  evermore  be  our  Lord 
and  King  Jesus,  and  the  blessing  of  God  be  upon 
His  Majesty,  and  the  Lord  make  us  thankful.'  ^ 

The  Assembly  showed  to  little  advantage  in  a 
Supplication  which  it  adopted  anent  The  Large 
Declaration.  It  devoted  enormous  pains  to  analys- 
ing this  extraordinary  production,  exposing  its 
'  lies  and  calumnies,'  and  asking  the  king  to  call 
in  the  book  and  have  its  authors  punished.  This 
manifesto  had  apparently  been  translated  into 
various  languages  and  sent  abroad,  representing 
the  Covenanters  as  plotting  rebellion  under  pretence 
of  religion.  It  embittered  their  feelings  against 
the  prelates,  who  were  regarded  as  the  real  authors, 
to  a  painful  degree,  and  they  permitted  themselves 
the  use  of  very  violent  language.  We  have  to 
remember  they  were  living  in  days  when  an  Arch- 

»  Peterkin,  Records  of  the  Kirk,  p.  261. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     219 

bishop  of  Canterbury  cut  off  men's  ears  and  branded 
their  faces  for  writing  pamphlets  against  him. 
When  a  lay  member  of  Assembly  desired  to  express 
his  opinion  of  the  wickedness  of  this  book  he  said, 
*  It  is  a  great  pity  that  many  honest  men  in 
Christendom  for  writing  little  books  called  pamphlets 
should  want  ears,  and  false  knaves  for  writing  such 
volumes  should  brooke  heads.' 

But  the  most  notable  and  most  regrettable 
proceeding  of  this  Assembly  was  a  supplication 
to  the  Commissioner  and  the  Privy  Council  to 
order  that  the  Covenant  be  subscribed  by  all  His 
Majesty's  subjects  in  Scotland  '  of  what  rank  and 
quality  soever  in  time  coming.'  This  was  prefaced 
by  a  loyal  declaration  that  they  never  had  any 
intention  to  attempt  anything  to  the  diminution 
of  the  king's  authority,  and  a  solemn  oath  to  stand 
to  the  defence  of  the  sovereign  in  everything 
concerning  His  Majesty's  honour.  A  committee 
of  the  Assembly,  of  which  Henderson  was  one, 
appeared  before  the  Privy  Council  with  the  petition  ; 
it  was  duly  granted,  and  an  Act  of  Council  passed. 
Not  a  voice,  either  in  Assembly  or  Council,  was 
raised  in  protest  against  this  proceeding,  althougli 
it  went  beyond  anything  the  Covenanters  had 
hitherto  done,  and  made  a  vital  change  in  their 
attitude  to  the  king  and  the  nation  which  led  in 
time  to  disastrous  results.  The  Covenant  had  been 
a  protest  against  coercion  in  matters  of  conscience, 
a  bond  voluntarily  entered  into  by  those  who 
signed  it  in  defence  of  liberty  in  the  worship  of 
God,  and  as  such  it  was  amply  justified.  This 
bond  was  now  to  be  imposed  by  civil  pains  and 
penalties  upon  every  Scottish  subject  whether  he 
agreed  with  it  or  not,  in  other  words,  it  was  per- 


220 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


verted  into  an  instrument  of  oppression.     It  was 
taken  as  a  matter  of  course,  in  accordance  with  the 
accepted  ideas  of  the  time,  that  the  national  Church 
should  impose  its  beliefs  on  the  whole  nation,  and 
that    every    individual    should    be    compelled    to 
accept  them  or  at  least  profess  acceptance.     But  it 
is  matter  for  profound  regret  that  men  who  valued 
liberty    so   highly   for   themselves,    and   had   just 
emerged  from  so  severe  a  struggle  for  it,  in  which 
they  had  pledged  life  and  fortune,   should  have 
made  the  serious  mistake  of  seeking  to  force  the 
Covenant  on  every  Scottish  subject  then  living,  and 
to  bind  every  future  generation  of  Scotsmen  to 
its  terms.     Men  who  could  do  that  had  after  all  a 
very  imperfect  notion  of  liberty.     And  it  is  specially 
lamentable    that     men     who     called     themselves 
Protestant,  who  professed  to  believe  in  the  right 
of  private  judgment  and  the  supremacy  of  con- 
science, had  so  imperfect  an  understanding  of  the 
meaning  and  effect  of  their  own  principles.     The 
Covenanters  made  undoubtedly  a  great  contribu- 
tion to  the  cause   of  liberty,  but  their  antagon- 
ists made  a  much-needed  contribution  too  when 
they   re-asserted   the   Reformation   principle   that 
*  General  Councils,  and  consequently  the  National 
Kirk  of  Scotland,  have   no   power  to   make   any 
perpetual  law  which  God  before  hath  not  made,' 
and   that   as  for  themselves  '  we  do  not  take  it 
upon  us  to  lay  any  further  bond  upon  our  posterity 
than  the  Word  of  God  doth,  recommending  only 
our  example  to  them,  so  far  as  they  shall  find  it 
agreeable  to  God's  Word.'  ^ 

This  Assembly  passed,  on  Henderson's  suggestion, 
an  admirable  piece  of  legislation,  the  first  Barrier 

*  3urnet;  Memoirs  of  the  Dukes  of  Hamilton  (1677),  pp.  86-7. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     221 

Act.  *  Considering  that  tlic  intended  Reformation 
being  recovered  may  be  established,  Ordains  that 
no  Novation  which  may  disturb  the  peace  of  the 
Church  and  make  division  be  suddenly  proponed 
and  enacted ;  But  so  that  the  motion  be  first 
communicated  to  the  several  synods,  presbyteries 
and  kirks,  that  the  matter  may  be  approved  by 
all  at  home,  and  commissioners  may  come  well 
prepared  unanimously  to  conclude  a  solid  de- 
liberation upon  these  points  in  the  General 
Assembly.'  The  reference  to  '  kirks '  or  kirk- 
sessions  is  worthy  of  notice.  This  act  has  been 
followed  by  others.  The  Barrier  Act  of  1697 
differs  chiefly  in  dropping  out  the  reference  to 
kirks,  providing  simply  that  the  overture  be 
remitted  to  the  consideration  of  the  several  pres- 
byteries. The  Church  had  had  too  much  experience 
of  proposals  brought  in  and  forced  through  in  one 
Assembly  under  pressure ;  the  object  was  to 
prevent  surprise  legislation  in  future,  to  secure 
deliberation  in  passing  Acts,  to  give  opportunity  to 
the  wliole  Church  to  have  a  previous  knowledge  of 
the  proposal,  and  to  express  their  opinion  upon  it. 

On  30th  August  Traquair  gratified  the  Assembly 
by  consenting  in  the  king's  name  to  all  its  acts, 
and  promising  that  the  first  thing  Parliament 
should  do  would  be  to  ratify  them.  He  was 
careful  to  see  that  the  terms  of  his  declarations  to 
the  Assembly  were  registered  in  the  books  of  the 
Privy  Council.  The  precise  terms  were  important 
in  view  of  his  Instructions  from  the  king.  He 
declared  that  '  for  giving  satisfaction  to  his  people 
and  for  quieting  of  the  present  distractions  he 
(the  king)  doth  consent  to  the  five  Articles  of  Perth, 
the  government  of  the   Church  by   bishops,   and 


222  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

civil  places  and  power  of  kirkmen  being  declared 
unlawful  within  this  kirk  as  contrary  to  the  con- 
stitutions thereof.'  But  it  was  added  that  '  the 
practice  of  the  premises  prohibited  within  this  kirk 
and  kingdom  shall  neither  bind  nor  infer  censure 
against  the  practisers  outwith  the  kingdom.'  ^ 

The  Commissioner  doubtless  fluttered  himself 
that  he  had  faithfully  carried  out  his  instructions, 
but  he  had  yet  to  learn  what  a  difficult  master 
Charles  was  to  serve.  The  king's  letter  of  1st 
October  must  have  come  as  a  cold  douche.  He 
was  there  sharply  informed  that  he  had  exceeded 
his  instructions,  that  the  king  totally  disapproved 
of  his  consenting  to  the  abolition  of  episcopacy 
as  *  unlawful,'  and  commanded  him  not  to  ratify 
the  act  in  the  same  terms  in  Parliament.  Charles 
was  distressed  lest  an  admission  that  episcopacy 
was  unlawful  in  Scotland  might  be  taken  as  ad- 
mitting it  to  be  unlawful  in  England  as  well. 
Against  that  he  was  entitled  to  be  protected.  But 
he  was  needlessly  apprehensive.  Traquair  was 
free  to  consent  to  the  abolition  of  episcopacy  '  as 
contrary  to  the  constitution  of  the  kirk,  of  Scot- 
land '  :  what  he  had  done  was  to  consent  to  its 
abolition  as  '  unlawful  within  this  kirk  as  contrary 
to  the  constitutions  thereof.'  Against  a  consent 
so  guarded  the  king  had  no  just  cause  of  complaint. 

The  churchmen  were  premature  in  their  rejoic- 
ings. Parliament  sat  on  31st  August,  the  day  after 
the  Assembly  rose,  meeting  for  the  first  time  in  the 
new  Parliament  House  which  had  just  been  built. 
Until  it  ratified  the  Acts  of  Assembly  and  until  the 
king  assented  to  the  Acts  of  Parliament  everything 
was  still  in  the  air,  the  Church  had  no  security. 

^  Register  of  Privy  Council^  vii.  (2ud  series),  p.  132. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    223 

But  Parliament  sat  till  14th  November,  and  was 
then  prorogued  without  its  own  consent  till  June 
1640,  and  still  nothing  was  settled.  If  the  king 
was  dissatisfied  with  the  Assembly  he  was  far  more 
deeply  dissatisfied  with  Parliament.  That  a  new 
spirit  was  at  work  in  it  was  evident  from  the  outset. 
A  great  deal  had  happened  in  Scotland  since  the 
Parliament  of  1633.  A  revolution  had  taken  place. 
The  great  Assembly  of  1638  had  dealt  a  fatal  blow 
at  episcopacy  and  also  at  absolute  monarchy. 
The  same  spirit  animated  the  Assembly  of  1639. 
It  entered  the  political  sphere  too,  and  at  once 
transformed  the  erstwhile  humble  and  subservient 
Scottish  Parliament.  This  was  evident  in  the 
very  first  business,  the  election  of  the  committee 
of  the  Articles.  The  disappearance  of  the  bishops 
involved  some  remodelling  of  that  committee. 
Traquair  was  to  try  to  fill  the  places  of  the  fourteen 
prelates  with  as  many  ministers  chosen  by  the  king. 
If  that  were  hopeless  the  next  best  was  that  fourteen 
laymen  should  be  chosen  by  the  king.  His  hope 
was  that  they  would  play  the  same  role  as  the  bishops 
had  previously  done  in  choosing  the  committee  of 
the  Articles,  and  in  that  way  enable  the  Crown 
to  retain  the  control  of  Parliament.  But  Argyll 
and  Loudoun,  while  agreeing  as  a  temporary 
arrangement  for  the  present  Parliament  that 
Traquair  should  elect  eight  noblemen  to  be  on  the 
Articles,  who  in  turn  should  choose  eight  barons 
and  eight  burgesses,  protested  that  this  was  not 
to  prejudice  *  their  right  and  liberty  of  a  free 
Parliament,'  and  that  '  an  article  be  presented 
and  an  Act  made  for  settling  a  perfect  order  of 
election  of  the  Articles  in  all  time  coming,  whereby 
the  noblemen  by  themselves,  the  barons  by  them- 


224     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

selves,  and  the  burghs  by  themselves  may  elect 
such  of  their  own  number  as  shall  be  upon  the 
Articles.'  This  meant  nothing  short  of  a  political 
revolution.  The  control  of  Parliament  would  be 
completely  wrested  out  of  the  hands  of  the  king. 
Here  was  a  new  and  alarming  development.  It 
was  no  re-assertion  of  former  liberties  as  in  the 
case  of  the  Church ;  it  was  a  new  and  unheard-of 
claim  to  subvert  the  constitution.  A  political 
change  so  vast  and  so  sudden  was  certain  to  strain 
the  unity  of  the  party,  to  bring  about  a  split 
between  the  radical  and  the  conservative 
Covenanters.  In  point  of  fact  the  split  occurred, 
and  it  is  important  as  the  first  cleavage  in  the 
hitherto  solid  ranks  of  the  Covenant.  A  con- 
servative party  appeared  headed  by  Montrose. 
They  too  were  against  episcopacy,  but  they  took 
for  granted  that  the  king  would  now  honestly 
accept  the  situation  and  reconcile  himself  to 
Scottish  presbyterianism.  The  majority,  on  the 
contrary,  were  convinced  that  to  leave  him  in  control 
of  Parliament  was  to  imperil  all  the  work  that  the 
Assembly  had  done.  Acting  on  his  belief,  Montrose 
was  prepared  to  support  the  Crown  in  striving  to 
maintain  its  control  of  Parliament  through  the 
committee  of  the  Articles.  He  was  jealous  of  the 
growing  strength  of  the  popular  movement  and 
of  Argyll's  leadership  :  he  believed  in  the  royal 
authority  as  something  not  derived  from,  but  to  be 
balanced  against,  national  right,  and  he  was  pre- 
pared to  go  great  lengths  in  submission  to  it. 
Besides,  he  had  not  taken  the  true  measure  of 
Charles's  character.  He  was  ardent  and  sincere 
in  his  devotion  to  his  country,  but  he  believed 
that  the  king  meant  well,  and  that  his  professions 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     225 

should   be   accepted.     He   had   not   imbibed  that 
deep  distrust  of  Charles  which  a  better  understand- 
ing and  a  longer  experience  of  him  had  implanted 
in  the  minds  of  other  men  both  in  England  and 
Scotland.     Had  Charles  even  now  frankly  accepted 
the   Pacification   as   Scotland   understood   it,    and 
made  his  peace  with  the  Church,  he  might  have 
secured   the   political   support   of  a   strong   party 
among  the  Covenanters,  and  the  neutrality  of  the 
Scots   in   the   coming   struggle   with   the   English 
Parliament.     He  threw  away  whatever  chance  he 
had    of  detaching   the    moderate    Covenanters   at 
this  time  by  the  line  he  took  on  the  Church  question. 
On  1st  October  he  wrote  to  Traquair  refusing  his 
consent  to  the  rescinding  of  any  Acts  of  Parliament 
in  favour  of  episcopacy.     That  made  it  plain  that 
his  consent  to  the  Assembly's  abolition  of  episcopacy 
was  due  simply  to  present  compulsion,  and  that  he 
would  undo  it  as  soon  as  he  felt  strong  enough. 
When  Parliament  proceeded  to  pass  Acts  abolishing 
episcopacy   as   '  unlawful   within   this   kirk,'    and 
depriving   bishops   of  their   votes   in   Parliament, 
and  other  Acts  ratifying  the  proceedings  of  the 
Assembly    he    resolved    to   delay    no    longer.     He 
ordered  Traquair  to  prorogue  Parliament  till  March. 
There  was  strong  opposition  to  proroguing  without 
consent  of  the  Estates  as  a  thing  without  precedent. 
The  Commissioner  consulted  the  king,  who  adhered 
to  his  resolution.     On   14th  November,  upon  the 
ground  that  '  diverse  things  have  occurred  in  this 
Parliament  which,  as  His  Majesty  conceives,  mainly 
touch  His  Majesty's  civil  authority  and  govern- 
ment,' prorogation  was  made  till  2nd  June  1640, 
in  the  face  of  a  solemn  remonstrance  and  protest. 
The  rupture  with  Parliament  was  due  to  the  king's 


226     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

attitude  on  Church  legislation,  but  he  wished  to 
rest  it  on  other  grounds.  '  If  you  find,'  he  wrote  to 
Traquair,  '  that  what  we  have  commanded  you  to 
do  is  likely  to  cause  a  rupture,  their  impertinent 
motions  give  you  a  fair  occasion  to  make  it  appear 
to  the  world  that  we  have  condescended  to  all 
matters  which  can  be  pretended  to  concern  con- 
science and  religion,  and  that  now  they  aim  at 
nothing  but  the  overthrow  of  royal  authority 
contrary  to  all  their  professions.  Therefore  we 
hope  and  expect  that  if  a  rupture  happen  you  will 
make  this  appear  to  be  the  cause  thereof  and  not 
religion.'  Whatever  he  wanted  to  '  appear  to  the 
world  '  Charles  knew  it  was  his  refusal  to  carry  out 
the  terms  of  the  Pacification  in  matters  of  religion 
that  lay  at  the  root  of  the  dissatisfaction  and 
irritation  in  Scotland. 

Before  the  prorogation  Loudoun  and  Dunfermline 
had  been  sent  up  by  the  Estates  to  ask  the  king 
to  confirm  the  Acts  of  the  Parliament.  They  were 
denied  access,  and  before  they  returned  from 
London  Parliament  had  been  prorogued.  A  second 
time  they  went  up  by  invitation  conveyed  through 
Traquair.  They  had  audiences  with  the  king 
in  February  and  March  1640,  but  nothing  came  of 
these  discussions.  Charles  showed  himself  as  un- 
willing as  before  to  throw  over  the  bishops  and 
confirm  the  Acts  of  the  Parliament,  and  so  settle 
the  Church  question  in  Scotland.  The  conferences 
were  futile,  for  the  simple  reason  that  he  had  already 
made  up  his  mind  for  war. 


1 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     227 

9.  BLUE  BONNETS  OVER  THE  BORDER 

August — October  1640 

Before  the  end  of  1639  the  king  had  called 
Wentworth  into  his  counsels.  A  committee  of 
eight  privy  councillors,  of  whom  only  one — 
Hamilton — was  a  Scotsman,  were  charged  with 
Scottish  affairs,  but  Wentworth  was  the  king's 
real  adviser  from  this  time  onwards.  He  was  all 
for  war  and  for  aggressive  war  against  Scotland. 
He  was  confident  that  the  Scots  would  be  easily 
subdued,  a  single  campaign  of  five  months  would 
suffice.  Charles  was  singularly  unfortunate  in  his 
advisers.  Just  a  year  before  Hamilton,  who  ought 
to  have  known  Scotland,  told  him  it  would  be  an 
easy  matter  to  take  the  kingly  way  and  conquer 
the  Scots.  Now  Wentworth,  who  certainly  did  not 
know  Scotland,  gave  the  same  advice.  In  the 
interval  the  king  himself  had  an  opportunity  of 
putting  the  matter  to  the  test.  He  knew  the  result 
of  his  miserable  expedition  to  Birks.  But  he  was 
incapable  of  learning.  So  there  must  be  a  second 
war  against  these  stiff-necked  Scots.  And 
Wentworth  had  no  doubt  how  it  ought  to  be  gone 
about.  A  Parliament  must  be  summoned.  He 
was  the  strong  man  who  had  shown  that  he  could 
rule  Ireland  and  could  manage  an  Irish  Parliament. 
But  his  advice  proved  that  he  understood  the 
feelings  of  England  as  little  as  he  did  those  of 
Scotland.  He  thought  the  English  were  as  full 
of  zeal  for  the  king  and  as  indignant  against  the 
Scots  as  he  himself  undoubtedly  was.  Nothing 
could  have  been  further  from  the  truth.  Their 
temper   during   his   long   absence   in    Ireland   had 


228  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

hardened  under  a  bitter  experience  of  ship-money, 
forced  loans,  ecclesiastical  innovations,  Star  Chamber 
and  High  Commission  rule.     Some  might  be  in- 
different,    but    the    most    part    and    the    most 
influential  part  of  the  English  people  were  now  in 
sympathy  with  the  Scots.     Charles,  however,  con- 
gratulated himself  he  had  found  a  piece  of  evidence 
of  Scottish  treason  that  would  cause  the  loyalty 
of  his  English  subjects  to  leap  into  flame.     Traquair 
had  come  into  possession  of  a  letter  which  the 
Covenanting  leaders  had  intended  in  the  previous 
year,  1639,  to  send  to  the  French  king  Louis  xiii., 
asking  him  to  mediate  between  Charles  and  them. 
The  letter  was  signed  by  Loudoun  among  others, 
but  it  had  never  been  sent.     Traquair  brought  it  to 
London  in  February  1640,  and  Loudoun,  who  was 
then    in    London,    was   thrown    into   the    Tower. 
Parliament  was  summoned  on  Wentworth's  advice, 
and  met  on  13th  April.     It  had  already  been  de- 
cided by  the  Council  of  War  that  an  army  was  to  be 
raised.     In  February  arrangements  were  made  to 
raise   30,000   foot   in   England  :    in   March  Went- 
worth  (how  Earl  of  Strafford)  crossed  over  to  Ireland 
and  induced  the  Parliament  there  to  vote  both 
men  and  money  for  the  king's  service  out  of  Ireland. 
When  Parliament  met  it  was  asked  to  provide 
money  for  the  army  which  Charles  said  he  had 
been  compelled  to  raise.     At  the  same  time  the 
letter  was  produced  and  read.     But  the  raising 
of  an  army  by  the  king's  sole  authority  had  been 
regarded   in   England   with   great   suspicion,    and 
Parliament  was  in  no  hurry  to  vote  supplies.     As 
for  the  letter  there  was  not  sufficient  evidence  to 
show  treasonable  intention,  and  it  was  simply  set 
aside.     Members  were  more  bent  upon  discussing 
the  grievances  of  the   English   people,   civil  and 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     229 

religious.  Under  Pym's  leadership  they  took  the 
position  of  refusing  to  vote  money  until  grievances 
were  redressed  and  from  that  position  they  refused 
to  move.  After  a  session  of  only  three  weeks,  the 
Short  Parliament  was  dissolved  on  5th  May. 
For  us  the  noteworthy  fact  is  that  the  dissolution 
was  due  immediately  to  Scottish  affairs.  The 
relations  between  the  two  countries  were  already 
developing  in  a  significant  fashion.  In  the  early 
part  of  the  year  secret  communications  had  passed 
between  the  leaders  in  England  and  in  Scotland. 
Burnet  has  a  story  of  one  Frost  being  sent  down 
from  England  as  a  poor  traveller  bearing  a  paper 
concealed  in  a  hollow  cane  to  be  communicated  only 
to  Rothes,  Argyll  and  Wariston.^  Gardiner  con- 
jectures that  the  communications  hinted  at  by 
Burnet  related  to  the  period  before  the  Short 
Parliament.^  Evidence  is  available  which  proves 
that  Gardiner's  conjecture  is  well  founded,  and  is 
interesting  for  another  reason.  It  amplifies  and 
corrects  Burnet's  version  of  the  matter,  and  shows 
that  the  threads  of  the  secret  messages  were  in 
Henderson's  hands.  The  Coltness  papers  tell  the 
story  in  much  fuller  detail.  It  appears  that  James 
Stewart,  an  Edinburgh  merchant  (afterwards  Sir 
James  Stewart  a  Lord  Provost  of  the  city),  was  fre- 
quently in  London  on  business  matters.  He  was 
well  known  to  be  a  staunch  Covenanter.  A  friend 
introduced  him  to  Lord  Savillc  with  whom  he  was 
closeted  for  some  hours.  Savillc  *  showed  him  the 
ferment  was  in  England  by  reason  of  the  Earl  of 
Strafford's  favouring  the  queen's  Roman  Catholic 
emissaries  in  England ;  that  Ireland,  in  which  he 
was  Lord  Deputy,  was  in  Roman  Catholic  hands, 

'  History  of  hit  ©irn  Time  (ed.  1823),  i.  p.  47. 
'  Hittory  of  England,  ix.  p.  178  note. 


230     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Scotland  could  not  long  be  safe ;  he  entreated  for  his 
country's  sake  he  would  put  his  friends  on  their 
guard.'  Stewart  was  averse  to  interfering,  but  on 
Saville's  pressure  agreed  to  a  second  interview.  At  it 
both  signed  an  oath  of  secrecy,  then  '  Saville  opened 
particulars  and  showed  Stewart  the  combination 
of  many  leaders  in  England  who  would  stand 
by  the  Scots  in  defence  of  their  liberties  sacred 
and  civil;  and  the  instructions  he  was  authorised 
to  lay  before  Argyll,  Rothes  and  Mr.  Henderson, 
minister,  were  all  read  over.'  Stewart  still  declined. 
'  At  length  it  was  concerted  that  because  of  spies 
or  strict  search  all  the  packet  should  be  conveyed 
in  a  hollowed  wheep,  and  that  Saville's  messenger 
should  go  along  in  the  character  of  Stewart's 
servant  with  a  portmantle ;  but  that  Stewart  should 
open  the  matter  in  a  verbal  conference  with  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Henderson  and  deliver  to  him  the  con- 
cealed packet,  which  Mr.  Henderson  in  the  most 
prudent  way  was  to  impart  to  the  two  Lords.' 
Stewart's  Day-book  gives  a  clue  to  the  date.  It 
contained  an  entry  :  '  6th  February,  Mr.  Frost  and 
I  came  from  London  in  ten  days.  What  have  I 
to  do  with  the  quarrel,  Earl  Strafford  and  Lord 
Saville  ?  Saville  drives  one  way  and  looks  another, 
yet  Providence  may  bring  good  out  their  jarrings  to 
his  own  cause.'  The  Coltness  writer  goes  on :  *  Bishop 
Burnet  hints  at  this  story  of  Lord  Saville  but  is 
in  somewhat  wrong.  He  says  all  the  subscrip- 
tions were  forged,  but  there  were  more  than  a 
dozen  genuine,  and  most  of  them  Parliament  men. 
Vane,  Strod  and  Hampden  were  in  the  concert  and 
so  was  HoUis,  though  he  knew  nothing  of  the 
forgeries,  for  several  such  were  adhibited.'  ^ 

^  OoUnass  Collections,  Maitland  Club,  pp.  19-21. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     231 

It  is  certain  that  conferences  also  took  place 
between  the  Opposition  leaders  and  the  Scots 
commissioners  who  were  in  London  in  regard  to 
the  Scottish  grievances.  Now  Parliament  was 
about  to  take  an  open  step  by  petitioning  the  king 
to  come  to  terms  with  the  Scots.  It  was  well 
known  that  the  war  against  Scotland  had  no  friends 
in  the  Commons,  that,  on  the  contrary,  many  looked 
on  the  cause  of  the  Scots  as  really  their  own.  The 
petition,  it  was  expected,  would  be  adopted  on  5th 
May.  The  prospect  of  a  debate  and  petition  on 
Scottish  matters  alarmed  the  king,  and  in  order  to 
prevent  it  he  hastened  to  dissolve  Parliament.^ 

But  though  the  king  had  resolved  on  war  he  was 
not  ready  to  strike.  Three  months  and  a  half 
were  still  to  elapse  before  he  left  London — on  20th 
August— to  put  himself  at  the  head  of  his  army. 
Over  the  historj^  of  those  three  months  are  written 
confusion,  distraction  and  vacillation.  The  king 
and  his  advisers  were  at  their  wits'  end  to  raise 
money.  Every  device  was  tried,  many  of  them  only 
to  be  dropped  :  forced  loans  from  the  city,  from 
peers,  from  others  in  the  king's  service,  a  bene- 
volence from  the  clergy,  an  advance  by  the  farmers 
of  the  customs,  debasing  the  silver  coinage,  a  sub- 
scription from  English  Roman  Catholics,  ship-money, 
coat  and  conduct  money,  and  so  forth.  The  king  was 
met  by  murmuring,  refusals,  resistance.  And  after 
every  effort  the  miserable  bodies  of  recruits  he  was 
able  to  gather  were  undisciplined,  mutinous,  ill-paid, 
ill-led,  a  greater  terror  to  friend  than  to  foe.  The 
Irish  army,  from  which  so  much  had  been  hoped, 
could  not  be  brought  over  for  want  of  money.  The 
delay  was  all  in  favour  of  the  Scots,  who  meanwhile 

»  Calendar  of  State  Papert  (Dom.),  1640,  p.  119. 


232     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

were  also  preparing  for  the  war.  In  April,  Leslie 
was  again  appointed  General  by  the  Committee  of 
Parliament,  and  the  former  organisation  brought 
to  life  for  raising  and  equipping  an  army.  But 
instead  of  apathy  and  discontent  Scotland  was 
filled  with  the  spirit  of  enthusiasm  and  energy ; 
voluntary  offerings  of  money,  silver  plate,  jewels, 
rings,  and  cloth  for  tents  poured  in.  An  army  was 
raised  of  some  22,000  foot  and  3000  horse.  The 
English  force  is  said  to  have  been  about  half  that 
number,  but  even  greater  was  the  contrast  in  the 
morale  of  the  opposing  armies.  The  Scottish 
soldiers  understood  and  believed  in  the  cause  for 
which  they  were  fighting,  they  had  confidence  in 
themselves  and  in  their  leaders ;  the  English 
lacked  all  these  things. 

If  the  people  of  Scotland  were  themselves  heart 
and  soul  in  the  cause,  their  leaders  acted  with  a 
determination,  promptness  and  skill  that  breathed 
confidence  into  the  nation.  Parliament  met  on 
2nd  June  and,  disregarding  an  order  from  the  king 
postponing  their  meeting  for  a  month  as  merely 
a  device  to  gain  time,  voted  themselves  a  lawful 
Parliament,  elected  a  president,  and  proceeded  with 
business  in  the  absence  of  the  Commissioner.  It 
rescinded  the  Acts  in  favour  of  prelates  sitting  and 
voting  in  Parliament,  made  Parliament  master  of 
its  own  committees,  free  to  pass  or  reject  bills 
proposed  by  the  committee  of  the  Articles,  which, 
if  elected  at  all,  was  to  contain  representatives  of 
each  Estate  chosen  by  that  Estate,  and  generally 
passed  all  the  bills  which  had  been  approved  by 
the  committee  of  the  Articles  before  the  prorogation 
of  November.  It  also  passed  an  Act  providing 
that  Parliaments  should  be  held  once  every  three 


^ 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     238 

years.  On  11th  June  it  rose,  after  ratifying  the 
appointment  of  LesHe  and  vesting  the  direction 
of  tlie  war  and  the  government  of  the  country  in  a 
large  Committee  of  Estates.  On  28th  July  the 
General  Assembly  met  at  Aberdeen.  Henderson 
was  not  present,  he  was  needed  in  Edinburgh  where 
the  leaders  of  the  nation  had  affairs  of  the  utmost 
gravity  on  hand.  The  Committee  of  Estates  first 
dealt  vigorously  with  the  north.  Aberdeen  and 
the  Gordon  country  were  sternly  brought  to  sub- 
mission by  Colonel  Munro.  Argyll  raided  the 
Athol  country  and  Angus ;  soon  there  was  no 
support  in  Scotland  for  the  king  except  Ruthven 
holding  the  castle  in  Edinburgh. 

In  regard  to  the  situation  in  England,  the 
Committee  of  Estates  felt  they  were  on  firmer 
ground  now  than  they  had  been  the  year  before. 
The  Short  Parliament  had  come  and  gone.  Its 
attitude  had  been  friendly  to  the  Scottish  cause  ; 
the  refusal  to  support  the  king  by  supplies  had  been 
an  invaluable  assistance.  The  situation  was  no 
longer  what  it  had  been.  The  two  nations  had 
drawn  more  closely  together,  and  come  to  realise 
that  they  were  fighting  the  same  battle.  The 
Committee  knew  also  the  king's  desperate  straits 
for  money,  the  widespread  discontent  of  the 
English  people,  and  the  disaffection  of  the  English 
troops.  The  Scots  were  in  secret  communication 
witli  a  number  of  English  noblemen,  and  were 
assured  of  their  sympathy  and  support,  and  they 
decided  not  to  wait  this  time  on  their  own  side  of 
the  Border  but  to  march  south.  After  their  ex- 
perience of  the  treaty  of  Birks  they  would  have 
nothing  more  to  do  with  a  peace  patched  up  with 
the  king  himself :    they  were  determined  to  deal 


234     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

direct    with    an    English    Parhament,    and    they 
beheved  that  could  not  be  done  till  a  Scottish  army 
stood  on  English  soil  and  controlled  the  situation. 
Having  decided  upon  an  invasion  of  England 
the  Scottish  leaders  early  in  August  issued  mani- 
festoes  addressed   to   the   English   people   setting 
forth  the  reasons  for  this  step.     They  had  then  as 
always  a  shrewd  idea  of  the  importance  of  what  we 
have  now  learned  to  call  the  publicity  department 
of  war.     One  of  these  manifestoes  was  a  short  paper 
entitled  an  '  Information  from  the  Scottish  Nation 
to  all  the  true  English  concerning  the  present  Ex- 
pedition.'     Another,    a     longer    document     from 
Henderson's  pen  was  headed  '  Six  Considerations 
of  the  Lawfulness  of  our  Expedition  into  England 
Manifested.'     The  Information  sets  out  by  referring 
to  the  futile  Pacification.     Then  it  proceeds  :  '  In 
this  case  to  send  new  commissioners  or  supplica- 
tions were  against  experience  and  hopeless  ;    to 
maintain   an  army  on  the  Borders  is  above  our 
strength  and  cannot  be  a  safety  unto  us  by  sea ; 
to  retire  homewards  were  to  call  on  our  enemies  to 
follow  us  and  to  make  ourselves  and  our  country 
a  prey  by  land,  as  our  ships  and  goods  are  made  at 
sea.     We  are  therefore  constrained  at  this  time  to 
come  into  England,  not  to  make  war,  but  for  seeking 
our  relief  and  preservation.'     Then  it  points  out 
that  the  cause  is  a  common  cause,  and  that  only  a 
Parliament  can  deal  with  it.     '  Your  grievances  are 
ours,    the    preservation    or    ruin    of   religion    and 
liberties  is  common  to  both  nations,  we  must  now 
stand  or  fall  together.     We  come  to  get  assurance 
of  the  enjoying  of  our  religion  and  liberties  in  peace 
against  invasion  ;    and  that  the  authors  of  all  our 
grievances   and   yours   being   tried   in   Parliament 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    235 

and  our  wrongs  redressed,  the  two  kingdoms  may 
live  in  greater  love  and  unity  than  ever  before,  if 
the  wicked  counsels  of  papists,  prelatists  and  other 
firebrands,  their  adherents,  be  not  more  hearkened 
unto  than  our  true  and  honest  Declarations.'  And 
they  did  not  forget  to  assure  their  readers  that  no 
soldier  would  be  allowed  to  commit  any  outrage 
or  do  the  smallest  wrong,  and  that  they  would  take 
neither  meat  nor  drink  nor  anything  else  but  for 
money.  A  third  and  fuller  manifesto  was  described 
as  *  The  Intentions  of  the  army  of  Scotland  declared 
to  their  brethren  of  England  by  the  commissioners 
of  the  late  Parliament,  and  by  the  General,  noblemen, 
barons  and  other  officers  of  the  army.'  These 
papers  the  Scots  circulated  through  towns  and 
villages  in  England  as  far  south  as  London,  and 
they  produced  no  little  effect  in  their  favour. 

The  actual  crossing  of  the  Tweed  took  place  at 
Coldstream  on  the  20th  of  August,  the  same  day 
on  which  the  king  left  London  for  the  north.  It 
happened  that  day  that  the  lot  fell  on  Montrose 
and  his  men  with  the  bunches  of  blue  ribbons  on 
their  bonnets  to  lead  the  van.  Montrose  himself 
went  on  foot  first  through  the  stream  and  returned 
to  encourage  his  men.  The  army  marched  through 
Northumberland  meeting  with  no  opposition.  The 
excellent  promises  of  their  manifestoes  were  followed 
by  excellent  conduct  on  the  part  of  the  invaders. 
Lord  Conway,  in  charge  of  the  king's  forces  in  the 
far  north,  reported  on  the  24th  :  '  They  deal  very 
subtilely,  they  hurt  no  man  in  any  kind,  they  pay 
for  what  they  take,  so  that  the  country  doth  give 
them  all  the  assistance  they  can.  Many  of  the 
country  gentlemen  do  come  to  them,  entertain  and 
feast  them.' 


236     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

On  the  king's  side  there  was  everywhere  con- 
fusion, shilly-shallying,  and  unreadiness.  When 
the  Scots  had  reached  the  Tyne  Conway  went  out 
of  Newcastle  with  part  of  his  forces  and  endeavoured 
to  stop  them  at  Newburn,  some  four  miles  up  the 
river.  The  Scots  had  the  better  ground,  there 
was  some  firing  of  cannon  on  both  sides,  but  the 
raw  English  levies  soon  threw  down  their  arms 
and  fled  as  some  Scottish  horse  began  to  cross  the 
river.  The  horse  charged  the  English  cavalry 
which  also  broke  and  fled  ;  the  infantry  fell  back 
on  Newcastle,  the  cavalry  posted  on  to  Durham. 
Such  was  the  battle  of  Newburn  on  28th  August, 
the  first  and  the  last  fight  in  Charles's  boasted 
expedition  to  overpower  Scotland.  The  Scots 
lost  a  dozen  men,  the  English  sixty  or  more. 
Newcastle,  which  ought  to  have  been  fortified  but 
was  not,  was  entered  by  the  Scots  next  day. 
Strafford  had  got  as  far  north  as  Darlington,  the 
king  was  at  Northallerton,  but  without  striking 
another  blow  they  turned  back  to  York,  leaving 
Northumberland  and  Durham  to  be  overrun  by 
the  Scottish  army.  On  the  following  Sunday  the 
invaders  had  a  high  day  in  Newcastle  :  a  public 
dinner  was  given  to  the  general  and  the  leaders, 
the  king's  health  was  drunk  with  enthusiasm,  and 
Henderson  preached  '  to  a  great  confluence  of 
people.' 

Little  wonder  that  Treasurer  Vane  reported  to 
Secretary  Windebanke,  '  It  is  strange  to  see  how 
Leslie  steals  the  hearts  of  the  people  in  these 
northern  parts.  You  shall  do  well  to  think  of 
timely  remedies  to  be  applied  lest  the  disease  grow 
incurable,  for  I  apprehend  you  are  not  much 
better  in  the  south.'     This  last  word  explains  the 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    237 

astounding  fact  that  not  another  shot  was  fired  in 
the  war ;    nobody  eitlier  north  or  south  had  any 
heart    for    the    king's    cause.     Its    collapse    was 
complete,  and  the  humiliated  king  could  only  appeal 
to  the  Privy  Council  in  London  for  advice.     They 
advised  the  calling  of  a  Great  Council  of  Peers  ; 
for  the  moment  this  would  save  the  king's  face, 
but  every  one  knew  what  it  meant — what  Charles 
hated  and  feared — the  calling  of  Parliament.     For 
once  Laud  put  the  truth  bluntly.     '  We  are  at  the 
wall,'  he  said,  '  we  have  no  way  but  this  or  the 
calling   of  a    Parliament,    and   the    Parliament   a 
consequent.'     The    Opposition    Lords    about    the 
same  time  had  also  sent  a  petition  to  the  king  with 
a   prayer   for  a   Parliament.     There   was   another 
from  the  city  of  London.     Finally  the  victorious 
Scots,  although  masters  of  the  North  of  England, 
were  content  also  to  petition  that  the  king  would 
consider  their  grievances  and  provide  the  repair 
of  their  wrongs  and  losses,   and  would  with  the 
advice   of  Parliament   settle   a   firm   and   durable 
peace.     Charles   submitted   to  the   universal    and 
inevitable    demand.      On    24th    September    when 
the  Great  Council  met  at  York  he  announced  that 
he  had  directed  Parliament  to  be  summoned  for 
3rd  November.     With  pompous  imbecility  he  spoke 
to  the  peers  about  chastising  the  rebels,  but  he 
found  them  in  no  mood  to  listen  to  such  language. 
Tlie  fact  was  plain  beyond  words  that  the  Scots 
were  masters  of  the  situation.     Their  leaders  had 
shown  themselves  to  be  clear-sighted  men.     The 
daring  policy  of  invading  England,  though  attended 
with  risks,  had  proved  itself  to  be  the  sound  policy. 
By  a  brief  and  almost   bloodless  campaign  it  had 
already  brought  within  sight  a  real  settlement  of 


238     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

the  Scottish  question.  And  it  had  done  more.  It 
had  brought  home  to  the  two  nations  the  con- 
viction that  their  cause  was  a  common  one  ;  and  by 
transferring  the  struggle  to  EngHsh  soil  and  forcing 
the  calling  of  a  Parliament  there  it  had  put  into  the 
hand  of  England  a  weapon  which  in  her  present 
temper  she  was  certain  to  use  for  her  own  deliver- 
ance from  the  common  oppressor. 

Meanwhile  the  Scots  were  ready  to  discuss  a 
treaty,  but  they  did  not  mean  to  waste  time  over 
it.  Their  army  had  to  be  fed,  and  if  time  were 
needed  for  settling  the  terms  of  a  treaty  provision 
must  be  made  by  England  at  once  for  the  main- 
tenance of  that  army.  '  We  were  somewhat  jealous 
of  the  English  policy  in  this  treaty,'  says  the 
cautious  Baillie.  '  If  it  take  not  speedy  success 
our  general  minds  to  lift  speedily  from  Newcastle 
and  draw  nearer  to  York.  We  hope  that  God  will 
make  the  fear  of  our  arms  to  further  the  Treaty.' 
The  fear  of  the  Scottish  arms  operated  with  re- 
markable effect.  Sixteen  English  peers  were  ap- 
pointed commissioners  to  treat.  Their  leader  was 
the  Earl  of  Bristol,  an  able  and  moderate  man. 
The  Scots  commissioners,  eight  in  number,  in- 
cluded Loudoun,  Dunfermline,  Henderson  and 
Wariston.  Their  conferences  were  held  at  Ripon, 
and  lasted  from  2nd  till  26th  October.  The 
Scots  commissioners  were  well  aware  of  the 
strength  of  their  position,  and  they  made  that 
evident  to  the  other  side.  At  the  king's  suggestion 
an  attempt  was  made  to  induce  them  to  leave 
Ripon  and  meet  in  York,  doubtless  that  he  might 
bring  his  personal  influence  to  bear  on  them ; 
Loudoun  and  his  colleagues  refused  to  stir.  In  the 
end  the  Scots  agreed  to  a  cessation  of  arms  upon 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     239 

payment  to  them  of  a  contribution  of  £850  a  day 
for  two  months.  Adequate  security  was  to  be 
found,  and  the  Scottish  army  was  to  remain  in 
occupation  of  Northumberland  and  Durham  till 
the  conclusion  of  the  Treaty.  The  peers  had  to 
find  money  also  for  the  English  army  ;  the  dis- 
banding of  it,  which  meant  leaving  the  whole  of 
England  at  the  mercy  of  the  Scots,  was  not  to  be 
thought  of.  The  city  of  London  had  no  money 
to  lend  Charles,  but  promised  at  once  a  loan  of 
£200,000  on  the  security  of  the  peers.  The  so- 
called  treaty  of  Ripon,  humiliating  though  it  was 
to  England,  was  confirmed  by  the  Great  Council  of 
Peers  on  28th  October.  The  English  commissioners 
thought  the  Scots  drove  a  hard  bargain,  but  they 
had  no  alternative  save  to  agree  to  terms  which  the 
other  side  would  accept.  At  the  conference  table 
on  16th  October  Henderson  assured  Bristol  in  his 
most  genial  tone  that  their  ends  were  all  one,  both 
sides  were  endeavouring  peace ;  in  fact  it  was 
England  that  had  the  advantage,  for  it  was  better 
to  give  than  to  receive.^  The  main  treaty  had  still 
to  be  discussed,  and  as  the  meeting  of  Parliament 
was  at  hand  it  was  agreed  to  carry  on  the  further 
negotiations  in  London. 

The  result  of  the  armistice  was  that  England 
had  to  support  two  opposing  armies,  its  own 
and  that  of  the  invaders.  That  was  bad  enough, 
but  the  extraordinary  situation  soon  developed — 
farcical  had  it  not  been  tragical — that  the  in- 
vaders remained  on  English  soil  long  after  the 
two  months  expired,  practically  at  the  invitation 
of  the  English  Parliament  to  enable  it  to  coerce 
the  English  king. 

'  Sir  John  Borough's  Notet :  Treaty  of  Ripon,  Camden  Society,  p.  45. 


240     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


10.  henderson  in  london  :    the  treaty  : 
castell's  petition 

Naoember  1640— July  1641 

The  current  swept  Henderson  and  his  colleagues 
during  the  next  few  months  into  the  very  heart  of 
the  most  stirring  and  stupendous  events  in  English 
history.  He  was  in  London  from  November  1640 
till  near  the  end  of  July  1641.  Those  nine  months 
saw  the  first  period  of  the  famous  Long  Parliament, 
when  its  vigour  was  unimpaired  and  its  ranks 
undivided.  They  saw  the  collapse  of  personal 
government,  the  liberation  and  triumphant  return 
of  Prynne,  Burton,  Bastwick,  Leighton  and  other 
victims  of  the  Star  Chamber,  the  impeachment, 
trial  and  execution  of  Strafford,  the  imprisonment 
of  Laud,  the  downfall  and  flight  of  Windebanke 
and  Finch,  the  Act  for  Triennial  Parliaments,  the 
discovery  of  the  Army  Plot  followed  by  the  Act 
providing  that  the  Parliament  should  not  be  dis- 
solved except  with  its  own  consent,  the  abolition  of 
the  Courts  of  Star  Chamber  and  of  High  Commis- 
sion, and  the  sweeping  away  of  other  inventions  of 
the  late  arbitrary  rule.  The  movement  in  England 
was  in  its  inception,  like  the  movement  in  Scot- 
land, conservative;  but  circumstances  soon  forced 
it  along  the  path  of  revolution.  Already  indeed 
in  those  few  months  a  revolution  was  peacefully 
accomplished.  How  came  it  that  the  English 
people  who  had  fretted  and  groaned  for  years  under 
civil  and  ecclesiastical  tyranny  were  able  so  rapidly 
to  make  such  a  riddance  ?  How  came  it  that  the 
powerful  king  and  his  powerful  ministers  submitted 
to  it  all  ?     The  simple  reason  was  the  presence  of 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     241 

the  victorious  Scots  army  at  Newcastle.  It  kept 
in  check  the  English  army  and  it  paralysed  Charles. 
Parliament  was  able  to  go  on  with  its  great  work, 
and  alongside  of  that  work  the  negotiations  with 
the  Scots  commissioners  also  went  on.  The  Scots 
army  was  willing  to  remain  if  its  needs  were  sup- 
plied, Parliament  was  willing  to  meet  them  but  in 
no  hurry  to  conclude  the  treaty,  pay  the  bill,  and 
let  the  Scots  go. 

A  singular  transformation  had  meanwhile  taken 
place  in  the  relations  between  the  two  countries. 
The  Union  of  the  Crowns  had  put  an  end  to  the 
old  conditions  of  intermittent  warfare,  but  James's 
migration  to  London,  bringing  in  his  train  courtiers 
and  other  followers  from  Scotland,  and  his  treat- 
ment of  the  English  Parliament  had  not  made  for 
increased  cordiality.  The  EngHsh  attitude  to  Scot- 
land was  one  of  suspicion  if  not  hostility.  Scotsmen 
were  not  popular  in  England  either  then  or  in  much 
later  days.  The  two  nations  were  in  fact  foreigners 
to  one  another.  The  Englishman's  ignorance  of 
Scotland  has  not  died  out  with  time,  it  is  the  theme 
of  one  of  Stevenson's  most  delightful  Memories 
and  Portraits.  Ignorance  of  his  neighbours,  accord- 
ing to  our  distinguished  and  outspoken  countryman, 
is  the  character  of  the  typical  Englishman  ;  in 
fact  he  *  sits  apart  bursting  with  pride  and  ignorance.' 
'  There  is  one  country  ...  of  which  I  will  go  bail  he 
knows  nothing.  His  ignorance  of  the  sister  kingdom 
cannot  be  described.'  The  twentieth  century  could 
already  furnish  fresh  illustrations  of  the  fact.  But 
there  is  more  than  mere  ignorance.  *  He  takes  no 
interest  in  Scotland  or  the  Scotch  and,  what  is  the 
unkindest  cut  of  all,  he  does  not  care  to  justify 
his  indifference.'     The  description  exactly  fits  the 

Q 


242     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

English  nearly  300  years  before  Stevenson  lived. 
In  a  well-known  passage  Clarendon  describes  their 
state  of  mind  just  before  the  storm  burst  in  Edin- 
burgh in  July  1637 :  '  The  truth  is  there  was  so 
little  curiosity  either  in  the  Court  or  the  country 
to  know  anything  of  Scotland  or  what  was  done 
there,  that  when  the  whole  nation  was  solicitous 
to  know  what  passed  weekly  in  Germany  and 
Poland  and  all  other  parts  of  Europe  no  man  ever 
inquired  what  was  doing  in  Scotland,  nor  had  that 
kingdom  a  place  or  mention  in  one  page  of  any 
gazette,  so  little  the  world  heard  or  thought  of  that 
people.' 

To  this  ignorance  of  Scotland  on  the  part  of 
Charles  and  Laud  was  largely  due  the  disastrous 
policy  of  1637.  But  as  that  policy  ripened  into 
civil  war  the  indifference  of  the  English  people 
to  their  northern  neighbours  rapidly  disappeared. 
Scotland  became  the  most  interesting  of  all  countries 
to  the  English.  They  followed  with  eagerness 
the  development  of  her  quarrel  with  the  king ; 
they  offered  her  sympathy  and  in  the  Short  Parlia- 
ment gave  her  very  practical  support.  It  was  not 
that  Englishmen  understood  Scotland  better,  it  was 
their  hatred  of  Charles's  tyranny  over  themselves 
that  drew  them  to  the  side  of  the  Scots.  Scottish 
visitors  were  now  made  welcome  in  London  as  they 
probably  never  were  before  or  since :  Henderson 
and  his  friends  during  their  stay  there  in  1640-41 
basked  in  the  sunshine  of  popularity.  The  warm 
friendship  was,  alas !  not  of  long  duration.  It  did 
not  stand  the  strain  of  the  closer  alliance  formed 
three  years  later.  That  alliance,  as  it  took  shape 
in  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant,  was  itself  in 
part  the  fruit  of  ignorance — ignorance  this  time 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    243 

about  England  on  the  part  of  the  Scots.  But  in 
the  early  days,  in  November  and  December  1640, 
there  was  no  cloud  on  the  friendship  between  the 
two  nations.  The  prestige  of  the  Scots  stood 
extraordinarily  high;  the  English  regarded  with 
admiration  the  small  and  poor  country  which  had 
known  how  to  curb  so  promptly  and  so  effectually 
the  king's  misgovemment.  The  public  feeling 
found  expression  in  the  flattering  reception  given 
to  the  Scots  commissioners  when  they  reached 
London. 

Nine  members  of  Parliament  were  appointed 
commissioners  from  Scotland  ;  to  these  Henderson 
and  Johnston  were  added  '  because  many  things 
may  occur  concerning  the  Church.'  Along  with 
them  Baillie,  Gillespie  and  Blair,  three  leading 
ministers,  were  sent  unofficially.  On  6th  November 
a  party  of  six,  which  included  Henderson  and  Baillie, 
left  Newcastle  on  horseback,  each  with  a  mounted 
servant.  They  found  England,  as  Scotsmen  pro- 
verbially do,  a  very  expensive  country.  '  Their 
inns,'  says  Baillie,  *are  all  hke  palaces;  for  three 
meals  we  would  pay  together  with  our  horses 
sixteen  or  seventeen  pounds  sterling.'  In  London 
they  were  received  with  the  greatest  distinction 
and  cordiality;  the  city  insisted  on  lodging  and 
entertaining  them  -is  its  guests.  They  were  lodged 
in  Worcester  House  in  the  city,  near  London  Stone, 
a  house  previously  occupied  by  the  Lord  Mayor  or 
one  of  the  sheriffs.  The  king  in  his  opening  speech 
in  Parliament  was  so  misguided  as  to  speak  of  the 
Scots  as  rebels.  His  people  regarded  them  in  a 
very  different  light,  they  spoke  of  the  commissioners 
as  *  their  brethren  from  Scotland,'  and  raised  such 
a   storm   that   two   davs    later   Charles    found    it 


244     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

necessary  to  explain  away  his  words.  The  Scots- 
men rose  still  higher  in  popular  favour ;  from  the 
ballad  singers  on  the  streets  of  London  to  the  ladies 
and  gentlemen  of  the  Court  their  praises  were  in 
every  mouth.  Parliament  voted  £100,000  for  the 
Scots  army.  The  commissioners  were  received  at 
Court  and  kissed  the  queen's  hand.  The  church  of 
St.  Antholin  or  St.  Anthony,  which  communicated 
by  a  private  passage  with  Worcester  House,  was  put 
at  the  disposal  of  the  Scottish  ministers,  and  there 
they  held  services  regularly  on  Sundays  and 
Thursdays.  The  preachers  and  their  sermons  at- 
tracted all  London  to  see  and  hear  them.  '  From 
the  first  appearance  of  day  in  the  morning  on  every 
Sunday  to  the  shutting  in  of  the  light  the  church 
was  never  empty,'  so  great  was  'the  conflux  and 
resort  of  citizens,'  says  Clarendon.  He  suggests 
some  came  out  of  curiosity,  some  out  of  humour 
and  faction  ;  but  the  truth  is  that  London  flocked 
to  see  and  hear  men  who  had  played  so  notable  a 
part  in  a  great  national  drama.  All  over  England 
the  question  of  Church  reform  was  already  a  burn- 
ing question,  and  it  was  natural  those  people  should 
be  eager  to  learn  from  the  lips  of  Henderson  and  his 
colleagues  what  they  had  to  tell  them  about  recent 
events  in  Scotland  and  about  the  Scottish  system 
of  Church  government.  It  was  during  the  same 
winter,  and  for  the  same  purpose  of  enlightening 
the  English  mind,  that  Henderson  wrote  and  pub- 
lished his  admirable  tract  entitled  '  The  Govern- 
ment and  Order  of  the  Church  of  Scotland.'  He 
was  the  outstanding  man  and  the  chief  centre  of 
interest.  He  must  needs  give  sittings  to  Hollar, 
the  distinguished  Bohemian  etcher  who  had  come 
over  to  England  in  the  train  of  the  Earl  of  Arundel. 


^/IS^'TX^ 


FROM  THK  ETCHING  BY  HOLLAR.  1641 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     245 

Hollar  executed  at  this  time  the  well-known 
etching  which  is  believed  to  be  the  source  of  all 
the  portraits  of  Henderson  that  we  possess. 

Meanwhile  the  work  which  had  brought  the 
commissioners  to  London  was  progressing.  It  was 
on  19th  November  that  they  met  the  English 
commissioners  at  Westminster.  The  latter  were 
very  friendly  but  were  not  to  be  hurried.  The 
truth  was  that  nothing  alarmed  them  '  so  much 
as  our  quick  agreeing  with  the  king  and  our  dis- 
banding of  our  army  thereupon.  Under  God  they 
all  everywhere  profess  that  they  owe  to  that  army 
their  religion,  liberties,  parliaments,  and  all  they 
have  ;  that  if  we  take  conditions  for  ourselves, 
they  say  they  are  imdone.'  The  Scots  drew  up 
their  demands  under  eight  heads.  The  first  was 
that  the  king  should  ratify  and  publish  the  Acts  of 
their  late  Parliament.  In  December  that  was 
discussed  and  conceded.  Other  demands  dealt 
with  a  variety  of  matters — dismantling  of  fortified 
places  on  the  borders,  restoring  of  ships  and  goods, 
freedom  to  put  the  incendiaries  on  trial,  and  so 
forth.  These  were  pretty  well  disposed  of  by  the 
end  of  the  year.  In  January  came  the  great 
question  of  the  war  indemnity  about  which  nmch 
debate  was  feared.  The  bill  in  all  its  grounds  and 
details  was  drawn  up  by  Wariston  and  revised 
by  Rothes,  but  even  in  this  matter  Henderson  was 
called  in.  It  was  '  perfected,'  says  Baillie,  by  him 
*  in  a  very  pretty  paper.'  This  tidy  bill  staggered 
Parliament  when  it  was  presented.  It  amounted 
to  over  £780,000.  The  Scots  were  willing  to  forego 
£270,000  or  thereby,  leaving  a  balance  of  over 
half  a  million.  The  Earl  of  Bristol,  in  the  Upper 
House  on  12th  January  1641,  was  not  unnaturally 


246     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

startled  at  this  '  vast  proposition,'  but  the  com- 
missioners seem  to  have  handled  the  indignant 
peers  with  canniness  and  discretion.  The  peers 
wished  to  hang  the  matter  up  altogether,  but  with 
great  care,  says  Baillie,  an  answer  was  penned  by 
Henderson  to  that  very  dangerous  proposition. 
Ruffled  feelings  were  soothed,  and  when  the  matter 
was  debated  in  the  Commons  on  the  21st,  the  result 
was  a  vote  that  sustenance  for  losses  and  charges 
should  be  granted,  the  amount  to  be  settled  later. 
In  February  the  sum  was  fixed  at  £300,000.  Parlia- 
ment had  '  a  world  of  great  affairs  '  on  hand,  and 
the  treaty  had  to  be  postponed  from  time  to  time, 
although  the  Scots  continued  to  clamour  for  pay- 
ment. In  March,  Strafford's  trial  filled  the  stage, 
and  every  other  question  had  to  stand  aside. 

Baillie  has  painted  for  us  a  vivid  picture  of  the 
great  trial.  The  Scots  commissioners  had  taken 
a  hand  in  the  framing  of  the  charges  against  both 
Strafford  and  Laud  so  far  as  they  affected  their 
own  country.  Strafford's  trial  in  Westminster  Hall 
began  on  22nd  March  and  went  on  daily  from  eight 
in  the  morning  till  three  or  four  in  the  afternoon. 
In  the  centre  stood  the  accused  man  dressed  in 
black  at  a  little  desk,  behind  him  his  secretaries 
and  his  counsel.  In  front  were  the  peers ;  on  each 
side,  east  and  west,  rose  tiers  of  seats  almost  to 
the  ceiling  :  there  sat  the  members  of  the  House 
of  Commons  and  among  them  the  Scots  com- 
missioners. At  the  north  end  was  set  a  throne 
for  the  king,  near  by  were  enclosures  for  foreign 
nobles  and  for  the  queen  and  court  ladies. 

'  It  was  daily  the  most  glorious  Assembly  the 
Isle  could  afford  :  yet  the  gravity  not  such  as  I 
expected.     Oft  great  clamour  without  about  the 


I 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     247 

doors.  In  the  intervals,  while  Strafford  was  making 
ready  for  answers  the  Lords  got  always  to  their 
feet,  walked  and  clattered ;  the  Lower  House 
men  too  loud  clattering.  After  ten  o'clock  much 
public  eating  not  only  of  confections,  but  of  flesh 
and  bread,  bottles  of  beer  and  wine  going  thick 
from  mouth  to  mouth  without  cups,  and  all  this 
in  the  king's  eye.  There  was  no  outgoing  to 
return,  and  oft  the  sitting  was  till  two  or  three  or 
four  o'clock.' 

Meanwhile  Henderson,  who  had  been  appointed 
in  December  1640  Rector  of  Edinburgh  University, 
embraced  the  opportunity  to  see  the  king  on  the 
subject  of  securing  better  endowments  for  the  poor 
Scottish  universities  out  of  the  bishops'  rents.  In 
February  the  king  had  long  interviews  with  the 
Scots  commissioners :  Rothes,  Loudoun  and  he 
were  in  great  favour,  and  Henderson  sought  to 
improve  the  occasion  for  the  advantage  of  his 
country. 

The  treaty  negotiations  drifted  on  till  May,  and 
the  relations  of  parties  did  not  improve  with  the 
lapse  of  time.  Parliament  was  more  ready  to 
vote  money  than  to  pay  it,  and  discontent  was 
growing  in  the  Scots  army  at  the  delay  in  providing 
supplies.  On  the  other  hand.  Englishmen  chafed 
under  the  indignity  of  a  foreign  army  occupying 
their  territory  so  long,  and  the  northern  counties 
were  growing  restive.  Rothes  was  won  over  by 
court  influences.  By  June,  however,  negotiations 
approached  an  end,  and  upon  18th  June  Parliament 
passed  a  measure  imposing  a  poll-tax  for  the 
payment  of  the  Scots  arrears  and  indemnity. 
The  tax  was  no  trifling  matter  :  it  ranged  from 
£100  for  a  duke  down  to  two  shillings  for  an  ordinary 


248     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

householder :  every  male  above  sixteen  had  to 
pay,  and  sixpence  per  poll  was  the  lowest  sum 
for  any.  The  treaty  was  actually  concluded  on 
7th  August,  and  on  the  10th  Charles  gave  his  consent 
to  a  bill  confirming  the  treaty.  Then  the  Scottish 
army  turned  its  face  homewards,  and  the  disband- 
ing of  the  English  army  began.  In  addition  to 
what  had  been  already  paid  to  them,  the  Scots  were 
to  receive  the  handsome  sum  of  £220,000,  half  at 
midsummer  1642,  and  the  balance  a  year  later — 
a  pretty  substantial  '  brotherly  assistance.'  The 
Treaty  of  London  was  in  every  way  a  contrast  to 
the  Pacification  of  Birks.  This  time  the  Scots 
made  '  siccar  '  work  of  it.  They  refused  to  treat 
with  the  king,  and  he  was  excluded  from  all  the 
conferences.  They  made  sure  beyond  the  possi- 
bility of  misunderstanding  that  it  rested  on  the 
public  faith  of  England  in  an  Act  of  the  English 
Parliament. 

But  already  larger  questions  were  under  dis- 
cussion, questions  touching  the  future  permanent 
relations  between  England  and  Scotland.  Ever 
since  the  Union  of  the  Crowns  in  1603  the  need  of 
a  closer  union  had  been  more  or  less  vaguely  in 
men's  minds.  King  James  brought  the  matter 
forward  more  than  once,  but  the  English  Parlia- 
ment was  unfriendly  and  nothing  was  done.  The 
same  feehng  lay  behind  Charles's  infatuated  Scottish 
policy  in  1637,  as  it  lay  behind  Wentworth's  policy 
in  Ireland.  Charles's  attempt  at  religious  uni- 
formity had  come  to  a  disastrous  end,  but  the  need 
for  closer  union  remained  — in  the  opinion  of 
Scotland  it  had  become  more  urgent  than  before. 
Many  there  desired  closer  trade  relations  with 
England,    and    the   Scots   commissioners   for   the 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     249 

Treaty  were  instructed  to  press  that  matter.  They 
urged  upon  their  EngHsh  colleagues  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  commission  to  draw  up  a  scheme  for 
freedom  of  trade — a  statesman-like  conception, 
but  it  had  to  wait :  England  was  still  jealous  and 
hostile.  The  matter  was  referred  back  to  the 
English  commissioners  for  further  consideration 
and  nothing  more  was  heard  of  it.  Others  again, 
of  whom  Henderson  was  one,  saw  in  Charles's 
attempted  innovations  need  for  the  Scottish 
national  religion  being  safeguarded  against  future 
attack.  What  better  way  to  do  this  than  by 
having  their  Presbyterian  system  set  up  in  England 
if  the  English  could  be  induced  to  adopt  it  ? 
Uniformity  of  rehgion,  an  inheritance  from  the 
Middle  Ages,  still  fascinated  the  human  mind ; 
if  it  could  be  secured  by  consent,  what  could  be 
more  desirable  ?  The  state  of  opinion  south  of 
the  Tweed  suggested  that  the  moment  was  oppor- 
tune to  make  the  attempt,  and  so  the  Scots  com- 
missioners were  instructed  to  table  the  proposition 
(contained  in  the  Eighth  Article  of  their  Demands) 
of  *  a  desire  for  unity  in  religion  and  uniformity 
in  Church  government  as  a  special  means  of  con- 
serving the  peace  between  the  two  countries.'  It 
was  with  an  eye  to  this  part  of  the  work  that 
Baillie  and  the  other  two  unofficial  envoys  were 
sent  up.^ 

And  there  was  a  still  larger  and  grander  vision 
before  the  minds  of  those  ardent  Protestants. 
The  counter-Reformation  had  made  alarming  pro- 
gress, and  the  Thirty  Years  War  was  now  raging 
in  Europe.  It  was  to  a  great  extent  a  struggle 
between    Protestant    and    Catholic,    and    British 

>  Utttrt  (Laiiig'H  ed.),  i.  p.  2H9. 


250     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Protestantism  was  deeply  concerned  in  the  issue. 
Jesuit  agents  abounded  in  England,  Roman 
Catholics  were  increasing  in  number,  the  Catholic 
queen  was  the  centre  of  Catholic  influence  and 
intrigue.  Would  it  not  be  well  to  have  a  union 
of  some  kind,  a  drawing  together  of  Protestant 
Churches  on  the  Continent  as  well  as  in  Britain 
against  the  common  enemy  ?  Thoughtful  Pro- 
testants in  more  quarters  than  one  were  revolving 
this  idea  in  their  minds.  John  Durie,  afterwards 
a  member  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  was 
advocating  the  great  plan  on  the  Continent  wher- 
ever he  could  get  a  hearing,  and  in  London  Samuel 
Hartlib,  Milton's  friend  and  Durie's  ardent  disciple, 
had  for  years  been  an  enthusiastic  missionary  in 
the  same  cause.  Laud  of  course  would  have 
nothing  to  say  to  it,  but  Hartlib  found  a  warmer 
welcome  in  genuinely  Protestant  quarters.  He 
was  an  eager  reformer  of  a  modern  type,  working 
for  improvements  in  education  and  for  all  sorts 
of  social  and  economic  reforms.  He  made  the 
acquaintance  of  Henderson  in  London,  in  order 
doubtless  to  discuss  with  him  the  great  scheme 
of  union  of  all  the  Protestant  Churches  of  Europe. 
There  was  correspondence  between  them  after 
Henderson's  return  to  Scotland.  Without  doubt 
some  such  plan  was  long  in  Henderson's  mind, 
and  it  explains  the  desire  for  a  common  system  of 
doctrine  and  Church  government  which  might  be 
acceptable  to  all  the  Churches  of  the  Reformation. 
This  desire  found  influential  expression  at  a  later  date 
in  a  letter  of  30th  November  1643,  addressed  by  the 
Westminster  Assembly  to  the  Reformed  Churches 
of  the  Continent.^     The  letter  narrated  the  course 

>  Neal,  History  of  the  Puritans,  iii.  (1796),  pp.  80-84. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     251 

of  events  since  1637,  sent  a  copy  of  the  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant,  and  asked  their  favourable 
judgment  and  sympathy.  It  begged  '  that  you 
would  conceive  of  our  condition  as  your  own 
common  cause,  which  if  it  be  lost  with  us  yourselves 
are  not  like  long  to  escape,  the  quarrel  being  not 
so  much  against  men's  persons  as  against  the 
power  of  godliness  and  the  purity  of  God's  Word.' 
Many  years  later  than  this  Cromwell  worked  for  a 
great  alliance  of  Protestant  states  with  England 
at  its  head. 

To  Henderson  and  his  fellow  travellers,  when  they 
entered  the  great  world  of  London  on  the  15th  of 
November  1640,  it  seemed  as  if  everything  favoured 
the  early  success  of  the  policy  of  Uniformity  which 
they  were  instructed  to  propose  to  England. 
London  was  in  a  state  of  high  excitement  and 
ferment.  The  Long  Parliament  had  just  assembled 
on  the  3rd,  and  already  a  huge  petition  was  in 
preparation  praying  that  episcopal  government 
might  be  abolished  and  a  ti-ue  government  accord- 
ing to  the  Word  of  God  established.  This  famous 
London  root-and-branch  petition  was  presented 
to  Parliament  on  11th  December,  signed  by  15,000 
hands  ;  on  the  day  of  its  delivery  a  crowd  of  1500 
men  of  quality  and  worth  attended  with  it  in 
Westminster  Hall.  And  soon  there  were  others 
in  a  similar  strain  ;  petitions  from  Kent,  Essex, 
from  ten  or  eleven  counties.  The  root-and-branch 
party  were  powerful  in  London,  and  the  Scotsmen 
found  the  anti-episcopal  current  running  strong. 
Baillie  reports,  *  Huge  things  are  here  in  working 
...  all  here  are  weary  of  bishops  ...  all  are  for 
bringing  them  very  low.'  ^     Yet  in  a  few  months 

'  LttUrt  (L»iu^'«  ed.),  i.  pp.  274,  275. 


252     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

the  Scottish  plan  was  rejected  by  the  English 
Parliament.  Why  did  the  policy  which  was  to 
be  adopted  in  1643  fail  in  1641  ?  The  truth  is  that 
the  undoubted  reaction  against  Laud  and  his 
bishops,  the  glowing  atmosphere  of  popularity  in 
which  they  themselves  moved,  and  their  inter- 
course with  Puritan  clergy  and  their  supporters  in 
Parliament  all  contributed  to  impress  the  Scottish 
visitors  with  an  exaggerated  idea  of  the  strength 
of  that  party.  They  were  sanguine  enough  to 
anticipate  already  the  day  of  triumph  for  Presby- 
terianism  in  England.  '  The  far  greatest  part  are 
for  our  discipline  ;  for  all  the  considerable  parts  of 
it  they  will  draw  up  a  model  of  their  own  with  our 
advice,  to  be  considered  upon  by  commissioners  of 
the  Church  and  others  appointed  by  Parliament, 
and  if  God  shall  bless  this  land,  by  these  commis- 
sioners to  be  settled  in  every  congregation  at  this 
extraordinary  time,  till  afterwards  the  Church 
being  constitute  a  General  Assembly  may  be  called 
to  perfect  it.'  ^  The  real  state  of  opinion  in  England 
at  the  opening  of  the  Long  Parliament  was  very 
different  from  the  sanguine  imaginations  of  Baillie 
and  his  colleagues.  There  was  deep  dissatisfaction 
with  the  Laudian  regime.  The  intermeddling  of 
the  bishops  with  secular  affairs  was  everywhere 
resented,  and  there  was  suspicion  of  a  design  to 
bring  back  popery  into  the  Church  of  England. 
But  the  general  desire  was  for  reformation  not 
abolition,  removal  of  grievances  not  overthrow 
of  episcopacy.  What  the  mass  of  Englishmen 
wanted  was  to  restrict  the  bishops  to  their  spiritual 
functions  and  to  uphold  the  puritanism  of  the 
parochial   clergy.     This   feeling   found    expression 

^  Itettern  (Laiqg's  ed.),  p.  287, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     253 

in  numerous  petitions  which  poured  into  Parlia- 
ment, notably  in  the  ministers'  well-known  Petition 
and  Remonstrance  presented  in  January  1641.  On 
8th  and  9th  February  the  petitions  were  debated 
in  the  Commons.  The  result  was  the  appoint- 
ment of  a  committee  which  reported  in  March, 
condemning  the  legislative  and  judicial  powers  of 
the  bishops  as  a  hindrance  to  the  discharge  of 
their  spiritual  function  and  prejudicial  to  the 
commonwealth.  In  the  end  of  March  a  Bishops' 
Bill  was  brought  in  giving  effect  to  this  view  ;  the 
object  was  to  eject  bishops  from  the  House  of  Lords 
and  Star  Chamber.  This  was  the  first  legis- 
lative effort  of  the  Long  Parliament  :  it  was  an 
attempt  at  moderate  reform,  and  it  reflected  the 
prevailing  state  of  opinion  out  of  doors  up  to 
that  time. 

But  the  programme  of  moderate  reform  failed. 
The  main  proposal  of  the  Bill  was  rejected  by  the 
Lords  on  24th  May.  This  rejection  marks  the 
opening  of  the  second  stage  of  the  movement. 
A  demand  now  arose  for  sharper  measures.  On 
27th  May  a  Root-and-Branch  Bill  to  abolish 
episcopacy  was  introduced  into  the  Commons.  The 
Lords  had  a  committee  of  their  own  to  inquire 
into  ceremonies  and  innovations,  and  a  Bill  was 
brought  into  their  House  in  July.  But  in  July  the 
hour  had  passed  for  steps  which  might  have 
satisfied  in  the  previous  November.  The  Root- 
and-Branch  Bill  found  strong  support  in  the 
Commons.  Opinion  had  hardened  so  far  that  a 
majority  were  now  prepared  to  abolish  bishops. 
But  this  brought  them  face  to  face  with  the  question. 
What  system  was  to  be  set  up  in  place  of  the  old 
one  ?     The  House  had  not  advanced  far  on  this 


254     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

subject  when  in  the  end  of  July  the  matter  was 
dropped  owing  to  Parliament  rising  in  alarm  at 
the  king's  projected  journey  to  Scotland.  But 
resolutions  had  been  adopted  vesting  the  jurisdic- 
tion of  the  bishops'  court  in  lay  commissioners 
appointed  by  Parliament,  and  referring  the  matter 
of  ordination  to  a  lay  commission  similarly  de- 
pendent on  Parliament.  Had  Church  reform 
been  allowed  to  proceed  peacefully  in  England, 
it  would  probably  have  worked  out  on  the 
lines  indicated  by  these  resolutions.  The  im- 
portant point  to  be  noticed  is  that  Parliament 
had  no  thought  of  adopting  the  Scottish  Presby- 
terian system.  The  debates  indeed  disclosed 
that  the  character  of  the  primitive  bishop  was 
held  in  veneration,  and  that  there  was  a  general 
desire  to  restore  the  ancient  primitive  presbytery 
in  which  every  minister  had  his  share  in  the 
work  of  Church  government.  But  that  was  a 
very  different  thing  from  setting  up  such  a  system 
as  prevailed  in  Scotland,  with  its  hierarchy  of 
Church  courts  possessing  a  jurisdiction  independent 
of  the  State  and  exercising  large  powers  of 
discipline. 

In  the  light  of  all  this  it  becomes  easy  to  under- 
stand the  fate  which  overtook  the  Scottish  pro- 
posals for  Uniformity.  Their  eighth  Demand, 
which  contained  their  '  Desires  concerning  Unity 
in  Religion  and  Uniformity  in  Church  Govern- 
ment as  a  special  means  to  conserve  Peace  in 
His  Majesty's  Dominions  '  was  not  reached  till 
the  middle  of  February  1641.  This  was  the 
greatest  of  questions  for  Scotland,  and  the  com- 
missioners were  eager  to  discuss  it  with  their 
English  friends.     It  had,  however,  to  be  postponed 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    255 

till  April,  and  meanwhile  an  unfortunate  affair 
occurred  which  nearly  wrecked  their  plans.  A 
story  got  into  circulation  (started,  they  believed, 
by  enemies  at  home)  that  the  commissioners 
were  growing  remiss  in  certain  matters,  especially 
in  their  attitude  towards  episcopacy.  Presbyterian 
London  had  just  raised  money  for  the  Scots  army, 
but  this  story  created  alarm  and  it  refused  to 
pay  over  the  money.  To  clear  the  air  Henderson 
consented  to  write  *  a  little  quick  paper  proclaim- 
ing the  constancy  of  our  zeal  against  episcopacy.' 
This  was  given  to  the  English  lords  of  the  Treaty 
to  be  communicated  to  Parliament,  but  a  copy 
fell  into  the  hands  of  a  printer,  who  published  it 
as  a  manifesto  of  the  Scots  commissioners  in  London. 
An  explosion  followed.  An  attack  on  the  Church 
of  England  by  envoys  from  another  nation,  printed 
and  published  in  England  without  the  king's 
authority,  was  a  grave  impropriety  and  offence. 
The  printer  was  committed  to  prison.  Charles 
'  ran  stark  mad  at  it '  ;  he  used  ominous  language, 
called  it  a  seditious  libel,  said  no  ambassadors 
*  durst  have  done  it  for  their  hanging,'  and  declared 
that  the  authors  had  lost  their  privilege,  meaning 
their  safe-conduct.  Bristol  was  much  displeased. 
Within  two  days,  on  26th  February,  the  matter  was 
brought  before  the  Commons  ;  even  their  friends 
there  told  the  Scots  they  had  been  too  rash,  *  though 
they  loved  not  the  bishops,  yet  for  the  honour  of 
their  nation  they  would  keep  them  up  rather  than 
that  we  as  strangers  should  pull  them  down.' 
Writing  to  Balmerino  next  day,  the  27th,  Wariston 
reported  the  sudden  storm  raised,  and  admitted 
they  could  not  justify  the  printing  of  the  document 
until  the  Scots  had  formally  given  in  their  demand 


256     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

for  removal  of  episcopacy  with  their  reasons.^ 
There  was  nothing  for  it  but  to  issue  a  quasi- 
apology,  'a  moUifying  explanation'  which  Hen- 
derson produced  a  few  days  later.  This  acted  as 
oil  on  the  stormy  waters.  On  2nd  March  Lord 
Maitland  was  able  to  report,  '  The  violence  of  that 
anger  I  hope  is  past,  as  his  Majesty  was  in  about 
that  paper  which  was  given  in  the  24  of  February, 
and  I  believe  the  paper  which  was  given  in  yesterday 
to  clear  our  intentions  will  stop  all  the  violent 
courses  was  spoken  of  either  by  proclamations  or 
otherwise.'  ^  In  the  end  even  this  ill  wind  blew 
some  good  to  the  Scots.  '  In  the  meantime  I 
believe  that  paper  was  not  altogether  fruitless, 
for  the  city  was  content  to  lend  160,000  lib.  to  the 
Parliament  yesterday  which  they  refused  before. 
This  will  I  hope  do  good  to  our  army  when  we  get 
our  proportion  of  it.' 

This  contretemps  made  it  urgently  necessary 
that  the  Reasons  in  support  of  their  Desire  for 
Uniformity  should  be  formally  presented  by  the 
Scots  commissioners  to  their  English  colleagues. 
The  important  document  was  drawn  by  Henderson 
with  the  utmost  care,  and  handed  in  on  10th  March. 
Its  language  was  far  from  provocative ;  it  set  forth 
the  Scottish  case  '  in  great  modesty  of  speech,' 
albeit,  adds  Baillie,  '  with  a  mighty  strength  of 
unanswerable  reasons.'  This  State  paper  is  the 
most  illuminating  document  we  possess  disclosing 
the  mind  of  Scotland  on  the  situation  in  the  im- 
portant year  1641,  and  it  deserves  attention.  We 
find  Cromwell  writing  to  his  friend,  Mr.  Willingham, 

1  Hailes's  Memorials  :  Reign  of  Charles  the  First,  p.  107. 
'  The  letter  is  in  the  VVodrow  MSS.,  and  printed  in  full  in  Analecta 
Scotica  (2nd  series),  pp.  256-7. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTI.AND     257 

to  send  him  his  copy  :  '  I  would  peruse  it  against 
we  fall  upon  that  Debate  which  will  be  speedily.'  ^ 
The  debate  in  the  Upper  House  took  place  in 
April,  and  in  the  Commons  about  the  middle  of 
May.  In  this  document  Henderson  himself  speaks, 
doubtless  after  full  consultation  with  his  fellow 
commissioners.^  He  places  before  us  their  view  of 
recent  events  in  Scotland  and  their  conception  of 
how  the  relations  of  the  two  countries  should  be 
settled.     They    declare    their    purpose    to    be    to 

*  establish  a  firm  and  happy  peace,'  not  a  cessation 
of  arms  for  a  time  but  peace  for  ever,  and  '  not  peace 
only  but  perfect  amity  and  a  more  near  union  than 
before.'     '  We  are  bound   as  commissioners   in   a 
special  duty  to  propound  the   best  and   readiest 
means  for  settling  of  a  firm  peace.'     For  this  end 
the  religious  question  must  be  dealt  with.     *  We 
know  .  .  .  that  religion  is  .  .  .  the  base  and  foun- 
dation of  kingdoms  and  states,  and  the  strongest 
band  to  tie  subjects  and  their  prince  in  true  loyalty 
and  to  knit  their  hearts  one  to  another  in  true 
unity.     Nothing  so  powerful  to  divide  the  hearts 
of  people  as  division  in  religion  ;    nothing  so  strong 
to  unite  the  hearts  of  people  as  unity  in  religion  ; 
and  the  greater  zeal  in  different  religions  the  greater 
division,  but  the  more  zeal  in  one  religion  the  more 
firm  union.     In  the  paradise  of  nature  the  diversity 
of  flowers  and  herbs  is  pleasant  and  useful,  but  in 
the  paradise  of  the  Church  different  and  contrary 
religions   are   unpleasant   and   hurtful.'     The   aim 
therefore  is  unity  in  religion  and  as  a  first  step  to 

'  Carlyle's  Cromvfltt  Letter)  and  Speechet,  i.  p.  86. 

*  Arguments  given  in  by  the  ('ommix»ionerg  of  Scotland  unto  the  Lords  of 
the  Treaty  (1641).  Adv.  Lib.  The  Paper  'm  also  to  be  found  under  the 
title  Argument  Persuading  Conformity  of  Church  tiovemment. 

R 


258  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

that  'one  form  of  Church  government  in  all  the 
Churches  of  his  Majesty's  dominions.'  The  fair 
vision  before  their  eyes  was  that  of  the  Jewish 
king  and  people  worshipping  together :  that  '  king, 
court  and  people  may  without  all  scruple  of  con- 
science be  partakers  of  one  and  the  same  form  of 
divine  worship,  and  his  Majesty  with  his  court  may 
come  to  the  public  assembly  of  the  people  and 
serve  God  with  them  according  to  the  practice  of 
the  good  kings  of  Judah.' 

No  dissent  or  discord  must  be  allowed  to  disturb 
the  harmony.  '  The  names  of  heresies  and  sects,  of 
Puritans,  Conformists,  Separatists  .  .  .  shall  be  heard 
no  more.  Papists  and  recusants  shall  despair  of 
success  to  have  their  religion  set  up  again,  and  shall* 
either  conform  themselves  or  get  them  hence.' 

The  accomplishment  of  such  an  end  may  properly 
be  sought  by  political  methods.  '  This  unity  of 
religion  is  a  thing  so  desirable  that  all  sound  divines 
and  politicians  are  for  it  where  it  may  be  easily 
obtained  and  brought  about.'  Accordingly  they  go 
on  to  express  approval  of  the  aim  of  King  James's 
policy.  '  None  of  all  the  Reformed  Churches  .  .  . 
are  at  so  great  a  difference  in  Church  government 
as  these  two  kingdoms  be  which  are  in  one  island 
and  under  one  monarch — which  made  King  James 
of  happy  memory  to  labour  to  bring  them  under 
one  form  of  government.'  But  '  all  the  question 
is,  Whether  of  the  two  Church  governments  shall 
have  place  in  both  nations  (for  we  know  no  third 
form  of  government  of  a  National  Church  distinct 
from  these  two).'  King  James  was  right  in  his  aim, 
he  was  wrong  only  in  selecting  the  wrong  Church 
government  to  be  the  government  for  the  two 
nations.     If  King  Charles  will  only  adopt  the  course 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     259 

now  recommended  all  will  be  well.  '  If  it  shall 
please  the  Lord  to  move  the  king's  heart  to  choose 
this  course  he  shall  in  a  better  way  than  was  pro- 
jected accomplish  the  great  and  glorious  design 
which  King  James  had  before  his  eyes  all  his  time, 
the  unity  of  religion  and  Church  government  in  all 
his  dominions.'  The  course  suggested  is  to  cast 
out  episcopacy  from  the  Church  of  England  and 
remodel  it  after  the  pattern  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land. Only  by  this  means  is  there  any  prospect 
of  peace.  '  The  government  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland  is  the  same  with  the  government  of  all 
the  Reformed  Churches'  except  that  of  England, 
where  '  the  government  of  the  Church  was  not 
changed  with  the  doctrine  at  the  time  of  the 
Reformation.'  *  The  prelates  of  England  .  .  .  have 
left  nothing  undone  which  might  tend  to  the  over- 
throw of  the  Church  of  Scotland  '  :  their  hostility 
arises  *  from  that  opposition  which  is  between 
episcopal  government  and  the  government  of  the 
Reformed  Churches  by  Assemblies.'  The  Church 
of  Scotland,  on  the  contrary,  '  never  had  molested 
them  either  in  the  doctrine,  worship,  ceremonies 
or  discipline  of  their  Church,  but  have  lived  quietly 
by  them,  kept  themselves  within  their  line,  and 
would  have  been  glad  to  enjoy  their  own  liberties 
in  peace.'  But  '  we  cannot  conceal  our  minds 
iDut  must  declare — not  from  any  presumptuous 
intention  to  reform  England  but  from  our  just 
tears  and  apprehensions — that  our  Reformation 
which  hath  cost  us  so  dear  and  is  all  our  wealth 
and  glory  shall  again  be  spoiled  and  defaced  from 
England  ...  if  episcopacy  sliall  be  retained  '  there. 
This  conclusion  is  deduced  from  Scotland's  recent 
experience.     '  The  Church  of  Scotland  hath  been 


260     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

continually  and  many  sundry  ways  vexed  and 
disquieted  by  the  bishops  of  England.'  In  James's 
time  '  by  the  continual  and  restless  negotiation  of 
the  prime  prelates  in  England  with  some  of  that 
faction  in  Scotland  both  before  the  coming  of  King 
James  into  England  and  since  his  coming ;  till 
at  last  a  kind  of  episcopacy  was  erected  there  by 
the  power  of  the  prelates  of  England.  They 
rested  not  here  but  proceeded  to  change  the  form 
of  divine  worship,  and  for  many  years  bred  a  great 
disturbance  both  to  pastors  and  people  by  five 
articles  of  conformity  with  the  Church  of  England  ' 
(the  Articles  of  Perth).  Then  in  Charles's  time : 
*  Having  in  the  former  prevailed  and  finding  their 
opportunity  and  rare  concourse  of  many  powerful 
hands  and  heads  ready  to  co-operate,  they  made 
strong  assaults  upon  the  whole  external  worship 
and  doctrine  of  our  Church  by  enforcing  upon  us 
a  popish  Book  of  Common  Prayer  for  making  Scot- 
land first  as  the  weaker,  and  thereafter  England,  con- 
form to  Rome  ;  and  upon  the  consciences,  liberties 
and  goods  of  the  people  by  a  Book  of  Canons  and 
Constitutions  Ecclesiastical,  establishing  a  tyranni- 
cal power  in  the  persons  of  our  prelates,  and  abolish- 
ing the  whole  discipline  and  government  of  our 
Church  without  so  much  as  consulting  with  any 
Presbytery,  Synod  or  Assembly  in  all  the  land.' 

'  The  Church  of  Scotland  had  abjured  episcopal 
government  and  by  solemn  oath  and  covenant 
divers  times  before  and  now  again  of  late  has 
established  the  government  of  the  Church  by 
Assemblies.  .  .  .  Our  late  oath  was  nothing  but 
the  renovation  of  our  former  oath  and  covenant 
which  did  bind  our  Church  before  but  was  trans- 
gressed by  many  by  means  of  the  prelates.     It 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     261 

would  seem  that  limitations,  cautions,  and  triennial 
parliaments  may  do  much,  but  we  know  that  fear 
of  perjury,  infamy,  excommunication,  and  the 
power  of  a  National  Assembly,  which  was  in 
Scotland  as  terrible  to  a  bishop  as  a  parliament, 
could  not  keep  our  men  from  rising  to  be  prelates. 
Much  is  spoken  and  written  for  the  limitations  of 
bishops,  but  what  good  can  their  limitation  do  to  the 
Church  if  ordination  and  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction 
shall  depend  upon  them  and  shall  not  be  absolutely 
into  the  hands  of  the  Assemblies  of  the  Church  ?  ' 

To  the  English  this  was  no  convincing  argument ; 
they  replied  that  if  episcopal  uniformity  was  unjust 
to  Scotland,  presbyterian  uniformity  was  equally 
unjust  to  England.  The  Scots  had  no  difficulty  in 
disposing  of  that  objection.  They  distinguished 
'  prclatical  conformity  '  from  '  presbyterial  uni- 
formity.' The  latter  was  grounded  upon  and 
warranted  by  the  Word  of  God.  There  was  not 
'  any  substantial  part  of  the  Uniformity  according 
to  the  Covenant  which  is  not  either  expressly 
grounded  upon  and  warranted  by  the  Word  of 
God  or  by  necessary  consequence  drawn  from  it, 
and  so  no  commandment  of  men  but  of  God.'  ^ 
The  former  was  imposed  by  the  mere  will  and 
authority  of  the  lawmakers.  *  They  imposed  upon 
others  ceremonies  acknowledged  by  themselves  to 
be  indifferent.  Our  principle  is  that  things  in- 
different ought  not  to  be  practised  to  the  scandal 
and  offence  of  the  godly.'  - 

Although  the  attempt  to  overthrow  the  Church 
of  Scotland  had  proved  too  great  a  task  for  the 
king,  there  is  no  hint  in  this  document  that  Hender- 

*  George  Gillespie,  A  Trtatitt  of  Mincellany  QuM/ion«  (1049),  chap.  15. 
»  Ibid. 


262     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

son  anticipated  any  great  difliculty  in  overthrow- 
ing the  Church  of  England.  That  matter  is  calmly 
disposed  of  in  a  single  word  :  '  the  cause  being 
taken  away,  the  effects  will  cease  and  the  peace 
shall  be  firm.' 

It  is  plain  that  even  so  sagacious  a  man  as  he 
had  been  carried  off  his  feet  by  the  presbyterian 
sentiment  surrounding  him  in  London,  when  he 
could  write  in  a  grave  public  document  :  *  We 
conceive  so  pious  and  profitable  a  work  .  .  .  with- 
out forcing  of  consciences  seemeth  not  only  to  be 
possible  but  an  easy  work.' 

Parliament  was  very  far  from  being  of  the 
same  mind.  The  Scottish  plan  was  courteously 
but  firmly  put  aside,  and  a  resolution  passed  by 
the  Commons  in  these  terms  :  '  This  House  doth 
approve  of  the  affection  of  their  brethren  of  Scot- 
land in  their  desire  of  a  conformity  of  Church 
government  between  the  two  nations,  and  doth 
give  thanks  for  it.  And  as  they  have  already  taken 
into  consideration  the  reformation  of  Church  govern- 
ment, so  they  will  proceed  therein  in  due  time  as 
shall  best  conduce  to  the  glory  of  God  and  peace 
of  the  Church.'  Beyond  this  position  Parliament 
refused  to  move.  Words  to  the  same  effect  were 
inserted  in  the  Treaty  as  ratified  by  bill  in  August 
1641.     There  for  the  present  the  matter  rested.^ 

An  event  occurred  in  1641  which  alone  would 
make  that  year  memorable,  and  which  must  find 
a  place  in  the  record  of  Henderson's  life  in  London 
at  that  time.  A  Petition  was  presented  to  Parlia- 
ment, remarkable  in  itself  and  remarkable  for 
Henderson's  connection  with  it.    It  bears  the  date 

'  Dr.  W.  A.  Shaw,  A  History  of  the  English  Church  during  the  Civil 
Wart  and  under  the  Commonwealth,  i.  chap.  i. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    263 

1641,  and  the  narrative  shows,  from  its  reference 
to  '  the  daily  liappy  expected  accord  between  us* 
and  the  Scots,'  that  it  was  written  while  the  treaty 
with  Scotland  was  still  under  discussion  and  the 
Scots  commissioners  were  still  in  London. 

The  petitioner  was  William  Castell,  a  Church  of 
England  clergyman,  parson  of  Courtenhall  in 
Northamptonshire.  The  purpose  of  the  Petition 
was  '  for  the  propagating  of  the  Gospel  in  America 
and  the  West  Indies  and  for  the  settling  of  our 
Plantations  there.'  In  order  to  commend  his 
Petition  to  Parliament  he  secured  the  approval 
of  seventy  English  divines  in  London  and  various 
other  places,  many  of  them  names  of  distinction. 
But  more  influential  than  any  of  these  with  the 
English  Parliament  at  that  hour  was  the  Scotsman, 
Alexander  Henderson.  Castell  hastened  to  secure 
his  support  and  that  of  his  colleagues,  and  was 
able  to  submit  his  Petition  bearing  on  its  title-page 
the  following  words :  '  Which  Petition  is  approved 
by  seventy  able  English  Divines  :  Also  by  Master 
Alexander  Henderson  and  some  other  worthy 
Ministers  of  Scotland ' — a  remarkable  sidelight  on 
the  position  which  Scotland  and  her  representative 
man  then  occupied  in  the  eye  of  England,  and 
the  favour  with  which  they  were  regarded. 

The  Petition  itself  is  in  the  first  place  a  plea  for 
Christian  missions  to  the  heathen,  followed  by  a 
plea  for  the  strengthening  of  the  Colonies  and  the 
expansion  of  England  in  America.  The  religious 
motives  for  missionary  work  are  first  dwelt  on : 
'  A  greater  expression  of  piety  there  cannot  be  than 
to  make  God  known  where  He  was  never  spoken 
nor  thought  of,  to  advance  the  sceptre  of  Christ's 
kingdom.     /Vnd  now  again  to  reduce  those  who  at 


264     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

first  were  created  after  the  image  of  God  from  tlie 
manifest  worship  of  devils  to  acknowledge  and 
adore  the  blessed  Trinity  in  Unity,  to  do  this  is 
to  be  the  happy  instruments  of  effecting  those 
often-repeated  promises  of  God  in  making  all 
nations  blessed  by  the  coming  of  Christ  and  by 
sending  His  Word  to  all  lands ;  it  is  to  enlarge 
greatly  the  pale  of  the  Church,  and  to  make  those 
who  were  the  most  detestable  synagogues  of  Satan 
delightful  temples  of  the  Holy  Ghost.' 

Then  he  deals  with  the  necessity  for  undertaking 
the  work.  Spain  is  in  possession  of  a  great  part 
of  the  American  territory,  but  the  Spaniards'  well- 
known  cruelty  unfits  them  for  this  task.  *  The 
Spaniard  boasteth  much  of  what  he  hath  already 
done  in  this  kind,  but  their  own  authors  report 
their  unchristian  behaviour,  especially  their 
monstrous  cruelties  to  be  such  as  they  caused  the 
Infidels  to  detest  the  name  of  Christ.'  Besides, 
'  neither  could  they  impart  unto  others  the  Gospel 
in  the  truth  and  purity  thereof,  who  have  it  not 
themselves  but  very  corruptly,  accompanied  with 
many  idle,  absurd,  idolatrous  Inventions  of  their 
own.'  Although  some  of  the  reformed  religion, 
English,  Scottish,  French,  Dutch,  have  already 
settled  in  those  parts,  they  are  of  no  account  for 
this  purpose,  for  they  are  '  but  in  the  skirts  of 
America  where  there  are  but  few  natives.' 

Then  he  turns  to  political  considerations.  The 
weakly  settled  English  Plantations  will  not  long 
be  able  to  hold  their  own  against  the  Spaniard. 
'  There  is  little  or  no  hope  our  Plantations  there 
should  be  of  any  long  continuance,  but  this  is 
evident  that  the  proud  superstitious  Spaniard 
will  spare  them  no  longer  than  shall  seem  good.' 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     265 

In  the  judgment  of  most  judicious  travellers  they 
may  easily  enough  suppress  and  destroy  them.  In 
the  interests  of  the  liberties  and  lives  of  our  country- 
men there,  as  well  as  for  the  progress  of  the  Gospel, 
there  should  be  such  a  speedy  supply  of  colonists 
as  may  secure  them  against  the  now  expected 
cruelty  of  the  Spaniard. 

The   petitioner  supports   his   argument  by  two 
further  considerations  :    (1)  the  temporal  benefits 
likely  to  accrue  to  this  kingdom,  and  (2)  the  ease 
with  which  his  proposals  may  be  carried  out.     The 
first  makes  quaint  reading  to-day.     It  is  that  this 
country  will  find  in  the  Colonies  a  needed  outlet  for 
her  surplus  population.    '  When  a  kingdom  beginneth 
to  be  over-burdened  with  a  multitude  of  people  (as 
England  and  Scotland  now  do)  to  have  a  con- 
venient place  where  to  send  forth  such  colonies  is  no 
small  benefit.'     This  at  a  time  when  the  population 
of  England  was  less  than  five  and  a  half  millions,  and 
that  of  Scotland  about  a  million  !     The  parts  of 
America  between  the  degrees  of  25  and  45  north 
latitude  are  at  this  time  even  offering  themselves 
to  us  to  be  protected  by  us ;    *  a  very  large  tract 
of  ground  containing  spacious,  healthful,  pleasant 
and  fruitful  countries,  not  only  apt,  but  already 
provided  of  all  things  necessary  for  man's  sustenta- 
tion,   corn,  grass   and  wholesome   cattle   in  good 
competency,   but   fish,   fowl,   fruits   and   herbs   in 
abundant    variety.'     Virginia    he    describes    as    a 
land  flowing  with  milk  and  honey.     '  We  shall  find 
there   all   manner  of  provision   for  life  :     besides 
merchantable     commodities,    silk,    vines,    cotton, 
tobacco,  deer-skins,  goat-skins,  rich  fur,  and  beavers 
good  store,  timber,  brass,   iron,   pitch,  tar,  rosin, 
and  almost  all  things  necessary  for  shipping,  which  if 


266     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

they  shall  be  employed  that  way  they  who  are  sent 
away  may  (with  God's  blessing)  within  short  time 
in  due  recompence  of  their  setting  forth  return 
this  kingdom  store  of  silver  and  gold,  pearls  and 
precious  stones  ;  for  undoubtedly  (if  there  be  not  a 
general  mistake  in  all  authors  who  have  written 
of  these  places)  such  treasure  is  to  be  had,  if  not 
there,  yet  in  places  not  far  remote  where  as  yet 
the  Spaniard  hath  nothing  to  do.  And  in  case  the 
Spaniard  will  be  troublesome  to  our  Plantations, 
or  shall  (as  is  generally  conceived)  be  found  an 
enemy  to  this  kingdom,  there  is  no  way  more  likely 
to  secure  England  than  by  having  a  strong  navy 
there  ;  hereby  we  may  come  to  share,  if  not  utterly 
to  defeat  him  of  that  vast  Indian  treasure  where- 
with he  setteth  on  fire  so  great  a  part  of  the  Chris- 
tian world,  corrupteth  many  Counsellors  of  state, 
supporteth  the  Papacy,  and  generally  perplexeth 
all  reformed  Churches.  Nor  need  any  scrupulous 
query  be  made  whether  we  may  not  assault  an 
enemy  in  any  place,  or  not  esteem  them  such  as 
shall  assault  us  in  those  places,  where  we  have 
as  much  to  do  as  they.  The  Spaniard  claimeth 
indeed  an  interest  little  less  than  hereditary  in 
almost  all  America  and  the  West  Indies,  but  it  is 
but  by  virtue  of  the  Pope's  grant,  which  is  worth 
nothing,  as  was  long  since  determined  by  Queen 
Elizabeth  and  her  Council ;  so  as  for  the  Spaniard 
to  debar  us  in  the  liberty  of  our  Plantations,  or 
freedom  of  commerce  in  those  spacious  countries, 
were  over  proudly  to  take  upon  him,  and  for  us  to 
permit  it  were  over-much  to  yield  of  our  own 
right.' 

The  petitioner's  next  point  is  the  ease  with  which 
his  proposal  may  be  carried  out.     That  turns  on 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     207 

England's  sea-power,  wliicli  she  has  and  ought  to 
use.  '  Your  Petitioner  conceiveth  there  is  no  great 
difficulty  in  the  preparation  here,  or  tediousness 
in  the  passage  thither,  or  hazard  when  we  come 
there.  The  preparation  of  men  and  shipping  is 
already  made,  and  as  for  money  it  is  in  the  power 
of  this  honom-able  House  to  give  sufficient,  without 
any  grievance  or  dislike  of  the  Commonwealth. 
And  as  for  the  passage,  how  can  it  be  thought  cither 
tedious  or  dangerous,  it  being  ordinarily  but  six 
weeks'  sail,  in  a  sea  much  more  secure  from  pirates 
and  much  more  free  from  shipwreck  and  enemies' 
coasts  than  our  ten  or  twelve  months'  voyage 
into  the  East  Indies.  And  as  for  our  good  success 
there,  we  need  not  fear  it.  The  natives  being  now 
everywhere  more  than  ever,  out  of  an  inveterate 
hatred  to  the  Spaniard,  ready  and  glad  to  enter- 
tain us.  Our  best  friends  the  Netherlanders  being 
with  eight  and  twenty  ships  gone  before  to  assist 
and  further  us.  And  which  is  much  more,  our 
going  with  a  general  consent  in  God's  cause,  for 
the  promoting  of  the  Gospel  and  enlarging  of  His 
Church  may  assure  us  of  a  more  than  ordinary 
protection  and  direction.' 

Casteirs  Petition  was  a  sign  of  the  earnest  spirit 
of  religious  reform  and  revival  then  stirring  in 
England  and  Scotland,  and  may  be  said  to  be  a 
landmark  in  the  history  of  Protestant  missions. 
The  evangelistic  mission  of  the  Church  was  made 
prominent  then,  as  it  has  been  in  all  times  of  religious 
revival.  Dr.  Hill  one  of  the  divines  consulted  by 
the  Lords'  Committee  '  on  innovations  concerning 
religion,'  afterwards  a  member  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  preached  to  the  House  of  Commons  on 
1st  July   1642   on  the   state   of  the   Church   and 


268     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

religion,  and  one  of  his  suggestions  was,  '  Wiiat  if 
there  be  some  evangehcal  itinerant  preachers  sent 
abroad  upon  a  pubhc  stock  to  enhghten  dark 
countries  ?  '  ^  It  has  been  said  that  Castell's 
Petition  is  the  first  evidence  of  any  desire  to  urge 
upon  the  legislature  of  England  a  regard  for  the 
spiritual  condition  of  her  colonies.^  It  is  true 
that  the  early  Puritan  emigrants  to  America 
adopted  from  the  beginning,  both  in  Virginia  and 
Massachusetts,  as  part  of  their  religious  colonial 
programme  the  conversion  of  the  native  heathen. 
The  device  on  the  seal  of  the  Massachusetts  Company, 
which  obtained  a  Royal  Charter  from  Charles  i. 
in  1628,  was  an  Indian  with  the  words  in  his  mouth, 
*  Come  over  and  help  us,'  and  the  charter  itself 
bore  '  that  the  people  from  England  may  be  so 
religiously,  peaceably  and  civilly  governed  as  their 
good  life  and  orderly  conversation  may  win  and 
incite  the  natives  of  the  country  to  the  knowledge 
and  obedience  of  the  only  true  God  and  Saviour 
of  mankind  and  the  Christian  faith.'  But  little 
or  nothing  was  done  to  give  effect  to  these  good 
intentions.  Other  influences  were  at  work,  and 
instead  of  Indian  missions  there  was  war  and 
bloodshed  between  the  Indians  and  the  colonists. 
Official  religion  in  the  time  of  Laud  was  concerned 
with  very  different  matters.  The  severities  of  the 
Star  Chamber  and  the  High  Commission  Court 
had  their  counterpart  in  like  needs  in  Virginia,  and 
produced  like  consequences.  It  was  left  to  one  de- 
voted man,  John  Eliot,  a  pastor  in  New  England, 
to  attempt  on  his  own  personal  initiative  the  first 

*  Mitchell,  The  Westminster  Assembly,  p.  101. 

2  J.  S.  M.  Anderson,  History  of  the  Church  of  England  in  the  Colonies 
(1856),  ii.  p.  10. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     269 

missionary  enterprise  among  the  Indians.  His 
example  was  followed  by  others.  He  was  tlie 
first  evangelical  missionary,  and  his  work  attracted 
attention  in  England  and  stimulated  the  missionary 
spirit  there.  Castell's  Petition  may  well  be  one 
of  the  results.  It  in  turn  apparently  elicited  from 
Parliament  in  1648  a  proclamation  or  manifesto 
in  favour  of  missions,  which  was  to  be  read  in  all 
the  churches  and  which  asked  for  mission 
collections.^  Out  of  this  arose  in  1649  the  Corpora- 
tion or  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel 
in  New  England.  And  that  body,  according  to 
Warneck,  was  probably  the  mother  of  the  great 
Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the  Gospel  in  Foreign 
Parts,  founded  in  1701.  Another  fruit  of  the 
parliamentary  manifesto  of  1648  may  possibly  be 
seen  in  a  vast  and  ambitious  scheme  of  missions 
put  forth  by  Cromwell.  According  to  it  there  was 
to  be  a  congregatio  de  fide  'propaganda  in  the  interest 
of  Protestant  missions.  The  whole  earth  was 
divided  into  four  mission  provinces  :  the  first  two 
embraced  Europe,  the  third  and  fourth  the  rest  of 
the  world.  The  death  of  Cromwell  prevented  any- 
thing being  done  to  put  the  scheme  into  operation, 
but  it  remains  a  striking  example  of  the  pubfic 
acknowledgment  of  the  duty  of  missions. 

Castell's  Petition  is  highly  significant  from  another 
point  of  view.  It  is  probably  the  most  remarkable 
example  that  exists  of  co-operation  between  High 
Churchmen,  Puritans,  and  Presbyterians  for  a 
great  missionary  enterprise.  Its  signatories  in- 
cluded staunch  episcopalians  like  Robert  Sanderson, 

'  Warneck's  History  0/ Protestant  Missions,  Smith'*  trans.,  1884,  p.  36  ; 
Robson'd  ed.,  1906,  p.  47.  (Warneck  girea  the  date  of  Castell'*  Petition 
erroneously  as  1C44.) 


270     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

afterwards  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  and  Daniel  Featly, 
and  leaders  of  the  Puritan  party  such  as  Joseph 
Caryll,  Edmond  Calamy  and  Stephen  Marshall. 
These  men  and  the  Scottish  presbyterians  spoke 
with  one  voice  on  the  high  and  sacr.ed  object — 
higher  than  all  their  differences — which  made  them 
for  the  moment  one.  '  We  whose  names  are  here 
underwritten,'  wrote  the  English  divines,  '  having 
been  upon  occasion  acquainted  with  a  motion 
intended  to  be  made  by  Master  William  Castell 
to  the  high  and  honourable  Court  of  Parliament 
now  assembled  concerning  the  propagation  of  the 
glorious  Gospel  of  Christ  in  America,  as  we  do  well 
approve  of  the  motion  so  we  do  humbly  desire 
his  reasons  may  be  duly  considered.'  Henderson, 
Blair,  Baillie  and  Gillespie  added  :  '  The  motion 
made  by  Master  William  Castell  for  propagating 
of  the  blessed  Evangel  of  Christ  our  Lord  and 
Saviour  in  America  we  conceive  in  the  general  to 
be  most  pious.  Christian  and  charitable,  and  there- 
fore worthy  to  be  seriously  considered  of  all  that 
love  the  glorious  name  of  Christ,  and  all  things 
necessary  for  the  prosecution  of  so  pious  a  work 
to  be  considered  by  the  wisdoms  of  churches  and 
civil  powers.' 

The  most  striking  fact  is  not  that  men  of  so 
widely  divergent  theological  and  ecclesiastical 
parties  should  have  so  united,  but  that  they 
should  have  done  so  at  such  a  time.  Already 
in  1641  the  atmosphere  was  highly  charged  with 
the  fierce  currents  which  tore  England  asunder 
in  civil  strife  in  the  following  year.  It  would  not 
have  been  surprising  if  churchmen  in  hostile  camps 
had  so  distrusted  each  other  as  to  find  it  impossible 
to  work  together.     Castell's  Petition  is  a  refreshing 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND    271 

proof  that  there  were  earnest  men  on  both  sides 
who  up  till  the  last  cherished  a  spirit  of  conciliation 
and  strove  for  peace. 

11.    THE    REVOLUTION    TRIUMPHANT:     CHARLES 
IN    SCOTLAND 

AuguM — November  1641 

The  Church  now  desired  Henderson  to  take 
the  leading  place  as  Moderator  of  its  General 
Assembly  for  the  second  time.  He  had  been  its 
leading  spokesman  in  London,  and  was  more  than 
ever  before  its  representative  man.  Charles  had 
intended  to  nominate  the  Earl  of  Southesk  as 
commissioner,  on  Traquair's  suggestion,  but  Hen- 
derson dissuaded  him  from  appointing  a  man 
whom  the  Covenanters  did  not  trust,  and  Lord 
Wemyss  was  appointed  instead.  The  Assembly 
met  in  St.  Andrews  on  20th  July.  Parliament 
had  been  sitting  in  Edinburgh  since  the  15th,  and 
it  sent  a  formal  request  to  the  Assembly  to  adjourn 
its  meetings  thither  for  the  convenience  of  those 
who  were  members  of  both  bodies.  Andrew  Ramsay, 
the  former  Moderator,  continued  to  act  in  that 
capacity  simply  for  the  purpose  of  adjourning  to 
Edinburgh  ;  when  the  Assembly  met  there  on 
27th  July,  Henderson  had  returned  and  was 
elected  to  the  chair. 

When  Henderson  quitted  London  in  the  latter 
part  of  July  1641,  the  Scottish  revolution  may  be 
said  to  have  been  complete.  Charles  had  conceded 
nothing  till  he  was  no  longer  able  to  refuse  anything. 
Now,  strangest  spectacle  of  all,  he  evinced  a  desire 
to  cultivate  the  friendship  of  the  triumphant 
'  rebels '  ;    he   was   impatient   during  the   summer 


272  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

months  to  conclude  the  treaty  negotiations  and 
hurry  off  to  Scotland,  and  when  August  came  he 
could  no  longer  be  restrained.  The  centre  of 
political  interest  was  suddenly  shifted  to  Edinburgh, 
whither  Charles  went.  Was  it  in  order  to  crown 
by  his  presence  the  rejoicings  of  his  Scottish 
subjects  over  the  liberties  they  had  just  wrung 
from  him  ?  The  English  Parliament  did  not  think 
so.  With  eyes  of  suspicion  and  alarm  it  followed 
him  to  the  north.  It  sent  some  of  its  members  of 
whom  Hampden  was  one  to  keep  a  watch  on  this 
suspicious  fraternising.  But  Charles  had  not 
changed.  He  had  closed  one  chapter  of  his  career, 
he  was  opening  another  and  more  terrible  one. 

The   Assembly   sat   in   Greyfriars   church   from 
27th  July  till  9th  August.     It  was  notable  for  two 
things,  both  suggestive  of  the  new  ideas  that  were 
in  the  air.     Henderson  brought  with  him  a  letter 
from  a  number  of  Church  of  England  ministers  in 
and   about    London    addressed   to   the  Assembly. 
It  contained  the  first  formal  expression,  at  least 
on  the  side  of  England,  of  the  solidarity  of  interest 
on  the   part   of  the   Churches  of  both  countries. 
*  These  Churches  of  England  and  Scotland,'  they 
said,  '  may  seem  both  to  be  embarked  in  the  same 
bottom,   to   sink   or   swim   together,   and   are   so 
nearly  conjoined  by  many  strong  ties  not  only  as 
fellow  members  under  the  same  head  Christ,  and 
fellow  subjects  under  the  same  king,  but  also  by 
such  neighbourhood  and  vicinity  of  place  that  if 
any  evil  shall  infest  the  one  the  other  cannot  be 
altogether  free.'     The  writers  went  on  to  say  that 
their  hopes  had  been  raised  of  removing  the  yoke 
of  episcopacy,  and  sundry  other  forms  of  Church 
government  had  been  projected  to  be  set  up  in  its 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     273 

room.  One  of  these  was  Congregationalism,  accord- 
ing to  whicli  the  whole  power  of  Church  government 
rested  with  the  majority  of  each  congregation,  all 
outside  jurisdiction  of  presbyteries,  synods,  or 
Assemblies  being  rejected  as  mere  usurpation. 
The  writers  asked  the  judgment  of  the  Assembly  to 
aid  them  in  settling  the  question  among  themselves, 
the  rather  because  they  had  heard  that  some 
leaders  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  inclined  to  approve 
of  that  way  of  government.  This  last  was  a  re- 
ference to  a  matter  which  had  caused  no  little 
trouble  in  Scotland  for  some  years  past,  the  practice 
namely  of  private  meetings  or  conventicles  of  lay- 
men for  religious  edification  apart  from  the  regular 
worship  of  the  Church  and  presence  of  the  pastor. 
The  question  whether  or  not  such  meetings 
should  be  permitted  had  caused  much  discussion 
in  the  Assembly  of  1638,  and  at  the  Aberdeen 
Assembly  of  1640,  and  it  had  come  up  again  in 
the  present  year,  when  a  compromise  had  with 
difficulty  been  arranged.  In  their  answer  the 
Assembly  were  unanimous  in  repudiating  Con- 
gregationalism. They  declared  that  '  the  execution 
of  ecclesiastical  power  and  authority  properly 
belongs  to  the  officers  of  the  kirk,  yet  so  that  in 
matters  of  chiefest  importance  the  tacit  consent 
of  the  congregation  be  had  before  their  decrees 
and  sentences  receive  final  execution,'  but  '  the 
officers  of  a  particular  congregation  may  not 
exercise  this  power  independently,  but  with  sub- 
ordination unto  greater  Presbyteries  and  Synods, 
provincial  and  national.'  This  they  regarded  as 
'  grounded  on  the  Word  of  God  and  to  be  conform 
to  the  pattern  of  the  primitive  and  apostolical 
kirks,  and  without  which  neither  could  the  kirks 

s 


274     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

in  this  kingdom  have  been  reformed,  nor  were  we 
able  for  any  time  to  preserve  truth  and  unity 
among  us.' 

In  addition  to  answering  the  question  referred 
to  them  by  the  EngUsh  brethren  the  Assembly 
went  further,  and,  in  language  which  we  can 
recognise  without  difficulty  as  Henderson's,  declared 
that  recent  experience  had  shown  how  desirable 
it  was  that  there  should  be  in  the  kirks  of  England 
and  Scotland  one  Confession,  one  Directory  for 
public  worship,  one  Catechism,  and  one  form  of 
kirk  government.  It  was  to  this  uniformity  they 
looked  as  '  a  sure  foundation  for  a  durable  peace,' 
as  a  protection  against  *  the  rising  or  spreading 
of  heresy  and  schism  amongst  themselves  and  of 
invasion  from  foreign  enemies.' 

So  eager  was  Henderson  at  this  time  to  advance 
his  favourite  policy  that  he  brought  forward  a 
motion  for  drawing  up  a  new  Confession  of  Faith, 
a  Catechism,  a  Directory  of  public  worship,  and  a 
Platform  of  kirk  government.  The  raison  d'etre  of 
this  great  scheme  was  to  secure  common  ground 
on  which  the  Churches  of  England  and  Scotland 
might  agree.  The  Assembly  approved  and  passed 
an  Act  in  terms  of  Henderson's  proposal.  It  also 
laid  the  work  on  the  shoulders  of  the  only  man 
able,  if  any  man  was  able,  to  carry  it  out.  The 
scheme  was  the  first  attempt  to  give  form  and 
shape  to  the  policy  of  Uniformity,  but  it  was  crude 
and  ill-digested,  and  he  soon  laid  it  aside.  Further 
reflection,  as  we  shall  see,  satisfied  him  that  this 
was  the  wrong  way  to  go  about  the  business. 
England  must,  he  saw,  decide  these  great  matters 
for  herself ;  it  would  be  time  enough  after  that  for 
Scotland  to  see  if  she  could  come  to  an  agreement 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     275 

with  England.  There  must  be  no  attempt  to  impose 
a  Scottish  creed  or  church  system  on  England. 

That  his  work  was  already  proving  too  heavy  a 
burden  is  evident  from  the  desire  which  Henderson 
pressed  upon  this  Assembly  for  liberty  to  leave 
Edinburgh.  He  pleaded  that  his  voice  was  too 
weak  for  any  church  in  the  to^vn  and  that  he  never 
enjoyed  health  there.  He  recalled  also  that  he  had 
stipulated  in  leaving  Leuchars  that  he  should  be 
free  to  remove  from  Edinburgh  '  when  the  public 
commotions  were  settled  '  if  he  found  the  town 
disagreed  with  his  health.  That  time  seemed  now 
to  have  arrived,  and  he  asked  the  Assembly  to  release 
him.  The  College  of  St.  Andrews  made  him  a 
tempting  offer  of  its  Principalship,  but  he  put  it 
aside  :  if  he  left  Edinburgh  it  would  be  to  retire 
to  '  some  quiet  little  landward  charge.'  What  a 
strangely  unambitious  man ;  small  wonder  that 
his  brethren  treated  his  proposal  at  first  as  a  jest. 
Edinburgli  took  alarm  at  the  prospect  of  losing 
him  ;  it  was  solicitous  for  his  health,  and  would 
buy  him  a  house  '  with  good  air  and  yards,'  and  he 
might  preach  only  when  he  pleased.  He  yielded 
to  his  people's  importunity,  and  agreed  to  remain 
with  them  as  long  as  health  permitted.  His 
future  was  strangely  different  from  what  he  antici- 
pated in  1641.  He  had  only  five  years  to  live,  and 
though  he  died  minister  of  the  High  Church,  li^^tle 
of  those  five  years  was  spent  in  the  work  ol'  liis 
parish,  little  indeed  in  Edinburgh  or  in  Scotland. 
There  was  to  be  no  release  for  him  as  long  as  he 
lived  from  the  burden  of  pubHc  affairs,  which  grew 
heavier  with  the  years. 

We  are  not  in  doubt  where  the  house  with  good 
air  and  yards  was  found  for  him.     It  was  in  the 


276    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

High  School  Yards,  on  the  ground  that  formerly 
belonged  to  the  Blackfriars  monastery.^  It  was 
here  that  he  wrote  his  will  a  few  years  later  '  near 
to  the  High  School.'  This  situation  on  the  south 
side  of  the  Cowgate  was  at  that  time  the  mildest 
and  most  sheltered  part  of  the  city.  When  George 
Gillespie's  health  gave  way  some  years  later,  the 
Town  Council  provided  for  him  also  a  house  in 
the  same  favoured  and  healthful  district,  *  a  house 
of  the  best  air  and  other  commodities.'  ^ 

Up  till  this  time  Henderson  seems  to  have 
occupied  a  house  in  Liberton's  Wynd  on  the  south 
side  of  the  Lawnmarket,  running  between  it  and 
the  Cowgate,^  a  well-known  thoroughfare  of  old 
Edinburgh  long  since  swept  away.* 

King  Charles  entered  Edinburgh  on  Saturday, 
14th  August.  Parliament  had  already  been  sitting 
for  a  month  in  the  new  Parliament  House.  On 
Tuesday  the  17th  he  appeared  there  and  made  a 
gracious  speech.  He  had  last  met  a  Scottish 
Parliament  in  1633  :  with  what  feelings  must  he 
now  have  faced  that  of  1641  ?  The  world  had 
been  turned  upside  down  in  the  interval.  Laud, 
then  all-powerful,  was  now  a  prisoner ;  his  ministers 
had  been  struck  down,  his  policy  had  come  to 
nought,  power  and  prerogative  had  in  large  measure 
been  wrested  from  him.  Yet  Charles  put  a  brave 
face  on  it.  He  said  he  had  come  out  of  love  to  his 
native  country  to  perfect  what  he  had  promised, 
to  end  distractions.  He  hastened  to  touch  with 
his  sceptre  all  the  Acts  of  Parliament  in  terms  of 

1  Town  Council  Records,  vol.  16,  fol.  166,  169. 

2  Ihid.,  vol.  17,  fol.  68. 

'  Ibid.  ;  John  Hay's  Protocols,  vol.  iii.  p.  64 ;  Treasurer's  Accounts, 
1638-9  and  1641-2. 

*  See  Daniel  Wilson's  Memorials  of  Edinburgh,  i.  pp.  180,  181. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     277 

the  treaty.  He  accepted  Henderson  as  his  chaplain, 
making  no  complaint  of  the  want  of  a  liturgy. 
*  Master  Henderson  is  in  great  favour  with  the 
king,'  wrote  an  Englishman  in  Edinburgh  to  his 
friend  in  London  on  1st  September,  '  and  stands 
next  to  the  chair  in  sermon  time.  His  Majesty 
doth  hear  two  sermons  every  Sunday  beside 
week-day  Lectures,  but  there  is  no  Service  at  all 
read,  but  only  a  Psalm  before  Sermon.'  Within 
a  few  days  of  his  arrival  the  leading  non-covenanting 
nobles,  Lennox,  Hamilton,  Morton,  Roxburghe 
and  others  signed  the  Covenant.  But  it  was  not 
for  such  things  that  Charles  came  to  Scotland.  He 
was  plotting  a  counter-revolution.  As  early  as 
May,  when  his  prospects  looked  better  than  they 
did  now,  he  had  decided  to  go  north.  Montrose 
and  his  friends  had  been  drifting  further  apart 
from  the  rest  of  the  Covenanting  party,  and  had 
formed  a  design  to  attack  Argyll  and  Hamilton 
(who  had  allied  himself  with  Argyll)  if  the  king 
were  present  to  give  his  countenance.  He  and 
Napier  his  brother-in-law  had  been  in  secret 
correspondence  with  Charles,  and  from  them 
apparently  came  the  suggestion  that  he  should 
appear  in  Scotland  while  Parliament  was  sitting. 
But  disappointment  dogged  the  steps  of  Charles's 
hopes  and  plans.  Montrose's  plot  leaked  out 
prematurely,  and  on  11th  June  he  and  his  fellow- 
plotters  were  arrested  and  thrown  into  prison  in 
Edinburgh  Castle.  Another  promising  scheme  had 
also  come  to  grief.  Rothes  had  been  won  over 
in  England  to  the  Court,  and  the  king  hoped  to 
use  him  for  his  own  purposes  among  the  Scottish 
nobles.  But  Rothes  fell  sick  and  lay  dying  at 
Richmond  at  the  very  time  when  Charles  hastened 


278     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

north.  So  the  king  had  to  make  the  best  of  it 
with  Argyll  and  the  others  whose  influence  was 
paramount  in  Scotland.  For  a  time  all  went  well. 
On  31st  August  there  was  a  great  banquet  in  the 
Parliament  House  given  by  the  Provost  of  Edin- 
burgh with  much  loyal  speech-making  and  general 
rejoicing.  Charles  believed  he  was  really  winning 
the  affections  of  Scotland  and  that  his  difficulties 
were  now  disappearing.  But  tough  disputes  soon 
arose  over  the  right  to  make  appointments  to  the 
offices  of  State  and  the  seats  in  the  Privy  Council, 
in  fact  all  political  and  judicial  offices.  The  king 
maintained  that  the  right  of  nomination  to  those 
offices  was  a  special  part  of  his  prerogative.  Parlia- 
ment claimed  that  the  appointments  were  by  law 
and  old  custom  made  only  with  their  advice.  The 
real  question  of  course  was  who  was  to  rule  Scotland. 
Charles  gave  way,  and  an  Act  was  passed  that 
the  king  was  to  choose  his  officers  subject  to  the 
advice  and  approbation  of  Parliament.  Then 
followed  a  long  struggle  over  the  nominations  for 
the  offices.  Loudoun  was  made  Chancellor.  Charles 
nominated  for  the  office  of  Treasurer  first  Morton, 
then  Almond  a  friend  of  Montrose.  Both  were 
fiercely  opposed,  and  finally  a  commission  of  five  was 
appointed,  Argyll  being  one.  Of  the  Privy  Council 
nearly  a  third  were  new  members.  Wariston  be- 
came a  judge  and  was  knighted.  John  Campbell, 
Lord  Loudoun  the  covenanting  Chancellor  was  made 
an  earl,  Leslie  the  covenanting  general  was  created 
Earl  of  Leven,  Argyll  the  covenanting  parliamentary 
leader  a  marquis.  A  shower  of  titles  descended  on 
Scotland ;  '  sundry  earls  and  lords,  but  a  world  of 
knights  were  created.'  Henderson  was  appointed 
dean  of  the  Chapel  Royal   at  Holyrood   with   a 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  SCOTLAND     279 

stipend  of  4000  merks.  A  covenanting  victory  in 
truth,  complete  in  form  as  well  as  in  fact.  The 
Opposition  which  had  struggled  into  existence  in 
the  winter  of  1637  had  now  crossed  the  floor  and 
was  installed  in  office,  the  Privy  Council  of  those 
days  had  vanished  from  the  earth. 

But  had  Charles  after  all  won  Scotland's  heart  ? 
Did  Scotland  trust  her  king  ?  When  he  left  on 
the  16th  of  November  he  went  empty-handed,  a 
deeply  disappointed  man.  His  hopes  of  help  from 
that  country  were  at  an  end.  It  was  true  Montrose 
and  his  fellow-plotters  and  two  incendiaries.  Sir 
Robert  Spottiswoode  and  Sir  John  Hay,  were 
liberated,  thanks  to  Argyll's  advice  supported 
by  Henderson.  But  Charles  had  gained  nothing 
else.  He  had  formed  no  party  in  Scotland,  even 
Hamilton  his  friend  had,  for  the  time  at  least,  gone 
over  to  Argyll  and  the  Parliament.  His  crushing 
disappointment  had  been  the  disbanding  of  the 
Scottish  troops,  save  three  regiments,  in  the  end 
of  August.  There  is  little  doubt  that  Charles's 
main  purpose  in  this  northern  excursion  was  to 
secure  control  of  the  military  force  which  Scotland 
commanded.  With  such  a  weapon  he  thought  he 
could  make  short  work  of  the  English  Parliament. 
It  had  been  suggested  that  4000  or  5000  of  the 
troops  should  be  kept  under  arms  for  a  time,  and 
Charles  was  sanguine  enough  to  believe  they  would 
be  placed  at  his  disposal.  A  counter-revolution 
with  the  aid  of  the  Scottish  Parliament  was  surely 
the  wildest  of  delusions.  But  that  dream  was  now 
at  an  end.  In  spite  of  loyal  banquets  and  showers 
of  titles  there  lay  deep  in  the  heart  of  Scotland  an 
incurable  distnist  of  the  king.  The  obscure  plot 
which  figures  in  history  under  the  colourless  title 


280     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

of  The  Incident,  whether  the  king  was  an  accomplice 
or  not,  appeared  to  Scotsmen  as  the  work  of  his 
friends,  a  blow  aimed  at  Argyll  and  therefore  at  the 
Parliament.  It  failed,  and  left  Argyll  more  powerful 
than  before.  Then  came,  on  28th  October,  the 
thunder-clap  of  the  Irish  rebellion  and  the  massacre 
of  Protestants  in  Ireland.  The  public  mind  in 
Scotland  and  England  was  startled  and  agitated 
with  stories  of  popish  plots ;  many  were  ready 
to  believe  that  '  the  Irish  rebellion  and  new  plots 
in  England  against  the  Parliament  were  invented 
by  the  Queen  and  not  against  the  king's  mind.'  ^ 

Under    that    dark    cloud    Charles    quitted    his 
northern  kingdom  for  the  last  time. 

'  Baillie's  Letters  (Laing's  ed.)^  i.  p.  S97> 


IV 

THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND 

1.    IS    SCOTLAND    TO    REMAIN    NEUTRAL  ? 

If  Henderson  had  committed  his  inmost  thoughts 
to  paper  and  that  private  diary  were  open  before 
us  to-day,  we  would  probably  have  found  that  his 
deepest  longings  at  the  close  of  1641  were  for  peace 
for  his  country  and  a  life  of  retirement  for  his 
remaining  years.  He  was  now  fifty-nine,  the 
last  years  had  been  full  of  incessant  labour  and 
heavy  responsibilities,  he  had  no  personal  ambitions 
to  gratify  and  his  health  was  far  from  robust.  He 
had  been  so  fortunate  as  to  win  the  confidence  of 
church  and  nation,  even  the  king  whom  he  had 
opposed  had  paid  him  respect  and  honour.  But 
success,  no  less  than  failure,  had  its  penalty  to  pay  : 
it  had  stirred  into  activity  the  meaner  passions  of 
smaller  men  around  him.  The  voice  of  detraction 
and  envy  began  to  be  heard.  It  was  hinted  he  was 
too  moderate  in  his  views  and  language,  his  friendly 
relations  with  the  king  had  made  him  too  tender 
and  sparing  in  his  public  utterances,  besides,  had 
he  not  accepted  from  Charles  an  office  with  a 
pension  ?  An  opportunity  soon  came  to  the  ex- 
tremists to  put  a  public  slight  upon  him.  A  new 
commission  was  appointed  by  Parliament  in 
November  1641  to  proceed  to  London,  and 
Henderson  was  passed  over  for  the  office  of  chaplain. 


282     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

He  submitted  to  these  pinpricks  in  silence ;  they  did 
not  change  or  affect  his  course  of  action. 

The  situation  for  Scotland  as  the  months  wore 
on  became  one  of  increasing  delicacy  and  difficulty. 
In  England  the  state  of  matters  was  already 
alarming.  Alienation  between  king  and  Parlia- 
ment grew  daily  wider.  The  Grand  Remonstrance 
passed  the  Commons  by  a  majority  of  eleven  after 
a  great  debate  on  22nd  November  :  then  for  the 
first  time  the  hitherto  united  House  fell  asunder, 
the  Puritan  and  Royalist  parties  sprang  into 
being,  and  men  knew  that  civil  war  was  approach- 
ing. The  king's  answer  was  the  mad  attempt 
to  arrest  the  Five  Members  on  the  memorable 
4th  of  January  1642,  then  he  left  London  to  pre- 
pare for  war  :  in  February  the  queen  sailed  for 
the  Hague,  carrying  with  her  the  crown  jewels  to 
pawn  them  for  arms  and  soldiers  :  in  March  the 
king  made  his  headquarters  at  York  and  summoned 
his  friends  round  him  :  after  fruitless  negotiations 
over  the  control  of  the  militia  and  the  responsibility 
of  ministers  to  Parliament  he  raised  the  royal 
standard  at  Nottingham  on  22nd  August  and  civil 
war  began. 

Scotland  looked  on,  a  deeply  interested  and 
anxious  spectator.  Every  reasonable  man  there 
desired  to  keep  clear  of  the  quarrel,  and  if  possible 
to  aid  the  cause  of  peace.  It  was  already  co- 
operating actively  with  the  king  and  the  English 
Parliament  in  dealing  with  the  Irish  rebellion. 
The  new  Privy  Council  at  its  first  meeting  on  19th 
November  was  met  with  applications  from  both  for 
help.  Energetic  measures  were  taken  without 
delay  to  raise  a  levy  of  5000  men  for  Ireland,  and 
the  Council  bound  itself  to  raise  5000  more ;    by 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     283 

the  month  of  February  the  first  5000  had  been 
equipped  and  transported  to  Ulster.     It  also  dis- 
patched   to    London   the    Earls   of    Lothian    and 
Lindsay  (two  of  the  parliamentary  commissioners) 
in  answer  to  the  king's  request.     Their  instructions 
were  to  see  to  the  carrying  out  of  the  Treaty  and 
to  co-operate  in  the  Irish  business,  but  they  had  a 
wider  mandate,  '  to  labour  by  all  means  to  keep  a 
right   understanding   betwixt   the    king's   Majesty 
and  his  people  and  betwixt  the  two  nations  .  .  . 
and  to   proffer  your  mediation   for  removing  all 
jealousies  and  mistakes,  which  may  arise  betwixt 
His  Majesty  and  that  kingdom.'     Scotland,  in  other 
words,  was   ready  to   mediate   between   king   and 
Parliament.      But    the    role    of    peacemaker    was 
not  an  easy  nor  a  grateful  one.     The  Scots  com- 
missioners managed  things  so  badly  in  their  first 
attempt  at  mediation  that  they  drew  from  Charles 
a   curt   intimation   to  the   Privy   Council   on   8th 
February,     '  that    the    commissioners    should    be 
desired  by  the  Council  not  to  meddle  betwixt  the 
king    and    Parliament    of    England    without    his 
Majesty's  knowledge  and  approbation.'     In  April 
both  king  and  Parliament  foimd  it  to  their  interest 
to  appeal  to  the  Council.     Each  side   wished  to 
present   its   own  view  of  the  quarrel  in  the   best 
light  to  tlie  people  of  Scotland.     It  was  important 
to  both  to  secure  the  goodwill  of  Scotland,  and  a 
diplomatic  rivalry  went  on  between  them  for  that 
end.     The  Council,  still  bent  on  holding  the  balance 
even,  were  in  no  little  embarrassment.     To  both 
they  used  the  language  of  courtesy  and  concilia- 
tion.    They  were  confident  that  Parliament '  would 
leave  no  fair  and  good  means  unessayed  to  induce 
His  Majesty  to  return  unto  them,  that  there  may 


284     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

be  a  better  understanding  betwixt  him  and  his 
people,  and  they  honoured  with  his  royal  presence 
and  strengthened  by  his  sceptre  and  authority.' 
To  Charles  their  humble  desire  was  '  that  His 
Majesty  may  be  pleased  to  hearken  to  the  earnest 
desire  and  hearty  invitation  of  his  people  in  return- 
ing to  his  Parliament  which,  as  it  is  his  great,  so 
it  is  his  best  and  most  impartial  council.'  On  one 
point,  however,  the  Privy  Council  were  quite  definite. 
The  king  had  announced  his  intention  of  going 
to  Ireland  in  person  :  the  Council  agreed  with  the 
English  Parliament  in  dissuading  him  from  that 
step.  They  hoped  that  he  might  be  pleased  '  to 
hear  and  consider  the  advice  and  counsel  of  his 
Parliament  of  England  as  being  more  nearly  con- 
cerned in  the  matters  of  Ireland,'  and  they  added 
an  entreaty  that  all  means  might  be  forborne 
'  which  may  make  the  breach  wider  or  the  wound 
deeper.'  This  was  on  22nd  April.  The  Council 
proposed  to  send  up  the  Chancellor  Loudoun  to 
York,  but  Loudon's  mission  did  not  prosper,  and 
he  was  sent  back  to  call  a  special  meeting  of  the 
Council  for  25th  May.  This  Scottish  neutrality 
was  not  in  the  least  to  Charles's  liking.  The 
outbreak  of  war  was  now  imminent,  and  he  was 
impatient  that  Scotland  should  definitely  declare 
herself  on  his  side.  Imposing  gatherings  of  royalist 
members  of  Council  and  their  friends  were  held  at 
Edinburgh — just  the  men  who  were  eyed  with 
suspicion  as  '  incendiaries,' '  banders,'  and  '  plotters,' 
— the  evident  purpose  being  to  overawe  the  Council 
and  obtain  a  vote  for  the  king.  But  Wariston 
too  was  on  the  ground  to  check  them.  He  was 
sent  down  by  his  fellow  commissioners  in  London 
who  were  in  touch  with  the  parliamentary  leaders. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     285 

The  Chancellor  read  two  documents  from  the  king, 
both  of  them  sharply  expressing  his  displeasure  at 
the  Council's  attitude,  and  plainly  pointing  to  the 
line  of  action  he  expected.  '  We  desire  not  that 
you  should  intermeddle  so  far  as  to  take  upon  you 
to  decide  the  differences  betwixt  us  and  our  Parlia- 
ment, but  that  you  will  labour  to  inform  yourselves 
of  the  true  estate  of  the  question  betwixt  us  and  our 
Parliament  .  .  .  that  you  may  be  the  more  able 
so  to  express  your  affection  to  our  service  as  that 
you  will  not  be  willing  to  see  us  suffer  in  our  honour 
or  authority.'  Again  :  '  We  did  not  require  of 
you  that  ye  should  sit  as  judges  upon  the  affaire  of 
another  kingdom.  We  only  intend  to  have  both 
our  sufferings  and  our  actions,  as  they  are  expresed 
in  many  papers  which  have  passed  betwixt  us  and 
our  Parliament,  made  thoroughly  known  to  you 
that  ye  may  clearly  see  that  we  have  been  so  far 
from  wronging  our  Parliament  of  England  that  we 
have  given  them  all  satisfaction.  Wc  will  not  put 
you  in  mind  of  your  natural  affection  towards  us, 
which  we  know  will  rather  be  kindled  than  ex- 
tinguished by  our  distress.'  A  declaration  from 
Parliament  to  the  Council  brought  down  by 
Wariston  merely  thanked  the  Council  for  the  advice 
they  had  given  the  king  and  entreated  them  to 
continue  their  good  advice,  and  to  suppress  the 
attempts  of  those  who  would  persuade  them  to 
interpose  in  the  unhappy  differences  in  any  such 
way  as  might  weaken  the  confidence  or  endanger  the 
peace  of  the  two  kingdoms.  But  the  stir  in  the 
camp  of  the  king's  friends,  and  their  attendance  in 
force  at  the  Council  meeting  of  25th  May,  aroused 
the  other  party  to  action.  On  the  31st  a  formidable 
petition   was   presented   in   the   name   of  a  large 


286  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

number  of  noblemen,  gentlemen,  burgesses,  and 
ministers  ;  they  reminded  the  Council  of  the  treaty 
of  peace  recently  concluded  between  Scotland  and 
England,  and  implored  them  to  shun  any  engage- 
ments direct  or  indirect  to  the  king,  by  which  the 
peace  might  be  endangered,  without  consent  of 
Parliament.  The  bold  attempt  to  commit  Scot- 
land to  active  support  of  Charles  in  the  approaching 
war  failed.  There  was  no  question  at  this  time 
of  siding  with  the  Parliament,  and  no  such  request 
had  been  made. 

This  attitude  of  detachment  became  every  day 
more  difficult  to  maintain.  When  the  General 
Assembly  met  at  St.  Andrews  on  27th  July  it 
found  itself  courted  by  both  parties.  They  knew 
that  the  Assembly  represented  Scottish  opinion 
more  fully  than  either  Parliament  or  the  Privy 
Coimcil.  The  Assembly  was  flattered  by  such 
attentions.  '  We  thought  ourselves  much  honoured,' 
says  Baillie,  '  by  the  respectful  letters  both  of  the 
king  and  Parliament  to  us.  It  seems  it  concerned 
both  to  have  our  good  opinion.'  The  king's  letter 
promised  that  if  anything  was  found  amiss  he 
would  reform  it  in  a  fair  and  orderly  way.  Parlia- 
ment deplored  the  growing  distractions  of  England 
and  the  threatened  civil  war ;  they  desired  a  re- 
formation both  in  Church  and  State  by  peaceable 
parliamentary  means,  but  they  had  been  interrupted 
by  '  the  plots  and  practices  of  a  malignant  party  of 
Papists  and  ill-affected  persons '  especially  of 
clergy,  by  the  incitement  of  bishops  and  others. 
But  they  did  not  doubt  they  would  settle  matters 
both  in  Church  and  State  '  by  an  advancement  of 
the  true  Religion  and  such  a  Reformation  of  the 
Church  as  shall  be  most  agreeable  to  God's  Word.' 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     287 

It  is  noticeable  that  they  were  careful  to  use  only 
general  language  on  the  question  of  Church  reform. 
Henderson  was  appointed  to  answer  both  letters. 
The  burden  of  the  answer  in  each  case  was  to  renew 
the  proposition  for  beginning  the  work  of  reforma- 
tion by  having  a  uniformity  of  Church  government 
between  the  two  nations.  Until  there  was  one  form 
of  ecclesiastical  government  there  could  be  no  unity 
in  religion  or  in  Confession,  but  when  the  prelatical 
party  was  put  out  of  the  way,  '  the  work  will  be 
easy  without  forcing  of  any  conscience  to  settle 
in  England  the  government  of  the  Reformed  kirk 
by  Assemblies.'  A  third  letter  came  to  the 
Assembly  from  some  ministers  in  England.  They 
used  no  ambiguous  language,  but  declared  it  to  be 
the  desire  of  the  most  considerable  part  among 
them  that  the  presbyterian  government  might  be 
established  among  them,  and  that  they  might  have 
one  Confession  of  P^aith  and  form  of  government. 
That  the  Assembly  meant  to  press  on  this  question 
of  Uniformity  was  shown  by  their  appointing  a 
strong  commission  '  for  public  affairs  of  this  kirk 
and  for  prosecuting  the  desire  of  this  Assembly  to 
Ilis  Majesty  and  the  Parliament  of  England.* 
To  this  commission  were  entrusted  large  powers 
'  for  furtherance  of  this  great  work  in  the  Union 
of  this  Island  in  Religion  and  kirk-government  by 
all  lawful  ecclesiastical  ways.'  The  first  step  it 
took  was  immediately  to  petition  the  Privy  Council 
for  their  concurrence  in  approaching  the  Parliament 
of  England  on  the  subject.  The  Council  concurrcd 
in  asking  Parliament  to  give  the  question  favourable 
consideration. 

This  appeal  from  Scotland  drew  from  the  English 
Parliament    a   highly    important   declaration.     In 


288     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

September  1642  the  Commons  resolved  without  a 
dissentient  voice  that  the  existing  government  of 
the  Churcli  of  England  must  be  taken  away,  and 
both  Houses  agreed  upon  a  Declaration  to  abolish 
episcopacy  and  reconstruct  the  national  church 
by  the  help  of  an  Assembly  of  Divines.  More  than 
anything  they  had  yet  done  this  was  a  definite 
step  towards  the  goal  of  Uniformity,  it  registered 
a  long  advance  upon  their  attitude  of  the  previous 
year.  '  We  hope  by  God's  assistance  to  be  directed 
so  that  we  may  cast  out  whatsoever  is  offensive 
to  God  or  justly  displeasing  to  any  neighbour 
Church,  and  so  far  agree  with  our  brethren  of 
Scotland  and  other  reformed  churches  in  all  sub- 
stantial parts  of  doctrine,  worship,  and  discipline, 
that  both  we  and  they  may  enjoy  those  advantages 
and  conveniences  which  are  mentioned  by  them  in 
this  their  answer,  to  the  more  strict  union  of  both 
kingdoms  .  .  .  more  constant  security  of  religion 
against  .  .  .  the  Papists  and  deceitful  errors  of 
other  sectaries.  The  main  cause  which  hitherto 
hath  deprived  us  of  these  and  other  great  advantages, 
which  we  might  have  by  a  more  close  union  with  the 
Church  of  Scotland  and  other  reformed  churches 
is  the  government  by  bishops  .  .  .  and  ...  we 
do  declare  that  the  government  by  archbishops, 
bishops,  etc.,  is  evil  and  justly  offensive  and 
burdensome  to  the  kingdom,  a  great  impediment 
to  reformation  and  growth  of  religion,  very  pre- 
judicial to  the  State  and  government  of  the  kingdom 
and  that  we  are  resolved  that  the  same  shall  be 
taken  away.  Our  purpose  is  to  consult  with  godly 
and  learned  divines  that  we  may  not  only  remove 
this,  but  settle  such  a  government  as  shall  be  most 
agreeable  to  God's  holy  word,  most  apt  to  procure 


( 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     289 

and  preserve  the  peace  of  tlie  Church  at  home, 
and  happy  union  with  the  Church  of  Scotland 
and  other  reformed  Churches  abroad.' 

This  Declaration  was  sent  in  September  to  the 
commission  of  the  General  Assembly.  It  does  not 
in  words  commit  Parliament  to  the  Scottish  pres- 
byterian  system,  and  it  is  consistent  with  the 
desire,  which  was  still  entertained,  to  reconstruct 
their  Church  in  an  English  sense,  but  we  need  not 
wonder  that  Scotland  read  it  as  meaning  practical 
acceptance  of  her  Church  polity,  accepted  it  with 
joy,  and  set  about  preparing  for  actual  negotia- 
tions. 

Henderson's  opponents  had  continued  to  invent 
or  to  magnify  causes  of  complaint  against  him. 
That  these  were  petty  calumnies  may  be  judged 
from  the  fact  that  the  acceptance  of  his  office  was 
cast  in  his  teeth.  He  might  well  have  ignored 
such  miserable  spite,  but  after  enduring  his  vexation 
in  silence  for  a  time  he  turned  on  his  tormentors 
in  this  Assembly  and  made  '  a  long  and  passionate 
apology  for  his  actions.'  It  is  painful  to  read  that 
a  man  who  had  rendered  such  services  to  his  Church 
and  nation  should  have  had  to  speak  of  matters 
so  paltry  as  those  which  formed  the  staple  of  the 
talk  against  him.  He  said  that  '  what  himself 
had  gotten  from  the  king  for  his  attendance  in  a 
painful  charge  was  no  pension,  that  he  had  touched 
as  yet  none  of  it,  that  he  was  vexed  with  injurious 
calumnies.'  ^  He  overwhelmed  his  opponents  and 
so  amply  vindicated  himself  that  a  reaction  seems 
to  have  set  in.  His  brethren  acknowledged  his 
untainted  honour  and  '  his  unparalleled  abilities 
to  serve  the  Cluirch  and  kingdom,'  and  from  that 

>  Baillie's  Lettert  (icing's  ed.),  ii.  p.  48. 
T 


290     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

day  till  the  end  of  his  life  he  enjoyed  the  fullest 
confidence  of  both. 

Further   messages   continued   to    pass   between 

the  Council  and  the  rival  parties  in  England,  with 

increasing  cordiality  on  the  part  of  the  Parliament, 

with  growing  asperity   on  the   part  of  the   king. 

After  the  outbreak  of  war  the  tension  grew  sharper, 

and  it  seemed  inevitable  that  Scotland  would  before 

long  in  spite  of  herself  be  dragged  into  the  conflict. 

But  Scotland  herself  was  divided  and  the  outlook 

was  very  grave.     How  grave  may  be  seen  from  a 

remarkable  step  taken  at  this  juncture  by  some 

leading  men  of  moderate  opinions  on  both  sides, 

not  only  to  keep  Scotland  neutral  but  to  stop  the 

bloodshed   which   had   already   begun.     Hamilton 

and  some  royalist   nobles   joined  with   Loudoun, 

Argyll,    Wariston,    and   Henderson   in   signing   an 

appeal  to  the  queen  then  in  Holland  to  come  to 

Scotland,  promising  that  they  would  concur  with 

her  in  mediating  between  the  king  and  Parliament. 

They  assured  her  of  security  for  her  person  and  the 

free  exercise  of  her  religion  for  herself  and  family, 

and  they  undertook  that  if  the  terms  they  should 

agree  to  propose  were  rejected  by  the  two  Houses 

they  would  take  sides  with  the  king  against  them.^ 

Surely  a  desperate  remedy  for  a  desperate  disease. 

One  circumstance  alone  could  have  suggested  it. 

Queen  Henrietta  was  a  bold  and  tireless  schemer, 

and  her  advice  had  always  been  for  arbitrary  courses, 

but  she  was  the  only  person,  now  that  Laud  had 

fallen,  who  had  any  real  influence  over  the  king. 

If  she  could  be  brought  to  agree  with  the  Scottish 

leaders  as  to  terms  of  peace,  Charles's  concurrence 

might  be  counted  on.     The  scheme  was  far  from 

1  Burnet,  Memoirs  of  the  Duket  of  Hamilton  (1677),  p.  201. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     291 

hopeful,  but  it  was  never  put  to  the  test.  Charles 
at  first  welcomed  it  '  with  a  deal  of  joy,'  but  he 
drew  back  on  the  weak  excuse  that  his  affection  for 
the  queen  made  him  fear  for  the  safety  of  her  person 
in  Scotland.  So  passed  his  last  opportunity  of 
help  from  a  united  Scotland.  On  23rd  October 
the  battle  of  Edgehill  was  fought.  This  brought 
matters  to  a  point.  Historians  speak  of  it  as  an 
inconclusive  fight  in  which  both  sides  claimed  the 
victory,  but  the  action  of  the  parliamentary 
leaders  reveals  their  true  opinion  of  their  victory. 
They  lost  no  time  in  applying  to  Scotland  for 
military  aid  ;  as  early  as  7th  November  a  long 
and  earnest  appeal  was  sent  to  the  Privy  Council. 
On  5th  December  there  came  from  the  king  a 
defence  and  apology  for  his  conduct  and  an  appeal 
to  the  people  of  Scotland.  Both  of  these 
manifestoes  were  discussed  by  the  Council  on 
20th  December,^  a  day  to  be  remembered  because 
then  the  Council  came  to  an  open  split.  By  a 
narrow  majority  it  resolved  to  publish  the  king's 
letter  alone.  This  was  the  signal  for  an  outbreak 
of  agitation  :  the  Church  and  the  great  body  of 
the  people  were  determined  Scotland  should  not  be 
committed  to  fight  for  the  king  against  the  Parlia- 
ment. Feeling  had  not  run  so  high  since  the 
memorable  days  of  1637,  and  it  became  clear  that 
the  Council's  action  did  not  have  public  opinion 
behind  it.  On  10th  January  1643  it  was  decided 
to  publish  the  declaration  of  Parliament  as  well, 
and  to  make  it  known  that  the  publishing  of  any 
of  these  papers  did  not  import  the  Council's  approval 
of  them.  The  heated  state  of  public  feeling  is 
reflected  in  two  strongly-worded  petitions  presented 

'  Regiater  o/  Privy  C'euncU,  vii.  (2iid  series),  p.  36tf. 


292     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

in  January  from  the  Commission  of  Assembly,  and 
in  what  came  to  be  known  as  a  '  Cross  Petition  ' 
from  the  Hamilton  party.  The  Church  party 
asked  the  Council  to  concur  with  them  in  recom- 
mending to  the  king  the  policy  of  Uniformity,  and 
the  Council  recognising  the  drift  of  public  opinion 
agreed  to  do  so. 

After  the  open  breach  in  the  Council  in  December, 
when  Argyll  and  Hamilton  again  parted  company, 
it  was  inevitable  that  Charles  would  regard  Argyll 
and  the  Church  party  as  scarcely  disguised  enemies. 
They  had  subjected  him  to  bitter  humiliation ; 
when  he  had  stooped  to  bid  against  the  Parliament 
for  their  support  they  had  not  only  turned  a  deaf 
ear  but  had  shown  that  their  sympathies  were  on 
the  other  side.  To  approach  the  king  after  such 
treatment  was  to  invite  a  rebuff  or  something  worse. 
Yet  in  February  1643  the  Conservators  of  the 
Peace,  thinking  it  desirable  in  view  of  the  state  of 
public  affairs  that  the  Scottish  Parliament  should 
meet  without  delay,  decided  to  send  Loudoun  to 
Oxford  to  request  the  king  to  summon  a  Parliament 
which  otherwise  would  not  meet  until  June  1644. 
They  entrusted  him  with  the  still  more  delicate 
duty  of  offering  their  mediation  between  himself 
and  the  two  Houses.  The  Commission  of  Assembly 
prepared  a  petition  for  Henderson  to  present  at 
the  same  time  pressing  for  Uniformity.  The  two 
requests  were  the  two  heads  of  the  same  policy : 
a  settlement  with  the  Parliament  on  the  footing 
of  uniformity  of  Church  government.  Accordingly 
Loudoun  and  Henderson  appeared  in  Oxford  towards 
the  end  of  February  on  their  joint  mission,  but  their 
reception  convinced  them  that  they  had  entered 
an  enemy's  headquarters.     The  Earl  of  Lanark, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     293 

Hamilton's  brother,  then  Secretary  for  Scotland, 
had  posted  off  in  advance  and  duly  informed  the 
king  of  the  attitude  and  temper  of  the  prevailing 
party  in  Scotland.  The  Assembly's  petition  was 
first  disposed  of.  Clarendon  professes  that  it  was 
'  of  a  very  strange  nature  and  dialect.'  The 
purport  of  it  was  '  in  all  humility  to  renew  the 
supplication  of  the  late  General  Assembly  and  our 
own  former  petition  in  their  name  for  unity  of 
religion  and  uniformity  of  Church  government  in 
all  your  Majesty's  dominions  and  to  this  effect 
for  a  meeting  of  some  divines  to  be  holden  in 
England  into  which  some  commissioners  may  be 
sent  from  this  kirk.'  They  added  one  quaint 
observation  which  had  more  truth  in  it  than  they 
knew  :  '  We  are  not  ignorant  that  the  work  is 
great,  the  difficulties  and  impediments  many,  and 
that  there  be  both  mountains  and  lions  in  the  way.' 
The  king  had  been  familiar  with  the  request  for 
Uniformity  at  least  since  1641,  but  he  had  no  hope 
now,  as  he  had  then,  of  winning  the  favour  of 
Scotland,  and  after  keeping  them  cooling  their 
heels  for  wellnigh  two  months  he  bowed  out  the 
petitioners  in  his  most  lofty  and  scornful  manner, 
telling  them  it  was  unwarranted  and  unbecoming 
for  them  to  intermeddle  in  affairs  so  foreign  to  their 
jurisdiction,  '  they  should  not  suffer  themselves 
to  be  transported  with  things  they  did  not  under- 
stand.' Loudoun  was  treated  in  a  similar  fashion. 
Town  and  gown  took  their  cue  from  the  Court. 
Henderson  was  reviled  from  the  windows  when 
he  walked  the  streets  of  Oxford,  some  of  his 
friends  seem  to  have  hinted  to  him  that  his  life 
was  in  danger.  Clarendon  is  not  surprised  that 
he    was   subjected   to    *  those   affronts   which    he 


294     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

might  naturally  expect  in  a  University.'  In  April 
rumours  reached  Scotland  that  the  commissioners 
were  ill-treated  at  Court,  and  they  were  at  once 
recalled. 

The  most  interesting  event  of  the  Oxford  visit 
was  Henderson's  meetings  with  the  learned  and 
devout  Jeremy  Taylor.  Taylor  was  then  chaplain 
to  King  Charles,  and  he  seems  to  have  thought  it 
his  duty  to  invite  Henderson  to  a  public  discussion 
on  the  merits  of  Episcopacy  versus  Presbytery. 
We  have  an  account  of  the  matter  in  Mercurius 
AulicuSy  the  newsletter  '  Communicating  the  In- 
telligence and  Affairs  of  the  Court  to  the  rest  of  the 
kingdom '  and  largely  filled  with  the  war  news  of 
the  day.  Under  date  Saturday,  4th  March,  we  find 
the  following :  '  It  was  given  out  that  the  Scotch 
commissioners  came  to  Court  with  Propositions  to 
destroy  Episcopacy  in  England  and  to  introduce 
the  Scotch  discipline  :  it  being  unfit  that  a  thing 
of  so  great  concernment  ih  religion  should  be 
accused  of  Unlawfulness  and  that  in  a  University 
and  that  a  public  satisfaction  should  not  be  required 
of  them  who  came  to  be  instruments  of  so  great 
an  Innovation.  Upon  this  Doctor  Taylor,  one  of 
his  Majesty's  household  chaplains  who  had  by 
his  Majesty's  command  lately  published  a  book 
to  assert  the  divine  right  of  Episcopacy^  (being 
accompanied  with  a  Batchelor  of  Divinity  a  man 
of  good  fame  and  learning  to  attest  what  should 
pass  in  that  intercourse)  on  the  19th  of  February 
last  went  to  Master  Henderson  (who  is  now  here  at 
the  Court)  and  presented  him  with  his  book  of 
Episcopacy,  and  propounded  to  him  three  Questions : 

^  The  Sacred  Order  and  Offices  of  Epitcopacy,  published  in  1642,  is 
doubtless  referred  to. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     295 

the  first  asserting  the  divine  right  of  Episcopacy  ; 
the  second  the  unlawfulness  and  incompetency  of 
lay  elders  to  the  government  of  a  Church  ;    the 
third  the   lawfulness   of  clergymen's   employment 
in  secular  affairs  if  the  causes  be  great  and  urgent ; 
and  with  much  civility  intreated  Master  Henderson 
cither  to  grant  those  Questions  or  maintain  the 
contrary  in  public  disputation  with  him,  telling  him 
that  it  was  his  duty  to  give  an  account  and  reason 
of  his  faith  to  every  one  that  asked  him,  that  it 
concerned  his  reputation  not  to  decline  it  and  his 
conscience   too,  inasmuch   as   if  Episcopacy  were 
unlawful  it  concerned  him  to  use  all  fair  means  of 
converting  them  from  what  he  thought  unlawful ; 
if  it  were  lawful  then  to  give  a  reason  why  he  should 
so  greatly  innovate  in  our  Church  ;   that  it  was  by 
them  justly  accounted  antichristian  in  the  Church 
of  Rome  to  obtrude  her  articles  upon  other  Churches, 
and  that  he  came  to  do  that  which  in  others  he  truly 
called  antichristian.     Upon  these  and  many  other 
incentives  he  offered  him  if  he  would  undertake 
to  dispute  with  him  he  should  choose  his  own  time, 
his  place,  the  Moderator,  his  Assessors,  and  whether 
he  would  oppose  or  answer.     But  Master  Henderson 
after  many  diversions,  as  he  was  a  Commissioner  and 
a  Delegate  of  the  Kirk  of  Scotland,  would  do  nothing 
without    particular    commission :     but    they    dis- 
covering these  to  be  evasions,  the  Doctor  offering 
to  procure  a  Delegation  from  the  University  under 
seal  or  else  to  dispute  with  him  in  any  capacity  and 
relinquish  the  delegation  of  either  part ;    at  last 
Master  Henderson  in  plain  terms  told  him  he  came 
only  upon  a  bravery  and  bid  him  return  to  them 
that  sent  him,  and  tell  them  that  the  Delegate  of 
the  Kirk  of  Scotland,  being  provoked  to  a  disputa- 


296     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

tion,  durst  not  undertake  him.  The  Doctor  pressed 
him  with  many  reasons  and  civil  arguments  still 
to  undertake  it  for  the  public  satisfaction,  but  was 
answered  with  a  direct  negative  ;  Master  Henderson 
being  resolved  upon  the  question  that  Episcopacy 
should  down  whether  it  were  right  or  wrong.' 
We  could  wish  we  had  Henderson's  reasons  through 
a  less  distorting  medium,  but  in  any  case  it  ought 
to  be  counted  to  him  for  righteousness  that  he 
declined  the  invitation  to  a  discussion  on  this 
occasion.  He  was  surfeited  with  controversy,  and 
he  had  the  good  sense  not  to  go  out  of  his  way  to 
engage  in  one  that  was  unnecessary  and  could  do 
no  possible  good.  Happily  he  had  already  shown 
that  at  a  higher  call  than  that  of  controversy  he 
was  very  willing  to  go  out  of  his  way. 

The  Court  was  alarmed  lest  Scotland  should  now 
take  sides  with  the  Parliament,  and  the  -commis- 
sioners were  refused  a  safe-conduct  to  London, 
where  they  proposed  to  go  on  leaving  Oxford. 
Hamilton  persuaded  the  king  that  he  and  his 
friends  still  had  sufficient  influence  to  prevent  a 
break,  and  with  other  royalist  nobles  he  hurried 
north  for  that  purpose. 

A  strange  errand  awaited  Henderson  on  his 
return.  Montrose  had  been  living  in  privacy  since 
his  liberation,  but  it  was  known  that  he  had  gone 
to  meet  the  queen  when  she  returned  from  Holland, 
and  had  been  with  her  at  York.  It  was  known 
also  that  his  offer  to  strike  the  first  blow  for  the 
king  in  Scotland  had  been  rejected  in  favour  of 
Hamilton's  diplomatic  policy.  If  at  this  critical 
moment  he  could  be  won  back  to  his  old  friends 
his  support  would  be  of  great  value  in  the  conflict 
which  was  now  close  at  hand.     At  Argyll's  instance 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     297 

offers  were  made  to  him  of  the  highest  command 
in  the  Scottish  army  next  to  Leshe.  Montrose 
beheved,  differing  from  most  of  his  countrymen, 
that  King  Charles  could  be  trusted  to  stand  by 
the  settlement  of  1641  even  in  the  event  of  his 
success  against  the  English  Parliament,  and  there- 
fore he  disapproved  of  Scotland  taking  sides 
against  the  king  in  the  English  quarrel.  He  did 
not  mean  to  entertain  the  offer  of  Argyll,  but  he 
dissembled,  he  professed  scruples  of  conscience ; 
probably  he  wanted  to  keep  the  Argyll  party  in 
uncertainty  in  the  hope  that  the  king  might  still 
adopt  his  advice.  He  suggested  that  he  wished 
to  have  a  conference  with  Henderson  on  his  return 
from  Oxford.  Henderson  met  him  on  the  banks  of 
the  Forth  near  Stirling  Bridge,  and  they  conferred 
together  by  the  waterside  for  the  space  of  two  hours. 
Montrose  was  eager  for  the  conference,  says 
Wishart,  as  he  fully  expected  to  fish  all  their  secrets 
out  of  him.^  Their  secret  had  already  been  disclosed 
when  the  offer  of  a  military  command  was  given 
Montrose.  It  was  Montrose's  hand  that  was  shown 
by  his  refusal.  Scotland  was  no  longer  safe  for 
him,  and  he  betook  himself  to  Oxford  to  the  service 
of  a  master  who  did  not  know  how  to  employ  a 
great  soldier — ^the  greatest  in  his  service — when  his 
help  might  have  made  all  the  difference  between 
victory  and  defeat,  but  sent  him  on  a  mad  enter- 
prise when  it  was  too  late  to  avert  defeat,  but  not 
too  late  to  work  deep  mischief  in  Scotland  and 
ruin  Montrose  himself. 

'  DtetU  of  Montrote  (Murdoch  and  Simpson),  p.  30. 


2dS    ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

2.  A  *  HARD  MORSEL  '  :  THE  SOLEMN  LEAGUE 
AND  COVENANT 

On  12th  May  1643  a  fateful  meeting  took  place  of 
the  Privy  Council  with  the  Conservators  of  Peace 
and  the  Commissioners  for  the  Common  Burdens. 
They  were  concerned  about  the  condition  of  the 
Scots  army  in  Ireland — these  men,  10,000  in  number, 
were  now  almost  starving  owing  to  the  failure  of 
the  English  Parliament  to  provide  for  them — as 
well  as  about  the  perils  to  Scotland  from  the  war  in 
England,  and  they  resolved  that  the  state  of  public 
affairs  made  it  necessary  that  a  Convention  of 
Estates,  a  sort  of  informal  parliament,  should  be 
summoned  at  once.  The  king  had  already  refused 
to  call  a  parliament  together ;  they  would  not  wait 
for  his  pleasure,  but  appointed  the  Convention  to 
meet  on  22nd  June,  and  wrote  to  the  king  that 
this  step  had  been  found  necessary.  On  1st  June 
came  a  long  declaration  from  Charles  to  the  people 
of  Scotland.  It  was  dated  21st  April  and  was 
evidently  the  result  of  the  deliberations  at  Oxford 
when  Lanark  was  there  present.  The  Hamilton 
party  had  not  neglected  to  point  out  to  Charles 
where  the  real  weakness  of  his  cause  in  Scotland 
lay.  It  lay  in  Scotland's  distrust  of  himself.  She 
could  not  forget  that  every  concession  had  been 
wrung  from  Charles,  that  he  had  twice  drawn  the 
sword  in  order  to  crush  her,  and  that  it  was  in 
large  measure  to  the  sympathy  and  support  of  the 
English  Parliament  that  Scotland  owed  the  liberties 
she  now  enjoyed.  Was  there  to  be  no  sympathy 
and  gratitude  from  Scotland  to  that  Parliament  in 
her  struggle  against  the  same  hated  absolutism  ? 
And,  more  important  still,  what  about  the  future 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     299 

for  Scotland  ?     Scotsmen  were  convinced  that  if 
Charles  should  overpower  the  forces  of  the  Parlia- 
ment, Scotland's  liberties  would  be  no  longer  safe. 
Their  conviction  was  expressed  in  Baillie's  words  : 
'  We  believe  that  none  can  be  so  blind  but  they  see 
clearly  if  the  courtiers  for  any  cause  can  get  this 
parliament  of  England  overthrown  by  forces  either 
at  home  or  abroad,  that  all  either  they  have  done 
or  our  parliament  has  done  already,  or  whatever 
any  parliament  should  mint  [attempt]  to  do  here- 
after, is  not  worth  a  fig.'  ^    Their  own  security,  they 
believed,  lay  in  a  constitutional  government  and  a 
Protestant  Church  akin  to  their  own  being  set  up  in 
England.     It  was  to  meet  that  state  of  mind  that 
Hamilton  emphasised  the  necessity  of  reassuring 
Scotland  that  her  Church  settlement  was  safe.     If 
that  could  be  done  he  believed  he  could  win  over 
a  sufficient  party  to  prevent  Argyll  and  the  majority 
from  actively  siding  with  the  English  Parliament. 
Accordingly  Charles  in  his  manifesto  laboured  to 
remove  the  apprehensions  of  his  northern  subjects. 
His  enemies  in  England  endeavoured,  he  said,  to 
insinuate   that   '  if  we   prevail   so  far  here   as  to 
preserve  ourselves  from  the  ruin  they  have  designed 
to  us,  the  same  will  have  a  dangerous  influence 
upon  our  kingdom  of  Scotland  and  to  the  peace 
established  there,  and  that  the  good  laws  lately 
consented  to  by  us  for  the  happiness  and  welfare 
of  our  native  kingdom  will  be  no  longer  observed 
and   maintained   by   us  than  the   same   necessity 
which  they  say  extorted  them  from  us  hangs  upon 
us.'     He  conjured  his  Scottish  subjects  to  believe 
that  this  was  '  a  calumny  groundlessly  and  im- 
piously raised,'  that  he  would  inviolably  observe 

*  Letters  (Laing'g  ed.)^  ii-  p.  34. 


SOO     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

the  laws  and  statutes  of  his  native  kingdom,  and 
'  the  protestations  we  have  so  often  made  for  the 
defence  of  the  true  reformed  protestant  reHgion, 
the  laws  of  the  land  and  the  just  privileges  and 
freedom  of  Parliaments.'  The  utmost  publicity 
was  at  the  king's  request  given  to  this  declaration. 
It  was  proclaimed  at  every  market  cross  in  Scot- 
land. If  any  man  was  in  doubt  whether  the  king 
meant  what  he  said,  a  discovery  was  made  '  in  this 
very  nick  of  time,'  as  Baillie  puts  it,  which  revealed 
the  real  intentions  of  the  king's  party  with  a 
clearness  that  brought  conviction  to  Scotland.  In 
the  end  of  May  the  Earl  of  Antrim  was  captured  on 
the  Irish  coast  near  Carrickfergus  by  some  of  the 
Scottish  troops  in  Ulster,  and  on  his  person  were 
found  letters  which  disclosed  a  plot  for  the  invasion 
of  Scotland.  The  letters  were  from  Viscount 
Aboyne,  Huntly's  son,  and  the  Earl  of  Nithsdale, 
both  Roman  Catholics.  On  9th  June  the  Privy 
Council  disclosed  the  plot  to  the  country.  The 
story  was  that  Antrim,  who  came  from  York,  was 
to  treat  with  the  Irish  rebels  and  bring  them  and 
the  English  forces  to  an  agreement,  that  these 
together  should  expel  the  Scots,  then  effect  a  landing 
in  England  where  they  would  be  joined  by  Nithsdale 
and  others.  Meanwhile  the  Highlands  and  Islands 
of  Scotland  were  to  be  invaded  and  ravaged  by 
Irish  Catholics,  while  the  papists  in  the  north  of 
Scotland  were  to  rise  and  make  common  cause  with 
the  invaders.  Now  this  was  in  outline  the  plan 
suggested  by  Montrose  to  the  queen  at  York. 
Montrose,  gauging  the  situation  better  than 
Hamilton,  believed  that  Scotland  would  soon 
declare  for  the  Parliament  and  that  Hamilton's 
policy  of  combating  Argyll  by  methods  of  diplomacy 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     301 

would  come  to  grief  :  he  proposed  to  strike  at  once 
before  Argyll  was  prepared  for  military  action. 
Montrose  was  put  aside  for  the  time  and  Hamilton 
sent  north  to  carry  out  his  policy.  Antrim  was 
at  York  when  the  plan  was  discussed  and  was 
returning  to  Ireland  when  he  was  captured.  There 
was  no  evidence  to  show  that  the  king  had  given 
his  consent,  but  it  was  well  known  that  he  had  for 
some  time  past  been  negotiating  with  the  Irish 
rebels  through  Ormond  for  an  understanding  with 
them.  In  point  of  fact  a  cessation  of  hostilities  for 
a  year  was  arranged  a  few  months  later.  Charles's 
purpose  was  correctly  divined  to  be  that  he  might 
use  the  English  troops  so  set  free  to  support  his 
cause  in  England.  And  Montrose's  plan  for  an 
invasion  of  Scotland  from  Ireland,  though  set  aside 
for  the  present,  bore  bitter  fruit  two  years  later. 
The  Privy  Council  in  divulging  the  plot  did  not 
implicate  the  king  ;  they  were  content  to  make 
the  significant  remark,  '  Nor  is  it  to  be  passed 
without  observation  that  while  his  Majesty  is 
making  a  public  declaration  of  his  intentions  to 
defend  and  maintain  the  religion,  rights  and 
liberties  of  this  kingdom  according  to  the  laws 
civil  and  ecclesiastic,  the  papists  are  conspiring, 
plotting  and  practising  against  the  lives  of  his 
Majesty's  good  subjects  whereby  they  do  really 
manifest  to  the  world  what  the  king's  Majesty 
against  all  his  declarations  and  liis  subjects  against 
their  confidence  grounded  thereupon  may  look 
for  from  their  malice  and  power  if  they  shall 
continue  in  arms  and,  which  God  forbid,  if  they 
shall  prevail  in  the  end.'  ^  The  discovery  of  the 
plot  sealed  the  fate  of  Charles's  hopes  and  party  in 

•  Register  of  Privy  Council,  vii.  (2nd  leries),  p.  444. 


302     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Scotland.  '  The  plot  of  Antrim,'  says  Baillie, 
'  wakened  in  all  a  great  fear  of  our  own  safety 
and  distrust  of  all  the  fair  words  that  were  or  could 
be  given  us.'  The  massacre  of  Protestants  in 
Ireland  was  fresh  in  every  mind  ;  it  is  impossible 
to  exaggerate  the  feeling  of  horror  and  alarm  which 
now  spread  through  Scotland  and  through  England 
too  when  the  seized  documents  were  sent  to 
Westminster.  If  the  king  himself  was  not  in- 
volved every  one  knew  that  his  Catholic  queen  was 
well  aware  of,  if  indeed  she  did  not  inspire,  the 
schemes  and  plots  of  her  co-religionists.  They 
looked  to  her  as  their  head  and  protector,  and  she 
played  the  part  with  energy  and  skill.  From  her 
point  of  view  she  was  doing  only  what  she  ought 
to  do  :  the  Catholics  of  England  suffered  all  sorts 
of  disabilities,  in  Ireland  their  position  was  a 
thousand  times  worse.  It  was  no  fault  of  hers 
that  she  found  herself  in  the  position— the  im- 
possible position — of  a  Catholic  queen  in  a  Pro- 
testant country  ;  but  the  more  she  schemed  and 
the  more  her  vigorous  nature  dominated  Charles's 
weaker  will,  the  more  surely  did  she  undermine 
the  confidence  of  his  subjects,  English  and  Scottish, 
in  their  king.  Whatever  were  the  grievances  of 
the  Irish  Catholics— and  no  English  party  in  those 
days  attempted  to  understand  or  remove  them — to 
use  the  wild  Irish  simply  as  pawns  in  the  king's 
game,  ship  them  across,  and  let  them  loose  to 
butcher  English  and  Scottish  Protestants  was  a  policy 
repugnant  to  the  feelings  of  Protestant  cavaliers 
no  less  than  of  puritans  and  presbyterians.  '  It 
seemed  now,'  says  D'Ewes,  '  that  there  was  a  fixed 
resolution  in  the  Popish  party  to  extirpate  the  true 
Protestant  religion  in  England,  Scotland  and  Ireland. ' 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     303 

If  the  king's  Irish  plots  were  driving  Scotland  in 
self-defence  into  the  arms  of  the  English  Parliament, 
his  military  successes  in  England  were  forcing  the 
Parliament  to  seek  the  help  of  the  Scots.  The  war 
had  been  dragging  heavily  and  going  badly  for  the 
Parliament,  and  in  June  and  July  1643  the  parlia- 
mentary fortunes  were  at  their  darkest  hour.  The 
king  was  master  of  the  north,  and  in  the  south-west 
he  had  achieved  great  success.  The  queen,  bringing 
much-needed  arms  and  ammunition,  had  landed 
at  Bridlington  in  February,  and  joined  the  king  at 
Oxford  in  May.  Hampden  was  mortally  wounded 
at  Chalgrove  Field  in  June,  Essex  was  a  sluggish 
and  ineffective  leader,  and  Cromwell  had  not  yet 
risen  to  high  command.  London,  the  great  prop 
of  the  parliamentary  cause,  was  fretting  with  dis- 
content. June  closed  with  the  defeat  of  Fairfax 
in  the  north  at  Adwalton  Moor  near  Bradford.  In 
July  Waller  suffered  two  defeats  in  the  south-west, 
at  Lansdown  near  Bath  on  the  5th,  and  at  Round- 
way  Down  on  the  13th.  Bristol,  the  second  city 
in  the  kingdom,  was  besieged  and  was  soon  to  fall 
a  prize  to  Prince  Rupert.  Baillie's  homely  phrase 
put  it  well,  *  for  the  present  the  Parliament  side  is 
running  down  the  brae.' 

It  was  now  that  Pym  decided  to  appeal  to  Scot- 
land for  aid.  Edgehill  had  made  it  plain  that  the 
war  was  to  be  no  rapid  success  for  the  Parliament, 
and  that  the  help  of  Scotland  would  be  needed. 
Yet  Parliament  hung  back  from  sending  messengers 
to  Edinburgh ;  there  was  still  some  hope  of  an 
agreement  with  the  king,  and  negotiations  with 
Charles  took  place  as  late  as  March  and  April 
1643.  This  last  effort  failed  and  the  final  step 
was  taken.     Most  unwillingly  was  this  done,  for 


804     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Englishmen  had  not  forgotten  their  experience  of 
the  last  Scottish  army  that  came  over  the  border. 
But  the  time  for  hesitation  was  past.  On  19th  July 
commissioners  from  the  two  Houses  of  Parliament 
were  instructed  to  proceed  to  Edinburgh  and  ask 
for  the  help  of  a  Scottish  army.  Two  peers  were 
named,  Lord  Grey  of  Wark  and  the  Earl  of  Rutland, 
and  four  commoners,  Sir  Harry  Vane  the  younger, 
Sir  William  Armine,  Mr.  Hatcher  and  Mr.  Darley. 
But  Pym  knew  the  Scots  would  expect  to  hear  what 
England  proposed  to  do  in  the  matter  of  uniformity 
of  Church  government.  This  indeed  was  all-im- 
portant for  the  success  of  the  mission  :  '  if  in  this  he 
bring  no  satisfaction  to  us  quickly  it  will  be  a  great 
impediment  to  their  affairs  here,'  writes  Baillie  in 
July  as  Scotland  sits  waiting  for  the  appearance 
of  the  visitors  from  the  south.  Accordingly  two 
members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly,  which  had 
met  on  1st  July,  were  added  to  the  commission, 
Stephen  Marshall  and  Philip  Nye.  All  of  them 
except  the  two  peers  arrived  at  Leith  on  7th 
August.  They  brought  with  them  letters  to  the 
Convention  and  to  the  General  Assembly  from  Parlia- 
ment, and  also  from  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
and  another  letter  from  seventy  English  divines. 
In  Edinburgh  they  found  both  those  bodies  sitting. 
The  Convention  of  Estates  had  met  on  22nd  June. 
It  was  largely  attended  and,  as  might  have  been 
expected,  overwhelmingly  against  the  king.  Charles 
had  forbidden  it  to  meet,  then,  pocketing  his  dignity, 
had  instructed  it  to  confine  its  attention  to  financial 
matters,  but  after  a  long  debate  in  which  Hamilton 
supported  the  king  the  Convention  voted  itself  free 
to  attend  to  public  business  without  limitation. 
On  2nd  August  the  General  Assembly  met  '  in  a 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     305 

little  room  of  the  East  Church  '  of  St.  Giles.  Another 
notable  day  for  Scotland  had  eome,  and  for  the 
third  time  Henderson  was  declared  Moderator  by 
a  unanimous  vote.  Weighty  business  was  to  be 
transacted,  and  every  one  agreed  he  '  was  the  only 
man  meet  for  the  time.'  Sir  Thomas  Hope  was 
royal  commissioner.  A  committee  of  nine  was 
appointed  to  receive  the  English  commissioners 
and  act  as  intermediary  between  them  and  the 
House.  In  the  Convention  a  similar  committee 
was  named.  The  official  papers  which  the  envoys 
brought  were  found  to  contain  a  request  that 
Scotland  should  raise  '  a  considerable  force  of 
horse  and  foot '  to  be  forthwith  sent  to  the  assist- 
ance of  the  English  Parliament.  On  the  other  side 
ParUament  made  two  promises  which  it  is  well  to 
bear  in  mind.  The  first  was  that  if  Scotland  was 
annoyed  or  endangered  by  any  force  or  army 
either  from  England  or  any  other  place  the  Lords 
and  Commons  would  assist  it '  with  a  proportionable 
strength  of  horse  and  foot  to  what  their  brethren 
shall  afford  for  the  defence  of  England.'  The 
second  was  that  Parliament  would  maintain  a 
guard  of  ships  at  their  own  charge  upon  the  coast 
of  Scotland  *  for  the  securing  of  that  kingdom 
from  an  invasion  of  Irish  rebels  or  other  enemies 
during  such  time  as  the  Scottish  army  shall  be 
employed  in  the  defence  of  England.'  The  only 
other  definite  request  was  one  made  to  the  General 
Assembly  that  it  should  send  to  Westminster 
*  such  number  of  godly  and  learned  divines  as  they 
shall  tliink  most  expedient  for  the  furtherance  of 
the  work  of  reformation  in  ecclesiastical  matters  in 
this  Church  and  kingdom  and  a  nearer  conjunction 
betwixt  both  Churches.'     There  was  a  good  deal 

u 


306     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

in  the  papers  narrating  the  work  of  purging  and 
reforming  rehgion  that  had  already  taken  place, 
and  expressing  a  desire  that  the  two  kingdoms 
might  be  brought  into  a  nearer  conjunction  in  one 
form  of  Church  government.  The  only  means 
suggested  for  effecting  this  end  was  that  both 
nations  enter  into  '  a  strict  union  and  league  ' 
according  to  the  desires  of  the  two  Houses  of 
Parliament.  That  league,  assuming  armed  inter- 
vention successful,  would  apparently  leave  England 
free  to  work  out  its  Church  reform  as  the  English 
Parliament  might  think  fit.  Among  the  Scots 
there  was  a  general  desire  to  help  the  English, 
and  a  general  agreement,  at  least  after  some  dis- 
cussion, that  they  must  take  the  side  of  the  Parlia- 
ment out  and  out.  But  in  the  committees  the 
'  hard  debates  '  to  which  Baillie  refers  turned  on 
the  point  whether  the  '  Union  and  League  '  of 
which  the  Parliament  spoke  was  to  be  anything 
more  than  a  military  alliance.  This  after  all  would 
not  bring  about  the  uniformity  which  Scotland 
desired,  and  the  more  the  matter  was  pressed 
it  became  the  clearer  that  '  the  English  were  for  a 
civil  league  '  as  distinguished  from  what  the  Scots 
aimed  at,  '  a  religious  covenant.'  This  was  exactly 
the  great  impediment  which  Baillie  had  anticipated, 
and  the  rulers  of  Scotland  would  not  consent  to 
send  an  army  into  England  until  it  was  removed. 
Recognising  this,  the  commissioners  assented  in 
principle  to  a  Covenant,  and  Henderson  submitted 
a  draft.  It  has  generally  been  supposed  that  the 
draft  was  entirely  Henderson's  work.  Baillie's 
expression  is  '  When  .  .  .  Mr.  Henderson  had  given 
them  a  draft  of  a  Covenant.'  This  is  not  conclusive, 
and  it  appears  that  Wariston  had  a  hand  in  its 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     307 

preparation.  His  Diary  for  1643  has  been  lost, 
but  in  June  1651  he  records  his  thanks  to  God 
'  for  making  use  of  me  in  the  draft  of  the  National 
Covenant,  Solemn  League,  and  Solemn  Acknow- 
ledgement whereof  the  first  scroll  was  from  Him  to 
me.'  ^  This  appears  to  mean  that  Wariston  had  a 
substantial  share  in  the  drafting  of  the  two  first 
documents.  The  draft  became,  after  some  amend- 
ments, the  famous  Solemn  League  and  Covenant. 
It  is  a  shorter  document  than  the  National  Covenant 
of  1638,  and  lacks  its  grave  and  sustained  dignity 
of  language,  but  it  is  a  more  remarkable  instrument 
and  had  very  different  historical  results. 

By  the  first  and  leading  clause,  as  drafted,  the 
signatories  bound  themselves  '  that  we  shall  en- 
deavour the  preservation  of  the  reformed  religion 
in  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  doctrine,  worship, 
discipline,  and  government,  the  reformation  of 
religion  in  the  Church  of  England  according  to  the 
example  of  the  best  reformed  Churches,  and  as  may 
bring  the  Churches  of  God  in  both  nations  to  the 
nearest  conjunction  and  uniformity  in  religion, 
confession  of  faith,  form  of  Church-government, 
directory  of  worship  and  catechising,  that  we  and 
our  posterity  after  us  may  as  brethren  live  in  faith 
and  love.' 

The  second  clause  ran  '  that  we  shall  in  like 
manner  without  respect  of  persons  endeavour  the 
extirpation  of  popery,  prelacy,  superstition,  heresy, 
profaneness.'  They  next  bound  themselves  to 
defend  the  king's  person  and  authority  in  the 
preservation  and  defence  of  the  true  religion, 
asserting  their  loyalty  and  that  they  had  no 
thought   or   intention   to   diminish   his    Majesty's 

'  Johmton  of  Waristou's  Diary  (1660-64),  p.  72. 


308  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

just    power    and    greatness.     Finally,   they   made 
confession    of    sin    before    God.     Vane    was    not 
satisfied  with  this  draft  and  again  trouble  arose. 
'  We  were  not  like  to  agree  on  the  frame,'  says 
Baillie,  who  was  a  member  of  the  Assembly's  com- 
mittee ;   '  they  were,  more  than  we  could  assent  to, 
for  keeping  a  door  open  in  England  to  Independency. 
Against  this  we  were  peremptory.'     Burnet  sup- 
plements  this    statement    by    adding   that   Vane 
suggested  the  additional  words  '  according  to  the 
Word  of  God  '    so  as  to  make  the  first  clause  run 
*  we  shall  endeavour  .  .  .  the  reformation  of  re- 
ligion in  the  Church  of  England  according  to  the 
Word  of  God  and  the  example  of  the  best  reformed 
Churches.'     This    addition    was   accepted    by  the 
committee,  and  the  Covenant  was  then  brought 
before  the  Assembly  on  Thursday,  17th  August. 
Henderson  prefaced  the  reading  of  it  by  a  '  most 
grave  oration,'  and  it  was  received  with  the  greatest 
applause.     A  second  time   he   read  it   distinctly, 
then  called  on   a  number  of  leading   men,   both 
ministers    and    elders,    to    express    their    minds. 
Every  one  approved,  and  the  Assembly  unanimously 
adopted  the  Covenant.     This  was  carried  through  in 
a  forenoon  sitting  ;    in  the  afternoon  of  the  same 
day   and   with   the   same    cordial   unanimity   the 
Covenant  passed  the  Convention  of  Estates.     Hope, 
the  royal  commissioner,  gave  in  a  paper  in  which 
he    expressed    his    personal    hearty   consent,   and 
assented  to  it  as  king's  commissioner  so  far  as 
concerned  the  religion  and  liberties  of  the  Church 
of  Scotland,  but  so  far  as  it  concerned  the  Parlia- 
ment of  England  with  whom  the  king  was  then  at 
war  he  did  not  assent. 

On  the  18th  eight  commissioners  were  chosen 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     309 

to  represent  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  the  West- 
minster Assembly.  These  were  Henderson,  Robert 
Douglas,  Baillie,  Samuel  Rutherfurd,  George 
Gillespie,  and  three  lay  elders,  Lord  Maitland,  the 
Earl  of  Cassillis,  and  Wariston.  Of  the  eight, 
Douglas  and  Cassillis  never  took  their  seats. 
Henderson's  health  was  already  so  poor  that  he 
was  extremely  averse  from  going,  protesting  his 
firm  expectation  of  death  before  he  could  reach 
London.  At  the  last  sitting  on  the  19th  answers 
were  read  and  approved  to  the  letters  from  the 
Parliament  of  England,  the  Westminster  Assembly 
and  the  English  divines.  As  nothing  more  could 
be  done  in  Scotland  until  it  were  seen  whether  the 
English  Parliament  would  adopt  the  Covenant, 
a  copy  of  it  was  at  once  dispatched  to  London  and 
the  Assembly  rose.  On  30th  August  three  of  the 
eight  commissioners,  forming  a  quorum,  also  sailed 
for  England — Henderson,  Gillespie,  and  Lord 
Maitland,  accompanied  by  two  of  the  Englishmen, 
Hatcher  and  Nyc.^  The  Convention  of  Estates  had 
meanwhile  issued  a  proclamation  stating  the  heads 
of  the  Covenant  and  commanding  all  men  between 
sixteen  and  sixty  to  be  in  readiness,  the  English 
commissioners  promising  to  provide  for  the  expense 
of  the  levy  and  three  months'  pay,  £100,000,  the 
money  to  be  sent  down  before  Scotland  moved 
•further. 

When  it  reached  London  and  was  presented  to 
Parliament  on  26th  August  the  Covenant  produced 
a  favourable  impression.     It  was  read  in  the  House 

'  Tlie  Estates  on  2r>th  August  164n  mudified  an  allowance  to  those 
three  commissioners  out  of  public  funds  '  as  they  are  upon  the  public 
employment  of  this  kirk  and  kingdom  to  repair  to  England.'  Hender- 
son was  to  have  the  sum  of  'JOs.  sterling  daily  '  so  long  as  be  shall  be  on 
^hia  aervice,'  and  £30  for  his  extraordinary  charges, 


310  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

of  Commons  on  that  day  and  at  once  referred  to 
the  Assembly  of  divines  who  discussed  it  fully. 
They  introduced  an  alteration  in  the  second  Article 
by  adding  a  parenthesis  defining  the  Prelacy  which 
they  were  to  endeavour  to  extirpate.  The  Article 
then  read,  '  We  shall  endeavour  the  extirpation  of 
Popery,  Prelacy  (that  is  Church-government  by 
archbishops,  bishops,  their  chancellors  and  com- 
missaries, deans,  deans  and  chapters,  archdeacons 
and  all  other  ecclesiastical  officers  depending  on 
that  hierarchy),'  and  so  on.  On  31st  August  the 
Assembly  gave  in  their  report  to  the  Commons  who 
themselves  made  a  further  change,  bringing  Ireland 
into  the  Covenant  with  England  and  Scotland. 
With  these  alterations  it  was  approved  by  the 
House  of  Commons  on  14th  September,  and 
passed  by  the  House  of  Lords  on  18th  September.^ 
When  the  three  Scots  commissioners  entered  the 
Assembly  on  15th  September  they  were  displeased 
that  changes  had  been  introduced  without  their 
advice,  but  a  committee  of  both  Houses  and  of  the 
Assembly  went  into  the  matter  with  them,  and  they 
became  satisfied  that  the  alterations  were  for  the 
better.  It  was  arranged  that  on  25th  September 
the  House  of  Commons  and  the  Assembly  should 
swear  and  subscribe  the  Covenant,  and  this  was 
done  in  St.  Margaret's  church  on  that  date,  after 
Nye  and  Henderson  had  addressed  the  assembled 
company.  Probably  112  members  of  the  Commons 
signed  it  then.  On  13th  October  in  the  East  Kirk 
of  St.  Giles  it  was  sworn  and  subscribed  by  the 

^  Baillie  is  incorrect  in  stating  that  the  Covenant  passed  the  Commons 
on  Saturday  2nd  September  and  the  House  of  Peers  on  the  following 
Monday.  (Laing's  Baillie  s  Letters,  ii.  99.)  He  was  not  in  London  at 
that  time^  and  his  iaforpiation  was  not  at  first  hand, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     311 

commissions  of  the  Estates  and  of  the  Assembly 
and  by  the  English  commissioners  who  had  re- 
mained in  Edinburgh,  and  thereafter  by  the  people 
generally  in  the  parish  churches. 

The  reader  of  these  transactions  is  struck  by  the 
haste  with  which  the  new  Covenant  was  accepted 
by  the  Assembly  and  Convention  on  17th  August. 
Here  was  a  solemn  Instrument  by  which  two 
nations,  each  in  large  measure  strange  to  the  other, 
pledged  themselves  to  embark  on  a  vast  enterprise 
outside  their  own  boundaries  affecting  the  beliefs 
and  practices  of  millions  of  people,  and  the  General 
Assembly  were  content  to  adopt  it  although  the 
members  had  only  heard  it  read  aloud  twice  in  one 
sitting,  but  had  no  opportunity  each  man  by  himself 
of  reading  and  weighing  its  language.  And  the 
Estates  adopted  it  in  a  similar  fashion  at  a  sitting 
on  the  same  day.  Think  of  the  Barrier  Act  to 
secure  time  and  deliberation,  and  consultation  of 
the  whole  Church  before  an  important  change  is 
made  !  And  of  the  careful  provision  which  every 
legislative  assembly  makes  for  weighing  every  clause 
and  word  of  the  most  trifling  bill !  This  momentous 
document,  which  was  to  affect  for  good  or  ill  two 
(as  it  turned  out,  three)  great  nations,  is  drafted  by 
Henderson  and  Wariston  and  discussed  in  private 
by  two  small  committees  along  with  six  English 
commissioners,  and  then  it  is  immediately  adopted 
by  these  two  Scottish  Parliaments  without  anything 
that  deserves  to  be  called  even  a  single  debate.  It 
is  impossible  not  to  sympathise  with  Burnet's 
remark,  *  Wise  observers  wondered  to  see  a  matter 
of  that  importance  carried  through  upon  so  little 
deliberation  or  debate.'  *     If  it  be  true,  as  Guthry 

»   Burnet.  Memoirs  qfthe  DuktM  qf  HamUton  (1677),  p.  231). 


812     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

states/  that  Mr.  Matthew  Brisbane,  minister  of 
Erskine,  desired  that  before  men  were  urged  to 
vote  leisure  might  be  given  them  for  some  few 
days  to  have  their  scruples  removed,  it  must  remain 
a  matter  of  wonder  and  regret  that  his  advice  went 
unheeded.  There  is  only  one  explanation— the 
war.  Things  were  growing  desperate  with  the 
Parliament.  News  had  just  come  from  the  south 
that  Bristol  was  lost,  and  that  there  was  nothing 
to  prevent  the  king  from  marching  on  London  and 
taking  it.  It  was  under  this  pressure  that  the 
negotiations  went  on  ;  '  above  all  diligence  was 
urged,'  says  Baillie.  England  must  have  military 
aid,  she  could  not  afford  to  quarrel  with  the  con- 
ditions which  Scotland  laid  down.  An  anonymous 
English  writer  of  the  day,  friendly  to  the  cause, 
admits  that  the  Covenant  was  not  at  first  palatable 
to  his  countrymen.  '  At  first,'  he  says,  '  it  seemed 
a  hard  morsel,'  but  he  pleads  '  it  ought  not  to  be 
attributed  to  any  slightness  or  suddenness  in  a 
matter  of  so  great  concernment  but  to  their  diligence 
and  apprehension  of  the  present  necessity  of  the 
business.' 

Scotland  grasped  at  the  opportunity  to  realise 
her  dream  of  uniformity.  It  was  as  truly  a  dream 
as  was  Charles's  design  to  impose  England's  Church 
system  on  Scotland.  But  the  temptation  to  press 
for  uniformity  at  that  moment  was,  it  must  be 
admitted,  a  strong  one  for  Scotland.  We  can  in 
part  at  least  understand  how  far  it  was  from  appear- 
ing to  Henderson  to  be  a  dream,  how,  in  fact,  it 
seemed  to  be  a  case  of  the  two  nations  having 
already  almost  reached  common  ground.  He  knew 
that  the  position  had  changed  since  the  fruitless 

»  Memoirs  (1748),  p.  138, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     318 

negotiations  in  the  spring  and  summer  of  1641.  The 
Enghsh  Parhament  had  made  open  and  definite 
advances  in  the  direction  of  Uniformity.  Notably 
these.  In  the  Grand  Remonstrance  (November  1641) 
it  had  declared  its  intention  to  effect  a  through-going 
reformation.  This  had  been  followed  in  September 
1642,  as  we  have  seen,  by  a  Declaration  much  more 
explicit,  agreeing  to  abolish  episcopacy  and  settle  a 
government  most  apt  to  promote  a  happy  union 
with  the  Church  of  Scotland.  Then  in  June  1643,  in 
the  Ordinance  appointing  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
Parliament  repeated  that  many  things  in  the  dis- 
cipline and  government  of  the  Church  required  a 
more  perfect  reformation  than  had  yet  been 
attained,  that  the  existing  hierarchical  government 
was  evil,  a  great  impediment  to  reformation  and 
growth  of  religion,  and  that  the  Lords  and  Commons 
were  resolved  that  it  should  be  taken  away,  and 
such  government  settled  in  the  Church  as  might 
be  most  agreeable  to  God's  Word,  most  apt  to 
procure  peace  of  the  Church  at  home,  and  nearer 
agreement  with  the  Church  of  Scotland  and  other 
reformed  Churches  abroad.  Finally,  the  West- 
minster divines  were  now  actually  at  work,  and  it 
would  be  for  them,  a  body  of  Englishmen,  to 
prepare  a  reformed  confession  and  system  of 
Church  government  for  England.  Scotland  was 
now  invited  to  join  in  their  work  ;  she  would  not 
impose  her  form  on  England,  but  the  two  working 
together  would  endeavour  to  carry  through  a 
scheme  of  doctrine  and  worship  which  would  bind 
the  two  nations  together. 

It  has  often  been  said  that  Scotland  meant  by 
the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  to  force  presby- 
terianism  on  England  at  the  point  of  the  sword. 


314     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

The  facts  are  very  far  from  warranting  so  sweeping 
a  judgment.  Let  us  see  how  the  matter  took 
shape  in  Henderson's  mind. 

As  early  as  August  1640,  in  his  paper  on  the 
'  Lawfulness  of  their  Expedition  into  England,' 
he  expresses  the  belief  that  if  the  expedition 
succeeded  '  Scotland  would  be  reformed  as  at  the 
beginning,  and  the  reformation  of  England  would 
be  carried  out  according  to  the  wishes  of  the  pro- 
testant  party  in  England.'  There  is  no  suggestion 
that  Scotland  meant  to  impose  her  system  of  doc- 
trine or  discipline  on  England.  That  becomes 
still  more  plain  when  we  look  at  his  next  impor- 
tant utterance.  This  is  the  paper  written  when 
Henderson  was  in  London  in  1640-41  in  connection 
with  the  Treaty  negotiations,  containing  the  Reasons 
for  Scotland's  desire  for  Uniformity.  It  has  already 
been  discussed,^  but  the  explicit  language  he  uses — 
speaking  with  full  responsibility  on  behalf  of  his 
country — deserves  to  be  remembered.  '  As  we 
account  it  no  less  than  usurpation  and  presumption 
for  one  kingdom  or  Church,  were  it  never  so  mighty 
and  glorious,  to  give  laws  and  rules  of  reformation 
to  another  free  and  independent  Church  and 
kingdom,  were  it  never  so  mean  ...  so  have  we 
not  been  so  forgetful  of  ourselves,  who  are  the 
lesser,  and  of  England  which  is  the  greater  kingdom, 
as  to  suffer  any  such  arrogant  and  presumptuous 
thoughts  to  enter  into  our  minds.'  And  again  : 
*  We  do  not  presume  to  propound  the  government 
of  the  Church  of  Scotland  as  a  pattern  for  the 
Church  of  England,  but  do  only  represent  in  all 
modesty  these  few  considerations  according  to  the 
trust  committed  to  us.'     It  is  clear  therefore  that, 

'  Pp.  267-2G1, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     315 

so  far  as  Henderson  was  concerned,  what  he  con- 
templated was  that  England  of  her  own  accord 
should  reform  her  own  Church  on  lines  similar  to 
the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  not  that  Scotland 
should  force  her  system  on  England.  This  is  put 
beyond  dispute  by  a  most  instructive  letter  written 
by  him  at  a  later  date,  April  1642.  He  had  taken 
time  for  further  reflection  on  the  whole  subject,  and 
he  thus  spoke  in  the  frankness  of  private  corre- 
spondence :  '  I  cannot  think  it  expedient  that  any 
such  thing,  whether  Confession  of  Faith,  Directory 
for  Worship,  Form  of  Government,  or  Catechism, 
less  or  more,  should  be  agreed  upon  and  authorised 
by  our  kirk  till  we  see  what  the  Lord  will  do  in 
England  and  Ireland,  where  I  will  wait  for  a  re- 
formation and  uniformity  with  us.  But  this  must 
be  brought  to  pass  by  common  consent.  We  are 
not  to  conceive  that  they  will  embrace  our  form,  but 
a  new  form  must  be  set  down  for  us  all,  and  in  my 
opinion  some  men  set  apart  some  time  for  that 
work.  And  although  we  should  never  come  to  this 
unity  in  religion  and  uniformity  in  worship,  yet 
my  desire  is  to  see  what  form  England  shall  pitch 
upon  before  we  publish  ours.'  ^  WTien  the  English 
commissioners  appeared  in  Edinburgh  in  August 
1643  we  can  understand  how  it  must  have  seemed 
to  the  writer  of  these  words  that  the  conditions 
which  he  desiderated  were  now  fulfilled,  and  that 
the  opportunity  had  come  for  pressing  the  policy 
of  Uniformity  to  an  issue.  Rutherfurd  writing  in 
1648,  when  the  whole  policy  had  proved  a  disastrous 
failure,  gave  a  similar  account  of  it :  *  As  for  the 
forcing  of  our  opinions  upon  the  consciences  of  any 
...  it  was  not  in  our  thoughts  or  intentions  to 

'  Baillie't  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  ii.  p.  2. 


316     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

obtrude  by  the  sword  and  force  of  arms  any  Church- 
government  at  all  on  our  brethren  in  England.'  ^ 

It  is  impossible  to  say  that  Henderson's  large 
and  statesmanlike  view  was  held  by  all  his  country- 
men ;  few  of  them  had  so  open  and  so  sympathetic 
a  mind  as  he.  Baillie  states  the  more  common 
view  when  he  says,  '  the  chief  aim  of  it  was  for  the 
propagation  of  our  Church  discipline  in  England  and 
Ireland.'  But  undoubtedly  whatever  men's  in- 
tentions may  have  been  the  facts  of  the  situation 
were  too  strong  for  them.  A  Covenant  in  the 
Scottish  sense  implied  a  united  nation.  It  was 
because  there  was  a  united  Scotland  in  1637  that 
a  National  Covenant  was  possible.  But  England 
in  1643  was  split  into  two  camps,  and  civil  war  was 
raging.  A  Covenant  with  '  England  '  could  only 
be  at  best  a  Covenant  with  half  a  nation,  and  the 
results  inevitably  were  fatal  to  the  avowed  object 
of  promoting  peace.  Scotland  found  herself  from 
the  outset  a  party  to  a  system  of  active  intolerance. 
The  English  Parliament  allowed  no  time  for  the 
friendly  working  out  of  a  new  Church  system  to 
suit  both  countries.  The  Covenant  was  imposed 
at  once.  It  was  used  as  a  political  test  to  dis- 
tinguish Parliament-men  from  malignants  or  king's- 
men,  and  at  the  same  time  to  extirpate  episcopacy. 
It  is  startling  to  note  how  small  was  the  handful  of 
men  who  carried  out  this  policy.  We  speak  of  the 
two  Houses  of  Parliament  doing  it,  but  in  fact  only 
a  fragment  was  at  this  time  in  attendance  at 
Westminster.  The  House  of  Lords  was  a  mere 
shadow,  10  or  15  members  on  an  average  :  only 
30  peers  in  all  had  declared  for  the  Parliament, 
royalists  numbered  100  or  thereby.   In  the  Commons 

'  4  Survey  of  the  Spiritual  Antichrist :  Introductory  Epistle  (1648),  p.  8. 


I 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     317 

the  ordinary  number  present  did  not  exceed  100 ; 
on  special  occasions  from  200  to  near  300  could  be 
whipped  up  :  the  royalist  commoners  were  some- 
what fewer,  the  full  roll  of  the  House  being  between 
500  and  600. 

Yet  although  the  new  Church  system  had  still 
to  be  created,  though  the  Westminster  Assembly 
had  not  even  begun  to  consider  it,  and  no  one  could 
tell  what  their  labours  might  produce,  from 
September  1643  onwards  the  Covenant  was  im- 
posed for  the  extirpation  of  prelacy  wherever  this 
remnant  of  Parliament  held  the  power.  The 
Assembly  spoke  mildly  of  '  extirpation  in  a  lawful 
way,'  but  as  a  matter  of  fact  what  happened  was 
that  beneficed  clergy  who  refused  to  sign  were 
ejected  from  their  livings  in  large  numbers.  Neal, 
the  puritan  historian,  estimates  the  number  of 
incumbents  ejected  at  1600,  about  one-fifth  or  one- 
sixth  of  the  benefices  of  England.  This  figure 
doubtless  slumps  together  all  who  lost  their  livings 
during  the  war.  Some  of  these  were  convicted 
as  men  of  scandalous  life  and  were  turned  out  on 
that  ground,  others  for  unsoundness  of  doctrine, 
suffering  in  turn  what  the  puritans  suffered  under 
Laud.  Others  again  were  dealt  with  for  taking 
part  with  the  king  in  the  war,  or  disowning  the 
authority  of  Parliament  and  exciting  the  people 
to  an  absolute  submission  to  the  Crown.  Neal 
concludes  that  the  number  displaced  *  only  for 
refusing  the  Covenant  must  be  very  inconsiderable.' 
But  this  indefinite  language  cannot  hide  the  de- 
finite and  painful  fact  that  the  Covenant  was 
responsible  for  ill-treatment  of  many  whose  only 
offence  was  that  as  conscientious  upholders  of 
the  existing  episcopacy  they   refused   to  sign   it. 


318     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

The  ejected  incumbents  continued,  it  is  true,  to  re- 
ceive one-fifth  of  their  incomes,  and  it  must  in 
fairness  be  said  that  they  suffered  far  less  than  the 
persecuted  clergy  under  Laud,  and  far  less  than 
those  ejected  in  1662.  In  London  no  man  could 
be  a  common  councilman  who  had  not  subscribed. 
So  wide  was  the  Parliament's  net  cast  that  in 
February  1644  it  ordained  ministers  to  tender 
the  Covenant  in  the  parish  churches  to  all  persons 
of  eighteen  years  and  upwards  ;  if  they  refused 
to  sign  they  were  to  be  reported  to  Parliament. 

In  Scotland  itself  the  work  of  signing  went  on,  as 
might  be  expected,  with  a  much  greater  degree  of 
unanimity,  but  Baillie  admits  there  was  a  hostile 
minority,  '  a'  great  many  averse  among  us  from 
this  course  who  bitterly  spoke  against  our  way 
everywhere,  and  none  more  than  some  of  our 
friends.'  Stern  measures  were  adopted  with  those 
candid  friends.  The  Commission  of  Assembly  on 
11th  October  instructed  presbyteries  '  that  they 
proceed  with  the  censures  of  the  kirk  against  all 
such  as  shall  refuse  or  shift  to  swear  and  subscribe.' 
And  next  day  the  Commission  of  the  Estates  added 
its  civil  terrors  :  it  ordained  subscribing  by  all  his 
Majesty's  subjects  '  under  the  pain  to  such  as  still 
postpone  or  refuse  to  be  esteemed  and  punished 
as  enemies  to  religion,  and  to  have  their  goods  and 
rents  confiscated  for  the  use  of  the  public,  and  that 
they  shall  not  bruik  nor  enjoy  any  benefit  place  nor 
office  within  this  kingdom.' 

To  treat  opponents  in  this  fashion  seemed  the 
plain  path  of  duty  to  men  who  read  the  Old  Testa- 
ment with  their  eyes.  '  When  King  Josiah,'  wrote 
Gillespie,  '  made  a  solemn  Covenant  (the  effect 
whereof  was  a  thorough  reformation)  he  did  not 


i 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     319 

leave  his  Covenant  arbitrary,  but  caused  all  that 
were  present  in  Jerusalem  and  Benjamin  to  stand 
to  it.  2  Chron.  xxxiv.  32.  In  all  which  he  is  set 
forth  as  a  precedent  to  Christian  reformers  that 
they  may  know  their  duty  in  like  cases.'  ^  They 
had  yet  to  learn  how  worthless  to  their  cause  was 
adherence  procured  by  such  means  and  how  it 
corrupted  the  men  whom  they  coerced.  There  was 
no  more  zealous  Covenanter  in  Scotland  than 
James  Guthrie,  but  it  is  he  who  confesses  *  Many 
did  take  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  for  fear, 
because  the  refusing  to  take  it  was  attended  both 
with  ecclesiastical  and  civil  censures.  ...  In  taking 
of  both  Covenants  there  were  not  a  few  whom  after 
discoveries  have  made  manifest  who  were  acted 
thereto  by  carnal  wisdom  and  policy,  for  attaining 
their  own  base  and  corrupt  ends,  such  as  riches, 
places  of  preferment,  and  livelihood  and  ease.' 

3.    UNIFORMITY    A    FAILURE 

Bishop  Guthry,  who  in  his  presbyterian  days  was 
a  member  of  the  Assembly  of  1643,  states  that  he 
proposed  that  before  dealing  with  the  requests 
of  the  English  commissioners  the  Assembly  should 
ask  the  English  Parliament  to  state  expressly  what 
they  intended  to  introduce  in  place  of  the  episcopacy 
they  desired  to  remove. ^  He  adds  that  Henderson 
as  moderator  *  paused  a  long  time  upon  Mr.  Guthry's 
discourse,  and  at  last  made  no  direct  reply  to  it.' 
According  to  Wodrow,  Balmerino  objected  to  the 
words  in  the  Covenant  referring  to  *  the  example 
of  the  best  reformed  Churches,'  and  asked  why  they 
were  not  plain  and  downright.^     Doubtless  it  was 

•  A  Tri-atise  of  Mitceiiany  Quesdont  (|1649),  cliap.  xvL 

*  Memoirs  (1748),  p.  137.  '  Anaieeta,  u.  p.  240. 


320     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

felt  that  to  press  the  subject  further  at  the  time 
might  lead  to  discussion  and  delay.  What  was 
needed  at  the  moment  was  an  agreement  on  the 
strength  of  which  Scotland  would  give  immediate 
military  aid,  the  question  as  to  the  actual  form  of 
Church  settlement  might  be  postponed  with  the 
hope  that  in  the  end  harmony  might  somehow  be 
reached.  Yet  this  policy  of  covering  up  unsettled 
questions  by  the  use  of  general  language  was  full 
of  danger.  Unquestionably  the  seeds  of  future 
trouble  lay  concealed  in  the  new  Covenant. 
Clarendon's  notion  that  Vane  was  sent  to  Edinburgh 
*  to  cheat  and  cozen  a  whole  nation  '  may  be  dis- 
missed as  unfounded.  The  words  added  on  his 
suggestion  to  the  Covenant  were  taken  from  the 
language  which  the  Parliament  had  used  in  regard 
to  the  proposed  reformation—'  such  a  government 
in  the  Church  as  may  be  most  agreeable  to  God's 
holy  Word.'  The  effect  of  the  amendment  was 
practically  that  Parliament  when  it  adopted  the 
Covenant  was  pledged  to  the  Scottish  Church 
system  only  so  far  as  it  was  found  agreeable  to  the 
Word  of  God.  This  no  doubt  opened  a  door  for 
discussion,  but  Henderson  with  his  belief  in  the 
jus  divinum  of  presbytery  could  have  no  possible 
objection  to  inserting  the  words  in  his  draft. 

In  another  direction  the  terms  of  the  Covenant 
made  room  for  possible  dissension.  Mercurius 
Aulicus  reports  that  no  little  heat  and  debate  were 
caused  in  the  Westminster  Assembly  by  the  pro- 
posal to  extirpate  episcopacy.  Moderate  episco- 
pacy found  many  supporters  as  being  more  suitable 
to  England  than  presbytery.  Richard  Baxter 
says  very  much  the  same  thing.  The  parenthesis 
added  by  the   Westminster  divines  was   inserted 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     321 

expressly  on  the  ground  that  several  of  those 
English  divines  refused  to  commit  themselves 
against  all  forms  of  episcopacy  ;  the  door  was  left 
open  for  a  modified  form. 

But  greater  difficulties  lay  ahead.  Henderson 
and  his  friends  believed  they  had  the  support  of  a 
strong  body  of  presbyterian  opinion  in  England. 
In  that  matter  they  were  under  misapprehension 
in  two  respects.  The  first  was  that  England  was 
not  so  strongly  presbyterian  as  the  Parliament 
itself.  It  had  been  elected  at  a  moment  when 
feeling  against  the  king  was  at  its  highest  and 
sympathy  with  Scotland  was  intense  :  the  per- 
manent attitude  of  the  English  mind  was  not  so 
marked  in  either  direction.  The  second  was  more 
serious  because  it  misled  them  as  to  what  English 
presbyterianism  really  was.  The  grievance  felt 
by  the  great  mass  of  Englishmen  was  against  the 
powers  and  pretensions  of  their  bishops.  They 
wished  these  severely  curtailed ;  if  that  were  done 
they  would  have  been  content  with  a  moderate 
episcopal  system.  Failing  such  a  reform,  they  were 
prepared  to  get  rid  of  bisliops  and  adopt  the  system 
which  cast  them  out  altogetlier.  Such  men  were 
accounted  presbyterian,  and  so  they  were  in  the 
sense  that  they  preferred  their  Church  to  be  without 
bishops  than  to  be  ruled  by  the  kind  of  bishops  they 
knew.  Many  of  tiie  so-called  presbyterians  in  the 
English  Parliament  were  men  of  this  stamp.  But 
they  had  no  belief  in  the  divine  right  of  presbytery, 
and  no  idea  of  accepting  tlie  Scottish  view  of  a 
Church  claiming  a  jurisdiction  in  spiritual  matters 
independent  of  the  State.  That  view  of  tlie  relation 
of  Church  to  State  was  alien  if  not  abhorrent  to 
the  English  mind.    The  supremacy  of  the  State  over 

X 


322     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

the  Church  was  to  them  a  part  of  their  creed  ; 
it  was  rooted  in  the  history  and  traditions  of 
England.  The  Long  Parhament  held  it  as  firmly 
as  Henry  viii.  or  Charles  i.,  only  they  held  the 
supremacy  to  be  not  in  the  king  alone  but  in  the 
king  and  Parliament.  The  Grand  Remonstrance 
spoke  of  the  obedience  which  every  man  owed 
'  under  God  to  his  Majesty,  whom  we  know  to  be 
entrusted  with  the  ecclesiastical  law  as  well  as  with 
the  temporal  to  regulate  all  the  members  of  the 
Church  of  England  by  such  rules  of  order  and 
discipline  as  are  established  by  Parliament  which 
is  the  great  Council  in  all  affairs  both  of  Church 
and  State.'  The  Assembly  of  divines  which  Parlia- 
ment desired  to  be  summoned  was  to  be  a  purely 
subordinate  body  called  for  a  limited  and  specific 
purpose,  to  '  consider  of  all  things  necessary  for 
the  peace  and  good  government  of  the  Church,  and 
represent  the  results  of  their  consultations  to 
Parliament  to  be  there  allowed  and  confirmed  and 
receive  the  stamp  of  authority,  thereby  to  find 
passage  and  obedience  throughout  the  kingdom.' 
The  Ordinance  calling  the  Westminster  Assembly 
spoke  in  similar  language.  The  day  came  when 
the  Scotsmen  in  that  Assembly  and  those  who 
sympathised  with  them  in  claiming  autonomy  for 
the  Church  found  themselves  against  a  dead  wall 
of  opposition  both  in  the  Assembly  and  in  Parlia- 
ment. There  was  the  great  Erastian  party,  led  in 
the  Assembly  by  Selden,  very  strong  in  the  Commons, 
and  utterly  rejecting  that  view.  And  there  were 
others  too  in  Parliament  who  disliked  presbytery 
for  a  different  reason.  Baillie  complained  bitterly 
of  '  the  body  of  lawyers  who  were  another  strong 
party  in  the  House,  believing  all  Church  government 
to  be  a  part  of  the  civil  and  parliamentary  power 


i 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     323 

which  nature  and  scripture  have  placed  in  them, 
and  to  be  derived  from  them  to  the  ministers  only 
so  far  as  they  think  expedient ' ;  and  of  others 
*  who  are  extremely  affrighted  to  come  under  the 
yoke  of  ecclesiastic  discipline.'  Those  differences 
with  men  who  were  neither  of  the  Episcopal  nor  of 
the  Independent  party  ultimately  came  to  such  a 
height  that  they  proved,  in  the  opinion  of  a  high 
authority,  to  be  *  one  main  cause  why  presbyteri- 
anism  was  never  fully  set  up  in  England.'  ^ 

One  cannot  help  feeling  that  the  Scottish  leaders 
in  their  eagerness  for  uniformity  allowed  themselves 
to  be  misled  by  words  and  names.  They  mistook 
the  presbytcrian  majority  in  Parliament  for  the 
English  nation,  and  they  erroneously  supposed 
that  the  label  '  Presbyterian  '  meant  the  same  thing 
in  England  as  it  did  in  Scotland.  They  omitted  to 
take  due  account  of  the  fact  that  there  was  nothing 
in  England  comparable  to  the  position  of  the  Church 
in  Scotland.  There  presbyterianism  had  won  a 
triumph  which  was  a  national  triumph.  The 
Church  had  played  the  part  of  champion  of  civil 
as  well  as  religious  liberty  against  royal  absolutism, 
and  it  had  earned  a  nation's  gratitude  and  loyalty. 
In  England  the  Church  had  no  such  record  and 
held  no  such  position.  The  nation  was  deeply 
divided  on  religious  matters.  The  Church  accepted 
the  supremacy  of  the  State,  it  made  no  claim  to 
possess  an  independent  jurisdiction.  And  the  very 
Parliament  which  had  sworn  the  Covenant  was 
filled  with  men  nurtured  in  the  Erastian  spirit  of 
State  supremacy,  and  scouting  the  notion  of  sub- 
mission to  such  a  discipline  as  the  presbytcrian 
Church  enforced  in  Scotland.  It  would  have  been 
far  better  to  have  faced  the  difficulties  at  the  outset 

>  Mitchell,  The  Weatmintter  As$embly,  p.  270. 


324     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

than  to  make  the  discovery  after  years  of  labour 
that  they  were  on  vital  matters  so  far  asunder.  It 
was  here  that  the  Scots'  ignorance  of  England  led 
to  so  tragic  a  mistake.  To  Scotsmen  England  was 
a  foreign  land.  They  had  but  a  dim  conception 
of  the  Englishman's  mental  and  spiritual  attitude, 
and  the  political  sympathy  between  the  two 
countries  at  the  time  tended  to  lead  them  astray. 
It  was  they  who  forced  on  England  the  policy  of 
covenanted  Uniformity  which  meant  the  acceptance 
by  her  of  a  Church  system  alien  to  all  her  ideas. 
When  they  embarked  on  that  vast  scheme  they  were 
sailing  into  a  dangerous  and  uncharted  sea,  and  it 
came  to  grief  on  the  hidden  rocks  which  abounded 
there. 

But  other  and  even  greater  difficulties  began  to 
appear  almost  from  the  time  when  Henderson  and 
his  colleagues  took  their  seats  among  the  West- 
minster divines.  The  whole  situation  indoors  as 
well  as  out  of  doors  was  dominated  by  the  war. 
It  had  brought  Scotland  and  England  together 
in  friendly  alliance,  but  in  the  course  of  three  years 
it  raised  between  them  barriers  of  dislike  and 
distrust  and  finally  it  drove  them  asunder.  And 
this  not  by  reason  of  the  failure  of  their  cause.  On 
the  contrary,  every  success  won  against  the  king  had 
the  odd  result  of  weakening  their  own  alliance. 
After  Marston  Moor  had  delivered  them  from  the 
fear  of  Charles  gratitude  to  their  Scottish  allies  began 
to  cool  among  a  strong  party  of  the  English,  a 
process  of  disenchantment  set  in,  and  the  cause 
of  covenanted  uniformity  went  steadily  back. 
The  true  reason  was  that  the  alliance  did  not  '  rest 
upon  broad  and  real  community  of  aim,  sentiment,  or 
policy,  and  the  result  was  that  Scottish  and  English 
allies  were  always  on  the  verge  of  open  enmity. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     325 

The  two  nations  were  not  one  in  temperament  nor 
spiritual  experience  nor  political  requirements, 
and  even  at  the  few  moments  when  they  approached 
a  kind  of  cordiality  their  relations  were  uneasy.'  ^ 
If  the  Scottish  army  had  had  a  successful  career 
all  might  have  been  different.  It  is  impossible  to 
deny  that  Henderson  and  his  colleagues  relied  on 
its  presence  and  achievements  in  England  to  silence 
doubts  and  opposition  there.  Shortly  after  the 
Covenant  had  been  sworn  by  the  Commons  in 
September  1643,  Henderson  wrote  home,  '  The 
House  of  Lords  is  to  take  it  shortly.  And  it  hath 
been  taken  the  last  Lord's  day  by  a  great  part  of 
the  city  in  their  several  parishes.  If  the  Scottish 
army  were  here  the  Covenant  would  go  through 
the  more  easily.'  In  November  Baillie  naively 
confessed,  '  Mr.  Henderson's  hopes  are  not  great 
of  their  conformity  to  us  before  our  army  be  in 
England.'  The  military  alliance  was  not  com- 
pleted till  the  end  of  November.  In  December 
the  army  had  not  yet  crossed  the  Border,  and  the 
arguments  in  the  Assembly  with  the  Independents 
were  prudently  postponed  :  '  wherewith,'  says 
Baillie  in  the  candour  of  a  private  letter,  '  we 
purpose  not  to  meddle  in  haste  till  it  please  Gk)d  to 
advance  our  army  which  we  expect  will  much  assist 
our  arguments.'  When  it  did  come  in  January 
1644 — albeit  18,000  foot  with  cavalry  and  artillery 
— the  army  proved  a  great  disappointment.  Un- 
doubtedly it  relieved  the  situation  at  first  by 
clearing  the  royal  troops  out  of  the  north  of  England, 
but  it  seemed  content  to  settle  down  there  and  live 
on  the  country.  The  anxious  commissioners  in 
London  were  annoyed  beyond  measure.  *  We  are 
exceeding  sad,'  wrote  Baillie  in  April  1644,  *  and 

'  Morley's  Cromwefi,  p.  133. 


326     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

ashamed  that  our  army,  so  much  talked  of,  has 
done  as  yet  nothing  at  all.'  It  helped  to  win 
Marston  Moor  in  July  of  that  year,  in  October  it 
took  Newcastle,  and  in  June  1645  it  took  Carlisle. 
But  these  things  fell  very  short  of  expectation,  and 
in  fact  the  Scots  army  was  a  cause  of  constant 
friction  and  growing  irritation.  The  Scots  com- 
plained that  their  pay,  the  £30,000  a  month 
promised,  was  in  arrears,  that  they  were  in  need 
of  food  and  clothing  ;  the  English  retorted  that 
they  were  doing  uncommonly  little  to  help  the 
cause.  The  Scottish  leaders  could  hardly  be  sur- 
prised that  when  the  weapon  in  which  they  had 
trusted  failed  their  cause  incurred  a  certain  amount 
of  disrepute  thereby. 

Meanwhile,  within  the  Assembly,  matters  were 
developing  in  a  way  far  from  satisfactory.  It 
was  almost  wholly  presbyterian  in  opinion  or  in 
sympathy.  The  few  staunch  episcopalians  who 
had  at  first  put  in  an  appearance  dropped  off  or 
were  driven  off  by  the  Covenant.  In  the  whole 
House,  Baillie  mentions  only  some  ten  or  eleven 
as  Independents.  But  what  these  last  lacked  in 
numbers  they  made  up  in  ability  and  power  of 
debate.  On  many  questions  of  doctrine  and 
worship  they  did  not  differ  seriously  from  the 
majority,  but  they  insisted  on  needlessly  prolonging 
discussion.  In  fact,  it  soon  became  evident  that 
they  were  masters  of  the  art  of  parliamentary 
obstruction,  the  progress  made  was  slow,  and  the 
Assembly,  and  in  particular  the  Scots  commis- 
sioners, became  restive.  '  The  Independents,  do 
what  we  are  all  able,  have  kept  us  debating  these 
fourteen  days  on  these  two  easy  propositions,  and 
now  all  the  world  proclaims  in  their  face  that  they 
and  they  only  have  been  the  retarders  of  the  Assembly 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     327 

to  the  evident  hazard  of  the  Church's  safety  which 
will  not  be  much  longer  suffered.'     Why  all  this 
obstruction  ?     The    answer    is    simple.     They    ex- 
pected   presbyterian    government    and    discipline 
to  be  set  up  in  England,  and  they  were  fighting 
for  standing  room  for  themselves,   for  toleration 
in  a  presbyterian  England.     Those  men  or  some 
of  them  had  taken  refuge  in  Holland  from  Laud's 
tyranny,  they  had  now  reason  to  fear  their  fate 
might  be  similar  under  the  new  regime,  and  there- 
fore their  policy  was  to  postpone  as  long  as  they 
could  any  decisions  at  all.     There  was  no  conceal- 
ment  about   it :     '  the   Independents   being   most 
able  men  and  of  great  credit,  fearing  no  less  than 
banishment  from  their   native  country  if  presby- 
teries were  erected,  are  watchful  that  no  conclusion 
be  taken  for  their  prejudice.'  ^     So  serious  was  the 
delay  that  the  Scottish  members  in  January  1644 
wrote  a  joint  letter  to  the  Commission  of  General 
Assembly  suggesting  that  they  should  remonstrate 
on   the    subject   with   the    Lords    and    Commons. 
'  The  slow  progress  of  reformation  here,'  they  said, 
'  is  apprehended  both  by  us  and  others  who  would 
advance  this   work   with   us   as  that   which   may 
prove    of    very    dangerous    consequence,    neither 
doth  it  proceed  only  from  negligence  or  slackness 
that  the  work  is  so  much  retarded,  but  from  the 
deliberate  endeavours  of  some  who  tliink  to  gain 
the  accession  of  some  strength  to  themselves  in 
this   unsettled   condition   of  affairs.'     What   they 
feared  was  *  that  either  the  common  enemy  may 
grow  stronger  or  the  intestine  rupture  and  disease 
more   incurable   before   the   remedy   be   prepared, 
that  errors  may  spread  and  sects  multiply.'     In 
August  following,  the  General  Assembly  did  send 

'  Baillie's  Letters  (Laing's  ed.),  ii.  p.  117. 


328     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

letters  expressing  *  the  passionate  desires  '  of  Scot- 
land for  the  performance  of  the  covenanted  uni- 
formity, and  a  meeting  of  a  grand  committee  of 
Lords,  Commons  and  Assembly  was  held,  where 
Henderson  presented  a  written  statement  '  bearing 
the  great  evils  of  so  long  a  delay  of  settling  religion 
and  our  earnest  desires  that  some  ways  might  be 
found  out  for  expedition.'  There  was  indeed  too 
much  ground  for  alarm.  If  inside  the  Assembly 
the  current  was  running  slowly  but  steadily  towards 
presbyterian  uniformity,  out  of  doors  the  stream 
was  raging  like  a  torrent  in  the  opposition  direction. 
Civil  war  had  burst  asunder  the  bonds  of  traditional 
belief,  new  sects  sprang  up  and  multiplied  in- 
credibly, every  conceivable  form  of  belief  and 
unbelief,  blasphemies  of  all  sorts  were  raising  their 
heads  and  growing  daily  bolder.  With  amazed 
and  sad  eyes  the  sober-minded  Scottish  divines 
looked  out  on  this  tumult  and  welter.  The  In- 
dependents in  the  Assembly  were  mild  and  re- 
spectable as  compared  with  the  Independents  and 
other  sectaries  outside,  but  they  insisted  not  only 
on  toleration  for  themselves  but,  worse  still,  on 
'  pernicious  liberty  '  for  all  sects.  The  Scotsmen 
had  no  doubt  as  to  the  remedy  for  all  this  madness. 
Henderson  wrote  home  about  '  such  sects  and 
monsters  of  opinions  as  are  daily  set  on  foot  and 
multiplied  in  this  kingdom  through  the  want  of 
that  Church  government  by  Assemblies  which  hath 
preserved  us,  and  we  hope,  through  the  blessing 
of  God,  shall  cure  them.'  '  No  people,'  said  Baillie, 
'  had  so  much  need  of  a  Presbytery.'  Presbytery 
was  to  be  a  sort  of  strait- jacket  for  the  patient 
in  his  frenzy,  it  would  quieten  and  settle  him.  It 
never  occurred  to  them  to  doubt  the  efficacy  of  this 
sovereign  remedy ;    all  that  was  needed  was  to 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     329 

put  it  in  operation  without  delay.  But  the  delay 
was  becoming  dangerous.  Ominous  symptoms 
appeared  tliat  Independency  was  growing  in  the 
English  army,  Independency  too  of  a  violent  type, 
passing  into  anabaptism  and  antinomianism.  By 
and  by  we  hear  that  two-thirds  of  the  officers  and 
men  in  the  parliamentary  armies  are  Independents 
and  these  '  the  most  resolute  and  confident  men.' 
To  such  a  pitch  had  the  danger  increased.  The 
men  who  were  winning  battles  and  defeating  the 
cavaliers  were  those  very  sectaries.  If  that  ad- 
mitted of  any  doubt  at  Marston  Moor  it  was  no 
longer  doubtful  at  Naseby.  Their  leader  was 
Cromwell  '  the  great  Independent '  who  now  stood 
out  as  the  great  soldier  of  the  Civil  War.  War 
then  as  now  tested  the  foundations  of  all  things. 
This  war  taught  England  strange  and  unexpected 
lessons,  and  out  of  it  a  new  England  was  born. 
Cromwell  early  discovered  that  the  army  that 
could  overcome  the  royalists  had  still  to  be  created. 
He  was  in  earnest  himself,  and  the  army  which  he 
set  about  collecting  and  drilling  was  to  be  of  the 
same  type.  Efficiency  was  his  watchword.  His 
men  must  be  thoroughly  disciplined  soldiers  and 
they  must  be  men  of  character,  *  religious  meru' 
Efficiency  was  the  sole  passport  to  promotion  in 
his  army  ;  his  officers  many  of  them  were  of  the 
humblest  origin,  but  if  men  were  of  the  right 
fighting  stuff  he  allowed  the  greatest  amount  ©f 
individual  liberty  of  opinion.  His  ranks  were  filled 
with  sectaries  of  every  shape  and  colour,  earnest 
religious  men  according  to  their  light,  glorying  in 
their  freedom  and  prepared  to  stand  up  for  it. 

His  own  attitude  to  religion  was  that  of  a 
soldier,  a  thoughtful,  clear-headed  pmitan  soldier. 
Brought  up  in  the  Church  of  England,  he  had  no 


330  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

great  quarrel  with  it.  Nor  had  he  any  great 
quarrel  with  presbytery  ;  he  cared  little  for  bishops, 
little  for  ecclesiastical  forms  or  organisations  of  any 
sort.  He  had  signed  the  Covenant — it  is  easy  to 
believe  without  cordiality — but  the  war  taught  him 
that  there  must  be  toleration  for  men  who  served 
the  State  well  whether  they  called  themselves 
Independents,  Presbyterians,  Baptists  or  what  not. 
He  reached  this  conclusion  on  grounds  of  practical 
necessity,  and  proceeded  in  his  blunt  and  downright 
fashion  to  give  effect  to  it.  In  September  1644  he 
raised  the  question  in  the  Commons,  and  they 
agreed  to  refer  to  the  Committee  of  Both  Kingdoms 
— the  War  Cabinet  of  that  day  ^ — the  '  accommoda- 
tion '  or  toleration  of  the  Independents.  '  A  high 
and  unexpected  order,'  cries  Baillie,  almost  startled 
put  of  his  senses.  But  there  was  much  worse  to 
follow.  Cromwell  was  all  for  getting  on  with  the 
war,  not  playing  with  it  as  he  believed  Manchester 
and  Essex  were  doing,  and  after  the  second  battle 
of  Newbury,  in  October  1644,  the  quarrel  broke  out 
which  ended  in  the  Self-denying  Ordinance,  finally 
passed  into  law  in  April  1645.  Here  Cromwell 
took  bolder  ground  about  individual  liberty  :  men 
must  be  allowed  to  serve  in  the  army  without 
signing  the  Covenant.  The  Scots  took  alarm. 
Individual  liberty  of  this  sort  cut  clean  across  the 
old  belief,  common  both  to  English  and  Scots, 
in  a  national  Church  to  which  every  man  must 
conform.  And,  of  course,  it  would  bring  to  ruin 
the  great  plan  of  a  covenanted  uniformity  of  both 
countries.     Such  new-fangled  explosive  ideas  filled 

1  It  is  interesting  to  note  that  this  federal  War  Cabinet,  which  had 
full  power  in  regard  to  military  operations,  and  met  daily,  consisted  of  no 
fewer  than  twenty-five  members  :  twenty-one  English  members  (seven 
Lords  and  fourteen  Commoners)  and  four  Scots.  It  was  established  in 
February  16-44  and  dissolved  in  January  1648. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     331 

with  horror  the  minds  of  men  who  were  satished 
they  already  knew  the  whole  truth.  '  In  God's 
mattei*s,'  said  Samuel  Rutherfurd,  '  there  be  not  as 
in  grammar  the  positive  and  comparative  degrees  ; 
there  are  not  here  truth  and  more  true  and  most 
true.  Truth  is  an  indivisible  line  which  hath  no 
latitude  and  cannot  admit  of  splitting.'  ^  There 
nmst  be  no  compromise,  only  rigid  and  unbending 
opposition  to  these  new  ideas.  This  Cromwell 
with  his  notions  would  turn  their  world  upside 
down.  '  He  had  even,'  says  Baillie,  '  spoken  con- 
tumeliously  of  the  Scots'  intention  in  coming  to 
England  to  establish  their  Church  government, 
and  said  he  would  draw  his  sword  against  them,' 
it  was  nothing  but  '  a  high  and  mighty  plot  of  the 
Independent  party  to  get  an  army  for  themselves  and 
to  dissolve  the  union  of  the  nations  ' ;  they  must 
see  to  it  to  '  obtain  his  removal  from  the  army.' 

This  was  no  mere  idle  gossip  of  Baillie's.  Crom- 
well's language,  revealed  by  Manchester,  was  duly 
reported  to  the  Government  in  Edinburgh,  and  it 
probably  lost  nothing  in  the  telling.  The  Com- 
mittee of  Estates  learned  with  horror  that  this  man, 
professedly  a  friend  of  their  cause,  had  declared 
his  hatred  against  the  Scottish  nation  to  be  as 
great  as  *  against  any  in  his  Majesty's  armies,'  had 
slandered  the  Assembly  of  divines  as  '  persecutors 
of  honester  men  than  themselves,'  and  had  pro- 
fessed he  would  as  soon  draw  his  sword  against  the 
Scots  '  as  against  these  who  arc  declared  enemies 
of  both  kingdoms.'  To  them  such  language  was 
intolerable,  they  rushed  to  the  conclusion  that 
Cromwell  must  be  impeached  as  an  Incendiary. 
On  17th  December  1644  the  Committee  of  Estates 
sent  instructions  to  their  commissioners  in  London 

»  The  Due  Right  of  Presbyter iet  (1644)  :  Epistle  to  the  Reader. 


332     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

to  see  that  this  was  done.  Their  letter  recounted 
with  indignation  Cromwell's  language  and  pro- 
ceeded :  '  Therefore  we  have  unanimously  thought 
fit  to  desire  you  to  demand  in  name  of  this  kingdom 
from  the  honourable  Houses  that  justice  may  be 
done  upon  him  as  an  incendiary  betwixt  the  nations, 
that  by  his  exemplary  punishment  none  hereafter 
may  dare  to  endeavour  the  interruption  of  the 
brotherly  affection  and  Christian  amity  betwixt 
the  kingdoms.  The  particular  way  of  managing 
hereof  we  remit  to  yourselves,  and  expect  your 
special  care  and  diligence  herein.'  Cooler  reflection 
apparently  suggested  that  the  obeying  of  these 
instructions  might  prove  a  more  difficult  and 
delicate  matter  than  they  had  supposed,  and  a 
second  letter  followed  on  the  same  date  :  '  Consider- 
ing that  in  respect  of  the  condition  of  affairs  there 
the  way  of  managing  that  business  will  be  better 
known  to  you  we  have  thought  fit  hereby  (not- 
withstanding of  our  other  letter)  to  allow  to  your 
Lordships  a  latitude  to  do  therein  as  you  shall  find 
most  conducing  for  the  furthering  of  the  work  of 
reformation  and  good  of  both  kingdoms.'  ^  One 
is  glad  to  know  this  grotesque  proposal  did  not 
originate  with  Henderson  or  his  fellow-countrymen 
in  London,  but  with  men  far  removed  from  the 
scene  of  action,  who  had  but  little  conception  of  the 
position  which  Cromwell  held  in  Parliament  and  in 
the  army. 

The  sequel  presents  an  incident  piquant  and 
amusing,  to  which  it  would  be  difficult  to  find  a 
parallel.  The  commissioners  were  bound  to  '  special 
care  and  diligence  '  in  carrying  out  the  instructions 
of  their  Government,  but  like  wise  men  they  made 

^  Correspondence  of  the  Scots   Commissioners   in   London  (1644-1646), 
Roxburghe  Club,  p.  52. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     333 

full  use  of  the  *  latitude  '  given  them.  Instead  of 
tabling  a  demand  for  impeachment  before  the 
Houses  they  proceeded  ^vith  extraordinary  caution 
and  secrecy.  A  midnight  conclave  was  held  at 
Essex  House  :  Loudoun,  the  chancellor,  was  there 
with  Henderson  to  discuss  matters  with  Essex 
and  other  trusted  English  friends.  The  safe  but 
unheroic  conclusion  was  reached  that  legal  advice 
should  be  taken  before  anything  was  attempted. 
Never,  it  is  certain,  was  a  consultation  with  counsel 
held  in  circumstances  so  remarkable  ;  it  would  be 
an  incredible  tale  but  that  our  informant  is  himself 
one  of  the  counsel.  The  lawyers  consulted  were 
Maynard  and  Whitelocke,  two  members  of  the 
parliamentary  party,  both  in  the  House  of  Commons. 
They  were  summoned  very  late  that  December 
night  by  a  mysterious  message  to  come  to  Essex 
House  on  urgent  business  ;  *  there  was  no  excuse 
to  be  admitted  nor  did  they  know  beforehand  the 
occasion  of  their  being  sent  for.'  Loudoun  took 
speech  in  hand  and  laid  the  case  before  them. 
Cromwell,  he  said,  is  no  friend  of  ours,  and  since 
the  advance  of  our  army  into  England  has  used  all 
underhand  and  cunning  means  to  take  off  from 
our  honour  and  merit ;  lie  is  no  friend  to  us  and 
to  the  government  of  our  Church,  and  no  well- 
wisher  to  Essex  ;  if  he  be  permitted  to  go  on  in  his 
ways  it  may  endanger  the  whole  business.  You 
may  know  that  by  our  law  in  Scotland  we  call  a 
man  an  Incendiary  who  kindles  coals  of  contention 
and  raises  differences  in  the  State  to  the  public 
danger.  We  want  to  know  whether  your  law  is  the 
same,  and  how  an  Incendiary  is  to  be  proceeded 
against ;  is  Lieutenant-General  Cromwell  such'  an 
Incendiary  ?  The  two  English  lawyers  listened, 
we  may  be  sure,  with  becoming  gravity  but  doubt- 


334     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

less  inward  amusement.  They  replied  with 
judicious  caution  that  Incendiary  was  a  term  not 
much  met  with  in  their  law,  but  it  meant  very 
much  the  same  as  in  the  law  of  Scotland.  Whether 
Cromwell  was  an  Incendiary  or  no  could  not  be 
known  but  by  proofs  of  his  particular  words  or 
actions  :  they  knew  none,  but  would  be  glad  to 
consider  and  advise  in  any  that  might  be  put 
before  them.  Only,  the  Scots  commissioners 
must  be  prepared  before  they  brought  Cromwell 
on  the  stage  to  carry  the  matter  through  to  a 
successful  end,  otherwise  the  issue  of  the  business 
might  not  answer  their  expectations.  '  I  believe,' 
said  Maynard, '  it  will  be  more  difficult  than  perhaps 
some  of  us  may  imagine  to  fasten  this  upon  him.' 
Cromwell  was,  they  went  on,  '  a  gentleman  of  quick 
and  subtle  parts,  and  one  who  had  gained  no  small 
interest  in  the  House  of  Commons,  nor  is  wanting 
of  friends  in  the  House  of  Peers,  nor  of  abilities 
in  himself  to  manage  his  own  part  or  defence  to 
the  best  advantage.'  ^  That  hint  was  sufficient. 
Henderson  and  his  colleagues  '  were  not  so  forward 
to  adventure  upon  it.'  Maynard  and  Whitelocke 
were  dismissed  about  two  o'clock  in  the  morning 
with  thanks  and  compliments,  and  nothing  more 
was  heard  of  the  extraordinary  notion  of  im- 
peaching Cromwell. 

But  the  Scots  drifted  further  apart  from  him. 
They  saw  only  an  anarchist  in  the  man  whose 
vision  was  opening  to  larger  and  loftier  ideals. 
After  Naseby,  in  June  1645,  Cromwell  wrote  to 
Parliament  :  '  Honest  men  served  you  faithfully 
in  this  action.  Sir,  they  are  trusty ;  I  beseech  you 
in  the  name  of  God  not  to  discourage  them.  He 
that  ventures  his  life  for  the  liberty  of  his  country 

>  Whitelocke's  Memorials  (ed.  1682),  pp.  111-12. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     .335 

I  wish  he  trust  God  for  the  liberty  of  his  conscience, 
and  you  for  the  hberty  he  fights  for.'  When 
Bristol  fell  in  September  he  wrote  :  '  Presby- 
terians, Independents,  all  have  here  the  same 
spirit  of  faith  and  prayer ;  the  same  presence 
and  answer  :  they  agree  here,  have  no  names  of 
difference  ;  pity  it  is  it  should  be  otherwise  any- 
where. All  that  believe  have  the  real  unity  which 
is  most  glorious,  because  inward  and  spiritual, 
in  the  Body  and  to  the  Head.  For  being  united 
in  forms,  commonly  called  Uniformity,  every 
Christian  will  for  peace  sake  study  and  do  as  far 
as  conscience  will  permit.  And  for  brethren,  in 
things  of  the  mind  we  look  for  no  compulsion  but 
that  of  light  and  reason.' 

A  new  and  sweet  note,  but  the  world  of  that  day 
was  only  alarmed  by  its  novelty  not  captivated  by  its 
music.  Tlie  Scottish  leaders  were  perturbed  beyond 
measure.  Cromwell  on  his  side  judged  presby- 
terianism  unfairly.  A  system  which  to  Scotsmen 
stood  for  ordered  liberty,  democratic  in  spirit  and 
operation,  he  suspected,  and  Milton  more  than 
suspected,  to  be  a  new  engine  of  ecclesiastical 
oppression.  Their  bitter  experiences  under  Laud's 
tyranny  produced  a  reaction  which  led  them  to 
emphasise  individual  liberty  in  religion,  to  reject 
authority,  especially  clerical  authority,  and  to 
distrust  elaborate  organisation.  But  the  Scots 
had  only  themselves  to  blame  that  Cromwell's 
suspicions  deepened  when  he  found  them  resolute 
against  toleration  either  in  the  army  or  out  of  it. 
Much  as  he  disliked  their  insistence  on  their  form 
of  Church  government  he  would  probably  have 
accepted  presbyterianism  if  it  had  been  coupled 
with  the  vital  concession  of  toleration.  But  the 
Scots  were  blind  to  the  teaching  of  events  :    they 


336     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

could  not  or  would  not  see  that  from  the  time 
when  the  Independent  party  rose  to  influence  the 
war  which  they  helped  to  wage  was  not  only  de- 
feating the  king,  it  was  defeating  themselves,  for 
the  policy  of  Presbyterian  Uniformity  then  became 
impossible  except  by  being  modified  or  enlarged 
so  as  to  allow  room  for  the  new  forms  of  opinion 
which  had  grown  up  among  their  English  allies. 
Alas  !  the  spirits  of  Scotsmen  grew  full  of  bitterness 
as  time  went  on.  Scotland  had  at  least  sent  her 
army  to  England's  help,  but  England  had  not  ful- 
filled the  promise  solemnly  made  to  prevent  invasion 
of  Scotland  by  sea  or  land.  Their  country  was  over- 
run by  Montrose  with  his  wild  Irish,  and  Scotland 
was  paying  a  terrible  price — ^tortured  at  home,  de- 
spised in  England.  Disillusionment  was  opening 
the  eyes  and  sharpening  the  tongue  of  each  ally  to 
appreciate  the  faults  and  shortcomings  of  the  other. 
The  Parliament,  still  predominantly  presbyterian, 
voted  in  January  1645  that  the  Church  of  England 
should  henceforth  be  presbyterian,  and  during  the 
winter  of  1645-6  it  gradually  completed  the  details 
of  the  frame  of  the  new  Church  government.  In 
London,  where  the  atmosphere  was  friendly,  it  was 
to  be  put  in  operation  at  once,  and  by  and  by  all 
over  England.  It  was  after  all  but  '  a  kind  of 
nominal  presbytery,'  Baillie  thought.  The  Erastians 
forming  a  coalition  with  the  Independents  took 
care  that  the  Church  courts  were  subordinated 
to  parliamentary  commissioners.  But,  even  so 
emasculated,  the  great  scheme  was  still-bom.  In 
London,  indeed,  classes  or  presbyteries  were  set 
up.  Fourteen  of  them,  all  included  in  one  synod, 
had  a  rather  feeble  existence  there  for  a  time  ;  in 
Lancashire,  nine  presbyteries  were  organised  with 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     337 

more  life  in  them.  On  paper  there  were  some 
sixty  synods  for  the  whole  of  England,  but  they 
existed  on  paper  only.  That  they  never  came  into 
actual  being  was  due,  says  Baillie,  to  '  the  sottish 
negligence  of  the  ministers  and  gentry  in  the  shires,' 
in  other  words,  the  people  of  England  were  indiffer- 
ent or  hostile.  And  so  Scotland  lost  her  one  great 
opportunity  of  cstabHshing  her  polity  south  of  the 
Border.  So  wide  indeed  did  the  gulf  between  the 
parties  become  that  their  old  friends  came  to  see 
in  the  Scottish  army  no  longer  champions  of 
freedom  but  imposers  of  a  new  bondage,  and  flung 
at  them  Milton's  bitter  gibe, 

'  New  Presbyter  is  but  old  Priest  writ  large.' 
4.    HENDERSON    IN    THE    WESTMINSTER    ASSEMBLY 

The  great  plan  of  Uniformity  was  a  failure.  The 
Westminster  Assembly  was  both  a  failure  and  a 
success  :  a  local  failure,  but  a  success  on  a  vast 
scale  unforeseen  and  undreamt  of  by  its  creators. 
It  was  part  of  the  plan  that  the  Assembly,  with  the 
help  of  the  Scots  commissioners,  should  prepare  a 
new  basis  to  take  the  place  of  the  existing  govern- 
ment, ritual  and  creed  of  the  separate  Churches. 
The  new  basis  was  embodied  in  certain  documents 
which  cost  the  Assembly  years  of  labour ;  a 
Directory  of  Worship,  a  Form  of  Church  Govern- 
ment, a  Confession  of  Faith  and  two  Catechisms. 
In  England,  their  native  land,  they  failed  of  their 
immediate  purpose,  but  the  Confession  of  Faith 
and  the  Shorter  Catechism— the  best  fruits  of  the 
labour  of  those  years — continued  to  live  and  mould 
the  faith  and  life  of  future  generations  in  Scotland 
and,  mainly  through  Scotland,  in  the  great  English- 


338     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

speaking  nations  beyond  the  seas  wherever  men  of 
Scottish  blood  made  their  homes. 

Uniformity  of  Church  government  in  the  three 
kingdoms  was  a  dream  ;  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession of  Faith  is  a  factor  of  permanent  historical 
importance  in  the  life  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  race.  For 
us  the  Westminster  Assembly  possesses  this  further 
interest,  that  it  is  the  first  and  only  Church  Council 
held  in  these  Islands,  and  it  still  stands  first  among 
Protestant  Councils. 

The  Assembly  was  opened  on  Saturday,  1st  July 
1643,  in  Westminster  Abbey,  in  presence  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament  and  a  large  congregation. 
Dr.  Twisse,  the  Prolocutor  or  Moderator,  preached, 
thereafter  the  members  repaired  to  the  chapel  of 
Henry  vii.     We  can  well  believe  the  rich  archi- 
tecture of  the  chapel  was  in  striking  contrast  to 
the   puritan   simplicity   of  dress— black   coats   or 
cloaks,  skull-caps  and  Geneva  bands,  a  few  canonical 
gowns,  the  broad  double  ruff  of  the  day  worn  round 
the  neck.     When  the  cold  weather  began,  in  the  end 
of  September,  the  Assembly  met  in  the  Jerusalem 
Chamber  in  the  Deanery  of  Westminster.     It  sat 
daily  (Saturday  and   Sunday  and  some  vacations 
excepted)    for   five   years   and   six   months,   until 
22nd  February  1649,  holding  1163  regular  sittings 
from  nine  in  the  morning  till  one  or  two  o'clock. 
The  afternoons  were  devoted  to  the  meetings  of 
the  three  committees  which  were  formed  to  draft 
the  work  for  the  Assembly.     After  22nd  February 
1649  its  work  was  done,  but  it  met  as  a  kind  of 
standing    committee    with    a    scanty    attendance 
every  Thursday,  for  examination  and  ordination 
of  candidates  for  the  ministry,  till  25th  March  1652, 
when  it  flickered  out. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     339 

It  was  not  called  together  by  any  ecclesiastical 
authority.  The  Long  Parliament  summoned  it 
*  to  consult  and  advise  of  such  matters  and  things 
as  shall  be  proposed  unto  them  by  both  or  either 
of  the  Houses  of  Parliament.'  It  was  simply  an 
advisory  council  of  Parliament  which  claimed  to 
exercise  the  ecclesiastical  supremacy  of  the  Crown, 
and  the  Confession  of  Faith  was  presented  to 
Parliament  as  '  a  humble  Advice.'  Parliament 
was  paymaster,  and  the  members  received  the  sum 
of  four  shillings  a  day  ;  even  this  was  irregularly 
paid.  The  Scots  commissioners  were  the  only 
delegates  elected  by  a  proper  ecclesiastical 
authority — the  General  Assembly  of  their  own 
Church.  The  position  at  the  time  was  very 
anomalous.  The  hierarchy  liad  been  abolished  by 
Parliament  on  10th  September  1642  by  an  Act  to 
take  effect  on  5th  November  1643.  Ordinances 
to  carry  it  out  were  not  passed  till  October  and 
November  1646.  Before  the  Assembly  had  devised 
and  constructed  the  new  ecclesiastical  edifice  the 
existing  Church  was  suffering  decay  from  the  general 
upheaval  and  the  application  of  the  Covenant  test. 
Something  was  done  to  keep  things  going  in  the 
interregnum  by  the  Assembly  at  its  own  hand  ex- 
amining and  admitting  candidates  for  the  ministry. 

As  Church  reform  was  the  raison  d'etre  of  the 
Assembly,  its  members  were  chosen  by  the  House 
of  Commons  with  that  view.  Some  progress  had 
been  made  in  1642 ;  three  bills  passed  through 
Parliament  for  calling  an  Assembly,  but  the  king 
refused  his  assent,  war  broke  out,  and  nothing  more 
was  done.  Finally,  on  12th  June  1643  an  Ordinance 
was  passed  for  the  purpose  by  Lords  and  Commons. 
The   members    had    been   selected   apparently    in 


840  ALEXANDER  HENt)ERSON 

April  1642,  the  parliamentary  representatives  of 
each  county  and  the  burghs  within  it  recommending 
two,  two  were  chosen  for  each  of  the  Universities, 
four  for  the  city  of  London.     It  was  intended  that 
they  should  represent  all  the  parties  of  English 
Protestants  except  Laud's.     Most  of  the  members 
were  Church  of  England  clergy,  among  the  number 
were   four   bishops.     Several   were   favourable   to 
a  moderate  episcopacy,  many  more  were  presby- 
terian  in  sympathy,  only  about  ten  or  twelve  were 
independents.      Invitations    were    sent    to    three 
ministers  of  the  Congregational  churches  of  New 
England  but  none  of  them  came.     There  were  in 
all  151  members ;    of  these  121  were  divines,  and 
30  laymen,  10  of  them  Lords  and  20  Commoners. 
The  quorum  was  40.     Few  of  the  royalist  episco- 
palians appeared,  for  the  king  issued  a  proclamation 
forbidding  the  Assembly,  declaring  it  illegal,  and 
threatening   severe   punishments   against   all   who 
presumed   to   meet.     Meixurius   Aulicus   of   30th 
July  has  this  instructive  comment :   '  A  Committee 
was  appointed  by  the  prevailing  faction  of  both 
Houses  of  Parliament  to  go  to  Scotland  to  solicit 
their  brethren  there  to  aid  them  in  this  Rebellion 
against  his  Majesty.  .  .  .  The  faction  in  the  Lower 
House  sent  away  their  members  on  Wednesday 
last  to  dispatch  this  business,  who  took  along  with 
them    as    the    delegates    from    the    New-England 
Assembly  which  is  now  on  foot  two  godly  ministers, 
that  is  to  say  Stephen  Marshall  (one  of  the  great 
Incendiaries  of  this  nation),  and  one  Master  Nye, 
the  better  to  endear  the  cause  to  Father  Henderson, 
who   is   returned   again   to   his   old   factiousness.' 
'  New-England  Assembly  '  is  a  singularly  clumsy 
and  pointless  gibe  in  the  light  of  the  facts.     Even 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     341 

less  happy  if  possible  is  the  suggestion  that  the 
presence  of  Nye,  a  well-known  Independent,  would 
specially  endear  the  cause  to  the  staunch  presby- 
terian  leader.  But  in  royalist  circles  this  kind  of 
language  was  thought  the  best  method  for  bring- 
ing the  Assembly  into  contempt.  Laud  went  so  far 
as  to  say,  '  Tlie  greatest  part  of  them  were  Brown- 
ists  or  Independents  or  New  England  Ministers, 
if  not  worse.'  Clarendon  indulged  in  slanders  of 
another  sort  :  '  Some  were  infamous  in  their  lives 
and  conversations,  and  most  of  them  of  very  mean 
parts  in  learning  if  not  of  scandalous  ignorance,  or 
of  no  other  reputation  but  of  malice  to  the  Church 
of  England.' 

Henderson  we  know  reached  London  on  14th 
September  and  was  received  by  the  Assembly 
next  day.  He  was  again  housed  in  his  old 
quarters  at  Worcester  House,  with  St.  Antholin's 
church  for  preaching  in.  When  the  later  com- 
missioners arrived  from  Scotland  and  were  intro- 
duced in  November,  here  is  the  '  taste  of  the  out- 
ward form  of  the  Assembly  '  which  Baillie  provided 
for  his  correspondent  in  Holland.  '  At  the  one 
end  nearest  the  door  and  both  sides  are  stages  of 
seats,  there  will  be  room  for  five  or  six  score.  At 
the  upmost  end  there  is  a  chair  set  on  a  frame  a 
foot  from  the  earth  for  the  Mr.  Prolocutor,  Dr. 
Twisse.  Before  it  on  the  ground  stand  two  chairs, 
for  the  two  Mr.  Assessors.  Before  these  two  chairs, 
througli  the  length  of  the  room,  stands  a  table  at 
which  sit  the  two  scribes.  The  house  is  all  well 
hung  and  has  a  good  fire,  which  is  some  dainties  ^ 
at  London.  In  front  of  the  table  upon  the  Pro- 
locutor's right  hand  there  are  three  or  four  ranks 

*  A  luxury. 


342     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

of  forms.  On  the  lowest  we  five  do  sit.  Upon  the 
other  at  our  backs  the  members  of  Parliament 
deputed  to  the  Assembly.  On  the  forms  opposite 
us  on  the  Prolocutor's  left  hand,  going  from  the 
upper  end  of  the  house  to  the  chimney,  and  at  the 
other  end  of  the  house,  and  backside  of  the  table 
till  it  come  about  to  our  feet,  are  four  or  five  stages 
of  forms  whereupon  the  divines  sit  as  they  please, 
albeit  commonly  they  keep  the  same  place.  From 
the  chimney  to  the  door  there  are  no  seats,  but  a 
void  for  passage.  The  lords  of  Parliament  use  to 
sit  on  chairs  in  that  void  about  the  fire.' 

The  Scotsmen  did  not  sit  as  ordinary  members 
of  the  Assembly.  They  came  up  as  commissioners 
from  their  national  Church  to  treat  for  Uniformity, 
and  they  required  that  they  should  be  dealt  with 
in  that  capacity.  They  were  wilHng  as  individuals 
to  sit  in  the  Assembly,  and  did  so  sit  and  gave  their 
advice  upon  occasion  on  points  debated,  but  they 
required  that  a  committee  be  appointed  from  the 
Parliament  and  Assembly  to  treat  with  them  about 
the  Uniformity.  Nor  were  they  conspicuous  as 
talkers.  Henderson  appears  to  have  used  his 
influence  wisely  in  composing  differences  which 
arose  in  the  course  of  the  debates ;  he  was  silent 
'  for  the  far  most  part  of  the  last  two  years,'  says 
his  friend  in  January  1647.  Baillie  has  some 
caustic  comments  on  the  speakers.  '  Four  parts 
of  five  do  not  speak  at  all :  of  these  few  that  use 
to  speak  sundry  are  so  tedious  and  thrust  them- 
selves in  with  such  misregard  to  others  that  it  were 
better  for  them  to  be  silent.'  On  the  other  hand, 
'  there  are  some  eight  or  nine  so  able  and  ready 
at  all  times  that  hardly  a  man  can  say  anything 
but  what  others  without  his  labour  are  sure  to  say 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     343 

it  as  well  or  better.'  But  the  Scots  commis- 
sioners wielded  an  influence  out  of  all  proportion 
to  their  numbers.  At  first  the  Assembly  com- 
menced revising  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  but 
with  the  adoption  of  the  Covenant  and  the  arrival 
of  the  Scotsmen  that  work  was  laid  aside  for  the 
new  task.  On  one  or  two  occasions  the  House 
had  a  taste  of  the  quality  of  the  men  from  the 
north.  Henderson  on  one  never-forgotten  day  was 
roused  out  of  his  habitual  calm  into  a  heat  of 
energy  and  eloquence  that  astonished  the  House. 
Nye  made  a  vicious  onset  on  Presbytery  as  incon- 
sistent with  a  civil  state,  and  next  day  in  presence 
of  a  large  number  of  members  of  both  Houses 
returned  to  the  attack.  He  demonstrated  to  his 
own  satisfaction  that  the  bringing  of  a  whole  king- 
dom under  one  national  Assembly  was  pernicious 
to  civil  states  and  kingdoms.  That  was  more  than 
Henderson  could  stand,  especially  from  the  man 
who  in  Edinburgh  had  accepted  the  aid  of  Scotland 
on  the  basis  of  Uniformity,  and  he  rose  and  exposed 
the  absurdity  of  the  argument  as  one  directed  not 
against  the  Scottish  Church  only  but  against  all 
the  reformed  (  hurches,  comparing  the  conduct  of 
Nye  to  that  of  Lucian  and  the  pagan  writers  who 
were  wont  to  stir  up  princes  and  states  against  the 
Christian  religion.  He  carried  the  sympathy  of 
the  Assembly  and  Nye  was  censured.  Another 
occasion  witnessed  a  battle  of  giants  when  young 
Gillespie,  the  junior  of  the  Scottish  delegates,  with- 
out preparation  entered  the  lists  against  the  re- 
doubtable Selden,  and  proved  himself  more  than 
a  match  for  that  paracfoii  of  loaniinf',  Srlrh  n  himsilf 
being  witness. 

By  the  end  of   1644  the  Assembly  had  worked 


344     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

its  way  through  the  new  Directory  of  Worship  and 
the  new  Form  of  Church  Government.  Next  month 
the  work  received  the  stamp  of  authority.  On 
4th  January  1645  Parhament  passed  an  Ordinance 
aboHshing  the  use  of  the  Prayer  Book  and  adopting 
the  new  Directory  :  on  the  28th  day  of  the  same 
month  four  Resolutions  were  passed  containing  all 
the  essentials  of  Presbytery.  In  December  1646  the 
Confession  of  Faith  was  completed  and  presented 
to  Parliament.  At  a  later  date,  June  1648,  Parlia- 
ment voted  it  in  part,  but  it  never  authorised  the 
Confession  as  a  whole;  it  omitted  Articles  XXX. 
(On  Church  Censures)  and  XXXI.  (On  Synods 
and  Councils)  with  parts  of  XX.  and  XXIV.  The 
Larger  Catechism  was  presented  to  Parliament  on 
22nd  October  1647,  the  Shorter  on  25th  November 
of  the  same  year.  The  Scotsmen  took  an  active 
part  in  the  shaping  of  all  the  documents  except 
the  Shorter  Catechism.  Henderson  quitted  London 
in  May  1646,  Baillie  in  December  following,  and 
Gillespie  in  May  1647.  It  was  not  till  August 
1647  that  a  committee  was  chosen  to  prepare  the 
Shorter  Catechism  ;  it  made  its  report  in  October. 
Rutherfurd  remained  till  November  1647,  but  he 
made  no  mark  on  the  book.  The  Confession  of 
Faith  was  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  in  its 
entirety  on  27th  August  1647  as  being  '  most 
agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God  and  in  nothing 
contrary  to  the'  received  doctrine,  worship,  dis- 
cipline and  government  of  this  kirk.'  The  Scottish 
Parliament  endorsed  it  on  7th  February  1649. 
The  Catechisms  also  received  ecclesiastical  and 
civil  sanction  in  Scotland,  the  Assembly  adopting 
the  Larger  on  20th  July  1648,  and  the  Shorter 
eight  days  later  ;   Parliament  approving  of  both  on 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     315 

7th  February  1649.  When  presbyterian  govern- 
ment was  established  in  1690  the  Confession  was 
made  statute  law,  but  no  mention  was  made  of  the 
Catechisms.  In  England  the  fate  of  the  Confession 
was  necessarily  altogether  different.  It  lacked  the 
stamp  of  parliamentary  authority.  It  is  plain  too 
that  its  English  authors  never  intended  to  accept 
the  Confession  as  a  document  for  subscription. 
Their  experience  had  taught  them  to  fight  shy  of 
binding  it  on  the  conscience  of  men. 

Theologians  say  that  the  Confession  is  a  great 
success  as  a  statement  of  the  whole  Calvinistic 
scheme  of  doctrine.  Its  sharpened  logical  state- 
ments, fuller  and  harder  than  the  earlier  reformed 
creeds,  bear  the  mark  of  the  theological  conflicts 
which  had  recently  taken  place ;  but  our  later 
age,  which  seeks  a  far  simpler  creed,  can  only 
wonder  that  this  great  body  of  divinity  should  have 
been  put  into  a  public  Confession  of  Faith,  still 
more  that  it  should  have  been  imposed  on  men  as 
a  creed.  '  Let  us  not  put  disputes  and  scholastic 
tilings  into  a  confession  of  faith,'  said  Reynolds 
with  rare  wisdom,  and  it  would  have  been  well  if 
his  colleagues  had  attended  to  his  warning.  But 
they  had  no  lack  of  confidence  in  their  power  to 
grasp  and  define  the  greatest  mysteries.  Of  one 
of  them.  Dr.  VVallis,  an  eminent  Cambridge  mathe- 
matician, afterwards  one  of  the  founders  of  the 
Royal  Society,  it  is  said  he  found  nothing  mysterious 
in  the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  But  the  West- 
minster divines  had  their  moments  of  inspiration 
too.  They  seized  and  set  forth  for  the  first  time 
in  a  confession  of  faith  the  true  ground  and  principle 
of  religious  liberty,  '  God  alone  is  lord  of  the 
conscience,'  but  the  seventeenth  century  found  it 


346     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

hard  to  breathe  long  in  so  high  an  altitude.  Again, 
in  dealing  with  the  communion  of  saints  they  are 
on  sure  and  lofty  ground,  urging  the  duty  of 
cherishing  and  promoting  harmony  and  union  with 
all  Christians  of  whatever  part  of  the  visible  Church. 
The  most  immediately  and  widely  popular  part 
of  their  work  was  the  Shorter  Catechism.  It  came 
into  use  in  England  at  once  not  only  among  pres- 
byterians  but  with  independents,  baptists  and 
others.  And  it  soon  began  to  enjoy  a  similar 
popularity  in  America.  But  it  was  in  Scotland 
that  it  found  the  most  hospitable  reception.  In- 
tended as  a  subsidiary  part  of  the  great  scheme, 
it  proved  the  most  fruitful  bit  of  the  Assembly's 
work  ;  it  became  for  generations  the  real  creed 
of  Scotland  as  far  as  the  bulk  of  the  people  were 
concerned.  The  fact  that  its  first  question  '  is 
asked  of  us  all,  from  the  peer  to  the  plough-boy, 
binds  us  more  nearly  together '  :  so  Stevenson 
puts  it  with  a  deft  touch  of  over-colouring  in  the 
picture.  It  is  often  said  to  be  typical  of  Scotland, 
but  it  was  largely  the  work  of  Dr.  Wallis,  secretary 
of  the  committee  which  produced  it.^  The  com- 
mittee's work,  it  is  true,  contained  some  of  the 
materials  of  a  catechism  partially  prepared  in  1646 
when  the  Scotsmen  were  present.  The  Scots  were 
its  first  critics  :  the  General  Assembly,  says  Baillie, 
*  thought  the  Shorter  too  long  and  too  high  for 
our  common  people  and  children.'  Fortunately 
they  let  it  stand.  There  was  something  arresting 
in  the  first  question,  '  striking  at  the  very  roots 
of  life  with  "  What  is  the  chief  end  of  man  ?  " 
and  answering  nobly  if  obscurely,  "  To  glorify 
God  and  enjoy  Him  for  ever."     That  opened  to  us 

1  Mitchell^  The  Westminster  Assembly,  p.  431. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     347 

Scots  a  great  field  of  speculation.'  The  thought 
of  *  the  glory  of  God  '  so  central  in  Calvinism  laid 
hold  of  the  minds  of  Scotsmen.  To  them  it  was 
no  shallow  phrase  suggesting  self-glorification  and 
display,  it  meant  something  far  more  profound. 
*  The  older  I  grow,'  said  Carlyle  the  aged,  *  the 
more  comes  back  to  me  the  first  sentence  in  the 
catechism  I  learned  when  a  child,  and  the  fuller 
and  deeper  the  meaning  becomes.'  There  was  in 
it  a  greater  field  of  speculation  than  they  supposed. 
Philosophy  has  discovered  to-day  that  the  old 
theological  phrase  expressed  the  highest  and  richest 
truth,  *  the  revelation  in  and  to  finite  spirits  of  the 
infinite  riches  of  the  divine  life.'  And  this  '  is 
the  philosophical  meaning  of  the  saying  that  God 
is  Love.'  ^ 

In  America  the  Westminster  Standards  were 
planted  long  before  the  Declaration  of  In- 
dependence. Singularly  enough  the  first  Church 
there  to  adopt  the  Confession  of  Faith  was  not  a 
Presbyterian  but  an  Independent  Church.  The 
Congregational  Synod  of  Cambridge  in  the  colony 
of  Massachusetts  adopted  it  *  for  substance  of 
doctrine  '  in  1648,  the  very  year  after  its  issue  in 
England.  The  Presbyterian  Churches  adopted  it 
at  first  without  alteration,  the  oldest  being  the 
Presbytery  of  Philadelphia,  organised  in  1706. 
After  the  revolutionary  war  changes  were  made  in 
the  chapters  dealing  with  the  relation  of  Church 
and  State.  The  large  Presbyterian  Church  of  the 
United  States  accepts  the  Confession  as  containing 
the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  Scripture,  but 
has  altered  the  statements  in  regard  to  the  powei-s 
of    the   civil   magistrate   so   as   to    recognise    the 

«  Priagle-Fattison,  The  Idea  o/Go«/ (Glfford  Lecturet),  pp.  308-9. 


348     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

principle  of  religious  liberty  and  equality  of  all 
denominations  before  the  law.  Other  Presbyterian 
Churches  in  the  United  States  have  also  adopted  it 
with  similar  modifications.  It  has  been  adopted 
by  the  Presbyterian  Church  of  Canada,  Natal, 
Tasmania,  Ceylon ;  by  the  Presbyterian  Church 
in  Ireland,  Eastern  Australia,  New  South  Wales, 
Queensland,  South  Australia,  Victoria,  West 
Australia,  New  Zealand,  Otago  and  Southland,  and 
by  other  Churches.  The  Churches  of  Australasia 
have  made  similar  changes  to  those  of  the  United 
States  in  regard  to  the  question  of  Church  and 
State. 

When  we  remember  the  influential  and  admirable 
part  which  Presbjrterians  have  played  in  the  life 
of  America  and  in  that  of  the  sister  nations  of  the 
British  Empire  beyond  the  seas,  and  how  deep  a 
mark  Westminster  theology  has  left  on  their 
character,  we  shall  be  ready  to  confess  that  those 
far-off  divines  of  the  seventeenth  century,  despite 
their  limitations  and  mistakes,  have  made  a  worthy 
and  enduring  contribution  to  the  best  civilisation 
of  the  modern  world. ^ 

There  remains  one  other  part  of  the  labours  of 
the  Westminster  Assembly,  an  interesting  and 
important  part  of  the  intended  Uniformity.  The 
Scottish  reformers,  in  common  with  those  of  other 
Churches,  gave  prominence  to  congregational 
psalmody  and  made  it  a  regular  portion  of  public 
worship.  They  adopted  the  metrical  version  of 
the  psalms  published  in  England  in  1563  by 
Sternhold  and  Hopkins,  substituting  different 
versions  of  a  considerable  number  of  psalms  written 
by  various  authors.     In  1564  the  use  of  this  psalm 

*  History  of  Creed,»  cknd  Con/estiong  of  Faiths  Prof.  W.  A.  Curtis,  p.  276, 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     340 

book  was  ordered  by  the  Assembly.  King  James 
having  entrusted  a  body  ol*  divines  with  a  revision 
of  the  EngHsh  Bible  took  in  hand  himself  to 
produce  a  new  version  of  the  psalms  in  metre 
for  general  use.  Several  were  completed  before 
his  death,  and  the  work  was  left  in  the  hands  of 
Sir  William  Alexander  of  Menstric,  afterwards 
Earl  of  Stirling,  a  distinguished  poet  of  the  day, 
who  was  probably  the  true  author  of  the  version. 
In  1631  the  work  was  published  under  the  name 
of  King  James,  *  the  Psalms  of  King  David,  trans- 
lated by  King  James.'  His  son  Charles  in  1634 
instructed  the  Privy  Council  that  no  other  version 
was  to  be  used  in  Scotland,  and  in  1636  it  was 
republished  and  attached  to  the  Service  Book  of 
1637,  considerably  altered  from  the  edition  of  1631. 
The  opposition  to  the  Service  Book  was  fatal  also 
to  this  version  of  the  psalms,  and  it  never  super- 
seded the  earlier  version  of  1564,  which  continued 
in  use  until  1650.  Next  came  our  present  version 
of  the  psalms,  first  published  in  1643.  It  is  a 
singular  fact  that  Scotland  owes  it  to  an  English- 
man and  to  a  resolution  of  the  House  of  Commons. 
The  writer  was  Francis  Rouse,  a  Cornishman  of 
learning  and  distinction,  who  sat  in  the  Long 
Parliament  and  was  also  one  of  the  lay  members 
of  the  Westminster  Assembly.  He  was  later  one 
of  Cromwell's  privy  councillors,  and  died  in  1658. 

There  was  a  general  desire  at  the  time  for  a  new 
metrical  version  of  the  psalms,  several  were  in 
fact  published,  but  Rouse's  was  preferred  by  the 
Commons,  who  ordered  it  to  be  published  in  1643. 
On  20th  November  of  that  year  they  ordered  that 
the  Assembly  '  be  desired  to  give  their  advice 
whether  it  may  not  be  useful  and  profitable  to  the 


350  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

Church  that  the  Psalms  set  forth  by  Mr.  Rouse  be 
permitted  to  be  pubHcly  sung.'     Two  days  later 
the  Assembly  referred  Rouse's  version  to  its  three 
committees  for  revision.     Great  pains  were  spent 
on  correcting  and  amending,  and  two  years  later, 
in   November    1645,    the   Commons    ordered   that 
'  the  Book  of  Psalms  set  forth  by  Mr.  Rouse  and 
perused  by  the  Assembly  of  Divines  be  forthwith 
printed.'      Rouse's    revised    version    appeared    in 
1646.     Thereafter  it  was  sent  down  to  Scotland  in 
February  1647  by  the  commissioners  in  London, 
who  said,  '  One  psalm  book  in  the  three  kingdoms 
will  be  a  considerable  part  of  Uniformity  if  it  can 
be  fully  agreed  upon  both  there  and  here,  and  we 
believe   it   is   generally   acknowledged   there   is   a 
necessity   of  some   change,  there   being   so  many 
just  exceptions  against  the  old  and  usual  para- 
phrase.    And  we  humbly  conceive  there  will  be  as 
little  controversy  that  this  which   we  now  send 
you,  as  it  hath  come  through  the  hands  of  more 
examiners,  so  it  will  be  found  as  near  the  original 
as  any  paraphrase  in  metre  can  readily  be,  and 
much  nearer  than  other  works  of  that  kind,  which 
is  a  good  compensation  to  make  up  the  want  of 
that  poetical  liberty  and  sweet  pleasant  running 
which  some  desire.'     The  book  was  again  subjected 
to  much  examination  in  Scotland.     It  was  at  once 
sent    to    presbyteries,    and    in    August    1647    the 
Assembly    appointed    four    members    to    examine 
the  psalms  and,  if  they  thought  fit,  to  correct  them, 
utilising   for  that   purpose   the   suggestions   from 
presbyteries,  and  also  the  metrical  versions  which 
had  been  made  by  Sir  William  Mure  of  Rowallan 
and  Zachary  Boyd,  one  of  the  Glasgow  ministers. 
For  two  years  more  the  work  of  revision  went  on. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     351 

passing  through  the  hands  of  presbyteries,  synods, 
and  General  Assembly.  Finally  the  Assembly  of 
1649  authorised  its  Commission  to  complete  the 
task  by  publishing  the  psalms  for  public  use. 
This  they  did  in  1650  by  appointing  them  to  be 
the  only  paraphrase  of  the  psalms  of  David  to  be 
sung  in  the  kirk  of  Scotland  after  1st  May  1650. 
It  has  many  imperfections,  but  it  has  all  the  merits 
claimed  for  it  by  the  poet  Beattie  :  '  In  this  version 
there  is  a  manly  though  severe  simplicity  without  any 
affected  refinement,  and  there  are  many  passages 
so  beautiful  as  to  stand  in  need  of  no  emendation.'  ^ 
Its  latest  critic,  Mr.  Hepburn  Millar,  agrees  that 
'  it  contains  many  passages  of  artless  and  simple 
beauty,  and  some  of  unostentatious  dignity.'  And 
for  us  it  wears  an  added  charm,  '  it  is  hallowed  by 
the  associations  of  two  centuries  and  a  half.'  ^ 

5.    UXBRIDGE  :     A    ROUND   TABLE    CONFERENCE 

The  second  battle  of  Newbury  in  October  1644, 
where  a  parliamentary  victory  was  thrown  away 
by  refusal  to  follow  it  up,  was  the  turning  point  in 
the  military  history  of  the  war.  It  was  then  that 
Cromwell  made  up  his  mind  that  the  military 
machine  must  be  overhauled,  and  proceeded  to 
unfold  his  scheme  of  a  New  Model  army.  But 
the  quarrel  which  then  broke  out  in  the  party  was 
political  as  well  as  military.  The  militaiy  chiefs 
Manchester  and  Essex  were,  it  is  true,  indifferent 
commanders,  but  more  than  that,  they  were 
presbyterian  and  royalist  in  sympathy,  they  had 
no  wish  to  beat  the  king  to  his  knees,  they  preferred 
settling  with  him  by  negotiation  to  defeating  him 

'  -4  Letter  on  the  improxtment  of  Psalmody  in  Gotland,  p.  10. 
'  A  Literary  History  of  Scotland,  p.  241. 


S52     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

by  the  sword.  The  vigorous  and  successful  soldiers 
were  most  of  them  among  the  independents  or 
other  sectaries,  and  they  were  the  men  who  were 
for  fighting  it  out  in  dead  earnest.  There  was, 
in  fact,  a  peace  party  and  a  war  party.  The  peace 
party  was  for  the  time  the  more  influential ;  it  had 
with  it  the  House  of  Lords  and  the  Scots,  it  voiced 
the  feeling  of  war  weariness  which  weighed  down 
a  people  groaning  under  two  years  of  suffering  and 
misery  in  an  unnatural  strife.  The  party  was 
stirred  into  motion  by  the  activity  of  Cromwell 
with  his  ominous  schemes  for  driving  the  politicians 
out  of  the  army,  and  turning  it  as  they  thought 
into  an  engine  of  revolution.  Their  fear  was  that 
if  the  war  went  on  power  would  fall  more  and  more 
into  his  hands  and  the  hands  of  those  capable 
and  dangerous  men  who  looked  to  him  as  leader. 
The  alarm  they  felt  took  shape  in  the  attempt 
made  by  the  Scots  in  December  1644  to  get  rid  of 
Cromwell  by  impeachment.  It  took  shape  also 
in  attempts  to  which  Parliament,  not  without 
difficulty,  gave  its  consent  to  enter  on  peace  negotia- 
tions with  the  king,  attempts  which  resulted  in  the 
famous  conference  known  as  the  treaty  of  Uxbridge 
in  January  and  February  of  1645.  On  the  king's 
side  also  there  was  a  party  which  earnestly  desired 
peace.  The  war  had  brought  poverty  and  distress 
on  many  of  the  gentry  who  adhered  to  his  cause, 
and  the  Oxford  Parliament  let  its  voice  be  heard 
so  distinctly  that  Charles  had  to  yield.  He  was 
well  aware  of  the  dissensions,  military,  political  and 
religious  among  his  opponents,  and  he  had  some 
hopes  of  securing  peace  terms  from  the  weakness 
of  the  foe. 

Elaborate  preparations  were  made.     The  little 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     353 

town  of  Ux bridge  near  the  western  boundaty  of 
Middlesex  was  chosen  as  tlie  place  of  meeting,  there 
were  to  be  sixteen  commissioners  for  the  Parhament 
and  as  many  for  the  king,  and  the  Scottish  Estates 
were  separately  represented.  The  parliamentary 
and  Scots  commissioners  with  their  retinue  were 
not  to  exceed  in  all  108  persons  ;  on  the  king's 
side  the  number  was  the  same.  On  the  29th 
of  January  both  parties  arrived  and  the  small 
town  could  hardly  contain  them.  Those  of  the 
Parliament  and  their  retinue  filled  the  north  side, 
the  king's  party  the  south  ;  the  best  inn  on  the 
one  side  and  the  best  inn  on  the  other  were  the 
respective  headquarters.  '  The  town  was  so  ex- 
ceeding full  of  company  that  it  was  hard  to  get  any 
quarter  except  for  the  commissioners  and  their 
retinue,  and  some  of  the  commissioners  were 
forced  to  lie  two  of  them  in  a  chamber  together 
in  field  beds  only  upon  a  quilt,  in  that  cold  weather 
not  coming  into  a  bed  during  all  the  Treaty.'  ^ 
Tlie  largest  house  in  the  town  was  chosen  as  the 
meeting-place  :  *  the  foreway  into  the  house  was 
appointed  for  the  king's  commissioners  to  come  in 
at,  and  the  back  way  for  the  Parliament's  com- 
missioners ;  in  the  middle  of  the  house  was  a  fair 
great  chamber,  where  they  caused  a  large  table  to 
be  made,'  and  round  this  table  the  two  parties 
ranged  themselves.  It  had  been  settled  that  the 
three  topics  to  be  discussed  were  to  be  Religion, 
the  Militia,  and  Ireland,  to  be  taken  in  the  order 
stated,  twenty  days  to  be  allotted  to  each.  The 
conference  was  primarily  the  work  of  the  Scots 
and  their  English  sympathisers,  it  was  a  supreme 
effort  on  their  part  to  l)ring  about  a  presbyterian 

>  Whitelocke's  JJemoriaU  (ed.  1682),  p.  122. 

Z 


354     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

settlement :  if  that  were  secured  they  were  disposed 
to  help  the  king  on  the  other  matters.     It  followed 
that  Henderson  must  be  their  foremost  champion 
at    Uxbridge.     That    position    was    none    of    his 
seeking,  but  he  had  no  choice.     The  correspondence 
of  the  Scots  commissioners  in  London  with  the 
Committee   of  Estates  at   Edinburgh   shows  how 
indispensable   in   the   opinion   of  his   countrymen 
was  this  man  for  the  work,  yet  how  modestly  he 
himself  shrank  from  the  honour  and  responsibility 
they   sought   to    thrust   upon   him.      '  Foreseeing 
the  business  of  the  Treaty  to  be  of  such  importance 
and  so  full  of  difficulties  '  the  commissioners  '  have 
taken  along  with  them  Mr.  Alex.  Henderson.  .  .  . 
Found  Mr.  Henderson  "  very  averse  "  and  anxious 
to  attend  the  Assembly.  .  .  .  Yet  having  repre- 
sented to  him  how  prejudicial  his  absence  would 
be  to  the  ends  for  which  he  was  sent  into  this 
kingdom  we  at  length  persuaded  him  to  go  along 
with    us.'  ^     The    General    Assembly    meeting    in 
Edinburgh,  in  January  1645,  passed  an  Act  specially 
authorising  him  to  go  to  Uxbridge,  and  the  appoint- 
ment of  commissioners  was  made  expressly  '  to- 
gether with  Master  Alexander  Henderson  upon  the 
propositions  concerning  religion.'     The  three  pro- 
positions,   as   they   were   called,    were   the   terms 
which  the  parliamentary  commissioners  were  in- 
structed to   offer  the   king.     Under  the   head   of 
religion  the  king  was  to  sign  and  swear  the  Solemn 
League  and  Covenant  and  to  agree  that  all  subjects 
were  to  take  the  Covenant  under  penalties  fixed 
by  Parliament ;  to  consent  to  the  abolishing  of  the 
episcopal  hierarchy  and  the  Prayer  Book  from  the 

*  Correspondence  of  the    Scots   Commissioners    in    London    (1644-46), 
Rozburghe  Club,  p.  67-8. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     355 

Church  of  England  and  of  Ireland  ;  reformation 
of  religion  according  to  the  Covenant  was  to  be 
settled  by  Parliament,  the  Directory  taking  the 
place  of  the  Prayer  Book  ;  the  Ordinance  for  the 
Westminster  Assembly  was  to  be  confirmed  by 
Parliament.  Under  the  second  head  the  militia 
was  to  be  permanently  controlled  by  commissioners 
named  by  Parliament  with  a  certain  number  of 
Scottish  commissioners,  the  Scottish  militia  to  be 
similarly  in  the  hands  of  Scottish  and  English 
commissioners.  Under  the  third  head  the  Irish 
Cessation  was  to  be  made  void  by  Act  of  Parliament, 
and  the  war  in  Ireland  was  to  be  carried  on  by  the 
English  Parliament  without  the  king's  interference. 
The  discussion  began  on  1st  February  with  the 
Church  question.  Dr.  Stewart,  an  episcopal  divine, 
argued  on  the  one  side,  Henderson  on  the  other. 
A  modern  writer  makes  a  high  claim  for  Henderson, 
but  one  which  does  not  go  beyond  the  facts  when  he 
says  that '  In  the  history  of  Great  Britain  no  Scottish 
ecclesiastic  has  occupied  so  august  a  position,  and 
the  fact  that  Henderson  occupied  it,  implying  as 
it  does  the  entire  confidence  of  his  own  countrymen, 
and  the  trust  of  that  immense  multitude  of  tiie 
nol)ility  and  people  of  England  which  had  risen  up 
against  the  king,  proves  him  to  have  been  no 
ordinary  man.'  *  The  line  he  adopted  showed  both 
skill  and  discretion.  His  argument,  as  reported 
by  Clarendon,  waived  the  question  of  the  lawfulness 
of  episcopacy  :  recent  events  had  shown  that  at 
least  it  was  inexpedient,  the  Parliaments  of  England 
and  Scotland  had  both  found  tiiat  it  had  produced 
great  mischiefs  to  the  State,  it  had  led  to  war 
between  Scotland  and  England,  and  now  to  civil 

'  Bsyae,  Cki^  Actors  in  Ikt  I'uritan  Htvolution,  y.  467. 


356     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

war  in  England,  it  was  plain  this  inconvenient  and 
mischievous  government  of  the  Church  must  be 
changed  if  the  State  itself  was  to  be  preserved  ;  the 
king  ought  to  consent  to  this  in  the  interest  of 
both  kingdoms,  and  the  fact  that  he  had  already 
consented  to  it  in  Scotland  showed  that  he  did  not 
believe  that  episcopacy  was  necessary  for  the  support 
of  the  Christian  religion. 

Yet  it  is  hard  to  see  how  the  presbyterian  party 
cotdd  persuade  themselves  that  the  king  would 
accept  their  terms.  Charles  had  an  infinite 
capacity  for  intrigue  even  when  his  affairs  were 
desperate,  and  his  cause  was  by  no  means  desperate 
in  the  beginning  of  1645.  His  instructions  to  his 
commissioners  show  he  had  no  thought  of  yielding 
an  inch.  There  was  to  be  no  concession  on  the  point 
of  bishops,  he  was  particularly  bound  by  the  oath 
he  took  at  his  coronation  not  to  alter  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  from  what  he  found  it.  He 
reported  to  the  queen  that  it  was  '  the  unreasonable 
stubbornness  of  the  rebels  that  gave  daily  less  and 
less  hope  of  any  accommodation.'  The  only  sug- 
gestion that  occurred  to  the  king  by  way  of  sweeten- 
ing the  atmosphere  at  the  conference  table  was 
made  to  Nicholas,  his  secretary,  who  was  one  of 
his  commissioners  :  '  I  should  think  if  in  your 
private  discourses  with  the  London  commissioners 
you  would  put  them  in  mind  that  they  are  arrant 
rebels,  and  that  their  end  must  be  damnation,  ruin 
and  infamy  except  they  repented,  it  might  do  good 
.  .  .  the  more  of  you  that  speak  in  this  dialect  the 
better.'  ^  Each  side  stood  stiff  and  unyielding 
on  its  own  ground,  and  so  long  as  that  continued 
progress  was  impossible.     But  on  13th  February 

*  Evelyn's  Memoirs  (ed.  1827),  v.  p.  117. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     357 

came  the  great  surprise  of  the  conference.  Tlie 
king's  commissioners  tabled  new  proposals.  In 
the  matter  of  religion  they  were  willing  *  That 
freedom  be  left  to  all  persons  of  what  opinions 
soever  in  matters  of  ceremony,  and  that  all  the 
penalties  of  the  laws  and  customs  which  enjoin 
those  ceremonies  be  suspended.  That  the  bishop 
shall  exercise  no  act  of  jurisdiction  or  ordination 
without  the  consent  and  counsel  of  the  presbyters 
who  shall  be  chosen  by  the  clergy  of  each  diocese 
out  of  the  most  learned  and  gravest  ministers  of 
that  diocese.'  AU  other  abuses  in  the  exercise 
of  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  were  to  be  dealt  with 
by  Parliament.  Here  was  at  least  the  language 
of  compromise  ;  a  scheme  put  forward  for  the  first 
time  by  an  English  party  embodying  in  it  the 
principle  of  toleration— a  distinct  anticipation  of 
the  settlement  of  1689.  It  is  difficult  to  believe 
it  had  Charles's  cordial  approval,  but  in  any  event 
it  shows  the  strength  and  earnestness  of  the  peace 
party  on  his  side.  How  was  it  received  ?  Here 
is  the  answer  of  the  presbyterians.  *  It  is  a  new 
proposition  which  wholly  differs  from  ours,  is  in 
no  way  satisfactory  to  our  desires,  nor  con  it  ^^ 
with  that  reformation  to  which  both  kin^  i.  :..i. 
are  obliged  by  their  solemn  Covenant,  therefore 
we  can  give  no  other  answer  to  it,  but  must  insist 
to  desire  your  Lordships  that  the  bill  may  be 
passed  and  our  other  demands  concerning  religion 
granted.'  In  other  words,  it  was  met  by  a  blank 
no7i  pos^umus.  The  Covenant  tied  their  hands, 
it  prevented  them  from  even  considering  any 
other  proposal.  They  had  come  not  to  negotiate, 
not  to  discuss  terms  of  settlement,  but  simply 
to  present  their  terms  for  acceptance  as  they  stood. 


358     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

'  At  the  treaty  of  Uxbridge,'  wrote  George  Gillespie, 
'  the  propositions  for  religion  (of  which  the  con- 
firming of  the  Covenant  is  the  first  and  chiefest) 
were  acknowledged  to  be  of  such  excellency  and 
absolute  necessity  as  they  were  appointed  to  be 
treated  of  in  the  first  place,  and  that  no  peace  or 
agreement  should  be  till  they  were  first  agreed 
unto.'  *  This  was  the  weakness  of  the  covenanting 
position  in  face  of  the  situation  in  England.  It 
prevented  them  from  going  half  way,  or  any  part 
of  the  way  to  meet  independents  on  the  one  hand, 
or  episcopalians  on  the  other,  and  without  the 
support  of  one  or  the  other  their  policy  could  make 
no  real  headway  in  England.  It  was  not  without 
some  reason  that  the  king's  commissioners  pro- 
tested :  '  We  desire  you  to  consider  that  we  are 
now  in  a  treaty,  and  we  conceive  the  proper 
business  thereof  to  be  for  your  Lordships  to  give 
us  reasons  why  his  Majesty  should  consent  to  the 
propositions  made  by  you,  otherwise  it  would  be 
only  a  demand  on  your  Lordships'  part  and  no 
argument  of  Treaty  between  us.'  And  they  went 
on  :  '  Since  it  appears  that  the  utter  abolishing  of 
episcopacy  in  the  manner  proposed  is  visibly  in- 
convenient and  may  be  mischievous,  the  regulating 
of  episcopacy  being  most  consonant  to  the  primitive 
institution,  which  regulated  episcopacy  is  the  sum 
of  our  former  paper,  we  desire  your  Lordships 
to  consent  to  the  same.'  From  the  other  side  of 
the  table  things  looked  very  different.  On  18th 
February  the  Scots  commissioners  told  their  friends 
at  home  '  The  matters  of  religion  do  most  stick 
with  the  king  and  those  that  are  about  him,  and 
therein  we  find  the  commissioners  with  whom  we 

*  A  Treatise  of  Miscellany  Questions  (1649),  ch,  16. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     aso 

treat  most  adverse  to  grant  our  desires.'  ^  Wliat 
they  thouglit  of  the  EngHsli  proposals,  and  inci- 
dentally of  Henderson's  conduct,  appears  when  on 
14tli  March  they  wrote  :  '  We  found  His  Majesty's 
commissioners  most  averse  to  give  satisfaction 
in  the  matters  of  religion,  and  after  long  and 
serious  debate  amongst  ourselves  and  between 
the  divines  of  both  sides  (wherein  Mr.  Henderson's 
assistance  was  very  stedable  2),  we  could  receive 
no  answer  in  the  point  of  Church  government,  but 
that  they  would  condescend  to  a  regulated 
episcopacy,  which  is  no  other  than  what  the  Bishops 
are  obliged  unto  by  the  canons  of  this  Church  and 
the  laws  of  the  kingdom.  .  .  .  Concerning  our 
other  desires  for  enjoining  the  Covenant,  abolishing 
the  Service  Book,  and  establishing  the  Directory 
they  would  in  no  ways  grant  them.'  ^  Each  side 
seemed  to  expect  that  the  other  would  listen  to 
arguments  from  expediency  or  convenience — on 
which  there  was  much  to  be  said— yet  both  knew 
that  each  stood  on  the  high  ground  of  the  jus 
divinum  of  his  own  system,  which  rendered  all 
such  arguments  irrelevant  and  futile.  Conferences 
between  such  opponents  are  apt  to  leave  eacli 
wondering  at  the  others'  obstinacy  ;  sometimes  to 
lead  to  the  unexpected  result  expressed  in  this  case 
by  the  Marquis  of  Hertford,  who  blurted  out  that 
they  were  both  wrong,  '  for  my  part  I  think  neither 
the  one  nor  the  other  nor  any  other  government 
whatever  to  he  jure  divino.^ 

The   other  two   Propositions   proved,   as   might 
have   been   expected,   equally  unpalatable   to   the 

'  Correspondence  of  the  Scott  CommUtionen  (1G44-4G),  Koxburghe  Club, 
p.  60. 
'  Of  jfreat  value. 
'  Correspondence  qf  the  Scott  CommUtionertf  p.  02. 


360     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

king,  and  the  conference  ended  in  failure.  The 
independents  present  at  Uxbridge — ^the  most  pro- 
minent were  Vane  and  St.  John — seem  to  have 
played  a  subordinate  part.  They  must  have  hoped 
and  expected  that  the  negotiations  would  prove 
fruitless  :  a  coalition  between  the  other  two  parties 
would  augur  no  good  to  them.  They  were  not 
tempted  even  by  the  compromise  proposed,  their 
suspicion  and  distrust  of  Charles  were  probably  too 
deep  to  be  overcome  by  offers  of  even  a  limited 
toleration,  which  might  prove  in  his  hands  to  be 
largely  illusory. 

In  point  of  fact  the  course  of  the  negotiations 
had  the  immediate  effect  of  smoothing  the  passage 
of  the  New  Model  Ordinance  through  the  House  of 
Lords.  And  the  Scots  were  compelled,  however 
reluctantly,  to  make  common  cause  with  Cromwell 
and  his  party  in  prosecuting  the  war.  The  king 
too  was  well  pleased  to  see  an  end  to  the  conference, 
and  looked  forward  with  high  hopes  to  the  coming 
campaign.  He  had  been  waiting  for  tidings  of 
Montrose  for  some  time  :  on  19th  February  he 
wrote  to  the  queen  the  great  news  '  I  cannot  but 
tell  thee  that  even  now  I  have  received  certain 
intelligence  of  a  great  defeat  given  to  Argyle  by 
Montrose,  who  upon  surprise  totally  routed  those 
rebels,  killed  1500  upon  the  place.'  This  was  the 
astounding  victory  of  Inverlochy  at  the  foot  of 
Ben  Nevis.  The  battle  had  been  fought  on  the 
2nd  of  the  month,  and  Montrose  reported  to  Charles 
that  by  the  summer  he  expected  to  have  Scotland 
at  his  feet. 

The  king  had  some  cause  for  his  elation,  and  the 
Uxbridge  negotiations  were  broken  off  on  the 
22nd. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND      361 

6.    CHARLES    AND    HENDERSON  :    THE    NEWCASTLE 
DISCUSSION 

During  the  year  1645  Hcndei'son  continued  at 
his  post  in  the  Assembly  at  Westminster.  His 
labours  were  beginning  now  visibly  to  affect  his 
health.  He  had  taken  an  important  part  in  the 
work,  but  his  chief  anxieties  arose  from  the  cease- 
less opposition  of  the  Independents.  They  were  re- 
solved that  if  they  could  not  prevent  the  adoption 
of  presbyterian  government,  or  secure  for  them- 
selves the  liberty  they  claimed,  thc}^  would  join 
with  the  Erastians  to  put  the  new  Church  in  State 
fetters.  The  struggle  both  in  the  Assembly  and  in 
Parliament  went  on  with  varying  fortune.  In  the 
Assembly  the  friends  of  Church  autonomy  and 
divine  right  of  presbytery  were  generally  able  to 
carry  the  day,  but  when  the  battle  was  transferred 
to  Parliament  the  hostile  forces  were  enormously 
and  increasingly  powerful.  As  time  wore  on  it 
became  apparent  that  the  Scots  commissioner 
would  not  obtain  their  ends,  indeed  the  new  Church 
constitution  that  was  emerging  from  the  clash 
of  opinion  was  likely  to  prove  one  that  would 
satisfy  no  party.  Then  there  were  other  worries. 
The  inactivity  of  the  Scots  army  was  a  continual 
vexation.  The  supply  of  recruits  was  not  kept  up 
from  home,  the  English  Parliament  allowed  its 
pay  to  fall  into  arrears,  and  the  soldiery  had  to 
plunder  for  a  subsistence.  Meanwhile  the  condition 
of  Scotland  was  grievous  in  the  extreme,  smitten 
as  it  was  by  sword  and  pestilence.  Montrose 
marched  from  victory  to  victory,  and  depression 
settled  on  the  spirits  of  the  Covenanters  at  home 
and  of  their  countrymen  in  London.     Even  the 


362     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

crowning  defeat  of  Charles  at  Naseby  in  June 
1645  brought  them  only  a  chastened  joy.  It 
was  won  mainly  by  the  Independents,  and  did  not 
Cromwell  in  announcing  the  victory  '  desire  the 
House,'  says  the  horrified  Baillie,  '  not  to  discourage 
those  who  had  ventured  their  life  for  them  and  to 
come  out  expressly  with  their  much-desired  liberty 
of  conscience  ?  '  Henderson's  life  had  now  for 
years  past  been  one  of  unceasing  toil  and  anxious 
responsibility.  His  countrymen  told  him  he  could 
not  be  spared  from  London,  the  centre  of  affairs. 
At  the  close  of  the  Uxbridge  conference  he  had 
thought  of  crossing  to  Holland,  and  obtained  a 
passport  from  the  king  for  that  purpose.  The 
Protestant  Churches  on  the  Continent  were  always 
in  his  mind,  and  he  probably  meant  by  a  personal 
visit  to  enlist  their  active  support  for  the  cause. 
But  the  plan  had  to  be  dropped,  he  was  unable 
even  to  revisit  his  native  Scotland  either  in  1644 
or  '45  along  with  his  colleagues.  On  all  great 
public  occasions  he  took  the  position  of  leading 
ecclesiastic.  At  the  thanksgiving  for  Marston  Moor 
on  18th  July  1644  he  preached  before  the  Lords 
and  Commons,  and  performed  similar  service  at 
other  notable  gatherings.  Under  the  long  strain 
of  work,  anxiety  and  disappointment  his  health, 
never  robust,  gave  way.  In  June  1645  an  ominous 
illness  laid  him  aside  ;  he  took  the  Ipswich  waters, 
found  some  relief  and  returned,  still  enfeebled,  to 
his  post. 

If  the  cause  of  covenanted  Uniformity  was 
pursuing  in  1645  a  chequered  career,  the  royalist 
cause  met  with  complete  and  irretrievable  disaster. 
The  campaign  from  which  so  much  had  been 
hoped  proved  a  total  failure  :    Naseby,   at  mid- 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     363 

summer,  was  decisive  in  England ;  in  the  autumn 
Montrose  was  overwhelmed  in  Scotland  with  ex- 
tinction as  sudden  and  complete  as  his  rise  had  been 
sudden  and  brilliant.     The  fire  flickered  out  as  one 
fortified  place  after  another  fell  before  the  cannon 
of  Fairfax  or  Cromwell  during  the  winter,  and  in 
the  early  part  of  1646  it  became  certain  that  the 
fall  of  Oxford,  the  king's  headquarters  and  last 
remaining  stronghold,  was  a  matter  of  only  a  short 
time.     The   urgent  question  now  was — What  was 
the  king  to  do  ?     To  most  men  the  answer,  however 
painful,   would  have  been  at  least  clear  enough. 
Charles  had  appealed  to  the  sword  to  decide  the 
quarrel  between  him  and  his  Parliament ;    he  had 
waged  war  for  three  years,  the  best  blood  of  England 
had  been  shed  in  his  defence,  his  resources  were 
exhausted,  he  was  beaten.     His  plain  duty  was  to 
accept  the  inevitable  and  make  the  best  terms  he 
could  with  the  victors.     The  whole  country  longed 
for  peace  ;    cavaliers,   even  bishops,   advised   him 
to  accept  what  he  could  not  prevent.     But  Charles 
was  not  like  other  men.     He  did  not  see  that  he 
must  accept  the  logic  of  battle.     He  proposed  to 
start  negotiations  with  his  enemies  exactly  as  if 
no  war  had  taken  place,  and  he  seemed  to  expect 
they    would    agree    to    that.     His    most    hopeless 
defect  was  that  he  would  not,  or  could  not,  see  facts 
as  they  really  were,  and  the  failing  was  never  so 
apparent  as  at  this  moment.     With  eommonsensc 
and  sincerity  on  his  part  there  was  no  reason  why 
the   questions   in   dispute   between   him   and   the 
Parliament  might  not  have  been  settled.     Yet  this 
man    *  of  great    parts    and   great    understanding,* 
as  Cromwell   described   him,   of  courage,   dignity, 
taste,  a  devoted  husband  and  affectionate  father, 


364     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

a  lover  of  good  literature  and  good  pictures,  was 
tragically  unequal  to  his  fate.  He  entered  on  a 
path  which  led  to  his  own  destruction.  He  pro- 
fessed to  negotiate  with  presbyterians  and  with 
independents,  yet  his  purpose  was  not  to  come 
to  terms  with  either,  but  to  raise  distractions 
between  them  so  that  they  might  destroy  each 
other,  or  to  gain  time  for  maturing  plots  with 
foreign  powers  to  invade  England  on  his  behalf  and 
destroy  them  both.  The  real  Charles  is  disclosed 
in  his  secret  correspondence  with  the  queen,  carried 
on  while  he  was  intriguing  with  one  party  or 
another,  and  the  interest  lies  not  in  the  proposals 
he  made — ^these  were  purposely  vague  and  am- 
biguous— but  in  the  revelation  of  the  mind  and 
character  of  this  extraordinary  man. 

In  December  1645  he  tried  to  open  negotiations 
with  Parliament  by  offering  to  send  '  such  pro- 
positions as  his  Majesty  is  confident  will  be  the 
foundation  of  a  happy  and  well-grounded  peace,' 
then  he  suggested  coming  personally  to  West- 
minster. His  real  purpose  he  thus  explains  to 
the  queen.  '  As  to  the  fruits  which  I  expected 
by  my  treaty  at  London.  Knowing  assuredly  the 
great  animosity  which  is  betwixt  the  Independents 
and  Presbyterians  I  had  great  reason  to  hope  that 
one  of  the  factions  would  so  address  themselves  to 
me  that  I  might  without  great  difficulty  obtain 
my  so  just  ends.  ...  I  might  have  found  means 
to  have  put  distractions  amongst  them  though  I 
had  found  none.'  ^  At  the  same  time  he  was  busy 
with  the  threads  of  a  private  intrigue  with  the 
Scots.  He  was  to  come  to  them  assured  he  could 
rely  on  their  loyal  devotion  to  their  monarch.     Of 

1  Bruce,  Charles  L  in  1646,  p.  11. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     365 

course  it  would  be  necessary  to  make,  or  appear  to 
make,  terms  with  them.  *  For  the  Scots  I  promise 
thee  to  employ  all  possible  pains  and  industry  to 
agree  with  them.'  He  could  not  give  up  the 
Church  of  England,  but  still  '  as  for  Church  business 
I  hope  to  manage  it  so  as  not  to  give  them  distaste 
and  yet  do  nothing  against  my  conscience.'  At 
this  very  time  he  is  at  pains  to  tell  the  queen  his 
true  sentiments  about  the  presbyterianism  with 
wliich  he  was  to  come  to  terms.  '  The  nature 
of  Presbyterian  government  is  to  steal  or  force  the 
crown  from  the  king's  head.'  ^  '  For  the  Presby- 
terian government  I  hold  it  absolutely  unlawful, 
one  chief  (among  many)  argument  being  that  it 
never  came  into  any  country  but  by  rebellion.'  ^ 

While  Charles  imagined  that  in  this  way  he  was 
deluding  the  parties  at  home  during  the  early 
months  of  1646  he  was  deep  in  wild  cat  schemes 
for  the  invasion  of  England.  One  of  his  plans 
was  that  a  French  force  of  5000  was  to  land  near 
Hastings,  while  he  himself  with  2000  horse  was  to 
march  into  Kent.  He  had  another  and  more 
grandiose  scheme  ;  it  was  to  be  carried  out  with  the 
aid  of  the  pope  and  the  English  Roman  Catholics. 
Peace  was  to  be  made  witii  the  Irish  Catholics  ; 
10,000  Irisli  thus  released  were  to  be  brought  across 
to  Chester,  and  a  like  body  to  South  Wales.  At 
the  same  time  a  foreign  army  of  0000  was  to  be 
landed  at  Lynn.  The  price  to  be  paid  was  a  liberal 
one ;  he  was  to  repeal  the  penal  laws  against 
Roman  Catholics  in  England  and  Ireland.  *  By 
this  means,'  he  wrote,  *  I  shall  hope  to  suppress  the 
Presbyterian  and  Independent  factions  and  also 
preserve  the  Church  of  England  and  my  crown  from 

'  Bruce,  Ckarkt  I.  in  104C,  p.  22.  '  Jhid.,  p.  27. 


366     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

utter  ruin.'  ^  An  accident  brought  this  plot  to 
Hght,  and  its  discovery  left  Charles  as  bankrupt 
in  diplomacy  as  he  was  helpless  in  arms. 

Oxford  was  no  longer  safe,  and  on  5th  May  he 
betook  himself  to  the  Scots  army  at  Newark, 
which  on  the  13th  retired  north  to  Newcastle. 
This  step,  the  only  one  open  to  him  that  offered 
any  safety,  came  nearer  accomplishing  his  ends 
than  all  his  elaborate  intrigues.  In  a  moment  it 
profoundly  changed  the  situation.  The  inde- 
pendents saw  in  it  a  design  of  the  Scots  with  their 
king  and  probably  foreign  nations  to  betray 
England.  They  knew  that  France  had  sent 
Montreuil,  a  diplomatist,  to  negotiate  on  Charles's 
behalf,  and  that  he  had  been  working  for  months 
to  bring  the  king  and  the  Scots  together.  They 
suspected  that  a  presbyterian  treaty  had  now  been 
arranged,  and  the  king  at  the  ripe  moment  had  put 
himself  at  the  head  of  the  movement.  Many  things 
pointed  in  the  same  direction.  Charles  was  writing 
temporising  letters  from  the  Scottish  camp  to  the 
Houses  of  Parliament  and  to  the  City  fathers  ;  in 
the  City  there  was  an  outburst  of  presbyterian 
fervour  and  petitions  to  Parliament  in  favour  of 
Presbyterian  Uniformity  and  No  Toleration.  The 
atmosphere  was  charged  with  danger.  On  19th 
May  the  Commons  passed  a  blunt  resolution,  under 
the  influence  of  the  anti-Scottish  party,  that  there 
was  no  further  use  for  the  Scots  army  within  the 
kingdom  of  England.  The  Scots  were  willing  to 
give  Charles  their  help,  but  always  on  the  condition 
that  he  accepted  the  Covenant.  Charles  was  an 
embarrassing  visitor  on  their  hands.  They  made 
it  plain  to  him  as  soon  as  he  appeared  among  them 

>  Bruce,  Charles  L  in  1646,  p.  26. 


THE  RF.VOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     367 

that  they  adhered  to  their  Covenant  and  to  their 
Enghsh  allies,  and  they  urged  him  to  agree  to  the 
settling  of  presbyterian  government  in  England. 
It  was  the  burden  of  his  lettei-s  to  the  queen  that 
he  was  pressed  and  baited  to  do  this.  Charles 
himself  was  as  far  as  ever  from  being  cured  of  his 
insane  optimism.  He  was  still  living  in  a  world  far 
removed  from  the  realities  of  life.  Of  this  there 
could  be  no  more  convincing  illustration  than  the 
fact  that  he  imagined  the  Scottish  leaders  were 
ready  in  the  spring  of  1646  to  make  common  cause 
with  Montrose  in  helping  him  against  the  English. 
At  Newcastle  he  still  vaguely  believed  he  would 
escape  the  pressure  of  the  Scots  either  by  a  foreign 
invasion — '  the  gathering  of  a  storm  from  abroad  * — 
or  by  a  revolution  at  home.  On  28th  May  he  was 
again  urging  on  the  queen  the  old  fatal  plan  '  to 
invite  the  pope  and  the  other  Roman  Catholics  to 
help  me  for  the  restitution  of  episcopacy  upon 
condition  of  giving  them  free  liberty  of  conscience 
and  convenient  places  for  their  devotions.'  She 
was  to  acquaint  Mazarin  with  the  scheme  and  ask 
the  assistance  of  France.  As  late  as  30th  November 
he  assured  the  queen,  '  I  am  most  confident  that 
within  a  very  small  time  I  shall  be  recalled  with 
much  honour.' 

It  was  therefore  Charles's  policy  to  protract 
negotiations  and  discussions  as  long  as  possible. 
Parliament  was  preparing  its  Propositions  to  be 
submitted  to  him,  but  meanwhile  the  Scottish 
leaders  who  had  gathered  at  Newcastle — Loudoun, 
Argyll  and  others — were  very  urgent  that  he  should 
come  to  terms  with  them.  There  was  one  Scotsman 
for  whom  Charles  had  a  liking  more  than  for  any 
of  them  ;   him  he  would  be  glad  to  see  now  to  talk 


368     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

over  his  difficulties  with  him.  On  25th  May 
Montreuil  wrote  to  Cardinal  Mazarin  from  New- 
castle :  '  The  king  was  no  sooner  among  the  Scots 
than  they  pressed  upon  him  the  question  of  religion. 
.  .  .  He  has  told  them  he  would  be  glad  to  have 
Henderson  one  of  their  famous  clergymen  near  him, 
and  that  he  would  contribute  his  part  and  do  all 
that  depended  on  him  to  clear  up  his  doubts,  and 
that  even  although  he  might  not  be  absolutely 
satisfied  he  hoped  he  would  be  brought  to  give 
them  satisfaction,  if  he  saw  it  was  necessary  for 
the  welfare  of  his  people.'  ^  Such  a  request  could 
not  well  be  refused.  Henderson  we  may  be  sure 
acceeded  to  it  reluctantly.  To  Charles  episcopacy 
was  a  matter  of  conscience,  but  he  had  made  it 
difficult  for  his  opponents  to  believe  that;  they 
knew  only  that  they  thoroughly  distrusted  him. 
Even  Baillie,  royalist  and  conservative  in  all  his 
sympathies,  wrote  at  this  time,  '  Though  he  should 
swear  it,  no  man  will  believe  it  that  he  sticks  upon 
Episcopacy  for  any  conscience.'  The  other  party 
openly  treated  his  debates  as  *  a  pretence  to  gain 
time.'  In  his  heart  Henderson  must  have  known 
that  his  task  was  a  vain  one,  yet  the  Scots  hoped 
against  hope  that  the  king  might  still  yield,  and 
they  induced  Henderson  to  meet  Charles  in  friendly 
discussion.  Sickness  lay  heavy  upon  him,  his 
illness  had  gained  ground,  he  was  little  able  to 
travel.  About  the  15th  of  May  he  reached  New- 
castle ;  for  seven  weeks  or  thereby,  from  the  middle 
of  May  till  near  the  middle  of  July,  Charles  and  he 
had  much  intercourse  ;  their  formal  discussion  on 
the  rival  claims  of  episcopacy  and  presbytery  as 
it  has  come  down  to  us  was  carried  on  by  letters. 

'  Montreuil' V  Correspondence,  i.  p.  194. 


THE  REVOLUTION  IN  ENGLAND     369 

The  king's  lettci-s  are  said  to  have  been  transcribed 
by  Sir  Robert  Moray,  afterwards  first  president  of 
the  Royal  Society,  who  also  made  copies  of 
Henderson's  for  the  king.^  Charles  opened  with  a 
letter  on  29th  May,  writing  again  on  6th  and  22nd 
June  and  on  3rd  and  16th  July.  Henderson  replied 
on  3rd  June,  again  on  17th,  and  again  on  2nd  July. 
Wodrow  says  there  was  a  reply  to  the  king's  last 
paper,  but  it  was  agreed  to  suppress  it  out  of 
courtesy  so  that  the  king  might  have  the  last  word. 
Apparently  on  this  occasion,  as  at  their  previous 
meetings,  Henderson  left  a  favourable  impression 
on  the  king  :  '  he  expressed  an  uncommon  esteem 
for  his  learning,  piety  and  solidity.'  Henderson 
wrote  modestly  and  manfully  :  '  It  is  your  Majesty's 
royal  goodness  and  not  my  merit  that  hath  made 
your  Majesty  to  conceive  any  opinion  of  my 
abilities  which  (were  they  worthy  of  the  smallest 
testimony  from  your  Majesty)  ought  in  all  duty  to 
be  improved  for  your  Majesty's  satisfaction.  And 
this  I  intended  in  my  coming  here  at  this  time, 
by  a  free  yet  modest  expression  of  the  true  motives 
and  inducements  which  drew  my  mind  to  the 
dislike  of  Episcopal  government  wherein  I  was 
bred  in  my  younger  years  in  the  University.' 
Charles  on  his  side  appears  to  have  thoroughly 
enjoyed  the  debate  :  he  conducted  his  argument 
with  skill  and  ability ;  on  such  topics  he  was  a  true 
son  of  his  father.  He  rested  his  case  chiefly  on  the 
consent  of  the  Fathers;  Henderson  founded  his 
on  Scripture  alone ;  of  course  neither  contro- 
versialist moved  the  other.  The  whole  thing  was 
unreal  on  the  king's  side.  What  he  was  really 
thinking  is  shown  in  a  letter  written  in  the  middle 

'  Buroet,  Metnoxn  (fftkt  Dukes  of  U ami f ton  (1677),  pp.  277-8. 

2a 


370     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

of  the  discussion  (17th  June)  to  the  queen.  He 
there  amuses  her  with  a  sketch  of  the  Scots  and  their 
parties — '  a  particular  account  of  the  humours  of 
the  Scots.'  He  divides  them  into  four  '  factions  '  : 
Montroses,  neutrals,  Hamiltons,  Campbells.  '  They 
all  seem  to  court  me,  and  I  behave  myself  as  evenly 
to  all  as  I  can.  .  .  .  My  opinion  of  this  whole 
business  is  that  these  divisions  will  either  serve 
to  make  them  all  join  with  me,  or  else  God  hath 
prepared  this  way  to  punish  them  for  their  many 
rebellions  and  perfidies.  .  .  .  Assuredly  no  honest 
man  can  prosper  in  these  people's  company.' 

What  were  Henderson's  private  thoughts  during 
those  days  ?  Unfortunately  he  left  no  record. 
We  are  again  reminded  of  the  parallel  of  Knox 
and  Mary.  Knox  formed  a  shrewd  impression 
of  Mary's  cunning,  offering  toleration  to  Scottish 
Protestants  while  she  was  assuring  the  Courts  of 
France  and  Spain  as  well  as  the  pope  that  she 
would  make  no  compromise  with  Protestantism. 

Charles  was  now  playing  the  same  game  :  there 
is  little  doubt  Henderson  read  the  same  cunning 
and  duplicity  in  Mary's  grandson. 


THE  END 

Early  in  August  alarming  news  reached  London  of 
Henderson's    condition.     His    fruitless    discussion 
with  the  king  was  followed  by  an  equally  fruitless 
attempt  on  the  part  of  the  commissioners  sent  to 
Newcastle  by  Parliament  to  come  to  terms  with 
Charles  on  the  Nineteen  Propositions  submitted  to 
him.     He  was  asked  to  agree  to  terms  which  were  in 
substantials  the  same  as  the  terms  offered  him  at 
Uxbridge.    There  was  still  no  hint  of  toleration.    On 
2.3rd  July  the  first  meeting  took  place  between  the 
king  and  the  commissioners.     The  only  reply  Charles 
would  give  was  a  letter  to  the  Speaker  in  which 
he  said  an  immediate  answer  was  impossible,  but 
he  proposed  to  come  to  London  to  treat  personally. 
With  this  the  commissioners  had  to  be  content,  and 
they  left  Newcastle  on  2nd  August.     This  answer 
was  simply  another  move  in  the  game  of  delay. 
As  early  as  24th  June  Charles  had  written  to  the 
queen,  *  All  my  endeavours  must  be  the  delaying  my 
answer   till   there    be   considerable    parties   visibly 
formed,  to  which  end  I  think  my  proposing  to  go 
to  London  will  be  the  best  put-off.'     A  settlement 
was  hopeless  on  the  lines  proposed  by  Parliament ; 
if  it  ever  was  possible  it  was  too  late  now.     On  the 
one  hand  there  was  the  king's  oft-repeated  declara- 
tion that  his  conscience  forbade  him  to  yield  the 

point  of  episcopacy,  but  even  if  his  difficulties  had 

•n 


3-^2  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

been  removed  Cromwell  and  his  party  were  now 
far  more  powerful  than  at  Uxbridge,  and  they 
would  not  have  submitted  to  an  imposed  Presby- 
terian Church  with  no  provision  for  freedom  for 
themselves. 

The  king's  answer  and  the  darkness  of  the  outlook 
were  the  last  blow  to  Henderson's  hopes  and  health. 
The  strain  of  work  and  disappointment  was  too 
much  for  his  already  enfeebled  frame.  On  7th 
August  his  friend  Baillie  wrote  with  too  much 
truth,  *  Mr.  Henderson  is  dying,  most  of  heart- 
break, at  Newcastle.'  His  own  feelings  at  this  dark 
moment  were  those  of  Henderson  and  all  the 
Scots  :  *  The  king's  answer  has  broken  our  heart ; 
we  see  nothing  but  a  sea  of  new  horrible  confusions.' 
He  did  his  best  to  comfort  his  '  dear  brother.' 
*  It  is  a  part  of  my  prayer  to  God  to  restore  you  to 
health  and  to  continue  your  service  at  this  so 
necessary  a  time  :  we  never  had  so  much  need  of 
you  as  now.  .  .  .  We  know  well  the  weight  that 
lies  on  your  heart ;  I  fear  this  be  the  fountain  of 
your  disease.  Yet  I  am  sure,  if  you  would  take 
courage  and  digest  what  cannot  be  gotten  amended, 
and  if  after  the  shaking  off  melancholious  thoughts 
the  Lord  might  be  pleased  to  strengthen  you  at  this 
time,  you  would  much  more  promote  the  honour 
of  God,  the  welfare  of  Scotland  and  England,  the 
comfort  of  many  thousands  than  you  can  do  by 
weakening  of  your  body  and  mind  with  such 
thoughts  as  are  unprofitable.'  A  few  days  later, 
on  13th  August,  he  again  wrote  his  dying  friend 
with  hearty  love  and  reverence,  '  Your  weakness 
is  much  regretted  by  many  here,  to  me  it  is  one 
of  our  sad  presages  of  evils  coming.'  When  those 
words  were  written  Henderson  was  already  in  his 


THE  END  373 

own  house  in  Edinburgh.  He  went  from  Newcastle 
to  Lcith  by  sea,  arriving  there  on  11th  August.^ 
Before  he  stepped  on  board  the  sliip  which  bore  him 
home  he  knew  his  work  was  done.  As  he  laid  down 
his  task  weariness  and  depression  passed  from 
his  spirit.  The  exile,  though  he  returned  only  to 
die  among  his  own  people,  was  cheered  by  the  sight 
of  his  native  land,  and  he  felt  a  deeper  joy  as  he 
thouglit  of  his  landing  on  another  shore  where  a 
greater  welcome  awaited  him.  His  friends  found 
him  *  very  weak  and  greatly  decayed  in  his  natural 
strength.'  He  was  able  one  evening  to  dine  with 
Sir  James  Stewart,  and  seemed  exceedingly  cheerful 
and  hearty.  After  dinner  he  asked  his  host  if 
he  had  not  observed  him  more  than  ordinarily 
cheerful.  Sir  James  answered  he  was  pleased  to 
find  him  so  well  as  he  was.  '  Well,*  said  the  other, 
'  I  am  near  the  end  of  my  race,  hasting  home,  and 
there  was  never  a  schoolboy  more  desirous  to  have 
the  play  than  I  am  to  have  leave  of  this  world. 
In  a  few  days  (naming  the  time)  I  will  sicken  and 
at  such  a  time  die.  In  my  sickness  I  will  l>e  much 
out  of  ease  to  speak  anything,  but  I  desire  you  may 
be  with  me  as  much  as  you  can,  and  you  shall  see 
all  will  end  well.*  *  All  fell  out  as  he  had  foretold. 
I  think  it  was  a  fever  he  fell  into,  and  during  much 
of  it  he  was  in  much  disorder,  only  when  ministers 
came  in  he  would  desire  them  to  pray,  and  all  the 

'  Of  tliis  latit  journey  a  |>atlietic  little  record  ha.«  como  to  li|rht  only 
the  other  tiny.  The  account  of  Sir  Adnin  llephurn  of  liiinihie,  Treaaiirer 
of  the  Scots  Army,  rontainH  in  a  mincellaneoua  \\*t  of  *  extra  charge*'  a 
brief  entry  under  date  Aug*.  2\K  ir>4(>,  in  tlieae  word»i :  '  Paid  to  Ko* 
Stewart  in  I<eith  for  fraught  and  paHAodge  of  Mr.  Alex'  Ilenryaoune 
from  Newcaistell  to  I^ith  p'  recept  i.'»*.0  0  0.'  Terry'*  Thr  Army  of  I kt 
Cot^uiml  (1G43-1647),  ii.  p.  3i)5.  The  i'60  waa  ScoU  monty,  eiiual  to  £5 
sterling. 


374     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

time  of  prayer  he  was  still,  composed,  and  most 
affectionately  joined.'  Sir  James  and  another 
friend  stood  at  the  foot  of  his  bed  as  he  was  dying  : 
suddenly  he  opened  his  eyes  and,  with  a  glance 
upward  '  brighter  than  any  sparkle  of  a  diamond,' 
expired.^ 

After  his  death  there  was  found  among  his  papers 
a  brief  writing  which  doubtless  reflects  his  latest  and 
deepest  thoughts.  In  it  he  declared  himself  '  most 
of  all  obliged  to  the  care  and  goodness  of  God  for 
calling  him  to  believe  the  promises  of  the  gospel 
and  for  exalting  him  to  be  a  preacher  of  them  to 
others  ;  and  to  be  a  willing  though  weak  instrument 
in  this  great  and  wonderful  work  of  Reformation 
which  he  earnestly  beseeched  the  Lord  to  bring  to 
a  happy  conclusion.' 

His  death  took  place  on  the  19th  of  August  1646, 
in  his  sixty-third  year.  He  died  in  his  own  house, 
the  house  provided  for  him  by  the  Town  Council 
some  years  before.  His  will  is  dated  the  17th  day 
of  August,  '  given  up  by  himself  weak  in  body  and 
perfect  in  spirit  at  his  dwelling  house  near  unto 
the  High  School.'  On  the  21st  he  was  buried 
in  Greyfriars  churchyard.  The  Commission  of  the 
General  Assembly  was  then  sitting ;  they  went 
together  to  perform  to  their  distinguished  brother 
their  last  duty,^  and  he  was  laid  in  his  tomb  with 
every  mark  of  grief  and  honour. 

Aiton  states  (without  giving  his  authority)  that 
he  was  laid  to  rest  in  St.  Giles  churchyard,  and  that 
at  a  later  date  his  body  was  reinterred  in  Greyfriars 
yard  when  the  Parliament  Square  was  formed. 

Wodrow,  followed  by  M'Crie,  makes  no  mention 

*  Wodrow  Correspondence,  iii.  p.  33 ;  Analecta,  i.  p.  368. 

*  General  Assembly  Records,  1646-7,  pp.  38-9. 


THE  END  375 

of  St.  Giles  churchyard,  and  it  is  higlily  improbable 
that  he  was  buried  there.  The  new  Parliament 
House  was  completed  in  or  about  1639,  and  all 
traces  of  the  cemetery  must  have  been  obliterated 
then  if  not  earlier.  The  use  of  St.  Giles  churchyard 
as  a  burying  ground  had  in  all  likelihood  ceased 
many  years  before.  The  Greyfriars  yard  was 
granted  by  Queen  Mary  to  the  Town  Council  for 
the  purpose  of  a  public  burying  ground  in  1562, 
and  it  was  in  use  very  soon  after.  From  that  time 
onwards  the  old  burying  ground  of  St.  Giles  was 
gradually  forsaken  and  neglected.  The  Nether 
kirkyard  of  the  High  Kirk  was  closed  up  probably 
for  the  last  time  in  September  1585.^ 

A  monument  was  erected  over  the  grave  by  his 
nephew  George  Henderson,  a  *  storied  urn  '  resting 
on  a  quadrangular  pedestal.  Each  of  the  four 
sides  bears  an  inscription  in  Latin  or  English, 
setting  forth  his  praises  in  copious  language  after 
the  manner  of  the  times.  It  was  also  unhappily 
in  the  spirit  of  the  Restoration  that  when  epis- 
copacy returned  the  inscription  was  in  1662  defaced 
or  obliterated  by  a  platoon  of  soldiers  acting  on  an 
order  of  Parliament.  After  the  Revolution  of  1688 
the  inscription  was  restored. 

It  is  fitting  that  close  by  Henderson's  grave  in 
this  historic  ground  a  mural  tablet  should  bear 
the  great  name  of  William  Carstares,  who  carried 
on  into  happier  days  the  succession  of  statesman- 
ship in  the  Church  of  Scotland. 

In  1877  a  granite  tablet  set  in  freestone  was 
built  into  the  south  wall  of  the  nave  of  the  old 

'   Moir  Bryce.  /"  'Ihe  OM  Orefifriart  Church,  [t.SA.    Theenrlieitt 

Greyfrian  Buri.i:  now  pxtAtit  goet  no  further  hark  thoii   1C58 

and  throws  no  li^lit  uu  the  queiition.  The  Kcfristera  of  earlier  date 
have  beea  destroyed  or  lost. 


376     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

church  at  Leuchars,  and  transferred  some  four 
years  ago  to  a  new  porch.  This  memorial,  erected 
by  the  hberahty  and  exertions  of  a  St.  Andrews 
lady,  Miss  Mary  Webster,  commemorates  Henderson 
in  simpler  and  terser  language  as  *  the  distinguished 
leader  of  the  Church  of  Scotland  in  times  of  difficulty 
and  danger.' 

Chiefly  because  it  is  a  remarkable  though  un- 
designed tribute  by  his  enemies  to  the  influence  of 
Henderson's  name  is  the  story  worth  recalling  that 
he  repented  of  the  part  he  had  played  in  his  dealings 
with  the  king,  and  died  of  grief  and  remorse  on  that 
account.  So  ridiculous  a  fable  needs  no  contra- 
dicting to  one  who  reads  his  life  with  any  real  under- 
standing, but  the  partisans  of  the  king  thought 
to  make  some  party  capital  out  of  it.  Very  early 
after  his  death  the  rumour  was  circulated.  On 
2nd  October  Baillie  writes  to  his  cousin  Spang  in 
Holland,  'The  false  reports  which  went  here  of 
Mr.  Henderson  are,  I  see,  come  also  to  your  hand.' 
He  adds,  as  one  might  expect, '  Believe  me,  for  I 
have  it  under  his  own  hand  a  little  before  his  death 
that  he  was  utterly  displeased  with  the  king's 
ways,  and  ever  the  longer  the  more,  and  whoever 
say  otherwise  I  know  they  speak  false.'  Such  a 
testimony  should  have  been  sufficient  if  any  were 
needed,  but  the  story  was  too  useful  to  be  allowed 
to  die.  Clarendon  and  other  royalist  writers  con- 
tinued to  repeat  it.  Two  years  after  his  death, 
in  1648,  it  blossomed  out  into  a  long  '  Declaration 
by  Mr.  Alexander  Henderson,  Principal  Minister 
of  the  Word  of  God  at  Edinburgh  and  Chief  Com- 
missioner from  the  Kirk  of  Scotland  to  the  Parlia- 
ment and  Synod  of  England  made  upon  his  Death- 
bed.'    Wodrow  attributes  it  to  '  some  of  the  Scots 


THE  END  377 

Episcopal  scribblers  who  had  fled  to  England  for 
shelter  and  lived  by  what  they  could  earn  by  their 
pen ' ;  ^  Lee  goes  further  and  adds  that  '  the  dis- 
graceful forgery  has  been  traced  to  a  Scotch 
episcopal  writer.'  -  The  General  Assembly,  on 
7th  August  1648,  pronounced  the  Declaration  a 
forgery.  They  were  moved  by  '  the  tender  respect 
which  they  do  bear  to  his  name  which  ought  to  be 
very  precious  to  them  and  all  posterity  for  his 
faithful  service  in  the  great  work  of  Reformation  in 
these  kingdoms  wherein  the  Lord  was  pleased  to 
make  him  eminently  instrumental '  to  pass  an  Act 
after  full  inquiry.  They  found  the  whole  story 
of  the  alleged  Declaration  to  be  nothing  but '  gross 
lies  and  impudent  calumnies.'  Wodrow  thought 
the  forgery  a  clumsy  one  ;  there  was  nothing  in 
it,  he  said,  that  in  the  least  resembled  the  nervous 
solid  sententious  style  of  Henderson.  But  his 
detractors  were  not  ashamed  to  repeat  tlieir 
calumnies  and  a  war  of  pamphlets,  profitless  now 
to  recall,  went  on  for  many  years. ^ 

To  his  contemporaries  Henderson  was  first  and 
foremost  the  great  churchman  of  his  day,  tiic 
Restorer  and  Reformer  of  their  beloved  national 
Church,  second  only  to  Knox.  Their  estimate 
of  him  is  probably  best  expressed  in  the  words  of 
Baillie :  '  He  ought  to  be  accounted  by  us  and  tlie 
posterity  the  fairest  ornament  after  John  Knox 
of  incomparable  memory  that  ever  the  Church  of 
Scotland  did  enjoy.'  But  in  an  age  of  revolution 
the  affairs  of  Church  and  State  were  so  closely 
intertwined  that   the   leading  churchman   became 

•  iVodrow  f'orr  ,  iii.  p.  203. 

'  Hintorfj  n/lhr  '  Scotland,  ii.  p.  3(M{. 

'  See  I.tidlow'B  pamphlet,  Trtith  brought  to  Light  (1093),  in  answer  to 
pr.  Hollinffwtirtli 


378     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

in  spite  of  himself  a  leading  statesman  too.  In 
both  capacities  he  impressed  his  countrymen  as, 
taken  all  in  all,  their  most  massive  and  sagacious 
leader,  courageous  yet  cautious,  bold  yet  con- 
ciliatory, a  man  of  energy,  skill  and  resource.  He 
was  no  pushing  ambitious  ecclesiastic,  rather  was 
he  unobtrusive  and  retiring,  yet  to  him  churchmen 
and  politicians  looked  for  guidance  in  every 
emergency.  Because  he  was  a  Presbyterian 
minister  he  filled  no  office  of  State,  but  he  wielded 
power  greater  probably  than  any  other  man  in 
Scotland.  He  was  the  oracle  of  the  party  and  was 
entrusted  with  the  negotiating  of  many  difficult 
affairs  both  in  Church  and  State,  a  task  for  which 
he  was  admirably  fitted  by  his  practical  sagacity 
combined  with  an  equable  temper  and  a  gentleness 
and  charm  of  manner  rare  in  those  days.  In 
England  too  he  produced  the  same  impression  of 
high  character  and  high  capacity.  '  Alexander 
Henderson,  the  chief  of  the  Scottish  clergy  in  this 
reign,'  says  an  Anglican  writer,  '  was  learned, 
eloquent  and  polite,  and  perfectly  well  versed  in 
the  knowledge  of  mankind.  He  was  at  the  helm 
of  affairs  in  the  General  Assembly  in  Scotland,  and 
was  sent  into  England  in  the  double  capacity  of 
a  divine  and  plenipotentiary.  He  knew  how  to 
rouse  the  people  to  war  or  negotiate  a  peace  : 
whenever  he  preached  it  was  to  a  crowded  audience, 
and  when  he  pleaded  or  argued  he  was  regarded 
with  mute  attention.'  ^  From  friendly  and  hostile 
quarters  alike,  from  contemporaries  and  moderns, 
comes  a  remarkably  unanimous  chorus  of  praise. 
Bishop  Guthry,  no  friendly  critic,  said  of  him  that 
'  in   gravity,    learning,    wisdom    and    state-policy 

*  Granger,  Biographical  History  of  England  (ed.  1779),  ii.  p.  199. 


THE  END  379 

he  far  exceeded  any  of  the  Presbyterian  ministry.* 
Andrew  Lang  describes  him  as  the  most  powerful 
minister  in  Scotland,  '  who  conducted  himself  like 
a  gentleman  of  honour  now  as  always.'  The  note 
that  is  struck  again  and  again  by  those  who  knew 
him  best  is  the  note  of  moral  greatness  in  his 
character  —  a  man  unselfish,  humble,  stainless. 
When  Maxwell,  ex-bishop  of  Ross,  in  whom  some 
bitterness  may  well  be  excused,  sneered  at  him 
as  *  the  Scotch  pope,'  ^  Baillie  was  able  to  claim  in 
reply,  *  A  more  modest  and  humble  spirit  of  so 
great  parts  and  deserved  authority  with  all  the 
greatest  of  the  Isle  lives  not  this  day  in  the  Re- 
formed Churches.'  ^  The  open  secret  of  his  attrac- 
tion and  influence  cannot  be  better  told  than  it  was 
by  a  brother  minister  in  Fife  who  enjoyed  much 
helpful  intercourse  with  him :  '  I  love  you,  sir, 
because  I  think  you  are  a  man  in  whom  I  see  much 
of  the  image  of  Christ,  and  who  fears  God.' 

We  can  understand  how  in  the  public  life  of 
Scotland  in  that  hard  and  rough  age  a  man  of  so 
rare  and  fine  a  spirit  stood  out  pre-eminent,  the 
most  trusted  and  best  loved  among  them  all. 

The  National  Covenant,  for  which  he  was  so 
largely  responsible,  showed  the  true  instinct  of 
leadership  in  a  great  crisis.  It  was  in  a  line  with 
the  religious  traditions  of  Scotland,  and  combined 
the  appeal  to  religious  and  political  motive  which 
united  Scotland  as  one  man.  The  movement  was 
led  from  first  to  last  with  remarkable  skill,  and  it 
left  its  permanent  stamp  on  tin*  religion  and  politics 
of  Scotland.  The  triumph  of  1689  was  still  a  long 
way  off,  but  it  anticipated  that  day  and  prepared 
the  way  for  it. 

'  In  The  Burden  of  Ittackar.  '  Historical  ^' indication,  p.  46. 


380     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

The  later  Covenant  belongs  to  a  totally  different 
category,  and  the  policy  it  expressed  was  a  mis- 
taken one.  It  was  not  advocated  by  Henderson 
as  an  instrument  to  enforce  an  alien  creed  or  system 
on  an  unwilling  country,  but  to  promote  unity  and 
peace  between  two  nations  believed  to  be  already 
in  agreement  on  those  matters.  But  it  was 
entered  into  under  serious  misapprehension  as  to 
the  state  of  feeling  and  opinion  in  England,  and 
it  was  enforced  in  a  way  that  wrecked  any  prospect 
of  success  it  ever  had. 

The  point  at  which  Henderson's  policy  shows 
at  its  weakest  was  in  refusing  to  accept  a  settlement 
making  room  for  toleration  when  the  lessons  of 
the  Civil  War  had  shown  that  to  be  inevitable,  and 
in  clinging  to  the  League  and  Covenant  when  it  had 
become  evident  that  conditions  were  so  altered  that 
it  had  ceased  to  be  (if  it  ever  had  been)  practicable. 
But  it  is  fair  to  remember  that  ere  that  time  came 
Henderson  was  already  worn  out  by  disease,  he  had 
no  longer  the  vigour  of  mind  or  body  to  grapple  with 
a  new  situation.  Had  ten  years  more  of  life  and 
health  been  granted  him  the  course  of  events  in  Scot- 
land might  have  been  very  different.  The  misfor- 
tune was  he  left  no  successor.  After  his  death,  when 
the  Scots  army  had  returned  home  and  the  League 
was  at  an  end,  the  Church  still  adhered  to  the 
Covenant.  The  story  of  those  later  years  no 
Scotsman  can  read  without  indignation  and  sorrow. 
Endless  miseries  fell  on  the  country  and  humiliation 
on  the  Church.  The  country  was  involved  in  dis- 
astrous war  with  England.  The  Church  was  split 
into  two  irreconcilable  factions,  and  the  division 
fatally  weakened  her.  She  was  dragged  into  ruinous 
political  entanglements  :    she  stooped  to  the  deep 


THE  END  381 

degradation  of  forcing  the  dissolute  Charles  ii.  to 
swear  the  Covenant,  an  oath  which  the  Covenanters 
knew  or  ought  to  have  known  was  a  piece  of  sheer 
hypocrisy.  '  We  did  sinfully  both  entangle  the 
nation  and  ourselves,'  one  of  them  confessed,  *  and 
that  poor  young  prince,  making  him  sign  and 
swear  a  covenant  which  we  knew  he  hated  in  his 
heart.'  One  cannot  believe  that  Henderson  would 
have  consented  to  drag  the  Church  through  the  mire 
of  those  disgraceful  trafFickings.  When  the  Stewarts 
returned  the  Covenanters  suffered  grievously,  but 
their  sufferings  were  their  real  contribution  to 
Scotland.  They  suffered  for  something  better  than 
the  Covenant.  Their  courage  and  constancy  shone 
out  against  the  dark  background  of  ferocious 
persecution.  The  martyr  deaths  of  the  moss-hags 
and  the  Grassmarket  burned  into  the  Scottish 
heart  a  deeper  hatred  of  lawless  oppression  and  a 
warmer  attachment  to  the  faith  in  which  those 
humble  peasants  died.  They  lost  their  earthly  all, 
but  they  found  an  imperishable  place  in  the  hearts 
of  the  Scottish  people,  in  their  history  and  their 
literature.  Their  names  were  revered  and  their 
story  enriched  the  lifeblood  of  their  countr>\  *  A 
Scottish  child,'  says  Stevenson  recalling  his  own 
childhood,  *  hears  much  of  shipwreck,  outlying 
iron-skerries,  pitiless  breakers  and  great  sea-lights ; 
much  of  heathery  mountains,  wild  clans,  and  hunted 
Covenanters.'  The  hunted  Covenantci*s  have  taken 
their  place  among  the  nation's  heroes  with  Wallace 
and  Bruce  and  many  another  champion  of  faith  and 
freedom  who  have  t  '  *  her  people  to  value  *  a 
moral  ratlur  tluin  a  il  crit*  rioii  for  h'fe.' 


VI 

HENDERSON'S  WORK  FOR  EDUCATION 

The  Reformed  Church  of  Scotland  was  from  the 
first  the  friend  and  champion  of  Education.  Knox 
with  a  statesman's  mind  laid  down  the  lines  of  a 
national  scheme.  Melville,  a  brilliant  scholar,  was 
the  reformer  of  University  education,  widening 
its  scope  and  breathing  into  it  the  fresh  life  of  the 
Renaissance.  Henderson,  their  successor  as  Church 
leader,  inherited  also  their  zeal  for  Education. 
Melville's  name  is  associated  with  Glasgow  and 
St.  Andrews,  Henderson  is  identified  with  Edin- 
burgh. But  before  he  became  Rector  of  Edinburgh 
College,  the  Church  under  his  leadership  had 
turned  her  attention  to  the  educational  needs  of 
the  country.  The  great  Assembly  of  1638  found 
time  to  deal  with  schools  and  colleges.  The  old 
Acts  of  Assembly  were  revived  which  required 
that  'the  minister  of  the  parish,  the  Principal, 
regents  and  professors  within  colleges,  and  masters 
and  doctors  of  schools  be  tried  concerning  the 
soundness  of  their  judgment  in  matters  of  religion, 
their  ability  for  discharge  of  their  calling,  and  the 
honesty  of  their  conversation.'  It  gave  directions 
also  to  presbyteries  for  planting  schools  in  landward 
parishes  and  '  providing  of  men  able  for  the  charge 
of  teaching  of  the  youth,  public  reading  and 
precenting  of  the  psalms,  and  the  catechising  of  the 
common  people,  and  that  means  be  provided  for 


HENDERSON'S  WORK  FOR  EDUCATION  388 

their  entertainment  in  the  most  convenient  manner 
that  may  be  had  according  to  the  abihty  of  the 
parish.'  That  and  successive  AssembHes  in  the 
years  following  show  a  record  of  vigorous  work. 
They  appointed  visitations  of  schools  and  colleges 
by  Commissions  of  Assembly.  The  Church  records 
of  those  years  bear  evidence  of  visitations  of  the 
Universities  of  St.  Andrews,  Glasgow  and  Aberdeen, 
and  of  overtures  dealing  with  the  planting  of  schools. 
In  1642  the  Assembly  adopted  overtures  to  the 
effect  that  '  every  parish  would  have  a  Reader  and 
a  school  whore  children  are  to  be  bred  in  reading, 
writing  and  grounds  of  religion.  Where  Grammar 
schools  may  be  had  as  in  burglis  and  other  con- 
siderable places  that  they  be  erected.  Anent 
tliese  schools  every  minister  with  his  ciders  shall 
give  account  to  the  presbyteries  at  the  visitation 
of  the  kirk.  Because  this  hath  been  most  neglected 
in  the  Highlands,  Islands  and  Borders,  therefore 
the  ministers  of  every  parish  arc  to  instnict  by 
tlieir  commissioners  to  the  next  General  Assembly 
that  this  course  is  begun.  And  because  the  means 
hitherto  named  or  appointed  for  schools  of  all  sorts 
hath  been  both  Httle  and  ill  paid  the  Assembly 
would  supplicate  this  Parliament  that  they  would 
find  out  how  means  shall  be  had  for  so  good  an  use, 
especially  that  the  children  of  poor  men  (being 
very  capable  of  learning  and  of  good  ability)  may 
be  trained  up  according  as  the  exigence  and 
necessity  of  every  place  shall  require.  And  that 
the  commissioners  who  shall  be  named  by  this 
Assembly  to  wait  upon  the  Parliament  may  be 
appointed  to  represent  this  to  His  Majesty  and  the 
Parliament.  The  Assembly  would  supplicate  the 
Parliament  that  for  youths  of  the  finest  and  best 


384     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

spirits  of  the  Highlands  and  Borders  maintenance 
may  be  allotted  (as  to  bursars)  to  be  bred  in 
Universities.'  Specially  admirable  were  the  efforts 
of  the  Church  to  open  the  path  of  learning  to  sons 
of  poor  men.  It  was  enacted  that  every  presbytery 
consisting  of  twelve  ministers  should  maintain  a 
bursar,  and  where  the  number  was  fewer  than 
twelve  they  were  to  be  joined  with  members  of 
another  presbytery  whose  numbers  exceeded 
twelve.  Provision  was  thus  made  for  the  college 
expenses  of  one  young  man  on  an  average  from 
every  presbytery.  The  Assembly  of  1645  adopted 
overtures  highly  instructive  as  showing  the  Church's 
enlightened  interest  in  the  higher  walks  of  learning 
as  well  as  in  good  order  in  grammar  schools  and 
colleges.  They  ordained  that  every  grammar  school 
was  to  be  visited  twice  a  year  by  visitors  appointed 
by  the  presbytery  and  kirk  session  in  landward 
parishes  and  by  the  Town  Council  in  burghs  with 
their  ministers,  and  where  Universities  are  by  the 
Universities,  with  consent  always  of  the  patrons 
of  the  school,  that  both  the  fidelity  and  diligence 
of  the  masters  and  the  proficiency  of  the  scholars 
in  piety  and  learning  may  appear  and  deficiency 
censured  accordingly,  and  that  the  visitors  see  that 
the  masters  be  not  distracted  by  any  other  employ- 
ments which  may  divert  them  from  diligent 
attendance.  For  the  remedy  of  the  great  decay 
of  poesy  and  of  ability  to  make  verse,  and  in 
respect  of  the  common  ignorance  of  prosody,  no 
schoolmaster  was  to  be  admitted  to  teach  in  a 
grammar  school  but  such  as  after  examination 
shall  be  found  skilful  in  the  Latin  tongue  not  only 
for  Prose  but  also  for  Verse.  There  is  a  modern 
touch  in  the  article  which  provides,  'Neither  the 


HENDERSON'S  WORK  FOR  EDUCATION   385 

Greek  language  nor  Logic  nor  any  part  of  Philosophy 
be  taught  in  any  grammar  school  to  young  scholars 
who  thereafter  are  to  enter  to  any  College  unless  it 
be  for  a  preparation  to  their  entry  there.'  An 
entrance  examination  in  Latin  is  provided  for : 
*  That  none  be  admitted  to  enter  a  student  of  the 
Greek  tongue  in  any  College  unless  after  trial  he 
be  found  able  to  make  a  congruous  Theme  in  Latin, 
or  at  least  being  admonished  of  his  error,  can 
readily  show  how  to  correct  the  same.'  Here  is 
a  very  practical  stimulus  to  study  :  '  That  none 
be  promoted  from  an  inferior  class  of  the  ordinary 
course  to  a  superior  unless  he  be  found  worthy  and 
to  have  sufficiently  profited  ;  otherwise  that  he  be 
ordained  not  to  ascend  with  his  co-disciples,  and  if 
he  be  a  bursar  to  lose  his  bursary.'  The  giving  of 
degrees  is  to  be  carefully  guarded  :  '  It  is  a  disgrace 
to  learning  and  hindrance  to  trades  and  other 
callings  and  an  abuse  hurtful  to  the  public  that  such 
as  are  ignorant  and  unworthy  be  honoured  with  a 
degree  or  public  testimony  of  Learning  ;  that  there- 
fore such  trials  be  taken  of  students,  especially  of 
Magistrands,  that  those  who  are  found  unworthy  be 
not  admitted  to  the  degree  and  honour  of  Masters.' 
It  is  evident  from  these  and  other  provisions 
that  the  quickened  life  of  the  Church  found  an 
expression  in  a  rcal  desire  to  improve  the  state  of 
schools  and  colleges,  and  that  the  Assembly's 
care  extended  from  practical  details  up  to  the 
elegant  accomplishments  of  classical  scliolarship. 
The  charge  which  has  often  been  made  against  the 
Covenanters  that  they  were  men  of  so  little  taste 
and  learning  that  they  discountenanced  all  elegant 
and  classical  study  is  a  groundless  misrepresentation.* 

•  I>ce,  The  rnivtrtiiy  of  Kdinhurgk/rom  16SS  to  1RS9,  p.  6%  (1884). 


386     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

That  much  of  this  alert  and  intelligent  interest 
over   the    whole    field    of   education    was    due   to 
Henderson  is  easy  to  believe  when  we  learn  that 
during  the  short  period  of  his  tenure  of  the  office 
of  Rector  of  the  College  of  Edinburgh  (1640-46), 
notwithstanding   his   other   duties    and    his    long 
absences,  he  gave  an   immense   stimulus  to  that 
College.    '  He  was,'  in  the  opinion  of  a  distinguished 
modern  educationist,   himself  a  Principal  of  the 
same  University,  '  the  ablest  educationist  and  the 
man  of  clearest  insight  of  all  who  had  had  to  do 
with  the   College   since   its   foundation.     He   saw 
what  was  wanted  and  had  the  energy  and  the  tact 
necessary  for  securing  it.'  ^     Robert  RoUock,  the 
first  Principal,  held  the  combined  offices  of  Principal 
and  Rector,  but  later  the  Rectorship  was  made  a 
separate  office.     It  was  treated  by  Henderson's  pre- 
decessors as  merely  nominal  and  was  in  abeyance 
for  nine  years  before  1640,  when  the  Town  Council, 
whose  connection  with  the  College  was  one  highly 
creditable    to   them,    decided   to    revive    it.     The 
Rector   was   to   be   appointed   annually   with   six 
assessors.     He  was  to  be  '  the  eye  of  the  Town 
Council,'  and  the  medium  of  communication  between 
the  College  and  the  Council.     He  was  to  see  that 
the    Principal   and   regents   fulfilled   their   duties. 
He  was  to  advise  the  Council  as  to  College  finances, 
and  he  was  to  preside  at  all  ceremonies.     A  silver 
mace  was  to  be  carried  before  him,  and  one  of  the 
students  was  appointed  to  be  his  bedell  or  macer. 
The    finances    needed    to    be    strengthened,    and 
Henderson   exerted   himself  in   various   directions 
for  that  end.     The  office  of  Treasurer  was  created, 
and    the    Rector  succeeded  in  raising  a  loan  of 

1  Sir  A.  Grant,  The  Story  of  the  University  of  Edinburgh,  i.  p.  209. 


HENDERSON'S  WORK  FOR  EDUCATION  887 

£21,777  (Scots)  for  College  purposes.  He  induced 
wealtliy  citizens  to  gift  or  bequeath  money  ;  in  his 
time  the  number  of  such  benefactions  was  notably 
large  ;  he  omitted  no  opportunity  of  advancing  the 
prosperity  of  the  University,  and  by  common 
consent  filled  his  office  with  great  lustre.^  It  was 
owing  to  his  influence  that  the  Parliament  of 
1641  after  much  difficulty  assigned  to  the  College 
the  rents  of  the  bishoprics  of  Edinburgh  and  of 
Orkney.  It  was  found,  however,  that  only  some 
remnants  of  these  remained,  '  both  were  spoiled  by 
prior  gifts.'  Henderson  and  the  Church  made 
strong  efforts  at  this  time  on  behalf  of  education 
generally.  Glasgow  and  Aberdeen  Universities 
benefited  as  well  as  Edinburgh  :  the  revenues  of 
the  bishopric  of  Galloway  under  some  deductions 
were  given  to  Glasgow,  to  Aberdeen  went  those  of 
the  Aberdeen  bishopric.  The  struggle  for  financial 
support  to  churches  and  schools  or  colleges  was 
always  a  hard  one.  *  We  had  here,'  says  Baillie, 
*  few  or  no  real  friends  '  :  powerful  nobles  grasped 
at  everything  for  themselves. 

The  Rector  took  a  special  interest  in  obtaining 
;i  building  for  the  library  of  Edinburgh  University  : 
in  1644  a  beginning  was  made  and  it  was  continued 
as  money  came  in  from  generous  donors.  Before 
the  new  building  existed  the  Rector  missed  no 
chance  of  picking  up  suitable  books  to  fill  its 
shelves,  as  witness  these  entries  from  the  Edinburgh 
Treasurer's  Accounts  :  *  1641,  March  26th,  Books 
for  College  Library  bought  at  London  by  Mr. 
Alexander  Henderson  '  ;  and  again,  *  1641,  Augt. 
11th,  £49. 0.6  Sterling  paid  to  Mr.  Alexander  Hender- 
son for  books  bought  at  London  for  College  Library.' 

*  I)»lzel,  History  qf  CnivtrtUjf  qf  Edinburgh,  ii.  pp.  136-7. 


888     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

St.  Andrews,  his  own  Alma  Mater,  also  benefited 
in  its  library  from  Henderson's  generosity.       He 
was  a  member  of  a  commission  appointed  by  the 
General  Assembly  of  1642  to  visit  that  University. 
The  visitation  took  place  in  August  of  that  year. 
The  commission  found  that  great  necessity  existed 
for  a  public  library  in  the  University  '  for  pro- 
moting the  studies  of  the  masters  and  scholars, 
and  that  for  the  present  there  is  neither  a  sufficient 
house  for  the  Library  nor  ways  and  means  thought 
upon    for    furnishing    of   books.*     The    need    was 
generously  met  by  Henderson  himself.     He  '  being 
first   a   student   and   thereafter   a   Regent   in  the 
University,  to  give  testimony  of  his  thankfulness 
and  affection  to  the  flourishing  of  the  University 
in  learning,  did  willingly  and  of  his  own  accord 
make  offer  of  the  sum  of  one  thousand  pounds 
(Scots)  which  was  thought  by  the  commissioners 
sufficient  both  for  perfecting  the  house  appointed 
for  the  Library  and  for  the  Public  School  destined 
for  the  solemn  meetings  of  the  University,  which 
was  thankfully   accepted   by  the   whole   commis- 
sioners.' ^ 

It  was  a  happy  thought  of  Dr.  Maitland  Anderson, 
the  present  librarian  of  the  University,  when  the 
most  recent  addition  to  the  library  was  built, 
to  insert  the  Henderson  arms  over  the  entrance 
doorway  alongside  those  of  King  James  vi.,  the 
king  being  the  founder  of  the  library  and  Henderson 
the  first  donor  of  buildings. 

Another  benefaction  made  by  Henderson  in  the 
interests  of  Education  was  a  gift  to  his  old  parish 
of  Leuchars.     He  '  mortified  '  a  house,  garden  and 

1  Scottish  Universities  Commission  (Evidence),  1826,  p.  20i  ;  Ibid.,  1837, 
iii.  p.  210. 


HENDERSON'S  WORK  FOR  EDUCATION  389 

cToft  with  two  acres  or  thereby  of  land  north-west 
of  the  village  and  £4,  10s.  Gd.  sterling  to  the  holders 
of  the  office  of  schoolmaster  at  Leuchars.  The 
land,  known  by  the  name  of  Pittenbrog,  was 
bought  by  him  in  1630.  The  house  is  said  to  have 
been  used  for  some  time  as  a  manse,  and  afterwards 
as  the  schoolmaster's  house  till  about  1870,  when 
it  was  pulled  down.^ 

Wlien  he  sat  down  to  write  his  will  he  did  not 
forget  his  native  parish.  He  bequeathed  the  sum 
of  2000  merks  to  be  left  in  charge  of  the  minister 
of  Creich  for  behoof  of  the  schoolmaster  of  Luthrie. 
The  terms  of  the  will  indicate  that  part  of  this 
sum  he  intended  to  be  used  for  building  a  school- 
house  and  the  rest  as  an  addition  to  the  school- 
master's salary.  But  it  appears  that  the  interest 
of  the  whole  sum  was  paid  over  annually  to  the 
schoolmaster.'* 

In  other  ways  besides  these  Henderson  strove 
to  advance  the  cause  of  learning.  In  Edinburgh 
University  he  restored,  after  thirteen  years'  inter- 
mission, classes  for  honours,  or  *  circles '  as  they  were 
then  called.  We  may  trace  his  influence  in  the 
appointment  for  the  first  time  of  a  professor  of 
Hebrew.  Up  till  then  no  provision  existed  for 
the  systematic  teaching  of  Hebrew,  though  a  large 
number  of  the  graduates  entered  the  ministry. 
Orjijinally  one  of  the  regents,  and  later  the  pro- 
lessor  of  Divinity,  read  some  Hebrew  with  the 
students,  but  the  work  was  perfunctor>'.  The 
General  Assembly,  probably  at  his  suggestion,  re- 
solved that  *  it  were  goo<i  for  the  Universities  to 
send  abroad  for  able  and  approved  men '  to  b<-  pro- 

*■  Old  StatutieaJ  Aeevumt  of  SeotUmd,  xviii.  p.  i^). 
>  Ibid.,  Iv.  p.  229. 


390     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

fessors  of  Divinity.  He  probably  felt  that  the  home 
learning  needed  replenishing,  as  in  former  days, 
from  the  Universities  of  the  Continent.  A  learned 
foreigner,  Julius  Conradus  Otto,  was  appointed  to 
the  new  chair  as  professor  of  Hebrew  and  Oriental 
tongues,  and  held  the  post  till  1656. 

Unfortunately  Henderson  was  cut  off  too  soon 
for  the  interests  of  Edinburgh  College  and  of  Scottish 
education.  His  hand  was  in  all  the  movements 
for  University  reform  in  his  day.  '  It  would  have 
been  an  inestimable  advantage,'  says  the  latest 
historian  of  Edinburgh  University,  '  for  the  Uni- 
versities of  Scotland  if  his  life  could  have  been 
prolonged  for  twenty  years.' 


VII 

WRITINGS— PORTRAITS 

Henderson  left  behind  him  no  systematic  works. 
Such  writings  as  we  liave  are  chiefly  controversial- 
party  manifestoes,  State  papers,  and  the  Hke, 
called  forth  by  the  conflicts  in  which  he  bore  a 
leading  part.  These  have  been  already  noticed 
in  earlier  chapters.  The  only  treatise  is  the  tract 
on  the  Government  and  Order  of  the  Church  of 
Scotland.  Besides  that  there  are  only  some  sermons 
and  addresses.  A  volume  of  these  has  been 
collected  and  published.^  His  private  letters  liave 
nearly  all  disappeared.  How  great  is  our  loss  we 
may  guess  from  Rutherfurd's  one  grateful  word, 
*  I  received  your  letters.  They  are  as  apples  of 
gold  to  me.'  Of  his  literary  style  we  have  con- 
sequently very  inadequate  materials  on  which 
to  form  a  judgment.  It  is  not  free  from  the 
cumbrous  and  loose  character  of  much  of  the  prose 
writing  of  the  day,  but  sometimes  he  writes  with 
vigour  and  dignity.  Here  is  an  admirable  passage 
from  the  tract  on  the  Government  and  Order  of 
tlie  Church  of  Scotland  : — 

*  Here  there  is  a  superiority  without  tyranny  for 
no  minister  hath  a  papal  or  monarchical  jurisdiction 
over  his  own  flock,  far  less  over  other  pastors  and 

>  Edited  bj  R.  Thornton  lUitin  (1867). 


392     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

over  all  the  congregations  or  a  large  diocese.  Here 
there  is  a  parity  without  confusion  and  disorder, 
for  the  Pastors  are  in  order  before  the  Elders  and 
the  Elders  before  the  Deacons  :  every  particular 
Church  is  subordinate  to  the  Presbytery,  the 
Presbytery  to  the  Synod,  and  the  Synod  to  the 
National  Assembly.  One  Pastor  hath  priority 
before  another  for  age,  for  zeal,  for  gifts,  for  his 
good  deservings  of  the  church,  each  one  honouring 
him  whom  God  hath  honoured  and  as  he  beareth 
the  image  of  God  which  was  to  be  seen  amongst  the 
Apostles  themselves.  But  none  hath  pre-eminence 
of  title  or  power  or  jurisdiction  above  others ; 
even  as  in  nature  one  eye  hath  not  power  over 
another,  only  the  head  hath  power  over  all,  even 
as  Christ  over  His  Church.  .  .  .  And  lastly  here 
there  is  a  subjection  without  slavery,  for  the  people 
are  subject  to  the  Pastors  and  Assemblies,  yet 
there  is  no  Assembly  wherein  every  particular 
Church  hath  not  interest  and  power,  nor  is  there 
anything  done  but  they  are  if  not  actually  yet 
virtually  called  to  consent  unto  it. 

'  As  they  have  done  and  suffered  much  for 
vindicating  and  maintaining  the  liberty  of  their 
Religion,  that  what  belongeth  unto  God  may  be 
rendered  unto  God,  so  do  they  desire  that  according 
to  the  rule  of  righteousness  each  man  have  his  own, 
and  above  all  men  that  the  things  which  are 
Caesar's  be  rendered  unto  him,  and  to  give  him 
that  which  is  God's  were  a  wronging  both  of  God 
and  Caesar.  They  join  with  the  inward  reverence 
of  their  heart  external  honour  and  obedience  in 
all  things  lawful.' 

Another    extract,    this    time    from    a    sermon. 


WRITINGS  898 

illustrates  the  tender  and  gracious  spirit  which 
went  with  harder  and  sterner  elements  to  the 
making  of  the  seventeenth-century  character : — 

*  There  are  few  or  none  of  the  children  of  God 
in  whom  something  may  not  be  marked  which 
tends  to  infirmity,  and  there  be  few  or  none  of  them 
in  whom  something  has  not  been  marked  ;  and  I 
may  say  more,  who  of  them  is  there  in  whom  God 
has  not  marked  many  things  ?  Before  the  spirit 
of  regeneration  come,  and  we  are  in  nature,  then 
are  we  wholly  in  darkness  and  ill ;  and  when  we 
are  in  glory  then  we  are  altogether  good  and  in 
light ;  but  while  we  are  here  into  the  state  of  grace 
there  is  a  mixture  of  good  and  ill  in  us,  of  light  and 
darkness.  And  if  so  be  it  be  true  grace  we  have,  we 
will  see  it  to  be  so,  and  if  it  be  true  grace  then  that 
which  is  imperfect  will  be  passed  by  and  that  which 
is  good  will  be  remembered.  And  this  woman 
she  made  a  lie  yet  that  is  passed  by  in  silence,  and 
only  her  faith  is  remembered ;  and  the  Spirit 
of  God  speaking  in  Job  says,  "  Ye  have  heard  of 
the  patience  of  Job,"  and  yet  there  was  much  im- 
patience in  him,  but  there  is  no  word  of  that. 
And  all  the  saints  of  God  while  they  are  here  have 
many  infirmities  and  yet  the  Lord  passes  by  all 
these  and  remombcTS  only  of  that  which  is  good  in 
them.  The  Lord  He  is  glad  to  put  down  His  hand 
and  gather  up  the  smallest  crumbs  of  faith  and 
make  something  of  them  ;  and  not  only  docs  he 
this  with  Abraham  or  Moses  or  such  worthies  as 
these,  but  even  Sarah  He  rememlxrs  her  faith, 
and  llahab's,  and  passes  by  all  their  ill— never  a 
word  of  that.  It  is  not  so  much  as  mentioned  of 
some  of  them  that  there  was  such  a  thing.     Yet 


394     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

this  is  a  matter  of  great  comfort  to  the  children 
of  God  who  sees  all  their  best  actions  to  be  greatly 
stained  with  infirmity,  so  as  they  think  they  rather 
deserve  to  be  punished  for  their  unbelief  than  to 
be  rewarded  for  their  faith.  But  this  may  comfort 
us  if  so  be  that  our  faith  be  true  and  sincere,  albeit 
it  be  but  weak,  yet  the  Lord  will  accept  that  weak 
faith  and  will  respect  it,  especially  when  it  is  un- 
feigned and  it  is  a  wise  faith  and  there  is  a  desire 
to  have  it  increased.' 


Of  portraits  of  Henderson  by  far  the  best  known 
is  the  picture  at  Yester  in  Lord  Tweeddale's 
collection.  Tradition  associates  it  with  the  name 
of  Van  Dyck :  it  is  an  excellent  piece  of  work,  a 
vivid  life-like  presentation  of  a  face  with  strongly- 
marked  features.  But  it  is  probable  that  the 
earliest  and  most  reliable  portrait  is  the  etching 
made  by  Hollar  in  1641  during  Henderson's  stay 
in  London.^  Nothing  is  known  of  the  history  of 
the  Yester  portrait.  Bishop  Pocock  saw  it  there 
in  1760.  There  is  no  certainty  that  it  is  the  work 
of  Van  Dyck  ;  it  may  be  by  some  Dutch  artist  of 
the  later  seventeenth  century  after  Hollar's  print. 
The  other  portraits  of  Henderson  appear  to  have 
been  based  upon  the  etching.  When  Aiton  wrote 
(1836)  one  was  at  Hamilton  Palace  and  one  at 
Duff  House  ;  both  were  attributed  to  Jamesone. 
The  former,  mentioned  by  Pennant  in  his  Tour  in 
Scotland  (1769),  has  been  repainted,  the  latter  was 
sold  a  good  many  years  ago  as  of  little  value. 
There  is  a  portrait  in  Edinburgh  University  and 
another  in  Glasgow  University,  neither  of  much 

1  See  p.  246. 


PORTRAITS  395 

value.  Recently  another  portrait  was  acquired 
lor  the  Scottish  National  Gallery.  It  is  less 
than  life  size,  old  and  similar  in  type  to  the 
Yester  portrait,  but  lacking  in  its  precision  and 
force.  ^ 

^  I  am  indebted  to  the  courtesy  of  James  L.  Caw,  Esq.,  Director  of 
the  Scottish  Natiotiul  Gallery,  for  information  about  the  Henderson 
jK>rtr;iits.      Sej!  aUo  h\^  work.  ScoltUh  Purtruits. 


CHRONOLOGICAL     TABLE 

1.560.    Reformation  in  Scotland. 
1566.  James  vi.  born. 

1.567.   Protestant  Church  established  by  Parliament. 
1572  (Jan.).    Convention   at   Leith  :    Episcopal   polity   introduced 
into  the  Church. 
(Nov.).  John  Knox  died. 
1581.  Second  Book  of  Discipline  adopted  by  the  Church. 
1583.   Henderson  born. 
1592.   Presbyterian  Magna  Charta  passed. 

1599  (Dec).  Henderson   matriculated   at   St.   Salvator's  College, 

St.  Andrews. 

1600  (Aug.).  Gowrie  conspiracy. 

(Oct.).  Convention  at  Holyrood  :  diocesan  Episcopacy  intro- 
duced :  three  bishops  appointed. 
(Dec).  First  bishop  admitted  to  Privy  Council. 
l60'i.   Henderson  graduated  M. A. 
1605.  Gledstanes  appointed  Archbishop  of  St.  Andrews. 

(July).  Nineteen    ministers   met   and    constituted    General 

Assembly  at  Aberdeen  against  the  king's  command. 
(Oct.).   Fourteen  ministers  tried  before  Privy  Council. 
1606  (Jan.).  Six  ministers  tried  for  treason. 

(July).  Act  passed  restoring  ancient  estate  of  bishops. 
(Dec).  Convention  at   Linlithgow:   king's  scheme  for  con- 
stant moderators  adopted. 
1607.   Episcopate  restored  to  pre- Reformation  number, 
1610.  Two  Courts  of  High  Commission  established. 

(June).  Glasgow  Assembly:  diocesan  synods  established. 
(Sept.).  Spottiswoode  and    two   bishops  received    Episcopal 
consecration  in  Ix)ndon  from  English  bishops. 
Ifill.    Henderson  licensed. 

1612.   Henderson  settled  at  I^uchars  :  Parliament  ratified  Acts  of 
(ilnsgow    Assembly:     V  ry    established:     Presby- 

terian Magna  Charta  n 
ifil.T.  Spottiswoode  appointed  Archbishop  of  St.  Andrews. 
KilfWAug.  l.>-18).  Aberdeen  Assembl v. 
I6I8  (Aug   25-27).   Perth     Assembly:'     Perth     Articles     pwsed. 

Henderson  received  a  call  to  Edinburgh. 
1 625.  Charles  I's  Act  of  Revocation. 

tat 


398     ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

163.3.  Charles  i.  visited  Scotland, 

(Aug.).   Laud  appointed  Archbishop  of  Canterbury. 

(Sept.).  Bishopric  of  Edinburgh  created. 
16.34,  New  Court  of  High  Commission  established :  Spottiswoode 

appointed  Chancellor. 
1 634-5.  Trial  of  Balmerino, 
1636.  Book  of  Canons  published. 

1637  (May).  Service  Book  published. 

(July  23).  Attempted  reading  of  Service  Book  in  St.  Giles  : 

riot. 
(Aug.).  Henderson  and  others  charged  to  purchase  copies  of 

Service  Book. 
(Aug.  23).    Henderson  and   two  others   presented   Bill   of 

Suspension  to  Privy  Council  against  the  charge. 
(Aug.   25).    Deliverance   of  Privy   Council    suspending   the 

charge. 
(Oct.  17).  Charles  refused  petitions  against  Service  Book, 
(Oct,  18),  Riot  in  Edinburgh  :  General  Supplication  prepared 

against  Service  Book,  Book  of  Canons,  and  bishops, 
(Nov,  15),  The  Tables  first  formed, 

1638  (Feb.  19)-   Proclamation  at  Stirling  :  agitation  against  Service 

Book  forbidden  under  pain  of  treason. 
(Feb.  22).  Proclamation  made  at  cross  of  Edinburgh  :  pro- 
testation read  by  Wariston :  Organisation  of  the  Tables 

completed. 
(Feb.  23).  Decision  to  Draw  up  National  Covenant. 
(Feb.  28,  Wed.).  National   Covenant   signed   in   Greyfriars 

Kirk  by  nobles  and  barons. 
(Mar.  1,  Thur.).  National  Covenant  signed  by  ministers  and 

commissioners  of  burghs. 
(Mar.  2,  Frid.).  National  Covenant  signed  by  people  at  large 

in  Trinity  Kirk. 
(Apr.   1,  Sunday).   National  Covenant  sworn  by  nobles  and 

people  in  Edinburgh  churches. 
(May)  Henderson   received    freedom   of  Dundee  :    elected 

minister  of  Greyfriars  Church,  Edinburgh. 
(June   7).     Marquis    of    Hamilton,    King's    Commissioner, 

reached  Edinburgh. 
(Nov.    21).     Meeting   of    Glasgow   Assembly :     Henderson 

Moderator. 
(Nov.  29).   The   Commissioner  quitted   the  Assembly,  and 

ordered  it  to  be  dissolved. 
(Dec.  20).  Glasgow  Assembly  rose. 

1639  (Jan.  2).  Henderson  elected  by  Town  Council  of  Edinburgh 

minister  of  the  High  Church,  Edinburgli. 
(June).  Charles  with  his  army  at  Birks,  near  Berwick. 
(June  5).  Scottish  Army  under  Leslie  at  Duns. 
(June  11-18).  Pacification  of  Birks. 


CHRONOLOGICAL  TABLE  399 

1639  (Aug.).  General  Assembly  passed  first  Barrier  Act. 

1640  (April  IS).   King  summoned  Short  Parliament. 
(May  5).  Short  Parliament  dissolved. 

(Aug.  20).  Scots  Army  crossed  Tweed  at  Coldstream. 

(Aug.  28).  Battle  of  Newbum-on-Tyne. 

(Sept).  Great  Council  of  Peers  at  York. 

(Oct.).   Negotiations  at  Hipon  :  armistice. 

(Nov.  3).   Long  Parliament  met. 

(Nov.  1.5).  Henderson  and  other  Scots  Commissioners 
reached  London. 

(Nov.).  Negotiations  for  Treaty  between  England  and  Scot- 
land begun. 

(Dec).  Henderson  appointed  Kector  of  Edinburgh  University. 

(Dec.  11).   Root-and- Branch  petition  to  Parliament. 

1641  (Mar.)  Trial  of  Strafford. 

(Mar. -July).  Scots  demand  for  Uniformity  considered  by 
Parliament  and  rejected. 

Castell's  petition,  sup{K)rted  by  Henderson,  presented  to 
P;«rliament. 

(July).  Henderson  returned  to  Scotland  :  elected  Moderator 
of  General  Assembly  the  second  time. 

(Aug.).  Treaty  completed :  Charles  left  London  for  Edin- 
burgh. 

(Aug.  14).  Charles  entered  Edinburgh. 

(Aug.  17).  Charles  met  Scottish  Parliament. 

(Nov.  18).  Charles  left  Scotland  for  the  last  time. 

1642  (Aug.  22).  Civil  war  broke  out  in  England. 
(Oct.  23).  Battle  of  Edgehill. 

1643  (Feb.).  Slission  of  Loudoun  and   Henderson  to  tht-  king  at 

Oxford.       Henderson  met  Jeremy  Taylor  at  Oxford 
Conference  between  Henderson  and   Montrose  near  Stirling 

Bridge. 
(June).  Death  of  Hampden  near  Chalgrove  Field:  defeat  of 

Fairfax  at  Adwalton  Moor. 
1643  (July  1).   Westminster  Assembly  began  its  sittings. 

(July).  Waller  defeated  at  I^nsdown  and  Kound^ay  Down. 
(Aug.  2).    General   Assembly  met:    Henderson    Moderator 

for  third  time. 
(Aug.  7).    English    Parliamentary  Commissioners  arrived  at 

Leith  to  ask  military  aid  from  Scotland. 
(Aug.  17).  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  adopted  by  General 

Assembly  and  Convention  of  Flstates. 
(Aug.  18).   Eight  Commissioners  chosen  to  represent  Church 

of  Scotland  in  Westminster  Assembly. 
(Aug.    26).    Solemn    League   and    Covenant    presented    to 

English  V  t 

(Sept.   l.S).    II  I,  Gillespie,  and   Lord   Maitland  took 

their  seats  in  Westminster  Assembly. 


400  ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 

1643  (Sept.   25).  Solemn   League  and  Covenant  subscribed  and 
sworn  by  members  of  House  of  Commons  and  of  West- 
minster Assembly. 
l64-i  (Jan.).  Scots  army  entered  England. 
(July).  Battle  of  Marston  Moor. 
(Sept.).  Cromwell  raised  in  House  of  Commons  the  question 

of  toleration  for  Independents. 
(Dec).    Committee    of    Estates    desired    impeachment    of 
Cromwell  as  an  incendiary. 

1645  (Jan.).  Presbytery  established  in  England  by  resolutions  of 

Parliament. 
(Jan. — Feb.).     Uxbridge    Conference    between    king    and 

Parliament. 
(Feb.  2).  Montrose's  victory  at  Inverlochy. 
(Feb.  22).  Uxbridge  Conference  broken  off. 
(June).  Battle  of  Naseby. 
(Sept.).  Montrose  defeated  at  Philiphaugh. 

1646  (May).  Charles  betook  himself  to  Scots  army  at  Newark. 
(May  15).   Henderson  came  to  Newcastle  at  king's  request. 
(May  29 — July  2).  Discussion  before  Charles  and  Henderson 

at  Newcastle. 
(Aug.  1 1 ).  Henderson  arrived  at  Leith  from  Newcastle. 
(Aug.  19).  Henderson  died  in  Edinburgh. 
(Dec).  Confession   of  Faith   completed   and    presented   to 

English  Parliament. 

1647  (Aug.).  Confession  of  Faith  adopted  by  General  Assembly. 

1648  (July).  Both  Catechisms  adopted  by  General  Assembly. 

1649  (Feb.).  Scottish    Parliament  approved   Confession  of  Faith 

and  Catechisms. 
1650.  Rouse's  metrical  version  of  Psalms  authorised  by  General 
Assembly  and  published  for  public  use. 


INDEX 


Abrrdbkn    doctors,    153-5,    185-6, 

■120. 
Aboyiie,  Viscount,  202,  300. 
Act  of  1592,  gee  Magna  Charta  of 

Church  of  ^Scotland. 
Act  of  Revocation,  48. 
Alexander,  Sir   William,  of  Men- 

strie,  349. 
America,    Westminster    Standards 

in,  347,  348. 
Anderson,  Dr.  Maitland,  388. 
Antrim,  Earl  of,  300,  302. 
Argyll,  Earl  of,  186,  210,  223,  233, 

277,  278,  279,  290. 
Articles  of  Perth,  see  Perth  Articles. 
Australia,  Confession  of  Faith  in, 

348. 


Buchanan,  Georgs,  19G-7. 

Buckle,  H.  T.,  23. 

Burnet,  Bishop,  79,  142,  214,  229- 

30. 
Robert,  116. 


Baiu,ik,  Robert,  2,  78,  120,  243, 

309,  344. 
Balcanquhal,  Dr.,  195. 
Balfour  of  Burleigh,  Ix)rd,  79. 

Sir  James,  49,  UU  ».,  210. 

Balmerino,  Ix)rd,  55-6,  72,  118,319. 
Barrier  Act  of  1«W9,  221  ;  of  1697, 

221. 
Baxter,  Richard,  320. 
Beattie,  Professor  James,  3.>1. 
Bellenden,  Bi)«hopof  DuiiMane,  53. 
Benson,  A.  ('.,  78  h. 
Berriedalc,  Master  of,  \'2'.> 
Bill  of  SuHpension  against  Service 

Book.  81. 
Birks,  Pacification  of,  205-6,  208. 
Bishops,   56,    60,   80,    88,     169-70, 

18.3. 
*  Black  Acts,'  24. 
HI...  L     n.v.;,!    ■'.:    •'7. 

1'.  130. 

li ...  ,. 

Brisbane.  Matthew,  312. 

Bristol,  Earl  of,  238,  239.  24£,  265. 

Bruce,  Robert,  of  Kinoaird,  7>  31. 


Calamy,  Edward,  270. 

Calderwood,  David,  10,  46. 

Canada,  Confession  of  Faith  in, 
348. 

Canons,  Book  of,  61. 

Cant  of  Pitsligo,  1.53. 

Carlyle,  Thomas,  .347. 

Carmichael  of  Kilconqubar,  10, 
11. 

Caryll,  Joseph,  270. 

Cassillis,  Lord,  121,  131,  309. 

('astell's  Petition  to  Parliament, 
262. 

Catechism,  Shorter,  .^37.  344,  346, 
.'i46. 

(Ceylon,  Confession  of  Faith  in,  348. 

Chambers,  R«ilitrt.  li?.1. 

Charles  I.,  ati  ;  his  ignor- 

ance of  Scd  .  *4'_*  ;   visits 

Scotland,  5(>-l  ;  crow  •  ly- 

rond,  52  ;  rhnrnctprd'  us, 

'»'  '  U    p^'llliOUS 

a^:  '^,  91  ;    pro- 

cluinaliun  -^vire    Book, 

1(»7  :  reifar  il  Covenant 

n-  11;  puts  forward 

K  nil    to   defeat  it, 

!'•" ;  I     army    agjiintt 

Coven  !;  at  Birks,  206; 

h"       '  "''  :     prorogue* 

i'  ^  reason  for 

V  ....i......„nj 

t  of 

S  a- 

ti  i<t 

It, 
2ih»;     his  attitude  at  » Li x bridge 

2o 


402 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


Conference,  S56,  357 ;  refuses  to 
accept  defeat,  363 ;  professes  to 
nejfotiate,  364 ;  his  duplicity, 
364 ;  schemes  for  foreign  invasion, 
365  ;  effects  of  his  retiral  to  Scots 
army,  366 ;  professes  desire  to 
meet  Henderson,  368;  discussions 
with  him,  368-9. 

Church  of  Scotland,  22,  23,  31-2. 

Clarendon,  242,  244,  341,  365, 
376. 

Clarke,  Rev.  Samuel,  2. 

Cockburn,  Lord,  117. 

Coltness  Papers,  account  of  secret 
messages  from  Lord  Saville  to 
Covenanters,  229-30. 

*  Combiners,'  early  name  for  Cove- 
nanters, 149. 

'  Combustion,'  86. 

Commission  of  General  Assembly, 
287,  288,  292. 

Confession  of  Kaith,  344,  346. 

Congregationalism,  273. 

Constant  Moderatorships,  35. 

Convention  of  Leith,  18. 

Covenanters,  149,  176  ».,  194,  200, 
381,  385. 

Crawford,  George,  125. 

Creich,  3,  389. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  251,  257,  269, 
303,  329,  330,  331,  3.34,  a35,  352, 
360,  363,  372. 


D'EwES,  Sir  Symonds,  302. 
Dickson,   David,  72,   74,  99,  115, 

163,  215. 
Discontent  in  Scotland  at  James's 

Church  policy,  43. 
Douglas,  Robert,  309. 
Drummond  of  Hawthornden,  66. 
Dugar,  John,  173. 
Dunbar,  Earl  of,  36-7,  43. 
Dunfermline,   Earl    of,   206,   206, 

226,  238. 
Dunlop,  Alexander  Murray,  117. 
Durie,  John,  250. 


Edgehill,  battle  of,  291,  303. 
Eliot,  John,  missionary  to  Indians, 

269. 
Episcopacy  in  Church  of  Scotland, 

17-18,  31-2,  182. 
Essex,  Earl  of,  303,  361. 


Fairue,  James,  136. 
Featly,  Daniel,  270. 
Finch,  John,  Chief  Justice  of  the 

Common  Pleas,  143,  240. 
Five  Articles  of  Perth,  see  Perth 

Articles. 
Fletcher,  James,  135. 
Forbes,  Patrick,  Bishop  of  Aberdeen, 

13,  42,  164. 
Frost,   his  connection   with^  secret 

messages  from    Lord   Saville   to 

Covenanters,  229,  280. 


General  Assembly,  21,  22,  23,  33 ; 

at  Aberdeen  1616,  9. 
General  Supplication  against  Service 

Book,  93,  96,  104-6. 
Gerson,  Chancellor  of  University  of 

Paris,  199. 
Gillespie,   George,   91,    243,    261, 

309,  318,  344,  358. 
Glasgow,  Assembly  of  1610,  36. 
of  1»38,   166,   173,   174, 

182,  183,  184,  185,  382-3. 
Gledstanes,  George,  Archbishop  of 

St.  Andrews,  4,  5,  9. 
Glencairn,  Earl  of,  2. 
Gordon,  parson  of  Rothiemay,  126. 
Gowrie  Conspiracy,  30-1. 
Green  Tables,  see  Tables. 
Grey  of  Wark,  Lord,  304. 
Greyfriars      Churchyard,       124-6, 

376. 
Guthrie,  James,  319. 
Guthry,    Bishop,    72,    124-5,    311, 

319,  378. 


Hamilton,  James,  Third  Marquis 
of,  106,  130,  139,  142,  149,  1.50, 
152,  156,  161,  164, 166,  172,  175, 
176,  177,  178,  202,  215,  216,  277, 
290,  299,  301. 

Sir  John,  Justice-Clerk,  106, 

138. 

Hampden,  John,  75,  140,  230,  272, 
303. 

Hartlib,  Samuel,  260. 

Hay,  Sir  John,  Clerk  Register,  90, 
94,  107,  279. 

Henderson,  Alexander,  few  per- 
sonal details  about  him,  1  ;  bom 
at  Luthrie,  parish  of  Creich,  3  ; 
at    St.    Andrews   College,  3 ;   a 


INDEX 


408 


regent  ot  philnsuphy,  3;  licensed 
and  settled  at  l^uchari,  5,  6 ; 
friendship  with  Gledstanes,  5  ; 
conversion,  8  ;  joins  I'reshyterian 
party,  8  ;  at  Aberdeen  .Ac^.".>i>i'-, 
1616,    9;     at    Perth 

1618,    10;    proposed    t: :: 

to    Edinbiirph    in    1618,    1()-11; 
disobeys  Perth  Articles,  11  ;  be-  ' 
fore    Hi^h    Commission    Court, 
11-12;    at   St.   Andrews  confer- 
ence    on     Perth     Articles,    12;! 
Moutry  Burn,  repairs  to  bridf^e, 
his  connection  with,  14;  called 
to    Aberdeen,    14 ;    correspond- 
ence with  Countess  of  Mar,  14- 
16;     did    he    secretly    stir     up' 
opposition  to  Service  Book  ?  72-  | 
73  ;  he  petitions  against  it,  81  ;  t 
resolves  to  renew  Covenant,  115; 
drafts  National  Covenant,  116; 
his  character,  118;  church  build- 
ing^s    at    Leuchars,    135;    writes 
manifestoes      for     Covenanters, 
144;  visits  Aberdeen,   153;   op- 
poses King's  Confession,  160-1  ; 
Protestation     a^inst     it,     162;' 
ioderator  of  Glasjjow  Assembly,  ! 
177  ;     refuses   to   dissolve   it  at  i 
bidding  of  Koyal  Commissioner,  | 
181  ;  translated  to  Hiffh  Church  I 
of    I5dinburgh,    181) ;     his    poor  I 
health,    189,    n.  ;    writes    mani-  I 
festo  to  people  of  Kngland,  1S>5  ; 
writes  '  instructions   for   Defen-  ' 
•ive  Arms,"  11M>-1) ;   political  im- 
portance   of     this    paper.    200 ; 
meets  Charles  at  Birks.  20*5,  216; 
Covenant   imposed    ou   all   sub- 
jects, 219  ;  proposes  Barrier  Act,  | 
220-1  ;    writes    m-^"'*— •"••-    '"• 
fore  Covenanters  < 

234      iirp.iclu^i  .tt  \ 

at    i 

24-. 

Hollar,  N'ctor  of  I 

burgh    '  247 : 

course 

262;      .. 

Episcopal,  y  ui  KiiKl^nd 

storm,    255  ;    writ*^    s 

mand     for    I'  . ,     I'.iti  7  ;  . 

Parliament     ■  -cots'    De-  ! 

mand    in     lti4i,    _•,_  ;    supports  | 

Castell's  petition  to  Parliament,  , 


263;  Moderator  of  Cieneral  As- 
sembly for  second  time,  271  ; 
seeks  to  advance  Uniformity, 
274  ;  desires  to  retire  from  Kdin- 
burgh,  276;  appointed  Dean  of 
(.'hapcl  Koyal,  278  ;  attacks  upon 
by  extremists,  289-90 ;  at  Ox- 
ford with  petition  to  king,  292  ; 
badly  received  there,  293;  dis- 
cussions with  Jeremy  Taylor, 
294  ;  meets  Montrose  near  Stir- 
ling Bridge,  297 ;  Moderator 
of  General  Assembly  for  third 
time,  305 ;  submits  draft  of 
Solemn  I^affiie  and  Covenant, 
306,308;  o  ler  to  West- 

minster A  <>9;  why  he 

advocated  I  iiifdnnity,  314-15; 
the  proposed  impeachment  of 
Cromwell,  3.JI,  340;  in  West- 
minster Assembly.  341  ;  answers 
Nve's  attacks,  ;J43  ;  at  L'xbridge, 
354,  355,  359;  his  health  de- 
clines, 361-2 ;  agrees  to  meet 
Charles  at  Newcastle,  368  ;  dis- 
cussion with  the  king,  368-9 ; 
leaves  Newcastle  in  dying  condi- 
tion, 373;  dies  at  Edinburgh, 
374 ;  buried  in  Greyfriars  church- 
yard. 374  :  his  prnvr,  375  ;  his 
Edinburgh  honi'  rmorial 

in  leuchars  chi.  alleged 

deathbed  Deolaraimu,  ^76  ;  esti- 
mate of  character  and  work, 
377-9 :  as  rector  of  FMinburgh 
I'nivcruity.  .'J86-7 ;  gifts  to  St 
Andrews    Univ.  ""M  ;      to 

Uurhars,  388;  ...IBO; 

;.     '■•.••     •-    •  ...  .,.»0;   his 

I'  I  ;     lit«r»ry 

„....  3i)4. 
,<>ie«n  ofCharlesi., 

M.  Sir  Adam   of  Humbie, 


^  of,  360. 
:i.  Courts  of,  96, 


'1. 


h   SrhonI   Yards,  Haadvwn's 

■74. 

ninster  Anembly 
divitie,  -Oy  U. 
Hollar.    Wensel,    etcher,     244-6, 

304. 
Home,  Earl,  100. 


404 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


Hope,  Sir  Thomas,  72-3,  110,  140, 
165,  306,  308. 

Hume  Brown,  Professor,  195,  212. 

Huntly,  iMarquis  of  (George  Gor- 
don), 24,  26,  202. 


Incident,  The,  280. 

Independents  in  Westminster  As- 
sembly, 326,  328,  336,  361. 

Information  :  Paper  issued  by  the 
Tables,  114. 

Inglis,  John,  Lord  President,  134 n. 

Irish  Rebellion,  280. 


Jamks  VI.,  and  Andrew  Melville,  4  ; 
founds  University  Library  at  St. 
Andrews,  4,  6  ;  his  treatment  of 
Robert  Bruce  of  Kinnaird,  7-8  ; 
why  he  desired  episcopacy  in 
Church  of  Scotland,  18-19  ;  con- 
sents to  Act  of  1592,  24-5; 
summons  Assemblies  on  his  own 
authority,  27 ;  introduces  dio- 
cesan episcopacy  into  Church  of 
Scotland,  31-2  ;  forbids  meeting 
of  General  Assembly,  32 ;  visits 
Scotland,  38 ;  his  character,  40- 
41 ;  character  of  his  bishops,  42  ; 
discontent  with  his  church  policy, 
46,  47;  its  failure,  47;  Confession 
of  1580,  115;  author  of  metrical 
version  of  the  Psalms  (i^),  349. 

Jeffreys,  Judge,  143. 

Johnston,  Archibald  of  VV^aristou. 
See  Wariston. 


KiNNouL,  Earl  of,  63. 
Knox,  John,  1,  18-19,  370. 


Lanark,  Earl  of,  292,  298. 

Lang,  Andrew,  75,  379. 

Large  Declaration,  the,  72,  167, 
169,  195,  218. 

Laud,  Archbishop,  in  Scotland,  38, 
and  Charles  i.,  48;  ignorance  of 
Scotland,  48,  242  ;  second  visit 
to  Scotland,  62  ;  advice  to  Charles 
about  bishops,  53  ;  and  Service 
Book,  77,  78  n.  ;  the  king's 
counsellor  on  Scottish  affairs, 
106,    139;  on    Henderson,  191; 


advises  Charles  to  punish  Scots, 

191,  237. 
Lay  elders,  rights  of,  158. 
Lee,   Rev.   Dr.,    on    Covenanters, 

176  n. 
Leslie,  Alexander,  131,  201,  204, 

232. 
Leuchars,  5,  6,  189  n.,  388. 

church,  6,  376. 

church  buildings  at,  136. 

Liberton's      Wynd,      Henderson's 

house  in,  276. 
Lindsay,  Lord,  109,  123. 
Linlithgow     Assembly     of     1606, 

35. 
Livingstone,  John,  126,  130. 
Ix)ndon,  Treaty  of,  245-8. 
Ijong  Parliament,  at  first  attempts 

moderate  Church  reform,  262-3. 
Lords  of  the  Articles,  22. 
Lome,    Lord,   97,    139,    160.     See 

Argyll. 
Loudoun,  Lord  (John  Campbell), 

101,  105,  118, 121, 122,  123,  131, 

206,  216,  223,  226,  228,  238,  278, 

284,  290,  292,  332. 
Luthrie,  3. 


Mackenzie,  Sib  Gkorge,  143. 

Mackinnon,  Professor  James,  24. 

M'Crie,  Dr.,  74. 

Magna  Charta  of  Church  of  Scot- 
land, 24-5,  37. 

Maitland,  Lord,  256,  309. 

Maitland,  Sir  John  of  Thirlstane, 
24-6. 

Major,  John,  199. 

Manchester,  Earl  of,  330,  361 . 

Mar,  Earl  of,  18. 

Marie,  Countess  of,  14-16. 

Marshall,  Stephen,  270,  304,  340. 

Masson,  Professor,  162. 

Maynard,  John,  333,  334. 

Maxwell,  Bishop  of  Ross,  66,  63, 
139  379. 

Melville,  Andrew,  4,  22,  24,  34. 

James,  34. 

Memories  and  Portraits,  241. 

Mercurius  Aulicus,  294,  320,  340. 

Millar,  Professor  Hepburn,  351. 

Milton,  John,  335,  337. 

Mitchell,  David,  132. 

Montgomery,  tulcan  Archbishop 
of  Glasgow,  24. 


INDEX 


405 


Montreuil,  3B0,  .368. 

Montrose,  Karl  of  (James  (traham), 
!H>,  124,  131,  153,  161,  202,  216, 
224,  2:Vi,  277,  27!>,  296,  21)7,  300, 

•.Mn,  ;$.»;,  3r>o,  36i,  363. 

Montrose  A«isenibly  of  1600,  29-30. 
Moray,  Sir  Robert,  369. 
Morley,  Viscount,  324. 
Morton,  Recent,  18,  19. 
Moutry  Hum,  11. 
Mowat,     Roger,    of     BalquhoUie, 

101. 
Mure,  Sir  William,  of  Rowallan, 

350. 


Napier,  Lord,  54,  277. 

Natal,    Confession     of    Kaith    in, 

348. 
National  Covenant,  The,  116, 121-3, 

127-34,  219. 
Newburn,  Battle  of,  236. 
Newbury,  Battle  of,  351. 
Newcastle  Discussion,  The,  367-70. 
New  Zealand,  Confession  of  Faitii 

in,  348. 
Nicolson,  Sir  Thomas,  101,  140. 
Nithsdale,  Earl  of,  300. 
Norgate,  Edward,  207. 
Nye,  Philip,  304,  310,  340,  343. 


Pakuament  House,  New,  222,  276, 

374. 
Parliament  of  Scotland,  tee  Scottish 

Parliament. 
Perth    '         '        9.  10-11,  40. 
Pfrth  12,46. 

Prin;;!  i.-,-r......_    ■, ,; 

Privv  -72, 

82,  -.  ....  9. 

Prote-  linst  king's  procla- 

t.i«  .  111. 

r  iou  of,  348. 


Rai?«v,  Dr.,  131. 
Rait,  Professor,  134  n. 
Ramsay,  Andrew,  78,  135. 
Reformation,   Scotland's    debt    to, 

78-9. 
Reynolds,  Dr.,  345. 
Ripon.  Treaty  of,  238-9. 
Rolluck,  ilciiry,  78,  12.3. 


Rosebcry,  Earl  of,  77. 

Rothes,  Karl  of,  41,  101,  11.3,  118, 

121,  122,  123, 131,  161,  206,  216, 

245.  247,  277. 
Rouse,  Francis,  ;348,  .349. 
Rutherfurd,  Samuel,  73,  309,  315, 

330,  391. 
Rutland,  Earl  of,  304. 


Sanderson,  Robert,  Bishop  of  Lin- 
coln, 270. 

Saville,  Lord,  229-30. 

Scone,  Lord,  12,  13. 

Scot,  Sir  John  of  Scotstarvet, 
164  n. 

Scott,  Sir  Walter,  79-80. 

William  of  Cupar,  9.  10,  12. 

Scottish  Parliament,  20,  21,  61. 

.Selden,    '    '        ' 

Service  I  72,  76-7. 

Short  P.  — .>,  231. 

Solemn  I  i  Covenant, 306-7, 

■Mm    :  lO. 

,  'lence,  Church  of 

Scotland  s  claim  to,  22-3. 
Spottiswoode,    Archbishop    of    St. 

Andrews,  9, 10,  13,  41-2,  53, 137, 

1.39. 

Sir  Robert,  107,  279. 

Sprott,  Dr.,  on  Serrirc  Book,  77, 

78. 
St.  Andrews  Conference  1619,  12. 
Stemhold   and    IT'  metrical 

version  of  P»alri 
^'  y    •      -•♦1,  ..^..,  381. 


I  Sir  LeM 

i    S»r,fr,.r,J,    Kai. 


.Sy. 


.1.  Pjirlof,  l-<       .     _ 
)iop  of  (tallowaj,  60, 


Tables,   The,   93.    06,    100,    114, 

16S«. 
TaamaniA,  Coaf— ion  of  Faith  in, 

.34a 


I  nirratidii, 

371,372. 


.1,  373  II. 
030,  3.34-5, 


406 


ALEXANDER  HENDERSON 


Traquair,  Earl  of.  Lord  Treasurer, 
(John  Stewart),  63,  88,  95,  102, 
106,  109,  138,  139,  215,  221, 
223,  228. 

Treaty  of  London,  247-8. 

Trial  of  Ministers  for  treason,  33, 
34. 

Tulchan  bishops,  19. 

Uniformity  of  Religion,  249,  250, 
287,  312,  328,  330,  336,  337, 
348,361. 

Uxbridge  Conference,  361-9. 

Vane,  Sir  Harry  the  Younger,  304, 

320,  360. 
Verney,  Sir  Edmund,  203,  205. 

Wallis,  Dr.,  345,  346. 
AVar  Cabinet,  330. 


VVariston,    91,   92,   101,  105,  108, 

116,  121-3,  131,   143,   152,  169, 

161-2,  167,  169,  208,   238,  245, 

255,  278,  290,  307,  309. 
Warneck,  Dr.,  269. 
Watergate  of  Edinburgh,  216. 
Webster,     Miss      Mary,     of     St. 

Andrews,  375. 
Wedderburii,  Alexander,  135. 

Bishop  of  Dunblane,  60. 

Welsh,  John,  34. 
Wemyss,  John,  218. 
Wentworth,  see  Strafford. 
Westminster  Assembly,  304,   305, 

309-10,  321-2,  326-7,  337,  3.38. 
Whitfoord,  Bishop  of  Brechin,  60, 

137,  139. 
Whitelocke,    Sir    Bulstrode,    333, 

334. 
Worcester  House,  243,  341. 


Printed  in  Great  Britain  by  T.  and  A.  Constable,  Printers  to  His  Majesty 
at  the  Edinburgh  University  Press 


j 

4 

University  of  Toronto 

C 

X 
(4 

Library 

&  ac 

x/ 

0. 

C 

DO  NOT       /^ 

OD 
O 

o> 

REMOVE    ll 
THE            // 

/ 

CARD 

FROM         ^ 

o 

-I 

o 

e  i 

"B    = 

5    * 

a 

£, 
H 

dj 
i—i 

•< 

:     \ 

J 

I 

THIS            \ 
POCKEl'         \^ 

Acme  Library  Card  Pocket 
Made  by  LIBI^                 KEAU