•A°NA' O,
c - i 3
Digitized by the Internet Archive
in 2012 with funding from
National Library of Scotland
http://archive.org/details/melvillesearlsv100fras
32, South Castle Street, Min?mr(Ji.
9*l.gecmJc,<gJ.
^.JlllllllllllilllliilBil'iiilpiiiiii'imm^^
(j&or^-uis Coitus de 7s\'I el\' ill ,0J iceco nits de. Kirka/dy,
p ^iJoinirius de.^.ai,tk,^4loniniai/-,et JZallivccn~ie ;
QJ crcni/smns prirtcvpibiu (j/uUiehno tcrtio^/Kaonre Sri hi nice
trancice et Nibcmiice, Key i ', e t ^flaricr Renince pi~o antique
<&^>o)catice rcc/no PROR EX; cFv/jurffj status cfccretarius.
IV CONTENTS.
PAGE
THE MELVILLES OF RAITH IN FIFE :—
I. John Melville, first of Raith, 1400 — c. 1427, . . . 23-27
II. Sir John Melville, second of Raith, c. 1427 — c. 1463, . 27-28
Marjory Scott (Balwearie), his wife.
III. William Melville of Raith, c. 1463-1502, . . . 29-35
Margaret Douglas (Longniddry), his first wife.
Euphame Lundie (Balgonie), his second wife.
IV. John Melville, younger of Raith, d. 1494, . . . 35-37
Janet Bonar (of Rossie), his wife.
V. Sir John Melville of Raith, 1502-1548, . . . 38-81
Margaret Wemyss, his first wife.
Helen Napier, his second wife.
Sir Robert Melville of Murdochcairnie, knight, first Lord
Melville of Monimail, b. c. 1527, d. 1621, . . 82-124
Katherine Adamson, his first wife.
Lady Mary Leslie, his second wife.
Lady Jean Stewart, his third wife.
Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland, second Lord Melville of
Monimail, 1621-1635, ..... 124-132
Margaret Ker (Ferniehirst), his first wife.
Jean Hamilton, Lady Ross, his second wife.
Sir James Melville of Hallhill, author of the "Memoirs," 1535-
1617, .... ... 133-162
Christian Boswell, his wife.
Sir Andrew Melville of Garvock, Master of the Household to
Queen Mary and King James the Sixth, 1 567-161 7, . [163-167
Jane Kennedy, his first wife.
Elizabeth Hamilton, his second wife.
William Melville, Commendator of Tonglnnd, and Lord
Tongland, 1584-1613, ..... 168-171
Anna Lindsay, his wife.
CONTENTS.
VI. John Melville of Raith, 1548-1605, .... 172-184
Isabella Lundie, his first wife.
Margaret Bonar, his second wife.
Grisell Meldrum, his third wife.
VII. John Melville of Raith, 1605-1626, .... 185-189
Margaret Scott (Balwearie), his wife.
VIII. John Melville, seventh Laird of Raith, and third Lord Melville
of Monimail, 1626-1643, .... 190-194
Anne Erskine (Invertiel), his wife.
IX. George, fourth Lord and first Earl of Melville, 1643-1707, . 195-244
Lady Catherine Leslie (Leven), his countess.
X. David, third Earl of Leven, and second Earl of Melville, b.
1660; Earl of Leven 1681 ; Earl of Melville 1707;
d. 1728, ....... 245-307
Lady Anne Wemyss, his countess.
XII. 1. David, fourth Earl of Leven, and third Earl of Melville,
b. 1717, d. 1729, ..... 308
XI. 2. Alexander, fifth Earl of Leven, and fourth Earl of Mel-
ville, 1729-1754, ..... 309-336
Mary Erskine (Carnock), his first wife.
Elizabeth Monypenny (Pitmilly), his second wife.
XII. 2. David, sixth Earl of Leven, and fifth Earl of Melville,
1754-1802, ...... 337-352
Wilhelmina Nisbet (Dirleton), his countess.
XIII. Alexander, seventh Earl of Leven, and sixth Earl of Melville,
1802-1820, ...... 353-370
Jane Thornton, his countess.
XIV. 1. David, eighth Earl of Leven, and seventh Earl of Melville,
1820-1860, ...... 371-380
Elizabeth Anne Campbell (of Succoth), his countess.
VI CONTENTS.
PAGE
XV. 2. Lady Elizabeth Jane Leslie Melville Cartwright of Melville, . 381
Thomas Robert Brook Leslie Melville Cartwright, her husband.
XIV. 2. John, ninth Earl of Leven, and eighth Earl of Melville,
1860-1876, ........ 382-385
Harriet Thornton, his first wife.
Sophia Thornton, his second wife.
XV. 3. Alexander, tenth Earl of Leven, and ninth Earl of
Melville, ...... 386
XV. 4. Ronald, eleventh Earl of Leven, and tenth Earl of Melville, 386
Hon. Emma Selina Portman, his countess.
THE EARLS OF LEVEN AND LORDS BALGONIE :—
I. Sir Alexander Leslie, first Earl of Leven, b. c. 1580, d. 1661, . 387-438
Agnes Renton (Billie), his countess.
Alexander Leslie, Lord Balgonie, d, 1645, vita patris, . 437
Lady Margaret Leslie, his wife.
II. Alexander, second Earl of Leven, 1661-1664, . . . 439-442
Margaret Howard (Carlisle), his countess.
Margaret Leslie, Countess of Leven, d. 1674, . . 440-442
Hon. Francis Montgomerie, her husband,
Catherine Leslie, Countess of Leven, d. 1676, . . 442
ARMORIAL BEARINGS, ...... 443-444
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MEL-
VILLE, . ...... 44S-4SI
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF LESLIE, EARLS OF
LEVEN, ........ 452
CONTENTS.
Vll
ILLUSTRATIONS IN VOLUME FIRST.
Portrait of George, first Earl of Melville,
The Stralsund Gold Medal, 1628, ....
The Bishop's Palace at Monimail, Cardinal Beaton's Tower,
Melville House, Fifeshire, .....
Balgonie Castle, Fifeshire, .....
Portrait of Lady Katherine Leslie, wife of George, first Earl of Melville,
Portrait of Alexander, fifth Earl of Leven and Melville, .
Portrait of David, sixth Earl of Leven and Melville,
Portrait of Wilhelmina Nisbet, his countess,
Portrait of Alexander, seventh Earl of Leven and Melville,
Portrait of Jane Thornton, his countess, ....
Portrait of David, eighth Earl of Leven and Melville,
Portrait of Elizabeth Anne Campbell, his countess,
Portrait of Agnes Renton, wife of Sir Alexander Leslie, first Earl of
Leven, .......
Portrait of Lady Margaret Leslie, wife of Alexander, Lord Balgonie,
PAGE
Frontispiece
xxix
xlviii
xlviii
lii
196
3°9
337
337
353
353
37i
37*
43°
433
WOODCUT SIGNATURES AND SEAL.
Signatures of —
Sir John Melville of Raith, 1502-1548, .... 81
Sir Robert Melville of Murdochcairnie, knight, first Lord Melville
of Monimail, 1527-1621, . . . . .124
Sir Robert Melville of Bruntisland, second Lord Melville of Moni-
mail, 1621-1635, ...... 132
Sir James Melville of Hallhill, 1535-1617, .... 162
John Melville of Raith, 1548-1605, ..... 184
John Melville of Raith, 1605-1626, ..... 189
John Melville, third Lord Melville of Monimail, 1626-1643, . 194
VOL. 1. b
Vlll CONTENTS.
Woodcut Signatures— continued. page
George, fourth Lord and first Earl of Melville, 1643-1707, . . 244
David, third Earl of Leven and second Earl of Melville, 1 660-1 728, 307
George, Lord Balgonie, his eldest son, .... 307
David, fourth Earl of Leven, as Lord Balgonie, 1723, . . 308
Alexander, fifth Earl of Leven, and fourth Earl of Melville,
I729-I7S4) ....... 336
David, sixth Earl of Leven, and fifth Earl of Melville, 1754-1802, . 352
Alexander, seventh Earl of Leven, and sixth Earl of Melville, 1802, 370
David, eighth Earl of Leven and Melville, 1832, . . . 380
Seal of —
John Melville, first of Raith, 1400-1427, .... 27
THE LEVEE" AND MELVILLE PEEEAGES.
In the month of August 1856, a request was made to me by David, Earl of
Leven and Melville, and his two brothers, the Honourable John Leslie
Melville, and the Honourable Alexander Leslie Melville, to meet them at
Melville House. The health of the earl's only surviving son — the gallant
and amiable Alexander, Lord Balgonie — a major in the army, had suffered
severely in the Crimean Avar, and the progress of his indisposition occasioned
much anxiety to his venerable father. The earl was the holder of the two
earldoms of Leven and Melville and the minor dignities of Lord Balgonie
and of Viscount Kirkcaldy and Lord Melville of Monimail, etc., connected
with these respective earldoms. He was also proprietor of the entailed
estate of Melville, and of the unentailed estate of Hallhill and others.
In the belief that the personal peerages and the landed estates were
always intended to descend to and be enjoyed by the same heirs, the earl
considered it to be his duty to make arrangements to provide for this so far
as lay in his power. His peerages were held under patents granted by
successive sovereigns, James the Sixth, Charles the First, and Charles
the Second, and also by King William the Third. One at least of
these original patents, that of the earldom of Leven, which was limited
to heirs-male, had been surrendered in the hands of King Charles the
Second, and a regrant made to include heirs-female as well as male. Under
that regrant, on the failure of heirs-male, two heirs-female successively
enjoyed the earldom of Leven. From this fact it was inferred by certain
lawyers that heirs-female could succeed whenever the succession opened to
vol. I. c
X INTRODUCTION.
them. The Earl of Leven and Melville had obtained advice in reference to
the succession both to his peerages and his entailed estate of Melville in the
event of his only sou dying without issue, but the advice had been contra-
dictory and therefore unsatisfactory.
It was in- these circumstances that I was requested to attend a conference
with the earl and his two brothers, when I stated my opinion that in the
event of the death of Lord Balgonie, all the peerages would descend to the
heir-male of the family, and that the entailed estate of Melville would be
separated from the peerages and be inherited by the heir of line. But
that opinion was given with reserve, as I had not had an opportunity of
examining all the original patents, the resignations, and regrants of them.
Before an authoritative and reliable opinion could be given, I suggested
that the patents and regrants should all be carefully examined.
At the request of the family I undertook such an examination. The
result was given in a statement completed by me in May 1857, with
reference to all the Leven and Melville peerages. My opinion was confirmed
that these were all descendible to the heir-male of the then Earl of Leven
and Melville. My statement in manuscript extended to upwards of one
hundred folio pages, and I believe it is still in manuscript, never having
been printed.
Tkust-Settlements by Earl David in 1857.
The great anxiety of David, Earl of Leven and Melville, in reference to
the succession to his peerages and estates, will be best explained by the
measures which he adopted to avert what he feared was a crisis in the
history of the family. While Lord Balgonie was still alive, Earl David
executed on 14th July 185 7 a disposition and settlement of his estates.
The circumstances which induced his lordship to grant it are fully narrated
in the following terms : —
" Considering that whereas I have been advised that the earldom of Leven,
and the earldom of Melville, and barony of Melville of Monimail, and other
titles of honor vested in my person, are or may be held and assumed by the
investitures thereof to stand so destined as that the same may descend to heirs-
FIRST TRUST SETTLEMENT OF 1857. XI
male to the exclusion of heirs-female : and whereas I have been further advised
that the entailed estate of Melville and others, also vested in my person, are or
may be held and assumed by the investitures thereof to stand so destined as
that the same may descend to heirs-female to the exclusion of heirs-male : and
whereas I am fully satisfied that it was the express desire and intention of my
ancestors that the destination of the estate should make the same to descend to
the same series of heirs as under the investiture of the titles of honor, that such
intention was originally carried into effect and enforced in successive generations
by my ancestors at the sacrifice of their feelings towards the younger branches of
the family, and for the advantage of those inheriting the honors, and that if the
original provisions regarding the estate are not effectual after my decease for the
same purpose, and a divergence of the destinations of the honors and estates to
different series of heirs shall thereafter take place, it will have arisen solely from
misconception as to the destination of the honors belonging to the family, so that
it is incumbent on me, alike from the same motives of preserving the dignity and
standing of our house which actuated my ancestors, as in return for the benefits
derived by me personally under the arrangements made by them, to make pro-
vision, so far as in my power, that the objects originally contemplated be here-
after as hitherto secured, and that in the event of the said entailed estate
descending to heirs-female, and of the said titles of honor, and all and every one
of such titles of honor descending to heirs-male, but only in that event, then and
thereupon the several heirs shall transact, by means of excambion or disentail, or
otherwise, for the transfer of the mansion-house of Melville and lands adjacent
thereto, to the end that the same shall become re-united and descendible along
with the said titles of honor, and so remain in all time to come; therefore, and
for aiding and promoting such re-union, and the causes and considerations afore-
said me moving, I hereby dispone, convey, assign, and make over to and in
favour of my now only son, Alexander Leslie Melville, commonly called Lord
Balgony, and the heirs-male of his body ; whom failing, to the heirs-female of his
body succeeding to him in the titles of honor now vested in me, or to any one or
more of such titles of honor ; whom failing, to the other heirs-female of my own
body succeeding to the said titles of honor, or to any one or more of such titles
of honor ; whom failing, to the Hon. John Thornton Leslie Melville, my brother,
and the heirs-male of his body ; whom failing, to the Hon. Alexander Leslie
Melville, my brother, and the heirs-male of his body ; whom failing, to the heirs-
female of the said John Thornton Leslie Melville succeeding to the titles of honor,
or to any one or more of such titles of honor ; whom failing, to the heirs-female
of the body of the said Alexander Leslie Melville, succeeding to the said titles of
Xll INTRODUCTION.
honor, or to any one or more of such titles of honor ; whom all failing, to my
heirs and assignees whomsoever."
The lands contained in that disposition were the manor-place of Monimail
and mansion-house of Melville, Letham, Coldcoats, Monksmyre, Edensmuir,
patronage of Monimail, Pitlair, and others, all erected into the lordship and
barony of Monimail, by charter granted by King Charles the Second, dated
1st October 1669 ; also the lands of Pathcondie and Muirfield, part of
Uthrogal, and the Wards Park of the barony of Hallhill.
As the barony of Monimail had been entailed in the year 1784, by the
grandfather of David, the eighth earl, and as doubts existed as to the latter's
competency to dispone them to a different class of heirs from those named in
that entail, provision was made in his disposition and settlement in the
following terms : —
"And in the event of the foregoing disposition being found not effectual to
convey the lands and others above described, but only in that event, I do hereby
dispone, assign, and make over to, and in favour of the said Alexander Leslie
Melville, Lord Balgonie, and his foresaids in the second place, all the unentailed
lands belonging to me at my decease."
These unentailed lands included Easter Collessie called Hallhill, Muirfield,
parts of Uthrogal, parts of Hilton, Carslogie and Sunnybraes, with subjects
in the village of Letham and others.
The disposition and settlement also contained the following provision : —
" Providing always and declaring, as it is hereby expressly provided and
declared, as a condition irritant and resolutive of the destination in favour of heirs-
female above written, that in the event of the succession thereby opening to an
heir-female, the first heir-female entitled thereto shall be allowed the space of
eighteen months from and after that event to claim and establish, by due order of
law, her right to succeed to and assume the titles of honor aforesaid, or any one
or more of such titles of honor : and upon and after the elapse of the said space
of eighteen months, and failure of the first heir-female to establish her right to
such titles or title of honor as aforesaid, then and thereupon the whole destina-
tion in favour of heirs-female, not only the first heir-female, but also all the
substitute heirs-female, is, and shall be held to be and become, void and null, and
of no force, strength, or effect whatsoever, and the destination is and shall stand
SECOND TRUST SETTLEMENT OF 1857. xiii
limited to heirs-male throughout the order of succession, exclusive of heirs-female
altogether, without any process of law for that purpose. . . . And further pro-
viding that if this disposition shall be found sufficient to convey the lands
disponed in the first place, then the conveyance of the other subjects in the second
place shall be superseded and of no force or effect."
Death of Lord Balgonie, 28th August 1857, and additional
Trust-Settlement by his father.
Shortly after the execution of that disposition and settlement, Alexander,
Lord Balgonie, died on 28th August 1857, and Earl David had then to make
further settlements to meet the altered circumstances. On 12th October
following, his lordship granted a trust-deed which narrates the death of his
son, as follows : —
" The decease of my son Alexander Leslie Melville, Lord Balgonie, and the
failure of heirs of his body, whereby the succession falls to the heirs substituted
to them by the destination hereinbefore written, and now seeing it is proper to
make certain additions to the foregoing disposition and settlement, and also to
establish and interpose a trust for the more effectually securing and executing the
whole provisions and purposes of the same."
He therefore nominated and appointed the honourable John Thornton
Leslie Melville aforesaid, the honourable Alexander Leslie Melville aforesaid,
and their eldest sons respectively, granting in their favour the whole subjects
in the said disposition and settlement, etc.
" But declaring that these presents are granted by me in trust only, and for
the uses and purposes following, to wit, — prhno, to be held the whole trust-estate
by the said trustees for the use and behoof of my heirs called and appointed to
the succession by the said disposition and settlement before written in their order,
and for implement of the provisions and conditions of the same ; secundo, my
intention now being to make a settlement in strict entail in terms thereof, to
denude the said trustees by executing, recording, and completing by infeftment a
disposition and deed of entail of the lands and other heritages before disponed in
favour of my said heirs, with prohibitory, irritant, and resolutive clauses, and all
other clauses usual and requisite to make the same binding and effectual, and so
conceived as to bind the institute or person in whose favour the same is directly
granted, as well as the other heirs of entail, and to retain the personal estate,
XIV INTRODUCTION.
heritable debt, and proceeds thereof, as also any bequests in favour of the said
trustees by my last will and testament, here held to be part and portion of the
personal estate under this trust, and when convenient after realizing the same to
employ and lay out the free proceeds in the purchase of other lands or heritages
to be settled and entailed in the same manner as above provided and directed."
Last Will by Earl David, 12th October 1857.
On the same date, 12th October 1857, Earl David made his last will and
testament. He thereby made further bequests to each of his second, third,
and fourth daughters. He also left and bequeathed to his heirs succeeding
to him in the mansion-house of Melville all effects and moveable property of
every kind and description whatsoever, which should be contained in the said
mansion-house and belong to him at his decease, it being his wish and
intention that the same should remain there for the use and benefit of his
said heirs, but that always under the burden and subject to the payment by
his said heirs of £3000 sterling thereby bequeathed to the trustees for the
heirs succeeding to him in his titles of honour under his special disposition
and settlement in their favour ; and lastly the earl bequeathed to his trustees
the whole free residue of his moveable estate.
Law-suit by Earl David to void Entail of Melville, 1858.
In pursuance of his intentions as to his titles and -estates, Earl David
on 31st May 1858 instituted an action of declarator in the Court of Session
against his daughters and all the other heirs of entail in the estate of Melville
under the entail made by his grandfather in the year 1784. The action was
instituted for the purpose of having it found that the entail was invalid, and
the earl entitled to dispose of the estate in fee-simple.
Before the action was decided by the Court of Session, David, Earl of
Leven and Melville, died, in 1860, and the trustees nominated by him insisted
in the action. The Court ultimately, by decree dated 12th June 1861, decided
in favour of the eldest daughter of Earl David, Lady Elizabeth Jane Leslie
Melville Cartwright, who thus succeeded to the barony of Melville, while the
earl's next brother John succeeded to the titles and became ninth Earl of
Leven and eighth of Melville.
entails by earl david s trustees. xv
Entail by Eakl David's Teustees of Hallhill, etc., 1864.
After this decision in favour of Lady Elizabeth Cartwright, the trustees
named by her father made up titles to the unentailed estates conveyed to
them, and on 29th and 30th November 1864 they entailed these in favour of
John Thornton Leslie Melville, Earl of Leven and Melville ; whom failing,
the Hon. Alexander Leslie Melville, his brother, and the heirs-male of their
bodies respectively ; whom all failing, the heirs and assignees whomsoever of
the deceased David, Earl of Leven and Melville.
The lands thus entailed were Easter Collessie, called Hallhill, Muirfield,
and others, erected into the barony of Hallhill ; the lands of Hilton,
Carslogie, Sunnybraes, Uthrogal, and others.
Entail by Eakl David's Trustees of part of Glenferness, 1869.
The trustees of Earl David further, in 1869, purchased the easter portion
of Glenferness, in the county of Nairn, for £1 2,000/ and soon afterwards
they made a second entail,2 narrating that the conveyance of the barony of
Monimail, disponed in the first place by settlement of Earl David, was found
to be ineffectual, and the conveyance of the lands therein disponed in the
second place became operative ; that Lady Elizabeth Leslie Melville Cart-
wright had failed to establish her right to any of the titles of honour vested
in her father, and therefore that the whole destination in his settlement in
favour of heirs-female, not only the first heir-female, but all the substitute
heirs-female, has become void, and the destination in his settlement now
stands limited to heirs-male throughout the order of succession.
This entail of 1869, after referring to the previous entail of Hallhill in
1864, proceeds to narrate the purchase by the trustees of part of Glenferness,
being the lands of Airdrie and others as described, which are thereby
entailed on the same heirs as in the entail of Hallhill in 1864. The entail
also contains a declaration that John, Earl of Leven and Melville, and each
heir of entail who should succeed to the lands and others disponed, shall be
1 On the same date, John, Earl of Leven 2 Dated 19th, 23d, and 26th November,
and Melville, acquired the wester and larger and recorded in the Register of Entails 10th
portion of the same property for £47,900. December 1S69.
XVI INTRODUCTION.
obliged to bear, use, and constantly retain the surname of Leslie Melville,
and the coat armorial of Leven and Melville, without prejudice to his
bearing, using, and retaining along therewith any other surname and coat
armorial and other title of honour. A similar declaration is contained in the
entail of Hallhill and other lands entailed in 1864.
Exchange and Entail by Earl John of his portion of Glenferness
for Hilton, etc., in Fife, 1870.
In the year 1870, John, Earl of Leven and, Melville, proprietor of the
larger portion of Glenferness in fee-simple, and also proprietor in entail of
the lands of Hilton and Sunnybraes, and others, entered into a contract of
excambion and deed of entail whereby he disentailed Hilton and Sunnybraes,
etc., these lands becoming his property in fee-simple, while he entailed the
larger portion of Glenferness acquired by himself upon the same series of
heirs on whom the smaller portion of Glenferness had been entailed by the
trustees of Earl David in 1869.1
General Explanation of Historical Papers at Melville House, and
Proposal to Print them in 1857.
While engaged in examining the Melville muniments in reference to the
succession of the family peerages in the year 1857, as already explained, I
discovered many interesting historical documents in the extensive collection.
These included several charters to the family by King William the
Lion, letters from Mary Queen of Scots, King William the Third,
and his Queen Mary, Sophia, Electress of Hanover, her son, the Elector,
afterwards King George the First, and many other distinguished persons.
I submitted to David, Earl of Leven, that the charters and corre-
spondence, with a detailed history of the Melvilles, Earls of Melville,
and the Leslies, Earls of Leven, would form a valuable and interest-
ing family record. Lord Leven- listened favourably to the suggestion, and
1 The lands of Hilton and Sunnybraes, etc., and Melville, who left them to his sister,
thus disentailed by Earl John, were inherited The lands have thus become entirely separa-
by his son Alexander, the late Earl of Leven ted from the main line of the family.
HISTORICAL PAPERS AND MELVILLE BOOK. xvii
some preliminaries were arranged with him for carrying it out, but lie only-
survived the loss of his son; Lord Balgonie, a few years, and little progress
was made with the proposed work. Lady Elizabeth Leslie Melville
Cartwright, who succeeded to the entailed estate of Melville, and her husband,
Mr. Leslie Melville Cartwright of Melville, however, both favoured the
proposal for a Melville Family Book, and contributed to carry it out. Under
the trust-deed of her father, her ladyship had acquired the contents of
Melville House, including the muniments of the family. Although dis-
appointed that my investigations into the origin and descent of the Leven
and Melville peerages did not result in encouraging her to claim one or more
of them as allowed under her father's trust-deed, her ladyship did not
challenge my opinion, but generously intrusted me with the custody of such
of the Melville muniments as had come into my possession, in the hope that
some favourable opportunity might occur for forming them into a family
history. Her uncle, Earl John, who was satisfied with my opinion about his
right to the peerages, and who as the inheritor of them was entitled to the
delivery of the patents and resignations and regrants, also deposited these
in my custody. His son and successor, the tenth earl, also followed his
example in this respect, and I had the satisfaction of being thus intrusted
both by the heir of line and the heir-male with their respective portions of
the family muniments.
The Melville Book, authorised by Lady Elizabeth Leslie Melville
Cartwright.
Lady Elizabeth Leslie Melville Cartwright and her husband, Mr. Leslie
Melville Cartwright, having thus resolved to carry out the long contemplated
family history, were pleased to confide to me the task of completing it. The
writing of other family histories, which were also confided to me, retarded the
progress of the present work, but it has now been finished in three quarto
volumes. The first of these contains a detailed History of the families of
Melville and Leslie from Galfrid Melville, who was a justiciar of Scotland
in the time of King Malcolm the Maiden and King William the Lion, down
to his living descendants. The second volume contains the Correspondence
vol. i. d
XVlll INTRODUCTION.
of the family from the time of King James the Fifth and Queen Mary. The
third and last volume contains the Charters and miscellaneous muniments
of the family from the time of King William the Lion.
Prefixed to the respective volumes of Correspondence and Charters are full
abstracts of the contents of each volume. These abstracts will facilitate
reference both to the correspondence and charters. There is also a compre-
hensive index in the third volume, to all the persons and places mentioned
in the three volumes.
The Leven and Melville Papers, printed in 1843.
The late Honourable William" Henry Leslie Melville, who was the
immediate younger brother of John, ninth Earl of Leven, took a great interest
in the history of his family, and specially interested himself in their
muniments. He was for many years in India in the Honourable East India
Company's service, and after his return to England he became a director of the
Company. He was a member of the Bannatyne Club, and in the year 1843
he presented to the members of that club a large quarto volume extending to
608 pages, and including nearly six hundred letters and papers. The volume
is known as the " Leven and Melville Papers," or, as more fully described in
the title-page, " Letters and State Papers chiefly addressed to George, Earl of
Melville, Secretary of State for Scotland, 1689-1691, from the originals in the
possession of the Earl of Leven and Melville." A preface, written by Mr.
Melville, and dated from London, April 1843, extends to 30 pages and is very
interesting. Lord Macaulay in his " History of England " makes several
references to that work, and he pays a graceful compliment to Mr. Leslie
Melville, who, he says, " has deserved well of all students of history, by the
diligence and fidelity with which he has performed his editorial duties." x
King Louis Philippe's Copy of the above Work.
One copy of Mr. Leslie Melville's work had a somewhat romantic history.
It was presented either by himself or by his eldest brother David, Earl of
1 " History of England," vol. iv. p. 187 n.
MR. WILLIAM LESLIE MELVILLE. XIX
Leven and -Melville, to Louis Philippe, then king of the French, who had it
bound in a very sumptuous style, and stamped on both sides with his initials
L. P., surmounted by a royal crown. At the Kevolution of 1848, the library
of the king appears to have been at least partially dispersed. His copy of
the " Leven and Melville Papers " found its way into the shop of a bookseller
at Bath. A medical gentleman there observed the book for sale, and being a
friend of Mr. Leslie Melville, he advised him of this. Mr. Melville acquired
it, and presented it to the library at Melville House, where it is still
preserved.
Intended Additional Work on the Melville Family by
Mr. William Leslie Melville.
Mr. Leslie Melville's work, although containing nearly 600 of the Melville
letters and papers, was limited to the two years, 1689-91, when his ancestor
was Secretary of State for Scotland. His work left untouched the other and
larger portion of the collection of manuscripts at Melville. Mr. Melville
continued his study and arrangement of these with a view to the future
publication of them. He communicated with me on that subject very
frequently when he was in Edinburgh in the autumn of the year 1852, and
afterwards. But he had not then any settled plan except that he was
anxious to make the additional work less bulky than his contribution to the
Bannatyne Club. Mr. Leslie Melville continued to consider the subject of
the publication of additional Melville muniments, till the date of his death
in 1856. He knew the history of his family well, and could dilate upon it
with great accuracy, and his preface to the Bannatyne contribution shows
that he had made a careful study of the subject. He often confessed to me
that the history of the Melville family as given in the Peerage Books was
imperfect, and he anxiously desired to have it made more complete. From
his long study of the subject, I had hoped to find some notes or memor-
anda in addition to his preface,, but no trace of any notes or memoranda by
him have been discovered, and the only assistance which I have received in
connection with the present work from Mr. Melville's long labours on the
family muniments is that contained in his preface to the Bannatyne book.
XX INTRODUCTION.
Mr. Melville was a very estimable gentleman, much respected by a wide
circle of relatives and friends. There is at Melville House a characteristic
oil portrait of him. At the time of his death there was circulated among his
friends a small sketch in water-colour which showed his features very
vividly.
His Disappointment at not finding more of the Correspondence
of the first Earl of Melville.
In his preface, Mr. Leslie Melville remarks that " only a few of Lord
Melville's own letters appear in this collection, but they are all of which
copies have been preserved."1 Mr. Leslie Melville explained that he had
made searches in the British Museum and State Paper Office, and at Welbeck,
the seat of the Duke of Portland. But he was unsuccessful in finding more
of his ancestor's letters in these repositories. He remarks with disappoint-
ment that he was not permitted personally to make the searches in the two
public offices named, in the same way as he himself was allowed to inspect
the correspondence at Welbeck.
More of Lord Melville's Letters since Discovered.
During my own investigations for letters of the first Earl of Melville, I
have been more successful.
In the charter-chest of his «race the Duke of Hamilton I discovered
twenty-six original letters of the first Earl of Melville, between the years
1689 and 1692, and they are included in the present work.2 In the same
great repository I discovered several letters written by the first Earl of Leven
to the Marquis of Hamilton,3 when they were co-operating together under
Gustavus Adolphus in his great wars. One of these letters from Leslie gives
a detailed account of the death of Gustavus. All these letters of Leslie, with
six original letters of Gustavus Adolphus himself, are, from the same source,
included in the present work.4
1 Preface, p. xl. 2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 125, Nos. 149-174.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 77, Nos. 101, 105-107, 109-114.
* Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 13-21, Nos. 17-22.
MELVILLE CORRESPONDENCE — QUEEN MARY. xxi
The Volume of Correspondence of the present Work.
The volume of Correspondence, being the second of this work, is very
different from the one which was printed by Mr. Leslie Melville, which
was restricted to the transactions of two years, 1689-1691, in connection
with the Revolution settlement. The present publication has a much
wider and a more varied range of subjects. It contains royal letters
from King James the Fifth, Queen Mary, and successive sovereigns down
to King William the Fourth, also state and official letters from many
statesmen in Scotland and England, including John, Duke of Marlborough,
and John, Duke of Argyll, two great military commanders, Lord Godolphin,
the high treasurer, and Lord Somers the lord chancellor, about the union
between England and Scotland. The third division of letters is the family
or domestic letters. This includes a variety of correspondents, the Duke of
Monmouth, Jane, Duchess of Gordon, William Cowper the poet, George
Chalmers on the progress of his " Caledonia," Dr. Thomas Chalmers on his
removal from the parish of Kilmany by a call to Glasgow, where his
fame as an eloquent pulpit orator was acquired, George Dempster of
Dunnichen, Zachary Macaulay, father of the historian, the Earl of Buchan,
Charles Kirkpatrick Sharpe, and other writers of note.
The Three Melville Brothers and Queen Mary, and her Letters to
Sir Robert Melville from Lochleven, etc.
As three Melville brothers, Sir Robert Melville, afterwards first Lord
Melville, Sir James Melville of Hallhill, author of the Memoirs, and Sir
Andrew Melville of Garvock, all held places of great trust and confidence
under Queen Mary and her son, King James, it might be expected that
more of the queen's letters to them should have been preserved. Any
letters addressed by the queen to Sir James and Sir Andrew Melville would
be properly in the custody of their respective representatives.1
1 In a book sale at Sotheby's in London, in the cover. It is supposed that it was pre-
1S79, there occurred a copy of Theodore Beza's sented by the queen to Sir James Melville,
" Confession of the Christian Faith," printed as it bears his autograph signature. The book
1560. It belonged to Queen Mary, having was catalogued as an " extraordinary rarity,"
her name stamped in gold on both sides of and it brought the high price of £149. Sir
XX11 INTRODUCTION.
Those addressed to Sir Eobert Melville, and now preserved at Melville
House, are only six in number. Many more letters must have been written
by Queen Mary to Sir Eobert Melville. One important letter from the
queen to him as her trusty servant, in which she explains her marriage
with Bothwell to be submitted to Queen Elizabeth, is printed by Anderson
in his collection1 from a state register of letters by Queen Mary among the
public archives. One of her Majesty's letters to Sir Eobert, written while
she was a prisoner at Lochleven, is of interest, as it shows the straits to
which she and her maids of honour were reduced for necessary apparel.
The island fortress was unsuitable for a royal household as well as a private
family. The queen requires Melville to send " my madynis clais, for thai
ar naikit."2 The same letter discloses that the queen had been bent in
occupying part of her time in embroidering, as she asks for supplies of
" sewing gold and silver."
That letter was printed as part of the Melville papers in the Miscellany
of the Maitland Club,3 where there is also given a facsimile of the letter,
which, however, does not give a true representation of the original, and its
faded ink, being reproduced in ink of a very dark colour.
According to popular tradition, the queen's correspondence was so
watched by her jailers at Lochleven that she was denied proper paper and
ink. The appearance of the original of this letter might support the legend
that the queen sometimes had recourse to the soot in the chimney of her
apartment to serve for ink. The paper on which the letter is written is very
coarse in quality, and the ink is very faint.
In a letter from Sir Eobert Melville to the laird of Lochleven he asks
to be excused to the queen for not sending " her baggage " sooner.4
The request in the queen's letter for embroidering needles and other
materials is the more interesting because the identical work on which she
Walter Scott paid a tribute to the "Memoirs" 3 Vol. iii. p. 186. The date of the letter
written by Sir James. He said that they in that work is stated in the heading of it as
may "justly be compared with the most 3d September 1567, while in the text it is
valuable materials which British history printed the iiij September. In the print
affords." — [History of Scotland, edition 1S50, the queen asks " rasene " needles to be sent
vol. ii. p. 93.] to her at Lochleven. But the original says
1 Vol. i. pp. 102-107. " rasour " Deedles.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 7, No. 8. 4 Ibid. p. 232.
QUEEN MARY AT LOCHLEVEN. xxiii
and her maidens employed their art at Lochleven is believed to be still in
existence, in the possession of the Earl of Morton at Dalmahoy House, his
ancestor being the custodier of Queen Mary. The relic in question is a
piece of ancient worked tapestry which covers a folding screen. It is
unfinished as the queen left it at her escape. As described by a lady writer,
Miss Strickland,1 who had carefully examined it, the screen is " wrought
with coloured wools in fine tent stitch, on canvas of precisely the same
fabric as that used by ladies of our own times for that kind of work ; it is
about twelve yards in length, but in separate breadths, arranged one above
another, on a high folding frame to form a screen. . . . The design is most
elaborate, being a succession of pictorial groups of ladies and gentlemen
dressed in the costume of the period, and richly decorated with rings,
brooches, and chains. The jewels are worked in glazed flax thread, in satin
stitch, and the pearls indicated by white dots." Miss Strickland also in her
work, to which reference may be made, gives a full account of the figures on
the screen, which, however, is too long for repetition here. Sir Walter Scott,
who saw the screen, confessed himself unable to make out the story, and
fancied it must have been taken from some old ballad or French or Italian
romance. But Miss Strickland expresses the opinion that the figures on the
tapestry are " an allegorical illustration of the ill-fated loves of Mary herself
and Darnley, the opposition to their union by Queen Elizabeth, her deter-
mined hostility to both, and his tragical death."2
Queen Mary at Lochleven Castle, and visits to her there by
Sir Eobert Melville.
During the years between 1561, when the queen returned from France to
take up the rule of her own kingdom, and 1567, when she was imprisoned at
Lochleven, Queen Mary made several pleasant visits to Lochleven. Apart-
ments were fitted rip for her reception at the castle with some show of
royalty, beds and other furniture being provided.3 Darnley also, on his visits
to Lochleven, appears to have enjoyed the pleasures of the chase in the
1 Strickland's Queens of Scotland, vol. vi. p. 32. 2 Ibid. p. 33.
3 Inventories of Queen Mary, pp. 20, 21, 35, 50, 112.
xxiv INTRODUCTION".
neighbourhood. A letter from him as king, dated from Burley Castle,1 to the
laird of Lochleven, 11th November 1566, complains of poachers or "common
shooters," as he calls them, who are to be apprehended with their guns and
sent to his Majesty. He also orders that no fires be made upon tbe waters
for fishing, as it scares the fowls.2
One of Queen Mary's visitors at Lochleven was John Knox, the reformer,
who, on 13th April 1563, went to expostulate with her Majesty as to her
laxity in enforcing the penal laws against the Eoman Catholics. The queen
and Knox held a long conference in the castle, and again on the following
day they had a second conference in the west of the town of Kinross, where
the queen was hawking.
Her imprisonment at Lochleven began on Tuesday the 17th June 1567,
and ended by her escape3 on Sunday, 2d May 1568.
A fortnight after her imprisonment Sir Robert Melville paid a visit to the
queen, on 1st July 1567, to report on his embassy to Queen Elizabeth in
reference to Mary's marriage to Bothwell, and other business. Eight days after-
wards Sir Eobert Melville again visited Mary at Lochleven. A third visit by
him soon after followed on 1 7th July, when it is supposed that he hinted to
the queen an abdication by her in favour of her son. It is said that Melville
carried to the queen in the scabbard of his sword a letter from Throgmorton,
the English ambassador, advising Queeir Mary to sign the abdication.4
Melville also urged strongly that she should renounce all communication with
Bothwell. But she declined, giving as one reason that she believed herself to
be with child, and that a divorce from Bothwell might prejudice any offspring.
In anticipation of Sir Bobert Melville's visit to her, she had written a letter
to Bothwell trusting that Sir Bobert would forward it. But Sir Bobert refused
even to accept of the letter, and the Queen indignantly threw it into the fire.
Soon after this episode there occurred one of the most painful transac-
1 The present Lord Balfour of Burley also • and appears in the collection of his well-
claimed at the same time the title of Lord known etchings printed for the Bannatyne
Kilwinning. A facetious friend said to the Club. A more elaborate drawing of the
writer, who was engaged in the case, that royal escape was painted by the late D. 0.
Kilwinning should be Kilsharp. Hill, secretary of the Scottish Academy, and
2 Registrum Honoris de Morton, vol. i. p. 14. engraved by William B. Scott.
3 A drawing of the queen's escape from 4 Memoirs of Queen Mary by Claude Nau,
the castle was made by John Clerk of Eldin, her secretary, 1SS3, p. 64.
PORTRAIT OF SIR ROBERT MELVILLE. XXV
tions connected with the residence of Queen Mary at Lochleven, namely,
her resignation, on 24th July 1567, of the crown of Scotland in favour of
her son, King James. The two commissioners appointed by the parliament
and the regent were Lord Lindsay of the Byres and Lord Euthven. Their
unfeeling coercion towards the queen in obtaining her signature to the
instrument of resignation of her kingdom has been often told, and need not
be repeated here. But as Sir Bobert Melville was present and took an
active, although mediating, part in that transaction, and as amid the many
portraits of royal and noble and distinguished persons at Melville House,
of which a list is given in this work,1 none in that large collection has been
identified as that of Sir Bobert Melville, it may be permissible to exhibit in
this place a fancy portrait of him which has been drawn by the master-hand
of Sir Walter Scott, who thus writes : —
" The personage who rode with Lord Lindsay at the head of the party was
an absolute contrast to him in manner, form, and features. His thin and silky
hair was already white, though he seemed not above forty-five or fifty years old.
His tone of voice was soft and insinuating, — his form thin, spare, and bent by a
habitual stoop, — his pale cheek was expressive of shrewdness and intelligence, his
eye was quick though placid, and his whole demeanour mild and conciliatory.
He rode an ambling nag, such as were used by ladies, clergymen, or others of
peaceful professions, — wore a riding habit of black velvet, with a cap and feather
of the same hue, fastened up by a golden medal, — and for show, and as a mark
of rank rather than for use, carried a walking sword (as the short light rapiers
were called) without any other arms offensive or defensive." 2
1 Vol. ii. pp. 336-3-10. Dr. M'Crie, in his dukedom of Montrose, created in the year
Life of Andrew Melville, regrets that he was 1-4SS. On that occasion partisan feeling ran
unable to find a portrait of him or of his pretty high, and a noble lord said to the
nephew James. [Ed. 1S56, p. 492.] writer that the only fault he had to find with
him was " that he fought against those Lind-
2 The Abbot, by Sir Walter Scott, ed. says that he loved so dearly." At a later
1S'20, vol. ii. p. ICO. The writer is tempted period the writer was again engaged in fight-
to place the companion portrait of Lord Lind- jng — this time on behalf of the Lindsays —
say, drawn by the same magic hand, beside to establish the claim of the present Lord
that of Melville, but it is not so germane to Lindsay of the Byres and Earl of Lindsay,
the present subject. The writer has a profes- All the Lindsays, chief and cadets, have
sional if not a personal interest in the great treated the writer with characteristic cour-
house of Lindsay. Forty years ago he as- tesy, whether he was engaged fighting for
sisted actively in opposing their claim to the or against them professionally.
VOL. I. e
XXVI
INTRODUCTION.
Keys found in Lochleven.
Before passing from the subject of Lochleven and Sir Robert Melville's
visit there, notice may be taken of a relic with which his name has been
connected. Sometime before 1820 a key was found in the loch, having
become entangled in a fisherman's net, and was brought to the minister of
Kinross, who presented it to the seventh Earl of Leven, and it is now at
Melville House.1 It is a little over three inches long, with a Gothic bow
highly decorated, the neck of open work, and the pipe and wards damasked
over with engraved flowers. The date 1565 is deeply cut along the out-
ward edge of the wards and the words " Marie Eex " on the rim of the bow-
Miss Strickland describes it as a gold or richly gilt key, and assumes, from
" its ornamental character and the inscription," that it must have been the
badge of office of Queen Mary's lord chamberlain, " and was probably lost by
Sir Robert Melville in one of his voyages to or from the castle."2
The keys of Lochleven Castle themselves are now in the possession of the
Earl of Morton. They are five in number, large and small, of antique work-
manship. The keys are said to have been thrown into the loch by Willie
Douglas, the lad who assisted Queen Mary to escape, and to have been found
in the beginning of the present century. Another set of keys, however, are
said to be in the possession of Sir Charles Adam of Blairadam. Another
key, with parts of the wards of a lock, was found in Lochleven Castle in
1831. As represented in a recent popular work, it is much ornamented,
having human figures and birds twisted into the scroll-work which composes
the handle. The wards of the lock, which may have belonged to some door
or chest in the castle, are also curious.3
1 A label attached to the key gives the
history of it. " This key was found in their
nets by some fishermen on Lochleven, and
taken by them to the minister of Kinross,
who gave it to my grandfather. It was lent
by my father to Lady Harriet St. Clair
Erskine for the purpose of sketching it.
She, however, had it copied, which copy is
now at Dysart House. — Elizabeth Leslie
Melville Cartwright."
2 Queens of Scotland, vol. vi. p. 71, n.
An examination of the key seems to show
that it is simply of brass, not of gold, as Miss
Strickland alleges. The inscription " Marie
Hex " and the date are of very doubtful
authenticity. The key may be that of an
old chest or wardrobe, and may or may not
be connected with Sir Robert Melville.
3 An engraving of the key and the wards
will be found in " Castles, Palaces, and
Prisons of Mary of Scotland," by Charles
Mackie, ed. 1850, p. 369.
QUEEN MARY S JEWELS AND SIR ROBERT MELVILLE. xxvii
Queen Mary's Jewels.
As Queen of Scotland and Queen Dowager of France, Queen Mary
inherited many valuable jewels. Many of these were for a time in the
custody of Sir Eobert Melville, who duly delivered them to the queen at
Bolton in England, as appears from her receipt in his favour.1 At a later
date, however, they were rigorously inquired for by the regents, who obtained
power from parliament to recover them. One of the most valuable was
the famous "great Harry" which was presented by King Henry the Second
of France to Queen Mary, his daughter-in-law. The Eegent Murray, it
appears, had bestowed it upon his wife. She held it with such a firm grasp
that successive regents were baffled in its recovery. Great rigour was
observed by the Eegent Morton in his measures for recovering the jewels of
the queen from holders of them, and in 1573, after the fall of Edinburgh
Castle, Sir Eobert Melville, as has been said, " with the halter round his
neck," had to answer for everything which had passed through his hands.
But his life was spared at the intercession of Queen Elizabeth.
Family Jewels of the first Earl of Leven.
The fate of Queen Mary's jewels suggests that the family of Melville also
have suffered loss of a similar kind. The parliament of Scotland on two
occasions voted a jewel to the first Earl of Leven. The parliament of
England also, in 1646, ordered a jewel to be delivered to his excellency
the Earl of Leven as a testimony of their great respect to him and high
esteem of his fidelity and gallantry.2 There is some doubt if he received
these, but another jewel was given to him by the King of Sweden, to which
the earl refers in his last will, desiring it may be kept in his family as an
heirloom.3 None of these three jewels, if all were received, have been pre-
served in the family. In the portrait of the first Earl of Leven, an
engraving of which forms the frontispiece to the second volume of this work,
there is suspended by a black ribbon around his neck, and on his breast, a
1 Vol. ii. of this work, p. S. 2 Vol. ii. hereof, p. 96, No. 118.
3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 175, No. 129.
INTRODUCTION.
miniature of Gustavus Adolphus. The order of which it was the badge was
created by the king for his Swedish generals, and the first Earl of Leven is
the only one known to whom the order was given out of Sweden. Even
that miniature has not been preserved.1
Gold Medal of 1628.
A solid gold medal, known in the Leven and Melville family as the medal
of Gustavus Adolphus, has been more fortunate in its preservation. It was
exhibited by the late Mr. William Leslie Melville, with the consent of his
brother David, Earl of Leven and Melville, the owner, to a meeting of the
Numismatic Society on 26th February 1852. It excited much interest, and
a member remarked that he believed it to be unique.2
The obverse bears a pheon within a laurel garland, and the legend, " Deo
optimo maximo, Imperatori Eomano, Foederi posterisque, 1628," translated
thus : —
To God the best and greatest, to the Roman Emperor, to the League and
to posterity, 1628.
The reverse bears an inscription, " Memorise • Urbis • Stralsvndae • Ao •
mdcxxvui • Die • xn • Mai • a • Milite • Csesariano • Cinctse • Aliquoties • oppug-
natte • Sed ■ Dei ■ gratia • et • ope • inclytor • Eegvm • Septentrional • Die • XXIII •
Ivli • obsidione • Liberatae ■ S • P • Q • S • F • F • "
Which being extended is : —
"Memorise Urbis Stralsvndae, Anno mdcxxvui, die xn Mai, a milite
Csesariano cmotee, aliquoties oppugnatae ; sed Dei gratia et ope inclytorum
Eegvm Septentrionalium, die xxin Ivli obsidione liberate. Senatus popu-
lusque Stralsvndae fabricari fecerunt."
1 Besides the portrait of the earl referred
to, there is also at Melville House an en-
graving, bearing the inscription — " The por-
tractur of Alexander Leslie, Earle of
Leaven", Generall of the Scotes armie.
An. D. 1644." It is a line engraving repre-
senting him with long hair and beard and
moustache in the style of King Charles the
First. Only the bust is shown. Another
portrait which may be noted, as it is not
named in the list given in volume second of
this work, is a miniature likeness of John,
Earl and Duke of Rothes, brother of Lady
Margaret Leslie, who married Alexander,
Lord Balgonie, son of the first Earl of Leven.
It is contained in a finely enamelled locket.
2 Letter from J. Y. Akerman, secretary,
27th February 1S52, at Melville House.
THE STRALSUND MEDAL, 1628.
XXIX
Which translated is : — ■
In memory that the city of Stralsund, on the 12th day of May in the
year 1628, was beleaguered by the army of the Kaiser, was several times
attempted to be taken by storm, but by the grace of God, and the succour of
the renowned Kings of the North, on the 23d day of July was delivered from
siege, the council and people of Stralsund have caused [this medal] to be
struck.
The event which this medal commemorates is explained in the memoir
of the first Earl of Leven,1 who was the hero on the occasion. An accurate
engraving of both sides of the medal is here given,
Before passing from the volume of correspondence, it may be noted that
there are at Melville House many letters which passed between Anna,
Duchess of Buccleuch and Monmouth and George, first Earl of Melville, and
his son David, third Earl of Leven, whose countess, Lady Anne Wemyss,
was a niece of the duchess. The correspondence between these friends
chiefly relates to the management of the Buccleuch estates by Lord Melville.
The letters were printed in " The Scotts of Buccleuch," 2 and it has been
deemed unnecessary to reprint them in the present work.
1 Vol. i. of this work, p. 389. 2 Vol. ii. pp. 369-377.
XXX
INTRODUCTION.
The Melville Charters.
The third volume contains Charters and Miscellaneous Muniments of
the Melville family. Eight of these charters were granted by King William
the Lion between the years 1165 and 1214. Seven of them are in favour of
the earliest known members of the Melville family — Galfrid of Melville, the
justiciar, Gregory Melville his son and heir, and Richard the son of Gregory.
It is very rarely that charters by King William the Lion are preserved in
Scottish charter-chests : the present collection in that respect may be con-
sidered unique. Eeference is made in these charters to earlier grants to the
Melvilles in the time of King Malcolm the Maiden, who reigned between the
years 1153 and 1165. But these have not been preserved.1
A number of the early charters in the Melville charter-chest refer to the
lands of Inchmartin in the county of Perth. The earliest of these is by
Henry (of Stirling), one of the natural sons of David, Earl of Huntingdon
and Garioch. He appears to have acquired the lands of Inchmartin before
1st November 1241, the date of his charter. It was granted for the sustenta-
tion of a chaplain to serve for ever in the chapel of Inchmartin within the
granter's court. The charter grants and provides to the chaplain a variety of
rents, etc., from various subjects described. He was also to have the
dwelling-house in which John the chaplain was wont to dwell, with the
garden and court, and a toft.
1 Id a recent work there was printed the
earliest known charter connected with Scot-
land, along with a facsimile. It was granted
by King Duncan the Second to the monks of
St. Cuthbert, in the year 1094, of Tyning-
hame and other lands. [Memorials of the
Earls of Haddington, 1S89, vol. i. p. xxiii of
Introduction.]
Shortly after the publication of Duncan's
charter a noble and distinguished author sent
to the writer of the present work " Copy
of the original charter of the lands of Pow-
mode the year 1057." "I, Malcolm Kan-
more, King, the first of my reing, gives to
the barron Hunter, Upper and Nether Pow-
mode, with all the bounds within the flood,
with the Hoop, and Hoop town, and all
the bounds up and down, above the earth
to heaven, and all below the earth to hell,
as free to the and thine as ever God gave to
me and mine, and that for a bow and a brod
arrow when I come to hunt upon Yarrow.
And for the mair faith I bite the white wax
with my teeth, before Margaret, my wife, and
Mall, my nurse. Sic subscribitur Malcolm
Kanmore. Margaret, witness; Mall, wit-
ness." The copy had been recently for-
warded to the correspondent, who asked if
the original charter was preserved in Her
Majesty's General E.egister House. Replying
in the negative, the writer was bound to add
his belief that no such charter ever existed.
MELVILLE HISTORICAL WRITS. XXXI
These Inchmartin charters appear to have been acquired when the first
Earl of Leven purchased Inclimartin. He changed the name to Inchleslie.
After the property was sold by his descendant, these early charters of the
time of the families of Inchmartin, Glen, and Ogilvie, who long held Inch-
martin, remained with the Leslies of Leven. These Inchmartin charters
have been of great use in elucidating the true history of the family of
Wemyss of Wemyss, who intermarried with the Inchmartins and Glens.
These intermarriages led to very complicated subdivisions of the Wemyss
estates. But the preservation of the Inchmartin writs in the Melville
collection of charters threw valuable light on a very intricate subject.
Amongst the miscellaneous writs is a licence, in 1463, by King James the
Third to William Scott of Balwearie, to construct a castle or fortalice in his
lands of Balwearie, to fortify it with walls and ditches, strengthen it with
iron gates, and provide it in the upper part with engines of defence, and with
power to appoint constables, etc.1 The castle which was thus authorised to
be built was long occupied by the family of Scott, and the ruins of it are still
extant. The estate of Balwearie was afterwards acquired by Sir George
Erskine of Invertiel, and inherited by the Melvilles of Baith, one of the
minor titles of the first Earl of Melville being Lord Balwearie.
When Prince Oscar of Sweden and Norway, now the king of these
countries, was on a visit to Mr. and Lady Elizabeth Melville Cartwright at
Melville House in the year 1871, His Boyal Highness saw a portion of the
royal charters and correspondence. He was much interested with the collec-
tion. A selection of the charters of King William the Lion, and the letters
of King James the Fifth, Queen Mary, King James the Sixth, arid others,
were lithographed for Prince Oscar, who was pleased to accept of the
presentation very graciously.
Band for the Murder of Pjccio,
But interesting as these very ancient royal charters of the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries are to the descendants of those to whom they were
granted, as well as to charter scholars generally, the present collection con-
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 46, No. 49.
XX xu INTRODUCTION.
tains some documents possessing even a wider interest. One of these is
the original band entered into by the Earls of Argyll, Murray, Gleneairn, and
Rothes, with Lords Boyd and Ochiltree, and their accomplices, to Henry, Lord
Darnley, as King of Scotland. The band, ostensibly for the purpose of obtain-
ing the crown-matrimonial for Darnley, bound the granters to take true part
with him in all his actions, to be friends with his friends, and to be enemies
to his enemies, and not to spare their lives to do him service. They also
promised to fortify and maintain Damley's title to the crown of Scotland
failing succession of the queen. And should any person or persons oppose
these objects, the banders promise to seek and pursue them, and to extirpate
them out of the realm of Scotland, or take, or slay them. Of the four earls
and two lords who were named in the band, only two earls and one lord
actually subscribed it. These are James Stewart, Earl of Murray, Andrew
Earl of Rothes, and Andrew Stewart of Ochiltree. The other three signa-
tures to the band are those of William Kirkcaldy of Grange, John Wishart
of Pittaro, and James Haliburton, the tutor of Pitcur.1
Bond by King Henry Darnley.
There can be little doubt that Argyll, Gleneairn, and Boyd, who are
specially named in the bond, though they did not actually adhibit their names,
were privy to its object as much as the Earl of Murray and the other five
who signed. Indeed, most of the nobility of Scotland were implicated,
though only a few took a prominent part. The leaders of the conspiracy,
however, distrusted Darnley so much that, while they pledged themselves to
aid his views in regard to Riccio, they forced the king to bind himself to
keep the whole of those concerned scatheless for the intended murder. Such
1 The band is dated at Newcastle the 2d omitted the indorsation on the original —
March 1565-6. It was printed by Goodall, " Ane band maid be my Lord of Murray
but without the signatures. It was again, and certane other noblemen with him befoir
along with other documents, printed in the the slauchtir of Davie." This indorsation is
year 1S43 in the third volume of the Miscel- in a contemporary handwriting. There is
lany of the Maitland Club, by the permission another indorsation in a later hand : " Ane
of David, Earl of Leven and Melville. The band subscrywit to the Kyngis Maiestes
six signatures adhibited to the band are there derrest fader."
given in facsimile. But there has been
BOND BY DARNLEY, 1566. xxxiii
a bond, conceived in general terms, the king granted to Murray and his
friends, but he also granted one of wider scope, in which he expressly affirmed
his design against " aue straunger Italian callid David," and stated that as he
could not carry out his purpose alone, he had drawn certain " nobilite, erles,
lords, barons, freholders, gentilmen, marchaints, and craftsmen," to assist him.
This important document, which Darnley violated almost immediately after
the murder, has often been referred to, and is printed by Goodall,1 but as its
contents are not so well known as those of the other bonds, the terms of it
are here inserted from a copy in an English handwriting, preserved in the
British Museum : —
" Beit kend till all men by thies present lettres, We, Henry, by the grace of
God King of Scotland and husband to the Queues Maieste, forasmekle we, having
consyderation of the gentle and good nature, with many other good qualites, in her
Maieste, we haue thought pete, and also thinketh it great conscience to vs that is
her husband, to suffer her to be abused or seduced by eerteyn priuey persons, which
it and vngodly [sic] not regarding her Maiestes honnour, ours, the nobilite therof,
nor the common weal of the same, but sekes their oun commodites and priuey
gaynes, specially ane straunger Italian callid Dauid, which may be thoccasion of her
Maiestes destruction, ours, the nobilite and coniun weall of the same, without hasty
remedye be putt therunto, which we ar willing to do, and to that effect we have
devised to take their piriuey persons, ennemys to her Maieste, vs, the nobilite and
common weale to punish them conform to their demerits, and in causes of any diffi-
cultye to cutt them of immediately and sla them where ever it happens : And bycaus
we cannot accomplish the same without thassistence of others, Therefor have we
drawen certain of our nobilite, erles, lords, barons, freholders, gent., marchaints, and
craftsmen, to assist vs in this our entreprise which cannot be finished without great
hurt : And bycaus it may chaunce that there be sundry great persons present, who
may make them ganestand our entreprise, wherewith sum of them may be slayn,
and likewise of ours, wherewith perpetuel fead may be contracted betwixt the
one pertye and the other, Therfor we bynd and oblige vs, our heyres and
successors, to the said earles, lords, barons, freholders, gentilmen, marchants, and
craftsmen, their heyres and successors, that we shall except the forsayd fead on vs
and fortifye and maynteyn them at the vttermoost of our powers ; and shalbe
freend to their freends and ennemy to their ennemys ; and shall neither suffer
them nor theirs to be molested nor troubled in their bodyes, lands, goodds, rowmes,
possessions, so far as is in vs: And if any person wold call any of the sayd earles,
1 Goodall's Queen Mary, vol. i. pp. 266-8.
VOL. I. /
XXXIV INTRODUCTION.
lords, barons, freholders, gentilmen, marchants, and craftsmen, for entreprising or
assisting with vs for achieving of our purpos, bycause it may chaunce to be don in
the presence of the Quenes Maieste or within her pallaice of Holy-roudhouse, we
by the woord of a prince shall accept to take the same on vs, now as then and
then as nowe, and shall warraunt and kepe harmeles the forsayd earles, lords,
barons, freholders, gent., marchants, and craftsmen at our vtter power. In witnes
wherof we haue subscribed this present with our hand. At Edinbrough the first
of March the yeres of God 1565." l
Death of Kiccio.
The bond by the king, as above cited, was dated 1st March 1565-66, and
that by Murray and his friends at Newcastle on the following clay. A week
afterwards, on Saturday evening, 9th March, the unhappy Eiccio was
murdered in the queen's apartments at Holyrood. The circumstances
attending " the slauchtir of Davie "have been often told by historians, but
the account of it by Mr. Tytler is so graphic that it may be permissible to
repeat it here : —
" On Saturday evening about seven o'clock, when it was dark, the Earls of
Morton and Lindsay, with a hundred and fifty men bearing torches and weapons,
occupied the court of the palace of Holyrood, seized the gates without resistance,
and closed them against all but their own friends. At this moment Mary was
at supper in a small closet or cabinet, which entered from her bed-chamber.
She was attended by the Countess of Argyll, the commendator of Holyrood,
Beaton, master of the household, Arthur Erskine, captain of the guard, and her
secretary, Eiccio. The bed-chamber communicated by a secret turnpike stair
with the king's apartment below, to which the conspirators had been admitted ;
and Darnley, ascending this stair, threw up the arras which concealed its opening
in the wall, entered the little apartment where Mary sat, and casting his arm
fondly round her waist, seated himself beside her at table. A minute had
scarcely passed when Euthven, clad in complete armour, abruptly broke in.
This man had just risen from a sickbed ; his features were sunk and pale from
disease, his voice hollow, and his whole appearance haggard and terrible. Mary,
who was now seven months gone with child, started up in terror, commanding
him to be gone ; but ere the words were uttered torches gleamed in the outer
room, a confused noise of voices and weapons was heard, and the next moment
George Douglas, Car of Faudonside, and other conspirators, rushed into the
1 British Museum, Calig. B. ix. f. 216.
DEATH OF EICCIO. XXXV
closet. Buthven now drew his dagger, and calling out that their business was
with Eiccio, made an effort to seize him ; whilst this miserable victim, springing
behind the queen, clung by her gown, and in his broken language called out,
' Giustizia ! giustizia ! sauve ma vie, madame ; sauve ma vie ! ' All was now
uproar and confusion ; and though Mary earnestly implored them to have mercy,
they were deaf to her entreaties. The table and lights were thrown down ;
Eiccio was stabbed by Douglas over the queen's shoulder ; Car of Faudonside,
one of the most ferocious of the conspirators, held a pistol to her breast, and
whilst she shrieked with terror, their bleeding victim was torn from her knees
and dragged, amidst shouts and execrations, through the queen's bedroom to the
entrance of the presence-chamber. Here Morton and his men rushed upon him,
and buried their daggers in his body. So eager and reckless were they in their
ferocity, that in the struggle to get at him they wounded one another ; nor did
they think the work complete till the body was mangled by fifty-six wounds,1
and left in a pool of blood, with the king's dagger sticking in it, to show, as was
afterwards alleged, that he had sanctioned the murder.
" Nothing can more strongly show the ferocious manners of the times than an
incident which now occurred. Euthven, faint from sickness, and reeking from
the scene of blood, staggered into the queen's cabinet, where Mary still stood
distracted and in terror of her life. Here he threw himself upon a seat, called
for a cup of wine, and being reproached for the cruelty of his conduct, not only
vindicated himself and his associates, but plunged a new dagger into the heart of
the unhappy queen by declaring that her husband had advised the whole. She
was then ignorant of the completion of the murder, but suddenly one of her ladies
rushed into the room and cried out that their victim was slain. ' And is it so ! '
said Mary ; ' then farewell tears, we must now think of revenge.' " 2
1 Thirty-four of these are said to have died a natural death. But two of his sons
been in his hack. were murdered. The elder of the two was
the notorious James Stewart, the usurper of
2 Tytler's History, Edition 1845, vol. v. pp. the earldom of Arran. A more pleasing
343-5. It may be noted that as the signatories reminiscence of Lord Ochiltree's family is
to the bond at Newcastle were six of the the fact that his daughter Margaret married
most prominent actors in the affairs of the reformer John Knox, of whom Lord
Scotland, so two of them at least met Ochiltree was a strong supporter. Her
with violent deaths. Murray, called "the second husband was Andrew Ker of Fawdon-
good Regent," was assassinated, while Sir side, son of the man who earned the
William Kirkcaldy of Grange was executed. unenviable distinction of having actively
Andrew, Lord Ochiltree, although wounded assisted in the murder of Riccio, and of
in the battle of Langside, is believed to have presenting a pistol at the Queen.
XXXVI INTRODUCTION.
Darnley's Denial op his Bond.
As a sequel to the bond already quoted, in which Darnley affirmed his
murderous intentions towards Kiccio, and bound himself to shield and support
his accomplices, the proclamation by which lie afterwards asserted his
innocence is noteworthy. The very event which his fellow-conspirators
dreaded, and against which they tried to guard, happened as they feared.
Darnley was swayed by the queen, first to accompany her out of Edinburgh,
and then to betray his accomplices. Three days after the murder, the Icing
and queen fled to Dunbar, and five days later returned to Edinburgh accom-
panied by a considerable armed force. The conspirators took alarm and
escaped from Scotland, before a decree of the privy council was issued
against them on 19th March 1565-6. * In issuing this decree the queen
asserted that she was assured of the assistance of her husband, who had
declared to her in the presence of the council his innocency of the conspiracy,
and a formal proclamation to this effect was published on the following day.
The general opinion as to which proceeding may be gathered from Knox, who
says that it " made all understanding men laugh . . . since the king not only
had given his consent, but also had subscribed the bond ; " while another
historian writes, " All men were discharged by proclamation to affirme that
the king was partaker or privie to the last fact ; wherat nianie smiled."
The proclamation has been printed by Goodall,2 but as his work is little
known, it is repeated here :—
" Apud Edinbroug, xx Martii 1565.
" Forasmuchas diuers sedicious and wicked persons haue maliciously sowed
rumors, bruts, and pryve whisperings amongst the lieges of our realm, slaunder-
ously and irreverently backbiting the kings majestie, as that the late conspiracye
and cruel murder committed in presence of the quenes majeste, and treasonable
deteyning of her majestes moost noble persone in captiuitye, was done at his com-
maundement, by his counsaill, assistence, and approbation, his grace, for the
removing of the evill opinion which the good subiects may be induced to conceyve
through such false reports and sedicious rumors, hath aswell to the quenes
majeste as in the presence of the lords of secret counsaill, plainly declared, vppon
1 Register of Privy Council, vol. i. pp. 436, 437.
2 Goodall's Queen Mary, vol. i. pp. 280, 281.
RICCIO AND MELVILLE CASTLE. xxxvu
his honour, fidelite, and the woord of a prince, that he nevir knewe of any part of
the sayd treasonable conspiracye wherof he is slaundrously and sakelesly tra-
duced, nor never counsailed, commaunded, consented, assisted, nor approved the
same. Thus farr onely his highnes oversaw himself in to, that at the intisement
and perswasion of the sayd late conspirators, his grace, without the queues
majestes advise and knowledge, consented to the bringing home out of England
of the Earles of Murrey, Glencarn, Rothes, and other persons being theer, with
whom her highnes was offended, which he hath in no wise denyed, and this is
the simple, syncere, and playn truth, to all and sun-dry to whome it effers be it
made knowen and manifest by thies presents." l
There is probably truth in the assertions of the enemies of Eiccio that he
acquired an undue influence in the management of state business, owing to
the partiality of Mary. During the five years which Eiccio was in the
service of the queen, he rose rapidly in her favour and confidence. He was a
Savoyard of humble parentage. He came to Edinburgh in the train of the
ambassador of the Duke of Savoy. He was soon afterwards appointed one of
the valets of the queen. After a service in that capacity, he was promoted
to the more important office of French secretary, and at the same time seems
to have acted as privy purse both to the king and queen. The enemies
of Eiccio maintain that he was deformed in his person and unprepossessing
in his appearance. These defects he strove to hide by the gorgeousness
of his apparel. Knox says "that at this time, 1565, David Eiccio, Italian,
began to be higher exalted, inasmuch as there was no matter or thing of
importance done without his advice."2 Buchanan even goes the length of
saying that Mary wished to make Eiccio a peer of Scotland, and to invest
him with the old lordship and barony of Melville.3 At the time of Eiecio's
murder, James, Lord Eoss of Hawkhead was proprietor of the lordship of
Melville, and it appears that Queen Mary had occasionally resided at the
house of Melville, and that her Italian secretary had been so frequently
visitor to her there, that even the house of Melville came to be called Eiccio's
house. Lord Euthven, as the chief actor in the murder of Eiccio, upbraided
the queen that Eiccio " had caused her Majesty to put out the Lord Eoss
1 Caligula B. ix. fol. 217 (copy).
2 Knox's History, vol. ii. p. 513, vide also p. 519.
3 Buchanan, Lib. xvii. cap. 55.
xxxvill INTRODUCTION.
from his whole lands, because he would not give over the lordship of Melvin
to the said Davie." x
Among other prominent documents in this volume may be noted the
commissions granted by the convention of estates in 1639 and 1640
appointing Sir Alexander Leslie, afterwards the first Earl of Leven, to be
general of the forces. So unanimous were these commissions that they bear
the signature of nearly every member of the estates. The first of the two,
that of 1639, is printed for the first time in this work, but the second was
printed in the Miscellany of the Maitland Club in 1843, and facsimiles were
given of all the signatures.
Manuscripts at Melville House.
In addition to the various charters and letters printed or referred to in
these volumes, there are at Melville the following manuscripts of interest : —
1. A manuscript copy of Bishop Leslie's History of Scotland, in a hand-
writing of the later part of the sixteenth century.2
2. A copy of the National Covenant of 1580. as renewed in 1638, and
subscribed in 1639, by Sir Alexander Leslie, afterwards first Earl of Leven.
His signature is the third from the left, immediately following those of the
Earls of Argyll and Rothes, and is followed by the names of Eglinton, Dun-
fermline, Lindsay, Wigtown, Montrose, and others.
3. A volume of Minutes of the Privy Council during a portion of the
year 1689 and 1690. They are apparently copies of the daily minutes
which were made for Alexander, Lord Eaith, and they have since been
collected and bound together.
To these may be added a number of Household books, from about the
year 1630 onwards, some of which have been quoted from in the memoirs.
Various members of the family also, who held high official positions, have
left a large collection of documents, which it was impossible to include in
this work, but which may supply materials for a future historian.
1 Scotia Rediviva, p. 341. the gaps in it have been supplied by a modern
hand from a Ms. of similar date in the British
- The original MS. is much mutilated, and Museum.
THE ANCIENT BARONY OF MELVILLE. XXXIX
LANDS AND BARONIES OF THE MELVILLE FAMILY.
During the seven centuries and upwards in which the family of Melville
have flourished in Scotland they have been prominently associated with the
baronies of Melville in Midlothian, and Eaith and Monimail or Melville in
Fife, and other territorial possessions. This appears from the history of the
family ; but it may be interesting to trace here the successive baronies and
lands of the Melvilles in more comprehensive form than could well be done
in the memoirs.
1. The Lordship, Barony, and Parish of Melville, in Midlothian.
As stated in the memoir of Galfrid Melville, the first lord of Melville, he
appears to have bestowed his own name upon a portion of the lands which
he held in Midlothian. The extent of the lands thus named Melville, which
lay on the banks of the North Esk, is somewhat difficult to define, as neither
the early nor later charters give any indication on the point. The lands of
Melville, however, gave name to the whole possessions which Galfrid Mel-
ville and his posterity held in Scotland, as at a very early date they are
described as lords of the barony of Melville.
The original charter of erection of the barony of Melville has not been
discovered, but it must have been previous to the year 1429, as in that year
John Melville was served heir to his father, Thomas Melville, in the barony
of Melville.1 The barony, however, was of new erected by King James the
Fourth in favour of John, second Lord Boss of Hawkhead, the son of Agnes
Melville, the heiress of Melville. The charter, which is dated 21st February
1509, describes the lands then possessed by the granter as the heir of the
Melvilles, but without detailing their boundaries or extent. The lands then
comprehended in the barony were : the town and lands of Melville, with
mill; the lands of Stenhouse, with mill ; and the lands of Mosshouses, all in
the county of Edinburgh : Tartraven ; Preston, with mill ; and Waterston, in
1 Retoui-. Inventory ol Melville writs.
xl INTRODUCTION.
the county of Linlithgow : and the land of " Morowingsidis " or Muiravon-
side, in the county of Stirling.
The barony of Melville thus re-erected was, however, not identical with
the earlier lordship of Melville. In 1344 the barony of Melville, as it is then
called, included, in addition to the lands named in the charter of 1509, the
lands of Leadburn in Peeblesshire, and in 1379 it also included Greviston
or Grieston and Hallmyre, in the same county, with Hawthornden, and the
superiority at least of the lands of Granton, both in the county of Edinburgh.
All these territories were in the possession of the lords of Melville, and a
brief notice of each, in the order of their acquisition so far as known, may
here be given.
The earliest Melville charter which has been preserved is a grant by
King William the Lion to Galfrid Melville and his son of that land
which Malbeth held in Liberton, having the same marches, and the land
of Lecbernard or Letbernard. Both these lands had belonged to Malbet, a
baron of the time of King David the First, who in one or two charters
is called Malbet of Liberton. He is also named Malbet Ber or Bere,
and in two instances his name is spelt Macbet. He was owner of a part of
the modern parish of Liberton, and apparently founded the church of that
parish, which he endowed with lands in Liberton and also with a grant from
Letbernard, probably Leadburn. It is doubtless from the name of this baron
of Liberton that the popular tradition arose that the ancient church of that
parish was founded by King Macbeth.
The particular lands in Liberton thus granted to Galfrid Melville cannot
be ascertained, but they do not appear to have remained long in the possession
of the Melville family, as no reference is made to them in charters later than
1190. They probably lay near or round the tower of Liberton, but a portion
of them was granted by the younger Galfrid Melville to the monks of Holy-
rood, and the rest may have been otherwise disposed of.
Perhaps, however, the district known as Liberton then comprehended the
lands now known as Melville, from the name of Galfrid Melville, who is the
first recorded owner. These are the lands of Melville Grange, South Melville,
Wester Melville, Melville Mains, with the parks and haughs round and near
Melville Castle in Midlothian, with Elginhaugh, Westfield, and other pendicles
MELVILLE CASTLE, MIDLOTHIAN. xli
in the neighbourhood. The estate as thus formed is situated in the three
modern parishes of Liberton, Dalkeith, and Lasswade, but it may originally
have been in the territory known as Liberton.
The present fine castellated edifice of Melville Castle was built in the year
1786, after plans by John Playfair, architect, on the site of the old house or
fortalice of Melville. It was built for the Eight Honourable Henry Dundas,
afterwards Viscount Melville, who took his title from the estate which had
been purchased by his father-in-law, Mr. David Kenuie, from the Lords Eoss,
the former owners.1 There is reference to a house at Melville so early as the
year 1177, which was probably erected by Galfrid Melville, but it does not
appear to have been a castle. Nor is there in any charter, so far as has been
found, any reference to a fortalice or tower on the lands, the place being
mentioned merely as the principal messuage.
The connection of Queen Mary's secretary, David Eiccio, with Melville
has been noted, and tradition may be correct in stating that he planted
some of the fine ti'ees in the grounds. One of these trees, an old oak, which
bears his name, still remains. It is ' on the right-hand side of the approach
looking towards the castle from the west, and about 250 yards from it. It
is 48 feet high, and its circumference 20 feet 10 inches, according to
measurements made some years ago.2
The existence of a mansion-house at Melville in the time of Queen Mary
is instructed by a contract dated at Melville in the year 1573, between Lord
and Lady Eoss, then proprietors of Melville, and John Hering in Gilmerton,
as to coal working on the Melville estate. The document is of some interest
as a specimen of such agreements. The parties to it are James, fourth Lord
Eoss, with his wife, Jean Sempill, on the one part, and John Hering, in
1 There is at Melville Castle a painting of Victoria also visited the castle in 1842. The
the old mansion of Melville, made shortly larger of Lord Eklin's etchings has been
before its demolition in the year 1786. Two reproduced in Grant's "Old aud New Edin-
etchings of Melville Castle by John Clerk of burgh," vol. iii. p. 363. There is an engrav-
Eldiu were made shortly before its removal ing of the new castle in " The Beauties of
to make way for the new castle. These Scotland, 1819," and it is also photographed
etchings show the large trees near the ca3tle in the "Castles and Mansions of the Lothians,"
[Clerk's Etchings, Bannatyne Club, 1855, No. [vol. ii.].
x.] King George the Fourth visited Melville 2 Oak Trees of Scotland in Transactions of
Castle when in Scotland in 1822, and Queen the Highland Society.
VOL. I. a
xlii INTRODUCTION.
Gilmerton, for himself and his colliers, on the other. Hering undertakes,
" God willing," to win coal and coal-heughs within the bounds and farms of
Melville, Easter and Wester, and binds himself and his craftsmen to enter
eight colliers to labour the place where the coal shall happen to be, within
three days from date, who shall be partners with him in all expenses and
profits of working the coal. They shall labour a level and water-pots for
drawing off water and keeping dry the coal and coal-heughs. Hering also
promises to work the coal, upper and nether, in such a way that "the samin sail
not be fullzeit ouir-rwn nor waistit be ony maner of way, and to work and seik
the mane coill, vuir and nethir, to the vtirmest hall of the samin, sa fer as pos-
sibill is to ony workmen to laubour or do in sic behaulffls." The contract is to
endure for two years only from the date of Hering's entry on 14 th November 1573.
Lord and Lady Boss, on the other hand, bind themselves to cause " men
of jwgement and vnderstanding " to examine the work twice or thrice or
oftener in the year, and if it be not clone to the owner's profit, the contract
shall be void. It shall also expire if Hering should die or fail within the two
years. Lord and Lady Boss are also bound to pay Hering one-half of the
expenses incurred in winning the coal, and to find " and sustene quarrell
mellis, quarrell pikis, wageis, towis, forkis, rowis, doggis, and buckattis, if
neid beis to that effect, as vse is requiseit in sic caiss." Further, Hering for
performing the contract shall have the third of Lord and Lady Boss's part
of the coal that shall happen to be won, he sustaining the third of the
expenses as they do. Providing always that the grieve or overseer to be
appointed over the coal working shall be chosen by Lord Boss and Lady Boss.
They shall also receive from Hering yearly during the contract three dozen
draughts of coal, one dozen at Christmas, Easter, and Whitsunday respec-
tively, which coals are to be free and not named or counted as " pairtismenis
pairtis nor collearis coillis." The parties bind themselves faithfully to observe
the contract, which is dated at Melville on the 11th November 1573.1
Whether Galfrid Melville built a house or stronghold on his property or
not, one of his first acts was to erect and endow a church at Melville, the
1 Original contract. Among the witnesses and Sir John Holland, notary public. The
are John Ross of Swanston, John Ross in latter is known as the author of "The Court
Tartraven, Hew Ross, brother to Lord Ross, of Venus" and other poems.
THE OLD CHUfiCH OF MELVILLE. xliii
patronage of which he granted to the monks at Dunfermline, and which they
held down to the Reformation. He endowed the church with lands which
cannot now be traced by name, but which probably comprised part of the
hangh land by the side of the North Esk. The church was dedicated to St.
Andrew, and the parish, called Melville, afterwards attached to it was
composed of the barony of Melville and the smaller barony of Lugton near
Dalkeith.1 In 1615 the church was in a ruinous condition. The parish had
previously, in 1583, been united by the general assembly to Newbattle, but
in 1632 the commissioners of teinds suppressed the parish, described as
" the paroch kirk and parochine of St. Androis." They also disjoined " the
tounes and lands of Lugtoun and Melvill, with thair pertinents," of which
the parish was composed, and united Lugton to Dalkeith and Melville to
Lasswade, an arrangement which was ratified by parliament in the year 1633.2
The exact situation of the old church of Melville is believed to have been within
the grounds of St. Anne's, Lasswade, the present residence of Dr. Falconer.
Only a small portion of the foundations can now be said to remain of the
ancient building, which must have stood close to the river Esk, as in May
1642 the kirk-session of Lasswade paid to Francis Somervell six shillings "for
uptaking the stanes that fell from St. Andro's kirk end into the water." So
early as 1622, at a visitation of the kirk and parish of Lasswade, Archbishop
Spottiswood gave permission for repairs of the kirkyard dyke to be made with
stones from the kirk of Melville, then in ruins. Further demolition of the
building was made in 1659, when stones were taken from it by permission of
Lord Eoss to build a manse for the minister of Lasswade. In the garden of
St. Anne's, human bones are frequently dug up, revealing the site of the
1 The building stood within a stone-cast of them until about 1620. The king then pre-
the church of Lasswade, and on account of sented the vacant stipend, glebe, and teinds
this proximity it was not provided either with to Mr. James Porteous, minister of Lasswade,
a minister or reader at the Reformation; but who was a member of the assembly of 163S,
Mr. John Aird, an "expectant" or proba- and died in 1643, "being one of those ac-
tioner in Dalkeith presbytery, had charge as counted eminent in their day for ' grace and
a minister at Melville from 1612 to 1614. He gifts or faithfulness and success.' " [Memorials
probably, however, did not enjoy the fruits of the Montgomeries, vol. ii. p. 287 ; Scott's
of the benefice, as these had been granted by Fasti, Part I. pp. 2S9, 293.]
King James the Sixth in 1586 to John Her-
ries, minister of Newbattle, and again in 2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol.
1610 to another John Herries, who enjoyed v. pp. 145, 146.
xliv INTRODUCTION.
ancient burying-ground of Melville ; and an old resident in the neighbour-
hood remembers tbat when a boy he saw cartdoads of soil containing remains
of the dead carted from tbe site of the old carpet-manufactory at St. Anne's
and spread upon the school green. The burial-ground was used long after
the church became ruinous. In 1634 the kirk-session of Lasswade enacted
that a register should be kept, both of those buried in the kirkyard of Lass-
wade " and St. Andros quhilk is for Melville, from this day foorth." x
The Lords Loss, probably as representing the Melville family, also held
rights over certain lands in Liberton parish known as the "Jvirklands of St.
Catherine, called the Oyliewell." These lands belonged to a very ancient
chapel dedicated to St. Catherine, which stood, with its burying-ground, near
the modern mansion of St. Catherine's. The remains of it, however, have long
since disappeared. A rising ground to the east, now known as Gracemount,
was formerly called Priesthill, and may have formed part of the kirklands of
St. Catherine's. The fact that Lord Koss was patron of the cha.pel seems to
point to a right inherited from the lords of Melville, but this is not instructed
by extant charter evidence of an early date. The " Oyliewell " or Balmwell
of St. Catherine's was at one time an object of veneration for its healing
powers. King James the Sixth on his visit to Scotland in 1617 went to see
it. The well is still in good preservation.
2. The Lands of Leadburn in the Pabish of Penicuik.
Although the lands of Lecbernard, Letbernard, or Leadburn, which also
had belonged to Malbet, were, like those of Melville, in the possession of
Galfrid Melville from the time of King Malcolm the Fourth, there is very
little mention of them in the extant writs of the family, and no very definite
information has been obtained from other sources. The lands were in the
possession of John Melville, lord of the Barony of Melville, in 1344, but the
territory appears to have been broken up before the time of his grandson of
the same name, who mortgaged various parts of his lands. So far as can be
gathered the Leadburn which was granted to Galfrid Melville included the
modern lands of Halls, Mosshouses, Temple Hall, as well as the modern
Leadburn, and probably others which have not been ascertained. Of these
1 From information supplied by a gentleman at Loanbead, and communicated to the writer.
THE LANDS OF LEADBORN, STENHOCJSE, ETC. xlv
lands Halls passed into possession of a branch of the family of Eamsay.
Temple Hall was mortgaged in 1386 to Sir William Douglas of Strathbrock.
Mosshouses was also mortgaged to Henry Douglas of Logton about 1392,1
but was apparently redeemed, as it was inherited by Lord Eoss with the rest
of the Barony of Melville.
3. Lands of Stenhouse, Liberton.
The small estate of Stenhouse, situated to the east of, and not far from the
church of, Liberton, was among the earliest possessions of the Melvilles. It
was for a time in the hands of Galfrid Melville, the younger, ancestor of the
Melvilles of Carnbee, and his descendants also held it in tenandry along with
their lands of Granton. But it reverted to the main line, as it is named in
the charter of the Barony of Melville in favour of Lord Boss in 1509.
4. Lands of Tartraven, Breston, and Others in Linlithgowshire.
These lands are not named in any of the early charters by King William
the Lion now in the Melville charter-chest, but they were in possession of the
family at a very early period, if not so early as the time of King Malcolm the
Fourth. Tartraven, or Betrevyn as it was then called, formed part of the
dowry of Matilda Malherbe, the second wife of Galfrid Melville the elder,
about 1180. The lands in Linlithgowshire, afterwards incorporated in the
barony of Melville, appear to have been Breston, Tartraven, and Mid-
Tartraven, with the mains of Breston and Tartraven and others lying near.
At Tartraven there was a chapel dedicated to St. Leonard, which was
endowed, if not erected, by Sir Bichard Melville about 1200, and placed under
the charge of the prior and canons of St. Andrews, with whom a special
agreement concerning it was made in the year 1314 by John Melville of that
ilk. The further history of the chapel has not been ascertained.
5. Muiravonside, in Stirlingshire.
Among the other lands erected in 1509 into the united barony of
Melville was the territory of Muiravonside, a place which now gives name to
a parish. The " Statistical Account " of the parish and other authorities give
1 Registrum Honoris de Morton, vol. ii. p. 179.
xlvi INTRODUCTION.
the popular name of it as " Moranside," deriving the name from the moory
character of the district. The earliest charter, however, in which it is named
in this work, dated between 1189 and 1199, furnishes a different reason for
the name given to the parish. Between these years Sir Eichard Melville
married Margaret Prat, daughter of Eeginald Prat, lord of Tynedale, in
Northumberland, who granted as his daughter's dowry his lands of " Mor-
gunessete " or " Murganesete." The lands which thus came into possession
of the lords of Melville, and the boundaries of which are fnlly given in the
charter to Sir Eichard Melville,1 though their limits cannot now be traced,
evidently took their name from one of their principal land-marks, described
in the charter as the seat of St. Morgan. The land-mark in question may be
the eminence known as Sight Hill, but who St. Morgan was is doubtful.
There is no St. Morgan in the Eomish calendar, though a St. Moran or Moder-
andus has a place there. The latter, however, is not usually reckoned among
Scottish Saints, and it is probable that " Morgan " is merely a variation of
the name of St. Marnan or St. Miren, both of whom were prominent teachers
in Scotland. This view is corroborated by the fact that the parish church is
said to have been dedicated to St. Marnua.
The present parish of Muiravonside was formed in 1648. In terms of a
petition by James, Earl of Callendar, patron of the churches of Falkirk,
Denny, and Muiravonside, Parliament, on the recommendation also of the
presbytery of Linlithgow, disjoined from Falkirk the church and parish of
Muiravonside, reserving the rights of the patron, and granting all privileges
due to the minister of the parish.2
Hawthornden in Midlothian.
Besides the barony of Melville, which, as shown, comprehended in 1509
not only the lands of that name in Midlothian, but also the other estates
enumerated above, the Melvilles held for a time other lands, which did not
descend with the heiress of Melville to the Eoss family. Of these the most
important was the estate of Hawthornden, which was the property of John
Melville of Melville in 1386, and he for a time resided at the castle.
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 4, 5.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. p. 119.
HAWTHOKNDEN. xlvii
This possession of Hawthornden by the Melvilles has been unnoticed by
historians. In the time of King Eobert Bruce the castle of Hawthornden
and the lands round it were in the hands of Sir Laurence Abernethy, a cadet
of the family of Abernethy of Saltoun. In 1338 he was a partisan of the
English, and held the castle in their interest. His lands of Hawthornden in
Midlothian, Myrehall or Halmyre in Peeblesshire, Borthwickshiels in Box-
burghshire, and Lamberton in Berwickshire, were forfeited to the Crown, and
granted by King David the Second to various persons.1 According to a
recent writer, the greater portion of the lands forfeited by Sir Laurence were
restored to his son Hugh, and were afterwards inherited by daughters of Sir
Laurence, co-heiresses.2 There is no evidence given in support of this last
statement, but it is not improbable that it was in some such way that the
lands of Hawthornden came to John Melville. For it would appear that he
held also part of the lands of Halmyre in Peeblesshire, which had belonged
to Sir Laurence Abernethy, and this fact corroborates the probability of a
division between co-heiresses. But the evidence presently available does not
show whether John Melville himself married one of these co-heiresses, or
whether he inherited from one of them as his mother or grandmother, but
the latter view is the most probable.
Some authorities, ignorant of the Melville connection with Hawthornden,
have stated that in 1388 it was in possession of the Abernethys, who sold it
to the family of Douglas. The lands of Hawthornden did come into the
hands of a family of the name of Douglas, who occupied them until about
1596, when they were sold to Sir John Drummond, father of the celebrated
poet. But the transactions which took place in 1386, 1399, and 1400,
between John Melville and his " cousin " or kinsman, Sir William Douglas,
son and heir of Sir James Douglas of Strathbrock, were the first dealings
of the Douglases with the lands, which came into their possession at a
later date. The writs by John Melville are in the form of leases, but
they were in reality wadsets or mortgages, as in the first document he
refers to a sum of money paid to him, for which he leases the lands for
ten years. But how or when the Douglases obtained full possession of
1 Kobertson's Index, pp. 5i, 56, 57, 116.
2 The Frasers of Philorth, by Lord Saltoun, vol. ii. pp. 158, 159.
xlviii INTRODUCTION.
Hawthornden cannot be learned from any documents now in the Melville
charter-chest.
John Melville refers also to part of the lands of Grieston, in Traquair
parish and Buteland, in Currie parish, which may also have come to him with
Hawthornden. Grieston remained in the hands of the Melvilles until 1473,
but its later history, and also that of Buteland, have not been ascertained.
Melville House and the Palace of Monimail, in Fife.
This noble mansion, which was erected by George, first Earl of Melville,
about 1692, stands a short distance to the south of an older building called
the Palace of Monimail, from its being the country residence of the bishops
and archbishops of St. Andrews.1 The lands of Monimail, on which the
palace was built, were in possession of the see of St. Andrews at a very
early date. Only a portion of the old palace now remains. It is known
as Cardinal Beaton's Tower, and a lithographed representation of it, as well as
of Melville House, is given in the present work.
The acquisition of the house or palace of Monimail by Sir Eobert Melville
of Murdochcairnie has been explained in his memoir, and the circumstances
under which John Hamilton, archbishop of St. Andrews, sold the house in
1564 to Sir James Balfour of Pittendreich have also been narrated. These
need not be repeated here, as the writs there quoted contain all the informa-
tion now in the Melville charter-chest. But the archbishop's charter, and
that to Sir Bobert Melville, only deal with the house and its immediate
surroundings, the green before the outer gate, the whole being described as
" within all the principal dykes," which were probably mounds of turf which
fenced off the house and grounds from the neighbouring lands, which had
been feued to separate proprietors.
1 John Hamilton, archbishop of St. Andrews, of the well, declaring that the cure was really
was residing at his palace of Monimail, when effected by the exercise enjoined upon " the
he was cured of a dangerous malady (phthisis, lazy prelate," as he calls him, of walking to
according to some writers) by Jerome Oar- and from the well, though the distance is
dan, the famous Italian physician, by means inconsiderable. A few yeai-s ago a young
of the healing virtues of a well, which is calf, grazing in the park in which the well is
adjacent to the palace, and is still known as situated, fell into it and was drowned. The
Cardan's well. A late minister of the parish well has thus the distinction of having cured
of Monimail, however, disputed the virtues an archbishop and killed a calf.
w
o
"0
CO
"0
>
r
>
o
m
o
z
2
>
o
>
o
>
o
o
2
m
o
m
rn
1 feiH
o itfss
4*
Mi
ifMl
I \Mmmr
i Pi
" i i
i ill
PALACE OF MONTMAIL. xlix
Monimail, as afterwards erected into a temporal barony in 1 6 1 3, in favour
of Sir Eobert Melville of Murdochcairnie, comprehended the place of Moni-
mail and the lands of Letham, Monksmire, Edensmoor, with the teinds of the
parish of Monimail and others, as resigned by Sir Eobert in the hands of the
Crown. These lands, some of which were occupied by portioners, had been
gradually acquired by Sir Eobert, and his son, the second Lord Melville,
added Montagart to their number, as shown by his resignation in 1627. In
1643 the old family estate of Eaith was also included in the lordship, and
in 1669 King Charles the Second granted a new charter of erection, adding
to the barony of Monimail the lands of Pitlair and Balwearie.
The house of Monimail continued to be known by that name until about
1692, when the new house was built and called Melville. Sir Eobert Sibbald
describes it in 1710 as a great, noble, and regular new house, richly furnished,
with office-houses without, large gardens, vast enclosures for pasture and
barren-planting. The house was erected in the style of the period, and is a
large square building consisting of two principal stories, with a basement and
attic. Two deep projecting wings enclosed a court at the original front, but
the front has since been changed, a new entrance made at what was formerly
the back, and the court has been laid out as a parterre, ornamented with
shrubs and flowers. The saloon, or hall, measures forty-five feet by twenty-
four. The park which surrounds the house is enriched with a fine display of
noble trees. The old approach is very grand, having on each side a double
row of beech-trees of great height and beauty, but, though the trees still re-
main, a new winding approach has been made through the richly wooded park.
In the year 1733, between six and seven o'clock in the morning of the
27th October, while all the family were in bed, Melville House, then occupied
by Alexander, fifth Earl of Leven, was struck by lightning, and the effects of
the electric fluid were so remarkable that they were thought worthy of the
attention of the Eoyal Society in London, and were fully described by
Professor Colin Maclaurin of Edinburgh in a letter to Sir Hans Sloan.1 The
letter was accompanied by plans in explanation of the statements made, and
is also too long to be inserted here. But it would appear that the lightning
affected almost every room in the house, which was roofed with lead. One
1 The Letter was printed in the Scots Magazine of the period.
VOL. I. h
1 INTRODUCTION.
" chimney head " or stalk was struck level with the roof, and the stones
scattered to the distance of one hundred feet from the house. In some of the
rooms little damage was done — some gilding melted or a pane of glass cracked,
while in others stones were thrown out of the wall, panels loosened or splin-
tered, pictures tarnished or thrown from one side to the other of the apart-
ment, glasses broken, and other similar injuries inflicted upon the furniture.
There were also breaches in the walls, some of considerable extent, others
trifling, and such occurred in rooms far apart from each other.
In the bed-chamber of Lord and Lady Leven two panes of one window
were broken, and the pieces of glass driven towards the bed on the opposite
side of the room. In the corner next that window the mouldings of the
panels were broken off and also thrown towards the bed. The mirror of a
dressing-glass that stood under these was broken to pieces and the quick-
silver melted off, but the frame was entire and stood in its place, though it
smelt of sulphur some hours afterwards. A picture close by was tarnished,
and others beat against the opposite sides of the room, but not tarnished.
A mirror between the two windows was entire, though a panel under it was
struck out, while a chest of drawers in front of the panel suffered no harm.
Other damage was done in the room, but it was comparatively slight.
Lord Leven's personal experiences are thus described : — " He was awak'd
with the noise of a great gust of wind, that, upon looking up and drawing the
curtain, he perceived the lightning enter the room with a great brightness,
appearing of a blewish colour, in the corner where it did most mischief. The
brightness of it made him cover his eyes for a moment, then, looking up, the
light seem'd to him to have abated, and the blewish colour had disappeared ;
at the same time he heard the thunder, which had an uncommon noise. He
compares it to that which is made by the rings of a curtain when drawn
violently over the rod. He felt at the same time the bed and the whole room
shake, and was like to be choaked with the sulphur. The room was full of
smoke, partly occasioned by the soot that came down the chimney. When
my lady's woman, on ringing of the bell, open'd the door, she says she was
scarce able to enter for the sulphurious steams that filled the room."1 The
latter, fortunately, was large and of a good height. It may be added that no
1 From copy of letter in Melville Charter-chest, made in 17S6 for the sixth Earl of Leven.
MELVILLE HOUSE AND OTHERS, IN FIFE. li
one in the house was injured in any way, except that Lord Leven's eyes were
uncomfortable for a few days from the brilliancy of the lightning.
Eaith and Abbotshall, in Fife.
Of the early history of the lands of Eaith there is no trace in the extant
charters of the Melville family. These show that John Melville was
proprietor of Eaith in the year 1412. But from a charter granted in 1474
by Henry, Abbot of Dunfermline, to William Melville, then laird of Eaith,
we learn that the lands belonged to the abbey of Dunfermline as superiors,
forming part of their regality, and were held by the Melvilles for an annual
payment of £5 Scots, with the services of ward and relief.1 The lands of
Eaith do not appear under that name in the register of the abbey of Dun-
fermline until 1474, the date of the above writ; but they were probably in-
cluded in the territory described as " Kirkcaldyshire," gifted to the monastery
at its foundation by King Malcolm Canmore and Queen Margaret.2 The
district thus named included the parish of Abbotshall, in which Eaith is
now situated, but which was disjoined from Kirkcaldy only in 1650.
The monks appear to have had at one time a dispute as to the possession
of that portion of their territory, for at a later date King David the First
repeated the grant made by his father and mother of the whole shire of
Kirkcaldy, which Constantine, Earl of Fife, had withheld from the abbey by
force. He further prohibited the heirs of Earl Constantine from challenging
the grant. After this Balwearie and other places in the neighbourhood
appear separately in the abbey register, but not Eaith, so that the time of its
acquisition by the Melvilles has not been ascertained.
The history of the barony while in their hands may be gathered from the
memoirs. It was incorporated with the larger barony of Melville in 1643,
and sold by David, third Earl of Leven, in 1725 to the ancestor of the
present proprietor, Mr. Munro Ferguson. The mansion-house is thus
noticed by Sibbald ; " Eaith, the ancient seat of the chief of the Melvills,
who had, and yet have, sundry lands in this shire. The Lord Eaith, trea-
surer-depute, built a very good new house here, with all its attendants of
1 "Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 47-49. 2 Registrum de Dunfermelyn, p. 1.
lii INTRODUCTION.
gardens and others, and it has some old barren -planting."1 The house then
built has since been added to and improved in appearance.
The present mansion-house of Eaith stands upon the summit of a con-
siderable hill, and is surrounded by extensive and beautiful pleasure-grounds,
in front of which there is a large lake. A view taken from the south of the
house and lake and grounds is given in " Fife Illustrated."2
In the gardens of Eaith House there is a large yew-tree of great antiquity,
which indicates the site of the mansion of Abbotshall, to which the abbots
of Dunfermline occasionally retired as one of the country seats belonging to
that rich ecclesiastical establishment. Abbotshall House, which was built of
stone, and appears to have been of considerable strength, with the grounds
and the port of Burntisland, were resigned by the abbot into the hands of
Kiug James the Fifth. At a later period Queen Mary conferred Abbotshall
upon Sir Eobert Melville of Murdochcairnie, whose right was confirmed in
1586 by King James the Sixth, and by Patrick, Master of Gray, who was
for a time commendator of Dunfermline.3 The old country house of the
abbots probably became incorporated with the estate of Eaith in the time
of John, third Lord Melville.
The Territorial Earldom of Leven and Lordship and Barony of
Balgonie, erected in 1664.
Although the territory of Balgonie has now passed to other hands, it
was for two centuries in the possession of the Earls of Leven and Melville.
The title of Lord Balgonie was derived from the lands and castle of that
name. The castle was inhabited by the earls till the year 1824, and a short
notice of the castle may here be appropriate. It is situated on a steep
bank overhanging the river Leven, crowning an eminence about thirty-six
feet above the bed of the stream. The building consists of an ancient
tower or keep, with a more modern house of three stories communicating
with it, to which a wing has been added. The more ancient tower is
eighty feet high, and measures forty-five feet by thirty-six feet over walls.
1 Sibbakl, p. 125. 2 By Joseph Swan, etc., 1840, vol. ii.
3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 125-127.
CD
>
CD
O
o
>
Cfi
H
BALGONIE CASTLE, ETC. liii
It appears to date from the fourteenth or fifteenth century, and was pro-
bably erected by the Sibbalds, the first recorded owners of the lands. The
castle and lands passed by an heiress, Elizabeth Sibbald, about 1450, to the
family of Lundie, from whom they were acquired by Sir Alexander Leslie,
afterwards first Earl of Leven. He made large additions to the house, and
laid out new gardens and extensive enclosures around it on both sides of
the river Leven. The character of the foundations suggest that the additions
then made were raised upon those of an earlier building. The castle was
formerly surrounded on three sides with a ditch and mound of earth, the
fourth side being defended by the steep bank towards the river Leven.
Balgonie was a favourite residence of the sixth and seventh Earls of
Leven, but was sold in 1824 by David, Earl of Leven and Melville, to James
Balfour of Whittinghame. The price was £104,000 sterling. Mr. Balfour
provided Balgonie to his second sou, Charles Balfour, who was succeeded in
it by his son, Charles Barrington Balfour of Balgonie and Newton Don.
A lithographed view of Balgonie Castle is given in the present work.
In addition to the baronies and lands now described, as possessed by the
main stem, several branches of the Melville family acquired other lands
and baronies in different parts of Scotland. Prominent among these cadets
were the Melvilles of Glenbervie in the parish of that name, in the county
of Kincardine, of which Philip Melville was sheriff, in the reign of King-
Alexander the Second.
Of one of that sheriff's descendants, John Melville, Laird of Glenbervie,
himself also sheriff of the Mearns, a painful tradition has been persistently
preserved of his death in the neighbouring parish of Garvock. It is thus
detailed by the minister of that parish :l —
" In a hollow at the east side of the parish is said to be the place where the
sheriff was boiled. The tradition is this, and affords a sad specimen of the
barbarity of the times of James I., about 1420. Melville, the Laird of Glenbervie
and sheriff of the Mearns, had, by a strict exercise of his authority, rendered him-
self obnoxious to the surrounding barons, who having teased the king by repeated
complaints against him, at last, in a fit of impatience, the king said to Barclay.
1 New Statistical Account, Garvock, vol. xi. p. 34.
liv INTRODUCTION.
laird of Mathers, who had come with another complaint : ' Sorroiv gin that sheriff'
war sodden and suppit in broo.' ' As your majesty pleases,' said Barclay, and
immediately withdrew — went and assembled his neighbours, the lairds of
Lauriston, Arbuthnott, Pitarrow, and Halkerton — appointed a great hunting-
match in the forest of Garvock, to which they kindly invited the devoted Melville.
And having privately got ready a large kettle of boiling water in a retired place,,
they decoyed unsuspecting Melville to the fatal spot, knocked him down, stripped
him, and threw him into the boiling kettle. And after he was boiled or soddt n
for some time, they took each a spoonful of the soup. To screen himself from
royal justice Barclay built that fortress in the parish of St. Cyrus, called the
Kaim of Mathers, on a perj)endicular and peninsular rock, sixty feet above the
sea, where in those days he lived quite secure. The laird of Arbuthnott claimed
and obtained the benefit of the law of Clan Macduff, which, in case of homicide,
allowed a pardon to any one within the ninth degree of kindred to Macduff,
Thane of Fife, who should flee to his cross, which then stood near Lindores, on
the march between Fife and Strathern, and pay a fine. The pardon is still extant
in Arbuthnott House.1 On the fate of the other conspirators the voice of tradi-
tion has died away. The field where this horrid deed happened still retains the
name of Brownies' Leys, because from the murderous deed then perpetrated, it
was long supposed to be haunted by the sprites called Brownies."
The main line of the Melvilles of Glenbervie continued till the reign of
King James the Second, when Elizabeth and Giles or Egidia Melville,
daughters and co-heiresses of Alexander Melville of Glenbervie, inherited
that property. Elizabeth Melville married Sir John Auchenleck of that ilk
in the county of Ayr, while Giles Melville married James Auchenleck,
younger brother of Sir John. The grandchild and heir-female of Sir John
Auchenleck and Elizabeth Melville was Elizabeth Auchenleck. She in-
herited Glenbervie and married Sir William Douglas of Braidwood, son of
Archibald, fifth Earl of Angus, " Bell the Cat." Their descendants became
prominent as Douglases of Glenbervie and as Earls of Angus.2
A branch of the Melvilles of Glenbervie inherited the separate estates of
Dysaet, in the parish of Maryton, and Baldovie, in the parish of Craig, both
1 This is not now the case, and as shown was unaccompanied by the horrible acces-
by a MS. of Principal Arbuthnott, preserved sories described by the tradition,
at Arbuthnott House, the death of Sheriff 2 The Douglas Book, 1885, vol. ii. pp. Ill
Melville was brought about in hot blood, and et seq.
MELVILLES OF GLENBERVIE. Iv
in the county of Forfar. Andrew Melville, the famous Presbyterian divine,
and who has been called the father of Scottish Presbytery, and his nephew,
James Melville, minister of Kilrennie in Fife, and author of the Diaiy which
bears his name, were cadets of the Melvilles of Glenbervie, being descended
from the Melvilles of Baldovie.
Andrew Melville found an able and learned biographer in Dr. Thomas
M'Crie, and his Life of Melville is well known. In the edition of 1856 an
original letter from Andrew Melville, written at Sedan in 1617, is printed, and
also given in facsimile. He subscribes it " An : Melvin." Another signature
of Melville as principal of St. Mary's College, St. Andrews, is here given : —
His father used the proper name of Melville, of which Melvin is a
corruption. In Dr. M'Crie's " Life of Melville " much genealogical informa-
tion is given regarding his family*
Another branch of the Melville family early acquired the barony of
Carnbee, in the parish of that name in the county of Fife. In the Baronage
of Scotland by Sir Bobert Douglas, a detailed descent of the Melvilles of
Carnbee is given under the title of " Melvilles of Strathkinness and Craig-
toun."2 The Melvilles of Carnbee are there traced from Sir Bichard Mel-
ville, knight in the reign of King Alexander the Second, down to Bobert
Melville, a general in the army, who bought Strathkinness and Craigtoun, and
afterwards erected a new mansion which he called Mount Melville.
It does not, however, fall within the scope of the present work to give a
detailed history of these branches of the Melville family, or of other less pro-
minent cadets, who also acquired estates in different parts of Scotland.
Two families so prominent as the Melvilles of Melville and the Leslies of
Leven, both celebrated for civil and military service in the history of Scotland,
1 Memorials of the Earls of Haddington, Melvilles of Carnbee are also noticed in
vol. i. p. xxxi. Wood's East Neuk of Fife, p. 330.
2 Douglas Baronage 1798, p. 527. The
lvi INTRODUCTION.
could not fail to attract the attention of historians. Eeference has heen made
to the previous publication by the Maitland Club and others of portions of
the Melville muniments. At an earlier date the celebrated Charter scholar,
Mr. Thomas Thomson, advocate, who was the first Deputy Clerk-Eegister of
Scotland, was intrusted by Alexander, Earl of Leven and Melville, with the
arrangement of his family muniments. In a letter to his lordship, Mr.
Thomson explains the progress that had been made in arranging the valuable
papers which Lord Leven had intrusted to his care. After apologising that
his other avocations had prevented the arrangements from being as yet quite
completed, Mr. Thomson adds : " Your Lordship may rest assured that I shall
allow no unnecessary or unavoidable delay to prevent the completion of the
plan which I have in view, and which will, I flatter myself, add considerably
to the historical, as well as the private, interest of the great, but very con-
fused, mass of documents which were intrusted to me."
Mr. Thomson concludes his letter with an expression of regret at being
unable to accept of Lord Leven's very kind invitation to inspect the other
literary treasures in his lordship's possession, as his occupations had kept
him a prisoner in Edinburgh during all the year.1
The arrangement of the Melville Eapers undertaken by Mr. Thomson
was never completed. No trace, indeed, of their having been intrusted to
him appears in the Melville muniments except in his letter now quoted.
This is much to be regretted, as he had the largest experience of such work
of any man in Scotland. From the time of his appointment to his office of
Deputy Clerk-Eegister, in the year 1806, until the year 1841, when he ceased
1 Original letter at Melville House, dated " is on the same side of the street with Walter
from Castle Street, Edinburgh, 2Sth October " Scott's, but a little lower down. . . . His
1818. Mr. Deputy-Register Thomson had a mother took a house in South Castle Street."
partiality for occupying houses in Castle [Memoir of Thomas Thomson, 1854, p. 33,
Street. He had houses successively in both n. 7.] Sir Walter Scott's house in Castle
the south and north divisions of it. " His Street was No. 39, where his immortal ro-
" first house was up ' a common stair,' then mances were chiefly written. He had pre-
" numbered 19 in North Castle Street. In viously occupied No. 19 in South Castle
" 1799 he had moved to what was then 32 Street. Shortly before his bride was brought
" South Castle Street, and about 1804 to a to his lodging in No. 108 George Street, the
" house with a street-door in his time num- back windows of which overlook the court in
" bered 12, now 61, North Castle Street. It the rear of No. 32 Castle Street.
DEPUTY-CLERK REGISTER THOMSON. lvii
to hold it, he bestowed great care and labour on the improvement and
arrangement of the National Eecords of Scotland preserved in Her Majesty's
General Eegister House in Edinburgh. The folio edition of the Acts of the
Parliaments of Scotland, generally known by his name, is a monument to
his learning and ability. Headers of " The Monastery " will remember Sir
"Walter Scott's graphic description of Mr. Thomson as Mr. Deputy-Eegister
of Scotland. It occurs in the passage where Captain Clutterbuck is repre-
sented as conversing with the stranger who came to explore Melrose Abbey.
The captain was the local authority, and he was taken by surprise when the
stranger displayed more knowledge than himself. It is explained that
" much of the stranger's arguments and inductions rested upon the authority
" of Mr. Deputy-Eegister of Scotland and his lucubrations ; a gentleman
" whose indefatigable research into the national records is like to destroy my
" trade, and that of all local antiquaries, by substituting truth instead of
" legend and romance. Alas ! I would the learned gentleman did but know
" how difficult it is for us dealers in petty wares of antiquity to
" ' Pluck from our memories a rooted " legend " ;
" Raze out the written records of our brain,
" Or cleanse our bosoms of that perilous stuff,'
" and so forth. It would, I am sure, move his pity to think how many old
" dogs he hath set to learn new tricks, how many venerable parrots he hath
" taught to sing a new song, how many grey heads he hath addled by vain
" attempts to exchange their old mumpsimus for his new sumpsimus. But let
" it pass. Humana perpessi sumus. All changes round us, past, present, and
" to come ; that which was history yesterday becomes fable to-day, and the
" truth of to-day is hatched into a lie by to-morrow." x
" Nothing," it has been said, " is so ravishing as records." During the
thirty-five years from 1806 to 1841, when the first Deputy Clerk-Eegister
of Scotland held office amongst the national records, he must have enjoyed
the pleasurable sensation referred to. For even a longer period than that
accorded to Mr. Thomson, the writer in various forms, and latterly as Deputy-
Keeper of the Eecords, has had to acknowledge the services of the first
1 The Monastery, ed. 1S70, p. 24.
VOL. I. i
lviii INTRODUCTION.
Depnty-Eegister. As a humble follower in the paths so successfully trod by
so great a master, the writer has endeavoured to set forth in previous works
the history and records of many of the noble and baronial families of
Scotland. In the present work he has again been assisted by friends who
deserve his special thanks for cordial co-operation. He must add that the
generous confidence and ready assistance which have been afforded to him by
those most interested in the present work have greatly lessened his labours.
Lady Elizabeth Leslie-Melville Cartwright and her husband, Mr. Leslie-
Melville Cartwright, have not only intrusted to him unreservedly their
valuable muniments, but have shown enlightened liberality in printing
these exhaustively, and illustrating them extensively with the family
portraits, ancient charters and letters, castles, medals, etc.
Exactly seventy-two years have elapsed since 1818, when the letter of
the first Deputy Clerk-Eegister was written from Castle Street, Edinburgh,
explaining his delay in not arranging the Melville muniments. At the end
of these seventy-two years, and in the same street, another and humbler
deputy-custodier of the Eecords has completed the arrangement which was
then only commenced.
A great writer has said that " those only deserve to be remembered who
treasure up a history of their ancestors." The present amiable heiress of the
Melvilles and Leslies may be deemed worthy of the commendation of being
held in remembrance by the treasuring up of the present Eecord of her
Ancient Eace.
WILLIAM FEASEE.
Edinburgh, 32 Castle Street,
November 1890.
THE MELVILLES OF MELVILLE.
THE LOEDS OF MELVILLE IN MIDLOTHIAN
FROM 1160 TO 1458.
According to tradition, the original ancestor of the family of Melville was
one of those Hungarian noblemen who are said to have accompanied from
their exile in Hungary the Saxon Prince Edgar Atheling and his sisters the
Princesses Margaret and Cristina, to Scotland in the year 1068. To this it
is added that this nobleman afterwards received from King Malcolm Can-
more, who married the Princess Margaret, a grant of various lands in
Midlothian, on which he built Castle Melville, and became the progenitor
of all the Melvilles in Scotland.
Tbis account of the origin of the Melvilles in Scotland, which resembles
the mythical tale of Prince Maurice, the fabled ancestor of the Drum-
monds,1 is varied by another theory put forth by a comparatively recent
writer. Mr. Chalmers, the author of " Caledonia," thus writes : " Before the
middle of the twelfth century, a person of Anglo-Norman lineage, who was
called Male, settled under David I., on some lands in Midlothian, which he
obtained from that beneficent prince. Male and Maule were probably of the
same race. Male, who obtained the lands in Lothian, called the place where
he settled, Male-ville, and from this local appellation, his family were distin-
guished by the surname of Male-ville."2
With regard to this statement, however, no person of the name of Male
is found in any record of the time of King David the First, and Mr.
Chalmers adduces no authority in support of this part of his theory. On
the other hand, there is good reason to believe that the Melvilles are
of Norman descent. Among those who accompanied William, Duke of
1 Cf. The Red Book of Menteitk, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. i. p. liii.
2 Caledonia, vol. i. p. 524.
VOL. I. A
2 NORMAN ORIGIN OF THE MELVILLES OF MELVILLE.
Normandy, on his expedition against England in 1066 appears the name
of Guillaume de Malleville,1 who probably, like other adherents of the
Conqueror, obtained lands and settled in England, whence his descendants,
like so many other Anglo-Normans, came to Scotland. In another list he is
referred to as " Le Sieur de Malleville," and he, or a relative of the same
name, was a member of the expedition undertaken in 1096 by Eobert Curt-
hose, Duke of Normandy, and Godfrey of Bouillon, Duke of Lorraine.2
Further notices of the name of Maleville or Melville in England are very
few. The name has not been found in Domesday Book, but during the reigns
of King Henry the Second and his son, Eichard Coeur-de-Lion [1154-1199].
Stephen and Eobert Malluvell or Melville, brothers, appear as owners of
seven oxgangs of land in Eavenston, in the county of Nottingham.3 During
the reign of Henry the Third, in 1272, an English jury found that John, son
and heir of William of Maleville, was sixteen years of age in April of that
year. No locality is named, but about the same time the manor of Halstead,
in Kent, was vacant by the death of William of Malevile, who may have
been father of John. Twenty-five years later another John of Malevyle, and
an Alicia of Malevyle appear as two of three heirs of Thomas Tycheseye, a
proprietor in Surrey.4 To these facts it may be added that, so recently as
1667, there were three principal families of the name of Malleville in
Normandy, represented by the Seigneur de Carville, the Sieur de la Fosse,
and the Sieur de Champeaux, du Thuit Nollent, du Flessis.5 The Norman
origin of the family of Melville may therefore be inferred from the fore-
going facts, while it is evident that the name survived both in England and
Normandy long after it was established in Scotland.
1 Nobiliaire de Normandie, par E. de vol. i. p. 234.
Magny, p. 5. 5 Nobiliaire de Normandie, pp. 9S, 99.
2 Histoire Generale de Normandie, par Their names and arms are given as follows :
Dumoulin, p. 190, App. p. 16. His name and " Malleville (de) Chevalier, seigneur de Car-
arms are given asfollow: "MonsieurGuillaume ville, etc. ; D'azur, au chef denche d'argent,
Malleuille, d'azur a vn chef d'argent endente' charge d'un lean leoparde de gueules: Malle-
de l'vn a l'autre vn lyonceau de gueulles ville (de) Ecuyer, sieur de la Fosse ; De
passant en chef." gueules, a trois molettes, d'eperon d'or ; Malle-
3 Abbreviatio plaeitorum, Record Publica- ville (de) Ecuyer, sieur de Champeaux, du
tions, pp. 4, 45. a.d. 1150-1199. Thuit-Nollent, du Plessis, etc. ; D'argent, au
4 Calendarium Genealogicum, Rolls Publi- chevron d'azur, accompagne de trois roses de
cations, pp. 156, 536 ; Eotuli Hundredoriim, gueules.
the first loud of melville. 3
Galfrid Melville, Lord of Melville,
Sheriff of Edinburgh Castle, and Justiciary of Scotland, c. 1150-1180.
Nothing has been ascertained, even from English records, of the
immediate parentage and descent of the subject of this notice, Galfrid
Melville, who was the first of his family to settle in the northern kingdom.
He is first found on record in a charter by King Malcolm the Fourth, dated
in the year 1162.1 As already stated, Mr. Chalmers assigns an earlier date
to the first ancestor of the Melvilles in Scotland, but no proof of this has
been discovered, and all the grants of land in favour of Galfrid Melville date
only from the time of King Malcolm the Maiden.
But whatever was his origin, Galfrid Melville, at his earliest appearance
in Scottish record, is found occupying the important office of sheriff of Edin-
burgh Castle, and he thus at once comes into notice as a trusted servant of
the king. The extent of the jurisdiction of the sheriff of Edinburgh Castle
cannot be clearly defined, but it is probable that his sheriffdom included
Midlothian, and perhaps also East Lothian, which was a separate constabu-
lary, situated within the sheriffdom of Edinburgh.2 Apart, however, from
the actual extent of his jurisdiction, the sheriff's duties must have been
onerous. A sheriff was required to attend the king's courts, to receive com-
plaints before they were heard by the king, and to further as far as possible
within his own territory the business of the government for the sovereign's
benefit. These duties must have been rendered the more weighty in Galfrid's
case, as the castle of Edinburgh was a prominent royal residence, on which
account, also, his office must have been one of special honour. The writ in
which he is first named shows him engaged in one of the duties commonly
performed by the sheriff — settling the boundaries of a landed property. King
Malcolm had just bestowed upon the monks of Kewbattle a large tract of
1 Fiegistrum de Neubotle, pp. xxxvi, 122, 2 Ibid, ut supra. Linlithgow or West
123. The date is fixed by the fact that Lothian and Lanarkshire, as appears from
Arnald, bishop of St. Andrews, one of the the same writ in which the sheriff of
witnesses, died in September 1162, while Edinburgh Castle is named, were each under
Puchard Morville, another witness, succeeded a separate sheriff, who is conjoined with
his father as constable at an earlier date in Galfrid Melville in carrying out an order of
the same year. the king.
4 GALFRID MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE.
land in Clydesdale, named Dunpelder, now represented by Drumpellier, and
comprehending the modern parishes of Old and New Monkland. To define
the marches of this extensive territory the king directed Galfrid Melville,
whom he describes " as my sheriff of the castle of the Maidens," and two
other sheriffs, Baldwin, sheriff of Lanark, and Uchtred, sheriff of Linlithgow,
to perambulate the lands and give sasine to the monks.1 A few years later,
in 1165, Galfrid Melville, along with Uchtred, sheriff of Linlithgow, performed
a similar service on behalf of the monks of Holyrood, to whom King Malcolm
gave the church lands of Bathgate. In this case also the sheriffs acted in
obedience to a mandate from the king, and the lands were measured in
presence of the abbot of the monastery.2
Besides the fact that Galfrid Melville occupied the trusted post of sheriff
of a royal residence and adjacent district, the numerous grants of land which
he received from King Malcolm the Fourth indicate that he was in high
favour with that monarch. The original charters to Galfrid have not been
preserved, except in one instance, but from that and later writs, with other
evidence, we learn that among the lands he received from King Malcolm
were a part of Liberton parish with Leebernard (Leadburn) in Midlothian.3
He also possessed estates in the county of Linlithgow, and either then or at a
later date the lands called Melville in Midlothian.
The lands which Galfrid Melville possessed in Liberton are described as
" that land which Malbeth held in Liberton." This former possessor of the
lands is variously described as Malbeth and Malbet, or Macbet Bere, and also
as Malbet or Malbead of Liberton. He was a baron of the time of King
David the First, and appears as a witness to several charters by that monarch
and his son, Henry, Earl of Northumberland. Previous to 1147, Malbet
made a grant to King David's new abbey of Holyrood of two oxgangs of land,
with the chapel of Liberton, and the teinds and dues of things living and dead
in Legbernard. Legbernard, or Leebernard, appears to survive in the modern
name of Leadburn, and at that time comprehended a considerable portion of
1 Registrum de Neubotle, pp. xxxvi, 122, 2 Ibid. p. 22S ; Register of Holyrood,
123. The former proprietor of the lands was pp. 24, 208, 209. Galfrid Melville is also a
Gillepatrik Makerin, evidently a Celt, and witness to the king's grant of the lands,
several men with Celtic names were to assist
the sheriffs. 3 Cf. vol. iii. of this work, p. 1.
OWNER OF LIBERTON, LEADBURN, PRESTON, ETC. 5
the parish of Penicuik. Galfrid Melville was in possession of the lands of
Liberton and Leadburn between 1153 and 1165, and he or his son of same
name confirmed his predecessor's gift to the monks of Holyrood.1
The lands which Galfrid Melville possessed in the county of Linlithgow
are more difficult to define, but they were probably identical with those held
later by his descendants, including the barony of Preston near the town of
Linlithgow, with Eetreven or Tartraven and others, in the same neighbour-
hood.2 Besides these lands it would appear that the subject of this notice
held the lands now known as Melville. It is not clear whether these were
comprehended in the territory of Liberton or not, but it is probable Galfrid
gave his own name to the lands when he founded the church of Melville.
The precise year of its foundation is not clear, as the date of the charter
in which it is first named, and by which it was conveyed to the abbey of
Dunfermline, cannot be more nearly stated than between 1177 and 1188.
Galfrid, however, refers to the church as already dedicated, and grants the
church, with the land assigned to it at its dedication, to the monks of Dun-
fermline in pure alms, under condition that a light shall be kept perpetually
burning before the tombs of King David the First and Malcolm the Fourth.3
The fact that Galfrid Melville, besides being patron of the church of Mel-
ville, was also owner of the lands around it, appears more evident from
another charter by him of uncertain date,4 in which the kirk lands are de-
scribed. These are the whole lands of Potwell, with their meadows, lying
near the church, and the orchard meadow, also orchard bank on the west side
of the highway ; Well meadow, with Wellflat, under the hills, and the steep
hill of Thorlothane, and upon the hills one acre and a half of the lands called
Cobrinetscroft, with the tofts and crofts and habitation there ; three acres
lying in Wadyngflat ; in Parkley, two acres ; iir the Kirk haugh, near the
mill, three acres and a half ; below the house of Melville, " aulas de Mailuyn,"
on the east side, two acres ; and one acre above the cross, with three acres in
1 Register of Holyrood, pp. 4, 20S ; cf. for 3 Registrum de Dunfermelyn, p. 91.
other references to Malbet or Macbet Bere
of Liberton, ibid. pp. S, 9 ; B,egistruni Sancti 4 Ibid. p. 190. The charter as recorded in
Andree, pp. 181, 191 ; Registrum de Neu- the register is incomplete, the testing clause
botle, p. 1. and part of the description of the lands being
2 Cf. vol. iii. of this work, pp. 2, 9-11. omitted.
6 GALFRID MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE.
Logton, of which one lies on the west side of the loning there, and two lie
above the croft flat, with free ingress and egress, and the free multures per-
taining to said church, also to the church in common pasture in the town of
Melville for twelve cows. Here the charter ends abruptly, but there is suffi-
cient to show that the granter was owner of the surrounding property, and it
would also appear that there was then a manorial residence, if not a castle, at
Melville.1
From the office of sheriff of Edinburgh Castle, in the time of King-
Malcolm Fourth, Galfrid Melville appears to have been promoted in the suc-
ceeding reign of King William the Lion to the office of justiciary, probably of
the district south of the Forth.2 He did not, however, hold this post long,
as he seems to have been succeeded, about 1178, by Duncan, Earl of Fife.
Galfrid Melville was also a witness to several charters by King William
the Lion between the years 1171 and 1178, but he does not appear to have
long survived the latter date.
There is reason to believe that Galfrid Melville was twice married. The
name of his first wife has not been ascertained, but his second wife was
Matilda Malherbe, who survived him. She was also of Anglo-Norman extrac-
tion, although the Malherbes assumed the name of Morham, from their lands
in East Lothian. He had issue, seven sons.
1 . Gregory, his heir, of whom a short notice follows.
2. Galfrid, who received from his nephew Richard, son of his brother Gregory,
the lands of Grendun (now Granton, near Edinburgh) and the lands of
Stanehouse or Stenhouse, near Liberton. In the charter by King William
the Lion, confirming the grant by Richard, Galfrid is described as uncle of
Richard Melville, and son of Matilda Malherbe, an expression which seems
to imply that she was not the mother of Richard's father.3 This view
is strengthened by another writ in which Richard, son of Gregory Melville,
ratines an agreement between Galfrid Melville and Matilda Malherbe, his
mother, to the effect that Matilda should give up the half of Retrevin, now
Tartraven, in Linlithgowshire, which was her dowry, and accept in
exchange the lands of Stenhouse, which are to be held by her as Gregory
1 Eegistrum de Dunfermelyn, ut supra. and 1178. Registrum Episcopatus Glasguen-
2 Galfrid Melville is only once named as sis, p. 36.
justiciar, in a charter dated between 1171 3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 3.
HIS CHILDREN — THE MELVILLES OF CARNBEE. 7
Melville held them.1 The phraseology of this writ would imply that Matilda
Malherbe was the mother of Galfrid, and not of his brother Gregory, and
therefore, a second wife of the elder Galfrid. The younger Galfrid appar-
ently received from his father a portion of the Liberton lands, as he con-
firmed to the monks of Holyrood the two oxgangs of land in Liberton,
given by Malbet Bere. The land is to be held as freely and peaceably as
the granter can give it, a phrase which suggests a qualified ownership.'2
Galfrid Melville, the younger, apparently survived until the reign of King
Alexander the Second. About the year 1200 he appears as a witness, with
the bishop of St. Andrews, several other bishops, the Earls of Fife, Strathern
and Angus, and a number of Fifeshire gentlemen,3 to an important con-
vention between the prior and canons of St. Andrews and the Culdees
there, as to the rents and dues of certain lands and teinds. About the
same date, or later, Galfrid Melville is a witness to a charter by another
Fifeshire laird, Thomas, son of Walter of Lundin or Lundie, granting the
lands of Balcormo in Fife to the aDbey of Cambushenneth.4 He is also
named with the same Thomas of Lundin and others in the same neiah-
bourhood, as witness to a charter by John, son of Michael, then laird of
Wemyss, to the monks of May, about the year 1230.5 This constant
connection with the county of Fife indicates that Galfrid Melville, the
second of that name, had settled in that district. It is not improbable
both from this fact, from a tradition preserved in the family of the Melvilles
of Raith, that the laird of Carnbee was the second son of the first Lord of
Melville,6 and also from the circumstance that at a later date the lands of
Granton and Stenhouse were in possession of the Melvilles of Carnbee,
that Galfrid the younger was the ancestor of that branch of the family.7
3. Thomas, who, with his four following brothers, is named as a witness to their
father's grant of the church of Melville to the abbey of Dunfermline, already
narrated. Of him no further trace has been discovered.
4. Robert, named in the same charter. A Sir Robert Melville, who is probably
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 2, 3. 4 The Cartulary of Cambuakenneth, p. 57.
a Register of Holyrood, p. 208. The char- 5 Registrum Sancti Andree, p. 3S1.
ter is dated before 1174, and one reason for
assuming that the granter is the younger and " MS- "Genologie of the House of the
not the older Galfrid is, that among the wit- Kaith," ™ Melville Charter-chest,
nesses to the deed are Galfrid the Sheriff and 7 The lands of Granton and Stenhouse were
Gregory, his son, who are probably the father in the hands of Melville of Carnbee before
and brother of the granter. 1379. [The Scotts of Buccleuch, by Sir
3 Registrum Sancti Andree, p. 319. William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. ii. p. 10.]
8 GREGORY MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE.
the same, is a witness to a decision by Sir Walter Olifard the younger,
justiciary of Lothian, in a dispute between the bishop of Glasgow and
Jordan of Currokes or Corehouse, as to the lands of Stobo, confirmed by
King Alexander the Second, in 12 23.1 He is also a witness in the year
1226, along with the Scottish chancellor, Sir Walter Olifard and others, to
a charter by John Normanville to the abbey of Melrose, of part of the
lands of Maxton.2 Sir Robert Melville may have held lands in Roxburgh-
shire and Peeblesshire, where the Melvilles certainly had possessions at a
later date.
5. Hugh, named as above. He appears as a witness, about 1203, to a charter
by Alan Fitz- Walter, steward of Scotland, granting lands in Eenfrew to
the abbey of Paisley, and is also a witness to another charter to that abbey,
of uncertain date, but about the same period.3
6. Ricbard ; and
7. Walter, who are also named in the charter quoted, but regarding whom
nothing further has been ascertained.
Gregory Melville, Lord of Melville, eldest son of Galfrid
de Melville, d. 1178.
The facts which have been ascertained regarding this member of the
Melville family are very few, but they are sufficient to show that he was
the son of Galfrid Melville, and the father of Eichard, who carried on
the main line of the family. It appears from a charter of King William the
Lion that he had joint ownership with his father of the lands in Liberton
and of Leadburn.4 From the same monarch he received the lands of
Grendun, now known as Granton, near Edinburgh, which were granted in
exchange for a large tract of territory in Ednam, Roxburghshire, which had
been bestowed upon Gregory by King Malcolm the Fourth.6 Besides these
he held the lands of Stenhouse, near Liberton.6 It is doubtful if he did not
predecease his father. The name of his wife is not known. He was suc-
ceeded by his son Richard.
1 Registrum Episcopatus Glasguensis, pp. 4 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 1.
108,109. 5 Ibid. p. 2. The lands in Ednam extended
2 Liber de Melros, vol. i. p. 220. to about 208 acres.
3 Registrum de Passelet, pp. 14, 49. ° Ibid. p. 3.
SIR RICHARD MELVILLE. 9
Sir Richard Melville, Lord of Melville, Knight, c. 1180-c. 1215.
Bichard Melville succeeded to his father and grandfather in the estates
of Liberton and Leadburn, Granton, Stenhouse, and others, about the year
1178, and his rights were duly confirmed by King William the Lion.1 This
is not Richard Melville's first appearance in history, however, as he seems to
have been one of the personal followers of King William the Lion, and
accompanied that monarch on his hostile expedition into England in 1174,
which ended in the capture of the king. The details of the story have been
frequently told, but may here be briefly given. William crossed the borders
with his army, which was partly composed of mercenaries from the Low
Countries. He advanced through Northumberland, taking various small
strongholds on his way, to the south bank of the Tyne, whence he meditated
an invasion of Yorkshire. Learning, however, that the barons of that county
were preparing to oppose his advance, he retreated towards Scotland.
On reaching Alnwick, the King of Scots despatched the greater part of
his army, under the command of Duncan, Earl of Fife, to devastate the sur-
rounding provinces. This the earl proceeded to do, and for greater effect
divided his forces into three divisions, who ravaged the neighbourhood
with ferocious cruelty. Meanwhile the Yorkshire barons marched to New-
castle, and found that the Scottish army had retreated. Notwithstanding
this, they determined to press northward, as they had learned of the dis-
persion of William's troops, and believed him to be ignorant of their approach.
In the early morning of the 13 th July they hastened onward without inter-
ruption, their small force being screened from sight by a dense fog while
passing near Warkworth, wdiich the Scots were then burning and pillaging.
The fog lifted as they neared the castle of Alnwick, and they hoped soon to
gain its friendly shelter, when they perceived a small body of about sixty
knights tilting in a neighbouring meadow. These were the King of Scots,
with Richard Melville and other immediate followers, who were thus amus-
ing themselves in fancied security, and paid no regard to the approaching
band of horsemen until the latter were recognised as English. King William
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 2, 3.
VOL. I. B
10 SIR RICHARD MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE, KNIGHT.
then, with rash gallantry, rushed against the enemy, but in a few minutes
his horse was slain and himself a prisoner. His followers then surrendered,
and, with their leader, were carried in triumph to Newcastle.1
The Scottish king remained a prisoner until December, and Eichard
Melville probably shared his master's captivity, both being liberated after
the Treaty of Falaise. He may also have attended with King William
at York in the following August, when the Scottish king and Earl David his
brother, with the bishops, abbots, earls, barons, and knights of Scotland,
joined in swearing fealty to the King of England, and ratified the Treaty of
Falaise.2 Eichard Melville was present with his master, in 1178, on an
important occasion, which arose out of the capture at Alnwick. This was
the consecration of the first abbot of the new monastery which King "William
founded at Arbroath in honour of Saint Thomas the Martyr, the very saint
before whose shrine King Henry the Second had done penance a day or two
previous to the Scottish king's capture, and to whose ageucy that event was
ascribed. The first inmates of the new foundation were monks brought from
Kelso, and Friar Eeginald, one of their number, was the first abbot, who was
consecrated by Matthew, bishop of Aberdeen, the see of St. Andrews being
then vacant. After the ceremony, the abbot of Kelso, who had been Abbot
Eeginald's superior, formally freed him from all subjection and obedience,
and declared that though monks had been taken from Kelso to build the new
abbey, yet no abbot of Kelso should claim authority over any abbot, or over
the abbey of St. Thomas. To this declaration King William himself was a
witness, with various ecclesiastics and personal attendants, one of whom was
Eichard Melville.3
The latter was himself a benefactor to the new foundation, bestowing
upon the monks there and upon the chapel of St. Laurence of Kinblethmont
1 Robertson's Scotland under her Early terner, William de Insula [Lisle], Henry
Kings, vol. i. pp. 366-370. Palgrave's His- Reuel, Ralph de Vere, Jordan the Fleming,
torical Documents, pp. 77-80 : where it is Waldeve, son of Baldwin of Biggar, and
stated that the English barons heard that Richard Melville.
King William had sent his army from him. 2 The Treaty of Falaise was dated i>th
The chronicler states that only the king's December 1174 [Foedera, vol. i. p. 30], and
own household ("privata familia") remained the meeting at York took place on 10th
with him. Those who surrendered with the August 1175.
king were Richard Cumin, William de Mor- 3 Registrum Vetus de Aberbrothoc, p. 9.
MARRIAGE TO MARGARET PRAT OF TYNEDALE. 1 1
ten acres in the plain of Kinblethrnont,1 and half an acre in the chapel toft,
with the teind of the mill ; granting also such pasturage as might enable the
chaplain serving the chapel to keep one horse, two oxen, four cows, and forty
sheep.2 At what date this grant was made is uncertain, but Eichard
Melville appears to have conferred the church of Tannadice, in the county of
Forfar, upon the canons of St. Andrews before the year 1187.3
Besides these lands in Forfarshire, Eichard Melville, as we have seen,
held the lands belonging to his father and grandfather in Mid Lothian and
West Lothian, and granted various charters in favour of his uncle Galfrid.
He was also, towards the latter portion of the reign of King William, sheriff
of Linlithgow.4 It appears from a charter by his grandson, Gregory, that
Richard Melville endowed, if he did not found, a chapel on his lands of
Retrevyn or Tartraven in West Lothian. It was dedicated to St. Leonard,
and received a grant of about fifty acres of land, which was continued and
added to by Eichard's successors.5
Eichard Melville appears to have received the rank of knighthood before
his death, as his grandson refers to him as Sir Eichard of Melville. He
appears to have died not long after the end of King William's reign, as no
further record of him has been found.
Sir Eichard Melville married, between 1189 and 1199, Margaret Prat,
daughter of Eichard Prat of Tynedale, who granted to his daughter and her
husband a large tract of land, called in the charter Morgunessete, but which
from later writs is identified with a large portion, if not the whole, of the
modern parish of Muiravonside, in the county of Stirling.0 The boundaries
of the lands are defined to be : As the old road passes from Sauelmesford, as
far as the seat of St. Morgan, and from the seat, as far as the stone which
Eichard Melville fixed by advice of the granter, and from that stone as
Witherlem holds itself, as far as the great road on the west side of Armethe,
1 In the parish of Inverkeillor, Forfarshire. 4 Register of Holyrood, p. 28.
2 Registrum Vetua de Aberbrothoc. John, 5 Registrum Saneti Andree, p. 376.
bishop of Caithness, is a witness, who became 6 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 4, 5. On the
bishop about 1186, but the date of his death back of the writ the name is written in a
is uncertain. contemporary hand, " Morwensete," and
3 Registrum Saneti Andree, cf. pp. 64, appears in later charters as Morvingside,
152, 230. Morinsyde, Morwyusyde, Morowinsyde.
12 WILLIAM MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE,
and as that road goes as far as the stream running from Monecapel, and
from Monecapel towards the west to the head of the stream flowing as far as
the South Moss, and as the moss and dry land extend themselves to the rock
on the west side of the moss, and from the rock to the Little Black Hill, and
from the hill to the west part of the peatary of Morgunessete, and as the
peatary and dry land extend towards the east to the stream flowing from the
peatary, and as the stream flows to the Avon. A right to the common
pasture of Manuel is also included in the charter. It is probable that most
of the boundaries indicated are not now traceable, but the lands granted lay
near Melville's lands of Preston, Tartraven, and others in Linlithgow, the
Avon flowing between.
Eichard Melville had, so far as has been ascertained, only one son, who
succeeded to his estates.
William Melville, Lord of Melville, c. 1200.
It is only from the charters of his son, Gregory, who succeeded him, that
the name and existence of this lord of Melville is known, and these charters
give no indication of the date or length of his career. There is nothing to
show whether he survived or predeceased his father, Sir Richard, and no
evidence has been found to show that he exercised any proprietary rights
over the estates. He appears to have left three sons —
1. Sir Gregory, of whom a memoir follows.
2. Thomas, called Thomas of Haddington in a charter by his brother, Sir
Gregory, to the chapel of Retrevyn (Tartraven).1 He married Christiana,
sister of Gregory Lysurs, chaplain, a member of the Gorton family, and
under the designation of Thomas, son of William Melville, he received from
his brother-in-law a grant of six acres of the lands of Temple, including four
acres lying between Dalhousie and Gorton, with pasture for four oxen, four
cows, thirty sheep, four swine, and one horse.- Thomas of Temple, of
Haddington, or Melville, as he was variously called, left no male issue,
and his lands in Gorton passed, in the first place, to his three daughters.
They were, Cristiana, who married Adam, son of Walter, son of Aldwyn ;
1 Registrum Sancti Andree, p. 377. 2 Registrum de Neubotle, p. 301.
GRANT OF CHURCH OF MELVILLE TO DUNFERMLINE ABBEY. 13
Alicia, who married Richard, son of Galfrid, son of Gunnild ; and Eva, who
married Malcolm, son of David Dun. They had their father's lands con-
firmed to them hy William Lysurs, laird of Gorton, but at a later date he
granted the lands to Stephen of Melville, a clerk, perhaps a kinsman of
Thomas, though this is uncertain.1
3. David, who is also described by Sir Gregory Melville as his brother,2 but of
whom nothing further is known.
Sir Gregory Melville, Lord of Melville, Knight, c. 1242-c. 1270.
The materials for the history of this member of the family are also very
meagre, but there is evidence that he possessed the chief estates of his ances-
tors for some years. His name first appears on record about the year 1242,
as a witness to transactions with the abbey of Arbroath and the bishop of
Aberdeen, in which Alan the Doorward was interested.3 He appears also
under the designation of Gregory, lord of Melville, in a charter of uncertain
date, but granted probably between 1240 and 1250, relating to lands in the
burgh of Linlithgow.4
During the years between 1250 and 1264, Gregory Melville granted
a number of charters to various religious houses, chiefly confirming former
benefactions made by his predecessors. In the presence of Gamelin, the newly-
elected bishop of St. Andrews, and a considerable company of ecclesiastics,
gathered in full chapter at Dunfermline, this lord of Melville, on 2 2d Novem-
ber 1250, granted to the abbey of Dunfermline his rights of patronage over the
church of Melville, renouncing them wholly in favour of the monks. This
grant was followed in the succeeding year by another renunciation of the
same rights, which had perhaps been challenged in the interval. This final
transaction took place in the castle of Edinburgh, and in all the writs the
granter describes himself as Gregory of Melville, son of William of Melville.5
1 Registrant de Neubotle, pp. o01-o04. was really the laird of Melville, or a priest of
2 Registrum Saucti Andree, p. 377. the same name.
3 Registrum Aberdoneuse, p. 17; Regis-
trum Vetus de Aberbrothoc, p. 91. There is,
Registrum de Neubotle, p. 150.
however, some reason to doubt whether the 5 Registrum de Dunfermelyn, pp. 92, 1 16,
Gregory Melville who figures in these writs 119.
14 SIR GREGORY MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE.
The abbey of Newbattle also received from Sir Gregory at a later date
various grants, one of the gifts being a stone of wax for lighting the church,
to be furnished from the lands of Leadburn. Sir Gregory promised that each
year, on the 25th of March, the sacristan of the abbey should receive the
wax by the hands of a servant, the granter stipulating that he might in
charity receive a share of the benefits of the convent.1 The date of this
grant is uncertain, but the giver had received the rank of knighthood. On
another 25th March, in the year 1264, Sir Gregory bestowed on the monks
of Newbattle the right of free transit through his lands of Eetrevyn or
Tartraven, while passing with their animals and baggage to their lands in
Clydesdale, or when returning thence to their monastery by the road which
they had used in time past. The privilege was to be exercised as often as
convenient to the monks, who were also permitted to unyoke and feed their
animals in the common pasture of Sir Gregory's land, excepting the standing-
corn and the meadow land, without hindrance. Permission to sojourn over-
night, if necessary, once in going and once in returning, was also accorded,
as often as the monks passed that way. The abbey, however, was to give an
equivalent for the privileges thus granted, by furnishing Sir Gregory or his
heirs yearly with a new waggon filled with timber, such a waggon as the
monks made for their own work in Clydesdale.2
Besides these grants, Sir Gregory Melville entered into an obligation by
which he bound himself and his heirs to maintain a chaplain to serve the
chapel of St. Leonard on his lands of Eetrevyn. He also promised, in addi-
tion to the land already bestowed by his grandfather Sir Richard, to give
two merks and a half from his lands of Leadburn — the whole to be spent in
masses for the souls of David, William, Alexander, and their successors,
kings of Scotland, and the souls of Galfrid, Richard, and William Melville,
and their successors. If, however, Sir Gregory or his heirs deemed it better
to retain the curate of the chapel as their private chaplain, or at their own
table, they should have power to resume the land or annualrent in their
own hands, a sufficient service being provided in the chapel, under a penalty
1 Registrum de Neubotle, pp. 156, 157. was to be delivered by the monks on the 1st
2 Ibid. pp. 161, 162. Date of grant, 25th of August yearly, doubtless to be used for
March (New Year's Day) 1264. The waggon the harvest.
WILLIAM MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE. 15
of £100 and ecclesiastical censure. The chapel and chaplain in question
were to be under the jurisdiction of the prior and bishop of St. Andrews.1
Nothing further has been found on record regarding Sir Gregory Melville.,
save the fact that he appears to have been sheriff of Aberdeen prior to 1 264,
but his account rendered to exchequer has not been preserved.2 The name
of his wife is unknown, and, as far as has been ascertained, he left only one
son, William, who succeeded him.
William Melville, Lord of Melville, c. 1270-e. 1304.
Like his grandfather of the same name, little is known regarding this
member of the family beyond his name. He appears on record as a witness
to his father's obligation respecting the chapel of St. Leonard, at Tartraven,
and is there designated son and heir of Sir Gregory, the charter in question
being dated about 1270.3 It is also on record that he paid homage to King-
Edward the First in 1296. In the Ragman Roll, to which his name was
appended at Berwick, he is described as William de Maleville, seignor de
Retrevyn, and is said to do homage for lands in Roxburghshire. His seal is
still appended to the Ragman Roll, but is defaced. He appears to have died
about 1304, and was succeeded by his son, John Melville. Marie, widow of
William of Melville, appears in 1304, as the recipient of various grants from
King Edward the Eirst, but it is not clear whether she was the widow of
AVilliam Melville of that ilk, or of another William Melville, who held lands
in Peeblesshire, and who died in 1298. The seal of this William Melville
is described as bearing a hunting horn.4
John Melville, Lord of Melville, c. 1320-1345.
John Melville succeeded his father and grandfather before 1329, but how
long before that date does not appear. As in the case of his ancestors, it is
principally from his benefactions to various religious houses that anything is
known regarding him. His first appearance on record is in the year named,
when, under the designation of John Melville, lord of that ilk, son and
1 Registrant Sancti Andree, pp. 376, 377. 4 Calendar of Documents relating to Scot-
2 Exchequer Rolls of Scotland, vol. i. p. 12. land, vol. ii. pp. 200, 211 ; Nos. 809, 1544,
3 Registrum Sancti Andree, p. 377. 1579, 1594.
16 JOHN MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE.
heir of the late William Melville, he confirmed to the monks of Newbattle,
the privilege of free passage through his lands, formerly granted by his grand-
father, Sir Gregory Melville. This charter, as recorded, has an alternative
reddendo, the granter binding himself in one clause to accept from the monks
only one merk of yearly rent assigned to him from their land of Ballormy,
while, in a separate clause, the waggon formerly exacted is declared to be
a sufficient equivalent.1 The second clause, however, appears to have been
added at a later date, when the abbot of Newbattle bound himself and his
convent to furnish such a waggon yearly, giving the lord of Melville power
to distrain their goods, if they failed in performance. On the same day,
Melville entered into a similar obligation, to continue to the monks of New-
battle the stone of wax yearly, which his grandfather had bestowed, or to pay
four shillings annually. The granter gives the convent power of distraint
over his lands in default of payment, and his son, Thomas, is a consenting
party to the obligation.2
In the following year, the lord of Melville, continuing the benefactions
of his ancestors, entered into an agreement with William, prior of St.
Andrews, by which he conveyed to the canons of St. Andrews a half
carucate of land of his lordship of Preston, in West Lothian, lying between
Riccartoun on the east, " Estyrhyld cleffe " on the west, the land called the
Hill on the south, and Parkly on the north ; to be held in free alms. There
was reserved, however, the privilege of access to the quarry on the land, to
obtain stones for building the laird's own manor of Preston, with free passage
for carrying the stones, where the property of the canons might be least injured.
On the other hand, the prior and canons granted to the chaplain of St.
Leonard's chapel of Eetrevyn or Tartraven, their small teinds of Retrevyn,
but reserving the teind-sheaves of the land, and the funeral rights of the lord
and lady of Retrevyn for the time, as customary, and also reserving to the
vicar of Linlithgow, for the time, four pennies for each dead body of the said
town of Retrevyn and its neighbourhood, levied by him or his chaplains.
Further, John Melville and his heirs were to minister to the chaplain all
1 Registrum de Neubotle, pp. 161-163. tember 1344.
Charter by John Melville, 3d August 1329; 2 Ibid. pp. 176, 177. Both obligations
alternative clause, dated apparently 5th Sep- dated 5th September 1344.
THOMAS MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE. 17
things necessary in food, and clothing, and salary, honourably and sufficiently,
from the rents of Eetrevyn and Preston, so that the chaplain should exact
nothing more from the prior and canons than the small teinds. He was
to be chosen and inducted by the prior ; if found deficient, he was to be
removed by the prior, and another substituted, every chaplain making faith
to the church of Linlithgow that it should suffer no detriment from him. If,
however, the lord of Melville, or his heirs, should agree with the chaplain
that he might be at their table, they might during such time dispose of the
small teinds, and the chaplain should take oath to serve the chapel and to
keep his master's counsel. It is further provided that if, because of civil
war and the wasting of the country through any unavoidable cause, no
chaplain were found for the chapel, the small teinds of Eetrevyn should be
collected by the lord and the chamberlain of the canons, or either of them,
and preserved entire for the use of a future chaplain. Should the prior and
canons be evicted from the half carucate of land, then the small teinds were
to revert to them. This agreement was executed in duplicate, and duly
sealed by both parties.1
Nothing further is known of the history of this lord of Melville. He
had a son and heir,
Thomas Melville, Loed of Melville, 1344-1345,
Who was a consenting party to his father's grant to the abbey of Newbattle
in 1344, and to the agreement with the prior of St. Andrews in 1345. His
name has not been found elsewhere on record, and it is not known whether
he actually succeeded to the estate. He had a son,
John Melville, Lokd of Melville, 1379-1400.
This lord of Melville first appears on record in the year 1379, when
he was in full possession of the family estates. In November of that year
he granted to John Melville, son of John Melville of Carnbee, his lands of
Granton and Stenhouse in the barony of Melville. These lands, as already
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 9-11.
VOL. I. C
18 JOHN MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE.
stated in a previous memoir, were among the earliest estates held by the
Melville family in Scotland, being bestowed npon Gregory Melville by King
Malcolm the Fourth before 1165. They were afterwards bestowed by
Eichard, son of Gregory, upon his uncle, Galfrid Melville, who appears to
have settled in Fife. The superiority, however, of the lands apparently
remained with the granter, as his direct descendant, John Melville, was over-
lord in 1379. As remarked on a previous page, though it is not clear that
the Melvilles of Carnbee were the direct descendants of Galfrid Melville,
their possession of Granton, and their relations with the lords of Melville as
the feudal superiors of their lands argues the probability of such descent.
The lands were resigned and re-granted to a series of heirs, first to John
Melville, younger of Carnbee, and the heirs-male of his body ; secondly, to
his brother, Thomas Melville ; and thirdly, to another brother, James Melville.
Failing all these and the heirs-male of their bodies, the lands were to pass to
Christian Melville, sister of James, and daughter of the elder John Melville,
and her heirs whomsoever, and to the heirs whomsoever of her father. The
lands were to be held in fee and heritage for the usual ward and relief, etc.,
with the services of two servants or men-at-arms, one with a horse and a
hauberk, and the other with a horse and no hauberk.1
The next reference to John Melville which has been discovered is in a
charter by King Eobert the Second, confirming to John Cross, burgess of
Linlithgow, a wadset over the lands of Hillcliff of Upper Preston. These
lands, with two parts of the mains of Preston towards the east, near the town
of Linlithgow, had been mortgaged by the lord of Melville, and were now
confirmed by the king, reserving his own rights.2 Three years later, we find
John Melville granting to Sir William Douglas, son and heir of Sir James
Douglas of Strabrock, a lease of various lands including a considerable
extent of territory. These were the lands of Hawthornden, in the barony
of Gorton, on the Esk, the lands of " the Temple," in the barony of Leadburn,
and Buteland, in the parish of Currie, all in the shire of Edinburgh, with
Greviston or Grieston, in the parish of Traquair, county of Peebles ; which
1 Charter granted at Melville, 20th Novem- 2 Charter dated at Kilwinning, 30th Octo-
ber 1379. The Scotts of Buecleuch, by Sir ber 1383. Registrum Magni Sigilli, ed. 1814,
William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. ii. n- 10. p. 167.
THOMAS MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE. 19
were to be held on a lease of sixteen years. The sum to be paid for the
first ten years is not specified, but during the last six years Sir William
was to pay two merks sterling yearly, at Hawthornden.1 The lease, so far
at least as regarded Hawthornden and Grieston, was renewed in 1399, for a
further term of ten years, at a yearly rental of £20 Scots.2 A few months
later, in the beginning of 1400, John Melville leased to the same Sir
William Douglas his land of the hall of the myre, now Halmyre, in Peebles-
shire, at a yearly rent of two and a half merks Scots. The money was
to be paid at Hawthornden, and the lease to endure until Sir William could
pay to Melville the sum of £20 Scots, when he and his heirs were to possess
half the lands.3
Besides these leases, John Melville, in the year 1392, executed a wadset
or mortgage of his lands of Mosshouses, in the county of Edinburgh, in
favour of Sir Henry Douglas, Lord of Logton. This appears from a charter
by Sir Henry, in favour of his son Henry Douglas, of these lands, with others
mortgaged by Sir John Stewart of Cragy.4
John Melville of that ilk was succeeded by his son,
Thomas Melville, Lord of Melville, 1427-1429.
It has not been ascertained at what particular date Thomas Melville
succeeded to the estate. But he was in possession of " Mailvil," and exer-
cising the right of ownership as "lord of the samyn sted," on the 27th of
March 1427. On that date he entered into a contract of excambion, with
consent of John Melville, his son and heir, on the one part, and Sir William
Tynnyngham, parson of the " kyrk of Mailvil," anent the " kyrklands of
Mailvil." 5 This transaction appears to have been entered into when Thomas
Melville was far advanced in life, and his death occurred about two years
later, in December 1429. He was succeeded by his son John, the consent ei'
in the contract of 1427.
1 Lease, dated at Linlithgow, 1st April Ibid. p. 16-
1386, vol. iii. of this work, p. 14. 4 Dated at Logton, 6th November 1392.
3 Lease, dated at Dalkeith, 10th July 1399. Registrum Honoris de Morton, vol. ii. p. 179.
Ibid. p. 15. 5 Original contract in possession of the
3 Lease,dated at Dalkeith, 12 th March 1400, Earl of Glasgow.
20 JOHN MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE.
John Melville, Lord of Melville, 1429-c. 1442.
John Melville succeeded his father in December 1429, and on 27th
January 1429, he was retoured heir to him in the barony of " Malwyle " — the
name of the barony, and the surnames of the father and son, being all written
in that form. It is stated in the retour that the barony was in non-entry
from the decease of Thomas Melville eight weeks before.1 In the following
February, he was also infeft in a small portion of the lands of Grieston
in Peeblesshire.2 Nothing further has been discovered regarding him, but he
appears to have died before 1442, and was succeeded by his son Thomas
Melville. The name of his wife has not been ascertained, but she survived
him, and died in the year 1465, as it appears that she received her terce
up to June of that year.3
Thomas Melville, Loed of Melville, 1442-1458.
He appears to have succeeded his father about the year 1442, as, according
to a list of crown sasines under that date, he was then infeft in the lands of
Grieston, Peeblesshire.4 Ten years later he witnessed a charter by Eobert
Boyd of Kilmarnock to Sir David Hay of Yester, and is described as Thomas
Melville, lord of that ilk.5 Two years after, under the decree of a justiciary
court, held in January 1454, his goods were escheated to the extent of £10.6
The reason of this is not stated, and it does not appear that he was embroiled
in any political offence. He may, however, have been in debt, as there is
evidence that his lands of Mosshouses and Grieston were mortgaged for a
time. During his possession of the barony of Melville and the other landed
estates, he was styled in a deed granted by himself, " a noble and potent
1 Original retour, dated 27th January 4 Index in libros responsionum, Exchequer
1429-30, in possession of the Earl of Glasgow. Rolls, vol. ix. p. 657.
2 Certificate of sasine by the sheriff of
Peebles, 14th February 1429-30. Vol. iii. of
Charter, dated at Edinburgh, 10th Janu-
ary 1451-2. Registrum Magni Sigilli, vol. ii.
this work, p. 22. No. 521.
3 Exchequer Rolls, vol. vii. pp. 254, 320,
403. 6 Exchequer Rolls, vol. vi. pp. 143, 144.
THOMAS MELVILLE, LORD OF MELVILLE. 21
Thomas Malwin, lord of the same." This designation occurs in the obliga-
tion dated in 1457, the year before his death.1
Thomas Melville died in 1458, the last direct male heir of his family, and
was succeeded by his daughter and heiress, Agnes Melville, who was then
a minor. He left a widow, whose name is unknown, who survived at least
until the year 1471, but how much later has not been ascertained.2
Agnes Melville, daughter and heiress of Thomas Melville, remained a ward
of the Crown until Whitsunday 1471, when she entered into full possession of the
barony of Melville, being retoured heir to her father on 23d April of that year.3
She also received infeftment of the lands of Greiston, in Peeblesshire, about 1473.4
She married Eobert Ross, son of Sir John Ross of Halkhead, and shortly after
acquiring her estates, with consent of her husband, appointed her father-in-
law, Sir John Ross of Halkhead, bailie of the barony of Melville during his life,
describing herself in the writ as Agnes Melville of that ilk.5 In 1473 an
action was brought against her husband by Archibald Melville, who claimed the
south mains of Tartraven, on a lease granted to him by the late Thomas Melville,
her father. The lords auditors, however, decided that Melville should give up the
lands to Ross, but they requested the latter to give to him and his wife, for his
lifetime, six acres of corn-land and two acres of meadow, free of rent.6
The heiress of Melville, however, was dead before 1478, leaving a son and
heir, John Ross, a minor. After her decease, a question arose as to her husband's
right over the lands or tenandry of Granton and Stenhouse, held of her as superior,
but from which the king claimed the casualty of ward on account of her death.
The claim was resisted by their proprietor, Henry Melville of Carnbee, on the
ground that the lands were not in ward, because the lady's husband, Robert Ross,
held the whole lordship and lands of his late wife by the courtesy of Scotland.
The lords of council, however, decided in favour of the Crowu, declaring that the
lands were and should be in the king's hands, by reason of ward, until the lawful
1 On 12th August 1457, Thomas Melville ess entered to possession, the sums no longer
of that ilk received from Thomas Coekburn, appear in the official accounts. [Exchequer
rector of Henriland (Megget ?), a letter of re- Rolls, vol. vii. pp. 254, 320, 403, 535, 628 ;
version for redemption of his lands of Moss- vol. viii. p. 62.]
houses and Grieston. Original in possession 3 y0j_ jj{_ 0f j^is wol.]s ,,pj 4(j 47
of Earl of Glasgow. , „ , „ ,. , .
., _, . & „ ,, _, , „ „ 4 Exchequer Rolls, vol. lx. p. 674.
- lhe evidence 01 the Exchequer Kolls
shows that the terce of the widow of Thomas 6 Let*er of bailiary, 24th May 1471, in
Melville was a charge on the lands, which possession of the Earl of Glasgow.
were in ward, until 1471, but when the heir- G 29th July 1473. Acta Auditorum, p. 24.
22 AGNES MELVILLE, LADY OF MELVILLE.
age of Agnes Melville's heir. The reasons were, first, that Eobert Eoss had his
late wife's lands only by special privilege of the courtesy of Scotland, which was
granted only " to the persons that maryis a maydin and feis the land," and
should not be extended to any other person but that one ; secondly, that such
person has only the use of the lands, and no real possession or sasine, and, there-
fore, Eobert Eoss had no fee or real possession over the lands in question.1
John Eoss, son of Agnes Melville of that ilk, was retoured heir to his mother
in the barony of Melville on 16th May 1496, although he was apparently in pos-
session of the estate in 1490.2 That retour and the other writs cited prove the
inaccuracy of the hitherto accepted genealogies of the family of Eoss, Lord Eoss.
Some peerage-writers state that the heiress of Melville married Sir John Eoss of
Halkhead, knight, who lived in the years 1392 and 1397, and also that their son,
Sir John Eoss, received a charter of the barony of Melville as early as the year
1401. Both these statements are entirely erroneous. Sir John Eoss, the alleged
husband of the heiress, and Sir John Eoss, her alleged son, were respectively the
great-great-grandfather and great-grandfather of Eobert Eoss, her husband, who
was eldest son of Sir John Eoss of Halkhead, but who predeceased his father. Sir
John Eoss, afterwards first Lord Eoss, whom these peerage-writers divide
into two persons, flourished as early as the year 1449, and till between 1490
and 1500, and was succeeded by his grandson, also Sir John Eoss, the son
of Agnes Melville, who was the second Lord Eoss, and was killed at Flodden on
9th September 1513. The baronies of Melville, Halkhead, and others, were
inherited by his male descendants, some of whom took the title of Lord Eoss of
Melville and Halkhead, until the death, in 1754, of William, fourteenth Lord
Eoss, unmarried. His sister, the Honourable Elizabeth Eoss, having married
on 11th June of the following year, John, third Earl of Glasgow, direct ancestor
of George Frederick Boyle, now Earl of Glasgow, and Baron Eoss of Halkhead,
in the peerage of the United Kingdom, his lordship is the representative in
the female line of the two ancient houses of Melville of Melville and Eoss of
Halkhead.
1 16th October 1478. Acta Dominorum vol. ii. No. 1973, under date 27th September
Concilii, p. 13. 1490. According to an entry in the Liber
reaponsionum [Exchequer Rolls, vol. ix.
2 Original retours in possession of the Earl p. 680], a John Eoss was infeft in part of
of Glasgow. Cf. Registrum Magni Sigilli, Grieston in 1479.
THE MELVILLES OF EAITH IN FIFE.
I. — John Melville, fiest of Eaith, 1400-c 1427.
Just about the time that the direct male line of the old family of the
lords of Melville in Midlothian became extinct, one of the cadet branches of
the house was taking root on the northern shore of the Firth of Forth, at
Eaith, near Kirkcaldy, in the county of Fife. In this family of Melville of
Eaith the race of the Melvilles was again to flourish, and to rise to nobler
rank than it had formerly enjoyed.
In the year 1575 John Melville, the then laird of Eaith, prepared the
following short pedigree of his family, or, as he worded it, —
" The Genologie of the Hows of the Bayth rakenit be Jhone Maluill present in the
lxxv yeir of God, sa far as he cowld rakin of his predisessouris, howbeit the
hows was mekyll alder of a lang time. This Jhone was the last of vi."
" Schir Stein Maluill maried the lord of Lornes dowghter, quhais sone was
Schir John Maluill, quha maried the laird of Balueries dowghter ; of quhom
was begottin William Maluill, quha maried the Erll of Mortouns brother
dowghter, quha was laird of Langniddrie, quhilk William Maluill maried after
ane wther wyf also, quha was dowghter to Schir Eobert Lundy, laird of Balgony,
treasorer for the tyme, wpon quhom he begat sonnes and dowghters ; bot of his first
wyf he begat ane sone, Johne Maluill, quhilk Jhone Maluill of Bayth maried
the laird of Bosseis dowghter, wpon quhom he begat Schir Johne Maluill, quha
maried the laird of Wemys dowghter of that ilk, wpon quhom he begat sonnes
and dowghters, bot the sonnes thairof decesit. And the said Schir Jhone maried
agane, ane wther wyf callit Dame Elene Nepar, quha was the laird of Mercam-
stons brother dowghter, and hir mother the laird of Craigmillers dowghter,
wpon quhom the said Schir Jhone Maluill begat ix sonnes and twa dowghters.
Thair eldest sone, Jhone Maluill foirsaid, succedit to the landis of the Bayth. And
the said Jhone Maluill maried the laird of Lundeis of that ilk dowghter in the
lxiij yeir of God, wpon quhom he begat ane sone callit Jhone Maluill, and twa
dowghteris ; quhais first wyf also decesit, and the said Jhone maried agane to
his secund wyf ane dowghter of the laird of Bosseis callit Margrat Bonar, wpon
quhom he begat thre dowghters and ane sone callit Thomas Maluill. [Quhilk
24 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
Jhone Maluill maried agane the laird of Segy his dovghtir, vpon quhom he begat
ane sone callit James Maluill, and thre dovghtir, quhilk James and his ayris suld
brvik the toun and landis of Feddinche."] x
The earlier portion of this pedigree is, of course, purely traditional, and, in
common with most of such traditional accounts of families, is confused and
inaccurate in its chronology and relationships, though the persons named may
actually have existed. In regard to his own family connections and those of
his father, grandfather, great-grandfather, and even great-great-grandfather,
the writer, as may be supposed, speaks of what is matter of personal know-
ledge, either of himself5 or of those living in his day. But the earlier genera-
tions, being by that time beyond the memory even of second parties, were
practically lost. A tradition remained that the writer was the sixth genera-
tion of his family who had been lairds of Raith ; and in this he was correct.
But who the first laird was, tradition alone could tell, and it pronounced his
name to have been Sir Stephen. We know, however, from authentic writs,
that the name of the first known Melville, laird of Raith, was John, whose
son really acted the part ascribed to the son of Sir Stephen, by marrying the
daughter of William Scott, laird of Balwearie, an estate adjacent to Raith.
In another pedigree of the family, without date, but written in a hand
contemporary with the preceding, the descent of the Raith family is also
deduced from Sir Stephen Melville, who, however, is placed a generation
further back, and a son John given to him, whose son, also named John,
married the laird of Balwearie's daughter. This pedigree is as follows : —
" The genologie of the hovs of the Raith sa far as is rememberit, hovbeit
our surname cam out of Hungare as freyndis to Quene Margrat, King Malcum
Canmoris vyf, quhilk vas in the yeir of God Im ane hunder and xxviii yeiris.
" At quhilk tyme thre brether of the Maluils cam in Scotland. The eldest
brother vas Lord Maluill of that ilk. The scund brother gat the landis and
leving of Raith. The thryd brother gat the landis of Glenbarve in the Mernis,
out of the quhilk is cum the hovs of Dysert in Angus, and the Maluils therof ;
bot the surname is decayit in Glenbarve be dovghters, and alswa the Lord Maluils
hovs. And the laird of Carnbe vas ane scund sone of the Lord Maluils.
"The eldest of the hovs of the Raith in mannis memore vas Schir Stein
Maluill, quha begat Johne Maluill. This Jhone Maluill mareit the lord of
1 Original in Melville Charter-cheat. The part in brackets is added in a later hand.
EARLY PEDIGREES OF THE MELVILLES OF RAITH. 2 5
Lornes dovghter, vpon quhom he begat Schir Jhone Maluill, that vas callit Schir
Jhone with the blak butis. This Schir Jhone maveit the laird of Balueries
dovghter that vas callit Dame Margere Scot. In this Schir Jhonis tyme the
Quene for the tyme biggit Bavynshevgh Castell. And this Schir Jhone begat on
his wyf Villiam Maluill." J
These pedigrees prove the persistent tradition in the family of the Melvilles
of Baith that the founder of their branch of the family was a Stephen Melville ;
and although no trace of the existence of a Stephen Melville at the date
ascribed to him by this tradition can be found, there is authentic evidence
that a Stephen Melville actually flourished a few generations earlier, and had
relations with the family of the lords of Melville. Between the years 1233
and 1249 Stephen Melville was a witness, along with William Melville
and others, to a charter affecting Kilbucho, in Beeblesshire,2 and about the
same date he was also witness to the charters granted by William Lysurs,
laird of Gorton, to Thomas of Haddington or Temple, son of William, lord of
Melville, and to his three daughters, as related on a previous page.3 In
addition to this he received a grant of these lands and others, from William
Lysurs to himself in feufarm.4 No relationship to the lords of Melville is
anywhere adverted to in these documents, but his association with them, and
the interest manifested in acquiring the lands held by members of that
family, render it highly probable that Stephen Melville was himself a son
of the house. If so, his position in the pedigree is probably that of a
younger son of Sir Bichard Melville, lord of Melville, sheriff of Linlithgow,
and thus a brother of William, lord of Melville, and an uncle of Thomas
of Haddington.
In some of these charters Stephen Melville is designated a clerk, but this
is evidently a lay-clerkship, as he left a son, Walter Melville, who inherited
these lands acquired by his father, and disponed them shortly afterwards to
Sir William of St. Clair.5 Whether Walter Melville left issue is not clearly
ascertainable from extant sources. But if the tradition of the descent from
Stephen is authentic, Walter may have been the father of John Melville,
1 Original in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Pp. 12, 13, supra.
4 Registrum de Neubotle, pp. 303, 304.
2 Registrum Glasguense, vol. i. p. 128. 5 Ibid. pp. 304, 305.
VOL. I. D
26 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
who lived in the time of King Robert the Bruce, and resigned in his
hands his lands of Caproneston, in the county of Peebles, in favour of his
son, Walter Melville, and Margaret, daughter of John Ayr, his spouse. Walter
Melville also surrendered these lands in the hands of the same king for a
regrant in favour of himself and his spouse and their issue and other heirs,
which was confirmed on 5th July 1365 by King David the Second, after the
deaths of John and Walter Melville.1 By this charter it appears that Walter
Melville and Margaret Ayr left issue, and they may have been the immediate
progenitors of the first known and authenticated laird of Baith. But this
cannot be verified from any available sources.
Whatever the descent of the subject of this memoir, John Melville appears
on record as laird of Baith about 1400, and is the first of his family who is found
in possession of that territory. The lands of Baith belonged, as appears from
later writs, to the abbey of Dunfermline, as superiors, but the extant register
of their possessions contains no record of Baith or its occupiers until the year
1474, when a charter was given to William Melville of Baith upon his own
resignation, and the chief source of information is thus silent on the subject.
John Melville of Baith is first named in a charter granted to him by
William Scott, laird of Balwearie, of the lands of Pitscottie, with a third part
of the lands of Callange. The document is not dated, but from the names of
the witnesses it may be assigned to the year 1400,2 and the grant of Pit-
scottie was confirmed by Robert, Duke of Albany, as Earl of Fife, in August
1411.3 The laird of Balwearie, in his charter, states that John Melville's pre-
decessors had held the lands of his predecessors in fee and heritage, but this
does not prove conclusively that Melville acquired the lands by inheritance.
The next reference to John Melville of Baith is in a charter to his son
John, who, in 1412, on his marriage with Marjory Scott of Balwearie, received
the lands of Dura from his father-in-law.4 The elder laird, however, was
1 Registrum Magiii Sigilli, vol. i. p. 53, be "bef ore dates."
ISIo. 160. 3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. IS, 3d August
2 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 17. The want 1411.
of a date gives rise to a curious argument in 4 Ibid. pp. 18, 19, 31st May 1412. [The
one of the old MS. pedigrees of the family, seal of this laird of Raith, attached to the
where the writ is claimed to be about 475 charter to his son in 1412, bears a bend, fess-
years old, or about 1215, because it is said to wise between three crescents, two and one.]
SIR JOHN MELVILLE, SECOND LAIRD OF RAITH.
27
probably dead before 1427, as it appears to have been his son who in that
year entered into an agreement with Sir John Wernyss as to a mill-dam from
Loch Gelly to Melville's mill of Pitconmark.1
According to the MS. pedigrees of the family this laird of Eaith married
a daughter of Stewart of Lorn, but as to this no evidence has been found.
He was succeeded by his son, Sir John Melville, of whom a notice follows.
II. — Sir John Melville, second of Eaith, c. 1427-e. 1463.
Marjory Scott (Balwearie), his Wife.
John Melville, the second laird of Eaith who has been found on record,
is first named in a charter in 1412 to him and his intended spouse, Marjory
Scott of Balwearie. He is there described as " Jone the Malvyle, the sone
and the ayre of Jone the Malvyle, lord of the Rath," and his proposed father-
in-law, William Scott of Balwearie, grants to him and his future wife the
lands of " Durachmure " or Dura, in the parish of Kemback, Fifeshire. The
lands, however, were burdened with a duty of a chalder of meal, or twenty
shillings in money, to be paid yearly to the church of " Andirstoun" or St.
Andrews. Melville and his wife, and their heirs, were to hold the lands in
ward and relief of the granter, a further stipulation being that the property
was to remain with the receivers, until the payment by the granter or his
heirs of the sum of £20 Scots. The seals of the granter and the elder laird
of Eaith are still appended to the writ which was dated at Balwearie.2
1 Original, dated 12th June 1427, in - Charter, dated 31st May 1412. Vol. iii.
Wemyss Charter-chest. of this work, pp. 18, 19.
28 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
It was probably this laird of Eaith who, in 1427, entered into an agree-
ment with Sir John Wernyss of Beres, a neighbouring proprietor, as to a
mill-lade for bringing water from Loch Gelly through Sir John's lands there
to Melville's mill of Pitconmark. From the terms of the agreement it would
appear that there had been no mill-lade previously, the making of it being
provided for at the point most suitable for the mill. Sir John Wemyss and
his son David gave permission that Melville should have free issue of water
and a sufficient lade from Loch Gelly, passing through their lands of
Powguild and others, descendiug towards his mill made on his own lands of
Pitconmark. John Melville and his heirs were to have power to make and
uphold the lade and to enclose the water upon Sir John's lands and draw the
water therefrom, without any hindrance, both parties binding themselves
loyally to preserve the privilege for ever. In return for their concessions, Sir
John Wemyss, his heirs, and tenants ou the adjoining lands, were to receive
special relaxations and favours in the grinding of their corn at the mill in
question, which appears to have been that afterwards named Shaw's mill, and
still so designated, situated on a small stream which issuing from Loch Gelly
flows eastward past the mill, through Cardenden and falls into the river Ore.1
The next reference which has been found to this laird of Eaith is in the
year 1454, when he appears to have received the rank of knighthood, as he
is described in a writ of that date as Sir John Melville, knight.2 He appears
to have died before August 1463.
By his wife, Marjory Scott, Sir John Melville had at least two children :
1. William, who succeeded his father, and of whom a short notice follows.
2. Elizabeth, who married, before 24th June 1436, David Boswell of Balgregie,
afterwards of Balmuto, who, on that date, granted a discharge to his father-
in-law for 100 merks of tocher.3 David Boswell, their son and heir, received,
in 1458, on his father's resignation, a charter of Glassmonth, Balmuto,
and others, reserving the liferent and terce of his father and mother.4
1 Original agreement, dated at Dysart 12th 3 Ibid. 24th June 1436, transcript for Sir
June 1427, in Wemyss Charter-chest. John Melville, 24th July 1454.
4 4th November 1458. Registrum Magni
2 Vol. iii. oi this work, pp. 22, 23. Sigilli, vol. ii. No. 638.
WILLIAM MELVILLE, THIRD LAIRD OF RAITH. 29
III.— William Melville of Eaith, c. 1463-1502.
Margaret Douglas (Longnidbby), his first Wife,
euphame lundie (balgonie), his second wlfe.
William Melville first appears on record as witness to a charter dated in
August 1463, and as he is designed William Melville of Eaith, he must have
succeeded his father before that date.1 In 1474 he resigned his lands of
Eaith into the hands of his superior, Henry, abbot of Dunfermline, and
received from him a charter to himself and his heirs without limitation.
The yearly rental of the lands was fixed at £5 Scots, and in addition ward
and relief with other duties were exigible. The chief restrictions upon
Melville as vassal were in regard to his mill. Neither he nor his heirs
in any time to come were to receive knowingly, either by themselves or
their servants, to their mill for grinding corn, those who lived on lands
properly belonging of right to St. Margaret, that is, to the abbey. Further,
Melville and his heirs were not to build any mill for grinding corn except
on the land of Pitconmark ; and if they contravened these restrictions,
the abbot claimed power to resume that mill with its multures, and apply
it to the use of the abbey. Infeftment followed on this charter, in the
usual form.2
In January 1480, this laird of Eaith was one of five arbiters who decided
a question between John Menteith and Eobert Stewart as to the restoration
of certain goods to the lands of Schanbothy, the decision being afterwards en-
forced by the lords of council.3 At a later date, the laird himself submitted
to arbitration in regard to disputes with his oldest son, John Melville, and
indeed it is chiefly in connection with such that any notices of the laird
appear on record. In this case, he and his son appeared before the lords of
council, and bound themselves to accept the verdict of the Earl of Argyll,
1 Charter by George Abernetby of Balglaly vol. iii. p. 95.]
Wester, of an annual rent therefrom to John 2 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 47-49, 26th
Boswell of Bowhill, 2d August 1463. [The May 1474.
Douglas Book, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., 3 Acta Dominorum Concilii, p. 69.
30 WILLIAM MELVILLE OP KAITH.
then chancellor, the Earl of Bothwell and Lord Home, for " a gude way " to
be found between the father and son as to the questions between them —
especially that the elder laird should not alienate his lands, nor any part of
them, from his son.1
As will be shown in the next memoir, the laird's eldest son, John, married
Janet Bonar, of the family of Bonar of Eossie, and it was probably on this
account that the laird, in 1490, appears as tutor to John Bonar, the young
laird of Bossie, whose father, James Bonar, had deceased before that date.
As a result of this relationship, the laird found himself and his ward com-
pelled to pay various sums of money, in one case 1 40 merks, liabilities
incurred by his ward's father.2
The questions which the laird and his son were to submit to arbitration, as
already noted, are not clearly defined, but, probably in terms of an award, the
laird appears to have entered into an obligation to resign his lands to his
eldest son, and also to deliver certain goods, as corn, horses, sheep, gold and
silver money, amounting to £1000 Scots. This obligation was so far carried
out by a resignation of the lands in the hands of the superior, Adam, abbot of
Dunfermline, who granted a precept for infefting the younger Melville, which
was followed by sasine.3 Very shortly afterwards, however, the laird violated
his bond, and the son then brought an action against his father before the
lords of council. He accused his father of wrongfully revoking the procura-
tory granted for resigning the lands of Baith, Bitconmark, Torbain, Pitscottie,
and Dura, in favour of his eldest son, and, instead thereof, infefting a younger
son, William Melville, in part of the lands. The younger Melville further
required that his father should be adjudged to make over the frank -tenement
in his favour, and also to pay the money prescribed in the obligation. The
counsel for the laird, on the other hand, challenged the authenticity of the
instrument produced, narrating the obligation and alleged it to be false.
The pleadings on the first day having been concluded, an adjournment was
made to another day for the purpose of examining the notary who prepared
the writ, and other witnesses.
1 Acta Dominorum Concilii, p. 154, 22d 3 Date of Resignation and Precept, 2d
October 1490. November 1490, narrated in Instrument of
Sasine, 4th November 1490, in Melville
2 Ibid. pp. 157, 158, 25th October 1490. Charter-chest.
LITIGATION WITH HIS RLDEST SON. 31
Two days later, when the evidence had been heard, the lords declared
the document founded on by the pursuer to be valid, and, as the laird's
counsel admitted that alienation of part of the lands had been made, it was
decided that the laird should fulfil in their entirety the conditions of his
bond. The amount of the moveable goods to be delivered was also deter-
mined by a formal decree.1 The matter was concluded in the following-
May by the laird making another and formal resignation in favour of his
son John, of the frank-tenement of all his lands. These included Eaith,
Pitconmark, Torbain, Pitscottie, Dura, and Feddinch, with annual-rents from
the lands of Strathendry, and the burghs of Dysart and Kirkcaldy. The
transfer was effected by the laird delivering a straw to his son as a symbol
of real possession of the lands, moveables, and annual-rents. The laird
further constituted his son his assignee to the leases of Easter Balbarton and
mill, and of Powguild and Dundonald. He then, upon oath, declared, and
with a loud voice explained, that he never made or ordered to make any
charters or evidents of the lands named to any person, his first-born son
excepted, and if such writs were made that he was unwitting, nor did he
make or know of them. This closed the transaction, which took place
within the parish church of Kirkcaldy.2
While this question affecting the lands was thus settled for the time, it
re-appeared two years later under a somewhat different form. The laird of
Eaith was naturally desirous of providing his younger sons, William and
Andrew Melville, to some portion of his property, but in this he was appa-
rently opposed by his eldest son. The laird, however, seems to have
bestowed the lands of Pitscottie and Dura on his second son, William
Melville, a proceeding which involved a law plea with his feudal supe-
rior in the lands, Mr. William Scott of Flawcraig, who alleged that they
were alienated without his confirmation, and protested that his interests
should not suffer. In reply, Melville admitted that he was a free tenant of
the lands in question under William Scott of Balwearie, until the latter
gave the fee of Iris lands to Mr. William Scott, his son. The lands were
1 Acta Dominorum Concilii, pp. 169, 170, - On 20th May 1491. Vol. iii. of this
172. 12th and 14th February and 7th March work, pp. 50, 51.
1490-91.
32 WILLIAM MELVILLE OF EAITH.
then held from the younger Scott, until alienated to the laird's son, as
stated.1
What objection the younger laird of Eaith took to the provision for his
brothers does not appear. But, in June 1493, a compromise was effected
between them and the elder Melville, with his sons, "William and Andrew, on
one side, and the younger laird on the other, they binding themselves to
obey any award which should be made by arbitration. The arbiters were
John, Lord Glamis, John, prior of St. Andrews, and Henry, abbot of Cam-
buskenneth, and the question for their decision had regard to the ejection
and eviction of Andrew Melville from the leases and rents of the lands of
Eaith, Pitconmark, and Torbain, and the taking from him of thirty-six
score of sheep, and other goods. The award of the arbiters, which was to
be given within a week, is not recorded, but it is evident that the younger
laird of Eaith had objected to his brother's possession of the lands from
whatever source derived.2
The laird of Eaith's eldest son died within the year after the date
referred to, but litigation continued with his widow, Janet Bonar. The
laird accused his daughter-in-law of withholding from him the house and
place of the Eaith, and the lands of the Mains of Eaith and Torbain, and
further of ejecting him from the same. The cause was debated in presence
of the king, who, with the council, decided against the laird in respect he had
resigned the lands and the frank-tenement in favour of his son.3
The last reference which has been found to this laird of Eaith is in
February 1498, when he was one of the parties to a marriage-contract between
his daughter, Elspet or Elizabeth Melville, and John Gourlay, younger of
Lamlethan. The other parties were the laird's wife, Euphame Lundie, and
William Melville, their son, on the one side, and John Gourlay, elder of Lam-
lethan, on the other side. The laird, his wife, and son, undertook to pay two
hundred merks as dowry, and, in security of this sum, Elspet Melville and her
husband were to receive a lease of the lands of Feddinch for thirteen years at
a yearly rental of thirty-six merks, half of which was to be remitted each year
1 Acta Dominorum Concilii, p. 269. 23d January 1492-3.
?' Acta Auditornm, p. 176, 13th June 1493.
3 Acta Dominorum Concilii, p. 339, 25th June 1494.
HIS WIVES AND CHILDREN. 33
until the two hundred merks were paid. The laird and his family were also
to maintain his daughter honourably in food and clothing until a crop should
be obtained from the lands of Feddinch. On the other hand, the younger
Gourlay was to find security for payment of the rent of Feddinch, while the
elder Gourlay was to infeft his son and spouse in the lands of Cargour, and
also, if necessary, to pay for a dispensation from the Pope on account of
relationship, under a penalty of two hundred merks.1
The laird died within a year or two after the date of this contract, although
the actual date of his decease cannot be ascertained. He was probably
dead before 29th October 1502, when his grandson, Sir John Melville, was
retoured heir of his father, the deceased John Melville, in the lands of Eaith
and others.2
William Melville is said to have married twice, the name of his first wife
being given as Margaret Douglas, daughter of the laird of Longniddry, but
though no evidence has been discovered of such marriage, it is not improbable
from the litigations which took place between this laird and his eldest son
that the latter was born of a previous marriage. The only wife of this laird
of whom there is any record, is Euphemia Lundie, who was the mother of
most of his children. She survived her husband. A year or more after his
decease we find her engaged in a dispute with the heir in possession, John
Melville, her husband's grandson, about the payment of her terce. The
matter, which at first had been referred to arbiters, was finally submitted to
the judgment of the lords of council, who decided that she was entitled to
her whole terce of the lands of Eaith, Pitconmark, and Torbain, besides the
lands of Feddinch, also held by her. But with consent of both parties it was
determined that John Melville should pay to Euphemia Lundie £20 Scots
yearly in lieu of all third or terce she might claim from the lands of Eaith
and others, excepting Feddinch, which she then had. The sum was to be
paid by half-yearly instalments of £10 each, the lady in return giving up
and renouncing all contracts or other writs by which she might claim, and
discharging all such in future.3 Two years after this decree, Euphemia
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 51-53, 28th February 1497-8.
- Ibid. pp. 53, 54.
s Decree, dated 23d March 1503-4, Robertson's Kecords of Parliament, pp. 500, 501.
VOL. I. E
34 WILLIAM MELVILLE OF RAITH.
Lundie, in addition to the usual discharge for her teree, granted to John,
now Sir John Melville, a lease of her lands of Feddineh for five years imme-
diately following the expiry of Gourlay's tenancy already referred to. In
return for this lease and for other considerations, Sir John Melville obliged
himself to cause his mother, Janet Bonar, acquit Euphemia Lundie and her
sons, David and Andrew Melville, of the goods taken by them from the house
of the Eaith and elsewhere, during their occupation.1
This laird of Eaith had issue four sons, and perhaps two daughters. The
sons were —
1. John Melville, younger of Eaith, of whom a short notice follows.
2. William Melville, who appears frequently in the legal transactions between his
father and elder brother. He was, apparently, provided by his father in the
lands of Pitscottie and Dura, and, in 1493, he and several others were
defenders in an action of spoliation at the instance of various tenants of these
lands, when they were decerned to restore to each tenant pursuing, the
number of sheep, or the horse or cow stolen, or their value.2 The reason of
the spoliation is not stated. William Melville was one of the parties to his
sister Elizabeth's marriage-contract in 1498; he seems to have survived until
the year 1513, but nothing further has been ascertained regarding him.
3. Andrew Melville, who is also referred to in connection with the litigation
between his father and brother, and who was ejected by his eldest brother
from possession of the lands of Eaith. At a later date, in 1506, as already
noted, he, with his brother David and their mother, Euphemia Lundie, were
still subject to a claim from the proprietrix of Eaith for goods taken by them
when in occupation. He settled in Leith, as appears from a discharge which
he granted to his nephew for £40, a sum decreed to him by arbiters as a
composition for a yearly payment of ten merks due to him for twenty-two
years past. The discharge is dated in March 15 16,3 and nothing further has
been discovered regarding this Andrew Melville.
4. David Melville, who is named along with his brother Andrew in a discharge
granted by their mother to Sir John Melville, as already stated, but no
further reference to him has been found.
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 55, 20th April 1506.
2 Acta Dommorum Concilii, p. 280, 11th February 1492-3.
3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 60, 22d March 1515-6.
JOHN MELVILLE, YOUNGER OF RAITH. 35
The daughters were —
Elspeth or Elizabeth, who, on 28th February 1498, was contracted in marriage
to John Gourlay, younger of Lamlethan. The terms of the contract have
already been narrated.
Margaret, who is stated by the family pedigrees to have married James Bonar
of Rossie. No evidence of this has been found among the family papers,
save that James Bonar' s son, John, was a ward of William Melville.
IV. — John Melville, younger of Raith. d. 1494.
Janet Bonae (of Rossie), his Wife.
John Melville was the son and apparent heir of William Melville, but
predeceased his father, leaving a son, John, who succeeded to the family
estates. Much of the history of this John Melville, younger of Raith, has
already been told in the preceding memoir, as he and his father were so con-
stantly engaged in litigation with each other that the same narrative must
relate to both. The elder Melville, as previously related, resigned his lands
in favour of his son,1 and was compelled by a decree of the lords of council
to deliver up various goods and victuals. The value of these was fixed as
follows : — Thirteen chalders of oats which were in the Raith, at 4s. the boll ;
twelve bolls of wheat, at 10s. the boll; forty bolls of bear, at 6s. the boll;
thirty-one oxen in the Raith, valued at two rnerks each ; five chalders of oats,
at 4s. the boll ; and ten bolls of bear, at 6s. 5d. the boll ; eight oxen, which
were in Balbarton, each worth two merks ; two horses, each 40s. ; nine cows,
each two merks ; seven stirks, each 6s. 8d. ; two young cattle (" nolt "), each
10s.; twelve score ewes, each 5s.; ten score of old sheep, each 4s.; seven
score of hoggs, each 2s. 6d. ; five chalders of farm rent, which was owing to
the said laird of Raith, the price of each boll being 6s. 8d. ; all which were
proved to be in the elder laird's possession on 14th February 1491. Besides
the above, he was also to deliver over such moveable goods as were in his
hands, in terms of the decree.2
1 John Melville, younger of Raith, was 2 7th March 1490-91, Acta Domiaorum
infeft in the lands on November 1490. Ori- Concilii, p. 172.
ginal sasine in Melville Charter-chest.
36 JOHN MELVILLE, YOUNGER OF RAITH.
Shortly after this a claim was preferred against John Melville himself by
James Richardson, a burgess of Edinburgh, for £70. This amount was
owing to Richardson by Thomas Moultray, from whom Melville had been
empowered by the king's letters to collect it. Melville declared that he
apprised Moultray's goods to the value of £48, which he had delivered to
Richardson's agent, who in turn asserted that he had paid the money to his
principal.1
As narrated in the previous memoir, John Melville received a final
resignation of the lands of Raith and others from his father in May 1491,
and occupied them until his death, about the year 1494. In June of that
year his widow, Janet Bonar, brought an action against Mr. William Scott of
Flawcraig, the feudal superior of Pitscottie and other lands, for wrongfully
putting her forth from the lease of Easter Balbarton. She further charged
him with spoliation of certain goods of hers, and withholding an ox from
amongst them ; also with vexing and troubling her and her tenants in her
third of Pitscottie and Dura, and taking the tenants' goods and rents thereof.
Scott, in his defence, alleged that the Earl of Morton was his guarantee as to
the lands of Balbarton, who was summoned to appear. As for Pitscottie and
Dura, the king's sheriffs were directed to defend the pursuer in such posses-
sion of these lands as she and her husband had, while justice was to be done
in regard to the goods spoiled. When the case again came before the Court,
Mr. William Scott admitted that there was a " sasine ox " taken from the
pursuer out of the lands of East Balbarton since Whitsunday, by which it
was understood that the pursuer was in possession of the lease of the farm in
question, and she was formally secured in her rights.2
Besides the foregoing action, Janet Bonar also suffered annoyance from
her father-in-law, who declared that she wrongfully detained and withheld
from him the house of Raith, with the lands of the Mains of Raith and of
Torbain. In this case, however, the lords of council at once decided in her
favour, on account of her rights of terce, and because her husband, the late
1 Acta Dominoruni Concilii, pp. 189, 229, of the tragedy are not known, but the con-
22d March 1490-91. The proceedings against sequences will be treated of in the next
Moultray on this occasion may have led to memoir.
the quarrel in which he was slain by John 2 14th June and 3d July 1494, Acta
Melville, or his servants. The particulars Dominorum Concilii, pp. 324, 325, 352, 353.
HIS WIFE AND CHILDREN. 37
John Melville, was the last person infeft in the lands, while, as already
stated, he was also in possession of the frank-tenement.1
Towards the close of the same year, 1494, Janet Bonar had again to
defend her own and her late husband's rights. Two tenants of the lands of
Dunbulg or Dunbog complained against her and John Ogilvy of Inver-
quharity for wrongfully despoiling them of certain cattle and horses, and
exacting double rent. In defence, Janet Bonar claimed right to the rent in
terms of an assignation dated 9th January 1489, in favour of her husband,
John Melville, and herself, made by Christian Balfour, widow of the deceased
William Bonar of Bossie. Ogilvy of Inverquharity, on his part, claimed the
rents as bailie to the same Christian, in terms of a letter of bailiary from her
which he produced, while he challenged the authenticity of the assignation.
Evidence was led, and as the tenants themselves admitted that they had
received their leases from John Melville, the lords of council fixed a day for
production of these writs, and also of any evidence to be adduced by Ogilvy.
Meanwhile they, without prejudice to either party, directed him to restore
the goods and grain taken by him from the complainers, and also ordered
that Janet Bonar or Melville should remain in such possession of the rents as
she and her spouse formerly had, in which she was probably allowed to con-
tinue, as no further record of the case has been found.'2
How long Janet Bonar survived her husband has not been ascertained.
She was alive in 1506, when she was asked to discharge her brothers-in-law
of her claims against them for spoliation, as referred to in a previous memoir.3
John Melville, younger of Eaith, and Janet Bonar, his wife, had two
sons —
1. John, who succeeded his lather and grandfather in the family estate, and of
whom a memoir follows.
2. David, of whom nothing is known beyond the fact that he became a burgess
of Edinburgh, and left a son, Walter.
1 Acta Domiiiorurn Concilii, p. 339, 26th June 1494.
2 Acta Auditorum, p. 202, 13th December 1494.
3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 55 ; p. 34 of this vol.
38 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
V. — Sie John Melville of Eaith, 1502-1548.
Margaret Wemyss, his first "Wife.
Helen Napier, his second Wife.
As stated in the preceding pages, William Melville of Eaith was suc-
ceeded in his estates, not by his eldest son, who predeceased him, but by his
grandson, John Melville, who forms the subject of this memoir. The exact
date of John Melville's succession has not been ascertained, but he was
retoured heir to his father in the lands of Eaith, Pitconmark and Torbain, in
October 1502, when his grandfather was probably dead, and was infeft in the
lands in the following November.1 Shortly after obtaining possession of his
estates he married Margaret Wemyss, daughter of Sir John Wemyss of
Wemyss, who granted to his son-in-law a portion of his barony of Methil in
warrandice of the lands of Wester Eaith, which were the bride's dowry.2
The next reference to the laird of Eaith, three years later, shows that in
the interval he had received the rank of knighthood, though there is no
evidence to show the precise date or circumstances when this honour was con-
ferred. Not improbably it was bestowed amid the festivities attendant on the
marriage of King James the Fourth with the Princess Margaret of England,
which took place on 11th August 1503, when various titles and dignities were
distributed. Sir John Melville is described as a knight in the year 1506,
when he and his grandfather's widow, Euphemia Lundie, entered into an
arrangement, already noted in the previous memoirs, as to the payment of
her terce, the lease of Feddinch to Sir John, and other matters in which Sir
John's mother also had an interest.3
During the next few years the notices of Sir John Melville chiefly refer
to land transactions. The first of these on record, however, presents some
peculiarities, illustrative of the turbulent state of Scottish society. It would
appear that some years previously, Sir John's father, by himself or his
servants, had caused the death of a neighbouring laird, Thomas Moultray of
i Retour, 29th October 1502 ; Sasine, 24fch in Methil, 28th July 1503, ibid. p. 54.
November 1502 ; vol. iii. of this work, p. 53 ;
of. p. 114. 3 Vol. iii. of this work, p, 55. 20th April
2 Precept for infeftment of John Melville 1506 ; p. 34 of this vol.
FEUD WITH THE MOULTRAYS OF MARKINCH. 39
Markincn. This event, which took place in or near Moultray's own house
of Seaneld, situated on the north side of the Forth, between Kirkcaldy
and Kinghorn, led to one of these family feuds so common in Scotland, where
the relatives and kin of both parties took up the quarrel, and, as in this case,
carried on a series of mutual annoyances and plots to assassinate the princi-
pals. The abbot of Dunfermline, however (then James Beaton, afterwards
archbishop of Glasgow and St. Andrews), who relates the circumstances,
determined to act as peacemaker, because the death of Moultray had been
brought about, not by direct malice, but by instigation and persuasion of
wicked men. His efforts so far succeeded with the young laird of Eaith, that
for the sake of concord he resigned in the hands of the abbot, who was also
his feudal superior, the sum of twelve merks, to be uplifted yearly from his
lands of Eaith and others, and expended in masses for the soul of the
slain Moultray. This money the abbot, by a formal charter, bestowed upon
John Moidtray, the son and heir of the deceased, with full permission to
expend it upon a chaplain who should celebrate a yearly mass in a fitting
place.1 Thus, according to the abbot, the feud was composed for the time,
but, as will be shown on a later page, it was renewed some years afterwards
with greater intensity than before.
In August 1507, Sir John Melville received a Crown precept directed to
the bailies of Dysart, to complete his title to an annualrent due from certain
houses in that burgh, of twenty- two shillings yearly, part of his inheritance
from his grandfather, William Melville.2 Sir John also, about this time, or a
little later, became bound in the sum of two hundred merks to Sir William
Scott of Balwearie, who granted in return an obligation, discharging payment
of the sum should he fail in the keeping of " favour and kindness " to
Melville.3 This, however, did not prevent him, some years later, putting an
arrestment in force against the crops of Sir John Melville for the amount of
the debt, until Sir John found security for its payment.4
In May 1512, a question which had arisen between Sir John Melville and
his neighbour, the laird of Carden, as to the marches of their respective pro-
1 Charter, 6th February 1506-7, by the this work, p. 56.
abbot of Dunfermline to John Moultray of
Mai kineh, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Precept, 6th August 1507, vol. iii. of 4 6th March 1516-7, ibid. p. 60.
3 6th February 1509-10, ibid.
40 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OP RA1TH.
perties, was brought before a justiciary court held for the purpose upon the
ground in dispute. The justices were Sir David Wemyss of Wemyss, Sir
Peter Crichton, and Alexander Inglis of Tarvit. Perambulation of the lands
was made and a number of witnesses were examined, upon whose evidence
a formal decision was given, denning the boundaries between Sir John
Melville's lands of Torbain and the lands of Carden. Sir John made a pro-
test that the judges should not proceed without seeing a charter denning the
bounds, but apparently the decision was accepted by the parties.1 Another
transaction in which Sir John Melville took part at this period was the mort-
gage of a portion of his lands of Easter Pitscottie, which were granted to a
burgess of Cupar, George Airth, and his wife.2
Sir John Melville is said by some writers to have attended King
James the Fourth to Flodden, and to have been slain on that disastrous field.
This, however, is disproved by the family papers, while they afford no indi-
cation as to whether Sir John was present at Flodden or not. The first refer-
ence to him after the date of the battle is in March 1516, when he received
from his uncle, Andrew Melville, a discharge for a sum of money claimed
by the latter to be due to him at the rate of ten merks yearly for the past
twenty-two years. Sir John Melville appears to have disputed the claim, and
the matter was decided by arbitration, the sum of £40, or sixty merks Scots,
being paid as an equivalent of the whole amount of 220 merks.3
A few years later, Sir John Melville entered into a series of bonds of
friendship and mutual service with neighbouring lairds. The most important
of such obligations was one in which Sir John shared with no fewer than
seventeen other Fifeshire gentlemen, the chief of whom were David Wemyss of
Wemyss, James Lundie of Balgonie, William Forbes of Eeres, and John Moul-
tiay of Markinch. They bound themselves to take true part with each other
in all lawful disputes, and specially in defence of their persons and heritage,
against every one excepting the king, the governor (John, Duke of Albany),
their own immediate superiors and their overlords, and made provision
for settling differences among themselves by mutual arbitration. The bond
1 Decision and relative testimony, 21st May 1512, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Charter of sale, 6th Jnne 1512, vol. iii. of this work, p. 57.
3 Discharge, 22(1 March 1515-6, vol. iii. of this work, p. 60.
MUTUAL BOND BETWEEN FLFESH1RE LAIRDS, 1521. 41
is dated and signed at Scone on 13th February of the year 1521. x No public
occasion is on record which could convene so many Fifeshire lairds so far
from their own homes ; but they may have been there in attendance on Andrew
Forman, an ambitious prelate, then archbishop of St. Andrews and legate
in Scotland of the Eoman See, who was the feudal superior of most of them.
If not, they may have assembled for the special purpose of joining in this
mutual bond of defence.
One cause of the meeting, it is highly probable, was the disturbed con-
dition of Scotland at the time. John, Duke of Albany, who had in 1515
been appointed regent of Scotland, for some time ruled with vigour, but
in June 1517 he returned to France, leaving the government in the
hands of six regents, the Earls of Angus, Arran, Argyll, and Huntly, and
the archbishops of St. Andrews and Glasgow. The chief result of this
arrangement was that two of the regents, Angus and Arran, with their
respective partisans, renewed their former struggles for supremacy, and
the country came to be virtually at the mercy of the two contending factions.
In such a state of affairs it was natural that the smaller barons, as in the
present case, should band together for their common safety. Bonds of the
kind were frequent at this time, though it was not usual for so many to
combine together. There are, however, two instances of a similar nature at
this very period. In July and August 1520, that family of the Kers who
acknowledged the laird of Cessford as their chief, who had been adherents of
Angus, deserted his party and made alliance with Arran, obliging themselves
to him in terms similar to the Scone bond just mentioned ; while in January
1521, only a month before the meeting at Scone, the provost and magistrates
of Edinburgh united in an obligation to support Arran in his maintenance of
the king's authority, and in opposition to Angus.2 The bond now entered
into by Sir John Melville and his neighbours only differed in terms from
those named, in that it did not bind the subscribers to join any particular
faction, but might rather form a measure of defence against the aggression of
either of the contending parties.
1 Original bond, dated 13th February and 19th January 1520-21, in the Hamilton
1520-21, in the Wemyss Charter-chest. Charter-chest. [Report of Historical mss.
2 Original bonds, dated 10th July 1520, Commission, No. XI. Part vi. pp. 32-34. j
VOL. I. F
42 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF EAITH.
Other writs of a similar tenor with which Sir John Melville was con-
cerned, about the same date, were three bonds of manreut by as many neigh-
bouring lairds, who looked to him for aid and protection, promising in their
turn to aid him with their advice, and an armed force if necessary.1
In course of time, however, Sir John Melville was drawn into the current
of public affairs. In October 1526 he received the appointment of master
of artillery for life,2 but it is not clear how long he held the office. In
December of the same year he joined John, Earl of Lennox, in his attempt to
wrest King James the Fifth from the control of the Douglases. The then
archbishop of St. Andrews (James Beaton) was a keen opponent of the Earl of
Angus, and it was no doubt as a vassal of that prelate that Sir John and his
retainers took the field. Lennox mustered his army at Stirling, and marched
towards Edinburgh, but, as is well known, his forces were totally routed near
Linlithgow, and he himself was slain. The archbishop of St. Andrews was
forced to take refuge in flight and disguise, and, according to a contemporary
witness, " all the lords and lardes of the este and north parts " who had
joined Lennox, were in the hands of the Earl of Angus and his brother,
George Douglas, "to raunsom and fyne at there pleasyr."3 What penalty
was inflicted on the laird of Eaith is unknown, but in August of the following
year, 1527, he received a remission for his offence of appearing in arms
against the king, Angus being then chancellor of Scotland.4 Among those
conjoined with Melville in this remission were his son-in-law, James Kirk-
caldy of Grange, David Wemyss of Wemyss, and others. As an instance of
the political changes of the period, it may be noted that, two years later, Sir
John and his son-in-law received a remission for having had dealings with
the Douglases, then in exile.5
During the seven years succeeding 1526, while Sir John Melville was
more than once engaged in public affairs, he was subjected, in his own neigh-
1 Bonds of manrent, 2d January 1520, 9th olair had held it in times bygone.
July and 30th August 1522, by Robert Or- 3 Letter, Sir Christopher Daere to Lord
rock, son of James Orrock of that ilk, Alex- Daere, 2d December 1526 ; Pinkerton, vol. ii.
ander Orrock of Silliebalbie, and David Bos- p. 478.
well of Glasmonth. Vol. iii. of this work, * 14th August 1527 ; vol. iii. of this work,
pp. 51, 52. p. 66.
2 Rpgistrum Secreti Sigilli, vol. vii. f. 29. b 26th July 1529 ; ibid. p. 68 ; cf. also p.
The office was to be held as Henry, Lord Sin- 67.
LEASE OF THE ABTHANE OF KINGHORN. 43
bourhood, to a series of active annoyances and assaults on the persons of
himself and his friends. These were in a certain measure the consequences
of the feud already referred to in which Sir John's father, the young laird of
Raith, had killed Thomas Moultray of Seafield. The slain man's son, John
Moultray of Markinch and Seafield, had carried on the feud, but by the
interposition of James Beaton, then abbot of Dunfermline, the affair had been
compounded in 1506. The families then, according to Sir John Melville's
own statement, had remained on neighbourly and friendly terms for several
years, and as already noted they joined together in the friendly bond at Scone
in February 1521.
About that time, however, or at least previous to the death of Archbishop
Eorman, who died before May 1521,1 John Moultray had attempted to interfere
with Sir John Melville's possession of certain lands near Kinghorn, called the
abtbane of Kinghorn, now Abden. These lands apparently belonged to the
abbey of Dunfermline, of which the archbishop was commendator, and were
leased to an aunt of Sir John Melville, who assigned the lease to her nephew.
Six years before the lease expired, Moultray granted a mortgage on his lands
of Seafield, and offered the proceeds, 600 merks, to the archbishop, to take
the lease from Sir John Melville, the result being that the latter, to retain
possession, was forced to pay £300 Scots for renewal of his lease instead of
£40 as before.2
This proceeding naturally aroused Sir John Melville's displeasure, but no
open rupture then took place, though Moultray pursued a similar course with
the family of Kirkcaldy of the Grange, who were related to Sir John. In
the end of November 1526, however, Moultray's goods were escheated to the
Crown for the crime of manslaughter, and when the messenger-at-arms
appeared, with the officer of the Earl of Morton, feudal superior of the lands
of Seafield, Moultray and his men deforced the messenger, and recovered the
goods distrained.3 Either on this or a precisely similar occasion when the
officers of the Earl of Morton exacted payment of a debt of £60 Scots adjudged
1 Keith [Scottish Bishops, p. 35] states that Archbishop Forman died in 1522, but there
is documentary evidence to show that the see of St. Andrews was vacant ou IStli May
1521.
2 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 70 3 Ibid. p. G3.
44 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
to James Kirkcaldy of Grange, and apprised Moultray's goods, the latter
resented the presence on his ground of Sir John Melville, James Kirkcaldy,
and other neighbouring lairds, who, by the judge's order, accompanied the
officers.1
Moultray's first step in retaliation was a resort, not to force, but to the
commiuatory powers of the church, and a sentence of excommunication was
pronounced by the principal Official of St. Andrews against Sir John Melville,
James Kirkcaldy, and several other lairds of the neighbourhood. They
appealed from this sentence, pleading first, that they had not been either
cited or convicted; secondly, as to the charge of aiding the officers of the
Earl of Morton, it was in the power of every competent judge to demand
assistance in the execution of his decrees ; thirdly, if it were alleged that the
Official had issued to the appellants letters inhibiting the apprising of the
grain, they denied receiving such, as it was only reported that they were to
be excommunicated, and the final sentence was pronounced wholly unknown
to them.2
The result of this appeal is not recorded, but very shortly after it was
made, Moultray determined to take the law into his own hand, and on Ash
Wednesday of the year 1527 3 he, with his son and other accomplices, began
the first of a series of hostile attacks upon Sir John Melville and his friends,
which were repeated at intervals during the next few years. Unfortunately
we have only Sir John's statement of the facts, but so far as that goes, it is
graphic enough. There are two versions of the narrative, both intended for
the perusal of the lords of session before whom the case ultimately came, the
first being apparently a personal relation by Sir John, while the second is a
more elaborate statement prepared by counsel. From these we learn that Sir
John Melville and James Kirkcaldy of the Grange, accompanied only by
their household servants, on their way to Edinburgh, passed through the town
1 On 11th December 1526, James, Earl of enforced by a decree of the lords of council,
Morton, obliged himself to defend and keep dated 27th February 1528-9. [Decree, narrat-
scatheless Sir John Melville in his dealings ing obligation, in Melville Charter-chest.]
with the escheated goods of John Moultray, 2 Appeal, by Sir John Melville and others,
and states that he had directed Sir John to 20th February 1526-7, vol. iii. of this work,
pass with his (the earl's) officers to take up pp. 64-66.
the goods. This obligation was afterwards 3 6th March 1527.
CONFLICTS WITH MOULTRAY AT KINGHORN AND KIRKCALDY. 45
of Kinghorn1 on this particular Ash Wednesday. This being the first day of
Lent they resolved to hear mass, and proceeded towards the parish church
for that purpose. But ere they reached it, Moultray and his followers, who
were within the sacred building, being advertised of Sir John's approach,
rose hastily, and rushed out to the church gate, with drawn swords, and
besetting the street, made a violent attack upon Melville and his friends,
who wore no defensive armour, James Kirkcaldy being wounded in the
fray.2
In the same year, probably about July, Sir John Melville, with his
retainers, returning from the service of the king, who had made a raid upon
the borderers, again passed through Kinghorn on bis way homeward. On
this occasion his companions were David Wemyss of Wemyss, and James
Lundie of Balgonie, and the three lairds leaving their attendants, went quietly
to the church " to do thair devotioun and heir mess, as gud Cristine men suld
do." While thus engaged, the young laird of Searield, who had observed their
movements and the absence of their retainers, sent to his father's tower, about
a mile to the east of Kinghorn, and mustered eight of his followers, clad in
iron head-pieces and other armour of defence. When Sir John Melville and
his companions left the church, therefore, they found themselves confronted
by these men drawn up in battle array, of whom four singled out Sir John,
and attacked him in the churchyard. How the fight ended is not distinctly
stated, but the combatants apparently were separated, one of the Seafield
men being wounded or killed.3
But the most thoroughly organised and determined attack made by the
Moultrays was in May, 1529, in the town of Kirkcaldy. Sir John Melville
tells us that the archbishop of St. Andrews (his former friend, James Beaton)
had come to that town, and that he himself was quietly riding from his
house of Kaith to an interview with that prelate, when the fray took place.
Sir John describes himself as wholly innocent of evil intention on his own
part, and entirely unconscious of the plots against him ; he was attended only
1 Described as " Kinghoru-Easter," Burnt- 3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 71, 73, H. This
island being then frequently styled " King- servant's name was Wood, and he was appar-
horn- Wester." ently killed, as compensation for his deatli
2 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 71, 73. was afterwards claimed [cf. p. 69].
46 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
by his own servants, and wore no defensive armour, being dressed in a short
white coat,1 with doublet and hose, with a red bonnet on his head. The other
party, however, who knew of the laird's intended meeting with the
archbishop, were astir betimes and laid their plans with great determina-
tion. On this occasion Moultray was accompanied by, or called to his
aid, the family of another laird of the neighbourhood, Variance of
Pitteadie. With the Vallances, and his and their retainers, all fully armed
with "jak,"2 steel bonnets, swords and bucklers, he rode from Seafield to
Kirkcaldy. Moultray himself was apparently in peaceable guise, wearing
a furred gown, but his armour was carried by a boy. They proceeded to
the house of one Alexander Balcanquhal, in Kirkcaldy, whence they sent
a spy towards Abbotshall to watch for and report the coming of the laird
of Eaith.
On receiving intimation of Melville's approach and his unarmed condition,
the laird of Seafield donned his armour, jack, steel bonnet, and plaited gloves,
and summoned the laird of Pitteadie and his followers, who were drinking in
the town. He reproved their delay, and bade them haste, as the laird of
Eaith was coming, and they would never have a better opportunity.
Vallance, however, who had a regard for Melville, was loath to fight without
any quarrel, and tried to dissuade Seafield, objecting that there was no such
reason to make slaughter, and that Melville had friends in the district. This
speech roused Moultray's ire, and he exclaimed : " Fye on ye, John Vallance,
I trowit (believed) nevir better at thi hand." This taunt stung poor Vallance,
who was probably excited by his morning's draught, and becoming " crabbit
and angry," he declared he would go further than the laird of Seafield himself
dare go. Saying this he seized two axes and halberts from Balcanquhal's
house and was ready for the combat. At this point the archbishop interfered
as a peacemaker, and begged the party to remain quietly with him, and not
to make provocation, saying that the laird of Eaith was coming to speak with
himself, adding, " ye have bene oft togidder with me of befor without skaith."
The words were scarcely uttered when Melville and his company appeared at
1 This may have been a coat uf buff or 2 A " jack " was a thick quilted coat used
white leather, and the wearer would therefore as armour of defence,
not be entirely defenceless.
JOHN VALLANCE OF PITTEADIE AND OTHERS SLAIN. 47
the west port of the town, and Moultray replying hotly to the arch-
bishop, " were I ten and he twenty, he durst nocht hald the gait (street),"
caught sight of his opponent. He rushed out of the house with his
servants, drawing their weapons as they approached Melville and his
party.
Sir John Melville, as he saw the excited laird of Seafield coming on, called
out to him to take half of the street, but the other would not listen. He still
advanced, crying out, " Fy, set upon the tratouris," and so encouraged his
followers. The laird of Pitteadie with his servants was already in front, thus
making his boast good, and in the melee he was slain. A servant of Seafield's
also was wounded to death, and Sir John Melville himself was dangerously
hurt in various parts of his body before the affair ended. It is not stated in
Sir John's narrative which party was victorious, though he seems to imply it
was his own, but he appears to have much regretted the fate of the laird
of Pitteadie, who had been in his house only a few days before, and was
friendly with him. Pitteadie's relatives, however, made no charge against
Melville for his death, which was brought about in the heat of combat and
in pure self-defence.
Sir John Melville's knowledge of what was said and done in Kirkcaldy
before his own arrival on the scene was obtained from the full confession of
one of his adversary's retainers, who was fatally wounded, but survived two
days after the fight. This man, named Andrew Traill, several times before
his death, related to his friends the foregoing facts. He also, in a conscience-
stricken mood, sent two priests, one of them a notary, to ask Sir John's
forgiveness in his own behalf, thanking God for the latter's escape. He stated
that the laird of Seafield had lain in wait for Melville no fewer than seven
times in that year with murderous intent ; that he himself with three others
had on this occasion undertaken to attack Melville alone, and to slay him if
possible, adding that each of them had struck at their victim, although they
had met the fate intended for him.1 It may here be stated that within a
month after the " slaughter," as it was called, Sir John Melville and two
others received a remission from the king for art and part in the deaths of
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 71, 72, 74, 75, whence the whole of the foregoing narrative
is adapted.
48 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
John Vallauce of Pitteadie, Andrew Traill, and another man Alexander
Wemyss,1 probably also a servant of Moultray's.2
These persecutions by the laird of Seafield were not confined to the laird
of Raith only, but were directed against others, his friends, and even his
servants. Thus on one occasion, probably in the beginning of 1533, while
Sir John Melville was absent from home in the king's service, the laird of
Seafield, with some of his men, on horseback, encountering a kinsman of Sir
John, James Melville, a chaplain, on foot, at the east end of Kirkcaldy, gave
chase to him with a purpose to kill him. The chaplain took refuge in a
house, the doors of which the marauders broke in, but fortunately their
intended victim escaped by a backway. On another occasion, about July
1533, some of the Vallances, who were partisans of Moultray, at a public
fair in Dunfermline, attacked John Kirkcaldy, brother to the laird of Grange,
but he defended himself successfully. Again, in September of the same
year, while the laird of Eaith's servants were attending even-song at Kinghorn
Church, they were treacherously assaulted in the churchyard by the Vallances
and others, relatives of those who had been killed in the fray in Kirkcaldy.
The parties were separated by the bystanders, but not before the assailants,
perhaps accidentally, wounded Marion Kirkcaldy, sister of Grange.3
The pleadings presented to the lords of session on behalf of Sir John
Melville and James Kirkcaldy, which narrate the foregoing indictment
against the laird of Seafield and his accomplices, wind up with the conclusion,
drawn from the facts, that he is a common oppressor. They state specially
that for seven years he had oppressed the vicar of Kinghorn, by violently pre-
1 Remission, 12th June 1529. Pitcaim's issued, supported by a precept from the king,
Criminal Trials, vol. i. p. 244*. Robert requiring the earl to keep Sir John scatheless
Clerk and Sir Thomas Thomson, perhaps his from Moultray as to certain goods taken from
chaplain, are conjoined with Melville in this the latter by Melville — 10 bolls of threshed
remission, which is to endure for nineteen wheat at 36s. the boll, 19 bolls of bear at 33s.
years. and 40 bolls of oats at 26s. , taken from the
! As a side issue to the disputes between half lands of Tyrie. In August 1532, Sir
Melville and Moultray, Sir John appears also John Melville received letters giving him
to have had difficulties with the Earl of power of distraint over the Earl of Morton's
Morton, superior of Seafield. As noted on a lands of Aberdour. [Decree and precept,
previous page, the earl was under an obliga- dated 15th December 1531 ; letters dated
tion to Sir John in regard to Moultray's 7th August 1532, in Melville Charter-chest.]
goods, and in 1531 a decree of council was 3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 72, 76.
COMPLAINS AGAINST MOULTRAY OF SEAFIELD. 49
venting him from tilling his lands of the Vicars-Grange ; that he built dikes
on these lands to prevent tillage, broke the vicar's ploughs, maltreated his
servants, and put his own sheep to graze on the vicar's grass, besides 'with-
holding his teinds of salt and similar commodities. This oppression, and the
other misdeeds enumerated, are declared to be notorious throughout the
district. Indeed the quarrel between the two factions, whichever was
most to blame, had become so serious in its consequences that it engaged
the attention of King James the Fifth himself. He came in person to
Cupar-in-Fife, where the parties appeared before him, and both signed in his
presence an obligation binding themselves and their adherents to submit to
the decision of the lords of session, and to appear before the judges when
required to do so. From the phraseology of this document, it would appear
as if Moultray had complained against Melville. The latter is referred to as
the aggressor, and it is chiefly in regard to the compensation to be paid by
him, for the deaths of Vallanee of Pitteadie and others, that the submission
is made ; touching all quarrels between them and harm done to Moultray, he
is content to leave the whole matter in the king's hand.1 About a fortnight
afterwards, the king, who was still at Cupar, issued directions to those of the
council and session who had been chosen to decide in the case, desiring them
to bring the matter to a good ending, and to see where the occasion of dis-
pleasure has begun between the two parties. As the umpires found cause,
they were to weigh the same to the great hurt of neither disputant, but
where the fault was greatest to decide accordingly. Specially, however,
were they to make " ane gud end " of the affair, that the parties might
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 69, 70. rick Kirkcaldy, Sir James Melville, all landed
15th January 1533-4. The king was at- men. The laird of Seafield was responsible
tended on this occasion by John, Lord for David, George, and Henry Vallanee, bro-
Lindsay of the Byres, formerly, if not then, thers to the deceased John Vallanee of Pit-
acting as sheriff of Fife, and others. The teadie, James Trail, brother of the slain
adherents for whom Sir John Melville be- Andrew Trail, David Wemyss, son to the
came security were James Kirkcaldy of the deceased Alexander Wemyss, and William
Grange, William Barclay of Touch, John Wood, probably a relative of the William
Melville of Wester Touch, James Melville, Wood for whose death compensation was
son and heir of the late David Melville, bur- demanded, and who was fatally hurt or killed
gess of Edinburgh, Robert Clerk in Dysart, at Kinghorn.
Robert Melville, goldsmith, Edinburgh, Pat-
VOL. I. G
50
SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
" stand in concord eftyrwart," x which probably was done, as no further
trouble seems to have arisen between the two families.
From allusions in the foregoing narrative, and from other sources, it
would appear that Sir John Melville took the field more than once under the
banner of his sovereign. He was present, he himself tells us, with the
expedition directed against the borderers in 1527, when many of their chiefs
were compelled to give security for good behaviour. There is no evidence
that Sir John took part in the raid upon the Armstrongs in 1530, though
the king is said to have been attended by a large force, but he accompanied
his sovereign to the borders at a later date on a more important occasion.
This was in the beginning of 1533, when the relations between the Scottish
king and Henry the Eighth were far from cordial, owing to the ungracious
treatment by the former of the exiled Archibald, Earl of Angus, and his
brother, George Douglas. Partly because of their hostility to King James,
and partly because of the ill-feeling between the two countries, a series of
retaliatory raids took place on both sides of the border. So much destruc-
tion was caused by the Douglases and their allies upon the southern counties
of Scotland, that King James mustered a strong army and marched to Had-
dington, there to consult with his natural brother, James, Earl of Moray, then
lieutenant of the East Marches, as to an invasion of England. Sir John
Melville and his retainers formed part of this force, which, however, did
nothing in the way of active hostility, and a few months later a truce of one
year was effected between the two countries.2
In January 1536, Sir John Melville, with two other gentlemen, received
a special commission to act as a justiciar in the trial of Sir Patrick Hepburn
1 Letter, dated 29th January 1533-4 : Stewart became security. The latter failed
vol. ii. of this work, p. 1. On 6th November
of the same year, 1534, Sir John Melville,
under circumstances arising out of another
local family feud, received a charter granting
him an annual rent of 40 merks from the
Mains of Hilton of Rosyth, in Fife, belonging
to Henry Stewart of Rosyth. Robert Orrock
of that ilk, and Alexander Orrock of Balbie,
his kinsman, had quarrelled, and were fined
by the king's justiciar £550 Scots, for pay-
ment of which Sir John Melville and Henry
to do his part, and his lands of the Mains of
Hilton were therefore legally apprised to Sir
John Melville, who received sasine 22d March
1534-5. [Crown charter, precept, and sasine
in Melville Charter-chest ; cf. also Registrum
Magni Sigilli, vol. iii. No. 1428.]
2 State papers, Henry viii., vol. iv. p. 637 ;
cf. pp. 622-638. The king was at Haddington
in February 1533, and at Melrose in the fol-
lowing month.
RECEIVES GRANT OF THE LANDS OF MURDOCHCAIRNIE, 1536. 51
of Waughton and others convicted of assault, etc.1 In August of the same
year he and his friends formerly named received a general remission for all
crimes except treason.2 Between these two dates, on 23d May, he received
from the king a feu-charter to himself and Helen Napier, his second wife, of
the lands of Murdochcairnie in Fife, with the usual commonty of the marshy
land lying between Murdochcairnie and Starr, in the parish of Kilmany.
The annual feu-duty to be paid was £21 Scots, with 24 bolls of barley, 20
bolls of wheat, four dozen of capons and other poultry. A suitable mansion
and policies were to be erected and maintained ; while the king revoked in
favour of Sir John and his wife all other grants made of the lands.3 Five
years later a change was made in the holding, Sir John Melville and his
wife receiving three-quarters of Murdochcairnie with commonty in the
" myre " of Starr, for an annual payment of £15, 15s. Scots, 18 bolls of barley,
15 bolls of wheat, and three dozen fowls, under the same conditions.4 In
October 1537 Sir John appears to have mortgaged part of his lands of
Torbain, as he then received a letter of reversion from Archbishop James
Beaton, as administrator of the abbey of Dunfermline, giving him regress to
the lands on payment of £40. At a later date this sum was increased to
600 merks, for which, in 1545, Sir John received another letter of reversion
from Archibald Beaton of Capildrae, heir of the archbishop.5
In July 1537 the laird of Baith was present as one of the jury on the
remarkable trials of John, Master of Forbes, Janet Douglas, Lady Glands,
and her son, Lord Glamis, charged with conspiring against the life of King
James the Fifth.6 The circumstances of these trials, however, are well known,
and need not be repeated here. A few years later Sir John Melville himself
came under the ban, not of a criminal but of the civil court, in consequence
of a judgment pronounced against him by the lords of council. From this
1 Pitcaim's Criminal Trials, vol. i. p. 172*. 1587, 23d May 1536.
2 Ibid. p. 250* 15th August 1536. 4 lm. No. 2492, 23d October 1541.
James Kirkcaldy of Grange, with his
brothers, John and Patrick, William Bar- ' ^egistrum de Dunfermelyn, p. 386, 2d
clay of Touch, John Melville of Wester October 1537 ; vol. iii. of this work, p. 84,
Touch, and eight others, were included in 26th July 1545-
this remission. 6 Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, vol. i. pp.
3 Registrum Magni Sigilli, vol. iii. No. 184*, 190* 199*.
52 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF EAITH.
position, however, he was released by the king, who granted him a formal
discharge. According to this writ, a question had arisen as to the holding of
the lands of Lundie, or Limdin, then in possession of Walter Lundie of that
ilk, and the lords of council decided that a retour of service affecting the
lands, made by Sir John Melville, was a wilful error. The lands were
retoured as held for ward and relief, while a particular charter had been
overlooked, the tenor of which, however, is not stated, and for this error Sir
John's "oods were declared escheat to the Crown. But in consideration of
the fact that at the date of the retour, Sir John Melville was under age, or,
as it is put, " of imperfite age, lakking discretioun and understanding," and
also that since then he had attended upon the king's service at great expense
to himself, the king with consent of his treasurer remitted and forgave the
escheat and all claim thereto. He also rehabilitated and restored Melville to
the same position in which he stood before he was convicted of the wilful
error in question, and all legal processes against the defendant were dis-
charged.1 In the August following Sir John was on the jmy who tried and
convicted Sir James Hamilton of Finnart, of an attempt to assassinate the
king, but the details of the trial are not known.2
Another land transaction in which Sir John Melville was concerned, and
which must have taken place about this time, though the exact date has not
been ascertained, is of some interest. This related to the lands of Abthane,
or Abden, near Kinghorn, of which casual mention has already been made.
Before 1521 Sir John Melville had acquired right to a lease of the lands, by
assignation from his aunt, and, as already noted, the lease was continued to
him. On the accession of David Beaton to the archbishopric of St. Andrews,
or about 1540, Sir John Melville appears to have received a charter of the
lands in feu-farm under certain conditions. According to a recent writer,
who appears to have seen Cardinal Beaton's grant, as well as a crown-charter
of subsequent date, there is a distinct reservation that the king and his
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 77, 78. The Melville, and had probably used their iuflu-
discharge is dated at Linlithgow, 7th Janu- enee to obtain his release from civil disabili-
ary 1539-40. It is signed by the king, and ties. He had, however, to pay a composition
indorsed by James Kirkcaldy of Grange, the of £300 Scots.
treasurer, and by Mr. Henry Balnaves, both 2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland
of whom were very friendly to Sir John vol. ii. p. 302.
APPOINTED CAPTAIN OF THE CASTLE OP DUNBAR. 53
successors should have lodging and residence at the Abden whenever they
pleased to come to Kingborn, and as long as they chose to stay, but at the
king's own cost. It would seem that Cardinal Beaton held the lands on
the same condition.1 The writer adds that " in the old orchard of Abden
there were not long ago removed the remains of a building which tradition
declared belonged to the king, and the road to which from the shore or
landing-place was called the King's Gate."
It is said by some historians that Sir John Melville was held in much
esteem by King James the Fifth, who conferred upon him various offices,
especially the important post of captain of the castle of Dunbar. The first
part of this statement is so far borne out by the charter of rehabilitation
already quoted, in which the king refers to Sir John's labours and expendi-
ture in the royal service. This was in 1540, and the king then describes Sir
John as his " louit familiar seruitour," and in the following year he showed a
friendly interest in the marriage of Sir John's eldest son.2 It was apparently
in or before the former of these years that Sir John was made captain of the
castle of Dunbar, where he had the responsible task assigned him of guarding
some of those Highland chiefs whom King James brought with him as host-
ages, from his expedition to the Isles in 1540. One chieftain thus placed
under Sir John's care was Angus M'Connel or Macdoiiald of Isla, who was so
pleased with the kindly treatment accorded to him, that, at a later date, he
remembered it, and gladly requited it to Sir John Melville's son, James, when
the latter, on his way to France, in 1550, was storm-stayed near Macdonald's
castle of Dunaveg.3 The laird of Eaith was apparently still captain of
Dunbar in August 1542, when that officer was directed to blow up the house
of Edrington, otherwise known as Cawmills, a small stronghold in the parish
of Mordington, not far from the English border. This fortalice had been,
ten years previously, during the troubles with England, and while in the
hands of Sir George Douglas of Pittendriech, a cause of considerable annoy-
ance to the Scots, although in a partly ruinous condition. At a later date,
1534, it was restored to Scotland, but as war was now, in 1542, again declared,
1 Statistical Account of Scotland, 1S45, pp. 77, 78.
vol. ix. Kiughorn, p. 809. 3 Memoirs of Sir James Melville of Hall-
2 Cf. vol. ii. of this work, p. 2 ; vol. iii. hill, Bannatyne Club eJ., p. 12.
54 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
it was deemed necessary to destroy the building, though this was at variance
with royal letters issued shortly before directing the laird of the Bass to
'-' kepe Edrington." *
There is thus evidence that at least towards the later years of the king's
reign, Sir John Melville was held in good estimation, and there can be no
doubt that he had many friends among those in office or in attendance on the
Court. James Kirkcaldy of Grange, who was high treasurer during the last
five years of the king's reign, was Sir John's son-in-law. Another friend was
Mr. Henry Balnaves, appointed in 1538 a senator of the college of justice,
and also holding office about the Court. A third intimate was Sir John,
or Captain Borthwick, one of those appointed by King James the Fifth
to attend Sir Balph Sadler, the English ambassador, during his stay in
Scotland in the beginning of 1540. The king's physician, Michael Durham,
also appears to have ranked among Sir John's associates, and others
might be added, though with less certainty, including probably Sir James
Learmonth of Dairsie, master of the royal household.2 From his intimacy
with these men, each of whom had more or less interest with the king, it is
probable that Sir John Melville also shared in the royal favour. But it is of
more importance to note that his association in this group connected him
with the earliest stirrings of the Reformation in Scotland, of which the
persons named were among the first and most active adherents.
Henry Balnaves had been educated abroad, and in his travels on the
Continent had imbibed the new doctrines. As he was a native of Kirk-
caldy, he knew Sir John Melville, and after his return to Scotland, before
1535, was frequently at Baith, where he appears to have met a congenial
spirit.3 Sir John Borthwick also appears to have returned to Scotland
shortly before Sadler's embassy, having been an ensign or lieutenant in the
1 Order to the captain of Dunbar, 15th Grange), interested themselves in Sir John
August 1542, vol. ii. of this work, p. 2. Melville's affairs, appears by a friendly letter
Treasurer's accounts, 7th August 1542, quoted from the king, who states that they had in-
by Pitcairn, vol. i. p. 324*. formed him as to the proposed marriage of Sir
2 Cf. Calderwood's Historie of the Kirk of John's eldest son. [3d April 1541, vol. ii.
Scotland, vol. i. p. 158; Sadler's State Papers, of this work, p. 2.]
vol. i. p. 19 ; vol. iii. of this work, p. 89.
That the master of household (Sir James 3 Calderwood's Historie of the Kirk of
Learmonth), and the treasurer (Kirkcaldy of Scotland, vol. i. p. 158.
ATTACHMENT TO THE REFORMATION CAUSE. 55
Scottish archer guard of the King of France.1 The other friends of Sir John
Melville named were also well affected to the Eeformation doctrines, and he
and they thus became obnoxious to the clergy, although Sir John Borthwick,
perhaps because he was less immediately under the royal patronage, was the
first of Sir John Melville's intimates to suffer for his opinions. On 28th May
1540, he was summoned before an ecclesiastical court at St. Andrews and
found guilty of having the New Testament in English, the works of Erasmus,
and other writings reputed heretical, in his possession. He was condemned
to death, but made his escape to England, where he resided for many years.
This persecution, and others organised against heresy in the years 1539-40,
were directed mainly by the influence of Cardinal David Beaton, who had
succeeded his uncle, Archbishop James Beaton, in the see of St. Andrews.
Under his guidance the clergy prepared, it is said, a list of upwards of three
hundred noblemen, gentlemen, and burgesses, whom they accused of holding-
heretical opinions. This list the prelates presented to King James, urging
him to confiscate the estates of those named. The laird of Baith, his son-
in-law, and other Fifeshire gentlemen, were included in this list, but fortun-
ately for him and them, when it was first shown to the king, he rejected it.
Knox, followed by Calderwood, states that it was about July 1540, after
the return of King James from a voyage to Orkney and the Western Isles,
that the list in question was presented and rejected. According to these
writers, Kirkcaldy was then held in much esteem by the king, and not only
persuaded him to refuse the demand of the clergy, but spoke so plainly
regarding the abuses in church and state caused by their ambition and
licentious lives that the king gave a wrathful answer to the prelates,
threatening them with punishment if they did not reform their own lives
and cease to be instruments of discord between him and his nobility.2 This
utterance is said to have been made at Holyrood-house, but in a letter
of the period it is reported that such a conversation took place at Linlith-
gow. Sir David Lindsay's celebrated satire of " The Three Estates "
1 His name appears in the rolls of the Scots Guards of France from 1529 to 1539, when
he left that service. [The Scots Guards in France, by William Forbes-Leith, vol. ii.
pp. 120-132.]
2 Knox's History, Laing's ed., vol. i. p. 82 ; Calderwood, vol. i. pp. 146, 147.
56
SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
was performed in presence of the Court, and so impressed the king that
after the play was finished he specially rebuked certain of the prelates
and urged them to reform.1 This was in January 1540, some months before
the alleged presentation of the list, but the story told by Knox is not
improbable, as King James the Fifth more than once dealt sternly with
his clergy.2
But though the clerical demand was set aside for the time, it was not
abandoned, and was again brought forward at a time when the king was
less inclined to resist. In October 1542, King James, embroiled with his
uncle, King Henry the Eighth, had mustered an army on Fala-moor with
intent to invade England, when his nobility and barons refused to follow
him on such an errand. In his rage at their refusal, his desire to humble
them was so strong that it is said he now accepted the proposal of the clergy,
renewed at this juncture, expressing his regret that he had so long despised
their counsel. Every effort was then made by the clergy to further the
king's wishes by an expedition which was to be commanded by their nominee,
the king's minion, Oliver Sinclair, who undertook the enterprise only to cast
it miserably away on the shore of the Solway Firth. The king, seeing
all his hopes frustrated of invading England and humbling his nobility,
sank under the disgrace, and died in little more than a fortnight after the
rout of Solway, and the scroll, upon which the clergy founded their hopes of
aggrandisement, was found in his pocket after his death.3 Knox tells us
1 Letter, Sir William Eure to Thomas
Cromwell, enclosing a note of the " Inter-
lude," 26th January 1540, printed in Pin-
kerton, vol. ii. pp. 494-497.
- Cf. letter, 24th March 1536, from Archi-
bald, Earl of Angus, to his brother George
Doudas, in which he says the clergy of Scot-
land were " newer sa ewyll content " as they
then were at a charge made to them by the
king requiring them to relax their extortions.
[The Douglas Book, by Sir William Fraser,
K.C.B., vol. iv. pp. 143, 144.]
3 Knox's History, Laing's ed., vol. i.
pp. 82-92 ; Calderwood's History, vol. i.
pp. 144-151 ; Sadler's State Papers, vol. i.
p. 94; Keith's History, edition 1734, pp. 12,
21. Historians differ as to the number of
names included in this list. Knox and Cal-
derwood say it contained the names of one
hundred landed men, besides others of lower
rank. Buchanan gives the number of three
hundred, while Sadler says plainly, on the
authority of the Regent Arran himself, that
there were three hundred and sixty in all.
Bishop Keith doubts the story of its being
found in the king's pocket, as he thinks Car-
dinal Beaton would have destroyed it, but he
overlooks the fact that the cardinal hoped
himself to have the supreme power.
DEATH AND TESTAMENT OF KING JAMES THE FIFTH.
57
that after the defeat, the king, being ashamed to look any one in the face,
departed secretly to Fife, where, among other places, he visited Hallyards,
then occupied by his treasurer, Kirkcaldy of Grange. The latter was absent,
but his oldest son, William, afterwards the famous partisan of Queen Mary,
with a few others, waited upon the unfortunate monarch, and Lady Grange,
the daughter of Sir John Melville, an " ancient and godly matron," received
him courteously, and strove to comfort him with kindly words. But the
king's only reply was, " My portion of this world is short, for I will not
be with you fifteen days," and to his servants he said, " Ere Yule clay ye
will be masterless and the realm without a king."1 His forebodings were
fulfilled, for he expired in his palace of Falkland on the 16th December
1542.2
Immediately after the death of King James, Cardinal Beaton caused
himself and three colleagues, the Earls of Moray, Huntly, and Argyll, to be
proclaimed governors of the kingdom, alleging in support of this act a testa-
mentary settlement or will of the late king. Had this project succeeded it
would have "one hard with Sir John Melville and others who had embraced
the reformed doctrines, but the alleged testament was declared to be a forgery,
or to have been fraudulently obtained, and James, Earl of Arran, the second
person in the kingdom, was appointed governor.3 The crafty cardinal was
1 Knox's History, Laing's ed., vol. i. p.
90. Calderwood, vol. i. p. 151. Kirkcaldy
of Grange received a feu-charter of Hall-
yards, in Fife, and other lands, from the
abbot of Dunfermline, on loth October 1539
[Ptegistrum Magni Sigilli, vol. iii. No. 2264].
"Ancient," as here applied to the Lady of
Grange, must mean experienced, wise, or
sagacious, as she could not have been much
more than forty years of age.
2 Various dates have been assigned for
the death of King James the Fifth. The
14th December has been commonly accepted
by historians, but if the treasurer's accounts
be correct he expired on the 16th December,
and this date is corroborated by the regnal
years of the charters in the next reign,
[Registrum Magni Sigilli, vol. iii. p. 661.
VOL. I.
note, et seq. passim.]
3 These facts are stated by all historians,
but the allegation made against Cardinal
Beaton of founding on an illegal document
has been corroborated by the recent discovery,
in the Hamilton charter-chest, of a notarial in-
strument purporting tobe a formal appointment
by King James the Fifth of the cardinal, the
Earl of Moray (a natural brother of the king),
and the Earls of Huntly and Argyll, as tutors-
testamentary to the infant Princess Mary,
and governors of the realm during her
minority. This writ, which was no doubt
taken possession of at the time by the Regent
Arran, is dated 14th December 1542, two
days, apparently, before the death of the
king, and is written in due form by the sub-
scribing notary, Henry Balfour. Balfour had
58
SIB JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
imprisoned in the castle of Blackness, and though many of the priests, of
whom he was the ecclesiastical head, ceased to officiate, and thus endeavoured
to put the kingdom under excommunication, he had eventually to submit.
During the first year of the government of Arran the reformed opinions
spread rapidly, being greatly assisted by the Act of Parliament permitting
the use of the Old and New Testaments in the vernacular, an Act which
was promoted by Sir John Melville's friend, Henry Balnaves. But ere
the close of 1543 Arran went over to the party of the cardinal, who was
appointed lord chancellor, and virtually became supreme in the state. The
laws against heretics were re-enacted, and persecutions increased in number,
culminating in the burning at the stake of the famous preacher, George
Wishart.
This event was closely followed by the death of Cardinal Beaton himself,
under circumstances so well known that they need not be related here, the
rather as Sir John Melville was not one of the actual perpetrators of the
tragedy. It cannot, indeed, be clearly ascertained how far Sir John con-
tributed to the death of the cardinal. It was afterwards charged against him
that more or less from the death of Xing James the Fifth, and particularly
during the first six months of 1546, he was a strong supporter of King Henry
the Eighth's designs upon Scotland. This was probably true, as many who
inclined to the reformed doctrines were favourable to the English alliance.
But no charge was made of complicity in the murder of Beaton, nor is Sir
John named in the letters of summons directed against the assassins and
other conspirators.1 There is, indeed, a sentence in an important letter
apparently been in the king's service as a
chaplain [Treasurer's accounts, 1536, Pitcairn,
vol. i. p. 286*], but Buchanan styles him a
" mercenary priest," and openly charges him
with forgery, while Knox and Calderwood so
correctly describe the contents of the docu-
ment, though denouncing it as fraudulent,
that it is evident they refer to this writ, upon
the back of which is written in a contempo-
rary hand, " Schir Henry Balfour instrument,
that was never notar," implying that he was
not recognised as a regular notary public,
although using that title in the king's pre-
tended will. The existence of this writ,
bearing out in every detail the assertions of
contemporary historians, renders it highly
probable that their statements regarding the
scroll already referred to, and the existence
of which has been doubted, are correct, and
that it also was an authentic document,
though it may not have been preserved.
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
vol. ii. p. 477.
HIS LIFE SOUGHT BY CARDINAL BEATON. 59
written at a later date by Sir John himself, where he refers to something
done that was " plesand " to King Henry, and for which he expected reward.
This might he construed as a reference to the cardinal's death, but his
accusers did not treat it in that light, looking upon it rather as a general
furthering of King Henry's policy.1 On the other hand, the laird of Eaith
could scarcely have been ignorant of the plots which for two years previously
had been entertained for the removal of the cardinal. In April 1544, the
Earl of Hertford wrote to King Henry the Eighth that the laird of Grange,
late treasurer of Scotland, the Master of Eothes, and others would attempt
to take or kill the cardinal in one of his progresses through Fife, and they
only waited the English king's approbation and assistance.2 The laird of
Grange, who had been deprived of his office by the influence of Beaton, and
probably nursed revenge, was, as already stated, Sir John Melville's son-in-
law, and though the project was deferred, or passed into other hands for a
time, he was one of those who eventually carried it out, while among the
other conspirators were several of the name of Melville, including a natural
son of Sir John himself.3
Crawfurd, indeed, in his Peerage, but on what authority does not appear,
alleges that a strong enmity existed on the part of the cardinal against Sir
John Melville, because the latter was so devoted to the reformed religion.
It is stated that Sir John was accused of heresy by Beaton, and would have
fallen a victim had not King James interposed, and that when this plan
failed, the cardinal afterwards strove to gain his end by hiring some ruffians
to waylay Melville and assassinate him, the laird being saved only by the
number and courage of his retainers.4 It may be suggested that the
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 87, 88. actual murderers were only three in number,
2 Letter, 17th April 1544, State Papers, John Leslie of Parkhill, Peter Carmiehael of
Henry vin. vol. v. p. 377 ; History of Scot- Balmadie, and James Melville. The last
land by J. H. Burton, vol. iii. p. 25S. named, who gave the cardinal his death-blow,
3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ii. has sometimes been confounded with the
p. 377. It may here be noted that though the laird of Eaith, but appears to have been one
laird of Grange, his son William, and several of the Melvilles of Carnbee. So Spottiswood,
of his family, and various Mel villes, besides the quoted by Laing. [Cf. Laing's ed. of Knox,
Master of Rothes and others, were among the vol. i. p. 23±note, and pp. 174-177, for account
conspirators who entered the castle of St. of Beaton's murder.]
Andrews with intent to kill Beaton, the * Crawfurd's Peerage, pp. 324, 325.
60 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OP B.AITH.
foundation for this narrative is an erroneous version of that encounter
between Sir John Melville and Moultray of Seafield, in which Archbishop
Beaton figured, as detailed on a former page, were it not that Knox gives
currency to a story of a similar character. In May 1546, there were fears
entertained of an English invasion on the east coast of Scotland, and Cardinal
Beaton summoned the barons and gentlemen of Fife, including Sir John
Melville and some of his neighbours, to meet at Falkland to ride with him
to visit the coast and prepare for defence. So Lindsay of Pitscottie and
Buchanan tell us, but Knox and Calderwood state that under this purpose
the cardinal concealed another, which was discovered after his death, namely,
to get into his power Norman and John Leslie, the laird of Grange, Sir
John Melville, " the faythfull lard of Baith," as Knox styles him, and others,
who might be slain or imprisoned at pleasure. This statement may imply
that Beaton was aware of the plots against his own life, and wished to be
beforehand with the conspirators, yet it is possible that it was not considera-
tion for his own personal safety which prompted this enterprise, but a deter-
mination to prevent the gentlemen named from giving active assistance to
the threatened invasion. It may be to this alleged plot of the cardinal
that Crawfurd refers, but, whatever were the prelate's intentions, they were
forestalled by the tragedy which ended his own life, two days before that
appointed for the meeting at Falkland.1
In the events which followed upon the death of the cardinal, Sir John
Melville, if he did not take a prominent part, was yet not an uninterested
spectator. As is well known, the conspirators, when they found themselves
in possession of the castle of St. Andrews, determined to hold it against the
government. Their original number was only sixteen, but they were rapidly
reinforced by their friends, and the castle became, within a few days after the
slaughter of Beaton, a virtual Cave of Adullam for many who sympathised
with that deed, and for others who believed themselves obnoxious to the
regent and queen dowager. Such persons, to the number of about one
1 Lindsay's History, ed. 1778, p. 297 ; papers found in his chamber, and by the
Buchanan, Aikinan's ed., ii. p. 359 ; Knox's evidence of certain of his council. The meet-
History, vol. i. p. 174 ; Calderwood, vol. i. p. ing was appointed for Monday, 31st May
221. Knox and Calderwood state that the 1546, while the cardinal was slain on 29th
cardinal's designs were made known b3' May.
SIEGE OF THE CASTLE OF ST. ANDREWS. 61
hundred and forty, flocked to St. Andrews, where they completed the fortifica-
tions, nearly finished by the cardinal, and otherwise prepared for defence.
The governor and his council, after in vain summoning the holders of the
castle to appear before them, resolved upon a siege, which was begun towards
the end of August 1546, and dragged on without success until December of
the same year.
In that month the governor, by the advice of his council, accepted certain
overtures which the besieged made for negotiation, and an armistice or
arrangement was come to by which hostilities were postponed for a time,
although it would appear that neither party intended to fulfil the agreement.
The garrison had, about a month previously, requested Mr. Henry Balnaves
and another to ask for assistance from King Henry the Eighth, and wrote a
narrative of the facts, to be shown to that king.1 From this narrative we learn
the position which Sir John Melville occupied amid the contending parties.
The garrison, while they admit that the agreement on their part was only a
pretext to gain time, state that the other side had threatened, if they refused
an armistice, to seize four of their "most spetial freyndis," and to put some of
them to death and the others in prison. One of these special friends was the
laird of Eaith, and it thus appears that he was looked upon by the besieged
as their staunch friend, while he was obnoxious to the government. No other
record of him, however, occurs in connection with the siege, which was only
terminated on 31st July 1547 by the surrender of the garrison.2
This result was effected by the agency of a French fleet, to the commander
of which the besieged capitulated and were carried to France as prisoners.
In connection with this, Sir John Melville's influence and sympathy with the
garrison was taken advantage of by the Scottish government at a later date.
1 Henry Balnaves was not one of the ori- 2 Calderwood's History, vol. i. pp. 225,
ginal sixteen conspirators, nor did he join 226, 240 ; State Papers (Henry vin.), vol. v.
them immediately after the death of the car- p. 581. The other friends of the besieged
dinal, as asserted by some ; he continued to who were threatened were Balfour of Mont-
sit in the Privy Council until 3d August quhanie, Crichton of Naughton, and Ramsay
1546. He went to England in November of Colluthie. The death of King Henry the
1546, and the negotiations referred to began Eighth, on 28th January 1547, soon after the
on 16th December of that year. [Register communication was made, postponed the hope
of the Privy Council, vol. i. p. 33 ; Diurnal of of aid from England.
Occurrents, p. 43.]
62 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF EAITH.
Among the Scottish nobles taken prisoner at Solway Moss was Malcolm, Lord
Fleming, who was released from captivity on giving a bond to further King
Henry's schemes for an alliance between Scotland and England, and leaving
his son James, Master of Fleming, behind him as a hostage. Before a year
had passed Lord Fleming joined the party of Cardinal Beaton and repudi-
ated the English alliance, declaring also that he would never go back to
England whatever became of his son. He also, it is said, paid the sum of
£1000 fixed for his ransom, and so released himself from obligation to the
English king.1 Malcolm, Lord Fleming, was killed at Pinkie in September
1547, while his son was still detained in England, and it was for the release
of that son, now James, Lord Fleming, that the Scottish government, in June
1548, desired Sir John Melville to interest himself. The mode proposed for
obtaining Lord Fleming's freedom appears to have been that one of those
gentlemen who had been carried from the castle of St. Andrews to a French
prison should be released thence and take the place of Lord Fleming in
England. As this implied the consent of the French government, the appli-
cation was doubtless made at this time in view of the fact that Lady Fleming,
mother of the hostage, was governess of the young Queen of Scotland, whom
it was proposed to send to France, and who did sail thither about two months
later. It was evidently intended that Sir John Melville should be the
medium of communication with the prisoner from St. Andrews who was to
be exchanged for Lord Fleming, and with this view he received a letter from
the Governor Arran, authorising him to write to England to make the neces-
sary arrangements.2 The immediate result of his efforts has not been ascer-
tained. James, Lord Fleming, had indeed returned to Scotland in 1550, but
this may have been only the effect of the peace concluded in April of that
year.
"We now approach the closing tragedy of Sir John Melville's own life,
who, within six months from the date of the regent's letter, was accused of
treason and beheaded. The fact, and the cause of it, have been variously
1 "Biggar and the House of Fleming," by W. Hunter, pp. 513, 514. The statement
that the ransom money was paid is somewhat doubtful, since the hostage was detained
so long.
2 Vol. iii. of this work, p. S6. 1st June 1548.
CHARGED WITH TREASON, 1548. 63
related by contemporary and more modern historians, and it has been referred
to as perhaps one of the most remarkable of the too frequent instances of
judicial murder which unhappily disfigure our early Scottish annals.1 The
author who thus writes, however, admits that the circumstances have hitherto
been little known. The three earliest historians who refer to Sir John
Melville's fate are Knox, Buchanan, and Calderwood, and these differ in their
account of the cause which led to his apprehension and conviction. Buchanan
and Calderwood state that certain letters which Sir John had written to an
Englishman on behalf of a prisoner, a friend of his, were intercepted, and led
to his arrest,2 but this is evidently an erroneous version of the application
made for Lord Fleming, which was duly authorised. Knox is more correct
when he says that Melville suffered because he wrote a letter to his son,
John Melville, then in England. All these writers, however, agree in
representing that Sir John was innocent of any crime, while Knox and
Calderwood attribute his fate to the enmity of two churchmen. The first of
these was John Hamilton, natural brother of the Begent Arran, an ambitious
prelate, then abbot of Paisley and bishop of Dunkeld, afterwards archbishop
of St. Andrews ; the other being George Durie, commendator of Dunfermline,
Melville's feudal superior. It is alleged that these two men sought Sir John's
death because he was known to be a favourer of the Beformation, and a friend
to those who had held the castle of St. Andrews. This view has been adopted
by a modern writer, who, after commenting on the rigorous and tyrannical
conduct of Arran and his brother against those barons and others who
favoured the reformed religion, states that instead of attempting to prosecute
such for heresy the authorities preferred to try them for alleged crimes
against the state. Among other instances he notices Sir John Melville's case
in terms which give a fair summary of the opinions of all the historians who
have narrated it — " Sir John Melville of Baith, a gentleman of distinguished
probity, and of untainted loyalty, was accused of a traitorous connection with
the enemy ; and although the only evidence adduced in support of the charge
was a letter written by him to one of his sons, then in England, and although
1 Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, vol. i. p. *339. p. 378 ; Calderwood, vol. i. p. 262. These
two writers are also wrong in the date they
2 Buchanan's History, Aikman's ed. vol. ii. assign to Sir John's death.
64 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
this letter contained nothing criminal, yet was he unjustly condemned and
beheaded."1
It is to be observed, however, that while, as will be shown, there is con-
siderable ground for the indignation expressed by the careful and accurate
writer quoted, he yet relies for his information on the accounts of earlier
historians, and does not appear to have seen the letter of Sir John Melville
to which he refers. The criminal records of that period which are extant are
mutilated and imperfect, and no evidence bearing on this trial has been
discovered amongst them.2 All former statements on the subject of Sir John
Melville's conviction have therefore been founded on imperfect knowledge of
the details of the accusation against him, only now supplied from two docu-
ments preserved in the family charter-chest, and printed at length in another
volume of this work. Although, being from official sources, these writs do
not give any clue to the secret or personal motives which may have inspired
the action against Sir John, they yet throw a clearer light upon the main
facts of the case than has hitherto been attainable. The papers in question
are, first, a contemporary official extract from the records of justiciary
narrating the trial and sentence, with a certified copy of the letter upon
which the charge was founded ; while the second writ is likewise an official
copy of the act of parliament rescinding the forfeiture of Sir John Melville's
estates, which also recapitulates the proceedings of his condemnation.3
From these papers it will be seen that Knox is correct in his statement
of the charge made against Sir John Melville. Reference has already been
made to a natural son of Sir John, who was apparently one of the original
sixteen conspirators against the life of Cardinal Beaton, and one of the
garrison of St. Andrews. This man, also named John Melville, appears to
have left the castle before its surrender and settled in England, where he
seems to have been an emissary of the Protector Somerset, and whence he
kept up communication with his father and other friends in Scotland. It
was a letter which Sir John Melville had written to this son, at a critical time
1 M'Crie's Life of Knox, 3d ed. ; vol. i. Parliament, 4tli June 1563, vol. iii. of this
pp. 163, 164. work, pp. S6-90, 102-108. The first of these
2 Pitcairn's Crimiual Trials, vol. i. p. *339. writs was probably supplied officially, when
3 Official extract from books of justiciary, Sir John Melville's children and friends ob-
13th December 154S; and extract Act of tained the second from parliament.
THE LETTER TO HIS SON, JOHN MELVILLE. 65
in the struggle then going on between England and Scotland, which fell into
the governor's hands, and brought Sir John to the block. In this letter,
written in January 1548, the writer informs his son of the chief military
events then taking place in Scotland, and specially notes that the Earl of
Argyll was advancing upon Dundee, then in the hands of the English. He
distinctly expresses his sympathy with the army invading Scotland, and
suggests to his son how he might gain intelligence for the Protector Somerset.
He then refers to their friends in France and others of the late garrison
of St. Andrews, and concludes with good wishes to comrades in England.1
These are the main points in the letter, but to understand their signifi-
cance, and the effect of such a document made public at the probable date
of its discovery by the authorities, it is necessary to glance briefly at the
history of the period, and the state of affairs then existing between Scotland
and England. After the death of King James the Fifth, the English
king, Henry the Eighth, earnestly endeavoured to bring about a marriage
between his son and the infant Queen of Scotland. In his proposals
to this end he was supported by a strong party in Scotland, including some
of the most prominent men in that country, notably the Douglases, the Earls
of Cassillis, Glencairn, and many others, who also more or less favoured the
reformed religion. But owing to the violent manner in which King Henry,
and, after his death, the Protector Somerset, strove to further their purposes,
most of the Scottish nobility and others who had favoured the English
alliance, drew back, and either renounced their engagements with the English
king, or, if they still maintained correspondence with him, held themselves
ready to resist any invasion of Scotland. More especially was this the case
after the battle of Pinkie, in September 1547, when the Scots suffered a
severe defeat, and the English fleet seized Broughty Castle on the Tay, and
the island of Inchcolm in the Firth of Forth. Besides this, a few months
later, in the beginning of 1548, another English force, under Lord Grey
of Wilton, overran a great part of the south of Scotland almost to
the gates of Edinburgh, seizing Dalkeith Castle and other strongholds. In
August of the same year the war was renewed with greater intensity on the
part of the English, who burned Dundee, seized Dunbar, and endeavoured to
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 89.
VOL. I. I
66 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF EAITH.
land in Fife, but were repulsed with loss. All this hostility embittered the
Scots, and the bitterness engendered between the two nations expressed
itself in the following year, if not earlier, in a proclamation by the Governor
Arran that every Scotsman serving the King of England should be slain as
soon as taken, which was met by a retaliatory order that every Scotsman
taken prisoner by the English should be killed without ransom until Arran
should revoke his proclamation.1
These orders were apparently issued after Sir John Melville's death, but
they sufficiently indicate the bitterness which had infused itself into the
minds of the Scots, and which, perhaps, more than any other cause, led to
his execution, and to the death or forfeiture of others on similar grounds.
That Sir John Melville bad a strong leaning to the English alliance is proved
by all the various glimpses we have of his doings since the year 1542,
especially his sympathy with those who formed the garrison of St. Andrews.
It was unfortunate for himself, therefore, that the discovery of the letter to
his son proved that even after the battle of Pinkie, and while Scotland was
invaded both by sea and land, instead of desiring to repel the enemy, he was,
on the contrary, well inclined to their presence in his neighbourhood. This
was written when Broughty Castle and the island of Inchcolm were in
English occupation, and Sir John Melville complains that his power was not
equal to his will to assist the invaders, as his neighbours around are
" unfaythf ull," and have caused the government to be " extreme " to him
and his friends. There is, therefore, not much reason to wonder that the
discovery of a letter containing such sentiments led to Sir John's being
accused of treason, and suffering accordingly.
How the letter fell into the hands of the authorities is not clear. Knox
states that it was alleged to have been found in the house of Ormiston.
Were this so, it would agree with the terms of the letter itself, in which
Melville refers to the laird of Ormiston and others as his friends, and speci-
ally names him as the channel of communication with England. John Cock-
burn, laird of Ormiston, is well known to history as the friend and supporter
of the martyr Wishart, but he was also an active partisan of the English,
and, as extant documents show, he was in constant correspondence with the
1 State papers quoted by Tytler, History, vol. iv. pp. 481, 482, app. L.
HOW THE LETTER WAS DISCOVERED. 67
Protector Somerset or Lord Grey of Wilton, while a kinsman or namesake,
Captain Ninian Cockburn, acted as their paid emissary.1 At the very date
on which Melville's letter was written to be forwarded through him, Cock-
burn was in close alliance with Lord Grey, then preparing to enter Scotland
with an army. When Grey did invade the Lothians, Ormiston joined him
openly and received command of the tower of Salton, near his own residence
in East Lothian, a small fortalice which had fallen into possession of the
English. This post, however, was suddenly surprised by the Governor Arran,
who also took and burned Ormiston's own house, a fact which Lord Grey
himself announces to the Protector Somerset.2 This was in February 1548, a
few weeks after the date of Melville's letter ; and if that document was
found in the house of Ormiston, it would be conclusive evidence to the
authorities that Melville and Cockburn were in the same confederacy.
One difficulty presents itself in regard to this theory, that the attack on
Ormiston took place in the beginning of the year 1548, and Sir John Mel-
ville's trial was in December of that year, while, as has been shown, he was
in the interval still in credit with the government, which suggests that the
letter was still a secret. Knox, however, gives an alternative theory that in
regard to the document many suspected the trickery and craft of Eingan or
Ninian Cockburn, now (says Knox) called Captain Ninian, to whom the paper
was delivered.3 The history of this Ninian Cockburn is very obscure, but he
had been one of those summoned for connivance in the murder of Cardinal
Beaton, and was at this time an emissary or spy on behalf of the English
generals. It is of some importance to note that in January 1549, a month
after Sir John Melville's death, the name of Eingan Cockburn appears on the
rolls of the Scottish Archer Guard of France, suggesting that he had then
made his escape from Scotland. There he remained abroad until 1565, when
he again appeared in Scotland in the suite of Mons. Mauvissiere, the Sieur
de Castelnau, who in that year came as an ambassador from France, to act as
1 Thorpe's Calendar of State Papers, Scot- their escape from Scotland, and though their
land, vol. i. pp. 67-81 passim, cf. p. 69. estates were forfeited at the same time with
2 Ibid. p. 81 ; cf. the Frasers of Philorth, those of Sir John Melville, they were after-
Lords Saltoun, vol. ii. pp. 55-57. The laird wards restored to their lands and played a
of Ormiston, and another active agent of the prominent part in the Reformation.
English part}', Crichton of Brunstane, made 3 Knox's History, Laing's ed., vol. i. p. 224.
68 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
mediator between Queen Mary and her turbulent nobles. In this connection
Captain Cockburn acted as the agent of Cecil, the famous minister of Queen
Elizabeth.1 Sir James Melville of Hallhill describes Cockburn as " a busy
medler,"2 and it is therefore probable he was one of those restless men, who
take advantage of a disturbed state of society to serve many masters, and play
many parts. Be this as it may, and although Sir John Melville may have
been a victim of treachery, or sacrificed to facilitate the escape of others in
whom he trusted too implicitly, it yet cannot, on a calm view of his letter
and the charges founded on it, be alleged that he was altogether guiltless of
treasonable practices.
He was arrested some time before the 3d of December 1548,3 and was
brought to trial ten days afterwards. Crawfurd, in his Peerage, says that on
the discovery of the letter it was shown to the archbishop of St. Andrews.4
From another source we learn that it was by that prelate's orders Sir John
was suddenly seized, and sent a prisoner to Edinburgh, where he was strictly
confined. He was tried by a jury, chiefly composed of Fifeshire lairds, some
of them Sir John's immediate neighbours. The judges were Andrew Ker of
Dolphingston, then provost of Edinburgh, and Patrick Barroun of Spittal-
field. The charges preferred against Sir John were six in number, and they
were all founded, not on the evidence of witnesses, as alleged by some, but
upon this letter to his son, which was produced in Court, and which, accord-
ing to the indictment, Sir John Melville acknowledged himself to have
written.
The first count against the accused charged him with treasonably
receiving treasonable writings sent to him in October, November, December,
and January 1547-8, by his natural son, John Melville, from England,
desiring him, to the prejudice of his own sovereign, to aid the captains of the
1 The Scots Guards in France, by W. 4 Crawfurd's Peerage, p. 325. The "bishop
Forbes Leith, vol. ii. pp. 146-168 passim; of St. Andrews" referred to was John Haruil-
Thorpe's Calendar of State Papers, Scotland, ton, natural brother of the Regent Arran, who
pp. 221, 227, 827, etc. was then bishop of Dunkeld. Crawfurd mis-
2 Memoirs, Bannatyne Club, p. 20. dates the trial by a year, placing it in 1549,
3 Letters were sent on 3d and 5th Decern- but in this he follows other historians. Craw-
ber 1548 to summon a jury to sit in Edin- furd also places the scene of the trial at Stir-
burgh. [Treasurer's Accounts, Pitcairn, vol. i. ling, but this is disproved by extant writs.
341*.]
THE COUNTS OF HIS INDICTMENT. C9
English garrisons in Broughty Castle and Inchcolm. This was declared to
be proved by the first sentence of the letter, in which Sir John acknowledged
receipt of letters from his son, to the effect stated, while he regretted his
inability to express his goodwill to the English enterprise. The second
charge was, his treasonably concealing the treasonable writings from the
authorities, while the third count was his sending a reply to such writings,
of which last the letter itself was produced as proof, wherein he also counselled
his son to serve the English well, and not to trust to any kindness in Scot-
land as long as the then government lasted. The fourth charge accused Sir
John of furthering the evil and mischievous purposes of King Henry the
Eighth against Scotland, in the months of January, February, March, April,
and May 1546, in hope of receiving a reward from the English king. The
evidence adduced in support of this was Sir John's own words to his son
that his good friends the lairds of Ormiston and Montquhanie (Balfour), and
Ninian Cockburn, could tell what his part had been since the field (of Pinkie)
and before ; his good brethren and companions, Sir John Borthwick, Dr.
Durham, and John Leslie could testify of the first purpose being done that
was pleasing to King Henry, and he thought he should have been remem-
bered among the first. He then added as a piece of news that the Earl of
Argyll was marching strongly upon Dundee, advising his son that if the
Protector of England would permit him to enter Lothian he might obtain
much intelligence, and do good service to the English. Upon this the fifth
charge was founded, that Sir John had supplied intelligence to the enemy so
far as he could, continually since the death of King James the Fifth, and
specially in the month of January 1548, when the letter was written. The
letter concluded with notices of friends, remembrances to those in England,
advice to his son, and a promise that he would write to the laird of Ormiston
of things as they occurred, which was made the subject of the sixth and last
charge, that the intelligence thus conveyed was intended for the Protector
Somerset.1
These were the charges made against Sir John Melville, and of which he
was found guilty on 13th December 1548. On the face of the official docu-
ments, it is difficult to clear Sir John of the charge of treason, and it does
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 86-90, 103, 104.
70 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF KAITH.
not appear that the authorship of the letter was ever actually disproved.
But while this is so, and while the authorities were so far justified in pro-
ceeding against one whom they helieved to he a traitor, yet in fairness to Sir
John Melville and to those historians who have taken a lenient view of his
case, testimony from another contemporary source may now be produced,
which declares that whatever his offence, his apprehension, trial, and con-
demnation were attended by circumstances of special harshness and treachery.
This testimony is also embodied in an official document. In 1563 Sir John's
widow, Helen Napier, and her elder children, one of whom at least, Eobert
Melville, afterwards Sir Eobert Melville, was high in favour with Queen
Mary, petitioned the government to rescind the condemnation and sentence
of forfeiture pronounced against Sir John, and to rehabilitate him and them
by restoring the family estates. In answer to this a royal summons was
issued in the usual form, narrating the sentence and proceedings against
Melville, and requiring the judges, jurors, and others concerned to appear
before parliament to hear and see the sentence rescinded. It is from this
document, compiled no doubt from evidence supplied by Sir John Melville's
friends, that we obtain, besides the formal narrative of the trial, a remarkable
series of statements on behalf of Sir John, which are evidently the ground-
work of the charge against the authorities made by Knox and other historians.
As the writ was drawn up at a period many years after the trial, when the
reformers were in the ascendancy, and those against whom the summons was
chiefly directed were in exile or deprived of power, and as it contains what
may be called special pleas against the justice of Sir John's sentence, it is
necessarily somewhat partisan in tone, and its details may be given in an
exaggerated form.1 Yet the statements therein made, aided as they must
have been by living testimony, are not to be disregarded, and they tend to
support Knox's assertion regarding the enmity displayed by the two prelates
formerly named, John Hamilton, abbot of Paisley, and George Durie, corn-
mendator of Dunfermline.
As regards the former, the cause of his dislike to Sir John Melville is not
stated, but the enmity of Durie arose out of one of those family feuds then
so prevalent in Scotland, and one of which with the Moultrays of Seafield
1 Copies or drafts of summons, in Melville Charter-chest.
HIS TREACHEROUS APPREHENSION. 71
has already been referred to. In 1571, Sir John's grandson, the famous
Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange, addressed a letter to the kirk-session
of Edinburgh defending himself against a charge founded on a squabble in
which he had engaged with some of the Durie family at Dunfermline.
In that letter he states, as an excuse : " It is notoriously known that they
— the principals of the house of Durie — have done to me and mine many
great offences, grievous injuries, and exorbitant displeasures ; the principal
of that house being the chief author of the death and destruction of my
grandfather, the laird of Eaith, with the ruin of his house. And since then
have they not daily and continually molested us, his posterity and friends,
in our possessions?" etc.1 Allowing for a certain heat of anger in this
statement, it yet corroborates the evidence adduced on behalf of Sir John
Melville.
The pleadings contained in the royal summons declare that the sentence
should be rescinded on five grounds : — First, because the judges who tried
the case were not properly commissioned to do so ; second, because Sir John
was not properly nor legally summoned ; third, because he was deceived and
concussed into confessing that the letter founded on against him was written
by him, and did not make a voluntary confession ; fourth, that the letter in
question was written under privilege and licence ; and fifth, because the
verdict was not founded upon the exact terms of the letter adduced in sup-
port of the accusation.
Into every detail of the narrative in support of these five reasons it is not
necessary to enter ; the chief points of interest are those affecting Sir John's
apprehension and his treatment previous to trial, with the pressure whicli
was brought to bear upon the authorities against him. We are told that
instead of a legal warning being given, Sir John was, about fifteen days
before his trial, suddenly seized by the servants of John Hamilton, abbot of
Paisley, then treasurer of Scotland. This was done, it is said, while Sir
John, with only a few of his own retainers, was accompanying the treasurer
in friendly convoy towards Burntisland, on the " Clayness " sands. The
unsuspecting victim was so roughly seized and handled that he was not
allowed even once to look behind him. He was carried to the castle of
1 Bannatyne's Memoriales, Baunatyne Club ed., p. 7-1.
72 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF KAITH.
Edinburgh and confined there, without being formally charged with any
crime, and without knowing of what he was accused. He was further, it is
said, so straitly incarcerated that none of his friends or kin were allowed to
see or speak with him, nor could they inform him that he was to be tried
for his life, and he was thus deprived of all proper and legal means of
defending himself.
This, however, was not the worst part of his treatment. The narrative
proceeds, under its third head, to show bow George Durie, commendator of
Dunfermline, having conceived and rooted in his heart old rancour, deadly
hatred and malice, against Sir John, because of a long before contracted feud,
and other known causes, being his overlord, and in the hope of obtaining the
prisoner's lands, but specially for the true religion, which Sir John always
favoured, when he could attain his purpose by no other means, did so by
craft. Perceiving the opportunity a fit one for gratifying his revenge, he
very deceitfully came forward as a friend and adviser of the captive, and
represented himself to Sir John and his friends as desirous to procure his
release. He first, however, used his influence over the Governor Arran to
procure that Sir John should be sharply accused upon the terms of the letter,
having determined that Sir John should not escape, and that he would induce
him to confess writing the document, which was the sole ground of the
charges against him.
To effect this result, Durie, we are told, went to the castle of Edinburgh
to advise with Sir John, and, to make his visit more acceptable, he was
accompanied by some of Sir John's friends, and also by the prisoner's wife,
Helen Napier, who had hitherto been strictly refused all admission to her
husband. At the first meeting with the captive, Durie spoke in so homely
a manner that Sir John " believed him na less freindlie than he had bene
his father," saying, as is reported, " Quhat do ye sa ewill lyk, man, or
quhairupon pause ye ? I trow I wat quhat movis yow erest (soonest)
for the vreting of ane scabbit bill. Lat be and study na mair thairone, it is
bot ane triffill, and it can do yow na harm, nother anent your lyf nor lands,
howbeit it war nevir sa trew. If ye will use my counsaill, I sail varrand
yow upon my lyf and honour." Surprised by this friendly tone, and con-
sidering that the speaker was one of the Privy Council, and had great influ-
TREACHERY OF GEORGE DURIE, ABBOT OF DUNFERMLINE. 73
ence with the Eegent Arran, Melville asked his visitor what he should do.
The reply was that as Sir John had been taken, the governor thought it
necessary to make some show at least of accusing him, but there could be
nothing laid to his charge save the letter, and if he confessed that and sub-
mitted to the governor, Durie undertook that he would incur no danger. As
an alternative to this, Durie pointed out the effects of rousing the governor's
anger, and, without detailing the whole conversation, it is sufficient to state
that he by various arguments urged Sir John to accept his advice. Durie
further assured Sir John of his own friendly feeling towards him, and that
he had come to get an answer from him as to what he meant to do when the
letter was produced against him, the governor having promised that Sir John
should "aill nathing" if he confessed and submitted, but he wished a reply
ere he left.
At this stage of the interview Durie retired for a time, saying that he
would send certain friends, with whom Sir John might consult and advise in
the matter. These were John Wemyss, laird of Wemyss, Bonar of Eossie,
and Melville of Touch, all kinsmen of the prisoner, who said he would be
glad to have their counsel, in which he expressed confidence. They were
therefore admitted, Durie having told them of his proposal and recommended
its adoption, to which, all unconscious of treachery, they strongly advised
Melville. The latter was for a time very unwilling to accept this advice,
asking for what purpose he should admit or confess the thing he did not do,
but under the influence of his friends, the fear and terror of the misery he
had endured, and the strictness of his confinement having driven him almost
distracted, he at last consented to make confession, relying on the faith of
his friends and the promises made to him. No sooner did Durie learn this
than he hastened to the regent, and declared to him how Sir John was
willing to confess, and submit himself to Arran's will in the matter. On
hearing this, the governor was so moved with compassion that he could not
order Sir John to be put to death, nor would he be so cruel to " ane old agit
barroun of the realme," who was also a kinsman, even though the letter
appeared somewhat treasonable.
Thus foiled in his purpose, and fearing defeat, Durie, as a last resort,
went to the queen dowager, Mary of Guise, and Tepresented to her that Sir
VOL. I. K
74 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
John was a traitor, that he was willing to confess his treason, and yet that
the regent was not minded to punish him, but if this were not done those
who favoured England would ruin the kingdom. Thus urged, the queen
dowager took up the matter, and threatened to treat the governor as a
partisan of the English if Sir John was not proceeded against with rigour.1
The governor yielded, and Sir John was arraigned before a jury, who, as
already stated, gave a verdict against him.
Such is the story, as told by his friends, of the proceedings which led to
Sir John Melville's trial and execution. Even admitting that the facts stated
are set forth in the pleadings in a partial manner, it is to be remembered that
those friends who were the unconscious instruments of Sir John's fate were,
in 1563, still alive, and able to add their testimony. At that date also, as
will be more fully stated on a later page, George Dime, the prime mover in
the tragedy, had left Scotland, and they were free to state what they knew
of the matter. The details, so recited, confirm the general statement made
by Knox as to the iniquitous dealing with Sir John Melville, but are not
conclusive as to his actual guilt or innocence of the crime laid to his charge.
The remainder of the pleadings contained in the royal summons throw no
light on the point in question, as they state no new facts and do not cate-
gorically deny the alleged authorship of the letter on which the charge
was founded. We are told that many of the jurors were unfriendly to Sir
John, and also that, confiding in the promises made by Durie, he attempted
no defence, nor did he take the usual precautions to obtain, if possible, a fair
trial. But these statements prove nothing, and the source from which an
authoritative statement might have been expected is wholly silent on the
main question. The Act of parliament which, in terms ,of the summons
referred to, rehabilitated Sir John Melville and restored Eaith and other
estates to his family, proceeds merely on the technical ground that the judges
were incompetent to try the case, not having been specially commissioned
to do so. All the arguments advanced by his friends are thus passed over,
and while Durie's alleged treachery is not substantiated, Sir John himself is
1 There are several copies of the summons deleted, and it is only stated that the governor
in the Melville Charter-ohest, and in two of was gradually influenced to order Sir John to
these the reference to the queen dowager is be tried.
HIS DEATH DIVISION OF HIS ESTATES. 75
not formally exonerated — a course which may have been dictated by policy,
but which is unfortunate for the historian.
The sentence pronounced against Sir John Melville was followed on the
same day by his execution, in the brutal manner then in vogue, and, on the
following day, by the confiscation of all his lands and goods to the Crown.
On 14th December 1548, James Adamson and Mr. David Eamsay received a
royal grant of the escheat of the late Sir John Melville's moveable goods. A
special clause provided that if the deceased had in his possession any silver
work or gold work, or other goods belonging to the late Cardinal Beaton,
Norman Leslie, sometime Master of Eothes, James Kirkcaldy, sometime laird
of Grange, or any other person convicted or banished for holding or taking
part with the holders of the castle of St. Andrews, then the governor is to
pursue for such goods.1 This clause may have been inserted pro forma, but
if not, it shows how the government looked upon the relations which Sir
John Melville held with the murderers of Cardinal Beaton.
Besides the escheating of his moveable goods, Sir John Melville's landed
estates were forfeited. They were divided in larger or smaller shares
among various parties. Bobert Carnegie of Kinnaird, ancestor of the Earls
of Southesk, received Murdocairnie, which was held of the Crown.2 Pitscottie
and Dura passed to Mr. William Scott, son of Sir William Scott of Balwearie,
the superior ; while Bobert Carnegie and James Scott, brother of David Scott
of Spencerfield, divided betwixt them the leases of the lands of Prinlaws.3
The largest portion of Sir John's estates, however, consisting of Baith, Pitcon-
mark, and Torbain, was bestowed upon David Hamilton, third son of the
Begent Arran. These lands were held of the abbey of Dunfermline, of which
George Durie was commendator, and as superior he granted a charter accept-
ing Hamilton as a new tenant presented to him by the Crown, in place of
Sir John Melville.4
The fact that Baith was granted to the son of the governor may be claimed
as an argument in support of the assertion that Sir John Melville's fate was
1 Original letters of gift, dated 14th De- chest.
eember 154S, in Melville Charter-chest. 4 Copy charter, dated ]4th April 1549, in
2 Charter, dated 7th January 1549, Regis- Melville Charter-chest. Cf. P^egistrum de
truni Magni Sigilli, vol. iv. No. 267. Dunfermelyn, p. 396, and vol. iii. of this
3 Copy summons, 1563, in Melville Charter- work, p. 90.
76 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF KAITH.
brought about by sinister motives on the part of the governor and his advisers,
but all that is known on this point has already been stated. One charge,
however, which has been made, and coupled with the name of Archbishop
Hamilton, that Sir John Melville's wife and children were dispossessed of
their home with all the circumstances of barbarity which malice could
invent,1 is disproved by existing documents. Instead of being immediately
turned out of house and home, as this statement would imply, we find that
Helen Napier, Sir John's widow, was still in Kaith more than six months after
his death. Not only so, but she received from the regent, acting as tutor
to his son, then a minor, permission for herself and her children, to occupy
the house and lands of Eaith until the 1st November following, so that she
might in the meantime gather her goods and grain together, only stipulating
her removal at that date without injuring the property, and that she should
allow wheat to be sown on the regent's behalf.2 In fact, she remained in
the lands or part of them as tenant and occupier, and that, according to
her own evidence, by the tolerance of the regent.3 Further, about the same
time, David Hamilton, the new proprietor of Eaith, granted a new charter to
Katherine Melville, daughter of Sir John, receiving her in due form as his
tenant in the lands of Shawsmill, formerly held by her from her father, and
treating her in all respects like any other vassal. Archbishop Hamilton was pre-
sent when this writ was signed by the granter and his father.4 These facts, and
also the sending of Sir John Melville's third surviving son, James, to France,
under the patronage of the queen-dowager, about a year after his father's death,
seem to show that no undue severity was practised towards Sir John's family.
It may be noted that on the day after Sir John's trial, his friends, Cock-
burn of Ormiston and Crichton of Brunstane, who had both escaped, were
forfeited for the same offence of treason, and summonses were issued against
Henry Balnaves and others. They were active adherents of the reformed
faith, but as many others who are known to have been such were also con-
victed on political grounds, it is probable that the government, in the case of
Sir John Melville and his friends, gave expression rather to bitter feelings
against England than to religious persecution.
1 Crawfurrt's Peerage, p. 325. 3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 93, 94.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 2, 3. 4 1st July 1549, ibid. pp. 90, 91.
EPIGRAM BY JOHN JOHNSTON. 77
The fate of Sir John Melville was made the subject of an epigram by
John Johnston, a poet who wrote about half a century later, and who thus
celebrated the laird of Eaith among other Scottish heroes. It proceeds on
the assumption of his innocence.
Johannes Malvillus, Eethitjs,
Nobilis Fifanus, Jacobo V. Eegi, olini familiarissirnus summa vitas innocentia,
ob pur* relligionis studium in suspicione falsi criminis iniquissimo judicio
sublatus est, anno Christi, 1548.
Quidnam ego commerui 1 Quae tanta injuria facti 1
Hostis ut in nostrum sseviat ense caput 1
Idem hostis, judexque simul. Pro crimine, Christi
Eelligio et foedo crimine pura manus.
0 secla ! 0 mores ! scelerum sic tollere poenas
Ut virtus sceleri debita damna luat.1
Sir John Melville was twice married. His first wife, who has hitherto
been overlooked by genealogists, was, as already stated, a daughter of Sir
John Wemyss of that ilk. They were married about July 1503. Nothing
further has been discovered regarding Sir John Melville's first wife, but that
she had issue.
Sir John Melville's second wife was Helen Napier, who is said to have
been the daughter of Sir Alexander Napier of Merchiston.2 When they were
married has not been ascertained, but probably about the year 1525. She
survived her husband for several years. As already stated she received a
letter from the Eegent Arran, permitting her and her children to remain at
Eaith for some months after Sir John's death. At a later date she was still
occupant of the lands, as appears from a statement on her behalf in an appeal
against an ecclesiastical censure which bad been pronounced against her.
This arose out of a demand which was made upon her for payment of the
twelve merks of annual rent formerly referred to as bestowed by Sir John
1 " Heroes ex omni Historia Scotica Leetis- dura of the family, dated 1575, she is said to
simi," by John Johnston, 1603, pp. 2S, 29 ; be niece of the laird of Merchiston, and her
cf. Pitcairn, i. 341*. mother a daughter of the laird of Craigmillar.
2 So the genealogists ; but in a memoran- Neither statement has been verified.
78 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
Melville in 1506 on behalf of the deceased Thomas Moultray of Markinch,
and which was claimed for the year 1549 by a chaplain of the parish church
of Kinghorn. In support of his demand he procured letters of excommunica-
tion, against which Lady Melville appealed on the following grounds : First,
that she as occupier and cultivator of the lands over which the sum was
secured should not be required to pay it, because before Whitsunday 1549
the lands had fallen into the hands of the Eegent Arran and the abbot of
Dunfermline, as superiors, in consequence of the death of her husband, and
the subsequent confiscation of his lands and goods. Second, that though the
annual rent, if granted by the lairds of Eaith, was still leviable from the lands,
these had reverted to the superiors as if they had never been granted, and
therefore unless the annual rent had been mortified in perpetuity, it was no
longer exigible. Thirdly, the appellant states, that although she cultivates
and labours the lands in question or part of them, she does so by the toler-
ance and forbearance of the regent and other superiors, wherefore she alleges
she should the less be called upon to pay the annual rent ; and she further
concludes with announcing an appeal to the Holy See, requesting the
usual letters to enable her to do so. These were afterwards granted by the
Official of St. Andrews, but the sequel is not recorded.1
Helen Napier, Lady Melville, with her eldest son, John, and her second
son, Eobert Melville, succeeded in 1563, in obtaining from parliament a
reversal of her husband's forfeiture, which has been already referred to. In
1569 she purchased from David Hamilton, son of the former regent, now
Duke of Chatelherault, and received a charter to herself and her son John,
of the lands of the abthanery of Kinghorn Easter, now Abden, upon which
infeftment followed in due form.2 She was still in possession of these lands
in May 1584.
Sir John Melville by his two wives had a numerous family. According
to a genealogical memorandum preserved in the family, dated about 1690, he
had by his first wife sons and daughters, but the sons deceased ; while by his
second wife, Helen Napier, he had nine sons and two daughters. Seven of
these sons and three daughters are named below, but the others are said to
1 Appeal, 30th March 1550, vol. iii. of this 2 Charter, dated 1569, and Sasine, 2Sth
work, pp. 92-95. August 1570, both in Melville Charter-chest.
HIS CHILDREN. 79
have died young. This memorandum has been followed in preference to
other notices of the family, as to the ages and successions of the sons, it
being more in accordance with the ascertained facts.
1. William Melville, who predeceased his father. His place in the family
pedigree has been mistaken by genealogists, probably because so little is
known of him. He was apparently the son of Sir John by his first wife
Margaret Wemyss. In 1541, Robert Douglas of Lochleven made overtures
for the marriage of William Melville to his sister, Margaret Douglas. Sir
John Melville, however, hesitated to complete the transaction without the
consent of King James the Fifth, but this was accorded and the marriage
was solemnised.1 Sir John Melville made a settlement on his son and his
wife, at Lochleven in July 1544, of part of the lands of Pitconmark,2 but
William Melville did not long survive his marriage, dying apparently about
1547, the last recorded reference to him being on 5th March of that year,
when he was a member of an assize in an action of apprising.3 He left
no surviving issue, as his father's estates, when restored, passed to his next
brother. His widow, Margaret Douglas, was still alive in May 1584.
2. John Melville, eldest son of Sir John Melville and Helen Napier, who succeeded
to the family estates. A memoir of him is given on a later page.
3. Robert Melville, second son of the second marriage, born apparently in 1534.
He is well known as Sir Robert Melville of Murdocairnie, and was created
first Lord Melville in 1616. A memoir of him will be found on a later
page.
4. Sir James Melville of Hallhill. A memoir of him also will be found on a later
page.
5. David Melville, designed "of Newmill." His name first occurs as a witness
to contracts between his brothers, John and Robert, in 1561 and 1563.4
He became a partisan of Queen Mary in the struggles between " king's men "
and " queen's men," which took place after the queen's flight to England.
He joined Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange in the castle of Edinburgh in
1570, and next year, along with his brothers, Robert and Andrew, was
forfeited by parliament. He held the rank of captain in the queen's forces,
being appointed on 5th June 1571, and took part in various engagements,
1 3d April 1541, vol. ii. of this work, p. 2. parently predeceased his brother-in-law, who
2 Registrum de Dunfermelyn, p. 562. died about 1548.
3 Acta Donvinorum Concilii et Sessionis, 4 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 102, 109 ;
vol. xxii. f. 152, 5th March 1546-7. He ap- Registrum Magui Sigilli, vol. iv. No. 1507.
80 SIR JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
but he does not appear to have joined in the last defence of the castle of
Edinburgh in 1573.1 A pacification was concluded at Perth in February
1572-3, between the Regent Morton and the Hamiltons, and to the benefit of
this David Melville was admitted in 1579.2 Other references to him chiefly
relate to his lands. Among other possessions he held the small estate of
Prinlaws, in the parish of Leslie, Fifeshire, from the commendator of the
priory of Inchcolm, but his right was disputed by David Eeid of Aikenhead,
who claimed under a charter from Robert Carnegie of Kinnaird. Melville
summoned Reid before the lords of session, and obtained a reduction of
Reid's infeftment, and also a decree of removing. Reid, however, renewed
the action by pleading a confirmation from the pope in favour of Carnegie,
to which Melville objected that this confirmation was forged. The matter
was referred to the privy council, and a commission was appointed to
examine the validity of the alleged confirmation, but the result is not
recorded.3 David Melville acquired the lands of Newmill, from which he
was designated some time prior to 1584, as in October of that year he wit-
nessed the contract of marriage between his nephew, Robert Melville
younger of Murdocairnie, and Margaret Ker of Ferniehirst, and is there
described as David Melville of Newmill.4 He died in October 1594, leav-
ing a widow, named Margaret Douglas. He appointed, by his will, dated
7th October in that year, his brother, Sir James Melville, to be tutor
"to his bairne, gif God send onie." This expectation was apparently
not fulfilled, as in the following January his next elder brother, Sir James
Melville of Hallhill, was ' retoured heir to him, by reason of conquest, in the
lands of Prinlaws, while in March 1596 his oldest brother, John Melville
of Raith, was retoured heir of tailzie and provision to him in the grain-mill
and mill-lands of Dairsie, with the gardens of the chapel of St. Leonard,
near Dairsie.5
6. Walter Melville, who is named along with his brother David as a witness in
1561 and 1563.6 Sir James Melville of Hallhill, in his memoirs, refers to
his brother as " one of the gentlemen of the Earl of Murray's chamber," and
on one occasion he appears as a witness to a charter by that earl to his
1 Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 218 ; cf. pp. 4 Contract, 24th and 28th October 1584,
238, 257. in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 5 gpecial retours fm, ^ Nqs_ ^^
vol. m. p. 186. 1523 15th Jauuary 1594.5 anci 4tll March
3 4th January 1586-7, and 27th February 159g_6
1589-90. Register of Privy Council, vol. iv.
pp. 133, 460, 461. ° Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 102, 109.
HIS CHILDREN. 81
servitor, John Wood of Tilliedavie, in 1565.1 He continued in Murray's
service when regent, and apparently was at the battle of Langside. It is
said he declined in the regent's favour because he gave advice and reproof
more freely than was palatable.2 He appears to have died young.
7. Sir Andrew Melville of Garvock, of whom also a memoir will be found on a
later page.
8. William Melville, commendator of Tongland, of whom likewise a separate
memoir is given on a later page.
The daughters of Sir John Melville of Eaith were : —
1. Janet (daughter of Margaret Wemyss), who married James Kirkcaldy of
Grange, treasurer of Scotland. When he was prisoner in France after the
taking of St. Andrews castle, she appears to have been warded with her
children, but was released by her father's influence, and was dependent on
him for support.3 She survived her husband, dying in February 1560. He
died between 24th May 1556, and 1560.* They had issue Sir William Kirk-
caldy of Grange, the famous partisan of Queen Mary, with other children.
2. Catherine, who married Brown, and was provided by her father in the
lands of Shawsmill. After his death, she received a charter of the lands
from David Hamilton, son of the Regent Arran. She died in May 1558,
and was succeeded in Shawsmill by her son, John Brown.5
3. Janet, probably a daughter of the second marriage, who married James John-
stone of Elphinstone. They had issue two sons, James and Robert John-
stone.6 She died in September 1603.
Besides the sons and daughters enumerated, Sir John Melville had a natural
son, John Melville, who has been referred to as one of the conspirators against
Cardinal Beaton, and whose correspondence with his father led to the latter's
execution. Nothing further has been ascertained regarding this John Melville.
1 17th January 1564-5, Registrum Magni Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. iii. p 255.
Sigilli, vol. iv. No. 1596. 5 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 90, 9S.
2 Memoirs of Sir James Melville, p. 260. ° Registrum Magni Sigilli, vol. iv. Nos.
3 Cf. vol. iii. of this work, p. S9. 1665, 2533 ; cf. Memoirs of Sir James Mel-
4 Ibid. p. 97 ; The Douglas Book, by ville, Bannatyne Club, p. 155.
'qX*
VOL. I.
82
Sir Eobert Melville of Murdochcairnie, Knight, First Lord Melville
of Monimail, Born c. 1527; died 1621.
Katherine Adamson, his first Wife.
Lady Mary Leslie, his second Wife.
Lady Jean Stewart, his third Wife.
Sir Eobert Melville, the second son of Sir John Melville of Raith and Helen
Napier, was one of the most active statesmen of his time, though he is less popu-
larly known than his younger brother, Sir James Melville, who was perhaps more
of a courtier than a statesman. He was probably born about the year 1527, and
would just reach his majority when his father's fate and forfeiture overshadowed
the fortunes of the family. These, however, seem to have brightened when
the queen-dowager, Mary of Guise, assumed the regency, as in 1555 Robert
Melville, "servand to the quenis grace," appears in receipt, first of a sum of £50
Scots paid by her special command, and later, of a pension of £150 Scots yearly,
though what post he held at court is not clear.1 By some writers he is said to have
gone to France and to have become a favourite of King Henry the Second, return-
ing to Scotland in 1562 ; but Robert Melville, if he visited France at all, had
certainly returned thence before October 1559.2 In that month he received from
King Francis the Second and Mary Queen of Scots a grant of annual-rents over the
lands of Hilton of Rosyth, which had belonged to his father. In the charter he is
described as the beloved servitor of their majesties, but this may be because he
was in the service of the queen-regent.3 In 1560 he entered into various trans-
actions with his brother John, which will be referred to in the memoir of the
latter. After the forfeiture of their father was recalled, Robert, in 1564, received
from his elder brother a charter of the lands of Murdochcairnie in Fife, which,
however, he appears to have held before that date.4
In the end of 1559, Robert Melville first appears in a political capacity, as a
subordinate agent in the mission of AVilliam Maitland of Lethington to England
on behalf of the Protestant lords of the congregation in Scotland. According to
the charter of 1559 above referred to, he was still in the service of the queen
1 Treasurer's Accounts, May and Septem- 3 10th October 1559, vol. iii. of this work,
ber 1555 ; Laing's Knox, vol. ii. p. 361, note. p. 99.
2 King Henry the Second of France died 4 Ibid. pp. 100-102 ; Uegistrum Magni
on 10th July 1559, and Melville may then Sigilli, 1546-1580, No. 1507. 14th Febru-
have returned to his native country. ary 1563-4.
A COLLEAGUE OF MAITLAND OF LETHINGTON. 83
or queen-regent on 10th October of that year. In the end of that month
Maitland, who had been secretary of state, left the service of the queen-regent
and openly joined the lords of the congregation, to whom it is said he had been
for a long time secretly favourable and helpful, and possibly Eobert Melville
followed his example. The time of their accession to the Protestant party was a
very critical period in the history of the Eeformation in Scotland. Some months
previously the strained relations between the queen-regent and her French allies
on the one hand, and the leaders of the Protestant party on the other, had
resulted in open war, and at this period the Protestants, to their dismay, found
themselves losing ground, unless they received aid from England. The arrival in
the Protestant camp of Secretary Maitland and Robert Melville was therefore
gladly welcomed, and they were at once employed in the important business of
negotiations with England.
At this stage of his career, however, Melville acted more as the messenger
between parties than as a principal agent. He returned to Scotland before Leth-
ington as the bearer of the articles which were afterwards formulated into the
treaty of Berwick on 27th February 1560.1 In October of the same year he again
acted as a messenger in connection with the embassy of the Earls of Glencairn and
Morton with Secretary Lethington to England, to propose a marriage between
Queen Elizabeth and the Earl of Arran.2 It seems not improbable that Melville
at this date was an assistant or special agent of the secretary. Knox, writing
in his history under date 1562, says of the proposals about the queen's marriage,
that a union with Darnley began to be talked of, and that " it was said that
Lethingtoun spack the Lady Margarete Dowglass [Darnley 's mother], and that
Robert Melven receaved ane horse to the secreatares use fra the Erie of Levenox
or from his wy ff." 3
When, however, Robert Melville next appears in the history of the time, it is
on the opposite side to that which the secretary favoured. The vexed question
of Queen Mary's marriage had been settled by her union with Darnley, which
the secretary supported. But the Duke of Chatelherault, the Earls of Murray,
Glencairn, and others, including Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange, Melville's
nephew, determined to oppose the marriage, and Melville joined their party. As
is well known, Murray and his supporters, on taking up arms in a hasty manner,
found an unexpected force arrayed against them, and were compelled to flee from
one place to another. They took refuge for a time at Dumfries, near the English
border, and thence, on 10th September 1565, they despatched Robert Melville
1 Calderwood's History, vol. i. p. 561. 2 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. p. 164.
3 Laing's Knox, vol. ii. p. 361.
84 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
to the English court with an earnest appeal to Elizabeth and her minister, Cecil,
to aid them with men and money. Melville's mission was recommended by the
Earl of Bedford, Elizabeth's lieutenant on the borders, who had been ordered to
help the rebels. But on the real weakness of their party being discovered Murray
was told that neither men nor money would be given. Another urgent appeal,
however, was addressed through Melville, who had reached the English court, and
he returned about the 9 th October with the reply that the English queen deplored
the situation of the rebel lords, but intended treating with the Queen of Scots,
and would help them if mediation failed.1
This answer was equivalent to the abandonment of their cause, and Mui'ray,
with others, took refuge in England, the Earl of Bedford being instructed to
give assistance to those who crossed the border. Robert Melville probably also
remained in England for a time, as his personal estate was declared to be for-
feited. But his brother, Sir James, who remained in favour with Queen Mary,
received the grant of his escheat, so that it was not lost to the family.2 In
December 1565, however, Melville was again in the Scottish court, he and the
abbot of Kilwinning negotiating for the rebel lords. The abbot rejsresented
the Duke of Chatelherault, while Melville sued on behalf of Murray ; but both
were unsuccessful in their mission, as the queen refused to pardon them. Sir
James Melville and Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, one of her English friends, also
besought her to be reconciled to Murray, but in vain. It is said that she would
have yielded, but that Darnley's influence was then adverse. Murray refers to
the matter in a letter to Cecil from Newcastle : " What Robert Melvil hath done
in my action I cannot tell further than this, that, so far as ever I have understood,
it standeth worse and worse," adding in a postscript, " Even now, I have received
word from Mr. Melvil, that his suit for my poor servants, that they might resort
in that country for their feeble affairs, has received a plain refusal ; whereof your
honour may conjecture what I myself may look for."
But though Robert Melville thus failed in his mission on behalf of Murray
his own affairs began to prosper. Owing probably to the influence of his brother
with the queen, and also perhaps to his own former services, Melville was re-
ceived again into favour, and immediately despatched on a mission to England.
It would appear also that Lethington stood his friend, although the secretary's
influence was waning while Riccio was gaining ground at court. Be that as it
may, Queen Mary wrote to Queen Elizabeth, and also to Cecil, explaining that
1 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. pp. 219-222; vol. ii. pp. 827-829.
2 Grant to Sir James, 10th November 1565. Register of Privy Seal, vol. xxxiii. f. 125.
3 Original Letter, 15tli January 1565-6 ; Keith's History, App. p. 166.
BOND FOR THE MURDER OF RICCIO. 85
she had pardoned Melville, and now sent him as her resident ambassador at the
court of England.1
At first his embassy did not wholly prosper. He had scarcely reached Lon-
don before he received from Queen Mary a letter detailing the conduct of Thomas
Randolph, the English resident in Scotland, who had assisted Murray's faction in
their rebellion by the payment of 3000 crowns to Lady Murray. This charge
was proved true by the testimony of the man who had carried the money and
received Lady Murray's acknowledgment. As the queen considered that this
conduct was utterly opposed to the office of an ambassador, she had resolved
to dismiss Randolph from court, and Melville is to explain her reasons for so
doing both to Queen Elizabeth and to the Earl of Leicester.2 The facts were
stated to Queen Elizabeth, who took offence at the treatment of her ambassador,
and sent back Melville to the Scottish court, where he arrived toward the end of
March 1566.
During his stay in England events had developed rapidly, and he arrived
in Scotland to find Riccio dead, and Murray and his companions again in Scot-
land, though not received at court. These main events are so well known to
readers of history that they need not be here enlarged upon. But it may be
noted that it is probably owing to Robert Melville that we owe the preser-
vation in the Melville charter-chest of the original bond or covenant between
the Earl of Murray and those with him in Newcastle, and King Henry Darnley,
it being agreed on his part that they should return to Scotland, while they
pledged themselves to obey him, to secure for him the " crown matrimonial "
or right of succession to the throne, and to support him against his enemies,
even to slaying them. There is no doubt that Riccio's death is pointed at by
the clauses of this bond. We are plainly so told by Lord Ruthven in his
narrative of the tragedy, and were other evidence wanting it would be found
in the contemporary indorsation of the document, which runs, " Ane band maid
be my lord of Murray and certane wthir noble men with him befoir the
slauchtir of Davie."3 After the murder, and in terms of the agreement, Murray
with his friends arrived in Edinburgh, and was favourably received by the
queen, but apparently by the time Melville returned to Scotland Murray had by
her Majesty's desire retired to Argyllshire.*
1 Keith's History, p. 325; App. p. 119; printed in the Maitland Miscellany, but with-
Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. p. 228. out the indorsations. It is also known from
2 Letter, dated 17th February 1565-6, vol. Keith's History, App. p. 120, where, however,
ii. of this work, pp. 3-5. it is given in an abridged form.
3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 110-112. This
document, with the signatures, has also been 4 Laing's Knox, vol. ii. p. 527.
86 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
In the beginning of April 1566, Melville wrote to Queen Elizabeth and also
to Cecil, giving particulars of the state of affairs in Scotland and indicating that
a reconciliation between Murray, Bothwell, and Huntly had taken place by the
queen's agency. Shortly afterwards, in May 1566, we find Melville again on his
way to England as Scottish ambassador. His character as such was not at first
recognised on the border, as on 23d May lie wrote to the English queen
and her minister complaining of being detained at Berwick while on his way
to treat of matters acceptable to the English court.1 His mission on this
occasion seems to have had important consequences, one of the first of these
being an order banishing from England, where they had taken refuge, the Earl
of Morton and others concerned in Biccio's murder.
Another matter which engaged Melville's attention was a charge made by
Elizabeth and Cecil against the Scottish queen for harbouring, as they alleged, and
having dealings with Christopher Eokeby, a rebel and a papist. Henry Killigrew
was sent to Scotland to negotiate, but ere he reached that country James Melville
joined his brother in England with the news of the birth of her son, afterwards
King James the Sixth.2 The main incidents of James Melville's visit to London
at this time will be told in his memoir, but he also informs us of his brother
Robert's diplomacy in regard to the affair of Eokeby, who went to Scotland
pretending to be a refugee on account of religion. This, however, was a
mere subterfuge, by which, it is said, he imposed on John Lesley, bishop of
Ross. Eobert Melville, however, by his credit in England discovered that
Eokeby was really a spy of Cecil's to find out, if possible, Mary's dealings with
English subjects as to her title to the English crown.3 He was thus enabled
to give such advice to his sovereign as to her treatment of Eokeby and her
conduct towards the English court and ambassador that she escaped the plot
laid for her.
James Melville gives us an outline of his brother's advice to Queen Mary,
which he himself seems to have conveyed. His own situation at the English
court was precarious owing to Bokeby's intelligence to Cecil, so he advised a
1 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. pp. 232, 234. quiet, and yet pricks for his mistress title as
2 A conversation with Sir James Melville heir-apparent, to which he says her Majesty
at this time, told in a letter by Thomas Bishop, is more inclined than to any other title, so
a well-known English emissary, gives the that his mistress please her Highness and
latter's opinion of Robert Melville as "being follow her opinion." [State Papers, Domestic,
of good religion, and a quiet gentlemau who Addenda 1566-1579, pp. 12, 13.]
would make the best between the Princes.
... In my opinion he is an honest gentle- 3 Keith's History, pp. 337-343 ; Thorpe's
man, and seems as if he would have all things Calendar, vol. i. p. 236.
AT THE COURT OF QUEEN ELIZABETH. 87
hint to Killigrew as if he were soon to be recalled. Killigrew was to be well
treated, while Eokeby was to be detained, and no notice in the meantime was to
be taken of the conduct of the Earl of Northumberland or his brother, who had
betrayed Queen Mary. Her Majesty was to write two letters to Melville, one to
be shown to Elizabeth and the other to Cecil. Above all, the queen was to be
careful and circumspect in her dealings, " seeing the great mark which her
majesty shoots at." The advice was followed, and when Killigrew, in terms of
his instructions, complained against Eokeby, the latter was at once arrested,
apparently to the consternation of the ambassador, who at once wrote to Cecil
announcing the fact, and expressing the fear that Cecil's letter would be found
among the spy's papers. According to Sir James Melville, Eokeby's first apparent
success at the Scottish court was owing to the bishop of Eoss and the Earl of
Bothwell, who did not desire Queen Mary's affairs to prosper under Eobert
Melville's management, because he was not of their faction.
Another matter of which Elizabeth complained was alleged negotiations
between the Scottish queen and the Irish chieftain O'Neil, but the full force
of this charge was obviated by Melville's advice that the Earl of Argyll
should receive O'Neil or his ambassador as if he were a personal friend, and
the queen should appear to know nothing of it. As a result of this diplomacy,
Mary was able to write to Melville as he requested. She begins her letter by
acknowledging the good news given by his brother James of Queen Elizabeth's
friendship and promises. She then states that Mr. Killigrew would be able to
satisfy his mistress as to O'Neil and Eokeby. As to her succession to the
English throne, she professes to leave that to Queen Elizabeth's own will, and
concludes with promises of the utmost amity and goodwill.1
Soon after this, Eobert Melville returned or was recalled to Scotland, where
he remained till October 1566, when he was again in London. Thence he wrote
to Archbishop Beaton, Queen Mary's ambassador in France, telling of her visit to
Jedburgh, and the accident to Bothwell. In his letter, Melville refers to the
queen's displeasure with her husband, and the professed intention of Darnley to
quit Scotland, in terms which almost suggest that ere the writer left Edin-
burgh he had been present at the remarkable scene which took place in the
palace of Holyrood between the king and queen and the lords of privy council,
as narrated by Secretary Lethington to the queen-mother of France.2 But while
Melville's letter was being written, Mary was lying sick at Jedburgh of the fever,
brought on directly by her ride from Jedburgh to Hermitage, and indirectly by
1 Letter 1 1th July 1 566, vol. ii. of this work, pp. 5, 6 ; Keith's History, pp. 342, 343.
2 Keith's History, pp. 345-350.
88 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
mental anxiety about her husband, and other matters. After her Majesty's
convalescence, she left Jedburgh about the 9th November, and passing by
Kelso and paying a visit to Berwick, she arrived at Dunbar. There, about the
18th of that month, she received important despatches from Eobert Melville,
as to the offers to be made by Queen Elizabeth through the Earl of Bed-
ford, who was appointed to be present at the baptism of the young prince of
Scotland.
These related to Mary's claim to the succession in England ; and while the
papers bearing on the subject need not be detailed here, it may be stated that it
is evident, from the frequent mention of Robert Melville's name, that his concern
in the negotiations had been considerable, and that he was trusted by both parties.
He does not appear to have come to Scotland for the baptism of the young
prince. Keith expresses the opinion that he came to Scotland in January 1566,
and again returned to England in February of that year. The evidence is
doubtful; but he appears to have been in England during February, and pro-
bably at the date of Darnley's murder.1
In the following May, however, he was residing at his own house of Mur-
dochcairnie, in Fife, whence he wrote to Cecil a private letter as to the state of
affairs in Scotland. It is probable that on account of the proceedings following on
the murder of Darnley, the mock-trial and acquittal of Bothwell, and the ascend-
ancy he had gained over the queen, Melville thought it prudent to withdraw from
court. He and Bothwell had never been very friendly; and though Melville was
much attached to his sovereign he now held aloof, or he may have joined the con-
federacy against her and Bothwell, probably in the hope he might thus do her
greater service. In his letter to Cecil, Melville tries to excuse his mistress,
ascribing her unaccountable conduct wholly to the influence of Bothwell. He
intimates that the confederate lords, who were now at Stirling, meant to ask
assistance from Elizabeth, because the murdered king was her relative, and he
believes " easy help shall obtain the queen's liberty, and in like manner have the
murderers of the king punished. Thus far," he adds, " I will make your honour
privy of, that France has offered to enter in band with the nobility of the realm,
and to enlist the company of men at arms, and to give divers pensions to noble-
men and gentlemen of their realm, which some did like well ; but the honest sort
has concluded and brought the rest to the same effect, that they will do nothing
which may offend your sovereign without the fault be in her Majesty ; and it
appears both Papist and Protestant join together with an earnest affection for the
weal of their country." Melville concludes by stating that all believed the mar-
1 Keith's History, p. 369 ; Calendar of State Papers, vol. i. p. 243.
BOND FOR THE MARRIAGE OF MARY AND BOTHWELL. 8&
riage would soon take place, and by again representing Mary's conduct as the
result of evil advice.1
The marriage of Mary and Bothwell took place on 15th May, eight days after
the above letter was written. It is said that on the night before the ceremony Mary
gave her consent to a bond, a copy of which is in the Melville charter-chest,
subscribed by Huntly, Argyll, Morton, and several other noblemen, with a number
of prelates, promising to support the queen if she married Bothwell. This was
the famous bond described by Buchanan as signed at " Ainslie's supper," or a
supper at Ainslie's tavern, on the evening of the 19th April 1567. That is the
date of a copy which is preserved in the Cottonian Collection, and which has
appended on a separate paper a list of alleged subscribers, including the Earl of
Murray. Keith, however, in his history impugns the accuracy both of the date
and of the signatures of the copy in question, and supports his contention by
quoting a copy then in the archives of the Scots College in Paris, certified by
Sir James Balfour of Pittendriech as authentic, which bears a different set of
names, and is dated on the 20th April, which was a Sunday. This attested copy
referred to by Keith is corroborated by the copy in the Melville charter-chest,
probably at one time in Robert Melville's own possession, and which agrees with
that formerly in the Scots College in date and signatures. This is an important
fact, as it seems to disprove Buchanan's story about the bond being signed after
a convivial meeting on the evening of 19th April. The list of subscribers in the
Cottonian copy is certainly erroneous, as it includes Murray, who was then out of
Scotland. But if the bond was signed on the 20th April, it must have been done
deliberately, and reflects more strongly on those who signed it, a deed which they
repented almost immediately afterwards.2 It may be added that the queen, in
letters which she wrote to France and England excusing her marriage, treats the
i Letter, Ttli May 1567 ; quoted by Tyt- Ogilvy, W. Ruthven, Flemyng, Serupill."
ler, History, 3d ed.,vol. v. pp. 406,407 ; Calen- These are the noblemen who are supposed to
dar of State Papers (Foreign), at date. have signed it first, and Buchanan says the
bishops signed it later. Their names on the
2 Keith's History, pp. 380-383. The copy copy are, " Sanctandrois, William bishop of
of the bond in the Melville Charter-chest Abirdene, Alexr. Episcopus Candidas Casse,
is contemporary, and is indorsed, "Ane William bischop of Dunblane, Alexr. Epus.
band mayd concernyng the erle bothwell," Brechinensis, Joannes Epus. Rossen, Joline
" Ane copie of the Band subscryvit with the bischop of th' yllis, Ad. Orcaden." It is
noblemen for taking part with the Erie Both- possible that the original bond was signed
well." It bears to be signed by " George erll by all together on the 20th, and that the
of Huntlie, Argyll, Mortoun,Cassillis, Suther- tavern supper was afterwards put forward as
land, Erroll, Craufurd, Caithnes, Rothes ; an excuse for those who were ashamed of
R. Boyd, Herys, Johne 1. glammis, James 1. their share in the bond.
VOL. I. M
90 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
document as a writing signed by the Estates in Parliament, but this is probably
a diplomatic statement, intended to palliate her own weakness.
Melville was recalled from his retirement to be the bearer of the queen's
letter to the court of Elizabeth. Three days after his letter to Cecil already
quoted, he wrote in similar terms to Sir Nicholas Throckmorton. He was then
still in Fife, but on the 17th May, two days after the queen's marriage, we find
him in Edinburgh,1 and in the beginning of June he was on his way south, with
his instructions. These set forth chiefly the political necessities which, according
to the writer, brought about the marriage. Mary also excuses her haste and not
asking Elizabeth's advice, and she begs the latter to extend her friendship to her
new husband. Such were Melville's public credentials, but he appears to have
received others, similar in character, but more confidential. Bothwell also wrote
to Elizabeth and Cecil by the same messenger.2
A recent historian, commenting on Mary's despatch to Elizabeth, remarks that
her choice of an envoy was unfortunate, " Robert Melvil, the secret but determined
enemy of Bothwell, and one of the principal associates in the confederacy against
him and herself." The writer further asserts that Melville availed himself of the
confidence with which he was treated to reveal Mary's purposes to his con-
federates, and in the execution of his mission acted for both parties. Besides
Mary's despatch to Elizabeth, it is said that Melville carried letters from the lords
of the coalition, and that Morton described him to Elizabeth as their trusty friend.3
This serious charge against Melville is, however, founded on very slender evidence.
It is true that Melville was opposed to Bothwell politically, and it is probable he
sympathised strongly with the cause of the confederates, but there seems no
reason to accuse him of treachery to the queen. His letter to Cecil, upon which
part of the charge is apparently founded, is that of a news-writer more
than of a partisan, and at its date the marriage had not taken place and
might yet be prevented. The other accusation, that he betrayed Mary, is
supported by no evidence, while the statement that he was recommended to
Cecil by the confederate lords is somewhat doubtful, as at the dates quoted
by Tytler, Melville was on his way home, and the reference to him by Morton
appears to relate to his letter to Cecil.4 The English secretary does indeed
write to the English ambassador in France of a packet of letters left by Mr.
Melville, "who lately came hither from the Queen of Scotts," and which Cecil
1 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. p. 246 ; vol. ii. 3 Tytler, History of Scotland, 3d ed. vol. v.
p. 840. pp. 417, 418.
2 Letters, dated 1st June 1567, Calendar
of State Papers, Foreign, at date. 4 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. pp. 248, 249.
BEFRIENDS THE ROYAL PRISONER IN LOCHLEVEN. 91
forwarded to the Earl of Murray, then in France. The earl's presence, he writes,
was earnestly desired both in Scotland and in England.1 If this were so, and
Melville was the bearer of the packet, he, no doubt, believed he was furthering
the welfare of his country, but in so doing he did not neglect the queen's
service, and, as later events show, he was one of her most faithful adherents
during her troubles.
A letter of the same date as Cecil's, written to Melville himself by one of his
agents, does indeed charge him with having " done ill to declare himself so openly
in the lords' affairs, for somewhat has come to the knowledge of the French
ambassador," but it is not very clear what is referred to, as Melville had already
left London, and reached Berwick two days after the letter was written.2 He
arrived in Edinburgh on the 29th of June, and found the confederate lords
in full power, while the queen was a prisoner in Lochleven. He brought a
message to her from Elizabeth condemning her marriage, but promising, since
her nobility had separated from her, to do everything proper for her honour and
safety.3 He also, however, bore a message to the confederate lords, which
encouraged them, but their immediate want was money, for which Melville wrote
to Cecil at once, on his return, after communicating with Maitland of Lethington.4
Two days after his return Melville had an interview with the captive queen,
when he delivered his message from Queen Elizabeth, but was not allowed to see
Mary alone. After this meeting he retired to his own residence in Fife, but a
week later he again saw the prisoner, this time alone ; and according to his own
account, endeavoured to persuade her to give up Bothwell, but without success.
On 17th July he made another attempt, and delivered a letter from Sir Nicholas
Throckmorton also advising her to renounce Bothwell, but Mary again refused to
desert her husband. She even requested Melville to procure the delivery of a letter
to Bothwell, which he declined to do, and she threw the document into the fire.
Melville also had frequent interviews with Throckmorton, the English ambas-
sador, who was not permitted to have access to the Scottish queen, but who
contrived to send messages to her by Melville. In one of their conferences, Mel-
ville reminded the ambassador that Queen Elizabeth had promised, in presence
of her council, that Throckmorton should have commission to aid the lords
with money, and to further their proceedings against the murderers of Darnley.
Melville thought that a sum of money would secure the attachment of the
confederates to the English interest, and make them more willing to listen to
i Letter, 26th June 1567 ; quoted by 3 Ibid.
Keith, p. 442, note. * Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. p. 251. July
2 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. p. 249. 8th.
92 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
Elizabeth's negotiations on behalf of Mary. Lethington was also to confer with
the ambassador on the same subject ; and there can be no doubt that Lethington
and Melville both secretly favoured Queen Mary, and were favourable to her
restoration to power on certain conditions.1 This was not, however, the opinion
of the majority of the confederates, who determined to force the queen to demit
the government, and appoint the Earl of Murray to act as regent during her
son's minority. It was at first resolved to send Melville to persuade her to this
course ; but he, his brother James tells us, " refused flatly to medle in that
matter." Lord Lindsay was then despatched with sterner instructions, but Mel-
ville accompanied or preceded him, and communicated to her the advice of
Lethington, Grange, and others of her friends, that she should sign the writs,
remembering that nothing done by her in prison would prejudice her if she
regained her liberty. Throckmorton also wrote to her, giving the same advice,
in a letter which Melville carried in the scabbard of his sword. Mary hesi-
tated, but at length consented, and signed the documents which Lindsay placed
before her, though with many tears and protests of what she would do were she
at liberty.2
This was on 24th July, and a few days later Melville wrote to Queen Eliza-
beth, that though her ambassador had not been admitted to Mary, he had led
her to understand his sovereign's goodwill. He advises gentle dealing in Scot-
tish affairs. This letter was written from Edinburgh on the very day the young
prince was crowned at Stirling ; but the English ambassador states that Melville
was not willing to assist at the ceremony, and remained in the capital.3 On the
14th August the English ambassador wrote that he had again been able through
Melville to communicate with Mary, who had replied, though with some diffi-
culty.4 On the 15th of that month, the Earl of Murray, who had returned to Scot-
land, visited his sister at Lochleven, when she implored him to accept the
regency, and afterwards resigned to him her jewels and other valuables to
remain in his custody. In connection with this, Valentine Brown, afterwards
Sir Valentine Brown, wrote from Berwick to Cecil that Kobert Melville had
applied, as if from the lords in Scotland, to borrow money, declaring that Queen
Mary had committed to Murray her jewels which should be pledged. Brown
adds, " It seems that Melville, sorrowing his mistress' cause, will in no wise be
known to be any means (medium) herein.
" 5
1 Sir N. Throckmorton to Elizabeth, 19th 29th and 31st.
July 1567. Keith, pp. 420-424. 4 Ibid. 14th August 1567.
2 Keith's History, p. 425, note (b). 5 Calendar of State Papers, Foreign, 1st
3 Calendar of State Papers, Foreign, July September 1567; Keith, p. 458.
WITH QUEEN MARY AT HAMILTON, 1568. 93
It would appear that Melville travelled to Berwick in the suite of the Eng-
lish ambassador, who at that date left Scotland. His visit to Berwick at this
time explains the delay referred to in Queen Mary's letter to him of 3d Septem-
ber. She writes to him to send certain dress material and various gowns and
articles of raiment for herself and for her attendants. Clothes for them are
urgently requested, shoes, cambric and linen, with needles. She also asked that
some fruit, plums and pears, should be sent, and she marvels that he had not sent
her the silver promised.1 Melville seems to have replied by a letter to the laird
of Lochleven, begging to be excused to the queen on account of absence from
home ; 2 but her orders were no doubt attended to, as at a later date, Drury
writes to Cecil that " Robert Melville has often recourse to the queen. . . . She
calls now and then for some money, a small portion Robert Melville from the
regent brings unto her." 3
On 18th September 1567, Robert Melville received sasine of the office of
keeper of Linlithgow Palace, which had been bestowed on him in the previous
February, but of which he had never obtained formal possession.4 During the
remainder of 1567 and the first months of 1568 no reference is found in any
contemporary document to Robert Melville, who probably continued to act as
a friend of the captive queen, and a messenger between her and the regent.
He is named, however, among those of her partisans who rallied round her at
Hamilton after her escape. Mary reached Hamilton on the 3d of May, and
five days later no fewer than nine earls, nine bishops, with eighteen considerable
barons and others of less note, had gathered to her standard, representing a force
of 6000 men. The leaders bound themselves to support her authority, and to
defend her person and government. Finding herself thus befriended, she
constituted a council, and declared to them that her demission of the government
and appointment of the Earl of Murray were wrung from her by force and fear
during her captivity. For a witness of this statement she appealed to Robert
Melville, who had been present at her signing the writs in question. In terms of
their joint testimony a remarkable document was drawn up, by which the queen
revoked the deeds signed under compulsion, and makes, or promises to make,
other arrangements for the government of the realm.
This document, to which Robert Melville thus contributed, has been over-
looked by historians, and although Keith mentions the fact, he was apparently
unaware of a written revocation, of which only one copy, a contemporary
1 Letter, 3d September 1567, vol. ii. p. 7. 2 Ibid. p. 232.
3 Calendar of State Papers, Foreign, 30th September 15G7.
4 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 116, note.
94 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
copy, if not the original draft, is known to exist, having been preserved by
Thomas Hamilton, first Earl of Haddington, whose father was an ardent sup-
porter of Queen Mary. It begins in the form of an address to all kings,
princes, and magistrates, the queen's friends, setting forth the conspiracy
against her, and denouncing the perpetrators and the confederate lords by name,
from the Earls of Morton and Murray to the meanest member of their party.
Then follows a statement of alleged practices against the welfare of the family of
Hamilton, and a vindication of the late King Henry Darnley. A formal
revocation of the writs signed in Lochleven is succeeded by an appointment of
the Duke of Chatelherault and his heirs as protectors and governors of the realm
and of the young prince, in the absence of the queen, who also acknowledges the
title of the duke and his heirs to the crown. The conclusion requires all kings
and princes, and also charges her own subjects, to help and support her cause.1
The date of the document is left blank, and there are indications that it was
purposely so left, and that the writ was not in itself final, but was intended to be
brought before a parliament for ratification. The remarkable points about it are
the extraordinary force of vituperation which is expended on the leaders of the
king's party, and the vindication of Darnley, who is described as the victim of
slanderous tongues. The Duke of Chatelherault is referred to as the queen's
dearest " father adoptive," and the whole writ is in praise of the Hamiltons, being
doubtless written by one of the name, perhaps by the archbishop of St. Andrews.
After the queen's party had thus expressed their sympathy with her, it was
resolved to march towards Dumbarton Castle, where it was proposed that Mary
should remain until a parliament could assemble, or her subjects be drawn to her
allegiance. But, as is well known, this plan was frustrated by the prompt action
of the regent, who met the queen's army at Langside, and in the conflict which
ensued her party was defeated. Mary fled, first towards Dumbarton, then towards
the south, and Eobert Melville was among those taken prisoners. It does not
appear that he was long a captive, as his brother and other friends were of the
regent's party, and he was probably not considered as a combatant, as he had so
frequently acted the part of a diplomatist.
It is indeed in the capacity of an envoy that he next appears in history.
Mary by her flight into England having put herself in the power of Elizabeth, it
was resolved by that queen and her advisers not only to detain her in custody,
but that she should in a manner be brought to trial, and Murray given an
opportunity to produce evidence against her as to the murder of Darnley.
1 Memorials of the Earls of HaddingtoD, 268-277 ; also The Lennox, vol. ii. pp. 437-
by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. ii. pp. 447.
PROPOSED MARRIAGE OF MARY AND DUKE OF NORFOLK. 95
Commissioners were appointed by Elizabeth to try the cause, while Murray on
one side and Mary on the other were each to name commissioners to appear for
them, the trial to take place at York. While preparations were making for this
event, Melville was sent by Lethington to Queen Mary with a message of the
utmost importance. He advised her that Murray meant to bring against her
accusations of the most serious kind, and enclosed copies, secretly obtained, of
the letters which were to be produced in proof of her complicity in the murder
of Darnley. These letters were the famous documents known as the casket
letters, which appear to have then been communicated to her for the first time.
Lethington was evidently impressed by them, as he assured her that nothing but
a desire to do her service had induced him to come into England, — he was not a
commissioner, — and he begged the queen to tell him by Melville what he should
do. Mary, however, in her reply took little notice of the letters, but simply
requested him to use his efforts to stay Murray's accusations, to labour with
the Duke of Norfolk in her favour, and to give full credit to the bishop
of Ross.1
Mary was very confident of a verdict in her favour, chiefly because the Duke
of Norfolk was the principal commissioner, and, according to her own words,
" she understood of the duke's goodwill towards her, and the bruit was alse
spread abroad of a marriage betwixt the duke and her." This was, indeed,
a project which had been fostered if not originated by the fertile brain of
Lethington, who employed Melville as his active instrument in the matter. He
it was who dealt with Mary at first, and brought about a meeting between her
agent Lesley, bishop of Eoss, and Lethington in the latter's lodgings at York,
when they "talked almost a whole night" on the subject.
Melville was again with Queen Mary on the 15th October 1568, when he
delivered to her her jewels, clothing, and horses which he had received in custody
from her while she was in Lochleven. She granted a receipt for these,
acknowledging also his faithful service.2 Melville at the same time engaged
in a more delicate negotiation with the queen. The Conference had met at
York, and, besides other evidence, Murray had privately shown to the English
commissioners the famous casket letters. These, however, had not yet been
publicly produced, nor had a formal accusation been made. Murray and his
fellow-commissioners were doubtful what course Elizabeth might pursue, as her
commissioners had no power to decide the case. The alternative before the
Scotch commissioners is thus stated in a letter from the Earl of Sussex to Sir
1 Tytler's History, 3d ed. vol. vi. pp. 58, 59 ; Cobbett's State Trials, vol. i. 975, etc.
2 Receipt, Bolton, 15th October 156S ; vol. ii. of this work, p. 8.
96 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
William Cecil : " This matter must at length take end, either by finding the Scotch
queen guilty of the crimes that are objected against her, or by some manner of
composition with a view of saving her honour." Further on in the letter he says,
" They (the Scotch commissioners) intend to labour a composition, wherein
Lethington was a dealer here, hath by means dealt with the Scotch queen, and
will also, I think, deal there, and to that end you shall shortly hear of Melville
there, who is the instrument between Murray, Lethington, and the queen to work
this composition." 1
This was the delicate negotiation on which Melville now entered with Queen
Mary. He was authorised by Murray to propose a scheme by which all
necessity for accusing her should be removed and an amicable compromise take
place. She was to ratify her demission which had been signed at Lochleven, to
confirm Murray in his government, while she was to remain in England under the
protection of Elizabeth, and with a revenue suitable to her dignity. If she
agreed to these conditions Murray promised to be silent. Mary at first demurred
to accept such terms, but was at length convinced by Melville's arguments that
the course proposed was the best for her interest and honour.2 She therefore
dismissed him to carry her consent to Murray, with a letter to Queen Elizabeth,
and despatched her commissioners to London, whither the conference had been
adjourned.3
As is well known, the intended compromise failed by Murray being forced
to produce his accusation, but the secret negotiations with Norfolk were con-
tinued, and conferences about the proposed marriage took place between
him and the bishop of Ross. In these also Melville was the medium of
communication with Queen Mary, as the bishop of Ross afterwards stated that,
in October 1568, besides the proposals for compromise already referred to,
Melville brought messages from Lethington as to interviews with the Duke of
Norfolk on the subject of the marriage which Lethington strongly encouraged.
Melville again was the messenger employed by Murray in regard to the same affair
at a critical moment. It is difficult to know how far Murray entertained the pro-
posal of a marriage between Mary and Norfolk, but it is said that hearing of a
plot for his assassination on his way back to Scotland, he renewed his intercourse
with Norfolk, which had been broken off, and appeared to give his consent to
the union. Not only so, but he despatched Melville to Queen Mary with an
1 Letter, Sussex to Cecil, from York, 22d October 156S, printed in Hosack's Mary Queen
of Scots, 1st ed. p. 516.
3 Melville's declaration, cited by Tytler, 3d ed. vol. vi. pp. 65, 66.
3 Ibid. ; Thorpe's Calendar, vol. ii. p. 862, 25th October 1568.
TAKES PART WITH THE CASTILIANS, 1571. 97
intimation of his approval, with the result that Norfolk gave strict orders that
Murray was to be allowed to return in safety to Scotland.1
The regent did return to Scotland in the end of January or beginning of
February 1569, but whether Melville was then in his retinue does not appear.
The next reference to him is in a letter from Sir William Drury to Cecil in
October 1569, where the writer states that "Eobert Melville brought the queen's
mind to Lethington ; " but from the letter it is not clear what queen is referred
to. At this time Lethington was in the castle of Edinburgh, nominally a
prisoner accused of the murder of Darnley, though really under the protection
of Kirkcaldy of Grange, who was then beginning to espouse the queen's cause,
and it is probable that Melville also was inclining to throw in his lot with
them. That he did so at a later date is certain.
Nothing is known of his history during the intervening period, but in May
1571 he was with Kirkcaldy and Lethington in the castle of Edinburgh, and was
looked upon as holding an influential position among his party. This is evident
from an application made to him by his brother-in-law, Johnstone of Elphinstone.
A day or two previously a skirmish, the first actual outbreak of warfare between
those known as the Castilians and the king's party, had taken place near
Edinburgh. The fight led to a mutual declaration of war between the opposing
factions, and the friends of John Knox, then resident in Edinburgh, became
alarmed for his safety, as the whole town was virtually at the mercy of the
commander of the castle. Eobert Melville was therefore earnestly desired by
letter to have a care that Mr. Knox should not be troubled. He replied, that
although Knox had used those of the castle otherwise than they deserved, yet
they meant no harm to him, but because the mob could not be entirely controlled,
he advised, either that Knox should repair within the fortress, or else that he
should go to the house of some friend, there to stay till the troubles ended.
Melville's brother-in-law then promised to procure Mr. Knox's safe removal, which
was effected a few days later.2
Edinburgh now became the centre of one of the bitterest civil wars on record,
and from this date onward constant attacks and counter attacks, with much
bloodshed and great hardship to innocent people, took place between the king's
party and those in the castle. Eobert Melville is nowhere mentioned as taking
part in active hostilities, but he is named by Sir William Drury to Lord
Burghley, first in connection with the so-called parliament, held on 12th June
1571 by the Duke of Chatelherault, Kirkcaldy of Grange, and others. He is also
1 Lesley's examination, Cobbett's State Trials, vol. i. pp. 979-9S2 ; Tytler, vol. vi. p. 87.
2 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. pp. 72, 73.
VOL. I. N
98 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
spoken of some weeks later as a probable envoy from the queen's party to the
English court. He was, however, refused a safe-conduct by the Regent Lennox,
who was swayed by Morton, because he was considered " a great enemy to the
king's cause," and on 3d September 1571 he was still in the castle, detained by
the " danger of the j)assage." l
On that day the attack on Stirling was made, in which the Eegent Lennox
was slain, an event which, although the Earl of Mar was chosen to succeed, threw
the actual power still more into the hands of the Earl of Morton, who was
a bitter enemy to the queen's party, and especially to those in the castle of
Edinburgh. The civil war raged with greater intensity, notwithstanding the
efforts of the English queen to reconcile the contending factions. In July 1572,
a peace was concluded for two months by the mediation of Sir William Drury,
and Monsieur La Croc, the French ambassador. In bringing about this truce
Melville seems to have used his influence, as in one letter Drury writes to Cecil
that '' Robert Melville and Lethington guide Grange." Owing to Lethington's
physical infirmity Melville was the active diplomatist, and held interviews with
the Regent Mar and his council. After the truce was proclaimed, Melville expressed
to Lord Burghley his pleasure that Grange had been allowed by Elizabeth to
retain command of the castle of Edinburgh.2
About a month later the party in the castle had resolved to send Melville as
their envoy to England, but ere he was despatched the whole political horizon
was darkened by the news of the massacre of St. Bartholomew. On learning
the facts, Melville expressed in a letter to Drury his deep regret at the tragedy,
adding a hope that the troubles may be quieted, as great practices seemed to be
used for the overthrow of religion.3 Not only as a staunch Protestant but as a
partisan of Queen Mary, Melville had good reason to lament the massacre and its
effect upon the opinions of the English queen in regard to his party. On the
news of St. Bartholomew reaching England, Killigrew was despatched to Scot-
land, ostensibly with a message to both parties warning them against foreign
invasion, but secretly with a mission directed against the life of the captive queen.
The latter object was not carried out, partly owing to the illness and death of the
1 State Papers, Foreign, 17th June, 30th customs of the port there, which were during
July, 4th August, and 3d September 1571. his forfeiture given to David Durie of that
On 30th August 1571 Melville, along with ilk. [Registrum Magni Sigilli, 1546-1580,
others of his faction, was forfeited by the No. 19S3, 15th November 1571.]
regent. What his possessions were is no- 2 State Papers, Foreign, ISth July, 20th
where stated, but he had then, in addition to July, and 2d August 15/2.
Murdochcairnie, the tower and fortalice of 3 Letter to Drury, 11th September 1572.
Burntisland, and the power of drawing the Thorpe, vol. i. p. 361.
NEGOTIATING FOR THE SURRENDER OF THE CASTLE. 99
Regent Mar, but Killigrew's agency brought about another result, a reconciliation
between the Hamiltons, Argyll, Huntly and other members of the old queen's
party, and the regent — a result, however, from which Grange, Lethington, and
Melville, with the other Castilians, were excluded. They were at first invited to
join, and Robert Melville wrote to Killigrew apparently indicating the spirit in
which they would come to terms. He assured the English ambassador that he
and his companions meant truly and faithfully to join themselves in friendship
with the rest of the country for the preservation of religion and avoiding of
strangers. As he was a Christian, they meant no otherwise, but to make a present
end, craving nothing but surety in times to come, and not intending to perform
any of those designs which their enemies invented against them, and their reason-
able offers are hindered.1
We learn something of these reasonable offers from a letter of Killigrew's to
Lord Burghley, stating that Grange and Melville were in favour of peace, if assured
of their lives and restoration of their property, the castle being continued in
Grange's keejiing. This was while Mar was still regent, but his death a few days
later threw the government into the hands of the Earl of Morton, who had not
only a grudge against Kirkcaldy of Grange, but was firmly convinced that Edin-
burgh castle could not with safety be continued in his hands. The truce, how-
ever, between the parties, was prolonged until the 1st of January 1573. During
this cessation of hostilities John Knox, who had returned from St. Andrews,
died at Edinburgh on the 24th November 1572. Before his death he sent an
earnest warning to Kirkcaldy to give up the castle, prophesying that if he did
not, his fate would be a tragic one. The messenger reported that Kirkcaldy
was a little affected, Lethington scornful, but that Melville was somewhat moved.2
He seems to have felt the position more keenly than most of his party.
When hostilities recommenced, the Castilians found themselves almost the sole
supporters of the queen in Scotland. Even under the guns of the castle, for
Kirkcaldy could no longer hold the town, the king's party were able in safety to
hold a parliament, which passed an act of indemnity for all the queen's former
adherents who now conformed to the new regime. While the estates were in
session they were much annoyed by the guns of the castle, yet Robert Melville
wrote to Killigrew objecting to a proclamation which he alleged was unfairly set
forth against his party, that they had refused all reasonable conditions. He
begged the English ambassador to cause the truth be known, to which Killigrew
replied that he would place their demands before the parliament as best he could,
1 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. p. 362, 1st October 1572.
2 Burtou's History of Scotland, 2d ed. vol. v. p. 127.
100 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, EIRST LORD MELVILLE.
but adding that if their public deeds deserved the love of the people no papers
would cause their hate.1
The castle party were further distressed by the fact that the aid which about
this time was sent from France was intercepted by a stratagem of Sir James
Balfour, and all their hopes from that quarter were disappointed. In the end of
March Killigrew made another attempt at agreement by sending to the castle
the articles of pacification which had been signed at Perth with other members
of the queen's party, and urging an answer. He assured them that they would
never again have the like offer, that they have no hope of support, and that if
they do not yield they will feel the cannon within eight days. This was the last
manifesto, and it was rejected, although Killigrew wrote to Lord Burghley that
they all seemed ill with overworking and watching, and Robert Melville much
amazed in his mind. Three days later he wrote again that Melville and others
would gladly quit the fortress if they could do so with honour.2 A few days later,
all negotiations being repelled by the obstinacy of the Castilians, who now felt
bound to fight to the bitter end, the siege operations began, and we hear nothing
more of Melville until the English cannon had done their work, and part of the
castle had been carried by storm. A general assault was planned, but, at this
juncture, Grange requested from Drury, the English leader, a truce of two days to
prepare for a surrender. This led to an interview in which Melville took part.
He and Grange with Echlin, the laird of Pittadro, were let down from the castle
by ropes, and, as a condition of surrender, desired surety for their lives and
livings, that Lethington and Lord Home might be allowed to go to England, and
Grange remain unmolested in Scotland.3
These conditions might have been yielded by Drury, but the Regent Morton
scornfully rejected them, and while he agreed that the main body of the garrison
might go free, he specially excepted Grange, Lethington, and Melville, with Lord
Home and five others of less note, who were required to submit unconditionally.
The result was that two days later Grange, Melville, and the others, by a private
arrangement with Sir William Drury, surrendered to him, and were courteously
received. As is well known, however, they were a few weeks later, by the orders
of Elizabeth, delivered to the Regent Morton. But in her letter to the regent,
while referring the case of the other prisoners to him and the laws of Scotland,
the queen made a special exception of Robert Melville, whom she had known as
one who dealt sincerely. She cannot think that he has fallen away from all his
1 23d and 24th January 1572-3 ; Thorpe's Calendar, vol. i. p. 366.
2 Ibid. p. 371 ; State Papers, Foreign, 30th March 1573.
3 State Papers, 27th May 1573 ; cf. Burton and Tytler.
RESTORED TO LIBERTY AND TO HIS ESTATES. 101
fair promises, and she asks that favour may be shown to him and no extremity-
used in the meantime.1 Thus it came about that while Grange and others were
executed, Eobert Melville, although imprisoned for a time, was finally set at
liberty a year later. He was placed in custody, first in Holyroodhouse and after-
wards in Lethington House, now known as Lennoxlove. The English queen and
her ministers continued to urge the regent on his behalf, and in August 1574 lie
writes from his own house in Fife to the Earl of Leicester, expressing his gratitude
to Queen Elizabeth for her efforts by which he had obtained life and liberty.2
For the next few years Robert Melville appears to have lived in retirement.
But while this was the case, he and those of his former comrades in the castle of
Edinburgh who survived still kept their attachment to the queen's faction. A
contemporary historian sa}rs of Eobert Melville and John Maitland, afterwards
chancellor, that "howbeit they were pardonned, yitt they keeped still their
minde, interteaning mutual freindship and intelligence, waiting upon all occasions.
They advanced indirectlie and secretlie as they could the queen's caus, that is the
associatioun with her sone in the governement."3 The historian adds that along
with this scheme they cherished a deep enmity to the Regent Morton. While he
was in full power as regent and supported by Queen Elizabeth, they remained
quiet, but at last an opportunity came. Morton's demission of office in 1578,
brought about by Athole and Argyll, enabled these earls, who had been attached
to the queen's party, to seize for a time the chief authority. Morton's return to
power in another form and the death of Athole somewhat retarded the secret
movement in which Melville and his comrades were interested, but they obtained
an ally from an unexpected quarter. This was Esme Stewart, Lord d'Aubigny,
whom it is said the Marian faction sent for from France. He arrived in Scot-
land about July 1579, and so fascinated the young king that Morton's influence
began to wane, while titles, honours, and estates, were heaped upon the favourite,
who was made Earl and afterwards Duke of Lennox. It was probably owing to
the rising influence of Lennox that in the first parliament held after his coming to
Scotland, an act was passed admitting Melville and others of the old Castilians
to the benefit of the pacification of 1573, and thus rescinding the forfeiture of
Melville's estates.4
We hear nothing further regarding Melville till the following year, during
which period the power of Lennox had been steadily increasing, but on September
1 Letter cited by Burton, 2d edit. vol. v. 3 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. p. 457.
p. 125.
3 18th August 1574, Thorpe's Calendar, * November 1579, Acts of the Parliaments
p. 386. of Scotland, vol. iii. p. 1S6\
102 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
1580, Robert Bowes, the English resident at the Scottish court, writes: "John
Matland, brother to the lard of Ledington deceased, and not muche inferior
in witt and practise, and Robert Melvin, are lately entertayned and growe
great in counsell and creditt about Lenox, that bussyly seketh all men and all
meanes to uphold his greatnes in this realme."1 This was just after the appoint-
ment of Lennox as lord chamberlain, and Bowes forebodes ill from the coming
changes.
Two days later, Bowes records that he and Melville, whom he describes as
" one especially depending on and well hard of lord Ruthen," afterwards the
Earl of Gowrie, had conferred together, and Melville had recounted a conversation
with Lord Ruthven. Lord Ruthven, he said, was slow to promise and ready to
perform, but had agreed with himself, and had offered to further any course for
the king's benefit and to advance friendship with England. He also promised to
further any suitable " matche in mariadge " which could be found for the king in
England. Melville also urged expedition, because he said, the king had declared
to Lord Ruthven his desire to marry speedily, and he offered his own services to
forward the matter, to which the Earls of Argyll and Lennox were favourable.
It was further added that if the English queen agreed to this they would perform
their promises, but if she continued to use her influence against Lennox, her
cause would suffer.2 Bowes comments that he had received the motion with
respect as it came from Lord Ruthven, but he meant still to continue his former
course against Lennox. The chief importance of his statement is that it shows
that Ruthven and Lennox were then on good terms, or else Melville was playing
a double game, more especially as Bowes in the same letter states that those who
were formerly friends of Athole had transferred the leadership to Lennox, who
had also won over Ruthven and some others.
In Bowes' next letter, he says that Robert Melville, while professing great
devotion to Elizabeth, had warned him that his last commission had deeply hurt
the king's feelings, and caused Lennox to despair of gaining her Majesty's favour.
1 Bowes' Correspondence, Surtees Society, trafficking with France and Spain to pluck the
p. 131, 25th September 15S0. The more crown from the king's head, to revenge them-
rigid Presbyterians afterwards alleged this as selves for their loss in the castle of Edinburgh,
an offence against Lennox, that he hadprocured Terrible results are ascribed to their influence
the court favour for Melville, his brother Sir on the king, the death of Morton being one
James, John Maitland and others, who are of the least consequences of the alleged en-
described as the "most notorious changers of ticements of "these pernicious plagues."
court, and perellous practisers." They are [Calderwood's History, pp. 40S, 409.]
accused of bringing the Regent Murray to his 2 Bowes' Correspondence, pp. 133, 134,
grave and the king's mother into exile, and of 27th September 1580.
RECEIVES THE HONOUR OF KNIGHTHOOD, 1581. 103
Melville advised Bowes of the trouble that might arise between the two countries,
and as a result of their conference, it was proposed that under certain conditions,
subject to the queen's approval, Lennox might be received to favour.1 Here
Melville was clearly acting on behalf of Lennox, and it is probable that the
former conversation was really in his interest also.
The next answer from England was unfavourable, and dealt so sharply with
the Scottish court that negotiations were broken off, but not before Bowes had
done his best to sow dissension between Lennox and Ruthven, which bore fruit
at a later date. It was proposed at first to send Melville as an envoy to
the English court, but this plan was rejected, perhaps because of his continued
attachment to Queen Mary.3 Bowes left Scotland for a time, and his accounts
of proceedings there for the next two years are not so minute, being written from
Berwick or Newcastle. In the interval, Morton's arrest, trial, and execution had
been carried into effect, notwithstanding Elizabeth's remonstrances and threats.
A few months after his death, when Lord Ruthven was created Earl of Gowrie, on
20th October 1581, Robert Melville received the honour of knighthood.3 Some
months later, at a time when others of the old Marian faction were received into
favour, Sir Robert was appointed clerk and deputy to the Earl of Gowrie, then
treasurer of Scotland, with the usual powers, and with authority to pass signa-
tures under certain conditions.4 In August 1582, the raid of Ruthven took
place, by which, as is well known, the Earl of Gowrie and his friends became for
a time the virtual rulers of Scotland.5 The "raid" was very acceptable to the
English court, and Bowes was at once sent to Scotland to encourage the new
government.
His accounts of all that went on are very minute ; but he says so little of
Robert Melville that it would seem as if the latter, though retaining his office, did
not sympathise with Gowrie's party. This view is strengthened by the fact that
as soon as De la Mothe Fenelon, the French ambassador, arrived in Scotland,
charged, as was believed, with a special mission, Bowes reports that Melville was
one of those who most frequented the ambassador's lodgings. Melville and the
others are also said to have such free access to the court that they can give full
1 Bowes' Correspondence, p. 137. Woodfield, with the marsh or moss of Grange
2 Ibid. pp. 146, 147. niyre, in the barony of Aberdour, Fife. This
3 Marjoribanks' Annals, p. 40. acquisition was confirmed by the king in
4 13th April 1582, Register of the Privy November 15S2 and July 1583, and the
Council, vol. iii. pp. 478-480. lands were exempted from the estates re-
5 Melville's friend, the Duke of Lennox, stored to Ludovic, Duke of Lennox. [Regis-
was compelled to leave Scotland, but before trum Magni Sigilli, 1580-1593, Nos. 470,
he went, he sold to Melville the lands of 590, 59G.]
104 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
intelligence to the ambassador.1 Calderwood corroborates this statement so far
by noting that when the French ambassador had an audience of the king, Sir
Robert Melville was sent to accompany him to the presence, and he also acted as
a messenger on an errand of the ambassador's. It is probable that his knowledge
of the French language led to his being appointed to attend on the ambassador,
just as his brother Sir James was employed on similar occasions.
Bowes records, in one of his letters a month or two later, that Melville was
the means of Gowrie's losing the office of treasurer. The story, as Bowes tells it,
is to the effect that Gowrie had taken offence against certain persons who he
thought desired to remove him from office; and that by Sir Bobert Melville's
advice he surrendered his post into the hands of the king, who, contrary to
his expectation, accepted his resignation, and caused an act to be made to that
effect and recorded. No such act is among the extant records of the privy
council, which may be explained by a later statement of Bowes. He says that
much interest, his own among others, was used with the king to restore Gowrie.
His Majesty stated that the earl had often complained of the burden of office, and
that he had been advised to give it to some fit person of less rank. Gowrie had
therefore virtually yielded the office a year before, and retained only the name of
treasurer, the duties being performed by Sir Bobert Melville. The result of the
matter appears in an act of council of 20th April 1583, by which Gowrie and
Melville are continued as treasurer principal and depute respectively, but ordained
to act along with and by the advice of certain persons, including the very men
whose conduct had excited Gowrie's jealousy.2 How he bore this we learn from
Bowes, who, a few days later, writes : " The Earl of Gowrie sticketh still with his
office of treasurer, wherein little or nothing was moved at this convention [of
estates], so as the matter resteth now at his own choice to retain or surrender at
his pleasure. He is persuaded by Sir Bobert Melville, his deputy, to give it up ;
but that advice is hitherto heard with deaf ears." 3
The next notice of Sir Bobert Melville in Bowes' letters is brief, but
significant in the view of what took place a few days later. Towards the end of
May 1583, the king, somewhat against the will of Gowrie and the other " lords
reformers " as they were called, set out on a " progresse " towards Linlithgow, Fife,
and elsewhere. On 17th June, Bowes writes: "The king in his progress is to
visit Cairnie, Sir Bobert Melville's house, and thence go to Falkland." A fort-
night later, the king was in St. Andrews surrounded by the partisans of Arran
i Bowes' Correspondence, p. 330, 15th January 1583.
2 Register of the Privy Council, vol. iii. pp. 564, 565.
3 Bowes' Correspondence, pp. 416, 417, 23d April 1583.
DOWNFALL OF THE GOWRIE ADMINISTRATION, 1583. 105
and Lennox, and the administration of Gowrie and his faction was at an end.
There is an allusion in Sir James Melville's memoirs which indicates that he and
his brother had a considerable share in bringing about this revolution, and the
king's visit to Murdoch cairnie shortly before lends probability to that statement.
So also does the fact that the new government had not been long in office ere Sir
Robert, his brother, and John Maitland were made members of the privy
council, and thenceforth took a share in the administration.1
Previous to this, however, Melville was an active man under the new
regime. Among other pieces of gossip at this time Bowes writes in the middle
of July 1583, that he is credibly informed that Sir Eobert Melville and others
of the same way of thinking are shortly to meet together and confer as to
the king's mother, with a view, Bowes thinks, to advise the king. Some days
afterwards he records that it was proposed to send Sir Robert on an embassy
to England to explain the new state of affairs, adding significantly that the
proposal does not please the " well affected," that is, the English party in
Scotland.2
There seems no doubt that, whether owing to his attachment to Queen
Mary's party or not, Robert Melville was a favourite of King James, and em-
ployed by him on delicate missions. One of these, if Bowes be correct,
seriously affected the Earl of Gowrie. Writing in the middle of August 1583,
Bowes states that the Earl of Gowrie was lately sent for by the king,
who deputed Sir Eobert Melville to persuade him to come to the king. Sir
Robert induced the earl to come to Cupar, and after his arrival, Colonel
William .Stewart, Sir Robert, his brother Sir James, and Maitland " dealt very
earnestly " with the earl to accept the king's remission for the Ruthven
raid. It is said that Gowrie was wrought into a passion and cursed his
obedience to the kinsr's letter, declarins; that he desired banishment rather than
take a remission. In the end, however, finding himself pressed, he, " after a
great battle," agreed to do what would please the king. Bowes adds that
Gowrie then retired to his own house malcontent.3 There may be some doubt
about this story, as Calderwood implies that Gowrie received a remission at
St. Andrews on the day of the counter revolution, but the historian does not
positively assert the fact, although he states that by accepting a remission
1 Register of Privy Council, vol. iii. p. 594, Colonel Stewart were also, at a later date,
29th August 15S3. accused by Mr. Patrick Galloway, of an
2 Bowes' Correspondence, pp. 497, 506, endeavour to entice him, while a captive, to
13th and 16th July 1583. disavow the Act of the General Assembly in
3 Bowes' Correspondence, p. 552, 17th favour of Gowrie and his party. [Calder-
August 1583. Sir Robert Melville and wood, vol. iv. p. 116.]
VOL. I. O
106 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
Gowrie condemned himself and his associates and ultimately ruined his cause.
On the other hand, Bowes' relation is probably correct, as he places the event
just after the return to court of the Earl of Arran, whose influence with the
king would be used strongly against Gowrie, and if the latter were forced to
accept a remission, his party would be weakened. New proclamations were
also issued at this time against the Ruthven raiders.1
Another evidence of Melville's being in the inner counsels of the king
even before his actual admission as a privy councillor, is found in a letter from
Bowes to Walsingham, then travelling towards Scotland on a special embassy.
He advises "Walsingham how to carry his mission, and states that he had held
communication with Robert and James Melville who, he says, " chiefly carry this
course by their advices," desiring them to move the king to yield to the views
of the English queen in regard to remissions to the Ruthven raiders.2 Wal-
singham arrived in Edinburgh on 1st September, Melville being in the mean-
time admitted a privy councillor. The English ambassador had some difficulty
of access to the king, who had gone to Perth, but at last he was enabled to
present the complaints with which he was charged by the English court, chiefly
directed against the change of government and the growing ascendency of Arran.
What followed, as recorded by Bowes, was significant. He writes : "For the
deliberation of the griefs (complaints) delivered to the king by my lord ambassador
(Walsingham), the king called to that consultation Arran, Montrose, Colonel
Stewart, Sir Robert Melville, and John Maitland, leaving out Rothes, Gowrie,
Newbattle (and others), who were thought not meet to be privy to the secresy
of the debate and resolution in that cause."3
It has been asserted, though it is not clear on what authority, that Sir Robert
Melville, like his brother, Sir James, formed one of the wiser and more moderate
party of the king's advisers, but if so, and the statement is warranted by Sir
James Melville himself, Arran's more violent counsels prevailed, and sterner
measures were dealt out to Gowrie's faction.4 As we lose at this date the minute
record of Scottish affairs made by Bowes, who had been recalled to England, it
is impossible to state with accuracy what Melville's position clearly was as regards
the conflicting parties. It may be noted, however, that he was a very regular
1 Calderwood's History, pp. 716, 719, 722. raider, but had afterwards consented, and
2 Bowes' Correspondence, pp. 557, 558, was llow iU at ease uncler the new enact"
°Oth August 15S3 ments. On 19th September 1583 he writes
that Rothes remains at home disquieted ;
3 Ibid. p. 571, 12th September 1583. one of his friends advising him to hang gh,
4 Bowes tells a somewhat unintelligible Robert Melville to recover the good opinion
story about Rothes, who was not a Ruthven of his former friends.
HIS CONCERN IN THE DEATH OF COWRIE, 1584. 107
attender at the meetings of the privy council,1 and he appears to have been
present on 17th April 1584, when a proclamation was issued forbidding the wife,
friends, or dependants of the Earl of Gowrie from approaching the king or court.
This renewed severity against Gowrie was caused by certain warlike move-
ments of his supporters, and by the fact that the unfortunate earl himself was
then a captive, having been arrested at Dundee by Colonel William Stewart.
He was brought to Edinburgh, and there confined for a few days, after which he
was removed to Stirling for trial. According to certain documents, evidently
contemporary, and which are believed to be papers containing an account of the
trial, procured by Davison, then resident in Scotland, and forwarded by him to
the English court, Sir Kobert Melville played an important part in a scene
which took place with Gowrie before his trial, and also at the trial itself.
One of these documents gives an account of an interview held with Gowrie
while still confined in Edinburgh. In that paper, which is headed, " The practise
of Arran and Sir Eobert Melville against the life of Gowrie," it is stated that
Arran, Gowrie's great enemy and rival, accompanied by Sir Eobert Melville, paid
a visit to the captive, and, under pretence of friendship and desire for his welfare,
persuaded him to write a letter of confession to the king. Gowrie at first
refused, but afterwards yielded on a promise of pardon being held out to him.2
Another document informs us that when the trial came on, the earl's indict-
ment was framed upon the points contained in his letter to the king. He
strongly protested against this, and alleged that he never would have been so
foolish as to write his own accusation had it not been that he was promised a
pardon. He then, it is said, challenged Sir Robert Melville and the others to
prove this, who, he declared, had often urged him to set forth the truth. The lord
advocate told him that they had no power to promise him life. He earnestly
appealed to them if they did not promise pardon in the king's name, but this they
1 Register of Privy Council, vol. iii. pp. 594 paper, points out certain discrepancies in its
el seq. Besides his ordinary attendances in statements as compared with those of Arch-
council, Sir Robert is specially named at bishop Spottiswood, who publishes Gowrie's
this time (1) as member of a committee for letter, but on examination these apparent
checking an account of ransom-money col- discrepancies can be explained, and though
lected to free captives from the Turks ; (2) the paper may not be literally reliable,
as arbiter in a dispute between the laird of the main facts seem clear that such an
Anstruther and the burgesses of Crail ; (3) interview did take place, and that Sir Robert
as one of the subscribers of a signature in Melville was present. Indeed, Spottiswood
favour of the family of Sir James Balfour of also gives his name and those of the Earl of
Pittendriech. Montrose and Lord Doune (omitting Arran)
2 Archieologia, vol. xxxiii. pp. 161-163. A as persons appointed to examine Gowrie.
writer in the Archseologia, who prints this [History, vol. ii. p. 310.]
108 SIE ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
denied. He then pressed each separately to go to the king on his behalf, but this
also was refused. The indictment proceeded, the jury were sworn, a verdict of guilty
was returned, and sentence of death was pronounced. Gowrie then bade them good-
bye, and after a short time spent in devotion was conducted to the scaffold. There
he was attended by the lord justice-clerk and Sir Robert Melville. It was to the
latter that the earl addressed almost his last words, desiring him to pay the execu-
tioner money in lieu of his clothes, which he had given to his page. He then "smyl-
inglie " put his head under the axe. He was buried, according to the same account,
beside the late lord chancellor, Lord Glamis, in Stirling, and his remains were
followed to the grave by the secretary, Maitland of Thirlestane, Sir Robert Mel-
ville, the justice-clerk, Sir Lewis Belleuden, and Sir Robert Stewart of Traquair.1
This tragedy over, Arran's ascendency became still more complete, as Gowrie's
chief partisans were all either in custody or in exile. Although from causes already
noted we have less information regarding Sir Robert Melville, the allusions to him
are of such a nature as to indicate that he and his old comrade, Maitland, were
looked upon as attached to Queen Mary's party, and that they supported Arran
because he seemed to favour their schemes. The first prominent notice of Sir
Robert Melville, after Gowrie's death, is the ratification by parliament of his
appointment as treasurer-depute. The parliament met about a fortnight after
Gowrie's death, and contrary to the usual practice, its proceedings were kept pro-
foundly secret till it was over, when it was found that the chief acts passed were
strongly directed against the kirk and her discipline.2 At this juncture, Davison
was again sent to Scotland as ambassador from England, and again he seems to
have come into contact with Sir Robert Melville and his brother, Sir James.
Whether as a result of his interview with them or not, Davison reported to his
government that Scotland was fast falling under the influence of the queen of
Scots, and that the course taken against Gowrie and his party was owing to her
negotiations and those of the French court. This information excited much
1 Archreologia, vol. xxxiii. pp. 163, 170. has no such sentence, and nowhere states
The apparently treacherous conduct of Sir that Melville was Gowrie's "friend." There
Robert Melville towards Gowrie, as im- is evidence rather that their opinions were
plied in these papers, has been severely opposed, but Melville had been officially
commented on. A recent writer [Tytler's associated with Gowrie, and probably felt
History, 3d ed. p. 383 and note], in that death shut out all animosities. Spot-
dealing with the matter, assumes, on the tiswoode [History, vol. ii. p. 313] says of
authority of the papers cited, that Melville Gowrie's death, " His servants were per-
was a "friend" of Gowrie and quotes "He mitted to take the head with the body and
(Gowrie) was buried by his three friends, bury it."
Sir Robert Melvalle," etc., but the original 2 Cf. Calderwood, vol. iv. pp. 62, 63.
THE COUNTESS OF ARRAN AND THE CROWN JEWELS. 109
consternation at the English court, and it was decided to use every effort to gain
over Arran, whose power over James was greatest. Even here, however, Sir
Robert Melville's influence seems to have been felt, as Lord Hunsdon in a letter
to Davison writes that Arran's intimacy with Maitland and Melville is suspicious,
for they are both the Scottish queen's, body and soul.1
Shortly after the date of this letter, a meeting took place between Hunsdon
and Arran, which was friendly to the aims of Elizabeth. Arran protested that
both the king of Scots and himself were ready to serve the English interest ; and
at this interview he introduced to Hunsdon the Master of Gray, who was shortly
to be despatched to England as ambassador. According to Davison, Gray was
sent for the purpose of revealing, with her son's consent, Queen Mary's plans to
the English queen.
Previous to his meeting with Hunsdon, Arran had made a pretended dis-
covery of a plot, as he alleged, for seizing the king, killing Arran, and taking
Edinburgh castle, which led to his securing the custody of that fortress for him-
self. The Master of Mar was constable of the castle, but at the king's order he
gave it up to Arran. On his return from the conference with Hunsdon, Arran
began to carry matters with a high hand, and he and his wife took possession of
the crown jewels and Queen Mary's wardrobe, much to the disgust of Sir Robert
Melville, who was responsible for their custody. Davison wrote to Walsingham
that Lady Arran had made new keys to the jewel chests without the king's know-
ledge or command ; while the old keys remained with Melville, who " is mynded
to resygne them up to his Maiesty, so sone as he shall come to the court, bycause
he will no longer stand charged with that which she has the disposicion of,
[whom] every man suspectith to[o] skillfull in substraction." 2
In a postscript, Davison says, " The provost of Glenliwde [LincludenJ3 is
brought againe to this towne and comytted to the castle ; their foreign conspiracy
is at an end, nowe my lord of Arane hath hitt the mark he aymid at. The king
himself, as is assured me by some of his owne counsel], hath an vtter mislyk of
the chang, and hath blaimed the secretary [Maitland] and Sir Robert Melvin for
dealing further in the matter then they had warrant from himself. But some
think the master's [of Mar's] yelding in this, and others extraordinary dealing
against him without the king's warrant will turne to Aranes disadvantage with
the tyme howsoever he do presently bear yt out," etc.4 The reference to Melville
1 Letter, 3d August 15S4, Thorpe's Calen- 3 Mr. Robert Douglas, provost of Linclu-
dar of State Papers, vol. i. p. 481. den, who was one of the Marian faction, and
2 24th August 1584. Papers relating to one of the pretended conspirators.
Patrick, Master of Gray, Bannatyne Club, p. 6. 4 Ibid. p. 7.
110 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
is somewhat obscure, but the tone of Davison's letter towards Arran is very
severe, and notwithstanding their dealings with the earl, the English government
were determined if possible to remove him from power.
This result was brought about some months later, during which period we
find little notice of Sir Eobert Melville. He is mentioned in a paper sent to
Queen Elizabeth by the banished lords of the Gowrie faction, and is classed with
Arran, Maitland, and others, as opponents and haters of the English queen.1 This
statement may have been dictated by partisanship, and, as will be seen, both Mait-
land and Melville were won over to oppose Arran. Melville continued to be one
of the most regular attenders of the privy council, and therefore probably assented
to much of the work done there, including the severe edicts against the clergy.
He is referred to as present with the king on a visit to Dirleton in May 1585,
where Arran entertained the court for twelve days. They passed the time, says
Calderwood, with the play of Eobin Hood.2
Soon after this visit to Dirleton, Henry Wotton arrived as ambassador from
England, on the ostensible mission of persuading the king of Scots to enter into
a league offensive and defensive with England. In this he was successful, and
the league was finally passed at a convention of estates held at St. Andrews on
31st July 1585. Arran also signed the league, though he was absent from the
convention, having been committed to ward on the previous day at the demand
of the English ambassador for alleged participation in the accidental death of
Lord Russell at a border meeting. This accident was used as the pretext which
the English government had long desired to get rid of Arran, and it was so far
successful. There are good grounds for believing that had this not occurred, an
attempt would have been made to remove him by violence. Sir Eobert Melville
was a member of the convention at which the treaty with England was agreed to ;
but although one of the officers of state, his signature is not among those appended
to the document. According to a contemporary writer, an agent of Queen Mary,
Melville had, previous to this date, left the party of Arran, and entered into a bond
with Maitland and the Earls of Huntly, Athole, and Bothwell in opposition to
1 Calderwood's History, vol. iv. p. 197. with pearle, diamondis and rubeis," but the
2 Ibid. p. 366. A few days before this, Sir sum for which it was pledged is not stated.
Robert received from George Meldrum of It may be added that Meldrum died shortly
Fyvie a receipt for a jewel which had been after this, and the casualty of his sons' ward
left in his hands, probably as a pledge for and marriage was bestowed on Robert Mel-
some fine or other debt to the crown, and ville, younger of Murdochcairnie. [Vol. iii. of
which Sir Robert now returned to its owner. this work, p. 124. Gift in Melville Charter-
It is described as " ane garnising of gold set chest.]
NEGOTIATES ON BEHALF OF QUEEN MARY, 1586. Ill
Arran. The Master of Gray was, it is stated, at the head of this new party,
which he had probably formed to weaken Arran's influence.
What Melville's motive was in joining Gray's party is not clear ; but Mait-
land and some others of the council were certainly though secretly in favour of
the return of the banished lords to Scotland, and of the revolution which their
return would probably effect. That revolution did take place a few months later,
when the Earls of Angus and Mar and the others, by Elizabeth's permission,
crossed the border into Scotland, and advanced at the head of a considerable force
to Stirling, where the king then was. Arran was then with the king ; but the
royal forces made no resistance, and the town was easily taken. Arran fled, the
banished lords were admitted to the king's presence and graciously received, and
Sir Eobert Melville was one of the six members of council who, with the
king, framed a proclamation for a pacification and remission.1 His attendance
on the business of the council continued to be as assiduous as before, but
as the reference to him as an official or a councillor are for the most part formal,
no special detail of them need be given.2 On one occasion, however, in the end
of 1586 and beginning of 1587, he was placed in a very responsible position,
out of his ordinary routine.
In October 1586, Mary Queen of Scots had been brought to trial, and con-
demned to death in England. When information of this reached Scotland, there
was great excitement, and it was at once resolved to send an important mission
to the English court to remonstrate with Elizabeth. After some delay the Master
of Gray was commissioned to go, and Sir Robert Melville, known to be one of
her supporters, was appointed to accompany him. The Earl of Bothwell, the
famous Francis Stewart, was also named, but he was not sent, owing, it is said, to
Gray's influence, because, according to a contemporary, the earl was " prompt and
free of speech and affectionate to the Queene of Scottis, and such a one as would
not, if he discovered any of the trecheries which moste suspected by him, conceale
1 Register of Privy Council, vol. iv. pp. abbey of Dunfermline, a charter of the
30, 31. lands of Garvock in Fife, dated 17th Febru-
2 On 10th May 1586, he and his son ary 1586. He had previously received these
Robert received from Patrick, Master of lands from John Fenton, " yconimus " of
Gray, lately made commendator of Dunferin- the abbey of Dunfermline, with consent of
line, a ratification of a grant of the house of William, commendator of Pittenweem, and
Abbotshall, and the erection of Burntisland was infeft in them on 25th November 1584.
into a free port. [Vol. iii. of this work, pp. These grants were confirmed to Sir Robert
125-127.] This writ will be more fully by King James the Sixth, on 31st March
noticed in the next memoir. Sir Robert, 1589. Sir Robert granted a charter of Gar-
about the same time, acquired from the vock to his brother, Sir Andrew, dated 17th
Master of Gray, as commendator of the April 1588. [Inventory of Garvock Writs.]
112 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
it." * Sir Robert Melville was no doubt more diplomatic, but he was still truly-
attached to his old mistress, and he appears to have made every effort he could
on her behalf. His efforts, though outwardly seconded, were really thwarted by
his colleague, and, as is well known, they were in vain. Elizabeth received the
ambassadors ungraciously enough, and when she heard their proposals that Mary
should demit her succession to her son and the king of Scots should be considered
as in his mother's place, thus obviating popish intrigues, she burst into one of her
terrible fits of passion, and rejected the idea with bitter taunts. Gray desired
that Mary's life might be spared for fifteen days, to allow time to communicate
with Scotland, but Elizabeth refused ; Melville then begged for only eight days,
but she replied, not for an hour, and cut short the conference.2 Sir Robert and
Gray, however, wrote to King James that their negotiations were hindered by
reports that he was not in earnest in the matter. They had another interview
with Elizabeth, who was then more inclined to consider their proposals, but showed
no real change of purpose on the most important point.3
Gray and Melville returned to Scotland on February 7th, 1587, and on the
following day, the very day of Mary's execution, although that was not known
in Scotland for some time, they reported to the king and council the unsuccessful
result of their mission, when they were duly commended and discharged.4 Of
Melville, the French ambassador wrote that he understood Sir Robert Melville
had done his part, and was sorry his labour had no better success.5 For his
services as ambassador Melville received from the king a grant of the marriage of
Kennedy of Ardmillan, valued at £1000.
To the French envoy, Courcelles, we owe several notices of Sir Robert
Melville, and of the part he played at this crisis. Soon after Mary's execution
Elizabeth sent Mr. Robert Carey as a special messenger to Scotland to give the
king her version of the tragedy, but King James refused an audience, despatching
Mr. Peter Young to learn whether his mother was really dead. He had already
been advised of the event by his own agents, particularly by Archibald Douglas,
but Melville told Courcelles that the king would not seem to believe the fact
until the return of Peter Young. On learning the truth from Carey's own lips,
the king positively refused to see him, and peremptorily ordered him to remain
1 Courcelles' Despatches, Bannatyne Club, herself boisted [threatened] him (if hislyf.''
1828, p. 22. [Memoirs, p. 357.]
2 Papers relating toPatrick, Masterof Gray, 3 PapersrelatingtoPatrick,Masterof Gray,
Bannatyne Club, 1S36, pp. 129, 130. Sir Bannatyne Club, 1836, pp. 132-134.
James Melville says of his brother on this .
. , , . , , 4 Register ol Privy Council, vol. iv. p. 144.
occasion, "he spak braue and stout langage J
to the consaill of England, sa that the queen 5 Courcelles' Despatches, p. 41.
INDIGNATION AT THE DEATH OF QUEEN MARY. 113
at Berwick, adding that certain members of the Scottish council would be sent to
receive his message. Those selected for this duty were Sir Robert Melville and
Sir James Home of Cowdenknowes, who met Carey at Foulden, not far from
Berwick.1
In terms of Elizabeth's instructions, Carey affirmed that the Queen of Scots
was executed without the knowledge of his mistress, her councillors having got
the warrant signed among other papers, and she had imprisoned Davison on
account of it, with other excuses. Melville answered that the whole Scottish
nation were offended by this proceeding against a sovereign queen, that Elizabeth
might make what excuses she pleased now, but that before the Scottish ambas-
sadors left she showed herself not against the execution, but rather to approve it,
giving them no hope of saving Mary's life. The English queen should show her
displeasure against the murderers, her own councillors and subjects. As for the
friendship desired by her, added Melville, when she had satisfied the king in a
matter of such weight touching him in honour, he would consider it. On the
English ambassador's saying that his mistress was resolved to content the king in
all he could desire, the Scottish envoys said they were not to advise the queen,
and in answer to a request that libellers should be restrained, Melville replied
that the king could not hinder that to be set down in words which the queen had
performed in deeds.2
From this conversation, as reported by Courcelles, who probably had it from
Melville himself, we gather that Sir Robert at least was indignant at Mary's
execution, but all contemporary accounts agree in representing the king himself
as comparatively indifferent in the matter, and the excitement, which for a time
prevailed, soon subsided. Melville continued his attendance on public affairs,3
and is mentioned in connection with the General Assembly of the Church of
Scotland in February 1588. This assembly was specially summoned by Mr.
Andrew Melville because of the increased activity of Jesuits and Roman Catholics
generally in Scotland, in view of the threatened invasion by the Spanish Armada.
It was proposed that a list of Jesuits, priests and others, should be given up by
the members of the assembly, both lay and clerical, that summonses might be
issued against them in the king's name. Sir Robert Melville was to be intrusted
with this duty. He also appeared in the assembly as a witness against a clergy-
man who was accused of slandering the king. This was Mr. James Gibson,
minister of Pencaitland, who had formerly been dealt with by the assembly. It
1 Calderwood, vol. iv. p. 612. office of keeper of Linlithgow Palace, con-
2 Courcelles' Despatches, pp. 49, 50. ferred by Queen Mary, in favour of Sir Lewis
3 On 22d November 1587 he resigned his Bellenden of Auchnoul, justice-clerk.
VOL. I. P
114 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
was alleged that he had confessed his offence, and Melville and others were pro-
duced to prove his confession, and as a result of their evidence the offending
minister was suspended from his office for a time.
When King James left Scotland for Denmark in October 1589, he made
special appointments and arrangements for the government of the country
during his absence. In these arrangements Melville held a principal place,
being deputed to act as chancellor.1 The king was absent for six months, a
period, as was remarked at the time, of unusual peace and order in Scotland.
Melville had in the early part of 1589 been engaged in the king's service or in
attendance on his Majesty during the expedition conducted by James in person
against his rebellious Catholic subjects in the north of Scotland.2 After the
king's return from Denmark a commission was issued specially providing for good
rule on the borders, of which commission Melville was appointed a member. His
energies therefore were not confined to the special duties of his own office, but he
ajipears to have taken an active part in all affairs.
His office of treasurer-depute was no sinecure, but often a serious burden, as
he had frequently to advance large sums to the king, and his accounts then showed
a considerable balance against the government. To repay him for his extra
expenditure on one occasion the profits of the mint were conveyed to him, to be
paid to him until the debt to him was fully discharged.3 Probably with the
view of further reimbursing him, the king, in December 1590, granted to him
the crown casualties of ward and others due from the lands and baronies of the
lately deceased Dame Margaret Balfour of Burlie during the minority of her
eldest son and heir, Michael Balfour, and also the casualty of his marriage.4
In September of the same year Sir Robert Melville displeased the presbytery
of Kirkcaldy because he and the magistrates of Burntisland refused to apj:>rehend
Mr. James Gordon, a prominent Jesuit. The king was informed of the fact, but
took no steps in the matter. Another incidental notice of Sir Robert is in
August 1592, after the attack made by the turbulent Earl of Bothwell on Falk-
land Palace. A letter from Bowes, the English Resident in Scotland, to Lord
Burghley states that the chancellor, Lord Thirlestane, and Sir Robert Melville
were suspected of connivance at or participation in Bothwell's pranks ; but
1 Register of the Privy Council, vol. iv. estate, Michael Balfour of Burlie, on 23d
p. 429. July 1591, acknowledged receipt from Sir
2 Qf ifad p- 825. Robert Melville of a gold chain, a pair of
bracelets set with agates and pearl, a sapphire
3 Register of Privy Council, vol. iv. p. 470. „ tablet?n and other jewellery> which Balfouj.
4 Gift, dated loth December 1590, in Mel- accepted as " heirship " from his mother's
ville Charter-chest. In connection with this property. [Vol. iii. of this work, p. 133.]
ACQUISITION OF THE BISHOPS PALACE OF MONIMAIL. 115
if so, they never lost the confidence of the king. Sir James Melville, on the
other hand, records in his Memoirs that it was Sir Robert's vigilance which
brought about the failure of the attack, and that when Both well had, in December
1591, made a similar attack on Holyrood, his brother had warned the king to
take care of himself, but in vain.
In December 1592 Sir Robert Melville purchased the manor-house of Moni-
mail, which, with various additions, now forms the barony of Melville in Fifeshire.
The seller of the property was James Balfour, described as commendator of the
priory of Charterhouse, near Perth, who had acquired possession of the lands from
his father, the famous Sir James Balfour of Pittendriech. The contract of sale
comprehends the commendator's " palice, ludging, and manor-place " of Monimail,
and also " the grene lying foranent the foir yett of the said place."1 This palace
had been a residence of the bishops and archbishops of St. Andrews. It is believed
to have been originally built by Bishop Lamberton, in the time of King Robert
the Bruce, but was rebuilt or added to by Cardinal Beaton, whose cardinal's hat
is represented on the tower which bears his name and is the only part of the
old palace now remaining. An engraving of the tower in its present state is
given in this work.
The cardinal's successor, John Hamilton, also resided at Monimail for a time,
and it was there that in 1551 he fell sick of the disease of which he was cured
by the famous Italian physician, Cardan. In 1564, Archbishop Hamilton granted
the house and lands to James Balfour, then styled rector of Flisk and official of
Lothian, and the reason for the grant is of interest, as showing the condition of
the place at that date. The preamble of the archbishop's charter narrates that
the lands of Pathcondie, Letham, and others adjoining the manor of Monimail had
been feued out to tenants, also that the manor itself was ruinous, waste, and
broken, and could not be repaired except at great cost, while even if it were re-
paired and rebuilt, the archbishop and his successors could not comfortably reside
there owing to the feuing of the adjacent lands. For these reasons the arch-
bishop grants the manor-house of Monimail to James Balfour for a yearly feu-
duty of 13s. 4d. and other dues, and under the following among other conditions,
that Balfour should assist and concur with the neighbouring tenants in maintaining
and defending the house against any violence or injury by others in the vicinity.2
1 Contract of sale dated 19th December the Sixth to Sir Robert Melville, dated 8th
1592. Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 133-136. April 1593, in Melville Charter-chest. The
precept of sasine is directed to Robert Balfour,
2 The archbishop's charter, which is dated brother-german of Michael Balfour of Burlie,
10th September 1564, is given at length a member of the family who is not known to
in a confirmation granted by King James the peerage-writers.
116 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
Ill 1578, Balfour, now described as James Balfour of Pittendriech, knight,
granted the house and place of Monimail to his second son, James, who, as already
stated, sold them to Sir Robert Melville. The sum to be paid was 5500 merks,
and the contract of sale was followed by a charter of the lands, dated at Dundee
on 20th February 1593, confirmed, along with the two preceding writs, by King
James the Sixth, under the great seal, on 8th April 1593.1
Soon after this date, Melville was sent as a special ambassador to England.
He had a somewhat delicate mission to perform. A few months before, Edin-
burgh and Scotland generally had been thrown into great excitement by the dis-
covery of a plot by which a Spanish army was to land in Scotland and to be
joined by a force under the Earls of Huntly, Errol, and Angus, and other Scottish
Catholics. By this means it was hoped to re-establish the Catholic religion in
Scotland and perhaps also in England. The discovery was followed by the im-
mediate imprisonment of Angus, and an expedition to the north with the king
himself at its head. Little, however, was really effected by this apparent activity^
The king also was annoyed at the cordial reception which the rebel Bothwell had
in the north of England under orders from Elizabeth herself. In the midst of
his perplexities, Lord Burgh arrived from England as envoy-extraordinary from
the English queen to urge on her part, first, that James should declare war against
Spain ; second, that he should exercise an unceasing rigour against the Papists ;
and third, that the two kingdoms should take united action against the Spaniards.
Sir Robert Melville was sent to interview the ambassador and to reply to his de-
mands, by assuring him on the first point, that there was no occasion of war with
Spain, as Scottish subjects had a free trade with that country, and that if the
King of Spain meant to pursue England, he would give pledges that no harm
would be done. Melville also reminded the envoy that many fair offers were
made by the English queen in the last strait, but not a word was kept. On
the second point, he said that his Majesty was a free prince, and could take no
directions from the Queen of England as to dealing with his own subjects ; while
as to the third demand, as there had been no break of friendship there could be
.no renewal.2 King James further insisted that it was Elizabeth's interest to co-
operate with him in his present action ; but to aid him he needed both men and
money, and he remonstrated strongly against the conduct of the English queen
in encouraging Bothwell in his treason.3 It was to carry his answers to Lord
Burgh's message, and to emphasise the demand for Bothwell's expulsion from
1 Confirmation charter, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Moysie's Memoirs, p. 101.
3 Warrender uss., cited in Tytler, 3d ed., voL vii. pp. 197, 198.
AMBASSADOR TO THE ENGLISH COURT, 1593. 117
England, and for money to aid in putting down the Catholic rebels, that King
James despatched Melville. He was also to receive the king's annuity.1
Before leaving for the south, Melville acted as one of the commissioners for
opening parliament, which was then adjourned to a later date. According to
the parliamentary records, he was in Edinburgh on 9th June, but Calderwood
implies he left on the 7th. Bowes, however, then the English Resident in Scot-
land, wrote to Burghley that he had endeavoured to delay Melville's journey.
While in England, Melville received from King James a letter bidding him
assure the queen of the intended forfeiture of the Catholic earls, and the restora-
tion of the chancellor.3 Notwithstanding this assurance, Melville's embassy was
not so successful as the king and he would have liked, and he wrote to Burghley
that the queen's answer was not agreeable to his master's expectations, nor was
the assistance given so effectual as was hoped. He begs Burghley to intercede
with the queen to reconsider the matter, and that the money promised to King
James may not be lessened.3 The king also again complained of Bothwell's pro-
ceedings, and the encouragement he received in England. He had good reason to
complain, for ere Melville's return Bothwell had made his famous entry into Holy-
rood Palace, and the king had been forced to come to terms.4 An act of remission
was passed in favour of Bothwell and his accomplices, while it was agreed that
he should stand his trial for his alleged offences against the king. One result of
this was that when Melville returned from England he found the king virtually
a prisoner in Bothwell's hands. Bothwell was tried by a jury on the 10th
August following, and acquitted. On the 11th, the king made an attempt to
escape from Holyrood, but was intercepted by Bothwell, who declared he should
not leave the palace till the country was more settled. Melville was apparently
again in attendance on the king, if not actually present at the scene with Both-
well, and his name was dragged into the discussion in a curious manner. James
protested strongly against Bothwell's breach of faith in thus detaining him, and
not withdrawing, as promised, from the palace. Bothwell in turn demanded,
before he fulfilled his promise, to be restored to his lauds, and that the murder
of the " bonnie Earl of Moray " should be avenged. He then charged the chan—
1 Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 252, 253. Bothwell, but in one epistle at least, ad-
2 Ibid. pp. 253, 254. dressed to John, Lord Hamilton, he added a
3 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. ii. p. 630. private postscript somewhat at variance with
4 In this affair King James showed much the rest of the letter: " Milorde, thir folkis
diplomacy, submitting for the time with the haue promeisit all humilitie, suppose the
view of gaining opportunities of retaliation. form uoilent ; and indeed presentlie there
He wrote letters to some of his nobles bearing is na force heir bot inyne." — [Historical iiss.
publicly the fact of his reconciliation to Commission, Report xi., Part vi. p. 66.]
118 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
cellor and others, including Sir Kobert Melville, with signing a warrant for
Moray's slaughter. " Tush, tush ! " said the king, " a better man than you,
Bothwell, shall answer for Sir Robert." " I deny that," was the retort, " unless
that be your Majesty." 1 The dispute between the parties then grew so hot
that all attempts at an amicable settlement appeared unavailing.
A few days later, however, the courtiers, among whom was Melville, with the
magistrates and ministers of Edinburgh, arranged an agreement, which was signed
by them and by the king and Bothwell's party. Certain nobles, including Chan-
cellor Maitland, were to absent themselves from court, while Bothwell also was to
retire and allow the king freedom of action, receiving at the same time remission
of all offences. At a later date Melville was one of those selected to convey to
Bothwell the decision of a convention of estates held at Stirling, and the promise
that the king did not mean to withdraw his pardon or the restoration of his
estates, but would ratify the same in parliament, provided Bothwell became a
suppliant, and would leave the country.'2 These conditions were accepted, and,
according to Bowes, the arrangement was cemented by a banquet given by Both-
well to the king, but the reconciliation was very brief.
The next notice of Sir Bobert Melville records his presence at a convention
of estates held at Linlithgow in the end of October 1593, and which continued to
sit at intervals for a time, almost superseding the regular council. He was also
one of those who aided in passing the " Act of Abolition," as it was called, in
favour of the Roman Catholic earls, Huntly, Angus, and Errol, granting them
pardon on certain conditions. This act greatly disappointed the clergy, but was
afterwards revoked, as the earls did not comply with its conditions. As a result,
the king, stimulated probably by a sharp rebuke from Queen Elizabeth, directed
Sir Robert Melville and others to prepare a summons against the rebels, the pres-
bytery of Edinburgh being also called in to advise on the subject. Proceedings
were varied by a sudden raid, led by the irrepressible Bothwell in person, on 3d
April, and a few days later, Sir Robert Melville met the presbytery with a pro-
position that they should devise a method to keep Bothwell's forces out of the
neighbourhood. The ministers, suspecting a snare, replied they would pray for
him and against all opponents to the good cause. Sir Robert urged a more
satisfactory answer, but they refused to move till they saw further action.
Melville then complained that the nobility had left the king, to which Mr. Robert
1 Letter from Bowes to Burghley, 16th August 1593, Thorpe's Calendar, vol. ii. p. 632,
cited in Tytler, 3d ed., vol. vii. pp. 220, 221.
2 Calderwood's History, vol. v. pp. 257-261.
APPOINTED A LORD OF SESSION, 1594. 119
Bruce responded to the effect that it was his Majesty's own fault, and their advice
was that he should turn and repent.1
On the same day a proclamation was issued declaring the king's intention to
make an armed expedition to the north, and summoning the lieges to his standard
for repression of the rebels. Two days afterwards James crossed the Forth to
Burntisland on a visit to Sir Robert Melville, and also, it is said, with the hope
of surprising some of Bothwell's party in Fife. From Burntisland Sir Robert,
doubtless by the request of the king, wrote to Burghley and also to Queen Eliza-
beth, expressing regret for the " jealousies " which had fallen out between the two
sovereigns, and assuring them of his master's sincere affection towards her
Majesty.2 On the king's return to Edinburgh he and the council had before them
Mr. John Ross, a minister within the bounds of the synod of Perth, who was
charged with uttering treasonable speeches against the king. He had been appre-
hended near Burntisland in disguise, and seized as a suspected adherent of
Bothwell. Sir Robert Melville was present at the examination, but appears only
to have spoken once, in defence of his former mistress, Queen Mary, whom he
affirmed to be " als vertuous a prince as ever raigned in Europe." Sir Robert was
also appointed to lay Ross's case and other matters on behalf of the king before
the General Assembly.3
Sir Robert, as on former occasions, was one of the commissioners for opening
parliament in May and June 1594, when Huntly and the other Catholic earls were
forfeited. Three days before the sitting of the parliament the king had promoted
Melville to be one of the extraordinary lords of session, as successor to Sir John
Seton of Barns, and on the 1 1 th June he presented the king's warrant and was
duly admitted to the bench."4 About the same date he, with some other officers
of state, was waited on by a committee of ministers who were anxious to secure
the prosecution of the sentence against the Catholic earls, but the result of the
interview is not recorded.6 A few days previously he had written a friendly
epistle to Burghley, assuring him of the king's continued affection towards
Elizabeth, concluding, however, with an urgent request that she would advance
the king's annuity and all arrears.6 The money was much needed, as the king
was then preparing on the one hand, to levy an army against the rebels, and on
the other, to celebrate with great magnificence the baptism of his eldest son,
1 Calderwood's History, vol. v. pp. 289, 4 Book of Sederunt, vol. iv. f. 148.
ono oof; ooq
in w ' 1 ti -pi i i •• 6 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 336.
2 Ibid. p. 299 ; Thorpe s Calendar, vol. n.
p. 648. 8 Thorpe's Calendar, vol. ii. p. 653. 7th
3 Calderwood, vol. v. pp. 303, 323-326. June 1594.
120 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
Prince Henry, and Sir Robert Melville was one of those specially deputed to
" consult how money might be had." 1
The baptism took place in the Chapel Eoyal of Stirling on 30th August 1594,
and about six weeks later the king was on his march northwards to punish Huntly
and the other rebels, who were now joined by Bothwell, and had gained a some-
what doubtful victory at Glenlivat over a force commanded by the young Earl of
Argyll. The latter met the king at Dundee, and the royal forces marched to
Aberdeen, but the rebels made no opposition. The castles of Strathbogie and
Slains, with some minor fortalices, were destroyed, and the king returned to
Edinburgh about the middle of November. Sir Eobert Melville accompanied the
expedition, and remained in the north for a time as one of the chief advisers of
the Duke of Lennox, who had been appointed the king's lieutenant for final sup-
pression of the rebels. The methods pursued to this end met with the approval
of the king and council, though Calderwood comments upon them unfavourably,
while he alleges that Lennox " had avaritious and craftie counsellers left with
him," but whether this description is intended to apply to Melville is not clear.
The Duke of Lennox returned to the south on 16th February 1595, and received
a discharge of his commission, but Melville does not appear in the privy council
till 20th March.2
Mr. John Colville, however, notes, in a letter to Bowes on 11th March 1595,
that Sir Eobert Melville was desirous to be sent to England. This desire was
apparently not gratified, but it no doubt arose from his wish to smooth matters
between his master and the English queen, who had refused to implement her
promises of pecuniary assistance, much to the wrath of James, whose mind, how-
ever, was somewhat distracted by troubles in his own household. Melville's
attendances at council seem during this year to have been less frequent or are
less faithfully recorded. In August 1595, the king and queen, who had been at
variance, were reconciled, and proposed a journey from Falkland to Perth, there
to receive the communion together, and one of the houses at which her Majesty
was to stay during her progress was that of Sir Robert Melville. 3
In the beginning of the year 1596 King James made some changes in his
administration which had an important result for Sir Eobert Melville. The over-
sight of the finances was handed over to eight councillors, who, from their number,
received the name of Octavians. They were commissioned to do all in their power
to regulate the king's affairs and replenish his coffers, but in doing so they appro-
1 Calderwood's History, vol. v. p. 341.
2 Ibid. pp. 357, 363; Register of Privy Council, vol. v. pp. 207, 216.
3 Letter, Nicolsou to Bowes, 15th August 1595, cited by Tytler, 3d ed. vol. vii. p. 294.
TERMINATION OF OFFICE AS TREASURER-DEPUTE. 121
priated to themselves the chief offices of state. As a consequence Melville was
deprived of his place as treasurer-depute, much to his displeasure if a gossiping
letter from Bowes to Lord Burghley be correct.1 Beflections upon Melville's
treasurership have been made, one writer asserting that he aud others had been
protected by the late chancellor, Lord Thirlestane, and that the king suspected
them of fattening at his expense. Another writer, a contemporary, speaking of
the Octavians and their reforms, says : — " Next they fell upon the Master of
Glamis, treasurer, and his deputy, Sir Bobert Melville, and by examining their
accompts found them liable in such sums to the king as to obtain a quietus est
they were glad to resign the treasury, which was bestowed on the prior of Blan-
tyre." 2 These statements, however, are at variance with the evidence afforded
by the records of the period, that so far from Sir Bobert being liable to the king,
the reverse was the case, and he had advanced large sums on behalf of the public.
The first proof of this is a document signed by the king and produced by Sir
Bobert before the lords of session, which narrates that Sir Bobert in his accounts
of the crown casualties had taken allowance of certain sums paid by him to
various persons, which he was " evir myndit to haif payit gif he had bene pait of
his super expenssis restand awand to him be ws at the fitting of his comptis;"
which over-expenditure the king goes on to say " far exceidis the sum quhairof he
hes takin allowance and quhairin he standis debtour to our liegis, swa that the
non-payment thairof is not in his default." The king then provides that though
Melville is beset with creditors on account of his inability to pay, the court is
not to entertain any action against him, superseding all such that Sir Bobert may
not be troubled in any way.3 This document afterwards formed the basis of an
act of parliament in which the king acknowledges his debt and gives a promise
of payment, but continues the protection against Sir Bobert's creditors.4 These
writs dispose of the question of Melville's liabilities, and three years later his
over-expenditure was still unpaid. His successor, when he retired in 1600, was
"super-expended" in the sum of £18,452, 5s. Scots, part of which was a debt
still owing to Sir Bobert Melville, amounting to £2850 Scots.5 It will thus be
evident that the office of treasurer to King James was an extremely costly post
to its holder.
Towards the close of the year 1596, the Octavians, finding the work they had
1 Letter, Bowes to Burghley, 10th March Books of Sederunt, vol. iv. part i. f. 200.
1 596, Thorpe's Calendar, vol. ii. pp. 706, 707. 4 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
2 Spottiswood, p. 413. vol. iv. p. 147. 16th December 1597.
3 Supersedere, dated 27th May 1596, pre- 5 Register of Privy Council, 1599, vol. v.
sented to the Lords of Session 28th May. p. 549 ; Ibid. 1600, vol. vi. p. 92.
VOL. I.
Q
122 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
undertaken to be too onerous, petitioned for assistance, and Sir Robert Melville
was one of ten persons appointed to act along with them.1 The administration of
the Octavians, however, came to a sudden close in January 1597, their demission
being hastened by the extraordinary Edinburgh tumult of 17th December 1596.
"Whether Sir Robert Melville had any share in promoting this tumult cannot be
ascertained, though his son was one of those courtiers to whom its origin was
ascribed. Sir Robert, indeed, appears to have then been absent from court, as he
is not named in any sederunt of the privy council after the tumult until 15th
February 1597, not even in a convention of estates held on 6th January.2 His
attendances in council after his loss of the treasurership were less frequent, but he
was one of those re-appointed as a privy councillor on the formation of a new and
more compact council in December 1598. After that date he continued to attend
with great regularity, until the beginning of 1600 ; and then, with somewhat less
frequency, until December of that year, when he demitted his place in council in
favour of his son, then known as Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland.3 Two months
later he also retired from his place of extraordinary lord of session, which was
likewise bestowed on his son. The king's letter to the lords of session announc-
ing the appointment states the reason of Sir Robert's retirement thus : " For-
samekill as we have daylie divers and sindrie occasionis to imploy our trustie
and weil-belouit consalour, Sir Robert Melville of Murdocairny, knycht, in our
awin effairis ; wnderstanding also be his aige and waiknes that he is not abill to
await daylie on our session, and that he has demittit his place," etc., the king
appoints the son to succeed the father.4
Although his age and weakness thus debarred Sir Robert from his former
active part in public affairs, he still continued to take an interest in the adminis-
tration. He seems to have been present at the convention of estates held in June
1600, when the young Earl of Gowrie attracted so much attention by his speech
against the subsidy desired by the king,6 and he was present at one of the diets
for examination of witnesses in the Gowrie conspiracy in August of same year.6
In 1603, Sir Robert Melville appears to have accompanied or followed King
James to London on his accession to the English crown. There he acted for a
time as one of the council who managed affairs in England, and his name is
appended to an act of that council convened to try the offence conceived by Queen
Anna against the Earl of Mar, because of his refusal to give up Prince Henry to
1 Register of Privy Council, vol. v. p. 338. 26th February 1601.
2 Ibid. p. 364. 5 Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. p. 121,
3 Ibid. vol. vi. p. 182. and note.
4 Books of Sederunt, vol. iv. part ii. f. 303, ° Calderwood, vol. vi. p, 59.
CREATED LORD MELVILLE OF MONIMAIL, 1616. 123
her until commanded by the king. The council decided that the queen had no
cause of offence in the matter.1 In February 1604, the king issued a special
mandate in his favour, dispensing with his regular attendance at council and ses-
sion, because of his " age, seiknes, and infirmiteis." " Yet in July following he
was appointed by the Scottish parliament as one of their commissioners for treat-
ing of a union between England and Scotland, and he signed the completed draft
treaty in December of that year. On 10th January 1606, he was present and
acted as one of the judicial assessors at the trial of those ministers who were
accused of treason for holding a general assembly at Aberdeen.3 In 1610 the
king, finding the Scottish privy council too unwieldy in numbers to work well,
limited the members to thirty-five, to be specially nominated by himself, and Sir
Robert Melville was one of the council thus reconstructed. These are the chief pub-
lic appearances recorded of Sir Robert Melville during the later years of his life.
As to his private affairs during the same period, he was not left altogether
without marks of continued royal favour. In February 1605, the king, in con-
sideration of the good service done to him from his infancy by Sir Robert
Melville, " albeit as yit not dewlie recompansit," grants to Sir Robert, and to his
son and son's wife, a discharge or remission of all rent or feufarms payable by
them to the Crown from the lands of Murdochcairnie, in Fife — the exemption to
endure for their respective lifetimes. This grant was afterwards ratified in
parliament.4 A few years later a more personal honour was conferred upon him.
He was created a peer of parliament, with the title of Lord Melville of
Monimail, by patent dated 1st April 16 16. The patent gives as the reason for
the grant the king's consideration and remembrance of the great and many
very important and honourable offices and posts with which Sir Robert had
from his youth been burdened during the reigns of the king's predecessors, as
also under the king himself, both in embassies to foreign princes and in domestic
affairs, in the administration of the royal revenues, and in all other matters of the
highest importance ; also of the dignity with which Sir Robert transacted affairs
to the king's honour and contentment, and to the general satisfaction of the
lieges.5 The limitation of the dignity was to Sir Robert for life, and after his
death to his eldest son, Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland, and the lawful heirs-
male of the body of either of them.
1 Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. pp. * Grant dated 20th February 1605 ; con-
577, 578, 5th July 1603. firmed 24th June 1609. Acts of the Parlia-
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 12. ments of Scotland, vol. iv. p. 455.
3 Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. pp.
xxxiv, 5, 164. 5 vol. iii. of this work, pp. 152, 153.
124 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, FIRST LORD MELVILLE.
Kobert, first Lord Melville, did not long survive this tribute to his long,
laborious, and faithful service, as he died five years later, in December 1621, at
the very advanced age of ninety-four. He made his will, and gave up an
inventory of his debts and goods on the 5th of that month, appointing his cousin,
Mr. Thomas Melville, his sole executor, who is to act by the advice of the testa-
tor's son, Robert, Master of Melville.
Eobert, first Lord Melville, was thrice married. His first wife was Katherine
Adamson, said to be a daughter of William Adamson of Craigcrook, a burgess of
Edinburgh. She was still alive on 11th December 1586. His second wife was
Lady Mary Leslie, daughter of Andrew, Earl of Rothes, whom he married before
1593, and who died in March or April 1605. His third wife was Lady Jean
Stewart, daughter of Robert Stewart, Earl of Orkney, and widow of Patrick Leslie,
first Lord Lindores. She survived him and was still alive in 1642. He had
issue by his first wife only — one son, also named Robert, who succeeded to the title
and estates, and of whom a memoir follows.
tP-fyn
-rntP-fyryC*^
qfjryym v~ 2^ -yvfi^evvyi o-^?i
Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland, second Lord Melville
of Monimail, 1621-1635.
Margaret Ker (Ferniehirst), his first Wife.
Jean Hamilton, Lady Ross, his second Wife.
Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland was the only child of Sir Robert Melville
of Murdochcairnie, first Lord Melville, and his first wife, Katherine Adamson.
He is first named in a contract between his parents and Sir Thomas Ker of
Ferniehirst for his marriage to Margaret Ker, daughter of Sir Thomas. Her
mother was Janet Kirkcaldy, daughter of Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange,
and grand-niece of Sir Robert Melville, who was thus great-grand-uncle of
the bride. The contract provided for securing Margaret Ker in the liferent
of the half-lands of Hillcairny, and in 200 merks annual-rent from the lands
of Woodfield and Grangemure, in Fife. The contract also provided that in the
HIS SON, ROBERT, SECOND LORD MELVILLE. 125
event of the younger Melville being the sole heir-male of his father, or dying
without issue, the lands of Murdochcairnie and Hillcairny, with the office of keeper
of the palace of Linlithgow, should pass to Sir Robert's elder brother, John
Melville of Eaith ; the east quarter of Wester Kinghorn to Sir James Melville
of Hallhill ; the lands of Woodfield to David Melville of Newmill ; the lands
of Grangemure to Andrew Melville ; and two chalders of wheat from the lands
of Letham to William Melville, all brothers of Sir Robert.1
In 1586, the younger Melville and his wife joined with his father and
mother in arranging an exchange of lands with Thomas Oliphaut, giving their half
of Hillcairny, and 500 merks, for his cpiarter of Murdochcairnie and other lands
named.2 In the same year, Patrick, Master of Gray, as commendator of the
monastery of Dunfermline, granted to the younger Melville a ratification of his
recent infeftment in the " stane hous " called " the abbotis hall," with six acres
adjacent to the haven of Burntisland, near the lands of Wester Kinghorn, as
described. These lands, haven, and house had been resigned by George Durie, a
former commendator, into the hands of King James the Fifth, who erected the
haven of Burntisland into a free port and the burgh into a royal burgh. Queen
Mary also is said to have granted the house of Abbotshall to Sir Robert Melville,
who now resigned it in favour of his son. This resignation, and the infeftment
following, the Master of Gray ratifies in due form.3
In November 1587, the younger Melville joined with his father in resigning
the office of keeper of the palace of Linlithgow in favour of Sir Lewis Bellenden
of Auchnoul.* In the following year the king granted to the elder Melville, for good
service, and to his son, the lands of Wester Kinghorn or Over Kinghorn, Welton,
Orrock, Balbie, and other lands named, and an annual-rent of 53s. 4d. from the
monastery of Inchcolm, with the castle of Burntisland. The king also conferred
the privilege of free regality, chapel, and chancery of the lands, the superiority of
the same, with the advowson of the church of Wester Kinghorn, and erected the
whole into a free barony and regality to be named Burntisland. This grant was
made in January 1588; but on 1st March the elder Melville resigned the lands,
and the king bestowed the barony on his son, with the office of customs-receiver at
the port of Burntisland.5 In May of same year, the lands of South Ferry of Portin-
craig, now Ferryport-on-Craig, with the town, port, and right of ferry, at a yearly
1 Original contract, dated at Edinburgh 4 Registrant Magiri Sigilli, No. 1417.
and Murdochcairnie, 24th and 2Sth October 6 Registrant Magni Sigilli, 15S0-1593.
1584, in Melville Charter-chest. Nos. 1430, 1476, 9th January and 1st March
- Registrum Magni Sigilli, etc., Nos. 1393, 1588. On the last date also, the king
1394. granted the lands of Letham, with the mill of
3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 125-127. Monimail. [Ibid. No. 1475.]
126 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, SECOND LORD MELVILLE.
rental to be paid to the crown of £25, 8s. 3d. Scots, were granted to the elder
Melville in liferent and to the son in fee.1 Their possession of this ferry and of
the fishings attached seems to have been peaceful for the next five years, when
opportunity was taken of the absence of the elder Melville in London in 1593 to
disturb it. A number of persons who claimed feus in the lands obtained a con-
firmation from the crown of a charter by the archbishop of St. Andrews in their
favour. This deed, however, was challenged by the Melvilles, in January 1594,
before the privy council, and as the claimants did not appear in their own defence,
judgment was given in favour of Robert Melville and his father, as the writ was
a violation of the act of annexation.2 The younger Melville is at this date, 26 th
January 1594, described as Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland, but when or for
what reason he received the rank of knighthood does not appear.
Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland was, it is said, one of those courtiers who
joined in stirring up the tumult of the 1 7th December 1596, which had for its object
the overthrow of the Octavian administration.3 This was done by suggesting to the
ministers that the Octavians meditated the re-establishment of Popery, and on the
other hand by warning the Octavians of the unfriendly attitude of the church.
As is well known, the agitation ended in an uprising of the citizens of Edinburgh,
which was soon quieted, but which effected the end desired — the resignation of
the Octavians.
In December 1 600, the younger Melville was, as already stated in the previous
memoir, admitted a member of the Scottish privy council in place of his father
who retired, and in the following February he was promoted to his father's post
of extraordinary lord of session, under the title of Lord Burntisland.4 In his
capacity as privy councillor he attended as regularly as his father had done, but
never took so prominent a place in public affairs. Two notices of him about the
same period connect him with a person whose tragic fate a year or two later
created somewhat of a sensation in Edinburgh. This was Francis Moubray, son
of the deceased John Moubray, laird of Barnbougal, who had been an adherent
of the turbulent Bothwell, and who in 1602 was accused of a design to murder or
poison King James. He was confined in Edinburgh castle, and made an attempt
to escape, but fell on the castle rocks and was so seriously injured that he died
soon afterwards. On the present occasion, in July and October 1601, Moubray
1 Registrum Magni Sigilli, No. 1543, 18th No. 2046, 7th February 1592.]
May 1588. The whole of these grants and 2 Register of Privy Council, vol. v. pp.
baronies were ratified to the younger Melville 124-126.
on 1st February 1592. [Ibid. No. 2040.] 3 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 510.
A similar grant was made of the lands of 4 Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. p. 1S2 ;
Murdochcairnie and others named. [Ibid. Books of Sederunt, vol. iv. part ii. fol. 303.
OCCASIONAL VISITS TO LONDON. 127
appears to have been charged with plotting in some form or other, perhaps in
connection with the Roman Catholic party, though there is also evidence of a
correspondence with England. Whatever his offence, he was warded in Edin-
burgh, and Sir Robert Melville became one of three sureties on his behalf. At
a later date he was commanded to leave Scotland, and obliged himself, on being
released from ward, to go to Burntisland and remain there under Sir Robert's
charge until he could quit the country.1
After the accession of King James to the English throne Sir Robert Melville,
the younger, was one of those who followed him to London, and he acted as one
of the Scottish privy council there.2 In 1607, as a privy councillor and lord of
session, he took the new oath of allegiance which in that year King James im-
posed upon all who held public offices, and which acknowledged the king
as " onlie supreame governoure of this kingdome over all persons and in all
causes," an enactment intended to give the king greater authority over the
clergy.3 In 1 6 1 0 the younger Melville, with other three extraordinary lords of
session, was deposed from office for a short time, that the king might place John
Spottiswood, afterwards archbishop of St. Andrews, in one of the vacancies, but
Melville was soon restored to his place. A little later he was made a member of
the king's new privy council, and was assiduous in his attendance as formerly.4
In 1613, Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland and his second wife, Jean Hamil-
ton, entered into an agreement with the elder Sir Robert to infeft the latter's third
wife, Lady Jean Stewart, in an annual-rent for her life of ten chalders of victual
composed of one chalder of wheat, four chalders of barley, and five chalders of
oats, secured upon the lands of Murdochcairnie.5 In June of the following year,
1614, he appears to have been in London or at court for a time, as he then
received a letter from Alexander, Earl of Dunfermline, chancellor of Scotland,
written in some perplexity as to certain communications as to which he wished
Lord Burntisland to speak to the Earl of Somerset. The chancellor states what
these are, and expresses an opinion that they could not have been sent with the
king's knowledge, as they were contrary both to the law and practice of Scotland.
Another letter from the king on which the chancellor comments was a protection
in favour of Francis Stewart, son of the late Earl of Bothwell. The king desired
the writ to be so framed that it should not prejudice the forfeiture of the
father, but that it should mean only liberty to Stewart to marry and possess
1 Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. pp. 690, 3 Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. p. 3S5.
700 ; cf. Calderwood, vol. vi. pp. 160, 203, 204. 4 Ibid. vol. vii. pp. 406, 415.
- Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. pp. 6 Duplicate Contract, signed, year 1613, day
577, 5S2. aad month blank, in Melville Charter-chest.
128 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, SECOND LORD MELVILLE.
what he could gain by marriage or otherwise lawfully, and to have equal
rights with other subjects as if he had not been dishabilitated by his father's
forfeiture. The chancellor expresses himself " mistie " on the subject of this pro-
tection as he has no intelligence of the promoters of the affair, which, he says,
makes his service difficult ; but, he adds, " I hoipe alwayis, God willing, I sail
keip the pairt off a guid skipper. I sail doe all may be done be sic winde and
wadder as fallis me, and if the wadder sould ouer whelme me, I sail perish with
the ruidder in my hand on a dew and honest course."1 He concludes with an
opinion that the king meant to restore Stewart's estate, an opinion so far
justified by an act of rehabilitation granted a few years later.
Other notices of Lord Burntisland during the next few years are unimportant.
In January 1614, he and his wife, Jean Hamilton, signed a document securing the
elder Sir Robert Melville in the liferent of Monimail and Letham, the teinds of
which they had purchased from the Crown.3 In December of the same year
he received a discharge from Robert Durie of that ilk of the sum of 2400 merks,
apparently a mortgage over the lands of Ferryport-on-Craig, from possession of
which Durie had been evicted by the archbishop of St. Andrews.3 About the
same date Sir Robert acted as one of the cautioners of his nephew by marriage,
Andrew Ker, younger of Oxnam and Ferniehirst, that the terms of his mar-
riage contract with Margaret Ker, widow of Lord Yester, and daughter of
Mark Ker, Earl of Lothian, would be carried out.4 In 1617, he received
from the privy council permission for himself and friends to eat flesh
during Lent, and on three days a week for one year.5 In August 1621, the
Scottish parliament ratified to Sir Robert and his wife a charter, dated in 1613,
granting to him the lands of Letham, mill of Monimail, lands of Mouksmyre and
Edensmoor, and erecting them into the barony of Monimail. The same parlia-
ment accepted an offer made by him and the other extraordinary lords of session
to tax themselves in aid of a subsidy required by the king. In July of this year
also, 1621, Sir Robert appended his signature to an act affecting the clerks of
session, which was likewise ratified by parliament.6
In December of the same year, 1621, Sir Robert Melville of Burntisland suc-
ceeded to his father in his title and full possession of his estates as second Lord
Melville of Monimail. His father's will, though not appointing him executor, left
so few legacies that he was practically the receiver of the whole personal estate.
1 Letter, dated 21st June 1614, vol. ii. of 4 Original minute, ibid.
this work, pp. 75, 76. 5 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 77, 8th March
2 Original writ in Melville Charter-chest, 1617.
14th January 1614. ° Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
3 Original receipt in Melville Charter-chest. vol. iv. pp. 661, 693, 696.
KING CHARLES THE FIRSTS FISHING COMPANY. 129
Lord Melville was a member of the first convention of estates in Scotland
after the accession of King Charles the First, which voted a large subsidy to the
new monarch. In this convention some opposition was made to certain measures
proposed by the king affecting the lords of session, and Lord Melville probably
joined in the request made for delay and fuller consideration by the estates.
The king, however, disregarded this plea, and in the beginning of 1626, Lord
Melville and the other extraordinary lords were deprived of office by a
royal order. But as a member of the privy council he was present at a conven-
tion of estates in July 1630, when he formed one of a very important committee
which was appointed to deal with the subject of fisheries in Scotland.
The king, probably inspired by Sir William Alexander, had issued a letter to
the estates of Scotland drawing attention to " the great blessing offered . . . in the
great abundance of fishe vpon all the coasts of these yllands " which should no
longer be neglected. The benefit of this, his Majesty states, " is reaped onelie by
strangers " to the disadvantage of his own subjects, and he exj>resses his intention
" to sett up a commoun fishing to be a nurserie to seamen and to increasse the
shipping and trade in all parts " of the kingdom. He proposes that " adven-
turers " from both England and Scotland should unite in this undertaking in the
manner of a joint-stock company. An estimate is then given of the number of
vessels, 200, to be used in addition to those actually employed, with the cost of
their outfits and crews, and a note of probable profits to be realised in the enter-
prise. The affair was to be managed by one body or corporation, with separate
companies or branches in various chief towns of the country, these branches being
contributed to by people in the neighbourhood. The form of the corporation was
to be modelled upon similar bodies lately constituted in Spain, France, and the
Low Countries, and the common council was to be composed of men of both
nations. The adventurers or those who embarked in the undertaking were to
be subjects of the king only, no foreigner being allowed to take part.
Such in the main was the king's proposal, and a committee of the estates, of
whom Lord Melville was one, was appointed to deal with the subject and the
possibility of procuring a good conclusion. Some days later they reported that
the association with England was inconvenient, that the burghs were able and
willing to undertake by themselves the land fishing among the lochs and islands
and twenty-eight miles from the coast, without help from any other nation, pro-
vided they have proper stations. Englishmen were prohibited, the committee
added, by law, from fishing in the lochs. It is unnecessary here to detail the
proceedings of the committee, which were prolonged for several months ; but on
23d December 1630, Lord Melville joined in a letter to the king recommending
vol. I. E
130 SIB ROBERT MELVILLE, SECOND LORD MELVILLE.
special commissioners to treat with those of England. He also seems to have
attended later meetings of the committee, in which was considered the question
of what fishings on the Scottish coast should be thrown open to the company and
what reserved to the natives. This somewhat difficult point being settled, mat-
ters were finally adjusted, and the king, on 19th July 1632, issued a charter
erecting a society or corporation to be composed of Scotchmen, Englishmen, and
Irishmen, granting them exclusive jurisdiction in matters relating to fishing, with
power to take sea fish and herring, but excluding salmon, and under reservation
of particular districts to be fished only by natives, and further conferring certain
privileges.1 Lord Melville's name, however, is not among the members of the
new association, and its duration and working were probably interrupted by the
troubles which arose a few years later.
These were even now beginning to show themselves, for some matters pro-
posed at the convention of 1630 were looked upon by many as mere court
devices, and even the taxation, though heartily voted, was regarded with
jealousy because of the way it was expended. In 1633, King Charles visited
Scotland for his coronation there, and also held a parliament, at which measures
were passed which gave great offence to many of the members and to the country
at large. One of these, and perhaps the most important in its consequences, was
an act which united the question of the apparel of churchmen and the larger sub-
ject of the king's prerogative. This act was prepared by the lords of the articles,
composed in this case of eight bishops and an equal number of courtiers, who
were devoted to the king's policy ; but when it came before the whole parlia-
ment, to be accepted or rejected, as was then the custom, there was considerable
opposition. The act as it was framed was specially objected to, as, while most
or all of the members were willing to accept the clause affirming the royal
prerogative, many were strongly opposed to the other clause, which foreshadowed
innovations. Many stories are told of how the opposition was overcome or
ignored ; and from one of these narratives it appears that Lord Melville strongly
objected to the second clause of the act, and, addressing the king, exclaimed, " I
have sworn with your father and the whole kingdom to the confession of faith,
in which the innovations intended by these articles were solemnly abjured." 2 It
is added that Charles, disconcerted at this unexpected address, retired for a little,
but shortly returned, and producing a list of the members, noted with his own
hand those who voted against the measures he wished to carry. Lord Melville,
however, continued to sit in the privy council, and was one of a special com-
1 Acta of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. pp. 208, 220-246.
2 Senators of the College of Justice, p. 243.
RE-GRANT OF THE TITLE OF LORD MELVILLE. 131
mission for auditing the treasurer's accounts, in February 1634, or about a year
before his death.1 He also, it is said, took much interest in the case of the second
Lord Balmerino, who was in June 1634 confined on a charge of treason.
As to private affairs, he and his wife, Jean Hamilton, in 1627, resigned into
the king's hands the lands and barony of Monimail as described, and also the
" title, honour, and dignitie of the lordschip of Monymaill," granted by the late
King James. In regard to this the king wrote to the lord advocate that, be-
cause of the long and faithful services performed by Lord Melville and his father,
his Majesty was pleased to accept the resignation of his title, and to regrant it
to him and any of his heirs upjon whom he intended to confer his estate.2 In
terms of this a signature was issued on 17th August 1627, granting the barony of
Monimail to Lord Melville and his wife in conjunct fee, and failing lawful heirs
of his own body, to any heirs-male, general or of conquest, whom he should
nominate at any time during his life ; reuniting the lands and erecting them of new
into a barony ; granting the dignity of new, and adding a special clause that the
heir to be named by Lord Melville shall " have the onlie richt of successioun." 3
Robert, second Lord Melville of Monimail, died on 19th March 1635. He
made his last will on the 9th of that month, appointing John Melville of Raith
and James Melville of Hallhill his sole executors. The sum of his personal estate
amounted to £18,186, 13s. 4d. Scots, while the whole estate, deducting the debts
due by him, estimated at £3304, 7s. Scots, yielded the considerable sum of
£28,571, 3s. Scots. Among other items of his personal property are noted, as in
the hands of Robert Hamilton of Milnburn, three chains of gold, two jewels, a
"hingar of ane agatt," a ring with five diamonds, and a "garnissing" twenty
pieces of gold, and three dozen gold buttons, valued in all at £1400 Scots.
Among the legacies left by Lord Melville were, to Margaret Scott, widow of
his wife's son, James, Lord Ross, a plaited chain of gold with a rich jewel of
diamonds thereat ; to Mrs. Jean Ross, her daughter, " ane nett cheinzie of gold in
my playid with ane skarff sett with pearle ; to James, Lord Ros,4 if it pleis God he
returne, and failzeing of him be deceis, to William Ros, his brothei-, ane purse of
cloth of gold and tuentie-thrie or thairby peise of gold within it ; " to Robert
Ross a stand of gold buttons, and another stand to William Ross ; to Lady Raith a
jewel set with three diamonds and three pearls ; to Lady Hallhill a chain of gold
enamelled " sett with grit knaps and ane agatt with ane mort-heid on the other
1 Register of Royal Letters, vol. ii. p. 719. 4 James, Lord Ross, here named, died in
2 Ibid. vol. i. p. 159 ; Original resignation, 1636; he and his brothers, William and Robert,
undated, in Melville Charter-chest. were the grandchildren of Lord Melville's
3 Copy signature, ibid. second wife.
132 SIR ROBERT MELVILLE, SECOND LORD MELVILLE.
syde." Lord Melville also bequeathed to James Melville, brother to the laird of
Eaith, one thousand pounds ; to Mr. Eobert Melville, brother of the laird of Hall-
hill, one thousand merks ; to Eobert Balfour, brother of Michael Balfour of Grange,
two thousand merks; to Harry Melville, brother of Sir George Melville of
Garvock, two thousand merks ; to Jean Adamson, daughter of the Goodman of
" Graycruik " or Craigcrook, five hundred merks ; with various sums to others,
including his servants. The residue of his estate, after paying legacies, was to
be divided between his executors.1 Lord Melville died at Edinburgh, but was
interred at Monimail without any funeral ceremony on 15th April 1635.2
Eobert, second Lord Melville, was twice married, but had no surviving issue
by either of his wives. His first wife was, as already stated, Margaret Ker of
Ferniehirst, whom he married in 1584. She died on 24th May 1594, after
making a will in which she appointed her husband her sole executor and virtually
left everything she possessed to him, except £100 to be given to the poor.3 Lord
Melville's second wife, whom he married before 1613, was Jean Hamilton,
daughter of Gavin Hamilton of Eaploch, and widow of Eobert, fifth Lord Eoss.
Judging from a discharge granted to her in 1619 by her son, James, Lord Eoss,
she appears to have been a woman of some ability. Lord Eoss speaks of his
mother " haiving maist cairfully brocht me vp sen my infancie and maist pro-
vidently governit my estait and leving to the maist evident weill and vtilitie of
me my airis and successouris in respect of the greit burdenes and wodsettis being
thairvpone the tyme of the deceis of my vmquhile father, quhilkis haill burdenes
and wodsettis scho hes lauchfully redemit be debursing of greit sowmes of money.
... As lykwyse that scho hes debursit beyond the sowme of fourtie thowsand
merkis for my intertenement and chairges during my absence furth of this cuntry
in the visiteing of forane nationis, and that by and attour greit sowmes of money
debursit be hir for the rycht and assignatioun of my waird and mariage ; as
lykwys that now sen my lauchfull and perfyte aige my said mother hes maid
trew and thankfull compt, &c. to me of hir intromissioun with my leving, maills,"
etc., for which reason he exoners her and her husband, then Sir Eobert Melville, of
all their dealings with his estate.4 Jean Hamilton, Lady Melville, predeceased
her second husband, dying in May 1631.
1 Testament in Melville Charter-chest. 4 Original discharge, dated 5th May 1619,
2 Balfour's Annals, vol. ii. p. 223. in Melville Charter-chest.
s Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 136-140.
ff2*J*y£
133
Sir Jajvies Melville of Hallhill, Author of the " Memoirs," 1535-1617.
Christian Boswell, his Wife.
Sir James Melville, who became a prominent courtier and statesman during the
reigns of Mary, Queen of Scots, and King James the Sixth, was, as already stated,
the third son of Sir John Melville of Raith by his second wife, Helen Napier.
His " Memoirs of his own life " 1 are well known, and they will supply the material
of this notice, additions being made where necessary, from original and other
sources. He was born in 1535, and at the age of fourteen was sent to France by
Mary of Guise, the queen-dowager of Scotland, to serve his young queen as a
page of honour. He left Scotland in January 1549-50, in the train of John de
Montluc, bishop of Valence, then French envoy to the Scottish court. Melville
recites with considerable humour the adventures of the party after leaving the
port of Irvine, whence they sailed to Ireland. A mishap, which cost the bishop
the loss of a phial " of the only maist precious balm that grew in Egipt," valued
at 2000 crowns, and the strong desire a young Irish maiden had to marry Mel-
ville himself, are graphically told. The lady had a priest ready, and the intended
bridegroom only escaped by assuring her that he was yet young, was bound to
France, and above all had no rents, that is, no income.
From Ireland the bishop and his party, who were greatly incommoded by
stormy weather, again visited Kintyre, where Macdonald of Dunaveg was
1 The latest edition of these Memoirs is tion (of Scott's work) was published " at
that published by the Bannafcyne Club in Edinburgh in the year 1735 in octavo," and
1827. As stated in the preface, this edition was followed by a reprint, which may be
was printed from what is believed to be the called the third edition, published at Glas-
original MS., which had twice gone amissing gow in 1751, in duodecimo. A translation of
and was twice discovered, first, in 1660 in the the Memoirs into French was published at
castle of Edinburgh, and secondly, in the pos- the Hague in 1694, in two vols. Svo ; reprinted
session of the Right Hon. Sir George H. Rose, at Lyons in 1695, and at Amsterdam in 1704.
with whose permission it was published. A new or improved translation was issued in
The previous editions have been numerous, 1745, in three vols, small Svo, said to be
and may be briefly detailed. The first edition published "a Edimbourg chez Barrows et
was in folio, published in 1683 by a grandson Young," but evidently printed abroad. The
of the author, George Scott of Pitlochie, in third volume contained letters, written chiefly
whose hands the original MS. was for a time. by Queen Mary, selected from various printed
The editor, however, took liberties with the works. [Memoirs of his own life, by Sir
MS., and deviated from its arrangement in James Melville of Halhill, Bannatyne Club
some respects, which lessen the strictly his- edition, Preface and Appendix, where the
torical value of the work. The second edi- various editions of the work are noted.]
134 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
specially kind to Melville in return for favours received from the latter's father,
as stated in the memoir of Sir John. After another visit to Scotland, they took
a final leave of the queen-dowager at Stirling, and after an eight days' voyage
landed in France. Melville and a Scotch companion rode from Brest to Paris,
whither the bishop preceded them, and on the way young Melville's knowledge
of the language enabled him to circumvent intended knavery on the part of
some French fellow-travellers. He arrived in Paris about Easter 1550, where,
however, he was not at once presented to the young queen, but seems to have
continued his education in various accomplishments. For three years he re-
mained thus, when the bishop, who had returned to Paris from a foreign
embassy, proposed to introduce him at court. But ere this was done, Melville
had an interview, under somewhat peculiar circumstances, with the Constable
de Montmorency, then virtual ruler of France. Captain Eingan or Ninian
Cockburn, one of the Scots archer-guard, already referred to in the memoir
of Sir John Melville, arrived from Scotland, and craved an audience with
the Constable. Encountering Melville, Cockburn secured his services as inter-
preter, he himself speaking but " ill French." He undertook the office very
unwillingly, and in the end refused to repeat the captain's account of affairs in
Scotland. The captain claimed to be Melville's uncle, but this was indignantly
denied, while the interview had this result that the Constable invited Melville to
enter his own service instead of that of the Queen of Scots. This offer, as the
Constable was esteemed the best master in France, and might do him most good,
Melville accepted in May 1553.
Under the Constable of France Melville saw considerable military service.
He attended his master in the Low Countries, France being then at war with the
Emperor, Charles the Fifth, and was present at the siege of Eenty, where he
witnessed the bravery and the fatal wound of Norman Leslie, Master of Rothes,
then in the French service. He was also at the battle or rather skirmish of St.
Quentin, where the French were seized with a panic, and the Constable taken
prisoner. Melville himself was wounded, and narrowly escaped captivity by
his horse running away with him.
This was in August 1557, and the Constable remained a prisoner until, two
years later, a peace was concluded by the treaty of Chateau-Cambresis.1 Soon
after the peace the attention of the French king, Henry the Second, was directed
to the affairs of Scotland, and by the advice of his friend and patron, the Constable,
Melville was despatched on a special mission to his own country. His instruc-
tions were to discover the intentions of Lord James Stewart, then known
1 On 2d April 1559. M'Crie's Life of Knox, ed. 1855, p. 359.
HIS SERVICES AT CONTINENTAL COURTS. 135
as prior of St. Andrews, and afterwards Earl of Murray, whom the queen-
regent charged with a desire to usurp the crown of Scotland. Melville arrived in
Scotland at a most critical moment, reaching Falkland, where the regent was,
on the very day when her forces, under the Duke of Chatelherault, and Mons.
D'Oysel, the French lieutenant, were drawn up on Cupar moor to meet the army
of the lords of the congregation.1 A battle was averted by the prudence of the
commanders of the regent's forces, much to her chagrin, and a truce was concluded.
This gave Melville an opportunity for an interview with Lord James Stewart,
which he obtained by the good offices of Mr. Henry Balnaves. The meeting
with Lord James, and his frank statements of his position, satisfied Melville, who
at once returned to France, only, however, to find King Henry the Second on
his deathbed. With his decease, a few days later, the Constable of France was
forced to retire from court, and Melville followed him in his adverse fortunes.
King Henry was succeeded by his son, Francis the Second, husband of Mary,
Queen of Scots, who acted under the influence of the House of Guise, the family to
which the queen-regent of Scotland belonged, and to which Melville attributes the
origin of many troubles in that country. Matters there had been advanced by
the arrival, on 2d May 1559, of John Knox, and at a later date, by the Protestant
leaders taking possession of Edinburgh. French soldiers were despatched to the
aid of the regent, while the Protestant leaders sought the aid of England. The
state of affairs in Scotland led to harsh measures against Scotchmen residing in
France, and Melville retired for a short time to the court of the Elector Palatine,
whence he returned on the death, in December 15 GO, of Francis the Second. His
mission was one of condolence, but he took a deep interest in the changes at the
French court, where the Guises were now discredited, and the Constable of
France and the young king of Navarre (father of King Henry the Fourth) were
in favour. Melville himself was graciously received by the queen-mother,
Catherine de Medicis, and sent back with friendly messages to the Elector
Palatine, after taking leave of his widowed mistress.
When he again met the Queen of Scots it was shortly before her departure
for Scotland, while staying with her uncle, the Duke of Guise. There Melville
waited upon her with humble offers of service, for which she thanked him, and
desired him, when he left the Elector Palatine, to come and serve her in Scotland.
Ere that time arrived, however, a year or two elapsed, during which he was
employed with regard to proposals of marriage made by certain continental
princes for the two queens, of England and Scotland respectively. Duke John
Casimir, second son of the Elector Palatine, sued for the hand of Queen Elizabeth,
1 This was on 12th June 1559. Keith's History, p. 91.
136 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
while the Archduke Charles of Austria was proposed as a husband for Queen
Mary. Melville was to be the envoy of both suitors. He, however, at first
refused to bear the message and portrait of Duke Casimir to Queen Elizabeth.
As to the other proposal, Melville had an interview with the Emperor Maximilian,
brother of the Archduke, not to much purpose, and, learning by a stratagem
the Emperor's real aversion to the marriage, he soon afterwards left his court,
travelling to Rome. On his return to the Elector Palatine he was despatched to
the court of France in reference to a proposed marriage between King Charles
the Ninth and the second daughter of the Emperor Maximilian. His first inter-
view with the French king and his mother was not favourable, but in the end
Catherine de Medicis offered Melville a post of honour at the court of France.
While still weighing this offer, and staying at Paris, he received an invitation
to come to Scotland on his queen's service, which he interpreted to refer to her
marriage. Much against the wishes of his former patron, the Constable, and other
friends in France, Melville determined to go to Scotland. The prince palatine
also opposed his going there, but it was agreed that he should take Duke Casimir's
portrait and present it to the Queen of England. Melville then left Heidelberg
and passed to England, where he had an interview with Queen Elizabeth, to
whom, after some diplomacy, he showed the portraits, offering them to her, with
the exception of those of the elector and his wife, " bot sche wald haue nane of
them." Duke Casimir, however, took his rejection philosophically, and shortly
afterwards married a princess of Saxony.
Besides her own affairs, Queen Elizabeth was sufficiently interested in those
of her sister queen to deal with Melville as to the marriage of his mistress,
but Elizabeth's opinions and intrigues on this subject are well known, and need
not be detailed here. After passing through England Melville reached Perth,
where Queen Mary then was, on 5th May 1564, and was favourably received.
He relates with considerable naivete her endeavours to win him to settle in Scot-
land, and his own objections thereto, as he saw little appearance of profit, and
more prospect of trouble than he had expected. But her graciousness and liberal
spirit so gained upon him that he was vanquished and won to tarry with her, and
to leave all other profits or preferments in France or elsewhere, although he had
then no other heritage than his service.1
Mary's first intention was to employ her new courtier in Germany, but
1 About this time, or at least on 20th July to be paid out of the thirds of benefices.
1564, Queen Mary bestowed upon Melville, [RegistrumSecreti Sigilli, Lib. xxxii. f. 84 ; cf.
described as " Gentleman to the Queen's Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iii.
Majestie," a pension of £100 Scots for life, p. 246.]
COUNSELS RICCIO AS TO HIS CONDUCT AT COURT. 137
she sent him to England towards the end of September 1564. He was instructed
to gain the confidence of Elizabeth, to ascertain her real opinions as to Mary's
marriage, and to secure some certainty as to her succession to the English
throne. Melville conducted his negotiations with his usual skill, and has
in his account of them left on record one of the most graphic personal
sketches of Elizabeth herself, as well as of her favourite, Leicester, and Henry
Darnley, afterwards king of Scots. The English queen was charmed with
Melville's courtly ways, and gave him many opportunities for an interview. She
secretly showed him, from her private cabinet, Leicester's portrait, while she
excited his courtier-like devotion by kissing the picture of Queen Mary. The
little plot by which Melville was enabled to hear Elizabeth play on the virginals,
his being invited to see her dance, and the secret delight with which she received
his proposal to carry her to Scotland in the guise of a page, all these have been
frequently quoted, and are well known. The ambassador, however, was in no
wise blinded by all the attentions and professions lavished upon him at the
English court, and privately told his royal mistress that Elizabeth was practising
dissimulation.
A more delicate matter on which he entered, and which he records at
this time, was the queen's conduct towards David Eiccio. The influence of
that Italian had been growing, much to the displeasure of the Scottish nobility,
who treated him in such a way that he took fright and consulted Melville
as to his conduct at court. Melville advised him to put himself forward less
prominently, instancing his own example in a similar position at the court of
the Elector Palatine. Eiccio tried to follow this advice, but afterwards told
Melville that the queen would not agree to it. Melville then, seeing matters grow
worse, approached her Majesty on the subject, but after hearing him patiently,
she only thanked him for his care, and promised to take order in the matter.1
Melville in his memoirs passes rapidly over the events which preceded and
the motives which prompted the queen's marriage with Darnley. He himself,
on one occasion, spoke to Mary in favour of the union, and indeed one of his
secret commissions on his embassy to England was to deal with the Countess
1 On 22d January 1565, the queen, in part they afterwards formed part of the estate of
recompence of the services of James Melville, her son, Norman Leslie, Master of Rothes.
her familiar servitor, granted to him a feu- They were in the queen's hands by his for-
eharter of the lands of Drumeorse, in the feiture, and were to be held by Melville for
county of Linlithgow. These lands had been a feu-duty of 40 merks and 20s. yearly.—
feued by King James the Fifth to the late [Registrum Magni Sigilli, vol. iv. No. 1579.]
Margaret Crichton, Countess of Rothes, and
VOL. I. S
138 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLH1LL.
of Lennox to obtain leave for her son to go to Scotland. Melville himself was
confessedly a favourer of the Earl of Murray, but played a very diplomatic part
throughout the whole affair, urging on the queen at a critical moment that she
should pardon Murray and the other opponents of her intended marriage. The
marriage with Darnley gave rise to numerous reports of danger to the reformed
religion, he being a Catholic ; but over these Melville passes lightly, while he
tells quaintly enough a little story of his own experience. The Pope, he says,
sent a sum of 8000 crowns to Queen Mary, but the ship containing the money
was wrecked on the English coast within the jurisdiction of the Earl of
Northumberland. That nobleman laid claim to the whole " by just law ;
quhilk," says Melville, " he caused his advocat read unto me (when I was
directed to him for the said siluer) in the auld Normand langage, quhilk nother
he nor I understod weill, it was sa corrupt. Bot he wald geue na part therof
to the queen."
Notwithstanding Melville's prudent advice about the banished lords, especially
backed by reference to evil reports, which were only too soon to be verified, the
queen refused to stay proceedings against them. Melville, indeed, tells us that
ere this he, being dissatisfied with his position at court, had begged leave
from his mistress to return to France, but she refused to grant it, and used all her
endeavours to bring about a friendly relation between him and her husband.
This obliged Melville to devote himself more thoroughly to her service ;
but his well-meant efforts were in vain, as Mary had become too closely involved
with her relatives of the house of Guise and other Catholic princes, who
urged her to attempt the overthrow of Protestantism. This led the queen
to hasten the intended forfeiture of Murray and the other offenders against
her policy.
Riccio, too, counselled the queen to adhere to her Catholic allies, and this, with
the hatred conceived against him by Darnley and other nobles, led to his tragic
fate. Melville was apparently in the palace of Holyrood during the night of the
murder, 9th March 1566, but does not appear to have been a witness. He says
nothing of his own doings until the next morning, when he was allowed to pass
out of the palace gate, and being observed by the queen, was despatched to the
provost of Edinburgh, that he might summon the townsmen to her aid. In this
he was unsuccessful ; but by the queen's desire he had an early interview with
Murray, when the latter returned from England on the Monday following the
tragedy.
The queen's dexterity soon enabled her to detach Darnley from his associates
in the plot against Riccio ; and she used Melville as an agent to win Murray also
ENDEAVOURS TO " SKAR QUEEN ELIZABETH FROM MARRYING. 139
to her interest, which he succeeded in doing, at least for a time.1 Melville him-
self was then acting as secretary of state, Maitland of Lethington being under
suspicion. Murray's return to favour gave rise to jealousies, as to which, however,
Mary talked quite frankly to Melville, who advised her to put them out of her
mind. So strong was Melville's influence believed to be at this time, that the
Earl of Morton, one of the most prominent of Riccio's enemies, made application
to him for letters of introduction to the Elector Palatine and other German
princes. The earl's agent was Melville's own sister, the wife of Johnstone of
Elphinstone, and the matter was laid before the queen, who, however, forbade
Melville to write in favour of Morton.
Melville, as is well known, was selected by Queen Mary to bear the tidings to
Queen Elizabeth of the birth of her son, afterwards King James the Sixth, and
he made such speed that he was in London on the fifth day after leaving
Edinburgh. His interview with Queen Elizabeth, and the manner in which she
received the news, have often been described. One remark of his own in the
conversation is told with much complacency. In declaring the good news, he
asserted that it was dearly bought with the peril of Mary's life, she " was sa sair
handled in the mean tym, that she wished never to have bene maried. This I
said to geue her [Queen Elizabeth] a little skar to mary be the way ; " for he had
heard of certain threats of matrimonial intentions. The conversation then
diverged to other matters. Before he took final leave of the English court, Mel-
ville again broached the subject of Mary's succession, but to no great purpose.
The chief message he carried to Scotland was an advice from his brother, Robert
Melville, then Scottish ambassador in England, that Mary should by all means
preserve amity between the two kingdoms.
Melville on his return to Scotland found the political situation little changed,
except that Bothwell had begun that career of ascendency over Mary which
ended so fatally for her and himself. Melville's recollection of the sequence of
events at this time, however, is inaccurate, and requires to be supplemented from
other sources. Thus he places the baptism of Prince James before the Queen's
ride to visit Bothwell, which happened in October, whereas the baptism was in
December. He also speaks of a confidential interview with Queen Mary at
Stirling, when she was evidently in a very depressed state of mind. This was
1 On lOth April 1566, Melville received receiving "large commoditie, " and having
from the king (Darnley) and queen, for life, left the same at the queen's desire, and
a pension of 500 merks Scots yearly. The entered her service, where he had " servit
pension is granted for his past services, he respectablie." [Register of Privy Seal, Lib.
having been in the service of a noble prince, xxxiv. f. 63.]
140 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
previous to the baptism, and was probably a result of the severe illness which
attacked the queen after her visit to the Hermitage. Melville says he gave the
queen much good advice, but laments that she had " ouer evell company about
hir for the tym." He describes the baptism and some peculiar pageants which
were exhibited, but he hurries over events, merely touching on the coldness
which had arisen between the queen and her husband,1 and the alliance between
Murray, Bothwell, and Morton, until the tragedy of Darnley's murder. Melville
himself was invited the next morning to visit the place and see the king's body,
that there was no hurt or mark on it. He went, but found the body guarded,
and did not see it.
When the excitement caused by Darnley's death had subsided, and public
rumour was busy with the report of the queen's intended marriage to Bothwell,
Melville suddenly found himself placed in a delicate position as regarded his
mistress and her lover. He had received from Thomas Bishop, a well-known
Scottish emissary in England, a long letter setting forth the evil consequences
of such a union as was reported. This letter he laid before the queen, who,
describing it as a " strange wreting," showed it to Secretary Lethington. The
secretary, taking Melville aside, asked what he meant, and said — So soon as the
Earl Bothwell gets word, as I fear he shall, he will not fail to slay you. Melville
made a faint excuse, and Lethington remarking that he had done more honestly
than wisely, advised to him to retire with diligence ere Bothwell came up
from his dinner. The sequel may be told in Melville's own words : " Hir
Majeste told him [Bothwell] at the first meting, with a condition that he suld
not do me any harm ; bot I was flown and was socht bot culd not be found, till
my lordis fury was slaiked, for I was advertist that ther was nathing bot
slauchter in caice I had bene gottin." The queen, however, interfered, and
Melville was restored to her service.
He was in her retinue when on her way from Stirling to Edinburgh. Both-
well, with a numerous company, met her near Linlithgow, and seizing her bridle,
forced her to ride with him to Dunbar. A few of her train, including Melville,
were compelled to go also, but he was soon liberated, and went home. He was
1 An incident illustrative of the relations animal to him. This gift was highly dis-
between Mary and Darnley, and in which pleasing to the queen, who " fell mervelous-
Melville figured, is told in a letter from the lie out " with Melville, called him dissembler
Earl of Bedford to Cecil. An English mer- and flatterer, and said she could not trust
chant having a fine water-spaniel, gave it to him who would give anything to such one
James Melville, who, seeing the pleasure as she loved not. [Quoted in Calderwood,
Darnley took in such dogs, presented the Wodrow ed., vol. ii. p. 326, note.]
WITH QUEEN MARY AND BOTHWELL. 141
present at the marriage, on 15 th May 1567, between Mary and Both well, and had
a meeting with that powerful nobleman, when he was greeted in a jocular manner
as having been a great stranger. The earl asked him to supper, and when he
declined, pledged him in a cup of wine, and desired him to drink it up that he
might grow fatter ; for, said Bothwell, " the zeal of the commoun weal has eaten
you up and made you sa lean." The rest of the conversation shocked Melville so
much that he made his escape, and went to wait on the queen, who, he says,
" was very glaid of my commyng."
Bothwell had no sooner married the queen than he endeavoured to get her
son, the infant prince, into his hands. The child was then at Stirling castle, in
the custody of the Earl of Mar, who refused to deliver him ; but so much pres:
sure was put upon Mar that he scarcely knew what to do. In his perplexity he
applied to Melville, who suggested a way out of the difficulty; but the question
was disposed of by the sudden flight of the queen and her husband from Holy-
rood palace to Borthwick castle. This step was caused by a strong gathering of
the Scottish nobility, who had entered into a confederacy against Bothwell, with
the avowed objects of avenging the murder of Darnley and upholding the safety of
the prince. In the important events which followed, including the meeting of
the queen's army and that of the confederate lords at Carberry Hill, the surrender
of the queen and her subsequent imprisonment in Lochleven castle, Melville
appears to have taken no prominent personal part, though he adhered to the con-
federates.1 It is after the queen was compelled to demit the crown that we first
find him named as an actor in the drama. A gathering of the Hamiltons and a
few other noblemen of the queen's party had taken place at Hamilton, and to
them Melville was sent as an envoy to announce Mary's demission and the
intended coronation of the young prince. He was courteously received, but his
mission led to no practical result; and the Hamilton party, though they did not
oppose it, refused to countenance by their presence the coronation, which took
place at Stirling on 29th July 1567.
Meanwhile the Earl of Murray, who had been in France, received an offer of
the regency, and was now on his way home to Scotland. He arrived at Berwick
in the beginning of August 1567, and Melville, whose talents for diplomacy seem
to have been appreciated by all parties, was commissioned to meet him there,
1 He is, however, casually mentioned by does not record the fact. [Letter, Throck-
Sir Nicholas Throckmorton, the English am- morton to Cecil, 12th July 1567. Robert-
bassador, as meeting with him at Fast Castle son's History of Scotland, Appendix No.
on 11th July 1567. Melville probably accom- xxii.]
panied Secretary Lethington, but he himself
142 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
and formally declare the offer of the regency. This errand Melville undertook
readily in the hope of giving Murray timely good counsel. He was charged with
two different sets of instructions from two parties among the confederate lords. On
one hand he was to inform Murray of their proceedings, and to require that
nothing should be done with the queen without them, for they were afraid of his
being too lenient with her. The other party prayed him on the contrary to be
kind to Mary and keep favour with her. This advice, Melville says, Murray
approved ; but he alleges that when, after accepting the regency, he had
an interview with the queen, he reproached her so bitterly as almost to break her
heart, and that he thus cut the thread of love and credit between her and him-
self for ever. Melville adds that those, including himself, who found fault with
the regent for this, lost his favour ; but it may be doubted whether Melville was
not more free than wise in his counsels.
At this point Melville deprecates the fact that a little more address was not
displayed in the dealings of the king's party with the Hamiltons and others,
who formed the queen's party. They, he thinks, if rightly dealt with, would
have joined the original confederacy and much evil might have been averted.
Melville evidently hoped the queen would be restored, if she had not escaped
untimely from Lochleven, for the regent though rigorous " was facill and might
have bene won with proces of tym be hir wisdome, and the moyen [means] of
hir frendis that wer in his company." But whatever hopes Melville and others
may have entertained of again seeing Queen Mary on the throne were frustrated
by her escape from captivity, the battle of Langside, and all that followed.
Melville states that the queen desired to take refuge in the castle of Dumbar-
ton, and gradually to win back her subjects to their allegiance, but her adherents
insisted on hazarding a battle. She also endeavoured to bring about an agree-
ment between the parties, and wrote to Melville desiring his aid in the matter,
but her army advanced so rapidly there was no opportunity for negotiations.
After the queen's flight into England, the first event of importance recorded
by Melville was the conference at York, and the subsequent meeting at Hampton
Court, when the accusation against Queen Mary of being accessory to Darnley's
murder was made before the English commissioners. Melville's whole sympathies
appear to have been opposed to Murray's conduct in this affair, and while he
relates the proceedings in a very graphic manner, he contrives to bring the
accusers of Mary into ridicule. But the story has been often quoted, and though
Melville appears to have been present, he does not expressly say so. There is
therefore less reason for repeating the details. It would appear that Mel-
ville's sympathies, though he adhered to Murray's party, were strongly drawn to
ADVISER OF THE REGENTS. 143
favour those who had declared for the queen. He seems to have had a special
admiration for his nephew, Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange, and when Secretary
Lethington and Sir James Balfour were, by order of the regent, arrested for com-
plicity in Darnley's murder, Melville interceded with the regent that they should
be banished or set at liberty, promising that if this were done, Grange would
deliver the castle of Edinburgh, and the regency be thus more firmly established.
The death of Murray by the assassin's bullet within a few months afterwards,
on 23d January 1570, calls forth from Melville a eulogium, mingled with such
criticism of the regent's political career as to suggest the idea that Melville's dis-
satisfaction with Murray arose chiefly because the latter would not take his advice.
Melville tells us he gathered clivers scraps of wisdom from Solomon, Augustine,
Plutarch and others, but chiefly out of the Bible, which he was wont to recite to
the regent on all " erroneous occasions," that is, when he thought Murray was
mistaken in his policy. He complacently adds that Murray " tok bettir with
them therfore, then gif they had proceadit from the learnit philosophers ; therfore
I promysed to put them in wret and giue him to kepe in his poutche, bot he was
slain as said is, before I culd meit with him."
Of the political movements which followed immediately upon the Regent
Murray's death, Melville takes little notice. Randolph was despatched as English
envoy to Scotland, and the Earl of Sussex was ordered with a strong force to the
borders. The election of a successor to Murray was delayed, partly that Eliza-
beth might be advised on the subject. Meanwhile Melville himself appears to
have joined the party of Grange, Lethington, and others who were now beginning
to declare openly for the queen's faction, and he was sent on their behalf to deal
with the Earl of Sussex, and to learn that nobleman's intentions. He was well
received and hospitably entertained, but returned to his patrons with no decided
answer, though with a firm opinion that Sussex was sent to play a double part —
on the one hand to promote the election of Lennox as regent and promise support
to the king's party, while on the other hand he also encouraged the queen's
faction.
It is characteristic of Melville that though in his mission to Sussex he was
acting as agent for Grange and others who were in league with the Hamiltons,
he yet thought it his " dewty " to visit at Berwick the regent-elect, who was one
of the most bitter opponents of the queen's party. Melville's excuse for this visit
was that when Lennox had come to Scotland with his son Darnley in 1565, his
countess had recommended him to rely much on the advice of Melville and his
brother Robert. Melville therefore now presumed on his former friendship to
dissuade Lennox from accepting the regency, setting forth the disturbed state of
144 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
the country, which would put his life iu peril. At the same time he offered the
earl his own service and assistance, while admitting that this was not the inten-
tion of those in Edinburgh Castle. The conference concluded by Melville's
hoping that Lennox might still continue the friendship he had with Grange.
While returning homeward Melville met the abbot of Dunfermline (Robert
Pitcairn), the agent of the king's party, on his way to meet the Earl of Lennox,
and afterwards to England, to negotiate the delivery of Queen Mary to the
custody of the Scots.1
After Lennox came to Scotland and assumed the regency, Melville wished to
attend on him in various expeditions, but was detained by Randolph, the English
ambassador, on the pretext that he might become a mediator between the regent
and those in the castle of Edinburgh. Grange had not yet made up his mind to
break finally with the king's party, and some negotiation did take place. But
Melville openly declares that Randolph's intentions were the reverse of pacific,
and rather to promote strife than reconciliation. Into Melville's views on this
point, however, it is unnecessary to enter, the more so as his anger was excited
against Randolph by a personal matter in which the English Resident overreached
him, as he believed. This referred to the teinds of the lands of Letham, near
Monimail, in Fife, the right to which had been promised to Melville. Randolph
offered to secure the fulfilment of this if Melville would aid him with the queen's
party ; but the teinds were bestowed on some one else, which partly explains the
severe terms in which Melville condemns Randolph's policy.
This policy, and certain advices from England regarding it, had, according to
Melville, nearly produced a result opposite to that which the Resident desired, as
the factions were almost driven to combine against England. But the bestowal
of the bishopric of St. Andrews upon the Earl of Morton led to that nobleman
doing his best to prevent any agreement. One step taken to this end was the
arrest of Melville himself, which was effected by the Earl of Buchan.2 When
arrested Melville was at a wedding at Fordel, and his friends there beinsr
numerous, offered to chase the earl back again, but Melville would not permit
this, and went with his captor willingly. When he arrived at Leith, where the
regent's camp was, it was proposed that he should send a message to his friends
in the castle that unless it were delivered his life would be in peril. But he
1 It is not easy to follow Melville's chrono- '- The Earl of Buchan at this date was a
logy, which appears confused at this point, distant kinsman of Morton, Robert Douglas,
but the sequence of his interviews with a son of the laird of Lochleven, who had
Sussex, Lennox, and others have been stated married Christian Stewart, Countess of
as he narrates it. Buchan.
NEGOTIATES BETWEEN MORTON AND THE CASTILIANS. 145
refused to do this, ridiculing the proposal as a childish tale. Kirkcaldy of
Grange, however, when he heard of the capture, sent a secret message offering to
rescue the prisoner ; but Melville would not consent, assuring him there was no
danger, and this turned out to be the case, as the arrest was only laughed at, and
Melville was liberated without being brought before the council at all.
This ' incident apparently took place some time in the year 1571, and
Melville passes rapidly over the death of the Regent Lennox in September of
that year, and the election of Mar as his successor. The next event which
he records as personally affecting himself is the arrival in Scotland of Mr.
Henry Killigrew as ambassador from England, in August 1572, after the
massacre of St. Bartholomew. Killigrew was an old friend of Melville, and
sent for the latter to talk with him. Killigrew assured Melville that the Earl
of Morton was the person in Scotland upon whom the hopes of Elizabeth and
her ministers were placed. Melville told this to his friends in the castle.
Killigrew at a later date had an interview with them, but without immediate
result, and at another attempt Kirkcaldy plainly refused to refer the matters in
debate between him and the king's party to the decision of the English queen
and council. About this time Melville himself was summoned by the Regent
Mar, and commissioned to make another effort to make peace with Grange and
his adherents, which, according to the envoy, was nearly completed when Mar
took ill and died after a short sickness.
This untoward event threw matters into confusion, but the Earl of Morton
was declared regent, and he assured Melville, who was again the intermediary, that
he would fulfil the conditions made with the Earl of Mar. More difficulty was
made in agreeing with Morton, whose character was much disliked, yet Grange
and Lethington both assented to a peace. But when Melville went to Morton
and reported the result, adding that Grange's influence would be useful to bring
about a general agreement, the regent replied that he did not mean to agree
with the whole of the opposite faction. He then gave his reasons, and bade
Melville show to Grange that either he and his friends must agree separately
from the Hamiltons and their allies, or the latter would make their peace without
reference to those of the castle. To this Melville only answered that he understood
the regent, " his speach was very plain." Kirkcaldy received the result of the
conference calmly, asserting that if the Hamiltons now deserted him he deserved
better at their hands, but he would rather they deceived him than that he should
do so to them.
At first Morton seemed to respect this chivalrous dealing, but in the end
he negotiated a separate pacification with the Hamiltons, and when that was
VOL. I. T
146 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
concluded he refused to deal further with those of the castle. The fortress
was besieged by an English force, who brought very heavy artillery to bear upon
it, and soon effected a breach. Two of Melville's brothers, Robert and Andrew,
were among those who remained in the castle to the last, and when the final
surrender took place, and the chief defenders were, after a few days of respite,
made prisoners, Robert Melville would have been executed but for the express
desire of Queen Elizabeth. To Kirkcaldy no such mercy was shown, and he was
executed on 3d August 1573, his death calling forth from Melville a eulogium
which has been often quoted, and which forms one of the most beautiful passages
in his Memoirs.
After narrating this tragedy, Melville treats of more general matters, including
the character of the Regent Morton, his mode of government, and the education
and surroundings of the young king, summing up in a few pages the chief
events between the death of Kirkcaldy in 1573 and the fall of Morton
himself in 1581. Only one personal incident does Melville relate about himself
during this period, but it is characteristic. Morton, he says, had become proud
and disdainful, and although his government was firm, his conduct gave great
offence to many. Among others, the laird of Carmichael, who was one of his
closest adherents, felt aggrieved at the regent's ingratitude, and would have left
his service. But he consulted Melville, whose advice was worldly wise in the
extreme, and not without a touch of sarcasm. He referred to his own case
and that of his brother in the service of the Regent Murray, how when they
had admonished their master, they had lost his favour, while others gained it
by flattery and obsequiousness. " Thir men wan him and we tint (lost) him,
and apperantly," said Melville to Carmichael, " ye folow the lyk fulische behauour
as we did ; therfore ye mon tak up another kynd of doing now sen your frend is
become regent. Imagen that ye wes never acquanted with him of before, bot
entrit to serve a new maister. Cast never up your auld and lang service ; bek
(bow) laich, ' grace ' him at every word, find na fait with his procedingis, but
serve all his affections with gret diligence and continowell onwating, and ye sal
be sure of a reward. Other wayes all the formair tym spendit in his service sal
be tint, and he sal hate yow." Carmichael was wise in his generation ; he
became a greater courtier than before, and was employed, rewarded, and enabled
to do pleasure to his friends ; but, Melville concludes, " I fand him not thank-
full efterwart to me for my consaill."
Other matters of personal interest to Melville which occurred about this
period, but which are not referred to in his Memoirs, may here be noted. They
relate chiefly to the lands from which his best-known designation was derived,
ADOPTED BY BALNAVES AS HIS SON AND HEIR. 147
Hallhill, possession of which he acquired about 1570. The lands of Easter Col-
lessie or Hallhill, in the parish of Collessie, Fife, had belonged to Mr. Henry
Balnaves, of whom mention was made in the memoir of Sir John Melville of
Raith. A senator of the college of justice, he was an active adherent and pro-
moter of the Reformation, and having joined the garrison of St. Andrews after
the death of Cardinal Beaton, was carried prisoner to Eouen in France, where
he remained a captive till 1550. His estate in Scotland was restored to him
in 1556, when apparently he returned to his own country.1 While residing
abroad he met James Melville, then at the court of France, who gave him
assistance and showed kindness to him as a countryman. This Balnaves repaid
by adopting Melville as his own son, having no children of his own.2 Balnaves
died in February 1570, leaving, by his testament, dated 3d January that
year, his whole estate to his " sone " or " sone adoptive," James Melville, who
was also appointed sole executor.3 Among his other legacies, he bequeathed to
his " sones wyffe " his damask gown lined with velvet. From this we learn that
James Melville was married at this date, though he says nothing of it. His wife
was Christine Boswell, of what particular family is not certain. Within a few
years after his succession to Hallhill he granted these lands, described as the
half-lands of Easter Collessie, called Hallhdl, and the mill, with the half-lands
of Murefield, to her in liferent, reserving the tower, fortalice, and gardens of
Hallhill.4
His position as a landed proprietor probably tempted Melville, after the death
of his friend Grange, and during the comparatively settled government under the
Eegent Morton, to retire into private life, from which, as he tells us, he was very
loath to emerge, when required to do so at a later date. His views on the sub-
ject of a retired life may be gathered from a letter written by him about the
beginning of Morton's regency, in March 1572, to the well-known English diplo-
matist, Thomas Randolph, who had recently returned to Scotland along with Sir
William Drury on a special mission. "As armytis " (hermits), writes Melville,
" wer wont to retire them in solitary places, euen so am I drawen to a quyet
1 Calderwood's Historie, vol. i. pp. 242, cuute or Pathcondie, in the parish of Moni-
244, 318. mail. [Register of Privy Seal, Lib. xxxvi.
f. 64.]
2 Henry Balnaves married a lady named 3 Confirmed Testament of Mr. Henry Bal-
Catharine Scheves, but they apparently had naves, vol. iii. of this work, pp. 117-120.
no surviving issue. The first grant to Mel- 4 Charter, dated at Edinburgh, 20th Feb-
ville was in March 1566-7, during Mr. Henry's ruary 1575-6 ; confirmed 24th February same
lifetime, aud included the lands of Hallhill year. — Registrum Magni Sigilli, vol. iv. No.
and Murefield, in Collessie parish, with Pet- 2521.
148 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
maner of lyving, content wyth the portion which God has geuen me, wha has
also mouit the hartis of my lord regents grace and the nobilite to be protectours
of my quyetnes ; quhilk is such that I nayther am curious of newes nor desirous
of negotiations." He is anxious to know of Randolph's welfare since the latter's
marriage, and as to the welfare of others whom he names. Were it not that
Randolph were lately married the writer would pity his want of rest in " cumber-
some occupations." He refers to the object of Randolph's mission and con-
tinues : — " Whatsoeuer he be that parturbes my quyet lyf and estait with any
busynes will get as mekle thankes as Alexander had of Diogenes, when he stod
betwix hym and the sowne ; therefore I pray you fauour my quyetnes and find
na fait that I presse not till com wher ye ar, for my affection toward yow of auld
is sa ruted, that it most be yet a greter storm and a more vehement blast before
it can be blawen out and away ; howbeit I haue yet matter and store of flyting
keping for conuenient tym," etc.1
How long Melville continued in his retirement does not appear, but he does
not describe himself as taking any active part in public affairs during the years
of Morton's regency and those which followed when King James the Sixth
assumed the reins of government. The story of the ascendency which was
gained over the boy king by two favourites, Esme Stewart d'Aubigny, created
Duke of Lennox, and James Stewart of Ochiltree, known as Earl of Arran,
with the events which led to the death of Morton and afterwards to the " Raid
of Ruthven," is familiar to all students of Scottish history and need not be
detailed here, as they are lightly passed over by Melville himself. He was,
however, not one of those who feared the influence about the king of the
Duke of Lennox, of whom he speaks in terms of praise, attributing the faults
of the administration to the evil counsel of the Earl of Arran and his wife.
Melville's brother, Robert Melville of Murdoch cairnie, a strong supporter of the
Marian faction, had been a promoter of the duke's coming to Scotland,2 and
it is probable that on this account Melville was well affected towards Lennox.
Owing to his attachment to that nobleman Melville was drawn into the
current of public events immediately connected with the Raid of Ruthven.
We gather from a church historian that Melville was with the court at
Perth on 6th July 1582, when the commissioners from the General Assembly
of the Kirk of Scotland, including Andrew Melville and his nephew James,
appeared before the king and convention of estates to present a list of
grievances. Andrew Melville's boldness on the occasion was so conspicuous
1 Original letter, date 14tli March [1571-2], Melville, Bannatyne edition,
printed in preface to Memoirs of Sir James 2 Calderwood, vol. iii. p. 457.
FOREWARNED OF THE RAID OF RUTHVEN. 149
that it overawed the duke and Arran, and the commissioners departed
unharmed, though, shortly before, Andrew Melville and his nephew had both
been advised to leave the town as they were obnoxious to the court. The
younger Melville, who records the fact, states that it was Sir James Melville
of Hallhill who thus warned them, and he was inclined to obey, but his uncle
would not yield.1
From Perth Melville came to Edinburgh, perhaps in the train of the Duke of
Lennox, who passed on to Dalkeith. Melville, who apparently at this time was
a privy councillor, was fulfilling certain duties of justiciary over the shire of
Linlithgow, when one morning, before he was out of bed, a gentleman came to
him offering to make him the instrument to save the king from a plot against
him. Melville was incredulous, but expressed more anxiety about the Duke of
Lennox. His visitor, however, who desired to conceal his name, declared that
the king was in danger, and he named the chief conspirators, omitting, accidentally
or otherwise, the Earl of Gowrie.2 Melville hastily rode to Dalkeith to consult
Lennox, who sent a messenger to the king, and also to Arran, then at Kinneil.
This, however, apparently precipitated matters, as the conspirators, fearing dis-
covery, seized the king at Kuthven, while Arran reached his Majesty just in time
to be himself placed in ward.
This is nearly all that Melville relates of the bold stroke by which the Earl
of Gowrie and others gained possession of the person of the king, and drove
Lennox and Arran from the administration. Almost on the same page on which
Melville records the success of the plot, he begins to tell by what means the
king strove to free himself from the Iiuthven raiders, whose authority he felt
to be irksome. The " Raid of Ruthven " took place on 22d August 1582, and
ten months later, on the 27th June following, the king effected his counter
revolution, having laid his plans very secretly some time before. He left Edin-
burgh in May, much against the will of his advisers, under pretext of wishing to
" tak a progresse," and went first to Linlithgow and thence to Falkland.3 While
there he summoned Melville to his counsels, sending a secret messenger to reveal
his designs, and desiring assistance and advice in gaining his liberty.
Melville was very unwilling to comply with this request, but finally consented.
The king complained of his hard condition, to which Melville replied with his
usual facility of giving advice, urging, however, that if the king freed himself,
1 Diary of Mr. James Melville, nephew of known as a conspirator ; also that Ruthven
Andrew Melville, Bannatyne ed. p. 94. House was made the scene of the conspiracy
2 Melville alleges that Gowrie had just to embark Gowrie more deeply in the plot,
newly been drawn into the plot, and was not 3 Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 713, 714.
150 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
he should be leuient in his dealings with Gowrie and his friends. When the
king's plans were completed he rode quietly to St. Andrews, having summoned a
number of lords favourable to the faction of Lennox and Arran to meet him
there. Some of these, including the Earl of March, met him at Dairsie, at which
meeting, says Melville, "his Maieste thocht himself at liberte, with gret joy and
exclamation, lyk a burd flowen out of a kaige . . . thinking himself then sur
anough." Melville himself, however, was far from sharing this confidence ; and
if he is to be believed, it was greatly owing to his foresight and prudence that
the enterprise was finally successful. The king was at first lodged in a place
which was even less defensible than the palace of Falkland ; and it was only by
much persuasion that Melville prevailed on him to spend the night in the castle
of St. Andrews. Had he not done so, he might again have been seized, and even
as it was, on the next day the retainers of the Gowrie faction crowded into the
fortress well armed ; but such precautions were taken that their designs failed.
The king's friends, who had been late in arriving, rallied round him so strongly
that his safety was secured, and the Euthven administration came to an end,
the lords of that party being forbidden to approach the court. For his services
Melville was thanked publicly by the king in presence of the new council, as
"the only instrument, under God, of his libertie." This publicity, however,
was by no means agreeable to Melville, who declared to the king that there was
sufficient ill-will against him already.
r . The king and his new advisers were at first moderate in their dealings with
the contrary party, Gowrie even remaining a member of the council. Arran held
aloof from the court for a time, but soon began to intrigue for his return. His
agent even applied to Melville, who was at this time in high favour, to influence
the king on Arran's behalf. This Melville was reluctant to do, and in a private
interview with the king, when his Majesty lamented the loss of former friends,
and complained that the Earl of Arran was not allowed to come to him, Melville
spoke freely of the earl as one of the worst instruments who could come about
his sovereign. Arran, however, was admitted, and rapidly gained an ascendency
over the king and council. The harsh measures which he proposed against the
Euthven raiders were extremely displeasing to Melville, who opposed them
strongly, and provoked a quarrel with Arran, which, however, delayed extremities
somewhat. Melville was also at this time in the king's confidence about a letter
from Queen Elizabeth protesting against the new government, and wrote a draft
reply explaining the circumstances. Indeed, about this time he was offered but
refused the post of secretary.
One result of the jealousy between Melville and Arran was that the former
RELATIONS WITH JAMES STEWART, EARL OF ARRAN. 151
was shut out as far as possible from access to the king. At this point his narra-
tive is difficult to follow, as he places events in a wrong sequence, but his retire-
ment from court was either very short or succeeded instead of preceding the
arrival of Sir Francis Walsingham as English ambassador. Melville was sum-
moned to attend upon him and welcome him in the king's name, and accom-
panied him to Perth, where James then was.1 Walsingham was well pleased to
meet Melville, for they had been comrades abroad, and he refused other escort
that they might see more of each other. He had an audience with the king, after
some delay, for which, he writes, lie dealt " roundly " with Melville, and, according
to the latter, was much impressed with the youthful monarch ; 2 but he refused to
have any dealings with Arran, who, in revenge, cheated the ambassador at his
departure by substituting a ring with a stone of crystal for the diamond worth
700 crowns which the king had intended to give him. After Walsingham's
departure Melville returned home, from which he was summoned by the king in the
end of October 1583, to undertake a proposed embassy to England. But though
he answered the call, he dissuaded the king from sending him on this mission.
Melville again retired to his own house, as appears from two letters written
by him from Hallhill to his friends, Henry Killigrew and Sir Francis Walsingham,
one of them being in favour of his brother William, then with the Prince of
Orange.3 In the beginning of December a convention of estates met at Edin-
burgh, and declared the Raid of Ruthven to be treason. When the king told
Melville, who had not been present on the first day, the latter expressed his great
regret, as he feared the measures taken would drive those affected to desperation.
He further expostulated with the king about Arran, whose doing this was, urged
sending the favourite into retirement for a time, and spoke so freely, that at last
James left him in an angry mood. That came to pass which Melville predicted ;
a coalition of the Earls of Mar, Angus, and others of the Gowrie faction did
take place, and in the following April they seized Stirling Castle, but the sudden
capture of the Earl of Gowrie thwarted their plans, and they escaped to England.
The capture of Gowrie was followed not long afterwards by his execution, on
2d May 1584. Affairs became somewhat more settled after this event, but as
the death of Gowrie and the exile of the banished lords were distasteful to the
1 Arran's return to court was on 5th factory from a political point of view. Cf.
August 1583. Walsingham arrived in Edin- Walsingham's letters to Elizabeth. [Thorpe's
burgh on 1st September, and left for Perth Calendar of State Papers, Scotland, vol. i.
on the 7th. [Calderwood, vol. iii. pp. 722, pp. 455, 456.]
724.] 3 Letters, dated Hallhill, 7th November
2 Their interview, however, was not satis- 1583. Ibid. p. 461.
152 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
English government, it was resolved to send Secretary Davison as an envoy to
Scotland. Melville, as on former occasions, was despatched to the borders to
meet and accompany him to court. He tells us nothing of their intercourse in his
" Memoirs," but in a letter addressed to his brother Eobert he gives a minute
account of their conversation. It is evident that Melville was commissioned to
sound the ambassador as to the intentions of the English queen. From his letter,
which is too long for quotation, it would appear that he pressed Davison hard
with home-thrusts directed against Elizabeth's policy. He hinted it was a policy
which sowed discord under a pretence of amity, and meddled with the factious
subjects of a friendly king. He exposed the practices of some of these " busy
factioners," and concluded with a plain statement that Elizabeth must love
the king's friends and hate his enemies, if she desired friendship, adding with
reference to the succession to the crown of England, that the king was young
and could " abide upon anything God has provided for him." 1
On reaching the Scottish court, Davison, in contrast to Walsingham's
behaviour, but no doubt acting under instructions, devoted himself to Arran, and
endeavoured to gain the favourite to the English interest. This conduct disgusted
Melville, who commented upon it to the king, virtually charging Davison with
double-dealing. While Davison was in Scotland Arran made an alleged discovery
of a conspiracy to kill himself and others about the king.2 It is apparently in
reference to this that Melville states that he was advised to absent himself from
court for a few days to escape the danger. He, however, warned the king, urging
him to send Arran away, but in vain. Arran himself then, to Melville's surprise,
sought an interview, and expressed a desire to be friendly, but the jealousies
between them were too great, and the result was far from amicable. Parliament
met on 22d August, within a few weeks after the alleged discovery, and
pronounced sentence of forfeiture against the Earls of Angus, Mar, and other
banished lords, and all who were prominent in the Eaid of Euthven. The king
was much pleased with this, but when in a private interview he asked Melville's
opinion, the latter regretted what had been done. He bade the king thank God,
and not good management, for the comparative quiet which prevailed ; asserted
that the banished lords would not rest, while many who now assisted Arran did
so from fear only, and not for love, and that his doings really excited envy and
hatred.
1 Letter, dated June 6, 1584. Thorpe's 2 Examination of George Drummond of
Calendar of State Papers, Scotland, vol. i. Blair, 31st July and 4th August 1584.
p. 475; fully quoted in Tytler's History of Calderwood, vol. iv. pp. 169, 170.
Scotland, 3d ed. vol. vi. pp. 390-392.
THE ENGLISH AND DANISH AMBASSADORS. 153
It may seem strange that Melville was permitted to speak so freely regard-
ing Arran, but it is evident that he was much respected by the king, to whose
mother he had been a faithful servant. His counsels and warnings as to
Arran were prophetic of the result. There can be no doubt the earl was
hated ; the difficulty was to find an agent sufficiently bold and unscrupulous to
bring about his ruin, but within a year from Melville's speech to the king
Arran was in disgrace, as the result of the combined influence of the English
ambassador and the intrigues of the Master of Gray. The means by which
this was brought about have no special connection with the subject of this
memoir, but Edward Wotton, the English envoy engaged in the affair was
like so many other diplomates, an old acquaintance of Melville's. The story
which the latter relates of Wotton is, however, intended to tell rather in favour
of his cunning than his honesty, being the narrative of a plan proposed by
Wotton when a young man to the Constable of France for the surprise and taking
of the town of Calais. Remembering this fact, Melville warned the king against
Wotton's skill in beguilement, but without effect.
The ambassador came, and what with presents of horses, and his apparent
passion for sporting and hunting, pastimes in which the king delighted, he
fairly won the monarch's heart. All this of course was done with a purpose
to gain James to conclude a settled union with England, but it had a side
issue in which Melville played a busy part. While Wotton was in Scotland, three
ambassadors arrived from Denmark, " a gret and magnifik ambassade ... a sex
score of persones, in twa braue schippis." Melville, as usual, was deputed to
wait upon them, but so occupied was the king with the delights presented to
him by the English envoy that the Danes were much neglected, or as it is
expressed, though the king wished to treat them honourably, they were " never-
theles mishandled, ruffeled, triffelit, drifted and delayed ... to ther gret
charges and miscontentement." The pre-occupation of the king left the Danes
at the mercy of Arran and other courtiers who were hostile to their mission,
which was nominally to buy back the islands of Orkney and Shetland,
but really to negotiate a marriage between King James and one of the
princesses of Denmark. Another cause of the disrespect shown to the envoys
was the duplicity of Wotton, who, knowing that his mistress was opposed to such
a marriage, filled the ear of James with evil stories of the Danish ambassadors,
and while he visited them in an outwardly friendly manner, misrepresented
the king's conduct and speech to them.
As a result the ambassadors would probably have returned to their own
king in high dudgeon at the treatment they received had Melville not
vol. i. . xj
154 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
interposed, and by his good offices secured an interview between King James
and the Danes, which ended to the satisfaction of both parties. Even then,
matters nearly miscarried. The king ordered a banquet to be made for the
distinguished guests, but his controller and other officers were quietly for-
bidden to prepare it. Melville's energy averted the insult thus intended, by
persuading the Earl of March to prepare a great banquet in the king's name.
This disconcerted the English ambassador, who, however, prevented the king
being present ; but on Melville's explanation, James rose from his own dinner,
went to the banquet and drank the healths of the King and Queen of Denmark
and their envoys. The latter would then have been honourably dismissed, but
Melville represented that there was no present prepared for them, upon which
the king " was maruelous sory, and sayed they wald schame him, that had the
handling of his affaires." The difficulty was got over in a characteristic manner.
The Earl of Arran was just then ordered to leave the court, but ere his departure
the king sent to desire him to lend him a great chain, weighing 750 crowns, to
be given to the Danes, as to which Melville remarks, that if Arran refused the
chain he lost the king, and in delivering it he lost the chain. The trinket
thus obtained was divided into three parts, and the three Danish ambassadors
were despatched to their own land rejoicing, and making many professions of
amity between the two nations.
Events in Scotland at this date, August 1585, had reached a crisis. The
wiles of the English ambassador had triumphed so far that in a convention of
estates at St. Andrews a league, offensive and defensive, had been completed with
England, while Arran had been committed to ward on the pretext of concern in
the death of Lord Russell, who had been slain in a fray on the borders.1 The
Master of Gray, who had been in England, hurried north and used all his efforts
to effect the ruin of Arran and procure the release of the banished lords. After
some diplomatic delays, Angus, Mar, and their companions in exile were allowed
to leave England, and reached Berwick about the 17th October 1585, meeting
there the English ambassador, who had become alarmed for his own safety. From
Berwick they advanced into Scotland, and began what might be called their
triumphal march towards Stirling Castle, where King James then was.
It was at this juncture, as the banished lords were entering Scotland, that
1 Arran was warded for three or four days alleged that he had made a promise to Queen
in the castle of St. Andrews, and Melville Elizabeth to prevent James marrying for
states that he was in fear of his life, which three years, that he might wed a lady of the
made him call for Melville and others and English blood-royal,
beg them to procure his freedom. He also
DECLINES EMBASSIES TO ENGLAND, DENMARK, AND SPAIN. 155
Melville was summoned to the king. On liis arrival he informed the king of their
reported arrival on the borders. An enterprise was projected to march against
the banished lords, but this plan was defeated by the intrigues of those around
the king. Melville himself was despatched on a feigned errand to Dunkeld,
whither the Master of Gray had gone. According to Melville, the only benefit
gained by his visit there was the delaying the Earl of Athole, who was ready
to march to Stirling with a considerable force. Whether this array was to
support the king or the banished lords does not appear, but meanwhile the latter
had reached Stirling and assumed the government, Arran having escaped. When
Melville returned to court he was well received by the king and also by the new
council, and his opinion, which was always on the side of moderation, was sought
after and followed as far as possible.
As the party of the banished lords was favourable to the English alliance,
negotiations to that end were proceeded with, and on 5th July 1586 a league
between the two nations was duly confirmed. In regard to this, Melville states
that the king wished to send him as an envoy to take the Queen of England's
oath of confirmation, but that he was unwilling to go, as the league was an
indirect breach of the bond with France. The king at first would take no
excuse, but Kandolph, learning the king's purpose, used all his influence to
prevent Melville's being sent. Randolph spoke much good of Melville, hav-
ing known him in France and Italy, but they " schot at sindre markis," and
the English envoy now alleged that Melville would not be acceptable to Eliza-
beth at this time, because his brothers, Robert and Andrew, were both
partisans of Queen Mary. The king remarked that he was never " esteamed
a factioner," and refused to yield ; but Melville persuaded him to do so. Mel-
ville also, at a later date, declined to undertake a proposed embassy to Spain.
When King James made up his mind, in the year 1588, to marry Anna, second
daughter of Frederick the Second, King of Denmark, then lately deceased, he
was very anxious that Melville should be one of two ambassadors to go to Den-
mark and conclude the arrangements. Melville, however, declined the honour,
notwithstanding the king's urgent persuasions, and after much tedious and
unnecessary delay, George Keith, Earl Marischal, was sent.1 Again, at a later
1 On 3d April 1589, about two months iv. p. 371]. The circumstances are not stated
before the despatch of the Earl Marischal, in the Register, but appear to be those nar-
Melville was appointed one of a commission rated by Mr. James Melville in his diary
to inquire into and settle a controversy which [Bannatyne Club ed., pp. 182-184], when a
had arisen between the University of St. partisan of Bishop Adamson wounded a pro-
Andrews and the citizens, in which blood had fessor, William Walwood, and a tumult took
been shed. [Register of Privy Council, vol. place in consequence.
156 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
period, when preparations were being made for the reception of the queen and
there were daily expectations of her arrival, Melville alleges that the king sent
for him and his brother, Sir Robert, lamenting his " mishandled estate " and
begging them to undertake his affairs. This they declined to do, beyond using
their best efforts to prepare for receiving the queen honourably. The confi-
dence thus shown by the king to Melville and his brother was displeasing to
Chancellor Maitland, and nearly led to unpleasant consequences after the king's
return from Norway. Indeed, according to Melville, he and his brother were
much annoyed by court intrigues and plots against themselves and their credit
with the king.
Melville was appointed one of the queen's special attendants as a privy
councillor and gentleman of her chamber, and on the occasion of her coronation
he was raised to the honour of knighthood.1 He tells us that when he was
presented to her Majesty, the king praised him very much, commenting on his
travels, his great experience, and his services to the late Queen of Scots, with a
desire to make Queen Anna take a liking to her new servitor. Her Majesty,
however, received the praise and also Melville himself somewhat coldly, and
some days afterwards, with a curious appreciation of the situation, asked if he
was ordained to be her keeper. To this Sir James replied that she was well
descended and well brought up, and needed no keeper, but to be honourably
served according to her rank. She then explained that some had striven to
inspire her with disfavour against him. His answer was characteristic, that he
was placed in her service to " instruct sic indiscret persones, and also to geue
them gud exemple how to behaue themselues dewtifully and reuerently unto hir
Maieste and to hald them a bak ; and that way to kep hir from ther raschnes
and importunite." After this, Sir James devoted himself more particularly to
attendance on the queen, with which, he observes, she appeared to be satisfied.
Sir James Melville was in the palace of Holyrood on the night of the 27th
December 1591, when Francis Stewart, Earl of Bothwell, attempted to obtain
possession of the king's person. The earl was incited to this enterprise by some
who were jealous of Chancellor Thirlestane, and they secured him and his
followers a ready entrance to the palace through a stable, belonging, it is said,
to the Duke of Lennox. Douglas of Spott, however, one of Bothwell's men,
alarmed the household by an altercation with the porters about some of his
servants who were in ward there, and the king had time to escape to a place
of security. Bothwell attacked the queen's rooms, where he expected to find
the king, and fore-hammers were used against the door. The chancellor's quarters
1 On 17tli May 1590. CaWerwood, vol. v. p. 95.
BOTH WELLS ATTACK UPON HOLYROOD, 1591. 157
were also beset, but he defended himself manfully, and the assailants were kept
at bay, until succour arrived from the Canongate, Andrew Melville, brother of
Sir James, leading the rescuers in through the chapel, whereupon Bothwell and
his accomplices fled.
When Bothwell first entered, Melville was sitting with the Duke of Len-
nox, having just finished supper. The duke at once rose, drew his sword and
rushed out, but he bad no assistance, and as the place was full of " unfriends "
the two were compelled to fortify the doors and stairs with boards, forms and
stools, and " be spectatoris of that strange hurly-burly for the spaice of ane hour ;
behalding with torch light fourth of the dukis gallerie, their reilling, their
rombling with halbertis, the clakking of their colveringis and pistolles, the
duntting of melis [striking of mallets] and forehammers, and their crying for
justice." During the mel6e the chancellor passed by a private stair to the duke's
department and desired admission. The duke, acting by Melville's advice, ex-
pressed a wish that the chancellor's men should dispute the lower door as long
as they could, though he offered to admit himself. But the other was offended
at this reply and returned to his own rooms. Sir James Melville adds that he
and his brother Sir Robert had, two days before, received warning of some such
enterprise, and had done their best to prevent the king exposing himself, but
in vain.
It is clear from what Melville says that he himself was one of those in opposi-
tion to Lord Thirlestane, whom he charges directly or indirectly with all or most
of the abuses in the government. For some time after the attempt by Bothwell
the court appears to have been in much confusion. The queen sided with Both-
well's faction, and the chancellor was forced to retire for a time. Melville him-
self was absent for a season, and on his return to court, found his brother out of
favour as well as the chancellor. Sir James, however, succeeded in rehabilitating
him in the good graces of the king. Sir James and his brother were both members
of the privy council, which was reconstituted in June of this year, 1592, and
were no doubt consenting parties to the act of parliament which established the
kirk, and has been called the Magna Charta of Scottish Presbyterianism.1
Calderwood and others allege that this act, as it was passed by the influence
of the chancellor, was intended to win over the ministers to his party in
opposition to Bothwell, who was still a source of much disquiet. A few weeks
later he made another attempt upon the king's person. On this occasion his
Majesty was at Falkland, and as there were reports that an attempt was to
be made, he was advised to take measures accordingly, but refused to do
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. iii. pp. 541, 542, 562, 563.
158 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
so. Sir James Melville asserts that had it not been for the vigilance of his
brother, Sir Robert, and the energetic behaviour of one of his servants, the king
and his household would have been wholly taken by surprise. As it was, Both-
well and his men besieged the place for some hours on the morning of the 28th
June 1592, and only fled because they were afraid the country people would rise
against them. Melville did his best to rouse the country for the relief of the
king, but he and those he assembled received intimation that the earl and his
followers had made their escape.
The " Memoirs," as preserved, come to an abrupt close not long after this,
the chief remaining incidents narrated being Bothwell's invasion of Holyrood in
July 1593, and the baptism of Prince Henry in 1594. We learn, however, from
other sources that Melville continued about the court, more or less in attendance
on the privy council, and occasionally engaged on special commissions. Thus
in March 1593, he and some other gentlemen of Fife were appointed arbiters in a
dispute between the magistrates of St. Andrews and a number of the townsmen.
The magistrates, in consequence of the poverty and distressed state of the burgh,
which had been visited by the plague, finding themselves unable to preserve the
necessary public works of the place from decay, had resolved to lease out certain
of the burgh lands in acre lots. To this many of the citizens were opposed, with-
out reason, as the magistrates averred, and the matter was laid before the privy
council. The arbiters went to St. Andrews, and spent three days there, but
separated without coming to a decision, and the subject was again laid before
the privy council. The complaint this time was directed against the magistrates
and others, and the same arbiters were reappointed to convene on the 23d of
April 1593, but the result is not recorded.1 On the following day the General
Assembly met at Dundee, whither Sir James Melville went as a commissioner
on behalf of the king to arrange certain articles. These chiefly related to the
recent act of parliament, and the appointment of chaplains to the royal house-
hold, and were agreed to by the assembly.2
Bothwell's next attempt to gain access to the king in Holyrood need not be
detailed here, except as regards Melville's share in the matter. The earl obtained
entrance very early on the morning of the 24th July 1593, and finding the king
in such a condition that he could neither fight nor flee, protested that he only
came to seek pardon of his Majesty, and made a formal submission. Meanwhile,
though the palace gates were beset by Bothwell's retainers, an alarm had been
given, and the provost of Edinburgh and many of the townsmen in armour had
1 Register of the Privy Council, vol. v. - Calderwood's Historie, vol. v. pp. 242-
pp. 56, 61. 245.
THE BAPTISM OF PEINCE HENRY, 1594. 159
rushed down to the king's rescue. Among others came Sir James Melville, who
called up to the king's window to ask of his welfare. The king came to the
window and said all would be well enough ; that he had agreed with Bothwell on
certain conditions, which were to be put in writing. He further bade the armed
citizens wait for a short time, but they soon returned home. Melville was, at a
later date, called in to advise the king how to act in the new state of affairs.
With some difficulty, an agreement was come to, that Bothwell should be restored
to his estates, which had been forfeited, and that both he and the opposite faction
should for the time leave the court. Melville also refers to the later proceedings
affecting the earl, but the Memoirs fail at this point.
The baptism of Prince Henry was celebrated with some magnificence at
Stirling Castle on 30th August 1594. Previous to the ceremony Sir James was
much employed in providing for the reception and proper entertainment of the
various foreign ambassadors, especially those of Denmark and the Netherlands.
He acted as interpreter when the ambassadors were presented to the queen,
and also, at her desire, received from them the costly presents which they
brought for the royal infant. Among other gifts he mentions great cups of
massive gold, brought by the ambassadors of the Netherlands, two of which in
particular were so heavy that he could scarcely lift them. He adds, however,
that " they wer schone melted and spendit, I mean sa many as wer of gold,
quhilkis suld haue bene keped in store to the posterite," and he implies that this
was done to feed the rapacity of some of the courtiers.
In 1595 he again acted as a messenger from the king to the General
Assembly, which visited the unfortunate Bothwell with excommunication.1
In October of the same year Chancellor Thirlestane died. His office was
not filled up, but in January of the following year the king appointed eight
councillors, with very absolute powers, to manage his affairs, who, from their
number, were known as the Octavians. Although this appointment is beyond
the date at which Sir James Melville actually closes his memoirs, he has, under
the date of 1589, given the substance of various advices tendered by him to the
king. The advice as written must have been given at different periods, and in
one paragraph Sir James refers to the Octavians. The king, he says, told him
that in appointing them he had followed his advice, but Melville appears to
have objected to their administration, and records their demission of office with-
out regret.
In December 1597 Melville's pensions of £100 and 500 merks, formerly
granted by Queen Mary, were ratified of new by the king in parliament, with an
1 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 365.
160 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
augmentation of £300 for his fee. In Juty 1599 he was one of a commission
for providing men for military service, appointed probably in consequence of a
fear entertained by the king that he might have to fight for his rights to the
crown of England.1 In July 1600 he was sworn in as a member of the privy
council, which had been reconstituted in 1598, his previous attendances having
apparently been by special favour or desire of the king.2 About the same period
he, with other tenants and feuars of crown lands in Fifeshire, was summoned
by the king's treasurer and advocate to pay rent on a higher rate of assess-
ment than their charters showed; but their claims were settled by an act of
parliament in November of that year, which declared the rental to be correctly
fixed. The lands feued by Sir James were Hallhill and Murefield.3
It is to be regretted that Sir James did not continue his memoirs down to
the year 1600, as he might have left on record his opinion as to the strange
eventful history of the Govvrie conspiracy. Though evidently not in personal
attendance on the king at the time, Sir James was, probably as a privy councillor,
present at the examination of some of the witnesses. Sir James was present
at a meeting of council on 21st August 1600, when orders were given for
publishing the day of thanksgiving for the king's escape, but after that date he
disappears from the diets of council, and apparently from public record generally.
There is, however, evidence from a private source that he remained in the
service of the royal household until the departure of King James to take posses-
sion of the English throne. The king earnestly desired him to accompany the
court to London, holding out prospects of advancement there, but Melville
declined the promised honours, and, being now well advanced in years, desired
permission to spend the rest of his days in retirement. At a later period, how-
ever, he found himself in duty bound to wait on King James in Eugland, where he
was graciously received. He attended there some weeks " humbly giving," we are
told, " his Majesty his best advice," but no allurements of the court could induce
him to forego his intentions of retiring from public life. He therefore returned
home, and appears to have employed his remaining years in composing his
memoirs for the benefit of his son, to whom the preface is particularly addressed.4
It has been supposed that he continued the narrative of his life to the time of
the king's departure from Scotland, but this is uncertain, and the " Memoirs," as
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 4 Preface, Bannatyne Club edition, p. xxi.
vol. iv. pp. 156, 188. "Epistle to Reader," appended to first edi-
2 Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. p. 130, tion in 1683, by George Scott of Pitlochie,
14th July 1600. the author's grandson. Cf. also Memoirs,
3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, pp. 1-7.
vol. iv. p. 251.
HIS CHILDREN. 161
at present known, break off abruptly at a point not later than the year 1597.
He survived his visit to England for some years, dying at the age of eighty-two
on 1 3th November 1617, and was buried in the churchyard of Collessie. His
wife, Christina Boswell, was alive in 1589, but the date of her death has not
been ascertained.
Sir James Melville had issue, so far as is known, two sons and two daughters.
One of the daughters was Elizabeth, who became the wife of John Colville, for
some years Commendator of Culross. She is said to have been highly accom-
plished, but still more eminent for her piety and for her stout adherence to the
persecuted church of her country. It was she who wrote to Rigg of Aithernie
when he was confined in Blackness Castle in 1624 that " the darkness of
Blackness was not the blackness of darkness."1 She was the ancestress of the
present Lord Colville of Culross.
The other daughter, Margaret, became the second wife of the well-known
statesman and patron of literature, Sir John Scott of Scotstarvit. By him she
had an only son, George Scott, designated of Pitlochie. It was he who first issued,
in 1683, a printed edition of his grandfather's "Memoirs." He was, in 1677,
confined in the Bass for adherence to presbyterianism, but was liberated in 1684,
and in 1685 sailed for New Jersey in America, with his wife, a daughter of Rigg
of Aithernie, his son-in-law, named Johnston, and a number of covenanters, whom
the privy council had ordered to be transported to the plantations. Many died
on the passage, including Scott and his wife.2
The second son of Sir James was Mr. Robert Melville, who was named in the
will of the second Lord Melville as a legatee of 1000 merks. He was minister
of the parish of Simprin, in Berwickshire, from 1641 to 1652, about which date he
died, leaving a widow, Catherine Melville, a son, John, and a daughter, Margaret.*
Sir James Melville's elder son was James Melville, who was retoured heir to
him in the lands of Prinlaws on 14th April 1618.4 He is first named as receiv-
ing charters from his father of the lands of Hallhill, Murefield, and Pathcondie
in 1583. He also, in 1589, obtained a crown charter of resignation to his father
and mother in liferent and himself in fee.5 In 1636 he was retoured heir of
line to his cousin Robert, second Lord Melville, in the lands of Nether- grange, or
mains of Wester Kinghorn, the manor called the Castle of Burntisland, the mills
1 Select Biographies. Wodrow Society, 3 Fasti Ecclesife Scoticanse, part ii. pp.
vol. i. p. 342. 448, 449.
4 Fife Retours, No. 275.
2 Wodrow's History, folio edition, vol. ii. 5 Old Inventories of Hallliill, etc., in Mel-
pp. 9, 481, 565. ville Charter-chest.
VOL. I. X
162 SIR JAMES MELVILLE OF HALLHILL.
called the sea-mills of Burntisland, with the east quarter of the lands of
Wester Kinghorn, all in the regality of Dunfermline.1 Previous to this he sold
his lands of Pathcondie and Murefield to his cousin, but retained Hallhill.2 In
1638 he received a crown confirmation of the lands of Burntisland and others,
which was ratified by parliament in 1641. There was opposition made to his
charter by the bailies of the burgh of Burntisland, but Melville declared that his
grant in no way included the burgh, its port or privileges.3 The date of his
death has not been ascertained. The name of his wife was Catherine Learmonth,
and they had issue, so far as known, two sons, the first of whom was Sir James
Melville of Hallhill and Burntisland, who succeeded his father, while the second
son was named Robert, but of him nothing further has been ascertained.
Sir James Melville, the third of Hallhill, was also known as of Burntisland.
He married, about 1645, Margaret Farcpihar. He is referred to several times
as a member of various committees of parliament between 1644 and 1661.4 He
and his father appear to have sustained considerable losses during that period,
and, to meet his liabilities, Sir James sold the barony of Burntisland to General
James Wemyss, while after his death Hallhill was adjudged to George, Lord
Melville, in payment of debt. He died in the year 1664. Two sons at least
survived him. The eldest of these was James Melville, from whom the estate of
Hallhill was adjudged in 1675.5 He probably died without issue. The other
son was Gilbert Melville, who entered the church and became, in 1688, minister
of Arngask, from which, in 1694, he was translated to Glendevon. He demitted
his office in 1709.° In 1714 he was retoured heir-special to his father, Sir
James Melville of Hallhill, and to his uncle, Robert, brother of Sir James, in ten
acres of the east quarter of Wester Kinghorn.7 Nothing further has been ascer-
tained regarding either of these descendants of Sir James Melville.
1 22d July 1636, Fife Retours, No. 539. 5 Writ in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Old Inventory in Melville Charter-chest. ,_,._,. _ . .
, . . . . , _ .. , . „ ,, , b Fasti Ecclesue Scoticanre, part iv. pp.
* Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, _„_
vol. v. pp. 435, 550.
* Ibid. vol. vi., parts T. and n., passim; 7 Index to Service of Heirs, 1710-1719,
vol. vii. p. 206. p. 18.
163
Sir Andrew Melville of Garvock, Master of the Household
to Queen Mary and King James the Sixth, 1567-1617.
Jane Kennedy, his first Wife.
Elizabeth Hamilton, his second Wife.
Andrew Melville, the seventh son of Sir John Melville of Eaith, entered the
personal service of Queen Mary, and in February 1567 she granted to him for his
good service, as her " lovit servitour," a pension for life of £200 Scots yearly.1
This gift was made only three days after the murder of Darnley, and in the
troublous times which followed Melville adhered closely to his royal mistress. His
name is not attached to the bond signed by the Hamiltons and others for defence
of the queen after her escape from Lochleven Castle, but he and his brother,
Robert, were in the queen's forces at the battle of Langside. They were taken
prisoners, but appear to have been favoured, as three of their brothers (probably
John, James, and Walter) were in the victorious army.2
After the defeat at Langside and the queen's flight to England, and when,
in 1570, his nephew, Sir William Kirkcaldy of Grange, who was captain of
Edinburgh Castle, declared for the queen, Melville joined him and entered the
fortress. For this and other causes he was, in the following year, forfeited by
the parliament held at Stirling by the Regent Lennox.3 He was probably less a
soldier than a courtier, and in November of the same year, 1571, he acted as an
envoy between Grange and Secretary Maitland and Lord Hunsdon, who had been
sent by Queen Elizabeth to Berwick to gain over the former, if possible, to the
king's party.4 In his instructions the two leaders explained the difficulties of their
position, and proposed a government by nobles from both factions in Scotland;
but this not being acceded to, the negotiations failed, and the country continued
to suffer from what has been described as one of the bitterest civil wars on
record. Andrew Melville remained in Edinburgh Castle till its surrender, being
one of the small garrison who resolved to defend it to the last when besieged by
an English force in May 1573.5
He then went to England, and became master of the household to the exiled
queen, being referred to in January 1585 as negotiating about some plate, doubt-
1 Registrant Secreti Sigilli, lib. xxxvi. 3 Memoirs of Sir James Melville, p. 226 ;
fol. iii. Calderwood's Historie, vol. iii. p. 137.
2 Report of the battle of Langside in the 4 Calendar of State Papers, Scotland, vol. i.
State Paper Office. Tytler's History, vol. vi. p. 333.
pp. 470, 471. 5 Memoirs of Sir James Melville, p. 254.
164 SIR ANDREW MELVILLE OP GARVOCK.
less for her Majesty, and in October of the same year as certifying a receipt
for 2000 crowns, a marriage gift from the Queen of Scots to Gilbert Curll and
Barbara Moubray, two of her attendants.1 He continued in the household of
Queen Mary until her death, attended her during her trial on 14th October
1586, and took an affecting farewell of her on the morning of her execution.
He had been excluded from the queen's presence for some weeks, and when they
met, he, with tears, deplored her sad fate. She embraced him, praising his fidelity,
which she regretted it was not now in her power to recompense. She would,
she said, leave that to others, and, as a last service, bade him carry to Scotland a
faithful report of her carriage in her misfortunes. When, with renewed manifesta-
tions of grief, he replied that such would be the most doleful tidings he had ever
had to carry, that his queen and mistress was dead, she said to him, " You should
rather rejoice that the end of Mary Stuart's troubles is at hand. Thou knowest,
Melville, that this world is only vanity, full of troubles and miseries. Tell them
that I died a Catholic, firm in my religion, a Scotchwoman, and true to France.
May God pardon those who have sought my death. He who is the judge of secret
thoughts, and of human actions, knows my motives, and that my desire has always
been that Scotland and England should be united. Remember me to my son, and
tell him that I have done nothing to prejudice his throne or sovereign power, even
when forced thereto by my enemies." With difficulty she then prevailed on her
guards to permit Melville to attend her at the scaffold, and he bore her train to
the foot of its steps.2
After the death of the queen, Melville made preparations to return to Scot-
land, but was detained in England for several months. In the afternoon of the
day of the queen's execution, Melville and her other servants met to hear her
will read, but although there were bequests to each, the amount bequeathed to
him has not been ascertained. The following morning the late queen's household
assembled to offer prayers for her repose, but the keeper of the castle forbade
them to offer mass in any form, an order to which Melville acceded, being a Pro-
testant, but the other members of the household were aggrieved. Melville attended
the removal of Queen Mary's remains to Peterborough Cathedral in August 1587,
and took part in the funeral pageant. After this he and his fellow-servants
were detained in London for fifteen days, subjected to much anxiety and expense,
and were objects of public curiosity. At last passports were given to them, and
they apparently went to France before passing to Scotland.3
1 Calendar of State Papers, Scotland, vol. ii. 3 Vita Maria? Reginse Scotorum, by Samuel
pp. 962, 978. Jebb, vol. ii. pp. (534-636, 646, 647, 659, 660 ;
2 Tytler's History, vol. vii. pp. 74, 116. Teulet's Papiers, etc., tome ii. p. 876.
KECEIVES THE HONOUR OF KNIGHTHOOD. 165
At what date Melville reached the northern kingdom is not clear ; but he
had probably entered the service of King James the Sixth as one of the masters
of the household before 10th September 1588, when the king bestowed on him a
pension for life of four hundred merks yearly from the temporalities of the abbacy
of Crossraguel in Ayrshire. To this were added eight chalders of oats yearly from
the bishopric of St. Andrews, and the whole gift was ratified by parliament and
exempted from the king's revocation, and also from the annexation of church lands.1
In 1590, on the occasion of the coronation of Queen Anna of Denmark, Melville
received £200 to provide suitable clothing.2 In the following year, during one
of Both well's attacks on the palace of Holyrood, Melville distinguished himself by
bringing a number of armed citizens to the rescue of their Majesties, and was
nearly shot in the confusion.3 In 1593 he received on behalf of the king the
sum of 2000 merks, a fine exacted from Patrick, Lord Gray, for his concern
in the abduction of Katherine Carnegie, a daughter of John Carnegie of that ilk.4
In connection with the baptism of the king's eldest son, Prince Henry, at Stirling
Castle, in the following year, Melville was charged with the receiving and expen-
diture of the sums of money and other contributions of the king's loyal subjects
towards the festivities.5
In 1598, Andrew Melville became involved in some disputes with neighbouring
proprietors in Fife, and both he and they were bound under heavy penalties not to
molest each other.6 After this he received the honour of knighthood, which
was probably conferred by King James on his accession to the throne of Eng-
land, and just before his departure from Scotland.7 Sir Andrew Melville did
not accompany his royal master, but appears to have retired to his own estate,
to which, in the year 1604, he added considerably. He already possessed the
small property of Garvock-wood, in the parish of Dunfermline, held of
his brother, Sir Robert Melville of Murdochcairnie, on which he built a
mansion-house, and in the year named he purchased from various proprietors
separate portions of an adjoining estate, South Fod. His lands of Garvock
and South Fod were secured to him and his second wife by a charter from
Queen Anna in 1608, they being included in her jointure lands of the regality of
1 5th June 1592, Acts of the Parliaments of 5 Register of Privy Council, vol. v. p. 152.
Scotland, vol. iii. p. 602 ; vol. iv. pp. 94, 156. 6 Ibid. pp. 695-697.
2 Marriage of James the Sixth. Bannatyne 7 According to the treasurer's accounts,
Club, App. p. 17- Andrew Melville was still unknighted on 1st
3 Memoirs of Sir James Melville, p. 398. April 1603, when he was receiving £125
* Register of the Privy Council, vol. v. pp. a year for livery. In 1604, however, he is
44, 54 ; Calderwood's History, vol. v. p. 252. referred to in charters as Sir Andrew Melville.
166 SIR ANDREW MELVILLE OP GARVOCK.
Dunfermline.1 In the same year he received from King James, through the privy
council, a mandate requiring him, with others who had formerly been of the royal
household, to attend upon the Duke of Wurtemberg, who then paid a visit to
Scotland. The duke was to be lodged in the royal palace at the king's charges,
and waited upon in all things by the former officers of the royal household.
Calderwood states that the duke, " a young man of comelie behaviour," was
convoyed from place to place by noblemen, by the king's direction, and well
entertained.2
Sir Andrew Melville survived his eldest brother, John Melville of Raith, and
is named in the inventory of the latter's effects, in 1606, as a creditor to the
extent of £30.3 In 1611 King James bestowed on him a considerable pension.
In his letter to the Scottish commissioners of rents, authorising the payment,
the king writes, " Whereas Sir Androe Melvill of Garvocke, knight, having
for a long whyle, abone fortie yeares at least, served most dewtifully our
mother of most worthie memorie, and sensyne our selfe also, for many yeares
before our coming from that kingdome, and willing that now in his old age
he should have some testimonie of our favour as a remembrance and rewarde
for his services past, therefore we have graunted vnto him during lyfe a
pension of twelve hundreth pounds Scotts money ... as lykewise we have
thought meitt to will yow to make payement hereafter to the said Sir Androe the
some of fyve hundreth marks Scotts money as for his fie of being one of our
maister houshaldis there, which we will to be continewed and payed from hence-
forth during his lyfetyme, according as Sir Michaell Elphinston, knight, another
of our said maister househaldis, haith in tyme past and sail hereafter in lyke sorte
have the same."4 This pension, however, was paid very irregularly, as appears
from a warrant issued in 1 62 6 in favour of Sir Andrew Melville's widow.5
In June 1 6 1 4 he was cautioner for the executor of his brother, William Melville,
Lord Tongland, and also for the executor of that brother's only son, while in 1615
1 He purchased one-eighth of South Fod 2 Register of Privy Council, vol. viii. pp.
from Sir Robert Halket of Pitfirrane, on 11th 52S, 529; Calderwood's Historie, vol. vi. p.
February 1604; one-fourth from George Curie 7S3. The young duke was in mourning for
of Craig-luscar, on 9th February 1604 ; and his father, whom he succeeded in this year,
three-eighths from William Walwood, por-
tioner of Touch, on 18th January 1604, and 3 Vo1- m- of this work> P- 150-
24th August 1606, in all which he was . „ . , ,„ , . , . _,
6 ' •■,.-, Original Warraut in volume of Royal
duly infeft. Queen Anna's charter is dated r , .... .„ „ . „ .. _, '
f „,.,,,, ,„,, Letters, 1601-1616, in H.M. General Register
14th Mav 1608, and sasine followed on Utn „ »-,,. , ,
- ' House, Edinburgh.
February 1613. [Laing Charters, in Univer-
sity Library, Edinburgh.] s Register of Royal Letters, vol. i. p. 96.
HIS WIVES AND CHILDREN. 167
he was retoured heir to his brother's daughter, Agnes Melville, in a small annual
rent from the lands of Prinlaws.1 He was one of the masters of the household
named in connection with King James's visit to Scotland in 1G17, but apparently
he did not long survive that date, though the exact year of his death has not been
ascertained. He was twice married. His first wife was Jane Kennedy, who, like
himself, had been in the household of Queen Mary, and attended her in her last
moments. Jane Kennedy went to France and returned to Scotland in the early
part of 1588. Whether Sir Andrew Melville and she were then married is not
certain, but their union was not of long duration. In October 1589, when King
James the Sixth expected his Queen from Norway, he summoned his mother's
former maid of honour to attend upon Queen Anna. Jane Kennedy promptly
answered the royal message, and was not deterred by stormy weather from
attempting to cross between Burntisland and Leith, but during the passage a
ship driven by the storm collided with the ferry boat, which was swamped, and
the lady and the other passengers, except two, were drowned.2
Sir Andrew Melville married, secondly, Elizabeth Hamilton, of what family
has not been ascertained. She survived her husband, and was still alive in 1626.
By her he had at least two sons.3
Sir George Melville, under master of the household to King Charles the
Second in 1650 and 1651. He married and had issue, as appears from
a letter from James Melville of Hallhill to John, Lord Melville, in
1651,4 but no further details have been ascertained.
Henry, named as a legatee of 2000 merks in the will of his cousin, Robert,
second Lord Melville of Monimail, who died in 1635.5
1 Commissariot of Edinburgh, Testaments, abuses of the ferries, notes among other in-
vol. 48, 17th June 1614 ; Retours for Fife- stances "the loss of Mrs. Jane Kennedie and
shire, No. 236, 1st February 1615. £10,000 in goods, jewels, etc., with thirty per-
sons, run down between Leithand Burntisland,
2 Memoirs of Sir James Melville, Banna- which happened through drunkenness and
tyne Club, pp. 369, 370. This storm was one without storm." [Letter in regard to the sea
of those supposed to be raised by witches to ferries, c. 1636. Historical Commission Re-
prevent the queen's sailing to Scotland. [Cf. port, No. ix., Part II., p. 252.]
also Piteairn's Criminal Trials, vol. i. pp. 218, 3 In the royal warrant of pension in 1626,
237, etc.] It would appear that the boat Elizabeth Hamilton is described as a widow
carried jewels and other gifts intended for with ten children, but this may be a mistake,
presentation to her Majesty. Sir James Mel- or the others may have died young,
ville distinctly says the weather was stormy, 4 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 23, 232-234.
but a writer in 1636, commenting on the 5 Testameut in Melville Charter-chest.
168
William Melville, Commendator of Tongland and Lord Tonoland,
1584-1613.
Anna Lindsay, his Wife.
William Melville, the eighth son of Sir John Melville of Eaith and Helen Napier,
is usually described as their fourth son, but as he does not appear publicly till
about 1 584-, it is probable he was younger, and may indeed have been born after
the death of his oldest brother William, but this is not certain. In 1575,
a witness to a charter by James Johnstone of Elphinstone is " William Melville "
who was probably the subject of this notice as Johnstone was his brother-in-law.1
He appears to have been well educated, perhaps on the Continent, and is de-
scribed by his brother, Sir James, as a good scholar, speaking perfectly Latin, High
Dutch or German, Flemish, and French.2 From a letter by Sir James, in
November 1583, to Mr. Henry Killigrew, we learn that his brother was then
in the service of the Prince of Orange, but was not well treated.3 In this
connection a letter addressed by Maurice, Count of Nassau, to King James the
Sixth, in 1586, is of interest. The prince states that a " Sieur de Melville" had
been in charge of his person for several years, by command of his father, the
famous William, Prince of Orange. This Sieur de Melville, having visited
foreign nations, desired in that year to retire to his native country, which he
did with letters of recommendation from Prince Maurice.4 If this Sieur de
Melville be identical with the subject of this notice, his linguistic accomplish-
ments and other courtly qualifications would be explained. The date of the
letter agrees with William Melville's first appearance in Scottish record.
William Melville was appointed an ordinary lord of session about the year
1587, and he was also in 1588 provided to the spirituality of the abbacy of
Tongland, in Galloway.5 He had been appointed commendator some time
previously. This was probably intended as a reward for his services in going
to France, where he was commissioned to make acquaintance with the Princess of
Navarre. This embassy took place while negotiations were going on with Denmark
for a union between King James the Sixth and a princess of Denmark. Overtures
had been made in that direction before, but had failed. In the beginning of
1 Registrum Magui Sigilli, vol. iv. No. 2533. Prince Maurice, 13th March 15S6, in the
The date is doubtful and may be earlier. Earl of Haddington's Charter-chest ; cf.
3 Memoirs of Sir James Melville, p. 365. Calderwood's History, vol. iv. p. 394.
3 Thorpe's Calendar of State Papers, vol. i.
[i. 461. 5 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
4 Contemporary copy of original letter from vol. iv. pp. 307, 308.
OBTAINS THE ABBACY OF KILWINNING. 1G9
June 1587, however, negotiations were renewed by King James, but while his
ambassadors were in Denmark, the Sieur du Bartas arrived in Scotland as a
private envoy from King Henry of Navarre, afterwards Henry the Fourth
of France. What passed between King James and Du Bartas is not recorded,
but one result was the embassy referred to, which was undertaken by the com-
mendator of Tongland. He was well received and entertained by the King of
Navarre, and also gained the favour of the young princess, returning to Scot-
land with her portrait and a good report of her rare cpjalities. In the end,
as is well known, King James, having received the portraits of both the French
and Danish princesses, decided on marrying the latter. He desired Sir James
Melville to pass to Denmark and conclude all arrangements, and also commis-
sioned the commendator to accompany his brother. But, as formerly stated, Sir
James had no desire to undertake the mission, and it was finally discharged by
the Earl Marischal of Scotland.1 The two brothers, however, figured prominently
in the preparations made for the queen's expected home-coming in October 1589. 2
The grant made to William Melville in 1588 included the profits from the
churches of Troqueer, Tongland, Sandwick (now part of Borgue, Minnigaff, and
Leswalt), with those of Inch and " Gretoun " annexed ; in addition to which he
was assigned a yearly pension of £616, 18s. 4d. Scots, from the temporalities of
the bishopric of Galloway, then in the hands of the Crown, the grants being
afterwards ratified by parliament.3 Three years later the king conferred on
him the benefice and abbacy of the monastery of Kilwinning, in Ayrshire,
with jurisdiction of regality over the lands, lordships, etc., thereof. This the
commendator, in the following year, resigned into the king's hands for a regrant
to himself, his heirs and assignees, and on 17th May 1592 a charter in his favour
passed the great seal. This writ narrates his services to the king in dealing with
various princes and nobles beyond the kingdom. Some difficulty was experienced
by the new lord of Kilwinning in taking possession, owing to the non-delivery of
the register-book of the abbey, as well as of the abbacy itself, which was still in
the hands of the widow and son of Alexander Cunningham, the former com-
mendator. In February 1592, William Melville raised an action against these
parties for delivery of the abbacy, the register-book, and the seal of the chapter,
which was also missing. He afterwards departed from the claim as regarded the
register, and decree accordingly was pronounced against the defenders. Melville,
however, did not long retain the barony of Kilwinning, but in 1603 sold it,
1 Memoirs, ut supra, pp. 364-366, 368. 3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
vol. iv. pp. 307, 30S. Dates of grants, 7th
2 Calderwood's History, vol. v. p. 63. November and 8th December 15S8.
VOL. I. Y
170 WILLIAM MELVILLE, LORD TONGLAND.
including the lands of Lyandcross and Skaimmerland, to Hugh Montgomerie, fifth
Earl of Eglinton, whose lineal representative, the present Earl of Eglinton and
Winton, is still in possession.1
William Melville, although a senator of the college of justice and a privy
councillor, does not appear frequently on public record, though he seems to have
taken his share in the events of his time. He subscribed the lease by which, in
January 1594, the mint was leased to the town' of Edinburgh for a certain term,
at a rental of 110,000 merks, payable at the rate of 1000 merks weekly. This
lease was entered into shortly before the birth of Prince Henry, and doubtless
with a view to provide the royal household with ready money in view of that
event. The baptism of the young prince followed in due course, and preparations
for the ceremony were begun months before it took place. Lord Tongland was
one of those specially appointed to attend upon and entertain the foreign ambas-
sadors who were invited. This he and his brothers did much to the satisfaction
of the guests, who expressed their contentment, greatly to the king's pleasure. 2
The commendator also was present at various conventions of estates and less
often at meetings of the privy council, of which he was admitted a regular
member in June 1607.3 He was in 1594 made responsible for payment of the
taxation on account of Prince Henry's baptism, collected in his locality, and in
the same year he was named as an assessor to the justices of his neighbourhood for
more effectual punishment of criminals.4 He also appears on two occasions as
taking part in ecclesiastical politics, and though the part he is recorded as taking
was indeed insignificant, the questions at issue were important. They arose out
of the determination of King James, which of late years had been more and more
openly expressed, to interfere in the government of the Church, and secure the
establishment of an order of prelates. This desire, though not stated, was implied
in a resolution put to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland at Dundee
in March 1598, and carried, to the effect that the ministry of the Church should
have a vote in parliament. Against this and the conclusions following on it, Mr.
John Davidson, minister of Prestonpans, had protested, greatly to the displeasure
of the king, who after the close of the assembly at once took measures against
him in the presbytery of Haddington.6 One of the commissioners despatched
to press the king's opinion against Mr. Davidson was Lord Tongland, and
1 Memorials of the Montgomeries, Earls 3 Register of Privy Council, vols. v. pp.
of Eglinton, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., 288, 332, 334, 367, 462, 488, 496, 499, 556 ;
vol. i. pp. xix, 54, 55; also his Memoirs of vi. pp. 23, 62 ; vii. pp. 55, 380, 407,411,421,
the Maxwells of Pollok, vol. i. p. 11. 422, 526.
- Memoirs of Sir James Melville, pp. 411, 4 Ibid. vol. v. pp. 646, 755.
412. 5 Calderwood's History, vol. v. pp. 709, 724.
HIS DEATH : HIS WIFE AND CHILDREN. 171
though the proceedings ended in nothing, he was again employed on a similar
errand. It had been resolved that the election of those ministers who were to
vote in parliament should be settled at a meeting at Falkland, to be composed of
commissioners from the various provincial synods. The king therefore devoted
all his energies to secure from the various synods the return of men favourable to
his views. The synod of Fife, which met in June 1598, being an influential
body, the king despatched Lord Tongland and another as special commissioners
to guide the election. There was a considerable debate, but the commissioners
effected their purpose by dexterously preparing a long leet for election, thus exclud-
ing those named in it, while they dealt with the remainder so effectually that three
persons acceptable to the king were chosen, though not without opposition.1
Some years later, the king attained his purpose, and bishops were appointed
to most of the old sees. Mr. Gavin Hamilton was in 1605 constituted bishop
of Galloway, and as Lord Tongland derived his income from revenues formerly
belonging to that diocese, the new order of things affected his rights. He there-
fore presented a petition to parliament, which ratified all his rights and
particularly an arrangement by which the new bishop promised never to hurt or
molest him in the pension enjoyed by him, it being the king's desire that such
pension should remain unaffected by the bishop's appointment.2
Mr. William Melville in 1606 was a creditor of his eldest brother, John
Melville of Eaith, for £40.3 He was also " parson " or lessee of the parsonage
teinds of the parish of Monimail.4 He died on 3d October 1613, intestate,
and his nephew, Mr. Thomas Melville, son of John Melville of Kaith, was his
executor-dative.5 Lord Tongland married Anna Lindsay, by whom he had two
children, one son and a daughter.
The son was Frederick Melville, who only survived his father five months,
dying in March 1614. His cousin, Mr. Thomas Melville, was his executor, and
his library was valued at £100 Scots, while he also possessed two rings, each
valued at £50 Scots, one containing a diamond."
The daughter was Agnes Melville, who died before 1st February 1615, when
her uncle, Sir Andrew Melville of Garvock, was retoured heir to her in an
annualrent of sixty merks in money with seven bolls two firlots of barley,
secured over the lands of Prinlaws in Fife.7
1 Calderwood, vol. v. p. 725. 4 Writs in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Petition and contract with Bishop 5 Commissariot of Edinburgh, Testaments,
Hamilton, Acts of the Parliaments of Scot- vol. 48, 24th May and 17th June 1614.
land, vol. iv. pp. 306-308. c Ibid., 17th June 1614.
3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 150. 7 Fifeshire Retours, No. 236.
172
VI. — John Melville of Eaith, 1548-1605.
Isabella Lundie, his first Wife.
Margaret Bonar, his second Wife.
Grisell Meldrum, his third Wife.
As shown in the memoir of his father,1 this laird of Eaith was not
the eldest son of Sir John Melville, but he became entitled to the suc-
cession by the death of his elder brother, William, in their father's lifetime.
He was, however, the eldest son of Sir John Melville by his second
marriage with Helen Napier, and had probably just reached his majority
at his father's death. Owing, no doubt, to the depressed state of the
family fortunes, under the sentence of forfeiture pronounced on his father,
John Melville does not appear on record till about the year 1560, when
the reforming party had gained ascendency in the state. Genealogical
writers in their account of the family state that John Melville of Eaith
was restored to his paternal inheritance by Mary of Guise, the queen-
regent, in 1553, on the intercession of King Henry the Second of Trance,
with whom, it is said, the laird's younger brother, Eobert, was a favourite.
But this statement is not corroborated by any evidence. Mary of Guise
was not regent in 1553, while David Hamilton was still proprietor of
Eaith so late as 1559.2
There is no record of any relaxation of the forfeiture until it was rescinded
by parliament in 1563, and it is probable that John Melville remained at
Eaith with his mother as tenant of his father's estates. In 1560, however,
the tide of his fortune began to turn. His brother, Eobert, who had been in
the personal service either of the queen-dowager, or of the young Queen Mary,
received in October 1559 from her and her husband, Francis, a grant of two
1 P. 79, antea. 2 Cf. vol. iii. of this work, p. 98.
AGREEMENT WITH HIS BROTHER, SIR ROBERT. 173
annualrents payable from the lands of Hilton of Eosyth, which had belonged
to the late Sir John Melville and been escheated to the Crown.1 These, in
the following year, Eobert Melville resigned in favour of his elder brother,
whom he styles " my belovit brother, Johne Mailuill of Eaith." This trans-
action took place on 31st December 1560. About a month later George
Durie, abbot of Dunfermline, the alleged enemy of the Melvilles, took his
departure from Scotland.2 The part which Durie is said to have played
in the final tragedy of Sir John Melville's life has already been fully
narrated in his memoir, and it is certainly remarkable that the next trans-
action between John Melville and his brother, a few weeks after the abbot's
departure, is founded on an expectation that the forfeiture of the lands of
Eaith would be rescinded and the estates restored. In the event of such a
result being attained, the brothers agreed that John Melville, on obtain-
ing Eaith, should make over to Eobert the lands of Murdochcairnie, while
the latter, in turn, should resign his rights over the Abden of Kinghorn. It
was further provided that if John Melville failed to obtain possession of
Eaith, then within two years he should pay to his brother one thousand
merks for the rights over the Abden, while, on the other hand, the arrange-
ment was declared optional on both sides.3
The anticipations of John Melville and his brother were not realised
until upwards of two years later. During the interval, however, John Mel-
ville received various letters of gift from Queen Mary, one of which granted
to him the escheat of the two annualrents formerly referred to, amounting
together to 43 merks 3s. lOd. Scots, due by the Stewarts of Eosyth from the
Hilton of Eosyth, and which had remained unpaid from Martinmas 1549
to Martinmas 1559. This gift was followed by letters forbidding Eobert
Stewart of Eosyth from alienating the subjects mortgaged to evade payment
of the interest due.4 Queen Mary also, about four months before his
restoration, granted to John Melville all reversions, escheats of annualrents
and other sums of money which had belonged to his deceased father.6
1 Cf. vol. iii. of this work, p. 99. vol. iii. of this work, p. 101.
- George Durie sailed for France on 29th 4 Gift, 28th April 1562, and Letters, 7th
January 1560-61. [Diurnal of Occurrents, October 1562, in Melville Charter-chest,
p. 64.] 5 12th February 1562-3, Pitcairn's Criminal
3 Contract, dated 18th March 1560-61, Trials, vol. i. pp. *341 and *342.
174 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
As formerly stated, John Melville joined with his mother and his
brother, Robert, in petitioning for the rescinding of his father's forfeiture.
The matter came before parliament on 4th June 1563, when an act was
passed declaring the sentence and forfeiture directed against Sir John Mel-
ville to be null and void, and restoring his widow and children to their
former position and rights of succession as if the sentence had never been
pronounced.1
After this date we find John Melville exercising proprietorship over his
family estates and property. One of his earliest recorded acts was to carry
out the arrangement formerly made with his brother, Eobert, respecting
Murdochcairnie and the lands of the Abden of Kinghorn.2 A few months
later the new laird of Eaith entered into an arrangement with Eobert Stewart
of Eosyth as to the annualrents formerly referred to, by which a sum of £600
was to be paid in full for the past interest, while the yearly rate due was
to be regularly paid.3
John Melville of Eaith was, on 10th November 1563, duly retoured as
lawful heir-general of his father, Sir John Melville, but his full title to his
lands of Eaith and others does not appear to have been completed till some
years later, partly owing to opposition by the holder of a small mortgage
over the lands of Torbain,4 and partly to delay in judicial proceedings for
legally evicting David Hamilton from the lands of Eaith. A final decree,
however, declaring Hamilton's possession void, was pronounced by the lords
of session in the beginning of the year 1566;° a precept of sasine was
issued by Eobert [Pitcairn], commendator of Dunfermline, as superior, on
3d October 1566, and John Melville was duly infeft a week or two later.6
John Melville of Eaith appears to have taken little part in public affairs.
He was present at the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland held in
July 1567, and subscribed the articles dealing with the affairs of the kirk,7
but no other public appearance has been recorded regarding him, although
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 102-108. 5 Decree, 19th January 1565-6, in Melville
2 Agreement, dated 31st July 1563, vol. Charter-chest,
iii. of this work, p. 108.
3 Agreement, dated 9th October 1563, in Sa3lne' dated 15th 0ctober 1566' in Mel"
Melville Charter-chest. vllle barter-chest.
4 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 109, 112-115. 7 Calderwood's History, vol. ii. p. 382.
CLEARING THE ESTATES OF INCUMBRANCES. 175
his brothers were prominent statesmen. He seems to have occupied himself
chiefly with the business of his estate, and the family papers indicate that
during the twenty years after he came into full possession he paid off a
number of mortgages. It is not clear whether these were the result of
pecuniary embarrassments or temporary loans. Some of them were obliga-
tions inherited from his father. As many of the transactions are of local
interest, the principal of them are here noted.
His first payment of this nature was to his brother Eobert, of 750
merks Scots which had been secured over the lands of Torbain and Pitcon-
rnark.1 The next was to John Moultray of Markinch and Seafield. The
sum of 12 merks yearly, which, as narrated in the memoir of Sir John
Melville, was granted as compensation for the slaughter of Thomas Moultray
of Markinch, had been regularly paid until 1558, when payment was inter-
mitted. Moultray, in 1563, sued Melville for payment for the preceding
five years, but, by an agreement between the parties at Lundie, Moultray
accepted a sum of 240 merks, and discharged Melville of all claims for the
future.2 A few days later, John White of Lumbany, brother and heir of the
late Eobert White in Bannettle, [Bennochie?] acknowledged payment of
200 merks, secured over Shawsmill, and due to his deceased brother.3
Another creditor was Alexander Jameson, burgess of Cupar, to whom the
laird paid 444 merks in 1566.4 In the same year he granted an annualrent
of one chalder of barley and one of oats, from his lands of Torbane, to John
Melville of Wester Touch, Margaret Mason, his wife, and Margaret Melville,
their daughter, as interest on a loan of 600 merks.5 In 1572 he paid 300
merks due from Shawsmill to the deceased John White, burgess of Kirk-
caldy, which White's widow, Alison Lowdoun, and James White, their
eldest son, acknowledged.6 In October 1574, a sum of 140 merks, secured
over Torbain, was paid, apparently to another branch of the same family,
1 Original receipt, dated 10th December 3 Receipt, dated loth March 1564-5, ibid.
1563, in Melville Charter-chest. 4 Obligation, dated 19th January 1565-6 ;
acknowledgment, 10th November 1566, ibid.
2 Copy Summons against Melville, ISth 5 Letter of reversion, 22d November 1566,
November 1563 ; discharge by Moultray, ibid.
28th February 1564-5, in Melville Charter- 6 Receipt, 10th November 1572, in Mel-
chest, ville Charter-chest.
176 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
Katherine Napier, relict of the late James White, burgess of Kirkcaldy,
acknowledging receipt. About the same time also were paid — to Mr. George
Lundie of Gorthie, 100 merks, secured over Eaith ; to Mr. Peter Kamsay, as
brother-german and heir of the late Mr. William Eamsay, one of the four
masters of St. Salvator's College, St. Andrews, 400 merks, also secured over
Eaith ; and to Janet Calpe, as heir of her late father, Patrick Calpe, burgess
of Easter Kinghorn, 200 merks.1 It may be noted that Peter Eamsay is
described as a son of the late Helen Bruce, wife of the laird of Brackmonth,
and the original loan to Melville is said to have been paid in coins called
xxxs pieces.
In 1577 John Melville discharged a debt inherited from his father, who
in 1512 had mortgaged to George Airth, burgess of Cupar, and Janet
Clepane, his wife, the lands of Easter Pitscottie and part of Torbain. The
obligation was assigned by George Airth, son of the original creditors, to
Allan Jameson, burgess of Cupar, and in November 1577 Melville acquired
for 815 merks from David Jameson, burgess of Cupar, son and heir of David
Jameson, and grandson of Allan Jameson, all his rights over the lands mort-
gaged.2 Four years later 500 merks, which had been borrowed in 1573, were
repaid to Archibald Melville, burgess of Dysart,3 and in 1583 Eobert Bruce,
brother of Eobert Bruce of Airth, acknowledged payment of two sums of 500
merks and £100 Scots respectively.4
In 1584, Margaret Irving, relict of John Boswell, burgess of Kinghorn,
acknowledged for herself and John Boswell, her son, the payment of 240
merks, and in 1586, 600 merks were paid to James Johnston, son and heir of
the deceased James Johnston, in Over Grange of Kinghorn.6 In 1587, James
Henryson, chirurgeon and burgess of Edinburgh, as assignee for John Henry-
son, lieutenant to Captain William Moncreiff, acknowledges payment of 140
1 Lundie's acknowledgment, dated 15th having receipt, 11th May 1581, indorsed, in
September 1574; White's, dated 16th Octo- Melville Charter-chest. A later loan of 200
ber ; Ramsay's, dated 27th October, and merks was negotiated with the same Archi-
Calpe's, dated 10th November, same year, all bald and Janet Preston, his spouse, in 1570.
in Melville Charter-chest. 4 Receipt, dated Dysart, 10th May 15S3.
2 Agreement with Jameson, 19th October Ibid.
1576, and his receipt, 23d November 1577, 5 Renunciation by Boswells, 5th June
ibid. ; cf. vol. iii. of this work, p. 57. 1584, and by Johnston, 23d May 1586, in
3 Original obligation, 24th November 1573, Melville Charter-chest.
ANNUALRENT FROM HILTON OF ROSYTH. 177
merks, being seven years' interest due to the lieutenant.1 In 1588 the laird
of Eaith, by a contract between him and the other parties concerned, was
released from the payment of an annual rent which had first been incurred by
his father as surety for a neighbouring laird. The circumstances were briefly
related in the memoir of Sir John Melville, but may again be stated. Eobert
Orrock of that ilk,2 was, at the instance of his kinsman, Alexander Orrock of
Silliebalbie, or Balbie, adjudged by the bailie of the regality of Dunfermline
to pay a fine of £550 Scots. Sir John Melville became his cautioner, and an
apprising of the sum of 43 merks, 3s. 4d. yearly was taken over his lands of
Eaith by James Beaton, archbishop of St. Andrews and commendator of
Dunfermline, while a similar sum was secured to Sir John from the lands of
Hilton of Eosyth, belonging to Henry Stewart, the other cautioner who
had failed to pay. After the death of Archbishop Beaton the aimualrent
from Eaith was paid to his nephew, Archibald Beaton of Capildra. The
son of the latter, John Beaton of Capildra, alienated his rights over
Eaith to Alan Coutts of Grange, who, in 1588, entered into an agreement
with John Melville, Henry Stewart of Eosyth, as heir to his father, the late
Henry Stewart, and Henry Orrock of that ilk, as heir to his father, the late
Eobert Orrock. The parties agreed that as Alan Coutts and Henry Orrock
had arranged together for payment of the annualrent, Coutts should discharge
Melville of all liability, while Melville in turn acquitted Stewart, and Stewart
exonered Orrock of all claims, which was done, all the parties signing the
contract, and binding themselves to observe it.3
Other creditors, at various times and for various sums, were Magnus
Sinclair of Lees ; Henry Echlin of Pittadro ;4 Henry, Lord Sinclair ; George
Broun, litster of Kirkcaldy, Grisell Bouch, his wife, and their sons, George
and William ; Mr. Eichard Spens, advocate, succeeded by his son, Archibald
Spens, their rights being assigned to Elizabeth Spens, eldest daughter of
1 15th January 1587-8. were paid by Melville to Mr. Francis Both-
2 He is called William in another part of well, brother of John, commendator of Holy-
this writ, and also in a duplicate, but the rood, as executor of Alan Coutts.
earlier writs name him as Robert Orrock.
3 Contract, dated 28th January 15SS-9, 4 1581. A seal is attached to the writ
and duplicate, signed by Henry Orrock signed by Echlin, showing, quarterly, (I) a
alone, in Melville Charter-chest. It may be fess cheque, (2) a galley, (3) a stag, and (4)
added that, ou 6th July 1599, 800 merks a dog ; legend "S. Hake Ec[hlin]e"
VOL. I. Z
178 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
Bichard, and her husband, James Stewart of Allanton ; William Buist,
burgess of Kirkcaldy, Margaret Williamson, his wife, and Bessie Buist, his
daughter, with others. These mortgages were paid off from time to time.
John Melville of Baith appears to have had a long-continued dispute
with a neighbouring laird, George Martin of Carden, respecting the marches
between his lands of Carden and Melville's lands of Torbain and Pitconmark.
A similar dispute in 1512 had been settled by a deliverance of adjoining pro-
prietors. In 1567 John Melville obtained letters of arrestment against
George Martin of Carden, his mother, Jonet Durie, widow of the late David
Martin of Carden, James Wemyss of Caskieberran, now her husband, and
Thomas Stark, tenant of the lands of Carden, charging them with sowing
and cultivating their grain, pasturing their cattle and sheep, and cutting
peats, etc., within the bounds of his lands of Baith, Torbain, and Pitcon-
mark. The time of encroachment is not stated, but it probably began
during the continuance of Sir John Melville's forfeiture, and was perhaps
encouraged by George Durie, abbot of Dunfermline, who, before his going
to France, had acted as tutor to the young laird of Carden.
The letters for arresting the grain crop of the trespassers were issued in
August 1567,1 and put in force a few days later, and they continued in force
for a month, when they were relaxed with John Melville's consent, without
prejudice to his rights. An arrangement was made in the following
February for settling the matter by the arbitration of Sir William Kirkcaldy
of Grange, William Bonar of Bossie, Bobert Melville of Murdochcairnie, and
William Barclay of Touch, on the part of John Melville ; and Alexander
Inglis of Tarvit, John Wemyss of Pittencrieff, James Wemyss of Lathoker,
and Peter Martin, burgess of Edinburgh, on the part of Martin. The arbiters
met on the ground on 8th March 1568, and adjourned the inquiry to the
5th June following, on which day witnesses were examined for both parties.
The case afterwards went before the lords of council and session, and
dragged on for several years, as appears from the dates of documents pro-
duced in Court.
One of these, dated in 1582, shows a relationship between the Martins of
1 Letters, issued 23d, enforced 29th August, and loosed 21st September 1567, in Melville
Charter-chest.
DISPUTE WITH THE MARTINS OF CARDEN. 179
Carden and Eobert Logan of Eestalrig, afterwards famous for his alleged
connection with the Gowrie conspiracy. From this writ, a copy of an in-
strument of sasine, it appears that George Martin was only infeft in his lands
of Carden in April 1583, and that they had been fifty years in non-entry. In
1559 a decree was issued at the instance of Peter Durie of "Wester Kinghorn,
who had a gifc of the non-entry duties, against George Martin, his mother,
and her second husband, James Wemyss ; and Robert Logan, then of Eestal-
ri" and George Ooilvie, son and heir of Sir Walter Osnlvie of Dunluoas, were
summoned for their interest as grandsons and apparent heirs of the deceased
Elizabeth Martin, lady of Eastcastle.1 In 1581 the lands of Carden were
apprised to the Crown, and George, now Sir George Ogilvie of Dunlugas, and
Eobert Logan, son and heir of the former Eobert Logan, were summoned for
their interest. Who Elizabeth Martin was has not been clearly ascertained,
but from the degree of relationship stated she appears to have been the wife
of Sir Patrick Home of Fastcastle in the time of King James the Fourth,
and was probably heiress of the barony of Fastcastle. Sir Patrick Home had
issue two heiresses, one of whom, Alison, married Sir Walter Ogilvie of
Duulugas, while the other, Elizabeth, married Sir Eobert Logan of Eestalrig,
and became grandmother of the alleged conspirator.
The dispute between Eaith and Carden was still going on in 1594,
probably because, as the Martins of Carden were adherents, first of Queen
Mary's party and afterwards of the faction of Francis, Earl of Bothwell, they
occasionally suffered under civil disabilities. The quarrel, however, was
renewed or aggravated by an incident which took place on 1st July of that
year, perhaps by arrangement that the matter might be formally brought into
court. On that date, as recorded in a notarial instrument, Thomas Scott, as
acting for the laird of Eaith, and his son, John Melville, younger, then in
possession of Pitcomnark, and certain tenants and servants, were casting turf
and pasturing cattle on that part of the lands of Torbain " callit the Staip
Stanes, betuix the west end of the mos and the todholes." While so engaged
the laird of Carden and his servants appeared, and with dogs violently drove
away Melville's cattle and sheep from the part of the land named, and
1 Copy sasine, 2d April 1583, in Melville Charter- chest ; cf. Registrum Magni Sigilli,
1580-1593, No. 436.
180 JOHN MELVILLE OF EAITH.
stopped Scott in cutting turf. Scott then, on behalf of his employers,
declared in presence of the notary that he had been wrongfully molested
and the servants of both parties were entered as witnesses of the fact.
Complaint was made to the privy council, who, a month later, took security
from George Martin to the amount of 5000 merks that he would not trouble
the elder Melville, but some days later this order was cancelled, perhaps
because the parties had brought a civil action against each other.1 This
action was still in dependence in October 1595, when the laird of Eaith pro-
cured letters of summons for citing his witnesses, but the final result of this
dispute is not known from any papers now in the charter-chest.
In June 1589, the laird of Eaith had a visit from William Douglas, ninth
Earl of Angus, who had lately entered into possession of his earldom, and
was then not long returned from a warlike expedition with the king against
the Catholic rebels in the north of Scotland. While at Eaith the earl
granted a feu-charter to Alexander Home of Northberwick Mains, of part of
the lands of Byrecleuch, in Berwickshire.2 In September 1595, John Melville
joined with several other Fifeshire barons in appointing Sir John Wemyss,
younger of Wemyss, and Sir John Melville of Carnbee, to represent them in
parliament, and in 1598 he joined in a similar commission to Sir John
Wemyss and Andrew Wood of Largo.3
Any further details of the history of this laird of Eaith relate almost
wholly to his family and domestic affairs. He was three times married, first, in
1563, to Isobel Lundie, daughter of the laird of Lundie. By her he had one
son, who succeeded him, and two daughters. It has not been ascertained
when she died, but in 1575 he administered as executor to his second wife,
Margaret Bonar. She was of the family of Eossie, and died in October
1574, leaving issue one son, Mr. Thomas Melville, and, it is said, three
daughters, but only two are named. The laird married, as his third wife,
Grisell Meldrum, of the family of Segie. She died in October 1597, leaving
issue one son, James, and three daughters.4 In 1584, the laird and his third
1 Instrument, 1st July 1594, in Melville 3 Memorials of the Family of Wemyss of
Charter-chest; Register of Privy Council, Wemyss, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B.,
vol. v. p. 630. vol. iii. pp. 219-221.
2 Registrant Magni Sigilli, 1580-1593, No.
1866. 4 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 121.
HIS THREE MARRIAGES. 181
wife entered into a contract with James Scott of Balwearie and his sister
Margaret Scott, for the marriage of the latter and John Melville, younger of
Baith.1 The elder Melville agreed to infeft his son and his wife in conjunct
fee of all his lands, Baith, Torbain, Bitconmark, Bitscottie Easter, Feddinch,
and Shawsmill, with the Abden of Easter Kinghorn, reserving, however, the
Abden in liferent to Helen Napier, widow of Sir John Melville, part of Bit-
conmark to Margaret Douglas, widow of William Melville, Sir John's eldest
son, his own life interest and his wife's rights under her marriage contract.
In return John Melville, younger, was to undertake the redemption of the
various mortgages still existing on the estate, provision being made for the
laird's younger children. Some question appears to have arisen at a later
date, as to a formerly intended union between the families of Scott and
Melville, and perhaps some demands were made by the former on the strength
of an alleged agreement. Be this as it may, to settle the question, John Mel-
ville, along with a notary, paid a visit to William Barclay of Touch, said to
be one of the witnesses of the contract, and who was then lying ill. Barclay
being solemnly adjured to declare the truth, asserted that he never was
present at any contract of marriage made between the late Sir William
Scott of Balwearie and the late Sir John Melville ; that he neither knew nor
heard that Sir John had received 200 merks as part payment of a tocher
promised by Sir William with his daughter, to Sir John's son ; that he had
frequently heard Sir John Melville declare that he would never put his son
in fee of his lands, nor would he be obliged to do so ; and lastly, that of
late years Thomas Scott of Brunshiels would have persuaded the witness
that he was present at the said contract of marriage, but Barclay constantly
affirmed he never knew of such a thing.2 No further reference is found to
this subject, and it may be noted that so early as 1509 and 1517, questions
as to a sum of 200 merks did arise between Sir William Scott and Sir John
Melville, as stated in the previous memoir, but this sum had no apparent
connection with any marriage contract,3 though it may have been the origin
of a report to that effect.
1 Contract dated at Kirkcaldy, 30th May 14th May 1586 ; John Barclay o£ Touch,
1584. David his son, and others, witnesses. Vol.
2 Notarial instrument recording Barclay"s iii. of this work, pp. 127, 128.
statement, dated in his house at Kirkcaldy, 3 P. 39 of this volume ; vol. iii. pp. 56, 60.
182 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
In the following year, 1585, the laird married his daughter Margaret to
James Wemyss of Bogie, a younger son of David Wemyss of that ilk, and
gave with her a tocher of 2500 merks.1 In 1588 another agreement was made
between the elder Melville and his wife and the younger Melville, restating
the terms of the previous contract, hut omitting the clauses as to the two
jointures chargeable on the estate.2 The provisions for the laird's younger
children are also more clearly defined, and arrangements made for their pay-
ment.3 In the following January Isobel Melville, daughter of the laird,
married George Auchinleck, son of George Auchinleck of Balmanno. Her
father promised with her a dowry of 5000 merks.4
In October 1597, John Melville's third wife, Grisell Meldrum, died, and
in the following year he administered to her estate.5 Two years later he
and his eldest son and his son's wife entered into another agreement as to
the family estate. In this document no reference is made to the younger
children, who were otherwise provided for, but the elder Melville gave up
his whole estate to his son, who undertook to pay all the interests due
after "Whitsunday 1600. The younger Melville and his wife bound them-
selves to furnish yearly to the laird four chalders of good victual, beginning
between Yule 1600 and Candlemas 1601, with six dozen fowls, thirty of
these being capons and the rest poultry. The laird had also right to obtain
coal and lime from the lands of Baith, and security was given for the pay-
ment of his yearly pension over the house of Baith and three acres and
other lands adjoining, with grass for three horses and forty sheep yearly.6
In terms of this contract the laird formally resigned his lands of Baith and
others held of the Crown into the hands of Queen Anna, who was then
superior of the regality of Dunfermline, and on 28th April 1602 the king
and queen granted a charter to John Melville, younger, and Margaret Scott
Ms wife.7
1 Contoact, dated 1st October 15S5, 4 Contract, dated 25th January 15S8-9,
Memorials of the Family of Wemyss, vol. ii. in Melville Charter-chest.
pp. 213-210. 5 26th December 1598, vol. iii. of this
work, pp. 142-146.
6 Contract, dated 20th June 1600, in Mel-
ville Charter-chest.
3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 128-131. 7 Charter and relative writs, ibid.
2 Dame Helen Napier and Margaret
Douglas had probably died in the interval.
HIS DEATH : HIS CHILDREN. 183
John Melville of Eaith died in the month of March 1605, having made
his will and given up an inventory of his effects on the 16th January preced-
ing. His personal goods and the debts due to him amounted to £861, 10s.
Scots, but his debts to others exceeded that sum by £736, 8s. 8d. Scots. He
is said to have been buried at Kirkcaldy. He appointed his younger sons,
Mr. Thomas Melville and James Melville, his executors, the last named,
however, refusing to accept. He provided for his three unmarried daughters
by recommending them respectively to the care of his brothers Sir Eobert and
Sir James Melville and of his nephew Sir Eobert, " that they (his daughters)
may be in gude company, to be brocht up in the knawlege and feir of God
and all honest vertewis." Their guardians are also to "haif a cair to sie
thame honestlie provydit quhensoevir it sail pleis God that anie meit occa-
sioun to mariage sail offer." He concludes by desiring their guardians to
accept of his daughters " as childrene, and to supplie his place in dischairging
a fatherlie dewtie towardis thame, and sua hopeing, he levis to thame his
blissiug."1
By his three wives John Melville of Eaith had three sons and eight
daughters : —
1. John Melville, son of the first marriage, who succeeded his father in the estate
of Eaith. Of him a memoir follows.
2. Mr. Thomas Melville, the son of the second marriage. He is named as a
witness in various documents, also as a cautioner in the marriage contract of
his niece, Elizabeth Melville, in 1616. He was named executor in the will of
Eobert, Lord Melville, in 1621. He had a gift of the marriage of his nephew
John in 1 626. He is named as a legatee in a testament made by his nephew
John, Lord Melville, on 8th May 1642, but is omitted in the confirmed tes-
tament of 21st April 1643. He probably died between those two dates.2
3. James Melville, the son of the third marriage, who, about 1588, was provided
to the lands of Feddinch. He died apparently between 1642 and 1652.
He had issue, so far as is known, two daughters. The eldest, Jean, is
named by her cousin John, third Lord Melville, in 1642, as the intended
recipient of 200 merks. She married (contract dated 29th April 1652)
Adam Scott, writer in Edinburgh, her dowry being 10,000 merks.3 The
1 Testament, vol. iii. of this work, pp. 149-151.
- Vol. iii. of this work, p. 172, and Testament in Melville Charter-chest.
3 Original contract in Melville Charter-chest.
184 JOHN MELVILLE OF EAITH.
second daughter, Christian, is referred to in 1642 as the probable recipient
of 250 merks.
The daughters were : —
1. Margaret, who married, in 1585, James Wemyss of Bogie. She died in
October 1598, leaving issue three sons, James, Ludovic, and Patrick Wemyss.1
2. Isobel, who married, in 1588, George Auchinleck, younger of Balmanno. She
died on 21st December 1593 at Pitterichie, in the parish of Glenbervie,
which was her jointure-house, apparently without issue.2
3. Agnes Melville, 1 named in 1575 as the daughters and executors of their
4. Janet Melville, J mother, Margaret Bonar, lady of Raith.3 As no further
notice of them has been found, and no provision for their maintenance is
recorded, they probably died young.
5. Alison, who married Mr. David Barclay of Touch. She was probably a
daughter of the third marriage with Grisell Meklrum. Provision is made
for her and her three younger sisters in 1587. Her husband was minister
successively at Dailly, Maybole, Dumfries, Kilwinning, and St. Andrews,
and was a prominent Presbyterian. Alison Melville died before 1627, and
no issue of the marriage is recorded.
6. Margaret, who is named in 1587 as one of the younger daughters of John
Melville, and in 1597 as a daughter of Grisell Meldrum. In 1606 she was
recommended by her father to the care of her cousin, Sir Robert Melville
of Burntisland. She was apparently still unmarried in 1621, when she is
named in the will of her uncle Robert, first Lord Melville, as legatee or
creditor for 500 merks.4
7. Christian, who is named along with her sisters in 1587 and 1597. She was
commended by her father to the care of her uncle, Sir James Melville of
Hallhill, and is named by Lord Melville, in 1621, as legatee of 500 merks.5
8. Katherine, who is described by her father as his youngest daughter, and was
commended to the care of his brother Sir Robert, afterwards first Lord
Melville, by whose testament, in 1621, she receives 1000 merks.6
1 Commissariot of Edinburgh, Testaments, 3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 121.
10th November 1599. i Ibid. pp. 130, 142, 151, and 157.
- Ibid., 15th December 1596. 5 Ibid. c Ibid.
185
VII. — John Melville of Eaith.
Margaret Scott (Balwearie), his Wife.
1605-1626.
Very little has been ascertained regarding this laird of Kaith, either
from the family papers or from public records. According to the manuscript
genealogy formerly referred to, he was probably born about 1563 or 1564.
He is first mentioned in 1584, when he was contracted in marriage to Mar-
■ garet Scott, sister of James Scott, then laird of Balwearie. The bride's dowry
was 5000 merks, and due provision was made for her from the estates of
Eaith, though, as formerly stated, these were already burdened with two
jointures.1 In 1587 and 1597, Melville also joined in agreements for settling
the estate, and providing for his father's younger children. In 1596 his wife
was secured in a provision of two chalders of victual yearly.2
As narrated in the previous memoir, John Melville, younger, received in
1602, on his father's resignation, a charter from Queen Anna of the lands of
Eaith and others, formerly held of the abbacy of Dunfermline, and was duly
infeft.3 In 1605 John Melville succeeded his father in full possession of
the estates, but little can be recorded of his occupancy. He, however, gradu-
ally paid off the various mortgages on the lands, and other debts not cleared
off by his father.
While thus engaged he appears to have taken no part in public affairs,
though he was not altogether out of the course of current events. In 1608
he was summoned to join the expedition resolved upon by King James to
reduce the turbulent clansmen of the Western Islands to order and obedi-
ence. Levies were ordered from all parts of the kingdom to meet at Islay in
the month of July 1608, there to serve under the command of Andrew
Stewart, Lord Ochiltree. The laird of Eaith, however, did not obey the
order, and at a later date purchased an exemption from the service by a
l Contract of marriage in Melville Charter- - Papers, ibid.
chest. 3 Charter and relative papers, ibid.
VOL. I. 2 A
186 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
composition of £12 Scots.1 la the following year the laird's name appears
in connection with the great scheme put forward for the colonisation of the
north of Ireland, known as the plantation of Ulster. A large portion of
that district having become forfeited to the Crown, the king resolved to
introduce a colony of Protestant settlers, and, in the first stage of the pro-
posal, 90,000 acres were set apart to be taken up by Scotchmen. This
land was to be divided out in estates of three sizes — 2000, 1500, and 1000
acres. There were certain conditions attached to the occupancy of these
estates, such as building strong houses, sufficiently providing them with
arms, and settling on the land a certain number of Scottish tenants or
cultivators. Each person applying for an allotment was to grant security
for fulfilment of the conditions, the amount required being £400 sterling for
a grant of 2000 acres, £300 for 1500 acres, and £200 for 1000 acres. This
proposal was intimated to the Scottish Privy Council in March 1609, but
was not fully responded to until July following, when above seventy persons
applied for grants, among whom was the laird of Eaith's second son James,
whose name was enrolled as an applicant for 2000 acres. The laird, how-
ever, does not appear as surety for his son, whose uncle, James Melville of
Feddinch, is the cautioner. The list of applicants was afterwards revised,
those giving doubtful sureties being excluded, and this was probably the
case with James Melville, as he does not appear to have obtained the grant
applied for.2
In 1616 the laird of Eaith followed his father's example and resigned
his lands to his eldest son, John Melville, on condition that the younger
children be provided for. The contract between the parties states, that John
Melville, elder, and Margaret Scott, his wife, " considering that thair estait is
presentlie burdanit with certane debtis and sowmes of money, and also that
thay haif ane nowmer of othir childrene to provyde, quhilk can not be
commodiouslie done and performet be the said John Melville, elder, and
his spous, being now of guid aige," in respect whereof they resolve to dis-
pose of their estate to their son. This they do, reserving their own liferent
rights, and also the various mortgages and bonds on the estates, the interest
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 158 ; cf. Register of Privy Council, vol. viii. p. liv.
- Ibid. pp. Ixxxii-xciii, 330.
RESIGNS HIS ESTATES ; HIS DEATH. 187
of which the younger Melville binds himself to pay, and to redeem the lands
when possible. They also transfer their whole right to the teind sheaves
of the lands, under certain reservations. In return for these and other
conditions the younger Melville binds himself to give to his brothers, James,
David, and Thomas, and to his sisters, Jean, Elspeth, Bathia, Eufame, and
Margaret, their respective portions as defined, at particular dates.1 A month
later, the laird granted a formal charter of his lands to his eldest son, which
was confirmed by King Charles the First after the laird's death.2
After resigning the management of his estates to his son, John Melville,
elder of Eaith, is scarcely referred to in the family papers, except as nominal
laird of Raith, in documents affecting securities on the lands. He died
intestate, in January 1626, and was survived by his wife, Margaret Scott,
who, with some of his children, gave up the usual inventory of his personal
estate, which amounted to £853, 6s. 8d., and when his debts, chiefly for
servants' wages, were deducted, to £689, 13s. 4d. Scots.3
The children of this laird of Eaith were —
1. John Melville, who succeeded and became third Lord Melville. A memoir of
him follows.
2. James Melville, whose name has been already referred to in connection
with the plantation of Ulster. His share of his father's estate was fixed
by the contract of 1616 at the sum of 1000 merks, payable at Whitsunday
in the year 1620. Between 2d May and 6th June 1618 he married
Jean Sinclair, designed " Lady Parbroith," probably widow of one of the
Setons of Parbroath, and his elder brother, John, granted them by a contract
dated at Dysart, a yearly sum of 300 merks Scots, representing a principal
sum of 3000 merks. Five years later, James Melville, then designed "of
Admure," and his wife, acknowledged receipt from the young laird of Eaith
of the sum of 3000 merks Scots.4 In 1635 he was left a legacy of £1000
Scots by Robert, second Lord Melville.5 Nothing more has been discovered
regarding this James Melville, unless he be identical with a James Melville
1 Contract, Raith, Sth March 1616, in June 1618, and at Kingask 7th May 1623, to
Melville Charter-chest. the second of which David Seton, apparent of
2 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 157-160. Parbroath, is a witness, in Melville Charter-
3 Confirmed Testament, dated 20th April chest.
1627, vol. iii. of this work, pp. 161, 162. 5 Confirmed Testament in Melville Charter-
4 Discharges, dated Raith 2d May and 6th chest.
188 JOHN MELVILLE OF RAITH.
" of Ardmoone," to whom, in 1653, Mr. Thomas Melville of Kinglassie was
executor-dative.1
3. David Melville, named in the contract of 1616, as provided to 700 merks pay-
able at Whitsunday 1619. He appears as a witness to various documents,
and in 1643 was creditor to his brother John, Lord Melville, in £6000
Scots, with interest on two separate loans of £4000 and £2000 respectively.
He was also appointed one of the tutors to his brother's children. He
was alive on 27th May 1644, but deceased before 25th December following,
apparently unmarried, as he had assigned his property to his brother, Mr.
Thomas, minister of Kinglassie.2
4. Thomas Melville, afterwards Mr. Thomas, who became minister of Kinglassie.
He was born apparently about 1602, and appears frequently in the family
papers as a witness to writs by his brothers and other relatives. His por-
tion from his father's estate in 1616 was 500 merks, payable in 1620.
According to a recent author, Thomas Melville took the degree of M.A. at
St. Andrews in 1622, and was presented and ordained as minister of the
parish of Kinglassie in 1630.3 In 1643 he was a creditor of his brother
John, Lord Melville, to the amount of 3200 merks Scots,4 and in 1644
assignee of his deceased brother David's property. He was a member of the
commission of the Church, 1647, and of the general assembly, 1650. In
1653 he administered to the estate of James Melville " of Ardmoone," pro-
bably his brother. He gifted four silver communion cups to his parish. He
died 21st April 1675, aged about seventy-three. He married Jean Gourlay,
and had issue three sons, John, Moses, and George, and three daughters,
Jean, Bathia, and Catherine.5
The daughters were —
1. Jean Melville. Her portion, as arranged in 1616, amounted to 3000 merks,
which was paid to her on 2d May 1618.6 She married, contract dated
26th July and 2d August 1623, Michael Balfour of Grange or Newgrange,
who in 1629 acknowledges full payment of her dowry of 5000 merks.
2. Elspeth or Elizabeth Melville. Her portion was 2000 merks. She married,
contract dated 24th May 1616, Mr. Robert Murray, minister, styled provost
1 Commissariot of St. Andrews, Register of p. 547. It may be noticed that he is styled
Testaments, 11th April 1653. Mr. Thomas so early as 1618.
2 Discharge by Mr. Thomas for himself 4 Testament in Melville Charter-chest,
and his late brother David, 25th December 5 Bathia Melville's testament, ibid. ; Scott's
1644, in Melville Charter-chest. Fasti, ut supra.
3 Scott's Fasti Eeclesias Scoticana?, part iv. ° Vol. iii. of this work, p. 153.
HIS DAUGHTERS. 189
of Methven, who was a prominent man in the church. They had issue a
son, John, who succeeded his father in Methven, and three daughters,
Elizabeth, Mary, and Anna, the former of whom is said to have married Mr.
George Gillespie, afterwards minister in Edinburgh, but if so she must have
been his first wife. John Murray, the son, married Isobel or Elizabeth
Scrimgeour, perhaps his cousin.1
3. Bathia Melville, who, apparently about 1629, acknowledged payment of £1000
from her brother as her share of her father's estate.2 She married, contract
dated 17th September 1634, John Traill, younger of Dinnork, son of Alex-
ander Traill of Dinnork, who on 25th August 1638 acknowledged 5000 merks
paid as tocher.3 She survived her husband, and died in Kinglassie, Fife,
in July 1652.4
4. Euphame Melville, who on 19th June 1629 gave a discharge for her portion
of 1000 merks. She apparently remained unmarried.
5. Margaret, who on the same day as her sister, Bathia, received 1000 merks as
her portion.5 She married, contract dated at Wester Bowhill and Raith,
10th and 12th December 1632, James Scrimgeour of "Wester of Caik-
moir " [Wester Cartmore 1~\, son of Mr. John Scrimgeour, sometime minister
at Kingborn, but deprived and residing on his property of Wester Bowhill,
Auchterderran. Her dowry of 2700 merks was paid to her husband on 4th
June 1633, by his mother-in-law, Margaret Scott, lady of Eaith.6 The
Elizabeth Scrimgeour who married Mr. John Murray, younger minister of
Methven, may have been a daughter of this marriage.
1 Cf. Scott's Fasti, etc., part iv. p. 650. G Discharge in Melville Charter- eh est.
2 Discharge, vol. iii. of this work, p. 154, There is reason to believe that Mr. Scrim-
printed as of date 1020, but more probably geour, elder, was a cadet of the family of
1629, as it was after the father's death in Scrimgeour of Myres, who held the office of
1626. hereditary macers and sergeants-at-arms of
3 Discharge, in Melville Charter-chest. the Palace of Falkland. The son James here
4 Confirmed Testament of Bathia Mel- referred to is not named by Mr. Scott in his
ville, 9th March 1653, ibid. Fasti. [Cf. part iv. p. 54-1.]
6 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 1 54.
o^W-
^332-
190
VIII. — John Melville, seventh Laird of Raith, and third Lord Melville
OF Monimail, 1626-1643.
Anne Erskine (Invertiel), his Wife.
John Melville, seventh of Eaith, succeeded his father in the family
estates in January 1626, and was duly infeft in Raith on 13th March 1626.1
He had already been placed in virtual possession of the estates, under con-
ditions as to provisions for his younger brothers and sisters, by a contract
with his father in March 1616, as noted in the previous memoir. A charter
granted to him by his father and mother, in April 1616, was confirmed by
King Charles the First on 3d February 1626.2 In October 1627 he married
Anna Erskine, eldest daughter and co-heiress of Sir George Erskine of
Invertiel, one of the senators of the college of justice. The laird of Raith
bound himself to secure his intended spouse in as much of his lands of
Torbain, Pitconmark, and others, as would yield a yearly value of twenty-six
chalders of victual, while Sir George Erskine promised with his daughter a
dowry of twenty thousand merks.3
This laird of Raith appears to have taken little part in public affairs, and
his name does not occur in the record of any prominent event until after his
accession to the dignity of Lord Melville in 1635. As already stated on a
previous page, Robert, second Lord Melville, was by special charter em-
powered to nominate either his heir-general or heir of conquest as his suc-
cessor in the title. His heir-general was James Melville of Hallhill, who
was his cousin, and the son of his father's immediate younger brother,
while his heir of conquest was John Melville of Raith, not so near a kins-
man, but descended from the elder brother of Lord Melville's father. These
two, the laird of Raith and the laird of Hallhill, on the day on which Robert,
Lord Melville, made his will and his choice of a successor, entered into a
contract by which they bound themselves to abide by his decision in the
1 Original sasine in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Contract, dated 27th October 1627, in
2 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 157-160. Melville Charter-chest.
SUCCESSION TO THE TITLE OP LORD MELVILLE. 191
matter, which was in favour of John Melville of Eaith. Eobert, Lord Mel-
ville, died on 19th Match 1635, and the laird of Eaith assumed the title,
although the king at first demurred to acknowledge him as Lord Melville.
Two months later King Charles the First wrote to the Scottish privy council
that he had been informed that the laird of Eaith had assumed the title of a
lord and baron of parliament upon a testamentary declaration made by the
deceased Eobert, Lord Melville ; he had not been acquainted with the reason
of this step, for which there was no precedent, and he desires the council to
summon the laird before them, and to forbid using " suche title of a lord "
until authorised by a royal warrant to do so.1 The council, on receipt of
this, summoned Melville before them, but on his production of the royal
charter of 1627, which empowered the deceased Lord Melville to nominate
his successor, they were satisfied, and represented the case fully to the
king in favour of the new peer. On 11th May 1636 he was retoured heir
of conquest and provision of the late Eobert, Lord Melville, in the lands
and barony of Monimail, with the title of Lord Melville, and in the lands of
Letham of Edensmoor, Monksmire, and others named, in the shire of Fife.2
The new peer was also attacked at this time in regard to the executry
of his predecessor in the title. George Melville of Garvock, elder son of
the late Sir Andrew Melville of Garvock, and a cousin of the late Eobert,
Lord Melville, who seems to have been a man of somewhat fast life, thought
himself entitled to a sum of money from the estates respectively of the first
and second Lords Melville. It would appear that before the second Lord
Melville's death this man had come from England and stayed with him,
being kindly received, but his behaviour was so offensive that Lord Melville
took a dislike to him, and expressly stated on his deathbed to a mutual
friend that he was unworthy of a legacy or any remembrance. George
Melville himself, however, did not think so, and he brought a claim against
John, Lord Melville, and the other executor of the second Lord Melville,
for a very considerable sum. He claimed, first, £1000 as a legacy said to
have been left him by the first Lord Melville, but which he alleged was
unfairly kept from him ; secondly, a sum of 14,000 merks from the executry
1 Letter, 22d May 1635, vol. ii. of this 2 Abridgment of Retours for Fife, No.
work, p. 21. 534.
192 JOHN MELVILLE, THIRD LORD MELVILLE OP MONIMAIL.
of the first Lord Melville; thirdly, 100,000 merks from the estate of the
late Jean Hamilton, Lady Melville, which he declared had been improperly
given up ; and lastly, a share of the property of the second Lord Melville,
who he declared was desirous to provide specially for him, but was deceived
by misreports of his character.1
This large demand was disputed by Lord Melville and his fellow-executor,
James Melville of Hallhill, and on its being taken into court, decision was
given entirely in their favour. George Melville was compelled to sign an
obligation exonering and discharging the executors of every claim, and he
disappeared from the scene for a time, but he will be noticed again at a
later period. According to a letter afterwards written by James Melville
of Hallhill, one of the executors, to George, Lord Melville, George Melville's
claim against them was owing to the influence of Archbishop Spottiswood,
then chancellor of Scotland, who had, it is alleged, a grudge against Lord
Melville. James Melville also charges the chancellor with doing his best
to obstruct the decree given in favour of the executors, and compelling the
latter to pay 5000 merks to himself.2 It would also seem that this or some
other matter connected with the executry at one time caused a breach in
the friendship of the two executors, but apparently it was only temporary.3
This disagreeable experience lasted nearly two years, the discharge granted
by George Melville of Garvock being dated in March 1637. In July of the
same year arose the popular excitement in Scotland as to the service-book
and the encroachments of episcopacy. What part Lord Melville took in the
movements of the time is not recorded, but as his name is said to be attached
to the petition directed to the presbytery of Edinburgh asking them to libel
the bishops,4 his sympathies were evidently with the popular party. Lord
Melville was present in the short parliament of 1639, and also in that of the
following year when the estates assembled without a commissioner, but his
name does not occur in the rolls of the parliament of 1641, over which the
king presided in person.
In the beginning of 1640 Lord Melville joined with other heritors of the
1 Papers in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Copy Letter, James Melville of Hallhill
2 Letter, 31st May 1651, vol. ii. of this to John, Lord Melville, 22d November 1635.
work, pp. 233, 234. 4 Gordon's Scots Affairs, vol. i. p. 127.
NEW ERECTION OF LORDSHIP OF MONIMAIL, 1643. 193
parish of Monimail in an obligation to pay ten merks in every hundred
merks of valued rent, as a contribution towards meeting the expenses
" bestowit in the lait trubles." 1 About the same date a list of the heritors
in the parish was made up, enumerating their valued rent, the number of
their tenants, and the state of their warlike equipments or ability to furnish
such. Lord Melville's net rental in the parish is stated at 3900 merks.
Nearly all his domestic or household servants were armed with swords, one
of them bearing musket and pistols in addition, and most of his tenants had
at least a sword, while four of them were willing to provide muskets also.
Lord Melville agreed to provide so many muskets and pikes for his tenants
in Monimail parish, and also for his men on his property elsewhere.2 In
March 1643 he resigned the lands of Monimail, Letham, and others, which he
had inherited from the late Eobert, Lord Melville, and also his own lands of
Eaith, Torbain, and Pitconmark, and received a crown charter erecting the
whole of new into one barony, to be called the lordship of Monimail, in
favour of himself in liferent, and his son, George, Master of Melville, in fee.3
John, third Lord Melville, died on 22d May 1643, not long after the
above charter was granted. He made a testament on 8th May 1642,4 indi-
cating a number of legacies and other sums to be paid and discharged, but
this document appears to have been cancelled, and was never confirmed. It
was superseded by a later will made on 21st April 1643, which was duly
confirmed with the usual inventory of the deceased's effects. By this later
will no legacies were bequeathed, but Lord Melville appointed his eldest son,
then a minor, as his sole executor, placing him under the guardianship of Sir
George Erskine of Invertiel, Mr. Thomas Melville, minister at Kinglassie,
and Mr. Eobert Murray, minister at Methveu. Lord Melville also provided
for his other children, John, James, Isabel, Jean, Anna, and Catherine Mel-
ville. Archibald, Marquis of Argyll, John, Earl of Lindsay, William, Earl of
Dalhousie, Eobert, Lord Balfour of Burleigh, and Sir John Wemyss of Bogie
were to oversee the tutors, and attend to the interests of the children.
1 Obligation, dated 28th February 1640, in date given as at Oxford, 18th March 1643.
Melville Charter-chest. . Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi.
2 List, etc., in Melville Charter-chest. Part I. p. 250.
3 Copy signature (undated) in Melville
Charter-chest ; ratified by parliament, and 4 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 170-172.
VOL. I. 2 B
194 JOHN MELVILLE, THIRD LORD MELVILLE OF MONIMAIL.
Confirmation was granted on 27th May 1644, the debts exceeding the per-
sonal estate and assets by £2927.1
By his wife, Anna Erskine, who survived him for some years, John, third
Lord Melville, had three sons and four daughters : —
1. George, Master of Melville, who succeeded his father, and of whom a memoir
follows.
2. John, who is named in his father's will and in a bond of provision of same
date, which assigns to him a portion of 10,000 merks. He died before
1675 without issue.
3. James Melville of Cassingray. He was provided by his father to a sum of
8000 merks. He married, contract dated 7th December 1672, Anne,
daughter of Mr. Alexander Burnett of Carlips. He was still alive in
1693, but appears to have died without issue, as David, third Earl of
Leven, his nephew, was retoured his heir-general on 19th August 1714. It
is not clear from whom he acquired the lands of Cassingray, but up to about
1600 they belonged to the families of Hay of Errol and of Foodie. The
earliest charter of the lands is described as from King William the Lion to
Eobert, son of Henry. Robert was succeeded by a son, William, whose
daughter, Eda, resigned the lands, about 1282, to Eichard (or Gilbert) Hay.
Gilbert of Cassingray and Laurence of Cassingray are also named about the
same period.2
4. Isabel, provided in 1643 to the sum of 6000 merks. She appears to have
died young.
5. Jean, also provided to the sum of 6000 merks. She died between 1645
and 1650.
6. Anna, who married Thomas Boyd, younger of Pinkhill. She had issue, and
died before 1675. Her portion also was 6000 merks.
7. Catherine, who died unmarried, and was buried at Eaith, 18th March 1692.
She had the same provision as her sisters.
1 Confirmed testament in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Inventory of Writs of Cassingray, ibid.
fuAc
195
IX. — George, fourth Lord and first Earl of Melville, 1643-1707.
Lady Catherine Leslie (Leven), his Countess.
George Melville, who apparently received his baptismal name from his
maternal grandfather, Sir George Erskine, Lord Invertiel, appears to have
been born in the year 1636, as he was aged 71 years at his death in 1707.
He was thus only about seven years old when he succeeded to his father in
the title and estates. He was placed under the guardianship of Sir George
Erskine of Invertiel, and of his uncles, Mr. Thomas Melville and Mr. Eobert
Murray. In 1644 parliament ratified in his favour the charter granted to
his father, erecting the lands of Monimail and Eaith into one barony.
Lord Melville does not appear on any of the rolls of parliament until
1661, but in 1651 and 1652 he was the recipient of letters from King
Charles the Second. The first of these is in favour of George, now Sir
George Melville of Garvock, who had obtained the post of under-master of
the household to the king in Scotland.1 The king, writing from Dunferm-
line on 6th May 1651, recommended Sir George Melville to the attention of
his kinsman, on the plea that Sir George's ability to serve the king properly
depended on Lord Melville, who was expected to do " what may be thought
inst, fit, and honorable." 2 This recommendation, however, really meant an
application by Sir George Melville for money, and Lord Melville appears to
have consulted his friends on the subject, one of whom, James Melville of
Hallhill, wrote a long letter by no means complimentary to Sir George, and
detailing his behaviour towards the late Lord Melville, to which reference has
been made in the previous memoir.3 The immediate cause of this unplea-
sant epistle was a letter which Sir George wrote to Major-General Sir John
Brown of Fordel, one of Lord Melville's friends, defending himself in an
indignant tone,4 but nothing further has been found regarding the affair.
The other letters from the king are dated in 1652, and appear to be
1 Appointed 5th July 1650. Acta of the 3 Ibid. pp. 232-234.
Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. Part II. p. 605. 4 Letter, 26th May 1651, in Melville Char-
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 23. ter-chest.
196 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
circular letters appealing for aid on behalf of the royal necessities.1 Similar
letters were despatched by King Charles at this period to the head of more
than one noble family in Scotland.
Lord Melville, perhaps because of his minority, does not appear to have
fallen under the ban of the Commonwealth in Scotland, as he is not named
in the list of those who were fined by Cromwell. The insurrection organised
in the north of Scotland by the Earl of Glencairn and others, did, however,
affect the young lord, although he took no part in the movement. Parties
from the insurgent forces passed through various parts of Scotland, especially
through Fifeshire, and carried off numbers of horses. On the other hand,
orders were issued that all horses of a certain value were to be brought into
the English garrisons. The English troopers also made expeditions in search
of horses, and on one such visit to St. Andrews, on 3d January 1654, they
seized the young Lord Melville and Sir John . Carstairs, and carried them
prisoners to Burntisland. This was done because the captives were assumed
to be accessory to the taking away of horses by some of Glencairn's men.2
The imprisonment was, however, apparently not of long duration.
In January of the following year, 1655, Lord Melville, then in his nine-
teenth year, married Lady Catherine Leslie, only daughter of the late
Alexander Leslie, Lord Balgonie, and grand-daughter of the famous general,
the first Earl of Leven. The wedding took place at Wemyss, the residence
of the bride's mother, who had married, as her third husband, David, second
Earl of Wemyss, and the bride brought with her a tocher of 25,000 merks.3
During the next few years, although Lord Melville is mentioned on the
rolls of the parliament of 1661, and as a member of the committee of the
shire of Fife, he does not appear to have taken much part in public affairs,
and the chief notices of him relate to his private life. In May 1660 he went
to London to welcome King Charles the Second on his restoration, and was,
it is said, graciously received, but remained in the metropolis only ten days,
returning to Scotland on 12th June 1660. He continued to reside in Scot-
land, and among other pursuits seems to have engaged in horse-racing.
1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 23, 24.
2 Lamont's Diary, 1830, p. 65.
3 Ibid. p. 84 ; Marriage-Contract in Melville Charter-chest.
■
LADY KATHER1NE LESLIE
WIFE OF
GEORGE FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
A CURATOR OP ANNA, DUCHESS OF BUCCLEUCH. 197
That was an amusement in which many of the leading noblemen and gentlemen
of the county of Fife took a very active part. Many records of the Cupar
races are still extant. At these races in April 1662, Lord Melville entered a
mare to contend for a cup to be given by the Earl of Rothes, but he was
unsuccessful during the two days of the meeting. In the following year he
was more fortunate ; his mare won a " silver goblett aboue two pounde
weight," and it was said that this was the first mare that had carried the day
at Cupar since the races there were instituted in the year 1621. Some days
afterwards, however, the mare was beaten at a race at Corstorphine. In the
year 1665, at the annual race meeting at Cupar, one of Lord Melville's horses
was hurt in a mel^e which arose out of a quarrel and attempted duel
between the Earl of Linlithgow and Lord Carnegie.1
In February 1663 Lord Melville paid another visit to London, the dura-
tion of which is not stated, but he may have remained there until after the
marriage of the young Anna, Countess of Buccleuch, to the Duke of Mon-
mouth, on 20th April 1663. Through his marriage with Catherine Leslie,
Lord Melville became the brother-in-law of the young Countess of Buc-
cleuch, who was a daughter of the same mother by a former marriage. He
was appointed one of her curators, and afterwards managed her affairs in
Scotland. He was one of the parties to her marriage-contract, and in their
later transactions the duchess reposed great confidence in him, and fre-
quently acknowledged the benefit of his advice and counsel. It is unneces-
sary here to give the details of Lord Melville's management of the Buccleuch
estates, which has been fully commented upon in " The Scotts of Buc-
cleuch," but there is evidence that his duties were very ably discharged,
and his conduct brought to him commendation not only from the duke and
duchess but from King Charles himself. In September 1678 he received a
special commission over the Buccleuch estates, probably as the result of a
visit to London which he made in the spring of that year. In 1681, how-
ever, he appears to have desired to resign his trust, but the duchess persuaded
him to retain his charge, which he did until compelled, in 1683, to leave
the kingdom.2
1 Lamont's Diary, 1830, pp. 145, 160, 161, 187.
3 The Scotts of Buccleuch, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. i. pp. 409, 412, 436-440.
198 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
In 1679 Lord Melville was associated with the Duke of Monmouth when
the latter was appointed captain-general of the royal forces in opposition to
the covenanters. The story of the affair, as told in a paper written hy his
great-grandson, David, sixth Earl of Leven and Melville, is to the effect that
in that year, on Lord Melville making his usual visit to court, the king
asked him what was doing in Scotland. He replied that he was sorry some
people there were threatening to rise against his Majesty, but he did not
doubt that the Duke of Monmouth would quell them immediately. To
this the king assented, saying that he would have sent Melville with the
duke, and on Melville offering to be of service, the king gave him permis-
sion to go, and sent despatches with him to the duke. The account further
states that Lord Melville joined the duke the day before the battle of Both-
well Bridge, and that he was sent over to the covenanters to endeavour to
bring them to submit, a mission which he discharged to his utmost power,
but without result.
This act of his, however, was called in question at a later date, when
accusations were brought against Lord Melville of participation in the Bye-
house plot, and it would appear from evidence given before the privy council,
probably extorted by torture, that he employed others to communicate with
the insurgent forces. Even in the year immediately following, 1680, Lord
Melville thought it necessary to procure from the Duke of Monmouth a
certificate that his correspondence and communications with the covenanters
were made by the duke's direct authority.2 Setting aside some doubtful
statements made by one of the witnesses, their evidence showed that Lord
Melville had been very earnest in urging the covenanters to lay down
their arms. He assured them that if they were defeated it would ruin the
cause of Bresbyterianism, while if they submitted, the duke was willing to
grant them favourable terms.3 This offer was so far responded to by the
covenanters, but dissensions among them rendered the negotiations futile.
1 Cf. account as printed in Leven and Scotland, vol. viii., App. p. 58. ISth May
Melville Papers, Bannatyne Club, p. xiii. 1683. It was probably in consequence of
•y tmi t icon it i •• c j-i.- i this evidence that the Duke of Monmouth,
- 10th June 1680. Vol. n. of this work '
,-,_ on 10th June 1683, granted a more formal
certificate, signed in. the preseuce of wit-
3 Evidence. Acts of the Parliaments of nesses. [Vol. ii. of this work, p. 29.]
THE RYEHOUSE PLOT, 1683. 199'
The Duke of Monmouth lost his influence at court in September 1679,
but Melville appears to have remained in favour, probably because of his
important position in charge of the Buccleuch estates, about the disposal of
which the king was much interested. He seems to have resided chiefly in
Scotland, with occasional visits to London on the duke's business.
Lord Melville was in Scotland in 1683, when orders were given for his
arrest on suspicion of connection with the conspiracy known as the Eyehouse
plot. The account given by his great-grandson assigns this intended
arrest to the year 1680, but this is a mistake, as the alleged discovery of the
Eyehouse plot only took place in June 1683. The sole information as to
Lord Melville's part in the affair is the evidence given by or extorted from
witnesses examined at his trial in absence in 1685, and their testimony is of
the slightest. One of the witnesses, Commissary Monro, stated that a
meeting was held in London in May 1683, at which Lord Melville was
present, but Monro's evidence showed that, so far from this being a con-
spiracy, those present, of whom he was one, were afraid that the tyrannical
measures of the government would cause a rising in Scotland, or, as it is
phrased, " that the countrey might run together to save themselves, and so
make a present disturbance." It was then resolved that an effort should be
made to prevent this, and also to obtain information as to the real condition
of affairs. Sir John Cochrane of Ochiltree spoke of money being furnished
by the English to enable the Earl of Argyll, then in Holland, to send arms to
Scotland, but to this Lord Melville was opposed, being averse to dealing with
the English, saying, " we never medled with them bot they ruined us." The
first resolution to inquire into affairs in Scotland and hinder any disturbance
was then adhered to.1 Another witness, the Eev. William Carstares, after-
wards known as the chief presbyterian adviser of King William the Third,
and who was also present at the meeting, said he understood the money
referred to was to be used to promote an armed rising in Scotland, but he
added that Lord Melville thought everything hazardous, and was not positive
in anything, but was most inclined to have the Duke of Monmouth to lead
them in Scotland.2 It is well known, however, that Mr. Carstares' deposition
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. viii., App. p. 34.
2 Ibid. p. 35.
200 GEORGE, FOUETH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
was elicited by torture, and on the condition that it was not to he used
against any person.
On another point also Commissary Monro gave evidence that Lord
Melville called him one day from his lodging to wait upon the Duke of
Monmouth. The duke being at Lord Russell's house, they paid their visit
there. In course of conversation, Lord Russell spoke of sending £10,000 to
Argyll to buy arms, at which Lord Melville laughed, and said they might as
well send ten pence. He then broke up the discourse, and shortly after-
wards left, with a remark that they were unhappy who meddled with these
people.1 This is all the evidence of Lord Melville's connection with Sir John
Cochrane, Lord Russell, or any of those who were justly or unjustly accused
of plotting against the king. When the proclamations for the arrest of those
implicated reached Scotland, Lord Melville was at his residence of Melville
House in Life, wholly unsuspicious of any evil, and had it not been for the
good offices of Sir George Mackenzie, afterwards Earl of Cromartie, he would
most probably have been taken. As it was, he was enabled to make his escape.
The incidents of this escape have been told at length by Lord Melville's
great-grandson in a narrative already quoted from, but as this narrative has
been printed, the details may be given more briefly here. Lord Melville
had, it is said, sent over one of his attendants, an old and faithful retainer,
named Duncan Macarthur, to Edinburgh on private business. He found the
city in an unusual stir, and in passing up the Canongate he met Sir George
Mackenzie, who at once accosted him with the words, " ' You Highland
dog ' (a name he was in use of giving him), ' how does my lord, what brought
you here V Says Duncan, 'He is very well, he has sent me over about some
private business.' Says my lord, ' you had better go home again directly.'
' No, faith,' says Duncan, ' not till my business is done.' ' I say,' says my
lord, 'you Highland dog, go home as fast as you can,' and so left him."
Macarthur, acting on the hint, hurried back to Leith, where he found a
troop of dragoons just embarking for Fife, but could get no clew to their
destination. He himself hired a yawl to Kinghorn, and was fortunate
enough to meet Lord Melville and his second son, the Earl of Leven, at
Balbimie Bridge, on their way to Wemyss Castle.
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. viii. p. 34.
ESCAPES TO HOLLAND, 1683. 201
Lord Melville, unconscious of any cause of offence, was not at first
alarmed, but was persuaded to go directly to the ferry, until the movements
of the dragoons could be ascertained. These arrived at Melville that night
with a warrant of arrest, and this intelligence being conveyed to Lord
Melville, he and his son took boat to Berwick, whence they travelled with
all speed to London. There he endeavoured to gain an audience of the king,
but without success. He had, however, an interview with the Duke of York,
who received him courteously, and denied all knowledge of a warrant against
him. By the duke's interest he obtained an audience of the king, but met
with a very cool reception. On his leaving the presence he met a friend, who,
surprised at seeing him, exclaimed, " Lord Melville, what are you doing here
— do you know there is a warrant out to apprehend you ? " Melville replied
that he had done nothing to offend the king, and trusted to his Majesty's
justice and his own innocence, but that night a messenger came to his
lodgings to seize him, and he only escaped arrest by a stratagem of his land-
lady's. He changed his residence and his name, but two days later he and
his son were arrested by a party of dragoons. Before they were carried off,
however, a Mr. Nairn, a page of the Duchess of Monmouth, arrived on the
scene, and begged a private interview with the prisoners in name of the
duchess. This was granted, when the page told Lord Melville from the
duchess that his life was at stake, and that she advised immediate escape.
This was effected with the aid of the page, who accompanied the fugitives,
and they all reached Wapping safely, and embarked for Holland.1
The narrative quoted does not give the date of this escape, but it must
have been some time about the middle of July 1683, as a proclamation
issued on the 28th of that month refers to Lord Melville as being then out
of the kingdom.2 He attached himself to the court of the Prince of Orange,
where he was well received and gained the favour of his Highness. He
appears to have remained in Holland until some time after the Prince of
Orange sailed for England in November 1688. It has been stated that
Lord Melville was one of those who accompanied Monmouth on his ill-
fated expedition, but this is not borne out by evidence. He himself stated
1 Leven and Melville Papers, Barmatyne ms. in Melville Charter-chest.
Club, pp. xiii, xiv, compared with original 2 Wodrow, ed. 1722, vol. ii. app. No. 89.
VOL. I. 2 C
202 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
in a vindication of his conduct, written by him in 1703, that he was opposed
to both the expeditions by Monmouth and Argyll, and that he took no part
in the latter is proved by his interview with James Stewart, who wished
him to subscribe towards the expense. The interview is noted at length by
Lord Melville himself ; here it need only be said that he did, after many
objections, grant a bond for £500, but the expedition had sailed before
this was done.1
Argyll's force left Holland on or before 1st May 1685, and was followed
a few weeks later by Monmouth's descent upon England. The disastrous
fate of this enterprise is well known, but Margaret, Countess of Wemyss,
when she writes to Lord Melville's son as to the probable fate of the unhappy
duke,2 makes no reference to his father, and it may thus be considered
certain, in view also of Lord Melville's own testimony, that he was not pre-
sent. But though this was so, his person and estate were proceeded against
as if he had been guilty. In January 1684 he had been summoned to appear
before the privy council of Scotland, but on the day named, 8th April,
certificates were produced, signed by physicians in Holland, that he was
unable to travel. In November of the same year proceedings against him
were resumed, and in June 1685, after the rebellion, he was formally declared
a rebel by parliament, and his estates were forfeited and annexed to
the Crown. His wife, Lady Melville, endeavoured to avert this sentence,
by producing the attestation by the Duke of Monmouth relative to the
year 1679, but the plea was rejected.3 At a later date, some compromise
was effected, by which Lady Melville and her family probably benefited.
Lord Tarbat seems to have forwarded in July 1685 a petition by Melville
to King James, but no immediate answer is recorded.4 Lord Fountainhall
records, of date October 1686, that Lord Melville "obtains a pardon for
life and fortune, but pays a large sum to the Secretary" — then the Earl
of Melfort. In January following King James the Seventh wrote to the
lords of the Scottish treasury that he had extended his clemency to Lord
Melville, and had granted his forfeited estates to his eldest son, the Master of
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 184-187. vol. viii. p. 491, App. pp. 59-65.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 235, 236. 4 Letter, Lord Tarbat to Lord Melville,
3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 7th July 16S5, in Melville Charter-chest.
PRESENT IN CONVENTION OF ESTATES, 1689. 203
Melville. The king also expressed his intention of acknowledging the ser-
vices of the family by dissolving the lands from the Crown with a view to
restitution ; meanwhile new infeftments were to be granted to the Master
of Melville.1 For this favour Melville paid the large composition of £3000
sterling, in addition to £200 of yearly rent.2
Notwithstanding these acts of clemency, Lord Melville continued to
reside in Holland, and, as already indicated, did not leave that country until
some time after the Prince of Orange. He arrived in England after William
and Mary had been proclaimed king and queen, and was at once sent down
to Scotland to attend the convention of estates, which was to meet on 14th
March 1689. His instructions are dated the 7th of that month, and his
name is inserted in the roll of those present on the opening day, but does not
occur in the proceedings until 27th March, when he was appointed one
of a committee to settle the government. As a result of this committee's
labours, and of the reasons they adduced, the estates on 11th April declared
the throne to be vacant, and resolved that William and Mary should be king
and queen of Scotland, a proclamation being immediately issued to that
effect.3
On 25th April 1689 Melville received a letter from King William, in
which the king says he is confirmed in the opinion he had long held of Mel-
ville's concern for his interest and service. The wish is at the same time
expressed that in some things the convention had proceeded otherwise than
they had done, but as to this the king does not blame Melville, rather agree-
ing with the latter that something is reasonably to be sacrificed to gain time,
" since no inconveniency is more irreparable than that of delay." It is some-
what difficult to understand from the proceedings in the convention wherein
they fell short of the king's wish, but it would appear from a draft in Lord
Melville's handwriting that he had prepared an act embodying his instruc-
tions, and which may have been seen by the king, though it was either not
submitted to the convention, or perhaps was objected to on account of its
comprising too many subjects in one act. It not only narrated the past
1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 29, 30. to the Earl of Perth.
2 Ibid. p. 30. Part of this sum was granted 3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
to the Viscount of Tarbat, and the other half vol. ix. p. 22.
204 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
history of Scotland, but it aimed at declaring the throne vacant, proclaiming
William and Mary as king and queen, establishing the church, and uniting
the two kingdoms, all in and by one enactment.1 Although these measures
could not thus be dealt with, steps were taken to forward some of them, but the
confused state of parties prevented concerted action. The king in his letter
specially desired Lord Melville's attendance at court as his adviser, and also his
opinion in writing as to what further should be done in the convention.2
The convention on 29th April adjourned for a few weeks, and Melville at
once obeyed the king's command to come to court. He was present on the
11th of May, when the crown of Scotland was offered to and accepted by the
king and queen. The Earl of Argyll, Sir James Montgomerie of Skelmorlie,
and Sir John Dalrymple, were commissioned by the convention to present
the offer of the crown with the conditions attached to it, and to hear the new
monarchs take the oath. It was afterwards made the subject of dispute
whether the instructions given by the convention had been accurately carried
out, and insinuations were made against Sir John Dalrymple that he had
betrayed the liberties of his country. In a letter from the Earl of Argyll to
the Duke of Hamilton, giving, on behalf of himself and Sir James Mont-
gomerie, a private account of what was done, the earl writes in a somewhat
querulous tone about the Dalrymples, and places Lord Melville in the same
category. He says, " When we [the commissioners] parted [from Edinburgh],
the father and son [Sir John Dalrymple and his father, Sir James] were thought
hard enough matches for us without ther being reinforced by Lord Melvin,
and yet we should have made our partie good enough against them if we had
had that assistance from you in relation to Melvin that you were obliged to
have given us, both upon your own account and to vindicat that publickt
affront he had thrown upon the estates by his coming away without libertie."
In another place the earl writes, " They strugled hard to defeat the grivances
by proposing they should not be read till after the king had taken the oath,
iiotwithstanding we were instructed to the contrarie, but they failed in it." 3
It is evident from this letter that the writer was jealous of Melville's
1 Draft Act in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 15.
3 Historical mss. Commission Report on Hamilton Papers, p. 182.
APPOINTED SOLE SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND, 1689. 205
influence with the king, and he was probably unaware of the king's command
that Melville should come to court.
One of King William's first acts, after receiving the crown of Scotland,
was to appoint Lord Melville sole secretary of state for that country. This
appointment was made on the 13th May 1689. The letter already cited from
Argyll and Montgomerie, which is dated on the previous day, 12th May,
suggests that Duke Hamilton should write to the king to make exact inquiry
after persons and things before he fill the great offices, especially the secre-
taries' places, as all places will shortly be filled " by those persons' direc-
tions." x But the king's promptitude apparently disappointed this plan.
Melville received many congratulatory letters on his accession to office, but
it also gave rise to many ill-natured remarks, the composition of the new
privy council being specially objected to. Melville was accused of com-
plicity with the Dalrymples, of introducing the " country's old oppressors " to
the council. On the other hand, he was declared to be " a good and sober
man," and his nominations were accepted as being as good as any possible in
the circumstances. So at least ran the current comments, but such need not
here be enlarged upon. Lord Melville had a very difficult task to perform,
and that he felt it to be so is evident from his more confidential letters. Thus,
writing to Sir Patrick Hume of Polwarth, he says : " It hath indeed been my
misfortune to be mistaken when I have been, according to my knowledge,
acting with the greatest sinceritie for my countre and the publick interest ;
but I am hopefull, as it has hitherto been my endeavour, so it shall for the
future be my care so to manage myselfe, through divine assistance, that my
actions, upon strictest search, may be lyable to no just blame." He points
out to Sir Patrick that mistaken measures, even of such persons as are
desirous for the public good, give a bad impression of affairs, and that even
Sir Patrick himself was unconsciously promoting what he most wished to
avoid. He defends his own appointment as sole secretary, not only because
it was the king's wish, but because the king himself understood and looked
narrowly into affairs. He concludes by repeating that it is his desire rightly,
by the help of God, to discharge the duties of his office.2
1 Historical mss. Commission Report on Hamilton Papers, p. 1S3.
2 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 55-57, 13th June 1689.
206 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
In such a spirit did Melville take up the duties of his new office, but he
was not well supported even by those who shared his views. The conven-
tion had been turned into a parliament, which met on 5th June 1689, under
the Duke of Hamilton as high commissioner, but it had scarcely begun its
sittings before it came into collision with the Crown, a position which it
more or less maintained during its existence. The points on which the
opposition insisted were — (1) the abolition of the committee of parliament
known as the lords of articles, it being contended that fixed committees
were a grievance; (2) the question of the appointment by the Crown or by
parliament of the judges of the court of session ; and (3) an act for incapaci-
tating from office all those who had served under the late government — a
measure specially directed against the Dalrymples. On these matters dis-
sension ran high, and no efforts of the king or Melville could allay the
excitement or conciliate the opposition. The latter did not hesitate to make
charges against the secretary, but, as will be shown, he was really believed to be
honest in his intentions, and incorruptible in his fidelity to the government.
In consequence of these proceedings, the parliament of 1689 was hastily
adjourned on 2d August, after a sitting of two months, during which practi-
cally nothing was done. It is unnecessary to detail its proceedings, or their
reference to Lord Melville, as we have few or no evidences of his direct
interference, though he was the king's principal adviser, and received direct
intelligence of all that took place. But his own opinion may be quoted from
a letter, one of the few of his known to be extant at this period, written to
the Earl of Crawford on 30th July 1689, after the order for adjournment had
been issued. Lord Crawford was president of the parliament, and a staunch
supporter of Lord Melville, who thus writes : — " I am much troubled with the
relation you give me of affaires with yow. I am very sensible of the difficult
task yow have ; I pray God direct both yow and me. Things seeme to have
a very bad prospect ; I know not well what to writ or what to advice yow."
He refers to the intended adjournment, and continues : — " As for the setle-
ment of church government " — a matter constantly pressed upon the parlia-
ment, and as often put aside—" I see so many difficulties in it as things
presently stands, what from one party and another, that I cannot see through
it, nor do I know whither it be better it ly over a while."
HIS ADVICE TO THE SCOTTISH CLERGY, 1689. 207
Lord Melville then proceeds to advise the clergy : " I wish the ministers
and others truly concerned for ther interest, may be at one among them-
selves, and may be very sober, and not give those who may be watching for
their halting advantage. Ther are abundance to misrepresent them and
there way. Men most take what they can have in a cleanly way, when they
cannot have all they would. I wish they may understand and distinguish
weell betuixt their friends and others. I know not well whither to advyse if
they should send up on or tuo of ther number. If men were more free of
humour and jealousy, and a fit person or persons could be fallen one, it would
seeme not amiss, but whom you or I might thinke proper on severall accounts
may not be so, either for a court or conversing with other here, and for a
thing to be done and not to purpose, especially when expensive, does not
import much ; however, I should thinke it wer not amiss that they should be
at pains to draw up somwhat for removing the aspersions cast on them and
their way, and show what are ther principles and demands, and the soberer
the better, and what they think expedients in this conjuncture to be pro-
posed. They have Mr. Adair here, who might communicate to others, both
of English and Scots, of ther own persuasion, and take ther advice and assist-
ance. I am affraid our divisions and managment may do great hurt to the
publick setlment, and may endanger the bringing that on or about which
men seemes to fear, for it 's scarce to be imagined that some men's way and
procedure, if as related, can be acceptable." Lord Melville concludes by
asking information as to particular persons.1
A further exposition of Lord Melville's views, as to his own policy at this
date, occurs in a paper addressed by him to the king about 1691, in vindica-
tion of his administration, a paper which was revised and annotated by Mr.
Carstairs, who therefore doubtless approved of it. Lord Melville begins by
stating that it was duty and zeal for the king's service rather than any
interest of his own that prompted him to be concerned in public affairs. He
thanks the king for his generosity, and adds : " I cannot boast of merit in
serving of your Majesty, while all that I could or can doe cannot but come
short of what I and all true Protestants of these kingdoms doe owe to him
who under God did deliver us from greatest misery." In regard to the con-
1 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 210, 211.
208 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
vention, Lord Melville claims to have successfully carried through the king's
instructions, and securing a speedy settlement of the government without
limitations which might disagreeably affect the king, and without diminishing
the power of the Crown. Of the period now under consideration Lord Mel-
ville says : " When I had the honour to be sole secretarrie of state to your
Majesty for your ancient kingdom all my advices and actings were, according
to my capacity, regulated with a respect, not so much to the gratefeing of the
humor of any party, as the laying of such foundations as might give no just
ground of complaint to any, but might make all sensible that in a hearty sub-
mission to your Majesty's government they might expect your protection."
He states that he, to that end, nominated such persons in the several
judicatories of the nation as seemed to be for the king's true interest, both in
England and Scotland ; and this, he adds, " will sufficiently appear, if it be
considered that by doeing thus I was exposed to the displeasure of not a few
of my own persuasion, and did the rather lessen than advance my interest in
the kingdom, many of those I then named being persons in whom I had no
particular concern, and from whom I have had litle proof either of gratitude
or kindenes, having alwise resolved that integrity in your service and your
Majesty's favour should be my only support." *
Shortly before the adjournment of the parliament, Melville received the
news of Mackay's defeat at Killiecrankie, the details of which were at first
confused and exaggerated. It was believed that the greater part of Mackay's
officers were killed, and it was expected that Dundee would become master of
a great part of the north of Scotland, and perhaps gain possession of Stirling-
Castle. Strong appeals were made for the aid of troops from England.
General Mackay in his memoirs charges both King William and Melville
with indifference to the military interests of Scotland and with turning a deaf
ear to his advice. But there was no want of promptitude in responding to the
appeal of the Scottish authorities. The battle of Killiecrankie was fought on
27th July, on the 28th the Duke of Hamilton wrote to Melville, and on the
1st of August orders were issued for the march of troops towards Scotland.'2
Meanwhile, however, more correct intelligence as to Mackay's position, and
the news of Dundee's death, had reached Edinburgh, and the excitement was
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 219, 220. 2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 140, 141.
AFFAIRS AFTER KILLIECRANKIE. 209
somewhat allayed, the fate of Dundee being looked upon almost as a victory
for the government.
On this being communicated to Melville, the march of troops from the
south was countermanded, as even Hamilton thought the forces in Scotland
were sufficient to repress the rebellion, and a little later the Earl of Crawford
wrote stating that there were more troops in Scotland than the country could
support without free quartering, which he deprecated.1 On the 8 th of August
Lord Melville wrote to General Mackay congratulating him upon his safety
after Killiecrankie, and his success in a later skirmish, and trusting he would
be a happy and eminent instrument for settling the country. He suggests
that Mackay should send up Lord Leven, " for its not unneedful to have
things pressed a little by one that is concerned ; and if you shall judge it
proper to do so, you would write very particularly and show how necessary
money is on many accounts, for some considerable sum timously bestowed
might go a great way in settling things, save much blood, the fatigueing of
the forces, harassing the country and also much expense to the long run ; for
our nation is at present, not only in a very low and poor, but in a very un-
setled condition on many accounts." This sentence refers to Melville's views
about the pacification of the Highlands, which he believed might be brought
about by privately buying the chiefs, and thus diverting their allegiance from
King James.
On this point, after stating that the king had ordered a proclamation
of indemnity to those rebels who should lay down arms, acknowledge
the government and promise to live peaceably, Melville continues, " But
I doubt [if] this will prove very effectual unless they be very weak and out
of hopes of assistance from Ireland ; for you know there are many private
reasons besides the late King James's interest that foments this quarell ; so
that I am still of the opinion that transactions with some of the chief of them
to break them among themselves would be the safest and best way. Yoti
know this was my opinion before I came from Scotland ; but money was
wanting, and likewise you may perceive there has been more in this business
than many then thought, though I was suspicious at that time, and am yet
a little, of some who have not yet publickly discovered themselves." Lord
1 Letter, 19th October 1689, in Melville Charter-chest.
VOL. I. 2D
210 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
Melville states that the king consents to bestow money on the scheme, which
he again recommends as saving trouble and fatigue to the troops.
This was not a new scheme on Lord Melville's part. So early as April of
this year the king had written to him, in answer to his expressed opinion,
that if he thought Lord Tarbat could be serviceable in quieting the north, he
should encourage him going there. The king adds, that a distribution of
money among the Highlanders being thought the most likely way to satisfy
them, he had given orders for five or six thousand pounds to be sent to Major
General Mackay for that purpose. It does not appear that this money was
sent immediately ; but shortly after the date of the king's letter, General
Mackay wrote to Lord Tarbat, in answer to the latter's fear of being mis-
represented to the king, that he had written assuring his Majesty of Tarbat's
zeal and desire to see the government established in the king's person.
Mackay writes that in this the king " cannot doe better than hold himself
to the testimony of my Lord Melvill, who is so attached to his Majestie's
service and the interest of the Protestant religion, that he would not recom-
mend his son if he thought him capable to act against those principles,"
adding, " I did commit to your direction and prudence the management of
the difference betwixt the Highland clans and Annie, who was the first
mover of it. I pray you then, my lord, loose no tyme to gain Locheyl,
assuring him from me of the king's favour and consideration if he shew him-
self active in breaking the Highland combination." x The negotiations, how-
ever, if they were ever begun, certainly failed at that time, no doubt, as Lord
Melville states, owing to the conflicting interests at work, but he seems to
have still cherished the hope of settling the country in that way. The " sus-
picions " of which he speaks probably related to Lord Breadalbane.
In September 1689 the party who had been in opposition to the govern-
ment measures in the parliament lately adjourned prepared a representation
or petition to the king, which was signed by several noblemen and a number
of commissioners for shires and burghs. In this they complained bitterly of
the government policy, and commented on the acts which had been voted by
the estates but had not been ratified by the crown. The petitioners defended
these acts, and while protesting the utmost loyalty alleged various reasons
1 The Earls of Cromartie, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. i. pp. 61, 62.
PETITION BY THE OPPOSITION PARTY. 211
for their opposition.1 It may be to the movement for this petition that Lord
Crawford refers in a letter to Lord Melville in August 1689 : " I am much
perplexed that I find a storme ariseing against you, by persons pretendedly
your friends, and who have little power except what they have under your
wings. I would have spared this warning to you, but that some of your
relations, by smooth words, are imposed upon to have other thoughts of
such. Yet I am certain that treachery is design'd, and a combination with
your enimies entered into, which may be fatall, if you be not on your guard ;
and the countrie shall be ruined by those persons being in the government,
who are yet to begin to lean to King William's interest as they shall find it
their advantage or not. . . . Examine this information with your first pos-
sible conveniency, and delay not till matters are past cure, and your credit at
court be undermined." 2
The Earl of Annandale, Lord Eoss, and Sir James Montgomerie of Skel-
morlie, were three of the chief promoters of the petition.3 They hastened to
London to press the matter before the king in person. One point on which
they were anxious was the appointment of the judges of the court of session.
The estates had voted that the judges should be appointed by parliament,
whereas the king claimed the right of nomination for the crown, but the peti-
tioners opposed this and hoped to gain acceptance to their views. An
unpublished letter from David (afterwards Sir David) Nairn to the Earl of
Leven gives some account of their proceedings, and may be quoted : —
"Your lordship may remember before I went to Newmarket I told you
what progress was made by the three, viz., Annandale, Ross, and Skellmorlie.
They came all to Newmarket on Mnnday the 14th, acompanyd with Mr.
Johnstone, their stout agent amongst the English. When they came to Court
there they went into the bed-chamber, as others ; it is said that Annandale
desired to speak with his Majesty, which was refused. This they took as I could
wish ; but, indeed, it might have hapned to any who had not pressing business,
1 Paper printed, vol. iii. of this work, pp. 3 It has been said that Sir Patrick Hume
209-212, the date being there inadvertently of Polwarth presented the petition, but we
given as September 1690, though it was pre- learn from Forbes of Cullodeu that though he
sented a year earlier. was brought from a sick-bed to do it, Anuan-
2 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 260, 20th dale made the actual presentation.
Au ?ust 1689.
212 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
for excepting such the king shun'd all ; however, their constant caire was to ply
Portland, who I doe confess to your lordship I look upon to be too much their
freind, tho' others who knows better asurs me of the contrarie, and says he
only smoths them to have them quiet, but that I thinke is not the way. In
short, the main point they solicet soe hard for at Newmarket was to delay
the nameing of the judges. One that hard the conference one day told me
that they told Portland that they hard it was to be done immediately ; this
was on Wedensday the 9th, and Portland answered, Doe not truble yourselves,
it will not be done, and immediatly he went to the king, where my lord
secretarie (Melville) was with the list ready, and it was not done."
The writer continues —
" Now since they [Annandale, etc.] came from Newmarket, they have been
working to get their adress presented, and they are given to understand that
the king will heare when they will. They talked of doeing it yesterday morn-
ing, then it was put off till the afternoon, then till this morning, but it was
five at night when I came from thence, and it was not done. It 's said that
they can not agree who shall present it ; the king has heard all of them, and
they have noe reason to bragg of kinde entertainment. The whole clubb is
now shatering ; none waits on my lord secretarie more assidously then Colloden,
Pitliver, Rikertone, and others, and more wold, but my lord does not incouradge,
by which you may see he thinks himselfe in noe danger. My lord advocate,
Arbruchell, and some others of my lord's freinds within these few days have been
frequently with Portland, and they are of oppinion that he is extremely fixed. The
Bishop of Salsburry [Burnet] I hear is come to town this day, and our parliament
sits on Saturday ; he and Mr. Johnston are busie men, and wee have some here
that taks fire with litle sparks, and if they joyne with ours they may be truble-
some, tho' they will not better themselves. The nomination of the lords [of
Session] is yet put off till Friday, which is hard enugh, and in the mean time all
industry is useing with Enstruther and some others here, not [to] accept, and I
question not but many letters will be write on that subject this night. It is not
thought needfull to be very earnest with Eankillor ; the maister [of Melville]
knows him better than I can tell him." 1
A few days later the king and Melville nominated the judges of session,
who, after the usual formalities, took their seats without disturbance,
1 Letter, dated 15th October 16S9, in Mel- of that Ilk and Archibald Hope of Rankeillor
ville Charter-chest. Sir William Anstruther were two of the intended lords of Session.
SETTLEMENT OF CHURCH-GOVERNMENT. 213
although the opposition party, or " club," as they were called, did endeavour
to raise difficulties. Another matter, however, and one in which Lord
Melville took a deep interest, engaged more attention. This was the settling
of church-government, as to which Melville wrote to the ministers that the
king had instructed his commissioner (Hamilton) to secure it without any
limitation but what might be most acceptable to his people, and was so
anxious to satisfy Scotland on the point that he had repeated his instruc-
tions. These had been neglected by Parliament, but Melville assured the
ministers that the king continued still in the same mind. At a later date
the ministers acknowledged that Lord Melville had materially aided their
cause.1 The Earl of Crawford, a staunch presbyterian, writes in reference to
the same subject of Melville's " eminent zeal for building the house of God,"
which he is convinced his lordship will never regret, whatever enemies it
may have stirred up against him. " Allow me, my lord, to say of your lord-
ship's late defeating the designs of the Bishop of Salisbury, and others of
that way for reponing the conform ministers, as the people said of Jonathan,
that you wrought with God that day, and brought about a great salvation to
his church; for that course had certainly, at least for a time effectually,
embroylled the nation and ruined the presbiterian interest, whereas that
partie deserves not common pitie if they will not venture to the outmost for
your lordship, who hath pawnded your all, of a worldly concern, in your
bold appearing for them at such a criticall juncture."2
A promise, which is first mentioned in Sir David Nairn's letter, that King
William would in person come to Scotland, gave great joy to many, in the
hope that his presence would give some settlement to the party divisions in
the kingdom, but the promise was not fulfilled. Affairs in Ireland required
the king's serious attention, and he at last resolved that the Scottish parlia-
ment should be held as before under a commissioner. The Duke of Hamil-
ton was, as a matter of courtesy, first named, but he refused to accept, and
Lord Melville was then formally appointed. He was privately very unwill-
ing to take the position thus conferred upon him, but he was trusted
by the king, and he believed he could not refuse without hazarding the
king's affairs. At the same time he fully realised the difficulties in his
1 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 312, 329. 2 23d November 16S9 ; ibid. p. 330.
214 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
way, as appears from statements by himself. One of his difficulties
was indicated by Lord Crawford in December 1689, who quoted a report
to the effect that Annandale, Eoss, and Skelmorlie, whose designs had
hitherto failed, were yet " hopefull to hough Melvill and defeat all his
presbiterian projects." x
This danger took an aggravated form at a later date ; but when Lord
Crawford wrote there was no expectation that Lord Melville would be com-
missioner, and it was only his general policy which was aimed at. But in the
end of February 1690 the king had decided on his course, and issued his
instructions to Melville. These instructions, according to a paper written
by Duncan Forbes of Culloden, father of tbe famous President Forbes, were
based upon, and gave effect to, certain proposals made by Sir Patrick Hume
of Polwarth and himself when in London. They were active members of
the " club," or country party, and appear to have had interviews both with
the king and Melville, who desired them to use their influence with their
party, which had hitherto been in opposition, to promote the plans of the
government. But to assume that the views of the king and Melville,
however they may have been modified by the representations of Hume
and Culloden, were based upon these, is not warranted by the facts. Both
Melville and his master were men of moderation, and had the good of the
country at heart. They were willing to deal with men of all parties for that
end, and the instructions issued to Melville in February 1690 will be found
to be nearly identical with those issued in May 1689 to the Duke of
Hamilton, but which were in a great measure frustrated by the opposition.2
Melville indeed had special and probably private instructions from the king
to deal with any members of a party to gain their co-operation, and in this
capacity he dealt with Hume and Forbes, who were evidently satisfied with
the government proposals and agreed to further them.
Hume and Forbes left London in the beginning of February, and on their
arrival in Edinburgh at once set to work to gain their party.3 So at
least they wrote to the king and Lord Melville, and though they found unex-
1 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 357. liaments of Scotland, vol. ix. .A pp. pp. 125,
126.
2 Ibid. pp. 414, 415 ; cf. Acts of the Par- 3 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 402, 403.
OPENS PARLIAMENT AS COMMISSIONER, 1690. 215
pected difficulties in their way, events show that in some measure they
effected their purpose. Melville himself followed about a month later,
but owing to the king's objection to the English and Scottish parlia-
ments sitting simultaneously, the latter was more than once adjourned.
As this gave rise to discontent, the king at last authorised Melville to
open the session on 15th April, which was done. A few days before,
the king had promoted the commissioner to the dignity of earl, for his
great and faithful services, his firm adherence to the reformed religion, his
constant fidelity to the royal family, and especially his good offices in
regard to the king's accession.1
The earl in opening the session of parliament made a speech in which he
struck the key-note of his own and the king's policy. He explained the
cause of the king's absence in spite of his real desire to be present, and
assured the house of his Majesty's intention to visit Scotland, adding that the
king would no longer delay their meeting for giving such a settlement to
the nation as would secure its religion and true liberty. The earl then dwelt
on what the king had done for the nation, and touching lightly on past dis-
putes, said, " He refuseth nothing that can be justly demanded ; his uncontro-
verted rights are only valued by him as they are useful for your good and
security." He then stated that he was commanded to tell them that the king
was resolved to live and die in the sincere profession of the true Protestant
religion, and was about to expose his person in its defence ; and was also
willing to concur with them for the settlement of church and state upon
such solid foundations that they need not again fear a relapse into former
evils. After enumerating a few measures which were proposed, and beseech-
ing the parliament to behave with zeal for the good of the country and
the king's honour, and to lay aside animosities, the earl added, " I hope you
will not take it ill that I mind you of that useful precept of the, apostle, Let
your moderation be known unto all men. For the unfriends of our nation
have taken occasion to reproach us more for the vehemence of our temper
than any thing else." He concluded with expressing the high honour the
king had done him, and that he had no design before him but the public
good ; while he hoped his deportment and sufferings in the past would secure
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 205-207.
216 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
him from all suspicion of being a promoter of arbitrary power of which the
king had no design.1
Moderation was the principle which Melville not only inculcated, but acted
upon. He controlled the debates in the house, cutting them short when they
threatened to impede business, and dismissing the subject when they were
frivolous, and he succeeded in passing important acts which had not been
ratified in the previous session. He also induced the House to pass
a modified form of the act abolishing the lords of articles, and pro-
viding committees appointed by the whole estates — a question which had
caused much bitterness. On 7th June 1690 the act for settling church
government in Scotland was passed, which ratified the Westminster Con-
fession of Faith and established presbytery. At a later date an act
abolishing patronages was passed, and on the same day another, which
not only completed the abolition of prelacy, but, by rescinding all acts
enjoining civil penalties upon sentences of excommunication, prevented all
intolerant severities which might have arisen had the powers of the prelates
been transferred to the new ecclesiastical establishment.2
It is probable that this last-named act passed almost unnoticed by the
presbyterian clergy, but they were deeply grateful to Melville, as well as to
the king, for the favour shown to them, and the earl's administration appears
to have given general satisfaction. On 18th September 1690 a letter from
the Scottish council to the king, largely signed even by those who in the for-
mer session had been in opposition, gives this testimony : — " Your Majesties
commissioner, the Earl of Melvill, hath manadged that great trust reposed
in him with much dexteritie and dilligence. Ther was never greater freedom
in parliament or councill in ther reasonings and resolutiones, and yett with-
out giveing offence or irritation to any. He hath brought matters calmely
to a good issue, and wee hope the settlements made shall be manadged in
the course of the government with such moderatione that your reigne shall
be comfortable to your subjects, and without trouble to your Majestie." 3
A week or two later, a representative body of ministers wrote in similar
terms to the king, thanking him for, inter alia, the establishment of Pres-
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, - Ibid. vol. ix. pp. Ill, 133, 196, 198.
vol. ix. App. p. 88. 3 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 531.
melville's view of his position. 217
byterianism by the ministry of the Earl of Melville, " to whose wise and
steddie conduct, and faithfull and diligent management," they chiefly ascribe
their " happy setlement." 1
This result, however, was brought about under great difficulties. Sir
John Dalrymple, in his " Memoirs of Great Britain and Ireland," says that
Lord Melville as commissioner, and Lord Stair, president of the court of ses-
sion, alarmed by junction of the country and Jacobite parties, hastened to get
every bill passed which was likely to please the people, even though at the
expense of the Crown, while the Master of Stair induced the country party to
separate from the Jacobites, and they broke away from Montgomerie, Eoss,
and Aunandale.2 This statement is not inconsistent with Melville's own
account of the matter, but it does not cover the whole ground, nor reveal all
the perplexities which beset Melville in his post as commissioner. As
already indicated, the country party had been partly gained ere Melville
was formally appointed, while the Jacobite tendencies of Eoss and the others
were not clearly known until a month after parliament began its work,
or even later. These hindrances to progress were, therefore, less formidable
than might otherwise have been the case.
Before commenting on the plot which was associated with the names of
Montgomerie and his accomplices, and which was meant to wreck both the
government and the nation, Melville's own statement of his position, as
given in a letter to an unknown correspondent, probably Monsieur d'Alonne,
the queen's secretary, may here be quoted. He begins by stating his unwill-
ingness, except for the king's service, to undertake the work : — " I did forsee
the dangers of such a station thogh in a more setled tyme, and the difficulties
I was like to meet with.3 ... I am farr from thinking either the difficulties
or danger over, thogh this may be thought malancholy, for this nation is in
a strange unsettled condition, more than can be weell apprehended by those
at a distance." The earl then refers at some length to the plot, and certain
discoveries and information regarding it, and continues : — " I know I may be
1 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 534. lie had been aided "better nor I or any other
2 Dalrymple's Memoirs, vol. i. p. 127. could rationally propose, or many did think,"
3 At this point the earl expresses thankful- evidently in allusion to the agreement with
ness that, even before he undertook the office, Hume and Forbes, and their party.
VOL. I. 2 E
218 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
blamed that I have not don more to crush this design sooner, and to secure
persons concerned, but I can sufficientlie Justine myself, and I am unwilling
to lay the blame elsewhere. ... I have had possibly the difficultest ghame
to play since I left you that ever a subject in Brittain had these hundreds of
years, a strong combination of many severall interests on the one side, many
both great, active, and dilligent men amongst them, and a weake, disapointed,
and abused people on the other; an army without pay and many of them
very ill appointed ; many both insufficient and scarce to be trusted officers
and ready to mutiny ; the country like to doe the same, partly through the
oppression of the souldiers, and partly through other discontents, and the
jealousies cunning and malicious men have made their work to raise in them ;
a general who would follow no councell, who has no comprehension of affairs,
and with whom I could not use that freedom was necessary upon such an
exigent, though he be a very honest man himselfe, because he is influenced
and easily abused by others, and enteted with what he once takes a resolu-
tion of; no money in the exchequer to defray any necessary expense." Lord
Melville here refers to the ill-paid and starving condition of particular
regiments, and adds : " So you may easily judge how hard a taske I have,
then an open enemie in armes wasting the country, and aboundance of secrett
ones in our bosomes, which I fear is much more."
Such, at least in Melville's view, were the difficulties of his position, but
he met them with fortitude, and by his steady loyalty and cautious but
firm statesmanship guided matters to a successful issue, and as will be seen,
won praise even from his opponents. The principal of these, since Hume
and Forbes had been won over, were the Earl of Annandale, Lord Eoss, and
Sir James Montgomerie of Skelmorlie. Montgomerie had hoped to be
appointed secretary of state, while Lord Eoss desired the office of president
of session. They had joined with the opposition in the first session of par-
liament, and Montgomerie at least bore the character of a very strict presby-
terian. As already stated, they had endeavoured to present a petition to
King William, but this gave offence, and they lost the king's favour. Seeing
this, Sir James Montgomerie, whose plans were already formed, proposed
offering their services to the exiled King James. This was done by cor-
respondence, but the conspirators, believing their party, that is, the party in
JACOBITE PLOT FRUSTRATED BY MELVILLE. 219
opposition, to be the majority in the Scottish parliament, hoped to achieve
their end by constitutional means, by forcing King William to dissolve par-
liament, expecting that when a new one was summoned they would obtain
a majority favourable to the return of King James.
Such were their intentions, and on returning to Scotland they put their
schemes into operation. Pretending still to belong to the country party, who
only objected to certain measures, they yet joined with the Jacobites in their
policy of obstruction. Every endeavour was made to induce the Jacobites to
take the oaths, so that from their numbers on the one hand, and on the other
a pretended zeal for the liberty of the subject, which gained many of the
country party, the conspirators had great hopes of success. But by their
own admission their plans were wholly frustrated, chiefly by the influence of
the Earl of Melville. Sir James Montgomerie, who was the originator of the
plot and a shrewd observer, reported to King James in 1693 on the state of
political parties, and thus referred to Melville. " For myself I did indeed
attribute all that was called his [Melville's] witt to his warrienes and
timorous disposition till his carriage in parliament 1690, tho both I and
others took wayes both at that time and before to affright him, besides our
endeavours to make things heavie to him, yet all would not doe, and [he]
became successfull beyond expectation. But much of this might proceed
from good luck more than good guyding, tho it must be acknowledged he
managed with more closenes, steadienes, and firmnes then we did imagine,
and was luckie in his discoveries, which broak all measures." 1 This, in a
paper which was specially written to depreciate Melville's statesmanship, is
high praise, and we have from another conspirator testimony to the same
effect. The Earl of Annandale stated in his confession that they were
speedily disappointed of their success, for the parliament had sat only a few
days, when they plainly saw that the " dissenters " or opposition country
party had got " such a confidance in the Earle of Melvill's sinceritie, both for
the interest of the king and libertie of the people, and seeing us openly apeir
with thos they concluded Jacobits they left us almost in evrie vott, so that
the Jacobits fynding that grat inconveniances might aryse to them from so
publick ane apeirance against the interest of the king and settehnent of the
1 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 229, 230.
220 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
nation, they told us plainlie they wold leave us, and concur in the monay bill,
which was the chiff thing that from the begining we wer all resolved to
oppose. Thus the mesur of getting the parliament dissolved being brook, we
brook amongst ourselves, and evrie on looked to ther own saiftie." 1
This they did by each conspirator doing his best to betray the others, or at
least to make terms for himself from the very man whose administration they
had plotted to frustrate. The act granting supply was passed on 7th June
1690, but the intended desertion of the Jacobite party must have been
known to the conspirators some time previously, as on 30th May an anony-
mous letter was addressed to Melville giving a brief account of the origin of
the plot, and also of a scheme for King James landing in Scotland and Eng-
land with a considerable force, and a reserve of money and arms. The names
of the chief conspirators were given, and those whom they had tried to gain,
and also of those who were believed incorruptible, among whom was Melville
himself. Sir James Montgomerie has been accused of thus seeking safety at
the expense of his colleagues, but it is doubtful if he were the original
revealer of the plot. Lord Melville does not appear to have acted at
once upon the information furnished to him, but on 23d June he wrote to
Queen Mary, the king being in Ireland, referring to the bearer of the letter,
probably Lord Eoss, as one who was willing to make disclosures on certain
conditions. It is unnecessary to follow the history of the affair at this point,
as the scene of action was transferred to London. Suffice it to say that
Eoss, Annandale, and Montgomerie were each examined by Queen Mary in
person or by her order, and each made a statement more or less incriminating,
though no one was tried for the affair. Mr. Carstares and Lord Melville
had promised indemnity to two of the conspirators, Eoss and Montgomerie,
hoping that by their confessions the plot in all its ramifications might be
fully disclosed. Melville was afterwards strongly censured by Sir William
Lockhart, then solicitor-general, for, as the latter alleged, taking Sir James
Montgomerie into his friendship or reconciling him to the king's favour,
but the earl had already explained the reason of his dealings with Sir James
to the queen herself, and showed her that he had authority from the king
for what he did. Sir James, however, seems to have tried to play Melville
1 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 508 ; cf. Dalrymple's Memoirs, vol. iii. App. ii. p. 101, etc.
NEGOTIATIONS WITH THE HIGHLANDERS, 1690. 221
false, and the pardon which had been offered to him was withdrawn, while
he narrowly escaped imprisonment in the Tower by a flight to the Continent.1
One other incident of the earl's career as commissioner may be noticed, as
it led to tragical consequences, although for these he was in no way respon-
sible. Eeference has already been made to Lord Melville's opinion about the
Highlands and their pacification, and to the efforts to that end proposed to be
made through Viscount Tarbat and General Mackay. These appear to have
failed, and on 20th March 1690, after Melville's appointment, King William
wrote him that it would be necessary to endeavour to gain Lord Breadalbane,
and if possible detach him from the party of the rebels ; for which service his
Majesty offered a considerable sum. In pursuance of this Melville granted
a warrant to the Earl of Breadalbane empowering him to treat and correspond
with the Highland chiefs with the view of their submission and obedience to
the government.2 This warrant was dated 24th April, and was to remain in
force only until the 20th of May. If any negotiations took place at this time
they were not successful, but Breadalbane's position led to his being appointed
in the following year, when Sir John Dalrymple was secretary, and one result
was the massacre of Glencoe.
In regard to Breadalbane's negotiations, Lord Melville, in his own vindi-
cation addressed to the king, expresses himself to the effect that though it
was thought proper to gain if possible by money some of the chief High-
landers, and that it was the king's interest to have as many of the Highland
superiorities in his own hand as could fairly be purchased without doing-
violence to any particular person, yet, the earl adds, " I must take the bold-
ness also to say that I did and doe think that the obligeing of the heads of the
clanns to give good security for the peaceable behaviour of their dependants
would have been a surer foundation of peace amongst men who can be tied
by no faith, and this was that the law did allow. I doe not see, indeed, any
great prejudice to the publick interest by Broadalbans articles in so fare as
they relate to particular persons, nor doe I take upon me to condemn the
granting of an indemnity to the Highlanders for their rebellion against your
Majesty's government ; but I durst never have advised the freeing of them
from all obligation to make satisfaction for the depredations and robberries
1 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 480, 4S2, 499, 515, 520. "- Ibid. pp. 421, 429.
222 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
comitted by them against your Majesty's best subjects, this being the thing
which is grievous to your Majesty's faithful servants." The earl adds, " As
for the affronts which some did putt upon me in the management of that and
other businesses, tho I could not but be sensible of them, yet respect to your
Majesty's service did make me burie in silence my resentments, though I
regrated more upon a nationall account than my own." l
Two acts passed by the parliament of 1690 were in favour of the Earl of
Melville himself — the first rescinding the forfeiture of his estates, and the
second formally dissolving the estates from the crown, to be enjoyed by him-
self and his heirs.2 The second act was passed on 2 2d July, the last day of
the session, and the parliament was adjourned to 3d September, when it
again met for a short session under Lord Melville as commissioner. He
remained in Scotland during the interval between the sessions, his time being
chiefly devoted to correspondence about the Montgomerie plot and in dealing
with the Highlands. When the third session of parliament closed, Melville
returned to London, where he arrived on the 7th of October 1690.
A few days later he wrote to the Earl of Crawford, like himself a devoted
presbyterian, about the arrangements for the first general assembly of the
re-established Church of Scotland, which had been appointed to meet on
16th October. He forwarded a commission in favour of Lord Carmichael
as the royal representative, and a letter from the king to the assembly.
Melville was very anxious that the labours of the assembly should be agree-
able to the king and honourable to the church. He expressed a wish that
the meeting had been deferred for six months, and regretted the dangers
threatening presbyterianism from misrepresentation and other causes. "There
is nothing now," he says, " but the greatest sobrietie and moderation imagin-
able to be used, unless men will hazard the overturning of all, and
take this as earnest and not as imaginations and fears only ; and it would
be my opinion that this ensueing assembly should medle with nothing
at this time, but what is verie clear will give no occasion of division
amongst themselves, nor advantage to these who have no good will to
them, and are but watching for their halting ; and they may endeavour to
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 223.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. pp. 181, 22S.
THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY OF 1690. 223
stop their enemies mouths by their moderation ; and I wish they might
adjurn after a few dayes till some more convenient time, when heats and
mistakes may be more over, and people calmly to see their own true intrest,
and the calumnies that men are asperst with and too much believed, removed
and seen to be false, and the church may have a fuller representative." Mel-
ville also urged upon Lord Crawford the necessity of advising his friends to
moderation, which he willingly promised, and the secretary also wrote to
several of the leading ministers appealing to them to be moderate in their
conduct and counsels, and warning them of the danger of precipitancy or
indiscreet zeal in giving their enemies a triumph over them.1
In another letter addressed to the assembly, Melville conveys the king's
commands and wishes to the same effect. He reminds them that the
reformed religion had always been dear to the king, who assures them that
nothing shall be wanting on his part to make it prosper in Scotland. " He
doubts not of your containuing firm in your dutie to him, and he allows me
to assure you that in your doeing so and keeping in your judicatoures within
the bounds of your propper work, without concerning yourselves in things
alien from you, that he will preserve you in the peaceable possession and
christian excersise of what he haith graciously granted ; but he expects that
in your manadgement you will have a respect to his affairs els where as well
as amongst yourselves, and that a regard to the publick interest and common
good of his kingdoms will weigh more with you then any particular consider-
ations ; this is what his Majestie haith commanded me to give in return for
your address."2 These advices were taken by the assembly, and at its close
the most favourable accounts of its proceedings were transmitted to the king
and Lord Melville.
Soon after this Melville's administration as sole secretary for Scotland
came to an end. According to some, he lost the confidence of the king ; and
though he continued to act as principal secretary for some time longer, yet in
the end of 1690 Sir John Dalrymple was conjoined with him, and accom-
1 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 540-544. Carstares, who supported Melville in his
It may be added that the original drafts of ecclesiastical policy.
these letters, preserved in the Melville Char- 2 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 555 ; 24th
ter-chest, are in the handwriting of Mr. October 1690.
224 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
panied the king to Flanders. Premonitions of the coming change occur in
one or two letters addressed to Lord Melville at this time. His friend, Lord
Crawford, writing regarding the close of the general assembly and the part he
had taken in it, states that what he had done was not only out of friendship
to Melville, but because of a full conviction that if he should be rendered
" uneasie " in Ms present post, " and upon that weary of it, the presbiterian
interest, and, in consequence, the king's, in this nation will go near to ruine." 1
This is the first indication that Melville was beginning to find his post
unstable, but a few weeks later Crawford writes — " ... I have ever
looked on your lordship as a true friend to your master, your nation, church.
. . . You must needs give me charity that I have not been an unconcerned
spectator while your lordship of late hes had your tossings above and bluster-
ing at you from all airths. It is not much that I can signify, yet I have used
what influence 1 had here and ells where for your support and weakening the
credit of your adversaries." 2
The causes which led to Melville's finally vacating the office of secretary
of state have been variously stated by historians, but they are nowhere clearly
revealed by Melville himself, though he has left several papers dealing with
his own administration. Bishop Burnet states that Lord Melville lost credit
with the king by exceeding his instructions as commissioner, but this asser-
tion has been examined and refuted by a recent writer, who at the same
time confesses his inability to throw light on the subject.3 He, however,
accepts as the most plausible solution a theory put forward by the English
historian, Balph, who says that " how much soever Lord Melville has suffered
from the imputations of his countryman, Burnet, it must be acknowledged
that he took the only course which the exigencies of the times would admit
of, to provide for the security of the government ;" while in another place it
is suggested rather than affirmed that the king displaced Melville as a peace-
offering to the English Church, and in pursuance of his policy to keep all
parties dependent upon him.4 Macaulay adopts Burnet's view, but modifies
1 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 571; 15tb 3 Mr. Leslie Melville in preface to Leven
November 1690. and Melville Papers.
4 Ibid. p. xx. et seq. ; of. Ralph's History
2 Ibid. p. 580; 4th December 1690. of England, vol. ii. pp. 212, 332.
REASONS OF HIS RETIREMENT. 225
it by asserting that Melville was set aside because he did not carry out the
king's desire for toleration to the episcopalian dissenters. He also accepts
and enlarges Ealph's theory by affirming that this alleged want of toleration
raised a clamour in England which the king was fain to gratify by depriving
Melville of his position.1
Ealph, however, so far as he indicates any particular cause of Melville's
being set aside, refers it entirely to the king and the changes of his policy.
A recent author who touches on the subject suggests a reason also based on
the exigencies of politics altogether apart from the question of church
government, namely, that King William, being a shrewd judge of ahility
and of the necessities of state, saw that a firm hand and an able head were
requisite at this juncture, and that Melville's moderate talents, combined with
honesty of purpose, could not compensate for want of such firmness and
ability.2
Iu the absence of any authoritative statement on the point it is pro-
bable that no one reason can be assigned for Melville's retirement, but that
all the causes stated, except the one alleged by Burnet, combined to produce
that result. To these may be added, first, an element personal to the earl
himself, arising out of his own character and disposition, and secondly, the
adverse influence of the Master of Stair, who for some undefined reason had
hecome hostile, probably because he leaned to episcopacy, while Melville was
strictly presbyterian. In collecting the contemporary evidence bearing on
his change of position, precedence may be given to a remark of his own
made while still acting as commissioner, contained in his letter to Monsieur
d'Alonne about June 1690, formerly cited. In regard to what he believed
to have been plots in England against the government, he writes that he had
long been apprehensive that " the king was betrayed hy some, when I was
with you, when I observed some methodes taken and some measures his
Majestie was put upon, and I was so bold as to tell him I thought so then,
and to wreat to him oftner than once that it was still my opinion. I fancy
if I had been believed and employed, I could have put his Majestie on the
way of discovering, and the persons, himself; but I know I had many, both
1 Macavday's History of England, vol. iv. 2 Memoirs of Viscount Stair, by ^Eneas
pp. 1S6, 187. G. Mackay, advocate, p. 244.
VOL. I. 2 F
226 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
with you and my own countrymen, to misrepresent me, some upon one
account and some upon another, and I have the misfortune to be one of
unpolished temper, and not shapen for a court, being too plain and too rough,
that might make what I said have the less impression." At another part of
the letter he says, " Though I acknowledge the king has given me as much
trust as [is] fitt for a servant to have, yett [he] has not put me in that
capacity to serve him in this conjuncture as the necessity of his affairs
requires." 1 Here it will be seen that, even before Melville became commis-
sioner, and although the king considered him, and rightly, a faithful servant,
his very faithfulness, and a certain bluntness of manner, seemed to have
caused a friction between him and his master.
The praises bestowed upon Melville's administration have been already
stated, and all his contemporaries acknowledged his prudence and honesty,
but when the special work for which his talents were best fitted was done, it
was only natural that the king should look to others who might better carry
out other parts of his policy. That the king did do so is indicated by advices
from Lord Tarbat, given in letters to Melville. Thus in one place he writes : —
" We heare so various reports from what 's said and thought at court, that
albeit some of them be unpleasant enough, yett I have this much satisfaction
that I cannot trust them, because my Lord Eaith tells me they are not true.
. . . But lett me in the old straine tell that your too much addiction to on
party cannot but be dangerous, soone or syne ; and especially when (as I
think) they are not worth all that ; not that I think they, as being most
ingadged against the king's enimies, are very sure to him and you, but if they
gett more be farr as [than] there suitable proportion of place and favour, they
are selfish and no good nor just freends, if they think that all beside them,
and many more nor they, are to be cast of to please them only." Lord
Tarbat further remarks that it is not fit for the king to be head of a party,
nor for an officer so high in station as Melville to be of a party, and proceeds
to condemn the doings of the ecclesiastical party, foreshadowing the troubles
of nonconformists.2 This letter is clearly directed against Melville's attach-
ment to the Presbyterians, and indicates the feeling of Episcopalians in
1 Copy letter in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 558 ; 30th October 1690.
IS APPOINTED LORD PRIVY SEAL. 227
Scotland. The general assembly was then sitting, which accounts for the
reference to ecclesiastics whose " moderation " Lord Tarbat derides. In a
later letter, evidently in answer to an expostulation from Melville, Tarbat
says : " I know I can be mistaken, and it is not impossible but we both may ;
yett I still think it is safer erring on the gentle and comprehensive then on
the narrow exclusive side. I doe not beleeve the tenth of our reports, but I
know the universality of our murmurs ; and it is impossible that the negative
moderation (viz., to kill slowly and with smoother words), and the reforming of
churches by Earl Angus' regiment and such others, can produce good effects."1
Lord Tarbat's letters are from the view of a politician only, but they show
that Melville's presbyterianism was not agreeable to many, who did not fail
to misrepresent him, and to raise clamours against his ecclesiastical policy.
These may have had some effect with the king ; but it is probable that his
Majesty's visit to the Continent, which took place in the beginning of 1691,
was what really led to his conjoining Dalrymple with Melville. William was
then cementing his great alliance with the continental powers in opposition
to France, and no doubt felt the need of a man of younger years and more
versatile talents to be with him, who was also familiar with Scottish affairs.
Melville does not appear to have submitted meekly to being thus set aside,
though he nominally held the principal place. In December 1690 Tarbat
wrote : — " . . . Some reports come which I hope will prove as false as former
ones of that nature ; but whatever fall, . . . take no petts. Eemember your
king, your country, your freends." Later he writes : — " My lord, I can but
conjecture at things by what you writt ; but this I will still say, that subjects
ought to capitulat with there soveraigne as to offices and government on the
king's tearmes. My dear lord, take no pett, but make the best of what
occurrs; the king will soon find who are his best servants, and you can nether
be so usefull to him, your freends, or yourself when you are out as when in."2
The date of Lord Melville's appointment as lord privy seal is 29th
December 1691, but it was not presented for registration in the Scottish
records till June 1692.3 Soon after it was made, there were other changes in
1 Leven and Melville Papers, p. 571 ; 14th November 1690.
2 Ibid. pp. 587, 590 ; 19th and 30th December 1690.
3 Original in Melville Charter-chest.
228 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
the Scottish administration, and it is apparently to these that Lord Melville
refers in his vindication addressed to the king, prohahly about this date,
where he says : — " As to such whom it may be fit to emploey in the manage-
ment of publick affairs in your kingdom of Scotland, I must confess that I
cannot well perceive the necessity of imploying at present any that are
jealoused by those that have been all along faithfull to your interest, the
ballance being too much already upon that side ; and the clamours that have
been made of your councill haveing been either groundlesse, or proceeding
only from the opposition that was made to the granting of unseasonable
favors to such as were known enemies to your interest. Yet seing important
reasons, which it were presumption in me to enquire into, doe make your
Majesty think it fitt to emploey some such, it is my humble opinion that
those who are least obnoxious to your people, and have never been active
against your government, may be pitched upon, and who I take to be such I
shall give my sentiments, without prejudice against any man, whenever your
Majesty shall think fitt to putt the question to me." 1 Melville concludes
his paper with the words, " Thus, sir, I have taken the boldness to give your
Majesty an short but true account of my management, and also to offer my
advice as to what I humbly judge may be for your service." It would
appear from this, that although Melville accepted a less important office, he still
believed himself to have the regard, if not the full confidence, of the king.
The notices of Lord Melville during the year 1692, even in the family
papers, are very meagre, and nothing is known of his public life, except that
he appears to have confined himself to the duties of his new office and taken
little part in public affairs. In a draft letter, written by himself to a cor-
respondent, whose name has not been ascertained, he states incidentally that
he had been appointed one of the Scottish commissioners of admiralty. In
this letter, which is not dated, but which was probably written in the end of
the year 1693, Lord Melville writes: — "Your lordship knowes the changes I
have met with since I was imployed in the king's service, of which I doe
not in the least complain, for his Majestie may serve himselfe of whom and
in what capacitie he employs any as he pleases, but this hath given my ill-
wishers advantage to prejudice me in my private concerns. I may say I had
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 224.
MISREPRESENTATIONS MADE AGAINST HIM. 229
as few [ill-wishers] as any Scotsman befor I engadged in his Majestie's
service, and it was my zeale for and faithfulnes in it procured me these, for
I was for packing with non, though I have been solicited] eneugh by al
parties that hath been since the revolution, because I see much private
design, to say no worse, amongst too many. This is what has occasioned so
many of different interests take many methodes to have me misrepresented
to my master, and tho my particular (as every one is ready to doe) may
affect me, yett I am the more [sic] because so many takes notice of what I
have and doe meet with, and wonder what may be the reason, or thinke I
have committed some crime, or have behaved my selfe ill in the station
I have enjoyed. If the king have receaved any badd impressions of me I
should be glade to know it, that I might endeavour to remove them and to
vindicate my selfe in what I may be blamed for, which I thinke I am
sufficiently able to doe ; for if I have failed in any thing it hath proceeded
for want of better understandeing, and not either from negligence or unfaith-
fulness. You know the last change I underwent, I did submitte to it upon
your desire and advice ; I doe not in the least thinke either the king or your
lordship designed me any prejudice by it, for the king might have laid me
aside altogether, and I was not to complaine. I never sought publick
employment, but often in my time I have shuned it. I did offer my service
to the king in a time when I knew not whom to recomend ; and as I served
alwaies faithfully, so while I had his countenance I served him successfully,
notwithstanding of all the opposition I had to graple with, which possiblie
was the greatest ever any Scots minister of state mett with. The advan-
tages of the one place more than the other, wer my sallary payed, ar not
considerable or what I value ; nor doe I at all grudge the person's [John-
stone] getteing my former employment ; I have a kindness and respect for
him, but this employment the king hath pleased confer on me in some respect
is a stepe of advance in haveing the door." Lord Melville then refers to his
connection with the court of admiralty and an affront put on him there, as
also to the fact that he had not been made, as was usual in the case of former
lords privy seal, one of the recently appointed extraordinary lords of session,
and he details other grievances.1
1 Draft letter in Melville Charter-chest.
230 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
That Melville was not entirely without justification in complaining of the
misrepresentations and affronts to which he was subjected appears from a
statement by Sir James Montgomerie of Skelmorlie, prepared for the exiled
King James as to the state of parties in Scotland. The full text of this
paper, from a revised copy in the Melville charter-chest, will be found in
another volume of this work,1 and only those sentences which relate to Mel-
ville at this period may be quoted here. Sir James, after narrating the
failure of the former plot, states that at that time they hoped to misrepresent
and accuse Melville. This was defeated, but at the date of writing — about
1693 — he reports more hopefully in favour of a Jacobite rising in Scotland.
Many had given him assurances, the most faithful regiments, those of Angus
and Leven, were out of the country, and the people were afraid of the
soldiers now among them,2 so that " no great opposition was to be expected
from any within the country, they wanting a head in Avhoni to concenter, and
its rationall to conjecture that Melville will not medle much when he may be
convinced that he cannot now doe it to any purpose, and cannot but be con-
vinced of the weaknes and fooly of the pairty, especiallie being in some
manner laid aside and not trusted as formerly. Besides, there will not be
wanting endeavours for getting him and his sones out of their employments,
which, if it take effect, may have severall consequences."
Sir James proceeds to say that correspondence may now be carried on
more safely, " for there was now no such prying into things as when Melville
was with the king and trusted by him." Again, " It was a good step for
your interest when Melville was gott removed from him [King William], and
if his sones or any of them could be gott removed from their employments it
would be ane other good one . . . the children are alse biggott as the
father, whom no man can gaine but to that which he himselff thinks to be
right. It 's good he is of so uncomplacent a humor, else he might have had
more interest with his king still then he hes." 3 This is followed by the
1 Vol. iii. pp. 225-233. was not displeased at being set aside. " He
2 This statement is corroborated by papers thinks it was greatly his advantage, being of
in Melville's own handwriting. a temper that never courted publick imploy-
3 As a commentary on this, a paper in the ment. . . . You know the man and his man-
Melville Charter-chest, also written about ner, and of how unpolished a temper he is,
1G93, in defence of Melville, states that he and that old sparrows are ill to tame."
LORD TARBAT'S OPINION OF HIM. 231
paragraph disparaging Melville's character for wisdom, but admitting the
success of his administration, which has already been referred to and partly
cited. Sir James adds, " But grant he were so wise a man . . . your
Majestie [King James] needs not apprehend him much — for gained he cannot
be ; neither need you be anxious about it, for if he be wise he will never
think it his interest to goe burn his fingers again and expose himselff to no
purpose ; for in the station he is in, as he is yoaked he cannot doe much, for
neither of the secretaries [the Master of Stair and Mr. Johnstone] have any
kindness for him, but rather are jealous, and will doe all they can to keep the
king from ever employing him further than at present." 1
These remarks also suggest that Melville's personal character contributed
somewhat to his removal from high office. But we have from another source
further testimony as to the treatment of Melville, which distinctly points
out the Master of Stair as his political opponent, and the person who
weakened his influence in the government. In May 1695 Lord Tarbat wrote
to Mr. Carstares, referring in a somewhat enigmatical way to his own " adver-
sars," and stating he is quite willing to give up office to serve the king.
He then adds, " I am afraid this will not cure the [party] distemper, yet
it 's all I can contribute to it. But when their heat cannot bear with the
Earl Melville's family and with you, to whom they owe, under the king,
all the power they have, I can little wonder of their fretting at me ; but
I hope their folly will not frighten the king from so. faithful servants, nor
you from giving him counsel for their sakes, whose fire will hurry to self-
prejudice, if not stopt by prudence." 2 A few weeks later Lord Tarbat writes
again that though he does not pretend to bigotry, yet he desires a settled
church, and to this end — apparently in view of a general assembly — he
thinks it the king's and church's interest to have a firm yet moderate Pres-
byterian, one above suspicion with the church, while able to stop violent
fury. He then proceeds : — " Another thing is of importance in my judge-
ment, and that is, since the interest of the moderate party is much weakened
by what was done to the Earl of Melvill, which renders him less able to do
effectual service, it might be useful to the king and country, if by some
1 Vol. iii. pp. 227-230.
- Letter, 16th May 1696, Carstares State Papers, etc., p. 229.
232 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
demonstration of favour, others may be incouraged to follow his directions,
which would put many in a right road who goes wrong." 1
Another letter is more explicit. Lord Tarbat writes : — "The methods of
some men and their heats you (though you know us well) cannot conceive,
nor can the sad consequences be safely exprest. ... It 's certain, if the pres-
byterian party would moderate their designs, and were they managed by wise
men, they are sure to the king and against his enemies ; but as the Master
of Stair may repent his successe against the Earl of Melvill, so may others,
for he had the best founded interest with that party, and, if he had not been
loaded with marks of disgrace, he had led that party to the king's mind ; but
being put from the secretar's office — and without an exoneration either in
that office or in the commissioner's, which was never refused to any — the
preferring his juniors in presiding in councel and parliament ; the taking
his Sonne's regiment from him, and his sonne left out of the commission for
auditing of accompts ; forcing a deputy on his sonne in the castle, and all
who come down from court making it their work to lessen him. But I do
not see a probable way for the king to manage the true presbyterian party
but by his [Melville's] family ; and if they were countenanced by the king
they could doe more by their finger than others can doe with both their
hands ; yea, altho he be thus lessened, the body of the presbyterians have
more kindness for him than for all the other officers of state. The hot
party who attackt him rudely enough at first, and spoke loudly of it, found
the respect of the presbyterians so strong for him that now they court him,
whilst others see that he moderates many ; in spite of the heats they all
desire union with him. But he would be less useful were he plunged in a
party. In short, if this confusion and wrong steps be retrievable, I see not so
fixt a base to draw up on as him and his family, for Lord Piaith is certainly
one of the sharpest, most judicious, diligentest in the nation. ... I wish
earnestly that the king may put Earl Melvill and his children under such
marks of his favour as may strengthen them to sett right what is wrong. . . .
So go about, sir, consider our nation and where the strength of it lies, and
then consider our present state and what comes next, and judge if wit and
discretion be not necessar. Then view our trustee governors, and take or
1 llth June 1C95, Carstares State Papers, p. 231.
ME. OARSTARES FRIENDSHIP. 233
offer what measure you judge fit. I wish the lord-keeper Sunimars [Somers]
and Earl Melvill did correspond, and that the king and E [arl] P[ortland]
would write kindly to him [Melville], for he got discouraging blows ; and
you know his reserved temper and unwillingness to medle ; but he is ane ill
man if he refuse when he is so necessar." 1
It is clear, therefore, that, in the opinion of shrewd observers, Melville
had, since his deposition from the office of secretary, gone on faithfully dis-
charging the lesser duties intrusted to him, in spite of opposition and mis-
representation, and was still a considerable power in the state. There was
one person whose friendship had never failed him — the correspondent to whom
Tarbat writes so freely — Mr. Carstares, then one of the royal chaplains. Even
in 1694, when Melville was comparatively in disgrace, Carstares writes —
"... Eor my part I am as much your lordship's friend and servant as ever,
and I doe believe many doe take me to be more so then I am in a capacitie
effectualie to testifie that I am ; but I hope differences amongst those that I
have the honour to have for my friends shall not alter my respect to them,
nor influence me to act anything that shall be unjust, ingrate, or unkind." 2
This last sentence is somewhat explained by the terms of an anonymous letter,
dated a few months later. The writer says — " A servant of yours being alone
with Mr. C[arstares] tooke occasion to discourse concerning M[elville] and
his son, regrating that iealousies betwixt others and them did weaken the
publick interest, and pleaded as what ane advantage it would be to have love
and harmony among all those who sincerly love ecclesiastick and civill
establishments ; so how proper for him who had access to, and interest with,
all the great folk to endeavour the removing of mistakes ; yea, particularly
proposed that he might use what means he could to prevent any alterations
as to places which Melville or his sons do now enioy, but that matters might
continue as now they are untill other persons be in Scotland, when, by being
sometimes together, matters may be better concerted, and means for begetting
a right understanding more like to prove effectuall. He frankly granted the
reasonableness of what was said, and professed a great readyness to do what
he could ; but after all, I know one who wisheth Melville were by his master,
1 Letter, 25th June 1695, Carstares State 2 Letter, 27th August 1694, in Melville
Papers, etc., p. 233. Charter-chest.
VOL. I. 2 Q
234 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND EIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
because sight of friends doth readily renew remembrance of services which
sometimes are lesse minded in absence, especially if there be any to call the
services small. But this is too tender a point for my pen ; onely passion to
serve where singularly oblidged doth constrain to this hint. I beg pardon if
I have said too much. Adieu!" 1 This letter suggests that Melville's troubles
were owing partly to local jealousies, and partly to the fact that his want of
access to the royal person was unfavourable to his interests.
King William, however, was not unmindful of his old servant, and later
on, in the same year, Mr. Carstares was enabled to write to his friend in terms
which indicated a more open manifestation of the king's confidence than
Melville had lately enjoyed. The Master of Stair's political influence
suddenly ceased in that year in consequence of the parliamentary report upon
the massacre of Glencoe, and writing in July 1695, at a date when the terms
of the report were probably known to King William, though not formally
passed, Carstares says he is desired " to lett your lordship know that your
carriage in this parliament is acceptable here. I hear the 3000 lib. sterling
businesse is to be brought into the parliament, but if it be I have reason to
think it will not turn to your disadvantage, but upon the contrarie." A few
days later he repeats the statement about Melville's conduct, and adds, " I
am heartilie your lordship's. I shall only add one thing more, that your
reasons which your lordship gives for your carriage in parliament are solid
and satisfieing." 2 What Carstares refers to can only be conjectured, but
there are some points, especially his relations to the Dalrymples, on which
we have some information of interest. Among other things we are told that
in a matter affecting Viscount Stair, the earl, though under no great obliga-
tions to that family, was too generous to assist the proceedings against the
old man ; also that when the parliament voted for imprisoning Breadalbane,
Melville refused to join the vote, because he thought the king ought to be
consulted before such summary procedure was taken. In regard to the
report on the Glencoe massacre, although Melville "abhorred that action
alwise, as he doeth still," yet as the vote against the Master of Stair was not
stated in a way he thought reasonable, he refused to vote. As he had the
1 Letter, unsigned and not addressed, 9th 4i Letters, July 1st and July 4th, 1G95, in
February 1695, in Melville Charter-chest. Melville Charter-chest.
OFFERED THE PRESIDENCY OF THE PRIVY COUNCIL. 235
second vote in the house many followed his example, which was afterwards
charged against him, but the paper adds that he was always " for solid, sober,
and disinterested measures, and never a lover of Jehu-like dryving which he
never see have a good issue." x
The £3000 referred to by Mr. Carstares was a sum of money contained
in a bond granted in 1690 by the town of Edinburgh to the Treasury, which
was afterwards assigned to Melville. In the end of June 1695 the town
petitioned parliament that as the sum had been granted as a gratuity, or at
least to obtain an act which was not carried, the bond should be declared
null and void. The parliament remitted the matter to the court of session
to be dealt with by ordinary legal process.2 The dispute was only settled in
1698, when the king stated in Melville's favour that the gratuity was given
by his full consent, and the money was paid. The parliament of 1695
also granted to Melville the right of holding two fairs yearly, in May and
October, on his lands of Letham, near Monimail.3
In October of the same year, Lord Melville received a letter from Mr.
Carstares, intimating that it would not be displeasing to the king if he came
to London; and two days later he virtually repeats the statement, and
expresses his pleasure that Lord Leven is coming also, concluding with
renewed assurances of friendship. These verbal compliments were enhanced
some months later by a more substantial mark of confidence. In the fol-
lowing May, John, Lord Murray, afterwards Earl of Tullibardine, Dalrymple's
successor as secretary of state, wrote a friendly letter to Lord Melville
informing him of proposed changes in the government, and offering him, by
the king's desire, the post of president of the privy council. Sir James
Ogilvie, the under secretary, wrote to the same effect, adding : " I doubt not
your lordship will use your endeavours to make good agreement amongst
al the king intrusts in the government. Wee can neaver expect ane ful
setelment in the kingdom whilst thos imployed in the publict doe not
1 Anonymous paper, Ibid. It is written in the subject of the Dalrymples, the paper
the form of a letter to some one at Court, touches on other matters, but adds nothing
but is only a fragment, and undated. It re- to what is known of Lord Melville,
lates to the session of 1695, and defends - Acts of the Parliament of Scotland,
Melville from various misrepresentations, vol. ix. pp. 408-410.
alleged to be made against him. Besides 3 Ibid. p. 502.
236 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
agree." 1 When Lord Murray's letter reached Lord Melville he was at his
country seat of Moniruail, whence he wrote thanking Lord Murray for the offer
of so honourable a post, but expressing himself averse to making changes.2
He wrote in the same strain to Secretary Ogilvie.3 His friend, Mr. Carstares,
wrote that the proposal was made with a sincere regard for Melville himself
and for the advantage of the king's service ; also, that it was considered an
office more fit for one of Lord Melville's years and experience than for a
young man.4 Notwithstanding this, however, Melville continued for some
time steadily to decline the office, but in the end accepted. It is probable
that he was finally induced to take office by a letter from the Earl of Port-
land, who had always been very friendly to him, and who wrote that he
regretted Melville had so much difficulty in resolving to accept the post
offered : " The difference [between the offices] in emolument, if any, is so
small, and as regards the honour of directing affairs and having the king's
confidence, so great, that I confess to you I did not believe you would hesi-
tate. Your friend, to whom I have spoken, had the same feeling ; and you
see it is a thing which he wishes, although he, nevertheless, leaves you entire
freedom to do what you think good." 5 Soon after the receipt of this letter
Melville presented his commission for registration, and probably entered
upon his new duties about the middle of August 1696.6 The salary attached
to the new office was £1000 sterling yearly.7
The Earl of Melville was present at the parliament of 1696, which
assembled shortly after his appointment, and took his seat as one of the great
officers of state. He was appointed a member of the committee for the
security of the kingdom, and appears to have acted as president or chairman,
as towards the end of September Mr. Carstares writes : " I was heartilie glad
to hear that things have gone so well in the committie where your lordship
presided, to which I know your lordship hath not a little contributed." 8
1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 174, 175. 6 Commission, dated at Breda, 25th May
2 Letter, 15th May 1696, in Atholl Charter- 1696, and registered 13th August 1696 ; ori-
chest. ginal in Melville Charter-chest.
3 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 175, 176. - ,-. . • , . ., . ,
' Original warrant, ibid.
4 Ibid. pp. 175, 177.
5 /bid. p. 178; letter, in French, dated 16th 8 Letter, 25th September 1696, in Melville
July 1696. Charter-chest.
LATER YEARS : DARIEN COMPANY. 237
After his appointment as president of the privy council there is little to
record of Melville, either in a public or private capacity. He continued to
hold the office during the remainder of King William's reign, and from the
incidental notices we have, appears to have enjoyed the confidence of the
government, although his post was at one time threatened by his opponents.
He was present at the parliament of 1698, but took little part in its proceed-
ings. Indeed the Earl of Argyll wrote to Mr. Carstares, " Our friend Melvill
has not opened his mouth scarce all this session." He, however, voted with
the government, though some of his usual followers deserted him. The same
writer says of him later in the same year, " Our friend Melville is not so cap-
able for discharge of duty. ... I am afraid he is declining." l He main-
tained friendly relations with the secretaries of state, one of whom, Viscount
Seafield, formerly Sir James Ogilvie, thus wrote him in December 1699:
"We have had occasion this day to give his Majesty full information how
faithfully and vigourously you and your son, my Lord Leven, act in his
Majesty's concerns, and I shall not faill from time to time to let your lord-
ship know what his Majesty desires to be done, and I will take it very kindly
that your lordship do writ frequently to me and let me have your opinion in
anything that occurs." Lord Seafield adds, " Difference in opinion [among
the officers of state] is as much to be shund as is possible in publict orders,
for it takes off their weight and influence when they do not come out with
unanimity, and meeting together beforhand is the surest way to prevent mis-
takes. If we do continue unite[d] amongst ourselves we will be capable to
signify to his Majesty and to one another, but nothing will give so great
advantage against us as division. I know your lordship will excuse me for
useing this freedom, for you cannot but be convinced that ther are a great
maney who act under a popolor pretence of a national concern when their
own interest is only at the bottom." 2
The " national concern " here referred to was the trading enterprise known
as the Darien Company, the disasters to which were then strongly exercising
1 Carstares State Papers, pp. 372, 412, 444. pired, but which Argyll wished for a kins-
The duty to which the Earl of Argyll par- man, the Earl of Loudoun,
ticularly refers was that of an extraordinary
lord of session, to which office MelviUe as- 2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 181.
238 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
the minds of the Scots. It is not clear how far the Earl of Melville himself
was concerned in the company. His sons appear as stockholders, but his
own name does not occur. As a Scotsman, however, he must have felt
keenly the troubles which assailed the intended colony, and also the slights
which his nation received at the hands of England. The silent policy of
King William in not answering the appeals of the Scottish council also
alienated many, but Melville seems to have understood the difficulties of the
king's position better than many of his countrymen, a fact which appears in
his letters to his friend Mr. Carstares. He voted against the national address
which it was proposed to present to the king in the beginning of the year
1700, but which was coldly received by his Majesty.
The parliament met on 21st May 1700, and Melville was present in
his place. Both the Duke of Queensberry as commissioner and the Earl
of Marchmont as chancellor impressed upon the house the difficulties of the
political situation, and deprecated weakening the king's influence abroad by
divisions at home. Notwithstanding this, numerous petitions and remon-
strances were addressed to the parliament, and in terms of these they moved
a resolution in support of the settlement at Darien, a motion not in accord-
ance with the commissioner's instructions, and to gain time he adjourned the
assembly. This policy and subsequent adjournments exasperated the popu-
lace, and their discontent broke out in a riot, of which Melville and others
wrote intelligence to Carstares. The latter replied that the king highly
resented the treatment Melville and the other officers of state had received,
and that he was inclined to allow the parliament to sit in August " if it may
be hoped they will be in any kind of temper." 1
Lord Melville at this time wrote long letters to Mr. Carstares lamenting
the condition of affairs in Scotland, expressing a wish that the king would
remain in England, and urging that parliament be again assembled. In
answer to one of these Carstares writes : " I read to the king those parts of
your lordship's letter that were proper to be read to him ; his affaires necessarilie
call him abroad, and he must be at the assemblie of the States [of Holland]
that are now mett, and are not to part till he be with them ; he is fullie of
your lordship's mind as to the meeting of parliament in Agust if possiblie
1 Letter, 26th June 1700, vol. ii. of this work, p. 181.
RETIRES FINALLY FROM OFFICE, 1702. 239
it may be without the ruin of his affaires, and he is satisfied with the
reasons which your lordship gives for its meeting." 1 The parliament, how-
ever, did not meet until the end of October 1700, and in the interval Melville
paid a visit to Bath to recruit his failing health, whence apparently he went
to London, but returned in time to be present at the opening of the session.
The king sent a conciliatory message to the estates, expressing sympathy
with the disasters which had befallen the expedition to Darien, and offering to
aid the national enterprise, but distinctly stating that he could not, in view of
the state of affairs in Europe, sanction the colony. With this message the
estates were not satisfied, and they moved the assertion of the legality of the
colony. A large minority wished to pass this motion into an act, but by
a majority of twenty-four it was carried in the form of a resolution to be
forwarded to the king. Lord Melville was one of those who supported the
government, but that is the only notice of him in the records of parliament.2
King "William died in March 1702 ; but the Earl of Melville continued to
hold his office under Queen Anne's government until December of that year,
when the Earl of Annandale was appointed in his place. He nevertheless
attended the various meetings of parliament. In the session of 1703 he is
referred to as joining in a protest against certain clauses proposed to be
inserted in the act of security in regard to the succession to the kingdom.
He petitioned the same parliament on behalf of the privacy and amenity of
his house and park at Monimail, then styled Melville, that as he had planted
and fenced the land round it, through which there was a public path, the
parliament would order the road to be diverted so as to protect his grounds.
The petition was granted., and a new road ordered to be made at the sight of
the justices of Fife.3
In the session of 1704 reference was made to a matter which harassed
the later years of the earl's life. This was a disagreement between him and
his son, Lord Leven, on one side, and Anna, Duchess of Buccleuch, whose
affairs they had directed for many years, on the other. The details need not
here be fully stated ; but the earl and his son were accused of corrupt
1 Letter, 3d July 1700, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. x. p. 247.
3 Ibid. vol. xi. pp. 61, 70.
240 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
management, and a long and bitter litigation ensued between the parties,
which was only settled by arbitration in 1711, after Lord Melville's death.
He felt very keenly the breaking up of the friendship which had subsisted
between him and the duchess for so long a period, especially in view of the
many services he had rendered to her family.1
Lord Melville was not a member of the last Scottish parliament, which
began its sittings on 3d October 1706, but he presented a petition for repay-
ment of sums advanced by him in 1689 and 1690 for the public service.
The occasion of the advance was to aid those officers who were then com-
missioned in paying for their commissions, the money being secured over the
pay clue to their respective companies. In 1690 the earl advanced a further
sum of £260 sterling to maintain some of the troops who had not been paid,
bonds being granted by the commanding officers over the arrears of pay.
The earl states that owing to the great deficiency of the funds, and the dis-
tressed condition of the officers for want of pay, he did not press his claims ;
but now that the whole or great part of the arrears of pay due to the army
was to be paid up, he thought it reasonable that his advances should be
refunded from the first payments. The parliament granted the petition, and
passed an act accordingly in favour of Lord Melville.2
The earl, however, did not gain any benefit from this concession, as he
died within a few months afterwards, on 20th May 1707.3 His remains
were buried in the parish church of Monimail.
He was survived by his countess, to whom he was married in 1655, their
contract being dated 1 7th January in that year. At the date of her marriage
the bride was little more than fifteen years of age, having been born in 1639.4
She is described by her great-grandson David, sixth Earl of Leven and
Melville, as " a little woman, low of stature." By the marriage contract
Lord Melville was bound to secure his future spouse in liferent of his lands
in Eaith and others named, and also to resign his whole lands of Monimail
and Eaith for new infeftment to himself and her in conjunct fee. On the
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ruary 1707, in Melville Charter-chest.
xi. pp. 130, 153 ; The Scotts of Buccleuch, :l Extract from parish register.
vol. l. p. 470. i Certificate of Baptism, 13th May 1639,
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. extracted Sth June 1674, in Melville Charter-
xi. App. p. 100 ; Extract Act, 12th Feb- chest.
HIS CHILDREN : LORD RAITH. 241
other hand, she, with consent of her curators, assigned to him her dowry
of twenty-five thousand merks, which had been provided by her grand-
father.1 At a later date, about 1674, Lady Melville and her husband raised
an action against the heirs of her grandfather for payment of a sum of
40,000 merks, provided to her because of her personal exclusion from the
entail of the Leven titles and estates.2 The Countess of Melville died on 2d
April 1713, and was buried beside her husband in the church of Monimail.
George, Earl of Melville, and his countess had issue eight sons and four
daughters. The sons were —
1. Alexander, who bore the courtesy titles successively of Master of Melville and
Lord Eaith, born 23d December 1655. He remained with his mother and
attended to the interests of the family at home during the enforced exile of
his father in Holland. After the revolution he was appointed a member of
the Scottish privy council and treasurer-depute — an office which he dis-
charged with great zeal and ability, although amid much discouragement.
He was as staunch a Presbyterian as his father, whose ecclesiastical policy
he suj^ported, and was subjected to the assaults of the same political adver-
saries. He was much respected, however, even by his opponents. Sir
James Montgomerie, who estimated Lord Eaith's abilities above those of
his father, in 1693 writes to King James : " We were in hopes that Eaith,
who is a mettled man, should haue been out of employment ere now, for it
was talked he was to demitt, having mett with something like ane affront
as he thought." 3 Lord Eaith did not resign, but continued to discharge his
duties so well as to call from Lord Tarbat in 1695, the remark to Mr. Carstares,
" Lord Eaith is certainly one of the sharpest, most judicious, diligentest, in
the nation " — a statement which, as has been said, would not have been
made to one so well informed as Carstares unless it had been deserved.4
Other notices of Lord Eaith's personal and political character are
found in papers in the Melville charter-chest. One of these, an anony-
mous defence of Lord Melville's policy in the parliament of 1695, mentions
Lord Eaith in connection with " an act relative to the church, whereby a
new clay is given to those who call themselves the episcopall clergy for
takeing the oaths."5 Those taking the oaths before 1st September 1695
1 Contract in Melville Charter-chest. i Leven and Melville Papers, Preface,
2 Transumpt, 24th July 1674, of bond 3d p. xxxiii.
January 1646, ibid. 5 Cf. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
3 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 229, 230. vol. ix. p. 450.
VOL. I. 2 H
242 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
were to possess their churches and stipends, and to have the protection of
the civil government, whether they formally owned the established church
government or not, and whether qualified or not. " This act, so formed,
came into the house by way of surprize, few or non hearing of it till it was
presented. . . . The Lord Raith, Melvil's son, upon hearing it read in par-
liament, for he had not heard of it before, proposed that since these
ministers were to have the protection of the government, and to enjoy
their benefices, and were not accountable any manner of way to the church,
that they should be obliged to sign the Confession of Faith, as all the
ministers of the kingdom are, that that being a test of their orthodoxie, the
people might not be in haizard of being poisioned by erronious and false
doctrine." 1 Secretary Johnstone, however, the writer adds, pressed the
act on the house, and Raith's motion was not carried.
Another document of similar character, of uncertain date, thus refers
to Lord Raith : " Whatever may be said of the father [Lord Melville]
as too warrie and timerous and slow a man, and not bred to busines,
yet that cannot be objected against the children. For Raith, most that
know him look upon him as a man of the best abilities and greatest
integrity in the government, and as Queensberrie sayes of him, he lies, tho' a
litle man, both a head and a heart, and would have been glaidly in a good
correspondence with him, and whatever you may think at court, there is a
grande difirance (as a Frenchwoman said when a minister was goeing to
mary a shoemaker's wife) betuixt the chancelours [Tweeddale's] pairts and
his, and as for integrity (not to say any thing of the chancelours), the king
hes not that to give which would make him to doe that which he thinks
ane ill thing ; and its often eneugh said by some they know how to manadge
others, when they have busines to doe, but there is no way to be found to
manage Raith but what the merits of the cause may doe." The writer then
notes some points in which Raith's " streightnes and his faithfullnes in the
king's service makes him uneasie to others," and refers to questions about
precedence and other trivial matters of dispute between him and his
colleagues : " What other things may be said must be gross lyes and
calumnies, which he [Raith] does not at all value, and he might be saifely
adventured to enter the lists in debate with all the great folk you have witli
you. But he is to be blamed for being too much of his father's humor in
some things, and is litle desireous to medle, but very unwilling to be baffled
or affronted. He would willingly have quitt his employment, but that his
' Original paper (c. 1695), in Melville Charter-chest.
HIS YOUNGER CHILDREN. 243
friends with great pains dissuaded him, for that were but the giving the
ball to enemies, so that I belive now they [Melville and his sons] resolve to
keep till they be turned out, that at least they may not give their enemies
that satisfaction to make way for them. The king may doe what he pleases,
and they must be content." x
Thus respected in political life, his death on 27th March 1698, at a
comparatively early age, was a loss to his country and a deep regret to his
friends. Mr. Carstares and Secretary Ogilvie wrote letters of condolence to
his father, Lord Melville ; and the Eev. Daniel Williams, minister at
Moorfields, London, adds the following tribute : "lam sorry for the public
loss the church and state, as well as your family, haue sustained by the
death of my Lord Baith ; his gifts and spirit consecrated to a common good
must have rendered him a signal blessing when the experience of age had
been added to the early specimen he gave the world so soon. ... I wish
it be no presage the good work in Scotland is to find some stop, when
such hopeful instruments are removed and few apt ones yet appear." 2
Lord Eaith married (contract dated 27th August 1689) Barbara Dundas,
third daughter of the deceased Walter Dundas of that ilk, her mother,
Lady Christian Leslie, being a consenting party.3 They had issue two sons,
born respectively 29th January 1693 and 28th May 1695, who both died
in infancy. Lady Raith survived her husband until 23d February 1719.
2. John Melville, born 28th May 1657, who died young.
3. David, born 5th May 1660, third Earl of Leven. Of him a memoir follows.
4. G-eorge Melville, born on 24th September 1664, and died young.
5. James Melville, born 18th December 1665. He appears to have acted as
secretary to his father, and was in constant attendance upon him during the
later years of his life. He also shared in his father's management of the
Buccleuch estates. In 1675 the lands of Hallhill, belonging to James Mel-
ville, son and heir of the late Sir James Melville of Burntisland and
Hallhill, were adjudged to Lord Melville for debt, and transferred by him to
his son James, who became James Melville of Hallhill; but in 1699 he
regranted the lands to his father.4 James Melville also had the lands of
Balgarvie. He died in the year 1706, leaving a widow, Elizabeth Mon-
crieff, of what family is not known, three sons, George, Alexander, and
1 Paper, undated, c. 1693, in Melville 3 Original contract, ibid.
Charter-chest, referred to supra, p. 230.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 179, 180; letter, 4 Inventory of writs, etc., in Melville
2d July 1698, in Melville Charter-chest. Charter-chest.
244 GEORGE, FOURTH LORD AND FIRST EARL OF MELVILLE.
David, and four daughters, named Margaret, Anne, Barbara, and Mary.
The eldest son, George Melville of Balgarvie, residenter in Edinburgh,
died in December 1713, apparently unmarried and without issue. He
appointed his brother-german, Alexander Melville, his executor, and left
legacies to his four sisters.1 Alexander Melville, also of Balgarvie, the
second son, was, on 16th February 1714, and again on 12th April 1737,
retoured heir-general to his brother George. On 19th October 1736, and
on 20th April 1742, he was retoured heir-general to his father, who is
described as James Melville of Hallhill, and also as James Melville, son
of George, Earl of Melville.2 The third son, David, survived until 1782,
and died at his house in the Sciennes, Edinburgh, on 12th December of that
year.3 The eldest daughter, Margaret, married, as his first wife, Mr. John
Erskine of Carnock, author of " Institutes of the Law of Scotland," and had
a son, Dr. John Erskine, of New Greyfriars Church, Edinburgh.4 The
second daughter, Anne, appears to have died unmarried. The third daughter,
Barbara, married Mr. Alexander Stoddart, minister at Falkland, whom she
survived. They had issue, James Stoddart, merchant in Edinburgh. The
fourth daughter, Mary, died, apparently unmarried, on 22d June 1759. 5
C. John Melville, born 24th April 1670. Died young.
7. Charles Melville, born 2d December 1673. Died young.
8. John Melville, born 26th September 1677. Died young.
The daughters were —
1. Margaret Melville, born 2Sth October 1658. She married Robert, fourth Lord
Balfour of Burleigh. Her second daughter, Mary, married General Alexander
Bruce of Kennet, and was the ancestress of the present Lord Balfour.
2. Mary Melville, born 7th May 1662. ^
3. Anna Melville, born 8th March 1 668. I to^ tf T hte™ ffappear
4. Katherine Melville, born 1st June 1671. J ' n°"
1 Commissariot of Edinburgh, Testaments. i Fasti Ecclesia? Scoticanse, part iv. p. 76.
Vol. 88, 17th March 1721. Commissariot of Edinburgh, Testaments.
2 Indexes of Services of Heirs at dates. 5 Will, dated at Falkland, Sth April 175S.
3 Scots Magazine, December 1782. Ibid. vol. IIS, 17th August 1761.
245
X. — David, third Earl of Leven, and second Earl of Melville.
Lady Anne Wemyss, his Countess.
Born 1660; Earl of Leven, 1681 ; Earl of Melville, 1707 ; Died 1728.
The Honourable David Melville, third Earl of Leven, was the second
surviving son of George, first Earl of Melville, and his countess, Catherine
Leslie. He was born on 5th May 1660,1 and was baptized at Monimail on
the 11th of the same month.2 He succeeded to the earldom of Leven when
he had just attained his majority, and possessed it for nearly half a century,
filling also important positions as a military commander. He took a
prominent part in the settlement of the government of Scotland at the
Eevolution, and was also a cordial supporter of the Union.
He first conies into public notice as a claimant to the earldom of Leven on
the death of the two young countesses, Margaret and Catherine, the daughters
of Alexander Leslie, second Earl of Leven. In his entail of the Leven estates,
made in 1663, the second earl, failing his own issue, male and female,
provided them to a succession of heirs, first, to the second son of John, Earl
of Eothes, whom failing, to the second son of George, Lord Melville, his
brother-in-law, whom failing, to the second son of David, Earl of Wemyss,
and the entailer's mother, Lady Margaret Leslie, whom all failing, to the
entailer's heirs and assignees whatsoever. The Earl of Eothes had no sons
surviving, and so the Honourable David Melville was the heir-presumptive.
But on his claiming to be served heir, the Duke of Eothes interposed the
objection that the claim was premature, as it was possible he might still have
a second son to inherit the Leven estates. The case was sharply contested
in the court of session in February 1677, by Eothes, who was lord chancellor,
and by Lord Melville, whose son David was still in his minority, and who
had a gift of the non-entry of the earldom, dated 13th June 1676. The
court sustained the contention of Eothes, and held that so long as there
1 Entry in old Family Bible at Melville. * Register of the parish of MonimaiL
246 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
was a possibility of his having a second son, David Melville could not be
served heir.1
So triumphant was the chancellor over his victory that at the earliest
possible moment — twenty-four hours after the reading in the minute-book —
he demanded an extract of the decreet in his favour. It was refused, how-
ever, as Lord Melville had been before him, and given in a plea contending
that as there was no true contradicter in the field, the finding became null.
This plea was sustained by the lords, and they withdrew their decree. The
chancellor now strove to get the case re-debated, but all his influence could
not move the session to do so. Meanwhile Lord Melville secured the influ-
ence of Lauderdale, who was then at court, in the matter, and letters of gift
under the hand of King Charles the Second were obtained in which the lands
are declared to be in the king's hands, if not by virtue of the prerogative, at
ieast as " pater patriae," whereby it was proper he should provide that such
heirs of entail as were only in hope should not be prejudiced by the neglect
of their estates, and to this end the king appointed George, Lord Melville,
and his heirs, curatores bo?iis over the earldom of Leven, on behalf of the true
heir."2 In July following Lauderdale came to Edinburgh, and Melville by
his influence revived the case before the session, though Eothes foreseeing the
issue would now fain have let it rest. The result was that on this occasion
a decision was given in Melville's favour, in terms of the king's gift. This
gift was said to have been the first of its kind ever granted.3
All prospect of a possible heir of entail from the Duke of Eothes being
terminated by his death on 27th July 1681, without male issue, the earldom
and estates of Leven then devolved upon David Melville, who at once
assumed the title as third Earl of Leven. On the following day, the 28th,
when the parliament met at Edinburgh, a protest for precedency over the
1 Lord Fountainhall's Historical Notices, But I [the chancellor] say, Nihil tale,
vol. i. p. 140. His lordship reflects the hum- Until : te interred
our of the bench on the occasion. One reason Eus reale oraves for to be served-"
for the finding was, " for the devill must byde 2 Royal signature, dated Whitehall, 29th
his day.'' A roundel was also made on the May 1677, presented by Lauderdale and sub-
case : scribed by him and other members of the
" Ens reale [Melville's second son] craves Privv couucil-
to be preferred. 3 Fountainhall's Historical Notices, vol. i.
Ad quantum et ad quale, Ens reale. pp. 167, 168.
FLIGHT WITH HIS FATHER TO HOLLAND, 1683. 247
Earl of Callendar was made in his name and on his behalf by Sir George
Mackenzie of Tarbat.1 His peerage gave him a seat in parliament, where he
took precedence of his father. In the following year he was duly retoured
and infeft in the Leven estates as heir to Catherine, Countess of Leven, who
was the previous holder of the title and estates.2 Among the first of his
proceedings on accpiiring the estates, was the raising of a process against Mr.
Francis Montgomerie, the husband of Margaret, Countess of Leven, the elder
sister of Countess Catherine, for reduction of their marriage-contract, by
which he had been provided to a liferent annuity of ten thousand merks out
of the estate. He also claimed right to the jewels and moveables of his late
wife. The pleas were that Margaret, Countess of Leven, by reason of ill-
health, and being in minority, was incapable of marriage, but was forced
thereto by her uucle, the Duke of Rothes, and that the provision was exorbi-
tant and injurious to the estate. The lords of session, however, found that
neither plea was well grounded, and decision therefore was given against
the Earl of Leven, who afterwards arranged matters with Mr. Francis
Montgomerie.3
In 1683 the Earl of Leven accompanied his father in his flight to Holland,
though personally he had no reason to become an exile, the government being
desirous only to secure Lord Melville. The circumstances of the flight have
been narrated in the previous memoir, and probably the very day on which
they left Fife is fixed by a deed of factory executed by the Earl of Leven in
favour of his uncle, James Melville of Cassingray. It is dated on 24th April
1683 at West Wemyss, whither he and his father were bound when Mac-
arthur is said to have met them, and as " Duncan Macarthur in Monimeal "
was one of the witnesses, it may be inferred that directly on meeting him
they had gone to Wemyss, and there matured arrangements for escape. The
reason given by the Earl for granting this deed is his " necessary absence." 4
After his arrival in Holland, the Earl of Leven appears to have spent
some time in travelling, and a note-book of his expenditure, somewhat
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, Charter-chest. Retonr, dated 26th April
vol. viii. p. 234. 16S2 [Fife P.etours, No. 1204].
3 Foimtainhall's Historical Notices, vol. i.
- Crown precept and sasine thereon, dated p. 396.
27th May and 1st June 1682, in Melville 4 Original in Melville Charter-chest.
248 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
irregularly kept, from May 1684 to March 1686, is still preserved at Melville.
Three factorial commissions to Ms uncle and others show that in December
1685 he was at Kell, in January 1686 at Hamburg, and in June 1687 at
Berlin. Ere the last-mentioned date, through the good offices of the Electress
Sophia of Hanover, who retained a constant friendship afterwards for the
earl, he had entered the service of her son-in-law, the Duke of Branden-
burg, and was in September 1687 appointed a colonel in the elector's army.
At the court of Berlin, as the earl himself informs us, he was employed by
the Prince of Orange to advance his interest privately, and he succeeded
in his mission to the satisfaction of the prince, whose gratitude was expressed
in his letters to the earl at this time, and in more substantial manner later.1
A private letter, written by one of the Scottish refugees on the Continent,
fully bears out the fact that the earl was in high favour at the court of
Berlin. It is from Mr. James Brown, minister of the gospel at Konigsberg,
and seeks to enlist the good offices of the earl with the elector for the
ratification and extension of his favours to the refugees, especially from
Scotland. He writes : —
" Right noble Lord, — Though it hath not been my happiness to be admitted
to your lordship's aquaintanc, yet having heard from severall, and particularly of
Mr. Fairly (though under secrecy) of your lordship being at Berlin, and that you
are highly favoured by our renowned P., Elector of Brandenburg, I have presumed
to salute and attend upon your lordship by these lines. I do greatly rejoice to
hear of your welfare and of your lordship's good inclination and inducements
becoming a true protestant Scotch nobleman ; your travells abroad for a litle
time, as times now are, may further qualify your lordship for more service to God
and your countrey."
He then states his desire, of which he says, " The furthering of this will be
your lordship's honour, and great service to the nation, and who knows but
God may have brought your lordship to that place for this end." He sug-
gests that the earl should deal with M. Brunsenius, minister to the Elector
at Potsdam, and Baron Kniphausen, one of his chief councillors, both of whom
had been the principal patrons of the Scots at their prince's court.2
1 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 56 note.
2 Original letter, dated 13th December 1686, in Melville Charter-chest.
HIS POLITICAL SERVICES BEFORE 1688. 249
As one result of his political mission, the earl arranged a meeting at Cleves
between the Prince of Orange and the Elector of Brandenburg. The confer-
ences on that occasion contributed to the bringing about of the Revolution of
1688. During the negotiations which followed this meeting, Lord Leven
continued to act as intermediary, and made frequent journeys between Berlin
and the Hague in promotion of the enterprise. In further aid thereof, at his
own expense, he raised a regiment of his countrymen in Germany and Hol-
land. The proposal to do so emanated from the Elector of Brandenburg,
and was highly approved by the Prince of Orange, who thought, however, that
the task would be a somewhat difficult one in respect of the rank and file,
though officers would be easily got. But the enrolment was accomplished
within a comparatively short time, the proposal being made in August and
the earl's commission as colonel being dated on 7th September 1688,
and this regiment, which became the 25th, was honoured to render very
important services in effecting the Revolution. At the head of it the earl
accompanied the prince to England in the following November, and when
Plymouth surrendered, as it was the first of the English towns to do so, the
earl received instructions to proceed thither with his regiment, receive the
town, and garrison it, which was done.
When the Prince of Orange had received the crown of England, a number
of the Scottish nobles and gentry who had come to London met there with
the object of placing the Scottish crown also in his hands. It was agreed that
the estates of Scotland should be convened, and that the prince, now King
William, should address a letter to the convention. The king made choice
of the Earl of Leven to be the bearer of this important missive to the
Scottish estates, and he had the honour of presenting it on the third day of
their meeting at Edinburgh, on 16th March 1689, where he also attended as
a member. The convention passed a vote of thanks to those of their number
who had met in London, and done such "tymeous and duty-full" service.1
Lord Leven also received a circular letter from the King signed " G. Prince
d'Orange," desiring him to attend this meeting of the estates.2
A day or two after the convention met in Edinburgh, the military
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. pp. 8, 14,
2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 31, 32.
VOL. I. 2 I
250 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
character of the earl was recognised, and he was intrusted in this capacity
with the necessary powers to secure that their deliberations should be con-
ducted in peace. The Duke of Gordon had possession of the castle, and held
it for King James, refusing to surrender. Claverhouse and his dragoons
were in the town, he himself attending the convention. But on discovering
that the meeting was unfavourable to James, Claverhouse held a hasty con-
ference with the Duke of Gordon at the western postern of the fortress, and
departed to rouse the Highlands in his master's interest. In consequence
of this an order was issued empowering the Earl of Leven to raise a regiment
eight hundred strong, to guard the town, disperse all parties bearing arms
save themselves, and prevent any persons entering or leaving the castle. His
own regiment being still about Plymouth, the earl formed this new regiment
out of entirely fresh levies, but these were chiefly and readily supplied by
west-country men, who had come to Edinburgh for the special purpose of
strengthening the hands of the promoters of the Eevolution. The measure,
however, was merely temporary, until the arrival of regular troops from
England, whither the Scots had sent their regiments for the time. The
earl himself is said to have levied seamen from Arbroath during this year
for the service of England.1
In the proceedings of the convention also the earl took an active part in
the interest of King William. He signed the declaration- that the meeting-
was a free parliament, also their letter to the king, and was appointed one of
a small committee to whom was assigned the task of auditing the revenue
accounts of the general receivers. He was also named on the militia com-
mission for the shires of Fife and Kinross, and on the committee of supply
for Fife. With the Earl of Callendar he became personally cautioner for
Lieutenant-Colonel John Balfour of Fernie, who thereupon received his
liberty. Permission was also accorded him to quarter his regiment, which
was now under orders to proceed from England to Scotland, wherever he
pleased in Fife.2
King William's first Scottish parliament sat in Edinburgh on 5th June
1689, but the Earl of Leven is not mentioned as taking any special part in its
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, - Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
vol. ix. pp. 11, 12, 17, 23, 32 ; xi. p. 154. vol. ix. pp. 9, 20, 29, 33, 65. 73.
ENDEAVOURS TO PACIFY THE HIGHLANDS. 251
work, further than being present and protesting for the precedency of his
title over the Earl of Callendar.1 There was other business on hand more
congenial to his military tastes. His regiment was now with him in Scot-
land, having left Plymouth at the beginning of May for Chester, thence to
proceed to Kirkcudbright by sea ;- and the earl received a new commission as
its colonel, with the captaincy of a company in it, from their Majesties, King
William and Queen Mary, which was dated 20th June 1689, but was ordained
to rank from the 7th September of the previous year, the date of his last
commission, granted by the king as Prince of Orange.3 An army was being
levied to cope with Claverhouse, who had succeeded in raising the clans, and
the earl was associated with Major-General Mackay, who had been sent to
take the chief command of the troops in Scotland, in dealing with the in-
surgent Highlanders. A royal warrant authorised both officers to use their
best endeavours to induce the rebels to lay down their arms, and empowered
them to grant assurances to such as would do so.4 At the date of his asso-
ciation in this form with General Mackay, the Earl of Leven was only in his
twenty-ninth year, while Mackay was much his senior in years, as well as in
military service.
Mackay had been following Claverhouse in the Highlands, but was forced
to return to Edinburgh for additional troops before risking an engagement.
Here he was joined by several regiments, including the greater portion of Lord
Leven's, part of it being employed elsewhere. Marching into Athole they
encountered the Highlanders at Killiecrankie, where the battle was fought
which cost the government a defeat and the insurgents their leader. Mackay's
troops, on the onslaught of the Highlanders, ignominiously broke and fled, all
save two regiments, those of Leven and Hastings, and it was generally
admitted that these saved the credit, such as there was, of the army of King-
William. General Mackay was loud in his praise of these regiments, but
gives as the reason of their firmness that they were well officered, and were
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 3 Original Commission in Melville Cbarter-
vol. ix. pp. 95, 99. chest.
2 Letter, Sir David Nairne to the Earl of 4 Printed in vol. ii. of this work, p. 34.
Leven, 4th May 1689, in Melville Charter- A contemporary copy in the Melville Charter-
chest ; cf. Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 3- chest shows that it was addressed to the
5, 10. Earl of Leven and Major-General Mackay.
252 DAVID, THIRD EAKL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
not attacked in the same manner as the others. The Jacobite account of the
battle states that Claverhouse, not having sufficient men to extend his line
equal to that of Mackay, and desiring to guard against the possibility of being
flanked, left a large gap in the centre opposite to the regiment commanded by
the Earl of Leven. While the rest fled it thus stood entire, and did much
execution by its fire among the Highlanders, the most of whom, however,
passed on in pursuit of the fugitives. Hastings' men, who had been posted on
the extreme right of the line, were for a similar reason not attacked until,
when the main body fled, a number of the Highlanders rallied from the pur-
suit and attacked them. Seeing this Leven marched to their assistance, and
compelled the assailants to retreat. The Highlanders in their retreat dis-
covered the body of Claverhouse, and carried him off the field, but Leven's
regiment poured such a fire into them that their devotion cost them clear.
Mackay having now joined these two regiments, to escape the fury of the
Highlanders returning from the pursuit, drew them off to the neighbouring
mansion-house of Urrard, where for a time they successfully resisted attack.
In the darkness, however, they retreated, sustaining an attack from the Athole
men before clearing the pass, but ultimately getting away they crossed the
hills to Weem, and thence to Drummond and Stirling.1 The Jacobites
indeed alleged that the Earl of Leven and all that had horses, fled from
the field very early.2 But had this been the case, which is contrary to the
evidence of some of the Jacobites themselves, the Earl of Leven would have
been among the first to proclaim his own safety. On the contrary, with
the news of the disaster brought by the fugitives, several noblemeu wrote to
Lord Melville, then at London, deploring the fate of Lord Leven and General
Mackay, who were both thought to be killed. The earl was also said to
have been wounded in the shoulder ; but their appearance at Stirling unin-
jured dispelled the rumours. Mackay was then able to state the case for
himself, and writing to the Duke of Hamilton, then royal commissioner to
the parliament at Edinburgh, he says : " There was no regement or troop with
me but behaved lyck the vilest cowards in nature, except Hastings and my
Lord Levens, whom I most praise at such a degree, as I cannot but blame
1 Mackay's Memoirs, pp. 54-G1 ; Memoirs of Loeheill, pp. 26S-272.
- Ibid.
HIS BEHAVIOUR AT KILLIJECEANKIE. 253
others, of whom I expected more ; " and writing to Lord Melville he says,
" My Lord, your son hath behaved himself with all his officers and soulders
extraordinary well, as did also Colonel Hastings with his." 1
In a vindication written in or about the year 1695 of Lord Leven and his
father, the Earl of Melville, entitled " A true account of these things, whereby
some endeavour for their own ends and designes to misrepresent Melvill and
his sones to the king, etc.," some further details of the actual events of the
battlefield, hitherto unknown, are stated : —
" As to Melvill himself, I need not tell you that it was a Jacobite designe to have
him out of the king's favour, because he had discovered and defeat all their
designes, and it may be without vanity said that he did that service to the king-
in so criticall a time as then no Scotsman was able to doe. They see themselves
brought alltogither in the king's mercie, and so thought they could never be
secure till they should gett the king prepossessed against him and he removed
from his station. The methods they fell upon to accomplish this was first to
engage Generall Major M'Kay on their syde, who, they knew, had taken up a
mortall prejudice and envie at Leven, tho upon very unjust grounds, as I shall
mention afterwards. The reason was that Leven had gained some reputation,
and he had lost his. All the country blamed his conduct. Both his own
souldiers and his enemies contemned him. At Gillekrankie non keept their
ground but Leven and a pairt of his regiment. A great many of them were
detached into other places of the country. Tho Collonell Hastings behaved him-
self well, but was beat of his ground, and upon that retireing till he knew that
Leven's men had stood. All the rest of the army runn, and the generall major
was a missing till after the busines was over, and they say was found in a
thicket. When he came up to Leven, who had beat of the enemie, and who had
in his own person recovered M'Kay's collours, M'Kay lighted and embraced him,
and kissed him many times, saying he had saved his honour, his life, and the
kingdome. He would never forgett it, and he would represent it fully to the
king. Further to evidence M'Kay's ingratitude to him, after the Highlanders
were beat of, he went out to see what was become of the generall, and in seeking
for him he found his nevoey, this present Collonell Robert M'Kay, staggering
and fainting of his wounds. He lighted and toar his own linnings, and his ser-
vants, and bound up his wounds, sett him on his own horse, which was the
only horse he had (left of 14 or 16, his servants some of them being killed, and
1 Maekay's Memoirs, j>p. 248-260.
254 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
some haveing runn away with his horsses), and betook himselff to his foot. This
gentleman is not so ingrate as his uncle. Within three or four dayes of this
M'Kay took up that prejudice and envie at Leven. The reason was because the
country were crying out against him, and much regraiting Leven, even those who
had never seen him; ffor for these tuo three days it was thought both were
killed. And when Leven after was comeing through the country to Edinburgh,
the people all along run out as to a fair whenever he came alongst to see him
and blissed him. On the conterarie they made songs on M'Kay. This raised
his envie, and there is no standing before envie. The thanks Leven gott for
this, tho he loosed above 1000 lib. at that engagement (for M'Kay would have
them make the retreat tho the feeld was their own, and leave all the baggage)
was to have others preferred who run away, and to have on of them put over his
head, and afterwards ane other, who was much younger then he in comission, and
now at last his regiment taken from him. . . ." J
Some further instances of Mackay's jealousy of Leven are given, but these
need not here be adverted to. It may be noticed, however, that after the
meeting of Mackay and Leven on the field, Mackay, it is stated, "gave him
[Leven] the comand of the retreat, which was his due, and that night never
a hollow given, or any small allarum, but then, ' Where was Leven? ' and for
that night and the nixt they were very well togither, but within a few dayes
after he changed extremly." -
In referring to the Killiecrankie episode in his life at a still later date,
when defending himself against the charges of disloyalty made by his enemies,
the earl himself says : —
" What my conduct was, and the behaviour of my regiment in that battle
(altho' the battle went against his Majesty) I wish I were so happy as that
even my enemys were to give their account thereof, for that was so well known
and so full in the publick prints that (without my presumeing to give her royall
highness, Princess Sophia, ane account of my small appearance) yet she honoured
me with a letter upon that account, wherin she was pleased to take notice of
my behaviour, which letter I have yet in my custody." 3
The letter from the Princess Sophia here referred to has not been found
1 Vindication in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Another vindication, ibid.
3 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 254.
APPOINTED GOVERNOR OF EDINBURGH CASTLE. 255
in the Melville Charter-chest, and could not therefore be printed with the
other letters with which the Electress honoured the earl.
When the castle of Edinburgh was surrendered by the Duke of Gordon on
I4.th June 1689, the keeping of it was conferred by the king and queen on
their tried and trusted servant, Lord Leven. It had been previously promised
to him by the king,1 and on 4th July following a warrant was issued for
expeding the commission in favour of the earl.2 The commission is dated
23d August 1689, and bears that the king and queen appoint David, Earl of
Leven, constable and governor of the castle of Edinburgh during their
pleasure.3 When the commission came before the privy council of Scotland it
gave rise to a debate, and the passing of it under the seals was postponed until
the reasons of their refusal were communicated to the king. The real reason
was party jealousy,4 but those alleged were of a purely technical nature and
somewhat frivolous. The objections appear to have delayed the formal
completion of the commission for a year, as it bears to have been sealed and
engrossed in the register of the great seal on 23d August 1690. It did not,
however, delay the entry of the earl on his duties as governor of the castle,
as there is evidence of his acting in that capacity in the beginning of Sep-
tember 1689.5 Indeed, in that month, the council did appoint the seal to
be appended, but a wish was expressed for a clearer understanding of what
their relations to the earl in his new position would be, while, at the same
time, they approved of the king's choice of the earl as a good one.6 He was
complimented on his appointment by the Electress Sophia, who gave it
as her opinion that the king had only, with his usual discernment of
character, paid the tribute due to the earl's merit and noble birth.7 He
was also congratulated by the Duke of Schomberg, then in Ireland, who
wrote that he had seen in the gazette that the earl "had the government
of Edinburgh." 8
Lord Leven was in January 1690 appointed by King William to take
1 Leven aud Melville Papers, p. 66. 5 Ibid. p. 271.
2 Vol. iii. of this "work, pp. 190-192. b ^ i •• r j.i_- i mo
' rr " Vol. n. of this work, p. 122.
3 Original commission in Melville Charter-
chest. '' md- V- 55.
4 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 164, 265, 8 Ibid. p. 125. Leven and Melville Papers,
266. pp. 295, 296.
256 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
certain measures along with General Mackay and Sir George Munro in
relation to the forces, probably the planting of garrisons in the Highlands,
which was proposed at the time. But the result of that commission does not
appear.1 At a later date the earl was authorised by the privy council, along
with Lord Euthven, to speak with the Earl of Seaforth, then a prisoner in
the castle, that he might influence his uncle, Mr. Colin Mackenzie, to give up
the castle of Ellandonan to the government, evidently that it might be made
one of the proposed garrisons in the Highlands.
About this time also the earl had a seat on the privy council of Scotland,
where he is mentioned as taking active part in a warm debate with the Duke
of Hamilton, then president of the council, as to the signing of official deeds.
He certainly at a later date acted as a privy councillor, and in this capacity
did much to further the settlement of the country under King William.3
In the two parliamentary sessions of 1690 Lord Leven also took an active
part. The first lasted from April to July. He was placed upon the
committee for fines and forfeitures, and on the commission for the plantation
of kirks, as well as on the committees of supply for the counties of Fife and
Perth. The second session only lasted a few clays in September, when the
earl was nominated on another committee for preparing acts in relation to
shires and burghs.4
An account-book kept by Charles Hay, the earl's chamberlain, from 11th
September 1689, about the time the earl entered on his duties as keeper of
the castle of Edinburgh, gives some information about the more private life
of his lordship. He expended large sums in payment of his regiment, a fact
which is borne out also by a letter from Lord Melville. Writing about June
1690 he says, "Leven had paid his regiment out of his own pocket these five
months and upwards . . . and has always kept above his complement.
But this will not do long with us. The others are upon the country and in
a starving condition." 5 His interest in the political discussions of the time
are shown by the purchase of twenty-six copies of the printed " Grievances
1 Order for payment to them of more 3 Leven and Melville Papers, pp. 344, C34.
money for the purpose, in Melville Charter- 4 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
chest. vol. ix. pp. 10(i, 114, 143. 161, 1SS, 200,
230, 232.
- Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 224, 225. 5 Draft in Melville Charter-chest.
CONVIVIAL HABITS OF THE TIME. 257
and Instructions," which were " all given to Westshiels, goeing to the west
countrey, to disperse; they coast £1, 4s. Scots." 1 Then two copies of " Staires
Vindication,"2 and a copy of "Dr. Eule's Vindication," for which last
Duncan M'Arthur paid on behalf of the earl £1, 10s. Scots.3 The earl wore
periwigs, and when colded, as he sometimes was in winter, had brandy and
sugar or a posset of milk and sugar. The convivial habits of the time are
reflected in various payments of accounts incurred at what was apparently a
combined musical and political club called " Pat. Steills," as besides the
frequent mention of a dozen bottles being carried down from the castle to
SteiU's, which were drunk there with the Earl of Argyll and others,4 two
dozen which were drunk with the Earl of Carnwath and others,5 a dozen
which were carried down and drunk with Drumlanrig,6 and again of one
dozen which were drunk at " Thomas Kyles " with Sir George Monroe,7
there are entries of accounts paid which were incurred there. Probably the
bottles carried to these taverns contained more choice liquor than could be
obtained there, as the earl occasionally made such purchases, as of "24 pynts
Eanish wyne at 4 shillings sterling per pynt" from Captain Brown in
Leith, whither the bottles were carried empty and brought back again
full.8 At different dates there was the carrying down of bottles of wine, etc.,
from the castle to the abbey, the residence for the time of his father, Lord
Melville, as commissioner, to the Countess of Wemyss' lodgings, and some-
times to others, as Lords Tarbat and Prestonhall. Then there was the
importation of quantities of Preston ale and Dundee ale, doubtless for the
use of the garrison, and large consignments of bottles from the glass-works at
Leith were occasionally received ; one such consignment requiring the service
of no fewer than twenty-five women with creels to carry them to the castle.
Occasionally entries occur affecting other members of the family, as on
25th November 1689, at the departure of his brother James for London, the
earl and the rest of the company, who had met to "speed the parting guest,"
hired two coaches, procured a"flambo," and conveyed him to his coach at
the Canongate foot. At another time the earl's sister, " Mistris Mary, was very
1 28th December 1689. 5 3d May 1690.
2 13th March 1690. 6 19th March 1690.
3 2d November 1691. 7 7th August 1690.
4 21st February 1690. s 8th January 1690.
VOL. I. 2 K
258 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
tender," x and before the month was expired there is notice of a purchase of
" black stockins to the accomptant for Lady Mary's mournings," 2 and later
also of a purchase at London of " 2 rims fyne cutt, gilded, and mourning
paper, and some wax sent to Scotland for your lordship's use, paper beeing
then scarse and course at Edinburgh, 27 shillings sterling."3
That the earl was a patron of horse-racing is also shown in the accounts.
He seems to have been a regular attender at the races on Leith Links yearly
in the month of March, and sometimes at Cupar in April. He kept a
jockey, named Colin Wright, and ran his own horses, not unfrequently
with success.4 Among other charitable contributions is one of a dollar " for
a fyre latly in James Stewart's Close." 6 He occupied a seat in the Tron
Church, and is mentioned as having gone to it as his " own seat " for the first
time on the fast day, when he gave the beadle half-a- crown.6 Other fast-
day attendances at church are recorded, one being on Wednesday, 24th June
1691, apparently in Edinburgh, when his chamberlain gave him "to the
broad, halfe a doller." The next entry is on the following day, " Item — given
your lordshipe to a penny wedding 4 rix dollers." Then frequent visits to
Fife are recorded, some on regimental and political business, as " to see the
magistrates of Kirkaldy chosen," but very often finishing such business
with a ride to Wemyss. Latterly his visits thither became more frequent.
His lordship had formed an attachment to the eldest daughter of
Margaret, Countess of Wemyss, Lady Anna Wemyss, to whom he was
married in September 1691. Born on 18th October 1675, Lady Anna
was sought in marriage by Charles, fourth Earl of Southesk, before she had
completed her sixteenth year. She was not personally averse to the match,
and Lord Southesk was so eager for the marriage that he offered to take her
without any portion, and to settle on her any jointure the countess, her
mother, might think proper. Lady Wemyss, however, consulted her friends
on the matter (her husband, James, Lord Burntisland, being dead), and
chiefly George, first Earl of Melville, her brother-in-law.7 For reasons,
1 13th March 1690. 6 27th May 1691.
2 27th March 1690. 7 Original letter in Melville Charter-chest,
3 15th December 1690. printed in " Memorials of the Family of
4 Cf. vol. ii. of this work, p. 242. Wemyss," by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B.,
5 15th May 1690. vol. iii. p. 142.
HIS MARRIAGE TO LADY ANNA WEMYSS. 259
however, which do not clearly appear, the marriage of Lady Anne to Lord
Southesk was decided against, and it then became known that Lord Leven
bore her more than an ordinary affection. Writing on 18th March [1691] to
Lord Melville, Lady Wemyss says : —
" My lord, as for what I wrote formerly to your lordship concerning my Lord
Southesk, his proposalls to my daughter, they were soe verry fair and his offers
soe great as his affection to her apear'd to bee, that really I think it was noe
great wonder that my daughter seem'd to incline to that match. That which I
do think a great deall more strange is that one soe young as she should have
been soe concern'd to have ane unjust right quatt, which might have ruin'd my
familly if it had come to a competition, as I hope in God it never shall. I finde
she has a great minde to have the persone she chuses for her husband should
love her more then his interest, and have noe eye upon her brother's estate, and
I believe she will finde few if anie in Scotland that has a larger share of honour
and generosity then your lordship's sone, my Lord Leven, who, I hope, by this
time has persuaded her of his great affection to her ; but if neither I nor she did
at first believe it was soe great, he may blame himselfe and his friends who were
against it. I have often and frily told him I think he should marry none that
your lordship and his mother are averse from, since marriages seldome prosper
when parents only give a forced consent.
" I am, your lordship's affectionat sister and humble servant,
" M. Wemyss.1 "
The contract of marriage between the earl and Lady Anna Wemyss is
dated at Wemyss 3d September 1691. It obliged the earl to infeft Lady Anna
for life in Craigincat and Balgonie as her jointure lands after his decease,
with 500 merks Scots, and for the better settlement of his estates on the
heirs of the marriage he resigned the whole earldom of Leven. It was like-
wise arranged that if Lady Anna should succeed to the estate of Wemyss,
and there should be two sons of the marriage, the elder should succeed as
Earl of Wemyss, and the second as Earl of Leven. Should there be but one
son, he was to be Earl of Wemyss, and was taken bound to denude himself
of the earldom of Leven in favour of the heir-male of any other marriage of
the Earl of Leven. It was further agreed that if Mr. Francis Montgomerie,
the husband of the deceased Margaret, Countess of Leven, who, as formerly
1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 23S, 239.
260 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
stated, had a large liferent provision out of the estate, still survived when
Lady Anna's jointure became payable, that she would restrict the same
during his lifetime. In respect of the existing entail of the earldom of
Leven, the earl makes provision for the daughters of the marriage, 40,000
merks if only one was born, 50,000 if two, and 60,000 if three or more.
Lady Anna's tocher was 45,000 merks.1
The wedding appears to have taken place the same day, as Lady Leven
begins to keep a household account from that day separately. It is also evident
from entries in the chamberlain's household book, already referred to, that it
must have been celebrated not later than the 27th of the same month. On
that day the earl and countess seem to have been " lurked " at East Wemyss,
when a guinea was given to John More, reader there, with a ducatoon to the
beadle, and the earl's six coach horses were provided for in the village.
Other entries about the same date show that the precentor and beadle at
Markinch church were likewise remembered ; and on 3d October there was
" bought by my lady's ordor for her page, a bible and a quare of papper."
At the same time that the contract of marriage was completed, the
Countess of Wemyss, in view of her own possible future marriage, made an
agreement with her daughter, Lady Anna, whereby the latter, with consent of
the Earl of Leven, promised that in the event of the death of her only
brother, David, Lord Elcho, and of her mother marrying again and having
sons, she would renounce her right of succession to the earldom and estates of
"Wemyss in favour of such heir-male — an agreement which was contrary to
the entail of the estates.2 Happily, however, there was no need for putting
the case to a practical test, as Lord Elcho survived and left a flourishing
family, which is largely represented to this day.
Besides signing the marriage-contract, and giving his consent to the agree-
ment between the Countess of Wemyss and Lady Anna, the Earl of Leven,
the same day, gave his own bond in connection with the marriage arrange-
ments, whereby he promised, in the event of Lady Anna dying without issue,
to restrict the amount of her tocher to be received by him to 36,000 merks.
In the event of his having received the whole, or more than this amount,
1 Original marriage-contract, in Melville 2 Duplicate bond, in Melville Charter-
Charter-ehest. chest.
LORD TAEBAT AND THE COUNTESS OF WEMYSS. 261
before such a casualty, he obliged himself to repay such overplus to the
Countess of Wemyss or her heirs.1
The Countess of Wemyss did afterwards marry, her second husband being-
Sir George Mackenzie, Viscount of Tarbat, afterwards first Earl of Cromartie ;
but they had no issue. As he was seventy and she only forty years of age, the
match created considerable sensation, and no little merriment in social circles.
But the disparity of years was balanced by the great warmth of Lord Tarbat's
affection. For a time the marriage was opposed by her children and their
spouses, and Lord Leven is specially mentioned as being averse. But as they
were unable to change the resolution of the countess, they ultimately con-
sented. In a letter to his wife written from Errol, Lord Leven describes the
signing of the marriage-contract there in April 1700. He says : —
" My Lady Weemys is almost satisfyed with me, but not at all with Elcho or
Northesk. The contract was signed this day by my Lord Tarbat and my Lady
Weemys ; my father and Prestonhall witnesses. Elcho and I wer present.
Northesk went home yesternight and came not back this day. . . . My Lady
Weemys said this day she wold not marry till nixt week. Tarbat signed first, as
is usuall, and when he gave hir the pen he kissed it, and affter she had done he
kised hir hands and then hir mouth." 2
Lord Tarbat's great affection for his second wife, the Countess of Wemyss,
has been shown in the history of the Earls of Cromartie. He survived her,
and occupied much of his time in preparing monuments to her memory.3
Lady Margaret Wemyss, the younger sister of the Countess of Leven,
married David, fourth Earl of Northesk. The match was for a time opposed
by her mother on account of his Jacobite leanings, but he was at length
successful in his suit. In a letter to his countess, which is, as was usual
with the earl, undated, Lord Leven refers to Lord Northesk's courtship. He
says : —
" Northesk is now to lay a closs seidge. My lady sticks much at his not
takeing the oaths. I think your sister should make him a Williamit. My service
to hir. The king is cume to England. I am, ever yours.4
1 Duplicate bond, dated 3d September of Wemyss of Wemyss," vol. i. pp. 316-320,
1691, in Melville Charter-chest. and vol. ii. of this work, p. 242.
3 "The Earls of Cromartie," vol. i. pp.
2 Original letter, undated, in Melville cxlix, cl.
Charter-chest ; cf . " Memorials of the Family 4 Letter in Melville Charter-chest.
262 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
Lady Northesk in a letter to her sister, Lady Leven, describes an inter-
view she had with her mother and father-in-law shortly after their marriage,
which took place on the 29th of April 1700. She says : —
" I know, my dearest sister, yon '11 be content to hear the history of my jurney
to Elcho. I went on Thursday night that I might come home on Saturday morn-
ing, for I expected company with my lord. My mother was very dry to me att
first, and I was hardly set doun when Tarbat went out of the room. She fell on
me for my lords not syning the contrack, and all hir other quarels att him, and
the greatest was that when she asked him before your lord if he minded that she
wou'd not drink your health, he wou'd not say he did not mind it. I heard hir
till ane end, which was a good time, but or all was done I was not a word behind
with hir ladyship, which calmed hir a litle ; for I find what your lord sayes is
very true, It 's best to hold to hir. I asked my father's picture, and she made
many excuses for takeing it doune, becaus it wanted a frame, and was a syse less
then hirs, which was not true, for my lord measured them both when he went
there with hir, but she had forgott that. She promised it me without very much
intrety, and said she would caus draw one for hir self the syse of hir oune
picture. They lay a-bed till ten, and she goes much sooner to bed then
ordiner. She cokers him well up with broath and milk, with strengthening-
roots. I beleve he needs them all. She was expecting your lord, for he
promised to come. She said I cou'd not learne what fine things he hed
given hir. I fancie verie litle. I was very much on the reserve whyle there,
and did not goe to hir room till I was sent for, which she observed and quareld
me for. There was a great dale of ceremony betueen them when I was there ;
nothing but 'my lord' and 'madam' pas'd betuen them, but they were at 'heart'
and 'joy' er I cam, and when I was gone he waited on me to Segieden on Saturday
afternoon, for there was no crossing sooner. He took it very ill when I wished
he might not be the worce with the ill night, and said he was not so tender as
some thought him. Ime sure you are wearie reading noncense, as I am wreten
it. My lord gives his humble service to yow, as we both doe to your lord. I
cannot persuad him to goe see my lady. . . . Burne this as yow wou'd oblidg,
yours, my dear heart. . . . We did not forget Leven's health on Sunday." 1
A letter written by the earl to Lady Anna on the first anniversary of the
day the contract was signed, and when he was abroad with his regiment,
indicates the warmth of his affection for his wife. He writes : —
1 Original letter, May S [1700], in Melville Charter-ehest.
LETTERS TO HIS WIFE. 263
" Fume, September 3d.
" My dearest Heart, — You may easily belive that this is a day I shall never
forgett. But, to speack plainer, I shall always oun that this day twelfe moneth
was the beginning of my happyness in this world, for which, my dearest heart, I
can never thank yow as yow deserve. But since same are still so villanous as to
rob the pacquet and take our letters, I shall say no more on this head, lest this
should have that fate. Only, my dearest, I dare assure yow that my love for yow
encreaseth every day, and it shall not faill to have that effect which yow desire,
and which I have promised. And in this I must reprotch yow that yow doe not
make me that retorn which yow ought, for I am informed from good hands, that
yow have not that regaurd to your health which is both necisar and a dewty on
yow. Pardon me, my dearest, to chid yow so far this day, for I should have done
as much this day twelfe moneth had ther been so much need for it. I think if yow
wold but consider with your selfe the arguments that yow could use to perswade
me to have a care of myselfe, they should be sufficient to perswade yow to the like.
I have wreat to yow thre or four letters since I came to this place, which wee are
bussie fortifying. I have this morning gott two letters from yow, on of 9th and
on of 20 of Agust. Yow may easily judge how acceptable they wer to me. But
alas ! when I had read them, espetialy the last, it maks this day, which I had de-
signed for a day of mirth, to be a day raither of murning, since I know not but
it may be worse with my clearest and my child then when your letter was wreat.
This is a very long letter, so I shall only add that if yow love me yow will have a
good care of your selfe. — I am, my dearest, unalterably yours,
" For the Countess of Leven, Edinburg Castle, Scotland." l
Another letter of uncertain date may also be given as typical of many
by the earl to his countess : —
" Munday.
" My Dearest, — I have yours of Sunday's date, and am at least as sorry for
your being so sick as is proper for a husband to be for so kind and so incomparable
a wife as you are, my dearest heart. I have sent over Doctor Freer, it being fitt
that Mitchell and he wait by turns on yow. Mistris Hunter shall be sent in a
day, if I send not for yow, which I can hardly resolve upon yett. It's like a day
or two may determine me. — My dear, have a care of yourselfe, and belive I am,
ever yours.
" Be assured I will be with yow as soon as possible." 2
1 Original letter in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Original letter, undated, ibid.
264 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
None of the letters of the countess to the earl seem to be preserved, but
one written apparently by her sister, Lady Margaret Wemyss, gives the
opinion of her family about Lord Leven. It is addressed to the Countess of
Leven. She says : —
" My dear Sister, — I know you '11 get a letter from your lord with this post,
so I need say nothing of hem, only that I am very glade to se hem look so
well, and I beleve he is the best husband on earth, which I know you are sufitiently
convinced of. I never saw him so uneasie as he was that night he came hear, for
he had heard on the roade that you was not well, and had got no word after.
He said he would take post nixt day and goe hom if he got no letters that night.
Then he fancied my lady 1 had keeped them from him. Yow may se what
nead you have to take care of yourself for his sake. We shall take all the care
of him we can. My lady has got a very ill cold. She gives her blissing to yow.
The Dutchess of Monmouth came to toune on Wedensday. I like my Lady Dal-
keith. She looks very good. It is late and Saturday, so I shall end. — My dear,
yours for ever,
"December 14th, [16]95."2
Soon after his marriage, as one letter quoted above shows, the Earl of
Leven was required to go abroad with his regiment, as King William in
person was leading an expedition in Flanders against the French. There
was some delay in the despatch of the troops, which occasioned the following-
letter to Lord Leven and his somewhat spirited reply : —
"Whitehall, the 16th February [16]9J.
" My Lord, — His Majesty does not doubt that the regiment under your lord-
ship's command will be sail'd with this fair wind. However, least there might
be any delay in that behalf, his Majesty commands me to signify his pleasure
that you cause them to go on shipboard immediatly, if the weather permit, with-
out staying either for recruits or anything else, which, if necessary for the regi-
ment, may by the next opportunity be sent after them to Holland. — I am, my
Lord, your Lordship's most humble servant, William Blathwayt.
" Earle of Leven."
The earl's reply to this is as follows : —
"Edinburg Castle, February 23.
" Sir, — I had yours of 16, which yow say was by his Majestyfs] order. In
answer to which I must tell yow that it 's non of my fault that the regiment under
1 Margaret, Countess of Wemyss, their mother. 2 Original in Melville Charter-chest.
HIS CAMPAIGN IN FLANDERS, 1692. 265
my command is not in Flanders ere now. Yow know I have not the command,
so was to wait orders, and the frost has been so great that the convoy ships wold
not goe to sea. I have done all I could to haisten this affair, judging it his
Majesty's service, and therfor my dewty, and has accordingly given good example
to the other collonells by shiping my regiment eight days agoe. Collonell
Lawther's regiment was shiped yeasterday, and on batalion of Collonell
Beveridge this day, and the rest are to be shiped to-morrow.
" Ther is on thing that I must take notice off to yow, which is that Sir
Thomas Livingston sais he has no orders for us what the regiments are to doe
when landed, which is vexing. Therfor I wold intreat yow to have orders for
them at ther landing. I have shiped a compleat regiment, and so shall need no
recreuts at present.1 They are all in very good heart, and ther only regrait is to
stay so long a ship board befor they saill. I hop, sir, yow will give his Majesty
account of my diligence wherby yow will very much obleidge, sir, your most
humble servant, Leven.
" Mr. Blaithwait."
Lord Leven did not accompany his regiment, but joined it afterwards in
Flanders. His letters show that he journeyed by Helvoetsluis (23d June) to
Antwerp, where he arrived at the beginning of July.2 On the 25th he was
still there, and wrote to his wife, who, being in delicate health at the time,
had been kept in ignorance of his departure. After referring to the child
"which it has pleased God to give us"— his daughter Mary, who was born
about this time — he says : —
" My dearest Heart, — . . . I shall say no more of my jurnay, haveing wreat
therof formerly suffitiently, I hop, to convince yow of the reasons of my going with-
out your knowledge. All I shall say now is that I am cume this lenth in good health,
and am to be at Brussells to-morrow. The armee. they say, lyeth 9 or ten myles
from it. It 's said here this day that the two armees did engeadge yeasterday, but
the event is not yett known here. All I know is from the Master of Stair's man,
on Macadam. He is here going for Holland, and sais that yeasterday morning our
armee marched from Hall towards the enimie who lay at Engien, within 3 or 4
myles of on another, and that he heard the cannon yeasterday afternoon, and the
small shot when he left Brussells at 7 at night. I shall wreat more fully of this by
nixt post. I have just now sent to the post house to know newes, and I am told
1 He was reported at the time to have taken a considerable number of men out of their
beds for this purpose ; but the statement lacks proof.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 240.
VOL. I. 2 L
266 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
that it was only the left wing of our arrnee did engeadge, and that wee have
gained a pass which it seems the enimie and wee wer both stryveing to be masters
off, and it 's said that Lewt.-Generall Mackay is killed. But I desire not to be
the authour of anie of these newes, not being weell informed. I am apt to
belive ther will now be no more action this year. My dearest, have a care of
your selfe. I hop wee shall have a merry meetting shortly. — I am, ever yours." 1
The engagement referred to was the eventful battle of Steinkirk, and the
news of the death of his old comrade and commander, General Mackay, was
too true. The earl himself does not appear to have been in any action during
the campaign. In his next letter, which is dated from Ninove, he expresses
the opinion that the war would now speedily terminate : —
'•' Espeatialy since the French are affraid to fight us, which maks them keep
them selfes in such strong grands that its impossible for us to cume att them. . . .
Wee came to this camp yeasterday. This camp useth to be the last every year
so it 's like to be so this also. My dearest heart, I am very weell. I want for
nothing. I have a very good stomack, and wants naither good meat nor drink.
I mind yovv as I ought so good and kind a wife, and yow shall always be my
dearest, dearest heart, and I your most affectionate, L." 2
Prom Ninove the earl moved to Bruges, whence he writes to the countess
on August 23d, old style : —
"My dearest, I came here yeasterday. Wee are six regiments of foot under
Ramsay's command, and Lewt.-Generall Talmatch is to cume to us this day with
fyfe regiments more. I belive wee are to march to-morrow towards Ostend to
joine the Due of Linster, who is now landed ther with the English army. . . .
It 's said wee are going to fortify a place called Dixmude near Newport, and it 's
like that will end this campaigne. . . . My horses are cume from England, so I
am weell eneugh mounted. . . . The king is still at Deynse betwixt the French
and us." 3
On the 26th August the earl again wrote as he was passing through
Nieuport, en route for Fumes, and three days later from Furnes, where he
was to join the Duke of Leinster. He says, we are " repairing the fortify -
cations of this place, which has long been in possession of the French.
1 Letter, dated July 25th, old style, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Letter, dated August 11th, old style, ibid. 3 Letter, ibid.
MILITARY DUTY ABROAD. 267
The Due of Linster is lying within a legue of us with the English armee
under his command, and is to join us this day. The French are in great
consternation by our army being so near, and in so many bodys. But the
season is so far advanced that ther's litle hops of doing so much as wer
necisar to bumble them as they ought."1 During the greater part of the
following month the earl was at Dixmude, which the army fortified, but were
much retarded in their operations by wet weather, and he took his turn of
duty as governor of the camp. Writing on 1 1th September (old style) he
says, " Brigadier Bamsay was gouerneur last week, and now I am this week,
for it goes round. The command is honurable but troblesome. I have six
regiments in garrison ; the rest of the army are camped without the ports." 2
Letters from home having informed the earl that the health of his
countess was seriously affected by his absence, and by her fears for his safety,
he wrote her frequently on the subject. In one letter he writes : —
" Dixmude, September 9.
" My deaeest, — I can abstean no longer from chiding with yow, and I shall
leve it to yowr selfe to judge if I have reason or not. Its wreat to me from all
hands that yow are very negligent and careless of your health, and that yow are
therby becunie or raither continous very weak. Sure I am your love to me ought
to have ane other effect, and God knous it grives me that it should have such as
it haith. I must tell you likeways to take care yow offend not God by so doing,
for to be over anxious, and not submissive to what God trysteth us with, is no
doubt sinfull, and may be a ready way to provoke him to make us meett with
what afflictions wee are too distrustfully affraied off. For no doubt wee ought
to depend on God for protection as weell as for salvation, and certenly ther is
more reason to be thankfull to him on my account for former protection then to
be distrustfull for the future. Its trew, if Gods ways wer as our ways, I and
all concerned in me might be affraid of greater judgements to befall me then that
of falling by, or in the hands of a French enemie. But he is mercyfull, and I
hop will not deall with me according to my deservings, but according to the
greatness of his mercy will deall accordingly with me both in time and in eternitty.
You know me better then to think, my dearest heart, that its a matter of
indifferency for me to be absent from yow (without anie compliment, my dear, I
wer not worthy of yow if I wer so). I assure its heavier for me to bear then
ever anie did or shall know. But no more of this melancholy subject. So I
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Letter, ibid.
268 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
shall now tell yow that befor this cume to your hand I hop to beginc my jurnay.
You will know by the publick newes when the king goes. Wee hear that he is
to leve the great army this day, and to goe for Holand. I have sume thoughts
to goe wait on the Elector of Brandenburg, who is at Cleve. This will take a
week to goe and cume back to Holand. But if he cume to see the king, as its
said he will, that will save my jurnay. Yow wold direct all your letters to
me to Mr. Nairn or to be left with Mr. Andrew Russell, marchand in Rotterdam,
but to Mr. Nairn will be best, I think. I am, my dearest, yours, if yow have a
good care of yourself. Make my compliment to my lady, my sister and brother.
The last I had from yow was of 20 Agust."
In another letter from the same place, dated 1 8th September, he hopes to
begin his journey home the following week, and again chides the countess
for her fears : —
" I wonder why yow wer so allarmed at my telling yow wee wer in the French
Flanders, for I have always told yow that they dare not fight us. If they did I
assure yow ther wold soon be ane end of the war. ... If the weather had not
been very rainie wee had been readie to leve this in two thre days. The king,
I hear, is gone from the great army yeasterday for Holland, wher he will stay ten
days. I hop to wait on him to England." 1
The earl left Dixmude on the 23d September with a part of the army
under Major-General Sir Henry Bellasis for shipment at Ostend, but their
progress was stayed at Nieuport by rain and storms for a week or so. There
was further delay at Ostend both by the time necessary for embarking the
" great guns," and waiting for the fleet which was to convoy them home. On
1 9th October the earl writes : — " I hop to be under saill for England by
twelfe a cloack this day. All things are makeing ready, and wee have a faire
wind, so I hop to be soon in England." Before the end of October he was in
London, and in one of his letters to the countess he says : — " I have brought
six pritty little coach horses from Flanders to yow for the black horse I took
from yow. I have sent him to the Elector of Brandenburg." 2 In the same
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest, horses he had sent had arrived. He adds —
" They are of a greatness and size such as we
2 The gift was acknowledged by M. desire, and there is no doubt they will please
Schwerin, the Master of the Horse, who in- his serene highness." [French letter, 27th
timated that both the black and the bay September 1692, ibid.]
STATE OF HIS REGIMENT. 269
letter he explains why he should have to stay in London for a short time.
" I am put in hops to gett sume of my arrears very shortly, which I need much,
for Flanders has cost me very dear." But on 29th November he writes : —
" I hop to be as good as my word in my last, for I hop to begine my jurnay
this day. I took leve of the king and queen yeasterday. ... I have no newes.
I told yow formerly that Mr. Stewart was made kings advacatt. He was
knighted this day. I hop to see yow the 10th except the ways be bad. Yow
may be sure I will make no stay at Edinburg." T
The earl left his regiment in Flanders to take part in the campaign of
the succeeding years, but did not return to take his place at the head of it.
This was matter of regret to his friends connected with the re°iment.
Before he joined it in Flanders in 1692, Sir David Nairne,2 the agent of the
family in London, and who also looked after the financial affairs of the regi-
ment, wrote to him : — " I wish it were with your lordship's conveniencey to be
in Flanders. Livtenant Collonell Arnott writs that you have many enimies
there. I doubt not but your presence wold make many disappear." 3 Six
months later, after the earl had been to Flanders and returned, Sir David,
referring to the lieutenant-colonel, in whose charge the earl had left his
regiment, writes : — " They say he is a brave man ; yet I wish with all my
heart your lordship were well quit of him." * It was reported that this officer
absented himself from the regiment when it took part in the action at
Naniur ; and as some of the other officers did likewise, and the regiment
behaved ill in consequence, much of the blame was laid on the earl. The
king, indeed, was totally averse to colonels being absent from their regiments
when on active service, and he threatened to supersede all such as continued
to absent themselves. On being informed of this the earl wrote the following
letter, evidently to the Earl of Portland : —
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest. the Earl of Leven abroad, and on their return
- Sir David Nairne was originally a page with the Prince of Orange, was, by Lord Mel-
in the service of Anna, Duchess of Buccleuch ville's influence, appointed secretary to the
and Monmouth, and was sent by her to warn Thistle, and to other offices, afterwards be-
Lord Melville, or rather to assist him in coming apparently an under-secretary of state,
making his escape from arrest when in Lon- 3 Letter, 4th June 1(392. in Melville Charter-
don. Being himself in jeopardy on this chest,
account, he accompanied Lord Melville and 4 Letter, 24th January 1693, ibid.
270 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
"Edinburgh Castle, September 5.
" My Lord, — Being informed that its judged to be prujuditiall to his
Majesty's service that any regiment should be without a colonell at ther head,
and I being necisarly obleidged to atend here, both in obeidiance to his Majestys
commands and the circumstances of this castle does require, therfor I humbly
intreat of your lordship that you would acquent his Majestye that he would be
pleased to dispose of that regiment which I have the honour to command. I
most also intreat of your lordship that you will take this regiment unto your
speciall protection, and in particular I humbly recommend the Major therof to
your lordships favour, for its he who has been most asisting to me in every
thing which conserned the good of the regiment. And this I dare say for him
that your lordship shall never repent of any favour you shall be pleased to put on
him. Pardon this trouble amongst many others which I have given your lord-
ship, and be pleased to continue your favour to — My Lord, your Lordships most
humble and most obedient servant." 1
Probably the major here referred to is Eobert Maekay, whom the Earl
of Leven assisted on the field of Killiecrankie. A few days later, on hearing-
it rumoured that the earl intended to resign, Maekay applied to him for
his recommendation of him to the post, not knowing it had already been
given. In his letter he tells of the conduct of the regiment in the
engagement, and how the lieutenant-colonel was at Louvaiu, where "he
could not but hear our canon, . . . and might have bein with the regiment
befor it fired a shott."2 Arnot himself, however, wrote the earl on the
subject of the engagement, and from information he obtained at court was
able to give Lord Portland's opinion that the king would not take the
regiment from the earl without speaking first with himself (Leven) on the
subject.3 But Arnot was superseded as lieutenant-colonel in the earl's
regiment at this time, by Major Keith, of whom Sir David Nairne writes :
" I have known him intimately for many years. He is nicely honest, but
somewhat peevish, or to give it a Scots name, he is cankerd." i The earl
soon after this did lose the command of his regiment, as this was one
ground of complaint in 1695 by him and his father of their treatment by
1 Unsigned and unaddressed draft in Mel- 3 Letter, 3d September 1693, in Melville
ville Charter-chest. Charter-chest.
2 Letter, 10th September 1693, ibid. 4 Letter, 31st October 1693, ibid.
TROUBLES ABOUT APPOINTMENTS IN CASTLE. 271
the court ; but it is possible that this was merely owing to the king's known
opposition to absentee colonels being put in force against Lord Leven, as
it had been in other cases.
Still, about the time indicated efforts were made to influence the king
against the earl and other, members of his family, which partially suc-
ceeded ; so that the promotion which he might naturally have expected
was withheld, and younger men preferred. Thus Sir Thomas Living-
stone, though he had no interest in Scotland save that of birth, and
was a younger colonel, was made commander-in-chief. Then also a
deputy -governor was thrust upon Lord Leven in the castle without his
knowledge or consent, and the salary attached to the office was given to
this man, whom Leven could not trust, because he had formerly deserted the
king's service when the pay failed, and many of his relatives were Jacobites.
Besides, the appointment, but for the firmness displayed by the earl, would
have injured the garrison, which to a certain extent it did, for the earl,
being wont to employ his salary for the benefit of the garrison, was now
unable to do so, and he only retained the post, though at much personal
expense, because he believed it for the king's interest that he should.
Misunderstanding also arose between the commander-in-chief and the
earl in respect to the appointment of the master-gunner in the castle. It
was an old but undecided question, which of these officers had the right to
appoint. The office being or becoming vacant in the earl's time, he talked
over the matter with Livingstone, who, as general of the ordnance, claimed the
patronage. Leven, being directly responsible to the king for his charge, felt
he could not be answerable for those in the castle if appointed by others than
himself, yet he agreed to yield if Livingstone could prove his right, and it was
arranged that Livingstone should look out a suitable man, who would after-
wards be commissioned by the one whose right was established. Notwith-
standing this agreement Livingstone gave his commission to an old man,
named Lockhart, above seventy years of age, whom the earl refused to
receive, and the matter was referred to the decision of the king. He decided
against the earl, stating that " the master of the ordnance had the right of
appointing the canoneers in all the castles without exception." x
1 Letter, Earl of Portland to Earl of Leven, 26th February [no year], in Melville Charter-chest.
272 DAVID, THIRD KARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE
Much of this opposition was designed, it is said, that the earl might
lose the governorship of the castle, which the Jacobite plotters intended
for Annandale.1 That this was so far true is shown from a statement in a
report made by Sir James Montgomerie to King James the Seventh. " If,"
he says, " Leven could be gott removed from the castle of Edinburgh, and
the same putt in any other man's hand that may pretend to it, there might
be hopes of gaineing it, which would make your busines easie. There hath
been endeavours used at a distance to sound his inclinations, but all to no
purpose."2 This from a political opponent is flattering testimony to the earl's
genuine loyalty to King William's interest, from which, indeed, neither he
nor any of his family would allow themselves to be drawn by any allure-
ments whatever.
As governor of the castle of Edinburgh it was the earl's duty to receive
and provide for the safe custody of such prisoners as were committed to his
fortress. These were chiefly noblemen and gentlemen who had either taken
part with or were suspected of favouring the Jacobite plotters. One of these,
already mentioned, was the Earl of Seaforth, another the Earl of Home ; 3
while a third was the Earl of Breadalbane, who was incarcerated to appease
the public outcry on account of the massacre of Glencoe. But some mem-
bers of parliament, among whom was Lord Leven, thought that Breadalbane
should not be made a prisoner, and he was not long detained in the castle.4
Among others in the charge of the earl in 1696 were the Earl of Strathmore,
Lord Drumcairn, Sir William Bruce of Kinross, and Sir William Sharp.5
The earl and his family sometimes resided in the castle, one occasion of
the countess coming to it being chronicled at the commencement of a house-
hold book, beginning at that date, 22 July 1697. But they had also a house
or apartments in Edinburgh, these being located in the Canongate in 1 692
and later in the Castlehill, adjacent to the castle. At one time, probably in
1696, the earl discovered a plot to betray the castle. In a letter to the
countess, dated Edinburgh, April 30th, he writes : —
1 Vindication in Melville Charter-chest. 4 The Marchmont Papers, vol. iii. p. 415.
„ „ , . , „„, Vol. ii. of this work, p. 54.
2 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 230. . _• , ,. ' l ., . ..,.,,,
■' Orders respecting their custody m Mel-
s Ibid. pp. 224, 225, 233. ville Charter-chest.
DEFEATS A PLOT TO BETKAY EDINBURGH CASTLE. 273
"My dearest HEART, — I came safe hear yeasterday at 12 aclock, and the
most opertunily in the world, for the counsill was sitting, and were takeing sume
resulutions concerning the castle. Ther is no express nor post cume since what
yow heard of, and its generaly said by all persons that if anie invasion be it
will be in England and not here. However, folk have been alarmed here by a
rumore as if the castle should have been betrayed, and that by sume within it,
particularly Lewtenant Crighton. But since I came I have putt him under
arreast, and has turned all the ladys and women out of the castle, and does not
allow of anie person to enter the castle untill they have my spetiall allowance.
My aiming has putt the toun in good heart, for I lay here last night. My
dearest, I must beg yow not to [be] frighted, for a dare say that thers no fear. I
will be obleidged to stay here till Tewsdays post cume, because the Theasmy
sitts ane Munday, and ther I must attend to gett provisions for the castle, and I
hop by Tewsdays post wee shall know what all will turn too. . . ." 1
Several letters to the countess in December 1695 show that the earl at
that date paid a visit to London in connection with his official duties. He
had an audience with the king, and spent some time agreeably with his wife's
mother and the Wemyss family, also meeting there the Duchess of Buccleuch
and Monmouth.2
The earl was a close attender of the Scottish parliament in all its sessions
during this period, and on account both of his high official position and
known loyalty, was always a member of the committee for the security
of the kingdom. Other committees on which he served were the commis-
sion appointed in 1693 for the conversion of the poll-tax into a collec-
tion, and that for reporting on controverted elections in 1696.3 In the
latter year he signed an address presented to the king by the parliament,
in which the signatories congratulated him on the failure of the Popish plot
to assassinate his Majesty and invade the kingdom, anew declared their
allegiance to him, and avowed their determination to avenge his death should
he fall in such wise by the hands of his enemies.4
The Earl of Leven seems to have opposed the popular clamour and sided
with the measures proposed by the king on the Darien colonisation scheme,
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
2 Letters, ibid. ; also vol. ii. of this work, vol. ix. pp. 351, 453, App. p. 72; x. 9, 123,
pp. 173, 240. Memoirs of the Family of 193, 207 ; xi. 14.
Wemyss of Wemyss, vol. iii. p. 132. 4 Ibid. vol. x. p. 10.
VOL. I. 2 M
274 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
which so much excited both the parliament and country at this time. He
is generally named as voting against the extreme measures proposed from
time to time on this business.1 And, no doubt, his action was based on
sound financial and political economy, as well as upon a desire to defeat the
objects of partisans who sought to make the agitation a stepping-stone to
another revolution ; for to such considerations he was not indifferent, being
at or about this time a shareholder and one of the governors of the Bank of
Scotland, then just established, and he continued to direct the affairs of the
bank all his life.
"While the Scottish parliament lasted, the earl generally tabled his pro-
test at the commencement of the several sessions against the precedency
given to the title of the Earl of Callendar over his own. From a paper on
the subject, written for the earl's information, it would appear that he
then contemplated the further testing of the question. But nothing more
was done.2 Of one debate in parliament, evidently the question whether
Lord Montgomerie was to be employed as lord high treasurer for voting in
parliament, which came before the house on Tuesday, 29th October 1700,
the earl wrote to his wife somewhat triumphantly, on account of the part he
himself acted in it. His letter is only dated " Wednesday." He says : —
"... Wee had a long battle yeasterday, but no victory in either side, ther
being no votte, but wee offered it to them, and they yealded the point in debate
raither as ventour the votte. I had the good fortoun to dryve the naill in the
debate to the head, so that none pretended to make a reply. And yett wee did
not improve the advantage as wee ought. This will make yow vaine, and yow
may think me so in telling it. But I know yow will be glad to hear that I do
act as good a part as anie other. I was much thanked by the commissioner,3 and
other very good judges. . . ."
He then refers to the controverted election for the county of Wigtown,
between Lord Basil Hamilton (brother of the duke) and William Stewart of
Castlemilk, which was to be considered on the morrow, and in which he
anticipated their side would also win.4
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. x. 3 The Duke of Queensberry.
j). 247; Marchmont Papers, vol. iii. p. 182.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. ix. 4 Letter in Melville Charter-chest; cf.
p. 350; x. pp. 6, 116, 186; xi. pp. 6, 32, 303. Hume of Crossrig's Diary, pp. 6-8.
THE DEATH OF HIS COUNTESS, 1702. 275
In October of this year the earl had an illness, accompanied with a swim-
ming in his head and other symptoms of bodily derangement. But towards
the end of that month he was recovering. Soon afterwards, however, he
suffered a severe bereavement by the death of his much-loved countess,
which took place somewhat suddenly in the castle of Edinburgh on 9th
January 1702. Her loss was much lamented, both by the earl and her
acquaintances. It was made the subject of some verses which were printed
at the time. They characterise her as
" A lady good and just, while living, dy'd,
While dying, lived, to heaven's now convey 'd.
The maiden Mount outvies the Roman seven,
Gave a wise king to earth, and a great saint to heaven,
Great Britain's James, and Anna Weems of Levin.
The oppressed's patron, and the orphan's stay,
She did her charity to all display.
No interest, passion, or blind prejudice
Could on the reins of her bright judgement seize.
Calm and serene her mind, from passion free,
Like just Astraa judged with equity.
Her husband's glory, and her sex's pride,
Who lov'd, admir'd, and all submission paid." 1
The death of the countess had been preceded a few years by the death of
the earl's elder brother, Alexander, Lord Baith, and it was followed within
two months by the death of King William. To the earl, who had been
among the first and the firmest of his adherents, this was also a sad stroke.
Besides the intelligence of the council, a friendly letter from the secretary of
state, the Earl of Seafield, conveyed the news in sympathetic form, and the
Electress Sophia likewise condoled with the earl on the loss to the nation
and themselves.2 She prided herself on being a Scot by extraction, and took
a warm interest in whatever related to the welfare of the country. The earl
1 Scottish Elegiac Verses, 1629-1729, pp. 136-140.
2 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 56, 182.
276 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EAEL OF MELVILLE.
took an active part in promoting the succession of Queen Anne, and his con-
duct was commended by the electress, who quite approved of the policy of
the constitutional party. His services were also acknowledged by the
government. Lord Seafield writes : " Your lordship's friends here are most
sensible that your lordship has acted very vigorously and faithfully in the
present juncture." 1
He was also one of the few Scottish statesmen who supported the
English proposal for the limitation of the succession after the failure of the
children of Queen Anne, to the children of the Electress Sophia. The
majority of the Scottish parliament, however, led by Andrew Fletcher of
Salton, carried another act of security, though the commissioner, Queen sberry,
refused to give it the royal assent.2 At the conclusion of the parliament the
commissioner went to court to acquaint the queen with the progress of events
in Scotland, and reported very favourably to her Majesty the part the Earl
of Leven had acted. A letter by Sir David Nairne, dated 16th October 1703,
and indorsed by the earl — " Ordoring me to come up to London by hir
Majesty's ordors," states : —
" His Grace, my lord commissioner came hither on Munday last, and on
Tewsday went to Windsor, and returned at night, none being with him but
myselfe. Yeasterday he went again, and this day had a good opportunity of
speaking pritty fully to the queen, yet not soe much as goe to all circumstances
of her affairs in the time he had. He did most fathfully give accountt of your
lordship's services in soe much that her Majestie is very much convinced thereby
both of your honor, honesty, and capacity, and did desire his grace wold write
for your lordship to come up hither with as much convenient expedition as you
can make. After his grace's long jurny, and soe much fatigue since, with
some concerne for his sons being indisposed, he is not able to write by this post,
and beggs your lordship will for these reasons excuse him. He hopes your lord-
ship on recept of this will prepaire for Edinburgh (towards your jurny), where
there will be a letter from his grace to your lordship, signyfying her Majestie's
pleasure, which your lordship may depend upon is what I herebye tell your lord-
ship. I need not tell your lordship with what satisfaction I heard his Grace
represent you, both as to your services to the queen and your affectionat way of
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 182.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. xi. pp. 70, 73.
APPOINTED MAJOR-GENERAL OF THE FORCES. 277
performing them with respect to his grace, and I assure your lordship he is most
sensible of them, and declairs soe on all occasions. . . ."
The writer in concluding the letter expresses his great desire for a con-
tinuance of the warm friendship between the earl and the commissioner,
who was likely to be able to serve him, for, he says, the queen received him
" with all the kindness he could wish, and tho' noe others but myselfe doe yet
know it, I must tell your lordship that she has declaired to him this day that
she will containow with him the trust she has hitherto reposed in him, and
that it shall not be in the power of any to alter her in this respect."
At first, to all appearance, the queen did not really know who were
her best friends in Scotland, and offices were conferred on some whom the
queen soon saw reason to discard again. At the close of 1702 the Earl of
Leven was deprived of the command of the castle of Edinburgh, which was
given, by commission dated 31st December that year, to William, Earl of
March, the second son of the first Duke of Queensberry. This loss was
somewhat compensated by the earl's appointment, under the queen's com-
mission dated 1st January 1703, as major-general of all the forces in
Scotland.1 This was prior to the meeting of parliament, and the subsequent
recommendation of the Earl of Leven to the queen's favour above referred
to. Queensberry's account of affairs appears to have led to a resolution to
redistribute the Scottish offices, and the earl was not forgotten. Sir David
jSTairne, in a long letter dated 25th December, without year, but probably
written in 1703, and for obvious reasons unsigned, but indorsed with the
writer's name by the earl, gives an account of the meeting of the Scottish
statesmen at which these matters were discussed. The letter, however,
is limited to that portion of it which relates to Leven. It is of some value
as showing the inner working of state affairs at the time : —
" Two or three dayes agoe I was present at a very deliberat reasoning on all
affairs with the D. of A.,2 the Ch.,3 and two secretaries. There was scarse any
thing wee did not goe through. Amongst others what concerned the E. of L.4
And first, as to his gift of wards, it was said that noething made a greater noise
in King James' times then the like to the Earl of Pearth ; that it in a manner
1 Commission in Melville Charter-chest. 3 The chancellor, Earl of Seafield.
2 John, second Duke of Argyll. 4 Earl of Leven.
278 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
subjected all the subjects in the kingdom by turns to that earle ; that it put the
queen out of a power to oblidge people, as parliament] men, etc., when there
are not places enngh to give to evrie body, and the granting of the releiff and
wards was very often great obligations. Soe that I found, unless the earle con-
descends to the restriction which was proposed to him by the Earle of Loudoun,
the gift will be opposed. I said that the gift was not granted to that earle on a
gratuitous complyment, but for ane onerous cause, viz., a debt due, and that it was
to containow noe longer then the debt was payd. This did much startle the
Duke of Argyll, who knew it not befor, and very ffrankly he said it much altered
the cace ; and tho' he thought the gift should not pass without the restrictions,
yet it ought to be in such manner contrived as to secure the debt. I said that I
did not think the earle had any vew by it, but to be payd what was due to him-
selfe and father, and that if they wold propose any funde to secure the debt, I
belived he wold not be tenacious for that gift. They all thought the proposall
reasonable, and resolved to let the gift ley by till further consideration and
advisement with the earle himselfe.
" Next came to the point of commander in cheiff. They all agreed that he
shoud have it, but it seems the stop he put to the adjutant's commission maks
them think he intends a power of nameing all the officers in the armie as they
fall, which its thought he shoud not have — that Ramsay had it once — but King
William seeing the inconveniency of it, did recall it. Beside they thought evrie
collonell of a regiment ought to have the recommendation of there officers. I
said that he was answerable for the armie, and therfor ought to have the appro-
bation of officers ; but that as to the puting in or out into particular regiments, I
did not beleive he wold by any absolute power, but upon consertion with the
collonells, unless on some particular occasions when good reasons might be given
for it. Then wee came to the guards, and positively the Duke of Argyll said he
had warrants to ley doun his uncle's commission, if he had them not. Soe there
was noe argueing on that point. I said I beleived the earle wold be as wrell
pleased to keep the castle. That was thought inconvenient too. Yet I found
that will be rather agreed to.
" Then it was started who shoud have the ordinance. It was proposed to me.
I said I never had the lest notion that the earle was to lose it, and that if he did
I thought he had noe reason to thank any bodjr for the other. It was said it was
too many places in one. I instanced others that had the like, particularly Duglass
and Sir Thomas Livingston. However, that was let fall. However, I think the earl
shoud be advised to wrrite to the Duke of Marlborough and my lord treasurer on
this subject. I have done my pairt here with his other friends of this kingdom.
DISCUSSION ABOUT HIS OFFICES. 279
"Next came in a point of a commission for commissary of the af tilery.
This the Duke of Argyll proposed, indeed, when he came first up, but I spoak to
the secretaries about it. Soe it was delayd and I heard noe more of it till then.
The duke asked the secretary about it as if it had been done. They said they
had not got it from me. Then fury rose. I notwithstanding told them that I
thought it ought not to be done without the Earle of Leven's consent. Then I
was plainly told that I had a mind to make that earl sole governour of the king-
dom both in civill and military affairs, viz., by the gift of wards and the power
of commander in cheiff. I answered very submissively that I thought it my
duty to tell the inconveniencys of things proposed, but after that, I was to obey
commands and draw what papers I was ordered. The duke roard, and said that
it was in his power to prevent anything the earle pretended to, and that seing he
has not done it even when his own uncle had soe good pretentions, he thought he
might have such a small commission for askeing when he could get it himselfe if
he wold aske the queen. I told his grace that I did not doubt but the earle wold
be ready to gratyfye him in any thing in his power, and that what letters I had
got from his lordship seemed to ley a dependence on his graces favour in caice
he should meet with opposition from others, and that what I had now objected
to that commission was only what occured to myselfe and consonant even to
what he had just said befor, viz., that collonells shoud have the recommending of
there own officers, and that this was more immediatly under himselfe as
generall of the ordinance and not as commander in cheiff. After much talkeing
he became calmer and took me aside, and desired me to write to the earle about
it by way of complyment, that he wold take it kindly if it was done. Now, my
poor oppinion is that the earle shoud grant it by way of comptyment, for I know
it will be done, and if the earle maks the complyment the duke swears he will
not oppose his pretention to the commandership, and if otherways he will, and
he is pritty positive, and I beleive has soe much interest by that way as to have
anything done what he pleases. I know there are many things in this long
letter may be usefull to the earle, and when ever I finde any thing that is soe I
think I ought [to] finde some way to let him know it, and this is one. I beg you
will give him great caution not to let any use he maks of it be as that it may
be knowen the information came this way, for I finde I am suspected by some to
be too much his servant, but that I think I can not be.
"25 December.
"Pray let me know some merchant in toune there that I may send letters
under his covert, and let me know of your receaveing this." 1
1 Original in Melville Charter-chest.
280 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
The gift of wards referred to in this letter was duly bestowed upon the earl
by Queen Anne on 20th May 1704, with the limitations agreed upon, so far
at least. The signature states that her Majesty, considering the small advan-
tage she had by the casualties belonging to her of the lands held by her as
queen or prince and steward of Scotland, whether ward simple, or taxed, or
feu, with the marriage, or by non-entry of vassals, holding their lands ward or
blench, and also " considering the faithfull services done and performed by her
Majesties right trusty and welbeloved cousin and counsellor David, Earle of
Leven, and her right trusty and welbeloved cousin, George, Earle of Melvill,
his father, to her Majestie and her royall brother, King William, of blessed
memory, and that there is considerable arrears due to them of their pensions
and sallerys for their services in the offices they were employed in by us and
our said royall brother," ordains, with consent of her commissioners of
treasury and exchequer, a letter of gift of these wards which had fallen in
the hands of the crown since the 23d April 1689, and which should hereafter
become due (excepting such as had been paid) until the sum of thou-
sand pounds sterling, free of all charges and expenses, should have been paid
up, when the gift should, ipso facto, become void. In order to a proper
accounting it was provided that all sums should be paid in exchequer. It is
not clearly ascertainable whether this gift ever became really operative, but
the signature is indorsed " ]SToArember tenth 1704, presented in tresurie.
(Signd.) Loudoun." 1
A few months previously the queen had also conferred on the earl a lease of
the assize herrings on the east seas between Berwick and Ferryport-on- Craig
for nineteen years, from the date of the expiry of a former lease granted by
King William the Third to the earl's lately deceased uncle, Mr. James Mel-
ville of Cassingray and his heirs. The earl was the heir of his uncle ; but
accounts show that for each of the years 1705 and 1706 the value of the
gift was only £2 sterling.2
While referring to grants to the earl in recognition of his services, etc.,
it may be noted that there exists in the Melville charter-chest also an old
copy letter, unsigned and undated, which bears that a grant had the same
1 Original signature in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Original lease, dated 29th January 1703, ibid.
QUEEN ANNE'S CONFIDENCE IN THE EARL. 281
day beeu made to the earl, probably by King William, of the right " to sett
tacks of the haill teynds within the bishoprick and pryorie of St. Andrews
that are now fallen or that shall hapen to fall within the space of seven
years efter the date of thir presents through the expyreing of the former
tacks." These had fallen in the hands of the crown by the suppression of
episcopacy in Scotland. The letter directs that the signature, as soon as
presented, should pass the great seal per saltum.1
From letters written by the Duke of Queensberry to Lord Leven it appears
that he had obeyed her Majesty's summons to come to London. So satisfied
was the queen with him that she declared her resolution of being guided by
his advice, in conjunction with one or two others, with regard to Scottish
affairs. This was communicated to the earl by the Duke of Argyll, with whom
matters appear to have been satisfactorily arranged, probably on the footing
suggested by Sir David Nairne.2 It was considered necessary that Leven
should return to Scotland to keep the party there together, in view of the
approaching meeting of parliament ; and some interesting letters bearing on
the political situation passed between the earl and Queensberry and other
noblemen. The meeting of parliament was a stormy one, and its pro-
ceedings formed the subject of some correspondence between the earl and
prominent English statesmen, among whom was Sidney, Lord Godolphin,
lord treasurer of England, who assured the earl of the queen's constant
regard for him.3
Besides the political situation the earl was personally interested in this
parliament in connection first with a petition presented on behalf of the
Duchess of Buccleuch about her estate affairs, in which he had acted as one of
her commissioners ; and secondly, the auditing of the public accounts. He
was involved in the latter by being cautioner for his uncle, the laird of Cas-
singray, collector of the hearth-money, and parliamentary inquisition was now
being made into the returns. Apparently in connection with this fund the
earl had applied for a royal remission, which, however, the queen was too
prudent to grant, though she promised to interpose her authority in case of
need.4 The matter accordingly came before parliament, and, as his uncle was
1 Copy in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 1S6, 187.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 184. i Ibid, p. 185.
VOL. I. 2 N
282 DAVID, THIRD EARL OP LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
dead, the earl was dealt with as the responsible party, but in a spirit of
fairness.1
After the parliament was over the queen restored the keeping of the
castle of Edinburgh to the Earl of Leven by a new commission, dated 17th
October 1704. The tenure of the office was, as formerly, during her Majesty's
pleasure.2 A question afterwards arose between him and the Earl of March
as to who was entitled to the castle revenues for that year, and the court of
session decided that each should receive the just and equal half.3 The earl
was congratulated on his restoration by the Princess Sophia, who also expressed
her high appreciation of his devotion to her service, and in this her son,
George, Elector of Brunswick, afterwards King George the First of Great
Britain, joined her.4 Lord Godolphin and the Earl of Seafield also wrote to
the earl ; the former in his letter refers to another appointment for which
the earl had made application through the Duke of Marlborough, that of
master of the ordnance. This, however, the queen delayed until Marl-
borough's return ; " She thought it was better to stick to what your lordship
had desired, and she had promised." 5
The delay was not long, as by her Majesty's commission, dated 7th April
1705, the earl was duly constituted master of the ordnance in Scotland, and of
the same date he received letters, giving him an annual pension of £1 50 sterling
with that office, in addition to the usual salary of £150.6 Soon afterwards,
through the death of Lieut.-General Bamsay, the post of commander-in-chief of
the Scottish forces became vacant, and as next in command the earl desired her
Majesty to prefer him to the office. As both Lord Godolphin and the Duke of
Marlborough interested themselves in his favour, the appointment virtually
lying in the duke's power, and as the queen was entirely satisfied with the capa-
cities and loyalty of the earl, the appointment was practically made, though
it awaited the return of the duke from abroad. In January 1706, the duke
wrote to the earl congratulating him on his promotion, and he received immedi-
ately thereafter similar letters from other friends to the same purpose.7 His
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 4 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 58, 59.
vol. xi. pp. 170, 171. 6 Ibid. p. 188.
2 Original commission in Melville Charter- 6 Original commission and letters in Mel-
chest, ville Charter-chest.
3 Decreet, 28th June 1710, ibid. 7 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 189-194.
APPOINTED COMMANDER-IN-CHIEF IN SCOTLAND. 283
commission was dated 2d March 1706, and provided that the office should be
held without prejudice to his other positions.1
The earl had now attained to all the posts mapped out for him in Sir
David Nairne's letter formerly referred to. Along with the custody of the
metropolitan fortress he held the highest military authority in Scotland,
co-ordinate with that of John, Duke of Marlborough, in England, with whom,
indeed, the Earl of Leven had much official correspondence, which was always
conducted in a strain of mutual friendship and esteem.2 After the Union,
however, there was a reconstruction of the military establishment, and the
Scottish office, though not abolished, appears to have been in a manner sub-
ordinated to Marlborough's commission. It was found necessary, at least, that
the duke " must be master of the ordinance for the whole islands ; " but Lord
Loudoun, who intimates the decision to the earl, says it would be so done
that he should be no loser thereby.3 To the same effect Sir David Nairne
wrote, "... I think now the establishment is very near ended, and
the castle will be to your satisfaction, and you are set doun livtenant
generall's pay. But I finde you can not containow to be master of the
ordinance, as judgeing it inconsistant with the Duke of Marlborrow's com-
mission. But the queen has promised the pay shall be made up to your
lordship, but I believe of this the secretaire will write by the queen's
commands. . . ."4 The earl continued to hold the office, probably under
the duke.
When Lord Leven became commander-in-chief the appointments in the
army were at the will of other officials than himself, such as the secre-
taries of state and others. But the queen opposed this method, and
declared it to be her desire that all appointments should be upon the
earl's recommendation. Perhaps this result was indirectly brought about
by Sir David Nairne, who in a long letter relates an interview with the
queen at which she intimated this desire. When he went to her Majesty to
get a number of commissions signed, " she asked me, whom you had recom-
mended ? " On Nairne replying that he " was obliged to lay before her the
1 Commission in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Original letter, 23d April 1708, in Mel-
ville Charter-chest.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 183-230 passim. 4 Original letter, 22d April 1708, ibid.
284 DAVID, THIRD KARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
pretentious of severall others, she said she wold not minde any recommenda-
tion but your lordship's, and seeing you was to answer for the manadgement
of the armie she was resolved to hear noe others." Not having the commis-
sions with him jSTairne took them next day, and was asked if he " had got the
persons' names from your lordship who were to be filled up ?" whereupon he
had to explain he had not, but that there were several to which Lord Leven
agreed. Then he goes on to say : —
"When I offered the commissions she took notice they were blank, and stopt.
1 said that as to the captains' commissions I had letters from both secretaries
desireing me to lay befor her majesty the severall pretentions of those who had
wrote. She told me pritty quickly that she thought I had knowen her minde in
these matters, and put me in minde that two years agoe I had told her that it
wold be both for her ease and service to take the generall's advice in all things
concerning the armies ; that she had told the secretaries for Scotland that she
wold doe soe, and that tho the circumstances of affairs had not let her goe on in
that manner hithertoo, yet now she wold bring evrie thing to the practise of
England as soon and as near as she could, and that in all affairs of the armie the
secretaries here did not medle in the lest. I told her majesty that perhaps some
might have good pretentions, and if such did complain afterwards her majesty
might justly say that she kuew not there pretentions. She told me the Earle of
Leven was better judge for the justness of there pretentions then she ; that ther-
for they should apply to him and not to the secretaries. I told her that the
practise hitherto had been otherwayes, but I hope in time they wold be altered.
She further said, and most justly, that she saw noe other effects ; that pretenders
writing to the secretaries wold have but to turne all upon her, for they were
acquitt by saying they had laid there clames befor her, and she wold not grant
but to such as she pleasd. Which she plainly said she wold not allow off, and
commanded me to write to both the secretaries, and tell them that if any letters
come recommending auy body in the armie, they should not speak of it to her,
but give them for answer to apply to your lordship. And then she said, the com-
missions being blank, she did not know but other names might be put in then
your lordship approved off. I told her that I knew my duty to her majesty soe
well, and had too great honor for your lordship then disobey her commands, or
doe anye thing to lessen the authority she had given you, and which I always
thought was soe just for you to have ; and that in this cace, if her majesty
pleased, I wold fill up the person your lordship recommended for the company,
and the charge of my Lord Belcarras sons befor her. She was pleased to say she
INSULTED ON THE HIGH STREET. 285
did not distrust me, but laughingly said she must take my promise not to let them
goe out of my hand till they were tilled up, which I very readyly past, and soe
she signd them, and I have write to the secretaries that I am not to part with
them till I have your lordship's directions."
Sir David Nairne then congratulates the earl on the increased authority
this would give him, and claims some credit for it, while he expresses his
belief that in its exercise the earl will so carry to the secretaries " as if they
had the power they have had hithertoo." J Besides the interesting nature of
this interview with the queen in reference to the earl's position and power,
this letter gives an insight into the method in which Queen Anne conducted
the business of state, and affords also a pleasing testimony of the confidence
she reposed in the ability and integrity of the Earl of Leven.
While the earl was resident in the castle, and about this time, an adven-
ture befell him through the practical joking of some young topers. He was
being carried up the High Street of Edinburgh in his sedan chair to the
castle. It was ten o'clock at night, and a group of young men of good birth,
some of them in the army, had just emerged from a house where they had
been drinking. In their frolic they had commenced a dance in the street, at
a somewhat shaded spot, when the Earl's chair, borne by two footmen, one of
whom carried a lantern, approached. One of the dancers reeled against a
bearer, who retorted with an oath, whereupon the dancers suggested to over-
turn the chair in the mud. Beady for anything, they at once attacked the
servants, smashed the lantern, and one of the footmen was wounded by a
sword-thrust. Indignant remonstrances were made by the earl, and the
rioters were seized by the bystanders. Their alarm was great when they
learned whom they had insulted ; but the earl did not visit them with any
severe punishment so as to incur the loss of military rank. They endured a
month's imprisonment, and then, confessing publicly their regret upon their
knees before the privy council, were restored to liberty.
The negotiations for union between the kingdoms of Scotland and
England were now being brought forward and commanding general attention.
Lockhart says that about this time, 1705, the Earl of Leven was made joint-
1 Original letter, dated 16th September 1707, in Melville Charter-chest.
286 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
secretary of Scotland with the Marquis of Anuandale,1 but nowhere is cor-
roboration found of such an appointment. Lord Leven, however, took a very
active part in forwarding the union, both as a commissioner and by his vote
in parliament, while it occasioned him several visits to London. He went
thither in March 1706 with his brother-in-law, the Earl of Wemyss,2 who
about this time was appointed lord high admiral of Scotland. A song was
made about them on this occasion, which commences —
" Let all our forraign enemies
Attack us if they dare — a,
Since Weems is Neptune of the seas
And Leven the god of war — a." 3
As one of the original commissioners on the Scottish side for the union
appointed in October 1702, Lord Leven had formerly attended the meetings
of the commissioners at London in January and February 1703. In 1706 he
was re-appointed, and scarcely missed one of the numerous sittings which took
place in London between the 16th April and 23d July, when the commissioners
concluded their labours.4 In a letter to the Earl of Melville, written on his
return from London, and dated 6th May 1706, Sir Eobert Murray says: "I
left the Earle of Leven in good health, zelous for the union. Some off our
commissionars ar weel at court, some weel with the Whigs, bot I knou non
so weel at court and the Whigs as my lord your son. I can assure your
lordship that no Scotsman is more valued amongst the best of men there
than the Earle of Leven." 5
At the conclusion of their labours in London, the queen hastened the Scot-
tish commissioners home to carry forward the work in the parliament there.
Lord Leven frequently corresponded with prominent English statesmen on
the subject, entering into the minute details of the treaty. In his military
capacity also he had to act for the furtherance of the work, by quelling the
tumults which arose in connection therewith.6
At the conclusion of the union the earl was elected one of the sixteen
1 Memoirs concerning the Affairs of Scot- 4 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
land, vol. i. p. 112. vol. xi., Appendix, pp. 143-191.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 202. '■> Letter in Melville Charter-chest.
3 Scottish Pasquils, vol. iii. p. 82. « Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 203-214.
THREATENED INVASION OF SCOTLAND IN 1708. 287
Scottish representative peers, who, by the treaty, were to represent the
Scottish nobility in the union parliament at Westminster.1 The castle at this
time received into its custody the state regalia, the crown, the sceptre, the
sword of state, and the treasurer's rod of office, and it was ordained that they
were not again to leave it. It was their usual place of deposit, indeed, and the
earl was their custodier, during his term as governor — for to him in 1705 the
Duke of Queensberry had to make application for the sword of state, when
instructed to act for her Majesty in conferring the order of the Thistle on
the first Marquis of Lothian.2 But it does not appear that the earl was
present at the last consignment of the regalia to their resting-place in the
crown-room of the castle.
About this time, also, the Duke of Queensberry, as commissioner, and the
lords of the privy council appointed the Earl of Leven principal steward of
the stewartry and lordship of Strathearn and Balquhidder, and bailie of the
regality of Drummond, an office which was held to be vacant through the
failure of James, Lord Drummond, who had the office by hereditary right, to
take the oath of allegiance to the queen, and sign the assurance. The earl's
tenure was to exist only during the pleasure of the council, or until Lord
Drummond or his successors qualified themselves. It was a condition of the
grant that the earl before entering upon the exercise of the office should take
the oath and give the assurance required.3 On the death of his father, on
20th May 1707, the Earl of Leven succeeded to the family estates of Mel-
ville, Kaith, and others, and became second Earl of Melville, though he did
not assume the title.
The attempted invasion of Scotland by a French army in the interests of
the Pretender, in concert with a projected rising of the Jacobites in the
country, gave rise to much excitement during the early months of the year
1708. When the news reached London that the French fleet had left Dun-
kirk, Lord Leven, who was at court at the time, returned rapidly to Scotland
to take defensive measures and prevent a landing. A British fleet under the
command of Admiral Sir George Byng started in pursuit, and constant com-
1 Acta of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. xi. p. 431.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 191.
3 Commission, dated 24th February 1707, in Melville Charter-chest.
288 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
munication as to the enemy's movements was maintained between the
admiral and the English commander-in-chief, while Lord Leven also re-
ceived intelligence from the authorities along the east coast. The Firth of
Forth was known to be intended as the point of attack, and the appearance
of a large fleet in the Forth gave rise to the belief that the French had come.
The troops under Leven's personal command were drawn up on the shore of
Leith to resist a landing, but the vessels proved to be the British ships, the
French having missed the Firth, and sailed further north.
Another feature of the plan of the invasion on this occasion was the
seizure of the castle of Edinburgh. It was known to have been depleted of
stores and ordnance, and that there was hardly ammunition enough to serve
a few rounds of the guns. Besides, it now contained the " equivalent " —
upwards of £20,000 — and the crown jewels with which it was intended the
Pretender should be crowned in St. Giles' church. Happily, however, the
landing of the French did not take place. The coast was too well guarded
for the attempt to be made, and they were obliged to return to France with-
out effecting anything, and with some loss.
Lockhart of Carnwath in referring to the episode says that the Earl of
Leven in one of his letters to the secretaries of state remarked that in expec-
tation of the expedition, " the Jacobites were so uppish he durst hardly look
them in the face as they walked in the streets of Edinburgh." a This was
soon altered, as numerous arrests among the noblemen and gentlemen of
Jacobite proclivities were ordered to be made, and these were effected by
the earl. Not a few of the more prominent were confined under Lord
Leven's own eye in the castle of Edinburgh, while others were consigned to
the remaining fortresses of the kingdom, until orders came for their removal
to London for trial. If they were " uppish " before, they were now content to
be humble supplicants to the earl. He received numerous letters from those
implicated entreating his friendship and consideration in regard to their
imprisonment and treatment.2 Even Lockhart, who has seldom anything
nattering to say of the earl, admits that these were cheerfully accorded, for
he says : " He was no ways severe, but rather very civil to all the cavaliers,
especially such as were prisoners in the castle of Edinburgh, when he was
1 Memoirs, ed. 1714, p. 374. 2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 61-67, 214-227.
MAKES AN INVENTORY OF THE CASTLE ORDNANCE. 289
governour, from whence he gained more of their favour than any man in the
government." x When the danger and the excitement were over the queen
wrote a special letter of thanks to the earl for his good services in the con-
tingency, and desired him to come up to London that by his attendance at
Westminster he might continue to forward her interests.2 It may be noted
that on his arrival in Edinburgh in April 1708, for the purpose of taking
defensive measures against the French, the Earl of Leven qualified himself by
taking the oath of abjuration for acting under her Majesty in his various
military offices in Scotland.3
Before leaving for London the Earl of Leven entered into a contract for
the execution of certain works on the fortifications of the castle; but he
found some months later on his return that the new works went " but slowly
on," as the money was not forthcoming, and without it the masons naturally
declined to give their services. The earl, in a letter to the Duke of Queens-
berry, regretted this niggardliness on the part of the government.4 About
the same time also he prepared an inventory of the ordnance in the castle,
giving the dimensions of each of the suns and of their carriages, and among
others he mentions a " brass cannon, commonly called the Green Falcon,"
also a " brass falcon, commonly called Queen Marie's pocket pistoll," and the
celebrated Mons Meg, of which it is stated : " This gun was not cast, but made
of iron barrs and girds, commonly called Mons Megg, without a carriage, and
disabled by a burst at the reinforce." The two latter, with a good many more,
are set down as inefficient in one way or another.5
A new Jacobite scare occurred in each of the following years, 1709 and
1710. In 1709, in consequence of information of a renewal of the attempt at
invasion, the earl, who was at the time in London, hastened back to Edin-
burgh with instructions to ascertain the " humours and disposition of the
people, and what expectations they may have about any such design," using
every caution not to alarm the public mind. Some gentlemen had lately
gone from France to encourage the disaffected in Scotland, and " the word or
1 Memoirs, ed. 1714, p. 100. draft letter, dated 16th April 1709, in Mel-
2 Vol. ii. o£ this work, pp. 68, 248, 249. ville Charter-chest.
3 Extract Act of Privy Council, 9th April 6 " List of the ordinance belonging to the
170S, in Melville Charter-chest. garrison of the Castle of Edinburgh." 1708.
1 Contract, dated 3d August 1708, and Ibid.
VOL. I. 2 0
-290 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
expression amongst them is, 'He will come.'"1 In reply the earl narrates
the rumours of another intended invasion, and draws attention to the unpro-
vided condition of the castles. The Pretender, he informs the duke, accord-
ing to the intelligence he got, intended to come in person, and to land in the
north of Scotland without an army, relying upon his friends here and in the
north of England rising in his interest. The earl was on the track of four
Jesuits who had come over, two Scotch and two French, viz. — " Durhame, a
titulary bishop, Father Creichtoun, Monsieur Le Fray, and Monsieur La Bat,"
and he received a royal warrant to arrest the four Jesuits if he saw cause.
He ascertained, too, that some of the Jacobites "drink a health tothe fouer and
tuenty of May," which he thought would be the date of the expected arrival.2
In April of the following year the scare again arose. In a series of
letters the earl informs the Duke of Queensberry that the Highland clans
were expecting the Pretender in May. He was to be accompanied by
troops from Ireland and Spain, and to land at Inverlochy. He was
even then (April 28th) said by some to be lurking privately in the High-
lands. The King of France, however, had desired two persons of note
from Scotland to be sent to him to give some assurance of the reason-
ableness of the proposed expedition, and Lord Drummond and the Captain of
Clanranald were the persons who had been selected for that errand. This
was so far authenticated by the fact of their being out of the country. A
Highland hunt took place in May, which the Marquis of Huntly attended.
Respecting this the earl writes : " I wish this practise of the great men in the
highlands were putt a stope too ; for houever innocent the practise may be,
yet it is hard to distinguish betuixt jest and earnest. And altho some
thousands of men may come togither with armes, with noe other designe but
to hunt the staig, yet at other tymes such a randizvous may be upon a uorse
designe." In June the earl secured an informant, who stated that in Feb-
ruary Captain John Ogilvie had been sent from the court of St. Germains to
converse with the chiefs of the Highland clans, to encourage them to stand
1 Letter, Duke of Queensberry to Lord 1709, Earl of Leven to the Duke of Queens-
Leveii, 5th April 1700, in Melville Charter- berry, in Melville Charter-chest. Cf. vol. ii.
chest. . of this work, p. 68.
-' Draft letter, dated in April and May
PROJECTED INVASION OF SCOTLAND IN 1710. 291
firm, and to assure them " that the Pretender was fully resolved to come
amongst them that summer and vindicate (as he called it) his own ryt."
Each chief was to be constituted a colonel and to have a sum of money for
equipping his men. Ogilvie returned to France in March ; and on the
strength of his report an invasion was projected for May, but on further
advice was postponed till August, as then the harvest would be ready, and
furnish supplies for both man and beast. Two thousand men were to be sent
from Brest to attack and seize Inveiiochy (Fort- William), and simul-
taneously the Pretender was to sail from France with three or four thousand
men, and effect a landing at Stonehaven in the Mearns, other three thousand
men being afterwards despatched to his assistance. The departure of these
troops in small detachments would, it was thought, attract less attention from
England. The landing at Stonehaven was fixed for the 15th or 20th of
August, and thither the Highlanders were to march (Inveiiochy being sup-
posed taken) to accompany the Pretender to Edinburgh, and having been
there proclaimed king, he was to advance into England. The Duke of Ber-
wick was to be in command of the invading army.
In his letters the earl greatly deplores the state of the Scottish fortresses,
and the remissness of the government in neither fortifying them nor provid-
ing them with necessaries for defence. There were but few troops in the
country, altogether insufficient both to furnish garrisons and an army to
resist an invasion should such be attempted. He complained also of being
put to great charges for obtaining intelligence of what was going on,
and of " not having received on farthing on that head since the happy union
of the two kingdomes." Ascertaining that some five hundred firelocks, with
some hundreds of pistols and swords, had been purchased from a merchant
in Glasgow to be conveyed to the Highlands, he desired the magistrates of
that city to prevent their removal, and obtained authority to purchase them
for the government. On another occasion he " was ordered to inquire after
some armes that were bought by a Highlandman called Rob Eoy, and carried
into the Highlands by him." He adds : " These armes, except a very few, I
have got into my custody, and has payed them at the same rate that the
gentleman bought them."
This correspondence continued till the month of October, during which
292 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
the sufficiency of the fort at Inverlochy was criticised adversely by the earl,
and also several details in connection with meetings in the Highlands.
August passed and no invaders came ; but in October the earl was informed
by Queensberry of some movements going on at Dunkirk, and warned to be
on his guard, but quietly, so as not to give alarm. The earl promised to do
his best, but expressed the opinion that for this year the danger of an inva-
sion was over. At the same time he again urged the government to give
some attention to the condition of the fortresses, adding that the unfinished
state of the repairs commenced at Edinburgh Castle two years previously,
and now apparently abandoned, left it weaker than before. In his last letter,
which is dated 13th October 1710, the earl informs the duke of the further
progress of the intrigues between France and the Highlands, giving the
names of the chiefs of clans with whom correspondence was being conducted.
Ogilvie was again expected, and the earl had made arrangements for securing
him if he came to Scotland. He might, however, come to London, and for
the duke's better information he describes him as " of a midle size, neither
fair nor black, he has a roman nose, and something pitted with the small-pox,
he looks brisk and lively, and is of age betwixt fifty and sixty." He passed
formerly under the name of John Greirson ; on this occasion he was to be
known as John Brown.1
Nothing further of importance appears to have occurred during the
remaining years of Queen Anne's reign in reference to the Jacobites in
Scotland. Their cause was now espoused elsewhere. In 1710 a dissolution
of parliament took place, and the Earl of Leven was not on this nor on any
subsequent occasion returned as a representative peer, though he regularly
took part in the proceedings at such elections.2 The reactionary policy which
was about this time inaugurated by the court of Queen Anne doubtless to
some extent alienated the affections of the earl, and all the more when it
hegan to affect the stability of the presbyterian church as well as the
principles of the Eevolution, which he had ever so strongly supported. Eae
says that the faction which then bore sway, in 1712, to further their Jacobite
schemes, " drew up lists of all the officers of the revenue of the crown, with
1 Draft letter in Melville Charter-chest.
- Robertson's Proceedings relating to the Peerage, pp. 8-121, passim.
IS DEPRIVED OF HIS APPOINTMENTS. 293
an account of each man's principles, and by whose interest they were recom-
mended to their places ; and then made a change of such in their public
offices as they thought not disposed to follow their measures." 1 The con-
sequence was that, as the earl's legal adviser afterwards wrote in his remini-
scences of the earl's life, " The Earl of Leven was stript of his imployments
of commander-in-chief, master of ordinance, and governour of Edinburgh
Castle, as not being a person fitt to be trusted, about the latter end of Queen
Anne's reign." He significantly adds what is a strong testimony to the
earl's attachment to principle : " All the gold of Peru would not have tempted
him to embark in the scheme then in view." 2 The earl in a later memorial
mentions the date of his dismissal as June 1712,3 and in a letter to the Duke
of Marlborough, who was deprived of his offices at the same time, states
that it was for his " close dependance upon your grace and firm adherence to
his majesties interest." i
Considerable arrears of pay being due to the earl in connection with his
services to the queen and country, he in April 1713 presented a memorial to
the queen on the subject. He stated that at the union, there being no fund
for procuring intelligence and defraying contingent charges connected with
the office of commander-in-chief, he had personally advanced what sums
were necessary for the efficient discharge of his duty in these respects. In
1708 he had represented the matter to her Majesty, when the Earl of Godolphin,
as lord high treasurer, gave him assurances that he would be reimbursed of
what he had already expended, and a yearly allowance settled upon him for
such charge. These promises were repeated from time to time, and the earl
estimated his expenditure on this head a,t over £2000. He stated further,
that both before and since the union he had been master of the ordnance and
enjoyed the salary of £300 annexed to that office ; but that subsequently her
Majesty, while judging it necessary to subject the ordnance of Scotland to
the management of that in England, yet signified, through the Earl of Mar,
then secretary of state, that the salary would be continued to the earl. But
beyond the sum received for the first year this had not been paid, so that five
1 Rae's History of the Rebellion, p. 13. 3 Memorial to King George the First in
Melville Charter-chest.
- Vol. ii. of this work, p. 256. * Letter dated 10th Feb. 1719, ibid.
294 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
years' allowance, £1500, were now due, and for these two sums, and such
further reward for his services as her Majesty should think fit, the earl
requested the favour of the queen.1
Before this, however, the earl had written on the subject, and received a
letter in reply from his old correspondent, Eobert Harley, now Earl of Oxford
and first commissioner of the treasury, to the effect that the queen, in
accordance with her promises, did intend to take care of his lordship.2 As
the memorial appears to have been partly successful, the earl wrote to the
Earl of Mar, then secretary of state, who in his reply acknowledges receipt
of two letters, and says : —
" I have spoke to the queen of all the different heads of your memoriall with
all the earnestness I could, and her majestie heard me with all the goodness and
concern that she ever shows in what relaits to your lordship. As to that point of
it, for intelligence and contingent charges dureing the time of your lordships
haveing the comand in Scotland, she does not seem to think there is anything due
your lordship haveing had appointments as comander-in-chife, and those things
being necessary incidents to that emploiment. The next point you mention is a
mark of her majesties favour. The queen was pleased to say upon this that
there is nothing offers just now for her to do for your lordship. But as she is
very well satisfied with your services, when any thing does she will be very reddy
to show you her favour, and this she belives your lordship will not doubt of
considering with what reddyness her majestie lately ordred that fivetien hundred
pounds to be payed you upon account of your pretention of being formerly
master of the ordinance in Scotland, after that place being five years sunk. . . .
The queen realie shows alwise that goodness for what concerns your lordship
that I have no doubt of her showing you her favour when an opportunity
offers."
The Earl of Mar further expresses doubt as to Lord Leven's wisdom in
pressing his claims again so soon, and regret at his affairs being so straitened.
This he advises him to remedy as speedily as possible, as such a condition of
matters could only weaken any claims he might have on royal favour. The
1 Memorial in Melville Charter-chest, indorsed as having been delivered to her Majesty,
and also to the lord treasurer, on 17th April 1713.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 229.
REJOICES IN THE ACCESSION OF KING GEORGE THE FIRST. 295
queen's late indisposition had delayed the letter, but that was now over,
and she was very well, " only she has the gout in her handes." 1
Some months later, however, the earl again insisted, and Lord Mar wrote
acknowledging having received other two letters, but had only to report ill
success. The earl appears to have entreated restoration to his offices, but on
that subject the Secretary Mar writes : —
" I had nothing to say that wou'd have been agreeable to you on the subject
you wrote of, for the queen was determin'd how to dispose of those posts. ... I
read your lordship's letter to her Majestie, who askt me if I had not wrote to
your lordship since I came from Scotland on the heads of your memoriall as she
had directed me. I told her I had, but it seem'd your lordship was straitned,
which made you apply so soon again."
The queen instructed Lord Mar to send the memorial with the earl's letter
and his own reply to the memorial to the lord treasurer, which being done,
they were referred by him to the war office, or to the exchequer in Scotland,
for examination and report, and Lord Mar counselled the earl to follow the
matter up in the office to which it had been transmitted.2
No immediate results, however, were attained, and on 1st August 1714
Queen Anne died. Amid every expression of loyalty and sincere gratification
her successor, King George the First, was proclaimed at Edinburgh on the 4th
of the same month. The earl and his son, Lord Balgonie, took part in the
proceedings of that day,3 and immediately afterwards they set out for London
to welcome to British shores as their sovereign the son of the Electress
Sophia of Hanover, who had been the friend and correspondent of Lord Leven
from an early period. The law agent of the Leven family, Mr. John Edmonstone,
writer, Edinburgh, already referred to, accompanied them as far as Berwick,
and he relates that the earl, though now an aging man, was in exuberant
spirits, recounting to them all the events of the revolution, and thanking
God, with eyes full of tears, that he was yet spared to see his long labours
crowned with success, in that he would leave a Protestant king sitting on
the throne of Britain. And he frequently bade his auditors to thank God,
who had brought about so great a blessing to these lands, of which they
1 Letter, 2fith December 1713, in Melville 2 Letter, 17th June 1714, ibid.
Charter-chest. 3 Rae, p. 62.
296 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
would be more sensible when lie was dead and gone.1 The earl was per-
sonally known to King George, with whom he had corresponded, and from
whom he had received several assurances of friendship.2 He accordingly went
up in full expectation of having this friendship renewed, and at first he was
not disappointed. On the 17th September the king landed at Greenwich,
and hearing the Earl of Leven named, looked around for him, and seeing
him, stretched forth his hand, brought him within the circle of the guards,
and leaning his hand on the earl's shoulder, spoke to him of the days they
had spent together at the court of Brandenburg, and asked all about himself
and about his family in the most friendly manner.3 It is said that this dis-
tinguishing mark of the king's favour to the earl so roused the envy of his
enemies who saw it, that by their means, he, from that hour, neither had
another interview with the king nor was the recipient of a single favour. He
received a formal invitation to be present at the coronation ceremony,4 which
he obeyed. He remained in London during the whole winter, and both
through friends and by letter sought an audience with the king. The follow-
ing is a translation of a letter he wrote at this time to King George the
First, the original being in French : —
" Sire, — I believed it to be my duty to come here, to have the honour of con-
gratulating your majesty on your happy accession to the throne of Great Britain.
I flatter myself, sire, that my zeal and fidelity have been long known to your
majesty, and that you will do me the justice to believe that I shall permit no
occasion to escape which offers itself of advancing your interests, but that I shall
eagerly embrace it.
" I doubt not that many persons will seek to offer their services to your
majesty ; but I can assure you, sire, that no one shall esteem it more their glory
than I, if I be honoured with some employment in your service ; and I can say
that I rejoice as much as any of your subjects to see your majesty established on
your throne. In consideration whereof, and that I have always been constant in
the protestant religion, and in the interests of your majesty's succession, by which
we see our religion established for ever, I hope that I shall receive some mark of
your royal favour.
" It would be presumption in me to circumscribe your majesty in the choice of
1 Vol. ii. of tbis ivork, p. 256. 3 Ibid. p. 257.
- Ibid. pp. 56-59. 4 Ibid. p. 69.
HIS EFFORTS TO OBTAIN ACCESS TO THE KING. 297
such employment, whether civil or military. I therefore cast myself humbly at
your feet, leaving it to your majesty to dispose of me as you may find most to
advantage. I had the honour to command as general of the queen in Scotland,
and was for seven years governor of the castle of Edinburgh. All the time that
I was in the service, after the change of ministry, they did all they could to
discourage me, in the hope that I would quit my post. But I suffered patiently
all these hardships, hoping that if I were continued in that employment I should
be in a condition to show your majesty how firm I was for your interest.
At last, when they saw that they could not force me to quit my offices or chill my
zeal for your majesty's service, they dismissed me therefrom two years since.
However, I shall stand all my life in the interests of your majesty, and maintain
them inviolable to the last drop of my blood." 1
Either at this time, or at a later date, the earl addressed a " very humble
request " to the king, setting forth the sufferings of himself and his father in
the interests of the protestant succession, and also his own services in the
time of King William and Queen Anne. He further states that at the com-
mencement of the last reign he was one of the first to propose in the parlia-
ment of Scotland that the succession should be established in the king's family,
the interests of which no one could say that he had ever faltered in his zeal
to advance. And seeing that his majesty had now provided the most part of
those who had been deprived in the end of the late reign, either by restoring
them to their offices, or giving them others, he hopes that in considera-
tion of his long services the king will of his goodness honour him with some
employment, or confer on him such pension as he should find convenient.2
As no efforts put forth by the earl to see the king proved of any avail, he
was obliged to return home amazed and sorrowful, nay almost heart-broken,
at being subjected to such a strange and undeserved neglect. He repeated
his efforts after his return by addressing memorials to the king, which were
sometimes received, and referred to the treasury, but nothing came of them.
The family agent in his reminiscences states that this neglect was the
result of a foul plot to ruin the character of the Earl of Leven with King
George ; and it unhappily proved effective in terminating his lordship's
1 Draft in Melville Charter-chest.
2 " La trez humble requite du Comte de Leven," in Melville Charter-chest.
VOL. I. 2 P
-298 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
political career. It is to be remembered that the ministry in power at the
time of Queen Anne's death was of a distinctly reactionary character, and
had no sympathy with men such as Lord Leven. Some of his countrymen,
struck with the friendly attention shown by the king to his lordship on the
shore at Greenwich, and apprehensive that if he became influential at court,
their Jacobite designs would not prosper, but would share the same fate as
their former efforts under the administration of his father, the Earl of
Melville, that very night devised their schemes and put it into the hands of
Simon, Lord Lovat, for execution. He obtained the services of one of his
clansmen, Major James Fraser, third son of Fraser of Culduthel, who had
gone to France in July 1714 to avoid being arrested at home for debt, and
had attached himself to Lovat, then at Saumur. Lovat employed him as a
messenger between the Pretender and the exiled Jacobites, as well as those in
Scotland. He got this man to swear before Lord Islay, a member of the
government, that he had been sent from the Pretender's court at Baiieduc in
France with letters and medals, which were to serve as tokens, to a number
of Scotsmen, and in particular that he was charged with a large packet of
such to the Earl of Leven, which he duly delivered to him at Bafgonie.
Lovat further affirmed that he had sent a letter to the Earl of Leven offer-
ing his services in the interests of Prince George of Hanover, and that Leven
had sent it to the Duke of Perth, to show him how false Lovat was to the
interests of the Pretender. Along with Leven, Lovat inculpated the Duke of
Athole and Alexander Mackenzie of Fraserdale, as having been co-recipients
of letters and medals, and as these two were his mortal enemies, Athole for
his foul outrage on his sister, and Fraserdale for opposing his claim to the
Lovat peerage and estates, the nature of Lovat's plot is apparent.
The earl only learned of the existence of this plot in the end of the year
1716. He then received a letter from Alexander Fraser in the following
o
terms : —
"London, December 2 2d, 1716.
" My Lord, — Being befor and since her late majestie's deceass my Lord
Lovat's agent or doer here, till within this three months, I had the perfect
knowledge of all his intrigues, how and for what reasones he missrepresented
severall persons of quality, and among the rest, your lordship, by sending in the
LOVAT S PLOT TO RUIN HIM. 299
month of December 1714, after his coming from France, on James Fraser, he had
there with him, along with me, to the Earle of Isla to assure him that your lord-
ship was ane enemy to the government and him ; that your lordship corresponded
with the court of St. Germains, and particularly with the Duke of Perth, to
whom, as the said James Fraser assur'd the Earle of Isla, your lordship had sent
a letter of my Lord Lovatt's to your lordship, wherein Lovat made mention to
your lordship of his earnest desyre to serve the then Elector of Hannover, and
desyr'd your lordship's concurrence and advice to enable him thereto. This letter
as the said James Fraser alleadg'd your lordship sent to the court of St. Germains
to show them what a traiterous villain Lovatt was to their interest. He like-
wayes assur'd the Earle of Isla that the Duke of Perth had showen my Lord
Lovat's letter to your lordship to him. This with accounts of the like nature
against other persons of quality the Earle of Hay desyr'd to be brought in writting,
which accordingly was done, and every particular I putt in writing vouch'd by
the said James Fraser to the Earle att my Lord Lovatt's desyre. Other persons of
the first rank in Scotland were likeway basely bely'd and missrepresented by the
said James Fraser att my Lord Lovat's desyre, as the said James own'd severall
times to me. . . . 1
The writer of this letter further states that he had been induced to
make known the facts by Captain Neil Macleod on the assurance that
he would receive his lordship's protection if he thought good to move in
the affair. It seems to have been through Macleod, who was a friend of
Lord Leven, that Fraser was induced to reveal the facts at all, and in a later
letter he repudiates the character of an informer, in the accepted sense. He
afterwards cordially co-operated with the earl in making the truth known to
the government.
Lord Leven, immediately on receiving the astounding revelations made
by Fraser, took steps to vindicate his character and reputation at court.
The rebellion of 1715 had brought him further trouble on account of his
continued steadfast adherence to the king. His house of Balgonie was made
a garrison by the rebels, and his lands and tenants plundered and spoiled.
He intimated the facts of the case to Baron Bothmar. He stated that he
believed he had suffered more from the rebels than any others around, and
desired that it might be mentioned to the king as a mark of his continued
1 Original letter in Melville Charter-chest.
300 DAVID, THIRD EAEL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
zeal and affection, and that he bore all cheerfully on his account.1 The earl
had also to submit to the indignity of having his house in Edinburgh
searched for rebels, and the insolent way in which it was done raising his
indignation, he remonstrated with the officers, who thereupon, though they
searched the house and were in no way hindered, spread the report that
he would not allow his house to be searched. This obliged Lord Leven to
write to Sir David Dalrymple, then lord advocate, declaring the story in
circulation through Edinburgh " absolutely false," and his surprise that his
house " should be suspected to be a shelter of the king's enemies." 2
The Earl of Leven, soon after his discovery of the plot against him,
addressed a letter to the king, in which he intimated what had just been
brought to his knowledge, declared all Fraser's charges " absolutely false
and groundless," and begged his Majesty to allow the Duke of Eoxburghe,
then secretary of state for Scotland, to investigate the accusations, as he was
certain his innocence would be established. To the duke himself the earl
sent Captain Macleod with a letter asking that he (Macleod) should be
allowed to bring Alexander Fraser before him, and also with a memorial in
which the earl vindicated himself. With regard to the correspondence about
Lovat with the Earl of Perth, he says : —
"I do posativly affirm that this most be falls for two reasons, furst, becaws
I never had any corespondance with Simon Fraser, so I could know nothing what
way he was inclyned. Secondly, I do solemly declair that I never had, derectly
nor inderectly, any corespondance with any person in France since the Revolu-
tion, and far les with any, ath[er] att St. Germains or Barleduce, or any conserned
any maner of way with the Pretender ; and I am shure if I had been the fooll to
have been tampering with any conserned about thos two placess (considering how
much hardsheps my father, his family and myself, mett with from King Charles
and King James), the Earle of Perth would have been the lastt man I would
have coresponded with, for he was the person who, when my father was forfett,
took a gifft of his forfettor, so I think upon that head, he and I could not have
been in frindship togither, therfor I hop I have said a nuffe to convince any
impartiall judge, that what is said of me upon this head is al togither falls and
growndles."
1 Draft letter, dated 14th and 24th January 1716, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Draft letter, 10th September 1715, in Melville Charter-chest.
ARREST OF LOVAT S AC4ENT. 301
Then as to the medals, he stated that his informer would show that they
were really intended for " the chiffs of the naim of Fraser," as his defamer had
frequently confessed to the informer.1
The king gave the required permission, and the Duke of Eoxburghe took
up the case. On the information of Alexander Fraser he ordered the arrest
of a servant of Lovat of the same name, but in order to stifle inquiry Lovat's
agent, even after the man was in the custody of a messenger, secured his
escape and concealed him. For this the agent himself was arrested by a
file of musketeers, and would have been sent to Newgate by the duke, but
owing to sickness he was liberated on bail. The man, however, was secured
later, and gave damaging evidence against Lovat.2 The Duke of Athole and
Mackenzie of Fraserdale co-operated with the earl in correcting the misrepre-
sentations of Lovat, and Lovat himself wrote to the earl in his characteristic
style, denying that he had in any way maligned him to the king.3 Attempts
were made to discover James Fraser, the defamer, and in one of his letters,
dated 16th September 1717, the Duke of Athole, after deploring an accident
which had befallen the Earl of Leven,4 and promising to speak favourably for
him to the king, as he was on his way to London, states that James Fraser was
seen at Dalkeith on his way to the north in disguise in a black periwig ; that
he had been sought for unsuccessfully in London, and that he was to request
an order from the justice-clerk to have him apprehended in the north in
hopes of discovering who put " him on this vilany." 5 These efforts may
have been so far crowned with success as to disabuse the king's miDd of the
idea that the earl was disloyal, but they procured no practical results, as
beyond promises of consideration nothing was done for the earl. He felt
this treatment extremely, and his anxiety was such that he became danger-
ously ill at Balgonie. Physicians brought from Edinburgh declared him in
imminent danger, so he desired the curtains of his bed to be drawn back as
far as possible, and, as his law-agent narrates : —
1 Draft memorial and letters, February reply, the Earl of Leven says : " I was this
1717, in Melville Charter-chest. affternoon outt one horsbak with my sherers,
2 Letters, ibid. and comeing home my hors fell with me, by
3 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 249-253. which I have strained my neck so much and
4 In a draft of the letter, dated 13th Sep- hurtt my head, that I am not able to travell."
tember 1717, to which the duke's was a 5 Original letter in Melville Charter-chest.
302 DAVID, THIRD KARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
" In the hearing of the whole physicians and other gentlemen present, he in the
most solemn manner, takeing the Almighty God to witness his sincerity, declared
that every word in the said affidavit which he caused me read, was absolutely
false and without foundation ; that he never keept the smallest correspondence in
the course of his life with the pretender, or any of his aiders or abbettors, or had
ever in thought, word, or deed, swerved in the least degree from his duty to his
only rightfull and lawfull sovereign, King George, and in presence of all the com-
pany in the room he desired me to reduce to writeing what he had declared, to
the end it might be signed by him, if able, that so all in his power might be done
to wipie off that most unjust calumny and reproach, which I did, and helpt to
support him in his bed when he signed it." 1
This illness of the earl, however, was not fatal. He lived for several
years afterwards in retirement. His financial affairs fell into an embar-
rassed condition, and continued so for many years, compelling him to sell
several of his estates. Even in 1716 matters had become so complicated
that he was obliged to recall his two sons from their regiment to assist him
with these, and to sell their commissions. In a letter to Baron Bothmar, in
which he thanks him for his concern on their behalf, he says : —
" I do assure your lordship I doe verry much regrete that I was necessitate to
desire my sone to dispose of his commission. But my circumstances are still so
pressing, that it is very uneasie and troublesome to me, both to pay the yearly
interest of the money I laid out for his commission, and to defray the expense
that his attendance at his post puts him to; and your lordship will easily judge
that his pay comes far short of these demands."
Lord Leven then proceeds to say —
" My lord, the great reason of my affairs being in such disorder proceeds from
my preferring the publick interest to my own, ever since the very first beginning
of the revolution, and I dar say, I neither spared pains nor expense to advance
and promote the protestant succession, and the interest of his Majestie and his
royall family upon all occasions ; and therefore I still hope my service and familie
will be minded when his Majestie shall think fit, and I must again intreat that
your lordship will doe me the honour to assure his Majestie of my unalterable
zeal and fidelity to his Majestie's interest and service." . . .2
1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 257, 258. Declaration printed in vol. iii. p. 243.
2 Draft letter, 30th August 1715, in Melville Charter-chest.
THE STATE OF THE EARL's AFFAIRS. 303
To the same effect he repeatedly pressed his claims directly upon his
Majesty. Taking advantage of the opportunity of congratulating the king-
on his return from a visit to the Continent in 1719, and after referring to
his former services, he says : —
. . " But suffer me to inform your Majesty that such was my zeal for the public
service that thereby my own affairs have been altogether neglected ; so that by
the great debts which I have been obliged to contract, my family is in imminent
danger of falling into ruin. For these causes I take the liberty of casting myself
at the feet of your Majesty, praying very humbly that your Majesty will have the
goodness to think of me, and to do something on my behalf, that so I may have the
means of preserving my house from the ruin which threatens it."1
In addition to his own countrymen in office, such as the Duke of Mon-
trose, and also Baron Bothmar, the earl obtained the services of Baron
Bernsdorf, the Duke of Marlborough, the Earl of Sunderland, and others, to
intercede for him with the king,2 but evidently to no purpose, as neither
offices were given nor pensions bestowed, nor, indeed, relief of any kind.
It bears out the earl's statement of the neglect of his private concerns in
his zeal for public affairs that, though his father died in 1707, and his elder
brother, Lord Baith, in 1698, he did not obtain himself served heir to them
until the year 1717, though he was served heir to his uncle, James Melville
of Cassingray, in 1714.3 He was in debt to the Crown for the non-entry duties
of the estates, and in or about 1720 he presented a petition to the king that
these might be remitted on account of the services and sufferings of himself
and his father in his behalf, but the result of the petition has not been
ascertained.
In the ear her period of his career the earl added the estate of Newton of
Bires to the family possessions, by purchasing it in 1691. He also purchased
Drumeldrie, Johnstone-mill, and others, from James Lundin of Strathairlie,
and gave them to his son, Alexander, as part of his patrimony.
In 1692 he proposed to execute a new entail of the Leven estates in favour
of himself and his heirs-male, then to pass to the second son of his brother,
1 Draft letter in French, 6th December 1719, in Melville Charter- chest.
'2 Letters, Ibid. ; vol. ii. of this work, p. 253.
3 Ketours in Melville Charter-chest.
304 DAVID, THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OF MELVILLE.
Lord Eaith, and his heirs-male, then to Mr. James Melville of Hallhill and
his heirs-male ; failing these, to the eldest heir-female of the earl, and after-
wards to Eobert, Master of Burleigh, G-eorge, Earl of Melville, and their
respective heirs-male ; and failing these, to the eldest heir-female of the Earl
of Melville ; then successively to James Melville of Cassingray, and his heirs-
male or female, Alexander Melville of Murdochcairnie and Ids heirs-male,
David M'Gill, younger of Eankeillor, and his heirs-male ; whom all failing,
to the second son of David, Lord Elcho, and his heirs-male, to Lord Henry
Scott and his heirs-male, and failing them, to the second son of James,
Earl of Dalkeith, and his heirs-male, or to such person or persons as the Earl
of Leven might appoint.1 This entail, however, does not appear to have been
made ; hut the earl shortly afterwards obtained a substantial reduction on
the duties paid to the Crown for his Balgonie estates.
When the first Earl of Leven had his lands erected into an earldom his
holding of the crown was blench, and he chose a feather as his symbol of
recognisance. Nothing was ever paid for the lands until 1675, when the
lords of exchequer put a money value upon the feather — £100 Scots yearly.
In 1694 the earl took exception to this amount as being exorbitant, and in a
petition to the lords commissioners of the treasury and exchequer, pointed
out that their lordships had put no such value upon other like blench hold-
ings. He instanced in this respect Smiddiehill and Brewhouse belonging to
Newton Falconer, held for a pair of gilt spurs, which were rated at £8
Scots formerly, and converted to £1, 6s. 8d. ; and Houstoun, pertaining to
Glenfarqubar, which had the same symbol, and was rated at £8 Scots, but
converted by their lordships to 13s. 4d. The lord advocate, to whom the
matter was referred, instanced further that £8 Scots was the usual rating of
a pair of gilt spurs in various parts of the country ; that the blench duty of
Plenderleith, in Roxburghshire — a flower of gold — was estimated at 18s.
Scots; that of Pitsligo, in Aberdeenshire — a penny of gold — at £10, 13s. 4d,
Scots ; that of Castlehill and Thirstoune Castle — a crown of the sun — at
£10 Scots; and that of Allinstoune and Dades — a third part of a pair of
gloves — at £1 Scots. He also expressed the opinion that the rating of a
white feather at £100 Scots was " singullar and far above examples of
1 Memorandum by Sir William Hamilton, 1692, in Melville Charter-chest.
HIS PROVISIONS FOR HIS FAMILY. 305
the lyk nature," and the commissioners found " That the hundreth pounds
Scots whereunto the pannashe or whyt feather was estimate haith been
through some mistake overvalued, it being far above the true value therof,"
and they accordingly reduced it to £10 Scots yearly, to date from July 1690,
when the last balance was struck.1
After the death of his elder brother, Lord Eaith, in 1698, the Earl of
Leven became heir-apparent to the Melville estates, and his father disponed
these to him and his heirs-male in 1706. Previously, in 1700, the Earl of
Melville had disponed to the Earl of Leven, " our most duetifull sone," all
his movable property at the time of his decease, under burden of his debts,
and certain legacies to members of his family.2 But in the disposition of
1706 he made over to him and his sons successively his estates, com-
prehending the lands of Monimail, Letham, Monksmyre, Edinsmure, Eaith,
Balwearie, and Pitlair.3 As already stated, he succeeded to the title and
honours of Melville on his father's death, soon afterwards ; and in 1710, the
Earl of Leven, in view of his own dissolution, having previously provided
for his younger children by bonds over the estates, made his testament,
in which he appointed George, Lord Balgonie, his eldest son, his sole
executor. In 1716 arrangements were made for the marriage of Lord
Balgonie with Lady Margaret Carnegie, eldest daughter of David, fourth Earl
of Northesk, and the Earl of Leven then made over all the estates to his son
in fee under the burden of relieving him of his debts or most part thereof.
These were at this time nearly £400,000 Scots, for payment of the interest
of which alone the earl frequently expressed the greatest concern in the
then great scarcity of money in the country.
In the following year, 1717, the lands of Inchleslie were sold to Colonel
Patrick Ogilvie, brother of James, Earl of Findlater, for £11,454, 0s. lOd.
sterling, in order to satisfy some of the most pressing creditors. Eaith
was next put into the market, and was only, after considerable delay arid
disappointing negotiations with others, sold by public roup in 1725 to Mr.
William Ferguson, the ancestor of the present possessor. Lord Balgonie died
in 1721, to the great grief of his father, and it was as tutor of his grandson
1 Extract Act in favour of the Earl of Leven, dated 5th January 1694, in Melville Charter-
chest. 2 Disposition, ibid. 3 Signature for charter, dated 31st July 1706, ibid.
VOL. I. 2 Q
306 DAVID. THIRD EARL OF LEVEN, AND SECOND EARL OP MELVILLE.
that Lord Leven sold Eaith and some other lands, among which were Carden,
Westfield, Drurneldrie, and Cassingray.
Among other matters connected witli the financial affairs of the earl may-
be mentioned a long and tedious plea in 1719 with the executors of Viscount
Frendraught, which was only terminated by a compromise through arbitra-
tion. For some time he acted with his father and others as a commissioner
on the Buccleuch estates for the duchess, and like his father was in-
volved in an unhappy litigation on that account, and also in pecuniary loss.
Then the heavy liferent provision, which the lords of session ordained
should be paid to Mr. Francis Montgomerie from the Leven estates, was a
lifelong burden to him, as both lived about equally long. In 1720 the earl
mentions, in a letter to the Duke of Montrose, his still having to pay this
yearly, " which indead straitens me so much that I am not able to clear
anuall-rents yearly, which makes me rune more and more in debt."1 To
assist him in some measure, the earl, on the death of the Marquis of Annan-
dale in the following year, asked Montrose to recommend him to the king for
the post thus left vacant — apparently that of keeper of the privy seal — but
if the recommendation was made it was not successful.2
The earl died on 6th June 1728, and was buried at Markinch on the 12th
of the same month. He was in his sixty-ninth year. He had by his
countess, Lady Anna Wemyss, issue as follows : —
1. George, Lord Balgonie, who was born in January 1695, and was named after
his grandfather, the first Earl of Melville. He entered the army as an
ensign in Brigadier James Maitland's regiment, and afterwards held the
commission of captain in the third regiment of Foot Guards,3 commanded by
the Earl of Dunmore, but sold it in 1716. He in that year (contract dated
27th July) married his cousin-german, Lady Margaret Carnegie, eldest
daughter of David, fourth Earl of Northesk. Their mothers were sisters,
and from their correspondence it appears that the two cousins were by them
destined for each other from infancy. Lord Balgonie was also in that year
placed by his father in possession of the Leven and Melville estates, and they
afterwards acted in concert respecting them. He took part with his father
1 Draft letter, dated 24th May 1720, in Melville Charter-chest.
- Draft letter to the Duke of Montrose, dated 24th January 1721, Hid.
3 Commissions, dated 11th March 1704 and 17th April 1711, ibid.
HIS CHILDREN. 307
in the proclamation of King George the First at Edinburgh, and afterwards
accompanied him to London to welcome the king on his arrival in Britain.
He was a most affectionate son, and gave every piromise of an honourable
career. But this was cut short by his premature death, on or about the 20th
August 1721, in the 27th year of his age. Lady Balgonie took the death of
her husband so sorely to heart that she did not long survive him. Her
father, the Earl of Northesk, in a letter to Lord Leven, says : " I must say
I think my daughter has just cause of sorrow, for a kind husband's loss, but
I wish she moderate it, as her duty to God, and the care she should
have in view of his children requires, tho' this is more easie to enjoyn
then practise. Besides hir, I think we have all lossed a good frind, and
have too good reason to regrait it." 1 A few months later, however, Lord
Leven, writing to the Duke of Montrose, says of Lady Balgonie : " She has
been decaying daily ever since your grace saw her, and we have but little
hopes of her recovery." She died on 7th July 1722.2 They had issue one
son and one daughter.
(1) David, who succeeded his grandfather as fourth Earl of Leven and
third Earl of Melville, and of whom a short notice follows.
(2) Lady Anne, born on 7th April 1721, and died in 1723.
2. Alexander, who succeeded his nephew as fifth Earl of Leven and fourth Earl
of Melville, and of whom a memoir follows.
3. James, who is mentioned in certain legal papers connected with the executry
of the third Earl of Leven, as his lawful son, but save that he was still alive
in 1738, nothing further is known of him.
4. Lady Mary, born in July 1692. In 1708 she married "William, Lord Haddo,
afterwards second Earl of Aberdeen, and died in 1710, leaving a daughter,
Lady Anne Gordon, who became Countess of Dumfries and Stair.
5. Lady Margaret, born in March 1696, and appears to have died in infancy.
1 Original letter, dated 29th August 1721, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 History of the Carnegies, Earls of Southesk, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. ii. p. 391.
308
XII. I. — David, fourth Earl of Leven and third Earl of Melville.
Born 1717: Died 1729.
On the death of David, third Earl of Leven, his honours and estates
devolved upon his grandson David, the only son of George, Lord Balgonie,
and Lady Margaret Carnegie. He was born on 17th December 1717, and
apparently in Milne's Square, Edinburgh. Lord Balgonie, writing to his
father to forward his wife some money for requisite preparations a little
before, says : " She lodges in Mills Squair, the hous below wher my aunt
Burlie stayd."1 After his father's death in 1721, he was styled Lord Bal-
gonie. He carried on a correspondence with his grandfather, and several
of his juvenile productions are still preserved at Melville. One may be
given as a specimen : —
" My dear grandpapa, — I received your letter from Blackfoord this evening,
and am very glad that your lordship is in good health. I have given orders for
makeing the cream cheese and the butter. The servants are all busy with the
hay. I have ordered to send your bit cheese and some butter, and the Bighty
horse and another work horse. I give you thanks for the muir fowls your lord-
ship sent me. My sister and I are in good health, just as you left us. I give
my humble service to my uncle, and am just going to my bed. My dear grand-
papa.— Your affectionate son, ^ jo
" Melvil, June 24th, (/) sy ffl * V) / i
"Monday, 1723." J> ULLUD fLU
His father having held the fee of the estates, the young lord was on 9th
June 1722 served heir to him, and his grandfather was appointed his tutor
and guardian. He succeeded as Earl of Leven and Melville on his grand-
father's death in June 1728, and as he was still only in his eleventh year, his
uncle, Alexander, took charge of his affairs. But he did not enjoy his
honours long, as he died in June 1729, when these devolved upon his uncle
as his heir.
1 Original letter, dated 17th November 1717, in Melville Charter-chest.
ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEV EN
D I F D ! 7 5 4 .
309
XI. 2. — Alexander, fifth Earl of Leven, and fourth Earl of Melville.
Mary Erskine (Carnock), his first wife.
Elizabeth Monypenny (Pitmilly), his second wife.
1729—1754.
Alexander Leslie, fifth Earl of Leven, was the second son of David, third
Earl of Leven, and was born in or about the year 1699. He probably
received his baptismal name in honour of his distinguished ancestor, Alex-
ander, first Earl of Leven. The earliest notice of him in the family papers is
a bond of provision by his father in December 1702, granting to him, in
addition to the lands of Drnmeldrie, Johnstone-mill, and others, a sum of
40,000 merks as his portion. In 1710 this provision was increased to 100,000
merks, the lands, however, being apparently excluded.1 He was at Melville
in April 1713 attending a funeral, apparently that of his grandmother,
Katherine, Countess of Melville, and he wrote to his father, who was not
present, stating who were there, although his juvenile epistle is not very
intelligible. He is more interested in a present from his father, — " I hope
your lordship shall find the giting over of the two litel mears shall encurage
me to my book ; I cannot express how much I am oblidged to your lordship
for alowing them to me." 2
He was educated for the legal profession, and, according to the practice of
the time, was sent in September 1715 to Leyden, in Holland, to complete his
study of law. He had previously obtained a commission as ensign in the same
regiment as his brother, Lord Balgonie, the third regiment of Foot Guards,
under the Earl of Dunmore as colonel. When he was on the eve of setting
out for Holland, he received an order from his colonel to join the company
to which he belonged, an order which caused him some difficulty. His father
wrote on his behalf to his friend, Count Bothmar, representing the circum-
stances and pleading for a dispensation : —
" My lord, I doe assure your lordship that were my sone of age, it would affoord
me the greatest pleasure to have him attend his Majesties service, but he is only
about fifteen years old at present, and therby very unfitt for service. He has been
1 Bonds of provision in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Original letter, ibid.
310 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
at school, and is still following his book, and now fit for goeing to Holland to pro-
secute and perfect his studies. Therefore I most humbly intreat your lordship to
represent my sones case to the king, and at the same time lay my most humble
request before his Majestie, that he would be graciously pleased to dispense with
his attendance, untill he perfect his learning and be of age, and therby more
capable to serve his Majestie in attending his post."
In a postscript the Earl of Leven entreats Count Bothmar to prevent Lord
Dunmore disposing of young Leslie's commission " under pretence of his
absence."1 He also wrote to the Earl of Dunmore and Brigadier John
Stewart, in similar terms,2 the requisite permission was obtained, and it
was renewed two years afterwards. Mr. Leslie at Leyden was under the
charge of Mr. Charles Mackay, afterwards Professor of Civil History in the
University of Edinburgh, with whom he formed a lasting friendship. In
November of 1 7 1 5 he wrote to his father, expressing pleasure at learning the
family were well. He adds : —
"I shall endeavour to be as frugall as possible, and I hope to have your lord-
ship's approbation upon that account at our meeting. I should deserve the worst
things the world can afford if I did not studie to please such a gratious father in
every thing were it never so difficult. I hope that by application I shall be able
to master this very difficult task (I am sure if your lordship had knowen what
toil and pains it costs me every day you would never [have] allowed me to cume
here), but it will take longer tyme than your lordship mentioned to me at our
parting, two years, but your lordship may do me the justice to expect [that]
all that lyes in my pour shall be doun, that I again may have the pleasure of
waiting upon your lordship and my brother."
The writer incidentally refers to the difficulty of getting passports to leave
Holland. He concludes, " I am very happie in my lodging, for I stay in the
same house with the laird of Salton's nephew, who is a very prittie young
gentelman and very oblidging to me."3 The climate of Leyden, however,
1 Letter, dated 4th August 1715, in Melville afterwards Lord-Justice Clerk, who was edu-
Charter-chest. cated there. He was the son of Mr. Henry
2 Letters, 9th August, ibid.
Fletcher, brother of the celebrated Andrew
Fletcher of Salton, and Margaret Carnegie
3 Original letter, 22d November 1715. of Pitarrow, was born in 1692, and called to
This nephew of the laird of Salton was the bar in 1717. He was pursuing his legal
probably Mr. Andrew Fletcher of Milton, studies at the date of this letter.
HIS STUDIES AT LEYDEN, AND TRAVELS. 311
appears to have disagreeably affected the health of the young student. In
January and June of 1717 we find his brother and father writing in anxiety
about his health, but they express confidence in Mr. Mackay's care of him.
In June Lord Leven writes to Mr. Mackay that his son should not be dis-
couraged by his ailments, and adds : —
" I had ane account of him yeasterday from Mr. Charles Erskin, brother to Sir
John, which was most agreable to me ; tell my sone that it is a great comfort to
me to hear folk give such character of him, let him be assured of my tender
affection, and what I recommend to him is his duty to God, and nixt care of his
hoast [cough]. I am very weel informed of your care of my sone, for which I
thank you."
In a postscript the earl sends his " service " to Lord Elcho, the Duke of
Queensberry, and others who appear to have been travelling in Holland, and
also desires to be told how his son is to pass his holidays.1 A letter from
Mr. Mackay to Lord Balgonie in the following October implies that he and
Mr. Leslie had been travelling together, but gives no particulars of the
journey. Mr. Leslie, he says —
" aggreed very well with travelling, and was very curious in observing every-
thing worth his notice in the severall places we pass'd through. We returned
just in time to the sitting doun of the colledges, and since that time he has been
very busy. The colledges he attends this winter are upon the Institutions of the
Civill Law and Pandects, universall history, and a colledge upon Florus. With
the pains he gives at present he would make charming progress in the law if he
were sufficiently master of the Latin. I presume your lordship will believe that
I am not wanting to give him any little assistance, so far as I am capable, in his
studys. . . . The tea he sent your lordship was entrusted to the care of
Captain Spence's mate, who was to sail from Rotterdam above a fortnight ago." 2
Alexander Leslie was still at Leyden in December 1718, when he writes
to his brother, Lord Balgonie, expressing the hope of " a mirrie meeting "
soon, and about a " cutting knife " which he recommends : —
" I wrot to your lordship about it once before, and told your lordship that all
the Duch people make use of it, which is en infallaball mark that it is usefull.
1 Original letter, 22d June 1717, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Letter, dated 26th October 1717, ibid.
312 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC
I am told that if you give a horse but half as much corn as ordinary mixed with
straw after it is cut, that he will fatten much sooner then if he had double corn.
If it does fail, the expence of it is very small, so that we will lose but little ; it is
pritty difficult to make it cut, but no doubt Sandie Scot knowes the way, for they
were much made use of in Flanders in the camp. ... I shall presume to put
your lordship in mind that if you want Holland for shirts, I shall endeavour
to furnish you or my lord [Leven], but they must be made and washed here for
fear of duty, therfor if your lordship wants any I must know by the first occasion.
I hope your lordship will mention the price. I have taken of two duzen for
myself, for I will perhaps never have so good occasion again." 1
Mr. Alexander Leslie was admitted in clue form as an advocate before
the court of session on 14th July 171 9.2 This was not done, however,
without applying to Lord Dunmore to allow him to return home to be received
into the ranks of the legal profession. A promise was also made that he
would continue in the king's service, but shortly after his being made
advocate he applied to be allowed to dispose of his commission.3
In 1720 Mr. Leslie was in London, where he, like so many others, was
affected by the South Sea Company mania. This appears from a letter to his
brother, Lord Balgonie, which also refers to a proposal to sell the lands of
Eaith. He states that he had spoken to several gentlemen as probable
buyers, one of them being Colonel Charteris, but they all made difficulties,
and the affair did not progress. He writes : —
" I find they are all very nice and indifferent, land being so high, and I am
advised to acquaint your lordship that there is no time to be lost, nor can you
reasonably expect so much as proposed at parting, for they say that when they
buy at forty years' purchase they make but two per cent, of there money, so it is
much better for them to keep it in the stocks ; this they say alreadie ; but further
people are of opinion, that the South Sea Company will declair a greater dividend
then the present, and in that case land will fall to its ancient standert, for then
every bodie will be fond of keeping in the stocks. ... I am now to acquaint
my lord [Leven] and your lordship that there is to be a new subscription
very soon. I have both the Duke of Montrose and Earl of Eothes promise
1 Letter, 6th December 1718, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Extract Act of Admission, ibid.
3 Letters, 3d February and 30th July 1719, ibid.
HIS ANXIETY TO BUY SOUTH SEA STOCK. 313
that they will do their utmost to procure me a subscription, but this I relay
little upon, for its to be presumed that they will imploy all there intrest
that way in procuring to there oun friends, but I am advised by severals who
understand those matters fully and are very capable of giving advise, such as
Sir David Dalrumple, Harry Cunningham, &c, that the only way would be if my
lord [Leven] would be prevailed upon to writ to the Earle of Sunderland that he
might be one of the Treasury list, but this I know my lord would not incline
because that would be reckoned a favour, and so he would have the less to aske
afterwards. My lord's only way therfor, as they say, would be to writ a separat
letter to Sir John Phellis, sub-governour of the South Sea Company, and a
general letter to the directors ; all that would be necessary for my lord to say [is]
that he had not as yet had any concern in the South sea, and that he would take
it as a great favour if they would allow him a subscription (or two) as you incline.
This is a thing commonly done and scarce ever refused."
He proposes that his father should take one " subscription," Lord Bal-
gonie a second, and himself a third, as " every subscription is realy 2 or
3000 pound clear gain, with almost no hazard." He further writes : —
" The want of money here is a very great loss to me, for there can be
nothing done without money and there can be non got, unless one would give
5 per cent, a month. Since I came here I had an opportunity of making 4 or 500
pound if I had had money, nay, Paterson was so generous as to offer to advance
me 500 pound upon my bills for Scotland (which was a great favour as matters
goes here, for its the richest man here can command lest, all there money being
in the stockes), but this your lordship may be sure I would not do, when I had
not advertised you of it ; I understand it will be the same way in Holland, for I
saw a letter from Carstairs at Rotterdam to a gentleman telling him that there
never was such demands for money as now in Holland, and that he, nor no
marchand in Holland, could do any service to any without they either brought
ready money with them or credit. People here are still perswaded that the States
will go into some measurs very soon ; I cannot yet be determined when I will be
readie to go, for I have not yet seen the Earle of Dunmore, but the duke tells
me I cannot git liberty to sell without the king's consent.1 ... I most now
earnestly beg that your lordship will fall upon some way [to] git me credit for 500
pounds as soon as possible, for the loss of a day is very considerable. This 500
1 This relates to the intended sale of the writer's military commission, which apparently
was not yet disposed of.
VOL. I. 2 K
314 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OP LEVEN, ETC.
pound may be of more use to me just now then all my patrimony at another time ;
without this I may just come home again, for its impossible to git any thing done
without money."
He concludes with a proposal that Lord Leven should borrow money from
the Bank [of Scotland], Lord Wernyss, or some other source. This letter,
however, was written towards the end of July 1720, and a few weeks later
the run on the South Sea stock lessened, its value in the market decreased,
and thousands who had advanced money on the shares were ruined. The
delay, therefore, which took place in procuring the money probably saved
Mr. Leslie's fortunes and perhaps those of his family also.
When in his twenty -second year Mr. Leslie married, on 23d February
1721, Mary Erskine, eldest daughter of Colonel John Erskine of Carnock,
with whom he received the sum of 18,000 merks Scots of dowry. A few
months later he had to mourn the death of his elder brother, Lord Balgonie,
to whom he appears to have been much attached. After that event, which
took place in August 1721, he seems to have been much with his father, and
to have assisted him in the management of the family estates. This appears
from letters to him, and, among others, one from his wife, who, writing
from Culross in May 1723, urges him to do all he can to promote the com-
fort and cheerfulness of his father.1 The character of the writer comes
out pleasingly in her letters, only two of which seem to have been preserved.
Although not strong, and indeed apparently of a consumptive tendency, she
writes cheerfully to her husband and his father, then an ailing man. She
wishes Lord Leven to induce her husband to go straight from Melville to
Edinburgh, and not to take the long route by Culross, dwelling playfully
also on a slight improvement in her health. To her husband she writes
desiring that he would rather remain with his invalid father than come
to her, and only requiring that he would let her know regularly how he is.
He appears to have appreciated her feelings and provided her with a carriage
that she might gain fresh air without fatigue.2 Mrs. Leslie's mother also was
an invalid, and whether this increased her debility is not clear, but she died
1 From one sentence in the letter it might certain,
be inferred that Mr. Leslie was a member of 2 Letters, dated 6th and 10th May 1723,
the General Assembly for 1723, but it is not in Melville Charter-chest.
HIS SECOND MARRIAGE. 315
only two months later, on 12th July 1723, much to the grief of her husband,
who has left on record a testimony of his sorrow. On her deathbed Mrs.
Leslie expressed an earnest wish that their infant son should be brought up in
the strictest Presbyterianism, and this request was incorporated by her husband
in a manuscript containing religious advice for the benefit of his successor.1
Colonel Erskine, after his daughter's funeral, wrote to Lord Leven expressing
pleasure to know that he and Mr. Leslie were so far safe on their way
home, and desiring to know how they " and sweet little Davy " (afterwards
sixth Earl of Leven) were. He adds that he is deeply sensible " of the par-
ticulair regaird and esteem you had from first to last for my dear daughter." 2
Within three years Mr. Leslie entered into a second marriage, on 10th
March 1726, with Elizabeth Monypenny, daughter of the deceased Alexander
Monypenny of Pitmilly, and sister of Mr. David Monypenny of Pitmilly,
advocate. This lady had a dowry of nine thousand merks Scots, but the writ
narrating the contract is so destroyed by damp that the provisions contained
in it cannot be clearly ascertained.3
During the year 1727, if not before that date, Mr. Leslie held the office
of provost of the burgh of Kirkcaldy, and in March of that year he was
appointed to represent the burgh as an elder in the ensuing General Assembly
of the Church of Scotland.4 On the death of his father, in 1728, Mr. Leslie
acted as executor of his trust-estate, and as guardian of his nephew, David,
fourth Earl of Leven. He paid out for funeral expenses, apothecaries' bills,
and other preferable charges on the estate of the deceased David, third Earl
of Leven, the sum of £3992, 6s. lid., for which, on 6th November 1728, he
obtained before the commissary of St. Andrews a decree of cognition against
his nephew and his own younger brother, Mr. James Leslie.
On the death of his young nephew, in June 1729, Mr. Alexander Leslie
became fifth Earl of Leven and fourth Earl of Melville. One of his first acts
was to increase the settlement made on his wife by their marriage contract,
and to make provision for his younger children suitable to his new rank. He
also applied himself to pay off the debts on the estates, and to develop their
1 Manuscript in Mr. Leslie's handwriting, 3 Writ [date worn away], ibid.
in Melville Charter-chest. i Extract Act of Presbytery of Kirkcaldy,
2 Letter, 19th July 1723, ibid. 30th March 1727, ibid.
316 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EAEL OF LEVEN, ETC.
resources. This is proved by the discharges for the various sums paid, and
by a letter written in 1732 to Mr. Charles Mackay, in which the earl says : —
"You will reckon it good news that I have an offer of £100 per annum for a
twenty years' tack of my coall from good hands. We are very near agreed,
and ere next week I hope to be able to tell you its ended to my satisfaction. If
this happen I think my money will not be thrown away ; all my projectors are
saying I 'm mad. However, I can stand that brush when I 'm satisfyed in my
own mind and have the concurrence of my best friends, for I take it for granted
I have yours." 1
On the resignation of James Erskine, Lord Grange, the Earl of Leven was
appointed by King George the Second a senator of the college of justice.
He took his seat on the bench on 11th July 1734.2 He was also appointed,
during the king's pleasure, chamberlain of the crown lands of Fife and
Stratheru in room of the Earl of Eothes, with the usual powers, and a yearly
salary of £300, in addition to £20 of victual.3 It would appear that in the
previous year Lord Leven had received offers of preferment. He states in a
letter to a friend that a member of parliament had written him : " I was with
the great man and used the freedom to mention your name, tho I had no
allowance for it ; he seems fond of haveing you in his interest, and desired
me to let you know this." The " great man " here referred to was probably
Sir Eobert Walpole, as in another letter Lord Leven says : —
" The letter I got the post befor shows that there is some intention to take
some notice of me, what their byviews may be I cannot find out, but sure they
must have some, for I 'm sensible its not on my own account, neither do I believe
that as yet Hay has any hand in it. . . . Here Mr. Drummond, tho' he says my
friends here, yet I fancy he means Sir Eobert only ; now what I want most is to
know how he [Drummond] stands with Islay, for I would fain hope he [Hay] is
not amongst the friends he mentions, for I own it would give me double satis-
1 Letter, 25th April 1732, iu Melville appears from a memorial, presented by him to
Charter-chest. the Treasury in 1751, that he held the office
2 The royal letter for his admission is only two years, and did not receive a formal
dated 28th June 1734, and is in the usual exoneration of his accounts. In consequence,
form ; vol. ii. of this work, pp. 69, 70. a prosecution was begun against him for a
3 Commissions, dated 29th April and 23d balance due to the Crown, and he was forced
August 1734, in Melville Charter-chest. It to petition for the usual release.
APPOINTED COMMISSIONER TO GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 317
faction if anything were done for me that I did not owe it to him, it would be
much more for my honor that it came from Sir Kobert himself."
As one of the senators of the college of justice, Lord Leven was called to
London in April 1737, along with certain of his brother judges, to advise the
House of Lords as to the legal proceedings arising out of the Porteous riot.
The House of Lords resolved to bring in a bill disqualifying the provost of
Edinburgh from holding office anywhere in Great Britain, with other proposals,
which, however, were not finally embodied in the act afterwards passed. The bill
was brought into the house about the beginning of April, and the 2d May was
fixed for the second reading. Lord Leven writes to a friend, " No Scotsman
voted against the bill but the Dukes of Argile and Athole ; Lord Hay did not
divide at all; however, I'm told, upon cool thought, they will behave otherways,
I mean the bulk . . . No bodie yet knows in what way the judges will appear in
the house of Lords, whether at the bar or elsewhere." 1 This last sentence refers
to a proposal which had been made and maintained by the Duke of Argyll
and other Scottish peers that the lords of session should have seats on the wool-
sack, like the English judges in similar circumstances. But this view was
declared to be contrary to precedent, and the Scottish judges were required
to stand at the bar — a fact which caused much irritation in Scotland as an
indignity to the country.
In 1741 King George the Second appointed Lord Leven his commissioner
to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland.2 In this position Lord
Leven does not appear to have indulged in much pomp, nor is it recorded, as
in the case of some other commissioners, that he was attended by members
of the nobility. His speeches, however, it has been said, and the opinion is
borne out by such as are quoted in this memoir, were delivered " with more
frequency and freedom than would now be relished, or perhaps tolerated." 3
1 Letters, 17th and 22d February 1733, his preparations for the coming Assembly —
in Melville Charter-ehest. first as to his wigs, one of which fitted him
2 Letter, 21st March [1741] from the Earl exactly, the other was to be " made by one
of Islay, in Melville Charter-chest. Fogo." His correspondent is requested to
3 Morren's Annals of Assembly, 1739-1752, send for Fogo, and show the wig to him.
ed. 183S, p. 296. In a letter dated 22d The reputation of the wig-makers at the
April 1741, in Melville Charter-chest, the time was very bad, as appears from the
earl expresses anxiety about two points in following sentence in the same letter : " But
318 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EAKL OF LEVEN, ETC.
Ill the course of his evangelistic labours the Eev. George Whitefield visited
Scotland in the summer of this year. From Edinburgh he passed to Dun-
fermline, where he preached in Erskine's meeting-house. Lord Leven invited
Mr. Whitefield to visit him at Melville House, which he did in October,
but could not prolong his visit as he had engagements at Dundee and Aber-
deen.1 It may be interesting to notice that the spring of this year appears
to have been very rigorous. Lord Leven in one of his letters, dated from
Melville in April, states that there is little appearance of the season growing
better —
" which is a dismal prospect to the country in general ; here we have no grass
at all, if we get no change of weather the poor people and cattle must starve. The
poor creatures in the neighbourhood come here beging leave to pull nettles about
the dicks for themselves and heather in the muir for their beasts. We have them
dailly in shoalls of 20 with death in their faces, and at the same time the country
is so loose that the people are forced to watch their houses and barns."
Lord Leven appears to have taken ill, soon after May 1741, of some kind
of fever, perhaps aggravated by the inclement weather, but recovered, though
after this date there are frequent references in his letters to various ailments.2
In the following year, Sir Eobert Walpole, finding himself no longer able
to contend against the opposition to his policy, chiefly exerted by John,
Duke of Argyll, resigned his position as chief of the government. A new
administration was at once formed, under which the Duke of Argyll was
appointed commander-in-chief of the forces, besides his other military offices.
A few weeks later, however, a correspondent of Lord Leven wrote specially
to tell him of " the extraordinary news " that the duke had " resigned the
whole of his posts," adding, "What influence such sudden alterations at
court may have on affairs abroad, I believe will not be easy to tell, but it
looks as if things might pretty near keep the old channel at home." The
reason of the duke's sudden resignation was his disappointment that the
tho I have clap'd my seal upon it, yet they are 1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 258, 259.
such rogues that I would not incline to trust 2 On 30th November of that year the earl
him with it by himself." Lord Leven also was installed Grand Master Mason of Scot-
wished to know if any separate sum were land, and continued in office for one year, but
allowed to the pursebearer, for upon this his the date of his first connection with the Order
choice of that functionary would depend. of Freemasons has not been ascertained.
APPLIES FOR A COMMISSION TO HIS SON. 319
Marquis of Tweeddale was made secretary of state for Scotland, and the
setting aside of some of his own friends in the distribution of offices.
The Duke of Argyll was succeeded by Lord Stair as commander-in-chief,
and to him and to the new Scottish secretary Lord Leven applied for a
commission in the army to his eldest son, David, Lord Balgonie, who was then
with his tutor in Holland. This fact, and his probable re-appointment as
commissioner to the Church of Scotland, are referred to by Lord Leven in
one of his letters. He writes, " I had a letter from Lord Hay last post,
wherin he sais ' it was extremely agreeable to me the other day to hear from
good hands that our church at present and what relates to it could not be in
a better way than it is.' This, with what I heard formerly, makes me
conclude the farce will be acted over again this year as last ; but I have
had no ansuere from the Marquis [Tweeddale], which I wonder at, but I
know he spoke very obligingly of me at his levee." The earl then refers to
an application to Lord Stair on behalf of his son.1 In another letter about
same date, the earl writes, " I 'm glad to see by the London Gazette that all
matters are to turn out for the good of the country ; this I take for granted
must certainly be the case since Lord Stair has accepted of office — a patriot
of his magnitude sure would accept on no other terms."2
The Earl of Leven again, as he anticipated, was appointed commissioner
to the general assembly of 1742, and at the close of its sittings received
from Lord Tweeddale a congratulatory letter upon its successful conclusion,
approving also the earl's own conduct and management.3
In the autumn of the same year, Lord Leven was the means of obtaining
the settlement in his neighbouring parish of Collessie of a clergyman who
afterwards became famous as an eloquent preacher and professor of Belles
Lettres and Khetorie in the University of Edinburgh. This was the Kever-
end Hugh Blair. Two months after his induction to Collessie, he received
a call to the Canongate church, Edinburgh. Lord Leven expressed deep
regret, but declared that neither he nor the parish would oppose the change,
as it was evidently for Mr. Blair's advantage. The transfer, however, did not
take place till June of the following year.
1 Letter, March 1742, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Letter, 24th March 1742, ibid. 3 Letter, 29th May 1742, ibid.
320 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
The earl was again royal commissioner to the general assemblies of 1743
and 1744. In his speech to the assembly in 1743 he departed from the more
formal style of such utterances by advising the members to study peace and
good understanding among themselves, and to guard against everything that
may break or interrupt these, especially
" when by an unhappy schism so many have withdrawn from the communion of
this church, and the ringleaders of this faction are every where dispersed and
catch at all advantage to foment and encrease the division ; in this juncture to be
sure a more than ordinary caution and circumspection is necessary. The true
sons of the Church should be knit together more close than ever, laying aside all
passion and variance which may give occasion to the common adversary to
triumph ; it 's by your behaviour, gentlemen, by the calmness and discretion of
your counsels and equity of your sentences, by joyning harmoniously in this one
concern of promoting the valuable interests of this Church, — it 's thus, I say, that
under God our present disorders may be rectified, your enemies put to shame,
and the eyes of poor misguided creatures opened to see and acknowledge their
mistake." 1
It was the Commission of this assembly which authorised the carrying
through of a scheme for making provision for the widows and children of
ministers and professors, and despatched some of their number to London to
obtain an Act of Parliament embodying the scheme. Lord Leven appears to
have used his influence in promoting the desired result, and an Act was duly
obtained. To this Lord Tweeddale alludes in his letter announcing Lord
Leven's reappointment as high commissioner in 1744. "I make no doubt,"
he says, " you will find the assembly in good humour and full of gratitude for
the favour his Majesty has so lately conferred on the church, which was so
warmly recommended to me by your lordship." 2 Lord Leven dealt with
the subject in one of his speeches to the assembly, when he reminded them
that the great affairs of government and the press of important business
which had claimed the king's attention at this critical juncture had not pre-
vented his Majesty from showing in the strongest manner his concern in the
prosperity of the church, and generously interesting himself in her welfare.
1 MS. speech in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Letter, 21st April 1744, in Melville
The reference is to the secession by Erskine Charter-chest,
and his associates in 1733.
HIS SPEECH TO THE ASSEMBLY OF 1745. 321
The " critical juncture " referred to was a threatened invasion by the French,
whose fleet had sailed up the Channel in the middle of the previous February,
in order to cover a projected descent upon England from Dunkirk and other
French ports. But a few days later the English fleet, much superior to that
of the French, drove the latter down the channel, and the real danger of
invasion ceased. For this Lord Leven in his speech expresses gratitude "that
in so few weeks after we were threatened with an invasion in favour of a
Popish pretender by a people of whose perfidiousness and inveterate enmity
to our religion and libertys we have had so long experience, we should be
assembled here in peace and quiet, in the possession of all we hold dear and
sacred, in the possession of all we could dread the loss of." 1
In the memorable year 1745, Lord Leven was again commissioner to the
assembly, and it is curious to compare his concluding speech to the house
with the events which a few months later filled the country with alarm. He
spoke of the happy blessings then enjoyed of peace and tranquillity, and
expressed himself persuaded that the ministers woidd continue to represent
those blessings in the liveliest colours to their people, " and shew them how
their duty to their sovereign is inseparably connected with their own private
interest." 2 This was in May, and in the following August Prince Charles
Edward raised his standard at Glenfinnan. His victorious progress south-
ward, his arrival in Edinburgh, and the defeat of the royal forces at Preston-
pans, are matters of history. Of the defeat at Prestonpans there are some
brief notices in a letter in the Melville charter-chest, written apparently by
the fourth Lord Belhaven.
The writer, on 23d September 1745, two days after the battle, says :
" George Cranston pass'd here this morning with a pacquet to Berwick ; he
says that he mounted guard upon the canon during that fatal action, that
after his men had given two or three platoons, they wheel'd about to make
way for the dragoons, who, instead of riding in sword in hand, wheel'd about
on his soldiers, and threw them into the utmost disorder." Cranston him-
self " got into the grave-digger's house in Prestonpans, where he remained
till 3 o'clock next morning, during which time the people belonging to that
house informed him that several persons of distinction amongst the High-
1 MS. speech in Melville Charter-chest. 2 MS. speech, 1745, ibid.
VOL. I. 2 S
322 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
landers were lying in the church, having fine linen and covered over with
plaids, several Highlanders sitting at their head and feet, howling over them ;
that orders had come to the sexton to prepare five more graves, for which he
was to be handsomely rewarded." The writer also refers to the efforts of
their officers to rally the dragoons, and to the great slaughter which took
place at the wall of Preston park. Of the two commanding officers who
escaped to Berwick, Cranston reported " that Brigadier Fowke was among the
last who left the field ; that he escaped very narrowly, having several shot
fir'd at him ; that he [Cranston] met him near Cockenzie, [he] appeard very
cool, and rode at an easy trot to Dunbar, where he dined, and proceeded in
the afternoon to Berwick, having a commission to land the Dutch at New-
castle ; that Colonel Lascelles in the pursuit was taken prisoner and sent to
the rear, but pretending to be wounded, and putting on a white cockade, he
received a horse from one of their folks, and came on with Brigadier
Fowkes." 1 The writer concludes : " We are assur'd that 900 Dutch were in
Burlington Bay. I hear Lord George Hay gives out that ten battalions of
English are landed. The advocate, solicitor, Sir John Inglis, encamped last
night in and about Berwick. Several people, viz., Sir Bobert Henderson,
J. Anstruther, etc., observed that our retreat was not so precipitate, but that
we kept in the rear of the above-mentioned ministers." 2
The Viscount of Strathallan joined the rebel army, and he sent from
Perth, in December 1745, a requisition to the Earl of Leven, desiring him to
send the sum of £100 within ten days, "and thereby prevent any further
trouble." 3 It is doubtful whether the earl received this letter at the time,
and it would appear he was not at home when a party of rebels did visit
Melville and made a search for arms, carrying off horses, blunderbusses, and
other weapons, for which they duly gave a receipt to Lady Leven.4 Lord
Leven had gone on a journey southward, first to Berwick and thence to
Alnwick, from which place he wrote on 27th December to his friend Mr.
1 It was to these two officers that, on their but the above is the contemporary version,
arrival at Berwick, General Lord Mark Kerr 2 Letter, with Lord Belhaven's seal of
exclaimed : " I have seen some battles, heard arms, in Melville Charter-chest,
of many, but never of the first news of defeat 3 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 230.
being brought by the general officers before." 4 R-eceipt, 13th December 1745, in Mel-
This story was afterwards applied to Cope, ville Charter-chest.
CONCLUSION OF THE REBELLION OF 1745. 323
Charles Mackay. He thinks he will be better at Alnwick than even at
Edinburgh, " since I 'm of no use there either to my friends or the govern-
ment." He continues : " I 'm told by a gentleman who left Edinburgh on
Tuesday night that the foot from Stirling were come there, and that the
Highlanders were gone towards Stirling. I 'm really afraid of Stirling in that
case." After referring to the movements of the Royal troops, and com-
menting on the probable delay in the landing of the Hessians, the earl
writes : " I hear the skirmish was betwixt 200 dragoons, commanded by
General Honeywood (who by the by is wounded), and the rearguard of the
rebells, commanded by Lord Elcho. There was 11 dragoons killed on
the spot and 8 Highlanders. Honeywood dismounted the dragoons, and
took betwixt 60 and 70 prisoners, and found about 40 half dead and
drown'd in a river."1 Lord Leven desires his correspondent not to let
" any bodie " know where he is, and concludes his letter with an incidental
notice of the bombardment of Carlisle by the Duke of Cumberland.2
Lord Leven's absence from home was partly caused by a desire to get
rid of indisposition, apparently of an asthmatic nature, but he was again at
Melville in February 1746, although again attacked, which prevented him
attending, as required, upon the Duke of Cumberland. He had a letter from
the duke expressing regret at his ailment, and thanking him for some trouble
he had undertaken. The duke states that the Hessians and some English
cavalry were at Perth and Stirling, who would aid in protecting the lowlands.3
The conflict at Culloden on 16th April 1746 put an end to the rebellion,
and in May Lord Leven was able to congratulate the general assembly
" upon that happy, that surprising deliverance this church and nation have
by the blissing of Almighty God so lately received from the glorious victory
obtained . . . over these perfidious traitors to our king and country and
avow'd enemies to every thing that is dear to us as men and Christians."
The earl proceeded to express his horror at the "wicked and unnatural
rebellion," and to depict its probable dreadful consequences had it succeeded,
1 It is not clear whether this is a version siderably from the rebel accounts.
of the skirmish between the rear-guard of the „ T , „ , ^ , ,„,^ . , , .„
, _ ,, , " Letter, 27th December 1745, in Melville
rebels, under Lord George Murray, and a
detachment of the Duke of Cumberland's
army at Clifton, but if so, it differs con- 3 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 71.
324 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
but he praised the conduct of the ministers in the crisis, and attributed the
non-success of the rebellion largely to their influence.1 He conveyed to the
house a special message from the king to the same effect, and also one con-
tained in a letter to himself from the Duke of Cumberland. The duke wrote
from Inverness on 21st May to express publicly during the sitting of the
Assembly the just sense he had " of the very steddy and laudable conduct of
the clergy of that church through the whole course of this most wicked,
unnatural, and unprovoked rebellion." He testified to the zeal and loyalty
of the ministers, and their forwardness to act for the government.2
A letter from Lady Anne Leslie, eldest daughter of the earl, to her brother,
Lord Balgonie, then stationed at Inverness with General Handasyde's
regiment, gives a glimpse of the gayer aspects of the high commissioner's
sojourn in Edinburgh. She writes : —
" The Prince of Hesse did us the honour to dine with us on Fryday, drank tea
and at five waited on papa to the General Assembly, and the ladys waited on his
highness there and sat in the loft [gallery]. He staid an hour. On Fryday we
had a fine dancing assembly; his highness got the first set to dispose of; he gave
me the first couple, but he began with dancing a minuet with his partner, Mrs.
Kinloch, and then he danced one with me. My partner was Sir Patty Murray ;
we led down the country dances. There was four setts, and a vast crowd of
company. Every thing was directed with the utmost p>rudence and discretion,
and no petts that I can hear of." 3
In the end of May and middle of July Lord Leven again had communica-
tions from the Duke of Cumberland, the first announcing the submission of
the Clan Cameron, and the second intimating the duke's departure for the
south. His military secretary, Sir Everard Fawkener, expressed a wish to
meet Lord Leven, and strengthen their acquaintance, on which he placed
much value.4
Lord Leven again met the general assembly as commissioner in 1747, but
the proceeding's call for no special notice, nor do those of 1748. In 1747, however,
Lord Leven was called to a wider sphere of action by his being elected one of
the sixteen representative peers of Scotland. In consequence of this he was in
1 MS. speech in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Ibid. p. 261, 26th May 1746.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 71, 72. * Ibid. pp. 230, 231.
HIS ADVICE AS TO OFFICE OF LORD PRESIDENT. 325
London in January 1748, as we learn from a long letter to a friend. The first
part of it deals with his reception at court and in political circles, which was
favourable. " My wife and Anne were at court on new year's day ; the king,
the duke, and Princess Emelia all asked for me, and, to say truth, madam has
met with uncommon respect from all of them." The letter then deals with
the subject of the probable successor of President Forbes, who had died in
December 1747. Lord Leven had been appealed to for advice, and had various
interviews with the Duke of Newcastle on the subject.
" He told me the first time, he did not know what to do ; if I could put him
on a way to please all partys he would be obliged to me. I told him that was
impossible, but I thought he ought to do what would be obliging to the whigs,
the king's friends, and that was to make Lord A[rniston] president, that his own
principles and that of his family were long known ; that the other, whatever his
principles were now, it was certain his family at least was a little obnoxious to
the king's friends in Scotland ; that in short it would be a blow to the king's
interest in that country."
In addition to some other details of less importance, Lord Leven told the
duke " that Arniston had more influence in the country than any private
gentleman whatever, and even more than many of another class put together."
A proposal to make the younger Eobert Dundas, son of Lord Arniston, lord
advocate, was rejected by Lord Leven as unacceptable to the young man
himself in the circumstances. The earl proceeds : —
'•' The next interview produced nothing new, only as I saw A[rniston] would
not be the man, I said I thought T.1 would be more obnoxious to the whigs than
any bodie ; then he [the duke] asked who there were ; I named Elchies (who I
told [him] would be a certain persons man nixt to T.) and Robert Craigie. All
the thanks I have got for my pains from one of A.s friends I find is that under
pretence of serving A. I did what I could for Elchies. This has nettled me a
good dale, and would determine most people to act no further part, yet as I dare-
say he would not suspect me himself, if there remains any place for it, I will still
proceed." 2
' It may be noted that Lord Arniston was promoted to be president of the
1 Probably Charles Erskine, Lord Tinwald, king and his friends the whigs.
whose connection with the Mar family might 2 Letter, 3d January 174S, in Melville
explain why his name was obnoxious to the Charter-chest.
326 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
court of session on 10th September 1748, Lord Tinwald having been made
justice-clerk in June of the same year.
In the autumn of the following year, 1749, Lord Leven paid a visit to
France, but his lordship did not enjoy his experiences of continental travel.
He had a stormy but comparatively short passage from Dover to Calais,
whence he set out for Lille.
" I lay at St. Omer the first night, which is a very fine place and well for-
tifyed ; its full of fine churches. From this I was silly enough to be prevailed
on to quit the post road, as I was in a hyred chaise, to save some miles, by which
I met with very bad roads, and had like to have stuck in several places, often in
the midle of woods not within two or three miles of a house, so, had an accident
happened, I had been forced to ly all night in my chaise at the mercy of ruffians
who abound in this part of the country at present. We saw many that day who
would have attacked us if they durst, but the gun frighted them ; but at length
I got safe to Bethune, and so to Lille very late. The people in this country
appear very odd, especially the women are the hideousest creatures ever I saw.
Every thing is dirty ; no service at the inns, even at Lille, where I was at the
best hotel, there was but one waiter and one maid for the whole house. I stayed
at Lille all yesterday [Wednesday, 24th September], and set out this morning
post for Paris. Oh ! its miserable posting in this country, 5 or at most 6
miles in one hour; all we could do was to reach this place, Per on, 60 miles.
They yoke 3 miserable beasts all in a breast, just as we do harrows, and an
old surly rascal as post boy, who will do nothing but what he pleases. One of
them had the impudence this day to tell us, after we had given him sixpence to
drink, that we payed like Frenchmen and not like Englishmen, and gave us
names, upon which Sandie 1 threshed him. This night I have got wine I was
forced to warm with sugar befor I could drink it, and yet this is the best place
for lying at betwixt Lille and Paris (Paris — I find now this is not true). The
Windmiln twopenny is better than any wine I have yet seen, except at Lille, and
it not very good."
The preceding was written from " Peron, twelve posts from Lisle," on
25th September 1749, and on the 27th the earl continues: —
" Senlis, 22 posts from Lille. Got here just now, nothing remarkable
1 This was Lord Leven's second surviving son, Alexander, whom he had met at Lille,
and who accompanied him to Pari.*.
HIS EXPERIENCES OP TRAVELLING IN FRANCE. 327
on the road, but a charming country. All the road we travailed this day is
almost one continued avenew as straight as a rash, and in several places for two
miles together they are aple trees quite full which had a fine effect. From the
last post-house called Pont St. Maixence, we past thorrow one of the king's
hunting forrests, called Du Sallats (?), the finest thing I ever saw. Where we
came thorrow it its seven English miles, the trees cut hedge-ways on each side
and very tall, but the apprehension of being robed took off some of the pleasure.
I could easily have gone to Paris this night, but did not chuse to travail late for
fear of accidents ; we shall be there to-morrow to breakfast, God willing. We
scarce see a house on the road but the places where we stop to change the horses,
and those are as bad as a Scots tennents house in most places, except when it
happens in a town, and even those have bad accomodation. Its amazing who
labours the ground, for tho its a rich corn country all betwixt this and Lille,
except the last stage, where any ground I could see for the wood is heathy, yet I
scarce observed a farm-house, tho the country is all open, for the avenews I men-
tioned are but one row of trees on each side of the road at about 12 or 14 foot
distance. To-morrow I am told we pass throw the forrest of Chantilier [Chan-
tilly], longer, they say, than the one I passed this day."
Lord Leven expresses a hope that he will soon see his friend the Earl of
Albemarle, who was then English ambassador at the French court, and he
states that his malady, the asthma, had almost left him. He proceeds —
" The multitudes of English in this country has made travailing as dear as in
England, the expence of horses for one chaise by the king's ordonnance comes to
four shillings English every six miles, which is as much as we pay in England for
both chaise and horses, except where they have close post-chaises ; for these we
pay one shilling per mile. I payed at Lille 3 guineas for the use of a chaise
to Paris. The guides, for I cannot call them boys, as they are generally old fel-
lows, I have met with are allowed only threepence English per post, yet our
countrymen have debauched them to such a degree that they grumble if they
don't get double, and their post is generally but six miles. In short, one way or
other, I see this will come out a dearer job than I was made believe, so that I
repent my journey heartily. . . . The roads here are all made and keeped up at
the public expence, and no turnpikes, which is grand indeed, and the king has
been at great pains to keep the roads free of rogues since the disbanding of the
troops; the disbanded men were all carryed by their officers to their several
parishes to prevent their playing tricks, this was very prudently done, and
328 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
deserves commendation. I am delighted with the country since I entered France,
and flatter myself I shall continue more so the more I see of it."
"Paris, 28th, ten in the morning. I arrived yesterday befor dinner, had a
most agreeable jurney. The wood of Chantilier is very large and fine, its above
eight league over, but not above two where we crossed it ; I think the other the
prittyest and best keeped, and largest trees. On the roadside the trees are all
cliped hedge-ways for about 16 or 18 foot high, and then the branches are
allowed to spread so that you ride under cover when you go on the side of the
road off the casway which is in the midle. They [the roads] are indeed very
good, but still very uneasie in comparison of the made roads in England, and
make such a noise that there is hardly any conversing, and it is with great diffi-
culty the boys will be prevailed upon to quit it, as it is lighter for their horses
than the sandie roads. One thing surprised me, when we came within two stages
of Paris, the avenews failed where I expected they would have been best. My
chaise broke about 3 miles from Paris, which hindered me a long while. I
stoped at the Hotel de Flandre and dined, where I was sadly imposed upon ;
because I would not lodge there they made me pay very well for my dinner you
may believe, and over and above 6 livres for the use of the room for 3 hours.
I have got into a much better house in the Rue de Tournon, as reckoned the best
air in Paris, and near the gardens of Luxembourg, and near one Madam Douglas,
who Lord Morton recommended me to, who has been extremely obliging. There
is no such thing here as geting lodgings in a private house, every bodie lodges in
hotels ; how my wife will do when she comes I can't imagine, as I cannot yet hear
of a house large enough for us, all being taken up with English, etc. . . . Our
chaises would be of no manner of use here as they are so much slighter than the
French, neither the wheels nor bodie would go twenty miles without being broke
to pieces, so we shall be obliged to buy chaises here as they have scarce such a
thing as chaises upon the road to hyre with the horses as in England, every bodie
providing themselves. I fancy it will end in buying a Berlain and one chaise
which will accommodate us all. What I have seen of Paris coming along the
streets yesterday really exceeded my expectation ; the houses are generally much
better than in the streets of London, and higher, and have a grander look, but I
have seen none equal to our people of fashions houses built in the squares, but I
have seen so little yet, I must refer saying any further till I have seen more.
The king [Louis XV.] is just returned from taking a jaunt to Havre de Grace, and
is at Versailles at present, but I hear he goes to Fountainbleau on Tuesday or
Wedensday, which is unlucky for me, as I shall not see him befor he goes, I can
have no cloathes ready so soon. I brought my old blew coat with the silver lace,
HIS SOJOURN IN PARIS. 329
which my taillor tells me looks very well and in the mode, only the sleeves not
altogether so long as they are used. . . . Mr. Smollet [the novelist] is in this
town I hear, I wish I could meet with him to amuse me."
Lord Leven concludes with references to a visit from Lord Albemarle, to
the number of English then in Paris,1 his asthma, and the probability of its
cure by going further south, as to Aix in Provence. He, however, makes up
his mind to return as soon as possible to London, as it is now too late for
the south of Prance.2 In another letter, written a few days later, he writes : —
" This to be sure is a vast putty place, and the more one sees of it they are
the more taken with it, the publick buildings are very magnificent. I have delayed
going to see the palaces till I see if my folks come ... I am tired to death even
in Paris, I have nothing to do, I know no bodie ; all my acquaintances consists
in Lord Albemarle's family, Lord Cathcart, and Colonel York, and even those I
see seldom. ... In short I am so badly off and so much out of my way here
that I would not stay a fortnight longer here in the way I have been in upon any
consideration. I heartily repent my expedition I assure you. Poor Scotland
might have served even a sick Scotsman. If I get health I shall buy it very
dear, I am imposed upon in every thing, which I cannot bear ; theres nothing
I buy but my valet de place has so much on it in spite of my heart ; he has so
much from my coach hyrer, my hotel, in short on everything you can figure : my
only comfort is every bodie is in the same situation, which is monstruous. I have
been in a low room all this week, but to-morrow I get an appartment on the
first floor, for which I pay 3 guineas per week, but it is very handsome. I dine
at the rate of half a crown each, and but poorly off, and my burgundie coasts
about 16 pence the bottle ; their manner of doing everything is so different from
ours, I cannot be reconciled to it at all."
After a reference to Lord Albemarle's kindness, and to Lord Crawford's
son " here in the accadamy, who is a fine obliging boy and very serviceable to
me," Lord Leven incidentally remarks : " Our gooseberrys answers the grapes
we get here, and in my oppinion very little inferior."
A fortnight later, on the same sheet of paper, Lord Leven wrote from
London announcing his arrival there : —
1 Among English visitors the earl enume- 3 Letter, dated 25th, 27th [sic — probably
rates Lord Bath and his lady, Lord London- 26th], 28th, and 30th September 1749, in
derry, Lord Charles Douglas, the Duke of Melville Charter-chest.
Queensberry's son, and others.
VOL. I. 2 T
330 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
" I left Paris on Saturnday last [18th October 1749] and came to Chantilly,
where I passed all the day, as I had not seen it befor hiring on to Paris from Lisle
by the south side of the forest as I wrot you. I reached Bouloigne on Monday
to dinner. There my chaise broke, so was obliged to stay there, where I took a
little fly boat (a little before 9, Tuesday morning) with a close deck, not near so
large as a Burntisland boat. It blew desperately hard, by which we were often
under watter for half a minute, but the wind was fair, by which means I got the
quickest passage that has been for many years; I was but three hours and 20
minutes on the passage, which is reckoned nine mile more than at Calais, which
is reckoned 2 1 miles. When I came to shore the people told me I had escaped
very well as she [the boat] had been condemned two months befor, being quite
rotten, but was once esteemed the best sailor in the Channel. I landed at Dover
at 12 o'clock on Tuesday and got to London yesterday to dinner, where I sur-
prised my folks who did not expect me for ten days. I cannot express how
happy I am that I am out of a country I hate so much, I mean the people, for
the country itself is charming. ... I was at court this day and presented again
on my arrival ; they were all surprised to see me so soon, tho they knew I was to
return as my folks could' not follow. ... I have been in perfect health, and
never have had a severe fit of the asthma since I left Scotland." x
During the next few years the references in the family papers to the Earl
of Leven are few and unimportant. One of his letters, written in March 1751,
refers to the death of Frederick, Prince of Wales, eldest son of King George
the Second : —
" The princes death affects every mortal. The good king is in great affliction
and has writ a most affectionate letter with his own hand to the princess. It has
put a stop to all business and will make it impossible for some time to get any
private affairs set agoing. ... I hear its to be proposed to pay all the princes just
debts. God grant matters may be conducted with discretion and the good king
long preserved ; his life if possible is now more precious than ever ; a minority
in this kingdome would be a terrible situation."
In the same year, no doubt because of his frequent appointments as
commissioner to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland, Lord Leven
was appealed to by the college of New Jersey in America. Professor Aaron
Burr, apparently then head of the college, wrote enclosing a copy of the
charter incorporating the institution. He also stated that under his manage-
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest.
FLOODS IN ENGLAND, DECEMBER 1752. 331
ment the number of students had largely increased ; that their instruction
was carried on in the best way possible, but the funds were not sufficient to
build a house. For assistance they looked to friends abroad, as the province
was poor and contained many Quakers, who were not friends of learning. It
had been proposed that an act of the general assembly should be obtained
for a national collection, and on behalf of this Mr. Burr appeals to Lord
Leven for encouragement.1 This application was probably brought before
the assembly of 1752, when Lord Leven was again commissioner, but the
result is not recorded among his papers.
Lord Leven made another visit to London in the end of December 1752,
and from one of his letters we learn that the country was then much flooded.
Lady Leven was his companion, and he writes : —
" Madam was for pushing on at 3 stages a day ; she has made her part good,
but as it always happens when a good-natured fellow grants them one request
they always demand more, so this morning she insisted on making 4 stages,
which I was forced to comply with, so we got here [Grantham] in good time
from Doncaster. We were extremely lucky in not being stoped by the watters
at Newark. Had we come there Thursday, Fryday, or yesterday, we could not
have pas't, and had we got there only to-morrow, we would have been stoped
with a new flood by the melting of the snow from the Derby hills, which w\\\ be
down to-morrow, so we escaped between flaws as the sailors say. To-morrow
madam proposes to go 5 stages, that we may have but 4 to London next day
for fear of collectors, who are not so peaceably disposed in this country as
yours in James's court.'2 Lord Marchmont was stoped all Fryday at Tuxford
in hopes of geting throw at Newark on Saturnday, but finding it impracticable he
went off yesterday morning by Nottingham, where he will undoubtedly be stoped
again as the new flood will be down there this day, and my landlord here, who is
a clever fellow, says he may happen to be forced back by Tuxford yet befor he
get over." 3
During the early part of 1753 and 1754 we have more of Lord Leven's
correspondence, but as much of it is in a species of cipher, the full tenor of
it cannot be understood. A few facts, however, may be gathered. On 11th
1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 2G2, 263. Court, Edinburgh, was the residence of various
prominent Scotsmen.
- This allusion is to the highwaymen who 3 Letter, 31st December 1752, in Melville
then infested the roads near London. James's Charter-chest.
332 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
January 1753 lie writes: "I am going to commence doctor to-morrow; poor
Lord Chesterfield has turned very deaf, he has tryed every bodie here to no
purpose, and I have undertaken either to cure him, or at least to do him no
harm. If I raise my character as a doctor it will be more than you ever ex-
pected I am sure." x In another letter, a few days later, he refers to a report
that the plague had broken out at Eouen in France, which he earnestly hopes
may not be true. He then adds : " There is a plague of another kind which
prevails with great spirit in that country just now ; how it will end no bodie
can say. I used to rejoice at hearing of disturbances there, as a kind of
security to us, but talking the other day with a great man he told me I was
mistaken, for that the only danger from France was when their parties ran
high, for when they found nothing else would unite [them], they declared
war with their neighbours, and that never failed to have that effect in order
to crush the common enemy. There is some sense in the observation." -
Other points on which Lord Leven touches in his letters in 1753, are the
Marriage Acts, which were passed in that year, and the state of the roads,
which were infested by highwaymen. Of the first he says : " A bill is ordered
to be brought in which will annull all clandestine marriages whatever."
Lord Bath had called upon the house [of lords] " to alter a law that had in so
many instances produced such dismal effects," and he stated cases where
families had been ruined by such marriages.
" The chancellor [Lord Hardwicke] said, There had been several attempts
made of that nature which had always failed, he did not know how, but that now
it behoved to be made effectual in some shape or other, and in his opinion the
most solid and effectual way would be to have them [clandestine marriages]
declared void and null with the consequences, . . . that infamous practise of
private marriages was come to such a monstrous height that it was a reproach to
suffer it any longer ; that his station gave him access to know more of them than
any other one person in the kingdom ; that to his certain knowledge this last
year, one Keith had marryed 1700 people."3
Lord Leven refers to the subject again in a later letter, but has nothing
1 Letter, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Letter, dated 19th January 1753, ibid.
'■'• Letter, I st February 1 753, ibid.
PREVALENCE OF HIGHWAY ROBBERY NEAR LONDON. 333
further of importance. It may be added that the enactment then passed was
the basis of the present marriage law of England.
In regard to the state of the roads Lord Leven writes : —
" I am sorry you should be molested with rogues and pickpockets about
Edinburgh; they must soon be discovered. Robbing is now become intoler-
able here. On Thursday Colonel Shutz, coming from the city, was stoped at
St. Giles church by three fellows with pistols. One called to the coachman to
stop, and another came up to the door of the coach, and without saying ' mark,'
held his pistol close to his breast and fired. He [Colonel Shutz] is not dan-
gerously wounded ; the ball sclented along his ribbs. The fellows, believing they
had killed him, made off, apprehending the fireing would have raised the mob
upon them. We are to take that part of his Majesty's speach relating to roberies
into consideration on Fryday nist week. What they will make of it I don't
know. If nothing effectual is done, better not medle with it." 1
In 1753, the Earl of Leven was again, and for the last time, appointed
high commissioner to the general assembly of the church of Scotland. It
was probably in view of its meeting that he wrote to his friend Mr. Charles
Mackay on 1st May, stating that he was leaving London shortly, and asking
him to give notice to his wig-maker, and also to look out for a house. " If
a publick house can't be got, it must be some private one if such can be had."
The requisition for a public-house may appear strange to present ideas as
to the office of commissioner, but it was in accordance with a custom of
the period. The earl's son, David, sixth Earl of Leven, when commissioner,
held his levees at a well-known resort called " Fortune's tavern," and Dr.
Carlyle of Inveresk says that it was at this time customary for patrons of
parishes when they had litigations about settlements, which sometimes lasted
for years, to open public-houses to entertain the members of assembly. As an
instance of this abuse he refers to the Duke of Douglas, whose factor, White
of Stockbridge, " opened a daily table for a score of people, which vied with
the lord commissioner's for dinners, and surpassed it far in wine." 2 Whether
1 Letter, dated 2d February [probably p. 229. White figures prominently in the
1753], in Melville Charter-chest. Douglas cause. He widened the breach be-
tween the Duke of Douglas and his only sister
2 Autobiography of Dr. Alexander Carlyle, Lady Jane Douglas.
334 ALEXANDEB, FIFTH EAEL OF LEVEN, ETC.
this last criticism applied to Lord Leven's entertainments is not clear, but
the date referred to was during his term of office.
Lord Leven's letters, in the beginning of 1754, refer to Mr. Pelham's
death, and the changes of ministry which ensued. He died on 6th March,
and on the 14th Lord Leven wrote that there was a hesitation as to the
settlement of the public offices, which he hopes will come to nothing, " It 's
said Mr. Fox x refuses to accept of being secretary of state." In another
letter he says : " Poor Duke of Newcastle is inconsolable for his brother's [Mr.
Pelham's] death, altogether independent of any other connection; I never
saw a man so overcome in all my lifetime. He 's not able so much as to
speak to any mortal, his heart is so touched it quite unmans him. . . .
However, his friends hope a week more may give him more resolution ; his
behaviour would gain the esteem of any man but a savage. I 'm sure I
bleed for him." There are various other references to this subject, but they
do not affect Lord Leven personally, and are therefore of less importance here.
Parliament was dissolved in April 1754, and a general election of repre-
sentative peers took place in the following month, but though Lord Leven
was present he was not elected, and apparently did not desire a return to
parliamentary life. He was appointed in that year one of the lords of police,
as successor to Lord Torphichen. On his return from London to Scotland in
May 1754, he speaks of going to " the lodge " to reside for a few days. This
was the earl's country house near Edinburgh, and stood in what were then the
outskirts of the city, at the west side of Bruntsfield Links, and commemorated
by the street known as Leven Street. It is described in a modern work as
" a plain but massive old edifice that once contained a grand oak staircase
and stately dining-hall, with windows facing the south." 2
1 The Right Hon. Henry Fox. Duchess Countess of Sutherland. In eonnee-
2 Old and New Edinburgh, vol. iii. p. 30. tion with Leven Lodge, "we remember that
After the death of the Earl of Leveu in after the marriage of the late Sir William
1754, Leven Lodge was occupied by Mary, Stirling Maxwell with Lady Anna Leslie Mel-
Countess of Sutherland, and on the 24th May ville, who was a daughter of David, Earl of
1765, her only surviving daughter, Lady Leven andMelvilIe,weinducedhim todriveto
Elizabeth Sutherland, was born there, who Leven Lodge to seetheoakstaircase and dining
became Countess of Sutherland in her own hall. But he was disappointed with them in
right, and by marriage Lady Trentham, their ruinous condition, and asked disparag-
Countess Gower, Marchioness of Stafford and ingly, " What came we out for to see 1"
HIS DEATH : HIS FAMILY. 335
The death of Alexander, fifth Earl of Leveu, occurred on the 2d of
September 1754, with comparative suddenness, at the residence of Lord
Balcarras in Fife, whither he had gone to dine. The cause of death was
disease of the heart. His body was brought to Melville House.1 He was
survived by his countess, Elizabeth Monypenny. Her daughter, Lady Mary,
wrote of her, in 1779, as the best of mothers, whose whole life has been
a pattern of unerring excellence.2 Lady Leven lived until 1783, and died
on 15th March of that year, in the eighty-fourth year of her age. By his
first wife the earl had issue one son, and by his second wife he had two
sons and four daughters.
1. David, sixth Earl of Leven and Melville. Of him a memoir follows.
2. Hon. George Leslie, named in a bond of provision by his father in 1730, as
then only son of the second marriage. He apparently died young, as no
further reference, to him has been found.
3. Hon. Alexander Leslie, born in 1731. He was partly educated abroad, and
accompanied his father during his travels in France in 1749, where he
showed himself well acquainted with the language. He entered the army
in 1753, and rose rapidly through the various grades, becoming lieutenant-
colonel of the 56th regiment in 1766. He was for a short time in the
marines, but effected an exchange into the land forces in 1756. In 1774
he was in America, whence he writes giving an account of the state of
public opinion, and commenting on the stubborn spirit of the people. He
advocates very sharp measures for enforcing obedience to the British govern-
ment.3 In 1775 he was appointed aide-de-camp to King George the Third,
with the rank of colonel in the army. In the following year he was again
in America and acted as brigadier-general under Sir William Howe, who
expressed much appreciation of his gallantry in the field. In 1780 he was
major-general, and marched to join Lord Cornwallis in North Carolina, and
was present at the battle of Guildford in March 1781. He commanded at
Charlestown towards the end of the same year, but his health began to give
way, and he obtained leave of absence on 27th May 1782.4 He was afterwards
for some years second in command of the forces in Scotland, and died at Beech-
wood, near Edinburgh, on 27th December 1794. He was interred " in the
1 Letter, 3d September 1754, vol. ii. of this 3 Letter, June, July 1774, ibid.
work, pp. '263, 264.
2 Original letter in Melville Charter- chest. 4 Letters, iliid.
336 ALEXANDER, FIFTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
burial-place of Nisbet of Dean, in the west church ayle, near his mother."
The funeral, which, in accordance with the opinion of Lord Leven and Lord
Adam Gordon, the commander-in-chief, was without military honours, was
attended by " the staff, relations, near neighbours, and a few select friends,
about forty. Never man was more regretted by all ranks." 1 He married,
23d December 1760, the second daughter of Walter Tullideph of that ilk in
Forfarshire, and by her, who died 14th December 1761, he had a daughter,
Mary Anne Leslie, who married John Rutherford of Edgerston, in the county
of Roxburgh, but had no issue.
1. Lady Anne Leslie, born 27th February 1730. She married, on 30th April
1748, George, sixth Earl of Northesk, and had issue. She died at Edin-
burgh on 8th November 1779, aged fifty.
2. Lady Elizabeth Leslie, born in March 1735 ; died in infancy.
3. Lady Elizabeth Leslie, born in July 1737. She married, on 10th June 1767,
John, second Earl of Hopetoun, and had issue. The earl, when he proposed
to Lady Elizabeth, was fully double her age, he being sixty- three and her
ladyship thirty, while he had been twice previously married. According to
a tradition in the Hopetoun family, when he proposed to her ladyship, she
asked time to consider such an important cpiestion, but the earl deprecated
any delay, and said, " Not a day, not an hour, not a moment." Thus
pressed, Lady Elizabeth complied by saying, " Yes, yes, yes." Elizabeth,
Countess of Hopetoun, survived her husband seven years, and died on 1 0th
April 1788, aged fifty-one.
4. Lady Mary Leslie. She married, in 1762, Dr. James Walker, of Innerdovat, in
the county of Fife, and had issue three sons and one daughter. In cor-
respondence with her nephew Alexander, seventh Earl of Leven, part of
which is printed in this work, she refers to her services to literature, and also
to her management of the estate of " Success " in Jamaica, which was devised
to her by Mr. Hamilton. Lady Mary was still alive in the year 1818.2
1 Letter, Alexander Monypenny to Lord Balgonie, 7th January 1795, in Melville Charter-
chest. - Letters, ibid.
DAVID. SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN,
B. 1722. D. 1802.
WILHELMINA NISBET, COUNTESS OF DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN.
MAR: 1747. DIED, 1798.
337
XII. — 2. David, sixth Earl of Leven, and fifth Earl of Melville.
"WlLHELMINA NlSBET (DlRLETON), HIS COUNTESS.
1754—1802.
David, sixth Earl of Leven, was born on 4th March 1722, and succeeded
to the courtesy title of Lord Balgonie on his father's accession to the family
honours and estates in 1729. There are very few references in the family
papers to his younger years, but in 1735 his father writes to his friend,
Professor Charles Mackay, about a new tutor "for Davie," as Mr. George
Preston, who had been his tutor, had been recently appointed minister of
the parish of Markinch. The professor recommended a young man of the
name of Morton as tutor, regarding whom he wrote to a friend : —
" To call home Mr. Morton, and the sooner he can enter to the family so much the
better, for it will be a very great loss to Lordie,1 if he should want him any
time now that Mr. Preston is gone. I cannot promise that his appointments will
exceed 12 pounds per annum, but if matters succeed with his pupill, as I hope
they will, I'm perswaded my lord's patronage and countenance to him will be
worth a great deal more, and may prove the making of his fortune. I forgot in
talking of that affair to mention one circumstance to you, which is that my lord
and my lady both expect he is not to make the least scruple of acting as
chaplain, as it has always been the way in the family. I assurd them Mr. Morton
would not hesitate in the least as to that point." 2
At a later date, perhaps in the end of the same year, Lord Balgonie
entered the university of Edinburgh, where he was a class-mate of the
famous Dr. Alexander Carlyle of Inveresk. They were together under Mr.
Kerr, the professor of Latin, of whom Dr. Carlyle says that —
" He was very partial to his scholars of rank, and having two lords at his
class, viz., Lord Balgonie and Lord Dalziel, he took great pains to make them
(especially the first, for the second was hardly ostensible), appear among the best
scholars, which would not do, and only served to make him ridiculous, as well as
his young lord." 3
1 Apparently a pet name for Lord Balgonie. 3 Carlyle's Autobiography, p. 31.
'- Letter, 19th August 1735, in Melville Charter-chest.
VOL. I. 2 U
338 DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
This remark, though not very complimentary, and written long after the
event, seems to imply that Lord Balgonie was recognised by his classmates as
a promising student unduly patronised by his professor on account of his
rank as a peer. He was, in November of this year, 1735, appointed a com-
missioner of police in Scotland, but apparently did not take office until the
following year, after he reached the age of fourteen.1
In the year 1740 Lord Balgonie was sent abroad with his tutor, Mr.
Morton, to study at Groningen in Holland. There he began, or continued, a
study of law. Those letters of his which have been preserved do not contain
anything of special importance, referring only in a general way to his studies
and pursuits. Besides his college lectures and reading, to which he appears
to have given steady attention, he had intervals of lighter subjects. He says
in one letter : —
" We stay in Mr. Lacarrieres in de Buterenstraadt, a French house, which is
by far the best boarding house here, besides the advantage of the language, which
I wou'd willingly be master of as soon as possible ; what spare time I have, I spend
it mostly that way, and have also a French master for an hour every day. As for
diversions, I go to the fencing school. We have also a riding school for 4 months
in the year, which I intend to go to for twice or thrice a week." He adds : " The
Prince and Princess of Orange, who commonly stay in this place three or four
months in the year, are expected very soon. The winter comes on very fast ; we
had very cold frosty weather for these three weeks bygone." 2
In later letters, of date May and October 1741, he refers to various visits
paid to court during the college vacation, and to the friendly notice taken of
him and the other British residents by the Prince and Princess of Orange.
He also refers to his studies, stating that he attended Barbeyrac's lectures on
Grotius and Puffendorf.3 He was still at Groningen in the beginning of
1742, when he received a letter from his father's friend, Professor Charles
Mackay, telling him of the death of his former teacher in Edinburgh
University, Mr. Kerr, and giving a humorous account of the disputes be-
tween the college of justice, the town council, and others interested in the
1 Commission, 7th November 1735, and in Melville Charter-chest,
certification of qualification, 23d December
1736, in Melville Charter-chest. 3 Letters 2d May and 31st October 1741,
2 Letter, Groningen, 24th October 1740, ibid.
ENTERS THE MILITARY PROFESSION. 339
election of a new professor.1 He appears to have remained in Holland until
March or April 1742, when his father expressed a wish that he should enter
the army. Britain was then about to take part in the war on the Continent,
and the Earl of Stair was appointed commander-in-chief in Flanders. Lord
Leven appears to have entertaiued the idea of his son acting as a volunteer
under the distinguished field-marshal, but that view was abandoned, and Lord
Balgonie in June 1742 received a commission appointing him ensign in one
of the troops of the regiment of foot commanded by General Handasyde
and then stationed in the north of Scotland.2
Lord Balgonie continued in that regiment during the rebellion of 1745-6,
but it does not appear that he saw any active service. On 29th July 1747,
he married Wilhelmina, daughter of William Nisbet of Dirleton, but except
one or two casual allusions in letters, one of which apparently refers to a
visit to Ireland, perhaps on duty, the family papers record little regarding
him until 1754, the year in which he succeeded to his father in the title and
estates. A few days after his father's death, he nominated his wife and
several other persons to be tutors and curators to his children.3 In the
following month, October 1754, he went to London, where he was graciously
received by King George the Second, and also had an interview with the
Duke of Cumberland. The chief object of his journey appears to have been
to sue for the continuance to himself of the office of lord of police held by
his father. As to this he writes : —
" The Duke of Newcastle and every body was out of town when I came ;
however, I have been twice with the duke since, and have great reason to be satis-
fied with what pass'd there, tho' he told me that I cou'd not possibly get the
police, but gave me the greatest reason to think that he really intends to do
something worth my while. After I found that the police wou'd not do, and
nothing casting up just now, I determined to ask a pension."
On this point also he had received encouragement, though he adds : " If
I do not get some light into them [his affairs] in a fortnight, it will be in
vain to expect anything done for a long time, as their hands will be full for a
considerable number of days." 4
1 Letter, 9th January 1742, in Melville " Nomination, 13th September 1754, in
Charter-chest. Melville Charter-chest.
2 Commission, dated 4th June 1742, ibid. 4 Letter, 19th October 1754, ibid.
340 DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
In November 1756, the Earl of Leven received a letter from Sir John
Anstruther of Elie, which merits more than a passing notice. It was an
invitation to join a whale-fishing company to be established in the town of
Anstruther, but Sir John's own letter may be quoted : —
" As I know your lordship is a wellwisher and incuradger of what is advanta-
gious to the country, I therefor presume to give you the trouble of this to acquaint
your lordship we have sett on foott a scheme that is so, and at the saime time
may be a very profitable one to those concern'd. We have begun a whaill fishing
company for fitting out a ship from Anstruther, in which I and the gentlemen of
this nighburhood are to be concernd and severall others. The ship proposed
from two hunderd to about 250 tuns, the capital three thousand pounds ; each
shair 50£, with a call of 10 per cent.
" As to the manadgment and plan to be followed, we propose that of the
Dunbar company, which has been very successfull, in a great measure owing to the
right manadgment, and in the execution of it we think our situation more
favourable, particularly in the article of sailors, as there are just now a num-
ber of hands on this coast who have been imploy'd in that service in differant
companys. I hope your lordship will joine us in having a concern in so
laudable a scheme, which I with greater freedom solicit, as from my information
from my friends that know it, I am assurd that there cane be but a triffle
lost were the ship unsuccessfull, the bounty given by goverment being so con-
siderable." x
The idea of this company and of its constitution probably owed its exist-
ence to Sir John's wife, Miss Fall of Dunbar, who is said to have been a
woman of superior intelligence and energy, and to her father, Mr. Fall of
Dunbar. The latter was one of the extraordinary managers of the new
company, in which Lord Leven became a partner, as we learn from a letter
from Sir John in March 1757, who states he had subscribed on the earl's
behalf. He adds, however : —
" At our meeting we found we could not send out a ship this season without
being at a much greater expense than necessary, on account of the high price every
thing would cost to fitt out in time this year. But we are to provide a ship and
1 Letter, dated Elie House, 29th November 1756, in Melville Charter-cheat.
OFFERED THE CHAIR OF GRAND MASTER MASON. 341
other materials for next year, as we cane find them cheap and reight for our busi-
ness, and have already bought some things for which there will be a call of 20 per
cent, by the managers at Whitsunday." l
In November of the following year, 1758, Lord Leven received a letter
from the Earl of Galloway, which gave him much gratification, offering him
the chair of the grand master of the freemasons in Scotland : —
" My lord, the chair of the grand master of masons in Scotland, which I have
the honour to fill att present, becomes vacant the 30th of this month, being St.
Andrew's day. I look upon it as a very materiall part of my duty to be carefull
in naming for my successor one under whom the craft will be most likely to
flourish. As I know no man better qualify'd to support so sublime a character,
and as I 'm sure you '11 be most acceptable to the fraternity, I have done myself
the honour to name your lordship for my successor. I flatter myself you '11 be so
good as to accept and correct the errors of your predecessor. Your lordship's
being with us upon St. Andrew's day will be most obliging to the whole
fraternity, but to nobody more than myself. ... I beleive I continue in office
another year, but I must now [name] my successor." 2
Lord Leven in his reply says, —
" I am at a loss for words to express the sense I have of the great honour
your lordship has done me in naming me for your successor in the chair of the
grand master of masons in Scotland ; a trust I am conscious to myself of being
very unfitt for, for many reasons, particularly by being a mason of a short
standing, want of experience, besides the disadvantage I shall have of im-
mediately succeeding your lordship who fills that chair with so much dignity.
For all these reasons, prudence ought to make me decline, but the credit and
satisfaction of being at the head of so respectable and worthy a fraternity, and
the hopes of improving during the year of my noviciat, by a constant attention
to your lordship's behaviour as grand master, prompts me to accept of the great
honour you have been so good as to design for me," etc.3
1 Sir John adds : " The ordinary managers on the members payable on 26th May, and a
are Baillie Waddle, shipbuilder, and James further call was intimated on the purchase of
Anderson, a shipmaster ; the extraordinary a ship, but no further evidence of the pro-
are Sir Philip Anstruther, David Anstruther, gress and fortunes of the company has been
Mr. Fall, and myself." Letter, 11th March discovered among Lord Leven's papers.
1757, in Melville Charter-chest. On 25th 2 Letter, 21st November 1758, ibid.
March a call of £10 sterling a share was made 3 Draft letter, ibid.
342 DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
Lord Leven, accordingly, in the following year, 1759, was installed in the
grand master's chair, which he occupied for two years, being succeeded in
1761 by the Earl of Elgin.
The family papers of the next few years, being chiefly letters addressed to
the earl's son, Lord Balgonie, or by Lord Balgonie to his father from abroad,
do not afford materials for the earl's own personal history, his general
correspondence being otherwise unimportant. One letter, however, may be
noticed, written by Dr. Joseph M'Cormick, minister of Prestonpans, who
edited the " State Papers and Letters " of the Rev. William Carstares. Dr.
John Erskine, in September 1773,1 wrote to Lord Leven announcing the
intended publication, and stating that in one of the letters there was " an
insinuation as if Lord Melvin [George, first Earl of Melville] had no authority
from King William to abrogate the patronage act." Dr. Erskine desires Lord
Leven to furnish information on the subject, and two months later Dr.
M'Cormick wrote that he would be glad of any materials to enable him
to do that justice to Lord Melville's character which it deserved. Dr.
M'Cormick adds : —
" From the vouchers in my possession, I own I was led to think that King
William was not satisfyed with his conduct in the particular you mention ; and
in the account I have given of church affairs during that period in the life of Mr.
Carstares, I have assigned that as the reason of the changes both of men and
measures which happened soon after. At the same time no one acquainted with
the history of the times will consider this as any impeachment of my Lord Mel-
ville's integrity. In whatever way his instructions were worded, I am convinced
that he thought himself authorized to do what he did in that affair by his instruc-
tions. I am likewise convinced that he thought it for King William's interest,
and the interest of the nation, as matters then stood, to gratify the presbyterians
in so darling an object to them as the abolition of patronages. But I apprehend
the undiscreet use which the presbyterian clergy made of the power that was
put into their hands by the concessions made to them in Lord Melville's par-
liament did irritate the king, and dispose him to hearken, with too willing an
ear, to the misrepresentations which Lord Melvill's ennemies gave of his partiality
to that body. As several of the letters in my publication occasionally mention my
Lord Melvill and his family as under some marks of the king's displeasure, I
1 Letter in Melville CLarter-cliest.
THE SOCIETY FOR PROPAGATING CHRISTIAN KNOWLEDGE. 343
thought it but fair that the world should know that it was more owing to the
indiscretion of his friends and the malice of his ennemies than to any fault of
his own." *
Lord Leven was a member of the Society in Scotland for Propagating
Christian Knowledge, and in 1778 was their president. In that year and the
following, the society took much interest in the question of the repeal of the
Roman Catholic penal laws, which had been passed in England, and which
it was expected would be extended to Scotland. The society came to a
resolution to oppose such a repeal act for Scotland. On this point Lord
Leven wrote to the secretary, Dr. Eobert Dick : —
" From family and from education no person ought to be more firmly attached
to the true interest of the Protestant religion, and from principle few, I believe,
are more so than I am. This creates an earnest wish that the penal laws in
King William's reign against Roman Catholicks in England had not been repealed
in the last session of parliament ; and did I believe that the repeal of these acts
went so far as to give a free toleration to priests to perform the publick celebra-
tion of their worship, or to open schools for the education of youth, I would
heartily join in every measure to defeat the expected repeal ; but as that is by
no means the case in England, and many statutes will still be in force in Scot-
land to prevent such consequences, tho' the same repeal should take place, it is
my opinion that we are not in the danger which many persons apprehend, for
which reason, and as we are totally unacquainted with the nature of the expected
repeal, I wish to concur with those who are of opinion that the society ought to
postpone taking any steps in this matter."
Lord Leven, however, approves of recommending to the society's teachers
in the Highlands " the greatest watchfulness and diligence to preserve
their scholars from being seduced, in case the expected repeal should
take place." 2
Other doings of Lord Leven's at this time are noted by him in a letter to
his son, Lord Balgonie, in March 1779. He writes from Edinburgh, first, in
reference to some estate business, and then adds : —
" Yesterday was our election day at the bank [probably the Bank of Scotland],
and I was fully employed from 1 0 till \ past eight at night. Had 2 companies to
1 Letter, 22d November 1773, in Melville 2 Draft letter, 25th December 1778, in
Charter-chest. Melville Charter- chest.
344 DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
entertain, entered upon a fresh one at 7 at night. The Duke of Buccleugh and
Lauderdale gave faithfull attendance. I was by no means fou, but I am stupid
and thirsty all this day. Took a ride in the forenoon, and saw the Fencibles
perform ; they fire well indeed. On the peir I met Sir William Scott just em-
barking for you — proposed to be at Melvill by 6 this evening. I thought if you
went to Bonar's ordination at the Elie — that he would have cold quarters, but I
said nothing, as you did not seem resolved. " 1
Lord Leven held his post as one of the lords of police until the year
1782, when that board was abolished. In the following year, he was
appointed to the office of lord high commissioner to the general assembly
of the Church of Scotland.2 King George the Third conferred that honour
on the recommendation of Lord North, then Home Secretary. The earl's
daughter, Lady Kuthven, writing to her brother, Lord Balgonie, on 10th May
1783, after the commission was signed, states that her father had received
every thing he wished from Lord North
" relating to public affairs, and at the same time a very handsome private letter
congratulating him in the most friendly manner upon his preferment, and having
had it in his power so early to shew his readiness to be of service to him. You
never really read a prettier letter. . . . You cannot imagine how brightened up
our circle is, and how our dear father seems to enjoy the certainty of his prefer-
ment. Suspense is a most shocking state." 3
Lord Leven's commission was dated 5 th May, and the assembly met on
2 2d May, with, it is said, even more than usual pomp. Preparations were
made some days before, the commissioner's pages were selected, and Mr.
Martin, minister of Monimail, wrote to Lord Balgonie : — " I foresee my lord
will be splendid. I have got a new suit of the best cloth the man could
send. I daresay much money will not be saved this year. Everybody much
pleased with the nomination."4 Lord Leven on the 21st May received the
usual compliments from the magistrates of Edinburgh, and on the next day
he opened the assembly in due form. Lord Leven's levees, it is said, were
1 Letter, 31st March 1779, in Melville obtain the appointment, but was unsuccess-
Charter-chest. ful.
2 Lord Leven's commission, in the Melville 3 Letter, dated 10th May 1783, in Melville
Charter-chest, is dated 5th May 1783. It Charter-chest.
would appear that in 1764 he had hoped to 4 Letter, 15th May 1783, ibid.
HIGH COMMISSIONER TO THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 345
numerously attended by the Scottish nobility, and the opening procession
created great excitement and enthusiasm. His first speech, though evidently
modelled on the style of his father's speeches, is more formal and more akin
to the style of the present day. He professed his " sincere and zealous
attachment to the Church of Scotland, in whose principles I have been
educated, of whose assemblies I have often had the honour to be a member,
and for whose real interest and prosperity all my influence shall on every
occasion be employed." 1
Of minor matters, we have a glimpse in a letter from John Erskine
(perhaps one of the Carnock family) to Lord Balgonie.
" It is most easy for me to give you a most satisfactory answer to all your ques-
tions. I 've been thrice dining with his grace since his accession, and never saw
anything more comma il faut than everything is ; the livery 's handsome without
being loaded, and your worthy father more at his ease than I could have eon-
cieved a person who has been so many years removed from the folly of parade
and ceremony."
In a postscript the writer says : " The commissioner has been well
attended ; he has allways soup and wine, etc., in the retiring room, of which
his grace's goodness makes me partake. I hope he won't suffer from the
long seats, — the ministers and lawyers both speak unmercifully." 2 That he
did not suffer is shown by a sentence in a letter from one of his daughters to
Lord Balgonie : " Papa returned to us yesterday ; . . . the honest man is
looking fat and fair, and seems to have gained rather than lost from the
fatigue of being commissioner." 8 In one of his letters to his oldest son at
this time, Lord Leven writes : " Medina goes on briskly ; to-morrow, I think
may finish, and he will go over on Saturday," 4 a sentence which may refer
to a portrait by Sir John Medina, who painted portraits of several members
of the Leven family.
In 1784, Lord Leven was again high commissioner, and in 1785 he again
1 MS. speech, in Melville Charter-chest. read upon the throne, when his Majesty tires
2 Letter, May 30, 1783, in Melville Char- of the speeches."
ter-ehest. An antidote against the long 3 Letter, 5th June 1783, in Melville Char-
speeches was perhaps found, as the earl had ter-chest.
desired his sons in England to send him "a 4 Letter, undated, but written about 1783,
daily paper or two during the assembly to ibid.
VOL. I. 2 X
346 DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
applied for the appointment. Nothing special W noteworthy occurs n his
speeches of those years. An interesting literary note appears in one of his
letters to Lord Balgonie, of uncertain date, but perhaps about 1 785 : "To descend
from serious to glee, there has nothing for a long time afforded so much laugh-
ing in this family as John Gilpin. It has already been three times read to
different persons. It tickles mother and Mary vastly, and we want a con-
tinuation to know what became of the six precious souls at Edmonton."1
During the remaining years of the earl's life, the only papers of interest
relating to his personal history are his speeches at the general assemblies, to
which he was commissioner for nineteen years. He held his levees in
Fortune's tavern, at the Cross Keys, in the Old Stamp Office Close. Thence
also took place the Sunday processions to church, which were usually very
attractive. A strong military force was always present, and the bands of
various regiments played in honour of the commissioner, who went on
foot from the tavern to St. Giles' church, escorted by his guard of honour.
Lord Leven also resided for a time in a house at the north-west corner of
Nicolson Square, and latterly at No. 2 St. Andrew Square.
The general assembly then met in a part of the church of St. Giles
called the Old Kirk or South Church. David Allan, the Scottish artist, made
a drawing of the general assembly in the Old Kirk, St. Giles', in 1787. The
drawing represents the assembly in session under the presidency of the
Earl of Leven. His grace is represented in a conspicuous position surrounded
by his attendants, who appear to crowd inconveniently around his throne.2
The earl's speeches are for the most part formal, but in some of them we
have reference to passing events. Thus, in May 1789, he congratulates the
assembly on the recovery of King George the Third from his first attack of
mental indisposition. In another speech, May 1793, the earl states that he
has authority " to notice the conduct of the ministers of the Church of Scot-
land, their loyalty and zeal on a late trying occasion, when designing deluded
men, not satisfied with the civil and religious blessings which it had pleased
God to bestow upon the nation, attempted in some degree to overturn our
glorious constitution."3 This appears to refer to the seditious practices of
1 Letter, in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Original drawing iu British Museum.
3 MS. speeches, 1789, 1793, in Melville Charter-chest.
THE UNION WITH IRELAND, 1800. 347
the "Friends of the People," who had been active during the year 1792 in
promoting revolutionary ideas. The earl also in this year transmitted an
address from the assembly, " on the occasion of the war in which this coun-
try is at present engaged with France, expressing their abhorrence of the
attempts which have been made by that nation to overturn the other govern-
ments of Europe, and assuring his Majesty of the dutiful attachment of the
Church of Scotland," which was graciously received and acknowledged.1
In 1794, Lord Leven was able to congratulate the assembly on the fact
that the revolutionary spirit had in a great degree subsided, and he indicated
his belief that this was in a great measure owing to their exertions and
admonitions.2 The assembly in their address to the king referred to the
success which had attended the British arms in Europe and in the East and
West Indies, and expressed a hope that the war would soon terminate.
Passing over matters of less interest, notice may be taken of the address
presented to the king by the assembly in the year 1801. Besides express-
ing gratitude for the victories won against France in the Baltic and Egypt,
and mourning the fall of Sir Ealph Abercromby, they congratulate his
Majesty on the completion of the union with Ireland, in words which contrast
widely with some utterances of the present day.
" Amidst the splendid atchievernents of your Majesty's reign, permit us to say
that we admire and rejoice in none more than in your most fortunate completion
of a legislative union between Great Britain and Ireland, a measure of state so
long wished for with anxiety by the wise, and which, whether we consider its
magnitude, the difficulty of its accomplishment, or the great and important effects
it is likely to produce, must stand recorded in the annals of the world as a master-
piece of human policy and a lasting monument of your Majesty's paternal wisdom.
The experience which your Majesty's subjects in this part of the United Kingdom
have had, for nearly a century past, of the happy consequences of a similar
measure, entitles them to look forward with joyful expectation to no distant
period when the united empire in general, and the neighbouring island in parti-
cular, shall reap the full fruits of your Majesty's wise and magnanimous
counsels."3
1 Letter, 23d Hay 1793, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 MS. speech, ibid.
3 Copy address, ibid.
348 DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
In this year Lord Leven informed the assembly that it was probably
the last time he would represent his Majesty as commissioner. He said,
" The infirmities of old age, as I have now entered into the 80th year of
my life, and the growing incapacity of fulfilling the duties of that honour-
able office, will prevent me from having the presumption to ask his Majesty
to continue me any longer in it. It is now nineteen years since my first
appointment, in which time I have seen all the ministers of the church over and
over and over again. You whom I have now the honour to address are few in
comparison of the whole ; but I ask the favour of you that when you return to
your flocks and are met in presbytery, you may inform your brethren of my
having expressed an agreeable recollection of the pleasure I have had in
meeting with them for such a number of years, and of my fervent wishes for
their prosperity." x In return for this graceful farewell, the commission of
the assembly presented, on 2d June 1801, an address to the earl, expressing
their unfeigned sentiments of esteem and affection and their deep concern
that his growing infirmities led him to decline the office. They looked back
with agreeable reflections upon his long term of office for nineteen years,
and the kindly intercourse he had always maintained with them. They
acknowledged with gratitude that while discharging his duty with dignity,
he yet made every member of the church in his turn feel the pleasing
effects of his "condescending humanity," and gave to many of them un-
deniable proofs of his sincere friendship. They concluded by assuring Lord
Leven that their warmest wishes would follow him, and their most earnest
prayers would be offered on his behalf.2
While Lord Leven thus parted from the general assembly in so cordial a
manner, his parting from his office was no less agreeable. Lord Hopetoun,
writing to him on 3d May 1802, says: "Your lordship's kind letter . . .
gave us all here the greatest satisfaction, that his Majesty, in dispensing your
lordship from any longer representing his person, has expressed his approba-
tion of your long services in a manner so agreable to you and so pleasing to
all your friends, no one ever having fill'd the high station you held with so
much credit or so much dignity, as the universal opinion of your lordship's
conduct in it attests. Lord Napier will, I believe, be as acceptable as any
1 MS. speech, in Melville Charter-chest. - Copy address, ibid.
HIS DEATH : HIS COUNTESS. 349
successor to you can be. You have set him a great example, which I am
persuaded he will endeavour to follow." *
In the office of commissioner to the general assembly Lord Leven was
succeeded by Francis, Lord Napier, who entered on his duties in the
assembly of May 1802. Lord Leven came to Edinburgh to attend on his
successor. He also attended the celebration of the birthday of King George
the Third on the 4th of June, and he died at Edinburgh on the 9th of that
month in the 81st year of his age. His death was thus sudden, but
not quite so sudden as that of his father, though the cause was the
same, disease of the heart. He appears to have been ill only for a day
or two and while absent from home. His remains were carried from Edin-
burgh to Balgonie, and apparently buried from that place, probably at
Markinch. The letters received by his son after the death of his father bear
testimony to the earl's high character. General Eobert Melville wrote, com-
menting upon his " life, eminently exemplary in the exercise of piety and
virtue with the highest love and estimation, not only of his own family
relations and numerous friends, but of all worthy persons who had the honour
and happiness of enjoying his lordship's acquaintance."2 Other relatives
and friends write to the same effect.
After an enjoyment for half a century of a happy married life, Lord and
Lady Leven celebrated their " golden wedding " at Melville House on 29th
January 1797. But Lady Leven did not long survive that auspicious event,
as she died there on the 10th of May 1798, aged 74 years. In his grief for
her loss Lord Leven was compelled to allow the general assembly to hold the
opening meeting without his presence. When he met the assembly soon
afterwards his lordship referred in feeling terms to the circumstances : —
" I meet you now with strong impressions of gratitude for your having been
pleased to accept of a message from me, at the opening of the assembly, when
deep affliction prevented me from being with you personally : and I do most
cordially thank you for the many fervent applications which were made to a
throne of mercy for my support under it on the day of your meeting set apart
for prayer, — and I earnestly beg the continuance of them."
In the Life of Selina, Countess of Huntingdon, notice is taken of the
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Letter, 14th June 1S02, ibid.
350 DAVID, SIXTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EAEL OF MELVILLE.
exemplary piety of Wilhelrnina, Countess of Leven. She was one of a
band of excellent ladies in high rank who united in establishing a meeting
for reading the Scriptures, to be held alternately at each other's houses. It
continued to be well attended and singularly useful for many years. It was
strictly confined to a select circle of women in high life, many of whom were
ornaments to the Christian church by a life of holiness. The Countesses of
jSTorthesk and Hopetoun, daughters to Lord and Lady Leven, Lady Glenorchy,
Wilhelrnina, Countess of Leven, with her excellent sisters, Lady Euthven and
Lady Banff, etc., were valuable members of that select band.1
The tradition in the family is that Wilhelrnina Nisbet, when in her
nineteenth year, and shortly before her marriage, was converted by the
Beverend George Whitfield to a life of eminent piety, which she continued
to exemplify during the remainder of her long life. Several journals or
diaries written by her are still preserved by her grand-daughter Miss Leslie.
They are all on religious subjects. Lady Leven was the posthumous daughter
of her parents. She was either their nineteenth or twentieth child. There
were nine daughters, who were all married, — three of them to peers of Scot-
land, other three to baronets, and the remaining three to squires.
Among other memorials of this good lady is a farm on the Melville
estate, which was specially named after her as Nisbet or Nisbetfield. Bart
of her correspondence with her eldest son, the seventh Earl of Leven, while
Lord Balgonie, has been preserved at Melville House, and will be noticed
in his memoir which follows. Several of her letters are impressed with a
seal, having on the centre her initials, W. 1ST. L. Below these is an earl's
coronet, but above and over all is the peculiar motto, "Holiness is happiness."
The earl and his countess had issue five sons and three daughters : 2 —
■"61
1. Alexander, who succeeded. Of him a memoir follows.
2. Hon. William Leslie, born 8th August 1751. He entered the army as an
ensign in the 42d Highlanders or "Black Watch," and went with that
1 The Life and Times of Selina, Countess that Alexander was not the oldest child, as a
of Huntingdon, vol. i. pp. 100, 101. child was born, and died about that date,
but the sex of the child is not stated, and it
2 From a letter from Lord and Lady is not named in the list written by Lord
Northesk, dated 4th May 1748, it appears Leven himself in his family Bible.
HIS CHILDREN. 351
regiment to Ireland in 1771. Writing to his brother, Lord Balgonie, from
Belfast on 16th February, "Nothing extraordinary going on here. The
Hearts Steell are all come back to the country, it is thought they will kick
up a dust again, but don't speak of that as it will make mama uneasy ; they
fired four days ago at a sergeant of ours and a constable walking together,
and wounded the constable." x In a later letter he writes, " The parliament
[of Ireland] has met, and the ministry has 25 of majority. There was a riot
at Dublin, pulled the members out of their chairs, broke noses, gave blue
eyes, and tossed their wigs in the air, etc."2 In 1773, he left the 42d, and
became a lieutenant in the 17th regiment. Three years later, in 1776,
when he had attained the rank of captain, he and his regiment were in
America, and he served with it in the successful attack on Long Island in
August 1776. His letters describe the attack, and also the taking of
New York, which was burned by the Americans. He also describes the
storming of Fort Washington, and an intended advance upon Philadelphia.
This last letter was dated 25th December 1776, and a few days later, on 3d
January 1777, he was killed when leading his company against an over-
whelmingly superior force at a place near Princeton, New Jersey. His fall
was much regretted by his comrades. His body was placed in a waggon,
but as the British were forced to retreat, the waggon was taken by the
Americans. Shortly after this General Washington and his staff rode up,
and inquired what officers were killed. On Captain Leslie's name being
mentioned, Benjamin Bush, M.D. of Philadelphia, who had formerly, when
a student of medicine at Edinburgh, received great kindness from the Leven
family, and who accompanied Washington, showed great emotion, and the
body was borne to the rear, and buried with all the honours of war, at
Pluckamin, then the headquarters of Washington's army. A monument with
an inscription was raised over his remains by Dr. Rush. It stood for sixty
years ; and was repaired, and the original inscription reproduced in the year
1835, at the request of David, eighth Earl of Leven, the nephew of the
young officer. Captain Leslie died unmarried.
3. Hon. David Leslie, born 13th January 1755. He also entered the army, and
was with his regiment, the 1 6th, stationed for a time at Gibraltar, soon after
the famous siege of that place in 1782. He afterwards acted as aide-de-camp
to his uncle, General Alexander Leslie, while second in command of the
forces in Scotland. In 1796 he was sent to Ireland, and was on duty there
in various stations till 1804, assisting particularly in quelling the Irish
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Letter, 1st March 1771, ibid.
352 DAVID, SIXTH EAEL OF LEVEN, AND FIFTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
rebellion of 1798. In 1800 he attained the rank of colonel, and in 180S he
became major-general on the North-British staff. He reached the rank of
general on 22d July 1838. After retiring from the army, General Leslie
resided at Jedbank, near Jedburgh. He married at Glasgow, on 16th
January 1787, Eebecca, daughter of the Eev. John Gillies, D.D., minister
of Blackfriars Church, Glasgow. General Leslie died at Edinburgh on
21st October 1838, and was interred in the burial-ground of the Abbey of
Jedburgh. He left no issue.
4. Hon. John Leslie, born 20th November 1759. He entered as ensign, on 22d
July 1778, the first regiment of Foot Guards, and got his rank as captain in
the army in July 1781. In 1793 he served in Flanders, and was wounded
in an engagement in 1794. He attained the rank of general on 12th August
1819. He married, on 13th September 1816, Jane, eldest daughter and
heiress of Thomas Cuming, banker in Edinburgh, who claimed to be the
representative of the ancient family of Cuming of Earnside, and assumed
the name of Leslie Cuming. He died in November 1824, without issue.
5. Hon. George Melvill Leslie, born 21st April 1766. He frequently acted
as purse-bearer when his father was commissioner to the general assembly.
He entered the Indian Civil Service in 1802, and was stationed in Ceylon.
He married, on 27th November 1802, Jacomina Gertrude, only daughter of
William Jacob Vander-Graaff, governor of Java, and died on 8th March
1812, leaving issue one child, Mary Christiana Melvill Leslie, born in
Ceylon on 10th November 1803, who resides at Leven Lodge, Portobello.
The daughters were : —
1. Lady Jane Leslie, born 1st April 1753. She married, on 9th November 1775,
Sir John Wishart Belsches Stuart, baronet, of Fettercairn, M.P., and had
issue one child, Williamina, who married Sir William Forbes of Pitsligo,
baronet. Lady Jane died 28th October 1829.
2. Lady Mary Elizabeth, bom 4th March 1757. She married, on 8th November
1776, her cousin, the Hon. James Euthven, afterwards fourth Lord Euthven,
and had issue. She died in 1820.
3. Lady Charlotte, born 22d September 1761. She died, unmarried, on 2Gth
October 1830.
i/>ovn.
ALEXANDER, EARL OF LEVEN & MELVILLE,
B. 1749. M. 1784. D. 1820.
I) B Mu.rph.j- clelm
AMI Hurram sculp
JAETIS C©T!T.Wir:ig§ ©IF 1UF?3I-F Ai"Et> MMI^TLILEJE,
353
XIII. — Alexander, seventh Earl of Leven and sixth Earl of Melville.
Jane Thornton, his Countess.
1802-1820.
Alexander, seventh Earl of Leven, was born on 7th November 1749.
The family papers do not show where he was educated, nor do they tell any-
thing about his younger years. He is referred to in a letter from his father
to Professor Mackay in 1761, when he had been ill. Lord Leven wrote : —
" I am much obliged to you for your concern about Sandie. His situation
ever since I saw you has been such as to give us the greatest hopes that a little
time and care will make him quite well ; he can at present read a distinct hand
of writ, but he is only tried to see what progress his recovery makes. I hope his
ilness will be no material loss to him as yet, as he daily hears his brother's Latin
and French lessons, and has much pleasure in it." x
A considerable packet of letters addressed to Lord Balgonie, during
the year 1768, and at intervals up to January 1772, by Mr. Alexander
Belsches, an advocate, and one of the family of Invermay, contain a great
deal of the Edinburgh and other gossip of the day. The character of these
letters may be gathered from a few which are printed in this work.2 But
though interesting in themselves, they contain very little that bears on
Lord Balgonie's personal history. We learn, however, incidentally, that he
was a member of the Rhetorical Society of Edinburgh, that he had a taste
for music and some ability in performance, that at one period he practised
the study of shorthand, and that during the years named he occasionally
travelled over parts of Scotland and England.3
In the autumn of the year 1773, Lord Balgonie left home to make a tour
on the Continent. He travelled by Newcastle and visited Blenheim, Oxford,
1 Letter, 13th April 1761, in Melville earlier letters as an intimate friend of Lord
Charter-chest. Balgonie, was Dr. Benjamin Rush, a young
medical man, who left Scotland in 1768, and
after some travelling went to America, where
3 It may be noted here that one person he joined Washington and became one of his
Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 264-276.
whom Mr. Belsches frequently names in his staff, as noted in the previous memoir.
VOL. I. • 2 Y
354 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
and other places on his way to London, which he reached on 25th September
1773. He remained in London for a few days, and was apparently presented
to the king and queen, after which he went to Margate, whence he sailed to
France, about the 15 th of October. On his way to Paris he passed through
Dunkirk, where he visited the convent of English nuns. He writes : —
" They are most agreeable women, and were happy beyond measure to see a
country man (as we are all English in France). I was there two hours, and
never more happy. Religion was by no means the topick, tho' I believe they
prayed for me, and of[ten] said to themselfs talking of me ' poor thing.' There
was a beautiful noviciate [novice] who will take the veil next week. I am affraid
not entirely with her consent, which is most terrible to think of indeed." J
Lord Balgonie did not then stay long in Paris, but went on to Orleans,
where he remained for a time in order to learn French and fencing, his
masters in both these subjects being excellent. His immediate surroundings
may be gathered from a letter to his father : —
" I dine at a Monsr Ricci, an old Italian gentleman, who having lived much in
company takes a method of enjoying enough of it by having a table d'hote in
his house, where every person pays a shilling at dinner and the same at supper.
He gives you a good plain dinner and as much wine of his own growth and
making as you like. Here we meet every day several French gentlemen and all
the English here, who besides Marshal and self amount to five. We have two
Marshalls of France, two Chevaliers de St. Louis, in all at dinner about 15, who
make a droll mixture, and whose characters will one day make a good subject of
a letter to Mary, to whom I am in sad debt. As to lodging, I am remarkably
lucky, tho' I pay rather dear, but the object here is to have a house near to where
you dine and sup, and mine is only across a square. I give a guinea a week, and
for this I have a very good room without a bed, a nice little room to sleep in,
Mr. Marshal has above an excellent bed-chamber where he will sit often, and a
clever place for Edward.2 ... I forgot to mention that the man where I lodge
is an excellent scholar (very rare in this town, which consists of merchants), and
has a collection of books worth 5000 livres which he has allowed me the use of.
He is a musician, speaks excellent French, and is by trade a breeches maker.
My windows are vis a vis La pucelle d 'Orleans in the Rue royal. She is almost
1 Letter, Paris, 25th October 1773, in the capacity of companion to Lord Balgonie,
Melville Charter-chest. though not as tutor, his expenses being
2 Mr. Marshall appears to have acted in paid. Edward was Lord Balgonie's servant.
TRAVELS IN FRANCE AND ITALY, 1773-4. 355
as much adored here as the Virgin Mary, which you know is saying a great deal.
The statue I mean stood upon the old bridge." x
In other letters Lord Balgonie describes the country, the people, their
manners and customs. After a stay of three months at Orleans, Lord Bal-
gonie went to Tours, where he appears to have resided in the house of Abbe
Bovere, one of the canons of the church of St. Martin of Tours. During his
sojourn at Tours Lord Balgonie made a fortnight's excursion into Brittany,
which he enjoyed.2 From Tours he returned to Paris, where he was fre-
quently assured that he bore a strong resemblance to the king, Louis the
Fifteenth. He was very anxious to be allowed to extend his travels to Italy,
and, permission being accorded, he set out apparently alone, or accompanied
only by his servant, Marshall having parted from him at Paris. He travelled
by Dijon, Lyons, and Turin to Florence, on his way to Pome, and at Florence
he met " the Pretender,'' Prince Charles Edward, of whom he says : —
" I do not remember if I have mention'd the Pretender, who is here with his
wife and suite ; his wife a fine woman but gauche to a degree. I know both very
well, and as it is Masquerade time, nous causons beaucoup . . . 3 semble. II est
un homme fort agreable quand il [est] pas gris, cequ . . . pourtant tres souvent.
. . . The Pretender speaks English very well, and she a little in the prettiest
manner in the world. When fou, he is really drole, but when sober seems to be
thoughtfull, which is not surprising in a person situated as he is. He never lets
his wife go out of his sight nor from his side. She is very handsome and young ;
he rather the contrary in both respects. He has about £8000 to spend, three
of which are allowed him by his brother the Cardinal, who is immensely rich,
weak and a bigot. Apropos you ask me about the conclave. I cannot tell you
more about it than if I was with you ; all we hear is now and then a rumour of a
Pope being elected, which is next day contradicted. However, will be full upon
this head from Borne." 4
From the same letter we learn that Lord Balgonie was at Florence
during carnival :
" The carnival here at present is neither gay nor brilliant. Tho' I have been
1 Letter, Orleans, 5th November 1773, in 3 The letter is here torn.
Melville Charter-chest. * Letter, Florence, 24th January 1775, in
2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 278, 279. Melville Charter-chest.
356 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EA.RL OF LEVEN, ETC.
in luck to see more fetes than have been known here for many years past, yet
except one, a ball given at the Opera house to the Elector Palatin, they have been
much inferior to my expectation, and even this was by halves, as we payd for
everything we called for, tho' admittance was gratis, and the salle charmingly
illuminated. The stinginess of the Grand Duke, a man of 28, and one of the
most humane and affable sovereigns in the world, is beyond description, and his
riches are immense, much greater in rarities, quantities of plate, pictures, statues,
busts, medals, etc., than allmost any prince in the world ; yet he sells by auction,
every year during Lent, immense quantities of old beds, chairs, tables, particularly
a set of Delft china-ware which my landlord bought for £25 sterling, the designs
of which were by the great Raphael."
Lord Balgonie reached Eome on 30th January 1775, and remained there
until the 6th of May. During that period he devoted himself largely to
sight-seeing, but neither his letters nor the diaries he kept show anything
specially noteworthy. At Eome he made the acquaintance of a well-known
ecclesiastic of Scottish extraction, Abbe- Peter Grant, who wrote to a friend
in Scotland, giving a high character of the young nobleman : —
" His lordship has been here these six weeks past, and is a most respectable
and valuable young nobleman, extremely prudent, uncommonly accomplished,
universally beloved, and truely does honor to our country. He continues here till
after Easter, then proposes going to Naples, there to reside for some time." x
The person to whom this was written, in sending a copy to Lord Leven, adds,
" What the Abbe says is confirmed by two very sensible young gentlemen
just arrived at Nice from Eome, who seem to be happy in his lordship's
acquaintance."
Lord Balgonie wrote from Naples, whither he had gone from Eome, to
his father, proposing alternative routes for his return home, by Venice, or by
Genoa and the south of France, but how far he carried out his plans is un-
certain, as his letters for the last six months of 1775 do not appear to be
preserved. While at Naples he visited Pompeii, Psestum, and other places of
interest in the neighbourhood, but the chief impression upon his mind
was made by the cruelty to animals and the beggary displayed in the streets
of Naples. Lord Balgonie returned from Naples to Eome, and was present at
the fetes given in the last-named city to the Archduke Maximilian in July
1 Copy, in letter dated 9th May 1775, in Melville Charter-chest.
VISITS NAPLES, ROME, VENICE, ETC., 1775. 357
1775. He has given a brief sketch of the various processions and fetes in
one of his diaries ; they seem to have impressed him greatly with their
magnificence. Abbe" Grant was his guide to some of the festivities, and with
them and the illuminations Lord Balgonie was greatly pleased.
It would appear that owing to over-fatigue from his last journey from
Naples, and also to the heat of the climate, Lord Balgonie was taken ill
while at Borne the second time, but how long his illness lasted is nowhere
stated. A letter from Canon Bovere was written and addressed to him at
Venice, where he was expected to be in September 1775, but the first notice
from himself of his movements is in a letter from Strasbourg, dated 8th
December 1775. From it we learn that he did visit Venice and had two
narrow escapes from drowning. He was also at Fadua, one incident of his
stay there being that he was nearly bitten by a scorpion which had crept into
his bed. He found the weather very cold at Strasbourg, but enjoyed good
health. He expressed a great desire to be allowed to accompany Sir Bobert
Murray Keith, English ambassador at Vienna, that he might see the busi-
ness in his office at that court — a study which he hoped might one day be
useful to him. This proposal, however, was not agreed to by his father,
and instead of ooing to Vienna, he made a short excursion into Switzerland.
He reached Berne on 3d April 1776, passing through Basle on his way.
Basle, he writes —
" Is that of all the thirteen cantons which has preserved its primitive appearance,
at least in the greatest purity, no doubt not a little owing to the strictness
of its sumptuary laws, which permits no lace or embroidery, no velvets, no laced
ruffles to men or women, no jewels, no footmen behind carriages, &c." l
At Berne Lord Balgonie met an old friend, who gave him a warm welcome,
but he was disappointed that the season rendered the glaciers inaccessible.
" Their very singular appearance makes me regret not being able to approach
them, tho' that and every other dissapointment I can possibly meet with in this
country is compensated by the very kind and hospitable reception I have here
met with."
Lord Balgonie also visited Geneva, where he saw the so-called " Sage of
Ferney," the famous Voltaire, of whom he writes : —
1 Letter, dated Berne, 4th April 1776, in Melville Charter-chest.
358 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
" And now pray don't suppose me stupid enough to have passed a day at
Geneva without going to Ferney to see , you know who. Dare not men-
tion names in case this letter should fall into certain hands, but upon the whole,
in this as well as in most of my undertakings, have been remarkably fortunate,
and to tell you the truth from what I have allways heard, and what I had here
confirmed in regard to his shyness of seeing people, had hardly hopes of seeing
any more than his house and garden. But to my great satisfaction, without
giving myself or any body any trouble, met this prodigy walking in the garden
alone, where, as you may be sure, not failing to pass quite near him [I] took a
good phizz of him, when I found him the oldest, 82, most infirm and emaciated
figure that I ever beheld, dressed in the same wig and kind of bonnet cap that we
allways see him represented in, in busts, medals, prints, &c. Again, while I was
in his library, in which he has a superb edition of his works, he came in from the
garden, and passing thro' the room, he asked my pardon for leaving me alone,
but that he found himself very far from well. In fact he had been very ill in the
morning, and among other com [plaints] this miserable skeleton so bit with buggs
as to be obliged to have his whole bed undone, in which state I saw it. What is
remarkable is that the house is full of busts and pictures of him. In one room I
observed one statue, one picture in crayons, another in sewing, besides a bust,
upon the pedestal of which was written immortalis, but modestly enough a card
announced its being given him by the King of Prussia, anno 1775, of whom I
also saw here an original picture sent to Voltaire." *
From Geneva Lord Balgonie travelled by Fribourg, Berne, Zurich, where
he visited " the incomparable Gessner," and by the falls of Schaffhauseu to
Montbeliard, where he was the guest of the exiled Lord Elcho, eldest son of
the fourth Earl of Wemyss. Lord Elcho joined Prince Charles Edward in
1745, and was attainted for his share in the rebellion. He went abroad, and
was at this time residing in Montbeliard. He was a kinsman of Lord Bal-
gonie, who styles him Lord Wemyss or Earl of Wemyss, and thus writes : —
" But as to this unfortunate noble cousin. He desires me to offer you his
best respects, and is pleased to say that he is most sensible of your attention in
sending me to wait upon him. He is in good looks, health and spirits, recalls to
mind the happy days of Kinnaird with pleasui'e, as well as those of Cupar races,
with many circumstances too tedious to mention. His memory is much beyond
1 Letter, Geneva, 15th April 1776, in Jlel- quotation, "Voltaire," lias been written in
ville Charter-chest. The last word of the full, then deleted, but is still legible.
VISIT TO LORD ELCHO AT MONTBELIARD, 1776. 359
that of any person I ever remember to have seen except a beggar at Buxton who,
without knowing a figure, used to multiply 6 figures into as many as one desired
of him. He [Lord Elcho] is here at the Court of a brother of the Duke of
Wurtemberg who beat me yesterday, that I spent the day with him, no less than
three games of chess, and whose wife, niece to the king of Prussia, scolded me
heartily for having kissed the Pope's slipper." 1
From Montbeliard Lord Balgonie returned to Strasbourg, which he left
finally about the 17th July 1776 on his way homeward, travelling by Carls-
ruhe to Mannheim. On the way he spent a short time at Schwetzingen, the
country residence of the Elector Palatine, who received him kindly, and
which place he quitted with regret. He wrote from Mannheim to his father,
proposing to travel down the Ehine by Mayence, Coblentz, Bonn, Cologne,
and Dusseldorf, thence to Wesel, Nymegen, and Antwerp, and other towns in
Holland. This plan he carried out, and probably returned home about
October 1776. In the following January, the death of his brother, Captain
William Leslie, killed near Princeton, in America, caused grief to the
family. Lord Balgonie was much attached to this brother, and refers to
him in his letters with great affection. He also appears about this time to
have been crossed in love, having set his heart upon a young lady whose
name is not mentioned, but who is described by his aunt, Lady Northesk,
as "a charming girl," and "the first woman in this country." Their cir-
cumstances, however, did not admit of a mutual affection being- encouraged.2
During the next few years there is nothing specially noteworthy to
chronicle regarding Lord Balgonie, except occasional absences from Melville
1 Letter, Montbeliard, 1st May 1776, in 1741 my lord returned from abroad, where
Melville Charter-chest. Lord Balgonie adds he had spent four years, and found sitting
to his letter the following memorandum : with his father, my grandfather [the fifth
" Lord Wemyss [Elcho] was bred a protes- Earl of Leven], and my lord Sutherland, the
tant, but with strong Jacobite principles, and first of whom was all along his best friend,
when young, in the year , was sent by as he says, and used all his means to prevent
his father to Rome to see the Pretender, his taking the foolish step he did take. The
when at two different times he was intro- 1742 he spent in Britain, and in 1743 joind
duced into his apartments at his palace in our troops in Flanders as a Volontier, where
the Piazza dei Santi Apostoli by a trap door he serv'd a campaign."
under the table, which was shewn to me 2 Letter, 27th March 1777, in Melville
when there by the Abbe Grant. In the Charter-chest.
360 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
in England or elsewhere. On these occasions he received letters from his
parents, especially his mother, whose epistles mingle religious advice with
domestic details, and from relatives. One of the most gratifying features
of these letters is the great family affection which they display, Lord Balgonie
being evidently much beloved by his brothers and sisters. One letter written
during this period may be quoted, as it mentions Lord Balgonie as a patron
of art. Bichard Cooper, an engraver, writes thanking his lordship and his
cousin, Lord Banff, for their purchase of some mezzotint engravings from the
writer. Cooper refers to an engraving by him " of a famous picture of Bem-
brandt ... in the possession of Lord Maynard, who purchased it of our friend
Mr. Slade for a good sum," but he does not indicate the subject. He adds :
" I am at present about a most interesting work from Vandike, no less than
his original design for what he was to have painted for the banqueting house at
Whitehall, the procession of the Order of the Garter. The figures are small, and
some of the portraits are discernahle, such as King Charles the 1st, Vandike,
Inigo Jones, and others. This is a work that all the world knows Vandike was
to have done, but went back on account of the troubles of the time, and very few
knew that there ever was anything of it. It is a long sketch painted in brown
and white upon board, about near 5 feet long and about a foot high. The picture
I have been favoured with at my own house belongs to Lord Northington. Wal-
pole makes mention of it in Vandike's life ; I intend to imitate it as nearly as I
can of the same size, which I shall do by a mixture of engraving and the aquatinta
together. You see, my lord, it will be a long print, and I do assure you I think
myself very lucky in having got it." 1
The announcement, in 1784, of Lord Baloonie's intended marriage with
Jane, daughter of John Thornton of Clapham, Surrey, gave much pleasure to
his family, and great preparations were made by the ladies at Melville for
the reception of the young couple. The marriage took place on 1 2th August
1784, and on the following day, Mrs. Thornton, the bride's mother, wrote to
Lady Leven sending her sincere congratulations to Lord Leven, herself and
family on the completion of an event which the writer hoped would prove the
beginning of much comfort and satisfaction to many. The writer adds :
"As Lord Balgonie declared he could give no description, ... so it is more
1 Letter, 13th November 1781, in Melville Charter-chest.
I
MARRIAGE TO MISS JANE THORNTON, 1784. 361
than probable a few of my peculiar anecdotes may let you more into the history
of this memorable clay than what your ladyship would receive either from his
lordship or Mr. Thornton. Suffice it to say, that it past off exceeding well ; my
daughter . . . went thro' the solemn service well, which, with a few exceptions,
is a very excellent form, and my brother Conyers, who is a very serious and
excellent minister, made it more so by his devout temper. . . . Lord Balgouie
behaved throwout the whole scene of the day with the utmost propriety, serious
but not sad, and very easy and affectionate. Lord Bamff's unexpected arrival
rather enlivened the scene than did any harm, as he brought much ease and
good nature along with him, and the dispersing of cake, letter writing, walking,
etc., filled up the different intervals of the day very agreably, and the remarks of
the poor and the populace in this neighbourhood, who are not used to noblemen's
weddings, occationed some diversion. As Lord Baniff arrived, while the ceremony
was performing, in a chaise with a cypher B and a coronett, he was supposed by
some to be the bridesgroom come too late, and as the church door was locked he
knocked hard for admittance before he gained it, which the mobility thought
very hard ; however, they got to know the right gentleman when returning home,
and exprest much sattisfaction at his gentility and appearance."
Mrs. Thornton also mentions that Mr. Jonas Han way, " a character much
known and respected in England for his usefulness and benevolence, and as
a public man," likewise appeared unexpectedly on the scene, " and seemed
much pleased to be introduced to Lord Balgonie."
The marriage was hailed with great joy, and the bride received a
warm welcome from her new kinsfolk.2 Congratulations poured in upon
Lord and Lady Balgonie, who, a day or two later, set out on their way to
Scotland, and arrived in Edinburgh about the end of August. He received at
this time a letter from his youngest brother, George Leslie, which expresses
the feeling of the neighbourhood on the subject : —
" I write this, my dear Bal[gonie] to congratulate you and my dear new
sister, upon your arrival in Edinburgh, where I hope you are arrived before now.
We are all, as you may belive, sincerly happy in the hopes of seeing you to-
morrow, and I asure you that ice is very comprehensive. It contains the whole
parish, who are very impatient to pay their compliments to Lady Balgonie, who
is as great a favourite on your account as she will hereafter be on her own, which
1 Letter, 13th August 1784, iu Melville Charter-chest.
2 Cf. vol. ii. of this work, pp. 2SS, 289.
VOL. I. 2 Z
362 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
you will allow is saying a good deal. ... If there are any fireworks to be had
I wish you would send them by the bearer ; Mr. Erskine of Cardross promised
to send me some India ones, but they are not come, which I regret much. . . .
I expect to be created master of the revels, which I hope are to take place on
this happy occasion." x
After their visit to Scotland, Lord Balgonie and his wife seem to have
gone back to London, and to have remained there for a time. A letter
written to him by his mother, Lady Leven, about this period, shows that he
was in London, and may be quoted as an example of her letters : —
" My dear Bal., Lady B.'s letter and yours was a prodigious feast to me, and
Mr. Henry's [Mr. Henry Thornton] was the desert ; I thank you for affording
me the pleasure of transmitting this seasonable bounty. . . . Sorry for Jane's
toothach, hope it is gone. I think, if very bad, it would have kept her from
church, at any rate, I fear, from hearing. I have been a strong wrestler for the
church in this way, and I commend her for it. I have so little power now that
I must make my will conform to ability, and be thankful that God is not confined
to temples made with hands. No weather prevented my sister and I long ago
from walking a mile, three times a week to attend the early church hours in
Edinburgh. They then met at 8 and 9, — now reduced to two in number, and
deformation
meet at \ past 1 0 ; there is a reformation (sic) of manners in every thing since
that old date. I thank you for the specimen of corespondence you sent and .
beseech you to send some more of the same ; the worthy man has such a pleasure
in doing good that he will not withhold such a cordial from one that of late years
has few of that nature.2 Living in the country and unable to keep up an
extensive corespondence, I have but few opportunitys of learning many things
that refreshed my spirits when they came to my knowledge, besides that most of
my most precious corespondents are now in heaven. You are much indebted for
all the substantial proofs you receive of affection and generosity. I trust you will
render yourself ever worthy of the love and esteem of such friends ; are you not
ashamed of Mr. Thornton's liberality] I thank you for communicating the
adventures of a day ; I hope you approved as much of the evening excercise of it
1 Letter in Melville Charter-chest. chest. Originally addressed to Mr. or Mrs.
Thornton, they were probably transmitted
2 This sentence appears to account for for the edification of the Countess of Leven,
numerous letters from clergymen and from and kept by her. Among the writers were
religious friends of the Thornton family the Rev. John Newton, the Rev. John Ber-
which are found in the Melville Charter- ridge, and others.
I
LETTER FROM HIS MOTHER, 1785. 363
as I did when I read it, a far preferable and more substantial ground for pleasure
than that the Pr. of W. enjoyed at the D-ch-ss's. Tis pity but that his highness
were introduced to Dr. C — 's meeting. We have had most severe weather, I
wonder you say nothing of it, as it was commenced when you wrote. An amaz-
ing quantity of snow has fain since Sabbath se'enight and the cold for 4 or 5
days has been intense. Let me know how you feel and if much snow has fain
about London. Write to your father whenever you think any thing can be done
about the coal ; he will turn very keen if once set agoing, perhaps hands should
be secured as they are often ill to be got, and also instruments for their work. I
will send a note soon to Wheble for candles, hope he will not send what is made
in frost as they are always bad. I suppose they give no discount. Is any of the
robbers discovered that made the attempt upon Mr. Thornton's house ; the man's
face that looked in at the window has often been represented to my vision — the
poor housekeeper has my sympathy.
" You have not mentioned dear George, but I dare say you do not forget him.
He is a fine creature, I hope in God he shall not fall into bad hands. Don't let
him go among heathens. Is it not amazing that government does not give
encouragement to some pious men to go out with our fleets and armies and to
some to settle among our people in different settlements to endeavour to prevent
their turning heathens also, which they soon do. Let me hear from you as often
as possible as it is a great pleasure. My best respects to all the worthy family
roots and branches, and believe me ever your truely affectionate mother.
" I wish you could procure Herbert's poems, I am sure you would like them." x
A few months later, in June 1785, the Society in Scotland for Propagating
Christian Knowledge admitted Lord Balgonie as one of their members. The
reason of this honour on their part was the fact that at the annual sermon
preached in London on their behalf the sum collected was £200, a larger
amount than had ever before been realised. The society in this recognised the
good offices of Lord Balgonie, " who had interested himself in the success of
the society, and had prevailed with a number of the nobility and gentlemen
to become members of the corresponding board, and that he had personally
attended the annual sermon and dinner." They therefore formally thanked
him and made him one of their number, a decision which was conveyed to
him by his father as president of the society.2
1 Letter, dated Feb. 2-tth, probably 1785, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Letter and Minute, 2d and 3d June 17S5.
364 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
From this period for some years, Lord Balgonie's life seems to have been
without much incident. He was appointed in 1786 comptroller of the
customs at Edinburgh, and continued to discharge the duties of that office for
a considerable period. His correspondence, though voluminous, contains at
this date nothing specially noteworthy, an exception perhaps being an
account of a visit in 1792 by Mr. and Mrs. Eobert Thornton to Miss Hannah
More and her work at Cowslip Green. Mrs. Thornton wrote to Lord
Balgonie from Penzance, whither they had gone on a pleasure trip : —
"We left Clapham as we proposed, the 30 of August, and came by Bucking-
ham to see Stow, a grand place, but the gardens are much too crowded with
buildings for the more chaste taste of the present day. We spent our first
Sunday at Cowslip Green, which gave us an opportunity of going with Hannah
More and her sister Patty their Sunday circuit to three of their schools. They
have literally been the instruments of civilizing the country round them for a
diameter of twenty miles, and the effects upon the parents as well as the children
is very striking. I never spent so interesting a day in all my life. The neglected
situation of these parishes perhaps can hardly be supposed when the Miss Mores
first set up their schools. Several of them had not had a resident clergyman
amongst them for fifty years, and their employment being to work in mines . . .
they were in a manner shut oat from the rest of the world, and two of the
parishes had not even a family amongst them of the rank of the lowest farmer.
They were such absolute savages that Miss More told me, at Shipham where they
have one of their most flourishing schools, they were so devoid of the principles
of common honesty, that if any one owed money to any person out of the village
the creditor gave up the debt sooner than risk his person amongst them by
coming to demand the debt." J
Mr. Eobert Thornton also writes on the same subject, and adds :
" It is impossible to calculate how much good she [Miss Hannah More] does.
Miss Patty More also is the most animated creature I ever met with. There is a
character for pleasantness and moral conversation in these ladies which I cannot
describe." 2
Lord Balgonie was, in 1794, appointed by the Earl of Crawford one of
his deputy-lieutenants of the shire of Fife,3 and in 1798 he was made
1 Letter, 15th September 1792, iu Melville Charter-chest.
2 Letter, ibid, [date uncertain].
3 Commission, 12th August 1794, ibid.
HIS SERVICES AS COLONEL OF MILITIA, 1798. 365
lieutenant-colonel of the Fifth or Fifeshire Regiment of Militia.1 The
regiment had been embodied in the winter of 1797-8, and was now ready for
service. They were inarched in the spring of 1799, first to Aberdeen, and
thence to Fort George, where they were stationed for a time as guards over
those Irishmen who had been taken in the rebellion of 1798, and were
confined at that place. Eegarding these Colonel David Leslie wrote : " At
Fort George you may have the pleasure of guarding our Irish traitors, — they
are slippery chaps, so take care of them. They will leave nothing undone to
corrupt your people." Lord Balgonie soon after followed his regiment, and
he and his family took up their residence for a short time at Cawdor Castle
in the vicinity, their first views of which were not cheering. A friend wrote
that there was excellent barrack accommodation at Fort George, but that
the situation was remote from society, though well enough in the summer.
Lord Adam Gordon, the commander-in-chief for Scotland, wrote: "Lady
Balgony will find plenty of space at the Thane of Calder's old castle, but not
much furniture. It is a pretty old mansion, and may answer for summer."
Lord Leven wrote, "I have received yours of Sunday 19th [May 1799], with
the awfull description of Cawdor ^Castle. Sombre as it is, you and Lady
Balgonie will be much happier there than in the Fort. The distance of a
market, and even bread and beer, will be your greatest inconveniency." Sir
Charles Boss of Balnagowan wrote from Ireland : —
" Say everything to her ladyship [Lady Balgonie] that respect and esteem
can dictate, and give my love to my dear young friends. I heartily regret being
absent from Ross- shire during the time that your regiment occupy s the quarter
in my neighbourhood ; it will afford me peculiar pleasure to think that my place
produces any thing that can be at all useful to you or Lady Balgonie, and I have
desired my factotum, Mr. Baillie, at Knockbreak by Tain, to send you some hens
and eggs whenever you apply for them. The best way will be for you to make
one of your soldiers go from Fort George and bring them over ; the distance is
not above twelve miles. I wish with all my heart that you commenced your
military career with more pleasant service and in a more agreeable country, but
in those days we must make the best of anything. We have just received
accounts of the French fleet having got out of Brest, and there seems every
reason to think that their destination is Ireland. We soldiers never can be better
1 Certificate of qualification, 14th July 179S, iu Melville Charter-chest.
366 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
prepared to receive them, but I shall not regret being deprived of my share of
the laurels, if Lord Bridport is fortunate enough to meet with them. They have
many friends in this unhappy land, and I fear that nothing but trying the
experiment will convince the wretches that the fraternal embrace is not of all
blessings the greatest. I am sorry to say that a Paddy is something like a
nettle, he must be squeezed hard to prevent his stinging, and if the French get
amongst them, they will probably meet with enough of that discipline." x
Lord and Lady Balgonie, however, notwithstanding the " desolate state "
of Cawdor Castle, remained there from May till November, when they
returned to Edinburgh. In the following year, 1800, his lordship was again
with his regiment, which was stationed at Aberdeen.
Lord Balgonie succeeded his father as Earl of Leven on 9th June 1802,
and assumed, being the firstin the family to do so, the designation of Earl of
Leven and Melville. This was probably owing to the creation of another
peerage of Melville only six months after his succession. The famous states-
man, Henry Dundas of Melville, in Midlothian, was created Viscount Melville
on 24th December 1802, apparently in ignorance of the existence of the earlier
and higher dignity of Earl of Melville, which had not been assumed by the
holders of it after the death of the first Earl of Melville in the year 1707.
Following out his adoption of the title of Melville in addition to Leven, the
Earl's younger children, in 1803, assumed the surname of Melville in
addition to that of Leslie. This step was taken partly in consequence of an
urgent request on the part of General Robert Melville, who was a son of
a former minister of Monimail. The general wished to leave his landed pro-
perty to a series of heirs, including Lord Leven's second son and his younger
brothers successively, on condition that they should assume the surname of
Melville, " being the ancient paternal surname of their family." This pro-
posal was made in August 1802, after Lord Leven's aceession, but the question
as to Lord Balgonie's younger sons bearing the name of Melville had been
raised and discussed some years previously, and an opinion expressed in
1795, that not only might the Earl of Leven assume both titles, but that
the younger members of the family might take the name of Melville alone.2
1 Letter, 9th May 1799, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 Paper iu Melville Charter-chest.
J
ASSUMES STYLE OF EARL OF LEVEN AND MELVILLE, 1803. 367
When, however, General Melville's proposal was made in 1802, Lord Leven
at first demurred, for although he admitted that his sons already assumed
the name of Melville in addition to that of Leslie, he objected to the
stipulation that it should be assumed in place of Leslie. This point, how-
ever, was afterwards arranged, and in April 1803 it was agreed that the
surname of the younger members of the family should be Leslie-Melville.
The Earl was, in December 1804, a candidate for election as one of the
sixteen representative peers of Scotland, but was not returned as such till the
general election of 1806. His daughter Jane, aged ten, writes to her mother:
" We all congratulate dear papa on his good success, and thank you and Lucy
for your kind letters, which we were happy to see franked by papa, who is
greatly improved in his writing. I fancy he has had a lesson or two from
Mr. Lutterworth." 1
In the year 1813 the Earl of Leven and Melville was required to appoint
a professor of chemistry in St. Andrews University in the following circum-
stances: Five years previously Mr. John Gray of London left part of his
estate for various purposes in Scotland, including, first, £500 to be invested
for paying the yearly salary of a schoolmistress in the parish of Cupar, to
instruct "the young females in the proper branches of female education,"
under certain conditions, and under the patronage of the Countess of Leven
for the time, who should examine the scholars ; and secondly, the sum of
£2000, to be invested in the name of the principal and masters of the United
College of St. Andrews, to pay " the salary for a professor of chemistry in
the said university," together with two bursaries of £10 each, which were to
be competed for. Lord Leven was specially nominated patron of the pro-
fessorship, but the opportunity for acting on the will did not occur until some
time afterwards. Mr. Gray died about 1811, but there was some difficulty
about the funds at the disposal of his executor, and Lord Leven's first
nomination was only made in 1813, by the appointment to the chair of Dr.
Patrick Mudie, a physician of St. Andrews.2
One of the earl's correspondents about this time was the Eev. Thomas
Chalmers, then minister of Kilmany, a parish not far from Melville House.
1 Letter, 18th December 1S06, in Melville Charter-chest.
- Papers on the subject in Melville Charter-chest.
368 ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEK, ETC.
He wrote to Lord Leven a few days after his acceptance of a call to be
minister of the Tron Church in Glasgow, a characteristic letter expressing
gratitude for kindness on the earl's part.1 Another correspondent was the
veteran agriculturist, George Dempster of Dunnichen, whose activity in pro-
moting the fisheries and agriculture of Scotland in the beginning of this
century is well known. He sent, as a present to Lord Leven, a " Skibo cow,"
which he recommends for its fattening qualities, and for its colour. " It may
pass for a deer that has strayed from the herd, and if not doomed to the baulk,
would make a pretty gentle pet for a lady — a pad, indeed, if the lady lived
in Astracan." 2 Two years later the octogenarian donor again refers to the
cow, and alleges that, if it be " suffered to breed, the park of Melville might
have a herd of animals little less ornamental than deer, and nearly as deli-
cious as the deer kind." s The letters of Charles Kirkpatrick Sharpe to Lord
Leven will be found to be written with even more than his usual raciness of
style, and some of them contain references to his books.4 Sir David Wilkie,
the well-known painter, was also one of the earl's correspondents.5
In the beginning of 1818, the Earl of Leven and Melville lost his
countess, who, after a comparatively brief illness, died on 13th February in
that year. Writing to his eldest son, who was then in Italy, Lord Leven says : —
" Dear David, — The sad event you have been led to expect took place in so
easy a way as not to be hardly distinguished by the tender anxious witnesses
surrounding her deathbed. You know it took place on the 13th, about 3 o'clock,
and if two restless nights are excepted, her pain was not severe, her suffering
moderate, and her death easy ; that prepared as she was for the change, it ought
to be our ambition to live so as to hope for a peacefull removal and a blessed
eternity. . . . The funeral did not take place till the 21, to give John a power of
coming, tho' not from his late fatigue hardly expected, assuring you that from the
arrangements made which the time admitted of, every point was conducted with
becoming decency, propriety, and the approbation of many hundreds who, both
here and at Markinch, in spite of bad weather, testified their silent affection in
return for many instances of kind charity administered to them. Yesterday, too,
Vol. ii. of this work, p. 30S. nature of his holograph letter, an intimation
that he i« aged eighty-four.
4 Ibid. pp. 314, 317
:l Ibid. p. 317. The writer adds to the sig- 5 Ibid. pp. 325-327.
2 Ibid. p. 309. 4 ,
r 4 Ibid. pp. 314, 317-324.
DEATH AND BURIAL OF THE COUNTESS, 1818. 369
Sunday the 2 2d, at church, where she was a close attender, renewed our grief,
especially when by name her character was fully and justly and truly delineated
by Dr. Martin, whose wife, if not a corpse, was left all but so ; but she in the
evening rallied, to the surprise of all. The turn-out was most respectable, twenty
carriages, most of the gentlemen in our neighbourhood, and nearly every farmer
and feuar of the estate, to the number of some hundreds." 1
The letters which have been preserved relating to the death of Lady
Leven all speak of her in the highest terms.
The earl did not long survive his countess, as he died about two years
later, on 22d February 1820. They had issue nine children : —
1. David, Lord Balgonie, who succeeded. Of him a memoir follows.
2. Hon. John Thornton Leslie-Melville, who became ninth Earl of Leven and
eighth Earl of Melville. Of him a memoir follows.
3. Hon. William Henry Leslie-Melville, born 19th May 1788. He entered the
service of the Hon. East India Company, and sailed for India on the 5 th
March 1808. He reached the Cape of Good Hope on 31st May, and
Madras in August of that year. He was detained at Madras some time
by the illness and death of his cousin, the Hon. David Euthven, who
was one of his companions on the voyage, and whose loss he very deeply
regretted. He reached Calcutta about the 24th of October. Few of his
letters from India seem to have been preserved, but he appears to have
liked the country and his work. He was engaged at first in the commercial
and later in the judicial department of the company's service. In 1817
he was, at his own request, made assistant to the superintendent of police
at Calcutta, an active situation, and one in the way of promotion. He
returned home before 1832, and in 1841 was made a director of the East
India Company. At this period he took much interest in the history of
his family, made many researches as to its origin and descent, and prepared
for the press a selection from the letters and papers of his ancestor, George,
first Earl of Melville, which was printed for the Bannatyne Club in 1843, as
" The Leven and Melville Papers." He died unmarried on 9th April 1856.
4. Hon. and Eev. Eobert Samuel Leslie-Melville, born about 1793. He entered
the Church of England, and gave promise of much excellence in his pro-
fession, but his career was comparatively short. In 1825 he was in Italy,
evidently in search of health, and died on 24th October 1826, unmarried.
1 Letter, 23d February 1818, in Melville Charter-chest.
VOL. I. 3 A
370
ALEXANDER, SEVENTH EARL OF LEVEN, ETC.
Hon. Alexander Leslie-Melville of Bramston Hall, county Lincoln, born 18th
June 1800. He entered the legal profession, and was called to the Scottish
bar. According to one of his eldest brother's correspondents, he made his
"maiden speech " as an advocate at the Perth circuit in September 1824.
It " did him great credit. I noticed with what satisfaction Lord Pitmilly
listened to it."1 He married, on 19th October 1825, Charlotte, daughter
of Samuel Smith, M.P., of Woodhall Park, Hertfordshire. She died on
26th April 1879. Their issue are enumerated in the genealogical table.
The daughters were—
1. Lady Lucy Leslie-Melville, born 10th December 1789; died 11th February
1791.
2. Lady Lucy Leslie-Melville, bom on 26th January 1794. She married, on
14th July 1824, Henry, third son of Samuel Smith, M.P., and had issue.
She died on 23d December 1865.
3. Lady Jane Elizabeth Leslie-Melville, born on 16th May 1796. She married,
on 13th October 1816, Francis Pym, of the Hasells, Bedfordshire, and had
issue. She died on 25th April 1848.
4. Lady Marianne Leslie-Melville, born on 30th November 1797. She married,
in 1822, Abel Smith of Woodhall Park, M.P., and died at their residence
in Berkeley Square, London, on 2 2d March 1823, without issue.
1 Letter, the Earl of Kellie to Lord Leven, 24th September 1S24, in Melville Charter-chest.
'
DAVID EARLof LEVEN and MELVILLE.
BORN 1785. Dl ED 1860.
Qhxf.SeauAU ySt IV(t
ELIZABETH ANNE, COUNTESS of LEVEN and M ELVI LLE.
MARRIED 1884, DIED 1863.
£%^ ~?J \ <T'i
371
XIV. 1. — David, eighth Eakl of Leven and seventh Earl of Melville.
Elizabeth Anne Campbell (of Sdccoth), his Countess.
1820—1860.
David, eighth Earl of Leven, was born on 22d June 1785. After the
death of his grandfather in 1802 his courtesy title was Lord Balgonie. In
1792 his father began to inquire as to a public school for him. His uncle,
Mr. Samuel Thornton, in reply wrote, " with respect to your inquiries about
David, I believe Eugby to be the best of the schools you have mentioned; I
should greatly object to Westminster, and think him also too young for
Eton." 1 A few days later he wrote that he thought on the whole Eton pre-
ferable to Eugby, " having turned out such good scholars as Grey, Whitbread,
and some others of late, and such steady ones as young Brogden, etc." 2 It
would appear, however, that Lord Balgonie was placed at a private school
near London.3 But during the years before his grandfather's death the
references to him are of the most casual and meagre description.
He entered the Eoyal Navy before March 1800, and in the year 1808,
when his ship, the Cygnet, visited Leith, he appears to have resided at
Melville for a few weeks. In the following year, 1809, he was with the
British fleet under Collingwood, as a lieutenant on board the Ville de Paris,
Lord Collingwood's flag-ship, of 110 guns. In an attack upon a French
convoy which had sailed from Toulon and gone into the Bay of Eosas, on the
north-east coast of Spain, Lord Balgonie volunteered to command one of the
boats which were to be engaged, and took charge of one from the Topaz.
The action began about four in the morning, first on the French store-ship,
and then on the convoy. In writing about it to his father, he says, "Almost
every vessel proved armed, but they were taken one after another under
showers of shot from four batteries ... in less than two hours there were ten
sail burnt and four towed out. The explosions were grander than anything
1 Letter, 31st October 1792, in Melville 3 A letter by him to his father, without
Charter-chest. date, but written in a round half-text hand,
is sent from Wandsworth. He refers to his
2 Letter, Nov. 5, ibid. garden and other amuspinents.
372 DAVID, EIGHTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND SEVENTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
I ever saw."1 One of the vessels towed out was taken by Lord Balgonie, and
he was specially mentioned for his gallantry by Lord Collingwood in his
despatches. In consequence, no doubt, of his dash on that occasion, he
was in December following promoted to the rank of commander, and
received the command of a brig,2 although not long before he had written
to his father expressing considerable anxiety about his prospects of advance-
ment.3 His naval career cannot be traced in detail from the family papers.
He was promoted to the rank of post-captain in 1S12, and appears to have
retired from active service in the spring of 1814, somewhat out of health.
Referring to this, a friend writes to him, in a spirit of banter : —
" Your safe arrival in your native country has given us all much pleasure.
I was afraid your noted gallantry to the fair sex would induce you to exert your-
self too much on the voyage, and perhaps hurt your health. In your short note
to me you do not mention whether the cough has left you ; you must -now be
very careful of yourself, and recruit after the London campaign. I am informed
by very creditable authority that you not only entered into the gayities of the
town during my absence, but that you were frequently seen of cold raw nights
bellowing among the link boys for some of the old dowagers' carriages. Now, my
good friend, in your delicate state, you should not carry your good-nature so far."_4
Lord Balgonie again went abroad in the years 1817-1819, and was at
Naples or at least in Italy at the time of his mother's death. He left Lome
about the middle of June 1819, when he thus wrote to his brother John: —
" At last I am off from Rome, and must say it is almost with regret, there
are so many objects of admiration and interest that one must get some taste for
one of the arts during a short residence. I believe if I had remained a few
months longer I should have begun to paint. Several ladies have been tempted,
and have made some progress. Mrs. Captain Graham really copies well in three
weeks. Eastlake,5 a friend of mine, was the general master, and very much
liked. He is to paint me two or three pictures of Greece and Sicily where we
were together. He is very clever, and I expect they will be good. When my
old pictures arrive I should like Lord and Lady Caledon to see one of them, a
1 Letter, 2d November 1809, vol. ii. of 4 Letter, Edmund W. Knox, 10th July
this work, pp. 304, 305. IS 14, in Melville Charter-chest.
2 He was at a later date in command of
H.M.S. Romulus. 5 Afterwards Sir Charles Eastlake, presi-
3 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 305, 306. dent of the Royal Academy.
HIS SUCCESSION AS EARL, AND MARRIAGE. 373
Crucifixion, which we admired another copy of much together. Mr. Eastlake
also wishes a friend of his to see it." x
Not many months after his return home, he succeeded to the title and
estates on the death of his father, and appears to have continued to reside at
Melville, except when called to London in connection with his duties as a
representative peer. He intended to go there in the spring of 1821, as
appears from a letter of his friend Mr. Eastlake,2 but it is not certain if he
went ; and although invited to attend, he was not present at the coronation
of King George the Fourth, which took place on 1st August 1821.3
The Earl of Leven married, on 21st June 1824, Elizabeth Anne Campbell,
second daughter of Sir Archibald Campbell, second Baronet of Succoth.4
His uncle, General David Leslie, a few days before the event, wrote congratu-
lating him on his happy prospects, and upon having selected a partner for life,
whose superior good qualities must ensure to him "that domestic felicity
which is the choicest blessing of heaven." General Leslie and his wife,
however, were unable to be present, but sent their best wishes, and Mrs.
Leslie added: "May you keep the anniversary of the 21st fifty years hence,
as was the lot of your worthy grandfather and grandmother to do after a
union of fifty years, and I verily believe in all that long time they never had
one dispute or any serious difference even of opinion." 5
At the general election of the sixteen representative peers of Scotland
held on 3d June 1831, Lord Leven was elected one of them. His lordship was
re-elected at every subsequent general election, including that of 10th May
1 Letter, IStb. June 1819, in Melville country beside yourself, which together with
Charter-chest. the circumstance of there being no ladies to
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 332. walk in the procession, has made me so care-
3 A letter to him, of date Gth July 1S21, less about witnessing this pageant that, unless
from his cousin, Samuel Thornton, thus com- it is for the fun of seeing the scramble in
ments on the approaching ceremony. "We Westminster Hall (the only real sight after
are disappointed in not being likely to see all), I doubt whether I should be willing to
you or your sisters in town, after all the spend three weeks' half-pay upon a seat,
hopes you have been holding out to your either in the abbey, hall or booths."
brother. I am not the less sorry at the 4 He is designated in the certificate of
diminution of splendour, and I may add of banns as " Sir Archibald Campbell of Gar-
respectability, which the approaching corona- scube."
tion will suffer by the absence of several 6 Letter, 11th June 1824, in Melville Char-
other members of the ancient nobility of the ter-ehest.
374 DAVID, EIGHTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND SEVENTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
1859, which was the last previous to his death, so that he held the position
of a representative peer for the long period of thirty-eight years. His first
election in 1831 had special reference to the impending struggle on the
Eeform Bill. His opinions, however, were not on all points in accord with
those of the Conservative party, to which he usually adhered, as some cor-
respondence with the Earls of Eosslyn and Harrowby, the managers for the
opponents of the Eeform Bill, shows. The debate in the House of Lords on
the second reading took place in the beginning of October 1831, and in
August the earl wrote to Lord Eosslyn enclosing his proxy, and expressing
the hope that it would be placed in hands disposed to promote the great
object for which he came forward at the last election. He added that it was
his desire to make certain concessions to the reform party so as to avoid
collision with the popular voice.1 But his views were not encouraged by
Lord Eosslyn.2 In a later letter, dated 29th September 1831, Lord Leven
gave reasons why he could not be in London at the second reading.3
Lord Eosslyn in his reply expressed sanguine hopes that the bill would
be defeated,4 and, as is well known, this debate in the House of Lords ended
in the rejection of the first Eeform Bill. With various alterations it was
again brought forward in the next session, passed by a large majority in
the Commons, and sent up to the House of Lords in due course. Lord
Leven had not gone to London, but still took a deep interest in the matter.
As he and Lord Eosslyn did not wholly agree about the bill, and believing
that Lord Harrowby, who, though he had made a powerful speech against the
second reading of the first bill, was disposed to accept the new bill with
certain alterations and omissions, most nearly represented his own views,
Lord Leven wrote to him in the end of February 1832 : —
"As I concur generally in the view your lordship has taken upon the question
of reform, and regard compromise as the only mode of extrication from the
difficulties in which the country has been placed by the government, permit me
to offer my support to your lordship should it be agreeable to continue to take a
lead in promoting that object." u
1 Copy letter, 8th August 1831, in Melville 3 Copy letter, in Melville Charter-chest.
Charter-chest. i Copy letter, 4th October, ibid.
- Copy letter, ibid. 6 Copy letter, 27th February 1832, ibid.
HIS VIEWS ON THE REFORM BILL, 1832. 375
The earl then expressed a desire to transfer his proxy from Lord Eosslyn to
Lord Harrowby, and the latter in reply stated his surprise and gratification at
Lord Leven's concurrence with his views. Lord Rosslyn, however, wrote : —
" I cannot help believing that your lordship has acted upon erroneous informa-
tion, for it is not only acknowledged by Lord Harrowby and Lord Wharncliffe
that there exists at present no compromise with the government upon any
part of the question, but it is certain that the ministers omit no opportunity of
disclaiming all intention to concede any point of importance, and afford no
encouragement to hope that they will yield anything to Lord Harrowby, or those
who may join him in voting for the second reading."
Lord Eosslyn then proceeds to point out wherein he thinks Lords Harrowby
and Wharncliffe are mistaken in their view of the situation, and their hope
of averting the threatened creation of new peers by voting for the second
reading and then altering the bill in committee. He comments at some
length upon what he styles their fallacious calculations, and concludes by
recommending Lord Leven to attend the committee stage of the bill.1
Lord Leven's reply fully indicates his position and sentiments. After
thanking Lord Rosslyn forgiving effect to his wish about his proxy, he says: —
" I regret, however, very much to find that you, as well as some others of my
political and private friends, attach so much importance to that step, and indeed
regard it as little less than a secession from the conservative party. I can only
say I never contemplated it in that light, and I have not pledged myself to any-
thing beyond the sentiments expressed by Lord Harrowby on the second reading
of the late bill in the House of Lords. . . . Your lordship may recollect that
when I first transmitted my proxy to you, I expressed a hope that some com-
promise might be attempted. In reply you followed the argument since taken
by your party and Lord Harrowby in the House of Lords that no modification
would render that bill an expedient measure. I did not perceive any advantage
likely to arise from continuing the discussion at that time, but my opinion
remained unchanged, and the best consideration I could since give the subject
has tended to confirm it. It appeared to me that amongst the enormous difficul-
ties which on either side beset the subject, and the settlement of it, our only
prospect of extrication lay in selecting some middle points which might still
preserve much of the spirit and substance of our constitution ; that any leading
1 Copy letter, 2d March 1832, in Melville Charter-cheat.
376 DAVID, EIGHTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND SEVENTH EAEL OF MELVILLE.
person making the effort even must carry with him a very large and respectable
party in the nation, House of Lords, and perhaps the government, who at present
regard the tories as pledged to resist all reform ; that Lord Grey, although he
maintains the doctrine of resistance to all material alterations, may explain those
terms as he likes, and I cannot but believe he will yield rather than adopt a
measure so subversive of the constitution as the creation of peers ; that in fact
joining property with population as the basis of representation is a considerable
concession ; that I am unable to perceive any hope of settling the question by
continued and uncompromising resistance to the whole of it, and that the
attempt to come to terms, if not met by ministers in a fair, candid and reasonable
spirit, must contribute to place them still further in the wrong, while in my
opinion nothing of moment is lost in making the effort.
" Such, in my humble judgment, are some of the grounds which recommend
conrpromise, and when I found a person so highly respectable as Lord Harrowby
coincide with me, and disposed to propose something specific, your lordship will
understand, altho' you do not concur with me, my reasons for wishing to
strengthen his hands in any negotiation in which he might engage according to
the sentiments he had declared. Feeling deeply sensible of the importance of the
crisis, and how necessary it is to inform myself upon the subject, I have deter-
mined to go to London for the second reading.
" I should regard a breach in the conservative party at the present moment
as a serious evil, and not perceiving among them any such essential difference in
principle as should lead to separation, I cannot but hope so heavy an addition to
our difficulties may be avoided. However this may be, it affords me great satis-
faction to learn that the difference of opinion which exists between us on this
occasion will make no alteration in our private friendship, and that I may continue
to hold these sentiments of regard and esteem I have ever entertained for your
lordship." 1
The earl's resolution to proceed to London and to be present at the debate
on the second reading appears to have been not altogether spontaneous, as
a letter addressed to hiru on 5th March 1832 contains a strong expression
of opinion about his procedure. The writer says : —
" I am sorry you have withdrawn your proxy from Lord Eosslyn and given
it to Lord Harrowby, as by so doing you separate yourself entirely from the
party who assisted in bringing you in as one of the sixteen, and if you have any
wish of being a representative peer next parliament you cannot expect their
1 Copy letter [no date] Melville Charttr-chest.
PROMOTED TO THE RANK OF REAR-ADMIRAL, 1846. 377
support, and I think it would have been better had you adhered to the same
opinion which guided your vote last time upon this awful question, and you
should recollect that your principal support was from those peers who have
always been opposed to the principles of the Eeform Bill, and who of course
understood you to entertain the same sentiments, and by voting for the second
reading you at once admit the principle. But all this must have occurred to
yourself, and you are the best judge of your own conduct, and I only hope you
will excuse the liberty I have taken in saying what I have done, and if you
should change your mind you have still plenty of time to give your proxy to
whom you please. I have no doubt of the bill going into committee, but I confess
I should have liked to have seen it do so without your support. Lord Grey
certainly holds a carte blanche to make as many peers as he may think necessary,
and he will of course exercise that power not only to carry the Eeform Bill, but
any other measure that may be proposed." x
This last statement, though no doubt believed by the writer, was at this
stage somewhat premature, but the whole tone of the letter appears to have
weighed with Lord Leven, who on the 12th March wrote again to Lord
Harrowby that he had desired to support the propositions for compromise
thrown out by him, but intimating his intention of being present at the
debate in person. To the copy of this and the other letters, Lord Leven adds
a note that he had received an answer from Lord Harrowby, and in reply
had stated more distinctly that if no reasonable compromise according
to his views was effected with the Government, he would reserve his
decision upon supporting the second reading of the bill until he reached
London, and informed himself further upon the subject.2 The result was
that Lord Leven did attend the debate, and he voted against the second
reading, being thus opposed to Lord Harrowby, who voted for it.
The earl was on 31st October 1846 promoted to the rank of a retired
rear-admiral, and this appears to be the chief public event recorded regarding
him during a long series of years. He took no very active part in politics,
but lived privately, devoting much of his time and attention to the furtherance
of local interests and the amelioration of the condition of his tenants and
labourers. In this respect he followed in the footsteps of his predecessors,
1 Copy extract from letter, in Melville Charter-chest. The name of the writer is not
stated. 2 Copy letter in Melville Charter-chest.
VOL. I. 3 B
378 DAVID, EIGHTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND SEVENTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
and it was the boast of some of his tenants that they and their fathers had
possessed their farms on the estate for close upon three centuries. The
family of Leven and Melville always gave much attention to their estates,
and studied to introduce agricultural improvements and to encourage good
farming, while the steadings and cottages were models of excellence. A
notice of the Earl of Leven, written in a local newspaper at the time of his
death, remarks, " The late earl was not behind any of his predecessors in kind
consideration for his tenants. He had his own way — as who has not — but
for genuine kind-hearted interest in the prosperity and well-being of all on
the estates, tenants and workers, his lordship was one in a thousand ; and not
less honourably distinguished in his efforts for the welfare of the people within
the reach of his influence, than were the houses of which he was the worthy
representative in the annals of their country's struggle for liberty and peace." 2
From the same source we learn that in matters of local public interest,
the earl " was among the foremost. He took a deep interest in the formation
of the Fife Kailway, of which he was the first chairman, and with his relative,
Mr. Balfour of Balbirnie, almost the only considerable holder of stock in the
county. To every other public object of general utility he gave a liberal and
hearty support, and the latest — the volunteer movement — has also had his
cordial sympathies and liberal contributions. The active interest he took in
the welfare of the labourer seemed even to increase with his failing strength.
He was always providing employment for them, and otherwise contributing
to enable the aged to have comfort in their declining years." When he died
" he was busily engaged in a well-formed and extensive plan for the erection
of additional buildings, especially of new cottages where he considered them
required." He was also one of the trustees of the Bell bequest, and in that
office lent a most beneficial influence to the cause of education.
Some years before his death great grief and anxiety were caused to Earl
David, by the illness and death of his only surviving son, Alexander,
Lord Balgonie. The family arrangements which Earl David thought fit and
proper to make in the crisis which thus arose, have been fully explained in
the Introduction, to which reference is made.
The earl died of apoplexy at Melville House, on 8th October 1860, at the
1 Fife Journal, quoted in Courant, 12tli October 1860.
HIS LATER YEARS AND DEATH. 379
age of seventy-five, and his remains were interred in the family bury in g-
place, at the old church of Monimail. He was succeeded in the lordship
and barony of Monimail and other lands known as the estate of Melville,
by his eldest daughter and heir of line and entail, Lady Elizabeth Jane
Leslie Melville, then Cartwright. The peerages of Leven and Melville were
inherited by his lordship's next brother, the Hon. John Thornton Leslie
Melville, as nearest heir-male under the investitures.
Earl David was survived, for upwards of three years, by his countess,
Elizabeth, who continued to reside at Melville House, and died there on 6th
November 1863. Her remains were interred beside those of her husband. A
monument to his memory, in the present church of Monimail, which was
commenced by the countess, was completed in 1868 by their surviving
children, Elizabeth, Anne, Susan, and Emily, in affectionate remembrance of
both their parents. Their issue were two sons and four daughters.
1. Alexander, Lord Balgonie, born 19th November 1831. Educated at Eton,
he entered the army in December 1850 as ensign, and became lieutenant
in the 1st (Grenadier) Foot Guards, of which the Duke of Wellington was
colonel. His majority was celebrated at Melville House in November 1852,
and not long afterwards he accompanied his regiment to the East at the
outbreak of the Crimean war. He served during the greater part of the
campaign of 1854, acting as aide-de-camp to General Sir Henry Bentinck,
and attained the rank of major. At the battle of Inkerman his horse was
shot under him, and when the ammunition had run short, he stopped a
donkey laden with stones for the trenches and rolled them down on
the Russians. Lord Balgonie inherited the ardour of his ancestors for
military service, and was a most promising young officer, of great
amiability of character, and much beloved in his regiment. He, however,
suffered severely from the hardships of the Crimean campaign, and towards
the close of the year 1855 was obliged to return home. A few days
after his return he was to have been presented with the freedom of the
burgh of Cupar at a dinner given there, but was suddenly seized with the
illness which afterwards terminated fatally. The following autumn, just
before starting to spend the winter in Egypt, in September 1856, the free-
dom of the burgh of Cupar was presented to him at Melville House. He
spent the winter and spring of 1856-57 in Egypt, in a vain attempt to
regain his health, and, returning to England, died at Eoehampton House,
380 DAVID, EIGHTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND SEVENTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
Surrey, the residence of his uncle John, on 29th August 1857. His death,
which was deeply mourned by his sorrowing parents and numerous relatives,
occurred on the eve of a county festival in his honour. His remains
were brought from Roehampton to Scotland, and interred in the family
burying-place at the old church of Monimail. The tenantry on the
Melville estates and the neighbouring gentlemen erected, in the church of
Monimail, a marble tablet with an inscription which narrates his military
services and lamented death, and states that his high principles and kind
and gentle disposition endeared him to all. There is also an inscription on
a monument to him in the Guards' Chapel in Wellington Barracks, London.
2. Honourable David Archibald Leslie Melville, who was born on 14th October
1833, and died on 20th October 1854, unmarried. His remains were
interred at the old church of Monimail.
1. Lady Elizabeth Jane Leslie Melville, who succeeded to Melville.
2. Lady Anna Maria, who married, at Paris, on 26th April 1865, Sir William
Stirling-Maxwell, Baronet, of Keir and Pollok, K.T. As the result of an
accident, Lady Anna died at Keir, on 8th December 1874. Sir William
survived her and died on 15th June 1878. They had issue two sons, Sir
John Stirling-Maxwell, Baronet of Pollok, and Archibald Stirling of Keir.
3. Lady Susan Lucy, who was appointed lady-in-waiting to Her Royal Highness,
the late Duchess of Kent, in 1859, and was with her till the death of the
Duchess in 1861. In 1866 Lady Susan was appointed lady-in-waiting to
Her Boyal Highness, Princess Christian of Schleswig-Holstein, on her
marriage, and resigned in 1883.
4. Lady Emily Eleanor, born 22d May 1840. She married, on 28th March
1864, John Glencairn Carter Hamilton, of Dalzell, who was created Baron
Hamilton of Dalzell in 1886. Lady Emily died on 11th November 1882,
much regretted by all classes in her neighbourhood, leaving surviving issue
three sons and four daughters.
/£^J^L^
381
XV. — 2. Lady Elizabeth Jane Leslie Melville Cartwright of Melville.
Thomas Eobert Brook Leslie Melville Cartwright, her Husband.
On the death of her father, David, eighth Earl of Leven and seventh Earl
of Melville, Lady Elizabeth inherited the family estates of Melville as heir of
line. In the lifetime of her father, about two years previous to his death, she
married, on 2d November 1858, Thomas Eobert Brook Cartwright, second son
of Sir Thomas Cartwright, G. C. H., of Aynhoe, Northamptonshire, Minister
Plenipotentiary to the Diet of Frankfort, and afterwards Envoy Extra-
ordinary to the Court of Sweden and Norway, where he died in April 1850,
survived by his widow, who is still alive in her eighty-sixth year. The
Cartwright family, various members of which have been distinguished in
war, politics, and invention, is descended from Hugh Cartwright, who lived
in the reign of King Henry the Seventh. His eldest son William was the
ancestor of the Cartwrights of Norwell and Maruham, while Boland, the
second son, was the ancestor of the Cartwrights of Aynhoe. Boland's
grandson, Bichard Cartwright of the Inner Temple, purchased, about 1600,
the Manor of Aynhoe, which has ever since remained with his descendants.
William, grandson of Bichard, married as his second wife Ursula, seventh
daughter of Ferdinando, second Lord Fairfax of Cameron, a sister of the
famous Thomas, Lord Fairfax, and their son was the direct ancestor of the
present representatives of the family.
After the succession of Lady Elizabeth to the Melville estates, Mr. Cart-
wright adopted the additional names of Leslie Melville before his own. They
have had issue, one son and four daughters.
1. Alexander William Leslie Melville Cartwright, born 5th March 1863, died
24th September same year.
1. Elizabeth Harriet Leslie Melville Cartwright, born on 18th August 1859.
2. Marian Leslie Melville Cartwright, born on 11th February 1861.
3. Frances Agnes Leslie Melville Cartwright, born on 22d January 1862.
4. Ursula Leslie Melville Cartwright, born on 17th July 1864. She married,
on 7th August 1889, Charles Walter Cottrell-Dormer of Bousham, Oxford-
shire, captain in the 13th Hussars.
382
XIV. — 2. John, ninth Eael of Leven and eighth Eael of Melville.
Hakeiet Thornton, his fiest Wife.
Sophia Thoenton, his second Wife.
1860—1876.
John Thornton Leslie Melville, who succeeded his brother David, as
heir-male, in the peerages of Leven and Melville, was born on 18th December
1786. He appears to have been educated at a private school near London.
In 1804 it was intended that he should proceed to Kussia, apparently in
connection with the business of his uncles, the Messrs. Thornton, but the idea
was abandoned. He afterwards, in 1809, acted as assistant deputy pay-
master-general to the forces under Sir Arthur Wellesley, then in the Penin-
sula. In one letter which has been preserved Mr. Leslie Melville gives a
sketch of the situation in Spain after the battle of Talavera. He regrets
that the date of his commission did not allow him to be present at that
conflict, and adds : —
" Every officer I have spoken to on this subject assures me that such a fight
with such unequal numbers was never seen before. ... I am told the French
claim the victory since our retreat, but they ought in justice to remember who
maintained the field of battle, and who were the first to fly. Indeed our coming
away at all was not so much from fear of the same army returning to attack us,
as from knowing that Soult's army, of at least 15,000 infantry and 5000 cavalry,
were within three days' march of our rear.
" You will ask how our commander-in-chief suffered them to get there ?
(which we flatter ourselves is the only part of his conduct which can be called
in question), and thus it is to be explained. They could only get into this posi-
tion by one road, and that is commanded by the pass of Gata, where Cuesta1
placed 300 men and guns enough to defend it; but as soon as a few French
cavalry appeared in sight away they went, leaving guns and everything else for
the French, in spite of the perswasion of an English officer who attempted to get
them to do their duty. But the truth of the matter is, altho' so much is said of
1 The Spanish general.
HIS EXPERIENCES IN SPAIN. 383
Spanish patriots, of their spirit, and determination to die or free themselves from the
French yoke, they are a complete set of cowardly banditti who will submit, after
our departure from the country, to the will and pleasure of Joseph Bonaparte, and
if the game is really up in Austria, in my humble opinion he will very soon have
quiet possession of this kingdom, tho' if our government please to defend Portugal,
they will not find it easy to drive us from thence. As for comparing, either as
soldiers or as a people, the Portuguese with the Spaniards, the former are decidedly
superior in both points of view, and the only advantages possessed by the
Spaniards are a more fertile soil (to which they do no justice), and a handsomer
race of females, for whom they will not fight.
" But, to give the devil his due, I believe the common Spanish soldiers are not
so much to blame as the officers, for the latter generally run first. The Portuguese
are pretty well off for English officers, and considering the short time they have
had the command, it is wonderful to see their state of discipline. I saw General
Beresford at the head of 6000 of them a fortnight ago, and very well, indeed,
they looked. Our own army are now very sickly indeed, and growing more so
every day, owing to the scarcity of provisions. No wine or brandy can be pro-
cured, and many days the whole ration of bread cannot be served out, sometimes
none at all. Report says we are to retire as far as Elms on the borders of Por-
tugal, but this seems to me to depend upon our finding provisions plentiful or
scarce in our retreat. Sir Arthur could not now muster above 16 or 17,000 men
here, but General Catlin Crawford is on the north of the Tagus with 7000 fresh
troops, who have never yet been engaged. We all blame ministers for not send-
ing Lord Chatham's expedition here, not, however, wishing for his lordship's pre-
sence, but that the troops should have been under the command of Sir Arthur
Wellesley.
"We are at present encamped on the bank of the river Guadiana within
a \ of a mile of the town of Merida. . . . All the paymasters of the different
regiments at Talavera have been put under arrest for running away from the
battle, and it is expected to prove a serious matter to most of them. Some of
the commissaries have been dismissed the service for the same offence. Our
officers and men fought like lions — many have to lament the loss of their
friends, but it was a glorious fight. The regiments that were in the hottest of it
were the Brigade of Guards, 23d Light Dragoons, 48th Regiment, and 47th
Regiment — the last had every officer, except 3, killed or wounded. Two friends
of mine, Christie and Sandilands, both Fife men in the Coldstream Guards,
received slight wounds in the leg and were taken with the rest of our wounded at
Talavera ; but they have both since had the good fortune to be exchanged, and
384 JOHN, NINTH EARL OF LEVEN, AND EIGHTH EARL OF MELVILLE.
we expect them to join as soon as their wounds will permit. Sir Arthur wrote
to Mortier,1 after we left Talavera, to claim every attention to our sick left, and
to ask permission to send an officer with money to them. The answer was ' that
they were in the hands of Frenchmen ; that rations should be served to them be-
fore the French army received any ; that no money was necessary, for he would
furnish any sum required out of his own pocket until the matter was arranged
by his Government, and concluded by assuring Sir Arthur he should always have
the highest respect for him and the brave English nation.'
" My own exploits have been none, except a very rapid retreat, for on my
way to join Sir Arthur by the regular road from Lisbon I got within 10 English
miles of four hundred of Soult's cavalry who were within two miles of the place
I intended to have slept at that night, and advancing on the road to meet me.
However, I went back 47 miles to Castello Branco, and after remaining some
days at that place I crossed the Tagus at the famous bridge of Alcantara, and
proceeded to join Sir Arthur, who had retreated as far as Truxillo, when I got up
to him. The French have made this town (famous for being the birth-place of
Pizarro) quite a heap of ruins. It stands in a very commanding situation, and
from the remains of Moorish walls, towers, etc., has in days of yore been a very
strong place. . . ." 2
It does not appear how long Mr. Leslie Melville remained with the army,
but he was in London in the year 1812, if not earlier, and he must therefore
have left Spain before the end of the Peninsular war. Beyond this date,
scarcely anything can be gathered of his career from the family papers. He
entered into business and became one of the original partners in the London
banking-house of Williams, Deacon, Labouchere, Thornton & Co., and he
continued a partner till within a few years of his death. His elder brother,
David, eighth Earl of Leven, dying, in 1860, without surviving male issue,
the Hon. John Leslie Melville succeeded to the titles and dignities of the
family, and became ninth Earl of Leven and eighth Earl of Melville. At
the first general election after his succession he was chosen one of the sixteen
representative peers of Scotland, on 28th July 1865. He was re-elected at
subsequent general elections previous to his death in 1876.
1 French General. General would " send this letter to my father
2 Letter from Merida, 31st August 1809, to read ; as we march to-morrow. I know
addressed to General Robert Melville. In a not when I shall be able to write two more
postscript the writer adds a wish that the sheets to anybody."
s
HIS CHILDREN. ' 385
In the year 1869, the earl purchased the estate of Glenferness which
formed part of the lands of Coulniony and others on the south side of the
river Findhorn in the barony and parish of Ardclach, late regality of Spynie,
and county of Nairn.1 Glenferness thereafter became his principal Scottish
residence. The family arrangements under which this ninth Earl of Leven
and eighth Earl of Melville acquired the old Melville barony of Hallhill in
the county of Fife, aud other lands there, have been fully explained in the
Introduction, and need not be repeated here. This earl attained to the
great age of ninety years. He retained all his faculties of mind and body
to the last. A paralytic attack ended fatally at Glenferness on Saturday,
16th September 1876. The earl was twice married, first on 15th September
1812, to his cousin Harriet, youngest daughter of Samuel Thornton of
Clapham. She died after apparently a lingering illness, on 26th July 1832.
His second wife, to whom he was married on 23d April'1834, was another
cousin, Sophia, fourth daughter of: Henry Thornton of London. By his two
wives this earl had issue : —
1. Alexander, eldest son of the first marriage, who succeeded him as Earl of
Leven and Melville as aftermentioned.
2. Alfred John Leslie Melville, born 5th June 1826. He entered the service
of the Hon. East India Company, and died at Penang, on 25th May 185],
without issue.
3. Ronald Ruthven Leslie Melville, eldest son of the second marriage, who
succeeded as eleventh Earl of Leven and tenth Earl of Melville as after-
mentioned.
4. Hon. Norman Leslie Melville, born on 5th February 1839. He entered the
army, and was a captain in the Grenadier Guards. He married, on 4th
December 1861, Georgina, daughter of William Shirley Ball of Abbeylara,
county Longford, and has issue. [See Genealogical Table for his children ;
also for his younger brother and sisters].
1 The price paid for the western portion of David, and entailed on Earl John, was £12,000,
Glenferness by the Hon. John Leslie Melville in all £60,000. [Record of Sasines, County
was £47,900 ; and for the eastern portion of of Nairn, vol. i. pp. 10S, 113, 175.]
it by the trustees of his eldest brother, Earl
VOL. I. 3 C
386
XV. — 3. Alexandee, tenth Eael of Leven and ninth Eael of Melville.
He was the elder son of the first marriage of his father, and was born on
the 11th January 1817. He was educated at Eton and Trinity College,
Cambridge. He early engaged in business as a banker at "Windsor, and
afterwards became a partner in the banking-house of Williams, Deacon &
Co., London. On the death of his father in September 1876, he succeeded
to the peerages of Leven and Melville. At the general election held on
16th April 1880 he was elected one of the sixteen representative peers of
Scotland, and was re-elected at subsequent elections held previous to his
death. He also inherited from his father the estates of Hallhill in Fife and
Glenferness in Nairn. He died at Glenferness on 22d October 1889, aged
72 years, unmarried, when his peerages and the entailed estates of Glenfer-
ness and Hallhill devolved upon his half-brother, the Honourable Eonald
Euthven Leslie Melville.
XV. — 4. Eonald, eleventh Eael of Leven and tenth Eael of Melville.
He was the eldest son of the second marriage of his father, and was born
on 19th December 1835. He was educated at Eton and Christ Church,
Oxford, where he took his degree of M.A. On the death of his elder brother,
as above stated, he inherited the peerages of Earl of Leven and Earl of
Melville, and also the estates of Hallhill and Glenferness, the latter being
his principal residence in Scotland. . He married, on 7th May 1885, Emma
Selina, eldest daughter of the second and present Viscount Portman, and
has issue : —
1. John David Leslie Melville, Lord Balgonie, born at Portrnan House, London,
on 5th April 1886.
2. Archibald Alexander Leslie Melville, born at Glenferness on 6th August 1890.
3. Constance Betty, born at Eoehampton House on 7th August 1888.
387
THE EAELS OF LEVEN AND LORDS BALGONIE.
I. — Sir Alexander Leslie, first Earl of Leven. born c. 1580 : died 1661.
Agnes Kenton (Billie), his Countess.
This distinguished soldier and statesman was a cadet of the historical house
of Leslie, of which the Earls of Rothes were chiefs, and one of whom, in the
time of King Charles the Second, attained the rank of Duke of Rothes. The
earliest known ancestor of the Leslies appears in the twelfth century, when David,
Earl of Huntingdon, who was also Lord of the Garioch, granted to Malcolm, the
son of Bartolph, the lands of Lessele, and their name became the surname of the
descendants of Malcolm. These lauds are situated in the parish of Leslie in the
lordship or earldom of Garioch and county of Aberdeen. Through marriages with
the heiress of Rothes in Strathspey, and with a co-heiress of Abernethy on the Tay,
the Leslie family at an early date obtained large possessions in the shires of Moray
and Fife, and with these estates the fortunes of the Leslie family were long associated.
Sir Alexander Leslie, the subject of this memoir, was descended from the
Balquhain branch of the Leslie family which long flourished in the district of the
Garioch. He is stated to have been a son of Captain George Leslie, who was second
son of George Leslie, first Laird of Drummuir, who was the third son of Alexander
Leslie, first Laird of Kininvie, who was the second son of George Leslie, first Laird
of New Leslie, who was second son of Sir "William Leslie, fourth Baron of Balquhain.
George Leslie, the father of Sir Alexander Leslie, first Earl of Leven, was
captain of the castle of Blair in Athole in the reign of King James the Sixth, and
had the repute of being a brave soldier. He married Sybil Steuart and had issue
three sons, John, George, and David, and several daughters. He was also
the father of Sir Alexander Leslie, first Earl of Leven. Captain George Leslie
married after the death of his first wife for the purpose of legitimating his son,
Sir Alexander, who had by that time distinguished himself as a military com-
mander, and risen to the rank of general.1
1 Historical Records of the family of Balquhain. A more detailed history of the
Leslie, by Colonel Leslie of Balquhain, vol. iii. family of Leslie was published in the year
p. 356. Several histories of the Leslie family 1869 by the late Colonel Leslie of Balquhain
have appeared. One of the earliest is known in three volumes octavo. According to the
as the Laurus Leslceana, which was published contemporary journal of David, second Earl
at Gratz in the year 1692. It was the work of Wemyss, the mother of the first Earl of
of the Rev. William Leslie, younger sou of Leven was a " wench in Raunoch." — [Original
Patrick, Count Leslie, fifteenth Baron of Ms. Journal at Wemyss Castle.]
388 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
Only a few writs relating to his brothers and sisters in connection with Sir
Alexander Leslie are preserved in the Leven charter-chest. The earl gave his
sister, Margaret Leslie, on her marriage with George Law, fiar of Brunton, in
1643, a tocher of 13,000 merks, and after the death of her husband the earl
arranged for her second marriage, when she was styled "Lady Brunton," in 1647,
to Lieutenant-Colonel James Brainer. To Janet Leslie, daughter of the deceased
Colonel George Leslie, brother of the earl, his lordship, on her marriage, in 1642,
to Alexander Pennecuik, surgeon, burgess of Edinburgh, who was probably father
of Dr. Pennecuik of New-hall, gave a tocher of 2000 merks. His brother,
Captain John Leslie, gave another 1000 merks.1
From the circumstances connected with his birth, the education of Leslie in
the ordinary branches of learning appears to have been neglected. His signa-
tures "A. Leslie" and " Leuen " are the only specimens of his handwriting
which have been discovered in the Leven charter-chest. He formed the letters
of his name as if each letter was printed instead of written in the ordinary form.
All his signatures, whether as a commoner or a peer, are quite distinct, and we
cannot agree with Lord Hailes when he says that his signature of " Lesley " is
so awkward and mis-shapen as to confirm the tradition of his being absolutely
illiterate. Many a distinguished man of letters has had a more illegible signature
than Leslie. Lord Hailes states that while upon a march, Leslie, in passing by
a certain house, said, " There is the house where I was taught to read." " How,
general," said one of his attendants, " I thought that you had never been taught
to read." " Pardon me," replied he, " I got the length of the letter g." 2 The
letter on which Lord Hailes comments is quoted as signed " Lesly." But it
must have been misread, as he signed "A. Leslie" before he was made a peer.
Leslie is not the only distinguished general who has been accused of being
illiterate. Dundee was said by Sir Walter Scott to spell like a chambermaid,
while Lord Macaulay said that Dundee's letters would have disgraced a washer-
woman. But although Dundee's spelling was defective, he was far from being an
illiterate man, as his holograph letters instruct. Uneducated, however, as Leslie
was, he affords a very striking example of a man with a neglected education
possessing a great military genius, and raising himself to the highest position in
the profession of arms. This will appear in the following narrative of his
remarkably successful career as a military commander.
Colonel James Turner, in his Memoirs, states that Alexander, first Earl of
Leven, was over eighty years of age when he died in 1661. That age would fix
1 Contracts and Discharges in Melville Charter- chest.
2 Records of the Leslies, vol. iii. pp. 357, 35S.
HIS DEFENCE AND RELIEF OF STRALSUND, 1628. 389
the date of his birth as in or before the year 1580. Trained in youth like his
father and brothers, Captain John and Colonel George Leslie, to carry arms,
Alexander Leslie went abroad apparently before 1605, taking service with the
Dutch, who were then engaged in war with Spain. He was a captain in the
regiment of Horatio, Lord Vere, in that campaign, and afterwards obtained a
commission in the army of Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, and as in 1638
he had been in the Swedish service for thirty years, he must have entered it about
1608. Under that renowned leader, commonly called the " Lion of the North," the
military genius of Leslie won rapid recognition. He was soon promoted to the
rank of lieutenant-general, and afterwards made a field-marshal. In the thirty
years' war in Germany, he acted for long a conspicuous part. In 1628, when
Gustavus Adolphus entered on the war with the imperialist troops, the important
seaport of Stralsund, on the Baltic, was placed by Denmark under his protection,
though at the time it was invested by the victorious army of Wallenstein. The
latter had threatened and vowed to take the town, " though it were fastened by a
chain to the heavens,"and to make its site as flat as a table. It was the last hope of
Germany, and Leslie was chosen by Gustavus to replace the Danish commander
who had hitherto conducted the defence. He was thereupon appointed governor
of Stralsund, and also of the cities along the Baltic coast. Colonel Munro speaks
of Leslie at this date as an expert and valorous Scots commander, and narrates
that, having some Scottish regiments with him, and desirous of winning credit for
his countrymen, he made a sortie with them alone. He adds that they were forced
to retire, but it was with their faces to the enemy.1 So well was the defence of
the city now managed, that the imperialist general was, with his army, compelled
to withdraw, and Leslie, to whom this success was due, was greatly idolised by the
citizens, who munificently rewarded him. Medals were struck in commemoration
of the relief of Stralsund. One of these in solid gold was given by Gustavus
Adolphus to General Leslie. An engraving of it is given in this work from the
original medal at Melville.
When, in 1631, James, third Marquis, afterwards first Duke of Hamilton,
raised a force of six thousand soldiers to assist the King of Sweden in this war,
Leslie was deputed by the latter to take command immediately under the
Marquis, with the rank of sergeant-major-general, and to act as adviser to his
lordship, as had been promised in the formal agreement between Gustavus and
Hamilton. Leslie was authorised to prepare for the landing of the British
troops, and also to provide for their being supplemented by new levies in
Germany. Careful instructions were given him by the king, which directed his
1 Munro's Expedition, 1637, pp. 75-78.
390 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
going to England to meet the marquis if that should be necessary. The appointed
landing-place was Bremen, at the mouth of the river Weser, but as the setting
out had been delayed, and the imperialist troops held much of the country
between that town and the positions then occupied by Gustavus Adolphus, the
marquis, who had been joined by Leslie in England, thought it more expedient
to proceed to the mouth of the Oder in Pomerania.1
Having landed in Germany at the end of July 1631, the Anglo-Scottish
troops proceeded up the Oder towards Silesia. Very soon after commencing the
campaign at least a third- of the force fell victims to sickness and death. But,
though thus diminished, they reduced and took possession of the towns of
Crossen, Frankfort, and Guben on the Oder. The town last named lay in the
province of Silesia, and on the strength of a report that it was but carelessly
guarded, Leslie was sent with a small force to take it. He, however, found
his information false, and had recourse to stratagem to obtain an entrance. Con-
cealing himself in the suburbs until sunrise, when the bridge was lowered, he
seized it, broke open the port with hatchets, and secured an entrance for his
own forces. Thence Leslie accompanied the Marquis of Hamilton to effect
the reconquest of Magdeburg, which had been taken amid fearful carnage
by the imperialist general, Tilly. It was now a city of the first importance,
strongly garrisoned, and containing the treasure collected by the imperialists.
After some months' siege it was surrendered, the garrison being allowed to
withdraw.
When the Marquis of Hamilton returned to Britain, Leslie remained in
Germany, and was present at the battle of Lutzen, where, on the 6th November
1632, Gustavus Adolphus was killed. He sent a graphic account of the circum-
stances of the king's death to James, Marquis of Hamilton; and in the letter
Leslie evinces his interest and concern for the triumph of the protestant cause.
His opinion was that the king of Bohemia, the brother-in-law of King Charles
the First, should take the command of the protestant army and continue the
struggle ; 2 but that prince had neither the influence nor the force of character
requisite for being a successor to the great champion of the reformation, and,
moreover, his career was cut short by death only two months later.
The particular services of Leslie in Germany are not now easily ascertainable,
but, among other engagements, he took part in the siege of Brandenburg, in
March 1634, which surrendered to him on the 16th of that month, and he after-
wards went into Pomerania ; thence he returned in May of the same year to assist
1 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 13-19, 77-80. Report on the Duke of Hamilton's Manuscripts,
by the Hist. mss. Commission, pp. 69-73. 2 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 82, 83.
RECALLED TO SCOTLAND, 1638. 391
in the reduction of Frankfort on the Oder.1 In the spring of 1636 he had the
command of the army in Westphalia, and among his conquests were the castle of
Petershagen upon the Weser, the relief of Osnabriick, and the capture of the town
of Minden on the Weser, which commanded a pass of considerable importance.
While in this place he despatched Colonel Robert Munro to Scotland for the
purpose of raising new levies, and especially commended him to the Marquis of
Hamilton for assistance from the court. Leslie also, by a letter to King Charles,
acquainted him with the doings of his subjects in Germany, referring him to the
marquis for a detailed account of his own engagements, the narrative of which he
had sent from his camp at Herford in Westphalia.2
Success, however, was not always on the side of the protestant troops, and
the next letter which has been found from Leslie, and which is dated from Stock-
holm on 15th September 1637, relates a retreat from Torgau, in Saxony, whence
they were pursued down the Elbe to Tangermund and Neustadt and Schwedt, in
Pomerania. On reaching Stettin, Leslie, seeing no opportunity at once of
resuming the offensive, crossed over to Stockholm to make new arrangements
respecting the army. In this letter Leslie places before the Marquis of Hamilton,
to whom he is writing, the extremity to which the protestant cause must now be
reduced if timely help were not afforded.3 Leslie appears, however, to have
returned to Germany to continue the war in the protestant interest, as on 19th
September of the same year, for his conduct in Pomerania, he received instruc-
tions signed by Axel Oxenstierna, the Swedish chancellor, and other officers of
state. A few days later he received a yearly pension of 800 rex dollars, in
consideration of his great services under Gustavus Adolphus ; and his son, Alex-
ander, who was also in the Swedish service, was promoted to the rank of colonel.4
But just at this time events in Scotland were hastening to a crisis in the
same direction as in Germany — a war on account of religion — and when the
second reformation progressed, and it was seen that for its maintenance recourse
to arms was inevitable, the eyes of the nation turned towards Germany, where
so many of its sons of military skill were, and especially to Leslie, whose
fame as a soldier was established throughout Europe. He was entreated to
transfer his acknowledged warlike abilities to the service of his own country.
Leslie, and many of the Scots with him, at once responded to the call. He
obtained letters of demission from Queen Christina of Sweden, dated 14th August
1638, which were couched in terms of grateful recognition of long services —
1 Report on the mss. of the Duke of Hamilton ; Hist. mss. Commission, p. 91.
2 Ibid. pp. 92, 93 ; vol. ii. of this work, pp. 84-87. 3 Ibid. pp. 87, 88.
4 Original Swedish Documents in Melville Charter-chest.
392 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIEST EARL OF LEVEN.
for thirty years — under her grandfather and father ; and, on the same day, she
granted an order on the board of war that Sir Alexander Leslie should be
furnished with two field-pieces and two thousand muskets,1 which Leslie is said
to have taken in part payment of his salary. Turner says that the administrators
in Sweden encouraged the Scots to go home. In October following, Leslie crossed
from Germany in a small barque, which, by its unpretentiousness, escaped the
English cruisers sent to intercept him. He was in full sympathy with the refor-
mation movement, and actively supported it. By way of preparation, as Baillie
states, he caused " a great number of our commanders in Germany subscryve
our covenant, and provided much good munition," 2 and he was one of those who
subscribed the libel against the bishops.3
On his arrival in Scotland, the direction of military operations was at once
intrusted to Field-Marshal Leslie, as none of the nobility had the military experience
which he possessed. Spalding says he caused cannon to be cast in the Potterrow,
by Captain Hamilton (afterwards general of artillery to the covenanters), he sent
to Holland for all kinds of arms and ammunition, and also to all the continental
countries in which he knew his countrymen were engaged in military service,
bidding them return for patriotic duty. He established a council of war com-
posed of nobles, colonels, captains, and other wise and expert persons, and
commenced to fortify Leith. He also levied men and drilled them.4 Baillie's
testimony is to the same effect : " Much help we gott from good Generall Leslie,
who satt daylie with our general committees. His advise in giving of orders was
much followed. We intended to give unto him when the tyme of need came, as
we did, the charge of our generallissimo, with the style of His Excellence, but for
the present he was diligent, without any charge, to call home officers of his
regiments, to send for powlder, ruuskett, picks, canons, wherein from Holland,
Swaine,5 Germanie, we were pretty well answered." 6
Then Leslie's tact and management sometimes stood in place of arms. An
instance of this occurs at the very commencement of operations in his obtaining
the surrender of Aberdeen and securing adhesion to the Covenant by the Marquis
of Huntly in April 1639. The opposition in the North, led by the marquis, had
become so great that an expedition was despatched to cope with it. The Earl
of Montrose was nominally in command, but Leslie was sent with him, and, as
Spalding says, everything was done by his advice. From this temporary preced-
1 Original Documents in Melville Charter-chest. 2 Letters, vol. i. p. 111.
3 Gordon's History of Scots Affairs, vol. i. p. 127.
4 Memorialls of the Trubles, vol. i. p. 130.
5 Sweden. G Letters, vol. i. p. 192.
CAPTURE OF- EDINBURGH CASTLE, 1639. 393
ence Montrose expected always to be preferred to Leslie in military affairs, and
it was the disappointment of his ambition in this respect that afterwards caused
Montrose to take umbrage at the covenanters. Baillie says in reference to this :
" When the canniness of Rothes had brought in Montrose to our party, his more
than ordinare and civill pride made him very hard to be guided. His first voyage
to Aberdeen made him swallow the certaine hopes of a generallat over all our
armies. When that honour was put on Lesley, he incontinent began to deale
with the king." 1
But that in point of fact this command was only given to Montrose as a sop
to his ambition, and that General Leslie was not only a tower of strength to the
covenanters, alike by counsel, service, and renown, but also a terror to his enemies,
is shown by a letter from Ulick, Earl of St. Albans and Clanricarde, then
governor of Berwick-upon-Tweed, to secretary Windebank, in which he says —
" We shall have some leisure to repair the ruins that time and neglect have
wrought here, General Lesley being not yet returned to Edinburgh since Aber-
deen was rendered to him without a blow struck, according to former examples.
By his learning and oratory he has wrought upon the tender conscience of
Marquis Huntley to swear the covenant, by which you may know how the 3000
arms sent to his [Huntly's] assistance will be employed." 2
It was the king's resolution to put a stop to the work of reformation in
Scotland that gave the signal for active hostilities on the part of the Scots. Lists
of all men able to bear arms, and of the kind of arms they possessed, were pre-
pared in every parish and district. One of Leslie's first exploits was the taking
of the castle of Edinburgh. It was done in half an hour, and without the loss
of a soldier on either side. One afternoon in March 1639, Leslie, accompanied
by certain noblemen, and supported by the town's armed bands, walked up to
the castle gate, and demanded the surrender of the fortress. The constable,
Archibald Haldane, uncle of the Laird of Gleneagles, absolutely refused, and after
some parley, the two parties took apparent farewell. Before departing, however,
Leslie applied a petard to the outer gate, by the explosion of which the gate was
destroyed. Then the inner gate was plied with axes, hammers and rams, scaling-
ladders were attached to the walls, and ere the garrison could recover from their
astonishment the castle was in the hands of the covenanters. 3
When the levies for the army were made Leslie was unanimously chosen
general of all the Scottish forces by land or sea, horse and foot, and of all forti-
1 Letters, etc., vol. ii. p. 261.
2 Letter dated from Berwick, April 14th, State Papers, Domestic, 1639, p. 39.
3 Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 197; Balfour's Annals, vol. ii. p. 321.
VOL. I. 3d
394 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
fied places, with plenary powers ; and in bestowing his commission upon him
the whole estates of the realm assembled in convention swore to give him all
dutiful obedience in this office. His commission was to endure " so long as we
ar necessitat to be in armes for the defence of the couenant, for religione, crowne
and countrie, and ay and vvhill the Lord send peace to this kingdome."1 Baillie
remarks that in this " verie ample commission" there was but one proviso, "that
he should be subject to answer to the courts, ecclesiastick and civill, according
to the settled laws of the kingdome."2
As the royalist troops were by this time assembling at York, Leslie ordered
a general muster of the Scottish forces at Leith on 20th May. One reason for
choosing this place may have been that the Marquis of Hamilton with a fleet in
the interests of King Charles now lay in the Firth of Forth. All sorts of rumours
as to Leslie's intentions went to England. One Dr. Watts, who had been in the
wars of Germany, is reported as stating the general's mind to be not to risk a
pitched battle with the royal forces, as it might be difficult to bring another Scot-
tish army into the field.3 Another report reached the king's ears and was repeated
by himself at the English treasurer's table at Baby Castle, that General Leslie
had said he would meet the king upon the Borders, or rather near Berwick, with
30,000 men and would there parley with him. "Most intolerable insolency of
so worthless a vassal to such a sovereign ! " writes the narrator.4 He also notes
in another letter that General Leslie sent to the Marquis of Hamilton " who lies
at anchor before Leith, this ' braving ' message, that hitherto they had constantly
made good the mutual agreement and resolution concluded among themselves,
which was not to appear in way of hostile invasion upon any English ground or
man, whom hitherto they had not wronged to the loss of a hen, or hurt of a
broken pate. But now, seeing his Majesty's preparations by land and sea, his
lordship having taken or stayed some of their ships, and the frontier towns made
good against them by our new planted garrisons, it was now high time for them
to fall off from their first intentions, and to think of the invasive as well as of the
defensive part. That he so little regarded his lordship's navy and forces, that
were the sea shore covered with angels of gold, yet not a man should dare to set
foot ashore to touch a piece." 5 According to the same writer, this interchange
of pleasantries between the two commanders, who were formerly comrades in
arms in Germany, continued for some days. " The Marquis of Hamilton keeps
the sea, and demanding fresh water is denied by Lesley, who braves him, and
1 Vol. iii. of bis work, pp. 162, 164. 4 Edward Norgate, brother of the Earl of
2 Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 203. Warwick, 19th April, ibid., pp. 59, 66, 67.
:i State Papers, Domestic, 1639, i>. 51. 5 Ibid. 12th May 1639, p. 162.
HIS INFLUENCE IN SCOTLAND. 395
bids him come ami fetch it."1 But in a later letter he gives an incident which
shows that though Leslie acted thus towards his own countrymen who were in
arms on the king's side he made a distinction in regard to Englishmen. Several
of the latter had landed from Hamilton's ships a few miles from Leith fort in
search of water, and being taken by the coast-guard were brought before Leslie,
who happened to be in Leith at the time. Satisfied of their nationality and
business he said he was glad he was there to defend them from the ill-usage of the
soldiers, and bade them fetch vessels, and take as much water as they would.2
There can be no doubt that at this period General Leslie was the leading and
most powerful man in Scotland. This was admitted in both nations. Among
the Scots his influence was such that it excited the admiring wonder of Baillie
himself. Referring to the courageous spirit shown by the Scottish army, which
he accompanied as one of the chaplains, he says : — " Also Leslie, his skill and
fortoun made them all so resolute for battell as could be wished. We were feared
that emulation among our nobles might have done harme when they should be
mett in the fields ; but such was the wisdome and authoritie of that old, little
crooked souldier, that all, with ane incredible submission, from the beginning to
the end, gave over themselves to be guided by him, as if he had been great
Solyman. Certainlie the obedience of our nobles to that man's advices was as
great as their forbears wont to be to their king's commands ; yet that was the
man's understanding of our Scott's humours, that gave out, not onlie to the
nobles, but to verie mean gentlemen, his directions in a verie homelie and simple
forme, as if they had been bot the advyces of their neighbour and companion." 3
Among the English also Leslie was regarded as the real head and guiding spirit
of the Scottish movement, and everything that could be learned of his private or
public proceedure was greedily reported. He was said to be "a great rich man,"
possessed of two earldoms in Germany, and one in Sweden, and to have also
purchased two lordships in Scotland worth £2000 per annum. One Englishman,
who had frequent discourses with the general, told how he resided in a mean
lodging in Edinburgh, " not surrounded with legions, as we have been told, and
but meanly attended." Another, writing from the fleet in the Firth of Forth,
says in a letter to Secretary Windebank : — " I cannot but advertise you that the
impudence and insolence of Lesley are come to such a height as it is incredible.
I will instance only this, that he sits at table with the best of the nobility of
Scotland at the upper end covered, and they all bareheaded ; that in the letters
or acts that are subscribed by them ... he signs before them all. He boasts he
1 State Papers, Domestic, 16th May 1639, p. 180.
2 Ibid. p. 190. 3 Letters, vol. i. pp. 213, 214.
396 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
will make my Lord of Holland to rise without bis periwig ; that the king's army
is not able to stand against him, and the like stuff, which I know you can no
more bear than I write without indignation." The same writer states in another
letter that at the meetings of " the tables " of the covenanters, Leslie " sat at the
upper end of the table with his hat on, and all the rest, whereof many were
ancient peers, stood uncovered." Also that absurd stories were circulated to
insjiire awe for Leslie, as his having eaten a toad, etc. It was considered to be a
test of loyalty if, where the English soldiers came, the inhabitants prayed for the
king and cursed Leslie. Norgate gives a few instances of this, where at Colding-
ham the women met the king's troopers, crying " Grace ! grace ! God and the
king ! " and cursing Leslie with many a malison. At Dunbar, he says they were
also met by the women (for never a male appeared) crying for mercy and saying :
" We are all for God and the king, and the deil take Lesley." 1
When it was ascertained that the king's army was drawing near Berwick
upon Tweed, the following letter was sent from General Leslie to be circulated
through the country, to rouse the citizens to action : — ■
" Whereas it was formerly appoynted that if the king's army should approach the
borders with any great forces, that upon warning all should be readie upon the first
call to march to the borders with what armes they could find, horse or foot ; this is
therefore to warn all that love the good of this cause and their own safety, to come in
all haste once this week, and to bring what they can of a month's provision, and let
the rest follow them ; for if they come, a competent number together, we shall be able,
by God's assistance, to hold them up from breaking in into the countrey, in the which,
if once they gett footing, it will not be easie to bring them to a stand ; and upon the
guard of thir parts is the safety of the whole kingdom. They that shall be found
wanting now, are enemies to this cause and their countrey. Stirr up one another, and
remember that your chartour chists are lying at the borders. We shall bear them
witness. But let none stay at home, when strangers are hired for 3s. a week to make
us all slaves. They are not worthie to be free men who will stay at home and neglect
their countrey, which is now readie to bleed for their neglect. Some of the enemies
are come over the border, Ethrintoun is taken ; Eymouth is feared to be taken this
night, where there is a verie great magazine of victuals. If horse and foot haste not,
we can hardlie hold them up. Be not wanting to yourselves, and be confident God
will send an outgate to all these difficulties. So, in haste, looking for all dispatch at
their hands whom the lyke concerns, I rest." 2
Similar letters from the general and noblemen associated with him followed
1 State Papers, Domestic, 1639, pp. 226, - Baillie's Letters, etc., vol. ii. pp. 438,
227, 234, 267, 271, 520. 439.
TREATY WITH KING CHARLES AT DUNS LAW, 1639. 397
these. And on the eve of their march to Duns Law they sent from Dunglas in
East Lothian a message rallying their countrymen on their supineness, and on the
manifestation of a spirit to withdraw from the undertaking. In this letter the
general and his associates say : —
" The sword wes drawen befoir, now it is at the throat of religioun and libertie, if
it have not given a deipe wound already. . . . Our inexcusable fault is that the power
commited to us we have not used, altho we have sworne and subscryved to do it. It
will seime that people are rewing what they have been doeing, and will subject their
necks to spirituall and bodily slavery, may be desperately heir and for ever, whilk we
are loath to conceave ; or that some spirit of slumber hes overtakin them, and pos-
sessed them, whilk maketh them think that the fyre is not kendled, when the flame
may be seen, and all is in ane burning. We can say no more, but we sail resolve,
under the conduct of our Lord, to whom we have sworne, to go on without fear, and in
ane livelie hope. If our countrie men and fellow covenanters, equallie obliged with us,
sail either withdrawe themselves or come too laite, it may be to the burying of our
bodies, whilk with the cause itself might be saved by their speid, horse and foote, let
them answer to God for it ; to whoise grace, coumending ourselves and you, we con-
tinue, your loving friends." 1
Leslie led an army of nearly 30,000 horse and foot to Dans Law, where he
encamped in full view of the English host. Some skirmishing took place, and
the English began to feel uneasy. The king, however, remained " as fixed as
unconcerned ; and when it was hastily told him that Leslie was within four miles
of him he said, 'Why, then, I am within four miles of Lesley.'"2 As is well
known, this campaign, thanks to the firm attitude maintained by Leslie, termin-
ated in favour of the Scots without a battle. This result was achieved by
negotiation, the credit of inaugurating which is ascribed to Robert Leslie, a Scots-
man, and one of the king's pages, who paid a visit to the Scottish camp to see
some old friends. Through his dropping a hint that the king was not indisposed
to treat if the Scots first made the advances, the Scots presented their petition,
and a treaty of peace, yielding their demands, was entered upon. One of the
conditions pressed by the king was that the commission granted to General Leslie
should be cancelled. His Majesty seems to have entertained a strong dislike to
the Scots commander, as in the royal proclamation prior to the treaty Leslie was
especially exempted from the pardon promised to others, and a reward of £500
sterling was offered for his head. Though the Scots were reluctant to agree to
this condition imposed by the king, and on which he insisted, Leslie himself com-
1 Baillie's Letters, etc., vol. ii. pp. 439-443.
2 Historical mss. Commission's Fourth Report, Appendix, p. 294.
398 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
plied most willingly, and repeatedly pressed his countrymen to permit him to
resign, to which they at last yielded.1
Eaillie relates that while he was at Duns, Leslie took up his quarters in the
castle at the foot of the Law. He had "a brave royall tent," but it was not set
up. His bodyguard was some hundreds of musketeers, mostly or entirely Scottish
lawyers under the command of Sir Thomas Hope and Sir Alexander Gibson of
Dune, who were all well apparelled and armed, and had their position before the
castle gate " with cocked matches." The general, with his lieutenant, who at this
time was William Baillie of Letham, personally saw to the posting of the guards
at night. Baillie also states that Leslie
" keeped dailie in the castle of Dunce ane honourable table for the nobles and strangers
with himself, for gentlemen waiters thereafter at a long syde table. I had the honour
by accident one day to be his chaplaine at table, on his left hand. The fare was as
became a generall in tyme of warr ; not so curious be fan as Armidaill's to our nobles.
Bot ye know that the English sumptuositie, both in warr and peace, is despised by all
their neighbours. It seems our generall's table was on his own charge, for so farr as
yet I know, neither he, nor any noble or gentleman of considerable rent, got anything
for their charge."2
During the progress of the negotiations the camp on Duns Law was visited by
the English Earl of Stamford, who, being recognised by " Sandy Hamilton," the
general of artillery, was brought to Leslie. He first was feasted in a princely way,
and then was shown round the camp, where the exuberant display of loyalty he
witnessed rather surprised him. Another thing which interested him was the
cavalry corps of the Marchioness of Hamilton, the impress on whose " coronets "
was a hand repelling a book,3 and the motto, " For God, the king, religion, and
the covenant." 4 The marchioness, though her son was commander of the royal
expedition into Scotland, was an enthusiastic covenanter, and on her son's
arrival with the English fleet in the Firth of Forth, came forth with a pistol,
with which she vowed to shoot him if he offered to come ashore. It is also said
that she animated all other ladies and gentlewomen to make all possible resistance
to his landing, and she and other ladies wrought at the fort of Leith, carrying
earth and stone, and refusing no labour to make it good against assault. Although
on the shore, she refused to see her son. When the army marched she too pro-
ceeded at the head of her troop, a case of pistols at her saddle, and a case of dags
at her girdle, not forgetting to carry with her silver bullets for her own son and
1 State Papers, 1639, pp. 407, 408, 419. 3 Evidently the Service-Book.
Balfour's Annals, vol. ii. pp. 334, 336.
2 Baillie's Letters, vol. i. pp. 212, 214. ' State Papers, 1039, p. 331.
AGAIN APPOINTED LORD GENERAL, 1640. 399
the English general. The ladies and gentlewomen, says Norgate, by her example,
do all practise their arms, in which new kind of housewifery they are very expert.1
The treaty of pacification made between Charles and his Scottish subjects gave
no real satisfaction to either party, so that though the latter disbanded their
forces, gave up the fortresses, and loyally observed all the rest of the conditions
agreed upon, the king regarded the pacification as a mere truce, to be employed
in preparations for inflicting summary vengeance on the Scots at no distant date.
It was accordingly with very slight regret that many saw the infatuated monarch
resile from his pledges, and signs thereby given that the differences between
parties must soon be more decisively settled. At a meeting of the Scottish nobles,
held in November 1639, Leslie came to Edinburgh, presumably from a period of
retirement at his seat of Balgonie, and told the nobles, doubtless in response to a
request from them to resume the command of their forces when required, that
they should command his services as they pleased. He probably was then
and there informally re-invested with office in order to organise the army, as
active preparations were now pushed forward, and Leslie, when seen in the streets
of Edinburgh, was always attended by thirty or forty officers. In March 1640,
the nobles made him an offer of the generalship in conjunction with some of their
own number, but he declined it on these terms. At the meeting, however, he
made a speech which greatly encouraged the people, and made them resolve to
fight the king's army, though it were ten times as numerous as their own.2 By
this time Charles had proclaimed the Scots traitors and rebels, and made overt
preparations for reducing them to obedience.
It was on the 17th of April 1640 that Leslie received from a meeting of the
convention of estates at Edinburgh the formal renewal of his commission as lord-
general of all the Scottish forces;3 and that he was actively engaged in discharging
the duties of the post, is shown by a letter from his headquarters at Dunglas in
the following months of May and June, directing the movements of his outposts
nearer the borders.* About the same time also Leslie was in correspondence
with John, Earl of Athole, and the landed gentlemen of the Athole district,
in reference to levies of men, and the contribution for the support of the
army.5 His commission was fully confirmed by the parliament which met at
the same place on 2d June following, as adjourned till then by his Majesty's
commissioner from November of the previous year. They declared his election
1 State Papers, 1639, pp. 146, 163, 282. Earl of Lothian, 31st Mayaud 3d June 1640,
2 Ibid. 1639-40, pp. 113, 362, 555. printed in Correspondence of the Earls of
3 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 164-167. Ancram and Lothian, vol. i. pp. 101-103.
4 Letters, Sir Alexander Leslie to William, 5 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 88-90,
400 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
and commission "to be done for the weell of this kingdome, and for his eminent
woorth deservedly conferred vpoun him." And, at the same time, they granted
him a full and complete ratification of all his proceedings under his former com-
mission, making mention of " the thankefull and painefuil service " done by him
at that time, and " acknowledging that his singular caire, vigilancie, paines, and
good governement meriteth ane greater reward then this, which is only in there
power to confere." But they publicly record this as a proof to posterity of their
obligation.1
Much was made by Charles of a letter which was discovered to have been
written by some of the more prominent Scots to Louis the Thirteenth of France
during the campaign of the previous year, by which they designed to acquaint
him with the true reasons of their quarrel with their king, and to invoke the
influence of the old Scoto-French alliance. Leslie was one of the signatories,
and, along with the others, was summoned to the royal presence to answer to a
charge of high treason. The summons, of course, was disregarded; but John,
Earl of Loudoun, another signatory, fell into the king's hands while acting as a
commissioner for the Scots, and very narrowly escaped summary execution in the
Tower.
One of Leslie's first attempts in the opening of the new campaign was to
regain possession of the castle of Edinburgh. But previous experience had not
been lost upon the royalist garrison, and though the castle was partly under-
mined and some of the outworks destroyed, the breaches were quickly repaired,
and the attempt to take it was for the time abandoned, to the great displeasure
of the town. The loss, through their capture by the English, of several ships,
one of which is said to have belonged to Leslie himself, and to have been laden
with ordnance and ammunition, greatly enraged him, so that he vowed he would
no longer delay. If, he said, the answer from the king was not presently satis-
factory he would march into England, and not be pillaged by sea and blocked up
by land.2 And he was as good as his word. Before the end of the month of
June he had his army on the borders preparing to enter England.3
It was, however, fully the middle of August before Leslie crossed the Tweed,
and the delay fostered the belief in the minds of the English authorities at Ber-
wick that it was not his intention to enter England on this occasion, as he had
not on the former expedition. Yet his purpose of proceeding to Newcastle, and
taking command of the coalfields which supplied the whole country, was reported
by an English spy fully a month before. And even when Leslie did cross the
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. p. 2S5.
- State Papers, 1C40, pp. 313, 336. 3 Ibid. p. 447.
ENGLISH BURLESQUE OF A SPEECH AT THE TWEED. 401
Tweed, the matter was not looked at in a serious light, and the exuberant levity
of some English spirit found vent in a squib, which the English secretary (Winde-
bank) found pleasure in transcribing. This squib is entitled : —
"LESLIE'S SPEECH TO HIS SOLDIEES AFTER THEY WERE PASSED
THE TWEED.
" Fellow-Soldiers and Countrymen, — Give me leave to bid you heartily welcome
thus far. We are now with Caesar passed the Rubicon, and this night you are to lie
on English ground. This is the land of promise, which as yet ye see but afar off. Do
but follow me, I will be your Joshua. Your turf cottages you shall ere long exchange
for stately houses, and let not the thought of your wives and beams and such like
lumber which you leave behind trouble you, for having done your business you shall
have choice of English lasses, whereon you may beget a new and better world. Was
not their great William the Conqueror a bastard 1 And in some things we are not
inferior to him, and will never despair of as great a fortune ; nay, in many things we
have far greater advantages than that Norman Duke, and shall we be such dastards
not to pursue them 1 At his first entrance he had no party to trust to, but we have
already many a fair town ; yea London itself is as sure to us as the good town of
Edinburgh. Their purses, which have been shut to their king, doubt not but you
shall find open to you. The brethren who have in their hearts long since sworn the
covenant are already providing change of raiment for you, and the sisters clean linen,
and do but long for your coming to fetch it. You have fast friends both in court and
city, fathers, brothers, and kindred that will employ their utmost ability to solicit
your cause ; and if occasion be, their swords, I trust, shall be as ready to make way for
you as your own. Our informations, our declarations, and especially our late inten-
tions are generally well liked of and approved by all. What remains but that like
true Scots we lay hold of this blessed opportunity. I shall quickly bring you to the
sight of gay coats, caps and feathers, goodly horses, bonnie lasses, fair houses. What
shall I say 1 Win them and wear them. When we are once in possession they shall
know more of our minds. Return to Scotland they that list for Leslie." 1
But this spirit of levity and mirth was soon proved to be ill-timed, and those
who indulged it were ignorant of the resolute determination which animated the
Scots, though it was apparent enough to others. Thus a Dutchman, Jean de
Gyrisch, who believing himself to have been ill-used in England, and who, volun-
teering his services to Leslie, was made colonel-major of cavalry and captain of
the general's own company, wrote to certain of his friends warning them of their
hazard if they should join with the English against the Scots. " If," he says,
" you have a friend whom you love who wishes to serve against the Scots, dis-
1 State Papers, 1640, pp. 447, 480, 484, 529, 546, 612.
VOL. I. 3 E
402 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
suade him from it, for be sure the English will gain very little honour in their
undertakings. And, moreover, were their forces four times as great, they would
effect but little." 1
After crossing the Tweed, Leslie marched straight to the Tyne, and after a
smart conflict with the English troops in forcing the passage of that river at
Newburn, the details of which are matter of history, he entered Newcastle
towards the end of August. A letter giving an account of these events was sent
by him to the committee of estates, and at the same time he despatched from
himself and from the army a submissive petition to the king, who was then at
York. After some delay Charles hastily summoned and acted upon the advice of
his great council of peers to treat with the Scots; a conference was opened at
Eipon, and afterwards adjourned to London, where a treaty of peace was com-
pleted, but not until 7th August 1641.2
All this time, the space of a year, Leslie lay in Newcastle with the Scottish
army, save that he also took and placed under military control the towns of any
consequence on the Tyne and in the neighbourhood, including those of Durham,
Sunderland, Hartlepool, and Darlington on the Tees.3 Lord Loudoun was
appointed governor of the town of Newcastle. On the day after the town sur-
rendered Leslie made his formal entry, and was entertained by the mayor in
great state ; and on the ensuing Sabbath, says an English correspondent, " he
went to church, four men bare before him, one lord, bareheaded, on whom he
lays his arm, and in his other hand his staff, so walked to the church, and sat in
state in the same place his Majesty sat in when he was there." The same writer
says : " Leslie swears all the townspeople to the covenant, and those that refuse
he imprisons. Last Tuesday he began to fortify a hill on this side the town,
which shows he intends to keep that place, and there is reason for it, because it
is worth more to the king in custom and coals than all the revenue of Scotland
by far." Other English letters state that Leslie not only taxed Newcastle heavily
for the support of his army, but levied on the bishopric of Durham an impost of
£350 a day, and exacted it punctually. The Scots, however, alleged this and
the other supplies to be voluntary offers, made, of course, to avoid compulsion, as
the Scots army, compelled to stay at Newcastle, could not starve. For falling
into arrears the mayor and aldermen of Newcastle were thrown into prison, kept
in the dark, and fed on bread and water till payment was made ; but Leslie rode
about in the town in Sir John Suckling's coach, which he had seized, along with
1 State Papers, 1640, p. 556. ments of Scotland, vol. v. pp. 335-345 ;
Baillie's Letters, etc., vol. ii. p. 470.
2 Ibid. pp. 649, 651 ; Acts of the Pariia- 3 State Papers, 1640-1641, pp. 464, 558.
RETURNS FROM NEWCASTLE WITH HIS ARMY, 1641. 403
that knight's clothes and money.1 Perhaps one of the most important additions
to his strength as generalissimo of the Scottish army accrued to Leslie while he
lay at Newcastle, for then no fewer than twenty-six of his comrades in the
Swedish army, who had been principal colonels and officers there, including
Colonel David Leslie, who had been Banner's lieutenant-general and right-hand
man, and Colonels Lumsden and Sinclair, obtained leave to return to Scotland.
What made them still more welcome was that they took their arrears of pay in
the form of munitions of war, a course which, says the English correspondent,
was " begun by Leslie the Great." 2
Two letters from General Leslie in reference to the negotiations then in
progress, which were to effect the return of the Scottish army, dated both in July
1641, were produced in the Scottish parliament at the time, and are printed
among their proceedings.3 As soon as the terms of the treaty between England
and Scotland were arranged in a definite form, and in response to a letter from
the Earl of Holland, general of the English army at York, stating that he was
about to disband his army, and that it would be a satisfaction to hear that the
Scots had retired from the Tees, Leslie began to call in his troops from the
country around Newcastle. He thus had his army consolidated there when King
Charles passed through that town on his way to Edinburgh to hold the Scottish
parliament. The Scottish army received the king with every demonstration of
affectionate loyalty, and was reviewed by him. He was afterwards entertained
to dinner in a magnificent manner by Leslie at his house in Newcastle, and the
Scottish general seems to have made a most favourable impression upon Charles
at this their first meeting. It was immediately rumoured that he was to be
made an earl, and not only so, but during his life to take precedence of all the
earls of the kingdom, and then his son to follow the rank of his creation.4
After the king had passed on towards Edinburgh, Leslie led the Scottish
army homewards. Some dispute arose among the English as to whether he
should cross the Tweed by the bridge at Berwick, or by a bridge of boats ; and
the king intimated it as his will that he should be permitted to use the bridge
at Berwick. Leslie, however, solved the difficulty by saying he would go by the
way he had come. So fording the Tweed at Coldstream, he led his army to
Hirsel Law, and there disbanded it.5 Leslie was with the king in Edinburgh on
1 StatePapers,1640-1641,pp.48-50,93,157. 110. Sixth Report of the Historical mss.
2 Ibid. pp. 101, 102. Commission, Appendix, p. 82.
3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 5 Memorials of the Family of Wemyss of
vol. v. pp. 626, 631. Wemyss, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. i.
4 State Papers, 1641-1643, pp. 48, 105, p. 244 ; State Papers, 1641-1643, p. 100.
404 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
the morning of the 28th of August, and two days later was entertained at a
feast given by the provost to the king and the nobles in the great hall of the
parliament, where he took precedence of all the nobles in respect of his office of
general, of which he had not yet been relieved.1
The meeting of parliament to preside over which Charles came to Scotland,
proved an exciting and eventful one in itself, and was very important in its bear-
ing on the fortunes of General Leslie. One of the most prominent episodes of the
meeting was the alleged plot against the lives of Argyll, the Marquis of Hamilton
and his brother, the Earl of Lanark, known in history as "the Incident." Get-
ting word of the plot these three noblemen fled to Hamilton's house at Kinneil,
and the day after, when the king rode up to the Parliament House, with an armed
force of five hundred men, many of whom were known to be disaffected to the
covenant, the estates took alarm and, as Baillie says, "would not be pacified till
Lesslie had gotten a commission, verie absolute, to guard the parliament, with all
the bands of the citie, and regiments yet on foot, and some troups of horse, which
according to his printed warrand he did quicklie and diligentlie." 2 According to
Sir Edward Nicholas, it was General Leslie who revealed the existence of the plot
to Argyll and Hamilton, he having obtained his information from two officers
in the army, Lieutenant-Colonel Sir John Hurry, and Captain William Stuart,
both of whom had been pressed to take part in carrying out the nefarious design.3
In the Earl of Lanark's account of the affair the general's part is narrated. " On
the 2d of this current, General Leslie sent to the Parliament House to desire my
brother and the Earl of Argyle before their return to court to come and speak
with him at his house with as great privacy as could be ; which they did, and
with him. they found one, Lieutenant-Colonel Hurrie, to whom, the general said,
my brother and Argyle were much obliged, and desired Hurrie to acquaint them
with that particular which he had already discovered to him." * The king was,
or professed to be incensed at the subsequent conduct of the marquis, his brother,
and Argyll, and also challenged Leslie for not coming first to him with the infor-
mation, to which the general made the excuse that he had thought the whole
affair to be but " a foolish business." 5
At this meeting of parliament General Leslie was chosen by the king as one
of the Scottish privy council.0 The general here, too, acted a very graceful part
1 State Papers, pp. 106, 110. 2 Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 392.
3 Account of the Plot, State Papers, 1641-1643, p. 137.
4 Hardwicke's State Papers, vol. ii. pp. 299-303.
5 Narrative by Nicholas already referred to.
6 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. pp. 3SS, 704 ; Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. p. 67.
CREATED EARL OF LEVEN AND LORD BALGONIE, 1641. 405
to an old companion in arms in the German wars, General Patrick Ruthven, Lord
Ettrick, who had, however, latterly appeared on the field in the king's behalf.
This nobleman had been appointed governor of Edinburgh Castle, and had
successfully resisted the second assault made by Leslie upon it, holding it for the
king against the Scottish covenanters until compelled by want of supplies to
capitulate. For this offence the Scottish parliament had passed sentence of
forfeiture against Lord Ettrick. On 1 3th October General Leslie presented a peti-
tion to parliament praying for the restoration of Lord Ettrick to his honours and
estates, and about a month later the petition was acceded to, " especiallie in
respect of the earnest sut of the said lord Generall Leslie." 1
Another important event of this parliament was the installation of General
Leslie as a peer under the titles of Earl of Leven and Lord Balgonie. The
proceedings formed the sole business of the meeting of parliament on one day of
the session, Saturday, 6th November. General Leslie, attired in his parliamentary
robes, and supported by the Earl of Eglinton on his right hand, and by the Earl
of Dunfermline on his left, also in their robes of state, was ushered into the
king's presence, then sitting in full parliament and was solemnly invested. The
procession was composed of six trumpeters in their liveries, two and two ; the
pursuivants in their coats of office, two and two ; the heralds in their coats, the
oldest carrying the earl's coronet ; next the lyon king of arms, carrying the
earl's patent in his hand, and after him the Duke of Lennox and Richmond, lord
great chamberlain, in his official robes, followed by the earl marischal, who
ushered in the newly created earl and his supporters. When they reached the
throne, the lyon king of arms delivered the letters patent by the king to the
Earl of Leven, who handed it to the president of the parliament, and he again to
the clerk. The patent having been publicly read was returned to the president
who gave it to his Majesty, whereupon, with three obeisances, the earl ascended
the throne, and kneeling before the king, had the usual oath of an earl admini-
stered to him by the Earl of Lanark, secretary of state. His Majesty thereupon
handed to the earl his patent, and placed the coronet on his head. The earl,
then, rising from his knees, humbly thanked his Majesty for this great testimony
of his favour, and besought him that the four escpires who attended him might
be knighted. These were John Leslie of Birkhill, John Brown of Fordel, James
Melville of Burntisland, and Andrew Skeen of Auchtertool. Called in this order
by the lyon king of arms they ascended the throne, and kneeling, were severally
dubbed knights by his Majesty with the sword of state ; then again kneeling they
had a gilt spur put on their right heels by Sir David Crichton of Lugton, the
1 Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. p. 102 ; Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. p. 382.
406 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
oldest knight present, and the oath of knighthood, their right hand uplifted, was
administered to them by the lyon king of arms, after which they kissed the king's
hands and attended the newly made earl to his place, where he was ranked
among his peers. There were then four several largesses proclaimed by the lyon,
first, for the king, by the heralds for the new earl, and by the pursuivants for the
four knights, with all their titles. This being done, the earl retired and dis-
robed, and then returned to the house ; but there was nothing further of con-
sequence done in the house that day.1
The patent of the earldom of Leven, granted by the king to General Sir Alex-
ander Leslie, sets forth as the reason of the grant his greatness and valour in war-
like enterprise in Germany and Sweden, whereby he had won such applause, reputa-
tion, and approbation as to reflect great honour and renown on " our ancient
realm of Scotland, whereof he is a native and subject." The dignity is conferred
on the general and the lawful heirs-male of his body, who are in all time coming
to be called Earls of Leven and Lords of Balgonie, with due precedency as earls
and lords of parliament. It is dated at Holyrood the 11th, written to the great
seal the 13th, and sealed with that seal on the 20th October 1641. 2 There can
be little doubt that the prime reason of the parliament in obtaining this well-
merited honour for Sir Alexander Leslie was the great service he had rendered as
general of their forces against the king ; but for obvious reasons no account could
be taken of this in the patent. Yet an Englishman with the king, Sydney Bere,
asserts the opposite. He says in a letter to Sir John Pennington: — "Last
Friday Leslie was created an earl; he takes his title from a little river near his
lands in Fife called Leven. His patent was read openly, wherein is a large
recital of his great services and deservings, as in many occasions, so in this last
year's employments." 3 But the patent shows that this was not the case.
These late services, however, were not altogether passed over in silence. A
more substantial recognition of them was made in the gift to the Earl of Leven
of a hundred thousand merks Scots, or between five and six thousand pounds
sterling. An act for this purpose was passed, wherein it is narrated that the
king and estates of parliament, taking to consideration the great and acceptable
service done to this kingdom by Alexander, Earl of Leven, general of the whole
forces thereof during the late troubles, and being most willing to give him some
token and testimony of their thankful remembrance of the same, grant the sum
above stated to be paid to him, his heirs and assignees, out of the first and
1 Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. pp. 139-141 ; 2 "Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 167, 168.
Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v.
p. 381. 3 State Papers, 1641-1643, p. 161.
APPROBATION OF HIS SERVICES BY PARLIAMENT. 407
readiest of the moneys pertaining to the public at the term of Lammas next,
1642, with the ordinary interest thereafter if not paid at that term.1
On the same day there was also passed in his favour, by parliament, an act
of exoneration and approbation in respect of these services, wherein, after having,
at tbe earl's own request, received from him an account of his actions and car-
riage, and compared the same with his commission, they
" doe find and declaire that the said noble erle, Alexander, Erie of Levin, designit in
his commissione Sir Alexander Leslie of Ballgonie, heath woorthilie acquite himselfe of
that great place and trust was put "wpoun him to be generall of ther armyes and heath
so noblie behaved himselfe in al the pairtes of his chairge, as he justlie deserveth ther
trewe testimony of his approvine fidelitie, worth, and abilitie. And therfor his Ma-
jestie and estates of parliament doe not onlie liberat and exoner him of all questiones
or challenge which can be made to him for his cariage in the said place in tymes
bygone, but also for the full demonstratione of their dewe acknowledgment of his
woorthie cariage, doe give him this weell deserved testimony and approbatione to be
recordit to efter ages. That he heath deserved nobilie of the kingdome, and in all
his actiones have exprest pietie, valour, wisdom, and good governmente." 2
In addition to all this the earl was on the same day appointed captain and
keeper of the castle of Edinburgh, with the whole rents, duties, liberties, and
privileges pertaining to that office. It is ordained that the castle be put in the
condition it was before the late troubles, and that it be delivered over to the
Earl of Leven.3 A signature for the crown grant of the office is still preserved in
the Melville charter-chest, and shows that as granted by King James the Sixth to
John, Earl of Mar, then keeper, 9th July 1618, the revenues of the castle con-
sisted of payments of grain from the abbey of Scone, the priory of Charterhouse,
the kirk of Monifieth, the bishopric of Dunkeld, the abbey of Holyrood, the
lands of Ardat, the lands of Dron, the lands of Easter Fairny, and from the Tron
customs of Edinburgh ; and these were still to form the revenue of the castle,
any portion thereof which had been since estranged to be restored.
The estimation in which the Earl of Leven was held for energy and usefulness
in the public service is further evinced by his being made not only a member of
the privy council, but also a member of various important commissions and com-
mittees. He was placed on a commission for regulating the taxation and public
burdens to be imposed on the nation, with special reference to the liabilities in-
curred during the troubles. Closely connected with this was a commission for
receiving the " brotherly assistance " from England, and upon it the earl also had
a seat. Another was appointed for the conservation of the treaty recently con-
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. p. 432.
2 Ibid. p. 430. 3 Ibid. p. 432.
408 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
eluded with England, on which the earl was placed, and he also is included among
the councillors to whom the king, before his departure from Scotland, committed
the practical government of his northern dominion. To him also was intrusted
a commission with regard to the forces still undisbanded.1
Some days before the parliament closed the earl was engaged on another
committee of four noblemen, to whom was assigned the task of considering and
reporting on what should be done in the case of the prince Elector Palatine.2
This prince was present with his uncle, King Charles, at the Scottish parliament,
and when, on the following day, the committee of noblemen reported that there
might be ten thousand infantry sent on the country's charges to any convenient
port in Germany for his assistance, the prince rose, hat in hand, and expressed
his hearty thanks for this token of their affection to him, and hoped he might be
able to reciprocate it. His mother, Elizabeth, dowager queen of Bohemia, in
letters to Sir Thomas Roe, English ambassador to the diet of Ratisbon, indicates
that this result was largely due to the Earl of Leven. " My brother," she says,
" carried my son to the Parliament House ; they all showed a great affection to
us, especially Leslie and the officers of the army, who are all willing to be em-
ployed for us. . . . You will have heard the resolution of the Scotch parliament
to give my son 10,000 men for Germany, if you have not contentment, which I
fear you are not like to have." 3
On the last day of the parliament, "Wednesday, 17th November, there was a
very solemn riding from Holyrood Palace to the place of meeting, when, in virtue
of his generalship, the Earl of Leven rode first before all. It was at this meeting
that he formally demitted his office of general to the king and parliament by lay-
ing down his baton, and received their public approbation of his services. But
until the council were able to provide money, it was ordained that he should have
the command of all horse and foot. At the same sederunt he obtained a parlia-
mentary ratification of the crown charter of his lands granted on 6th July 1635,4
to which fuller reference will be made on a later page.
Not long after this a question arose between the Earl of Leven and the Earl
of Callendar respecting the precedency of their respective peerages. Sir James
Livingstone, Lord Livingstone of Almond, was further ennobled by King Charles
creating him Earl of Callendar, and the warrant or signature for his patent was
dated 6th October 1641 — five days before that of the Earl of Leven. The latter,
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 3 Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. pp. 145-147 ;
vol. v. pp. 392, 395, 404, 405, 430. State Papers, 1641-1643, pp. 121, 19S.
2 Charles Lewis, Count Palatine of the * Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. pp. 159-163; Acts
Rhine and Duke of Bavaria. of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. p. 450.
DISPUTE WITH EARL OF CALLENDAR AS TO PRECEDENCY. 409
however, as has already been stated, was invested as earl on 6th November follow-
ing, his completed patent being delivered to him on that day, whereas that of the
Earl of Callendar was only sealed on the 19th, and delivered to him on the 21st
November by the Privy Council. Callendar claimed to be ranked before Leven on
the five days' prior dating of his signature. Leven urged that the signature was
not a patent, and that as his patent was perfected by the act of sealing five weeks
before that of Callendar, and, moreover, as he had sat and voted in parliament as
an earl while his opponent was present and voted only as Lord Almond, he was
clearly entitled to the priority.1 But the better to establish his position Lord
Leven obtained a letter from King Charles, dated 24th January 1642, wherein the
king declares the dating of Callendar's patent to have proceeded from a mistake,
and that as it never was his intention, and was contrary to what he had ever
resolved, that Callendar should have the precedency, so he would shortly take a
course for remedy of the mistake which should give the earl satisfaction.2 This
decided the matter in favour of the Earl of Leven. The Earl of Callendar, how-
ever, did not accept the situation, and protested against the Earl of Leven being
enrolled, called, and voting in parliament before him. Probably the renewal of
the strained relations between Charles and his Scottish subjects sufficiently
explains the failure of the promise to rectify the mistake. During the lifetime
of the Earl of Leven, the precedency of his peerage was maintained, but imme-
diately after his death, the Earl of Callendar revived the question, and secured
the verdict of a Committee of Parliament (of 1661) in his favour.
The Earl of Leven was cordially congratulated on his creation as Earl of
Leven by his warm friend Axel Oxenstierna, the Chancellor of Sweden, in a letter
which breathes the spirit of sincere esteem and affection, and which was accom-
panied by another written in rej)ly to a communication from Leven, and sent by
Colonel Sir Lewis Leslie, in reference to the promised contingent of Scotsmen in
aid of the Bohemian Crown. This intention, however, of reuniting Scottish and
Swedish forces on the Continent was defeated by the outbreak of the rebellion in
Ireland, and the highly disturbed state of the relations betwixt the king and the
English parliament.3 The news of the massacres of the Protestants in Ireland
roused great indignation in Scotland, and the ten thousand men promised to
Bohemia were offered and accepted for the quelling of the Irish, and placed under
command of the Earl of Leven, as general. On this occasion the commission, of
the earl was granted by the king himself at York on 7th May 1642.4
1 MS. information in Melville Charter- 3 Letters, dated from Stockholm, 12th Sep.
chest, 16-42. tember 1642. Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 90-02.
2 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 21. 4 Vol. iii. of this work, pp. 168, 169.
VOL. I. 3 F
410 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, EIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
In the beginning of the year the earl had considerable labour and some
correspondence in the raising of the levies.1 But for any detailed account of the
earl's conduct in this Irish campaign, we are indebted to Sir James Turner, who
accompanied the expedition as major to Lord Sinclair's regiment. Turner, how-
ever, writes with a continual feeling of umbrage towards Leven, who, he says,
was dissatisfied with his appointment by Lord Sinclair, as his consent was not
asked. " If it had, I am sure it had never been got, for that excellence of his
was constantlie my very heavie friend." 2 The Scottish forces went to Ireland
in the spring of the year 1642, but the earl did not accompany them. He went
later and made only a short stay, and Turner's account of him may best be given
as he himself tells it : —
"About Lambes in this yeare, 1642, came Generall Leven over to Ireland, and
with him the Earle of Eglinton, who had one of these ten regiments, my Lord Sinclare,
and Hamilton, generall of the artillerie, better known by the name of Deare Sandie.
Great matters were expected from so famous a captain as Leven was, but he did not
ansuere expectation. One cavalcad he made, in which I joyned with him with 300
men, in which I coidd not see what he intended, or what he proposd to himselfe.
Sure I am he returnd to Craigfergus without doeing anything. And the same game
he playd over againe at his second march, except that he visited the Neurie ; for which
we were but litle obligd to him, being forcd thereby to part with our hay, wine, beere,
and breade, of which we were not very well stord. . . .
" The officers of this our Scots armie in Ireland finding themselves ill payd, and
which was worse, not knowing in the time of the civill warre who sould be their pay-
masters, and reflecting on the successfull issue of the Nationall Covenant of Scotland,
bethought themselves of makeing one also ; bot they were wise enough to give it ane
other name, and therefore christened it a Mutual Assurance ; wherby upon the matter
they made themselves independent of any except these who wold be their actuall and
reall paymasters, with whom, for anything I know, they met not the whole time of the
warre. The generall was very dissatisfied with this bond of union, as he had reason ;
and at first spoke hie language of strikeing heads of ; bot the officers sticking close one
to another, made these threates evanish in smoake. And indeed it is like ane active
generall (who could have added policie to courage, and divided them), might have made
their union appear in its oune collors, which were even these of blacke mutinie. Bot
the Earle of Leven, not being able to overmaster it, got himselfe ane errand to go to
Scotland, and so gave an everlasting adieu to Ireland. The most remarkeable thing he
did-in the time of his stay was that he tooke 2500 lb. sterline to himselfe, which the
parliament of England had sent to the officers of his armie for wagon money. And
trulie this earle, who lived till he past fourscore, was of so good a memorie, that he
was never knowne to forget himselfe, nay not in his extreame age. I cannot say more
1 Correspondence of the Earls of Ancram and Lothian, vol. i. pp. 131-133.
2 Memoirs of Sir James Turner, p. IS).
THE IRISH CAMPAIGN OF 1642-3. 411
of his deportments in Ireland then what my Lord Viscount Moore (who was killd nixt
yeare) said to tuo of my friends, and it was this : That the Earle of Leven's actions
made not such a noyse in the world as these of Generall Lesley." 1
Before leaving and after returning to Scotland the earl was kept informed of
the progress of the Scottish arms in Ireland by Major-General Robert Monro —
two at least of whose letters to the earl are preserved. One of these is dated 13th
May 1642, and along with other two letters from the Corporation of Londonderry
arid the Earl of Antrim to Monro, which accompanied it, was printed, as a thin
pamphlet of nine small quarto pages at London in 1642. It is in reply to a
communication from the Earl of Leven, and details the progress of the campaign.2
The other letter is of fully a year's later date, and relates the making of a tem-
porary armistice with the rebels, and how this circumstance led to the intercepting
and capture of the Earl of Antrim,3 who was commissioned to Ireland by King
Charles to effect a pacification there and release both English and Irish, and the
Scots too, if they could be corrupted for the king's service in England. Antrim,
who had on a former occasion effected his escape from the Scottish general, was
this time kept in close ward, notwithstanding repeated orders and missives
from the king himself requiring his release. One such letter was addressed to
the Earl of Leven on 11th June 1643,4 but as he and Monro only recognised
instructions received through the Scottish council or parliament, these royal let-
ters were disregarded, and Antrim was not delivered up by the Scottish army in
Ireland. The English parliament demanded that he should be delivered up
to them to be tried for treason, and an order was issued by the Scottish parlia-
ment to the Earl of Leven to hand over his prisoner to them ; while the French
also interposed with a request for his liberation. But, meanwhile, Antrim
delivered them from any dilemma in regard to him by again effecting his escape
from Carrickfergus.5
King Charles the First and the parliament of England were by this time
engaged in the throes of civil war, in which the parliamentary forces were gradu-
ally being worsted. As to all intents and purposes the war was a religious one,
— a helium episcopate, as it was called, the king being obliged to rely for the
support of his army on the bishops — the sympathy of the Scots was opjposed
to the king, so that when their assistance was solicited and an offer made by the
English parliament of a mutual league, offensive and defensive, it was willingly
1 Memoirs of Sir James Turner, pp. 23-25. 4 Ibid. p. 22.
2 Copy of original print in Library of the 5 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
University of Edinburgh. vol. vi. part i. p. 17 ; Baillie's Letters, vol. ii.
3 Vol. ii. of this work, pp. 93-95. pp. 70, 80, 105, 11G.
412 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
agreed to. One condition was insisted upon by the Scots, that the league should
be primarily a religious one; hence the Solemn League and Covenant of England,
Scotland, and Ireland, which was adopted not only by the national representa-
tives, but by the great mass of the people with great enthusiasm. The Scots were
now leagued in arms with the parliament of England against the king and
accordingly a new army was levied, and the Earl of Leven, who had attended
the meetings of the Convention of the Estates in June, July, and August of
this year, 1643, and had been placed on committees to consider what remedies
should be applied against the dangers which threatened religion, and what was
necessary for the defence of the kingdom, was again appointed to the supreme
command of this army.1 The English parliament sent a special request to the
Earl of Leven that if the Scots sent any army for their assistance, he should
take the command of it.2 Baillie intimates his acceptance, with a note of ex-
planation : " Generall Leslie is chosen, and accepted his old charge. It is true he
past mauie promises to the king, that he would no more fight in his contrare ;
hot, as he declares, it was with the expresse and necessar condition, that religion
and country's rights were not in hazard ; as all indifferent men thinks now they
are in a verie evident one." 3
The earl was present at the meeting of the Convention of Estates on 3d
January 1644, but on the 8th, when he was also present, he was instructed to go
to the army on the Borders,4 and the Tweed was crossed and England entered in
the frost and snow of midwinter. Turner states his army to have consisted of
about 20,000 foot and 2000 horse. They crossed on the ice, the river being so
strongly frozen that it supported even their wagons, etc. Marching to the Tyne
they forded it just in time to avoid the floods consequent on the melting of the
snow, and encamped before the town of Newcastle. Turner paid a visit to the
army just when they were about to cross the Tyne and invest the town, and
being asked his opinion, advised that false alarms should be made at different points
around the town, lest the royal troops should fall in force ujjon those who were
making the bridge for the army to cross. He was sent to acquaint the general
with this opinion, which was agreed in by all ; and he relates that he found him
going to supper. " When I returnd, I was ashamd to relate the ansuere of that
old captaine, which was that he feard the brightnes of the night (for it was
mooneshine) would discover the burning matches to those on the walls. I told
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, sion's Fifth Report, Appendix, p. 96.
vol. vi. part i. pp. 3, 13, 57, 59. 3 Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. 100.
2 Draft letter, dated 19th July 1643, in * Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
House of Lords. Historical mss. Commis- vol. vi. part i. pp. 60, 69.
CAMPAIGN IN NORTHUMBERLAND, 1644. 413
him the mooneshine was a prejudice to the designe, for it wold hinder the
matches to be sene ; for the more lunts were seene, the better for a false alarme."
Turner affects to make very merry over what he calls " Generall Leven's imper-
tinent ansuer to my message." 1 But apart from his own royalist proclivities, his
prejudice against Leven, and his bombastic comparisons of his own better
military judgment with that of his experienced commander's, his story does not
comport with contemporary accounts of the passage of the Tyne by the Scottish
army. As on the previous occasion, the Earl of Leven made for the ford at New-
bum, but finding it too strongly fortified, proceeded up the river to Ovingham,
Bywell, and Altringham, where they waded the river.2 The siege of Newcastle
lasted for nine months, and from that town to York was the skirmishing ground
between the Scots and the royalist army under the Marquis of Newcastle, who
was thought not unworthy of being pitted against " the great soldier, Leslie." 3
The Scots had also to keep Northumberland, and Leven is notified as being at
Newton in that county on 26th February, by the date of a commission to a
son of the Earl of Eglinton, which he signed there on that day.4 At the end of
March the joint committee of both the kingdoms made the Earl of Leven com-
mander-in-chief over all the forces, both " British " and Scottish then in Ireland,
and as he personally was required in England, he was desired to appoint some
one to be commander-in-chief under himself, who should direct the army in his
absence. He appears, indeed, to have held in some way a priority among the
generals of the army in England, as in their official despatches he is usually the
first to sign, and he was sometimes designated " Lord General," while usually
addressed as " His Excellency." This last title he had brought with him from
Germany. Probably, however, no real seniority or priority was implied, and the
precedency he got was due to the courtesy and deference of the English parlia-
mentary generals, which they showed alike to his age and military experience,
and also to the fact of his being the representative of a neighbouring and assist-
ing power. The native modesty which he displayed in commanding the Scottish
army, and which Baillie notes as having such an admirable effect in preventing
rivalries among the Scottish nobles, was as conspicuous when he joined his forces
with the English leaders. At a later period of the war, when some contention
was threatened in the English army respecting the chief command on a junction of
separate corps, the joint committee of the kingdoms wrote, warmly deprecating
1 Turner's Memoirs, pp. 31-33. 3 State Papers, 1G44, p. 35.
4 Memorials of the Montgomeries, Earls
2 Newcastle Reprints, quoted by Burton, of Eglinton, by Sir William Eraser, K.C.B.,
History of Scotland, vol. vi. p. 357. vol. ii. p. 294.
414 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEX.
any such spirit manifesting itself, and desiring that those interested should take
" as an example the fair and amicable agreement that was between the three
generals at Marston Moor and the taking of York, where in all that time they
were together there never grew any disputes nor differences about command." x
Leven achieved little during the first six months of this campaign in England,
though in other parts the parliamentary generals reaped some victories. Baillie
laments that the aid of the Scots was not more effectively shown. Leven, he
says, " as yett has had his hands bound." 2 His chief occupation was keeping
the royalist troops in check in the district north of York. One of the royalist
generals, the Marquis of Newcastle, had a considerable army situated at various
points in this region, but his troops were gradually forced to the two positions of
Newcastle and York. Lord Fairfax, in one of his reports, praises the Earl of
Leven for his prudent and vigorous conduct on one occasion in following up the
army under the Marquis of Newcastle, and to this he ascribes the safety of his
own army, which was so much smaller than Newcastle's that it could not have
escaped. The Scottish forces and those of the parliamentary generals were now
joined together for the investiture of York, into which the bulk of the troops
under Newcastle had thrown themselves. On April 20th the Earl of Leven had
formed his camp at Wetherby,3 and thence marched to York, before which he
lay for nine or ten weeks. One day the commandant of the town sent out a flag
of truce to Leven, to ask why he " beleaguered this city on all sides, made
batteries against it, and so near approached it?" To which Leven replied "that
it was with intention to reduce it to the obedience of king and parliament."
It was in the neighbourhood of York that one of the great and more im-
portant battles of the Civil War took place, that of Marston Moor. Prince
Rupert had succeeded in raising a splendid army from the western counties, and
in concert with the king and the Marquis of Newcastle, marched to the relief of
York. The united forces of the English parliament and the Scots were under
Leven, Fairfax, and the Earl of Manchester, and the two armies met on 2d July.
So uncertain was the issue for a time that Baillie says of the generals on both
sides that " within halfe an hour and less, all six took them to their heels." 4
Turner makes merry over this incident of the battle, but suppresses remark about
the English commanders. Of those on the parliament's side he says that all
three " had shamefullie left the field and fled ; but Leven fled furthest, for he did
1 State Papers, 1644, pp. 80, 206, 266, 3 Seventh Report of Commissioners on
287,311,432,491. Hist, mss., App. part ii. p. 60. Fourth
Pieport, App. p. 268.
2 Letters, vol. ii. p. 179. 4 Baillie's Letters, vol. ii. p. 204.
CAPTURE OF NEWCASTLE BY STORM, 1644. 415
not draw bridle till he was at Wedderbie, four and twentie miles from the place
of battell. There was reason he sould take the start of the other tuo, because he
had furthest home."1 The flight of Leven was occasioned by one of Prince
Rupert's brilliant charges, which broke up and disorganised the wing of the army
which was under the command of Leven and Fairfax, and Rupert was even
credited with having made a prisoner of " Ould Lesley." 2 But the pursuit was
carried too far, and the prince returned to the field to find it in the possession of
Leven's lieutenant-general, David Leslie, aud of Cromwell, and it now became
his turn for flight. A fortnight after the battle, on 16th July, the city of York
capitulated.3
The next important episode in the war in which Leven was engaged was the
siege and capture of Newcastle. It had stood a long siege, and refused still to
accept conditions of surrender, so it was resolved to take it by storm. This was
carried out by the Earl of Leven on 19th October, and the mayor, Sir John Morley,
whom even Turner condemns for refusing the very fair offers made him by
Leven, was thrown into prison to await the parliament's pleasure.4 Newcastle
thus fell a second time to the sword of the Earl of Leven, and that it resisted
so long on this occasion was doubtless owing to the fact that military operations
elsewhere demanded the attention of the veteran lord-general. He appointed
Sir James Lumsden as governor of the city.5
In the beginning of the following year the earl paid a visit to Scotland and
attended the meeting of parliament held at Edinburgh on 7th January 1645.
He was placed on the committee for carrying on the war both within and
without the country.6 The usual protest for precedency was made on behalf
of the Earl of Callendar, by Lord Yester, and the Earl of Leven protested
for himself in the contrary.7 He also interested himself with the parliament
on behalf of the children and grand-children of his son-in-law, General
Ruthven of Dunglas, whom he calls his pupils. He saw the matter taken in
hand by the parliament, and wrote to Alexander, sixth Earl of Eglinton
asking him to attend it for him in his absence.8 Probably the Earl of Leven
was now obliged to return to his post at Newcastle, whence he writes to
1 Turner's Memoirs, p. 38. 5 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
2 Historical mss. Commissions, Fourth vol. vi. part ii. pp. 363, 371.
Report, App. p. 276 Acts of the Parlia- 6 Ibid. pp. 2S4, 287.
ments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. p. 861. 7 Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. p. 246.
3 State Papers, 1644, pp. 359, 361, etc. 8 Memorials of the Montgomeries, Earls
4 Ibid. p. 432 ; Historical mss. Commis- of Eglinton, by Sir William Eraser, K.C. B.,
sion's Sixth Report, App. p. 32. vol. i. pp. 269, 270.
416 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
Hugh, Lord Montgomerie, son of the Earl of Eglinton, who was stationed about
Halifax, directing him to keep a close watch on the movements of Prince Rupert.1
In June Leven was instructed to march to Worcester,2 and thence they proceeded
into Gloucestershire, on the way learning that the king had lost the battle of
Naseby (fought on 14th June), the last great conflict of the war. Hereford was
then invested by the Scots army for some weeks, but the approach of Charles
himself at the head of an army forced them to raise the siege and return to
Yorkshire, where Leven joined his forces to the parliamentary troops then engaged
in besieging Newark on Trent. Turner says that he was then ordered by the
parliament to go to Newcastle ; " I am very sure," he adds, " sore against his will
he parted with a command whereby he could have put abundance of money in
his pocket, which Lieutenant Generall David Lesley could not choose bot doe." 3
Leven was at Northallerton on 24th September, as he wrote thence on that day
to Alexander, Earl of Eglinton, congratulating him on the victory obtained over
Montrose, and declaring his intention to demit office, as he now felt himself un-
able to perform such duty as he would for the public. He had written to the
Scottish Estates of parliament requesting an exoneration and discharge, and he
entreats Lord Eglinton to further his suit with them.4
The lord general's proffered resignation, however, was not at this time accepted,
and in the end of the following November he had returned to the neighbourhood
of Newark upon Trent, his first feat on this occasion being the capture of Musk-
ham Bridge and the sconce on the farther side of the river ; but he was back
again at Newcastle on the last day of December.5 A week later the Scottish
parliament instructed him to co-operate with the English parliamentary forces for
the reduction of Newark upon Trent, and he must have left for that place forth-
with, as on 11th January 1646 he wrote to the parliament requesting them to
send Lord Humbie to his army at Newark to clear accounts with Yorkshire, and
to send a committee of their number to be with the army.6
At a subsequent meeting the parliament re-affirmed by a public declaration
that the supreme command of all Scottish armies was held by the Earl of Leven.
The act was as follows : — " That anie commissions formarlie granted doeth naways
derogat to the commissions granted to the Erie of Leavine to be generall of the
1 Memorials of the Montgomeries, Earls 4 Memorials of the Montgomeries, Earls
of Eglinton, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., of Eglinton, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B.,
vol. i. pp. 278, 279. vol. i. p. 279.
2 Sixth Report of Hist. mss. Commission, b Ibid. pp. 279, 280. Cf. Sixth Report of
App. p. 6C|; also Eighth Report, part ii. p. 62. Historical mss. Commission, App p. S7.
3 Turner's Memoirs, pp. 40, 41. 6 Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. p. 362.
HIS SERVICES RECOGNISED BY THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT. 417
haill forces within and without this kingdome, but is altogethir without prejudice
therof in anie poynt." 1
The reason for this declaration appears in the further proceedings of the
parliament on the day it was made. They had offered to the Earl of Callen-
dar a commission as commander-in-chief of the forces serving in Scotland,
without derogation of the Earl of Leven's patent in any respect. But Callendar,
who had a standing quarrel with Leven in reference to the precedency of their
respective peerages, declined acceptance of the commission with any such reserva-
tion, saying he would not act in a subordinate capacity, whereupon the commis-
sion was offered to Major-G-eneral Middleton, who accepted it.2
To this parliament also the earl had represented the inconvenience sustained
by him through the non-payment of the money they had assigned to him, — -
12,320 merks being still due to him of the 100,000 merks voted to him in 1641
— and they ordained that this balance should be paid by the treasurer from the
fines and forfeitures, in preference to all other claims thereupon.3
An interesting recognition of the services rendered by the earl to England
was about this time made by the English parliament. Very probably they had
heard of his intention to resign his commission, and hoped that in this way they
might prevail upon him to continue his services until the conclusion of the war.
They sent him a jewel with a special letter to himself, testifying their great
respect for his personal and military c|ualities, and their high esteem of his fidelity
and gallantry. Unfortunately the letter by the parliament to Leven has not been
discovered, but the jewel and letter were formally intrusted by the speaker, Henry
Mildmay, to the English commissioners in attendance upon the Scottish parlia-
ment at Edinburgh, who were instructed to have them conveyed to the earl.4
What form the jewel took, or what was its future history, has not been ascer-
tained ; but it is not referred to by the earl at a later date, when he makes special
mention of the jewel given him by Gustavus Adolphus. It is an evidence also of
the popularity of Leven with the English generally, in consequence of the mild-
ness of his rule, that some of those who for adherence to the king fell under the
displeasure of the parliament, obtained the benefit of his intercession with that
body.5
While the Scottish army lay at Newark a very unexpected incident occurred
which, for a time, interrupted the harmony which had hitherto existed between
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. pp. 559, 5S4.
vol. vi. part ii. pp. 502, 557. 4 Vol. ii. of this work, p. 90.
a Balfour's Annals, vol. iii. pp. 370, 371. 5 Historical mss. Commission Reports, v.
3 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, p. 331 ; vi. p. 110; ix. part ii. p. 393.
VOL. I. 3 G
418 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
the two kingdoms and their armies. The king had been driven from his last
stronghold by the parliamentary troops, and after wandering about for some days
in disguise, he resolved to intrust himself to his Scottish subjects. Accordingly
he appeared in their midst on the morning of the 5th of May 1646, and was
received with due ceremony and submission, in the course of which the Earl of
Leven gave up his sword to the king. Contrary to custom the king retained the
sword of the general, which -was an act so significant that the earl judged it
expedient to remind the king that he was in command of the army, though in
humble duty to his Majesty.
The English parliament demanded of the Scots the surrender of the king to
them ; but Leven declined, and placing him under a strong guard, alike for his
protection and to prevent him making his escape, returned to Newcastle where
they could be freer from intimidation by the English parliament. While there
Leven and the other officers and army, by a dutiful address to his Majesty,
did what they could, consistently with their obligations under the Solemn
League and Covenant, to induce the king to terminate the civil disorders. In
their petition they affirm their readiness to sacrifice their lives in his defence, if
he would take the covenant and promote the interests of true religion in his
realms. The petition and the king's reply were printed along with a declaration
by the Earl of Leven and others in name of the army, to obviate sinister reports
and imputations as to their design in keeping possession of the king.1
The war being now practically at an end the Scottish army only remained in
England awaiting the adjustment of their accounts and the settlement of arrears.
In December the Scottish parliament still instructed the earl to keep the king
safely in his camp, and to prevent any from getting access to him who had been
formerly of his party.2 The anxiety of the Scots to return home is shown by
references in letters from Leven read in the English parliament, wherein he states
the hardships to which his army were subjected by the delay in the settlement.3
This, however, was finally effected in January 1647, and the Scots recrossed the
border, but as the English threatened war if they took the king with them, they
were obliged to surrender him into the hands of his English parliament.4
As a large portion of the army was not disbanded, but remodelled for the
1 Printed in London, July 6, 1646. Copy 4 The Earl of Leven had a secretary while
in University Lihrary, Edinhurgh. in England, who also acted for the committee
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, with the army. He was Mr. Thomas Hen-
vol. vi. part ii. p. 637. derson, whose salary was fixed by parliament
3 Sixth Report by Historical mss. Commis- at £100 per month [Acts of the Parliaments
sioners, App. p. 139. of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. pp. 664, 709].
DEBT DUE TO HIM BY LORD NAPIER. 419
purpose of quelling the insurrection of the royalists in the north, the Earl of
Leven was retained in his post as general of all the forces, with a yearly salary of
10,000 merks. If circumstances required that he should personally take the
field, then over and above that his charges were to be taken into consideration.
In point of fact the command of the forces in the field was devolved on the
lieutenant-general, David Leslie, afterwards Lord Newark, and the Earl of Leven
remained with the acting committee of estates, of which he was a member, for
counsel and advising.1 In discharge of his duty as lord general we find him in
February 1647 demanding from parliament that a prisoner then in the Tolbooth
of Edinburgh should be delivered over to him for trial by court-martial. The
prisoner was Captain John Dennistoun, who was alleged to have killed a soldier
in the Marquis of Argyll's regiment, in which he was then serving as lieutenant.
The earl's demand was granted, protests being taken on behalf of the Earl
of Errol, the high constable, to whom pertained the right of judging all
matters of blood and riot within four miles of the person of the king, or of the
parliament or council, and on behalf of the town of Edinburgh that the transac-
tion should not prejudge their respective rights.2
Before this same meeting of parliament the Earl of Leven brought an action
against Archibald, Lord Napier, for payment of a debt of £10,000 Scots and
interest, incurred by his lordship's father to John Kenton of Lamberton, and
assigned by the latter to the Earl of Leven. This sum of money appears to have
been a fine or penalty incurred by the lately deceased Lord Napier for allowing
his son to escape, while they both, being staunch supporters of King Charles,
were under parole imprisonment by the covenanters. Young Lord Napier after-
wards obtained from Major-General Middleton an assurance of honour, life, and
fortune in respect of any deeds done in the late rebellion, and he pleaded that
this constituted also a remission of the fine in question. Leven denied that the
bond granted by the late Lord Napier to Kenton bore any relation to the penalty,
which had been received and discharged to him by Archibald Sydserf, general
commissary depute, some time previously. Kenton himself, who as constable of
the castle of Edinburgh had been custodier of the late Lord Napier while im-
prisoned there for a time, and other parties having been heard, Lord Napier,
among his other defences, denied the discharge by Sydserf, and prayed the par-
liament to consider his present encumbered condition. For payment of only part
of his debts his lands of Merchiston were mortgaged, while his west country lands
were so ruined and overburdened by military quarterings that he could not nearly
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
vol. vi. part ii. pp. 672, 710, 725. vol. vi, part i. pp. 707, 708.
420 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OE LEVEN.
meet the interest of his debts, far less provide for his own entertainment. Par-
liament, however, decided that the debt was valid, and that Lord Napier was
liable therefor to the Earl of Leven.1
In the following month parliament again passed in favour of the Earl of
Leven an act of approbation and exoneration in regard to his past services, and
ordained a valuable jewel to be given to him in token of their estimation thereof.
The act is as follows : —
"The estates of parliament haveing takine to thair consideration that Alexander, Erie
of Levin, Lord Balgony, hathe since the begining of the troubles of this kingdome
bene employed these nyne yeiris bygane as generall and commander in chiefe over all
the forces, horse and foote, within this kingdome, and sent into England and Ireland for
advancing the work of reformatioune of religion and promoving the endis of the Solemn
League and Covenant ; and that in all and everie ane of these imploymentis (whiche God
hathe blessed with happie succes) he hath evidentlie manifested his grave wisdome,
vigilancie, and indefatigable panes, constant fidelitie, gallant conduct, and everie gift
desireable in ane great leader of armies to the kingdome's great satisfaction and his
awne perpetuall honour. Therfore the saidis estates doe heirby allow and approve the
said noble Erie, Lord Generall Levin, his whole cariage and honourabill deportment in
the said charge and trust, with this testimonie, that he hath therby deserved this
approbatioune with the returne of their publiet acknowledgment of thankfulnes to be
recordit as ane memoriall of honour to posteritie, and have ordered that ane Jewell of
the value of ten thousand merkis Scotis, with the pension alreadie established upon him
be act, sail be given to him as ane small token of that great respect whiche they carie
to his worth, valour, and merite." 2
Had this jewel been bestowed it would have formed the third trophy of the
kind the earl received in recognition of his merit as a soldier, but the renewal of
the troubles in Scotland appear to have prevented parliament from carrying
this part of their resolution into effect. The Earl had already received a
similar gift from the King of Sweden, Gustavus Adolphus, which he prized
most highly, and in his will gave instructions that it should be preserved
as an heirloom.3 In a litigation which took place in 1683 among the descendants
of the earl special reference is made to the jewels. But only one is distinguished
as " the great jewell, called the Jewell of the family, gifted to Alexander Lesly,
first Earl of Leven, when a general in Germany, by Gustavus Adolphus, King of
Sweden," and it was decided that this jewel as the " airship jewell," must belong
to the family ; the rest, being of the nature of paraphernalia, could be treated as
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part i. pp. 694-696.
2 Ibid. p. 777. 3 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 175.
IS OPPOSED TO THE " ENGAGEMENT," 1648. 421
moveable property.1 The fact that the earl makes no mention of the English
parliamentary jewel in his testament seems to imply either that like the Scottish
jewel it was never presented, which is most likely, or that it had been lost or
disposed of prior to the earl's own death.
In the following year, 1648, the earl was present at the opening of the second
triennial parliament of Scotland held at Edinburgh, on 2d March. The most
important business of this parliament was what was done in support of " the
engagement" made by their commissioners with the king at Carisbrook, in
terms of which they sent an army into England to attempt his rescue from the
military faction which had seized the reins of power in England. But although
parliament by a majority carried this measure it was strenuously opposed
by the church and a number of the nobles headed by the Marquis of Argyll,
whose opposition was based on the fact that it was in contradiction to the
stipulations of the solemn league and covenant between the two kingdoms.
Argyll's party was known as " the honest party," or " the godly party," and the
Earl of Leven was among those who sided with Argyll. Turner says that Leven
privately signed a petition drawn up by Argyll, called the petition of the army,
the object of which was to secure religion before any forces were raised on the
king's behalf. As the promoters of the movement for the king's release were
indisposed to have Leven as their military superior, he was prevailed upon to
resign his office of lord general. During the preliminary stages of the debate, and
while reconciliation of the conflicting parties was being attempted, the orjposers
were assured that the old and tried officers of the army would again be their
military leaders, and, says Baillie, " The old generall " (meaning Lord Leven) " for
all his infirmitie is acceptable." But the Duke of Hamilton and the Earl of
Callendar, who were eager for the war, were resolved to supersede Leven, and so,
Baillie remarks again, " with threats and promises they moved old Lesley to lay
downe his place." 2 Lord Clarendon corroborates this statement by Baillie in a
passage in which he rather sneers at Leslie's reputation. He says : —
" It was a hard thing to remove the old General Leven who had been hitherto
in the head of their army in all their prosperous successes. But he was in the
confidence of Argyll, which was objection enough against him if there were no
other. And the man was grown old and appeared in the actions of the last
1 Fountainhall's Historical Notices of Scot- mittee of the parliament on military matters
tish Affairs, vol. i. pp. 421, 422. was appointed to meet on the afternoon on
2 Letters and Papers, vol. iii. pp. 40, 45. 25th March in the earl's lodging in Edin-
It corroborates the presumption that the earl burgh. [Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
was really infirm at this time, that a com- vol. vi. part ii. p. 16.]
422 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
expedition into England very unequal to the command. And therefore some
expedient was to be found to be rid of him, and they found it no hard matter to
prevail with him to decline command upon pretence of his age and infirmities,
when of a truth he had no mind to venture his honour against the English, except
assisted by English, which had been his good fortune in all the actions of moment
he had performed in this war, and when he had been destitute of that help he
had always received some affront." x But while writing thus Lord Clarendon
appears to have forgotten Newburn and Newcastle, as well as other victories won
by diplomacy by the " old general " when he had not only no assistance from the
English but had to face all the forces they could place in the field. The only real
affront he did sustain was when assisting the English at Marston Moor.
The act of parliament by which the earl was so far relieved of his command
as general (for as the act shows, he was not wholly divested of it) bears that the
measure was in response to his own request, as by reason of age and infirmity he
was no longer able to undergo that great charge. He declared, however, that his
affection and will to hazard his life for religion, king, and country remained un-
changed. In accepting his demission the parliament appointed " the committee
of 24 " to express to him their sense of his generous behaviour and fidelity, and
to present to him their formal approbation of his conduct as general,
"and everie passage therof, and in acknowledgment of thankfulnes they ordaine £1000
sterling to be peyed to him during his lyfetyme, and that ane effectual course be tane
for assureing the peyment therof to him out of the reddiest publict moneyis of the
kingdome. As also ordaines the jeuell formerlie appoynted to be presentlie provydit
and given to him as a merk of the parliamentis respect for his great and faithfull service.
And farder, in caice vpone the removeall of this army out of the kingdome thair sail
be occasioune to raise any new forces to be imployed within the kingdome for its
saifety and preservation^ the estates of parliament nominatis, maks, and constitutes
the said Erie of Levin to be lord generall of these forces." 2
This act manifests that though the Earl of Leven certainly had individual
enemies and detractors both in the army and in the parliament, he stood high in
the reputation and affection of both parties existing at this juncture, while in
due consistency with all his former professions he stood firm for the furtherance
of the ends of the solemn league and covenant. So did his able lieutenant, David
Leslie, and many of the other principal officers. When, therefore, the resolution
of parliament was taken to levy an army and send it into England for the deliver-
ance of the king, it was necessary that the command of that army should devolve
1 History of the Rebellion, vol. vi. p. 44.
2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. pp. 68, 88.
CROMWELL VISITS EDINBURGH, 1648. 423
upon those whose consciences were not fettered by the methods to be employed.
The movement was not popular in the country, and strong means were needed to
compel those levied to attend. When the army did enter England, as Turner
relates, the headstrong determination of Callendar to carry things his own way,
and the subsequent dissensions and breach between him and the Duke of Hamil-
ton, with want of heart to the work in the army, rendered it easy for Cromwell
to inflict a decisive defeat upon the Scots at Preston in Lancashire, and Hamilton,
taken prisoner, expiated his participation in the engagement with his life at
London.
In terms of this act the overthrow of the Duke of Hamilton at Preston, and
the dispersion of his army, ipso facto reponed the Earl of Leven in his old office
as lord general, while at the same time it recalled the Marquis of Argyll's party
to power. The ill-advised expedition into England gave Cromwell a sufficient
casus ielli with Scotland, and steps had to be taken at once to obviate further
disaster. He was met on the borders by Argyll and other prominent members
of the "honest party," and after explanations given and received, the English
leader was invited to Edinburgh as a peaceful guest, and accepted the invitation.
Meanwhile two Scottish armies had taken the field, one at Stirling, under the
Earl of Lanark and General Munro, being the remnant of Hamilton's army which
had escaped, and the other nearer Edinburgh, under the Earl of Leven and David
Leslie, each hostile to the other, but under treaty in face of the common danger.
In terms of the agreement with Cromwell, however, these were both disbanded,
with the exception of fifteen hundred horse and foot under the Earl of Leven,
which were to be maintained to secure the disbanding of the rest.1
Lambert, Cromwell's major-general, was the first to come to Edinburgh, and
he is mentioned as visiting the Earl of Leven and having some discussion with
him.2 Cromwell came soon after and was lodged in the Earl of Moray's house in
the Canongate, and during his stay was entertained by the Earl of Leven in the
castle of Edinburgh, "where was provided a very sumptious banquet, old Leven
doing the honours, my lord Marquis of Argyle and divers other lords being present
to grace the entertainment. At our departure many pieces of ordnance and a
volley of small shot was given us from the castle." 3 But this agreement with
Cromwell did not last long.
When parliament again met at Edinburgh on 4th January 1649, under
different auspices from the last, the Earl of Leven was present and was recog-
1 Carlyle's Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, Letter lxxv.
2 Historical mss. Report, x. partvi. p. 171.
3 Carlyle's Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, Letter Ixxvii.
424 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
nised as lord general. Important events were transpiring in England, where,
against the urgent remonstrances of the Scots, by their commissioners at London,
King Charles the First was put to death. On receiving intelligence of this, the
Scottish parliament proclaimed his son, King Charles the Second, as king of Great
Britain, France, and Ireland, and took measures for placing the kingdom in a
posture of defence, while they invited their new monarch to return from his exile
in Holland. The Earl of Leven, in regard to military matters, besides the supreme
command, was appointed on the committee of war for the county of Berwick,
and a supernumerary on the committee for despatches. He held the appointment
also of a colonel of the horse in the new levies, his troop being sixty strong.1
About this time also Montrose headed another expedition into Scotland, in
the hope of setting Charles the Second upon the throne without the aid of the
covenanters. It was his last and fatal effort. On his landing in Orkney the
parliament immediately required the Earl of Leven or his lieutenant to proceed
north to check his progress, and armed them with powers to deal with such as
had taken part with Montrose, either to punish or pardon. David Leslie
was sent, with the result that after his followers had been dispersed, Montrose
himself was brought to Edinburgh, tried, and executed.2 The alarm which existed
in the country during the expeditions of Montrose, between 1640 and 1650, is
shown by the burying of the Lovat charter-chest under ground to conceal it
from the enemy. This fact is stated in a letter by a lawyer to the Earl of Leven,
in which, referring to these, he says : — " I have seine the chartour kist, and I find
thair is many wreitis away since I wes thair last. It is alledgit that the chartour
kist wes put wnder the ground the tyme that Montrois wes in the country, and
that they war oppint than all out lyeing soe long wnder the earth for fear of
roating, at quhilk tyme I suspect they have gottine wrong."3
Other injunctions issued by this parliament to the Earl of Leven illustrate
the occasional use of the army as a civil police, a practice indeed frequently
resorted to by the parliaments of the covenanting period in their efforts to preserve
public order. He was placed on a small committee to arrest such of the engagers
as had committed outrages upon their fellow-subjects during their brief period of
power.4 On a supplication by the creditors of Sir Alexander Nisbet of West
Nisbet, a noted royalist, the lord general was authorised to have him arrested
by his troopers assisting the messengers-at-arnis, and to re-incarcerate him in the
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, 3 Letter, dated Elgin, 26th March 1651, in
vol. vi. part ii. pp. 124-187 passim, 379, 507. Melville Charter-chest.
4 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
2 Ibid. pp. 222, 700. vol. vi. part ii. p. 133.
HIS CONCERN FOR THE CASTLE OF EDINBURGH. 425
Tolbooth of Edinburgh, out of which he had been taken by Montrose in 1645 ;
and the like instructions were given him in regard to similar cases in other parts
of the country.1
In this same parliament of 1649, which the Earl of Leven attended to its
close, being mentioned by Balfour as one of the ten noblemen who alone put in
an appearance at this meeting, he, as keeper of the castle of Edinburgh, drew
attention, as he had formerly done, to the ruinous condition of its walls, its want
of proper victualling, and generally insecure condition. He offered that if the
treasurer would pay certain sums due to him, for which precepts had been long
issued by parliament, he would devote these to the reparation of the castle, and
wait the public convenience for receiving his own money. 12,320 merks were
still due to him of the sum voted in his favour in 1641 by the parliament, and
on this being represented, an act was passed of new, on 1 Gtli February 1649,
ordaining, that this sum should be paid. A discharge granted by the earl to Sir
John Wemyss of Bogie, treasurer of the army, for £8213, 6s. 8d. Scots, shows
that at length this sum of one hundred thousand merks was received in full by
the Earl of Leven.2 From similar documents and exchequer precepts preserved
at Melville, it is evident that the government of the day were frequently indebted
to the earl for accommodations to tide over temporary difficulties, and while the
authorities acknowledge their obligations, the earl's action and offers to expend
still in the public service these moneys, if repaid, show the sincerity of his
public spirit.
On the day that the earl received the money referred to above, the parliament
had under consideration another supplication from him respecting the condition
of the castle, as nothing had been done upon his former representation. In this
he states that having been intrusted by the king and parliament with the keep-
ing of the castle, he had been most careful in so doing for the public service.
He had deemed it his duty to represent to them its insecure condition, and also
to suggest how the cost of repairs might be defrayed. Nothing had been done,
however, and now that the parliament was ordering the embodiment of a new
army to meet the dangers which threatened the kingdom, he " conceaves himselff
obleidged in duety againe to represent to the parliament the conditioune of that
castle. If the repaireing of that castle and furnishing of it be any laager
delayed, this will beare witnes that he hes discharged his duety, and that no
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, probably a mistake for 1649, according to
vol. vi. part ii. pp. 351, 428, 720. the Scottish mode of reckoning at that date,
- The discharge in the Melville Charter- though the old style was still recognised in
chest is dated 14th March 1G48. But this is England and elsewhere.
VOL. I. 3 H
426 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
blame may be imputed to him." On this occasion the parliament was stirred to
action, and the offers of the earl accepted, their orders probably being the occa-
sion of the payment of the balance of the grant of 1641. Instructions were given
to the treasury, who placed in the earl's hands a precept on the chamberlain of
Fife for £500 sterling for the purpose of repairing the castle. The work was imme-
diately begun, and the earl's next report on 8th June following set forth that he
had expended £1 1,801, 9s. 4d. in the work (whether sterling or Scots money is not
stated), but he had not been able to obtain the amount of the precept. Another
recommendation to the treasury was the result, but apparently to little purpose.
One part of the changes authorised at the castle was the demolition of the
outmost fortification called " the Spur," which for the greater security of the
castle was to be smoothed and levelled. The stones were to be used by the earl
in repairing the other walls, and what remained with the outer gate and its
pertinents were to be given to the town of Edinburgh, while the great gate was
to be placed about the parliament house for beautifying the outer court thereof.
Other arrangements were also debated in parliament respecting the fortress
and its provisioning ; but, despite all that the general could do, the recommenda-
tions on this point were not attended to. When Cromwell's army was preparing
to march upon Scotland, the earl, in consequence hereof, in his own name and
the under officers of the castle, protested that he should be free of any incon-
venience which might befall the castle of Edinburgh, in respect it had not been
properly provided.1 Events, however, soon severed the connection of the Earl
of Leven with the castle.
Another meeting of parliament took place in Edinburgh on 7th March 1650, and
continued in session there until the 5th of July. It was part of its labours to con-
duct the negotiations with King Charles the Second at Breda, and before it rose
the king had arrived in the country. His coming was the signal for war with Eng-
land ; and when it was known that Cromwell was preparing an expedition into
Scotland, an order 'for the levy of an army was at once issued. A day or two
previous to the passing of this act, and in view of the duties which he saw would
be imposed on him thereby, the Earl of Leven desired to be relieved of his office
as general. Balfour says that in a short discourse, he, on account of his age and
for other reasons, laid down his office at the parliament's feet, and so removed
himself out of the house. He then adds that the house, having taken to their
serious consideration the lord general's proposal and demission, ordained the lord
president to tell his excellence that they greatly blessed God, with all thankfulness
to His divine Majesty for his happy carriage in the former conduct of their armies,
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. pp. 280, 403, 517, 50S, 5S3, 597, etc.
THE BATTLE OF DUNBAR, 1650. 427
and entreated him still to continue in his charge. And seeing he had so able a
depute (meaning the lieutenant-general, David Leslie), they would have a care to
lay no more upon him than he should be able to undergo, and with which his
great age might comport. This was all but unanimously agreed to, one solitary
vote being offered in the contrary by one of the commissioners for the shire of
Wigtown, Glendinning of Gelston, whom Balfour characterises as " a phanatick
fellow, made from the dunghill by meclling with the publickes seruice." 1
The Earl of Leven was accordingly continued in his command as general of
the Scottish army, but more as an advising than an active leader. His prudence
and sagacity in military matters had been hitherto so conspicuously crowned with
success, and so reverse had been the experience of the Scots when he was absent,
as at Preston in England, that the parliament felt they could not afford to dis-
pense with his services, even though they could no longer expect from his age
that he would lead their battalions in the field. But as he and his lieutenant-
general, David Leslie, wrought so perfectly in harmony together, the arrangement
was as good as might be.
In his expedition into. Scotland in 1650, Cromwell found his march unopposed
till he reached the neighbourhood of Edinburgh. Here an army was assembled
under General David Leslie, whose policy seems to have been the old Scottish one,
if possible, not to fight, but to wait and watch, in the hope that the difficulty of
procuring supplies would compel Cromwell's retreat. Consequently, while
watching every movement made by Cromwell, and successfully thwarting all his
efforts to gain the town, Leslie maintained the defensive for over a month, and
had the satisfaction of seeing his tactics succeed. Worn out with exposure to an
inclement autumn, and on the verge of starvation, the English army was com-
pelled to retreat to Dunbar. Leslie now followed them, and seizing the hill-
passes of the Lammermuirs immediately to the south, determined to cut off their
retreat. The prospects of the English looked desperate, and even Cromwell felt
them to be so. But as is well known, an ill-advised movement on the part of
Leslie gave an opportunity which Cromwell promptly seized, and the issue of
the battle of Dunbar left him a conqueror. The Scots army was completely
broken up and routed, and fled to Edinburgh pursued by the Ironsides. The
battle took place at dawn on the 3d of September 1650. The Earl of Leven,
who had been personally on the field, succeeded in making good his escape, reach-
ing Edinburgh only about two in the afternoon.2
1 Annals of Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 58, 59. 2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
Cf. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. p. 769.
vol. vi. part ii. p. 5S7.
428 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
That town, however, was now at the mercy of Cromwell, who shortly after
took possession of it, but doubtless before he entered, the earl had taken his
departure, as he would not afterwards have been allowed to leave the city. In doing
so, however, he gave the castle in charge to his son-in-law, Walter Dundas, younger
of Dundas, who succeeded for a time in holding it against the English leader, but
was ultimately obliged to yield. Before the battle of Dunbar took place the king
and court had been removed to Perth. But the committee of estates only went to
Stirling, where another army was assembled and posted under David Leslie, to
prevent the passage of the English northwards. Where the Earl of Leven went
it does not clearly appear. Balfour gives a minute account of the proceedings of
the committee of estates, and the names of the nobles present at their meetings
in Stirling, but Leven is not included. He either retired to his residence in Fife,
or more probably was with the army at Stirling. The next mention of him is at
the parliament which met at Perth on 26th November 1650, though it does not
appear that he was present. On the third day of the parliament, a petition was
laid before them from the earl in which he supplicated for an expression of their
judgment respecting his conduct at the battle of Dunbar, and laying down his
commission at the feet of the king and parliament until he be cleared.1 This
petition was referred to the committee for military affairs, and the fact of its
being presented, together with the renewal of his commission by parliament
several months before the affair of Dunbar, and a statement by the Earl at a
later date in his petition to the English parliament refute the generally expressed
opinion that the earl was only present at this battle as a volunteer.- He was
there as commander-in-chief, and in his petition to parliament he assumed all the
responsibility for the result. In his supplication he craved " that his Majestie and
estaittis of parliament wald be pleased to tak exact tryall of all his cariages in
there severall services, and especiallie concerning the late vnhappie bussienes at
Dumbar, and that as his deserveing sould requyre, that some impartiall course
may be takin thairin and testimonie gevin him accordinglie." A deliverance was
given in his favour in the following terms : —
" His Majestie and the estaittis forsaidis haveing called to mynd the said Erie of
Levin, lord generall, his cariage and deportment in the late conduct of the armie,
wherein it pleased God not to give such succes as at other tymes ; and remembring
the many faithfull eminent services done by him in prosecuteiug the enemies of this
caus and kingdome both within and without the countrie, and haveing so good and
reall proofe of his faithfulness and abilities in dischairge of the trust committed to him,
thairfore his Majestie and estaittis forsaidis doe give and grant to the said Erie of
1 Balfour's Annals of Scotland, vol. iv. p. 187.
WISHES TO LAY DOWN HIS COMMISSION. 429
Levin, lord generall, ane full exounoratione in relatione to all his former imploymentis
and service, with ample approbatioue for his fidelitie thairin." 1
Another meeting of parliament took place at Perth in March 1651, which
the Earl of Leven attended, and a few days after its opening made another effort
to be relieved of his charge as lord general of the army. It was ineffectual, how-
ever, as the parliament were averse to the loss of his services. He was now very
aged, and pleaded this fact. In his petition he says that —
" Conceaveing it to be his greatest happines to be serviceable to the king's
Majestie and the kingdome in the preservatioun of the caus of God (he) lies thairvpone,
with much waiknes bot with exact fidelity and affectione, contribute his vtmost endea-
vours and paines in thair service thir twelf yeirs bygone, and wold have most willingly
continevved thairin, bot that it hes pleased God to viseit him with such waiknes, the
inseparable companion of old aige, that he is not able to performe that service that
ather the importance of the publict affairs or his duetie and affection to his Majesties
service doeth requyre of him ; and thairfore that thair be no preindice by him, he
does with all humility surrauder and dimitt to the king's Majestie and estates of
parliament his office and charge of being general of the forces of the kingdome, to be
dispoised as the king's Majestie shall think fitt, and if it shall pleas God to grant him
health and strenth, he shall be most willing to attend his Majestie and contribute with
his best advyse."
In reply to which the parliament, after passing, in terms as formerly, a high
encomium on his services and character, continued him " in his former charge as
generall of the forces of this kingdome ; and considdering that in respect of his
aige and indispositioun of his bod}', he is not aible to geive constant attendance
vpone the airmy ; thairfore his Majestie and Estates forsaidis dispences thairwith,
he always attending his Majestie and the airmy as his hailth may permitt him ;
and declairs that in respect of his indispositioun foresaid he shall noways be
comptable for any omission if any shall be in the airmy bot shall be only redy to
geive his best advyse in everything concerneing the sam."2
After a short recess of a few weeks the parliament met again at Stirling, but
in connection with it the Earl of Leven is noticed only as presenting a petition
and obtaining decree in his favour against Sir James Stuart, and also being con-
tinued as a member of the committee of estates.3 He seems at this time, not-
withstanding his dispensation, to have been present with the army at Stirling,
whence he could not return home to attend the funeral of his wife, the Countess
1 Extract Act in Leven Charter-chest, 2 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
dated 23d December 1C50. Cf. Acts of the vol. vi. part ii. p. 651.
Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. pp.
609, 618, 62L 3 Ibid. pp. 668, G79, 687.
430 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
of Leven, who died at Inclileslie, in the Carse of Gowrie, on 26th June, this
year. Lamont notes the event, and adds : — " Her corps were brought to
Balgonie in Fyfe, and were interred the 23d of July att Markinshe, in the night
season, a fewe onlie attending them, her husband, the Earle of Leuin, not being
present, bot was vp att Stirling with the armie." l Possibly the movements of
Cromwell's troops had something to do with the earl's absence from the funeral
of his countess ; for at this very time, while Cromwell himself was threatening
the Scottish position at Stirling, part of his forces had effected a landing on the
Fifeshire coast, and had taken possession of the district.2
When Cromwell crossed the Firth of Forth the Scottish leaders resolved on
the bold step of invading England. Led by David Leslie, and with King
Charles the Second himself in their midst, they suddenly struck their camp and
marched southwards. Their destination was the English capital, and they suc-
ceeded in reaching Worcester before the pursuit of Cromwell forced them to
stand. Here the Scots fortified themselves, and on the anniversary of Dunbar,
the 3d of September, the battle of Worcester took place. After a stubborn fight
the Scots were totally defeated, oidy a few, among whom was the king, succeed-
ing in effecting their escape.
While the Scottish army was marching south, a powerful detachment of the
English parliamentary forces under General Monck continued their progress
northwards and throughout Fife. Perth had been rendered before Cromwell left,
and now Monck's soldiers were besieging Dundee. The Scottish committee of
estates, with whom the Earl of Leven was, were being driven further north.
They attempted to hold a meeting at Alyth, in Forfarshire, on the 28th of
August. But intelligence having reached Monck at Dundee, he sent a military
force to the spot, which succeeded in surprising and capturing all the members,
including the Earl of Leven. The prisoners were immediately sent off by sea to
England — first to Tynemouth Castle and then to the Tower of London, where
they probably arrived in the latter half of September. They were certainly there
before the 1st October, as on that date his son-in-law, Ralph Delaval of Seaton-
Delaval, in the county of Northumberland, petitioned the English council of state
for leave to visit the Earl of Leven in the Tower in order to supply him with
necessaries, and the request was granted. Two days later, on the motion of
Cromwell himself, the council agreed to give the earl the liberty of the Tower,
and leave to his servant to come and attend him. Delaval, however, endeavoured
to obtain the council's permission that the earl should be imprisoned at his house
1 Lamont's Diary, p. 31.
2 Carlyle's Cromwell's Letters and Speeches, Letter elxxvi.
AGNES RENTON.
WIFE OF
ALEXANDER LESLIE. FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
A PRISONER IN ENGLAND. 431
in Northumberland, to which they agreed on condition that the earl himself gave
his parole under his hand and seal, and that Delaval found security to the amount
of £20,000 that the earl would be a true prisoner to parliament, as by them
confined to Mr. Delaval's house at Seaton Delaval, or within twelve miles
thereof, and not depart thence without leave, nor meantime act, advise,
or contrive anything prejudicial to parliament. These conditions were com-
plied with, the earl giving his parole as required, and Delaval himself, with John
Delaval of Peterborough and John Delaval of Dover, probably relatives, entering
into a recognisance, jointly and severally, of £20,000 for his safe keeping.
Warrant was thereupon given to the lieutenant of the Tower to release the earl,
and also Lauchlan Leslie, his servant, to attend him.1
The Earl of Leven continued to reside at the house of Mr. Delaval and his
eldest daughter until the year 1654, save that in June 1652 he received a permit
from the English council to proceed to London for two months, the time being
afterwards twice extended for similar periods, the latter on account of the inex-
pediency of his travelling so far in mid-winter. While he was in London in
December 1652 a general order was issued for the remanding of all prisoners,
and it appears as if the earl had been again committed to the Tower, as special
instructions were sent to the lieutenant of the Tower that it had not been
intended by this order that the Earl of Leven should be remanded. He also
employed his stay in London to petition for the recovery of his estates, concern -
in°- which reference was made to the Scottish executive, and orders issued that
none of them should meanwhile be given away or disposed of.2 Nothing, how-
ever, was immediately done. In August 1653 the earl was again petitioning the
English council, when it was arranged that Captain Howard should present the
earl's petition to the parliament.3 In the following March it is minuted in the
council's proceedings that the earl's petition had been referred to the committee
for Scottish business for report.4 To what this petition related does not appear,
but about this time Christina, Queen of Sweden, and her son the king, were
exerting themselves on behalf of the earl. The queen wrote to the English par-
liament requesting his freedom, and setting forth the great services he had ren-
dered in various countries between 1605 and 1638. Her letter is dated from
Stockholm on 17th September 1653,5 and may have been penned in support of a
petition for freedom from the earl himself. At all events her intervention was
1 State Papers, 1651, pp. 431, 458,465; Parliaments of Scotland, vol. vi. part ii. pp.
1651-2, pp. 12, 16, 17. 777, 797, 800.
3 Ibid. 1653-4, p. 79.
2 State Papers, 1651-2, pp. 2S9, 432, 511 ; 4 Ibid. 1654, p. 54.
1652-3, pp. 65, 97, 100, 103 ; ef. Acts of the 5 Note of Letter in Melville Charter-cuest.
432 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
successful, and the earl was permitted to return to Scotland. He came to Bal-
gonie, says Lamont, on 25th May 1G54, "haveing his person relaxed, his seques-
tration taken of, and frie of any pecuniall fyne ; this was done by the meanes of
the Queene of Swedden." 1
Some portion of the earl's estates, however, had been disposed of to an
English officer, with whom complications arose later. These gave rise to the fol-
lowing petition, presented by the Earl of Leven to the English parliament, which
is interesting as giving the earl's own account of some of the main incidents of
his later life : —
" To the Supreame Authority the Parliament of the Commonwealth of England,
" The humble peticion of Alexander, Earle of Leven ;
"Humbly sheweth, — That in the yeare 1640 your petitioner came into England
generall of the Scotch army at a seasonable tyme out of a brotherly affection to this
nation, which, by the providence of God after the success of the Scottish army at
Nuburne, proved the greate occasion that induced the late king to call this present
parliament ; and how faithfull your petitioner was to the intrest of the good people of
this nation dureing the tyme the Scotch army resided in Angland in keepeing the
army from being wrought uppon to your disservice he doubts not but is fresh in your
honnours memory.
"That in the yeare 1643 hee came in like manner generall of the Scottish army
in the winter season, and made way with the same, notwithstanding the interposition
of the Earle of Newcastels army, till be became possessed of the port of Sunderland in
order to your service, and that after Yorke fight, your petitioner layd seige to the
towne of Newcastle which place he obteyned, and though the same was taken by
storme, yet out of his affection to the English nation he would not suffer that the
inhabitants should be put to the sword ; allthough the army were exceedingly provoaked
thereto by the losse of the lives of many of theire best commanders.
"That in anno 1648, when Duke Hamilton invaded this nation, your petitioner,
notwithstanding all importunities and profferred incourragments for ingageing in that
service, did refuse to invade England, and not only thereupon layd downe his commis-
sion granted to him for his life, but likwise did take vpon him the commande of the
army raised by the well efected in Scotland in opposition to that ingagement of the
said dukes. For all which services your petitioner did at severall tymes receive letters
of thankes and other toakens of acceptance from this parliament.
"That your petitioner doth ackuowledg that in the yeare 1650, when your forces
entred Scottland, your petitioner, haueing then the tytle of generall, was thereby
obliged to be with the Scotch army at Dunbarr. But after the Scotch army entred
England the petitioner did not enter with them ; but retired with other noblemen and
gentlemen of that nation northwards, where afterwards he was taken prisoner at Elliott.
" That your petitioner being thus taken prisonour had his estate therevpou seized and
i Diary, p. 72.
PETITION TO THE ENGLISH PARLIAMENT, C. 1659. 433
seqnestred, and afterwards, by an order of this present parliament of the ffowerteenth of
May 52 it was reffered to the commissioners for sequestration and confiscated estates
in Scottland to sett forth lande of the cleare yearly vallue of .£500 per annum for
Colonel Overton and his heires (£100 per annum whereof hee was to pay as a rent to
the commonwealth ; in pursuance whereof the said commissioners, although your
petitioners estate was never adjudged confiscat by parliament), did assigne the said
Colonel Overton to receive the said annuall sume out of bis estate ; and your petitioner
afterwards humbly addressing himselfe to this present parliament for releefe therein, you
were pleased by your order of the 29 of October 1652, for the reasons therein eon-
teyned in his petition, to referr your petitioners case to a committee of your owne,
and in the meanetyme, and vntill the matter of fact was stated and reported to your
honnours, were pleased to order the stopp of any further disposall of your petitioners
estate ; but your honnours, before any reporte made of his case being interrupted,
afterwards vpon a generall order made by the late deceased protectour for satisfaction
of those persons who had donatiues, the said Colonel Overton, by his atturney there-
vnto authorised, did decleare his willingness (before hee was vnder any restraynt) to
except of satisfaction in money for his said donatiue from the state after the rate of
tenn years value out of the £40,000 imposed as a ffyne vpon certayne persons in Scott-
land, and about the same tyme the said deceased protectour was pleased, in considera-
tion of your petitioners said service, and vpon a lettre written from the King of
Sweaden mediateing on your petitioners behalfe for the free restoreing him to his said
estate, to cause all sequestration to be discharged ; and your petitioner, shortly after
marrying his grand childe to the daughter of Sir William Howard of Naworth, in the
county of Cumberland, did settle and entayle his said estate vpon his said grand childe
and his posterity.
" That Colonel Overton net haueing received the afforesaid satisfaction in leiu of
the said donatiue, hath lately presented this parliament with a petition to be restored
to his said donative out of your petitioner's said estate ; which, if your honnours should
grant, will not only be a greater punishment then hath been inflicted vpon any the
confiscated persons in Scotland, but is that which will be the total ruine of your
petitioner and his relations, and must necessaryly bring downe his grey haires with
sorrow to the grave.
"Your honnours' petitioner therfore humbly prayeth that the perticulars before
mentioned may be taken into your serious consideracion, as also the settle-
ment of your petitioner's estate vpon marriage as fforesaid, and to continue
your petitioner and his said grand childe in the possession of theire said
estate ; and that for effectuall releife and satisfaction to the said Colonel
Overton, your petitioner humbly beseecheth your honnours will be pleased
to finde out such other way as by your honnours' greate wisdome and good-
ness shall be thought fitt.
" And he, as in duty bound, shall ever pray, etc. u -, „ l
1 Original or signed copy, undated, in Mel- lately deceased protector fixes the date as
ville Charter- chest. The reference to the about the year 1659.
VOL. I. 3 I
434 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
What the result of this petition was has not been ascertained. It is indeed
doubtful if anything was done by the English parliament, as they soon had enough
of other work cut out for them by the schemes of General Monck. The restora-
tion of the monarchy, however, in the following year, placed an insuperable bar
in the way of Colonel Overton's wishes, and gave the desired relief to the old
Earl of Leven.
Hitherto we have only dealt with the political career of the Earl of Leven.
It is necessary that we look back to his domestic and private life, of which, how-
ever, little is known, until he came into prominence as the great warrior he was.
As a soldier, early in life he had carved out his fortune with his sword, and from
time to time, during his military career on the Continent, found leisure to return
to his native country and enjoy somewhat of domestic felicity. He must have mar-
ried pretty early in life, as his son Alexander took service with him under the king
of Sweden, and was, as formerly stated, a colonel in the Swedish army in 1637.
It was in 1635, during one of his visits to Scotland, that Sir Alexander
Leslie purchased the greater portion of his landed estates. These investments
indicate a wish on his part to retire from active military service for the remainder
of his life. He already possessed an estate in Sweden, which he had received
from Gustavus Adolphus in 1630, confirmed to him by Queen Christina in 1632,
and, as formerly noted, two earldoms in Germany — at least according to an
English account. His rights to these, however, if they were granted, must have
vanished when the Imperialist troops again overran the country ; and the Swedish
estate never seems to have been entered upon. Indeed it was recalled by the
Swedish government in 1655, as having been unduly and therefore illegally
bestowed on him. But the leanings of Sir Alexander Leslie were towards his
native country, and he aimed at settling there.
The barony of Balgonie, in Fife, belonged, in 1445, to the Sibbalds, from
whom, a little later, it passed by marriage to the family of Lundie. The Lundies
held it for more than a century, and then sold it in 1626 to two sons of Boswell
of Balmuto. Being, however, heavily encumbered with debt, the barony was
sold in 1634 to John, Earl of Rothes, who, in purchasing, probably acted for Sir
Alexander Leslie, as he sold it to him in the following year, with the lands of
Craigincat, likewise acquired from the Boswells.1 About the same time Leslie
acquired Boglilie from Sir John Boswell of Balmuto, with consent of the Earl of
Rothes and others. The infeftments of these lands were taken to Sir Alexander
Leslie as liferenter, and to his son, Colonel Alexander Leslie, as fiar, who in the
following year married Lady Margaret Leslie, daughter of the Earl of Rothes.
1 Disposition, dated 13th June 1635, in Melville Charter-chest.
SETTLEMENT OP HIS ESTATES. 435
Another estate purchased at this time was that of East Nisbet in Berwick-
shire. In the latter half of the fifteenth century it came by marriage from the
family of Nisbet to that of Chirnside, and continued with the latter till 1 622, when
it was apprised for debt by John Cranston of Thorndykes, who, in 1626, disponed
it to Lord Cranston, and he to General Leslie in 1635. This estate, with the
others in Fife, were by crown-charter erected into the barony of Balgonie in
favour of Sir Alexander Leslie and his son, and their heirs, and the grant was
afterwards ratified by parliament.1
One thing which shows that Sir Alexander Leslie was in Scotland at the time
these purchases were made is that he was then presented with the freedom of the
ancient burgh of Culross.2 This was apparently the only case in which the
continental fame of the earl procured such a recognition. After his services,
however, as general of the Scots army, similar honours were conferred upon him
by other Scottish towns. On 1st November 1639 he was presented with the
freedom of the town of Perth. Edinburgh followed suit on 1st April 1640,
and a month later South Queensferry made " the right honourable and renowned "
general one of her burgesses. In 1642, when the expedition under his care was
sent to Ireland, Dunbar showed her esteem for " the mighty and potent Erie,
Alexander Erie of Levin," etc., by enrolling his name, on the 6th July, on her
civic list ; and on his way to assume the command, he was stopped at Ayr, and
presented with the freedom of that town ; while Glasgow seized her opportunity
on his return from Ireland thither on 2d December to make " the most honour-
able brave and worthy leader " one of her burgesses.3
In 1642 the Earl of Leven made a further settlement of his estates by an
entail conceived in favour of his respective grand-children and their issue. He,
as liferenter, and his son, Lord Balgonie, as fiar, grant these estates to Alexander
Leslie, only son of the said Lord Balgonie and Lady Margaret Leslie, his wife,
daughter of the deceased John, Earl of Bothes, and to the heirs-male of his body.
The succession in the entail is then stated to the following other grand-children
of the earl and their heirs-male, viz., Alexander and Francis Buthvens, the
second and third sons of Major-General Sir John Buthven and Lady Barbara, the
eldest daughter of the earl ; to the son of Walter Dundas, fiar of that ilk, and
Lady Christian, second daughter of the earl ; to the second son of Hugh, Master
of Lovat, and Lady Anna, third daughter of the earl ; and then to the second son
of his youngest daughter, Lady Mary, and whomsoever she should marry. Fail-
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, vol. v. p. 450.
2 Burgess ticket, dated 9th July 1635, in Melville Charter-chest.
3 Burgess tickets in Melville Charter-chest.
436 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
ing all these the succession was devolved on Captain John Leslie of Edrom,
brother of the earl, and the heirs-male of his body ; then on the second son or
lawful nearest heir-male of the family of Rothes, and finally on the heirs-male of
that house succeeding to the earldom of Rothes, the successor being obliged to
take the name of Leslie, and bear the insignia of Leven and Balgonie. The
granters reserved their respective liferents and power of redemption by payment
in the church of Markinch, or at the outer door of Balgonie, of ten merks Scots,
gold or silver, on three days' warning.1
The close relations that existed between the house of Rothes and the earl's
family are manifested in this entail, as well as in the matrimonial alliance between
them. It is further evinced by the earl obtaining, after the death of John, Earl
of Rothes, in August 1641, a gift from the king of the ward and marriage of
the young earl, who afterwards became Duke of Rothes and chancellor of the
kingdom. Along with the gift there is stated to have been an assignation
of the same in favour of the young Earl of Rothes, showing the intention of
Lord Leven to make it over to him at a convenient season.2 Probably this was
done on the occasion of his marriage in 1648 to Lady Anna Lindsay, eldest
daughter of the lord high treasurer, to which, as one of his curators, the Earl
of Leven gave his sanction.3
Later, the Earl of Leven added to his possessions in the counties of Fife and
Berwick by the purchase in 1650 from Sir Patrick Ogilvie, Lord Deskford, of the
estate of Inchmartin in the parish of Errol, and Carse of Gowrie, Perthshire.
The price ap>pears to have been 40,000 merks, for which the earl granted a bond.
But owing to the events which took place immediately afterwards, and the cap-
ture and removal of the earl to England, the bond was not duly met until after
his return, before which time, however, action for payment had been commenced
against the earl in the court of Cromwell's " Keepers of the Liberty."* The
earl changed the name of the estate to Inchleslie, but the Ogilvies re-acquired
the estate about 1720, and the name was restored to its original form.
When between 1651 and 1654 the earl was in England a prisoner of the
commonwealth, and residing at Seaton-Delaval, in Northumberland, the residence
of his third daughter, Lady Anne, the Howards of Naworth Castle, in the
adjacent county of Cumberland, did some friendly service in connection with the
negotiations with Cromwell's parliament for his release, etc., and the friendship
1 Charter, dated 27tb July 1642, in Melville 3 Fourth Report of Historical mss. Com-
Charter-chest. mission, Appendix, p. 510.
2 Fourth Report of Historical mss. Comrnis- * Disposition and other papers iu Melville
sion, Appendix, p. 509. Charter-chest.
HIS MARRIAGE AND CHILDREN. 437
with this family was soon afterwards more closely cemented by the earl's arrang-
ing the marriage of his grandson to Margaret Howard, the sister of Charles, first
Earl of Carlisle. In 1656 he made his will, in which he left all his property
to his grandson, with a particular charge to preserve in the family the jewel
gifted to him by the King of Sweden ; and he added several other special wishes.1
He lived to see the restoration of King Charles the Second in 1660, and died at
Balgonie on 4th April 1661. He was buried in the evening of the 19th of the
same month in his own aisle at Markinch Church.
As formerly stated, Alexander, first Earl of Leven, married Dame Agnes
Renton, daughter of David Renton of Billie, in the county of Berwick, who
predeceased him on 26th June 1651, and was buried at Markinch on 23d July,
under circumstances already referred to. It is stated, on the authority of an
English peerage-writer, that the earl afterwards married, as his second wife,
Frances, daughter of Sir John Ferrers of Tamworth, in Staffordshire, widow of
Sir John Packington of Westwood, in Worcestershire, but not the slightest indi-
cation of such a marriage is afforded by the family papers, so that, to say the
least, it is extremely doubtful. By his countess, Agnes Renton, he had issue
two sons and five daughters : — -
1. Gustavus Leslie, who appears to have died young.
2. Alexander Leslie, Lord Balgonie, the second, but only surviving son, who,
following the same calling as his father, accompanied him to the Continent,
and rose to the rank of colonel in the -Swedish service. He married, in 1636,
Lady Margaret Leslie, second daughter of John, fifth Earl of Rothes, having
previously, as stated above, been placed in possession of the estates as fiar,
in part of which Lady Margaret was infeft as her jointure lands.2 He
seems to have been of a facile and easy nature, and to prevent the possi-
bility of injury to the family on that account he granted a bond debarring
himself from borrowing money, contracting debts or cautionries, or doing
anything to dilapidate the estate, without the consent of his " loveing father,"
and of William, Master of Cranston, Major-General Sir John Ruthven, and
Walter Dundas, younger of that ilk, his brothers-in-law, and John Renton
of Lamberton, while letters of inhibition following upon the bond were
procured against Lord Balgonie.3 He made his will on 12th January 1644,
appointing curators for his children,4 and died in the following year.
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 175.
2 Fourth Report by the Historical mss. Commissioners, Appendix, p. 509 ; cf. Memoirs
of the Family of Wemyss of Wemyss, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B., vol. ii. pp. 318, 319.
3 Bond (Extract), dated 27th December 1643, and Letters of Inhibition, dated 24th
January 1645, in Melville Charter chest. 4 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 172.
438 SIR ALEXANDER LESLIE, FIRST EARL OF LEVEN.
Lady Margaret Leslie, Lady Balgonie, survived her husband, and was
twice afterwards married, to Francis, second Earl of Buccleuch, in 1646, and
to David, second Earl of Wemyss, in 1653. This remarkable lady had a
very prominent hand in bringing about the restoration of King Charles the
Second in 1660. She was by her several marriages mother of the second
Earl of Leven, of the two young Countesses of Buccleuch, Mary, and Anna
who became Duchess of Buccleuch and Monmouth, and also of Margaret,
Countess of Wemyss in her own right. The issue of the marriage of
Alexander, Lord Balgonie, and Lady Margaret Leslie were —
(1.) Alexander Leslie, second Earl of Leven, of whom a short notice
follows.
(2.) Catherine Leslie, who married George, first Earl of Melville, and
has been noticed in his memoir.
(3.) Agnes Leslie, who is mentioned in her father's testament, but appears
to have died young, apparently before January 1646.
The daughters of Alexander, first Earl of Leven, and Agnes Renton, were —
1. Lady Barbara Leslie, who married General Sir John Ruthven of Dunglas, and
had issue.
2. Lady Christian Leslie, who married Walter Dundas, younger, of Dundas,
and had issue.
3. Lady Anne Leslie, who married, first, Hugh, Master of Lovat, and had
issue, and secondly, Sir Ralph Delaval of Seaton-Delaval, in the county of
Northumberland, and had issue.
4. Lady Margaret Leslie, who married James Crichton, first Viscount of Fren-
draught, and left issue a daughter, Lady Janet, to whom the Earl of Leven
refers in his will. She married, in 1665, Sir James M'Gill of Rankeillor,
her dowry being provided temporarily out of the Leven estates.1
5. Lady Mary Leslie, who married William, Master of, afterwards third Lord
Cranston, and had issue.
1 Lamont's Diary, p. 181.
LADY MARGARET LESLIE, COUNTESS OF BUCCLEUCH:
MARRIED 1646; DIED 1688.
439
II. — Alexander, second Earl of Leven.
Margaret Howard (Carlisle), his Countess.
1(561—1664.
On the death of his father in 1645, Alexander Leslie, afterwards second Earl of
Leven, was still in his minority, having been born in or about the year 1637. He
was, with his surviving sister, Lady Catherine, taken under the care of his grand-
father, who having provided the estates to him, made a special provision for his
sister,1 and afterwards arranged her marriage, as already stated, to George, Lord
Melville. Young Lord Balgonie had as his tutor or " pedagoge " in 1647, Mr.
Eobert Turnbull,2 and his grandfather, in 1656, arranged his marriage to
Margaret, fifth daughter of Sir William Howard, and sister to Charles, Earl of
Carlisle. The marriage took place at Naworth Castle, in Cumberland, the resid-
ence of the bride's brother, on 30th December of that year, but Lamont says
she did not come to Balgonie till the following month of March. He adds that
her dowry was forty-five thousand merks, her jointure from the Leven estates
nine thousand merks, and that the home-coming cost Lord Balgonie about
twenty-four thousand merks.3
In 1661, on the death of his grandfather, Lord Balgonie succeeded as second
Earl of Leven, and as such appeared in parliament at Edinburgh on 14th May of
that year, and took the oath of allegiance and his seat. The Earl of Callendar,
who had striven so long and unsuccessfully with the first earl to have precedency
for his title, took this opportunity to raise the question of new, and on this occasion
the question was remitted to the lords of the articles for debate. They, after
consideration, and hearing both parties, reported in favour of the Earl of Callen-
dar, and parliament accordingly passed a decree in his favour, in which they state
their reasons for so doing. In the same parliament the earl took the precaution
of obtaining a ratification of the charter of his lands granted by King Charles the
First to his grandfather in 164 1.4
The earl is mentioned in the following year as forming, with his attendants,
1 Vol. iii. of this work, p. 173. 3 Contract of marriage in Melville Charter-
2 He was a witness to the marriage eon- chest ; Lamout's Diary, p. 90.
tract of Colonel Brainer and Margaret Leslie, 4 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland,
Lady Brunton. vol. vii. pp. 200, 210, 273.
440 ALEXANDER, SECOND EARL OF LEVEN.
part of the convoy of the newly consecrated archbishop of St. Andrews, James
Sharpe, on his way through Fife to St. Andrews, and he attended the meeting of
parliament at Edinburgh on 8th Ma}', at which the bishops were reintroduced as
members of the estates. In the following year he was chosen to act on the
parliamentary commission for the plantation of kirks, made a justice of the peace
for the counties of Berwick and Fife, and placed on a committee for adjusting
accounts with the collectors of Fife, which was appointed at his own request.1
In the same year he was chosen by Anna, Countess of Buccleuch, as one of her
curators, and as such signed her marriage contract to James, Duke of Monmouth.'2
This earl in 1663 made a new entail of the Leven estates, as, having no male
issue, he wished to provide them to his daughters, and failing them, to the second
son in succession of the Earls of Rothes, Melville, and Wemyss.3 In terms
thereof he resigned his estates, and a signature was given by the king in February
1664 for a re-grant, but before the charter was completed the earl died. In the
same year, 1663, he made his testament, but it was not completed. In it he
mentions his having two daughters, and refers to another child still unborn. He
died at Balgonie on 15th July 1664, Lamont says, of a high fever, after a deep
carouse with the Earl of Dundee at Edinburgh and Queensferry. Some say, he
relates, that in crossing the Firth they drank sea water to one another, and after
their landing they drank sack. He was buried at Markinch on 3d August with
some ceremony, a funeral sermon being preached on the occasion from James iv.
14, "Our life is but a vapour," by Mr. John .Robertson, minister of Edinburgh,
and formerly chaplain to the earl ; and the annalist adds that this was the first
funeral sermon preached in Fife for the last twenty-four years or more. He was
survived by his countess for only a short time. She died at Edinburgh on 30th
September, the same year, " being bot a tender weake woman," and her body
being transported from Leith to Wemyss by water, was interred at Markinch on
the evening of the 3d October.4 They had issue three daughters : —
1. Margaret, Countess of Leven, who in terms of the new entail made by her
father, succeeded to the title and estates. The Earl of Rothes was her
tutor, and obtained a new signature from the king in her favour in place of
the former one granted to her father. The heirs under the old entail
made objection to her succession, but Rothes summoned them to prove their
1 Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, Fraser, K.C.B., vol. i. pp. 409-413.
vol. vii. pp. 368, 446, 474, 501, 505, 507; 3 Dated 12th February 1663, in Melville
Lamont's Diary, pp. 146, 148. Charter-chest.
2 The Scotts of Buccleuch, by Sir William 4 Lamont's Diary, pp. 170 172.
MARGARET, COUNTESS OF LEVEN. 441
claims before the lords of session, who found that the lately deceased earl
had the power to alter the entail as he had done.1 In 1671 she made choice
of her curators, among whom were the Duke of Monmouth, the Earls of
Rothes, Wemyss, Egliuton, and Carlisle, and Lords Melville, Lindores, and
Newark.2 Alexander, eighth Earl of Eglinton, here named, was a nephew of
John, Earl of Rothes, being the son of his younger sister, Lady Mary, and
having no sons of his own, Rothes appears to have designed to marry the
young Countess of Leven to Eglinton's younger brother, the Hon. Francis
Montgomerie of Giffen. The following letter from her evidently to her
aunt, Lady Melville, is interesting as dealing with this subject. She appears
to have been residing at the time with her grandmother, the Countess of
Wemyss, who was the aunt of Montgomerie :—
"Wemyss, July 31,1673.
"My dieeest Ant, — I reseued yours and thinks my self very much
oblidged to your gret kyndnes in acquenting me uith things you hier of me,
ukich I can ashure you I am not gilty of, for my corospondans uith Mr. Munt-
gomry's sisters is nou almost auay, for I urot not to any of them hot ons sins I
sie you, and I am confident nather he nor his sisters has any ground to say I hau
any mor lou to him then I shuld hau to a cosin, and nather dar they say so
much uithout gluing me much ofeus, for it neuer uas my burner to given
any man that satisfaction to say I have any partikuler lou to him, nether did he
euer demand that of me yet. I beliue uhen he corns ouer he uill do it, and the
chansler will do all he can too. Bot be ashured I shall giu my consent to mary
to no man till I be tuenty yiers of ag, and then I hop in God I shall not be in
gret danger of bearing bairns. I got word from Dr. Waderburn that if I maried
nou I shuld haserd both my oun lyf and my chyld's. Bot I intend to put
the wyen to no hazerd sins I beliu its only the chansler's desyr to get him this
fortoun and me to dy, and therfor in a mater I oght to consider upon or I weaken
the family my gret grandfather got at the prys of his blood. I am sory you think
I can disemell, espitily uith on I loue so riell as you. Realy the thoghts of it
put me in a gret distemper hier yesterdy, and I uas a litel uuried, for I neuer
imagine! you had such an ill opinion of me as to think I could disemell any,
sins my father uas so frie of it. I asoir you all the kyndnes euer I profesed to
you was all in tru afection, and if you do not beliu me it shall truble me
mighttily, sins I prys your kyndnes at so gret a rait that I wold not los it for
any thing in the world. I shall falow my lady's derekshon as will sertenly
it uill be my saifest uay. I shall declair myself no farder of the kyndnes I hau
mor to my dier father's beloued sister, bot shall say this far uithout any disemliu,
— I am intierly, my dierest heart, your oun M. Liven.
1 Decreet, 10th February 1665, in Melville the dinner on the occasion at Cupar, lSth
Charter-chest. April, was over £140 Scots. [In Melville
2 The innkeeper's account for providing Charter-chest.]
VOL. I. 3 K
442 CATHERINE, COUNTESS OF LEV EN.
." I hail sent the berer expres uith this long leter, desyring to send a kleu of
virset uith him. My most humble seruis to your lord and children, and lykuys
the master, I shall sho you if it be good." x
Probably, however, the countess was not permitted to carry out her own
wishes in the matter, for within a few months the contract of marriage be-
tween her and Mr. Francis Montgomerie was prepared, and the marriage was
to be solemnised with all convenience thereafter.2 When it took place does
not appear, but the event that was feared was what actually happened. The
countess died in November 1674, leaving no issue. Her husband, by the
contract, was entitled to a large jointure out of the estates, which led to a
lawsuit between him and the third Earl of Leven, to which reference has
been made in the latter's memoir. One of the pleas urged was that the
marriage ought never to have taken place, as the young countess was in no
condition for matrimony, and that she was forced thereto by the Duke of
Rothes ; but medical evidence was adduced on both sides, which determined
nothing, and the plea was not sustained.3 She was succeeded by her only
surviving sister, Lady Catherine Leslie.
2. Lady Anna Leslie, the second daughter, is mentioned in the testament of her
father in 1663. In an account by the apothecary who furnished medicines
for the three sisters from 11th July 1668 to 22d January 1676, and which
amounted to £2312, 9s. Od., Lady Anna is said to have been the most
valetudinary of the three. She must have predeceased her eldest sister.
3. Catherine, Countess of Leven, who was born in 1663 or 1664, and succeeded
on the death of her sister, Lady Margaret, to the title and estates of Leven.
George, Lord Melville, was on 15th January 1675 appointed tutor-in-law
to her by letters under the great seal,4 and in October of the same year she
chose as her curators the Duke of Monmouth, the Earl of Carlisle, George,
Lord Melville, and his son, the Master, one of whom was to be sine qua non ;
and there were others, but the Duke of Rothes is not named. Countess
Catherine, as is indicated by the apothecary's account, died on 21st January
1676, unmarried, and was succeeded in the title and estates by her cousin,
David Melville, the next heir of entail, as third Earl of Leven. His lineal
male descendants have inherited the Leven and Melville peerages, as ex-
plained in the previous memoirs of the Melville family.
1 Copy letter in Melville Charter-chest. Memorials of the Montgomeries, Earls of
2 Contract of marriage, dated 10th October Eglinton, by Sir William Fraser, K.C.B.,
1G73, ibid. vol. i. p. 94.
3 Papers in Melville Charter-chest. Cf. 4 In Melville Charter-chest.
443
ARMORIAL BEARINGS.
For Melville — Quarterly, first and fourth, gules, three crescents argent, within
a bordure of the second, charged with eight roses of the first ; second and third,
argent, a fess gules.
Crest. The head of a ratch hound, erased, sable.
Supporters. Dexter, an eagle ; Sinister, a ratch hound, both proper.
Motto. Denique coelum.
For Leven — Quarterly, first and fourth, azure, a thistle slipped, proper,
ensigned with an imperial crown, or, a coat of augmentation to the arms of
Leslie ; second and third, argent, on a bend, azure, three buckles or, for Leslie.
Crest. A demi-chevalier in complete armour, holding in his right hand a
dagger, erect, proper, the pommel and hilt, or.
Supporters. Two chevaliers in armour, each holding in his exterior hand the
banner of Scotland.
Motto. Pro rege et patria.
The coat of arms of the Melville family is of considerable antiquity. But, as
a recent writer on heraldry remarks, the arms have varied much, and the remark
is warranted by the various charges on the armorial seals of the family of which
there is any record. The opportunity for comparison is in this case more than
usually ample, as in 1296, at which date the earliest seals of the family are found,
no fewer than nine persons of the name of Melville did homage to King Edward
the First for lands in several counties of Scotland. Some of the seals then used
are preserved, or their charges are known. Thus the seal of Sir John Melville,
apparently of Glenbervie, shows a shield with a fess. The seal of James Melville
of Aberdeen, probably a burgess, also bears a fess, surmounting a garb. Another
seal, belonging to William Melville, who held lands in Peeblesshire, bears a
hunting-horn, stringed. Robert Melville, who did homage for lands in Roxburgh-
shire, is said to have used a seal bearing a lion rampant. Reginald Melville, a
burgess of Stirling, also swore fealty. His seal is not preserved, but that of his
son Henry, attached to a writ of later date, shows a single crescent on a shield.
There is no seal extant, so far as is known, of an early date, bearing the
name of any of the Melvilles of Melville in Midlothian ; but Sir David Lindsay,
in his Book of Heraldry, of date 1542, assigns to " Melving of that ilke " a
blazon of gules, three crescents argent, within a bordure of the second, charged
with eight roses of the first. This coat also was quartered by the family of Lord
444 ARMORIAL BEARINGS.
Ross of Halkhead and Melville, after intermarriage, about 1470, with Agnes
Melville, the heiress of Melville.
The Melvilles of Carnbee, in Fife, likewise blazoned crescents, but their coat
also varied. In one case, of uncertain date, it is described as argent, a fess gules,
a bordure of eight gyronny and or. In 1685 their arms, as registered in the
Lyon Office, were — or, three cushions gules, each charged with a crescent, argent
all within a bordure of the second, charged with eight roses of the first. But a
seal, appended to a charter by John Melville of Carnbee in the year 1509, shows
a shield bearing three cushions, each charged with a crescent. The bordure of
roses must have been added at a later date.
The Melvilles of Raith, according to Sir David Lindsay, bore simply argent,
a fess gules, but the seal of the earliest known laird of Raith, John Melville in
1412, shows a fess between three crescents. This bearing, which combines the
cognizance assigned to the Melvilles of that ilk with another old Melville blazon,
the fess, continued to be used by the Melvilles of Raith down to their accession
to the peerage of Lord Melville, as shown by extant seals. After the creation of
the peerage, Sir Robert Melville of Murdochcairnie, who up to that time had
used the fess between three crescents, received a new coat of arms, blazoned
quarterly, first and fourth, gules, three crescents argent, within a bordure of the
second, charged with eight roses of the first, as in the blazon of Melville of that
ilk ; second and third, argent, a fess gules ; with the supporters, an eagle and
ratch hound, crest and motto, as at present. This blazon was continued by the
second and third lords Melville, and also by George, first Earl of Melville. The
patent of his arms has not been preserved at Melville, and it is left blank in the
Lyon Office Record, the name only being entered ; but a blazoned Genealogy by
Walter Muir, Rothesay Herald, of date 1690, so far supplies the want of the
original and the defective record. Since that period, however, the arrangement of
the blazon and supporters has for some reason been altered, the modern armorial
bearings of the family showing quarterly, first and fourth argent, a fess gules ;
second and third, gules, three crescents argent within a bordure of the second,
charged with eight roses of the first, while the supporters have changed sides.
The cadets of Raith also appear to have used different coats. Sir Andrew
Melville of Garvock blazoned an eagle displayed between three crescents.
Melville of Auchmoor, about 1673, showed the fess gules, charged with three
crescents, and differenced. Probably about the same period, Sir James Melville of
Burntisland, a descendant of Sir James Melville of Hallhill, was allowed the old
coat of the Melvilles of that ilk, with a crescent for cadency, as appears from a blazon
of his arms at Melville House under the hand of John Sawer, Snawdon herald.
445
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MELVILLE.
GALFRID MELVILLE OF Melville, in Midlothian, flourished in the reigns of King Malcolm the Fourth and King
William the Lion, and was a prominent courtier of these sovereigns. He held the offices of sheriff of Edinburgh
Castle, and justiciar of Scotland, probably south of the Forth. Between 1170 and 1178 he granted the church of. Mel-
ville to the monks of Dunfermline, and five of his sons appear as witnesses to the charter. He was twice married, his
second wife being Matilda Malherbe ; and he had seven sons.
I
GREGORY MELVILLE op Melville,
eldest son, "who succeeded. He
excambed the lands of Ednam, etc.,
in Roxburghshire, for those of Gran-
ton, etc., in Midlothian, and is men-
tioned in charters to his son,
I
Galfrid Melville,
who was probably
ancestor of the
family of Melville
of Carnbee.
Thomas Melville,
who, with his
younger brothers,
witnessed a char-
ter by his father.
I I I I
Robert Melville.
Hugh Melville.
Richard Melville.
Walter Melville.
I
SIR RICHARD MELVILLE, sheriff of Linlithgow under King William the Lion, from whom he received several charters. He
married Margaret, daughter of Reginald Prat of Tynedale. In 1174 he was captured at Alnwick with his sovereign,
and was compelled before his release to swear fealty to the English king.
I
I
WILLIAM MELVILLE, mentioned in charters by
his son Gregory.
I
STEPHEN MELVILLE, probably uncle of Thomas of Temple,
as on his death he obtained his lands. He had a son,
SIR GREGORY MELVILLE, who between
1255 and 1271 confirmed a charter by his
grandfather, Sir Richard, for maintaining
a chaplainry at Tartraven, through which
lands he granted, in 1264, a right of way to
the monks of Newbattle. He is frequently
mentioned as a witness to charters, and
about 1264 is designated lately sheriff of
Aberdeen. He had a son,
WILLIAM MELVILLE, designated in a charter
by his father Sir Gregory, his son and heir.
In 1296 he swore fealty to King Edward the
First of England. He had a son,
David, who wit-
nessed a charter
by his brother
Gregory.
I
Thomas of Haddington, who as snch
witnessed a charter by his brother
Gregory. Probably he is also the
Thomas of Temple, son of William
Melville, who married Christian,
sister of Gregory Lysurs, and with
her obtained six acres of temple
lands in Gorton. He left three
daughters.
I I I
Christian, who married Adam, son of Walter,
son of Aldwyne.
Altcia, who married Richard, son of Galfrkl,
son of Gunnyld.
Eva, who married Malcolm, son of David Dun.
WALTER MELVILLE,
who inherited from his
father the temple lands
in Gorton, but disponed
them to William St. Clair.
He was probably the
father of
JOHN MELVILLE, who
lived during the reign
of Robert Bruce, and left
I
JOHN MELVILLE, Lord of that Ilk, who confirmed to the
monks of Newbattle in 1329 the charter of right of way
through Tartraven granted by his grandfather, Sir Gregory,
and also in 1344, his* gift of a stone of wax. He had a son,
WALTER MELVILLE, who, on his father's resignation in the
hands of King Robert Bruce, had a charter to himself and
Margaret, his wife, daughter of John Ayr, of the lands of
Capronestoun, in Peeblesshire. He died before 5th July 1365.
THOMAS MELVILLE, who was a consenting party to
his father's charter of 1344. He had a son,
THE MELVILLES OP RAITH.
JOHN MELVILLE, first of Raith, who had a charter of Pitscottie, in
Fife, from William Scott of Balwearie, in the reign of Robert III. His son,
JOHN MELVILLE, Lord of that Ilk, who, on 2nth November 1379,
granted a charter to John, son of John Melville of Carnbee, of the lands
of Granton and Stenhouse.
THOMAS MELVILLE, Lord of that Ilk, who in 1427 made an agree-
ment with Sir William Tyninghame, parson of Melville, anent the kirk
lands. He died before 27th January 1429, when his son,
!_
SIR JOHN MELVILLE, second of Raith, on 31st
May 1412 obtained the lands of Dura from William
Scott of Balwearie, with his daughter Marjory
Scott in marriage. He entered into a contract with
the laird of Wemyss in 1429 about a mill-lade. He
had a son and a daughter,
JOHN MELVILLE, Lord
op that Ilk, was served
heir to him. He died
before the year 1442,
when his son,
VOL. I.
WILLIAM MELVILLE, third of Raith, who on 26th May 1474 received
a charter of Raith from the abbot of Dunfermline. He married, first,
Margaret, daughter of Douglas of Longniddry ; and, secondly,
Euphame, daughter of Sir Robert Lundie of Balgonie, who survived
him. He died before 29th October 1502.
I
b
Elizabeth, who married,
about 1455, David Bos-
well of Balmuto.
3 L
446
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MELVILLE.
THOMAS MELVILLE of that Ilk, succeeded in 1442.
His estates seem to have suffered from debt. He
died in 1458, leaving a daughter Agnes, who married
Robert, son of Sir John Ross of Hawkhead. She died
before 16th October 147S, and in 1496 her son John
Ross, second Lord Ross of Hawkhead and Melville,
was retoured her heir in the barony of Melville.
JOHN MELVILLE, fiar of Raith. He granted a bond of manrent on
16th August 1487 to Sir John Wemyss of that Ilk. In 1491, on his
father's resignation, he obtained the family estates of Raith, and some
litigation subsequently took place between him and his father. He
married Janet Bonar, daughter of the laird of Rossie, who survived him.
He predeceased his father between June 1493 and June 1494, but left
two sons,
I d
SIR JOHN MELVILLE, fourth of Raith, who succeeded his grandfather in the estates of Raith, being served heir on 29th October
1502, and infeft ou 24th November following. He was created a knight by King James the Fourth, and rose to high favour with
King James the Fifth, by whom he was appointed Master-general of the Ordnance, Captain of the Castle of Dunbar, etc. But
having embraced the Reformed faith, he became obnoxious to the ruling clergy, and was executed on a charge of treason in 1548.
He married, first, Margaret Wemyss, daughter of Sir John Wemyss of that Ilk, by whom he had a son and daughter : secondly,
Helen, eldest daughter of Sir Alexander Napier of Merchiston, who survived him, dying about 1588, by whom also he had issue.
I
William Melville,
who, in 1544, had a
charter to himself
and his wife, Mar-
garet Douglas, sister
of Robert Douglas
of Lochleven. He
died without issue.
His wife survived
him until about the
year 15S8.
JOHN MELVILLE, fifth of Raith, who
was restored to his father's forfeited
estates on 4th June 1563. He married,
first, Isobel, daughter of the laird of
Lundie, by whom he had one son and two
daughters ; secondly, Margaret Bonar,
who died in October 1574, also leaving
issue ; and thirdly, Grissel Meldrum,
daughter of the laird of Seggie, who like-
wise predeceased him in 1597, leaving
issue. He died in March 1605.
SIR ROBERT MELVILLE OF
MURDOCAIRNIE, afterwards first
Lord Melville. He was a dis-
tinguished statesman. He was
thrice married, first, to Kathe-
rine, daughter of William Adam-
son of Craigcrook, by whom he
had one son ; secondly, to Lady
Mary Leslie, daughter of Andrew,
fifth Earl of Rothes ; thirdly, in
1613, to Lady Jean Stewart,
daughter of Robert, Earl of
Orkney, and widow of Patrick,
first Lord Lindores, by neither
of whom he had issue. He died
in 1621.
Sir James Melville
of Hallhill, also a distin-
guished courtier and states-
man. He was the author
of his "Memoirs." He
married Christian Bos-
well, and had issue two
sons and two daughters.
He died on 13th Novem-
ber 1617, and "was suc-
ceeded by his son.
/
JOHN MELVILLE, sixth of
Raith, succeeded his father in
the family estates. In 1602 he
obtained a charter of the lands
of Raith and others. He mar-
ried, in 1584, Margaret, daugh-
ter of Sir William Scott of
Balwearie, who survived him.
He died on 17th January 1626,
leaving issue.
I I
Mr. Thomas Melville.
He had a gift of the mar-
riage of his nephew John,
on 4th January 1626. He
appears to have died about
April 1643.
James Melville, named
along with his brother in
1605 in their father's will.
He had the lands of Fedd-
inch. He married, and
had issue two daughters.
I I I I I
Margaret, who married, contract
dated 1st October 15S5, James
Wemyss of Bogie, and had issue.
Isobel, who married, contract dated
25th January 15S8, George, eldest
son of George Auchinleck of Bal-
manno.
Agnes, » w],0 appear to have died
Janet, ) young.
Alison, "who married Mr. David Bar-
clay of Touch.
I I I
Margaret, who was
still unmarried in
1621, when she was
a legatee of her
uncle Robert, first
Lord Melville.
Christian, who
was also one of her
uncle's legatees in
1621.
Katherine, young-
est daughter. She
was also a legatee
in 1621.
I
JOHN MELVILLE, seventh of Raith,
third Lord Melville, succeeded his father
in Raith in 1626, and in 1635 succeeded his
cousin, Robert, second Lord Melville, in
his honours. He married, contract dated
27th October 1627, Anne, elder daughter
and coheiress of Sir George Erskine, Lord
Innertiel, a brother of the first Earl of
Kellie. She survived her husband, being
still alive in 1648. He died on 22d May
643, leaving issue. [
I
James Melville, who
was connected with
the plantation of
Ulster. He married,
in 1618, Jean Sinclair,
" Lady Parbroith,"
and died about 1653,
apparently s.p.
I
David Melville, who appears
as a witness to a resignation
by his brother-german, John,
Lord Melville, on 11th Janu-
ary 1643, was appointed
tutor to his brother's chil-
dren in May 1644, but died
in that year, apparently
unmarried.
I 9
Mr. Thomas Melville,
minister of Kinglassie,
ancestor of the Melvilles
of C'airnie. He married
Jean Gourlay, and died
21st April 1675, aged 73.
He had issue three sons
and three daughters.
I I !
John Melville. Moses Melville. George Melville.
I I I
Jean.
Bathia.
Catherine.
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MELVILLE.
b
447
William Melville, who
had a disposition of the
lands of Pitscottie and
Dura. He appears fre-
quently on record.
I
Andrew Melville, who was a
party with his father and
brothers in their pleas before
the lords of parliament, etc.
He lived at Leith.
I
David, mentioned
as son of Eupharne
Luudie in 1506.
Elizabeth, who mar-
ried, contract dated
27th February 1497,
John Gourlay, son
of the laird of Lam-
lethan.
Margabet, who
married James
Bonar of Rossie.
I
David Melville, bur-
gess of Edinburgh,
who married and left
a son, I
"Walter Melville.
Captain David Melville of
Nevvmill. He had a charter
of the mills of Dairsie in
1581. He married Margaret
Douglas, but died in October
1594, s./j., when his brother
James was served heir to
him in Prinlaws, his brother
John being served heir to
Dairsie mills.
Walter Melville, one of the
gentlemen of the Earl of
Murray's chamber. He died
young.
I
Sir Andrew Melville of
Woodend and Garvock.
He was master of the
household to Queen Mary
and James the Sixth. He
married, first, Jean Ken-
nedy, one of Queen Mary's
ladies-in-waiting, who was
drowned in 1589 in cross-
ing the Firth of Forth on
her way to Court ; se-
condly, Elizabeth Hamil-
ton, by whom he had two
sons,
William Melville, commenda-
tor of Tunglaud and Kilwin-
ning. He was a lord of session
from 1587 to 1613. He mar-
ried Anna Lindsay, and left
an only son, Frederick, who
died in March 1614, and a
daughter, Agnes, who died in
1615, her uncle Andrew being
served heir to her on 1st Feb-
ruary of that year.
John Melville, an illegitimate
son, forfeited for taking part in
the death of Cardinal Beaton.
I I I
Janet, who married James Kirk-
caldy of Grange, and had issue.
Katharine, who, on 1st July 1549,
on her father's forfeiture, obtained
a charter of Shawsmill from David
Hamilton, son of the Governor
Arran. She married Brown,
her son John Browu being retoured
her heir on 18th February 1558.
Joneta, who married James John-
stone of Elphinstone.
ROBEPvT, second Lord Melville,
formerly styled of Burntisland. He
was also a distinguished statesman.
He married, first, contract dated 24th
and 2Sth October 1580, Margaret,
daughter of Sir Thomas Ker of Fer-
niehirst, who died on 24th May 1594 ;
secondly, Jean, daughter of Gaviu
Hamilton of Raploch, and relict of
Robert, fourth Lord Ross, who also
predeceased him in 1631. He died on
]9th March 1635, without issue, and
his titles devolved on John Melville
of Raith.
James Melville of Hallhill, was
served heir to his father on
14th April 1618, in the lands
of Prinlaws, and on 22d July
1636, and 12th April 1653,
heir of line of Robert, Lord
Melville, in the lands of Nether
Grange of Kinghorn, the castle
of Burntisland, etc. He mar-
ried, before 1615, Catherine
Learmonth, and left issue two
sons.
Mr.RobertMel-
ville, minister
of Simprin,
Berwickshire.
He married
Catherine Mel-
ville, and had
issue a son and
a daughter.
I I
John Melville.
Margaret.
Elizabeth, who
married John
Colville, com-
mendator of
Culross, ances-
tor of the Lords
Colville of Cul-
Margaret, who
married Sir
John Scot of
Scotstarvit, and
had issue.
Sir George Mel-
ville, under mas-
ter of the house-
hold to King
Charles the
Second. He mar-
ried, and had
issue.
Henry Melville.
styled brother of
George Melville
of Garvock.
I I
jEAN,whomarried Michael
Balfour of Grange.
Elizabeth, who married,
contract dated 24th May
1616, Mr. Robert Mur-
ray, provost of Meth-
ven, and had issue.
I I I
Bathia, who married John
Trail of Dinnork.
Euphame, who appears to
have died unmarried.
Margaret, who married
James Scrimgeour of
Wester Cartmore.
Sir James Melville of Hallhill, also of Burntisland. He mar-
ried Margaret Farquhnr, and died in 1664, leaving two sons.
James Melville of Hallhill. Gilbert Melville, who entered
He lost the estate of Hall-
hill by adjudication in 1675,
and appears to have died s.p.
before 1714.
the church, and was succes-
sively minister of Arngask and
Glendevon, but demitted his
office in 1709. In 1714 he was
served heir to his father and
uncle Robert.
Robert
Melville,
who
appears to
have died
s.p., as his
nephew
was served
as his
heir in
1714.
448
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MELVILLE.
I
GEORGE, fourth Lord Melville and first EARL OP MELVILLE, born 1636, succeeded his father in 1643, John Melville,
and became a distinguished statesman. Charged with complicity in the Ryehouse Plot, he was obliged to who is men-
Heo to Holland, whence, however, he returned with William, Prince of Orange, and was by him created, on tioned in his
8th April 1690, Earl of Melville, Viscount of Kirkcaldy, Lord Raith, Monimail, and Balwearie. He afterwards father's will in
became secretary of state for Scotland, president of the council, etc. He married, contract dated 17th January 1643. He died
1655, Catherine, daughter of Alexander, Lord Balgonie, who survived her husband, dying on 2d April 1713. he{ore1675, s.p.
George, Earl of Melville, died on 20th May 1707, aged 71 years. He had issue.
Alexander, who had the courtesy titles of Master
of Melville and Lord Raith, born 23d December
1655, was for some time treasurer-depute of Scot-
laud. He married, contract dated 27th August 16S9,
Barbara, third daughter of Walter Dundas of Dun-
das, who survived him, dying on 23d February 1719,
by whom he had two sons, both of whom died in
infancy. He predeceased his father on 27th March
1698.
I I
John Melville, born
28th May 1657.
Georoe Melville,
born 24th Septem-
ber 1664.
Both appear to have
died young.
DAVID, third EARL OF LEVEN and second EARL
OF MELVILLE, born 5th May 1660. He succeeded
to the earldom of Leven on the death of John, Duke
of Rothes, iu 1681, as heir of his cousin, Catherine,
Countess of Leven ; and he succeeded his father as
Earl of Melville in 1707. He married, contract
dated 3d September 1691, Lady Anne Wemyss,
eldest daughter of Margaret, Countess of Wemyss,
and died on 6th June 1728. They had issue.
I
I
GEORGE, Lord Baloonie and Raith, who
was born iu January 1695. He married,
contract dated 27th July 1716, his cousin-
german, Lady Margaret Carnegie, eldest
daughter of David, fourth Earl of Northesk,
by whom he had issue. He died in August
1721, and Lady Balgonie died on 7th July
1722.
I I I
ALEXANDER, fifth EARL OF LEVEN and fourth EARL OF MEL- Hon.
VILLE, was educated for the legal profession, and succeeded his nephew James
in the family honours and estates in 1729. He was high commissioner Leslie,
to the General Assembly for several years. He married, first, in 1721, alive in
Mary, eldest daughter of Hon. Colonel John Erskine of Carnock, by 1738.
whom he had a son ; secondly, in March 1726, Elizabeth, daughter of
David Monypenny of Pitmilly, Fifeshire, who survived him, dying on
15th March 1783, in her 84th year. He had also issue by her, and died
on 2d September 1754.
I
DAVID, fourth EARL OF LEVEN
and third EARL OF MELVILLE,
born 17th December 1717. He was
served heir to his father in 1722,
and succeeded his grandfather in
1728, but died in June 1729, in his
11th year.
I
Anne, born
April 1721,
died in 1723.
7th
and
DAVID, sixth EARL OF LEVEN and fifth of Hon. George
MELVILLE, born 4th March 1722, served for some Leslie, alive
time in the army, and succeeded his father in 1754. iu 1730. He
He was high commissioner to the General Assembly appears to
for nineteen years. He married, 29th July 1747, have kdied
Wilhelmina, daughter of William Nisbet of Dirletou, young,
wdio died 10th May 1798. Lord Leven died at Edin-
burgh 9th June 1802, aged 80, leaving issue.
ALEXANDER, seventh EARL OF LEVEN and sixth EARL
OF MELVILLE, born 7th November 1749. In 17S6 he was
appointed comptroller of customs in Scotland, and in 1806 he
was chosen a representative peer. He was also for some time
colonel of a regiment of militia. He succeeded his father in
1802. He married, on 12th August 17S4, Jane, daughtor of
John Thornton of Clapham, Surrey, who died 13th February
1S18. The earl died 22d February 1S20, leaving issue.
Hon. William Leslie,
bora 8th August 1751,
entered the army, and was
killed at Princeton, in
America, on 3d January
1777.
Hon. David Leslie, born 13th
January 1755. He also
entered the army, and rose
to rank of brigadier-general.
He married, 16th January
1787, Rebecca, daughter of
Rev. John Gillies, D.D., of
Glasgow, and died 21st Oc-
tober 1838, s.p.
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MELVILLE.
449
Hon. James Melville of Cassingray. He was a
witness to a discharge by his brother George, on
22d August 1693, at Melville. He married, con-
tract dated 7th December 1672, Anne, daughter
of Mr. Alexander Burnett of Carlops, but"appears
to have died, s.p., aboutl706. David, third Earl of
Leven, his nephew, was served heir-general to him
on 19th August 1714.
I sore L, who died
young.
Jean, who died before
1650.
Anna, who married Thomas Boyd, younger
of Pinkhill, and had issue.
Katherine. She made her will on 20th
February 1692, and appoints her brother,
James Melville of Cassingray, her only
executor. She died unmarried in March
1692.
k |
Hon. James Melville of
Balgarvie, also of Hallhill,
born 18th December 1665.
He married Elizabeth Mon-
crietf, and had issue. He
died in 1706.
I I I
John Melville, born 24th
April 1670.
Charles Melville, born 2d
December 1673.
John Melville, born 26th
September 1677.
All of whom appear to have
died young.
Margaret, who was born on
28th October 1658, and mar-
ried Robert, fourth Lord
Balfour of Burleigh. They
had issue.
I I I
Mary Melville, born 7th
May 1662, who died in March
1690.
Anna Melville, born 8th
March 1668, who died young.
Katharine Melville, born
1st June 1671, who died
young.
Lady Mart, born in
July 1692, who mar-
ried William, second
Earl of Aberdeen, and
died in 1710, leaving
a daughter Anne,
Countess of Dumfries.
Lady Margaret, born
in March 1696, died
in infancy.
George Melville
of Balgarvie, who
died in December
1713, apparently
unmarried.
I
Alexander Mel-
ville of Bal-
garvie, who, in
1714 and 1737,
was served heir to
his brother
George, and in
1736 to his father.
I
David Melville,
who resided at
Sciennes, Edin-
burgh, and died
there, 12th De-
cember 1782.
I I I I
Margaret, who married Mr. John Erskine
of Carnock, author of the " Institutes."
Their son was Dr. John Erskine of Edin-
burgh.
Anne, who died unmarried.
Barbara, who married Mr. Alexander Stod-
dart, minister at Falkland, and had issue.
Mary, who died unmarried, 22d June 1759.
m
Hon. General Alexander Leslie, born in April 1731,
who entered the army, and had a distinguished military
career. He married, 23d December 1760, the second
daughter of Walter Tullideph of Tullideph, and had
issue one daughter. He died 27th December 1794.
Mary Anne, who married, in 1787, John Rutherford of
Edgerstoun, but died s.p.
Lady Anne, born 27th February
1730, married, 30th April 1748,
George, sixth Earl of Northesk,
and had issue. She died 8th
November 1779.
Lady Elizabeth, born in March
1735, but died in infancy.
I
Lady Elizabeth,
born in July 1737,
married, 10th
June 1767, to
John, second Earl
of Hopetoun, and
had issue. She
died 10th April
1788.
Lady Mary,
who married,
5th January
17 6 2, Dr.
James Walker
oflnverdovat,
Fifeshire, and
had issue.
I
Hon. John Leslie, born 20th
November 1759, also entered
the army, and rose to rank of
lieutenant-general. He mar-
ried, 13th September 1816,
Jane, eldest daughter and heir
of Thomas Cuming, Esq., and
assumed the name of Cuming.
| He died in November 1824, s.p.
I
Hon. George Melville Leslie, who
was born 21st April 1766, and entered
the Indian Civil Service at Ceylon in
1802. He married, on 27th Novem-
ber 1802, Jacomina-Gertrude, only
daughter of William Jacob Vander
Graaff, governor of Java, Batavia.
He died on 8th March 1812, leaving
an only daughter, named Mary Chris-
tiana, of Leven Lodge, Portobello,
who still survives.
Lady Jane, born 1st April 1753, who married, on 9th
November 1775, Sir John Wishart Belsches Stuart, Bart.,
of Fettercairn, M.P., and had issue. Died 28th October
1829.
Lady Mary Elizabeth, born 4th March 1757, who mar-
ried, 8th November 1776, her cousin-german, James,
fourth Lord Ruthven, and had issue. She died in 1820.
Lady Charlotte, born 22d September 1761.
26th October 1830, unmarried.
She died on
VOL. I.
3 M
450
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MELVILLE.
I
DAVID, eighth EARL OF LEVEN and seventh EARL OF
MELVILLE, born 22d June 1785. He entered the royal navy,
and rose to the rank of rear-admiral. He succeeded his father
on 22d February 1820, and was chosen one of the sixteen
representaiive peers of Scotland. He married, on 21st June
1824, Elizabeth Anne, second daughter of Sir Archibald Camp-
bell of Succoth, and by her, who died on 6th November 1863,
had issue two sons and four daughters. He died on 8th October
1860, aged 75 years.
I P
JOHN THORNTON, ninth EARL OF LEVEN and eighth
EARL OF MELVILLE, born on 18th December 1786. He suc-
ceeded his eldest brother in the family dignities in October 1860,
and was afterwards elected one of the representative peers of
Scotland. He was twice married, first, on 15th September 1812,
to Harriet, youngest daughter of Samuel Thornton of Clapham,
M.P. ; and, secondly, on 23d April 1834, to Sophia, fourth daughter
of Henry Thornton, and had issue by both. He died on 16th
September 1876.
I I
Alexander, Lord Bal-
gonie, born 19th No-
vember 18-31. He en-
tered the army, and rose
to the rank of major.
For services in the
Crimea he obtained
from France the Cross
of the Legion of Honour,
hut having contracted
disease inthat campaign,
he died at Roehampton
House, Surrey, on 29th
August 1857, unmarried.
Hon. David Archibald
Leslie Melville, born
on 14th October 1833,
and died on 20th October
1854, unmarried.
Lady Elizabeth Jane
Leslie Mel ville
Cartwright, who on
the death of her father
in I860, inherited the
family estates of Mel-
ville, the titles being
inherited by her uncle,
as the heir- male. On
2d November 1858,
she married Thomas
Robert Brook Cart-
wright of Aynho,
Northamptonshire,
second son of Sir
Thomas Cartwright,
G.C.H., and has had
issue one son and
lour daughters.
Ill
Lady Anna Maria, who
married at Paris, on 26th
April 1865, Sir William
Stirling- Maxwell, Baro-
net, and had issue. She
died on 8th December
1874.
Lady Susan Lucy, who
was lady of the bed-
chamber to Princess
Christian from 1S68 to
1883.
Lady Emily Eleanor,
who, on 28th March
1864, married John Glen-
cairn Carter Hamilton,
afterwards Lord Hamil-
ton of Dalzell, Lanark-
shire, and died 11th
November 1882, leaving
issue.
I [
ALEXANDER, tenth Alfred
EARL OF ' LEVEN John
and ninth EARL OF Leslie
MELVILLE, born Melville,
11th January 1817. born 5th
He succeeded his June 1826.
father in the dignities He entered
in 1876, and was sub- the service
sequently elected one ofthe
of the sixteen repre- East India
sentative peers of Company,
Scotland. He died at and died at
Glenferness, on 22d Penang on
October 1889, aged 25th May
72 years, unmarried, 1851, s.p.
when the honours de-
volved upon his half-
brother, Ronald.
RONALD RUTHVEN,
eleventh EARL OF
LEVEN and tenth
EARL OF MEL-
VILLE, eldest son of
the second marriage,
born on 19th Decem-
ber 1835. He mar-
ried, on 7th May 1885,
Emma Selina Port-
man, eldest daughter
of the second Vis-
count Portman, and
has issue.
Alexander William
Leslie Melville
Cartwright, born
on 23d March 1863,
and died 24th Sep-
tember the same
year.
I I I
Elizabeth Harriet,
born on 18th Au-
gust 1859.
Marian, born on 11th
February 1861.
Frances Agnes, born
on 22d January
1862.
Ursula, born on 17th
July 1864. She
married, on 7th Au-
gust 1889, Charles
Walter Cottrell-
Dormer of Rous-
ham Park, Oxford-
shire, captain of
13th Hussars.
1 1
John David Leslie
1
Constance
Melville, Lord
Betty,
Balgonie, born
born
on 5th April 1886.
on 7th
August
Archibald Alex-
1838.
ander Leslie
Melville, born
at Glenferness on
6th August 1890.
Ill
Galprid John Leslie Mel-
ville, born on 11th No-
vember 1863.
Florence Evelyn, who
died at Malta on 31st May
1864.
Kathleen Mabel, born on
22d November 1868.
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF MELVILLE OF MELVILLE.
451
P I I
Hon. William Henry Leslie Mel-
ville, born 19th May 1788. He be-
came a director of the East India
Company. He died on 9th April
1856, unmarried.
Hon. and Rev. Robert Samuel Les-
lie Melville, who entered the
church. He died on 24th October
1826, unmarried.
I
Hon. Alexander Leslie
Melville, of Branston
Hall, county Lincoln, boru
18th June 1800. He mar-
ried, on 19th October 1825,
Charlotte, daughter of
Samuel Smith, M.P., of
Woodhall Park, Herts,
and by her, who died on
26th April 1879, has issue.
I
I I
Lady Lucy, born on 10th De-
cember 1789, and died on 11th
February 1791.
Lady Lucy, born on 26th Janu-
ary 1794. She married, on
14th July 1824, Henry, son of
Samuel Smith, M.P., and died
on 23d December 1865.
I I
Lady Jane Elizabeth, born on
16th May 1796. She married, on
13th October 1816, Francis Pym,
of the Hasells, Bedfordshire. She
died on 25th April 1848.
Lady Marianne, born on 30th
November 1797. She married,
in 1822, Abel Smith, M.P., and
died iu the following year, s.p.
I I I I I I I I
Lady Emily Maria, who
married, on 18th Novem-
ber 1858, Robert Wil-
liams, of Bridehead,
county Dorset.
Hon. Norman Hon.
Leslie Mel- Ernest
ville, born on Leslie
5th February Melville,
1839. He en- born on
tered the army, 20th Janu- . ___ ,,,,,„
„„j ,„„„ „ „ „. . ioiq Anna Maria, who died on
and was a cap- ary 1843,
and died
on 1st
September
1862, s.p.
tain in the Gre-
nadier Guards.
He married, on
4th December
1861, Georgiua,
daughter of
William Shirley
Ball of Abbey-
ara, county
Longford, and
has issue.
25th September 1836.
Lady Julia Louisa, who
married, on 29th March
I
Alex-
ander
Samuel
Leslie
Melville,
born on
28th July
1829. He
married,
on 30th
1869, Lieutenant-General September
Richardson Robertson, of
Tullibelton, Perthshire,
and died on 24th Octo-
ber 1870.
Harriet Rosa, who died
on 20th April 1850.
Ladt Adelaide Harriet.
Lady Clara Sophia, born MJ??,et°n'
5th July 1843. a^as
Lady Florence Lucy,
born on 15th August 1848.
Both daughters of the
second marriage.
1858,
Albinia
Frances,
youngest
daughter
of Charles,
sixth
Viscount
I I !
William David
Leslie Mel-
ville, born on
9th January
1831, and died
in 1839.
Henry Leslie
Melville, born
on 14th October
1S33, and died
in 1840.
Charles Leslie
Melville, born
on 21st February
1835.
I
Rev. Frederick-
Abel Leslie
Mklville,M.A.,
rector of Wel-
bourue, Gran-
tham, county
Lincoln, bnrn in
September 1838.
He married, on
9th June 1869,
Susan Georgiana,
daughter of Mr.
and Lady Louisa
Wardlaw Ram-
say of Whitehill,
and has issue.
r I I I I I I I
Alexander Brodrick Leslie Melville, born on 19th December 18/2.
Charles le Despencer Leslie MELViLLE,born on 23d January 1877.
Emma Charlotte, who married, on 16th June 18S7, the Rev. John
Otter Stephens, rector of Blankney.
Albinia Harriet, who married, on 25th May 1886, Edward Evans
Lombe, of Bylaugh Park, Norfolkshire.
Lucy Victoria.
Edith Mary.
Constance Alice.
I I I I I I I
Arthur Charlotte Elizabeth,
Henry who married on 2d May
Leslie 1866, William Elphin-
Mel ville, stone Malcolm of Burn-
born on foot, Dumfriesshire.
12th March
1842. Marianne, who mar-
ried, on 27th January
1852, Francis Brown
Douglas, advocate,
Edinburgh.
Caroline, who married,
on 9th October 1879,
the Very Rev. William
Robert Fremantle,
D.D., Dean of Ripon.
Lucy Sophia, who mar-
ried, on 28th October
1857, Rev. Henry
Wright.
Emily.
Louisa Jane.
I I I I I I I
Ruthven Wardlaw Leslie Melville, born 27th July 1879.
Henry William Leslie Melville, born 9th June 1881. '
Malcolm Alexander Leslie Melville, born 11th December 1882.
Douglas Montague Leslie Melville, born 12th February, died
26th August 18S6.
Annie Louisa, born 2d August 1871.
Lucy Mabel, born 4th October 1873.
Eleanor, born 19th September 1875.
I
p<b
452
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF LESLIE, EARLS OF LEVEN.
SIE ALEXANDER LESLIE, fiest Eael of Leven, born in Athole about 1580, took service under Gustavus Adolphus, and rose to
the rank of field-marshal in the Swedish army. Recalled to Scotland in 1638, he was appointed lord-general of all the Scottish
forces, and made several successful expeditions into England. In 1641 he was created Earl of Leven and Lord Balgonie. He
"was, in 1651, taken prisoner by Cromwell's troops at Alyth, but was restored to liberty on the intercession of the Queen of
Sweden, and died in 1661. He married Agnes Renton, daughter of the Laird of Billy, in Berwickshire, who predeceased him in
1651, and by her had issue two sons and five daughters.
I
Gustavus,
who died
v.p., S.JJ.
ALEXANDER, Lord Balgonie,
a colonel in the Swedish army, who
married Lady Margaret Leslie,
sister of John, Earl, afterwards
Duke of Rothes, who survived him.
He predeceased his father in 1645,
leaving issue.
I I
Lady Barbara, who married Sir
John Ruthven of Dunglas, and
, had issue.
Lady Christian, who married
Walter Dundas, younger of Dun-
das, and had issue.
I I !
Lady Anne, who married, first, Hugh, Master
of Lovat ; and, secondly, Sir Ralph Delaval
of Seaton Delaval. Issue to both.
Lady Margaret, who married James, Vis-
count of Frendraught, and had issue.
Lady Mary, who married William, third
Lord Cranston, and had issue.
ALEXANDER, second Earl of Leven. He succeeded his grandfather in 1661,
and died on 15th July 1664. He married, in 1656, Margaret Howard, sister of
Charles, Earl of Carlisle. She died in September 1664. They had issue.
Catherine, who married George,
fourth Lord, afterwards first
Earl of Melville, and besides
other children had
I
I
Agnes,
who died
young.
MARGARET, Countess of Leven, who
succeeded her father in 1664. She
married, in 1673, the Hon. Francis
Montgomerie of Giffen, and died in
November 1674, s.p.
I
Lady
Anna,
who died
young.
CATHERINE, Countess of
Leven, who succeeded her
sister in 1674. She died un-
married on 21st January 1676,
and was succeeded by her
cousin, David Melville, who
became third Earl of Leven.
DAVID, third Earl of Leven, and after-
wards second Earlof Melville, who suc-
ceeded to the Leven honours and estates
after the death of his cousin, Countess
Catherine. For his descendants see the
Melville Genealogy.
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11