Montrose and Covenanters, their characters and conduct, illustrated from private letters and other original documents hitherto unpublished, embracing the times of Charles the First, from the rise of the troubles in Scotland, to the death of Montrose

Google

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world’s books discoverable online.

Ithas survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain, A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired, Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that’s often difficult to discover,

Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you,

Usage guidelines

Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible, Public domain books belong to the
publi
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.

and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to

‘We also ask that you:

+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.

+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.

+ Maintain attribution The Google “watermark” you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search, Please do not remove it.

+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can’t offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a books appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.

About Google Book Search

Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful, Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world’s books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
atfhttp: //books . google.com,

.vw-

GoW Meili
fr his sence frame
iy A Chopr~?
On bat Caving Elen
Lhectionr (P52

by koh hepeer, ot he haus. cue » Seine confer whe
ts senuice sot Jam muck
ki pine of it 7 i th rap
4 Lentini Y pour appurtenct, fo th of cfirn
run briny ek. wll muck phe. more ensbl gon
LL ihn. fom wellpbad wih gwar ropagre
encl vere reapb. of. your good. ‘endhau (oaucury for mytert
AL hall ‘Gow

euby

fatal Chariink

Ti he Lore taper

MONTROSE

AND

THE COVENANTERS,

THEIR
CHARACTERS AND CONDUCT,

ILLUSTRATED
FROM PRIVATE LETTERS AND OTHER ORIGINAL DOCUMENTS

HITHERTO UNPUBLISHED,

EMBRACING THE TIMES OF CHARLES THE FIRST, FROM
THE RISE OF THE TROUBLES IN SCOTLAND,
TO THE DEATH OF MONTROSE.

BY

MARK NAPIER, Ese.

4 ATE.
VOLUME FIRST.

LONDON:
JAMES DUNCAN, 37, PATERNOSTER-ROW.

M.DCCC.XXXVIIL.

ee

Aces”

Di goz,)

‘PRuNTen BY JOMM STARE, EDINAUROM.

iv PREFACE.

from abroad. Napier’s eldest son, the first Lord Na-
pier, a sincere disciple of his father’s in those rigid
Protestant doctrines, became the personal friend both of
James VI. and Charles 1, and, moreover, a second pa-
rent to Montrose. But, in the progress of events, all
that was honest and sincere of the anti-papistical party
in Scotland was superseded by an insidious democratic
clique, who, disguised for a time under the mantles of
such enthusiasts as Knox and Napier, and pretending
to identify Episcopacy with Popery, pressed onwards,
through thelr various stages of duplicity and crime,
until an ephemeral throne, born of their anarchy, was
reared upon the prostrate necks of RELIGION and Lr-
uERTY, whose sacred names they had taken in vain.
Hence it bappened that the immediate representative
of the great Napier, and his illustrious pupil Montrose,
were covenanting at first, and, without the saerifice of
‘a principle, martyrs to their loyalty in the end,

But, even in our own enlightened times, there is
a disposition to confound the cause of truth with
that career of democracy, and to claim for the fac-
tious Covenanter of Argyle’s Dictatorship,—as vicious
a compound as ever agitated under a veil of sanctity,—
the respect due to the stern virtues of some of our early
reformers, and also that admiring sympathy which the
violentand impolitic retaliation of the Government of the
second James has rendered no less due to the wrapt he-
roism of the Cameronian peasant, Some, indeed, carry
their vague ideas, of the political sobriquet “ Covenant-
ers,” so far as to consider the term sacred, to identify

=

vi PREFACE,

world, his exquisite, but unfortunately too meagre,
“ Legend of Montrose,” might have expanded in a work
of yet greater interest and effect; combining, too, the
truth and importance of historical discovery, with some
domestic matters of unquestionable fact, that beggar
even his powers of romantic fiction. The devotion, to
Montrose, of his nephew, who was so dearly beloved in
return, and who preserved that devotion to his uncle in
the face of the most powerful entreaties and tempta-
tions to forsake, or at least to quit him,—the no less
heroic adherence, to Montrose and his cause, displayed
by his nieces, who on his account suffered the impri-
sonment of malefactors, and were reduced from the af-
fluence and luxuries of their Ligh station to discomfort
and poverty,—the * well known token,” sent by them
to guide the hero to his career of ill-fated victories, —
—the abstracting of his heart from his mutilated tranle
beneath the gibbet,—and, above all, the extraordinary
progress of that romantic relic, through perils by land
and sea, even into the possession, and among the bar-
barie treasures of an Indian chief,—bimself an heroic
sufferer, whom we must not call savage,—these ave in=
cidents which ought to have been introduced to the
world by no other pen than Sir Walter Scott's; but
which, it may be hoped, will cause, even by this hum-
ler record of them, the Legend of Montrose itself to
be perused with additional interest.

‘The most important new matter, however, contained
in these volumes, are the historical fragments obtained
from the ives of the Napier family, with

viii PREPACE.

with a perusal of these volumes before they were pub-
Ushed,)—of having committed a false step in joining
at their outset the covenanting clique in Scotland,—a
word I'do not shrink from using, as being truly de
scriptive of a party who arrogated to themselves the
character of a whole nation’s generous voice,—of having
acted inconsistently with the dictates of his reason, and
his maturer principles of action, by having carried,
what he fondly considered the arms of “the Covenant,”
against the last hope of true Religion and Liberty in the
north,—from these charges Montrose can never be ex-
onerated. But the moral, and, when we remember his
expiatory struggle and death, it may be added, the
grandeur, of his heroic character and career, cannot,
by such defeets, lose their value and interest. The
documents referred to must carry an irresistible con-
viction, at least to every unbiassed mind commencing
its study of the times past, that, even in his first error
and inconsistency, Montrose was humane and honest,
was no far-sighted and selfish factionist, no blood-
thirsty destroyer, but a youthful and mistaken en-
thusiast. If the sudden and violent excitement of the
period, and Montrose’s age of four-and-twenty, will not
suffice to reconcile such political inconsistency as can
be proved against him, with the character of an honest
statesman, and a glorious hero, we may close the annals
of human virtue.

J am induced to notice still further in this place the
manuscripts which prove Montrose to have exercised,
in his later patriotic struggle, the ratiocination of an

\

x PREFACE.

gine that those powerful passages were composed un-
der the direct influence of a recollection of the times
of Charles L., or with an immediate reference to Mons
trose and the Covenanters. Certainly Professor Sedg-
wick had never seen the fragments of papers which
have preserved to us the reasonings of Montrose, and of
his preceptor, Napier, on the subject of Sovereign power,
and Rebellion, Yet, notwithstanding all that has come
and gone, since about the year 1641, when those frag-

given to the inspired Apostles, must, on that uccount, adopt lows exalt:
ed maxime us thelr rules of life: we may tate In gencral terma (with-
out loading this discussion with extreme camex which lend to no practi«
‘enl good in moral speculation), that where the Christian rehgion prevails
in his purity, iti» impomsible there shonld ever exist an aoinitigated dese
potivm : and whore the powor of the exucutive ix limited (ia however

where
bya moral and logal resistance. aban proscribed by human law,
a a Oye er ot Cot Buta moral opposition to the
‘executive, condacted on constitutional grounds, is proseribed by no law,
either of God or man : and if it be wisely and virtuously curried on, it
has in its own oature the elements of increasing strength, nnd must at
be It, however, during the progress of a state, the
‘authorities be in open wurfuro with each other ; a good man
at longth be compelled to take a side, und reluctantly to draw his
fovea dokeace of the bert Lnhcttanos of hs coontry. “Sock an Op
peal, to be just, must be made on principle; and after all other honest
‘means have heen tried in vxin.

Eee SURE Spiel ee be
‘bas too often boon contmonced by selfish mon for baw purposes Tne
wrend of taking their stand in Scovel il coon lial sarees 7b
tend of trying, by every human means, to concentrate all the might of
Ee Bes aetna thei sido, they have broken the laws of
their coantry, dipped their hands in blood, Bd oedlasaly brecght Tee
on thewselver wud their party. The vives of the subject arv not anly the
doapor's plou, but the daxpot’s atreugeh. Whury the virtuous vlemunts
of social order ure wanting in the state, whether men be willing slaves
‘or not, they nro unfit for treedom."— Discourse, fe. by Adam Sedgwick,
M, Ay PTS. $e. Woodwardian Professor and Fellow of Trinity
College, Cambridge, Fourth Bdition, Vii, pe V8T=130.

xii PREFACE.

peatedly enjoins it ;" and he refers us to the example of
the apostles of religion, who “ resisted not the powers
of the world by bodily force, but by patient endurance,
and by heroic self-devotion.” Finally he telly us, in
the concluding passage of the pages we have quoted
from him, a passage singularly applicable to the con-
duct of the covenanting rulers, that “ unfortunately,
the opposition to the encroachments of arbitrary power
has too often been commenced by selfish men for base
purposes,” who, he adds, “ have broken the Jaws of
their country, dipped their hands in blood, and need-
lessly brought ruin on themselves and their party.”
This is an unpremeditated and unconscious echo
of what the murdered Montrose, and his Mentor,
inculeated two hundred years ago, before the great
civil war, and its fearful results, bad verified their
worst anticipations, “ Civil socictics, (said they)
so pleasing to Almighty God, cannot subsist with
out government, nor government without a sove-
reign power to force obedience to laws and just
commands. ® * * This sovereignty is, @ power over
the people, above which power there is none upon
earth, whose acts cannot be rescinded by any other,
instituted by God for his glory, and the temporal and
eternal happiness of men. * * * Patience in the sub-
ject is the best remedy agninst the effects of a prince's
power too far extended, * * * But there is a fair and
justifiable way for subjects to procure a moderate go-
vermment, incumbent to them in duty, which is, to en-
tour the security of Religion and just Liberties, (the

Ex

ae oe we

erste ve Jeane aad wer. newed of mg
AG ae oremene Vi in agneniix. De owe
9A wy on. ball hone 4 add mM Ame Tae
Saots, sah Tne watered, vi cae mont amen? ered of
Vor tad, sae, 208, tate xl, shail mn any degos wend
tty weheoee tere, vacercok chicagey one Tmoscicas vie-
tein A Sy per tuen’s hemenraes, I am secsied to Ere up
wy (rn bnentaativnn in these volames to whatever cri-
tistases they taay eail bath.

St mly semaita ws be added, that I was nt so far
wanting ty my wibject, nor in duty to the noble family
whine. priasd diatinetion it is to represent the Hero, as
ty snnit sn application in the proper quarter for any
oniginal materials, in possession of the family, which
might WMustrate the lifeof Montrose. But that no such
materinis exint, J learn, with great regret, from his Grace
the present Duke of Montrose, who, in a polite com-
munication on the subject, informs me,—* I am sorry
ta may that we cannot give you any assistance in the
porformunce of the task you are preparing to undertake,
tn thors aro no papers whatever existing, and in our
powenion, which can throw light upon the subject.”

V1, Mafford Ntreat, Aprit 1838.

xiv PREEACE.

ment it required. If, however, the various original do-
cuments now produced, and which, instead of consign-
ing to the retirement of an appendix, I have interwoven
with my text, shall be found to add any thing to the
facts, and the interest of the most instructive period of
British history, and, above all, shall in any degree tend
to redeem from unmerited obloquy one illustrious vic~
tim of hypocritical democracy, I am satisfied to give up
my own lucubrations in these volumes to whatever cri-
ticism they may call forth.

Tt ouly remains to be added, that I was not so far
wanting to my subject, nor in duty to the noble family
whose proud distinction it is to represent the Hero, as
to omit an application in the proper quarter for any
original materials, in possession of the family, which
might illustrate the life of Montrose. But that no such
materials exist, I learn, with greatregret, from his Grace
the present Duke of Montrose, who, in a polite com-
munication on the subject, informs me,—* I am sorry
to say that we cannot give you any assistance in the
performance of the task you are preparing to undertake,
as there are no papers whatever existing, and in our
possession, which can throw light upon the subject,”

11, Stafford Street, April 1838,

ai

xvi CONTENTS,

Archer Guand of France—Contemy of his
‘rival the Marguis of Hamilton. arises! Leeper,
‘of Montroso—Anocdoto of Hamilton's double Sed nnd
treachery to Montrose at Court—Archibald Lord Lorn—
Montrose's contempt for him—The old ae of Argyle’s
chumeter of his son, 6s + Page 114
CHAPTER IL.
e 1636-1697.
‘When and why Moutrose joined the Covenanters—Seditious
‘and secret agitation in Scotland, betwixt the periods of the
promulgation of the Canons in 1696, and the appointment
of the now Liturgy in 1637—Popalar tamult against the
Jiturgy in Edinburgh Istigated by the ministers from the
[Seo ai ‘by Balmerino and the Advocate
Uo seevantmaids on the 22d of July
Sar eaaeectenian to Archibald Johnston of Was
tiston, to organise a popular insurrection against the Bishop
of St Andrews should é appear in public—Montrowe no

petitions against the Bishops, and the manner of his own
conversion to it—Result of tho agitation in the great con-
vention held at Edinburgh, 15th November 1637—Mon-
rok fitet joins the insurrection against the Bishops at this
convention—Indvced to join by the persuasions of Rothes
und thé Minister of Methven; und not through dis
HUslets Lote ol ‘him at Court—Constitation of

nd overthrown, and the Tubles erected, under the
ae of the ney pe ikape or the po ou.
thority, . 1a

CHAPTER IL
1637-1638.

‘The Covenant—Its insidious nature and fale pretensions—
Concocted by w few factionists—Dr Cook's contmdictory
‘views of it a yroof of its indefensible character—M# Bro-
dics enlogy of the Coyonunt—Contemporary account of

pte of James Gordon, parvon of Rotemay

xx CONTENTS.

der which be met the King—New sgitation and fresh im-
palse to the morement—When and why Montrose turned
from the Covenanters and tried to save the King—Cove-
nanting calumnies—Revolutionary Parliament in Sootland,
held in June 1640—The treasonable propositions af the
democratic leaders there urged, and Montrose’s opposition
to them proved—James Gordon's manuscript account of
the constitution of the Committee of Estates 1640—Con-
servative members of that Committee—Causes of Mon-
trose’s conservative conduct at this crisit—First invasion
of England by the corenanting army under Alexander Les-
lie—Aneodote of Montrose’s showing them the way across
the Tweed—Paseage of the Tyne—The Covenanters ov-
cupy Newcastle, - - - Page
CHAPTER X.
1640-1641.

Fate of Montrose’s first conservative attempts in support of
the King’s authority —His correspondence with the King,
how discovered by the Corenanter—Montrose fearlessly
justies himeelf—His conservative Association—Copy of
the Cumbernauld bond, from the manuscripts of the Ad-
vocates’ Library—Its fate—Original manuscript of Co-
opel Cochrane's declaration—Corenanting notions of tres-
‘son illustrated from original manuscripts, -

CHAPTER XJ.
1641.

‘A view behind the cartain of the Covenant—Architald
Johnston of Warirton—A covenanting antiquary—A co-
venanting patriot—Covenanting reformers—Covenanting
justice—Secret machinery of the Covenant—Original let-
tera of Archibald Jobneton, hitherto unprinted, exposing
the prof'igacy of himself and party—Original letter from.
Sir Thomas Hope, secretly informing Wariston of the cap-
sore of Walter Stewart, on bie journey, bearing = later
from the King to Montrose,

CHAPTER XII.
1641.

‘The reasunn of Montrose’s conservative bond, and the grounds

3

297

g INTRODUCTIOS.

sination, or by suddenly raising a faction in the hour
of unsuspecting security, to perpetrate an indiscrimi-
nate slaughter upon all the leading men of the party.
Detected in his wickedness, and ufferly cast off by the
whole body as bloated with iniquity, he allowed the
tumultuous fary of wounded pride and disappointed
ambition to assume the semblance of principle, and look-
ed towards the ruin of the political franchises and the
religion of bis country, which he bad so sworn to main-
tain, as to the necessary removal of standing reproach-
es of his apostacy, and barriers to his aggrandizement.
Hence there was xo scheme so desperate that he hesi-
tated to recommend, none so wicked that he declined
to execute.” *

There is no character, in ancient or modern times,
more atrocious than what is here described. Nor is our
historian contented with this concentration of his indig-
nant feelings against Montrose. Throughout various
passages of the work in question, he has exhausted the
powers of his language to paint that nobleman a mon-
ster. He calls him a “ nobleman destitute of either
public or private principle ;” and, while revelling in the
barbarous details of his execution, speaks of him as
“the blackest criminal,”—of “ his manifold enormities,”
his “ breach of the Covenant,”—his “ assassinations
and massacres,”—his “ cold-blooded, indiscriminate, un-
manly vengeance,’—his “horrid devastations,”—his
“ infamous end,”—and, finally, his “ poetry, no less exe-
erable than his actions had been as a member of socie-
ty.”+ Mr Brodie is an author of laborious research, and
it were not impossible that he had brought facts to light

© A History of the British Empire, by George Brodie, Esq. Advocate,

Vol. 404.
+ Vol. iv. pp. 270, 271, 272.

4 INTRODUCTION.

the modern historian, could be to the extent of the dif.
ference betwixt these two portraits. There was, besides,
another keen observer of human nature, the celebrated
Canpinat ve Rerz, personally acquainted with our
hero; and he pronounced the memorable opinion, that
the only being who had ever realized his idea of a chass
of heroes no longer living save in the pages of Plutarch,
was Montrose, who had sustained the cause of the King
of England with a greatness of soul unparalleled in that
age.* What has our modern historian established to
excuse his own unmeasured condemnation of Montrose
in the faceof such contemporary opinions? In vain have
‘we searched through his laboursto find proof for any one
of those flagrant acts upon which his delineation of Mon-
trose’s character appears to be founded. We obtain
from him, indeed, a new and most
portraiture of Montrose, but no new illustration of the
obscurer passages of his history,—not a single addi-
tional fact on the subject. The value of the vitupe-
rative censure in question is, in our humble opinion,
about equal to that of the contemporary abuse which
Mr Brodie, in his turn, might quote against our re-
liance upon Clarendon and De Retz, and which was
invariably expressed, and proved, thus :—* That erwel
Murtherer, and bloody excommunicated Traitor, James
Graham, sometime called Earl of Montrose!" The
Presbyterian democracy to which Montrose fell n vie~
tim, because he detected and opposed the designs of a
faction against the throne, systematically originated that
* Le Comte de Moutross, Ecomais, vt chef de In maison de Graham,
Je wou Kiomme du monde qui m’ait jamais rupellé Vidéo de certains he
ros que Vou nv voit plus quo dans ios view do Plutarque, avvit soOtenir
Jo parti Slerlfigtae S eterembemecegy
siesisls poles do periait ce sidele."— Mémoires de de

b

6 INTRODUCTION.

we find gathered together, and assumed as facts, vari-
ous obscure points which we mean to elucidate. The
object of the following pages is to supply an im-
portant and interesting chapter of history, no less than to
do justice to Montrose himeelf, by illustrating, frequent-
ly from original manuscripts, those circumstances of his
Ifo that have been least investigated, and most violent-
ly axaumed to his disadvantage. More moderate and less
prejudiced historianshavealso assumed what Mr Brodie
culln the “ bitterness of spirit,” the stinging of “ morti-
ficntion and revenge,” for “real or supposed neglect
from the court,” a8 the state of mind with which Mon-
troxe Joined the Covenanters. But evenin this false step
of hia early career, it may be shown that his motives
and feelings have been misunderstood or misrepresent-
vd, Hix separation from the Covenanters can be ac-
counted for by circumstances that must redeem his cha-
racter trom those vague and passing calumnies of the
lay; his alleged jealousy of Argyle in council, and Les-
Ve in the field “on the one hand,” and the allurements
tof tempting offers “on the other hand,"—so undoubt-
ingly recounted by Mr Brodie as the sole motives of his
change. With the aid of original manuscripts, we
Will warwvel much af the secret history of those mys-
ferlons ceeurreuces au which our historian, totally
Waiutuomed as ty the details founds his accusation
agmiet Montiven, of having * conspired by perjury
against the lies aad honour of ube individuals with
wha be Rat acted in concert.” We will prove that
Ure well.keow avecdhite faved i Lond Clarendon’s ma-
weer. Unat Mowtrose mate aun odfer to Ciarkes I.
we assassinate Naaailtea and Angvie.—an elfen, as the
SAY ges, Dedignantly giected be the Mu aarch,—did
eh, a COM ed por went: sind Ghat the gwent his
.

8 DSTEODCCTios.

extricating himself from the movement party, about
the close of the year 1639 It is principally a history
of bin woaderfal efforts in support of the falling cause
of Monarchy,—an enthusiastic appeal in his favour to
honour and high feeling abroad, from the barbarous
anarchy of “ the cload in the north” then expanding
over Britain. There is a domestic circumstance, how-
ever, incidentally mentioned by Wishart, which of iteelf
affords some contradiction to the extraordmary theory
that Montrose was 2 monster of malevolent impulses,
with whom no one of Christian feelings could have
endsred to be familiar. Immediately after the de-
feat at Philiphaugh, be is disclosed to us mourning
over the grave of his brother-imlaw, Lord Napier,
@ nobleman many years his senior, and one of the
most pious and irreproachable statesmen of bis day.*
Montrose, deprived of his own parent in early life,
was reared with parental affection by this Lord Na-
pier, who was one of his curators and married to his
elder sister. But, moreover, it was in councilship and
in company with this nobleman, who had also sub-
seribed the Covenant, that Montrose paseed through
that revulsion of political feeling which some would
have us believe to have been solely caused, in his
breast, by an aptitude to betray, and a propensity to
shed blood. The passage in Wishart is remarkable, and
we shall quote it from a translation published two
years before the death of Montrose. “ About this
time (1645,) the Lord Napier of Merchiston depart-
ed this life in Atholl,—a man of a most innocent life
and happy parts, a truly noble gentleman and chief of
an ancient family ; one who equalled his father and

© Archibald first Lord Napier, (eldest son of the Inventor of Loga-
ms) married Lady Margaret Graham, second danghter of John fourth
of Montrose.

ree yl ee ier
trose’s career when he was becoming sensible of his false
position, and of the insidious approaches ofan unprinei-
pled faction against the throne. They afford, in the most
convincing manner, a complete exposure of the baseless
calumnies upon which Montrese, Napier, and a few
others were so virulently pursued by the Committee of
Estates, on the pretext of what was termed “ the Plot,”
in the year 1641, and out of which arose * the Inci-
dent”—the shadow of a shade. This plot, the unravel-
ling of which will open up the whole merits of Mon-
trose’s separation from the Covenanters, we are now

written by himselfe.” "Tile dean seth ble
to" the Plot,” nor to any of the transactions which fall
wnder the denomination of “the Troubles” in Scotland.
1y wolates to-@ private cabal at court to deprive Napier

12 INTRODUCTION.

‘Time, (the whole malice of which has only of late years
‘become known to the world by the restoration of the
suppressed passages in the Oxford edition,) attributes
the ruin of the King entirely to the successes of Mon-
trose, “ The Marquis of Montrose’s success,” says the
Bishop, “ was very mischievous, and proved the ruin
of the King’s affairs ;" and, after amusing the reader
with some of his fascinating gossip, he adds,—“ his (the
King’s) affairs declined totally in England that sum-
mer, and Lord Hollis said to me all was owing to Lord
Montrose's unhappy successes.” This paradoxical as-
sertion is the finishing touch to a sketch, composed of
various sly and malicious notices of Montrose, by the
right reverend artist, in which he would persuade us
that the predominant features of that nobleman's mind
were a mischievous spirit of enterprize arising from a
weak superstition, and a vain affectation of heroism
checked and. paralyzed by his personal timidity in
the field! Well might filial piety, more tender of the
Bishop's reputation than he was of that of others,
suppress such a sentence as the following :—Mon-
trose “ in his detent took too much care of

for beiwas never willing to-eapoee hinesl/ toolwuche =
Was Montrose a coward ? We will believe all that
the Bishop tells us of Ais own moral courage—how
he, Gilbert Burnet, stood serene amid the convulsions
of faction, and, whether by the side of his friends
perishing on the scaffold, or in the presence of frown-

* In the original edition, by the Bishop's son, this seandalous:
pare ;

might have been an indiicemont for the Bishop to give so mulicious a0
account of the Marquis of Montrose’s transactions,”

4 iwrropuerron.

of the Rye-house plot, when, after the suicide of Essex,
Lord Russell is under condemnation, and on the eve of
ascending the scaffold. It is addressed, “ For John Bris-
bane, Esquire,” (Seeretary of the Admiralty.) and with-
in the cover there is written,—

“Dear Sir,

“ T have writ the inclosed paper with as much order
as the confusion Iam under can allow. I leave it to
you to shew it tomy Lord Halifax, or the King, as you
think fit, only I beg you will do it as soon as may be,
that inease my Lord Russel sends for me, the King may

_ not be provoked against me by that. So, Dear Sir, adieu.

“ Memorandum for Mr Brisbane.

“To let my L. Privy Seal know that out of respect
to him, I doe not come to him.* That I look on it as
agreat favour, that when so many houses were searched
mine was not, in which tho’ nothing eould have been
found, yet it would have marked me as a suspected per-
son, That I never was in my whole life under so ter-
rible 1 surprise and so deep a melancholy + as the dis-
mall things these last two or three days has brought
forth spreads over my mind ;} for God knows I never
so much as suspected any such thing ; all I fear’d was
only some rising if the King should happen to die ; and
that I only collected out of the obvious things that every

* Lord Halifex, If Burnet, ns he tells us in his History, was in the
habit, before and after the date of this letter, of bearding in their dens
both the King and the heir presumptive, why so coremonious with the
PL Pe ise-eurproeand-co Jeep acusdancbaly.™ iad Swift seen
this letter he would haye noted that here was a Seotch word signifying
1 ee Sit would have bis nl fing ihe Bishop's style—
“dari monnonse’’—M Scotch trnsh.”

.

—

|

the like, for I think he will believe me.* I ask nor
ing ern, 1 rok ee
resolved against it,

thoughts ;
tho I could obtain it;+ but 1 beg not to be more
under hard thoughts, especially since in all this disco
very there has not been so much occasion to name me
as to give a rise for a search, and the friendship I had
with these two,} and their confidence in me in all other
things, may show that they know I was not fo be
to in any thing against my duty to the King.§ I doe
beg of you that no discourse may be made of this, for
it would look like a sneaking for somewhat, and you in
. particular know how farre that is from my heart ;
* How well the Bishop (no Bishop then) kept his ward ! Hore Swift
TANT goes Wa Wr bc bd Sorel ts Seti as
—" Scotch dog, rogue, aes Leer reeera as

§ Bot see the History of his own Time! “ Lord Reser,
the country, Lwent to him to warn him of tho danger 1 feared

constitution
defend themselves; but I thought wasive and fears, and

it, did eet them at liberty to look to themselves, yet he confemed
were not ripe enough yet, and that an ill-aid, and rie

‘ing would be our ruin, Twos thes serfs came tom wel my
‘of the Reformation, and did so evidently noe thnt the struggle for Lady:
sey ore ‘abd Wyat's rising, wos that which ebrew the nation s0 quiche
Popery after King Rdward's days, that I was now very appre=
opie gee '—Vol. ii
Manpars hem hewn othr pmmags ofa Hatoy tad Bo.

18 INTRODUCTION,

the light I can give them. Adieu, my-dear friend,
_ and keep this as a witnesse against me if I ever fail in

the performance of it, 1 am, you know, with all the

zeal and fidelity possible, your most faithful and most
humble Servant,”

“ Sunday Morning, “G, BURNET”

190A July 1083,"

Burnet's abject letter did not succeed. He was dis-
graced, and obliged to go abroad. He became the most
active agent of the Revolution, and obtained a mitre
from King William. Lord Dartmouth says, “ Mr Se-
cretary Johnston, who was his intimate friend and near
relation, told me, that, after a debate in the House of
Lords, he (Burnet) usually went home, and altered
every body's charueter, as they had pleased or displeased
him that day.” ‘This remark has been considered ca-
lumnious, but something worse is proved against Bur-
net by his own letter. In his Life, prefixed to the His-
tory of hisown Time, it is said, His behaviour at the
trial of the Lord Russell, his attendance on him in prison,
and afterwards upon the scaffold, the examination heun-
derwent before the council, in relation to that Lord's
dying speech, and the boldness with which he there
undertook two vindicate his memory, as also the indig-
nation the court expressed against him upon that occa
sion, ave all fully set forth in the history.” But it is im-
possible to credit that history, in such matters, after
reading the above letter, which, be it observed, was to
be made known to the King. Where had Burnet
miraculously found the courage which, as the danger
thickened around him, made him so collected and dar-
ing, before that very King and his Council, as to en-

— [aa
20 imraodverions

suade the world of his own supereminent moral cous
rage, if he can. For our part, after reading the above
letter, we do not believe one malicious word of what Bur-
net has uttered, in the History of his own Tine, against
Charles I-and Montrose,—and he has therein said nothing
about them that is not malicious. We donotbelieve that
the apology for Hamilton, which he has given to the
world in the Memoirs of that house, is by any meansso
truthful anexposition of the character of
Marquis, as the letters and papers entrusted to the Bi-
shop, for the purpose of compiling the Memoirs, enabled
him togive. We feel thoroughly persuaded that Bishop
Burnet in that work, as well as in the History of his
own Time, reversed the goklen maxim of Cicero, me
quid falsi dicere andeat, ne quid veri non audeat. The
marvellous of himself,* and the malicious of others, we
henceforth altogether disbelieve when resting om the
sole authority of the Bishop's historical record, and will
never listen to when retailed traditionally and at se
cond-hand from him.+ Finally, we do believe the
truth of that anecdote, that the Bishop, “ after a debate
| # Be, gr. Burnet tolls not a very credible story of bis earliest intere
viows with Chacles [1° He says the King road in his presence part of
‘the Memoirs of the Hamitons in MS—wax much pleased with thom,
and more with the author; and, further, thut,* in a loug privates
that lasted nbove an hour, I took all the frevdor with hina tht I
‘became my profesdon,” Ce St heparan
to him, and whut he sald to the ing sol seer ae

in which never King was bearded by a bolder sutject. Then
Mee cceieca ot paises tetra eaga wne cho nia eee we
ho aly lectores most severely,

+ Br, gr. The coclound-ball story (said to hare heen derived. from

Brodie, Vol-ti.p.515—and well ied ny ot
in resistant Vols iv. CF

L

. a

as the prime minister of the Covennnt, collecting round
the devoted monarch the toils of the great Rebellion—
scenting, not afar off, his blood in the blood of Straf-
ford, and howling like a savage, for the rewatds that
were to satiate the malice and the avarice of Seotland.*
‘The blood of Strafford and of Laud, the Genevean ban-
ier planted in England, the murder of the King, the
pena Se = ep sree tee fae ee
NANT.

Yet how mean is the origin 06 thal rovOH HE
faction in Seotland, and how fallacious those views of
«it that represent its leaders in bright relief, of holy
and patriotic zeal, against the tyrannical enormities
of the monarch! Let us examine the seeds from
which the Scottish commotions sprung into thnt v=
volution which has been called “our second and glo-
rious Reformation in 1638, when this church was again
settled upon her own base, and the rights she claimed
from the time of the Reformation were restored, so that
she became fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and ter+
ible as an army with banners,”+ Was Charles I. real-
ly an oppressor amid religiously and patriotically dis+
posed chiefs of Scotland? Must we indeed concede to
the Historiographer for Scotland that the monarch was
worthy of thedeath hedied?} And will we discover,inthe
impenetrable mists of faction that surrounded his throne

* Archibald Johnston, of whom anon,

t Wodrow’s Latroduction, p. 2 ‘This historian of the Church of Soot.
land adds, somewhat in the style of the Rey. Robert Baillie's contr
yey oa a eo te

‘upon me to defend every step in that happy ‘That task was ree
Seve fr Mr Bro who has fatllf Wied i .

wealth and the long Parliament”

ES

from the first moment of his reign, and the abandoned
treachery that dogged his person through life, no ex-
euse for the worst steps of his policy in the govern-
ment of Seotland ?

—-,
5 iRing James being dead (coys Lord Nopler) and his

son King Charles: succeeding to him in his kingdom,

with some want of ex-
periente, which is only got with time, all the turbulent
and discontented humours of the former time were up,
x is usnal in these great transitions, and plied his Ma-

wanted not matter, and their endeavours had deserved
praise, if spleen to the persons of men, and their own
private interest, had not given life and motion to their
proceedings, rather than the service of the King and the
good of the state. Then was there nothing but factions,
and factions consultations, of the one, to hold that place
and power they possessed before,—of the other, to wrest
‘i out of their hands, and to invest themselves ; and no
‘dream or phantasy of innovation came in any body's
head, but presently he durst vent it to the King; and
‘still the most ignorant were boldest, Neither wanted
there some honest and wise men who gave their advice
‘out of mere affection to his Majesty and the public; but
‘wanting that bold forwardness, and factious assistance,
which the other had in prosecuting of their private ends,
no great hold was taken of them.”*
Charles, not yet crowned King of Scotland, received
sundry mysterious hints, that, if he did not conduct

pertain artes ce vin oon
obleman’s connexion vith the court,

a

—_

—

ties |

24 INTRODUCTION,

himself in a manner that seemed fully to recognize the
Independency of his ancient kingdom, the erawn might
‘be bestowed somewhere else; and most anxious was
Charles to avoid the imputation of intending to * re-
duce Scotland to a province.” Thus the affairs of that
country became to him # separate burden of a difficult
and irksome nature. For his privy-couneil of England
were not suffered to be cognisant of the affairs of the
other kingdom, which the King managed, through
the reports of his privy-council there, with the aid
(if aid it could be called) of his Seoteh favourites,
‘or such of the council as he summoned from Scotland
for special consultation. Indeed at this time there ap-
peared to be no connexion or sympathy betwixt the
kingdoms, The English nation, we are informed by
Clarendon, knew und cared less about Scotland than
they did about Poland or Germany ;—“ no man ever in-
quired what was doing in Scotland, nor had that king-
dom a place or mention in one page of any Gazette,”
But it was not the privilege of Charles to be able to
forget his ancient independent kingdom ; and certainly
his attention to the affairs of Scotland was kept alive
in a inanner most disagreeable to himself, and most dis-
creditable to his native country. Lord Napier, a Privy-
councillor, and Treasurer-Depute, under the Earl of
Mar, who held the white staff, mentions in his Rela-
tion, that Mar was not free from that storm of faction,
the great object of which was to wrest place and power
from each other, “ but was charged home by his ene-
mies with some abuses, in the King’s presence, which
they were not well able to make appear ; therefore, there
was a gentleman directed to me, desiring me to give
them intelligence upon what points my Lord might be
charged ; with assurance from them that it should never

earn that it was with the view of recon:
M that he did aot omit the Lords
in the commission of surrenders.

(a

ee |

26 INTRODUCTION,

the King, in presence of the Lords of Exchequer, and
whose answers were so poor, and excuses so frivolous,
ag made even those present, who set him on, to be
ashamed.”

The absence of every principle of honour and hones-
ty, anong the leading Scotch factionists who beset the
King, is further illustrated by the following very euri-
ous scene, and by-play of Scottish councils in
which cannot be given more graphically than in Lord
Napier’s own words; “ Sir Alexander Strachan and
some others, his partners, (of whom the Secretary* wus
one, for nothing passed whereon Ae was not a sharer,
and then nothing was so hurtful to the King oF coun-
try which was not delivered under the title of good ser-
vice,) had projected to the King great profit to arise out
of the wards of marriage and nonentries, which, being
most pernicious to his majesty and the best of his sub-
jects, I mainly opposed here in Scotland, and with much
ado got the passing of it delayed (so strongly had they
made their party in our exchequer) till it should be
debated before the King, who had sent for all his offi
cinrs to court, to have their opinion concerning the
business of the tithes. These and such like matters
increased their spleen against me, who still upon all oc-

* ‘This was Sir William Alexander of Menstrie, created Kart of
‘by Charles 1, and celebrated both as u poet and « courtior. “He
rough

Ho
oe erat ea a tous cotebrat beet on ore

Ion ting they» cn ne et
value of the weight of copper, which brought great prejadice to the
Kingdom ; at which time he built his great lodging in Stirling, and put
‘on tho gute thorvol Per mare, per eras, which » merry man changed,

per metre, per turners, meaning that he nd attained to his extate by
Foor ond fiat gh of taee move "—Scot of Scotarnet’s Manuscript,
Advocates! Library.

move him to be my accuser upon their former informa-
tion; aman, es much as I, hated by them, especially by
the chancellor,* whom he hnd acensed the year before of
bribery, to his face before the King, which he pressed #0
hard upon him, that, to save his reputation and his
place, James Douglas, deputy-secretaryy—a man religi-
‘ous and honest, but too, too simple, who hardly could
‘be induced totake the ordinary benefit of his placey—was
persuaded to take the fault upon him, and thereby lost
his place. Sir Alexander perceiving their drift and
spleen against me, made his advantage of it, promising,
if he might have a commission to bring in concealments
‘and omissions of the treasury, (which he afterwards
got to his great profit,) he should have matter enough
‘against me, and would charge me. When the exche-
‘quer met, 1 opposed Sir Alexander's project for the
wards, and found no resistance, but excusing himself,
that he thought it was for the good of the King and
oo ylaeledonne it were found not so, he
relinquish his suit, but said withal (ac-
Gor ets plot) that the King’s profit was neglected
‘by the officiars, and that he would give twenty. thousand
* Kinoul, of whom afterwards,

— {

a8 INTRODUCTION.

pounds for the omissions of the treasury, if he might
have commission to bring them in ; as indeed there was
something in that kind through no fault of mine, I
answered, that there were some omissions, which was
not altogether my Lord treasurer's fault or mine, but
partly theirs who served before us, and that we intend-
ed to bring them in; neither was there such perfection
among men to omit nothing ; and for my part, I would
not only not oppose him, but be a means to move the
King to grant him commission, and aceept the condi-
tion; but that he had not done amiss to have inform-
ed the officiars of these concealments, who would have
had a care to see his pains recompensed ; wherens now
this offer of his was of the nature of an accusation and
imputation to us. Those who were of the party, fear~
ing that I would hold him to bis word, and engage him,
brought him off with this motion, that he should have
the commission, and of what should be thereby brought
in, the King to have the one-half, and Sir Alexander
the other; to which they all assented but myself, (who
now began to smell the drift of it,) and the Bishop of
Ross, * whose opinion was, that the officiars should
bring. in these omissions, and Sir Alexander be consi<
dered for the discovery, The report was made to the
King, by the chancellor and secretary, that Sir Alex-
ander's project of the wards was disallowed, but that
‘he had undertaken to bring into his Majesty's: great
profit out of concealments, an excellent piece of service,
and that none of the number was against it but I,
for my own ends. The commission was drawn up in

* Patrick Lindsay, Bishop of Ross from 1618 to 1633, when he was
translated to the Archiopiveopal aco of Glaygow. Ho fell a victim to
coyenanting) persecution, and died in 1644, under the excommuntoation
of the kirk.

- |
wo INTRODUCTION, ©

Hamuron. “My Lord, how can there be such
neglect as you speak of, since I know they had almost
pat my mother * to the horn for forty shillings Scots?

“ Whereat the King smiled, and, rising up, said to
Sir Alexander Strachan,—

Tux KinG, “ You have said to me that there are
many omissions and faults, and that you will do me good
service. You shall have the commission, but, if you be
not as good as your word, I shall find a fault somewhere,

“ All this while my Lord Erskine, ¢ the treasurer's
son, stood by mute, as if the matter had no way eon-
cerned his father, for the chancellor had blocked up his
mouth, by a promise that not his father, but I only
should be charged with these omissions, and that he
should be free from any such imputation; which he
performed, saying he was a nobleman now inage, and
could not take care of the King's affairs, nor his own,
but all was my fault, excusing him so, to his disadvan.
tage, from, particular omission, by disabling bim of the
care of all. When we came from the King, the chan-
cellor toldSir William Balfour} how much he had been

. ibeteabtn etd Eile Glencairn, was the celebrat.
ehurchemilitant of

od lender of the ‘Scotland, who commenced
the tupults ugainst the Service Book.

+ Joho Lon! Erskine, th Earl of Mar. When this
was written Lord Napier knew not the interesting ties that were to
vunite the fails. daughter of this Earl, be-

panion
heart of Montrose was stolen (from under the gibbet where pipes
‘buriod,) dat she might preserve it eunbalmed.
‘The sur ly, upan whou Churles conferred the

icine Tawa ew ot nce ta So

of Strafford incxoribly wovere,
and resisted tho most considerable bribe ever offered to 4 governor to
cconnive at the of a state prisoner, Hat hs maniissted han.
nolf to be worthy of the confidence of the party, he became one of their
Palleh SoMaANrs eal ib Inna the satisfaction of encountering hie
royal master in arms.” —D" Ieraeti

al

(CHARLES I. AND SCOTCH COUNCILLORS. 31

gh Ihad moved the King to take Ork+
: got nlease of it myself. I desired Sit
f ‘tell him that he had exprest himself my
ies wih in at
eh . And withall tell him (said I) that I
‘go ill a servant to my master, as to advise
thirteen thousand pounds Sterling for re-
grant of Orkney, for the which he would
SRS a ties oasda BUSrtngs os tog

| whom he employed to procure it,
this my persecutors changed their mind, and
it fit that my name should be to the commis
who opposed it, to make it the more effectual
£ ‘the secretary delivered mo a command
pto subscribe it. To which I replyed,
to the commission of exchequer, which
ordains us to subscribe all signatours judicially, but if
manded me to subseribe it in particular, I would obey ;
‘but the next day he brouglit me a warrant under the
King’s hand to subscribe. I finding that my opposi-
1 upon me no small suspicion of fear and
gullies, having received this warrant, did subscribe
willingly, defying Sir Alexander and all
the world oidharge ran with any fault or malversation
' office, in presence of the Bishop of Ross, Sir Alex-
and divers others, This confidence and
did make the chancellor fear that the commis-
sion would not work the effect against me that he wish-
and then he began to peruse it more seriously,
that himself might come within the com-
‘poss of it, being a collector of taxation, did delay his
‘subscription, finding some faults and informalities in it,
and being further pressed, did pretend the gout in his

—

32 INTRODUCTION. _

hand, which was in his feet, not subscribing twenty
days after me, till the Earl of Nithisdale, Sir T
friend and none of his, told his Majesty that the chan-
cellor only did hinder the service himself had so
much commended in his presence. He then subseribed
it, But Sir Alexander could not have way for it through
the seals till he gave assurance to the chancellor and
treasurer, to meddle with nothing whereinto they had
interest. When it was past the seals they pressed him
to accuse me. He told them he had made diligent search
of the registers, and could find no matter; ifany of them
would inform him against me, and set their hands to
the information, he would acense me as he promised:
otherwise to misinform the King without a ier
and succumb in the probation, he thought it neither
part of a wise nor honest man. They being disappoint-
ed of the pleasure they conceived, to see the one of us
ruin the other, whom they equally hated, were so far
incensed against him, that at a convention of the estates,
which was shortly thereafter, they stirred up some of
the estates to complain upon him for purchasing a com-
mission to execute penal statutes, and made him so
odious that he was forced to give it over; yet, by the
help of his good friends, he got good satisfaction from
his Majesty.”

Lord Napier records another curious anecdote of the
dishonesty of Scotch factionists, and of the effrant-
ery with which they harassed and deceived the King.
“ His Majesty (he says)—being possessed that the lease
of Orkney was given to me upon trust, not only to pay:
the whole rent to the King, but also all benefit that
should accress to me as taksman,—while I was at court,
had given command to one (whom, I do not know, nor
could ever learn, although I used extraordinary impor-

ot INTRODUCTION,

times to come, to which I putto my hand. ‘This 7000
marks was given to Annandale, who, not content there-
with, foisted into his grant a term’s duty of the same
before my surrender. Then did they begin their calum-
nies afresh, without regard of truth or honour! And to
countenance the matter the better, the Lord Treasurer
was sent for by them, (a man of great age, and lame
of his leg, and went upon crutches,) pi him that
they had prepared the King so, and given him such im-
pressions of me, that there needed no more but his pre-
sence to turn me out. Mar was not slow to undertake
such a journey to that end, and in the midst of his
journey got so shrewd a fall, that for many days he was
not able to stir; yet at last went forward, so impla-
cable and malicious he was of nature. Tn the meantime
all the terrors of the world were given me,—that the
King would send me home to be tried where my ene-
mies were to be my judges,—that I should not only
want my fees, pension, and place, but the King’s fa-
your, and my own honour also,—and, as a delinquent
and criminal, be warded in the Castle of Edinburgh,
and deeply fined ! Neither did they stick to lay this im-
putation on the King’s justice, that the King was resoly-
ed to dispossess me of that place, and a fault must be
found, though there were none, to excuse the King in
‘that point, Upon no condition could I be induced to
hear so much as an offer, till my reputation were clean-
sed from all their foul aspersions.” Napier adds, that
Sir James Baillie left no means untried to obtain the
place of treasurer-depute, and made interest with Lord
Loudon, (here characterized as “ my friend, a wise

® Sir Jolin Murry, of the bed-ehamberof Junes VI, by whom he

was crested Viscount of Anoand, and Lord Murray of Lochmaben, and
afterwards Earl of Annandale, He died in 1610,

A

.

Tue Kine. “ No? Did not you refuse to surrender
your lease of Orkney to one who had commission from
me to demand it to my use?

Narien. “Truly, Sir, navermau demented if GEmm
neither did I know that such was your pleasure till
J heard in Scotland of your Majesty's anger for my re-

Tue Kise, “ Did not you say to him that you would
stand out in law against me, which is also under your
hand ?

Narzer. “ Do me the favour, Sir, toletiee keorgtia
whom your Majesty gave that commission, andconfront
us before you, and I doubt not to make him confess
that he has abused your Majesty with an untruth; and
if any such thing can be shown under my hand, I will
not only give the hand, but the head also to be stricke
en off.

“Then did I press with importunity to know this
fine commissioner ; but His Majesty by no means would
do it.

Tue Kina. “ It is enough, I am satisfied, and do not
believe it,

“Then did I tell His Majesty what storm was pre-
pared against me at my Lord of Mar's upcoming, that
I desired no more but impartial hearing, and protection
if my cause were honest, which he graciously promis-
ed, and thereupon gave me a kiss of bis hand.

“Some two or three days after my Lord of Mar’s ar-
riving at court, they altogether, and singly when they
had opportunity, vexed the King with their calumnies,
urging him to send me home to be judged, a point whieh
they laboured hy all means, * so that the King, for his

* This we shall find was also at all times a great ohjeat of the cove~
estig Cocos Same aNiee ee ne peree Oa ak
ensed into thelr merciless hands ia Seotlans

ce festlp Hubli 'te ay as
) which loses by submit
your Majesty, nor any

and your subjects, and for your Majesty's service and
my undertakings in it. But, Sir, I desire no more bat
the most rigorous and exact trial that can be desired,
80 it be just, and your Majesty my judge, and that I
‘be not remitted to Scotland, where my enemies are
to be my judges, and where, if I were as innocent as
Jesus Christ, I should be condemned. For the more
exact the trial be, the more shall my faithfulness
and integrity appear to your Majesty ; and I will not
only answer for my own actions, but if wife, friend, or
servant (who, by corrupt officiars, usually are set out
to be bawds to their bribery) have done wrong, 1 am
content it be imputed to me, If I had cozened your Ma-
jesty, and oppressed your people, and then made some
men sharers in the prey, your majesty had not been
troubled now, nor I thus persecuted, but had been de=
livered to your Majesty for a good and faithful servant.

“ Then his Majesty promised that he would hear all
himself, which was a point I desired much to gain, and
did serve me afterwards to purpose.

Narien. “ Then, Sir, be pleased to make these in-
formers set down their informations in writing, and set
their hands to it, and within three hours after I shall
either give a punctual and satisfactory answer, or other-
ways your Majesty may dispose of meat your pleasure.

“ His Majesty was pleased with the course, and I took
my leave. Immediately thereafter the Earl of Mar and
the whole troop of my adversaries (who were waiting in
the Earl's chamber till I should come from the King,)
expected a surrender of place and all to the King, be-
cause of the word satisfaction that I used to Sir Archi-
bald Acheson. As they came down stairs slowly, be-
cause of my Lord’s lameness, * one said, this is like the

* Of this John eayenth Burl of Mar, Scotstarvet suys,—* His chief dex

h

38 INTRODUCTION,

40 INTRODUCTION,

‘Ta Kina. “ My Lord, 1 woul do you any, favors
but I cannot do injustice for you.

toc tha apaosink ight kone eoieee
their persuit, so long as the King remained in Hamptou
Court, for the command to set down in writing under
their hands did much amaze them. Butevery day they
had their meetings and consultations how to overthrow
me, and being ignorant of the King’s promise to bear
all himself, all their endeavours tended to get me ne-
mitted to Scotland, and then they were sure of their
desire. His Majesty, having removed to Theoball’s,
asked the secretary if the informations in writing were
delivered to me, and commanded it to be done instant~
ly. This put them in some fear that the Lord of Tra-
quair® and his friends bad procured this, (who was
one expecting the place if I should have been put out
of it, and a man of another faction than Menteith
and the seeretary,) and, therefore, by the Earl of
Carrick they most earnestly dealt with me afresh to
treat with Sir James Baillie, adding great promises, but
with the like success as before. The secretary then sent
ame the informations, inclosed within a letter of his own
to me, shewing that it was his Majesty's pleasure that
1 should send the answers to him to be delivered by him ,
to the King: but I would not do so. When I opened
the articles of accusation I found no hand at them, but
written on a little piece of paper, so near the end there-
of as nob one letter could be written more, of purpose
that, if the King should urge them to set to their hands
upon a sudden, they might gain sometime, in writing
them over, to consult upon the matter. I presently drew
‘up the answers, and on the morraw I told his Majesty

* The same who was afterwards tronsurvr, and fell a victim to eo»
‘renanting, persecution, 4

;

42 INTRODUCTION.

Napier, however, put in writing an articulate reply
to each charge, and after explaining in the most satis-
factory manner every circumstance upon which a ca-
lumny could possibly be founded, thus concludes,—*Nei-
ther hath there any thing been done by me but that for
which I have your Majesty's warrant, your father’s, the
council's warrant, or that which by the duty of my
place I ought todo. My humble suit, therefore, is, that
your majesty will be pleased to judge of peters
by your own wisdom and justice, to which, only, I ap-
peal; or otherwise to free me of these calumnies by
your majesty’s declaration of my honest and faithful bee
haviour, as your Majesty hath already done by your
gracious letter to the exchequer, that I may be the bet-
ter encouraged to do you service.” This defence he
presented to Charles, and the result is curiously cha-
racteristic of the times and the actors. ‘* My enemies,”
says Lord Napier, “ refusing to subscribe the informa-
tions given by themselves, both by word and writ, to
his Majesty, gave me a great deal of advantage in the
King’s and all other men’s opinion. Yet ceased they not
still to persecute me. So bold were they in their ace
cusations because no man was punished for any calum-
ny, or the worse liked, out of a bad impression given”
to the King that, if he punished any such, he should
not get knowledge of the estate of his affairs, no roan
daring to do it unless they were able to prove it clearly,
which, although true, could not always be done. My
adversaries, being ignorant of his majesty’s promise to
hear all himself, and being oft refused, when they de-
sired him to remit my trial to Scotland, without know-
ing the cause, drew up a letter commanding me to be
tried before the Council of Scotland, which letter they
foisted in among other letters, and stole the King’s hand

‘4

“” aNTRODUCTION.
but because I saw the King’s hand, I refused to riveit,
and he did it, And because I would not seem to avoid
trial, I drew my letter thus: ‘ Whereas divers infor-
mations have been made to us against the Lord Napier,
it is our pleasure that you receive any thing concerning
them that shall be given in to you, and thereafter send
up the Lord Napier, together with his accusers, to us, to
reccive our determination, and that this letter be regis-
tered ; in the meantime, the Lord Napier to enjoy his
fees, pensions, and full exercise of his place’ My ene-
mies speeding no better ut court, gave out that what-
ever warrant I gave out should not be answered, as in-
deed I found by proof: I asked my arcars,—I could
have no part of them, the treasurer had forbidden the
receivers to pay me; I asked an account of their de-
bursing the King’s money in my absence,—that was
denied me, and all theuse of the King’s favourable letter
wns this, thatit was registered not without difficulty, not-
withstanding the King’s command. Then the chancellor
asked for the articles of accusation, as if he hadnever seen
them, which being produced he commanded to be putin
the public register, (without any warrant from the King
or council, and would not by any means register my an-
swers to them,) there to remain for a dishonour and a
stain to me, my house and posterity, to after ages who
should not know that they were shamefully disavowed
by the informers themselves, nor [that they were] an-
swered by me,—an act of superlative malice! I made an
offer of the aecount of the fines received by me-—they
would not hear it, nor yet give me out instruments of
my offer when J asked them, which the clerk durst not
give out according to my words, but framed in such
terms as they set down to him.

“ At this time Annandale came to Scotland, and
brought with him a letter from the King to the exche-

&

; i |
46 INTRODUCTION,

fer af it before the exchequer, and did give direction
and a discharge to William Dick to pay it to Annan-
dale. The offer was refused, and the discharge sent
back by William Dick, who now had left me, and bad
with them. They would not suffer
Amnandale to take ft, but would needs go on with pure
suit against me for all I had received before my sur~
render, which they ought to bave done (by the King’s
letter,) only in case of my refusal to pay the term in
question, The King’s Advocate—a base follower of
greatness, and maliciously eloquent—pursued me hard,
alleging the lease was given me in trust, to bring
in improvement to the King, and that I had confessed
it; and he took out my answers to their informations,
to prove his alledgeance, and read these words,— I
never denied it, for I took it on condition,—and there
most unfaithfully would have staid, but I made him
read out all, to his shame,* whereby the few indiffer-
ent Lords that were, did detest his dishonest dealings.
I was forced to answer for myself, for, by no means,
could 1 procure an advocate to be admitted to plead for
‘me, although by our law it is not denied in any case,
even in treason, to any. So long as he kept off the
point of law I answered sufficiently; but when heeame
to dispute in law, I would not answer, but would be
absent, against a professed lawyer. Whereupon at
* The clause in Lord Napier’s answers, alluded to, is as follows 1 * Tt
is alleged thnt the Touse was entrusted to me—I never denied It, for L
took it upan condition to surrender when, and upon what terms, your
nusjesty should be pleased, and that then the improvement might come
into the exchequer. But that Ishould advance great sums of money, and
be lluble to the yearly payment of 45,000 marke, (enough to have uns
done my estate, If one evil year bad come, or if my subtaxsnuan hud
eskseetet wichauesl is owl fotingy ox rsoomponts—T-wllbefer
“drat pasa ea hl nothing can harbour con.
Amury to justice and equity," Be.

more desired in my secretest thoughts than to be fairs
ly rid of that place, long before my trouble, for after
my wife died, (a woman religious, chaste, and beautiful,
and my chief joyin this world,)* I had no pleasure to re-
main in Scotland, having had experience of the ehief of
[the Lords of] Council and Session,t and of their man-
ners, to which I could never fashion myself, and con-
sidering the place I held could never be profitable to a
man that had resolved fair and honourable dealing.”

‘That the King’s Advocate could countenance se-
cret meetings for organizing sedition,—that the gentle
men of the King’s bed-chamber were capnble of picking
his Majesty’s pockets, in order to make themselves mas-
ter of his private correspondence,—that the nobleman
whom Charles trusted above all others was constantly
betraying him to his enemies,—these, and other myste=
rious anecdotes of the rise and progress of the covenant
ing faction, do not appear so incredible after reading
what we have extracted from Lord Napier’s manu-
scripts, and still less so when we find, by the following,
how very low Scottish noblemen could stoop, in false~
hood and treachery, to attain their private ends.

“ At court, Morton, Roxburgh, and the secretary
made up a faction and agreement, wherein the Karl of
Menteith and the chancellor were comprised, whereby
they, who had wont to cross other, should now serve
others turns, and monopolize to themselves the King’s
favor, to his and his subjects’ heavy detriment, nobody

# There iaan original pleture by Jameson, of Lady Graham,
idbosalen otters uaa Toles he dnoepoa a teas ot
sequently whe must have died betwixt that your and 1680, the year of

bore.
+ ‘had been privy-councillor ince 1615; in 1623, he was
Justion Olerk, and an Ordinary Loed of Session ; in 1626, an Bxtraordie
nary Lord of Sesion

(adding many oaths,

Starke ipising:) Wliereol T-wistmcet tin
contrary Co my ends, who lay in wait
ion to leave the place, yet seemed to be
proof of him. When he came to

believe, told the King also (for to all

that he had commission and power

effect, which was most false, To the

ng gave way, a8 being my own desire, and
D

(

wD INTLODUCTION.

then was moved to make a promise of it to Traquair,
by this new faction of which he was one. And Menteith
coming to Scotland, a letter was purchased from the
King, after the wauel obscure style, whereby he would
have made me believe that it was the King’s pleasure
that I should give way to Traquair, and, to that pur-
pose, that I should transact with Menteith, although
the letter in my understanding contained no such mat-
ter, but was his Majesty's answer to a suit of mine,
wherein his Majesty wrote that he had imparted his
pleasure, concerning my desire, to the Earl of Menteith.
‘This letter was kept up long, of purpose, till the new
treasurer, Morton, should come home, who was upon
his journey ; but Menteith would have had me take his
word upon it. But I desiring nothing more (althongh
T pretended the contrary) than that the King would
have expressed his desire to be that I should leave the
place, (forthen with honour, profit, and the King’s good
will, I might treat with them,) made Menteith this an-
swer, that the letter contained no such thing as he gave
ont, and that [ would not treat with him, nor no man
else, till from his Majesty's own mouth his pleasure
were delivered to me to that effect, At this answer he
was extremely moved, and being immoderately earnest
with me afterwards, and, nevertheless, not being able
to effectuate any thing whereof he had made so large
promises to them at Court, gave them advertisement,
and they dealt earnestly with the King. For this com-
bination had now undertaken the whole government
here,* under the King, and grent hopes given, and great
promises made of excellent service, only, they told the
King, that his service would be still hindered by my

* Le OF Scotland,

——

CHARLES I. AND SCOTCH COUNCILLORS. BL
E~ llasetrpatita to think it expedient

eres
‘was not to with,
the chancellor, Menteith, and he, to make me loath the
service, (which in my secretest thoughts I did long ago,)
business no way honourable for them, and
prove dangerous if any of them
should happen to fall een th the King’s favour. There
was, after the death of King James, a commission of
Exebequer sent down by his Majesty now reigning, un-
der bis hand (for by the death of his father all former
commissions expired) and left undated, to those who
erate ren’ the manner of which commission
is this : The King signs a commission in paper, which
thereafter is ingrossed in parchment, translated in Las
tin, and the King’s Great Seal appended to it, and the
paper under the King’s hand is kept for a warrant ta
the Great Seal. This commission in paper under the
King’s hand being sent down, and being defective, or
at least the King’s Advocate would have it to seem 80;
because it was not drawn up by him, was not passed
kept by him, the chancellor, or seeretary,
esent up of the Advocate's penning, which
being sent down again signed by the King, was passed
)was the warrant of all the Exchequer's
proceedings six years after. The old unpassed sig-
nature of commission they took, and where these words
“treasurer or treasurer-depute’ occurred, {ax they did
through the body of the signature) they
made Mr William Chamber, in a chamber of Holy-
roodhouse, put a mark betwixt treasurer and treasurer-

Le a rl the margin write these words
so that it was to be read * treasurer,

/

ll _

52 INTRODUCTION.

or, in his absence, treasurer-ilepute, and the word in
the margin about five or six several times subscribed by
Morton and Menteith. Besides, they inserted the
date, ‘ White-hall, 28th June, 1630,’ with new black
ink, where all the rest was worn whitish, and it was
torn in the foldings, which ocular inspection bewrayed
the antiquity and falsehood of the same. So by this
commission I was to do nothing, (directly contrary to
my patent, and the purpose of the institution of that
office) the treasurer being present. About twelve o'clock
I got intelligence that there was a new commission
brought down by the treasurer, Morton, and was at the
seals, I presently went to the director of the Chancery’s
chamber,* who showed it to me, and said he mar-
velled much how the chancellor durst append the Great
Seal upon such a warrant. I viewed it as well as I
could in so short a space. At two o'clock thereafter, the
Exchequer convened, where, before the chancellor, lay
this signature of commission, and the double in parch-
ment in Latiu, with the Great Seal thereat, together
with two letters of the King’s. We being all set, the
chancellor gave the signature in paper to the clerk to
be read, and the double in Latin with the seal, in parch-
ment, to the King’s Advocate to be collationed. The
clerk had much ado to read it, it was so worn, being
now made use of six years after it was signed by the
King. But I, seeing two of the King’s letters unbro-
ken up, took no exceptions at the signature, (suspecting
that they did contain something to supply the defects
and informality of the signature,) till the letters were
read, which contained nothing of that purpose. Then
I rose up and said,—

* Sir John Scot of Scotstarvet, whose curious though maliclons ma-

nuscript, entitled the * Tho Staggering State of the Scots Statexmen,”
in preserved in the Advocates’ Library,

oF * INTRODUCTION.

My Lord, (turning towards Marton,) your Lordship is
very hot with me, but be assured there is nothing done
amiss which concernseither the King’s service, or mein
my particular, that I will stand in awe of any man to
question.

Moron, “ This was done by the King’s direc
tion, and we will answer it.

Menverrn. “ My Lord Napier, you are so passion-
ate in your own particular, that you will not forbear
to question what the King commanded! For his Mar
jesty stood by while it waa done, and we will answer it.

Narien. “If it had been the King’s direction, why
would you not bestow upon him a clean sheet of paper,
and ingrossed these marginal notes of yours in the body
of the signature, rather than made use of this old torn
thing ? Then needed not the signature, with the King’s
hand at it, receive validity from yours upon the mar=
gin.

“ But he, that never was ashamed to do or say any
thing, still affirmed that his Majesty stood by till he
saw them subscribe, and that it was his direction!

Napiex. “ My Lord, I marvel that you are not
ashamed to say so. Let the Lords look the date with
a blacker ink than the rest, ‘at White-hall the 28th of
June, 1630 ;—then you were there, you say, with the
King? Your Lordship has ridden fast, for you were
here, and presided in council, the 29th of June 1680,
to verity which, I desire that the clerk of Council's book
of sederunt may be produced, and, my Lord Marton,
your Lordship set out of London before him.

“ Menteith, being convinced of a manifest untruth
in presence of all the Lords, was so confounded and sur-
prised with it, that he made this answer, nothing to
‘the purpose,—

1

own profit,) that he was content to take no notice
of it.

“ T resolved then to go to court, and, some days be-
fore I went, Menteith sent up his man, Mr Henry
Drammond, with a letter, drawn up by himself and the
secretary, and sent up to the secretary’s son, who wait-
ed there in absence of his father, who was in Scotland,
the contents whereof were to stay me by the way, or
to command me to return again into Scotland, This
letter was to be signed by the King, and Mr Henry
was to meet me upon the way, and to deliver it to me.
T rode on my own horses to Berwick, and purposed to
send them back, and take post there, where the post~
master told me, (having asked who rode last,) that Mr
Henry was gone up post, and told him he was to ride
night and day, and was very shortly to come back.
Upon which I conjectured that he was sent up to pro»
eure my stay or return, (as indeed he was,) upon some
misinformation. Therefore, to prevent their purpose,
I changed mine, and upon my own horses rode on the
western way, where no post lyeth.

“ The secretary's son having presented this letter for
amy stay, forthe King’s hand, his majesty threw it away,
saying, this man hath suffered enough already ; and in
place thereof made him write another to me, most gra-
cious and favourable, which he signed. ‘This letter was
given to Mr Hary Drummond to be given to me, but
he gave it to his master, (who then was on his journey,)
with the copy thereof sent down by the secretary's son,
which by no means I could ever come to the sight of;
although I got knowledge of the tenor afterwards.
How soon I came to Court [ had speech with his Ma-
jesty concerning these businesses, who said, that he
‘could not but acknowledge my good service, my honesty,
and integrity, but that he was informed that the prin-

56 IntRODUCTION,

i

58 INTRODUCTION,

It was amid such an atmosphere of petty but dis-
tracting factions, that Charles the First passed the shart
period of his reign which, at the time, was the admira-
tion and envy of Europe for its apparent prosperity
and repose. Even the few pages of secret history we
have quoted, besides affording some instructive views
of the characters of Seoteh councillors and courtiers,
suggest reflections not unfavourable to the King. The
scenes are during those few years immediately preced-
ing the revolt of Scotland, when, says Clarendon, “ Bri-
tain enjoyed the greatest culm and the fullest measure
of felicity that any people in any age for so long time to-
gether havebeen blessed with.” But wesee how sinall was

‘yaineglorious than they both, but different in the ‘of that bo-
mour. Her the rely mes cgpoe ond lowes a ae Baa
and drow all discourses from their proper subject to Ais own prates.
Monteith did the eame, but, as he Hought, more subvtily, but
‘idlioulousl y negave mintter of mirth to all thoww to whom it waa —
Lord Nopier’s MS, Theso portraits are worthy of the pen of Clarendon
Destine riaerpeypet ioe
would have bevn the Scottish Clarendon. Hix kinsrnan
Seat comiean soa serooee person, Sele om
he was lnvestal wit the ofits of facto gece! of Scotland, prosi-
dent of the privy-council, and ee eerie Ea oC aes He
‘was William Grobam seventh Earl of Monteith, wna
from Robert IL, to whose eldest son hy Euphemia Ross, David Earl of
Strathern, Menteith wan rerved heir, which service was ratified by the
acevo See 1631, authorizing bim to assume the tithe of Barl

1 Mentuith. ie athe le ae
Bom ye tert se of Robert AL (and not Elizaboth More, xubee
quently ascertained to haye been s0,) und the pretension to the

+ crown ‘sectand, tavolved {a this service, wae suggested 10 Charles,
especinlly by Drummond of Hawthornden, nx dangerous to his crown,
Seotatarvet says that when Menteith renounced his claim to the Crown
he did so under reservation of his right of blood, and boasted that he
had the reddest blood in Scotland, Accordingly bis tithes wore all sot
auido in 146343, and he deprived of his oflices and confined for w time to
hin own islo of Monteith, But when divested of his other titles, the
‘Karldom of Airth was conferred upon him. ft wos his eldest son, Lord
Kilpontgwho wax so basely murdered in Montrose's camp, insnedintely
after the battle of Tipperrauir, by Stewart of Ardvoirlich,

60 INTRODUCTION.

tertained and practised, factions in Court and state
a-foot, accusations, calunmies, and aspersions ordinary,
and, which was worse, combinations, and hopes given
thereby of great service to the King, without any perfor-
mance, but, by the contrary, his Majesty's just and gra-
cious inclination abused by misinformations, his ears
blocked up and so straightly beleagured that truth could
not approach them,—and all for their own profit and
prejudice of the King and State,—the presence of ho-
nest men, who could not comply with them in their ob-
lique courses, so hateful that they could not endure it,
and so bold, in consideration of the strength of their
leagues, that they did not stick to falsify the King's
hand, surreptitiously to steal his majesty's superscrip-
tions, and to frame letters contrary to his meaning, and
many other things of this kind?* So wuch for Charles's
enjoyment of the repose of this pastoral period of his
reign. In illustration of his share of its affiuence, let
‘us cull another story from Lord Napier’s manuseript.
“His Majesty intended a journey into Scotland, but no
money being in his coffers there, Chancellor Hay made
offer of ten thousand pounds Sterling, for his Majesty's
entertainment during the time of his abode there, upon
condition he might have the collection of the taxation,
at which he ever aimed most earnestly for the hid pro-
fit that was therein, especially the extraordinary, an im-
position of his own invention. This galled Menteith,
Nithisdale, and that faction, who left no means unat-
tempted to cross the same. But it was still entertain-
ed, no other appearing to offer a better expedient. They
dealt earnestly with me to make offer of money, and
+ Sir Philip Warwick (p. 146,) also alludes to this method of deeciv-

ing the King, during the correspondence betwixt ix Majesty and the
Marquis of Halton, when with his eet in the Frith of Forth, in 1690,

A SS ee ae ae

62 INTRODUCTION.

his journey till the next spring.* He went a progress,
and I took my leave for Scotland. But, while his Ma
jesty was at Beaulie the answer of his letter came up,
not only refusing his desire, but advising him to call «
convention, and impose (I use their very words) a tax=
ation : and, if his Majesty would need have them levy
money, they thought it reasonable that every man bay-
ing warrants, fees, or pensions out of the exchequer,
(who, indeed, for the most part are poor, and have no
other means to live) should bind with them for the
money. At which his Majesty was much offended, as
he had good reason, and did suspect that they had no
mind to see him there. At this time Archibald Campbell.
being at Court was told of the letter by the secretary,
who asked him where I was, and if I would yet un-
dertake to furnish the King money for his journey. He
answered that I was still in London, and was assured
that I would do any thing I was able for the King’s ser-
vicet This being reported to the King, Archibald
Campbell was presently dispatched away with a letter
tome. When I came, his Majesty told me that he re-
ceived a most shameful refusal, and asked me what I
would do for him. Nothing, Sir, (said I) less than Iam
able, and, if my friends who are to engage themselves.
for me shall see a sure way of relief, if ye want money
ye shall blame me, but I will desire your Majesty to
give commission to your officiars to order your enfer-

* This was the memorable coronation visit to Scotland, which, after
many delays, the King effected in 1093, It was only lex fatul to lian
than the next vinit in 1041, when, in spite, ax we shall Gnd, of the meal
ous exertions of Montrose nnd Napier to save him, his Majeaty wns vir-
tually dethroned in Scotland,

t “Archibald Campbell was n brother of ir James Campbell of Laws

ers He figures during the troubles as the confidential agent af the sie

nister Angyle. r

6s INTRODUCTION,

Tn consequence of this mean intriguing of the Scotch
factionists,—not for the “ good of the state,” but out of
“ spleen to the persons of men, and their own private
interest,”—this scheme, to assist the King with money
for his long projected visit to Scotland, was frustrated,
and the royal warrants which Lord Napier
Scotland were actually refused to be received. “ Upon
which,” says he, “ 1 resolved to go up to show his Ma-
Jjesty what rabs his service had got in my person, that
hig service might not be disappointed, but that he might
remove them, or take some other course in due time,”
On his journey, however, Napier was encountered
at “ Cobbrandspath," by Roxburgh, Archibald Camp-
bell, and Sir James Baillie, who persuaded him to pause
eight days on the road, until they should communicate
with the Earl of Mar, with a view of accommodating
matters. Then they brought the draught of letter to
the King, for Napier to sign, so worded as to imply a
voluntary resignation by him, in favour of Mar, of the
employment for which Napier had obtained the royal ware
rant to himself. " This (says he) not giving satisfaction,
they persuaded me to goto Tuninghame to the Earl of
Haddington, * who undoubtedly would find a temper of

* This wns the celebrated Thomas Hamilton of Priextfield, (a younger
ranch of Hamilton of Innerwick,) who wus Lord Advoeste in 1590, wud
Presidant of the Court of Session in 1614, having been previously suis
st the preg i ile of Lard Blaniog end Bret I ali
‘wns created Enrl of Melrose, and some years afterwards Earl
ington. Upon ano oceasion, when presiding, ts te Donne Ralls
“in an improtntion of a writ, which the Lords wery convinced was
ed, but puziled for want of clear proof, Lord Binning toking up:
writ in hig band, and holding it betwixt him and the light, discovered
the forgery by the stamp of the paper, the first paper of wuch » stamp

posterior to the date of the writ quarrelled. At another thue a
re mises a snipe Xe atom rd sotto ea Siero:
"« interrogatories, meoting an rhlandor who came to depoue:
in thvour of the some party, advised him to bewnee of the man with the
partridge eye."—Prefuce to Forbes's Collection of Decisions. Among Sle

68 INTRODUCTION.

‘excessive donations of princes were the first causes of
corruption in the Roman church, the taste whereof did
‘so inflame the avarice and ambition of the successors,
that they have raised themselves above all secular and
sovereign power, and to maintain the same have ob-
tended to the world certain devices of thelr own for mat-
ters of faith. Not to Kings, nor states, for histories
witness what troubles have been raised to Kings, what
tragedies among subjects, in all places where ehureh-
men were great. Our reformed churches having re-
duced religion to the ancient primitive trath and sim-
plicity, ought to beware that corruption enter not in
their church at the same gate, which already is open
with store of attendant thereat to welcome it with pomp
and ceremony. +e

“9, Tutors and counsellors to young princes, next
under God, have the fate of after-times in their hands,
For according as the first impressions and maxims of
government, wherewith these new vessels are seasoned,
eee Sed eee
happy or miserable.

“3. To know men, their abilities, dispositions, and
affections, is the proper art of princes, their most pro-
fitable study, the abridgement of all good government.
For, there being uo public business which falleth not

nage of Clureadon's, written ut a tutor period. Laud “did really beliere
that nothing more contributed to the benefit and advancement of the
church, than the promotion of ehnrchmen to places of the greatest ho-
nour, and offices of the highest trust, ‘This opinion, and the promewe
Hen of (though bls intgey wae soweonae, nd bi oa
for ¢he good and honour of the state os for the udvancement
of the church,) wa tho akingy /wadalar 4p ha son
Projudice towards, mai malice agarast, aud almost destruction of the church.
—Hint. Vol. i. p, 192—The date of Lord Napler’s MS. is probably soon
after the coronation visit to Scotland, and when Charles imprudently
raised so many churchmen to hix councils, and invested Archbinop
Hpotawood with the eal of tht Wogdom,

:

i, prince,
never let the reins and rud~

il warrant of justice betwixt
‘they obliged to [be just]

_eghsalc hmeangrerreia ie
Shak neo ereresiey
reckeu are here spledeonjcturaly, the aa

(2)

7 INTRODUCTION.

heart; wicked are those who move them to it,—like
Dalila they cut their hair when they are asleep, and
ee ee telnet ee

ee 6 ee well, good counsel and careers
tion are requisite; this is the ground of that, for no
good advice can be given if the estate of the matter be
mistaken, Of the two, ¢rue information is the most ne-
cessary for the affairs of remote kingdoms; for those
businesses which require deep advice are managed there
where the person of the prince resideth; seldom do
great matters occur in remote places, and where they
do, the nature of the thing alloweth time of deliberation,
(for great bodies have slow motions ;) there, if matters
go in the ordinary way, all is well; but, without true
information, a prince can neither order things, com-
mand, sign, nor direct anything aright.

“7. ‘Phisis good for the King, ill for the people, good
for the people, ill for the King, and contrarily, are in-
congruities in speech, impossibilities in nature, and can-
not be instanced ; they divide things indivisible, and
separate what God bas conjoined, and have wrought
bad opinions in the minds of princes and their subjects
in-some parts of the world; they are false though fre-
quent, and are the eruptions and sallies from the minds
of those evil spirits who walk betwixt a King and his
people. Fora King and his people make up one poli-
tie body, whereof the King is the head. In a politic
as ina natural body what is good or ill for one is so
for both, neither can the one subsist without the other,
but must go to ruin with the other.

“8, Princes’ letters and laws ought to be clear and per-
spicuous, without equivocal or perplexed sense, admit-
ting no construction but one. . For an obscure law
alleged in any cause, gives occasion of more process,

7 INTRODUCTION.

ought to be punished by [the prince] himself, So shall
justice be satisfied, the honour-of the King’s a
and his prerogative remain inviolated.

“ Those councils (with the ike ofthat kind,) wherein
the prince’s good is pretended, the private ends of these
bad councillors only intended, hath been the efficient
causes of the ruin of kings, kingdoms and estates—
which Almighty God ean only remead. And therefore,
let all good subjects who love their prince and country.
pray with Solomon, Lorp remove THE WICKED*
from the King, and his throne shall be established in
rightcousness.”

‘Such were the reflections, on the prospects of King
and country, noted in the privacy of his closet, and ere
the great Rebellion had commenced, by one who may be
said to have reared that “ bloody murtherer and ex-
communicated traitor Montrose, and whom we shall
presently discover sharing and approving every step of
his calumniated pupil's career, from his early and mis-
taken support of the Covenant, to his raising the roy-
al banner in Seotland. Had Napier, like Clarendon,
lived to know the fate of Charles, and to trace his
history back from its bloody close through all the ma-
zes of faction and faithlessness that destroyed him,
he would have needed not to depart from or alter a
single sentence of his painful meditations. There is a
melancholy interest in redeeming from its lurking
place of many generations, so prophetic a manu-
script, on such a subject, to contrast it with the vo-
Jumes that have been published since, and especially
with the too perfect fulfilment as recorded in the

+ Those words ure writton emphatically in large lotiers in the mune
script.

m4 INTRODUCTION.

the fatal effeet of those mists of ignorance and “ mis-
takings,” as to the affairs of Scotland, in which the King
was continually enveloped, by those who, for the suke
of petty and private interests, so treacherously practis-
ed upon the facilities of his disposition.

“ Offers of usaful service to your Majesty, some few
propositions Lye Hanke adc whereby the use of
that sereice may be better known.

“ That the state of business is oftimes disguised to
princes, for private ends.

“ That the truth of business is hardly to be expected
from the relations® of great men, whose friendships and
dependencies extend far,—or from men ,fuctions,—or
from such servants as endeavour to build up their for-~
tunes with their own hands, not leaving to their masters
to do it upon their good deserving,—or from parties.

“That from misinformation, all errors,
in matters of estate, and mistaking of the true means,
whereby th Jost end gresiowepeerceetnteineomieas
to be do proceed.

“That it is not easy to distinguish truth from false-
hood, seconded by friends, and supported by reasons
probable.

“ That it is impossible to do any thing conveniently
or rightly, or to determine any thing de jure, if first it
be not known how it is de facto.

“That the justest and wisest princes must err in
their directions given upon sinister information of the
state of the business in hand,

“ That it is an easy matter to a just prince, by fol-
lowing only the bent of his own inclination, to give

* &¢ Tnfirmation,”

=

76 INTRODUCTION.

and to give me some place of access to your Majesty's
ha nate etibeebis iostberesra™ =!
unuseful,) and a reasonable means that I be not forced
to undo my estate, and instead of a useful servant be-
come a troublesome suitor, (whereby there shall be more
by many degrees brought in, and saved in your Ma-
jesty’s coffers,) then Ido humbly offer and undertake,—
“ To establish such correspondence in most parts of
Scotland, and in all the courts and judicatures thereof,
with men honest and judicious, not interested in affains,
and not knowing one of another, who shall give me
sure intelligence of the state of every business which
shall occur; and if any of them shall chance to be par-
tinlly affected, the relation of the others shall control
what is amiss in his. Which relations shall be made
known to your Majesty by me, without passion or af-
fection, and without respect to any end of my own or of
‘others, as I shall answer to God in conscience, to your
Majesty upon my alledgeance, and under pain of your
highest displeasure. Whereby your Majesty shall reap
these commodities following, and many more.
“1. As the clouds which obseure and darken the
‘sun are dispersed by the heat of the same, so shall the
cloud of factions, compacted to no other end but to mis-

which never bore fruit.” A few yours afterwards, however, the King:
made a point, against very opposition, of preferring bed
the place Ck tanaurordepoln, “and (Pe 808) alittle before his death he
recommended mie, T being then in Scotland, to his son King Charles, as
hin majonty (Charles) himself was pleased tovell me, than which a greater
tostimony of a nuuster's favour to an absent servant, at such
timo, could not be expressed.” [find from a letter of Napict’s, (while
_gontleman

tava een well for he monarch but Napier ben In she glace of Hite
Wall Murray of the bedchnaiber,’

78 INTRODUCTION,

“ These commodities, and many more, shall redound
to your Majesty by knowledge of the true estate of busi«
ness, which I do humbly offer to procure, if your Ma-
jesty do think that I can be faithful, But if it shall
not please your Majesty to embrace or like of these of-
fers, I shall pray Almighty God, who hath the hearts
of princes in his hand, to direct your Majesty to a bet-
ter course than this, for your Majesty's own good and
that of your subjects.”

‘The endeavours of Charles I. to relieve the Scottish
nation from the oppression of the aristocratic tithe-
holders, and the state prosecution of Lord Balmerino
for a seditious libel, aproseeution which wrose out of the
circumstances of the King’s coronation visit to Scotland:
in 1633, may be termed the seeds of the Covenant, and
of that revolt in the north which sogreatly aided, if it did
not bring about, the subsequent Rebellion. With regard
tothe important subject of the tithe policy of Charles I.
Lord Napier’s manuscripts afforda more authentic and
interesting elucidation, especially as regards the King’s
motivesand intentions, than has hitherto been recorded.*
Malcolm Laing observes, that “ a general revocation of
the tithes and benefices usurped by the laity had been
projected by James, but deferred from the unexpected

* Mr Connell (Treatise on Tithes, Vol. i. p.¥80,) of the
tem introduced by Charles 1, observes,—" The events which led to

k

turns that found it their private prejudice (interest) to
render the business intricate, longsome, and difficult,
‘upon hope his Majesty would relinquish the same ;
neither was this form of proceeding displeasing to some
most intrusted, for by the difficulty they did indear
their services, and in the mean time, giving his Majes-
ty hopes of great matters, they drew from him present
and certain benefits, above the proportion of their merit,
or of his Majesty’s ability.”

The design of recovering the tithes from the hands of
those grasping und factious barans who had made the
reformation of the church in Scotland an excuse for ap-
propriating that property to themselves, was thus pro-
tracted through a number of years from the commence-
ment of the reign; and Charles himself refers to the un-
just discontent of the nobles, whose power was to suf-
fer from this salutary restriction, the murmurs and
heart-burnings which founda vent in the insurrection
against Episcopacy. When the general revocation was
first proposed, the King met with a violent opposition
from interested noblemen, several of whom were at the
very time disgusting his Majesty with those petty face
tions at court, of which Lord Napier hasleft so curious a
record. Mar, Haddington, Roxburgh, Morton, and
the violent old gouty chancellor, Sir George Hay
(Kinuoul) were, from personal interest, among the lead-
ers of that opposition, which, we are told by Burnet,
very nearly brought on an extraordinary scene of assas-
sination and massacre when Nithisdale came to Scot-
land commissioned by the King to make good the revo-
cation. It was after this failure that the famous “Com~-
mission of Surrenders of Superiorities and ‘Tithes” was
issued in the year 1627, the following illustration of
which, from a manuscript in Lord Napicr’s handwrit-

bk

a |

Be INTRODUCTION,

causes to deeper judgments. Neither will I meddle with
the Commission,* nor the tenor of it, But that I may
in some measure give satisfaction to your desire, I will
only set down the known effects, and then deliver my
opinion of the nearest cause of these effects.

“ The effects are these: A tedious in=
superable difficulties, and a general complaint of all par-
ties,—evident arguments of a business ill managed and
miscarried, and giving just cause of fear that the event
shall not answer his Majesty's expectation in honour
nor profit. That it is longsome, and like to be so still,
and that it is intricate und dificile, these three years’ en-
deavours, with so small advancement, gives evident de-
monstration, where difficulties, like the heads of Hydra,
‘no sooner one cut off but another arises. That the com-
plaint and discontent is general the induction of parti«
culars will best shew. .

“ The CLency complain that they are not only de=
frauded, by this course, of the tithes the true patrimony
of the church, but of all hope of recovering the same
in any time coming,—that the constitutions of men are
preferred to the law of God, not only by derogating
from it, but by utterly abolishing the same,—that sa-
erilege is allowed by public authority, and brought in-
to the King’s house.

“ The Trrotars +} complain that their infeftments,
and ratifications of the same in Parliament, (the funda- ,
mental law whereby the subjects possess any thing in

* “Commission granted by King Charles te the clergy, nobility,
try, and barghs of Scotland to treat anent his revocation, Talves otthe
Court

4 Anglice, impropriators,—the nobles and barons, numely, whe after
tho Reformation, obtained to themselves gifts from the Crown of theso
tithes, burdened with the support of the clergy.

‘84 INTRODUCTION.

frustrated and disappointed, and that whieh his Majes-
ty intended for the general good, to give general dis-
contentment, through the ill carriage of the business,
whereby his Majesty is defrauded of thehonour due to
his virtuous and good designs, than which never prince
intended more just, more gracious, nor more truly ho=
nourable; and in the end it.is most likely that his pro-
fit shall be much diminished, unless some better course
be taken, For after the valuations be made, whieh
some of good judgment think will come short of that
which was made when the thirds of benefices were as-
summed, and after that the ministers have procured aug~
mentations of stipend, which indeed is expedient, and
of number, which is more necessary for the serviee of
God, and after that maintenance for hospitals and
schools, and other means, be deducted off the tithes,
and after that the titulars, cither out of favour, ar out
of consideration of the loss, and the just and meritori-
ous causes of their acquisition of the said tithes, get sa-
tisfaction, which undoubtedly all will pretend to, all
demand, and most of them likely enough receive from
80 bountiful a disposition—the remainder is not likely
to prove so great as is given out.

“ As to that other way invented to raise profit to his

of church property made within eighty yenurs, comprehending thus all
tho lavish and profuse grants of James VEL ‘The threats of a proceeding
thus began excited great alarm and the King was foreed to lawor his

pro

vision for the clergy, and for education j and,2. ‘The freeing of owners of

Iand fromthe oppression suffered in the drawing and levying of tithes”—

P.908. Hot all themanuycripts of Lard Napier on the subject—written, be

‘it remembered, long previous to those troubles which arose out of the
: 3 :

toy mismanagement ofthe King’s pious
\emer—aiford a view, af the purity of is intentions, from one so long
‘anil intimately acquainted harles, that hie toatimony eannot be

21a OS

86 INTRODUCTION,

endenvour to establish a general quota upon which me-
the valuation of all the lands in

Scotland. Indeed if the Commission had been given:

‘to this end, to establish a certain tithe in some new
found land, where never any was before, this had been
the only way; but in Scotland, where there has ever
been a known, or easily to be known, tithe of every
parcel of ground, since first it received the Christian re-
ligiow, according to which tacks bave been set, fines
raised, and bargains of salé made, to induce a new quo-
- ta, and fit it to all parts af the kingdom alike, were, in
my opinion, the way to disturb and confound the whole
business, and no more a means to facilitate the sale, ad-
anitting that sale had been the true means, than if a
‘merchant, to the effect his cloth might sell the better,
would sell none with the old received yard, but stay
till a new one were made by Act of Parliament.

“ Butit may besaid, ant ne carpasalienc, vel ede tua®
‘The first whereof I would not do, if I did not think there
were a way (if I be not mistaken) to perform the
King’s gracious intention, in short time, with ease, con«
veniency, contentment and profit to all, or the most part,
without any considerable innovation (which, though to
the better, is ever of dangerous consequence ina settled
state,)} and, what is no little ease to his Majesty, by
which no man, of what quality soever, can have any
the least pretext to demand satisfaction, or to diminish
his Majesty's profit, But neither is this time fit for
any such proposition,—when his Majesty ix made so
hopeful of the course in hand, and so well conceited of
the abilities and the affection of the instruments employ-
ed and entrusted,—neither am I a fit man to do it in the

* Biuher do not carp at the plane of others, oF publish your own.
+ This was prophetic.

i |

88 INTRODUCTION.

had,—to be seen riding so near the Pope and in speech
with him,—and he rests ay well satisfied as if the truth
had been exactly told him?

“ And truly, if ever any King, our Sovereign, in 60
far as concerneth Scottish business, may justly make:
Dioelesian’s complaint, —Colliguat se quatuor aut quin-

non sinunt—Svv BONUS, SAPIENS, CAUTUS,
DECIPITOR IMPERATOR.”*

From these, and other fragments of his reflections
we shall yet have to quote, it might almost seem
that the preceptor of Montrose had been gifted with
the second sight of his country, and that to him the
* coming events cast their shadows before.” It is in~
teresting to connect the above manuscript, upon one of
the most influential and least elucidated events of the
times, with a passage in Heylyn’s Life of Laud. That
contemporary writer narrates, that, in the minority of

oe sk ae oreo ensayo hs cee
It is & speech put in the mouth of the Emporor Dioeletinn, after

Jontary abdication of the throne, when on Pieseche Be
the difficulty of a prince. El
mage. “How often ls it the interest of four or five ministers to
together to ir Sovorelgn | ‘mankind ty his ex.
alted dignity, the truth is concealed from his knowledgo,—he can see
only with their eyes, he hears nothing but their miarepresentations,
confers important offices upon vice and weukness,
the most virtuous and deserving among his subjects. By such infamous
‘arta the best snd wivoxt prinoos are sold to the venal corruptions of
courtiors.” The quotation in. manuscript ts from Vise
aw, a learned Syracwan, reckoned the Coryphanat song She six ope
entled Historie Ay ‘His otyleis

Auguste Seriptores, considered more
leant uod pure than that of any of the others, and Gibbon iss particue
lar sete yreat store by him.

|

90 INTRODUCTION.

mission, matters were in the state commented upon by
Lord Re see eee ee eee it
appears, however, that, shortly after
Sania nel ek aly bea eaten oa
vour, but obtained an opportunity of com:
all his views on the subject of the tithe policy to the
King himself. “ In the year 1630,” says Heylyn, “com-
missioners (from the tithe-holders) are sent to the Court
‘of England, and amongst others, the learned and right
noble Lord of Merchiston (Napier) srom whose mouth
I had all this relation ; who, after a long treaty with
the King, did at last agree that the said Commission
should proceed as formerly, and that all such superio-
rities and tithes as had been, or should be surrendered,
should be regranted by the King on these conditions:
1. That all such as held hereditary sheriffdoms, or had
the power of life and death over such as lived within
their jurisdiction, should quit those royalties to the
King. 2 That they should make unto their tenants
in their several Jands, some permanent estates, either
for their lives, or one-and-twenty years, or some such
like term, that so the tenants might be encouraged to
build and plant, and improve the patrimony of that
kingdom. 3, That some provisions should be made for
augmenting the stipends of the clergy. 4. That they
should double the yearly rents which were reserved
unto the crown by their former grants. 5. That these
conditions being performed on their parts, the King
should settle their estates by act of Parliament, Home
went the commissioners with joy for their good success,
jing to be entertained with bells and bonfires,
But they found the contrary, the proud Scots being ge-
nerally resolved rather to put all to hazard, than to quit
that power and tyranny which they had over their poor

=

ie |
92 INTRODUCTION.

more deadly promoter of the Rebellion, assisted to bear
the train. 2

The factious insolency of his Scotch nobles which
Charles had experienced in England, he now met with,
in more dangerous and personal collision, “ at home.”
No sooner had he set his foot in Scotland than he cre-
ated the chancellor Earl of Kinnoul, a favour whieh
had litte effect in molifying the temper of that states-
aman. Charles had always wished that the primate of
Scotland should have precedence of the chancellor;
“ which,” (says Sir James Balfour)“ the Lord Chancel-
lor Hay, « gallant stout man, would never condescend
to, nor ever suffer him to have place of him, do what
he could, all the days of his lifetime.” Once again
Charles endeavoured to effect this. It was when ar-
ranging the pageantry of his coronation with Sir James
Balfour, the Lord Lyon, in whose own graphic words
we must give the anecdote. “ I remember that King
Charles sent me to the Lord Chancellor, being then
Earl of Kinnoul, the day of his own coronation, in the
morning, to shew him that it was his will and pleasure,
but only for that day, that he would cede and give place
to the Archbishop; but he returned by me to his Ma-
jasty a very brusk answer, which was, that since his
‘Majesty had been pleased to continue him in that office
of chancellor, which, by his means, his worthy father, of
happy memory, had bestowed upon him, he was ready
in all humility to lay it down at his Majesty's feet;
but since it was his royal will he should enjoy it with
the known privileges of the same, never a stol'd priest
in Scotland should set a foot before him so long as his
blood was hot. When I had related his answer to the
King, he said, * Weel, Lyon, let's go to business ; I will
not meddle further with that old cankered, gouty man,

a

ee |

94 INTRODUCTION.

expose to the hunter's fury, to save their own careases,
So he dismissed them to a conference with his secre-
tary, Sir Alexander Stirling, and the nobleman who
had interceded for them, namely, the Earl of Menteith.
‘These stricken does, however, did not retire to weep.
When Charles took his seat in the Scotch Parlia-
ment of 1633, Rothes and Loudon proved to be leaders
of the very dangerous herd he there brought to bay.
‘The King had paused in his favourite and pious scheme,
of arranging a uniformity of worship throughout his
kingdoms, and now determined to conquer more gradu.
ally, and with as little violence as possible, the selfish
obstinacy of the tithe-holders, which, he had every rea-
son to believe, was the only obstacle to his ameliora-
tions of the Episcopal church of Scotland. But he had
no idea of giving up to this faction Religion and the
Church as already established. Unconscious of Papis-
tical inclinations, and too enlightened himself not to
perceive, in the rising murmurs aguinst popery, either
an irrational or a treacherous opposition, he determin+
ed to assert in his own name what had been peacefully
established by his immediate predecessor. That the
King could take his seat in this Parliament, (at a time,
too, when prerogative and privilege were all undefine
ed,) with calm and prudential feelings towards such an
opposition, was not to be expected. To adopt his own
account of the matter,—which, from its truth, became
80 hateful to the Covenanters. —" we (says the King,)
undertook a journey to them, and, according to our ex-
peetation, were most joyfully received by them. But
immediately before, and at the sitting down of our Par-
liament there, we quickly found that the very same
persons who since were the contrivers of, and still con-
tinue the sticklers for, their now pretended Covenant,

=

96 INTRODUCTION.
Seoasedinlgsy without om ee

oe noblemen who led this factious ovat
and the manner in which they did so, were
calculated to throw the hasty King off his
this unhappy collision with a, Patooan cease

Par-
liament, that the ordering of the apparel of churchmen
should appertain to him. Charles, consistently with
his object of uniformity in chureh matters, was amx-
Jous not to lose sight of this act, and the Lords of the
articles had included it in the general act of his prero-
gative. The opposition seized upon this as the most
favourable subject for popular agitation, it being easy,
with the aid of a fanatical clergy, to excite the people
into irrational violence against thesurplice, and through
that perverted medium to poison their minds with false
ideas of the King's intentions. From Sanderson's con-
temporary history ,wederivethe following quaint andcir-
curnstantial deseription of the style of a debate that was
in fact pregnant with the fate of England. “ The first
that opposed this act was the Lord Loudon,abold young
man ofva broken estate, lately come from school (their
college) and a Master of Arts. A deft Lord he was, who
missing of the Court to civilize his studies, must needs
want morality to bring him to manners, and being
besides of a cavilling contradictory nature, nothing
would seem to him so positive in reason as his own opi-
nion; and therefore now, as heretofore at school, he argu
ed with his distinctions—duplici querstioni non potest
dari unaresponsio ; itaest sic probo,—and after his syllo-

SE ea oe Ne oad laad
il sunanecamee

i

4

98 INTRODUCTION.

remarked that at this time Rothes and his party en-
deavoured “ to make themselves popular by speaking
in Parliament against those things which were most
grateful to his Majesty, and which still passed notwith~
standing their contradiction, and he thoughta little dis
countenance upon those persons would either suppress.
that spirit within themselves, or make the poison of
it less operative upon others.” That great historian
aids, that of the Earl of Rothes, and others, the King
had the worst opinion, and purposely withheld from
them any grace by never speaking to them, or taking
notice of them in the Court. Yet such was their ef-
frontery, and determination to attain their ends, that
“when the King was abroad in the fields, or passing
through villages, when the greatest crowds of people
flocked to see him, those men would still be next him, and
entertain him with some discourse and pleasant rela-
fions, which the King’s gentle disposition could not
avoid, and which made those persons to be generally
believed to be most acceptable to his Majesty,"—a cha-
racteristic demeanour of ambitious democracy, upon
which Clarendon passes the shrewd reflection, that “let
‘the proudest or most formal man resolve to keep what
distance he will towards others, a bold and confident
man instantly demolishes that whole machine, and gets
within him, and even obliges him to his own laws of
conversation.” Such wax the faction with whom Charles
came into collision in the Scotch Parliament of 1633,
and to whose bitter disappointment the King’s preraga-
tive was saved, for the time, by his still commanding a
majority of that Parliament against the rising tide of
disloyalty and disorder. * But it was not merely to ac-

* Dr Cook Has been misled into « most mlstaken history of this mat-
tor, by Bishop Barnet, to whose mallee the Reverond author woul pro-

‘ing the royal signature to a letter to the Pope. Ki
cleat rage epee en
could not redeem it from its inherent vice. son was
of the keenest of the cabal against Charles I, and to
this nobleman it was that Haig first submitted his
scheme of a revolution, which he called “a fit.
cation to be presented to his Majesty.” Lord

‘83 appears from his own depositions, dl

ried it to Lord Rothes, and further * declares, thnt the
Earl of Rothes, and the deponer, having read the sup-
plication, thought it no ways ft to be presented to his
Majesty, but to be absolutely suppressed.” It is not
surprising that even their effrontery, who at the
very time were forcing themselves upon thé’ King
in his progresses, was unequal to the task of pre-
senting this petition; for a more purely insulting
document, if offered to the King, and, if circulated
among the people, a more insidiously seditious one, could
not have been framed. Tt began by accusing the King
of asserting in the recent Parliament, “a s

‘to innovate the order and government long continued
in the reformed church of Scotland,"—it referred to the
known wish of Charles to have a litnegy’ propared for
1 See Lond Balmerino's depositions in the record of his State Trial,

artic ioe he reenter, Re Cook he ot coset eh etna Ta

\

5

104 INTRODECTION.

man copy oue of them for him, and that he returned the
draft to its notable contriver. The other copy Bale
vino delivered to Rothes, who, “ sworn upon his great
oath,” declared he read part of it, when going with the
Earl of Cassils and Lord Yester (dissenting Lords) in
coach to the King at Dalkeith, and that, “ finding it of
such a strain, and having told them that his Majesty
had given him an express command to suppress all that
was of that nature, the deponer and they, al? in one
voice, thought it should be suppressed; and the de
poner did put it in his pocket.” That same day, the
King having taxed Rothes at Dalkeith with certain
information laid against him, “he purged himself clear-
ly to his Majesty,” taking great credit to himself with
the King “ for suppressing all petitions of the nature
of that which was moved in the time of the Parlia-
ment,” and then, with ludicrous effrontery, added,
that he had one of these suppressed petitions in his
pocket, * if your Majesty be pleased to look upon it."
‘The King replied, “ It is no matter, I have no leisure,
Tam going to the park,” where, of course, this pertina-
cious factionist pursued the unfortunate monarch with
patronizing attentions, and jesting conversation, The
petition remained in Rothes’s pocket for eight days “ un
looked upon by him ;” but, most probably, for the in-
spection of the valet who dusted his clothes. He then
“ caused copy it by his own servant,” and returned the
original to Balmerino. Yet be swears that “he ever
thought it fit to be supprest,” and most earnestly dis
claims having any concern with Mr William Haig, “of
whom he had ever suspicion, because he has ever been
busy upon such idle and foolish toys.”

Balmerino obviously intended to make some use of
the copy he had retained, for it was slightly interlined

SEEDS OF THE COVENANT. 107

ought never to lose sight of the state of the times, or of
‘the fact that secret combinations were then rife, and
were well known to be the means constantly employ-
ed by such intriguers, whether the object was to ad-
‘Vance some petty interests by the ruin of an individual,
designs of a political clique by the ruin of
j—we must keep in mind, (to recur to the ex-
of Lord Napier,) “ the iniquity of those times,
for bribery, concussion of the people, and abus-
inig of the King, no age can parallel," and which were
Haunted by the “ evil spirits who walk betwixt a King
and his ” .
Charles, then, was advised, to make an example of
‘Balmerino, the factious and ungrateful, son of a traito-
rous father—an advice fully justified by the results
of the excitement at Inst triumphantly effected by
‘the very came party, whose Covenant swept all before
it, inchiding the Throne. Balmerino received every
“advantage that equity could demand. He was remit-
ted to ajnty of his own countrymen, to be tried in his
‘own country, on the statutes against leasing-making.
It was ever the demand of the factious in Scotland,
that their enemies should be sent home to be dealt with ;
‘and it was/a friend and leader of faction that now
‘acquired what to him was an advantage, and very
nearly equivalent to an acquittal. He was indicted by
‘Sir Thomas Hope, and the libel presents a curious con-
trast to the opinion delivered a few: years afterwards
by that distinguished legal adviser of the Crown, that
the Covenant, (of whieh the Balmerino petition was but
a type or | .) with all its machinery of sedi-
tion; was a legal and constitutional act. The Balme-
ino petition, however, this indictment characterizes, in

o

—

108 INTRODUCTION.

the name of the King, as “a most scandalous, reproach-—
ful, odious, infamous, and seditious libel ;"—speaks of
the “curious and furious brain of the cursed and un-
happy libeller,” who, it adds, “ not content with these
reproaches, most villanously and despitefully beleht
and vamited forth against our sacred person, proceeds
to a most fearful and dangerous undermining of our
honour, credit, and greatest happiness, in affirming that
there is now a general fear of some innovation intend-
ed in essential points of religion ; albeit, blessed be
God, it be certainly known to all our good subjects
that we are, and in all our actings have shown ourselves
to be, a most devout and religious prince, hating and
abhorring, in heart and affection, all papistical super-
stition and idolatry.” Strange to say, the Lord Ad-
yocate, who did his duty con amore upon this occasion,
was the same who, about two years afterwards, so
effectually, though secretly, aided and abetted the most
seditious plot (being the same plot, and the same
actors) that ever brought a country to disgrace and
ruin. -Eyery art of sedition was exerted to turn the
trial of Balmerino into the triumph of democracy. The

were excited into a state of frenzy, and the lives
of the judgesand the jury werethreatened, if they should
dare to condemn the accused. It was falsely asserted
against the King and his advisers, that the noblemen
and gentlemen composing the assize had been secretly
influenced, and packed for the purpose of securing a con-
viction. Besides all this tremendous machinery of fac~
tion to averawe the proceedings, Balmerino was de-
fended by the whole strength of the bar, and the rele-
vancy was attacked by volumes of elaborate and intri-
catearguments from the civil law, enough tohave turned

it; it was a matter of blood, and

ght of that as long as they liv-

been drawn in to shed blood,

pardon, but it cost: him

pardon ; it had given him many

day and night; and as he spoke

over his face ; this struck a damp on

of Traquair took up the argument,”

was nota murderer, Upon his

such awful weight of recollections,

}as clear as his conscience. The dri-
p uated murderer,—for what else

1. ipresion to the effect, at least,

hae

cn aia

10 INTRODUCTION,

only a majority of one, ‘That nobleman had been in«
dicted as “ airt and part of the penning and forming of
the said infamous libel, at the least concealer and not
revealer thereof ;” also, “ of the dispersing and
ing of the snid infamous libel ;” also, “of the not ap-
prehending of Mr William Haig, whom: he affirmed to
be the author.” The verdict was far more restricted
than what the proof might have sustained, and it
little justified the accusution against the jury of being
subservient and yenal. They only found him guilty
“ of the hearing of the said infamous libel, concealing
and not revealing of the said Mr William Haig, af-
firmed by him to:be the author thereof." | The Lord
Justice-General (Errol) declared, “ that the said John
Lord Balmerino bas there-through. incurred, the pain
of death contained in the acts of Parliament; sus-
always the execution thereof, until the time bis
Majesty's will and pleasure beshown and declared there-
anent; to whose sacred Majesty the manner, time, and
place of the execution of the said sentence is remitted.”
To overawe the justice of the King, or to rob him of
‘the attribute of his merey, the senseless mob had been
agitated throughout to a pitch of audacity, that now
threatened the lives both of the judges and the jury.
But the desire of Charles, at no time, was the death of
a human being. Into this present prosecution his
nce had been foreed by the political iniqui-
ty of Scotland, and the selection made was indicative
of a lofty sense of justice, but at the same time an
extreme moderation in the desire of examples. Had he
been the King to carry that example to extremity,—the
justice of which must have been acknowledged by civi-
lized Ewrope,—it could not have been his fate to have
been led to the block by his own subjects, who usurp-
a

k

liz INTRODUCTION.

cunning ofdemocracy? If Charles had beenthe ’

claim the head of the justly condemned Balmerino, the
menaces of a faction would have been powerless against
his justice, nor could so stern and determined a disposi~
tion ever have been compelled, by that very faction, to
‘sign the death warrant of his greatest statesman. But
he exercised the mercy so honourable to his nature,—
mercy which Batmerino himself, among others, would
not suffer the King to extend to Strafford. From his
Majesty's own account we shall now quote the result of
Balmerino’s trial. “ Notwithstanding the head of this
family, which was first raised by our father, and then be-
ing fallen, yet raised by him again, and now relapsed,
‘was once again brought under our axe, as it had been
before brought under the axe of our royal father, we,
desirous to shew ourself the true heir of none of our
blessed father’s virtues more than of his mercy and cle-
mency, were contented, upon his deep protestations of
loyalty for the time to come, to grant him under our
great seal for that our kingdom, not only a pardon of
that crime of which he stood convicted, but also his
liberty and enlargement ; which gracious pardon of
ours, when it was delivered to him by our council, who
sent for him, being then prisoner in the Castle of Edin-
burgh, he did before that table receive on his knees,
with the highest magnifying of our mercy, with the
humblest acknowledgments of those infinite obligations,
by which he and his family stood for ever engaged in
the service of us and our crown, with the deepest pro-
testations of all loyal, quict, and peaceable deportment
of himself even hereafter, and of bending all his endea-
vours to attend upon all our loyal courses and com-
mandments, sothat our conneil remonstrated unto usthat
we had bestowed ourmercy andgraceuponaman, of whom

SEEDS OF THE COVENANT. 113

there could not be the least suspicion of his averseness
from our service at any time hereafter, but of whom
they might safely promise all forwardness and alacrity
in all our just courses, whensoever it should please us
touse him. And now this same pardoned Lord Bal-
merino, being one of the chief contrivers and most ma-
licious prosecutors of this wicked Covenantmade against
us and our authority, how he can be able to answer it
to God, us, and our crown, his own conscience, or to the
world, even in the point of honour and reputation, it
must be left to the world to judge.”

The history of “this wicked Covenant,”—and if law-
less designs, and cruel deeds, perpetrated under a false
though specious exterior of religion and patriotism, be
sins, the Covenant was indeed very wicked,—we shall
have to trace in recording the life and death of
MONTROSE.

VOL. 1. H

14 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

CHAPTER I.

MONTROSE —HUNTLY —MASILTOR—ARGYEAG

Monrtrosk was not more than fourteen years of age,
when his father, John third Earl of Montrose, died un~
expectedly upon the 24th of November 1626.* It must
have been from this date to the time of his first going
abroad, about the commencement of the year 1633, that
the young Earl found in Lord Napier “ a most tender
father ;"t and, if we may judge from the intellectual ac-
complishments which not even his stormy destiny could
altogether suppress or conceal, and of which we shall be
able to afford proofs hitherto unnoticed, there can be no
doubt that the greatest pains had been bestowed upon
his education. It is said that, being an only son, he was
advised to marry at a very early period of his life, and
that he did so is apparent from the fact of his eldest son
being sixteen years old, when, to the great grief of Mon-
trose, he died at Gordon Castle early in 1645. The lady
whom Montrose married was Magdalene, a daughter of

* Wo are told by Dr Wishnrt that Montrose was in hin thirty-fourth,
yeur whon he quitted Seotland for Norway, in the month of September
1646; nnd from other expressions in the same work it would appene that
ho was born about the close of 161¥, or the commencement of the fl
lowing year.

+ Wishart.

£ “Gth March 1643. Yeheir how Montrois cumin to the Bog (of Gieicht,
now Gordon Custle,) His eldest son, the Lord Graham, wes in bis come
Baar. proner Tout, eboot 10 yi ol od of sloguldr exposition.

‘takis seikness, deix in the Bog in a few dayis, and ix bureit in the
ue of Belle, to father ryt grei"— Spalding,

writer,—whose name has
a of himself, that he fol-

several of his expeditions,*—gives
“In bis younger days he
Italy, where he made it his work

of their qualities necessary for a
javing rendered himself perfect in
‘next delight was to improve his in-
did by allotting a proportionable
cand conversing with learned men, yet
used his exercise as he might not forget
das much of the mathematies as is re-
Idier, but his great atudy waa to read
c men. Thus he spent three
-and Italy, and had surveyed the rari-
st, if his domestic affairs had not obliged

s True Funoruls ofthe great Lord Marquet Mon.
tot oe Warts Lata Hist, eon 1720"

{

116 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

his return home, which chanced at that time the late
Rebellion began to peep out.” ‘This is a more pleasing
picture, of the manner in which Montrose was occupi-

ed when abroad, than we obtain from Dileep Bees
who corroborates, however, the account both of our he-
ro's learning and his travels. He says that the Earl of
Montrose was “a young man well learned, who bad tra-
velled, but had taken upon him the part of a hero too
much, and lived as in a romance, for his whole manner
was stately to affectation.” As this portrait, how~
ever, might convey a more favourable opinion than the
malicious Bishop intended, he qualifies it by the infor=
mation, that, “ when Montrose was beyond sea he tra-
velled with the Harl of Denbigh, and they consulted all
the astrologers they could hear of; I plainly saw the
Earl of Denbigh relied on what had been told him to
his dying day, and the rather because the Earl of Mon-
trove was promised a glorions fortune for some time,
but all was to be overthrown in conclusion.” ‘The al-
leged accuracy of this prediction is not bad evidence
that it never occurred, and there is probably more of
malicious detraction in the spirit with whieh Burnet
retails it, than superstitions reliance on the truth of his
anecdote. The difficulty of discovering any prominent
vices in the character of Montrose has rendered his
political enemies, of all eras, vaguely extravagant in
theif terms of abuse, and somewhat pucrile in theiranec-
dotes of detraction. Conscious that the unprejudiced
would still be apt to admire him as a generous hero,
though designed a“ bloody murdererand excommunicat-
ed traitor,” such writers have laboured to trace his best
qualities from impure sources, and to annihilate the ab-

* Burnet’s Iistory ofhis own Timos p51, Oxford edition, 1823, with
the suppressed pawaygen.

7 ta
Keech Ow F

lent daughter of William first Parl of
13 ike Ocwnibcoeaptracy
PSE ere oe

» of that

i. |

118 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

It would be a fact of greater interest to establish that
‘Montrose, when in France, “ became passionately
attached to the military profession, and accepted a
commission of captain of the Royal Guand of Louis
XII." Several modern writers have recorded with-
out expressing any doubt as to this interesting circum-
stance, That Montrose’s innate love of arms and heroic
adventure had been first stirred by visiting the war-
like nations of the continent, in the age too of Gustavus
Adolphus, may readily be believed; and the manly
accomplishments, and military capacities, which so
soon distinguished him at home, indicate that when
abroad he had studied to perfect himself for the field.
But he could not have been much more than twenty-
two years of age when he returned to Scotland, about
the commencement of the year 1636 ; he was only three
years abroad, during which time he was travelling, and”
it seems that he meant to have visited the cast, had his
presence not been required in Scotland. Yet some
contemporary historians have even asserted that Mon-
trose commanded the Scottish Guard in France. San«
derson, in his Life of Charles L, (printed only eight
years after the death of Montrose,) speaks of that no-
bleman’s “ return from his travels in France, where he
had command of the Scots Guard.” Heylyn in his eu-
rious remarks (printed two years earlier than Sander-
son'swork) upon Hammond L’Estrange’s History of the
Reign of Charles I., also records Montrose’s “return
from the court of France, where he was captain, as I
take it, of the Scottish Guard.” The command alluded
to must have been of that illustrious body, so famous
in the romance of history, sometimes called the Com-

* Lodge. Dame, lao, rocords the same as 8 certain fact.

EE

YOUTH OF MONTROSE. lg

pany of Scottish Archers, whose high privilege it was
to guard the person of the King of France. Arising

‘in his eloquent funeral oration over Henrietta Maria,

identifies the Archer Guard with Scotland, in a remark,

So 2 ee alae is certainly not applicable to

Montrose. The Scotch, he says, in whose hands the

Lc ed England placed himself, gave him up to the

un and thus the faithful guards of our
Kings betrayed their own! *

‘There is a circumstance in the history of the Scottish
‘Guard which may account for Heylyn’s surmise, and at
the same time afford the most probable theory of Mon-
‘trose’sfirst departure from his native country. Before the
timeof Louis XIII. the guard had lost much of itsScottish
‘exelusiveness, with the concomitant honourand privileges
to that nation, and French noblemen aspired to, and ob-
tained, the distinctions that still nominally belonged to
Scotland. From some original papers on the subject
it appears that James VI. was induced to interpose his
personal demand to have the guard restored to its pris-
tine ; in France, or that it should no longer be

| with his kingdom. ‘This happened in the

years 1611 and 1612, when Mary de Medicis was Re-
gent of France. In 1624, her son, Louis XIII. ap-
pears to have been very anxious to derive this aid
en Ritmo Parliamentaires

fidelles de nos Rois, trahissent le leur."— Orairon
he Henr- Marie de Prance.

120 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

from Scotland upon its original footing. He granted
his patent, dated 19th April in that year, of the“ com-
and of company of seated 6 A
by the death of its former commander

Lennox,” to George Lord Gordon, wher
Marquis of Huntly. This Lord Gordon was the noble-
man to whom Montrose, when first in arms for the
Covenant, was opposed in the north of Scotland, who
was said to have afterwards entertained a fatal jealousy
of Montrose in their loyal career, and who finally
suffered death in the same cause, about the same time,
It appears by various letters, from about the date of this
patent to the year 1637 inclusive, that the King of
Frunce had long ardently desired the presence of Lord
Gordon and his company, which was

land, Hitherto it has been recorded that this noble-
man passed over to France, with his brilliant cortege,
in 1624, the date of his commission, in which ease
Montrose was too young. to have accompanied him.
But that he did not do so until the year 1633 is prov-
ed from the tenor of the correspondence alluded to, and
the occasion was after Louis had resolved to aid, the
united princes of Germany against the house of Austria.
A contemporary manuscript history of the family of Gor-
don says, that young Huntly “ conducted with him from
Scotland the bravest company of Scotch gens d'armes
that ever had been seen in France, all of them gentle-
men, and the Baron Gray, one of the most ancient barons
in Scotland, for their lieutenant,”* ‘The letter of Louis,
in which he appoints Lord Gray to be Lieutenant, in
consequence of the demise * du feu Sieur de Gourdon,”
is preserved with the rest,

* Manuscript History of the Family of Gordon. Advocates’ Library.

of Spire, valiantly fighting upon the breach
his pike in bis hand, and never gave

eer fy

192 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

over till the city surrendered.”* This was the same
gallant youth who commanded the left wing of the loy-
al army at the battle of Alford, and whose death there
so sadly clouded the success of Montrose.

‘The “ thirty years war,” then, was the school of arms,
and its heroes the chivalry, by whose fame at least, if
not in actual service with them, Montrose first felt
awakened within him the lofty and warlike longings
which, Burnet tells us, made him “ take upon him the
part of a hero too much,” though the Bishop will allow
no purer source of that demeanour than the fact of hav-
ing hunted astrologers with the Earl of Denbigh. Mon-
troge returned to Scotland about the close of 1635, or
the commencement of the following year, when he met
with a reception from Charles I. to which alone has been
generally ascribed the most mistaken step of our hero's
subsequent career. But before narrating this anecdote,
we must notice another nobleman, whose character and
conduct exercised a fatal influence in all that befel the
King, Huntly, and Montrose,

‘The excellent Sir Philip Warwick, speaking of that
prudent Marquis of Hamilton who was the minister of
King James, adds, “ he had two sons, James aud Wil-
liam, neither of them so graceful persons as himself,
and both of some hard visage, the elder of a neater
shape and gracefuller motion than his brother; how-
ever, 1 was in the presence-chamber at Whitehall, when,
after his father’s death, he (the elder) returned from his
travels, and waiting on the King from chapel with great
observance, and the King using him with great kind-
ness, the eyes of the whole Court were upon the young
man. His hair was short, and he wore a little black

* Wis, of the Family of Gordon,

call, Pigeeenieweho usually at Court put the
arising man, generally agreed in

Sees esr be evinces had such a cloud
‘seems to have impressed aliquid in-

me, which I often reflected on when his future ac-

first to be suspected, then to be declaimed

against. I have lately seen the memoirs of a countryman
of his,* who is master ofa very good pen, and who hath
represented this great man by a light which few others,
either of his own nation or ours, discovered him by.
;1 would sully no man's fame, especially 30
eminent a person's, for to write invectives is more cri-
nifnal than to err in eulogies. As for myself I was
known unto him and ever civilly treated [by?] him;
however, I must concur in that general opinion, that
naturally he loved to gain his point rather by some ser-
pentine winding, than by a direct path, which was
to the nature of his younger brother (La-

nerick) of whom that gallant, loyal peer, the Earl of
Montrose, was wont to say, that even when this gentle-
man was his enemy, and in arms against the King, he
did it open-faced, and without the least freachery, ei-
ther to his Majesty, or any of his ministers,—a charac-
ter worthy of a great man, though deflecting from

eles pamyes of Hamilton has already been af-
forded, exciting a smile from his admiring master dur-
ing an angry discussion at the councils of Scotland,—
“ My Lord Chancellor, how can there be such neglect
‘as you speak of, since I know they had almost put my

* Bishop Burnet's Memoirs of tho House of Hamilton.
+ Sie Philip Warwick's Memoirs of the Reign of Charles I. p. 111.

124 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

mother to the horn for forty shillings Scots! whereat
the King smiled."* His mother was the noted Lady
Ann Cunningham, of the right covenanting breed,
being a daughter of the Earl of Glencairn. This lady
was the unrivalled leader of the female church-militant
in Scotland. Her officers were the Nicholas Balfours,
Eupham Hendersons, Bethia and Elpsa Craigs, and
other “ godly matrons” of the Covenant. Her veteran.
guards were such as the stool- propelling Jenny Geddes,
and her light troops, the “ recorded so

exultingly by Robert Baillie as the first victors agninst
Episcopacy. The Marquiswasaboutten years older than
Montrose, and from boyhood had obtained that ascen-
dency over the affections and judgment of Charles which
enters so deeply into the history of the times. The eon-
trol exercised by the mysterious “serpentine” Hamilton,
was not legs pernicious to the country and the King,
than had been the influence of Buckingham. In secret,
and while, perhaps, only contemplating petty and sel~
fish results, his deceptive and wavering conduct sapped
the foyndations of the throne itself. Burnet has most
artfully laboured to gain for him greater favour with
posterity than he deserves. But Clarendon, ina single
sentence, throws more light upon the Marquis's charae-
ter: “ His natural darkness (he says) and reservation in
discourse, made him be thought a wise man, and his
having been in command under the King of Sweden, and
his continual discourse of battles aud fortifications, made
him be thought a soldier; and both these mistakes
were the cause that made him be looked upon as a worse
and more dangerous man, than, in truth, he deserved to
be.” He has, indeed, been suspected of designs in his

* Introtuctory Chapter, p80.

J nothing to the loyal

and when he discoursed
Adolphus, the characteristic

0 Montrose, may be justly

idious enemy, asbeing one who took

¢ part of a hero too much, In all his

Sibasith beliarodl Adee'ta bw at Moda
ght his brother (the Marquis) had
.

‘the Incident, 1641, by Lord Lanerick, Hardwicke’

=

1296 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS-

self, having followed him several years in his expedi-
tions, and what I have learned from others of good
narne and credit. He was of a middle stature, and most
exquisitely proportioned limbs, his hair of a light chest-
nut, his complexion betwixt pale and ruddy, his eye
most penetrating, though inclining to gray, his nose ra-
ther aquiline than otherwise. As he was strong of
body and limbs, so he was most agile, which made him
excel most of others in those exercises where these two
are required. In riding the great horse, and malsing
use of his arms, he came short of none. J never heard
much of his delight in dancing, though his countenanee
and other his bodily endowments were equally fitting
the court as the camp.” *

Montrose’s father had been president of the council ;
his grandfather high treasurer, chancellor, and finally
viceroy of Scotland; his ancestors, of royal descent,
were distinguished by every circumstance most likely to
recommend their representative to the King; and his
own personal accomplishments were such as to plead
yet more powerfully in his favour. ‘T’o ingratiate him-
self with such a monarch as Charles, could not fail to
be Montrose’s first desire on returning from his travels,
and he was well entitled to expect to succeed by no

* Dr Wishart describes Montrose in similar terms: “ He wns not
pak tabs a much exceeding a middle stature, but af an exceeding:

pri enact fino features. His hui was of w dutk-brown eo

spirit, which began to appear in hia, to the wonder and expectation of
all men, even in his childhood.”

ys Heylyn) of James Earl of Mon-
he Covenanters, as he afterwards
was briefly this: At his return
where he was captain (as I
Guard, he had a mind to put
service, and was advised tomake

quis of Hamilton, who, knowing the
and fearing a competitor in his
cunningly told him that he would do

which the King intended to reduce

w of a province, he could not suffer the indig-
putupon him. This done he repairs

tells him of the Earl's return from
purpose to attend him at the time

ol plead ace fe aie
mong the Scots, by reason of an old de-

he royal family, that, if he were not nipped

128 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

in the bud, as we used to say, he might endanger the
King’s interests and affairs in Scotland. The Earl be-
ing brought unto'the King, with great demonstration
of affection on the Marquis’s part, the King, without
taking any great notice of him, gave him his hand to
kiss, and so turned aside; which so confirmed the
truth of that false report which Hamilton had de-
livered to him, that in geeat displeasure and disdain be
makes for Scotland, where he found who knew how to
work on such humours as he brought along with him,
till, by seconding the information which he had from
Hamilton, they had fashioned him wholly to their will.”"*

‘The disgust which Charles had conceived at the
Rothes party in Scotland, and the circumstances which
occasioned that disgust, have been noticed in our intro-
ductory chapter. Most probably Hamilton had taken
advantage, of the King’sdisposition to evince upon every
opportunity a marked discountenance of all who adher=
ed to that faction, to persuade Charles that Montrose
was to be a leader among those turbulent-nobles, Be
this as it may, such a reception of a young nobleman,
as yet only distinguished for every personal attraction,
must have been as remarkable, as itwas mortifying to its
object. Sir Philip Warwick tells us, that Charles * with
any artist or good mechanic, traveller, or scholar would
discourse freely ;" and he also records this trait of the
King’s affectionatecharacter, that“ whenever any young
nobleman, or gentleman of quality, who was going to
travel, came to kiss his hand, he cheerfully would give

* This is from Heyl upon L'Estrange,
Life of Laud he i lee oat eal ciMontoaes
“ the Guard of Franco. It will be observed, as noticed in
‘our introductory chapter, that Heylyn obtained some materials for his

Life of Land from Lord Napier. and Whitelock both allude
to the circumstance narrated by Hoylys.

i

o say, that they were like Caesar and

endure no superior, and the

equal." De Retz confirms the

Montrose,—the parallel be-
r

ee. |

132 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

of the country were about to be infringed, and the Pro-
testant religion on the eve of being forcibly supplanted
by Popery,—the same false view of the King’s inten-
tions, that, for a like factions purpose, had been
gated against the tithe policy. The scheme
mity in the Protestant worship of the kingdom was,
in itvelf, rational and praiseworthy, not originating
with, but inherited by, Charles. The attempt, how-
ever, was ill timed, and worse conducted, and resistance
to it in Scotland might have claimed some admiration,
as well as sympathy, had that resistance been the na+
tural and unanimous expression of « rational feeling, or
had it possessed one feature which deserves to be re-
garded with other sentiments than disgust. The peo-
ple of Scotland, though, as Maleolm Laing well ob-
serves, “ seldom distinguished for loyalty,” were not, ge
nerally speaking, anti-monarchical, nor were they dis-
posed, says Clarendon, to enter into “a bare-faced rebel-
lion against their King, whose person they loved, and
reverenced his government ;" nor, he adds, “ would they
_ have been wrought upon towards the lessening the one
or the other, by any other suggestions or infusions, than
such as should make them jealous, or apprehensive ofa
design to introduce Popery, their whole religion consist-
ing in an entire detestation of Popery, in believing the
Pope to be antichrist, and hating perfectly the persons
ofall Papists.” A false alarm of Popery was, indeed,
the great lever of insurgency in Scotland, and the bet-
ter suited for the purposes of those who used it, that
the enlightened monarch was capable of regarding
the time, as nothing else than what the Church iss
Jand herself uow admits it to have been,* namely,

* Seo" Popular Reflections on the progress of the Principles of Tate
mtion, and the rensonablenew of the Catholic claims, by a Protestatt,”

;

a. |
134 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

poses his church is about to be divided, are to blame;
“the one putsidolatry, Popery, superstition, in sundry
things whieh are innocent of these faults 5 pete
of the persons and actions of men

comes," * * the other seems ert
flame, to command upon sole authority, without ever
craving the advice of any, so faras we can hear, ifsuch
things be expedient, yea if they be lawful,"—a view of |
the whole matter which happens precisely to coincide
with Clarendon's statement of the seditious fanaticism
of the Covenanters, and the overbearing Episcopal po-
licy of Laud. The contents of “the Boole" we letra
from the same covenanting source, are canvassed before
they are known or understood, and pronounced to be a
popish ceremonial illegally imposed, —* in a word, that it
was nought but the mass in English, brought im by the |
craft and violence of the bishops, against the mind of
all the rest, both of church and statesmen." It is re-
markable, considering the previous history of the
Church of Scotland, how much laborious agitation it
cost the Rothes faction, and the clergy, their instra-
ments, to rouse the tumultuous portion of the commu-
nity, even with all the advantage obtained from Laud's
mismanagement. The violent burst against the ser-
vice-book was far from being a spontaneous or general
impulse of the people,—* these things (that the liturgy
was just the muss in English, &e.) sounded from puede
pits, were carried from hand to hand in papers, were
the table-talk and open discourse of high and low."*
With all this preparatory agitation, when the royal
order, for reading the new service, on Sunday 23d July
1637, was attempted to be fulfilled, in St Giles’ Church
by the Bishop and Dean of Edinburgh, and in the

136 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

ness out of their hands,’—which, accordingly, the ma-
trons undertook todo, Some haye affected to treat this
‘story as a gratuitous invention by Bishop Guthrie. Dr
Cook attributes the riots, (which, however, he cannot re-

strain himself from calling“ atrocities from which men not
destitute of religious impressions, would naturally have
shrank,”) to a conscientious: “that they were
engaged in the cause of religion, and were contributing
to purify those temples which apparently they profaned.”*
Bishop Guthrie, however, is not only generally corrobo- _
rated by the admissions of Baillie as to the systematic
outrages committed by the women, but the fact that the
ebullitions of popular fury were arranged before-hand
by the /eaders of the faction, who pretended to disclaim
the riots, is sufficiently proved by an original and anony-
mous letter, to that noted character Mr Archibald John-
ston, the son of Mlspa Craig,—the clerk of the Assem-
bly—the procurator of the church,—the feamer of the
Cevenant—the pillar of the cause—and, finally, ereated
a Peer by Cromwell !

“ Dear Christian brother, and courageous ‘Protes-
tant,” says this worthy’s anonymous correspondent,
“upon some rumour of the Prelate of St Andrews
coming over the water, finding it altogether éncomee-
nient that he or any of that kind, should’ show them-
selves peaceably in public, some course was taken howhe
might be entertained in such places as he should come
unto. Weare now informed that he will not come, but
that Brechin is in Edinburgh or thereabout. It is the
advice of your friends there, that, in a private way,
some course may be taken for his terror and
if he offer to show /imself publicly. Think upon the

* Dr Cook's Mistory of the Church, Vol ti p. 97%

k

of
faction of
asa
“brought in” +

bapa elie
ncy

termed, to suspend the imposition of the service-book.
‘The 20th September 1637, a convention was assem-
bled, at which noblemen and gentlemen now ventured

Ree designation of sup
plicants. “The oracle,” says Bishop Guthrie, “ whom
the supplicants consulted anent the legality of their
proceeding was Sir Thomas Hope, his Majesty's advo-
cate, who, though he professed to have no hand in the
business, being the King’s servant, yet, in the mean-
time, privately Inid down the grounds and ways where-
by they were to proceed ; and that he might not be re-
marked, pitched upon Balmerino and Mr Henderson
to be the men who, from time to time, should come to
him and receive his overtures.” First and foremost to
this convention came the needy and dissolute Earl of
Rothes. With him came Cassils, Eglington, Home, Lo-
thian, and Wemyss, Lindsay, Yester, Balmerino, Cran-
ston, and Loudon, accompanied by ministers and bur-
gesses from Fife and the western shires. Their sup-
plications were too respectfully received by the privy-
council; and the excellent Duke of Lennox, who had
just arrived in Scotland to attend his mother’s funeral,
was burdened with the odious task of representing the
business fully to his Majesty. The council dissolved,
‘but the supplicants still held mectings for the purpose of
organizing sedition, not being quite satisfied with their
numerical demonstration. Various districts were al-
lotted to the most active of the ministers attached to
‘the faction, in which they were enjoined, not to preach
Christianity, but to agitate—agitate—agitate.*

* “Tt wns laid upon Mr Henry Pollock to deal with those of Lothian,

Le

but the érwth was, that night after

fa

We MOUTROSE SSD THE COVESASTERS.

supper in Balmerino's lodging, where the whole nobi-
ity I think supped, some commissioners, from the gen-
try, town, and ministers, met, where I was among the
rest : there it was resolved to meet against the 15th of
November, in as great numbers as possibly could be had,
to wait on the answer of their prior supplication, and
to get their complaint once tabled and received.” At
this covenanting conviviality, the learned but somewhat
incoherent and bewildered Baillie, sat in wondrous ad-
miration of those long headed arch-insurgents, Balme-
rino and Loudon. He “ thought them the best spokes-
men that ever he heard open a mouth.” He says it
was“ a meeting of harmony, and mutual love, zeal, and
gravity beyond what had occurred even in a meeting
composed solely of churchmen for forty years.” When
taking leave of the nobles, however, one of the ministers
lectured their Lordships upon the “reformation of their
persons, and using the exercise of piety in their fami-
lies; which all took well, and promised fair.” The
ministers returned to their respective districts of agita-
tion, to raise, from their preverted pulpits, the seditious
criew that were to bring the people to the meeting of the
15th of November. “ The fame of that 15th day spread
at once far and broad, even to the King’s ear, and all
were in great suspense what it might produce.”* So
closed the second scene.

‘Thus by the arts of a desperate faction,—working in
Scotland, under the leadership of the Earl of Rothes,
ever since the period when Charles attempted to ame-
liorate the country at the expense of the tithe-holders,
—was the community wrought up to its highest pitch
of excitement before Montrose became in any way con-
nected with these proceedings. It was at the great

* Baillie,

| MONTROSE GAINED oven, 143
eonvention of the 15th of November 1637, which had

that Montrose first ap-
aap cette (ope step cats
who had not been formerly there, came at that diet the
Earl of Montrose, which was most faken notice of;
yea, when the bishops heard that he was come there to
join, they were somewhat affrighted, having that es-
we cao that they they thought it time to prepare
he engaged.” And why had he ap-

pot eared ‘Was it that, like Argyle, he hurk-
‘ed bebind the scenes until he saw the safest moment for
declaring himself,—or was it the spontaneous impulse
‘of patriotic alarm,—or was it, as Dr Wishart says, that™
® the tales they mude, they never wanted fitting instru-
‘ments to tell and spread,” and that his youthful and ar-
dent mind bad been worked upon by the faction? Bail.
Tie has answered the question in a few expressive words,
— the canniness* of Rothes brought in Montrose to
7 y.”" But it can be shewn that even Rothes is not
entitled to the sole merit of this conquest. In an ori-
| ginal manuscript deposition, (taken during that perse-
‘cution of Montrose and his friends, in 1641, which will
‘be the subject of a future chapter,) I find, what had
hitherto escaped observation, that Montrose himself
names a minister as having laboured to convert him.
“ Thereafter my Lord (Montrose) says to the deponer,
‘you were an instrument of bringing me to this cause ;
‘Tam calumniated and slandered as a backslider in this
cause, and am desirous to give you and all honest men
satisfaction?” Now this deponer is Mr Robert Mur-
‘ray, minister of Methven,—the very clergyman upon
whom (preparatory to the grand agitation for this meet-

* Canniness, &. ¢ Scotch cunmmg,

i {

14s MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

ing of the 15th of November) “ it was laid, to traeail
with them of Perth and Stirlingshire,"—the districts in
which lay the estates of Montrose, and his relatives, Lord
Napier, and Sir George Stirling of Keir.

At this grand convention the treasurer Traquair, one
of the most able and eloquent of the privy-couneil, and
well disposed towards the King’s interests, though ad-
verse to the civil aggrandizement of the bishops, ebal-
lenged their proceedings, says Baillie, “ with great ad-
miration to some of his wisdom and faculty of speech.”
But, he adds, “ the advocate, after some little displea-
‘sure at the treasurer for his motion, resolved, that they
might meet in law to chuse commissioners to Parlia-
ment, to convention of estates, or any public business.”
It was then determined to appoint acommittee of twelve,
representing as many several estates as in their wis-
dom this convention saw fit, that the new constitution
should embrace. Rothes, Loudon, Montrose, and Lind-
say, were the four noblemen selected; and Sir
Stirling of Keir, (Montrose’s nephew by marriage with
Lord Napier’s daughter,) was one of those chosen to re-
present the lesser barons. ‘Thus originated that scourge
of the kingdom, factiously appointed committees, usurp-
ing the whole functions of government in Scotland.
So artfully was the matter managed as to seem # cons
servative act of the privy-council itself, fortified by the
Jegal opinion of the first law officer of the crown. It
was, however, a8 Baillie assures us,a deliberate plan of
the faction to constitute a new and irresponsible go-
vernment of their own, at which their contemplated

of the bishops might be received, and
“ tabled,” a phrase which afforded a vulgar nomencla-
ture to a lawless and tyrannical constitution, *
** Tho Tublen"*

MONTROSE GAINED OVER. 145

Yet the day was not far distant when Montrose was
to learn to appreciate a covenanting committee of
estates ! when his horror of such tribunals was even to
mingle with the gentlest effusions of his accomplished
mind,—

My dear and only love, I pray,
‘This noble world of thee
‘Be governed by no other sway
But purest monarchy.
Por if confusion have a part,
Which virtuous souls abhor,
. And hold a synod in thy heart,
Til never love thee more.
eoeeee
If in the empire of thy heart
Where I should solely be,
‘Another do pretend a part,
‘And dare to vie with me,
Or if committees thou erect,
‘And goes on such a score,
Tl sing and laugh at thy neglect,
‘And never love thee more.

VOL. 1. x

146 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

CHAPTER III.

‘THE COVENANT CONTRADICTORY VIEMs OP 1t ALAR YINWS GP IT=ERGS
VIRWS OF IT —HUNTLY'S REIECTION OF IT.

‘Tux constitution of Scotland being thus overturned,
the destructive party instantly proceeded to the eontri~
vance of theirmemorable charter. The COVENANT, that
bond of faction and banner of rebellion, is inseparable
from the name of Montrose, not only because eventual-
ly he fell a sacrifice in the vain attempt to save his
King and country from its desolating effects, but be-
cause he was amongst the foremost to sign it, and, for
a brief space, supported itin council and enforced itin the
field. Some of the original editions of the Covenant are
yet preserved in the Advocates’ Library, and among the
crowded signatures attached to these sad memorials of
national turbulence, and human vanity and folly, ap-
pears the name of Montrose, conspicuous both from its
foremost place, and the characteristic boldness of the
autograph. Were this bond what some have imagin-
ed it to be, a patriotic and holy expression of unanimous
feeling in all who signed it,—a feeling for the preserva-
tion of their Religion and Liberties,—had Charles I.
veally entertained the determined purpose, agai
“ Independency" of Scotland, which the Covenant is by
some supposed to have met, then, however illegal in it-
self, and though leading to worse evils thun it professed
to cure, all who signed it in that good faith and feeling
might well be excused. If Montrose, who we shall find
only abjured the Covenant after he distinctly saw that

ee

THE COVENANT. ur

it was made to serve the ruinous purposes of a revolu-
tionary movement, had reallysigned it under cireumstan-

ces which necessarily impelled every Christian patriot
so to do, his political character would be blameless.
It is to be feared, however, that the martyr of loyalty
stands not so well excused in his early career. He appears
to have taken that step, as many others did, with but
confused ideas of its propriety. The best
ca ofthe Church of Scotland now admit,
ox but feehly veil the fat, that the Covenant, as disho-

politicians. But Montrose was naturally

le of conceiving #0 profound ao plot, as he

the scope and tendency of the

the time when he signed it. He was

me of the intriguers who so artfully contriv-

successful scheme ngainst established or-

der. Rothes, Loudon, and Balmerino, with their

a Archibald Johnston of Wariston,

a apostle Alexander Henderson,—

‘these five are immortalized as its able, though disinge-

The scheme of the Covenant is well

edie Po to adopt that Confession of Faith—

d against Popery at a time when the popish plots

and a less enlightened era, rendered the fer-

ore excusable and sincere—whieh King James

th had signed along with the nation. There

added to this protestant confession a bond

or obligation for maintenance of the true religion, and

f the King’s person. Some years afterwards James

upon his constitution of the church, the

five articles of Perth, and thus, with the acquiescence of

is people, introduced that Episcopal imparity of church
government, which was virtually the scheme of Kur

:

es |

150 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

of the life and actions of Montrose, that we should ob-
tain a juster view, of the principles and history of theCo-
venant of 1638, than is usually presented to us, even by
the most conscientious covenanting historians of the
Church of Scotland. Those who glorify the Covenant in
vagueterms of admiration, without venturing into minute
details, are the most aptto record that Montrose only join-
ed itfrom motives of selfish pique, and quitted it fromyet
more selfish feclings of disappointment. But if it be the
case that every art of insurgency had been employed, by
a political clique, to rouse the passions and blind the un-
derstanding of all classes of the community, and that
thereafter they proceeded in a more reckless and head-
Jongcourse of democracy,—if such, in few words, be the
history of the Covenant, it is not difficult to understand
how the young and ardent Montrose came tojoin it with
thoughtless zeal, and to quit itso soon with disgust and
indignation, The movement, however, La ete oee
wise characterized, and by none more it

by thelearned author of a History ofthe Bh pe
The Covenant, according to this writer, was “ agrand
national movementagainstarbitrary power, civiland re-
ligious,"—it was “not merely # cool assent of the under-
standing, but of the heart, heated to an enthusiasm, of
which a faint conception, only, can be formed by those
who have lived in quiet times ;* the Covenant was embra-
ced with tears of penitence for past dyfection, and shouts

'* Some are apt to consider the asvent of a cool
trunt-worthy und laudable, than the assunt ofa heated heurt, to
pitch {ts thermometer may rise. As for our “quiet times" heing fineapa-
ble of appreciating the enthusiasm of demoerncy, they nro at least mend. 4
ing, Mr Brodic's History wae printed in 1823, since when Bristol has
been burt by a reforming mob, and many other eireumatances have
oceutted to remind us of the rise of the troubles in Scotland, and the
subsequent fate of tho British Monarchy.

THE COVENANT. 151

of unutierable joy for the hoped-for fruits,’—not of busy
Siar” ier
"Yet neither will this historian suffer the

‘roused rebellion while professing loyalty,
and effected a secret combination against the person and.
authority of the King while it took God to witness a
determination to defend both, but because of its “ into-
or ae eben “ Men," adds our
historiographer, “ who were themselves smarting un-
der the effects of intolerance, might have had pie
‘with the feelings of those who also adhered to their own
notions of worshipping their Maker,”*—meaning theres
Church of England, which the Co-
‘yenanters 50 intolerantly and inconsistently assailed, but
the worshippers of the Pope. How incongruous is this
idea, | for Roman Catholic worship being
‘an ingredient in the composition of the Covenant! so
much so, indeed, that we must altogether distrust the
vision with which our wrapt historian had contemplated.
the great presbyterian crisis. For that eloquent page
thenof Mr Brodie’s constitutional history, we would sub-
‘stitute the following details, afforded by the manuscript
‘account of James Gordon, parson of Rothemay-+
_ “ The Covenant was no sooner agreed upon, but in-
stantly it was begun to be subscribed, in Edinburgh
first, and the church chosen out for that solemnity was
=. church, where, after it had been read

¢ Brodi’s History of the British Empire, Vol. th p. 471, 472.
Gordon was the son ofa conspicuous actor in the troubles of
» Robert Gordon of Straloch, Some account of James Gor-
curious and valuable contemporary history, which has nevor
sand from which wo shall frequently have ceoasion to ex

‘be found in & note at the end of this volume, i

152 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

over publicly, and a long speech bad been made by the
Lord Loudon in commendation thereof, Mr Alexander
Henderson seconded him with a prayer, and then all
fell a swearing and subscribing, some of the nobility
leading the way. The first, as I am credibly informed,
was John Gordon, Earl of Sutherland, and the next was
Sir Andrew Murray, Lord Balvaird, minister at Abdie
in Fife, two noblemen who, out of zeal to their profes-
sion, without any by-ends, thought it a happiness to
be among the first subscribents and swearers to the
Covenant. After them, all that were present ran to
the subscription of it, aud then through the rest of the
city it went, every one contesting who might be first,
and others, without further examination, or question-
ing the articles thereof, following their example. Wo-
men, young people, and servant-maids, did swear and
hold up their hands to the Covenant. All who were
present at Edinburgh at that meeting in the month of
February, subscribed and swore to the Covenant be-
fore they went from thence, and at their parting,
ministers, and noblemen, and gentlemen, who were
well affected to the cause, carried copies thereof along
with them, or caused them to be written out after their
return to their several parishes and counties of Scot-
land, which copies were ordinarily written upon great
skins of parchment, for which cause, at that time, ina
written pasquil, the Covenant was termed the conalel-
lation upon the back of Aries. And suchas took copies
along with them to be subscribed, caused ordinarily
such as had sworn, or underwritten their names al-
ready, if they were noblemen or ministers of note, to
set to their hands anew to the several copies, that,
where themselves could not be present to invite others,
their handwriting might be their proxy. The months

»

of many to injuries and
and some were threatened and beaten who
dlurst refuse, especially in greatest cities, (as likewise in

sedpoblerens carried copies of it about in their port
Geet tees aati sreith thele friends
ours wi wir
in private to subscribe. It was subscribed publicly in
churches, ministers exhorting their people thereto; it
was subseribed and sworn privately ; all had power to
take the oath, and were licensed and weleome to come
in; and any that pleased had power and license to carry
the Covenant about with him, and give the oath to
such as were willing to subscribe and swear. And
such was the zeal of many subscribents, that, for a
while, many subscribed with fears on their cheeks, and
it is constantly reported that some did draw their own
Wood, and wsed it in place of ink to underwrite their
ames, Such ministers as spoke most for it were heard
#0 passionately, and with such frequency, that church-
‘es could not contain their hearers in cities, some keep-
from Friday to Sunday to get the com-
them sitting,—some of the devouter sex,
tata sitting all night before such
sermons in the churches, for fear of losing a room or
Bees ror te least, some of their hand-
maids sitting constantly there all night, till “7 .

a

154 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

tresses came to take up their places and to relieve them,
‘so that several, as I had it from very sober and credi-
ble men, under that religious confinement, were forced
to give way to those natural necessities which they
could no longer contain, These things will scarce be
believed, but I relate them upon the credit of such as
knew this to be truth. Nor were they serupulous to
give the Covenant, to such as startled at any point
thereof, with such protestations as in some measure
were destructive to the sense thereof, as was seen in
several instances, so that they got subscriptions

_thereto, and it came to that height, indeed, that such as
refused to subscribe were accounted no better than Pa~
pists. Such ministers as dissuaded their people from
‘subscription, either had enough ado to maintain them-
selves in their parishes, (and though afterwards they
did subscribe, yet other quarrels were found to drive
them from their stations,) or, if not that, do or say what
they pleased, they were held in suspicion and not trust~
ed, Although it be true that some ministers, who were
recusants at first, did afterwards vie for zeal and ac-
tivity with the first subscribents,—by this means both
redeeming their delay of time, and rubbing off all sus-
picion from themselves,—others were forced to flee and
desert their stations and places, being persecuted by
their parishioners, especially such as had been active for
the bishops, and had been hasty to read or commend
the Service-Book, or Book of Canons. Many ministers
at first not being well satisfied, refused to subscribe,
pretending seruple ‘of conscience, and some few, as we
shall hear, were scrupled indeed. Other ministers, as
other men likewise, hopeful that the cause would not
prevail, refused to swear, fearing that the King and
bishops would in the end be masters, and question all

er they
eigen dtat the: bishops, celcgrop,
from them. It were a longsome
give an account of all the particulars. Most

the effects not agreeable to their expectation of what
was promised, became cold, and remitted of their for-
mer zeal, and not a few turned as bitter enemies to
the Covenant as they were at first forward friends to
‘it, and died fighting against it, or suffered exemplary
deaths upon scaffolds for opposing that which once vo-
Juntarily they did engage themselves to maintain. All
noblemen and gentlemen and others who were wearied
‘of the present government, and maligned the Episcopal
greatness, readily embraced it, and most part or all
their followers by their example. Ministers who had
ever been opposite to the bishops, and such ceremonies
as King James had established, subscribed with the
first, and by their examples drew either most part of
their parishes, or all of them after them. Such minis-
ters as refused, they took pains to win over to their side
eee anil dispute,—if they were men otherwise

in their calling, orlearned,—but if they
knew them to be faulty, then they were brought over
with threats, and terror of church censures. Such mi-
nisters for a while stood out till they saw no shelter else-
where, and then there were of them who were glad to
flee into the Covenant as a sanctuary ; (instances of such
might be given, but I forbear to rub upon the crimes
of such who are removed, and goue to their place,) some
yet living, and known to have come over upon that ac-
count, Finally the fears of the more zealous professarr

i |

156 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS-

that religion was in hazard, the factious spirits of others,
example, allurements, threats, terrors, brought over the
multitude. The nom-subseribents on the other part
might be reduced either to, 1. Papists, for it was de-
structive to their profession; 2. such as would not en-
gage for displeasing the King, as holding their places
of him, or those who by their refusal of the Covenant
thought one day to plead merit and reward at the
King’s hand, without any farther aim or reason, being
otherways not concerned in the matter of religion ;
others were non-subscribents, as being unsatisfied that
the ceremonies of the church of England, Perth arti-
cles, and Episcopacy, should be abjured as popery, they
being already established ; others quarrelled both with
the abjuring of these things for their matter, as also for
the formality of the oath, and refused to accept of it,—
as pressed without and contrary to authority, without
necessity,—or for all these causes together. Albeit the
subscription of the Covenant was carried on, as to the
multitude, in short space, yet this was but a declar-
ing of men’s party who before were practised upon, or
had fully discovered themselves, nor were they so in-
considerate as to fall a subscribing it publicly till they
were sure, underhand, of the greatest part of the king-
dom, who, for their power and number, might be able to
bear down all their opposers. Nor were underhand as-
strances wanting from England, for without that, there
had been as many opposers as might have rendered the
game hazardous and desperate enough. As they did
encourage them to declare themselves, so it did quick~
Jy let all be seen who were either against them upon
their own private account, (these were all the Papists,)
or such as would own the King’s authority, which was
now beginning to reel in Scotland. So that now they

—

THE COVENANT. 157

‘began to be distinguished by divers names, as well ux
factions,—Protestants and Papists, who were non-sub-
seribents, were put all in one predicament, and called
anti or non-Covenanters, and all the subscribents were
called Covenanrens, which names afterward changed
into others equivalent, as the face of affairs altered.”
——— °

This minute contemporary account, of the machinery
of the Covenant, is more worthy of eredit than the
many vague encomiums bestowed upon it by those wri-
tery who are anxious fo invest a democratical revolu-
tion with a sacred character. The following sentences
of a letter from Mr David Mitchell, one of the perse-
ented ministers of Edinburgh, to Dr John Lesly, Bishop

R: ‘a curious confirmation of the record
of the parson of Rothemay, “The greater part of the
i subscribed, and the rest are daily sub-
scribing a covenamt. It is the oath of the King’s house
1580, with strange additions, 1 mutual combination
nee of all novations in religion, doctrine, and

and rites of worship that have been

in since that time; so 08 if the least of the subscribers

there be some of them not en years of

‘some not worth twopence,*—that all shall con~

‘their defence, and for the expulsion of all Pa-
Jversaries, (that is, ald that will not subscribe,

and kingdom, according to the laws,
lwndred are cited in the charter. This
The frue pastors are brought into Edin-

ingh to ery out against ws wolees, and they, with our
2 the universal fooling ngainst the liturgy, the potition of
oo eenphlaatherdapca pe broke rac red

a |

158 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

brethren here, Mr Andrew Ramsay, Mr Henry Pol-
lock, and your whileome friend the Principal, [Adam-
son] crying out that they are neither good Christians,
nor good subjects, that do not subscribe, nay, nor in
covenant with God, have made us so odious that we
dare not go on the streets. 1 have been dogged by
some gentlemen, and followed with many mumbled
threatnings behind my back, and then when in stairs,
swords drawn, and‘ if they had the Papist villain,
oh!* Yet I thank God I am living to serve God and
the King, and the church, and your Lordship. Your
chief [Rothes] is chief in this business. There is no-
thing expected here but civil war.”

These are not the only contemporary sources from
which it can be proved that the views of thase writers
who maintain that a unanimous, spontancous, pious
and patriotic impulse gave birth to the Covenant, are
baseless and rhapsodical.+ But even had that political

* Compare this with the acerot letter to Archibald Jobnston, quoted.

supra, p. 196. Robert Buillie, though he sometimes condemned the system,
hus expressed bis senve of the value of strokes in 9 Covenanter,

“D, Monto (he auys) since his strokes, is amongst the in our
"Monro had been nearly stoned to death, by tho women of
Kinghorn, for his supposed affection towards the

4p There re some very curious and amusing letters written in 1638,
during the covenanting tumult, by one signing himself "Jean do Max
rin," (and obviously addressed to the Duke of Leanox in England from

on Ms

one in Scotland, printed by Lord Hailes, iu hix Eiistorl-
cal Collections, from the origimals proswrved in the Advocates"
‘They are vory long in tho writer great

form, than “Jenn da Maria's” exposé of the arts of
that bogot the Covenant, He snys that the King’s bickwnrdness to take
strong measures against the Covenanting combination, “makes mmny

scribed the same, who otherwise had undoubtedly stood outy* and, * if
‘

THE COVENANT. 159

been characterized by the lawless plot-
9 concuss and terrify the lieges into
it would still have been but a gigantic in-
stance of that fallacious harmony of patriotic feeling
which is so graphically exposed by Dr Johnson, in tra~
-cing the rise and progress of a factious petition multitu-
Ainoualy signed.” In the course of his admirable illustra-

jamesareeasily collected ; one mansigns
beeause he hates the Papists, another because it will
vex the parson, one because he is rich, another because
he is poor, one to show that he is not afraid, and an-
other to shew that he can write.” And such, on a larger
scale, was the patriotism of the Covenant. The grand
national movement, the penitent embraces, the tears,
the shouts of joy unuéterable, the promised hopes, all
that Mr Brodie has so imposingly crowded into his
bean ideal of that revolutionary charter, was but the

, the false excitement, the senseless
clamour, and the lawless violence, of its day. “The
passage, however,” continues Dr Johnson, in the ce-
lebrated political essay to which we have referred,—
* is not always smooth. Those who collect contribu-

aleeury =

-hat odd, uncouth and ridiculons courses they nse to draw

instructive:
7 2 Yon may Judge Roel vp nbs rhavs aot txicrtind
‘are in {a good} taking, when an insolent elavering puppy,
whore wife ix asister of our Sheriff's, (whose deportment for
Anegret most of any man’s in thix county,)and who qua.
‘a his joint commissioner for this shire, dared be so pert
sto our church, and there, svcing how fow werv like to
) them, say, that he desired but the names of thoww who should
to subseribe, with « note of their worths in means or otherwise,
them alone fo take order with them."—Original MS, Advocates’

| # “The False Alarin.” 1770.

i. |

160 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

tions to sedition sometimes apply toa man of higher
rank, and more enlightened mind, who, instead of lend-
ing them his name, calmly reproves them for being se-
ducers of the people.” Would, that, in
parallel, we might claim this lofty position for Mon-
traxe. But, although certainly not of the faction who
secretly organized and propelled the movement, Mon-
trose was carried by the arts of insurgency, and,
for a time, deluded like many others, ‘There is one no-
bleman, however, in whom the parallel is sustained.
He, who “ instead of lending them his name, calmly
reproved them for being seducers of the people,” was
George Gordon, Marquis of Huntly, the solitary noble-
man who, from the first moment of the covenanting
excitement, never hesitated in his determined loyalty,
although, unfortunately, his means of assisting the
King were not in proportion to his inclination.
Huntly, whose early distinction in France we have
already noticed, had been reared at the Court of Eng-
land with Prince Henry, and Charles then Duke of
York, and, under the superintendence of King James,
(who had found the task of protecting his father, the
popish Enrl, neither easy nor sufe,) was instructed in
the protestant doctrines of the church of England.
‘Thus the reputation of the old Earl, and his own epis-
copal education, made it easy forthe presbyterian party
to denounce Huntly as a papist, whenever be presum-
ed to evinee his loyalty. This nobleman was, more-
over, much embarrassed in his cirenmstances, having
contracted debts, to the amount of about a hundred
thousand pounds Sterling, in keeping up his military
state abroad during the lifetime of his father. The
Covenanters made one attempt to bring over Huntly,
by mercenary offers, before it fell to the lot of Montrose

EEE

“HUNTLY REJECTS THE COVENANT. 161

to endeavour the conversion of the north vel arte vel
arte. ‘There had lately returned from the German
wars Colonel Robert Monro, afterwards conspicu-
ous as a covenanting commander, who had served
under Gustavus Adolphus. He is described as a fear-
less and free spoken soldier, of some powers of ad-
drest, who had been at the Court of England, where,
he was slighted and had retired in dis-
suggested to the Earl of Rothes the
great advantage of acquiring Huntly for a military lea-
<email eae Mptamehone
Charged accordingly with a commission
‘that effeet, Colonel Monroset out for Huntly’s place
where the Earl reeeived him as an old
companion in arms,and presently, while they were walk-
ing together in bis garden, was insulted by his guest,
with the temptation in these terms : “ It is," said the
Colonel,“ my love and duty towards you and your house,
that have induced me to come with a proposal which
Lintreat you to take under your serious consideration.
There is now so strong a party combined against the
King, that whoever shall attempt to raise a party in his
favour will find themselves in the proportion of one to a
hundred. Iam commissioned, on the other hand, to offer
you the Covenant, and to say that, if it please you to give
in your adherence to that party, you will be chosen for
its leader, and your fortunes restored ; but if you de-
termine to adhere to the King, and oppose the Cove-
want, means will be taken to render your assistance to
his Majesty totally ineffectual, yourself will be ruined,
and your house sink under its load of a hundred thou.
sand pounds of debt."* The manuscript from which
this anecdote is derived, does not proceed to say that
* James Gordon's MS.

VOL. T. L

(ai

- —— el

ingly, when Loudon and Lindsay met him with excuses
from the rest of the aristocracy, he was so highly of
fended as to be on the point of turning bis horses heads
back again to Court. But Rothes,—the canny Rothes,—
“having communed some two or three hours with him
in Dalkeith, appeased and removed his mistakings.”*
It was on the 8th of June 1638, that Hamilton made
his vi from Dalkeith to a
Hoos ty teen and Leith. “In fiat
think at Leith (says Baillie) as much honour was done
unto him, as ever toa King in our country. Huge
multitudes, as ever was gathered on that field, set them-
selves in hisway. Nobles, gentry of all shires, women,
awworld ! the town of Edinburgh all at the Watergate.
But we were most conspicuous in our black cloaks,
above five hundred on a brae-side, in the links alone,
~~ for his sight ; we had appointed Mr William Living-
ston, the strongest in voice and awsterest in connte-
nance of us all, to make him a short welcome.” ‘This
~last compliment, however, the Commissioner, whe had
obtained a timely hint of the probable nature of such
covenanting welcome, begged to decline, and it was be-
stowed upon him afterwards in private. Already did
Hamilton adopt that system of duplicity, in negotiat~
ing betwixt the King and his rebellious ‘
eventually paralyzed the loyal struggles both of Huntly
and Montrose. “The Marquis, in the way, was much
moved to pity, even to tears; he professed thereafter
his desire to have had King Charles present at that
sight of the whole country so earnestly and Aumbly ery-
ing for the safety of their liberties and religion." One of
the most characteristic anecdotes, however, of that cele=

* Baillie. + Tid,

re

the Commissioner and the ministers, there passed «
rencounter, which, though related upon the by, may
give matter of laughter to some in a serious business.
‘The Commissioner, passing by the crowd of the mini-
stry, who were there waiting on his entry, did re-salute
them in a very respectful manner, who were all mak-
ing curtsies to his grace. At this time he, looking
upon them with a smiling countenance, repeated the
words of Matthew v.13,* in Latin, vos estis sal terre.
A minister, not far distant, who could not distinctly
hear whut the Commissioner spoke, questions another
minister, who was nearer, upon the Commissioner's
words, who, wittingly, instead of what the Commission
er had spoken, told him, * Brother, the Commissioner
said, it ix we who make all the kail salt, alluding to a
Scottish proverb, which is usually spoken when any:
thing is said to mar or undo an action, or to make mis~
takes, There was so much of salt ¢ruth in the jest that
‘it was by many taken notice of, though what sense the
‘Commissioner spoke it in is uninown.”
hid Hamilton been a month in Scotland,
when an incident occurred which first awakened the
suspicions of Montrose that the exeitemerit of the times,
on the subject of Religion and Liberties, was taken ad-
Se Bement eatooe se wear te
throne, Montrose had been selected, along with Rothes
and Loudon, to treat, on the part of the Covenanters,
ermal during that revolution~
y of protestationagainst proclamation, which,
© = Vo aro the wilt ofthe garth: but if tho mlt have lost his vour

wherewith shall it be ralted 7 it is thonoeforth good for nothing, but to
‘be cast out and to be trodden under foot of men.”

166 MONTROSE AND THR COVENANTERS.

owing to the peculiar management of Hamilton, now
raged as fiercely as ever. After one of these disgrace-
ful scenes it was, that Montrose, Rothes, and Loudon,

Commissioner, in presence of the Privy-Couneil, his
Grace, at the close of their conference, requesting the
councillors to remain in the audience chamber, accom-
panied the deputation through the reyal apartments in
Holyroodhouse, till they arrived at the great gallery,
where, leading them into a corner, he addressed them
confidentially in these remarkable words: “ My Lords
and Gentlemen, I spoke to you before those Lords of
Council ax the King’s Commissioner; now there being
none present but yourselves, I speak to you as a kindly
Scotsman. If you go on with cowrage and resolution
you will carry what you please, but if you faint, and
give ground in the least, you are undone,—a word ix
enough to wise men.” ‘This story, if it be true, is deci-
sive of the character of Hamilton, and that it is true,
neither the direct evidence offered in support of it, nor
the remarkable confirmation afforded by every thing
that can be ascertained of the conduct and character of
that statesman, permit us to doubt.* It is recorded by
Bishop Guthrie (then minister of Stirling) who, after
narrating thus circumstantially the time, place, and oc-
casion, with the particular words uttered, proceeds to
support his statement by what he calls,“ my warrants
for what I have set down.” 1, On the same day that

* Dr Cook bas only noticed thls anecdote in u note, ax follows m=
* Guthrie, in his Memoirs p. 34, 33, records speech us made

ton, which, if genuine, would placo his treachery beyond doubt ; bat the

wvidenco of hix having spoken it la not conclusive, and Barnet li sntie-

Suctorily established his loyalty." —Vol. ii. p. 446,

— ;

ster at Coupar, Mr Robert Knox, minister at Kelso, and
to Henry Guthrie himself. 2 On the evening of the
day that Guthrie heard this from Dr Guild, “ the said
Henry (says the Bishop of himself) being that night
with the Barl of

drew him to a window, and there told him, in the very
same terms Dr Guild had reported it to him, adding,
that it wrought an impression, that my Lord Hamilton
by this business to advance his design,*

Id suspend his judgment until he saw

farther, and in the meantime look more narrow to his
walking.” The cnemies of Montrose are precluded from
the argument that Bishop Guthrie had been imposed
of that nobleman to prejudice

his rival, for Mr Cant, also present when Hamilton, as
alleged, so addressed the deputation, had made the very
same narration previously to Dr Guild. It remains
then to defend Hamilton by supposing that his words
|, or that the whole story, with

its alleged proofs, is a circuimstantial falsehood, delibe-

rately recorded in his closet by Bishop Guthrie, + Such
violent suppositions, however, are rendered desperate
wenc.,. of Hamilton himself, as subsequently

the Crown of Scotland.
‘notices this anecdote ngninst Hamilton, and adopts it,
this ruxnnrkable

168 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

disclosed. Whatever might be his ulterior objects, and
whether he was swayed at the time | by selfish and vas
a sae wines pers

no was acting a
his King and country, and most discreditable to him-
self. We learn from Baillie, that Hamilton met the sedi-
tiousdemonstration of the Covenanters with affectionate
sympathy, that even showed itself in tears, and that he
Jamented the King himself was not thereto be edified and
subdued in heart, by the “ humble crying” of the pa-
triotic multitude. His Grace's countenance and care
riage,” says Baillie, “ was #0 courteous, and his private
speeches so fair, that wewere ingood hopes for some days
afterwards, the

to obtain all our desires.” A few months
same chronicler, in his account of the memorable as-
sembly of 1638, favours us with this portrait of the
Commissioner: “I take the man to be of a sharp, ready,
solid, clear wit—of a brave and masterly expression,—
loud, distinct, slow, full, yet concise, modest,
yet simple and natural language. If the King have
many such men he is a well served prince. My
thoughts of the man were hard and base, But a day
- or two's audience wrought my mind to a great change
towards him, which yet remains, and ever will, till his
deeds be notoriously evil." So writes our penetrating
Covenanter in 1638; but in the following year, at the
treaty of Berwick, we find him again at fault in his at
tempts to fathom the serpentine favourite : “ The Mar-
quis’s ways were so ambiguous that no man understood
him, only bis absolute power with the King was oft
there clearly seen.” Now at the very period when
Hamilton felt, or affected, such melting sympathy for his
seditious countrymen, he was corresponding with his
royal master, in terms inevitably calculated to impel

"HAMILTON'S DOUBLE-DEALING. 169

‘the peaceful and generous, but hasty monarch, into
hostile expressions and projects, which Hamilton him-
self had pre-determined should proceed no farther than
just to compromise the honour of the King, and aggra-
‘vate the disaffection of Scotland. Burnet tells us in
page without producing the letters, that, soon
after his Grace bad arrived in Scotland, he transmitted
detailed account of the state of affairs ; he
advised him to garrison Berwick with 1500 men, and
‘Carlisle with 500, and to follow up these orders vigo-
rously in person, at the head of a brave army, which, if
the matterwere well managed, would be crowned with
victory. Hamilton added, however, a caution, calculated
to mingle doubt and wenkness with the vigorous mea-
“he represented withal, (says Bur-
‘net) that bis Majesty would consider how far in his
wisdom he would connive at the madness of his own
poor people, or how far in justice he would punish their
folly, assuring him their present madness was such that
‘nothing but force would make them quit their Cove-
nant, and that they would all lay down their lives eer
they would give itup.” That, notwithstanding his cro-
codile tears, and “ his private speeches so fair” in Scot-
land, Hamilton, while he acted so equivocally there,
had done his utmost to inflame the King, and that hav-
‘ing done this, he continually checked the spirit he had
roused, and thus occasioned that contradictory policy
which has been solely attributed to want of sincerity in
‘Charles,—all this may be gathered even from the very
partial view of the correspondence with which Burnet
chose to favour the public. It is impossible, then, un-
der all the circumstances, to doubt the truth of the
anecdote which Bishop Guthrie has recorded.
‘That at this, the second meeting of Hamilton and Mon-

170 MONTROSE AND THR COVENANTERS.

trose, another instance of the duplicity of the former
should have occurred, sosimilar tothat which had driven
Montrose from Court, is somewhat remarkable, and raises
our curiosity to know in what manner the wily commis.
sioner was at this same time speaking of Montrose to the
King. Now of this we happen to be informed by a letter
from the Marquisto his sovereign, dated 17th November
1638, which, though suppressed by Burnet, has been
presented to the world in that very valuable collection,
the Hardwicke State Papers.* In this letter, his Grace
comments upon the Covenanters in a manner that would
have petrified their deluded chronicler Baillie, “ It is
more than probable,” he says, “ that these people have
somewhat else in their thought than religion; but that
must serve for a cloak to rebellion, wherein for a time
they may prevail, but to make them miserable, and
bring them again to a dutiful obedience, [am confident
your Majesty will not find it a work of long time, nor
of great difficulty as they have foolishly fancied to them-
selves,” And of the leading Covenanters he thus speaks ;
“ Now, for the Covenanters, I shall only say this, in ge-
neral they may all be placed in one roll, as they now
stand, But certainly, Sir, those that have both broach.
ed the business, and still hold it aloft, are Rothes, Bal-
merino, Lindsay, Lothian, Loudon, Yester, Cranston.
‘There are many others as forward in show, amongst
whom none more vainly foolish than Montrose. But
the above-mentioned are the main contriyers.” Here
we obtain another curious confirmation of the trath of
Bishop Guthrie's ancedote, for, taking that anecdote in
connexion with the above letter, it brings out a game
of double-dealing, forming a perfect pendant to what
Hamond L'Estrange has recorded against Hamilton on

* Vol fi, p. 418.

sonia tha dcp conizivers of the opeae but asan
enthusiastic adherent, generally intoxicated witha vain

such a character, in short, as he had pre-
dicted of him before to induce the King to exclude Mon-
‘trose from Court.

‘Hamilton, having managed matters in Scotland so
‘as to satisfy the leaders of the Covenant that they had
the ball at their foot, returned in the month of July,to
report progress to his Majesty, and to obtain instruc-
tions as to the demand for an Assembly and Parliament.
‘In the interval, the Covenanters were most anxious to
bring under subjection the loyalists in the north, that

when the Commissioner returned it might be said that
the whole of Scotland was within the pale of the Cove-
nant. Montrose was the leader entrusted with this im-
portant, and it might be perilous, expedition to seduce
or concuss the learned and loyal Aberdonians. [t
‘was not a warlike expedition, however, but rather a
erusnde of itinerant agitators, taking advantage of
a vacation at the main scene of action, to stir up dis-
affection in quict districts, and, by threatening the
respectable and haranguing the vulgar, to create that
false excitement upon which a vicious revolution de-
pends. There can be little doubt, however, that Rothes

the scheme, and influenced Montrose in the
conduct of it. ‘This appears to be proved by the fol
Jowing letter, addressed by the former to his cousin, Pa-
trick Leslie, and dated 13th July 1638, shortly before
Montrose and his party arrived at Aberdeen.

a

I MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

“ Loving Cousty,
“ Because [your dowal of Atsardesariaerer tite
only burgh in Scotland that hath not subscribed the
Confession of Faith, and all the good they can obtain

miny, and the doctors that are unsound punished by the
Assembly ; and if things go to extremity because they
refuse, and, in hopes of the Marquis Huntly’s help, the
King will perhaps send in some ship or ships and men
there, asa sure place, and if that be good for the coun-
try, judge ye of it. It is but a fighting against the
High God to resist this course, and it is se, far adean-
ced already, that, on my honour, we could obtain with
consent, 1. Bishops limited by all the strait caveats; 2
To be yearly censurable by assemblies ; 3. Articles of
Perth discharged ; 4. Entry of ministers free; 5.Bishops
and doctors censured for bygone usurpation, either in
teaching false doctrine or oppressing their brethren.
But God hath a great work to do here, 03 will be short-
ly seen, and men be judged by what is past. Do ye all
the good yecanin that town and in the country about,—
ye will not repent it,—and attend my Lord Montrose,
who is a noble and true-hearted cavalier. 1 remit to
my brother Arthur to tell you how reasonable the Mar-
quis Huntly was being here away; he was but slight-
ed by the Commisnioner, and not of his: privy-council.
No further. Iam your friend and cousin,
“ Rornes.”*
* ie, Tho Corynunt, ‘This first sentence of Rothey’s letter does infl>

Tetter is printed from the (which Ts in pelvate hasida)
arid ‘Cluby in the pa spretat ke al

apostles of the Covenant,” viz. Henderson, Dickson, and
Cant. The district to be honoured with this special
visitation was an oasis in the desert. The arts of
insurgency had been so successful throughout the rest
of Scotland, as to create a specious, but false, appear.
ance of national feeling in favour of the Covenant.
Here, however, all that was rational, well-ordered, and
estimable, was yet actually predominant. Blasphemy
did not pass current for piety, nor the darkling and
destructive ravings of fanaticism, for the ont-pour-
ings of gifted and enlightened minds, ‘The towns and
College of Aberdeen were at this time rich in divines
and professors eminently distinguished for their learn-
ing, integrity, and good sense. The celebrated Dr John
Forbes of Corse was Professor of Divinity in old Aber.
deen, Dr William Lesly, Principal of the King’s Col-
lege, and Dr Alexander Scroggie, minister. In new
Aberdeen, Dr Robert Baron was Professor of Divinity,
and Drs James Sibbald and Alexander Ross were mini-
ster. The characters and habits of these highly gift-
ed, and sorely persecuted, clergymen of the north, were
ieeettngy pictured about a century ago, by a townsman
of theirown. “ These,” he says, speaking of the divines
whom we have enumerated, were then the ministers of
Aberdeen, frmous then, yet, and ever will be, for their
‘eminent learning, loyalty, and piety. While they were
allowed to live there, there was no such ery heard in
‘the streets of that then loyal city, fo your tents, O Ts-

—

m4 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

rael, the common cant then of the Covenanters. They
were faithful pastors,—they led their flocks to quiet wa-
ters—they fed them with wholesome food, brought from
the Scriptures, and the practice of the primitive Christ-
jans. They had read most exactly the writings of the
ancient fathers, in their own language,
because unknown to the present teachers in that city.
They knew the practice of the primitive Christians,
in the time of their hottest persecutions by the heathen
emperors. They taught their people to obey the King
as supreme, and those subordinate to him, for conseience
sake, and not to rise up in arms and rebel for conscience
sake, a8 the Covenanters did. They were affectionate
fathers to their flocks,—they taught them, in the words
of the wise man, My son, fear God, and honour the
King, and meddle not with those who are given to
change, and as they taught so did they practise. In
fine, the learned works they left behind them, will con-
tinue their fame all the learned world over, ax long as
learning is in any esteem.” Such were the champions
who, when they heard of the approaching visitation by
Montrose and his party, cheerfully made ready to do
intellectual battle with the “ three apostles of the Co«
venant.”* -
The town-council of Aberdeen, informed of the
honour that awaited them, had met upon the 16th

* Ms Brodla ovelochings whole Aare propled with thw wi
tertained independent, rational, and conscientious feelings in

‘ofthe jesuitien! Covenant,—nnd in the face ot the fact that Huntly imal
Mamet soplers i bape be Ee nies ee in
support of tho Episcopal w cause—thus shortly disposes of the
exeuptian of Aberdven : “ In about two months the Covenant id Covenant obtained
‘the assunt of almost every quarter of Scotland, with the exception of
Aberdeen, which wns withheld through the infuence of the Marquis of
‘Huntly, ite patron.” —Vol. ii. 471.

——

MONTROSK'S MISSION TOABERDEEN, 175

of July, and resolved to persist in their refusal of the
Covenant, and to remain firm in their obedience to the
King.* But with the most cordial and Christian feel-
e admirable royalists inclined to meet the
disturbers of their peace, and future perseeutors, No
sooner did the commissioners arrive than the provost
and bailies sent one of theirnumber to compliment them,
and to offer what was called the courtesy of the town,
being a collation of wine and confectionary. “ But,”
says honest Spalding, “ this their courteous offer was
refused, saying, they would drink none
with them until first the Covenant was subscribed,
whereat the provost and bailies were sormewhat offend-
ed, took their leave suddenly, and caused deal the wine
in the bead-house, amongst the poor men, which they
so disdainfully had refused, whereof the like was never
done to Aberdeen in no man’s memory.” It was not
alone with food for their bodies that Montrose and his
party were greeted at Aberdeen ; there was at the
same time tendered to their excited minds, the whole-
some sedative of certain rational queries and doubts con-
cerning the merits of the Covenant. These were pre-
sented to the Commissioners, soon after they bad alight-
ed from their horses, in a paper drawn up by the pro-
fessors and divines of Aberdeen, in which they also de-
clared, that, if Montrose and his compatriots would re-
move these doubts, the propounders would join in that
Covenant with them, from which they had hitherto ab-
stained not without many and weighty reasons, though,
they were most willing and anxious to be
convinced, There can be no question that even the
three apostles of the Covenant were powerless, in all
save the arts of insurgency, before the wisdom, the learn-
ing, and the Christian integrity of these northern divines.
* Town Records of Aberdeen,

176 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

So to the arts of insurgency they instantly betook them-
selves. The request they preferred, in reply to the
challenge of the doctors, was no less than to be permit-
ted to occupy the pulpits on the following Sunday, when
they engaged to convert the people, and to satisfy the
doctors themselves. To this modest demand it wasan-
swered by the champions of Aberdeen, that, although
they were willing to yield to any rational proposition,
yet they must be excused from admitting to their pulpits ~
those who were anxious to contradict the established
doctrines, taught there by clergymen who ought first
to be convinced that those doctrines were erroneous,
Thus the ministers of Aberdecn were so unreasonable,
according to Baillie’s view of their conduct, as to insist
upon preaching in their own pulpite to their own flocks.
‘The result we may give in the words of Spalding, who
was present in Aberdeen at the time: “Upon the
morn, being Sunday, thir three covenanting ministers
intended to preach, but the town's ministers -keeped
‘them therefrae, and would give them no entrance, but
preached themselves in their own pulpits. They, see
ing themselves so disappointed, go to the Earl Maris-
chall’s Close, where the Lady Pitsligo, his sister, was
then dwelling, a rank puritan, and the said Mr Alex-
ander Henderson preached first, next Mr David Dick-
son, and lastly Mr Andrew Cant, all on the suid Sun-
day, and divers people flocked in within the said close
to hear thir preachers, and see this novelty. It is said
this Mr Henderson read out, after his sermon, certain
articles proponed by the divines of Aberdeen, amongst
which was alleged, they could not subscribe this Cove-
nant without the King’s command, whereunto he made
such answers as pleased him best.” From James Gor-
don's manuscript it also appears, that this was one of

—

178 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

and of some others the week following, whe were
thought by many to have either delayed, or been pur-
posely kept off till that solemnity, both for the credit of
the speakers, and that they might be a ‘prepa-
rative and example to others.” But the prize
gained by Montrose and his party upon this occasion was
Dr Guild, though the terms of his submission scarcely
justify their exultation. That clergyman, along with Mr
Robert Reid, minister at Resbeenly ee
these express conditions, to wit, that we
not, nor yet condemn, the Articles of Perth to be
lawfal, or heads of popery, but only promise, for the
peace of the church, and other reasons, to forbear the
practice thereof for a time. 2. That we condemn no
Episcopal government, excepting the personal abuse
thereof, 8, That we still retain, and shall retain, all
loyal and dutiful subjection and obedience unto our
dread Sovereign the King's Majesty, and that in this
‘sense, and no otherways, we have put our hands tothe
foresaid Covenant. At Aberdeen, 30th July 1638,"*
Having thus distinguished themselves in Aberdeen,
Montrose and his party, about thirty on horsebaek, vi-
sited various districts of the north, holding meetings
with ministers and presbyteries, and picking up signa-
tures to the Covenant, from all whom fear, fanaticisin,
or ignorance characterized, rather than enlightened re-
flection. Within the presbytery of Strathbogie, how=
ever, the perambulators did not venture, for the heart of
that was the residence of Huntly. Daring this exeur-

* This important qualification wns attested by the signatures of the
Commissioners themaelven, in. those words: * Likens, we under sube
scribing do declare that they neither had, nor havo, any intention batof
loyalty to his Majesty, as the said Covenant bears." —(Signed,) Montrese,
Couper, Forbes, Morphie, Leyes, Honderson, Dickson, Cant.

\ P

MONTROBE’S MISSION TO ABERDEEN. 179

sion from Aberdeen, the doctors prepared and printed
a reply to the feeble answer their adversaries had put
forth to the queries and doubts presented on their arri-
val; and when Montrose and his cavalcade returned to
Aberdeen, a paper war awaited them on the subject of
a mission that was incapable of a rational defence.
Each party claimed the victory upon the whole result
of this crusade, though it was not much to boast of
on either side. Montrose returned to Edinburgh with a
parchment full of signatures, too contemptible for his-
tory to record, and which he himself was ere long to
despise. The doctors of Aberdeen remained in pos-
session of a field of reason, in which their antagonists
had been Henderson, Dickson, and Cant.

| omvnnan, assewaiy, 1638. 181

| when last it Scotland, Hamilton had so impressed the:
| Covenanters with the idea of his inclination towards
‘them, that even Henderson, their most honest and able
apostle, ventured to print, as an argument in his con-
‘troversy with the doctors of Aberdeen, that the com«
‘was favourable to the Covenant, and,

in regard toall their proceedings,—an as~
that nobleman, with real alarm, but af-

fected indignation, now took the utmost pains to con

Mafia catrsinthiename.ot the King, offered cers

tcc artns somata orerany cos
the persons and property of the lieges in

vehemently resisted by the Tables, whose
So esegegera such control over the returns as
would insure to them the power of packing their con-
‘ventions ; in other words, of retaining the Tables, under
adifferent denomination, Hamilton had also suggested
tothe King # method of superseding the Covenant itself,
— the Confession of Falt, esta

clear hitvelf, upon which it
the

182 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

Dlished by various statutes in the previous century, (of
which statutes the Covenant professed to be simply 3

construed an innovation upon the Religion, Laws, and -

Liberties of Scotland, might well have satisfied the peo-
ple, and would, in fact, have done so, had it not been the
interest of a faction to meet as usual the gracious com-
conten oe
testation. ‘The insatiable demands of the Covenanters,
wa thelr cuiet devooteut tC Laat
mented upon, and by none with more effective severity
than by Dr Cook. Speaking of the crisis to whieh we
allude, that historian observes—“ The various acts
of concession were regularly proclaimed, and it was
with much reason hoped that moderate men would be
contented, and would resist any endeavours to thwart
the intentions of the King. A

replete with the most disingenuous reasoning, and evin-
cing the determination of the leading Covenanters to re-
sist all terms, was read,” and the Earl of Montrose ap-
peared, upon this occasion, in name of the discontented
nobility. This conduct of the Presbyterians cavaot be
justified + i

Ityas read by Archibald Johnstan, and moxt probably:
wa Speer

not justify them upon some * J" ne inthe inxtance we
ea afore 140.” Perapa the fact of Montrose

minent upon thix occasion rendered a justification lo tom
historian of the kirk.

ruling-elders every ’

equal the voices of the ministers in ever,

indie re Seeley ee
by many others) disadvantageous | m

out of which three were to be chosen, itis.

that all the six ministers. must be removed
tion, and have no voice themselves, so that undoubt-
edly the ruling-elders behoved for to over-rule the
election of the three ministers to be chosen ; or if in
any presbytery the six ministers gave their voices be-
fore their removal, yet, no man being able togive voice |
to himself, of necessity the number (ifthey
were unanimous,) must exceed the number of the mini-

fim "

. Norecan the answer that is given
satisfy,—viz. that ministers are

a negative to a mo-

the King’s negative hindered, which ever
after the Assembly at Glasgow was denied to him,) for
their instructions ordered noblemen to be chosen rul-
ing elders where they were, and all such have vote in
Parliament. Next, that, for want ofnoblemen, the chief
gentlemen should be chosen commissioners to the as-
sembly, who probably likewise (or someof them,) would
‘be chosen commissioners to the Parliament. For the
‘barons the like may be said, and was scen of the burghs
their commissioners, and they were sure what such
thad voted in an Assembly they would vote over again
jn s Parliament. This made the Tables so contest to-
haye the Asserably meet before the Parliament should
‘sitdown, that so the acts of Parliament might depend
on the General Assembly, the members of the Ge-
neral Assembly depend on the Tables, or be the
very members of the Tables, but neither Parliament
nor Assembly any. more to depend on the King, but
in effect upon themselves, as it appeared in the fol-
lowing years after they took the power in their hands,
‘Lastly, by this means the laics excused themselves
from the power, and from all fear of the clergy, and
this was the temper that the noblemen did find out for
to curb the untowardliness of the former presbyterian
“power, which the ministry had exercised in the mino-

ng the history of that memorable
r ery ofa faction, out of which
g constitution of Scotland. Nor can

his epistolary history of that As-
remarkable expressions,—* thirty~

iy have chosen their commis-

by the Tables in Edin-

rds he affords, unwittingly, a valu-

o the superiority which the mind of
d, even in the moment of his most
over the meanness of his early political
anecdote now alluded to we proceed

tions had been sent tothe Presbytery

ct them in the choice of a representa-

ne of Dun was first elected, as their ruling-
of one minister, and some lay elders,

ery met in agrenter number, and,

| the other ministers and elders, Lord

t son of the Earl of Southesk, and

i

sailed by the Veblen wad reco witearlarea
tur on the back of it, to this effect, that the commission

‘publicly by the clerk of the Asserably, Baillie says,
“ the clerk, I think unadvisedly, rend in public, not only
the commission, but also the Tables’ subscribed appro-
bation on the back.” This clerk was the notorious Ar-
chibald Johnston, and it was not from manliness that
he had read aloud what Baillie wished Had been kept
out of view. The account in the King’s Declaration is,
that the clerk read out various reasons written on the
back of Erskine's commission in support of it, “in
which, amongst other things, it was objected against the
Lord Carnegie’s election that it was made contrary to
the directions of the Tables at Edinburgh, which the
clerk perceiving stopped, and would read no further.”
But the Commissioner instantly caught at the advan-
tage; and demanded a copy of that commission, with
the deliverance on the back, and the names of those
who had subscribed it. ‘The earnestness with whieh
the Marquis of Hamilton pressed this demand in the
name of the King, and the severity of his animad-
versions upon the proceedings of the Covenanters,
present one of those contradictory views of his own
policy which sometimes raise a doubt whether his
object was to support the King or the Covenant.

were

the ne

ate without disgust the rank hy-
i Bi epee cor lilt

wun Kiwi. Angus 15h,

Jen
ondent, Mr William Spang,
the matter: “ Our synod in Glas~

rs, commanding me, upon my cano~

o preach on Wednesday betore the sy-
the matter of my sermon to my own
‘Thad but two free days, yet I
than to hazard myself in needless

196 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

as I might, on 2d Tim. iv.1.% J charge thee before
God to preach in season and out of season.” * ;
Now, in hese letters at least, we can discover none
of the “ manliness of spirit” to which our historian re-
fers; that to the bishop is tinged with
want of courage, and that to his friend, with i
very like want of truth. But this is not all. In the
following year this very bishop, whom Baillie knew to
be an excellent man, and a valuable pastor, upon whose
presence in the diocese Baillie admitted that the pence
and happiness of “ many thousands” depended, was
stimmoncd as a delinquent, along with all the other bi-
shops, to answer (at the bar of an Assembly where they
ought to have sat as judges,) to what those prelates
justly called “ a most infamous and scurrile libel,”
charging them, indiscriminately, with simony, incest,
fornication, adultery, Sabbath-breaking, drunkenness,
and gaming. Had Baillie possessed one spark of
mantiness of spirit, he would have raised his voice,
at least in defence of that bishop to whom he had writ~
ten, but the year before, the letter we have quoted.
On the contrary, he joined in the inhuman persecution
by which this excellent prelate was ruined—driven
from the flock whose peace and happiness depended up-
on him—ecommunicaled—and all because he declined
the authority of an unconstitutional and lawless conven-
tion! It adds to the meanness of Baillie’s conduct that
he retained his good opinion of the bishop, and did not
desire his destruction, though he thus comments upon it:
—* Since his sentence of excommunication he bane Hist

+ Dalle contrived to skulle ovt of tho duty, a did not prone fier
ai. ”Me John Linde, the elargyman who dl the duty, wa very wet
women, hho apprebonudod froet

Probably the
‘theso faries had moro weight with Baillic then his conscience hnde=Jour>
ats and Letters, Vol. i pp % 8

“CHARACTERISTICS OF BAILLIE, 199
that reason, ought to be remov-
ed? Baillie was: to feel in his

honest. He had brought his mind to accede to the re-
‘moval of Episcopacy from the Covenanting church,
“but withal,” besays, “I heartily wished in the act of
removal of it, no clause might be put which might
oblige us in conscience to count that for wicked and
unlawful in itself, which the whole reformed churches
this day, and, s0 far as I know, all the famous and elas-
‘sic divines that ever put pen to paper, either of old or
of late, absolved of unlawfilness.” Again,—* The qnes-
tion was formed, about the abjuration of all kind of
Episcopacy, in such terms as I profess I did not well, in
the time, understand, and thought them so cunningly
intricate that hardly could I give anyanswer, either ia
or mon.” The determination he came to was to make:
no speech on the subject, but when his vote was called
words in qualification thereof ; for, he says,
“to make any public dispute I thought it not safe, be-
ing myself alone, and fearing, above all evils, to be the
occasion of any division, which was our certain wreck,
So when all men were called to propone what doubts
ae voicing, I, with all the rest, was
” When it came to his vote he attempt-
| onetaendeerma but was easily silenced
by Loudon and Argyle. On the last day of the Ax.
sembly, the proposition, that Episcopacy had been total-
ly abjured in the Confession of Faith in 1580, was again
before them, and an act was proposed for ordaining the
signing of the Covenant over again, under this new in-
terpretation of the negative confession. To this Bail-
lie was decidedly opposed, and, in the shape of a letter

200 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

- to the clerk, drew out his reasons of dissent, to be eom-
municated to the Moderntor and Lord Loudon. The
Jatter knew well how to manage the conscience of hit
reverend friend, whohimself informs us that, “
this act, whereunto all yielded, I was ready~to have
dissented, which, soc ny pool lenny (ogc
alone should go oft be found icting the synod,

A young
Baillie, though shocked by his! having fearlomly expres
sed opinions condemning the resistance to the service
book, loved and admired, was deposed upon a Libel
which accused him of calling the Covenant seditions,
treasonable, jesuitic, to which charge was added such
sundries asthese, that,—“ he gave money at his entry for
his place, and struck a beggar on the Sabbath day; a
number of such things were libelled, and urged hotly
against him.” Baillie’s heart told him that injustice
was about to be done,— the Moderator and others, for
his sister's sake, had a great mind to have delayed him,
but, no man speaking for him, he was deposed. I re-
pented of my silence ; but the reason of it was, both my
lothness to be heard often in one day to conteadict the
whole synod, as also my fear and xuspicion of further
ills in the youth than yet was spoken of !"

So much (and a great deal more might be added,)
for the cnlightened mind, manly spirit, and sensitive
conscience of the Reverend Robert Baillie, among the

* This war worthy of tho party that accused Charles the First of ine
acag alee ret ofthe vtein the Prtament of 183 The King’s
Large ‘narmtes the fact of the euppression of Baillic's vote,

a pean or a with merited severity, —See Note in illustration of
the Large Deckiration at the end of this volume.

4 i_ =

aE

- SHARACTRINSTICS OF BAILLIE. 201

‘dest of the covenanting clergy. He was learned, in the
sense of having acquired (it is said) a knowledge of
thirteen languages—he had a conscience, for it cost hin
eae eee ewes cnighiened Per
he was sensible of the snered and constitutional cha-
racter of the episcopal order, with whose irrational de-
stroyers he nevertheless continued to make common
canse—nay he was loyal, for he posseased a secret ad~
miration,and sneaking kindness, for the monarch whose
rain he ardently aided toaccomplish. But neither the
learning, nor the conscience of Baillie, were such as to
save him from becoming a blind instrument in the
‘hands of unprincipled democratic spirits, and thus it
is, that the voluminous record he has left of his feelings,
(se near loosed
Whatever judgment he possessed was:
iat ereesiclaed ty tex ot vine fanaticism,
a of meekness, modesty, aud

venant. And this is the man who, in his correspond
‘rice with the reverend friend whom he was furnishing
with materials for a history of the times, did not scru-

‘the high-minded
‘man's departure from the covenanting faction,

‘The Marquis of Hamilton, too, affected to treat the
conduct and character of Montrose with contempt. Let
‘as consider his own at this juncture. The persecution
‘of the non-covenanting clergy, and the nnprincipled de-
struction of Episcopacy, took place in a convention

i {

eon |

202 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS,

which had previously been dissolved, under pain of
eat by the royal Commissioner, who having done’
much, by his “ serpentine" policy, to ruin the King’s
affairs in Scotland, and work up the revolt to its pre-
sent pitch of ungovernable frenzy, suddenly “ turned
his back upon them,” to use Buillie’s phrase, when he
knew that the Assembly would sit without him, and
act more outrageously in his absence. Upon Wednes-
day, the 28th of November, he announced his determi-
nations to leave them to themselves. “ When the Mo-
derator,” says Baillie, “ pressed the voicing if we were
the bishops’ judges, there fell asad, grave, and sor
rowful discourse. This was the Commissioner's last
passage ; he acted it with tears, anddrew, by his speech,
water from many eyes, as I think,—well I wot much
from mine, for then I apprehended the
vitable of these tragedies which now are in doing.
Much was said of his sincere endeavours to serve
the King, and his country; of his grief, yet necessity
to depart. The cause he alleged was the spoil
the Assembly, which he had obtained most free, by our
most partial directions from our Tables at
‘The letter in which Hamilton tells the King, that of all
the promoters of the Covenant, none was “ more vainly
foolish than Montrose," is dated on the day previous to
this scene That characteristicully fearless
by which Montrose announced his determination, and.
the determination of hix party, as he supposed, to “ ace
knowledge the least jot of what was writ" by the Tables
to the presbyteries, had been so interpreted by Hamil-
ton. Was it his earnest desire for the
purity of the Assembly, or his jealousy of Montrase,

* Soe before, p: 170,

| the part of Bishop Burnet, as were the
rs poured out by Hamilton upon his
Where are these letters by which

‘not to the public, because he knew
that interesting pleture of the mind
on the 27th of November 1638, the

in the Hardwicke Collection ; and in

ee

that letter his love for his native country, and his tear
ful tenderness of heart, are manifested in expressions
that amount to execration of Scotland.* But of Ha-
milton’s duplicity we shall have too many instances to
notice in the progress of our illustrations.

As the favourite glided back to the bosom of his mas-

fatigable chronicler, and the naivefé of Baillie’s record
is not less amusing than instructive. “ Before his
Grace's departure, Argyle craved leave to speak, and
that time we did not well understand him ; si but hia ae?
fions since have made his somewhat.
plain.” When the Commissioner left them, the As
sembly were in a state of confusion and perplexity, and
“some three or four Angussmen, with the laird of
Aithie, departed, alleging their commission had an
express clause of the King’s countenaneing of the As-
sembly.” The Moderator, Loudon, and some others, ©
harangued them on the propriety of against
the Commissioner’s departure, and of their continuing to
sit. Tothis all agreed, but, adds Baillie, “it was good we
were all put to it presently, for if it had been delayed
till the morrow, it is feared many would have slipt
away.” On the morrow, however, “ Argyle came back
tous. The Moderator earnestly entreated him, that
though he was xo member of the Assembly, yet, for the
common interest he had in the Chureh, he would be
* "If Tkeop my fe (though next Tell 1 hate this place,) if you
think mo worthy of employment, F shall not woury till the government
ee aaa er na
teh ts Rapa * #8 Tw Pressing vere isd

——

| CHARACTERISTICS OF ARGYLE. 205

pleased to countenance our meetings, and bear witness
of the righteousness of all our proceedings. This, to
all our great joy, he promised to do, and truly perform-
ed his promise, No one thing did confirm us so much
: presence, not only as he was by fir the most
in the kingdom, but also at this time

in good grace with the King and the Commissioner ;
we could not conceive but his staying was with the al-
lowance of both, permitting him to be amongst us to
keep matters in some temper, and hold us from despe-
rate extremities.” The fact was, however, that Argyle
| opportunity of unmasking himself, and of us-

his kind—the government of Scotland.

Mie Ming Sal honoured and trusted Argyle, notwith-
‘standing the solemn declarations of the old Earl, that
,nor truth, nor social feeling would be
found in bis son Lorn. This prophecy was now to be
fulfilled. The revolutionary convocation, assembled in
that noblernan’s patrimonial kingdom of the west, and,
suddenly left without a head, was now ripe for his lurk-
How accurately had the old Earl pre-

dicted in thatsolemn warning to Charles! A few years
from the time it was uttered, and disregarded, the King
himself was constrained to publish the commentary we
now quote upon the conduct and character of Argyle in

_* Towards the end of their Assembly, they divided
themselves into several commitiees, which should, after
their rising, see all their acts put in execution, a thing
never heard of before in that church, The Moderator
concluded with thunks to God for their good success,
and then to the nobility and the rest for their great
pains, and, last of all, with a speech to the Earl of Ar-
gyle, giving him thanks for his presence, and counsel:

| CHARACTERISTICS OF ARGYLE. 207

the indifferent reader. But for this revolted Lord, who
amade this speech, and professcth in it, that, if he had
‘BOW not adjoined himself to them, he should have prov-
eda knave, We can give this testimony of him, that at
his last being here with Us in England, at which time
we had good renson to misdoubt him, he gave us as
surance that he would rest fully satisfied if we would
Perform those things which we have made good, by

‘declaration, in which we have grant-
éd more than we did at that time promise, so that we
had little reason to expect his adjoining himself to
them, who had given us so great assurance to the cons
trary, besides that assurance which he gave to our Com-
imissioner when he was in Scotland ; and now, if by his
own confession he carried things closely for the Cave-
nanters’ advantage, being then one of the Lords of our
secret council, and that in the end he must openly join
with them or be a knave, what he hath proved himself
to be, by his close and false carriage, let the world
judge”*

When Montrose crossed Tweed with the rebels in
1640, and, as democracy became developed from under
the disguise of patriotism, bethought himself of secret-

the omnipotent faction that had de-
ceived him and others, he was only struggling to save
the King, from whose councils he was exeluded, and
acting a part, which, however derogatory and uncon-
genial to his open character, was perilous to his per-
son, and sufficiently justified by the necessity of the
ease, That of Argyle is the converse of this, The
anomalous position he avowed—of a concealed patriot,

* King’s Large Declaration, 1639, p. 325.

208 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.,

professing loyalty, and promising aid to his sovereign,
yet lurking in his councils only to betray him,—can
admit of no excuse. To be a privy-councillor was Ar-
gyle’s hereditary and constitutional position ; and that
he continued to be a privy-councillor for the alleged
purpose of playing into the hands of bolder patriots, iu-
stead of patriotically joining them in their open revolt,
can be classed under no category of virtue, enterprise,
or necessity, but was simply a safe and cowardly per-
version of a sacred constitutional trust. The difference
between the two cases is the difference betwen the cha-
racters of Argyle and Montrose.

EE

_ POLICY OF HAMILTON. 209°

CHAPTER VI.

now TRE LOYALTY OF THE NORTH WAS PARALYZED NY HAMILTON, AND.
ROW HENTLY WAS MADE PRISONKK AY MONTROSE AND THK COVENANTRAS.

Havin, in the last chapter, contemplated Montrose
asa leader in the Assembly of 1638, wherein he shewed
somewhat too honest for the councils of the Covenant-
evs, we have now to follow him in expeditions where he
likewise proved himself to be too humane for their arms,
namely, against Huntly, and the ever-memorable loyal-
ists of the north. But, in the first place, w must
consider the position in which Huntly was placed by
Hamilton. ;

Even after certain individuals in Scotland, among
whom we must reckon Montrose, had brought that un-
Lappy country into the predicament which might have
excused a little “fire and sword” to check the progress
of anarchy, Charles invariably proved himself more apt
to yield than to resist, and, as we have seen, instead of
leading an army against them, devolved the task of set-
tling Scotland upon a “ kindly Scotchman,” the “ ambi-
guous” son of a covenanting mother, When that Com-
missioner, after apparently exertinghimself,and in vain,
tokeep the armed convention of 1638 within the bounds
of constitutional and Christian order, wrote to Charles,
— it is more than probable that these people have
somewhat else in their thoughts than religion ; but
that must serve for a cloak to rebellion, wherein for a
time they may prevail; but to make them miserable,
and bring them again to a dutiful obedience, I am con-

VOL, 1. °

Fla wskcewa ton more Uae a generals

st not the worse for that) traduced to be
aE ahd Bates Gaealey ear es
faults, But, howover, this Tam sire
r Rati mesic vost 1
io May ely nay bread
no Teansot say:

EE

POLICY OF HAMILTON. 213

and also to visit the College of Old Aberdeen, and “‘re-
" Upon Huntly's expressing

pair the faults thereof.
‘ of this plan, as contrary to the
Pie ‘the peace of the country, Bir
“My Lord, I fear these things will be
| ores eepean In vain the gallant Huntly took
up his abode in Aberdeon, (his person guarded night
gentlemenof rank and con-
| dition) and, from thence cast many a longing look to
| the sea-port for his promised succours from England.
*"Phecomission Huntly reecived,—the nid of men was
came to him, after much ex-
pectation, but arms for three thousand foot and a
bandred horse, which came not to him till that year
in March, and were sent upon the charges of Dr Mor-
ton, Bishop of Durham. As for the soldiers who should
‘have landed at Aberdeen, or elsewhere, it is true that
promised Huntly assistance of men, but
the Marquis of Hamilton,—who always looked upon
‘Huntly with an evil eye, as the emulator of his great-
pes, and withal was a sceret friend to the Covenans
ters—dissuaded the King from sending men, alleging
that, if the King did so, it would turn all
the burden of the war upon the King. How truly this
leave to the readers. One thing certainly is
true, that, by this counsel, the King’s hopes that hehad
conceived from his friends in Scotland were blasted;
for the noblemen and Highlanders, who stood for the
King in Scotland, promised their concurrence upon that
‘express condition, that they might have a considerable
‘of trained soldiers to join with, who never ap-
‘those who had undertaken to do much
either could not, or made that their pre-
feisty te would not stir. It was by this means

26 MONTOSE AND THE COVENANTERS.
of the cavalry of the Mearns and Angus gentryas were

sctorspanted with te mm bis ofdeanfoea Eadraalia
lant gentlemen, having first not neglected to bid the
Forbeses and Frazers, and all whom the shortness of
the time could permit them to convene, to be there

timeously upon the day appointed, which they failed
not todo." By means of this forced march, Montrose
reached Turreff before Huntly arrived, and mustering,
with his own followers and friends who had joined
him, to the number, says Spalding, of *

well-horsed, well-armed gentlemen, and foot:

with buff coats, swords, corslets, jacks, Pistols, carbines,

Turreff, and busked (arr: |) very advantageously
their muskets round about the dykes of the kirk-yard,
and sat within the kirk thereof, such as were of the
committee, viz. Montrose, Kinghorn, Cooper, Frazer,
and Forbes.” —
No sooner were they thus established, than the van
of Huntly’s army arrived, and, finding the village so
formidably occupied, drew off to the fields in the neigh-
bourhood. Huntly was accompanied by a gallant host
of “gentlemen and others, about 2500, all mounted on
horse, though all the horse not fit for service, nor all
the men fit to serve on horse.” For his council of war
he had his gallant sons, the Lords Gordon and Aboyne,
who, with the loyal lairds, Drum, Banff, Gight, Haddo,
Pitfoddels, Foveran, Newtoun, and Udny, urged their
commander to fall on the Covenanters at once, and
crush rebellion at its first appearance. The King's
Lieutenant, they said, would do no more than bis dnty

for their prompt attendance, and exhorted them to con-
finue firm in their loyalty. Meanwhile the Earl of
Finlater, who accompanied Huntly, but, as alleged by
the contemporary chroniclers, with little stomach for

fighting, passed over, of his own accord, to Montrose,
to deprecate a rencounter. Montrose sent back this
message to Huntly, that he and his party had no inten-
tion of breaking the public peace, or molesting any one,
but would not submit to injury, if they could help it;
adding, that, if Huntly and his friends had business to
transact in the town of Turreff, they might betake
themselves to any part of it except that occupied by
the Covenanters. So ended a meeting from which
much was expected and little came to pass. Huntly
his rendezvous before sunset, and sent the
most of his own followers back to Strathbogie, under
the command of his second son, the Viscount of Aboyne,
directing his own course towards Forglen, the house of
‘Ogilvy of Banif, accompanied by the brave barans whose
blood was upin vain. They dashed their steeds through
‘the village of Turreff, riding under the walls of the
Kirk-yard, and within two pikes’ length of Montrose
and his comrades. But not a word was interchanged,
and no salutation, or sign of courtesy, past betwixt the

EV
ALEXANDER LESLIE. 221
" Ithappened, accordingly, that

Al eo
_“ Now about this time, (January 1639,] or a Jit-
m1 re came out of Germany, from the wars,

home to Scotland, ane gentleman of base birth,* born in
‘Balveny, who had served long and fortunately in the
German wars, and called to his name Felt Marshall
Excellence. His name, indeed, was [Alex-

ander] Leslie, but, by his valour and good luck, attain-
ed to this title, Ais Excellence, inferior to none but to
the King of Sweden, under whom he served amongst
* all his cavallirie. Weill,—this Felt Marshall Leslie,
having conquest, frae nought, honour, and wealth, in
resolved to come home to his native

Scotland, and settle besides his chief, the

as he did indeed, and coft fair lands in

Fife. But this Earl, foreseeing the troubles, whereof
himself was one of the principal beginners, took hold of
this Leslie, who was both wise and stout, acquaints
him with this plot, and had his advice for furthering
thereof to his power. And first, he advises cannon to
be cast in the Potter-row, by one Captnit Hamilton, ¢
‘he began to drill the Barl’s men in Fife; he caused
send to Holland for ammunition, powder and ball, mus+
Kets, carbines, pistols, pikes, swords, cannon, cartill, and
EEE ext of neceeenty rma, 8¢ for ‘old and young

‘mean base by comparison with his riso, and not in
ee iat alata ts came nek xn Bi

d by the cavalry of the Mearns,
and other districts to
er Forth. Levies of foot were also

the barrier mountains, To this

h was much pressed upon Mon-

he would only reply, that,

aul act of the last Assembly, he was bound
ge of Aberdeen, but that he and his
for whatever they took, and be
acts of violence. The result of these
ll give in the precise words of the un-

n they returned from Montrose to Aber-
ted their answer, which was nothing pleas-
Huntly began to rendezvous his men, and
ith of March, had about two thousand two
| horse well-armed at Iuverury, but all
and though none wanted good

none were amongst them who had skill
pra ier been upon any considerable

, who neither bad orders to fight, nor
in the skill of his commanders, resolves
face upon the matter, and to keep
till he might see the utmost of it.

Pr

a

_ taken so little notice of their last coming as that he
4 did not pause nor delay his rendezvous one hour, nor
a his march anywhile, upon that account.

I _ “ Great was the trepidation that was amongst them ;
and whatever might be the General Montrose's confi-
dence, yet the mixed multitude, his followers, either
wanted stomach to the service, or were fearful of the
event; and albeit they saw no enemy as yet, they went
hot about theirbusiness with confidenceenough. Hither-
to they had assisted the reading of protestations, or sit-

tenin Assembly, ortakensome empty or disarmed castles}
now they supposed they were to dispute it with their
enemy in the fields ; and whatever means was used by
the nobility, or their ministry, to persuade the vulgar
sort of the justness of their quarrel, yet the most part
of them, who had been born and bred up under a long
peace, could hardly distinguish it from rebellion against
their King. This abstracted confidence from many of
the meaner sort, and bred trepidation in them at the
hearing of their own drums, trumpets, and shots.

* At this time likewise, the Covenanters began to
wear and take for their colours blew ribbons, which
they carried about them scarf-wise, or as some orders
of knighthood wear their ribbons. This was Mon-
trose’s whimsies. To these ribbons ordinarily the ca-
valry did append their spanuers for their firelocks, and
the foot had them stuck up in bushes in their blue caps,
which dovice seemed so plausible, that when the army
marched towards the border,someshort timeafterwards,
many of the gentry threw away their hats, and would
carry nothing but bonnets, and bushes of blew ribbons
or pannashes therein, in contempt of the Englishers
who disdainfully called them blew caps and jockeys. *

* Spalding thus notices * Montroso's whimsies.” “2 nt

-MONTROSH'S WHTMSTES. 227

-

, where they left the Earl of Mon-

rs, a little after sun rising, as they

rds the mouth of the north-water, which
miles distant from the town of Montrose,
eir waiters did espy the sun shining in a

L yet could they discern no vapour

jically occasion the change of his co-

ined at some distance above the sea, and
rd by the shore. The difference betwixt
when his colour is obfuscated by va-

hat at other times, at his rise and set, his
i dreggy, and inclines to brown; but that
# colour looked like to fresh blood, whereof a lit-
tity is poured into a bright silver bason; or
| rose, or like that blood in the cheek which
8 call sanguis floridus. A second great dif-
in the duration and continuance of that

olour, for, whereas at other times the
keep away the sun's bright colour but
space after his rise or before his sett, it

—_ :

i ie 5k ae
SA ely rsp Mf Stealoch, (t

bk

SS

MONTROSE AND LESLIE, 231

his rendezvons at Inverury, March 18th,* the King’s
household entered their , towards York, and the
journey towards York till March

after Huntly’s disbanding some days.”

have been in strict compliance with

t of many of his gallant followers, Huntly

portion of his army, and retired to his own
ogic, where he took up a defensive po-
= erreereap cad ‘retained about his person.}
‘The retreat of the King’s lieutenant enabled the north-
era Covenanters, with the Lord Frazer and the Master
of Forbes at their head, to march without molestation
to Aberdeen, there to join Montrose, who entered it,
says James Gordon, “on Palm Sunday, 30th March,
with a veni vidi vic.” By his side there appeared the
veteran of many a desperate field in the land of battles.
Well had Rothes catered for rebellion, when he “ took
hold” of Leslie. Montrose was instructed to give im-
plicit attention to the advice of this experienced leader,
and to consider him as his military tutor. Even the
pad and imperious Montrose submitted, it seems, to
/ “ We were feared," says Baillie, in
» “that emulation among our no-

‘says, that Huntly held his rendezvous at Invernry oa the
and Simolved show on tho 20th, "Those dates av pro-
than Jamox Gordon's.

Speen yd dbs soanend wt ie Rep
sas tha sn ne bor this he reared by

282 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

homely d

advices of their pelgshonneeive eval 4,

crooked familiar, who now so

‘trose’s side, was he who had been greatly 0
Gustavus Adolphus, his instructor in battle. But Leslie
degraded himself too long under the impious banner of
the Covenant, and even learnt to become coward 5 for
this same little old fighting Mentor was in

the head of * all his cavallirie,” from the battle of Mars-
ton-moor, some twenty miles homewards, when over-
taken by the news that the battle was their own.
Shade of the immortal Gustavus! *

* Tho reverend Mr Aiton, = le en a
ductory to hie Life and Times of

seen of Meraronsnnd oe cles aden Cove.
nanters. This wary General, &x.’p, 76, The mmates
‘companionship would have been
ied an re ish mt ho
under the clroumstancos,

‘Mr Aiton, | hie
work, line fled to dintinguish betwixt these two mercenaries of extra
ondinary fortune.

EE

It must have been a sore sight, to those who remained
in Aberdeen to see it, when the combined forces of the
, thousand strong, paraded upon the

‘Mentor,

. He says,
that the noble burgh of Aberdeen, being “ daily deaved"
‘with the news of the coming of an army, and their own
Marquis having dissolved his host at Inverury, and ap-
parently deserted them in the hour of need, and no help
arriving from the King, they began to be heartless and
comfortless, and entirely to despair, not knowng what
course to take. Hitherto there had been brave mus-
terings and drillings, casting of trenches, watches and
eathands in the streets, pieces of ordnance in the cause-
ways, and fortifications in every direction; moreover,
every man carried at least a sword by his side. But
‘when Huntly seemed to desert them, they held mourn-
ful consultations together, and agreed, that, as all seemed
lest, they should cast their weapons away, forbear all
their warlike preparations, and open wide their gates
to the approaching Covenanters. Then every man,
his community, began to shift for him-

, Some removed their goods, and some fled with
from the town. Amongst others, there

fled by ses about sixty of the bravest men and youths
well armed with sword, musket, and

handilier. They took one of the town's colours,
and John Poak, their drummer, with them, and
resolve to go to the King. And with them were the

and the ferocious,

to how! and hammer out uncouth sedition to the terri-
fied and bewildered people.“ There they ery victory!
and begin to sing a song to the townsmen of a far other
tune than they had learned from their own ministers
and doctors, crying down that doctrine which the town's
doctors, they knew, were not now in equal terms with
them to maintain any more, without bana

persons.” +

Loree remaining a few days ta Aberdaeny ple
completely disarmed, and having done as little violence
to persons and property, but as much to conscience and
Christianity, as circumstances admitted of, Montrose

+ Sce at the end of this volume, some extructs of this date, from the

‘Town-Council hooks of Aberdeen.
+ James Gordon, who add>—" all their success was imputed to the
of the cause, to which God began to shew himself so fhvourable, |

days of Murch, commonly called borrowing days, that tsne, to sniracl,
[rT bences proached before many witeens

SS

DEAR SANDIE’S STOUPS. 235

and Leslie marched their host to Inverury, to discuss
Huntly, leaving behind them the Earl of Kinghorn,
as Governor of Aberdeen. “ They did lie down at Inver-
ury with open leaguer, having drawn along with them
some short field picces of three feet long, or thereby,
which, for all that, were of an indifferent wideness, and
did shoot an indifferent great ball. These pieces,—com-
monly nick-named Dear Sandie’s Stoups,as being the
invention, or so thought, of Colonel Alexander Hamilton,
master of their artillery, who himself was nick-named
wards, for some time, were made use of by the Cove-
nanters.”"* Huntly in the meantime had retired to
the Bog of Gicht (Gordon Castle); and, anxious to re-
lieve the north from the plundering and oppressive vi-
sitation of the eovenanting army, he wrote to Robert
Gordon of Straloch, once more to become a mediator
betwixt them. Straloch immediately proceeded to Mon-
trose’s quarters at Kintore, and urged a treaty, Mon-
trose showed himself well inclined to bring matters to
that pass ; and it was finally arranged that Huntly and
Montrose, each accompanied by eleven of their friends,
should meet a few days afterwards, at Lowess, a country

about nine miles south of Strathbogie, and five
miles north of the Covenanters’ camp. The respective
parties met at the appointed place and time, (Lords Oli-
phant and Aboyne being with Huntly, Lords Elcho
and Couper with Montrose,) armed only with walking-
swords, and such was the mutual jealousy or formality
of the meeting, that a gentleman from either party wus
appointed to search the other, for fear of hidden arms,
Huntly and Montrose then respectfully saluted each

* James Gordon's MS, See before, p. 221.

|

936 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

other, and, after interchanging some expressions of
courtesy, they stepped aside and held together m lang
private conversation, to which the rest were merely spec+
tators. Huntly's friends were somewhat offended at
the privacy of this conference, and James Gordon adds,
that he never could learn what were the particulars of
the private conversation betwixt Huntly and Montrose,
which did not transpire. The immediate effect, how-
ever, was an agreement quite unlooked for. After a
few hours occupied in this manner at Lowess, Huntly
mounted his horse, and, without a reason assigned, rode
forward with Montrose and his friends to the leaguer at
Tuverury, where, their appearance being as welcome as
it was unexpected, Huntly and his astonished compa
nions, among whom was Robert Gordon of Straloch,
‘were entertained by the Covenanters with great respect
and forbearance. ‘I'he result was, that Huntly signed «
paper, the precise terms of which are not known, but
which soems to have been some qualified version of one
or other of the Covenants, amounting to no more than a
declaration in favour of the national Religion, and Li-
berties—probably something similar to what Mon-
trose had been satisfied with (on his previous reform-
ing expedition) from Dr Guild and others at Aber-
deen.

Montrose, being no party to the covert deaigus of the
faction, was but a blundering Covenanter, and, being
‘upon this occasion left very much to his own devices
in furthering the cause, was not only willing to accept
of very equivocal converts, but, totally forgetting the
importance of the Magua Charta of his party, now ate
tempted to make Covenanters of Papists, by the in-
genious device of waiving the Covenant itself,—as the
Play of Hamlet was tnolited by the itinerant manager.

, and such of them as would
as they were invited to it, so
t them advise upon it, and not

d; as also what assurance might

To this purpose there was a
with all such, that they should be
they subscribing a declaration

to coneur with the Covenanters in
and Liberties of thekingdam and,

tht be encouraged into the subsign-
ion and bond, there was a decla-

8 POLICY CONTROLLED, 239

| seit heetet we oaszni sini, and withal
told Montrose, that if an attempt were made to take
south with them as a prisoner, the country
A ‘not so quietly submit to the outrage as Huntly’s
ji Montrose replied, that very pro-
hably these people bore Huntly no good will, and that,
indeed, he knew as much from themselves, but, for his

; part, was willing to do for Huntly all the good

he could, and would fail in no promise to him 5

‘only,’ added Montrose, ‘ there is this difficulty, that bu-
oad eter transneted Jy vote and a committee, nor
ee ine mye * You have done

so much by yourself already, rejoined Straloch, ‘ why

not the whole ? If you be so inclined, of which I make

‘no doubt, then being General here, and the prineipal per-

son upon this expedition, when you stand to your point,

Huntly's enemies must yield.’ To which Montrose an-

‘swered, ‘I shall do my utmost for Huntly's satisfaction,

—and with this answer, says James Gordon, who nar-

rates the above, his father was dismissed ; nor, he adds,

| Montrase “fail of the performance of his promise ;

‘that night, after Huntly had subscribed the paper

agroed upon, Montrose was content that he should re-

turn peaceably to his own house, which he did accord-

_ ingly, not without the great miscontent of those who
would have had him detained.” *

wing thus discussed Huntly, Montrose broke up

Joao account by James Gordon, whose
<0 tht the meeting ut Lowoos

the second day, Huntly went not near the eunp,
bea boad sient ea
in which he appears to have been misinformed, und pres

\

=

‘MONTROSE'S POLICY CONTROLLED. 241

councils of this expedition, and was overborne in commit-
tee, now became verified. Huntly. was again requested
to meet the Covenanters, with which request he reluct-
autly complied, upon receiving assurance from Montrose,
and the other leaders, that he would not be detained
prisoner. No sooner had he arrived, however, than
the Forbeses and Frazers, and more especially Crich~
ton of Frendraught, the sworn foe of Huntly, began to
urge his detention in the most vehement manner, and
the result was very discreditable to theparty that effected
it, Various obligations and new terms were attempted to
be imposed upon Huntly, who indignantly demanded
‘that the bond of maintenance he had signed at Inver-
ury should, in the first instance, be restored to him.
Then, (says Spalding) the bond being immediately de-
livered to the Marquis, he asked, ‘ Whether will ye
take me south with you as a captive, or shall I go vo-
untarily ?) Montrose answered, ‘ Make your choice.’
*Then, said the other, ‘I will not go as a captive,
‘but as a volunteer. Upon this affair, James Gordon
‘thus comments; “ Whether Montrose was content to
be overborne by votes, that so it might be his greater
glory to Jead Huntly to Edinburgh as a trophy of his
conquest, or if, indeed, Montrose was overpowered, and
‘constrained to yield to the clamours of the northern
‘Covenanters, who had drawn the south country men
their way, it is uncertain; but, however, it was con-
‘eluded that Huntly must go along with them to Edin-
bargh under a guard, though not disarmed as a pri-
‘soner, which was accordingly performed. So Montrose
and his party, within less thana fortnight aftertheircom-
ing, marched south again, establishing a committee of
es ne ere, ond thele associates, to guard
L a

—

— ae

MONTROSE'S POLICY CONTROLLED. 245

Such is an unfavourable account of this matter for
Montrose, recorded by a particular friend and follower
of Huntly. Menteith, whose history of the troubles
‘was written in French, and printed at Paris in the year
1661, states positively, that when Huntly made his ap-
pearance, under promise of safety, at Aberdeen, “ im-
mediately they commenced to solicit Montrose not to
suffer him to remain in his own country, whatever pro-
mise he had made him to the contrary, and although
Montrose opposed them to his utmost (s'opposast de
tout son pouuoir) to prevent their breaking the parole
that had been given, nevertheless his single authority
being insufficient to prevent it, Huntly and his eldest
son were carried prisoners to the Castle of Edinburgh,
from whence they were not liberated till the peace of

~ Berwick." Both Wishart and Guthrie exonerate Mon-
trose, but are neither precise nor accurate in the few
details they afford, in which they appear too much pre-
Judiced against Huntly. From all the accounts, how-
ever, it is obvious that this disereditable proceeding was
not the policy of Montrose, and hud been carried into
execution contrary to his remonstrance and plans, for,
when acting for himself, Montrose had actually dis-
inissed Huntly upon the most favourable terms; and
if Huntly was of a disposition to cherish, even to the
min Of his King and country, the remembrance of that
wrong in after years, the fact of Montrose having com-
manded various covenanting expeditions in arms against
the loyalty of Huntly’s district, is sufficient to account
for that fatal “ distaste,” without the necessity of sup-
posing that Montrose was a willing party to the dis-
honourable act.* Indeed, it appears to be obvious, from
oe spirited reply to the noblemen, gentlemen, wad mini-
‘on the part of the Covenanters, Karo tis the option of joln-

—

CC

GENEROSITY OP MONTROSE. 245

not abundance of bensts, mutton, and good fare for little
pay,) in order of battle, with bagpipes and Highland
five hundred men, They went about the
cross in rank, and being viewed, the General (Montrose)
commanded tiem to go to their lodgings, which were
prepared within the town for them; and that ¢hey should
do no wrong, which they carefully obeyed, and for the
which the town gave them five hundred merks in money
when they removed with the foot army.” It is mani-
fest, therefore, that Montrose had been exerting bim-
self, and successfully, on all hands to relieve, as far as
possible, town and country from the burdens and ex-
cesses of war. Again, James Gordon notes, that,—
“ April 12th, General Leslie marched out of Aberdeen,
southward, compelling the town to pay him ten thou-
sand merks, as a great courtesy to him.” The fact was,
however, that Montrose’s instructions were to exact
a hundred thousand merks, and to visit the recusant
north, and especially Aberdeen, with the greatest seve-
rity in every respect. Had he carried fire and sword
through the whole district, he would have done no
more than what the Tubles,.and especially the cove-
nanting clergy, wished and expected him todo. It was
through Montrose’s leniency, as Spalding expressly ad-
‘mits, that the fine upon Aberdeen was reduced to ten
thousand merks; and Baillie, after shortly narrating
the subjugation of Aberdeen by Montrose, adds these
expressions of disappointment : “The dis.

cretion of that generous and noble youth (Montrose)
was but foo great. A great sum was named as a fine
to that unnatural city, but all was forgiven ;" and,
speaking of the free quarters upon Drum and Pitfod-
~ dels —“ This was inuch eried out upon by our enemies,
as cruel and barbarous plunderings, but a little time

=

SS

HAMILTON IN THE FIRTH. 247

CHAPTER VIL.

PHEW LNS HOW MAOILTON BETRAYED THE LOYAL BARONS OF THK NORTH,
AND HOW MONTROSE SUBDUKD THEA,

Tr was about the middle of the month of April 1639,
that Montrose and Leslie returned in triumph from the
north with Huntly a prisoner. This was the period of
the most general and sincere excitement, throughout
Scotland, against the measures of the Court, for the
real secret, and the actual temper of the present threat-
ening attitude of the King, was understood only by a
few. His Majesty had reached York with an inefficient
‘but most imposing array, and bis evil genius, Hamil-
ton, “ must,” says Sir Philip Warwick, “ be a distinct
General both by sea and land, and with a good fleet
must block up the Scotch seas, and, fo my knowledge,
he promised so to visit his countrymen on their coasts,
as that they should find little ease or security in their
habitations.” Hamilton's own letter, which time has
disclosed, verifies the ubove, for therein, when planning
this very expedition, he advises the King to “ curb the
insolency of this rebellious nation,” and to “‘ make them
miserable,” with “ assistance from England.” This,
be adds, “ will certainly so trritate them, as all those
who within this country’stand for your Majesty will
be in great and imminent danger."* Five months
from the date of this letter had scarcely elapsed, when

* Letter in the Hantwicke Collection, alroady referred to, dated Nov.
Ti, 163M.

a

p citainelleyichaicakatanker
» the ignorant people believe that

or the land soldiers to sicken,

to die; otherwise the fleet did more
2 ei than to the enemy.
(pk ios ae es

smd worthless country | Billie nddsy—
‘il ocenion of boglnning the war he ai
rehore with w shot." “

= ‘
COVENANTING ARMY. 253

might not be sufficiently efficacious, it was articled—
“ When any march is to be made, every man that is
sworn shall follow his colours; whosoever presumes
without leave to stay behind shall be punished. If any
upon mutiny be found to do it, be they many or be
they few, they shall die for it." The first article of
the code, however, is titled “ Ecclesiastical Discipline,”
‘and commences with the provision—* That in every
regiment under a colonel, there be an ecclesiastical el~
dership, or kirk-session," &e. Nor must we forget
their celebrated banner, in which a worldly craving for
‘regal power, so characteristic of the Kirk, was thus im~
piously typified, —* the Scottish arms, and this motto,
Jor Christ's crown and Covenant, in golden letters.”
‘The policy of all this, in the little old crooked friend
‘of Gustavus Adolphus, may be gathered from the ac-
count of Baillie, who, more than half-crazed with ex-
‘citement on the occasion,® favours us with the follow-
‘ing exquisite portrait of himself; “1 furnished to half-
‘a-lozen of good fellows, muskets and pikes, and to my
‘boy a broad-sword. I carried myself, as the fashion
“was, a sword, and a couple of Duteh pistols at my sad-
dle, but, I promise, for the offence of no man, except a

ae Hie sey,“ [was as a man who had taken my leave from the workd,

and was resolved to die in that service, without return, found the fa-
“your of God shining upon papi pyc ads Riiubla; yot strong

Seaete cacao the bands of churchmen, who kept
BURRESS ca phat eau tcdiess yao und Seaaaa.
grip of some of these who lad first kind-

Sesitlnee fea iit cas ry ree could east them in the
it, to taste if that heat wus plewant when it came near their

~

STATE OF THE NORTH. 255

opening scene of that civil strife which ceased not until
after the national honour had received an indelible stain,
and the throne itself was swept away. ‘This was the
vital quarter at present of the royal cause; and Ha-
milton, accordingly, there left it to its fate, while Mon-
trose displayed a corresponding degree of activity on
the side of the Covenanters. The Viscount of Aboyne,
second son, a mere boy, was now looked to

by the loyal barons as their leader, the Lord Gordon
being at this time with his father in the hands of
the enemy, But even of this youthful leader the
north was deprived at a most critical juncture; for,
on the dd of May, he had suddenly taken his depar-
ture by sea, in order to claim succours in person from
his Majesty. Aboyne succeeded in obtaining the King’s
ear, the favourite being absent; and he implored his
Majesty to grant him an order upon the Marquis of
Hamilton for some of the English troops, to aid the ris-
ing in the shires of Aberdeen and Banff, Charles in-
vested the young nobleman with the lieutenancy of
‘the north, and, at the same time, sent a letter by-bim
to Hamilton, in which his Majesty told the latter not
to involve him in money expense, his Exchequer being
‘drained, but “ as for what assistance you can spare hizn
(Aboyne) out of the forces that are with you, I leave
gosto judes, and 1 shall be glad of it if you find it may
* and again,—* if, with the countenance and
Galas of what force you have, you may uphold
my party in the north, and the rest of those noblemen
Beereecat te yc, L chal eceem ita wery great ser-
tice."* So the fate of the north, and of the monarchy,
was again cast upon the will of Hamilton, whose extra-
"# Thialetter, which In printed by Burnt in bls Mem. of the Dukes of

Harallton, p. 155, is dated Newcastle, 13th May 1639.
“os

a

on before his Majesty, as it did

, that there should
the same was done, first, in

to Spang, dated 26th Sept 1630, few months after

r ‘in the cause he was supporting.
6 eval. to, restrain the lawlessness of a
them to musters and

, and then ordering them to their

a peremptory was he nda
rations and defences of the town, and
bitants, that when the drum beat

d Town of Aberdeen, commanding them,

b, to deliver up their whole arms to the

sievar, “ the Old Town people, trembling
thi [Eo aeae aateheeency

girnels
deonsumed—uo0 fow),\cock or hen,
|” ‘Phen Montrose decreed that, by eleven

nt _a thousand men on horse and foot,

_- HAMILTON’s HOSTILITIES. oT

you can do upon the rebels, for my service, with those
men you have, for you cannot have one man from
hence.” The story which Bishop Burnet relates, as the
immediate consequence of the above letter from the
King, if it be a fact, places Hamilton in the most ridi-
culous and contemptible point of view. “ The Mar+
quis,” says Burnet, “no sooner got this, but he pre+
sently sef fo work, resolving neither to spare Burrough+
stowness, which was his own town, nor Prestonpans,
which was his cousin's. But a strange accident befel
him the wext day, for as he went out in a small ves-
‘scl, with a drake on her, and sixty soldiers, to view the
‘Queensferry, and burn the ships that lay in the har-
‘bour, he saw a merchant-barque coming down towards
him, and he caused row up fo her ; but she, perceiving
her danger, run herself aground upon the sands of
Barnbougle ; the tide falling apace, and he following
» run himself likewise on ground,
where he was like to have been very quickly taken by
‘the men on the shore, who were playing upon him, and
some vollies passed upon both hands, But they on
the land were waiting till the water should fall, reck-
| ening him their prey already, which had been inevi-
table, had not the seamen got out, and, being almost
to the middle in water, with great tugging set them
‘afloat, and so he returned safe to the fleet; and this
was all the ground for that calumny of his making ap-
pointments on the sands of Barnbougle with the Cove-
a9,

CHARLES DECEIVED AND BETRAYED. 277%

= fleet, not as their enemy, but as
nd and mediator with the King. The
‘quoted, when contrasted with Hamil-
theme the King, as found in the
‘Hardwicke collection, and in Burnet's Memoirs of his

of itself to prove that the favourite
was not merely a vacillating, but a deceptive and
traitorous part. Indeed when we attend, chronologi-

tally, to the events crowded within the space of about six
months, and which were decisive of the fate of the
King, it is impossible to doubt that he was betrayed
evil genins Hamilton.

letter to Charles, dated 27th November 1638,

1 speaks of Scotland as a rebellious nation, a
s country, a people having other thoughts than
, which they used as acloak to rebellion, Then
the plan of a most effective invasion, to
: this people to dutiful obedience, to irritate them,
miserable, and he suggests the Marquis

to be his Majesty's lieutenant in the north,
= himself entirely into the hands of the
favourite, Huntly is appointed, the invasion proceeds,
and, by the first of May, Hamilton anchors in the Firth,
and the King is with the army on his way to Berwick.
same instant, Huntly is taken prisoner—a
Sle les dee Rea ees
could have prevented. Hamilton withholds
from Aboyne, though that young nobleman
en to obtain them, and manifestly ought

with a vigour and activity in
‘ay Joss sustained by the captivity of his
‘Between the 8th and the 29th of May, Charles

oa various letters to Hamilton, evineing the utmost
desire that Aboyne should obtain the aid he demanded,

correspondence)
et you loose to do what mischief you can
for my service” On the 4th of June,
afterwards, Henry Vane writes to
Majesty doth now clearly see, and
d in his own judgment, that what pas~
ry betwixt his Majesty, your Lord-

pest therefore, his Majesty would not

with them, but to settle things with

good posture, and yourself to come
to consult what counsels are fit to be

i ll

_ -PACIFICATION OF BERWICK, 281
Berwick, in the summer of 1639, has been represented
by several historians as

a measure equally ruinous and
7 itwas ruinous, thatis, thatitformed
one link in the chain that dragged the King to destrue-
1 ; but it was both inevitable and
"And one reason of its necessity
| aire by this able writer is, that “ the Scots were en~
| ‘unanimous, and entire masters of their
The value of covenanting enthusiasm and
Eoiemdlniy,prdixationsl charscteritio, sud principe of
action, we have already had occasion to consider, ‘That
the Covenanting faction were now entire masters of
their country, and that, again to use the words of Mr
Hallam,— the terms of Charles's treaty with his re-
volted subjects were unsatisfactory and indefinite, enor-
some Falconcesslon, and: yet affording a pretext for new
” are fatal truths, involving a nation’s

ad disgrace, for which Hamilton is deeply re-
sponsible, who at this time so meanly betrayed his too
confiding master, And now the crisis was at hand, when
Montrose, awakening to a sense of the monarchy in
danger, and becoming gradually confirmed in the con-
viction that Charles was betrayed by those he trusted,
paused in the delusive excitement of eovenanting patrio~
tism, whilehis heart yearned to tell his Sovereign of “the
‘serpent in his bosom.” Meanwhile we must follow Mon-
trose through his last covenanting triumph in the north.

ri
It was upon Friday the 14th of June 1639, that
Aboyne, despairing of the promised assistance from
Hamilton, and not in the secret of the transac
tions we have noticed, commenced his march from
Aberdeen towards Angus. His hope was, with the aid
of the gallant “eile ale desis

— a

, that Aboyne, when his party had
towards Stonehaven, came himself,
foistknoe! ad:dent then a letter, which

Eid good aler than solyabie

Bee before, p, 257,

_ Young and inexperienced
Pete ae whos the adic tne crcl of wer
‘he licensed all the foot to depart home, and with the
horse returns to Aberdeen. And now Gun, having
acted the first essay of his treachery, he could not hope
) enemy, seeing so fair an advantage offered,
‘qrould be sure-to take the occasion, as indeed they did.”
‘The account in James Gordon's manuscript is sub-
stantially the same, though it varies in some particulars.
‘a little skirmishing, in which Aboyne’s
havea an back, Montrose sent a few cannon
‘bullets among Aboyne’s brigades, which so alarmed the
‘Highlanders that they wheeled about and fled in con
fusion, nor ever looked behind them, (although Aboyne
‘himself made every exertion to rally the fugitives) until
they reached a morass about half a mile distant.* This

iewe:

Is seems, wore wally unprparad forthe ext
‘a dear Sandy's stovp,” They had nnother name

party
‘wore coming ‘to have clean defeat un; fo
een owt al st a kes tha

rnd A

‘MONTROSE MARCHES | UPON ABERDEEN. = 287

| Montrose, with the prompt energy to which he owed:

his future successes, instantly determined to march once

| more upon Aberdeen, and when within six miles of

‘that devoted town, an advanced patty of his cavaley

| encountered an equal number of the Gordons, whom

Aboyne had dispatched to watch the motions of the

Covenanters. Being only seven on each side, there was

something knightly and romantic in this encounter,

im which the Gordons were victors, for after several

| wounds | and received, Montrose’s seven horsemen
the laird of Powrie Fotheringhame ~

eer Gordon of Fechill, and Ogilvy of

Powrie, younger, wounded and taken by Nathaniel

Gordon, best and bravest of loyalists, the future com-

panion, and fellow martyr, of Montrose. Aboyne’s par-

ty was led upon this occasion by the gullant Colonel

Jobuston, who was most anxious to have returned to

a whole chivalry of the Gordons,

would utterly rout the combined

eee wt Marischal. he result of his

spirited councils, and of his obstinate defence of the

bridge of Dee, all rendered abortive by traitor Gun,

we cannot do better than present to our readers in the

precise words of the manuscript accounts left by Patrick

r Gordon.

aio says Patrick Gordon, “a new oceasion
of jealousy towards Gun; for my Lord (Aboyne) had
commanded Johnston to take some horsemen with him,
-wnd go forth to view the enemy, which he did very
exactly, and, when he returned, assures my Lord that
if he would give him out an hundred borse, and fifty
‘commanded musketeers, he was sure to give them such
as should bring them all to confusion, and

| seconded with the rest of the horsemen,

hia ialosencc’ being in fall view of
a near distance, the Covenant-
let fly some shot at them. It was

‘BATTLE OF THE BRIDGE OF DER. 293

fusal of his to charge was so ill taken, that the company
‘began to tell Aboyne that Gun had betrayed bim, and
Arradoul, in a great chafe, told him to his face that he
wasa villain, and on arrant traitor, all which Colonel
Gun swallowed quietly. Half-an-hour after the foot
had left the bridge, the Covenanters’ fore-party entered
the port, and marched alongst it, keeping their journey
towards Aberdeen, for it was late in the afternoon,
without offering to pursue any of Aboyne’s party, who
had got time to retire.” *

Thus was Aberdeen once more in the power of the
yet covenanting Montrose. In the next chapter we
will have occasion to advert to an assertion of Robert
Baillie’s, that Montrose, because he had not been ap-
pointed in place of Leslie to the command of the cove
nanting army at the borders, was doing his utmost at
this very time to ruin the Covenanters, and would ac-
tually have placed the whole of the north in the hands
of the King, upon the present occasion, had he not been
prevented by the “ honesty and courage” of Marischal.
Such was Baillic's theory of Montrose's motives and
actions, when the spleen of the reverend partisan had
been etirred by the subsequent career of our hero. Yet,
at the time, Baillie expresses the highest admiration of
Montrose, and condemns nothing but his lenity—* At

‘once Montrose and Marischal, most vaorous and
happy noblemen, gave then some other matter to
do.” “ Montrose and Marischal, knowing the danger,
their country, but the whole cause, if they
retire or stand, resolved to go and fight.”
Atlast, with some slaughter on both sides, we won the
.. ee

_ Patrick Gordon's manuscript is equally severe

rate, From Baillie's own excited re-
to gather thus much. But inthe
Gordon we find the facts more ex=

s warrant for that effect. He

best to advise a night upon it,

n was the London of the north, and the
prejudice themselves. It was taken

drew up @ paper, signed with both their
ring that they had hindered it, and pro-
‘pose with the Committce of Hstates for
‘year, when he was made prisoner

was objected to Montrose, that he had

Guthrie records that Montrose disbanded his *
Angus, and retired to his own house, expect-

at Leslie and his council would have sent for him

ind take command of his regiment, and that, as

slected to do so, he remained at Old Montrose
‘return of the army. This account, however,

be inaccurate, for, as Baillie himself was with

army, it may be presumed that he

not be mistaken in what he writes to Spang up-

0 namely, that “ Montrose and Marischal
‘did post to Dunse to have their part of the joy, as wel!

ul el

296 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS

they did deserve, in the common peace, where they
were made most welcome both to their comrades and
to their King.”*

* Aboyne took ship to,Berwick on the 26th of June, but had nearly
been killed by the “rascal multitude,” in his coach in Edinburgh
James Gordon's MS. The particulars are thus given by Baillie in his
letter to Spang, September 28, 1639: “ The people of Edinburgh, being
provoked by the insolent and triumphant behaviour of that unhappy
spark, Aboyne, who yet recking from our blood in the north, would rat
te in his open coach through their causey, made an onset upon him, and
well near had done him violeuce.” So Baillie, who condemned Mon
trose for not having given up Aberdeen to fire and sword, speaks of the
conquered Aboyne as one “ reeking from our blood in the north,” and
justifies the attempt upon his life by what he calls the provocation of
‘Aboyne’s travelling in his own carriage through the streets of Edis
burgh, ten days after the pacification had been signed at Berwick!
This was the time when the treasurer, Traquair, was also nearly ma-
dered. This breach of the pacification appears to have been the result
of some plan, “that in a private way some course may be taken fit
their terror and disgrace, if they offer to show themselves publicly.”—
Letter to Wariston.

Gun went to Berwick at the same time as Aboyne, but we hear of to
assault upon him. “ But shortly afterwards Johnston coming to cour,
his leg being cured, accused him as a traitor, and challenged him to
single combat. But Hamilton conveyed Gun away to Holland, who,
the while that he staid at court, traduced Huntly’s followers as boldly
‘as they confidently accused him, so that hardly knew the King whom
to believe amongst them.”—James Gordon's MS.

ll

" PRESHt IMPULSE To ‘THE MOVEMENT. 299

ut wives who at first put life in the cause,”
‘were so conspicuous, and which unquestionably were
secretly instigated by the principal agents of the faction,
in ‘upon the 2d of July 1689,
eae Lord eae ghrambes was so brutally
assaulted, Bishop Guthrie declares that there were few
who doubted that this breach of the pacification * had
private allowance,” but that Lord Loudon was dis-
patched on the 4th tothe King at Berwick, to excuse
returned with an order from his Majesty re~
quiring fourteen of the covenanting leaders to attend
him at his conrt there, in order to arrange his progress
to Scotland, where he meant to hold an Assembly and
Parliament in person. Only three of the noblemen
obeyed this.summons, namely, Montrose, Rothes, and
Lothian, and his Majesty was so disgusted by the in-
excuses sent by the rest, as to return to London
on the 29th, and forego his intention of trusting him-
self in the hands of this faithless and unprincipled
faction. *

Dr Cook, in his History of the Church, has adopted,
without sufficient examination, the popular theory of
Montrose’s Joyalty. Speaking of the occasion, when
Montrose was one of the three noblemen who dared to

to-come to us to Terwick, by which disobedience they manifestly
their of us; and it cannot be thought reasonable that
eee ee eee ees
—— "—Declara-

ie A

{mlssfoner, brought. the country: and the King. The
‘crisis was so abrupt and violent, that it could not fail
eee. For, besides all this, a most
determined attack was now made upon the prerogatives
. ‘The control of the Mint,—the com-
ee ees ae

2S a jurisdictions,—the regulating pre-
eedency,—these were all demanded to be transferred,
eerie © Parliament. Here were ianova-
| fious infinitely beyond any thing attempted by the King,
“and which must have convinced all who retained the
| power of calm reflection, that the design was to abro-

tions concerning the constitution of Parliaments, and
eeeee things never treated on before, whereanent the
| Commissioner told them he had no instructions, Mon-
| trose argued somewhat against those motions, for which
| the zenlots became suspicious of him, that the King
| had turned him at his being with his Majesty at Ber-
Beaten ort teed 10 cake Nite. nadics therm
| only the vulgar, whom they used to hound out, whis-
| pered im the streets to his prejudice, and the next
[feeenatea Bs Sena efx epon his chamber door. x pa

{
te aA

eS

_ COVENANTING CALUMNIES. 805

to fall foul upon the question of our new private mect-
ings.” We find, too, in the correspondence of this re-
‘verend partisan, another version of Montrose’s defection,
somewhat different from that of the Berwick seduction.
Ina letter, dated in 1645, to which we have elsewhere
alluded, when most violently excited against Mon-
trose, Buillie writes," Our present posture is this;
when the canniness of Rothes had brought in Montrose
to our party, his more than ordinary and ‘evil pride
made him very hard to be guided ; his first voyage to
Aberdeen made him swallow the certain hopes of a
te over all our armies ; when that honour was
Leite n Leslie, he incontinent began to. deal with
King, and, when we were at Dunse-law, had given
assurance, and was in a fair way of performance had~
‘not the honesty and courage of Marischal prevented it,
to have given over the whole north to the enemy;
when our voyage to Newcastle came in hand, by his
damnable band he thought to have sold sus to the
enemy ; thereafter he was ever on correspondence for
our ruin.” From such vague calumnies,—the prejudiced
assumptions of the moment, by narrow and clouded
minds judging characters they were incapable of ap-
preciating,—a certain class of writers concoct pages of
‘positive assertion against Montrose, and call it history.
Temay be seen, from the history we have already traced,
is the assertion that jealousy of Leslie’s
to command the rebellious army of 1639,
induced Montrose, at this time, to turn against the Cove-
nanters. Baillic's theory in 1645 is totally at variance
with the facts he himself records in 1639. Besides,
‘Marischal, a youth of about three-and-twenty, was
obviously swayed by Montrose, and we shall find that
‘the very first signature to what Baillie calls Montrose's
‘VOL. 1 uv

ee

PARLIAMENT OF JUNE 1640. 307

such risks, but transmitted a command to the Justice-
| Clerk to take the Advocate along with him, and proro-
gate the Parliament in virtue of the sub-commission.
says that the Lord Ad “was glad both of
being delivered from his disgrace, and for being honoured
‘with the employment,” and that when the Parliament
| ‘met, he moved Lord Elphinstone, as first named in the ©
commission, to go up with them to the throne and
| execute the King’scommand. That nobleman required
to see Traqunir's order. Hope urged the King’s com-
mand as paramount, but Elphinston would not depart
from the letter of his commission. The Advocate then
turned to Lord Napier, who was much too precise and
punetilious in all such matters to be guided by any
thing but the express terms of the Royal Commission,
aud he, too, declined to act. Nevertheless the Cove-
nanting Parliament determined to sit, and elected Lord
Burleigh as their President.

The only nobleman who appears to have opposed
with spirit and determination the assumed powers of
this extraordinary Parliament was Montrose himself.
Bishop Guthrie has told us that, in the democratical
proceedings of 1639, Montrose first incurred the dis-
pleasure of the faction by arguing against their revolu-
onary propositions. What we are about to narrate
corroborates that statement, and from a quarter that is
nottobe doubted. It will be manifest, when we come
to record the history of Montrose's first conservative
attempts to countermine the leading Covenanters, that
inthese Parliaments, and elsewhere, he had been startled
and shocked by the treasonable manner in which the

authority, or the necessity of having a King at
ail, began to be spoken of ; and he had even gathered
expressions, and rumours of expressions, from Argyle

a

——

- COMMITTER OF ESTATES 1640. 309

“had occurred at this lawless convention, * whereof”
(says honest Spalding) the like was never seen in the
‘Christian world, where any King ruled and rang.” The
‘whole revolutionary plan of the previous Parliament
was here effected, and various acts were passed and
forced upon all, the manifest object of which was to
fortify the faction in the approaching rebellion. The
‘conservative feelings of Montrose, and a few others in
‘were powerless to arrest the develope-
‘ment of the“ cloud in the north.” They were induced,
‘or rather compelled, to subscribe with the rest its law-
less proceedings, in the vain hope that here was the
‘utmost limit of the movement, and that by giving way
to the pressure now, they were preserving themselves
to be of use to the King in future. Nay, by a master
stroke of policy on the part of the faction, they were
‘even put upon the monstrous committee to which this
Parliament gave birth.
_ Fromm James Gordon's manuscript we shall now ex-
‘tract a very distinct and curious account of the new go-
yernment, constituted by this revolutionary convention
of June 1640.
“It will not be amiss to give some account of the
Committee of Estates, and their power, as it was spe-
cified in this Parliament, because in the following year
‘this new representative had the power of kings and
parliaiients engrossed in their persons und judicatories.
‘The members of it were noblemen, Rothes, Montrose,
Cassits, Wigton, Dumfermline, Lothian, Karls; for
Lords were, Lindsay, Balmerino, Couper, Burleigh,
, Lower ; Lords of Session were, Lord Dury,
Lord Craighall, Lord Scotstarvet ; then followed Sir
‘Thomas Nicholson of Carnock, lawyer, Sir Patrick
Hepburn of Wachtov, Sir David Hume of Wedderburn,

C—_—

‘POWER AND CUNNING OF AROYLE, sll

yened @ foul rupture and schism amongst the principal
members of this committee. One thing was much re-
marked here by all men, that it shewed much modesty
and sejf-denial in Argyle to be contented not to be
preferred to this high honour. But all saw he was
major potestas, and though not formally a member, yet
all knew that it was his influence that gave being, life,
and motion to these new-modelled governors ; and not
a few thought that this junto was his invention, If it
were so or not, I determine not. A reason why he was
not nominated was his absence at this time in the
Highlands, and his being employed much of this sum-
mer in waiting upon the supposed invasion of Strat-
ford's army. Yet there was a door left open for him
to enter the committee whenever be pleased, both as an
officer of the army, and upon the call of the committee;
for they had power to call any they pleased to assist
them, so, albeit he was not nominated, yet he was in-
cluded in the state committee.”

‘That the above is a true account of this committee,
which usurped every function of government, and by
means of the lurking power of Argyle, and the factious
abilities of a few leading Covenanters, commanded the
Parliament of which they professed to be the organ, will
beamply proved even by the history of their proceedings
against Montrose, to be presently unfolded. The re-
volt of Scotland was manifestly progressing (from
the tithe agitation of Rothes, who was now compara-
tively insignificant,) to be under the dictatorship of
Argyle, whose “ great power and following,” und vi-
cous ability, rendered him, notwithstanding his con-
stitational nervousness, without a competitor in such a
pretension. Argyle was sent, both in 1639 and 1640,

i

=

‘MONTROSE’S MOTIVES AND OnJECTS, 313

Argyle’s own tent, at the Ford of Lyon, where, as cir-
cumstantinlly reported to Montrose by John Stewart,
certain expressions:

worthy of remark, too, that, according to Stewart's
‘story, this conversation had reference to that very de-
bate mysteriously alluded to in the passage we have
quoted from the secret correspondence of Archibald
Johnston. The history of this charge of high treason
against Argyle (which became the means of destroy-
ing the conservative party in Scotland) will appear in
a subsequent chapter.

Thus it happened that Montrose, (independently of
the circumstances already detailed as having opened his
eyes to the danger of the country, and caused him in
the parliaments of 1639 and 1640, to “ dispute” ngainst
such statesmen as Argyle, Rothes, Balmerino, and
Archibald Johnston,) shortly after the Inst convention
of the Estates in June, had become impressed with the
belief that n plot really existed to dethrone the King
in Scotland, and to place the Earl of Argyle as dictator
over the distracted country. This had been pressed
‘upon his attention by various circumstances occurring
about the same time, and which were sufficiently con-
vincing, though it was not so easy to bring home an
accusation of the sort against the wily and powerful

potentate, who rejoiced in a supreme eriti-
nal jurisdiction as his own appanage, and lorded it over
hosts of “ uncanny trewsmen,"—as Baillie culls them
with mingled fear and admiration,—“ these supple fel-
Jows with their plaids, targes, and dorlachs,"—
memories and consciences were as supple as their limbs.
Montrose determined, however, to unravel the treason
and denonnee the traitors, and he was most anxious

“ a

‘MONTROSE’S MOTIVES AND OBJECTS. 815

could prevail, that army should not rob the King of his

To the bond above-mentioned he had
obtained, among other important signatures, that of the
Lieutenant-Genera) himself, Lord Amond, who was
second in command under Leslie. Thus Montrose
hoped to have saved the King from any desperate de-
signs of this invasion, and also to have bound together
a party to support his undisguised opposition in the
ensuing Parliament. This measure of necessity, the
true history and details of which have never been re-
corded, is vaguely referred to by those inimical to the
fame of Montrose, in order to prove mean duplicity
against @ character naturully as truthful and fearless as
ever fell a victim to faction. Compelled as he was to
ananeeuvre for his King, in times when loyalty scarce-
Ty dared to manifest itself in Scotland, we will find that
for the successful conduct even of this stratagem his
nature was totally unsuited. The terms of this bond,
and the reasons for it assigned by Montrose himself,
will be Jnid before the reader, when we arrive at the
circumstances which brought the matter prematurely to
light. In the meantime we must follow him with the
invading army to Newcastle,

Argyle acted as whipper-in to the Scotch army, but
always found an excuse for not joining it in person.®

® Baillie gives a most amusing account of Argyle’s campaigns with

however, was “ to lie about Stirling, in the heart
to be always ready in subsidies for unexpected accidents,
fo our neutralists, |\, 6 all peaceably inclined and weil dix
Jor butmanted frien! (4, ¢. all conservative Covenanters),

le

_ ENGLAND IxvaDen, 1640, 317

land, “ from whence,” adds their too honest chronicler,
“there was no expectation of money till we went to
fetch it’ Vt was sometime during this pause, betwixt
the mustering of the army and its crossing the borders,
‘that Montrose framed and obtained signatures to his
conservative bond.*

‘The little crooked Felt-Marshal, engaged to fight in
the leading strings of a covenanting committee, now
again saw himself surrounded by that motley host of
black gowns and blue bonnets which composed the fan-
tastical ranks of the kirk-militant, and not a man of
them with a certain or sane view of their precise plan
and purpose. Seizing that attitude of mingled doubt,

and fear, and bravado, some wag of the

day has embalmed the Scots invading army of 1640 in
an immortal ballad, most descriptive of its extravagant
Sieieesescanconth:acay:

‘March! March |

| Why the devil do yo nn march ?

‘Stand to your arms, my Inds,

Fight in good order ;

Front about ye musketyers all

‘ill ye come to the English border ;

+ De Wishart states, that Montrose was absent when the rebel
‘came to the determination to cross the borders ; and he odda,—" Which
resolution of theirs the chief of the Covenanters bud taken up in their
ieee six weeks bofore, and to that purpove bad
in through all Great Britain thelr apologeti pam

‘not hinder, would not seem to disapprove. Montrose com-
Senate yy tnd ut lr and oe

him to the King, or at lenst hod broken tho neck of the Covenanters’
design”

OO

SCOTS ARMY AT NEWCASTLE, 319

passed and repassed, “ boots and all,” the whole
army prepared to incur once the risk he thus in-
curred thrice: “ And so,” says Baillie, “we passed
Tweed the 20th of August with great courage, our
horse troops standing in the water, our foot all wading
in order about their middle.” The miserable affair of
Newbury, where Lord Conway scarcely disputed the
passage of the Tyne, enabled the Scots to fasten with
impunity upon Newcastle, and afforded them the pre-
tensions of a great victory. Sir James Turner (appa-
rently the prototype of Rit-master Dugald Dalgetty)
happened at this time to be returning from mercenary
service abroad, and was roving anywhere for a new
commander. So he stumbled upon the victorious Scots
‘at Neweastle, where, he says, “1 found this success
had elevated the minds of my countrymen to such a
height of vanity that most of them thought, and many
‘said, they should quickly make a full conquest of Eng-
Jand ; but time hath shewn them since that they made
their reckoning without their host." *

Tn none of the accounts of this passuge of the Tyne
do we find any mention of Montrose. The affair ap-
pears to have been decided by Leslie's judicious ma-
ak of bis “ dear Sandie’s stoups.”+ It was to

Bs fing cans actly to renllze the fruits of their ndventures,

wa teed ‘the least worldly, the most conscientious, and the

‘disinterested patriot of the faction, thus gloats over thelr extmor-

Slory god run the esp th tse of cnt

Sterling —5,408,000 morks Scots! isa pretly sum in our land,

tele the 1,800,000 merks for our army these last four months, and

1.25000 for the fifth month coming! Yet the heurty giving of
it to usyne to their brethren, refreshed un ua much as the money itself” ~

—Letiers avid Journals, They bad certainly * gone to fetch it” to some

mention of Montrose in the Covenanters’ dixpatches isus
the urmy came to their night's leaguer at Newbum-

a

TRACTORS IN THE WEO-CHAMBER. 3@L

CHAPTER X.

FATE OF MONTHOSR'S TERST CONSERVATIVE ATTEMPTS IN SUPFONT OF
‘THE KING'S AUTHORITY.

Towanps the end of the month of September 1640,
‘Montrose contrived to transmit a letter to the King.
“In the time of the truce (says Dr Wishart) Montrose
had sent letters unto the King, professing his fidelity,
and most dutiful and ready obedience to his Majesty,
nor did the letters contain any thing else. These being
stolen away in the night, and copied out by the King’s
own bed-chamber men,—men most endeared to the
King of all the world—were sent back by them to the
Covenanters at Neweastle ; and it was the fashion with
those very men to communicate unto the Covenanters,
from day to day, the King’s most secret councils, of
which they themselves only were either authors or par-
takers.”* According to Sanderson, this treachery had

eae ly way nee a
Janes Mercer * did often vouch before many witnesses,” thot
‘Covenanters obtuinud their knowledge of Montrwe’s correspoud-
si tig Dp smeamno Heron be road the address
Te wcadentally fll —— Burnet adds,
Faas tang rasan the covenanting com-

vend,

produced a copy of the letter he said he had

x

EE

“MONTROSE’S CONSERVATIVE BOND, 323

speech, letters, signs, or any other way, under the pain
to be punished as a traitor.” In fact, his Majesty was

considered the enemy, and a loyal correspondence with
the Sovereign, apart from the faction, was treason by
their code. But when Montrose boldly justified the act,
it was impossible to gainsay him, For these same
articles of war, true to the system of the Covenanters,
who never struck a rebellious blow without first pro-
claiming God save the King, contained this provision ;
“Ifany man shall open his mouth against the King’s Ma-
Jesty’s person, or authority, or shall presume to touch
his sacred person, he shail be punished as a traiter !" So
the matter ended for the time.
_ But the Earl of Argyle was not to be out-manosivred
by such a character as Montrose. The private bond,
which the latter no doubt flattered himself would be the
means of saving the country, was also speedily dis-
covered, and brought before the Committee at Edin-
burgh by Argyle himself. One of the peers who signed
it was young Lord Boyd, Montrose’s “ ally,” aud the
‘son-inaw of the Earl of Wigton. Lord Boyd died
about the 24th year of his age (necording to Sir James
Balfour in consequence of a “ burning fever,") on the
19th November 1640. Shortly before his death be had
uttered some expressions which made known that such
a bond existed. Argyle, with characteristic sagacity,
discovered the whole secret. He paid a visit at Cal-
Tendar, (where Lord Amond had arrived for a time from
his command at Neweastle,) nor did he depart without
btaining all the information of which he was in quest,
e before his subservient Committee at
who immediately summoned Montrose,
otland, and the rest of the noblemen impli-
within their reach, to appear and answer to
accusation of treason agairist the faction of

==

‘MONTROSE’S CONSERVATIVE BOND, 325

sthe lawless arm of # tyrannical Committee could not
band, by which he thought
‘to have sold us to the enemy.” 1am not aware that a
topy of this bond was hitherto known to exist. It is
frequently alluded to in history, but the terms of it are
no where quoted. Among the manuscripts of Sir James
Balfour, however, I have been so fortunate as to diseover
of the bond, and of the subsequent de-
elaration mentioned by Guthrie. These shall now be
| nid before the reader, that he may judge how fur the
| violent expressions of the reverend Covenanter were
justified.
“The copy of the bond subscribed by Montrose and
the rest of these noblemen,

“ Whereas we under-subscribers, out of our duty to
Religion, King, and Country, were forced to join our-
selves in a Covenant for the maintenance and defence
of eithers, and every one of other in that behalf, Now
finding how that, by the particular and indirect prac
ve. the country, and cause now depending,

much suffer, do heartily, hereby, bind and oblige

‘ ourselves, out of our duty to all these respects above
mentioned, but chiefly and namely that Covenant al-
Sneed to wed and study all public ends which
to the safety both of Religion, Laws, and

of this poor kingdom ; and, a8 we are to make

an account before that Great Judge at the last day, that
re contribute one with another, in a unanimous
nt way, in whatsomever may concern the public,
cause, to the hazard of our lives, fortunes and
of us doing, consulting, nor eondeseend-
point, without the consent and approbation

: that power in support of the King’s
inst a democratic faction, he would only
the Covenant from the abuse of it by a

c fiche ty poieurighe ee
in destroying a cabal

smal," subversive of the Covenant. But
: consisted his crime, for the Cove-
duced the country to this, that might was the

Socivts. We all embniced
ffartane a Unie conve meteors

=

Colonel declared, that when he was last in Holland the
‘Palsgrave sent for the deponer to the Breill, where he,
entering in discourse anent his Highness's own affairs,
‘desired the Colonel to represent his condition to the Ex-
tates of Scotland, and named some of the Scots noble-
‘men whom he knew, and named the Earl of Montrose
as one of whom he had much heard, and desired be
might have the opportunity to speak with bim. There-
after the deponer coming to Newcastle had not occa.
sion to speak with the Earl of Montrose for a reason-
able time. The first time they met nothing past
betwixt them but general discourse. ‘The next time the
Earl told he was desirous to follow the wars abroad,
and wished that things were settled at home that he
might employ his talents that way. Whereupon the
deponer told the Earl of Montrose the desire the Pals-
grave had to meet with him, who willed the deponer to
write a letter to the Palsgrave, that he might call the
Earl of Montrose to court, where they might meet,
which accordingly he did, and within a while there-
after, the General (Leslic) taxed the deponer for writ-
ing that letter in such a private way, whereunto he
answered that he did not apprehend any fault in it;
and so it was passed over at that time. Thereafter
he told the Earl of Montrose that the General had

‘him, and,as he apprehended, the letter was
intercepted. The Enrl of Montrose answered, that if

* 1k was passed aver (as Montrone's lettor wns) becanse there was
outing to lay hold of. ‘The letter had been intercepted, and this shows

vany means break through that mugie cirele which Hiamiltou,
thelr as wells his own, bad draws round tho King toexclude
Montrose, and every other bold and upright adviser.

eadaeretiterertcee oe war we find ‘ excessively
Joyal provision already quoted, und which, it might be
have prevented an officer of that army
ing 80 much alarm, as Colonel Cocheran
have done, when Montrose declared that he
liad detueted high treason, But after that clause in
King’s authority, and in the same article,
immediately,—* he that shall speak evil of the

‘cause which we defend, or of the kingdom and coun-
try in the defence thereof, or shall use any words ten-
ding to the dishonour of the Lord General, he shall be

” Now, the manner in which ull

such clauses, in the Covenanting statutes and articles
of war, were practically interpreted, was this: Any
‘ope attempting to establish a treasonable purpose on
the part of Argyle, or of the few who, with the aid of
his power, now monopolized the government of Scot-
tand, was closely watched, and detected before his proofs
could be irresistibly fortified, and that person, be his
station oF credit in the country what it might, was im-
mediately persecuted, to the extent of liberty and life,
esan incendiary, or a bander, or a plotter, or an evit
speaker ogainst the cause: On the other hand, treason
against the King himself might be darkly spoken by
the privileged Covenanters with impunity, notwith-
stamling the profuse loyalty of their declarations ;
stich Jangaage was in them protected from prosecutions,
oF finpeacksnent, in the manner above stated, the King
being iu reality considered “ the enemy” so long as he

—

Balmerino, the following sentence occurs: “ There
is some word here of Sir Thomas Hope's

at Neweastle, since our way coming, that the King
himself might be cited to the Parliament, as well
as the Earl of Strafford; but Sir Thomas wrote to
‘me what he spoke, and from whom he thinks that
calumny comes. Some of us here [the Seotch commis-
‘sioners] strive to shew the King’s-danger in bring-
img any such things to question, whereby both the re-
levaney of such a libel may be quarrelled [disputed,]
and Ais actions called in doubt as the ground there-
of* In other words, this arch traitor is offended at the
idea of the King’s protecting his crown from treasonable
‘expressions and propositions, and he hints that the at-
tempt would only recoil upon himself. Now there is
another secret letter, signed A. B,, but unquestionably
from this same Sir Thomas Hope (the Lord Advocate's
second son, who commanded the “ College of Justice
‘Troop,”) to Archibald Johnston, and dated from Edin-
burgh, 7th June 1641, wherein is the following post-
‘weript, clearly referring to the incident mentioned in
the former letter. “ Walter Stewart has craved a par-
don for the wrong he did me, and has set down the
words, which past betwixt us, under his hand, whereof
Thave sent the authentic copy to my brother, which
yemay have from him, if ye desire to see it."| Among
the voluminous collection of manuscripts in the Advo-
eates’ Librury, I have also discovered the original re-

(i gafiatedaeredr pet clit eral
the resenrch,

Neither bed Lord Hailes observed this letter, which will be found
wt the conclusion of next Chapter,

Ai i

COVENANTING NOTIONS OF TREASON, 335

i torote that? To the which Sir Thomas
did not remember their names for
to his memory, Kenneth the Secoud,
the Third, was one of them. And so they
ing upon that particular. The deponer
‘none were present at the words speaking
General alone, and that those were the words,
c¢ in substance, which the deponer did relate

Sheriff of Teviotdale, and that he did not speak
an ontofany il intention, and declares, that he never
heard Sir Thomas speak any other words of this kind
| —

Dieter au. this, (perhaps a little more) may have been
| paid very innocently by Sir Thomas Hope, as Walter
Stewart in this second version of his story asserts, but
‘any thing as suspicious pointed ogainst the de furcto
King of Scotland, Argyle, would have met with a more
| Aaborate scrutiny, the object of which would have
teen to ruin, and not to screen the accuser. This
‘conversation, however, even a8 given, cannot fail to re-
mind us of the debate at the opening of the Scotch
Parliament of June 1640, and, by a singular coinci-
donee, it occurred at the very crisis when the King’s
een person began to be mysteriously spoken
MS. Ad. Lid,
See Ta erg been
‘to diepose of such ‘a matter, We shall have ocension to shew after=
Walter Stewart wus eusily frightened into giving any tos
Ieee tho ticve whan tle declaration wus elllted to white.
wash Sir Thomas Hope, Walter Stewurt hod just been seized by tho
al lied dat the King to Mon

=

COVENANTING NOTIONS OF TREASON. 337

“ the particular practising of afew,” was early suspected,
and immediately provided against, by the demagogue,
Archibald Johnston, who, we shall find, was but too
triumphant in his scheme of destroying Montrose’s
conservative efforts, by bringing him under the lawless
tyranny of the Scotch Directory, in 1641, immediately
before the King arrived in Scotland.

In the following chapter shail be disclosed the pri-
vate practising of this Archibald Jolinston, which we
have it in our power to illustrate by some curious ori-
ginal manuscripts not hitherto published.

VOL. 1. ¥

ee

ARCHIBALD JOHNSTON. 3389

Devil xwell thee, Deuth,
| And burst thee, like a tun,
| ‘That took away good Elspet Craig,
And left the knave her son,

ly "This worthy appears to have been very soon singled

among his learned brethren, as a fitting in=

of faetion, and Baillie destinguishes him as

only advocate who in this business is trusted.”

‘soon as “the cause” commenced, he became its
and was eer long Secretary of State to the Co-
‘The prominent part be acted in framing that
| chorta is well known. The following anecdote,
manuscript of James Gordon, I have not met
with elsewhere. “ The penner of all the Covenanters’
protestations, and their public papers, mostly, was Mr
Jobnston, afterwards Lord Wariston, who is
likewise said to have been the chief contriver of the
‘frame of the Covenant, and to this purpose did make
use of the History of the Civil Wars of France, whence
he took his model for these public papers This was
related to me by him who at that time lent him the
three volumes of that history, who is a near relation of
his.” When the * free Assembly” of 1648 was convok-
ed, next to the appointment of Alexander Henderson,
‘as their moderator, that of Archibald Johnston, ax their
clerk, was felt to be equivalent to transferring the
whole spirit of the Tables into the Assembly, and a
great struggle was made to gain that point. A most
Cate scene, narrated by Baillie, then occurred,

‘The only reeords of the kirk in possession of the for-
mer clerk of the Assembly, and delivered to Johnston
upon his election, were two registers containing the
acts of Assembly since 1590. The Moderator said, that
the loss of such @ treasure was pitiful, and earnestly en-

“A COVENANTING ANTIQUARY, B41

terizes as an “ imposition,” and Dr Cook as“ a picee of
i We will presently find this same mi-
of the Covenant threatening to look over

old practiques against the Monarchy, if his Majesty
‘continued to be troublesome in taking cognizance of the
wrouches of democracy. Archibald Johnston appears
been particularly fortunate in his discovery of
ancient records, which he kept secret for his own con-
‘stitutional purposes. Wodrow has left an anecdote in
mnuseript, relating to the period of Charles's visit to
‘Scotland in 1641, which we may here anticipate. He
tmentions that some person who was employed by Ar-
chibal Johnston's son, to put his father's papers in
order, discovered a voluminous dinry which had been
Kept by the demagogue, of his own times. ‘“ My in-
former finds likewise in that diary that after the
treaty, [of London in 1640 and 1641,] when the King
came a little into Scotland, there were many con-
ferences among the prime of the Covenanters and the
‘King, at all which Waristoun was, The Scots Lords
insisted much that the King would allow them the li-
ering ea the officers of state’ in the Parliament.
The King was very peremptory against it. They
pleaded that it had been auciently allowed by the Kings
of Scotland, and alleged the records. The King de-
nied there was any such thing, and told them he knew
in his father’s time any thing with relation to these was
lost. After their insisting, the King required to see
the records, They told him they were yet extant,
‘not among the records of the nation, After

had given his oath that he would not call for
int of his hands, some two or three on the King’s
side, and as many on the other side, all upon oath, were
let into the secret, and the King and they went over to

{=

==

A COVESANTING Parntor, S43

the Parliament of June 1640, he was ordained to attend
General Leslie in the camp, to be present on all ocea-
sions with the war committee, and to superintend what-
ever treaties, consultations, or public declarations, might
arise. When the treaty at Rippon was removed to
‘London, he was specially added to the number of the
ioners, for the purpose of watching the
interests of the Church, ‘Then it was that his secret
with Balmerino, and a select few of the
| Committee in Scotland, which we are about to disclose,
| geeurred. It may be necessary, however, in order fully
to understand and appreciate some of his allusions, to
‘illustrate, from other sources, his particular objects,

‘To effect the destruction of Strafford and Laud—to
root out Episcopacy even in England—to reduce the
‘King’s authority to a shadow—to trample on the neck
‘of every statesman who dared to impede the revolution-
ary movement, were the avowed objects of the Procu-
rator of the Kirk. To be Clerk-Register, as the
next step in bis own political aggrandizement, was his
secret object, and therefore his chief aim was to de-
prive the King of his prerogative of choosing his own
officers of State. And what a deplorable picture of
‘the inconsistency, avarice, and ruflian democracy of
sige faction, presented itself, under these

at the treaty of London! Among the manu-

the Advocates’ Library, there ix a volume
Poataiaing- couvemporary transcripts of the various ne-
gociations and correspondence connected with this
xeaty. Among other papers is that of the demands,
phyla ecovenanting commissioners, upon England,
in satisfaction of their “ brotherly assistance.” “That
they should have demanded three hundred thousand

(

EVE

« COVENANTING REFORMERS, B45

Having, as they conceive, saved, by this disclaimer, the
ee ee rene oo ee
proceed to show cause for, nevertheless,

Genevean forms upon England :—

they say,“ yet charity is no presump-

eee y, they santa to be their

‘duty, both as Christians and commissioners,
that England should become Presbyterian !
They ereeely announce, “we love not to be curious
‘in any other commonwealth, or to play the Bishop in
another man’s diocese,’—and yet they add, “in the
paradise of nature, the diversity of flawers and herbs
are useful, but in the paradise of the Church, different
religions are unpleasant and hurtful; it

is therefore to be wished that there were one Confes-
sion of Faith, one form of Catechism, one Directory for
‘the parts and public worship of God, as prayer, pray-
‘ing, administration of the sacrament, &c. and one form
of church government in all the churches of his Ma-

‘y's dominions.” *

To the prolix reasons added in support of this de-
mand, England, verging to its ruin, but not yet a prey
to the puritanical party, returned the following answer,
which the same contemporary transcriber entitles, “The
Peers’ answer to our Commissioners’ demand concern-

eta AGH), completely juctivion the penitent ‘Charles's in-
‘Oe Boba i church goverament of Scotland, and leav-

this:—Charles endeavoured to improve
ee of Sapnisganhies had alrwady, for thirty

ftutionally established there, ‘The Cowenantersy=that
ie ‘agitators und factionists who badd usurped the functions
it to be their duty to overthrow Kpiscopacy

it hud ulways been established, nod aguinst the seuse

n to plant Presbytery there, where it had nevur boon wdsnit

SS —

COVENANTING JUSTICE. 387

peace. The prosecution of Balmerino in 1634 was
‘one of the strongest roots of the Covenant, and the fac~
‘tion raised a terrible outcry against Charles for the
‘tyminny and injustice, as they termed it, of this criminal
process, Yet in the very outset of their career they esta-
blished the most powerful engine of their revolt, name-
Jy, criminal processes, devoid of every shadow of right,
and principle of justice, concocted and matured, per fis
et nefar, by their own committees, and brought before
‘their own lawless conventions, ‘The pursuit of “ In-
cendinries” quickly succeeded the hue and ery after
Bishops, and the very term jncendiary was one of the
‘arts of insurgency to prejudge individuals obnoxious
to them, but against whom there was in reality no
case. All men of any weight in the country, who
would not bow to the Covenant, every servant of the
King enjoying place, and not of the faction, were
liable to be denounced as incendiaries, their persons de-
mazded in Scotland, to be tried there, by the covenant-
ing Parliament, where the secret influence of Argyle
‘was omnipotent, while, at the same time, the King’s
prerogative of mercy wax excluded, and his prerogative
of filling up the vacancies occasioned by such disqua-
lifications, demanded us the privilege of that same de-
‘mocratical tribunal. Among the many mischievous
acts passed in the Parliament of June 1640, there was
‘one, of whose real object we are informed by Sir James
Balfour, at that time (though he afterwards saw reason
‘to change bis views) a keen Covenanter. “Seventeenth
act against Jeasing-makers, of whatzomever quality,
office, place, or dignity; this act was made purposely
fo catch Traquair, the Treasurer; Sir John Hay,
Clerk- Register ; Sir Robert Spottiswood, President of
the Session; Maxwell, Bishop of Ross ; and others who.

= —

SECKET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 349

on bis part, would except some of themselves, the faction,
conscious upon whom such exception ought to fall, ex-

equivalent as injustice and tyranny !
‘Let us now turn to the secret correspondence of Mr
Archibald Johnston, and observe low he worked the
machinery of this revolution.

‘The following letter is dated from Loudon, 2d Decem-
ber 1640, and addressed, “ For my Noble Lord my Lord
Balmerino at Neweastle.”

“ My Noble Lord,—I received your's of the 20th
November by the public letter. Ye know all the pa-
pers that have past. The King, since the last answer
of ours on Monday, scems not well pleased. It may
be if that day of before we had not gotten a kiss of
the Queen's hand we would not get it in haste. He
would have the acts that import the authority of the
Parliament suppressed, at the least us to undertake to
recommend the same to the Parliament, for the which ye
might justly hang us all, beside our perjury and the ruin
of the kingdom's liberty. Business [é. ¢. democracy]
makes slow progress here. The Lieutenant, albeit he lies
in the Tower, has the King’s heart.* The lower House
men get liberty to be at the examination of the witnesses,
even at the councillors upon oath, who dispute hotly
they could not depone against their fellow-councillors
for any thing spoken or done in council. Burton and
Prynnet on Saturday were brought in with a hundred
coaches, and great multitudes of people on horse and
foot. The Londoners’ petition is not given in yet till
a fit opportunity. There is a remonstrance, against

* Strafford, the persecution of whom had just commenced.

+ The scurrilous libellers, whose severe andimpolitic but aot unprovoke-
‘ed patiahiment was now made the handle of agitation,

| al

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 351

and God knows if that will either be to the honour or
pence of the kingdom.* Let not this meet me here
again, The disputes that arose by the King’s ques-
tions, and our answers, are ordained to be suppressed,
for the English} thought shame that ever the King
should have proposed them, Let none retire home as
if all were concluded, } for I profess the King’s quar-
relling of the Parliament shews what he grants one
day he recals the next aguin.§ The Committee should
be desired at home not to cause print the late acts now
without the King, seeing he is in the way of publishing
them in his own name. I wayte not what to say anent
this money which has been so delayed. I know not
how, and dare vot say but, they mean reality. The
Lord direct us all, Your humble Servant, A. J.”
“This letter has lain these two days beside me.
The King since has granted the acts. The L.20,000
is sent away. We have renewed the treaty. Give us
strict directions anent demanding Traquair and Ba-
cangquel,|| (whom the Estates in the narrative of their
acts have specified, and in ¢fect condemned with Clerk-
Register and President,) to be sent home to prison to
suffer justice, A direction of this kind would keep
‘us in peace amongst ourselves, while some would either

. ea certainly not have beet to the profit of the covenanting

Pe reaalig Wltaicea a tcoa fa England.
Reng he Kg
de to the King’s disclaiming the Scots Purlianont of June
had never granted « right to that Purtiament to pass

Imalcoqial'e mont le offence was his having compiled
i Seta
his M pime, ‘That unanswernble appeal, from sedition snd hy-

to. ‘sod Cheistinn feeling, contained the truth, and se the
gers reviled it,

—_

ee

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT, $53

over House citing their partial favour to him, more
than to the lower House itself, persewing him for
treason, and thereby premonstrating their inclinations
tw clenge (acquit) him, made on a suddenty all the
lower House to shout with a terrible noise, withdra,
withdraw, which many mistook for draw, draw,* made
the King and Queen, and Lords, presently retire, this
being very like our Glasgow Assembly on the Com-
inissioner's removal. The lower House sat (in the)
afternoon—received the witnesses whom the Lords had
refused—rend their bill of attayndre, by way of act of
Parliament, declaring Strafford a traitor, which, after
twice reading, they will present on Tuesday to the
higher House, whereof many will join to them, and if,
it stick at the King’s refusal, they are to make a de-
‘aration of all to the Commoners of England.” +

Another letter we must quote at some length, as il-
Justrating the real spirit of the criminal processes in
Scotland, raised in the name of the Covenanting Par-
Hament under whose lawless persecution we shall pre-
sently discover Montrose.

“ My Noble Lord,—Albeit I have written with this
same bearer, Merschal, two letters to Humbie, to be
sent to your Lordship, yet for fear of delay or miscar-
tying, I add the third, to shew your Lordship how the

This curious fhet [ have not found mentioned elsewhere. Dalllie in
eis jomenal of Strnfford’s trial, states it thus :—* The Commons on both
House rose in fury with » shout of withdraw! withdraw |
wt got ull to their fest, on with their hats, cocked their beavers
ts ea ‘We all feared it should go to = present tumult,
away in confusion. Strafford slipt away to as ae

fhe Torre» by n hs vr pe

ft Original MS. Not priatod by Hailes.
‘VOL, b %

—

| eel

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 355

a thing withia the power of the Committee, let be of
ours, and for the which ye might all be censured. I
them so really to be incendiaries, a8 (that) ye should
ing intended peace, he would not stand

om this, and from which it is likeliest that he intends
war 5 whether we yielded in that or not war would we
have. [think Ibe one man as sure ta be pursued by
Traquair; and so is yourself thought one of those
whom the King would reserve on Zvaguair’s informa-
tion, who professed to sundry his having challenges of
ftrenson against so many of us. My Lord Kothes is
certainly one, as Traquair oft has vented himself.
Argyle is suspected to be another. Except the fear of
your own hazurd from Zraquair's boasts move you
to send we instructions to pass from him, 1 think nei-
ther Aonowr, nor conscience, nor duty can move any,and I
believe ye love not lo be so boasted. Fye on us, that any
we sh be on these devices for to save the honour
oe the prejudice of the honour of
i dying under the blame of treason
reorder (unless) He be brought to an acknow-
Command us to be resolved, in this pursuit,

all bonsts and threatenings—be diligent with

eyers, I think the Parliament should, by way

of injunction, lay a necessity on Sir Thomas Nicholson
to plead that cause for the Commonwealih. I would
request you, with the greatest secrecy that can be, to
cause fry if all the honours and registers were left in
the castle that ever had been in it, or, if any of them be
if Traquairand the Clerk-Registerhave taken

them away. This were a fact of clear treasan® in the

* Very clear treason, truly, that the High Treasurer and Clork-Re-

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 957

to his army, to whom there is some new vath, of abso-
lute following him, sent down. The lower House
would not condescend that the officers should go down.
This day the Parliament is to fall to our demands, and
to get wx money. God is going on in some hid way
Sor his son's crown. Yt will break forth. I thank God
that keeps my spirit far above all fears, either national
‘or personal." The Lord direct you to be preparing
fora storm. 22d April, (1641,) Your Lordship’s real
servant, A. J.

_ “My Lord Dumfermling has been oft with the King,
‘and is suspected to have been on this plot of the King
professing his intention to come to Scotland.

“ Isend you the copy of our information to some
Parliament men, whieh we read also to the King, bué
whereat some of our number were mightily offended.
Thope they will let you see reason for their standing
toitalso. I t{rust you] will make as much, of this
letter and information, ax (that) I may be confident that
we shall have no directions from the Committee at all
emer mi srceniiiarsee +

This was the third letter which Archibald Johnston
had written that day, to Balmerino and Adam Hep-
burn, full of the most violent malignity against the
King, Traquair, Strafford, and other “ incendiaries,”

‘Yer this letter is deeply imbued with his personal fears, which whet
the edge of hix malignity. A aentonce to be hanged never rung upon
= more cownnily heart than Wariston's, as we shall find in the sequel

+ Original ATS. ‘This is one of the letters selected by Lord Hailes. Bat
the edition of it in his collections is most inaccurate, and in some places
quite unintelligible. The two last clauses aro, in the original,

‘notes. In the Hailes’ Collection they are introduced into the body of
the letter, and in the middle of u sentence, so us to divide and destroy
the sense,

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT, 359

And this was the man who first directed the storm
‘of covenanting persecution against Montrose, because
be suspected that nobleman of the unpardonable offence
of privately corresponding with the Earl,ofjTraquair,
‘on the subject of supporting the King in‘his constitue
tional prerogatives. The Procurator,of the Kirk, it
seems, might indulge to any extent in a secret corre-
spondence, selecting whom he pleased of the,faction!as
parties to that confidence, and yet be responsible to no
one for the most malicious expressions against indivi-
duals, and the most inflammatory and treasonable propo-
sitions against the King and constitution. We must
now quote some other passages from his secret corre-
spondence, which indicate this demagogue’s suspicions
of the conservative party in Scotland, and his desire to
everwhelm them in the ruin he so savagely decreed
against ‘Traquair.

“20th April ‘The greatest opposition by the King
is made against the Act of Oblivion, which he will ei-
ther have to be universal or none at all, or will reserve
an many among us [a3] we reserve of those that are
cited. The Duke of Lennox, in the higher House,
made a large discourse on all these three members. It
és easily known from whom it comes,—my Lord Tra-
qvair—as he professed once to myself, and another
time to Mr Henderson, that he could challenge the
Earl of Rothes of treason; and he both saidfonce to
me, and, as my Lord Rothes knows from others, he
said it also to the King, that before he perished, he

-
tuleroad or misprinted it thus,—" who was aye said to,be}blythe, ax J
ee ‘both the sense, and Wariston’s chaneter-

=

But it is hard to b

—

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. $61

King to accuse any of us of treason will not counsel
him also to lay us fast, as pledges of the Scots army re-
maining quiet. Neither do I sce, if any of us be once
accused of treason, how the persons accused can go on
‘im the treaty, but should go home, and let your Com-
mittee send in their stead whom they please, or do
otherwise as they think fit. Those of us who favoured
‘Traquair may sleep sound and fear no danger, but God
help them that are counted his enemies for sticking steve
by Meir inetructions.* Ihave made a fair offer for myself
‘that I shall be heartily content to be yoked in one chain
with the Earl of Traquair, | and sent to Scotland, and
Jet him aceuse me, and me accuse him, and let the in-
mocent. go free, and the nocent suffer. We have writ
ten information for some Lords, and some of the lower
House, and as I have said to them, so I say and write
to you from the bottom of my heart, that before the
Parliament of Scotland were thus scqffed and boasted
from their pursuit of incendiaries, (whom now, if ever
they may see to be incendiaries,)t I would rather be con-
tent for myself this night to be laid fast in the Gate-house,
and letthem do with me to-morrow what they pleased. I
will say no more, but that it isa shame that any, let be
so many of us, should yet be pleading for them, and
whereas I was never for their blood, but only for their
confession, (fo save the King and kingdom's honour,)

* Which instractions, however, were Wariston's own prompting and

insisting upon.

Sf There Sesotho a the expromlon ‘The boast was &
safe one, for two reasons: 1st, Johnaton knew there was no chance
of belng iaken at his word. 2d, Keven if he had, there was no question
how the secumation would have been determined in Scotland,

This wes Jolnston's mode of lashing others into bis own malevolent
_ Se me
Position, that, if pexce wus to be settled betwixt the
‘gtoundices und lawloss prrocomes should be departed from.

a :

=

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 368

lower House that they saw the

in the Parliament, council, &. to

‘be unlawful, and their sole power of ordination and ju-
tindiction, which is intended to be voiced to-morrow, and

toon thereat; for: removal of Episcopacy out of all his
Majesty's dominions.”

_* 10th March. My Noble Lord,—These are only to
shew. you, besides my letter yesterday with merchant
post, that this day the whole lower House unanimous-
ly, but with four or five contrary voices, has declared

should have no civil places. And then
again,that they shouldhave no voice in Parliament. The

Earl of Cork has proven some foul points of new against »

the lieutenant. There is some commissioners come
from Ireland with report of * © " or protestations
there against the prelates; and at night we gave in
our large demand for unity in religion and govern-
went, all which coming on the King together, and on
asuddainty, you may guess what a mood they would
put him in, I wish his confidence of standing out have
no ground from some at home. We are discharged
to give copies out of our long paper against Episco-
pacy, but receive the other papers with the order of
the lower House. Tell this good news to the honest
man and good, Mr Hery.} Truly, I thiuk them worth
‘$alladiog ‘Montrose and his conservative friends.
ive
3 Relioc, the ninloter who took. charge of the miracle
ot Manyara and who, whoo desired by the spectators to
her,

Pome King Pe
fof the Almighty in these lotters is most impious. Referring ta: the
{prompect of the Scotch Commissioners, and thearmy, being able to leave

A

fi

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 365

SOMME Miia cities cea tayinc ie,

wealth as in private processes of well-paying clients,
request your Lordship to pay them before-hand large-
dy, and to remember we have to do with a man who
will muke no conscience, but think it good policy in
such a streight, by large bucdes (bribes) to lay law-
yers bye, and cause their servants reveal all the secret-
est articles which are against him. Fye on them that
will not be diligent in this. Were not that I must be
one of the primest witnesses in many points laid to his
charge, and 30 cannot be his pursuer, if I were in their
ease, I would have thought it a notable occasion to caite
(manifest) both affection to the cause and country. But,
however,* if [ can win down, I shall do my utmost to
help to prepare things.”

| We shall conclude our extracts from the secret let-
ters of this disgusting demagogue, by quoting a scene
in which he comes in contact with Charles I, It
‘was more than sufficient penance for all the sins, mo-
ral and political, ever proved against that Christian
monarch, that he should have to endure for a moment
the presence and the insolence of Archibald Johnston.

The following is addressed,—* To my loving brother,
Mr Adam Hebrone of Humbie, or to Mr Robert Mel-
drum in his absence.”

“ @ist April [1641.] Loving brother,—Since my
writing my last with this same bearer, and closing it

Thad occasion this morning to speak with
M.,f and after, by Ais advice, with the King, to whom
* Tho farce of this “ however” appt

‘all law, and the most essential principles of ;
Sporialiyptor wander tar Rcaate Fenton and this notice

= -«.-

SECRET MACHINERY OF THK COVENANT. 367.
Cheaper oo much of our money,*

prorogue

met “agai, which he is confident they will do, he will
assuredly go home himself,and settle the business. He
bas said this, and sworn it too, unto us, except some

occur that he knows not of as yet, that
he hopes to get his business ended here. Then he
fell on the act of oblivion. We read the information
whieh I sent to you within a letter to Mr Alexander
Colvin. He raged nt it, and called us jesuitical ; then
he cried and swore, that if we excepted [from the act
of oblivion) any, he would except some also; and this
he declared over and over aguin, and professed his hope
that the Parliament would be of the same judgment.
We answered in reason from our iaadility to pass from
what the Parliament had appointed, and from his
granting of the same already in the treaty.+ I must

sive aa rmch alte pile to yet and be King and, fo tho ake,
‘of preserving the peace of my Reains, 1 have yielded more than Tought.”
pete dormant wae te Bes Comic of 150,000

Tiament says that you must depend upon <b ayo
peel grate w35, foe emake of earn, T lhe whae can do
myself. 1 have no exchequer—my porso ix empty—but [have still «

SECRET MACHINERY OF THE COVENANT. 369

spoken by the Earl of Argyle at his expedition in
Athol, of no less moment than the deposing of the
ing? He confessed he gave # copy of his relation to
the Earl of Montrose, and another to Walter Stewart,
(my man.) to be given to the Earl of Traquair. Wal-
ter was happily rancountered, upon Friday, betwixt
Cokburn'spath and Haddington, by one was sent ex-
pressly to meet him, aud conveyed to Balmerino’s lodg-
ings, at nine o'clock at night, where I was the first man
that came in after him, about some other business with
my Lord. After he denied he had any more papers
than wege in his cloth-bag, there was a leather bag
found in the pannel of his saddle, wherein was a letter
Jrom the King to Montrose, a letter to himself (Stewart)
written from Colonel Cochrane at Neweastle, to Lon-
don, and a signature of the Chamberlanrie of the Bi-
shop of Dunkeld to Mr John Stewart, with a blank for
‘a pension, but not signed by the King’s hand. After
many shifts, being convinced by some notes under his
own hand, which were found in his pocket, (and which
‘with astonishment he swore he thought had not been
in the world,) he was brought to promise plain dealing,
and deponed, as ye will find in the papers sent to
Humby. But I believe he has not dealt truly in all the
points, Specially I doubt the interpretation of A. B.
Pe aed he says are meant the Banders,? and
of the viper in the King’s bosom, by which he means
Canterbury, which J deliece not, 1 will not touch any
more of the particulars, because you will find them
in ‘copies of the papers. Mr John Stewart has
since confessed his knavery in the general, but has not
* 4 & Montrose and those who signed the conservative bond.
Aa

Mie <“/

CHAPTER XII

‘OF MOSTROSE'S CONSERYATITE BOND, AND THE GROUXDS
ALARM FOR THE MONARCHY, ILLUVTRATED YROM ORIGINGL

MANUSCRITTA.

~~

We must now shift the scene to Scotland, and de-
velope the details of a lawless persecution of Montrose,
and other conservative Covenanters there, of which
history only affords a partial and inaccurate view.
Fortunately it happens, that most of the original pa-
pers, relating to the events mentioned in the letter with
which our Jast chapter concludes, have also been pre~
served among the manuscripts of the Advocates’ Li-
brary. They have not hitherto been printed, and his-
torians, who slightly notice the extraordinary scenes to
which they relate, appear never to have consulted the
documents themselves. These shall now be laid before
the reader, with the exception only of the antiquated

“ May 27, 1641.—Mr Robert Murray, minister at
Methven, being come to Edinburgh upon Wednesday
Tast, at night, upon other occasions, was called off the
streets upon Thursday, the 27th day of Muay, instant,
to compear before the Committee of Estates, and hav-
ing before them, was told by their Lordships,
that MrJobn Graham, minister of Auchterarder, being
examined by their Lordships upon the author of his
speeches which he spake before the Presbytery of
Auchterarder, gave up the snid Mr Robert as his au-

|

‘MR ROBERT MURRAY'S DEPOSITION. 378

his Lordship at Perth, or any other place he pleased,
but could not go to Scoon that night. And so the said
Earl came to Margaret Donaldson's in Perth, where the
deponer came to his Lordship, being advertised to come
there to his Lordship. At the first meeting with his
Lordship, my Lord challenged the deponer for his long
absence from him, who excused bimself by reason his
Lordship was taken up with many others that were in
his Lordship’s company, and that he was loath to come
‘except to meet his Lordship in private. Thereafter my
‘Lied says to the deponer, * you were an instrument of
bringing me to this cause, 1 ain calumniated, and slan-
dered as a backslider in this cause, and am desirous to
give you and all honest men satisfaction anent my
carriage therein.’ The deponer then asked his Lordship
why he subscribed the bond that was contrary to the
Covenant. The Earl answered, it was not contrary to
the Covenant, but for the Covenant. The deponer
asked the reason, and why it was done in private, seeing:
any bond that had been for the Covenant might
have beenavowed. About this time Mr Johu Robert-
‘son, minister at Perth, being sent for by the Earl, came
im to them, and then the Earl continuing his dis-
course in presence of the said Mr John, answered,
‘that they saw some few particular men taking same
+ particular courses contrary to the cause and Covenant,
and therefore they behoved to strengthen themselves,
for the maintenance of the cause and Covenant by that
bond. The deponer answered, * how does that appear ?”
‘The Earl answered, * there were some few upon courses
for change of the Government, * for there has been a
motion for deposing of the King, and next for, setling
erage and, that failing, there was another
s seiting a General within the country, as

ae

* ie The monarchwal form of government. s

“MR ROBERT MURRAY'S DEPOSITION, 875

sired the Parliament to have sitten, but not for that end,
but only to have added some to the Committee, because
many able men were left out, who might strengthen the
Committee if they were at it. And the Earl, being ask-
ed again whether or no he had purpose to question
these acts, answered, he had not, because he had sub-
scribed them, and would maintain them with his blood.
‘The deponer remembered little more of any thing pns-
sed that night, but only that the Earl desired the de-
poner might go to Scoon that night, who promised to
be there to-morrow. On the morrow, being Tuesday,
the deponer came to Scoon, and waiting on awhile, i
respect the Earl was speaking with the Earl of Athol
and Mr John Stewart, some of his friends attending
beside, one told the Earl that the deponer was there.
So the Earl cume himself, and entered on the same dis-
course that he and the deponer were on before. The
deponer showed that God had put in his heart a just
auswer thereto. The Earl repeated what he had said
the night before anent the change of Government, where-
tunito the deponer gave this answer, that, ‘ howsoever I
elieve not any such motions to have been, yet I think
if any such has been, they have been conditional, and
not absolute, but only in case of unavoidableextremities,
looking to the weal of the country, and government
thereof in causes of necessity, and that their practice
proves that it was but conditional, if any such was, be-
cause that now, when the King ix content to go on with
them to the treaty, they go on sweetly seeking peace.*

+ This & to wy, the revolutionary party of the Scotch Commission.
ens In London, which was the predominant purty, required the King to
give up all bis royal prerogutives, otherwise Architald Johnwtou would
ferret ut “ old prectiques,” a» a ground for taking them. “ Dethrone
yourself by concomions,” was virtually thelr language, * or we will de-

fa d

gi

Sr ie al

=

|

=

ee.

‘Mi ROBERT MURRAY'S DEPOSITION. 37

or no peace, in token whereof, the Commissioners had
written that their mame would stink if they sought them,
aml the commitice had written back, they should not
pass from them without their advice.* The depon-
er answered, that these might well stand with the con-
dition, because if they found they coufd not obtain them,
then they would pass from them. Then the deponer
demanded the Earl how he could think that his bond
was for the Covenant, since upon the hearing of it
the King had made a halt with the Commissioners of
the treaty. The Earl answered, ‘ the King had got
knowledge of the bond by some speeches of the late
Lord Boyd, which were reported to the Commission.
ers, and by them to the English, and so it came to his
Majesty's cars’ ‘The Earl was desired to come to his
dinner. Then the deponer entreated his Lordship to
nity.| The Earl answered, he loved unity, aud would
clear himself before the Parliament and General As-
sembly. ‘The deponer alleged it would hinder the set-
Hing of the common cause. He answered, he should do
it in such a way as could not wrong the public, because
he would not make bis challenge till the public business
were settled, and then he should put it off himself, and
lay it on those who had calumniated him.t The depon«
er declares that the Earl of Montrose named the Earl

* The committee had written back, in terms of Archibald Johnstan's
setrot orders to thew, for inatructions.
By unity, the Covenanters invariably meant, no opposition to the
‘Movement. ‘Thus welear from Haillie’s own confortions,
‘that ot the commencument of the busines, that Covenanter got the
letter of hls conscience, for the ake of unity.
Thus the too open Montrose had prematurely disclosed his whole
plan to 4 creature of the fiction, who took good care to provent its

=

MONTROSE’S DECLARATION, 379

Further the deponer, being interrogated if he knew of
any other authors of Mr John’s speeches than himself,
answered, that he had heard, from Mr James Forsyth,
that Mr John had said to Mr James, and Mr John
Fyfe, minister at Fowles, that there were five gentle-
men and a minister whom Mr Joha could make his
authors of his speeches to the Presbytery, and declares
that the names of the gentlemen and ministers were
not told to the deponer.

“ ‘This deposition being read to the depouer, he de-
clares the same to be of verity.

“ The last of May 1641. ‘This day the foresnid de-
position being again read to the depouer, and he having
given his oath, declares the same to be true, and of ve~
‘ity in substance and sense, according to his memory,
es he shall answer to God. (Signed) Mr Robert Mur-
ray. Sr. A. Gibsone, I. P.D.”*

On the same day, Montrose himself was subjected
to the interrogatories of this Committee, and his own
statements shall now be laid before the reader, from
the original manuscript.

“The Earl of Montrose being desired to shew what
had passed betwixt his Lordship and Mr Robert Mur
ray, in the speeches had at Perth and Scoon, in the
common business, his Lordship told, that he had said
to Mr Robert that he was wronged by the scandal
raised upon the bond, which was not against the Co-
venant or country. As likewise told Mr Robert that

* Original MS, indorwd, “#7 May. Mr Robert Murry, ble de-
pore se specches hetwist the Earl of Montrose and him,
Swoen and subscribed last May 1661."

EE

“MONTROSR’s DECLARATION. 381

would lay it down at the right door. Being question-
‘ed anent the sixteen who were witnesses to it as good
as himself, declares his Lordship had said there were
some of the particulars to his own knowledge, and that
there were ten or twelve others who would bear him
witness, aud that to them all, some one or other would
be gotten to take them off his hand, or prove them.
‘The Committee appointed the Earl of Montrose to show
his author. Being desired to do it, the Earl of Mon-
trose desired that since the Earl of Argyle was named
by him, which he was forced to do, (he) might express
his knowledge in this business. The Earl of Argyle
answered, that he thought it incumbent to him to clear
himself, and would do it (imme]difately if] the Com-
mittee would oppoint him. ‘The Earl of Argyle, by
his oath wmreguired, declared that [he had never) heard
‘of such a matter, and would make it good that [the
man] who would say that he was the man spoke of de-
posi[ng the King, or] of his knowledge of these bonds,
owas nlinr and a base * * * * * * +

“Phe Earl of Montrose declared that there were
four [reasons for the bond he] had spoken of. The
Jirat, a Dictator, the second, four bonds, the third, can-
toning the country, and the fourth, deposfing the King.)
‘He was loath to speak of the first, because the author

4g, The manuscript is destroyed by dcp in thone places where I have
anjecrurally rppled the ‘vooancies, The lust epithet applied by Are
pyle muse be loft to the imaginution of the reader, The contrast be
"po anarapdeptensengd of Montrow,and the violence of Argyle,
rand reminds ns of what Clarendon says of the batter
‘was a ian endued with all the faculties of eraft and dissimulation
Salsas ocentty vo oe ore ietgss to wffeet, und bad, in respect
of hile extate and authority, a very great interest in Scotlwnd; yet he had
‘no rmartin! qualities, vor the reputation of more courage thin Yarolent
‘and imperious persons, whilst they meet with no opposition, ure used to
haves”— Mist, ¥. 92.

MONTROSE AND 1OKD LINDSAY, 385

indeed obeyed the charge, aud compeared, and did abide
bby the speeches, saying to Argyle, My Lord, I heard
‘you speak these words in Athol, in presence of a great
many people, whereof you are in good memory, Argyle
auswers, saying, while he was in Athol. he found the
‘Stewarts there against the subscribing of the Covenant,
to whom he said, this covenant was not against the
King, but for Religion and Liberties of the kingdom, and
if they would not subscribe the same, it might breed
themselves both peril and skaith ; for if the body of the
country would not go one way, but be divided agninst
themselves, it were an highway to bring in the English-
‘man into the land, to dethrone the King. and bring the
fobles under servitude und slavery. ‘This he remem-
bered to have said, but denied any further.”

However apt the covenanting committee were to
adopt rumours and private conversations as grounds
of criminal process against any who opposed them, and

their articles of war inade it death to speak
against the King or his authority, their inquisitorial
Figour seems not for an instant to have been directed
against Argyle. No sooner, however, had John Stew-
art put his hand to the information he gave Montrose,
than he, Stewart, was sent to prison. There we1ustleave
that unfortunate gentleman until we develope another
scene in this drama of covenanting justice.

Lord Lindsay was placed in an awkward predica-
ment. Montrose had affirmed that he named the Earl
of Argyle as the person who was to be Dictator, and
Argyle had volunteered bis great oath that allthis was a
foul calumny. The covenanting committee were per-
plexed and armoyed, for Lindsay was a leader of the fac-
tion.” Yet Montross was not to be easily discredited ;

* This was John tenth Lord Lindsay of Byres, His patent ax Earl

VoL. I. ab

=. i.

—

MONTROSE AND LORD LINDSAY. 387

nferred as much as the Earl of Argyle was the man
‘meant by (him:) but because, in the circumstance of
the discourse, there may be other men concerned whom
the Earl Montrose was loath to name, he desired uot
to speak any further in it.*

“ The Earl of Montrose declared that the Lord Lind-
‘say, [he Montrose] falling with him upona regret of the
course of business in this country, and that some were
crying up the Earl of Argyle too much, whereupon the
‘Lord Lindsay auswered, that such a man speaking to the
same purpose, told that the Romans, when their affairs
‘were at a low ebb, made choice of one to be a Dictator,
that the command should be in one man’s person, such
aman as had following and power, and to his Lord-
‘ship's memory the Lord Lindsay named the Eurl of
Argyle to be the man pointed at, and that the discourse
inferred so much ; and withal extreated the Lord Lind»
say would not think any thing of it, because it was but
‘upon suspicions and jealousies.

“The Lord Lindsay asked the Earl of Montrose,
whether or not he said there was any such intention to
make a Dictator, who answered, that he does not say
that the Lord Lindsay said it positive, but recitative,
or

“ The Earl Montrose and Lord Lindsay being re-
moved, the Earl of Argyle desired to speak, who told,
that since his Lordship’s name was mentioned in the
sane, he desired that he might be made clear of any
thing may reflect upon him ; and, next, he thought it
fittest that each of the noblemen should set down the
discourse (that) passed, and then the Committee might

# Montrose, howurer, proceeds in his declaration, probably from haw
ing bees unged.

“MONTROSE AND LORD LINDSAY. 389

that, to his bert memory, the Lord Lindsay named the
Earl of Argyle to be the man pointed at; but howso-
ever, the whole drift of the discourse did infer s0 much,
as the Earl of Montrose did conceive the same.”*

Lord Lindsay's declaration appears to have been as
follows :

“4th June 1641, ‘The Lord Lindsay dtclares, that
at Edinburgh, in a discourse betwixt the Earl of Mon-
trose and him, the Eurl of Montrose asked how busi-
ness went, For answer whereunto, the Lord Lindsay
sald, he had entered upon no business since he came,
nor had not spoke with any particulars since his Lord-
ship's coming to Edinburgh ; but did relate some dis«
course made to him by some persons, which was in sub-
stance as follows. One grief was a regret of the divi-
sions and jealowsies of this country ; another was that
it was a pity that we who are Christian, and have not
only our liberties, lands, wives and children, but also
our religion in question, cannot agree amongst our
selves, whilst the Romans, who are but Ethnic, when
their affairs came in hazard, they would agree among
themselves, and so fur yield one to another, that they
would make one of themselves to be Dictator, to have
the sole power over them; yea, private enemics, when
they were employed in public affairs, did lay down their
private quarrels, and join in hearty union so long as
the public was in question. And declares that neither
the man, who made this discourse, named the Earl of
Argyle, or any other man ; neither does the deponer re=
member that ever he named the Earl of Argyle, or

© Original MS. Signed,“ Montrose.—Camailis, Balmerino, Nuper.*

MONTROSE’S PRINCIPLES. 391

CHAPTER XIII.

IN WHICH MONTROSE SPEAKS FOR HIMSELF.

Tue original documents contained in the last three
chapters were unknown to Clarendon and Hume. Con-
sequently these great historians had not the means of
protecting Montrose against the calumnies of subse-
quent writers, who, in equal ignorance of the details
now disclosed, have assumed to his prejudice a very
different theory, from what is suggested by these do-
cuments, of the motives and circumstances which in-
fluenced his defection from the Covenanters. The se-
cret correspondence, in 1640-41, betwixt the Procura-
tor of the Church, and the clique (for it was no more)
of covenanting lords, lairds, and lawyers, who held
sway in Edinburgh under the command of Argyle, to-
gether with the private records of their inquisitorial
examinations, tell thus much of the story so minutely
and curiously, and bring so completely under our view
the dramatis persone of that hitherto darkling chap-
ter of Montrose’s career, that instead of weaving a nar=
rative from such materials, and consigning the graphic
originals to the obscurity of an appendix, I have thought
it best to give them verbatim in the text. Indeed it is
the principal plan and object, throughout these Illus-
trations of Montrose and the Covenanters, to produce
the hitherto hidden details and narrative, contained in
the private records of the Covenanting Goverument, in
VOL. I.

-—

MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES, 393

and his present critical position. We have seen how,
at the close of the year 1637, he was persuaded, by
Rothes and his clerical agitators, to take a public and
prominent part against the policy of Laud. Iu the year
1638, we find him conspicuous in the memorable As-
sembly which destroyed the hierarchy, and usurped the
functions of Government in Scotland. The year 1639
discovers Montrose at the head of a convenanting force,
opposed in arms to the anti-covenanters in Scotland,
carried by the military excitement so congenial to his
disposition, but, withal, merciful in his use of fire and
sword against bis loyal countrymen, even to a degree
that called forth the murmurs and disapprobation of the
‘most conscientious, civilized, and accomplished of the
covenanting clergy. ‘The anti-monarchical propositions
pressed in the General Assembly held that same year,
immediately after the treaty of Berwick, seem first to
have awakened Montrose to the important question,
what was to be the limit of this revolution in Scotland,
and where the precise point at which covenanting de+
mands were to cease, and the spirit of loyalty and
obedience to the monarchical government, to revive.
Accordingly, in this Assembly, Montrose argued against
the new impetus, proposed in the demands that the
most important prerogatives of the Crown should be
transferred to the Parliament, From the principle of
this opposition he never swerved. Archibald Jobn-
ston himself tells us that, in the Parliament of 1640,—
“ Montrose did dispute against Argyle, Rothes, Bal-
merino, and myself; because some urged, that, as long.
as we had a King, we could not sit without him; and
it was answered, that to do the less was more lawful
_ than to do the greater.” In that same year, Montrose
.

few alarmists of the year 1637, zeal for

been untainted by one anti-monarchi-

» and the dismay of such, on discovering
may be better understood than deseribed.

n was Lord Napier. That excellent

ee eaaniad been renred by his father,

nti-p cal writer of his day, (who con-

his Parortall discovery of the Logarithms

ag in comparison with his exposition of the

) in all due abhorrence of the Pope, and

in more than due dislike of prelatic digni-
power,* but at the same time so loyally

y be consigned while yet a youth into the hands of

VL, who, on bis deathbed, recommended him to
Charles," as one “ free of partiality or any fuc-

"And accordingly we find that Napier,

J and after the excited period when he too
in covenant with a masked faction, was busied
with his favourite subject, and one which we are now
j ieaealier ies) the, very entipades of covenanting
namely, “ elaborate discourses” to prove the
saaaaes Binge. Montrose, again, was educated

a Napa» views onthe sult of plate wer ia i MS.
Tntroduetion, p, 07. Montrow's

the effects of both. Thirdly, I
ne arguments and false positions main~

» to dispose and direct private endea-
ends, and to unite and incorporate the
into one body politic, that with joint

ind abilities they may the better advance
d. ‘This sovereignty is a power over the

frrarily,sbutiit ts thereby Wousded, and!thé

———

MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES. 399

in any man’s conecit that hath common sense; in speech
it is incongruity, and to attempt it in act is pernicious.

“ Having in some measure expressed the nature of
supreme power, it shall be better known by the actual
practice of all nations, in all the several sorts of govern~
ment, as well Republics as Monarchies.

“ The people of Rome, (who were masters of policy,
gud war too, and to this day are made patterns of both,)
being an Estate popular, did exercise withont controul-
ment or opposition all the fore-named points essential
to supreme power. No law was made but by the
people ; and though the Senate did propone and advise
a law to be made, it was the people that gave it sanc-
tion, and it received the force of Jaw from their com-
mand and authority, as may appear by the respective
phrases of the propounder,—quod faustum feliaque sit,
cobis populoque Romano velitis jubeatis. The people
used these imperative words, esto sunéo ; and if it were
refused, the Tribune of the people expressed it with a
vefo. The propounder or adviser of the law was said
rogare legem, and the people jubere legem. The elec~
tion of officers was only made by the people, as appears
by the ambitious buying and begging of suffrages, so
frequent among them upon the occasions. War and
peace was ever concluded by them, and never denoun-
ced but by their Fecidles with commission from them,
They, only, gave grace and pardon, and for the last
refuge, delinquents, and they who were wronged by
the sentence of judges and officers, provocabant ad pa-

“So it was in Avuens, and to this day among the
Swissens and Grissons, the Estate of HoLtanb, and
all Estates popular. In Vewice, which is a pure Aris-
tocracy, laws, war, peace, election of officers, pardon

MONTROSH'S PIUNCIPLES, sor

persuade the arbitrary with reflexion on their
knowing that the exercise thereof shall be
them, whereby they shall be able quickly to
theie ends, robbing thereby the people of their
I King of the people's love due to him, and
honour and reputation of wisdom.* The effects
government are religion, justice, and
love of the subjects towards their
in whose hearts he reigns,—durableness and
) against foreign invasions and intestine sedi-
andsecurity to King and people. Theef-
at prince's power too far extended is tyranny, from
if he be ill, if he be good, tyranny or a fear
of it from them to whom he hath intrusted the manag-
_ ing of public affairs. The effect of the royal power re~
| strained is the oppression and tyranny of subjects—
] | the most fierce, insatiable, and insupportable tyranny
i the world—where every man of power oppresseth
| thie neighbour, withoutany hope of redress from a prince
despoiled of his power to punish oppressors. The people
under an extended power are miserable, but most miser=
able under the restrained power. The effects of the
former may be cured by good advice, satiety in the
Prinee, or fear of infamy, or the pains of writers, or by
| some event which may bring a prince to the sense of
‘his errors, and when nothing else can do it, seeing the
prince is mortal, patience in the subject is a sovereign
and danyeriess remedy, who in wisdom and duty is a:
liged to tollerate the vices of his prince. as they do
‘storms and tempests, and other natural evils which are
+.°

— MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES. 403

| on ecesamnamdl “But there is a fair and justifi-
‘subjects to procure a moderate, govern-

“Befat, incumbent to them in duty, which is to endea-
and just Liberties, (the mat-

ter on which the exorbitancy of « prince's power doth

| work) which being secured, his power must needs be
| temperate and run in the even channel. * But, it may
‘be demanded, * how shall the people's just liberties be
preserved if they be not known, and how known if they -

_ be not determined to be such 2° It is answered, the laws
contain them, and the Parliaments (whieh ever have been
‘the bulwarks of subjects’ liberties in monarchies) may
advise new laws, against emergent occasions which pre-
judge their liberties ; and so leave it to occasion, and
‘not prevent it by foolish haste in Parliaments, which
breeds contention, and disturbance to the quiet of the
state. Aud if Parliaments be frequent, and rightly
what favourile councillor or statesman dare

or mislead a King to the prejudice of a sub-

jeet’s liberty, knowing he must answer it upon the peril
‘of his head and estate at the next ensuing Parliament,t

temperate historians huve indulged in the gros calumny, that
tuicomeciove that humanity fs the moxt distinguished

strribute ofan herolcal chameter.” Malcotm Laing, We belieww that
ja more than the truth of himself, when he sald—In

we here from an unpublished manuseript of his
owt hie wurderers on the eve of bis exccntion=
lay it ane to keop my soldiors buck frow spoiling and
the country; and for bloodshed, if it could have teen: there

‘authority, Baillie, ‘very expedi=
stele humanity) of that generows Eadie
coe ‘has clearly a reference to the constitution and proceed.

{

‘the hed and 0 far are they from contre
otions, that there is nothing good or
is not just so for the other;® if their
rs be divers, and never so little ec
king inclineth to tyranny, or that
ity.—if they be contrary, it is mere
loyalty. To the 4th: The King’s
the subjects’ privilege are so far from
that the one can never stand unless sup=
er. For the Sovereign being strong,

a of his lawful power and preroga-
to protect his subjects from once
a Seagal dag oS os

--MONTROSE’s PRINCIPLES, 407

lity; your houses decayed, either by merit or his grace
aud favour are repaired, without which you full in con-
tempt; the people, jealous of their liberty, when ye
deserve best, to shelter themselves, will make you
shorter by the head, or serve you with an ostracism.
If thelr first act be against kingly power, their next
act will be against you ; for if the people be of a fierce
nature, they will cut your throats, (as the Switzers did
of old), you shall be contemptible, (as some of antient
houses are in Holland, their very burgomaster is the bet=
ter man ;) your honours—life—fortunes stand at the
discretion of a seditious preacher. And you, ye meancr
people of Seotland, who are not capable of a republic,
for many grave reasons, why are you induced by spe-
cious pretexts, to your own heavy prejudice and detri-
ment, to be instruments of other's ambition ? Do ye
‘not know, when the monarchical government is shaken,
the great ones strive for the garland with your blood
and your fortunes ? whereby you gain nothing, but, in-
stead of a race of kings who have governed you two
thousand years with peace and justice, and have pre-
served your liberties against all domineering nations,
shall purchase to yourselves vultures and tigers to relgn
over your posterity, and yourselves shall endure all
those miseries, massacres, and proscriptions of the tri-
mimvirate oF Rome—the kingdom fall again into the
hands of one, who of necessity must, and for reason of
‘state will, tyrannize over you. For kingdoms acquired
by blood and violence nre by the same means enter-
tained. And you great men, (if any such be among you so
blinded with ambition), who aim so high as the crown,
do you think we are so for degenerate from the virtue,
valour, and fidelity to our true and lawful Sovereign,

Ee

| -MONTROSE'S PRINCIPLES, 440

“ Now, Sir, you have my opinion concerning your
desire, and that which I esteem truth set down nakedly
for your use, not adorned for public view. And if zeal
for my Sovereign, and Country, have transported me
a little too far, I hope you will excuse the errors pro-
ceeding from so good a cause of

Your humble servant,

“ Monrose.”

‘This is a remarkable letter to have been written by
one recorded in our modern histories as “ destitute of
either public or private principle.” If the sentiments of
Montrose, at that critical period before the King’s visit
to Scotland in 1641, were such as are recorded in the
foregoing private letter, can it be true that the advice
he was constrained to offer secretly to his sovereign
Was unprincipled, violent, and unpatriotic ? That
the letter was written by Montrose, we have on the
authority of a transcript (hitherto unpublished and un-
noticed) in the handwriting of Wodrow himself, the
well known champion of the Church of Scotland. The
transeript is not addressed, nor dated, but the tenor

*MrBrodio, Thissuthor, in the prefice to his History, bos many severe
comments upon Me Hume, for his predisposition unfuyourahle to a calm
inguiry after truth, and being impatient of that unwearied research,
which, never satisfied while any source of infurmation remains wnex=
plored, oF probubility not my ‘weighed, with unremitting industry sift
‘said collates,”—and. for allowing " his narrative to be directed by his
preditections, und overlooking the materials from whieh it oughe wo have
bees constructed.” Tn a corresponding degree, our Historiographer pax
srades his own researches" in the Advocates’ Library at Edinburgh,” te.
fe. Why, then, did Mr Brodie not coustract his character of Montrose
from such materials ns the above lotter, and various origival zmanuvcripts
weave yet to produce, of which Mr Brodie would seem co have been
‘in total ignorunce,although they were equally open to his resvarches in
the collection of Manuseripts in the Advocates’ Library ?

410 MONTROSE AND THE COVENANTERS.

proves that the letter must have been written before the
great civil war broke out in 1642, and indeed before
‘Montrose’s imprisonment and persecution by the Co
venanters, during thelast seven months of the year, 1641.
The letter is also curiously identified by the fact, thit
some of the sentences are the very same as some that
occur in Lord Napier’s manuscripts, now first produced
from the Napier charter-chest. Its most probable date
is the close of the year 1640, before the conclusion of
the Treaty of London, the very period when Montrose
and his conservative friends held those private consul-
tations, on the state of the times and the perilous posi-
tion of the monarchy, which will be disclosed in the
following chapter.

_

‘THE CONSERVATIVES oF 1640, 411

CHAPTER XIV.
‘THE CONSERVATIVES OF 1040,

OF Montrose’s domestic life and habits few or no
anecdotes are to be discovered. Indeed it is very plain,
from the transactions we have illustrated, that since his
return from his youthful travels, he could have enjoyed
very little peace and quiet as a private individual.*

* In the Napier charter-cheat there ix mdeod which bears that—
* We, James Erle of Montrois, Lord Graeme and Mogdok, for the
special love and favour qubilk we haitf und bear to
Beatrix Greme, our lawful sister, and for the better advancing
‘sald Lady Bentslx to une honorable maronge, according to
and fe’ —obligon himself and his heirs to secure to the
aiid Beatrix the sum of thousand marks, far tochor. This con-
dition, however, is added: * always, likens we ballf gevin
tod grantit thir presenta npan this special provision and condition, and.
Bentrixy—as God

forbid, —to dafyle her body, or join herself in roareage with any person.
‘without our special adyyse and consent, then and in those cases, or uther
of them, thir prewnts to be null.” ‘This deed ix xigned by Montrose
himself, “at Auld Montrols, the 27th day of Morche 1639,"—the very
Hime when ho wns in all the bustle and cxeltement of preparing for his
march upon Aberdoen.—<Sve befire, p. 22.

‘of her illustrious brother’s solicitnde, Lady Beatrix, became
the wife of Dwrid, third Lord Maierty, and fairly won her twenty thou
aund tnathe

‘The following letter was kindly communicated to me by Mies Graham
‘of Fintry, who in in possession of the original. Its date rofers to « sub=
‘sequent period of Montrose’s history, but we may give it hero; it is wd-
dressed to James Graham of Crago, younger ta iat Graham of

peepee

be so much niniss, and s0 many abuses committed, touching my

Old Monitrois, (ax Robert Grwme in the same will show
ngth,) as Emust intreat you to take the pains to zoe and

‘in auch ane way ns you shall think most Gt. For

sof 1.900,000, which they had
cen before, at least as being given or paid
‘new reasons must be found for another

his Majesty to go into Scotland ; and, ac~
ajesty went into that kingdom, and

of him; amongst whom the Marquis
‘made Duke.”*

‘peut to have entertained no doubt whatever

Wey continue in them. Your part uth been such as you

—

THE CONSERVATIVES OF 1640, 415

‘to transpire, and, consequently, we may be certain that
they were such as by no arts of democratical iniseon-
struction could be made a handle of public agitation,
‘tither against the King or his loyal adherents. What
renders thy scene still more singular is, that, Sir Tho-
‘tas Hope was the son of his Majesty's Advocate ; and
Balmerino was the very man whom that same Lord
Advocate had brought under the King’s mercy a few
years before. To assist these midnight inquisitors, a
third is sent for, one Edward Edgar, who, from a bur=
gess and bailie of Edinburgh, had been elevated into
2 committee-man, and who appears to have been one
of those subservient cyphers, the use of which were to
give numerical value to such committee digitals as
‘Balmerino and Hope. ‘This upon the present, as upon
various other occasions, was the whole representation
of the Parliament, Government, Religion, Libertics,
Laws, and unanimous covenanting zeal, of Scotland.

All the arts of intimidation, or persuasion, employed
to obtain such information from Walter Stewart as
best suited their purpose, it is of course impossible to
koow. But even in their own secret records of the mat-
ter, which shall presently be laid before the reader, une-
“quivocal symptoms may be detected af the working
of such arts upon the weak mind of Walter Stewart,
Who seems to have unbosomed himself, both of teuth
and falsehood, under the influence of no. slight alarm
for his personal safety. After all, however, his infor-
mation only amounted to this, that he had been occa-
siounlly at supper, sometimes in Montrose’s house, and
sometimes in Napier’s, in company with Sir
Stirling and Sir Archibald Stewart, and that he had,
upon those oceasions, been intrusted with some instruce
tions to Traquair at Court, the object of whieh was to
induce the King to come in person to Scotland, and,

| THE CONSERVATIVES oF 1640. “7

rent, a containing all the facts and the real state of the
ease. I shall quote the entire passage, that it may be
eamede rey te nee details with yotiicts we
are fortunately enabled to illustrate the subject of Mon-
neta defection from “ the Cause.”

_“ The Scots,” says Mr Laing, “ in consequence of a
solemn, obligation inserted in their covenant, to abstain
from separate, or divisice measures, had hitherto pre-
served a degree of union perhaps unexampled, to which
they were principally indebted for their past success.
But for an opportune discovery that union was almost
dissolved. Impatient of a superior, and conscious of
military talents unmarked by his countrymen, Montrose
was unable to brook the pre-eminence of Argyle in the
senate, or of Lesly in the field. His expectations of
the supreme command were disappointed ; and, at
Berwick, the returning favour of his sovereign had
regained a nobleman, originally estranged from the
Court by neglect, and detached from the Covenant
by secret disgust. His correspondence with Charles
was detected during the treaty of Rippon ; and a bond,
or counter association, was discovered, to which he had
procured the subscription of nineteen peers. The
Committee of Estates were averse to division, and dis-
posed to rest satisfied with the surrender and formal
renunciation of the bond ; conciliatory measures were
disappointed by a report, which Montrose had propa-
gated, injurious to Argyle. Stewart, commissary or
judge of the consistorial court of Dunkeld, was pro-
duced as his author, according to whose information,
Argyle, in the presence of the Earl of Athol, and eight
others his prisoners, declared that the Estates had con-
sulted divines and lawyers, and intended to proceed to
the deposition of the King. An allegation so little re-
concileable with his characteristical prudence was sus-

.

=.

eV"

THE CONSERVATIVES OF 1640. 419

glossing over the fact that Argyle and his subservient
‘agitators would brook no independent, enlightened, or
in their councils, The terms of Mon-

‘trose's bond, which this author had not seen, would
have informed him that it was caused by the divisive
taeasures of the “ prime Covenanters” themselves, act-
img against the professed spirit and objects of that
anomalous deed of national obligation, out of which
they were carving their fortunes to the ruin of their
country. Moreover, Mr Laing has assumed the mean-
‘est motives, for Montrose’s opposition, which he could
pot prove, and, in reference to the leasing-making of
the unfortunate Commissary, und the whole merits of
the case against “ the Plotters,” he appears to have
een totally uninformed in point of fact. The true
version of all these matters, which the documents ale
ready produced have in some degree elucidated, we
proceed still further to develope from original manu-
scripts. It will be found that the secret history of
the fate of Stewart of Ladywell leaves no stain upon
‘the character of Montrose, but casts a dark shadow
upon that of Argyle; that the evidence extorted
from Walter Stewart, in so far ax it was made the
pretext for sending Montrose and his friends to pri-
son, were falsehoods of the most pucrile nature, and
moreover, were completely refuted, and sifted from
the truth, by the separate depositions upon oath of
Montrose, Napier, Keir, and Blackhall, even before
their incarceration; that, nevertheless, in the pro-
section of their design agalnst Montrose, the co-
government proceeded upon the single tes-

timony of Walter Stewart, a man neither of honesty nor
courage, while they treated with contempt theconcurring
testimony of four of the most honourable and highest

.

—

(poop théiray thoy: would gtva'Cemmay

‘was his. While these thoughts and discourses
ined among them, Lieutenant Walter
to the town, who was repairing to court
Whereupon it was thought

mploy him to deal with the Duke of Len-
‘Stuart, and one that was oft at court they

‘It will be observed that some of the expres-
are the same with some used by Montrose in hig

MONTROSE'S ADVICE TO CHARLES, 493.

was that Montrose and his friends were sent to prison,
solong. Yet we are told, by the noble

of * Some Memorials of Jolin Hampden,” in re-
tothia very imprisonment,—* Montrose had been
confinement, by the Parliament of Scotland,
complication of proved offences of the highest
tort,”—such is Lord Nugent's fiat on the subject:
t zi had been corresponding with an unprincipled
_ violent faction in Scotland,—a strange letter from the
_ Earl of Montrose, whose ambitious designs were now
generally had been discovered,"—such is

| Mr Brodie's, But what if this letter, here so con-
| -veniently characterized as “ strange,” contained the
| purest and soundest advice, conveyed in the noblest
expressions? Mr Brodie intimates that the disco-
very of this strange letter was a cause why the Com-
mons of England so vehemently resisted the sudden
resolution formed by Charles of visiting Scotland in
the year 1641. We know not precisely to what let-
ter our historiographer refers, and doubt much if he
himself had any precise knowledge on the subject. But
are we to believe the simple statement, of the mo-
tives and objects of Montrose and his friends, left by
‘Lord Napier in his private notes, or the wild and vio-
ent theories of modern party writers? Was the secret
correspondence, of “ the Plotters” with their Sovereign,
unprincipled, violent, and strange, or did it breathe the
very soul of lofty integrityand disinterested patriotiam?
Let the original draft, also in the handwriting of this
Lord Napier, of a letter,—now for the first time brought
‘to light—and which we may well believe influeneed
that sudden and hitherto unaccountable determina-
tion of Charles, against every remonstrance of the Lords
and Commons of England, to place himself in the hands

=

to any other. If you send

on “ laicer bebe he shall neither

MONTROSE’S ADVICE TO CHARLES I 427

estate, and stirs up troubles : The people of the western
parts of the world could never endure it any long time,
and they of Scotland less than any.* Hearken not to
Rehoboam's councillors,—they are flatterers, and there-
fore cannot be friends,—they follow your fortune, and
Jove not your person,—pretend what they will, their
hasty ambition and avarice make them persuade au
absolute government, that the exercise of the same [may
‘be put up] on them, and then they know how to get
wealth, — +

wprereereerr eee eeeeeeee

“ Practice, Sir, the temperate government. It fit-
teth the humour and disposition of the nation best. It
‘is most strong, most powerful, and most durable of any.
It gladdeth the heart of your subjects, and then they
erect a throne there for you to reign,—jirmissimum
imperium quo obedientes gaudent, Let your last act
there be the settling the Offices of State upon men of
known integrity and suflficiency.} Take them not upon

* Compare with Hamilton's letter, p. 247,
+ There is here w hiatus of ubout two linos in the manuscript, which
appears to have suffered from fire. The blank may bo thus supplied from
carrespoading in the letter of Montrose, given in Chapter
XIT—" robbing thereby the people of their wealth, the King af the peo-
ple lowe sue to him, am of the honour and reputation of windom.”
at ‘The Scotch Commisiouers of the treaty in London wore at this
time making the most outrageous and insulting demands upon the
‘King’s prorogutive and personal freedom. ‘They demanded that be
Heat We Pies Wold frequraty tel foride i Sobtad, and chat about
their persons and the Queen's should be placed snch as were not
‘obnasious to the faction. In the King's answers, which
‘are exceudingly temperate und dignifivd, there is a coincidence of
‘expression with see shove letier, His Majesty most justly observes,

|

===

‘MONTROSE'S ADVICE TO CHARLES 1. 42g

both. Nor by love or virtue, most men being wicked
and inclined to hate. There must be a eoactive power
to force obedience to laws and just commandements.
To weaken then this power is to dissolve society, over-
throw government, and introduce confusion and dis-
order.

“ 3. It is made weak when it is restrained too far
within, and, it is weak also when it is extended be-
yond, the true bounds: (like a strong signet of gold,
which may be extended to a great length and breadth,
to almost an airy thinness, but thereby is extremely
weakened.) It is onlystrongand durable when it is tem-

“ 4 The extent of kingly power is the step next to
tyranny, if the prince be bad,—if good, to the tyramy
of courtiers,—the restraint to anarchy, (whether he be
good or bad,) and the ¢yranny and oppression of men
of power in the kingdom. The tyranny of subjects,—
being the most fierce, insatiable, and unsupportable ty-
ranny,—procureth that solecism of state, a miserable
people under a good and just king.

“ 5. Sovereign power is a sacred thing,—not to be
defined, bounded, nor disputed of by subjects,—indeed
not to be meddled with at all by them—they wound
it though they touch it fever so tenderly.

"6G. Subjects ought only to endeavour the security of
their own Laws and Liberties, whereby the sovereign
power, without their endeavours, by necessary conse
quence, must run in its own true and natural channel,
and keep a temperate course, wherein consisteth the
joint happiness of King and subject. If it be short
and restrained, it is good for both that it be enlarged
till it meet with the subjects liberties and privilege, and
there it ought to sist, for that is the true limits of it;

=

LETTER FROM CHARLES I, TO NAPERK. 431

memorable occasion,* are very remarkable, and tend to
confirm the idea that his Majesty had received the let-
ter, and that its contents had made a powerful impres-
sion on bis mind. It would have rendered our evi-
dence, of the nature and principles of Montrose and Na-
pier's plotting, very complete, could the letter have been.
discovered which Walter Stewart was bringing from
Charles to Montrose, on the 4th of June 1641.
Another letter, however, from his Majesty to Lord
Napier, dated only about a fortnight earlier than the
day on which Walter Stewart was seized, had reached
its destination in safety, and probably without the
knowledge of the tyrannical Committee. ‘This appears
from the original, which has been preserved with the
other manuscripts in the Napier charter-chest. Let us
see then in what dark terms Charles I. “ tampered”
with this “ wnprincipled violent faction in Scotland,”

“To our right trusty and well beloved Councillor, the
Lord Naper.

“Crarces R.

“ Right trusty and well beloved, We greet you well.
Having fully resolved to repair unto that our kingdom,
for holding of the parliament the 15th of July next—
that we may satisfy our good subjects of our real in-
tentions to settle all matters in a peaceable manner, as
may most conduce for the weal of our kingdom,—so,
having of late written unto our council there to meet
and attend at Edinburgh to receive our further diree-
tions, we have likewise, out of the former experience

* The King’s speech will be found im Rushworth, Franklin, and in
‘Balfour's Annals,

COVENANTING TACTICS, 433

CHAPTER XV.

‘THE CARE AGAINST THE PLOTTENS,

ThovaH some of our modern historians sneer at the
authority of Dr Wishart, while they rely upon contem-
poraries infinitely more questionable, that loyal clergy-
aman was perfectly accurate in saying, that what-
ever tales the Covenanters framed to answer their si-
nister purposes, they wanted not proper instruments,
always at hand, to spread them among the people. The
noble author who, in our own times, so sententiously
remarks, that prudential motives alone prevented *
the Scots from publickly arraigning Montrose, is only
right in sense he did not intend, namely, that the
faction having no case, in law or equity, against him
whom they found 50 “ very hard to be guided,” pru-
dently betook themselves to the meanest arta of tyran-
nical democracy. The same syste: of unprincipled agi-

Lond Nugent, in bis work entitled, “ Some Memorials of Johm
Usa Pa Fn (n charactoriatic of which ix this cha-
St Shenoy howe rodiow opt was neve stayed by oy
ements he Reverted i. jos eftatgun orchaens:
‘any man wh ix objvets of ‘or obstruc-

ted the views of his high-rcaching umbition,”)—records, ns matter of
‘been thrown into confinement by the
eae uaiacibcateds kr + svepiianbn ot preanh epee ine
highest wnt. He had the year befare engaged himself in a slot to be:
texy the covenanting army, with whon he was serving, because he had

il
i
i

YB gland t00; who in the meaner arts of de-
ceetewee

bes
seg eit atad dean,
wotsbrtales

left i,
sain

‘be more j examined
Brodie adopt it, und gloat over it,

+ MONTROSE 281 TH OTEK aSTiRS

me memsmapo of arrve mmc Hamizea was cha-
ess ¢ Mame * Fur ve sini now dragto
SSE oem we wes ee = emating faction
* Seni gen secre ame emt acme modern histo-
SR eemseres on ce research, have
$ eur sven dunweme. We will prove that
== * ossmce cocrsseemeser nx crue. the faction
et ae sxesien: remem u snow. wae the abcurd in-
eons. c Vian Seswar. wor wind Montrose had
AME 2 mk TG Be int ~ eemeral alarm,”
mem = = aan to uae ~ Soe” ct wae purpoly
Smee wos Gemaees are of nse Cavemanters, who,
see comeemex Te: Tom amc al that was illus
SSF € + = De asec ney chemecives extorted,
ms am cues al tt wa erscical inflam
2. mm mae

sure wna we gree Som che original ma-

te lames cE ste Lord Balme-

i Wi FR Is cegudation at
2 Secon auc. chur his errand
S mcier-nsuws Lami w a petition.
Ly ibcmrse a Broxmoath with
~ ster: answers. that he spake
wt Auucene 1 msmcombic space. but spoke
Lia: ait Sumy 2segt aews af court, A paper
“= bau Vniss Gley Were m2 examination, written
wt ue Leunnanc-Ccimels se head, containing let-
ee “Ue Sams WR Je Wis desired to explain. De-

Mesum Lamy.

SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT, 441

-elares, that by the D, in the second line, is understood
Duke of Lennox.* Being asked bow he came to
| this paper, declares, he got [it] at London.
ng interrogated who gave him the purposes con-
therein, answered, he behoved to have time to
his memory. Being inquired anent a letter
4 to him by Colonel Cochrane, who was the
thereof to him, answers, it was Major Cun<

i Major to Dundas’s regiment. Being likewise
_ interrogated what was the purpose meant in the letter
_ which was mystical, answered that it was something
concerning the Palsgrave, and that it was that if the
Earl of Montrose should not be gotten written for by
his Majesty to come up, (which is understood by the
jewell,) that the Colonel himself may be written for,
and did expone the letter at the foot thereof under his
hand. Being examined upon another paper, written
with his own hand, wherein there are the letters M,
whereby he declares is meant the Earl of Montrose, by
‘the letter L, is meant the King’s Majesty, by the letter
1, is meant the Earl of Traquair, and by the letter K,

| # Thix must be the paper alluded to by Sir Thomas Hope, aud which he
ta AA Ae esi a
‘manuscripts. Spalding, however, eays,that among Stewart's
oa there was n curious obscure ploce written after the form follow-
+ * Toll Lif G and Bho disbanded, the Parliament may be holden,
‘Aund Rminy be cut off by A, B,C) and by these means other mat=
‘yet known may take effect, and Dand T may effectuate what
Lao ipermereg ey M relies upon L, K looks

he weans

Rem beiet Eanes paper quoted fn the
{it wae found in separate sermps,

SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. aacd

_ “They parted at that time, and met thereafter, at which
“meeting the Earl of Montrose gave the deponer some
- directions to draw up instructions, which the deponer
did write with his own hand, and did shew them to the
Earl of Montrose, Lord Napier, Lairds of Keirand Black-
hall, at their next meeting. Any thing which was amiss
was helped by them at the Lord Napier’s house. ‘The
substance whereof,—that if the King would bepleased to
securethemintheir Religionand Liberties,grant theman
act of oblivion for all bygones, and do everything which
‘might secure Religion and Liberties of the country, they
would stand for the King against all men who will op-
‘pose him, provided that he come down to the Parlin-
“ment himself, and keep up the offices of state undis-
rnd till his Majesty saw who should deserve them

Bae erti acts dopo went to court. Declares,
that he carried no letters from the Earl of Montrose,
neither did hé subscribe the instructions lest they should
be intercepted. The deponer had directions to the
Earl of Traquair to the same purpose, and to impart
these instructions to him. The deponer made his ad-
‘dress first to the Earl of Traquair, and told him his
instrnctions, who answered, that, for what concerned
the King, be thought these might be easily granted, as
well anent the granting the securing of Religion and
Liberties, as of his down coming, and keeping up of the
- Offices of State. The deponer was desired to speak

ee
27 the excoption of the word “ provided,” which

r nstohim. The deponer made his ad-
the Earl of Traquair, and told him his
who answered, that, for what concerned

¢ thought: ae aa ata! y granted, as
ranting the x

t “SECHED HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 45

swered, these were not words becoming a subject.
‘The deponer?next asked if the Lord Balmerino would
see him get no wrong. Whereunto the Lord Balme-
fino answered, that he wished any wrong that should
oe, the Earl of Traquair by his deed might

ight upon himself,* and that in the Earl of Traquair’s
‘own particular he was to do him any service he could,
‘but what he was to be challenged by the Estate that
differenced the case, and desired the Licutenant-Colonel
to remember these same words, and he did report the
same to the Earl of Traquair, who gave no further di-
rection to answer at all, Declares likewise, that the de-
poner hearing the Lord Angus was not well affected to
the Earl of Traquair, desired Archibald Stewart to try
my Lord's mind in it. Declares also, that the Earl of
‘Traquair desired to know how the town of Glasgow
was affected towards him in his particular, when it
Should occur in a public way. As also the Earl of
‘Traquair desired to know how the Earl Marishall was
affected towards him. The like anent Ardincapell.
‘The Earl of Traquair discoursed with the deponer anent
the two commissions for demolishing the King’s houses,
whereupon he set down in his memorandum to get the
double of them, but never did it. The Earl of Tra-
quair asked the deponer whether or not there was a
commission for commanding all men beyond the water
of Forth, who answered he knew not, but set it down
in his memorandum to seek it out, but never sought
the same.

‘The Earl Montrose gave directions to the deponer to

© As Walter Stowart was making his deposition in presence of
Balincrine himself it is to be supposed that the lutter hud really use
Meer ietreslica Siy me cates wad coviastsd wilh Archibald
Johnston's violent and viralunt feelings against Traquair expromed to
Balmerino himself at this very time. See before, ps ii,

va

)

"

upon the bailzerie. He desired him
a respect Sir Thomas had a mind to it,

i fevheid vt recibir uf Bua eet
thrice or four times spoken to the de-

eof Tragunir) eve he id ink it ot
r es sv apr ce

truth of all those transactions will be found in Lord Tne
‘to be quoted afterwards,

| SECRET HISTORY OF THe FLoT, Ho

peses of the Argyle faction. It was agreeable to their
desires that Montrose should seem to be detected in a
plot with Traquair, for these were the two noble-
men who had ineurred their most deadly batred.
‘The mysterious terms, too, in which the correspon-
dence appeared, were invaluable, ad eaplandum vulgus,
in a prosecution the object of which was to be attained
in defiance of every enlightened principle of truth, jus-
tice, and common sense. But it was not so convenient
to have it established, that the letters A, B, C, stood
for those who had subscribed the bond, or that these
were the parties who were involved in the terrible plot
for being preferred to vacant places. To send 80

to prison upon such a charge, was a
step for which the faction was not prepared. The
charge, however, was rendered more manageable aftere
wards by declarations whieh approached nearer to
the simple truth, though they still left the evidence of
Walter Stewart substantially false, On the 9th ‘of
Tune be was again examined by the same members of
the Committee, when he added to, and modified his

testimony ax follows:

© Lieutenant-Colonel Walter Stewart declares, that
after Yule (Christmas) last, having occasion to visit
Sir Archibald Stewart of Blackhall in his chamber in
Edinburgh, where, they entering in a discourse, uc-
cording to the deponer’s metnory, anent his going
to Court, Blackhall desired bim to speak with the
Earl of Montrose, which the deponer yielded to, and
wont the next night to supper at the Earl of Montrose’s
where were present the said Earl, the Lord
‘the Laird of Keir, Blackhall, the deponer,
and Lieutenant-Colonel Sibbald. one supper the
you. 1. ¥

SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 451

nothing spoken of those who had subscribed the bond,
but that the deponer understood them to be included
under the name of these three, and their friends. De-
clares, that the deponer means by his paper anent the
managing of affairs by A, B, C, that the foresaid three,
and their friends, should have the rule, but does not
remember that any of them desired the deponer to
propose so much.

Being interrogated what the deponer meant by the
word serpent in his paper, declares, it is the Marquis
of Hamilton,* and that the meaning of these words
came from the foresaid four persons, who thought
that the Marquis of Hamilton and Earl of Argyle
might have strange intentions. Declares, that the in-
structions, dictated by the Earl of Montrose in presence
of the Lord Napier, Lairds of Keir and Blackhall, be-
fore-mentioned, were written in a covert way of letters
for names, and not in cyphers, and that the paper was
a little piece narrow paper. Declares, that the Earl of
Traquair curried the heads of his instructions to the
King, and got particular answers to them.t The prin-
cipal papers being shewn to the deponer, he acknow-
ledges them to be the self-same papers mentiondd by
him, and that they were all written with his own hand,
and in testification thereof, he has declared the same
upon the back of the said papers, the one whereof is
his first instructions given him by the Earl of Mon-
trose, Lord Napier, Keir, and Blackhall, and the other
paper is the paper given by him to the Earl of Tra-
quair, and his Majesty's answer reported by the Earl
of Traquair to the deponer. And that the meaning
of the instructions may be known, the deponer has ex-

* Sir Thomas Hope, in his letter to A. Johnstone, mentions that W.

Stewart at first said it was Laud who was so figured.
+ Contradicted, both by the King and Trag

being that referred to in the

Noblemen, Gentlemen, and Barons, be the
t Jobmston in London, who tarned it into a

‘of sgitation,
Id corr svn boy torts er pal peace

SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 455

“Upon the 10th of Junc, Walter Stewart was again
_ examined by Balmerino, Hope, and Edgar. “ He was
questioned upon the word Jlephant, contained in his
with the letters. Declares, that
thereby was meant the Marquis of Hamilton, and all
others who would oppose the King, and not rest satis-
fied when Religion and Liberty should be granted. De-
dares, that the note was drewn up at their directions,
and the next night revised, and what was wanting or
@mixs was mended, Declares, that at his coming back
from court the Earl of Montrose was not at Newcastle,
and that he desires his former deposition to be helped
in that point where he says the Karl of Montrose re-
ceived the Duke of Leunox’s letter at Newcastle, because
be now remeinbers that he delivered it to the Laird
of Keir, to whom he guve n double of the paper brought
along with him," &c.

‘Upon the 15th of June, * Lieutenant-Colonel Walter
Stewart was examined upon oath, who declared that
the first words of his first deposition, 6th June instant,
may be helped, where he says that his crrand was to
his brother-in-law, in respect be now declares that he
came to give an account of the former instructions,
which he had from the Earl of Montrose, Lord Napier,
Lairds of Keirand Blackhall, and declares, that Black-
hall was present, but had little hand in the business.
Declares that the deponer had intention to go to court
about bis own business, and his brother-indaw’s busi-

ed under hls hand, thot ‘Traquair carried them to the King and came
Iackand reported thoanswer to hia, Walter Stowart. This, thore is every
reason to boliere, wus false testimony, for the sake of pleasing the Come
nee ie knie i tuplicatiog Traquair, The King’s nuswer, if mot m
‘was probably reported through the Duke of Lenvox,

Ina te Da say onr y propositions duit wore

rnade from * the Plotters” to his Majesty.

Walter
other by Traquair but for the

—

| SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT, $59

MDuff; or any other there in these parts wherein

iteno and some of the Redshank's friends
can best inform and instruct. To assure Siguion Pa
ritano that he will get satisfaction anent the ward and
marriage he desired, but that now it is nota fit time
to do it for him, or any others so disposed as he is.
To tell Genero that so soon as Dick comes to the
school, who is daily looked for, he will by him hear
from L.* To kt... know how well L takes their
care, and in the diseretest way to inform yourself of
their desires, and particularly jf reik aims upwards.+
‘To try the suramons ngainst T, and to send up a double
‘thathe may compare them with that which he has gotten,
and to assure. . . and all others, that he shall clear
himself of all these, us clear us day light. { ‘That by all
meanstheylabourwith the P’antations §toletthem know,
the Tablet being filled up and made good, how much it
concerns them to show themselves affectionate (to) L.”

| While the examinations of Walter Stewart were in
progress, Montrose, Napier, Keir, and Blackhall, were

* + Dromedary—Argyle. MDuff—Athol. Signior Puritano—B.
Seaforth, Redshanks—M‘Donwld. Dich—Sir Richard Graham. School

f reik aime upwards,” in explained, both in the 8. and in the
by “if business goes aright.” It wauld appear, however, by
= Mtatetnent of Lord Napicr’s, to be afterwards quoted, that Walter ‘Stem

ly referring to the malicious and savage persecution of
ay ih ehiefly instigated by Archibald Johnston,
‘of Pertiament.”*

Sitters ection some om the margin, and
some abory the mystical terme in the munuscript, The rare pamphlet
alluded to before (p. 452, note,) has obviously bea hurriedly printed
Palaver dage for somo of those explanations have heen mistaken

for interlincations, and printed ncebrdingly, and there are other mistakow
‘Jn the pamphlet, evidently in consequence of a mixrvading of the intrix
‘ate MS.

—-

SECRET HisTORY oY THE PLOT. 461

into particulars with him of this nature, seeing his
name at that some time was called iu question for the
private bond contraverted. That the deponer was in-
duced by the Laird of Keir to enter with them, where
they four, with Lieutenant-Colonel Walter Stewart,
entered in discourse anent the King’s down-coming, as
the fittest menns for settling of business, which was
approven by them all. Thereafter they fell upon dis-
‘course anent the disbanding the armies, which probably
might interrupt his Majesty’s journey, and could not
stand with his Majesty's honour to have the armies on
foot and he coming down in a peaceable way for set-
thing of all jars and questions ; whereunto they all four
agreed, (but doex not remember who proposed the same
first,) and therefore thought fitto recommend to the said
Lieutenant-Colouel Stewart that he might propone the
same to the Duke of Lennox, the Enrl of Traquair,*
and his friends and acquaintance about court, to enter+
tain that motion with the King. And they thought it
fit his Majesty should be pleased to keep up the Offices
of State undisposed of till his own down-coming. And
these three particulars they gave to the Lieutenant-

© In his previons declaration of tho 7th of June, Blackhall declared
in more general terms, « that tho Earl of Tmquait, to his memory, was

lnlly with rand Blackdiall upoo this point ia ix eub-
by which, however, he explained away his former
evidence. On the 4th of ‘Binckhall being interrognted, * whe-

‘or nequaint the Parl of Traquair with their direc
ton, hodesires that this nay be udded,—that at the naming of the Bart of
‘Traquair, it was opposed by the Lord Napier, and assented unto by the
sont part of the rest.” The result was, however, we shall find, that
‘Stewart wns directed by this couservutive party to move bis Majesty
through Lennox, and not Traquair.

{|

| SECRET HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 463

Lientenant-Colonel, agreed amongst themselves, that, if
hedid write any to them, it would be under these terms

eeeeesesieionn down-coming. Denies, that he
thing more of Walter Stewart's nego-
did see any of his papers, neither did ever,
after their meeting at the Lord Napier’s house, meet
with the Earl of Montrose, or Laird of Keir, till they
met at Edinburgh in the beginning of June instant,
when the Laird of Keir desired the deponer to dine
with him ; and, thereafter, met with the Earl of Mon-
trose, Lord Napier, and Laird of Keir, at supper, after
the deponer had made his first deposition,® to whom
he told what he had deponed. Deelares that at their
first meeting, either in the Earl Montrose’s house, or in
the Lord Napier’s, they all promised secrecy. And also
depones, that the bond and reasons of the bond, whieh
was the indirect practising of a few, were spoken of in
the Earl of Montrose’s house at supper, but denies that
any of these few were particularly named. Declares,
that he received a Jetter from the said Lieutenant-Co-
Jonel, dated at Glasgow, under the former dark terms,
and to the same purpose, with some remembrance of
commendations from the Duke of Lennox, and Earl of
‘Traquair, and a request to speak to the Commissioners
of Parliament, with the sheriffdom of Renfrew and
Dumbartane, in favour of the Earl of Traquair, and,
namely, Ardincaple." +

‘This account, it will be observed, differs in some es-
‘sential particulars from that of Walter Stewart. The

* Which is dated 7th June 1641, Te was on the L1th of that month
‘thit Montrosy and his friends were went to the castle,

+ Originnl manuscripts eigoed, * $e A. S. Blackhull,—Balmerino, Sr.
Thomas Hop, Bilvard Pagar," td dated at Er. 26 June toe.

SECHEY HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 405

my judgement. I questioned the Earl of Montrose upon
ly after my first examination, who
‘assured me he did never hear of such a motion till
Lieutenant-Colonel Stewart, in the passing, came to
Neweastle, and pressed his Lordship with (for?) an
answer, if his Lordship would join in the foresaid bond,
which (answer) was delivered in these terms to (the)
Lieutenant-Colonel:— That bonds were now of so
dangerous consequence that his Lordship would not
Join in any, which, if the Duke of Lennox should move
Gt) at his coming to Scotland, he would declare to
himself)” “ Sr A. S. Blackhall.”

Walter Stewart being thus positively contradict-
ed, was, on the last day of June, again brought
before the Inquisitors, when “ he declares that he did
not motion a bond to be made with the Duke, and his
noble friends, but that he had instructions to speak with
the Duke and Traquair for joining in friendship with
these three, viz. the Earl of Moutrose, Lord Napier, and
Laird of Keir, and their friends ; and being confronted
with Blackhall, depones, as is before written, and Black-
hall affirms in his presence as is set down in Blackhall’s
former depositions. Declares, that when he eame back
from court, the Earl of Montrose and the deponer en-

in a discourse anent a solid friendship to be be-
twixt the Duke of Lennox and his noble friends, and
the Earl of Moutrose and those who were joined with
him, and their friends, the Earl said that any tic of
friendship of that kind will be best gotten done when
the Duke should come to Scotland.” *

‘Walter Stewart was also positively contradicted by
Sir George Stirling.
* Orig. MS Signed, “ W. Stowart—Balimerino, LP. D."
vou. 1. Gg

SECKIED HISTORY OF THE PLOT. 467

| being interrogated whether or not he had ever seen the

said paper, or taken a copy thereof, declares that, so
faras he remembers, he never did see it, or take a copy
thereof.” *
_ Upon comparing the terms of their respective depo-
sitions, it is impossible not to be convinced that Black-
hall and Keir deponed truly, and that Walter Stewart's
deposition was false: + and of this we will be thos
roughly persuaded when we come in the sequel to con-
‘sider other unpublished manuscripts which we have
yet to produce. If the covenanting government of
Scotland had been actuated by principles of ho=
‘nour, honesty, and common sense, not to say pa-
friotism, Walter Stewart's deposition (which proved
nothing criminal against Montrose and his friends,
even had it been all true,) would, upon # comparison of
the statements of Montrose, Napier, Keir, and Black-
“hall, have been rejected with contempt. Although
Walter Stewart's depositions were not finally arranged

coming his own affairs, that is not given in the copy from which the
oft hhave been printed. Walter Stowner

from Traquair, and the

‘SECKET MISTORY OF THE PLOT, 469

CHAPTER XVI.

NOW DICTATON CAMPBELL, ADMINISTERED INJUSTICE, AND DID NOT
PEMPER IT WITH stEWOY.

Wuewn Montrose and his friends were sent to the
Castle, both they and the community at large were
kept in total igtiorance of the details of the evidence that
had been obtained against them. The“ private practis-
ing” of the covenanting faction had also deprived Mon-
trose’s contemporary biographer of the means of expos-
ing, in detail, proceedings of which we have already
disclosed enough to prove that Dr Wishart was, never-
theless, perfectly well founded in the following general
observations which occur in the opening chapter of his
celebrated History : “ They (the Covenanters) seriously
consult how they should take Montrose out of the way,
whose heroic spirit, being fixed on high and honourable,
however difficult achievements, they could not endure,
To make their way, therefore, into so villainous an act,
by the assistance of some courtiers * whom with gifts
and promises they had corrupted, they understood that
the King had written letters to Montrose, and that
they were quilted in the saddle of the bearer, one Stew~
art belonging to the Earl of Traquair. The bearer

* This ls vory likely. Hamilton's creature, that worthless
Willisas Murray, of tho Bed-chamber, was the nephew of that sue
Robert Murmy with whose doposition this fracas commenced,

JOHN STEWART'S LuLTER TO ARGYLE. 471

‘Bishop Guthrie narrates, that after John Stewart was
‘sommitted to prison, “my Lord Balmerino and my
Lord Durie being sent from the Committee to the Cas-
He to examine him, they did try another way with him,
and dealt with him that he would rather take a tache
‘upon himself than Jet Argyle lie under such a blunder ;"
and he adds that “ both being profound men they knew
well what arguments to use for that effect ;" and, accord~
ingly persuaded Stewart to write a letter to the Earl of
Argyle, “ wherein he cleared him of those speeches,
and acknowledged that himself had forged them out of
innlice against his Lordship.” This contemporary chro-
vicler, rejected by covenanting authors, is, though not
always accurate in his details, nevertheless substantially
confirmed, in what we have quoted, by the manuscripts
we now bring to light. The following is from the ori-
ginal letter written by John Stewart to Argyle, with
the deliverance upon it by the President of the Com-
mittee of Estates.

© For the Right Honourable and Noble Lord, the
Larl of Argyle, these. 2

“ Right Honourable and Noble Lord,

“ In respect it hath pleased your Lordship to admit
‘of my former, I have therefore taken boldness by these
to beg that favour from your Lordship to admit me to
your Lordship’s presence, before I be further heard in
public, hoping to yive your Lordship satisfaction, pro-
mising to conceal nothing that I know to your Lord-
ship's prejudiceand harm, or of the public's, Considering
your Lordship's generous disposition, I will hope for
‘no Jess than that you will requite evil with good, which
‘will contribute more for your Lordship’s honour and

SS i

_ JOHN STEWant's CONFESSIONS, ~ 473
nye Raa Lordships’ pardon, especially those

“here, in that I could not give
at that present, in respect of
| weakness of my body and spirit, and
g dashed (abashed) with such a number,
t for satisfaction, now I declare,
ne, Ibeing desired by the Earls of Montrose,
and Athol, present at Scoon, to try what bonds were
pressed, either by the Earl of Argyle himself, or his
friends, or subscribed to him in Athol or elsewhere;
secondly, to try what presumptions there might be had
that he was the acquirer of his late commission him-
self, and how he carried himself therein ; thirdly, what
presumptions might be had that he did aspire for su-
premacy above his equals, with that caveat given me
by Montrose thot I should rather keep me within
bounds nor (than) exceed; yet, notwithstanding, by that
odious paper, I have abused his Lordship’s, and Athol’s,
trust in me, wronged the Earl of Argyle, and disere-
dited myself, conceiving all things with a prejudicat
opinion and unjust malice against the Earl of Argyle,
all things to sinister senses, contrary either
to his Lordship's words or actions, for which doings
I crave his Lordship’s mercy, and pleads only now
guilty, beseeching his Lordship to have compassion
upon my wretched estate; being only desirous to have
pleasured the receiver thereby, imagining never to have
been brought to answer for them thereafter, as now I
am, to my great grief and late repentance. And how.
soever Ihave condescended upon a number of witnesses,
upon weak grounds of some of their discourses, as will
be found after trial, I declare there is never one of
them accessory to this my malicious and calumnious
pamphlet and paper, nor had hand therein, except

— - 4

the doing of it at this time, yet he

be the first thing they would fall upon

ion," —or,* it will be the first thing will be

the next session,’—and declares that the Earl
ords were only these in general, viz, * that
discourse at the Parliament of the reasons
0 ' deposing of Kings in general,’ which the

deposition 1 cannot discover among the other MSS.

JOHN STEWART’S CONFESSIONS. aT

ifthe said Archibald had eight days time, he would get
as much against the Earl of Athol as might endanger
his life and estate, which the Earl of Argyle had in bis
pocket.” *

_ Now it was on the day following that on which the
above deposition of John Stewart was emitted, that
‘Montrose and his friends were taken by surprise, and
gent with public ignominy to the castle. Yet so far
was that evidence from fortifying the wretched trash
previously extorted from Walter Stewart, that it only
tended to confirm the fact of Montrose and his friends
being innocent of the shadow of a public crime, The
miserable state of body and mind to which John Stewart
had been reduced, and his terror at the prospect of his
fate, cannot be doubted after the documents now pro=
duced. Had he, under these circumstances, cast all the
edium of his alleged false testimony (as Lord Nugent
and Mr Brodie have done) upon Montrose, had he ac-
cused that nobleman of instigating him to raise a cas
Tmony agninst Argyle, for factious purposes, however
eagerly such a declaration would have been seized and
acted upon by Argyle, and his subservient Committee,
‘most unquestionably it would have been totally unwor-
thy of credit, But, in his utmost misery, John Stewart
said nothing of the kind. His confessions absolutely
refute the assertion that Montrose incited or suborned
him to accuse Argyle. Taking those confessions as
they stand, (though clearly Montrose is not to be

- judged by them, }) no more is brouglit out than that

* Original M.& signed “John Stowart—Balmerino, Thomas Hop,
Bdward Ragas.”

iiaairasté ore ecovent of tbe voniter Will be plrencta sn bite
quent chapter, from the origival manuscript.

7
be i

asec te Bin
ieee ree Nei ae ee

nt of the Committee.
w a'kt Balaburgh, 224 June 1641. ‘The Committee

“MONTROSE AND THE COMMITTEE, 481

ing about four hundred men." The same chronicler re-
cords that, to the Committee's interrogatories, Montrose
“ would give no answer, nor solution, saying, he would
answer in Parliament before his Peers, and Was fio more
obliged.” But let us again bring to light the best evi-
dence in| favour of Montrose, namely, that of his ene-
mies, as afforded by their original draft of the pro-
‘coudings.

| “ At Edinburgh, 234 June 1641. The Earl of Mon-
“trose being appointed to appear before the Committee,
was brought down, who being desired to answer to some
interrogatories, which he shunned in a fair way of dis-
course, but would not say positively he would refuse
to answer, The Committee appointed him to declare
in direct terms, yea or not, who, being thereafter call-
ed, still put off with generals, and would not con-
descend, at least expressly yea or not, and still adher-
‘ed to his paper before written. The Committee de-
clared they would take his answer for a denial, which
being intimated to his Lordship, and one of the inter-
asked, he continued still in his former refus-
al, which the Committee taking to their consideration,
after the asking of opinions of all the noblemen, and
considerable gentlemen, and others present, they all
found that the Earl of Montrose is hereby disobedient
and contumacious to the Committee, in refusing to an-
swer to their interrogatories, which they desired the
President yet again to intimate to the said Earl, that
if he pleased he might yet reeall his former denial, and
obey the Committee, since he. is so obliged by oath, sub-
“i a eran ‘This was intimated,
the said Earl continued in his former denial."*
Ms. * PD

% * Original MS. signed “Crlgiat

i

—

| KEIR AND THE COMMITTEE. 483

™ The Laird of Keir being likewise desired, the said
‘Pst June, did refuse to answer to any interrogatories,
and being called this 23d June, before the whole Com-
mittee, was interrogated whether he would answer to
the said interrogatories, who answered, that he had
answered already, and put the same in ‘writing, where-
‘unto he adhered, and since the matter for which he was
ealled in question was concerning the public, ke desir-
ed he might be tried publickly, and therefore desired to
be spared. The President oft prest him to tell whether
be would answer, yea or not, whereunto he still re-
plied, that as oft as the President would demand him,
he would nx oft desire to be excused. The Committee
after voting, found that he ought to answer, and not
to stand to a refusal, and therefore appointed the Presi-
dent yet again to require; which being accordingly
done, he still refused to answer. The President told
him that the Committee would declare him obstinate
and coutumacious, whose answer was, that he should
be content “they should add that to the rest, and cen
sure him for altogether, if he, in any of his carriage or
has misbehaved himself, for the which
he ought or should bs declared obstinate and contuma-
cious."

‘Lord Napier’s deposition of the 23d of June is not
to be found among the manuscripts of the Advocates’
Library. Fortunately, however, we are not left in doubt:
as to the nature ofhis “ ingenuous answering;” for in the
charter-chest of his family, notes of it, in his own hand-

+ Original M3, “Craighall, LP.D,," and endorsed, “E. Mone
trose, La Nupler, Laird of Keir, anont their carriage in the nneworing
to interrogatories, ist and 23d Juno 1641."

| they meant. “They told me then that

from tho inal Manaseript,
somos miner we

‘all the mystical torms in this MS, Lord Nae

fai ey eed Celts tip
mira and Jay down their arms at his +

ful business, and an act read whereby I was’

| to answer them when they should call for me.
cl I replied, that I knew that sentence proceed~
their favour to me, but truly in very deed it
o favour, but the doubling of a disgrace, first to
to the Castle as a traitor to God and my coun-

let me go, which, if 1 did accept, was a certain

houg atacit confession of guiltiness. It was auswer-
it was not only favour, but out of considera-
ibe) ie ps eae To which

d A knew I was as guilty as any of the rest,

OE a ib acs ven wore nauanee

ee a mates ‘This fhlse alarm of whe part of Haxnil=
i mre a tah ie FB Josie tu be considered after-

—— -

a
FATE OF JOUN STEWART. 491

trial coricerned not his, Argyle’s, credit and ho-
‘nour alone, but that of the whole House ; in the face of
_ the public he declared that he did uot bear malice
‘against any man’s person, but what the sequel of this
| “affair might prove he remitted to the wise consideration
| of the House ; lest, however, it should be thought that
the judges favoured him in any thing, he humbly de-
‘sired that the House would be pleased to appoint some
‘of their number to be assessors to the Justice-Deputes,
that by their help and advice, these things might be
decided by law. Accordingly, Lord Baleomey,* Lord
Elphinston, Rigg of Ederney, and John Semple (pro-
‘vost of Dumbartane, a most violent factionist,) were ap-
pointed to assist the judges. Lord Elphinston petitioned
the House ‘ that his conscience would not suffer him
to sit as judge to Mr John Stewart, in respect he him=
self was within degrees descended to my Lord Argyle ;
the House ordains the said Lord Elphinston and his
colleagues’ assessors to proceed and do justice.”

And yet before this farce occurred, an act and decree,
dated 6th July 1641, had been passed by the Committee
of Estates, by which the doom of John Stewart was
sealed. ‘I'he Committee had already entered into the
whole merits of the case, expressly exonerated Argyle,.
and, declaring that all Stewart's informations were ma-
licious lies, remitted him to be tried accordingly.

Once again were the old statutes against leasing~
making recapitulated in a libel of Sir Thomas Hope's,
—the statutes which had been so scorned and rejected

* Sie James Learmonth, a Lord of Session, of whom Nicol, in bis
MS. Diary, says that he was a man ** very painfal in his offoo," wud that
hho died suddenly in his seat on the Bench, 1637, * which was eetowmed
to be a natioual judgment.” €

+ Balfour's Journal of the Parl, 1061.

Le sail

FATE OF JOHN STEWART,

“aati records he never saw, and,
desperate and triumphant plunge into the

nny, pronounces for history —* no-
remained for Montrose, but to denounce

having been suborned to forge this confes-
hs emoing he eee stneaaes

oak have glanced at the col-

‘of the Angyle Committee, really said to of bs ends
Gotathes, thin Srould aod bate boon « pertinseta

teak Rar Keir. Upon the 21st of Jaly, the new constable
‘to Parliament to know if be might #0 fur relax the confinement

THE CASE FOR ARGYLE. 497

recantation, where he, Stewart, states the interpola-
tion of which he accused himself, and in which be
draws the distinction betwixt a discourse of Kings
fn general, and the King in particular. Now, adds Mr
Laing, —* that this confession was strictly true appears
from Sir Thomas Stewart's original declaration,”—al-
Tuding toa more cautious version of the matter, as refer-
ring to Kinga ia general, which Sir Thomasdeclared he
wrote out for Walter Stewart, * But so hurriedly, in
his anxiety to controvert “the royalists,” had our
historian examined the matter, as not to perceive that,
in reference to the character of Argyle, the assumption
‘of the truth of John Stowart’s recantation is equally
dangerous as to suppose that it was fictitious, If Sir
‘Thomas Stewart's attestation proves that John Stew-
art's confession was “ strictly true,” what does it
prove of Argyle's declaration ? That nobleman,
with passionate oaths, “ denied the whole and every
part thereof, whereat many wondered.” Nor is this

- a mis-statement or mistake on the part of Bishop

Guthrie. Although John Stewart was condemned.
upon the confessions obtained from him, and although,
—when at his trial he desired to adduce certain
witnesses in support of his information as to the trea-
sonable bonds,—he was peremptorily met with his own
plea of guilty, yet Argyle thought it necessary to prove
that the recantation as it stood was still essentially
false. He produced certain depositions, of his own
clansmen and followers, who were about him at the
ford of Lyon,—those “ supple fellows, with their plaids,
targes, and dorlachs,"—in order to prove that not one

* Sir Thomas Stewart's (younger of Grantully) share in those trans
‘ctions wil be discloned in the chapter of Traqrusirs defines.
VOL. I. “Ti

THE CASE POR ARGYLE. 99

tent, when the Earl of Athol and gentlemen of Athol
came there; and staid there all the time, exeept (whereof
he does not fully remember) he went out and came in
presently again, and that he did hear all the discourse
passed betwixt the said Earls and others; and declares,
he remembers not of any discourse had by the Earl of
Argyle anent the prorogation of the Parliament, or of
the reasons or ground for deposing of Kings in ge-
neral or particular, ax witness these presents sworn
and subscribed in presence foresaid.”

3, “Alexander Menzies of Weeme, being sworn
solemnly, deponed, that he was in the Earl of Argyle’s
tent when the Earl of Athol and gentlemen of Athol
that were prisoners, came there; and that the deponer
staid there until they condescended on the sending out
of the fourth man, * and the chusing of the Captain ;
and does not remember that the Earl of Argyle dis-
coursed to them anent the deposing of Kings in gene-
ral or particular, or of prorogation of the Parliament,
whilst the deponer was there, as witness these sub-
scribed in presence foresaid.”

4.“ Sir Duncan Campbell, of Auchinbreck, (on the
15th of June,) being examined upon onth, declares, that
he had the charge of the guard the day that the Earl
of Athol came to the ford of Lyon, which occasioned
him to conduct the Earl of Athol aud rest of the pri«
soners to the Earl of Argyle’s tent, where, for the
most part, he remained all the while the Athol-men were
within the same, except at such times as his charge did
draw him out, and so was still coming in and out,

* This must allude to thot notable illustration and evidence of the

ccorenanting unanimity of focling throughout Scotland, which consisted
in the conscription of every fourth man to serve in arms for the Co-
‘renant.

(a i

‘THE CASE POK ARGYLE. Sol

‘to peruse the manuscripts we have
being satisfied that Argyle attempted
what he knew to be false. That John
guilty of exaggeration, by asserting
“the express and particular application of what the wily
Earl had put in more guarded terms, is possible. But
_ Stewart never could have imagined the insane project
of entirely inventing a conversation, as having pas-

| sed in a crowd of witnesses, naming the particular men
“who had heard it, had the fact been that not one word
ofthe kind ever passed. ‘The hopeless scheme of ruin-
ing, by a falsehood utterly baseless, and certain of de-
tection, the most powerful, the most vindictive, and
‘one of the most able men in the kingdom, could never
have entered a human brain. This circumstance,
moreover, renders Argyle’s defence incredible, name-
ly, that Johu Stewart wrote to him, on the Sth of
June, the letter we have quoted, and which, in the
most abject terms of broken-hearted terror, offers a
complete recantation, Now, upon the 7th and the
10th of the same month, we have the confessions
and both contain the modified version

of the discourse, as applied to Kings in general, to
which he also adhered on his trial, Is it possible,
wader the circumstances, that John Stewart would have
still adhered to so much, vay, the essential part of his
falsehood, supposing the fact to have been that nothing
was said of Kings in general or particular? On the
other hand, the idea of some such discourse having pas=
sed, is powerfully corroborated by its alleged relation
to that debate in the Scots Parliament of June 1640;
a debate which (as we now know, from the admission
contained in Archibald Johnston's secret letter,) Argyle
*and the faction had maintained against the King’s in-

—— re hl

THE CASE FOR ARGYLE, 503

“Majesty as “ the enemy ;” and it is easy to under-
dangerous might be the treason-
effeet of such bonds from the Earl of
that nobleman’s constitutional caution
so far forsaken him,as to allow such designs to
very expressly on the face of the bonds.
Menzies, son to the Laird of Weeme, was al-
go examined on the subject of the bond said to have
been shewn to his father, and he “ declares that there
‘was & copy of a bond shewn by Glenlyon, which was
for maintenance of the Religion, Laws, and Liberties
of the Kingdom: and declares he never saw any bond
wherein the Earl of Argyle is named without relation
‘to the public, neither is he assured whether the Earl
of Argyle’s name was in it or uot, but he thinks it
owas” But what better right had the Earl of Argyle
to be“ pressing” such bonds without the knowledge
of Montrose, and the conservative noblemen, than
Montrose had to get up his bond, for the mainte.
nance of the Religion, Laws, Liberties and Throne
of the kingdom, without the knowledge of Argyle
and his fuction? The Committee, however, on the
production of these Argyle bonds, pronounce, at Ar+
Byle’s express desire, a decree, dated 17th June 1641,
approving of them all, and finding “ the taking of
them to be good service to the public, and ordains an
‘act to be granted to the said Karl thereupon.”*

How completely is the ground of Montrose’s bond,
* the private and indirect practising of a few,” justified

© The bonds themselves I cannot discover among these manuscripts ;

‘but their dates are mentioned in the act and instrument of approval, an

seme a oni and Sd July 1640, that is, ahortly bofore Montrose got wp
‘his conservative bond at Cumbernauld.

a i

“THE TYRANNY oF SUBJECTS, 505

critical writer has said that “ when

“subtle to press that which their English friends did
“not wish, and too prudent to refrain from the chance
of partaking of those royal favours which they were
sensible were ready to be showered on them.”* But
‘the true key to their demeanour is to be found in the
‘seeret machinations of the Procurator of the covenant~
‘The first rumour of the King’s intention
to go to Scotland had given him great alarm, and his let-
ters are full of violent scoffing on the subject. When he
found that the King had indeed so determined, his object
was to turn that scheme to account. Johnston knew
that if any thing impeded the movement, if such an
irresistible impulse were not now given to the machi-
nery against the Throne as would enable him to say,
“ T think it is now over in God's own hand to do for
himeelf,” then his, this impious demagogue's, occupa.
tion was gone. He was aware that the royal visit in-
volved the ruin of the faction, or would crown its tri-
umph, according to circumstances. If Montrose, and
every determined and upright adviser who might in-
fluence the King, could be kept from him during his
presence in Scotland, the faction would triumph even
upon that point of the treaty which now formed the
death-struggle betwixt Monarchy and Democracy,
namely, whether the King or the Argyle-ridden Par-
Hament should appoint the Oficers of State and judi-
‘cial functionaries there, But so far was this from
being a national feeling, that its agitation appears
— © Dilosulis Commontaries, \ ol iv, p. 307.

i

=

,7 ‘THE TYRANNY OF SUBJECTS. 507

_ written that “their name would stink if they sought
them,” and that the Committee had written back orders
to press the demand, Now it was one and the same
individual who kept up the agitation ou the subject both
“among the Commissioners and the Committee. Archi-
bald Johnston, in a letter dated the 3d of March 1641,
which we had not quoted before, thus informs Balme-
¥ino:—" The Sheriff-clerk and Riccartoun this day with
‘great heat, hath disputed against our seeking the King’s
chusing the Councillors and Sessioners by advice of the
Estates, alleging that our first instructions therefore
were taken away by that instruction sent up with Mait-
land, for seeing honest men provided to places of State
and Session, &. Lord Rothes, Loudon, and myself
steivly byde by it, and shewed there was neither any
contrariety, nor, albeit there were, could we but obey
the first, which was subscribed by both quorums, and
declared unrepealable by any one of the quorums.
So that changing only some few words we have forced
aid to keep the article."* It is the cousin and corre

. Oe ie epetiony a ‘This letter had buen so ill tran
Lord Hailos, ax utterly to destroy the sense of it in hixeollec=
mule iti very nest ihe wks fi serapoiack i
‘which thut great historiea! antiquary had published some
‘no innceurately as to bo quite unworthy of his subsequent fare. 4
‘material to know this, for the fragments of Johnston’ letters are refer=
‘red to by Mr Hallam and other distinguished English authors, under the
SS = Derma Momma of Jones eal Chas. ka ha acne
and Ztieourton,

PIOUS MOTIVES OF THE KINO. 509

‘the fair working even of thecovenant~
. It wos the private and indirect prace
"a few, for their own ends, and by means that
involved ‘the downfal of the monarehy, precisely a8
complained. We find, moreover, « curious
“letter from the Scotch Commissioners to the Committee
in Edinburgh, which places the conduct of the faction
| im a most extraordinary point of view, and we have
| prefixed it to this volume, that the reader may be still
better enabled to form his judgment of the secret ma-
chinations of the Procurator of the Church in 1641.
Let us turn from him to one who, however defi-
cient in some of the essentials of the kingly character,
‘was a gentleman and a Christian.

In the very interesting charter-room, of that orna-
ment of the north, Fyvie Castle—a scene of Mon-
trose’s bravery and Argyle's disgrace,—we find a do-
cument which cannot be regarded without emotion.
Tt is the original manuscript, with interlineations by
the King himself, of the Instructions he framed
for the Earls of Dunfermline and Loudon, to pre-
sent at the meeting of the Scotch Parliament in
1641. It was on the 20th of May that Charles an-
nounced his intention to Napier in the letter we have
given. About ten days afterwards he had written to
Montrose the letter found in Walter Stewart's saddle,
where, most probably, it had not been secreted at the
desire of the King, or any friend of his. Before the
30th of June, however, the date of the Instructions to
which» we allude, his Majesty had become aware of the
imprisonment of Montrose, and his friends, and was also
vaguely informed of the falsehoods by which Walter

dase ait April 104, ix given, Thero isa clerical ilstake in
line of p. 306, vis, “any answer” ought to be “any accuser.”

;

ADDITIONAL NOTES

AND

ILLUSTRATIONS.

Nora I. p. 138.—Bishop Burnet's Letters in the Nopier charter.cheat.
‘Tax history of the very curious letter from Bishop Burnet, now:
first published in our introductory chapter, being among the Napier
papers, ix this: Archibald the second Lord Napier, Montrose’s ne=
7, and devoted companion-in-arms, wa», eventually, succeeded
im the honours of Napier by his second daughter, Margaret. ‘Thin
Jady was murried to John Brisbane, Exq. whose vpitaph, in St
George's Chapel at Windsor, refers shortly to bis many distinguish:
ed public services. “ Here lies the body of John Brisbane, Ea-
quire, who served King Charles the Second in many honourable ex
and died Eavoy Extraordinary for Portugal in the year
1684, aged 46 yeurs.” Ho was a friend and patron of the Bishop,
sod, when Burnet wrote to him the abject letter which thus came
to be preserved in the Napier charter-chest, Brisbane held the office
‘af Secretary to the Admirulty. It is curious to compare the style
of the letter in question with the following, written by Burnet to
the Baroness Napier in her widowhood, and when ho, Brisbane's
+ poor melancholy friend,” had attained the eourtly distinction und
‘state influence of his latter days. ‘The sufferings of tho Napier fae
mily in the couse of royalty were more handsomely acknowledged
csicspost il sine th eshonatoal eal ake SWaples aoe
a Saran dealer reece ed
ment. The following letter to her from Bishop Burnet, of which
the original is in the Napier chartor-chest, pegs eeian =
consequence of some statement of her claims made through the

Vole te * kk
—

i ) aes

ABD ILLUSTRATIONS, 515

Ls BBB 20-— Arh fir | Lond Napier Core
. ‘pondence with James VI
TtuSOd GG iti ba tid ct, Se gga ens

in-law and tutor, But there has been recently printed,

to the Abbotsford Club by John Hope, Enq. Dean of

, 4 State Papors and Miscellaneous Correspondence of Thomas
Earl of Melrose,” and for several of the documents to which T allude,

Tneed only now refer the reader to the index of that magnificent col-
lection, expecially in reference to Napier’s appointment to the office of
| Fustice-Clerk, which he held for a short period before he waa rained
te the peerage. Bur the following letter from him to James VI.
ras not been printed.

| © To the King’s most excellent Majesty,”

‘© Mosr Sacunp Sovention,

* Being by your Majosty’s favour admitted in the place of Justice
Olerk, I think it my duty to give your Majesty information of the
extate of it at my entry. I find great confusion and disorder in the
pleco, and, next, many principal parte of that office exerood by coi
‘missions, and by other judges not competent, through former negli-
gence, whereby that judicature, where the chief point of your Mas

sovereign power ought to be exerced, has now lost much of
‘the antient power and dignity. For the disorder, it may be much
amended by my care, which ahsll not be wanting, ‘The other losses
‘or abuses will require your Majesty's special directions to the coun~
‘cil, by your Majesty's letter, requiring them to see all matters bee
Tonging to that judicature returned again to it, to be handled there
ee ought to be, and ux was wont to be. The partioulurs (if a0 it
Please your Majesty) to be reformed, for avoiding your Majesty's
‘trouble [ have sent up to James Douglas, that, when your Majesty
shall be plessed to write to the council for this purpose, be may
show your Majesty these articles, and receive your Majesty's direc»
ton, either conform to them, or otherwise, ax your Majesty, in your
great wisdom, whall think expedient, to which I most bumbly sub+
mit myself, with most ready mind to perform your Majesty’s ples |

{

AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 517

‘This Lord Napler's manuscripts in the Napier churter-chest also
afford » curious portraitury of Jumes Vi., drawn from the life, for
Napier was a gentleman of his privy-chamber for seventeen years.
“No man," says Nupier, “had the art to kaow men more

than he; yet still importunity provailed with him againat

his own choice —for it was his manner to give way to strong op~
position, or his favourite’s intreatios, yet never to give over his pur-
cepa ae yee ee

, ‘when Sir Gideon Murray left by his death the place of Trea+
wurer-Depute vacant, his Majesty determined tbat with this office
the long and faithful wervices of Napier should be rewarded : “ Every
‘man who had power put in for his friend, without respect of his
eee sit, eho: an ool be pepe nese ae
his Majesty did not take some exception ; which being perceived

by the lote Marquis of Hamilton, [father of the fatitess Murquls]
wise nobleman, in whom thure was no virtue wanting, befitting
‘his place and quality, and judging that the King had made some
‘secret election in his own mind, desired to know who it was, His
Majesty having named me, the Murquis did not only approve his
“Majesty's judgment, but also procured a warrant for my admission,

Napier adds, that “ from the King’s own mouth, who knew the cute
tom of the court, and could never endure to be robbed of his thanks,
the whole curriage of that business was delivered unto me, together
with a commond to me to serve him faithfully, not to be factions,
nor to comply with any to his prejudicc, or the country’s, of to
wrong any private man for favour of another.” At the same time
James wrote to the Earl of Mar that letter (soe p. 39, note,) in
‘which he declares Napier to be “ free of partiality, or any factious
Jnsnour.”

Bat Lord Napier was no sycophant, and never hesitated togive the
‘most fearless advice, both to James V1. and Charles I., upon the
most delicate subjects. The fullowing, which is from the original
draft in his Lordship’s handwriting, will afford another illustration
ef the fuet. The tenor proves it to have been advice to James VI.
‘on the subject of the propriety of carrying the centence of death
nto execution upon the favorite Somerset, whom James eventually
pardoned. Those who are curious as to the historical problem of
‘the guilt of that unhappy nobleman, and of the King’s participa»
tion therein, will read this with considerable interest. It seems to
Prove that the writer hnd not the slightest idea of James being

-

|
ii AND ILLUSTILATIONS, 519

graces ought to be bestowed at several times—punishments and exex
— If his Majesty give way to the execution of these
* after vo long a pause, men will think thut thesw
ipeetens oa never end, since neither time nor satisfied justice
cam mitigato tho rigor ; and that ho is framing a precodent and a
reason, by the Sater ‘one in so greot favour with him, and.
his countryman, + he may be excused to use the noblemen
‘and gentlemen of England with tho like or greater rigor upon o¢-
casion. ‘The noblemen, and theve of great trust and place about
‘him, will never more, after this man’s destruction, trust to his good-
‘nes, his favour, or their own merit, but will seek to strengthen
themselves with friendship, (a way much neglected by Snenay
‘and will secretly Ieague, and bind themselves together, aguinat the
power, whereby he shall not only not be able to punish thom
if they deserve, but also he shall find great difficulty to manage any
Jusinest tn hia mind that concerns any of them, so that he shall
gerurn precario, upon courtesy.

Since, therefore, it is neither for the King’s honouy, nor his
hyactheliaaee extremity being guilty, when there is no-
thing but presumption against him, } which may fall upon the most
Annocent, it is far less profitablo or honourable for his Majesty to
suffer sich extreme persecution, or to deny hin tho ordinury favours,
‘nd meuns to clear himself, that wre granted to men in like ease, or
to expose him and his life to the acarch of his enemics, or to give
them liberty to shift their accusations, and seek now and
crimes, when the old will not serve their turus ; these are infallible
arguments and demonstrations to the world that justice fs but pre-
tended, and the overthrow of the pervon, pero mas oprah
or wrong, intended. In the course thot is kept his
nour suffers extremely, for the people at first admlred the Stare
Justice—detested the pervon of the malefactar ; but now the note ix

* Somerwe and his Countem
‘The favourite, Somerset, was Hobert Carre, a Seoccliman.
hdl ee To
# AM! the agcomplices In Ovorbury's murder reesived the punishment due to thele
probe grep earn ppl vt eects =

persons
‘whom he bad once fovroured with his most tener affections" —His. Vol, vi pT
Mut the above pleading of Lord Napier, anid not want of fortitude in the Kings
say Ihave saved Somerset.

AND ILLUSTRATIONS, Sal

made betwixt us of the date, the 12th day of September, anno
| Dowink 1628, is contained. Notwithstanding, for the benefit L
am te reap for the said employment, I qm content to be bound,
ener ee a sen my eins executors, and as
oa Weasecinenten ha alld toed
‘that | See eed tslewa asl sor adeed coee
with 4s. 6d. per pound for natural dried of all sorts; and with
I te pia pea pectoral grenereen and for Savoy amber,
‘Savoy pistacho amber, and Savoy fennell amber, 10s. per pound ;
and for pound of ordinary confects, Is. 2d.; and that of theso eon~
ections as shall bespent for his Majesty's own use only, and fur sueh
‘confections as shall be vonded by me for the uso of the country, I
SEEM Kal ap Geeta, chat vive peion T wuallecatve es
5s. fur the naturals, 3s. for tho pastes and preserves, and for Savoy
Savoy pistache amber, and Savoy fennell amber, above 10s,
per pound, and for the ordinary confects above Is. 2d. the pound,
Seats sally shared betwisi me ond any the Tac Naper shall
appoint. In witnows whereof, I have subscribed those presents with
my land, before these witnesses, Archibald Campbell, brother ta
‘Sir James Campbell of Lawers, Alexander Naper, brother to the
said Lord Naper, and Alexander Naper, burgess of Edinburgh. At
‘Westminster the 12th day of September 1628."

This ix obviously the contract referred to in our note to p. 53,
and of which Lord Napier snys,—« Then said I, 1 acquainted the
King,—as indeed J did, and his Majesty remembered it—with the
manner and matter of this bargain.” On the back of the bond ix
noted :—'"24 Decr. 1620. Ihave this day received this back bond
from the Lard Naper to be delivered up to his Majesty.”

Nore II. pp. 00-102 —Charles 1. and the Scotch Parliament 1633.
Dr Cock, in hi History of the Church of Scien, and when
narrating the proceedings of the Seotch Parliament 1633, at which

King took into his own hand a Tist of the members, and marked
their votes. The majority was hostile to the Court, and Charles
could not fail to know, from the paper which be held, that this was
the case. The clerk of Parliament, however, whose otlice it was to

expected even from the humblest individual, gave his sanction to

4|

_

AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 523

Gt being, ax our Chancellor's office to ask the voices, s0 our Clerk of
Rogister's office to take them and record them, and according to his
‘ows, and his clerks’ notes who wssist bim, to pronounce the act pas
ed or stopt ; In which it in impossible he should dent but with sine

‘Tt is not casy to understand by whut process of reasoning Dr Cook
Jud brought himself to take this most natural, and unanswerable
statement, as evidence against the King; or how he makes out
‘that * the anxiety shown to refate the charge, proves that it was ge
erally believed, and had deeply impressed the public mind !” ‘The
King was aware that bis throne was attacked by the calumnions
whisperings and secret machinations of a powerful demperatic fac
tion in Scotland ; therefare he published this unanswerable defetice,
for the benofit of the public, as well as for his own ; ond to cast it
aside, os Dr Cook hus done, (while be takes as unquestionable the
posthumous calumny of Burnet,) or toadopt it as proving the charge
‘to have been true, indicutes ant opinion formed upon no just or weien=
tiffe consideration of the evidence. But let us seo if De Couk's
other authorities bear him out, 1. ‘The entire pasage from Row's
‘MS. is as follows: But the nogative votes were thought by some
to have equalled the affirmative; and a worthy gentleman stood
up and quarrelled the Clork-Register for not marking tho votes

‘pon
man sat down and was silent."—Jtow's MS, Advocates’ Library. An
‘on dit in the chronicle of u factious Scotch clergyman of the times
is not the moet trustworthy evidence, in mich a matter, ageinet

clerk-register

riuns have laid much stress upon this fuet,

‘Ring. Bot the truth is that the King only did what all

eg eapinlet bade eer
strange

King’s enemies, contradict Burnet. Compare him

and Whitelock, all of whom Dr Cook has so

‘support of Burnet! But there is another re

which tho Bishop, and which, unhappily, Dr Cook
‘omitted to consult, namely, the state trinl of Balmerino, Bur-
sequel of the passage we have quoted, connects the Bul~

(the seditious libel framed by Haig,) with the ale

of the vote in Parliament, which dishonest act of
‘states to have been a principal ground of that petition,

petition itself is printed in that record. It commences
humble remonstrance that his Majesty had not

of the opinions of a number of your supplicants

im voting about these acts,” and that he had put notes against their
mames, &c., and then it goes on to say, thit " they that have been
mind toa resolution carried by the plurality of votes have

never hitherto been censured by prince of so much justice and
goodness as your Majesty.” Thus even that notorious paper
which Haig confessed that he had “ made out af some callections,
which he had gathered upon some conferences which be hod with
sundry persons the time of the Parliament,”"—andin which, had there
‘been a shadow of truth in the subsequently whispered calumny,
that calumny would have been most prominent,—affords not a bint
of the kind, but absolutely states, as a matter not disputed or doubt-
‘ed, that the aotsin queation were curried by the plurality of votes."*
‘That Dr Cook had not consulted this record appears from the fact,
‘Vhat throughout his most mistaken veraion of the matter he continu«
ally speaks of the author of the libel os being Hayne, his Majesty’s

—

AND ILLUSTRATIONS. aT

nnd make extricts frum a manuscript, the history of which is in-
scribed upon it, as follows :

“ Written on the first leaf of the manuscript, in Mr T, Roddie
man’s handwriting, from which this copy was taken in the years
1788 and 1789.

History of Scots affairs from the your 1687 to the year 1641,
in five books, but the first wanting, und probably never written,
being designed only as an introduction to the rext,

“ This was written either as is supposed by the famous Robert
Gordon of Straloch, oz by James Gordon, parson of Rothiemay, his
wn”

‘That this MS. History, however, was not compiled by Robert,
Gordon of Straloch himaclt is manifest by that extract we have
quoted from it, (sve p, 230,) im which the writer, after enumerating
Straloch among the Commissioners sent by Huntly to Montrose,
adds that he, the writer, was.“ myself in company with the Com=
missioners from Huntly.” This is most likely to have been James
Gordon, Stralvch's sou. It is known that this James Gordon eue-
ceeded Mr Alexander Innes as parson at Rothiemay, and there ix
‘a passage in the manuscript history obviously referring to the fact :
“ Mr Alexander Lanes, minister at Rothiemay, was brothervinslaw
to Mr John Maxwell, Bishop of Ross,—that was enough ; but he res
fused to take the Covenant, and anno 1639, had gone to Berwick to
the King ; therefore, July Ist, be was tarned out of hix place, and
in tho following years exposed to many more sufferings, yet happler
therein than Mr John Forbes, that bis cbureh the very next year,
1641, was planted with another whom himself had named, and to
whote entry he gave his express consent ; one who was willing to
‘obseree to Mr Alexander Innes the common rule of equity of quod
4ibi eri non vis—and ane who, in the following years, upon that
relf-samo very account which had turned out Mr Alexander Innes,
did run the hazard, oftener than once, of being turned out of that
place, as well ns his predecessor had been.”

Another evidence, that Jumes Gordon was the author, in derived
from 6 very rare printed fragment, (for the use of which, and also
for introductions to the various gentlemen who enabled me to inspect
the MS. of the King’s College, and the Records of Aberdeen, 1
‘am indebted to tho kindnoss of Joseph Robertson, Esq.) being the
Introduction to Memoirs of Scottish affairs from 1624 to 1653,"
which were never published or completed, a work projected, and wr
fax composed, by an industrious and somewhat learned person, of

AND ILLUSTRATIONS. 529

friends of Hamilton and Montrose speak not over fax
al Di eealipirlendetearan es
truse's merle, every where extolling him as a hero, and giving a bet~

a to the future part of it.”
James Gordon's original MS. hax been again lost sight of, but
‘the separate transcripts at Aberdeen, and in Man's MS. supply ita
Of Patrick Gordon's MS., however, I have not been able
‘to discover that either the original or a transcript is known to exe
ist. Hence those extracts, marked “ P. G." in what is inaccurate.
ly called tho Straloch MS. in the Advocates’ Library, and of which
we have thus afforded the explanation, are the more valuable, from
being all that has been preserved of this contemporary chronicler,
‘the loxa of whose history of Montrose's progress ix much to be re~
gFetted.
Nore V. p.200.—The Large Declaration, Margaret Mitchelson,
Many of Dr Bulcanqual’s original MSS. of the Large Declaration,
which he compiled under the sanction of Charles I., arc preserved in
the Advocates’ Library. No statement or argument of those excited
and ‘times will bear a closer examination than this

des
and imitates the tone, Speaking of the Rev. Robert Baillie, he
says. “The Targe Declarution this writer pronounces ‘ an unexs
ampled manifesto, heaping up » rabble of the foulest columnies that
‘ever were put into any one discourse thut he had read.’ Hence
(adds Mr Brodie) little reliance can be placed on it ; and Z suspect
that the story of Mitchelsan, the prophetess, is one of the forgeries of
Baleanqual, Ress, and olhors, Burnet gives no authority, and Bail-
lie and others never allude to it.” Hise Val 3h. p- 608, But, we
sail el ie tee sted Sete el aes By
* and others to forge and publish a story of the very day, the al-
leged witnesses being the public itself! Mr Brodie does not reflect
that the allegation to the public of a fact as being notorious to that
public, cannot well be a forgery.

‘But we can sffard, in corroboration of the account given in the
Sla{oDeserachny wcontemnporary anthony ban fom the ejehaod

Pk,

AND ILLUSTRATIOSS. 331

The other authority is « contemporary MS. im the Advocates’ Li-
trary, entitled, “A Tree Relation of the Bishops im intreducing of
the Service Book,” &c. and im which eccars the following pacenge :

\« Margeret Mitchelsen's gracieas replurcs.

« About this time sles, in Edinburgh, ene Margaret Mitchelon,
‘good religions damecl, being semewhat treubled in spirit, fell into
‘trance, and was so ravished with heavenly and divine speeches and
praises to Christ, that her bodily sences almest failed her ; and im the
time of those raptures, which took her often, and sometimes keeped
her lang, she might take no mest ner drink, nor did nothing but
bursted out in admirable divine speeches, expressing her love and
joy in Christ, and her assurance of blessedness in him, as the like
speeches never proceeded of flesh and blood ; mapy of the nobility
and ministry, and well-affected Christians, thronging to hear her,
being wonderfully moved with her speeches.”

Note V1. p. 234—Towa-Coancil Books of Aberdeen.
‘The following extracts, from the Town-Council books of Aber-
deen, prove that Montrose exercised no unnecessary tyranny of
harshness towards the town when occupying it for the Covenanters.
‘Nor can I find any entry in thoee records at all corroborative of the
accusation of cruelty brought against Montrose, by modern writers.
I must acknowledge my obligation to Mr Hardy, the town-clerk
of Aberdeen, for the facilities afforded me there, of inspecting and
making extracts from these original records.

«95th March 1639.—The quhilk day, in respect that Doctor
William Johnston, and George Morison, who were directed com-
missioners from this burgh to the Earl of Montrose, upon the
20th day of March instant, with Mr Robert Gordon of Straloch,
and Doctor William Gordon, commissioners likewise to his Lordship
from the Marquis of Huntly, did receive a delaying answer at that
time from the said Earl of Montrose to such propositions as they
did remonstrate to his Lordship. Therefore the provost, bailies,
and council, think it expedient to direct the same commi
new again to the said Earl of Montrose, aud to propone to his Lord-
ship, and others of the nobility there present with him, the articles
following, and to crave their answer thereupon ; of the qubilk ur-
ticles the tenor follows :

AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 533,
Mar, ond Buchan, come to the town of —

hundred men, to lie in the town till their back-cotning ; and before:
they marched out of the links the noblemen sent for our provost and

‘again, under the pain of and rasing our town, qubille
obeyed.”
Nore VIL p.312.—dnecdotes of Argyle.

Bishop Guthrie records that, in the year 1640, Argyle persisted
im destroying the house of Airly, (with whom he was at personal
feud,) although Montrose had put a garrison into it, under command
‘of Colonel Sibbald, and had written to Argyle to that effect. James
Gordon in his MS. hes this account :

“1 have seen some memorials, of the proceedingn of these times,
which do refer tho demolishing of Aitly Castle to this expedition,
though I made mention of it the last year (1639,) Sure it is that in
anno 1630 it. was burnt by Argyle; therefore what more’ he did
there at this time 1 cannot peremptorily determine. ‘This far is cer-
tuin that (if you abstenct from the time) Montrose with a party was
the first who besieged Airly, and left. the prosecution of it to Ar=
syle, who at the demolishing thereof is said to have shewed himself
so extremely earnest, that he was seen taking a hammer in bis hand,
and knocking down the hewed work of the doors aud windows till
he did ewent for heat ut his work. There was likewise another
dwelling, belonging to Aisly’s eldest sou, the Lord Ogilvy, called
Forthar, where bis lady sqjourned for the time, ‘This house, though
no strength, behoved to be slighted ; and although the Lady Ogilvy,
being yreat with child at the time, asked licence of to stay
in her own house till she were brought to bed, that could not be ob«

Douglos, '
Kelly, hearing tell what extremity her grandchild, Ogilry,
Lal aspen

y ESN i

to move her Majesty to do all the respect and kindness
she can do to that nation,

There are dayly arguments and reasons given in, in his Majes=

that the act of oblivion may be general, without reserva=

mor exception of any person whomvoever, which we do alwnys

‘Yet wo cannot but shew your Lordships, that youi have laid.

‘es very hard und difficult charge upon us, in commanding ns to main=

tain thot none cited to the Parliament can be passed from, but that

‘the act of oblivion be general for all mon and all faults upon the

one side, and that the noblemen, and considerable gentlemen who

HareiAdiered tobe King, shall be under the lank and hazard of the

Parliament's censure, But we are revolved closely to adhere to

your directions and instructions, and maintain them with the best
reasons we can.

“ We have, and shall with all instancy urge the removing of
the Incendiaries from the King and Court ; and we did yesterday
make une of the information sont to us, concerning the discovery
‘of the Eorl of Traquair's plots, as an argument to the English
‘Commissioners, and the Committee of both Houses of Parlin«
ment, (who did then convene with us,) to move them to intercede
with the King that he might be removed from his Majesty, and
from Court, and sent home to abide his trial, which we shall still
press, whether the same be obtained or not ; and shall make the beat
‘se me can of any further infarmations or discovery your Lordships
shall be pleased (o send us. The King denies his knowledge of these
plots betwixt the Earls of Montrose and Traquair; and we heard
that Traquair doth likewine pertinaciously deny that wherewith he
isecharged. But it is not likely that Licutenant-Colonel Walter
Stewart, his relation to the Enrl of Trnquair being considered, would,
to his prejudice, have invented them, and we hope that God, who
has begun to discover these mischievous plots, will at last bring the
samme to light.

+ Mr Archibald Johaston le to take journey from huneo one of
‘these two days; nor could the condition of our affsirs and
spare him sooner, The dehates we have about the act of oblivion

as

a

AND ILLUSTRATIONS, 53T
«4, Coneorning the presentations of ministers to the kirks where»
‘of we are patron, we intend to take such arder by the advice of the

General Assembly, and our Council, ax men of best gifts, ond quali-
fications, may be presented to there churches.

“6. To show that we intend to grant some supply, out of tho rents
of the Inte bishops, to the colleges, which are the eeminuries of learn
ing, the better to enable them to breed men of suck virtue and en-
dowments, as may be fit for the service both of Church and State.

“6, Concerning the Government civil, you shall declare that it is
‘our royal resolution to govern our people according to the funda-
mental laws of that kingdom, and to minister justice equally to all
men, and that all matters ecelesiastic be judged by the General As-
‘semblies, and other subordinate assemblies of the church, and that
‘all mattera civil hall be judged by the Parliment, and other in«
ferior Courts of Justice established by the laws of that kingdom.

"7. To show that we shall ratify the treaty of peace in the Par~
Viament of England before our parting from hence, and shall like»
wise ratify the same in the Parliament of Scotland at the next Sea-
ion thereof.

+B, Seeing we conceive that there is nothing which can conduce
‘more for establishing our authority, and procure the obedience of
‘our subjects more, than the administration of justice, to show that
wwe intend, at our being in Scotland, to command the Council and
Session, and other Courts of Justice, to be patent, und. to proceed
in the administration of justice.

“9. As concerning the selection and appointing of our Officers of
‘State, Counwollory, und Seesioners, we desire you to be most care~
fal ond earnest in endeavouring all ye can, and using of your best
means, to make the articles that we already deew up typan that pro-
position to be condescended unto, and accepted, as fittest for our
honour, and the just sutisfuction of our subjects.

10. We having most clearly expressed ovr former resolution to
‘establish a durable pence, in the Church and State, in that our an-
cient and native kingdom of Scotland, and for that effect to be pre=
‘sent at the Parlinment shortly to bold there, and being most desir=
ous to prevent all impediments that may eross or hinder cordinl
unity, 90 really intended by ux with our native subjects, we earnest=
Iy recommend to your care, that the Earl of Traquair, making hum-
ble submission to us and tho Parliament, you try the minds of
the Committee, and deal effectually with them to intercede with
the Parliament, to accept of his humble sulmiasdon, and the same

VOR. 1 um

i

ai