LIBRARY PRINCETON, X. ./. No. Book The John M. Krehs Donation. /7< THBl EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF SCOTLAND REFORMATION TO THE REVOLUTION. JOHN PARKER LAWSON, M.A. AUTHOR OF THE " HISTORY OF THE SCOTTISH EPISCOPAL CHURCH FROM THE REVOLUTION TO THE PRESENT TIME," ETC. EDINBURGH: GALLIE AND BAYLEY, GEORGE STREET. LONDON : JAMES BURNS ; SIMPKIN, MARSHALL, AND CO, GLASGOW : MURRAY. ABERDEEN : BROWN AND CO. OXFORD : J. H. PARKER. CAMBRIDGE : J. AND J. J. DEIGHTON. DUBLIN : GRANT AND BOLTON. M.DCCC.XLIV. ALEX. LAURIE AND CO. PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTV. PREFACE. This Volume, derived from Acts of Parliament, Proceedings of General Assemblies, Eecords of Diocesan and Presbyterian Synods, Episcopal and Presbyterian Presbyteries, and numerous contemporary and other Records, is intended to elucidate the History of the Episcopal Church when it was the Ecclesiastical or National Establishment of Scotland. It is designed to illus- trate what the Episcopal Church, while connected with the State, really was, and its condition during its contentions with successive generations of adversaries. For this purpose the nar- rative is divided into Three Books or Parts — I. The History OF THE Titular or Tulchan Episcopate from the Reformation to the Accession of James VI. to the English Crown. II. The History of the Episcopal Church of Scotland from 1606, and especially from the First Consecration in 1610 to the commencement of the Covenanting Rebellion in 1638. III. The History of the Episcopal Church from the Restoration to the Revolution, or from 1661 to 1688. Of the first, or Tulchan Episcopate, the Author has freely expressed his opinion as a miserable and contemptible system, and it is only surprising that the Titulars could have considered themselves true Bishops in any sense, yet aifiple proof is adduced in the following narrative that they did so, and that they endured persecutions and indignities for maintaining their " phantom Episcopate." Nevertheless it served its political and temporary purposes, and as such the Titular Episcopacy must be understood, in developing the progress of ecclesiastical affairs in Scotland previous to the union of the two Crowns in the person of King James VI. IV PREFACE. The Author designs this Work as a contribution to Scottish Ecclesiastical History, and the reader is referred for subsequent details to his " History of the Scottish Episcopal Church FROM THE Revolution to the Present Time " as a continua- tion of this narrative. It will be seen from a perusal of both volumes, that probably no branch of the Church Catholic has experienced more vicissitudes, or has been more traduced and misrepresented by its enemies, than the Episcopal Church of Scotland, both during its legal establishment and after the Revolution, when it was supplanted by Presbyterianisra. Not- withstanding the depressions, persecutions, and malignant false- hoods against which that Church contended, the treachery of its pretended friends, and the malignant hostility of its Covenanting enemies, whose libelling and assassinating propensities cannot be denied, the Scottish Bishops and clergy maintained the cause of their Chui'ch with dignity and constancy in the most dangerous and eventful times. The present Writer, therefore, submits his Work with confidence to the reader, convinced that he has distorted no fact, and that he has detailed in as temperate language as is pos- sible to be employed, the history of a Church which has never been properly understood by some, and has been assailed by others with all the rancour, hatred, and revenge of sectarian hostility. Edinburgh, March 1844. CONTENTS. BOOK I. HISTORY OP THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE IN SCOTLAND AFTER THE REFORMATION. Chat. page I. — Scottish Archbishoprics and Bishoprics at the Reformation, " . . I II. — The Reformation in Scotland and its Consequences — the last Roman Catholic Bishops, and the first Protestant Preachers, in Scotland, 39 III. — The Superintendent System of Church Government, . . 80 IV. — The Titular or Tulchan Episcopate, 96 V. — The Titular Bishops — their Humiliating Position — Proceedings of the General Assemblies — their Presbyterian Opponents, . . 12-1 VI. — The Titular Bishops attacked in the General Assemblies, . . 143 VII. — Progress of Presbyterianism, . ..... IG8 VIII. — King James Vl's Contentions with the Presbyterians, . . 202 IX. — Opinions and Practices of the Presbyterians of Scotland at the end of the Sixteenth Century — their Notions of Ordination — Mode of Exer- cising Discipline — Fondness for Trying and Punishing Cases of Scandal and Licentious Offences — their Tyrannical Proceedings, . . 243 BOOK II. THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF SCOTLAND FROM 1606 TO 1639. Chap. I.— Establishment of the Church, . . . . 263 II.— Internal State of the Church— Trial of Lord Balmerino— The High Court of Commission — General Assembly — Synods of Fife and Lothian — Consecration of the Scottish Bishops, . . . 297 III. — Peaceful State of the Church — Bishop Cowpar of Galloway — Trial of Ogilvie the Jesuit — Death of Archbishop Gladstanes, . . 319 IV. — Internal State of the Church — Archbishop Spottiswoode removed to St Andrews — Changes in the Bishoprics — The See of Orkney — The High Commission — General Assembly at Aberdeen — A Catechism, Liturgy, and Book of Canons, ordered to be prepared — A Confession of Faith approved, . . . . . . 347 V. — King James in Scotland in 1617 — Proceedings during his Visit — Its Results — General Assembly at St Andrews — State of the Assembly — Elevation of Patrick Forbes of Corse to the Bishopric of Aberdeen, 365 VI. — The General Assembly and Five Articles of Perth — Bishop Cowpar's Defence of them — The Controversies which ensued — Conduct of Hen- derson— Fate of the Records of the General Assemblies, . 390 IV CONTENTS. Chat. page VII. — The Observance of the Perth Articles — Death of Bishop Cowpar — Ecclesi- astical Arrangemeuts and Discussions — Meeting of the Scottish Parlia- ment— Its Proceedings — Changes in the Dioceses, . . 408 VIII. — The Episcopal Church at the Accession of Charles I. — Proceedings of the Bishops — History of Teinds in Scotland — The King's Revocation of the Teinds — Its Disastrous Consequences, . . . 426 IX. — Changes in the Dioceses — Irregular Ordination of Presbyterians in Ire- land— Internal Affairs of the Church — Coronation of Charles I. at Holyroodhouse — Foundation of the Bishopric of Edinburgh — The First Bishop — His Death — Death of Bishop Forbes of Aberdeen, 445 X. — Discontent in Scotland — Plots of the English Puritans and Scottish Pres- byterians— Trial of the Second Lord Balmerino — Bishop Sydserff of Galloway — Calvinism — The Compilation of the Scottish Liturgy — Archbishop Laud's Correspondence with the Scottish Bishops, . 463 XI. — The Scottish Book of Canons and Scottish Liturgy, . . 484 XII.— The Riots at Edinburgh at the First Use of the Liturgy and the Results, 499 XIII. — The National Covenant and the Covenanters, . . . 532 XIV. — The Confederacy against the Church and the Rival Covenant, . 548 XV. — The Glasgow General Assembly, . ... 571 XVI. — Overthrow of the Church — the Aberdeen Doctors — the Solemn League and Covenant — the Civil War — the Presbyterians sell the King, 604 XVII. — Fanaticism, Oppression, and Craelties of the Covenanting Presbyterians, 035 BOOK III. THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OP SCOTLAND FROM 1661 TO 1688. Chap. I. — Preliminaries of the Re-establishment of the Church, . 661 II. — The Scottish Bishops of the Second Anglican Consecration, . 676 III. — The Retaliation, ..... 702 IV. — The Consecration and Public Atfairs, .... 715 V. — Administration of the Church during its Establishment, , 741 VI. — Changes in the Episcopate and State of the Kingdom, . 749 VII.— DitRculties of the Church and Plots of its Enemies, . 769 VIII. — Farther Discouragements of the Church, . . . 789 IX.— The Church and its Opponents, . . . . 810 X. — The Murder of Archbishop Sharp, . . . .836 XI. — The Church and the Covenanters, .... 851 XII.— State of the Church previous to the Revolution, . . 869 BOOK I. THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE IN SCOTLAND AFTER THE REFORMATION. CHAPTER I. SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS AT THE REFORMATION. After the primitive Episcopacy of the ancient Culdees was sub- verted, and merged into the Church of Rome, so as to leave few memorials of its existence, the City of St Andrews in Fife was for centuries the seat of the Scottish Roman Catholic Primates, as Maximi Episcopi Scotorum, but the See was not constituted arch- episcopal till 1470, during the episcopate of Patrick Graham, the successor and half-brother of the illustrious Bishop Kennedy who founded the University of St Andrews. This mark of distinction appears to have been procured from Pope Paul II. by Bishop Gi*aham when at Rome, to extinguish the claims of superiority over the Scottish Church which had been often asserted by the Archbishops of York, In 1488, Robert Black- adder, who was consecrated Bishop of Glasgow in 1484, pro- cured a Bull from Pope Alexander VI. erecting that See into an Archbishopric, notwithstanding the violent opposition of Arch- bishop Schevez of St Andrews and other dignitaries. The king- dom was thus divided into two ecclesiastical provinces, at the head of each of which was the Archbishop, whose powers and jurisdic- tion were defined by Papal Bulls, and ratified by royal charters. The Archbishop of St Andrews was Primate of all Scotland and Metropolitan ; but it does not appear that the Archbishops of Glas- gow ever enjoyed the title of Primate, as in the case of the Arch- 1 2 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS bishops of York, who are styled Primate of England, and of the Archbishops of Dublin, who are Primate of Ireland. The Suffragan Sees of the Scottish Archbishops were subsequent- ly arranged. Those of the Province of St Andrews were Aber- deen, Brechin, Caithness, Dunblane, Dunkeld, Moray, Orkney, and Boss ; those of the Province of Glasgow were Galloway, Argyll, and the Isles. Keith includes Dunblane and Dunkeld among the Suffi-agan Sees of Glasgow as ai)pointed by the Bull of Pope Alex- ander VI., and omits The Isles ; but this must either be a mistake, or a different arrangement was subsequently effected. The Diocese of St Andrews was of great extent before the foundation of the Bishopric of Edinburgh by Charles I. It included the counties of Fife, Kinross, and Clackmannan, and a large portion of Perth, For- far, and Kincardine shires, on the north side of the Firth of Forth ; the counties of Haddington, Edinburgh, Linlithgow, and part of Stir- ling and Berwick shires, on the south side of that river and estuary, stretching towards the English Border ; and a considerable number of parishes, churches, and chapels in other dioceses, belonged to the See. In reference to the Suffragans, the Diocese of Aberdeen com- prehended the county of Aberdeen (except six parishes in the district of Strathbogie), twelve parishes in Banffshire, and four in Kincardineshire. It is said that the Bishops of Aberdeen ancient- ly took precedence after the two Archbishops, which was altered in 1633, when Edinburgh and Galloway ranked next to the Arch- bishops, and the rest according to the seniority of their consecration. Brechin included parts of the t\vo counties of Forfar and Kincar- dine. Caithness comprised the counties of Sutherland and Caith- ness. The Diocese of Ross extended over the counties of Eoss and Cromarty, and most of Inverness. That of Moray consisted of the counties of Elgin and Nairn, parts of the counties of Banff and Inverness, and some parishes in Aberdeenshire. The Diocese of Dunkeld comprehended the greater part of Perthshire, some districts in Forfarshire, and some parishes south of the Forth in Linlithgowshire. The Diocese of Dunblane included the west and southern districts of Perthshire, and a small portion of Stir- lingshire. The Diocese of Orkney consisted of all the Orkney and Shetland Islands. The Archdiocese of Glasgow extended over the counties of Lanark, Dunbarton, Renfrew, Ayr, and part of the counties of AT THE REFORMATION. 3 Dumfries, Peebles, Selkirk, Eoxburgh, and part of Berwickshire. Some portions of Stirlingshire were also included. The Diocese of Galloway comprehended the ancient district so called, now divided into the counties of Wigton and Kirkcudbright, and part of Dumfries-shire. The Diocese of Argyll contained the county of Argyll and some of the Western Isles. The Diocese of The Isles included the Islands of Bute and An-an in the Frith of Clyde, and most of the Western Islands in the dreary and remote regions of the Scottish Archipelago. The Isle of Man is said to have been anciently a part of the Diocese of The Isles, from which it was disjoined, during the contest between Bruce and BaHol for the Scottish Crown, by Edward III. of England, who made himself master of the island. A curious arrangement took place in 1508, which was ratified by a Papal Bull that year. It was ordered that in future the Bishop of Galloway, or Whitehorn, as the Diocese was sometimes designated, should be Dean of the Chapel- Royal at Stirling, con- stituted and endowed by James IV., with " the care of the souls of the King and Queen, along with precedence in the Chapel." The additional title of Bishop of the Chapel-Royal was conferred on the Bishops of Galloway by the King's solicitation, and con- firmed by Pope Alexander VI., with all the emoluments derived from the appointment as Dean of the Chapel-Royal.* The first prelate who enjoyed the united bishopric, if that of the Chapel- Royal may be designated, was George Vans or Vans, and the second was James Beaton, successively Archbishop of Glasgow and St Andrews. The prelates who held the united episcopal jurisdic- tion, after the translation of Archbishop Beaton to Glasgow, were David Arnot, Archdeacon of Lothian, Provost of Bothwell, and Abbot of Cambuskenneth ; Henry Wemyss ; Andrew Durie, Ab- bot of Melrose ; and Alexander Gordon, who is prominently noticed in the sequel. As to the Chapel- Royal of Stirhng, within the pre- cincts of that Castle, it is said to have represented a more ancient chapel dedicated to St Michael, to which the provostry of the church of St Mary of Kirkheugh, near St Andrews, was annexed about the close of the fifteenth century, before the Chapel-Royal was endowed by James IV. The edifice founded or enlarged by • Brief Analysis of the Chartularies of the Abbey of Cambuskenneth, Chapel- Royal of Stirling, &c. by Sir John Graham Dalyell, Bart. Edin. 1828, p. 55, 56, 57. 4 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS that monarch was demolished by order of James VI., and the pre- sent building was erected, probably more extensive, when he re- solved to celebrate the baptism of his eldest son Prince Henry in it with great splendour in 1594. The revenues of the Ohapel- Eoyal of Stirling were absorbed after the Reformation, and the accession of James VI. to the English Crown extinguished its im- portance. The building has been in subsequent times used as an armoury, and for keeping fire-engines and small pieces of artillery. The only memorials long visible were a mutilated wooden crown, ornamented with a border in relief, and the stains of decaying colours. These had survived the wreck of the decorations with which the interior was adorned for the royal baptism, when ambassa- dors from Denmark, England, France, Holland, Brunswick, and Magdeburg, were present, and the Prince baptised amid a mix- ture of christian devotion and pagan pantomime. It is clear from the details of the chartulary, that James IV. must have orna- mented his episcopal Chapel-Royal in a munificent manner. One of the articles of furniture is a striking clock, " per dominum Jaco- bum Pettygrew fabricatum and as the inventory was made in 1505, this is the second intimation of a clock striking the hours in Scotland, the first, as is supposed, occurring in 1489. Three organs are described — ^" Tria paria organorum, quorum unum ut de lignis, et duo alii de stanno sive plumbo." Sir John Dalyell observes — " Possibly they were portable." On this conjecture the following statement is curious : — " Most probably not. The very learned authority forgets that at this period music was cultivated by church- men as a science — that the chanter, whose rank was next to the sub-dean, had no less than sixteen canons under him, and six sing- ing boys, all trained to the Church services, including the solemn requiem for the souls of the departed. Could any thing be more ludicrous than to figure three of the prebends or canons, each grinding away on his portable organ ? Did it not occur to the learned author that the tria paria might include the choir, the great organ, and the swell ? An instrument of this description is now extant in Holland, which was removed from the Cathedral of Glasgow at the period of the Reformation."* Let us now attend to the Chapters of the several Dioceses as * The above, written in pencil, on the copy of Sir John Dalyell's " Brief Analysis of the Chartulary of the Chapel-Royal of Stirling," in the Advocates' Library, Edin. p. 69. AT THE REFORMATION, 5 they were constituted before and at the period of the Reformation, so far as they arc known, commencing with the metropohtan church of St Andrews. The Diocese included the Deaneries of St An- drews, Fothrick, Gowrie, Angus, Mearns, Linlithgow, Haddington, Dunbar, and the Merse, or Berwickshire. The Archdeacons of St Andrews and Lothian are specified as the principal dignitaries. According to Martinets statement, the Archbishops of St Andrews before the Reformation had no chapter, properly so called, but the Prior and Convent were considered a Chapter, and all acts or confirmations were " testified by appending the Convent's common seal. — Thereafter, the Priorie being erected into a temporal Lord- ship, it was found needful that the See should not want a Chapter, the former being by this erection supprest, but that some course behoved to be taken for a new one," which was carried into effect in 1G09 and IGl?.* The Chapter of Aberdeen appears to have varied in number at different periods. In 1256, the statutes enjoined that the number of Canons should be thirteen at least, which was ratified by Bishop WiUiam de Deyn in 13GG ; but in 1382 they had encreased to twenty-two. Between 1448 and 1514, the statutes, which were con- firmed or sanctioned by Bishop Elphinstone, intimate that twenty nine persons were either obliged to find vicars, or that so many vicars were considered necessary for the performance of the ecclesias- tical duties, to all of whom it is probable that prebends were assign- ed. Bishop Elphinstone provided in his Constitutions, dated 1506, that to prevent any disputes about the hire of the vicars of the choir of the cathedral church, there shall be twenty vicars of the priesthood in the choir skilled in the Gregorian song for the daily service, two deans, two sub-deans, two accolites, six boys, and the sacrist." The Constitutions of Bishop Peter Ramsay, in 1256, enjoin the Dean to reside the greater part of the year ; the Precentor, Chancellor, and Treasurer, half the year ; and the non- residence of the Archdeacon was allowed on certain days, because it was his duty to go through the diocese, and regulate abuses.f The Bull obtained from Pope Innocent IV. by the same Bishop • Reliquiae Divi Andreae, or the State of the Venerable and Primatial See of St An- drews, by a true though unworthy Sone of the Church (George Martine), first publish- ed in 1683, reprinted at St Andrews in 1797, 4to. p. 39. t Remarks on the Chartularics of the See of Aberdeen, by Sir John Graham Dalycll, Bart. pp. 14, 15, IG. 6 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS that year, ordained the College of Ccanons, founded about 1157 by Bishop Edward in consequence of a Bull from Pope Adrian, to consist of twelve prebendaries, some of whom were appointed dig- nitaries, and a house, glebe, and garden, were allotted to each in the Chanonry, The Bishop of Aberdeen was rector of the parish of St Nicholas in New Aberdeen ; the rector of the church of Kirktown of Seaton was Dean of the Chapter, the parson of Birse was Chancellor, the parson of Daviot was Treasurer, and the par- son of Rhynie was Archdeacon. The other prebendaries were seven, exclusive of the minor canons or vicars-choral, who were presby- ters, the singing boys, and the sacrist. But other prebendaries were added by subsequent prelates. Bishop Potton, or Polton, added one in 12G2 ; Bishop Cheyne, four between 1313 and 1328 ; Bishop Alexander Kinninmont I. one in 1330 : Bishop Alexander Kinninmont II. five from 1356 to 1368 ; Bishop Greenlaw, one in 1412 ; Bishop Leighton, two in 1420 and 1424 ; and Bishop Lindsay, two in 1445. The rector of St Peter's Hospital was admitted to the dignity of a prebendary in 1527 by Bishop Dun- bar, and was appointed sub-chantor. The twenty vicars-choral, or minor canons, were appointed by Bishop Elphinstone with con- sent of the Dean and Chapter. The sacrist, who was a priest, was to attend the choir properly vested, along with the other vicars, on holidays and festivals, and cause his beadle to ring the bells on these occasions, and throughout the year. Before the Reforma- tion the Diocese of Aberdeen contained two Cathedrals — Mort- lach and Old Aberdeen, and episcopal palaces at Balveny and Old Aberdeen, three episcopal manors, ten religious houses, three collegiate churches, one collegiate chapel, one university of King's college, one grammar school at Aberdeen, and the five Deaneries of Aberdeen, Mar, Garioch, Buchan, and Boyne. The Deanery of Aberdeen comprehended nine parish churches ; that of Mar, thirty-three ; that of Garioch, twenty-two ; that of Buchan, seven- teen ; and that of Boyne, fifteen.* The Chapter of Moray consisted, about 1208, of eight preben- daries, constituted by Bishop Bricius, and confirmed by his suc- cessor Bishop Andrew in 1226 ; but in subsequent times the num- bers, as in other establishments, were variable, and were probably augmented as the funds of the Cathedral were encreased by dona- ' Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen, vol. ii. p. 317-327. AT THE REFORMATION. 7 tions. In 1362 seventeen chaplains were constantly resident at the cathedral church of the Holy Trinity at Elgin, performing divine service. In 1542 and 1545 two prebends were instituted by Bishop Patrick. The official members of the Chapter speci- fied are the Dean, the Chantor, Treasurer, Chancellor, Archdeacon, Sub-Dean, and Sub-Chantor, The dependencies enumerated are sixteen parsonages, six common churches, and twenty-six chaplain- eries, of which latter seventeen were within the walls of the Cathe- dral.* It appears upon the original documents that Bishop Bri- cius instituted eight canonries when the Cathedral of Moray was at Spynie, from whom he nominated the Dean, Chancellor, Arch- deacon, Chantor, and Treasurer.f Bishop Andrew in 1226 added fourteen canons, and the Chapter of Moray was thus encreased to twenty-two, a number which they never exceeded. To every ca- nonry a vicarage was annexed for the better subsistence of the in- cumbent, who received the great tithes of both parishes, and was generally the patron of the vicarage. The Diocese of Moray was divided into the Deaneries of Elgin, comprising twelve parishes ; Inverness, fourteen parishes ; Strathbogie, eight parishes ; and Strathspey, nine parishes. The Chapter of Ross consisted of the Dean, the Chancellor, Archdeacon, Chantor, and Treasurer, but the number of canons or prebendaries is not accurately known. No chartulary belong- ing to the Bishopric of Ross has been discovered in Scotland. The conjecture is not improbable that Bishop Leslie, the last Roman Catholic Prelate, who was the zealous defender of Queen Mary, carried with him the documents of his Diocese, and they are now either lost, or preserved in a foreign library or coUege.J The Chapter of Caithness is also unknown, as are the ecclesias- tical divisions or deaneries. It is probable that the writs and other documents connected with this Diocese may be in the posses sion of the Duke of Sutherland. The state of the Chapter of the insular Diocese of Orkney in former times is very obscure. In 1544, Bishop Robert Reid " Brief Analysis of the Ancient Records of the Bishopric of Moray, by Sir John Graham Dalyell, Bart. p. 7, 8, 9. •f The original documents, with translations, are inserted in the Appendix to the edi- tion of Mr. Lachlan Shaw's History of the Province of Moray, brought down to the year 1826, and published in 1827 by John Grant. % Sir John Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland, vol. sd. p. 341. 8 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS granted a charter for the " foundation and erection of certain offices in the cathedral church of Orkney for the service of God six canons and as many chaplains are mentioned, and the Chapter is noticed as consisting of the Provost, Archdeacon, Chantor, Chancellor, Treasurer, Sub-Dean, Sub-Chantor, seven prebendaries, thirteen chaplains, and six singing boys." The Provost was to be a Doctor of Theology, of " good fame, conversation, and name," who was to take precedence immediately after the Bishop ; and the duties of his office are defined — " totius diocesis inquisitor here- tice pravitatis, cui correctio canonicorum, prebendariorium, et ca- pellaniorum in capitulo spectabit." In his absence the Sub-Dean was to act. The second dignitary next to the Provost was to be the Archdeacon, who was to be a Master of Arts — " vir probatis, vitse, et morum, presbiter bene eruditus in diuinis et humanis literis." The Precentor or Chantor was to be the third dignitary ; and to be eligible for the office he was to be a Master of Arts, or a gra- duate in another faculty well instructed in the Gregorian chant. The Chancellor was to rank third after the Provost, and he was to be a doctor in canon or civil law, or " bachalarius formatus in ali- qua florenti universitate." Next to him was the Treasurer, who was to be a Master of Arts — " vir probus et circumspectus ;" the sub-dean was also to be a Master of Arts — " presbiter vir bene instructus in utroque testamento ;" and the Sub-Chantor was to be a presbyter — " bene instructus per omnes numeros in utroque cantu." The duties of the librarian, organist, the keeper of the clock, and other minor functionaries, are defined. This arrange- ment of the Chapter of Orkney was confirmed and ratified by Cardinal Beaton, when Archbishop of St Andrews and Papal Legate, in 1545.* The Chapter, as above constituted, continued in that state till the Reformation. Little is apparently known of the ancient Chapter of Brechin. The Chancellor of this Diocese is mentioned in a document signed by the Bishop in 1511, the original of which is in the possession of Viscount Arbuthnot.-f- Some notices occur of the cathedral establishment in the various charters to the bishops and clergy. King Robert Bruce, • The original documents are printed in " Rentals of the Ancient Earldom and Bishopric of Orkney," by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. Edinburgh, 1820, 8vo. Appendix, p. 18-30. •f The History of Brechin, by David D. Black, Town-Clerk, 1839. AT THE REFORMATION. 9 by a charter dated at Scone, 10th July 1322, gave to John, Bishop of Brechin, and to the chaplain and canons of the cathedral church, the privilege of holding a market within the city on Sundays. In 1359, David II. confirmed to the same cathedral church all the privileges granted by his ancestors ; and in 1374, Robert II. en- joined his justiciaries, sheriffs, and provosts, to defend the Bishop of Brechin and the canons in all their lands and privileges. Among the more conspicuous benefactors was Walter Stewart, Earl of AthoU and Caithness, who, in 1429, assigned L.40 Scots, payable annually from his estate and lordship of Oortachy or from Brechin, for the maintenance of two chaplains and six boys, to perform divine service within the choir ; and he gave land on the west side of the city for their residence. The one chaplain is enjoined to be instructed in music, and the other in grammar, which they were expected to study during the hours of interval from their spiritual functions. In 1435, the Bishop reduced the chaplaincies to one ; and nearly ninety years afterwards, in 1524, the then Bishop de- cided in some differences between the chaplains and the Chapter, for non-performance of duties. The Bishop, Dean, and Chapter, are noticed in a legal document dated 1535 ; and in 15G6, Bishop Hepburn, at the request of Erskine of Dun, the patron of the two chaplaincies of the Virgin Mary in the Cathedral, united them, because they were insufficient for the support of two, and appro- priated the income to one. But the constitution of the Chapter may be inferred from a reference to a more ancient document, de- signated an " ApostoHc Letter issued on Trinity Monday, in 1372, by Patrick, Bishop of Brechin, and the Chapter, in presence of the canons, rectors, and vicars of the diocese, to ascertain the number of benefices, and the dignities and offices belonging to the Cathedral, the incumbents who were to be considered prebendaries, and who of the eleven of them were to enjoy the dignities of Dean, Chantor, Chancellor, Treasurer, and Archdeacon." Among the official wit- nesses are the Precentor, Chancellor, Treasurer, Arch-Dean, Sub- Dean, two prebendaries, and sundry canons of the Cathedral, the Dean and one prebendary being absent on account of distance. In 1 384 the parish church of Lethnot was constituted a prebend at the request of Sir David Lindsay of Glenesk, with a stall in the choir, and a place in the Chapter. In 1429 the Bishop and Chapter de- clare that the Dean, Precentor, Chancellor, and Treasurer, have 10 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS precedence of all the Canons, which was confirmed by their signa- tures in 1435. The parish church of Finhaven was constituted a prebend in 1474 at the request of the Earl of Crawford, Several chaplaincies and altarages were connected with the Cathedral.* The Chapters of Dunkeld and Dunblane consisted of the usual dignitaries, but were Hmited ; as both these Dioceses, like that of Brechin, were of no great extent. The Bishops had what were called mcnsal churches in various Dioceses. The chartulary and other records of the Bishopric of Dunblane are not to be found. Those of Dunkeld may probably be among the archives of the Dukes of Atholl, and some allusions occur in the Lives of the Bishops of Dunkeld, from the foundation of the See to 1515, writ- ten in Latin by Alexander Myln, Abbot of Cambuskenneth, and published in 1831. In the Archiepiscopal Province of Glasgow the Chapter of the Archdiocese of Glasgow first demands our attention. After John Achaius, the preceptor and chaplain of Alexander I., was promoted to the Bishopric in 1129, he divided the Diocese into the two Arch- deaconries of Glasgow and Teviotdale, established the dignitaries of Dean, Sub-Dean, Chanter, Chancellor, Treasurer, S«b-Chantor, and Sacrist, and settled a prebend on each out of the donations he had received from the King. ])uring the episcopate of Bishop John Cameron, the most munificent of all the prelates who occu- pied the See of Glasgow, elected in 1421, the members of the Chap- ter were thirty-nine, whom he ordered to erect parsonages, and reside in the vicinity of the Cathedral, appointing curates to offici- ate in their respective parishes. Those parsonages were situated at the upper end of the High Street near the ancient Cross, and in the streets called Drygate, Rottenrow, and Deanside Brae. During Bishop Cameron''s episcopate, the Dean, Chanter, Chan- cellor, Treasurer, Sub-Dean, and Archdeacon, were the dignitaries, and this constitution of the Chapter continued till the Reform- ation. The vicars of the choir are not of course included.-f- The original Chapter of the See of Whitehorn or Galloway consisted of the Bishop, the Prior, Sub-Prior, and eleven Canons. J Nothing is known of the Chapters of Argyll and of The Isles. • The History of Brechin, by David D. Black, Town-Clerk, 1839. f Cleland's Annals of Glasgow, vol. i, p. 113, 114. t Brief Analysis of the Chapel-Royal of Stirling, p. 58. AT THE REFORMATION. 11 The Earl of Argyll seized all the registers and charters of those Sees at the Reforaiation, when he obtained possession of the church lands, and it is uncertain whether they are lost, or were wilfully destroyed at the time. In taking a view of the Scottish Cathedrals, much valuable in- formation is presented to the ecclesiastical historian and anti- quary. With no pretension to the magnificence, vastness, and im- posing grandem- of those of England, and in every respect inferior in architectural display and genius, some of the Scottish Cathedrals were nevertheless stately edifices ; and those of Glasgow and Kirkwall, the two which are entire, may be considered as muni- ficent memorials of the founders. The Cathedral of St Andrews was one of the largest in Scotland, and though most of those in England are of greater extent, it was undoubtedly a splendid church. The ruins which remain, chiefly a monument of the violence of John Knox and his followers, and partly in subsequent times the work of the inhabitants, who resorted to it for materials to build houses and garden walls, sufficiently indicate the dimen- sions. The church consisted of the nave, 200 feet long and 62 wide, including the two lateral aisles ; a transept, with an eastern aisle, 160 feet long ; a choir with two lateral aisles, 98 feet long ; and at the eastern extremity 33 feet long :* the entire length of the whole structure within the walls being 356 feet. This magni- ficent edifice, the erection of which occupied one hundred and sixty years, with its stately towers and shining copper roof, all destined to fall by the hands of some thousands of sacrilegious enthusiasts, was begun by Bishop Arnold, formerly Abbot of Kelso, who filled the See from 1159 to 1162. Malcolm IV. was present at the foundation. The building was carried on by eleven of his suc- cessors, but the work, as appears from the long time for its com- pletion, advanced slowly on account of the want of funds, and the anxiety that the edifice should be as splendid as possible. It was finished in 1318, when King Robert Bruce was present at the con- secration, during the episcopate of Bishop Lamberton, who filled the See from 1298 to 1328 ; and, says Martine, " considering the time it was demolisht [June 1559], it stood entire two hundred and forty years, and from the foundation to the razing thereof, * The History of St Auckews, by the Rev. C. J. Lyon, M.A. In 2 vols. EJin. 1813. 12 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS occasioned by a sermon of John Knox against idolatrie, preached to a giddy lawless multitude, it was just four hundred years." It appears, however, that fifty years after the consecration a part of the church was accidentally burnt, but it was speedily repaired, and placed under the superintendence of the Priors of St An- drews, several of whom awarded large sums from their own revenues for its internal and external decoration. The ground selected for the site of the Cathedral is an elevated piece of table land on the east end of the city, overlooking the Bay of St Andrews, and a short distance north of the Priory, which had been founded for the Canons by Bishop Robert, the immediate predecessor of Bishop Arnold. Adjoining stands the vener- able tower of the Chapel of St Eegulus, the walls of the latter still remaining, 32 feet long and 25 feet broad ; the whole struc- ture generally admitted to be as ancient as the end of the fourth or the beginning of the fifth century, though unnoticed by histo- rians till the thirteenth century, when the common tradition is retailed by them. The ruins of the Cathedral of St Andrews, which are now preserved with great care from farther dilapida- tion, are the remaining portions of a very large cross church, which, when entire, was principally of the very late Norman style, with some portions early English, and some parts later. The ruins consist of the east end of the choir, part of the walls of the south transept and south aisle of the nave, and a portion of the west end. Mr. Eickman states — " The details of the several styles, as far as they can be made out, are very fine, and it is to be regretted that so little is left for examination." The east gable contains three oblong windows with semicircular arches, above which is a large window, all between two turrets terminated by pointed octagonal pinnacles. The west point consists of a pointed arched gateway, ornamented with rich mouldings, but only one of the two windows above is entire, with one of the turrets of light and elegant workmanship surmounted by an octagonal lantern pinnacle.* The great central tower was supported by four mas- sive pillars, the bases of which are still seen at the intersection of the nave with the transept. The Cathedral, which in addition to the outrages committed on it by Knox's adherents in 1559, pro- bably was farther dilapidated in 1560, when an order was issued • History of St Andrews, by the Re\r. C. J. Lyon, M.A. Edin. 1843. AT THE REFORMATION'. 13 for demolishing such cloisters and abbey churches as were not then pulled down, must have been considered beyond the possi- bility of repair after the partial and nominal restoration of the Episcopal Church in 1572, and its full estabhshment in 160G. Most of the rubbish lay on the site of the ruined church till 1826, when it was removed by order of the Barons of the Scottish Court of Exchequer, and the floor and foundations of the columns laid open. Since that year subsequent clearings have farther developed this now melancholy memorial of fanatical violence, which may be viewed as no en\-iable monument of Knox and his mob. The ruins of the Archepiscopal Castle of St Andrews are a short dis- tance north-west of the Cathedral, overlooking the Bay. The castle was completely destroyed after the murder of Cardinal Beaton, when the assassins and their followers were compelled to surrender ; but it was rebuilt by Archbishop Hamilton, the Car- dinal's successor, whose arms are still to be seen on the walls. The front window in it, from which the Cardinal is said to have witnessed the incremation of his conspiring enemy George Wishart, " the Martyr,'" is therefore, as far as that tradition is concerned, altogether a fable. It is already mentioned that only two of the Scottish Cathedrals are entire, or escaped the violence of the Reformation — Glasgow, preserved by the spirited conduct of the citizens, and Orkney, which owed its safety to its distance from the scene of tui'bulence. These edifices are subsequently noticed ; meanwhile, proceeding northwards, the episcopal city of Brechin, nearly forty miles from St Andrews by Dundee and Forfar, claims our notice. This Cathedral was founded by David I. in the eleventh century, and dedi- cated to the Holy Trinity, but no distinct account of the date of the erection of the church, or of the adjoining steeple, and cele- brated round tower, is known to exist. The belfry appears to have been built between 1354 and 1384, at least during the epis- copate of Bishop Patrick de Leuchars, when, as a part of the payment of twenty-eight marks due annually from the parish of Lethnot to the Cathedral, Henry de Leighton, the vicar, delivered to the Bishop " a large white horse, and also a cart and horse to lead stones to the building of the belfrey of the Chm-ch of Brechin."* It appears that this Cathedral never was completed ; • History of Brechin, by David D. Black, p. 17. 14 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS and though some beautiful ruins of the choir and chancel are still seen, the intelligent historian of Brechin doubts if " the high altar had ever been finished, and if there had been any thing more than a Lady Chapel, of which the foundations are occasionally met with to the east of the ruins.""* The great western door and the nave, according to this statement, constituted the whole of Brechin Cathedral ever erected, as there is no appearance of transepts, and what are now considered as such seem to have been mere extensions of the side aisles. This Cathedral escaped the fury of Knox's mob, whose ravages indeed were very limited north of the Tay. Before 1806 the church, as used by the Presbyterian con- gregation, was an elegant Gothic edifice, consisting of the nave and two side aisles, and the transepts or extension of the aisles. In that year the north and south transepts were removed, new aisles were built on each side of the nave, and one roof placed over the whole, completely eclipsing the beautiful clere storey windows in the nave, and obscuring a fine carved cornice of the " nail head quatrefoil description, which runs under the eaves of the nave.-f- It is needless to observe that, in an architectural point of view, the Presbyterians have completely deformed the edifice by their outrageous alterations. The church, as now occu- pied by the Established Presbyterians, is 114 feet in length, and 30 feet in breadth, or 58 feet including the aisles, added in 1806-7, each of which measures 14 feet, and the whole is supported by 12 pillars. The western door is beautifully carved, and the large Gothic window above it is deservedly admired for its elegant mullions and tracery. The original roof was Gothic, and was of a similar construction to that of Westminster Hall. At the north angle of the nave, close to the west door, rises the steeple, a stately square tower of 70 feet high, ornamented with elegant quatrefoil belfry windows, the top battlemented, and surrounded with a bar- tizan, from which rises a fine octagon spire 50 feet high. The base of the steeple contains an apartment with an elegant groined roof, terminating in an open circle about four feet in diameter, and 17 feet from the floor.J This room in all probability was a kind of chapter room for the clergy of the Cathedral, and it is now used as the Presbyterian session-house. A board in it intimates • History of Brechin, by David D. Black, p. 253, 254. t Ihid. p. 251. t Ibid. p. 253, 254, 255. AT THE REFORMATION. 15 that in 1G15, Andrew, Bishop of Brechin, " gifted the Jiearse before the pulpit," the said liearse^ which is still in the church, being a very elegant brass chandelier for holding candles. This Bishop was Andrew Lamb, one of those consecrated in England in 1610. Another intimation in this " session-house" is to the effect that in 1 GG5, David, Bishop of Brechin, gifted the " orlodge," or clock on the steeple. This prelate was David Strachan, conse- crated in 1GG2.* The residence of the Bishops of Brechin in their own episcopal city was near a lane, still called the Bishop's Close, to the east of the Cathedral, and leading to the High Street. At one end is an arch, the aisles of which display part of the walls which enclosed the episcopal house, but no vestige now remains. Campbell, the last Roman Catholic incumbent, who dilapidated the See after the Reformation in favour of the Earl of Argyll, probably sold the mansion when he disposed of a piece of ground near the Bishop's Close to a certain James Graham, on the pretence that it had long been a " I'eceptacle of filth and nuisance," and that " he had not been able to walk in his ovra garden in safety by reason thereof." It is well observed by the local historian of Brechin, that at the Reformation it was simul- taneously discovered that the " manses, houses, and hospitals of the Roman Catholics, had been contrived to last only during the continuance of their dominion. — The Archdean sold his man- sion, with the houses and yards pertaining thereto ; the Chancellor conveyed a piece of waste ground upon which formerly stood his manse, with the garden thereof, and the Presbyters found that part of their residence and habitation was in a like dangerous and decayed situation, and that there was no cure but a sale. These and other similar grants are all ratified by James IV., and thus a great part of the property belonging to the church of Brechin passed to lay hands."| Such was the fate of nmch of the ecclesi- astical property in other places. The Sec of Aberdeen is generally alleged to have been at Mort- lach, a parish and decayed hamlet in the county of Banff, the latter in the vicinity of the thriving village of Dufftown, erected since 1815 under the auspices of the Earl of Fife. Malcolm II. is the reputed founder, and he was induced to erect a church and monastery to perpetuate a victory over the Danes in the • History of Brechin, by David D. Black, p. 302, 305. f ^bid. p. 32, 33. 16 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS neighbourhood about A. D. 1010. Mortlach became the scat of the ancient prelates, and the Cathedral, such as it is, a remark- ably plain edifice, is still used for parochial purposes ; but the time of the proper erection of the See must be referred to the reign of David I,, about 113G, when Nectanus was appointed Bishop, and the seat of the Diocese transferred to Old Aberdeen, within two miles of the large seaport of Aberdeen. The present Cathedral, dedicated to St Machar, occupies the site of the old church of St Machar, and was begun by Bishop Alexander Kinin- mont, the second of that name, who succeeded to the See about 1357 ; but at his death in 1381 the work had made little progress. His successors carried on the edifice according to their resources, which appear to have been very limited ; for in 1430, Bishop Leighton laid the foundation of the steeple on the east end, and of the two towers on the west front. Bishop Lindsay, who suc- ceeded him, completed the roof of the nave about 1445, and the church continued in this state till the episcopate of Bishop Elphin- stone, who after 1484 rebuilt the ancient choir on the east end, and covered the roof with lead at the expense of James IV. That prelate also completed the great steeple about 1511, and placed in it three bells, the united weight of which was twelve thousand pounds. Bishop Gavin Dunbar, uncle of Archbishop Gavin Dun- bar of Glasgow, who succeeded in 1518, finished the Cathe- dral, by completing the two towers on the west end, and about 1522 erecting the south transept, which was known by the name of his aisle. He also ceiled the roof of the nave with the finest oak of curious workmanship. His two successors, however, must have done something to the fabric, as their names and that of Queen Mary appear on the roof. But the Cathedral of Aber- deen, which occupied upwards of one hundred and fifty years in erecting, was not allowed to remain forty years entire. As the citizens of both the towns of Aberdeen were generally by no means favourable to the Reformation, being under the influence of the Earl of Huntly, and other noblemen and barons devoted to the Roman Hierarchy, a body of Reformers from the South considered it necessary to meet them, and ascertain their sentiments on the Protestant opinions. As the magistrates had heard of their de- stroying propensities in other places, they removed every article of value to a place of safety, and secured the archives and public AT THE REFORMATION. 17 records. At the end of December 1559, a large mob of enthusiasts entered the seaport town of Aberdeen, and commenced their usual work of destruction by attempting to pull down the great spire of the church of St Nicholas, but they were driven back, and the fabric was saved, though they succeeded in destroying the monas- teries of the Black Friars and Carmelites. The insurgents next pro- ceeded to Old Aberdeen, to wreak their vengeance on the Cathe- dral. Bishop William Gordon, a relative of the Earl of Huntly, was fortunate to secure the jewels, silver plate, and other valuables belonging to the Church, portions of which were entrusted to the prebendaries for protection, and were never afterwards seen. En- raged at being deprived of their plunder, they stripped the Cathe- dral of its roof, demolished the choir and chancel, and the whole fabric would have been destroyed if the Earl of Huntly and Les- lie of Balquhain had not arrived at the head of a strong force of armed retainers, and dispersed the assailants. They contrived to seize the lead of the church roof, and the three bells which Bishop Elphinstone had placed in the steeple, all of which were shipped at Aberdeen to be sold in Holland ; but it is some consolation to know that their avarice was frustrated, and that the vessel sunk with the plunder near the Girdleness, within half a mile of the harbour. That poi-tion of the Cathedral preserved by the timely interference of the Earl of Huntly remained in a neglected state till 1607, when it was repaired by the inhabitants of the parish of Old Machar, in which it is situated, and covered with slates. From that time, except the interruptions noticed in the sequel, till a few years after the Revolution, the church was the Cathedral of the Diocese of Aberdeen, and the Principal of King's College was constituted Dean of the Chapter. In 1C88, the lofty steeple on the east end, which was about 150 feet high, and contained three bells presented by Bishop Patrick Forbes, fell on the eastern part of the nave. It was in consequence greatly injured, and several of the sepulchral monuments were destroyed ; but the bells had been re- moved a short time before this accident, which was occasioned, according to the local tradition, by Cromwell's soldiers who were stationed in Aberdeen, and who had removed some of the buttresses to procure materials for military works erected by them on the Castlehill. The Cathedral, which is now possessed by the congregation of the 2 18 SCOTTISH ARC'IIBISIIOPKIC'S AND BISHOPRICS Established Presbyterians, and is in complete repaii', is a large Gothic edifice of granite, massive and stately, bnt externally of no architectural pretensions. In reality it is far inferior in beauty to several of the other Cathedrals even in Scotland. The west part, however, is very imposing, and is mostly worked in granite, in a bold style, of the decorated character. As it now exists, the church consists only of the nave and side aisles, 126 feet in length, and nearly 68 feet broad, including tlie latter, a very small portion of the wall of the transepts remaining ; but when entire, the edifice is conjectured to have been about 200 feet in length, and the choir and transepts were probably 70 feet long. The windows are lan- cet-shaped in the west end, above the great entrance, and on this part are two towers, each 112 feet high, rising square above the ground about 52 feet, at which three projecting courses of stones are successively laid with intervening spaces, and then projecting probably 15 inches within the wall. The breadth above is con- tracted, and the towers are octagonal, diminishing as they rise in height. The spires are divided into three storeys, and terminate in points, on each of which is an iron cross, the whole being a very humble imitation of the papal crown. The side walls are about 42 feet high, and supported by a range of pillars on each side, 15 feet 6 inches high, and the diameter upwards of three feet. Seven Gothic arches are thrown over these pillars, extending the entire length of the side walls, and between them is an open passage in the centre of the wall, 5 feet 9 inches high, by one foot 10 inches broad. One of the Gothic arches which supported the great steeple is still in the east end, the columns of the arch entire, resembling trunks of trees bound together, and the capitals displaying beauti- fully ornamented foliage in high relief. In the south aisle a portion of Bishop Dunbars tomb still exists, and in St John's, or the north aisle, are the remains of the tomb of Bishop Leighton, both of which monuments were defaced by the incendiaries at the Reformation. The roof, originally constructed by Bishop Dunbar, includes three compartments of square pannels joining at the opposite angular points, on which are painted the arms and titles of the sovereigns, princes, prelates, and nobles, who are supposed to have contribut- ed to the Gxpence of the edifice. In the first compartment, among the sovereigns and princes arc the Emperor of Germany, the Kings of England, France, Spain, Denmark, Hungary, Portugal, Aragon, AT THE REFORMATION. 19 Navarre, Sicily, Poland, and Bohemia, two foreign Dukes, and the city of Old Aberdeen. In the second compartment appear the Pope, the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, all the Scot- tish Bishops, the Prior of St Andrews, and the University of King's College. In the third are the Scottish King and Queen, the Duke of Albany, the Earls of March, Moray, Douglas, Angus, Mar, Sutherland, Crawford, Huntly, Orkney, Erroll, Marischal, and Bothwoll, and the town of New Aberdeen ; along the top of the walls are also inscribed on the south side the names of all the Scottish sovereigns, from Malcolm II. to Queen Mary, and on the north side, of all the Bishops from Nectanus to Bishop William Gordon, the last Roman Catholic prelate. The latter records a succession of twenty-six Bishops, including Nectanus. All the in- scriptions arc painted in the old black Saxon character, but the great height precludes the decyphering of them in a legible man- ner. Tradition ascribes the whole to an artist named James Winter, a native of Forfarshire. A tabular record of this ceiling is inserted in Kennedy's " Annals of Aberdeen," which, it is stated, was the performance of " Mr James Paterson, the last master of the ancient music school of Old Aberdeen, who was also clerk of the [Presbyterian] church-session, and died some years ago at the advanced age of eighty-nine." It is farther stated — " A neat pdnt- ing of this ceiling was executed by Mr. Oordincr, one of the ministers of St. PauFs Chapel in Aberdeen, and presented to the Royal Society of Antiquaries of London." The mutilated tomb of Bishop Dunbar, in the south aisle of the church, is already mentioned. It is an altar tomb, the effigy of the prelate in full pontificals under a round flowered arch, at the base of which are his family arms and those of Scotland. His body is interred in the vault beneath. Near his tomb is a blue stone marking the cemetery of Bishop Forbes in 1G35, and in the same aisle is also an altar tomb, under a round arch of oak branches, with the figure of a bishop in pontificals wanting the head, a horn at the feet, under the head of which is a helmet for a cushion, with arms, and a lion rampant. This aisle was respectively known as St Machars, Bishop Dunbar's, Bishop Cheyne's, and Bishop ScougalPs Aisle. The tomb of the last-mentioned prelate is entire in the west end of the church. It was at one time finely illumin- ated, but the colours are now scarcely discernible. In the centre 20 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS of the tomb is an effigy of the Bishop in his episcopal robes in high rehef, supported on each side by a young man, and in the back- ground appears a burning torch. His mitre and crozier are finely cut on the pedestal, with his armorial bearings and motto, over which are placed three flaming urns. The inscription on the tablet intimates that he was consecrated in 1664, and that he died on the 16th of February 1682, in the 18th year of his episcopate, and 75th of his age. This monument, which was erected by his son, Mr. James Scougall, commissary of the Diocese, formerly stood at some distance from the walls, where it accidentally fell down, but it was ordered to be carefully rebuilt in its present position by Dr. Skene Ogilvy, one of the Presbyterian incumbents of the parish. Several other Bishops are interred in the aisles, whose graves are only indicated by common stones.* The Cathedral of Aberdeen was the scene of another act of fa- natical violence, nearly one hundred years after its first dilapidation by the mob in 1560. This was in 1649, when the crimes of that disastrous period were consummated by the murder of Charles I. " So violent," says Grose, " were the zeal of that reforming period against all monuments of idolatry, that perhaps the sun and moon, very ancient objects of false worship, owed their safety to their distance. As there was nothing to be found in the Cathedral of Aberdeen worth carrying off", the illiberal zealots wreaked their vengeance upon the stones and timber. The high altar-piece, of the finest workmanship of any thing of the kind in Europe, had to that time remained inviolate, but in the year 1649 it was hewed to pieces by order, and with the aid of the [Presbyterian] parish minister. The carpenter employed for this infamous purpose, awed by the sanctity of the place, and struck with the noble work- manship, refused to lay a tool on it till the more than Gothic priest took the hatchet from his hand, and struck the first blow. The wainscotting was richly carved, and ornamented with different kinds of crowns at the top, admirably cut ; one of these, large and of superior workmanship, even staggered the zeal of the furi- ous priest ; he wished to save it, perhaps as a trophy over a fallen enemy. Whatever his motive may have been, his hopes were dis- appointed. While the carpenter rudely hewed down the sup- • Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen, 4fo. 1818, vol, ii, p. 338-346. AT THE REFORMATION. 21 porting timber, the crown fell from a great height, ploughed up the pavement of the church, and flew in a thousand pieces."* If Grose is correct in his date, the Presbyterian " priest," the hero of this exploit, was named William Strachan. The consistory-housc, adjoining the west end of the church, was built by Bishop William Stewart, in which is preserved an oak pulpit, having on the front his initials and a mitre. The episcopal residence stood at the east end of the Cathedral, and communicated with the east end of tlie choir by a covered passage. It was dila- pidated during the episcopate of one of the Bishops Kinninmont, was repaired by Bishop Spens about 1459, and from that period the Bishops of Aberdeen had a permanent mansion in their own city. This residence was of limited accommodation, and was of no architectural importance, consisting of a quadrangular court, with a small turret at each of the angles. During the Civil Wars the building was plundered and defaced by the Presbyterian Co- venanters, and in 1651 the whole materials were carried to the Castlehill of New Aberdeen by CromwelFs soldiers to complete their fortifications. The deanery house occupied the site of the Presbyterian manse, and most of the houses of the prebendaries were removed about 1725. The date of the erection of the See of Moray is uncertain. Malcolm III. is the reputed founder according to Leslie and Buch- anan, and it certainly existed in the twelfth century. Bishop Gregory of Moray is a witness in the chartulary of Scone Priory in 1115. Various churches were used as the Cathedral till 1208, when Bishop Bricius, of the Douglas family, applied to Pope Inno- cent III., who empowered the Bishops of St Andrews and Brechin and the Abbot of Lindores to transfer the See to the church of the Holy Trinity at Spynie, and to distinguish it by the title of a Cathe- dral ; but that locality was soon found to be inconvenient and in- secure, and in 1224 Pope Honorius enjoined the Bishop of Caith- ness, the Abbot of Kinloss, and the Dean of Ross, to translate the seat of the Diocese to the church of the Holy Trinity at Elgin, now the county town of Elgin, or Moray, sixty-seven miles north-west from Aberdeen by Huntly. King Alexander II. granted a site to Bishop Andrew Moray, or de Moravia, the successor of Bishop " Grose's Antiquities of Scotland, Ito. 17!)1, vol. ii. p. 265. 22 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND rUSHOPRICS Bricius, on the east side of the town, near the river Lossic. Tlie foundation of the magnificent Cathedral was laid by that prelate on the site of the former church in 1224. No information of the progress of the edifice is given in the chartulary, though penalties are mentioned which were incurred for not fulfilHng obligations connected with the construction or repair of the building. One instance occurs in 1234, and two others in 128C and 1293. Bishop Andrew de Moravia added fourteen canons to the eight constitut- ed by Bishop Bricius, and it is said that the Cathedral w-as almost completed during his episcopate, which terminated at liis death in 1242, eighteen years after the foundation. In 1890 the Cathedral of Elgin was burnt, during the episcopate of Bishop Alexander Barr, by Alexander Earl of Buchan, commonly called the Wolf of Badenoch, youngest son of King Robei't II. by Elizabeth More. This was to revenge a sentence of excommunication issued against him for keeping forcible possession of some ecclesiastical property, and the town shared the same fate of the Cathedral. This is the usual reason assigned for the attack of this fierce chief on the Cathedral of Elgin, but his resentment may have been excited by a different cause. In 1380, the very year before he committed this outrage, the Bishops of Moray and Ross, as judges ordinary of the Diocese of each litigant party, took cognizance of the Wolf of Badenoch for deserting his lawful wife, the Lady Euphomia Ross, and living in adultery with another woman. The Bishops ordained that the said Eupliemia Ross " be restored to Alexander Stewart, Earl of Buchan and Lord of Ross, her husband, along with her possessions, to be treated with conjugal affection, in bed and board, in clothing, and all other matters corresponding to her station — that he shall put away Atliyn's daughter Mariota — and failing to do so, as the said Lady Euphemia alleges fear of her life, he shall find the security of great and noble persons, under penalty of L.200, to treat her respectfully in every thing, and without endangering her safety." Moray was a flourishing See, but it comprised a district in which the people were fierce and barbarous, and ready to follow their leaders in any outrage. Bishop Barr represented the state of his Cathedral and Diocese, after the violence commit- ted by the Wolf of Badenoch, in a very affecting manner to King Robert III. He says — " Being debilitated by age, impoverished and reduced by so many depredations and robberies, and brought AT THE REFORMATION, 23 to such necessity, that at this ParHament of Scone I can scarcely sustain a needy existence for myself and my few servants, to solicit the rebuilding of my church, which was the especial ornament of the coimtry and the glory of the kingdom, the delight of strangers, the praise of guests, the renowned among foreign nations for its beautiful decorations, and the number of those in its service. I shall say nothing of its lofty towers, its venerable utensils, and in- numerable jewels, having had a personal concern in them along with some of my Canons. Because the ParHament did not hold, and as I could not labour farther in the cause of God and my church from the want of funds, I humbly implore your Majesty to compel the incendiaries to give suitable satisfaction for proper re-edification, and the other damage which they have occasioned ; and because I, a feeble old man, cannot prosecute the injury and the burning of my church for the foregoing reasons, T commit it to the justice of your royal Majesty, as the Bishop of Ross will explain."* It appears that the Bishop directed a subsidy to be levied from all the benefices in his Diocese to repair the mischief inflicted by the W olf of Badenoch, and he enforced this subsidy by a seques- tration of their fruits. The rebuilding of the Cathedral was in pro- gress in 1414, for we find the members of the Chapter, who had convened to elect a Bishop, binding themselves by an oath that he on whom the choice might fall should assign a third of his revenues until the fabric was repaired. The Cathedral was at last rebuilt in a style inferior to few in that age, in the form of a Jerusalem cross, ornamented with five towers, two of which were at the west end, two at the east, and one in the centre. The church remain- ed entire many years till To()(), when the great steeple in the centre, begun by Bishop Innes, who was consecrated by Pope Benedict in 1406-7, fell down. On the following year Bishop Forinan commenced the rebuilding of it, which was not finished till 1538, when the height, including the spire, was 198 feet. The stately edifice thus continued, and escaped the violence of the mob at the Reformation only to be dilapidated in a more premeditated manner. On the 14th of February 1567-8, the Privy-Council issued an order that the " lead be taken from the Cathedral • Brief Analysis of the Ancient Records of the Sec of Moray, by Sir John Graham Dalycll, Bart. p. 10, 11. 24 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPHICS AND BISHOPRICS churches of Aberdeen and Elgin, and sold for sustentation of the men of war." The Earl of Huntly and his deputies, with William, Bishop of Aberdeen, and Patrick, Bishop of Moray, were appointed to enforce the order, which is signed 11. M., probably the initials of the Regent Moray. The lead was accordingly stript from the Cathedral of Elgin, which was left completely roofless, and shipped at Aberdeen with the lead from that church ; but the vessel went down off the Girdleness as already stated, and the sacrilegious cupidity of the Privy-Council was utterly defeated. The stately Cathedral of Elgin soon fell rapidly to decay, though some painted rooms remained entire in the towers and choirs till about 16*40, and were frequented by Roman Catholics for devotional purposes. The great tower fell in 1711. Considerable attention has been paid by Crovernment to prevent the ruins from complete decay, and the edifice is now an object of great and impressive interest, though the service of the Episcopal Church was never celebrated within its walls. The two western towers are of massive and ele- gant proportions, and are the most entire portions of the present ruin. The two eastern turrets are also tolerably entire ; but no part of the great or centre tower now remains. From an engrav- ing of the roofless Cathedral in 1G68, it appears that the edifice was then in good preservation ; but more than one half of it has now disappeared. The walls of the choir and the whole chapter- house remain, but those of the nave and transepts have fallen. The dimensions of the Cathedral are variously given. According to one authority, the measurement of which is expressly stated to be " nearly accurate," the length over walls was 234 feet, the breadth 35 feet; the transept 114 feet ; height of centre tower 198 feet ; eastern turrets 60 feet ; western towers, without the spires, 84 feet ; side wall 36 feet.* Another statement is, that " the length from east to west, including towers, is 289 feet ; breadth of nave and side aisles 144 feet ; breadth of choir, includ- ing walls and side aisles, 79 feet ; length of transepts, including walls, 120 feet ; height of west towers 83 feet ; of east towers 64 feet ; of middle tower and spire 198 feet ; height of grand entrance 26 feet ; of gi'cat western window 28 feet ; of side walls 43 feet ; breadth of side aisles 18 feet ; diameter of eastern wheel window • New Statistical Account of ScoUand — Morayshire. AT THE REFORMATION. 25 12 feet."* The chapter-house, which is lighted by seven windows and is in good preservation, is an octagon, 37 feet in diagonal breadth, with a vaulted roof 34 feet high, supported in the cen- ti'e by a column 24 feet high, and 9 feet in circumference, sus- taining arched pillars from each angle. In the walls are niches of the oak stalls or chairs of the clergy. It is on the north side of the Cathedral, and is entered by an arched apartment called the sacristy. The episcopal residence was the castle of Spynie, up- wards of a mile from Elgin, and on the banks of what was formerly the loch or lake of Spynie. The ruins still indicate the importance and extent of the palace, which, when it stood entire, in the opinion of Mr. Lachlan Shaw, " was incomparably the most stately and niagnificant he had seen in any Diocese in Scotland."-j- Mr Rick- man's observations on the architecture of Elgin Cathedral are to the following effect : — " The general arrangements of this church seem to have been early English, carried on slowly, and thus mixed gradually with ornaments of later date. There are several very fine doors, and in some of them the ornaments of the early English and decorated characters are mixed. The east end is a very fine specimen of enriched early English, not exactly resem- bling any other example of that style. The western towers are of a plainer character, and the wall between them, with the great entrance doors and large window above, seem of rather later date. The chapter-house may be considered decorated, and there are a few fragments of perpendicular character. This church must be seen to be properly appreciated."^ The Cathedral of Ross, the See of which was founded by David I., was in the small town of Chanonry, about a mile from the an- cient royal burgh of Rosemarkie, and hence the Bishops of Ross were often designated Episcopi Rosemarkiensis. It stood in a spa- cious square formed by the residences of the clergy, and at the present time almost every house in the town was a manse belong- ing to the Chapter. The episcopal palace was situated a short distance from the residences of the canons, and as mentioned by Bishop Leslie, the last Roman Catholic prelate of the Diocese, as * Rhind's Sketches of the History of -Moray, t History of the Province of Moray, Ito. edition of 1827, p. 322. X Rickman on the Styles of the Artliitccture of England, from the Conquest to the Reformation, p. 287. 26 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS splendid and magnificent. The date of the erection of the Cathe- dral is unknown, and no description is preserved of its architec- tural appearance, though it is stated to have been a fine edifice, with a lofty steeple. It is said to have been considerably injured at the Reformation, but the tradition in the district is that both the church and the episcopal palace were pulled down by Crom- well's soldiers to procure materials for his fort at Inverness, eight miles distant, and that he sent the stones thither by sea. A part of the edifice, however, was left, which was repaired, and used for divine service during the establishment of the Episcopal Church after the Restoration of Charles II. At that period it was sup- posed to have been a portion of the original church, about 100 feet long, and 30 feet broad, with an arched roof. The edifice, however, was either repaired, or a new building was projected, during the reign of James I. In a letter from Mr. John Carse to the Right Rev. Dr. Patrick Lindsay, Bishop of Ross, dated Lon- don, Jan. 10, supposed year 1615, the writer says — My hart rises at the newes of a rysing cathedral at Rosse."* The only remnant of it is in a state of decay, and is used as a burying-placc. At the east of this sole memorial of the fabric, but detached from it, is a building supposed to have been the vestry, the upper part, now the council-chamber of the little burgh, and the vault below formerly used as a prison. A large bell in the modern spire bears the inscription of Thomas TuUoch, Bishop of Ross, and that it was dedicated to the Virgin Mary and St Boniface, the latter the pa- tron of the place, in 1460 ; but according to Keith, Thomas Ur- quhart was Bishop of Ross from 1449 to 1463, in which year he was succeeded by a prelate whose name was Henry. The seal of the old Cathedral is still preserved as the common seal of the royal burgh of Rosemarkie, and contains an inscription in Saxon charac- ters, with St Peter and his keys, and St Boniface with his crook. In the inside of the ruins of the Cathedral are some nuitilated stone- coffins, with figures of bishops in their episcoi)al dress, which ap- pear to have been elegantly cut, but time and violence have en- tirely defaced the names and dates.-f- * Letters ami State Papers of the Reign of Jaincs VI. Edinburgh, Ito. printed for the Abbotsford Club in 1838. p. 248, 249. t Sir John Sinclair's Statistical Account of Scotland, vol. xi. p. 311, 312. New- Statistical Account of Scotland — Koss and Cromarty shires. AT THE REFORMATION. 27 The date of the erection of the See of Caithness is uncertain. The first recorded Bishop is Andrew in 1150, and his name occurs as a witness in several charters. The Cathedral was erected in the now poor and decayed royal burgh of Dornoch, 57 miles from In- verness, on the road to Thurso. The Cathedral is supposed to have been built by Bishop Gilbert Moray, who was consecrated in 1222, and died at Scrabster, where the Bishops of Caithness had a resi- dence, in 1245. Ho was afterwards canonized, and a mutilated statue of him, under the name of St Gilbert, is still in the church. This Cathedral was a large and beautiful structure in the form of a cross, and escaped, by its distance from the scene of fanatical vio- lence, the fury of the heroes of the Reformation, only to be burnt, with the exception of the steeple, in 1570, by the Master of Caith- ness and Mackay of Strathnaver, who had a feud with the Murrays, a tribe who then inhabited the district, about the possession of the person of Alexander eleventh Earl of Sutherland, at that time a minor. They also burnt the episcopal palace or castle, a large and massive edifice into which the Murrays had retired, but a part of it was repaired in 1813, and subse(iucntly used as the county jail of Sutherland. The Cathedral was renovated by John twelfth Earl of Sutherland, and completed by Sir Robert Gordon, his " tutour." The whole was completely rebuilt, renewed, and beautified after 1835 by the Duchess-Countess of Sutherland, mother of the second Duke, and it is now one of the finest struc- tures of the kind in Scotland. A part of it is the burying-placo of the Noble Family of Sutherland, and the other portions are fitted up for the Presbyterian congregation.* Proceeding northward in these remote regions, and crossing the Pentland Frith, the stately pile of the Cathedral of Magnus, the church of the See of Orkney, towers above the houses of the royal burgh of Kirkwall, on the island known as the Mainland of Orkney, rising in the midst of dreariness and apparent desolation. The date of the foundation of the Sec of Orkney is unknown, and as the Orkney Islands, though occasionally under the Scottish crown, were often subject to Norway, their ancient ecclesiastical history is obscure. Rudulphus, Bishop of Orkney, is first mentioned as a wit- ness to a charter of David I., but not as a liege of that monarch, " New Statistical Accouul of Scotland — SuthcrlandiiLirc. 28 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS The foundation of the Cathedral is thus historically related. Mag- nus, Earl of Orkney, was murdered in the island of Eaglesay, one of the Shetland groupe, about 1115, by a rival named Haoo. The Earl, on account of his reputed sanctity, was canonized, and his body deposited in Christ Church at Birsay, on the north-west of the Mainland. His nephew Ronald, who had visited Palestine as a Crusader, failed in an attempt to gain possession of the Earldom of Orkney, and resolved to rouse the courage of his followers by religion. Before he sailed from Shetland for Orkney, he vowed that if he was successful he would found a splendid church, and dedicate it to his uncle's memory. This was between the years 1130 and 1159, but the exact date is not known. In the accom- plishment of the work he found it necessary to parcel out the islands in lots among his followers and subjects, to induce them to assist in completing the church, some vestiges of which are said to be still perceptible in the udal land-rights of the proprietors. The body of St Magnus was transferred from Birsay to the Cathedral thirty-four years after his murder, and the Pope declared Earl Ronald a saint for his pious work. At that time Orkney was under Norwegian dominion, and there can be little doubt that the Bishopric was then in existence. It is proved from some of the public records of Scotland that the Cathedral of St Magnus was canonically occupied in 1266. In the Parliament held at Edin- burgh in 1485, seventeen years after the Orkney Islands were ab- solutely transferred to the Scottish Crown, the Scottish Ambas- sador at Rome was ordered to obtain a confirmation of all the transactions from the Pope, and the Cathedral was duly vested, along with the other rights of sovereignty, in the Scottish Kings. Soon after this annexation, James III. in 1486 erected the village of Kirkwall into a royal burgh and episcopal city, with extensive jurisdiction, property, and privileges ; and the Cathedral church with all its lands and rights, were conferred on the corporation, with power to let or sell the lands, " to be always employed and bestowed upon repairing and upholding of the said kirk called St Magnus' Kirk but the Cathedral and its funds were speedily re- stored to episcopal authority. Bishop Edward Stewart lengthened the choir of the Cathedral at the east, by adding three arches resting on Gothic columns, and introducing the rose window at the altar. Bishop Robert Maxwell, who succeeded to the See in AT THE REFORMATION. 29 1525, fitted up the choir with stalls, and furnished the tower with a set of finely toned bells, which still enliven the citizens of this remote town every day in a particular chime. Bishop Robert Reid, the founder of the University of Edinburgh, and projector of a college in Orkney, who obtained the See in 1540, enlarged very considerably the Cathedral at the west end, but the arched roof of this addition was never finished. This portion of the church is curiously decorated by various mixed specimens of architecture. The embellishment and completion of the Cathedral terminated with Bishop Roid's life, and its great distance from the scenes of destruction at the Reformation accounts for its preservation. Sub- sequently, while the Stuart Earls held the patronages in Orkney, and possessed the Bishopric at the first introduction of Presbyte- rianism, they maintained the Cathedral, and the nominal Bishop kept the choir in repair. The church was threatened with destruc- tion by the Earl of Caithness, who was sent to quell an alleged rebellion of Patrick, Earl of Orkney, between 1G09 and 1614, but he was prevented by the resolute conduct of the Bishop. Crom- well's soldiers committed gross outrages in the Cathedral, and it appears that the " pulpitt and the rest of the seats in the church were bi-oken down by thame and brunt." In 1G71, during the episcopate of Bishop Honeyman, the spire was struck with light- ning and entirely destroyed. The tower was afterwards roofed in with a paltry roof, which greatly disfigured the edifice.* But CromwelFs soldiers were not the only desecrators of the venerable Cathedral of St Magnus, which Mr. Erskine, Sheriff- Depute of Orkney, afterwards a Judge in the Supreme Court by the title of Lord Kinnedar, justly designated in his Report to tho Barons of Exchequer as " one of the most beautiful and valuable reliques of antiquity in Scotland," when he was successful in pre- venting the Magistrates, Kirk-Session, and others from erecting 8ome hideous buildings in the church-yard, on the north side of the Cathedral, for school-rooms, a county-hall, and various local purposes. In Presbyterian times it appears that the Magistrates of Kirkwall generally converted the church into a guard-house during their annual fair in August. This was done at least in • Notes on Orkney and Zetland, illustrative of the History, Antiquities, Scenery, and Customs of those Islands, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. Sheriff-Substitute of Ork- ney. Edin. 1822, 8vo. vol. i. p. 26—55. 30 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS 1701 ; but it is only justice to the Presbyterian authorities or ministers to state that tliey denounce this as an " unchristian and more than barbarous practice," and speak of the people of the town " keeping guard within the church, shooting of guns, burning great fyres on the graves of the dead, drinking, fiddling, pipeing, swearing and cursing night and day, within the church." It appears also that little respect was evinced even when a sermon was delivered in the choir ; for the same parties allege — " Neither can the preacher open his mouth, nor the hearers conveniently attend, for smoke ; yea, some of the members of the Presbytery have been stopped in the outgoing and coming to their meetings, and most rudely pursued by the soldiers with their musquets and halberts." In 1710, however, one Presbyterian minister was charged with " taking his horse through St Magnus' church to grass in the church-yard, and another not long ago caused tye his horse to a pillar within the church, where it stood all the time of the sermon."* The Cathedral of St Magnus is said to be the property of the Corporation and inhabitants of Kirkwall, granted by charter of James III., confirmed in 1536 by James V., and again by Charles II. in IGGl. Infeftment followed upon the last-mentioned charter in 1669, and it was confirmed by an Act of the Scottish Parlia- ment in 1670.-f- The entire length of the church from east to west outside is 226 feet, the breadth 56 feet ; the arms of the cross or transept are each 28 feet beyond the side walls, and 28 feet in breadth. The height from the floor to the roof is 71 feet, and to the summit of the spire on the central tower variously stated at 133, and about 135, or 140 feet. Thirty-two pillars, faced with freestone, support the elegantly arched main roof of the choir and part of the nave ; the roof of the side aisles consists of groined arches ; and the whole edifice is lighted by 103 windows, including those of the steeple, some of them in the Gothic style, and of great size. The east window is provincially called a rose window, being of Gothic form, of four pointed arches separated by three shafts, and a wheel or circle is added above of twelve com- partments ; the height of the whole is 36 feet, and the width 12 feet. On the south wing of the cross or transept is another cir- * Pctcrkin's Notes on Orkney and Zetland, vol. i, p. 57, 58. t Acta Parliamentorum Scotorum, vol. viii. p. 34, 35, 36. AT THE KEFORMATION. 31 cular window, aiul in the nave three doors and a fine Gothic pointed window, two side doors forming with the others a porch. The whole edifice is built chiefly of red sandstone, interspersed regularly, especially on the west end, with white. The architecture is mixed Saxon and Gothic. This Cathedral was long kept in repair solely by a small fund derived I'rom seat-rents, but it was inadequate for the purpose, and the church was prevented from becoming ruinous by the generous bequest of Gilbert Meason, Esq., a wealthy native of Orkney, who left, at the suggestion of his relative, Malcolm Laing, Esq., author of a well known History of Scotland, the sum of L.IOOO sterling, the interest of which he ordered to be annually applied to repairing and beautifying the edifice. The choir is used by the Presbyterian congregation, and is fitted up in the most uncomfortable and deforming style ; but they threaten to evacuate the edifice altogether, and occiipya structure near it, erect- ed in 1842, and dignified with the title of the " East Church."* Close to the Cathedral, in the vicinity of the ruins of the Palace of the Earl of Orkney, are the dilapidated remains of the Epis- copal Palace. It is locally known as the Palace of the Yard, and is interesting as the scene of the death of Haco, King of Norway, after his defeat at the battle of Largs in Ayrshire, in 12G3. James V. also resided within its walls some days, and was the guest of the Bishop when he visited Orkney. The Episcopal Palace is of great antiquity, but the date of its erection is im- known. Little remains except the round tower built at the north end of it by Bishop Reid, a small freestone statue of whom has escaped the ruthless hands of the barbarians who pulled down and stole the materials of the rest of the Palace. A different scene presents itself to the inquirer into the his- tory of Scottish ecclesiastical antiquities, when surveying the vene- rable Cathedral of Dunkeld in Perthshire, romantically situated on the banks of the River Tay, and literally embosomed among the magnificent scenery of the neighbourhood. When first seen on diverging from the Pass of Birnam, a hill immortalized by Shak- speare, this old episcopal city and its environs have a most striking effect, the fine bridge, the ruined Cathedral, and the palace of the • Peterkin's Notes on Orkney and Zetland, vol. i," p. 55, 5(!. New Statistical Account of Scotland, 1641. Orkney. 32 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS Dukes of Atholl, appearing amid the dark woods. Great obscurity involves the early history of this original seat of the Scottish Pri- mates before it was transferred to St Andrews. The choir, now used for parochial purposes, was built by Bishop Sinclair in 1350 ; Bishop Cairney commenced the great aisle, which was finished by Bishop Ralston in 1450 ; the chapter-house was built and the foundation of the tower laid by Bishop Lauder in 1409 ; and the lat- ter was completed by Bishop lirown in 1501. There were several other buildings and the episcopal residence. At the Reformation this Cathedral was gutted and defaced in the most wanton man- ner. On the 12th of August 15G0, a letter was written at Edin- burgh, signed by the Earl of Argyll, the Regent Moray, then Lord James Stuart, and Lord Ruthven, addressed to their " traist friendis the Lairds of Arntilly and Kinvaid,"" enjoining them " to pass incontinent to the kyrk of Dunkeld, and tak down the haill images thereof, and bring furth to the kirk-yaird, and burn the organ openly ; and siclyk cast down the altaris, and purge the kyrk of all kynd of monuments of idolatrye." It is true that those three unprincipled worthies of the Reformation intimated in a postscript to their trusty friends — " Faill bot ze tak guid held that neither the dasks, windocks, nor duris be ony ways hurt or broken, either glassen wark or iron wark." A rabble of fanatics excited by the most outrageous passions are seldom disposed to respect conditions, or to be restrained within certain limits, and this was exemplified in the case of the Cathedral of Dunkeld. Neither the sacredness of the pile, nor the romantic beauties by which it was suiTounded, could impress their ruthless minds, and half the church was at least laid in ruins. According to the statement of Abbot Mylne of Cambuskenneth, who thirty years before was one of the Canons of the Cathedral, the mob had ample temptations to display their destructive propensities, for he describes the south gate built by Bishop Lauder as an elegant piece of architecture, beautified with several statues. The Presbyterian congregation occupy the choir of the Cathe- dral. In the centre of the wall of the east gable is a part, of the wall of the old abbey of the Culdees. The present roof was placed over the choir, instead of the former decayed one, in 1762, by James second Duke of Atholl, who obtained L.300 from Govern- ment to assist in defraying the expences, and making alterations AT THE RESTORATION, 33 ill the interior, and on that occasion the elegant Gothic windows were altered in a style which displays the barbarian taste of the parties concerned. Several monuments of the Bishops who were buried in the choir were either defaced at the Reformation, or have entirely disappeared. The square slab of blue marble which indicated the grave of Bishop Sinclair, part of whose arms are on the outside of the east gable, long lay in front of the Duke of Athoirs pew on the floor. In the interior, on the south wall, are the arms of Bishop Alexander Lindsay, who filled the See at the eventful year of 1G38. The monument of the WoH" of Badenoch, already mentioned in the notice of Elgin Cathedral, now on the north side of the door from the choir into the nave, stood origin- ally in the centre of the choir. It consists of a recumbent figure in armour, the size of life, supported by a row of ornamental pil- lars, between which are figures, and a Latin inscription recording his titles, that he was of " good memory," and that he died in 1394. Although this and other monuments were greatly mutilated by a party of Cameronians after the Revolution in 1(589, it is in toler- able preservation. The architecture of the nave, and of other parts of the church in ruins, is simple and elegant. A range of seven round pillars, above which are an equal number of windows, rises on each other in the walls of the nave, and at the west end are the remains of a magnificent window. In the wall of the south aisle, is the monument of a bishop in his episcopal dress, with his stafi', in a niche prepared for its reception. On the north side of the choir is the chapter-house, the upper apartment of which is the charter-room of the Dukes of Atholl, and the vault below is the cemetery of that Noble Family. The steeple, which was roofed in 1762, contains four of the five bells placed in it by Bishop Brown in 1502. The fifth, which was broken, was recast in 1688, at the expence of John Marquis of Atholl. This steeple is rent in a singular manner on the west side, from the bottom of the upper- most window down the centre of the wall. The present state of Dunkeld Cathedral may be thus described. Exclusive of the choir the great aisle is 122 feet long, the breadth 62 feet, that of each of the side aisles 12 feet, and the height of the walls 40 feet. The body of the church is separated from the choir by a lofty built up Gothic arch. The main aisle is separated from the side one by six plain pillars of the Roman style, and two half columns, 3 34 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS the capitals being plain mouldings, supporting Gothic arches of the second style, above each of which is a semicircular window of two bays, with a trefoil in the interval. Above the roof of the said aisles is an acute bisected window with two trefoils, and a quatre- foil in the intervals. All the mullions have disappeared from the great western window, but the remaining fragments springing from the arch indicate that it was of a handsome florid design. Above it was a circular spiral window, the gable terminating with an elegant florid cross.* The Cathedral of Dunblane, the See of which was erected by David I., though the date is uncertain, and an ancient religious house of the Culdees superseded by it, is in the episcopal town of that name, seven miles from Stirling, on the road to Perth, The founder of this Cathedral is unknown. When entire, it was an elegant edifice, 216 feet in length, 56 feet in breadth, and the length of the walls 56 feet. The general style of the church is the early English, of a beautiful character, but it has various later intersections and alterations. The choir is used by the Presby- terian congregation, all the rest of the church being in ruins. Some of the prebendal stalls are still entire in the choir, and the original roof and ceiling. The steeple is a modern erection, 128 feet high. Here are still some remains of the episcopal residence, which in Slezer's time, after the Revolution, as appears from the view of the city in his " Theatrum Scotise," was then a ruin of considerable extent, and a sequestered promenade in the neigh- bourhood is known as the Bishop's Walk. Slezer mentions that " in the ruins is an ancient picture representing the Countess of Stratherne, with her children, kneeling, asking a blessing from St. Blasius, clothed in his pontifical habit." The greater part of this Cathedral was dilapidated by a band of Reformers led by the Earl of Argyll and the Regent Moray, then Prior of St Andrews, one morning towards the end of June 1559, and the interior was purified, while the people were at mass, in the absence of Bishop William Chisholm, who was peculiarly obnoxious to the marauders. The Register of Dunblane, commencing 15th January 1663, is extant in the Library of the Faculty of Advocates at • Macculloch's Highlands and Western Islands of Scotland, Edin. 1824, vol. i. p. 23, 24. AT THE RESTORATION. 35 Edinburgh. It is a folio volume, written in a neat style, and chiefly consists of transcripts of leases of the teinds belonging to this poor Bishopric, granted by the Chapter to particular indivi- duals after 1663 ; but it contains no information respecting the state of the Diocese, except the names of the Bishops, the pre- bendaries, and members of the Chapter. The Eegister of Dun- blane, however, is a valuable document. It is stated in a manu- script note at the commencement of the volume, signed by John Swinton, then solicitor for the renewal of leases of the Bishops' Teinds in Scotland, afterwards a Judge in the Court of Session, from 178"A to 1799, by the title of Lord Swinton, that this Eegis- ter was discovered in the garret of a house in Perth, which " Neil Menzies, surgeon there, purchased from Provost William Fergu- son, whose wife was related to John Graham, commissary-clerk, and clerk of the Chapter of Dunblane." The said Neil Menzies gave it to Patrick Murray, sheriff'-clerk of Perth, his great- grandson, who, in 1767, says Lord Swinton, " gave it to me, mentioning that he believed it to be a record of the Bishopric of Dunblane," in Mr. Graham's handwriting, " as it might be use- ful to me in my office of solicitor for Bishops' Teinds." The Cathedral of the Archiepiscopal Diocese of Glasgow, still the most interesting object of antiquity in that large and populous commercial city, now claims our notice as the chief of the western Dioceses. The foundation of the See of Glasgow is generally as- cribed to St Mungo, or Kentigern, in A. D. 560, and tradition alleges that the holy man was burned at the east end of the ground on which the church stands, his tomb being pointed out in the Crypt below. Previous to 1100, St Mungo's church was an erec- tion of wood, and was a very humble edifice. John Achaius, who suc- ceeded to the See in 1129, began the Cathedral, and the portion of it built by him was solemnly consecrated in 1133, in the pre- sence of David I. Bishop Joceline added to the Cathedral, and it was carried on by succeeding Bishops, though very few notices are recorded of the progress of the work. It was designed to be in the form of a cross, but the transepts were never erected, the founda- tions of the south one, covering a funeral arched vault beneath, having only been laid. It appears that in the fourteenth century, the great spire was of wood ; for in 1387, during the episcopate of Mathew Glendoning, it was destroyed by lightning. In 1408, 36 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS Bishop William Lauder, his successor, built the great tower to the first battlement, and also laid the foundation of the chapter- house. Bishop John Cameron succeeded Bishop Lauder, and he expended considerable sums in completing the Cathedral and Epis- copal Castle — the Royal Infirmary now occupying the site of the latter. Bishop Andrew Muirhead, who obtained the See in 1455, also adorned and beautified the Cathedral. This magnificent old edifice of Saxon architecture stands on the banks of the ravine traversed by the Molendinar rivulet, on the north-east side of Glasgow, in the locality called the Townhead. Previous to the repairs and alterations contemplated in 1843, the church measured 319 feet from east to west ; width, 65 feet ; height of the nave, 90 feet ; of the choir, 85 feet — the general character of the whole structure being the early English, excel- lently designed and executed. The interior contains 147 pillars, and the whole is lighted by 159 windows, many of them of exqui- site workmanship. " The composition of the nave and choir" observes Mr. Rickman, " is different, but each very good. In the choir the capitals are flowered, in the nave plain. These in the choir very much resemble some capitals in the transepts at York Minster, and are equally well executed. The west door is one of great richness and beauty, and bears a strong resemblance to the doors of the continental churches, being a double door, with a square head to each aperture, and the space above filled with good niches. The general design of the doorway is French, but the mouldings and details are English." A splendid tower, sui-mounted by a graceful spire, rises from the centre. The grand entrance is on the west end, and on the south and north are doors ; the choir, locally known as the High Church, is the only part of the Cathe- dral now used by the Presbyterians, and behind are the Lady Chapel and the Chapter-House. The latter, at the north end of the chancel, forms a cube of 28 feet, and the groined ceiling is supported by a pillar 20 feet high. The Consistory House, in which the Bishops held their ecclesiastical courts, projects from the north-west corner of the Cathedral, is 25 feet long, and 23 feet broad ; but as it is evidently a more modern addition, it in- jures the general harmony of the whole building. The Dripping Aisle, so called from the perpetual dropping of water from the roof, is the lower part of the unfinished transept, long a place of AT THE RESTORATION. 37 sepulture for the parochial incumbents of Glasgow. The Crypt, under the choir and chancel of the Cathedral, is not surpassed by any similar structure in Great Britain. M'Ure, the gossiping historian of Glasgow, who describes the Crypt when it was fitted up as a place of worship for the parishioners of the Barony parish, states, that " it is of length 108 feet, and 72 feet wide ; it is sup- ported by 65 pillars, some of which are 18 feet in circumference ; the height of each, 18 feet ; it is illuminated with 41 windows." The piers and groining of the pillars are of the most intricate character, beautifully designed and executed, the groinings having rich bosses, and the doors much enriched with foliage and other ornaments. The Crypt is again restored to its ancient purpose as an impressive region of death, at the east end of which is the sup- posed recumbent statue of St Mungo over his reputed grave. The noble Cathedral of Glasgow only escaped the fate of the Cathedral of St Andrews at the Reformation by the prudence of the Lord Provost of the city, who appears to have been Robert Lindsay of Dunrod. The populace wished to pull down this grand fabric of former ages, and the Provost alleged that he was equally anxious for its destruction ; but he advised them first to build a new church. This suggestion appeared reasonable, and the church was saved from the tempest of the Reformation. The citizens soon recovered their attachment to their Cathedral ; for some years afterwards, when the famous Andrew Melville, then Principal of the University, and the preachers in the neighbourhood, had in- duced the Magistrates to sanction its demolition, the incorpo- rated trades ran to arms, took possession of the church, and threatened instant death to the first individual who offered to in- jure a stone. They even compelled the Magistrates to make a solemn declaration that the edifice would be preserved. The work of renovating the Cathedral of Glasgow was in active progress in 1843. The Cathedral of Galloway was at the royal burgh of Whit- horn, in the county of Wigton, on Wigton Bay. Nothing is re- covered of its architectural appearance, size, dimensions, or even of its ultimate destruction. The church is so completely dilapi- dated, or rather demolished, by time and human violence, that only a few old arches remain, one of them of the Saxon order, al- 38 SCOTTISH ARCHBISHOPRICS AND BISHOPRICS. most entire, and much admired as the finest specimen of the kind in that quarter of Scotland. The Cathedral of the See of Argyll, a See founded about 1200, and disjoined from the Diocese of Dunkeld, was in the Island of Lismore, at the mouth of the large inlet of Loch Linnhe, nearly eight miles from Oban. The chancel of the Cathedral, after hav- ing been considerably altered, is used as a Presbyterian place of worship, but nothing is known of the original edifice, the date of its erection, or the builder. Four miles west of this Island Cathedral, such as it now is, are the ruins of the Bishop's Castle, having a square open court in the interior. The parish church of St Mary at Rothsay, in the Island of Bute, was one of the cathedral churches of the Diocese of The Isles for a considerable time before the Reformation, and the sole Cathedral during the establishment of the Episcopal Church in the seventeenth century. It was probably built about the end of the thirteenth century, and was taken down in 1692. The most of the materials were used to erect a new one, which was succeeded by the present Presbyterian edifice, built in 1795, Near this the walls of the choir of the old church of St Mary are still seen, and in it Robert Wallace, Bishop of the Isles, was interred in 1669. Such is a sketch of the past and present state of the ancient Ca- thedrals of the Scottish Sees, for that of St Giles at Edinburgh was not so constituted till the foundation of the Bishopric by Charles I. in 1633. It will thus be seen, that in only a few of them was divine service performed by the Bishops and clergy after the Re- formation, and those now wholly or partly entire are defaced and deformed to adapt them to the Presbyterian mode of worship. No allusion is here made to the destruction of the monasteries, abbeys, priories, and other religious houses, as the present volume has only to do with the ecclesiastical edifices connected with the Sees. CHAPTER II. THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND AND ITS CONSEQUENCES — THE LAST ROMAN CATHOLIC BISHOPS, AND THE FIRST PROTESTANT PREACHERS, IN SCOTLAND. The destructive outrages committed in Scotland at the outbreak of the Reformation attracted the attention of several distinguished members of the Church of England, who appear to have fraternized considerably with the Reformers of Switzerland. John Knox ar- rived in Edinburgh from France on the 2d of May 1559, and the first fruits of his orations were the destruction of most of the Cathe- drals and religious houses. The reader may form some idea of the kind of information then current in England, at least in London, and of its authenticity, from several letters of Bishop J ewel to Peter Martyr : — " In Scotland we hear that there have been some dis- turbances, I know not of what kind, respecting matters of religion ; that the nobles have driven out the monks, and taken possession of the monastei-ies ; that some French soldiers of the garrison, [probably Edinburgh Castle is meant] have been slain in a riot, and that the Queen [Mary of Guise, widow of James V., and mo- ther of Queen Mary, then RegentJ was so incensed, as to proclaim the banishment of the preacher Knox by sound of horn, according to the usual custom in Scotland when they mean to send any one into exile. What has become of him I know not."* In another letter is the following information : — " Every thing is in a ferment • John Jewel to Peter Martyr, no date, but supposed to be 1559, in the " Zurich Letters, comprising the Correspondence of several English Bishops and others with the Helvetian Reformers, during the early part of the Reign of Queen Elizabeth," edited and translated for the Parker Society, by the Rev. H'stings Robinson, D.D. &c. 1813, p. 24. 40 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1559. in Scotland. Knox, surrounded by a thousand followers, is hold- ing assemblies throughout the whole kingdom. The old Queen [Dowager and Regent] has been compelled to shut herself up in garrison. The Nobility, with united hearts and hands, are re- storing religion throughout the country in spite of all opposition. All the monasteries are everywhere levelled with the ground, the theatrical dresses, the sacrilegious chalices, the idols, the altars, are consigned to the flames ; not a vestige of the ancient superstition and idolatry is left. What do you ask for ? You have often heard of drinking like a Scythian, but this is churching like a Scythian^* It is melancholy to find such a man as Bishop Jewel not merely writing gross absurdities to his correspondent Peter Martyr, but actually exulting at the committal of the outrages caused by Knox, which he well knew must have been of the most serious consequences, and productive of the greatest distress and poverty, to say nothing of the valuable property destroyed, which to a country then so poor as Scotland nuist have been a severe de- privation. But as the EstabHshed Episcopal Church of Scotland had no connection with the public affairs of those times, and was never linked in any way with the Roman Catholic Hierarchy which was prostrated by the Reformation, it is only necessary to narrate those transactions illustrative of the change of religious opinions, and the introduction of Presbyterianism into the country previous to the establishment of Episcopacy as the apostolical and primi- tive government of the Church. And as the present work is not intended to be a History of the Reformation, or of the strife of partizanship which it engendered, it is only necessary to follow the public events which were to exercise an important influence on the government and the community. In the Parliament which met at Edinburgh on the 29th of No- vember 1558, the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the Bishops of Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Moray, and Dunblane, were present. The Archbishop of St Andrews was John Hamilton, an illegitimate son of James first Earl of Arran, who was translated to the Primacy from Dunkeld soon after the murder of Cardinal Beaton. The Archbishop of Glasgow was James Beaton, nephew • Jewel to Peter Mart/r, London, August 1, 1559, p. 39, 40. 15G0.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 41 of the Cardinal, and the successor of Archbishop Dunbar in the See. The Bishop of Dunkeld was Robert Crichton, advanced to that See after the translation of Archbishop Hamilton. The Bishop of Aberdeen was William Gordon, fourth son of Alexander third Earl of Huntly. The Bishop of Moray was Patrick Hepburn, third son of Patrick first Earl of Bothwell, and brother of John Hep- burn, Bishop of Brechin, who died in the month of August the same year in which this Parliament met ; and the Bishop of Dun- blane was William Chisholm, uncle of William Chisholm, the last Roman Catholic Bishop of that See, his coadjutor. Fourteen Abbots and Priors also took their seats in this Parliament, exclu- sive of Lord James Stuart, Prior of St Andrews, and Sir James Sandilands, styled Lord St John, or Preceptor of the Knights Templars, both of whom were laymen. The only business of any importance which the Parliament transacted was to negotiate and ratify the marriage of the young Queen Mary and the Dauphin of France, son of the " maist cristine king," afterwards Francis II. After this meeting of the Estates the destruction of the monas- teries and churches took place; the triumphant party deposed the Queen Regent from her office, and appointed a council, too nume- rous to be of much essential benefit, for the government of the kingdom until the Parliament again met; and defended their con- duct on the plea that they were hereditary councillors of their sovereign, describing themselves, moreover, as " the Nohility and Commons of the Protestants of the Church of Scotland.'" The Parliament, in which was sealed the fate of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy of Scotland as an ecclesiastical establishment, met at Edinburgh on the 1st of August 15G0. The Church dig- nitaries mustered in considerable force. The Archbishop of St Andrews, the Bishops of Dunkeld and Dunblane already mention- ed, James Hamilton, Bishop-elect of Argyll, brother of the Arch- bishop, but never consecrated, Alexander Gordon, Bishop of Gallo- way, on whom the Pope had conferred the title of Archbishop of Athens, and John Campbell, Bishop-elect of the Isles, were pre- sent. It thus appears that before the Reformation the Bishops were entitled to take their seats in the Scottish Parliament after their election to their Sees, even previous to their consecration. No fewer than twenty-one Abbots and Priors attended, including 42 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G0. Lord James Stuart, the lay Prior of St Andrews.* The proceed- ings are not recorded till the 18th of August, when the " Confes- sion of Fayth professed and believed by the Protestants within the realme of Scotland" was produced. This is said to have been the compilation of a committee, though Knox is generally considered the principal, and it was " publischit by thame in Parliament, and by the Estatis thairof ratifeit and approvit as hailsome and sound doctrine, groundit upoun the infallibill trewth of God's word." This production, which is of considerable length, and is inserted in the Acts of the Scottish Parliament, has never been minutely analyzed by Presbyterian writers, and most assuredly it contains little to favour many points of their system.-}* Although evidently an emanation from the school of Calvin, so far as it discusses the speculative doctrines of election and predestination, this Confes- sion neither maintains parity in the ministerial office, nor denies the episcopal government of the Church Catholic. It is for the most part doctrinal, and after an introductory preamble, in- cludes the following subjects : — " Of God — Of the Creatioun of Man — Of Originall Sin — Of the Revelatioun of the Promeis — The continuance, increase, and preservatioun of the Kirk — of the Incarnatioun of Chryst Jesus — why it behovit the Mediator to be very God and very man — Electioun — Chrysfs Death, Pas- sioun, Buriall, &c. — Resurrectioun — Ascensioun — Faith in the Haly Gaist — The same of Gude Warkis — What Warkis are re- putit gude befoi-e God — The Perfectioun of the Law and Imper- fectioun of Man — Of the Kirk — The Immortalitie of the Sauhs — Of the Notis by the quhilk the trew Kirk is decernit fra the false, and quha shall be judge of the Doctrine — The authoritie of the Scriptures — Of Generall Counsells, of thair Power, authoritie, and cause of thair conventioun — Of the Sacraments — Of the rycht ad- ministratioun of the Sacraments — To quhome Sacraments apper- teine — Of the Civil Magistrate— The Gifts frehe gevin to the Kirk." Many of these subjects are discussed at considerable length, and' some of them contain the very language of the Thirty- Nine * Acta Pari. Scot. vol. ii. p. 523. t Acto Pari. Scot. vol. ii. p, 526-534. 1560.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 43 Articles approved by the Convocation held at London in 1552, only eight years before, which Knox and the compilers must have seen. Thus, in the one entitled " Of the Kirk" — it is stated — " We utterlie abhorr the blasphemie of thame that affirrae that men quhilk live according to equitie and justice sal be saved, quhat religioun that ever they have professit." In the one entitled " General Counsells," the compilers affirm — " As v*'e do not raschly denie that quhilk godlie men assemblit togidder in generall counsel lauchfuUie gadderit have proponit unto us ; so, without just examinatioun, dar we not ressave quhatsaever is obtrudit unto men under the name of General Counsells ; for plane it is that thay wer men, sa have sum of thame manifestlie erred, and that in materis of greit wecht and importance and they conclude by de- claring— " Not that we think that ane policie and ane ordour in cere- monies can be appointit for all aiges, tymes, and places ; for as ce- remonies, sic as men have devysit, ar bot temporall, so may and aucht thay to be changeit when they rather foster superstitioun, than that thay edifie the Kirk using the same." But the sentiments of the compilers of this Confession respecting the Sacraments are worthy of notice, because they are utterly at variance with those of the Scottish Presbyterians of modern times who claim Knox and his associates as the founders of their system. " We utterlie denie the vanitie of those that affirme Sacramentis to be nathing else but nakit and bair signes. No; we assuritlie believe that by baptisme we are ingraffit in Christ Jesus, to be maid partak- aris of his justice, by quhilk our sins are coverit and remittit. And also that in the Supper rychtlie usit Christ Jesus is sa joynit with us, that he becumes the very nurischement and fude of our saulis. Not that we imagine ony transubstantiatioun of breid in Cristis naturall body, and of wyne in his naturall bluide, as the Pa- pists have perniciously taucht and damnablie believit, but this unioun and conjunctioun quhilk we have with the body and blude of Christ Jesus is wrought by the operatioun of the Haly Gaist." Mr. Tytler, who pronounces this Confession to be " a clear and admirable summary of Christian doctrine grounded on the word of God," thus writes — " On most CKSsential points it approximates in- definitely near, and in many instances uses the very words of the Apostles' Creed, and the Articles of the Church of England as established by Edward VI. Thus, in the section on Baptism, the 44 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1560. Scottish Confession of Faith declares — ' We assuredly believe, that by baptism we are ingrafted into Jesus Christ, to be made partakers of his justice, by the which our sins are covered and remitted.' Compare this with the Article of Edward VI. and Elizabeth, ' Of Baptism.' It is there said to be a sign not only of profession but of regeneration, whereby as an instrument they that receive bap- tism rightly ' are grafted into the Church? ^ After observing that a passage in the same Confession on the Lord's Supper consists of the " precise words," as in the Articles of Edward VI., Mr. Tytler adds — " Indeed, it is worthy of remark, that in these holy mysteries of our Faith this Confession, drawn up by the primitive Scottish Reformers, keeps in some points at a greater distance from the rationalizing of ultra-protestantism than the Articles of Edward."* This Confession was read in the Parliament on the 17th of August, and confirmed by the three Estates. On the 24th of August the jurisdiction of the Pope in Scotland was abolished, under the penalty, in the case of those who persist in acknowledg- ing the papal supremacy, of " prosci'iption, banishment, and never to bruike honor, office, nor dignitie within this realme :" and that " na Bischop nor uther Prelat use any jurisdiction in tymes to cum by the said Bischop of Rome's autlioritie under the pane fore- said." All previous Acts of Parliament on religious matters, " not agreeing with God's holie Word," were repealed; and the celebra- tion of or resorting to mass was prohibited, " under the pane of confiscatioun of all thair gudes movable and unmovable, and punis- sing of thair bodies at the discrecioun of the magistrate within whose jurisdictioun sik personis happynis to be apprehendit, for the first fait ; banissing of the realme for the secund fait ; and justifying to the death for the third fait." In reference to the penalties enacted against the supporters of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy by the very men who] declaimed against its tyranny, and declared its ministers to be usurpers, it may be merely observed that we need not accuse Rome of a mo- nopoly of persecution. This Confession is chiefly remarkable as having been the common creed of the Established Episcopal • History of Scotland, by Patrick Frascr Tytler, Esq. vol. vi. Edinljurgh, 1837, 8vo. Edit. p. 212-213. 1560.] AND ITS COItSEQUENCES. 45 Church in subsequent times, and of the Presbyterians, until they adopted the Westminster Confession. It was adopted by Knox, Row, Winram, Willox, Spottiswoode (father of the Archbishop), and Douglas, Rector of the University of St Andrews, and after- wards the first titular Archbishop of that See. Although only four days were employed in the preparation of this summary of the doctrines which they considered true, and necessary to be received, an examination proves that it embodies the result of much previous study and theological research. The compilers were considerably divided in opinion, Spottiswoode, Winram, Willox, and Douglas, being anxious merely to reform corruptions and abuses, while Knox and Row contended for a complete change. It has been argued that the Parliament which ratified the Confession was ille- gal, because at the time there was no accredited Government in Scotland, and it wanted the sanction of the Sovereign ; but though the objection is important, it is now of little moment, for all the Acts of this Parhament were confirmed by Queen Mary in 1577, or rather by the Regent Moray. The timidity and apathy of the Roman Catholics who were present, and heard the Confession read and ratified, may justly be pronounced disgi'aceful. Not one of them raised his voice against it, and the Earl Marischal bitterly animadverted on their conduct. The Earl of Atholl, Lord Borth- wick, and Lord Somerville, were the only opponents, but they contented themselves with merely declaring that they would " be- lieve as their fathers had believed." The First Book of DiscipHne, the work of the same compilers, was also presented with this Con- fession ; but neither it nor the Second Book of Discipline ever re- ceived the sanction of law. An analysis of the former work is un- necessary on the present occasion. It may be observed that by this First Book of Discipline the election of " ministers" was vested solely in the people, after which the individuals were to be exa- mined publicly by other ministers and elders, before admitted to discharge their functions. If such examination was satisfactory, each individual so elected was to be introduced to his congrega- tion by his brethren without ordination or ceremony of any Tcind — the " approbation of the people, and the declaration of the chief minister, that the person presented is appointed to serve," being expressly declared sufficient ; for, according to the compilers, " albeit the Apostles used the imposition of hands, yet seeing the 46 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G0. miracle is ceased, the using the ceremony wc judge not to he neces- sary^'' The conduct of the triumphant party, and the pusillanimity of the Eoman Catholic Prelates, in this alleged Parliament of 15G0, are thus noticed in a MS. sketch written at the time of the Re- volution : — " Upon the whole, it can scarcely be said that a right step was taken by either party at that time. The Reformers did all in a hurry, with violence and precipitation, breaking through all order and decency, and allowing themselves to be made tools by a few ambitious aspirers, who perhaps had something less than religion in their eye. On the other hands it will not be easy to underrate the conduct of the Popish churchmen either. Their general silence under the attacks that were made upon the Hier- archy and rights of the Church gave their adversaries too much advantage over them, and made the equity of their cause too much suspected, according to what Spottiswoode tells us of the Earl Marischal's speech in what was called the Parliament of 1560 — ' Seeing my Lords the Bishops, who by their learning can, and for the zeal they have for the truth, would, as I suppose, gainsay any- thing repugnant to it, say nothing against the Confession we have heard, I cannot think but it is the very truth of God, and the con- trary of it false and deceivable doctrine.' Such a silence, I do think, was not agreeable to the practice of the first Christians in such cases. They preached and wrote, held Councils, and published decisions ; and even when under the persecutions of heathenish or oppressions of heretical Emperors, still they kept up a succession of church governors in every national church, and asserted, both with vigour and patience, their original and spiritual privileges ; whereas it does not appear that any such thing was done by the Popish clergy in Scotland at that time."* Such was the fall of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in Scotland, with the miserable prostration of its digni- taries, when not one of them had the courage to raise his voice in defence or palliation of that system of which they ought to have been the resolute defenders. It is, however, stated, on the autho- rity of Archbishop Hamilton, that the Bishops of Dunkeld, Dun- blane, and another, probably indicating himself, opposed the new Confession ; but it is evident that he must mean what is called a • MS. Advocates' Library, (marked 32, 3, 7,) p. 120, 121. 1560.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 47 silent vote, though it is probable that they were intimidated by their peculiar circumstances. Several of them, considering the meeting as illegal, absented themselves ; and others, who took their seats, having protested against the injustice of excluding them from being chosen Lords of the Articles, refused to interfere. A bill of complaint was presented against them by the Barons, " con- taining," says Eandolph, the English ambassador, " rather a gene- ral accusation of all living Bishops than any special crime they were burdened with." No answer was returned to this document by the Prelates, and as the Archbishop of St Andrews, and the Bishops of Dunkeld and Dunblane, who were specially cited, ne- glected to appear, a decree was passed for the " stay of their livings." All the leases which the Prelates had granted to pre- serve their lands from the avaricious grasp of the Reforming leaders, under the stipulation that the rents were to be paid, and the lands reconveyed to their original proprietors in more prosperous times, which had been duly sanctioned by the Pope, were declared to be void, without further process of law.* The First Book of Discipline encountered a determined oppo- sition. Knox and his colleagues suggested a most impracticable scheme for collecting the ecclesiastical revenues, which it was never supposed for a moment would be appropriated by the rapa- cious reforming nobility to their own use. It was recommended that " annual deacons should be surrogated into the room of the former legal proprietors," to collect the tithes and rents of the church lands, and " those deacons were to distribute the incomes according to warrants signed by the ministers and elders."-f- This proposition was received with scorn, and ironically termed " a devout imagination." As a reply to the suggestion of Knox, it was subsequently enacted by the Secret Council on the 17th of January 1560-1, that " the Bishops, Abbots, Priors, and other Prelates, and beneficed Vicars, who have also joined themselves to us, bruik [enjoy] the revenues of their benefices during their lifetimes, they sustaining and upholding the ministry and minis- ters for the preaching of the word, and the ministration of the sacraments." Dr George Cook, a Presbyterian writer of high " Tytler's History of Scotland, vol. vi. 8vo edit. p. 220, 221. t Bishop Keith's History, p. 491. 48 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G0. authority, thus expresses himself on the appropriation of the temporalities at the Reformation : — " Had the Papal Bishops been succeeded by men invested with the episcopal character, it would have been very difficult for the laity, as the law then stood, to wrest from the Church her ample possessions. By destroying the ancient policy, and laying the foundation of a new church, these possessions were left without a legal owner, and it might have been perceived that the nobles and barons would feel little inclina- tion to endow the infant establishment with the wealth which they had so long contemplated with envy, when it ministered to the pomp and the indulgence of the priesthood."* Meanwhile the first Greneral Assembly of this new religious association, for the Roman Catholic Hierarchy was still the legal establishment, and, as will be subsequently seen, the Bishops con- tinued to sit in Parliament, was held at Edinburgh on the 20th of December 15G0. It consisted of forty-six individuals, preachers and private individuals, of whom John Knox was the most con- spicuous, as " minister" of Edinburgh. A list was presented of those persons who were thought most qualified for the " ministering of the Word of God and Sacraments, and reading of the com- munion prayers publicklie in all kirks and congregations, and given up by them every ane within their awin bounds." Eight individuals were nominated " readers," with a certain John Chal- mers, described as " apt to teach," in the district of Ayrshire, anciently termed Kyle ; twenty-one were nominated " for minister- ing and teaching " in St Andrews, probably'meaning the Diocese generally ; and twelve are " thought apt and able" by the forty- six " ministers and commissioners" comprising the Assembly, " to minister." On the 21st of December, the deanery church of Restalrig, about a mile and a half equally distant from Leith and Edinburgh, and then the parish church of Leith, was ordered to be " raysit, and utterlie casten downe and destroyed," because it was a " monument of idolatrie." On the 27th of December, sundi-y resolutions were adopted in opposition to the " Pope's Kirk," and it was resolved to apply to Parliament and the Lords of Secret Council to inflict " sharp punishment " on sundry per- sons of rank in Wigtonshire, Kirkcudbrightshire, Haddingtonshire, * Cook's History of the Reformation in Scotland, vol, ii. p. 415. 15G0.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 49 Fifeshire, Selkirkshire, and Ayrshire, for " causing masses to be said, and being present thereat." Among them are specified in the district of Galloway, now the counties of Wigton and Kirkcud- bright, the Prior of Whithorn and the Laird of Kirmichaell, the latter charged with causing " masse daylie to be said, and images holden up, and idolatrie to be maintained within his bounds." In Ayrshire the principal recusants were the Earls of Eglinton and Oassillis, the Abbots of Crossraguel, and the parishioners of May- bole, Girvan, Kirkoswald, and Dailly. The " auld Ladie Hume in Thornetoun" is denounced in Haddingtonshire, and " the good- man " of Galashiels in Selkirkshire, who " not only causes masse to be said, but also maintains the sayers thereof, who are enemies to God and his truth, and therefore were exylit out of Edin- burgh."* It is clear, from a careful examination of all the proceedings of Knox and his associates, that they had adopted no regular plan for their new religious system. They appointed preachers in most of the principal towns, and they next subdivided a considerable part of the kingdom into five districts, to each of which they no- minated persons to exercise a kind of jurisdiction or controul, under the title of Superintendents, over the preachers in the seve- ral towns and parishes. It was contemplated to increase those Superintendents to ten, but this was never effected, and even the five continued in their anomalous and illegal vocation only a short time. Those were John Spottiswoode, for the counties south of the Frith of Forth, to the English Border ; John Winram, for the county of Fife ; John Willox, for the counties included in the Archepiscopal Diocese of Glasgow ; John Oarswell, for the Bishop- rics of Argyll and The Isles ; and John Erskine, Baron or " Laird" Dun, for the counties of Forfar and Kincardine, then known as Angus and Mearns. With the exception of Erskine of Dun, all the " Superintendents " were in holy orders. Spottiswoode, who was descended from ancient family in Berwickshire, had been ordain- ed by Archbishop Cranmer in England, and when he returned to Scotland he was appointed " parson" of Calder in Linlithgowshire by Sir James Sandilands, a parish which he held till his death. * " Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland," or Acts and Proceedings of the General Assemblies of the Kirk of Scotland from 15G0. Printed for the Bannat)'ne Club, Edinburgh, 4to. 1839. Part I. p. .3-6. 4 50 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G0. Winram had been Sub-Prior of St Andrews, and was an Augus- tine Monk. He is described by Principal Lee, of the University of Edinburgh, who is considered very high Presbyterian authority, as " a man of an intriguing turn, and probably was admitted to the confidence of both parties. It is not understood that he ever made any strenuous efforts in support of the Protestant doctrines ; but he was allowed to retain some of the most lucrative appoint- ments in the church, along with the dignity and honour of Super- intendent. In various actions carried on before the Commissary Court of St Andrews he continued to be designated Prior of PortmoaJc, Sub-Prior of St Andrews, Superintendent of Stratherne, Parson ofKirkness, Scc.till the time of his deathin September 1582."* In 1566, Winram appears, however, to have become weary of the " dignity and honour" of Superintendent of Fife, as he confessed to the General Assembly that year " his own inabilitie to discharge the office, and desired the Assemblie to denude him of it."f Wil- lox was originally a Dominican Friar in the town of Ayr, and it appears that after his appointment as Superintendent he took possession of the Dean's residence in Glasgow, and continued to receive L.IOOO (probably Scots money) per annum out of the re- venues of the Archbishopric. J Carswell was rector or parson of Kilmartine in Argyllshire, and having been patronized by the Earl of Argyll, a zealous reformer, he was promoted to this office by the interest of that nobleman, to assist him in his projects of seizing the temporalities of the Bishoprics of Argyll and The Isles. The facility with which the Superintendent Willox was enabled to receive a considerable portion of the revenues of the See of Glasgow is easilyexplained. At the outbreak of the Keformation in 1559, Archbishop James Beaton, already mentioned as the Cardi- nal's nephew, retired to Paris, and he subsequently obtained con- siderable preferment in France. The victorious insurgents insti- tuted a legal process against him, and sequestered all the revenues of his See. The Archbishop carried with him some of the silver • Notice prefixed to the Revocation of the sentence of heresy pronounced by Cardinal Beaton against Sir John Borthwick, son of Lord Borthwick. Bannatyne Club, 4to, 1827, vol, i. p. 254. t Booke of the Universal! Kirk of Scotland, part I. p. 77. X Letter of Thomas Archibald, Chamberlain to Archbishop Beaton of Glasgow, at Paris, dated 10th October 1560. 1560.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 51 ornaments, charters, documents, and whatever he could save from certain destruction by the mob. He never returned to Scotland, and before his death in 1 603 he committed them to the care of the Scottish College of Douay and ordered all the writings to be restored when the Papal Hierarchy was re-established. It may be here observed that most of the documents were sent to Scotland in 1839, and were deposited in the Roman Catholic Col- lege of St Mary at Blairs, in Maryculter parish, near Aberdeen. But extraordinary, unecclesiastical, and preposterous as was the new religious association, it is singular to find the Roman Catholic Prelates proffering to maintain its preachers. At a meeting of the Convention of Estates held at Edinburgh on the 22d of December 1561, the Archbishop of St Andrews, and the Bishops of Dunkeld, Moray, and Ross, appeared and offered to relinquish the third part of their revenues for various purposes, after the amount of the rentals was accurately ascertained, and " siclyke to charge the whole Superintendents, ministers, eldars, and deacons, of the principale touns and shires of this realme to give in before the Queen's grace and Lords of Counsale foirsaid, [on] the 24th day Januar next to cum, ane formale and sufficient roU and memoriall what may be sufficient and reasonable to sustene the ministerie and whole mem- bers of the realme, that her Majestie and Lords of Counsale foirsaids may tak order thairintil as accords." Th^ same Prelates on that occasion also offered, on the condition that their benefices and pri- vileges were restored to them, to the " Queen's Majestie for the space of ane yeir the third part of the rents of thair benefices, to be employit as hir Grace thinkis expedient, and this they ofFerit, and na forder."* Queen Mary landed at Leith from France on the 20tli of August 1561. and soon found her kingdom in a religious, political, and civil feud. This unfortunate Sovereign assumed the government of a people little removed from barbarism, and excited by the most extravagant fanaticism. The ecclesiastical establishment was sub- verted; the temporalities seized by the powerful nobility; and a religious polity was openly sanctioned which was not only ill di- gested, but apparently not well understood by its authors. The whole country was in a state of confusion, and religion was made • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. ii. Appendix, p. G06, 607. 52 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G1-2. the pretext for committing atrocious crimes and causing innumer- able disorders. The utter inefficiency of the Superintendent System is proved by the facts recorded at the time. At the meeting of the " haill Kirk," held in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh on the 26th of May 1561, it was resolved to petition the Lords of the Secret Councel " for maintaining, and speciall provision to be made for Superintendents, for the erecting and establishing of more in places convenient, and for punishing of the contemners of the said Superintendents, and disobeyers of them."* This indicates that the functionaries were not generally recognized in their new office, and it would startle many to see a man like Winram, who, as al- ready observed, is described of " an intriguing turn," who had been the intimate friend of Cardinal Beaton, and who had preached the sermon in the Cathedral of St Andrews at the commencement of Wishart's trial for heresy on the last day of February 1545-6, advocating opinions in 1561 which he then maintained should be opposed by the Church and State, and that those who held them might be lawfully put to death. Complaints were soon preferred against the conduct of the Superintendents. In the General Assembly, held in the " Auld Counsell-House" at Edinburgh on the 25th of December 1562 — the sacred festival of Christmas being utterly disregarded, Spottiswoode, the Superintendent of Lothian, was alleged to be " somewhat slack in his visitations, and remaned not at the kirks for ordering such things as were necessar for the same ; that he was too much given to worldlie affaires, slack in preaching, rash in excommunicatioun, sharper nor became him in making acts for payment of small tithes." Even of the Baron of Dun, lay Superintendent of Angus and Mearns, it was complained, that " manie popish priests, unable and of wicked life, were admitted to reading at kirks within his Diocese — that some young men were rashlie admitted to the ministrie, and to be exhortars, without such trial and examination as are required in the Book of Discipline — that gentlemen of vitious lives were chosen to be elders in divers kirks — that sundrie ministers under his jurisdictioun re- maned not at thair kirks, visit not the sick in thair extremitie, also that the youth are not instructed — that some ministers come too late to the kirks where they should preach on the Lord's Day, • Booke of the Uiiiversall Kirk of Scotland, printed for Bannatyue Club, Part I, p. 5. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 53 so that the people doe wearie staying upon them, and inconti- nent the sermon being ended they depart."* In the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 25th of December 1563 in the " New Tolbuith," it was alleged against Winram, as Superintendent of Fife, that " he preached not in his visitations, but caused the minister of the kirk to occupie the room and Willox of Glasgow was accused of not using " his endeavour to procure the extirpation of idolatrie in his bounds," the blame of which he ascribed to the Duke of Chatelherault and the Earl of Oassilis. The state of Angus and Mearns was also noticed — that no discipline was used in " many of the kirks" — that " there was no convention of elders and deacons at kirks for correction of faults" — and that Erskine "■ preached not at his visitations." So completely satisfied were the Superintendents themselves of the utter inefficiency of their system, that on this very occasion Spot- tiswoode " requested the Assemblie to give him libertie to return to his former cure, because he was not able to discharge so great a burthen as he was burthened with." This was followed by a complaint from the parishioners of Calder, that " Mr John Spot- tiswoode, presented to the parsonage of Calder fifteen years since by the Laird of Calder, had been presented three years since to be Superintendent of Lowthiane without their knowledge, and that by reason of his public office and exercise he is abstracted from his cure at the said kirk the most part of the year ; desired, therefore, as before, to cause him renounce his Superintendentship, and returne to his former vocation, or else to demitt the said par- sonage, to the effect ane other qualified man might be presented." Willox " desired to be disburthened of the great charge laid upon him, which he had undertaken onlie for a time, and request- ed the Assemblie to lay no greater burthen upon him than he was able to bear."-f- Two years afterwards, in the Assembly held at Edinburgh in 1565, when Erskine of Dun was chosen Moderator, he candidly admitted that his " visitations could not be very pro- fitable, in respect it behoved him to lodge with his friends for the most part, who had most need of correction and discipline ; there- fore he besought the Assemblie to provide some other to that office. ";|: BtxAe of the Uuiversall Kirk of Scotland, Part I, p. 25, 26. t Ibid. p. 39. $ [bid. p. 65. 64 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563. Some of the ordinary preachers were becoming dissatisfied with the unscriptural system of ecclesiastical polity with which they were connected, and which had not received any legal sanction. A cer- tain Robert Kamsay was accused in the Assembly of 1563 of " en- tering in the ministrie within the Superintendent of Angus his bounds without electioun or his admission ; and that he affirmed there was a mid way hetween Papistrie and our religion!''' It is true it was also alleged against the said Eobert Ramsay that he had borrowed some money on security from the town of Inverness to purchase books, which he had not paid ; but as this was a mat- ter with which the Assembly had no right to interfere, there can be little doubt that his principal offence was the assertion of the " mid way between Papistrie and their religion." He was sus- pended from his functions, and ordered to appear before Winram at St Andrews, on the 19th of January following.* The confusion which succeeded the Reformation in Scotland had its effect on some of the Roman Catholic Bishops, two of whom associated with the promoters of the new polity, and two others, who were Bishops elect, but never consecrated, joined the same party. The two latter were James Hamilton, elect of Argyll, and Eobert Stewart, elect of Caithness ; the two former were Adam Bothwell, promoted to the See of Orkney, and Alexander Gordon, Bishop of Galloway and titular Archbishop of Athens. Hamilton was an illegitimate son of the Duke of Chatelherault, formerly bet- ter known as the Earl of Arran, Regent of the kingdom, and younger brother of Archbishop Hamilton of St Andrews. He was at the outset of life incumbent of Petty in the Diocese of Moray, subsequently Rector of Spott in Haddingtonshire, and after various unsuccessful nominations to the Abbey of Paisley and even the Archbishopric of Glasgow, he was preferred to the See of Argyll, with the Sub-Deanery of Glasgow, in 1558 ; but there is no evidence of his consecration. He was on the side of the Reformers in the Convention or Parliament of 1560, in the list of which his name appears as James, Bishop of Argyll. The only other notices of him which subsequently occur are in a charter granted to an individual in 1565, and his signature to the bond, with other relations of the name of Hamilton, to release Queen • Booke of the Universal! Kirk of Scotland— Acts of General AssembUes, Part I. p. 44. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 55 Mary from prison in 1567. He was alive in 1575. His name is also in the Commission of the Estates appointed in August 1560, to " move the Queene of England to take the'Earl of Arran [the Duke of Ohatelherault his father] to be her husband ."*;^llobert Stewart, designated Bishop of Caithness, of the temporalities of which he obtained possession, though he was never in holy orders, was the second son of John third Earl of Lennox. He was edu- cated for the Church, and there is little doubt that his powerful family connections would have procured for him the highest eccle- siastical preferment, as while Provost of the collegiate church of Dunbarton he was made Bishop-elect of Caithness in 1542, at the death of Bishop Andrew Stewart, son of John Earl of AthoU. Before he could enter into holy orders he became involved in the feuds between his brother, Matthew fourth Earl of Lennox, father of Lord Darnley, and the party who supported the Earl of Arran previously mentioned. He incurred the same forfeiture in 1545 with his brother the Earl, and was compelled to live in exile till 1563, when he returned to Scotland, and was not only invested with the temporalities of the Bishopric of Caithness, but was eventually rewarded, for complying with the Reformation, by a grant of the Priory of St Andrews, from his brother the Earl during his regency, after the assassination of the Regent Moray. He became sixth Earl of Lennox by royal charter, dated June 1578, at the death of his nephew Charles fifth Earl ; but as he had only one illegitimate daughter, he resigned the earldom of Lennox for that of March in favour of his grandnephew Esme Stewart, Lord of Aubigny in France. The Earl of Lennox or March retained his title of Bishop of Caithness after he became a Protestant, and occasionally took a prominent part in the religious proceedings of his time. He is mentioned as connected with the " Superintendents, ministers, and commissioners of the Kirk," in the proceedings of the General Assembly held at Perth on the 25th of June 1563, when "commissions were given to the Bishops of Galloway, Orkney, and Caithness, for the space of a year, to plant kirks within their own bounds ."-f- In subse- quent Assemblies his name occurs in a similar manner. He resided privately at St Andrews till his death in March 1586, • Acta Pari. Scot. Vol. II. Appendix, p. 606. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part 1. p. 32. THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563- in the 70th year of his age. Though a mere layman, he is styled in the commission signed at Leith, in 1571, the Right Reverend Father in God Robert., Bishop of Caithness, directing him and the Superintendents of Lothian, Fife, Angus, or " any uthers lawful Bischops and Superintendents within this realm," to consecrate John Douglas as " Bischop and Pastour of the metropolitan kirk of St Androis." This is one of the many instances of the ecclesiastical disorders which succeeded the Reformation in Scotland, when worldliness and fanaticism perpetrated acts utterly opposed to every principle of apostolical and primitive antiquity. More comprehensive notices of the two conforming Bishops, Bothwell of Orkney, and Gordon of Galloway, must be given, be- cause those two very questionable personages early connected them- selves with the then so called " General Assemblies." The See of Orkney was vacant after the death of Bishop Robert Reid at Dieppe in 1558, when returning with the other commissioners ap- pointed to proceed to France to witness the marriage of Queen Mary to the Dauphin. Adam Bothwell, second son of Francis Bothwell, one of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Scotland at its institution in 1532, was admitted to the temporalities of the See of Orkney on the 11th of October 1550. Bishop Bothwell was the uncle of John Napier of Merchiston, the celebrated inventor of Logarithms. He is described by the biographer of that great man as " courtly and luxurious," and " although he was the first Re- formed Bishop of Orkney, no prelate of the ancient regime could have been more studious of his ease. He seems to have joined the infant church rather from a sense of the staggering state of the old religion than because he entertained a violent distaste for its corruptions. He succeeded his brother William as rector of Ashkirk [a parish partly in the counties of Roxburgh and Selkirk] in 1552, and was only about thirty years of age when the vacancy occurred in the See of Orkney which he was selected to fill."* As he is designated Bishop of Orkney in the grant investing him with the temporalities of the Bishopric on the 11th October 1559, he must have been elected by the Chapter some time previous to that date. His consecration is not recorded, but there is no doubt of • Memoirs of John Napier of Mcrcliiston, by Mark Napier, Esq. Edin. Ito. 1834, p. 61, 62. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 57 the fact from subsequent acts of his life, and because he was duly elected by the Chapter. In a letter to his " richt honorable and best beloved brother the Laird of Merchistoun," dated 5th Feb- ruary, the year supposed to be 156U,* he expressly mentions a visitation which he made of his Diocese, which corrects the asser- tion of Keith in his Catalogue of Scottish Bishops, that " Adam of Orkney appears never to have taken any charge of his cure." He was confirmed by Queen Mary in the Bishopric in 1562, about which period he joined Knox's party, and he continued to associate with them, though his office and station rendered him always an object of their suspicion. He was connected with the General Assembly held at Perth in 1563, when he obtained a " commis- sion for one year to " plant kirks " within his Diocese, and the name of Adam, Bishop of Orkney, occurs among the list of the principal persons present in the General Assembly held in the " New Tolbooth " of Edinburgh on the 2oth of December that year, when he was appointed one of a committee to revise the Book of Discipline. In June 1565, Adam, Bishop of Orkney, George Buchanan, and four others, were by the same body " ordained to convene, and decide questions proponed or to be proponed, and to report their decision to the Assemblie, that the same may be inserted in the register."f He had been nominated an Extraordi- nary Lord or Judge in the Supreme Court of Law on the 14th of January 1564, by the promotion of Sir James Balfour, and an Ordirtary Lord or Judge on the 13th of November 1565. This appointment involved no abandonment of any principle by Both- well, because by the original constitution of the Scottish Supreme Court, consisting of a President and fourteen Senators, eight, in- cluding the foreman, were to be ecclesiastics, and the distinction of spiritual and temporal judges, as provided by the act of institu- tion, was carefully preserved — an ecclesiastic receiving the ap- pointment when a vacancy occurred on the spiritual side of the Bench, and a layman at a deficiency on the temporal side ; but this distinction was ordered to be " suppressed and forgotten " by the Act of 1640, by which all the Judges were enjoined to be of * Memoirs of John Napiti- of Mcichiston, by Mark Napier, Esq. p. 68. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part I. p. 60, 61. 58 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G3. the " temporal estate," or laymen.* " Adam of Orkney, ane of the Sessioun," was present in the General Assembly held at Edin- burgh in June 1566. In his judicial capacity or function Both- well appears to have been considered useful, and he was appointed one of two committees, one of which was authorized to " recon- sider and revise " an answer to a book by Henry Bullinger, written by William Ramsay, Professor in St Salvador's College, St An- drews ; and the other was to " receive and decide questions, and to report decisions."-|- But the important political affairs with which Bishop Bothwell connected himself soon drew upon him the resentment of his Reform- ing associates. He subscribed his name to the bond granted by several of the nobility to the notorious James Hepburn, Earl of Bothwell, on the 20th of April 1567, and he celebrated the un- happy marriage of that personage and Queen Mary in the great hall of the Palace of Holyrood House on the 15th of May that year, in the form of the Protestants then in use. Yet the Bishop of Orkney, immediately after sanctioning a marriage he had counselled, which involved the Queen in irretrievable misery, and caused much disorder and bloodshed in the kingdom, joined the powerful association formed against the Earl of Bothwell. It is appropriately said of the Bishop of Orkney, and his cousin the Lord Justice-Clerk, Sir John Bellenden, that " two greater hypo- crites never breathed," and that " they were deeply implicated in the rebellion of the times, and parties to that diabolical plan to ruin the Queen which owed its success to treason, murder, rape, and forgei'y."J In the deed of abdication extorted from Marj' in favour of her son James, dated the 24th of July 1567, one of the Commissioners named in the document, as if empowered by the Queen to receive her renunciation of the throne, is Adam, Bishop of Orkney ; and on the 29th of that month he performed the cere- mony of crowning the infant King in the parish church of Stirling, at the instigation of the insurgent nobility and their adherents. When the Earl of Bothwell, whom the Queen at the unhappy mar- " Historical Account of the Senators of the College of Justice from its institution in 1532, by George Brunton and David Haig, Edin. 8vo. 1832, p. xxxvii. •f Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part I. p. 90. % Napier's Life of John Napier of Merchiston, p. 112. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 59 riage had created Duke of Orkney, fled to that island region after his humiliating disgrace at Oarberry Hill near Musselburgh, an armament of five ships was fitted out against him under the com- mand of Sir William Murray of TuUibardine, and Sir William Kirkaldy of Grange, two of the most daring personages of that age, and they sailed in quest of Bothwell on the 19th of August 15G7, accompanied by the Bishop of Orkney, who went in Kirk- aldy's ship named the Unicorn. They descried two of BothwelFs ships cruising off the east coast of the Shetland Islands noted for dangerous currents, tides, and whirlpools. Kirkaldy's vessel was the swiftest, and he approached Bressay Sound, through which the fugitive Earl steered. So close was the chace that when Bothwell escaped by the north entrance Kirkaldy came in by the south. The followers of the Earl knew well those dangerous and narrow seas, and though their keel often grazed the sunken rocks, they soon got into a deeper and safer sea. In opposition to the remonstrance of his more experienced mariners, Kirkaldy, who saw his prize within his grasp, ordered every sail to impel the bulky Unicorn, and the ship struck on a rock covered at high water. It became instantly a wreck, and there was only time to save the crew and soldiers in a boat. Bothwell escaped — but the interest- ing part of this adventure followed. "As it was, one wamor heavily armed still clung to the wreck, and the boat already on its way deeply laden, it seemed impossible to save this being from de- struction. His cries reached them, and were disregarded; another instant of delay, and he had perished; when collecting all his energies, he sprung with a desperate efibrt into the midst of the crowded boat, causing it to reel with his additional weight, encum- bered as he was with a corslet of proof. Who could have sur- mised that this athletic man-at-arms, the last to quit the wreck, was a Bishop — the Bishop who had so lately joined the hand of him he pursued with that of Queen Mary — the very Bishop who a month before had poured the holy oil on the infant head of James VI., and stood proxy for the extorted abdication of that monarch's mother ! It was Adam Bothwell, Bishop of Orkney. The rock from which he leapt can be seen at low water, and is called the Unicorn to this day."* " Napier's Memoirs of John Napier of Merchiston, p. 121, 122, 123. 60 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563. The conspicuous enmity of Bishop Bothwell to the Earl of Both- well, and his prominent connexion with the insurgent party against Queen Mary, were of little avail with his Reforming associates of the new " Church.'" In the General Assembly held in the " Nether Tolbuith" of Edinburgh, on the 25th of December 1567 — " Adam, called Bishop of Orkney, Commissioner for Orkney, being absent, was deleted for not visiting the kirks of his country but from Lambmass [Lammas] to Hallowmass. Item, that he occupied the room of a judge in the Session, the sheep wandering without a pastor. Item, because he retained in his own company Sir Francis BothweU, a Papist, to whom he had given benefices, and placed a minister. Item, because he solemnized the marriage of the Queen and the Earl of Bothwell, which was altogether wicked, and con- trair to God's law and statutes of the Kirk."* On the 30th of December it was declared — " Anent the marriage of the Queene with the Erie of Bothwell, by Adam, called Bischop of Orkney, the haill Kirk finds that he transgressed the Act of the Kirk in marrying the divorcit adulterer, -|- and therfor depryvis him fra all functioun of the ministrie, conforme to the tenour of the Act made thereupon, ay and until the Kirk be satisfied of the slander com- mittit by him."| Calderwood states — " Adam, called Bishop of Orkney, pretended he might not remain in Orkney by reason of the evil air and weakness of his body. He denied that he understood Francis Bothwell to be a Papist, or that he had placed him in the ministry."" This Francis Bothwell was a son of either Richard or William, the Bishop's brothers, and is probably the " Freir Fran- cis Bothwell" who, with three others, found security to appear be- fore the Justiciary Court on the 15th of April 1561, for exciting a riot in the town of Kirkwall during the previous September, in which two persons were killed." |1 The wily Bishop, however, was not long under sentence of deprivation from " all functioun of the ministrie." In the proceedings of this General Assembly held at • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 112. j- Bothwell had divorced his Countess, Lady Jean Gordon, daughter of George fourth Earl of Huntly, that lie might be enabled to marry the Queen. Lady Jean married subsequently Alexander, eleventh Earl of Sutherland, and after his death Alexander Ogilvy of Boyne. She died at Edinburgh in 1629 in the 81th year of her age. i Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 114. II Pitcaim's Criminal Trials, vol. I. p. 413. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 61 Edinburgh on the 1st of July 1-568, occurs the following passage, which is sufficiently explanatory — " Touching the Bischop of Ork- ney's suspensioun from the ministrie [by] the last Assemblie, and his obedience and submission, the Kirk restores him again to the ministrie of the word, and also ordaines him one some Sonday when he best may for weakness of his body, to make a sermoun in the kirk of Halierudehous, and in the end thereof to confesse the offence in marrying the Queen with the Erie Bothwell, and desyre the Kirk ther present for the tyme to forgive him his offence, and slander given by him in doing the fornamet act. The quhilk he promised to doe."* The Bishop of Orkney was conspicuous in the Commission, chiefly composed of the murderers of Rizzio, against Queen Mary, This Commission met first at York, and the Regent Moray was incessantly urged by the Bishop and the more violent of his asso- ciates to prefer the charge against the Queen unconditionally. He was also the individual who gave in the document to the English Council accusing the Queen of the nmrder of Lord Darnloy, to which the Regent Moray pretended an opposition. The parties returned to Scotland in February 1568-9, and the disreputable service in which the Bishop of Orkney had been engaged, though approved by the incipient Presbyterian Reformers, who were the bitter enemies of Mary, failed to shield him from their resentment. Shortly after his return from England he exchanged the property of the Bishopric of Orkney with Lord Robert Stewart, Abbot of Holyroodhouse, an illegitimate son of James V., and afterwards created Earl of Orkney by James VI. in 1581. for that Abbacy, which was ratified by charter under the Great Seal dated the 25th of September 1569. This transaction exasperated his Reforming friends ; and in the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 1st of March 1569-70, it was made the first of six accusations, or " chief offences" brought against him ; but this alleged " simonia- cal charge" of which the wily Bishop was accused, appears to have been forced upon him much to his advantage in 1569, as appears by an Act of Parliament in 1592, entitled " Exceptioun in favour of Adam Bischope of Orknay." As the six charges now mentioned curiously illustrate the spirit of the times, and of the leaders of the new religious * Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 131. 62 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563. party in Scotland, they are worthy of perusal; more especi- ally as they were preferred by men with whom the Bishop of Orkney associated, and who only gave him battle, and tormented him, when they had some sinister purpose of their own in view, or when he objected to comply with some of their extravagant conceits. " Imprimis, The said Adam being called to the said office of Bischopric, and promoted to the profit thereof, and espe- cially in Christ's Kirk received the charge of preaching of the Evangell, to be also Commissioner in Orknay, quhilk he accepted, and executed for a certain space thereafter, quhile now of late he hath made a simoniacall change of the same with the Abbacy of Halyrudhous, yet bruiking the name, and stiled Bishop of the same, contrar to all laws both of God and man made against simony. Secondly, He hath demitted the said office and cure in and unto the hands of an unqualified person, without con- sent and licence asked and granted by the Assembly, leaving the flock destitute without a shepherd ; whereby not only ignorance is increased, but also most abundantly all vice and horrible crimes are there committed, as the number of six hundred persons, con- victed of incest, adultery, and fornication in Zetland, beareth witness; and hath simpliciter left the office of preaching, giving himself daily to the exercise of the office of a temporall judge as a Lord of the Session, which requireth the whole man, and so rightly no wise can execute both ; and stileth himself with Roman titles, as Eeverend Father in God, which pertaineth to no minister of Christ Jesus, nor is given them in Scriptures."" The third complains of the " great hurt and defraud of the Kirk," and the assumed injustice done to the " said Lord Robert and his bairnes," by the " simo- niacaU" exchange of the rents of Orkney for the third part of the revenue of the Abbey of Holyroodhouse, without " consent or knowledge of the Assembly." The fourth comprises local matters, chiefly accusing him of carelessness and neglect of his ecclesiasti- cal duties ; and the fifth, of allowing the parochial edifices to be- come so ruinous that it was dangerous to enter them. " Sixth, The said Adam hath accused, both publicly and privately, the minis- ters of Edinburgh as persons who have passed the bounds of God's word in their publick teaching, &c. ; in token whereof he hath ab- solutely absented himself from all preaching in the said kirk, and receiving of the sacraments, howbeit he hath had his dwelling 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES 63 place within the said burgh [Edinburgh] at certain and diverse times since." They add — " Many more might be laid to his charge, but the Assembly trusting the former being amended, the rest will the better be redressed, doth supersede."* But the Bishop of Orkney was too wily a personage to be easily frightened, and a few days afterwards he presented his answers to the " offences laid to his charge." In reply to the first he de- clared— " That in the 58 year of God [1558], before the Reforma- tione of religione, he was, according to the order then observed, provided to the Bishopric of Orknay ; and when idolatry and su- perstitione were suppressed, he suppressed the same also in his bounds, preached the word, administered the sacraments, planted ministers in Orkney and Zetland, and gave stipends out of his rents to ministers, exhorters, and readers; and when he was a commissioner, visited all the kirks of Orkney and Zetland twice, to the hazard of his life in dangerous stormes on the seas, whereby he contracted sickness to the great danger of his life, till he was suspended from the exercise of his said commission in the year 1567, by reason of his infirmity, and sickness contracted through the air of the countrey and travells in time of tempest, at what time he desired some other place to travel in, which was then thought reasonable." He denied that he had demitted any part of his office to Lord Robert Stewart, but " that the said Lord Robert violently intruded himself into his whole living, with bloodshed and hurt of his servants ; and after he had craved justice, his and his servants^ lives were sought in the very eyes of justice in Edinburgh ; and then was he constrained for mere necessity to take the Abbacy of Halyrud- house by advice of sundry godly men, because then we could not have the occasion of a Generall Assembly." In reference to the second accusation, he denied that he had abandoned absolutely the preaching of the Word, or that he had intended to do so, maintaining that ill health alone prevented him — that when Queen Mary appointed him a Judge in the Court of Session, he accepted the situation by the " advice of godly and learned men," believing that it was not repugnant to " any good order as yet established in the Kirk," and " alledged that diverse others having benefices had done the like, and are not condemned for so doing." • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 1G2, 1G3. 64 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563. He thus hypocritically noticed the conclusion of the second article, which charged him with assuming " Roman" titles — " With par- don and reverence of the Assembly I may declare that I never delighted in such a style, nor desired any such arrogant title ; for I acknowledge myself to be a worm of the earth, not worthy any reverence, giving and attributing to my God only all honour, glory, and reverence, with all humble submission." His answers to the third, fourth, and fifth charges consisted of explanations, modifi- cations, and denials, not particularly interesting." As to the last, he denied thathe "spake any thing butthat whichhespake in the last Assembly in their own audience. God forbid that he should be a detractor of God's ministers for any privie injustice done to him, as he alleged none ; if there were any, he would rather burie them than hinder the progress of the Evangell. As for absenting himself from their preaching, he answered, he only keeped his own parish kirk, where he I'eceived the sacraments.* John Knox and two others wei-e appointed to try the " suffi- ciency " of these answers, and to report to the next Assembly ; but as nothing occurs in the records, it may be presumed that the Bishop's defences were considered satisfactory. The General As- sembly held at Edinburgh on the 5th of March 1570-1, addressed a letter on that day to their " right worshipfuU and their loving brother," Lord Robert Stewart, whom they still designated Oom- mendator of Holyroodhouse, reminding him of their letter of the 8th of March 1568-9, thanking him for what he had done in " planting kirks " in Orkney and Shetland, and entreating him not only to " continue to the end," but to cause all who commit gross crimes and immoralities to be severely punished. Mean- while Bothwell continued to retain both the Abbey of Holyrood- house and the title of Bishop during his lifetime, and always after the exchange signed himself " Adam, Bishop of Orkney, Coni- mendator of Holyroodhouse." He was subsequently connected with various public transactions and matters of state, and died on the 23d of August 1593, in the 67th year of his age. His monument is still to be seen in the now ruinous chapel of the Palace of HoljTood, enumerating his titles, and containing a most flattering poetical inscription in Latin, in which this worldly hypo- • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotlanrl, Part First, p. 1C5-168. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 65 «rite and intriguing apostate is represented as one of the greatest and the best men of his time. The subsequent history of his family may be here summarily noticed. At what time the un- scrupulous Bishop Bothwell availed himself of a wife no intima- tion is preserved ; but he married Margaret, daughter of J ohn Murray of Touchadam, some years before 1580, by whom he left three sons and one daughter. John Bothwell, the eldest son, appointed a Lord of Session at his fathers resignation in July 1593, and sworn a Privy Councillor to James VI., whom he accompanied to England in 1603, was created a Peer, by the title of Lord Holyroodhouse, by charter on the 20th of December 1607, with remainder to the heirs-male of Adam, Bishop of Ork- ney, failing whom to his own heirs and assigns whosoever. He married a daughter of Sir John Oarmichael of Carmichael, by whom he had John, second Lord, who succeeded in 1629-30, and died without issue in 1635. The Peerage was dormant till 1704, when it was moved in Parliament that Alexander Bothwell of Olencorse, great-grandson of William, third son of Adam, Bishop of Orkney, who had been served heir to the second Lord, should have his name marked on the rolls of Parliament conform to his precedency. Some legal difficulties intervened, and his son Henry Bothwell of Glencorse was served heir to John, second Lord, in 1734. His petition was laid before the House of Lords on the 20th of March, but no judgment was ever pronounced. This gentleman, who died in the Canongate of Edinburgh in February 1755, married Mary, daughter of Lord Niel Campbell, second son of Archibald, eighth Earl and first Marquis of Argyll, and father of the Honourable Archibald Campbell, consecrated a Bishop of the Scottish Episcopal Church at Dundee in 1711, and by her had five sons, four of whom died without issue. Robert, the youngest, who settled in Jamaica, married Margaret, daughter of William Preston, Esq., of Gorton, near Edinburgh, by whom he had one daughter, who married Colin Drummond, M.D., a younger son of George Drummond, Esq., merchant, six times Lord Provost of Edinburgh. The offspring of this marriage were two sons and a daughter. One of the former, Archibald Bothwell of Glencorse, became Lieutenant-Colonel of the Scots Greys, and died in London in 1809. The children of the daugh- 5 66 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G3. ter are also mentioned, but the race of Adam Bothwell, Bishop of Orkney, is now extinct. Alexander Gordon, Bishop of Galloway, the only other conse- crated Bishop who associated with the Reformers, was the second son of John Lord Gordon, by Jane, called also Margaret in the Peerage Lists, an illegitimate daughter of James IV. by Mar- garet, daughter of John Lord Drummond. The Bishop''s father was Alexander third Earl of Huntly, and his brother George suc- ceeded as fourth Earl. In his early youth he associated much with King James V., with whom he became a favourite, and was intended to be promoted to the Bishopric of Caithness in 1542, then forfeited by Eobert Stewart, afterwards Earl of Lennox, already mentioned, but the election never took place, though the See of Caithness remained vacant from Stewart's forfeiture till his return to Scotland, and assumption of the temporalities of the Bishopric in 1563. At the death of Archbishop Dunbar, Gor- don was elected by the Chapter to the See of Glasgow, and went to Rome to receive his confirmation, but the enmity of the Regent Arraii was again successful, and James Beaton was consecrated at Rome to that Archbishopric in 1552, after a vacancy of a few years. The Pope, however, constituted him the titular Arch- bishop of Athens, and he was promised the first Scottish Bishopric, which was that of The Isles, to which he was elected in 1553, when he received the Abbey of Inchafiray, in the Strathearn dis- trict of Perthshire, in commendam. He had been admitted Abbot of Inchcolm, in the Frith of Forth, in March that year. He was translated to the See of Galloway, on the death of Bishop Durie, in 1558, but he also continued to retain the title of Archbishop of Athens. At the outbreak of the Reformation, the Bishop of Galloway immediately joined the leaders of the movement, and Bishop Keith alleges that he was the " only prelate of that dignity in office at the time who turned Protestant.""* If by this statement Bishop Keith intimates that Gordon was the only duly consecrated pre- late who deserted the Roman Catholic Hierarchy he is in error, for there is no doubt that Bishop Bothwell of Orkney was also consecrated. But it is pi'obable that Bishop Gordon had openly * Keith's History of the Affairs of Church and State in Scotland, note, p. 113. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 67 associated and was connected with the Reformers before the Bishop of Orkney identified himself with them, and to this he may allude in the extraordinary sermon alleged to have been preached by him in St Giles'' Church, Edinburgh, which is subsequently noticed. In that sermon he exhorts his hearers to pray for Queen Mary, and he is made to say — " Yea, and farther, was she ever excom- municat by the order of the Kirk ? If sa be, just causes had we not to pray for her ; and albeit she were, we aught to pray for her and all other sinners, to bring them to the spirit of repent- ance. But many of our ministers are too ceremonious at this present, for I remember myself, at the hegynning of our religion [the Reformation in 15G0], when I teached either in this pulpet, or in the pulpet heir besydes, when we wald have been glad to had the mass here, and the preaching there. And, brethren, when I stood with the stole about my neck, how many Bishops bade [remained] or bore the burden on their back than hut I ? But now our ministers are grown sa wantone and ceremonious, that they will not pray for their lawfull heretrix, wha hes permitted them such libertie of conscience, that they may use what religion they please."* Gordon sat in the disputed Parliament of 1560, and consented to the Book of Discipline, on the important condi- tion that those Prelates who joined the cause should retain their preferments for life. This renegade prelate had the meanness to petition the General Assembly, or " Convention of the Kirk," which met in June 1562, to be appointed " Superintendent" of Galloway, and he received a very contemptuous reply. " Mr Alexander Gordon, entituled Bishop of Galloway," w'as taken into some favour by the Assembly held in December that year, though placed on a leet for the office, he requested with Mr Robert Pont, minister of Dunkeld, and " in the meantyme, the Assemblie giveth commission to Mr Alexander to admit ministers, exhorters, and readers, and to doe such other things as were before accustomed in planting kirks."-f" In June the following year his conduct was ordered to be investigated, but a commission was given to him for one year, with the injunction "that the Bishop of Galloway haunt as weill the sherifdora of Wig- ' Memoriales of Transactions in Scotland, subsequently cited, p. 140. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part I. p. 28. 68 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [15G3. ton as the Stewartrie of Kirkubright, reckoned to be within his own bounds." His name occurs in various subsequent AssembHes, connected with his friend Bishop Adana Bothwell and others in the pecuHar business entrusted to them. On the 26th of Novem- ber 15 G5, having been previously sworn a Privy Councillor, Gor- don was appointed an Extraordinary Lord of Session, and he now assumed courage to disown the title of Superintendent, for which he had humbly petitioned, and, says Knox, " now he would no more be called overlooker or overseer of Galloway, but Bishop but Knox admits that he zealously used his influence with the Queen to secure the stipends promised to the preachers, and in December 1566, he procured for their support an assignation out of the thirds of the benefices. This service, however, did not pre- vent a complaint to be preferred against him in the General As- sembly held in December 1567 — though he and his nephew, the Earl of Huntly, had sat in the Regent Moray's Parliament held in that month — that " he had not visited these three years bygone the kirks within his charge ; that he had left off the visiting and planting of kirks, and he haunted Coui't too much, and had now purchased to be one of the Session and Privie Councel."* He confessed " all that was laid to his charge but his " commission was continued till the next Assemblie, with admonition to be dili- gent in visitation ."-j- Gordon joined Queen Mary immediately after her escape from Lochleven in May 1 568 ; and as this involved him in the party disputes which followed, the General Assembly, on the 10th of July, ordered him to appear at Edinburgh at the next meeting of Parliament, and once for all " answer whether he will await on Court and Councell, or upon preaching the word and planting kirks.^J The Assembly of July 1569 " inhibited him to exerce any function in the Kirk, conform to the act made against him in the General Assembly holden in July 1568.'" Bishop Gordon was associated with Bishop Leslie of Ross and Lord Livingstone as commissioners on behalf of Queen Mary, to receive proposals from Queen Elizabeth's Council. Their return renewed the civil war between the Queen's Men and the King's Men, as the contending parties were designated. On Sunday the 17th of June 1571, a few days after the Regent Morton had defeated • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part I, p. 112. t Ibid. p. 114. t Ibid. p. 131. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 69 a strong body of the former between Edinburgh and Leith, the Bishop of Galloway occupied the pulpit of John Knox in St Giles"" Church at Edinburgh. The sermon which he preached was pre- served by Richard Bannatyne, the gossiping secretary of Knox, who alleges that it was *' transported [reported] word by word, by the most copious auditorie being thair present for the tyme.""* It is, however, probable that this very extraordinary specimen of pulpit eloquence, which chiefly enjoins the duty of praying for Queen Mary, is altogether spurious, and it certainly bears marks of doubt as to its authenticity . About this time the Bishop was forfeited with the rest of the Queen's party ; but this sentence was soon afterwards annulled by what was called the Pacification of Perth. The Bishop's reconciliation with his associates of the General Assembly was not such an easy matter. In March 1572, " the Assembly, for certain causes moving them, discharge Alexander, called Bischop of Galloway, to use any function within the Kirk of God till they be farther advised ; and ordaineth Mr John Row, Commissioner of Galloway [who had superseded him in that office] to summon the said Alexander to compear before the next Gene- ral Assembly to answer such things as shall be laid to his charge, under the pain of excommunication.""-}- The Bishop appeared in the General Assembly held on the 6th of August 1573, and on the 9th seven charges were preferred against him, which were chiefly political ; but he was also accused of unwarrantably preach- ing in the kirks of Edinburgh, St. Cuthberts, and Holyroodhouse.| On the following day he sent an answer to the accusations by a domestic, but the Assembly refused to receive it, and ordered him to attend in person " the morne at ten hours." He still refused to appear, and he was in consequence ordered to " make publick repentance in sackcloath three severall Sundays — one in the kirk of Edinburgh, another in Halyrudhouse, and the third in the Queen"'s College for Sanct Cuthbei-fs kirk, humbly confessing his offences and slander, asking the Eternal God and his Kirk pardon for the same."" 1 1 The Bishop refused to obey this degrading • The " Sermon is printed in the " Memorialcs of the Transactions in Scotland, from 15G3 to 1567, by Richard Bannatyne, Secretary to Juhn Knox." Printed for the Bannatyne Club, one vol. 4to. Edinburgh, 1836, p. 138-141. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland. Part First, p. 261. { Ibid. p. 273, 274. I im. p. 277. 70 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563. sentence, which was doubly humihating when the parties who enjoined it are considered. He sent a " suppHcation" to the Assembly held in March 1574, with various explanations and ex- pressions of contrition, and by the interference of the Regent Morton, the " brethren ordered the said Bishop to appear before the kirk of Halyrudhouse, without sackcloath, upon Sunday next to come, and in presence of the congregation therein convened humbly to confess his offences, and ask the Eternal God mercy."* He complied with this modification of punishment ; and in the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the Gth of August 1575, it was found that he had " satisfied the sentence presented by them."-!- The interference of Morton in his favour explains a statement in the eccentric sermon ascribed to Bishop Gordon, who is reported to have said — " How mony lords have observit thair hand writes and their seales, or keipit thair promises, either upoun thair syde or ours ? Yea, few or nane. But I will speak newtral- ly, for it is my pairt, seeing my brother's sone and I am thriddia of kin to the Lord of Morton. Is not the Regent siclyke and we neir of kin f ' This Bishop died in 1576, and it is said that he made a resignation of his benefice in favour of George Gordon, one of his sons, which was afterwards confirmed by charter under the Great Seal ; and he is also said to have granted charters of church lands in the Stewartry of Kirkcudbright, in April 1564, to John Gordon of Lochinvar, grandfather of the first Viscount Kenmure.J The time of his marriage is not mentioned ; but it appears that his wife was named Barbara Logic. || His four sons and one daughter are enumerated. John Gordon, apparently the eldest son, after attending the University of St Andrews, was sent in 1565 to attend the Universities of Paris and Orleans, by the special direction of Queen Mary, who allowed him an annual sum from her French dowry and jointure for his maintenance. It is said|that his father designed to resign the Bishopric of Gal- loway in his favour in 1567, and had procured a confirmation of it under the Great Seal of Scotland, but it was never carried into * Booke of the Universal! Kirk of Scotland. Part First, p. 320. t Ibid. p. 334. % Catalogue of Scottish Bishops — Sec of Galloway. Sir Robert Gordon's History of the Earldom of Sutherland, folio. Edinburgh, 1813, p, 290. II Douglas' Peerage, edited by Wood, vol. ii. p. 26. 1563.1 AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 71 effect. John Gordon obtained some lay appointments at the French Court under Charles IX., Henry III., and Henry IV., and was a person of great learning. He went to England after the accession of James VI., entered into holy orders, and was ap- pointed Dean of Salisbury Cathedral in 1G04, which he held to his death in 1619 in the 75 th year of his age, and was interred in the choir of that church. He was made Doctor of Divinity at Oxford at the first visit of King James to the University. It is stated — " This John Gordon was one of the greatest advancers of our Reformed Churches in his time, and was one of the most learned men in Europe in his days — well read in the ancient fathers, excellent in the Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, and Greek languages, having by his travels much advanced the reformed religion in France during his stay there. — He was a stout defen- der of the privileges of the church of Sarum, having been in his lifetime, and after his death, in some particulars an instrument to preserve their liberties."* Of the Roman Catholic Prelates of Scotland at the Reformation who resolutely adhered to their own system little need be said. The fate of Archbishop Hamilton of St Andrews is well known. Three years after the meeting of the alleged Parliament in 1660, he was imprisoned in the Castle of Edinburgh for celebrating mass, and he was released only by the intercession of Queen Mary, who is said to have petitioned for his liberty with tears. In 1566 he baptized James VI. at Stirling, with all the ceremonial en- joined by the Church of Rome — a circumstance which powerfully operated against the Queen and himself in the minds of the Re- formers. He was soon afterwards accused as a party concerned in the murder of Lord Darnley, for which there was not the shadow of evidence. Faithful to the hapless Queen in all her vicissitudes and sufferings, he resolutely opposed her legitimate brother the Regent Moray, in whose first Parliament he was at- tainted and declared a traitor. He fell into the hands of his enemies in Dunbarton Castle, was carried to Stirling, and hanged on the old bridge over the Forth there on the 5th of April 1571. • Sir Robert Gordon's History of the Earldom of Sutherland, p. 292, 293. John Gordon was the author of several works enumerated in Watts " Bibliotheca Brittanica," in which he is absurdly designated Deacon of Salisbury. He was Dean from 1604 to 1619. Dodsworth's Historical account of the Cathedral Church of Salisbury, 4to. 1814, p. 234. n THE REFORMATION IX SCOTLAND [1563, This inhuman and wanton murder, committed in defiance of law, justice, and rehgion, was long remembered by the adherents of the prostrated Hierarchy of which he was the last Primate. He left a son who was subsequently legitimated. This individual is mentioned among those forfeited in 1571 ; but he and sundry others of his name were " restored" by the Pacification of Perth in February 1572-3. William Gordon, Bishop of Aberdeen, was the fourth son of George, fourth Earl of Huntly, brother of the fifth Earl, and nephew of Bishop Gordon of Galloway. Although attainted with sundry others for alleged political offences, he continued in the exercise of his temporal and occasionally of his spiritual functions till his death, which occurred on the 7th of August 1577. He seems to have viewed the Reformation with indifference or con- tempt. An instance of this is recorded in the case of Walter CuUen, vicar of Aberdeen, whom, though a zealous Protestant, he collated to the benefice in the month of June before his death. It is stated — " My Lord of Aberdeen gave the said Walter CuUen collacioun be ane ryng on his finger."* Cullen seems to have been as unscrupulous as the Bishop. The Bishop of Moray was Patrick Hepburn, third son of Patrick, first Earl of Bothwell, and grand-uncle of the notorious Earl. He kept possession of his episcopal palace of Spynie till his death in June 1573, and he was interred in the choir of his magnificent cathedral, which had several years previously been dilapidated by order of the Regent Moray. John Hepburn, an elder brother, was Bishop of Brechin from 1517 to his death in 1558. Donald Campbell, Abbot of Ooupar, fourth son of Archibald second Earl of Argyll, was elected his successor by the Chapter, but he became a Protestant, and was never consecrated, though he seems to have retained the temporalities till his death in the end of 1562, when he held the office of Lord Privy Seal to Queen Mary. His successor, after a vacancy of three years, was John Sinclair, or St Clair, Dean of Restalrig near Edinburgh, who married Queen Mary to Lord Darnley in the Chapel-Royal of Holyroodhousc on the 29th of July 15G5. He was the fourth son of Sir Oliver St Clair of Roslin, and younger brother of " Spalding Miscellany, Ito. 1612, toI. ii. p. ssv. 45. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 73 Henry Sinclair Bishop of Ross, with whom he proceeded to France in 1554, and returned with the documents which that prelate had collected for a continuation of Hector Eoece's History of Scot- land. Ho was admitted an Ordinary Lord of the Court of Ses- sion in April 1540, and succeeded his brother, the Bishop of Ross, as Lord President of the Court in 1565. He died in April 1566. Bishop Sinclair of Ross, previously Rector and Dean of Glas- gow and Abbot of Kilwinning, died on the first of January 1565, sometime after an operation had been performed on him at Paris by Laurentius, a celebrated practitioner of his time in cases of stone. It is doubtful whether he or his brother the Bishop of Brechin was the author of the Report of Decisions known as Sin- clair s Practicks, which commences from the 1st of June 1540, and are continued to the 28th of May 1549. His successor was John Les- lie, the learned and intrepid defender of Queen Ajlary, a truly emi- nent prelate, statesman, and historian. Ho is alleged to have been the son of Gavin Leslie, fourth son of Alexander Leslie of Balquhain in Aberdeenshire ; but Knox designates him a " priest's bastard," and Keith, who corroborates his illegitimacy from copies of original documents in the charter-chest of Balquhain, inclines to the opinion that he was the son of Gavin Leslie, parson of Kingussie. He was born in 1527, and notwithstanding the defect of his birth a dispensation was obtained in his favour, and he be- came a canon and prebendary of Aberdeen. In the beginning of 1561 he disputed with the Reformers at Edinburgh, and if Knox is to bo credited, he was compelled to confess that the only authority for the mass was that of the Pope. Nevertheless his own party had a high opinion of his abilities, and he was selected by them to proceed to Queen Mary after the death of Francis II., and invite her to return to Scotland, at the very time her illegi- timate brother, then Lord James Stuart, and designated Prior of St Andrews, was sent by the Reformers on a similar mission. He reached Mary one day before the Prior, returned with her, and soon afterwards was made a Privy Councillor, in 1564 was admitted an Ordinary Lord of Session, and obtained the Abbacy of Lindores in commendam. In 1565 he succeeded Bishop Henry Sinclair in the See of Ross, and his consecration was doubtless private. The exertions of Bishop Leslie in favour of Queen Mary are well known. He accompanied her to Carlisle, 74 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563. was appointed her ambassador to Elizabeth, the privilege of which he foreited by entering deeply into the Duke of Norfolk's intrigue. For this he was committed first to the charge of the Bishop of Ely, and to the Tower of London, from which he was liberated after an imprisonment of two years, on condition that he would leave England. He went to France, and thence to Rome, where he published his history of Scotland in Latin, only inferior to that of Buchanan, during a residence of three years. Subsequently he wandered from Court to Court, vainly endeavouring to rouse the Roman Catholic Princes in behalf of his captive mistress. He was appointed Vicar-General of the archipiscopal church of Rohan in 1579, and Bishop of Constances in Normandy in 1593, but the troubles of the times precluded him from deriving any advantage by those preferments, and he returned to Brussels, where he died in 1596, in the 69th year of his age. WilHam Chisholm, second son of Edward Chisholm of Cromhx was consecrated Bishop of Dunblane at Stirling, in 1527, and died in 1564. He was a zealous opponent of the Reformation, and alienated the greater part of his Bishopric to his nephew. Sir James Chisholm of Cromlix, and to his own three illegitimate children, a son and two daughters. William Chisholm, another nephew, was his coadjutor in the See, and still farther dilapidated the episcopal patrimony of the Bishopric. He was prosecuted for refusing to comply with the Reformation, and withdrew to France. He was appointed Bishop of Vaison, and is said to have died a Carthusian at Grenoble.* Robert Crichton, Bishop of Dunkeld, was expelled from his Diocese by the Reformers in 1561 or 1562. He succeeded his uncle Bishop George Crichton in the See. No particulars of any importance are recorded respecting him. The Diocese of the Isles was vacant by the translation of Bishop Gordon to Galloway. Keith mentions John Campbell, a son of Campbell of Cawdor in Nairn- shire, a branch of the Family of Argyll, and ancestor of the Earls of Cawdor, as elect of the Isles, and Prior of Ardchattan in 1558 and 1560, but he was never consecrated. This personage dilapi- dated most part of the episcopal patrimony of the insular Diocese * In " Catalogues of Scottish Writers" 8vo. Edinburgh, 1833, it is stated— '•• Guliel- mus Chisholmus scripsit Examen Confessionis Fidel Calvinianae. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 75 in favour of his relations, and conferred some heritable jurisdic- tions on his own family of Cawdor. The remaining property was seized by the Earl of Argyll, when to serve his own purposes he procured, in 1566, the appointment of John Carswell, his chaplain, and rector of Kilmartine, as titular Bishop both of the Isles and Argyll, of which he had been nominated Superintendent by the Reformers. Carswell encountered the censures of the General Assembly for his conduct, but the influence of the Earl of Argyll, and his own remote situation, probably rendered him indifferent to the remonstrances of his associates. He was present as Super- intendent of Argyll in the " Convention of the Kirk of Scotland " held on the " penult day of June 1562," and he was challenged in a subsequent General Assembly, but he is seldom mentioned in connection with the proceedings of the time. He died in 1572, or, according to Spottiswoode, in 1575, after various altercations with his opponents on the distracting subject of Chui'ch govern- ment, for accepting the titular Bishopric, and for his attachment to Queen Mary. Carswell was a man of considerable ability, and was the first who translated portions of the Scriptures into Gaelic. His son is mentioned in the public documents of the time. The more conspicuous of the preachers who supplanted the Ro- man Catholic Hierarchy in the principal towns, exclusive of the Superintendents, may be here noticed. John Knox, who studiously avoided the office of Superintendent, was located at Edinburgh. Bishop Keith observes — " It is most likely he saw that he could be more useful for the main point by remaining close within Edin- burgh, and guiding the inhabitants of that capital into such mea- sures as he found necessary for bringing about their designs." Various unsuccessful attempts were made to remove him both to St Andrews and to Stirling. Knox was very active at all their meetings, and was often employed in matters of importance. John Craig, educated at St Andrews, and originally a Dominican Friar, was appointed to the church of Holyrood in 1561, then the parish church of the Canongate in Edinburgh. He was command- ed in 1567 to publish the banns of marriage between Queen Mary and Bothwell, which he boldly refused, publicly condemned the marriage, and exhorted all who had access to or influence with the Queen to prevent such a scandalous alliance. Craig was also nine years colleague to John Knox, and he was afterwards re- 7B THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [1563. moved to Montrose. At the death of Adam Heriot subsequently noticed he succeeded him at Aberdeen, and resigned that charge in 1579, when he was appointed chaplain to James VI. He died in 1600, in the eighty-eighth year of his age. William Harlow, a person who had followed the avocation of a tailor in the Canon- gate, was appointed to St Outhberts, Edinburgh. David Lindsay, of an ancient family in Forfarshire, was located at Leith. It is said that he was ordained in England, and while officiating at Leith he baptized the Princess Elizabeth in Holyroodhouse in 1599, and Charles I. in the Palace of Dunfermline in 1600. He died Bishop of Ross in 1613. David Ferguson, a native of Ayr- shire, was stationed at Dunfermline. John Row, a priest, who had been induced to abandon the Roman Catholic Hierarchy by the detection of a clumsy imposture practised at Loretto, near the town of Musselburgh, intended to be set off as a miracle, was ap- pointed to Perth. He was a man of considerable attainments, and made a conspicuous figure in subsequent times. William Ohristison was located at Dundee. Christopher Goodman, a na- tive of Cheshire, and a student of Brazennose College, Oxford, at which he had been reader of the divinity lecture, was appointed to St Andrews. Ho became acquainted with Knox at Geneva, when a refugee during the reign of the English Mary, and readily adopted the tenets of Calvin. Although he died Archdeacon of Richmond in 1603, he is described as a violent nonconformist, and " for rigidness in opinion went beyond his friend Calvin, who remembers and mentions him in one of his Epistles."* He re- turned to England in 1565. Adam Heriot, an Augustine Monk of St Andrews, and connected with the family in Haddingtonshire from which the celebrated George Heriot was descended, was sta- tioned at Aberdeen. His stipend was fi.xed at L.200 Scots payable from the revenues of the town, and the Magistrates presented to him annually a suit of black clothes and other necessaries to the value of L.30, with a donation of L.IO in money for house-rent, the whole sum equal to L.55, 8s. sterHng. He died much respect- ed for learning, piety, and worth, in the 60th year of his age, in August 1574. The other individuals appointed as " Reformed preachers," in the cities, towns, and important districts in 1560, were of no particular note. • Wood's Athen. Own. by Dr. Philip Bliss, Vol. I. p. 722. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 77 Such was the singular amalgamation of individuals who at first supplanted the ancient Hierarchy, while most of its prelates and dignitaries were alive ; and " with this small number," as Arch- bishop Spottiswoode observes, " was the plantation of the church first undertaken." They of course received in every succeeding year considerable accessions, and before 1571-2, when Episcopacy was re- introduced during the Regency of Morton — if that can be called Episcopacy which consisted merely of the restoration of the titles of the Dioceses, the holders never having been consecrated — they form- ed a very numerous association, and had many powerful supporters. Their extensive ramifications are indicated by the curious " Register of Ministers, Exhorters, and Readers, and of their Stipends, after the Reformation,"* or " since the yeir of God 1567." In the dis- tricts from Stirling " eastward," including part of that county, and those of Linlithgow, Edinburgh, and Haddington, were seventy- nine ministers, exhorters, and readers, in the towns and parishes ; in the Lauderdale district of Berwick were only two ; but in the Merse district of that county were thirty-nine. In Forfarshire were thirty-two " ministers" and forty-seven " readers ;" in the Stormonth district of Perthshire were seventeen " ministers, ex- horters, and readers ;" and eleven in the Carse of Gowrie district ; in Kincardineshire were ten " ministers" and twenty " readers ;" those within " Fife, Strathern, Forthrig, Strathtay, and Menteth," including the exhorters, comprised one hundred and forty-five ; those of the district of Glasgow, comprising Lanark, Renfrew, and Dunbarton counties, were one hundred and seven ; in the Cunningham, Kyle, and Carrick districts of Ayrshire were fifty- six ; in Teviotdale, now Selkirk, and part of Roxburgh shires, were thirteen ; in Tweedale, were eighteen ; in Nithsdale, were thirty- nine ; in Annandale, were eighteen ; in the adjacent districts, call- ed Wauchopdale, Ewesdale, and Eskdale, were six ; and in the Bishopric of Galloway were fifty-eight. In the northern county of Ross were twenty-three ; in Caithness were twenty-two ; in Orkney were twenty-five ; Shetland, eleven ; in Moray were nine " ministers," eighteen " exhorters," and twenty-two " readers ;" in Aberdeen and Banff were twenty-six " ministers," six " exhor- ters," and sixty-nine " readers ; and in the Marr district of Aber- • Edinburgh, Ito. 1830. Printed for Ihe Maitland Ciul). 78 THE REFORMATION IN SCOTLAND [loG3. deen there were one " minister," two " exhortcrs," and twenty-one " readers."" All the names of the individuals are recorded, and some other modifications are given in the extracts from the " Bulk of Eesignations of the Ministers' and Reidars' Stipends" for the year 157G. The great proportion of those functionaries were " readers," and this office requires explanation, as it is always mentioned as infe- rior to " exhorters," who were next in grade to the " ministers," and whose functions arc sufficiently indicated by the title. The duties are thus defined in the First Book of Discipline :* — " To the churches where no ministers can be had presentlie must be appointed the most apt men that distinctlie can read the Common Prayers and the Scriptures, to exercise both themselves and the Church till they grow to greater perfection; and in the process of time he that is a reader may attain to a further degree, and by consent of the Church and discreet ministers may be permit- ted to minister sacraments, but not before that he be able somewhat to persuade by wholesome doctrine, beside his read- ing, and be admitted to the ministrie as before is said." On the 26th of December 1564 the General Assembly enjoined that every " Minister, Exhorter, and Reader, shall have one of the Psalme Bookes latelie printed in Edinburgh, and use the oi'der con- tained therein in prayers, marriage, and ministration of the Sacra- ments."-f- Readers were not allowed to baptize children or cele- brate marriages.:|: Several duties were connected with these functions. In 1578, for example, the Reader of Aberdeen was ordered to catechize the children ; and in 1604 he was enjoined, at the end of Prayers on Sunday mornings and week days, to re- cite the Ten Commandments and the Apostles' Creed. || The office was long retained even after the establishment of Presby- terianism in 1690, and appears to have been discharged by the parish schoolmasters, who read chapters from the Scriptures be- fore the "• minister " entered the pulpit. One of the last instances of which the present writer has heard, is that of Crail in the east of Fife, where the practice was retained till the beginning of the * Chap IV, Part. IV, § 14. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part I. p. 54. t Ibid. p. 82, 124, II Miscellany of the Spalding Club, Vol. II. 1842. Preface, p. xxiv. 1563.] AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 79 nineteenth century, and the parish schoolmaster acted as the " reader." It is probable that the same occurred in other parishes throughout Scotland, and it was curious as one of the last relics of an office introduced by Knox, Winram, Spottiswoode, and the other compilers of the First Book of Discipline, most of which is now abrogated even by the Presbyterians themselves, though they occasionally appeal to it as an authority when it suits their own purposes. The Second Book of Discipline, drawn up by Andrew Melville and others in 1579, and ratified by the General Assembly in 158] , contains all those pecuHarities and dogmas of Presbyter- ianism on which the First is silent. 80 [15G4. CHAPTER III. THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. The ecclesiastical, political, and civil disorders which sprung from the Scottish Reformation were farther increased by the conduct of the Government. We have seen that the Reformers in their General Assemblies had no scruples to accept the assistance of the regularly consecrated Bishops of Galloway and Orkney, and of the persons designating themselves Bishops of Caithness and Ar- gyll, and that they never refused to acknowledge the episcopal rank and functions of the two former, except when those prelates offended them by being either negligent or lukewarm in their cause. In 1564 Queen Mary appointed a Commission to the Col- leges in the University of St Andrews, to " cognosce, visit, and consider the patrimonie of the said Colleges,"'" to facilitate the purposes of instruction. In this Commission " ane Reverend Father in God," Bishop Sinclair of Ross, was associated with the Queen's illegitimate brother the Earl of Moray, the celebrated George Buchanan, John Erskine of Dun, John Winrara, Maitland of Lethington, and other avowed enemies of the former Hierarchy, and of that very religion to which Mary herself was zealously at- tached.* Meanwhile the Roman Catholic Prelates were still legally recognized, and in the Parliament which met at Edinburgh on the 16th April 1567, the Archbishop of St Andrews, and the Bishops of Dunkeld, Galloway, Dunblane, Brechin, Orkney, Aber- deen, and Ross, were present. John Carswell, titular of the Isles, also appeared, and took his place as if he had been a lawfully • Acta Pari. Scot. Vol. 11. p. 544. 1564.] THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM, &C. 81 consecrated Bishop, without any objections urged by those among whom he is enumerated. Three of those prelates — the Archbishop, and the Bishops of Boss and Orkney, with Carswell, Titular of the Isles, were elected to represent the clergy among the Lords of the Articles, for which the said Titular was censured by the General Assembly. On the last day of the Parliament, which was on the 19th of April, for the meeting continued only three days, an act was passed by the Bishops, Abbots, Nobility, and Commissioners from the burghs present, entitled — " Concerning the Beligion," but so vague and general that it might mean anything or nothing.* It merely sets forth that, as the Queen had " attempted nothing contrair the estait of religioun which her Majestic found public- He and universallie standing at the time of hir arrival furth of France," the Queen, with advice of the three Estates of Parlia ment, annuls and ajbrogates all laws, acts, and constitutions, " canon, civil, and municipal, introduced contrary to the fore- said religioun and professors of the same." If this refers to the peculiar association formed by Knox and his associates, it is an- other proof of the extraordinary apathy with which the Boman Catholics beheld the downfall of their Hierarchy. But this apathy may probably in some degree be explained. In 1561 the act had been passed, already mentioned, ordering the whole revenues of the Archbishoprics, Bishoprics, Abbacies, Priories, and all bene- fices, to be produced, out of which the Boman Catholic clergy agreed to give one-third to the Queen, on the condition that they were to retain the two-thirds. This third was to be appropriated to the maintenance of the preachers, the endowment of schools, the support of the poor, and the increase of the Crown revenues. " Before this proposal was made," Mr Tytler observes, " the funds of the Romish Church, previously immense, had been greatly dilapi- dated. On the overthrow of Popery the Bishops and other dignified clergy had entered into transactions with their friends or kinsmen, by which large portions of ecclesiastical property passed into private hands. In some cases sales had been made by the ancient incum- bents, or leases had been purchased by strangers, which the Pope, zealous to protect his persecuted children, had confirmed. The Crown, too, had appointed laymen to be factors or administrators " See Lord Hailes' Annals of Scotland, Edinburgh, 8vo. edit. vol. iii. Appendix. 6 82 THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM [1564. of Bishoprics and livings, so that by those various methods the property of the Church was so much dispersed and curtailed, that the third of all the money collected fell far below the sura neces- sary to give an adequate support to the clergy.""* In short, the temporalities were for the most part alienated, and that influence which the Prelates formerly possessed was now annihilated. The power of the Roman Catholic Prelates had been farther weakened by the institution of the Consistorial Court of Edinburgh by Queen Mary in 1563. For centuries they had been the judges in every matter connected with religion, and as the Church of Rome chooses to include man'iage among its Seven Sacraments, questions of divorce, illegitimacy, intestate successions, and scan- dal, as rendering the guilty parties liable to ecclesiastical censure, were brought exclusively under their jurisdiction. These eventu- ally became so numerous, and enabled the Bishops to obtain such a preponderating influence, that they were obliged in 1466 to de- legate their judicial functions to their vicars or commissioners, but in 1560 all clerical jurisdictions were abolished. Queen Mary, on the 8th of March 1563, instituted the Consistorial Court of Edinburgh, with four judges, to try questions of marriage, free- dom, nullity, divorce, legitimacy, bastardy, confirmations of move- able succession, and a variety of incidental matters, such as ali- mentary claims. A subordinate Commissary was also appointed to each of the Dioceses, to try minor causes, such as the consti- tution of the debts of a person deceased, confirmations of moveable estates, actions involving deelarator or nullity of marriages, and other cases of less importance. On the 12th of March the Queen issued particular instructions to be observed by the Commissa- ries of Edinburgh and of the Dioceses, which were ratified by King James and the Scottish Parliament in 1592 and 1 606. It may be here stated that in 1609, after the complete establishment of the Episcopal Church, the right of nominating the four Com- missary judges was conferred equally upon the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, who in 1610 issued certain instructions to be observed by the said judges and their clerks.f Cromwell made considerable changes in the forms of the Consistorial Court, which were re-adjusted by the instructions of Charles II. in January 1666, " Tytler's History of Scotland, 8vo. edition, vol. vi. p. 292, 293. t Sec Balfour's Practicks, p. 6.55. 1567.] OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 83 and the right of nominating the judges remained with the two Archbishops till the Eevolution, when, by the establishment of Presbyterianism, it devolved upon the Crown. It is curious to notice, that although Knox and his associates denounced the Romish Prelates for holding offices which were considered incom- patible with their functions, they never scrupled to arrogate to themselves those very powers, as if what was faulty in one set of men became the reverse when exercised by another. Accordingly, in the proceedings of their General Assemblies after 1560, we find those men assuming to themselves the judgment of cases of divorce, adultery, and other violations of morality, and discussing most licentious and indelicate subjects. It may be said that they thus act- ed to inflict ecclesiastical censures and penalties on the guilty par- ties, but a perusal of the proceedings of those General Assemblies, as detailed in the " Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland," at once proves that they interfered in indecent matters with which they had no connection, and discussed them with a coarseness and vulgarity strangely at variance with their extraordinary pretensions to religious sanctity. While, too, they unhesitatingly ascribed to the prelates and clergy all kinds of vices, numerous cases of gross and licentious immorality occurred among themselves, of which the case of Paul Methven, once baker in Jedburgh, and " Reformed minister" in Dundee, is as flagrant as any on record. The short meeting of the Parliament in April 1567, in which was passed the Act " Concerning the Religion," was the last with which Queen Mary was concerned. On the morning of the 10th of February of that year the murder of her husband Lord Darn- ley was perpetrated by the Earl of Bothwell and his associates in the house of Robert Balfour, Pi'ovost of the collegiate church of St Mary-in-the-Fields, commonly called the Kirh of Fields where Darnley was lodged while he was labouring under small pox, with which he had been seized at Glasgow. The locality where this horrid crime was committed, and which accelerated Mary's mis- fortunes, is now a part of the southern suburb of Edinburgh in the immediate vicinity of the University. On 15th of May following, Mary completed her ruin by marrying the Earl of Bothwell, the murderer of her husband ; on the 15th of June she surrendered to the insurgent Nobility on Carberry Hill near Musselburgh ; and on the evening of the ensuing day she was sent a prisoner to 84 THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM [1567. Lochleven Castle, Immured in that island-stronghold, the Queen was compelled to sign her resignation of the Crown and the ap- pointment of a Regency, both of which documents were proclaimed at the Cross of Edinburgh on the 25th of July. Four days after- wards the infant James VI., then not fourteen months old, was crowned at Stirling, the ceremony of anointing being performed by Adam Bothwell, Bishop of Orkney, and the sermon preached by Knox. In August the Earl of Moray was declared Regent, and the unfortunate Queen's authority in Scotland was annihilated. Her escape from Lochleven on the 2d of May 1568 ; the battle which ensued at Langside near Glasgow, where her supporters were utterly discomfited; and her flight into England, to endure a long and severe captivity, from which she was only released by the exe- cutioner in Fotheringay Castle, are matters of history well known. Such was the hapless fate of Mary of Scotland, and of all her ene- mies in her own kingdom the most bitter, bigotted, insulting, and ferocious, were the Reformed preachers and their adherents, both before and after her flight into England. In the midst of their devotional exercises they expressed themselves against her in language of fierce indignation, founding their arguments on the examples of wicked princes mentioned in the Scripture history of the Jews deposed and put to death for idolatry, and on alleged precedents in former reigns among their own sovereigns. The government was now in the hands of the Regent Moray, a personage who, under the mask of zeal for the " Reformed religion," concealed the most dangerous and unscrupulous designs, and who had been more or less cognizant of many of the crimes and con- spiracies of the age ; but at the same time a man of great abilities, of undoubted courage, and indefatigable in his exertions. The final doom of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy was sealed by Moray's appointment to the Regency. But before narrating the proceed- ings of his first Parliament, it is necessary to glance at some of the transactions of the General Assembly. It may be here observed, that whatever opinion may be formed of the new Superintendent System of church government invented and introduced by the Reformers, it was essentially different from the subsequent Presbyterian rule, about which nothing is said in the First Book of Discipline. The country was not divided into Presbyteries and Synods, and not a word occurs about Preshy- 1567,1 OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 85 terianism, as it is now known, in all the acts of the General Assem- blies of the " Universall Kirk" for many years after 1560. On the contrary, the word diocese, or " diocie,'''' is invariably used, and though in some instances the ancient boundaries was disregarded, this appears to have been done for the personal convenience of the Superintendents. In December 1566, John Knox was ordered by the General Assembly to write a letter to the English Bishops, which was thus addressed — " The Superintendents, Ministers, and Commissioners of kirks, within the realme of Scotland, to their Brethren the Bishops and Pastors of England, who hes renounced the Roman Antichrist, and who does professe with the Lord Jesus in sinceritie, desyres the perpetual increase of the Holy Spirit." This ungrammatical epistle, which appears to have been duly trans- mitted, though the individual Prelate who had the " honour" to receive it is not mentioned, is signed by John Spottiswoode, John Winram, John Erskine of Dun, John Row, David Lindsay, Robert Pont, James Melville, John Craig, William Christison, and Nicol Spittal, all leaders in their way, though the latter were less conspi- cuous than the former. It is a rather unpolite remonstrance from the above personages, who complain — " By word and w-rit it is come to our knowledge. Reverend Pastors, that divers of our dearest brethren, among whom are some of the best learned with- in that realme [England], are depryvit from ecclesiastical functions, and forbidden to preach, and so by you are stayed to promote the kingdom of Chryst, because their conscience will not suffer them to take upon them, at the commandment of the authoritie such garments as idolaters in the time of blindness have used in the time of idolatrie." Those incipient non-conformists had become troublesome to the English Bishops, by objecting to the canonical observances of the Church in divine service, and their Scottish " brethren" accordingly denounce " surplice-claithes, cornet, cap, and tippet," which they declare to be " dregs of the Romish Beast." After some impertinent advice they express themselves in a more respectful manner, and acknowledge the episcopal authority of the EngUsh Bishops. — " But herein we may confesse our offence, in that we have entered further in reasoning than was purposed and pronounced at the beginning ; and therefore we shortly return to our former humble supplication, which is, that our brethren who among you refuse the Romish rags, may find of you, the Prelates,'m favour 86 THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM ri5G7. as our Head and Master commands every ane of his members to shaw to another ; which we look to receive of your gentleness, not only for that ye fear to offend God's Majestie, in troubling your brethren for such vain trifles, but also because ye will not refuse the humble request of us, your brethren and fellow preachers, in whom, albeit there appear not great worldHe pomp, yet we suppose that ye will not so far despise us, but that ye will esteem us to be of the number of those that fight against the Koman Antichrist, and travell that the kingdom of Jesus Christ be univei'sallie advanced."* The correspondence between the General Assembly and their Oalvinistic friends in Switzerland, whatever it was, is not mentioned in their "Acts," as officially recorded in the " Booke of the Univer- sall Kirk of Scotland." Only two allusions occur during several years after 1560. One is in 1562, when " it was concluded that one uniforme ordour shall be taken or kept in the administration of the Sacraments, and solemnization of marriages and burialls of the dead, according to the Book of Geneva."*!- The other is some time afterwards. On the day they sent their interfering epistle to their " Brethren," the " Bishops of England" — is the following re- port:— " The Assemblie being advised with the interpretation of the Confession of the Kirk of Zurich by Mr Robert Pont, ordained the same to be presented, together with ane epistle sent by the Assem- blie of the Kirk of Scotland, approving the same, providing a note be put in the margin, where mention is made of some holidays." This Confession was penned by the pastors of Zurich, and other- wise called the Latter Confession of Helvetia. In this Confession superiority of " ministers above ministers" is called "ane human ap- pointment ; confirmation is judged to be a device of man, which the Kirk may want without damage ; baptism by women or mid- wives condemned ; item, prolix and tedious public prayers, hinder- ing the preaching of the Word in canonical hours, that is, prayers to be chanted, and often repeated at set times, to the prejudice of Christ's libertie ; observation of Saints' Days. And this As- sembly would not allow the days dedicated to Christ, the Circumci- * Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 85, 86, 87. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 30. It is also stated— " Ordains the Communion to be ministrat four times in the yeir within burroughs, and twyce in the year in landwart," or rural districts. 1567.] OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT, 87 sion, Nativitie, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and Pentecost Days, but took exception against that part of the Confession."* The Regent Moray's first ParHament was held at Edinburgh on the 15th of December 1567, and as this meeting of the Estates was the most important of any since the Reformation, a notice of it is indispensible. The Regent presided, and the Bishops of Moray (Hepburn.) Galloway, Orkney, and Brechin, were present. This last named person styled Bishop of Brechin, though never consecrated, was, it is already stated, Alexander Campbell, a younger brother of Campbell of Ardkinglas, and was nominated to the See of Brechin in 156G by the influence of the Earl of Argyll, after the death of Bishop Sinclair in 1565. His identity is involved in considerable difficulty. Bishop Keith alleges that Argyll obtained for him, while he was a " mere boy," the grant of the Bishopric, with power to alienate the temporalities as he pleased, and which he most unscrupulously achieved in favour of the Earl ; but another authority,-)- which completely refutes Keith's assertion, states that he was appointed Provost of St. Giles' church in Edinburgh in 1554, at the resignation of Bishop Crichton of Dunkeld. Among the first proceedings of Moray's Parliament were ratifi- cations of the Acts passed in 1560 concerning the jurisdiction of the Pope, the abolition of " Idolatry," and the acts contrary to the Confession of Faith " published in this Parliament," and the " abo- lition of the Mass." All the Acts of the disputed Parliament of 1560 were confirmed, and the Roman Catholic Hierarchy com- pletely abolished. Yet it is singular thf t no act was proposed to exclude the Prelates from their seats, for the Bishop of Moray was again in his place in the Parliament of 1568, and was chosen one of the Lords of the Articles on the spiritual side with Bishop Bothwell of Orkney. It is commonly asserted that the Regent Moray's first Parlia- ment established the Protestant religion in Scotland. New sta- tutes were undoubtedly added to those of 1560 ; the General As- semblies were in some measure ratified ; the thirds of benefices • Book of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 90. t Panmure MS. quoted in " History of Brechin," by David D. Black, Town-Clerk, p. 301, 302. Bishop Keith mistakes the meaning of a very common phrase. He says — " This Bishop was abroad at Geneva at the schools on the 28th of January 1573-4, so the reader may judge what age he has been of at the time of the grant of the Bish- opric." But this does not intimate that he was a boy at school. 88 THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM [1504. were ordered to be paid to collectors appointed by the Reformers, who were to account to the Exchequer after allotting stipends to the Superintendents, ministers, and their auxiharies the exhort- ers and readers ; and the funds of Provostries, Prebends, and Chaplaincies, were appropriated to the maintenance of Bursars in the Universities. It was also enacted that every sovereign at ac- cession should take an oath to maintain the Protestant religion, and that Protestants exclusively should be admitted to any office not hereditary or for life, such as that of a judge, procurator, no- tary, or member of any Court. The teachers of youth were sub- jected to the examination of the Superintendents and other visitors appointed by the General Assembly.* But though these measures caused an important change in the state of the kingdom, that state was the reverse of peace and harmony. The supporters of Episcopacy, and the advocates of Presbyterianism, while both united against the Papal Hierarchy, were now to enter on the questions of ecclesiastical poHty and disciphne ; and these dissen- sions, as is observed by Dr Cook, " strongly influenced the politi- cal principles, the manners, and the general sentiments of the in- habitants of Scotland.""!- Other matters also combined to fan the flame of discord. " Although," says Dr. Cook, " the Reformed faith had been declared to be that of the State, yet the manner in which it was to be inculcated, the form of church-government, and the support to be given to it by the Crown, were left in a great degree open for future discussion, rendering it probable that some changes in all these respects would yet be introduced. The un- settled condition of the Church was attended with many inconve- niences to the clergy. Their stipends were not regularly paid ; constant disputes arose between them and the persons who, under the former ecclesiastical establishment, had been inducted into benefices ; the funds for paying the ministers were not with suffi- cient precision defined ; and it was not determined whether, like the higher orders of the Popish clergy, they were to be recognized as one of the Estates of the kingdom.^J The official account of the proceedings of the General Assembly which met on the 25th of December 1567, ten days after the Par- ■ Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iii. p. 14, 15, et seq. ■f History of the Reformation in Scotland, vol. iii. p. 310. } History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 78, 79. 1568.] OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 89 liament, is not of much interest apart from local and personal matters. A committee was appointed, the more conspicuous members of which were the Superintendents of Lothian and Angus, John Knox and John Craig of Edinburgh, David Lindsay of Leith, and John Row of Perth, " to concur at all times with such persons of Parliament or Secret Counsell as my Lord Regent's Grace has nominat for such affairs as pertained to the Kirk and jurisdictioun thereof, and also for the decision of questions that may occur in the meane tyme."* Sundry regulations were sanctioned respecting the mode of collecting the stipends, and the " sufficiency" of the persons employed. Lady Jane, Coun- tess of Argyll, illegitimate daughter of James V. by Eliza- beth, daughter of John Lord Carmichael, appeared before this Assembly, and was ordered to " make public repentance in the Chapel-Royal of Stirling upon ane Sunday in time of preach- ing," for being present at the baptism of James VL in " a papis- ticall manner" by Archbishop Hamilton of St Andrews. The proceedings appear to have been concluded by a letter drawn up and sent to their " beloved brother," Mr Superintendent Willox of Glasgow, who for some reasons of his own had withdrawn himself into England, requesting him to return ; and it commences with the significant motto — " Videbam Satanam sicut fulgur de coelo caden- tem!'^ In this letter they give a flattering representation of the state of religion throughout the kingdom — " virtue increasing, virtuous men in reputation ;" and they conclude by declaring — " We cannot look for any other answer than ye shall give by yourself, and that with all expedition possible."-f- Willox obeyed the summons to return, and opened the General Assembly held on the 1st of July 15G8, of which he was chosen Moderator. Although in subsequent meetings of their Assemblies the " Reformed " preachers were continually petitioning the Govern- ment about the mode of collecting their stipends, it is well known that during Moray's regency they were greatly encouraged and protected. That regency terminated with the life of Moray, who was assassinated while riding through the town of Linlith- gow, on the 21st of January 1569-70, by Hamilton of Bothwell- haugh, to revenge the atrocious treatment of his lady by the • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 113. t Ibid. p. 120, 121, 122. 90 THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM [1569. Lord Justice-Clerk Bellenden, one of Moray's favourites, although ^ there is little doubt that the perpetrator of this deed was also the tool of a faction who had some time determined on the Regent's destruction. This extraordinary man, long remembered by his partizans as the Good Regent, and execrated by his opponents, obtained almost uncontrolled power as the leader of the Reform- ing party when little more than a youth, under his previous titles of Lord James Stuart, Prior of St Andrews and Earl of Mar, before he was created Earl of Moray, and he fell the victim of private vindictiveness in the midst of his greatness before he was forty years of age. He was interred in what was called St An- thony's Aisle in St Giles' church at Edinburgh, on the 14th of February, and John Knox preached his funeral sermon on the passage — " Blessed are the dead that die in the Lord." The General Assembly appointed to be held at Stirling on the 25th of February, was adjourned to the 1st of March at Edinburgh, be- cause only five persons appeared, " by reason of troubles falling out by the slaughter of my Lord Regent's Grace."* When that Assembly met, the principal business seems to have been the " accusations " and " offences " brought forward against Bishop Both well of Orkney previously noticed. During this period the civil government of Scotland, rent by faction, was in the utmost confusion after the Regent Moray's death. An English army, under the Earl of Sussex, invaded the ' kingdom by ravaging the romantic district of Teviotdale and the Merse, destroying fifty castles, towers, or fortalices, and numbers of hamlets. In a second inroad Home Castle, one of the strongest in that quarter, was taken. Lord Scrope about the same time entered Dumfries-shire, and the march of his soldiers was too fatally indicated by the flames of villages and farm-houses, and the destruction of the labours of the field. Queen Elizabeth followed up this severity by sending the Earl of Lennox and Sir William Drury, Marshal of Berwick, at the head of 1200 foot and 400 horse, to advance against Edinburgh, and avenge the murder of her great agent the Regent Moray upon the House of Hamilton, This was so far done effectually by forming a junction with the Earl of Morton, that Linlithgowshire and Clydesdale in Lanarkshire were devastated, and the estates and • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 156, 157. 1570.] OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 91 residences of the kindred and adherents of the House of Hamil- ton were ravaged. The appointment of the Earl of Lennox, father of the unfortunate Lord Darnley, and grandfather of the young King, to the regency, on the 12th of July 1570, evinced the power of the English interest. A civil war ensued, and Sussex at the head of 4000 men again invaded Scotland, ad- vancing through Annandale to Dumfries. Soon afterwards Arch- bishop Hamilton of St Andrews, who was found in Dunbarton Castle when that fortress was surprised, was carried to Stirling, and inhumanly executed on the bridge over the Forth, for his alleged concern in the murder of Lord Darnley and of the Regent Moray, the latter of which he is said to have admitted so far as to confess that he knew it was to be attempted. Such was the fate of the last Roman Catholic Primate of Scotland, the only Bishop who ever died by the hands of an executioner in Scotland ; a prelate whose character, even according to the admission of Dr Cook, though " far from spotless, possessed considerable vir- tues, and under other circumstances might have been useful to his country. His talents were respectable, and had in early life been assiduously cultivated ; he was for the period deeply versed in theological and moral science ; he made several efforts to re- form the Popish clergy, and to excite them to the discharge of their duties ; and he left, in the Catechism which he composed or approved, a striking proof of his learning and of his moderation. Although he was led upon some unhappy occasions to sanction the enormities of persecution, he was constitutionally mild, and had the merit of restraining the cruelty which his predecessors in the Primacy had delighted to indulge. But he had been cor- rupted by the dissolute manners which were so prevalent among the clergy of the Romish communion, and whilst he urged upon others a strict regard to temperance, he did not seek in his own conduct to preserve even the decency with which he might have been expected to veil his vices." The judicial murder of Archbishop Hamilton was the signal for Queen Mary's party to fly to arms ; the indignation of his kins- men the Hamiltons was unbounded ; and this deed caused a war of two years, by which the country was desolated by all the miseries of civil strife. It caused the assassination of the Regent Lennox, on the 4th of September 1571, at Stirling, by one Cap- 92 THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM [1571. tain Calder, who confessed, before he was broken upon the wheel, that he was instigated to shoot him through the back at the attack on StirHng by Lord Claud Hamilton and the Earl of Huntly, before they took the town, to revenge the death of the Archbishop, whose execution the Hamiltons had sworn to visit to the uttermost upon the Regent. The successor of Lennox in the regency was John sixth Earl of Mar of the name of Erskine, who was chosen by a majority of Parliament on the 5th of September, the day after the death of Lennox in the Castle of Stirling. This nobleman, under whose brief government a most important change was effected in the ecclesiastical polity introduced by the Reformers, is described as " owing his preferment to his moderation, his humanity, and his disinterestedness. As soon as he was in possession of that high office, he applied himself vigorously to allay, as far as possible, the contending factions in Scotland, and to free his country from the influence of English counsels. But Morton and his associates thwarted his views. The selfishness and ambition which reigned among his party made a deep impression on the Regent, who wished for peace with much ardour. — He was perhaps the only person in the kingdom who could have enjoyed the office of Regent without envy, and have left it without loss of reputation. Not- withstanding their mutual animosities, both parties acknowledged his views to be honourable, and his integrity to be uncorrupted."* This high eulogium is confirmed by historians. " The Earl of Mar, governor to the young King," says Mr Tytler, " was chosen Regent. His competitors for the office were Argyll, whom Mor- ton had induced to join the King's faction, and Morton himself, who was supported by English influence, but the majority declared for Mar, whose character for honesty in those profligate times stood higher than that of any of the nobles. On his accession to the supreme power. Mar confidently hoped that, by a judicious mixture of vigour and conciliation, he should be able to reduce the opposite faction, and restore peace to the country ; but the difficulties he had to contend against were infinitely more compli- cated than he anticipated. Every attempt at negotiation was defeated by the unreasonable and overbearing conduct of Morton, • Douglas' Peerage of Scotland, edited by Wood, folio, vol. ii, p. 212. 1571.J OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 93 who had entirely governed the late Regent, and determined either to rule or overwhelm his successor. This daring and crafty man, who was the slave of ambition, knew well that his best chance of receiving the supreme power lay in keeping up the commotions of the country, and in this perfidious effort he received rather coun- tenance than opposition from England. So successful were his efforts, that for some months after Mark's accession to the Regency ; the war assumed an aspect of unexampled ferocity. — For many miserable months Scotland presented a sight which might have drawn pity from the hardest heart ; her sons engaged in a ferocious and constant butchery of each other ; every peaceful and useful art entirely at a stand ; her agriculture, her commerce, and manufactures neglected ; nothing heard from one end of the country to the other but the clangour of arms and the roar of artillery ; nothing seen but villages in flames, towns beleagured by armed men, women and children flying from the cottages where their fathers or husbands had been massacred ; and even the pulpit and the altar surrounded by a steel-clad congregation, which listened tremblingly with their hands upon their weapons. Into all the separate facts which would support this dreadful picture I must not enter, nor would I willingly conduct my reader through the shambles of a civil war. Prisoners were tortured, or massacred in cold blood, or hung by forties and fifties at a time. Country- men driving their carts, or attempting to sell their stores in the city [Edinburgh], were hanged or branded with a hot iron. Wo- men coming to market were seized and scourged, and as the punish- ment did not prevent repetition of the offence, one delinquent, who ventured to retail her country produce, was barbarously hanged in her own village [West Edmonston] near the city. These are homely details, but they point to such intensity of national misery, and made so deep an impression, that the period, taking its name from Morton, was long after remembered as the days of the Douglas TFars."* The General Assembly held in 1570 appear to have confined themselves chiefly to the management of their own crude and un- defined system of polity. In that held at Stirling on the 6th of August 1571, a letter was read from John Knox, dated St An- • Tytler's History of Scotland, Edin. 8vo. edit. vol. vii. p. 3G5, 306, 370, 371. 94 THE SUPERINTENDENT SYSTEM [1571. drews, August 3d, in which he complains of his weak state of health, for he was then dying, otherwise he says — " I would not have troubled you with this my rude dictation." He entreats his brethren patiently to hear and judge certain libels against him in the former Assembly as they shall answer to God, being convinced that he had neither offended God nor good men in any thing of which he was accused. Those libels, it is alleged by his servant Bannatyne, had been thrown into the General Assembly in a counterfeit handwriting, accusing Knox of scurrilously reviling Queen Mary, and of sedition, schism, and erroneous doctrine.* Knox continues in his letter — " And now, brethren," he says, " be- cause the [daily] decay of naturall strength threatens unto me certain and sudden departure from the miseries of this hfe ; of love and conscience I exhort you, yea, in the fear of God I charge and command you, that ye take heed to yourselves, and the flock over which God has placed you pastours. To discourse of the behaviour of yourselves I may not ; but to command you to be faithful to the flock I dare not cease. Unfaithfull and traitours to the flock shall ye be before the Lord Jesus, if that with your consent, directlie or indirectlie, ye suffer unworthie men to be thrust into the ministrie of the Kirk, under what pretence that ever it be." He exhorts them to " gainstandthe merciless devourers of the patrimonie of the Kirk," and concludes by praying that God may give them " wisdom and stout courage in so just a cause," and himself a " happie end." It is recorded that this letter was " read, considered with ma- ture deliberation, and allowed in all points, with firm purpose to proceed and do according to the godly counsell contained therein touching the affairs of the whole Kirk. And as concerning his [Knox's] own part contained in the said letter, the Assembly or- dained all persons to be warned at the Tolbooth-door that had, or pretended to have any thing to lay to the charge of the Superin- dents or ministers, either presently convened or absent from the Assembly, to compear before the dissolving of the same, and ac- cuse, if they had any just matter ."f In this Assembly it was resolved that a certain number of them should be nominated commissioners to " pass to my Lord Regent's • Bannatyne's Memoriales, printed for the Bannatyne Club, 4to. 183G, p. 91-103. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p, 199-200. 1571.J OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. 95 [Mar] Grace, Counsell, and Parliament, and conclude upon the heads, articles, and designns, presented in his Grace's name to this Assembly ; to propone, humblie require, and desire, in the Kirk's name, the granting of heads, articles, and redresses of com- plaints, as shall be given to them by the Kirk, the ane and the other always to be concludit on conforme to the instructions to be delivered to them." Erskine of Dun, Spottiswoode, Winram, Eow, and fifteen others, or any eleven of them, were empowered to proceed to Stirling on the 22d of the same month of August, " to counsell and reason." Most important projects were now to be developed respecting the form of ecclesiastical government. It was clear that the Superintendent System, which was neither Episco- pal nor Presbyterian, with its ministers, exhorters, and readers, as devised by Knox, Spottiswoode, Winram, Erskine of Dun, Row, and others, had proved a failure, after an experiment of ten years, and it was clear that the very constitution of the kingdom had been rendered imperfect by the questionable authority of the Acts of the various Parliaments during that period. A different con- struction of the " Reformed Church" was in consequence deter- mined, and this forms a curious episode in the history of that eventful time. 96 [1571.] CHAPTER IV. THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. The miserable state of Scotland, rent by faction and civil discord, at the accession of the Earl of Mar to the Regency, is already delineated. The affairs of religion were also in utter confusion ; the Reformation had failed to produce beneficial effects on the gene- ration who embraced its doctrines ; and the ancient Hierarchy was extinct, or at best only represented by the temporizing Bishops of Galloway and Orkney. The Acts of Parliament merely sanctioned the " pure religion" then professed in the realm as taught by the Reformers, but no form of church-government, not even the Super- intendent System, was legally acknowledged. The laws of the kingdom still recognised the clerical order as one of the Estates of Parliament ; the Bishops and other dignitaries had been regu- larly summoned from a very early period to that assembly ; and their consent was indispensable in all the laws and constitutions enacted. " At the Reformation," says Dr Cook, " it was esteemed dangerous to make any great innovation upon the political consti- tution then existing, and although the Roman Catholic Bishops were prohibited from teaching, and were in fact deprived of their right to exercise their clerical functions, they were permitted to retain the privilege of sitting in Parliament, and many of them regularly attended its deliberations. In progress of time several of them died, and as there was no possibility of continuing the succession, the Sees remained permanently vacant, and there was a near prospect of the total extinction of the spiritual branch of the legislature. The persons who successively administered the government of James contemplated, with much anxiety and alarm, an event which might be attended with consequences fatal to the 1571.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 97 throne of their sovereign. They dreaded that if, under the reign of a minor, one of the Estates ceased to exist, their proceedings might be afterwards declared illegal, and the whole of those in- teresting regulations by which the liberty and the religion of the great mass of the people were intended to be secured might be set aside."* This is also the view of the then state of affairs by Bishop Sage. " The Lords," he says, " thought it expedient that the Ecclesiastical State should sit in Parliament, and therefore were eager to restore Bishops, that their acts might le valid.'f It was consequently determined to establish Episcopacy, if that can be so termed which was merely nominal, and had no pretensions to the episcopal function. Certain of the Protestant preachers were allowed to vote in the Parliaments as the successors of the defunct Prelates, and officially appointed Bishops of the vacant Sees. This measure excited considerable dissatisfaction on the part of those in the General Assemblies who were wedded to the Superintendent System. The persons selected for this visionary episcopate were John Douglas, originally a Carmelite Friar, rector of the University of St Andrews, a cadet of the Earl of Morton's family, who was appointed to the Archbishopric of St Andrews ; John Porterfield to Glasgow; and James Paton to Dunkeld. Some of the other Sees were not vacant, and the nomination of the titu- lars was delayed in several cases till a future period. The Earl of Morton had obtained from the Regent a gi-ant of the ample revenues of the Archbishopric of St Andrews, and doubtless others of the nobility anticipated similar appropriations. But this gift was illegal, for the patrimony of the Primacy never had been forfeited, and it was clear that, if by any change of affairs in subsequent times the Church should be restored, the Archbishops would have had a legal claim to recover not only the revenues, but to prosecute those by whom they had been appro- priated without the authority of Parliament. Another motive for restoring the nominal order of Bishops was, not only to prevent the possibility of such proceedings at a future period, but with their consent to secure a certain portion of the patrimony to each See, while the rest was to be conveyed by statute to those of the nobility already in possession of the ecclesiastical plunder. When • Cook's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 167, 168. t Fundamental Charter of Presbytery Examined, p. 195-198. 7 98 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571. Morton found that the Regent Mar was resolved to restore this nominal episcopacy, he hastened to St Andrews to secure the election of Douglas, and thus, by having a person entirely devoted to his interest in the See, keep undisturbed possession of the revenues, after allotting to him such an allowance as he was dis- posed to accept. Douglas appears to have been advanced in years, and in ill health at the time. The gossipping Richard Ban- natyne, secretary of John Knox, describes him as an " auld un- able man — " ane man unable to travell in body as a man should do, and more unable of his tongue to teach the principal office of ane bishop." He was nominated Archbishop on Saturday the 18th of August 1571, and as such he attended the Parliament or Convention held at Stirling on the 28th of that month. An attempt was made to prohibit him from voting as " ane of the Kirk," under pain of excommunication, until admitted by the said " Kirk," and Superintendent Winram was the party em- ployed to threaten him with their censures ;* but the Earl of Morton insisted on his voting as Archbishop of St Andrews under pain of high treason. He was ordered to get all the fruits of the benefice, and he attended the Convention of Stirling held on the 5th of September 1571, his name appearing as Joannes Archepisc Sancti-Andree^ with Adam. Orchaden. Episc.-y In the proceedings of that Convention they are designated Prelates., and as such they took the oaths of obedience to the Regent Mar, with the " Lords, commissioners of burghs, barons, and gentlemen."J Porterfield signs an " admonition " to the garrison of Edinburgh Castle as Archbishop of Glasgow along with Douglas and Bishop Bothwell-ll But before narrating the proceedings connected with the esta- bHshment of this nominal episcopacy, it is necessary to glance at the mode by which the Regent Mar successfully effected a change in the new ecclesiastical constitution. Some of the enactments of a previous Parliament had excited considerable discontent among the preachers, which was increased by the continued pressure of poverty, and by a declaration in the name of the Regent that the collectors who were appointed to receive the thirds of the ecclesi- • Bannatyne's Memorialles, p. 178, 183. t Ibid. p. 213. Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iii. p. 65. X Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iii. p. 67, 68. || Ibid. p. 70. 1571.J THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 99 astical revenues as the stipends of the preachers could cease to act. This order, which was proclaimed at St Andrews, was grounded on the pretence that the stipends had not been regular- ly paid, and that the King's proportion of the thirds had been withheld ; but it was reported that it originated with the Earl of Morton, whose agents had been prevented by the collectors from obtaining certain duties which he had appropriated. " It was thought,"" says Richard Bannatyne, " that these letters were raised by the Earl of ISIorton, unto whom the Rector of St An- drois had written, showing that the Collector wald not suffer him to take up certain dues pertaining to the Bishopric, as the said rector had alleged, who was appointed and made Bishop of St An- drois by the Lord of Morton, without any consent, assent, or ad- mission of the Kirk."* Erskine of Dun considered it necessary to correspond with his relative the Regent Mar on the state of religious affairs and the poverty of the Reformed preachers. His first letter is dated from Montrose, 10th November 1571, and some of the passages of it are curious, as developing the sentiments of this zealous supporter of the Superintendent System, and the extraordinary notions he maintained respecting church government in general. " As to the provision of benefices," he tells the Regent, " this is my judge- ment— All benefices of teinds, or having teinds joined or annexed thairto (which is taken up of the people's labours), have the offices joined unto them, which office is the preaching of the Evangel and ministration of the Sacraments ; and this office is spirituall, and thairfoir belongs to the Kirk, which only has the distributione and ministratione of spiritual things. So, by the Kirk spirituall offices are distributed, and men are received and admitted thairto ; and the administration of the power is committed by the Kirk to Bischops or Superintendents ; whairfoir to the Bischops and Superintendents pertains the examinatioun and admissioun of men into benefices and offices of spirituall cure, whatsoever bene- fice it be, as well Bishopricks, A bbacies, Priories, as other infe- rior benefices. That this pertains by the Scriptures of God to the Bischop or Superintendent is manifest." Erskine then cites 2 Tim. ii. 2, and 1 Tim. v. 22, for the edification of his friend the " Bannatyne's Memorialles, p. 197. 100 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571. Eegent, and proceeds — " The Apostle, also writing to Titus, Bischop of Crete, puts him in remembrance of his office, which was to admit and appoint ministers in every citie and congre- gation ; and they could not do the same rashlie, without examina- tione ; he expressed the qualities and conditiouns of some men as should be admitted, as at length is contained in the first chapter, in the epistle foresaid. The deacons that were chosen in Jerusa- lem by the whole congregatioun were received and admitted by the Apostles, and that by laying on of their hands, as Saint Luke writes in the 6th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. This we have expressed plainlie by the Scriptures, that to the office of a Bishop pertains examination and admission into spirituall cure and office, and also to oversee them that are admitted, that they walk uprichtlie, and exercise their office faithfully and purely. To take this power from the Bischop or Superintendent is to take away the office of a Bischop, that no Bischop be in the Kii'k, which were to alter and abolish the order that God has appointed in his Kirk — A greater offence or contempt of God and his Kirk can no prince do than to set up by his authority men in spirituall offices, as to create Bischops and Pastours of the Kirk, for so to do is to conclude no Kirk of God to be ; for the Kirk can not be without it have the own power, jurisdiction, and libertie, with the ministratione of such offices as God has appointed." Erskine next declares — " In speaking this touching the libertie of the Kirk, I mean not the hurt of the King or others in their patronages, but that they have their privileges of prescntatioun according to the laws, provyding always that the examinatioun and admissione pertain only to the Kirk of all benefices having cure of souls." After some general observations on benefices and their temporalities he proceeds to the proper subject of his letter, which is an expostulation with the Regent for having nomi- nated and constituted Douglas to be Archbishop of St Andrews, by his own authority, as grossly irregular and unscriptural, not to say unnecessary. " As to the question — If it be expedient ane Superintendent to be where a qualified Bischope is i — I under- stand that a Bischop or Superintendent to be but one office, and where the one is the other is. But having some respect unto the case whereupoun the questione is moved, I answer, the Super- intendents that are placed ought to continue in their offices, not- 1571.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 101 withstanding any othei's that intrude themselves, or are placed by us as have no power in such offices. They may be called Bischops, but are no Bischops, but idols (Zachar. verse 11., cap. vi.) with the Prophet, and thairfoir the Superintendents which are called and placed orderly by the Kirk have the office and jurisdictioun, and the other Bischops so called have no office nor jurisdic- tioune in the Kirk of God, for they enter not by the door but by another way, and thairfoir are not pastors, as says Christ, but thieves and robbers. I cannot but lament from my verie heart that great misorder used at Striveling at the last Par- liament in creating Bischops, placing them, and giving them vote in Parliament as Bischops, in despite of the Kirk and hie contempt of God, having the Kirk opposing itself against that misorder."* To this letter, and to another dated from Perth, 14th Novem- ber, the Eegent Mar addressed as his reply to his " right trustie cousine" from Leith, on the 15th November. It contains a most important statement, which indicates his enlightened views of the important subject. " The default of the whole stands in this, that the policie of the Kirke of Scotland is not perfect, nor any solid conference among godly men who are well willed and of judg- ment how the same may be helped ; and for corruptione which daily increases, whensoever the circumstances of things shall be well considered by the guid ministers that are neither busy nor over desirous of promotions to thame and thairs, it will be found that some have been authors and procurers of things that no guid policie in the Kirk can allow."-f- These admissions by the Eegent prove that the Superintendent System was a complete failure, and he might well say that the " policie of the Kirk of Scotland," as he calls it, though that Church was in reality extinct, was " not perfect." The Earl of Morton was at this time in Leith with the Regent, and Mr Richard Bannatyne records that " few godly believe that any comfort shall come to [the] Kirk by the Lord of Mortone's means, who more seiks the destructione of the Kirk in de- paupering the same, than either he seiks God's glorie, or the Weill of this present cause." The negotiations for altering and • Baniiatync's Memorialles, p. 108-201. t Ibid. p. 20j, 20G. 102 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571. adjusting the ecclesiastical " policie" are noticed in a letter from a certain Mr Alexander Hay, preserved by the same Bannatyne, retailing all the foreign and domestic news of the time, apparently to John Knox. He relates — " There has been some conference betuixt some of the Superintendents and Ministers, and my Lord Eegent's Grace and the Counsall, for agreement in matters touch- ing the policie of the Kirk and dispositioun of benefices. The matter is deferred till the 8th of January. It seems to differ rather in circumstances than in effect ; and to speake truth, I find the Regent willing and desirous to have a form agreed unto, which I trust he could perform for his interest. — If you have with you the book I sent you when I came from England, intituled Leges Ecclesiasticce Anglicance, or Reformatio Legum Ecclesiasticarum, which is the worke of John Foxe,* I will pray yow send the same to me with the bearer, and I shall doe goodwill to send you some other book to supplie the place of that, while [until] I return it, if ye think it worth."-j- On the 6th of December the Titular Archbishop Douglas and Superintendent Winram left St Andrews for Leith. As all parties were now generally agreed on the necessity of taking into considera- tion the subject of church government, the Eegent consented to the request of the leading preachers that their jurisdiction and main- tenance should be settled ; and Erskine of Dun wrote to the other Superintendents and Commissioners to assemble and make regu- lations respecting the provision for the King's household out of the thirds of the benefices, and to consult about other matters of ecclesiastical polity.J A Convention of " Superintendents, Com- missioners, Ministers, and Commissioners for towns and kirks," was accordingly held in the present parish church of Leith on the 12th of January 1571-2. The names of sixty-two persons are recorded as present ; the most conspicuous of whom are the Super- intendents Erskine, Spottiswoode, and Winram, Messrs David Lindsay of Leith, William Christison of Dundee, Robert Pont, and David Ferguson of Dunfermline. || They unanimously found that " the present Convention shall have the strength, force, and • No work so entitled occurs among the acknowledged writings of John Fox the " Martyrologist." t Bannatyne's Memorialles, p. 208. X ^''^d- P- 213. U Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 203, 204. 1571-2.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 103 effect of a General Assemblie, and that all things be treated and ended herein that may goodlie be done, and meet to be concluded in any Generall Assemblie." Erskine, Winram, William Lundie of that ilk, Andrew Hay, commissioner for Clydesdale, David Lindsay, commissioner for Kyle, Robert Pont, commissioner for Moray, and John Craig, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, or any four of them, were authorized to " compear before my Lord Re- gent's Grace, and so many of the Lords of the Secret Counsell as his Grace shall appoint, in Leith this instant month of January, and there in the Kirk's name most humbly request for answer thereto," and to report to the Generall Assembly appointed to be held at St Andrews on the 6th of March following. The mem- bers of this Convention or Assembly permitted Mr Robert Pont to accept the office of a Judge in the Court of Session, to which he had been appointed by the Regent, thus sanctioning in his case what they condemned in that of Bishop Bothwell of Orkney. This person, who became one of the leading preachers among the Re- formers, was born at the little town of Culross in 1529, and edu- cated at St Leonard's College in St Andrews, from which it is supposed he proceeded to a foreign university. It is already no- ticed that he competed for the office of Superintendent of Galloway with Bishop Gordon in 1563, and that in 1566, when a translation of the Helvetian Confession was ordered to be printed by the General Assembly, he was in so great repute with his party that they petitioned the Regent about three years afterwards to pre- fer him to a situation of greater usefulness. Pont was in con- sequence appointed Provost of Trinity College Church in Edin- burgh, and afterwards to St Cuthberts near that city. In 1569 he excommunicated Bishop Bothwell of Orkney by command of the General Assembly. It appears that he was indebted for his seat in the Supreme Court to the influence of the Earl of Morton, who had his own reasons at the time for propitiating the Reformers. Pont, who was continued in his " office of the ministrie," was ac- cused of non-residence in the General Assembly held at Edin- burgh in August 1573, and of not sufficiently visiting the district of Moray, in answer to which he pleaded want of leisure ; and " no wonder," says the zealous Calderwood, whose Presbyterian notions were offended at his appointment ; " he was suffered to be a Sena- tor in the College of Justice." 104 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571-2, The persons nominated to appear before the Regent Mar and the Lords of the Secret Council in the " Kirk's name," were met by the Earl of Morton, then Lord Chancellox-, Lord Eiithven, Lord High Treasurer, Bishop Eothwell of Orkney, Eobert Pitcairn, commendator of Dunfermline, " secretary to our sovereign Lord," James Macgill of Nether Eankeillor in Fife, Clerk-Register, Sir John Bellenden, Lord Justice-Clerk, William Lundie of that ilk, and Colin Campbell of Glenorchy, who, or any four of them, were authorized by the Regent, on the 16th of January 1571-2, to " converse, treat, and conclude with the Superintendents and ministers in the Kirk, or commissioners authorized by them, anent all matters binding to the ordering and establishing of the policy of the Kirk."* After several meetings and lengthy delibera- tions, Erskine, Winram, Craig, who was still the colleague of John Knox, and the others, agreed not only to overthrow the whole Superintendent System, but even to explode whatever tendency there might be towards Presbyterianism, and to substitute or re- store a peculiar kind of Episcopacy, of their own construction, which had no succession, and was utterly divested of apostolical authority. This singular transaction, which the great mass of the people beheld with indifference, and the adherents of the deposed and al- most defunct Romish Hierarchy with contempt, shews that its con- cocters were completely bewildered on the great and important subject of the constitution of the Christian Church. It was con- temptible in such a man as Winram to be a party to this spurious polity, which subsequently tended, more than any irregularity which the Reformation had introduced, to inflict serious injury on the Church, after Andrew Melville commenced the agitation in favour of Presbyterianism ; and it was degrading in Bishop Both- well of Orkney to sanction a procedure which incurred the ridicule of the people. It is too evident that religion at that period was in Scotland considered in a political view, and the holiest and most sacred functions were assumed and usurped by men who must be held as either destitute of principle, or as indifferent to the con- stitution of the Church from the apostolical times. The first article, as sanctioned by the two parties at their " Booke of the Univers;tll Kirk of Scotlanrl, Part First, p. 207. 1571-2.] THE TITULAR OR TULCIIAN EPISCOPATE. 105 deliberation, is entitled — " Anent Archbishopriks and Bishopriks," and is expressed in the following manner, the orthography of which it is unnecessary to give verbatim. The date is " at Leith, the xvi day of Januar 1571-2."" " It is thought, ill consideration of the present state, that the names and titles of Archbishops and Bishops are not to be altered or innovated, nor yet the bounds of the Dioceses confounded, but to stand and continue in time coming, as they did before the Re- formation of religion, at least till the King's majority, or consent of Parliament : — That persons pi'omoted to Archbishoprics and Bishoprics so far as may be endowed with qualities specified in the Epistles of Paul to Timothy and Titus : — That there be a cer- tain assembly or chapter of learned ministers annexed to every metropolitan or cathedral seat. To all Archbishoprics and Bishop- rics vacant, or that shall happen to be vacant hereafter, persons qualified [are] to be nominated within the space of [one] year and day after the vacancy, and the persons nominated to be thirty years of age at the least. The Dean, or failing the Dean, the next in dignity of the Chapter, during the time of the vacancy, shall be Vicar-General, and use the jurisdiction in s^nritualibus as the Bishop might have need. All Archbishops and Bishops to be admitted hereafter shall exercise no farther jurisdiction in spiritual function than the Superintendent has and presently exercises, until the same be agreed upon ; and that all Archbishops and Bishops be subject to the Kirk and General Assembly thereof in spirituali- bus as they are to the King in iemporalibus ; and have the advice of the best learned of the Chapter, to the number of six at the least, in the admission of such as shall have spiritual function in the Kirk ; as also, that it be lawful to as many others of the Chap- ter as please to be present at the said admission, and to vote thereanent."* The second article is entitled — "Anent Abbacies, Priories, and Nunneries." It places these under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of the Diocese in which they are situated, who is bound to take cog- nizance that the " ministerie" connected with them shall be main- tained, if possible, by special assignation of so much annual stipend from the revenues as shall be found reasonable. The Bishop in ' Bookc of the Universall Kirk of Scolland, Part First, p. 209. 106 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571-2. this matter was to act with the Privy Council. The remainder of the revenues were to be assigned to the support of those of the " Ec- clesiastical Estate" in Parhament who were to have the title of Abbot, Prior, or Commendator, and were to be " well learned and quali- fied therefore." The appointments were to be by royal letters under the Signet addressed to the Archbishops or Bishops of the Dioceses, who were to examine the persons so nominated for their learning and ability, and being found qualified, they were to be instituted to the dignities by the Bishops of the respective Dio- ceses, by authority of the King's letters under the Great Seal. All persons admitted commendators were to be eligible to be Senators of the " Spiritual State" in the College of Justice, or Court of Session, or might be employed in any other affairs con- nected with the public service, the consent of the Bishop being obtained that no churches connected with the preferments of such persons shall be " destitute of ministration." The third article, entitled " Anent Benefices of cure under Prelacies," contains a variety of particulars regulating the Crown and individual patronages, stipends, and the mode of presentation to vacant parishes. It was resolved that no person was eligible to the " office of a minister" under twenty-three years of age — that all such were to be admitted to their cures by the Bishop or Superintendent, in whose presence they were to subscribe all the articles of religion which " concern the confession of the true faith and the doctrine of the Sacraments," ratified by the Eegent Moray's first Parliament in 1567, — and they were also to take the oath of allegiance to the King acknowledging his authority. They were to procure from the Bishop a testimonial that they had thus qualified themselves, and on the first Sunday in " time of session or public prayers in the kirk," they were to read this testimonial and the Confession of Faith before the congregation, otherwise they were to be deprived. The other articles relate to " provost- ries of college kirks," prebends in the said " kirks," and chapel- ries founded for " support of the schools and increase of letters," and to maintain bursars or poor students at the grammar school and Universities. All bursars and students within the Diocese of Aberdeen, Moray, Eoss, Caithness, and Orkney, were " to study their art, Theologie, the Laws, or Medicine," at the University of King''s College in Old Aberdeen ; those in the Diocese of St 1571-2.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 107 Andrews, Dunkeld, Dunblane, and Brechin, within " ane of the Colleges of the University of St Andrews and those within the Diocese of Glasgow, Galloway, Argyll, and The Isles, were to study " thair art within the Pedagogy of Glasgow."' The fomi of " creating a Bishop," or appointment by the Crown to a vacant Diocese, was appi'oved, also the " license"" under the Great Seal to the Dean and Chapter to choose " such ane as Bishop and Pastor of the said Bishoprick that shall be devoted to God, and to his Highness [the King] and his realm." A certain document called an " edict " was also sanctioned, enjoining the Chapter to convene and choose their Bishop oh a specified day, and the Dean and Chapter were to return a prescribed " testi- monial" of their obedience to the King, who was to grant " con- firmation, provision, and royal assent upon the Chapter's certifi- cate made of their election." If the party elected was already a " Bishop," and was to be translated, the document was to be ex- pressed accordingly. After " the consecration," the Bishop was to appear before the King, and take the oath of allegiance and supremacy framed for that purpose. An arrangement was made for the restitution of the temporalities of the Dioceses to the^ Bishops, and in favour of the " metropolitan and cathedral kirks." The Chapters of the several Dioceses were also reconstructed. After stipulating that for the " seat" of St Andrews as many of the old Chapter then ahve and " are ministers, professours of the true religioun," shall be of the Chapter during their natural lives, among whom was the lay " Bishop " of Caithness, who is styled Commendator of the Priory of St Andrews, it was enjoined that after the " death of the present convent of the Abbey the Chap- ter was to consist of twenty-one members." The Prior of St An- drews was to be the Dean, and the others were to be the Prior of Portmoak, the Ministers of Edinburgh, Leith, Linlithgow, Stirling, Dunbar, Haddington, Perth, Crail, Cupar-Fife, Anstruther, Dy- sart, Kirkcaldy, Kinghorn, Dunfermline, Aberbrothwick, Calder, in " Lothian," Fettercairn, Dun, and Methven. There were to choose by the King's licence the Dean, the Archdean of St An- drews, the Archdean of Lothian, and the Chancellor ; and in the meanwhile Winram was to act as Archdean of St Andrews, Spot- tiswoode as Archdean of I^thian, and Mr David Lindsay of Leith as Chancellor. The seat" of Glasgow was arranged to 108 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571-2. have a Chapter of thirty-two " canons or prebendaries founded upon distinct and several benefices." Of these the Pastor of Hamilton was to be the Dean, the Parson of Kilbride was to be the Chantor, the Parson of Campsie was to be the Chancellor, the Parson of Carnwath was to be Treasurer, the Parson of Gad- der and Monkland was to be the Sub-Dean, and the other digni- taries were the Archdeans of Glasgow and Teviotdale. The Chap- ters of the other Dioceses are not enumerated in the Acts of the General Assemblies as recorded in the " I3ooke of the Universall Kirk." All these and other Articles were approved and ratified by the Regent Mar at Leith on the 1st day of February 1571-2. On the 24th of the previous January an " edict" was signed at Leith for the election of an Archbishop of St Andrews, conformably to this new state of affairs ; on the 28th of January the Earl of Morton had proceeded to that city to influence the appointment of John Douglas ; and the said " edict," by authority of the Regent, was fixed upon the church door and the Abbe}- gate on the 3d of February, ordering the election to take place on the Gth. An account of the proceedings is given by Richard Bannatyne, who, as secretary to John Knox, appears to have been present. On the Gth of February John Douglas gave " specimen doctrine," or in other words preached a " trial sermon," in the parish church, and the Earl of Morton was present. The Chapter assembled in the Abbey or Priory on the 8th, after a sermon preached by Patrick Adamson, otherwise Constance, whom Bannatyne ignorantly calls Cousting. He says that a considerable discussion ensued about the election of the " Archbishop," but " in the end the said Rec- tor was chosen, notwithstanding that many of the godly ministers were against it, and Mr George Scott, minister of Kirkaldy, took ane instrument that he condescended [consented] not." John Knox was then in St Andrews, and protested against the election of Douglas, but his secretary has not preserved the docu- ment, if the protestation was ever written. On Sunday the 10th of February, Douglas was " inaugurated" in presence of the Earl of Morton. Knox preached the sermon, but refused to assist far- ther at the ceremony, and the " consecration" was performed by the lay Bishop of Caithness, Spottiswoode, and David Lindsay of Leith. The three sat with Douglas on a seat in front of the 1571-2.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 109 pulpit during Knox's sermon, and after it was concluded Winram entered the pulpit. He delivered an address to Douglas from the first chapter of St Paul's Epistle to Titus, and then followed the order set forth in the First Book of Discipline for the election of Superintendents. Douglas read his answers to the several ques- tions, and Mr William Cock, a Bailie of St Andrews, appeared to represent the people. Douglas denied that he had formed, or in- tended to make, any " simonaicall paction declared that he would be " obedient to the Kirk, and that he should usurp no power over the same and that he would " take no more power than the Counsall and Generall Assemblie of the Kirk should prescribe." The lay Bishop of Caithness, Spottiswoodc, and Lindsay, then " laid their hands and embraced the said Rector, Mr. John Dou- glas, in token of admission to the Bishoprik."* Such was the " consecration" which those three men had the pre- sumption to perpetrate at the commencement of this spurious Epis- copacy, one of them, the Bishop of Caithness, let it be recollected, never in holy orders, and even Lindsay's ordination is doubtful, at least it is so considered by Bishop Keith. On the Sunday when it was done a poetical sat ire in Latin was posted on the gate of St Mary's College and on the church door. It was entitled Incommium., but was so general in its allusions that it annoyed three individuals — Mr Robert Hamilton, Mr William Skene, commissary of St Andrews, and Mr Archibald Hamilton, each of whom thought it levelled at himself. The part which Knox sustained in this pretended con- secration is curious, but if his secretary's statement is correct he was not inconsistent. Bannatyne alleges that this " inauguration" was " altogether against the mind of Mr Knox, as he at that time openly spake in pulpit," and " greatly inveighed against such ordour and doings as then were used." This excited the rage of Mr John Rutherford, Provost of St Salvador's College, who openly declared that Knox censured the proceedings because he had not himself been nominated to the See. This was told to Knox, who noticed it on the following Sunday in his sermon, when he declared that " he had refused a gi-eater Bishopric than ever it was, which he might have had with the favours of greater men than ever the other had this Bishopric ; but only that he spake for the discharge " Bannatyno's Memorialles, p. 223, 221. 110 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571-2. of his conscience, and that the Kirk of Scotland should not be subject to that order which was then used, considering the Lords of Scotland had subscribed, and also confirmed in Parliament, the order already and long ago appointed in the Book of Discipline."* Dr Cook's observations on the conduct of Knox seem to be legiti- mate inferences. After stating that Knox " expressed his disap- probation," and refused to " inaugurate " the " new Primate " — a ceremony which neither he, the lay Bishop of Caithness, Spottis- woode, nor Lindsay, had any more canonical authority to perform than the stalwart magistrate Mr ^Villiam Cock — the Presbyterian historian, says — " This opposition proceeded from various causes. Still desirous that the polity of the First Book of Discipline should not be invaded, he beheld with regret the first attack which was made upon it ; and he was satisfied that the choice of Douglas would be subservient to that robbery, as he usually styled it, of the Church's patrimony, which he had uniformly reprobated. He also dreaded that the consequences which Beza had apprehended would follow from the introduction of prelacy, and was thus led by his zeal for the purity of the Church not to concur in what might destroy that purity. That he was not influenced by the idea that Episcopacy was at variance with Scripture is evident from the communication which he within a few months made to the Assembly at Perth, and from the part in the ceremony taken by the Superintendent of Fife [Winram], one of his confidential friends.'"-f- Several of the Bishoprics were speedily filled by the leading men among the Reformed preachers, and this novel " Episco- pacy," or form of ecclesiastical polity even worse than the Super- intendent System, and more objectionable than Presbyterianism, because it was the mere shadow without the substance, was soon carried completely into operation. Dr Cook pronounces a high eulogium on the proceedings of the Convention or Assembly held at Leith which restored the archiepiscopal and episcopal rank, and led to the " inauguration of Douglas. " The episcopal polity," he says, " which issued from the Convention appears to have been admirably calculated for securing an useful and efficient * Bannatyne's Memorialles, p. 256, 257. t Cook's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 187, 188. 1571-2.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. Ill clergy. It established an excellent system of controul ; it enforced upon ministers the regular discharge of their pastoral duties ; it assigned a peculiar province to all holding benefices ; allotted a moderate provision for their support and comfort, whilst it sub- jected the highest dignitaries to restraints which guarded against the indolence or the profligacy that had disgraced the Bishops under the Popish Establishment." — " But although the Church of Scotland must be considered as having at this time adopted Epis- copacy, and although that adoption proceeded upon grounds so rational and so conformable to the principles of the Reformers, the zealous Presbyterians of after times looked back with regret to this part of the ecclesiastical history of their country, and en- deavoured very unnecessarily, and in express opposition to the language and proceedings of the Church, to represent the resolu- tions framed at Leith as having been rashly made, as having been forced upon the ministers, and as having never received the ex- plicit sanction of the General Assemblies — an effect of party zeal not uncommon, but weakening the cause which it was designed to support." These are candid admissions, and a careful investiga- tion of the whole circumstances triumphantly refutes the assertions of Wodrow, Calderwood, and other Presbyterian writers, who zealously endeavoured to shew that their Reformed association or society, which they dignify with the name of " The Church,'''' was opposed to Episcopacy. The very names of the parties present in the Convention or Assembly at Leith on the 12th (|f January 1571-2, and who are all enumerated in the " Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland," present an unanswerable confutation of the Presbyte- rian statements. As to the objection that the resolutions at Leith " never received the explicit sanction of the General Assemblies," though such is not the fact, yet if it were it would be a matter of no consequence, for those very General Assemblies, as the meetings were called, were not then legally recognized. Calderwood, Wodrow, Petrie, and other Presbyterian writers, have been satisfactorily an- swered by Bishop Sage, in his " Fundamental Charter of Presby- tery Examined," as to the opinions adduced from their v;ritings by Dr Cook, and it is truly a miserable subterfuge to adopt such a mode of treating with contempt the first appearance of this kind of Episcopacy in Scotland after the Reformation. The objection to it which must occur to the sound Churchman is, that it was 112 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571-2. altogether a vain and futile system — that it was no Episcopacy at all, or so only in name — that the " consecration" of Douglas and others by unauthorized men, one of whom was a layman, was dis- graceful, outrageous, and most sinful — and that the whole was a political arrangement to serve particular purposes, and introduce a set of men into the Parliaments to represent the defunct and ab- sent Prelates of the fallen Hierarchy, assuming their ecclesiastical titles, and pi'etending to be invested with functions which it was impossible to obtain without consecration from Bishops regularly and canonically consecrated. Episcopacy without the succession is nothing, and differs in no respect from Presbyterianism, for it is the apostolically derived succession which constitutes the Epis- copate. Even the people ridiculed the persons " inaugurated" by such men as the lay Bishop of Caithness, Winram, and Lindsay. They were long known by the very appropiiate and significant soubriquet of Twlchan Bishops, derived from a practice then pre- valent of stuffing a calf's skin with straw, and placing it before a cow to induce the animal to give milk, which figure was called a tulchan — a term derived from a word signifying a model or a close resemblance. The Tulchan Hierarchy was a complete deception, and was merely one of titles connected with personal arrange- ments and political expediency, to say nothing of its gross perver- sion of the real episcopate and its schismatical profanity. The men who figured in it as Titulars or Tulchans ought never to have been recognized by Keith in his enumeration of the Scottish Bishops. The Presbyterian Calderwood tells a story about Patrick Adam- son, the successor of Douglas as Titular Archbishop of St An- drews, that disappointed at having lost the election on the present occasion, or at not then obtaining a Bishopric, he told his audience in a sermon he preached at St Andrews in February 1571-2, the time of the " inauguration" of Douglas — " There were three sorts of Bishops — mi/ Lord Bishop, my Lord^ Bishop, and the Lord's Bishop. My Ljord Bishop was in the time of Popery ; my Lord's Bishop is now, when my Lord getteth the fat of the benefice, and the Bishop serveth for a portion out of the benefice, to make my Lord's right sure ; and the Lord's Bishop is the true minister of the Gospel." It is impossible to ascertain what amount of truth is to be attached to Calderwood's report of this sarcastic attack on the nobility. The same story is recorded by another Presby- 1571-2.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 113 terian partizan, who mentions that he was present — that it was the first time he heard Adamson preacli — and that the sermon was deHvered " the week after the Bishop was made."* It is not likely that Adamson would attempt to compete for the nomination to the Archbishopric with such a man as Douglas, the Rector of the University, and supported by the powerful influence of Morton. One author, of no great authority, thinks it necessary to deny the story by the statement that Adamson was not then in Scotland ;-f- but there is no doubt that he was in St Andrews at the time. Bannatyne expressly mentions that "Mr Patrick Cousting" — a cor- ruption of Constance, Adamson's proper surname — preached on Friday, the 8th of February 1571-2, the day on which Douglas was elected, though it is not likely that he would then introduce such pleasantries into his sermon ; but we have other evidence. The General Assembly held at Edinburgh in March 1570-1, "brotherly required Mr Patrick Adamson to enter again into the ministry, in respect of the good gifts that God hath given him, and scarceness of ministers in divers counties. He answered, that he would ad- vise with himself and brethren that love him till the next Assembly, and promised them to answer whether he would then enter in the ministry, or withdraw himself alluterly."J Accordingly, in the Ge- neral Assembly held in August 1571, his wTitten answer was read, " anent his re-entry to the ministry." It appears to have been in the affirmative, for the " Assembly ordained the commissioners appointed to speak to the Lord Regent's Grace before or at the next Parliament, to take order with the contents of his letter, and to report what they shall happen to do therein to the next Assem- bly. || This memorial in Adamson's favour to the Regent was so far successful, that he was granted, before March 1572, a pension of five hundred raerks annually out of the rental of the Parsonage of Glasgow, payable at Martinmas and Whitsunday, " because for his own part he was willing to endeavour himself to the utter- most of his power to the service of the ministry, according as it would please the Kirk to call him ; and also, " he would not only be at the Kirk's command to employ his labours, but also would • James Melville's Diary, p. 2-5. t Mackenzie's Lives of Scottish Writers, vol. iii. p. 36-5. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 19.3. II Ibid. p. 198, 199. 8 114 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1571-2, be content the said pension be at their pleasure, as any thing pertain- ing to the Kirk."* In August 1572 he was ordered by the Assembly to " enter in the ministry at Paisley at what time the commis- sioner of Clydesdale shall charge him thereto, which the Assem- bly desireth to be done with all diligence, according to the said Mr Patrick's own promise."-f" These facts prove that Adamson was then in Scotland, and was held in great repute by the lead- ers of his party, and they are here introduced as connected with a person who was soon to sustain a very prominent place in religious matters, and who was to experience no ordinary persecu- tion from his former associates. The resolutions of the Convention at Leith, ratifying the Titular or Tulchan Episcopacy, were reported to the General Assembly held at St Andrews on the 6th of March 1571-2, at which Douglas was present as " Archbishop," though his friend, Robert Hamilton, minister of St Andrews, was appointed Moderator. This offended several of the fanatical party, and, says Bnnnatyne, who complains bitterly of some of the proceedings, " things went not as the most godly and upright desired."^ No discussion took place on the subject, but a committee was appointed, consisting of the titular Archbishop, Superintendent Winram, John Knox, John Craig, Patrick Adamson, David Lindsay, John Craig, John Row, Robert Montgomery, and others of lesser note, to meet in the house of Knox, who was then resident in St Andrews in a very precarious state of health ; and they were enjoined to " con- sider and sight [sift] the said articles and conclusions, and what therein they find agreeable to God's word, and to the utility of the Kirk, to report the utility of the same to the Assembly" that night or the following day, that " the said conclusions may be in- serted in the Register." Nothing farther appears to have been done, but the title of Archbishop was recognized. Winram resigned his office of Superintendent of Fife ; Patrick Adamson signed the con- ditions for which he was to receive the pension of five hundred merks granted by the Regent out of the Parsonage of Glasgow ; and the titular Archbishop, though he offered and promised " to demit all the offices which might impede him to execute the office • Booke of the Universal! Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 240, 241. t lUd. p. 245. % Bannatyne's Memorialles, p. 227. 1571-2.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 115 of a Bishop," was continued Rector of the University, and Provost of the New College till next Assembly, " providing always he be diligent in visitation of his kirk." It appears, however, that Win" ram's resignation was not accepted, for he was ordered to "use his own jurisdiction as before in the provinces not yet subject to the Arch- bishopric of St Andrews, and requested to concur with the said Arch- bishop, when he requires him in his visitation, or otherways within his bounds, until the next General Assembly ; and in like manner the Superintendents of Angus and Lothian to continue in their jurisdiction in manner foresaid, without prejudice of the said Archbishop, except by virtue of his commission."* A form of prayer was then in use throughout the parishes, as a certain Patrick Creich, who " for just causes was deprived of all function in the Kirk, was admitted again to read the 'prayer in Haddington kirk if he and the town could agree."-|- On the 21st of April 1572, Ohristison, minister of Dundee, re- ported the arrival of an " Ireland Bischop, called the Bischope of Cashal," in that town. This must have been the titular or Roman Catholic Archbishop of Cashel, who, in 15 G7, wounded with a dagger James M'Caghwell, the proper Archbishop of that See, because he woidd not surrender to him the administration of his province, and effected his escape into Spain. In the following year this Titular and the Titular of Eraly were sent by certain confederated rebels in Ireland as their ambassadors to the Pope and the King of Spain, to implore their aid and assistance in res- cuing their religion and country from the alleged oppression of Queen Elizabeth. The object of this personage in visiting Scot- land is not very clear, but when he appeared in Dundee he was attended by a few servants, and brought a letter of recommenda- tion to the magistrates from the zealous and Reforming Earl of Argyll, who requested them to further him to Flanders, whether he wished to proceed under the pretence of " visiting the schools." Soon after his amval in Dundee this titular Archbishop was arrest- ed by order of the Regent Mar, and his attendants prevented from having any communication with him. A packet of letters was discovered in a closet of his lodging by one of the Bailies, which • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part I. p. 237-242. t Bannatyne's Meraorialles, p. 227, 228. 116 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [L572. was sent to the Regent. In this packet was a Latin commission, regularly sealed, directed to the Pope and the King of Spain, be- seeching them to emancipate Ireland from the sway of Queen Eliza- beth, and promising to use their exertions to restore the Roman Catholic religion both there and in Scotland. The Regent ordered the Titular to be removed from Dundee to St Andrews, in the castle of which he was confined. It was reported that Elizabeth demanded him to be surrendered and sent to England, but he escaped from his durance on the 8th of August, early in the morn- ing, out of a window, and descended a great part of the wall by means of his bed-clothes, which he cut and formed like a rope; " whether," says Bannatync, " by neghgence of his keepers, whom he had caused drink hard the night before with others in the place till midnight, or by policy and craft, I dare not affirm.""* The next General Assembly was held in the Tolbooth of Perth on the 6th of August 1572, and as it may be viewed as having sanctioned the Titular Episcopacy, its proceedings are of some importance. Erskine of Dun was unanimously chosen Moderator. One of the first decisions was a declaration that the Diocese of St Andrews, whatever might be its bounds, belonged exclusively to the Bishop, and to no other Superintendent, to " visit and plant kirks." The titular Archbishop requested that as the Diocese was extensive, and he was unable to discharge the whole duty person- ally, some of the " godliest and best learned" might be appointed, with whom he could consult about the order of the Diocese. Erskine of Dun, Spottiswoode, Robert Pont, John Craig, and Andrew Hay, commissioner for Clydesdale, were, at the request of the titular Archbishop, associated with him as a kind of " coun- cil." They next appointed a committee to revise the " heads and articles concluded at Leith in the month of January last, betwixt my Lord Regent's Grrace, the Secret Council, and commissioners of the Kirk." The most conspicuous persons of this committee were Erskine of Dun, Winram, John Craig, William Christison, John Row, David Ferguson, Robert Pont, David Lindsay. Altogether thirteen were appointed, to consider and report. Two days afterwards the Committee gave in the result of their delibei^ations, " requiring the tohole Assemhly to adhere to the same.'''' ' Bannatvne's Meinorialles, p. 234, 235, 219. 1572.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE, 117 The substance of their report was that by the adoption of certain ecclesiastical titles, such as Archbishop, Dean, Chancellor, and Chapter, neither they nor their brethren who convened at Leith intended any recognition of " papistrie or superstition," but they unanimously wished " rather the said names to be changed into others that are not slanderous or offensive ; and in like manner protest, that the said heads and articles agreed upon be only re- ceived as an interim, until farther and more perfect order be ob- tained at the hands of the King's Majesty's Regent and nobility." The Assembly " in one voice" ratified this report. It was also suggested that in future the title Bishop should alone be used ; that as the names Chapter, Dean, Arch-Dean, Chancellor, were dis- liked by numbers, other designations meaning precisely the same should be adopted which would give less offence, such as that the Chapter should be called the Bishop's Assemble/, and the Dean the Moderator of that Assembly — that " as to the functions of Deans, Archdeacons, and Chancellors, some be appointed by the present Assembly to try and give in their judgment concerning the said functions, how far they shall extend in particular, and also toward the functions of the Abbots and Priors, and of the interchanging of all their names to others more agreeable to God's word, and the policies of the best Reformed Kirks." The whole to be reported to the next Assembly, or to the Parliament, if any meeting inter- vened." Knox, who was still at St Andrews in such a state of illness that he signed himself in one of his letters half deid,* was unable to attend the Assembly, but he sent them a short epistle which was entrusted to the care of Winram and Pont. " Albeit," he wrote, " I have taken my leave not only of you, dear brethren, but also of the whole world and worldly affairs, yet, remaining in the flesh, I could not, cannot cease to admonish you of things which I know to be most prejudicial to the Kirk of Christ Jesus within this realm. Above all things preserve the Kirk from the bondage of the Universities. Persuade them to rule themselves peaceably and order the schools in Christ, but subject never the pulpit to their judgement, neither exempt them from your jurisdiction." • Knox to the Laird of Drumlanrig, '26th May 1572, Bannatvne's Memorialles, p. 236. 118 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1572. The meaning of this tirade against the Universities is not very clear, unless he refers particularly to the state of affairs at St An- drews, which might come under his notice during his residence there. Knox continues — " Farther, I have communicated my mind with these two dear brethren [Winram and Pont]. Hear them, and do as ye will answer before God." This refers to a paper which he transmitted with his letter, containing ten Articles which he urged the Assembly to consider and adopt with the sanction of the Regent. He requests that " all Bishoprics vacant may be presented, and qualified persons nominated thereunto, within a year after the vaiking thereof, according to the order taken in Leith by the commissioners of the nobility and of the Kirk in the month of January lasf — that no pensions of benefices be allowed without consent of the legal possessor, the Superintendent, or com- missioner of the district, or " q/" the Bishops lawfully elected accord- ing to the said order taken at LeitlC — that persons nominated Bishops be rejected if they " make not residence, or be slanderous, or found unworthy either in life or doctrine, by the judgment of the Kii-k" — and that " an Act be made, decerning and ordaining all Bishops admitted by the order of the Kirk now received, to give account of their whole rents and intromissions therewith once in the year."* It thus appears that Knox with almost his dying breath ap- proved of the resolutions of the Convention of Leith, introducing and establishing the Titular Episcopate subject to the General Assembly ; and yet with the knowledge of this fact JNIr Thomas M'Crie, a Dissenting Presbyterian teacher in Edinburgh, of the sect called " Original United Seceders," or popularly by the soub- riquet of Old or New Light Burghers^ has the effrontery to maintain the very reverse. In a series of lectures which he published, full of vulgar abuse, low scurrility, gross misrepresentations, and miser- able anecdotes pretending to be witty, this person the son of Knox's well known biographer, Dr M'Crie, states, with reference to the " phantom Bishops," as he designates the Titulars — " Still, however, the introduction of these nominal dignitaries threatened the future peace of the Church, and the prospect of the confusions to which it might give rise, embittered the last hours of Knox, " Booke of the Universall Kirke of Scotland, Part First, p. 248. 1572.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 119 whose ' dead hand and dying mice were raised against the innova- tion. Hume of Godscroft informs us that the Reformer rebuked Morton sharply for divers things, but especially for his labouring to set up and maintain the estate of Bishops."* Now, without reference to Hume of Godscroft as an authority, the whole of this as set by Mr Thomas M'Crie, a bitter Presbyterian enemy of the Episcopal Church, is utterly gratuitous. Knox, little more than three months before his death, wrote on the 5th of August 1572, to the General Assembly held at Perth, and among other matters entreated that " all Bishoprics vacant may he presented, and qualified persons nominated thereunto, within a year after the vaiking thereof, according to the order taken in Leith by the commissioners of the nobility and of the Kirk in tlie month of January last." In the account of Knox's last moments by his Secretary Bannatyne no " dead hand and dying voice," not a word was uttered against the Titular Episcopate, which he undeniably sanctioned by approving of the Convention in Leith ; and as to what he said to the Earl of Morton, who with Lord Boyd and Douglas of Drumlanrig, visited him on his death-bed a few days before he expired, Bannatyne expressly declares — " What purpose was among them none but themselves knew."-f- There is no doubt that Knox lived and died, unconscious to himself, in a state of schism, and as such the Pres- byterians are welcome to claim him if they please ; but it cannot be denied that he considered the Titular Episcopate as neither sinful nor unscriptural — a fact which Mr Thomas M'Crie ought to have ascertained before he added this to his collected mass of abuse with which his production abounds. In the Articles he transmitted by the hands of Winram and Pont to the Assembly at Perth, " he assented," says Dr Cook, " to the change of polity, for he advised the Assembly to petition the Regent that all vacant Bishoprics might be filled with qualified persons within a year after the vacancy had taken place, according to the order taken at Leith ; and he speaks of Bishops lawfully elected in conformity to that order. In the answer returned to him the Assembly informed him that they found his articles both reason- * Sketches of Scottish Church History embracing the Period from the Reformation to the Revolution, by the Rev. Thomas M'Crie, author of the " Life of Dr M'Crie." Edinburgh, 12mo. 1841, p. 07, 98. t Bannatyne's Memorialles, p. 285, 286. 120 THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. [1572. able and godly.'"* This answer was signed by Winrani, Lindsay, Pont, Row, Spottiswoode, Erskine of Dun, and the " Bishop of Oaithness.""-}- The Regent Mar died after a severe ilhiess at StirHng on the 29th of October 1572, though few expected that it would prove fatal ; and the Earl of Morton was elected his successor on the 24th of November, the very day on which Knox died in his house at Edinburgh. He had left St Andrews on the 17th of August, and he was in such a debilitated state that he did not reach Leith till the 23d. During his last illness, he was, according to Banna- tyne, who personally attended him, solely occupied in devotional exercises, and in receiving visits from his friends. Among the persons of rank who interested themselves in waiting upon him, were the Earls of Morton and Glencairn, Lords Ruthven and Lindsay, and the lay Bishop of Caithness. Knox, says Mr Tytler, " was scarcely to be called an aged man, not having completed his sixty-seventh year, but his life had been an incessant scene of theological and political warfare, and his ardent and restless intel- lect had worn out a frame which at no period had been a strong one." Of such a man as Knox little need be said in the present work. " None," as Mr Tytler observes, " who has studied the history of the times or his own writings, will deny that he was often fierce, unrelenting, and unscrupulous, but he was also disin- terested, upright, and sincere. He neither feared nor flattered the great ; the pomp of the mitre or the revenues of the wealthiest diocese had no attractions in his eyes ; and there cannot be a doubt of his sincerity, when in his last message to his old and long-tried friend Lord Burgliley, he assured him that he counted it higher honour to have been made the instrument that the gospel was simply and truly preached in his native country than to have been the highest prelate in England." The unfeeling and insolent conduct of Knox towards Queen Mary is one of the many instances of his " fierce and unrelenting " disposition, and his fore-knowledge of the horrid murder of David Riccio in the presence of his sovereign, which Mr Tytler has completely proved from authentic documents, shows that he was " unscrupulous," " Cook's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 185. t Booke of the Universal! Kirk of Scotland, Tart First, p. 2.50. 1572.] THE TITULAU OR TULCIIAN EPISCOrATE. 121 and that " on many occasions he acted upon the principle, so manifestly erroneous and unchristian, that the end justified the means."* His officious interference with the affairs of individuals excited against him numerous enemies, and many scandals were cir- lated of which he was the hero. Some of them are recorded by his servant Bannatyne. Knox was interred in the church-yard of St Giles at Edinburgh in the presence of the Regent Morton and several of the nobility. That cemetery, now covered with the buildings erected for the Supreme Courts of Scotland, then ex- tended from the south side of the church to the Cowgate, and the spot where Knox was buried was long traditionally preserved as having been almost directly in front of the equestrian statue of Charles II. in the Parliament Square. Knox was twice married. His first wife was Marjory Bowes, sometimes called Joane to distinguish her from another sister Margery, the fifth daughter of Sir George Bowes of Stretham, in the county of Durham, Knight Marshal, by whom he had two sons, Nathaniel and Eleazar. It is singular that Knox apparently took little interest in them, and even permitted them to be edu- cated in the principles of " Prelacy." A short time afterwards a notice occurs in the account of one of the meetings of the Gene- ral Af5sembly, that " Mr Knox had been in England to see his hainuT In 15GG they went to their mother's relations in England, and were educated at St John's College, Cambridge, their names being entered only eight days after their father s death. Nathaniel, the elder son, died Fellow of St John's in 1 580 ; and Eleazar was appointed one of the University Preachers. He was also ad- mitted to the vicarage of Great Clacton in Essex, died in 1591, and was interred in the chapel of St'John's College. Both died without issue. Knox's second wife was Margaret, daughter of Andrew Lord Stewart of Ochiltree, and sister of James Earl of Arran. By her he had three daughters, respectively named Martha, Margaret, and Ehzabeth, who were subsequently married to Presbyterian ministers — Robert Pont, minister of St Cuthberts, James Fleming, and the zealous Jolni Welsh of Ayr. The marriage of Knox to a lady in the rank of his second wife occasioned many jocular • Tytlci-s Hislorv- of Scotlnnd, 8vo. edit. vol. vii. p. 101, 127-138. 122 THE TITULAR OR TULCIIAN EPISCOPATE. [1572. observations, more especially as the disparity of years was consider- able, and the person and manners of the bridegroom were not particularly fascinating, a contemporary describing him as " ane auld blak carle," and very facetiously ranking the lady among the " pious sisterhood " of her day. She survived the Reformer, and married Sir Andrew Ker of Faldounside. She received a pen- sion of 500 merks, two chalders of wheat, six of barley, and four of oats for the year 1573. The writings of Knox are chiefly political and controversial. Archbishop Spottiswoode alleges that he was not the author of the work entitled the " Historie of the Reformatioun of Religioun within the Realm of Scotland," which bears his name ;* but the " supplication " of his servant Bannatyne to the General Assem- bly in 1573, places its genuineness beyond doubt. He declared that Knox had " continued and perfectly ended " the narrative to the year 1564 ; — " so that of things done since, nothing by him is put in that form and order as he hath done the former, yet not the less there are certain scrolls, papers, and minutes of things left to me by him, to be used at my pleasure, whereof a part were written and subscribed with his own hands, and another by mine at his command." He proceeds to state that the " said scrolls are so untacked and mixed together, that they were in danger of being lost if they fell into hands not accustomed to them, and that as he was unable to do so at his own expense, he requests a " reasonable pension " for his trouble. The sum of L.40 was allowed him for the purpose, and proper persons were associated with him in the publication of the work. Thus far have we traced the progress of the ecclesiastical polity introduced by the Scottish Reformers as it respects the Superin- tendent System, previous to the establishment of the Titular Episcopate. It was the boast of John Row, one of the most " " As to the History of the Church ascribed commonly to him," says the Arch- bishop, " the same was not his work, but his name supposed to give it credit ; for be- sides the scurril discourses we find in it, more fitting a comedian on a stage than a divine or minister, such as Mr Knox was, and the spiteful malice that another ex- presseth against the Queen Regent [consort of James V., and mother of Queen Mary] ; speaking of one of our martyrs, he remitteth the reader to a farther declaration of his sufferings to the Acts and Monuments set forth by Mr Fox, an Englishman, which came not to light some ten or twelve years after Mr Knox's death." History of the Church and State of Scotland, folio, 1677, p. 207. 1572.] THE TITULAR OR TULCHAN EPISCOPATE. 123 prominent of them, that they " took not their example from any Kirk in the world, no, not from Geneva." Independents, Method- ists, Baptists, and every sect, however extravagant, set forth similar pretensions, and have the same right to do so as the Pres- byterians, because this presumptuous boast of sectarianism, in any form by which it is characterized, results from the same dan- gerous source — the pernicious adoption of private judgment in opposition to ecclesiastical authority in all ages. It is one of the melancholy examples of men thinking that they ought to run as far as possible from what they are induced to hate. We need not, therefore, be surprized at the unsuccessful result of crude and ill-di- gested schemes, the offspring of private opinions, heated imagina- tions, and partyresentment, all deeply intermingled with the political strife and animosities of the times. " As the Scottish Eeforma- tion," it is alleged in a well known periodical not particularly friendly to the Episcopal Church,* " did not originate in native learning, so it did not even come recommended to the Scottish people by the learned authority of its propagators. In relation to other national reformers, the Eeformer of Scotland was an unlet- tered man. ' Compared with Knox,' says a gi-eat German writer, ' Luther was a timorous boy;' but if Knox surpassed Luther himself in intrepidity, even Luther was a learned theologian by the side of Knox. With the exception of Melville, who obtained what erudition he possessed abroad, the religion of the people of Scotland could boast of no theologian worthy of the name. Some remarkable divines, indeed, Scotland has possessed, but these were all adherents of that Church which for a season was esta- blished by the will of the monarch in opposition to the wishes of the nation. The two Forbeses, to say nothing of Leighton, Burnet, and Sage, were Episcopalians. In fact, the want of popular support made it necessary for the divines of that Esta- blishment to compensate by the strength of their theological learn- ing for the weakness of their political position." • Edinburgh Review, October 183G, p. 113, IH. 124 [1572-3. CHAPTER V. THE TITULAR BISHOPS — THEIR HUMILIATING POSITION — PRO- CEEDINGS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES — THEIR PRESBYTERIAN OPPONENTS. The Earl of Morton was confirmed in the Regency by a Conven- tion held at Edinburgh on the 24th of November 1572, which was attended by the Titular Archbishop of St Andrews, the lay Bishop of Caithness, and Bishop Bothwell of Orkney. His first Parlia- ment met also at Edinburgh on the 26th of January following. The first act was " anent the true and Haly Kirk and the " lawful Archbishops, Bishops, Superintendents, and Commis- sioners of the Dioceses and Provinces of the Realm," were en- joined to proceed vigorously against all the determined adherents of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy, under the penalty of " tynsall." or loss of the fruits of their benefices for one year to the Kings's use. Another act was passed, prohibiting the " adversaries of Christ's Evangel," by whom were meant the Romanists, from en- joying the " patrimony of the Kirk," which the " Archbishops, Bishops, Superintendents, Possessors, or Titulars of Prelacies," and the General Assembly were to enforce. It was also enacted that none were to be considered " loyal and dutiful subjects," if they re- fused or delayed to " make their profession of the true religion;" and they were imperatively commanded to " fortify, assist, and main- tain the true preachers and professors of Chryst's religion against whatsomever enemies and gainstanders," concluding with a de- nouncement of the " cruel decrees of the Council of Trent, which most injuriously is called by the adversaries of God's truth the 1572-3.] THE TITULAR BISHOPS, 125 Haly League." An act was passed regulating manses and glebes, and the parish churches were ordered to be repaired.* It is already stated that the Titular Prelates whom the change in affairs called into existence were Douglas of St Andrews, and James Paton, who was appointed to Dunkeld in 1571, when the See was declared to be vacant by the forfeiture of Bishop Crichton. The name of this Titular occurs in the List of Ministers, Exhorters, and Readers in 1567, as minister of Muckhart, a parish in the south-eastern part of the county of Perth, on the banks of the Devon. John Porterfield was also nominated titular Archbishop of Glasgow in 1571, in which he continued little more than a year, when he was succeeded by James Boyd, proprietor of the estate of Trochrig, the second son of Adam Boyd of Pinkhill, a younger brother of Alexander Boyd, father of Robert third Lord Boyd, ancestor of the Earls of Kilmarnock. Bishop Keith describes him as " a very worthy person," who " exercised the office of par- ticular pastor at the cathedral church, the Barony of Glasgow being then the parish that pertained to that church. Orkney and Caithness were still possessed, the former by Bishop Bothwell, the latter by the lay Titular Stewart. The Titular of Dunblane was not appointed till 1574, in the person of Andrew Graham, who is styled " preacher of the word of God," and who was the second son of William first Earl of Montrose by his third marriage, as is stated in the Peerage Lists, but in the Acts of the General As- sembly he is styled son to Graham of Morphie, a cadet of the Mon- trose Family, which is the correct statement. The presentation of this Titular to Dunblane caused a " difficultie" to the General Assembly held in March 1574^5, he having never been even a preacher^ but this objection was overruled, because they had not decided whether it was necessary that all " Bishops," as they styled the Titulars, should first be preachers, and Graham was ordered to be admitted if found qualified. For this purpose he was ordered to " exercise " or lecture on the beginning of the fifth chapter of the' Epistle to the Romans on a specified day in the Magdalene Chapel, which still stands in the Cowgate of Edinburgh, before the " Bishops, Superintendents, and ministers that may be " Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iii. p. 71, 72, 73, 76. 126 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1572-3. present, and especially before the minister of Edinburgh."* Aber- deen had no Titular till after the death of Bishop Gordon in 1579, when David Cunninghame, minister of St Nicholas in New Aber- deen, was appointed. George Douglas, an illegitimate son of Archi- bald sixth Earl of Angus, was nominated titular Bishop of Moray in 1573. Brechin was possessed by Alexander Campbell, of the Ardkinglas family ; and Bishop Leslie of Eoss, though one of the overthrown Hierarchy, and absent in England, was undisturbed in his nominal possession of the See, which he retained till his death in 1596. No Titular was appointed to Galloway, and none to The Isles after the death of Carswell, which occurred in 1572, till about 1575, when a " Bishop of the Isles" is recorded as present in the General Assembly held in August that year ;-|- but he is not men- tioned by Keith ; and none to Argyll till 1580, when Neil Camp- bell, minister of Kilmartin, was nominated. It thus appears that only a few Titulars were considered necessary to represent the defunct Spiritual Estate in Parliament. The name of John, " Bishop of Sanct Andrews," occurs several times in the account of the proceedings of the General Assembly held in March 1572-3 at Edinburgh, when several complaints were preferred against him. One of these was by Mr John Brand, minister of Holyroodhouse, who alleged that the titular Arch- bishop had authorized a Popish priest named Forrest to administer the sacrament of baptism at Swinton in Berwickshire, in violation of the injunctions of Spottiswoode the Superintendent. Douglas answered that "the foresaid priest had recanted all papistrie in the kirk of St Andrews, and thereafter he admitted him to administer the sacrament of baptism." The Titular was farther accused of not visiting the parish churches within Fife for six months past, and " also for not preaching since he was a Bishop." To this he replied that he " preached in every kirk which he visited by him- self at all times, but excused his not visitation since the last As- sembly by reason of his sickness." Some complaints were lodged against the titular Archbishop in the General Assembly held in Edinburgh in August 1573, but " Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 325. t Ibid. p. 331. 1573.] THEIR flUMILIATING SITUATION. 127 were merely connected with the mode in which he discharged his functions. Paton, the Titular of Dunkeld, was also subjected to an investigation. It was alleged that he " had received the name of a Bishop, but they had not heard that he had used the office within his bounds." He answered that he " had lately received that Bishopric, and that there was a Superintendent continued in that bounds tiU this Assembly." The other accusations against him were that he had not proceeded against Papists, and par- ticularly against John Stewart, fourth Earl of AthoU, who was well known to be a zealous Roman Catholic, and who, with Lords Sommerville and Borthwick, had strongly opposed the Reformation in 1560 — that he had made a simonaical compact about the profits of his Bishopric with the Earl of Argyll — and that he had voted in Parliament in favour of a certain act of divorce which had been passed in opposition to the sentiments of the General Assembly.* At this meeting Bishop Gordon of Galloway was charged with divers offences, and ordered to make public re- pentance in sackcloth three several Sundays in St Giles' church, the College church, and St Cuthbert's church, Edinburgh. The Titular of Dunkeld was peremptorily ordered to visit his Diocese after the Assembly was dissolved, to enforce the act of Parlia- ment " against Papists, of what degree so ever they be," and all other criminal persons, and to report at the next meeting. Mean- while intimations were given to appoint days for the election of the titular Archbishop of Glasgow, the titular Bishops of Moray, Ross, and Dunblane, and of a " suffragan" for the Titular of St Andrews in Lothian. Commissioners were ordered to be in all provinces where Bishops were not placed — the Parliament was to be petitioned respecting the repairs of those cathedrals used as parish churches, and as the most part of the canons, monks, and friars within the realm had made profession of the " true religion," they were enjoined to serve as readers,-f The General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 6th of March 1573-4, was attended by five Titulars of the " phantom Episcopate" — John " Bishop" of St Andrews, James " Bishop" of Glasgow, James " Bishop" of Dunkeld, George " Bishop" of Moray, and • Booke of tha Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 270. t Ibid. p. 280, 283. 128 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1574. Robert " Bishop" of Caithness. The proceedings appear to have commenced with the usual complaints against the Titular of St Andrews for neglecting his duty, and he urged his constant excuse that " he had been continually sick." The Titular of Dun- keld was again arraigned for not excommunicating the Earl of AthoU and his second Countess, Margaret, third daughter of Malcolm third Lord Fleming, and successively relict of the eldest son of the Earl of Montrose, and of the eldest son of the Earl of Mar. This lady was probably the more obnoxious to the leaders of the Assembly because it was generally believed that she pos- sessed the power ^f incantation, and had contrived, when Queen Mary gave birth to James VI., to transfer all the pains of child- labour to a certain dame patrimonially designated Lady Rires. The Titular very naturally had no inclination to incur the resent- ment of such a near and powerful neighbour as the Earl of Atholl, who then resided in great splendour on his own extensive domain, having at his command a numerous and fearless clan. He admit- ted the neglect, and was ordered not only to confess his fault pub- licly in the cathedral church of Dunkeld, but to pronounce the sentence of excommunication within forty days, and to report to the Regent Morton, with whom the Earl of Atholl was then at feud. A more serious charge was preferred against the Titular of Moray. He was accused of fornication, which he seems to have admitted, for he alleged that " after admonition given him he had abstained from all cohabitation with the said woman." He was ordered to " purge himself before the Assembly of the said crime," and a committee was appointed to summon the " Chapter of Moray" before them for irregularity in his election. The Titular satisfied a subsequent General Assembly for the " slander" under which he laboured, and was no more troubled on the matter. This Assembly sent a complaint to the Regent Morton, setting forth that they were much disappointed at the absence of his Grace and the nobility, which was to them '• most dolorous and lamentable," as it caused the non-attendance of many members who " well cannot be absent from the treating of these things that appertain to the Kirk and policie thereof in Assembly together," and to the " which end the Assemblies are appointed." They in- form the Regent that they extended their admonition to all per- sons, of whatever rank, who were then with him, and especially 1574.] THEIR HUMILIATING SITUATION. 129 the Bishops and " such as are of the ministry." This may have some reference to a Convention held by the Regent in Holyrood- house on the 5th of March, the day before their Assembly met, in which it was declared, that although since the " alteration of re- ligion the liberty of the Evangell has been enjoyed in unity of doc- trine, yet is there not to this day any perfect policy by laws and constitutions set out, how the Kirk in all degrees shall be govern- ed in decent and comely order, by which sundry inconveniences have followed, and more are like to occur hereafter, if timely remedy be not provided." The Estates nominated a commission to " con- vene, confer, reason, and put in form the ecclesiastical policy and order of the governing of the Kirk, as they shall find most agree- able to the truth of God's word, and most convenient for the state and people of the realm." The Commission consisted of John Lord Glammis, Chancellor, the titular Archbishop of Glas- gow, Bishop Bothwell of Orkney, the Commendators of Dunferm- line, Newbattle, Deer, and Pittenweem, James Macgill of Nether Rankeilour, Clerk Register, Sir James Bellenden, Lord Justice- Clerk, David Borthwick, King's Advocate, John Erskine of Dun, John Winram, John Spottiswoode, Alexander Arbuthnot, Princi- pal of King's College in Old Aberdeen, James Lawson, the successor of Knox as minister of Edinburgh, and David Lindsay of Leith."* They were all present, and were ordered to meet on the 14th of the same month of March in Holyroodhouse, to " draw a form of the said ecclesiastical policy," to be submitted to the Estates at their next convention, and by their advice presented to the Par- liament, that the whole, or part of it, may be sanctioned by law. Nothing, however, appears to have resulted from this Commission, at least their proceedings are not recorded. The situation of the Titular Bishops, and the domination over them by the General Assembly, are evident from sundiy resolu- tions at this meeting. It was declared that the " jurisdiction of Bishops in their ecclesiastical function " shall not exceed that of Superintendents, which they previously had and still have," and that, hke them, the said " Bishops" shall be " subject to the dis- cipline of the General Assembly as members thereof." The Titu- lars were also prohibited from collating to any benefice within the • Acta Pad. Scot. vol. iii. p. 89. 9 130 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1574. bounds of the Superintendents without their wittcn consent, and even the consent of three " well qualified ministers" was necessary before appointment to parishes within their own limits. Erskine, Spottiswoode, and Winram, resigned their office as Superintendents, and Robert Pont, " in respect that George Douglas is admitted Bishop of Moray, demitted his office of commissioner'''' for that Diocese. These details evince the miserable state of ecclesiastical affairs in Scotland at that period, when the Church was extinct, and the instruction of the people, the administration of the sacraments, and the whole clerical functions, usurped by self-constituted preach- ers. As to the Titular Episcopate, it was so utterly lifeless, in- efficient, and contemptible, that it is astonishing how the men in- vested with it had the boldness to call themselves, and the pre- sumption to consider themselves. Bishops in any sense. Yet that they did so is evident from their signatures, and their seals, on which their names are paraded as if they had been duly conse- crated Prelates, and part of the great succession of the Christian ministry. Much of the deplorable inefficiency of the system which prevailed is ascribed by Presbyterian writers to the conduct of the Regent Morton, who is accused of not only oppressing the people generally to gratify his avarice by extorting money, but of refus- ing to pay the stipends of the preachers, and even spurning the functions of those personages whom Dr Cook magniloquently terms " the venerable Superintendents, the fathers of the Protestant Establishment in Scotland."* Whatever truth may be in such charges, it is evident from Morton's conduct that he was dissatis- fied with the whole affair; he felt the responsibility of his situation as the head of the Government, and he was harassed and dis- gusted at those innovations in ecclesiastical polity which were continually in agitation in the General Assemblies, sowing the seeds of strife among the peaceable, and aiming at no practicable, intelligible, or satisfactory arrangement. Such was the state of affairs when Andrew Melville made his appearance in Scotland in July 1574. As this individuaFs history is zealously pourtrayed by a Presbyterian \vriter of local note,-f- • Cook's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. i. p. 235-241. •f Life of Andrew Melyille, containing Illustrations of the Literary and Ecclesias- l-)74.] THEIR HUMILIATING SITUATION. 131 who lias set forth all the said Melville's actions and sentiments in the most favourable manner to serve his own party, it would occupy too much space to enter into biographical details in the present work of his birth, connections, and educational career. It is enough to state that he was born in 1545 at Baldovie, on the banks of the South Esk, near Montrose, an estate of which his father, who fell in the battle of Pinkie, was the proprietor — that he ac- quired the rudiments of the Latin and Greek languages from a Frenchman named Marsilliers, who was patronized in the school of Montrose by Erskine of Dun — that he proceeded to the Uni- versity of St Andrews, where his abilities attracted the notice of the afterwards titular Archbishop Douglas then Rector — that he went to France in 1564, and distinguished himself at the Univer- sity of Paris, whence he removed to Poictiers, and was appointed Regent in St Marceon's College there — and that he went subse- quently to Geneva, and was presented to the chair of Humanity then vacant in that Academy or University. At Geneva he became intimately acquainted with Beza and other distinguished persons of the Calvinistic school. After an absence of ten years Melville returned to Scotland in 1574, and was " the first," as it is quaintly stated upwards of a century after his arrival, " who kindled the combustions in this Church by introducing the discipline of Geneva among us." This is of course denied by the Presbyterian writers, but the evidence of its truth, as previously adduced from the Acts of General Assemblies in their " Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland," is complete and satisfactory to any unprejudiced inquirer. Wodrow affirms that the Presbyterianism subsequently introduced by Melville was kept in view in all the measures adopt- ed from the Reformation ; but Dr Cook denies this statement, de- claring that the said Wodrow is " wrong" in so expressing him- self. A more recent Presbyterian writer, Mr W. M. Hethering- ton, ex-minister of Torphichen in Linlithgowshire — a person ani- mated, like most of the preachers of his views, by the most malig- nant hatred towards the Episcopal Church, of the true history and principles of which he is in utter ignorance, must needs make a tical History of Scotland during the latter part of the Sixteenth and beginning of the Seventeenth Century, by Thomas M'Crie, D.D., Minister of the Gospel, Edinburgh, Author of the " Life of John Knox," Edinburgh, 2 vols. 1819. 132 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1574. similar flourish to that of Wodrow, He asserts, and most truly, for the fact can be and has been repeatedly demonstrated, that " Episcopalians are in the habit of ascribing the decided Presby- terian form of church government in Scotland to the personal in- fluence of Andrew Melville, who had brought, say they, from Geneva the opinions of Calvin and Beza, and succeeded in infusing them into the Scottish ministers, who had previously been favour- able to a modified Prelacy." Yet in the face of the undeniable fact that such meetings called Presbyteries and Synods were not known or heard of in Scotland for upwards of twenty years after the Reform- ation, and notwithstanding the details previously given of the proceedings of the General Assemblies with which the Titular Bishops were associated, the Presbyterian preacher at Torphichen has the effrontery to say — " The Reformed Church of Scotland was from the beginning, and always has been, so far as she has been enabled to exhibit and act upon her own principles, decidedly opposed to Prelacy, taking neither her creed, her form of govern- ment, nor her discipline, from any other Church, but from the word of God alone, and in principle, aim, and endeavour, always essentially and determinedly Presbyterian."* A writer in a cele- brated periodical flatly contradicts this dogmatical and presump- tuous assertion. He observes that after the Reformation, " for nearly centuries Scotland, compared with other countries, may be broadly stated to have been without a Theology," and he alludes to the Presbyterians, for he explicitly states in the passage previously cited that " some remarkable divines indeed Scotland has produced, but these were all adherents of that Church which for a reason was established by the will of the monarch in opposition to the wishes of the nation." The reviewer proceeds to the utter annihilation of the Presbyterian preacher at Torphichen's ar- rogant declamation about the origin of this schism in the " Word of God :" — " The Reformation in Scotland, and the institution of the Scottish Church, were not indigenous — were not the conclusion of a native tlieology. In Scotland the new opinions were a communication from abroad. The polity and principles of the Scottish Church were borrowed — harrowed from • Hetherington's History of the " Church" of Scotland, Edinburgh, Svo. 1812, p. 1.33, 134. 1574.] THEIR HUMILIATING SITUATION. 133 Calvin and Geneva ; and it was only one, and one of the least prominent, of the many Oalvinist and Presbyterian churches throughout Europe. At the same time it was neither the creature nor the favourite of the Prince.* The truth is, that in Scotland the Church Catholic became extinct from the Refor- mation to IGIO, for neither can the ill-digested Superintendent System, with its array of " Ministers, Exhorters, and Readers," nor the miserable Titular Episcopacy incorporated with it, nor the human inventions introduced by Andrew Melville under the name of Presbyterianism, nor all three put together, be considered as entitled to any connection with the true and apostolic Church. As to the Titular Episcopacy, even Dr ISI'Crie, with all his Pres- bjlerian narrowness, rightly observes — " This mongrel species of Prelacy cannot meet the approbation of any true EpiscopaHan. Though certain eager advocates of primitive order, and the unin- terrupted succession of the Hierarchy, have pei'sisted in maintain- ing that Episcopacy always existed in Scotland, and in support of this plea have appealed among other things to the transactions at Leith, yet they have generally shewn themselves reluctant and shy in claiming kindred with the Tulchan Prelates whenever their true original and real condition were exposed. And, indeed, how could they acknowledge, as legitimate bishops, men who professed as little of the episcopal power as they did of the episcopal re- venues, who were subject to the authority of an assembly com- posed of pretended presbyters and mere laics, by whom they were liable to be tried, censured, suspended and deposed, and who, in one word, were utterly destitute of canonical consecration."f " Edinburgh Review, 183G, vol. Ixiv. p. 112. " All our sovereigns seem to have entertained an aversion to the Presbyterian form of church government, and to have taken every opportunity in their power to subvert it, and to establish the Episcopalian scheme." Aiton's History of the Rencontre at Drumclog and Battle at Bothwell Bridge, 1821, p. 22. t Life of Andrew Melville, vol. i. p. 151. Dr M'Crie is quite right in stating that no true Episcopalian ever could claim " kindred with the Tulchan Prelates," whether their " true original and real condition" were " fairly exposed or not." Being " utter- ly destitute of canonical consecration," they were, like his " pretended presbyters [though he used the word pretended ironically] and mere laics," intruders into the sacred office, and every att they performed was ecclesiastically invalid. It is distress- ing to think of the mockeries seriously practised in Scotland in those times under the name of " the Church," and Bishop Keith is severely censurable for inserting those men in the episcopal succession of the Sees in his Catalogue of Scottish Bishops. 134 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1574. It seems that Melville was induced to return to Scotland by the representations of a certain Andrew Polwart, who was then in Geneva as the companion of Alexander Campbell, the titular Bishop of Brechin. This is Dr M'Crie's statement, but Dr Cook makes the chief adviser to have been no less a personage than the Titular himself, " who happened to visit Geneva, and convinced that his [Melville's] abilities would be of much service to the cause of religion in Scotland, he earnestly requested him to re- nounce the situation which he held, and to visit his native land." It is difficult to say where Dr Cook discovered this glowing char- acter of the contemptible Titular of Brechin — a mere creature of the Earl of Argyll, who dilapidated the ecclesiastical patrimony in the most shameful manner in favour of his patron, and whose sa- crilegious transactions in alienating the church property from 1566 to 1605 are evident from the charters granted by him preserved among the records of Brechin. Melville, however, returned from Geneva with his friend the Titular and the said Polwart. He no sooner arrived in Edinburgh than he was visited by the celebrated George Buchanan, and also by Alexander Hay, clerk to the Privy Council, and Colonel James Halyburton, who were commissioned by the Regent Morton to offer him the appointment of domestic in- structor in his household until a situation became vacant ; but Mel- ville refused the offer, and retired to his brother's house of Baldo- vie, where he occupied himself some months in superintending the education of James Melville his nephew, afterwards an eminent Presbyterian preacher, who had been in his youth a zealous ad- mirer of the sermons of John Knox in St Andrews. Melville arrived at Edinburgh in the beginning of July 1574, and Douglas, the Titular of St Andrews, died on the last day Winram assisted at the " inauguration" of John Douglas as Titular of St Andrews, and " was popishly and in consequence episcopaUij and canonieally ordained," and as he held the office of " Sub-Prior of the Abbey, and as such Vicar-General during the vacancy of the See," Dr M'Ci-ie innocently asks — " Will not these two circumstances, joined to the tertium quid of his being a Superintendent, make him if not formaliter, at least virtualiter a Bishop ?" It is really amusing to find a man like Dr M'Crie, of some pre- tensions to research, indulging in this frivolous question. Though Winram had held a dozen of ecclesiastical preferments, the whole of them could not constitute him vir- tualiter a Bishop. He lived and died a schismatical presb3'ter, and had as much right to be considered a regularly and canonieally consecrated Bishop as Dr M'Crie himself, or any other Presbyterian minister. 1574.] THEIR HUMILIATING SITUATION. 135 of that month the same year. This caused a vacancy in the Tul- chan Primacy at the disposal of the Regent, who appears to have resolved to appoint Patrick Adamson, at that time officiating as one of his chaplains. A serious charge is brought against Melville at this crisis, which, if true, exhibits him not as the honest and con- scientious Presbyterian zealot, but as actuated in his subsequent con- duct by disappointed ambition. Though he had refused the Regent's offer to become his domestic preceptor from motives which are not sufficiently clear, he was in idle retirement at his brother's house of Baldovie, and it is possible that his vanity might have been gratified by the offer of the Titular preferment, which would have closely connected him with the University of St Andrews, though he may have refused the nomination. The Regent had never publicly intimated who w^s to be the successor of Douglas in the Titular Primacy, but " it was Mr Andrew Melville's misfor- tune that he was neglected, and therefore, in the year 1.575, he stir- red one Mr Dury to impugn the episcopal order and all imparity."* Such is the accusation, though it is difficult to reconcile it with Melville's avowed principles, which, though sufficiently insolent, were characterized by a kind of blunt sincerity. It must also be remembered that Bishop Sage quotes a letter from Melville to Beza, written in 1579, in which the former mentions that for five years he had not ceased to fight against the Titular Episcopacy, shewing that he had never lost sight of his project, and that he must have at least secretly promoted it after his return to Scotland. f A letter was sent by Beza with Melville to the General Assembly, recommending his friend for his piety and learning, and stating that the greatest affection Geneva could evince to Scotland was that the former had suffered itself to be " robbed," that the latter might be " enriched." Dr M'Crie also informs us that Beza's letter, and " the report of Polwart and the Bishop of Brechin • Extract from a MS. Narrative, said to be " written by a person of great honour and true learning," about the " several periods of Episcopacy and Presbytery in the Church of Scotland," in " An Apology for the Clergy of Scotland, chiefly opposed to the Censures, Calumnies, and Accusation of a late Presbyterian Vindicator," alleged to have been written by the Very Rev. Dr Monro, the ejected Principal of the Uni- versity of Edinburgh at the Revolution. London, 4to. 1693, p. 60. ■f Fundamental Charter of Presbytery examined, p. 217, 218 (?) 136 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1574. spread the fame of his erudition throughout the country." This would not be difficult to do, notwithstanding the questionable honour of a testimonial from such a despicable person as the Titu- lar of Brechin and the obscure Mr Polwart, in a country such as Scotland then was, in which the Presbyterians continued for nearly two centuries to be far behind all other national establishments in theological, and consequently in classical erudition for as it has been truly observed, the Presbyterian system " was neither the offspring of learning nor of power, and after being long upheld by the nation in defiance of every effort of the Government, it was finally established by a revolution.''''* This, in plain language, intimates that the whole change of religion in Scotland was ef- fected by an illiterate mob. Beza''s letter recommendatory of Melville was favourably re- ceived in the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 7th of August 1574 ; but he is only noticed in the proceedings as one of a Committee, consisting of George Buchanan, James Lawson, and Peter Young, described as " pedagogue to our Sovereign Lord,''''-f- appointed to revise the " History of J ob, compiled in Latin verse, by Mr Patrick Adamson," and if " found by them agreeable to the truth of God''s word, to authorize the same with testimony of their hand writ and subscription."! Adamson wrote the above men- • Edinburgh Review, 1836, vol. Ixiv. p. 112, 113. t Mr. Peter Young, one of James VI. preceptors, was lay Abbot of Dryburgli, and is described by Sir James Melville as a person of " milder mood" than his colleague the " Right Honourable" George Buchanan, who was lay Abbot of Crossraguel, an ap- pointment he received from Queen Mary. " Master Peter Young was genteeler, and was loth to offend the King at any time, and used [conducted] himself warily, as a man that had a mind of his own weill by keeping of his Majestie's favour." He was sent to Denmark, after the departure of Frederic IPs ambassadors, who came to Scot- land in 1585, ostensibly to claim the Orkney and Shetland, and bringing the money with them for their restoration to the Danish crown ; but in reality to inform the Scottish King that Frederic had " twa docliters, and was willing either to g^ve him his choice of them, or that he would accept the ane of them as it should please the father to be- stow, whilk should be the most comely, and the best for his princely contentment." — " Master Peter Young was sent into Denmark to thank that King and see his dochters, that he might make report again of his liking them, with a promise that Ins Majesty should .send them or it were lang ane honorable ambassade." Historie of King James the Sext, and Introduction to " Letters to King James the Sixth fi-om the Queen, Prince Henry, Prince Charles, Princess Elizabeth," &c. by Sir Patrick Walker, printed for the Maitland Club. Edinburgh, 4to. 1835, p. vi. ix. $ Books of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 310. 1574.] TIIKIR HUMILIATING SITUATION. 137 tioned " History,''"' or poetical version of the Book of Job, and the Tragedy of that Herod who was smote by an angel, also in Latin verse, apparently before 1573, when he nari'owly escaped murder at Bouvges, in which place he was during the massacre perpe- trated at Paris on St Bartholomew's Day, with his pupil Macgill of Nether Eankeillor. It is stated in his Preface to his Poem on Job that he was compelled to conceal himself seven months in the house of a publican, who for his compassion to " heretics" was thrown from the roof and killed, when upwards of seventy years old. Adamson had sent copies of both Poems to Lyons and Paris to be printed. The ensuing civil wars prevented their publication, and their author recovered one of the copies very accidentally which had been sent to his friend Lambinus at Paris, at whose death Dr Henry Blackwood discovered amonghis papersboth pieces, and trans- mitted them to Adamson, who printed them in 1572, and their appearance secured for him considerable reputation. The opinions of Melville, Buchanan, and their colleagues on Adamson's Poems are not officially recorded, but it may be inferred that it was fa- vourable, as in a subsequent Assembly he is included among cer- tain persons who are styled " well-beloved brethren" nominated for " reading and answering bills and complaints." Although, however, Melville was merely appointed one of a committee to revise the Poem of Adamson, and was not present in the Assembly, his merits were not overlooked. It was proposed to appoint him Principal Provost of St Mary's College in St Andrews vacant by the death of Douglas, but Boyd, the Titular of Glasgow, sup- ported by Andrew Hay, who acted as " commissioner of the West," so strongly represented the miserable condition of the University of Glasgow, that Melville was induced to prefer the claims of that seminary, which had suffered severely from the changes caused by the Reformation. He accordingly became Principal of the Uni- versity, and by his exertions restored its efficiency as an academi- cal institution. The conduct of the Titulars of Dunkeld and Moray was again discussed in this Assembly of August 1574, the former on some of the usual charges, especially for not excommunicating the Earl of Atlioll, for which he admitted he could " allege no lawful excuse," and the latter about the mode of his admission or election by the so called Dean and Chapter to the Bishopric. As the details are 138 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1574. of no particular interest, it is unnecessary to glance at these and other local proceedings. As a proof, however, that no avowed intention existed of abrogating the Titular Episcopate and intro- ducing Presbyterianism, among the articles ordered to be laid be- fore the Regent, it was resolved — " Because there are sundry Bishoprics vacant, such as Dunblane, Ross,* and others, that his Grace would take order that some qualified persons be provided thereto with diligence."f The Titular of Dunkeld was prohibited from administering the " Holy Supper upon week days at the kirks within his jurisdiction and peremptorily enjoined to ex- communicate the Earl of AthoU within forty days, " under the pain of suspension from his said office." The Titular was present, and " interponed his faithful promise but he offended their dig- nity by leaving the Assembly on the following day without their permission, for which he was ordered to be " delated at their next meeting." John Brand of Holyroodhouse was threatened with de- privation of his office if he delayed to excommunicate Bishop Gordon of Galloway, in the event of that Prelate not " satisfying the Kirk " before a specified day ; and their " loved brethren, Mr Robert Graham, Archdeacon of Ross, and Mr John Robertson, Treasurer thereof," were commissioned " conjunctly and severally to pass to the counties of Caithness and Sutherland, and there to visit kirks, colleges, and schools, and other places needful within the said bounds, and in the same to plant ministers, readers, elders, and deacons, schoolmasters, and other members necessary for erecting a perfect Reformed Kirk, suspend for a time, or simr pKciter deprive such as they shall find unworthy or not apt for their office, whether it be for crimes committed or ignorance ; abolish, eradicate, and destroy all monuments of idolatry ; establish and set up the true wprship of God as well in cathedral and col- legiate kirks, as in other places within the said bounds, conform to the order taken and agreed on in the Book of Discipline."! The proceedings of the next General Assembly, held at Edin- burgh on the 7th of March 1574-5, develope the position of the • Ross was not vacant, Bishop Leslie being still the Bishop, though not in Scotland ; but he was evidently considered to be no longer the Diocesan on account of his adlier- ence to the Roman Catholic Church. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 306. X Ibid. p. 311, 312. 1575.] THEIR HUMILIATING SITUATION. 139 Titular Episcopate, nevertheless no open attack was made upon it, though Andrew Melville was present as a member. The titu- lar Archbishop of Glasgow was chosen Moderator, and the busi- ness commenced with the usual complaint against the Titular of Dunkeld for not excommunicating the Earl of Atholl, to which were added the offence of leaving the last Assembly before it was dissolved, and the old charge of a " simoniacal paction with the Earl of Argyll," who was now dead. He answered the present charge by stating that he had " used admonitions with Atholl, " who desired some conference of godly and learned men, to the effect he might be resolved in such doubts of religion as pre- sently move him, seeing that hitherto he hath not heard preach- ing." The excuse for the second was, that being informed of one of his children " deadly sick, who soon after departed, he went in haste out of the town without advertisement of the brethren,"" but that he was willing to submit himself to the reproof of the Assembly if the excuse was not sufficient ; and the third charge was met by a general denial. Spottiswoode, Erskine, Winram, Lawson, and Hay, commissioner of Aberdeen, or any three of them, were appointed to convene with the Earl of Atholl, and report his answer to the Assembly. His Lordship was then in Edinburgh, and seems to have endured this intermeddling officiousness with much condescension. With the exception of Spottiswoode, they waited on him during the afternoon of that day, but they made little impression, for they reported that they found him " not fully resolved in sundry heads of religion," and he requested further conference with the parties whom he had already met, and in the meanwhile " promising of his honour that he would assist my Lord Bishop of Dunkeld for punishing of offences within his bounds, and setting forward of his synodal assemblies, and that no slander should be found within his house." This very reasonable declaration, however, was most unsatisfactory to the " Brethren," who sent David Lindsay, minis- ter of Leith, and George Hay, the Aberdeen commissioner, with a peremptory order to the Earl to give in his statements in writ- ing. They reported that the Earl still wished delay and longer time to have " consultation of learned men to the resolution of difficulties, and what he had promised before of his honour he should keep the same to the least point." The Assembly, " oar- 140 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1575. nestly cra\-ing the said Lord's conversion, and willing to win him bv all means possible, that he might be joined to the society of the Kirk." ordered him to have all his doubts removed before the en- suing midsummer, otherwise both be and his Countess were to be excommimieated by the Titular of Dunkeld. The same Titular had also a sHght altercation with his brother Titular of Brechin, who complained that certain expressions uttered by the former in the preceding Assembly about pensions was " a slandering of the nobleman departed, and desired it to be proven."' To this the Titular of Dunkeld replied, that " he de- clared he was pressed by the said umquhile Earl of Argyll to do something against his will,"^ and this he offered to state in WTiting, referring the whole matter to the Assembly. The cool impertinence of the Titular of Brechin on this occasion was only equalled bv his h>-pocrisy, for no one knew better than he did that the " umquhile " zealous Earl of Argyll had strong temporal reasons for support- ing the Reformation. Two other Titulars were also compelled to figm-e in this Assembly. The one was the " Bishop of Moray,''' and it was to be decided whether he had been lawfully chosen, before he could be tried in life and doctrine as a Bishop. Andrew Meh-ille, "^^'inram, and two individuals, were appointed to investi- gate and decide the point. The other was Andrew Graham, al- readv mentioned as nominated to Dunkeld by the Regent Morton. He was ordered to " give proof of his doctrine before the Brethren upon the text appointed by them to him.'" In the case of the Titular of ^loray, Melville and his associates reported that as there was " suspicion conceived by the trial of his doctrine and manners, he gave personally such trial of his doctrine as the short- ness of time ^^■ill permit."' He was also to make his purgation of the slanderous crimes whereof he was accused in the Assembly before, without prejudice of the process depending."' This de- cision, the latter part of which referred to his amour with a certain widow styled Lady Ardross, was considered satisfactorj', and the Titular was subjected to an examination. He was asked in what manner he had obeyed the act of the Assembly on the purgation of slander."" He replied that he had presented him- self before Douglas, the Titular of St Andrews, now resting with God."" and had obeyed the said act ; but a* he could produce no witnesses, the " Bretliren "" appointed Winram, A\'ilkie, rector of 1575.] THEIR HUMILIATING SITUATION". 141 St Andrews, and another, to take his " piiro^ation in the same manner as he should have done before the Titular and kirk of St Andrews ; and as he was then " under medicine," Andrew Mel- ville, Winram, and a third, were appointed to confer with him on matters of religion, and report to the Assembly. The result of this was stated by Winram, who informed the " Brethren" that the Titular was willing again to " purge himself," in other words, to do penance if no record of his former submission could be found at St Andrews. Ramsay, Titular of Dunblane, was ordered, after a discussion, which was decided in the affirmative, whether he was ehgible, as he had not been previously a preacher, to deliver an exercise, or trial discourse, in the Magdalene Chapel in the Cowgate of Edin- burgh, on the commencement of the fifth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans in presence of certain parties. It may be inferred that he gave satisfaction, as no further notice is recorded. An- other Titular, Alexander Hepburn, designated " elect of Ross," delivered a trial " exercise " on a prescribed part of the Prophecy of Zachariah, and he acquitted himself in such a manner that " the Brethren with one consent approved the said exercise and doctrine, and praised God for the same." In this Assembly final judgment was given against their former confederate Bishop Gor- don of Galloway, who was released from the degrading sentence of appearing as a criminal in three several churches in Edinburgh, on the condition that he presented himself before the congregation in the church of Holyroodhouse on the following Sunday, and " humbly confess his offences, and ask the eternal God's mercy." Having thus dealt with the Titulars and Bishop Gordon, they enacted that no person was to be admitted a minister who was ignorant of Latin, except such as after examination " for their singular graces and gifts of God shall be found able by them to use their function without knowledge of the Latin tongue." Decency in apparel was enjoined, and all dramatic representations founded on the narratives of the canonical Scriptures were prohi- bited either on Sundays or other days. A law was ordered to be framed, that " no Bishop be elected to a Bishopric by the Chapter before he give proof of his doctrine before the General Assemblv, and trial be taken by them of his doctrine, life, and conversation ;" and in the meantime this duty was to be done by the respective 142 THE TITULAR BISHOPS, [1575. Chapters, who were to be allowed to elect after the Assembly were satisfied. But the most interesting fact is the following. A statement was laid before them by Alexander Arbuthnot, burgess of Edinburgh, and Thomas Bassenden, printer and burgess, re- specting the publication of an edition of the Bible in English. Messrs David Lindsay of Leith, James Lawson of Edinburgh, Andrew Polwart, and George Young, were appointed to revise the edition, and the Assembly agreed that the printers were to receive L.4 : 13 : 4d. Scots money, or between seven and eight shillings sterling, for every copy sold. The " Bishops, Superintendents, and commissioners bearing charge within the realm," were ordered to use their influence with the " Lords, barons, and gentlemen of every parish, as also with the whole burghs within the same,"" to " try how many of them will be content to buy one of the said volumes, and will advance voluntarily the said price, whole, or half at the least, in part payment, and the rest at the receipt of their books." Every parish church was ordered to be provided with a Bible, and the edition was specified to be ready for delivery before the last day of March 1576. Such is the substance of the ar- rangement respecting one of the first editions, if not in reality the first printed Bible in Scotland,* which was the translation printed at Geneva a few years previous. The next General Assembly, in compliance with the petition of Arbuthnot, induced the commen- dator of Dunfermline, who is designated the " Lord Abbot," to licence Mr George Young to the " ofiice of corrector," whose charges and expences Arbuthnot stipulated he would himself de- fray. As the Regent had issued letters in the King's name, au- thorizing collections to be made as above noticed, the Assembly also granted another part of Arbuthnofs petition, which was to "charge every ordinary within his jurisdiction to put the said letters into execution, and make me be paid, conform to the tenor of the same, whereby the godly enterprize of the same may take full effect with expedition." • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 314-330. 1575.1 143 CHAPTEE VI. THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. The choosing of Boyd, the titular Archbishop of Glasgow, to be Moderator or President of the General Assembly held in March 1574^5, is a proof that no avowed intention had been expressed to overthrow the Titular Episcopacy sanctioned by the Convention of Leith. The first grand attack against the Tulchan System, and undoubtedly through it against the canonical Hierarchy every- where, was made in the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 6th of August 1575, when Bishop Gordon of Galloway, and the Titulars of Dunkeld, Brechin, Dunblane, Glasgow, and The Isles, with the Superintendents of Lothian and Angus, are enu- merated, and Robert Pont was chosen Moderator. Andrew Mel- ville, too cautious to appear personally the originator of the schemes he meditated, had previously been actively engaged in im- pressing some of the leaders in favour of the polity and principles of Geneva ; and wishing that the subject should be introduced as a Scottish emanation, he persuaded Mr John Dury, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, to bring the Presbyterian or Genevan polity before the Assembly. At the very outset of the proceed- ings, when they commenced their usual examination of the lives and doctrines of the Titulars, Dury protested " that the trial as Bishop prejudges not the opinions and reasons which he and other brethren of his mind had to oppose against the said office and name of a Bishop."* This elicited a speech from Melville, who pretended to address the " Brethren as if he had been entirely ignorant that the sub- • Bookc of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 231. 144 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1575. ject was to be introduced. He declaimed in favour of the flourish- ing state of what he called the " Church"" at Geneva, explained the notions of Calvin and Beza, denied the scriptural authority for the episcopal office, which he maintained to be the same as that of ordinary ministers, and urged many of the arguments which the Presbyterians and other anti-episcopal sects advance in favour of their system of parity. Melville's speech apparently made considerable impression, and six individuals were appointed to inquire " whether if the Bishops, as they are now in the Kirk of Scotland, have their functions in the Word of God or not, or if the Chapter appointed for creating them ought to be tolerated in this Keformed Kirke V If they had considered the subject in its proper light, they would have seen that the " function " or office of the then Titulars had no authority from the Scriptures, or ecclesiastical antiquity, because they were merely nominal Bishops for political or party purposes, unconsecrated, and of no higher authority than their lay preachers, whom they dignified with the title of " ministers," as if they had been canonically ordained deacons and presbyters. The persons appointed to con- duct this inquiry were Melville himself, John Craig, then minister of Aberdeen, formerly Knox's colleague at Edinburgh, James Law- son, minister of Edinburgh, David Lindsay of Leith, John Reid of Perth, and George Hay, the commissioner from Caithness. According to Archbishop Spottiswoode, Lindsay, Row, and Hay, were favourable to the " lawfulness of episcopal function in the Church," while Melville, Craig, and Lawson, were zealous for the Genevan or Presbyterian parity. After various conferences they all lodged a written declaration, stating that — " They think it not expedient presently to answer directly to the first question, but if any Bishop be chosen who has not such qualities as the word of God requires, let him be tried by the General Assemblies de novo, and so deposed." Nevertheless, they condescended to enlighten the " Brethren " on the points wherein they agreed concerning the office of Bishop and Superintendent : — " First, the name of Bishop is common to all those that have a parhicular charge, as well to preach the word as to minister the sacraments, and to execute the ecclesiastical discipline with consent of their elders ; and this is the chief function of the word of God. Also, that out of this number may be chosen some to have power to oversee 1575.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 145 and visit such reasonable bounds, besides his own flock, as the general Kirk shall appoint ; and in their bounds to appoint minis- ters, with the consent of the ministers of that province, and of the flock to whom they shall be appointed ; and also to appoint elders and deacons in every principal congregation where there are none, with the consent of the people thereof, and to suspend ministers for reasonable causes, with the consent of the ministers foresaid.'"* Such was the " deliverance," not so much affecting the then Titular Episcopate, which was a mere shadow, a miserable and unscriptural substitute, but against the constitution of the Catho- lic Church and the episcopal succession generally ; and it will be admitted that the said " deliverance " was sufficiently Presby- terian, although Melville did not " think it expedient to answer directly the first question," which was, if the episcopal function had any warrant in the Scriptures. Archbishop Spottiswoode cen- sures the Titulars for not opposing the above declaration, alleging that it was " no wisdom in them to have given a way to such novelties, and have suffered the lawfulness of their vocation to be thus drawn in question ;" but the venerable Primate forgot that their " vocation " was a fallacy, utterly unwarrantable and pre- posterous ; and it also appears that some of them, if not the whole, were absent, for although mentioned as present in the Assembly with the " commissioners" and " ministers," it is stated in the record of the second day's proceedings, that — " Because certain of the Bishops and Superintendents compeared not the first day of this Assembly, it was thought good to call [cite] them, and the absents to be noted."-f- The Presbyterian writer Wodrow infers, from the silence of the Titulars, that the Assem- bly was unanimous against the episcopal office, but this is at direct variance with all the facts and documents, and also with the sentiments expressed in the report to the " Brethren " on the occasion. The Titular of Dunkeld was suspended from his office by this Assembly on several accusations, one of which was the dilapidation of the benefice, particularly " a nineteen year tack [lease] of " Booke of the Universal! Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 343. t Ibid. p. 333. 10 146 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1575. thirty-six chalders of teind victual, at 5s. 8d. per boll, to the Earl of Argj'll," which he indeed confessed, declaring " that divers times it repented him thereof, and yet, by the grace of God, is willing to have it reformed, either by favour and good-will of my Lord Argyll, or by process of law, wherein my Lord Regent's Grace had promised to him his assistance." Another complaint was for not excommunicating the Earl of AthoU, his excuse for which was pronounced " frivolous,'" and intimation was given to the Earl and Countess that if they were not " resolved in the points of religion"" before Martinmas, to the satisfaction of John Row of Perth and three or four others, the said Row was to pronounce sentence of excommunication against them in Dunkeld, assisted by the Superintendents of Angus and Fife, and William Christison, minister of Dundee. Melville's friend, Andrew Polwart, is noticed in this Assembly's proceedings as " ordained [enjoined] to serve at Paisley, according to his promise made to the Bishop of Glas- gow." But Mr Andrew proved very unpopular in Paisley, the in- habitants insulting him and setting him at defiance ; and in Oc- tober 1577, he was " decerned to be free and at liberty, that he may serve where it pleases God to call him, because " of their con- tempt of the disciphne, their manifest vices, menacing, and boast- ing of him in doing his duty, his labours cannot be profitable to them" [at Paisley]. Bishop Gordon of Galloway was received into favour so far that he was allowed to preach, but he was still " suspended from commission of visitation," and he was exhorted " to concur and help the commissioner of Galloway in his visita- tion for keeping good order and discipline within these bounds." The other matters of which they thought proper to take cognizance were " heresies, witchcraft, blaspheming the name of God, viola- tion of the Sabbath-day," and regulations respecting marriages ; but chiefly gross, licentious, and revolting questions on crimes which it was disgraceful to discuss in any religious meeting exer- cising the high pretensions to which they laid claim. They ap- pear also to have been annoyed by the inhabitants of the county of Abei'decn. It was stated by way of complaint, that " the ministers and readers in the country keep certain patron and festival days, and on these days convene, pray, and preach, and foster the people in superstition." To this the commissioner of Aberdeen replied — " That some ministers of the country think it 157C.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 147 lawful, but for his own opinion, ho wished it should be taken away by an ordinance of the Assembly."* The next G eneral Assembly was held at Edinburgh on the 24th of April 157C, and John Row was chosen Moderator. The pro- ceedings commenced with complaints and accusations against all the Titulai's, with the exception of the so called Bishop of Ross, which were frivolous, factious, and contemptible, evidently origin- ating to display a kind of splenetic power. The Titular of Glas- gow was " dilated" for not " preaching in the town of Glasgow since he entered in his office, and also rarely preaching, howbeit he was thought diligent in visitation," and for having " no par- ticular flock." Three other charges were brought against him, which were even of less importance. Boyd modestly answered, that " preaching is the good gift of God, which is not equally be- stowed on all, and excused himself that he was not so able, nor , so liberally gifted with understanding as others ; although it can- s' not be denied but that he preached, especially at Govan and other kirks, and was willing to do his duty." As to the other charge, he contended that " he received no particular flock in the entry of his office, nor no question was moved thereupon ; but if the As- sembly think that he should be astricted to a particular flock, he should either obey the ordinance of the Assembly therein, or give place to others." The Superintendent of Lothian was accused of " initiating" the Titular of Ross in the Abbey of Holyroodhouse, though " admonished by the brethren not to do it," and of not frequently visiting his district. He confessed the first, and assigned sickness since Jauuary and " evil weather" as his excuse for the second. The Titular of Dunblane was " dilated" for not having " taught since his entry to his office, nor yet makes residence, nor hath a particular flock." The Titular of Moray was also alleged to have " no particular flock," which he admitted, but informed them that he was then " under process of horning," or prosecution, which rendered him liable to incarceration, and that he had pre- sented himself to the Assembly on that occasion solely by a per- sonal protection granted by the Regent. But the great attack was against the Titular of Dunkeld for " diminution of the rents of the Bishopric," in the affair of the " Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 331-347. 148 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1570. lease granted by him to the Earl of Argyll. After hearing hia defence and explanation, they found that he had violated the act of the General Assembly in March 15 G9 against " such persons as diminish the rents and fruits of their benefices," and that he had incurred " the penalty thereof, to wit, deprivation from his office, and that which he hath of the Kirk therethrough, so far as lies in their power for ever.'''' The Titular took an appeal from this decision to the Privy Council. Mr David Lindsay and Mr Patrick Adamson were appointed to intimate the sentence to the Eegent. They announced the Regent's opinion on the following day. Morton was justly exasperated at their conduct, after their previous expressions of satisfaction at the result of the Conference of I^eith, which they had professed to consider a final adjustment. He admitted that the Titular of Dunkeld had been justly de- prived for his offences, and that he " could find no fault therein yet he indignantly requested that " a polity and universal order would be established in the Kirk for such and other proceedings," and advised that either the agreement at Leith should be recon- sidered, or those points in it to which they objected be substituted by others, or to draw out some polity of their own, and submit it to his consideration. In the meanwhile he suggested that they should depute some of their number to answer the Titular of Dun- keWs appeal to the Privy Council. Sundry " honourable men and brethren" were appointed to answer the Regent, among whom were the Titular of Glasgow, Erskine of Dun, Andrew Melville, Pont, Lawson, Adamson, and Lindsay. Morton''s sug- gestion was adopted, and they accordingly appointed provincial committees to draw up " an overture of the polity and jurisdic- tion of the Kirk, and uttering the plain and simple meaning of the Assembly therein," and to report their proceedings to the next General Assembly. Among those appointed were the titu- lar Archbishop of Glasgow, Andrew Melville, and three others, for the Western counties, to meet and confer at Glasgow on a certain day ; Pont, Lawson, Lindsay, and two others, for Lothian, to meet at Edinburgh ; Winram, for they still recognized him as Superin- tendent of Fife, and the Masters of the University of St Andrews, to meet in that city, for Fife ; Erskine of Dun, Christison, Row, and two others, for Angus and Mearns, to meet at Montrose ; and Messrs John Craig, Alexander Arbuthnot, and George Hay, for 1577.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 149 Aberdeen. It will be observed, that in those arrangements they completely neglected the Highlands, Orkney, and Shetland. But this report was not forthcoming at the next General As- sembly, and even in the following, held in April 1577, it was acknow- ledged that " the matter of the polity of the Kirk collected by the Brethren is not yet in such perfect form as is requisite, and sundry things largely entreated [discussed], which will be more summarily handled : others requiring farther dilation.'"* The indignation of the Regent had apparently granted them permission to remodel the ecclesiastical constitution, and Melville and his friends were actively engaged in framing the whole scheme of the Presbyterian parity, as delineated in their singular compilation which they pro- duced, entitled the " Second Book of Discipline." Accordingly, with one exception, little occurs of public interest in the proceed- ings of the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 24th of October 1576, in that of 1st April 1577, or in that of the 25th of October of the same year. The exception now mentioned was the case of Patrick Adamson, whom the Regent Morton nominated titular Archbishop of St Andrews in the autumn of 157C. As this eminent person has been often mentioned in the present work, some notice of his early life may be here introduced. Adamson's proper name was Constance, and he was the son of poor though industrious parents, his father, according to Oalderwood, having been a baker at Perth, where he was born in March 1543, The reason for changing his name to Adamson is not stated. Oalderwood says that he " assisted as a minister in the first General Assembly of the Kirk of Scotland in 15G0," and the name of Patrick Constane certainly appears in the list of those in St Andrews for " ministering and teaching," men- tioned at that meeting, but he is not noticed as personally present. If the Patrick Constane was really Adamson, he was only in his eighteenth year, otherwise the date of his bii'th is incorrect, but it is probable that the necessities of the times made the Reforming leaders not very scrupulous about age, and he may in the outset have been merely one of their " readers." It is certain that, after attending some years at the University of St Andrews, he was about 1560 acting as a schoolmaster in a village near Cupar, the • Bookc of the Univeisall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 391. 150 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1577. county town of Fife, and that his great reputation for learning in- duced a neighbouring proprietor, Macgill of Nether Rankeillor, to engage him as preceptor to his eldest son, whom he intended to send to France to study civil law. His adventures at Bourges, and the Latin poems he there wrote, are already mentioned, and after his return to Scotland we find him prominent in the General Assembhes, and actively connected with the Titular Episcopate, until 1576, when he was appointed the head of that spurious and uncanonical order. A damson was present in the General Assembly held at Edin- burgh on the 24th of October 1576, when his nomination as Titu- lar by the Regent is thus noticed — " As by the ordinance of the Assembly, Bishops should be tried before them, before they be admitted by the Chapter," they " require both the counsel and advice of the Kirk herein. The said Mr Patrick being present, answered. That my Lord Regent's Grace had discharged him to proceed farther in this matter, in respect the said act and ordinance of the Kirk is not accorded on, and therefore he would not meddle farther and make instance therein ; which answer the Kirk thought should be given by the Chapter to my Lord Regent's Grace." The Regent transmitted forty-two questions, concocted, it is said, at the suggestion of Adamson, to this Assembly, requesting pro- per answers at their convenience. This is alleged to have been a device of the Regent to delay and thwart the details of ecclesiasti- cal policy in which Melville and his friends were engaged, at least such is the statement of Calderwood and Wodrow. Many of these questions are on the topics with which the reader is familiar. A certain number of persons, among whom were Erskine of Dun, Andrew Melville, James Melville, Pont, Row, Lindsay, Craig, Lawson, and Christison, were appointed to " consider the heads of the policy, advice and consult thereupon, and upon the said questions, and to report their judgments thereanent, conceived formally in writing, to the next Assembly." At a subsequent part of the proceedings Adamson's appointment was again brought before them, the so called Chapter of St Andrews having delayed the election. He was asked — " If he would submit himself to the trial and examination of the Assembly, and receive the office of a Bishop accoi'ding to the injunctions of the Kirk ?" This he posi- tively declined. Some curious notices occur of the manners of the 1577.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 151 times. The inhabitants of DunfermUne requested permission to act a " certain play not made upon the canonical parts of Scrip- ture " on a Sunday afternoon, which was refused, and the Bailie of Dunfermline was exhorted to " request the town to keep the ordinance of the Assembly." The question was discussed, whether a " minister or reader may tap ale, heer, or wine, and keep an open tavern^'' and it was actually decided that such might be allowed, only such minister or reader was to be exhorted to " keep deco- rum." Interments in the churches were prohibited, and those who opposed this were to be denied privileges until they made " public repentance." Salt-pans, mills, and " other labouring, which draws away innumerable people from hearing the word of God," were ordered to be stopped on the Sundays ; and probably they would have denounced the ebb and flow of the tide, the light of the sun, or any other operation of nature, if such had been submitted to their consideration. Sundry statements were reported to the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 1st of April 1577, about the progress of the " policie of the Kirk," as concocted by Andrew Afelville and his fellow-labourers in that work. Meanwhile, in the case of Adamson, who had now been elected titular Archbishop of St Andrews by the " Chapter" after the meeting of the previous Assembly, he was summoned to appear before this conclave on the charge that he " had entered in the said Bishopric against the acts of the Gene- ral Assembly, and usurped the office of visitation within the bounds of Fife, unauthorized by the commission or power of the Kirk, and left his ordinary office of ministry." The "ordinersand inagurers" of Adamson were also enjoined to be summoned, " if need require.'' In this year Adamson published a Catechism in Latin verse, in Four Books,* which is said to have been for the use of King James VI. It was so much approved, that both Pont and Law- son wrote very excellent Latin odes in its commendation, and it elicited the praise of the learned in England and on the Continent. Adamson seems to have been unmolested during the year 1577, and he was present in the Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 25th of October that year, when he was commissioned by the Regent Morton to lay before them a letter from Queen Elizabeth, intimat- * The title is " Catechismus Latino Carmine redditus, ct in Libios Quatuor digestus." 152 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1577. ing that a Council of the Protestants of Germany was to be held at Madgeburg for establishing the Augsburg Confession, originally drawn up by Melancthon with Luther's approbation, to be laid before the Emperor Charles V. at the great Diet held at Augsburg in June 1530. In this letter the Regent was requested to inform her Majesty if the Assembly " thought mete that any of the learned ministers shall repair thither, and who they will name to this effect." Eight persons were nominated, the Regent selecting three of them, one of whom was Andrew Melville, but none of them proceeded to Madgeburg, and Morton took no farther interest in the matter. Adamson, Melville, and a number of influential per- sons, were appointed to confer with the Regent, if such consultation was necessary, on the " heads of the policy and jurisdiction of the Kirk read in audience of the whole Assembly, and thought good that the same should be presented to my Lord Regent's Grace." The deliberations of Melville and the Presbyterian party were embodied in the production afterwards noticed, entitled, " The Second Book of Discipline," which was approved by the Assembly with only one^xception, and this appears to have been the eighth chapter, on " Deacons, and their Office, the last ordinary function in the Kirk." This production was laid before the Regent for his sanction, and when he received it he promised to appoint some of the Privy Council to meet with its compilers, but other and more important matters engaged his attention. The Regent's adminis- tration of the government had become unpopular, discontented and ambitious men fawned on the King, then in the dawn of youth, to whom he was misrepresented, and a project was formed to drive Morton from his high office. The Presbyterian party had become his inveterate enemies, and had so often irritated him by their opposition that he about this very period declared to Mel- ville on one occasion — " There never will be quietness in this country till half-a-dozen of you be hanged or banished the king- dom." Morton held that the General Assemblies were mere con- vocations of the King's lieges, and that it was treasonable for them to meet without his own permission as Regent. The truth of this was abundantly evident in the subsequent century after 1638, and though it has been virtually admitted and practised by the Pres- byterian Establishment since the Revolution of 1688, the claims of Melville and his party were of a different description. They 1578.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 153 maintained a jus divimm for their meetings, and their grand aim was to render themselves independent of all civil and secular authority, and to be the sole judges of their own conduct, as well as to be the dictators of that of others. Their pretensions were utterly incompatible with political freedom, and were the old and intole- rable usurpations of the Church of Rome under a more odious and unsufferable form. This King James soon discovered to his sad experience, and the tenets which Melville and his associates intro- duced and advocated partly caused the ruin of his son. Morton resigned the regency in the beginning of March 1578, and on the 8th of that month the King, though only in the twelfth year of his age, undertook the government in person, assisted by a Council selected by himself to manage the affairs of state. Those present at Stirling when James assumed the sceptre were the Earls of Argyll, AthoU, Montrose, Caithness, Mar, and Eglinton, Lords Maxwell, Ogilvy, Herries, and Invermeath, the titular Bishops of Moray and Brechin, the Commendators of Dunferndine, Cambuskenneth, and Newbattle, Sir William Murray of TuUibar- dine, and George Buchanan. Four days afterwards, at another and more numerous meeting, when Morton obtained a formal dis- charge from his office of Regent, Bishop Bothwell of Orkney, and the Titulars of Caithness, Moray, and Dunkeld, attended. The King''s Council were chosen at a meeting held in Stirling Castle on the 24th of March, at which were present the King in per- son, the Earls of Argyle, Atholl, Montrose, Caithness, Rothes, and Glencairn, Lords Ruthven, Maxwell, Herries, Oliphant, Ogilvy, and Invermeath, Bishop Bothwell, and the Titulars of Caithness, Moray, Dunkeld, and Brechin, the Commendators of Dunfermline and Newbattle, George Buchanan, as Keeper of the Privy Seal, and Sir William Murray. It was then resolved to elect six of the nobility, and three of what was called the " Spiri- tual Estate," to " remain together for furthsetting of his Majesty's authority and administration of justice until the next Parliament.?' The six noblemen were the Earls of Argyll, Atholl, Montrose, and Caithness, Lord Lindsay, and Lord Herries, and the three so called " spirituals" were the titular Bishop of Caithness, and the Commen- dators of Newbattle and Deer, with whom were associated Alex- ander Erskine of Logan. A certain number were selected to " be upon the Council when they were present," or when their " sove- 154 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1578. reign lord sent for them." These were the Earls of Angus, Mar, Rothes, Eglinton, Erroll, Glencairn, INIenteith, Lords Maxwell, Ogiivy, Gray, Invermeath, Bishop Bothwell, and the Commenda- tors of Dryburgh and Cambuskenneth.* Morton's resignation of the regency was so far favourable to the Presbyterian party, that it enabled them to prosecute their schemes more vigorously, and to become bolder in their demands. Although unscrupulous in his general conduct, and apparently in- different to religion, Morton had always supported the Reforma- tion, and had materially advanced that ecclesiastical revolution by his powerful influence. He was the opponent of Presbyterian parity, but he supported the titular Episcopacy from worldly, sel- fish, and political motives. In the language of Dr Cook — " By his demission the adherents of Presbytery gained a vast accession of strength, and instead of having to fear the resistance of a vigo- rous Government, they were now certain that the State would be weakened by the formation of parties striving to engross the royal favour, and that amidst the contest of those parties, they might not only steadily pursue their object, but render concession to themselves essential for the stability of the throne." This disposition was soon manifested in the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 24th of April, a few weeks after Mor- ton's demission of the regency. Andrew Melville was chosen Moderator, and as his party were now predominant none of the Titulars attended. It was resolved that " Bishops, and others bearing ecclesiastical functions, be called by their own names, or brethren, in time coming ;" and farther, that " no Bishops shall be elected or made hereafter before the next General Assembly, dis- charging all ministers and chapters to proceed anyways to election of Bishops in the meantime, under the pain of perpetual depriva- tion from their offices, and that this matter be proponed first in the next General Assembly, to be consulted what farther order shall be taken therewith." It was also ordered that no persons shall be collated to vacant parishes until the next General Assembly, and that even the King's presentation should be resisted. This direct interference with the prerogative of the Crown, and defiance of the Government, was followed by the nomination of Pont, Law- • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iii. p. 115-119. 1578.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 155 son, and Lindsay, to revise the copy of the new " Policie"" to be presented to the King ; and a certain number were appointed " to concur and convene at such times appointed by the King and Council," in the event of a conference being requested, at which, if such took place, they were to " reason also on the head of the ceremonies, and how far ministers may meddle with civil affairs, and if they may vote in Council or Parliament.* This last sub- ject of discussion was levelled at the Titulars, who attended and voted at the meetings of the Privy Council. In their usual inquisitorial manner, emboldened by the success- ful progress of their cause, they impeached the Earl of Atholl, the successor of Lord Glammis as Chancellor, who was killed in a street of Stirling in a Sijuable on the 17th of March, f the Earls of Caithness and Eglinton, and Lord Ogilvy, as suspected Eoman Catholics, and appointed Row and Lawson to admonish Atholl, and Craig and Duncanson to wait upon the others, to induce them to subscribe the " articles of the religion,"" and to " participate the communion.'" Atholl and Eglinton escaped the visitation of the " brethren," by having left Edinburgh, but Caithness and Ogilvy readily answered the inquiries. The former requested to " see the articles of religion which he was desired to sub- scribe, and he should give his answer ;" the latter declared that he had already done so, and he had communicated, but • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part Second, p. 404, 408, 409. I This nobleman is said to have been disposed to sanction some of Melville's projects, but, says Crawford, " his main difficulty was, that Episcopacy could not be suppressed without sinking one of the three Estates of Parliament." He wrote a letter to Beza on the subject of church government, in which he says — " Since every Church has its own pastor, and the power of pastors seems to be co-ordinate by the Christian institution, the question is, Whether the episcopal function is necessary for drawing these pastors into a Synod upon occasion, for ordaining pastors and for exercising the censure of the Church ? or whether it is more eligible that the pastors managing upon terms of equality, and under the check of prelatic superiority, should elect persons into the ministry, with the consent of the patron and people, and likewise be empowered to censure, depose, &c. Por keeping on the Bishops we have these two motives — First, the stiff and ungovernable temper of the people ; the dealing with their stubbornness would in all likelihood be impracticable, were it not for the force of the episcopal character and jurisdiction. The other motive is, that by the ancient constitution of the realm nothing can pass in Parliament without the Bishops, who make the said third Estate. Now, to change this usage, and sink this Ihird, would be extremely dange- rous.'' Crawford's Lives of the Officers of State in Scotland, folio, Edin. 1726, p. 133. 156 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1578. " if any man doubted his profession, he was content to subscribe the said articles, and to participate the supper of the Lord." The next General Assembly of this year was held at Stirling on the ] 1th of J une, probably to be near the King's residence, as we find them appointing a deputation to request the royal presence at one of their meetings. They soon proceeded to give their opinion on the order of " Bishops," and unanimously resolved that the act of the former Assembly " shall be extended for all times to come, ay and until the corruption of the estate of Bishops be al- luterly taken away, and that all Bishops already elected be re- quired particularly to submit themselves to the General Assembly [of the Kirk] concerning the reformation of the corruption of that estate of Bishops [in their persons], which if they refuse, after ad- monitions, excommunication to proceed against them." The Titu- lar of Dunblane was so mean as to proffer his submission. A report was given of the manner in which the King had received his copy of the " Policie," and the answer is described as " good and com- fortable"— that " not only would he concur with the Kirk in all things that might advance the true religion, but also would be a procurator for the Kirk."* But notwithstanding this denunciation of the episcopal office by the Presbyterian party in their Assembly, the Titular Bishops, with the exception of Graham of Dunblane, attended a meeting of the nobility and other Estates at Stirling Castle on the 12th of J une, at the very time the Assembly was convened, and took their places as spirtual peers. At this meeting were the Titulars Adamson of St Andrews, Boyd of Glasgow, Bishop Bothwell of Orkney, Stewart of Caithness, Campbell of Brechin, Cunninghame of Aberdeen, Douglas of Moray, and Paton of Dunkeld, who are all recorded as if they had been canonically consecrated prelates, and are regularly associated with the nobility, the commendators of the abbeys, and the commissioners from the burghs.f This proves that it was the decided conviction of the Government at the time that no act was valid without the sanction of the Spiritual Estate, even though re- presented by men who were unordained persons, and merely laymen. • Booke of the Uiiiversall Kirk of Scotland, Part Second, p. 413, 414. t Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iii. v- 121. 1578.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 157 All the before mentioned Titulars are repeatedly mentioned with the exception of Aberdeen. Mr David Cunningham, Sub-Dean of Glasgow, was nominated to that See in 1557 by the Regent Mor- ton, to whom he had officiated as one of his chaplains. He is de- scribed as a " learned man, and of singular good qualities, but the times were so troublesome that he had not the occasion to shew himself, or do any good." An account of his " consecration" is preserved by a contemporary diarist, who was reader of Aberdeen at the time. Bishop Gordon, the last Roman Catholic Prelate re- tained the See, by the interest of his relatives the Huntly Family, till his death on the 6th of August 1577. " On Monday the 11th day of November, the year of God 1577, Master David Cunyng- hame, son to the Laird of Cunynghameheid, was consecrat Bishop of Aberdeen in the kirk by Master Patrick Constance [Adamson] Bischop of Saint Andrews, who made the sermon. Master John Craig, minister of Aberdeen, and Master Andrew Strachan, minister [place not stated] collaters, and that in pre- sence of the whole congregation of Aberdeen, with others of the country present for the time."* The first Parliament of James VI., after his assumption of the government, was held on the 15th of July following, and among the several Acts passed, those connected with ecclesiastical affairs studiously omit any notice of the bold proceedings of the two former General Assemblies in which the Titular Episcopacy was declared to be abolished, and superseded by the Genevan or Pres- byterian parity. The third Act, entitled the " Ratification of the Liberty of the true Kirk of God and religion," consists of only a few lines, declaring that the King, with advice of his Three Estates of Parliament, including thereby the Titular Bishops, ratified and approved " all and whatsomever Acts of Parhament, Statutes, and • The Chronicle of Aberdeen from 1491 to 1593, by Walter Cullen, Vicar of Aber- deen, in the " Spalding Club Miscellany," vol. ii. p. 46, 47. In the Editor's Preface it is stated that this account is, " though brief, not without interest, as the only notice which, so far as the Editor knows, has been preserved of the forms used in the instal- lation of the Titular Bishops in Scotland between the year 1572 and the year 1606." To this it may be observed, that a much more minute account of such an " instal- lation" is given in the " Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland," and in Richard Bannatyne's " Memorialles," which is laid before the reader in a previous part of this volume, in the case of Douglas, titular Archbishop of St Andrews. Adamson seems to have followed that form. 158 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1578. Constitutions passed and made before, agreeable to God's Word, for maintenance of the libei-ty of the true Kirk of God and religion now presently professed within this realm, and purity thereof." A commissioner was appointed to visit the Universities, and " re- form such things as tended to superstition, idolatrie, and papistrie," and in this commission were the Titulars Adamson of St Andrews, Boyd of Glasgow, Cunninghame of Aberdeen, Ancbew Melville, Peter Young, Andrew Polwart, associated with the Earls of Len- nox and Buchan, Lord Boyd, and other influential persons. In an Act for visiting the Hospitals, the Titulars are explicitly re- cognized as " Bishops." But the most important Act was con- nected with the " Book of the Pohcie of the Kirk," or Second Book of Discipline, which had been presented to the King and the Estates for approval by the General Assembly at the instance of the Melville party, demanding it " to be confirmed by Act of Par- liament, and have the strength of a law perpetually in all time coming." This production was read in presence of the Lords of the Articles, but the " many heads thereof being found of so great weight and consequence, that no resolution nor determination can be presently given therein," yet " our said Sovereign Lord and his Three Estates being most willing that the policy of the Kirk should be certain and established," appointed twenty-seven persons to compare the " foresaid Book, with cei-tain treaties made before at Leith and Holyroodhouse, concerning the said poHcy," or any eighteen of them to convene at Stirling on the 18th of August. Among the twenty-seven specially nominated, were the Earls of Lennox and Buchan, and Lord Boyd, from the Privy Council ; the Titulars of St Andi'ews, Glasgow, and Aberdeen, for the " Bishops ;" the Coramendators of Newbattle, Dunfermline, and Deer, for the " Abbots ;" three, one of whom was Erskine of Dun, for the lesser " Barons ;" three for the burghs ; and among those for the " ministry" occur the names of Arbuthnot, Lawson, Lind- say, Christison, and Eow, as the more conspicuous, with whom were associated George Buchanan, Peter Young, and sundry law- yers connected with the Supreme Court.* Andrew Melville ap- pears to have been purposely excluded as a person not likely to promote harmony at the meeting. • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iii. p. 105. 1578.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 159 Little is known of the proceedings of the parties appointed to confer on the " Pohcy," or rather to examine the Second Book of DiscipHne, than the fact they could not agree, the support- ers of the rights of the Crown objecting to every apparent inter- ference with its prerogatives.* Another General Assembly was held at Edinburgh on the 24th of October, for they convened no fewer than three such meetings in 1578, and the usual discussions ensued. At the request of the Assembly, the Chancellor, AthoU, the Earl of Montrose, Lords Seton and Lindsay, met them, and Mr David Ferguson, the Moderator, harangued those noblemen on the " care and studio the Kirk of God had taken to entertain and keep the purity of the sincere word of God unmixed with the invention of their own heads." He set forth that as " true reli- gion is not able to continue nor endure long without a good dis- cipline and policy," his friends had therein employed their " wit and study, and drawn forth of the pure fountains of God's word such a discipline [and policy] as is mete to remain within the Kirk, which they presented to the King"'s Majesty," by whose com- mand commissioners were appointed to confer with certain of themselves, and the whole was again presented to the Lords of the Articles, with a request that the same might be ratified by law, but that as yet they had not succeeded. They therefore en- treated their Lordships present to use their influence to procure the sanction of the King and Parliament to the Presbyterian system as developed in their Book of the " Policie and Discipline." The noblemen replied in general terms that some of them had openly professed the religion then sanctioned by law some years past, and that they were resolved to maintain the same, but that all other details must be referred to the King and Privy Council. With this answer they were compelled to be content. The Titulars were also the objects of discussion. A damson was enjoined to " remove the corruptions of the state of a Bishop in his own person," which meant that he was to renounce his title of Archbishop of St Andrews, under penalty of excommunication. Lie was absent, but the titular Archbishop of Glasgow, whom they now simply designated Mr James Boyd, attended, and they de- • Anotlier meeting was held in December, of which Calderwood gives an account, but it is of no interest, and the result was unsatisfactory. 160 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1578. manded his " submission." The Titular had resolved to oppose them, and he replied in a written document. " First," he said, " I understand the name, office, and modest reverence borne to a Bishop to be lawful, and allowable by the Scriptures of God, and being elected by the Kirk and King to be Bishop of Glasgow, I esteem my calling and office lawful. As it respects my execution of that charge committed to me, I am content to endeavour at my uttermost ability to perform the same, and every point thereof, and to abide the honourable judgment of the Kirk from time to time of my offending by my duty, craving always a brotherly de- sire at their hands, seeing that the responsibility is weighty, and in the laying [any thing] to my charge, to be examined by the canon left by the Apostle to Timothy, (1 Timothy iii.) because that portion [of Scripture] was appointed to me at my receipt [in- duction], to understand therefrom the duties of a Bishop. As towards my living, rents, and other things granted by the Prince to me and my successors for the securing of that charge, I reckon the same lawful. As to my duty to the supreme magistrate, in assisting his Grace in Council or Parliament, being summoned thereto, I consider my position as a subject compells me to obey the same, and [that it is] no hurt but beneficial to the Kirk that some of our number are at the making of good laws and ordi- nances. In the doing whereof, I protest before God I intend never to do any thing but what I believe shall stand with the purity of the Scripture and a well reformed country, for a good part of the revenue I enjoy has been given for that cause."* This defence of himself and his order by the Titular of Glas- gow, which Dr Cook candidly admits was " moderate and judi- cious," was declared to be unsatisfactory, " no answer to the act," and he was ordered to consider the subject and to state the result in the afternoon. This he refused to do, and withdrew from the Assembly, " upon which," says Dr Cook, " a commission was given to Melville, and several of the most zealous of the Presbyterian faction, to urge his subscription to that act which required the complete submission of Bishops to the Assembly." Dr M'Crie denies that his hero Melville was connected with this commission to persecute the Titular of Glasgow, and alleges that • Booke of tlic Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part Second, p. 423. 1578.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 161 Mr David Weniyss, minister of Glasgow, was the " only individual employed in this business." Melville's name does not indeed appear, and Wemyss undoubtedly gave in the Titular's subscrip- tion or submission to the Assembly in 1579,* but Spottiswoode positively asserts the fact, and there is nothing improbable in the Archbishop's narrative, the accuracy of which was well known at the time. To prevent any mistake or indulgence in the matter, they enacted — " That they [the Titular Bishops] be content to be pastors and ministers of the flock. 2. That they usurp no criminal jurisdiction. 3. That they vote not in Parliament in name of the Kirk without permission from the Kirk. 4. That they take not up for the maintenance of their ambition and riotousness the emoluments of the Kirk which may sustain many pastors, the schools, and the poor, but be content with reasonable living according to their office. 5, That they claim not to them- selves the titles of the Lords Temporal, neither usurp temporal jurisdiction, whereby they are abstracted from their office. G. That they rule not above the particular elderships, but be subject to the same. 7- That they usurp not the power of the Presby- teries. 8. That they take no farther bounds of visitation than the Kirk committeth to them."-f- This terminated the proceedings of 1578, in which, notwith- standing all the exertions, Eliminations, and pretensions of the Presbyterian party, the ratification of their " Policie" was care- fully avoided by the Government. It now remains to offer a few observations on this said " Policie," or the " Second Book of Discipline," which was never sanctioned by Parliament, though it has been the great repository of reference by the Scottish Pres- byterians in support of their projects and sentiments. This pro- duction is of course the theme of extravagant praise by the Pres- byterian writers. In Dr Cook's opinion, though he is astonished at the presumptuous claim of the compilers that " the whole of the scheme was not merely agreeable to the word of God, but ex- pressly authorised and enjoined by divine authority," and although ho considers it at variance with the " very few incidental injunc- * Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part Second, p. 434. t Ibid. p. 425. 11 162 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1578. tions which are given by the sacred writers,'" yet Dr Cook must needs make a flourish in its favour, for he observes — " When we throw out of sight this radical error [that Presbyterianism is of divine authority !], from which so much evil afterwards arose, and examine the Po'ity upon its own merits, it may be admitted, even by those who turn the principle of divine institution against it, that there is much in it which is truly excellent, and many proofs of the vigorous and sound views of the persons by whom it was framed." And Dr M'Crie, who, as a Presbyterian Dissenting preacher, was thoroughly imbued with the bigotted prejudices of his sect, maintains that " the Second Book of Discipline was drawn up with great deliberation and care by persons who had studied the subject with much attention, and had leisure to digest their views. It is methodically arranged, and the propositions under each head are expressed with perspicuity, conciseness, and preci- sion.'" But this Presbyterian Dissenting Doctor adopts a dif- ferent view of its scriptural authority from his Presbyterian Established contemporary. The latter, we have seen, is " aston- ished" at the pretensions of its compilers, that the book is " agree- able to the word of God," or is " expressly authorized and en- joined by divine authority," and designates such claim as a " radical error ;" but Dr M'Crie is valiant in its defence : — " Its leading principles," he declares, " rest upon the express authority of the word of God. Its subordinate arrangements are sup- ported by the general rules of Scripture — they arc simple, calcu- lated to preserve order and promote edification, and adapted to the circumstances of the Church for which they were intended. It is equally opposed to arbitrary and lordly domination on the part of the clergy, and to popular confusion and misrule. — It is a form of ecclesiastical polity, where practical utility has been pro- portional to the purity in which its principles have been main- tained. Accordingly, it has secured the cordial and lasting attach- ment of the people of Scotland ; whenever it has been wrested from them by arbitrary violence, they have uniformly embraced the first favorable opportunity of demanding its restoration ; and the principal secessions which have been made from the national Church [the Presbyterian Establishment] in this part of the king- dom [Scotland] have been stated, not in the way of dissent 1578.] JN THE GENERAI- ASSEMBLIES. 163 from its constitution, as in England, but in opposition to depar- tures, real or alleged, from its original and genuine principles."* Leaving the Presbyterians themselves to reconcile the different views of Dr Cook and Dr M'Orie, both eminent men, on the scriptui'al authority of the scheme of ecclesiastical polity set forth in the " Second Book of Discipline," from the " constitu- tion " of which every true Churchman, in the proper sense of that term, must " dissent," the magniloquent phraseology and confi- dent assumptions of Dr M'Crie must be understood and received in a very modified manner as mere flights of imagination. The laboured defence of Melville, in reply to Archbishop Spottis- vvoode's narrative, which follows the above-quoted declamatory rhetoric, is a proof that Dr M'Crie felt it necessary to defend his hero, and attempt the refutation of the serious charges, undeni- ably true, preferred against him by the Scottish Primate. The public conduct of Melville, the Episcoporum Exactor, the Slinger- out of Bishops, which his relative, the other Melville admits in his Diary he obtained as a soubriquet, will not stand the test of impartial investigation, even although " he was on all the com- mittees employed in collecting materials for the Book of Polity, and in reducing them into form ;" although " he was present at most of the conferences held on the subject with members of the Privy Council and Parliament," had a " principal share in all the discussions and debates that occurred both in private and public on the articles which were most keenly disputed and opposed ; and subjected hiihself to great personal fatigue, and expence, and odium, during a series of years which were spent in completing the work, and in procuring its reception ."f These are the mere characteristics of a zealous and indefatigable leader, who is resolv- ed to achieve, if possible, a ti'iumph over those from whom he thinks that he cannot run far enough or oppose when he thoroughly hates them, but have no connection with the real merits of the case. All this alleged bodily and mental exertion may be, and often has been, spent in a bad or questionable as in a good cause, and the pride of partizanship or leadership generally induces men to make many sacrifices. The narrative of Archbishop Spottis- * Life of Andrew Melville, vol. i. p. 16G, 171, 172. t Ibid. vol. i. p. 173, 164 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED fl578. woode, undeniably proved by collateral and subsequent evidence,* remains unanswered by Melville's defenders, and the Presbyterian polity which he put into form was a mere human invention or de- vice, or, as Dr Cook calls it, a " radical error," when claiming as its warrant the high authority of Scripture. But some of the statements of Dr M'Crie, who may be considered the representa- tive of the extreme Presbyterians, deserve a passing notice. He asserts that " the Second Book of Discipline has secured the lasting attachment of the people of Scotland," and this is declared in the face of the well known fact, that one-half of the people of Scotland know nothing about it, and nine-tenths of the other half never saw the said Book, or feel any interest in its details. Dr M'Crie alleges that whenever the said Book " has been wrested from them by violence, they have uniformly embraced the first favourable opportunity of demanding its restitution." Now, every reader of history knows that when that exploit was achieved, the people were in rebellion against their lawful sovereign — that the Second Book of Discipline was not even mentioned at and after their Glasgow General Assembly of 1638 ; and if the Presbyterians can exult over the atrocities their predecessors perpetrated at that unhappy period, which led to the murder of their sovereign, they may well be viewed as the enemies of order and as the de- fenders of insurrection. Dr M'Crie farther boasts that the Second Book of Discipline " is equally opposed to arbitrary and lordly dominion on the part of the clergy, and to popular confusion and misrule " — that " it establishes an efficient discipline in every con- gregation," preserving " that unity which ought to subsist among the different branches of the church of Christ," and that " it encourages a friendly co-operation between the civil and ecclesi- astical authorities." Yet the Government of the rude age in which it was compiled shrank from recognizing in any way this boasted palladium, and the history of the Presbyterian Establish- ment of Scotland, from 1834 to 1843, is a triumphant refutation of Dr M'Crie's statements, which are proved to be mere opinions, at variance with dissensions which have occurred, and which threaten a war of extermination between two parties whose feuds and dissensions are unhappily notorious. • History of the Church and State of Scotland, p. 275. 1578.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 165 That the Second Book of Discipline contains many fundamental truths is not to be denied ; but most of sects hold some essential principles in common with the Church Catholic from which they have separated, and if Protestants choose to deny every funda- mental truth which even the Eomanists believe, obscured though it may be by their own inventions, they must of necessity altogether reject Christianity. Much, too, is said by the Presbyterian writers about the time and trouble employed in the compilation of the Second Book of Discipline, and of the learning and research it evinces. It is considered a wonderful production — umagnum opus — a prodigy of theological erudition. But any one who carefully examines it will form a much more^ moderate estimate of its merits. A con- siderable portion of it is very nearly the same with the First Book of Discipline, and many parts of it are derived from the outline in the " Form of Prayers and Administration of the Sacraments used in the English Congregation at Greneva, and approved by the famous and learned man John Calvin," printed first at Geneva in 1558.* The Book consists of thirteen chapters, divided into various sections ; but as the Presbyterian system of parity is now well understood, and prevails among Independents, Methodists, and other sects, it is unnecessary to enter into minute details. The whole is a compilation framed on human principles by un- authorized men, who interpreted the Scriptures to suit their own principles. It commences by drawing the distinction between civil and ecclesiastical power — a distinction in many cases re* markably intricate, and one which has been often made the agent of rebellion in Scotland, and dogmatical resistance to the consti- tuted law. It sets forth a separate and independent power to bo vested in themselves, who were to be the sole judges of what is civil and ecclesiastical, and who, under the pretence of discipline, were to domineer over all magistrates if they transgress in matters of con- science and religion. The entire compilation is framed on the assumption, that no other religious system was to be ever tolerated in Scotland but their own. Of course the episcopate is denounced, and the name of Bishop is declared to be synonymous with pastor or minister. The whole platform of Presbyterian polity is deve- loped in the institution of Presbyteries and Provincial Synods under • This tractate was represented at London in 1613, and comprises, including the title-page and preface, forty quarto pages. 166 THE TITULAR BISHOPS ATTACKED [1578. the controul of the General Assembly. One peculiarity is con- nected with what they designated the " ordinary call to enter on the ministry." In the First Book of Discipline the imposition of hands at ordination was declared unnecessary, and ordered to be discontinued. It was accordingly never observed by Knox and the other compilers of that work ; but in the Second Book of Dis- cipline it was enjoined to be restored, and always to be practised. It occurs in the eleventh and twelfth sections of the third chapter, entitled — " How the persons that bear Ecclesiastical Functions are admitted to their Offices." They declare that " ordination is the separation and sanctifying of the person appointed of God and his Kirk, after he be well tried and found qualified. The ceremonies of ordination are fasting, prayer, and imposition of hands of the eldershi-pr By the word eldership they mean the Presbytery, not the functionaries commonly known as elders in Scotland, whose duties and office are defined in the sixth and seventh chapters. And though the Second Book of Discipline was, as already ob- served, never ratified by law, from about this period may be dated the commencement of the present system of Presbyterian ordina- tion, for the compilers acted upon it in their own way, and con- sidered it binding on themselves. This, then, is the sole origin of " ordination " in the Presbyterian Establishment of Scotland, and among the Seceders, Cameronians, and other Presbyterian Dis- senters— enjoined by unauthorized men, and practised by their unauthorized followers. In tracing the history of the introduction of Presbyterianism into Scotland, we find numerous instances of the melancholy effects of human passions, prejudices, and errors. Although Melville, notwithstanding the assertions of Dr M'Crie, was the first im- porter of the Genevan system, it cannot be denied that the seeds of it were sown before his arrival, and that they only required a husbandman like him to take advantage of them as they sprung up, and bring them to maturity. From the framing of the First Book of Discipline down to the compilation of the Second, a period of about eighteen years, the " contendings " of the Re- formed preachers were against the " Pope''s Bishops," not against the episcopal order in general, for we have seen that they willingly recognized the Bishops of England as true Prelates, and even ad- dressed them as their " Brethren," But we must now view the 1578.] IN THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. 167 Melville party as endeavouring to carry out their principles to the utmost extent, not as carrying on a warfare against the mere Titular Episcopate, which in itself was as worthless as their own, but against the apostolical constitution of the Church, and maintaining a system in which all are masters. And as to their Second Book of Discipline, what after all is it ? A mere sti'inging together of their opinions about their " Policy," while nothing is mentioned of the doctrines of the gospel, and not a word introduced referring to the great and saving truths of Christianity, in which the people were to be instructed. They left out the " weightier matters " — " temperance, righteousness, and judgment to come," and contended solely for their own supremacy, with an arrogance, dogmatism, and presumption, which would not have been tolerated for a moment in any other than a kingdom such as Scotland then was — rent by faction, civil discord, political intrigue, and private hatred. 168 1578.] CHAPTER VII. PROGRESS 01? PRESBYTERIANISM. The unfortunate Titular of Glasgow, consigned to the tender mercies of Mr Andrew Melville and others, was now to experience the persecution which Adamson, his brother Titular of St Andrews, had long suffered. Melville peremptorily demanded Boyd's submis- sion to the General Assembly, and being then depressed by do- mestic grief and bodily suffering he pacified his tormentor by com- pliance. The ingratitude of Melville in this business, and as mani- fested in his general conduct, is admitted by Presbyterian writers. Boyd, says Dr Cook, " had been his friend and his patron : he had placed him in the University of Glasgow, and bestowed on him many favours ; but although Melville treated him in private with the utmost reverence, he in public reviled him, and he invaded his retirement, when a feeling mind should have regarded that retire- ment as sacred." Though Wodrow endeavours to vindicate Melville, and, omitting the harsh manner by which he obtained the Titular's submission, rests his defence on the allegation that Boyd was not the chief instrument of bringing Melville to Glas- gow— a statement contradicted by the other Melville in his Diary — the narrative of Spottiswoode is too important to be set aside. " Nothing," says the Archbishop, " did more grieve him [the titular Archbishop Boyd] than the ingi'atitude of Mr Andrew Melville, and his uncourteous forms. He had brought the man to Glas- gow, placed him Principal in the College, bestov/ed otherwise liberally upon him, and was paid for this his kindness with most disgraceful contempt. In private and at the Bishop's table, to 1579.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. 169 which he was over welcome, no man did ever use him with greater respect, giving him his titles of dignity and honour ; but in the public meetings, where he owed him gi'eatest reverence, he would call him by his own name, and use him most uncivilly." Dr M'Crie's apology for Melville's conduct is most extraordinary. After stating that " some of these charges are ridiculous and childish, and the rest are false and calumnious,"" and that " the allusion to Melville partaking of the Archbishop's hospitality is utterly unworthy of a reply," we are favoured with the following " deliverance" in the regular Presbyterian style of the sect to which the author belonged—" What is said as to the episcopal titles is absurd as well as puerile. There was an act of Assembly directing that the Bishops should be addressed by the same titles as other ministers. In obedience to this act, and in common with all his brethren, Melville observed the rule in the public meetings of the Church ; but he did not think that the Assembly intended to interfere with the ordinary civilities of life, and accordingly made no scruple of giving the Bishop his usual titles in private intercourse." A more degrading explanation of Melville's conduct could not have emanated even from an enemy. According to this logic he added private insult to public discourtesy, or he chose when at the Titular s table completely to gainsay his avowed principles for the pleasures of appetite. The testimony of Robert Boyd of Trochrig, the Titular's son, to the " inviolable friendship" between his father and Melville has nothing to do with the matter. That friendship is admitted ; but the charge against Melville is ingratitude and hypocrisy. In the spring of 1579 Melville and his party induced the magis- trates of Glasgow to meditate the demolition of the cathedral in that city ; but this is also denied by Dr M'Crie, because the " statement rests solely on the authority of Bishop Spottiswoode." " I never," says the Doctor, " met with any thing in the public or private writings of Melville, or of any minister contemporary with him, that gives the smallest gi'ound for the conclusion, that they looked upon cathedral churches as monuments of idolatry, or that they would have advised their demolition on this ground." It will be observed that this is in direct opposition to Dr M'Crie's recorded opinions on cathedrals in his Life of John Knox. As to cathedral churches, the Presbyterian party at that time were 170 PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. [1579. not afflicted by such eye-sores ; for the whole of them, with the ex- ception of Glasgow and Kirkwall, had been dilapidated by the so called Eeformers in the time of Knox. But why object to it be- cause it rests " solely upon the authority of Spottiswoode f He was Archbishop of the See before his translation to St Andrews, and must have known the history of the affair, which is noticed in all the local annals of Glasgow, and it is generally allowed that the massive structure was saved only by the interference of the in- corporated trades, who, when the workmen collected for the pur- pose were marched to destroy the church by beat of drum, " took arms," says the Archbishop, " swearing with many oaths that he who did cast down the first stone should be buried under it."' The proceedings of the Presbyterian party in the three General Assemblies of 1578 against the Titular Prelates, and in favour of their own system, attracted the notice of the Government, and in the General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 7th of July 1579, a letter from the King was read, requesting them to main- tain the " policy" then protected by the State, and during his minority both to conduct themselves peaceably, and to yield due obedience to their sovereign. His Majesty desired that they would not interfere with matters neither sanctioned by the law nor received in practice, reminding them that the meeting of Par- liament was approaching when the whole question of the Church Government would be considered, and intimating that if they persisted in any other course, some among them, " over busy to wish the contrary effects, may find themselves disappointed." The royal letter was pronounced unsatisfactory, and as they chose to set it at defiance, James became from this date, young as he then was, strongly prejudiced against the Presbyterians. They sum- moned the Titular of St Andrews to appear before them in Edin- burgh " at a reasonable day," to answer various charges, especi- ally his delaying " to remove the corruptions of the state of Bishops in his own person," to which they were the more emboldened by the submission of the Titular of Glasgow, which was produced by Mr David Wemyss, subscribed by himself on the 8th of June preced- ing. They concluded their proceedings by addressing a long letter to the King, in which, among other matters, they intimated to him the publication of the first printed edition of the Bible in Scotland by Alexander Arbuthnot, from the English translation made at 1570.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. 171 Geneva by " the godly men of the nation of England for the most part banished from their country for the gospel's cause"" — a state- ment which sufficiently indicates their sectarian predilections. They contrasted their " days of light, when almost in every private house the book of God's law is read and understood in our vulgar language, and the age of darkness, when scarcely in a whole city, without the cloisters of monks and friars, could the book of God once be found, and that in a strange tongue of Latin, not good, but mixed with barbarity, used and read by few, and almost un- derstood and expounded by none ; and when the false-named clergy of this realm, abusing the gentle nature of your Highness' most noble graudsire of worthy memory [James V.], made it a capital crime, to be punished with the fire, to have or read the New Testament, in the vulgar language ; yea, and to make them to all men more odious, as if it had been the detestable name of a preco- cious sect, they were named New Testamenters." They reminded James of the favourable manner in which he had at first received the " Book of the PoHcie of the Kirk," when he assumed the government, and entreated him to sanction it that their labours might not be lost, " whatsoever hath been bestowed therein." The state of the times is then set forth — the " manifest corrup- tion of our lives in all estates, and licentious and godless living of the multitude, the impurity of some, and wickedness, the cruel and un- natural murders, heinous and detestable incests, adulteries, sorcer- ies, and many such like enormities, with the oppression and contempt of the poor, almost universal corruption of justice and judgment, and many other evils which ovei-flow this commonwealth, bear evi- dent witness how slender and small success hath hitherto followed the reformation of religion within this realm." After this very extraor- dinary admission of the almost total failure of their teaching and preaching to improve the people for nearly twenty years, they wander into their usual field of controversy, their dearly beloved Genevan " Policy," which in their opinion was superior to the most fundamental principles of the Church, and request the King to establish it throughout the kingdom, reminding him of David, Solomon, Jehoshaphat, Josiah, Hezekiah, the " great Constantino," the " gentle Gratian," the " godly Thcodosius," and " such others, to be W'orthy of eternal memory and commendation."* • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part First, p. 441-448. 172 PROGRESS OF TRESBYTERIANISM. [1579. The effect of this Genevan homily on the young King is not stated. This General Assembly was dissolved on the 10th of July, and the ensuing one appointed to be held at Dundee on the 12th of July 1580. The Parliament met at Edinburgh on the 20th of October 1579, and notwithstanding the fulminations of the Presbyterian faction, the Titulars of St Andrews, Orkney, and Brechin, who are styled "reverend and venerable fathers in Christ,"" attended the first day as spiritual peers. The Titular of Caithness was also present, but as he had now succeeded as sixth Earl of Lennox he is noticed as such, and he obtained a confirmation of his infeftment in that Earldom from this Parliament. On the third day of the meeting they were joined by the Titular Prelates of Glasgow, Dunkeld, and Moray, and fifteen of the " Abbots" or coramendators were present. The Lords of the Articles were that day chosen, and the parties were the Titulars of St Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Orkney, the Oommendators of Dunferm- line, Newbattlc, Deer, Culross, and St Colm^ the Earls of Morton, Argyll, then Chancellor, Lennox, Montrose, Rothes, Eglinton, Lords Ruthven, Lindsay, and Herries, and nine gentlemen from the representatives of the burghs. On the fourth day of the meet- ing, at which the King was present, the six Titulars duly attended. The Estates refused to ratify the Second Book of Discipline, so that Melville and his friends were again mortified by its rejection, but they passed two acts, the one " Anent the true and Haly Kirk," and the other " Anent the jurisdiction of the Kirk." The former ratified all previous acts, and defined the " only true and Haly Kirk of Jesus Christ within the realm" to be that based on the Con- fession of 15G0; the latter declared the "jurisdiction of the Kirk" to be that which " consists and stands in the preaching of the true word of Jesus Christ, correction of manners, and administration of the holy sacraments," and that " there is no other face of Kirk nor other face of religion than is presently by the favour of God established within this realm." A committee was appointed to meet at Edinburgh on the 11th of April 1580, and to report to the King and three Estates what " other special points should apper- tain to the jurisdiction, privilege, and authority" of the said Kirk. The pei'sons nominated wore the Earls of Morton, Argyll, Rothes, and Buchan, the titular Archbishop Adamson of St Andrews, the Commendators of Dunfermline, Newbattlc, Deer, and Culross, 1579.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. 173 Erskine of Dun, Spottiswoode and Craig, Lawson and Lindsay, aa " ministers," with Alexander Hay, Clerk Register.* It will thus be seen that the Parliament considered the Titular Episcopate to be strictly legal, and paid no attention to the re- monstrances, petitions, and denunciations of the Presbyterian party. The favourite " Book of Policie," the so much boasted labour of years and display of learning, was not even discussed. This must have been humiliating to the pride of Melville, who saw his exertions baffled, and his Genevan parity disregarded. An act was passed by this Parliament, entitled " Ratification of the Reformation of the University of St Andrews," the object of which was " to visit and consider the foundations, to remove all superstitions and papistry, to displace unqualified persons, and plant worthy and qualified in their stead, to redress the form of studies and teaching by more or fewer professors, and generally to establish such order in that University as shall most tend to the glory of God, profit of this commonwealth, and good up-bringing of the youth in sciences needful for continuing of the true religion to all posterity." But in that act the General Assembly was not even mentioned, and it was declared that " the election of quali- fied persons [professors] shall from this forth pertain to the Bishop of St Andrews r A commission was appointed, among whom were the King's grand-uncle the Earl of Lennox, who was commendator of the Abbey of St Andrews, Patrick Archhishop of St Andrews, Erskine of Dun, and Winram, who was still designated Prior of Portmoak, authorizing them conjunctly, or any three of them, to take cognizance of the present ministers and members of the said University ."-f- An act was also passed by this Parliament which significantly delineates the morals of the people, and the lamentable failure of the religious instruction as imparted by the Reformed preachers to improve them. We have seen that the Presbyterian party them- selves acknowledged in their letter to the King the " slender and small success which hitherto followed the reformation of religion with- in this realm,"! and it could not be otherwise, when it is recollected that they occupied their time in discussions about their " Policie," • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. ui. p. 121, 127, 128, 129, 137, 138. t Ibid. vol. iii. p. 178-182. t Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part Second, p. 447. 174 PROGRESS OF PRESBYTEBIANISM. [1579. questions concerning marriage, divorce, and other matters of gross indelicacy. The act alluded to is entitled " Discharging of mar- kets and labouring on Sundays, or playing and drinking in time of sermon," but it is fair to state that the practices to which it al- ludes had been occasionally matter of complaint in the General Assemblies. It refers to an act passed in the reign of James IV. prohibiting the holding of markets and fairs on hohdays, or within the church or churchyard. This act, which had fallen into disuse, was ratified and confirmed in the following manner : — " And see- ing that the Sabbath days are now commonly violated and broken, as well within burgh as to landward [in town and country], to the great dishonour of God, by holding and keeping the said markets and fairs on Sundays, using of hand labour, and working thereon, as on the remaining days of the week, by gaming and playing, passing to taverns and alehouses, remaining from the parish kirk in time of sermon or prayers on the Sundays," the holding of mar- kets on these days, or any other [holiday], in the churches, or within the churchyards, was prohibited under the penalty of con- fiscation of the goods for the use of the poor of the parish. All labouring was to be pimished by a fine of ten shillings Scots, or ninepence sterling in the case of a poor person ; and those guilty of gambling, drinking in taverns and alehouses, and wilful absence from the parish church, were to be amerced in the sum of twenty shillings Scots, to be assigned to the poor of the parish, and if they refused or were unable to pay the fines, they were ordered to be placed in the stocks, or " such other engine devised for pub- lic punishment," for twenty-four hours.* Another act was passed which distinctly recognised the Titular Episcopate. A complaint had been transmitted to the King by the last General Assembly respecting the prevalent practice of educating the youth of the upper classes abroad, by which they were in danger of attaching themselves to the " Pope's Kirk." It was enacted that all such shall obtain the royal sanction for their departure, and within twenty days after their return they were to repair to the Bishop, Superintendent, or commissioner of the Kirk, within whose bounds they resided, and make " confession of their faith according to the true religion established in the realm." • Acta Pai-1. Scot. vol. iii. p. 138. 1579.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. 175 In September 1579, a young nobleman arrived in Scotland who soon became the intimate favourite of the King, and the most amiable of that class of royal companions, but who subsequently encountered the unmitigated opposition and abuse of the Presby- terian party on the supposition that he was a Roman Catholic, simply because he had been educated in that system, and was re- lated to the House of Guise. This was Esme Stuart, Lord Aubigny in France, son of John Lord Aubigny, a younger son of John third Earl of Lennox, the grandfather of Lord Darnley, and consequently the great grand-father of the King. James x-eceived his accomplished relative with the utmost kindness, and made no secret of his partiality. He induced his grand-uncle, the Titular of Caithness, to resign the Earldom of Lennox for that of March in October following the ari-ival of Lord Aubigny, who was created Earl of Lennox, and invested with the revenues of the Abbey of Arbroath, which had devolved to the Crown by the forfeiture of Lord John Hamilton. Lord Aubigny was advanced to the dignity of Duke of Lennox in 1581. This nobleman, either from convic- tion or policy, embraced the Reformed i-eligion soon after his ar- rival in Scotland, by a public profession thereof in St Giles' church at Edinburgh, participating in the Sacrament, and subscrib- ing the Confession of 1560 at Stirling. But this was not con- sidered satisfactory by the Presbyterian party, and the rapid advancement of a foreigner afforded them a favourable pretext for exciting a clamour that the King's religious principles would be perverted. Some dispensations from Rome, real or pretended, were accidentally discovered, permitting those who held them to swear and subscribe whatever should be required, if they diligently advanced in secret the Roman Catholic faith. James, young as he was, perceived the mischief which might be occasioned by these misrepresentations, and caused John Craig, who was now ad- mitted as a kind of chaplain to the royal household, to compose a Confession of Faith, to satisfy his subjects that the charges against him and Lennox were groundless. The original, with all the sig- natures, is preserved, written on parchment, in the Advocates' Library at Edinburgh,* and is entitled " Ane Short and General " It is endorsed — " Covenant subscryved by King James of worthie memorie and his Household, 28 Jan. 1580, sent frome Somer, in France, by Monsieur [name obliter- ated] to my Lord Scotstarvet, Aug. 1641." It is printed in the " Booke of the Uni- versall Kirk of Scotland," Part Second, Bannatyne Club, p. 515, 518. 176 PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. [1580. Confession of the true Christian Faith, according to God's Word and Acts of our Parliament, subscribed by the King's Majesty and Household, with sundrie others, to the glorie of God, and good example of all men," on the 28th of January, and confirmed at Holyroodhouse on the second of March 1589-90. It chiefly con- sists of a fierce tirade against the Pope, and the doctrines, ceremo- nies, and practices of the Church of Rome, expressed in the most unmeasured language of vituperation. It was signed by the King, Lennox, Morton, Argyll, Ruthven, and the whole of the Privy Council. The only Titular who subscribed was the ex-Earl of Lennox, who merely adhibits his name, Robert Stewart, omitting his assumed title of Bishop of Caithness. A gentleman named Borthwick adds to his signature " with hand and heart." Two General Assemblies were held in 1580, the one commencing on the 12th of July at Dundee, at which the Laird of Lundie was pre- sent as the representative of the King, and the other at Edinburgh on the 20th of October. In the former the usual complaints were brought against the episcopal function in general, and particularly against the Titulars of Moray, Dunkeld, and Dunblane. Graham, the Titular of Dunblane, submitted himself to their authority and direction. The " office of a Bishop" was again denounced, and the Titulars of St Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Moray, were respectively ordered to appear before a Synodal Assembly, to be held in St Andrews, Glasgow, Aberdeen, and Elgin, on the 18th of August, and if they refused they were to be summoned before the next General Assembly. The Titulars of Brechin, Argyll, Ork- ney, Caithness, and The Isles, were also ordered to attend that Assembly, to " answer such things as shall be inquired of them." Certain articles were drawn up for the consideration of the King and Privy Council, one of which was that the " Book of the Policie may be established by an Act of the Privy Council, until a Parliament be had, at which time it may be confirmed." Esme Earl of Lennox endeavoured to propitiate the Presbyterian party, by addressing a letter to this Assembly, setting forth his gratitude to divine mercy for his safe arrival in Scotland, and that he had been " called to the knowledge of salvation since he came into the land" — ^that " though he had made an open declaration" to this effect in Edinburgh, and subscribed the Confession of his faith at Stirling, he thought it his duty to " make them a free and humble 1580.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. 177 offer of due obedience, and to receive them well in any thing it shall please them," assuring them that he would " always be ready to perform the same with all humility." In the other General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 20th of October that year, it is recorded that the Titulars of St Andrews, Glasgow, Abei'deen, and Moray, did not appear when called on the second day. The proceedings on the third, fourth, fifth, sixth, and part of the seventh sittings are not recorded, several leaves of the original register having been torn out in 1584. Probably this ex- plains the charge preferred against the titular Archbishop Adamson by John Row, that he mutilated the Register of the General Assem- bly. Some submission must have been tendered by the titulars of St Andrews, Glasgow, and The Isles, for those of Moray, Aberdeen, Caithness, and Brechin, especially the two latter, were summoned to appear in the next General Assembly, and conform to the ex- ample of the others. The same was intimated to Bothwell of Orkney. Adamson of St Andrews is mentioned, though not in his titular capacity, as personally present. He was nominated to act with several on a matter connected with that University, and also to confer with the King on some of their demands. Andrew Melville was ordered, against his own inclination according to his nephew,* to resign his office of Principal and Professor in the Uni- versity of Glasgow in favour of Mr Thomas Smeaton, and remove to St Andrews, " to begin the work of theology there with such as he thought fit to take with him to that effect." Probably the most important statement in the records of this meeting is the order to divide the kingdom into Presbyteries, and to report to the next Assembly. Melville was admitted to his new office in the University of St Andrews in December that year. He was cordially received by the titular Archbishop, who, says James Melville, " resorted to our lessons, and kept familiar friendship with Mr Andrew, pro- mising what could lie in him for the welfare of that work. He had taken himself to the University of St Andrews, and taught twice in the week exceeding sweetly and eloquently ."-f This testi- mony, which is that of an avowed enemy, is honourable to Adam- son's character. It is even stated that Andrew Melville often " James Melville's Diary, printed for the Wodrow Society, 8vo. Edinburgh, 1842, p. 83. t Jbid. p. 85. 12 178 PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. [1581. preached for him when he was absent. They were so intimate that Melville borrowed a horse from the Titular, to enable him to attend the General Assembly held at Glasgow on the 24th of April 1581, which is an additional proof of Adamson's good nature, for he knew well that the " platform of Presbytery'' was to be ra- tified on that occasion chiefly by the instigation of Melville. This General Assembly is noted as the first in which the Pres- byterian system, as subsequently known in Scotland, was develop- ed. It was reported that exclusive of the Dioceses of Argyll and The Isles, the rentals of which had been seized by the Earl of Argyll after the Reformation, Scotland contained about nine hun- dred and twenty-four churches, some of which were " pendicles," probably chapelries, and many of them were in ruins. Sundry of the parishes were also declared to be too large for the convenient resort of the inhabitants to the churches. It was proposed to re- duce the number of parish churches to six hundred, in every one of which was to be a minister, and the stipends were to be paid as follows : — One hundred at 500 merks each, two hundred at 300 merks, two hundred at L.lOO, and one hundred at 100 merks, or " somewhat more or less."" These six hundred parishes were to be divided into fifty Presbyteries, twelve, or " thereabouts" to form a Presbytery ; three of those Presbyteries, or " more or fewer, as the country lies, to make a Diocese a certain number of Presby- teries were to form a Synod, and the members sent by those Synods were proposed to constitute the General Assemblies. A form of the " Dioceses" and Presbyteries was drawn up in the following order : — Orkney, to consist of the Presbyteries of Ting- wall and Kirkwall ; Caithness — Wick and Dornoch ; Edinburgh — Dalkeith, Edinburgh, Linlithgow, and Stirling ; Haddington, to comprize Haddington and Dunbar; Ross — Chanonrie, Tain, and Dingwall ; Moray — Forres, Elgin, and Inverness ; Banff — Banfi^, Deer, and Kildrummie ; Aberdeen — Aberdeen, Inverury, and Kincardine O'Neil ; Angus — Dundee, Kirriemuir, and Ket- tins ; Mearns — Bervie and Fordoun ; Dunkeld — Perth, Dunkeld, and Crieff ; St Andrews — St Andrews, Falkland, and Dunferm- line ; J edburgh — Chirnside, Dunse, Kelso, and Jedburgh ; Peebles — Melrose, Peebles, and Biggar ; Glasgow — Lanark, Glasgow, and Dunbarton ; Ayr — Ayr, Irvine, Maybole, and Colmonell ; Galloway — Whithorn and Kirkcudbright; Dumfries — Dumfries, 1581.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. 179 Penpont, Lochmaben, and Annan ; in all, eighteen Synods or " Dioceses," and fifty-three Presbyteries.* Such was the outline of the Presbyterian division of Scotland submitted to the General Assembly, to enable him to be present at which in proper time Melville borrowed a horse from the titu- lar Archbishop Adamson. As the time was too limited to take the whole into consideration, it was unanimously resolved that an experiment should be made — " ane beginning be had of the Pres- byteries instantly" — and the Presbyteries of Edinburgh, Hadding- ton, Dunbar, Chirnside, Linlithgow, Dunfermline, St Andrews, Dundee, Perth, Stirling, Glasgow, Ayr, and Irvine, were ordered to be constituted, but to most of them more than double the propos- ed twelve parishes were allotted. A certain number of persons were appointed to see those Presbyteries constituted before the ensuing May, and it is curious to find among them the names and titles of the Titulars of Glasgow and Dunblane. The only other transaction worthy of notice in this Assembly was connected with their " Policie," or Second Book of Discipline. Having failed to obtain a ratification of it by the King and Parliament, they order- ed it to be recorded in their registers, in the " Acts of the Kirk, and to remain therein ad perpetuam rei mmioriam, and copies thereof to be taken to every Presbytery." In this position the Second Book of Discipline still continues. The Confession of Faith, already mentioned as signed by the King and Privy Coun- cil, was unanimously declared to be " ane true and Christian Con- fession." James Melville describes it as "most notable," but he alleges as a reason for not inserting it in his Diary that copies were in the dwellings and hands of all.-f The King and the Lords of Secret Council olfered no opposition to this new division of the kingdom into Presbyteries, as appears from their declaration on the 9th of May 1581, in which " the King''s Majesty, with advice of the Lords of the Secret Council," finding that the spurious ecclesiastical polity would not be perma- nent, appointed commissioners to attend to the business.;!: They evidently resolved to carry into effect their own measures, in de- fiance of the General Assembly, the Second Book of Discipline, • Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part Second, p. 480, 481, 482. t James Melville's Diary, Wodrow Society, p. 87. J Booke of the Universall Kirk of Scotland, Part Second, p. 519, .520, 521. 180 PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. [1581. and the Presbyterian leaders. It was soon apparent that they had no intention of abandoning the Titular Episcopacy. Boyd, often mentioned as the titular Archbishop of Glasgow, died in 1581, and a successor to him was soon found in the person of Mr Robert Montgomery, minister at Stirling, who is accused of con- senting to become the tool of the Duke of Lennox, who was to re- ceive, for the payment of a small allowance annually, the whole revenues of the Archbishopric. The melancholy downfall and fate of one prominent personage in the drama of those times may be here noticed. The Earl of Morton, during whose Regency, and by whose influence, the Titular Episcopate was established, had fallen on the scaffold on the 2d of June that year, the victim of his own crimes, but chiefly of the hatred of one of the most unprin- cipled adventurers of that age, the notorious James Stewart of Bothwellmuir, second son of Andrew Lord Ochiltree, whose mother was the only daughter of James first Earl of Arran. This per- son, who had served in the Army of the States of Holland against the Spaniards, and was known by the title of " Captain" Stewart, returned to Scotland in 1579, and having obtained the favour of James VL, who appointed him to various offices, he commenced a fierce opposition to the Earl of Morton, against whom he prefer- red an accusation before the King in Council, in the Palace of Holyroodhouse, on the 30th of December 1580, of being accessory to the murder of Lord Darnley, the King's father, for which the Earl was tried and beheaded at Edinburgh by the instrument which he is said to have introduced, and well known as the Maiden. Stewart was a few months afterwards created Earl of Arran, and as such he is often mentioned in Scottish history, though the title was restored to the Hamilton Family in 1585, to whom it belong- ed. In 1596, when he was unexpectedly attacked near Douglas in Lanarkshire by Sir James Douglas of Parkhead, the nephew of Morton, who had long resolved to avenge the rigorous proceedings against his uncle, and killed him on the spot. The titular Archbishopric of Glasgow was thus vacant by the death of Boyd in June 1581, but the See was no more than no- minally vacant as it respects the temporalities, all of which were restored in 1588 by King James and the Parliament to Archbi- shop Beaton, who acted as ambassador at Paris, and enjoyed them till his death in 1603, having survived the Reformation, from the 1581.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. effects of which he fled to the Continent, nearly forty-three years. The appointment of Montgomery as Titular was a very extraor- dinary transaction, and on his part sufficiently unprincipled. The See was placed by the King at the disposal of his favourite the Duke of Lennox, who offered it to various preachers, on the con- dition of contenting themselves with an annual pension, and as- signing to him the revenues. Montgomery, whose position as minister of Stirling made him well known to the Court, was in- duced to comply with the terms of the Duke of Lennox, who is accused " by Guisian counsel and direction of having pressed the restoring of the estate of Bishops."* It is admitted by Bishop Keith that " Mr Montgomery gave bond that he should dispone to this Duke and his heirs the income of his See, how soon he should be admitted Bishop, for the yearly payment of L.IOOO Scots, with some horse-corn and poultry ."f This " vile bargain," as Archbishop Spottiswoode justly terms it, sanctioned by the influ- ence of the Court, was a regular declaration against the Presby- terian party, and excited much popular clamour. Of Montgo- mery personally nothing is known, except that his name occurs as present at several General Assemblies, that he was in the habit of defending the sentiments of Melville, and had proposed to censure certain of the preachers who solicited an explanation of the Acts passed in the General Assemblies, which set forth that " the office of a Bishop was not warranted by the word of God." It was now resolved to make another gi'and attack on the law- fulness of the episcopal function, and the alleged simony commit- ted by Montgomery, though the disgraceful transaction could scarcely be considered as such, because he was not in holy orders, and could not by any possibility be a properly consecrated Bishop. The General Assembly held at Edinburgh on the 17th of October 1581 discussed both subjects. At the opening " the whole Bishops being called, none was present but Dunblane." After arranging sundry of their own affairs respecting the " platt," as they desig- nated their scheme of the formation of a certain number of parishes * into Presbyteries, a message from the King was communicated to them about the admission of Montgomery, to which they delayed • James Melville's Diary, Wodrow Society, p. 118. t Catalo-uc of Scottish Bishops, edited by Bishop Russell, p. 261, 262. 182 PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. [1581. an answer, and " charged the said Mr Robert not to depart till this Assembly be dissolved." On the fifth of their sittings certain commissioners from the King wished to be informed on the im- portant point affecting the legal constitution of the Parliaments. " If," they asked, " the office of Bishops was to be condemned, to which temporal jurisdiction was also annexed, such as voting in Parliament, assisting at the Privy Council, and defraying part of the taxation, what reason could be adduced to shew that the King could lawfully abolish the episcopal estate V A committee of ministers and gentlemen were appointed to consider this question, which " the Assembly thought very weighty and of great conse- quence,"" and on the following day they reported that " after long reasoning that they had agreed thus far, that, touching voting in Parliament and assisting in Council, commissioners from the general Kirk should supply the place of Bishops," and that the heritable bailies could " exercise the civil and criminal jurisdiction anent the office of Bishops." This crafty attempt to obtain power and influence, which was sanctioned by Andrew Melville, Pont, and others of the preachers, was favourably received, and the " judgment of their brethren allowed." In the case of Mont- gomery the King declared that he was willing to allow them to inquire into his life and doctrine, and Andrew Melville three days afterwards produced sixteen charges against him, which he was ordered to answer in " write " on a certain day. Some of these charges are curious, and evince the determination of the Presbyterian party to render Montgomery obnoxious. The first was that in a public sermon at Stirling he discussed the cir- cumcision of women, and concluded by stating as his opinion that the operation was performed on the " skin of their forehead." 2, He maintained openly in Glasgow that the disciphne of the Kirk was a matter of no importance. 4. He alleged that the [Presby- terian] ministers used fallacious and captious arguments, and were men of " curious brains." 5. That he spoke contemptuously of the Hebrew and Greek languages, and tauntingly asked in what school Peter and Paul graduated. 8. That he had designated the " law- ful calling in the Kirk" and the Second Book of Discipline, " trifles of policie." 9. That he had accused the ministers of sedition. 11. That he denied the " doctrine of Christ," who pronounced that the most part are rebellious and perish. 12. He denied that in 1581.] PROGRESS OF PRESBYTERIANISM. 183 the New Testament the presbytery or eldership \v. 787-792. IGIO.] ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 307 it is really not such an appalling document, considering the time when it appeared and the state of society. Whether King James acted constitutionally by erecting this Court without the sanction of the Parliament is another question, but as a considerable lean- ing to sedition characterized all the religious orations of the dis- affected party, he had very substantial reasons for using every means to keep them under salutary restraint. It is also very un- fair to impute the origin of the High Court of Commission solely to the Scottish Bishops. The deed certainly authorized the Arch- bishops of St Andrews and Glasgow with certain other persons, five of whom, including the Archbishops, were competent to act, to take cognizance of offenders in morals or religion in their respec- tive Dioceses, and if they found them obstinate and insolent, the said Archbishops were empowered to issue a mandate to the parochial incumbents to excommunicate them. If the incumbents refused to comply, they were liable to suspension, deposition, or imprisonment. Ordinary offenders were also liable to fines and imprisonment, and in cases of contumacy the Privy Council were enjoined to see the sentences of the Court enforced, and denounce the obstinate as rebels and enemies of the state. But it ought to be recollected, that though the two Archbishops and all the Bishops were enumerated, many of the most distinguished of the nobility, clergy, and gentry of the kingdom were nominated mem- bers of the Court. The Commission was most extensive, and shews that some such proceeding was necessary in the exigen- cies of the times. They were empowered to " take trial of all such persons that have made defection, or are suspected in religion," and to investigate " whatsoever they shall learn or understand of any ministers, preachers, or teachers of schools, or colleges, or universities, or of exhorters or lecturers, being readers within these bounds, whose speeches in public had been impertinent, and against the present established order of the Kirk, against any of the conclusions of the bypast General As- sembly, or in favour of any of those who are banished, warded, or confined for their contemptuous offences, which being no matter of doctrine, and so much idle time spent without instruc- tion of their auditors in their salvation, ought so much the more to be severely punished ; and in regard that they are ministers, who of all others should spend least idle talk, and especially in the chair of verity." 308 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. [1610. The next public affair was the General Assembly held at Glas- gow on the 8th of June 1610. The King, it is said by the suggestion of the Bishops, though that is of little consequence, had addressed a letter to the different Presbyteries, requiring them to choose the wisest, most discreet, and peaceably disposed ministers, to attend the Assembly, and that he had intimated to the Arch- bishop of St Andrews the persons whom he expected them to elect. The Archbishop, in terms of the King's letter, wrote to the several Presbyteries, enclosing the list of ministers to be chosen, and warning them of the consequences if they offered any opposition. It is said that money was also distributed to secure the disaffected ; but be this as it may, the Assembly met at Glasgow on the appointed day, and the Earl of Dunbar represented the sovereign, who was attended by Doctors Hampton, Myreton, and Hunsdon or Hudstone, clergymen of the Church of England. The account of the proceedings is worth narrating. The first day of the meeting was observed as a fast, when three sermons were preached. The first was by Archbishop Spottiswoode in the morning, in the Cathedral Church. His discourse, according to James Melville, was against sacrilegous persons, and he is said to have thus concluded — " You look that I should speak something of the purpose for which this Assembly is convened. I will say no more than this, that religion must not be entertained after the manner it was brought into the land [the Reformation]. It was brought in by confusion, it must be entertained by order ; it was brought into the land against authority, it must be entertained by authority." Bishop Law of Orkney preached in the forenoon on peace, which he maintained could only be secured by adherence to the truth, and then discussed the episcopal government of the Church on the principles of antiquity, universality, and perpetuity, which James Melville sapiently designates " papistical arguments," and " so concluded," says the same veracious Diarist, " the verity of the question for episcopal government with a solemn oath and protestation of his conscience in that matter ; little remembering what he had publicly preached at Synods concerning that matter, and what they had sworn and subscribed before the Bishopric moved his conscience." In the afternoon Dr Hudstone preached on the same subject. Archbishop Spottiswoode was chosen Moderator, and the prin- cipal points decided to be observed in all time coming were — laio.] ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 309 1 . That the Bishops were to be moderators in all Diocesan Synods, and those were to be held in April and October annually, or oftcner, at convenient places in the large Dioceses. 2. No sen- tence of excommunication or absolution was to be allowed without the knowledge and approval of the Bishop of the Diocese, who was to be answerable to the King for his proceedings in such matters of discipline ; and any complaint against whom, if proved in the General Assembly, was to be transmitted to the King. 3. In the cases of presentations to vacant parishes the Bishop was to receive letters-testimonial of the " conversation, ability, and qualification,"" of the candidates, and if these were satis- factory, the Bishop, " assisted by such of the ministry of the bounds as lie will assume to himself, and as he will be answerable, to perfect the whole act of ordination.""' 4. The Bishop to have the sole power of deposition. 5. An oath of supremacy and alle- giance, and obedience to the Ordinary, to be taken by every per- son admitted to a cure and benefice, according to the form autho- rized in 1571. 6. The visitation of the Diocese to be performed by the Bishop, who was empowered to appoint a visitor in the large Dioceses, if he was unable to ovei-take the whole duty, and all incumbents who were wilfully absent from the diocesan meet- ings were to be suspended, and deprived if contumacious. 7. The weekly devotional exercises were to be continued at the usual meetings, the Bishop to preside, if present, or any other person appointed in the Diocesan Synod. 8. The Bishops were to be subjected " in all things concerning their life, conversation, office, and benefice,"'"' to the censure of the General Assembly, and if found guilty, to be deprived by advice and consent of the King. 9. That every person elected a Bishop shall have completed the fortieth year of his age, and shall have been " an actual teaching minister for the space of ten years at least."'"' No General Assem- blies were to be allowed without permission of the King, and no minister was to speak either publicly or privately against the resolutions of that Assembly under pain of deposition. All these articles were read several times in the General Assem- bly, and were approved by the nobility, gentlemen, and ministers present, with the exception of five who voted against them, and seven who refused to vote. Thus the Presbyterian system was overthrown in one day — " ane work," says James Melville, 310 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. [1610. " seventy years in building, and above twenty-four years spacious and profitable standing." Calderwood,'" observes Mr Scott, " pronounces this Assembly at Glasgow a woful Assemhly. It was indeed so with regard to Presbytery, and was therefore con- demned by the famous Assembly which met afterwards at Glasgow in IGSS.""* " Among the other directions,"'' says this Presby- terian annotator, " which the King, by virtue of his assumed supremacy, sent to the Church, this was one — ' Considering that lay elders have neither warrant in the Word [of God], nor example of the Primitive Church, and that nevertheless it is ex- pedient that some be appointed to assist the minister in repairing the fabric of the churches, providing elements to the holy com- munion, and collecting the contributions for the poor, with other necessary services, the minister is to make choice of the most wise and discreet persons in his parish to that effect, and present their names to the Ordinary, that his approbation may be had thereto.' Also — ' That the ministers of the parish be authorized to call before them, and their associates so allowed, all public and notorious offenders, according to the canons of the Church, or if they be obstinate and contumacious, declare their names to the Bishop, that order may be taken with them.' " It is not to be supposed that a change so important in the ecclesiastical constitution of the kingdom would be tacitly acknow- ledged, yet the wonder is, that it excited so little opposition from the people. The Presbyterian preachers, as most materially affected by the establishment of the Episcopal Church, were loud in thoir clamours, and some of them freely expressed their opinions. Mr Patrick Simpson lifted up his testimony against the proceed- ings of this Glasgow Assembly in a sermon preached at Stirling to certain of the " Nobility, Bishops, and ministers," which James Melville designates " a great and solemn audience," but his senti- ments were allowed to pass unnoticed. Mr Walter Balcanqual comported himself similarly in Edinburgh, for which he was sum- moned before the Council, and though he bitterly assailed Bishop Law of Orkney for what he called " apostacie and perjurie," ho escaped with a simple admonition. A certain merchant in Edin- burgh, named William Kemp, who had made himself conspicuous • Extracts from Kirk-Session Records of Perth, in Advocates' Library, Edinburjrh, MS. IGIO.] ESTABLISHMEiNT OF THE CHURCH. 311 by his inflammatory speeches, was in danger of a severe punish- ment, but Archbishop Spottiswoode interfered, and after an im- prisonment of a few days, he was admonished and set at liberty. Archbishop Spottiswoode and Bishop Lamb of Brechin soon afterwards repaired to the Court, followed by Bishop Hamilton of Galloway, to lay before the King a statement of their proceedings. According to James Melville the three hitherto titular Prelates remained in England till after their consecration on the 21st of October 1610. Although they were not Bishops till that invest- ment of the episcopal authority, up to that period they are men- tioned in the present work as such, because they were then duly consecrated. While Archbishop Spottiswoode and Bishops Lamb and Hamilton were in England, the following discussion occurred in the Diocesan Synod of Fife, held at St Andrews, by Archbishop Gladstanes on the 9th of October. It is related by Calderwood, but ^Ir Scott in his extracts from the Perth Kirk-Session Registers adds some particulars which entitle his account to the preference. " The Syn(;d met in the aisle of the church of St Andrews. On the east side of the aisle was set a table covered with a green cloth, and a green velvet cushion upon it before the Archbishop. A stool was placed beside it for the Clerk of Court. After prayer, and the choosing of the clerk, the Archbishop, still acting as moderator, proposed that according to custom some ministers should be nominated as members of the private committee. Then Mr John Malcolm, minister at Perth, spoke after this luannex' — ' Seeing we are here convened to see what shall be done to the glory of God and well [being] of his Kirk, we should know by what authority, and upon what ground, the order of our Kirk established by so many famous General Assemblies, and ratified by Acts of Parliament, was altered ; for we cannot see that order altered but with grief of heart, seeing we acknowledge it to be the only true form of government of Christ's Kirk.' The Archbishop in rage, and with contempt, answered — ' That he would not have believed that such an aged man would have uttered such foolish talk. Could he be ignorant of the Acts of the Assembly of Glas- gow ? He [the Archbishop] would be moderator according to that warrant ; and he was persuaded that none there present, ex- cept Mr ISIalcolm himself, was of a contrary judgment.' Mr Wil- liam Erskine, minister, said — ' My Lord, our reverend brother 312 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. [1610. and aged father hath not spoken without reason, for suppose we be come here thinking it is his Majesty's will, y^t we are not minded to do any thing, by God's grace, against our conscience. We would first see the warrant of your modei'atorship, otherwise if you do any thing tyrannically, it would be better for us to be absent than present.' The Archbishop answered — ' Who should inform you of the Acts of the Assembly ? I will not satisfy any of your hearts that way. If ye will depart, on your own peril be it. If there were but three or four to remain, I shall do my duty and service to the King's Majesty.' Mr John Kinnier, minister, said — ' Think you that this can be a meeting to God's glory, or to do any good, when you will sit to do as you please, and will not with patience hear the brethren ? You will find miscontentment in more here convened, if you give us not some warrant.' " The Archbishop became more calm, and said — ' It is strange, brethren, that you are so much about an indiffbrent matter. What avails it who be moderator, if nothing be done but to the contentment of you all I I shall promise before God that nothing shall be done but with the consent of the whole or greater part of the Assembly.' Mr William Cowpar, minister at Perth [after- wards Bishop of Galloway], said — ' My Lord, it were well done to go to the matter in hand, and then to let the brethren receive con- tentment.' Without farther opposition the Archbishop proceeded, and the private committee was chosen. After the Synod had gone through some other business, the Archbishop intimated to all present that if any man should speak against the acts of the Assembly of Glasgow he should be deposed, and farther punished according to his Majesty's pleasure. The Acts of the Glasgow Assembly were then read, with the hearing of which the brethren were much moved. After some had delivered their opinions, Mr William Cowpar said — ' My Lord, hear me ; and, brethren, I be- seech you in Christ, remember that these things are not such essential points as to rend the bowels of the Kirk, or to cast your ministry in hazard for them. AVhat joy can you have in your suffering, if ye suffer for matters so indifferent as who shall be moderator, or who shall have imposition of hands ? Wherefore serveth it to fill the people's ears with contentious doctrine con- cerning the government of the Kirk ? Were it not far better to preach Christ sincerely, [and] to wait on and see what the Lord IGIO.] ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 313 will work in these matters V Some more of the brethren having delivered their opinions, Mr David Mearns, minister, said — ' We can do no less than testify our miscontentment, and protest before God that we are not satisfied, and therefore will wait till the Lord grant a better time.' ' Then do so,' said the Archbishop, ' and let us conclude."' "* A somewhat similar scene occurred in the Diocesan Synod of Lothian, which was then in the Archdiocese of St Andrews. Archbishop Gladstanes, in his missive summoning the Synod to meet at Haddington on the 1st of November, required so many of their number in that Synod to be present, attended by two or three commissioners from every parish, assuring them that if they refused, he would consider it his duty to enforce the penalty en- joined by the Glasgow General Assembly, which would be at least suspension from the ministerial office. This intimation was the more necessary, as he anticipated some opposition in that quarter, but he was a man of firm determination, and was resolved to assert his authority. On the appointed day the Archbishop opened the Diocesan Synod by preaching a sermon on the passage. Judges xi. 12, and then took his place as Moderator. The discontented preachers had instructed a certain Mr James Carmichael, who is described as moderator of the Presbytery of Haddington, to organize the opposition, which in the end was a complete failure. The Archbishop stated that they must elect a clerk, and requested Mr John Ker, minister at Prestonpans, whom he designed for the office, to give his vote. That individual replied — " Sir, there is an- other matter which must go before the choosing of a clerk." " What is that V enquired the Archbishop. " The Presbytery," said Ker, " had given commission to Mr James Carmichael, their moderator, to present some few lines in their name, which I trust the Synod will find reasonable." " Nothing," replied the Arch- bishop, " can be received conveniently either by word or writing • Calderwood could not resist inserting the following accident, with which, if it really happened as he represents, it is evident Archbishop Gladstanes had nothing to do, and it might have occurred in the house of a Presbyterian minister. — " Upon the Sabbath-day after this Diocesan Synod, Bishop Gladstanes, reposing himself in his bed in time of the afternoon's sermon [at St Andrews], was wakened, and all the people in the kirk raised with a cry of blood and murder ; for his sister's son killed his cook with a throw of his dagger, just under the left pap [breast], while he was beginning to prepare the supper." 314 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. [1610. without a clerk, and I therefore request you to vote.'''' " I will now,'" said Ker, " stand to give my vote under protestation, that it shall not be prejudicial to that which shall be said or done bv me, or by my brethren afterward.'''' The clerk was then chosen, and after some uninteresting discussion, a Mr Archibald Oswald com- menced a speech. The Archbishop soon saw that he intended to decline his episcopal authority, and rising in an angry tone said — " What is that I am doing I I am not come here to reason, or contend with words, but to execute laws ; and therefore I will not hear you, nor any man speak more so in public. I order you to be silent." " If you will not hear me, but command me silence,'" replied the said Mr Archibald, " I shall be always silent.'''' " I mean not to hinder you,'''' observed the Archbishop, " to speak in right time and place. You shall be heard in the Privy Conference with your bills and protestations ; and if they be reasonable they shall have a reasonable answer." The Archbishop then com- manded silence till the votes were taken, and the committee was appointed. Calderwood observes at this stage of the proceedings — " None well affected [as he designates the Presbyterians] were chosen, one excepted. The three brethren above named found no assistance, as was pronounced both by their own brethren and the Presbytery of Dalkeith.'"* The discussion was resumed in the afternoon, the Archbishop exhorting them to be peaceable, and promising that he would con- cede every prudent demand. " But as for myself," he stated, " I dare not, nor will I, exempt you from obedience ; but will be con- tent to communicate my light to you, whereof I am well assured.'" " We,'" replied Mr John Ker, " are as willing to communicate our light to you, whereof we are as well assured f and he insisted that the Archbishop ought not to exercise jurisdiction over them. The before-mentioned Mr Oswald declared—" I will not refuse to obey any law of the Kirk, so far as my weak body and tender con- science suffers me, but as concerning this matter that we have now in hand, I am resolved not to obey, because my conscience will not ' Mr Calderwood records an accident which any man of common sense will at once admit might have happened to any Presbyterian minister as well as to Archbishop Glad- stanes. " While the Bishop was going to dinner he had almost broken his leg, for a great stone at the entrance of the kirk door, almost six quarters every way broad and long, steeped within and fell down with him, howbeit two or three hundred had gone out before him ; whereupon was made a pretty epigram in Latin." History, p. 643. ICIO.] ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 315 suffer " I hope we are all of this mind," said Mr John Ker. The Archbishop replied — " Obey it, or not obey it, upon your own peril, for ye know it." A trifling discussion ensued on the follow- ing day, apparently on local matters, and Calderwood admits that there was no more opposition in this Synod. He further states — " What opposition was made in other Synods by some of the best sort, I have not enquired. Howsoever it was, the Bishops were become so awful with their grandeur and the King's assistance, that there was little resistance, howbeit great murmuring and malcontentment, so that their possession was violent." Even from this statement by a Presbyterian enemy the real truth is easily deduced. We now come to that event which imparted to the Church of Scotland its episcopal constitution, which it had previously been merely in name. This was the consecration of Arch- bishop Spottiswoode of Glasgow, Bishop Lamb of Brechin, and Bishop Hamilton of Galloway. Archbishop Spottiswoode's own account of this event, in which he was personally interested, is worthy of notice. He and his two diocesan colleagues went to London in the middle of September by royal command. " At their first audience," says the Archbishop, " the King declared what the business was for which he had called them, speak- ing to this purpose — ' That he had to his great charge re- covered the Bishoprics forth of the hands of those that possessed them, and bestowed the same upon such as he hoped should prove worthy of their places ; but since he could not make them Bishops, nor could they assume that honour to themselves, and that in Scotland there was not a sufficient number to enter charge by consecration, he had called them to England, that being conse- crated themselves, they might at their return give ordination to those at home, and so the adversaries'' mouths be stopped, who said that he did take upon him to create Bishops, and bestow spi- ritual offices, which he never did, nor would presume to do, ac- knowledging that authority to belong to Christ alone, and those he had authorized with his power.' The Archbishop [Spottis- woode] answering in the name of the rest — ' That they were willing to obey his Majesty's desire, and only feared that the Church of Scotland, because of old usurpations, might take this for a sort of subjection to the Church of England.' The King said — ' That he 316 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. [IGIO. had provided sufficiently against that ; for neither should the Arch- bishop of Canterbury nor York, who were the only pretenders [asserters of metropolitan jurisdiction], have hand in the business, but consecration should be used by the Bishops of London, Ely, and Bath. The Scottish Bishops thanking his Majesty for the care he had of their Church, and professing their willingness to obey what he would command, the 21st of October was appointed to be the time, and the Chapel of London-House the place of con- secration. A question in the meantime was moved by Dr Andrews, Bishop of Ely, touching the consecration of the Scottish Bishops, who, as he said, must first be ordained Presbytefrs, as having re- ceived no ordination from a Bishop. The Archbishop of Canter- bury, Dr Bancroft, who was by, maintained ' that thereof there was no necessity, seeing where Bishops could not be had the ordi- nation given by the presbyters must be esteemed lawful, otherwise that it might be doubted if there were any lawful vocation in most of the Reformed Churches.' This applauded to by the other Bishops, Ely acquiesced, and at [on] the day and in the place ap- pointed the three Scottish Bishops were consecrated." Thus far our venerable Archbishop describes the first consecra- tion, or extension of the episcopal succession into Scotland. With all due deference to Archbishop Bancroft, whose observations Dr Cook very naturally considers "judicious," in overruling the objec- tions of the Bishop of Ely, it cannot be doubted that this conse- cration, though valid, would have been thoroughly canonical, if the Archbishop and the two Bishops had been previously ordained Deacons and Presbyters. " With due regard to Bancroft's me- mory," says CoUier, cited by Dr Cook, " his argument seems to stand upon a slender bottom, for without doubt neither Luther nor Calvin is the standard of discipline and government ; it is the Primi- tive plan we ought to proceed by in these matters. And therefore, if any modern Christian writer happen to refine upon Catholic mea- sures, and desert from the government of the Chui'ch settled for fifteen hundred years together ; if any Christians, I say, pretend to reform in this unfortunate manner, though they may call for our pity or our prayers, they ought never to command our imitation." Although Archbishop Spottiswoode generally mentions that the three consecrating Prelates appointed by the King were Dr George Abbot, Bishop of London, Dr Launcelot Andrews, Bishop of Ely, 1610.] ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 317 and Dr James Montague, Bishop of Bath and Wells, yet it ap- pears that the last named Bishop could not attend, and his place was supplied by Dr. Richard Neale, then Bishop of Rochester, and Dr Henry Parry, then Bishop of Worcester.* Calder\vood''s observations on this consecration are amusing. He denies its validity because it was not enjoined by the Glasgow General Assembly — that " unhappy pack," he calls them, " there convened." But what had the consecration to do with that As- sembly ? His grand argument is, that " the power granted to them was only a power derived from that convention, which another Assembly may take from them again, without degradation or exe- cration, as they call it. Their consecration then is of no force, and ought not to be acknowledged." The absurdity of this rea- soning is apparent. The objections of Bishop Andrews of Ely were more important. The consecrated Bishops returned to Scotland in December, and duly invested Archbishop Gladstanes of St Andi-ews with the episcopal function. It is stated, in a manuscript evidently written about the beginning of the seventeenth century,-]- that Archbishop Gladstanes " was consecrated in St Andrews, conform to the order, and has as great jurisdiction as any of his predecessors had at any time then before. He was consecrated in the parish kirk of St Andrews, the penult of December, and with him the Bishop of Orkney, by the Archbishop of Glasgow and the Bishops of Gal- loway and Brechin." Caldervvood states that " upon the Lord's Day, the 13th of January [1611], and upon the Lord's Day, the 24th February, the rest of the Bishops were consecrated, some at • James Melville in his Diary (Wodrow Society's edition, p. 803, 804), scruples not to volunteer the falsehood respecting this consecration, that the Archbishop and the two Bishops were " solemnlie inaugurat and consccrat with anoynting of oyle and other ceremonies, just according to English fashioun and Pontifical Papists." It would be ridiculous to refute this lying statement about the " oyle" and the fashion of the " Pon- tifical Papists," farther than by referring the reader to the order of consecrating Bishops printed in many editions of the Book of Common Prayer. Sir James Balfour, who had as good channels of information as James Melville, after stating that the three Scottish Bishops were consecrated in the Chapel of London-House by the Bishops of Loudon, Ely, Worcester, and Rochester, s:iys — " This consecration was performed, mutatis mutandis, according to the Church of England." Historical Works of Sir James Balfour, Knight and Baronet, Lord Lyon King-at-Arms to Charles L and Charles II., vol. ii. 35, 36. t Wodrow MSS. 4to. vol. xx. No. I, cited in " Analecta Scotica," edited by James Maidment, Esq. Advocate. Scconi Serie.-i, Edinburgh, 1837, p. 10. 318 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. [1611. St Andrews, and some at Leith.'" That they had been invested with the episcopate in the early part of IGll, is evident from a letter of Archbishop Gladstanes to King J ames, dated the 3d of May in that year — " All the Bishops," he informs the King, " of ray Province are now consecrated, for after that I had performed that work so in Leith and Edinburgh that the very precisians, who had carried prejudice about that purpose, were fully satisfied, being infoi'med that those in the North who be within my Diocese are more unruly than any in the South, spoke calumniously both in public and private of that consecration, I thought meet there also to practise that action, and thereupon have consecrated the Bishops of Aberdeen and Caithness in the cathedral kirk of Brechin, being assisted with [by] the Bishops of Dunkeld and Brechin, in the sight of such a multitude of people as I never saw in such bounds."* It will thus be seen that the Episcopal Church was established in Scotland in the course of a few years without any formidable con- tentions. Some of the more violent of the Presbyterian preachers grumbled and remonstrated, but no civil war, no riots, no commo- tions, ensued. In reality the great mass of the people were passive, and no serious opposition was even attempted. The church was established, moreover, by Parliaments of the whole nobility of the kingdom, and the representatives of the counties and royal burghs. Such are the historical facts, however much they may be distorted or denied by the Presbyterian writers. The mode of inducting the parochial clergy to the benefices during the establishment of the Episcopal Church is thus described by Erskine in his " Principles of the Law of Scotland :" — " Upon presentation by the patron, the Bishop collated or conferred the benefice upon the presentee by a writing, in which he appointed certain ministers of the Diocese to induct or institute him into the church, which induction completed his right, and was performed by their placing him in the pulpit, and delivering the Bible and the keys of the church." • Wodrow's MS. Collections, vol. i. p. 302. IGll.l 319 CHAPTER III. PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH — BISHOP COWPAR OF GAL- LOWAY— TRLA.L OP OGILVIE THE JESUIT — DEATH OF ARCHBISHOP GLADSTANES. The year 1611 presents few events of importance in the eccle- siastical history of Scotland. Even Calderwood can only mention a Mr John Straton, minister of Forres, who was cited before the Archbishop of St Andrews and some of the Privy Council for attacking the episcopal office, in a sermon at which the Bishop of Moray was present, and he was imprisoned in the Castle of Inver- ness. Those records of the kirk-sessions which the present writer has examined are chiefly occupied by local cases of discipline, and punishment for profaning the Sabbath by absence from sermons and strolling in the fields. During the year 1611, the Bishopric of Raphoe in Ireland became vacant by the preferment of Dr George Montgomery to the see of Meath. Bishop Montgomery was a native of Scotland, and had been Dean of Norwich before his advancement by King James to the see of Clogher in 1605. Andrew Knox, Bishop of The Isles, was translated to Raphoe, and Thomas Knox, his son, was his successor in the remote insular Diocese. Keith, whose date of the translation of Bishop Andrew Knox to Raphoe is most inaccurate, describes him as a " good man, and did much within his Diocese by propagating religion but he acted in a most irregular manner in Ireland, at least on one occasion, as adduced by Bishop Mant, when he was actually present at the ordination of a candidate who objected to the principles and practices of the Church, and countenanced an unlawful form.* This transaction is subsequently noticed in the proper place. * History of the Church of Ireland from the Reformation to the Revolution, by the Right Rev. Richard Mant, D.D., Lord Bishop of Down, Connor, and Dromore, 8vo. 1840, p. 4.56, 457. 320 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1G12. Calderwood inserts a letter of Archbishop Gladstanes to the King, dated Edinburgh, the 31st of August 1612, in reference to the approaching Parhament. If it is a genuine document it is sufficiently obsequious, though not much more so than most of the epistolary correspondence addressed to James I. The writer in- forms the King that he found Archbishop Spottiswoode of Glas- gow, and Sir Thomas Hamilton of Priestfield, the Secretary of State, cordially to agree with him about the matters to be discus- sed in the Parliament, and strongly advising the meeting to be held precisely on the 12th of October ensuing, as intimated by the proclamation of the 24th of August. It appears from the letter that the Bishops were then at variance with the Earl of Dunferm- line, then Lord Chancellor, of whom the Archbishop thus writes — " I will assure your Majesty that the very evil will which is carried to my Lord Chancellor by the nobility and people is like to make us great store of friendship, for they know him to be our professed enemy, and he dissembletli it not. I thank God that it pleased your Majesty to make choice of my Lord Seci-etary to be our formahst, and adviser of our acts, for we find him wise, fast, and discreet. We will not be idle in the meantime to prepai'e such as have vote to incline the right way. All men do follow us, and hunt for our favour, upon the report of your Majesty's good accept- ance of me, and the Bishop of Caithness, and sending for my Lord [Archbishop] of Glasgow, and the procurement of this Parliament without advice of the Chancellor.'''' The Archbishop jocularly styles the Secretary of State the " fourteenth Bishop of this king- dom^'' and wittily says to the King — " But my Lord of Glasgow and I are contending to which of the two Provinces he shall ap- pertain. Your Majesty, who is our great Archbishop, must decide it.'''' Calderwood's raving comments on this letter are ludicrous. He assails the writer for " traducing the Chancellor, and would make the King believe that he was hated by the people for hating them'''' — the Bishops, " and how again they recommended Sir Thomas Hamilton, lately made Secretary, as a sure and fast friend, worthy to be reputed the fourteenth Bishop ; no doubt because they had found him as forward in their course as any of themselves, he had given a proof before when he was the King's Advocate.'''' The Parliament met at Edinburgh on the 12th of October, the lG12.j PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 321 Earl of Dunfermline, Lord Chancellor, representing the Sovereign. The only Bishops absent were those of Orkney, The Isles, and Ross. On the following day the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the Bishops of Dunkeld, Galloway, Brechin, Dun- blane, and Caithness, were chosen among the Lords of the Articles. The first statute was a " Ratification of the Acts and Conclusions set down and agreed upon in the General Assembly held in Glas- gow in June IGIO, with an Explanation by the Estates of some of the Articles of the same." This act is a confirmation of the Glasgow decisions — that no General Assembly can be legally held without permission of the sovereign — that the Bishops shall be moderators in every Diocesan Synod — that Diocesan Synods shall be held twice annually in every Diocese, and in the larger Dioceses two or three Synods — that in the absence of the Bishop " a worthy minister bearing charge within the bounds " shall supply the place of the Diocesan who was to be appointed by the Archbishop — and that no excommunication or absolution shall be pronounced with- out the knowledge and approbation of the Bishop of the Diocese, who must be answerable to God and his ^Majesty for all formal and impartial proceeding therein." The proceedings relating to presentations to benefices and the deposition of incumbents were confirmed, and the oath of allegiance and supremacy was declared imperative. All these " acts, ordinances, declarations, and de- liberations, " were approved and ratified, annulling and rescinding the 114th act of his Majesty's Parliament held in 1592."* Various acts were passed in this Parliament connected with the temporalities of the Scottish Church, but these are chiefly local. The thirty-fifth act dissolved the Archdeanery of St An- drews, and annexed it to the Archbishopric. The Archdean of St Andrews was then Alexander Gladstanes, son of the Arch- bishop. Among the Ratifications to individuals is one of the " Bishopric of Galloway in favour of Mr William Cowpar, with some reservations in favour of some particular persons from the same act."-f- The See of Galloway must have been promised to Cowpar during the life of Bishop Hamilton, or it corrects a date in Keith's " Catalogue," that Bishop Hamilton of Galloway died in 1014. In the Perth Register Mr Scott says — " Mr William Cowpar had been made Bishop of Galloway July 31, 1612 ; but • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iv. p. 465-470. f Ibid. p. 522. 21 322 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1G13. he still continued to officiate as one of the ministers of Perth, and did so till the end of October 1615." The first of the duly consecrated Bishops died in 1612. This was Bishop Campbell of Argyll. He was succeeded in the See in 1613 by Andrew Boyd, then minister of Eaglesham in Renfrew- shire, said to have been an illegitimate son of Thomas fifth Lord Boyd, ancestor of the Earls of Kilmarnock. Keith describes Bishop Boyd as " a good man, and did much good in his Diocese, where he always resided." The year 1613 also furnishes few ecclesiastical events of general importance. In February a pro- clamation, obtained by the influence of Archbishop Spottiswoode, was announced at the Cross of Edinburgh, granting liberty to the Presbyterian preachers within the Diocese of Glasgow to attend the Established Presbyteries and Synods, on the condition that they conduct themselves with moderation and respect to their superiors. Calderwood, who was then minister of Crailing in Rox- burghshire, states that he and Mr George Johnstone, minister at Ancrum in the same county, chose rather to submit to restraint than comply with the proclamation. It must not be inferred, however, that either Mr Calderwood, or Mr Johnstone, or any of their brethren, was in prison. They were merely, as it respects preaching, confined to their parishes, and prevented from any share in the public business of the Church. In the case of Calder- wood, he had been under this novel restraint since 1608, for an act of contumacy in declining the jurisdiction of Archbishop Spottiswoode at a dioceasn visit to the Synod of Merse and Tiviot- dale. About this time died David Lindsay, Bishop of Ross, the same who prominently figures as minister of Leith in the Titular or Tulchan periods. It is said that at his death he was eighty-two or eighty-three years of age. He was in great favour with King James, whom he accompanied into England in 1603. Keith de- scribes him as a " grave and pious man," and observes that he continued his ministry in the town of Leith till the day of his death." Bishop Lindsay was succeeded in the Diocese of Ross by Patrick Lindsay, minister of St Vigean's in Forfarshire, close to the royal burgh of Arbroath, part of which, including the ruins of the stately abbey founded by William the Lion, is in the parish. Keith rightly conjectures that Bishop Lindsay was the uncle of 1614.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 323 Patrick Lindsay. The latter was nominated to the See of Ross in October 1613, and was consecrated in the parish church of Leith on the 1st of December. James Melville, nephew of Andrew Melville, died at Berwick- upon-Tweed, to which he had been confined during the royal pleasure, on the 21st of January 1614. Although this individual was a zealot in his admiration of the Presbyterian system, he, though considerably older, married the daughter of the vicar of Berwick with the reluctant consent of his uncle. About 1C12 he petitioned the King for permission to return to Scotland. In 1613 or 1614 the Scottish Bishops co-operated with sundry of the nobility for the return of the exiled preachers, in the vain hope that they would partially recognize the episcopal authority. James Melville was released from his durance, but his health had declined for some time, and when a short way on his journey to Edinburgh it was necessary to carry him back to Berwick, where he expired after lingering a few days in the fifty-ninth year of his age. He was a man of some learning and ability, but he evinces his bitter partizanship and uncharitableness throughout his " Diary" in a manner with which the reader is already familiar. On the 4th of March a proclamation was made at the Cross of Edinburgh, ordering the solemn observance of Easter Sunday, by the administration of the communion in all the parish churches throughout the kingdom, and the parishioners were enjoined to re- sort thither. Sir James Balfour alleges that this was done by the Privy Council at the suggestion of Archbishop Spottiswoode. As the Jesuits were then actively employed in tampering with the people, the object of the proclamation apparently was to discover how many were professed or were inclined to the Roman Catholic religion. Calderwood alleges that the " wiser sort of professors," meaning his Presbyterian friends, " took it for a trial how a people would bear with alterations and innovations." If this was the case, the experiment by his own admission was successful, for he says that " the most part obeyed, howbeit there were acts of the Ge- neral Assembly against it." On the following year a proclama- tion was published at the Cross of Edinburgh, fifteen days before Easter, enjoining the communion to be administered on Easter Sunday " in all times coming." Bishop Hamilton of Galloway died about this time, with the 324 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1614. reputation of an " excellent good man." Calderwood assails him in the most virulent manner, accusing him of avarice, negligence in preaching, wilfully disregarding discipline, and want of personal decorum. As to the first charge it appears on this Presbyterian writer's sole authority, for there is no evidence of part of it in the acts of Parliament, that Bishop Hamilton " was not content with the Bishopric of Galloway, as it had of old annexed unto it the Abbacy of Tongland, but procured also a new annexation of other two benefices, the Abbacy of Glenluce and the Priory of Whit- horn." Now, though this was really the case, the revenue of the Bishopric of Galloway was so small that these annexations were absolutely necessary. The second charge is that he seldom preach- ed, but this is founded simply on his refusal to " confine himself to a particular parish." The other accusations are evidently gross scandals, studiously propagated to render him odious. It appears from a statement in one of those slanders that his daughter mar- ried Bishop Campbell of Argyll, who died in 1C12. Bishop Hamilton was succeeded in the See of Galloway by William Cowpar, already known to the reader as one of the minis- ters of Perth — a man of eloquence, learning, and enlightened piety. Mr Scott has collected in his Perth Registers all the most import- ant particulars of Bishop Cowpar's life, for whose memory he had the greatest respect, and these are for the first time submitted to the reader. " Mr William Cowpar was born at Edinburgh, November 1565, and was a younger son of John Cowpar, merchant burgess of that city. He was licenced to preach [in the Presbyterian phrase- ology] about the year 1585. The General Assembly, May 10, 1588, appointed him to be minister at the church of Bothkennar [in Stirlingshire]. He was translated to Perth, October 5, 1595. At his admission to Perth he received imposition of hands from Mr William Rhynd, minister of Kinnoull, Mr Archibald Mon- criefF, minister of Abernethy, and Mr James Herring. Mr Patrick Galloway preached the admission sermon. His stipend at that time was only 400 merks, and L.20, with his house ; but he was afterwards presented to the parsonage of Perth, and had the par- sonage teinds, though his colleague, Mr John Malcolm, was an older man, and had been settled at Perth five years before him. November 1, 1602, Henry Balneaves and William Jack made 1614.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 325 their public repentance in their own seats in the church after ser- mon, for making a libel against Mr William Cowpar and Henry Elder, town-clerk. The libel contained — 'As King David [I. of Scotland] was a sore saint to the crown, so are Mr Cowpar and the clerk to this poor town.*" An act of Council was made against the two burgesses, that none of them should bear office or get honourable place in the town thereafter." This libel probably originated in the Gowrie Conspiracy, as Perth was the scene of that singular tragedy. Bishop Cowpar and Mr John Malcolm, his colleague, happened to be absent from Perth on the 5th of August, when that daring treason was perpe- trated, which corrects an error in Cant's annotations on the local metrical history of Perth by Henry Adamson, that Mr William Cowpar, observes Mr Scott, " along with one of the Bailies harangued the people of the town immediately after the unhappy affair, in order to quiet the insurrection of the people, and to per- suade them of the real danger the King had escaped." Mr Cow- par also in a sermon which he preached at Perth, August 10, de- clared that when he first heard of the affair he supposed the Earl had suffered innocently. Mr Cant likewise was mistaken when he represented Mr Patrick Galloway as at that time one of the ministers of Perth, for Mr Galloway had resigned his charge, and became one of the King's chaplains a long time before. The Lord's Day immediately after Cowrie's unhappy affair, Mr Cowpar preach- ed in the church of Perth, forenoon and afternoon, on the conver- sion of Zaccheus.* In the forenoon, after speaking of ' the neces- sity of applying for divine grace, which can only change the heart of sinnei's,' he proceeded to say — ' And especially let us seek it at this time, that now we abide not in the hardness of our heart, when the Lord both by his word and works is so fast calling for rei)cntance, and I think among all the works of God that serve to humble us, this last miserable event that fell out among us, [the Gowrie Conspiracy,] is one of the first. I know there arc many • Mr. Scott states his authority for this fact : — " There is presently [in 1775] in the possession of Mr. Cant, a manuscript book, containing- several sermons preached by Mr Cowpar when minister at Perth. The book bears that it is in the hand-writing of Donald Grcgor, who probably copied it from Mr Cowpar's own manuscripts. It be- longed once to George Adamson, who has wrote on the last leaf—' George Adamson aught this book, Perth, Dccemljer 7, 1629. Lord, I have loved the habitation of thy house, the place where thine honour dwelleth.' " 326 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1614. of you that think of it as I did myself when I heard first of it. I thought indeed he [GowTie] had suffered as an innocent, and what grief then it wrought in me my own conscience beareth me record. The loss of no earthly creature went never so near my heart, and the first thing that ever chilled my affection towards him was an appearance that he had gone beyond the compass of godliness, which made me then say these words to my people — ' I know,"' I said, ' it is light that must first satisfy your discontented minds, and therefore [may] the Father of light send light.' " Mr Scott ob- serves— " What Mr Cowpar calls ' the Earl having gone beyond the compass of godliness,'' relates to the Earl being infected with the weak and criminal credulity of those times with regard to pre- tended prophecies and the use of enchantments. That he was so infected seems to be incontestible." It appears that Bishop Cowpar was seven or eight years at Bothkennar before he was removed to Perth. " In a short ac- count of his own life," says Mr Scott, " which he wrote about two years before his death, he states — ' Two or three days before [he saw Perth, or heard of his appointment to be minister thei-e] did the Lord give me some signification of it ; but I understood it not till the event did teach me. For in my thoughts in the night there seemed a man to lead me by the hand to a little pleasant city, in a plain valley on a rivers side, having some banks lying at the shore thereof ; as indeed it had the first time that after this I was brought to it. Such a sight got I of it in that vision as after- wards I saw with my eyes. He led me a long time up and down the streets of that town, from one to another, and at length carried me over the water to a hill, and led me up unto it by many turn- ings and windings from one earth to another, very near unto the top thereof. Then did I awake, my face looking to the south- west. This made an impression on my mind which I never forgot. Let no man here impute to me the superstition either of Papists or Anabaptists. I know there is no revelation now of doctrine, or new article of faith to be sought out in dreams. The Lord hath spoken once for all unto us by his Son in his Word, but that the living Lord, who sleeps not, can give warnings to the souls of his servants when their bodies are sleeping, no man acquainted with his working I trust will deny.' " Mr William Cowpar," continues Mr Scott, " was undoubtedly 1614.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 327 one of the most pious men and eloquent preachers of his time. His writings, which are still in the hands of many, shew his singu- lar piety, his clear knowledge, and soundness in the faith. They would have been much more extolled in his own country, if he had not in the latter part of his life accepted a bishopric. He con- tinued in the ministerial work at Perth about nineteen years, preaching five times in the toeeJc^ and labouring both publicly and privately to suppress all manner of vice, and to turn souls to his Lord and Redeemer In 1611 he married a daughter of a gentle- man named Anderson ; and was consecrated Bishop of Galloway at Glasgow on the 4th of October 1612, which is another proof that the date 1G14 of Bishop Hamilton's death by Keith is incor- rect. Bishop Cowpar was also appointed Dean of the Chapel- Royal of Holyroodhouse. His popularity in Perth is proved by the following notice in the Kirk-Session Register, under date 23d October 1615 — " Compeared Alexander [Lindsay] Bishop of Dun- keld, and George [Graham] Bishop of Orkney, declaring that they had commission of the Archbishop of St Andrews [Spottiswoode] to intimate to the [Town] Council and [Kirk] Session of Perth, that William, Bishop of Galloway, by occasion of the affairs of office of bishopric, could not serve the cure of minister any longer in this burgh ; desiring them, therefore, to give some persons in leet to make choice of [one] to supply his place. Whereunto the Session answered, that they were grieved from their hearts at his transportation, and they hoped that he would return again to occupy his own place ; and in expectation thereof they would not as yet give any persons in leet ; yet nevertheless the said Bishops, [as] commissioners, desired to make note that they had done their commission." Bishop Cowpar was succeeded as minister of Perth by Mr John Guthrie, subsequently one of the ministers of Edin- burgh, and Bishop of Moray. Bishop Guthrie was admitted or inducted as minister of Perth by the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow.* Mr Scott farther observes that Bishop Cowpar " published during his life many excellent treatises, which after his death were collected and reprinted at London. Before he joined in the measures of the Court, which he began to do in 1600, by taking • Mercer's Chronicle, under date February 1617. It is added—" Withiu the kirk of Perth — Dr Barclay preached." 328 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1G14. the side of the King in the affair of the Earl of Gowrie, there was not a more popular man in the kingdom. But when he accepted a bishopric all his former friends of the Presbyterian party were exceedingly offended, and treated him with the most unremitting severity as an accursed [!] apostate. He preached, and wrote, and spoke much, in his own vindication. He made frequent ap- peals concerning his own sincerity, and declared that he had got more light than before concerning the proper manner of church government. He was told by way of answer that it was very true he had got more light, for now he had two great candlesticks upon his table, whereas he had only one small candle before. His nerves were weak, and he was naturally inclined to melan- choly.— On the whole we must say that the town of Perth was highly favoured in having so long the enjoyment of Mr Cowpar's ministry. It might have been happier for himself if he had con- tinued to be minister there all his life, and refused to accept a bishopric, but at the same time it was extremely rash in any person to judge hardly of him on that account, especially consider- ing how variable and unsettled the mode of church government had been all along from the Eeformation ; and though his temporal peace was much hurt by his change of station, yet that change has been a means made use of by Providence for making his valuable writings more circulated through the island, and more generally read than they otherwise would have been. Such as delight in evangelical doctrines, and at the same time love that they should be handled in a clear, lively, and experimental manner, especially such as feel their need of the refreshments of the gospel, will find much satisfaction in Bishop Cowpar's Works. It is but a small part of their praise to say that they abound with examples of the best eloquence." Such is the candid statement of a Presbyterian minister respect- ing this truly eminent man, and we shall now attend to his recorded memoir of himself, written on the 1st of January 161G. After alluding tojiis younger years, when he was " trained up with the wrestlings of God," he states that when he was eight years old he was sent from Edinburgh by his parents to the grammar school of Dunbar, where he continued till his twelfth year, and made great progress in his elementary education. In his thirteentli year he entered the University of St Andrews. " There," he says, 1614.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 329 " I made not such progress in knowledge as I had done in my other studies, either mine age not being capable of it, or my wise and merciful Father not thinking it expedient for me. Yet even there was the seed of grace still working in me, inclining me to a careful hearing and penning of sermons and theological lessons, as I could have occasion to hear them. — Having passed my course at St Andrews, at the age of sixteen years I returned to my parents in Edinburgh. I was pressed by them to enter into sundry sorts of life I liked not, for my heart still inclined to the study of the Holy Scriptures. Whereupon I resolved to go into England, where I evidently perceived the Lord going before me, and pro- viding for me at Hoddesdon, within eighteen miles of London. My mean portion which I had being all spent (I speak it to his glory that cared for me) in that same place, that same day I was desired by our kind countryman, Mr Guthrie, to assist him in the teaching of a school, with whom I remained three quarters of a year. But after did the Lord lead me farther, for having occasion to go to London, without my knowledge or any suit of mine I was called to the service of a learned divine, Mr Broughton,* unto the which, with the good will of Mr Guthrie, I entered, and there remained about a year and a half, daily exercised under him in the study of theology. To him, under God, and some other learned divines of that city, do I acknowledge myself bound for those beginnings of knowledge I then received. " In the nineteenth year of my life I returned again to Edin- burgh, where having the advantage of being with my brother, f then one of the ministers of Edinburgh, I still continued in the same study, and at length was required to give a proof of my gift privately, which I did in the new church in presence of Mr Robert Pont and ^Mr Robert Bollock, with sundry others of the ministry. Then, after that, I was required to teach publicly in the new church on a Sabbath in the afternoon, and the next week I was com- manded to teach publicly in the great church [St Giles] in time of • This was Hugh Broughton, a celebrated divine of the Church of England, who was Lorn in 1549, and died in 1612. He was distinguished for his knowledge in Hebrew and llabbinical learning, and the author of many theological works. t This was Mr John Cowpar, noticed in the preceding history of the Titular Episco- pate, who intruded himself into the pulpit of St Giles' church in Ediuburgh and in- sulted King James, but was compelled to give place to Adamson of St Andrews on that occasion. 328 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1614. the side of the King in the affair of the Earl of Gowrie, there was not a more popular man in the kingdom. But when he accepted a bishopric all his former friends of the Presbyterian party were exceedingly offended, and treated him with the most unremitting severity as an accursed [!] apostate. He preached, and wrote, and spoke much, in his own vindication. He made frequent ap- peals concerning his own sincerity, and declared that he had got more light than before concerning the proper manner of church government. He was told by way of answer that it was very true he had got more light, for now he had two great candlesticks upon his table, whereas he had only one small candle before. His nerves were weak, and he was naturally inclined to melan- choly.— On the whole we must say that the town of Perth was highly favoured in having so long the enjoyment of Mr Cowpar's ministry. It might have been happier for himself if he had con- tinued to be minister there all his life, and refused to accept a bishopric, but at the same time it was extremely rash in any person to judge hardly of him on that account, especially consider- ing how variable and unsettled the mode of church government had been all along from the Eeformation ; and though his temporal peace was much hurt by his change of station, yet that change has been a means made use of by Providence for making his valuable writings more circulated through the island, and more generally read than they otherwise would have been. Such as delight in evangelical doctrines, and at the same time love that they should be handled in a clear, lively, and experimental manner, especially such as feel their need of the refreshments of the gospel, will find much satisfaction in Bishop Cowpar's Works. It is but a small part of their praise to say that they abound with examples of the best eloquence." Such is the candid statement of a Presbyterian minister respect- ing this truly eminent man, and we shall now attend to his recorded memoir of himself, written on the 1st of January 161G. After alluding tojiis younger years, when he was " trained up with the wrestlings of God," he states that when he was eight years old he was sent from Edinburgh by his parents to the grammar school of Dunbar, where he continued till his twelfth year, and made great progress in his elementary education. In his thirteenth year he entered the University of St Andrews. " There," ho says, 16'14.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 329 " I made not such progress in knowledge as I had done in my other studies, either mine age not being capable of it, or my wise and merciful Father not thinking it expedient for me. Yet even there was the seed of grace still working in me, inclining me to a careful hearing and penning of sermons and theological lessons, as I could have occasion to hear them. — Having passed my course at St Andrews, at the age of sixteen years I returned to my parents in Edinburgh. I was pressed by them to enter into sundry sorts of life I liked not, for my heart still inclined to the study of the Holy Scriptures. Whereupon I resolved to go into England, where I evidently perceived the Lord, going before me, and pro- viding for me at Hoddesdon, within eighteen miles of London. My mean portion which I had being all spent (I speak it to his glory that cared for me) in that same place, that same day I was desired by our kind countryman, Mr Guthrie, to assist him in the teaching of a school, with whom I remained three quarters of a year. But after did the Lord lead me farther, for having occasion to go to London, without my knowledge or any suit of mine I was called to the service of a learned divine, Mr Broughton,* unto the which, with the good will of Mr Guthrie, I entered, and there remained about a year and a half, daily exercised under him in the study of theology. To him, under God, and some other learned divines of that city, do I acknowledge myself bound for those beginnings of knowledge I then received. " In the nineteenth year of my life I returned again to Edin- burgh, where having the advantage of being with my brother, -f- then one of the ministers of Edinburgh, I still continued in the same study, and at length was required to give a proof of my gift privately, which I did in the new church in presence of Mr Kobert Pont and Mv Robert Rollock, with sundry others of the ministry. Then, after that, I was required to teach publicly in the new church on a Sabbath in the afternoon, and the next week I was com- manded to teach publicly in the great church [St Giles] in time of * This was Hugh Broughton, a celebrated divine of theChui cIi of England, who was lorn in 1549, and died in 1G12. He was distinguished for his linowledge in Hebrew and Kabbinical learning, and the author of many theological works. t This was Mr John Cowpar, noticed in the preceding history of the Titular Episco- pate, who intruded himself into the pulpit of St Giles' church in Edinburgh and in- sulted King James, but was compelled to give place to Adamson of St Andrews on that occasion. 330 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1614. a fast, on a Thursday in the afternoon. Thus did the Lord train me up, and these were the beginnings of my ministry, which I recount to the praise of His grace who counted me faithful, and put me into his service. " A little after that, in the beginning of my twentieth year, there ensued a General Assembly of the Church at Edinburgh, and by their authority was I sent out and appointed pastor of Bothkennar, for that church had been desolate ever since the Reformation, and the people had given in their supphcation to the Assembly for a pastor. This calling of God and his Church I embraced, and went unto them, where I found the desolation so great, that except the walls, which were ruinous also, neither door, nor window, nor seat, nor pulpit, nor any part of a roof was there at all ; yet it pleased God to give such a blessing to the ministry of his word, that their hearts thereby were stirred up cheerfully to build the Lord's house, which most willingly they fully resolved within half a year, not content to build their own part of the house, but the choir also, which of due should have been done by the parson. Neither content to have built it only, they adorned it within and without not inferior to any other church of such quality round about. This was my first external seal and confirmation of my calling to the ministry. In this service I remained seven or eight years, subject to great bodily infirmities by reason of the weakness of the soil in winter, and the unwholesome waters there- of.* And here did the Lord first begin to acquaint me with hia terrors, and the inward exercises of sundry temptations, so that between these two my life was wasted through heaviness. Yet I bless the Lord for it. It was unto me like the Wilderness of Midian to Moses — a school of temptation whereby I learned daily • The parish of Bothkennar, ou the south side of the Forth, though during Bishop Cowpar's incumbency little better than a mere waste, and often flooded by the Forth and its tributary the Cairon, has been long under fine cultivation, and is part of the luxuriant and fertile Carse of Stirling, the surface diversified by orchards. Yet agri- culture was not neglected in the district in ancient times, for even in the fourteenth century its yearly feu-duty paid to the Crown was 26 chalders, besides six chalders to the Abbey of Cambuskenneth. It is stated of the parishioners of Bothkennar that they were so much attached to the Episcopal Church after the Revolution, " that they kept their minister, Mr Skiimer, a most worthy man, from 1688 till 1721, and had he not then resigned his situation, it is probable he would have died among them in the full possession of his ministerial functions." New Statistical Account of Scot- land—Stiriingshire, p. 203. 1G14.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 331 more and more to know Christ Jesus, gathering some store of knowledge there by inward exercises and outward studies, which the Lord afterwards called me to give out in more public places in his church. The necessity of increasing disease forcing me to be think of a transportation, the purpose of my mind was to another [parish] church implanted in the south, some eight miles west from Edinburgh, but the Lord still continued his calling, and drew me another way northward. For at the same time there intervened a General Assembly of the Church at Perth. There was I nomi- nated, and with consent of the Assembly and people was I written for to that ministry, as the letters of both, sent to me out of Perth with my dear brother Mr Patrick Simson,* yet extant, do bear. Thus did the Lord clear my way before me, and lead me where I thought never to have gone. " After this, three or four days, as I said, returned Mr Patrick Simson from the General Assembly at Perth to Stirling, and de- livered the letters from the Assembly and the town containing my calling to that ministry. The town shortly after sent their com- missioners to transport myself and family. There I continued doing the work of God for the full space of nineteen years. How I did carry myself in my open conversation, living among them not as one separated from them, but mixed myself in all their fel- lowships, as a comfort to the best and a wound to the worst in- clined sort, this age will not want living witnesses to record it. My diligence in like manner in the ministry was not only on the or- dinary days but on others, which I voluntarily chose thrice a week in the evenings, to-wit, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday, for a preparation to the Sabbath, for on those days they had no preach- ing in the morning. It would have done a Christian good to have seen those glorious and joyful assemblies, to have heard the zealous cryings to God among that people, with sighings and tears, melting hearts, and mourning eyes. It is not vain glorying. I abhor that. Not I, but His grace in me. Why shall it offend any man that I eat the fruit of my labour, and that my conscience this day enjoys the comfort of my former painfulness and fidelity ? My witness is in heaven, that the love of J esus and his people made continued preaching my pleasure, and I had no such joy as in doing His * Minister of Stirling, about twelve or fourteen miles west of the parish of Bothkennar. 332 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1G14. work. Some witnesses also I want not to remain, for albeit my charge was to teach five times in the week, yet this was more, that I penned thereafter whatever I preached, whereof some are al- ready extant ; others, by God's grace, if the Lord spare my days, shall come in their time. And in outward charge what care I had to see the house of God thus honoured, and the welfare of that people every way, there are monuments standing to me after I am dead." Bishop Cowpar, after alluding to his personal experience on religious matters, thus describes his reasons for accepting the epis- copal office : — " Now, about this time God had opened to me a door, and called me to the charge of the churches in Galloway, in the north-west part of this kingdom ; for being named with others by the General Assembly, of such as they thought meet to be preferred to the episcopal dignity, whereof I ever acknow- ledged myself not worthy, and recommended by the fathers of our Church, it was his Majesty's pleasure to present me to that bene- fice due to the office whereunto the Church had called me. God knows this was done without my knowledge or seeking directly or indirectly, for I could have been contented all my days with a pri- vate life, resolved to give honour and obedience to such as were in those places, after that it was once established by order in our Church, and I had considered the lawfulness, antiquity, and neces- sity for it among us. Here was I neither guilty of ambition, nor of any precipitate embracing of it, for between the date of his Majesty'spresentation and my acceptation there intervened eighteen weeks. Yet as the calling to this work was greater than any other whereto I had been led before, so the greatest opposition was there made to me by men whose lying libels and carnal contradic- tions caused me to spend more time unprofitably than I had done before since my entry to the ministry. The Lord forgive them, and me also, where in the manner of my answering I have been sharper than became Christian meekness. For as to the matter itself [the episcopate], unfeignedly I followed my light. I esteem it a lawful, ancient, and necessary government. I see not nor have I read of any Church which wanted it before our time ; only the abuses of it by pride, tyranny, and idleness, have brought it into misliking. From these evils I pray the Lord preserve his servants [the Bishops] that now are, or hereafter shall be called to 1614.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 333 these places. But there is no reason why a thing good in itself should be condemned or rejected for the evil of abuse, for no good thing at all would be retained in the Church ; and in this calling, how I have walked, and what my care was to advance the gospel there [in the Diocese of Galloway], I trust I shall not nor yet do want witnesses. In this [episcopal] estate I now live, my soul alway in my hand ready to be offered to my Gcd. Where or what kind of death God hath prepared for me I know not, but sure I am there can be no evil death to him that liveth in Christ, nor sudden death to a Christian pilgrim, who, as Job says, ' every day waits for his change.' Yea, many a day have I sought it with tears, not out of impatience, distrust, or perturbation, but being weary of sin, and fearful to fall into it. Concerning those who have been my enemies without cause, and charged me with many wrongful imputations, from which my conscience clears me, excus- ing me of those things, love of gain and glory, and such like, whereof they accused me, the Lord lay it not to their charge. I go to my Father, and seek His blessing to them, to rectify their judgments and moderate their affections with true piety from faith and love." Such was the eminent individual of whom Mr Caldcrwood, in the spleen of his malevolence, says — " After he had accepted the bishop- ric he set forth an apology in print, to purge himself of covetous- ness and ambition, and gave reasons wherefore he changed his mind ; but he was so vexed with answers that he cast some of them into the fire, and would not look upon them. None was more forward in the purer times against the estate of Bishops, none now more frank for the corruptions of the time. After he had got the bishopric he maketh not residence in Galloway, but in the foot of the Canongate [near the Palace of Holyroodhouse in Edinburgh], that he might be near the Chapel-Royal, where he preached as Dean, neglecting his Diocese, where he ought to have preached as Bishop, if his office had been lawful." A curious no- tice is recorded of his zeal in the discharge of his public duties in the Perth Kirk-Session Registers. Under date June 24, IGIO, it is stated that the " officer" or beadle is " ordered to have his red staff in the kirk on the Sabbath days, therewith to waken [rouse] sleepers, and to remove greeting bairns [children crying] furth of the kirk." This seems to have been an old habit also of 334 PEACEFUL STATE OP THE CHURCH. [1614. the citizens of Edinburgh, and Mr Scott inserts under date August 24, 1600, an extract from one of Bishop Cowpar s manuscript ser- mons, with which he commenced on the afternoon of that day, in St Giles's church, containing a reproof to the congregation for sleeping: " Before," said the Bishop, " we begin to speak to you, there is an impediment we must remove, which, if it occur, will both hinder us from speaking, and you from learning, and that is your infirmity of sleeping, whereunto at this time usually ye are subject. A preacher, you know, hath impediments enough in himself to hinder from teaching, suppose he have none of his people ; for Satan is ready, standing always at the right hand of Joshua to resist him. Such, therefore, among you as are Chris- tians, I bind you with the law of conscience to refrain from sleep- ing, and such among you as are civilians, let common courtesy be an awe-band to you, remembering that it is no point of civility to sleep in the house of God." As Bishop Cowpar is subsequently noticed in a prominent man- ner, the attention of the reader is now directed to public affairs, and here the Presbyterians may be left in silence for a short time, and the proceedings of those of the other extreme — the Roman Catholics — noticed at some length. Notwithstanding the total extinction^of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy in Scotland after the Reformation, its supporters were from time to time indefatigable in their exertions to regain their ascendancy among the people. Persons designated " Jesuits and seminary priests" in the public records traversed the kingdom in all directions, defying the se- vere Acts of Parliament against them, and practising both pub- licly and privately the rites of their religion. During the reign of King James, before and after his accession to the English Crown, seldom one year elapsed without rumours of new conspiracies of the Jesuits against his life, or against the Church of England. It appears from state papers, histories, and other records, that aboizt 16 14 a new attempt on the part of Spain and its auxiliaries was meditated, and which was only frustrated by the early detection and execution of some of the numerous emissaries of the Jesuits. One of the most extraordinary prosecutions was that of John Ogilvie, otherwise Watson, son of Walter Ogilvie of Drum. In the month of November 1613, he returned to Scotland, after an absence of twenty-two years, for the purpose of propagating the 1614.J PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 335 Roman Catholic faith. Ogilvie was evidently one of those enthu- siasts who scrupled not, regardless of his life, to embark in any daring and dangerous plot. In the beginning of October 1C14, he was apprehended in Glasgow, and brought before Archbishop Spottiswoode, on the charge of having " seduced sundry young men of the better sort of the people, and saying mass in sundry places within the town." Several of his converts were also seized, and a few of them imprisoned in Dunbarton Castle. On the 5th of October, Ogilvie and five individuals were examined at Glasgow before Archbishop Spottiswoode, Bishop Boyd of Argyll, Lords Fleming, Kilsyth, and Boyd, the Laird of Minto, Sir George EI- phinstone. Provost of the city, and three of the magistrates. The five prisoners swore that they had only known Ogilvie a very short time, and with one exception that they had attended once or oftener the celebration of mass in private houses. Ogilvie admit- ted that he was the son of Walter Ogilvie of Drum — that he had been abroad twenty-two years — that he had studied at certain Roman Catholic Colleges on the Continent, and had received the order of priesthood at Paris — that he had arrived in Scotland in November 1613, and after a residence upwards of six weeks he had proceeded to England, but returned in May 1614 — that he was " ane of the ordinary Jesuits," and maintained that the Pope's jurisdiction extended over the King's dominions in spiritual mat- ters, for which he declared that he was ready to die. About the beginning of November, Alexander Gladstanes, Arch- dean of St Andrews, son of the former Archbishop, apprehended another Jesuit named Moffat in St Andrews, who was brought be- fore the Privy Council on the 10th of December, and imprisoned in the Castle of Edinburgh. Ogilvie was also brought to Edinburgh, and examined by Archbishop Spottiswoode and some of the Privy Council. As a complete statement of the cases had been trans- mitted to the King, the Archbishops and the Bishops were ordered to proceed rigorously against the parties implicated, and all avow- ed or suspected J esuit priests, resorters to, and resetters of, the same, wherever they were found. Similar instructions were also sent to the Privy Council. The great act of cruelty which they committed in Ogilvie's case was the method they adopted to in- duce him to confess. He was allowed such food as barely sus- tained life, was not permitted to sleep for several nights, and when 338 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1615. that " he would take the advertisement, and speak more coolly, howbeit he would never acknowledge the judgment, nor think they had power to sit on his life. — And for the reverence I do you, to stand bare-headed before you, I let you know it is ad redemptionem vexationis, et non ad agnitionem judicii.'''' The fifteen jurymen were then chosen, among whom were Sir George Elphinestone of Blythswood, Sir Thomas Boyd of Bonshaw, Sir James Edmonstone of Duntreath, Muirhead of Lawhope, Crawfurd of Jordanhill, Mackerrel of Hillhouse, and Hugh Ken- nedy, Provost of Ayr. Ogilvie was permitted to challenge any of them, but he replied, that " he had one exception for them all ; they were either enemies to his cause or friends ; if enemies, they could not be admitted upon his trial, and if they were his friends, they should stand prisoners at the bar with him." The Jury were then sworn, and the indictment read to them, when the following dialogue ensued. " I wish these gentlemen," said Ogilvie, " to consider well what they do. I cannot be tried or judged by them, and whatsoever I suffer here is by way of injury, and not of judgment. I am ac- cused of treason, but have done no offence, and I will not ask mercy." " This is strange," observed Archbishop Spottiswoode :" " You have done no offence [you say], and yet you are come into his Majesty's kingdom, and you have laboured to pervert his Highness"" subjects. Both of these are against the law. In this have ye not offended f — " No," said Ogilvie, " I came by com- mandment, and if I were even now forth of the kingdom I should return ; neither do I respect anything, but that I have not been so busy as I should in that which ye call perverting. I hope to come to Glasgow again, and to do more good in it. If all the hairs of my head were priests, they should all come into the kingdom." " And do you not," inquired Archbishop Spottiswoode, " con- sider it a fault to go against the King's commandment, especially in this point of discharging you his kingdom ? If a king have any power within his kingdom, it seems he may rid himself and his country of those with whom he is offended, and it savours great rebellion to say otherwise." — " I am a subject," replied Ogilvie, " as free as the King is a king. He cannot discharge me if I be not an offender, which I am not." He was asked for what offences 1G15.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 339 the King could " discharge " or banish him, and he answered — " In the cases of theft and murder." — " All this while," said the Archbishop, " you do not answer the points of your indictment. Why do you decline his Majesty's authority, and refuse to give your opinion anent the Pope's power in deposing kings, and loosing subjects from their oaths of allegiance ? And when it is asked you if it were lawful to slay the King, if deposed and ex- communicated by the Pope, the very thought of which any loyal subject would abhor, why do you not simply condemn it as unlaw- ful I For if you do not condemn it, you shew yourself of the opinion of the rest of your sect, who in their books maintain that it is both lawful and commendable to slay kings, if the Pope's commission go forth once for it." — " For the declining of the King's authority,'" replied Ogilvie, " I will do it still in matters of religion, for with such matters he hath nothing to do ; neither have I done any other thing but that which the ministers did at Dundee. They would not acknowledge his Majesty's authority in spiritual matters more than I ; the best ministers of the land are still of that mind, and if they be once will continue so." " You are mistaken," said Archbishop Spottiswoode, " both in the place and matter ; for it was not at Dundee, but Aberdeen, where some ministers meeting to a General Assembly, contended not against the King's authority, but that the Assembly called to that place and time could not be discharged by his Majesty's commissioner. Neither should the fact of a few, taken at the worst, be esteemed the deed of the whole. These have been punished for their offences; some of them have confessed their error, and have been graciously pardoned by his Majesty. All good ministers profess otherwise, and our religion teacheth us to acknowledge his Majesty [as] our only supreme judge in all causes. The King is keeper of both Tables [of the Mosaic Law], and his state obliges him not only to the ruling of his subjects in justice, and preserving equity among them, but even to maintain religion and God's pure worship, of which he should have principal care. Your master the Pope hath not only denied this authority to kings, which God giveth them, but usurpeth to himself a power of deposing and killing when he is displeased. And it would be the less worthy of notice if the Pope's usurpation had gone no farther than your books ; but you have entered, by this pretended right, 340 PEACEFUL STATE OP THE CHURCH. [1615. the throats of the greatest kings, as your practice upon the two last Henrys of France bears witness. You are not able to lay such imputation upon us or our profession, which teaches that, next unto God Almighty, all men are bound to fear, serve, and honour their sovereigns. But what answer you touching these de- mands? Hath the Pope power to depose the King? Or is it murder to kill him, if he is deposed by the Pope ?" " I refused before," said Ogilvie, " to answer such questions, be- cause in answering I would acknowledge you [as] judges in con- troversies of religion, which I do not. I will not cast holy things to dogs." " And is it," asked the Archbishop, " a point of faith that the Pope may depose his Majesty ? Or do you think it a controversy in religion whether his Majesty, whom God save, may be lawfully killed or not?" " It is," replied Ogilvie, " a question among the doctors of the Church, and many hold the affirmative, not improbably. A Council hath not yet determined the point ; and if it shall be concluded by the Church that the Pope hath such power, I will give my life in defence of it ; and if I had a thousand lives, I would bestow them that way if they will make an article of faith of it." He was here urged to state his own opinion, and he declared that " he would not say it was unlawful, though he should save his life by it." He proceeded to discuss the alleged supre- macy of the Pope, and observed — " If the King offended against the Catholic Church the Pope might punish him, as well as a shepherd, or the poorest fellow in the kingdom. In abrogating the Pope's authority the Estates of Parliament had gone beyond their limits and the King, in usurping the Pope's right, had lost his own." As to the oath of allegiance, Ogilvie declared — " It was a damnable oath against God and his truth, and it is treason to swear it, be- cause it brings the King's person and state in danger. Since this kingdom was Christian, the Pope's supreme power was always ac- knowledged. This being cast off, as we see in the acts of your Parliament, against all reason and conscience, and subjects [are] forced to swear to a matter so unlawful, what marvel that attempts and dangerous courses be taken against him ? But if the King would reUnquish his usurpation upon the Pope, he might live with- out fear as well as the King of Spain, or any other Christian prince." He concluded by alluding to his own services, and those of other Jesuits for the King, and said — " Neitlier Bishop, 1615.] PEACEFUL STATE OP THE CHUJiCH. 341 nor minister, nor all the Bishops and ministers in his Majesty's kingdoms, had done or could do the like." Ogilvie proceeded in this language, not very polite either to the King or the judges. Archbishop Spottiswoode then spoke. " Gentlemen, and others who are named upon the assize," said the Archbishop, " though I intended to have said nothing, and to be merely a witness of the proceeding, I have been forced by his [the prisoner's] proud and impudent speeches somewhat to reply, and must with your patience say a little more. It is this same day two-and-twenty weeks past that this prisoner fell into my hands, and since that time he hath had leisure to think enough what course was fittest for him to take for satisfying his Majesty, whom he had offended ; neither hath he wanted counsel and advice, the best that we could give him. Besides, he hath found on our part nothing but courteous dealing, and better entertainment than, I must now say it, he hath deserved. My own hopes were that he would have followed another course than I see he has taken, and not stand to the answers which he made to those demands which were moved unto him by his Majesty's commissioners, and you have seen. But if his answers at the first were treasonable they are now so little better, as in all your hearings he hath uttered speeches most detestable, made a commentary worse than the text was, and shewed himself to carry the mind of an arrant and des- perate traitor. You perceive he obscures not the King's Ma- jesty our sovereign in all his speeches, preferring the Pope to his Majesty ; and, which is more intolerable, aflfirmeth the King's Majesty to have lost the right to his kingdom by usurping upon the Pope. He will not say it is unlawful to kill his Majesty ; he saith it is treason for subjects to swear the oath of allegiance ; and meaneth so much in his last words as the King's Majesty's life and estate cannot be secure except he render himself the Pope's vassal. Thus hath he left you little to do except that his Ma- jesty's pleasure, the ordinary form be kept with him, you would never need once to remove. All his speeches have been so stuffed with treason, that I am sure the patience of the noblemen and others here present hath been much provoked. In all that he hath said I can mark only two things alleged by him for the Pope's authority over kings — the words of our Saviour to St Peter, Feed my sheep ; and the subjection of kings, especially of 842 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [IGW. our kings, since the kingdom became Christian, to the Pope. For the words of our Saviour, how Httle they serve his purpose I have no need to tell you. To feed the sheep of Christ is not, I hope, to depose kings from their states, nor to inflame the hearts of subjects against princes, much less to kill and despatch them. We are better taught than to be deceived with such glosses. St Peter never made that sense of those words, and teacheth us a very different doctrine in his First Epistle, fifth chapter, second and third verses. I will not spend time with such purpose. Only this I must say, that whatever was St Peter's prerogative the Pope of Rome hath nothing to do with it ; for he cannot be St Peter's successor who hath forsaken his doctrine, and gone against his practice directly, both in that and other points of Christian faith. And for the antiquity of his usurped power, I may say justly that Master Ogilvie is not well seen in antiquity, or he speaketh against his knowledge, when he saith that this power of the Pope was ever acknowledged by Christian kings. The Bishops of Eome for many years made no such claim, neither did emperors nor kings ever dream of such subjection. Long it was ere the Pope of Rome came to the height of commanding kings, and not till he had oppressed the Church under the pretext of St Peter's keys, bearing down all the Bishops within Christendom, which having done, then he made his invasion upon princes, and that by degrees. The histories of all ages make this plain, and the re- sistance he found by kings in their kingdoms testifieth that they never acknowledged his superiority. Of our own, howbeit, as we lie far from his seat, so had we less business and fewer occasions of contradiction, yet I can make it appear in divers particulars, when any question fell out anent the provision of Bishops and Archbishops to their places, the Bulls of Rome were so little re- spected, as the King's predecessors have always preferred and borne out their own choice, and the interdictions made upon the realm by these occasions ; not without some imputation of weak- ness to the See Apostolic, have been recalled. The superstitions of Rome were amongst us last embraced, and with the first, by the mercies of God, shaken off". Whatsoever you boast of your anti- quity, it is false, both in this and all the other points of your profession, which I could prove if this time or place were fitting. But to you of this jury I have this only more to say, that you are 1615.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 343 to inquire upon the verity of the indictment whether such and such as are alleged to be committed by him have been so or not. You have his subscriptions which he acknowledgeth. You hear him- self, and how he hath treasonably disavowed his Majesty's autho- rity. It concerns you only to pronounce as you shall find verified by the speeches that you have heard and the testimonies produced. For the rest the justices know sufficiently what to do, and will serve God and his Majesty according'' to the commission given them." The Jury returned their verdict by Sir George Elphinestone of Blythswood, unanimously finding the unfortunate Jesuit guilty of treason, and he was sentenced to be hanged and quartered. Arch- bishop Spottiswoode asked him if he wished to say anything. "No my Lord," rephed Ogilvie, " but I give your Lordship thanks for your kindness, and will desire your hand." " If," replied the Archbishop, " you will acknowledge your fault done to his JNIajes- ty, and crave God's and his Highness' pardon, I will give you both hand and heart, for I wish you to die a good Christian." " Will I be allowed," asked Ogilvie, " to speak to the people V " If you will declare," said the Archbishop, " that you sufffer according to the law justly for your offence, and crave his Majesty's pardon for your treasonable speeches, you shall be licenced to say what you please, otherwise you ought not to be permitted." Ogilvie simply replied — " God have mercy upon me !" He then exclaimed loudly — " If there are here any secret Catholics, let them pray for me ; but the prayers of heretics I will not have." This tragedy, under the form of law, was concluded by the exe- cution of Ogilvie, and the only part of the sentence remitted was the quartering of his body. He met his fate three hours after the verdict was given, but his bodily infirmities or his fears were such, that after his devotions it was necessary to support him on the scaffold. He died professing his firm belief in the faith for which he may be said to be a martyr, but his wretched fate seems to have excited little sympathy. Even the Presbyterian party ex- pressed no compassion Calderwood coolly observes — " He had small courage when he came to the scaffold, died heartless and comfortless, could not commend himself to God at the minister's desire, but did it after the desire of the hangman." This extra- ordinary trial is not recorded in the Books of Adjournal, but was 344 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1615. reported by the commissioners and their assessors to the Privy Council.* The death of Archbishop Gladstanes occurred in the castle of St Andrews on the 2d of May. Oalderwood has shamefully tra- duced his memory, by recording all the false and infamous scandals against him. Archbishop Spottiswoode describes him as " a man of good learning, ready utterance, and great invention, but of an easy nature, and induced by those he trusted to do many things hurtful to the See, especially in leasing the titles of his benefice for many years to come ; esteeming, which is the error of many churchmen, that by this means he would purchase the love and friendship of men, whereas there is no sure friendship but that which is joined with respect. — He left behind him in writing a de- claration of his judgment touching matters then controvei'ted in the Church, professing that he had accepted the episcopal func- tion upon good warrant, and that his conscience never did accuse him for any thing done that way. This he did to obviate the rumours which he foresaw would be dispersed after his death, either of his recantation, or of some trouble of spirit that he was cast into, for these are the usual practices of the Puritan sect, whereas he ended his days most piously, and to the great comfort of all the beholders."" Archbishop Gladstanes was the first patron of the celebrated Alexander Henderson, then a zealous advocate of the Episcopal Church, and presented that individual, who is sub- sequently noticed, to the parish of Leuchars, about five miles west of St Andrews. Among Henderson's other acts of truculent sub- serviency at this period, he wrote a flattering dedication to the Primate. A Presbyterian writer-j- very gratuitously vilifies the memory of Archbishop Gladstanes, whom he describes " at his first start in public life schoolmaster at Montrose, and had been minister in several parishes before his settlement at Arbirlot near Arbroath." " Vain and pedantic," continues this writer, " obse- quious to one class, and overbearing to another, Gladstanes was from his temper, his office, and the spirit of the times, any thing but acceptable to the mass of the people." Again — " Gladstanes was odious in the estimation of the whole peasantry of the dis- • Pitcaim's Criminal Trials, vol. iii. p. 330-354. t Life and Times of Alexander Henderson, by John Alton, D. D. minister of Dol- phinton, p. 90, 91. 1615.] PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 345 trict." These statements are mere opinions, although all this alleged unpopularity is not surprizing if what this writer alleges is true, that " Fife was truly said by Gladstanes to be the most seditious province in the kingdom." It is singular that no Presbyterian his- torian can possibly give an impartial representation of the acts and character of the men of that age. The Archbishop was honour- ably interred in the church of St Salvador's College at St Andrews on the 7th of J une, and Bishop Cowpar of Galloway preached the funeral sermon, which unfortunately is not in the edition of his Works. Calderwood indulges his usual scurrility in reference to that sermon, describing it as " full of vile flattery and lies, for which he was derided by the people." That writer farther insinuates that the funeral of the Archbishop was a mere ceremonial : — "a canopy of black velvet was carried above the coffin by four men, and yet the corpse was not in the coffin, but buried soon after his death ;" but on this Mr Scott observes — " Indeed, if the body was not suf- ficiently embalmed, the long delay of the funeral might render such a precaution necessary."* Archbishop Gladstanes must have been in considerable favour with King James, if Calderwood's rumour is true that his Majes- ty " bestowed ten thousand merks upon his burial," though he also states that the Archbishop was in debt L.20,00() Scots at his death. Of his family or descendants little is known. His son, Alexander Gladstanes, the Archdean of St Andrews, is already mentioned. He studied at the University of Cambridge. Previous to 1C12 his father had continued to officiate as first minister of St Andrews, but in that year the Archdeanery was separated from the Archbishopric by act of Parliament, and Alexander Glad- stanes, though he had entered on the study of theology only three years before, was appointed the Archdean and first minister. He held that situation till 1G38, when he was deprived, but his con- duct seems to have been for some years very reprehensible, with- out taking into account the Presbyterian libels and charges against him. In December the very year of his father's death. Archbishop Spotiswoode exhorted him " to follow his calling and behave himself with greater gravity," and not to be " a company bearer with common folks in drinking."-f- A daughter married John Lyon, son " Perth Register of Deaths, MSS. Advocates' Library at EdiDburgh. t Wodrow's Biographical Collections, printed for the Maitland Club, Glasgow, 4to. 1834, vol. i. Part Second, Notes, p. 546, 547. 346 PEACEFUL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1G15 of Sir Thomas Lyon of Auldbar, the second son of John seventh Lord Glammis, who is known in Scottish history as the Master of Glammis, one of the principal agents in the seizure of James VL at the Raid of Ruthven in May 1580. There was no issue by this marriage, and the estate of Auldbar devolved to his relative John, second Earl of Kinghorn, father of the first Earl of Strath- more, a Peerage joined with the Earldom of Kinghorn in 1677. Another of the Archbishop's daughters married John Wemyss of Craigton, who was Commissary of St Andrews, and some time Rec- tor and Chancellor of the University. A curious letter is still, preserved, dated St Andrews, 23d September 1612, addressed to the King by Archbishop Gladstanes, recommending this son-in- law to be a judge in the Scottish Supreme Court in place of Wil- liam Melville, Commendator of Tongland, foui'th son of Sir John Melville of Raith, and brother of James Melville of Halhill, author of the celebrated " Memoirs," a complete edition of which was printed by the Bannatyne Club, and of Sir Robert Melville of Mur docairnie, created Lord Melville. The Commendator sat on the Bench by the title of Lord Tongland, and on this particular occasion some arrangement was to be made with his Lordship, who was to retire from the Bench in favour of Commissary Wemyss, but this was never effected, as Sir Gideon Murray of Elibank was ap- pointed an ordinary Lord in 1613. The letter alluded to is only signed by the Archbishop, the whole of it being the autograph of his son-in-law, though " whether the Archbishop dictated the let- ter, or whether Wemyss prepared it himself, and got his father- in-law's signature, cannot now be ascertained, but in either way the extreme modesty and coolness of the would be judge him- self recording his own merits are highly amusing."* An " appli- cation by John Wemyss to James VI., to be appointed a Lord of Session" is also preserved, without date, but supposed to be at least anterior to 1 619. Commissary Wemyss was subsequently appointed a J udge in the Supreme Court, took his seat on the Bench by the title of Lord Craigton, and was afterwards knighted. A grand- daughter of Archbishop Gladstanes, named Elizabeth or Elspet Gladstanes, was married in 1632 to Dr George Halyburton, They were the parents of Dr George Halyburton, born in 1635, and consecrated Bishop of Brechin, afterwards translated to Aber- deen, in which See he continued till the Revolution of 1688. • Analecta Scotica, Second Series, Edinburgh, 1837, p. 348, 349, in which the letter is printed. 1615.] 347 CHAPTER IV. INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH — ARCHBISHOP SPOTTISWOODE REMOVED TO ST ANDREWS — CHANGES IN THE BISHOPRICS — THE SEE OF ORKNEY — THE HIGH COMMISSION — GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT ABERDEEN — A CATECHISM, LITURGY, AND BOOK OF CANONS, ORDERED TO BE PREPARED — A CONFESSION OF FAITH APPROVED. Archbishop Gladstanes was succeeded in the Primacy by Arch- bishop Spottiswoode, who was translated from Glasgow much against his inclination. He had evinced his munificence by repair- ing the Cathedral church and episcopal castle of that See, and he first commenced the lead roof of the former. During his connection with Glasgow he exerted himself so successfully, that much of the Presbyterian disaffection had vanished in that Diocese. He entered St Andrews on the 3d of August 1615, accompanied by numbers of noblemen and gentlemen, and preached a sermon on the 5th, which, according to Calderwood, was a Saturday. The ceremony of his installation was performed on the following day in presence of most of the suffragan Bishops and a crowded congregation, after a sermon by Bishop Cowpar of Galloway on Titus ii. 7. 8. This very excellent sermon, which is dedicated to Lord Sanquhar, is in the collection of Bishop Cowpar's Works, and the object of it is to explain the duties of a good Bishop. The translation of Archbishop Spottiswoode to St Andrews rendered the See of Glasgow vacant, and Bishop Law was removed thither from Orkney in the beginning of September. He was suc- ceeded in Orkney by Bishop Graham of Dunblane. Adam Bel- lenden, rector of Falkirk, son of Sir John Bellenden of Auchnoul, Lord Justice-Clerk, was nominated to the Bishopric of Dunblane, and was consecrated at St Andrews about the close of the year. 348 INTERNAL STATE OP THE CHURCH. [1G15. If we are to believe Oalderwood, who records these appointments with disgusting indelicacy, Bellcnden was for some time a " vehe- ment opponent against Bishops," but now he was not ashamed to " accept that mean Bishopric [alluding to the well-known poverty of the See of Dunblane] to patch up his broken lairdship of Kin- nocher." He records that on the 26th of November, Archbishops Spottiswoode" and Law, after a sermon by Bishop Oowpar in the Chapel-Royal of Holyroodhouse at Edinburgh, took the oaths of allegiance — " renouncing all foreign authority, temporal or eccle- siastical, and did homage for their Archbishoprics upon their knees" before the noblemen who represented the King, and in pre- sence of sundry of the Nobility, the Lords of the Privy Council, the judges, and a large concourse of spectators. Some notices may be here appropriately inserted respecting the remote Bishopric of Orkney during the episcopate of Archbishop Law, before his translation to Glasgow. From the Reformation to the nomination of Bishop Law in 1605, religion in the Orkney and Shetland Islands had been miserably neglected. The connec- tion of Bishop Botliwell was little more than nominal. Apostatiz- ing from his sacred calling, he merged the episcopal function into those of a civil judge and courtly politician. He procured various leases of the Earldom of Orkney, all the lands of which had reverted to the Crown in 1544, at the death, without issue, of James Earl of Moray, illegitimate brother of James V., by whom they had been conferred on the Earl. Lord Robert Stewart, who had exchanged the Abbacy of Holyroodhouse with Bothwell for the Bishopric of Orkney, had enjoyed as a tenant, with some interruptions, the episcopal lands and also those of the Earldom for a number of years. The new possessor was equally regardless of the spiritual interests of the people, contenting himself, after the first introduction of Presbyterianism, with merely keeping the choir of the cathedral church of St Magnus in repair. Lord Robert was created Earl of Orkney in 1581, and thus obtained the rank and property of the St Clairs, the former Earls. He was the father of his successor Patrick, the second and only other Earl of this illegitimate descent of royalty. Earl Patrick succeeded his father in 1600, and among his other erections he built what is still known as the EarVs Palace., near the south side of the cathedral church of St Magnus, in the 1615.] INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 349 immediate vicinity of the Bishop's Palace. After the nomination of Bishop Law to the See, the King, in February 1005, granted a renunciation of the episcopal revenues, though they were still enjoyed by the Earl, who by a contract with Bishop Law con- tinued to possess the Bishopric, Nevertheless this arrangement, though so farfavourable, was prejudicial to the Earl, whose extortions to defray debts contracted by his extravagance were unbounded, and incited him to the grossest oppression. Bishop Law was well aware of the miseries inflicted by him, and the crimes of which he was guilty, but afraid of openly quarrelling with such a des- perate person, a mutual contract was formed, by which the Bishop agreed to resign to the Earl the lands and revenues of the See during his incumbency for the payment of a specified annuity, and the building called the New Wark of the Yards, or EarFs Palace, as a residence. But this agreement, advantageous to the Earl, was soon terminated. The people were still gi'ievously plundered, and petitions were sent to the Bishop, who transmitted them to the King and Privy Council. Negligent, if not corrupt, as the Privy Council of that period often was, the EarFs conduct could no longer pass unnoticed for his infamous cruelties and miseries perpetrated against the unoffending inhabitants of Orkney and Shetland. He was apprehended, and committed prisoner al- ternately to the castles of Edinburgh and Dunbarton. On the 2d of August IGIO, he was brought to trial for high treason and oppression of the Islanders.* His crimes are enumerated in the indictment from 1590, during the lifetime of his father, to 1610. The Earl was accused of holding and detaining the servants of certain gentlemen " in irons, stocks, close prison, and firmance, divers days and weeks, usurping thereby [our] royal authority, and bereaving our lawful subjects of their native liberty due to them, in their free passage and traffic, under our peace and protection, through all parts of our native kingdom by sea and land." In particular the said Earl, " leaving no sort of extraordinary op- pression and treasonable violence unpractised against the said in- habitants of Orkney and Zetland at the times specially above rehearsed, at the least in divers of the years and months afore- said, had compelled the most part of the gentlemen's tenants of " All the documents are printed in Pitcairn's Criminal Trials of Scotland, vol, iii, p. 81-87, 308-327. 350 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1615. the said counties of Orkney and Zetland to work to him all manner of work by sea and land, in rowing and sailing his ships and boats, working in the stone-quarries, winning and bearing furth thereof stones, and red furth thereof ; lading his boats and shallops with stone and lime, and loosing the same ; building his parks and dykes, and all other sorts of servile and painful labour, without either meat, drink, or hire." Though the trial was delayed, the Earl was detained in close custody. An otherwise candid Presbyterian writer on the history of Orkney attempts at this stage of the business to throw odium on Bishop Law. It is stated that the Bishop " collected the grounds of complaint, digested and procured accusations for the Privy Council and other corrupt courts of law in Scotland ; plied the cupidity of James by the prospect of a forfeiture of the Earldom to the Crown ; and fed his insatiable vanity by the most abject and ludicrous flattery."* But all the Bishop's movements in the matter, on the contrary, entitled him to the greatest commenda- tion, and he was only discharging his duty by representing the sufferings of the people inflicted by an infatuated and ambitious individual notorious for his crimes. It farther appears that he had other and more daring projects in view. In addition to his oppression of the inhabitants he had resolved to constitute himself in- dependent of the Scottish Crown, and this induced him to commit many acts of violence and insult to the Government, which were treated with remarkable leniency, considering the summary man- ner in which justice was often dispensed in those times. Even after he was in custody his cruel disposition was manifested by the con- duct of his agents in the islands. The most effectual check to his career was the sequestration of his revenues, and withholding from him all supplies except what was necessary for his bare maintenance as a state prisoner. Though under such restraints he nevertheless continued to defy the power of the King and the Privy Council of Scotland. He sent his illegitimate son Robert Stewart to " uplift bygone rents " and other dues, that he might procure money to bribe his guards. He also instructed his son to use every exertion to obtain possession of the castle of Kirkwall and fortalices • Notes on Orkney and Zetland, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. SlierifF-Substitute of Orkney. Edinburgh, 1822, vol. i. p. 46. 1615.] INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 351 belonging to him, which the Government had seized, trusting to his own ingenuity to escape from Dunbarton Castle. It is to be observed that both Orkney and Shetland were then governed by Danish law, which the Earl and his deputies had most iniquitously applied. In a letter from Bishop Law to the King, dated Edinburgh, November 17, 1608, his Lordship prominently notices " the many great and continual complaints of his Majesty's poor distressed subjects in these Isles," and his " Christian com- passion of their miseries." On the 6th of December that year the King wrote to the Privy Council on the same subject, enjoining them to compel the Earl to appear before them on the 2d of March following, with intimation that if he refused, as he had long defied the former proclamations of the Privy Council, they would be " assisted both by sea and land for the punishing of his rebellion." About this period he had mortgaged his estates to Sir J ohn Arnot, which the King redeemed by purchase, and took possession of the Earldom and all its castles. In 1611 a rumour was circulated that the Earl was to be set at liberty, and allowed to return to Orkney. Bishop Law, in a letter to the King dated the 2d of May that year, states — " Your Majesty will be pleased to consider his natural disposition, his former practices, his neces- sity, who cannot uphold his estate now without some wrongs done to Sir John Arnot or me, or else to the poor oppressed people." In that year proclamations were issued prohibiting the Earl, who was again tried in 1610 and 1611, and his deputies, from exercis- ing any jurisdiction, abolishing the Danish laws in the islands, sanctioning the appointment of Henry Aitken by the Bishop to be commissary, and strictly enforcing obedience to the Bishop. Various other proclamations appeared from time to time, and one in October 1612 annexed the Earldom to the Crown. In 1611 the Earl produced answers to the " pretended" complaints against him by the inhabitants of Orkney and Shetland, which had been drawn up by authority of Bishop Law. In 1614, the Earl, exasperated at his imprisonment, induced his illegitimate son to proceed to Orkney, levy his rents, exercise his jurisdictions, and take possession of his castles. In all this he was to a certain extent successful, but it is ascertained that he was favoured by the unpopularity of the Sheriff. George, fifth Earl of Caithness, between whom and the Earl of Orkney a rooted 352 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1615. hatred had long existed, put down this insurrection, and executed the ringleaders, though he was induced to interfere in it by the basest purposes. He was prevented from demolishing the cathe- dral of St Magnus solely by the spirited resistance of Bishop Law, who would not suffer him to throw it down. On the 1st of February 1615, the Earl of Orkney was tried before the High Court of Justiciary at Edinburgh for " rebellion, tyranny, and op- pression, high treason,"" and other crimes. The Jury consisted of the Earls of Glencairn, Winton, Perth, Lothian, and Tullibardine; Lords Scone, Sinclair, Herries, Torphichen, Sempill, and Kilniaurs; and four private gentlemen. The Earl was unanimously found guilty, and sentenced to be beheaded at the cross of Edinburgh two days afterwards, his family attainted, and all his property for- feited to the Crown. By the intercession of some of the ministers in Edinburgh the execution was delayed to the sixth of February, and on that day he was beheaded. Calderwood relates that although he was a person of courtly manners and polished address, he was " so ignorant that he could scarce rehearse the Lord's Prayer." His illegitimate son and associates, with only one exception, were tried and executed about the same time. In those days the transi- tion from the justice court to the scaffold was often remarkably brief. The tyrant Earl of Orkney was nevertheless the favourite of the Presbyterians, whose historians allege that his execution was a " judicial murder." They accordingly implicate Bishop Law in the whole matter, and we are gi-avely told that " the removal of the Earl would at all events free the See from his grants of it, and promotion to the Archbishopric of Glasgow was in fact the reward of the Bishop's services."* In the whole proceedings not the slight- est intimation occurs to warrant this statement, and the conduct of Bishop Law appears throughout to be that of one who advo- cated the cause of the oppressed. As it respects revenue the See of Orkney was richer than the Archbishopric of Glasgow, and even at the Revolution of 1088, when the Church was supplanted by the Presbyterian Establishment, and the episcopal rents seized by the Crown, the income of the Bishopric of Orkney was L.1.366, while that of Glasgow was L.1294. After the execution of the Earl of Orkney, the Earldom and the Bishopric were separated, * Notes on Orkney and Zetland, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. vol. i. p. 46. 1615.] INTERNAL STATE OP THE CHURCH. 353 the " Palace of the Yards," including the edifice erected by the Earl, was annexed to the See, with a condition that the King's Lieutenant, when in Orkney, was to be accommodated in it ; and from August 1615, when Bishop Graham succeeded Bishop Law, to 1688, the Earl of Orkney's palace was the episcopal resi- dence. The crown charter in favour of the Bishop and his Chap- ter was issued on the 4th of October 1614, and infeftment was taken on the 14th of November. A complete and entire separa- tion was effected between the Earldom and the Bishopric ; lands in certain of the island parishes were " confirmed and mortified" to the Bishop and his successors, reserving the legal rights of the udal- lers, or feuars; and " the whole lands, whether of old called king's lands, bishop's lands, udal lands, or kirk lands, were conveyed in superiority, modified in as far as udallers were concerned, to the Bishop, together with the holmes, skerries [little islands and rocks], and all parts and pertinents belonging to the lands." The parsonage and vicarage teinds which formerly belonged to the Bishopric, or to any other dignity, were dissolved from the Crown, and were declared the property and patrimony of the See, with the provision that the Bishops were to " plant" churches in the seve- ral parishes, and provide a sufficient stipend to each of the incum- bents. Finally, as it respected the ecclesiastical temporalities of this remote insular Diocese, confirmed by the episcopal charter, as it is called, of 1614, the " Bishop and his successors were con- stituted patrons of all the vicarages within the islands, lands, and bounds of Orkney and Zetland. A right and jurisdiction of sheriff and bailie was vested in the Bishops within the Bishopric territory, with the authority of commissary over Orkney and Zet- land ; and power being given to appoint sheriffs and bailies, the inhabitants of the Bishopric were exempted from the jurisdiction of the earldom functionaries ; and all rights of patronage, if there were any, within the bounds of the said Bishopric, were annulled, to the effect that they, and all the lands, rights, and jurisdictions, might remain with the Bishops as their patrimony and privilege for ever. — That [episcopal] charter is therefore now the standard by which all future grants of the earldom estate fall to be tried, and in as far as they are inconsistent with it, and the possession which followed upon it, in so far such grants may fairly be held null and ineffectual."* * Notes on Orkney and Zetland, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. vol. i. p. 138, 139, 140. 23 354 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH, [1G15. Leaving the insular Diocese of Orkney and Zetland under the jurisdiction of Bishop Graham, we find the Presbyterian writers carefully narrating that the High Court of Commission was re- modelled in December, and the previous two courts were united, though it appears that subsequently Archbishop Law was em- powered to institute one in his Diocese. The odium of this Court of Commission is thrown on the Scottish Bishops, but it ought to be recollected that, however objectionable the Court was, some- thing like it was necessary at the time, and, moreover, that many of the nobility, clergy, and gentry, were equally implicated. The High Commission authorized the members, or any five of them, to summon before them all persons " within the Provinces of St Andrews and Glasgow, and Dioceses of the same, being offenders either in life or religion, whom they find any way to be scandalous ; and especially resetters and intercommimers with Jesuits, semi- nary and mass priests, or excommunicated Papists, sayers and hearers of mass, recusants, and not communicants, incestuous and adulterous persons and the Court was armed with very sum- mary powers to imprison all such as were found " guilty and impenitent, refusing to acknowledge their offence also, to excom- municate them, and to censure or deprive those incumbents of parishes who refused to enforce the judgment of the Court. It farther appears that the High Court of Commission could exercise a kind of censorship over the press. Oalderwood relates that Arch- bishop Spottiswoode, soon after his translation to St Andrews, held a Court there on Tuesday, the 8th of August 1 615, when Mr John Malcolm, Bishop Cowpar's colleague at Perth, appeared to answer a charge against him. He had printed at Middleburg that year a Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, and in his Epistle Dedicatory to King James he demanded that the Presby- terian preachers not permitted to return to Scotland after the Con- ference at Hampton Court inl606, for maintaining that the General Assembly held at Aberdeen in 1605 was lawful,* should be re- called. He was accompanied by a number of his parishioners, and Even Mr Scott, in the Perth MS. Registers, admits that Malcolm expressed him- self to the King with " some freedom ;" in other words, in the style of dictation pecu- liar to the followers of Mr Andrew Melville. " But at the same time," says Mr Scott, " he shews a sincere affection to his Majesty, and to the real interests of his Govern- ment. He owns that his conscience was reluctant in complying with some of the King's commands with regard to the Church, and that his reluctance was a cause why he had not been more distinguished with the King's favour." 1615.1 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 355 subscribed a document, which was transmitted to the King. Mr Caldcrwood's subsequent observations, recorded with his usual scandal, are amusing. He designates Archbishops Spottiswoode and Law as " two pretty foot-ball men." They are " the only two Archbishops in Scotland, and have now, as we used to say, the ball at their foot. They were both near the point of sus- pension in the purer [Presbyterian] times for the profanation of the Sabbath ; now they have power to suspend, deprive, imprison, fine, or confine, any minister in Scotland. Out of preposterous pity they were spared then, but now they spare not the best and the most blameless." Mr Calderwood had good reason to denounce the High Court of Commission, as it will be subsequently seen that he was compel- led to appear before it in presence of the King. In the mean- while the Court reached a very different personage. This was the Earl [first Marquis] of Huntly, previously mentioned, who was summoned before the Court on the 12th of June 161G, and who had been formerly noted for his zealous attachment to the Roman Catholic faith. He and the Earl of Errol had defeated the royal forces, consisting of 7000 men under the Earl of Argyll, at Bel- rinnes, or Glenlivet, in 1594, and this battle was the result of their refusal to renounce the Papal Church, or remove out of the king- dom, after their treasonable correspondence with Spain. Huntly was committed to Stirling Castle in 1G06, from which he was liber- ated in December 1610, on his engagement to subscribe the then Confession of Faith and make satisfaction to the Church, with which he had been before involved for his slaughter of the " Bonnie" Earl of Moray at Dunibristle House in Fife, in February 1591-2. On the present occasion he had prohibited his retainers from at- tending the sermons of particular ministers, and was also under sentence of excommunication. The Marquis was committed to the Castle of Edinburgh for refusing to sign the Confession of Faith, or give any kind of satisfaction ; but after an imprison- ment of three days he was set at liberty by the Lord Chancellor Dunfermline. His Lordship, who was a great favourite with King James, appears to have been summoned to Court ; and as the Scot- tish Bishops were enraged at the Earl of Dunfermline for releasing him in defiance of the dignity and authority of the High Court of Commission, they sent Bishop Forbes of Caithness to complain to 356 INTERNAL STATE OP THE CHURCH. [1615. the King, The Marquis was recommended by James to the in- structions of Archbishop Abbot, the English Primate, who was so far successful. The excommunication was now the only difficulty, and as it could only be removed by the Church which inflicted it, the Bishop of Caithness, in name of the Scottish Bishops, though apparently without any authority from them, consented ;* and Archbishop Abbot accordingly absolved the Marquis from the ex- communication at Lambeth, on the 7th of July 1616, in the pre- sence of Dr Jones, Archbishop of Dublin ; Dr King, Bishop of Lon- don ; and " divers others ;"-f- his Lordship immediately afterwards receiving the Communion. Archbishop Spottiswoode and the Scot- tish Bishops were indignant at Archbishop Abbot's interference in a sentence pronounced or confirmed by them, and remonstrated with the King on the subject. James defended the act in a long letter to Archbishop Spottiswoode, to whom the English Primate also wrote an explanatory epistle, both of which were satisfactory. It was accordingly stipulated that the Marquis, who had now returned to Scotland, should petition the General Assembly when held at Aberdeen, acknowledge his offence, promise to educate his children in the Protestant faith, in the profession of which he was himself to continue, and be again absolved according to the form of the Church of Scotland. Huntly's friend, the Earl of Errol, who had also been excommunicated nine years before, was absolv- ed about the beginning of 1617 by some of the Bishops at Perth, In the beginning of July occurred the death of Bishop Black- burn of Aberdeen after a lingering illness. He was succeeded by Bishop Alexander Forbes of Caithness, minister of Fettercairn in Kincardineshire, who was unanimously elected by the Chapter. The successor of Bishop Forbes in the See of Caithness was J ohn Abernethy, minister of Jedburgh, the pastoral charge of which he continued to retain. The translation of Bishop Forbes to Aber- deen, and the appointment of Bishop Abernethy to Caithness, are here noticed by anticipation, as neither occurred till after the • Bishop Forbes, according to Calderwood, denied this in the General Assembly held at Aberdeen in August 1G16, when the matter of Huntly's absolution and the conduct of Archbishop Abbot were discussed. " It was still alleged upon him," says Calderwood, " and he was threatened with deposition from his Bishopric, but his de- position turned to greater preferment, for he was preferred before all other com- petitors to the Bishopric of Aberdeen not long after this Assembly." t Archbishop Abbot of Canterbury to Archbishop Spottiswoode of St Andrews, in the latter's " History of the Church and State of Scotland," p. 528. 1615.] INTERNAL STATE OP THE CHURCH. 357 General Assembly held at Aberdeen in August. Oalderwood mentions a circumstance, under the title of " doctors inaugurat," which he evidently considered of some importance. " Upon the 29th of July, Mr Robert Howie, Mr Peter Bruce, Mr James Martin, Principals of the three Colleges of St Andrews ; Mr Patrick Melville, Mr John Strang, Mr Theodore Hay, and Mr David Barclay, were inaugurate Doctors at St Andrews. This novelty was brought in among us, without advice and consent of the [Presbyterian] Kirk. Dr Young was the chief director in that action." It is said that " the first hint given about making Doctors of Law and Divinity is to be found in Archbishop Glad- stanes'' letter to the King, dated September 1G07. He requests the order and form of making them, ' to encourage our ignorant clergy to learning.'' " According to the same authority — " It was now introduced, that the ministers might in all things be conform- ed as much as possible to the English usages and yet the author of this statement, a minister of the Presbyterian Establish- ment, was himself complimented with and accepted the degree of " Doctor of Divinity" not long after the publication of his work. At the present day both the Established and Dissenting Presby- terian preachers in Scotland are covetous of the " novelty," which is evident from the number of them on whom it has been conferred both by the Scottish Universities, and by academical institutions in the United States. On the 13th of August the General Assembly was held at Aber- deen. The Archbishops, all the Bishops, and others qualified to attend, were present, and the King, by his letter appointed Arch- bishop Spottiswoode to preside as Moderator, the Earl of Mon- trose representing the Sovereign. The reasons for convening this Assembly seem chiefly to have been the spread of the Roman Catho- lic religion in the northern counties, and the necessity of devising measures in full convocation to correct and reform abuses. The zealous Presbyterian writers allege that this General Assembly was defective, because it was not constituted according to the " practice of their Kirk." The first day was observed as a fast. The learn- ed Patrick Forbes of Corse preached in the morning, Archbishop Spottiswoode in the forenoon, and William Forbes, afterwards the • Life and Times of Alexander Henderson, by John Aiton, D.D. minister of Dol- phinton. Edinburgh, 8vo. 1836, p. 96. 358 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1G16. first Bishop of Edinburgh, in the afternoon. Numbers of the nobility and gentlemen, the Lords of the Privy Council, and other dignitaries, were present. Calderwood sarcastically states that " the first four days were spent in preaching, renewing old acts, and making some new [ones], against Papists, as if no acts had been made against Papists before at Assemblies or Par- liaments but in his opinion this was done purposely to pro- tract the time, that those parish ministers who came from the southern counties, and who were alleged to be disaffected to- wards the episcopal order, might voluntarily withdraw to their several parishes, and unanimity would thus bo secured. Some very stringent resolutions were passed against the Eoman Catholics, and the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow were authorized to proceed rigorously against them in the High Court of Commis- sion. The absolution of the Marquis of Huntly by the Arch- bishop of Canterbury, the King's letter on that subject, and the petition of the Marquis, were discussed ; and on the last day of the Assembly he was absolved from the excommunicaton, after solemnly declaring that he, his family, servants, and retainers, would " abide by the true religion professed within this realm, and allowed by the laws and acts of Parliament." A new Confes- sion of Faith, which, Dr Cook admits, " displays the utmost moderation," was prepared and ratified, and ordered to be uni- versally received in all the parishes. Mr Patrick Galloway and Mr John Hall, ministers of Edinburgh, and Mr John Adam- son, minister of Libberton, near that city, were authorised to com- pile a Catechism, " easy, short, and compendious," for the in- struction of those who presented themselves as communicants. They were enjoined to have the Catechism completed before the 1st of October, that it may be printed with the King's licence, and no other was to be permitted throughout the kingdom.* Gallo- way, Adamson, Hewat, and another, were also empowered to form " an uniform order of Liturgy, or Divine Service, to be set down to be read in all kirks on the ordinary days of prayer, and every Sabbath-day before sermon, to the end [that] the common people may be acquainted therewith, and by custom may learn to serve God rightly ."t The holy communion was ordered to be adminis- " Dr Alton, in his " Life and Times of Alexander Henderson," p. 97, states that the new Confession of Faith and Catechism were proposed by Mr A. Hay. ■f This Liturgy was never prepared, and no Liturgy was ordered for general use till 1G16.] INTERNAL STATE OP THE CHURCH. 359 tered four times in the year in the cities and towns, and twice in the riu-al parishes, one of which times was to be on Easter Sun- day ; and all persons who refused or neglected to communicate once in the year were to be fined in terms of the act of Parliament. To promote uniformity of discipHne in the Church, a Book of Canons was also ordered to be compiled from the records of former Assemblies, and where these were defective, from the ancient Canons of Councils and ecclesiastical convocations. This work was committed to Archbishop Law of Glasgow, and Mr William Strutliers, minister of Edinburgh, and after the Canons were ratified, the King was to be petitioned for their approval and ratification. The College of St Mary's in St Andrews was enjoin- ed to be maintained exclusively for the study of theology, and as the revenues were small, it was ordered that every Diocese shall sup- port two students, or according to the extent of the Diocese, so that twenty-six students would be always at that College, the half of them to be the sons of poor incumbents, and to be presented by the respective Bishops. The sacrament of Baptism was en- joined, in terms of the acts of the General Assembly held at Holy- roodliouse on the 10th of October 1G02, to be administered to all children whose parents made confession of their faith, with " this extension and addition, that baptism shall no way be denied to the infant when either the parents of the infant, or any faithful Christian in place of the parents, shall require the same to the infant ; and that the same be granted any time of day, with- out any respect or delay till the hour of preaching." The parochial incumbents were ordered to keep accurate registers of baptisms, marriages, and deaths ; and the King was to be requested to sanc- tion them as legal evidence of the facts recorded. A commission was given to a specified number, including the two Archbishops, all the Bishops, and seventeen of the clergy, to meet at Edinburgh on the 1st of December, and " there to take order with the dilapi- dation of benefices, and to set down solid grounds how the pro- ICS?, when it was followed by the most disastrous results. Although Galloway, Adam- son, Hewat, and a Mr Erskine, arementionedby Calderwoodas the individuals authorized to prepare the Liturgy, as stated in the text, a biographer of Archbishop Spottiswoode alleges, that it was chiefly committed to William Cowpar, Bishop of Galloway. It is possible that a mistake here occurs. The Bishop of Galloway and Mr Patrick Gallo. way were contemporaries, and both usually resided in Edinburgh, the former as Dean of the Chapel-Royal at Holyroodliouse, and the latter as one of the ministers of that city. 360 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1616. gress of that mischief might be stayed ; and to decree some means to recover and restore the state of those benefices which by iniquity of time hath been lost, and if need be, to call and pursue before them those who have made the dilapidations." A copy of all the acts of this important General Assembly was transmitted to the King by Archbishop Law of Glasgow and Bishop Lindsay of Ross, and the royal sanction was soHcited. James approved of the proceedings, but he objected to the act respecting the rite of Confirmation, which he alleged, was expressed in a confused manner, and sent several regulations which he ordered to be inserted in the intended Canons. Some of these regulations were afterwards known as the celehrsited Five Articles of Perth. But the Scottish Bishops perceived the alarm which would be excited under the peculiar circumstances by incorporating those regula- tions. They firmly represented to James that the parties prepar- ing the Canons were exclusively limited to the acts of former General Assemblies, and to ancient Canons of Councils of the Church ; and that nothing could be inserted which had not been proposed and sanctioned at Aberdeen. The King was satisfied with this explanation, and in the meantime withch-ew his proposed regulations. If Mr Scott's view of the proceedings of this Assem- bly is correct, the results were singular and interesting. " An act," he observes, " was made by this Assembly concerning the cate- chizing and confirming of children by Bishops. Report of this act being made to the King, he framed five Articles, which he sent to the Bishops, desiring them to be added to the Canons of the Church. Two of these Articles, after they had been new modelled by the clergy in Scotland, were admitted by the Assembly of St Andrews in 1G17 : but the King being much dissatisfied, all the Articles, as they had been proposed by him, were at last admitted by the Assembly at Perth in August 1618."* The injunction in this General Assembly, to prepare a form of prayer for general use in Divine Service, may be considered the first important public intimation of the introduction of such a form. Dr Cook appropriately observes — " In the Scottish Church there had been from the Reformation certain forms of prayer which it was lawful to use, but every minister was at liberty to depart from these, and to substitute such prayers as he thought • Perth Kirk-Session Registers, MS. vol. i. 1616.] INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 361 the circumstances of his congregation required." To this it may be added, that the use of a Liturgy does not necessarily preclude the substitution of such prayers after the service of the Church. Dr Cook thinks that, as it respects this particular act of the Aberdeen General Assembly, the " design of this new regulation was to take away this liberty, and to introduce, as in England, a Liturgy invariably to be repeated." It is probable that such was the ultimate design, but it is not sufficiently apparent ; and ex- perience shews us that even the use of the Liturgy in the Church has not deprived the clergy of the liberty of extemporary prayer, if they have any inclination to indulge in that practice. Calderwood generally observes that this General Assembly passed what he calls many " dangerous acts, besides dangerous commissions for setting down a new Liturgy, a new Catechism, and a new Book of Canons for the church discipline, and to revise the Confession of Faith presented to this Assembly, which was penned by Mr John Hall [of Edinburgh] and Mr John Adamson [of Libberton], and devised of purpose to thrust out the Confession of Faith subscribed and sworn by all Estates." But it really did not abrogate the Confession to which he alludes as ratified by Parliament ; and though it was ordered to be subscribed " in special by all persons that bear office in the Church," it was most probably intended, from its minute details, to be the great test of renouncing the Roman Catholic faith, for we find that the Marquis of Huntly subscribed it when he was absolved from the sentence of excommunication. This Confession, which is a document of some length, asserts the attributes of God, the fall of man, the corruption of human nature, and the redemption of the world by our Saviour. It denies unauthorized traditions, excludes the Apocryphal Books as inspired, maintaining the authority of the Holy Scriptures, the divinity of Jesus Christ as the Eternal Son of God, and the union of his divine and human nature constitut- ing him God and man in one person. The following extract, con- taining upwards of a third of this Confession, explains the senti- ments of the Scottish Bishops and clergy of that period on some of the vital principles of Christianity. The reader will at once perceive how far they agree with the Articles of the Church of England. The whole is inserted by Calderwood in his History. " We believe that God hath appointed his word and sacra- 362 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1616. ments, as instruments of the Holy Ghost, to work and confirm faith in man. We believe that the word of God ought to be taught, and the sacraments administered, and all divine service, as praying and praising, in all languages known and understood by the people. We believe that the sacraments are certain visible seals of God's eternal covenant, ordained by God to re- present unto us Christ crucified, and to seal up our communion with him. We believe that the sacraments are to be ministered only hy them who are lawf ully called thereto hy the Kirk of God. We believe that the sacraments have power to confirm faith and confer grace, not of themselves, or ex opere operato, or force of the external action, but only by the powerful operation of the Holy Ghost. We believe that there be only two Sacraments appointed by Christ under the New Testament — Baptism and the Lord's Supper. We believe that Baptism is necessary to salvation, if it can be orderly had, and therefore that not the want of it but the contempt of it doth damn [condemn]. We believe that Baptism sealeth up .unto us the remission of all our sins whereof we are guilty, either before or after our baptism. We believe that Baptism is to be ministered simply with the ele- ment of water, with the rite of dipping, washing, or sprinkling, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, according to Clrrist's institution, without other elements or sacramental rites devised by man. We believe that the Lord's Supper is to be given to all communicants under the elements of bread and wine, according to Christ's institution. We believe that the elements of bread and wine are not transubstantiate, or changed in [to] the substance of the body and blood of Christ, but that they are sacraments of his body and blood, thus changing their use, but not their substance. We believe that the body and blood of Christ are truly present in the Holy Supper, and that they are truly exhibited unto us ; and that we in very truth do participate of them, albeit only spiritually and by faith, not carnally or corporally. We believe that the Lord's Supper is a commemoration of the sacrifice of Christ, which, once offered, did fully expiate our sins. With this one sacrifice, once offered, we are fully content ; neither do we seek any other expiatory or propitiatory sacrifice. But as for sacrifices of praise and thanksgivings, the sacrifice of a contrite heart, alms, and charitable deeds, these we ought daily to offer as 161G.] INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. 363 acceptable to God in Christ Jesus. We believe that the sacrifice and merit of Christ is not appHed to us by the work of the sacrific- ing mass priest, but by that faith which is wrought in our souls by the Holy Ghost, whereby the sacrifice and merit of Christ is applied to us; and being applied to us,becometh our satisfaction, atonement, and merit. We believe that the souls of God's children, which depart out of this present life in the faith of Jesus Christ, after the separating from their bodies immediately pass to heaven, and there rest from their labours to the day of judgment, at which time they shall be united to their bodies to enjoy life everlasting with Christ. Likeas the souls of the wicked pass immediately to hell, there to remain until the day of judgment, which day, being conjoined with their bodies, they shall sustain the judgment of ever- lasting fire ; and, besides these two, a third place for souls we do not acknowledge."" The Confession then declares that there is " an holy, catholic, or universal Church" — that the " true mem- bers of this Church are only the faithful " — that it is " one," and that " out of it there is no remission of sins" — that " this Kirk is partly triumphant in heaven, partly militant on the earth" — that " the whole militant Kirk on earth is divided into many and divers particidar Kirks, which are visible and conspicuous to the eyes of men" — that " only those particular Kirks are pure which continue in the doctrine of the prophets and apostles, according to the holy canonical Scriptures, worshipping God purely, and minis- tering the sacraments according to the same" — and that " these be the marks whereby a true Kirk on earth may be discerned and known." The Confession then declares that religious worship is only to be given to God " according to his own will revealed in his Avord" — denounces all " will-worship, all invocation of saints or angels, all worshipping of images, crucifixes, relics, and all other things which are beside the true God" — and acknowledges the duty of obedience to and praying for " kings, princes, and ma- gistrates." It concludes — " We believe and constantly affirm that the Church of Scotland, through the abundant grace of God, is one of the most pure Kirks under heaven, both in respect of truth in doctrine and purity in worship ; and therefore with all our hearts we adjoin ourselves thereto, and to the religion publicly professed by the King's Majesty and all his true subjects, and authorised by his Majesty's laws ; promising by the grace of God oG4 INTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH. [1616. to continue therein to the end of our life, according to the Articles which are set down ; which, as we believe with our heart, so we confess with our mouth, and subscribe with our hands, understand- ing them plainly as they are here conceived, without equivocation or mental reservation whatsomever. So may God help us in the great day of judgment r Such is an abstract of this Confession of Faith, of which a Presbyterian declares that it and the Catechism " were correct enough as to doctrine, but altogether corrupt as to discipline ;""* but the truth is that the Confession contains no allusion whatever to the discipline and government of the Church. Even as to doc- trine, though it is on the whole a very admirable compendium, it contains some objectionable points. Considering the age in which it was composed, and the parties concerned, it as a whole well deserves Dr Cook's encomium, that " in so far as it relates to the constitution of the Church it displays the utmost moderation." Caldervvood, who omits no opportunity to vilify the Church, in- forms us that Mr WiUiam Struthers, in a sermon preached at Edinburgh on the 27th of August, was loud in condemnation of the proceedings of the Aberdeen Assembly ; and Bishop Covvpar of Galloway advanced similar sentiments. " But little credit," he alleges, " was given to any of them, for the one was a Bishop, and the other a pensioner, that is, a soldier hired or waged to maintain their course." It was at this time usual for the General Assemblies, or their committees, to recommend persons to be ministers in the principal towns. This Assembly at Aberdeen passed an act to the effect that as " the provision of learned, wise, and peaceable men to be ministers at chief burgh towns in vacant places, such as Edin- burgh, Perth, Aberdeen, Banlf, and other places vacant, is a most effectual mean to root out Popery, and perpetuate the profession of true rehgion, it is therefore ordained that the burgh towns be provided with the most learned, wise, and peaceable men that may be obtained." " Alton's Life and Times of Alexander Henderson, p. 97. 1617.1 365 CHAPTER V. KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND IN 1617 — PROCEEDINGS DURING HIS VISIT — ITS RESULTS — GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT ST ANDREWS — STATE OF THE ASSEMBLY — ELEVATION OF PATRICK FORBES OF CORSE TO THE BISHOPRIC OF ABERDEEN. The year 1617 was memorable for the visit of Kin^ James to Scotland, and particularly to his native city of Edinburgh. Due preparations were ordered for the King's reception. It was found necessary to repair Holyroodhouse and its Chapel- Royal, in which Bishop Cowpar officiated as the Dean. It was intended to orna- ment the interior of that venerable edifice by some gilt and carved work in wood, consisting of statues of the Apostles ; and an organ was intended to be placed in the gallery above the west or grand entrance. Some of the citizens, incited by the Presbyterian party, actually thought that such ornaments were so many inti- mations of the introduction of the Roman Mass, and even Bishop Cowpar was infected by the unnecessary alarm. Archbishop Spot- tiswoode and several of the Bishops signed a letter of remonstrance, prepared by Bishop Cowpar, to the King on the subject, and tho ornamental decorations were omitted, though the Primate re- garded the clamours of the people as altogether groundless. The King censured their contracted views, and intimated to them that some English doctors in his train would enlighten them on these matters. James left London for Scotland on the 15th of March, reached Berwick on the 11th of May, and entered Scotland on the 13th of that month. Among the dignitaries of the Church of England who accompanied the King was the learned Dr Lancelot Andrewes, then Bishop of Ely, celebrated as one of the translators of the 366 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. authorized version of the Bible, and the future Archbishop Laud. James was welcomed at Dunglass Castle, at that time the seat of the first Earl of Home, a few miles east of Dunbar, on the borders of the counties of Haddington and Berwick, and a Latin speech was delivered by Alexander Home, supposed to be the rector of Logie, and second son of Patrick Home of Polwarth. This castle of Dunglass was the last roof in Scotland under which James slept before entering England in 1603. On the 14th of May the King visited the mansion of Cavers in Koxburghshire, and on the 15th he arrived at Seton, the seat of the Earl of Winton, within twelve miles of Edinburgh. On the 16th James entered his native capital by the West Port, or gate, where he was received by Sir William Nisbet of Dean, Lord Provost, the Magistrates, and Town-Council, attended by an immense concourse of spectators. Those who are famiHar with the localities of Edinburgh, and know the route by which George IV. in 1822, and Queen Victoria in 1842, entered the city, will be amused to know that James proceeded along the mean and narrow alley called the West Port, then through the Grassmarket, up the curious steep street, now almost removed, known as the West Bow, and down the Lawnmarket, High Street, and Canongate, to the Palace. It is proper to state that the King halted in his progress at St Giles church in the High Street, which he entered with his retinue, and heard a sermon preached by Archbishop Spottiswoode. King James had other motives for visiting Scotland than what he called his " salmon-like instinct" once more to see his native kingdom, although in his letter to the Privy Council, dated Newmarket, 15th December, he assigns that as the " main and principal motive" of his intended journey. He states that he would " hear and redress" grievances, if " any there be, as could not otherwise be redressed without his own presence ;" but he declares that he would not sanction " any alterations or reformations in the government either ecclesiastical or civil." A letter from Secretary Lake, dated at Edinburgh, J une 6, 1617, to Sir Dudley Carleton, while the King was in the neighbourhood of Dundee on a " hunting journey," gives some explanation of the repair of the Chapel-Eoyal at Holyrood. " We are fixed for a time to this city till the Parliament be passed, which beginneth on the 17th of this month. In the meanwhile his Majesty is in consultation, by way 1C17.J KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 367 of preparation towards his ends — that is, to procure better main- tenance than the ministry [clergy] here hath, and some conform- ity between this Church and ours in England in the public service, whereof of the first it is hard to guess, so many great men are in- terested in the tithes. Towards the other his Majesty hath set up his Chapel here in like manner of service as it is in England, which is well frequented by the people of the country."* On the 8th of June, which was the festival of Whitsunday, Bishop An- drewes preached before the King in the Chapel-Royal on St Luke iv. 18. 19. The discourse, which is on the " sending of the Holy Spirit," is the tenth of the Bishop's " Ninety-Six Sermons" publish- ed by direction of Charles I., under the care of Archbishop Laud, and of Dr Buckeridge, successively Bishop of Rochester and Ely. On that festival the communion was of course administered, and the Presbyterian writers assert that it was the first time since the Reformation when it was given kneeling, according to the order of the Church of England. Calderwood relates that the Earl of Dunfermline [Lord Chancellor], Secretary Sir Thomas Hamilton, the Clerk Register, Sir George Hay, afterwards first Earl of Kin- noull, the Earl of Argyll, Archbishop Spottiswoode, the Bishops of Ross, Dunblane, and Brechin, and sundry others, were among the communicants. Bishop Cowpar of Galloway at first refused, but " continued not long in that mind." The King ordered the Marquis of Hamilton, and the Earls of Mar and Glencairn, who were in the Chapel- Royal, but left it before the celebration, to communicate on the following Sunday, with all the Bishops and noblemen who were then in Edinburgh. On that day Mr Wil- liam Struthers, one of the ministers of the city, preached before the King, and " observed the English form in his prayer and car- riage."-}- The other clergy of Edinburgh acquiesced in what Mr " Calderwood states — " Upon Saturday the 17th of May, the English Service, sing- ing of choristers, and playing on organs, and surplices, were first heard and seen in the Chapel-Royal." t Mr Struthers was by no means consistent in his principles. At the time of the meeting of the Parliament in the ensuing June, Archbishop Spottiswoode states that " Mr WiUiam Struthers, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, did unhappily break out in his sermon upon these matters, condemning the rites received in the Church of England, and praying God to save Scotland from the same. This was reported to the King by some of the English Doctors that were his hearers, and he became greatly in- censed." History of the Church and State of Scotland, p. 531. Mr Struthers' signa- ture in Greek is affixed to eighteen lines of Greek verses, one of the " several Poesies" 368 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. Calderwood is pleased to call " this innovation, or bad example."" A letter written on the 21st of June by Mr Chamberlain to Sir Dudley Carleton contains the following notice : — " Our Church- men and ceremonies are not so well allowed of, the rather by an accident that fell out at the burial of one of our guard, who died there, and was buried after the English fashion ; and the Dean of St Paul's [Dr Valentine Carey, Master of Christ's College, Cam- bridge, and afterwards Bishop of Exeter] preaching, desired all the assembly to recommend with him the soul of their deceased brother unto Almighty God, which was so ill taken that he was driven to retract it openly, and to confess he did it in a kind of civility, rather than according to the perfect rule of divinity. Another exception was taken to Dr Laud [at that time chap- lain to Bishop Neile, afterwards Archbishop of York, and with that Prelate attendant on the King,] putting on a surplice when the corpse was to be laid in the ground. So that it seems they are very averse from our customs, insomuch that one of the Bishops [Cowpar of Galloway], Dean of the Chapel there to the King, refused to receive the communion with him kneeling.'"* It would be out of place in the present work to narrate all the complimentary speeches and the progresses of King James in Scotland in 1617. The events connected with the Church are those which are here chiefly given. The Scottish Parliament, which was summoned on the 27th of May, met on the 1.3th of June, but the great muster of the Bishops, Nobility, and represen- tatives of the burghs, was on the 17th.-f- The two Archbishops, and all the Bishops, with the exception of Bishop Cowpar, the so called lay abbot of Crossraguel, the Duke of Lennox, the Marquises of Hamilton and Huntly, fourteen Earls, three Viscounts, twenty- four Barons, the Officers of State, and the commissioners for all delivered to James at Dunglass Castle on his way to Edinburgh. He also contributed to the " Eisodia Edinburgensium," which welcomed Charles I. to Edinburgh in 1633, and died that year. In 1627 he quarrelled with Mr James Reid, one of the Professors in the University of Edinburgh. Mr Struthers took upon him to declare, in censure of an expectant, that " Philosophy was the dishclout of Divinity !" Mr Reid noticed this vulgar expression in his public thesis, and characterized it as " salsum et rigidum nimis." Nichols' Royal Progresses of James I. vol. iii. p. 306, 369. • Nichols' Progresses, Processions, and Magnificent Festivities, of King James the First, &c. London, 4to. 1838, vol. iii. p. 344. t Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iv. p. 523, 524. 1617.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 3G9 the counties and royal burghs, appear on the parHamentary roll as present. Archbishop Spottiswoode preached a sermon in St Giles' church at the commencement of the proceedings, after which the members retired to their place of meeting, and the King delivered a long address explanatory of his views and wishes. " His Ma- jesty," says the writer of a letter to the celebrated Bacon, then Lord Keeper, " the first day, by way of preparation to the subject of the Parliament, made a declaratory speech, wherein he ex- pressed himself what he would not do, but what he would do. The relation is too prolix for a sheet of paper, and 1 am promised copy of it, which I will bring myself unto your Lordship with what speed I may. But I may not be so reserved as not to tell your Lordship that in that speech his Majesty was pleased to do England and Englishmen much honour and grace ; and that he studied nothing so much, sleeping or waking, as to reduce the bar- barity (I have warrant to use the King's word) of this country unto the sweet civility of ours ; adding further, that if the Scottish nation would be as docible to learn the goodness of England as they are teachable to limp after their ill, he might with facility prevail in his desire ; for they had learned of the English to drink healths, to wear coaches and gay clothes, to take tobacco, and to speak neither Scottish nor English."" The Lords of the Articles were the two Archbishops, the Bishops of Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Brechin, Dunblane, and Orkney, eight noblemen, eight Officers of State, eight commissioners for the counties, and eight for the burghs. This peculiarity of the Lords of the Articles in the Scottish Par- liaments seems to have excited the notice of the writer of the letter above quoted. " The whole Assembly, after the wonted manner, was abstracted into eight Bishops, eight Lords, eight gentlemen knights of the shires, and eight lay burgesses for towns ; and this epitome of the whole Parliament did meet every day in one room to treat and debate of the great affairs of the kingdom. There was exception taken against some of the lower house, which were returned by the country, being pointed at as men averse in their appetites and humours to the business of the Par- liament, who were deposed of their attendance by the King's power ; and others, better affected, by the King's election placed in their room."* It is generally stated, and especially by the • Nichols' Koyal Progresses of King James I. vol. iii. p. 347, 348. 24 370 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. Presbyterian winters, that a very serious opposition was threatened to some of those whom the King, in the exercise of his preroga- tive, named as Lords of the A rticles, and that in consequence he threatened even to dissolve the Parliament. Oalderwood mentions the " Laird of Dunnipace,"" whom the King would on no account allow to be one of the Lords of the Articles, because his conduct at the Linlithgow Assembly had been particularly offensive. This " Laird " was commissioner or member for Stirlingshire, and his colleague the " Laird of Keir" was substituted in his stead. The opening of the Parliament was attended with considerable display, but the conclusion of that day's meeting was somewhat different, if Calderwood's account is correct : — " The King and the Estates came not out of the Parliament House before ten hours at night, and went down to the Palace in great confusion, some riding in their robes, others walking on foot, and the Honours [Regalia] were not carried as before." The correspondent of Lord Bacon informs his Lordship — " The greatest and weightiest articles agitated in this Parliament were specially touching the Kirk and Kirkmen, and the abolishing of hereditary sheriffs to an annual charge ; and to enable justices of the peace to have as well the real execution as the title of their places. — For the Church and commonwealth his Majesty doth strive to shape the frame of this kingdom to the method and de- grees of the government of England, as by reading of the several acts it may appear. The King's desire and travail therein, though he did suffer a momentary opposition (for his countrymen will speak boldly to him), hath in part been profitable. For though he hath not fully and complementally prevailed in all things, yet he hath won ground in most things, and hath gained acts of Par- liament to authorize particular commissioners to set down orders for the Church and Churchmen, and to treat with sheriffs for their offices by way of composition."* This and other contemporary evidence, in connection with the proceedings of the Parliament, undeniably prove that the great mass of the people of Scotland were at the time utterly indifferent to Presbyterianism, and pas- sive to any system of church government. This is substanti- ated by the very nature of the acts of this Parliament, in refer- ence to the Episcopal Church as then estabhshed, which King ' Nichols' Royal Progresses of King James I., vol. iii. p. 346. 1017.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 371 James would have found it imjjossible to pass if any violent ex- citement had existed among the people on the subject. But no serious opposition was offered to Episcopacy, and it is to be recol- lected that the following and other acts of subsequent Parliaments were passed by the whole nobility of the kingdom, most of them in consequence of their hereditary jurisdictions of great power and influence, and also by the representatives of the counties and the burghs. The first act of this Parliament regulated the order for the elec- tion of Archbishops and Bishops to vacant Dioceses. It was en- acted that the King should grant " licence to the Dean and Chap- ter of the cathedral kirk of the See to convene themselves for electing another Archbishop or Bishop in place of the former incumbent ; and the said licence being expede, an edict shall be affixed upon the most patent [public] door of the cathedral kirk, requiring and charging the Dean and Chapter of the said kirk to convene themselves for choosing of a Bishop to the same who shall be devoted to God, and to his Highness and realm profitable and faithful ; who being convened, the Dean of the said Chapter, with so many of them as shall happen to be assembled, shall pro- ceed and choose the person whom his Majesty pleased to nominate and recommend to their election, he always being an actual minis- ter of the Kirk, and shall elect none other than an actual minister to be so nominated and recommended by his Majesty as said is ; after the which election, testified under their seals and subscrip- tions, his Majesty's pleasure is to give his royal assent thereto ; upon the which assent, and his Highness' mandate to be directed to a competent number of Bishops within the Province where the benefice lies, the person elected shall be consecrated and received in his function by the rites and order accustomed ; and the said consecration being made, his Majesty's pleasure is to dispone to the person elected the temporality of the said benefice, with all privileges, honours, and dignities, belonging thereto."* The second act of this Parliament authorized the " restitution of Chapters'" — that " all the Deans and other members of the cathedral kirks within this kingdom shall be restored to their manses, glebes, rents, and other patrimony belonging to them ; and to that effect his Majesty, with advice of the said Estates, dissolves • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iv. p. 529. 372 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. from the Crown and patrimony thereof, the foresaid manses, glebes, rents, and duties, formally annexed, to the effect the same may be hereafter enjoyed and peaceably possessed by the ministers that are and hereafter shall be provided thereto." The act was declared not to affect " feus, leases, pensions, and other rights lawfully made of whatsomever manses, glebes, lands, and teinds of any part of the said chapter kirks, to the parties having right to the same and also it was not to prejudice the lay patrons of their " patron- ages granted to them by the King's Majesty, with consent of the Titulars for the time, albeit the same be not ratified in Parliament, which shall nowise be prejudged by this present act," The special exemptions were the Priory of St Andrews erected into a temporal lordship in favour of Ludovic, Duke of Lennox, and his heirs ; the " house and place," or palace, of Hamilton, with the " orchards, yards, and hail pertinents of the same," in so far as they belonged to the Deanery of Glasgow, but then held of his Majesty by his " loving cousin" James, Marquis of Hamilton; the city of Edin- burgh, as connected with its " Hospitals, College, and Ministry ;" and the University of St Andrews. And inasmuch as the Prior of St Andrews was anciently Dean of the Archiepiscopal Diocese, but the Priory had been constituted " ane temporal living and lord- ship," the Chapter of the Diocese was ordered to consist of twenty- four incumbents, who were collectively to " have the administra- tion, doing, and performing of the affairs belonging to the said Bishopric, and for the weal of the said cathedral kirk." The right to elect the Archbishop was vested in the Bishops of Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Brechin, Dunblane, Boss, Moray, Orkney, and Caith- ness, the Principal of St Leonard's College, the Archdean and Vicar of St Andrews, and the Vicars of Leuchars and Cupar-Fife ; the Bishop of Dunkeld to be in all time coming Vicar-General for convening the electors. The right of election to the Archbishop- ric of Glasgow was vested in the Bishops of Galloway, Argyll, and The Isles, and the greater part of the Chapter of Glasgow ; the Bishop of Galloway to be convener of the electors.* In addition to this act for reviving the Chapters of the Dioceses, that the Bishops might be elected according to the ancient mode, another was passed " anent the plantation of Kirks." Dr Cook justly describes this as " a most wise and just law framed for the • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. iv. p. 529, 530. 1617.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 373 maintenance of the clergy, and for the plantation of churches, by which such salaries were allotted to the ministers as guarded them from the poverty to which they had long submitted." A commis- sion was granted to the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the Bishops of Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Moray, Ross, Dunblane, and Galloway, " eight persons nominate for the clergy and pre- lates," and in case of the decease of any of them, to the Bishops of Brechin, Orkney, Argyll, and Caithness ; to eight of the nobi- lity ; and to a similar number of the representatives of the counties and burghs. The parties nominated in this commission were authorized to examine the state of the teinds of each parish, and in all cases where those teinds were sufficient for the purpose to assign to the incumbents as the minimum five chalders of victual, or five hundred merks, exclusive of manse and glebe ; and as the maximum eight chalders, or eight hundred merks. Grain was then valued at about seven shillings a boll. Dr Cook cites Bishop Burnet, who states, in reference to this act, that " considering the plenty and way of living in Scotland it gi-anted a very liberal provision to the clergy." The sixth act of this Parliament, entitled " anent furnishing of necessaries for ministering of the Sacraments," ordained that " all the parish kirks within the kingdom be provided with basins and lavers for the ministration of the sacrament of Baptism, and with cups, tables, and table-cloths, for the ministration of the Holy Communion," the incumbents, or their heirs and executors, to be responsible in cases of loss ; the whole at the expence of the parishioners. The Abbey of Fearn in Ross-shire was annexed to the Bishopric of Ross ; that of Crossraguel in Ayrshire, and the Priory of Monymusk in Aberdeenshire, to the Bishopric of Dun- blane ; the Priory of Ardchattan, on the shore of Loch Etive in Argyllshire, and the Abbey of Zona or Icolmkill, in the He- brides, were annexed to the Bishopric of The Isles ; and the parish churches of Kilbride and Renfrew were annexed to the University of Glasgow. Considerable indecision was evinced by the Bishops to some of the acts of Parliament, and a number of ministers, who were more or less warped by the Presbyterian notions, viewed the mode of electing them as an infringement of the powers of the General Assembly. The King requested a statute to be passed, enacting 374 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. that " whatsoever conclusion was taken by his Majesty, with the advice of the Archbishops and Bishops, in matters of exteraal poUty, should have the power and strength of an ecclesiastical law,"" This was opposed by the Bishops, and the King consented that it should be thus expressed : — " That whatsoever his Majesty should determine in the external government of the Church, with the advice of the Archbishops, Bishops, and a competent numher of the ministry/, should have the strength of law which was approved of by the Lords of the Articles. James wished to demolish the pretensions of the General Assemblies, which he had too much reason to dread from his past experience. Upwards of fifty Presbyterians and semi-episcopal preachers drew up a protest against this lav^, which they delivered to Hewat, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, to present to the King. Hewat, who as the titular Abbot of Crossraguel, had a seat in Parlia- ment, went to Holyroodhouse for that purpose, where he was op- posed by Archbishop Spottiswoode, who was enraged at the ex- pressions in the document, snatched it from the hands of Hewat, and tore it in pieces. The noise of this altercation brought the King undressed from his apartment to inquire the cause. The Archbishop strongly censured Hewat, who felt abashed in the pre- sence of J ames ; and the King, to avoid any pretence of agitation, ordered the bill, though approved by the Lords of the Articles, to be expunged. But the conduct of the protestors was not allowed to pass un- noticed after the dissolution of the Parliament. Simpson, who had subscribed the document as their clerk, was summoned before the High Commission, and was committed to the Castle of Edin- burgh for not producing the list of those who signed the original paper, alleging that he had given it to another individual. This was no other than the Presbyterian writer Calderwood, who was in consequence summoned by warrant of Archbishops Spottiswoode and Law to appear before the High Court of Commission at St Andrews, on the charge of " attending a mutinous assemblage, and of retaining in his possession a seditious protest concocted there- in, and of inducing others, to sign it, in contempt of God, and of the allegiance which he owed to the King." Simpson and Hewat were cited at the same time. The account of Calderwood's examination in St Andrews is very 1617.1 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 375 characteristic. The King in his progress through Fife, proceeded from Falkland Palace to the seat of the Primacy, and entered St iVndrews on the 10th of July. He was received with complimentary addresses in Latin from the Town and the University, the latter re- presented by Dr Peter Bruce the Eector. On the 11th he heard a sorraon preached by Gladstanes, Archdean of St Andrews ; and on the 12th a dissertation in theology conducted by Mr David Lind- say, then minister of Dundee, was held in the parish church before the King, who revived the practice of conferring academical de- grees, which had been discontinued by the Puritan faction ; and on the authority of a mandamus Dr John Young, the royal chaplain, created several Doctors of Divinity, among whom were William Forbes, first Bishop of Edinburgh, and John Strange or Strang, subsequently Principal of the University of Glasgow. James had resolved to deal with Oalderwood and his friends in person, and was present when they appeared before the High Court of Commission ; but before they were called the King addressed the Court — " We took," he is reported to have said, " this order with the Puritans of England. They stood out as long as they were de- prived only of their benefices, because they preached still, and lived upon the benevolence of the people well affected to their cause ; but when we deprived them of their office many yielded to us, and arc now become the best men we have. Let us take the like course with the Puritans here." The three were then brought into the Court. Hewat adhered to his protestation, was deprived of his office of preacher, and confined to Dundee ; but it appears that he soon conformed, and contented himself with living on the limit- ed revenues of the Abbey of Crossraguel. Calderwood alleges that " his voice would not serve him to teach any longer, and therefore he was content to be removed from the ministry for some honest cause." Simpson attended only the first examination, and sent a letter in Latin to the King pleading bodily infirmity, and yet ad- hering to the protest which was delivered by Archbishop Spottis- woode. It contained an offensive expression, and he was brought to St Andrews in custody, deprived, and confined to Aberdeen. The discussion between the King and Calderwood, who gives an ac- count of the examination of Hewat, is characteristic. Calderwood was urged — " Come to the King's will ; you will find it best ; and his Majesty will pardon you." " That which we have done," observed 376 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1G17. Calderwood, " was done with deliberation." James now began hisinquiries. Addressing Calderwood, he asked — " What movedyou to protest V " An article," was the reply, " concluded among the laws of the Articles." " But what fault was there in it V demanded James. " It cutteth off our General Assemblies," replied the Presbyterian." The King here inquired how long Calderwood had been a preacher, and then said — " Hear me, Mr David. I have been an older keeper of Greneral Assemblies than you. A General Assembly serveth to preserve doctrine in purity from error and heresy, the Kirk from schism, to make confessions of faith, and to put up petitions to the King in Parliament; but as for matters of order, rites, and things indifferent in Kirk policy, they may be concluded by the King, with the advice of Bishops and a choice number of ministers. What is a General Assembly but a con- vened number of ministers V "Sir," replied Calderwood, "it should serve, and our General Assemblies have served, these fifty-six years, not only for preserving doctrine from error and heresy, but also to make canons and constitutions of all rites and orders be- longing to the Kirk. As to the second point, as by a competent number of ministers may be meant a General Assembly, so also may be meant a fewer number of ministers than can make up a General Assembly." The King here challenged him about some words in the protest. " Whatsoever was the phrase of speech," replied Calderwood," we meant nothing but to protest that we would give passive obedience to your Majesty, but could not give active obedience to any unlawful thing which would flow from that article." '• Active and passive obedience !" exclaimed the King. " That is," said Calderwood. " we will rather suffer than practise." " I will tell thee, man," replied James, " what is obedience. The centurion when he said to his servants, to this man. Go ; and he goeth ; and to this man. Come; and he cometh; that is obedience." " To suffer. Sir," observed Calderwood, " is also obedience, how- beit not of the same kind ; and that obedience also was not abso- lute, but limited, with exception of a countermand from a superior power." " Mr David," here observed Lord Binning, the Secretary, " let alone ; confess your error " My Lord," was the reply, " I cannot see that I have committed any fault." " Well, Mr Calder- wood," said the King, " I will let you see that I am gracious and favourable. That meeting shall be condemned before ye be con- KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 377 (lenined ; all that are in the file, shall be filed before ye be filed, provided ye will conform." " Sir," replied Calderwood, " I have answered my libel. I ought to be urged no farther." " It is true, man, ye have answered your libel," observed James, " but consider I am here ; I may demand of you when and what I will." " Surely, Sir," rejoined Calderwood, " I get great wrong if I be compelled to answer here in judgment to any more than my libel." " An- swer, Sir," exclaimed the King, " ye are a refractor ; the Bishop of Glasgow your Ordinary, and the Bishop of Caithness, the moderator of your Presbytery,* testify ye have kept no order. Ye have repaired neither to Presbyteries nor Synods, and in no wise conform." " Sir," said Calderwood, " I have been confined [to his parish] these eight or nine years, so my conformity on that point could not be well known." " Good faith !" observed James, " thou art a very knave. See these self-same Puritans — they are ever playing with e([ui vocations. If ye were relaxed, will ye obey or not V " Sir," answered Calderwood, " I am wronged, in that I am forced to answer questions beside the libel ; yet seeing I must answer, I say. Sir, I shall either obey you, or give a reason wherefore I disobey ; and if I disobey, your Majesty knows I am to be under the same danger as I do now." " That is," said the King, " to obey either actively or passively." Calderwood replied — " I can go no farther." He was then removed, but he was afterwards called in, and the conversation was resumed. He was threatened to be deprived, and prohibited from preaching, but he persisted in declining the authority of Archbishop Law, and stated that " as long as his body is free he would teach, notwithstanding this sen- tence." Calderwood's behaviour was such that even according to his own statements he had very few sympathizers among the audience. Calderwood states that James Cranstoun, son of William first Lord Cranstoun, the chief proprietor of Crailing Park, became sure- ty that he would leave the kingdom. Lord Cranstoun and himself petitioned the Privy Council for farther time to arrange his affairs, and that " he might have leisure to lift up the year's stipend where- in he served." To secure this share of worldly goods he accom- * This was Bishop Abernethy, who still retained his parochial incumbency, and officiated as minister of Jedburgh. The Presbytery mentioned is that of Jedbui-gh, within the bounds of which is the parish of Crailing near the town of Jedburgh. 378 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND, [1617. panied Lord Cranstoun to Carlisle with a petition to the King that he might be again " confined within his parish." James sarcastically said to Lord Cranstoun, who urged the danger of a voyage during the winter — " As for the season of the year, if he [Calderwood] be drowned in the seas he might thank God that he had escaped a worse death." The King would give no other definite answer than that he would consult the Bishops. A petition was next sent to the Privy Council, but they also refused to interfere, and referred it to the Bishops, who declared they would do nothing unless they had a personal conference with him. His own narrative proves that he suffered for his absurd obstinacy, and that, considering the temper of the times, he was leniently treated. The conference was held in the residence of his Diocesan the Archbishop of Glasgow, and the Bishops of Ross, Caithness, and Orkney, were present. Calderwood brought with him the very inconsistent Mr William Struthers, who, with the other minis- ters of Edinburgh implicated in the protest, had saved himself by conforming, and two gentlemen named Cranstoun, as his witnesses. The Bishops promised to intercede for him on three conditions — 1. To confess that he had offended the King, and crave pardon. 2. To resort to the meetings of his Presbytery. 3. To attend Synods. He refused to agree to the first. When urged by Arch- bishop Law to attend the Synods, he was told that he would have " liberty to vote and reason, but he must not quarrel every thing." His neighbour at Jedburgh, Bishop Abernethy of Caithness, said to him—" Come and say, Hie sum, and then do as you please." " That Mc sum,'''' was his reply, " is the question." " We will not enter into dispute," said Archbishop Law, " yet I would hear wherefore ye will not agree to attend the Synods." Calderwood replied that it was because their " Diocesan Synods were but episcopal visitations, not councils properly so called ; and hovvbeit councils, yet not free councils, in respect that the Bishop had power over every minister in the Synod apart from the Synod, was moderator in respect of his episcopal office, was not account- able to the Synod, and there were no ordinary General Assem- blies to take order with them." The interview tenninated with an advice from the Bishops to " advise better answers." Another effort was made by Lord Cranstoun, but the Bishops were resolved not to yield too much to this dogmatical Presbyterian. They 1(>17.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 370 replied that his answers ought to have been different — that he must confess his fault and resort to the meetings of Presbyteries and Synods, and some of them contended that he ought to pro- mise to conform ; moreover, that he should solemnly declare that he would not " write against the established order of the Kirk." It was farther stipulated that his replies must not be called answers to the articles proposed by the Bishops, but offers to the Bishops. " My Lord," said Patrick Galloway, in whose house this application was made, addressing Lord Cranstoun, " I will sum up in two words all that he should do. Let him confess simply that he hath offended the King, and promise conformity." As Calderwood was ordered to leave Scotland at Michaelmas in 1617, Lord Cranstoun sent another petition for his " confinement within his parish" till the last day of the ensuing April, the Bishops having written to the Archbishop of St Andrews, who was then at Court, in his favour. The Privy Council again refused to interfere, alleging that it concerned the Bishops, and that whatever they did in the matter would be sanctioned. The Bishops consented to allow him twenty days after the return of Archbishop Spottiswoode, if the King would not postpone his departure till April. When the Archbishop arrived about the end of September he declared that the King would allow no one to speak to him on the subject, and that when any of the English clergy congratulated him on his return from Scotland his common reply to them was — " I hope you will not use me so irreverently as om Calderwood did in Scotland." Calderwood seems to have been much annoyed at this royal observation, and he observes that this was not the first of the Archbishop's " fictions." He was eventually obliged to retire to Holland from 1619 till after the death of King James, though he mentions that he visited Scotland in 1624, but his companion Simpson submitted, and was restored. During the King's visit to St Andrews, after the dissolution of the Parliament, a meeiing of the Bishops and about thirty-six of the influential ministers was held in the chapel of the castle, the then archiepiscopal residence. James was present, and addressed them in a speech, in which he took occasion to inform them that as they had resolved in their last General Assembly for " gather- ing the acts of the Church, and putting them in form," he had 380 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. " desired a few articles to be inserted— one was for the yearly commemoration of our Saviour's greatest blessings bestowed on mankind, viz. his Nativity, Passion, Eesurrection, Ascension, and the descent of the Holy Spirit ; another for the private use of both Sacraments in urgent and necessary cases ; a third for the reverent administration of his Holy Supper ; and a fourth for catechizing and confirming young children by Bishops." The King then reminded them of their excuses for not inserting these articles, which he accepted at the time, and he complained of the offensive protest which followed. He thus concluded ; — " But I will pass that among many other wrongs I have received at your hands. The errand for which I have now called you is to hear what your scruples are on these points, and the reasons, if any you have, why the same ought not to be admitted. I mean not to do any thing against reason ; but on the other hand, my demands being just and religious, you must not think that I will be refused or resisted. It is a power innated, and a special prerogative, which we that are Christian Kings possess, to order and dispose of external things in the polity of the Church, as we by the advice of our Bishops shall think most fitting ; and by your approving or disap- proving deceive not yourselves. I will never regard it unless you bring me a reason I cannot answer.'' Archbishop Spottiswoode, who was present, gives an authentic account of this conference. The ministers entreated the King to think favourably of them as good and loyal subjects, and to permit them to debate those matters among themselves. This was granted, and they retired to the parish church. After a discussion of two hours they appeared be- fore the King, with a petition that a General Assembly might be held, in which the above articles would be discussed and sanctioned. The King asked — " what assurance he might have of their consent- ing T' They declared that the Assemljly would yield to any reasonable demand of his Majesty. " But if it fall out otherwise," said James, " and the articles be refused, my difficulty shall be greater, and when I shall use my authority in establishing them they will call me a tyrant and persecutor." They exclaimed that none would be so insane as to express themselves in that manner. " Yet experience," said the King, " tells me it may be so ; there- fore, unless I be made sure I will not sanction an Assembly." Mr Patrick Galloway here suggested that Archbishop Spottis- 1017.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 381 woode should be responsible for the conduct of the ministers, but the Primate declined, alleging that he had been deceived by them, and that they had violated their promises during the meeting of the Parliament. " Then," said Galloway, " if your Majesty will trust me, I will become security for the ministers." The King consented, and a General Assembly was oi'dered to be held at St Andrews on the 2.5th of November. The King soon afterwards returned to England through the western counties. He proceeded to Stirling, Glasgow, and Pais- ley, visited the Marquis of Hamilton at Hamilton : on the last day of July arrived at Sanquhar Castle, now a picturesque ruin on a high bank overlooking the Nith, and then the residence of Wil- liam seventh Lord Crichton, created Viscount Ayr in 1622, and Earl of Dumfries in 1633 ; and on the following day he was en- tertained at Drumlanrig, the seat of Sir William Douglas, after- wards Earl of QueensbeiTy. On Monday the 3d of August James entered Dumfries, and there heard a farewell sermon preached by Bishop Cowpar, which Archbishop Spottiswoode says " made the hearers burst out into many tears." On the 4th of August the King arrived at Carlisle on his journey southwards, and thus ter- minated his progi'ess in Scotland. On the 5th of October the Diocesan Synod of Fife was held at St Andrews, and the commissioners or members to the Gene- ral Assembly were elected. All the Diocesan Synods through- out the kingdom were held in that month for the same purpose. Calderwood, as usual, styles this a " corrupt course which the Bishops had in hand," and alleges that " there was no freedom of election ;" but he assigns no adequate reason. He merely states that in the Diocesan Synod of Fife some were nominated as mem- bers of the General Assembly who " misliked the episcopal go- vernment," and the Archbishop very naturally exercised his in- fluence and authority to prevent their election. On the 4th of November the meeting of the General Assembly was proclaimed to be held on the 25th, and in Calderwood's opinion " this inti- mation was not timeous, nor sufficient ; seven Dioceses, as we are informed, were not present, and that through default of timeous warning, which is another exception against this Assembly." But admitting this to be the case, the state of the weather in Novem- ber, in a country such as Scotland then was, without public con- 382 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND, [1617. veyances of any kind, and the roads, if they deserved to be called roads, in the most wretched condition, would be a sufficient excuse for the absence of any of the members residing in remote districts, especially at discussions on matters which had been often before them. On the appointed day the General Assembly met at St Andrews. Calderwood says that the Earl of Montrose was the King's Com- missioner, but that his Lordship fell sick, and sent a letter to the Privy Council to that effect a few days before the day of meeting. The letter was shewn to Archbishop Spottiswoode, who answered that nevertheless the " King's service must not be neglected;" and David Lord Carnegie, afterwards Earl of Southesk, Lord Binning, Secretary of State, Sir William Livingstone of Kilsyth, father of the first Viscount Kilsyth, Sir William Oliphant of New- ton, Lord Advocate, and the Treasurer-Depute, or any three of them, were appointed by the Privy Council to supply the place of the Earl of Montrose ; yet Archbishop Spottiswoode states that Viscount Scone and Lord Binning were the King's Commissioners. Calderwood farther alleges that Archdean Gladstanee preached on the morning of the first day of the meeting, but the Archbishop declares that he " made the exhortation " himself, and he men- tions the subject of it — that he " deduced the story of the Church from the time of the Reformation, and shewed that the greatest hindrance received by the Church proceeded from the ministers themselves." The Archbishop states that " it seemed at first matters should have gone well ; for the first two days there was much calm- ness, and the reasoning very formal and free." The discussions were almost exclusively about the articles proposed by the King to be adopted by the Scottish Church, But the " calmness" of this General Assembly was only apparent. The Presbyterian leaven was still deeply infused, and the members agreed to admit and sanction only two of the articles, viz. the private adminis- tration of the Eucharist, and the one entitled " a more reverent manner of receiving the Lord's Supper ;" and though they en- cumbered the articles thus ratified with several exceptions, it was a wonderful advance to the recognized principles of the Church. The opinion of the General Assembly on those articles will be best ascertained from the manner in which they were sanctioned, 1617.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 383 which Calderwood states he found in the " clerks' scrolls," for " by reason of the shortness of the time, sudden convening of the Assembly, absence of many Dioceses and Commissioners from sundry Presbyteries, the articles were rather remitted to farther inquiry than any thing perfectly concluded." " At St Andrews 1617, the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland thus decided, affirmed, and sanctioned — First, if any good Christian visited with long sickness, and known to the pas- tor, by reason of his present infirmity, to be unable to resort to the church for receiving the Holy Communion ; or being sick, shall declare to the pastor upon his conscience that he thinketh his sickness to be deadly, shall earnestly desire to receive the same in his house, the minister shall not deny the same, so as lawful warning be given to him at the least twenty-four hours before ; and that there be six persons at least of good religion and conversa- tion, free of lawfid impediment, present with the sick person to receive, who must also provide a convenient place in his house, and all things necessary for the minister's reverent administration thereof, according to the order presci'ibed in the Church. Second, to remedy the irreverent behaviour of the vulgar sort, it is found mete by this Assembly that the minister shall in the celebration give the elements out of his own hand to every one of the com- municants, saying, when he giveth the bread — Take, eat, this is the body of the Lord Jesus Christ which was broken for you ; do this in remembrance of Him ; and that the minister exhort them to be thankful. And when he giveth the cup — Drink, this is the blood of the Lord Jesus Christ shed for you ; do this in remem- brance of Him ; and that the minister exhort them to be thankful. And to the end the minister may give the same more commo- diously, he is, by advice of the magistrates and honest men of his session, to prepare a table at the which the same may be conve- niently ministered, and shew a humble and religious behaviour in the receiving of the same." Eespecting the other Articles, espe- cially the " days of the Nativity, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension of our Lord, and the descending of the Holy Spirit," it was agreed, after " long reasoning," that as " a great number of commission- ers from Synods, burghs, and gentlemen, in respect of the season of the year, distance of the place, and shortness of the advertise- ment, could not be present," and some who attended had scruples 384 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. on the points proponed, are not fully resolved in some of them, to " refer the same to another General Assembly, which was to be convened by petition to the King." The result of this General Assembly imtated the King, though it ought to have had a contrary effect, for the adoption of even two of the articles was really a great victory gained over the opponents of the Episcopal Church. James ought to have been aware of the condition of the Scottish nation at the time. The aristocracy were fierce, proud, tyrannical over their dependents and retainers, and many of them, even the higher Nobility, ill educated ; while the people generally were extremely ignorant, superstitious, credulous, and bigotted. The discussions and dis- putes on church government from the Reformation to that period had engendered much political and domestic mischief ; yet the mass of the people were passive in the matter, and little excite- ment existed among them in favour of Presbyterianism. The Bishops were not personally unpopular, nor was the episcopal office obnoxious, inasmuch as the Bishops for the most part con- tinued to exercise their functions as parish ministers. An inter- view with them at their respective residences was considered by many of the young men attending the Universities as of some importance, and we have an instance of this in the case of Eobert Baillie, Principal of the University of Glasgow, who subsequently became a zealous Presbyterian, and who in 1G20 completed his philosophical course at that University. He and a few of his com- panions during that year made an excursion to some of the princi- pal towns in Scotland. They proceeded to Kilsyth, Stirling, the windings or Links of the Forth between Stirling and Alloa ; there- after to Perth, Scone, and Dundee, where, says Baillie — " We saw the Bishop of Brechin and Dr Bruce." From Dundee they went to St Andrews, visited the " kirk, castle, port, three Col- leges, Abbey," conversed with some of the Professors; and at Dair- sie, nearly seven miles from St Andrews, they had an interview with Archbishop Spottiswoode. As to the articles which the Ge- neral Assembly at St Andrews admitted, it would be unnecessary to discuss their propriety, expediency, and conformity to Primitive usage. Many Presbyterians in Scotland lament the rigidity of their system which precludes the administration of the Lord's Supper, even in their own way, and according to their own 1617.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND, 385 and according to their own notions of that Sacrament, to the aged, the sick, and the dying in private houses. On the 6th of December the King wrote a letter to the Arch- bishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, expressing his dissatisfaction at the proceedings of this General Assembly. James commanded Archbishop Spottiswoode, by deputy in St Andrews, and person- ally in Edinburgh, and Archbishop Law in Glasgow, to celebrate di\ine service and preach on the ensuing Christmas Day ; and en- joined them not to allow the stipends to be paid to any of the parish incumbents who refused to comply. In a postscript it was added — " So many Bishops as you can get warned in time to preach at their Sees on Christmas day, urge them to it. Thus much in haste for this time ; after two or three days ye shall hear further from us." The King added with his own hand — " Since your Scottish Church hath so far contemned my clemency, they shall now find what it is to draw the anger of a King upon them." This threat, though most imprudent and unnecessary, was a serious matter. On the 11th of December the King wi-ote to Archbishop Spottiswoode individually, and stated his objections to the con- ditions by which the Assembly at St Andrews had restricted the administration of the communion to the sick and dying in private houses. " Concerning the communion allowed to sick persons," said the King to the Archbishop, " besides the number [six per- sons] required to receive with such patients, and a necessity tying them upon oath to declare that they truly think not to recover, but to die of that disease, they are yet farther hedged in with a necessity to receive the sacrament, in case aforesaid, to be minis- tered unto them in a convenient room, which, what it importeth we cannot guess, seeing no room can be so convenient for a sick man sworn to die as his bed ; and that it were injurious and in- human from thence in any case to transport him, were the room never so neat and handsome to which they should carry him." The King next objected to the expressions about a " table" to be prepared for the administration of the communion in the parish churches. " Truly in this," he declares, " we must say that the ministers care and commodious sitting on his tail hath been more looked to than that kneeling which, for reverence, we directly required to be enjoined to the receivers of so divine a sacrament ; neither can we conceive what should be meant by that table, unless 25 386 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617- they mean to make a round table, as did the Jews, to sit at and receive it. In conclusion, seeing either we and this Church here must be held idolatrous on this point of kneeling, or they reputed rebellious knaves in refusing the same, and that the two foresaid acts are conceived so scornfully, and so far from our meaning, it is our pleasure that the same be altogether suppressed, and that no effect follow thereon." The Privy Council received a letter from the King at the same time, " for inhibiting the payment of stipends to any of the rebelhous ministers, refusers of the said articles, either in burgh or landward, till they shew their con- formity, and the same was duly testified by the subscription of the Primate and ordinary Bishop." This alarmed numbers of them, and those of Edinburgh in particular earnestly requested Arch- bishop Spottiswoode to preach in that city on Christmas Day in obedience to the King's order, and to exert his interest for the rest. The Archbishop complied, and was enabled to obtain a warrant for setting aside the order to prohibit payment of the stipends until the behaviour of the ministers was " tried in the particular Synods, and their disposition for accepting the articles." In the meanwhile, on the 14th of December, Bishop Alexander Forbes of Aberdeen died at Leith. Calderwood records his death with his usual scurrilities, which are unworthy of notice. He was succeeded in the See by the learned and celebrated Patrick Forbes of Corse, mentioned in the earlier part of this narrative. Calder- wood inserts a long letter written by Forbes of Corse to Arch- bishop Spottiswoode on his appointment to the Bishopric, and politely designates him a " hypocrite." — " It is known very well," he says, " that he undertook not the ministry till Bishoprics were in bestowing, and that he could find no better means to mend his broken lairdship." These accusations have no foundation in truth. On the contrary, Forbes was proprietor of the valuable estate of Corse in Aberdeenshire ; and it is undeniable that he " undertook the ministry" from conscientious zeal for religion when he was ad- vanced in life. " I never preached the gospel for worldly gain," he says in his letter to^ Archbishop Spottiswoode, " nor to this hour have made any gain of that sort, whereby my reward is before me, and I hope my Lord shall hold my heart still fixed on him." In this letter, which is dated at Keith, IGth February 1G18, he was anxious to decline the Bishopric, and this is Calderwood's sole 1617.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 387 authority for his charge of hypocrisy against one of the most learned and pious men of his age, who while residing on his estate as a private gentleman did more to maintain religion in his locality than a phalanx of such men as David Caldervvood. Bishop Forbes is deservedly ranked among the illustrious indi- viduals whom Scotland has produced. " There was one Patrick Forbes of Aberdeenshire," says Burnet,* " a gentleman of quality and estate, but much more eminent by his learning and piety than his birth or fortune could make him. He had a most terrible calamity on him in his own family, which needs not be named. I do not know whether that or a more early principle determined him to enter into orders. He undertook the labour of a private cure in the country, upon the most earnest invitations of his Bishop [Blackburn], when he was forty-eight years old, and discharged his duty there so worthily that within a few years he was promoted to be Bishop of Aberdeen, in which See he sat seventeen years. It was not easy for King James to persuade him to accept of that dignity, and many months past before he could be induced to it, for he had intended to have lived and died in a more obscure corner. It soon appeared how well he deserved his promotion, and that his unwillingness to it was not feigned, but the real effect of his humi- lity. He was in all things an apostolical man ; he used to go round his Diocese without noise, and but with one servant, that so he might rightly be informed of all matters." The personal details to which Burnet refers may be briefly stated. Bishop Forbes was the fifth in lineal descent from Pa- trick Forbes, third son of James second Lord Forbes, who was also the progenitor of the Baronets of Craigievar in Aberdeen- shire and the Earls of Granard in Ireland. The Bishop was box'n in 1564, and received the rudiments of his education under Thomas Buchanan, then schoolmaster of Stirling, the nephew of the cele- brated George Buchanan. He studied philosophy at Glasgow under Andrew Melville, and followed him as his pupil in Hebrew and theology when he removed to St Andrews. His progress was so remarkable, and his conduct so unblameable, that he was solicited to become a Professor in that University ; but he was summoned home by his father, who urged him to settle as a country gentleman, and he soon afterwards married Lucretia, a daughter " Preface to Life of Bishop Bedell, 168.5. 388 KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. [1617. of Spens of Wormiston, an ancient family in Fife. He lived in retirement for some time near Montrose, and at the death of his father in 1598 he removed to the family seat of Corse, in the now united parishes of Leochel and Cushnie. The castle of Corse, now roofless and ruinous, though a great part of the walls is still standing, is mentioned by Monipennie, in his " Brief Description of Scotland" appended to his Abridgement of the Chronicles, in 1612, when it was the Bishop''s family residence, as one of the strongest in the district of Marr. Over the lintel are the date of its erection in 1581, and the initials, W. F. and E. S., intimating the Bishop's father, William Forbes, and his mother Ehzabeth, daughter of Alexander Strachan of Thornton, the head of the an- cient family of the Strachans. In this sequestered castle Bishop Forbes, as his Latin biographer, Dr Garden, quaintly observes, cultivated his books and his fields, regularly performing divine service to his domestics on Sundays. His learning, piety, and unwearied zeal were well known, and in the then destitute reli- gious condition of that quarter of the kingdom, where the people were without instructors, he was repeatedly urged to perform the duties of a preacher in 1605, and we have seen how he explain- ed his conduct in a letter to King James. Bishop Blackburn often entreated him to become the minister of his own parish, but he steadily refused, alleging as a reason his sense of the import- ance of the priestly office, and the state of the times. On a re- presentation, however, made to Archbishop Gladstanes, who was opposed to lay preaching, an order was issued that he should desist unless he took ordination. Forbes accordingly returned to his former practice of family worship, and attended the parish church as a private individual. About 1612, the minister of Keith, in the adjoining county of Banff, a pious and worthy man, in a fit of melancholy made a fatal attempt on his own life. He had no sooner inflicted the wound than remorse seized him, and he sent for Forbes, to whose devout instructions he listened with peniten- tial edification. With his dying breath he entreated him to un- dertake the pastoral charge of the parish, to which, under circum- stances so peculiar, he consented, and was ordained by Bishop Blackburn. The suicide of his friend the minister of Keith is pro- bably the " terrible calamity" noticed by Burnet. His appoint- ment to the See of Aberdeen obtained the sincere approbation of 1617.] KING JAMES IN SCOTLAND. 389 all classes of the people, and soon after his promotion he was made Chancellor of King's College and University, which he raised from neglect and desolation to a most flourishing state, repairing the buildings, increasing the library, reviving the professorships of Divinity, Canon Law, and Physic, and procuring the addition of another professorship in Theology. Such was this great ornament of the Episcopal Church of Scotland — a man of the greatest pru- dence, integrity, and piety, clear genius, solid judgment, invincible fortitude, and remarkable constancy of mind. That the Scottish Bishops of that period were active, zealous, and exemplary, in the discharge of their duties, is farther proved by Burnet, who gives a description of one who was a contempor- ary of Bishop Forbes. This was Bishop Boyd of Argyll, already mentioned as promoted to that See in 1613. " Another of our late Bishops was the noblest born of all the order, being [illegitimate] brother to the Lord Boyd, that is one of the best families in Scot- land, but was provided to the poorest Bishopric, which was Argyll, yet he did great things in it. He found his Diocese overrun with ignorance and barbarity, so that in many places the name of Christ was not known, but he went about that apostolical work of plant- ing the gospel with a particular industry, and almost with equal success. He got churches and schools to be raised and endowed everywhere, and lived to see a great blessing on his endeavours, so that he is not so much as named in that country to this day but with a particular veneration, even by those who are otherwise no way equitable to that order. The only answer that our angiy people in Scotland used to make when they were pressed with such instances was that there were too few of them ; but some of the severest of them have owned to me, that if there were many such Bishops they would become Episcopal."* " Preface to Life of Bishop Bedell. 390 [1G18. CHAPTER VI. THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH — BISHOP COWPAR'S DEFENCE OP THEM — THE CONTROVERSIES WHICH ENSUED — CONDUCT OF HENDERSON — FATE OF THE RECORDS OF THE GENERAL ASSEMBLIES. On the 26th of January 1618 Archbishop Spottiswoode convened a meeting of the Bishops and clergy who were in Edinburgh at the time,* in that part of St Giles' church long locally designated the Little Kirk. The Primate read the King's letter, in which was stated his Majesty's expectation that all the Bishops and the clergy there assembled would sanction the Five Articles, and if the latter refused, they were to be suspended from their ministerial functions, and their stipends withheld. The clergy answered that they would consult their brethren, and " do what in them lay to give the King satisfaction." Oalderwood affects to doubt the authenticity of the King's letter, but his suppositions are frivolous and unworthy of notice. Two days afterwards a proclamation was published at the Cross of Edinburgh enjoining the observance of the five great comme- morations of the Church, viz. Christmas Day, Good Friday, Easter, Ascension Day, and Whitsunday. All manual labour was pro- hibited, and those who refused to conform were ordered to be punished as rebellious persons. A few days before the ensuing Good Friday, the Lord Provost and Magistrates received a letter from the King enjoining them to see that the day was properly observed. On the Wednesday before Good Friday the procla- mation was again made at the Cross, and on Good Friday the • The 26th is Calderwood's date, but Spottiswoode says the meeting was held on the 29th. 1618.] THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY AT PERTH. 391 Magistrates sent the officers throughout the city to prevent trading or labour of any kind. Sermons were preached in all the churches, and Bishop Cowpar officiated in the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood- house before sundry of the Privy Council and the Nobility. On Easter Sunday the Holy Communion was administered kneeling by several of the Bishops in those churches which were considered the temporary cathedrals, and by the Bishop of Galloway in the Chapel-Royal, where some of the Officers of State and nearly forty persons communicated kneeling. In obedience to the King's command the Officers of State again communicated on Whitsun- day. It appears that the Chapel-Royal was then provided with an organ. The King granted his licence authorising the General Assembly on the 10th of July, and on the 3d of August the Archbishops, Bishops, Ministers, and others, were summoned to attend by pro- clamation at the Cross of Edinburgh. As the proceedings of this General Assembly are prominently noticed by all the Scottish historians, it is unnecessary to enter into minute details in the present narrative. On the 25th of August the Assembly was opened at Perth, Lords Binning, Scone, and Carnegie, appearing as the King's Commissioners, attended by the Earl of Lothian, Lords Ochiltree, Boyd, Crichton of Sanquhar, Sir Gideon Murray the Depute-Treasurer, Sir William Oliphant, Lord Advocate, and a number of gentlemen as assessors. The only Bishops absent were those of Argyll and The Isles, and Calderwood asserts that those Dioceses, as also those of Caithness and Orkney, sent no " commissioners," or representatives. In accordance with an in- timation given in St John's church on the previous Sunday, the first day of the meeting was observed as a fast, and two sermons were preached, the one in the morning by Bishop Forbes of Aber- deen from Ezra vii. 23 ; the other in the forenoon by Archbishop Spottiswoode from 1 Cor. xi. 10, which occupied two hours in the delivery, and was afterwards printed, probably by the authority of the Archbishop, by Bishop Lindsay of Brechin in his account of the proceedings of the Assembly. Calderwood states that the argument maintained by Bishop Forbes was, that " nothing should be done nor determined in the Church by any superior power whatever but that which is according to the commandment of the Almighty King ;"" and that the Archbishop defended ceremonies in 392 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1618. general, and the Five Articles in particular, though he solemnly declared that they were sent to him without his knowledge, and that they were not intended to be proposed to the Church, but to be inserted among the Canons then in preparation. This account of the Archbishop's sermon is very correct, as appears from a perusal of it as published by Bishop Lindsay, and the whole is a learned, elo- quent, and masterly composition. It is founded on the text already cited — " But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God," and the Primate opens with a general discussion on religious ceremonies to be observed in the Church. " My Lords and Brethren," he began, " the business for which we meet here is known to you all, namely, to take resolution in these Articles, which we are required to admit in our Church by that power unto which we be all subject." He then elucidates the Five Articles, deducing the judgment of what he calls the " best Eeformed Churches touching Articles ;" and denies most explicitly that they " come by the suggestion of some of the En- glish Church, or of ourselves at home," referring in proof to the King's declaration in the chapel of St Andrews in 1617, wherein he stated that " neither the desire he had for conforming his Churches [of England and Scotland], nor the solicitation of any person, but his zeal for God, and a certain knowledge that he could not answer it in that great day if he should neglect his duty." In a subsequent part of his discourse the Archbishop says — " I, therefore, in the presence of Almighty God and of this honourable Assembly, solemnly protest that without my know- ledge, against my desire, and when I least expected, these Articles were sent unto me not to be proponed to the Church, but to be inserted among the Canons thereof, which then were ingathering ; touching which point I humbly excused myself, that I could not insert among the Canons that which was not first advised by the Church, and desired they might be referred to another considera- tion," The Primate adds — " So as I spake before, I would, if it had been in my power, most willingly have declined the receiving of these Articles ; not that I did esteem them either unlawful or inconvenient, for I am so far persuaded of the contrary as I can be of any thing, but I foresaw the contradiction which would be made, and the business we should fall into. Therefore let no man deceive himself. These things proceed from his Majesty, and are 1618.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH. 393 his own motions, not any other's." He concluded by reminding the Assembly — " The kingdom of God consists not in them [the Five Articles], but in righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost. Away with fruitless and contentious disputings. Remember the work we are sent for is to build the Church of God, and not to destroy it ; to call men to faith and repentance ; to stir them up to the works of true piety and love, and not to make them think they have religion enough when they have talked against Bishops and ceremonies." The business of the Assembly now commenced. A long table was placed in St John's church, with seats for the Bishops, noble- men, and other members, and at the head of it a cross table, with chairs for the King's Commissioners and the Moderator. Arch- bishop Spottiswoode took the chair as Moderator, and when a feeble attempt was made to urge an election by a Mr George Grier, minister of Haddington, the Archbishop replied that the Assembly was convened within the limits of his own Diocese, and he would allow no one to occupy his place. The King's letter was then presented by Dr Young, Dean of Winchester, by birth a Scotsman. It began with a statement that he had at one time fully resolved not to allow any more General Assemblies for " or- dering things concerning the policy of the Church," on account of the conduct exhibited in the former Assembly at St Andrews. It is a document of considerable length, arguing the whole matter, and abounding with expostulations. Archbishop Spottiswoode then rose, and after stating that the Five Articles now to be sub- mitted were not his suggestion, for he considered them inexpedient at the time, yet he knew the anxiety of the King on the subject, and warned them of the consequences both to the Church gene- rally, and to themselves individually, if the Articles were refused. " I know," he observed, " that when some of you are banished, and others deprived, you will blame us, and call us persecutors ; but we will lay all the burden upon the King, and if you call him a persecutor all the world will stand up against you." The Arch- bishop then asked the Dean of Winchester if he had any inclina- tion or authority to make known his sentiments. The Dean ad- dressed the Assembly in a long speech, complimenting the King on his intentions, and exhorting them to conformity. After the Dean concluded his speech, some objections about the mode of 394 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1618. voting and other minor details were repelled by the Archbishop. The Primate then nominated a lai-ge number of the nobility and gentry, all the Bishops, and thirty-seven doctors and ministers, who were to form a " Privy Conference,'' and who met in the afternoon to discuss the Five Articles. On the following day the Assembly met at eight in the morning, and the Five Articles were again debated. Another meeting was held in the afternoon. On the morning of the ensuing day Bishop Cowpar preached a sermon on Rom. xiv. 19, after which was the last sitting. Archbishop Spottiswoode now urged the Assembly to conform. He refuted sundry scandals and misrepresentations which had been industriously circulated by malicious persons, and de- clared his conviction that " there was neither man nor woman, rich nor poor, in Scotland, some few precise persons excepted, who were not only content, but also wished the order of kneeling [at the Communion] to be received, of which he had good proof and experience in his own city of St Andrews, and in this town of Perth since he had come hither." The Archbishop then men- tioned the circumstance of a pamphlet having been found in the pulpit at Edinburgh, charging the Bishops with attempting to in- troduce the Roman Catholic religion ; but in reply he maintained that " ceremonies make not separation betwixt us and the Roman Church, but their idolatry, which if the Romanists would forsake, they would meet them midway and join with them." Before the calling of the roll the King's letter was again read. The Presby- terian party attempted to limit the right of voting purposely to exclude certain persons ; but Archbishop Spottiswoode would not allow this proposal, and declared that " if all Scotland were there present they should vote." The vote was then taken, and the Five Articles were ratified by a great majority. After some routine business the Assembly was dissolved. On the 21st of Oc- tober the Articles were sanctioned by an act of the Privy Council ; and the King's proclamation to that effect was published at the Cross of Edinburgh on the 26th. The Five Articles of Perth were, as already stated — 1. Kneeling when receiving the Holy Communion ; 2. The administration of the Holy Communion to the sick, dying, or infirm persons in their houses in cases of urgent necessity. 3. The administration of Baptism in private under similar circumstances. 4. The Confir- 1()18.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH. 395 mation of the young by the Bishop of the Diocese. 5. The obser- vance of the five great commemorations of the Christian Church — the " Birth. Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and sending down of the Holy Ghost." The second is expressed in the same words as the first of the two Articles admitted by the General Assembly held at St Andrews in the previous year respecting the private administration of the Communion, with merely a few verbal altera- tions, and the number of persons to be present and communicate was limited to three or four instead of six. The Five Articles were ordered to be read and enforced in aU the parish churches throughout the kingdom, and proclamations were published enjoin- ing obedience and conformity at the market cross of all the prin- cipal towns. Yet such was the opposition of some of the Presby- terian party to these primitive and catholic commemorations of the great events connected with human redemption, that the order was in many cases disregarded, which caused considerable distractions, especially in Edinburgh. Mr Scott states as his opinion that " the Presbyterian party would have willingly accepted some of the Articles on condition of being relieved from the rest ;"* but he does not specify those of them which they would have sanctioned. The only one of them which the less rigid of the Presbyterian ministers in Scotland since the Revolution in 1688 adopt, is the administration of Baptism in private houses, whether the infants are in ill health or not, and this was probably forced upon them by necessity. As to the others it is well known that many Presbyterians in Scot- land are convinced that there is something harsh and deficient in their system, which denies the administration of the Communion, even in their own way, to the sick, the dying, and the aged, in pri- vate houses. f The majority may probably still object to kneeling at the administration of the Communion, inasmuch as they will not allow kneeling at public prayers. Many of them also have no ob- jections to the rite of Confirmation in itself, and not a few now • Kirk -Session Registers of Perth, MS. vol. i. t Mr Scott, in his MS. Extracts from the Kirk-Session Records of Perth, comment- ing on the Five Articles of Perth, says—" With regard to private Communion I have heard of a late instance of its being given by a minister of our [Presbyterian] Church in the south part of Scotland. The Presbytery to which he belongs have not inflicted any censure upon him, nor does it seem to be the resolution of the church judicatories in general to take any notice of it." 396 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1618. think that the five great commemorations of the Church ought to be observed. In short, a very different feeling pervades Scotland on many of those matters, which even those who adhere to the Cove- nanting fanaticism cannot deny. Intercourse with England, a better system of education, and other causes, might be assigned for the softening of the old rehgious and bigotted prejudices. It was not to be expected that the Five Articles would be admit- ted everywhere without opposition, yet on the whole they were received in many places if not with approbation at least with tacit consent. Much in these cases depended on the degree of personal respect in which the minister of each particular parish was held by the people. Mr Scott informs us of the manner of their recep- tion at Perth, which corroborates the statement of Archbishop Spottiswoode in the General Assembly. A meeting of the kirk-ses- sion was held on the 5th of March 1619, present Mr. John Guthrie and Mr John Malcolm, ministers: — "Proposition being made, if they [the kirk-session] will agree and consent that the Lord's Supper be celebrated in the burgh conform to the prescription of the Act of the General Assembly made thereanent last holden at Perth or not, viz. that the ministers give the wine and bread with their own hands to the communicants, and that they [the com- municants] be humbled on their knees, and reverently receive it ; and being voted, all agreed in one that the celebration thereof he made according to the said actr " The order of the [administra- tion] of the Communion,"" observes Mr Scott on this extract from the Kirk-Session Register, " seems to have been as follows: — The tables were placed in the choir or east part of the church. The communicants were to enter in the morning by the south door, where, to add to the solemnity, and to do honour to the occasion, several of the Magistrates and others were to stand in due form with their elders. The communicants were there to give their tokens [or tickets of admission] along with their alms, and then to pass either directly to the tables, or to seats in the choir allotted for them. Such as were not to communicate, at least on the first day of the communion, were to enter the church by the north door, and were there to give their alms. After the consecration of the elements the minister, followed by the bearers of the bread and wine, was to go through the tables, giving, as he went along, the elements with his own hands to each of the communi- 1618.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH. 397 cjyits kneeling ; after which they who had communicated would depart from the table, and be succeeded by such as were next to communicate." Mr Scott refers to the conduct of many persons in Edinburgh about kneeling at the tables. " Even some of the ministers," he observes, " did not at first conform, but adminis- tered the sacrament to the people sitting. There was, however, no such opposition, at least from the kirk-session at Perth."* Calderwood says of Bishop Cowpar, in reference to the sermon he preached during the sitting of the General Assembly at Perth, that " he set at nought the ancient [Presbyterian] order of the Kirk sometime highly commended by himself, and extolling his own new light, presumed to catechize those who might have cate- chized him." This is expressed by Calderwood in his usual strain of party malevolence. " As the Five Articles," says Mr Scott, " were the subjects of much controversy, and as the arguments against them are frequently to be met with in the histories of that period, it will be doing justice to the ancient kirk-session and people of Perth to take notice of what was then said on behalf of those Articles, and which determined many good men to submit to the observation of them." Bishop Cowpar's sentiments are here presented to the reader, as they are not generally known even in Scotland. They are worthy of perusal as illustrating the feelings of the time on the subjects he discusses. His observations are entitled — " The Bishop of Galloway's Answers to such as desire a resolution of their scruples against the Acts of the last Assembly holden at Perth in the month of August 1618 — mercy, grace, and peace, be unto all them that love the Lord Jesus." " We are commanded by St Peter to give a reason of the faith which is in us, and so will I. No good Christian differs one from another in any article of faith, for our Belief [the Creed] is a short compend of the Scripture ; and I have preached all the Articles thereof ; I believe all. As for Papists, where they differ from us see what I have professed in my writings published in print, and I am resolved to die in the same mind. What that is they may per- ceive by the ' Seven Days' Conference betwixt a Catholic Chris- tian and a Catholic Roman, and by the Threefold Treatise upon " Extracts from the Kirk-Session Records of Perth, vol. i. MS. in Advocates' Library, Edinburgh. 398 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1618. the eighth chapter to the Romans." Bishop Cowpar refers to others of his printed works for his opinions, and proceeds-^" As for these needless controversies that make divers voices among us, I say some are conscientious with Httle knowledge ; these I love. Others are contentious, with less knowledge ; these I pity, willing them always to remember that to them who are contentious and obey not the truth, unrighteousness shall bring indignation and wrath, Rom. ii. 8 ; yet I wish to them mercy, and light to illumi- nate their minds. " Of Days. — In ray mind no King on earth, no Church, may make an holy day ; only the Lord who made the day hath that prerogative, and He hath sanctified the seventh day. Yet either a Christian king, or a Church, may separate a day by preaching, and that either ordinary, as we have Tuesday, or extraordinary, for fasting and humiliation ; or for solemn joy and thanksgiving. This is and hath been ever the lawful practice of our Church, and continual, who at such times hath commanded cessation from or- dinary trades both before and after noon, that so the people might frequent the assembly. I hope [there isj no other purpose by our prince's proclamation, whereat so many are offended ; and if any cause of offence be, it is to be amended with humble supplica- tion, not with rebellious contradiction. " Brightman on the 11th of the Revelation* records that the day whereon Queen Elizabeth came to the crown after the Marian per- secutions was observed with an anniversary or yearly sermon, even by those who in that country are enemies to episcopal government, of which number himself is one. So we have preaching and pub- lic rejoicing [on] the fifth days of August and November-f- for that double deliverance of our gracious sovereign, whom may the Lord long continue a comfort to his Church. And I am sure we have greater cause to rejoice at the remembrance of Christ's Nati- vity, albeit Herod and Herodian in upper J erusalem were against it, when angels, heavenly soldiers, and saints redeemed, were sing- ing in Bethlehem, Glory be to God in heaven, and peace to men • Thomas Brightman, an English Puritan, born at Nottingham in 1557, and died in 1607, was the author of several works published after his death. The one to which Bishop Cowpar refers is his " Analysis et Scholia in Apocalypsin. ' f The latter is the well known Gunpowder Plot Day. The former commemorated the Gowrie Conspiracy, which was ordered to be kept, and was observed during the reign of James. 1618.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH. 399 on earth ! I will rather sing with the one than startle without cause with the other. " 0 ! but this is not the day of His nativity. I answer, Let it be so. It is not the day but the lenefit we remember, which no good Christian will deny should be done. Sure it is He was born, died upon Good Friday, and the third day He rose ; the fortieth day thereafter He ascended ; ten days after His ascension He sent the Holy Ghost, which from His resurrection is the fiftieth day, called. Acts ii. 2. the Pentecost, All this is according to the ar- ticles of our faith expressly set down in Scripture, and why, then, do men make such scruple to remember our Lord's Nativity on such a day as Christian Catholics in all ages have remembered \ " But here they say, we remember His nativity every day. I an- swer, this is like that presumption of the young man who spake to Christ in the Gospel — ' All these,' saith he, ' I have done from my youth.' He spake out of ignorance, affirming he had done the thing he did not. And so do they. I appeal to their own con- sciences how many days of the year will pass wherein they do not so much as think of His nativity ? But if it were as they say that they remember His nativity every day, why make they it strange to remember it on this day also \ " Yet, say they, Ye remember it this day more than another ! I answer. And why not ? Every good Christian hath his own days chosen by himself, some for fasting, some for thanksgiving for par- ticular benefits. What a private Christian may lawfully do, ye make it unlawful for a Christian Church to do, especially where we go in the communion of saints with all the Reformed Churches in Europe. In France, in the Protestant Church, their most notable preachers give the communion on that day, as did also the Primi- tive Churches throughout the world, as testifieth St Augustine in his Epistles 118th and 119th. So did our own Scottish Church also for eight hundred years, before it was polluted with Papistry, as I have proved in my forenamed Conference, whoso likes to read it. " But, say they, We have no commandment in the Word to do it. I answer. Let them distinguish betwixt that which is substan- tial and real in religion, and that which is circumstantial and ritual. A point substantial must have an express warrant in the Word commanding it ; for that which is circumstantial, it is suf- 400 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1G18. ficicnt if it be not against the Word, it being left to be ordained by ecclesiastical authority. As, for example, to preach in season and out of season is a substantial point; for it we have an express command in the Word. What day of the week ordinary preach- ing should be beside the Sabbath, that is circumstantial, and left to the decision of the Church, who by the same authority that they may ordain preaching [on] such a day of the week, may also or- dain preaching such of the month in a year. Again, he that sins openly shall be openly rebuked. This is substantial in religion, and we have an express command for it. But to set him on a pil- lar three days, or more, or fewer, is circumstantial, such as our Church without doing wrong to the Word of God hath deter- mined. I acknowledge it to be a good order, and will any of these men condemn it because it is not an express command in the word ? Marriage is honourable among all men, [and] for man and woman to join without marriage is fornication. This is substan- tial, and hath the warrant of the Word. But that first they must be three days publicly proclaimed, is circumstantial, done by the Church for good order, which I acknowledge sufficient, because it is not against the Word. " Yule Day, say they, was cast out of our Church. I answer, what they call Yule Day I know not ; but a day reputed for the day of Christ's nativity, and observed for the remembrance there- of, that I know. I find no ecclesiastical law standing in all our books of Assembly to the contrary. But if it have been cast out, yet a thing not against the Word of God upon good considerations may be brought in again, albeit it had been left out. Instances of this I might bring from the Church of Geneva ; one I bring from our own. Since baptism not upon a preaching day was cast out by act and practice, and yet is now received again, why may not preaching of Christ's Nativity, Passion, Resurrection, Ascension, and sending of the Holy Ghost, or such days, be received again, albeit it had been cast out ? We were well, they say, before ; and what needs this innova- tion ? I answer. Conformity with the ancient and recent Re- formed Churches require it, except we will be singular. Besides this, the question here is betwixt a prince and his people. They will be nourished in the humours, not remembering that a Chris- tian prince is also to be regarded, who finds himself bound in con- 1618.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OP PERTH. 401 science to see duties in religion performed. What is evil in their eyes seemeth good in his. And here the debate falling betwixt their will and his about a matter not against the word of God, let any unprejudiced man give a sentence who should be followed. Of a Baptism to he administered in due time and place. — Now for Baptism, our commission is to baptise without limitation either of time or place, decency alway both for time and place being observed. So far as may be, where the public order of the Church is not contemned. Baptism should not be refused. It is not, they will say, necessary to salvation. I grant that I abhor the blind and merciless sentence of Papists, that infants dying without bap- tism go to any house of hell. But although it were not necessary to the child's salvation, who will deny that it is necessary, at least a probable help of the parent's faith ? For our Lord hath not ordained it in vain. Where, then, a Christian parent desires it to his child, either upon a preaching day or other day, with what warrant a preacher can deny it I know not. " Of Private Communion. — The same is my judgment of Private Communion. Hei'e are two words [which] would be well under- stood. Private, I call it in respect of the public assembly, not of a private person ; Communion it is, in respect of many Christians partaking in it. Where a man hath been a reverent hearer of the word in the public assembly, and a reverent and careful receiver of the sacrament there, if God suspend him by sickness from doing that duty, may we not sit beside him and comfort him by the Word I May we not pray for him and for ourselves even in a private family I And why also may we not give to him, and take to ourselves, the seals of the covenant of mercy I The particular precepts hereof, both for the person and place, I take not upon me to determine, but leave it to the wisdom of the preacher. " Of Kneeling at the Communion. — The hardest point of all is kneeling at the Holy Communion, which is the more misliked because it was and yet is abused by Papists to idolatry. That vile error of transubstantiation and worshipping of the bread my soul abhorreth it, but it is hard to condemn a thing lawful in itself because it hath been abused. For what is so good that hath not or may not be abused I Shall not St Paul bow his knees to the Father of the whole family in heaven and earth, God the Creator, 26 402 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1618. because idolaters bow their knees to the creature ? He was not so scrupulous. " If I should condemn sitting at the table, I should do wrong to my mother Church — the Church of Scotland. If I should condemn standing, I should do wrong to that sister Church of France which hath stood for the truth to the blood. If I should condemn kneel- ing, I should do wrong to the Church of England, glorious with many crowns of martyrdom, and many other Churches also. I like well that modest judgment of Peter Martyr, who thinks any of these, sitting, standing, or kneeling, lawful. Our Church has determined that kneeling seems the most reverent form for receiving so great a benefit ; and the rude gesture of many of our people in many parts of the land requires that they should be led to a greater reverence of that holy mystery, and taught that by humble kneel- ing we shall at length be brought to a joyful sitting with Him for ever. " But here it will be objected to me that our Lord and his disciples sat at the table. I answer, that the Evangelist saith, that as He sat at the table He took bread, and gave thanks. This seemeth to note the time of the institution, to-wit, after He had done with the natural and paschal supper, not the gesture. For why ? St Paul, describing all that is essential in the sacrament, makes no mention either of sitting, standing, or kneeling : yet he says — ' What I have received of the Lord, that I delivered unto you.' If he received it, and delivered it not, he was not faithful, which I abhor to think. If he delivered it not, then surely he received it not. " This [kneeling] is the soundest and most safe course. It keepeth all the Reformed Churches free from doing against the Word of God, for we must think that St Paul knew certainly the mind of Christ. Such as are conscientious, let them ponder this well. The contentions I am not able to satisfy. If the ex- pediency be set aside, and the question be only of the lawfulness, my argument stands yet unanswered. Whatsoever spiritual bene- fit I may lawfully seek on my knees with supplication, that same I may lawfully receive on my knees with thanksgiving. But I may lawfully with supplication seek salvation by Jesus on my knees ; therefore I may lawfully receive it [the communion] on my knees. 1618.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH. 403 They answer nothing who say, I may not kneel to any idol, for to Christ I kneel, praising Him when I receive the holy symbols, exhibiting the instruments of his body and blood ; and it is mad- ness either to make them idols, as the Papists do, or to call them idols, as the malcontents do. " I have opened my mind according to my light. To them that ask, Where was the light before ? my answer is, remember what is said of our blessed Lord, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to loose — ' He increased in wisdom,' Luke ii. 52. Shall it then be an imputation to his silly, weak, unworthy, and infirm servants, that they increase in wisdom and grow in knowledge as they are commanded ? Such as are contentious I leave tumbling in the tumultuous thoughts of their perturbed minds, raging like the waves of the sea, foaming, and casting out their own dirt and shame. For me, I rest in the peace of my God through Jesus Christ, which, blessed be God, I enjoy. A sore famine of the Word of God is at hand, for the loathing of manna and murmur- ing against Moses and Aaron. There may be bread, but God will break the staff of it. Preaching of the Word in many parts, but \vithout life or power. Prattlers and lying libellers. Papists, or Atheists, I commend them to the mercy of God, that they may be brought to repentance. Let them read these words of our Saviour — Matt. vii. 6. ' Give not that which is holy unto dogs, neither cast ye your perils before swine.' Be not of that number, if ye mind to enter into the heavenly Jerusalem. I will have nothing spoken here extended to peaceable and truly religious Christians, of which number God hath a flourishing church both in this town [Edinburgh] and in other parts of the land. The Lord increase them ! The Lord grant peace to his own Jeru- salem, and have mercy upon us, that we may prevent these and other imminent judgments upon great and small by unfeigned repentance Mr Scott observes on the preceding passages, that Bishop Oowpar " has said what may shew us that he and others were not rashly to be condemned who submitted to the Five Acts of the Perth Assembly. — With regard to the confirmation of children. Bishop Cowpar in his defence takes no notice of it ; and indeed it was unnecessary to say any thing in its defence, considering the 404 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1618. inoffensive manner in which it had been expressed in the Act of Assembly."* The preceding extracts, though not unobjectionable in a few passages, are chiefly interesting as being part of the discourse which he preached in the Chapel-Eoyal of Holyroodhouse on the first Christmas Day after the meeting of the Perth General Assem- bly. Oalderwood says — " Mr William Cowpar preached upon Christmas Day in the Abbey Kirk. Many resorted to him out of curiosity, because he promised to give them resolution that day for observing of holidays. He was so impertinent and frivolous in his arguments that he was mocked." The reader will now per- ceive the audacity of this Presbyterian's assertion that the excel- lent Bishop of Galloway"'s " arguments" were " impertinent and frivolous." The General Assembly at Perth was attended by the afterwards noted Alexander Henderson as a " commissioner" for the Presby- tery of St Andrews. He had been previously attached to the Epis- copal Church, but he had now allied himself to the Presbyterian party. The Presbyterians allege that he was converted to their cause by hearing a sermon from Mr Robert Bruce of Kinnaird, a man of great abihties, who had long been a violent oppo- nent of King James, and repeatedly dictated to his sovereign in such an arbitrary and offensive manner, that it was at length found necessary, in 1621, to commit him to Edinburgh Castle for a few months ; and he was afterwards banished to Inverness, where he continued till the death of the King in 1625. f It was on a sacrament occasion, in a parish " somewhat distant from Leuchars," when Henderson heard Bruce preach the sermon which is said to have converted him to Presbyterianism ; but it is well known that his introduction to Leuchars parish was most unpopular. It is admitted that he was irritated by the neglect of Archbishop Spottiswoode, who after he became Primate had not thought himself bound to pay the future champion of the National Covenant any particular attention. " Gladstanes' death in June 1615," says Henderson's biographer, " removed from his • Extracts from the Kirk-Session Records of Perth, MS. Advocates' Library, Edinburgh. f This banishment to a particular and distinct town, far from friends and acquaint- ances, was no shght punishment in those days of bad roads, no conveyances, and no post-offices, while corresponding by letter was difficult and even dangerous. 1618.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH. 405 niiml any personal feeling of restraint which gratitude to his patron might have engendered ; and the studied indifference with which Spottiswoode treated the son and protegees of his prede- cessor could not fail to wound their pride, and disappoint their prospects.'"* This is a most important admission, and consider- ably militates against the conscientious motives of Henderson. Yet ho was not altogether neglected, for one of the very last acts of the Perth Assembly was to sanction the removal of " Mr William Scott and Mr Alexander Henderson " to Edinburgh ; and though Calderwood alleges that " the Bishops meant no such thing in earnest," merely because the appointment did not then happen, Dr Aiton confesses that " there is not even the slightest hint as to what actually was the cause why Scott and Henderson were not translated at this time, but it is probable that the choice merely was made, and that Spottiswoode refused to concur." In the Kecords of the Synod of Fife, Gth April 1619, the following notice occurs — " Mr Alexander Henderson has not given the '^ omraunion according to the presci'ibed order, not of contempt, as he deponed solemnly, but because he is not fully persuaded of the lawfulness thereof. He is exhorted to obedience and con- formity." Henderson and two of his friends published a pamph- let by subscription, entitled the " Perth Assembly," in which they attempted to show that the Five Articles were inconsistent with Scripture, and that the Assembly was illegally constituted and conducted. After this, till about 1630, he appears to have resided quietly in his parish of Leuchars. In 1G20 Archbishop Spottis- woode published in London the only work he is known to have printed in his lifetime — a small historical treatise in Latin entitled, " Refutatio Libelli de Regimine Ecclesise Scoticana3 " dedicated to the Prince of Wales, afterwards Charles I., and signed Jo. Fani Andrew Arciiepiscopus, It is an answer to a tract of Calder- wood, who replied in 1621 in a scurrilous production which he designated," Vindicise ejusdem Epistolte contra Calumnias Johannis Spotsvodi Fani Andrefe Psucdo-Archiepiscopi," which was after- wards subjoined to his " Altare Damasccnum." Bishop Lindsay of Brechin published in 1621 his " True Narration of the Proceed- ings in the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland holden • Life and Times of Alexander Heiideisoii, by John Aiton, D.D. Dolphington, p. 92. 406 THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY [1618. at Perth 25th August 1618, with a Just Defence of the Articles therein concluded against a Seditious Pamphlet" — referring to Calderwood's tract. It was printed in London by " William Stansby, for Ralph Rounthwait, dwelling at the signe of the Golden Lion in Paul's Church-yard," and is dedicated to the " Reverend and Godly Brethren the Pastors and Ministers of the Church of Scotland." The Bishop of Brechin's " Narration" caused the reply written in Latin by Calderwood, under the name of Edwardus Didoclavius, entitled " Altare Damascenum," of which a translation was published, with the title — " The Altar of Damascus, or the Pattern of the English Hierarchy and Church Pohcy obtruded upon the Church of Scotland," which also appeared in 1621, and was considered by his party unanswerable. The original Latin edition was published in Holland. King James, according to Presbyterian authority, was much annoyed by the publication of Calderwood's work. He was found very melan- choly one day by an English Bishop, and when asked the cause, he replied that he had just read the " Altar of Damascus." The Bishop desired the King not to vex himself about the book, for it would be answered. " Answer that, man !" James is made to say : " How can ye ? There is nothing in it but Scripture, reason, and the Fathers." Such is the anecdote, and whether true or false certain it is that every argument in Calderwood's production has been a thousand times answered and refuted. This General Assembly at Perth in 1618 was the last held in Scotland till the memorable one at Glasgow in 1638. It is to be re- gretted that no records are known to exist of the particular proceed- ings at Perth, or of the General Assembly held at St Andrews in the previous year, except what is preserved by Calderwood in his " History." The original records of all the General Assemblies entitled the " Booke of the Universal Kirk of Scotland," extending to three volumes, which were laid on the table of the Glasgow General Assembly in 1638, and attested as genuine, found their way into the possession of, or were entrusted to, Alexander second Lord Balcarras in 1652, probably during his Lordship's residence with his family in St Andrews that year, when he was in close cor- respondence with Charles II. They were afterwards concealed by a private individual till 1677, when they were placed in the hands of Bishop Paterson of Edinburgh, afterwards Archbishop of Glas- 1G18.] AND FIVE ARTICLES OF PERTH. 407 gow, who retained them till the Revolution in 1688. After the Kevolution some of the volumes and papers were entrusted to a son of the former clerk of the General Assemblies after that of 1038. This was Secretary Johnston, who lent some of them to his cousin Bishop Burnet, and others of them to the noted George Ridpath, who had undertaken to write a history of Scottish affairs. The three volumes previous to 1038 were obtained by the Honour- able and Right Reverend Bishop Archibald Campbell, son of Lord Niel Campbell, and grandson of the eighth Earl and first Marquis of Argyll, who, like Secretary Johnston's father, was executed as a traitor. The Presbyterians allege that Bishop Campbell obtain- ed possession of the books surreptitiously, but this they were never able to prove. In 1733, Mr William Grant, afterwards a judge in the Court of Session by the title of Lord Prestongrange, cor- responded with Bishop Campbell for the surrender of the books, but too large a sum of money was demanded, and even that sum the Bishop declared he would not accept till the books were to be published under his own exclusive superintendence. " While the negotiation was in progress," says Principal Lee of Edin- burgh, from whose statement these details are abridged, " Mr Campbell, as he had sometimes threatened to do, took a step which was intended to put the books for ever beyond the reach of the [Presbyterian] Church of Scotland, by entering into a deed or covenant with the President and Fellows of Sion College, with whom he deposited them." In 1828 and subsequent years the General Assembly made great efforts to obtain possession of the books, and had some disagreeable altercations with the Fellows of Sion College, who refused to give them upon any terms, but were willing to allow a transcript. It was at length resolved to petition Parliament on the subject. On the 2d of May 1834, the Assist- ant-Librarian of Sion College was summoned by a Committee of the House of Commons, and ordered to produce the books. On the 5th they were inspected by competent persons from Scotland, who attested their authenticity. The books were unfortunately left in the House of Commons, and perished in the great fire which destroyed both Houses of Parliament on the following ICth of Oc- tober. Those curious records of Scottish religious turmoil were thus irrecoverably lost. 408 [1G18. CHAPTER VII. THE OBSERVANCE OF THE PERTH ARTICLES — DEATH OF BISHOP COWPAR — ECCLESIASTICAL ARRANGEMENTS AND DISCUSSIONS — MEETING OF THE SCOTTISH PARLIAMENT — ITS PROCEEDINGS — CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. Some weeks after the meeting of the Perth General Assembly, Archbishop Law held Diocesan Synods at Glasgow and Peebles, in which considerable opposition was manifested to the Five Articles. On the last day of November the Archbishop wrote to his " reverend and well-beloved the Moderator and Brethren of the Presbytery of Ayr," imploringly and affectionately beseeching them to conformity. " I do by these presents," he said, " com- mand you all, and every one of you, to make due and lawful pre- monition to your parishioners to assemble and convene themselves the said 25th of December next to come at your several parish kirks, and there by public preaching, prayer, and thanksgiving, to worship God, and praise him for the inestimable benefit of the birth and incarnation of liis Son." The Archbishop proceeded to warn them of the consequences of their contumacy, which involved deposition from their parishes, and intimated to them the pain it would inflict upon himself to be compelled to adopt extreme mea- sures ; " but," he concludes, " hoping better of you, and that ye will in holy wisdom and due obedience conform yourselves to that which hath so much lawful authority, and will prove so profitable, I commend you to the grace of God." The effect of this letter, which the Archbishop would doubtless circulate throughout his whole Diocese, is not stated. Some days before the 25th of December the King addressed a letter to the ministers of Edinburgh to observe the injunction of the General 1018.] OBSERVANCE OF THE PERTH ARTICLES. 409 Assembly, and preach on that day. Calderwood states that only two of the parish churches of the city were open, in which Mr Patrick Galloway and Mr William Struthers officiated, and he assails those otherwise very inconsistent persons, if we take into account their previous career and sentiments, in the most opprobrious and vulgar manner. Galloway is designated a " vain-glorious man." Bishop Cowpar preached in the Chapel-Royal, and the reader is already familiar with the substance of his sermon. On the lOtli of Febru- ary three of the citizens were summoned before the High Commis- sion, accused of opening their shops duripg the time of divine service, sauntering before their shop doors, dissuading the people from resorting to the churches, and denouncing the observance of Christmas Day. They apologized for their conduct, and were dis- missed with an admonition to be more cautious in future. The sentiments of the Presbytery of Perth, which includes a large tract of country now divided into twenty parishes, exclusive of the city of Perth, may be inferred from the following extract from the manuscript Kirk-Session Records : — " Alexander Lind- say, Bishop of Dunkeld, as moderator of the Presbytery of Perth, acquainted the Presbytery, February 24, 1G19, that it was his Majesty's will that the statutes of the General Assembly holden at Perth in the month of August last be kept in all points, and especially in the ministration of the Communion, and keeping of the preaching days mentioned in the said acts of Assembly. A letter was produced to the Presbytery, March 10, 1619, sent by my Lord Archbishop of St Andrews, the tenor of which was : — ' Loving Brethren — I have understood that, notwithstanding the intimation made to you of the acts of our late General As- sembly, and a desire that ye should have conformed yourselves in preaching all this last Christmas in your kirks of the matters per- tinent to that day, divers have disobeyed, and not only foreborne to practice as you were commanded, but also in your sermons and exercises sought occasion to condemn the proceedings of the As- sembly, which in a Kirk well constituted is not tolerable. The evils hereof, and our care to prevent them, have brought us in this last meeting which we have kept at Edinburgh to appoint that A\ arning should be given by every Bishop to the Exercise [Presby- tery] within his Diocese for a precise keeping of these acts in time coming, especially for giving Communion on Easter Day in the 410 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1019. form prescribed by kneeling, and the observance of the Passion Day, Easter itself, Ascension Day, and Pentecost, by a thankful commemoration of the benefits [which] the Lord our God vouch- safed us thereon in Chi-ist Jesus. According to the whilk ordi- nance I have thought meet to make warning unto you, that none should pretend excuse, or deceive himself by a conceit of forbear- ing and oversight though he transgress, seeing, beside the danger of schism in this nonconformity, we are commanded by his Majesty to suffer that none may bruick [enjoy] the ministry that do not obey to the practice of the same, as we will be answerable upon our own dangers and the loss of our places, which we have in greater regard than to choose to lose them by our negligence ; and as I think ye will esteem somewhat more of your ministry than to be deprived, or lose the exercise thereof for disobeying in matters of indifferent nature. Howbeit if any will upon wilful pretext scorn, let him be assured upon notice hereof, to be called befoi'e the Commission, and discharged from henceforth of his minis- try. And trusting this shall be sufficient either to work obedience with you, or to discharge myself to those that will not, I commit you to God. You must direct your ministers to think in due time after what order these may best be done, and to prepare that all things may be with the conformity and greatest decency that is possible in your communions. Edinburgh, 16th February, 1619.^ " On the day before the date of this letter the Church sustained a severe loss by the death of Bishop Cowpar at Edinburgh in the fifty-third year of his age. Mr Scott candidly observes — " Calder- wood in his History has collected together several stories to the Bishop"'s disadvantage, tending chiefly to shew that he was rigor- ous in exacting the revenues of his Bishopric, and that therefore he bore too great a love to the world. But it is with the utmost caution that stories propagated in the times of party heat and ani- mosity should be admitted, and it is well known that the revenues of the Church in general, and of the Diocese of Galloway in parti- cular, had been dilapidated in the most shameful manner — an evil which from the Reformation to the present time has been felt, and loudly complained of."* We have another Presbyterian tes- timony in favour of Bishop Cowpar from a local writer, who con- * Kirk-Session Records of Perth, MS. 1619.] THE PERTH ARTICLES. 411 fesses that Calderwood's " observations respecting individuals must be received with caution. That Cowpar was both an amiable and pious man can hardly be denied, for though he changed his opi- nions on religious subjects, and espoused the cause of Episcopacy, yet he is said by impartial observers always to have exhibited a laudable moderation, and an undeviating attachment to the best interests of Christianity.^'* Calderwood accuses Bishop Cowpar of various acts of neglect, extortion, and oppression, which it was impossible he could commit even if he had been inchned, while his public and private character is a complete refutation of the charges paraded against him. He alleges that in the course of the seven years during which Bishop Cowpar held the See of Gal- loway he " extorted" not less than L.8,333 sterling. A greater falsehood never was invented even by Presbyterian malignity. The Bishopric of Galloway was, like Brechin and Dunblane, long proverbial for its poverty, and after the Revolution of 1G88, when all the revenues of the Scottish Archbishops and Bishops were seized by the Crown, the rental of this very Bishopric of Galloway as enjoyed by John Gordon the then Bishop, was only L.228, 12s. sterling. The sum of L.8,333 sterling, or L.100,000 Scots money, which Bishop Cowpar is accused of " extorting," was not in cir- culation in one half of the Lowland counties. Calderwood asserts " that Bishop Cowpar had never ability to go up to the pulpit after his Christmas sermon." It is generally stated that he died of what is expressively called a broken heart, and this is to a certain extent admitted by Archbishop Spottis- woode. After noticing the refutation of the falsehood that the Synod of Dordrecht in Holland, convened to repress the Armi- nians, had condemned the Five Articles of Perth, the Primate says of the Presbyterians — " They ceased not by their libels and pam- phlets to injure the most worthy men, and among others the Bishop of Galloway, whom they vexed so with their papers, that he, taking the business more to heart than was needful, fell into a sickness whereof he deceased in the beginning of the same year. An excellent and ready preacher he was, and a singular good man, • The History of Galloway from the Earliest Period to the Present Time, in two vols. Kirkcudbright, 1841, vol. ii. p. 27, 28, said to be written by Mr William Mac- kenzie, in 1843 inducted as Established Presbyterian minister of Skirling in Peeblesshire. 412 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1610. but one that affected too much the applause of the popular. The good opinion of the people is to be deserved, if it may be had law- fully, but when it cannot be obtained (as who is he that can please all men and at all times ?) the testimony of a well informed conscience should suffice." The authentic account of the last illness and death of Bishop Cowpar cannot fail to be read with interest. " Among the same papers," say the editors of his works," we found three short medi- tations, whereby he comforted himself when he found his death approaching, written also with his own hand, and bearing date the 7th of December 1618." They then state — " This faithful servant of God, who from the time of his entry into the ministry had always shewed himself diligent and faithful in his calling, notwithstanding that his sickness grew daily upon him, was no way deficient in his duties of ordinary preaching,* taking great pains also to perfect his work upon the Revelation, which he had begun, and desired greatly to finish it before his dying. Besides which studies the grief he received from the backwardess of unruly spirits in giving obedience to the Articles concluded in the late [Perth] Assembly, and ratified by authority, to the great disturbance of the peace of the Church which he laboured carefully in all his life to procure, did hasten him not a little into his end. In the beginning of Ja- nuary 1619, his infirmity increasing, he was compelled to keep at home, and not go any more abroad. Yet as his weakness did per- mit he gave himself to revise his writings and dispose of his worldly affairs, that he might be ready for his passage, which every day he expected. Some ten days before his departure, having his mind freed from all earthly business, he manifested a great contentment he had in his approaching death. The Wednesday before, which was the 10th of February, the Bishops and some other brethren being assembled at Edinburgh for certain affairs of the Church, took occasion to meet in his house because of his sickness, which he took most kindly, and continued with them that whole afternoon, giving wholesome advice in matters propounded ; and shewed himself as • It is previously stated that when Bishop Cowpar was minister of Perth, in addition to his sermons on Sunday he preached every Wednesday, Friday and Saturday even- ing, and on the forenoon of every Tuesday or Thursday. Mr Scott (MS. Kirk-Session Records) states that his " excellent and pious commentary on that devotional part of Scripture, the 119th Psalm, was delivered by him in the course of his evening lectures on the week days." 1G19.] THE PERTH ARTICLES. 413 pleasant and jocund in speeches as ever before. Howbeit, even then he signified to them that his death was drawing near, and declared his mind somewhat disposcdly concerning his successors. The days following, he kept with all that came to visit him in most holy and divine conferences, expressing a great wilHngness to exchange this life for that better. Upon Monday, which was the 15th day of February, at one ©''clock in the afternoon, feeling his strength and spirits to decay, after he had conceived a most heavenly prayer in the company of those that were with him, he desired to be laid in bed (for the days before he arose always, and walked or sat in his chamber), which being done, after he had commended himself to God, he took some quiet rest ; after which he spake not many words, but those which he uttered, shew his memory and other senses to have been perfect, his tongue only failing him ; and in this sort, about seven of the clock at night he rendered his soul to God in a most quiet and peaceable manner. His body the 18th of February was interred, according to his own direction, in the church-yard called the Greyfriars" at Edinburgh, on the south side of the new church, and was conveyed to the place by the Earl of Dunfermline, Chancellor, and the rest of the honourable Lords of Council, with the Magistrates of the city and many others, the funeral sermon being preached by the most reverend father in God the Archbishop of St Andrews."* Calderwood relates that the last clerical office which Bishop Cowpar discharged was his ordaining for the ministry a certain Mr Scott who had been his secretary, and that he performed this duty sitting up in his bed. The Bishop married, in 1611, Grizel daughter of Robert Anderson. Of his descendants little is known. He had a daughter named Lilias who was baptized at Perth on the 17th of April 1615, at which were the Earl of Montrose and Lord Scone as witnesses. Another daughter was married during his " The grave of Bishop Cowpar is still to be seen in the Greyfriars' church-yard, close to the south wall of the New Greyfriars' church, as it is called, built in 1721 at the west end of the church locally known as the Old Greyfriars, erected in 1612, in the grounds which were formerly the gardens of the Greyfriars' Monastery. The grave of the Bishop is marked by a flat stone, the Latin inscription on whicli was toler- ably legible in 1843. The epitaph is— « Hie conditum est corpus Gullielmi Cowpar, Candidae Casae Episcopi, qui postquam quinquaginta tres annos vixisset, et trigenta tres evangelium, multa cum spiratus virtute predicasset, et Opera Theologica non pauca, pietatis et eruditionis testes perennes scripsisset : quievit a laboribus 15to Februarii 1619." 414 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1619. lifetime to John Oawfurd of Skeldon, and this intimates that the mother of Lihas Cowpar was the Bishop's second wife. The whole of his valuable treatises were collected and published in one folio volume in London in 1726, when his Commentary on the Book of Revelation was the first time printed. Some of his manuscript writings, which were in the possession of private citizens of Perth in 1775, are probably now lost. Bishop Cowpar was succeeded in the See of Galloway by Bishop Lamb, one of the three consecrated at London, who was trans- lated from Brechin. The Presbyterian historian of Galloway thus speaks of Bishop Lamb — " Immoderately hostile to the cause of Presbytery, he was a fit member of the High Commission Court, Never was this man known to shew mercy to the suffering Presby- terians.'"* This is a mere gratuitous assertion, for there were no " suffering Presbyterians" in those times. Several memorials of Bishop Lamb still exist at Brechin. He was succeeded in that See by David Lindsay, then minister of Dundee, son of Colonel John Lindsay, a brother of Lindsay of Edzel — an ancient branch of the Lindsays in Forfarshire. He was consecrated in the Castle of St Andrews on the 23d of November by Archbishop Spottis- woode. Calderwood says that Bishop Lindsay's preferment was " the reward he got for his book entitled Resolutions for Kneeling, which was answered soon after in the book entitled Solutions of Doctor Besolutus his Resolutions for Kneeling^ The value of the so called " reward," will be easily understood by the reader when he is informed that the Bishopric of Brechin had been so dilapi- dated at and after the Reformation that it was the poorest in Scotland ; and at the Revolution the revenue enjoyed by Bishop Drummond was only L.76 sterling. To narrate all the local discussions, animosities, and evasions, connected with the Five Articles of Perth, and especially the one which enjoined the attitude of kneeling at the Eucharist, would be merely to quote Calderwood's accounts, and his exaggerations of the " scenes" at different places. Sydserff", afterwards Bishop of Galloway, was then one of the ministers of Edinburgh, and took a prominent part in the controversy. Some of the more refractory were called before the High Commission Court, but nothing of im- portance occurred. Archbishop Spottiswoode states that there • History of Galloway, 1841, vol. ii. p. 28. 1619.] THE PERTH ARTICLES. 415 was much contention in Edinburgh in the spring of 1619, between the clergy and the Magistrates, on account of the people " stray- ing from their churches, at which the Magistrates were thought to connive." The mutual retorts and recriminations were brought befoi-e the King. The ministers contended that they were " un- kindly used for the obedience given to the Acts of the Perth As- sembly while, on the other hand, the Magistrates alleged that " the ministers were the cause of the people's disobedience, some of them having directly preached against the Acts of Perth, and all of them affirming that these Acts were concluded against their hearts." The King ordered the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and Lord Binning, Secretary of State, to investigate the truth of these charges, and as it appeared that both parties were to blame, they were advised to " lay aside their grudges, and keep one course for the retaining the people in the obedience of God and his Majesty." On this occasion the Magistrates were enjoined to divide the city into parishes, and to provide four ad- ditional ministers. In consequence of this arrangement, Dr Wil- liam Forbes, minister at Aberdeen, Mr John Guthrie, minister at Perth, Mr John Maxwell of Mortlach, and Mr Alexander Thom- son of Cambuslang, were translated from their respective parishes to Edinburgh. The two first named were eminent individuals. Forbes is sub- sequently noticed as the first Bishop of Edinburgh, after the erec- tion of the See in 1633. Guthrie, afterwards Bishop of Moray, succeeded Bishop Cowpar as minister of Perth. His removal to Edinburgh was not effected till 1621, his popularity in Perth hav- ing induced the inhabitants to oppose it as much as possible. The Perth Kirk-Session Eecords, under date June 12th 1621, detail the popular reluctance which was manifested to his resignation of his charge in the " Fair City." Mr Scott remarks — " The Pres- bytery had concurred all along with the town-council and session in opposing Mr Guthrie's translation. — It was no doubt very hard to force Mr Guthrie from the charge which he loved, especially to carry him to a scene of tumult such as Edinburgh then was. But the situation of the Church seemed to require such a man as Mr Guthrie to be at Edinburgh ; and the King having directed that four new ministers should be added to the number who had for- merly been in Edinburgh, insisted that Mr Guthrie should obey. 416 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1G19. He was present again at Perth in a meeting of council and the kirk-session, July 12, 1621, after which his actual translation seems to have taken place." He was succeeded at Perth by Mr John Robertson, who, with the sanction of Archbishop Spottis- woode, was ordained and admitted second minister of Perth by the Bishop of Dunkeld on Sunday, March 3, 1622. Mr Scott says that Mr Robertson " continued minister at Perth, much esteemed by the people and by the brethren of the Presbytery, till he was deposed by a very arbitrary sentence, May 28, 1645." Several proceedings of the Bishops are recorded by Calderwood in the years 1617, 1620, and 1621, connected with the refractory preachers who would not acknowledge the Five Articles of Perth. The great source of contention was the enjoined mode of adminis- tering and receiving the Communion, but as the parties concerned were obscure and are now forgotten, the details are not of much interest. On the 6th of April 1619, Archbishop Spottiswoode held his Diocesan Synod at St Andrews, but no business was transac- ted, in consequence of an alarming report of the King's dangerous illness. At another Synod held in Edinburgh, after it was under- stood that the King had recovered, the Archbishop plainly inti- mated to some of the more obstinate ministers in the vicinity of the city that they were likely to incur banishment to the " new found lands, and loss of their stipends." A few days afterwards the Primate undertook one of his numerous journeys to the Court. The Archbishop of Glasgow in his Diocesan Synod carefully re- corded all those who had not conformed. A few were subsequent- ly deprived, or rather their ministerial functions were suspended, and confined to residence in distant towns. In June 1619, the Court of High Commission was renewed, with power to summon all avowed or suspected Roman Catholics, and all who opposed, either by speech or in writing, the Perth Articles — the punishment to be " suspension, deprivation, fining, warding, and imprisoning, of all such as are disaffected and seditious persons, according to the nature and aggravation of the offence." Mr Scott very can- didly observes — " The High Commission was, to be sure, a Court constituted for very arbitrary purposes. It is not impossible, how- ever, but that some honest men might think, though very unjustly that the necessity of the times required it." Calderwood reports a long " conference betwixt the Bishops and 1621.] THE PERTH ARTICLES. 417 ministers at St Andrews," on the 23d of November and two fol- lowing days. Archbishop Spottiswoode presided, and after open- ing the meeting with prayer, informed the parties present that the King had so far sanctioned the conference, and had sent Lord Scone to attend for his interest. The alleged speeches and obser- vations of the Bishops of Aberdeen, Brechin, Ross, and the Arch- bishop of Glasgow, are recorded, as also some of those of the ordi- nary ministers, but the discussion, which was chiefly about the state of the Church, and the observance of the Perth Articles, is now of no interest. In 1620 several of the Presbyterian party were cited before tfie High Commission. Some were " warded," but on the whole they were leniently treated. It appears from various documents that many of the Presbyteries exerted themselves greatly this year against the avowed or suspected professors of the Roman Catholic religion, especially those in the higher ranks of life. The members of the Roman Church, however, were gradually decreasing in in- fluence, and even in numbers, except among the half civilized Highlanders, many of whose Chiefs, from their lawless character and difficulty of access in their remote mountain districts, were unmolested. On the 1st of June 1621, the Scottish Parliament met at Edin- burgh, the Marquis of Hamilton presiding as the King's Commis- sioner. The two Archbishops, and all the Bishops, with the exception of those of Moray and The Isles, were present. On the third day after the meeting the Lords of the Articles were chosen, among whom were the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the Bishops of Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Brechin, Dunblane, Ork- ney, and Argyll. On the following day the very first act of the Parliament ratified the Five Articles of the Perth General Assem- bly, which was a severe blow to the Presbyterian party. In this Parliament the Deanery of the Chapel-Royal of Stirling Castle was annexed to the Bishopric of Dunblane ; but, with the exception of a few other acts regulating the temporalities of several parishes, and connecting them with particular Bishoprics, the great majority of the enactments had no connection with the Church. This was the last Scottish Parliament held in the reign of James, and Arch- bishop Spottiswoode states that it was the one "wherein he received greatest content " by the ratification of the Perth Articles. He 27 418 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1622. expressed his sentiments to the Bishops and Privy Council on the subject in letters dated the 29th of September. To the former the King wrote that " as they had to do with two sorts of enemies, Papists and Puritans, so they should go forward in action both against the one and the other ; that Papistry was a disease of the mind and Puritanism of the brain ; and the antidote of both a grave, settled, and well ordered Church, in the obedience of God and their King, whereof he willed them to be careful, and to use all means for reducing those that either of simplicity or wilfulness did err." On the last day of the Parliament a tremendous and alarming storm of thunder, lightning, rain, and hail, broke forth, accompanied by an extraordinary darkness, and it is gravely stated that " God appeared angry at the concluding of the [Perth] Ar- ticles," at the moment the Marquis of Hamilton, as Lord High Commissioner, rose to touch them with the sceptre, according to the Scottish custom when an act of Parliament was to be ratified. Archbishop Spottiswoode observes that " the factious sort did in- terpret it to be a visible sign of God's anger for ratifying the acts of Perth ; others, in derision of their folly, said — that it was to be taken for an approbation from Heaven, likening the same to the thunderings and lightnings at the giving of the Law of Moses." Nothing of any importance occurs in the history of the Church in 1622, with the exception of some proceedings against a few of the more refractory and obstinate of the Presbyterians. Among those who figured in this manner were Mr Robert Bruce, Mr Robert Blair, and Mr David Dickson. In that year Dr William Forbes was translated from Aberdeen to be one of the ministers of Edinburgh. In the Diocesan Synod of Fife held at St Andrews in the beginning of October, it was resolved that ministers should teach no other doctrine on the afternoons of Sunday except that contained in the catechism. Calderwood mentions a curious fact connected with the University of St Andrews in 1623. On the 15th of January, Dr Wedderburn and Dr Melville were directed by a letter from Dr Young, Dean of Winchester, in the King's name, to use the English Liturgy at morning and evening service in St Salvador's College, which was accordingly done without any opposi- tion. At that time, and long afterwards, most of the students resid- ed in the College, at least all those who were on the foundation. At this period great excitement prevailed in England and Scot- 1623.] THE PERTH ARTICLES. 419 land respecting the matrimonial expedition of Prince Charles to Spain. The unsuccessful result of that projected alliance is well known. Calderwood introduces it to indulge his malignity against the Church generally, and in particular against the future Bishop of Edinburgh. He records several gossipping reports of the theological opinions of Dr Forbes, whose learning, eloquence, and piety, could not be denied by the Presbyterians, and they resorted to their usual mode of endeavouring to prejudice the people against their opponents by representing him as a Romanist. It is, how- ever, unnecessary to narrate those contentions, all of which refer to merely local matters. Bishop Douglas of Moray died at his cathedral town of Elgin in May 1623, and was interred in the church of St Giles there, which was the pastoral charge of the Bishops of Moray. During the episcopate of Bishop Douglas, a second incumbent was ap- pointed about 1613, who was considered the Bishop's vicar, and even in the Presbyterian Establishment the incumbency of the town and parish of Elgin is still collegiate. Bishop Keith states that Bishop Douglas was interred in the " south aisle of the church of St Giles, in a vault built by his widow, who likewise erected a stately monument over him, which is to be seen quite entire to this day but Mr Lachlan Shaw, in his " History of Moray,"" informs us that " the church of St Giles, being an old vaulted fabric, fell down in 1679, and was soon rebuilt in the modern way as it now stands." The monument was doubtless preserved. The old church of St Giles fell on the forenoon of Sunday the 22d of June 1679, the very day on which the Battle of Bothwell Bridge was fought, and fortunately the accident happened after the congrega- tion had retired from the morning service. Bishop Douglas was. succeeded in the See of Moray by Mr John Guthrie, already men- tioned as successively one of the ministers of Perth and of Edin- burgh. He was proprietor of the estate of Guthrie in Forfarshire, and is justly described by Bishop Keith as a " venerable, worthy, and hospitable Prelate." In 1624 several Presbyterian preachers were deprived for hold- ing conventicles and other seditious meetings. Calderwood gives very ample details of their examinations, which resemble each other. Towardsthe end of that year the ministers of Edinburgh were again engaged in a troublesome dispute with some of the citizens 420 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1624. and members of the kirk-session about the order for administer- ing the Communion. The leader of this opposition to the clergy was one of the bailies or magistrates named William Rigg, assisted by several " base companions," as Archbishop Spottiswoode desig- nates them. Calderwood concludes his " History " by narrating the proceeding at length in his own way. It appears- that Bailie Eigg challenged Dr Forbes for " divers points of doctrine," says Archbishop Spottiswoode, who was present at the examinations, " delivered by him in his sermons, and as he refused to be judged by him and the laics that assisted, the said Baihe did openly threaten them all that unless they returned to the old [sitting] form of ministering the holy Communion, the whole people would forsake them." They were all summoned before Sir George.' Hay, afterwards first Earl of Kinnoul, who had been appointed T^ord Chancellor at the death of the Earl of Dunfermline in 1622. The Privy Council ordered them to leave the city, deprived Bailie Rigg of his situation inthe magistracy, and declared him incapable of ever holding any public office. The result of this dispute was favour- able to the Church in Edinburgh. The clergy were ordered to reside in their respective parishes ; and the popular election of the incumbents by the citizens was prohibited, and vested in the Lord Provost, Magistrates, and Town-Council, with whom the right of presentation to all the parishes within the ancient and extended Royalty still remains. During this local dispute Mr Patrick Galloway died at Edin- burgh about the end of the year. This personage was a very eminent though not the most consistent man in his day, and was well known in Scotland. In his youth he was a keen follower of Andrew Melville, and attached himself to the Presbyterian party ; he next approved to a certain extent of the Tulchan Episcopate ; and he latterly became zealous for the Episcopal Church. He left Perth at the end of 1591 to serve James VI. as his chaplain, and his abilities soon attracted the notice, and obtained for him the friendship, of the King. Mr Scott, in his Extracts from the Kirk-Session of Perth, has quaintly condensed all that is recorded of Patrick Galloway by Archbishop Spottiswoode, Calderwood, and others, and his notices are here for the first time printed. "In the year 1600 he [Galloway] was very serviceable to the King by his persuading many people of the reality of John Earl of 1624.] THE PERTH ARTICLES. 421 Go\vrie''s treason, especially by a sermon to that purpose which he preached at the Cross of Edinburgh a few days after the Earl and his brother Alexander Ruthven were slain. He chose for his text Psalm cxxiv., which according to the old translation was as follows : — ' Praised be the Lord who hath not given us a prey unto their teeth. Our soul is escaped even as a bird out of the snare of the fowlers f the snare is broken, and Ave are delivered. Our help is in the name of the Lord who hath made heaven and earth.' On the street, in the audience of the King, of many noblemen and barons, and of a great multitude of people, he related at length the particulars of the unhappy affair at Perth, according as it had been told him. He pathetically described the imminent danger in which the King had been ; and then, as the proper improvement, called upon the King to give thanks to God, and to continue his trust in the Divine Providence ; and urged all the rest who were present to unite in their thanksgivings as loyal subjects for the great deliverance their Prince had met with. Spottiswoode says that this sermon gave satisfaction to many who before had been very doubtful of the truth of the King's story. He continued his endeavours, labouring, both by his public discom'ses and by his private correspondence with ministers and others, to remove the unfavourable suspicions that had been entertained. The King his master was abundantly sensible of his faithful service in that cause. He doubled to him the pension he formerly received from the Abbey of Scone, and held him in greater esteem than ever ; but he lost much of his popularity by the zeal with which he espoused the King's interest. Some worthy good men, who did not see things in the same light as Mr Galloway, plainly told him they admired his great abilities, but were doubtful of the goodness or honesty of his heart. He seemed to many intoxicated with the royal favour ; but he was warm in whatever he engaged. Having high notions of the duty which he owed as a subject to his sovereign — to a sovereign especially who had called him to be his own minister, and who put confidence in him, he thought it incumbent upon him to act as far as he could with a safe conscience in his service ; and indeed he was brought over to embrace many of the King's opinions both with regard to Church and State. " When the King went to take possession of the Crown of England, April 4, 1603, he carried Mr Galloway along with him 422 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1624. as his minister. Mr Galloway was admitted to the celebrated Conference at Hampton Court, January 14, 1604, and afterwards wrote an account of that Conference, honourably mentioned by Dr Maclaine, the translator of Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History. In April 1604, Mr Galloway returned to Scotland, being thought a proper person to manage the affairs of the Scottish Church. He closely corresponded with the King, made frequent journeys to London, and kept the [Presbyterian] clergy and people in Scot- land wonderfully quiet, considering the design which was then taking effect against the Presbyterian Establishment. The Com- mission of the General Assembly, June 7, 1607, appointed him to be one of the ministers of Edinburgh. Though the Pai'liament which met at Perth, July 1, 1606, had established Prelacy in a more ample manner than it had been at any time since the Re- formation, and though the temporalities of the Bishoprics were restored by that Parliament, yet Mr Galloway, who no doubt might have had a Bishopric from the King if he had been pleased to take it, chose rather to live as a private minister. He was indeed of more service to the King by remaining in that station, than he could have been if he had accepted the odious (!) office of a Bishop ; and he continued throughout his whole life to have a good deal of influence with the Presbyterian party. " After the Assembly at Perth, August 25, 1618, in which the five famous Articles which the King was obtruding upon the Church were agreed to, Mr Galloway hurt his private usefulness as a minister of the gospel, and rendered himself obnoxious to many, by the impetuous manner in which he sought to enforce the practice of those Articles, particularly that of kneeling at the Com- munion. The people of Edinburgh shewed great backwardness to comply with this last ceremony, and Mr Patrick Galloway, whose temper could bear no contradiction from his parishioners, frequently shewed an indecent degree of passion, by rudely com- manding the communicants to kneel while he was giving them the elements at the Lord's table. " Calderwood relates an unseemly accident which befell on one of these occasions as follows, April 21, 1622 : — Mr Galloway, being to dispense the Lord's Supper in the Old Church of Edin- burgh, said in his sermon — ' To yourselves be it said, to God be it said, and to the King be it said, if ye kneel not, for now there 1624.] THE PERTH AKTICLES. 423 is a law established by act of Parliament for it.' Having come down from the pulpit after sermon to consecrate the elements by j)rayer, he kneeled, as the custom was, before the table, on which were four cups full of wine. In rising after prayer, being now very old and infirm, he took hold of the table to help him, but in so doing he overturned it with the four cups, and also two basons which contained the elements of bread. The bread and table- cloths being all wet, and stained with the colour of the wine, occasioned no little confusion, and discomposed the minds of many ; and the service was obliged to stop till the Dean of Guild went and got new provision of table-cloths, bread, and wine. The people considered this accident as a rebuke, and Mr Galloway himself appears to have been not entirely void of such an apprehension. The next Sabbath, continuing to give the Communion, he said to in old man who had been his parishioner in Perth, and who after- wards was his parishioner in Edinburgh, while he was putting the elements into his hands — ' Why do you sit so slovenly ? Bow down and kneel.' The man answered — ' If I be now doing wrong, you have been teaching me wrong these forty-three years.' But it was observed that when Mr Galloway himself communicated, he bowed only the one leg, and still sat upon the seat. Being grieved to the heart with the hurt which he saw insisting on the ceremony of kneeling occasioned, he intimated that the next Sabbath he would again proceed to give the Communion, and would give it to the communicants sitting, standing, or kneeling. Thus he seems to have yielded a point which he had zealously contended for about four years ; and in yielding this point, he shewed that the general success of the gospel was more precious to him than the favour of the Prince. " Many of the inhabitants of Edinburgh blamed him unjustly for •■ncouraging the King in the imposition of ceremonies. The fact was, that he and the other clergy who appeared obsequious were in their hearts averse from such things, at least judged their in- troduction at that time very inexpedient. In April 1620, a per- son in Edinburgh wrote in a letter to Mr Galloway the following severe words — ' In the pregnancy of your youth you stirred up the Lords against the King at the Raid of Ruthven ; in the dotage of your age you would stir up the King against the Lord's servants, both pastors and people." 424 THE OBSERVANCE OF [1625. " According to the Session-Register of Perth he was married to Martha Guthrie, with whom he was contracted, April 21, 1583 ; but by the account of his family in Douglas' Peerage it appears that she dying, he married another wife." This was Mary, daughter of James Lawson, the successor of John Knox as minister of Edinburgh. By this marriage he had a son, Sir Patrick Galloway, who acquired the lands of Carnbee in Fife, He was a person of great abilities, and obtained the favour of King James, by whom he was knighted, and appointed Master of Requests when a young man. He was continued in this office by Charles I., to whom he was devotedly attached, and who con- ferred on him various other appointments. In 1645, the King rewarded his fidelity and services by creating him Lord Dunkeld. He married a daughter of Sir Robert Norton, knight, by whom he had Thomas, who succeeded him as second Lord Dunkeld. That nobleman married Margaret, daughter of Sir Thomas Thom- son of Duddingstone near Edinburgh, by whom he had three sons and four daughters, the second of whom maiTied Thomas Rattray of Craighall in Perthshire, from whom descended Bishop Rattray, and the second married the Rev, Dr Falconer. His eldest son, James third Lord Dunkeld, embraced the military profession, and is described as having been a brave officer. He refused to conform to the Revolution, joined the Viscount of Dundee when he raised forces for James H., and was at the Battle of Killicrankie, for which he was outlawed and attainted. He retired to the exiled monarch's little Court at St Germains, entered the French ser- vice, and was killed in action, leaving a son and a daughter, who became a nun in the Val de Grace at Paris. This son took the title of Lord Dunkeld, and rose to the rank of Lieutenant-General in the French service. He married, but left no issue. " Thus," observes Mr Scott in his simple way, " the posterity of Mr Pat- rick Galloway were nobilitated ; thus did they continue obstinate in their fidelity to the Royal House of Stuart ; thus did they at last become Popish, and enter into a foreign service ; and in all pro- bability the direct male line is already or will soon be extinct." In the spring of 1625 King James, who had previously suffered from severe illness, was seized with ague, of which he died at Theobald's on the 27th of March in the fifty-ninth year of liis age. He was buried in Westminster Abbey, and his funeral sermon was 1625.] THE PERTH ARTICLES. 425 preached by Dr Williams the Dean, then Bishop of Lincoln, after- wards Archbishop of York. His views as to ecclesiastical and religious affairs in Scotland are best understood by the measures which he adopted, and for the accomplishment of which he exert- ed all his influence and authority with unwearied zeal and perse- verance. His character as a monarch and as a man has been so often discussed, that it would be superfluous to attempt any new delineation of it in the present work. As it respects his exertions for the Episcopal Church of Scotland, we are informed by Bishop Henry Guthrie in his " Memoirs of Scotland," in alluding to the Scottish Bishops of his reign — " It had been King James' custom, when a Bishopric became vacant, to appoint the Archbishop of St Andrews to convene the rest, and name three or four well quali- fied, so that there could not be an error in the choice, and then out of that list the King pitched upon one whom he preferred, whereby it came to pass that during his time most able men were advanced, such as Mr William Cowpar to Galloway and Mr John Guthrie to Moray." [1625. CHAPTER VIII. THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES L — PRO- CEEDINGS OF THE BISHOPS — HISTORY OF TEINDS IN SCOTLAND — THE king's REVOCATION OF THE TEINDS — ITS DISASTROUS CON- SEQUENCES. Charles I. soon after his accession to the throne solemnized his marriage to the Princess Henrietta of France, and dihgently ap- plied himself to public affairs. The new sovereign's attention was so much engrossed by foreign policy and events in England, that for sometime he interfered little with the ecclesiastical condition of Scotland. He indeed wrote to Archbishop Spottiswoode that he was resolved to enforce all the laws enacted in the preceding reign connected with the Church, and in August he issued a royal pro- clamation, which was posted on the doors of every parish church, enforcing the strictest conformity to the Perth Articles. He de- clared his approbation of the arrangements effected by his father, but he confined himself to some important regulations connected with property and the temporal condition of the parochial incum- bents. If, however, we are to credit the paper preserved by Wodrow, and said to have been written by Archbishop Spottis- woode, entitled " Extracts of the Church of Scotland as to Con- formity, 1627," it appears that three of the Perth Articles — Com- munion of the Sick, Private Baptism, and Confirmation — had sel- dom or never been administered, and even the other two, which enjoined kneeling at the communion, and the observance of the five great commemorations of the Church, were by no means generally acknowledged. This intimates that ecclesiastical affairs in Scotland were conducted by Archbishop Spottiswoode with the utmost mildness, and makes the conduct of the Presbyterian leaders the 1026.] EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 427 more unwarrantable at that period. This is admitted by the most candid writers of their party. Dr Aiton mentions with approval " the able administration of Archbishop Spottiswoode," and thinks that if Charles had continued to follow the Primate's policy, " the Scots, instead of being his first and fiercest foes, would have con- tinued his last and best friends." Dr Aiton farther asserts — " If Spottiswoode's mild measures had been persevered in till all the old heroes of Presbyterianism who had, previous to the Forth Assembly, preached against conformity, died out, and till the young were either molified by kindness, or altogether dis- regarded. Prelacy might have been fairly rooted in our soil, and even come to as full a growth in Scotland as it has done in Eng- land." These are mere matters of opinion, but it is ludicrous to find the biographer of Alexander Henderson writing about the growth of what he calls " Prelacy" in England. When was " Prelacy," or the episcopal succession, ever out of England since the time of the early British or Anglo-Saxon Church ? The condition of the people was much the same as during the reign of James. The country was wretchedly cultivated, the roads miserable, and the ignorance of the people greatly fostered by the religious dissensions and clamours of the Presbyterian preachers. Nevertheless there was no general dissatisfaction towards the Episcopal Church. We find even Principal Baillie of Glasgow, in a letter to one of his friends in 1637, declaring — " Bishops I love, but pride, greed, luxury, oppression, immersion in secular affairs, was the bane of the Romish Prelates, and cannot have good suc- cess in the Reformed." The several Presbyteries and Kirk-Sessions continued to occupy themselves with cases of scandal, immorality, quarrellings, strolling on Sundays, wilful neglect of public worship, deserting the parish churches, and though last not the least in that age — prosecutions for witchcraft. In that matter it cannot be denied that the Episcopal clergy were fully as zealous as their Presbyterian opponents. During a few of the subsequent years after 1625, little occurs in the history of the Church. In 1626 the King issued a commis- sion for constituting a new ecclesiastical judicatory under the di- rection of the Primate, but a clamour was raised by the Presby- terian party that the proposed Court was intended to resemble the Star Chamber Court in England, and the nobility opposed it so 428 THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH [1626. resolutely that the Commission for Grievances, as it was called, never held even one meeting. Archbishop Spottiswoode employed his leisure time at his country seat at Dairsie Castle in Fife, in collecting and arranging the materials for his " History of the Church and State of Scotland." The Primate had become pro- prietor of the estate of Dairsie, and erected the present parish church near his now ruinous castle in 1622 — one of the most ele- gant and finely proportioned structures of the kind in Scotland. It occupies a beautiful and picturesque situation on the bank of the river Eden, which debouches into the sea about four miles from St Andrews below the Guard Bridge erected by Bishop Wardlavv in the earlier part of the fifteenth century. The Primate also erected the bridge of three arches over the Eden leading to the castle and the parish church. The injury inflicted on the church of Dairsie after the Presbyterians obtained the ascendency is suf- ficiently testified by a report of its internal state as finished by the Archbishop, in the minutes of the Provincial Synod of Fife, dated November 2, 1G41. They had appointed sundry of their number to visit the church, and to report on the alleged " super- stitious monuments" it contained. Those enemies of architectural ornament stated that at the " entrie of sundrie desks upon the platform, and above the great west door, there are crosier staffs, in some part alone, and in other as an aditament and cognizance of the last pretended Bishop's arms, not being any sign or cogniz- ance ordinarie and commoune in the armes of that name or familie [of Spottiswoode], but merely a signe of his degree hierarchall, according to the manner and form used among the Roman Hierar- chists and others following them. Further, they find supersti- tious a glorious partition wall, with a degree ascending thereto, dividing the body of the kirk from their queir [choir], as it is ordinar- lic called in Papistrie, and among those that follow Papists (!) And because this particular is not speciallie named in their commissioun, and a great part is the building and ornament of some desks ; and above the great door of their queir, so called, the arms of Scot- land and England quartered, with divers crosses about and beside them, whereupon the Kirk has not yet particularlie determined." On the 4th of October 1G42, the "partition timber wall in the kirk of Dairsie " was ordered to be taken down, and on the 20th of May 1645 those bigotted individuals " recommended to Alex- 1626.] AT THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I, 429 ander Inglis of Kingask, depute-bailie of the regalitie of St An- drews, to have a care that the act of the Assembly be satisfied aiient the full removing of what is superstitious in the kirk of Dairsie, and particularlie anent the levelling of the choir, which he being present did promise." On the 14th of May 162G, King Charles sent a command signed by himself to the Lords of the Exchequer to admit Archbishop Spottiswoode as President of that Court. Sir James Balfour states that the Primate was the " first and last President that ever the Exchequer of Scotland had." On the 11th of June the King wrote to the Archbishop thanking him for his " pains in his ser- vice ;" and on the 12th of July Charles addressed a letter to the Privy Council, commanding that the Archbishop, as Primate of Scotland, should have precedence before the Lord Chancellor, and consequently before all the Nobility. The Lord Chancellor at the time was Sir George Hay, repeatedly mentioned as the first Earl of Kinnoidl, who resisted this order, and would never allow the Primate to have the precedence, " do what he could," says Sir James Balfour, " all the days of his life." This order for the pre- cedence of the Archbishop, though harmless in itself, and merely in conformity to the practice in England, was injudicious at the time, and eventually injurious to the Church, as it and some other marks of the royal favour rendered the Bishops liable to the ac- cusation of ambitious secularity — a charge of which their enemies failed not to take due advantage. At the time of the arrival of the above order Bishop Lindsay of Ross came from England, and brought ten articles signed by the King on the 12th of July respecting the Church, copies of which were sent to the Archbishops and to all the Bishops. They first authorized the Archbishops and Bishops to allow those mini- sters who were refractory, and would not conform to the Five Articles of Perth, " a time till they be better resolved, provided they utter no doctrine publicly against the King's authority, the church government, nor canons thereof ;" and the second stipulat- ed that those ministers were not either publicly or privately to dis- suade others from obeying them, nor refuse to administer the Com- munion to all who desired to receive it kneeling, prohibiting them from admitting any persons belonging to the congregations of their neighbours to the Communion without the testimonial of 430 THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT [1626. their ministers. The exiled preachers were to be allowed to re- turn, and those confined or suspended from their functions for their refractory conduct were to be placed again in churches, if they conducted themselves according to law, and recognized those conditions. The Archbishops and Bishops were enjoined to see that all parochial incumbents admitted since the Pei'th General Assembly observed the Five Articles, and to censure those who refused ; and if any had been admitted without subscribing a bond of conformity the Diocese was to be intimated to the King, and the Bishop censured, while the " said minister be ui'ged to sub- scribe the bond, which at his entry should have been done by him."" The Archbishops and Bishops were strictly ordered to reside at their cathedral churches, and those who neglected to do so were to be reported to the King. They were also to " use ordinary visitations, and in the time thereof they plant schools in every parish, and cause weekly cf^techize the people by every minister for renouncing ignorance, barbarity, and atheism ; and that also they take order for entertaining the poor in each parish." One of the articles specially referred to Robert first Earl of Nithsdale, who was not to be " troubled for his rehgion unless he give some public offence,'" until the King's pleasure was known. Mr Peter Hay of Naughton was ordered to deliver the manuscript of his book to the Archbishop of St Andrews for examination and cor- rection before it was sent to press, and the said Mr Peter was assured that the King would not forget his good services done to his " late dear father," but have a care of his preferment."* It is noticed in the records of the Diocesan Synod of Fife, held at St Andrews on the 2d of October 1627, that " my Lord Archbishop desired that the purpose concerning Mr Peter Hay of Naughton's book should not be mentioned in the public synod ; and de- clared that his Lordship would not be present if the same were spoken of."-}- This book was " An Advertisement to the Subjects of Scotland of the Fearfull Dangers threatened to Christian States, and namely to Great Britain, by the ambition of Spayne, with a Contemplation of the truest means to oppose it. Also diverse other Treatises touching the present Estate of the Kingdome of * Sir James Balfour's Annals, Edinburgh, 8vo. 1824, vol. ii. p. 142-145. t Selections from the Minutes of the Syn'od of Fife from IGl 1 to 1687, 4to. printed for the Abbotsford Club, 1837, p. 107. 162G.] THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 431 Scotland, verie necessarie to be knowne and considered in this tymo, called The First Blast of the Trumpet. In Aberdene, printed by Edward Raban, 1627." On the 22d of November 1626, King Charles granted a warrant of L.4000 Scots, or L..333 Sterling, to repair the Abbey Church of Holyroodhouse, and in that month a royal proclamation was issued, enjoining all persons to pay their tithes. On the 4th of December, the city of Edinburgh was divided into four parishes superintended by eight ministers, and the Privy Council officially ordered the citizens to resort to their respective churches, and to contribute to the maintenance of the incumbents. The records of the Diocesan Synods at that period and some years afterwards, like those of the Presbyteries, are chiefly occu- pied with local matters, such as the conduct of the clergy, the condition of the parishes, and the examinations of candidates for the ministry. The " Selections from the Minutes of the Synod of Fife, 1611 to 1687," printed in 1837, for the Abbotsford Club, may be assumed as fair specimens of the business transacted in the other Diocesan Synods, In the meeting held at St Andrews on the 3d and 4th of April 1627, it was reported that the blaster of Oliphant [afterwards sixth Lord Oliphant], who was suspected of Papistry, has sworn and subscribed the Confession of Faith, and was of purpose to have received the holy communion, but that a certain impediment did intervene the day immediately preceding the celebration thereof ! He has promised faithfully to conmumi- cate in any other kirk within that bounds within the space of ten days." A certain Mr James Bennet, minister of Auchterrauchty in Fife, who was admitted in 1615, conformed to Presbyterianism in 1638, and died about 1640, figures in no very enviable manner on this occasion. — " Because it was reported by the brethren of Cupar [Fife], that Mr James Bennet is ane frequent hunter with dogs, ane player at cards, and a runner of courses upon horses, the said Mr James being called upon, compeared, was gravely re- buked, and expressly inhibited to attend any of the former games in time coming ; and the brethi-en ordained to report in the next Synod how the said Mr James does behave himself in all these particulars. The brethren at Meigle are ordained to close their process against my Lord Gray, who continues avowedly in Papis- try, and to send the same to my Lord Archbishop, that the sen- 432 THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT [1627. tence of excommunication may be pronounced against him. The brethren were exhorted gravely in these dangerous times to walk circumspectly, and to abstain from the exercises of hunting, card- ing, running of horses, and all such as may give occasion of scan- dal and offence, under pain of suspension from their ministry." On the 4th twenty-one of the parish incumbents in the Diocese were appointed to attend a convention of the Bishops then as- sembled in Edinburgh, one of whom was Alexander Henderson of Leuchars, with " full power given to them to vote and consent to all such things as in these conventions shall be proposed, tending to the benefit and good of the Kirk." Charles I. was at this time engaged in his grand project, after- wards fatal to himself, though advantageous to the clergy, of the surrender of the Scottish teinds or tithes. The Bishops viewed this measure with alarm, as likely to excite numerous and power- ful enemies against the Church, who were then either friendly, or at least not its avowed opponents. On the 3d of May the King replied to their representation, reproving them as " men void of charity, beyond measure timorous without a cause." It was thought necessary to send a deputation to Charles on the subject, and a few days after the arrival of that letter. Bishop Bellenden of Dunblane, and Mr John Maxwell, then one of the ministers of Edinburgh, afterwards Bishop of Ross, were appointed. They were instructed to represent to the King the serious apprehensions of the Bishops and clergy that the project of the " surrenders" of the teinds would be fatal to the stability of the Church, which elicited an explanatory letter from the King on the 18th of May, to the effect that " churches already not sufficiently pro- vided be supplied ; that every proprietor of lands might have his own tithes upon a reasonable condition ; also that his own revenues might be increased and augmented." Meanwhile the conference to which Henderson and the others had been deputed was held at Edinburgh in July. Bishop Lind- say of Ross presided in the unavoidable absence of Archbishop Spottiswoode, who sent a letter on the subject. The Primate ad- vised the meeting to make arrangements for a day of public fast- ing and humiliation, and for a specific contribution to support a resident at Court, when the affairs and interest of the Church required such a representative. The nonconforming party insisted 1627.] THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 433 that, before discussing those two points, their meeting should be constituted a General Assembly ; but this demand was success- fully resisted. They then presented petitions in favour of those preachers who were " warded," or confined to particular towns and localities, and for the reformation of sundry alleged grievances. Bishop Lindsay of Ross maintained that those matters could only be discussed in a General Assembly. It was conceded that until such was held, any petitions to the King should be sent to the person selected to repair to the Court, who was to be authorized to intercede with the King to convene a General Assembly. Bishop Lindsay of Ross, Bishop Forbes of Aberdeen, Bishop Bellenden of Dunblane, and Bishop Abernethy of Caithness, were then placed on a leet to proceed to England, and the Bishop of Ross was unanimously chosen. Three ministers, Scott of Glasgow, Murray, and Henderson, one of whom was to accompany the Bishop, were then proposed, and Scott was elected in opposition to Henderson, though it does not appear that he ever went to London. It was also unanimously agreed that the parochial ministers should pay L.l Scots, or 6s. 8d. sterling, for every hundred merks, and L.5, lis. 4d. for every chalder of grain or victual which they enjoyed of stipend, to defray the expenses of the Bishop of Ross and his companion. The biographer of Henderson admits that when his hero " pro- moted Episcopacy it contained nothing to outrage the associations of the peasantry," who, he might have added, were utterly incom- petent to judge on any subject of controversy, and states his views on what he calls the Primate's error in sending commissioners to the Court. This project, according to him, with that of " levying con- tributions throughout Scotland for maintaining them there, was one of the few but fatal blunders which Spottiswoode committed in the course of a long and perplexing administration. One churchman after another of the party followed, ostensibly," con- tinues Dr Alton, " on the same errand, but really with the design of undermining his influence with the King. At any rate the fact is certain that from about 1627, when the Primate was managing matters with great dexterity, his influence began to wane. With King J ames his word was law — to him he sent up his own plans, as to what he judged proper to preserve Prelacy ,and a transcript of them uniformly came down in dispatches from the King. He even 28 434 THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT [1627. sometimes sent up the very draft of what he wanted, with di- rections to Mr Murray of the Bed-Chamber to get it copied, signed by his Majesty, and returned. Thus clothed with royal authority, the Primate behoved to be obeyed, and through this channel he was enabled to give his master's pleasure as a pretence for every forcible measure he might choose to adopt. For a time Charles placed in him the same implicit faith which James had done, and so long as he did so the mild measures of conciliation carried on by the Primate were rapidly contributing to the peace of the Scottish Church." This writer proceeds to state that the commissioners sent to the Court by Archbishop Spottiswoode at- tended more to their own interests and personal ambition than to the affairs of the Church, — that they saw Laud, then Bishop of Bath and Wells, in 1628 translated to London, rising in influence and fa- vour with the King, and they attached themselves to him as the cer- tain channel of preferment. It is farther asserted that " as Laud and Spottiswoode thus sailed on different tacks, in proportion as the former acquired the ascendency over the King's mind, in the same proportion the latter lost it." Dr Alton then attempts to delineate the character of Laud and Spottiswoode, representing each, especially the former, in no very favourable light, which was indeed to be expected from a Presbyterian, and alleges that the Scottish Primate committed therefore a fatal mistake in not con- tinuing to make himself the sole organ of communication with Charles as he had done with James, and in not getting himself nominated as the commissioner to be sent to Court at the public expence."* The charge of Arminianism and inclination towards the Papal Church is of course brought prominently forward against Laud, though it has been innumerable times refuted. In these statements several matters are introduced as authentic which are not supported by historical evidence. When Laud was in Scotland in 1617, the defects of the Established Church were too obvious to escape his notice. It wanted that efficient protection against fanaticism, and preservative of sound doctrine — a Liturgy such as that of the Church of England. It is stated that Laud was frequently consulted by the King on this important subject, yet there is no decisive evidence that he interfered much with public affairs in Scotland at the period to which Dr Aiton alludes, • Life and Times of Alexander Henderson, p. 121, 122, 123, 124. 1627.] THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 435 beyond giving his opinion when consulted, and his advice to those Scottish Bishops with whom he came in contact at the Court. In reality, he does not appear to have been much implicated in Scottish affairs till a short time before his translation to the Arch- bishopric of Canterbury in 1633. The statement that King James adopted all Archbishop Spottiswoode's suggestions, and acted solely by his advice, is contrary to the Primate's declaration re- specting the Five Articles of Perth — that he was not consulted in the matter — that those Articles had been sent to him unexpected- ly ; and it is now known that he was individually averse to their introduction. Dr Alton, moreover, while he traduces Laud, makes an important admission, which completely invalidates his previous assertions. " Till the number of his [Laud's] adherents was in- creased in Scotland, and until he was promoted to the height of a prelate's ambition. Laud felt himself restrained in his meditated out- rages on the Scottish Church, and in his opposition to so wary a statesman as Spottiswoode. The Presbyterians, therefore, con- tinued to enjoy comparative toleration till about 1634, when Laud, having no longer anything to fear or to expect, let himself fairly loose on his work of complete conformity." The " outrages" which Laud is charged with " meditating" on the Scottish Church are ac- knowledged by Dr Alton to be simply " complete conformity." The Presbyterians in 1643 were guilty of more enormous " outrages," when they attempted to compel the people of England and of Ireland forcibly to acknowledge their Solemn League and Covenant, the ostensible object of which was the " complete conformity" of the three kingdoms in doctrine, discipHne, and worship, denying any toleration whatever to those who refused. Of all sects the Scottish Presbyterians should be the last to assail Archbishop Laud for his alleged labours in the " work of complete conformity." As to the charge of what was called or believed to be Arminian- ism by an ignorant people, and studiously misrepresented by the Presbyterian preachers, the popular notion on the subject is suf- ficiently intimated by the then prevailing superstitions. In 1629 the appearance of a whale, always a strange though not unfrequent visi- tor from the Northern Seas in the Frith of Forth, at Aberlady in Haddingtonshire, and the occurrence of an alarming thunder storm in the Ayrshire district of Carrick, were actually believed to indicate 43G THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT [1627. Divine judgments on the Church for the introduction of imaginary Arminian tenets. It is now well known that it was not so much either the sub- sequent connection of Laud with Scottish affairs, his pretended opposition to Spottiswoode, or the unfortunate events resulting from the ill-managed introduction of the Liturgy in 1637, which caused the temporary downfall of the Episcopal Establishment of Scotland, as the combination and hatred which the King fatally en- tailed against himself in the adjustment of the teinds, part of the odium of which was thrown on the Church. Mr Scott truly observes in the Perth Register : — " King Charles'' fondness to pursue the revocation, by which he intended to enrich the Church in general, and more especially the dignified clergy, and to bring them into some degree with the Church and clergy in England, hurt him ex- ceedingly with the landed gentlemen in Scotland. It, together with his bestowing civil offices on some of the Bishops, furnished at last to many much the same motive to a reformation from Episcopacy as had been felt by their ancestors to reform from Popery to the Protestant religion." This is a fair representation of the case. It was a political and pecuniary warfare which was first waged against the Church, and though Presbyterianism was an important element, it was chiefly made auxiliary to the resentment of the influential opponents of the King, who found it necessary for their purpose to stir up and carry with them the preachers of the peoiDle. " Although," Dr Aiton admits, " the arrangements which Charles made respecting tithes produced effects permanently salutary, yet at the time it proved to be an unfortunate step, in so far as it was the means of enraging many of his former friends." An opposition to the King may be said to have been effectively formed soon after his accession. The history of teinds or tithes in Scotland is difficult and com- plicated. The Reformation, such as it was in Scotland, was ac- complished, and a scramble ensued for church lands, teinds, rents, feus, and moveable wealth, such as to justify the epithet be- stowed on the lay leaders of the tumults of 1.560, that they were absolute robbers. Even John Knox bitterly denounced their pro- ceedings, and when he complained that nothing was left for his new order of priesthood, his expostulations and demands were 1627.] THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 437 treated as a " devout imagination." In addition to those lands which were confiscated to the Crown, but the true meaning of which was appropriation to the friends and flatterers of the reign- ing sovereign, various of the old Eomish dignitaries who con- formed to the Reformation were allowed to retain the temporali- ties of their abbeys and benefices, under the title of Commenda- tors. Those church lands were erected by James VI. into tem- poral baronies, and their possessors known as Lords of Erection — a designation long relinquished as it respects their representatives, some of whom are members of the Scottish Peerage. The feuars of church-lands were similarly confirmed in their usurped rights, and from tenants they became proprietors. By this seizure of the church lands the cultivators of the soil and the peasantry were not in the least degree benefited, or their social condition improved. The whole of the Scottish teinds or tithes were seized by laymen, much in the same manner as a third part of the tithes in England were secured by lay improprietors, and those laymen, who were entitled to draw the Scottish tithes annually, were and still are designated Titulars of the Teinds. The teinds were regularly levied year after year from the cultivators of the land and others by the titu- lars, who enjoyed the exclusive benefit, and were not compelled to pay anything towards the support of the newly constituted preachers. Laws were indeed occasionally enacted to oblige the titulars to give up small portions of the teinds which they had illegally seized, but so weak was the existing Government, and so resolute were the titulars to keep possession of their plunder, that little of any consequence was done. In the time of Queen Mary, and especially during the long reign of James VI., the Scottish Parliament repeatedly passed acts regulating the stipends of the parochial incumbents, but those acts did not affect the right of property, in whatever manner the lands had been acquired by the possessors. King James appointed commissioners to appropriate stipends out of the teinds, and probably achieved as much as he could at the time to ameliorate the condition of the parish preachers. After the legal establishment of the Episcopal Church he granted to the Archbishops and Bishops the rents of certain lands, the pro- perty of the Crown, which had been anciently a part of the Roman Catholic patrimony. This was in 1606, so far as concerned the 438 THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT [1629. benefices of Bishops, and the benefices belono;ing to the Episcopal Chapters were in Hke manner restored to them in 1617. Never- theless vast confusion existed about the mode of paying the stipends of the incumbents, which had been the cause of much serious com- plaints, altercations, and disturbances, for half a century after the Reformation. Charles 1. after his accession saw the absurdity of this mode of supporting an Established clergy, and had the courage to grapple with it, though it raised up against him many danger- ous enemies. He revoked all the ecclesiastical grants which had been made in the two preceding reigns, except the church lands from which the Bishops derived their very limited revenues. The parties interested in the tithes entered into bonds of arbi- tration called Submissions, and referred their several claims to the King's own determination in 1628. These Submissions were four in number. The first and fourth were signed on the one part by the Lords of Erection and the tacksmen claiming under them ; and on the other by the proprietors, who wished either to pur- chase their own tithes, or to have them valued. The two Submis- sions contained what Erskine in his " Institute of the Law of Scot- land" designates " procuratories of resignation by the titulars, for surrendering their right of superiority to the King ad remanentiam,^'' and hence they were called the Surrenders of Teinds. The King was to decide what should be awarded to all the parties interested for the feu-duties, or other constant rent of the superiorities, and also the sums to be stipulated as the yearly rate and value of the tithes. The second Submission was signed by the Bishops and clergy in reference to the tithes to which they were legally en- titled, but of which they were not in possession ; and the third Submission was signed by the commissioners of several royal burghs, for such right as they could claim to the tithes formerly granted for the support of ministers, colleges, schools, or hospitals, within their respective burghs. On the 2d of September 1629, the King pronounced on each of the four Submissions a separate award, called a Decree- Arhitral, subjoined in the statute books to the acts of his reign. The First and Fourth Decrees declare the Crown's right to the superiorities of erection resigned by the Submissions to the King, who was to give lOOU merks Scots himself or thereby to the Lords of Erection in full payment of each chalder of feu farm, and for each 1 00 1629.] THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 439 merks of feu-duty, or other constant rent of these superiorities ; and the feu-duties were to be retained till such payment was made. This condition of the Decrees- Arbitral was confirmed bythe Parliament in 1603, with the exemption of the superiorities of the lands belonging to the Bishops or the Chapters whohadbeen restor- ed in 1606. The most important article in the Decrees-Arbitral is, as Erskine justly observes, that which directs the valuation at a certain annual rate, and the landlord is then entitled to the entire crop on paying such yearly duty to the titular. The result of the whole revocation, or the Four Submissions, into the hands of the King by the four different bodies who accepted his arbitration — viz. the Lords of Erection and landholders, the Bishops and clergy, the royal burghs, and certain tacksmen and others, having incidental right to teinds, in conseq^uence of the Decrees- Arbitral pronounced by his Majesty — was the establishment of valuations of tithes ; sales of them to the proprietors of the land, which pre- cluded the produce from the liability of division between the pro- prietor of the ground and the owner of the teind ; and the appro- priation of the teinds as a fund liable to the utmost extent for minister's stipend.* Such was the system accomplished by Charles I. in Scotland, notwithstanding the menaces and opposition of the powerful Nobi- lity, and it has continued to be the source from which the parochial incumbents derive their stipends. It is now universally admitted that it is a noble memorial of the King's prudence and wisdom. This boon conferred on the country was of the greatest conse- quence. Before the Four Submissions, and the pronouncing of the Decrees- Arbitral, the titulars of the teinds were entitled to a tenth part of the whole yearly crop ; and the grower could not carry off any portion of his nine parts till the titular had set aside or appropriated his tenth. Loud complaints were made by the agriculturists who paid the tithe, that the titulars often de- layed to select their portion till the whole crop had been damaged by the weather. " The ministers," Dr Aiton candidly observes, " were also loud in their complaints that they received no tithes, but only a poor pittance. In this state of the matter, both the • The reader will find the " Submissions and Surrenders of Teinds, &c. with His Majesty's Decreets following thereupon," and all the Documents, in "Acta Parliamen- torum Scotorum," printed by command of George HI., 1817, folio, vol. v. p. 189-207. 440 THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT [1629. clergy and yeomanry were entirely dependent on the Nobles who were the titulars — the one for a stipendiary benevolence, and the other for the safety of their crops. They therefore both remon- strated to the King, who at once saw the propriety of delivering them from so dangerous a vassalage to subjects." After noticing the appointment of the Commission to value the tithes, the liberty ulti- mately given to the proprietors to buy them up from the titulars at nine years' purchase, and eight chalders provided as a suitable provision for each incumbent, the biographer of Henderson says — " The clergy and gentry rejoiced at this deliverance from intoler- able bondage ; but the Nobles fretted, because by this plan they were deprived of that superiority over both clergy and yeomanry which, ' by the tye of tythes of the tenth,' they had enjoyed since the Reformation from Popery. The feudal rancours excited on account of this admirable arrangement was no fault of the King, but his misfortune. But the act of Revocation, in which Charles attempted to transfer to the Crown the church lands which had been long in possession of the old Court favourites, was the great foundation stone of all the mischief which followed.* — But as the attempt was obviously hazardous, he went to work with caution. To make the powerful Barons leading cards to the rest, the Abbey of Arbroath and the Lordship of Glasgow were procured by secret purchases, and conferred on the two Archbishoprics. Se- veral other estates of less value were managed in a similar way. So long as value was obtained, the Nobility, pretending favour to the Court, made a shew of zeal after a good bargain ; but when the Earl of Nithsdale came down in 1628 to offer merely the King's favour to those who surrendered the church lands, and to wrest them from those who refused, open resistance was in an instant determined upon, and the old cry of Popery was raised to serve the purpose of those interested in these grants. At a secret meeting it was settled that, if no other argument should induce Nithsdale to de- sist, the Barons should at once knock out his brains after the good old Scottish manner. When the parties came to a confer- ence in Edinburgh, the dark scowl of the Nobles, patiently waiting for vengeance, terrified the Court party so much, that they did not even disclose their instructions, but sent back Nithsdale to London to declare that the service was desperate. From this " Dr Aiton here refers to Balfour, p. 464, and Burnet's History, vol. i. p. 31. 1629.] THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 441 time the Nobles suspected the King, and began to play under- hand the game against his government. With a view to coalesce with a powerful opposition party they became avowed champions of Presbytery ; and from pecuniary motives, in their opposition to the Bishops, artfully laid the blame of every misfortune on Episcopacy. By thus making religion a mere stalking-horse to their own in- terests, they verified the general remark, that at the bottom of the purest boilings of patriotism there often lies a thick sediment of gross selfishness.""* Such are the admissions and representations of a Presbyterian writer. A well known anecdote illustrates the dangerous, lawless, and unprincipled character of the Scottish Nobility, in reference to this great measure of the revocation of the teinds, at the conference in Edinburgh. Sir Robert Douglas of Spott in Haddingtonshire, created Lord Belhaven in 1633, who had received favours both from James I. and Charles, was at that conference, and Burnet narrates the conduct of this personage, who, though blind, was as ferocious as any of the others, on the authority of Sir Archibald Primerose, father of the first Earl of Rosebery. When the Earl of Nithsdale, whose brains the worthies had resolved to knock out " after the good old Scottish manner," appeared with the commis- sion for the resumption of the church lands and tithes, it was agreed that he and his companions should be assassinated. One of them was the first Viscount Ayr, created Earl of Dumfries in 1633. Lord Belhaven, by which title he is better locally known, de- sired to sit near one of the Earl of Nithsdale's party, of whom, notwithstanding his blindness, he said he would make sure. He accordingly was placed next to the future Earl of Dumfries, whom he firmly grasped by the hand during the meeting. When the other asked him the meaning of this extraordinary conduct, Belhaven replied that since his blindness he was always so much in danger of falling that he was obliged to hold fast to any one who happen- ed to be near him. His other hand, however, rested on a dag- ger, with which he intended to stab his companion if any dis- order had occurred. It is already mentioned that the proprietors were allowed to buy up the teinds from the titulars at nine years' purchase. It was also arranged, that when paying the value of the teinds a certain • Life and Times of Alexander Henderson, p. 135, 136, 137. 442 THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT [1629. proportion of the price was to be withheld, to meet the obligation of each heritor to contribute a specific sum as stipend to the in- cumbent of the parish, and a small annuity to the King. This process for ever abolished the levying of tithes in kind in Scot- land, and as the King's Decrees-Arbitral Avere subsequently ratified by Parliament, such a proceeding was never attempted during the establishment of the Episcopal Church, or afterwards when it was supplanted by the Presbyterian system. Moreover, by the valuing and purchasing of the teinds, it was not intended that the incumbents were then to receive stipends to the full amount of those teinds in their parishes. The remainder was to form a cer- tain fund, as it were, from which their stipends were to be aug- mented at stated intervals of nineteen years, as sanctioned by Par- liament in 1633, until they and their successors received the whole. There is no evidence to shew that the Crown ever proceeded to act strictly on the King's Decrees-Arbitral. No estates were violently seized, and generally the provision was limited to render- ing the properties liable in feu-duties, which could well afford to be paid. Charles declared that he would retain those church lands held by Lords of Erection, royal burghs, and certain others, or take them at any future period convenient to the Crown on pay- ment of a fine, which was to be regulated according to the state of cultivation and produce. This right continued till the Union in 1707, when an act was passed declaring that the Crown had lost the right of redemption. The state of the kingdom before this benefit conferi'ed on the clergy, gentry, yeomanry, and peasantry, by Charles I., is set forth in a curious poem entitled " Scotland's Welcome to her Native Son and Sovereign Lord King Charles," written in 1633, after the Coronation at Holyroodhouse, by no less a personage than William Lithgow, who describes himself as " the Bonaventure of Europe, Asia, and Africa." Lithgow will be remembered by the anti- quarian reader as a well known traveller in the eai'lier part of the seventeenth century, though he attracted little notice till the publication of the curious narrative of his wanderings in 1614. In tliis poetical performance, which is of no great merit, he per- sonifies Scotland as relating the account of the King's Corona- tion, the meeting of the Parliament, and " the whole grievances and abuses of the commonwealth of this kingdom," as he expresses 1629.] THE ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. 443 himself on the title-page, " worthy to be by all the Nobles and gentry perused, and to be laid up in the hearts and chests of the Connnons, whose interest may best claim it, either in mean man- ner, from which their privileges and fortunes are drawn as from the loadstar of true direction." He makes Scotland thus descant on the teinds, and the intolerable conduct of the Nobihty and the titulars — " As for my tithes, which Nobles most recoil, It is another grievance to my soul. Should tithes belong to laics ? Should church rent Be,given to temp'ral lords ? By God's intent Tithes were for Levites, not for hawks or hounds, Nor no reward of sycophanting sounds. Tithes may be called God's rent, and they pertain Still to His priests His service to maintain. Nay, more than clerg}', tithes should, too, sustain My seminary schools with yearly grain." The loyal Mr Lithgow here maintains that tithes should support colleges, the decay of which he laments, build hospitals, schools, and bridges, and " sustain them too." Addressing the King, he makes Scotlatid say of the teinds — " But where they should do good they do most ill, Being abus'd by use and corrupt will. For, Sir, take heed, what grief is this, and cross To my poor Commons, and a yearly loss, That when their corns are shorn, stacked, dead and dry, They cannot get them teinded ? Nay, and why !' Some grudge of malice moves despite to wound The hopeful hairst, and rot then comes on ground. This is no rare thing ; on their stacks are seen Snow cover'd tops ; below them grass grown green, Wliich often breeds great famine and great scant, And plagues my Commons with a heart-broke want. For which they grieve in this long deformation. And hope to have from thee a reformation ; Which God may grant, and bless thy judgment too, For to consider what oppressors do. So, to reclaim them, deal them at thy pleasure For God, and godliness, and for thy treasure : V/hich being in thine hand, and then to farm Them back to Lords would bread a double harm. For worse and worse my Commons shall be crossed, And all thy good intentions therein lost. Then let my tithes be brought to money rent From thee, from land, and the poor tenant : 444 EPISCOPAL CHURCH AT ACCESSION OF CHARLES I. [1629. So may they shear, and lead, and stack their corn, At midnight, midday, afternoon, or mom ; Which shall be their advantage and my gain, Wlien barns and yards are filled with timely grain. As for this Valuation, who can tell What means thereby, or can my preachers well ? With one out of each parish lay the ground, What every land is worth, or may be found. No, no, its labour lost, and I pray God We be not scourged for it by his just rod. A lesser fault than this made Israel quake When David of his people count would make ; But value stock and brock, tithes, fruits, and all ; God must give increase, or the reck'ning fall." Lithgow in these passages may be considered as reflecting the sentiments of the farmers and peasantry, for there is reason to beUeve that he was a person of mean condition and poor circum- stances, though evidently his education surpassed that of his class at the period in which he lived. He seems to have been perfectly satisfied with the Episcopal Church as established, and after ex- horting the King to " install good godly men and sound in Pre- lates' functions," he thus compliments the clergy — " As for my clergy, I affirming vow The solid truth to God, and then to you. There are no people, nor no land so bless'd With godly preachers, and God's word profess'd With more sincerity, taught, shewn, and preach'd, Than in my kingdom ; there was never teach'd Profounder doctrine, more divine resounds In Christ's Reformed Church, than in my bounds, Which to perfect an universal mind, God grant his sacrament may passage find ; And scrupulous stops may be hewn down and made As plain as Christ himself has taught and said." 1629.] 445 CHAPTER IX. CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES — IRREGULAR ORDINATIONS OF PRESBY- TERIANS IN IRELAND — INTERNAL AFFAIRS OF- THE CHURCH — CORONATION OF CHARLES I. AT HOLYROODHOUSE — FOUNDATION OF THE BISHOPRIC OF EDINBURGH — THE FIRST BISHOP — HIS DEATH — DEATH OF BISHOP FORBES OF ABERDEEN. In August 1G28, John Leslie, of a branch of the ancient family of Balquhain in Aberdeenshire, was appointed Bishop of The Isles at the death of Bishop Thomas Knox, which Keith says occurred inlG26, though it is not hkely that the See would be so long vacant. Bishop Leslie was educated at Aberdeen, from which he proceed- ed to Oxford, where he remained some time. He had travelled much through France, Italy, Germany, and Spain, with the language of which countries he is stated to have been completely familiar, and Wood records that he was such a master of the Latin, as to elicit the observation of the learned in Spain — " Solm Lesleius Latinh loquitur.'''' When he returned to England he was complimented with the degree of Doctor of Divinity at Oxford. " He was from his tender years," says Wood, " conversant in Courts, where he learned that address and freedom which was peculiar to his edu- cation, and gave a particular air even to his preaching. Whence it was said of him, and another Bishop of his name, that no man preached more gracefully than the one, nor with more authority than the other.' These accomplishments introduced him to be treated even with familiarity by several princes and great men abroad, and he was particularly happy in the good esteem of his Majesty King Charles I., who admitted him to sit at his Council Table both in Scotland and Ireland, as his father King J ames had done for the first, in both which he was continued by King Charles 446 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1G29. II. His chief advancement in the Church of Scotland was the episcopal See of The Isles, where sitting several years not without trouble from the faction, he was translated to the See of Eaphoe in Ireland, anno 1633, and the same year was made one of his Majesty's Privy Council in that kingdom."* This Bishop was con- spicuous for his loyalty in Ireland, and encountered many hard- ships, yet he survived till 1671, when he died Bishop of Clogher, upwards of one hundred years of age. It is stated that in the 70th year of his age he married the Dean of Raphoe's daughter, by whom he had two sons and one daughter. One of his sons he lived to see a Dean, and the other was the celebrated Charles Leslie, Chancellor of Down before the Revolution, author of the " Snake in the Grass," and other learned controversial works.-f Bishop Leslie's brother, was Dr William Leslie, of King's College, in Old Aberdeen, one of the famous Aberdeen Doctors who opposed the Covenanters. A few of the Scottish Bishops of this period were translated to the northern Sees in the Irish Church, but the conduct of Bishop Andrew Knox, Bishop Leslie's predecessor in the See of The Isles and in Raphoe, was disreputable and scandalous. A number of the Presbyterian preachers resorted to the North of Ireland, among whom were Mr Robert Blair and Mr John Livingstone, both of whom were ordained in the most irregular manner, if ordination it can be called, the former by Bishop Robert Echlin, of Down and Connor, in 1623, and the other by Bishop Andrew Knox, of Ra- phoe, in 1630. Both of them sustained a prominent part in the rebellion of the Covenanters. Of the two, Blair was the more eminent, and his abihties were revived in several branches of his family, particularly in his grandson Robert Blair, minister of Athelstaneford in Haddingtonshire, the celebrated author of " The Grave," and his two great-grandsons, Dr Hugh Blair, author of the celebrated Sermons, and Lectures on Rhetoric, and the Right Honourable Robert Blair, Lord President of the Court of Session. The " worthy famous Mr John Livingstone," as he was termed bv the Presbyterian dames with whom he associated, was an en- thusiast of the most extravagant pretensions, who contrived by his peculiar preaching, aided by the casualty of his descent as the * Wood's Athens Oxoniensis, edited by Dr Bliss, vol. iv. col. 846. t Ihid. col. 847, 848. 1629.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 447 greai-grandson of Alexander fifth Lord Livingstone, ancestor of the Earls of Linlithgow and Oallender, to obtain considerable countenance frona various persons of rank and influence. Living- stone's " ordination," after he had been an itinerating preacher in Scotland, and one of the prominent leaders of the extraordi- nary " revival" at the Kirk of Shotts in June 1630, resembles that of Blair, and the following is his own account, with Bishop Mant's very excellent and judicious observations. It is to be observed that Livingstone, " in consequence of his opposition to Prelacy, was silenced by Spottiswoode, Archbishop of St Andrews, in 1627, but still continued to preach in Scotland occasionally and by stealth, his settlement in any parish being constantly opposed by the Bishops ;" but he had an opening in Ireland, and his mode of procuring " a free entry into the ministry" is described by himself. The Viscount Claneboy here mentioned was the son of a Scottish Presbyterian minister named Hamilton so created in 1622, and advanced to the dignity of Earl Clanbrassil in 1647 — a Peerage extinct in that family in 1675. " About August 1675," says Livingstone, " I got letters from the Viscount Clanneboy to come to Ireland, in reference to a call to Killinchy, whether I went, and got an unanimous call from the parish. And because it was needful I should be ordained to the ministry, and the Bishop of Down, in whose Diocese Killinchy was, being a cori-upt humorous ' [or, for various editions read differently, timorous'] man, would require some engagement, there- fore my Lord Clanneboy sent some with me, and wrote to Mr Andrew Knox, Bishop of Raphoe, who, when I came, and had de- livered the letters from my Lord Clanneboy, and from the Earl of Wigton, and some others, that I had for that purpose brought out of Scotland, told me he knew my errand ; that I came to him because I had scruples against Episcopacy and ceremonies, ac- cording as Mr Josias Welsh and some others had done before : and that he thought his old age was prolonged for little other purpose but to do such offices ; that if I scrupled to call him my Lord, he cared not much for it ; all he would desire of me, be- cause they got there but few sermons, was that I would preach at RamuUen the first Sabbath ; and that he would send for Mr William Cunningham and two or three other neighbouring minis- ters, who after sermon should give me imposition of hands. But 450 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1630. than the reception of the Five Articles of Perth, on which assur- ance they were ratified by the ParHament ; second, because the Church was not consulted about the intended alterations ; third, the reluctance of the people to observe " geniculation " at the Communion ; fourth, the unpopularity of the Bishops ; and fifth, that as " Popery is increased in the land," if any more changes were introduced the " people will be made susceptible of any reli- gion, and turn atheists in gross." It is not known whether the King ever saw this epistle. In reference to the proposed changes Wodrow says — " This I take to be the first motion for the English Liturgy in King Charles' reign." Maxwell returned to the Court, and held several interviews with Laud, who strongly advised the Scottish Church, if a Liturgy was introduced at all, to adopt that of the Church of England ; but this prudent advice was over- ruled, and the old objection about national jealousy, and that the people would prefer a Liturgy of their own, was advanced. Who is now afraid of the English Liturgy in Scotland ? How many thousands of it, of all forms and editions, are sold annually through- out the country even to Presbyterians ! In April 1630 the Diocesan Synod of Fife held at St Andrews unanimously requested Archbishop Spottiswoode, their " ordinar," to represent to the King the dangers likely to arise to the Church on account of the mode in which the tithes were then in process of valuation, by attempting to evade the Submissions and the King's Decrees-Arbitral. In the Diocesan Synod at St Andrews on the 5th of October that year the clergy were ordered to intimate in their several parishes, that all householders of every rank must present themselves and their families for examination before the administration of the Communion, otherwise they would not be permitted to approach the holy table. It was also enjoined that " the brethren be careful in their catechizing, and that they labour to expone to their people once in the year the Lord's Prayer, the Belief, and the Ten Commandments." On the 20th July a Convention of the Nobility, Bishops, barons, and commissioners of the counties and burghs, was held at Holy- roodhouse. The Archbishop of St Andrews, and the Bishops of Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Moray, Galloway, Brechin, Dunblane, Caith- ness, Argyle, and The Isles, were present. After producing the King's warrant for summoning this Convention of the Estates im.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 451 by the Lord Chancellor Hay, the royal letter was read, in which Charles intimated that he had deferred his visit till the spring of 1G31. Four short articles were sent by the King to the Conven- tion, referring to the speedy and exact valuation of the tithes, the employment of the people, a revisal of the laws to be sub- mitted to the Parliament, and a taxation to meet the expenses of the royal visit and to defray the debts contracted for the pur- chase of heritable offices. The Convention of Estates took the taxation first into consideration, and passed two acts authorising its collection. On the 29th of July the Convention ratified and approved the " four decreets given and pronounced by the King's Majesty upon the general Submissions made by the Prelates, Lords of Erection, Titulars, Heritors, Burghs, and others." The names of the Archbishop of St Andrews and the Bishop of Dunblane are prominent at various meetings of the Privy Council and Officers of State at Holyroodhouse and Perth in 1631. The business then transacted was chiefly connected with the fisheries on the coasts and in the lakes. The discipline of the Church was also duly enforced. In the Diocesan Synod of Fife held on the 19th of April 1631 — " It was found that Mr John Lindsay, minister at the kirk of Aberlemno, has been long absent from the service of the cure at his kirk, and his flock destitute of the benefit of his ministry. He was gravely rebuked in the face of the Synod, and admonished to attend his charge more faithfully, with certifi- cation if he shall be found to be fom- Sabbath days absent from his kirk in the whole year without lawful and necessary excuse, he shall be deprived from his ministry ipso facto. It is ordained by my Lord Archbishop and Brethren assembled, with one voice, that no ministers shall upon any occasion go into England with- out liberty asked and obtained from my Lord Archbishop and the brethren of the Presbytery where they reside, under the highest pains that may follow." The reasons for this peculiar restriction, though obvious, are not assigned. In the Diocesan Synod of Fife held on the 2d of October 1632, the metrical version of the Psalms by King James, zealously urged by King Charles to be generally used in Divine service, was " by my Lord Archbishop remembered and recommended to the Synod, and some [copies] of them delivered to certain brethren of the Presbyteries to be perused by them, and they ordained to report 452 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1632. their judgment thereanent against the next Synod."* But the King's metrical version was not favourably received by the clergy, and there is no evidence that it was ever used in the parish churches. Oalderwood, who had little respect for the royal author, criticised the work with great severity, and wrote " Reasons against the pubHc use of this new metaphrase of the Psalmes," maintaining that the old version by Sternhold and Hopkins "should be sung in the kirks of Scotland as they have been since 1564, and no ways suppressed, for any thing seen or heard yet-^-f- Toward the end of 1632, the Church experienced a severe loss by the illness of Bishop Forbes of Aberdeen and the death of Archbishop Law of Glasgow. A contemporary chronicler records the following affecting notice respecting the great and good Bishop Forbes : — " Patrick, Bishop of Aberdeen, sitting in his own chair in the Old Town [Old Aberdeen], was suddenly stricken in an apoplexy, and his right side clean taken away, and was forced to learn to subscribe with his left hand. He was carried in men's arms, sometimes to Provincial Assemblies [Diocesan Synods], and sometimes to sermons, and continued so till the 28th of March 1635, that he departed this life.| The death of Archbishop Law is briefly recorded by Sir James Balfour, who knew him intimately : — " In November this year, 1632, James Law, Archbishop of Glasgow, departed this life, and was interred in St Mungo's church [the Cathedral] there, the 8th of this same month." This Prelate, as already mentioned, ' The Psalms of King David, translated by King James, assisted, it is said, by Sir William Alexander of Menstrie, the first Viscount and Earl of Stirling, were originally printed in 1631, with the following privilege : — " Charles E. — Having caused this Translation of the Psalms, whereof our late dear Father was author, to be perused, and it being found to be exactly and truly done, we do hereby authorize the same to be imprinted, according to the patent granted thereupon, and do allow them to be sung in all the churches of our dominions, recommending them to all our good subjects for that effect." t Selections from the Minutes of the Synod of Fife, printed for the Abbotsford Club, p. 113, 114. — Bannatyne Miscellany, vol. i. p. 227. In the Diocesan Synod held at St Andrews 30th April 1633—" Doctor Alexander Gladstaues, Dr John Mitchelson, Mr Alexander Henderson, Mr Sylvester Lambie, and Mr Robert Murray, were apoyntit to concurr and convene with the rest of the commissioners nominate furth of other Synods, to give their sound judgment and opinion anent the new translated Buik of the Psalmes." — Minutes of the Synod of Fife, p. 114. \ Spalding's History of Troubles in Scotland and England from 1625 to 1645, printed for the Bannatyne Club, 2 vols. 4to. 1628, vol. i. p. 14. 1G33.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 453 was translated from Orkney to Glasgow in 1615. Bishop Keith says that Archbishop Law " was esteemed a man of good learn- ing, and had a grave and venerable aspect ; he left behind him a Commentary upon several places of Scripture which remains still in manuscript, and gives a good specimen of his knowledge both in the Fathers and the history of the Church. The Archbishop completed the lead roof of the Cathedral of Glasgow. He was twice married — first to a daughter of Dundas of Newliston in the parish of Kirkliston, county of Linlithgow, where he had been minister ; and to Marion, second daughter of J ohn Boyle of Kelburn in Ayrshire, ancestor of the Earls of Glasgow. The Archbishop left an estate in Fife to a son. He was descended from an ancient and respectable family in that county, a branch of whom gave birth to the celebrated financial adventurer, John Law of Laurieston near Edinburgh. Dr Arthur Johnston, Physi- cian to Charles I., one of his eminent contemporaries, commends him in some elegant Latin verses. Archbishop Law was succeeded in the See of Glasgow, in April ] G33, by Bishop Patrick Lindsay of Ross, the relative of Rachel, daughter of Bishop David Lind- say, his immediate predecessor in that See, and wife of Arch- bishop Spottiswoode. Bishop Lindsay's successor in Ross was Maxwell, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, a man of great learn- ing and abilities. The great event of 1G33 was the visit of Charles I. to Scotland, and his coronation in the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood at Edinburgh. A minute account of the whole of this grand pageant is given by Sir James Balfour, who was Lord Lyon King-at-Arms. The King, accompanied by Laud, then Bishop of London and Dean of the Chapel- Royal, Dr White, Bishop of Ely, then his Majesty's Almoner, and a number of the English Nobility and gentlemen, reached Ber- wick-upon-Tweed on the 8th of June, where he remained till the 12th, when he lodged one night in Dunglass Castle. On the following night he was entertained at Seaton by the Earl of Winton, from which he proceeded to the castle of Dalkeith, at that time the scat of the Earl of Morton. On Saturday the 1 5th the King made his public entry into Edinburgh on horseback amid the greatest pomp and magnificence, and reached the Palace of Holyrood by the same route through the city which his father traversed, after having been complimented by seven speeches during his progress. On the fol- 454 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1633. lowing day, which was Sunday, he attended Divine service in the Chapel- Royal, at which Bishop Bellenden of Dunblane, his chap- lain, officiated. On Monday the 17th the King rode to the castle of Edinburgh, where he lodged during the night, and on the following day was the coronation. A splendid procession of the Nobility, Officers of State, and other public functionaries, left the castle on the fore- noon for Holyroodhouse. The Chapel-Royal was fitted up in a manner suitable for the imposing ceremonial which was to be cele- brated within its walls. A contemporary alleges that there was a " four neuked taffel in manner of an altar within the kirk,"" on which were two clasped books, called Blind Books, two " chande- liers" with wax candles which were not lighted, an empty bason, and towards the wall rich tapestry, on which was a crucifix curiously wrought ; but Sir James Balfour, who superintended all the ar- rangements, expressly states that the communion-table was " de- cently decked." On the north side of the communion-table was the pulpit, and in front were kneeling cushions for the King. On the west side of the pulpit were two large seats for the Archbishop of St Andrews and the Bishops engaged in the ceremonial. A small table was placed near the south side of the communion-table for the crown, sceptre, sword of state, and the great seal of the kingdom. The King was received at the west or grand entrance of the church by Archbishop Spottiswoode and several Bishops, and after kneeling devotionally he was conducted to a chair placed at the west pillar of the side aisle, where Mr James Hannay, the preacher of the Chapel-Royal, addressed him in a short speech. The King then rose, and proceeded through the church to a plat- form, on which was the chair of state, the choir chanting the anthem — " Behold, O Lord our Protector, and look upon the face of thine anointed." Sir James Balfour, as Lord Lyon, then de- livered a golden viol with the oil to Archbishop Spottiswoode, who placed it on the communion-table, and the King removed from the platform to the chair near the pulpit. Bishop Lindsay of Brechin, whom Spalding designates a " prime scholar," preached the sermon from 1 Kings i. 39, after which the King returned to the platform, and occupied the chair of state. The ceremony of the coronation now commenced, and was performed with great 1633.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 455 dignity by Archbishop Spottiswoode, assisted by Bishop Bellenden of Dunblane, Bishop Alexander Lindsay of Dunkeld, Bishop David Lindsay of Brechin, Bishop Guthrie of Moray, and Bishop Max- well, elect of Ross, arrayed in their episcopal robes, or, as Spalding describes it, " with white rochets and white sleeves, and loops of gold, having blue silk to their foot." Bishop Guthrie acted as Lord Almoner, and scattered money among the people. While the 80th Psalm was sung by the choir the Archbishop went to the communion-table, and at the conclusion of the anthem the King approached the table to present his oblation, supported by Bishop Bellenden as Dean of the Chapel-Royal, and by Bishop Guthrie. Archbishop Spottiswoode received the oblation in a cup of gold, after which the King knelt, and the Primate said a prayer. He then sat down in his chair, and the Archbishop advancing to- ward him, asked if he was willing to take the oath appointed at the coronation of Kings. After the usual questions about faith- fully administering the laws of the kingdom, the promoting of true religion, the maintenance of the privileges, rights, and rents of the crown of Scotland inviolate, and the protection of the Church, the hymn Veni Creator was sung, after which the King knelt, and the Archbishop again prayed. The Litany was then said by the Bishops of Moray and Ross, and the Primate at its conclusion began that part of the Communion Office, saying aloud — " Lift up your hearts, and give thanks unto the Lord." The Archbishop then proceeded with the coronation, which took place about two o'clock, anointing the King on the head, and on the palm of the hands, and other parts of his body. After the preliminary cere- monies with the oil, Archbishop Spottiswoode took the crown in his hands, and with a prayer placed it on the King's head. The usual homage was then rendered by the Nobility, and the oath of allegiance administered. An anthem was now sung by the choir, after which the Lord Chamberlain loosed the sword from the King's side, who presented it to the Archbishop, by whom it was laid on the communion-table, where it was redeemed by the Earl of Erroll, who drew it from the scabbard, and carried it before the King. The Primate then placed the sceptre in the King's hand with an appropriate address and invocation. His Majesty kissed the Archbishop and the Bishops engaged in the ceremonial, and then ascended the platform, 456 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1633. where he was solemnly enthroned by the Primate. The Lord Chancellor now proclaimed at each corner of the platform the royal pardon under the Great Seal to all who required it, and the Archbishops and Bishops knelt and did homage, repeating the words after the Earl Marischal, and again kissing the King's left cheek. The whole was concluded by the administration of the Holy Communion, and the King entered the Palace with his whole train, having the crown on his head and the sceptre in his hand, amid the sound of trumpets, and the discharge of artillery from the castle. Such is a condensed account of the coronation of Charles I. in the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood by Archbishop Spottiswoode, and it is well observed that it " is the more entitled to our regard, as the solemnity happened at a period when the monarch was a free agent, and the aspect of public affairs was calm and unclouded, and not distracted by the dissensions and troubles that attended the subsequent coronation of Charles II., when that Prince was little better than a captive in the hands of a rebelhous and over- bearing faction ; on which account the former must now, strictly speaking, be regarded as the last regular and legitimate ceremonial of the kind in Scotland." Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow, and the other Bishops who were not required to assist at the corona- tion, wore black gowns. The Presbyterians advance a charge against Archbishop Laud, who took no active part in the ceremo- nial, that he thrust the Archbishop of Glasgow from the left side of the King, because he appeared without his episcopal robes, and substituted in his place. Maxwell Bishop-elect of Ross. It is to be observed, however, that what Laud's enemies term an " inde- cent violence " was merely a hint to Archbishop Lindsay, and that the incident originated in some mistake on the part of both. On Thursday the 20th, two days after the coronation, the Par- liament was held. Archbishop Spottiswoode preaching the opening sermon. The two Archbishops and all the Bishops were present, with the exception of Bishop Forbes of Aberdeen, who was unable to attend by sickness, and Bishop Abernethy of Caithness, whose proxy was the Bishop of Dunkeld. On the second and last day of the Parliament thirty-one acts were passed, and many commis- sions and ratifications in favour of certain of the Nobihty, Bishops, Colleges, and private individuals, were sanctioned. The taxation granted to the King of thirty shillings " upon the pound land, and 1633.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 457 the sixteenth penny of all annual rents," was affirmed, and granted for six years. The King's revocation and restitution of the church lands was also sanctioned, and an act, the third in order, was passed, though not without some difficulty, regulating the ecclesi- astical dress. Those two acts particularly inflamed the Presby- terian party. On Sunday the 23d of June the King went to St Giles' church, and heard a sermon by Bishop Guthrie, who preached in his epis- copal habit, which gave much offence to several then present. Two days afterwards the King attended Divine service in the Chapel-Royal, when Dr William Forbes preached from St J ohn, xiv. 27. The Liturgy of the Church of England was read on that occasion. Bishop Bellenden of Dunblane appeared in his episcopal dress, but the other Bishops in attendance wore black gowns. On the 28th the acts of Parliament were ratified. On Sunday the 30th the King attended divine service in the Chapel-Royal, when Archbishop Laud preached, " which scarce any Englishman," says Clarendon, " had done before him." He discoursed chiefly on the advantages of conformity, and reverence for the institutions of the Church. Laud was heard throughout by a crowded audience with the greatest attention and respect, although the Presbyterians assert that the congregation consisted chiefly of courtiers. " Many were then and still are of opinion," says Clarendon, " that if the King had then proposed the Liturgy of the Church of England to have been received and practised by that nation, it would have been submitted to without opposition; but upon mature considera- tion the King concluded that it was not a good season to promote that business." Charles, before his return to England, undertook a progress to various towns accompanied partly by Laud, who visited Arch- bishop Spottiswoode at St Andrews and Bishop licllcnden at Dun- blane. On the 16th of July the King arrived at Berwick on his journey southward. Before his departure he appointed a commit- tee of the Bishops to prepare a Liturgy, and to correspond on the subject with Laud, who, having no particular cause to hasten home, did not return from Scotland to his palace of Fulham until the 26th of July. The death of Archbishop Abbot occurred on the 4th of August, and Laud was translated to the Primacy of Canterbury, having secured the appointment of his old friend and 456 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1633. where he was solemnly enthroned by the Primate. The Lord Chancellor now proclaimed at each corner of the platform the royal pardon under the Great Seal to all who required it, and the Archbishops and Bishops knelt and did homage, repeating the words after the Earl Marischal, and again kissing the King's left cheek. The whole was concluded by the administration of the Holy Coranumion, and the King entered the Palace with his whole train, having the crown on his head and the sceptre in his hand, amid the sound of trumpets, and the discharge of artillery from the castle. Such is a condensed account of the coronation of Charles I. in the Chapel-Eoyal of Holyrood by Archbishop Spottiswoode, and it is well observed that it " is the more entitled to our regard, as the solemnity happened at a period when the monarch was a free agent, and the aspect of public affairs was calm and unclouded, and not disti-acted by the dissensions and troubles that attended the subsequent coronation of Charles II., when that Prince was little better than a captive in the hands of a rebelhous and over- bearing faction ; on which account the former must now, strictly speaking, be regarded as the last regular and legitimate ceremonial of the kind in Scotland." Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow, and the other Bishops who were not required to assist at the corona- tion, wore black gowns. The Presbyterians advance a charge against Archbishop Laud, who took no active part in the ceremo- nial, that he thrust the Archbishop of Glasgow from the left side of the King, because he appeared without his episcopal robes, and substituted in his place. Maxwell Bishop-elect of Ross. It is to be observed, however, that what Laud's enemies term an " inde- cent violence was merely a hint to Archbishop Lindsay, and that the incident originated in some mistake on the part of both. On Thursday the 20th, two days after the coronation, the Par- liament was held, Archbishop Spottiswoode preaching the opening sermon. The two Archbishops and all the Bishops were present, with the exception of Bishop Forbes of Aberdeen, who was unable to attend by sickness, and Bishop Abernethy of Caithness, whose proxy was the Bishop of Dunkeld. On the second and last day of the Parliament thirty-one acts were passed, and many commis- sions and ratifications in favour of certain of the Nobility, Bishops, Colleges, and private individuals, were sanctioned. The taxation granted to the King of thirty shillings " upon the pound land, and 1633.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 457 the sixteenth penny of all annual rents," was affirmed, and granted for six years. The King's revocation and restitution of the church lands was also sanctioned, and an act, the third in order, was passed, though not without some difficulty, regulating the ecclesi- astical dress. Those two acts particularly inflamed the Presby- terian party. On Sunday the 23d of June the King went to St Giles' church, and heard a sermon by Bishop Guthrie, who preached in his epis- copal habit, which gave much offence to several then present. Two days afterwards the King attended Divine service in the Chapel-Koyal, when Dr William Forbes preached from St John, xiv. 27. The Liturgy of the Church of England was read on that occasion. Bishop Bellenden of Dunblane appeared in his episcopal dress, but the other Bishops in attendance wore black gowns. On the 28th the acts of Parliament were ratified. On Sunday the 30th the King attended divine service in the Chapel-Koyal, when Archbishop Laud preached, " which scarce any Englishman," says Clarendon, " had done before him." He discoursed chiefly on the advantages of conformity, and reverence for the institutions of the Church. Laud was heard throughout by a crowded audience with the greatest attention and respect, although the Presbyterians assert that the congregation consisted chiefly of courtiers. " Many were then and still are of opinion," says Clarendon, " that if the King had then proposed the Liturgy of the Church of England to have been received and practised by that nation, it would have been submitted to without opposition ; but upon mature considera- tion the King concluded that it was not a good season to promote that business." Charles, before his return to England, undertook a progress to various towns accompanied partly by Laud, who visited Arch- bishop Spottiswoode at St Andrews and Bishop Bellenden at Dun- blane. On the 16th of July the King arrived at Berwick on his journey southward. Before his departure he appointed a commit- tee of the Bishops to prepare a Liturgy, and to correspond on the subject with Laud, who, having no particular cause to hasten home, did not return from Scotland to his palace of Fulham until the 26th of July. The death of Archbishop Abbot occurred on the 4th of August, and Laud was translated to the Primacy of Canterbury, having secured the appointment of his old friend and 458 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1633. fellow student, Dr William Juxon, to succeed him in the Diocese of London. One of the results of the King's visit to Scotland was the found- ation or erection of the Bishopric of Edinburgh, the charter of which is dated at Whitehall, 29th September 1633. It is already stated that the Archiepiscopal Diocese of St Andrews was most extensive. Clarendon observes — " Edinburgh, though the metro- polis of the kingdom, and the chief seat of the King's own resi- dence, and the place where the Council of State and the Courts of Justice still remained, was but a borough town in the Diocese of the Archbishop of St Andrews, and governed in all church affairs by the preachers of the town, who, being chosen by the citizens from the time of Knox, had been the most turbulent and seditious ministers that could be found in the kingdom."" Before the erec- tion of the See of Edinburgh, the ecclesiastical affairs of the dis- tricts contained in the Diocese of St Andrews south of the Forth were administered by an Archdeacon appointed by the Arch- bishops, and eight Deans belonged to the Diocese, being only one less than in the very extensive Diocese of Glasgow. The new Diocese included Clackmannanshire on the north side of the Forth, the counties from the town of Stirhng to the Tweed, bounded by the Forth, the Frith of Forth, and the German Ocean on the one side, and was bounded by the Bishopric of Galloway and Diocese of Glasgow on the other. The King purchased part of the estates which had been the patrimony of the ancient Priory of St Andrews from the Duke of Lennox, to secure a suitable revenue for the new Bishop, and that nobleman disposed of the property at a moderate sum to meet the King's wishes. The church of St Giles, the original parish church of the city, which has been long subdi- vided into various places of worship both in Episcopal and Pres- byterian times, and which was completely repaired and the outer walls rebuilt in 1830 and 1831, was constituted the cathedral. This large Gothic edifice, the erection of different times, though no part of its interior is apparently more ancient than the reign of James IV., is said to occupy the site of a church founded before A.D. 854, which was subsequently under the jurisdiction of the Bishops of Lindisferne or Holy Island. The Bishops of Edinburgh, by the King's charter of erection, were to have precedence after the two Archbishops, and next in 1633.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 459 order were the Bishops of Galloway. The Chapter was arranged to consist of a Dean and twelve Prebendaries. The principal minister of St Giles' was to be the Dean. In the charter the patrimony of the Bishopric is carefully enumerated, and a proper maintenance for the Bishop, Dean, and Prebendaries was secured from the tcinds, feus, and superiorities of various lands specified. This the King did, says Clarendon, " hoping the better to prepare the people of the place, who were most numerous and richest of the kingdom, to have a due reverence to order and government, and at least to discountenance, if not to suppress, the factious sprout of Presbytery which had so long ruled there." The first Bishop of Edinburgh was Dr William Forbes of Aberdeen — " a very eminent scholar," says Clarendon, " of a good family in the kingdom, who had been educated in the Uni- versity of Cambridge." In the short biographical notice of him in- serted by Bishop Keith it is stated that Dr Forbes was the son of Thomas Forbes of the family of Corsindae, who married a sister of James Cargill, a physician of great eminence in Aberdeen, where the Bishop was educated before he went to Cambridge. In his youth he travelled through Germany and Holland, and after an absence of five years he returned to Scotland, and became successively minister of the parishes of Alford and Monymusk in the county of Aberdeen. He was removed to be one of the minis- ters of Aberdeen, and Principal of Marischal College, and thence he was translated to be one of the ministers of Edinburgh. The reputation of Dr Forbes for theological learning soon attracted the notice of Charles during his visit to Scotland, who is said to have stated that he had " found a man who deserved to have a See erected for him." The patent of Dr Forbes to the Bishopric of Edinburgh was dated the 26th of January 1634, after he had been twenty years in holy orders, and he was immediately conse- crated ; but he died on the 1st of April following, universally regretted by all who knew him. Spalding, however, states that Bishop Forbes died on the 12th of April. " About this time " [1634], says that local contemporary, " Dr William Forbes, one of the ministers at Aberdeen, was translated therefrom to the town of Edinburgh, where, in February thereafter, he was with great solemnity consecrated Bishop of Edinburgh, and shortly thereafter transported his wife and children, goods and gear, from Aberdeen 460 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1033. to the said burgh. This man was the first that ever was made Bishop of Edinburgh, and continued short while ; for upon the 12th day of April in the said year 1G34, he departed this life, after taking of some physic, sitting in his own chair, suddenly — a matchless man of learning, languages, utterance, and delivery, a peerless preacher, of a grave and godly conversation, being about the age of forty-four years,"* Bishop Burnet, in the Preface to his " Life of Bishop Bedell," describes the first Bishop of Edinburgh, who was one of that illustrious and learned body of ecclesiastics popularly known as the " Doctors of Aberdeen." " One of the Doctors of Aber- deen," observes Burnet, " bred in his [Bishop Patrick Forbes"'] time, and of his name, William Forbes, was promoted by the late King while he was in Scotland in the year 1633, to the Bishopric of Edinburgh which was then founded by him, so that that glorious King said on good grounds that he had found out a Bishop who de- served that a See should be made for him. He was a grave and eminent divine. My father, -f who knew him long, and, being of counsel for him in his law matters, had occasion to know him well, has often told me that he never saw him but he thought his heart was in heaven, and he was never alone with him but he felt within himself a commentary on these words of the Apostle — ' Did not our hearts burn within us, while he yet talked with us, and opened to us the Scriptures V He preached with a zeal and vehemence that made him often forget all the measures of time ; two or three hours was no extraordinary thing for him ; those sermons wasted his strength so fast, and his ascetical course of life was such, that he supplied it so scantly that he died within a year after his promotion, so he only appeared there long enough to be known, but not long enough to do what might have been otherwise expected from so great a Prelate. The little remnant of his that is in print shews how learned he was. J I do not deny " Spalding's History of the Troubles in Scotland and England, printed for the Ban- natyne Club. t Robert Burnet of Crimond, a Judge in the Scottish Supreme Court hy the title of Lord Crimond, the brother-in-law of Sir Archibald Johnston of WarristoD, also designated Lord Warriston, the noted Covenanter, one of Cromwell's partizans. I Bishop Burnet here alludes to the treatise by Bishop Forbes, entitled — " Con- siderationes Modestae et Pacificae Controversiarum de Justificatione, Purgatorio, Invo- catione Sanctorum, Christi Mediatofe, Eucharistia."— " The book," says Pinkerton, 1633.] CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. 461 but his earnest desire of a general peace and union among all Christians has made him too favourable to many of the corrup- tions of the Church of Rome, but though a charity that is not well balanced may carry one to very indiscreet things, yet the principle from whence they flowed in him was so truly good, that the errors to which it carried him ought either to be excused, or at least to be very gently censured." A portrait of Bishop Forbes of Edinburgh is given in Pinker- ton's " Portraits of Illustrious Persons of Scotland" in his epis- copal habit, from a painting by the celebrated Jameson, known as the Scotish Vandyke. The Bishop was succeeded in the See of Edinburgh by Dr David Lindsay, who was translated from Brechin in September 1634. The successor of Bishop Lindsay in Brechin was Dr Walter Whiteford, son of Whiteford of Whiteford, who married Margaret, daughter of Sir James Somerville of Cam- nethan. Bishop Whiteford was consecrated in September 1634. He had previously held the incumbency of Monkland, and the Subdeanery of Glasgow, from which he was preferred to be rector of Moffat, retaining the Subdeanery in commendam. In 1620 he received the degree of Doctor of Divinity. Bishop Whiteford is mentioned in the Peerage of Scotland as having married Anne, fourth daughter of Sir John Carmichael of Carmichael in Lanark- shire, successively Warden of the Middle and West Marches on the English Border, who was murdered when on his way to hold a court at Lochmaben in 1600, by a person named Thomas Arm- strong and several accomplices, then returning from a match at foot-ball. This Sir John Carmichael was the grand-uncle of Sir James Carmichael of Hyndford, ancestor of the Earls of Hyndford. Bishop Patrick Forbes of Aberdeen died on Easter-Eve, 28th of March 1635, in the seventy-first year of his age, and was interred in the south aisle of the Cathedral of St Machar in Old Aberdeen. So much has been already said of this learned and illustrious ornament of the Scottish Episcopal Church, that any remarks are almost superfluous. Bishop Burnet truly describes him as " in " forms an octavo volume replete with theological learning, and its intentions are the more laudable, because very uncommon. But party, ever in extremes, is a stranger to reason, and to all Modest and Pacific Considerations. He who takes the middle open ground is only exposed to the fire of both armies." Iconographia Scoticae, London, 1797, vol. i. 462 CHANGES IN THE DIOCESES. [1633. all things an apostolical man." " When," says Burnet, " he heard reports of the weakness of any of his clergy, his custom was to go and lodge unknown near their church on the Saturday night, and next day, when the minister was got into the pulpit, he would come to the church, that so he might observe what his ordinary sermons were, and accordingly he admonished or encouraged them." After stating, in reference to the learning and loyalty of the Aberdeen Doctors, one of whom was his son John Forbes of Corse, Professor of Divinity in King's College, Aberdeen, and that " the true source of that advantage they had," in their con- troversy with the Covenanters, " is justly due" to the memory of Bishop Forbes, Burnet says — " He had Synods twice a year of his clergy, and before they went upon their other business he always began with a short discourse, excusing his own infirmities, and charging them that if they knew or observed any thing amiss in him, they would use all freedom with him, and either come and warn him in secret of secret errors, or if they were public, that they would speak of them there in public ; and upon that he with- drew to leave them to the freedom of speech. This condescension of his was never abused but by one petulant man, to whom all others were very severe for his insolence ; only the Bishop bore it gently, and as became him."* His character is amply delineated in the " Funeral Sermons, Orations, and Epitaphs, on the Right Reverend Patrick Forbes, Bishop of Aberdeen," published in 1635. Bishop Forbes was succeeded in the See of Aberdeen by Bishop Bellenden, translated from Dunblane, to which Dr James Wedder- burn was appointed in February 1636. Bishop Wedderburn was a native of Dundee, and was educated at Oxford, but if Hey- lin''s statement in his Life of Archbishop Laud is correct, part- ly at Cambridge. He obtained a prebendal stall in Wells Cathedral in 1631, and was afterwards Professor of Divinity in the University of St Andrews. Such were the changes in the episcopal succession previous to the memorable rebellion in 1638. " Preface to the Life of Bishop Bedell. 1G34.1 463 CHAPTER X. DISCONTENT IN SCOTLAND — PLOTS OF THE ENGLISH PURITANS AND SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIANS — TRIAL OP THE SECOND LORD BALMERINO — BISHOP SYDSERFP OF GALLOWAY — CALVINISM — THE COMPILATION OF THE SCOTTISH LITURGY — ARCHBISHOP laud's CORRESPONDENCE WITH THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS, The visit of Charles I. to Scotland, notwithstanding the enthusiasm with which he had been received, was followed by the most dis- astrous results. The Nobility remembered with rancorous hatred the revocation of the church lands : the ceremonial of the corona- tion had entailed upon them debts and expenceS which they were unable to defray wthout great exertions in a country where money was proverbially scarce ; and the taxation pressed hard upon their narrow resources. A general discontent pervaded the kingdom fostered by the Presbyterian party. The Court unfortunately at this crisis conferred appointments which were most imprudent. The Earl of Kinnoull, Lord Chancel- lor, died on 16th of December 1634, and Archbishop Spottiswoode was preferred to that high office on the 16th of January 1635. The Presbyterian writer Row observes respecting the appointment of Archbishop Spottiswoode as Lord Chancellor — " It was thought by many, he being an old and infirm man, and very unmeet for so great changes in Kirk and Commonwealth, that this was oddly done for a preparative that the Bishops of younger years might succeed him." It is more than probable that this supposed "prepara- tive" is fallacious and unfounded, but it proves that the seeds of discontent were widely sown among the Nobility and the people, and even those of the former who were attached to the Church were irritated at the preference awarded to the Bishops, believing 464 DISCONTENT IN SCOTLAND. [1634. that the object of the King in all proceedings connected with Scot- land was to aggrandize the clergy. Sir Robert Spottiswoode of New- abbey and Dunipace, the Primate's second son, who, it is already mentioned, successively held the office of an Extraordinary and Ordi- nary Lord of Session, was appointed Lord President of that Court after the death of Sir James Skene in 1633, and the Archbishop's acceptance of the office of Lord Chancellor, in connection with his son's position as head of the College of Justice, was the cause of much hostility. Even about the end of October 1634, it had been rumoured that the King, without any assignable cause, had sup- planted the Lord Chancellor Kinnoull, and the Earls of Mar, Winton, Haddington, Roxburgh, Lauderdale, Southesk, and others of inferior rank, as Lords of the Scottish Exchequer, and had no- minated in their stead the Archbishops of St Andrews and Glas- gow, the Bishops of Edinburgh and Ross, four judges of the Supreme Court, four of the Barons, the Earl of Morton, Lord High Treasurer, Sir John Hay of Barro, Lord Clerk Register, two of the Officers of State, and the lawyer who held the appointment of Depute-Advocate. It is also alleged that a new list of Privy Councillors, containing the names of nine of the Bishops, was transmitted, and that as many of the clergy as were noted for their zealous attachment to the Episcopal Church were constituted jus- tices of the peace. If these statements are correct, for the arrange- ments were never enforced, it cannot be denied that they were injudicious. The amount of talent which would have been brought into the public service was undoubtedly more than the King could supersede; for no man can deny the abilities of Archbishop Spottiswoode, Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow, Bishop Lindsay of Edinburgh, and Bishop Maxwell of Ross, exclusive of the four Noblemen and the Officers of State ; but the Nobility became alarm- ed at the probable loss of situations of dignity which had all along pertained to their rank, and granted to ministers of religion whom they considered intruders into secular pursuits. Bishop Burnet truly states that the Scottish Nobility at that period were as power- ful as they were ever known to have been in former times ; and Clarendon records that the honours conferred on the Bishops alienated many from the Church. " The promoting so many Bishops to be of the Privy Council," says the Noble historian, " and to sit in the Courts of Justice, [though there is no evidence 1634.] DISCONTENT IN SCOTLAND. 465 that any one of them was ever connected with the Supreme Court except Archbishop Spottiswoode as Lord Chancellor], seemed at first wonderfully to facilitate all that was in design, and to create an affection and reverence towards the Church, at least an appli- cation to and dependence upon the greatest Churchmen. So that there seemed to be not only a good preparation made with the people, but a general expectation, and even a desire, that they might have a Liturgy, and more decency observed in the Church ; and this temper was believed to be the more universal, because neither from any of the Nobility, nor from the clergy who were thought most averse to it, there appeared any sign of contra- diction, nor that licence of language against it as was natural to that nation ; but an entire acquiescence in all the Bishops thought fit to do, which was interpreted to proceed from a conversion to their judgment, at least to a submission to authority ; whereas, in truth, it appeared afterwards to be, from the observation they made of the temper and indiscretion of those Bishops in the great- est authority, that they were likely to have more advantages ad- ministered to them by their ill managery, than they could gain by any contrivance of their own." The various details of the general discontent against the King are more or less specified in all the histories of that memorable period. The Scottish Parliament of 1633 gave no satisfaction to the people. Sir James Balfour, who was the opponent of the Church, states that the " third and fourth acts of this Parliament so much displeased the subjects, that in effect they were the very ground stones of all the mischiefs that hath since followed. One whereof was anent his Majesty's royal prerogative and apparel of Kirkmen ; and the other, a ratification of all acts made in former Parliaments touching religion, and to bind the subjects the more to observe his Majesty's general revocation [of the teinds], was ratified, which was only intended to be an awe band [restraint] over men that would presume to attempt any thing against the two former acts. But it proved in the end a forcible rope to draw the affections of the subject from the Prince. To be short, of thirty one acts and statutes concluded in this Parliament, not three of them but were most hurtful to the liberty of the subject, and as it were as many partitions to separate the King from his people. This Parliament was led on by the Episcopal and Court 30 466 PLOTS OF THE ENGLISH PURITANS [1634. faction, which thereafter proved to be that stone which afterwards crushed them in pieces, and the fuel of that flame which set all Britain a fire not long thereafter. In this Parliament his Ma- jesty noted up the names of such as voted against the three former acts with his own hand, wherein he expi-essed now and then a great deal of spleen. This unseemly act of his Majesty bred a great heart-burning in many against his Majesty's proceed- ings and government." Though several of these statements are in- accurate, they are of some importance as the recorded sentiments of a man who lived at the time, and who, from his situation of Lord Lyon King-at-Arms, was concerned in most of the events of his day. Sir James Balfour also knew intimately most of the leaders of both parties, and although an avowed partizan, he un- doubtedly expresses the opinions which prevailed. But the Pres- byterian party were not idle in organizing an effectual opposition to the government of Charles L From the accession of King James to the English Crown they had maintained a correspondence with the Puritans. After the death of that monarch, they employ- ed a man named Berwick as their confidential agent in London, and a conspiracy was projected to assail the Church of England as soon as the war commenced against the Episcopal Church of Scotland. Various contemporary writers, especially Bishop Guth- rie, and even Bishop Burnet, explicitly state that the Presby- terians were encouraged to much of their subsequent violence and rebellion by the information they regularly procured from England ; and both Echard and Anthony Wood mention that the celebrated John Hampden annually visited Scotland to concert measures with his friends. This fact is also confirmed by Nalson, who tells us, that " the principal men of the English faction made frequent journeys into Scotland, and had many meetings and con- sultations how to carry on their combinations." The Presbyterian leaders were comparatively quiet during the King's visit to Scotland in 1633, but they were sedulously con- certing their plans. Sir James Balfour narrates that by act of Parliament in 1594, four of each of the Estates were to convene twenty days before the meeting of every Parliament, " to consider all articles and petitions which were to be given in, that such things only might be put in form, and presented to the Lords of the Articles in time of Parliament, as were reasonable and necessary, and that 1634.] AND SCOTTISH PRESBYTERIANS. 467 such as were impertinent and frivolous might be rejected ; but it was not determined who should make choice of the persons." It seems that this was not observed previous to the Parhament of 1633, and the only intimation was by a herald at the Cross of Edinburgh a month before the meeting, that all petitions were to be delivered to Sir John Hay, the Clerk Register — a " sworn enemy," says Sir James Balfour, " to religion and honesty," in other words a zealous opponent of the Presbyterians — and " a slave to the Bishops and Court, to be laid before such of the Privy Council and Estates as would be nominated to consider the petitions." Some of the Presbyterian preachers, suspecting they would not be heard in any other manner, appointed one of their " distressed brethren," a certain Mr Thomas Hog, to lodge their grievances with Sir John Hay, in the form of a memorial to be laid before the King and Estates of Parliament. Sir James Balfour has pre- served this document, which is entitled " Grievances and Petitions concerning the disordered estate of the Reformed Kirk within this Realm of Scotland, presented upon the 29th of May 1633 by me. Master Thomas Hogge, minister of the evangel, in my own name, and in name of others of the ministry likewise grieved, to Sir John Hay, Clerk of Register." The " grievances" set forth in Mr Thomas Hogg's " petitions" were the usual Presbyterian complaints against the Church. He and his friends demanded that no " ministers should be admitted to vote in Parliament without express warrant and direction from the Kirk" — that the said " ministers," as they termed the Bishops, ought to be subject to their seditious General Assemblies — and that the Five Articles of Perth should be rescinded. The other points set forth in the document, which is rather lengthy, are of little importance. The zealous Mr Hogg attended to present his " grievances," but no meeting of the Committee of the Estates was held, and his asso- ciates induced him to lay a supplication before the King, which he did at Dalkeith Castle on the 15th of June, the day of his Majes- ty's public entry into Edinburgh. Charles read the petition, but no farther notice was taken of the matter, and in the opinion of Sir James Balfour, the acts of the Parhament of 1633 " laid the foundation of an irreconcileable schism, and proved afterwards the ruin both of the King and the Bishops." The Marquis of Hamilton was intrusted by the King with the 468 LORD BALMERINO'S TRIAL. [1634. collection of the taxation granted by the Parliament. But another serious affair occurred in 1634 and 1635 which farther tended to widen the breach between the King and the Presbyterian party, and to enlist the sympathies of many of the people who cared little for the Presbyterian dogmas on the side of the latter. J ohn second Lord Balmerino was the only son by the first mar- riage of James the first Lord, who was tried, convicted, attainted, and condemned to be beheaded, in the reign of King James, as al- ready narrated. He was restored to the Peerage by letter under the Great Seal in August 1613, and after the accession of Charles became conspicuous by his opposition to the Government. His subsequent connection with the Covenanters, and friendship with Johnston of Warriston and other chief leaders of the Presbyteri- ans, sufficiently indicate his principles. In the Parliament of 1633 Lord Balmerino zealously denounced the act sanctioning the royal prerogative to regulate the dress of the clergy, and it is asserted that a majority voted against it, although Sir John Hay, whose duty it was as Clerk Register to collect the votes, asserted that it was carried in the affirmative. John fifth Earl of Rothes, who afterwards became an enthusiastic Covenanter, boldly stated in the House that the votes were erroneously reported, but the King peremptorily insisted that the Clerk Registers declaration must be held correct, unless Rothes should appear at the bar, and ac- cuse him of falsifying the records of Parliament. This, however, was a capital crime, and as the Earl was well aware that if he failed to prove it he was also liable to that punishment, he pru- dently withdrew his statement. The conduct of those noblemen excited the marked displeasure of the King ; but as they were still persuaded that the act, though passed, had been virtually rejected, and as they considered that the Parliament was useless if the Clerk Register was allowed to declare the votes as he pleased, more especially Sir John Hay who was indebted for all his preferment to Archbishop Spottiswoode, they resolved to adopt another course, which was undoubtedly legal and constitutional. They employed a gentleman named Haig, of the ancient family of Haig of Bemerside in Berwickshire, who had been solicitor to King James, to draw up a petition to King Charles, praying that this grievance might be redressed. Before presenting or even signing it, Rothes was desired to shew a copy 1GS4.] LORD BALMERINO'S TRIAL. 469 of it to the King, who, when informed of the scope of the docu- ment, so expressed himself that the design was rehnquished. It happened that Lord Balmerino preserved a copy of this peti- tion, which he had interlined in some places with his own hand, and shewed it, with the strictest injunction to secrecy, and a posi- tive order that he was not to transcribe it, to his legal adviser, a notary in Dundee named Dunmore. That individual, however, basely copied it, and gave it to Mr Peter Hay of Naughton, on the condition that he was not to exhibit it to any individual. But that was an age in which honour was little regarded, and Hay, who cherished a bitter dislike to his neighbour Lord Balmerino, car- ried it to Archbishop Spottiswoode. The Primate, who was either told or imagined that such an important document was circulating for signature, set off with it directly for London to lay it before the King, and the Archbishop's enemies accuse him of beginning his journey on a Sunday. Lord Balmerino was summoned on the 9th of June to appear before the Privy Council on the 11th. On the day of his citation his Lordship accidentally met Haig, who, after a conversation, considered it prudent to retire to Holland, from which he wrote a letter to Lord Balmerino, acknowledging that he was the author of the petition. But this was of no avail to his Lordship, who, after an examination before the Privy Council, was committed a close prisoner to Edinburgh Castle. He was tried on the 3d of December on the accusation of " art and part of the penning and setting down of a scandalous libel, and divulging and dispersing it among his Majesty's lieges which dangerous libel " depraved the laws, and misconstrued the proceedings of the King and the late Parliament ; so seditious that its thoughts infected the very air — a cockatrice which a good subject should have crushed in the egg."" To this inflated charge Lord Balmerino's counsel, three of whom were afterwards judges in the Supreme Court,* " Lord Balmerino's counsel were Mr Roger Mowat, Mr Alexander Pearson, Mr Eobert Macgill, and Mr John Nisbet, Advocates. Mr Alexander Pearson was appointed an Ordinary Lord of Session by the Estates of Parliament in March 1G50, and took Ms seat on the Bench by the title of Lord Southhall. He died in 1657, and his conduct or abihties had dissatisfied the EngHsh rulers of Scotland, for Lord Broghill, in a letter to Thurloe in November 1655, says of Lord Southhall—" We understand there are some things against him which possibly will soon invite to lay him aside." Mr Robert Maogill was appointed by the same Estates, and took his seat as Lord Foord in June 470 LORD BALMERINO'S TRIAL. [1634. replied that the interhneations, for which his Lordship was un- doubtedly responsible, were merely intended to mitigate the strong phraseology of the petition, and could not constitute a libel — that the said petition was only submitted to a confidential lawyer for his private opinion — that there was no precedent for a trial on such a charge — and that though it might have been illegal to conceal the petition if it was really seditious, its purport was ap- parently at least respectful. On the 20th of December the indict- ment was found what is called in Scottish law relevant, and re- mitted to an assize ; but the trial was delayed till the 20th of March 1635. Lord Balmerino was then placed at the bar, and in vain challenged eight of the jury. He succeeded with difficulty in set- ting aside the Earl of Dumfries, although it was proved that the said Earl had deliberately declared that, " if he were of his jury, though he [Balmerino] were as innocent as St Paul he would find him guilty."* The first Earl of Traquair, so created in 1633, and one of the ministers of State, was allowed to act as chancellor of the jury, notwithstanding his avowed hostility to Balmerino. When the jury were enclosed, Gordon of Buckie, who while a young man had been engaged with his chief the Earl of Huntly in the murder of the Earl of Moray in 1591-2, implored them with tears in his eyes not to shed blood by their verdict. Traquair replied that the jury had nothing to do with the punishment, but were merely judges of the act of concealment. Eight of the fifteen jury gave a verdict of guilty, and Lord Balmerino was sen- tenced to be beheaded when the King's pleasure was known. His Lordship's friends held numerous meetings, and so great was the excitement in his favour, that during the trial the people daily assembled in crowds on the streets in defiance of the efforts of the Magistrates. The condemnation of Lord Balmei-ino increas- ed their rage, and they planned the most desperate designs. It was resolved to break open the prison for his release, or, if that 1649. Mr aftei-wards Sir John Nisbet, who was Lord Balmerino's junior counsel, having been called to the Bar in 1633, was appointed Lord Advocate, and took his seat on the Bench as Lord Dirleton in 1664. He was forced to resign liis appointments in 1677, having incurred the resentment of Lord Haltoun, aftei-wards Earl of Lauderdale, brother of the powerful Duke of Lauderdale. • At that time a Scottish Peer was subject, like a commoner, to the cognizance of the Justiciary or Criminal Court and the verdict of a jury, but it was necessary that the majority should be of his own order. 1634.] LORD DALMERINO's TRIAL. 471 scheme was unsuccessful, to revenge his death on the judges, and on the eight jurymen by whom he was convicted. The Earl of Traquair, who was one of those designed to be murdered, hasten- ed to Court, and obtained a remission of the sentence. A i-espite was received, which was considered by the people as the forerunner of a pardon. The merit of procuring this respite is ascribed by the Presbyterian writer Row to Archbishop Laud's influence with the King, and by others to the royal clemency ; but we have un- doubted evidence that Balmerino was spared by the intercession of Laud, who had been the patron of Traquair, and who had been the instrument of raising him from the condition of a private gentleman to the rank of an Earl and the office of Lord High Treasurer. Balmerino was kept in confinement thirteen months, and he was then allowed to be merely a prisoner at large, as he was ordered to confine himself within certain bounds. A con- siderable time elapsed before he received a pardon. This prose- cution of Lord Balmerino was fatal to the King's interest in Scot- land, and tended still more to unite the Nobility against him.* In October 1634, the warrant of the King for re-establishing the Court of High Commission was received. It enumerated as members of the Court the two Archbishops, the twelve Bishops, a great many of the Nobility, Lord Lorne, afterwards a zealous Covenanter, better known as the eighth Earl and first Marquis of Argyll, and a numerous list of knights and baronets, clergy, and gentlemen. Seven of them, an Archbishop or Bishop being of the number, were empowered to call before them, at any time or place they chose to appoint, all who were avowed or suspected Roman Catholics or non-communicants, and others who were guilty of ecclesiastical or immoral offences. They were also en- joined to proceed against aJl who impugned the Five Acts ratified by the Perth General Assembly. It is curious to find the names of several who soon afterwards became active opponents of the Church in this document, and it cannot be denied, whatever opi- nion may be formed of the expediency of re-establishing the Court of High Commission at that time, that they were all equally responsible. In 1G34, died Bishop Lamb of Galloway, who had been trans- * The pleadings in this singular case, and a copy of the petition with the words in- terlined by Lord Balmerino, are inserted in the first volume of the " State Trials."' 472 BISHOP SYDSERFF OF GALLOWAY. [1634. lated from Brechin to that See in 1619. The successor of Bishop Lamb was Dr Sydserff, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, who is commonly said to have been translated from Brechin, to which he may have been probably nominated ; but his name does not occur in the succession of the Bishops of Brechin, and we have already seen that Dr Walter Whiteford was this year consecrated to that See, vacant by the translation of Bishop David Lindsay to Edin- burgh. The Bishopric of Galloway had long been noted for its religious animosities and fanatical opinions, and some of the most turbulent of the Presbyterian preachers having located themselves within its limits, Bishop Sydserff resolved to suppress their extravagances, and enforce the power vested in him by law. A gentleman named Gordon, of Earlston, thought proper violently to oppose the in- duction of a minister whom the people of the parish disliked, and he was in consequence cited before the Diocesan Commission Court. Gordon refused to appear, and he was fined, and ordered to remove to the town of Montrose. He was at the time superin- tending the estates of John Viscount Kenmure, a minor, who succeeded his father Sir John Gordon of Lochinvar, the first Viscount, in 1634, and who had appointed as his son's trustees his brother-in-law Lord Lome and the Earl of Morton. Lorne ex- erted himself to procure a remission of the banishment to Mon- trose, but ]3ishop Sydserff would listen to no representation in Gordon's favour. About the same time a Mr Robert Glendin- ning, minister of Kirkcudbright, was deprived, or probably sus- pended from the discharge of his functions, for refractory conduct, in refusing to allow a clergyman to officiate in his parish church under the authority of the Bishop. Mr Glendinning, who is de- scribed as then nearly eighty years of age, disregarded the Bishop's censure, and the magi strates of the town supported him in his contumacy by resorting to his serm.ons. The Bishop issued a warrant for his imprisonment, but his son, who was one of the magistrates, refused to put it in force. For this defiance of eccle- siastical authority he and the other magistrates were ordered to be confined in the Jail of Wigton. A certain Mr Wilham Dal- gleish, minister of the parish of Kirkmabreck, was also deposed for nonconformity.* Although these and similar instances chiefly • Nicholsou's History of Galloway, vol. ii. p. 41, 42, on the authority of a very un- fair and questionable writer named Aikman. 1635-G.] CALVINISM. 473 rest on the statements of Presbyterians, who carefully narrate them to their own advantage, and though now they appear harsh and oppressive, the circumstances of the times must be considered. The Episcopal Church was then the legal national Church, and those who refused to conform had no more right to the posses- sion of the parishes than the Episcopal Clergy now have to them under the Presbyterian Establishment, or the large party who seceded from it in 1843, and yet refused to acknowledge its con- stitution and discipline. In 1G35 and 1636 the compilation of the celebrated Scottish Liturgy or Service-Book of King Charles I., as it is called, was in progress, and as this, including the Book of Canons, was preg- nant with great and disastrous events, some introductory details are necessary. We have already seen that Presbyterianism was unknown in Scotland till 1560. Under the direction of Calvin that mode of discipline had been put into operation at Geneva, from which it was brought into Scotland by John Knox, though not in the same form or complexion as that afterwards given to it, and very different from what has been legally established in Scotland since the Eevohition of 1688. The doctrinal part of Presbyteri- anism, is known as Calvinism, from the name of its founder or propagator, and this has been long and controversially opposed to what is theologically called Arminianism. Calvinism appears to have been first so designated specifically at the Conference of Poissy in 1561, which Calvin was prevented from attending by his local duties and the state of his health ; but his correspondence with Beza, his deputy who was present, shews the intense interest he felt in the proceedings. A debate ensued on that occasion, respecting the orthodoxy of the Augsburg Con- fession, between the supporters of Luther and Calvin, and the followers of the latter from that time were known as Calvinists. The Scottish Reformers and their successors of the Melville and other trainings were all determined Calvinists, though we have seen that many of them were by no means satisfied with, or decided in their views of, the Presbyterian disciphne. They fluctuated in their opinions from time to time, and seem to have been guided by interest, expediency, and other casualties. But it is clear, and cannot be disputed, that the belief in the tenets of Calvinism, such as original sin, election, reprobation, absolute decrees, perseverance 474 CALVINISM. [1636. of the saints, irresistible grace, what is considered regeneration, the nature of the eucharist, and other points affected by or re- sulting therefrom, does not solely constitute any man a Presby- terian, for many eminent theologians of the Church of England have been Oalvinists. When that Church was first purified in the reign of Edward VI., and its unsettled state in the reign of his father corrected, it was to a considerable extent Calvinistic in doctrine, though apostolically episcopal in its constitution, and catholic in its observance of the ancient and primitive fasts and festivals. The rise of the Puritans in the reign of Elizabeth, and their increase under his successor, are facts well known. During the reign of James I. the English Puritans, in the excess of their zeal for Calvinism in all its forms and peculiarities, designated every one who was not of their sect, or who contended for the apos- tolical constitution, succession, rites, and ceremonies of the Church, an Arrainian. This was intended to excite the ignorant preju- dices of the common people against the Church of England, and those unscrupulous maligners soon extended their accusation by identifying what they called Arminianism with Popery. This mania spread into Scotland, and after the accession of Charles I. every one who was not a Presbyterian was stigmatized as an Arminian and a Papist. At the present time such an accusation would be received with the utmost indifference, for it is a matter of no consequence what the Presbyterians say of those who oppose their system ; but it had a different effect in the reign of Charles I. among an ignorant people such as the population of Scotland then were, few of whom could give any explanation of Arminianism, or knew anything of its doctrines. In all the writings of those men we find them labouring under the hallucination that confonnity to the Episcopal Church was a recognition of Arminianism and Popery, and this was more particularly the case after the promulgation of the Scottish Liturgy. Even Principal Baillie of Glasgow, one of the most sensible of them, who was himself admitted into orders by Archbishop Law of Glasgow, writes to one of his friends in 1638 : — " When they troubled us not with ceremonies the world knows we went with them (whereof we have no cause to repent), so far as our duty to G od or man could require ; but while they will have us against standing laws to devour Arminianism, and Popery, and all they please, shall we not bear them witness of 1636.] THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. 475 their opposition though we die for it, and preach the truth of God, wherein we have been brought up, against all who will gainsay V Archbishop- Laud was in England considered the great patron of this imaginary Arminianism and Popery, the falsehood of which the whole life and opinions of that martyred Primate abundantly testify. Laud was catholic in the proper not the Bomish meaning of that word, and his theology was derived not from the mere opinions and speculations of Arminians, but from the Scriptures, the Fathers, and the learned writers of the Church in all ages. He opposed the Puritans because he rightly believed them to be the inveterate enemies of the Church of England, and restless innovators who would destroy that great and illustrious fabric by annihilating the ecclesiastical authority with which the Bishops and clergy are invested, to preach, instruct, and administer the sacraments. Laud also opposed the Presbyterians on the same ground, and because they were self-elected teachers without canonical authority. To him, as a Catholic English Churchman, Puritanism under whatever form or pretensions, and Presbyterian- ism, were equally obnoxious, but he was no enemy to doctrinal Calvinism in itself, as his influence in the promotion of Usher to the primacy of the Irish Church, not to mention other Calvinists who obtained his patronage, sufficiently proves. Archbishop Laud was nevertheless accused as the great pro- moter of Arminianism and Popery, and we are gravely told by the Presbyterian writers that, after he took an interest in Scottish affairs, all those who were promoted to the Bishoprics were " rank Arminians."" Bishop Maxwell of Ross is particularly mentioned. This is one of those charges which would require more space to examine and refute than it is really worth. The matter will be best understood by examining Archbishop Laud's correspon- dence with the Scottish Church after 1G33, from which it appears that in all his letters he advised the Bishops to do nothing contrary to the law. A Scottish Liturgy had been long in contemplation, and we have seen that before Charles I. returned to England, in 1633, a Committee was appointed to prepare one for the revisal of cer- tain of the English Bishops. We have also seen that Archbishop Laud strongly advised the Scottish Bishops to adopt at once the 47C ARCHBISHOP laud's CORRESPONDENCE [163^. English Liturgy, and to trust to the effect of time for the removal of local prejudices, but his judicious advice was disregarded. On the 8th of October 1633, Charles had dispatched a letter to Bishop Bellenden as Dean of the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood, which Rush- worth alleges was written at the suggestion of Laud, for a " refor- mation in the Church of Scotland, beginning with the Chapel- Royal," and the orders it contained are " declared to be for a pat- tern of the intended reformation to all cathedrals, chapels, and parish churches, in Scotland." The King enjoined that the Dean of the Chapel-Royal and his successors should at all future coro- nations be assistant to the Archbishop of St Andrews — that the Book of the Form of the Coronation lately used was to be carefully preserved in a little box, and kept in possession of the Dean — that Divine service was to be performed twice every day according to the Liturgy of the Church of England, " till some course be taken for making one that may fit the custom and constitution of that Church" of Scotland — that the Holy Communion be received kneeling, and administered on the first Sunday of every month — that the Dean preach in his " whites," or surplice, on Sundays and other holidays observed by the Church, and be as seldom absent as possible except when visiting his Diocese — and that the Privy Council, Judges, and members of the College of Justice, communi- cate in the Chapel-Royal once every year, or be reported to the King by the Dean in case of refusal. This was followed by a let- ter to the Lords of Session dated at Greenwich 13th May 1634. It is a matter of no consequence whether or not Archbishop Laud was the adviser of the preceding injunctions. The Chapel- Royal belonged to the Crown as an appendage of the royal resi- dence of Holyroodhouse, and the King had an undoubted right to order Divine service to be performed in it according to the ritual of the Church of England, As to Archbishop Laud's own affairs, he maintained a considerable correspondence with the Bishops and some of the leading Scottish Nobility. In a letter to the Earl of Traquair, dated Lambeth, 14th March 1634, still preserved among the archives of Traquair House in Peeblesshire, the Ai'chbishop, after alluding to the trial of Lord Balmerino and other political topics, says — " I have nothing to do in these letters but to signify to you what is already done, save only to give you thanks for the care you have taken to fit the Bishop and choir of Edinburgh 1636.] WITH THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS. 477 with their choir and precincts to them, as also for your love to me ; and therefore, without creating any further trouble to you I leave you to the grace of God and Christ," Certain letters from Laud to Bishops Bellenden and Maxwell in 1634 and 1635 were made part of the charge against the Archbishop by the Scottish commissioners in December 1640, though it does not appear that they were ever produced in support of that charge. The letters to Bishop Bellenden chiefly relate to his preferment, he having apparently become tired of Dunblane. Bellenden was anxious to obtain the See of Edinburgh after the death of Bishop Forbes, and had applied to Archbishop Laud to use his interest with the King in his favour. Bellenden, however, had given offence to the Court, which the following letter from Laud sufficiently intimates, indorsed " anent the Liturgy and his sermon," and addressed " to the Right Reverend Father in God, my very good Lord and Bro- ther the Lord Bishop of Dunblane, at Edinburgh, these," dated Lambeth, ISIay 6, 1634. — " I am right sorry for the death of the Bishop of Edinburgh, the loss being very great both to the King and the Church. I acquainted his Majesty how needful it was to fill that place with an able successor, and when mention was made of divers men to succeed, I did, as you desire, shew his Majesty what your desires were, and what necessities lay upon you. After much consideration of the business his Majesty resolved to give the Bishopric of Edinburgh to my Lord of Brechin, and for your- self, he commanded me to write expressly to you, that he did not take it well that, contrary to his express command, you had omit- ted prayers in his Chapel-Royal according to the English Liturgy, with some other omissions there which pleased him not ; besides, his Majesty hath heard that there have been lately some differ- ences in Edinburgh about the sufferings of Christ, &c., and that your Lordship was some cause of them ; at least, such an occa- sion as might have bred much disturbance, if the late Bishop of Edinburgh's care and temper had not moderated them ; and this his Majesty is not well pleased with neither. And this hath been the cause, as I conceive, why his Majesty hath passed you over in this remove, and you shall do very well to apply yourself better both to his Majesty''s service and the well ordering of that Church, lest you give just occasion to the King to pass you by when any other remove falls. I am very sorry that I must write thus unto 478 ARCHBISHOP laud's CORRESPONDENCE [1636. you, but the only way of help lies in your own carriage ; and, therefore, if you will not be careful of that, I do not see what any friend can be able to do for you. Therefore, not doubting but you will take these things into serious consideration for your own good, I leave you to the grace of God, and rest your Lordship's loving friend and brother."* This rebuke to Bishop Bellenden elicited several letters to the King, and the contents of them will be readily understood by the fol- lowing to the Bishop from Archbishop Laud, dated Lambeth, July 1, 1634, indorsed " anent reading of the Liturgie and his sermon at Edinburgh." — " My haste at this time forces me to write very briefly ; and these are to let you know that I wrote nothing in my former letters but as the King was informed, and myself by him commanded. I have now read your Lordship's letters to his Ma- jesty, which hath in some part satisfied him, but not altogether. And for the present, his Majesty saith, that though the gentlemen of the Chapel- Royal did absent themselves for fear of arrests, hav- ing nought to pay, and this that might hinder the service in the Chapel in a solemn and a formal way of singing by them, yet his Majesty thinks you might have got a chaplain of your own to have read the English Liturgy, that so the work for the main part of it might have gone on ; and for the payment of those men, I think your Lordship knows that I have done all the good offices I can, but have it not in my power to mend all the difficulties of the time. Concerning the disturbance that was in Edinburgh, if any wi'ong was done your Lordship, that must be upon them who misreport- ed you to the King, whoever they were. And howsoever, the King took it not ill you advised the then Bishop of Edinburgh to appease the differences, for that was very worthily and deservedly done by you. But as far as I remember the charge laid upon you to the King was, that in your own sermon, which you preached about that time, you did rather side with one party than either repress or compose the difference, though I must needs confess to your Lordship that, by reason of the multitude of businesses which lie upon me, I cannot charge my memory with the particular, " Appendix of Original Letters and Papers to Letters and Journals of Robert Baillie, Principal of the University of Glasgow, 1637 to 1662, edited from the Author's MSB. by David Laing, Esq. Edinburgh, 1841, vol. i. p. 432 ; printed from the original in Wodrow MSS. folio, vol. Ixvi. No. 15. 1G3C.] WITH THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS. 479 You have done very well to acquaint their Lordships of Council and Session, &c., with his Majesty's resolution concerning the Communion in the Chapel-Royal, and I doubt not, if you continue to do that which his Majesty looks for in the course of your Church, and which is most just and fit to be done, but that you will easily recover his Majesty's favour, and find the good of it. So in haste I leave you to the grace of God, and rest your Lordship's loving friend and brother." This conciliatory letter was followed by another from Arch- bishop Laud, dated Croydon, October 4, 1634, but it is in such a very torn and mutilated state that the half of it at least is unin- telligible. The English Primate informs ]3ishop Bellenden — " I have a second time moved his Majesty concerning them that obey- ed or disobeyed his commands in receiving the Communion in the Chapel at Holyroodhouse, and you shall not fail to receive his Ma- jesty's answer by my Lord [Bishop Maxwell] of Eoss, so that I shall not need to be farther troublesome to you in that particular." The rest of the letter, so far as it is legible, refers to the payment of the gentlemen of the Chapel-Royal who had been defrauded of their stipends by their own employed agent, one Bancroft, and who, says Archbishop Laud, " either ran away with the money, or mis- spent it, or else served his own turn with it." The Primate justly observes that the King cannot be expected to pay the money twice, " and yet," he says, " I must confess it falls very hard upon the poor men to bear the loss, but they should have been wiser in the choice of their agent." The Archbishop promises, however, to " do his best," and declared that for the future they shall be "duly paid." On the 12th of January 1635, Archbishop Laud again wrote to Bishop Bellenden about the Chapel-Royal. The Edward Kellie mentioned at the close of the letter was appointed Receiver of the Fees of the Chapel-Royal in November 1629, by writ under the Privy Seal. The mode in which Divine service was conducted in the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood, before the introduction of the Liturgy, is narrated in a petition from Mr Kellie to the King, dated at Whitehall, 24th of January 1631, two years and a half before the coronation in Scotland. Mr Kellie mentions that he carried from London three large printed Bibles, one for his Majesty's seat, the second for the reader, and the third for the 480 ARCHBISHOP laud's CORRESPONDENCE [1636. Dean''s use. He also states that he had brought with him an or- ganist, two men to play on cornets and sackbuts [the latter a bass-trumpet kind of instrument,] and two boys for singing in the " versus.'''' — " In time of service within the Chapel," he says, " the organist and all the singing men are in black gowns, the boys are in sad [dark] coloured coats, and the usher, sexton, and vestry- keeper, are in brown gowns. The singing men sit in seats lately made before the noblemen, and the boys before them, with their books laid as in your Majesty's Chapel here [London]. One of the great Bibles is placed in the middle of the Chapel for the reader, the other before the Dean. There is sung before the ser- mon a full anthem, and after the sermon an anthem alone in ver- sus with the organ ; and thus every one attendeth the charge in his place in a very grave and decent form." He was allowed an apartment in the Palace of Holyrood, in which he says that he placed an organ and various instruments for the weekly practice of the organist and singers in English, Scottish, and Continental vocal and instrumental music* It is strange that the Presby- terian writers take no notice of this state of affairs at old Holy- rood, but refer the erection of the organ solely to the King's coronation. This short explanatory digression is of importance, as shewing the details then in progress. Archbishop Laud, in another letter of the 12th of January 1635 to Bishop Bellenden, compliments him on his " ordering of the Chapel-Eoyal," and on his resolution to wear his " whites," notwithstanding the " maliciousness of foolish men." He informs the Bishop that the King was now satisfied concerning his sermon and all other things committed to his care, and that " as opportunity serves he may expect from his Majesty all reasonable things." The English Primate states that in his first interview with the Earl of Traquair he would converse with him about the " gentlemen of the Chapel," and would show him what the Bishop wrote " concerning one Edward Kellie." In a postscript the Archbishop adds that he had seen the Earl, who assured him that Kellie had been paid. This evidently refers to the salaries of the persons belonging to the Chapel-Royal. • From an original paper preserved in the General Register House, Edinburgh, and printed in the Appendix to Dauney's " Ancient Scotish Melodies," Edin. 4to. 1838, p. 365, 366, 367. 1G3G.] WITH THE SCOTTISH DISIIOPS. 481 Bishop Bellenden was restored to the favour of the King, and Archbishop Laud was not forgetful of his promise of preferment. In a letter dated Lambeth, May 19, 1635, the Archbishop thus writes — " The King hath been acquainted with your care of the Chapel-Royal, and is very well pleased with the conformity that hath been there at the late reception of the blessed Sacrament ; and for my part I am heartily glad to see in what a fair way your Church businesses now are in those parts. I hope, if the Bishops be pleased to continue their good example and their care, all things will settle beyond expectation. The King hath declared his pleasure concerning the Bishoprics now void, and hath given you the Bishopric of Aberdeen, as you will hear more at large by my Lord [Bishop] of Ross. But being an University, and a place of consequence, he will have you reside there, and relies much upon you for the well ordering of the place. I am very glad the King- hath been so mindful of your remove." It is already mentioned that Bishop Bellcndcn''s successor in Dunblane was Dr James Wedderburn. Some intimations are given of the progress of the Liturgy and the Canons, in a letter from Archbishop Laud to Bishop Maxwell of Ross, dated Croydon, 19th September 1635. After complimenting Bishop Maxwell on the " forwardness" of the Liturgy, and expressing his satisfac- tion that the " Canons are also in good readiness," which he thought would be of " great use for the settling of the [Scottish] Church," Archbishop Laud thus notices Bishop Wedderburn, who had been one of his Prebendaries in the Cathedral of Wells. " I thank you for your care of Dr Wedderburn. He is very able to do service, and will certainly do it, if you can keep up his heart. I was in good hope he had been consecrated, as well as my Loi-d of Brechin [Bishop Whiteford], but I perceive he is not. AVhat the reason is [I know] not, but it is a thousand pities that those uncer- tanties abide with him. I pray [commend] my lovo to him, and tell him I would not have him stick at any thing, for the King will not have him long at Dunblane after ho hath once settled the Chapel [Royal] right, which I sec [he] will settle apace if he keep his footing. My letters are gone to the Bishop of Aberdeen, by the King's command, to desert his protestation concerning tho Chapel, [and] to leave the rents presently to Dr Wedderburn; and it will not be long ere letters come from the King to take of 31 482 ARCHBISHOP laud's CORRESPONDENCE [1636. the annats from the Bishoprics, and Dr Forbes, the late Bishop's executor, being a worthy man, may be better considered some other way. As for the annats of the ministers, the King is re- solved not to touch them at this time." Archbishop Laud then replies minutely to all which Bishop Maxwell had written to him on the affairs of the Church. He assures the Bishop that the Ohapel-Royal will soon be provided with silver vessels and other ornaments — that Archbishop Spottiswoode would shortly receive a letter from the King — mentions the arrival of the Bishop of Brechin with a letter from Archbishop Spottiswoode, which he [Laud] had fully answered — and states that he hopes to induce the Marquis of Hamilton to sell or " pass Arbroath full and wholly, precinct and all." He advises Bishop Maxwell not to despond, or to be uneasy at the designs and calumnies of the enemies of the Church, but to " serve God and the King, and leave the rest to their protection." He says that he does not believe that the King will erect any other Bishopric hastily, and wishes that those in existence were better in revenues. A contemporary MS. now printed,* is entitled " An Account of Papers intercepted betwixt Archbishop Laud and the Scots Bishops." Mr Laing observes that this " title is the indorsation of the paper in a later hand, with the date 1637 added. It ap- pears, however, that it was not before the year 1640 that the papers here referred to came into the possession of the Coven- anters." The first was entitled " Memoirs for my Lord Bishop of Ross, of matters to be proponed to his Majestic and my Lord [of] Canterbury his Grace," which are described as all written and subscribed by the Archbishop of St Andi-ews, August 8, 1634. This contemporary MS. was written by a furious Cove- nanter, and is expressed in the spirit of true Presbyterian hatred to Archbishop Laud. The first draught of the Book of Canons is alleged to have been sent at this time to the King and the Archbishop for revisal or correction, to whom the Scottish Bishops are charged with giving an account of all their actions. Some of these are curious as matters of history. Among the documents enumerated by the Covenanting writer is a narrative by the Scottish Bishops respecting the Liturgy, the Canons, and the • In the possession of David Laing, Esq. Edinburgh, and published in the Appendix of Original Letters and Papers to his valuable work, the " Letters and Journals" of Principal Baillie of Glasgow, vol. i. p. 428, 429, 430. 1G36.] WITH THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS. 483 Psalms ; papers on tho filling up of vacant benefices, the adminis- tration of tho Communion in the Chapel-Royal, and on constituting the High Court of Commission a constant judicatory for the sub- version of Presbyterian discipline ; in proof of which a reference is made to a letter written and subscribed by the King to Bishop Maxwell, 20th October 1634 — " Whereof," the Covenanters allege, " we have tho principal." Several of the documents are connected with local matters relating to St Andrews, in some of which the erection of a new cathedral is projected. Others refer to the Com- mission for the Surrender of Teinds, the Commissariot of Argyll, the remodelling of the Court of Exchequer, and Lord Balmerino. The papers enumerated are twenty-six, as sent, with other docu- ments specified, by Archbishop Spottiswoode, " our chiefest Pre- late," to Archbishop Laud, who is assailed for " medling in all our affaires," and the " absolute dependence" of the Scottish Bishops " on him therein as the primus and principal mover, author, and director, from whom all did and must flow, especially anent the Service-Book and Book of Canons, wherein our greatest Prelate [Spottiswoode] gives an account to the [Arch] Bishop of Canterbury, as equally joined with the King, even as scholars do unto their masters." To this, and the reiteration of the charge, that Archbishop Laud was the " prime and primwm mobile, especially anent Service- Book and Canons, and all other our Church changes," it may be answered, that without admitting it to the absurd extent which the Covenanters affected to believe, it was impossible for Laud not to be considerably involved in Scottish affairs at the time. He was constantly consulted by the King, and he was in close cor- respondence with the Scottish Bishops, who resorted to him for advice in all their difficulties. As to his alleged interference or " medling," he has left the true account in the affecting " History of his Troubles and Trials ;" and the statements of Archbishop Laud are of more authority than the declamations of his Cove- nanting enemies — men whose malignant hatred to those who differed from them was unbounded — men not only implicated in the murder of the King, but who had no inconsiderable agency in bringing the venerable Primate to the block. 484 [1G36. CHAPTER XI. THE SCOTTISH BOOK OF CANONS AND THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. Before 1636 the outbreak of popular fury and violence which ovenvhelmed the three kingdoms in anarchy and bloodshed was projected in Scotland, though the masses were apparently tranquil, notwithstanding the discontent which prevailed. If any oppo- sition was threatened it was either unknown to the Government, or treated with disregard. Yet the Presbyterian preachers had not been idle in animating the enthusiasm of their partizans. They resorted to their former practice of holding fast-days, which were not fast-days according to the proper meaning of the term, but days on which they delivered long extempore harangues to the people who resorted to them, exciting their passions, their igno- rant fears, and their superstitious resentments. Bishop Henry Guthrie [of Dunkeld after the Restoration] states that those who were zealous for Presbytery kept frequent fasts with their adher- ents, on which occasions they inflamed the popidar disaffection to the King's measures, hinted at the unlawfulness of what they called Prelacy, and the alleged mischiefs it caused ; and that they thus prepared for the riots and disorders of 1637. As it respects fast- days, however, some of the Bishops were not behind the Presby- terians in such observances, though from very different motives. An instance of this occurred in the Diocese of Aberdeen in 1636, when Bishop Bellenden committed a great irregidarity. He authorised a public fast to be held on a Sunday, which irri- tated the King, and caused a royal declaration that " no Bishop shoidd command or suffer any fast to be kept on that day, or on any other, without the special leave and command of the King." Mr Scott observes in the Pei-th Kirk-Session Registers — " King Charles undoubtedly was in the right, that the Lord's Day should not be turned into a day of fasting." 1636.] SCOTTISH book of canons and liturgy. 485 On tho 4th of May 1636, a book which Mr Scott designates " Ecclesiastical Constitutions " was produced to tho Presbytery of Perth, whose opinion is not recorded in the Kirk-Session Register. Mr Scott most erroneously supposes that this was either the " Ser- vice-Book," or the Book of Canons, or " both of them together." On the 18th of October, the King wrote to Archbishop Spottis- woode and the Privy Council on the introduction of the new Liturgy throughout the kingdom. From this letter it is evident that tho Liturgy was then prepared, though it was not printed till the following summer. Two copies of the Liturgy were enjoined to be purchased for each parish. A proclamation at the market- cross of every town established the Liturgy, which the people un- fortunately had never seen. On the 20th of December 1636, the Privy Council passed an act " authorizing the Service-Book, with his Majesty''s warrant of October 1636" — " commanding hereby all Archbishops and Bishops, and other presbyters and church- men, to take a special care that the said public form of worship be duly observed and obeyed, and the contraveners condignly cen- sured and punished ; and to have a special care that every parish bet-wixt and Pasch [Easter] next procure unto themselves two at the least of the said Books of Common Prayer for the use of the parish." This, however, was not enforced till the 13th of July 1637, when letters of horning were procured by the Privy Council against the refractoi-y incumbents. But by a singular fatality the Book of Canons which ratified the Liturgy was first published, and this enabled the enemies of the Church to assert that something favourable to the Church of Rome was intended to be enforced. The old cry of Popery was soon raised and credulously believed. Bishops Maxwell, Sydserff, Whiteford, and Bellenden, are the alleged compilers of the Book of Canons, but it may be assumed that the other Bishops were consulted. The original manuscript was transmitted to the King, by whom it was carefully revised. It was published by the title of " Canons and Constitutions Ecclesiastical, gathered and put in form for the Government of the Church of Scotland. Ratified and approved by Authority, and ordained to be observed by the Clergy, and all others whom they concern. Published by Authority. Aberdeen, imprinted by Edward Raban, dwelling upon the Market- Place, at the Arms of the City, 1636, with royal privilege." 486 THE SCOTTISH BOOK OF CANONS [1636. On the title-page are the arms of Aberdeen, with the city motto, Bon-Accord, and on the back are the royal arms of Great Britain, France, and Ireland. The Book of Canons consists of nineteen chapters, and extends to forty- three pages. The titles of the chapters are as follows : — 1. Of the Church of Scotland. 2. Of Presbyters and Deacons, their nomination, ordination, function, and charge. 3. Of Resi- dence and Preaching, 4. Of the Conversation of Presbyters. 5. Of Translation. 6. Of the Sacraments. 7. Of Marriage. 8. Of Synods. 9. Of Meetings to Divine Service. 10. Of School- masters. 11. Of Curates and Readers. 12. Of Printers. 13. Of Ohristnings, Weddings, and Burials, to be registered. 14. Of Public Fasts. 15. Of Decency in apparel enjoined to persons ecclesiastical. 16. Of Things pertaining to the Church. 17. Of Tithes and Lands dedicated to churches. 18. Of Censures Eccle- siastical. 19. Of Commissaries and their Courts. It was well known to the Presbyterians 'at the time that a col- lection of Canons had been authorized in the reign of King James by the General Assembly held at Aberdeen in 1616, and when King Charles was in Scotland in 1633, it was resolved speedily to collect them. The preparation of the Canons, therefore, was no novelty. The Canons in reality contain little more than the Five Articles of Perth, which, however, rendered them peculiarly ob- noxious to the Presbyterians, the more fanatical of whom main- tained that in their alleged spiritual matters they were indepen- dent of all civil authority, and that it was Erastianism of the deep- est dye to admit that their proceedings could be reviewed by Par- liaments and judicial courts. They held that they were entitled in the name and by the authority of the great Head of the Church to legislate as they thought proper, to convene and to dissolve their General Assemblies at pleasure, and to arrogate to them- selves the utmost plenitude of power. It is already seen that in ar- rogating pretensions to heaven- derived powers, and in claims to in- fallibility, Presbyterianism in Scotland yielded not to the Church of Rome. As the preachers had often disclaimed the sovereign's authority to summon their General Assemblies, claiming for them- selves an imperimn in imperio while eating the bread of State-con- nection, it was not likely that they would render obedience to Canons about which they had never been consulted. " But," says 1636.] AND THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. 487 Heylin, " as they had broken the rules of the Primitive Church in acting as sovereigns themselves, without the King's approbation or consent in former times, so were they now upon the point of having those old rules of theirs broken by the King, in making Canons, and putting laws and constructions upon them, for their future conduct, to which they had never consented. And, there- fore, though his Majesty had taken so much care, as himself ob- served, for facilitating their obedience by furthering their know- ledge in those points which before they knew not, yet they did generally behold it, and exclaimed against it, as one of the most grievous burdens which had hitherto been laid upon them." The Scottish Canons are unexceptionable, and the only misfor- tune was that they were announced before the Liturgy ; for the Scottish Bishops, as Clarendon truly observes, ought not to have " inverted the proper method, and first presented a body of Canons to precede the Liturgy, which was not yet ready, choosing to finish the shorter work first." — " It was strange," says the Noble histo- rian in another place, " that Canons should be published before the Liturgy was prepared, which was not ready in a year after or thereabouts, when three or four of the Canons were principally for the observation of and punctual compliance with the Liturgy, which all the clergy were to be sworn to submit to, and to pay all obedience to what was enjoined by it, before they knew what it contained, whereas if the Liturgy had been first published, with all the circumstances, it is possible that it might have found a better reception, and the Canons have been less examined." But the King's reasons in his Eoyal Declaration authorizing the Canons are worthy of notice. " First, that he held it exceedingly impera- tive that there should be some book extant to contain the rules of the ecclesiastical government, so that the clergy, as well as the laity, might have one certain rule to regulate the power of the one, and obedience and practice to the other. Second, that the Acts of General Assemblies were written onhj, and not printed, and therefore could not come to the knowledge of many ; so large and voluminous, that it was not easy to transcribe them, insomuch that few of the Presbyteries themselves could tell which of them were authenticated, which not ; so unsafe and uncertainly kept, that they knew not where to address themselves for consulting them. Thirdly, that by reducing those numerous Acts, and those 488 THE SCOTTISH BOOK OF CANONS [1G3G. not known unto themselves, to such a paucity of Canons, published and exposed to the public view, no man could be ensnared by ignorance, or have just reason to complain of their multiplicity. Finally, that no one in all that kingdom did either live under the obedience of the Acts of these General Assemblies, or did know what they were, or where to find them." In short, the whole would have been right, whatever may have been the result, if the fatal step had been avoided of promulgating the Canons before the Liturgy, because it allowed sufficient time to discover alleged de- fects, and to persuade the ignorant and weak-minded that they were the preludes to Popery. Another error which the King committed was issuing letters- patent under the Great Seal, declaring that, by his " prerogative- royal and supreme authority in causes ecclesiastical, he ratified and confirmed the said Canons, Orders, and Constitutions, and all and every thing in them contained," to be observed within the Provinces of St Andrews and Glasgow." This was dated at Green- wich, 23d May 1G35. Now, although the Scottish Parliament had no right to legislate in matters connected with the Church farther than to ratify and confirm whatever was brought before them, Charles ought at this crisis to have called a General Assembly, and he had then sufiicient influence to secure the assent of a majority in favour of the Canons. This was always the mode which King James adopted to carry his measures. The Five Articles of Perth, the authority to compile Canons and prepare a Liturgy, the very episcopate itself, were managed in this manner. It re- cognized so far the General Assemblies as legal ecclesiastical courts, which had never been denied by the most zealous supporters of the Episcopal Church, and it would have completely silenced the cavilling at the supposed arbitrary proceedings of the King. The Presbyterian party, if in the minority, would have resorted to their old practice of denying the legality of such a General Assem- bly ; but as they had done so on other occasions, it would have had little effect. As to the Canons, they contain nothing which is not familiar to those who are acquainted with those of the Church of England, the rubrics in the Liturgy, and other well known ecclesiastical rules of discipline. The first — " Of the Church of Scotland" — asserts the King's supremacy in all cases ecclesiastical, such as 1636.] AND THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. 489 " the godly Kings had among the J ews and Christian Emperors in the Primitive Church," and enjoined all to be excommunicated who affirmed the contrary, with power exclusively to the Archbishop of the Province to restore them after repentance, and " public revocation of their wicked errors." All were to be excommuni- cated, and only restored by the Bishop of the Diocese or Arch- bishop of the Province, who taught that " the doctrine of the Church of Scotland, the form of worship contained in the Book of Common Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments, the Rites and Ceremonies of the Church, the government of the Church by Archbishops, Bishops, and others who bear office in the same, the form of making and consecrating Archbishops, Bishops, Pres- bj-ters, and Deacons, as they are now established under his Ma- jesty"'s authority, do contain in them any thing repugnant to the Scriptures, or are corrupt, superstitious, or unlawful in the service or worship of God." The Canons regulated the education and examination for holy orders of deacons and presbyters. No one was to be admitted into deacon's orders before the twenty-first year of his age, and no pres- byter was to be ordained before completing his twenty-fifth year. Ordinations were enjoined to be held four times during the year, on the first weeks of March, June, September, and December. Every person at ordination and admission to a parish was to take the legal oath of supremacy, and he was to subscribe obedience to the Canons of the Church. Bishops who ordained, admitted, or licensed any person otherwise were to be " suspended from grant- ing orders and licenses to preach for twelve months," and refrac- tory presbyters and deacons, after so subscribing, were first to be suspended from their functions, and in cases of contumacy deposed from the ministry. The Archbishop or Bishop was enjoined to administer, at institution or collation to a benefice, the oath in the Book of Ordination against simony. Non-residence was strictly prohibited under pain of deprivation. No one was allow- ed to preach in any parish church unless he was licensed by the Bishop. Every presbyter, or he who officiated for him, being " lawfully called," was to perform Divine service before sermon accortling to the form in the Book of Common Prayer. Preachers were ordered to " eschew tediousness, and by a succinct closing lea\ e in the people an appetite for farther instiiiction, and a new 490 THE SCOTTISH BOOK OF CANONS [1636. desire to devotion.'" No layman, " whatsoever gifts he hath of learning, knowledge, or holiness," was to presume to officiate as a deacon or presbyter under pain of excommunication. PubHc catechising was enjoined every Sunday afternoon, and in the country parishes, when the people assembled for Divine service only once a-day, the Catechism was to be explained to them every alternate year. Various other matters connected with discipline, personal life, and conversation, were set forth, all truly excellent, and worthy at the present day of special observance. The fifth Canon of the fourth chapter — " Of the Conversation of Presbyters'" — is very significant. " It is observed that sundry presbyters resort oftener to, and stay longer in Edinburgh than their charges can well permit ; for which cause it is ordained that special notice be taken of such, and their names sent to their Ordinary, that due censure may be inflicted.'" Persons in holy orders who betook themselves to trade, and aban- doned their sacred profession, were to be branded as apostates, and all presbyters and deacons were not to " haunt the company of heretics, schismatics, or excommunicated persons, under the pain of suspension, unless the Chm-ch hath appointed them to confer with such persons for reducing them unto the right way." The Administration of the Sacraments embodied the Perth Articles. Diocesan Synods were to be held twice every year at such places as the Bishop appointed, and any presbyter who was wilfully ab- sent was to be suspended till the next Synod. National Synods were to be called solely by the King''s authority, and such Synods were declared to " bind all persons, as well absent as present, to the obedience of the decrees thereof iu matters ecclesiastical and those who maintained that a National Synod so assembled ought not to be obeyed were to be excommunicated, until they publicly repented. Any presbyter or layman who presumed to make rules, orders, or constitutions, in causes ecclesiastical,'" or who " added or detracted from any rubrics, articles, or other things without the King''s authority, or his successors,'''' was to be excommunicated ipso facto, and not restored until he repented ; but forasmuch as no reformation in doctrine or discipline can be made perfect at once in any Church, therefore it shall and may be lawful for the Church of Scotland at any time to make remon- strance to his Majesty, or his successors, what they conceive fit to be taken into farther consideration in and concerning the premises. 1636.] AND THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. 491 And if the King shall therefrom declare his liking and approba- tion, then both clergy and laity shall yield their obedience without incurring the censure aforesaid, or any other. But it shall not be lawful for the Bishops themselves, in a National Synod or other- wise, to alter any rubric, article, or canon, doctrinal or disciplinary, whatever, under the pain above mentioned and his Majesty's farther displeasure." Marriages were enjoined to be celebrated in the parish churches between the hours of eight o'clock and twelve noon, after procla- mation of banns on three several Sundays. The licence of the Archbishop of the Province or Bishop of the Diocese was declared necessary. No persons were to be married under the age of twenty-one without the consent of parents or guardians ; and a table of the forbidden degrees was to be affixed in every parish church. The Archbishops and Bishops were authorized to grant licences " to persons of good sort and quality, and upon good surety and caution that there is no impediment, and the persons not under the censure of the Church but in such " cases, wherein licence cannot be refused, to marry without asking banns." Some regula- tions were added respecting divorces, and the conduct of the parties so situated. The eleventh chapter, entitled — " Of meetings to [for] Divine Service" — enjoins decency of behaviour in the parish churches. No man was to " cover his head in time of Divine service except he have some infirmity, in which case he may wear a night-cap or coif." All persons were " reverently to kneel when the Confes- sion and other prayers were read, and stand up at the saying of the Creed." In all meetings for Divine worship, before sermon the " whole prayers, according to the Liturgy," were to "be deliber- ately and distinctly read ; neither shall any presbyter or reader be permitted to conceive prayers extemporary, or use any other form in the public Liturgy or Service than is prescribed, under the pain of deprivation from his benefice or cure." Professors in Colleges and parochial schoolmasters were to be under ecclesiastical con- troul. The appointment of Sunday as a fast-day was strictly pro- hibited, and no fasts were to be allowed on week days unless sanc- tioned by royal authority. No presbyter was to pronounce sentence of excommunication without the wi'itten approval of the Bishop. A regulation similar to the rubric of the Church of England in 492 THE SCOTTISH BOOK OF CANONS [1C3C. the Visitation of the Sick on sacramental confession and absolu- tion was inserted. Sentence of deprivation or deposition of a presbyter was to be pronounced exclusively by the Archbishop of the Province or Bishop of the Diocese, in presence of " three or four grave presbyters." Every person deprived or deposed, who persisted in exercising ecclesiastical functions, was to be excom- municated, and prosecuted in the civil courts. Penalties were inflicted on Bishops for irregular ordinations, and residence in their Dioceses was strictly enjoined, unless " employed by the King or by the Church." Such is the substance of the Scottish Book of " Constitutions and Canons Ecclesiastical." It would be superfluous to notice the comments of Presbyterian wi-iters, and their total misappre- hension of Primitive rule and order. Even Dr George Cook pro- nounces them " popish," or as tending to " popery," though an examination of them proves that such an inference is altogether unfounded. Previous to the publication of the Canons, the learned and venerable Bishop Juxon of London wrote to Bishop Maxwell of Eoss, dated London House, 17th February 163G, acknowledg- ing the receipt of a copy, and alluding to some explanations in the Liturgy then in the press. " With your letter of the Gth of this month," says Bishop Juxon, " I received your Book of Canons, which perchance at first will make more noise than all the can- nons in Edinburgh Castle ; but when men's ears have been used awhile to the sound of them, they will not startle so much at it as now at first, and perchance find them as useful for preservation of the Church as the others for the commonwealth. Our prayers here are for your happy proceedings in that great service, where- with I rest, your Lordship's assured friend to serve you — GuL. London." The Earl of Stirhng [Sir William Alexander of Men- strie]. Secretary of State for Scotland at the time, thus wrote to Bishop Maxwell — " I thank you heartily for your Book of the Canons, which I received yesternight. I was present in the morning when my Lord of Canterbury delivered the Book to the King, which, as soon as his Majesty had read some of it, he delivered unto me, and I was glad to hear him so well pleased therewith. I find some errors in the printer, by mistaking or reversing of let- ters, and therefore have the more care in looking to that in printing of the Servicc-Book, for Young, the printer, is the greatest knave AND THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. 493 that I ever dealt with ; and therefore trust nothing to him nor his servants but what of necessity you must. [Since] the wi-iting hereof I received a letter from my Lord of [Cantcr]bury, signify- ing his Majesty's pleasure for two letters that should be [drawn] up for his hand concerning the authorizing of the Book [of Ca]- nons, which, God willing, shall come home with the next packet. I hope my son will take such a course, with your advice, concern- ing the Psalms, as shall bo fit, to whom I refer the same."* The Psalms here mentioned were the metrical versions of King James, with which the Earl of Stirling was intimately connected, and his Lordship's severe reflection on the printer was elicited by transactions with him on that subject. Bishop Juxon's supposition that the Book of Canons would pro- bably " make more noise than all the cannons in Edinburgh Castle" was en-oneous. Though discontent existed, it excited no particular feeling against the Bishops or the Government. The great conspiracy was organized against the Liturgy, which it was well known would soon appear. Some curious gossiping on the state of affairs occurs in a long letter from Principal Baillie to his " dear and loving cousin," Mr William Spang, dated January 29, 1637. On the 18th of October 1636, the King signed a missive for warrant of an act of the Scottish Privy Council, which was issued on the 20th of December. The Archbishops of St. An- drews and Glasgow were present at that meeting, and the act enforcing the use of the Liturgy was proclaimed at the Cross of Edinburgh, but the book was not completed till May 1637. " The proclamation of a Liturgy," says Principal Baillie, on January 2, 1637, to Mr William Wilkie, then a Regent or Pro- fessor in the University of Glasgow, " is the matter of my great- est afiliction" — the said Mr Wilkie, whom Lord Hailes designates " a sort of ecclesiastical spy employed by Balcanqual, the great confidant of Charles I. in every thing relating to Scotland," at that time an aspirant for the Bishopric of Argyll, vacant by the death of Bish op Boyd in December 1636. Baillie, who in the above letter to Mr Wilkie declares — " Bishops I lovi'' — writes to his friend Mr Spang — " After we were beginning to forget the Book of our Ca- • Original Letters and Papers from the Wodrow MSS. folio, vol. Isvi. No. 21-22, in Appendix to " Letters and Journals of Robert Baillie, M.A. , Principal of the Univer- sity of Glasgow," edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 438-439. 494 THE SCOTTISH BOOK OP CANONS [163G. none, before Yule vacants [Ohi'istmas vacation] a proclamation was made by an act of Council at the King's direction brought home with the Bishop of Ross, who the last year brought us down our Canons, to receive the Service Book. This all the churches in Scotland are commanded to do against Pasch next under the pain of horning ; yet to this day [January 29, 1637] we cannot get a sight of that book. The reason, some say, is because our Scottish edition is not yet completely printed. I would rather think that some of our Bishops make delay, as not being at fuU point themselves what they would have in and what out. I know much of it was printed in Edinburgh before Yule [Christmas] was a year. We heard then that the Bishop of Edinburgh chiefly had obtained that we should be quite of the surplice, cross, Apocrypha, Saints' Days, and some other trash of the English Liturgy, but since that time they say that Canterbury sent down to our Chan- cellor [Archbishop Spottiswoode] a long writ of additions, which [he insisted] behoved to be put in." The absurd and ignorant fears of the Presbyterian party are expressed in the following most unfounded statements : — " However it be," Baillie writes to Spang, " my Lord Treasurer [the Earl of Traquair] brought home a copy of our Scottish Service printed at London, which sundry have perused, and say they find no difference betwixt it and the English Service save one, to-wit, an addition of sundry more Popish rites, which the English wants. We must cross in baptism, have ring in marriage, &c. ; but besides, we must consecrate at set times with set prayers holy water (!) to stand in the font ; at the delivery of the elements there is another, and that a very ambiguous prayer, as they say, looking much to transubstantiation ; the deacon, on his knees, must in an affecting manner present the devotions of the people to the Lord upon his altar or table. For myself, I suspend my judgment till I see the Book ; only I fear the event to be to the hurt of our poor Church."* Baillie at the time he thus wrote was a presbyter of the Episco- pal Church, yet here was a man, much superior in talent to the ordinary grade of those with whom he afterwards acted, delibe- rately, though ignorantly, setting forth the most erroneous and ridiculous statements about the Scottish Liturgy, which he con- • Letters and Journals, edited by David Lainj-, Esq. vol. i. p. 4. 163G.] AND THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. fesses he had not then seen. An examination of the Book, and a comparison of it with the Liturgy of the Church of England, is a complete refutation of all his visionary clamours against " Popery and Arminianism." The compilers of the Scottish Liturgy were, or are generally understood to have been. Archbishops Spottis- woode and Lindsay, Bishops Wedderburn, Gutlirie, Maxwell, and Whiteford. Dr Cook asserts that the Liturgy was chiefly pre- pared by Bishops Maxwell and Wedderburn, and it is probable that they were the active parties in the matter, but all the others were more or less concerned, as they had been with the compila- tion of the Book of Canons. They were ordered to transmit the work for revisal to Archbishop Laud, Bishop Juxon of London, and Bishop Wren of Norwich, the latter, according to Clarendon, " a man of a severe sour nature, but very learned, and particu- larly versed in the old Liturgies of the Greek and Latin Churches.* Yet from a fatal inadvertency, the Scottish Bishops neglected several of Laud's wise admonitions, and acted contrary to the advice of their more experienced brethren. The Liturgy appeared under the title of " The Book of Com- mon Prayer and Administration of the Sacraments ; and other • Parts of Divine Service for the Use of the Church of Scotland, Edinburgh, printed by Robert Young, Printer to the King's most excellent Majesty, 1637." The sentiments of Archbishop Spottis- vvoode on the Scottish Liturgy are intimated in a letter written by him to the learned and pious Bishop Hall of Norwich, the original of which is preserved in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin, in- serted in a copy printed on large paper, now re-bound and cut down : — " I was desired," writes Spottiswoode, " to present your Lordship with one of the copies of our Scottish Liturgy, which is formed so nigh the English as we could, that it might be known how we are nothing different in substance from that Church, And God I beseech to keep us one, and free us from those that crave divisions. Your Lordship will be pleased to accept of this little present as a testimony of our Church's love, and sent by him who truly loveth your Lordship, and will still remain your Lord- ship's most affectionate brother." Indorsed — •' To my very Re- verend good Lord and Brother, my Lord Bishop of Norwich."f • Heylin's Life of Archbishop Laud, p. 222. Laud's History of his Troubles and Trials, p. 168-169. Clarendon, vol. i. p. 153. t Appendix of Original Letters and Papers, in Principal Baillie's Letters and Jour- nals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 442. 496 THE SCOTTISH BOOK OP CANONS [1G3G. The Chapel-Royal of Holyrood was among the first of the churches supplied with the Liturgy, for which Robert Bryson, bookseller, and Evan Tyler, printer, granted a discharged receipt on the 15th of April, for the sum of L.144, 4s. Scuts money, or L.12 sterling. In that month Bishop David Lindsay of Edinburgh wrote to the clergy of the various Presbyteries, or Exercises, as they were then called, in his Diocese, of which that addressed to " his well-beloved Brethren, the Moderator and remanent Brethren of the Exercise of Dalkeith," is an interesting specimen, dated Holyroodhouse, 20th April : — " A great number of the ministers of this Diocese, thinking the day of the Synod had been the last Wednesday of April, did come to this town, and finding them- selves mistaken, presently returned to their own homes, with whom I spake not. These presents, therefore, are to desire you to keep precisely the time appointed, which is the last Wednesday of May, for at that time there [are] sundry things that I have to impart unto you, and in special concerning the Service Books that are to be received in our Church, of the which Books it is thought expedient that presently every minister and congregation buy two upon the common charges of the parish, one for the use of the minister, and the other for the reader, or him that shall assist the minister in the service. The price of the book I think shall bo L.4, 1 6s., that is L.9, 12s. [Scots, or 14s. 8d. sterling] the two. The matter is of no great moment, and the employment very necessary and profitable, as experience shall prove. I hope, therefore, you will not fail every one to bring in your monies, and receive your books, for it is appointed that the printer be paid, and the books taken off his hand, betwixt this and the first of June. Li the mean- time I expect that ye will observe the commemoration of Christ's Ascension on Thursday the 18th of May, and on Sunday the 28th thereafter, called Whitsunday, a commemoration of the descend- ing of the Holy Ghost, which have been and are solemnly observed through all the Christian world, to the honour of Him who is the ^ God of order, unity, and peace, to whose grace I leave you."* It is singular that the Presbyterian writers obstinately persist in maintaining that the Scottish Liturgy is another version of the Roman Missal. Kirkton, one of the enthusiasts of the Covenant, states — " I have seen the principal book, corrected with Bishop " From the Original in Wodrow MSS. folio, vol. Ixvi. No. 40, printed in Appendix . to Principal Balllie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 443. 163G.] AND THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. 497 Laiurs own hand, wherein, in every place which he corrected, he brings the word as near the Missal as the English can be to the Latin." An examination of the Liturgy itself is the best refuta- tion of this ignorant and absurd statement, and it is now admitted to be an excellent and judicious compilation. Collier in his Eccle- siastical History enumerates all the differences between the Scot- tish Liturgy and that of the Church of England, and gives an ac- count of the manner in which the former was framed. The same is found in the King's " Large Declaration," Lut the perusal of Hamond L'Estrange's " Alliance of Divine Office," will at once shew wherein the Scottish Liturgy agreed with, and wherein it differed from, even in the least instance, the English Book of Common Prayer. The Presbyterians of that time who denounced the Scottish Liturgy were men, as Bishop Burnet describes them, " all of a sort ; they affected great sublimity in devotion ; they poured themselves out in their prayers in a loud voice, and often with many tears: they had an ordinary proportion of learning among them, something of Hebrew, and very little Greek ; books of controversy with Papists, but above all with Arminians, were the height of their study." We have not only the internal testimony of the Scottish Liturgy to its general conformity to the English Book of Common Pravcr, and the written statement of Archbishop Spottiswoode to Bishop Hall of Norwich already quoted, but also a narrative of the whole matter in a paper, assumed on good authority to have been drawn up by the Earl of Stirling, then Secretary of State for Scotland, indorsed in the handwriting of Dr Walter Balcanqual, Dean of Rochester, under the title of " Instructions how the Service came to be made, delivered to me by the King."* It is there stated that the work had been in progress since 1C16, or at least that it was enjoined by the act of the General Assembly of that year to be prepared. A Liturgy was compiled and sent to Archbishop Spottiswoode, who transmitted it to King James for examination. After it was revised by Dr Young, Dean of Winchester, it was returned to Archbishop Spottiswoode, with the King's observa- tions as to what he wished to be omitted, altered, or added. During this interval King James died, but King Charles pursued • Printed from the Wodrow MSS. vol. Ixvi. No. 34, in the Appendix of Original Letters and Papers in Principal Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited bv David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 413, 444, 445. 32 498 THE SCOTTISH LITURGY. [1636. his father's design. " This very book, in statu quo King James left it," says the Earl of Stirling, " was sent to his Majesty, and presented to his Majesty by myself ; whether the same was done or not by the Bishop of Ross then [Patrick Lindsay], now Arch- bishop of Glasgow, I dare not confidently aver, but I think he it was. His Majesty took great care of it, gave it his royal judg- ment, and I returned home and signified his Majesty's pleasure to my Lord St Andrews, and he to each of the clergy as he thought fit. There were during this time much pains taken by his Majesty here, and my Lord St Andrews and some others there [in Scot- land], to have it so framed as we needed not to be ashamed of it when it should be seen to the Christian world, [and] with that prudent moderation that it might be done in that [way which might occasion] the least offence to weak ones there. — To facili- tate the liook of Common Prayer, a care was had besides to make it as perfect as could be, so likewise that howsoever it should come as near to this of England as could be, yet that it should be in some things different, that our Church and kingdom might not grumble as though we were a Church dependent upon or subordinate to them. — And yet [his Majesty's] care and prudence were more, that when all was concluded, and the Book ready for the press, to prepare men the better to receive it [he] gave order to all Arch- bishops and Bishops, till our own should be printed and fully authorized, to cause read the English Service-Book in their cathe- drals, to use it morning and evening in their own houses and col- leges, as it had been used in his Majesty's Chapel-Royal in the year of God 1617. The Bishops upon a remonstrance made to his Majesty, that seeing their own was shortly to come forth, desired that all should be continued till their own was printed and fully authorized, to which his Majesty graciously accorded." Although Archbishop Laud had no concern in the preparation of the Scottish Liturgy, he caused it to be translated into Latin, that the learned world might see the falsehood of the allegation of its enemies that it was Popish. His subsequent troubles and fate prevented its publication. 1637.] 499 CHAPTER XII. THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH AT THE FIRST USE OP THE LITURGY AND THE RESULTS. The Scottish Liturgy was ordei-ed to be introduced in Divine service on Easter Sunday 1G37, and the King repeatedly enjoined the Bishops not to neglect this duty. Bishop Lindsay of Edin- burgh was not prepared for it on that day, and at several meet- ings of the Bishops in June and J uly it was resolved, in obedience to a letter from the King, to use the Liturgy on Sunday the 23d of the latter month, which was publicly announced on the preceding Sunday. Baillie narrates an account of the preliminary arrangements in a letter, dated October 1637, to his " dear and loving cousin," Mr William Spang. " The Bishop of Ross himself," he says, " in his cathedral at least, did long before that time, and so to this day continues, to read a Liturgy, whether the English, or ours printed at London, I do not know. The Bishop of Dunblane at his Synod did read it, and gave all ministers [to] Michaelmas term to advise whether then they would use that Book or leave their places. The Bishop of Edinburgh in his Synod, when Mr. RoUock had preached at length for the obedience to the King and Church, did read the Book. Mr. D. Mitchell and young Durie were the chief answerers. St Andrews in his Diocese did propone the buying and using of the Book, and thereupon took instruments. Glasgow was sick in Edinburgh, so in our Synod was no word of the matter. In the meantime some copies of the Book go from hand to hand ; some of the unconform party make it their text daily to shew the multitude of Romish points contained in the Book, and the grossness of it far beyond the English ; the way of the imposing of it, not only without any meeting either of Church 500 THE RIOTS AT EDINIiURGII L1637. or State, but contrary to standing laws both of Church and State ; in a word, how that it was nought but the Mass in Enghsh brought in by the craft and violence of some of the Bishops against the mind of all the rest, both of Church and statesmen. These things did sound from pulpits, were carried from hand to hand in papers, were the table-talk and open discourse of high and low." On the 13th of June the Privy Council had issued an act enjoining that all the parishes should be provided with two copies of the Liturgy within fifteen days, under " pain of re- bellion and putting of them to the horn." Alexander Hen- derson of Leuchars, James Bruce, minister of Kingsbams, and George Hamilton, minister of Newburn, all in the Presbytery of St Andrews, in the name of a number of others who held the same opinions, presented a petition on the following day, request- ing a reasonable time to see and examine the Liturgy, which was granted. Meanwhile, every day of the week previous to the 23d of July the citizens of Edinburgh were considerably excited, and a combination was formed to prevent by clamorous violence the in- troduction of the Liturgy. Henderson continued in the city during the week, and was met by Mr David Dickson, minister of Irvine in Ayrshire, and Mr Andrew Cant, minister of Pitsligo in Aberdeenshire, who became the conspicuous leaders in the ap- proaching Covenanting crusade. They held repeated conferences with Lord Balmerino and Sir Thomas Hope, to whom they detailed the objects of their visit to Edinburgh, and the mea- sures they had resolved and were prepared to adopt. The appro- bation of Lord Balmerino might have been expected, consider- ing his avowed principles, and his previous prosecution by the Grovernment ; but such conduct was disgraceful to Sir Thomas Hope, who had received many personal favours from the King, and who, as Lord Advocate, entrusted with the administration of the law, ought to have cautioned Henderson, Dickson, and Cant, even though he coalesced with their alleged grievances. He well knew that the Episcopal Church had been the ecclesiastical esta- blishment of the kingdom for at least upwards of thirty years, solemnly ratified and confirmed by successive Parliaments, and that Presbyterianism was not and could not be recognized except by violence. Another meeting was held in the house of one Nicholas Balfour, in the street known as the Cowgate, which was 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 501 attended, it is stated, by the Earls of Rothes, Cassillis, Glencairn, Loudon, and Traquair, Lords Lorn, Lindsay, Balmerino, and several others, one of whom is alleged to have been the Marquis of Hamilton, though this may be doubted, and Henderson, Dick- son, Cant, and a number of the discontented Presbyterians. They railed at the alleged ambition and avarice of the Bishops, and their supposed innovations in the Church ; and the rights of the Nobility were mentioned as infringed. On this occasion they concerted their plan of operations, and in imitation of an incident recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, to which they referred, that the Jews stirred up devout and honourable women, they instructed some Presbyterian " matrons" of the lower orders to " give the first affront to the Book," meaning the Liturgy, and to commence an uproar in the church when the service commenced, assuring them that the business would be soon taken out of their hands by men stationed for the purpose, several of whom were to aid them, dis- guised in female attire. On that memorable Sunday, the seventh after Trinity that year both in the Scottish and English Liturgy, long known by the sou- briquets of Stowj Sahhath and the Casting of the Stools, a crowded congregation assembled in the morning in that part of St. Giles' church in Edinburgh, designated as the Old Church, the eastern division, or the High Church, being then, it is said, under repair. Archbishop Spottiswoode as Lord Chancellor, Archbishop Patrick Lindsay of Glasgow, several of the Bishops, numbers of the Privy Council, some of the Judges of the Supreme Court, and the Magis- trates of the city, all attended in their robes of office. It was then the custom of the poor classes to carry with them small three- footed stools on which they sat during the sermon. At the time of Divine service, which it appears was then nine o'clock in the morning, Mr. James Hannay, Dean of Edinburgh, entered the reading-desk habited in his surplice, and opened the Liturgy. The uproar was instantly commenced by the women and men in dis- guise. Baillie states that the riot in the church was carried on by " serving maids," who " began such a tumult as was never heard of since the Reformation in our nation." This riot is differently related by various writers, some of whom detail the blasphemous, indecent, and disgusting exclamations of the ignorant and design- ing wretches then present. Wodrow gives his gossipping Presby- 502 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. terian version, in his biographical sketch of Bishop Lindsay of Edin- burgh ;* but he is very inaccurate, and mentions incidents which could not have occurred. Clamours, outcries, and curses assailed the Dean, accompanied by such clapping of hands and other noises that not a word could be distinctly heard, and as the Dean still continued to read, those profanities were succeeded by a discharge of clasped Bibles, stools, stones, sticks, and other missiles, at his head. Others attempted to pull him out of the reading-desk, and he was glad to escape from their fury, leaving a part of his sur- plice in their hands. A portable stool was thrown at the head of the Dean, and he only evaded it by turning aside. Various paltry jokes, unworthy of notice, are recorded by the Presbyterian wTiters on this tumult. Bishop Lindsay, who was to preach the sermon, now went into the pulpit, and addressed the deluded and audacious disturbers of the service. He reminded them of the sacredness of the place and of their duty to God and the King, and he entreated them to desist from their fearful profanation ; but his courage, dignity, and eloquence, which even Wodrow admits he displayed, were of no avail. He was assailed by the most odious epithets, and it is said that a stool was also aimed at him, which might have killed him if it had not been averted by a friendly hand. Archbishop Spot- tiswoode, who occupied a seat in the gallery, also interfered, but he only turned the tide of fierce imprecation against himself. The Primate saw that it was vain to allay the profane uproar, and in the exercise of his authority as Lord Chancellor he ordered the Lord Provost and Magistrates to clear the church. With the assistance of the other members of the Town-Council this was done with difficulty, and the doors made fast. The service was then continued. The mob, however, though expelled, loudly knocked at the door, and broke the glass of the windows with stones. Nevertheless the service proceeded in defiance of this noise and violence, until some of the rioters left within the church raised their old cry — " A Pape ! a Pape ! pull him down." This compelled the Magistrates again to interfere, and to expel them from the cathedral. The service was then concluded, and the ser- mon delivered in quietness. " Wodrow MS. printed in Appendix to Life and Times of Alexander Henderson, by John Aiton, D.D. p. 623-627. 1637.1 AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 503 The Liturgy was opposed, though not with such indecency, in the other churches of the city. In one adjoining to that of St Giles' less uproar ensued, but sufficient disapprobation was mani- fested. Bishop Fairlie, who had been consecrated to the See of Argyll only two days before, was interrupted in the Greyfriars'' church by groans, hisses, and bowlings, when he commenced the morning service, and gave it up after the General Confession and Absolution were read. The minister of Trinity College church, although pledged to use the Liturgy, cautiously delayed till he learned its reception in the other churches, and at length adopted the extemporaneous form for his own safety. When the Bishops and the Nobility retired from St Giles' church after the morning service they found the street crowded by a mob, who insulted and threatened to attack them. One clergyman was severely beaten, and Bishop Lindsay, who was very corpulent, was so severely assaulted, though attended by one of the city clergy and a respectable merchant, that he was probably rescued from death solely by the domestics of the Earl of Wemyss, who carried him into that nobleman's residence. Before the afternoon service several of the Bishops convened in the house of Archbishop Spot- tiswoode, and there met the Magistrates, who adopted proper methods for preserving order. Numbers resorted to St Giles' church at two o'clock to hear the sermon, but no clergyman ap- peared. About three o'clock some of the Bishops and clergy went privately to the church accompanied by a strong guard. Another g«ard was stationed at the door, and only those were admitted who were known to be peaceable citizens. At the dismissal of the congregation about five o'clock the High Street was again crowded by male and female rioters, who were ready to renews their out- rages. The guard was thought insufficient to protect Bishop Lindsay on his way to Holyrood Palace, whither he intended to retire for safety, and though he was in the coach of the Earl of Roxburgh, Lord Pi-ivy Seal, with that nobleman, who was exceed- ingly popular, and who was suspected tq favour the opponents of the Liturgy, he escaped with great difficulty. The attempt to stop the coach and drag out the Bishop, who was erroneously supposed to be the most active promoter of the Liturgy, was repelled by the Earl's servants and the guards with drawn swords. The drivers cleared their way down the High Street, and soon 504 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [16^7. outstripped the rioters, who could not overtake them ; but as the Tron church was then building, the materials afforded a ready and plentiful supply of missiles to the insurgents, who pursued the coach to the Palace and injuring the EarFs domestics. A nobleman, supposed to be the facetious Earl of Rothes, who saw the populace running after the coach, exclaimed — "I will write to the King, and tell him that the Court here is changed, for my Lord Tra- quair used ever before to get the best following, but now the Earl of Roxburgh and the Bishop of Edinburgh have the best backing," This profane riot, rendered more so by occurring on a day for which the Presbyterians affect the greatest veneration, was origi- nally intended to be perpetrated on Easter Sunday by Henderson, Dickson, Cant, and their associates, if the Liturgy, in obedience to royal authority, had been introduced on that great Festival of the Church. Various reasons are assigned for the delay. Dean Balcanqual of Rochester alleges that the Liturgy was postponed till the 23d of July for the " farther trial of men's minds," that the Judges of the Supreme Court and other influential lawyers might ascertain its success before they left the city for the autumn vacation. Rapin supposes that it was delayed to ascertain if any signs of opposition transpired, which would have been vigorously checked. Clarendon states that the Earl of Traquair persuaded the King that preparation would be made for the more willing reception of the Liturgy in July ; yet it was observed that Traquair was pur- posely absent on the day of the tumult, afterwards assigning as an excuse that he was in the country on the occasion of the marriage of a kinsman, and was detained by rain on the Sunday morning ; while others maintain that it was postponed by the secret enemies of the Church, to allow the Presbyterians sufficient time to concert their measures. Bishop Lindsay, in his letter to the Presbytery or " Exercise" of Dalkeith on the 28th of April previously, merely reminded the incumbents that the next Diocesan Synod was to be held on the last Wednesday of May, and desired their attendance — " For," he observes, " at that time there are sundry things that I have to impart unto you, and in special concerning the Service- Books that are to he received in our Church." From this it ap- pears that the Liturgy was to be submitted to the Diocesan Synod. The success of the Liturgy in other Dioceses, except those in the North, was very indifferent. At St Andrews it is 1G37.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 505 said that only a part of it was used by Archdeacon Gladstanes for about a month. The officiating minister read the service for a time in Dunblane, and was in consequence designated a " corrupt icorldlinci The parish minister in Brechin cathedral refused, and Bishop Whiteford is alleged to have caused his own servant to officiate — which is probably a Presbyterian fiction. Such was the reception of the Scottish Liturgy, and it must be admitted that it was a fatal error to enforce its reception by authority on a people who were utterly ignorant of ecclesiastical usages and Primitive practice. The Privy Council soon became sensible of this fact. Meanwhile the state of Edinburgh after the above riot on the 23d of July deserves notice. Baillie says — " The day thereafter I had occasion to be in the town. I found the people nothing settled, but if that Service had been presented to them again, resolved to have done some mischief. Some six or seven servants were put in ward ; the town put under an episcopal interdict, which yet continues ; no preaching, no prayers on the week days, no reading nor prayers on Sundays." It is stated that for a month there was no public worship in the city — that " the haill kirk doors were locked, and the zealous [Presbyterian] parti- zans flocked each Sunday with melancholy foreboding to their de- votions in Fife, and then returned to their own homes."* On Monday the Privy Council issued a proclamation condemning the conduct of the rioters, and prohibiting all turbulent assem- blages of people under the highest penalties. The Magistrates also publicly denounced the tumult, laid the blame of the whole on the rabble, and promised to exert themselves by searching for and apprehending the ringleaders. They also declared to the English Privy Council that they would maintain the peace of the city, and establish the use of the Liturgy in all the parish churches. In a letter addressed to the King, which was sent to Archbishop Laud, they professed the most devoted loyalty, stated the additions to the stipends of the city clergy notwithstanding the exhaustion of the corporation funds by public works, and appealed in proof of their sincerity to the Scottish Privy Council, the Lord Treasurer Tra- quair. Bishop Sydserff of Galloway, and Bishop Wedderburn of Dunblane. They made a show of their zeal by imprisoning a few women, as mentioned by Baillie, and prohibiting the sale of the " Spalding's History, p. 43, 506 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. scurrilous pamphlet entitled, " A Dispute against the English Popish Ceremonies." It was evidently the object of all parties to free themselves from blame. Archbishop Spottiswoode convened the Bishops, who sent an express to Court, and in their account of the riot the citizens of Edinburgh were censured as the chief actors, with a complaint against the Earl of Traquair that he had been purpose- ly absent. The Pi'ivy Council were offended at this procedure without consulting them, and alleged that the Bishops had not sufficiently examined the facts. They held that the city would be liable for any mischief which might afterwards occur, silenced Ramsay and Bollock, two of the ministers, for not using the Liturgy in their respective churches on the preceding Sunday, and deposed Patrick Henderson, the ordinary reader in St Giles' church. This was on Friday the 28th, in a meeting at which Archbishops Spottiswoode and Lindsay, and the Bishops of Edin- burgh, Galloway, Ross, and Brechin, Aberdeen, and Moray, were present. After hearing the Magistrates explain the course they intended to adopt for the " peaceable exercise" of the Liturgy, and the protection of the clergy who used it in Divine service, the Lords of the Privy Council ordained " the Provost and Bailies to advise among themselves anent an obligatory act, to be given by the town for the real performance of what they shall undertake in the business above mentioned ; and allow them to publish by tuck of drum the orders to be established by them for keeping their town in peace and quietness, and preventing of all trouble and commotion within the same." On the following day the report of the clergy " anent the Service-Book" was received by the Privy Council at a meeting in Archbishop Spottiswoode's house, at which were present the Archbishop of Glasgow, and the Bishops of Galloway, Aberdeen, and Brechin. The Primate announced for himself and the other Bishops that in the then state of affairs, after the serious opposition to the Liturgy, it would be withdrawn till the King's pleasure was known regarding the " redress and punishment of the authors and actors of that disorderly tumult ;" and in the meanwhile, " in the whole churches of the city sermon shall be made at the accustomed times by regular and obedient ministers ; that a prayer shall be made before and after sermon ; and that neither the old Service nor the new established Service 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 507 be used in the interim." The Privy Council sanctioned this arrangement, by authorizing the Bishops " to do therein accord- ing to the powers incumbent unto them in the duty of their offices," When the tidings of the riot in Edinburgh reached the Court the King was greatly irritated. On the 7th of August Archbishop Laud wrote a long letter to the Earl of Traquair, expressing his sentiments and those of the King on the subject, and complaining of the injudicious manner in which the preparations were conducted. " His Majesty," said the Archbishop, " well knows the clergy have not power enough to go through with a business of this nature, and therefore is not very well satisfied with them either for the omission in that kind, to advise for assistance of the Lords of the Privy Council, or for the preparation or way they took. For cer- tainly the publication a week before, that on next Sunday the prayers according to the Liturgy should be read in all the churches of Edinburgh, was upon the matter to give those that were ill affected to the Service time to communicate their thoughts, and to premeditate and provide against it, as it is most apparent they did." The Archbishop also censured the clergy for their misman- agement, especially for transmitting their account of the tumult without consulting the Privy Council, and regrets the casualty of the marriage of Traquair's kinsman, which had prevented the EarPs presence in the city on that day. Archbishop Laud then laments the withdrawal of the Liturgy till the King's pleasure was known, which he thinks was the " weakest part." He states that he wrote to Archbishop Spottiswoode to that effect, and observes to Tra- quair— " Your Lordship at the Council, July 24, spoke very worthily against the interdicting of the Service, for that were in effect as much as to disclaim the work, or to give way to the inso- lency of the baser multitude, and his Majesty hath commanded me to thank you for it in his name; but the disclaiming the Book as any act of theirs, as [if] it was his Majesty's command, was most unworthy. It is most true the King commanded a Liturgy, and it was time they had one. They did not like to admit of ours, but thought it reputation for them, as indeed it was, to compile one of their own ; yet as near as may be they have done it well."* The very day on which Archbishop Laud wrote the above letter ' Rushworth's Historical Collections, vol. ii. p. 389, 390. 508 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. to the Earl of Traquair, that nobleman addressed an epistle to the Marquis of Hamilton, from which it appears that the Privy Coun- cil were most anxious to lay the chief blame on the Bishops. Other parties also endeavoured to exonerate themselves. Those were the Magistrates and Town-Council of Edinburgh, who on the 19th of August wrote to Archbishop Laud, expressing their deep regret at what had occurred, assuring his Grace of their loyal obedience, and that they had " daily concurred with their Ordinary [Bishop Lindsay] and the ministry for settling of the Service-Book,"" re- ferring as proof to the Earl of Traquair, and the Bishops of Gal- loway and Dunblane. They concluded by thanking the English Primate for past favours.* This letter gratified the Archbishop, who in a letter to Traquair, dated September 11, says that he had laid their " very full and discreet" letter before the King. " I have written the city an answer by the return, and given them his Majesty's thanks, which indeed he commanded me to do very heart- ily, and in truth they deserve it, especially as times stand." The Magistrates in a subsequent communication with the Archbishop, " thanked his Grace for his kind letter with all their hearts." The use of the Liturgy was nevertheless urged in the se- veral Dioceses, and in the northern counties it was very generally received. Baillie says that " most of the Bishops had raised letters of horning, to charge all the ministers in their Dioceses to buy two books for the use of their parishes within fifteen days. Glasgow was very diligent in charging all his Presbyteries, and by no entreaty would delay so much as to his assembly [Diocesan Synod] in August, but would have us all to the horn presently who would not buy. St Andrews moved many to buy the books with- out chai'ging ; only two or three unconform men were charged in his Diocese." The Diocesan Synod of Glasgow was appointed to be held on the last Wednesday of August, and on the 13th of that month Baillie, who was then minister of Kilwinning, received a letter from Archbishop Lindsay, requesting him to preach at the opening of the Synod, and " to frame his sermon to incite his hearers to the obedience and practice of the Canons of our Church and Service-Book published and established by authority." The reply of Baillie, who had not yet become a Presbyterian, ex- • Rushworth's Historical Collections, vol. ii. p. 393, 394. The Magistrates who sifjned the letter were John Cochrane, An. Ainslie, J. Smith, C. Hamilton. 1G37.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 509 plains his own feelings, and is honourable to the personal character of the Archbishop. He expresses himself grateful to the Arch- bishop for entertaining such an opinion of his " poor gifts" as to lionour him with so great a service ; but he respectfully declined on the plea that he had formed no opinion decisive on the Canons and Liturgy of which he had only a " slight view," and for the present it had not satisfied his mind. " Yea," he says, " the little pleasure I have in these Books, the great displeasure I find the most part both of pastors and people wherever I come to have conceived against them, has filled my mind with such a measure of grief that I am scarce able to preach to my own flock ; but to speak in an- other congregation, far less in so famous a meeting, and that upon these matters, I am at this time utterly unable. Your Lordship, I put no question, is so equitable as to take in good part this very ingenious confession of the true cause why I am unable to accept that honourable employment which your Lordship's more than or- dinary respect would have laid upon me ; so for this and many moi'e favours received, far above my deserving, I pray God to bless your Lordship, and to continue you many years to be our overseer ; for be persuaded that many thousands here where I live are greatly afraid that whenever your Lordship shall go their peace and greatness shall go with you." Notwithstanding this spontaneous testimony to the character of Archbishop Lindsay, and to his con- duct in his Diocese, the writer meanly designates him a " trouble- some man " in a letter to his friend Mr Spang written about the very time. Baillie, however, was charged on his canonical obe- dience to preach before the Synod, with an intimation that the sub- ject of his sermon was left to his own discretion. He prepared himself, and resolved, he says, " to have spoken no syllable of any conformity, but pressed those pastoral duties which would not have pleased all :" but he was accidentally relieved, and his place was supplied by Mr William Annan, moderator of the Presbytery of Ayr. The Archbishop, however, wished Baillie to preach on the following day, " being the chief day of the Synod," which he de- clined. He gives an account of Mr Annan's sermon, which was from the passage in the First Epistle to Timothy — " I command that prayers be made for all men." In the latter half of his dis- course Mr Annan commented on the Liturgy, and " spake for the defence of it," says BaiUie, " in whole, and sundry most plausible 510 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. parts of it, as well in my poor judgment as any in the Island of Great Britain could have done, considering all circumstances ; however, he did maintain, to the dislike of all in an unfit time, that which was hanging in suspense betwixt the King and the country." The sermon excited a considerable sensation among the female auditors. On the following day Mr John Lindsay, moderator of the Presbytery of Lanark, preached ; and as Mr Annan's defence of the Liturgy had given offence to the women, it is said that some of them whispered to Mr Lindsay, as he was proceeding to the pulpit, that " if he should touch the Service- Book in his sermon he should be rent out of the pulpit ; he took the advice, and let that matter alone." The viragoes resolved to revenge themselves on Mr Annan, and when he was leaving the cathedral church thirty or forty of them assailed him with such imprecations before the Archbishop and Magistrates, that it was necessary to send two of them to prison. This was soon known in such a small place as Glasgow then was, and during the day whenever he appeared in the streets angry looks and threats indicated his unpopularity. He was recognized about nine in the evening on his way to the Archbishop's residence with some of the clergy by some hundreds of those females, who grossly maltreated him, tore his clothes, and almost murdered him ; yet it was considered prudent not to investigate this disorder lest some women of good rank would have been implicated. On the following day Mr Annan was accompanied by the Magistrates and some of his brethren to protect him safely out of the town. While mounting his horse the animal fell with him, and both were rolled into what Baillie calls a " foul mire," which was unfeelingly cheered by the spectators. Much excitement prevailed in Glasgow at that time, and Baillie observes — " I suspect these tumults will hinder the [Arch]bishop, for all his stoutness, in haste to read the Service in his cathedral." On the 23d of August the " supphcation of certain ministers of Fife " was presented to the Privy Council by Henderson and two others. In Edinburgh they met William Oastlelaw from Stew- arton, Thomas Bonar from Maybole, both in Ayrshire, and Robert Wilkie, from Glasgow, Presbyterian ministers who had been charged by Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow to use the Liturgy, and who had been induced by the Earl of Loudon, Dickson, and 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 511 others in the West of Scotland, to resort thither for advice, Henderson and Dickson, who in their several localities, the former in Fifeshire, the latter in Ayrshire, were considered the acknow- ledged leaders of the Presbyterians, were now joined by Cant, Bollock, Ramsay, and Murray, all preachers in great repute among the common people. Henderson and his companions from Fife complained that they had been each required by the moderator of the Presbytery of St Andrews to procure two copies of the Liturgy, and declared that they would willingly receive one copy to read and examine it before they promised to obey it, but that this had been refused, and that they were now charged with letters of horning by their Lordships on an accusation that they had refused the books out of " curiosity and singularity." They ob- jected to the Liturgy generally that it was not sanctioned by the General Assembly nor by Act of Parliament — that the liberties of what they called the " true Kii'k," and the " form of worship and religion received at the Reformation, and universally practised since," had been warranted by those authorities, especially the Parliaments of 15G7 and 1633 — and that the Liturgy would be " found to depart far from the form of worship and reformation of this Kirk ; and in points most material to draw near to the Kirk of Rome." To all this Bishop Maxwell of Ross replied — " That whereas they pretend ignorance of what is contained in the Book, it appears by their many objections and exceptions to all parts of it almost, that they are too well versed in it, but have abused it pitifully : — that not the General Assembly, which consists of a multitude, but the Bishops, have the authority to govern the Church, and are the presentative Church of the kingdom : — that they will never be able, do what they can, to prove what is con- tained in the Service-Book to be either superstitious or idolatrous, but that it is one of the most orthodox and perfect Liturgies in the Christian Church." On the 25th of August, two days after the " Supplication" was presented, the Privy Council issued a de- claration to correct " a great mistaking in the letters and charges given out upon the act of Council made anent the buying of the Service-Book," and enjoined it to be understood that the said act and letters extended only to the buying of the books, and " no farther," which in other words intimated that they had nothing to do with the reading of them. It is stated that at the Council 512 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. board, before tho suspension of the reading of the Liturgy was discussed, several noblemen by letters, and numbers of gentlemen personally, entreated the Lords of the Privy Council " to hold the yoke of the black book* from off the necks of the ministers," and pointed out the dangerous consequences which might ensue to the Government. The Earl of Southesk recommended Henderson's supplication. He was answered by Archbishop Spottiswoode, who stated that " as there were only a few ministers, and two or three Fifegentlemenin [the] town, there needed to be no steer [noise] anent the affair." According to the " Eelation " of the Earl of Eothes, Southesk sternly replied — " If all their pouches [pockets] were weel ryped [rifled], a great many of the best gentry in the country would be found to resent these matters." "The Archbishop would only have looked to some petitions which were worst expressed ; but the Earl of Roxburgh pointed out the one from St Andrews, which spoke most freely." Henderson and the other Presbyterian ministers met at dinner on the day of the meeting of the Privy Council to consult about the state of their affairs, and one of them concocted a document, " averse to all conformity, but modest as could have been expected," which Baillie has preserved at length. In another paper, entitled "Informations given to several Council- lors, "the above objections by Henderson are repeated in four of the seven particulars set forth. In the fifth it is alleged that the Liturgy destroyed their kirk-sessions, presbyteries, and As- semblies— a most erroneous or unfounded inference ; and that it placed " censure of doctrine, the admission of ministers, and the whole government of the Kirk, absolutely in the hands of the Pre- lates." The sixth is not a little ludicrous, and shews how much the opponents of the Liturgy were blinded by prejudice : — " It es- tablisheth a reading ministry ; whosoever can read the Book can be a minister, and he who is best gifted must say no more nor he readeth, whether in prayer, baptism, communion, &c." According to this notion whosoever can pray extemporary is fit to be a Pres- byterian minister. The seventh and last objection was, in addition to the usual false charge of the Liturgy having " many gross points of Popery," that it " prescribeth Apocrypha to be read as if * Probably called the Black Book because tiie whole Liturgy, with the exception of the rubrics, is printed in black letter. 1G37.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 513 it were the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets." This is a shameful misrepresentation. The only chapters selected out of the Apocryphal Books are from the Books of Wisdom and Ecclesias- ticus, and are limited to the commemorations of the Conversion of St Paul, the Purification of the Virgin Mary, St Bartholomew's Day, St Matthew's Day, and All Saints' Day. Doubtless the Pres- byterians and the sectaries conscientiously object to the observance of such days, but these commemorations were not and never are enforced, and the recognition of them has no connection whatever with the practice of the Church of Rome. On the 25th of August the Privy Council WTote to the King, expressing their willingness to render every assistance to establish the Liturgy. They expected that the Liturgy might soon be brought into general use ; but after appointing a meeting of Council, though it was then the vacation, solely to devise the most prudent measures to carry it into effect — " We found ourselves, they declared, " far beyond our expectation surprised with the clamour and fears of his Majesty's subjects from almost all the parts and corners of the kingdom ;" and that such was the feeling " even of those who have heretofore lived in obedience and conformity to his Majesty's laws, both in an ecclesiastical and civil business ; and they found it so to increase, that they conceived it to be matter of high consequence, in respect of the general murmur and grudge in all sorts of people for urging of the Service-Book, as the like hath not been heard in this kingdom ; they therefore could no longer delay nor conceal from his ]\Lajesty, not knowing whereunto the same may tend, and what effects it may produce." The Privy Council concluded by suggest- ing to the King either to examine the whole matter by simimon- ing some of themselves, both clerical and lay, to London, or to adopt any other safe measure to settle the commotion. This let- ter was signed by Archbishop Spottiswoode, the Bishops of Edin- burgh, Galloway, Ross, Brechin, eight Earls, Sir Thomas Hope, as Lord Advocate, and several other members of the Privy Council. As this letter was despatched the day when the Privy Council issued their explanation, that their " charges and letters" only extended to the buying of the two copies of the Liturgy for each parish, Henderson and other " Supplication" men publicly dined together, and expressed their gratitude to their Lordships for the above mitigation, and for the representation of their case transmitted to 33 514 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1G37. the King. This was conveyed to the Privy Council by the Earls of Sutherland and Wemyss, who had now joined the movement, and encouraged the ringleaders in their opposition. The proceedings of the Privy Council were intimated to the Pres- byterian leaders ; the order for the use of the Liturgy was with- drawn ; and those committed to prison for their concern in the tumult were set at liberty. Baillie, indeed, states that the Privy Council resolved not to enforce even the purchase of the two copies of the Liturgy for every parish church, and that the Bishops, who were responsible for the expenses, insisted that the money should be guaranteed. According to the " Relation" of the Earl of Rothes,* Bishop Maxwell of Ross obtained a grant to print and sell the Liturgy, but " the same was gainstood, and [it] was thought fit that each Bishop should have the buying of such as served his own Diocese." The truth or inaccuracy of BaiUie's statement is now of no moment. The assurance that a full an- swer would be given to the demands of the Presbyterians restored apparent tranquillity ; but the popular feeling had only subsided, and the opposition to the Liturgy found new adherents in most of the counties south of the Tay. The Presbyterian leaders were the more successful in their projects, for none of the peasantry and many of the upper classes had ever seen the Liturgy, and as vast numbers of the former were uneducated, it would have been of no avail though it had been accessible to them all. They obtained their information on it solely from their preachers, who described the Liturgy in the most exaggerated language to their hearers. Inflammatory, false, and seditious pamphlets, chiefly sent from the English Puritans, were in extensive and rapid circulation through- out the country, irritating the minds of the populace, and laying the train for the great explosion. The 20th of September, when the King's answer was expected, was a day anxiously expected by the leaders of the movement. They had secured as their secret legal adviser the Lord Advocate Hope. Lord Balmerino and Henderson were to act when requir- ed, and four of their associates were sent to various parts of the kingdom to keep up the agitation. Rollock was entrusted with a " A Relation of the Proceedings concerning the Affairs of the Kii-k of Scotland from August 1637 to July 1638, by John Earl of Rothes. Edinburgh, 4to. printed for the Bannatyne Club, 1830. 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 515 mission to stir up the " brethren" in the Southern counties, Cant was appointed to the North, where their cause was most unpopu- lar, Ramsay to Forfar and Kincardine shires, and Murray to Perth and Stirling. The Western counties, Fife, and the city of Edinburgh, had no lack of agitators. Meanwhile, on the 4th of September Archbishop Laud wrote a letter to Archbishop Spottiswoode, in which he regretted that the Scottish Privy Council had not acted with that unanimity and determination which the crisis required, and deplored that they had not been acquainted with the proceedings of the Bishops, nor their advice taken, till it was too late : — " And that," continues the Arch- bishop, "after the thing was done, you consulted apart, and sent up to the King without calling a Council, or joining the lay Lords with you, whereas all was little enough in a business of this nature, and so much opposed by some factious men gathered, it seems, purposely together at Edinburgh to disturb this business. And indeed, my Lord, you could not in this particular have engaged the lay Lords too far ; and if any Lord here speak too much when he thought the Service might have been well received throughout all that kingdom in one day, I hope your Grace falls as much too short on the other side, for I hope it will be settled in far less time than seven years. And whereas you write that the fault is most in your ministers, I easily believe that to be true ; but then they should have been dealt with withal before hand, and made pliable, or else some others appointed in the room of such as dis- liked." The Archbishop concludes by noticing the conduct of the two Edinburgh ministers Ramsay and Rollock. He agrees with Archbishop Spottiswoode that " a sharper course would do more good " with such persons as the former ; and as to the latter he says — " I am sorry as well as you for Mr Rollock, and that is all I have to say of him." On the 11th of September Archbishop Laud wrote a long letter to the Earl of Traquair, in reply to one from that nobleman dated 20th August, and mentions that the English Puritans were greatly elated and encouraged by the opposition in Scotland to the Liturgy. He expresses himself disappointed at delaying the use of the Liturgy, and is not surprised at this recommendation from " such Lords and others as were ill affected to it, which they could not but see would answer their own ends, but that my Lord of Ross 516 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637- [Maxwell] should give the advice, and my Lord of St Andrews follow it with such stiffness, may be a wonder to any man that knows them and the business." He is surprised at the informa- tion communicated to him by Archbishop Spottiswoode, that Bishop Maxwell had gone to his Diocese, and that several of the others had also left Edinburgh — " my Lord of Ross especially, whose hand hath been as much in it as the most." He states that the King was much pleased at the Bishops of Edinburgh, Galloway, and Dunblane, remaining in the city, and also thanked Traquair " for staying with them, and keeping them so well in heart : for," he says, " as the business is now foiled, if you do not stick close to God's and the King's service in it, it will certainly suffer more than it is fit it should." The Archbishop farther intimates that the King was gratified at the Earl's exertions in Edinburgh to maintain " such as shall take upon them to read the Liturgy," and compliments the Magistrates on their conduct. After some observations the Archbishop concludes — " And since I hear from others that some exception is taken because there is more in that Liturgy than is in the Liturgy in England, why did they not ad- mit the Liturgy of England without more ado ? But by their refusal of that, and their dislike of this, it is more manifest they would have neither perhaps, yea, none at all, were they left to themselves. But, my Lord, to yourself only, and in your ear, a great favour you should do me if you will get my Lord [Bishop] of Galloway to set me down in brief propositions, without any further discourse, all the exceptions that are taken against the Liturgy by Ramsay, Rollock, or any other ; and I could be content to know who the Bishops are who would have amended something had they been advised with, and what that is which they would have so amended." The King's letter to the Privy Council, dated Oatlands, 10th September, was delivered some days afterwards by the Duke of Lennox. The Privy Council and the Magistrates of Edinburgh were censured — the former as a " very slack Council," or the people were very bad subjects: — for not continuing the use of the Liturgy after the 23d of July, and also for not punishing the rioters. A specified number of the Privy Council was ordered to attend in Edinburgh or the vicinity during the vacation time " till the Sor- vice-Book be settled." They were enjoined to see that the minis- 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 517 ters of Edinburgh performed their promised duty ; every Bishop was to introduce the Liturgy into his Diocese, as the Bishops of Ross and Dunblane had already done ; and the burghs were to be warned that only those were to be elected magistrates whose conformity would be certified. Such was the reply of Charles I., who, regardless of the Presby- terians, seems still to have confided in the loyalty of the mass of the people. It was soon known, and multitudes simultaneously re- sorted to Edinburgh, as if, observes Clarendon, in " a cause which concerned their salvation." This excitement, though ostensibly religious, had now to a great extent assumed a political aspect, and many of the Nobility and landed proprietors, who cherished an im- placable hatred to the King, on account of the compulsory surrender of the teinds, incited the malcontents in their opposition. On the same 20th of September the Privy Council replied to the King, and the letter evinces their disagi'eeable position. They made an act appointing seven of their number to attend constantly in Edinburgh during the vacation, two of whom were Archbishop Spottiswoode as Lord Chancellor, and the Earl of Traquair as Lord High Treasurer. They intimated their arrangements to the King, and informed him that they had ordered the burghs to " make a right choice of conform and well affected persons for the charge of the magistracy this ensuing year." They also described to the King the state of public feeling, and alleged that since the date of their last letter the opposition to the Liturgy had not abated, specifying sixty-eight petitions which they had received on the subject, and referring to the Presbytery of Auchterarder and the city of Glasgow — " the efffect and substance of all which resolve into one allegation, that the Service enjoined is against the religion presently professed, or that the same is unorderly brought in without the knowledge or consent of a General Assem- bly, or contrary to the acts of Parliament, or disconform from the Service used and received in England, [all] which the petitioners undertook to qualify and make good, wherewith we have forborne to meddle till we receive your Majesty's gracious resolution there- anent." They express their grief at the result, and refer to the Earl of Stirling, his '• Majesty's secretary, who could lay before him a more full and particular account of all that was moved of concluded in Council." 518 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1G37. The Earl of Rothes gives an account of the proceedings of the petitioners on this 20th of September, and although his statements are those of an enemy they are of contemporary impoi'tance. He attended a meeting in the residence of the Earl of Wemyss, where he met a number of the disaffected Nobility. They resolved to draw up a petition to the Privy Council, and accompany the Duke of Lennox thither. Other meetings were held of the smaller barons or lairds, those of Fife mustering in great force ; and upwards of one hundred ministers, magistrates of the principal burghs, deputies from seventy parishes, and numbers of the gentry from several adjacent counties, also appeared. It is said that " many of these knew not of the rest being there till they met at the door of the Council-House but this is not to be credited, and is refuted by the organized plan which had been effected. When the Duke of Lennox came up the High Street from Holyroodhouse to the meeting of the Council in the Tolbooth, an immense crowd of all ranks and classes resorted to learn the result. The Presbyterian ministers ranged themselves on a part of the High Street, and made a low obeisance as the Duke passed. The noblemen stationed themselves opposite the door of the Tolbooth. All the parties attended during the forenoon to give in their petition, which had been concocted from one written by Henderson, and expressed in the name of the Nobility, Barons, ministers, and burgesses ; but they were not heard, and the Council rose at twelve o'clock. The Duke of Lennox returned to the Palace to dinner, and the peti- tion, which had not been read, was procured from the clerk. Rothes carried it to Traquair, who after perusing it softened those expressions in it which required the Bishops to concur with the petitioners in their remonstrance to the King, and advised the Presbyterians not to irritate any individual. The petition was in consequence again written. Traquair appeared, unaccompanied by Lennox, between three and four in the afternoon, the " Supplicat- ing" noblemen and ministers ranging themselves in the same order as in the morning. The Earl retired with Archbishop Spottiswoode, several Bishops, and members of the Privy Council, to an apart- ment called the Banqueting House, in which they remained an hour and a half, and sent for Lennox, who soon joined them. The Earl of Sutherland presented the " Supplication"" to the clerk, and desired it to be read, while his friends out of doors adjourned to 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 519 what was called the Laigh House to wait the result. Before the Council rose the Earls of Sutherland and Wemyss were called in, and told that their petition had been duly considered, and would be presented to the King by Lennox. Rothes relates his interview with Archbishop Spottiswoode in the afternoon of that day. They conversed on the Liturgy, of which Rothes disapproved as illegal and unsound. The Arch- bishop denied the latter, and demanded the proof. Rothes re- ferred to the Office for administering the Communion, and to the Office for Baptism, which declared that infants were regenerated. The Archbishop contended that it was not fairly interpreted by the Presbyterians, and stated that the Bishop of Derry [Bramhall, afterwards Archbishop of Armagh], to whom he sent a copy, had expressed his opinion so favourably of the Liturgy as to regret that Scotland should have the advantage of England in such a work, and that the Prince's tutor had commended it, both declaring that there had not been such a Liturgy for the first six hundred years after Christ. Rothes replied that the Bishop of Derry was reputed the most unsound man in Ireland and a great Arminian, as the Prince's tutor was considered in England, and that it was the worse of any of their testimonies in favour of the Liturgy, or even of the Archbishop of Canterbury's. Archbishop Spottis- woode, smiling, asked — " What was the necessity of all this resist- ance 2 If the King turned Papist we behoved still to obey him as subjects. Who could resist princes ? When King Edward was a Protestant, and made a reformation. Queen Mary changed it, and Queen Elizabeth altered it again. There was no resisting, and no Kirk was without troubles." Rothes replied that they soon " got it changed in England, for the two professions were nearly equally divided ; but there were few here to concur in such a change, all being reformed, and would never yield. Moreover, in his opinion the reformation of England was not so complete as that of Scotland, and had not so much law for it ; the former was but half reformed." Rothes mentions that " distraction began to increase in that city [Edinburgh], because the Magistrates had never shewn their dislike of that Book as [did] the rest of the country." The crowd of persons in the city hostile to the Liturgy induced the Magis- trates to send a petition to the Committee of the Privy Council, 520 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. which was revised by Archbishop Spottiswoode, that the Liturgy- should not be pressed on them till the King's answer was known. It was intimated that their petition would be transmitted to the King, and his sentiments made known on the 17th of October, The Magistrates also considered themselves bound to explain their conduct to Archbishop Laud. In a letter dated the 26th of Sep- tember, which is in answer to one from the English Primate, they expressed their willingness to receive and maintain the Liturgy — " not only in ourselves, but in the greatest and best part of our inhabitants, of whom from time to time we have had most confi- dent assurance."" They then relate to the Archbishop their pecu- liar situation — " Since our last there hath been such an innume- rable confluence of people from all the corners of this kingdom, both of clergy and laity, and of all degrees, by occasion of two [Privy] Council days, and such things suggested to our poor igno- rant people, that they have razed out what we by great and con- tinual pains had imprinted in their minds, and diverted them alto- gether from their former resolutions ; so that now, when we were urged by ourselves alone, we could not adventure, but were forced to supplicate the Lords of the Council to continue us in the state they had done the rest of the kingdom, having hitherto forborne either to combine with them, or to countenance them in their sup- plications ; yet we will not forbear to do our Master's service to our power, and shall study to imprint on their minds what hath been taken away."* During the interval before the 1 7th of October the excitement still continued in Edinburgh, and multitudes remained to watch the progress of events, suspecting that if the Liturgy were formally received there it would be introduced into other towns, and by degrees throughout the kingdom. The influence of the Court had induced the Town-Council to elect Sir John Hay, a zealous sup- porter of the Episcopal Church, to be the Lord Provost. This excited additional alarm in the minds of the agitators, who nar- rowly watched the proceedings of the standing committee of the Privy Council, who daily attended. One day, when sitting in the Tolbooth, a mob of men and women rushed in upon the committee, exclaiming — " The Book we will not have." They assailed Sir • Rushworth's Collections, vol. ii. p. 399, 400. This letter is signed by Ch. Hamil- ton, James Eocheid, J. Cochrane, J. Smith, Bailiks. 1G37.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 521 John Hay with opprobrious epithets, and they were induced by the Magistrates to retire only by the assurance that at least the citi- zens would not be more urged to receive the Liturgy than the in- habitants of any other town in the kingdom. On the 17th of October three proclamations intimated the King's resolution. The first enjoined all strangers to leave Edin- burgh and return to their several homes within twenty-four hours, under the penalty of being denounced rebels, and their goods confiscated ; the second removed the Supreme Courts first to Linlithgow, and afterwards to Dundee, there to remain during the royal pleasure ; and the third prohibited the sale of Gillespie's performance — the " Dispute against the English Popish Cere- monies obtruded upon the Kirk of Scotland." On the following day a dreadful tumult broke out, which was of more serious im- portance than the riot on the 23d July. In the morning some hundreds of women assembled at the head of an alley near the Tolbooth, and moved in a body to the house in which the Town- Council were convened. An immense crowd soon collected near the Tolbooth, in which the Privy Council met, and the city was again in an uproar. At this crisis Bishop Sydserff of Galloway was recognized pressing through the populace towards the Tol- booth, where he was to be examined as a witness in a civil case. The assertion of the Earl of Dumfries had become public that the Bishop wore a gold crucifix under his vest, and the multitude attempted to ascertain the truth of this statement. After rough usage, and amid profane imprecations, the Bishop was enabled by some friends to approach near the Tolbooth. His dangerous situation was intimated by some of his domestics to his former pupil Traquair, who was with the Earl of Wigton, another of the Privy Council, in a house in the vicinity. Traquair, Wigton, and their servants, ran to the rescue of the Bishop, and after great exertions they got near him, but found themselves in no better condition. They contrived to send privately to the Magistrates for relief from this singular imprisonment amid a dense crowd of excited enthusiasts. The civic authorities replied that they were be- set in their own council room, which was filled with persons threaten- ing murder if their demands were not granted. The two noblemen and their followers forced a passage to the town-council room, and it was resolved by the Magistrates and Traquair to yield to the demands 522 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. of the rioters, and petition with them against the Liturgy ; and that Eamsay and Rollock, the silenced ministers, and Patrick Henderson, the deprived reader, should be restored. This ar- rangement was publicly notified by the Magistrates at the Cross, and calmed the opposition to the civic authorities. The two Earls now turned their thoughts to the perilous situation of the Bishop of Galloway, whom they had left a prisoner at the door of the Tolbooth. Traquair and two of the Magistrates, with several attendants, went to relieve him, but they were assailed with frantic exclamations — " God defend all those who defend God's cause ! God confound the Service-Book and all its maintainors !" Although the rioters were assured that their grievances would be redressed, their fury increased, and Traquair was thrown down on the street, and his hat, cloak, and white staff, indicating his office of Lord High Treasurer, violently pulled from him. The Earl was mal- treated in such a manner, that if he had not been pulled to his feet by some persons near him the populace would have trampled him to death. In this condition he was conveyed to the door of the Tolbooth, at which were the Bishop and others of the Privy Council. It was now the afternoon, yet the tumult was not sub- siding. Traquair, with the approbation of the Bishop and the Lord Provost Hay, at length sent Sir James Murray of Ravelrig to a house in the neighbourhood, in which were convened the Earl of Loudon and others of the " Supplicating" noblemen, requesting them to wait on him, Loudon and some of his friends complied, and surrounded Traquair, the Bishop, and the Provost, whom they escorted quietly down the street, their followers keeping off the crowd, till they came to Traquairs house in an alley long remov- ed known as Niddry's Wynd, when the rabble denounced Bishop Sydserff as a " Papist loon, Jesuit loon, and betrayer of religion." Here the courage of the Lord Provost failed, but he was assured by Loudon and others that those epithets were uttered only by a " pack of poor women," and he succeeded in reaching his own house. It is stated that the mob afterwards broke his windows, and might have done more mischief, but they were dispersed by his servant, who fired a musquet at them charged only with powder. The Privy Council met in Holyroodhouse in the afternoon, and issued a proclamation to keep the peace, prohibiting all " public gatherings and convocations within the city." This had some 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OP THE LITURGY. 523 effect in allaying the commotion. On the other side, the Presby- terians were actively engaged in their private and confidential arrangements. Baillie mentions that at the desire of Lord Mont- gomery his patron, in compliance with the request of the Earl of Rothes, Montgomery's father-in-law, he attended a meeting of the " Supplicants" at Edinburgh on the day of the above tumult. The Nobility, gentry, and preachers of the Presbyterian party met in separate rooms. In the evening a number of the " Supplicants" convened in Lord Balmerino's lodgings about eight o'clock after supper, and it was resolved that if any of them were cited before the High Commission, its authority should be declined as an un- lawful judicatory. The Earl of Loudon and Lord Balmerino made sundry speeches, and their next meeting was fixed for the 15th of November. It was on this occasion, or rather on the previous even- ing, that the true designs of Henderson were developed. He mov- ed that though they had formerly petitioned against the Liturgy, they might now complain of the Bishops as underniiners of religion, and crave justice to be done upon them. Many were at first averse to this bold proposition, declaring that they complained only of the Service-Book, but otherwise they had no quarrel with the Bishops. Loudon and Rothes silenced this opposition, and Loudon and Balmerino, Henderson and Dickson, were appointed to draw up a complaint against the Bishops, and this document was to be submitted to the " Supplicants" on the following morning. A letter was also sent to the Privy Council, pretending that as many of them had private affairs to transact in Edinburgh before the approaching term of Martinmas, it was impossible for them to leave the city within twenty-four hours, as the proclamation en- joined. On the evening of the day of the second riot several of the Bishops retired to Dalkeith Castle, six miles from Edinburgh, the site of which, now occupied by the Duke of Buccleuch's mansion, was then the residence of Traquair. It is stated on the authority of Baillie that the appointment of another assemblage on the 15th of November, and the signs of the times, so paralyzed Archbishop Spottiswoode, that he and the Bishops now seldom attended the Privy Council meetings. The Primate doubtless saw that one great object of the Presbyterians was to exclude him and his brethren from the Council table, and they might have conducted 524 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. themselves in this passive manner to avoid any cause of offence. But the Presbyterian leaders had recourse to other expedients. To enlist the populace in their behalf, they got up two petitions, one from the men, women, servants, and children, in Edinburgh against the Liturgy, which was addressed to Archbishop Spottis- woode as Lord Chancellor ; and the other was from the " Noble- men, barons, ministers, burgesses, and commons," against the Liturgy and the Book of Canons, and sent to the Privy Council, who transmitted both to the King. As no apology or regret was expressed for the riots the King delayed to answer the petitions, and commanded the Privy Council to issue a proclamation, de- nouncing the riot of the 18th of October, and solemnly assuring all his loyal subjects that he abhorred all " superstition of popery," and would maintain the true religion as was " presently professed within his most ancient kingdom of Scotland." The Presbyterian preachers, careful to foment the frantic excite- ment against the Church, diligently circulated throughout their respective localities the intelligence of their intended muster on the 1.5th of November, A greater concourse of persons resorted to Edinburgh on that day with their " Supplications " than on the former occasions, and the Magistrates, seriously taught by past experience, were in great alarm for the peace of the city. Among the noblemen who had not been at any previous meetings was James fifth Earl afterwards first Marquis of Montrose, and his appearance in defence of the Presbyterian party — a party against whom, within six years afterwards, he was to take up arms in behalf of the King, and become their most dangerous and formid- able enemy, was, we are told, " most taken notice of." Montrose was at the time twenty-five years of age. After his return from foreign travel he waited on the King, whose reception of him, it is said, was not very favourable, and he hastened to Scotland and joined the Supplicants." Whatever may have been his treat- ment at Court his talents were well known and appreciated, if the statement of a writer at that period is correct, that " when the Bishops heard that he was come to Edinburgh to join in hostile measures against them they were somewhat affrighted, having that esteem of his parts that they thought it time for a storm when he engaged." Montrose became one of the most zealous supporters of the Covenant, for which he first fought, and then 1G37.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 525 denounced, when in arms against his former associates, as in- fomous, treasonable, and wicked. The presence of such a mob, who were daily increasing, alarmed the citizens of Edinburgh and the authorities, more especially as the language and demeanour of those enthusiasts indicated no very peaceable disposition. Traquair entreated their friends to induce them to disperse, but their leaders refused to interfere, and simply cautioned the " Supplicants" not to commit any outrages, enjoining them to appear seldom on the streets. It was also arranged that the " Supplicants " from each county should meet in separate houses, and mutually communicate by authorized messengers. The Earls of Traquair, Lauderdale, and Lord Lorn, held a conference with the " Supplicating " Nobility, as arranged at the Privy Council, to whom they represented the danger and illegality of their followers convening so frequently, and in such large numbers, particularly as the King had promised not to enforce the Liturgy before more mature deliberation ; and as he had pardoned the recent tumults, their conduct was more likely to irritate than to obtain a satisfactory adjustment of their com- plaints. The " Supplicants " replied by evasive answers, defend- ing themselves, and complaining that the Bishops had designated them rebellious subjects. They declared that they had no objec- tions to select a few noblemen, two gentlemen from every county, and one burgess from every burgh, to act for the whole ; but if the Pri\7 Council refused to recommend their " Supplications," they would themselves draw up a declaration to the King. Tra- quair, Lauderdale, and Lorn, replied that they were expressly pro- hibited to transmit their " Supplications," and their declaration would be stopped before it reached the King. The Presbyterians argued that their " Supphcations " were vindications of their pro- ceedings, and urged their usual objections against the Liturgy, Canons, High Commission Court, and other " innovations." They were told that it would be prudent to confine their opposition solely to the Liturgy for the present ; and that as the Privy Council expected the King's answer in a few days, if the mass of the " Supplicants" would leave the city quietly their accredited agents would receive a faithful account of the instructions of the Court. If these were favourable they would request permission from the King to transmit their complaints to him, and in the 526 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1G37. meantime they promised to persuade the Bishops not to excite their prejudices in rcHgious matters. After this interview the " SuppHcants"" seemed to approve of the propositions of Traquair and his two friends. They arranged that as many of the Nobihty as were incHned should form a council, with whom were to be associated two gentlemen from every county, one minister from each Presbytery, and one burgess from each burgh, together with Henderson and Dickson, the Earls of Rothes, Montrose, and Loudon, and Lord Lindsay of Balcarras, for the Nobility, three gentlemen for the counties, and five others, two of whom were preachers, were constantly to act in Edinburgh for the others as occasion required, and if necessary to summon all their adherents throughout the kingdom. They thus constituted a most illegal, dangerous, and even treasonable body selected from a certain number of their leaders. Those delegates met the Privy Council at Holyroodhouse on the following day. On the 16th of November it was finally agreed that the accusation of rebellion against the " Supplicants" by the Bishops should be regarded as a mere ebulition of anger — that the Privy Council could not inter- fere with the reponing of the ministers Eamsay and Rollock during the absence of Sir John Hay the Lord Provost — that Bishop Lindsay should use his influence with Archbishop Spottis- woode to restore Henderson the reader — and, to a certain extent, that the " Supplicants were to be allowed to meet in their several counties for choosing delegates." On the evening of the following day, after devotional exercises in their own way, and solemn as- severations of obedience and loyalty to their sovereign, which every act of their subsequent proceedings belied, they resolved to return to their several homes, leaving their illegal council or committee to manage their affairs. The committees constituted by the " Supplicants'" to sit in Edin- burgh were soon distinguished by the eccentric soubriquet of the Tables, from the circumstance of conducting their deliberations at four separate tables, or in four rooms, in the new Parliament House. The Privy Council wrote to the King and to the Earl of Stirling, intimating that as it was then the season of the year for paying accounts, and transacting other civil and private business, they had not issued any proclamation ordering strangers to leave Edin- burgh, which in all probability would have been disobeyed — that 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OP THE LITURGY. 527 they had arranged with the leaders to prevent any assemblages of disorderly persons — that the " Supplicants " had accused them of not properly representing to the King their objections to the Liturgy, and their fears at the unlimited powers of the High Court of Commission — and that the said " Supplicants " had quietly dispersed, waiting to learn from their agents in Edinburgh the King's reply. During this interval the personages composing the fo%r Tables organized their confederacy. Each Table consisted of so many individuals — four noblemen, four gentlemen, four ministers, and four burgesses — in all, a council of sixteen, one from which constituted a General Table of ultimate resort ; but the Table of gentlemen was divided into a number of subordinate ones accord- ing to the several counties. Every measure which originated in the country was brought before the Table of the district, remitted to the General Table of sixteen, and then to the Table of four, whose decision was final. The Table of last resort, however, though intended to consist of a delegate from the other four, was soon monopolized by Rothes, Loudon, and Balmerino, and the ministers Henderson and Dickson, whom Baillie facetiously designates the " tico Archbishops^'' and who suggested and instructed all their measures. No tyranny could be more intolerable than that exercised by those men whose pretensions and claims were most outrageous. It is candidly admitted by Dr Alton that " they soon became a new representative government in Scotland " — that " they in the end usurped the authority of the whole kingdom, and issued orders which were even obeyed with more promptitude than those of the most despotic of sovereigns." Towards the end of November the heroes of the Tables ascer- tained that the Earl of Roxburgh had returned from Court, and that a meeting of the Privy Council was to be held at Linlithgow on the 7th of December. It was also rumoured that the Earl had brought with him certain instructions, dated the 15th of No- vember. The Tables immediately summoned a meeting of the dele- gates on the 5th of December, and were only persuaded not to proceed next day to Linlithgow by Traquair, who promised that nothing would be done injurious to their interests, and that their representatives would be fully heard at a Privy Council meeting within four days afterwards. On the 7th the Council issued three proclamations, one regulating t^eir own meetings, another those 528 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1G37. of the Supreme Courts, and the third was the one already men- tioned, assigning the King's reasons for delaying the consideration of the " Supplication," and his abhorrence of " all superstition of popery." On that day the Earls of Eothes, Loudon, Montrose, Lindsay, and a private gentleman, met the Earls of Traquair and Roxburgh. The latter referred to the King's conciliatory procla- mation, which clearly indicated that no change of religion was in- tended— advised Eothes and his party to limit their opposition solely to the Liturgy — and that they should alter their conduct, which was considered a rebellious combination, and present their complaints separately at different times by counties. Rothes and the others in their reply imputed the whole blame to the Bishops, and they de- manded that the Canons, Liturgy, and Court of High Commission, should be suppressed. After a discussion of two days on the proposed mode of dividing their petitions it was rejected by the Tables as censuring all their former proceedings, of which Hen- derson and Dickson, representing the preachers, informed the Council on the 11th. When this answer was returned — " My Lord Roxburgh," says Rothes, " did flee out in many great oaths that we would irritate a good King, in dealing with him in so peremp- tory and rude a manner, acknowledging withal that the hand of God was in it, and that he feared he would employ all his power to maintain that which we sought in so rude a manner to over- thx'ow. Mr. Henderson did reprove him for his oft swearing." The Privy Council met on the 12th of December at Dalkeith, and Rothes and the other delegates attended to demand an answer to their " Supplication," or liberty to transmit their grievances directly to the King. They were refused to be admitted as a body, and were desired to send their documents, which they de- clined, alleging that they wished to address the Privy Council. They rejected the permission that one of the Four Tables -xm^t present their " Supplication." They were then informed that seven or eight without distinction of rank would be admitted, but they replied that twelve were too few. After various unsuccessful con- ferences, the Privy Council passed an Act on the 19th granting them admission on the 21st. On that day Loudon and his friends appeared before the Privy Council, at which no Bishop was present. Loudon presented copies of the former " Supplications," with a new complaint that they were designated rebels and sedi- 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 529 tious bankrupts. He then addressed the Privy Council in a long speech, adducing the usual declamations against the Canons, the Liturgy, the High Court of Commission, the Bishops, the illegality of the " innovations," and the necessity of the Council sending some of the principal Officers of State to represent the whole con- troversy to the King. Fierce speeches were also delivered by Ramsay and the other disaffected preacher Cunningham. An act of the Privy Council was read to them, declaring that their " Supplications would be sent to the Com-t," and that they woidd be allowed to speak on their declinatm-e. When they returned from Dalkeith they wrote an " Historical Inforaiation" in defence of their proceedings, and a paper " against the Service-Book, Canons, and High Commission." They then appointed a com- mittee to confer with Traquair and Roxburgh; new delegates were to attend in Edinburgh in March ; a fast day was ordered ; and the Professors in Colleges were warned not to sanction the Liturg}', and to beware of what they taught in their prelections. On the following day they left Edinburgh. It is alleged by a writer, in reference to the origin and progress of this contest, that the abolition of Episcopacy was not contem- plated by the leaders — that they were rather convinced that the King's proceedings seriously affected ci\'il and rehgious liberty — and that they chiefly disliked the influence of the Bishops in the Pri\'y Council.* Yet it is undeniable that the said leaders were the avowed enemies of the Church. The whole was a political as well as a religious movement, carried on by men who excited the fanati- cism of an ignorant populace. Baillie thus describes the madness which then prevailed : — " What shall be the event God knows. There was in our land never such an appearance of a stir ; the whole people think Popery at the door ; the scandalous pamphlets which come daily from England add oil to the flame ; no man may speak any thing for the King's part, except he would have himself marked for a sacrifice to be killed one day. / think our people possessed with a bloody devil, far above any thing I ever could have imagined though the Mass in Latin had been presented. The ministers who have the command of their mind disavow their unchristian humour, but are no way so zealous against the devil of their fury as they are against the seducing spirit of the Bishops. For myself I • Guthrie's History of Scotland, vol. ix. p. 292. 34 530 THE RIOTS AT EDINBURGH [1637. think God, to revenge the crying sins of all estates and profes- sions, of which no example of our neighbours"' calamities would move us to repent, is going to execute his long denounced threatenings, and to give us over unto madness, that we may every one shoot our swords in our neighbours'' hearts."" In the same letter he says — " My heart is for the present full sore for that poor land wherein we were born, and Church where- in we were regenerated. If it were not a God who permitted a powerful devil to blind and enrage men against the common prin- ciple of clear natural reason, [without reference to] equity or re- ligion, / think both our Bishops and their opposers might he easily uoitlidrawn from destroying themselves and their neighbours ; but God and devils are too strong for us. For as well as I have been beloved hitherto by all who have known me, yet I think I may be killed, and my house burnt upon [over] my head ; for I think it wicked and base to be carried doAvn with the impetuous torrent of a multitude. My judgment cannot be altered by their motion, and so my pei'son and estate may be drowned in their violence.*'* The connection of the Puritans, and other enemies of the Church of England, with the Scottish tumults and subsequent rebellion, is distinctly admitted by all writers on that unhappy period. But another powerful engine was at work, directed by Cardinal Eichelieu, the minister of France, and although one of his three great and avowed schemes was the annihilation of the Calvinists as a political party, he was not scrupulous in his other measures of revenge. Charles I., ever hesitating in his foreign pohcy, had dis- appointed the Cardinal in his proposal of a defensive league between France and England, and inchned to a Spanish aUiance. Richelieu declared in a letter to the Count D'Estrades de Ruel — who had orders to tamper with some Scotsmen, particularly a certain nobleman and minister then at the English Court — dated 2d De- cember 1637, that the King and Queen of England would repent the rejection of the treaty before the year was over. In this let- ter he says — " I will pursue the advice you have given me as to Scotland, and will despatch thither the Abbe Chambers, my Almoner, who is himself a Scotsman, and who shall go to Edin- burgh to wait upon the two persons you have named to me, and to enter into a negotiation with them.'' In another passage of • Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 23, 24. 1637.] AT THE FIRST USE OF THE LITURGY. 531 the same letter he says — " If your two Scottish friends are yet at London, tell them to trust to whatever shall be communicated to them by the Abbe Chambers, and give them a letter from your- self to that Abbot, which will serve as a signal to introduce them to his company." Eichelieu is accused of exciting the Puritans and Covenanters by the agency of a certain Father Joseph and the French Ambassador at London. As it respects Scotland, arms and ammunition were sent to Leith from France for the use of the disaffected in 1G39. When the rebellion broke out not less a sum than 100,000 crowns of French money were deposited in the hands of General Leslie to defray the expences of the Covenanters, who could not in their poor and distracted country have obtained any adequate resources. Disguised emissaries wei-e actively engaged both in England and Scotland, some of them pretending to be zealous defenders of the Church, others appearing as violent Puritans, and others as furious Presbyterians, but all intent on widening the breach between the King and his people. The invectives published by the Puritans and Presbyterians were cordially sanc- tioned by those agents of Richeheu, and the Jesuits were over- joyed at the prospect of a commotion which held out to them strong hopes of temporal advantage and ecclesiastical domination. Such is a sketch of the political ferment carried on in the name of religion, and under the pretence of liberty, which agitated the greater part of Scotland at that period. Never was a tyi'anny more grinding, oppressive, and intolerable, than that which the Presbyterians were labouring to establish. The great conspiracy or combination against the Church now claims our attention. 532 [1G38. CHAPTER XIII. THE NATIONAL COVENANT AND THE COVENANTERS. The Earl of Traquair was summoned to Court immediately after the meeting of the Privy Council held on the 19th of December 1637- He refused to carry the " Historical Information" prepar- ed and revised by the " Supplicants," but he allowed it to be entrusted to Sir John Hamilton of Orbieston, Lord Justice-Clerk, who accompanied him. At his first interview Traquair detailed the state of affairs in Scotland, which distressed the King, who complained that the facts had either been concealed or greatly misrepresented. Traquair stated that an authentic account had been transmitted to the Earl of Stirling, but that nobleman blamed Archbishop Laud for not laying the dispatches before the King. The Archbishop positively denied the charge, and he was not a man to resile from any transaction with which he was concerned. The Earl of Traquair returned to Scotland on the 14th of Fe- bruary 1638, and his arrival at Dalkeith was soon known. Num- bers of the " Supplicants" resorted to Edinburgh, and the Earl was beset by several of the Nobility, and two individuals connected with the Tables, when he came to Edinburgh on the 15th. He cautiously informed the two delegates from the Tables, in the pre- sence of the Earl of Roxburgh, that he had no communication to them — that though he was not aware when they might expect an answer, or by whom, he believed it would be soon ; and assured them that the King would consider their " Supplications." On the following morning Rothes, at Traquair's request, had a long conference with him. Traquair informed Rothes that all their *' Supplications" were in possession of the King, who knew all their movements and leaders, mentioning their lawyers, especially 1638.] NATIONAL COVENANT AND THE COVENANTERS. 533 Mr John Nisbet,* as one of them, " who," says Rothes, " was not ; and reporting sundry other things which were mere mistakes and misinformation, though he ^neic many other things tohich tee thought had been hpt more close.'''' " Has the King," asked Rothes, " seen tlie Historical Information which was sent up with the Lord Justice-Clerk V " There was no necessity," repHed Traquair, " for it was previously in the press." " That," said Rothes, " could not be, for not a copy of that Information was ready before the one which the Justice-Clerk received." " The King," observed Tra- quair, " has all the particulars, though he had not the Informa- tion itself, but I believe he has now seen it." The Earl then com- plained to Rothes of the unscrupulous conduct of the Presbyterians towards himself and the Earl of Roxburgh, while they were both in treaty with Archbishop Spottiswoode for " drawing things to a pacification," and alleged that Rothes himself had " misinformed the King." " You seek," said Traquair, " the destruction of the IJishops, to which the King will never listen." " We crave no more," replied Rothes, " than the discharge of the Service-Book, Canons, and High Commission — that no oath should be exacted from ministers than that allowed by the Act of Parliament, which gives Bishops the power of ordination — that Bishops might be re- strained by these caveats, whereon the Kirk and King condescend- ed that they might not be uncontroulable, but liable to censure as the rest of the lieges." The Earl farther stated that his party demanded an annual General Assembly, adding that if the King rescinded the Five Articles of Perth he would receive a subsidy of L.GO,000 Scots money. " If," said Rothes jocularly, " there is no other mode of disposing of the Bishops, the noblemen, barons, and burgesses, would sit in judgment upon them, and hang them." " My Lord," replied Traquair in jest, " you are mg,d."f It is impossible to discuss the intrigues, conferences, and cor- respondence of that period within the limits of the present vo- lume, as connected with the Episcopal Church and Scottish history in general. They are all repetitions of the same affairs, the same men, the same principles, and the same contentions. The details • Previously noticed as one of Lord Balinerino's counsel, aftei-wards Sir John Nisbet, who became a Judge in the Court of Session by the title of Lord Dirleton, author of the well known work on Scottish law, entitled " Dirleton's Doubts." t The Earl of Rothes' Relation, printed for the Bannatyne Club, p. 55, 56, 57. 534 THE NATIONAL COVENANT [1638. are all characterized by a kind of repulsive worldliness, and an utter want of honourable and candid principle on the part of the Scot- tish Nobility who embarked in the movement. It may be admitted that the King and his advisers were imprudent in their ecclesias- tical proceedings, and that they ought to have made the use of the Liturgy optional, instead of rigidly demanding a general conform- ity in a matter on which the ignorant prejudices of the people were easily excited. Nevertheless a feeling of disgust cannot be suppressed at the perusal of the narratives of the Earl of Kothes and other actors in that memorable revolt — men utterly destitute of any religious px'inciple, who could jest unfeelingly on the most serious subjects. The Government issued no order to deprive men of their px'operty, their honour, or their life. To quote the lan- guage of the distinguished Presbyterian historian Dr Cook — " In- fatuated as Charles was, he threatened no such evils. In the ardour of party zeal it was indeed strongly insinuated that he was steadily prosecuting the design of restoring Popery, but there is not the slightest evidence to support the insinuation. The account of the religious calamities which the inhabitants of Scotland had to dread was the continuance of Episcopacy, or the attempt to continue it ; but it surely may be doubted how far this was at the commence- ment of the disturbances a sufficient cause for actually resisting the sovereign. Many of the clergy who joined in opposition to the Government had at this period no idea that Episcopacy was sub- versive of Christianity ; all of them had sworn obedience to the Bishops in whose Dioceses they ministered ; and some of them ex- pressly distinguished between Episcopacy as it existed in the time of Knox's Superintendents, and the Episcopacy which was now opposed, affirming that both ought to be removed, but that the for- mer ought not to be abjured."* A somewhat similar view is ex- pressed by the biographer of Henderson. " The Nobles," says Dr. Alton, " were of one opinion, and guided by a single senti- ment, and that sentiment evidently was a determined resistance to the Government, engendered by the spirit of revenge ever since the transference to the Crown of the Church lands which had been long in possession of the old Court favourites. Most appro- priately did Bishop Leslie of The Isles compare the behaviour of the Presbyterians towards Charles to that of the Jews, who one * History of the Church of Scotland from the Reformation, vol. ii. p. 415, 416. 1638.J AND THE COVENANTERS. 535 day saluted Christ with loud acclamations, and the next day voci- ferously demanded his crucifixion." The Privy Council was to meet at Stirling to issue the King's proclamation approving the Liturgy on the 20th of February, and the " Supplicants" prepared a remonstrance against it and the in- tended prohibition of their future meetings. In opposition to the urgent advice of Traquair they resolved to appear in Stirling for mutual defence, as numerously as they could muster, with their protest. The Privy Council attempted to anticipate their march thither. Very early on the morning of the day previous to the meeting Traquair and Roxburgh left Edinburgh to publish the proclamation before the disaffected had risen from their nocturnal slumbers, but their intention was accidentally discovered by the folly of Traquair's servant, who halted at a hostelry for refresh- ment, and mentioned to ^some persons in the house that he must immediately follow his master who was riding before him to Stir- ling. Lord Lindsay was in this hostelry on his way to Stirling with the Earl of Home and two gentlemen on behalf of the " Sup- plicants ;" and his domestic, who overheard the conversation of Traquairs attendant, informed his master. Lindsay knew well the EarFs object. Summoning his friends, they were all soon on horse- back, passed while it was still dark Traquair and Roxburgh, and entered Stirling liefore them. Ignorant of the movements of Home and Lindsay, who had stationed themselves at the Cross with their protestation attended by notaries, Traquair and Rox- burgh entered the towa about eight in the morning, and after breakfast, and waiting two hours for the specified number of the Pi'ivy Council to ratify the proclamation enforcing the Liturgy, they published it on their own responsibihty at the Cross. The proclamation is inserted by Rushworth in his Historical Collections. All meetings of the " Supplicants" on those matters were pro- hibited under the pain of rebellion, and all who were not members of the Privy Council were to leave Stirling within six hours, or be held as rebels. The proclamation was no sooner read than Home and Lindsay afiixed a copy of their protestation on the Cross. It stated their objections to the Liturgy and Canons, and their refusal to allow the Archbishops and Bishops to be their judges, until they " purge themselves of such crimes (!) as they [the Supplicants] had 536 THE NATIONAL COVENANT [1638. already laid to their charge and embodied their usual arguments, political, civil, and ecclesiastical, against the Liturgy and Book of Canons. During the whole of the day armed men resorted to Stirling from distances of forty miles, and no fewer than 2000 eventually assembled. They met in the old parish church near the Castle, and demanded a copy of the proclamation, which was refused till it was announced in the other towns. The presence of so many armed and dangerous enthusiasts in such a small town as Stirling was of a sufficiently alarming aspect, and, though the Pri\y Council met in the Castle, the report of a meditated attack on Archbishop Spottiswoode increased their apprehensions. They sent for Eothes, Montrose, and Wemyss, to induce their adherents to leave the town, assming them that the " Supplicants" who might remain would be allowed to present their declinature. The proposal to leave Stirling was at first resolutely opposed, but the influence of the three noblemen at length prevailed, and they agreed to retire from the town in the afternoon, leaving a deputa- tion to manage their afiairs, who were admitted to a meeting of the Privy Council held after the departure of the " Supplicants," which was attended by Bishops ^V^^lteford of Brechin and Sydsorff of Gal- loway. The deputation contended that those Bishops ought to be placed at the bar with themselves as parties, which caused some altercation. It seems that Bishop Sydserff was personally insulted by the populace of Stirling, and he encountei-ed a mob of female enthusiasts at Falkirk, who pelted him with stones. On the 21st of February the royal proclamation in favour of the Liturgy was published in Linlithgow, and on the following day at the Cross of Edinburgh. In the former town three per- sons appeared with a protestation, but in the latter a large as- semblage of the leading " Supplicants" mustered with their docu- ment at the Cross. They resolved to appeal to the inhabitants of those districts who had not declared in their favour, and Rothes submitted a letter to their consideration against the " Service- Book, Book of Canons, High Commission, and divers Proclama- tions." Loudon and Dickson also drew up an " Information" to be sent to other parties. Those inflammatory documents sum- moned all friendly to their movement to Edinburgh with the utmost expedition. A committee was chosen, consisting of four barons, four burgesses, and four ministers, to act with the Nobility ; and 1638.] AND THE COVENANTERS. 537 they " fell upon the consideration," says Rothes, '• of a Bond of Union to be made legally ; also, after his Majesty was suppHcated, and would not return an answer, a Declaration was thought on as the last act." This " Bond of Union" was the National Covenant, which embodied the Confession of Faith drawn up in 1580 and 1581, condemning episcopal government as existing in the Church of Rome, signed by King James in his youth, and again subscribed in 1590 and 159G. It was now proposed to adopt this Oojifession as a Covenant, and its supporters were to engage by oatV to main- tain religion as it appeared to them in 1580, rejecting what they considered " innovations" since that time. On the 23d and 24th of February the disaffected " Supplicants" resorted in great numbers to Edinburgh in defiance of the pro- clamation. They agreed to a motion by Loudon, that none of them should hold farther intercourse with the Privy Council without ge- neral consent. Meanwhile Henderson and J ohnston of Warriston were appointed to superintend the Covenant, which was to be revised by Loudon, Rothes, and Bahnerino. On the following day, which was Sunday, a fast was ordered to be observed, and some of the more violent of the preachers were enjoined to prepare the minds of the people for the intended Covenant. Two days after- wards a scroll of the Covenant was produced, and sent to the Presbyterian ministers for their concurrence. The National Covenant is inserted by Rushworth, who quotes the opinion of Dr Walter Balcanqual, the undoubted author of the King's celebrated Large Declaration. " The first dung," said the Dean of Rochester, " which from these stables was thrown upon the face of authority and government was that lewd Covenant and sedi- tious bond annexed to it." It consists of three divisions, the first being the Confession of 1580 ; the second enumerates all the Acts passed against the Church of Rome in the reign of James, and in the Parliament of 1G33 ; and the third refers to their own circum- stances. The subscribers covertly swore to maintain Presbyterian- ism, and to resist what they designated "contrary errors to the utter- most of their powers, all the days of their lives." They we\e also to defend one another — that " whatsoever should be done to the least of them for that cause should be taken as done to all in general, and to every one in particular." The first part of the bond annexed to this Covenant was the production of Johnston of 538 THE NATIONAL COVENANT [1638. Warriston, whose legal profession rendered him familiar with the Acts of Parliament, and the second part, against the Papal Church, was also his composition. The third part, in which they pretended " obedience to the commandment of God," immediately following the enumeration of the Acts, was written by Henderson, " and this," Baillie observes, " was all the difficulty." Although this docu- ment on the principles of common law sanctioned an illegal combin- ation, Lord Advocate Hope declared that it contained nothing inconsistent with the allegiance of a true and loyal subject. Yet the so called National Covenant was threatened with oppo- sition even in Edinburgh. It seems to have been apparently sug- gested by Henderson to some of the Nobility and a few of the preachers. Baillie says — " The Noblemen, with Mr Alexander Henderson and Mr David Dickson, resolve the renewing of the old Covenant for religion. A little inkling of this is given out at first to the rest.'''' At one of the meetings on the day before it was submitted and approved, a gentleman from Ayrshire stated, as the decided conviction of many persons belonging to his district, that the renewal of this Covenant implied that it had been previously void — and that some scrupled to sign because it contained opinions on some points contrary to their own, though they objected to the Liturgy. The Five Articles of Perth were also seriously dis- cussed. Several of the ministers said that they had sworn to ob- serve those Articles, and to deny them would be to perjure them- selves. The Earl of Rothes records that he contrived to remove this important difficulty. One of them, however, was not satisfied, alleging that he had " positively sworn to observe the Articles during the time of his ministry." Rothes repHed, in reference to kneeling at the Communion — " At that time the memory of super- stition and idolatry was past, and therefore it was thought good to kneel ; now, superstition and idolatry are re-entering, why should we not also abstain from the gesture ? A man is not tied to an unreasonable oath. When the oath appears now unreason- able he is no longer bound." This miserable sophistry satisfied the objector. Another asked — " As an oath could only be exact- ed by a superior, how could this oath [the Covenant] be exacted of them?" Rothes alluded to Acts of Parliament and of the Privy Council, shewing that ministers were bound to exact an oath to the Confession of Faith from their parishioners, though it was 1638.] AND THE COVENANTERS. 539 unnecessary from those who were ready to swear ; and besides, the Covenant was " an oath whereunto none were to be compelled, but it was expected that all would willingly condescend, and make their oath to Almighty God."" On the last day of February, or on the 1st of March, probably on both days, this " National Covenant" was signed in the Greyfriars' church and church-yard at Edinburgh. It is said that 60,000 par- tizans had resorted to the cjty, but considering its then limited ex- tent, and the population of Scotland at the time, this must be an exaggeration. It appears that doubts and perplexities marked the discussions on the Covenant, some arguing that it was illegal, others that it went too far, and others that they were not exactly prepared to receive it as binding them by an oath. The Earl of Cassillis, Baillie, and others from the Western counties, were most reluctant to have any connection with the Covenant at the preliminary ar- rangements. Eeferring to sundry sermons preached at the time, Baillie states that the " plainness" of Mr RoIIock " made him sus- pect their intention in this new Covenant to make them forswear Bishops and ceremonies in their meetings." — " I had," he continues, " discovered the same mind in some, alleging over and over [again] that the Achan of our land was the breach of our Covenant, in ad- mitting against the oath of our nation the government of Bishops and Articles of Perth. To this I gave so sharp and so modest a re- ply, that excluded thereafter this motion from this meeting. But I was filled with fear and great perplexity, that the bond which I found was conceiving should contain any such clauses ; for this, I thought, would inevitably open a gap, and make a present division in the ministry, which was the earnest desire and sure victory of the Bishops." Baillie adds — " Some other clauses also, which might have seemed to import a defence in arms against the King, these I would could not yield to in any imaginable case." These explanations were at length considered satisfactory, and Baillie writes — " It is expected that this day the hands of all estates shall be put to it [the Covenant], and thereafter a declaration shall be made of our innocency in this whole proceeding, and of the injustice of the Bishops, with an earnest desire to have our Prince informed in the truth of this cause by way of the most humble Supplication. We have yet no assurance or warrant that any one line of the Book shall be remitted, but hopes are made of 540 THE NATIONAL COVENANT [1638. withdrawing Liturgy, and Canons, and Commission, and all, if we would let the Bishops alone ; but the most part are pei*emptorily resolved not to endure any longer their lawless tyranny."* Having adjusted all their disputes, sophistical arguments, and very questionahle explanations, it was agreed that the leaders should meet in the Greyfriars' church in the afternoon to sub- scribe the Covenant. Henderson opened the proceedings in the church with a long prayer, and the Covenant was then read by John- ston of Warriston from " a fair parchment above an ell square." Those from the southern and western counties who had any doubts were ordered by Rothes to go to the west end of the church, where Loudon and Dickson would act as confessors ; and those connected with the counties of Linlithgow, Edinburgh, and Had- dington, and from the north side of the Frith of Forth, were to wait on him and Henderson in the east end for the same purpose. About four o'clock the leaders among the Nobility subscribed, and after them the small barons. The signing of the Covenant con- tinued till eight that evening. John thirteenth Earl of Sutherland was the first who signed, and the second is said to have been Sir An- drew Murray of Balvaird, minister of Abdie in Fife, who had been knighted by Charles L at his coronation in 1G33, and was created Lord Balvaird in 1641, which elicited the censure of a subsequent General Assembly, who ordered him not to assume improper titles. The Covenant was then carried to the burying-ground, spread upon a flat grave-stone, and signed by as many as could approach. It is mentioned as an extraordinary instance of their fanaticism, that hundreds not only added to their names the words till death, but actually cut themselves, and subscribed it with their blood. Every part of the parchment-sheet of " above an ell square" was crowded with names, the margins were scrolled over, and at last many were obliged to be content with adhibiting their initials. While this was in progress many of the enthusiasts wept bitterly, numbers groaned as if convulsed, others seemed to be completely happy, and a few shouted with joy. All confirmed their subscrip- tions by a solemn oath. A general oath was then administered, to which they assented by tumultuously lifting up their right hands, and the crowd retired. Op the following day Rothes, Lindsay, Loudon, and others • Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. voL i. p. 52, 53, 54. 1638.] AND THE COVENANTERS. 541 of their party, went to the Tailors' Hall in the Cowgate, where the Presbyterian preachers from the country were assembled. Nearly thi-ee hundred of them, exclusive of the delegates from the burghs, signed it that night. The Covenant was next carried for signature through the city, and it was followed in its itinerating progress from house to house by numbers of women and children, howling, groaning, and weeping. It is said that multitudes of the latter were allowed to subscribe, or rather, as many of them could not write, their hands were guided in their signatures, though Rothes states that only communicants were permitted to put their hands to the parchment. It is certain that much violence was used in some of the towns to procure names, especially in St An- drews and Glasgow, and personal compulsion was inflicted in numer- ous instances. All classes were admitted, and many were terrified into compliance by most appalling threats of Divine judgments. In the case of those who could not write public notaries were constantly in attendance. On Friday the 2d of March, a copy was transmitted to every county for signature in the parishes. Some of the Nobility took copies of it, signed by themselves, and solicited the signatures of those whom they met. This accounts for the existence of so many originals. In the Advocates' Li- brary at Edinburgh five copies written on parchment are pre- served, with the original signatures of Rothes, Loudon, Montrose, and many others of the leaders among the Nobility and gentry. Only one of these five copies, however, is apparently connected with the first signing of the National Covenant, and the other four, which are dated 1639, were subscribed after it was ratified by the General Assembly. When Archbishop Spottiswoode returned to Edinburgh, and was informed of the subscription to the Covenant, he is said to have exclaimed — " All which we have been attempting to build up during the last thirty years is now at once thrown down." On the 1st of March the Privy Council met at Stirling, which was attended by the Officers of State, Bishop Whiteford of Brechin, and eleven of the Nobility. The cause of this meeting was the " combustion within the countiy." A letter was read from Arch- bishop Spottiswoode, excusing himself from attending according to his promise. Traquair informed the Council that he had request- ed the Archbishop as Lord Chancellor to meet them, and the Council 542 THE NATIONAL COVENANT [1638. adjourned till the following morning. The Archbishop's letter was ordered to be entered in the Register of the Privy Council, and is a proof of the moderate principles of that great and good man. His letter, which is very short, is dated " Edinburgh, the last day of February IGSS," and he states, as his deliberate opinion — " Your Lordship knows my mind in the chiefest business which is to be entreated, which I assure myself will be the mind of all good clergymen, that is, to lay aside the Book, and not to press the subjects with it any more, rather than to bring it in with such trouble of the Church and the kingdom as we see ; but I should wish all this to be fairly, carried, without any touch to his Majesty's honour, and the opening of a door to the disobedience of ill-affected people." On the following day the Privy Council unanimously resolved that the causes of the " combustion " were the Liturgy, Ca- nons, and High Commission, which were consideredbymany as " con- trary or without sanction of the laws of the kingdom." At another meeting they declared that having in vain attempted to prohibit large assemblages by proclamations, they " can do no farther than is already done;" and they appointed the Lord Justice-Clerk Hamil- ton of Orbieston to proceed to London, and lay before the King a true representation of the state of the kingdom. Other letters of the same date were written by members of the Privy Council to the King and the Marquis of Hamilton.* The Covenanters, as they may now be designated, were not be- hind in exercising such influence at Court as they possessed. We have seen that in addition to their opposition to the Liturgy and Book of Canons, their public allegation against both was that they were introduced without the sanction of Parliament and the General Assembly. This specious objection had great influence with many, yet it could not include the Five Articles of Perth. Al- though they furiously complained of them as" innovations," they well knew that those Articles were sanctioned by the Parliaments of 1621 and 1633. After signing the Covenant, and organizing themselves throughout the country, their leaders soon saw that they were imitating the very course they denounced — that of adopting a Con- fession of Faith and Covenant without the sanction of a General • Those letters are inserted by Bishop Burnet in liis " Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton," in which work are several important original letters and documents con- nected with that eventful period. 1C38.] AND THE COVENANTERS. 543 Assembly, while they were also levying subsidies without the au- thority of the Government. Henderson and his party, called the Easterns^ coincided with Loudon, Baillie, and the Westerns, and it was resolved to demand a General Assembly and a Parliament, to " sanction," as Dr Alton says, " their daring measures." On the 13th of March they concocted another "Supplication" directed to the King, justifying their own conduct, insolently blaming the Bishops, requesting a General Assembly and a Parliament, and hypocritically concluding with an assurance to his Majesty that next to their salva/- tion they would render him dutiful obedience, praying that his reign might be long, peaceable, and prosperous. They also resolved to send Livingston, of Irish notoriety, who was now a preacher in Scotland, to the Court with letters to the Duke of Lennox, the Marquis of Hamilton, and the Earls of Haddington and Morton, soliciting their influence in behalf of their " Supplication." The Earl of Traquair had already written to the Marquis of Hamilton by the Lord Justice-Clerk, stating that unless the King withdrew the Liturgy he must bo prepared to oppose force to force. The Justice-Clerk passed Livingstone on the road, arrived first at Court, informed the King of the object of the Covenanters mission, and added that before he came to Scotland he had been deposed, degraded, and excommunicated by the Church of Ireland. The Earl of Had- dington protected him from prison by secreting him for a few days, and sent him back to Edinburgh with a mass of important private correspondence. It seems, however, that they had employed a Mr George Hallyburton on their mission. The " Supplication" was returned to the Covenanters in his hands unopened, and they were informed merely as individuals that the King would consult the Privy Council, and intimate his sentiments by a proclamation. Traquair, Roxburgh, and Lorne, were summoned to Court, carry- ing with them the extraordinary opinion of some lawyers in Edin- burgh that the Covenanters had not acted illegally, or were guilty of sedition. Meanwhile the Covenanters proceeded in their ramifications. On the 5th of March the delegates from the burghs were ordered to write to their constituents " not to be afraid of proclamations," and to send them a copy of the protest and of the Covenant. Their partizans in the burghs were enjoined to keep a list of those who signed and those who refused, which they were to transmit to 544 THE NATIONAL COVENANT [1638. Edinburgh. A deputation of four lairds was appointed to " go North," and confer with the Marquis of Huntley and other chiefs of influence in Aberdeenshire, Banffshire, and Morayshire. On the 6th it was unanimously resolved, that if any individual Covenanter was " criminally pursued," or " processed," all should be ready to assist. Sundry noblemen and others were appointed to visit the Colleges of Edinburgh, Glasgow, St Andrews, and Aberdeen, to " press the subscription of the Confession and Covenant ;" minor details were arranged ; and some of the preachers were authorized to refute the Service-Book and Canons for " information and pub- lic use, and that with convenient expedition." The reception of the Covenant was different in the Colleges. Those of St Andrews and Edinburgh subscribed with few excep- tions, butin Aberdeen it encountered the most determined opposition from the two Colleges, the Professors in which, men of great learn- ing, known as the Aberdeen Doctors, who, as Burnet says, " were an honour to the Church," would listen to it on no conditions. D.r Barron and Dr Forbes, the latter then Professor of Divinity in King's College, the son of Bishop Patrick Forbes of Aberdeen, defended the Liturgy, and assailed the whole system of Presby- terianism. In the College of Glasgow, too, the Covenant was vigorously resisted. " The greatest oppositionists in the West to this subscription," says Baillie, " are our friends in Glasgow ; all the College without exception ; Mr J ohn Maxwell, Mr John Bell younger, and Mr Zachary [Boyd], are not only withdrawers of their hands, but all of them pathetic reasoners against it." He mentions only two—" old Mr J ohn Bell and Mr Robert Wilkie — " as "passionately for it, albeit half derided by the others as simple fools." BaiUie farther states that Lord Boyd, four others, and " I, went in as commissioners from the meeting at Edinburgh to join with the rest, but I foresaw it was in vain, for no reasoning could move any of them to pass from the smallest of their scruples, which they yet multiplied. We left them resolved to celebrate the communion on Pasch [Easter] day in the High Church kneel- ing, but Mr Robert Wilkie and Mr John Bell are resolved to pass that day, and the next Sabbath to celebrate sitting in the Low Kirn." The Covenanters were more successful in the towns, and their peregrinations to procure signatures occupied them consi- derably during the months of April and May. 1G38.J AND THE COVENANTERS. 545 On the 20th of April a meeting of the Covenanting noblemen was held to consider the answers of the Duke of Lennox, the Mar- quis of Hamilton, and the Earl of Morton, brought on the IGth by Mr George Hallyburton in reply to the letters from the " Sup- plicants." Lennox wrote to Rothes, Hamilton to Montrose, and Morton to Cassillis. Rothes has preserved his, and mentions that the other two were similarly expressed. Lennox stated that Hamilton, Morton, and himself, had jointly read their letters, and acquainted the King with the contents, who commanded them to write that he was ever willing to receive petitions properly " con- ceived in matter and form" — that the Privy Council had duly transmitted their Supplications, respecting which various direc- tions had been issued — and that the King would soon declare and explain his intentions, and thereby free his subjects from any fears of " innovations of religion." Rothes, Montrose, and Cas- sillis, sent in reply a document to the Duke of Lennox, with a long note written by Henderson, containing eight " Articles for the present peace of the Kirk and Kingdom of Scotland." Those were, 1. Withdrawal of the Liturgy and Canons. 2. Abolition of the High Commission. 3. Revocation of the Perth Articles. 4. Limitation of Churchmen to vote in Parliament. 5. That the act of 1592, conferring on Presbyteries the power of collating and ordaining ministers to benefices, or of depriving, should be re- stored. 6. An annual General Assembly. 7. The summoning of a Parliament. 8. That if such were sanctioned, more particular suggestions for restoring peace would be submitted to the said General Assembly and Parliament. As to the National Covenant itself, although its object could not be misunderstood, it contains no direct denial of the royal authority and the episcopal government of the Church. This obtained for it signatures from many who were opposed to violent measures, and who never contemplated the overthrow of the Epis- copal Church. In a letter to Principal Strang of Glasgow, who had signed it, " so far as that it was not prejudicial to the King's authority, the office of episcopal government itself, and that power which is given to Bishops by lawful Assemblies and Parliar ments," Baillie says — " If ye saw any thing into this Covenant which, either in express terms, or by any good consequence, could infer the contradiction of any of these things ye name, ye might 35 546 THE NATIONAL COVENANT [1638. not in any terms, on any exposition or limitation, offer to sub- scribe it." He declares that he could see no word in it against the King's " full authority," or " against the office of Bishops and he says — " Not only I beheve this, but have professed so much more before the whole meeting at Edinburgh, often both in word and write, without the least appearance of contradiction to this hour." But he at once assigns the reasons for the whole movement, which he credulously believed — " Our main fear [is] to have our religion lost, our throats cutted, our poor country made an English province, to be disposed upon for ever hereafter at the will of a Bishop of Canterbury." Such were the false and in- famous statements which roused into madness the Covenanting populace. The intolerance of the faction is well described by Bishop Mitchell, then one of the ministers of Edinburgh, in a letter, dated Edinburgh, 19th March, to Dr John Leslie, Bishop of Raphoe, translated from the Diocese of The Isles in 1633, who must not be identified with Bishop Henry Leslie of Down — *' Truly it is like enough I will be brought to that necessity to leave my charge here, and then there is no man to whom I will be more willing to be beholding [than to your Lordship.] It would cause any man's ears to tingle to hear what a pitiful plunge this Church and kingdom are in. The greater part of the kingdom have subscribed, and the rest are daily subscrib- ing, a Covenant. It is the oath of the King's house 1580, with strange additions, a mutual combination for resistance of all novations in religion, doctrine, and disciphne, and rites of wor- ship that have been brought in since that time ; so as if the least of the subscribers be touched (and there be some of them not ten years of age, and some not worth twopence), that all shall concur for their defence, and for the expulsion of all Papists and adversaries, that is, all that will not subscribe, out of the Church and Kingdom, according to the laws, whereof one hundred are cited in the carta. This goes on apace. The true (!) pastors are brought in to Edinburgh to cry out against us wolves ; and they, with our brethren, Mr A. Ramsay, Mr H. Rollock, and your whilome friend the Principal [A damson], 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. I have been dogged by some gentlemen, and 1G38.] AND THE COVENANTEKS. 547 followed with many mumbled threatenings behind my back ; and then, when I was up stairs, swords drawn, and [they exclaimed] — ' If they had the papist villain, 0 V Yet I thank God I am living to serve God and the King, and the Church and your Lord- ship. There is nothing expected here but civil war. There is no meeting of Council. The Chancellor [Spottiswoode] may not with safety attend it, nor any Bishop ; the very name is more odious among old and young than the devil's. Galloway takes shelter under the Treasurer's [Traquair] wings ; he draws him out to known dangers, and then makes a show of protection. Ross keeps at home still, and keeps up the Service in his cathedral, but I fear shall not be able long. What was told your Lordship of his disclaiming the [Service] Book was most false ; Dun and he never spake together. Concerning the other point of your postscript, that the Book is a transcript of King Edward's Book, that is not true neither. I know my Lord [Bishop] of Ross sent a copy of ours to your Lordship, and the other you may have, and can compare them. They are somewhat like in the Communion, and great need there was to return to it propter sacramentarios. But now, when all shall be discharged, Service-Book, Canons, and High Commission, they will not rest there ; there is some other design in their heads. There are still here 500 commissioners of the estates ; they relieve one another by course, as Castor and Pollux went to hell. They sit daily, and make new laws ; their protestations and decrees begin thus — ' We, Noblemen, Barons, Gentlemen, Burgesses, Ministers, and Commons.' They depose moderators of Presbyteries, and choose new. Mr Matthew Wemyss subscribed on Friday, preached for the Covenanters on Sunday, and discharged the organ. I have neither more time nor paper. God send this Church peace, preserve yours, and send you better news next."* • Original in Wodrow MSS. folio, vol. Ixvi. No. 49, in Appendix to Principal Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. 1, p. 463-461. 548 [1G38. CHAPTER XIV. THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. J AMES third Marquis of Hamilton and second Earl of Cambridge, created in 1643 first Duke of Hamilton, whose fate in March 1649 was as unfortunate as that of his sovereign, was nominated Lord High Commissioner to Scotland by the King, to allay the religious and political distractions, and to restore peace to the kingdom. Charles announced his selection of the Marquis, in preference to certain others of the Scottish Nobility, to Arch- bishops Laud and Spottiswoode, and to the Bishops of Galloway, Brechin, and Ross, in his closet at Whitehall. On the 7th of May the appointment was intimated in Scotland ; and on the 16th the Marquis received his instructions, which were remarkably moderate and conciliatory. The only direct references to the Church are short. He was to admit no petition against the Five Articles of Perth, though for the present he was not to press the observance of them ; the Acts of the Privy Council enjoining the Liturgy were suspended ; and the Privy Council and Supreme Courts were to return to Edinburgh as soon as the citizens ab- rogated the Covenant, which was to be within six weeks or less, as set forth in the royal Declaration. About this time the Scottish Bishops transmitted to Arch- bishop Spottiswoode and their brethren, then in London, a detail of grievances, signed by the Bishops of Edinburgh, Dunblane, and Argyll, and by Mr Hannay, Dean of Edinburgh, and Messrs Mitchell and Fletcher. They complained of the violent and illegal conduct of the Covenanters in changing the moderators of Pres- byteries, maltreating several of the parochial clergy, giving " im- position of hands" without the knowledge of the Bishop — inducting 1038.] THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH. 549 seditious and banished preachers from Ireland into parishes — threatening to depose the clergy — -removing Alexander Henderson from Leuchars to Edinburgh without the consent of the Bishop — that " the ministers of Edinburgh who have not subscribed the Covenant were daily railed and cursed to their faces, and their stipends not paid ; and that all ministers who have not subscribed are in the same case and condition with them." The Marquis of Hamilton commenced his journey on the 26th May, and on the 3d of June he reached Berwick. He was there informed by the Earls of Roxburgh and Lauderdale, and Lord Lindsay, of the state of Edinburgh, that there was little hope of the abandonment of the Covenant, and that they demanded the aboli- tion of the Five Articles of Perth, and a Parliament and General Assembly, otherwise they would call the latter themselves before they left the city. Notwithstanding this discouraging intelligence the Marquis resolved to try the influence of his authority as High Commissioner. The leaders of the Covenanters prohibited any of their party to wait on him ; and his escort from Berwick, with the exception of his own friends, relations, and attendants, was limited. Even at Haddington a very few of the Nobility and Barons waited to escort him ; yet when he approached Dalkeith he was conducted into that town by a splendid cavalcade, consist- ing of the Privy Council, the Judges of the Supreme Courts, and a great number of the Nobility and gentry who were opposed to the Covenant. Previous to his arrival at Dalkeith he was con- vinced, from the intelligence he had received, that there was no chance of treating with the Covenanters, and he despatched a mes- senger to the King to prepare him for strong measures, espe- cially advising him to prevent the purchase of arms by the agents of the Covenanters on the Continent. The nomination of the Marquis of Hamilton was by no means popular among the Covenanters, though some witers have doubted his sincerity, and accuse him of secretly encouraging the move- ment. It is true that his mother, Lady Anne Cunningham, a daughter of James seventh Earl of Glencairn, had become a zealous adherent of the Covenanters, and her father's family since the Keformation were noted for their attachment to the then democratic Presbyterianism. So zealous was this lady in the cause, that in 1639, when the Marquis an-ived in the Frith 550 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638. of Forth with a force to overawe the Covenanters, his mother appeared on the shore at the head of a body of mounted troopers, drew a pistol from her saddle-bow, and declared that she would be the first to shoot her son if he landed and attacked his countrymen. Yet they recollected that he was a courtier — the relative of the King — and that his father, the second Marquis, had zealously pro- moted the Five Articles of Perth, which were ratified by the Par- liament in 1621. The Marquis was aware of the arduous duty de- volved upon him by the King, to whom he candidly stated that he considered his chance of success utterly hopeless and the employment hazardous. After his arrival at Dalkeith the Covenanting preachers soon declared against him. Before his proposals or intentions could be known he was violently denounced in their sermons, the King was charged with treachery, and their followers were warned to listen to no terms of accommodation, which were so many snares laid for their destruction. They maintained that the whole was a plan devised by Archbishop Laud to introduce Popery, and this falsehood was accompanied with every anathema which their ingenuity could devise. Their adherents were told that if they submitted they would be perjured traitors, betrayers of Jesus Christ and of the true religion, endangering the salvation of their souls ; and addresses and resolutions were circulated through- out the kingdom with incredible celerity. New committees were constituted, and measures were adopted to procure a supply of arms. Nor were the praises of the Covenant forgotten. As Prynne in England had declared that Christ was a Puritan, so in Scotland the people were taught to believe that Christ was a Covenanter ! He was the " Covenanted Jesus they declaimed about their " Covenanted God" and " Covenanted Kirk and as they now had a " Covenanted Bridegroom," they would never rest till they had a " Covenanted King." Mr Cant, in a ser- mon at Glasgow, told his audience that he was " sent to them with a commission from Christ to bid them subscribe, it being Chrisfs contract — that he came as a wooer for the bridegroom to call upon them to be hand-fasted by subscribing the contract — and that he would not depart till he had got the names of all refusers, of whom he would complain to his Master." Such was the state of public feeling when the Marquis summoned the Privy Council at Dalkeith. A deputation arrived from the 1638.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 551 Town-Council of Edinburgh entreating him to reside at Holyrood- house, which would be more convenient for the public. The Marquis refused to enter Edinburgh, because the city was in the hands of armed rebels under the guidance of the Tables, who on the other hand declared that they would not wait on him at Dal- keith, under the pretence that they were likely to be blown up with gunpowder taken some days previously from a vessel at Leith, and removed for security to Dalkeith, as all access to the Castle of Edinburgh was then prevented by the Covenanters. At length, however, he consented on the condition that the peaceable conduct of the multitudes in the city was guaranteed, and the guards at the gates and before the Castle were withdrawn. To this they agreed, and Friday the 9th of June was appointed for his arrival at Holyroodhouse. The Covenanters on this occasion resolved to make a display of numerical force. For some reasons of his own, instead of proceed- ing direct from Dalkeith to Edinburgh the Marquis diverged by Inveresk to Musselburgh, four miles from the former town on the shore, and six miles from Edinburgh. From Musselburgh the Marquis and his cortege rode along the coast on the present line of the post road, passing over the ground on which the large modern parliamentary burgh of Portobello is built, and the now irrigated tract of land then covered with furze, known as the Figgate Whins, to the common called Leith Links. During this progress the Marquis was followed by thousands who uttered loud excla- mations against Popery, Bishops, and the Book of Common Prayer. It is stated by the contemporary writers that no fewer than GO, 000 persons appeared, of whom a large proportion were women, though the Earl of Kothes limits the numbers to above 20,000. When the Marquis was approaching Leith Links he was met by thirty of the Covenanting Nobility, and the gentry marshalled themselves in a line along the sea-side extending nearly two miles in length. Passing through this array of the Covenanters, he perceived on an eminence near the east end of Leith Links from 500 to 600 of their preachers all dressed in their black Geneva cloaks. It was here intended to edify him with a speech, though Burnet states that four were to be delivered. Baillie, who was present, says — " We had appointed Mr William Livingstone, the strongest in voice and austerest in countenance of us all, to make him a short welcome." This individual, then a presbyterian preacher at Lanark 552 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638 was the brother of savoury Mr John Livingstone. But the Marquis was spared this infliction to the no small disappointment of the Cove- nanters. Dr Walter Balcanqual, Dean of Rochester, who attended him as chaplain, informed him that the repulsive-looking Mr Livingstone, whom he described as " one of the most seditious of the whole pack," would deliver an invective against the Bishops ; and the Marquis merely bowed to the Covenanter, telling him that he was aware of his intention, but that " harangues on the field were for princes, and above his place, yet what he had to say he should hear it gladly in private." The crowd on the Links, and on the road to Edinburgh, upwards of a mile distant, was im- mense. At the Watergate of the Canongate, close to the Palace of Holyroodhouse, the Marquis was received by the Magis- trates of the city. Baillie records that Hamilton was affected to tears during his progress at the sight of the vast assemblage, and at the apparent earnestness expressed in the countenances of the Covenanters. As Dr Walter Balcanqual is here noticed as attending the Marquis in the capacity of his chaplain, and as he is repeatedly mentioned in the present volume, it may be here stated that he was well acquainted with many of the Covenanting preachers. He was a native of Edinburgh, of which his father had been a turbulent minister for forty-three years previous to 1G16. The son, who was educated at Pembroke College, Oxford, enjoyed the patronage and friendship of King James and King Charles. Dr Balcanqual, it is stated by Burnet in his " Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton," came with the Marquis " as his council in Church affairs, which trust he discharged faithfully and diligently, and received those informations which were made public in the Large Declaration as penned by him." He is intimately connected with one of the noblest charitable institutions in Great Britain — George Heriot's Hospital at Edinburgh. Heriot, at his death in February 1624, ordained Dr Balcanqual to be the principal of the three executors of his last will, and to undertake the important charge of the erection of his Hospital in their native city. The building was in very slow progress in 1638, though the founda- tion-stone had been laid by Dr Balcanqual in person in 1628. One private object of his attendance on the Marquis of Hamilton on this occasion was the affairs of the Hospital. It was, however, surmised by the Covenanters that he was deputed by Archbishop 1G38.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 553 Laud as a spy both on the Marquis and on themselves. The Marquis had resolved after his arrival at Holyroodhouse to attend Divine service in the Chapel-Royal, where Dr Balcanqual was to officiate. The Covenanters contrived to enter the chapel secretly and nail up the organ, and they intimated to the Marquis that if the " English Service-Book " was again used the person who officiated would hazard his life. Much of their enmity was directed against Dr Balcanqual, although the manner in which he offended them is not recorded. In the " Oanterburian''s Self-Conviction," written by Baillie against Archbishop Laud, he is mentioned with- such asperity as to show that if he had fallen into the hands of Covenanters, he would not have been forgotten in their infamous and vindictive persecution of the martp^ed Primate of England. The Marquis of Hamilton delayed to publish the King's Decla- ration, lest it should be met by a protestation from the Covenan- ters. In reality, on the Tuesday after his arrival, in a long con- ference at Hol3Toodhouse, where he stated to the leaders that they would receive an answer by a public proclamation, he was inso- lently told that for every such document a protestation would be in readiness. He wrote to the King that their demands must be con- ceded, or they must be opposed by ai*ms, at the same time recom- mending leniency rather than the disastrous consequences of a civil war. On the 15th of June the Marquis was informed in a letter from the King that the proceedings of the Covenanters were so intolerable that he had resolved to reduce them by force — that the Marquis was to take possession of the Castles of Edinburgh and Stirling — that he might flatter them as he pleased, but that he was not to consent to the summoning of a Parliament and General Assembly " until the Covenant be disavowed and given up" — that he [the King] " would rather die than yield to their impertinent and damnable demands," as he [the Marquis] rightly called them — " in a word," concluded the King, " gain time by all the honest means you can, without forsaking your ground." When the Covenanters found that no concessions would be of- fered unless they relinquished the Covenant their rage was un- bounded. In the four sermons which their preachers were in the habit of delivering every day, except Saturday, the most furious and inflammatory imprecations were uttered, not forgetting to compliment the Marquis that faggots xoere prepared for Mm in hell ! 554 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [16*38. As for the Covenant, they bound themselves to abide by it with their Hves. They were duly informed of the preparations against them. They received letters from the Earl of Haddington and others at the Court, announcing that the King had resolved to " speak to them from the cannon's mouth." They had also learned that a powerful fleet was preparing to sail for the Frith of Forth and blockade the east and south-east coast of Scotland — that a strong force was to be landed from Ireland in the Western counties — and that the loyal Clans and followers of the influential Nobility opposed to the Covenant, assisted by the Roman Catholic Chiefs and their numerous dependants, were to act against them in the centre of the kingdom. All this intelli- gence induced them before the arrival of the Marquis to form a secret treaty, one of the articles of which enjoined their former committee to act with diligence about arms and other warlike preparations. The secret arrival of the stores at Leith for the use of the garrison of Edinburgh Castle, which were disembarked at Fisherrow harbour, close to Musselburgh, and sent up to Dalkeith, although they quadrupled the number of those stores, served to convince them that they must prepare for action. It is unnecessary to enter into minute details of the proclama- tions, and the protestations to the same by the Covenanters. On the IGth of June they presented a petition to the Marquis in Holyroodhouse, and demanded instant redress of their grievances as they could no longer delay. He told them that he had resolved to summon a General Assembly and Parliament, but they con- sidered even this answer as now unsatisfactory. They wanted the King to accept an Explanation of their Covenant, by which it would be seen that it was not illegal or derogatory to the royal authority. Rushworth asserts that the draught of this Explana- tion was made by Archbishop Spottiswoode. Bishop Burnet also observes — " To this I shall add a surprising thing, that 1 find the Archbishop of St Andrews was for accepting an Explanation of the Covenant, for a draught of it yet remains under his pen," and he inserts the document entire.* It ostentatiously set forth their regi'et that the King was offended at their " Bond or Covenant for the maintaining of the true religion and purity of God's worship in this kingdom, as if they had thereby usurped his Majesty's * Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, p. 58. 1638.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 555 authority," and they affected solemnly to protest that all their proceedings " were only for the maintaining of the true religion by them professed." They concluded by requesting a General Assem- bly and Parliament, for removing their fears of the " introduction into the Church of another form of worship than that to which they had been accustomed." This " Explanation" was transmitted to the King, who on the 25th of June returned an indignant reply. His Majesty declared that as to the " Explanation" of their " damnable Covenant, whether with or without it," he was left with no more power in Scotland than a Duke of Venice, which he would rather die than suffer, yet he recommended the Marquis to prudently listen to it that he might gain time. He said that he would not be sorry if they called a General Assembly and Parlia- ment without his authority, which would the more loudly shew them to be traitors and justify his actions. He thought his De- claration should no longer be delayed, but that was a mere opinion, not a command. The Marquis of Hamilton in vain expostulated, in his numerous and tedious conferences with the Covenanters, that they were driving matters to such an extremity by insulting the King's honour, that the result would be such as to render the Scottish nation the basest under the sun. When the Marquis was at one of those wearisome interviews he asked Rothes what the Covenanters intended to do in the General Assembly and Parlia- ment, the reply was that the latter would doubtless satisfy the proceedings of the former, but no one could say what those would be till the Assembly met. The dissimulation of Rothes is obvious. He knew well that his party had concocted the business of the Assembly. Their grand object was to procure the meeting of the Assembly before the Parliament, and towards this all their plans were directed. The Marquis of Hamilton at this crisis resolved to return to London, He told Rothes that he would " rather lose his life and all he had before he was put to such trouble and vexation as he had been this time past." He obtained leave on the 29th of June, which he intimated to the Covenanting leaders, stating that he would lay all their petitions before the King, and return them an answer within three weeks or a month. The Marquis induced the Covenanters to dismiss their adherents. He restored the Court of Session to Edinburgh, pledged himself that no proclama- 55G THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638, tions or alterations would be allowed in his absence, and that the Bishops should not be allowed to go to London. Some days before Sunday the 24th of June the Covenanters were informed that Bishop W edderburn of Dunblane had arrived from Seton House in Haddingtonshire, the seat of the Earl of Winton, about eleven miles from Edinburgh on the coast, and that he intended to read the Liturgy and officiate before the Marquis in the Chapel-Royal of Holyrood, Those very Covenanters, who while they were then in rebellion against the King for alleged violations of their conscience, were at the same time the bitter enemies of toleration, and cherished the most tyrannical hatred towards their opponents, sent a remonstrance to the Marquis, demanding that he should prohibit the use of the Liturgy on that Sunday in his presence, otherwise it would subsequently " disable him to do any good." Bishop Wedderburn knowing their disposition to violence, " willingly," says the Earl of Rothes, " absented himself." Disgusted at their insufferable interference with his religious duties, the Mar- quis, on the following Sunday, which was the 1st of July, proceeded in the morning on a visit to Seton Home, and heard a sermon preached by Dr Balcanqual in the parish church of Tranent. This sermon is designated " cold and wise," and probably it may have been both, yet we are assured by Bishop Burnet that Dr Bal- canqual was a " man of great parts, of subtile wit, and so eloquent a preacher, that he seldom preached in Scotland without drawing tears from the auditors." The Presbyterian writers allege that this visit to Seaton Home, where the Marquis remained during the night, and returned to Edinburgh on the following day, was " for the purpose of practising a trick" — that he then set out as if for London — and that " most of the leading Covenanters had gone home till the time he was to return from Court." The Presby- terians assign as their reason the publication of the proclamation which followed " in the absence" of the said " leading Covenant- ers." It is needless to observe that not the slightest evidence exists to substantiate this charge. On the 28th of June the King authorized a " Declaration" to be published, dated at Greenwich, promising to call a General As- sembly and a Parliament at his earliest convenience, withdrawing the Liturgy and the Book of Canons, and promising to rectify the High Commission with the advice and assistance of the Privy 1038.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 557 Council, that it " shall never impugn the laws nor be a just grievance to his loyal subjects." He again declared that he neither was nor would be " ever stained with Popish supersti- tion," but was resolved to " maintain the true Protestant religion already professed within his ancient kingdom." This Declaration or proclamation was submitted to the Privy Council on Tuesday the 3d of July, was signed by all present, and an act passed that it ought to be satisfactory to the people ; yet this is the very docu- ment about which the charge is brought against the Marquis, that he resorted to a trick to get the leading Covenanters out of the way. It was almost impossible that he could announce it to the Privy Council sooner, considering the mode of travelling in those days. It is dated on the 28th of June, which was Thursday, and the Marquis submitted it to the Privy Council on the following Wednesday, exactly six days from the time it was sent from Greenwich. It was proclaimed at the Cross of Edinburgh on the following day, but the Covenanters, notwithstanding all their com- plaints, were ready for its reception. When the heralds appeared with their trumpets, Cassillis and J ohnston of Warriston were at their side with a long protestation, in which all their objections to the Litui'gy, Canons, High Commission, defences of the Covenant, and complaints against the Bishops, are enumerated. Before the departure of the Marquis to London he made such arrangements for the security of the fortresses as his circum- stances permitted. The King had also instructed him to relieve those of the Bishops and clergy who were suffering for his interest out of the Treasury ; but the Exchequer was exhausted, and the Marquis liberally advanced to them money from his own private resources, without even taking legal security for repayment. A letter was written by Bishop Maxwell of Ross to the Marquis, dated Berwick, 29th June, which is printed by Burnet in his " Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton." Bishop Maxwell and some of his brethren were then enduring considerable privations at Berwick, from which the Marquis had advised them to remove, and they express their willingness to comply. The Bishop alludes to the expences already incurred by the Marquis — " Yet," he says, " your Lordship's noble and generous offer, and the necessity we are cast into at this present, that what is our own or due to us we cannot command, and know as little who will do us the favour at this 558 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638. time to trust us, hath made us, seeing obedience is better than sacrifice, to cast ourselves upon your Lordship's bounty and favour, fearing on the one part your Lordship may be offended if we do it not, and on the other that othei-wise we cannot be provided." Bishop Maxwell requests an advance of " one hundred and fifty pieces, payable at Whitsunday next with the interest, or Martin- mas, as your Lordship pleases," for which he sent his personal bond, and adding — " Here and at this time I cannot give better security, but by God's grace your Lordship shall be in no danger, come the world as it will." Archbishop Spottiswoode himself was then in a position not much more enviable. Rothes relates that on the 2d of July the Covenanters were afraid he would sit as Lord Chancellor in the Court of Session, where their cases would be • heard, and they re- solved to serve him with a declinature, refusing to acknowledge him in his judicial capacity. They devised the same procedure against Sir Robert Spottiswoode, the Lord President, whom Bur- net describes as " among the most accomplished of his nation, equally singular for his ability and integrity, but he was the Archbishop of St Andrews' son," and this was sufficient to consti- tute them his deadly enemies. His relative Sir John Hay, the Clerk Register, was also honoured with their vituperation, and they renewed their declinature against the three. But this was not the whole present extent of their hatred. On the 6th of July they resolved to prosecute Sir Robert Spottiswoode and Sir John Hay, first before the Marquis of Hamilton for alleged " faults committed in their places," and also criminally before the Lord Justice- General of the Justiciary Court for causing sedition be- tween the King and his subjects. They concerted a bill, demand- ing a warrant from the Marquis to Sir Thomas Hope, authorizing him as Lord Advocate to concur with them in the prosecution. The Marquis advised them, as the matter was of great import- ance, and deeply concerned such high public functionaries, to wait till he returned. Before leaving Edinburgh the Marquis held a conference with the Covenanting leaders, and proposed four arti- cles of agreement — 1. That during his absence those ministers who were not Covenanters should not be molested. 2. That the people should not be forced to subscribe the Covenant. 3. That the stipends of the ministers should be paid. 4. That if his return 1638.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 559 should be delayed longer than the 12th of August they would wait with patience, and not consider that he had broken faith. To the first they replied, that if any of the ministers should be de- posed it would not be for refusing to subscribe the Covenant, but for other causes, according to the laws of the Kirk, as they would prove to the Marquis at his return. They declared — the contrary of which was notorious — that none were forced to subscribe the Covenant ; but that those who did so were persuaded conscien- tiously, and the " matter was so holy that they held it irreligious to use wicked means for advancing so good a work," As to the third, they alleged that those ministers whose stipends were refused were themselves blameable by " railing upon their people." They agreed to the fourth, in the hope that the Marquis would be en- abled to return on the 12th of August, and requesting him to manage affairs " to a quiet issue." During the absence of the Marquis, though no public commotion occurred, the Covenanters were not idle. They pretended that the Marquis had sanctioned, or at least approved, the Covenant in the form they had presented to him — a falsehood which had a power- ful effect on the people in their itinerating journeys tlu-ough the Lowland countries to procure additional subscriptions. But of all the districts of Scotland the northern counties were the most averse to the practices and principles of the Covenanters. The Doc- tors of Aberdeen^ as the clergy of that city and the Professors in the two Colleges were designated, were loud in their denunciations of the Covenant. The Doctors of Aberdeen became " distinguish- ed," says Burnet, " from all the rest in Scotland, so that when the troubles in that Church broke out the Doctors there were the only persons that could maintain the cause of the Church, as appears by the papers which passed between them and the Covenanters ; and though they began first to manage that argument in print, there has nothing appeared since more perfect than what they ^^Tote." A deputation of Covenanters was appointed to proceed thither, and convince the said Doctors of its " lawfulness." This deputation consisted of Henderson, Dickson, and Cant, known in consequence as the Three Apostles of the Covenant, the Earl of ^Montrose, the Master of Forbes, and others, to obtain signatures. They arrived in Aberdeen about the end of JiJy, and met with a very cool re- ception from the clergy. Professors, and the Magistrates, some of 560 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638. whom violently opposed the Covenant on the ground that it was in every respect illegal. In New Aberdeen the Provost and Magistrates, who had previously decided by a majority in the Town-Council that the citizens should not be allowed to sign the Covenant, waited on them at their lodgings, and courteously offered to welcome them with a treat of wine which they had prepared, but they were told that the deputation would drink no wine with them till the Covenant was signed. Montrose spoke against the danger of " popish and prelatical innovations." The Provost re- plied that they were Protestants and not Papists — that they were satisfied with the King's Declarations — and that they would sanction nothing contrary to the King and the government. The Magistrates then abruptly left them, and distributed the wine among the poor. The Covenanting deputies received a paper, containing fourteen questions signed by the clergy of the town, who stated that if satisfactory answers were given they would subscribe the Covenant. A pamphleteering warfare commenced between the clergy and Professors on the one side, and the Three Apostles of the Covenant^ in which the whole subject of the episco- pate was ably maintained by the Doctors to be of Divine institu- tion. On Sunday, the 2od of July, the three Apostles resolved to preach in the church of St Nicolas and enforce their doctrines upon the people ; but they were prohibited by the incumbents, and were compelled to be content with a more humble station in the court of the Earl MarischaFs house in Castle Street, in which Lady Pitshgo, who favoured their cause, resided. Their discourses, however, had little influence on the people, and many of their hearers publicly ridiculed them. It is said that five hundred signatures were obtained, and a few signed the Covenant condition- alhj, especially Dr William Guild and another minister, under the limitation that they merely had scruples to the Perth Articles, but that they could not condemn episcopal government. The King was so well pleased with the conduct of the Magistrates, that he wrote a letter of thanks to them on the 31st of July, and one to the Professors on the 4th of August ; and on the 9th of September he granted to the Corporation and community a new charter, ratifying in the most ample manner all their ancient rights, privileges, and immunities. This charter was confirmed by the Parliament in 1641. 1638.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 561 The Marquis of Hamilton returned to Edinburgh on the 10th of August, and one of his first acts was to impeach the veracity of Henderson. That individual had twice declared in Aberdeen that the Marquis was satisfied with the loyal professions of the Covenanters — that he had sanctioned to a certain extent their Covenant — and that the Privy Council had issued or sanctioned certain proclamations connected with the Liturgy, the Eook of Canons, and the High Commission. The Marquis most solemnly denied these statements, and appealed not only to Henderson himself, and his associates Dickson and Cant, but to every noble- man and gentleman with whom he had ever any public or private intercourse. The King's instructions to the Marquis wore to renew the Confession of Faith drawn up at the Eeformation and ratified by Parliament in 1567 — to induce the Privy Council to sign it — and to summon, if necessary, a General Assembly at any time after the 1st of November. He was to use every exertion that the Bishops should vote as usual in the Assembly — that the Modera- tor, if possible, should be one of tlie Bishops — that the Articles of Perth were to be held as matters indifferent — that he might, if he considered it necessary, approve the act of the Privy Council of the 5th July at Holyroodhouse recalling the Liturgy, Book of Canons, and the High Commission — that he was to protest against the abolition of the episcopal dignity — and allow as few restric- tions or limitations to it as he possibly could. He was authorized to concede that the Bishops should be amenable to the General Assembly, which, however, was not to interfere with the pre- cedence of the Bishops, that " being no point of religion, and totally in the Crown." The Bishops who were accused of any particular offence, and also the Officers of State, were to have a free trial, and the Marquis was to exercise his own discretion in the case of those Bishops who were then out of the kingdom, while those in Scotland were to be advised not to attend the meetings of the Privy Council " till better and more favourable times for them." With these general instructions the Marquis was authorized to see that internal peace was restored before he called the Assembly — that the moderators of the Presbyteries nominated by the Bishops were reinstated, and to be officially mem- bers of the Assembly, according to the act of 1606— that all the 36 562 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638. incumbents expelled from their parishes were to be recalled, and preachers admitted without the license of the Bishops were to desist from exercising their functions — that all persons resorted to their parish churches — and that the Bishops and clergy who refused to sign the Covenant were not to be molested, and their stipends were to be regularly paid. Finally, if " need required," the Mar- quis " might call a Parliament against April next." A letter was also addressed by the King to the Privy Council, and a Declara- tion published, embodying the Confession of Faith of 1567, with a bond annexed, which was to be signed by the people, pledging them- selves to " profess and maintain" that Confession as the " true faith of Christ established by the laws of the country," and to defend the King's person and authority, the laws and liberties of the country. The Marquis found that the Covenanters had increased their demands during his absence. At a convention of the burghs it was resolved that no magistrate should be chosen who had not subscribed the Covenant ; and it was determined that the Bishops were not to vote in the General Assembly unless chosen by the Presbyteries, which they knew well they could prevent. They had so far organized their plans that Episcopacy was to be declared unlawful — the Five Articles of Perth were to be denounced — the Bishops prohibited from voting in Parliament — and all persons compelled to sign the Covenant. They resolved to elect as their lay delegates individuals of the greatest local power and influence ; and as at a meeting of one hundred and twenty ministers held at Edinburgh four-fifths were only for " limiting Episcopacy," none of those persons were to be eligible as members. The Marquis, under these circumstances, declined to call a General Assembly until he received more definite instructions from the King. After various interviews, explanations, and state- ments, he found himself much in the same position in which he was before he went to London. By the recommendation of Rothes and Argyll, the Covenanters consented to delay their resolution to call a General Assembly on their own authority till the 20th of September, on the condition that it should be speedily summoned after that date, and that none of their letters should be intercepted in England. The Marquis was again compelled to return to Court, and report the more violent aspect of affairs. 1638.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 563 He commenced his second journey on the 25th of August, and on that night he remained at Broxmouth, the seat of the Earl of Roxburgh, a short distance beyond Dunbar. There he found the Earls of Roxburgh, Traquair, and Southesk, and they all wrote and signed articles of advice to the King, to be presented by the Marquis. The usual complaints of the Covenanters were stated in this document against the Liturgy, Canons, High Commission Court, and the Articles of Perth. They declared that all those " evils" had stirred up the Covenant, and they earnestly recommend to the King to propose such a Confession of Faith, with a covenant or bond annexed, as that signed by his father King James in 1580, which they thought would satisfy the people. The Marquis laid this representation before the King, who evinced the most resolute dislike to that Confession, the signing of which his father had always regretted. He considered the " proposed remedy as bad, if not worse than the disease," and the Marquis admitted the fact, but he declared there was no other remedy, for the Covenant was now the " idol of Scotland." The King consented to a General Assembly, notwithstanding the opposition of Bishop Maxwell of Ross, who had arrived on a mission from the Bishops. The Marquis received his new instructions on the 10th of Sep- tember. They consisted of eighteen articles, revoking the Liturgy, the Canons, the High Commission Court, and the Perth Articles ; authorizing the Confession of Faith of 1580, with the bond thereto annexed — declaring also, that the censures of the Parliament and the General Assembly shall be inflicted on all subjects in a legal manner — and that the " episcopal government already established shall be limited" to " stand with the recognized laws of this Church and kingdom." The Marquis was empowered to summon a General Assembly in any other town than Edinburgh at his discretion, and a public fast was to be observed before the meeting. He received almost similar instructions with regard to the Parliament. But though the Marquis was to summon a General Assembly in any town he pleased except Edinburgh, the King himself suggested Glasgow in a written paper. Burnet states that " as the city was large and convenient, so the Magistracy there was right set : besides, it was next to the place of the Marquis' interest [the town of Hamilton, the family seat of the Dukes of Hamilton], whereby his power of overruling them might have been greatest." The extent and 564 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638. importance of Glasgow at that time are greatly exaggerated. Dr Cleland shows that the population scarcely amounted to 10,000, and the people enjoyed the unenviable character of being " malig- nant, superstitious, ignorant, and profane." The Marquis, on his journey to Scotland, met several of the Scottish Bishops at Ferrybridge in Yorkshire, five miles from Pontefract, long one of the great thoroughfares between Scotland and the North of England. He informed them of his instructions, and that the King would maintain Episcopacy, but that the Bishops were to be limited in their diocesan authority. The Bishops loudly complained of those concessions, as most fatal to the Church, and as in reality resigning them to the Covenanters. They nevertheless resolved to attend the General Assembly, and sent one of their number to the King. At this interview Archbishop Spottiswoode was offered L.2500 as a compensation to resign the Chancellor- ship, which he signified his willingness to accept. The Marquis returned to Scotland on the 15th of September, the day before the one appointed to be held as a public fast by the Covenanters, and on the 17th he removed to Holyroodhouse. He informed their leaders at a special interview that the King had granted all their demands, but he refused to enter into any details except through the Privy Council. It was alleged that the Assembly was to be held at Aberdeen in the spring of 1639, and Burnet states that this was the suggestion of Archbishop Spottiswoode. Though this rumour was altogether unfounded, it annoyed the Covenanters. Aberdeen was too distant for many of them at the season of the year ; and the Professors in King's and Marischal Colleges, and the clergy, had already defeated them in argument. The town was considered the very stronghold of the Episcopal Church ; and the surrounding district was the property of power- ful noblemen and gentlemen opposed to the Covenant, who could summon thousands of armed retainers to overawe the meeting. As soon as the Privy Council met, the Marquis of Hamilton produced the Confession of Faith of 1580, and urged its renewal in opposition to the Covenant, both by his own recommendation and by a letter from the King. He induced the Earls of Rothes, Argyll [then Lord Lorn], and Wigton, and the Lord Advocate Hope, to sign it, on the written condition that they did so ac- cording to its meaning when first sworn. The Marquis and about 16V38.J AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. 565 thirty of the Privy Council signed it on'the 22d September, after a wordy discussion of two days, and all subjects were ordered to adhibit their signatures to it, and to the annexed bond of 1589. The Privy Council authorized two public proclamations, the one calling by royal authority a General Assembly to be held at Glas- gow on the 21st of November ; and the other a Parliament to bo held at Edinburgh on the 15th of May 1639, to deliberate on measures for the "glory of God, and the peace of the Kirk and com- monwealth.'" The Archbishops and Bishops were summoned to attend both the General Assembly and the Parliament, and the fourteenth day before the meeting of the former was to be ob- served as a fast. Considerable divisions and jealousies existed between the Cove- nanting Nobility and the preachers about the appointment of the persons designated in Presbyterian phraseology " ruling elders," but these were for a time forgotten when the proclamation appeared enjoining subscription to the Confession of 1580 and 1581. As this I'ival Covenant, which was accompanied by the unequivocal revocation of the Liturgy, Canons, and High Commission, tended njuch to benefit the royal cause by representing the King's pro- ceedings in the most favourable light, the Covenanters became alarmed that it would completely overthrow their party, and that the King's sincerity would revive the loyalty of all peaceable and well disposed subjects. They accordingly met the royal proclama- tion by a long protest, in which they elaborately detailed their sentiments. The burden of the whole argument was to shew that they preferred their own Covenant to the Confession of 1580. Their seditious designs were now the more apparent, for that Confession formed verbatim a part of their Covenant, and the only difference was the bond of 1589 attached to it, which was levelled against the Roman Catholics. Delegates were accordingly sent to every Presbytery, advising the preachers to warn their hearers not to sign the Covenant authorized by the King, and a copy of their protest was transmitted to every town in which the proclamation was made. It consequently in many towns and districts met with decided opposition. On the other hand letters were circulated throughout the kingdom to procure signatures to the King's Covenant. At Glasgow the activity of the Justice-Clerk Hamilton and the eloquence of Dr Balcanqual induced numbers 566 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [1638. to sign, but Baillie, and other ministers acting with the Town- Council, caused the subscription to be delayed till after the meet- ing of the Assembly. In the northern counties upwards of 28,000 persons subscribed the King's Covenant, of whom 12,000 were procured by the Marquis of Huntly in the shires of Aberdeen and Banff. The Bishop and the Doctors of Aberdeen readily signed it, adding several explanations — distinctly stating that by so doing they were not to be considered as abjuring " episcopal government as it was in the days and after the days of the Apostles in the Christian Church for many hundreds of years, and is now, con- form thereto, restored in the Kirk of Scotland " — that they were not to be understood as abjuring the Perth Articles — that they did not presume by their personal oath either to prejudge the liberty of the Church of Scotland, or to change, reform, and correct the ambiguities and obscure expressions of the Confession — and that their present signatures were not to be held as bind- ing their descendants. In accordance with their designs and principles the Covenanters usurped ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and the " Brethren"" of the "Ex- ercise" or Presbytery of Edinburgh summoned Mr David Mitchell to appear before them, and be censured " for certain points of erroneous doctrine delivered by him from the pulpit," with inti- mation that they would either suspend or depose him if found guilty. This induced Bishop Lindsay of Edinburgh to write a letter to the said " Brethren," dated Holyroodhouse, 9th October, reminding them of the Act of the Glasgow Assembly of 1610, and of the Act of Parliament of 1612, restricting that power " as an inviolable law in all time coming" to the Bishop of the Diocese, who was " to associate to himself the ministry of the bounds wherever the delinquent serveth, to take trial of the fact, and upon just cause found," either to suspend or deprive. Bishop Lindsay strictly prohibited them to proceed against Mr Mitchell until he himself acted with them, or " to continue the process, and all other of this kind," till the meeting of the General Assembly. About this time Rothes and other Covenanters petitioned the Marquis of Hamilton for a warrant to cite the Bishops before the Assembly at Glasgow, but this was refused on the ground that " the law was open for citing all such as were either within or without the country — that it was beyond all precedent for him 1638.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. [the Marquis] to grant such warrants — and that it was enough for them that he did not protect the Bishop against trial." Foiled in that quarter, they applied to the Presbytery of Edin- burgh, who had the presumption to grant the warrant to summon the Bishops. In this document, which was read in Trinity Col- lege church in Edinburgh after the administration of the Com- munion, and in all the other parish churches, the Bishops were actually cited as guilty of every atrocious crime. The Marquis was urged by the Bishops and others to prorogue the meeting of the Assembly, but though this would have been a fair retaliation on the Covenanters it was considered inexpedient. Indeed, as matters had proceeded to such a length, and as the event proved, they would have disregarded the prorogation and held their Assembly in defiance. The great object now was the approaching meeting. The Covenanters were indefatigable in pro- curing the election of lay elders from the small burghs — men who were the mere creatures of the leaders, and on whom the latter could depend. They also attended at the election of the commissioners chosen for the approaching Parliament at Michaelmas, and by their violence so teiTified the loyal and peaceable that they also managed to pack that Parliament. The Marquis of Hamilton was deeply grieved at the result of the elections, and dreaded the almost inevitable consequences. He saw that few or none were chosen except those who were Covenanters, and who were noted for their violent sentiments. In a letter from Dr Balcanqual to Archbishop Laud, dated Holyroodhouse, and supposed to have been written in October, he asks — " One thing I desire your Grace to advise in — whether I shall not cause to be printed their gene- ral and public instructions to the several presbyteries for the election of their commissioners, as also their private ones, which they think are not known, that so the rest of the hoodwinked Covenanters may see how much they have been abused ? or shall we reserve that private paper to upbraid thera with it in their teeth at the opening of the Assembly ? I send your Gi-ace like- wise their new instructions, sent throughout the kingdom, by which your Grace may easily see what tumultuous and violent proceed- ings they [intend] to use, not without force if they see cause.* • Original from Wodrow MSS. folio, vol. Ixvi. No. 33, printed in Appendix to Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. p. 477. 56S THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH [IG08. The Marquis of Hamilton was most anxious that the Aberdeen Doctors should attend the Assembly, and he wote to them offer- ing to send one of his coaches for their conveyance. They origin- ally intended to be present, as appears in a letter from Mr Wil- liam Wilkie, minister of Govan near Glasgow, dated Gth November, to Dr Balcanqual : — " I received your letter, with the Doctors of Aberdeen their reply, for which I humbly thank you. All here are heartily glad of their intention to be at this Assembly ; and you may be sure they will not want lodgment, although my Lord Commissioner s Grace had not taken such particular care to have them provided. We could cause some of our students quit their chambers, and confine themselves in -less bounds, ere they lack- ed." Yet when the time approached, the state of the weather, and their forbodings of the fall of the Church and the rebellion which was to ensue, prevented their appearance. " That road, being always bad for a coach," says Burnet, " was impassable in winter, and the Doctors were so extremely averse from coming, that he could not importune them any farther, since he said it was resolved, though an angel from heaven should come to plead for Episcopacy, all would be rejected." The Marquis exerted himself to procure subscriptions to the King's Confession in that part of Lanarkshire with which he was more paj ticularly connected, and though his tenants and others at first refused, he succeeded in overcoming the scruples of many. Numbers in all parts of the country readily offered to sign, but the agents of the Covenanters prevented them by circulating reports that the King was insincere in his promises, and never intended to fulfil his offers ; and that it was deliberate perjury for those who had taken their Covenant to sign the King's. Burnet truly ob- serves— " The sins of Scotland being so great that they were to be punished with a track of bloody civil wars, God in his holy and wise judgments permitted the poor people to be so blind in their obedience to their leaders, that these arts took universally with them, to which may be justly imputed all the mischiefs that king- dom hath smarted under ever since." The King wrote repeatedly on the manner in which affairs were conducted in Scotland, and expressed his dissatisfaction at the proceedings both of the Mar- quis and the Privy Council, complaining particularly of the pro- test of the Covenanters to his Confession. " I see by yours of the 1638.] AND THE RIVAL COVENANT. §69 27th of September," said the King to the Marquis, " that the inahgnity of the Covenanters is greater than ever ; so that if you w ho are my true servants do not use extraordinary care and in- thistry, my affairs in that kingdom are Hkely rather to grow worse than better. In my mind the last protestation deserves [punish- ment] more than any thing they have yet done, for if raising of sedition be treason this can be judged no less. — And this I will say confidently, that until at least the adherers to this last protes- tation be declared traitors, nothing will go as it ought in that kingdom. I say this not to alter your course, but only to shew you my opinion of the state of affairs. As for the danger that episcopal government is in, I do not hold it so much as you do, for I believe that the number of those who are against Episcopacy, who are not in their hearts against monarchy, is not so consider- able as you take it. And for this General Assembly, though I can expect no good from it, yet I hope you may hinder much of the ill ; first, by putting divisions among them concerning the legality of their elections ; then by protestations against their tumultuous proceedings ; and I think it were not amiss if you could get their freedom defined before the meeting, so that it were not done too much in their favours." On the 29th of October the King again wrote — " As for the opinions of the clergy to prorogue this Assembly I utterly dislike them, for I should more hurt my reputation by not keeping it than their mad acts can prejudice my service ; wherefore I command you, hold your day ; but as you write, if you can break them by proving nullities in their pro- ceedings, nothing better." This explains a statement of Bishop Burnet respecting the Assembly, that the Covenanters " carried the elections as they pleased, for there being an elder out of every parish, they equalled the ministers in number, but exceeded them when the election was voted ; all the ministers who were on the list, and were ordinarily six or seven, being removed, yet in many presbyteries protestations were used against them by some minis- ters. The Marquis seeing how things were carried, and having informations from all places of the unlucky elections, began to draw up the nullities of the Assembly, sending the particulars to the King as he had them ; advising him withal to go on more frankly with his preparations, since he saw it impossible to prevent a rupture." 570 THE CONFEDERACY AGAINST THE CHURCH. [1688. On the 1st of November, when the Court of Session sat at Edin- burgh, nine of the then fifteen Judges signed the Kings's Confes- sion, two were absent, and four refused, but those Judges who sub- scribed were exposed to insult on the streets. Burnet states that about this time the Marquis gave Archbishop Spottiswoode secu- rity for the L.2500 as a compensation for the office of Chancellor, yet it is expressly stated of the Primate that he continued Lord Chancellor till his " dying day." As the Scottish Exchequer was entirely exhausted the Marquis became bound for that sum. It appears that he requested L. 10,000 sterling from the King for distribution among the Bishops and those of the clergy who were " ruined for their duty to the King." This sum was not remitted, and the Marquis continued to supply their necessities from his own resources. The infamous libels prepared against the Bishops in this Gene- ral Assembly are subsequently noticed. A letter from Mr William Wilkie of Govan to Dr Balcanqual, dated 29th of October, con- tains a curious account of the manner in which the libel against Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow was concocted. The Earl of Loudon and Lord Boyd attended the Presbytery of Glasgow to accuse the Archbishop of every possible crime in the catalogue of human depravity. This libel was read publicly in the Cathedral before the sermon by a " writer boy," who pronounced the word colleagues^ referring to the other Bishops, as colleges. The congre- gation were astonished, says Mr Wilkie, that the Archbishop and his College, presuming that Glasgow College was intended, should be " accused of incest, adultery, drunkenness, &c. for they believed that both the Bishop and we were free of these. Also they be- lieved that Bishops only should have been removed by this refor- mation, but for the Colleges they marvelled why they would re- move these." — " My heart," adds this honest Presbyterian, " was truly sorry to see such despiteful and insulting carriage." 1G38.] 571 CHAPTER XV. THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. The Marquis of Hamilton attended a meeting of the Privy Coun- cil on the 16th of November, and stated explicitly that in the affairs of the Church the King's " positive pleasure was, that Episcopacy might be limited, but not abolished." The Privy Coimcil were commanded to follow him to Glasgow, and he inti- mated to Sir Thomas Hope that, as Lord Advocate, it was expect- ed he would defend the Episcopal Establishment as the Church of the kingdom ; but that individual answered that this would be against his conscience, because he considered episcopal govern- ment to be unlawful, and opposed to the Scriptures. This extra- ordinary declaration — contrary to historical fact, for the Episcopal Church had been ratified by several Parliaments deliberately and solemnly — irritated the Marquis, who threatened to deprive him of his office. But the Marquis was met by the cool retort from the Lord Advocate, that his right to his office depended not on the King, having been confirmed by Parliament. The Marquis prohibited his attendance at Glasgow, and Sir Thomas Hope prudently obeyed. On the 17th of November the Marquis proceeded to Glasgow, leaving Bishops Maxwell of Ross and Whiteford of Brechin at Hamilton until he could convey them safely to the archiepiscopal castle of Glasgow. On the 20th he received a letter from those Bishops, enclosing one from Archbishop Spottiswoode. The nature of this letter will be inferred from the following passage in it : — " But above all, we two, for ourselves, and in name of our brethren, do with most thankful hearts acknowledge your Grace's most pious care of the liberties of this poor and distracted Church, and espe- 572 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. cially the solicitude and care your Grace hath that our Protestation he orderly done, secretly Jcept, and seasonally presented, before either the cause, or we that are Bishops, suffer wrong. The difficulties are great, the hopes none, but too pregnant fears to the contrary ; yet it is more like to be God's cause, that his work may appear, and it may be called digitus Dei, and marvellous in our eyes. Man's extremity is God's opportunity." An immense concourse of people resorted to Glasgow on this occasion, drawn together by the Covenanting Nobility, gentry, and preachers, in consequence of a rumour that the Marquis, the Privy Council, and those opposed to the Covenant, intended by the numbers of their followers to occupy all the accommodations for strangers. Baillie says — " The town did expect and provide for large multitudes of people, and put on their houses and beds excessive prices ; but the diligence of the Magistrates, and the vacancy of many rooms, did quickly moderate that excess." Meet- ings were held by the Covenanters to organize their proceedings, fasts were observed, and inflammatory sermons preached, Baillie, who was now one of the most active and influential of them, states that a Mr Alexander Sommerville, minister of Dolphington, an " old half-blind man, sore against his will" was induced to preach one of those preliminary sermons on the day before the meeting of the Assembly — " He did pretty well ; at length he insisted on the extirpation of Bishops, little to the contentment of some, but greatly to the mind of most." The election of the Moderator was discussed in a secret conclave, and after carefully discussing the merits of Dickson, Ramsay, Cant, Livingstone, and other such amiable worthies, with all of whom, according to Baillie, " there were some thing evidently wanting," Henderson was unanimously selected, as " incomparably the ablest man among us," says Baillie, " for all things." The only objection to him was one of expedi- ency. They fully expected " much dispute with the Bishops and Aberdeen Doctors," of the latter of whom they were in great dread, and Baillie observes — " We thought our loss great, and hazardous to tyne [want] our chief champion, by making him a judge of the party." After the arrival of the Marquis of Hamilton the Earl of Rothes and some of the delegates waited on him, to intimate that it was their custom to commence their General Assemblies with 1C38.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 573 solemn fasting. The Earl also told the Marquis that it was the practice of the senior minister of the town or district, or the moderator of the Presbytery, to preach and open the Assembly in the absence of the Moderator of the former Assembly, who in this case happened to be Archbishop Spottiswoode ; and that they had selected " old Mr John Bell," one of the ministers of Glas- gow, to perform that duty until the new Moderator was chosen. The Marquis agreed to both proposals, and sent Dr Balcanqual to " old Mr John Bell"" to express his approval of him. But although the Covenanting preachers were zealous in delivering sermons throughout Glasgow, Mr John Maxwell refused to admit any one of them into the pulpit of the cathedral during the time the Marquis acted as Lord High Commissioner, and " preached after his fashion," says Baillie, " nothing to the matter in hand, so ambiguously, that himself knew best to what side he inclined." The Bishops of Ross, Brechin, and Galloway, repaired from Hamil- ton to the archiepiscopal castle of Glasgow, and the Covenanters expected their appearance in the Assembly ; but in this they were disappointed, for those Prelates were persuaded not to appear, and soon returned to Hamilton Palace at the request of the Marquis. On Wednesday the 21st the Assembly met in the cathedral church. According to an accurate analysis the Assembly comprised 140 preachers, two Professors not preachers, and 98 ruling elders ; in all 240 persons. Of those ruling or lay elders seventeen were noble- men of high rank, nine were knights, twenty-five were landed proprie- tors, or lesser barons of such station as entitled them to sit in Par- liament ; and forty-seven were burgesses, generally the magistrates or bailies of the respective towns.* A number of persons also attended who had no right to vote, but who pretended to be ready to give their advice. A throne was provided for the Mar- quis as Lord High Commissioner, and on each side were seats for the Privy Council and Officers of State. At a long table on the floor were the Covenanting Nobility and gentry who acted as " elders from parishes" and " commissioners from presbyteries." Round this long table, rising gradually above each other, were rows of seats for the preaching " commissioners" from the most of the • Speech of Principal Lee at the "Commemoration of the Second Centenary" of this Assembly in December 1838 at Glasgow ; and Eecords of the Kirk of Scotland, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. vol. i. p. 109, 110, 111. 574 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. sixty-three Presbyteries into which the kingdom was then divided, and on these also sat the delegates from the Universities. In the centre, fronting the chair of state, was a small table for the ac- commodation of the Moderator and clerk. At the end a gal- lery was constructed for the young Nobility, and " huge numbers of people,"" says Baillie, " ladies and some gentlemen in the vaults above." Yet it is a curious characteristic of this motley conclave that, as Burnet truly observes, " some commissioners there were who could neither read nor write, and yet these were to judge of heresy an.d condemn Arminian points ! All depended on a few that were learned and grave, who gave law to the rest."* The proceedings commenced with a sermon by " old Mr John Bell," the acting Moderator, which Baillie describes as "very good and pertinent, sharp enough against our late novations and Episcopacy," but the preacher, on account of his age, was not hoard by a sixth part of the audience. After his sermon he con- stituted the Assembly by a prayer. They adjourned till the afternoon, when they proposed to elect their JNIoderator. The Marquis of Hamilton intimated that some things were necessary • Burnet's statement, however, was denied by Principal Lee of Edinburgh in his speech at the Second Centenary Commemoration of this Assembly at Glasgow in Decem- ber 1838. " It has indeed been alleged," said Principal Lee, " that a large proportion the elders consisted of illiterate men. I have seen it asserted in several books of late, even in some written by Presbyterians, that many of those in that Assembly who judged of the gravest questions concerning theological learning and soundness in the faith could neither read nor write. There is no authority for this insinuation except the random assertion of Bishop Burnet — supposed sometimes to have been a con- temporary, though he was not born for five years afterwards." After disputing Bur- net's " ignorant and erroneous statement" that ruling elders never came to the Assem- blies till 1638, Principal Lee discovers — " If the elders were unable to read or write, so much the less credit is due to the system of education which had prevailed nearly forty years before 1638 under auspices not Presbyterian." This is of little moment, and rather reflects on the conduct of the Covenanting preachers who intruded into the parishes. The Acts of the Scottish Parliaments amply prove that the prevailing igno- rance was not the fault of the Bishops, but was caused by the fanaticism of the age. Yet Principal Lee, who is a high reputed authority, was valiant in the defence of his Cove- nanting friends.—" There was not a peasant, as has been insinuated," he said, " or even a farmer or yeoman, in the number." They were all, in short, profoundly learned scholars, and this notable Presbyterian pluralist adds — "From what I know of the per- sonal history of many of these men, and from documents which I have seen and now pos- sess, I could undertake to prove that not one was illiterate." He refers to " most of the original commissions," which he had obtained twenty years previous, and asserts that " the signatures are for the most part in a superior style of penmanship." Be it so. This only makes their rebellious conduct the more inexcusable. lG38.j THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. to be (lone before that business, and that his commission must be first read to show whom he represented. This document was in Latin, and was handed to Mr Thomas Sandilands from Aberdeen, whom the Marquis had appointed clerk. After this was read and recorded an anxiety was again manifested about the Moderator- ship, but the Marquis insisted that the King's letter, dated 29th October, should be read. He then addressed the Assembly in a speech, regretting that his "education and profession" precludedhim from making long harangues, and maintaining that the King was sincere in all his professions. He vindicated the King from all the " sinistrous aspersions," and " foul and devihsh surmises," circu- lated against him. At the conclusion of his address he presented a paper containing the King's offers, with which the reader is familiar. The calling of the roll of the presbyteries, burghs, and universities, appears to have terminated the principal business of the preliminary meeting. During the afternoon the Marquis sent a gentleman to the Bishops of Ross and Brechin, who were with the Archbishop of Glasgow, to consult them as to the manner in which he ought to proceed in the Assembly. He desired the advice of the Bishops on three points — the first, whether the King's letter should be pro- duced before the election of the Moderator ; the second concerned the valid election of the delegates ; and the third referred to the proper time for presenting the intended Declinature of the Bishops. The Bishop of Ross in reply stated his opinion, that the King's letter to the Archbishops, Bishops, and others mentioned, should be presented and read by the clerk before the election of the Modera- tor. Bishop Maxwell maintained on the second point that both the " commissions and commissioners" are " most illegal, and there is more than sufficient ground from this one, if there were no more, to void this Assembly and make it null ;" but he feared that if this were done the Covenanters would renew their accusation against them that the King was " only deluding them for other ends." As to the third, concerning the Declinature of the Bishops — " My Lords of Glasgow and Brechin," said Bishop Max- well, " are fully of the mind, that at the very first it is to be read before the Assembly is established, and these reasons seem very pregnant ; first, because all declinatures are so used ; next, if the Assembly be once established how can it be declined, or your Grace admit our Declinature or Protestation f ' 576 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1G38. The discussions were numerous in the Assembly on all the prehminaries and points of forms ; debates succeeded protesta- tions, objections were moved, sustained, or disregarded ; and the Assembly, as described by the Presbyterian writers themselves, was the very personification of confusion. Much occurred to irri- tate the Marquis, who was often treated with comparatively little ceremony, and some allusions to the King were most uncourteous. At length the list of names from which the Moderator was to be chosen was presented, and Alexander Henderson was unanimously elected. He took the chair, and commenced an address conclud- ing with a long extemporary prayer. The Marquis proposed that Sandilands of Aberdeen, whose loyal principles he well knew, and who had ably discharged the duties of clerk to the General Assembly in 161 G, should be continued clerk, but this was opposed by Henderson on the pretence that he was old and inefficient, and Johnston of Warriston was elected with only one dissenting voice, the Covenanters binding themselves to recompence Sandi- lands in another way. Henderson now required that all who were in possession of any of the acts of the former General Assemblies should produce them, and Johnston of Warriston presented five folio manuscript volumes. The first and second volumes contained all the acts of the General Assemblies from 15C0 to 1572, duly signed by the clerk ; the third included those from 1572 to 1579, five leaves of which were torn out ; the fourth comprised those from 158G to 1589 ; and the fifth, which Henderson stated was the private property of Mr James Oarmichael, minister at Haddington, contained all the acts from 15G0 to 1590, margined by the then clerk. Those books after careful examination were declared to be authentic registers. Sandilands also exhibited some acts from 1590 to the Assembly held at Aberdeen in 161G, with several minutes of that meeting on a separate paper ; also the minutes of the Assembly held at St Andrews in 1G17, and the acts of the Assembly at Perth in ] 618 subscribed by his father, which he had received from Archbishop Spottiswoode. But the five volumes presented by Johnston were considered the most important. Three of the above volumes were subsequently bequeathed by Bishop Archibald Campbell to Sion Col- lege. The first extended from ]5G0 to 1589, the second from 1590 to 1597, and the third from 1597 to IGIG. It is already mentioned 1G38.] THE fJLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 577 that they were burnt in the great fire which destroyed the Houses of Pariiameut in 1834. Various tedious and paltry preHrainaries having been adjusted, the Marquis of Hamilton insisted that the Declinature of the Bishops should be read, but after some discussion this was delayed. The Mar- quis protested, and in reply to the Earl of Traquair it was contended by Lord Loudon that the Assembly must first be acknowledged as qualified judges before they could receive the Declinature of the Bishops. This extraordinary claim induced even the Covenanting Earl of Argyll to allege that as exceptions against any jury were always lodged before that jury was sworn, in like manner, if the Bishops had any thing against that Assembly, it was time to urge those exceptions. Henderson in a furious passion told Argyll that the Marquis of Hamilton could speak for himself, and that the As- sembly were not to be thwarted by the witty remarks of noblemen who had no right to interfere. Argyll, who was not a member, was enraged at this rebuke, and it would probably have led to a " scene," if it had not been stopped by an observation of Loudon, that Argyll's argument was good if the Bishops had appeared before the Assembly as defenders before the jury. The " Declinature and Protestation of the Archbishops and Bishops of the Church of Scotland, and others their adherents within that kingdom, against the pretended General Assembly holden at Glasgow, November 21, ICSB," is a long document pre- served by Rush worth and other collectors. It is such a complete exposure of the seditious, rebellious, and partial conduct and wild principles of the Covenanters, that their opposition to it is no matter of surprise. The whole memorial is a masterly, compre- hensive, and summary historical reply to the pretensions and as- sumptions of the Presbyterians. While the Bishops acknowledged the advantages to be derived from a " General Assembly lawfully called, and duly and orderly convened by royal authority," for adjusting the affairs of the Church, they declared that they could not recognize the legality of the Glasgow Assembly on account of the preposterous, partial, and notorious proceedings of the " so called Tables,^'' who ordered the Presbyteries to elect their dole- gates or representatives before the King's warrant authorizing the meeting was proclaimed, and this was in opposition to the act of Parliament 1572, The Bishops maintained that as most of 37 578 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBIiY. [1638. those " ministers " convened at Glasgow had not " assented to and subscribed the articles of religion ratified by acts of Parlia- ment in presence of the Archbishop, Superintendent, or Commis- sioner of the Province," acknowledging the King's authority, and had otherwise disqualified themselves according to law, they were precluded from exercising any function in the Church. It was farther contended that the Covenanters had vitiated their meeting by " impugning the dignity and authority of the Bishops as one of the three Estates of Parliament," denying them the right to vote, in opposition to the ratification of various General Assemblies, and affirming that the Archbishops and Bishops had " no warrant for their office in the Kirk." They held that the meeting was also illegal, because the constant moderators appointed by the Bishops to pre- side in the Synods, according to the decision of the General As- sembly in 1610, and the act of Parliament in 1612, had been de- posed, and others elected in their place. Moreover, that their lay elders, chosen out of every kirk-session and parish, were function- aries unknown in the Church, and that the " ministers " in that Assembly were chosen by laymen, contrary to all order, decency, and custom observed in the Christian world, in no way according to the custom of that Church which they pretended to follow — the Presbyteries never associating to themselves lay elders in the elec- tions to the General Assembly, but " only for their assistance in discipline and correction of manners, calling for them [only] at such times and occasions as they stood in need of their godly con- currence, declaring otherwise their meeting not necessary : — nor have lay elders sat ordinarily in Presbyteries upon any occasion these forty years and upwards, and never had any place or voice in the election of ministers for the General Assembly." The Bishops farther maintained that the " persons ecclesiasti- cal pretended to be authorised to this General Assembly have so behaved themselves, that justly they may be thought unworthy and incapable of commission to a free and lawful General Assembly." Two reasons are assigned for this statement. The one was their ha- bitual " railing and seditious sermons and pamphlets" against the King ; and the other that they were known to be " either schismati- cally refractory, opposed to good order settled in the Church and State," who, though they have sworn obedience to the Bishops, their Ordinaries, have never observed their oath, or have deliberately 1638.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 570 violated it, " to the contempt of authority and disturbance of the Church or such as are " under the censures of this Church " for "divers transgressions deserving deprivation. — I. For uttering in their sermons rash and irreverent speeches in the pulpit against his Majesty's Council and their proceedings, punishable by deprivation, by the Act of Assembly at Edinburgh, May 22, 1590. 2. For reproving his Majesty's laws, statutes, and ordinances, contrary to the Act of the Assembly at Perth, May 1, 1596. 3. For express- ing men's names in pulpits, or describing them vividly to their re- proach where there is no notorious fault, against another Act of the same Assembly. 4. For using applications in their sermons not tending to the edification of their auditory, contrary to an- other Act of the same Assembly. 5. For keeping conventions not allowed by his Majesty, without his knowledge and consent, contrary to another Act of the same Assembly. 6. For receiving of people of other ministers' flocks to the Communion, contrary to order. Acts of Assemblies, and Councils. 7. For intruding into other men's pulpits without calling and authority. 8. For usurp- ing the authority to convene their brethren, and proceeding against them to the censures of suspension and deprivation. 9. For press- ing the people to subscribe a Covenant not allowed by authority, and opposing and withstanding the subscribing of a Covenant offer- ed by his Majesty, and allowed by the [Privy] Council ; besides many personal faults and enormities, whereof many of them are guilty, which in charity they [the Bishops] forbear to express." The Bishops farther protested that by " reason. Scripture, or prac- tice of the Christian Church," no laymen " should be authorized to have voice in a General Assembly except delegates by sovereign authority," for which they refer to several of the ancient Councils. They conclude by stating that as the majority, if not all the persons then convened at Glasgow, " have precondemned episcopal govern- ment," and resolved to maintain their Covenant, as " doth appear by their Covenant, petitions, protestations, pamphlets, libels, and ser- mons," they cannot judge honestly or impartially on " persons and points which beforehand they have so unjustly condemned." They finally appeal to the " consciences of all honest men," whether it is reasonable and lawful for the " same persons to be both judges and parties" — declaring that those persons are avowed parties " against the Bishops, whom they have not only declined but 580 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [16^8. persecuted by their calumnies and reproaches, vented by word and writ, in public and in private, by invading their persons, and oppos- ing and oppressing them by strength of an unlawful combination." This Declinature was presented by Dr Eobert Hamilton, minis- ter of Glassford, and after it was read in the Assembly the Cove- nanters entered a declaration that the Bishops had acknowledged their citation, and that as they had appeared by Dr Hamilton, their alleged procurator, their absence was wilful. Dr Hamilton was then cited as procurator for the Bishops. A committee was ap- pointed to examine the Declinature, and two answers, subsequently compressed into one, were concocted. A long discussion ensued in which the Marquis and Dr Balcanqual on the one side, and Henderson and a preacher named Dalgleish on the other, took part. Henderson, as Moderator, at length asked the Marquis of Hamil- ton whether the question should be put — that the Assembly were to find themselves competent judges of the Bishops ? The Mar- quis requested that it might be deferred. Henderson replied that this was impossible, for the Declinature was under consideration. This appears to have occurred on the morning of the 28th of November. After the Marquis had intimated to a number of the leaders, in the chapter-house of the cathedral, that he would be compelled to dissolve the Assembly by royal authority and leave them, if they sat in judgment on the Bishops, which he announced to Henderson in the Assembly, Eothes and others defended their conduct in constituting the Tables, admitting lay elders, and their mode of electing the members. The Marquis denied that the Assembly was free, for it consisted of an undue proportion of lay elders, some of whom were not even inhabitants of the parishes they pretended to represent within the bounds of the Presbytery, while others had been constituted elders for party purposes after the Assembly had been summoned. He advised them to dissolve of their own accord, and rectify those errors in a new election, promising that the King would sanction another Assembly. Rothes had the effrontery to impute their disagreeable position to the Bishops, and the ferocious Loudon alleged that if the Bishops declined the judgment of the Assembly, the only judg- ment-seat for them was the King of heaven's. The Marquis re- plied, with tears in his eyes — " I stand to the King's prerogative as supreme judge over all causes civil and ecclesiastical. To him 1(538.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 581 the Lords of the clergy have appealed, and therefore I will not suffer their cause to be farther reasoned here." The concluding addresses of the Marquis are inserted at length by Bishop Burnet in his " Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton." He cited most of the arguments in the Declinature of the Bishops, complained of the illegal preponderance of the lay elders and their office, " it being unknown," he said, " to the Scripture or Church of Christ for above fifteen hundred years. Let the world," con- tinues the Marquis, " judge whether those laymen be fit to give votes in inflicting the censures of the Church, especially that great and highest censure of excommunication, none having power to cast out of the Church by that censure except those who have power to admit into the Church by baptism. — And [let the world also know] whether all the lay elders present at this Assembly be fit to judge of the high and deep mysteries of predestination, the universality of redemption, the sufficiency of grace given or not given to all men, the resistibility of grace, total and final persever- ance, or apostacy of the saints, the antilapsarian or postlapsarian opinion of election and reprobation, all which they mean to venti- late if they determine against the Arminians, as they give out they will." The Marquis then described many of the preachers and their principles. He said that " choice was made of some who are under the censure of the Church, of some who are deprived by the Church, of some who have been banished and put out of the Uni- versity of Glasgow for teaching their scholars that monarchies were unlawful, some banished out of the kingdom for their seditious sermons and behaviour, and some for the like offences banished out of another of his Majesty's dominions — Ireland ; some lying under the fearful sentence of excommunication, some having no ordination or imposition of hands, some admitted to the ministry contrary to the standing laws of this Church and kingdom ; all of them chosen by lay elders. What a scandal were it to the Reform- ed Churches to allow this to be a lawful Assembly, consisting of such members, and so unlawfully chosen ! Of this Assembly divers are under a writ of outlawry, and by the laws of this kingdom are incapable of sitting as judges in any judicatory. — Ye have cited the reverend Prelates of this land to appear before you in a way unheard of not only in this kingdom, but in the whole Christian world, their citations being read in the pulpits, which is not usual 582 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. in this Church ; nay, and many of them were read in the pulpits after they had been dehvered into the Bishops' own hands. How can his Majesty deny unto them, being his subjects, the benefit of his laws, in declining all those to be their judges who by their Covenant do uphold the principal thing in question, to-wit. Epis- copacy to be abjured, as many of you do ; or any of you to be their judges, who adhere to your last protestation, wherein you declare that it is an office not known in this kingdom, although at this present it stands established both by Acts of Parliament and Acts of General Assemblies ? Who ever heard of such judges as have sworn themselves parties V The Marquis concluded by again recommending them to " dissolve," and " amend all these errors in a new election," assuring them that he would exert his influence with the King to summon another Assembly. Henderson, as Moderator, replied in a long speech, in which, to the astonishment of many of the zealous Covenanters, he " magni- fied," says Burnet, " the King's authority in matters ecclesiastical, calling him the universal Bishop of the Churches in his dominions, with other such like expressions." He defended their proceedings against the Bishops, and several of the Covenanting Nobility main- tained the legality and freedom of the Assembly. The Marquis stated his opinion on what had been advanced, and after ordering some papers to be read, which were disowned by the Assembly as merely the " private opinions of some," he told them that for many months the Tables had been obeyed by all in preference to the King, but that he would now try their declarations of loyalty. He stated that " one of the chief reasons which moved him to dissolve this Assembly was to deliver the ministers from the tyranny of lay elders, who, if not suppressed, would, as they were now designing the ruin of episcopal power, prove not only ruling but overruling elders. Having in vain requested Henderson, as Moderator, to close the Assembly with prayer, the Marquis rose so visibly overcome with grief as to affect most of the persons present, and solemnly pro- tested in the name of the King, on behalf of himself and the Bi- shops, that no act after his departure would be legal. He then by royal authority dissolved the Assembly on the 29th of Novem- ber, and prohibited their farther proceedings. While the Marquis and the Lords of the Privy Council were leaving the cathedral, the Earl of Rothes handed to Johnston of Warriston a written 1638.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 583 protest, prepared in anticipation of this result, which was publicly read. The concluding scene, before the departure of the Commissioner, is worthy of perusal. " Before ye proceed farther," said the Mar- quis, " I will renew all my protestations made in name of my mas- ter and Lords of the clergy here, and will present unto you his Ma- jesty's gracious pleasure signed with my own hand by his warrant." The clerk then read the document presented by the Marquis, con- taining the withdrawal of the Book of Canons, Liturgy, and High Commission — that the Five Articles of Perth were not to be urged — that the Assembly were to have liberty to declare their opinion of those Articles to the ensuing Parliament — that the only oath to be taken by ministers was to be that according to the Act of Parliament — that General Assemblies were to be summoned when necessary or expedient — that the Bishops were to be liable to the censure of General Assemblies — that no change of re- ligion was intended — and that the Covenant and bond of 1580, revived in 1589, was to be subscribed. The Marquis then ad- dressed the Assembly on those topics, to which Henderson re- plied, and a desultory discussion ensued on the competency of the Assembly to be judges of the Bishops, in which the Marquis, Henderson, Lord Loudon, and the Earl of Rothes, were the speakers. The presence and voting of the " ruhng elders," and the conduct of the Tables, were also warmly debated. The latter subject elicited a facetious speech from the Earl of Rothes, in con- cluding which he asked — " When the Commissioners from shires and presbyteries met and sat down, what absurdity was there to call them so met a Table, seeing it is not called a Council Table, or a Judicial Table, such as Prelates called their Tables ? If we called it a Judicial Table, let us be hanged for it. A tailors table sitting with his men sewing upon it is called a table, or a company eating at such a man's table ; there is no absurdity in the speech, and we did not call ourselves the Tables, but others gave it that name." " I ex- cept not much," said the Marquis, " against the name of Table. I have no cause of passion to hear their meetings called a Table, for there is passion enough at my heart that I find so much power at these Tables, and so little at the Council Table, for it is well known your positive councils are more regarded than the King's Council Table." In reply to an observation of Rothes the Mar- 584 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. quis repeated his statement, and before he dissolved the As- sembly he said — " I heard these men [the Bishops] swear that for procuring the peace of the land they were content to lay down their offices and livings, and leave this- kingdom. I grant the offer is but small, for the Prince whom they serve can make it up another w-ay." He subsequently observed — " I am sure the Bishops desire nothing more than to have a lawful hearing before a judge free of partiality, but no man will submit himself to a judge whom he thinks is party, as they think this Assembly to be." He soon afterwards dissolved the Assembly and retired ; but the ques- tion was nevertheless renewed by Henderson — " Whether they found themselves lawful and competent judges to the pretended Bishops and Archbishops of this kingdom, and the complaints given against them and their adherents, notwithstanding their De- clinature and Protestation ?" Only four dissented from declaring the affirmative. Baillie alleges, as the opinion of some of his friends, who, he confesses, were " but short-sighted, and dived not deep into the mysteries of state," that if the Marquis had remained some days longer it would have been "in nothing prejudicial to his mastei-'s service ; yea, very conduceable to have kept all from those irreme- diable extremities all men saw by that departure to be inevitably consequent. Thequestion about the judgesofthe Bishops," continues Bailhe, " which his Grace took for the occasion of his rising, was brought on by his urgent pressing of reading their Declinature." To all this and many other opinions it may be replied, that the Marquis of Hamilton could not have acted otherwise without com- promising the honour and dignity of the Crown. Baillie observes on the " Bishops and their opposites," that " there can be no pos- sible agreeance but by yielding all to the one side." This was probably the fact. The law, to say nothing of truth, was on the side of the Bishops and of the Church, and the Covenanters con- tended for victory. " For my own part," says Baillie, " I thought that the standing of Episcopacy in any the least degree could not be yielded." The sincerity of the Marquis of Hamilton on this oc- casion and during his subsequent career has been variously dis- cussed. Bishop Henry Guthrie asserts that he secretly encour- aged the Covenanters in their designs, but this is indignantly denied by a contemporary in his annotations on some passages of 1G38.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 585 the Bishop's work.* It is certain from Baillie's narrative that the Presbyterians were at least pleased with his external demean- our. " My Lord Commissioner''s Grace," Baillie writes to his friend Spang, 12th Febiniary 1639, " seemed to us one of the ablest and best spoken statesmen the King has ; a great lover both of the King and his country ; as he left nothing unassayed among us to get the King his will, so we hope he has done his en- * Sir James Turner's Memoirs of his own Life and Times, printed for the Bannatjne Qub, Edinburgh, 4to. 1829, p. 231-235. The Bishop alleges that the Marquis after a certain interview said to the Covenanting Nobility and preaching leaders in private — " My Lords and gentlemen, I spoke to you before these Lords of the Council as the King's Commissioner ; now, there being none present but yourselves, I would speak one thing to you as a kindly Scotsman. If you go on with courage and resolution you will carry what you please ; but if you faint and give ground in the least, you are un- done ; a word is enough to wise men." The Bishop alleges that he would not have mentioned this private advice, if various contradictory accounts of it had not become public — that " some made it better, others worse than it was ; but that very same day Mr Andrew Cant told it to Mr Guild [of Aberdeen], as also to Mr Dalgleish, minister of Cupar [Fife], to Mr Robert Knox, minister of Kelso, and to Mr Henry Guthrie [the Bishop himself, then] minister of Stirling." Sir James Turner has the following severe remarks on this story : — " The Bishop, after so foul an aspersion, should have endeavoured to prove his accusation by some more habile witnesses than Mr Andrew Cant, yea, or any of the Covenanters, not excepting the best of them, for all of them were then party ; all of them knew but too well that many public affairs are carried on by lies, and the business ordinarily done before the people be undeceived. But the Bishop himself makes Mr Andrew Cant the reporter of this tale, and consequently father of the lie ; and indeed he [Cant] could not have told it to three fitter trumpeters, whereof this Bishop was himself one. But let this [the Bishop's] manuscript be ex- amined ; it will be found the Bishop accuses the same Mr Cant in another case to have made a concatenation of lies in the pulpit to his audience in a sermon, and blasphemous lies in his prayers to God Almighty. With what malice and impudence, then, can the Bishop make use of the same Mr Cant as a habile witness against James then Marquis since Duke of Hamilton ? This Mr Guild, if it be he I mean, was an honest man at the time and a royalist, and therefore Cant hath purposely told this lie to him, that Guild being once persuaded to believe it, might also labour to bring other honest and loyal men to a distrust of the Commissioner, that they might provide for their own safety by leaving him and joining with the Covenanters — Cant and all his crew knowing well enough that when one is boldly calumniated something will stick and adhere ; and as- suredly their design at that time, and long afterwards, was to make honest men jealous one of another, and particularly of James then Marquis of Hamilton, wherever they were but too successful, none contributing more to it than the Bishop, the author of this manuscript. But how wickedly and falsely the Bishop hath represented this story may appear perfectly by this, that he writes of the famous then Earl since Marquis of Montrose, as one who believed this ridiculous narration to be true." The indignant cavalier denies that Montrose gave it the slightest credit, and adds — " Assuredly he looked upon it as a fable invented by Master Cant, with some additional notes by Bishop Guthrie." 586 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. deavours, and will continue to obtain the country justice at the Kind's hand. Though he has done all against our proceedings which the heart of the Bishops in any wisdom could have com- manded him yet we take it all in good part, remembering the place that was put on him. My thoughts of the man before that time were hard and base ; but a day or two's audience did work my mind to a great change towards him, which yet remains, and ever will, till his deeds be most notoriously evil." And describing the disappointed feelings of the Marquis when dissolving the As- sembly Baillie says — " It kythed [appeared] by his extraordinary grief at their miscarriage ; many days thereafter he forgot to eat his bread, and through grief fell in sickness. My heart pitied the man." The Marquis after dissolving the Assembly summoned the Privy Council, who approved his conduct, with the exception of the Earl of Argyll, who declared that he would acknowledge the Assembly and take the Covenant. The Earl induced a few others of the Privy Council to follow his example, but their defection was considered by the Marquis an advantage. The Privy Council also wrote to the King commending the whole proceedings of the Marquis. On the morning of the ensuing day most of the Privy Councillors signed the proclamation dissolving the Assembly, which was pub- lished at the Cross of Glasgow, where it was met by a protestation subscribed by Johnston of Warriston. The Marquis then retired to his family mansion of Hamilton, carrying with him Bishops Max- well of Ross and Whiteford of Brechin, and a few days afterwards he went to Edinburgh, where he received a letter from the King, dated 7th December, applauding his proceedings, and intimating that early in the spring the military preparations would be com- pleted. The Marquis also received two letters from Archbishop Laud. The one, dated Lambeth, 3d December, was the Arch- bishop's reply to a letter from the Marquis of the 27th November. The Primate mentions two long letters he had received at the same time from Bishop Maxwell of Eoss and Dean Balcanqual, in which were full details of the proceedings of the Assembly. — " I heartily pray your Lordship," says Laud, " to thank both the Bishop of Ross and the Dean [Balcanqual] for their kind letters, and the full account they have given me ; but there is no particular that requires an answer in either of them, saving that I find in the Dean's letter 1638.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 587 that Mr Alexander Henderson, who went all this while for a quiet and calm-spirited man, hath shewed himself a most violent and passionate man^ and a moderator without moderation^ The Arch- bishop's other letter, dated Whitehall, 7th December, is an answer to one from the Marquis written on the 2d. It chiefly contains the King's sentiments on the state of affairs and some general details. Yet although the Marquis was zealously thanked by Archbishop Laud and others for his conduct, he so far adopted the Presbyterian notion in his letter to the King on the 27th of November, two days before he dissolved the Assembly, as to allege that the conduct of the Bishops in the matter of the Liturgy was illegal, though it is now evident that Archbishop Spottiswoode and others were opposed to its introduction. He most erroneously states — " Their pride was great, but their folly greater ; for if they had gone right about this work nothing was more easy than to have effected what was aimed at. As for the persons of the men, it will prove of small use to have them characterized by me ; their condition being such as they cannot be too much pitied, yet lest I should lay upon them a heavier imputation by saying nothing than I intend, therefore I shall crave leave to say thus much. It will be found that some of them have not been of the best lives, as St Andrews, Brechin, Argyll, Aberdeen ; yet for my Lord of Koss [Bishop Maxwell], the most hated of all, and generally by all, there are few personal faults laid to his charge more than ambition, which I cannot account a fault so it be in lawful things."* Henderson, after the departure of the Marquis, addressed the illegal conclave in a long speech. He said — " All who are pre- sent know how this Assembly was indicted, and what power we allow to our sovereign in matters ecclesiastical. Although we have acknowledged the power of Christian kings for con- vening Assemblies, and their power in them, yet that must not derogate from Christ's right ; for he has given warrant to convo- cate Assemblies whether magistrates consent or not." The argu- ments adduced in support of these opinions may be easily infer- red. The accession of Argyll to the now rebellious movement imparted fresh courage to the leaders, and Lord Erskine, then a youth, the son of the Earl of Mar, signed the Covenant, though three years afterwards he became a devoted loyalist. The question " Hardwicke's State Papers, vol. ii. p. 113. 588 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. was discussed — Whether they would adhere to the protestation against the Commissioner''s departure, and continue to meet till their business was concluded I With the exception of a few from the county of Forfar this was decided in the affirmative. The next question, similarly decided, was — Whether they were lawful and competent judges of the Archbishops and Bishops of the kingdom, and of the complaints given in against them and their adherents, without any regard to their Declinature and Protestation ? On the 30th of November the Earl of Traquair wrote from Fal- kirk to the Marquis of Hamilton — " The Service-Book will be condemned in general as repugnant to the tenets of this Church ; episcopal government as not agreeable to the government thereof ; and presently all the Bishops of this kingdom are condemned, and presently excommunicate. — If I should subscribe any covenant or confession which in my judgment excluded episcopacy or episcopal government, I behoved to subscribe against the light of my own con- science, and this I declared publicly, as I shall do while I breathe.''''* On the 8th of December a long proclamation was issued against the continuation of the Assembly, dated Whitehall, but the royal authority was set at defiance. Their proceedings, as affecting the Episcopal Church, while sitting in defiance of the law, may be thus summarily stated. They vindicated those of their own party who were under the censures of the Church, and answered the objec- tions of the Court against the lay elders. They set forth their peculiar explanation of the Covenant, and condemned the Perth Articles, the Book of Canons, the Liturgy, and the High Commis- sion. They denounced as illegal and corrupt the several General Assemblies of Linlithgow in 160G and 1G08, Glasgow in 1610, Aberdeen in 1616, St Andrews in 1617, and Perth in 1618. They enacted, as they alleged, in accordance with the Confession of Faith of 1560, 1581, and 1590, that Episcopacy, or any ecclesias- tical function differing from that of an ordinary Presbyterian minis- ter, was illegal. But the conduct cf the episcopally ordained Mr Baillie at the discussion of the abjuration of Episcopacy evinced some compunction of conscience. When the vote was put — Be- moved and abjured — in accordance to their Covenanting interpreta- tion that all episcopal government had been condemned by the Confession of Faith, Baillie drew upon himself universal attention • Hardwicke's State Papers, vol. ii. p. 121. 1638.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 589 when he alone declared — " Removed now, hut never before abjured.''''* He was similarly situated at the vote for the abjuration of the Perth Articles, and he describes the proceedings of his friends as most unprincipled and contemptible. " I pitied much," he says, " to see men take advantage of the time to cast their own conclu- sions in Assembly Acts, though with the extreme disgrace or danger of their brethren. The question was stated very cunningly, as ye may see in the act about the removal of these Articles out of our Church." The hypocrisy of Henderson was here prominently displayed. He professed that it was not intended to injure any man's conscientious scruples by pronouncing the Perth Articles " idolatrous or superstitious, as some esteemed them," and that he had no wish to condemn other Churches, who were " to be judged by their own Master." Baillie says that he saw the " snare," and though he was resolved not to dispute, yet before the vote he com- plained of the evident purport of the question, and maintained — " that to ask if [the] Perth Articles were to be removed according to our Confession, which was conceived by way of oath and cove- nant with God, [it] was all one as if to ask if they were truly ab- jured before, and all who had defended them since were truly per- jured, which was a very hard matter for many to grant." Hen- derson lost temper at this declaration, and denied that his lan- guage could be so construed. When the vote was taken, they all answered — " Abjured and removed ^ Baillie, who had, like many of them, acknowledged the Perth Articles, says — " No man was " Baillie's naiTative of his conduct on the occasion is very sophistical. He says — " The question was formed about the abjuration of all kind of Episcopacy in such terms as I profess I did not well at the time understand, and thought them so cunningly in- tricate, that hardly could I give any answer either ita or non. — When it came to my name, many eyes were fixed on me, expecting some opposition, but all I said was — that according to the express words of the Assembly 1580 [and] 1581 Episcopacy was to be distinguished. Episcopacy as used and taken in the Church of Scotland I thought to be removed ; yea, that it was a Popish error, against Scripture and antiquity, and so then abjured ; but Episcopacy simpliciter, such as was in the ancient Church, and in our Church during Knox's days in the persons of the Superintendents, it was for many reasons to be removed, but not abjured in our Confession of Faith. This Argyll and Loudon, and many, took out of my mouth as not ill said, and nothing against their mind, who spoke not of Episcopacy (impliciter, but in our own Church, whether or not it had been condemned at the time of the Covenant's first subscription." The approbation of Argyll and Loudon proves that Baillie's notions of what he designates " Episcopacy'' were of no value. Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 158. 590 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. opposed but myself, for here I saw no place for distinction as be- fore in Episcopacy, and so without any hesitation I voted — Removed now, hut never be/ore abjured.'''' But the great business was the mock deposition of the Bishops and numbers of the clergy. Every little foible, and every alleged error of conduct, without reference to time or place, were magni- fied into enormous crimes ; lies innumerable were invented and willingly credited ; and all, however immoral, disgraceful, and un- principled in their own characters and conduct, were gladly welcomed if they brought charges against the Bishops and clergy. It is some consolation to know that the Covenanting Presbyterians would have similarly treated the Apostles, the Fathers, and the illustrious Bishops and Martyrs of the Primitive times. On the evening of the very day of the dissolution of the A ssem- bly they commenced by referring to processes against some of their associates in the High Commission Court. After sundry speeches and the discussion of some minor points, Lord Montgomery moved that the summons and claim against the pretended Archbishops and Bishops be read. Henderson replied from the chair that the Prelates were summoned in the best form they could devise. " Let us now," he said, " hear what is said against one of the Bishops, and remove the rest to be looked on by those that have charge of the bills. We need not spend time in reading the general com- plaint against the Bishops ; but here is a particular condescend- ing upon some things which will clear the general. This is against the Bishop of Galloway." On the 1st of December the first process read was against Mr David Mitchell, minister of Edinburgh, Dr Panter, Principal of St Mary's College in St Andrews, and Dr Alexander Gladstanes, who were accused of Arminianism, and " many erroneous and Pa- pistical points of doctrine." This was followed two days after by a singular discussion on Arminianism conducted by David Dickson and Andrew Ramsay. The extraordinary absurdities uttered by those two men are apparent throughout all their statements on election, predestination, reprobation, and other Calvinistic tenets. A letter was then read from Bishop Graham of Orkney, produced by his son, or probably his son-in-law, Patrick Smyth of Braco, a member of the conclave, offering to " submit himself in all re- spects to the Assembly." Mr David Mitchell was then deposed — 1638.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 591 the very charitable and amiable Mr Robert Douglas stating in re- ply to Mr Moderator Henderson — " He is clearly convicted of Arminianism and many points of Popery, and the censure of the Kirk is deprivation for his false doctrine, and excommunica- tion for declining the General Assembly ; therefore I think this Assembly should extirpate such birds lest the Kirk should receive prejudice hereafter." Baillie says — " Mr David Mitchell this long time had delighted to grieve the whole land with the doctrine of the faction : Arminianism in all the heads, and sundry points of Popery, proved by sundry witnesses, besides his declining of the Assembly, which alone, according to the Acts of our Church, im- ports deposition. He came to Glasgow, at least remained some days in Hamilton with the Bishop of Ross. No man could have such a one in our Church without serious repentance for his manifold errors." The delegates from Edinburgh presented their grievances against the Dean [Hannay] and his colleagues, Messrs Thomson, Fletcher, and Dr Elliot — " the first three," says Baillie, " as decliners of the Assembly and practitioners of the Service- Book ; the last as obtruded on them by Sir John Hay's [Lord Provost] authority, and as too weak for that ministry ; also as one who had read the Liturgy in a Diocesan Assembly" [Synod]. On the 4th of December Mr William Maxwell of Dunbar and Mr George Sydserff of Cockburnspath in Haddingtonshire were referred to a committee appointed to meet in Edinburgh, and eventually deposed for their alleged " corrupt doctrine" and forcing their parishioners to conformity. " It is marvellous," adds Baillie, whose horror of Arminianism amounted to insanity, " how impu- dent all the familiars of the Bishops of Ross and Galloway were grown in avowing pertly Arminianism and much Popery." On this day Dr Gladstanes of St Andrews was unanimously deposed. Baillie's attack on him is so gross and rabid as to carry its refuta- tion. He describes him as a " monster of drunkenness and atheistic profanity ; Rome pagan could not have suffered such a beastly man to have remained a priest even to Bacchus ! I hear [for the pious Mr Baillie was not even acquainted with Gladstanes] that the man once had a very great appearance of many good parts. They say he was a trim personage of a man, had a pretty estate, was a scho- lar in all faculties ; right eloquent, wise, and discreet, and free of all scandalous vices ; in favour with the King, Court, and country ; 592 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. but long since, having cast away the fear of God [not becoming a Covenanter], all these gifts of the body, estate, and mind, have evidently left him." At a subsequent stage of the proceedings Dr Panter of St Mary's College experienced their tender mercies. Of him Baillie writes — "I never saw the man; but his Valliados* makes me love him as one of the best poets I know now living. The man has a bonny spirit, some things in all sciences, but St Andrews [Spottiswoode] was far in the wong to advance him to a divinity profession before he had well learned the grounds of that science. He was never diligent ; but he had not sooner settled himself in his chair when he began to recommend the English method of study to our youth, to begin with the Popish schoolmen and Fathers, and to close with Protestant Neoterics — a most unhappy and dangerous order. I hear in his public notes he has deboirded [swerved] to the Popish justification, and his discourses to the grossest Pelagianism in original sin, besides other points of Arminianism." On the 5th of December two of the parochial clergy were con- signed to the committee at Edinburgh, and the process against Dr Robert Hamilton, who presented the Declinature of the Bi- shops, was read. The official reported that Dr Hamilton had told him to hang himself when he summoned him — that he was not a traitor to appear before rebels — and that he was an hon ester man than any who sat in that Assembly. -f- " Besides his open affront- ing of the Assembly," writes Baillie, " he was found to have been absent at Court and at Edinburgh often twelve, fifteen, eighteen weeks together from his church, upon no reason but pleas for aug- mentation [of his stipend] and suits of farther promotion. The man's gifts are every way mean ; he had a good estate, and was well [in circumstances], but being smitten by the ambition of his brother-in-law Dr Whiteford [Bishop of Brechin], trode his steps of vain lavishness and dilapidation of what he had, to seek what he did not deserve." After this specimen of prying into private affairs — a common practice of the Presbyterians generally — Baillie unhesitatingly affirms that Dr Hamilton was " according to the • " A Latin Poem in hexameter verse, dedicated to King Charles, entitled — ' Vallia- dos Libri Tres opus inchoatum auctore Patricio Pantero, ad Fanum Andrea? Theologo.' Edinburgh, 1633, small 8vo." Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 149. f Records of the Kirk of Scotland, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. vol. i. p. 1C2. 1638.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 593 English fashion a profaner of the Sabbath," inducing his parish- ioners to dance and play at football : — " He was, as we call it, an ordinary swearer, for the faction delighted, as I have heard sundry of them, to adorn their speeches with the proverbs — Before God ; I protest to God : By my conscience ; On my soul ! and higher asseve- rations, by these phrases to clear themselves of Puritanism. Ho was a violent persecutor, even to excommunication, and denying of marriage and baptism, of those who would not communicate with him kneeling." Dr Hamilton intimated to Henderson that he declined to appear before that illegal Assembly, and maintaining that, if even all those falsehoods charged against him were true, he considered them unworthy of a rebuke from the Presbytery. He was eventually deposed, but he continued to officiate several weeks in his parish church in defiance of their fulminations. Dr Hamilton soon afterwards retii-ed into England, and the Cove- nanters were alarmed at the intelligence that he was nominated to the See of Caithness in room of Bishop Abernethy, who ac- knowledged the authority of the inquisitorial conclave, and actually subscribed the Covenant. The Doctor, however, was never conse- crated. Another Kobert Hamilton, minister of Lesmahago, was accused of " breaking the Sabbath, borrowing from his parishioners, detaining the penalties of delinquents, banishing some of his pa- rishioners out of the parish for not kneeling at the Communion, preaching Arminianism, and declining the Assembly." In addi- tion he was charged with insolent behaviour before the Presbytery of Lanark, by designating some of his Covenanting parishioners debauched villains ; but the great query about him was — " If he had cleared himself before the Presbytery concerning universal grace f He appeared, and as his replies were considered unsatis- factory he was suspended, declared worthy of deposition, ordered to appear before the Presbytery of Lanark, and next before their Commission at Edinburgh, after giving the former " satisfaction," or to proceed against him. He was eventually deposed on the 3l8t of January 1G30. He sent a letter to the said Presbytery declaring his contempt for the Assembly, and that he intended to " continue preaching notwithstanding his deposition ;" for which he was summoned before the Presbytery to " hear the sentence of the Kirk, under pain of excommunication." This Mr Hamilton 38 594 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [XG;38. was considered a person of some importance, as Mr Moderator Henderson expressed himself very anxious to " gain the man."* Mr John Crichton, minister of Paisley, was deposed on a charge of " many blasphemous points both of Arminianism and Popery — about forty- eight — besides his scandalous life."f A similar order was taken with JSlr John M'Naught, minister at Chirnside, for " de- serting his parish, declining his Presbytery, and preaching Armi- nian doctrine." Mr Wilham Annand of Ayr was ordered to be de- posed by the Presbytery of Ayr for " maintaining Saints' Days and many points of erroneous doctrine," especially those advanced in his sermon before the Diocesan Synod of Glasgow in 1G37. As it was also considered necessary to get up a charge of " scandalous life" as well as "erroneous doctrine" against Mr Annand, this very kind duty was volunteered by Mr John Sempill, Provost of Dun barton, and a Mr John Ferguson or Fergushill, who " gave a large testimony." " I pitied him much," says BailHe ; " the man in my mind had exceeding great gifts ; but profaneness and a resolute opposition to all things he counted puritanical did spoil all. His ditty was, that in a common head — Be Invocatione Sanctorum — he had main- tained Saints' Days ; he had preached in a Synod in defence of our Liturgy, with many invectives against conceived [ex- temporary] prayers ; he was frequently drunk, and an ordinary swearer ; that he had deserted his flock above eight months." Baillie, however, unwittingly records the real origin of those false charges — " It is strange to see that man's unhappiness ; he sub- scribed our Covenant ; his people, and toe all, had he been con- stant, were ready to have done him much pleasure." Mr Thomas Mackenzie, Archdeacon of Ross, was also deposed for " many foul crimes," such as " fornication, drunkenness, marrying of adulterers, &c." Dr Scrymgeour, whom Baillie calls his " old comerade" — stating that Moderator Henderson was " his neighbour and singular friend" — had been " suspended by the Presbytery [of St Andrews] for the Sei-vice, pressing conformity, preaching too grossly [the] necessity of Baptism, fornication since his ministry, drunkenness, playing at cards on Sunday." He presented a " con- • Extracts from the Register of the Presbytery of Lanark, printed for the Abbots- ford Club, 4to. 1839, p. 10. t Peterkin's Records of the Kirk of Scotland, vol. i. p. 163. 1G38.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 5.9.5 fession and supplication" to 1-is tyrannical inquisitors, but Sir John Leslie of Newton, uncle of the Earl of Rothes, was zealous for his deposition, and was only pacified by that farce being de- legated to the Presbytery. Another " old coinerade" of Baillie was a Mr John Macmath. His sentence of deposition by the Presbytery was produced and ratified for teaching " all Arminianism, prayer for the dead, invo- cation of saints, Christ's local descent to hell, damnation of chil- dren without Baptism, regeneration ex opere operato by Baptism, his obligation to say mass if King Charles commanded, his disdain to come near the Presbytery." Also Mr Francis Hervey, " for his erecting an altar with rails at his own hand [risk or expence], drinking and carding on Sunday, and without proclamation marry- ing our Bishop's son with Blantyre's daughter."* Mr Thomas For- rester, minister of Melrose, was also deposed, and the Covenanting hatred towards him is amusingly developed by Baillie, who desig- nates him " a monster." He was accused of " avowing that the Service was better than preaching — that preaching was no part of God's essential worship — that all prayers should be read off" books; he made his altar and rails himself ; stood within, and reached the elements to those who kneeled without ; he avowed Christ's pre- sence there, but whether sacramentally, or by way of consubstan- tiation, he wist not, but thought it a curiosity to dispute it ; he main- tained Christ's universal redemption, and all that was in our Ser- vice-Book was good ; yet he used to sit at preaching and prayer ; baptize in his own house; made a way through the church itself for his kine and sheep ; made a waggon of the old communion table to lead his peats in ; that to make the Sabbath a moral precept was to Judaize ; that it was lawful to work on it ; he caused lead his corn on it ; that our Confession of Faith was faithless — only an abjuration of many things better than there we swore to ; he kept no thanksgiving after Communion ; affirmed our Reformed to have brought more damage to the Church in one age than the Pope and his faction had done in a thousand years." It is singular that the usual charges of drunkenness, adultery, and other licentiousness, were forgotten in Mr Forrester's case. " This monster^'' adds Baillie ferociously, " was justly deposed."-f- Mr Forrester " is " If Baillie means that a son of Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow married a daughter of Lord Blantyre, no such marriage is recorded in the Peerage Lists and other records, t Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 165, 166. 596 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1G38. said to have often expressed himself in some ironical petitions of his own composition, containing such expressions as — " From the knock-down race of Knoxes, good Lord, deliver us."* He pro- bably held the memory of Mr John Knox in no great estimation, but the real cause of this witty deprecation of the " knock-down race of Knoxes'''' may have resulted from the circumstance, that Mr Forrester's immediate predecessor as minister of Melrose was Mr John Knox, a nephew of the " famous John." Such are examples of the summary mode in which the rebellious Covenanting conclave " dealt with" the parochial episcopal clergy. To the pretended charges of Popery and Arminianism were inva- riably appended false accusations of immorality, and this was de- signedly done to render the clergy odious to the people. Num- bers of them were transferred to the tender mercies of eight inquisitorial tribunals constituted by the leaders under the title of Commissions, which were appointed to convene at Edinburgh, Jedburgh, Irvine, Dundee, Chanonry of Eoss and Forres, Kirkcud- bright, and the Colleges of Aberdeen and Glasgow ; the first in De- cember, and the others in the following months of January, Feb- ruary, March, and April. Justice from such tyrannical and ille- gal committees was not to be expected, and they continued the work of deprivation and deposition. The High Commission Court was succeeded by Commissions of another kind far more odious and intolerable — the very personification of oppression and cruelty on the part of the Covenanters. The proceedings of those men against the Bishops now come under our notice. Lord Loudon alleged that when on one occasion their petition was presented to the Privy Council, Archbishop Spottis- woode rejected it because it was expressed in the name of the " Kirk and clergy," the Primate observing — " Whom call ye the Kirk ? a number of baggage ministers worthy to be banished. Ye shall understand that we are the Kirk." The narrator of this choice anecdote was followed by one named Bonar, who affirmed that he heard the Bishops declare in a convention at Leith — " They say that they are the Kirk, but we are the Kirk, and it shall be so ; who will say the contrary V Witnesses were suborned to de- pone against all the Bishops. They began as already noticed with Bishop Sydserff, who was accused of " preaching false doctrine, Arminianism, and bringing in the Service-Book." — " Besides com- • New Statistical Account of Scotland— Roxburghshire, p. 68. 1G38.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 507 nion faults," says Baillie, " he was proven to have preached Armi- iiiunism, to have had in his chamber a crucifix, and spoken for the comfortable use he found into it ; to have indicted two anniversary fasts in his Diocese, and enacted in his Synod a communion for his ministers at all posterior Synods ; he was proved to have deposed ministers, fined and confined gentlemen for unconformity, embraced excommunicated Papists, and professed more love to them than Puritans ; to have contemned exercise of prayer in his family ; to have profaned the Sabbath-day by buying horse ; doing any of his civil matters openly on it." It is hardly necessary to observe that all these were either gross lies, or wilful misrepresentations to suit their purpose. Archbishop Spottiswoode, in addition to preaching " Arminianism and papistical doctrine," was accused, besides his common faults, of ordinary profaning of the Sabbath, carding and diceing in time of Divine service [meaning their preachings /], riding through the country the whole day, tippling and drinking in taverns till midnight, falsifying with his hand the Acts of Aber- deen Assembly, lying and slandering our old Assemblies and Cove- nants in his wicked book."* Not content with such falsehoods, those unscrupulous men actually charged the venerable Primate with " adultery, incest, sacrilege, and frequent simony." Bishop Whiteford of Brechin was the next denounced. In addition to the usual charges, they procured a woman who had been a domestic servant to a nobleman falsely to allege that he was the father of her illegitimate child ; and she was ordered to attend and be ex- amined in the Assembly. Dr Whiteford had heard of this scandal invented by his enemies, and went to Glasgow to prove his inno- cence in the Assembly ; but the Marquis of Hamilton persuaded him not to appear, lest it should be considered an acknowledg- ment of their jurisdiction. These affairs occurred on the 7th of December. On the 8th Henderson commenced the proceedings by stating — " We began at the Bishop of Galloway, and then at St Andrews and Brechin, and lest it may seem a neglect that we are long in coming to the Bishop of Glasgow, whose residence is so hard by us, let us go on to the trial of him." The Earl of Wemyss replied — " The Bishop of Glasgow sent a gentleman to me desiring me earnestly to speak with him ; and because I could not go to him before the Assembly, * Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. i. p. 155. 598 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. he entreated me to desire the Assembly that nothing might be done anent him till I speak with him." This was granted, and a few " discreet members'" were associated wieli the Earl to confer with the Archbishop — " For," said Henderson, " it is better to wound one, than to lose twenty." They then proceeded to dis- cuss the alleged meaning of the Confessions of Faith of 1580, 1581, and 1590, and concluded their debate by the abjuration of Episcopacy. On the following day the Five Articles of Perth were condemned. A letter was next read from Bishop Abernethy of Caithness, set- ting forth that " bodily sickness and his extreme disease" were the sole causes of his absence from the Assembly ; and on the following day a committee was appointed " for clearing of the pro- cess " against him. Meanwhile the Earl of Wemyss stated that he had seen the Archbishop of Glasgow, who expressed his regret at putting his hand to the Declinature of the Bishops, which he did suddenly, having been strongly urged to it, and that he was only dissuaded by the Marquis of Hamilton from attending the Assem- bly. The Earl also mentioned that he requested Archbishop Lind- say to " give two lines under his hand declaring his submission to the Assembly ;" but he replied that " he had not his wits about him," and desired to be " dealt with as those who had submitted themselves." This was considered unsatisfactory, and it was found that as he had subscribed the Declinature of the Bishops " he be- hoved to have his own place." Bishop Lindsay of Edinburgh was the next. Two of them declared that they had seen him " bow to the altar," and other two alleged that they saw him " dedicate a kirk after the popish manner." Baillie says of the Bishop of Edin- burgh— " He was proven to have been a pressor of all the late no- vations, an urger of the Liturgy, a refuser to admit any to the ministry who would not first take the order of a preaching deacon, a bower to the altar, a wearer of the rochet, a consecrator of churches, a domineerer of Presbyteries, a licenser of marriages without bands to the great hurt of sundry, a countenancer of corrupt doctrine preached at Edinburgh, an elevator at consecration, a defender of ubiquity in his book.* We pronounced him to be deposed and * This refers to the " True Narration of all the Proceedings in the General Assem- bly holden at Perth the 25th of August 1618," written by Dr Lindsay when Bishop of Brechin. 1638.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. 599 excommunicated." Two of them stated of Bishop Bellenden of Aberdeen that when informed that the way to reform abuses in the Church was a free Greneral Assembly, he passionately exclaim- ed— " The first article he would make then would be to pull the crown off King Charles'' head." Another alleged that he was ac- cidentally present when he consecrated a chapel at the request of a lady named Gordon, locally known as Lady Wardhouse. " The lady," said the witness, " came in, and gave him a catalogue of the things that are within, which she had wrought with her own hands, and so desired that they might be dedicated to God, and so delivered the key to the Bishop, who went in and preached a sermon of con- secration, and baptized a child, and then went to feasting. His text was Solomon's dedication of the Temple."* Baillie's character of Bishop Bellenden is expressed in his usual style — " His proper faults were great slanders of frequent simony ; that though he was removed from the Chapel-Royal [of Holyrood] to Aberdeen, as one who did not favour well enough Canterbury's new ways, yet he had been found [as forward] as any to press the Canons and Liturgy ; that he suspended ministers for fasting on Sundays ; that he en- acted in his Synods without voting public fastings to be kept on Wednesdays only ; consecrated the chapel of an infamous woman, the Lady Wardhouse ;-f- stayed at his pleasure processes against Papists and incestuous persons. He had not subscribed the De- clinature, as was thought for lack of no good will, but only through distance of place the write in time could not be conveyed to him." The " defect in his process" was supplied by Moderator Henderson, who assailed him for being once " by appearance but too zealous against Bishops and all their courses." Bishop Maxwell of Ross was next in order, and he was the object of their peculiar ferocity. His " process " also was " no way perfect," but the Covenanters were not scrupulous in observing forms of justice. Mr John Irving, formerly Provost of Dumfries, alleged that one Sunday when he was in that town they placed cushions for him in the church, expecting him to attend, but he chose rather to remain all day in an " excom- municated Papist's house." Lord Loudon complained that though he went to Court by advice of the Bishops to procure the pro- ' Peterkin's Records of the Kirk of Scotland, vol. i. p. 170, 171. t Called " infamous" by the very charitable and amiable Mr Baillie because Lady Wardhouse was not a Presbyterian. 600 THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638. secution of the Roman Catholics, yet he brought Articles from thence, and came to Glasgow to present the Declinature of the Bishops. Baillie says of Bishop Maxwell — " It was proven that two years ago he was a public reader in his house and cathedral of the Eng- lish Liturgy ; that he was a bower at the altar, a wearer of the cope and rochet, a deposer of the godly ministers, a companion of Papists, an usual card [player] on Sunday ; yea, instead of going to thanksgiving on a communion-day, that he called for cards to play at the Beast; had often given absolution ; consecrated deacons ; robbed his vassals of about 40,000 merks ; kept fasts each Friday ; journeyed usually on Sunday ; had been a chief decliner of the As- sembly, and a prime instrument of all troubles both of Church and State. Of his excommunication no man made question." The process against Bishop Wedderburn was next discussed. He had neither been personally cited, nor had he subscribed the Declinature, and they well knew that he was then in England — " Yet," says Baillie, " he was excommunicated as one who had been a special instru- ment of all our mischiefs, having corrupted with Arminianism divers by his discourses and lectures in St Andrews ; whose errors and perversness kythe [appear] this day in all the nooks of the kingdom ; having been special penner, practiser, urger of our Books and all no- vations, a man set in the Chapel [Royal of Holyrood] to be a hand to Canterbury in all his intentions. What drunkenness, swearing, or other crimes were libelled, I do not remember." Mr James Forsyth, minister of Kilpatrick in Dunbartonshire, whom they had already suspended, was deposed on the charges of " read- ing an inhibition for the teinds against his people on the first com- munion day, at the table and betwixt sermons and celebration ; for teaching the lawfulness of the bowing at the name of Jesus ; that our Covenant was seditious, treasonable, Jesuitic ; that who knelt not got no good at the Communion ; he gave money at his entry for his place ; he struck a beggar on the Sabbath-day." Baillie admits that " they say he might have cleared himself for the most part," but Mr Forsyth would on no account acknowledge the Assembly ; and BailHe was silent on his behalf, at which he alleges that he was the less grieved when he recollected the " evil reward" he had experienced from Mr. John Corbet, " one of that fraternity" whom he had befriended, and who printed in Dublin in 1839 the " Ungirding of the Scottish Armour" — " one of the 1G38.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. GOl most venomous and bitter pamphlets against us all that coukl come from the hands of our most furious and enraged enemy." On the 11th of December Bishop Graham of Orkney, Bishop Guthrie of Moray, Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow, Bishop Fairlie of Argyll, and Bishop Campbell of The Isles, were severally de- nounced. Bishop Graham was accused as " a curler on the ice on the Sabbath-day ; a setter of the tacks to his sons-in-law to the prejudice of the Church ; he overlooked adultery, slighted charm- ing (!), neglected preaching, and doing of any good there ; held portions of ministers' stipends for building his cathedral." As he had acknowledged the Assembly, and professed his dislike to the Canons and Liturgy, he was ordered simply to be deposed. Bishop Guthrie had " all the ordinary faults of a Bishop." The veracious Mr Andrew Cant alleged that " he knew him to be a common rider on the Sabbath-day, and that he was a pretty dancer ; at his daugh- ter's bridal he danced in his shirt; also that he conveyed a gentlewo- man to a chapel to make penance all barefooted." A person named Carmichael deponed that on one occasion, when the Bishop was riding from a church on a Sunday morning, he was asked to stay all night as it was then the Sabbath-day," but he answered that he would " borrow that piece of the day from God, and be as good to him some other way." Moderator Henderson opposed his ex- communication, and Baillie says he assented in the hope of obtain- ing that favour " to poor Glasgow." That Archbishop was charged with " enjoining the Book of Canons in the Diocesan Synod, urging the Liturgy, oppressing his vassals, causing oaths of his own inven- tion to be subscribed by preachers, and interfering with the stipends of the ministers." He was ordered to be deposed and excommuni- cated. Bishop Fairlie of Argyll was accused as " an urger of the wicked oath on entrants, obtruding the Liturgy, oppressing his vassals, a preacher of Arminianism, a profaner of the Sabbath, and beginning to do all that Cantei'bury could have wished." It is astonishing that they preferred none of their usual falsehoods against Bishop Campbell of The Isles. Bishops Lindsay of Dun- keld and Abernethy of Caithness " obtained favour" by their sub- mission to the Assembly, and requested " to be continued in the office of the ministry — " Otherwise," says Baillie, " iliere loere truly alleged the common faults^ and as foul franks of simony and avarice as any of the others^ This admission sufficiently intimates that THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. [1638- the whole cliarges against the Bishops were false, infamous, and unworthy of the slightest credit. On the 13th of December the contemptible sentences against the Bishops were pronounced in the cathedral of Glasgow by Modera- tor Henderson, who preached a sermon on the occasion on Psalm ex. 1 : — " The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thine enemies my footstool." This sermon, with the act of the pretended deposition, was published as a small pamphlet in 1762 at Edinburgh, entitled " The Bishops' Doom." Hender- son enumerated all the preceding calumnies against the Bishops, eight of whom were deposed and excommunicated by him in name of the so called " honourable and reverend Assembly," and the other six deposed from the episcopal office. The eight then " de- posed and excommunicated''' were Archbishops Spottiswoodc and Lindsay, Bishops Lindsay of Edinburgh, Sydserff of Galloway, Maxwell of Ross, Whiteford of Brechin, Bellenden of Aberdeen, and Wedderburn of Dunblane. This farce was followed by the deposition, from the episcopal office merely, of Bishops Guthrie of Moray, Lindsay of Dunkeld, Abernethy of Caithness, Graham of Orkney, Fairlie of Argyll, and Campbell of The Isles. The re- bellious and self-constituted conclave continued its meetings for seven days afterwards till the 20th of December, when it was thought expedient to separate, after conditionally appointing the third Wednesday of July 1639 for the meeting of the next General Assembly, and valedictory speeches from Henderson, Dickson, Ramsay, and Argyll, the last of whom exhorted the persons present to be exemplary in their lives and peaceful in their conduct — " For we must not think," said the Earl, " that because we want Bishops therefore we may live as we will." It is said, and has been often repeated by the Presbyterian writers, that after Argyll's speech, and some concluding observations. Moderator Henderson, imagining himself a second Joshua, exclaimed — " We have now cast down the walls of J ericho ; let him that rebuildeth them be- ware of the curse of Hiel the Bethelite." This extraordinary in- stance of the perversion of Scripture rests solely on the authority of one acrimonious Presbyterian historian;* but if it were true, it • Stevenson's " History of the Church and State of Scotland." It is however observed by Mr Peterkin — " As Mr Stevenson does not state on what authority this is given, and as it is not mentioned in any other work that we have seen, we merely add 1G38.] THE GLASGOW GENERAL ASSEMBLY. G03 only shews the danger of such daring applications of sacred history to the peculiar actions of any sect of religionists. The pretendedly excommunicated and deposed Bishops and their inveterate Presbyterian enemies have long been gathered to their fathers, and men at this distance of time can reason on the preceding melancholy narrative of the extent of human passion and hatred with different feelings. The observations of Mr Scott, in the MS. Perth Registers, on the sentence of deposition pro- nounced against Bishop Guthrie of Moray are applicable to all the other Bishops, and are worthy of notice as the candid admissions of a Presbyterian minister. — " The first ground on which it pro- ceeded was his having acted contrary to the regulations agreed to in the Assembly at Montrose in 1600, restricting the powers of such as should sit and vote for the Church in Parliament. But the constitution of the Church had altered exceedingly after that date. Bishops were restored to all their ancient privileges in 1606, with which after Assemblies had found no fault ; therefore Mr Guthrie might think himself fully authorised to neglect regulations which had been virtually repealed. It is to be noted^that in the old Confession of Faith, ratified by Parliament in 15G0 and 1567, the office of a Bishop was only negatively condemned by its not being mentioned at all. If he [Bishop Guthrie] was otherwise persuaded of the lawfulness of the episcopal office, or of its agree- ableness to the word of God, which it is to be presumed he was, its being condemned by the old Confession, and by some of the old acts of the Church, would have little effect with him, especially as a new Confession had been framed in IGOG, and acts had been passed favourable to Episcopacy. The third ground was his re- fusal to underly the trial of the reigning slander of sundry other gross transgressions and offences laid to his charge ; but if he looked upon himself as lawfully a Bishop, he could not otherwise than decline the judgment of the Assembly. The ' other trans- gressions and offences laid to his charge' are not specified ; but it is plain they were of such a nature as to have been overlooked, if he had not otherwise fallen under the displeasure of the [Pres- byterian] church." it in a note — the expression being frequently referred to — without having before us any contemporary voucher for its accuracy." Records of the Kirk of Scotland, vol. i. p. 193. 604 [1G39. CHAPTER XVI. OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH — THE ABERDEEN DOCTORS — THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT — THE CIVIL WAR — THE PRES- BYTERIANS SELL THE KING. The Covenanters in their Assembly at Glasgow exhibited their tender mercies in the most approved style of sectarian hatred. But notwithstanding the melancholy display of unscrupulous pas- sions, prejudices, and errors, recorded in the preceding narrative, the Episcopal Church was still the lawful ecclesiastical establish- ment of the kingdom, and the despicable deposition and contempt- ible excommunication of the Archbishops, Bishops, and others who belonged to it, or the project of punishing them, was preposterous, tyrannical, and illegal. The Covenanting Assembly had no power to usurp judicial functions, which could only be derived from the supreme legislature of the country. The pretended deposition of the Bishops, the self-constituted prohibition of Episcopacy and the practice of the Five Articles of Perth, and their act against the press, were so many assumptions of civil power and jurisdic- tion. But the rebellion and tyranny of the Covenanting Assembly are now fully admitted. " It would be disingenuous as well as ab- surd,"" says a Presbyterian \vriter of high authority, " to disguise the fact that several acts of the Assembly of 1638 were violations of, and irreconcileable with, the existing law of the land, and im- ported an assumption of authority identical with that of the state. In fact, that Assembly was a political convention, as much at least as an ecclesiastical synod, having fully a hundred members of Parliament in its composition, and in many of its enactments and decrees it directly rescinded, and superseded a great number of acts of Parliament. Without entering at all on controversial 1G39.] OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. 605 ground, we may remark as a matter of fact and notoriety, estab- lished on the face of the Statute-Book, and by the tenor of the Assembly's acts, that that Assembly virtually and explicitly ab- rogated a series of acts of Parliament by which Prelacy was fully and distinctly settled as the Established Church of Scotland for a period of above thirty years preceding, under which the greater number of the clergy in that Assembly had received ordination and benefices, and in which the lay members had acquiesced with- out any visible opposition. In addition to the assumption of civil authority in practically repealing acts of Parliament, the As- sembly sustained complaints against the Prelates and others at the instance of miscellaneous and self-constituted public prose- cutors— a practice never recognised as competent in the laws of Scotland at any period. It deposed the Prelates not solely for erroneous doctrine or immoralities, but chiefly because they held offices conferred on them under the existing law of the country. It superseded the uniform and settled law both of the Church and State from the time of the Reformation on the point of ecclesiastical presentations to benefices, and transported ministers from place to place regardless of the rights of patrons and the wishes of incumbents. It imposed an absolute veto on the liberty of the press, and, above all, it issued an edict for coercing the whole people into an adoption of the Covenant or Confession ; and in obedience to its decrees, under the terrors of excommunication — a penalty at that time tantamount to outlawry, confiscation of property, and proscription — in each and all of these particulars deviating from the spiritual into the civil track of jurisprudence and legislation."* It cannot be denied that the Covenanting leaders in the Glasgow Assembly, who began what some fanatical and republican Presbyterian writers fondly designate the Second Reformation^ were most intolerant and grasping tyrants. " The triumph of the Covenanters," continues the above authority, " was not more distinguished than any other portion of the period re- ferred to for greater relaxation in this respect [toleration] than either the Popish or Episcopal Churches ; and during all the vi- cissitudes of their fortune we cannot find even a trace of any proposal to give freedom of conscience to others, even when they • Records of the Kirk of Scotland, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. vol. i. p. 194, 195. 606 OVERTHROW OP THE CHURCH. [1639. were waging war against Popery and Prelacy in the name of religious liberty.'" The canonical constitution of the Episcopal Church of Scotland during the Spottiswoode Succession of the Bishops has been disputed. It is contended that the defect lay in the want of the essential preliminaries to valid consecration — that Spottiswoode and his brethren ought to have been first ordained deacons and presbyters in England. This subject is casually noticed in the proper place in the present work. As the subsequent Scottish Episcopal Church derives its Succession from another consecration, previous to which the orders of deacons and presbyters were duly conferred, it is unnecessary to discuss the validity of the Episcopate under the Primates Gladstanes and Spottiswoode. It is worthy of remark, however, that this validity seems never to have been disputed by Archbishop Laud. Immediately after the illegal Assembly closed its sittings the several inquisitorial Commissions proceeded to " purge out" of the parishes all who adhered to the Episcopal Church, or who were obnoxious to the dominant faction. Baillie states that "many ministers who remained obstinate in scandals were deposed at Edinburgh, St Andrews, Dundee, Irvine, and elsewhere;" though by two acts of another Assembly, held in 1639, their depositions were to be removed if they submitted to the new oligarchy. But at Aberdeen the injunctions of the Glasgow Assembly encountered the most determined opposition, and Professor Lundie, the dele- gate from King's College, was summoned before the Senatus Acade- micus, by whom he was threatened with deprivation for remaining after the Marquis of Hamilton dissolved the Assembly. We may liei'e summarily notice the subsequent proceedings of the Scottish Bishops after their so called excommunication in eight in- stances, and the deposition of all, by the CovenantingPresbyterians. Archbishop Spottiswoode, at the time of the Glasgow Assembly, was in England, " knowing," says a writer of the period, " that although he had moderated in the last General Assembly held at Perth in 1618, yet he would not be welcome, or by any means admitted to preside in or open this Assembly."* This seems to imply that he was compelled to leave Scotland. In the sketch of " History of Scots Affairs, from 1637 to 1641, by James Gordon, Parson of Kothie- may, printed for the " Spalding Club," 3 vols. 4to. 1841, vol. i. p. 139. 1039.] OVERTHROW OP THE CHURCH. G07 the Archbishop's life by Dr Brian Duppa, Bishop of Winchester, it is stated that he was forced " for safety of his hfe to retire into England, where grief and age, with a sad soul in a crazy body, had so distempered him, that he was driven to take harbour at New- castle, till by some rest and the care of his physicians he had re- covered so much strength as brought him to London." It is stated that he resigned the seals as Lord Chancellor for the pecuniary consideration of L.2,500 Sterling, and if this is the case, that sum was probably all he now possessed for his subsistence. A contem- porary writer of his day alleges that he placed the seals in the hands of the Marquis of Hamilton, who retained them till the Earl of Loudon was appointed Lord Chancellor in 1G41 ; yet Bishop Duppa expressly states that he enjoyed the honour of the Chan- celloi'ship to his death. After the Archbishop arrived in London he again relapsed, and was visited in his last illness by Archbishop Laud and other Bishops, with whom he received the holy Com- munion. The Marquis of Hamilton was among the number of the persons of rank and distinction who waited on the aged and dying Primate, and Bishop Duppa's account of the interview is affecting. The Marquis approached his bed-side and said — " My Lord, I am come to kiss your Lordship's hands, and humbly to ask your blessing." " My Loi'd," replied the Archbishop, " you shall have my blessing ; but give me leave to speak these few words to you. My Lord, I visibly foresee that the Church and King are both in danger to be lost, and I am verily persuaded that there is none under God so able to prevent it as your Lordship ; and therefore I speak to you as a dying Prelate, in the words of Mordecai to Esther — ' If ye do it not, salvation in the end shall come elsewhere, but you and your house shall perish.' " The Marquis declared that " what he [the Primate] foresaw was his [own] grief, and he wished from his heart he were able to do that which was expected from him, though it were to be done with the sacrifice of his life and fortune ; after which, upon his knees, he received the Archbishop's blessing and departed." In his addition to his last will, immediately before his death he professed that he died in the faith of the Apostles' Creed ; — " For matters of rites and government," he declared, " my judgment is and hath been, that the most simple, decent, and humble rites should be chosen, such as the bowing of the knee in the receiving of the holy 008 OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. [1039. Sacrament, with others of the like kind ; profaneness being as dangerous to religion as superstition. As touching the govern- ment of the Church, I am verily persuaded that the government episcopal is the only right and apostolic form, parity among minis- ters being the breeder of all confusion, as experience might have taught us. And for those ruling elders, as they are a mere human ' device, so they will prove, when the way is more open to them, the ruin of both Church and State."" Archbishop Spottiswoode's " History of the Church and State of Scotland" from the year 203 to the accession of Charles I, in 1025, was published in London in 1055. The whole, with the exception of the first hundred and twenty pages, is valuable as the narrative of a contemporary, con- taining details not recorded by other writers, and is written in a clear though plain style, without the pedantry and quaintness peculiar to his time. This work, it is stated, was written by com- mand of King James, who told the Archbishop, in reply to an observation that he could not approve of all the actions of his mother Queen Mary — " Speak the truth, and spare not." The Archbishop dedicated it to Charles I, in an epistle dated " fi'om the place of my peregrination, 15th November 1039,"" in which it is singular that, though it extends to three pages, the writer alludes neither to his illness nor his exile, but speaks as if he were still in Scotland ; yet this date was only eleven days before his death, which, according to the inscription on his monument, occurred on the 2Gth of November 1039, in the 74th year of his age, and this is more likely to be authentic than the statement of other authorities that he died on the 20th or 27th of December. " The manner of his burial," says Bishop Duppa, by the command and care of his religious King, was solemnly ordered ; for the corpse being attend- ed by many mourners, and at least 800 torches, and being brought near the Abbey Church of Westminster, the whole Nobility of England and Scotland then present at Court, with all the King's servants and many gentlemen, came out of their coaches, and con- veyed the body to the west door, where it was met by the Dean and Prebendaries of that church in their clerical habits, and buried according to the solemn rites of the English Church, before the extermination of decent Christian burial was come in fashion." Without reference to the infamous lies and atrocious charges set forth by the Covenanters in their pretended libel against Arch- 1630.] OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. GOD bishop Spottiswoode, we find his character assailed by the gossip of the day. Burnet describes him as " a prudent and mild man, but of no great decency in his course of life," for, according to a statement in his work first printed at Oxford in 1823, " he was a frequent player at cards and used to eat often in taverns ; be- sides, that all his livings were scandalously exposed to sale by his servants." But Bishop Burnet was not born till nearly four years after the Archbishop's death, and his partial delineations are well known. It is evident that the Primate, like most of the Episcopal Church of Scotland, made no secret of his aversion and contempt for the austerity of the Puritans, and thus would appear to evince a laxity of decorum which his traducers magnified into egi-egious crimes ; yet it ought to be remembered that even Archbishop Abbot of Canterbury, puritanically inclined though he notoriously was, often joined in the diversion of the chase, of which the melancholy homicide he committed in Lord Zouch's park is a memorial. Martine describes Archbishop Spottiswoode as " a grave, sage, and peaceable Prelate, ' deserving a singular note and mark of honour,' for, among other things, ' composing an excellent Liturgy but in this he is mistaken, and the Scottish Primate appears rather to have been averse to the introduction of any Liturgy, knowing that he could gain nothing by disturbing the then established order, or exciting the prejudices of the Pres- byterians, though he did not openly oppose it in deference to the King. The testimony of Bishop Duppa is a warm eulogium on the piety and conduct of the Archbishop. " In his life he had set so severe a watch upon himself, that his conversation was without reproof, even in those times when the good name of every clergy- man was set at a rate as formerly were the heads of wolves. — For piety he was more for substance than for show ; more for the power of godliness than the bare form of it. Frequent he was in his private prayers, and in the public worship of God of such an exem- plary carriage as might warm the coldest congregation to gather heat, and to join with him in the same fervency and height of his devotion." Archbishop Spottiswoode left two sons and a daughter by his wife Rachel, daughter of Bishop Lindsay of Ross. Sir John Spottiswoode of Dairsie, the elder son, was alive in 1655, and it is said of him that he was then, " though not in a plen- * Reliquiae Divi Andreas, p. 251. 38 610 OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. [1G39. tiful, yet in a contented condition, not any way cast down or ashamed of his sufferings, but comforting himself rather that in this general ruin brought upon his country he hath kept his con- science free though his estate hath suffered." He died before the Restoration of Charles II., surviving a short time his only son, John Spottiswoode, a devoted royalist, who was the follower of the Marquis of Montrose, and executed as a Malignant soon after the Covenanting murder of that nobleman. The fate of Sir Robert Spottiswoode, the Archbishop's other son, is subsequently noticed. He married a daughter of Sir Alexander Morrison of Preston- grange in Haddingtonshire, a judge in the Court of Session under the title of Lord Prestongrange, and left three sons — John, who died unmarried before the Restoration — Sir Alexander, who carried on the succession of the family — and Robert, appointed by Charles II. physician to the governor and gai'rison of Tangiers, who was the father of General Alexander Spottiswoode, consti- tuted Lieutenant-Governor of Virginia in 1710. The Archbishop's daughter, Anne, married Sir William Sinclair of Roslin, by whom she had two sons. Dr James Spottiswoode, brother of the Arch- bishop, became rector of Wells in Norfolk in 1G03, and Bishop of Clogher in 1G21, in which See he continued to his death in 1C44, and was interred near the Archbishop in Westminster Abbey, leaving two sons and one daughter, who married, and had descend- ants, "whose posterity," it is stated, referring to Sir Henry Spottiswoode, the Bishop of Clogher's elder son, " still exist in Ireland, where they are possessed of opulent fortunes." * Archbishop Lindsay of Glasgow retired into England, and died at Newcastle in 1641. Keith says — " I have heard from some persons who knew him that he was both a good man and a very fervent preacher." The Archbishop is described as " aged and valetudinary" in 1638, and a contemporary chronicler says that he was then seventy-four years old, and confined to his bed by sickness. The Presbyterians assert that he fainted when the pretended de- position and excommunication were announced to him. It appears that he was really against the introduction of the Liturgy, and we have his statement to theEarl of Wemyss that he reluctantly signed the Declinature of the Bishops by the persuasion of the ^Marquis of Hamilton and Bishop Maxwell of Ross. Baillie states that he • Douglas- Baronag-e of Scotland, folio, 1798, p. 447. 1639.] OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. 611 was at one time inclined to submit himself to the Assembly, but a promised pension of L.5,000 sterling, and the hope of enjoying the revenues of the See of Glasgow for life, prevented him. " Since that time," says Baillie, " he has lived very quietly, miskent by all, and put well near to Adamson's misery ; had not peace shortly come his wants had been extreme, and without pity from many, or great relief from any hand we know." Bishop Lindsay of Edinburgh withdrew into England at the commencement of the Covenanting war, and died during the trou- bles. A few notices of the family of Bishop Bellenden occur. His son, David Bellenden, minister of Kincardine, died at the episcopal residence in Old Aberdeen, on the 24th of November 1638, during the meeting of the Glasgow Assembly. On the 22d of March 1G39 the Bishop left his palace in Old Aberdeen, and removed to New Aberdeen for " better security." He continued to preach and ad- minister the Communion till the 24th. On the 27th he was com- pelled by the threats of the Covenanters to leave the town with his son and nephew. The Bishop returned to Aberdeen on the 19th of May, but he was soon forced to depart. His daughter Margaret Bellenden followed him to England, and died at Berwick in January 1640 much lamented. Bishop Whiteford of Brechin also withdrew into England, and in 1642 it was rumoured in Aber- deen that he and Bishop Bellenden had obtained benefices from the King.* Baillie, however, mentions that in December 1640 the latter was living in London " in great poverty and misery." He survived till the month of April 1642, but he died soon afterwards, and Bishop Whiteford in 1643. Bishop Wedderburn of Dunblane died at or near Canterbury in 1639, in the fifty-fourth year of his age, and was buried within the chapel of the Virgin in the Cathedral, where a monument was erect- ed to his memory. It simply set forth that he was born at Dundee, was Dean of the Chapel-Royal [of Holyrood] and Bishop of Dun- blane four years, and that he was the ornament of his country for his learning, probity, and faithfulness. Bishop Maxwell of Ross, a man of great abilities, whom the Covenanters particularly hated, retired to England after the Parliament denounced him in 1639. " Spalding's History of the Troubles and Memorable Occurrences in Scotland and England from 1624 to 1645. Printed for the Bannatyne Club. Edinburgh, 1829, 2 vols. 4to. vol. i. p. 85, vol. ii. p. 39, 40. 612 OVERTHROW OP THE CHURCH. [1639. His wife is mentioned as the sister of Mr Alexander Innes, minis- ter of Eothiemay, with whom she took shelter after she was com- pelled to leave the episcopal residence at the Chanonry of Ross, and remained till the Bishop sent for her. Bishop Maxwell was appointed to the Sees of Killala and Achonry in Ireland in 1G40 at the deprivation of Dr Adair, and to the Archbishopric of Tuam in 1G45. He was fomid dead in his closet in 1646, on his knees in the attitude of prayer, and he is said to have died of grief at the tidings of the King's misfortunes. He was most barbarously treated by the rebels both at Killala and Tuam. He and his predecessor Archbishop Boyle of Tuam retired to Galway for protection in 1G41, and were in great danger of their lives from an insurrection of the inhabitants, who took up arms against the garrison. " Bishop Maxwell,'" says Bishop Mant, "had been forced from his episcopal palace by the rebels, plundered of his goods, attacked, with his wife, three children, and a number of Protestants, in all about a hundred, at the Bridge of Shruel, where several were slain, and the Bishop himself, with others, was wounded, but happily escaped under the protection of a neighbouring gentleman, who took them to his house, and afforded them signal assistance."* Ireland was at the unhappy period of 1639 an asylum for many of the loyal and orthodox clergy driven from Scotland by the ferocity and tyranny of the Covenanters. " In particular,"" says Bishop Mant, " the Archbishop of St Andrews, the Archbishop of Glasgow, the Bishop of Ross, and other lawful rulers of the Church of Scotland, being driven from their episcopal seats by schismatical intruders, sought shelter in the hospitable dwelling of the Bishop [Branihall] of Derry, and sought it not in vain. His hospitality and bounty were largely acknowledged in several letters, ' praying God to re- ward him for the relief which he gave to his distressed and perse- cuted brethren, of whom their own country was not worthy, not doubting but succeeding ages would mention it to his honour.'' '''' Bishop Guthrie of Moray would neither submit to the Covenant nor leave the kingdom, and he in consequence suffered great persecutions from the Covenanters. After his pretended deposition he was ordered to make his public repentance in St Giles'' church at Edinburgh for preaching before the King in his episcopal habit, under pain of excommunication, and as he set this threat at defi- • Bishop Mant's History of the Church of Ireland, 8vo. London, 1840, p. 563. 1639.] OVERTHROW OP THE CHURCH. 613 ance it was done in St Giles' church in the spring of 1639 by the preacher Rollock.* The sentence of his deposition by the Glasgow Assembly was intimated to him by three Covenanters deputed for that purpose, who met the Bishop at the door of his church at Elgin after he had preached a sermon. Those worthies also en- joined him to make public repentance. It was his usual practice to preach every Sunday, but he now desisted, though he often offi- ciated after his illegal deprivation, and retired to the old episcopal castle or palace of Spynie, in the neighbourhood, which he had amply provided with necessaries, and garrisoned by some soldiers or retainers, resolving to stand a siege. One account states that he occupied Spynie Castle till 1640, when he was compelled to sur- render to Colonel Monroe ; but according to another statement the Bishop's family retained possession till May 1642, when during his absence in Arbroath his wife sent all his goods and furniture by sea from Spynie Castle to his paternal mansion and estate of Guthrie in Forfarshire, and soon afterwards joined him attended by two of their sons — Patrick Guthrie, and John Guthrie, minister of Duffus, deposed by the General Assembly in 1642.-f- The judi- cial murder of another son is subsequently noticed. This " vene- rable, worthy, and hospitable Prelate," as Keith justly designates him, died during the Civil Wars. Bishop Guthrie was committed a prisoner to the Tolbooth of Edinburgh in 1640, where he endured many hardships and privations. On the 16th of November 1641 he petitioned the King and Estates of Parliament for " his enlarge- ment from the grievous prison wherein he had continued these fourteen months, and for taking course for the summons of forfeit- ure intended against him." He was ordered to be " put to liberty, with provision he do not return to the Diocese of Moray ."J Nothing is known of the subsequent retreat of Bishop Campbell of The Isles. " His censure," says Gordon of Rothiemay, " was deposition, and, except he submit to the Assembly, excommunica- tion. It seems this Bishop was upon the way of the Primitive • Rollock, who was succeeded by Henderson as one of the ministers of Edinburgh, repented of his Covenanting principles before his death in 1G42, for which, says Spald- ing, " he got small convoy to his grave by the Puritans of Edinburgh." History of Troubles in Scotland, vol. ii. p. 56. t Spalding's History of the Troubles and Memorable Occurrences in Scotland, vol. i. p. 99, vol. ii. p. 43, 44. t Acta Pari. Scot. vol. v. p. 482. 614 OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. [1639, party that resided in the West Isles about the Isle of Hya [lona] in the times of Oolumba and Aidanus ; being that, beyond all the rest, nothing could be objected to him but his being Bishop, so that in all probability the episcopal sanctity was fled to the con- fines of Christendom, to hallow anew the barbarous appendices of the Scottish continent. It was well for him, however, that his episcopal see was at such a distance with his episcopal superin- tendents, and himself stood at such a near relation to Argyll as his surname."* Bishop Sydserff retired first to England, and afterwards to France, exercising " his episcopal office in the chapel of Sir Richard Bro^vn, the King's Ambassador at Paris, by ordaining priests, and amongst the rest the laborious Mr John Durel."-f- Lord Hailes printed a letter regarding Bishop Sydserff, written from Paris by Robert Burnet, Lord Crimond, then in exile for not submitting to the faction, father of Bishop Burnet, to his brother-in-law the Cove- nanting Johnston of Warriston. " For Mr Sydserff, sometime Bishop of Galloway, he came here five or six weeks ago, and by [without] my knowledge, by the address of other Scotsmen, he took his chamber in the house where I am, and has been since my being here. I could have wished he had not come here as long as I had been here, rather to have satisfied other men's scruples, whom I have no intention to offend, than my own ; for the Lord is my witness, to whom I must answer at the last day, I think there was never a more unjust sentence of excommunication than that which was pronounced against some of these Bishops, and particularly against this man, since the creation of the world, and I am persuaded that those who did excommunicate him, did rather excommunicate them- selves from God than him ; for I have known him these twenty- nine years, and I have never known any wickedness or unconscien- tious dealing in him ; and I know him to be a learneder and more conscientious man, although I will not purge him of infirmities more than others, than any of those who were upon his excommu- nication. And, alas ! brother, what would you be at, that now when you have beggared him, and chaced him by club-law out of the country ? Would you have him reduced to despair, and will you • Gordon of Eothiemay's History of Scots Affairs, printed for the Spalding Club, Aberdeen, 1841, vol. ii. p. 142, 143. t Skinner's Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 348. 1G39.] OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. 615 exact that every man, yea, against his conscience, shall approve your deeds, how unjust soever, yea, out of the country ? — As I wrote to you before, none of the ministers of Paris would believe me that you would or durst excommunicate any for not subscrib- ing that Covenant, and the ministers declared to him, that not- withstanding his excommunication they would admit him to the Communion, since his excommunication was not for any crime, but par raison d'etat ; but he communicates with the English. All Scots and English here, both of our party and others, respect him; and 1 assure you he defends the Protestant religion stoutly against Papists, and none of our Scots Papists dare meddle with him after they have once essayed him. Be not too violent then, and do as you would be done to, for you know not how the world will turn yet."* Bishop Sydserff is subsequently noticed as the only sur- viving Scottish Bishop at the Restoration. The four Bishops who basely submitted to the rebeUious Assem- bly were Graham of Orkney, Abernethy of Caithness, Fairlie of Argyll, and Lindsay of Dunkeld. Keith says that Bishop Graham was " very rich," and was proprietor of the estate of Gorthie, which by his compliance with the times he contrived to save " and the money he had upon bond, otherwise it would all have fallen under escheat." He acknowledged the Glasgow Assembly of 1638, and in that at Edinburgh in 1639 a letter from him was read, " testi- fying his repentance and demission of his pretended office," at which Moderator Dickson " thanked God who had extorted a tes- timony out of the mouth of a man who was once an overseer," This truculent Prelate's renunciation of the episcopal function in- duced Bishop Hall, then of Exeter, afterwards of Norwich, to write his celebrated treatise entitled — "Episcopacy by Divine Right Asserted," at the recommendation of Archbishop Laud, which was published in 1640. It is an answer to the Presbyterian and Puri- tan allegation then set forth that Episcopacy was unlawful and antichristian, and the venerable Bishop Hall comments with great severity on the conduct of Graham, and by implication his three companions. Bishop Abernethy was to be provided with a charge in the " ministry" by the Covenanters, when one could be found " Memorials and Letters relating to the Reign of Charles I., Glasgow, 1766, p. 72- 75, cited in a note to Gordon of Rothiemay's History of Scots AiFairs, printed for the Spalding Club, vol. ii. p. 97, 98. 616 OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. [1630. for him, of which no notice occurs. Mr Scott mentions in his Perth MS. Registers that Bishop Abernethy was his mother s great- grandfather, and that on his death-bed he desired to be relax- ed from the " excommunication," which must have been a subse- quent procedure against him, but as he refused to admit that Episcopacy was unlawful and unscriptural, the usurping Presby- terians continued their puny sentence. Bishop Fairlie of Argyll became Presbyterian minister of Lasswade, a parish about five miles south of Edinburgh ; and Bishop Lindsay of Dunkeld, who in 1639 also declared " his unfeigned grief and sorrow of heart for undertaking the unlawful office of Episcopacy, swearing never to meddle, directly or indirectly, with that pretended office any more,"" was allowed to officiate in his former parish of St Madoes near Perth as the Presbyterian incumbent. Well might Bishop Hall exclaim at the commencement of the first section of his work with reference to those four unhappy men — " Good God ! what is this I have lived to hear ? A Bishop in a Christian Assembly renounce his episcopal functions, and cry mercy for his now abandoned call- ing ! — The world never heard of such a penance ; you cannot blame us if we receive it both with wonder and expostulation, and tell you that it had been much better you had never been born than to give such a scandal to God's Church, so deep a wound to His holy religion. — For a man held once worthy to be graced with the chair of Episcopacy to spurn that once honoured seat, and to make his very profession a sin, is so shameful an indignity, as will make the wise in succeeding ages shake their heads, and not mention it without just indignation." In the spring of 1639 the Covenanters indicated the hypocrisy of their professions of loyalty by taking up arms and appearing in rebel- lion against the King. Military committees were appointed for every county to assemble and train the peasantry, and to forward to their main army such levies and supplies as were necessary. Ar- tificers were everywhere employed in the fabrication of muskets, carbines, poleaxcs, halberts, and other implements of strife ; maga- zines were provided for the troops ; and beacons were construct- ed in each county to call together their partizans when occa- sion required. The celebrated General Alexander Leshe, after- wards created Lord Balgonie and Earl of Leven, was invited by the Covenanters from Sweden, where he had continued in the ser- 1G.39.] OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. 617 vice of Queen Christinca after the death of Gustavus, at the sug- gestion of the chief of his name, the Earl of Rothes ; and as the re- puted oppressions of the Covenanters had been dihgently circulated on the Continent, he brought with him a number of Scotsmen who had served in the wars of Gustavus as soldiers of fortune, who had nothing to lose, but every thing to gain, from a civil commo- tion in their own country. Arms to the amount of 30,000, exclu- sive of those of home manufacture, were obtained from Holland ; a foundry for cannon was established in the then suburban street of Edinburgh known as the Potterrow ; and Leith was soon placed in a state of defence by the plan of a new fort laid down by Sir Alex- ander Hamilton, General Leslie's acting engineer, which in less than a week was completed. The whole coast of Fife with its numerous towns was strengthened by cannons carried on shore from the ships ; and the Covenanters were soon in a state of pre- paration greatly superior to the King, though he had long medi- tated his hostilities before declaring against them. General Leslie was at this time an old man, little in stature and deformed in person, but his great reputation, and the affected piety of his deportment, rendered him, according to Baillie, who attended him, a most popular and respected leader. He was, more- over, powerfully supported by the zeal of his peasant soldiers — for the most part ploughmen from the Western counties — stout rustics whose bodies had been rendered muscular by their avocations, and who were impressed with the principle that the object was to defend their religion, their families, and their homes. The final muster of the Covenanters previous to their march southward was on the Links of Leith, 20tli of May, when many thousand appeared, all equipped in the German fashion, and they were constituted an army by the reading of the Articles of War, drawn up by Leslie on the model of those of Gustavus, every one receiving a printed copy. On the 21st of May they marched for the English Border, displaying their blue flags wdth the arms of Scotland wi'ought in gold, and the in- scription— " For Christ's Crown and Covenant." The preach- ers accompanied this force in great numbers, attended by little parties of their associates, and sermons were delivered every morn- ing and evening in various parts of the camp, with the exercises of psalm-singing, praying, and reading the Scriptures. Leslie ad- vanced toward the English Border, and halted at the little rural G18 OVERTHROW OP THE CHURCH. [1G39. town of Dunse, fourteen miles from Berwick and ten miles from Coldstream, at the base of the hill called Dunse Law. His army, strengthened by reinforcements, is variously estimated at from 20,000 to 28,000 men. Leslie fortified the hill to the very sum- mit, and his soldiers lay encamped on the sides. The King had advanced with a large army to a locality called Birks, on the Eng- lish side of the Tweed, a few miles beyond Berwick, and is said to have been the first to descry the encampment of the Covenanters on Dunse Law. An amicable arrangement, however, was formed between the King and the Covenanters, and the negotiation was proclaimed in both camps on the 18th of June, though it was of no long duration. On the summit of Dunse Law are still seen the vestiges of General Leslie's entrenchments, and an original copy of the National Covenant was discovered upwards of one hundred and sixty years afterwards in that old part of the present splendid man- sion of Dunse Castle said to have been erected by Kandolph Earl of Moray, nephew of King Robert Bruce. The room is also pre- served in which Leslie and his officers entertained their visitors. The Covenanters held their next General Assembly at Edinburgh on the 12th of August, the Earl of Traquair appearing as the King's Commissioner. In the treaty of the 18th of June it was stipulated by mutual consent that as all discussions concerning the General Assembly of 1638 should be waived, all ecclesiastical matters were to be settled in a General Assembly, and civil mat- ters in the Parliament and Coui'ts of Law. Nevertheless, as Epis- copacy was the unrepealed law of Scotland, the King, in his war- rant of the 29th of June authorizing the Assembly of 1639, directed that " all Archbishops, Bishops, and commissioners of kirks," should attend and vote as members. It is unnecessary to state that none of the Bishops appeared. The opening sermon was pi'eached by Henderson, and Mr David Dickson was chosen Moderator. They indulged in some of their usual tirades against the Liturgy, Canons, Perth Articles, and the Bishops ; and the King had so far yielded to them that Traquair stated — " My master was pleased at the camp to say, that if it could be made appa- rent to him by the Assembly of the Kirk, notwithstanding his own incHnation and opinion, which his education and the Church of England possibly give him of Episcopacy, that it was contrary to the constitution of this Church [of Scotland], he commandeth me 1639.] OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. 619 not only to concur with you, but to do all that could be expected from so good and gracious a King, both by ray consenting to it and ratifying it in Parliament." The penitential letters, submit- ting themselves to the Assembly, of Bishop Graham of Orkney and Bishop Lindsay of Dunkeld, were read, and much coarse ribaldry was uttered against the episcopal function in general. Although the Episcopal Church was still by law the ecclesiastical establish- ment of the kingdom, they resolved to punish every man who ad- hered to it, whether clerical or lay. Numbers of the clergy were deposed, and the depositions of others by the Presbyteries were sanctioned. They brought forward " a motion for authorizing the Covenant, by way of new swearing and subscribing thereto by the whole kingdom and produced a lengthy reply to the King's Large Declaration written by Dr Balcanqual, designating it " dis- honourable to God — to the King's Majesty — to this national Kirk — It is stuffed full of lies and calumnies." These formed as many distinct heads, which they endeavoured to prove, and con- cluded their sittings on the 30th of August, appointing their next General Assembly to be held at Aberdeen on the last Tuesday of July 1G40. The Parliament met on the last day of August, the day after the Assembly was dissolved, and the Earl of Traquair was also in it as the King's Commissioner. On the 6th of September Traquair subscribed the National Covenant in the Parliament, which he in- timated and caused to be recorded that he did so not as the King's Commissioner, but in his official capacity of Lord Treasurer. This reservation, however, was ordered to be expunged on the 17th as illegal. The acts of the recent Assembly, entitled the " Six Causes of bygane evils," and the act prefixed to the Covenant, were read and passed, as was also the " supplication" of the Assembly against Dr Balcanqual's Large Declaration of the King, which caused some altercation between Traquair on the part of the King, and Argyll and Rothes. It was ordered that " the act anent the esta- blishing of this Parliament to be a perfect judicatory, the act abolishing Episcopacy and the civil power of Churchmen, and another on the future constitution of the Parhaments, be drawn up in three separate acts." On the 24th of September the " act I'escissory of the acts introduced in favour of Episcopacy and other Prelates, &c. for their places," was read and voted, Traquair as 620 OVERTHROW OP THE CHURCH. [1C39. Commissioner declaring that he would cause the Lord A dvocate to " produce his reasons in writ against the article foresaid, or any other article which shall be voted to the Lords of the Articles to be presented to the Parliament prejudicial to his Majesty.""* Acts were also passed regulating the " presenting of ministers to kirks ; hearers of mass ; admission of ministers to kirks which be- longed to Bishoprics ; planting of and presentation to kirks usurped by Bishops;" and " suppressing the distinction and difference of spiritual and temporal Lords in the Court of Session." -f- Previous to the meeting of the General Assembly the " seeds of disunion," we are informed, were sown among the Presbyterians by " a miserable controversy among the Covenanters themselves about pinvate meetings for devotional purposes, which some of their leading men countenanced and others reprobated — a schism which was agitated at the Aberdeen Assembly, and at a future period increased, till the Presbyterian Church was divided into two furi- ous factions, denouncing, excommunicating, and persecuting each other."]: The Scottish Parliament again met in 1640, and on the 11th June, Eobert Lord Balfour of Burleigh was appointed Presi- dent in absence of the King's Commissioner. The Covenanters were at the time again collecting their forces under General Leslie against the King, having renewed their rebellion in April, though it was not till the end of August that they crossed the Tweed nearly thirty thousand strong, and defeated the royal troops at Newburn, by which they obtained possession of Newcastle, Tynemouth, Shields, and Durham, and several large magazines of provisions. In the acts of the above mentioned Parliament the pen is drawn through the usual introductory words — " Our Sovereign Lord and Estates of Parliament ;" and the phraseology substituted, or rather interlined, is — " The Estates of Parliament presently convened ly Ms Majesty''s special authority."'' The Parliament ratified the acts of the Covenanting Assembly of 1639, denouncing the Liturgy, Canons, Five Articles of Perth, and High Court of Commission ; and ordained that " the foresaid Service-Book, Book of Canons and Ordination, and the High Commission, be still rejected — that the Articles of Perth be no more practised — that episcopal govern- ment, the civil places and power of Kirkmen, be held still as unlaw- • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. v. p. 263. t Jbid. p. 278. X Records of the Kirk of Scotland, by Alexander Peterkin, Esq. vol. i. p. 278. 1639.] OVERTHROW OF THE CHURCH. 621 ful in this Kirk — that the pretended Assemblies at Linlithgow in IGOG and 1G08, at Glasgow in 1610, at Aberdeen in 1616, at St Andrews in 1617, at Perth in 1618, be hereafter accounted as null and of none effect ; and that for preservation of religion, and preventing all such evils in time coming. General Assemblies rightly constitute as the proper and competent judge of all mat- ters ecclesiastical hereafter be kept yearly, and oftener pro re nata as occasion and necessity shall require.""* The " Supplica- tion" and " Act of the General Assembly, ordaining by ecclesiasti- cal authority the subscription of the Confession of Faith and Cove- nant," and the Covenant itself, were approved and ratified. An act rescissory was passed, annulling the right of the Bishops to vote in Parliament, and declaring that " the sole and only power and jurisdiction within this Kirk stands in the Kirk of God as it is now reformed, and in the General [and] Provincial Presbyterial Assemblies, with the sessions of the Kirk established by act of Par- liament made in June 1592." All the acts against the Eoman Catholics were renewed, and the former authority of the Arch- bishops and Bishops to prosecute them was vested in the Cove- nanting Presbyteries. An act of the third Parliament of James VI. was revived, enjoining " letters of horning and caption by the Lords of Session against the excommunicated Prelates, and all other excommunicated persons." All the judges of the Court of Session were ordered to be laymen. Various other acts were passed in favour of the Covenanters and their proceedings with- out the royal sanction, which were consequently illegal. The next Covenanting General Assembly was held at Aberdeen on the 28th of July. No Commissioner was appointed by the King, and after waiting one day for the appearance of such a representa- tive they proceeded to business according to their own views of " the Uberties of the Kirk." They ordered all " idolatrous monuments," such as " crucifixes, images of Christ, Mary, and Saints departed," to be demolished ; all " witches and charmers" were to be prose- cuted ; ministers who subscribed and afterwards " spoke against" the Covenant were to be deprived and excommunicated; " any other man" was to be " dealt with as perjured ;" and no preacher or schoolmaster was to be allowed even to reside within a " burgh, uni- versity, or college," who refused to sign the Covenant. But their * Acta Pari. Scot. vol. v. p. 291, 292. 622 THE ABERDEEN DOCTORS. [1639. most important act was their " commission for visiting the Univer- sity of Aberdeen," which was in reality a crusading persecution of their formidable and dreaded opponents the justly celebrated Doctors. Their proceedings against the Aberdeen Doctors are noticed by Baillie, who was present. " We found," he says, " a great averseness in the hearts of many from our course, albeit little in countenance. Doctors Sibbald, Forbes, and Scroggie, were re- solved to suffer martyrdom before they subscribed any thing con- cerning [contrary to] Episcopacy and Perth Articles ; but we re- solved to speak nothing to them of these matters, but of far other purposes. We found them ii*resolute about the Canons of Dort, as things they had never seen, or at least considered. They would say nothing against any clause of the Book of Canons, Liturgy, Ordination, and High Commission. Dr Forbes' treatises, full of a number of Popish tenets, and intending direct reconciliation with Kome farther than either Montacute or Spalato, or any I ever saw among their hands and the hands of their young students, together with a treatise of Bishop Wedderburn's and an English priest Barnesius, all for reconciliation. Dr Sibbald in many points of doctrine we found very corrupt, for the which we deposed him, and ordained him without quick satisfaction to be processed. The man was there of great fame. It was laid upon poor me to be their examiner and " moderator to their process. Dr Scroggie, an old man, not very corrupt, yet perverse in the Covenant and Service-Book, Dr Forbes"' ingenuity pleased us so well that we have given him yet time for advisement. Poor Barron, otherwise an ornament of our nation, we find has been much in multis in the Canterburian way. Great knavery and direct intercourse with his Grace [Laud] was found among them, and yet all was hid from us that they possibly could." As an offset to this account the contemporary narrative of Gor- don of Rothiemay, the successor in that parish of Mr Innes, who was deposed by the Covenanters, the brother-in-law of Bishop Max- well of Eoss, is worthy of notice. This candid Presbyterian honour- ably mentions the Aberdeen Doctors, and the inquisitorial proceed- ings against them. The Committee met in the Earl Marischars house, and summoned the Principals and Professors of both Col- leges, Dr Alexander Leslie, minister of Old Aberdeen, Dr James Sibbald, minister of New Aberdeen, Mr John Gregory, minister 1639.] THE ABERDEEN DOCTORS. 623 of Drumoak, Mr John Ross, minister of Birse, Mr Alexander Strachan, minister of Chapel-of-Garioch, Mr Andrew Logie, mi- nister of Rayne, Archdeacon of Aberdeen — all of that Diocese ; Mr John Guthrie, minister of Duffus, son of Bishop Guthrie, and Mr Richard Maitland, minister of Aberchirder, in the Diocese of Moray. Some were also cited who were not questioned, but num- bers of the Diocese of Moray had been deposed by the committees before the meeting of the Assembly. Dr Scroggie was accused of " preaching long upon one text — that he was cold in his doctrine, and edified not his parishioners ; final- ly that he refused to subscribe the Covenant ; and with little cere- mony he was sentenced and deposed from his ministry by the voice of the Assembly." — " To my knowledge," says Gordon of Rothie- may, " he was a man sober, grave, and painful in his calling : his insisting upon a text long was never yet made nor could be mat- ter of accusation to any, if the text were material and the dis- course pertinent ; and for his cold delivery his age might excuse it." Dr Scroggie obtained a pension from the King in 16*41, and after his pretended deposition lived privately till his death at Rathven in 1659, in the 95th year of his age. He was preferred from the parish of Drumoak to be ordinary minister in the cathe- di-al church of Old Aberdeen in 1621 by Bishop Patrick Forbes. He left two sons, the elder of whom became minister in that church, and the younger was consecrated Bishop of Argyll in 1666. Dr Sibbald was accused of Arminianism and not subscribing the Covenant. The informer against him was the " flower of the Kirk," the savoury Samuel Rutherford, who had resorted to his sermons when exiled to Aberdeen for his seditious conduct. " It will not be affirmed by his very enemies," says Gordon of Rothie- may, " but that Dr James Sibbald was an eloquent and painsful preacher, a' man godly, and grave, and modest, not tainted with any vice unbeseeming a minister, to whom nothing could in reason be objected, if you call not his uncovenanting a crime." He went to Ireland, and at Dublin he maintained his reputation for piety, learning, and zeal in his sacred office. He is probably the James Syhald who subscribed a declaration of the clergy of Dublin in favour of the Liturgy in 1647. Against Dr Leslie, Principal of King's College, it was objected " that he was lazy," says Gordon of Rothiemay, " and neglective G24 THE ABERDEEN DOCTORS. [1.G39. in his charge ; they strove to brand him with personal escapes of drunkenness, and finally that he would not subscribe the Cove- nant. I must plead for him as for the rest, wherever I shall speak truth. His laziness might be imputed to his retired monastic way of living, being naturally melancholy, and a man of great reading, a painful student, who delighted in nothing else but to sit in his study, and spend days and nights at his books, which kind of life is opposite to a practical way of living. He never married in his lifetime, but lived solitary, and if sometimes to re- fresh him his friends took him from his books to converse with them, it ought not to have been objected to him as drunkenness, he being known to have been sober and abstemious above his accusers. He was a man grave, austere, and exemplary. The University was happy in having such a light as he, who was emi- nent in all the sciences above the most of his age. He had studied a full encyclopaedia, and it may be questioned whether he excelled most in Divinity, Humanity, or the Languages, he being of course Professor of the Hebrew and Divinity." He was succeeded by Dr William Guild, a regular "vicar of Bray," whose exploits are noticed in the following chapter. Principal Leslie resided some years after his " deposition" with the Marquis of Huntly, and latterly with his relative, a gentleman named Douglas, till his death, which occurred during CromwelFs domination in Scotland. " The many high en- comiums," says another Presbyterian authority, " bestowed on Dr William Leslie, must excite the deepest regret that he should have bequeathed so small a portion of his knowledge to posterity. Al- though he was regarded as a profound and universal scholar, he never courted the fame of authorship."* It is already noticed that he was, according to Keith, brother of John Leslie, succes- sively Bishop of The Isles, Raphoe, and Clogher, who was the fa- ther of the illustrious and learned Charles Leslie, author of " A Short and Easy Method with the Deists," and other well known works. Dr John Forbes of Corse, Professor of Divinity, is subsequently mentioned. " He was," says Gordon of Rothiemay, " the bone of any that troubled the Covenanters to digest ; for as he stood op- posed to the Covenant, which he had evinced in his Warning,-^ and " Dr David Ii-ving's Lives of the Scottish Poets, 1814, vol. i. p. 136. t " A Peaceable Warning to the Subjects in Scotland, given in the year of God 1638. Aberdeen, imprinted by Edw. Raban, the year above written." 1G39.] THE ABERDEEN DOCTORS. 625 had disputed against them in his queries ; so they knew him to be a man most eminent for learning and for piety, and they feared it would be a scandal to depose him. But all this would not do ; therefore he got his sentence of deposition as the rest had gotten before him." This excellent son of the great and good Bishop Patrick Forbes had conveyed his house in Aberdeen as a future re- sidence for the Professor of Divinity in King's College, and his Covenanting successor was mean enough to take advantage of the donation. We are told that his enemies would hardly allow him to " stay in Scotland till he put his affairs in order." He retired to his wife's relatives in Holland, and he was not permitted to re- turn till 164G. Dr Barron, a man of extraordinary learning, died during the previous year, yet " they thought him not orthodox in some of his tenets; therefore "such of his papers as were unprinted they must see, and they must be censured and purged." They compelled his widow, who had retired to her native district of Strathisla in Banffshire, to appear as a prisoner before them, and produce his manuscripts, but nothing farther was done in his case. " Thus," says Gordon of Rothiemay, " the Assembly's errand was thoroughly done— those eminent Divines of Aberdeen either dead, deposed, or banished, with whom fell more learning than was left behind in all Scotland beside at that time. Nor has that city, nor any city in Scotland, ever since seen so many learned Divines and scholars at one time together as were immediately before this in Aber- deen. From that time forward learning began to be discounte- nanced, and such as were knowing in antiquity and the writings of the Fathers were had in suspicion as men who smeUed of Popery ; and he was most esteemed who affected novelty and singularity most ; and the very form of preaching, as well as the materials, was changed for the most part. Learning was nick- named human learning, and some ministers so far cried it down in their pulpits as to be heard to say — Down doctrine, and up Christ Well might Archbishop Laud tell Alexander Hender- son that " he would do well to let Canterbury alone, and answer the learned Divines of Aberdeen, who have laid him and all that • History of Scots Affairs from 1637 to 1641, by James Gordon, Parson of Rothie- may. Printed for the Spalding Club, 4to. Aberdeen, vol. iii. p. 226, 244. 40 626 THE ABERDEEN DOCTORS. [1639. faction open enough to the Christian world, to make the memory of them and their cause stink to all posterity."* As for the sermons of the Covenanting Presbyterians, we are told by Gordon of Rothiemay that they " were either declama- tions or invectives against the King''s party, or Bishops, or cere- monies ; or persuasives to own the Covenant cordially, and to contribute liberally for the maintaining the good cause, for so it was ordinarily called. And it is very remarkable that those ministers who in the times of the Bishops pleaded tolerance for their non- conformity, and argued from the tenderness of their consciences, how soon as they got the power in their hands they spared not other menu's consciences, but pressed them to obedience, with threatenings of civil and ecclesiastic punishments. The work was begun at Glasgow Assembly, 1638 ; and promoved at Edinburgh, 1639. In this Assembly they got a full conquest and victory over the Episcopal party, and dislodged such of them as were either in eminent places or universities. Aberdeen was the last place where they voided pulpits and chairs. Neither failed they as soon as they had driven out the contrary faction to fill their places with men who were most zealous for Presbytery and the Cove- nant. Mr Alexander Henderson was already transplanted to Edinburgh from a country charge. Mr Robert Blair and Ruther- ford to St Andrews ; Mr David Dickson must be Professor in Glasgow ; and Mr Andrew Cant must once more step up in Dr Forbes"* chair in Aberdeen, as he had done before at Alford. He wanted learning to take upon him the profession of Divinity in the University. Churches so far were decried, lest people should imagine any inherent holiness with Papists to be in them, that from the pulpits by many the people were taught that they were to have them in no more reverent esteem than other houses ; sometimes they were worse used. Finally, whatever the Bishops had established it was their work to demolish.''''-f- This part of the history of the Episcopal Church of Scotland might with propriety be concluded here, for the future commotions had no reference to its Bishops and clergy. A few general notices, however, will explain the subsequent proceedings. A Covenanting • Wharton's History of Laud's Troubles and Trials, p. 112, 113. t Gordon's (of Rothiemay) History of Scots Affairs, vol. iii. p. 249, 250. 1G41.] THE COVENANTING PARLIAMENT. 027 Assembly was held at St Andrews on the 20th of July 1641, the Earl of Wemyss appearing as Commissioner, but none of its acts are of any importance. One was for drawing up a Catechism, Con- fession of Faith, Directory of Public Worship, and form of Kirk Government." This may be regarded as the commencement of their project to extend Calvinistic Presbyterianism into England — a scheme which was soon matured by the well known Westminster Assembly, and by the future Solemn League and Covenant. Bishop Guthrie petitioned this Assembly at St Andrews, that his benefice might be kept vacant for some time, but this was peremptorily re- fused. A feud still continued among them about private conven- ticles ; and Henry Guthrie, then minister of Stirling, the future Bishop of Dunkeld, fanned the flame of discord. One of the Co- venanting preachers at this Assembly contrived to get himself hanged for murder, which he committed during its sittings. This was a certain Mr Thomas Lamb, who killed a man on the road be- tween Edinburgh and Leith, for which he was tried, condemned, and executed. It is surprising that they did not interfere and rescue this wretch. A treaty of peace was concluded between England and Scotland on the 7th of August, and immediately after the 9th the King left London for Scotland. He arrived in Edinburgh about the middle of the month, but his reception was very different from that of 1633. The prerogatives of the Crown were now usurped by the Estates, and the King was compelled to enter the Palace of Holy- rood under the rebellious banner of the Covenant. He submitted to the infliction of hearing Henderson preach in the Chapel-Royal, and conformed himself to the forms and peculiarities of his Cove- nanting masters. In July a preparatory meeting of the Parlia- ment was held, in which, among other preliminary measures, the proceedings against the " incendiaries" commenced. These were the Earl of Traquair, Sir Robert Spottiswoode, Sir John Hay, Dr Balcanqual, and Bishop Maxwell of Ross ; and in the list of the proscribed, or of those consigned to destruction by the Covenant- ers, were the Earl of Montrose, Lord Napier, Sir George Stirling of Keir, and Sir Lewis Stewart of Blackball. Those loyal noblemen and gentlemen were the supporters of the King, and the feelings with which he received their denouncement may be easily understood. On the 17th of August the King attended 628 PLUNDER OF THE CHURCH. [1642. the Parliament in person, which was adjourned on the 17th of November, though it virtually continued its sittings till the be- ginning of June 1644. It was during the month of November that the King was informed at Holyrood of the horrible massacre in Ireland, which he immediately communicated to the Parliament. On the 18th of November he left his kingdom of Scotland, which he was never again to revisit. He created Argyll a ^Marquis, Lord Loudon and General Leslie were promoted to the rank of Earls, — the former of Loudon and the latter of Leven, and four of his attendants were knighted. The remaining patrimony of the Church was consigned in this Parliament to its Covenanting enemies. The Bishoprics and Deaneries of Edinburgh and Orkney were bestowed on the University of Edinburgh. That of St Andrews obtained L.IOOO sterling per annum out of the Archbishopric and Priory : the Bishopric of Galloway and spirituality of Glasgow were given to its University ; and King's College in Old Aberdeen received the episcopal revenue of that See. The Bishopric of Dunkeld fur- nished a portion of its scanty revenue to the town of Perth for the erection of a bridge over the Tay ; and an incorporated body of mechanics in Edinburgh, called the Hammermen^ obtained the re- mainder. The Marquis of Argyll secured the revenues of that See and of The Isles to his own use ; and those of the Bishoprics of Ross, Moray, and Caithness, were appropriated to other Cove- nanters. " These vulgar facts," it is well observed by a Presby- terian writer, " go far to explain some of the public phenomena of the Second Reformation, and to account for the zeal which had been manifested under the banner with Chrisfs Crown and Covenant in letters of gold inscribed upon its foldings.""* Scotland was now left under the sway of a Parliamentary Com- mission, controuled, guided, and animated at will or caprice by the Covenanting Presbyterians. Another of their General Assemblies was again held at St Andrews on the 27th of July 1642, the Earl of Dunfermline appearing as the King's Commissioner. Some months previous to that Assembly a complete rupture had taken place between the King and the English Parliament, and both par- ties were preparing an appeal to arms. The delegates of the Scot- tish Covenanters had proffered their mediation, and announced their rebellious project of overturning the Church of England, and • Peterkin's Records of the Kirk of Scotland, vol. i. p. 317, 318. 1642.] PROJECTS OF THE COVENANTERS. G29 setting up Presbyterianism as the means of allaying the animosities between the King and his subjects. The royal letter to the Cove- nanting Assembly at St Andrews assured it of the King's friendly disposition towards the now dominant Presbyterianism, and exhort- ed the leaders to promote order and obedience to the laws. In their answer they expressed their " great joy and gladness" at this intimation, with hypocritical assurances of their anxiety to secure loyalty and peace ; but they immediately followed this insincere statement by a most urgent demand for " unity in religion, and uniformity of church-government, as a mean of a firm and durable union between the two kingdoms, and without which former expe- riences put us out of hope long to enjoy the purity of the gospel." A Declaration was sent to this Assembly from the English Parlia- ment, the language of which was craftily suited to the principles of their Covenanting confedei'ates, ascribing all their troubles to " the plots and practices of Papists and ill-affected persons, espe- cially of the corrupt and dissolute clergy," as they falsely desig- nated those of the Church of England ; and to the " instigation of Bishops and others," who were " actuated by avarice and ambition, being not able to bear the Eeformation endeavoured by the Parlia- ment." The Covenanters returned an elaborate reply to this com- munication, stating their earnest desire for unity of religion — " that in all his Majesty's dominions there might be one Confession of Faith, one Directory for public worship, one public Catechism, and one form of Kirk Government" — that " the names of heresies and sects, Puritans, Conformists, Separatists, Anabaptists," &c. should be " suppressed,^'' by which they meant extirpation — and that, " the Prelatical Hierarchy being put out of the way, the work will be easy, without forcing any conscience, to settle in England the go- vernment of the Reformed Kirk by Assemblies." It is curious to observe that the Covenanters in this their brief triumph imitated the alleged conduct of Archbishop Laud and others, whom they accused of endeavouring to assimilate the Church of Scotland to that of England. They concerted a project of establishing Presbyterianism by compulsion in England, with- out any toleration whatever, and their proposals were equiva- lent to an announcement that they were ready to co-operate with the English agitators to force their humanly devised and repub- lican system upon the King and the English nation. This led to 630 THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. [1643. numerous negociations, deputations, and new agitations, until they appointed delegates to mediate between the King and the English Parliament, including Henderson and some other leaders, who were instructed to demand from the King a complete uniformity of reli- gion, the immediate dismissal from his service of all alleged Roman CathoHcs, and his own renunciation of the Church of England. The King declined to accede to those insolent proposals ; but without entering into the details of their subsequent pi'oceedings it may be noticed, that as the Covenanters had obtained the ascen- dancy in all the executive departments of the State, a messenger arrived from the English Parliament during the meeting of a Con- vention at Edinburgh in May 1643. He announced that, in con- formity to the communications with the last General Assembly, an " Assembly of Divines" was about to be convened at Westmin- ster, to regulate the worship and polity of England, and the uni- formity in these matters between the two kingdoms. This was one of the chief preliminaries to the meeting of the Covenanting Assembly at Edinburgh on the 2d of August 1643, at which Sir Thomas Hope of Craighall, who was still Lord Advocate, appeared as the King's Commissioner. The proceedings of that meeting were in accordance with those of the Westminster Assembly, and one of the results was the new bond of rebellion — the Solemn League and Covenant. Of that infamous, intolerant, and blood-thirsty document, or its concoctors, it is unnecessary to say much. The pretended unifor- mity of religion, which it enjoined in England, Scotland, and Ire- land, was to be achieved by the extirpation, without respect of per- sons., " of popery, prelacy, usurpation, heresy, schism, profaneness, and whatever shall be found to be contrary to sound doctrine and the power of godliness." They were also " with all faithfulness to endeavour the discovery of all such as have been or shall be incen- diaries, malignants, or evil instruments, by hindering the reforma- tion of religion, dividing the King from his people, or one of the kingdoms from the other, or making any faction or parties among the people contrary to this League and Covenant ; that they may be brought to public trial, and receive condign punishment, as the degree of their offences shall require or deserve." This Solemn League and Covenant emanated from the Covenanting General Assembly at Edinburgh in 1643, and was dated the 17th of August. 1G43.] THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. 631 After it was sanctioned, it was carried to London for the concur- rence of the Enghsh Parliament and the " Westminster Assembly of Divines'" — the latter, it is well known, a convention without the royal authority. It was presented to both Houses of Parliament on the 28th of August, and also to the Westminster Presbyte- rian conclave. After some discussion it was approved by them, and by the House of Commons, the members of which were ordered to subscribe it, and aU the people imperatively enjoined to sign, under the penalty of being denounced and punished as Malig- nants. On the 25th of September this atrocious charter of a new reign of terror was signed and sworn by both Houses of Parlia- ment, the Westminster Presbyterian Convention, the Scottish Covenanting delegates, and many others, in St Margaret's church at Westminster, which probably never had such a congregation within its walls convened for such an unholy purpose. The 13th of October was appointed for its final adoption in Scotland at Edinburgh, when the Presbyterian Commission of the Covenant- ing Assembly, the Committee of the Estates of Parliament, and the English delegates, met in one of the parish churches, and after devotional exercises in their own way the Solemn League and Covenant was signed and sworn by all present. On the 22d of October the Committee of Estates issued an edict, enjoining all subjects in Scotland to subscribe ; threatening recusants with most summary punishment, as enemies to religion, to the King, and to the peace of the kingdoms. The Lords of the Privy Council were imperatively commanded to appear on the 2d of November and take the new Covenant. The Marquis now Duke of Hamilton, the Earl of Lanark, and other noblemen and gentlemen who re- sisted the mandates of the usurping tyrants, were denounced as enemies to God, the King, and the country ; their estates were confiscated ; soldiers were sent to seize them, and to put to death all who opposed them. Many fled to the Continent, though not a few were compelled by circumstances to comply with the Covenanting injunctions. It was now resolved to proceed to the extirpation of the devoted adherents of the Church of England by the sword. Before the end of November the Covenanting Presby- terians were in force under old General Leslie, the Earl of Leven, and on the 19th of January 1644 this army of dangerous fanatics and rebels, consisting of 18,000 foot, and 3,500 horse, crossed the 632 THE SOLEMN LEAGUE AND COVENANT. [1644. Tweed near Berwick, and invaded England. The most dread- ful anarchy, bloodshed, and terror, pervaded the two kingdoms. During the march of the Covenanters into England, Archbishop Laud, after a vindictive, unjust, and infamous imprisonment of three years in the Tower, was tried by the English Parliament to gratify the Scottish Presbyterians, who soon glutted themselves with the blood of the venerable and martyred Primate on the 10th of January. The fate of that great and illustrious Prelate ought ever to make the Covenanting Presbyterians of Scotland odious to every sincere member of the Church of England. On the 15th of July the Scottish Parliament passed an " Act anent the Ratification of the calling of the Convention, Ratification of the League and Covenant, Articles of Treaty betwixt the kingdom of Scotland and England, and remanent Acts of the Convention of Estates, and Committee thereof." In 1G45 the Covenanting As- sembly held at Edinburgh ratified and approved the Solemn League and Covenant, which was enforced till the subjugation of Scotland by Cromwell. The identity of the real original of this blood-thirsty document appears to be disputed. An original is said to be in the possession of the University of Cambridge ; but in September 1843 a statement appeared in the public prints, setting forth that another original of the Solemn League and Covenant was exhibiting in the Museum of Antiquities at Leeds, and that it was the property of a private individual in Glasgow, who had refused four hundred guineas for it, offered by some amateur who had evidently more money than common sense. It would be an appropriate present to the sect of Presbyterian Dissenters in Scotland founded in May 1843 by Dr Chalmers and others, aided and abetted by some hundreds of preachers of the Presbyterian Establishment, who left their kirks, and bestowed on themselves the magniloquent title, as empty as it is fallacious, of the " Free Protesting Church of Scotland r The Scottish Covenanters concluded their rebellion and blood- shed by the violation of every solemn pledge which they had given to Charles I., who was induced to entrust himself to their pro- tection. On the 8th of December 1646 an agreement was made between the English Parliament and the Scottish Presbyterian army, that the former should pay the latter L.400,000 in pay- ment of arrears for the surrender of the King to the English com- 1G4G.] THE SELLING OF THE KING. 633 missioners sent to receive him. Of the above sum one-half was to be paid before the Scottish army passed the Border, and the remainder to be secured by the public faith. The King's treatment by the Co- venanters before this infamous transaction was concluded, his inter- esting correspondence with Henderson on the^MS divinum of Epis- copacy, and other personal events, are well known. On the 30th of January 1647 the King was delivered up to the English commission- ers ; but the Scottish leaders only received one-fourth of the money, or L.100,000 sterling, the remainder to be paid within two years and a half ; and it may be safely assumed that this mode of settlement, by accepting the money then and subsequently doled out to them from time to time in instalments, was fully understood on the part of the Covenanters as a pledge of their acquiescence in the decrees of the English Parliament as to the fate of the unfortunate mo- narch. Some Scottish historians have endeavoured to prove that the Presbyterian Covenanters were not guilty of selling the King ; and even Sir George Mackenzie of Rosehaugh is adduced as an authority in their favour. " The Parliament of Scotland" [in 1661], says the Lord Advocate of Charles II., " taking to their con- sideration how much and how unjustly this kingdom was injured by an aspersion cast upon it for the transactions at Newcastle in 1647, at which time the King was delivered to the Pariiament of England, which was called in some histories a selling of the King^ did by an express Act condemn and reprobate their treaty, and declare that the same was no national act, but was only carried on by some rebels who had falsely assumed the name of a Parliament. Nor wanted there many even in that Parliament who protested against all that procedure, and who had the courage and honesty to cause registrate that protestation. And I must here crave leave to expostulate with our neighbours of England for inveigh- ing so severely against our nation for delivering their King, seeing he was only delivered up to their Parliament, who first imprisoned and thereafter murdered him ; whereas, how soon our rebels discovered their design they carried into England a splendid mighty army for his defence ; and when his murder came to their ears they proclaimed his son their King, and sent Commissioners to treat with him and bring him to Scotland ; and when he was arrived, they did contribute their lives and fortunes for his safety."* • Memoirs of the Affairs of Scotland from the Restoration of Charles II., a. d. 634 THE SELLING OF THE KING. [1639. To all this it may be replied, that Charles II. was not invited to Scotland by the loyal part of the nation, but by the Covenanters, who were in arms against Cromwell and his " sectarian army"" for checking and restraining their Presbyterian intolerance. No man knew better than Sir George Mackenzie, that if Charles II. had not conformed to the Solemn League and Covenant the battles of Dunbar and Worcester never would have been fought. No morbid patriotism or party prejudices — no sophistry — no ingenious and elaborate defences — can remove the infamy of the charge of selling the King from the Scottish Covenanters. It may be conceded that the nation as such was not involved, for the loyal population was ruled with a rod of iron by the dominant faction ; but every attempt of the modern Presbyterian writers to vindicate the Covenanters from the charges of double-dealing, dissimulation, bad faith, and sordid treachery, which are too justly laid to their charge, has completely failed, and can be refuted by the most conclusive facts. The very attempt of the Scottish Parliament to rid themselves of this odious stigma is a proof that they considered it a national disgrace ; and the selling of Charles I. will ever remain an indelible consummation of all the enormities connected with the history of Scottish Covenanting Preshyterianism. The subsequent feeble and vain attempts of the Earl of Loudon and others of the leaders to rescue the King from the grasp of infuriated and murdering de- mocrats offer no palliation. The deed was done at Newcastle on the 30th of January 1647, and Charles I. was judicially murdered on the scaffold at Whitehall by the sordid means and treacherous agency of the Scottish Covenanters. 1660, by Sir George Mackenzie of Rosehaugh, and edited by Thomas Thomson, Esq. Depute Clerk Register of Scotland. Edinburgh, 4to. 1821. 1G39.] 635 CHAPTER XVII. FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. The people of Scotland are often told of the persecutions calumni- ously said to have been inflicted by the Episcopal Church after the Restoration of Charles II. on the Presbyterians. Those unhappy and obstinate enthusiasts are brought forward as contending for civil and religious liberty — as martyrs for every thing sacred and patrio- tic. They are the " Scots Worthies'''' and the '■'■Cloud of Witnesses;'''' while their dangerous and intolerant principles are carefully con- cealed. In like manner the Covenanting Presbyterians of the reign of Charles I. are also represented as the enemies of political and ecclesiastical tyranny, and the Bishops and Episcopal clergy are deUneated in the most odious manner as the supporters of ar- bitrary rule — as Papists, Arminians, addicted to the most scandal- ous vices, and perpetrators of the most atrocious crimes. The pre- ceding narrative shews the principles and conduct of the Covenant- ing Presbyterians, until it was necessary to restrain them by the strong arm of military power. Their fanaticism, oppression, and cruelties, now come under our notice. As to their fanaticism and impieties, selections from their printed productions would amply shew the deplorable condition in which Scotland was placed under the galling tyranny of the faction. " The pulpits," says Bishop Burnet, " sounded with the ruin of their re- ligion and liberties, and that all might now look for Popery and bondage if they did not acquit themselves like men. Curses were thundered out against those who went not out to help the angel of the Lord against the mighty, so oddly was the Scriptures applied ; and to set off all this the better, all was carried with so many fast- ings and prayers. By this means it was that the poor and well- meaning people were animated into great extremities of zeal, re- solving to hazard all in pursuance of the cause." As it respects their writings, we have those, for example, of Samuel Rutherford, 636 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION AND CRUELTIES [1639- one of their greatest saints, which are justly designated a com- pound of blasphemy, hypocrisy, obscenity, falsehood, calumny, and nonsense. Yet this Covenanting hero, who is yet held in great esteem by those in whom the old leaven effervesces, and whose " Letters " to various " godly ladies'" contain the most disgust- ing ribaldry, was in 1625 compelled to resign an office in the Uni- versity of Edinburgh for " some scandal on account of his mar- riage." The Earl of Loudon, a great chief of the Covenant, was a man of bad morals. His Countess, by his marriage with whom he acquired the estates of Loudon, threatened him with a process of adultery, of which she had undoubted proof, if he would not assist the Covenanters, and break certain engagements he had made with the King in England.* Yet Samuel Rutherford addresses Loudon on one occasion in these terms — " You come out to the streets with Christ on your forehead, when many are ashamed of him, and hide him under their cloaks as if he were a stolen Christ." Rushworth collected some specimens of the fanaticism of the Covenanting Presbyterians of the time, which, as already observed, could be easily extended from their writings. One refused to pray for Sir William Nisbet, a former Lord Provost of Edinburgh, when on his death-bed, because " he had not subscribed the Covenant and another " entreated God to scatter them all in Israel, and to divide them in Jacob, who had counselled them to subscribe the Confession of Faith authorized by the King." Numbers of their preachers refused to admit to their communion those who had not subscribed the Covenant, and classified them in their addresses before their administration of it as " adulterers, slanderers, and blasphemers :" and many would not allow children to be baptized except by Covenanting preachers, often compelling the parents to carry the infants several miles. One declared in a sermon that all " the non-subscribers of the Covenant were Atheists," among whom he included the Judges of the Supreme Court and those members of the Privy Council who had refused to sign. Another preached that " as the wrath of God never was diverted from his people until the seven sons of Saul were hanged up before the Lord in Gibeon ; so the wrath of God would never depart from the kingdom till the twice seven Prelates were hanged up before the Lord" — referring to the two Archbishops and the twelve Bishops of Scotland, A third maintained that " though there were ever so " Lamont's Chronicle of Fife, 4to. p. 38. 1650.] OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. 637 many acts of Parliament against the Covenant, yet it ought to be maintained against them all," Another said in his sermon — " Let us never give over till we have the King in our power, and then he shall see how good subjects we are." One also held that " the bloodiest and sharpest war was rather to be endured than the least error in doctrine and discipline." Another strangely wished that " he and all the Bishops of Scotland were in a bottomless boat at sea together, for he would be well content to lose his own life so that they lost theirs." In a Greneral Assembly held in August 1639, at which the Earl of Traquair was the Commissioner, Mr Alexander Carse, who was the buffoon of the Glasgow Assembly, stated, when denouncing the " unlucky bird of Episcopacy," which was " then to be slaughtered" — " There is not so much as a little cockle or darnell of perverse or heretical doctrine that shall spring up, but presently it shall be cut down and trod under ; and if it escape two or three, it shall not miss the fourth. If it shall happen to escape sessions, presby- teries, and synodal assemblies, it will happily be digested and concocted in such an assembly as this. — And here for this point I give this Episcopacy an eternal vale^ This miserable rhapsody may be adduced as a favourable specimen of the Covenanting ora- tory at the various meetings. Several curious instances are found of their pulpit exhibitions in numerous pamphlets of the day. One of the most ludicrous is the " Eedshanh Sermon, preached at St Giles's church in Edinburgh, the last Sunday in April [1638] by a Highland minis- ter, London, printed for T. Bates, 1642." Another amusing ver- sion of it was printed in 1828, from an original MS. in the posses- sion of David Laing, Esq. It is called the Redshanks Sermon, pro- bably from a name given to the Highlanders, who made buskins of the deer's hide. The " Highland minister," or preacher of the Pock- manty Sermon, by which it is also known, was Mr James Row, minis- ter of Monievaird and Strowan in the Highlands of Perthshire, who was the son of Mr John Row the Reformer, minister of Carnock in Fife from 1558 to 1637, the author of " The Historic of the Kirk of Scotland" during that period. The text of the Redshanks, or Pockmanty Sermon, is Jer. xxx. 17. and as it was delivered ex- tempore, the portion of it printed merely contains notes of what was said from the pulpit by the preacher, who is described in a pasquil circulated in 1638, in allusion to the sermon — " a springald 638 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1639- pulpit spouter." The latter part of the text states — " Sion is wounded, and I will heal her saith the Lord.'" — " I need not trouble you," said the preacher, " to set forth who is meant by Sion ; ye all know well enough that it is the poor Kirk of Scotland, who is now wounded in her head, in her heart, in her hands, and in her feet. In her head by government, in her heart by doctrine, in her hands by discipline, and in her feet by worship." The Red- shanks orator illustrates these assertions in a homely and ludicrous manner. " She is wounded in her heart," he says, " which is by the doctrine of the Kirk tlirough the abundance of Popery and Ar- minianism now common in our kirks and schools." He says that the said Presbyterian Kirk was " once a bonny grammar school," and was " wounded in her hands" by a " pilgrimage to Rome, where she was taken stealing of some of their trumpery ; yet when they knew her mind, and saw it was but only a Book of Common Prayer and the Canons of High Commission, which they saw made much for their matter, therefore they let her go, and flat- tered her to follow the order of the mother Kirk in other kingdoms, which she promising to do, then they bound her hands with a silken cord of canonical obedience to the Ordinary, and she took much delight to be bound with so bonny a band ; but after they got her fast, they made that silken cord a cable rope, with which they have girded her so fast as she cannot stir." A most amusing part of this specimen of Covenanting fanaticism is the following — " Now I come to tell you how she is wounded in her feet, that is in the worship of the Kirk. The office of the feet is to travel withall, and they have made a very hackney of religion : the Kirk was once a bonny nag, and so pretty as every man thought a pity to ride her, till at last the Bishops, those rank-riding loons, got on her back, and then she trotted so hard as they could hardly at the first well ride her ; yet at last they so cross- legged her and hopshackled her, that she became a pretty pacing beast, and so easy that they took great pleasure to ride upon her." The preacher illustrated his ideas by identifying Presbyterianism with Balaam's ass, and alleged that the Scottish Bishops had been riding to Rome with a pockmanty [or portmanteau] behind them, filled with the Liturgy, Canons, and Orders of the High Com- mission. One of the most extraordinary instances of their fanaticism com- bined with credulity is the story of the daughter of a preacher 1650.] THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. G39 named Mitchelson, one of their female partizans, whom they con- sidered a prophetess, and whose raptures in favour of the Cove- nant were received as divine communications. Persons of rank visited her in the house of a noted Covenanter, where she lay in a large bedroom, which was daily crowded to the door. Those who justly held this wretched female as insane were afraid to hazard their opinion of her peculiar distemper or condition. The story is narrated by Bishop Burnet in his Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamil- ton, and by other writers. " She was acquainted," says a contem- porary authority, " with the Scripture, and much taken with the Covenant ; and in her fits spoke much to its advantage, and much ill to its opposers, that would, or at least that she wished to, befall them. Great numbers of all kinds of people were her daily hearers ; and many of the devouter sex, the women, prayed and wept with joy and wonder to hear her speak. — She had intermissions of her dis- courses for days or weeks, and before she began to speak it was made known throughout Edinburgh. Mr Henry Eollock, who often came to see her, said that he thought it was not good manners to speak while his Master was speaking, and that he acknowledged his Master's voice in her. Some misconstrued her to be suborned by the Covenanters, and at least that she had nothing that sa- voured of a rapture but only of memory, and that she still knew what she spoke ; and, being inten-upted in her discourse, answer- ed pertinently to the purpose. Her language signified little. She spoke of Christ, and called him Covenanting Jesus — that the Cove- nant was approved from Heaven — that the King's Covenant was Satan's invention — that the Covenant should prosper, but the ad- herents to the King's Covenant should be confounded ; and much other stuff of this nature, which savoured at best but of senseless simplicity. The Earl of Airth upon a time, getting a paper of her prophecies, which was inscribed — " That such a day and such a year Mrs Mitchell awoke, and gloriously spoke'"' — in place of the word gloriously, which he blotted out, and wrote over it the word gowk- edly, or foolishly, was so much detested for a while among the superstitious admirers of this maid, that he had like to have run the fate of one of the Bishops by a charge with stones upon the street."* • History of Scots Affairs from 1637 to 1641. By James Gordon, Tarson of Rothie- may, Aberdeen, printed for the Spalding Club, 4to. vol. i. p. 131, 132. 640 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1639- Early in August 1640, the Earl of Seaforth, accompanied by the Master of Forbes, Dr Guild, Covenanting Principal of King's College, and others, met in the King's College at Old Aberdeen, from which they adjourned to the cathedral of St Machar. They or- dered all the curiously carved crucifixes and those ornaments which had escaped the fury of the first Eeformers to be destroyed. Bishop Dunbar's tomb was mutilated, and they " chissell out the name of Jesus drawn cipherways J. H. S. out of the timber wall on the front of St Machar's Aisle anent the consistory door ; the crucifix on the Old Town Cross thrown down : the crucifix on the New Town [Cross] closed up, being loth to break the stone ; the crucifix on the west end of St Nicholas' kirk in New Aberdeen thrown down — which was never troubled before."* Guild com- menced his career as Principal of King's College by demolishing a church called the Snow kirk, and built the college-yard walls with the materials, inserting the hewn stones in the decayed windows of the College. The local chronicler says of this exploit — " Many Old Town people murmured, the same being the parish kirk some time of Old Aberdeen, within which their friends and forefathers were buried." In 1G41, when two-thirds of the revenue of the Bishopric of Aberdeen were granted to King's College, and the re- maining one-third to Marischal College, Guild contrived to secure for himself the episcopal residence, garden, and grounds. In 1G42 he " caused take down the organ case, which was of fine wainscot, and had stood within the kirk since the Reformation." He soon afterwards completely demolished the episcopal residence, and gutted it of all its materials, with which he repaired the College. The barbarous architectural alterations which Guild perpetrated are dolefully narrated by Spalding. This Covenanting enemy of every thing venerable for antiquity and curious workmanship was farther accessaiy in 1642 to the destruction of the " back of the altar in Bishop Gavin Dunbar's Aisle, curiously wrought in wains- cot, matchless within all the kirks of Scotland, as smelling of popery — " pitiful," adds Spalding, " to behold." The wood was taken to ornament a hideous gallery which Guild ordered to be con- structed within the cathedral, occupying the breadth of the church south and north. The incident mentioned by Grose in his " Antiqui- • Spalding's History of the Troubles, &c. in Scotland, printed for the Bannatyne Club, vol. i. p. 235. -1650.] OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. 041 ties of Scotland" is duly recorded by Spalding as occurring under the direction of Guild and his preaching colleague William Strachan. " It is said the craftsman would not put his hand to the down- taking thereof [the back of the high altar in Bishop Dunbar's Aisle] until Mr William Strachan, our minister, had put hand thereto, which he did, and then the work was begun. And in downtaking of one of the three timber crowns, which they thought to have gotten down whole and unbroken by their expectation, it fell suddenly upon the kirk's great ladder, broke it in three places, and itself all in blads, and broke some pavement with the weight thereof." Spalding adds his denunciation of the " loft," or gal- lery, constructed by Guild " athwart" the church, " which took away the stately sight and glorious show of the whole body of the kirk :" — " With this back of the altar, and other ornaments thereupon, he decorated the front and back of this leastly lofi, whereas L.40 would have purchased as much other timber to have done the same, if they had suffered the foresaid ornament to stand." The " fine wainscot, so that within Scotland there was not a better wrought piece," which Guild and Strachan destroyed, is described as " having three crowns uppermost, and three other crowns beneath, well carved with golden knaps." * The magnificent though then and now roofless cathedral of Elgin was also profaned by " Mr Gilbert Ross, minister at Elgin, the young laird Innes, the laird Brodie, and some others ;" and this dese- cration was mere wantonness, as the church was not used for Divine service. " They broke down," says Spalding, " the timber partition wall dividing the kirk of Elgin from the choir, which had stood since the Reformation, near seven score years or above. On the west side was painted in excellent colours, illuminated with stars of bright gold, the crucifixion of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ. This piece was so excellently done, that the colours and stars never faded nor evanished, but kept whole and sound as they were at the beginning, notwithstanding this college or chan- nonry kirk wanted the roof since the Reformation, and no entire window thereunto to save the same from storm, wind, sleat, nor wet, which myself saw. And, marvellous to consider, on the other side of this wall, towards the east, was drawn the Day of Judgment. All is thrown down to the ground. It was said this minister caused • Spalding's History of-the Troubles, &c. in Scotland, vol. ii. p. 106. 41 642 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1639- bring home to his house the timber thereof, and turn the same for serving his kitchen and other uses ; but each night the fire went out whenever it was burnt, and could not be holden in to kindle the morning fire as use is ; whereat the servants and others mar- velled, and thereupon the minister left off any further to bring in or turn any more of that timber on his house. This was marked and spread through Elgin, and credibly reported to myself. A great boldness, without warrant of the King to destroy churches at that rate ; yet it is done at command of the [General] Assembly, as said was."* These are instances, which could easily be multiplied, of the unhallowed proceedings of the Covenanters at what the Presby- terians term the Second Beformation, and to which they proudly refer as the " golden age of Presbyterianism," when religion, honour, principle, and truth, were trampled under foot by a faction as daring, unscrupulous, and tyrannical, as ever disgraced the annals of any country. Every thing was prostrated and desecrated bythose wild and desperate men, whose public and private conduct was in unison with their insolent pretensions and their wicked rebellion. The oppressions practised by the Covenanters, from 1639 to tlie time of CromwelFs victory near Dunbar in 1650, are amply de- tailed in the contemporary narratives of the period. The whole kingdom was under the tyranny of intolerant zealots, who ruled the people with a rod of iron. If the King's friends met in private, they were denounced SiS Plotters by the dominant faction; and if those noblemen attached to the royal cause appeared with any number of followers such as their rank entitled them, or who were necessary by the state of the times and the example of Argyll and other Cove- nanting chiefs, they were ferociously assailed as a hostile array about to deluge the country with blood. The Covenanters pre- tended to the most exclusive infallibility, while, in their language, all the opinions and proceedings of the loyal party wei-e infamous and damnable. It was the avowed doctrine of the Eai-1 of Leven, Johnston of Warriston, and others, that every oath should be received with a mental reservation. Persons were ordered to be punished for simply conversing with Malignants^ and to have any intercourse with them hazarded the lives of those concerned. The censure of excommunication was brought into contempt by its • Spalding's History, vol. i. p. 286. -1650.] OP THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. G43 frequency, and its application to improper objects. After the Mar- quis of Montrose espoused the royal cause, numbers were proscribed for merely speaMnr/ to him. His followers were designated Banders, and he was himself usually styled the excommunicated traitor James Graham. " In time of Presbytery," says a Presbyterian writer, "after the yearlG38, ministers who would not subscribe the Cove- nant, or who conversed with the Marquis of Huntly or the Mar- quis of Montrose or who took a protection from them, were sus- pended, deprived, or deposed ; and gentlemen who took part with Huntly or Montrose were tossed from one judicatory to another, made to undergo a mock penance in sackcloth, and to swear to the Covenant."* In 1639 the town of Aberdeen was saved from conflagration solely by Montrose, at that time in the Covenanting interest. He resisted the urgent demands of the Covenanting preachers, who ac- companied his troops, that both Old and New Aberdeen should be given up to indiscriminate plunder and then burnt. Forty-eight of the citizens were thrown bound into prison, and a fine of several thou- sands of merks was exacted. In Baillie's " Letters and Journals "are evinced the Covenanting disposition to cruelty in the North of Scot- land. Andrew Cant, who was forcibly installed minister at Aber- deen, acted as a complete tyrant, and was slavishly obeyed by the Magistrates in every thing which he " daily devised, to the grievous burden of the people."f Numbers of the clergy, the Professors in the Colleges, and others, were deposed and persecuted in the most wanton manner. The treatment of the learned Dr John Forbes of Corse and the Aberdeen Doctors is already mentioned. On the brow of the Hill of Corse, in Leochel parish, nearly opposite the castle, is a small natural cave known as the Laird's hiding-hole, in which Dr Forbes frequently concealed himself from the vengeance of his Covenanting enemies. After the treaty of Berwick he re- turned to Aberdeen and often preached ; but he was again deposed for pretended contumacy, and the new persecution occasioned by the Solemn League and Covenant compelled him to retire to Hol- land, where he resided two years. He returned in 1G46, and died in his castle of Corse on the 29th of April. Shortly before his • Lachlan Shaw's History of Moray, edition of 1837, 4to. p. 346. t Spalding's History of Troubles, &c. printed for the Bannatyne Club, vol.ii. p. 114, 115. 644 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1639- death this pions and virtuous man applied to be interred beside his wife and his father in Bishop Dunbar's Aisle in the cathedral, but this was refused by the Covenanting rulers, and his body was buried in the church-yard of St Marnan of Leochel without any monument. The complete edition of his Latin works, published by the Wetsteins, was edited by Dr Garden. " His learning," says Dr Irving, " was such as to obtain the warm approbation of those eminent scholars Vossius, Usher, Morhof, Ernesti, and Cave ; and to this it would be surperfluous to add any commenda- tion." In 1G44, Aberdeen was visited by Argyll's men, eight hun- dred strong, who spared neither Covenanter nor Anti-Covenanter. The greatest tyranny and oppression at that time prevailed. The people groaned under burdens inflicted by the Covenanters, and their enthusiasm in the national movement had greatly subsided. " The country," Baillie writes, " was exceedingly exhausted with burdens, and, which was worse, a careless stupid lethargy had seized on the people, so that we were brought exceeding low." This state of affairs induced them to resort to their old device of sedi- tious agitation, by enforcing a fast day throughout the kingdom. Its compulsory observance in Aberdeen is well described by Spald- ing. " No meat durst be made ready ; searchers sought the town's houses and kitchens for the same ; thus are the people vexed with these extraordinary fasts and thanksgivings upon the Sabbath-day, appointed by God for a day of rest, more than their bodies are vexed with labour on the week day, through the preposterous zeal of our ministers."* Eobertson and Hallyburton, ministers of Perth, were deposed for lukewarmness in the cause ; but the latter was restored because " Dame Margaret Hallyburton, Lady of Cowpar," says Bishop Henry Guthrie, " come over the Frith, and with oaths vowed to my Lord Balmerino that unless he caused her cousin to be reinstated he should never enjoy the favour of the Lordship of Cowpar. This communication set Balmerino at work for him." The fate of Sir John Gordon of Haddo, ancestor of the Earls of Aberdeen, may be here noticed. He was appointed by the King next in command to the Marquis of Huntly to oppose the Cove- nanters in 1639 ; and in October 1643 he protested against the Solemn League and Covenant. The pretended General Assembly excommunicated him and Huntly in April 1644, and he fell into • Spalding's History of Troubles, &c. vol. ii. p. 47, 48. -1650.] OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. 645 the hands of his enemies soon afterwards. He was tried at Edin- burgh on a charge of high treason, found guilty, forfeited, and or- dered to be executed by an act of the usurping Estates of Parlia- ment. Sir John Gordon was brought to the scaffold with Captain John Logic, a companion in suffering, on the 19th of July, at the Cross of Edinburgh. He was infested in his last moments by the Covenanting preachers, one of whom scrupled not to announce to the spectators an infamous falsehood, which Sir John instantly contradicted, and his persecutors in retaliation railed against him in the most atrocious style of abuse. The only favour he requested from them was to be released from their sentence of excommunica- tion, as it affected the worldly condition of his family, which was granted. While engaged in his devotions Captain Logie was behead- ed before his eyes, but he continued unmoved in prayer, concluding in these affecting words — " I recommend my soul to Almighty God, and my six children to his Majesty's care, for whose sake I die this day." He then submitted to the fatal stroke of the machine called the Maiden, and his body was interred by his sorrowing friends in the Greyfriars' churchyard, where Captain Logie was also buried. Sir John Gordon was only thirty-four years of age — " of good life and conversation, temperate, moderate, and religious," when he was thus judicially murdered ; or, as Spalding says — " borne down by the burghs, the ministers of Edinburgh, the Parliament, Argyll, Balmcrino, and the Kirk, because he would not subscribe the Cove- nant.* The place of his imprisonment in Edinburgh was a horrid dungeon in the north-west part of St Giles' church adjacent to the old Tolbooth, and designated in consequence Uaddo's Hold or Hole, until its demolition in 1830. The cruel spirit of the Covenanters was particularly conspicuous in February 1645, when a Committee of the General A-ssembly pre- sented a remonstrance to the Parliament " anent executing of justice on delinquents and malignants." This Committee consisted of James Guthrie, who was afterwards hanged himself, David Dickson, Robert Blair, Andrew Cant, and Patrick Gillespie. They pressed the exe- cution of all the prisoners in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, which the Parliament, after complimenting the Covenanting preachers for the " zeal and piety" of the Assembly, only delayed lest some of their own friends should fall into the hands of Montrose. Dr Wishart, • History of Troubles, &c. in Scotland, vol, ii. p. 219, 250. 646 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1639- the future Bishop of Edinburgh, and his whole family, Avere reduced to a state of starvation. The sufferings of that eminent man ought not to be omitted. He was deposed by the General Assem- bly with his colleague Dr Gladstanes, when both were ministers of St Andrews, and they were succeeded by the Covenanting worthies Samuel Rutherford and Eobert Blair. Dr Wishart was detected in a correspondence with the royahsts, plundered of all his property, and thrown into a loathsome dungeon called the Thieves Hole, one of the most nauseous parts of the old Tolbooth of Edinburgh, then not the least disgusting prison in the kingdom, where he was almost killed by rats. He records of himself that he thrice suffered spoliation, imprisonment, and exile before 1647, for his attachment to royalty and the Episcopal Church. In January 1645, Dr Wishart petitioned the Estates of Parliament from the Tolbooth for maintenance to himself, wife, and five children, who were in a state of starvation, but the result is not stated. The ancient family of Irving of Drum near Aberdeen also severely suffered. The father and his two sons were imprisoned in the vile Tolbooth of Edin- burgh, in which one of the latter died from the cruel treatment he received, and the other son, who was also sick, was only relieved from his prison to be sent to the Castle, whither he was conveyed on a " wand bed." Another instance of their cruelty was their cowardly execution of James Small, a messenger from Montrose to the King. This unfortunate individual, who had passed through the Highlands in safety, was recognized on his journey southward by an individual who had known him in England, and he was betrayed to Lord Elphinstone, a member of the Committee of Estates, the uncle of Balmerino. Elphinstone sent him to the merciless tribunal at Edinburgh, and on the 1st of May 1645, the day after he appeared before the Committee, he was hanged by their orders at the Cross " to the great satisfaction of the KirJc /" This is one of the many instances of the thirst for blood, particularly for the lives of their religious and political opponents, which characterized the councils of the Covenanters. After the battle of Auldearn the Committee of Estates seized Lord Napier of Merchiston, then verging towards seventy years of age, the brother-in-law of Montrose, his lady, who was a daughter of the Earl of Mar, his brother-in-law Stirling of Keir, and his two sisters, one of them the wife of Keir, who -1650.] OP THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. G47 liad suffered much for his religion and loyalty, and cast them all into prison. But the Covenanting cruelty during this reign of terror in Scot- land was most conspicuous after the defeat of the Marquis of Mon- trose at Philiphaugh near Selkirk in 1G45. The massacre of the prisoners taken in that engagement is an indelible atrocity on the annals of Scottish Covenanting Presbyterianism. The principal slaughter was of defenceless and unresisting prisoners who had sought and obtained quarter; and the court-yard of Newark Castle is said to have been the spot upon which many were shot by order of General David Leslie, the Covenanting commander. Bishop Henry Guthrie states that the preachers complained of quarter " given to such wretohes as they, and declared it to be an act of most sinful impiety to spare them, wherein divers of the noblemen complied with the clergy'''' — meaning the Covenanting preachers, and " the army was let loose upon them, and cut them all in pieces." The preachers actually justified this massacre by adducing the case of Agag and the Amalekites, and other allu- sions to the Old Testament, by which they enforced the duty and lawfulness of their bloody work. In addition to the slaughter of the prisoners, hundreds were deliberately thrown from a high bridge, and thus destroyed. This fact has been denied by some writers, who try to convict Bishop Wishart of invention by assert- ing that " from Berwick to Peebles there was not a single bi'idge on the Tweed but Sir Walter Scott observes — " There is an old bridge over the Etterick only four miles from Philiphaugh, and another over the Yarrow, both of which lay in the very line of the flight and pursuit ; and either might have been the scene of the massacre." Though Father Hay ti*ansferred the scene of this massacre to Linlithgow bridge, upwards of forty miles from the field of battle, yet it is to be observed that Bishop Wishart does not mention the Tweed at all in his narrative, but simply states that the unfortunate victims of Covenanting tyranny were " thrown headlong from off a high bridge, and the men together with their wives and sucking children drowned in the river beneath." The fate of most of the prisoners of distinction taken on this occasion may be anticipated. The Committee of the Estates were inclined to spare their lives, but the Covenanting Presbyterian minis- ters urged their execution in the name of the Kirk! Ten were marked 648 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1G39- for execution— the Earl of Hartfell, Lord Ogilvy, Sir Robert Spottiswoode, Sir William RoUock, Sir Philip Nisbet, Alexander Ogilvy, younger of Inverquharity, William Murray, brother of the Earl of Tullibardine, Colonel Nathaniel Gordon, Captain Andrew Gruthrie, son of the Bishop of Moray, and an officer named Stew- art, all of whom had been delivered into the hands of the Cove- nanters by the peasantry, who found them wandering in tracts un- known to them. Sir William Rollock was the first who suffered, and on the following day Ogilvy of Inverquharity, a youth of only eighteen ; and it was on this occasion that David Dickson exult- ingly uttered the exclamation which afterwards became a proverb — " The work goes bonnilie on ! " With him perished Sir William Nisbet, a brave officer, who had commanded a regiment of royal- ists in England. Those butcheries took place at Glasgow. The fate of the others was delayed till the meeting of the Par- liament at St Andrews on the 20th of November 1645. Robert Blair, the Covenanting successor of Dr Wishart, opened the ses- sion with a sermon on the eighth verse of the 101st Psalm. — " I will early destroy all the wicked of the land, that I may cut off all wicked doers from the city of the Lord." The Earl of Hartfell, Lord Ogilvy, Sir Robert Spottiswoode, Gordon, Murray, and Guthrie, were condemned. Murray was not nineteen years of age. They were all sentenced to be beheaded at the cross of St Andrews on the 20th of January 1646, four days after the sen- tence was pronounced. Spottiswoode, Guthrie, and Gordon, were executed on the same day in the South Street of St Andrews, and young Murray, who had been respited to give time to inquire into a pretended plea of insanity brought forward by his friends, two days afterwards. The dying conduct of those loyal gentle- men, who were literally murdered by the Covenanters, was most heroic, pious, and affecting. Though persecuted, insulted, and de- nounced in their last moments, they displayed a courage and mag- nanimity which must have smote their enemies to the very soul. The Earl of Hartfell and Lord Ogilvy were " appointed to open the tragedy but the latter contrived to escape from prison in the dress of his sister, whom he left behind, and who at the dis- covery of the lady, and the flight of their victim, the Covenanters were restrained with difficulty from putting to death. Argyll imagined that Lord Ogilvy had been favoured by the Hamiltons, -1G50.] OP THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. G49 his relatives, and to mortify them he procured the pardon of their enemy the Earl of Hartfell. The account of this tragedy by an eye-witness, now pubHshed, is worthy of perusal as connected with Sir Robert Spottiswoode. Argyll had brought with him to that " bloody Assembly" at St An- drews his ward. Sir Ewen Cameron of Lochiel, then scarcely seven- teen years old, and we ai'e told in the Memoirs of Lochiel — " Though that gentleman was too young to make very solid reflec- tions on the conduct of his guardian, he soon conceived an aversion to the cruelty of that barbarous faction. He had a custom of visiting the state prisoners as he travelled from city to city ; but as he was ignorant of the reasons why they were confined, so he could have no other view in it but satisfying his curiosity ; but he had soon an opportunity of being fully informed." The young LochieFs interview with Sir Robert Spottiswoode took place the night before the execution of that distinguished person and his brave companions, who, after the "escape of Lord Ogilvy, were so narrowly watched, that their most intimate friends and relations were denied access to them. LochieFs connection with his guardian Argyll induced the keeper of the prison to ad- mit him into Sir Robert's cell, with whom the young Chief was left to converse. He was cheerfully received by Sir Robert, who ap- peared as if he was at complete liberty, and was not in the least dejected at his approaching fate. Informing the prisoner who he was, and of his visit to St Andrews, Sir Robert exclaimed — " Are you the son of John Cameron, my late worthy friend and acquain- tance, and the grandchild of the loyal Allan M'Coildui, who was not only instrumental in procuring that great victory to the gal- lant Marquis of Montrose, which he lately obtained at Inverlochy, but likewise assistant to him in the brave actions that followed, by the stout party of able men that he sent along with him V Sir Robert then tenderly embraced Sir Ewen, and inquired how he came to be placed under the guardianship of such a man as Argyll. Young Lochiel explained this to him as well as he could, and Sir Robert replied — " It is surprising to me that your friends, who are loyal men, should have entrusted the care of your education to a person so opposite to them in principles, as well with re- spect to the Church as to the State. Can they expect you will 650 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1G39- learn any thing at that school but treachery, ingratitude, enthu- siasm, cruelty, treason, disloyalty, and avarice V Sir Ewen apolo- gised for his friends, and assured him that Argyll was as kind to him as if he were his father. He asked Sir Robert why he accused one whom he considered his benefactor of such vices I Sir Eobert Spottiswoode replied that Argyll's kindness and civility were the more dangerous snares for one who was then so young, and hoped that he would imitate the loyalty and good principles of his family rather than the example of his patron. He then narrated to Lochiel the history of the rebellion from its commencement, gave him a " distinct view of the tempers and characters of the differ- ent factions that had conspired against the mitre and the crown," explained the nature of the constitution of the kingdom, and " in- sisted on the piety, innocence, and integrity of the King." Lochiel was astonished and affected at these statements, and, we are told, "conceived such a hatred and antipathy against the perfidious authors of these calamities that the impression continued with him during his life." Sir Robert perceived the influence of his obser- vations on the mind of the youthful Chief of the Oamerons. " He conjured him to leave Argyll as soon as possibly he could ; and exhorted him, as he valued his honour and prosperity in this life, and his immortal happiness in the next, not to allow himself to be seduced by the artful insinuations of subtle rebels, who never want plausible pretexts to cover their treasons, nor to be ensnared by the hypocritical sanctity of distracted enthusiasts; and observed that the present saints and apostles who arrogantly assumed to them- selves a title to reform the Church, and to compel mankind to be- lieve their impious, wild, and undigested notions, as so many articles of faith, were either excessively ignorant and stupid, or monstrous- ly selfish, perverse, and wicked." — "Judge always of mankind," said Sir Robert, " by their actions; there is no knowing the heart. Religion and virtue are inseparable, and are the only sure and in- fallible guides to pleasure and happiness. As they teach us our several duties to God, to our neighbours, to ourselves, and to our King and country, so it is impossible that a person can be endued with either who is deficient in any one of these indispensable duties, whatever he may pretend. Remember, young man, that you hear this from one who is to die to-morrow for endeavouring to perform -1G50.J OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. 651 those sacred obligations, and who can have no other interest in what he says than a real concern for your prosperity, happiness, and honour." "Several hours," continues the narrator — said to have been John Drummond of the family of Drummond of Balhaldy in Stirling- shire, " passed away in these discourses before Lochiel was aware that he had stayed too long. He took leave with tears in his eyes, and a heart bursting with a swell of passions which he had not formerly felt." Captain Andrew Guthrie is not mentioned ; but we are informed that Lochiel next visited Colonel Nathaniel Gordon — " a handsome young gentleman of very extraordinary qualities, and of great courage and fortitude," and having condoled with him a short time, he waited on William Murray, " a youth of uncommon vigour and vivacity, not exceeding the nineteenth year of his age. He bore his misfortune with a heroic spirit, and said to Lochiel that he was not afraid to die since he died in his duty, and was assured of a happy immortality for his reward. This gentleman was brother to the Earl of Tullibardine, who had interest enough to have saved him, but it is affirmed by contem- porary historians that he not only gave way to but even promoted his trial, in acquainting the Parliament, which then demurred upon the matter, that he had renounced him as a brother since he had joined that wicked crew, meaning the Royalists, and that he would take it as no favour to spare him. Of such violence was that faction as utterly to extinguish humanity, unman the soul, and drain off nature herself; and it may be observed that an ungovernable zeal for religion is more fruitful of mischief than all the other passions put together. The next day the bloody sen- tence was executed upon those innocents. Two preachers had for some days preceding endeavoured to prepare the people for the sacrifice, which, they said, ' God himself required, to expiate the sins of the land V And because they dreaded the influence that the dying words of so eloquent a speaker as Sir Robert Spottiswoode might have upon the hearers, they not only stopped his mouth, but tormented him in the last moments of his life with their officious exhortations and rhapsodies. Lochiel beheld this tragedy from a window opposite to the scaffiald, in company with the Marquis [Argyll] and other heads of the faction." After mentioning that their melancholy fate drew tears from the eyes of 652 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1639- those spectators who were most prejudiced against them, the narrator continues — " When the melancholy spectacle was over, Lochiel, who still concealed the visit he had made them, took the freedom to ask my Lord Argyll — ' What their crimes were ? For nothing of the criminal appeared from their behaviour. They had the face and courage of gentlemen, and they died with the meek- ness and resignation of men that were not conscious of guilt. We expected to have heard an open confession from their own mouths ; but they were not allowed to speak, though I am informed that the most wicked robbers and murderers are never debarred that privilege.' " Argyll, surprised at these observations from a person so young as Lochiel, replied in an insidious speech, denouncing the principles of the sufferers ; maintaining that as the crimes of robbery, murder, and the like, were commonly committed by " mean people," and " were too glaring, ugly, and odious in their nature to bear any justification," it was " for the benefit of man- kind that the criminal should be allowed to recite them in public, because the design was not to make converts but to strike mankind with hoiTor — that the Provost [of St Andrews] did wisely in not allowing the criminals to speak, and especially Sir Kobert Spottis- woode, for he was a man of very pernicious principles, a great statesman, a subtle lawyer, and very learned and eloquent ; and therefore the more capable to deduce his wicked maxims and dan- gerous principles in such an artful and insinuating manner, as would be apt to fix the attention of the people, and to impose upon their understanding." Argyll then detailed to his youthful ward his own version of the origin of the war, inveighing against Mon- trose and his followers, and would have completely swayed Lochiel " if he had not been wholly prepossessed by the more sohd reason- ings of Sir Robert Spottiswoode." The young Chief embraced the first opportunity of returning to Lochaber, became a de- voted loyalist, and is prominent in many transactions of Scottish history till his death in 1719 at the patriarchal age of ninety.* It is some consolation to know that Argyll, who glutted his hatred by this tragedy, met with the same fate nearly sixteen years afterwards. Thus fell Sir Robert Spottiswoode with his brave companions • Memoirs of Sir Ewen Cameron of Lochiel, Chief of the Clan Cameron. Edin- burgh, 4to. printed for the Abbotsford Club, 1842, p. 76-82. -1650] OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. 653 in his father's archiepiscopal city of St Andrews — a martyr like them for loyalty, law, and religion, cruelly put to death by those relentless oppressors. It may be said that they were executed by authority of the Parliament, and this is the fact ; but the Parlia- ment was composed altogether of Covenanters, and was com- pletely under the controul of the Covenanting preachers, who in their sermons and exhortations justified the atrocities perpetrated by their advice. Another of many instances may be given of their thirst for blood. After Montrose had disbanded his army by the King's order, Argyll returned to Tnvcrary, followed by General David Leslie and his army, who marched into the peninsula of Cantyre against Sir Alexander Macdonald and the Irish auxiliaries. The latter safely escaped to The Isles and thence to Ireland, and the inhabitants submitted on the promise of life and liberty; but a John Nevay, who is appropriately styled a " bloody preacher," seconded by Argyll, persuaded Leslie to disarm the WTCtched peasantry, and put them all to the sword without mercy. Leslie, struck with horror when it was too late, seeing the infamous Cove- nanting preacher Nevay and Argyll coolly surveying the scene of carnage, exclaimed — " Well, Mess-John, have you not for once got your fill of blood V These words saved eighteen persons, who were carried prisoners to Inverary, where they would have been allowed to starve in the dungeons of the unfeeling and treacherous Argyll if Lochiel had not daily visited them, and secretly convey- ed to them provisions.* The Covenanting reign of terror which oppressed Scotland from 1639 to the occupation of the kingdom by Cromwell is affectingly described in the " Memoirs of Lochiel." We are told of this " most cruel tyranny that ever scourged and affected the sons of men " — that " the jails were crammed full of innocent people, in order to furnish our governors with blood, sacrifices wherewith to feast their eyes ; the scaffolds daily smoked with the blood of our best patriots ; anarchy swayed with an uncontroverted authority ; and avarice, cruelty, and revenge, seemed to be ministers of state. The bones of the dead were digged out of their graves, and their living friends were compelled to ransom them at exorbitant suras. Such as they were pleased to call Malignants were taxed and pillaged at discretion ; and if they chanced to prove the least • Memoirs of Locliiel, 4to. Edinburgh, 1842, p. 84. 654 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1639- refractory or deficient in payment their persons or estates were seized. The Committee of the \Presbyterian\ Kirk sat at the helm, and were supported by a small number of fanatical [persons], and others, who called themselves the Committee of the Estates, but were truly no- thing else but the barbarous executioners of their [the Presbyterian] wrath and vengeance. — Every parish had a [preaching] tyrant, who made the greatest lord in his district stoop to his authority. The kirk was the place where he kept his court ; the pulpit his throne or tribunal from whence he issued out his terrible decrees, and twelve or fourteen sour ignorant enthusiasts, under the title of Elders, composed his council. If any, of what quality soever, had the assurance to disobey his edicts, the dreadful sentence of ex- communication was immediately thundered out against him, his goods and chattels confiscated and seized, and himself being looked upon as actually in the possession of the devil, and irretrievably doomed to eternal perdition. All that conversed with him were in no better esteem."* In addition to those parochial " tribunals " of the Covenanting preachers, and the elders whom they constituted as such, subjecting all and sundry to their caprice, their General Assemblies nominated what was called a Commission of Assemhly, which in despotic power far exceeded the former High Court of Commission, against which the Covenanters furiously complained during the establishment of the Episcopal Church. Mr Scott, in his notes on the MS. Hospital Registers of Perth, under date 1644, candidly states that " the Commission of the General Assembly was at that time perhaps the most formidable Court that had ever existed in this country. All liberty of private judgment, it has been often and justly complained, was taken away by the Commission. The [peaceable] ministers throughout the kingdom were intimi- dated, and frequently at a loss how to act so as to please that Court." Those Commissions, which were always composed of the most turbulent and ferocious of the Covenanting preachers and their specially selected elders, took cognizance of every one who " haunted the company of an excommunicated person," or any one not a Covenanter, or seen conversing or reported to correspond with the Marquis of Montrose, or having any relationship to or intimacy with Malignants, as the Covenanters designated all loyal- ists and adherents of the Episcopal Church. The Commissioners " Memoirs of Locliiel, Edinburgh, 4to. 1842, p. 87, 88. -1650.] OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. Go5 ordered " inquisition" to bo taken with all such persons, of whatever rank, station, or profession, against whom they thundered their curses loud and deep, by which the peasantry were both intimi- dated and excited to acts of violence, and many of the best men in the kingdom were driven into exile to preserve their lives. The execution of the Marquis of Montrose was, on account of the rank and importance of the victim, the last great judicial murder which the Covenanters were allowed to perpetrate. The fate of the gi-eat IMarquis is affectingly narrated by his eloquent biographer.* In his second attempt in 1650 to raise the royal standard he was surprised and defeated by an inferior force, and he escaped to be basely betrayed by Macleod of Assynt in Suther- landshire, from whom he had sought protection, for a thousand bolls of meal ! The ]\Iarquis was brought to Edinburgh by the Covenanting General Leslie, received with every mark of indignity which the Presbyterians could devise, publicly insulted, tormented by the preachers, condemned on his former pretended attainder to be executed on a gibbet thirty feet high at the Cross, his head to be placed on the Tolbooth, his arms on the gates of Perth and Stu-ling, his legs on the gates of Aberdeen and Glasgow, and his mangled body to be buried by the hangman in the tract on the south of the city known as the Boroughmuir — this last part of the sentence only to be relaxed if the Covenanters removed their mock excommunication against him. This inhuman sentence was rigidly inflicted under circumstances of peculiar atrocity on the part of the Presbyterian preachers, who embittered the last mo- ments of their illustrious victim by their blasphemies, revilings, and denunciations. They exulted over the fate of the " truculent traitor,'''' as they falsely called him — " that viperous brood of Satan, James Graham, whom the Estates of Parliament have since de- clared traitor, the Church hath delivered into the hands of the devil, and the nation doth generally detest and abhor and he who, with almost no resources, gained six victories, reconquered the kingdom — the poet, the scholar, the courtier, and the soldier — was numbered by the Covenanters in their impious phraseology among " the troublers of Israel, the fire-brands of hell, the Koraks, the Balaams, the Doegs, the Eabshakeks, the Hamans, the Tobiahs, and Sanballats of the time." Montrose, though he commenced his * The Life and Times of Montrose, by Mark Napier, Esq. Advocate. 656 FANATICISM, OPPRESSION, AND CRUELTIES [1650- public career in Scotland as a supporter of the National Covenant, never had any connection with the Solemn League. " For the League and Covenant," said the Marquis in his dying speech, " I thank God I was never in it, and therefore could not break it." In reference to the charge of cruelty against him he truly declared — " Never was any man's blood spilt but in battle, and even many thousands have I spared." Into the details of the invasion of Scotland by Cromwell, his victory over the Covenanting forces under Leslie near Dunbar, and his subjugation of the kingdom, it is unnecessary to enter in the present work. Cromwell returned in triumph to London, and one of his first proceedings was to depress the Scots, because, in his phraseology, they had " withstood the work of the gospel." An act was passed abolishing royalty in Scotland, and annexing the king- dom as a province to the Commonwealth of England, but allowing some representatives to be sent to the English Parliament. Judges were appointed for the administration of justice in the Supreme Courts ; and the people at large, now freed from the odious and in- supportable tyranny of the Presbyterian preachers, soon became reconciled to the new government. Though many of them were royalists, they experienced a security which had been unknown since the outbreak for the National Covenant in 1638, and the strong arm of military power afforded them a sufficient protection. It may be truly said that from this period, during the whole of Cromwell's domination, Scotland was quiet, contented, and compa- ratively prosperous. One great cause of this was, the determina- tion to prevent the meetings of General Assemblies of the preachers, though this at first scarcely restrained the Covenanting turbulence. A General Assembly had met at Edinburgh in July 1650, accord- ing to the appointment of a preceding Assembly, and Andrew Cant, described as then minister of Aberdeen, was elected Moderator, but none of the Acts are printed. Another met at St Andrews in June 1651, and adjourned to Dundee, where it was held for some days in July, and Robert Douglas was after a noisy discussion chosen Moderator. This meeting terminated in a ludicrous manner. The parties were informed that Cromwell's soldiers were marching towards Perth, and intended to visit Dundee. Panic-struck at this intelligence a certain Mr Alexander Gordon, who was one of them, and preserved a record of their proceedings transcribed by 1653.] OF THE COVENANTING PRESBYTERIANS. 657 Wodi'ow, in 1703, states — " The Assembly arose, and dispersed themselves the best way they could for escaping the enemy and their own safety ; yet some of them, notwithstanding, did fall into the enemy's hands, as Mr Robert Douglas, moderator, and some others." The Acts of this Assembly were never recognized or printed among the Acts of the Presbyterians as a party since the Revolution. A protestation was presented against the lawfulness of the Assembly, dated at St Andrews, 18th July 1651, chiefly on account of " the allowing and carrying on of a conjunction with the Malignant party, and bringing them in to places of power and trust in the army and in the judicatories, contrary to the word of God, the Solemn League and Covenant," and various other enumerated documents, such as Declarations, Warnings, Remon- strances, Letters, and Supplications. A third convened at Edin- burgh in July 1G52, at which the Anti-Resolutionists protested against the lawfulness of those of 1650 and 1651. On the 20th of July 1653, another General Assembly was held at Edinburgh, but no sooner had Mr David Dickson, the moderator, concluded his prayer than Colonel Cotterell surrounded the place of meeting by a body of troops, entered and dispersed the members for sitting without the authority of the Parliament of the Commonwealth of England, the commanders-in-chief of the English forces, and the English Judges in Scotland. The Presbyterian preachers, who had for years bearded a King and the whole Government, and at whose command thousands of ignorant enthusiasts repeatedly rose in defence of the Covenants, could now offer no resist- ance. It was in vain that Dickson pretended they were " an ecclesiastical synod, a spiritual court of the Lord Jesus Christ, which meddled not with any thing civil" — that their " authority was derived from God" — and that by the Solemn League and Covenant the most of the English soldiers were bound to de- fend them. Cotterell was inexorable. " He told us," says Baillie, who was present, " his order was to dissolve us : where- upon he commanded us all to follow him, else he would drag us out of the room. When we had entered a protestation against this unheard of and unexampled violence, we did rise and fol- low him." Cotterell led them like so many culprits through the streets surrounded by cavalry and foot soldiers, and when a mile from the city he informed them that they must " never dare to 42 658 PROSTRATION OF THE COVENANTERS. [1653. meet above three in number," and that they were to leave the city by eight o'clock on the following morning under pain of breaking the public peace. On that day they were commanded to depart by sound of trumpet, or " present imprisonment."* It was nevertheless attempted to hold a General Assembly at Edinburgh in July 1654, but before the meeting was constituted it was per- emptorily suppressed by the military. No more General Assem- blies were held tiU the first of the new Presbyterian Establishment after the Revolution. The Covenants were thus utterly prostrated by Cromwell, and though the Presbyterian preachers were allowed to retain posses- sion of the parishes and enjoy the stipends, they were happily under the only safe controul for the country at the time — that of military law. As it respects the result of Cromwell's proceedings, we have the admission of a noted Presbyterian wi'iter of the time, Mr James Kirkton, who may be considered the Calderwood of his day : — " The Enghsh became peaceable masters of Scotland for nine years following. So, after all the counties of Scotland had formally acknowledged the English for their sovereigns, they ap- pointed magistrates, and constituted judicatories to govern the land for their time. They did indeed proclaim a sort of tolera- tion to dissenters among Protestants, but permitted the gospel to have its course, and presbyteries and synods to continue in the exercise of their powei's ; and all the time of their government the work of the gospel prospered not a little but mightily. It is also true that because they knew the generality of the Scottish ministers were for the King upon any terms they did not permit the General Assembly to sit, and in this I believe they did no had office^ for both the authority of that meeting was denied by the Protesters, and the Assembly seemed to be more set upon establish- ing themselves than promoting religion.'''' Kirkton gives a most flat- tering account in his own style of the morals and the spiritual con- dition of the people, which is rightly pronouhced by a very compe- tent Presbyterian authority " to be in its leading points an en- thusiastic fable. There is in every ecclesiastical record of the time," continues this writer, " the most redundant and revolting proof that instead of the unspotted morality on which he [Kirkton] descants, enormities of every kind prevailed, and such records are • Baillie to Mr Calamy, minister at London, July 27, 1653. 1654.] PROSTRATION OF THE COVENANTERS. 659 unimpeachable evidence."* We have the statement of Sir James Turner that " he never saw either public or private sin more abound than in the years 1G43 and 1644, when the Solemn League and Covenant was subscribed by many."-f- Baillie, however, gives a less inflated representation of the Presbyterian cause than Kirk- ton: — " As for our church affairs" he writes to his friend Mr Spang, 19th July 1654, " thus they stand : — The Parliament of England had given to the English judges and sequestrators a very ample commission to put out and in ministers as they saw cause. Ac- cording to this power they put Mr John Row in Aberdeen, Mr Robert Leighton in Edinburgh, Mr Patrick Gillespie in Glasgow ; and Mr Samuel Colville they offered to the Old College of St Andrews, All our Colleges are likely to be undone. Our churches are in great confusion. No intrant gets any stipend till he has petitioned, and subscribed some acknowledgement to the English. When a very few of the Remonstrants and Independent party will call a man he gets the kirk and the stipend ; but whom the Presbytery and the whole congregation call and admit, he must preach in the fields, or in a barn, without stipend." Truly vre may well exclaim, after perusing this and other statements — How were the mighty Covenanters fallen ! And what became of the other actors in this said tragedy of the Covenants ? The Earl of Rothes, one of the great leaders of the rebellion, died at Richmond-upon-Thames, in the house of his aunt the Countess of Roxburgh, on the 23d of August, soon after the Parliament in that month had confirmed a pension of L.10,000 Scots, which had been settled on him for life. Rothes in reality abandoned the Covenanters, but " premature death put an end to all his projects, and perhaps saved him from the disgrace of apos- tacy .""f Most of the Nobility and gentry, disgusted with the Co- venanters, repudiating their religious and political principles, their horrid cruelties and oppressions, and their officious interference in all public and private affairs, left them to their fate, or could render them no assistance. Baillie witcs inl654 — "As for om- state this is its case — our Nobility near all wrecked. Dukes Hamilton, the one executed, the other slain ; their estate forfeited ; one part of it • Records of the Kirk of Scotland, by Alexander Peterkin. Edin. 8vo. vol. i. p. 626. t Sir James Turner's Memoirs. Edinburgh, 4to. 1829, p. 160. t Appendix to Earl of Rothes' " Relation," printed for Bannatyne Club, 4to. p. 226. 660 PROSTRATION OF THE COVENANTERS. [1654. gifted to English soldiers ; the rest will not pay the debts ; little left to the heretrix ; almost the whole name undone with debt. Huntly executed, his sons all dead but the youngest ; there is more debt on the house [family] nor the land can pay : Lennox is living as a man buried in his house of Cobham ; Argyll almost drowned with debt in friendship with the English, but in hatred with the country; he courts theRemonstrators, who are averse from him ; Chancellor Loudon lives like an outlaw about Atholl, his lands confiscated for debt under a general very great disgrace ; Marischal, Rothes [only son of the Covenanting Earl], Eglinton and his three sons, Crawfurd, Lauderdale, and others, prisoners in England ; and their lands either sequestrated or forfeited, and gifted to English soldiers ; Balmerino suddenly dead, and his son for public debt, comprizings, and captions, keeps not the cause- way ; Warriston [Johnston], having refunded most of what he got for places, lives privately in a hard enough condition, much hated by the most, and neglected by all except the Remonstrants, tq whom he is guide. Our criminal judicatures are all in the hands of the English ; our civil courts in their hands also. — The commissariot and sheriff courts are all in the hands of the Eng- lish soldiers, with the adjunction in some places of some few Re- monstrants. Strong garrisons in Leith, Edinburgh town and castle, Glasgow, Ayr, Dunbarton, Stirling," and other places. This, then, was the result of the rebellion engendered by the National Covenant and the Solemn League and Covenant. After all the blood which had been shed, the cruelties perpetrated, the infamous prosecution by the Presbyterians of Archbishop Laud, their selling of the King, and their war of extermination against those whom they chose to consider Malic/nanis, to say nothing of the bitter hatreds, feuds, and factions, which prevailed among themselves, the Covenanters gained not even one political or reli- gious advantage, and all their struggles for supremacy ended in the ruin of themselves. Their principles never permanently triumphed ; their Presbyterian successors, when established at the Revolution by mere political expediency, found that the new Government would not listen for a moment to their pretensions ; and thus ended the " golden age " of the pretended second Reformation. BOOK III. THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF SCOTLAND FROM 1661 TO 1688. CHAPTER I. PRELIMINARIES OP THE RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. The restoration of the Monarchy in the person of Charles II. in 1660, introduces us to new actors in the public events of the time both in the State and in the Church. Some of the former heroes of the Covenant were still alive at that era of our national history. Among the Nobility may be noticed the Earl of Loudon, who be- came a royalist after the murder of Charles I., but submitted to General Monk, and died in 1663. The Earl of Eglinton, who also became a royalist, and was detained a prisoner in Hull and Berwick till the Restoration, died in 1661 ; the Earl Marischal also died in 1661 , and the Earl of Wigton in 1665. The Earl of CassUlis, who never renounced his Presbyterianism, and whose eldest daughter, Lady Margaret Kennedy, by his first Countess, married Bishop Burnet, survived till 1668. The Earl of Haddington, who, how- ever, though a favourer of the party, can hardly be considered a Covenanter, died in 1669. The Earl of Lauderdale, afterwards Duke of Lauderdale, and the fate of the Marquis of Argyll, are subsequently noticed. The Earl of Sutherland died in 1663. The Earl of Home, before 1641 a Covenanter, died in 1666. The Earl of Lothian, who in 1638 manifested the greatest zeal for the Covenant, but became a royalist after the murder of Charles I., survived till 1675. Lord Sinclair, who also became a royalist, died on the following year. Sir Thomas Hope of Craighall, who was fatally retained by Charles I. in the office of Lord Advocate, which of aU others required the most active zeal in the royal ser- vice, predeceased the Restoration nearly five years, dying in 1646. 662 PRELIMINARIES OF THE [1G61. We have seen that he was appointed by the King to be his Com- missioner to the General Assembly in August 1643 — an office never before or since conferred upon a commoner, and the royalists were so much exasperated at this nomination of an avow- ed enemy instead of a friend, that they with very few exceptions refused to attend. Johnston of Warriston occupies a prominent place in the Covenanting Presbyterian martyrology. Of the Covenanting preachers it may be noticed that Henderson died in August 1646. The cause of his death is variously stated. It is alleged by Heylin, Collier, Saunderson, Hollingworth, and other writers of the time, that after his correspondence on Epis- copacy with Charles I. at Newcastle he retracted all his Presby- terian opinions, and denounced the proceedings of the Scottish army against the King ; but this is founded on very disputable authority, although it was subsequently maintained by men of the highest integrity. It is, however, a matter of little moment. Henderson was interred in the churchyard of St Giles, near the grave of John Knox ; but when that cemetery was partly convert- ed into the Pai-liament Close or Square his remains were exhumed, and removed to the Greyfriars' burying-ground ; and a monument was erected by his nephew — a homely square pedestal with inscrip- tions on three of the sides, surmounted by an urn, at the south- west end of the New Greyfriars"" church, near the gate leading into the pleasure-grounds of George Heriot's Hospital. Wodrow alleges that in June or July 1662, the Earl of Middleton, the King's Com- missioner, procured an order from the Parliament to eraze the in- flatedLatin inscriptions on Henderson's mnument. This statement is erroneous, for the Parliament issued no such order. Sir George Mackenzie says that the Committee of Estates, who met in August 1660, enjoined the inscriptions to be defaced on Henderson's tomb at Edinburgh and Gillespie's at Kirkcaldy. The difference is important, for Wodrow, by assigning 1662 as the year when this unnecessary spleen was authorized, and by connecting it with the Parliament, evidently wished to implicate the Bishops, all of whom, of the second succession, were then consecrated, and sat in that Parliament. In 1660 there were no Bishops in Scotland, and this procedure of the Committee was their own act. Baillie, who is often noticed in the preceding nan-ative as a zealous Covenanter, died Principal of the University of Glasgow in 1661.] RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 663 1662. " The " flower of the Kirk," Mr Samuel Rutherford, the author of the book entitled " Lex Rex," which was burnt with every mark of indignity at the Cross of Edinburgh, and beneath his win- dows in front of St Salvador's College in St Andrews, died in March 1661, His associate and colleague at St Andrews, Robert Blair, vvas allowed to retire to the parish of Aberdour, on the south shore of Fife, where he resided till his death in 1666. Andrew Cant, one of the famous apostles of the Covenant, died in 1664, and David Dickson in the previous year. John Livingstone was banished in 1663, and retired to Rotterdam, where he died in 1672. James Guthrie was hanged for high treason on the 1st of June 1661. The above were the principal Covenanting " Scots Worthies" alive at the Restoration, and they were soon succeeded by a race of most violent, sullen, and dangerous fanatics, whose extraordinary conduct as rebels and the enemies of toleration involved many of them in the most summary punishment. On the 10th of August 1660 a letter was written by Charles II. to the Presbytery of Edinburgh, to be communicated to other Presbyteries, in which the King declared — " We do also resolve to protect and preserve the government of the Church as if is settled hy laio, without violation." This letter was delivered by Sharp, soon afterwards Archbishop of St Andrews, to Mr Robert Douglas, on the 1st of September. The Presbyterians consider- ed this as guaranteeing the support of their system, and some of their writers assert that the King for several months after his restoration entertained no design of re-establishing the Episcopal Church. A letter to this effect is cited from the Earl [Duke] of Lauderdale, dated Whitehall, 23d October 1660, addressed to this Mr Robert Douglas, the moderator of the Covenanting General Assembly in 1649 — a person of very fickle and unsettled mind, who was almost induced to accept the Archbishopric of St Andrews, and whom even the credulous and gossipping Wodrow was inclined to consider a grandson of Queen Mary by a child born by her to George Douglas, younger of Lochleven, while she was a prisoner in that castle.* " As to the concerns of our mother Kirk," writes * This atrocious calumny against Queen Mary was readily believed by the Presby- terians, and probably Mr Eobert Douglas was not slow to give credence to a scandal which every one conversant with the history of the unhappy Queen, and especially her imprisonment in Lochleven Castle, knows to be false. 664 PRELIMINARIES OF THE [1661. Lauderdale to the pretended bastard of royalty, " I can only promise my faithful endeavours in what may be for her good ; and indeed it is no small matter to me, in serving my master, to find that his Majesty is so fixed in his resolution not to alter any thing in the government of that Church. Of this you may be confident, though I dare not answer ; but some would be willing enough to have it otherwise. I dare not doubt of the honest ministers con- tinuing in giving constant testimonies of their duty to the King, and your letter confirms me in these hopes ; and they doing their duty, I dare answer for the King, having of late had full content- ment in discoursing with his Majesty on that subject. His Majesty hath told me that he intends to call a General Assembly, and I have drawn a proclamation for that purpose, but the day is not yet resolved on. The proclamation shall, I think, come down with my Lord Treasurer [John Earl of Crawford], who says he will take journey this week." Whatever credit may be assigned to these statements, Lauderdale was the avowed friend of the Cove- nanting Presbyterian interest, and as the whole power and patron- age of Scotland were virtually placed in his hands after the dis- grace of the Earl of Middleton in 1662, his principles could not be misunderstood as those of one of the most ambitious, designing, and unscrupulous men of his time. After 1638, when he joined the Covenanters, he was a confidential manager of their affairs, and appointed one of their delegates to the Westminster Assembly in 1643, It is true that he suffered considerable hardships, and an imprisonment of nine years before the Restoration, but for these he was amply rewarded by honours and pecuniary advantages. We are told in a well known jom-nal " that the restoration of Episcopacy [in Scotland], whatever may be thought of its wis- dom, must be owned to have been a natural measure."* It is in- deed astonishing, after their rigorous enforcement of the Covenant, their excommunication of the Bishops and others, their undeniable oppressions and cruelties, and their bitter hatred of toleration in any form, that the Presbyterians could expect their system to be sanc- tioned as the national establishment after the Restoration. But the proceedings of the Parliament, which met at Edinburgh on the 1st of January 1661, sufficiently intimated that whatever was to be done the Covenants and their supporters were to expect no countenance. • Edinburgh Review, vol. xxxvi. p. 29. IGGl.] RE-ESTABLISIIMENT OF THE CHURCH. 665 The Earl of Middleton was the King's Commissioner, and the ParHament was opened by a sermon preached by Mr Kobert Dou- glas. The very first act enjoined the administration of the oath of allegiance to the members at every Parliament, in which it was declared that the King was the only supreme governor of the king- dom over all persons and in all causes^* This rescinded the acts of August and November 1641, the former of which was " anent the oath to be given by every member of Parliament," and pro- nounced the " same to be void and null in all time coming.'''' The Earl of Oassillis was the only member of the Parliament who re- fused to take the oath of allegiance, and deserted the meeting, be- cause, says Sir George Mackenzie, he would not allow the King''s supremacy in ecclesiastical matters, which was implied in the oath.-|- This was followed by an act against the noted Covenanting John- ston of Warriston, then a fugitive for high treason, depriving him of all his offices, especially that of Clerk-Eegistrar, which he held during the Covenanting domination in the Parliament. On the 4th of January an act was passed " that the bodies, bones, and heads of the late Marquis of Montrose and Sir William Hay of Dalgetty should be gathered and honourably buried at his Majes- ty's expence," ordering the Magistrates of Edinburgh to " see his Majesty''s will and pleasure herein punctually obeyed." Various acts of the Parliament of 1641, affecting the royal prerogative in choosing the Officers of State, the Privy Council, and the Lords of Session, were rescinded. On the 16th of January an act was passed denouncing, generally, all " leagues, councils, or conventions" not authorized by the King and his successors. The body of Colonel George Drummond, another sufferer to Covenanting tyranny, which " was unworthily buried, was to be raised by his friends, and buried where they should think fit." On the 22d, an act was passed annulling the Convention of Estates of 1643, and " rescinding any acts ratifying the same." The meetings of Quakers, Anabap- tists, and Fifth Monarchy Men, were strictly prohibited. On the 1st of February the " saying of mass, seminary and mass priests, and trafficking papists" were ordered to be punished by the exist- • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. vii. p. 7. t An Act was passed against the Earl of Oassillis on the 5th of April, declaring him incapable of any public office for refUsing to take the oath of allegiance. Acta Pari. Scot. vol. vii. p. 162, 163. 666 PRELIMINARIES OF THE [1661. ing laws. The forfeiture of the Marquis of Montrose was honour- ably removed and rescinded on the 8th ; and on the following day the Engagement of 1648 was ratified, while the Parliament and Committees of 1649 were rescinded. On the 20th an act was passed " condemning the delivery of the King," and the act of the 16th Jan- uary 1647, entitled, " Declaration of the kingdom of Scotland con- cerning the King's Majesty's person," was by the same authority ordered to be " expunged out of all records, and never to be remembered but with due abhorrence and detestation." Two days afterwards a commission was appointed to visit the Col- leges of Aberdeen, consisting of nine or ten noblemen, a number of gentlemen and several ministers, among whom are the names of James Sharp^ George Hallyiurton, David Strachan, and John Pater- son, afterwards Bishops. On the 27th all " public ministers were enjoined to take the oath of allegiance, and acknowledge the King's prerogative," in the latter of which the swearing of the Solemn League and Covenant, or of " any other oaths concerning the go- vernment of the Church or kingdom," was peremptorily pro- hibited ; and it was declared that the said League and Covenant was not obligatory on the subjects to " meddle or interpose by arms or any seditious way in any thing concerning the religion and government of the Churches in England and Ireland." This caused the retirement of Lord Balmerino, his relative Lord Cow- par, and others from the Parliament. Acts were also passed in favour of a number of parochial incumbents and their families who had been annoyed during the usurpation. On the 28th of March the most important act was passed, annulling, rescinding, and rendering null and void, all the acts of the " pretended Parlia- ments" from 1640 to 1648. This was followed by an " act con- cerning religion and church government," in which the King de- clared his firm resolution to maintain the true Reformed Protes- tant veWgwnasitwas estallished within this kingdom during the reigns of his royal father and grandfather ; " and as to the government of the Church," continues the act, " his Majesty will make it his care to settle and secure the same in such a frame as shall be most agree- able to the word of God, most suitable to monarchical government, and most complying with thepubhcpeace and quiet of the kingdom : And in the meantime his Majesty, with advice and consent foresaid, doth allow the present administration by [kirk] sessions, presbyteries, 1661.] RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. G67 and synods, they keeping themselves within bounds, and behaving themselves as said is, and that notwithstanding of the preceding Act- Rescissory of all pretended Parliaments since the year 1633." At subsequent proceedings of this Parliament the forfeitures and attainders of Sir John Gordon of Haddo, Sir Robert Spottis- woode, and other gentlemen who were victims to or sufferers from the Covenanting tyranny, were recalled and rescinded, and on the 13th of May a " solemn anniversary thanksgiving" for the King's Restoration was enjoined to be observed every 29th of JNIay. On the 15th, Mr John Wilkie, collector of the vacant stipends, was or- dered to pay Mr Patrick Wemyss and Mr James Aitken, " suffering ministers for their loyalty," the former L.2000 Scots, and the latter L.lOO sterling, out of the vacant stipends in Orkney. On the 28th, the said Mr Wilkie was authorised to pay Mr William Ogilvie, sometime minister at Kingoldrum — " a suffering minister" — three hundred merks Scots. On the 18th of June a long pro- clamation by the King " anent Church affairs," dated Whitehall, 10th June, was read, extending and explaining the act of the 28th of March ; and ordered to be published at the Cross of Edin- burgh and in all the other towns. On the 9th of July was passed an " act concerning the disposal of vacant stipends." This act chiefly alluded to the deprived Episcopal clergy during the Civil War. It set forth that, " considering during those troubles many learned and religious persons in the ministry and universities, for their expressions of duty and loyalty to his Majesty, or not concurring in the confusions of the time, have been deposed or suspended from their charge and ministry, and have been other- wise under great sufferings, and they and their families reduced to extreme misery and want" — it was enacted that all stipends of benefices vacant by death, deposition, suspension, translation, or otherwise, shall be " employed for the supply and maintenance towards the reparation of the sufferings and losses of the persons foresaid, and of the wives and bairns of such as are dead" — the act to continue in force seven years, or longer, " as his Majesty shall think fit."* The above were the principal acts of the first Scottish Par- liament after the Restoration which had reference directly or indirectly to ecclesiastical affairs. The condemnation of the Cove- • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. v. p. 303. 668 PRELIMINARIES OF THE [16G1. nants as illegal excited the fruitless opposition of the Covenanters. " The ministers," says Sir George Mackenzie, " did begin to thun- der after their usual manner, and resolved to issue remonstrances in the ensuing provincial assemblies ; but to prevent any such dis- order Eothes was sent to Fife, and AthoU to Perth, and some to each of their other provincial meetings, with power to dissolve them if any such thing had been proposed ; and by their presence all disturbances were then quieted, and Mr Andrew Cant, and many others who were violent Remonstrators, were deposed. Such also as preached before the Parliament, who were men picked out for their enmity to rebellion, did inveigh against the Covenant, and the irregular proceedings of these times ; and some were so forward as to recommend Episcopacy as that ecclesiastical go- vernment which suited best with monarchy, and was most conso- nant to the word of God.''''* In this Parliament numerous warrants were issued to grant relief to " suffering ministers," intimating the Episcopal clergy, and to the widows and children of those who were deceased. On the 15th of April, Dr Wishart petitioned the Parliament, shewing that " for his loyalty he had suffered as early, as much, as long, as constantly and patiently, as any of his station in the kingdom, being in 1G37 forced to flee to another kingdom from his charge at St Andrews, and since once and again robbed of all his goods, imprisoned, banished ; and for persisting in his known avowed loyalty, and in that Christian duty of holding up his Majesty's condition and just cause to Almighty [God] in public worship, followed with persecution even beyond seas by the late usurpers, and that even till the blessed day of his sacred Majesty's wonder- ful restitution." He also states that he is " not only valetudinary, and past sixty already," but that his " poor wife and children" would be destitute " in case Providence should remove him." Mr John Wilkie was ordered to pay Dr Wishart L.300 sterling " out of the first and readiest of the vacant stipends."f On the 21st of June a list of suffering ministers and their widows and children was presented to the Parliament, when various sums were ordered to be paid from the vacant stipends for • Sir George Mackenzie's Memoirs of the Affairs of Scotland, edited by Thomas Thomson, Esq. Edinburgh, 4to. 1821, p. 23. •f Acta Pari. Scot. vol. vii. Appendix, p. 59. 1661.] RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 669 their losses. The loyalty of the Aberdeen Doctors was not forgotten. The widow and children of Dr Barron were voted L.200 sterling ; the widow and children of Dr Sibbald, L.200 ;* and the widow and children of Dr Eoss, L.150. The chil- dren of Mr James Hannay, formerly Dean of Edinburgh, received L.lOO ; those of Mr John Brown, Professor in the College of Edinburgh, killed at Preston, L.lOO ; those of Mr John Logie, sometime minister at Ruthven, L.50 : the widow of Mr J ohn Heatly, minister at Wamphray, L.50 ; the widow and children of Mr Samuel Douglas, L.lOO ; those of Mr John Fyffe, minister of Foulis, L.lOO; the children of Mr James Drummond, L.50 ; and those of Dr Scrimgeour, L.lOO. To Mr David Mitchel, minister of Edinburgh, was voted the sum of L.200 ; to Dr Panter, formerly of St Andrews, L.200 ; to Mr John Rose, minister of Birse in Aberdeenshire, L.200; to Mr William Douglas, minister of Aboyne and Glentanner, L.lOO ; to Mr William Wilkie, minister of Govan near Glasgow, L.lOO ; to Mr George Hannay, L.lOO ; and to Mr John Macmath, L.lOO. Several others were voted L.50 each.-f At subsequent meetings of the Parliament Mr William Colvin was voted L.200. Mr William Hume, minister of Ayton, 2,400 merks ; Mr William Annand of Ayr, L.200 : James Maxwell, son of Bi- shop Maxwell of Ross, L.200; Mr Robert Balcanqual, L.200; and sums of L.lOO severally to the widows and children of the de- ceased clergy.J On the 5th of July the sum of L.1050 was oi'dered to be paid, in sums of L.lOO each, and one of L.150, to ten clergy- men or their children, and one of the latter was Mr John White- ford, described as son of the Bishop of Brechin. On the 9th of July Mr Robert Forbes was authorised to be the sole printer for ten years of the Replies of the Aberdeen Doctors to the Covenant- ers : Mr James Ramsay of Linlithgow was voted L.lOO ; and Mr Henry Guthrie, then minister of Kilspindie, L.150. On the 12th of July a sum upwards of L.2000 sterling, exclusive of 2000 merks, " It appears, however, that Mr John Wilkie refused to pay the L.200 to Dr Sibbald's widow, and in consequence " Elizabeth Nicolson, relict of the deceased Dr James Sibbald," presented a petition to the Parliament on the 15th of August 1662, complain- ing of the said Mr Wilkie, who refused, not because he wanted funds, for it is stated in the lady's petition that " he has paid and satisfied several persons whom he has been pleased to favour." The Parliament ordered Mr Wilkie, as collector of ,1;he vacant stipends, to pay the money. Acta. Pari. Scot. vol. vii. Appendix, p. 89. t Acta Pari. Scot. vol. vii. Appendix, p. 78. J Ibid. p. 79. 670 PRELIMINARIES OF THE [1661. was ordered to be paid to various clergj'men, and the widows and children of others, in sums chiefly varying from L.50to L.lOO each. Others are mentioned wlio were to be recommended to the King.* With all these undeniable facts, as recorded in the Minutes of the Parliament, it is really preposterous for the Presbyterians to allege that they were deceived by the King at the Restoration. It is true the Episcopal Church was not in existence till upwards of one year and a half after the return of Charles II., for Bishop Sydserff" of Galloway was the only one of the old Prelates who sur- vived, and he appears to have been in England at the time. The King owed no favour to the Presbyterians, who in 1650 took up arms in his favour from no feeling of loyalty, but because he had conformed to the Solemn League and Covenant. Their principles were completely influenced by their fanaticism, and by their hatred to OromwelFs " sectarian army." The proceedings of the Parliament of 1G61, therefore, though nothing was said or en- acted in favour of the Episcopal Church, sufficiently decided that Presbyterianism would not be established. On the 12th of July the Parliament was adjourned to the 12th of March 1662, and the Earl of Middleton, attended by the Clerk Register, proceeded to Court, carrying with him all the acts passed during the sittings. It appears from an entry, dated April 29, that Dr James Sharp, who is designated one of the King's chaplains, was appointed to accompany the Lord Chancellor Glencairn and the Earl of Rothes to London. The prudence of Middleton, in " quashing all the fanatic zeal," secured for him a flattering recep- tion at the Court, and immediately after his arrival a Scottish Privy Council was called, which was attended by the King and those of the English Privy Council who were appointed members of that of Scotland. The grand discussion was on the establishment of the Church in Scotland, and Sir George Mackenzie of Rosehaugh has preserved an account of this important meeting. He states that to surprise the Earls of Lauderdale, Crawfurd, and such others as were suspected of Presbyterianism, the Earl of Middleton was ap- pointed to introduce the subject. Addressing the King his Lord- ship said — " May it please your Majesty, you may perceive by the account I have now given of your affairs in Scotland that there is no present government as yet established in that Church. Pres- • Acta Pari. Scot. vol. vii. Appendix, p. 83, 84, 85. 1661.] RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 671 bytery is, after a long usurpation, now at last rescinded ; the Co- venant, whereby men thought they were obliged to it, is now de- clared to have been unlawful, and the acts of Parliament whereby it was fenced are removed ; so that it is arbitrary to your Ma- jesty to choose what government you will fix there, for to your Majesty this is, by the last act of supremacy, declared to belong. But if your Majesty do not interpose, then Episcopacy, which was unjustly invaded at once with your royal power, will return to its former vigour." This was followed by a speech from the Earl of Glencairn, as Lord Chancellor, the sentiments in which are extraor- dinary, considering the Covenanting and Presbyterian zeal which his Lordship's family had evinced from the Reformation. " The insolence of the Presbyterians," said his Lordship, " had so far dissatisfied all loyal subjects and wise men that six for one in Scot- land longed for Episcopacy, by which no rebellion was ever hatched, that government having still owned the royal interest ; whereas [Calvinism and] Presbytery had never been introduced in any country without blood and rebellion, as at Geneva, in France during their civil wars, in Holland, when they revolted from Spain, and now twice in Scotland — once by the Regent Moray, when Queen Mary was banished, and lastly in 1637." The Earl of Rothes here added to Glencairn's statements, that though he was too young to have " seen the rise of that innovation [in 1637], yet in 1648 he was witness to their ruining of the Engagement, and in 1649 and 1650 to their indiscreet usage of his Majesty." The Earl of Lauderdale argued that this was a motion of great importance, on which they required to think seriously, and obtain the most authentic informa- tion, as on the result of it depended the peace of the Scottish people, who were not very manageable in religious matters ; and he suggested that either a General Assembly be called, the Provincial Synods consulted, or that the King should summon some of the leading ministers to a conference at Westminster. " All these three ways," replied the Earl of Middleton, " tend to continue Presbytery, for it was most probable that [the] ministers who had governed all of late would have such influence as to choose ruling elders of the same minds, and both would be unwilling to quit their hold ; or at least, the leading men, whom the inferior clergy durst not disown whilst that Hierarchy stood, durst not quarrel the re- solutions of their Rabbis, who would adhere to the oath thay had 672 PRELIMINARIES OF THE [1661. taken, and defend stoutly their own supremacy ; and, therefore, neither a General nor a Provincial Assembly were fit judges, nor could they be now called together, seeing Presbytery was abro- gated ; and to call these were to restore them, and to infringe the Act- Rescissory." Silence ensued after this declaration, which was interrupted by the English Chancellor Clarendon, who observing the Earl of Crawfurd carefully abstaining from taking any part in the debate, pressed the King that all should express their opinions on a matter with which all were concerned. Sir George Mackenzie declares that Clarendon wanted Crawfurd either to disown Presby- terianism, or by maintaining it to displease the King, which would hazard his office of Lord High Treasurer, and transfer it to Mid- dleton. Thus compelled to speak, the Earl of Crawfurd earnestly urged that the Provincial Synods should be consulted, assuring the King that six for one in Scotland were in favour of Presbytery. He contended that the offences of reformers ought not to be charged on the Reformation — that irregularities had attended the most salutary changes — and that it was better to continue that form of [church] government which was now past all unavoidable hazards and errors, than attempt another which would at first be liable to similar inconveniences. He denied that the Act-Rescissory excluded Presbytei-y, which had been secured by acts of General Assemblies sanctioned by the late King's High Commissioners, and still unrepealed. The Duke of Hamilton, who was then a sup- porter of Lauderdale, and opposed to Middleton, here observed, that the Act-Rescissory was only passed smoothly, because his Ma- jesty had promised to continue Presbyterian government in his letter to the ministers of Edinburgh. Lord Chancellor Clarendon, turning to the King, said — " Indeed, Sir, Lauderdale has spoken like a judicious sober man, and has given your Majesty a very secure advice ;* but. Sir, the Earl of Crawfurd has owned all that ever was done in Scotland in their rebellion, and God preserve me from hving in a country where the Church is independent from the State, and may subsist by their own acts, for then all Churchmen may be kings." This closed the debate, the King declaring that the majority were in favour of the Episcopal Church, and that he would settle it with • Sir George Mackenzie observes — " For he [Clarendon] used to compliment Lauderdale, that his Majesty might think he loved his person, and so might not con- struct any thing that he said against him as proceeding from malice." IGGl.] RE-ESTABI,ISHMERT OP THE CHURCH. G73 out delay. Clarendon perceived Crawfurd much displeased, and whispered to him in a kind tone that if he were not such a rigid Presbyterian he [Clarendon] would be his friend and servant. " My Lord,"" answered Crawfurd, " I was your friend when you needed much my assistance," referring to his intercession by letters with the King on his behalf in 1653, when he incurred the resent- ment of the Queen-mother and the Duke of York. The Earls of Glencairn and Rothes were ordered to Scotland, by the advice, it is said, of the Earl of Lauderdale, who disliked the inclination of the former to support the Earl of Middleton's interest, and a letter from the King, dated 14th August, was pre- sented to the Scottish Privy Council on the 5th of September, which contained the official announcement of the re-establish- ment of the Church. This important document is as follows — " Whereas in the month of August 1C60 we did, by our letter to the Presbytery of Edinburgh, declare our purpose to maintain the government of the Church of Scotland settled by law, and our Parliament having since rescinded all the acts since the troubles began referring to that government, but also declared all these pretended Parliaments null and void, and left to us the settling and securing church government : therefore, in compliance with that act-rescissory, according to our late proclamation, dated at Whitehall the 10th of June, and in contemplation of the incon- veniencies from the church government, as it hath been exer- cised these twenty-three years past, of the unsuitableness there- of to our monarchical estate, of the sadly experienced confu- sions which have been caused during the late troubles by the violence done to our royal prerogative, and to the government civil and ecclesiastical, settled by unquestionable authority : We, from our respect to the glory of God, and the good and interest of the Protestant religion, from our pious care and princely zeal for the order, unity, peace, and stabiHty of that Church, and its better harmony with the government of the Churches of England and Ireland, have, after mature deliberation, declared to those of our Council here our firm resolution to interpose our royal authority for the restoring of that Church to its right government by Bishops, " Sir George Mackenzie's Memoirs of the Affairs of Scotland from the Eestoration of Charles II. to 1G70, edited by Thomas Thomson, Esq. Edinburgh, 4to. 1821, p. 52-56. 43 674 PRELIMINARIES OP THE [16G1. as it was by law before the late troubles, during the reigns of our royal father and grandfather of blessed memory, and as it now stands settled by law. Of this our royal pleasure concerning church government you are to take notice, and to make intima- tion thereof in such a way and manner as you shall judge most ex- pedient and effectual. — Our will is, that ye forthwith take such course with the rents belonging to the several Bishoprics and Deanries, that they may be restored and made useful to the Church, and that according to justice and the standing law. And, moreover, you are to inhibit the assembling of ministers in their several synodal meetings throughout the kingdom until our further pleasure ; and to keep a watchful eye over all who, upon any pretence whatsoever, shall, by discoursing, preaching, re- viling, or any irregular and unlawful way, endeavour to alienate the affections of our people, or dispose them to an ill opinion of us and the government, and to the disturbance of the peace of the kingdom." It thus appears that no deception or treachery was practised towards the Presbyterians. If they understood the King's declra*- ation in his letter of August 16G0 to the Presbytery of Edinburgh, that he would " maintain the government of the Church of Scot- land settled hj law — to refer to the Presbyterian system which they had established from 1G39 to 1G49, it was a most erroneous notion, for which they could only blame themselves. The King, on the other hand, by the phrase settled hj laio, now evidently indicat- ed the episcopal government before the outbreak of the Covenant, which it is undeniable was the legal establishment, solemnly rati- fied by several Parliaments and General Assemblies. The pro- ceedings of the Parliament of 1G61, rescinding and declaring null and void all the Parliaments from 1G39 or 1G40 to 1649 — the sums voted to the suffering Episcopal clergy, their widows, and children — the denunciation of the Covenants as illegal — and all acts in connection with ecclesiastical matters, to say nothing of private information — were conclusive that the Episcopal Church would be re-instated, and the Church was at least as much entitled to be established as Presbyterianism. Sir George Mackenzie states, that after the King's letter was read the Privy Council were silent, until the Earls of Tweeddale and Kincardine urged that they should write to the King, and 16G1.J RE-ESTABLISHMENT OF THE CHURCH. 675 advise him to consult the provincial synods, by which course, what- ever was the result, the King would not be blamed. This, how- ever, was opposed, and the Earl of Tweeddale consented to the proclamation which was immediately issued, and a letter was sent to the King, intimating that the Privy Council had rendered due obedience to his command. On the 18th of September the Privy Council issued a proclama- tion, prohibiting any who were "fanatically principled" to be elected magistrates of royal burghs under severe penalties, and though this was not ratified by an act of Parliament it was in no instance opposed by the burghs. In another letter on the 19th of Novem- ber the King ordered the Privy Council to enjoin that in all con- gregations Queen Catherine, the Queen his mother, and the Duke of York his brother, should be prayed for by name, and assigned as his excuse for sending such a command to the Privy Council " the not restitution as yet of Episcopacy."" " In the same letter likewise it was ordered," says Sir George Mackenzie, " that a proclamation should be issued against Papists ; and generally it was observed in those times that whenever any thing was done in favour of Episcopacy, there was also at the same time somewhat done against Popery, for allaying the humour of the people, who were bred to believe that Episcopacy was a limb of Antichrist." On the 12th of December all Presbyteries were prohibited to admit or induct ministers to parishes ; and in obedience to a letter from the King, dated the 2d of January 1GG2, forbidding the " meetings of all synods and [kirk] sessions," the Privy Council on the 19th " discharged them by express proclamation, which," says Sir George Mackenzie, " was misliked by many as tending to encourage all profanity, since after that proclamation there was no visible authority ecclesiastic whereby scandals could be punished ;" but we shall soon see that this was a most erroneous opinion. Every arrangement was thus made for the re-establishment of the Church, and it is undeniable that it would have been achieved without the concurrence and in defiance of the opposition of the individual who was at the time nominated to the Archbishopric of St Andrews. 676 [1G61. CHAPTER II. THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. The re-establishment of the Episcopal Church being determined by the Government, a new consecration was necessary, as Bishop Sydserff, formerly of Galloway, was the only survivor of the Spot- tiswoode succession of Prelates, and the Church was virtually ex- tinct. The persons selected for the episcopal function to be con- secrated in London were James Sharp for the Archbishopric of St Andrews, Andrew Fairfoull for the Archbishopric of Glasgow, James Hamilton for the Bishopric of Galloway, and Robert Leigh- ton for the Bishopric of Dunblane. As a reward of Bishop Syd- serff s sufferings and loyalty it was resolved to translate him to Orkney, where in his declining years he was less likely to be annoyed by any agitation or clamour. A short account of the Bishops of the Second Consecration is an appropriate introduction. Who in Scotland has not heard of James Sharp, Archbishop of St Andrews? Execrated by the Presbyterians as their Judas, traitor, and betrayer, and denounced by them as one of the most odious, cruel, and immoral of men ; extolled by their opponents for his dignified conduct, great abilities, and personal virtues! Heartily hated by one party, sincerely beloved and zealously de- fended by another. Archbishop Sharp must have been no ordi- nary man thus to obtain the transmission of his name to posterity through the two extremes of unmitigated abuse, any allusion to whom still excites his maligners to a state of insanity — and of devoted respect, whose atrocious murder by Presbyterian fanatics will never be forgotten. It is unnecessary to enter into biographical details of the early career of this celebrated Prelate. The Presbyterians, in accord- ance with their vindictive principles, were so mean as to asperse 1661.] THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF THE SECOND CONSECRATION. 677 his very birth, and to record the most infamous falsehoods of his parentage, which was a thousand times more respectable than that of many of their own. His paternal grandfather, David Sharp, a native of Perthshire, became a merchant of considerable eminence in Aberdeen, and married Magdalene, a daughter of Hallyburton of Pitcur ; and his father, William Sharp, was sheriff-clerk of the adjacent county of Banff. His mother, Isabel Leslie, a daughter of Leshe of Kininvy, was nearly related to the Earls of Rothes, and is described as a woman of extraordinary endowments, held in honour for her wisdom and piety, who lived to see the Restora- tion, and, as some allege, her son elevated to the Scottish Primacy. The Archbishop was born in the castle of Banff, the county town, in May 1618, and was baptized by the episcopal incumbent accord- ing to the form then recognized by the Established Episcopal Church. He was educated at King's College, Aberdeen, where he took the degree of Master of Arts, and heard the prelections of the celebrated Doctors Forbes and Barron ; and he is allowed to have greatly distinguished himself, and to have given ample indi- cations of his abilities. After he left King's College he went to England, where he appears to have resided during the turmoils of the Covenant in 1638, when he was only twenty years of age. In England he became acquainted with Hammond, Saunderson, and Jeremy Taylor, and it is said that he was only prevented from prose- cuting his studies at Oxford by the distracted state of the kingdom. At his return to Scotland he met his relation the Covenanting Earl of Rothes at the house of Viscount Oxenford, a few miles south of Dalkeith, and this must have been before August 1641, when the Earl of Rothes died, leaving his son and heir only eleven years of age. It is said that by the interest of Rothes he was appointed a regent or professor in St Leonard's College, St Andrews, now united to St Salvador's College, though this statement is by no means clear, and no less a person than Alexander Henderson is said to have recommended him to the situation which he obtained. Mr James Guthrie, hanged in 1661 for high treason, was at the time a Professor in St Andrews, and he exerted his influence im- successfully against Sharp in favour of a Mr John Sinclair to whom he afterwards demitted his own professorship. Shai-p was on bad terms with Sinclair for some time, and one Sunday he struck him in the presence of the Principal and others at the 678 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [1661. college table. This, it is alleged, was caused by Sinclair giving him the lie direct in a discussion which the latter maintained in favour of Episcopacy and against the Covenant ; but it is certain that Sharp made a most ample acknowledgment for this outrage, of which he sincerely repented. At that period he unavoidably conformed, like many others, to the Presbyterian system esta- blished by the Covenanters after 1639. In January 1G48 he was admitted minister of the parish and royal burgh of Crail in the east of Fife, to which he was appointed by the Earl of Crawfurd, to whom it is said he was recommended by Mr James Bruce, mi- nister of the neighbouring parish of Kingsbarns, who, however, was not altogether disinterested in this matter, for, if we are to credit a ridiculous story told by Wodrow, there was a love-affair between Sharp and Bruce's daughter, whom the future Archbishop intended to make his wife, but this connection never took place. His predecessors in Crail were Mr George Hallyburton, admitted in 1635, and expelled in 1638, Mr Arthur Myrton, and Mr John Hart.* It is contended by the author of a sketch of Archbishop Sharp's Life, published in 1719, that he was all along opposed to Presby- terianism, or at least to the Solemn League and Covenant ; but it is certain that he must have complied with the National Cove- nant when he obtained his professorship at St Andrews, and with the Solemn League at his admission to the parish of Crail. This is evident from the fact that he soon obtained the confidence of the most prominent Covenanting preachers and defenders of their system ; but he lived in exciting times, when many were induced to comply with the dominant faction for their own security, or were obliged to leave the kingdom. His affability and pleasing manners rendered him popular with his parishioners, yet he was a strict disciplinarian, and zealous in the discharge of his duty. He soon was invited to become one of the ministers of Edinburgh, but the Presbytery of St Andrews and Synod of Fife refused to accept his resignation of Crail, and though this was subsequently reversed by the General Assembly, it was prevented by the inva- sion of the English under Cromwell. In August 1651 he incurred • Catalogue of the Ministers in the Synod of Fife from 1560 to 1700, in Appendix to Selections from the Minutes of the Synod of Fife from 1611 to 1687. Edinburgh, 4to. printed for the Abbotsford Club, 1837. 1661.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 679 the displeasure of General Monk, who put him and several preach- ers on board a vessel at Eroughty Ferry near Dundee, and sent them prisoners to England ; but he contrived to obtain his liberty by " certain base compliances'''' to Cromwell according to his Pres- byterian enemies, though the nature of these " base compliances'" is not stated. He was probably less violent than his wild com- panions, whose fanatical principles he held in detestation. He obtained his liberty, leaving his associates in bondage, and returned to his parish of Crail. These were the principal events of Sharp's life to the time he was sent to London on a special mission to Cromwell, though the Presbyterians after his elevation to the Primacy circulated all kinds of gossipping and scurrilous stories against him. The origin of this mission will be explained by a reference to the state of parties in Scotland before and after the murder of Charles I. In 1648 the " Engagement,'''' approved by the Scottish Parhament in 1661, was formed for liberating the King, and this caused a violent schism among the Presbyterians, who denounced in their General Assembly those who were connected with it as Engagers. This continued till a new feud was excited by some preachers in the western counties, who in a public remonstrance maintained that it was sinful, and a breach of the Solemn League and Covenant, to associate or have any intercourse with Malignants, including as such all the Engagers, and the royalists who had served under Montrose. They even maintained that it was dishonouring to God to accept their assistance in any way against their common enemy Cromwell. This party were known as Remonstrators or Pro- testors, while their Presbyterian opponents, who thought differently, were designated Besolutioners. The Resolutioners may be consider- ed as the conservatives, and the Remonstrators as republican en- thusiasts, both parties bitterly hating each other, yet submissively courting Cromwell. Sharp was accordingly sent to London as the agent of the Resolutioners, and James Guthrie, then minister of Stirling, Patrick Gillespie, and others, were deputed to manage the affairs of the Remonstrators. Sharp and Guthrie were thus again brought into collision, and probably Guthrie''s treatment of him at St Andrews commenced that animosity which con- tinued between them during the whole of their after life. It is probable that Sharp was selected for this mission on account of 680 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [16G1. the connections he had formed in England. Bishop Burnet says of him — " He had been long in England, and was an active and eager man. He had a very small proportion of learning, and was but an indifferent preacher : but having some acquaintance with the Presbyterian ministers in London, whom Cromwell was then courting much, he was by an error that proved fatal to the whole party sent up in their name to London, where he continued for some years soliciting their concerns, and making himself known to all sorts of people." This outline of Sharp's character, however, must be received with suspicion, as Burnet was his personal enemy, and the Bishop of Salisbury delineated his foes in the most un- scrupulous manner. He adds that Sharp then " seemed more than ordinary zealous for Presbytery and when on one occasion Dr Wilkins, afterwards Bishop of Chester, who had married Cromwell's sister, declared to him his belief that if order was not restored the Protector would be compelled to set up Episcopacy in the kingdom, apparently meaning both England and Scotland, Sharp " could not bear the thought, and rejected it with horror." If there is any truth in this story, Sharp would doubtless " reject with horror" any " Episcopacy" which such a man as Cromwell could possibly " set up." The future Primate so much distinguished himself at London by his talents and address that Cromwell is said to have remarked to some of his friends — " That gentleman after the Scotch way ought to be styled Sharp of that Ilk.'''' As long as he was con- nected with the Presbyterian party for whom he acted, his piety, zeal, and general conduct, were the themes of their loudest praise. The eminent " flower" Samuel Rutherford on one occasion em- braced him affectionately, declaring that " he saw that out of the most rough and knotty timber Christ could make a vessel of mercy;*" and Baillie, after expressing his horror at the Protestors, adds — " The great instrument of God to cross their evil designs has been that very worthy, pious, wise, and diligent young man, Mr James Sharp." But his negotiations with Cromwell, Monk, and others before the Restoration, are affairs with which the Episcopal Church had no concern, though these materially affected his circumstances and influenced his change of sentiments. His abilities recom- mended him especially to General Monk, who at Coldstream indu- ced him to draw up the able declaration of his own intentions, which 1661.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. G81 prepared the English nation for the great event of the restoration of the monarchy. In a word, Sharp was employed by the Resolu- tioners to attend to their interests at London and at Breda. Now, those very Resolutioners were actually hesitating about the prin- ciples they were inclined to adopt. They sent a deputation to Breda to assure King Charles II. that they were attached to his interest, and were happy to hear of his constancy to the Protestant religion — " that for themselves they were no enemies to moderate Episcopacy, and only desired not to be pressed with such things in God's worship as by many were reckoned indifferent, and by ten- der consciences unlawful." ISIr Robert Douglas, who was a great leader of the Resolutionists, declared, in allusion to the measures projected by the English Privy Council to reinstate the Church of England, that "whatever kirk-government be settled there [in England] will have an influence upon this kingdom, for the generality of the new upstart generation have no love to presbyterial govern- ment, but are wearied of that yoke, feeding themselves with the fancy of Episcopacy, or moderate Episcopacy." These, however, were not the real sentiments of Mr Robert Douglas, but his recorded admission of the state of public feeling ; for in a sermon which he preached, on the 1 st of May 1G60, at the opening of the Synod of Lothian, if we are to credit Wodrow he stated — " The government of presbytery is good, but Prelacy is neither good in Christian policy or civil. Some men say. May we not have a moderate Episcopacy ? But it is a plant God never planted, and the ladder whereby Anti- christ mounted his throne. Bishops got caveats, and never kept one of them, and will just do the like again. We have abjured Episco- pacy; let us not lick it up again." Yet notwithstanding this senseless raving, Wodrowthus corroborates in his own way the public feeling towards Presbyterianism described by Douglas; — " Our Nobility and gentry were remarkably changed to the worse. Few of such as had been active in the former years were now alive, and those few were marked out for ruin. A young generation had sprung up under the Enghsh government, educated under penury and op- pression ; their estates were under burden, and many of them had little other prospect of mending their fortunes but by the King's favour, and so were ready to act that part he was best pleased with. Several of the most leading managers and members of Parliament had taken up a dislike to the strictness of Presbyterian 682 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [1661. discipline. Middleton had not forgot his excommunication, or the pronouncing of it, and others had been disgusted at their being obhged to satisfy for their lewdness and scandals, and upon this turn they were wilHng to enjoy a httle more latitude."* All this is another conclusive proof of the oppressions and cruelties inflicted on the people by the Covenanting Presbyterians during their do- mination. Wodrow asserts that the letter from the King to Douglas and the Presbytery of Edinburgh, delivered by Sharp on the 1st of September, was his own " penning." In addition to the declara- tion that the King was to " protect and preserve the government of the Church of Scotland as it is settled hy law^'' it was stated in the letter — " We will also take care that the authority and acts of the General Assembly at St Andrews and [adjourned to] Dun- dee 1651, be owned and stand in force until we shall call another General Assembly, which we purpose to do as soon as our affairs will permit." Now, although Wodrow designates the words — " as it is settled hy law'''' — a " double-faced expression," there was no inconsistency in the reference to the General Assembly convened at St Andrews in 1651, and adjourned to Dundee, where it ter- minated in a ludicrous and abrupt manner. The legality, so far as it went, of that Assembly was acknowledged by the Resolutioners, from whom Sharp was the delegate to London ; while it was vio- lently denied and denounced by the Bemonstrators or Protesters, such as James Guthrie, Patrick Gillespie, and others — by Wodrow himself, who raved against it as a " packed meeting." But it is impossible in these limits to enter minutely into the Presbyterian feuds and disputes. Wodrow acknowledges that Sharp designed this letter against the Protesters,-^ and this is an important admis- sion in favour of the Archbishop. It was also in accordance with the King's announcements to the Privy Council and the Parliament that until the ecclesiastical constitution of the kingdom was pro- perly arranged, the several kii'k-sessions, presbyteries, and synods, were in the meanwhile to continue, on the condition that " the ministers will keep within the compass of their station, meddling only with matters ecclesiastic, and promoting our authority and interest with our subjects against all opposers ; and that they will take special notice of such who, by preaching, or private conven- ' Wodrow's History, vol. i. folio, 1721, p. 20. f ^bid. vol. i. p. 14. IGGl.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. G83 tides, or any other way, transgress the limits of their calling by endeavouring to corrupt the people, or sow seeds of disaffection to us or our government." All the negotiations of the Presbyterians with Charles II. were conditional. They were to acknowledge him as their sovereign only if he conformed to the Solemn League and Covenant ; but as the King was restored without any terms, and without the aid of the Presbyterians, they as a party had no claim upon him. When General Monk commenced his march from the North of England to London in January 1G60, Mr Robert Douglas, and other leading men of the Resolutioners, applied to him to re- ceive Sharp as their representative. During the seven following months Sharp was in close communication with the principal persons of all parties ; with Monk, and the chief of the English and Scottish Nobility then in London ; with the Episcopal clergy and the Presbyterian ministers there ; and with the King and the members of his Court. He set out for Breda on the 4th, and returned to London on the 2Gth of May. While thus en- gaged he maintained an active correspondence with Douglas and other preachers. Those letters are now preserved in the Library of the University of Glasgow, but a very elaborate abstract of them is given by Wodrow.* It was evidently the opinion of Douglas, with which Wodrow coincides, that Sharp was persuaded to abandon the Presbyterians at Breda, where he was much in the company of Lord Chancellor Clarendon, and often with the King, who treated him with marked attention and familiarity. Previous to this he had been elected Professor of Ecclesiastical History in St Mary's College, St Andrews ;-f- and while at Breda he was appointed chaplain to the King for Scotland, with an annual salary of L.200. Wodrow is accused of garbling Sharp''s letters to Douglas, but this is denied by Dr Burns of Paisley, who states in his Glasgow edition of Wodrow's History that he com- pared the letters with the abstracts, and asserts " without hesita- tion, as a general result of the inquiry, that while the historian does by no means conceal his design of exposing Sharp's treachery, • In his Introduction to his " History of the Sufferings of the Church of Scotland from the Restoration to the Revolution." t On the 16th of January 1660. Catalogue of the Ministers of the Synod of Fife, in Appendix to Selections from Minutes of the Synod, printed for the Abbotsford Club. Edinburgh, 4to. 1837. 684 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [1661. he had it in his power from these documents to have held him up to detestation in still blacker colours had he quoted all the ex- pressions of devoted affection — all the solemn protestations of attachment to Presbytery — all the specimens of mean adulation — and all the bitter vituperations against his opponents, which these letters contain." This is strong language, but when we consider the peculiar opinions and partizanship of Dr Burns, and his bitter hatred to the Episcopal Church, it is what was to be expected from him ; and it is as impossible for a Roman Catholic to cease from abusing Luther as it is for a Presbyterian to write with temper on Arch- bishop Sharp. Without disputing the correctness of Wodrow's abstract of the letters to Douglas, they in reality afford no evi- dence of his insincerity, and there is no reason to believe that he was unfaithful to the cause of his mission. AVe have seen that the Resolutioners actually intimated to Charles II. at Breda that they were " no enemies to moderate Episcopacy." When Sharp returned to Scotland, in the beginning of September 16G0, he re- ceived the thanks of his friends for his conduct ; and he distinctly declared to them that " he had found the King very affectionate to Scotland, and resolved not to wrong the settled government of the Church ; but he apprehended they were mistaken who went about to estahlish the Presbyterian government^ The fears entertained by the Presbyterians of the re-establish- ment of the Episcopal Church are indicated in Baillie's letters to Sharp. In one, dated April 16, 1660, the former writes in re- ference to the expected restoration of the King — " If it please God to work out this wonder, his only work, marvellous in our eyes, and more in the eyes of the posterity, to bring home our sweet prince in peace, / th'uik in this case the greatest pull will be about Episcopacy and he then says to Sharp — " Concerning this great difficulty, I suggest unto you this my advice to cause set with all possible speed some serious and judicious pen, I think Dr Reynolds' were the fittest, in a few sheets of paper to print the tenets and point out the writings of the present leaders of the Episcopal party — Dr Taylor, Mr Pearce, Dr Hammond, Mr Thorn- dyke, Dr Heylin, Bishop Wren, Bishop Bramhall, and others."* In a letter to Baillie, dated at Edinburgh, 5th September 1660, Sharp writes — "His Majesty hath been pleased to send by me a gracious • Baillie's Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing, Esq. vol. iii. p. 400. 1661.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 685 letter to the Presbytery of Edinburgh, to be communicated to all the Presbyteries in Scotland, which I am confident will satisfy all who arc satisfiable : it will be printed, and within a day or two a copy transmitted to you. However the affairs of the Church of Eng- land may be disposed, which I see are tending to Episcopacy there, the blame whereof ought not to be laid on the King ; yet we need fear ho violation of our settlement here, if the Lord give us to prize our own mercy and know our duty. I have brought a letter from some city ministers, bearing an account of their late proceed- ing to an accommodation for moderated Episcopacy ; and the Church contests there are swallowed up by those who are for Pre- lacy in the former way, and those who are for a regulated Episco- pacy. The King, by his declaration, which will speedily be pub- lished, will endeavour a composing of these differences until a Synod be called.''* On the 13th of December Sharp again wrote to Baillie — " I shall only tell you this, that I am confident at this Parliament there will be no meddling with the matter of our Church and Baillie replies — " If the Parliament meddle with our Covenants they will grieve many, and me with the first ; for the time you can help many things [as much] as any man I know, but be assured no man's court lasts long." Sharp wrote to Baillie in January 1G61, announcing that he had secured to him the presen- tation from the King to be Principal of the University of Glasgow, and complaining of some violent conduct exhibited by the Synod of Glasgow, Various of Baillie's letters to Sharp are preserved, but they contain no allusions to the contemplated ecclesiastical arrangements of any importance. Baillie nevertheless anticipated the abrogation of Presbyterian- ism, and we find him thus writing, in a short letter to Sharp, dated 15th April — " The matter of our changes be near my heart; I think they will hasten my death, yet I make no noise about them."" Five days afterwards he addressed a long letter to the Earl of Lauderdale, complaining of the passing of the Act-Kescis- sory on the 28th of March, annulling the Covenanting Parliaments between 1640 and 1649 inclusive — " pulling down," he says, " all our laws at once which concerned our Church since 1633. — If you have gone with your heart to forsake your Covenant, to coun- tenance the introduction of Bishops and [Service] Books, and • Baillie's Letters and Journals, vol, iii. p. 410. 686 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [1G61. strengthening the King by your advice in these things, I think you a prime transgressor, and Hable among the first to answer to God for that question, and opening a door which in haste will not be closed, for persecution of a multitude of the best persons and most loyal subjects that are in all the three dominions. — If you or Mr Sharp, whom we trusted as our own souls, have swerved towards Chancellor [Clarendon] Hyde's principles, as now we see many do, you have much to answer for." On the 23d of April, which was the day of the King's corona- tion. Sharp preached before the Scottish Parliament, and on Monday the 29th he set out from Edinburgh to London with the Earls of Glencairn and Rothes, as appointed by the Parliament. Before he left Edinburgh he wrote to Baillie — " I am commanded to take a new toil, but I tell you it is not in order to a change of the Church. I easily foresee what occasion of jealousy and false surmises this my journey will give, but whenever the Lord shall return me, I trust my carriage through the Lord's help shall be such as my dear friend Mr Baillie will not condemn me. The reasons of my journey cannot be communicated in this way, but you may think they are pressing, else I may be charged with exceeding folly at this time to enter upon the stage." On the 29th of August Baillie wrote a reply to this letter, which he sent to Sharp at London, addressing him as Bear James. " What you are doing there now," he says, " I can learn from no man. I am sorry that none of your old friends keep correspondence with you at this so necessary a time. For myself, I rest on what you wrote to me when you went from this, that your journey was not for any change in our church. Divers times, since the King came home, by your letters you made us confident there was not any change intended for us. Blessed be God, hitherto there has been none offered. What now there among you may be in agitation you on place know. You were the most wise, honest, diligent, and successful agent of the nation in the late dangers of our church in Cromweirs time ; your experience and power now are greater. In this very great danger apprehended by many of other changes and sorer troubles from the Episcopal party both here and there, I hope God shall make you [an] happy instrument to prevent all our fears, and to allay all our present sorrowful perplexities, as you have oft been before. Let others think and speak of you as 1G61.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 687 they please, and in their folly give you matter of provocation, if you were not wise^ grave, and fearing of God, yet you shall deceive us notably, and do us a very evident evil turn, before I believe it. Since first acquaintance you have ever been very faithful and loving to myself on all occasions." Baillie then requests two favours from Sharp. The one was that he would " help the Col- lege [of Glasgow] in its very great necessity, not one of the Pro- fessors having gotten a sixpence of stipend, nor will get in haste and the University being L.IOOO behind for " last year's table," in addition to upwards of 2.5,000 merks of debt contracted by the alleged extravagance of Baillie's predecessoi-, Mr Patrick Gilles- pie. The other favour was — " If his Majesty be pleased to send for any from this to speak with anent our Church, as he has twice declared he purposes, you would see effectually that I be none of them ; for neither am I able, in this my sixtieth year, and frequent infirmities, for any such journey, whether by sea or land, nor does my mind serve to give advice for the least change in our Church, as ye well know.""* This letter induced Sharp to exert himself in behalf of the College of Glasgow ; and Baillie wrote to him on the 1st of October — " I was glad when I looked on the double of my last to you, to find your mistake to be clean the con- trary way. Whatever grief my heart has from our changes, and is like to have till I die, I hope it shall stand with terms of great respect to you, from whom I have received so many favours, and still expect to receive moi'e." He concludes familiarly — " James, I doubt not of your kindness, and if I did, I would not thus trouble you with my letters signing himself " your twenty year old friend and servant." ■)* It thus appears that Dr Sharp up to October 1661 was the pro- minent man of his party, and held in the highest repute as " wise, grave, and fearing of God." His great abilities are amply certified by Baillie, who, however, was so perverted in his judgment by Covenanting prejudices, that he forgot his own episcopal ordina- tion, and that he had once recorded his attachment to the episco- pal function in the strong statement — " Bishops I love.'''' It is unnecessary to enter into details respecting Sharp's conformity to the Episcopal Church, and his defection from Presbyterianism. One point is clear, that he betrayed the interest of no party, for • Baillie's Letters and Journals, voL iii. p. 473, 471. f ^fi'^- vol. iii. p. 482. 688 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [1661. he had ably and efficiently performed the duties assigned to him while acting as the delegate of the Presbyterians. After this he was undeniably a free agent, and as such was entitled to change his opinions as much as any other man. His case, moreover, was not singular, for nine other Presbyterian ministers of the moderate party, or Hesolutioners, most of whom were ordained before the out- break of the Rebellion, became Bishops of the newly restored Church. The charge that Sharp was bribed by the offer of the Archbishop- ric of St Andrews is unworthy of notice, but it was, after all, no very great matter as it respects income, and in 1831 the whole revenue of the See, as paid to the Scottish Exchequer, was only L.1544. Baillie narrates the defection of Archbishop Sharp with less acrimony than could have been expected. He says — " At that time it was that Dr Sheldon, now Bishop of London, and^Dr Mor- ley, did poison Mr Sharp our agent, whom we trusted, who piece and piece in so cunning a way has trepanned us, as we have never win so much as to petition either King, Parliament, or Council. My Lord Hyde [is] the great minister of state who guided all, and to whom at his lodging in Worcester-house the King weekly and oftener uses to resort, and keep counsel with him some hours ; and so with the King Mr Sharp became more intimate than any man almost of our nation. It seems he has undertaken to do in our Church that which now he has performed easily, and is still in acting. He had for co-operators the Commissioner [Middleton], Chancellor [Glencairn], and Rothes. Lauderdale and Crawfurd were a while contrary, but seeing the King peremptory they gave over."* This is a very different story from the extraordinary asser- tion of Bishop Burnet that the Act-Rescissory of 1661 was sug- gested at the Privy Council table in a drunken bout. Dr M'Crie's way of accounting for the restoration of the Episcopal Church is worthy of the Presbyterian sect to which he belonged. We are gravely told — " Charles II.'s maxim was that Presbyterianism was not fit for a gentleman. His dissipated and irreligious courtiers were of the same opinion, and therefore Episcopacy was re-esta- blished." This is a most extraordinary specimen of arriving at a self-complacent conclusion. Archbishop Sharp's presentation-charter to the Primacy and • Principal Baillie to Mr William Spang, May 12, 1G62. Letters and Jounials, 4to. vol. iii. p. 484, 485. IGGl.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. G89 See of St Andrews by the King, is dated Whitehall, 14th Novem- ber IGGl. It sets forth that " in the time not long since past, during nearly twenty-three years of disorder, many acts were passed in pretended Parliaments and pretended judicatories in this our ancient kingdom of Scotland, for the total extirpation of the eccle- siastical constitution by Archbishops and Bishops, contrary to the stability, law, and constitution of the Church of our said kingdom, and to the prejudice of our royal power and prerogative, which things, by the act of the new session of our Parliament, held at Edinburgh on the 1st day of January last, are to be held, and are declared null and void from the beginning, so that the civil and ecclesiastical authority is now restored and renewed, according to the laws ordained previously to that most wicked rebellion and tumult ; and because, during that time, many who were appointed to the various functions of Archbishops and Bishops in our said kingdom, besides Deans and members of Chapters, are deceased, and their offices vacant, so that they cannot now be chosen accord- ing to the order prescribed by our dear grandfather James I. of eternal and glorious memory in his Parliament held at Edinburgh A.D. 1617 ; and considering also that the supplying of the said functions of Archbishops and Bishops in our said kingdom of Scotland rests with us since the death or deposition of the late in- cumbents, and particularly of the Archbishopric of St Andrews since the death of John [Spottiswoode] the last Archbishop, Pri- mate and Metropolitan of Scotland ; and being assured of the piety, prudence, erudition, and fidelity of our beloved Master James Sharp, Rector of the University of St Andrews, as one well qualified for our service in the Church ; therefore, by our royal authority and power, of our own free will and accord, we have made, created, and appointed, and by these presents do make, create, and appoint. Master James Sharp, Archbishop of the said Archbishopric of St Andrews, and Primate and Metropolitan of our whole kingdom of Scotland, giving and granting to him during his whole life the said Archbishopric of St Andrews, with all the benefices thereunto annexed." The words make and create in this document are to be understood as referring to the temporalities which the King was entitled to bestow as patron ; for Archbishop Sharp was ca- nonically consecrated to the spiritual or episcopal function by those who only were competent to invest him with that authority 44 690 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [1661. which the sovereign could not confer. The " lands, lordships, baronies, abbacies, provostships, mansions, castles, towers, forti- lages, manors, places, gardens, meadows, mills, woods, fisheries," are enumerated ; but all these, though apparently very impor- tant in the charter, were in reality insignificant, as the pro- prietors had surrendered to Charles I. on certain conditions a small annual feu-duty or superiority from these lands as a pro- vision for the Archbishop, under the name of Bishop's rents. It is admitted even by Wodrow that the aggregate annual amount of all the revenues of the Bishops after the Restoration did not exceed L..5000 sterling, and some of the Prelates had not above L.250. We have seen that the sum of L.l 544 only was derived from the Archdiocese in 1831, and applied to temporal purposes. " This, however," says Mr Lyon, " does not include the profits of the re- gality and commissary courts, as also the fines for compositions and intromissions, which must have been considerable. I should con- ceive the income must have been equal to L.4000 of our money, and even this was a small sum for so weighty and expensive a charge, and greatly below what it had been previous to the Refor- mation."* The sum of L.130 was to be deducted from Arch- bishop Sharp's revenue, and paid to the Principals of St Salvador's, St Leonard's, and St Mary's Colleges, forming the University of St Andrews, till a similar sum was procured from some other source. The clause in Archbishop Spottiswoode's charter, obliging him to lay aside the surplus of his income above 10,000 merks for the rebuilding of the cathedral, was withdrawn from that purpose, and ordered to be applied by Archbishop Sharp to the ei'ection of a suitable residence for himself and his successors, on account of the ruinous state of the castle of St Andrews, the ancient residence of the Archbishops. The " right, privilege, liberty, benefice, and quotes of testament," granted by Charles I. at the foundation of the Bishopric of Edinburgh in 1633, were excluded from Arch- bishop Sharp's charter.-f- The Archbishopric of Glasgow was conferred by a similar pre- sentation-charter on Andrew Fairfoull. He is stated to have been a son of John Fairfoull of the town of Anstruther in Fife, " History of St Andrews, Episcopal, Monastic, Academic, and Civil, by the Kev. C. J. Lyon, M.A. Edinburgh, 1843, vol. ii. p. 69. t History of St Andrews, by the Rev. C. J. Lyon, M.A. vol. ii. p. 68, 69, 381-388. 1661.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 691 who was probably John Fairfoull, mentioned as minister of An- struther Wester in 1613, and who died in 1625.* Archbishop Gladstanes, in a letter to King James, dated November 24, 1609, says if this Mr John Fairfoull, who irritated the King by praying for the " banished ministers," that he had summon- ed him to answer for his " foolish behaviour" in the presence of Lord Scoon, the Magistrates and Town-Council of St Andrews, and that he was censured — " the one part voting for his warding in Blackness, of which number 1 was one ; the other greater part decerning him to be confined in the burgh of Dundee." His in- duction to Anstruther was opposed in 1610 by the people, who preferred a Mr John Dykes, and who petitioned Archbishop Glad- stanes in his favour.-f Bishop Keith says that Fairfoull was chaplain to the Earl of Rothes. He was minister of North Leith near Edinburgh in 1638, when he signed the National Covenant, and he is mentioned by Baillie under the name of Forfair, which is probably a misprint. | He was at the Covenanting General Assembly in 1641 ; and in 1643, as " every Assembly was troubled with the plantation of Edinburgh," it was proposed to remove him thither. In 1647 he was suspected of being " favourable to Malignants," and he took an active part against the dominant faction during the following year. Bishop Keith says that Fairfoull was afterwards minister of Dunse. " It is reported on good grounds," he adds, " that King Charles II. having heard him preach several times when he was in Scotland in the year 1650, was pleased upon his restoration to inquire after Mr. Fairfoull, and of his own mere motion pre- ferred him to this See on the 14th of November 1661." The Presbyterians describe Archbishop Fairfoull as " possessed of con- siderable learning ; better skilled, however, in physic than in theo- logy— a pleasant, facetious companion, but never esteemed a serious divine." This is an important admission from avowed enemies, and proves that he was a very eminent, pious, and distinguished person. As a specimen of the contemptible scandal in which the " Catalogue of the Ministers in the Synod of Fife from 1560 to 1700, in Appendix to Selections from the Minutes of the Synod, printed for the Abbotsford Club, 4to. 1837. f Wodrow's Biographical Collections — Archbishop Gladstanes to King James, Glas- gow, printed for the Maitland Club, 4to. 1834, vol. i. p. 269,270, 276. % Baillie's Letters and Journals, vol. i. p. 64. 692 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [16G1. Presbyterians indulged, to render their opponents odious, and ma- lign their private characters, the gossipping Wodrow relates the following anecdote on the authority of a person named Hastie ; — ■ " That Archbishop FairfouU was my Lord Rothes' chaplain, and my Lord Oolvin [Colville], from whom my narrator had this, and some others, were commending him for a smart man. ' Yes,' says Rothes, ' he has learning and sharpness enough, but he has no more sanctification than my grey horse.'' That the Bishop used to go out to a gentleman's house near St Andrews, and there all the Sabbath play at cards and drink. That one day one of the ser- vants came into the room. ' Have you been at sermon V says the Archbishop. ' Yes,' says he. ' Where was the text V ' Remem- ber the Sabbath day to keep it holy,' says the servant."* As to the opinion of such a person as the Earl of Rothes on sanctification it was utterly worthless, and the reader need hardly be reminded that all the rest of the above gossip is a vile falsehood ; yet such were the scandals busily circulated, and credulously believed, by the Presbyterian preachers and peasantry. The Presbyterians represent Mr James Hamilton, the Bishop- elect of Galloway, as a man whose abilities were not " above medio- crity, and his cunning was more remarkable than his piety." He was the second son of Sir James Hamilton of Broomhill,and younger brother of Sir John Hamilton, created Lord Relhaven in 1G47. He was admitted into holy orders by Archbishop Law of Glasgow in 1634, and was inducted minister of Cambusnethan in Lanark- shire, where he continued till the Restoration. He is sarcastically mentioned by Baillie as one of the preachers before the Parliament in 1661 . " They took a way," he observes," to nominate to them- selves preachers ; Mr Douglas indeed began, but was no more em- ployed ;" and after mentioning several who were " passed by," Baillie continues — " As all we of the West [were], except Mr James Hamilton of Camnethan and Mr Hugh Blair, but in all the nooks of Scotland men were picked out who were thought inclin- able to change our church-government ; and according to their invectives against what we were lately doing, were printed good or feckless divines at the pleasure of a very rascal, Tom Sincerfe, the diurnaller, a profane atheistical papist, as some count him." • Wodrow's Analecta, printed for the Maitland Club, 4to. Edinburgh, 1842, vol. i. p. 38. 1661.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 693 This diatribe refers to Thomas SydserfF, son of old Bishop Syd- serff, who edited and pubhshed the first diurnal in Scotland, printed weekly under the title of Mercurius Caledonius. The first number appeared on the 31st of December 1660, but it was of short duration, as it appears to have terminated on the 28th of March 1661. It was probably begun by Sydserff to annoy the Presbyterians, and Baillic states that it was stopped by order of the King.* Sydserff, some time after his fathers death, opened a theatre in the Oanongate of Edinburgh with a company of come- dians, and was the author of a play entitled " Tarugo's Wiles," printed at London in 1668. The fourth of the Bishops-elect of the Second Succession was the celebrated Robert Leighton, who was in London at the time of the Restoration, and was nominated to Dunblane. Though the son of Alexander Leighton, the author of " Zion's Plea against Prelacy"" — a most violent tirade for which he was severely pu- nished by sentence of the Star-Chamber in 1630, Leighton never was a thorough Presbyterian. He was born in Edinburgh in 1627, and educated at that University, under Robert Rankine, Professor of Philosophy, and James Fairlie, Professor of Divinity, Bishop of Argyll in 1637. His defection from Presbyterianism and the Covenant was in opposition to his father's well known principles. As the particulars of Leighton's public life are well known, it is only necessary in this sketch to shew in what estima- tion he was held by his contemporaries, and it will be seen that even such a man as Leighton is universally reputed to have been did not escape from the venom of slander. The following illustrations are additions to those inserted in the volume which is the continuation of the present narrative.-f- Sir James Stewart of Goodtrees, now Moredun, near Edinburgh, Lord Provost of the city in 1649 and 1659, was an eminent merchant, and in religion a zealous Pi-esbyte- rian Covenanter. In the course of his frequent journeys to London on business he became acquainted with the elder Leighton, who entrusted his son to his care, to be educated at the University of Edinburgh. " The father entreated, and the son was present,' says Sir Archibald Stewart Denham, Bart., " to train him up in the • Baillie's Letters and Journals, vol. iii. p. 4G8. t History of the Scottish Episcopal Church from the Revolution to the Present Time. By John Parker Lawson, M.A. Edinburgh, 8vo. 1843, p. 11, 12, 13, 14. 694 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OP [1661. true Presbyterian form, and Robert was strictly enjoined with his father's blessing to be steady in that way. While attending the University he was expelled for writing a satirical stanza on the Lord Provost of Edinburgh's name [Aikenhead], and the many pimples on his face." Leighton was afterwards Principal of the University of Edinburgh, previous to which he had been Presbyterian minister of Newbattle near Dalkeith, but he was always noted, and in con- sequence much disliked by his Covenanting brethren, for his mild- ness, moderation, and diligent discharge of his vocation. He care- fully avoided mixing or interfering with the distractions of that period after his return from the Continent in 1G41, and settlement at Newbattle when Presbyterianism became triumphant, and never made the pulpit the arena of political discussions. He rarely at- tended the meetings of the Presbytery, and when asked if he had complied with their usual custom of preaching twice a year to the times, he answered in the language of severe reproof — " For God's sake, when all my brethren preach to the times, suffer one poor person to preach about eternity." Wodrow, however, declares that " it was ordinary for Bishop Leighton, when minister at Newbattle, to engage the communicants at the Lord's table to the Covenant,"* but this is very improbable, and is at variance with his general character. " When Episcopacy became fashionable after the year 1660," continues the Coltness writer, " he forgot his father's injunction, and was Bishop and Archbishop, amicable composer of parties, and what not, in Scotland ; and in the end, disgusted with all, he threw himself free, and ended his days in a kind of monastic life in England ."f Wodrow records a sarcastic anecdote of Leigh- ton, which displays the feelings of the party. " The same person [Sir James Stewart] told Mr Muir that being big [intimate] with Bishop Leighton, he said — ' Sir, I hear your grandfather was a Papist, your father was a Presbyterian, and suffered much for it in England, and you a Bishop ? What a mixture is this f Leigh- ton is made to reply — ' It is true. Sir, and my grandfather was the honestest man of the three.' "J Baillie sneers at his style of preaching, which he calls the " new guise" introduced by him and a certain Mr Hugh Binning — " contemning the ordinary way of exponing and dividing a text, of raising doctrines and uses," but • Wodrow's Analecta, 4to. 1812, vol. ii. p. 361. t Coltness Collections. Printed for the Maitland Club, Ito. 1812, p. 22, 23 t Ibid. 4to. vol. i. p. 26. 1661. J THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 095 " running out in ca discourse on some common head in a high, ro- mancing, unscriptural style, tickling the ear for the present, and moving the affections in some, but leaving little or nought to the memory and understanding."* AVodrow mentions that Mr Wil- liam Guthrie, a well known Presbyterian preacher, occasionally resorted to Newbattle to hear Leighton preach, and " his re- mark," says Wodrow, " was, that in the time of hearing him he was as in heaven, but he could not bring one word with him almost out of the church doors, referring to his haranguing way of preaching without heads As he was indebted to the English for his appointment as Principal of the University of Edinburgh, Baillie says of him under date 16.58 — " Mr Leighton does nought to count of, but looks about him in his chamber."^ Wodrow explains this statement by an account of Leighton's habits as Principal, on the authority of a person who pretended that he obtained the information from his man-servant — " That frequently once a week or fourteenth night, Leighton, when Principal of the College, used to shut himself up in the room above the Library, and discharged any body to have access to him, and that for two days. He had nothing with him but his Bible, and sometimes he had a candle lighted at night ; frequently not ; and a choppin of ale and a bit of bread ; and his servant declares that at the third day when he came out there would scarce have been any of the ale and bread made use of. This monkish retire- ment, and other things, give great ground for suspicions of his inclinations to Popery." || But Wodrow inserts a different state- ment of Leighton's alleged principles — " I am told that Arch- bishop Leighton when at Edinburgh, was very much suspected to be an Arian, and vented several things in conversation that tended that way."§ Again, a certain Mr Robert Stewart told Wodrow that the " late [Lord] Advocate, Sir James Stewart, did express his suspicions to him that the late [Archbishop] Leighton was an Arian."ir The following is a specimen of the ridiculous trash which Wodrow collected of the sayings of Leighton. He was conversing one day with a person named Law, who became one of " Letters and Journals, 4to. vol. iii. p. 258, 259. t Analecta, 4to. 1812, vol. ii. p. 349. t Baillie to Spang— Letters and Journals, vol. iii. p. 365. II Wodrow's Analecta, 4to. 1842, vol. i. p. 327. § Ibid. vol. ii. p. 212. t Ibid. vol. ii. p. 361. 696 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [IGGl. the ministers of Edinburgh after the Eevokition. The subject of charity was introduced, on which Leighton expatiated. Law said that Mr David Dickson often observed that " people shouldTiot make a fool of their charity." Leighton is made to reply that " he did not know what Mr Dickson meant in these words ; but the Scripture made a fool of charity, since it said that fools bear all things, and charity beareth all things l"* The eccentric Mr William Guthrie, who resorted to Newbattle to hear Leighton preach, held a different notion of fools. He was preacher at Fenwick in Ayrshire before the Restoration, and was commonly called the Fool of Fenwick — a soubriquet which he bestowed on himself in the title-pages of his printed sermons. Bishop Burnet, who knew Leighton intimately for twenty-three years, speaks of him in the most enthusiastic strain : — " He had the greatest command of the purest Latin 1 ever knew in any man ; he was master of both the Greek and Hebrew, and of the whole compass of theological learning, chiefly in the study of the Scriptures. But that which excelled all the rest was, he was pos- sessed with the highest and boldest sense of Divine things that I ever saw in any man ; he had no regard for his person, unless it was to mortify it by a constant low diet that was like a perpetual fast. He had both a contempt of wealth and reputation ; he seemed to have the lowest thoughts of himself possible, and to de- sire that other persons should think as meanly of him as he did himself. He bore all sorts of ill usage and reproach like a man that took pleasure in it. He brought himself into so composed a gravity that I never saw him laugh, and but seldom smile, and he kept himself in such a constant recollection that I do not remem- ber that I ever heard him say one idle word. He had been bred up with the greatest aversion possible to the whole frame of the Church of England ; but he quickly bore through the prejudices of his education. His preaching had a sublimity both of thought and expression in it. The grace and gravity of his pronunciation were such that few heard him without a very sensible emotion ; I am sure I never did. His style was rather too fine, but there were a majesty and beauty in it that left so deep an impression, that I cannot yet forget the sermons I heard him preach thirty years ago ; and yet with this he seemed to look on himself as so • Wodrow's Analccta, Ito. 1842, p. 348, 349. IGGl.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 697 ordinary a preacher that while he had a cure he was ready to employ others, and when he was a Bishop he chose to preach to small auditories, and would never give notice beforehand. He had indeed a very low voice, and so could not be heard by a great crowd. He soon came to see the follies of the Presbyterians, and dislike their Covenant, particularly their enforcing it, and their fury against all who differed from them. He found they were not capable of large thoughts ; theirs were narrow as their tempers were sour, so he grew weary of mixing with them. Yet all the opposition that he made to them was that he preached up a more exact rule of life than seemed to them consistent with human nature, but his own practice did outshine his doctrine. He en- tered into a great correspondence with many of the Episcopal party, and with my own father in particular, and did wholly sepa- rate himself from the Presbyterians. At last he left them, and withdrew from his cure, for he could not do the things imposed on him any longer." Leighton had a brother well known at the Court, and whose character was the very reverse — " for," says Burnet, " though he loved to talk of great sublimities in religion, yet he was a very immoral man." This was Sir Elisha Leighton, wlio when secre- tary to the Duke of York became a Roman Catholic, or " was a Papist of a form of his own," He was in great favour with Charles II., to whom he recommended the ascetic Principal of the Univer- sity of Edinburgh, and Leighton was induced to accept the Bishop- ric of Dunblane — " a small Diocese as well as a little revenue i but the Deanery of the Chapel-Royal [of Holyrood] was annexed to that See ; so he was willing to engage in that, that he might set up the Common Prayer in the King's chapel, for the rebuilding of which orders had been given." Burnet alleges that Bishop Shel- don of London disliked Leighton's " great strictness," yet " he thought such a man as he was might give credit to Episcopacy in its first introduction to a nation much prejudiced against it." Ac- cording to the same authority Sharp also opposed Leighton's ap- pointment ; but Burnet's recorded opinions of the Scottish Primate render his statements suspicious, or at least they must be received with caution. Numerous anecdotes are chronicled by Wodrow against the Scot- tish Bishops of the second consecration, and particularly against 698 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [1661. Archbishop Sharp. The Presbyterians believed that all the sermons he preached while minister of Crail were " copied out of English books." It is alleged that one day he mentioned to the celebrated Nonconformist Calamy that he believed the King intended to re- store the Episcopal Church in Scotland. Calamy replied that he could not beheve that such an imprudent attempt would be made. " I assure you," said Sharp, " of it, and he has made unworthy me [Archjbishop of St Andrews." Calamy answered — " That will cer- tainly be grievous to the hearts of all serious persons." " Sharp," adds Wodrow, " took God to witness he embraced that place only to encourage such, and keep them from persecution."* — " There goes a story that when Leighton, who I suppose about this time was Bishop of Dunblane, and was in a meeting with Sharp, Arch- bishop of St Andrews, he frequently termed him my Lord^ and did not add your Grace to it ; and the Archbishop said huffingly — ' My Lord ! no more V ' Aye,' says Leighton, ' my Lord is more than either you or I should have.' "f The reader is to observe that this veracious colloquy is merely told as " there goes a story!'"' The following is from a fourth hand, for Mr Wodrow was not very particular as to his sources of information, and the other party mentioned was Mr James Wood, Professor of Divinity at St An- drews, respecting whom Baillie, in a letter to Sharp dated 17th December 16C0, satirically says — " My service to James Wood, if his archiepiscopal pride will permit him to accept it, but I let him Weill to wit that the Archbishops of Glasgow were large and proud as ever St Andrews could be." — " A little before Sharp's turning," says Wodrow, " he was much jealoused [suspected] al- most by all except Mr James Wood. One day in a meeting of ministers they fell a speaking about Sharp. Mr Wood did defend him. One of them went pretty far, and alleged Mr Wood was dravm over by him, at which Mr Wood said he would know what truth was in it. He [Wood] was told — ' Sii', you are a man of far more experience and prudence than I, but allow me to tell you Sharp will shift you, and bring on another discourse, and therefore keep him by the point.' Mr Wood went to him [Sharp], and after a little common conversation he said — ' Brother, you see the way how matters are like to go, and the Parliament are going on at a strange rate. It is the mind of several brethren a Testimony • Analecta, vol. i. p. 90. t ^f^^d- ^ol- i- P- 327. 1661.] THE SECOND ANGLICAN CONSECRATION. 699 should be given against this way, and particularly Episcopacy, and for the Covenants.' Mr Sharp never noticed what he said, but as soon as he was done he says — ' Mr Wood, my Lord Commissioner [Middleton] wonders you do not visit him. He has a great value for you.' Mr Wood presently took his drift, and says — ' Mr Sharp, you do not answer me my question. Do not wave me this way.' When he found he was in earnest, and would not be diverted, Sharp fell in a great rage, and said — ' What ! will you testify against the Parliament I You [will] find frost in that I see ' — or some expression to this purpose — ' to have all such meetings upon any such head declared seditious and treasonable, and meet if you dare.' Mr Wood came back to the ministers, and told them he believed now, and found all was true, and narrated what is above. After all was overturned, and Prelacy set up, Mr Donaldson meets Mr Wood in Edinburgh, and though Mr Donaldson was a pretty violent Protester, Mr Wood embraced him with a great concern. After a little conversation, Mr Donaldson asked Mr Wood's thoughts of their differences now. ' Alas ! ' says Mr Wood, ' I see now the Remonstrants were in the right ; the Resolutions have ruined us. For my own part I still [always] hated breaches and separation, and that made me do as I did."* We are farther told by Wod- row — " When Mr Sharp was beginning to appear in his own colours, and his villany to appear, a little before he went up to Court and was consecrate, he happened to be with Mr Douglas, and in conversation he termed Mr Douglas brother. He checked him, and said — ' Brother ! No more brother, James ! If my con- science had been of the make of yours, I could have been Bishop of St Andrews sooner than you.' "-f- The preceding anecdotes are specimens of the gossipping trash collected by Wodrow, and indicate the private conversations of the then Presbyterian preachers. Every scandal, however false, im- probable, or trifling, was readily believed, and industriously pro- pagated in their circles, and was the topic of their low ribaldry and indecent ridicule. Mr William Veitch, a well known fana- tical preacher, is adduced by Wodrow as his authority for an- other example of paltry malignity. This Veitch was standing at a shop door in the Parliament Close of Edinburgh, with the before • Wodrow's Analecta, 4to. 1842, vol. ii. p. 117, 118, 119. t Ibid. vol. ii. p. 136, 137. 700 THE SCOTTISH BISHOPS OF [16G1. mentioned Wood, " about the year 1660 or 166[2], a little after Sharp was made Archbishop, and the Chancellor's or Commis- sioner's coach came up, and Sharp came to him [Wood], and there were mutual caressings just befoi'e the shop door. Mr Wood said to Mr Veitch, pointing to Sharp — ' O false and perfidious traitor, who hath betrayed the Church of Scotland, if thou die the common death of men, I know nothing of the mind of Grod.' This was in- deed a prophetic afflatus, being eight or nine years before that Prelate's death."* Wodrow was here in gross error as to dates, for if there is any truth in this atrocious language said to be uttered by Wood, it was eighteen years before the murder of the Arch- bishop. " I am told," says Wodrow, " that about 1673, [Arch- bishop] Sharp was preaching in St Andrews, and citing that pas- sage— ' whoremongers and adulterers,' the woman Isobel Lindsay rose up in the church, and charged him with guilt, but was removed and gagged for some days." This infamous woman, it appears, was suborned to accuse the Archbishop of criminal intercourse with her, and this falsehood was readily believed by his enemies. Again — " Mr George Barclay was at St Andrews when the [Arch] bishop made his first sermon after he was Archbishop, and heard him speak to this purpose — ' I could have lived with Presbyterians all my days, but their divisions were so great that the King saw fit to set up Episcopacy, and has been pleased to name me to this See, and those that will not submit shall be forced to it by sword and law.' "-f — " Mr Warner tells me he was, before [Arch] bishop Sharp's death, in conversation with two ladies of good sense, and very serious. They told him that the [Arch] bishop, when he and they were talking about religion, and one in the company said somewhat of the insufficiency of blamelessness and morality for sal- vation, the [Arch] bishop returned — ' Be you good moralists, and I will warrant you.' " Yet this same Wodrow could complacently refer to the Archbishop when he compHmented a Presbyterian. " I hear," he writes, " when Mr Eobert Blair died, that Arch- bishop Sharp, when he heard of it, said he was the man of the most powerful gift of prayer he ever knew.";}: The following is another specimen of the Presbyterian hatred and superstition, re- lated by Wodrow, on the authority of a person named Stirling. — • Analecta, vol. ii. p. 250. f i^^e, p. 1039, 1010, 1041. 810 [1673. CHAPTER IX. THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. In 1673 the Quakers in Aberdeen again encountered the opposition of the Magistrates, who sent a memorial against them to the Privy Council, and the clergy applied to Archbishop Sharp, complaining that " the Quakers'" schism was prejudicial to the interest of the Church, and that by using a separate burial-place they prevented the payment of the fees customary on these occasions." This re- fers to a most unwarrantable act which the civic authorities per- petrated. They had previously enjoined all male Quakers to be apprehended at their next convention, imprisoned in the jail, and their meeting-house to be closed. The Quakers, nevertheless, per- severed in maintaining their peculiar tenets in defiance of every indignity ; but lest it should be supposed that they suffered solely because they were opposed to the Episcopal Church, it may be here observed that AVodrow and other Presbyterian witers approve of all the proceedings against them, and complain that they were not sufficiently prosecuted. The Quakers had appropriated ground on the east side of the street called the Gallowgate in Aberdeen for the interment of their dead. The Magisti'ates caused the walls of this cemetery to be demohshed, and the body of a child, which had been buried three days previously, was disinterred by their order, and buried near the adjoining fishing village of Footdee at the mouth of the Dee. In consequence of a report that the Quakers had abstracted the body, and filled the coffin with stones to deceive the Magistrates, another disinterment took place, which satisfied them that the rumour was unfounded. The Quakers, who are not without their superstitions, have a tradition that in consequence of this very harsh conduct on the part of the civic 1673.] THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. 811 authorities an unusual mortality of children occurred in Aber- deen that year, and the favourite grandchild of one of the Ma- gistrates who was most active in the affair was on the following day accidentally killed by his servant. This, however, did not lessen his opposition, and " going on " in what the Quaker Bar- clay calls " his usual course of wickedness, among similar acts often causing the walls of the burial-place and premises to be pulled down," he was soon afterwards " suspended in his career by a fall which fractured his leg." It is stated that the Ma- gistrates nevertheless continued to remove every corpse interred in the Quakers' ground, and they continued so to act until they were prohibited by the Privy Council. In June 1G73, nineteen of the Aberdeen Quakers were summoned before the Privy Council at Edinburgh and fined, but before the money was exacted a pro- clamation was issued remitting all penalties for nonconformity ex- cept those already paid, or engaged to be paid by the bond of the parties or other securities. In 1673 another attempt was meditated against the life of Archbishop Sharp by the field-preacher M itchell already mentioned. This man returned to Scotland that year, married, and hired a shop, in which his wife sold brandy and tobacco, within a few doors of the Archbishop's residence in Edinburgh. Mitchell was held in great repute for his previous attempt on the Primate by the Co- venanters. His shop was a secret resort of their leaders, who often discussed in it their intrigues with Holland. Mitchell had not been long in Edinburgh before he was apprehended as a suspi- cious person from his external appearance, for he is described as a " lean hollow-cheeked man, of a truculent countenance, and had the air of an assassin as much as a man could have." Two pistols, in size hke those he formerly possessed when he wounded Bishop Honyman, which were found each to be loaded with three bullets, were taken in his possession. He was conveyed by Sir William Sharp, then Keeper of the Signet, to his brother the Archbishop's residence. Though a crowd rushed into the house the Primate at once recognized Mitchell, and approaching him, said — " You are the man." He was soon afterwards brought before the Privy Council, at which the Duke of Lauderdale presided. Mitchell on that occasion refused to confess, but he acknowledged his guilt to a committee appointed to deal with him, which he signed in 812 THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. [1673. the presence of Lauderdale, his brother Lord Hatton, then Trea- surer-Depute, the Lord Chancellor Rothes, and others of the Privy Council, who adhibited their names as witnesses. In Fe- bruary 1674 he was brought to trial, when after his indictment was read he denied the whole, and retracted his confession. Sir John Nisbet, the Lord Advocate, desisted from the prosecution, and the Privy Council committed Mitchell a close prisoner to the Bass Rock in the mouth of the Frith of Forth. He continued on the Bass till the latter end of December 1677, when he was again called up to answer for his criminal designs. The Scottish Parliament met at Edinburgh on the 12th of No- vember, the Duke of Lauderdale representing the King as Lord High Commissioner, and the Lord Chancellor Rothes presiding. On roll as present are Archbishop Sharp of St Andrews, Leighton, styled Archbishop of Glasgow, and the Bishops of Edinburgh, Galloway, Brechin, Dunblane, Caithness, and Argyll. In the King's letter it is stated that " one of the principal reasons of keeping this session of Parliament was to the end [that] effectual courses may be laid down for curbing and punishing the insolent field conventicles, and other seditious practices which have since the last session too much abounded." — " You are our witnesses," says the royal document, " what Indulgences we have given, and with what lenity we have used such dissenters as would be peaceable ; and how much our favours have been abused. You have made many good laws, but still have failed in the execution against the contemners of the law. We must now, therefore, once for all lay down such solid and effectual courses as the whole king- dom may see that we and you are both in earnest ; and that if fairness will not, force must compel the refractory to be peaceable and obey the laws." Only four Acts were passed by this Parlia- ment, which was adjourned from time to time, and dissolved by royal proclamation dated the 19th of May 1674. A variety of events occurred in 1674. On the 29th of April we find the Diocesan Synod of Fife unanimously approving of an over- ture or memorial to Archbishop Sharp, entitled a " representation of the grievances of the Church to the Lords of the Privy Council" prepared by the Primate and the " Brethren of the Privy Confer- ence," which was dehvered into " the Lord Archbishop's hands for transmission." This document complains of the " increase of 1673] THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. 813 Popery" and the " defection of some into Quakerism;" the frequency of field-preaching, and assemblages of multitudes in the fields and private houses ; disorderly marriages ; the " refusal of delinquents to submit to the just censures of the Church for scandalous mis- carriages condemned by the word of God and laws of this king- dom the " licentiousness of persons openly profane, who are encouraged by this example ;" the " unhec^rd of intrusion into and invading the pulpits of the godly and orderly ministers of this Church, and the barbarous profanation of places dedicated to the service of God the " open and ordinary profanation of the Lord''s day by persons who, pretending necessary dispatch of busi- ness, do cause great disturbance in the several parishes through which the common road lieth, threatening and forcing hirers of horse, boatmen, and other people, to serve their worldly lusts and designs ; as also by the travelling of multitudes of people on the Lord's Day to conventicles at a distance." The conduct of the Duke of Lauderdale at this period of his administration was marked by his political insincerity and dupli- city to both the Episcopal Church and the Presbyterians. His notorious immorality, and his licentious intercourse with Elizabeth Murray, who succeeded her father the first Earl of Dysart as Countess in her own right, are facts well known and disgraceful even in that profligate age. His Duchess, who was the second daughter of the first Earl of Home, died at Paris in 1G71, and in February 1672 he married the Countess of Dysart, then the widow of Sir Lionel Talmash, Bart. She is described as a person of such remarkable beauty, fascinating manners, and varied accomplish- ments, that Cromwell himself could scarcely resist her attractions. Lauderdale and his second Duchess made a tour through many parts of Scotland after their marriage, and were received and at- tended with almost regal respect. The odium of his administration fell upon the Church, and the Bishops and clergy were accused of exciting his severe proclamations. Another misfortune was that no party could depend upon his policy. At one time he rigidly in- sisted on conformity, and threatened the discontented preachers who were sanctioned by the " Indulgence." We find him writing to the Privy Council in 1673 — " Because some of them are dis- pleased, forsooth, with the late Indulgence, you shall secure them from the fear of any more of that kind, and let them know that if, 814 THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. [1673. after all the lenity used towards them, they still continue refrac- tory and untractable, the whole of the royal power shall be em- ployed for securing the peace of the Church and Kingdom from their seditious practices." This decisive language contained much truth, but it was rendered altogether ineffectual by Lauderdale's subsequent conduct. After the prorogation of the Parliament in 1674 he and the Earl of Tweeddale wei'e summoned by the King to Court, and as a combination had been formed to deprive him of his power and influence, he thought proper to connect himself with the Presbyterians, by announcing a pardon on the 4th of May to all resorters to field-preachings and other meetings previous to that day, founded, as is alleged, on a letter from the King. This " act of grace," as Kirkton calls it, was proclaimed some days afterwards with due solemnity in presence of the Magistrate ; " but," says Kirkton, " though this act was not very full in itself, it had this effect, to be looked at by the common people rather as an encouragement for the time coming than as a re- mission for what was past ; and from that day forward the truth was Scotland broke loose with conventicles of all sorts in houses, fields, and vacant churches ; hence conventicles were not noticed, the field conventicles blinded the eyes of our State so much. The parish churches of the curates in the meantime came to be like pest-houses ; few went to any of them, and none to some, so the doors were kept locked. In the West there were not many, in regard of the Indulged ministers ; nor in the North, in regard of the disposition of the people there, who were never zealous for a good cause."* The " good cause" means Presbyterianism, this sneer at the northern counties indicating that the people were almost imiversally in favour of the Episcopal Church. Kirkton states that in the spring of this year the field- preachers and their adherents began " to act very high ; almost all of them preached, not only in houses, but went to the fields or vacant churches." He says that the common talk of the peasantry was about the success of the last Sunday's conventicle, the preach- ers, the numbers and enthusiasm of the audiences, the doctrines taught, the " change among the people : how some times the soldiers assaulted them, and some killed of them ; sometimes the soldiers were beaten, and some of them killed ; and this was the • Kirkton's History, edited by C. K. Sharpe, Esq. p. 343. 1674.] THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. 815 exercise of the people of Scotland for six yeai's time," or to the Battle of Bothwell Bridge in 1G79. It is easy to estimate the misery which all this fanaticism would engender and foster among the people by Lauderdale's proceedings, the barriers it op- posed to domestic, social, and intellectual improvement, the igno- rant prejudices it would perpetuate, and the hatred it would excite. It is singular that the Scottish Bishops had nevertheless the most implicit confidence in Lauderdale. Kirkton in his ironical style says — " Lauderdale had a party in the Parliament who stuck by him at that time. Among these were Argyll, Kincardine, and Stair, with whose heifer he ploughed most ; but we must not for- get the good Bishops, who stuck by the Commissioner as one man." In those letters of the Bishops who survived the Revolution, which are still preserved, the writers mention Lauderdale and his brother Lord Hatton as the sincere and determined supporters of the Church ; but that sincerity was very questionable which en- couraged the field -preachers and their followers at one time and denounced them at another. It is undeniable that he opposed the Presbyterians, but all his proceedings were characterized by ca- price, intei'est, and individual aggrandizement. The open field-preachings began in Fife early in 1G74 under the auspices of two noted leaders — Blackadder and Welsh — the latter the grandson of that John Welsh who was banished by King James. On the 2d of January the former collected a large as- semblage at Kincaple — a mansion upwards of two miles from St Andrews, at which Welsh was also present. Archbishop Sharp was from home, but his wife sent a body of militia who were ac- companied by a crowd from St Andrews, and a number of the stu- dents, to disperse the conventicle. After some violent altercation the proprietor of the mansion appeared, and asked the occasion of this disturbance on the Sabbath-day. The officer produced a warrant signed by Chancellor Rothes to apprehend him and his brother on the previous year. " I see," was the reply, " you have an old order from the Chancellor to that effect, which was extorted from him by the Prelate. If you intend to execute it now you may, but you will see the faces of men." According to the Presbyterian tradition Blackadder some weeks afterwards held another conven- ticle at Kincaple. Archbishop Sharp, who was then at home, sent for the Provost of St Andrews, and desired him to call out 816 THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. L1674. the mihtary, disperse the meeting, and apprehend the preacher. " My Lord," the Provost is made to reply, " the militia are gone there already to hear the preaching, and we have none to send." This story is one of the many fictions which are still credited. Encouraged by Lauderdale's act of indemnity, Welsh and other preachers forcibly entered parish churches in Fife and held forth to their followers. The Covenanters took possession of the parish church of Cramond and others near Edinburgh, and intruded themselves into the Magdalene Chapel in that city one Sunday. During this summer another attempt was projected against Arch- bishop Sharp ostensibly by female enthusiasts secretly abetted by the preachers. On the 4th of June, while he was passing through the Parliament Close at Edinburgh to attend a meeting of the Privy Council accompanied by the Lord Chancellor Rothes, many hundreds of women had assembled with a design to murder him, and the daughter of Johnston of Warriston was to give the signal. Rothes, who knew their intentions, diverted this wo- man by some general conversation, and the Archbishop entered the council-room in safety.* Wodrow says that one of them seized him rudely by the throat, designating him Judas Iscariof, and exclaiming — " Ere all was done his neck behoved to hang for it ;" but as this incident is not mentioned by any other writer, it is probably one of the usual fictions of the time. Three of those w omen, including Johnston's daughter, were imprisoned for a short period. " During the furies of the Covenant," as Mr C. K. Sharpe observes, " riotous assemblages of the female sex were very fre- quent in Edinburgh. One Mistress Kelt)', at the head of a regi- ment of pious sisters, threw a stone at the head of the Duke of Hamilton in 1G48, for which her hand was ordered to be cut off ; ' but he procured her pardon,' says Burnet in his Memoirs of the Duke, ' and said the stone had missed him ; therefore he was to take care that their sentence should miss her.' " The proceedings of the field-preachers had been represented to the Govei'nment, and a letter from the King to the Privy Council was read, requiring them by the aid of the military and standing force diligently to apprehend " preachers at conventicles, invaders of pulpits, and ringleading heritors." A committee was appointed, at the head of which were Archbishop Sharp and the Officers of • Sir George Mackenzie's Memoirs, 4to. p. 272, 273. 1673.] THE CHURCH AND ITS OPrONENTS. 817 Crown, and of the State, assisted by the Earls of Argyll, Linlith- gow, Kinghorn, Wigton, and Dundonald. John Welsh, Gabriel Seniijle, John Blackadder, and seventeen other field- preachers, were ordered to be apprehended, one of whom was a person named Forrester, minister of Alva, who had been induced to join the party, and was deposed by the Diocesan Synod of Dunkcld, which was ratified on the 4th of May by Bishop Guthrie. For Welsh and Sample, who were particularly obnoxious, a reward of L.400 ster- ling was offered, and for the others 1000 merks. The city of Edinburgh was fined L.lOO sterling, to be levied from those who were present, for allowing the conventicle in the Magdalene Chapel. Inglis of Cramond was ordered to pay L.103G Scots as the cost of hearing six Covenanting sermons in his parish church ; a gentle- man in Fife, for " harbouring" Welsh in his house one night, was ordered to pay 2000 merks, though Kirkton says that when Welsh lodged in his house he was from home ; and eleven heri- tors were fined upwards of 5500 merks for attending his field- preachings. Two proclamations followed, the one against those who resorted to conventicles ; landlords and masters were to be re- sponsible for the fines incurred by their tenants and servants ; and magistrates were authorized to compel all persons whom they sus- pected to produce security for their good behaviour. The other was against the field-preachers in terms of the Acts of Parliament. The King also intimated to the Privy Council that the military in Ireland and at Berwick were in readiness to serve in Scotland, and repress all conventicles and other seditious meetings. As it respects the field conventicles, the Diocesan Synod of Glasgow in October 1073 had complained of their injurious effects on the morals of the people. In addition to the undeniable charges of fanaticism, sedition, and abuse of the King and Government, the Diocesan Synod alleged that " incest, bestiality, murder of children, besides frequent adulteries, and other acts of wickedness,"" were the results of those meetings. The Presbyterians denounce these ac- cusations as foul and false aspersions, originating in exasperation at the numerous field assemblages, and the violent treatment which the clergy experienced from the Covenanters. Such writers ought, however, to recollect that their predecessors in 1G38 scrupled not to accuse the Scottish Bishops and clergy of similar crimes, and that not one of them has evinced the candour to deplore those vile 52 818 THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. [1674. and wicked calumnies. It is possible that the Diocesan Synod of Glasgow exaggerated the matter, but it cannot be denied that such promiscuous congregations of men and women in wild and remote localities were dangerous to the morals of an excited peasantry, and that the inflammatory harangues addressed to them in the coarsest and often in no very modest language would lead many into illicit intercourse. Long after the Revolution the dreadful immorality which resulted from the annual Presbyterian mode of adminis- tering the Sacrament, when the practice of what is called tent- preaching in the open air was prevalent, was admitted by the more enlightened of the Presbyterian ministers themselves, and the kirk-session records of the parishes corroborate the fact. Every one is familiar with Burns' " Holy Fair^'' and that exqui- site effusion of the Scottish poet did more to extinguish those ex- traordinary annual displays of fanaticism than many serious ex- hortations. And if the " Holy Fairs'' of the eighteenth century were unable to resist the attacks of ridicule on account of the licentiousness and immorality they fostered among the male and female peasantry, it can scarcely be credited that their ancestors who resorted to field-preachings were more virtuous. We are told that in 1G74 the Duke of Lauderdale reconciled himself to Archbishop Sharp, and secured the favour of Archbishop Sancroft of Canterbury. The result of this probably was the re- storation of Archbishop Burnet to his See of Glasgow, vacant by the retirement of Bishop Leighton. The King's letter in favour of Archbishop Burnet is dated the 7th of September, and on the 29th of that month the Privy Council passed an act in obedience to the royal authority, restoring " the said Alexander Archbishop of Glasgow to the possession and enjoyment of the Archbishopric." About this period his traducer, the future Bishop Burnet, resigned his Professorship of Divinity in the University of Glasgow, and removed to London. His subsequent career has no connection with the Episcopal Church of Scotland. During this year an agitation was excited by Bishops Ramsay of Dunblane and Lawrie of Brechin, and promoted by some of the clergy in Edinburgh and Leith, to obtain a National Synod " for considering the disorders in the Church." In a letter from Lauderdale to Archbishop Sharp, dated Windsor, 13th June, his Lordship states that he had informed the King, soon after the last 1674.J THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. 819 meeting of the Privy Council, of the exertions to persuade the Diocesan Synods to demand a national one — " And now,"' says the Duke, " it is apparent the design was more against Episcopacy than against conventicles and — " I am sorry to see, by my last letters of the 4th instant, that the design is still carried on, and that some that I took to be more orthodox have had too great a hand in carrying on that plot. I had a general account of the address of the Presbytery of Glasgow to that of Edinburgh for a meeting, forsooth, which would have looked too like the late Commission of the Kirk, and of an address made by some of the ministers about Edinburgh to that effect. This looks too like the petition of ministers before the Rebellion in the years 1637 and 1638." His Grace requests the Archbishop to intimate to him his " free advice" as to what he thinks the King should " command upon this occa- sion," assuring the Primate that " the King will be very careful that the honour and authority of the Bishops may be preserved, and all contrivances against them suppressed and punished." The Duke concludes — " Although I am no longer Commissioner, yet in all stations I shall be found zealous and active for the government of the Church as it is now by law settled, and for its peace and happiness." Archbishop Sharp was opposed to the projected Na- tional Synod, for which he saw no necessity, and he addressed a letter to Archbishop Sancroft to exert his influence against it with the King. He complains — " We ai'e assaulted not only by foreigners [probably alluding to the intrigues with Holland], our our old enemies the fanatics, who never were of us ; but, alas ! my Lord, there is a fire in our own bed-straw, by sons of our own bowels, who viper-like seek to eat that which produced them. They are all crying out for a national convocation of the clerg)', upon no other account but to shake off our yoke and break our bands asunder. — Their great aim and design is against me, who, God knows, like Paul, have spent myself in the service of the Church, and am yet willing to spend what remains. I believe no man can say I have run in vain. If I be not supported by his Majesty's special favour through your Gi'ace's recommendation, I shall inevitably suffer shipwreck, and that upon no evil, or upon mine own account, but I see that through my sides the Church will be wounded. The only remedy is to procure his Majesty to discharge the convocation, which will calm the storm, and quench 820 THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. [1674. all those malicious designs which are now on foot to disturb the peace of the Church. They are already come to that height that one Mr Cant, a presbvter, has shaken off all fear of God, and re- gard for his canonical oath, in calling me a gi-eat grievance to this Church."" The Mr Cant here mentioned is generally supposed to have been the son of Mr Andrew Cant, the noted Covenanting minister of Aberdeen, and was a presbyter of the Church which his father had violently opposed. This Mr Cant became one of the ministers of Edinburgh, and after 1675 was Principal of the University. His son, or relative, who was ejected at the Revolution, was con- secrated one of the Bishops of the disestablished Scottish Epis- copal Church in 1722. On the 2d of June, Archbishop Sharp complained to the Pri\-y Council of the conduct of Messrs Cant, Tm-ner, Robertson, and Hamilton. The Primate and some others were authorized to examine them, and commit them if they saw cause. Their report was transmitted to the King, who on the 16th of July wrote to the Priv}- Council, declaring his pleasure that Bishop Ramsay of Dunblane should remove into the Diocese of The Isles within two weeks — that Bishop Lawrie of Brechin should confine his ministry- to Trinity College church in Edin- burgh— and that Bishop Young should prohibit the refractory presbyters from officiating in any parish within that Diocese un- less by his special license. Mr Turner was to remove to Glasgow, Mr Robertson to Auchterless in Aberdeenshire, Mr Cant to Lib- berton, and ^Ir Hamilton to Cramond, until farther orders. The Presbyterians allege that this common kind of exile in those times was at the instigation of Archbishop Shai-p, who domineered over those who gave him vexation. As this is a matter of opinion it is unworthy of farther notice ; but if it were the fact, the Primate cannot be much blamed. Have Presbyterian General Assem- blies and Sj-nods never exercised tyrannical powers since the Revolution ? Bishop Hamilton of Galloway died in August this year. Wodrow has preserved a Presbyterian tradition as to the cause of his death. After stating a gross falsehood, that " few or none of the Bishops after the Restoration who had taken the Covenant died a natural death,"' he adds — " Mr James Hamilton, minister at Camnethan, and afterwards Bishop of Galloway, when Mr Gilbert Hall was 1674.J THE CHURCH AiND ITS OPrONENTS. 821 seized with a great palsy, the Bishop had that expression when he heard of it — ' Now God has stopped that man's mouth that we all could not get stopped.' Within a very little time, riding home from some place, by the road his tongue fell a swelling, and before he got home it was swelled to that degree that it hung out of his mouth, and he died in great anguish."* There is not a word of truth in this contemptible story. We are told that Bishop Hamilton " was a man of a sprightly but ordinary stature, well seen in divinity, especially in polemics and the languages, with a good memory, accurate in the Fathers and Church history, as is yet to be seen by the remarks upon his books. He was very pious and charitable, strictly pure in his morals, most kind to his friends, and most affable and courteous to strangers. He was a Boanerges in the pulpit, and every way worthy of the sacred character which he bore. — The Bishop was very happy in a pious, fond, and virtuous wife. She knew his constitution, and did, under God, keep him in a good state of health during her life ; but for the seven years he lived thereafter, his daughters being very young, and when come to any maturity married from him, he took the liberty to manage his diet as he pleased, which generally was one roasted egg in the morning, a little brotlv, and perhaps nothing [else], about four ; at night a small glass of ale to his pipe in the winter, and for the most part water in summer. This with his book w as most of the good Bishop's food during the last seven years of his life.""f The same writer, in reply to an assertion of Wodrow that Bishop Hamilton, when consecrated with the other Bishops in Westminster Abbey in 1661, there learned the " English Service," states — " Yet, for all that, he [Wodrow] hath neglected the Sy- nodal books at Glasgow, else he had found Mr James Hamilton to his lasting honour severely handled by the then Synod for using so long that great treasure of rational devotion, I mean our Liturgy, in his church at Cambusnethan." Bishop Hamilton was succeeded in the Diocese of Galloway by John Patcrson, Dean of Edinburgh, and minister of the Tron church in that city. He was a son of Bishop Paterson of Ross, and it is previously stated that he was minister of Ellon in Aberdeenshire. Both father and son were contemporaries in the episcopal office. • Analecta, vol. 1, 4to, 1812, p. 64, 65. t Account of the Familie of Hamilton of Broomhil!, p. 61, 62. 822 THE CUURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. [1074. In the summer of this year the Magistrates of Aberdeen began another crusade against the Quakers. They were forcibly expelled, from their meeting-house, of which, however, they took possession when the civic authorities retired, and they appear to have dis- played as much tenacity to their opinions in their own way as did their enemies the Covenanters. In terms of the proclama^ tion against house and field conventicles, two of them were im- prisoned for nearly three months, and as all the Quakers refused to subscribe a bond obliging themselves to abstain from such meetings, they were denounced by the Magistrates as rebels, and their personal property was declared to be forfeited to the King's use. They sent a memorial to the Privy Council, complaining of these proceedings, and declaring their loyal attachment to the Government. The Aberdeen Quakers have a tradition that one David Rait, who, along with sundry of the students of Marischal College, interrupted their meetings, was in consequence overtaken by severe afflictions, and died in a state of distraction. Towards the end of this year Archbishop Sharp went to London, where he appears to have remained till August 1675. Some letters connected with the internal affairs of the Church at this period which passed between the Primate, Bishop Paterson and Bishop Ram- say, are preserved in the Episcopal chest at Aberdeen, and others by Wodrow, but they contain no historical facts of importance. Bishop Ramsay followed the Archbishop to London, disregarding the King's command to locate himself in the Diocese of The Isles ; and on the 7th of June lG7o he addressed a long letter to the Pri- mate evidently written under excitement. The Bishop of Dunblane, though a man of undoubted integrity, was apparently of a restless disposition, and inclined to innovations. He complained that he had been misrepresented to the King, and that though he intended " to give exact obedience to his Majesty's pleasure,"" he had peti- tioned the Privy Council in vain to " represent his case," and that he " might be put to the strictest trial anent those crimes in- formed against him." He accused the Archbishop of being the sole opposer of his demands, and insisted that " as Primate you should have concerned yourself to help forward a favourable answer to the petition of a Bishop of your own Province so just in itself." — " But since I came here," says Bishop Ramsay, " I have been amazed to find a person of your character and parts could think it worthy of 1675.] THE CHURCH AND ITS OPPONENTS. 823 himself and his pains to make and spread such reports as I am told you have done. May I be so bold as to ask your Grace if indeed you believe me to be a fanatic, or upon what shadow of ground you either think or repoi-t it to others I Have you any letters un- der my hand avouching that presbyterial government, even for its substantials, is Jure divino, or that I was thinking s being one day in the fields in Galloway, with a small party of eight or ten, meets with as many of the rebels at a house, who Mil two of his men and Captain Urquhart, and had mri) nearly shot Douglas himself dead, had not the Whig's carbine misgiven, whereon Douglas pis- toled him presently. Urquhart is the only staff-officer this despe- rate crew have yet had the honour to kill. He was brought to Edinburgh, and buried with much respect." Lord Fountainhall adds — " They came a company of them to Kirkcudbright and killed two men ; and caused a minister called Mr Shaw to swear he would never preach again in Scotland ; and the Bishops offer- ing to loose him from this oath as unlawful, he refused their ab- solution, alleging it would have been unlawful to have sworn never to preach again, but he had only bound up himself from preaching in Scotland, and though extorted by fear of life, yet it was safest to keep it."* But notwithstanding the violence which characterised both the Government and the wild Covenanters in an arbitrary age noted for its stubborn intolerance, when the latter adopted murderous principles which in too many instances they practised, the Es- tablished Episcopal Church was yearly bringing the people within its pale, and in many of the counties, especially north of the Tay, thei'e were few or no Dissenters. Charles IL died on the 6th of February 1685, and was, after all the opposition of political enemies, succeeded by his brother the Duke of York as James IL of England and Ireland, and the Seventh of that name as King of Scotland, who was so proclaimed at Edinburgh on the 10th of February by the Earl of Perth, Lord Chancellor, the Arch- bishops, Bishops, Nobility, and Magistrates of the city. We • Historical Observes, 4to. 1840, printed for the Bannatync Club, p. I'JC. 1685.] PREVIOUS TO THE REVOLUTION. 873 have the authority of Bishop Sage, a man of unquestionable learning and veracity — who was one of the ministers of Glasgow at the time, that at the death of Charles II. the Established Episcopal Church was in a more prosperous and peaceable state than it had been since the Restoration. Bishop Sage declares that all the people were generally of the same communion — that the Roman Catholics were only as one to five hundred — and that the Presbyterians were divided into two sects who utterly hated each other. These were the Indulged and the Cameronian or Covenanting factions. The former, according to Bishop Sage, had for the most part conformed to the Church and attended its ministrations, and the Covenanting Cameronians alone tenaciously kept up the separation. The prudent and well informed Presby- terians acknowledged that they could conscientiously live in com- munion with the Episcopal Church, to which many of them were willingly reconciled. These facts are corroborated by an investi- gation of the history of that period, and shew that the Covenant- ing disaffection and rebellion originated not from any real griev- ances, but from the old leaven of former years. " We possessed," says Bishop Sage, " the true Christian faith — the same faith which the Catholic Church possessed in the days of the first four General Councils. We have neither subtracted one article from it nor added one article to it. — We owned only two Christian Sacra- ments, and these two we had administered in as great purity, and as exactly according to our Lord's institution, as you [the Presby- terians] or any party on earth can pretend to. We were secure that we had governors who had our Lord's commission to rule us, to dispense the Word to us, and to admit us to duly consecrated Sacraments. In a word, we had Bishops canonically and validly ordained by those who had power to ordain them, and commu- nicate true episcopal power. — Our worship could not be charged with any thing idolatrous or superstitious, immoral or unchristian, in it. — Set forms we had but few, and these few [are] used in all other Churches. No Church on earth has, no Church ever had, less of pomp and gaudiness, or more of plainness and simplicity. Our excess, if we had any, lay not that way."* " The Reasonableness of a Toleration to those of the Episcopal Persuasion inquired into purely on Church Principles, in Four Letters to Mr George Meldrum, Professor of Theology in the College of Edinburgh. 4to. 1704, p. 71, 72, 73. 874 STATE OF THE CHURCH [1685. The first Parliament of James II., or James VII. as he was called in Scotland, met at Edinburgh on the 23d of April 1685, the Duke of Queensberry appearing as Lord High Commissioner. The two Archbishops, and all the Bishops, with the exception of the Bishop of Orkney, Avere present. After the oath of allegiance had been taken, and the Test subscribed by all the members, the King's letter was read, which declared his determination to sup- port the " religion established by law, and their rights and pro- perties against fanatical contrivances, murderers, and assassins." The disaffected Covenanters are farther denounced as " wild and inhuman traitors." The two Archbishops, and the Bishops of Edinburgh, Galloway, Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Brechin, and Caith- ness, were elected among the Lords of the Articles. In the an- swer to the King's letter it is stated by the Parliament — " Nor shall we leave anything undone for extirpating all fanaticism, but especially those fanatical murderers and assassins, and for detect- ing and punishing the late conspirators," referring to the Earl of Argyll's insurrection in concert with the Duke of Monmouth. An Act was passed ratifying all former statutes for the security of the " liberty and freedom of the true Church of God, and the Pro- testant religion presently professed within this kingdom, in their whole strength and vigour." Bishop Maclean of Argyll took the oath of allegiance, and subscribed the Test on the 1st of May, and on the 8th the punishment of death on all field-preachers and re- sorters to house or field conventicles was confirmed. The Act for " taking the Test" was also renewed. On the 22d the vacant sti- pends in the Dioceses were ordered to be paid to the Universities, and partly expended in repairing bridges. This Act was to continue in force five years, excepting specially those parishes of which the King and the Bishops were patrons. On the VSth of June an Act was passed " for the Clergy" declaring the " assaulting the lives of the Bishops or other ministers, or invading or robbing their houses, or actually attempting the same," to be punishable by death and confiscation of goods. The inhabitants of evei-y parish in which such violence was perpetrated were to be assessed in a sum for the behalf of the family and relatives of the parties murdered at the discretion of the Privy Council. In the summer of this year the Earl of Argyll made his fatal invasion of Scotland, in concert with the Duke of Monmouth's 1685.1 PREVIOUS TO THE REVOLUTION. 875 attempt in England. He first appeared off the Orkneys, and sent Spence his secretary, and Blackadder, an " outed'" preacher s son, to ascertain the sentiments of the islanders. The venerable Bishop Mackenzie of Orkney caused them both to be apprehended, and the design was thus discovered. After various adventures and in- effectual demonstrations, Argyll was at last taken prisoner near Inchinnan in the vicinity of Renfrew, brought to Edinburgh, and executed on his former sentence on the 30th of June. He v^as attended on the scaffold by Mr Annand, Dean of Edinburgh, and by the Rev. Laurence Charteris, Professor of Divinity in the University of Edinburgh, the latter at his particular request in pre- ference to any of the Indulged Presbyterian preachers. His head was struck off by the Maiden, and his body was interred in the Grreyfriars' church-yard. " Argyll's first crime," says Lord Foun- tainhall, who was then his counsel, " was looked on by all as a very slender ground of forfeiture, but his conspiracy and rebellion since have expounded what he meant by his explanation of the Test too well." — " Whatever was in Argyll's first transgression in glossing the Test, which appeared slender, yet God's wonderful judgments are visible, pleading a controversy against him and his family for the cruel oppression he used not only to his father's but even to his own creditors."* The Earl's standard, which was taken and sent to the King, contained the motto — " For God and Religion, against Popery, Tyranny, Arbitrary Government, and Erastianism." On the 4th of December died ^Ir Andrew Cant, Principal of the University of Edinburgh, who is described as " a stout enemy of the Papists and Arminians, whom he confuted with much learn- ing and acuteness, and was therefore little or nothing regretted at his death." Bishop Paterson of Edinburgh endeavoured to se- cure the office for his brother, but it was objected to him that he was a layman, and the Town- Council bestowed it on Dr Alexander Monro, Professor of Divinity at St Andrews, who at the Revolu- tion was the Bishop-elect of Argyll, vacant by the death of Bishop Maclean. In February 1G86 Archbishop Ross of St Andrews and Bishop Paterson of Edinburgh went to London to consult the King on the affairs of the Church. It was about this time raraoui ed that • Historical Obsei-ves, 4to, 1840, p. 184. 876 STATE OF THE CHURCH [1G86. the King had resolved to call a meeting of the Parliament to re- peal the penal enactments against the Roman Catholics. This design was soon apparent. The second session of the only Scottish Parliament of King James commenced at Edinburgh on the 29th of April 1686, the Earl of Moray appearing as Lord High Com- missioner. The Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, and the Bishops of Edinburgh, Calloway, Dunkeld, Aberdeen, Moray, Eoss, Bj-Vschin, Dunblane, and The Isles, were present. The loyal con- duct of the Parliament in the former session, especially in reference to the Earl of Argyll's insurrection, is assigned in the King's letter as the cause of assembling the Estates on that occasion. Among other matters recommended for their consideration was one con- nected with the Roman Catholics : — " We cannot be unmindful of others our innocent subjects of the Roman Catholic Religion, who have with the hazard of their lives and fortunes been always assist- ant to the Crown in the worst of rebellions and usurpations, though they lay under discouragements hardly to be named. Them we do heartily recommend to your care, to the end that, as they have given good experience of their true loyalty and peaceable behaviour, so by your assistance they may have the protection of our laws, and that security under our government which others of our subjects have; not suffering them to lie under obligations which their religion cannot admit of." This in itself is fair and reasonable, and is acknowledged at the present day ; but it was a serious affair to King James, as he found to his cost within two years afterwards. The reply of the Scottish Parliament was dignified and significant. " As to that part of your Majesty's letter relating to your subjects of the Roman Catholic religion, we shall, in obedience to your Majesty's commands, and with tenderness to their persons, take the same into our serious and dutiful consideration ; and go as great lengths therein as our conscience will allow, not doubting that your Majesty tcill be careful to secure the Protestant religion established hy law^ No Act, however, in favour of the Roman Catholics occurs in the records of this session, and the Minutes of the pro- ceedings are not preserved. A debate originated on the proper terms to be applied to those who professed the Roman Catholic religion. Lord Fountainhall, who was a member of the Parliament, and determinedly opposed to the repeal of the penal laws, says' that he proposed the designation — " those commonly called Roman 1686.] PREVIOUS TO THE REVOLUTION. 877 Catholics^ The Chancellor Perth .objected that this was "nick- naming" the King, and suggested the more polite and general language — •" those subjects your Majesty has recommended to us;" but the motion of Archbishop Oairncross of Glasgow, that they should be simply termed Roman Catholics, which was a repetition of the King's own words, was finally carried. In compliance with the wishes of the King, the draft of an Act to repeal the penal laws of the Roman Catholics was prepared and submitted to the Parliament. Archbishop Cairncross opposed it, and Bishops Aitken of Galloway and Bruce of Dunkeld denounced it in the strongest language. The other Bishops were either passive, or were friendly to it on the principle of toleration. The charge against them that they were wavering towards the Church of Eome is now abandoned by the Presbyterians, and is too absurd to be refuted. What had the Scottish Bishops to fear from the small number of Roman Catholics then in Scotland, without Bishops, depressed, proscribed, and under heavy disabilities ? The fact that the King was of that religion was of comparatively little consequence. He might have influenced some of the Nobility to adopt it, and a few of the most powerful of them had always avowedly adhered to the Roman Catholic Church, but the events of the Revolution in 1688 sufficiently prove that the nation generally considered this of no importance. Though the measure for the repeal of the penal laws against the Roman Catholics was abandoned, and the Parliament prorogued, Archbishop Cairncross and the two Bishops incurred the serious displeasure of the Lord Chancellor Perth by their opposition ; but Bishop Keith states in reference to Dr Cairncross, that it was " de- servedly too, if all be true which Dr James Canaries, minister at Selkirk, relates." The King, on the 13th of January 1687, most injudiciously and imprudently ordered the Privy Council to deprive him of the See of Glasgow — " a very irregular step surely." Bishop Keith admits ; " the King should have taken a more ca- nonical course." He was succeeded in the Archbishopric by Bishop Paterson of Edinburgh ; and Bishop Rose of Moray, in which See he had been little more than six months, was translated to Edin- burgh. William Hay, successively minister of Kilconquhar in Fife, and of Perth, was consecrated to the See of Moray in 1688. Archbishop Cairncross resided privately until after the Revolution, 878 STATE OP THE CHURCH [1687. when by conforming to King William's government he was nomi- nated to the Irish See of Raphoe on the 16th of May 1693, then vacant by the translation of Bishop Smith to Kilmore. The deprived Archbishop of Glasgow continued in the See of Raphoe till his death in 1701. Bishop Bruce of Dunkeld, the successor of Bishop Lindsay at his death in 1679, was also deprived of that See by the King in 1686, and was succeeded by John Hamilton, son of John Hamil- ton of Blair. The royal displeasure toward Bishop Bruce, how- ever, was of no long continuance. On the 15th of August 1687 he received a dispensation from the King to " exercise his ministry," and on the 4th of May 1688 it is stated that " Andrew, late Bishop Dunkeld,"" was nominated to the See of Orkney, vacant by the death of Bishop Mackenzie in February, at the patriarchal age of nearly one hundred years. Bishop Aitken of Galloway was also ordered to be deprived of his See for opposing the repeal of the penal laws against the Roman Catholics : but his death at Edin- burgh on the 28th of October 1687, prevented this display of the King's caprice. He was interred in the Greyfriars' church-yard, and was succeeded in the See of Galloway by John Gordon, who had acted as a royal chaplain at New York. Though the King was defeated in Pai'liament, he resolved to achieve his favourite project by an exercise of his prerogative. He remodelled the Privy Council, by excluding those who were opposed to his designs respecting the Roman Catholics, and sup- planting them by the Duke of Gordon, the Earls of Seaforth, Traquair,and others of the Roman Catholic religion, and by his own authority issued a dispensation relieving them from subscribing the Test. The King ordered the ritual of the Church of Rome to be celebrated within the Palace of Holyroodhouse, and appointed a number of " chaplains," whom the Privy Council were enjoined to take under their " special care and protection." In February 1687 the King wrote to the Privy Council, denouncing in the strongest language the " field-conventiclers," as " enemies of Chris- tianity as well as of government and human society," and ordered them to be rooted out with all the severity of the laws. James at the same time issued a proclamation by his own " sovereign autho- rity, prerogative royal and absolute power," granting a toleration to all the then Dissenters in the kingdom, known as moderate 1687.] PREVIOUS TO THE REVOLUTION. 879 Presbyterians, Quakers, and Eoman Catholics, on the condition that they acknowledged him as their lawful sovereign, declaring that he would never suffer violence to be offered to any man's con- science, nor use force or invincible necessity against any man on account of his religious principles. This was designated the First Indulgence^ which was not passed in the Privy Council without some opposition. On the 5th of July the Second Indulgence, which was much more extensive, as it allowed complete libei'ty of conscience, was published. All persons were to be allowed to assemble for Divine service in their own way either in private houses, meeting-houses, and buildings erected for that purpose ; but the field-preachings were strictly prohibited, " for which," said the King, " after this our royal grace and favour, which surpasses the hopes and equals the verj- wishes of the most zealously concerned, there is not the least shadow of excuse left." The Bishops generously sent no remonstrance against those In- dulgences, the principles of which are now universally recognized ; and this fact proves them to have been men of enlightened and liberal minds, convinced that the Church of which they were the governors could not be endangered by such ameliorations of the laws. On the 20th of July a convention of Presbyterian preachers was held at Edinburgh, and after some discussion they agreed to accept the new Toleration, and voted a grateful and loyal address to the King, profuse in their expressions of attachment to his per- son, crown, and authority. The sincerity of their professions was soon tested by the Revolution, when they chose to forget these solemn declarations. Early in February 1688, Sir George Mac- kenzie was restored to his office of Lord Advocate, but no criminal informations were lodged, and the kiilgdom was in repose till the Revolution broke out in England, followed by the arrival of the Prince of Orange, the abdication and exile of the King, and the events in Scotland detailed in the author''s " History of the Scottish Episcopal Church from the Revolution to the Present Time," to which the reader is referred as a continuation of this narrative, and as delineating the fall and subsc(iuent fate of the Church, which was ejected at that memorable era by no act of violence on the part of the Presbyterians and Covenanters, who were utterly powerless, however willingly inclined, to inflict upon it any injury in a legal or constitutional manner, but because 880 THE CHURCH PREVIOUS TO THE REVOLUTION. [1G88. the Bishops and clergy would not transfer their allegiance to the new Government, otherwise it is not too rash to affirm that the Episcopal Church of Scotland would have continued the national ecclesiastical establishment. The hardships and sufferings endured by the depi'ived Episcopal incumbents are also detailed in the before -mentioned work. But the Presbyterianism then adopted was not the system of the National Covenant and Solemn League, for maintaining which the obstinate and unhappy Covenanters had incurred the vengeance of the Government. Their prin- ciples were scouted as utterly incompatible with the constitution of the kingdom, and all the blood which the Covenanters sacrificed was literally shed in vain. The " Covenanted work of Reforma- tion" was even denounced in the Presbyterian General Assemblies, and the " Suffering Remnant," of whom James Renwick was the last field-preacher capitally punished, saw to their inexpressible mortification that all their doctrines and pretensions were treated as the chimeras of enthusiasts. THE END. Recently Published, in One Volume uvo, cloth boards, Price Fijteen Shillings ( Intended as a Continuation of the present Work ) HISTORY OF THE SCOTTISH EPISCOPAL CHURCH FROM THE REVOLUTION TO THE PRESENT TIME. BT JOHN PARKER LAWSON, M.A. AUTHOR OF " THE LIFE AND TIMES OF ABCUBISHOF LAUD," ETC. ETC. In the year 1830 the Author began to form a collection of Docu- ments illustrative of the History and Condition of SCOTTISH Episcopacy, particularly since the repeal of the Penal Laws in 1792, the progress of the Church, and its prospects, from statisti- cal and other details ; and he continued from time to time this collection of materials. He also wrote a series of articles entitled the " Present State of the Scottish Episcopal Church," which ap- peared in the British Magazine for 1832 and 1833, when con- ducted by the late Rev. Hugh James Rose, B.D., latterly Prin- cipal of King's College, London, which attracted some attention at the time; and in severa' conversations which the Author had with that lamented and distinguished scholar and divine in London in 1835, he was strongly urged to undertake a regular History of the Church, particularly since its disestablishment at the Revolution. Various events have repeatedly occurred to show that such a work was really wanted, to make the condition and prin- ciples of the Church, as it now exists, fully known, not only in England, but to its own members and others in Scotland. This desideratum^ it is hoped, is now supplied. The above Volume is derived from the most authentic sources and materials, and many curious facts connected with Scottish 2 Ecclesiastical History at and after the Revolution of 1688 are introduced, which are, to say the least, very imperfectly known. The two Volumes just published form a most complete and authentic History of the Episcopal Church of Scotland from the Reformation, including the exciting reigns of James I., Charles I., Charles H., and James II., the whole derived from valuable MSS., Records, Rare Works, and other Authentic Sources. Many cu- rious and interesting details are given of the TRUE ecclesiastical state of Scotland in the Seventeenth Century not hitherto pub- lished. " We hasten to recommend this Work to all who are desirous of becoming acquainted with that portion of history which it embraces. Indefatigable research and interesting detail form a part of its contents, which are greatly enhanced by the ingenious though correct manner in which Mr Lawson constantly contrives to convict his adversaries out of their own mouths. The volume is as amusing as it is instructive, and the copious extracts from contemporary writers and oriLjinal documents give an authenticity to the narrative which counterbalance its defects of style and arrangement." — British Church- man, Jan. 1844. " Mr Lawson's Work has made its appearance at the right time, and will be read with great interest. The narrative of the disestablishment of the Scottish Episcopal Church at the Revolution, is a tale of suffering that has been seldom exceeded in these latter days of the Chnrch."— Oxford Herald. " From the cursory perusal we have given it, we are inclined to think it is a careful and temperate historical narrative of the persecutions, depressions, vicissitudes, and present state of the Scottish Episcopal Church." — Cambridge Chronicle. " It narrates the persecutions, depressions, vicissitudes, and present state of the Episcopal Church in North Britain ; and the narrative is one in which members of the Church of England ought to feel the deepest interest. Our readers will see, even from this imperfect glance, how interesting is Mr Lawson's Work to all who enjoy the privi- lege of belonging to the sister Church of England." — Hull Packet. " The appearance of Mr Lawson's very able Work prompts us to make a leap over the greatest part of a century, and to undertake, undpr his guidance, a sketch of the Church in Scotland from the Revolution in 1688. — We close with a general reference to our Author's full and very elaborate History — a History bringing the time down to the last Consecration." — London Christian liemembrancer, April 1843. " The History of the Episcopal Church of Scotland, in its close connection with the annals of Scottish Presbyterianism, is one of the most edifying episodes that ecclesiasti- cal records present to our notice, and this chiefly because we find therein displayed the horrors and wickedness of schism. — Mr Lawson has shown much ability, industry, and impartiality in his labours, for which we trust that he and his publishers may meet the return they most naturally desire. That this book, however, will not give satisfaction to the Presbyterians, is as indisputable as that no defendant ever heard an enlightened judge sum up a case, with a tendency to make the verdict go against him." — Church and State Gazette, May 19, 1843. Date Due fE 10 "5 2 4 '53