Columbia ^flnftiei^ftp 
 
 mtl)f€ttpofilfttJgork 
 
 THE LIBRARIES 
 
THE '• T lT>T:f^ A '|J"\'^^ 
 
 HISTORY OF SCOJLii^f^RIf ^ 
 
 FROM THE 
 
 UNION OF THE CROWNS 
 
 ACCESSION OF JAMES VI. TO THE THRONE OF ENGLAND, 
 
 THE UNION OF THE KINGDOMS 
 
 IN THE REIGN OF QUEEN ANNE, 
 
 THE THIRD EDITION, CORRECTED. 
 
 PRELIMINARY DISSERTATION 
 
 ON THE PAKTICIP4TI0N OP 
 
 MARY, QUEEN OF SCOTS, IN THE MURDER OF 
 DARNLEY. 
 
 BY 
 
 MALCOLM LAING, ESQ. 
 
 IN FOUR VOLUMES. 
 VOL. 1. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED FOR J. MAWMAN; LONGMAN, HURST, REES, 
 
 ORME, AND BROWN; 
 
 AND A. CONSTABLE AND CO, EDINBURGH. 
 
 1819. 
 
H H 
 
 'V 
 
 DAKNARD AND FARtEY, 
 
 Shiumr Street, London. 
 
=5 g 
 
. V/T// . ^ W/^r/7MW/mi.d' T^rc/m^ ^/- yy////A//r. v..ui,,.„v..i ,,.,..,.,., 
 
 ..n I 
 
 fnfi/Mtne ma mne Janr iaims rejoin masumn:^ ae y^ctrz pon^ 
 
 ie\Wj 
 
 
 J ^;v^^%^'^'^^'W'f^ ^..•#tx^\f^^\;w'i^ ''■"'■'''' 
 
 hiUulu.i /;..■ / yiMinm. /..W.7.. ;!/«/« 
 
' col.coll. j 
 prefac^eLIBRARY. ' 
 
 'J. JL » ^i 
 
 N.YORK. J 
 
 THE FIRST EDITION. 
 
 XHE following work was chiefly undertaken, 
 because a History of Scotland, from the Union 
 of the Crowns to the Union of the Kingdoms, 
 seemed to be still wanting to render its annals 
 complete. The early history of Scotland is in 
 other hands: the most important period has been 
 executed by Dr. Robertson, with a fidelity not 
 inferior to the elegance and the success of his 
 work ; but the domestic transactions of Scotland, 
 from the Accession to the Union, have hitherto 
 remained concealed in manuscripts, or are buried 
 in the obscure vohimes of ecclesiastical disputa- 
 tion. The most prominent events are alone re- 
 corded by English historians ; but the causes, the 
 consequences, and the whole train of subordinate 
 incidents, are imperfectly known. It is not my 
 province to determine, whether, or to what ex- 
 tent I have succeeded, in my design, to give a 
 just and impartial continuation of the History of 
 Scotland, down to the period when its History 
 expires. 
 
 During the whole of the civil wars, it is im- 
 A 2 
 
 /C^ -£ ^OL. KJ O 
 
iv PREFACE. 
 
 possible to separate the history of the two king- 
 doms. Without departing tlierefore from my 
 professed design, I have entered largely into the 
 relative affairs of England, and have omitted no 
 opportunity to illustrate, concisely, the most dis- 
 puted passages concerning the origin and con- 
 tinuance of the civil wars, the character and mo- 
 tives of Charles I. and the cause of his death. 
 It is here, vt'here the judgment is pre-occupied 
 with some historical theory or political system 
 that I anticipate the principal objections to my 
 work ; but if I deviate from our recent historians, 
 I approach the nearer to those original authori- 
 ties which I have been the more careful to quote, 
 and which they, who dispute my conclusions, 
 will do well to consult. 
 
 The manuscript materials employed in this 
 history are chiefly derived from the Ibrary of 
 the Faculty of Advocates in Edinburgh, to which 
 I enjoy a professional access. Calderwood*sMS. 
 cited wherever the printed abstract is defective, 
 Matthew Crawford's and some other manuscript 
 histories, were procured from the archives of the 
 church of Scotland. The records of the court of 
 justiciary, and of the privy council, have been 
 frequently examined : but I am also indebttd for 
 many valuable materials, to the private repo- 
 sitories of genllemen, whose friendship I am 
 proud to acknowledge. Mr. Erskine of Mar 
 communicated to me freely, and without solici- 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 tation, the correspondence of his ancestors, the 
 Earl of Mar and his brother Lord Grange. 
 Through the friendship of Mr. Clerk of Elden, 
 to whose Naval Tactics the nation is indebted 
 so largely for its naval victories, I obtained fnll 
 access to the historical writings of his father, Sir 
 John Clerk of Pennycuick, a commissioner at the 
 Union; and from the honourable Mr. Maule I 
 procured the transcripts of Fountainhall's Me- 
 moirs, and of other MSS. preserved by his an- 
 cestor, Mr. Henry Manle. 
 
 Instead of extracting, fiom these materials, a 
 collection of original papers, in which it would be 
 difficult to separate historical facts from the 
 fanaticism of the age, I have subjoined such 
 Notes and Illustrations as were necessary to ex- 
 plain at length, and to confirm the most doubtful, 
 or disputed passages. in each volume. I have de- 
 parted however from this plan, in the concluding 
 Dissertation, on the supposed authenticity of 
 Ossian's Poems. The prevailing belief of their 
 authenticity, at home and abroad, will render it 
 the less surprising, that, in a question respecting 
 our literature and eaily history, I was solicitous to 
 justify that incredulity which I have so freely and 
 repeatedly expressed. As a short note was found 
 insufficient for the purpose, I have entered, as 
 concisely as possible, into a copious detection of 
 those spurious poems, which are supposed by 
 some to reflect the greatest honour, and by others 
 
vi PREFACE. 
 
 the greatest disgrace, upon that part of the na- 
 tion which claims, and has attested the iaiposture 
 as its own. 
 
 As this work forms a continuation of Dr. Ro- 
 bertson's History of Scotland, it is my design to 
 add, in a preliminary, or rather an intermediate 
 volume, an Historical Dissertation on the parti- 
 cipation of Mary, Queen of Scots, in the murder 
 of her husband. When revived by Goodall, the 
 question was decided by Hume and Robertson ; 
 but the declamatory apologies, which have since 
 appeared, serve only to perplex the reader, and 
 to render the controversy more obscure than ever. 
 A clear and concise deduction of facts, in the 
 order of time, and a critical examination of the 
 letters, sonnets, and other evidence, are still re- 
 quisite to establish the innocence, or the guilt 
 of Mary, on a better foundation than the perver- 
 sion of almost every historical fact. Upon this 
 subject I have already discovered, and may still 
 expect to procure some original materials, sub- 
 servient to the evidence of which the public is 
 possessed. 
 
 The reader will be disappointed who expects 
 to be gratified, in this work, with any pointed, 
 political allusions to the present times. The pre- 
 sent ever appears the most important period, and 
 the political productions of the day are overpaid 
 with praise at the time, in proportion as they are 
 afterwards nfto:le<^ted or contemned. But the 
 
PREFACE. vii 
 
 following- History was chiefly written in a dis- 
 tant solitude, far removed from political discus- 
 sion. It is difficult to speak of the present times, 
 without degenerating either into adulation or 
 censure ; and it would be absurd indeed to render 
 the history of the last century a comment on the 
 philosophy or the folly of the present. 
 Edinburgh, June 2, 1800. 
 
 P. S. The Dissertation formerly proposed, on 
 the participation of Mary, Queen of Scots, in the 
 murder of her husband, is now submitted to the 
 public, as a preliminary work to my History of 
 Scotland, and as a necessary supplement to Dr. 
 Robertson's History, of which mine can only be 
 considered as an imperfect continuation. The 
 subject has unavoidably extended to two volumes, 
 as I did not choose, by retrenchmg the Appendix, 
 to deprive my argument of illustration or of 
 proof. But I trust that the reader will be better 
 pleased to possess the evidence of the Queen's 
 guilt entire, than to be referred to authorities 
 which are not always accessible, and which few, 
 perhaps, would be disposed to consult. 
 Edinburgh, January 18, 1804* 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 VOL. I. 
 
 Introduction - - - 1 
 
 CHAP. I. 
 
 The Facts antecedent to the Murder - 4 
 
 CHAP. n. 
 
 The Fads that succeeded the BTurder - 47 
 
 CHAP. HI. 
 
 The Conferences at York and Westminster 115 
 
 CHAP. IV. 
 
 The Letters - - - - 217 
 
 CHAP. V. 
 
 The Sonnets • - - - ,340 
 
 CHAP. VI. 
 
 Contracts of Marriage - - - 312 
 
AN 
 
 HISTORICAL DISSERTATION 
 
 ON THB PARTICIPATION 0» 
 
 MARY QUEEN OF SCOTS 
 
 MURDER OF DARNLEY. 
 
 THE innocence of Mary Queen of Scots, or intnxiuc- 
 Iier secret participation in the murder or 
 Darnley, her second husl)and, has bet?n long- 
 controverted, and at the distance of more than 
 two centuries, remains undetermined. The 
 opposite works of Buchanan and Lesly were 
 differently received, according- to the prejudices 
 and political disputes of the times. Lesly 's 
 Defence of the Honour of Mary was succeeded 
 on the continen*^ by a crowd of early apologists, 
 who, instead of investigating his facts and as- 
 sertions, wrote as if released by their residence 
 abroad, from the scrupulous observance of his- 
 torical truth. Buchanan's Detection of her 
 Guilt was adopted by Thuanus ; but the autho- 
 rity of Lesly and his numerous followers, was 
 preferred by Camden to the authentic docu- 
 
 VOL. I. B 
 
DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ments in the hands of his friends. The question 
 afterwards continued dormant, till revived by 
 the Jacobites, whose literary talents and party 
 zeal, were employed to vindicate, in every par- 
 ticular, an ill-fated house which they were un- 
 able to restore. The original documents were 
 then examined, and published by Anderson, 
 Keith, and Goodall, Haynes and Murdin ; 
 writers of the most opposite sects and discor- 
 dant tenets, whose industry, however, furnished 
 a large mass of materials for Robertson and 
 Hume. It was undoubtedly the interest of 
 Robertson to render Mary the heroine of his 
 story, and her innocence would have coincided 
 with the political opinions or the prejudices of 
 Hume ; but the conclusions which those great 
 historians have formed of her guilt, can only be 
 ascribed to their deference and unbiassed regard 
 for truth. Their impartial reasonings seemed 
 for a time to decide the controversy j till the 
 arguments of Keith and Goodall were resumed 
 by a series of new apologists. Gilbert Stuart's 
 history, written from motives of personal hos- 
 tility to Robertson, is little else than an elaborate 
 apology for every successive circumstance in the 
 conduct of Mary ; but the others proceed analy- 
 tically, to separate, in order to pervert or to 
 paUiate, historical facts, till the judgment, op- 
 pressed by a minute detail of unconnected par- 
 ticulars, is perplexed and confounded, rather 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 
 
 than convinced. We search in vain for that 
 moral evidence arising- from her conduct, which 
 is often more satisfactory than direct proofs; and 
 the question still remains undecided; or is deter- 
 mined by a gross, and scurrilous perversion of 
 every historical fact. 
 
 On a subject, upon which few discoveries are 
 now to be made, a clear and comprehensive state- 
 ment of facts, in the order of time, is the best cri- 
 terion of historical truth ; and when combined 
 with a full and impartial examination of the direct 
 evidence, may afford a convincing proof of her 
 innocence, or detection of her guilt. The con- 
 troversy may be reduced to seven distinct heads ; 
 under which every important circumstance may 
 be easily comprehended. I propose, therefore, 
 in the following chapters, to investigate histori- 
 cally ; I. The facts antecedent and conducive to 
 the murder of Darnley ; II. The events that suc- 
 ceeded his death ; III. The Conferences at York 
 and at Westminster ; and shall then proceed to 
 examine critically, IV. The Letters from Mary to 
 Bothwell; V. Her Sonnets ; VI. The Contracts 
 of Marriage that passed between them ; VII. 
 The Confessions and Judicial Depositions of 
 those who suffered for the murder of her husband. 
 
 b2 
 
DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 The Facts antecedent to the Murder. 
 
 CHAP 
 
 J • 1. TT is necessary to premise, that in addition to 
 '"""'^ every personal charm and accomplishment, 
 
 Mary's •' i "^ 
 
 early edu- evcrv moral and mental qualification has been as- 
 
 cation, *' 
 
 cribed to Mary ; in order to deduce her innocence 
 the better, from the ideal perfection with which 
 her character is so gratuitously invested. But 
 the court of Henry II. was the most dissolute, as 
 well as the most refined, in Europe. Gallantry 
 and licentious intrigues were the prevailing" vices ; 
 and in France, as well as in Scotland, assassination 
 was a frequent and familiar crime. The early 
 education of Mary under her uncles and Catherine 
 of Medicis, at a court which produced such flagi- 
 tious characters as Charles IX. Henry III. and 
 Margaret of Anjou, and among persons who af- 
 terwards projected the massacre of Paris, can 
 give us no assurance of a mind utterly incapable 
 of those crimes which have been laid to her 
 charge. At the same time, it would be not less 
 unjust, to indulge a previous suspicion of her guilt, 
 than improper to deduce a presumption of her in- 
 nocence, from her education in a profligate and 
 luxurious court. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 
 
 2. Her marriag-e wilh Dnrnley is the first cer- chap. 
 tain indication of the vig-our of her character, 
 
 15*^5 
 
 and of-the spirit wilh which she prosecuted her and mar- 
 favourite designs. Hitherto she had acted in Damiey. 
 France, under the controni of her uncles, and in 
 Scotland hy the advice of Murray, her natural 
 brother, whose? prudent manag-einent, and whose 
 established credit among- the reformers, liad made 
 her government respected, and her person belov- 
 ed. When suddeidy enamoured of the tall and 
 graceful, yet robust stature, the youthful bloom, 
 and the elegant, but superficial uccomplishments 
 of Darnley, she was blind to the vices and defects 
 of his character, and persisted in a mai riage, of 
 which her protestant nobility geneially difsapprov- 
 ed. As his religion was more than suspected, 
 they were justly alarmed for the security of the 
 reformed faith, if their recent alliance with Eng- 
 land should ever be dissolved'. Murray in par- 
 ticular, through whose interest Lennox had been 
 lately restored in parliament, was alarmed at the 
 undisguised resentment of Darnley. He refused to 
 sign an approbation of the marriage^, and being 
 apprehensive of some attempt upon his life, he 
 absented himself, under the pretext of sickness, 
 from a convention of estates which was held at 
 Perth. The Queen, when informed of an oppo- 
 site design, to intercept Darnley and herself, in 
 
 » Keith's History, pp. 268-9. Append. 163-5-7. 
 " Id. 274, Append. 160. Knox, 367. edit. 1732. 
 
 2 
 
e DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, their return from Pertli, passed precipitately to 
 ^-^z'^*-' Calender, across the Forth ; while Murray re- 
 
 15(Jo. 
 
 July 2. mained in Lochleven castle, Arg-yle at Castle 
 Campbell, and Hamilton at Kinneil. The Raid 
 of Beith, as their conspiracy was termed, and the 
 counter-project to assassinate Murray, must re- 
 main uncertain ; and although the reformers had 
 actually assem5)led at Edinburgh, and Randolph 
 had certainly been sounded on the delivery of 
 Lennox and his son to the English, the most pro- 
 bable supposition is, that each was a false, orpre- 
 Juiy 15. mature alarm^. On the queen's return, her vas- 
 
 ' Keith, 287 — 9, 90. Bandolph, the English resident, 
 writes, that Argyle and Hamilton concurred with Murray in 
 opinion, that the nobility would be forced to assemble, to 
 provide for the state ; that on hearing of Lady Lennox's im- 
 prisonment in the tower, some wished the father and son to 
 keep her company ; and that the question was asked him, 
 whether, if they (Lennox and Darnlcy) were delivered up at 
 Berwick, the English would receive them. Ibid. But there is 
 no intimation of any preparation or design to seize them, 
 which Randolph treats as groundless, and in his confidential 
 dispatches to Cecil, he had no motive to conceal the fact. 
 The queen's silence in her proclamations, when a supposititious 
 plot was certainly desirable, assures us, that there was then no 
 evidence of the Raidqf Beith, and that it was justly consi- 
 dered as a false alarm. Melvil, writing from memory, in his 
 old age, adopted the common report of the queen's party, 
 with this additional mistake, that the discontented lords, fail- 
 ing of their enterprise, took to the fields ; (Melvil's Memoirs, 
 p. 56,) whereas they did not take the field till six weeks after- 
 wards, when compelled by the queen. The evidence of Ar- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 7 
 
 sals were summoned to attend in arms, and the chap. 
 conspirators were cited to appear at court, to an- ^---v-^^ 
 
 I • 11 • 1565. 
 
 swer, not for then* treasonable attempt to surprise 
 and seize the person of their sovereign, but for 
 their calumnious reports of the designs of Darn- 
 ley against Murray's life. The Raid of Beith, 
 the only decent pretext for assembling an army, 
 is not once mentioned in the proclamations against 
 them ; a sufficient proof that no certain informa- 
 tion had been procured, nor perhaps any serious 
 belief entertained, of that treasonable design. 
 They were merely charged with uttering false re- 
 ports to excite discontent : Murray's declaration 
 of the conspiracy for his slaughter was pronounc- 
 ed " not so sufficient a purgation as the matter 
 required*;" and upon the queen*s marriage he was "^"'^ ^^* 
 proclaimed an outlaw, as he refused to entrust his 
 person, on her safe conduct, to a court where the 
 influence of Darnley and his associates prevailed. 
 A few days after her marriage, she appointed a 
 numerous army to assemble. The discontented 
 lords, who, after a fruitless consultation at Stirl- 
 ing, had remained a month at their own houses, 
 
 gyle and Rothes, I shall examine afterwards; but tiie plot, as 
 told, was evidently a false alarm. When informed, on re- 
 turning to Perth on Friday, of a design to intercept her at 
 the path of Dron in the neighbourhood, or at the kirk of 
 Beith, nearer Queensferry, the queen passed hastily, early on 
 Saturday morning, through those places, on the road to Cal- 
 lender, to the baptism of Lord Livingstone's child, which she 
 had promised to attend that night. Keith, 291. Knox, 377. 
 * Keith, 304-5. Append. 106. 
 
8 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, retired to the west, and were compelled to take 
 
 v-^^' arms. They were pursued by the queen, who 
 Aug.^25. ^ook the field iu person, and, rejecting- every in- 
 tercession, or offer of submission, drove them be- 
 fore her, from Glasgow to Edinburgh, thence 
 to Dumfries; and with an army of eighteen 
 thousand men, secured their castles, and allowed 
 them no rest nor respite till they were expelled 
 from Scotland. In these measures we discover 
 the decision, spirit, and vigorous resolution of 
 Mary's character, whose suspicions anticipated, 
 and whose exertions very probably prevented, a 
 dangerous insurrection that might have arisen 
 on her marriage. 
 
 ""^"Rfzio*^^ 3. Before a few months had elapsed, her ardent 
 1566. affection for Darnley began to subsidfc;\ His dis- 
 position was vail:, capricious, ungrateful, vin- 
 dictive, and insolent : he was addicted to intem- 
 perate, and low pleasures, in the pursuit of which 
 he deserted the queen ; their domestic dissen- 
 sions were frequently observed ; and when she 
 discovered his numerous defects and vices, she 
 began to repent of her precipitate choice. Slie 
 was still exasperated against Murray and his 
 associates, though inclined, from political mo- 
 tives, to assent to their return ; when instruc- 
 tions received from her uncle, the Cardinal of 
 Lorraine, suddenly induced her to become a party 
 
 « Keith, 3-29. Append. 1G5-6. Kuox,392. Robertson's 
 Hist. 11. 432. edit. 1787. 
 
THE MURDEPv OF DARNLEY. 9 
 
 to the league of Bavonne. It would be unjust to chap. 
 suppose that upon acceding' to the Holy League '^C'^ 
 for the preservation of the catholic faith, she was 
 apprised of the full extent of the design to exter- 
 minate the protestants, hy a general massacre, 
 throughout Christendom; but the instructions from 
 her uncle rendered her inexorable towards the 
 banished lords. Their attainder, in a parliament 
 summoned for the purpose, was prevented only 
 by the murder of Rizio. Darnley, not sa- 
 tisfit'd with the title of king-, had demanded the 
 crown matrimonial; and for the destruction of 
 Rizio, he conspired with Morton, Maitland of 
 Lethington, and other statesmen, whom that 
 upstart foreigner had supplanted in the favour of 
 the queen. The presen'ation of the bani.>hed 
 lords, of their own power, and of the piotestant 
 religion, was their professed, and undoubtedly 
 their real motive for seizing- Rizio, in order to 
 execute him in public, as they at first intended*^; 
 but the assassination of a favourite servant, in the March 9. 
 presence of the queen while pregnant, must be 
 ascribed to the jealous and vindictive caprice of 
 
 * Biiclianan, 1. xviii. p. 34G. Knox, or rather David Bu- 
 chanan, ills coiitinuator, and the Earl of Bedford, (Robert- 
 son's, ii. 430), mention the design to execute Rizio pubh'cly, 
 for whicli |nirj)Ose cords were provided, but that he, was dis- 
 patched by the hasteand rage of the conspirators, to Morton's 
 refiret. Knox, 392. The queen, in her letter to Archbishop 
 Betun, meulious the cords, as inteuded to hang Balfour. 
 
1566. 
 
 10 ' DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, her husband'. When the crime was perpetrated, 
 ^-'-v-*-' she desisted from vain lamentations and tears, 
 and declared that henceforth she would study 
 only revenge. She directed Melvil to rouse the 
 citizens; and the banished lords having-, on the 
 succeeding evening, availed themselves of the plot 
 to return to court, she employed the most skilful 
 manaofement to detach her brother and her bus- 
 band from the conspirators ; secured Murray by 
 the promise of an ample indemnity to his associ- 
 ates, and persuaded Darnley to procure the remo- 
 val of the guards, and to accompany her at mid- 
 night, in her flight to Dunbar''. Bothwell and 
 
 Keith, 332. Ruthven imagined that Rizio had heen taken 
 down to the king's chamber; whereas he was slain at the 
 outer door of the queen's apartment. Id. Append. 123. 
 
 ' " To taunt him in her presence, as she had not enter- 
 tained her husband as she ought." Id. 122. 
 
 « Ibid. Melvil, 67- Knox, 393. It is evident that Murray 
 ■was not accessary to the murder, but availed himself of an 
 intimation of the plot, to return, on the king's invitation, from 
 exile. He received, but it does not appear that he signed the 
 articles framed between Darnley and Ruthven ; yet he is re- 
 presented in this controversy, as the author of the design to 
 murder Rizio in the queen's presence, of which he was pro- 
 bably ignorant. I inquire not into Rizio's familiarity with 
 Mary, of which there is no proof now, but her husband's 
 suspicions. But that Rizio was old, deformed and decrepid, 
 is an interpolation of Dr. Mackenzie's, in his edition of Ruth- 
 ven's Narrative. Mackenzie's Lives of Scottish Writers, iii. 65. 
 Blackwood says, that he was assez agv, laid, morne et mal 
 plaisant (Jebb, ii. 202), which is transcribed by Guy on, in 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1 1 
 
 I. 
 1566. 
 
 Huntley were prepared for her escape, and on chap. 
 summoning- her nobility and subjects to her aid, 
 she returned in a few days, with eight thousand 
 men to Edinburgh, and a^ain expelled her oppo- 
 nents from Scotland. Upon this, as on the for- 
 mer occasion, the same vigour, spirit and resolu- 
 tion are discernible in her conduct ; and she sup- 
 pressed a conspiracy of the most subtle statesmen, 
 by her consummate prudence, art, and address. 
 4. From that moment her husband was uni- '^he 
 
 queen's 
 
 formlv neglected and contemned. It was impos- aversion to 
 
 •^ ~ * Daniley, 
 
 sible ever to forget, or perhaps to forgive, a bar- 
 barous outrage committed in her presence, which 
 from her advanced pregnancy was so dangerous 
 to her life; and Melvil, an acute and penetrating 
 observer, " could perceive nothing from that day 
 " forth, but great grudges that she entertained in 
 " her heart^." Her husband's denial of all share 
 in the conspiracy, incurred the public contempt. 
 She suspected all those who approached his per- 
 son J she even upbraided Melvil, who attempted 
 to reclaim him ; and as no confidence could be 
 placed in his character, the queen's protection and 
 
 the passage quoted by Lord Elibank : " II etoit assez age et 
 iaid, d'une humeur morgue et mauvais plaisant." Lord Eli- 
 Ijank's letter to Lord Hailes, 50. This, if true, corresponds 
 sufficiently with Buchanan's account, that he was ugly, but 
 not past his vigour. 
 
 » Melvil's Memoirs, 66, edit. 1683. 
 
12 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, favour were no sooner withdrawn from him, than 
 ^-— -y^^ he was universally shunned. After her delivery, 
 June 19. she rcmoved secretly from the castle, and was fol- 
 lowed by Darnley, toiilloa, Stirling", Meg-g-etland, 
 and back ag-jiin to Edinburgh, as if she were de- 
 sirous to escape from the presence of her husband. 
 They seldom ate, conversed, or cohabited too^elher: 
 and as hv^r aversion became daiiy more apparent 
 and incurable, he was attended by none but a 
 few of his own servants, and was exposed to 
 studied neglect and undissembled scorn"*. In 
 this situation he embraced a sudden resolution to 
 embark for the continent, and the artful repre- 
 sentations both from Le Croc, and from the 
 privy council, to the French court, of the queen's 
 
 "* Melvil's Memoirs. Robertson, ii. 433. Keith, Pref, vii. 
 Thin, the continuator of Holinshed, observes, that the queen, 
 accompanied by her husband and the Earls of" Huntley, Mur- 
 ray, Bothwell, and others, went to hunt in Meggetland; from 
 which Keith and Goodall infer, that her flight from the king 
 was false. But it proves the extreme accuracy of Cecil's, or 
 Murray's Diary, inserted in our Appendix, " that the queene 
 past to Meggetland to the huntis ;" till which time, ** the 
 king was put to abyide in Dalkeith, and after the returninge 
 from the huntis, was sent," as Thin informs us, " to StriviU 
 ing. About this tyme my lord of Murray aggreeit the king 
 and her, and they past to bed togedder." A temporary re- 
 conciliation was effected by Murray, but it is ridiculous to 
 consider Thin as a well informed historian. Holinshed, ii. 
 384. Keith, 345. Goodall, i. 295. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 13 
 
 endeavours to prevent his flight, are insufficient chap. 
 to clisnfuise the state of sullen desperation to — ^v^^ 
 
 * 1566. 
 
 which he was thus reduced ". 
 
 5. In proportion as her husband sunk, the Earl *."'* ^'^^^" 
 
 * • _ tion lor 
 
 of Bothwell rose in her confidence and esteem. B"thweii. 
 He had adhered, though a protestant, to her 
 mother, the queen regent, against the congre- 
 gation, and continued abroad in the service of 
 Mary, before her return to Scotland, from whence 
 he was soon expelled for a supposed plot against 
 Murray's life. On the disgrace and banishment 
 of that nobleman, he was recalled and received 
 into immediate favour ; and on the assassination 
 of Rizio, he acquired, by his successful services, 
 the most unbounded influence over the mind x)f 
 the queen. In addition to the wardenship of the 
 three marches, till then conferred upon separate 
 persons, he v^'as rewarded with the office of lord 
 high admiral, the abbeys of Melrose and Had- 
 dington, and the castle and lordship of Dunbar; 
 together with an extensive grant of the crown de- 
 mesnes'^. Huntley, whose sister he had lately 
 married, was appointed chancellor by his interest, 
 
 " Keitli, 345-6. From Lethington's letter to Archbishop 
 Beton, (see Appendix, No. I.) it appears, that the members 
 of council, instead of writing, were required by the queen to 
 subscribe those letters to the French court, which are prepos- 
 terously quoted as proofs of iier atfection, and of her hus- 
 band's caprice. 
 
 " Knox, 38G 9G. Anderson, i. 90. Melvil, 67. 
 
I. 
 
 1566, 
 
 14 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, and all favours and preferment passed through 
 his hands. His opinion was consulted upon 
 every occasion, and his interposition was em- 
 ployed in every transaction at court. His ex- 
 tensive possessions had rendered him powerful ; 
 his birth and personal advantages vain and am- 
 bitious; his embarrassments desperate; and when 
 the queen's attachment to Darnley was con- 
 verted into cold mistrust, or a rooted aversion, 
 his faithful services, insinuating address, and 
 unremitted assiduity, are supposed to have made 
 a deep impression upon her susceptible heart. 
 According to the representations of her enemies, 
 she acknowledged to Murray, when she was 
 afterwards confined in Lochleven castle, that 
 she was fir.^t betrayed into Both well's arms, on 
 her return from Alloa^^; but the alarm which she 
 felt, and the anxiety which she certainly express- 
 ed for his safety, on his being wounded in Lid- 
 desdale, are convincing proofs of the most tender 
 Oct. 7. affection. The day before her arrival at Jed- 
 burgh, to hold a court of justice, Bothwell had 
 proceeded to Liddesdale to apprehend some 
 thieves, and was attacked and wounded by one 
 whom he had shot unawares, and attempted to 
 seize^*. There was no insurrection to demand 
 
 " Buchanan's Detection, 2. compared with Keith, 445. 
 
 '* Buchanan says, by a base thief, whom he had mortally 
 wounded with a bullet, after he was taken ; (Hist. 349. De- 
 tect. 3.) Birrel observes, that he was " deidly woundil in the 
 
 1 
 
15()(). 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 15 
 
 her presence ; no visible circumstance to require, 
 or even to justify, a visit from the queen. 
 " But the queen understanding- the certain re- 
 " port of the accident,^' according- to a con- 
 temporary altogether partial to her fame, ** was 
 
 hand by John Elliot, or John of the Park, whose head was 
 sent in to Edinburgh thereafter;" (Diary, 6.) the MS. which 
 Craw fur d employed, entitled The Historic and Life of King 
 James the Sext, informs us, that " being sent to Liddesdale, 
 to corapell certane uubrydlet, insolent theevies to shaw thair 
 obedience, they invaded him fearcelie, and hurt him in 
 divers partes of his bodye and head, &c. and that in par- 
 ticular by the handis of John Eliot of the Park;" (infra 
 note 15) and Robert Melvil mentions in a letter, that "Both- 
 well having occasion to ride to Liddesdale, to bring in some 
 of the Elliots, was hurt by one of them," and ad^ls, that 
 "the nobility were in gude accord among themselvis, and 
 the country quiet." Keith, 35 J. From all this it appears, 
 that there was no insurrection, and that Bothwell received 
 some severe wounds from the despair of a thief, (noted in 
 Pinkerton's Ancient Scottish Poems, ii. 332,) whom he had 
 previously shot. Goodall adds some facts of his own, 
 which Tytler has softened; that on the news of this insure 
 rection, and of Botluvell being slain, the queen (and coun- 
 cil, according to Goodall,) with an armed force, made a sud- 
 den march to the hermitage; but, finding the rioters had fled 
 (or, according to Goodall, had taken refuge in England,) 
 she the very same day returned to Jedburgh. Goodall, i. 
 304. Tytler, ii. 39. Robertson justly observes, that when 
 the queen found Bothwell in no danger, she instantly return- 
 ed ; after which we hear no more of the insurrection, and 
 have no proof that the rioters took refuge in England, i. 389, 
 note. 
 
]5 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. " SO heichlie greevit in liairt, that schoe took na 
 " repose in bodye till schoe sawe hiin^\" No 
 
 '^ The Histork and Life of King James the Sext, the ma- 
 nuscript from wliich David Crawfurd of Drumsoy, compiled 
 his Memoirs. It is necessary to observe, that Crawfurd's 
 Memoirs are a downright forgery, \\hich has introduced 
 much error into tiie present controversy. Having found a 
 MS. history of the times, he expunged every passage unfa- 
 vourable to Mary, inserted every fact or assertion which he 
 found in Camden, Spottiswood, or Melvil, whom he quotes 
 on the margin as collateral authorities ; and after compiling 
 memoirs of his own, protests, that without wresting the words, 
 he has adhered to the sense and meaning of the original. 
 Crawfurd's Memoirs, pref. Keith, who possessed a copy of 
 the MS. gave the first intimation of the forgery (p. 333), , 
 which the very first paragraph is sufficient to detect. Id. 3.51, 
 note. From Goodall's advertisement to the second edition, 
 it appears, that the MS. was transferred to Mr. Hamilton of 
 Wishay. On making proper inquiry, I had the good fortune 
 to find it among the papers of his descendant, the present Lord 
 Belhaven, and a few copies have been since printed. From 
 the same advertisement it appears, that Goodall collated 
 Crawfurd's Memoirs, not only with Keith's copy, but with 
 another copy of the same MS. in the Advocate's library, en- 
 titled. Memoirs of the Four Regents, nor had Goodall the 
 honesty to explain the forgery which he must have perceived, 
 or to state, in a single instance, the discrepancy between the 
 MS. and the printed memoirs. Crawfurd was historiogra- 
 pher for Scotland in Queen Anne's reign ; and Whitaker de- 
 termines, that the memoirs were written by Gordon of Loch- 
 nvar, one of Mary's commissioners, from his minute account 
 of the conference at York, which Crawfurd transcribed al- 
 most verbatim from Melvil's Memoirs, with the addition of 
 some papers from the Cotton Library. Whitaker's Vindica- 
 
1566. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 17 
 
 sooner was she informed of his situation, than she chap. 
 rode from Jedburgh, with a few attendants, to 
 Hermitag-e Castle, whither Bothwell had been 
 conveyed ; a journey of twenty Scotch miles, 
 in the month of October, through a country in- 
 fested with banditti, and at that season almost 
 impassable'^ On discovering- that his wounds 
 were not dang-erons, she recollected the hazard to 
 which she was herself exposed, from the licentious 
 borderers, and she returned to Jedburgh that same 
 
 tion of Mary, iii. 451. Crawfurd procured large transcripts 
 of the Coltoii papers, published afterwards by Anderson 
 and Goodall, which he lodged in three volumes in the Advo- 
 cate's library. 
 
 '* Cecil's, or Murray's Diary, to which Buchanan adheres, 
 affirms, that Bothwell was hurt in Liddisdale, and that the 
 queen rode to Borthwick, on the 7th of October, and on the 
 8th, when apprised of the accident, she posted from thence, 
 by Melrose, to Jedburgh ; and then, though assured of his 
 life, to the Hermitage, from which she returned to Jedburgh 
 that night. Crawford's MS. observes, that " being at Jed- 
 burgh, she understood the certain report of the accident, &c." 
 but I suspect much that Buchanan is correct. Birrel's Diary 
 mentions, that on the 8th of October the queen went out of 
 Edinburgh to Jedburgh, to hold a Justice-eyre, and adds, " I 
 Earl of Bothwell, was deidly hurt in the hand by John Elliot 
 of Park." It is certain that she posted to the Hermitage, 
 on the first notice of Bothwell's wound ; but if she went to 
 Borthwick on the evening of the 7th, Birrel would mark her 
 departure, and Bothwell's accident,^ in his Diary, next day, 
 when he heard of both. If so, she must have performed a 
 journey, from Borthwick to the Hermitage, and back again 
 to Jedburgh, of more than sixty miles. 
 
 VOL. 1. c 
 
I56u. 
 
 18 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 night. The consequence of this expedition was 
 a burning- fever, occasioned by a rapid journey of 
 forty miles, by the night air, and above all " by 
 " the ofreat distress of her mind for the Earl of 
 " Bothwell;" or, according to Lethington, who 
 conceals the circumstance of the journey, her 
 sickness was *' causit of thoucht or displeasure, 
 ** and I trow, by that I could wring furder of 
 *' her avs'in declaration to me, the rote of it is 
 " the king"." Her life was despaired of for 
 many days. On beginning to recover, she was 
 visited by her husband, whom she received so 
 coldly, that he returned to Stirling the very next 
 Oct. 28. day^^ In the meanwhile, Bothwell was con- 
 
 " Crawfuid's MS. Keith, Pref. 7. (Append. 133-5. See 
 Appendix at the end of the volume. No. I. 
 
 '^ His late appearance at Jedburgh is ascribed to inatten- 
 tion, but the Historic of James the Sext, agrees with Bu- 
 chanan, that when he understood at Glasgow, " of this sud- 
 daine visitatiouu, he addrest himselfF with expeditioune, first 
 to Edinburgh, and next to Jedburgh, notwithstanding quhair- 
 of he was not made welcome as appertenit ;" which the au- 
 thor ascribes to the murder of Rizio. Le Croc writes on the 
 24th from Jedburgh : " Si es^t ce qu'ii a et6 adverty par quel- 
 qu un, et a eu du temps assez pour venir s'il eust voullu, c'est 
 une faulte que je ne puis excuser." Keith, Append. 133. 
 But Birrell, who might have heard early of Bothwell's wound, 
 from the information sent to the queen at Borthwick, informs 
 us, that notice of her sickness came not to Edinburgh till 
 October 25, when public prayers were ordered for her life. It 
 is not likely that Darnley, who had no friend at court, re- 
 ceived earlier notice at Glasgow ; and his expedition must be 
 
 2 
 
THE MURDER OF DxVRNLEY. 19 
 
 reyed to Jedburgh ; and on the convalescence of chap. 
 both, j^he resumed her progress by Kelso and ^^^v^*-* 
 Berwick, along* the eastern coast, till she arrived Nov. i. 
 at CraioTTiillar. 
 
 6. During- her residence there, she sunk into a Conference 
 
 _ at Craig- 
 
 profound melancholy ; heaving deep sighs, and miliar. 
 frequently repeating this emphatical expression, / 
 could wish to be dead. Her husband came and 
 remained a week; but Le Croc, the French re- 
 sident, observes, that the injury she has received 
 she will never forget. " For scho hes done him,^' 
 says Lethington, " sa great honour without the 
 *' advyce of her frends, and contrary to the ad- 
 *• vyse of her subjects, and he on the tother part 
 ** hes recompensit her with sik ingratitude, and 
 *' misuses himself sa far towards her, that it is 
 " ane heart break for her to think that he sould 
 " be her husband, and how to be free of him scho 
 " sees na outgait^^." There were now no hopes 
 of an accommodation between them ; among 
 other reasons, says Le Croc, " because he will 
 *' neither humble himself as he ought, nor can 
 " the queen perceive any nobleman speaking to 
 " him, but immediately she suspects some con- 
 " trivance between them^"." The expedient of 
 
 admitted, in reaching Jedburgh on the 28th, the day after 
 Hay, the messenger's departure for France. Keith, Pref. 7. 
 Append. 136, where it appears that Bothwell had already 
 been conveyed to Jedburgh. 
 
 •» See Appendix, No. I. '" Keith, Pref. 7. Melvil, 75, 
 c2 
 
1566. 
 
 20 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, a divorce was suggested by some of the nobility 
 pi'esent, who perceived her settled g-rief and in- 
 veterate aversion; but upon this subject the con- 
 ference can only be explained in her own words. 
 During the subsequent conferences at West- 
 minster, she sent a protestation touching the 
 king's murder, to be signed again by Argyle and 
 Huntley, and again returned. According to this 
 protestation, Lethington and Murray proposed 
 at Craigmillar to these noblemen, that they 
 should procure a pardon for Morton and his as- 
 sociates, upon condition that Huntley should be 
 restored to his forfeited estate and honours ; and 
 these objects they professed to accomplish, by de- 
 vising some expedient for the queen's divorce. 
 When they went with Bothwell into the queen's 
 presence, and proposed the divorce, she required, 
 that it should be lawfully made, without preju- 
 dice to her son. " Madam," said Lethington, 
 " fancie ye not that wi are heir of the principal 
 ^' of your graces nobilitie and counsal, that sail 
 " fynd the moyin that your majestic sail be qiiyt 
 " of him without prejudice of your sone : and 
 " albeite that my lord of Murraye heir present, 
 <* be lytill less scrupulus for ane protestant than 
 " your grace is for ane papist, I am assurit he will 
 *< looke throw his fingeris thairto, and will behald 
 " our doeings, saying nathing to the same/' ** I 
 '^ will that ye do nathing," said Mary, " quhair- 
 *' to any spot may be layit to my honour or con- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 21 
 
 " science, and thairfor I pray you rather let the chap. 
 *' matter be in the estait as it is, abvdins;' that ^-'-v^^ 
 
 ' . * =* 1566, 
 
 " God of his gudness put remeid thairto, that ye 
 " beleifing- to do me service, may possibill turn to 
 " my hurt and displeasour.'' *' Madam, ^' said 
 Lething'ton, " let us g"uyde the matter amongis 
 " us, and your g-race sail see nathing* but g'ude, 
 " and approvit be parliaments^" From these 
 premises, Argyle and Huntley are instructed to 
 conclude, and to maintain by single combat, that 
 Murray and Lethington were the authors of the 
 murder of which they had unjustly accused the 
 queen. Had Murray even proposed a divorce 
 with the queen's consent, the conclusion, that 
 therefore he murdered her husband without her 
 knowledge, has been justly ridiculed, as uncon- 
 nected with the premises ; and is worthy only of 
 the proof that was offered, if a judicial combat 
 can deserve that name^^ But according to 
 Paris's first declaration, which it is necessary to 
 anticipate, Bothwell informed him, that he was 
 sure of Lethington, the enterpriser of the whole, 
 and of Argyle, and Huntley his brother, whose 
 
 *' Anderson, iv. Part ii. p. 189. Goodall, ii. 318. From 
 these words of Lethington's, it is evident, that the queen, who 
 perceived his meaning by her former answer, acquiesced iu 
 the design. 
 
 -' Hume, V. note M. Robertson, ii.322. A very different, 
 and a far more natural account of the conference, is given by 
 Buchanan, in his Detection and History. 
 
I. 
 
 1566. 
 
 22 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, hand writs he had for the deed ; and that they 
 were willing- to have done it the last time that 
 they were at Craigniillar. If Lethington, there- 
 fore, allades, as his discourse undoubtedly does, 
 to the murder, whatever conclusion may be de- 
 duced from Murray's silence, the queen*s answer 
 but too evidently implies a foreknowledge, and 
 her acquiescence in Lethington's reply, a tacit 
 approbation of the whole design. 
 Baptism at 7. On her return to Stirling, she continued sad 
 Decern. 17. and pensive, frequently crying, both before and 
 after the baptism of her son. The preparations 
 for the ceremony, and the reception of the foreign 
 ambassadors, were consigned to Bothwell"^ ; but 
 the presence of her husband increased her morti- 
 fication. No provision was made for his appear- 
 ance either at the baptism, or at the suhsecjuent 
 festivals ; and no reason can be assigned for his 
 absence, but a prohibition from the queen. It 
 was expected that he would withdraw from court, 
 two days before the solemnity from which he 
 was excluded, but he remained confined to his 
 chamber, from a motive of sullen caprice ; de- 
 prived of every appearance of power or respect ; 
 shunned by the nobility, that they might avoid 
 suspicion j and not visited, on account of the 
 queen's displeasure towards him, even by the fo- 
 
 '^ Keith, Pref. 7. Robertson, ii. 435. Melvil, 77. 
 
1566, 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 23 
 
 reign ambassadors under the same roof-*. The 
 English however lamented at their departure, that 
 Darnley was so much slighted ; and the Earl of 
 Bedford exhorted Melvil to entreat tlie queen, that 
 she would entertain her husband as she had done 
 at first, for her own honour and the advancement 
 of her affairs. The intercession of Bedford was 
 also employed at her own request for the banished 
 lords; and while still inexorable towards her 
 
 '^ Camden's assertion, tliat Bedford was instructed by Eli- 
 zabeth not to give Darnley the title of king, \\;is certainly 
 not the cause of his absence. The injunction is not to be found 
 in Bedford's instructions, and was unknown at the time to 
 Le Croc, who would not have failed to assign that cause for 
 his absence, rather than the queen's displeasure. The only 
 question is, whether he was excluded by her prohibition, or 
 by his own caprice. But Le Croc writes from Edinburgh, so 
 early as December 2d, " I think he intends to go away to- 
 morrow; but in any event, I am much assured, as I al- 
 ways have been, that he will not be present at the baptism." 
 His uniform assurance, that whether Darnley went or not, he 
 would not be present at the baptism, must have been derived, 
 not from Darnley's caprice, which might induce him to re- 
 main, but from the queen's resolution, that he should not ap- 
 pear. As his departure was wished for, that he might not 
 appear, so he remained, in order to expose the queen ; and 
 Le Croc refused to see him, evidently on that account. Keith, 
 Pref. 7. Robertson, i. 390, note. Knox, 346. But the His- 
 tory of James VL positively affirms, that " Nather did 
 " King Henrie cum thair, albiet he was in Striviling, all that 
 " quhyll, nather was he permitted, or requyrit to cum op- 
 " pinly." 
 
24 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, husband, she consented to their pardon on con- 
 '^>'v^*^ dition of their continuing- in banishment for two 
 years more ; but this ostensible condition was mi- 
 tig-ated by Bothvvel), through whose influence 
 their recall was obtained'^. The consistorial ju- 
 risdiction of the Archbishop of St. Andrew's, 
 which had been suppressed at the reformation, 
 was first restored by the queen's sig"nature on the 
 23d of December^''. A remission was then granted 
 to Morton and his associates, upon a promise 
 ■which they had transmitted by Archibald Douglas, 
 during the baptism, that they would concur in a 
 bond to support the queen's authority and aban- 
 don the king- ; and in Paris's first declaration, 
 the reasons for which the pardon was procured, 
 are explained by Bothwell, namely, that Morton, 
 Ruthven, and Lindsay would never fail him, as 
 he spake for their grace^^ The queen went that 
 same day (Dec. 24) to Drummond castle, to 
 spend the Christmas there and at Tullibardine ; 
 while Darnley returned to his father's at Glas- 
 gow^^ where he was immediately seized with 
 
 « Melvil, 76. Robertson, 531. Morton's Confession, Ap- 
 pendix. 26 Sgp Appendix, No. II. 
 
 ^^ Privy Seal Record. Paris's, aud Morton's Confessions, 
 Appendix. 
 
 *• A letter from Lennox to his son, proposing to wait on 
 his majesty at Peebles, as soon as he hear> u\' l.-i-s journey 
 tbitbt-T, and dated at the c.)nLlusioD, " frM-i, C " . this 
 
 26th December, (1566,/' has been quoteo . 
 
156G. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 25 
 
 acute pain«?, and from the livid spots or pustules chap. 
 with which his body was covered, his disorder has 
 been variously imputed to the small-pox or to 
 poison^. Upon the hist day of December, she 
 returned, and remained for a fortnight at Stirling-, 
 where Lethington was married, and without visit- 
 ing her husband, to whose danger she seemed in- 
 different, she carried her infant son (Jan. 14) to i->g7. 
 Edinburgh. 
 
 Darnley was then at Stirling. But the letter was evidently 
 written in December, 15G5, when we know that Darnley 
 went to Peebles, and the year (1566), which Keith has an- 
 nexed to the month, within a parenthesis, was supplied from 
 conjecture, by Thomas Innes, at the top of the page, instead 
 of the conclusion of the letter. Keith, Pref. 7. MSS. Bri- 
 tish Museum, Ayscough's Catalogue, .3199. fol. 76. See 
 Tytler, ii. 71, who forgot that a date within a parenthesis is 
 always conjectural. Knox's, or his continuator's intimation, 
 that Darnley went without uood night, to his father's at Glas- 
 gow, has been explained away, that he went without bidding, 
 instead of receiving good night. Tytler, ii. 67. 
 
 ** Melvil,77. Knox, 346. Robertson, i. 405. Birrell says, 
 that " he was sick of the small-pox ; but some said he had 
 gotten poison." The History of James VI. observes " that 
 his haill bodye brak out in evill favourit pustullis, be the force 
 of young age that potentlye expellit the poyson quhilk was 
 given him to haist the end of bis dayes." The small-pox was 
 sufficient then, in the king's situation, to excite a surmise of 
 poison ; but Keith's assertion (from Freebairn's transla- 
 tion of Bois Guillibert, 110), that it was the great pox, is 
 not to be found in Lesly, and is one of those petty lies that 
 disgrace this controversy, Keith, 364. note. 
 
C2Q DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. 8. Upon the 20th of January she wrote to Be- 
 v-^,-^w ton, Archbishop of Glasg-ow, her ambassador at 
 QueeJ's Palis, complaining- of two of his servants, as the 
 §"3?%^° authors of dangerous, or rash reports. It appears 
 that Walker, one of his servants, had informed 
 her at Stirling, of a rumour that the king, assist- 
 ed by some of the nobility, intended to seize and 
 crown the young prince, and to assume the go- 
 vernment in his son's name. Highgate, whom 
 Walker named as his author, denied the report, 
 but acknowledged that he had heard and com- 
 municated to Lennox, another report of an oppo- 
 site design to imprison the king. The letter ex- 
 plains the mutual suspicions which the queen and 
 Darnley had long entertained ; and accounts, 
 perhaps, for his departure from Stirling, and for 
 the sudden removal of her son to Edinburgh. 
 But it contains no indication of returning affec- 
 tion ; no intimation of her intended journey to 
 visit her husband ; no allusion whatsoever to his 
 sickness, or to his absence from court : on the con- 
 trary, it concludes with bitter reflections on his past 
 ingratitude ; on his zealous and bust/ inquisitions 
 into her actions; and on his inclination to dis- 
 turb her government, if he were able, in conjunc- 
 tion with his father and their friends, whose at- 
 tempts she treats at the same time with contempt 
 and scorn^". Next day she departed for Glasgow, 
 
 '" "And for the king our husband, God knawis alwayis 
 our part towartis him ; and his behaviour and thankful- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 27 
 
 and was accompanied, as far as Callender, by cfiap, 
 Huntley and Bothwell, whose confidential ser- v-^,^w/ 
 vant, Nicholas Hubert, nicknamed French Paris, jaii. 21. 
 she received as her chamberlain. Upon Thurs- 
 day the 23d, she arrived at Glasg"ow, where 
 Darnley had already beofun to recover. \yh^n 
 no cause had occurred, since her letter to Arch- 
 bishop Beton, on Monday, to surmount her recent 
 disg-ust and aversion, much less to revive her 
 former attachment to her husband, she employed 
 the most tender assiduities to remove his suspi- 
 cions and regain his confidence ; to sooth and as- 
 sure his mind of a sincere reconciliation ; and to 
 persuade him to return with her in a litter to 
 
 ness to us is semblablcment well knawin to God and the 
 warld, speciallie our awin indiftVrent subjects seis it, and in 
 tlieir hartes, we doubt not, condeninis the saniyne. Ahvayis 
 we persave hira occupeit and bissy aneuch to half inquisi- 
 tioun of our Doyngis, quhilkis, God willing, sail ay be sic 
 as nane sail half occazoun to be offended with thamc, or to 
 report of us any wayis bot honorably; howsoever he, his 
 father, and their fautoris ^eik, quhilkis we knaw want na 
 gudewill to make us haif ado, gif tliair power wer equiva- 
 lent to thair niyndis. Bot God moderates their forces well 
 aneuch, and takis the nioyen of executioun of thair pretensis 
 fra thanie : for, as we believe, they sail find nane, or verray 
 few approveris of thair counsalis and devysis imaginit to our 
 displesor or niislyking." Keith, Pref. 8. This, it is said, has 
 no bitterness in it, but is merely a confidential letter to her 
 ambassador, the day before she went to visit her sick hus- 
 band. Tytler, ii. 09. 
 
1567. 
 
 28 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Edinburgh. The two first of her letters to 
 -' Both well, were written at Glasgow, upon Fri- 
 day night and on Saturday morning. They be- 
 long to a different branch of my subject, but it 
 is here material to observe, that, as it appears 
 from the evidence of Nelson (one of Darnley's 
 servants, who was strangely preserved at his 
 master's death), that the first design was to carry 
 the king to Craigmillar, she must, at this precise 
 period, have corresponded with Bothwell in order 
 to procure and to prepare the house for his recep- 
 tion at the Kirk of FiehP'. Another material 
 transaction is also observable. During this 
 interval of the queen's absence, Bothwell, ac- 
 cording to a Diary communicated to Cecil, 
 containing a short recital of the most material 
 passages, undertakes a journey to Liddesdale 
 which has not yet been explained^^ From 
 the date of Morton's pardon, upon Christmas 
 eve, Bothwell and Lethington had attended the 
 queen till her return to Edinburgh, January 14; 
 and there is no evidence that the former quitted 
 her then till their separation at Callender. While 
 the queen went to conduct her husband to Edin- 
 burgh, Bothwell, under the pretext of a journey 
 
 ^' Anderson, iv. 165. Nelson's Declaration. Appendix, 
 XXV. 
 
 ^' See Appendix, No. III. The authenticity of this Diary, 
 lo which I have adhered as to dates, will be examined in the 
 sequel. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. og 
 
 to Liddesdale, undertook a very different ex- chap. 
 pedition, which we discover only from Morton's 
 Confession. When Morton came from Wed- 
 derburn, after his return from banishment, Both- 
 well met him, as he informs us, at Wliittiiiffham ?^othweii's 
 
 ~ interview 
 
 in East Lothian, and proposed the assassination ^ith Mor 
 
 ton at 
 
 of Darnley, whom it was the queen's design to whitting- 
 remove for the murder of Rizio. On his de- 
 clining- the enterprise, as he was just relieved 
 from exile, and was still forbidden to approach 
 the court, Bothvvell and Archibald Douglas his 
 cousin, renewed their importunities, but he re- 
 quired a warrant under the queen's hand, which 
 the former was never able to procure^^. The 
 sequel is explained by Douglas in a letter writ- 
 ten to Mary after the execution of Morton, 
 requesting her to intercede with James VI. for 
 his return to Scotland. At Morton's desire he 
 accompanied Bothwell and Lethington back to 
 Edinburgh, and returned with a verbal message 
 from the latter: " Shaw to the Earl Morton, 
 ** that the queen will hear no speech of that 
 " matter appointed unto him^*." As the letter 
 is obviously framed by Douglas to attest his own 
 innocence, the message is also couched in such 
 ambiguous terms as might exculpate the queen. 
 But it is observable that the queen herself, pre- 
 
 " Morton's Confession. Appendix, XXXIV. 
 '* Archibald Douglas's Letter. Appendix, id. 
 
1567 
 
 30 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 vioiis to the conferences in England, avowed 
 her knowledge, that Lethington and Morton 
 were privy to the murder; declared that the 
 former at least w^ould be very loth to appear 
 against her, and of course was fully apprised of 
 Lethinirton's and Bothwell's interview with 
 Morton at Whittingham^*, And as the date of 
 that interview must be fixed at the period of 
 her absence at Glasgow, when Bothwell was 
 employed to provide a house for the reception 
 of her husband, so the sole purport of the mes- 
 sage was to shew to Morton, that the queen 
 would hear no speech, not of the murder, of 
 which the least intimation must have alarmed her 
 if innocent, but of the written warrant, the matter 
 promised, or appointed unto him, which Morton 
 demanded under her hand. 
 persuades 9. Her husbaud was persuaded to return to 
 band to' re- Edinburgh ; and on Monday, January 27th, she 
 Edhiburgh. brought him to Callender, on Tuesday to Lin- 
 lithgow, where she remained next day ; and on 
 Thursday she conveyed him to his lodgino-, 
 at the Kirk of Field, to which place she was 
 escorted by Bothwell, whom she met upon the 
 road. The place was chosen under the pretext 
 of free air, or of preserving the young Prince, 
 who was lodged in the palace, from the danger 
 of infection^*'. The house stood upon the town 
 
 ^* Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 55-90. 
 
 '" Paris's second Declaration. Appendix, No. XXVIII. 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 31 
 
 wall, between the ruins of the Kirk of Field, chap. 
 
 I- 
 and the Bhickfriars, a Dominican monastery, 
 
 which was also ruinous, and from which it was 
 separated by gardens of some extent. It had 
 belonged of old to the prebendaries of the Kirk 
 of Field, and consisted of two lodgings upon 
 different floors, connected by a tiirnjnke, or 
 spiral staircase. There was a postern door in the 
 cellar, opening through the town wall, and another 
 door in a passage leading from the lower apart- 
 ment into the garden^\ Its situation may be 
 still more precisely fixed : it was within the 
 college walls, partly upon the site, and ad- 
 joining partly to the east side, of the principal's 
 house. The only houses near it were some 
 beggar's huts, above the cowgate, and Hamilton 
 house, on the north side of the present colIege^^ 
 
 The house seems to have stood long empty, probably since 
 the reformation, when the prebendaries were expelled. 
 Blackwood's assertion, that Lord Bortliwick had lately 
 found benefit in it, from the free air, is transcribed by every 
 apologist for Mary. Blackwood could assert witliout con- 
 tradiction in France, what was unknown to Lesly in Scot- 
 land ; and the fact is introduced by a series of the grossest 
 fictions, for which his sole authority was the letter already 
 quoted, from Mary, communicated to him by Archbishop 
 Beton. Jebb, ii. 214. 
 
 " Hay's Confession, and Nelson's Declaration. Appendix, 
 
 '* Whitaker transfers the house to the present infirmary, 
 
 from the appearance of a gun port, which Arnot mistook 
 
 for a door, in the town wall. But the situation of the 
 
 house was always well kuown. The Blackfriars was con- 
 
32 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. A solitary house, so accessible and open on 
 every side, must have been chosen for the pur- 
 
 I. 
 
 1567, 
 
 verted in 1578 into the high school, and the Kirk of Field 
 into the College in 1581. In Professor Thomas Crawford's 
 MS. account of the College of Edinburgh, written about 
 the year 1640, it is thus described : " The Kirk of Field 
 stood along towards the east from the Potter-row port, 
 having a garden on the south, betwixt it and the present 
 town wall. On the east end thereof was the lodging of the 
 provost, where now the principal hath his rooms ; and to 
 the east from thence, (within the present College yards) 
 was the prebendaries chamber, blown up with fire at the 
 murder of King Henry ; and to this religious convent be- 
 longed all the college yards." Hamilton House was the 
 large building at the north side of the upper area,' and from 
 this description, it appears that the church .stood in the 
 middle of the area, which was not cleared of its ruins 
 till 1629. As the provost's lodgings were at the end of the 
 small garden south of the church, the prebendaries chamber 
 adjoining, must have extended along, and occupied a part 
 of, the principal's present house, with its gable end towards 
 the town wall. In De Wit's curious map of Edinburgh, 
 from a drawing by Sir Robert Gordon, in 1646, the provost's 
 or principal's lodgings, and the ruins of the prebendaries 
 chamber, where Darnley was blown up, are distinctly 
 marked. See the plate. The provost's lodging occupies 
 the front of the principal's present house, and is separated 
 from the prebendaries chamber by a narrow passage, form- 
 ing the little court or close to which Paris and Hepburn 
 allude in their depositions. They are both so narrow, 
 that the prebendaries house, as appears from Nelson's evi- 
 dence, consisted only of a single chamber and closet above 
 stairs, with a little gallery having a window in the south 
 gable, through the town wall ; and another chamber beneath 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 33 
 
 pose. As the king's consent to return was un- ^^hap. 
 certain, and as the first desig-n was to carry him ^--^-v^^ 
 
 , , 1567. 
 
 to Craigmillar, the house must have been pro- 
 vided under the queen's direction, during her 
 absence at Glasgow, not by Murray or Morton, 
 but by one whom she durst not afterwards 
 accuse of the murder; and Both well alone stood 
 in that predicament. The house belonged to 
 Robert Balfour, one of his creatures, upon whom 
 it had been lately bestowed by the queen^^ 
 But the proper place for the reception of the 
 king at the Kirk of Field, was Hamilton-house, 
 which was then unoccupied. Nelson, his servant, 
 " knew (of) no uther house quhill the king Carrieshim 
 " lychtit, at quhilk tyme he past derectlie to the of Field. 
 " Duikis hous, thinking it to be the lugeing 
 " preparit fur him; bot the contrare wes then 
 *' shawen to him by the queene, quha convoyet 
 '* him to the uther house." The keys were de- 
 livered by Balfour, the owner, to Nelson and 
 Bonkle, the king's servants, but the key to the 
 postern door in the cellar, was not to be found. 
 The outer door, at the bottom of the staircase, 
 
 the former, with the cellar to which there was a postern 
 door through the town wall. The cellar served perhaps 
 for the kitchen, into which Paris, in his first declaration, 
 says that he entered from the little court; and the house 
 which I have described, corresponds with the simplicity or 
 penury of the times. 
 
 ^* Dec. 9, 1566. Privy Seal Record, B. xxxv. fol. 96, 
 
 VOL. I. D 
 
34 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, vt'as afterwards employed, by the queen's direc- 
 v.<»^/-«w/ tions, as a cover for the vat in which her husband 
 bathed, and no security but the portal doors of 
 the gate remained. His chamber had been 
 furnished with hangings on his arrival, but a 
 new bed of black figured velvet *' standing 
 " therein,'^ was removed by her order, lest it 
 should be soiled by the bath, and an old purple 
 travelling bed was placed in its stead. A green 
 bed was prepared for the queen, in the lower 
 chamber beneath the king's. She slept there 
 either on Wednesday or on Thursday night, 
 upon which occasion the keys of the lower 
 chamber, and of the passage leading into the 
 garden (that of the cellar was retained by Bon- 
 kle) were delivered to Paris and Beton, her 
 servants, with whom they remained*^ Upon 
 Friday, February 7th, she slept again at the 
 Kirk of Field. At other times she returned to 
 the palace, but omitted no mark of affection or 
 of assiduous attention during the day. Notwith- 
 standing these indications of attachment to 
 Darnley, many suspected some enterprise of 
 Bothwell's against his life ; but no one durst 
 apprize him of his danger, as he revealed all, 
 says Melvil, to some of his own servants, who 
 were not all faithful : or rather, according to 
 Buchanan and Morton, and as explained by the 
 
 *" Anderson, iv, 165. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 35 
 
 event, told every thing- to the queen herself". It chap. 
 is said, that the house was deserted by some ^--^/^-^ 
 of his servants, who were aware ot the design ; 
 and it is certain that Durham, the one particularly 
 accused of betraying- his master, was rewarded 
 by Mary, five days after the murder, with a 
 place and pension*^ Lord Robert Stewart, her 
 bastard brother, informed him confidentially 3 
 ** that if he retired not hastily out of that place 
 " it would cost him his life, which he told ag-ain 
 " to the queen," upon Friday nig-ht, " and this f^^- '• 
 " advertisement," Melvil adds, " moved the 
 *' Earl of Bothwell to haste forward his enterprise." 
 Next morning-, instead of searching- privately to 
 discover the conspiracy, and prevent the dang-er, 
 she confronted her brother, who denied what 
 he durst not affirm in her presence, with her hus- 
 band, who g-ave him the lie direct, and as their 
 hands were already on their swords, she endea- 
 voured, according- to the conclusion of her ene- 
 mies, to instigate those tierce young men to some 
 
 -" Melvil, 78. Buchanan's Hist. L. xvii. p. 350. Morton's 
 Confession, Appendix. 
 
 ^* On Monday he kept the king's body in a neighbouring 
 house, from public inspection, till it was removed to tlie 
 abbey, (Melvil, 78.) And on Saturday the 15th, when the 
 king was buried, this porter of Darnley's was appointed, by 
 the queen's signature, master of the wardrobe to the voung 
 prince for life, with a yearly salary, of an hundred pounds 
 Scots. Privy Seal Record Book, 36. fol. 15» 
 
 D 2 
 
^Q DISSERTATION ON 
 
 act of sudden revenjye*^ On these occasions, two 
 of the letters preceding the murder were sent to 
 ^^^^' Bothwell, who lodged at the palace ; and on Sa- 
 Feb. 8. turday she bestowed a pension upon Margaret 
 Garwood, her confidential maid, " quha was 
 " previe, and ane helpar of all thair lufe." On 
 Sunday, February 9th, she conferred the vicarage 
 of Dunlop upon Archibald Beton, usher of the 
 chamber, who retained the keys of the Kirk of 
 Field". After supper she visited her husband, 
 with whom she remained in familiar conversa- 
 tion till a late hour, when, as if suddenly recol- 
 lecting Bastian's marriage with Margaret Car- 
 wood, at which she had promised a mask to her 
 servants, she returned to the palace with her 
 whole train. During this visit, the murderers 
 were introduced by Paris through the garden and 
 back door, into the lower apartment, and the 
 gunpowder was placed in the queen's chamber, 
 Where he immediately under the king's bed. Two hours 
 by^Botr'^ after midnight, the house was blown into the 
 
 well. 
 Feb. 10. 
 
 *2 Melvil, 78. Buchanan, L. xviii. p. 350. 
 
 ** Liferent Pension to Margaret Garwood of 300 merks out 
 of the lordship of Kincleven, at Edinburgh, viii. of February 
 1566. Privy Seal Record, b. 36. fol. 7. " To Archibald 
 Beton, our soverain's daily servitor of thair previe chalnier, 
 the vicarage of Dunlop, during his lifetime, at Edinburgh, 
 the nynt day of February, 1566." On Friday the 7th, the 
 parsonage of Old Roxbergh was given ^o James Beton, son 
 of Robert Beton, of Creich. Id. fol. 8. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. S7 
 
 air ; and the whole city was alarmed by the ex- chap. 
 plosion. The dead bodies of the king", and of a 
 domestic who slept in his chamber, were found 
 at some distance, untouched by the powder; two 
 other servants were blown up or buried in the 
 ruins ; while those who slept in an adjoining- 
 gallery were preserved by the intervention of a 
 large stone wall*\ 
 
 10. From those facts that preceded the mur- Conciu- 
 der, two conclusions, opposite to each other, re- 
 main to be deduced. The first is, that Murray 
 and his associates planned the conspiracy, and in- 
 stigated Bothwell to commit the crime, by the 
 hopes or assurance of obtaining the queen's hand. 
 The second is, that it was perpetrated by Both- 
 well alone, with the queen's consent ; for hitherto, 
 the vindication of his innocence has never been 
 
 ''* See the depositions of Hay and Hepburn, and Nelson's 
 evidence, in the Appendix. The proclamation to discover 
 the murderers mentions " the bodies of his grace and of a 
 servant found dead, besides sum otheris that thro' the 
 ruin of the liouse were oppressit, and some at God's plea- 
 sure preservit." Anderson, i. 36. Symonds' and Taylor's 
 boy, who lay in the little gallery, seem to have been pre- 
 served with Nelson, " Quhilk never knew of any thing 
 quhill the house in which they were was fallen about them." 
 Nelson's Evidence. Besides Taylor, who lay in the king's 
 chamber, Mackaig and Glen, his grooms, appear, from Ar- 
 chibald Douglas's trial, to have been also killed. Aruot's 
 Crimiaal Cases, 9-18. 
 
38 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, attempted, except by GoodalP. Murray, ac- 
 «^^^^^ cording- to the first conclusion, had proposed, 
 r,.ni*!Ii„c. that notwithstandinGf his illeoitiniate birth, the 
 "ui'it^^^ queen should entail the crown upon himself and 
 his family. For that purpose he endeavoured to 
 prevent her marriage, or to render it abortive : 
 he conspired, at the Raid of Beith, to murder 
 Darnley, and to secrete her person in Lochleveii 
 castle ; he contrived the assassination of Rizio in 
 her presence, that the child of which she was 
 pregnant might perish ; and devised tlie murder 
 of the king her husband, in order to precipitate 
 the queen into the arms of Bothwell, and in con- 
 sequence of the public discontent which their 
 marriage might excite, to assume the govern- 
 ment in his own name. The sole evidence of 
 these facts is the Instructions from the lords 
 and abbots of Mary's party, to Lesly, Bishop of 
 Ross, and his colleagues, her commissioners at 
 York. But these Instructions are obviously de- 
 vised and penned by the bishop himself*'. In 
 
 ^^ Goodall bestows a whole chaj3ter upon Bothwell's inno- 
 cence, (vol. i. chap, X. p. 237) the only part of that strange 
 medley of fact and fiction, which his transcribers have omit- 
 ted. In his notes on Scotstarvet, he renews the intimation, 
 " that there are people who do not believe that he, Bothwell, 
 was guilty of that murder ;" {Staggering State, &c. 152.) and 
 bestows the same vindication on Sir James Balfour, in the 
 life prefixed to Balfour's Practics. 
 
 *' The fact is evident from the same declamatory language 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 39 
 
 the immense mass of correspondence with France chap. 
 and England, no trace has been found of a pro- 
 posal by Murray to entail the crown on his own 
 family ; nor was any attempt ever made to re- 
 move his illegitimacy ; nmch less to alter the 
 lineal succession, acknowledged by parliament, 
 of the house of Hamilton to the Scottish throne. 
 
 and unconclusive arguments which Lesly has employed in 
 his defence of Mary's honour. It is also evident that the 
 Instructions were arbitrarily framed, in the same manner 
 with the protestation already quoted, which was drawn by 
 Lesly, and transmitted from England to be subscribed by 
 Argyle and Huntley, concerning their former declarations to 
 the bishop, of the conference at Craigmiilar. The Instruc- 
 tions state, that in order to procure a pardon for the banish- 
 ed lords, they offered to " find causes of divorce, outlier for 
 consanguinity, (as the dispensation was not published), 
 or else for adultery, or then to get Darnley convicted of 
 treason, for consenting to her retention in ward, (on the 
 murder of Rizio) or what other way to depeschc him, quhilk 
 altogether her grace rejusit ; so that having the means to be 
 separate, and yet wald not consent thereto, it may be clearly 
 considered that her grace wald never have consented to the 
 murder;" which is therefore transferred to the lords them- 
 selves. Goodall, ii. 359. This at least is explicit, if not 
 logical ; but when the particulars of the conference are ex- 
 ))lained in the Protestation, it appears that none of those 
 means, if suggested at all, were rejected by the queen. When 
 the Commissioner, instead of requesting an exact account of 
 the conference to be sent, transmits a protestation so coiitrary 
 to his Instructiona, to be signed by his constituents, we may 
 conclude that the Instructions, as well as the Protestation, 
 were devised by himself. Anderson, iv. 188. Goodall, ii. 314. 
 
I. 
 
 1567. 
 
 40 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, Where the preliminary fact is historically false, 
 we need not be surprised that Lesly's explanation 
 of the Raid of Beith, (to murder Dainley and to 
 imprison the queen, by anticipation, in Lochleven 
 castle), should be attested, among" others, by Ar- 
 gyle and Rothes, Murray's former confederates, 
 when it was convenient for their party to main- 
 tain the assertion. The assassination of Rizio in 
 the queen's presence, was not concerted by Mur- 
 ray, who merely availed himself of a plot to seize 
 and execute an insolent favorite, as a fair oppor- 
 tunity to return from exile. These premises, 
 indeed, were evidently so false, and so remote 
 from the conclusion, that Lesly afterwards inter- 
 posed another, of which there is no proof what- 
 soever, direct or presumptive; namely, that 
 Darnley, some time after the murder of Rizio, 
 proposed to certain nameless noblemen, to assas- 
 sinate Murray ; and that Murray, when inform- 
 ed by them of his danger, conceived such deadly 
 hatred, that he never ceased till he had accom- 
 plished the destruction of his enemy, for his own 
 preservation. When summoned to court on 
 some frivolous pretext, he returned to St. An- 
 drews on his wife's miscarriage, before the mur- 
 der ; but if absence aione be a proof of guilt, 
 what vindication remains for innocence to pro- 
 duce ? The opportunity was undoubtedly cho- 
 sen, when, from the resort of the nobdity to court, 
 the suspicion might be divided among them, or 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 41 
 
 at least removed from the real conspirators ; but chap. 
 Murray's supposed associates were also all absent; 
 the murderers of Kizio were still prohibited from 
 approaching within seven miles of the court; 
 Morton was then at Abernethy*^ and the nobiHty 
 present consisted entirely of Bothvi'eirs and of 
 the queen's friends". 
 
 But wherever the direct, or presumptive proofs Rejected. 
 of a crime are defective, we must resort to those 
 probable motives which are supposed to actuate 
 the conduct of men. The designs of Murray upon 
 the crown are entirely conjectural; but his ambi- 
 tion could propose no immediate benefit from the 
 removal of Darnley, whose existence, even on the 
 renewal of Mary's affection, would have been no 
 obstruction to Murray's regaining- his ascendancy 
 in her councils, and whose death, in the first in- 
 stance, would have been advantageous only as it 
 
 *^ Hume's History of the House of Douglas, 333. Mor- 
 ton's Confession, Appendix. Th. Crawford's Notes on Bu- 
 chanan, 170, from which it is evident that Morton had not 
 returned to court. After the confercme at Whittingham, he 
 crossed the Forth at Earlsferry, to visit his nephew, the Earl 
 of Angus, a student at St. Andrews, from whence he went to 
 Abernef hy, and was there the day that the murder took place. 
 
 *^ The Archbishop of St. Andrews, the Earls of Athol, 
 Argylc, Huntify, Caithness, Cassillis, Sutherland, and Both- 
 well, the Bishops of Ross and Galloway, the Lords Fleming 
 and Livingston, tlie Treasurer, Justice Clerk, and Secretary 
 Lethington. Council's Letter to the Queen Regent of France, 
 Appendix, No. V. 
 
42 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, released the queen from an odious husband. To 
 ^-^v-w precipitate Mary into the arms of Bothwell, in 
 order to confirm the suspicions of her subjects, 
 and by a general insurrection to deprive her of the 
 crown, were the objects which Murray must, 
 have proposed from the beginning-, if criminal; 
 but these were evidently too consequential, pre- 
 carious, and remote from view. Murder may be 
 committed from hatred, or from the hopes of im- 
 mediate gaiu : never for the mere purpose of 
 transferring the imputation of the crime to others. 
 But to conceive and plan the destruction of Darn- 
 ley, that the queen might be suspected of a share 
 in his death ; that she might not only be suspect- 
 ed, but involved in a marriage with the chief in- 
 strument of her husband's murder; that on this 
 disgraceful alliance, she might be opposed or de- 
 serted by her own subjects ; that she might not 
 merely be resisted, but imprisoned and deprived 
 of her paternal kingdom — all this implies a train 
 of consequences too remote to be distinctly fore- 
 seen a priori, and too refined and visionary ever 
 to operate as any rational inducement upon the 
 human mind. The queen, if innocent, might es- 
 cape suspicion, or might vindicate her own inno- 
 cence, to the satisfaction of her subjects, by the 
 prosecution of the murderers, and by the detec- 
 tion of Murray's guilt. Bothwell, if suspected, 
 might be disappointed of a marriage which was 
 still contingent, and if punished, or even rejected 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 43 
 
 by the queen, might he induced to reveal his most chap, 
 secret associates. But the marriage itself, of 
 
 which the remote and calamitous consequences 
 were the sole objects of pursuit, would have cre- 
 ated a rival, far more dangerous and hateful than 
 Darnley, whose address and power might have 
 finally triumphed over his opponents, and have 
 secured to himself the possession of the crown, 
 to which Murray secretly aspired. Or if the 
 opposition of Bothwell were once surmount- 
 ed, the removal of the young prince would 
 have raised a more formidable competition for 
 the crown ; and the contest^must have been re- 
 newed with the Ilamiltons, against whom Murray 
 found it so difficult, when regent, to maintain the 
 legitimate authority of the kiug, and whose 
 insidious vengeance in a few years deprived hiai 
 of his life^\ Judging, therefore, from the ordi- 
 nary principles of human conduct, we can dis- 
 cern no rational object for which Murray would 
 concert, or even engage in the murder, without 
 the queen's consent. 
 
 11. The remaining conclusion, that the mur- Conclusion 
 der was planned and executed by Bothwell, with the queenS 
 the secret approbation and connivance of the ° 
 queen, is confirmed by every circumstance in the 
 preceding detail. Her blind and ardent affec- 
 tion for Darnley, subsiding into cold indifference, 
 
 *' See Appendix, No. IV. 
 
1367. 
 
 44 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 and converted by a barbarous outrag-e into dis- 
 gust and aversion ; her deep melancholy, the 
 effect of contrition for an ill-advised attachment 
 and imprudent marriage ; her uniform and undis- 
 guised neglect of her husband, and the con- 
 tempt to which he was reduced, even on a public 
 solemnity, in the presence of foreign ambassadors ; 
 the pardon granted to the murderers of Rizio, 
 to whom she was inexorable, till it became her 
 interest to conciliate their support ; her supine in- 
 difference, and return to Edinburgh, during the 
 king's sickness, contrasted with her impatient 
 haste and anxiety to visit Bothwell, when slight- 
 ly wounded ; her sudden journey to Glasgow on 
 his recovery, and her reconciliation to him, which 
 is otherwise unaccountable, and which no man 
 can believe to have been sincere ; the artful po- 
 lic}^ with which she persuaded him to return, and 
 conducted him herself, to the house which 
 Bothwell had prepared for his destruction, dur- 
 ing her absence, with her direction or consent^'; 
 
 ^^ Blackwood, conscious of the force of this fact in Nelson's 
 evidence, inverts it entirely ; represents Murray, who was 
 certainly not at Glasgow, as advising the queen to carry her 
 husband to the Kirk of Field, as a place of good air, where 
 Lord Borthwick had lately been well lodged ; and on their 
 arival there, when conducting her husband by the hand to 
 Hamilton House, adjoining to the provost's, ellefut destour- 
 neepar Mourray, S^menee dedans la nmisonfuneste, Jebb, ii. 
 214. Of all the early apologists for Mary, Blackwood is 
 undoubtedly the greatest liar. 
 
I. 
 
 1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 45 
 
 her removal of the outer door, and of the new vel- chap. 
 vet bed ; the keys of the lower chamber, where 
 the powder was laid, entrusted to her servants; 
 the pensions bestowed at that critical moment, to 
 secure their connivance or silence; and the pre- 
 text employed for her absence that very night, 
 when the murder was committed, coincide with 
 the worst and strongest motives to be discovered 
 for her conduct; namely, to rid herself of a hus- 
 band whom she had long detested, for one whom 
 she preferred. Even the revival of the primate's 
 consistorial jurisdiction, was subservient to Both- 
 well's divorce or her own ; nor in the conference 
 at Craigmiilar, did she reject that expedient, for 
 which no immediate or decent pretext could be 
 found. The canon law could give no divorce 
 for her husband's infidelity (of which there is no 
 historical evidence) ; the pretext of consanguinity 
 was removed by a dispensation ; and nfter the 
 unsuccessful example of Henry VIII. a papal 
 bull for dissolving the marriage was disgraceful, 
 doubtful, and full of delay. The benefit of being 
 restored by Bothwell to the independence of a 
 single state, and a second choice, was great and 
 immediate ; nor can we presume upon her inno- 
 cence, from her education at a vicious court, among 
 nations already inured to the crime. A part of 
 her courtiers had assassinated Rizio, in order to 
 gratify the king. Others, without the ambition 
 imputed to Murray, were ready to gratify their 
 
46 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, mistress by a similar reveng-e upon Darnley, for 
 ^^'v^^ which her exalted station promised impunity; for 
 who would suspect a woman, or who would ven- 
 ture to accuse, even if they should chance to sus- 
 pect, the queen ? When the two conclusions are 
 fairly examined, we discover no proof nor proba- 
 ble motive of Murray's guilt, but on the contrary, 
 the strongest presumption not only that the queen 
 was privy, but that she was accessary to the 
 death of her husband. Had she proceeded no 
 farther, his fate might have been overlooked by 
 her subjects, and forgotten by the world : but as 
 suspended, her marriage with Bothwell, the chief murderer, 
 was deemed a convincing proof of her guilt, the 
 conclusion must be suspended, that we may exa- 
 mine the events which succeeded the murder. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 47 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 The Facts that succeeded the Murder. 
 
 1 . \^ ARLY in the morning, the people, alarmed chap. 
 -^^^ at the sudden explosion, and report of v^^v^ 
 the murder, hastened eajjerly to inspect the bodies, „\^^^-. 
 
 ' o J 1 » All inquiry 
 
 and to ijwestio'ate the circumstances of such an i"to the 
 
 " _ murder 
 
 atrocious crime. But the bodies were removed suppressed, 
 to the next house, on the arrival of Both well 
 with a guard from the palace ; nor was Melvil, 
 or the Piedmontese ambassador, admitted by the 
 soldiers to examine the corpse of the king'. It 
 was Bothwell's first design to persuade the peo- 
 ple that the house had been burnt by lightning, 
 or by some accidental fire ; but the appearance 
 of the dead bodies, without any marks of powder 
 or of external violence, in an adjacent garden 
 beyond the walls, excited a prevailing report and 
 belief, that the king and his servant had been 
 strangled and carried thither, before the house 
 was blown up^. The privy council wrote 
 immediately to the queen mother of France, 
 to explain the disaster j affirming that the 
 
 • Melvil, 78. Birrell's Diary, 7. Le Croc, the French 
 ambassador, was then in London. Keith, 26'3, n. 
 
 * Melvil, 78. Crawford's MS. 
 
( 
 
 48 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 queen and most of her nobility present, who 
 had remained till midnight in the king's 
 ^^^'^' chamber, had been very nearly destroyed by 
 the explosion; and from the signatures to 
 the letter, we discover that the nobility and 
 prelates then at court, consisted entirely of Both- 
 well's and of the queen's friends^ In the after- 
 noon an inquisition was taken by the justice ge- 
 neral; but when Nelson declared that Bonkle 
 had the key of the cellar, and the queen's ser- 
 vants those of the lower chamber, " hald there," 
 said TuUibardine the comptroller, " there is ane 
 "grund;" after which no further inquiry was 
 made*. In the meanwhile the queen kept her 
 bed, which was hung with black as a sign of 
 mourning; with candles ready to light, as the 
 daylight was excluded, according to the fashion 
 of the times. If we may trust farther to the 
 same evidence of Paris, Bothwell, upon his re- 
 turn, was admitted to a conference under the 
 curtain ; and the fact is confirmed by Melvil, 
 whom he met, and informed at the door, " that 
 
 ' See Appendix, No. V. 
 
 * James Murray, Tullibardine's brother, was the author 
 of the Placards, accusing Bothwell of committing the murder 
 with the queen's consent. TuUibardine himself, from whom 
 his brother must have derived his information, Avas undoubt- 
 edly innocent; and was shipwrecked in Slietland, in pursuit 
 of Bothwell. The inquisition therefore was stopped from 
 tenderness, not to Bothwell's, but to the queen's reputation. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 49 
 
 " the queen was sorrowful and quiet, which oc- chap. 
 " casioned him to come forth''.'^ Upon Tuesday ^-^'v^*-' 
 
 *■ , *' 1567. 
 
 morning- she rose as usual, and on the arrival of Feb. iiv 
 dispatches from her ambassador at Paris, she 
 Vrote in ansM'er, ** that the house in which the 
 " king' was lodged had been blown into the air, he 
 " lying" sleeping in his bed ;" and exaggerated the 
 effects of the explosion, the dihgence which the 
 privy-council had already exerted to discover the 
 murderers, and her own resolution to exact a ri- 
 gorous and exemplary vengeance; but no ex- 
 pression of affliction, or of pity for his untimely 
 fate, not even the name of husband, escapes her 
 pen. On the contrary, she seems to congratulate 
 herself upon her own escape ; intimates that the 
 enterprise was directed as well against her as 
 against the king, as she lay most part of the last 
 week in the same lodging, remained there with 
 most of the lords till midnight; " and of very 
 ** chance tarried not all night, by reason of a 
 ** mask at the abbey; but we believe it was not 
 *• chance, but God, that put it in our head." 
 Next day a proclamation was issued, in the same Feb. 12. 
 terms with the letter, offering a reward of 20001. 
 Scots (1661. sterling) to discover the murderers*. 
 The king's body was brought that same day to 
 the abbey chapel, and was " quietly," or rather 
 
 * Paris's Declaratiou, Appendix, XXV. 
 
 • Keith, pref. 8. Anderson, i. 37. 
 VOL. I. E 
 
1567. 
 
 50 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 " very secretly'^, interred by night," (upon Sa- 
 turday the 15th,) *' without any kind of solemnity 
 " or mourning' heard among all the persons at 
 " court;" and without the presence of a single 
 nobleman, or officer of state, but the justice 
 clerk®. On the same day that her husband 
 
 ' Birrell's Diary, Cecil's or Murray's Diary, Appendix. 
 Feb. 15. 8 Historic of James VI. ; not a word of which is to be 
 
 found in Crawford's Memoirs- That History and Birrell's 
 Diary confirm Buchanan's account of the nocturnal secrecy 
 and indecency of the funeral: and Lesly is unable to specify 
 a single person present, except Bellendeu, the justice clerk, 
 and the laird of Traquair. Anderson, ii. 23. Buchanan 
 adds, that the king was buried beside Rizio, whose body the 
 queen had formerly removed from before the abbey church 
 door, where it was first interred, to the royal vault where 
 James V. and his children were buried. The fact is strange- 
 ly confirmed by Melvil's Diary. The two Melvils, the cler- 
 gymen, on their visit to Buchanan before his death, found the 
 printer at the very passage in question, anent the burial of 
 Davie, at the end of the 17lh book, and having stopped the 
 press, Mr. Thomas Buchanan, his cousin, represented hovr 
 hard it was for the time, that the king would be offended at it, 
 which might stay the whole work. Buchanan immediately 
 appealed to them, whether he had told the truth, concerning 
 the burial of Rizio, to which they assented. (See Appendix, 
 No. XIX.) And the fact, which must have then been noto- 
 rious, is not contradicted by Keith's objection, that when the 
 vault was opened, by Sir Robert Sibbald, (1683) it was com- 
 pletely filled with the bodies of James V. his queen, and 
 Darnley, together with the two infant daughters of James 
 V. and his natural daughter, the Countess of Argyle. Keith, 
 368, note. Dalyel's Scottish Poems of the 16th century. 
 Pref. 26. Edin. 1801. The argument implies, that there 
 
1667. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 5 1 
 
 was buried, she conferred on Durham, the 
 servant who had deserted or betrayed him, a 
 pension, and a place about the person of her son, 
 and on Bothweil she bestowed the reversion of 
 the feudal superiority of Leith, which had been 
 already mortg-aged to the citizens of Edinburg-h, 
 and which gave him not only command of the 
 harbour, but from their desire to retain the supe- 
 riority, a proportionable influence over the capi- 
 tal^. Bothwell, however, in proportion to his 
 
 was no room for Rizio's body, which the regents would not 
 have suffered to remain there, and which must have been re- 
 moved before Murray's sister, the Countess of Argyle, who 
 died in 1585, could have been placed in the vault. Calder- 
 wood informs us, apparently on different authority from 
 Buchanan's, that Rizio's body, when removed from the 
 abbey church door, was buried in the night time, near Queeu 
 Magdalen's. Calderwood, MS. ii. 5. 
 
 ® Robertson, ii. 334. " Botlivtell having spent his whole 
 estate at his return from France in the year 1565, he was first 
 made lieutenant-general over all the borders ; he got the ab- 
 bey of Melross, which was better before his intromission there- 
 with thao 50001. Scots per annum. The abbey of Hadding- 
 ton, worth lOOOl. Scots, castle and lordship of Dunbar, be- 
 longing to the crown, worth 2000 marks per annum; captain- 
 ship of Edinburgh Castle, with a yearly allowance of 1000. 
 He was made duke of Orkney, and lord of Shetland, being 
 the property of the crown, worth 10,000 marks Scots. He 
 should have had the superiority of Leith, and feu of the 
 Canongate, beside Edinburgh, to be more able to make a 
 party to the town of Edinburgh ; and he had delivered to 
 him of the queen's jewels, to the value of 20 or 30,000 
 crowns." Answers from Scotland to a note containing cer- 
 
 e2 
 
52 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, power, and his favour with the queen, incurred 
 "•"^^^^ the public imputation of the murder. At first 
 
 1567. , . 11. 
 
 the most opposite reports were spread, that it 
 was committed by Huntley and Bothwell, or by 
 the contrivance of Murray and Morton ; and 
 which party soever were guilty, we may be as- 
 sured that they would be diligent in transferring 
 the imputation of the crime to the other. But 
 the reports and suspicions of the public soon 
 Bothwell settled upon Bothwell alone ; and, in consequence 
 suspected, of the proclamation of a reward, a placard was 
 Feb. 16. affixed to the public goal, upon Sunday, the 16th, 
 accusing him and three others, as the authors of 
 the murder, " the queen herself assenting there- 
 to." Another proclamation, desiring the accuser 
 to appear, and to subscribe the charge, produced 
 Feb. 19. a second placard on the 19th, the writer of which 
 required that the reward should be first lodged 
 in honest hands; proposed that three of the 
 queen's servants. Seigneur Francis, Bastian and 
 Joseph, should be arrested and stopt, and on these 
 conditions offered to appear, with four others, to 
 sign the accusation upon Sunday next. But the 
 queen and Bothwell had already retired to Seton, 
 where a pension was conferred upon Seigneur 
 Francis, the very day after the placard appear- 
 ed^" ; and all inquiry into the murder was silent- 
 tain inquiries from England ; Matthew Crawford's MSS. W, 
 2, 23, fol. 53. Adv. Library. 
 '* To Seineoure Johne Francisco de Buffo, knyt of the 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 55 
 
 ly, yet so completely abandoned, that from the chap. 
 proclamation issued on the 12th, it does not ap- ^-^^^^ 
 pear that a privy council was once held till the 
 1st of March, when it met for the ordinary dis- 
 patch of affairs". 
 
 2. But the queen's supine inattention to the Jl^iX^m', 
 murder of her husband, after the promise of such "u"pecJeY* 
 rierorous vengeance, can neither be imputed to \^«™"r- 
 
 . . . . ' derers. 
 
 excess of grief, nor to the imbecility incident to 
 a female reign. She was neither a minor nor 
 susceptible of tutelage. Her real character was 
 displayed, at her marriage, in the quick appre- 
 hension, the spirit, vigour, and resolution with 
 which she anticipated and quelled an insurrection; 
 and at the assassination of Rizio, by the most con- 
 summate dexterity, art, and address. If innocent 
 herself, she must of course have suspected some 
 desperate party or leader then at court ; nor could 
 she possibly believe that her husband was mur- 
 dered, without the least surmise of the real au- 
 thor, or the cause of his death'*. Her suspicions 
 
 order of St. James of Spada, and of her hienes master of 
 houseboldis, a pension of 4001. yearly, for life, out of the 
 bishoprick of Ross : At Seton, 20th Feb. 1566. Privy-seal 
 Record B. 36. fol. 9. 
 
 " Anderson, i. 36. ii. 156. Buchanan's Detection, 24. 
 Melvil, 78. 
 
 ''^ Blackwood, among other fictions on the subject, informs 
 us, that on leaving the Kirk of Field, to go to the palace, on 
 the night of the murder, the queen met Paris, Bothwell's ser- 
 vant, and asked him ^vhere he had been, that he smelt so 
 
1567. 
 
 54 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, must have fastened either upon Murray and his 
 adherents among- the reformers, or on the Hamil- 
 tons, the hereditary enemies of Lennox, or on 
 Bothwell and his associates ; the three parties that 
 prevailed at court. The first might justly allege, 
 that he had neither procured the house, nor con- 
 ducted the king- thither; the second, that they 
 were all absent except the archbishop. But if the 
 queen suspected Murray, the Hamiltons were 
 ready to join with Bothwell and Huntley, either 
 to imprison him, or, if he fled from justice, to 
 attaint him in parliament : if she suspected the 
 Hamiltons, Bothwell, Lennox and Murray were 
 prepared to reduce a potent family that had as- 
 pired to the crown. If, on the contrary, she had 
 suspected Bothwell, but had rendered him too 
 formidable to be arrested at court, the conduct 
 proper to be pursued was obviously the same 
 as at the murder of Rizio; to retire to the castle 
 of Edinburgh, or to Stirling castle, and under 
 the direction of Murray, Mar, or Lennox, to 
 summon her nobility and subjects to her aid. 
 If innocent, she must have suspected somebody, 
 and the means of detection were evidently in her 
 hands. The persons who provided, or furnished 
 the lodging, the man to whom the house belong- 
 strongly of gunpowder. Jebb, ii. 215. Blackwood unluckily 
 forgot, that if the fact were true, the queen could be at no 
 loss to discover the murderer, and should have arrested Paris* 
 if not his master, next day. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 55 
 
 ed, the servants of the queen who were entrusted 
 with the keys, the king^s servants who had pre- 
 viously withdrawn, or were preserved at his death, 
 her brother, Lord Robert, who had apprized 
 him of his danger, were the first objects for sus- 
 picion or inquiry, and their evidence would have 
 afforded the most ample detection. Had she 
 consulted either the preservation of her character, 
 or the gratification of a just revenge, the path 
 lay open before her, and a small portion of the 
 spirit, vigour and address which she had formerly 
 exeited on the assassination of Rizio, would have 
 sufficed to discover the real conspirators, and, 
 by an adequate vengeance, to rescue her own re- 
 putation from censure. But if accessary, or in 
 the least privy to the murder of her husband, 
 she must have acted precisely as she did. After 
 a slight or specious inquiry, she would omit all 
 farther investigation of a crime of which she was 
 conscious; and retire from the keen observation, 
 and reports of her capital, in order that the me- 
 mory of her husband during her absence, and the 
 silence of government, might gradually be effaced 
 from the mind of the people. 
 
 3. But the queen, if innocent, was not left to "^"^ ^"^i''- 
 
 '■ ' cions must 
 
 the pretext of ignorance, and her suspicions must, ''*^^ fi^ed 
 indisputably, have been fixed upon Bothwell. well. 
 Voices were heard at midnight in the streets, 
 paintings were posted up on the public buildings, 
 
1567. 
 
 56 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, denouncing" the murderers" ; nor was Mary ig*- 
 norant of those placards that accused Bothwell 
 and his accomplices, her servants, and herself. 
 Lennox advised her, in a letter from Houston, 
 February 20th, to assemble the nobility and 
 estates of the realm, with all convenient dilig-ence, 
 for the trial of the murder, and appealed to her 
 feelings in the most pathetic terms ; being the 
 father to him that is gone. In her answer from 
 Seton, dated the 21st, but received on the 24th, 
 she observes, that his advice to summon a con- 
 vention of estates, was already prevented by a 
 parliament which she had proclaimed, wherein 
 the murder should be the first subject investigat- 
 ed, and nothing left undone to promote the in- 
 quiry. The parliament had been proclaimed be- 
 fore Christmas^*, and was still so distant, that 
 Lennox renewed his former advice : That as the 
 meeting of parliament was remote or uncertain, 
 as the matter demanded an immediate punish- 
 ment, and as certain placards had been posted 
 up in answer to her proclamations, accusing the 
 contrivers of the murder by name j her majesty, 
 for her own honour and for the tranquillity of the 
 realm, should apprehend the accused and commit 
 
 " Buchanan's Detection, 22. 
 
 " Knox, 444. Quarto edit. Edinb. 1644. Calderwood, ii. 
 30. MS. 
 
 2 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. Sf 
 
 them to prison ; should assemble the nobility chap. 
 with dilig-ence, and by public proclamation, sum- ^-^•^/■^i/ 
 mon the authors of the placards to appear. His 
 advice was sound and judicious, as no accuser 
 nor witness, unless protected by the nobility, 
 would dare to appear against a powerful delin- 
 quent. But the queen in a letter from Seton, March i. 
 more evasive still than the former, replied that 
 she never meant to refer the matter, not being" a 
 parliamentary matter, to the meeting of parlia- 
 ment, but that the nobility would then be 
 more easily convened ; and as to the imprison- 
 ment of those accused, the placards were so nu- 
 merous, and the names so different, that she 
 knew not upon which to proceed; but if any were 
 named whom he thought worthy of trial, on re- 
 ceiving such information from him, she would 
 take such cognizance of them as might stand 
 with the laws'*. The contents therefore of 
 the two placards, the names of the persons ac- 
 cused of the murder, the suspicions expressed of 
 her own connivance, were not unknown to the 
 queen. She had received from the father of 
 her late husband, the most judicious and impres- 
 sive advice for the prosecution of the murderers i 
 but her refusal either to secure their per>ons, or 
 to summon a convention of estates for their 
 trial, leaves no room to doubt of her expectation, 
 
 " AndersoQ, i. 40 — 5. 
 
58 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, that Lennox, discouraged at the prospect of an 
 
 ^^^/-^ unavailing- trial, and intimidated by the danger 
 
 ^^^^* of appearing in person to support the charge, 
 
 would desist from any personal accusation of 
 
 Bothwell. 
 Bothweii 4 While Lennox continued to deliberate, she 
 
 accused by 
 
 Lennox, leturncd from Seton on the 10th of March, when 
 
 March 10. ... . _, 
 
 Murray obtamed permission to retire to France. 
 His name appears on the 11th '% as present at a 
 council held, like the former, upon ordinary affairs. 
 March 14. At another which met on the 14th, but of which 
 the names are not marked, a proclamation was 
 issued to apprehend the laird of Tullibardine's 
 brother, for certain defamatory paintings against 
 the queen ; and while all inquiry into the murder 
 was forgotten, it appears that a rigorous search 
 was employed to discover the authors of the late 
 
 »* Cecil's or Murray's Diary, Appendix, No. III. The 
 names marked as present on the 11th, are inadvertently trans- 
 ferred by Anderson to the council held on the 14th, the next 
 on the record. Anderson, i. 36. Records of Council ; Regis- 
 ter-house, Edinburgh. That Murray was still at Edinburgh 
 on the 13th, appears from the following letter to Throck- 
 morton, (probably sent by Killigrew) which may explain his 
 sentiments, and the nature of his correspondence with the 
 English court. 
 
 " Traist freind, after my maist harty commendatioun, yfF 
 after sic accidents as lately hayth fallen out in ther parts, ane 
 uther messenger hayth bene sent towards the quein, my 
 souveraigne, nor this present bearer, I wald have bene ernest 
 to haif lal you knaw moyr amply of my mynd by wrytt. But 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 59 
 
 placards ". After long deliberation, Lennox, in a chap, 
 letter from Houston, dated March 17, denounced ^-^v^/ 
 Both well, Balfour, and others named in the pla- March n. 
 cards, as the persons whom he strong-jy suspected 
 of the murder ; and renewed his former applica- 
 tion for their imprisonment, and for a convention 
 of the nobles^'. No answer was returned for a 
 week, till a negociation had been concluded with 
 the Earl of Mar, for the surrender of the castle of 
 Edinburg-h to Bothwell. The young- prince was 
 conveyed to Stirling-, on the 19th of March, and 
 delivered into his hands. The castle in return obtains 
 
 the com- 
 
 was surrendered on the 21st, and instead of com- «nand of 
 
 • • T» I 11 • • 1 I T the castle, 
 
 inittmg Bothwell to prison, as required by Len- March 21. 
 nox, the queen, in addition to every former office, 
 entrusted him with the custody of the chief for- 
 tress in the kingdom, at a time when he was pub- 
 licly charged, by her father in-law, with the mur- 
 der of her husband, the deceased king. After 
 such a preparatory step, as gave him the com- 
 
 in respect of the sufficiency of my said freind, I will not be 
 long : he haytli hard and seyn moyr nor I can wrytt. I will 
 desyir you to gif him credit on my behalf, and that accidents 
 procedinge from the botome of wickednes, alter not the good 
 wills of sic as upon raaist just raisons and considerations hes 
 deliberat to follow furth godly afid guid purposes, and thus 
 I end, committing you hartly to God ; frome Edynb. tl>€ xiii 
 of Marche, 1566. Yours raaist assured to his power. James 
 Stewart." Anderson's MSS. 
 
 " Buchanan's Detection, 22. Anderson, i. 38. 
 
 " Anderson, ii. 111. See Appendix, No. VI. 
 
60 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. 
 II. 
 
 24th. 
 
 mand of the city, and rendered his trial a mock- 
 ery of justice, a solemn mass and dirge were per- 
 MlTch'23. formed in the queen's chapel, for the repose of 
 her husband's soul '^ An answer was then re- 
 turned to Lennox ; that she had prevented his 
 desire of a convention of nobles, whom she had 
 sent for to be at Edinburgh on the approaching 
 week, where the persons named in his letter 
 should undergo such trial as is by law appointed : 
 and if found culpable of the odious fact where- 
 of he suspects them, they should receive such 
 condign punishment as the crime deserves. She 
 requests Lennox to attend, if convenient, and 
 give, information ; but the name of Bothvvell is 
 not once mentioned ; no suspicion of his guilt is 
 intimated; on the contrary, an affected disbelief 
 of the charge is insinuated^"; and no desire is 
 expressed to investigate the evidence previous to 
 the trial, or to discover any proof whatsoever of 
 the crime. At a council held on the 28th, by the 
 queen in person, Bothwell, instead of being com- 
 mitted to custody, sat and directed his own trial, 
 in conjunction with the Earls of Huntley, Argyle, 
 and Caithness, the Bishops of Ross and Galloway, 
 Lethington the secretary, and two subordinate 
 officers of state. As the design was to hasten 
 forward the trial, before the prosecutor had ob- 
 
 28th. 
 protected) 
 and his 
 trial has- 
 tened by 
 the queen. 
 
 '» Birrell's Diary. Keith, 379. Anderson, i. Pref. 64. 
 •" •• For indeed (as ye wrait) we esteem ourself party, 
 gif we were resolute of the auctours.'* Anderson, i, 49, 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 61 
 
 tained any evidence, or could venture to appear, 
 Lennox was cited in the beginning- of April, to 
 attend and support the charge on the 12th: the 
 crime was laid in the indictment on the 9th, in- 
 stead of the lOth of February, and the sole proof 
 offered of Bothwell's guilt, was, that it was 
 " notourly known quhilk he cannot deny^\" 
 From the whole circumstances, and correspond- 
 ence upon the subject, no doubt can remain with 
 an impartial mind, that Mary, conscious of Both- 
 well's guilt, and of the suspicions entertained of 
 her own connivance, endeavoured at first to pre- 
 vent, and afterwards defeat the accusation, by 
 accelerating a trial which she could not decently 
 refuse. 
 
 5. A privy couttcil was held at Dunbar, April Mui^'ay'* 
 
 ' •' ' r departure 
 
 2d, at which it appears that the queen was pre- a'"imo- 
 
 ' * ^ lives exa- 
 
 sent. Another met on the 5th, at Seton, where mined. 
 
 , . Aprils. 
 
 Ihe second contract or marriage between Mary 
 and Bothwell was fiamed by Huntley, who, ac- 
 cording to Cecil's or Murray's Diary, had ob- 
 tained a procuratori/, or proxy, from his sister 
 Lady Bothwell, to commence a suit for a divorce 
 from her husband. According to the same 
 Diary, Murray, whom we find at Whittingham 
 on the 8th, departed from Scotland on the 9th April 9ih. 
 of April; and, at this important juncture, his ab- 
 sence is again converted into a proof of his 
 
 '» Anderson, i. 50. ii. 97. 103. 
 
II. 
 
 1567. 
 
 52 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, guilt^^ According- to this hypothesis, his plans 
 for Both well's acquittal and divorce, and for his 
 marriage with the queen, the subsequent insur- 
 rections, the expulsion of the one, the captivity 
 of the other, and his own recall to the office ox 
 regent, were already concerted with Morton and 
 his associates, and he withdrew, with a sort of 
 prescience more than huii.an, to avoid the sus- 
 picion of those events which were still conting-ent, 
 and which it was impossible to have foreseen. 
 The conclusion is, when properly stated, too 
 absurd to be believed ; that a popular leader, the 
 author of every transaction conducive, or sub- 
 sequent to the murder of the king, should abandon 
 his party to its own guidance, and instead of 
 retiring to England, where perhaps he might 
 remotely direct his adherents, should withdraw 
 to France, to place himself, at the queen's de- 
 sire, in the hands of her popish relations and 
 friends. But the premises themselves are false. 
 The name of Murray is found only once in the 
 records of council, when his attendance was ne- 
 cessary to procure permission to quit the king- 
 dom ; and there is no proof whatsoever that he 
 resided or remained at court after the murder; 
 much less that he ohtair.ed a share in the admi- 
 nistration with BothwelF. His name does not 
 
 =** Privy Council Records. See Appendix, No. VII. 
 *' On this occasion Tytler advances the following facts, 
 on which his whole system depends, but for which I am 
 
 1 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 63 
 
 occur, as he was not present, at the privy council chap. 
 for BothweH's trial, where Lesly, who imputes - 
 the acquittal to Murray*s friends, has forgotten 
 to expliiin his own share in that infamous trans- 
 action. Morton and his associates, Ruthven and 
 Lindsay, are not once n)entioned in the council 
 records, nor does it appear that they had re- 
 turned to court, or resumed their seats at the 
 board of council. But the conduct of Murray 
 is susceptible of a more rational and just ex- 
 planation than it has hitherto obtained. The 
 designs observed by Lord Robert, his brother, 
 against Darnley's life, could not well have es- 
 caped his penetration or notice, as he was present 
 
 obliged to state, that there is no authority to be found, " A 
 fewdnys after the murder, Murray returned to court. There 
 he remains for the space of two months, joins in all the coun- 
 cils during the time, and is in strict intimacy with tlie Earl 
 of Bothwell. — After this (order for Bothwell's trial) we find 
 the Earl of Murray at court, and assisting in council until 
 the 9th of April, two days before Bothwell's trial." Tytler, 
 ii. 92-8. The privy councils, on the 11th and 28tli of 
 March, are the only two of which the names of the members 
 are marked in the record. Murray was necessarily present 
 at the first, when at court to obtain licence to quit the king- 
 dom ; but was not present at the second, when Bothwell's 
 collusive trial was arranged. Buchanan mentions his return, 
 and Bothwell's attempt to assassinate him, a few days after 
 the murder ; but there is no evidence whatsoever that he 
 remained in town, much less that he followed the court, or 
 attended the queen and Bothwell, during their long and 
 suspicious residence at Seton. 
 
^4 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, at their quarrel ; and if he considered the queen, 
 ^-^v^-' from her conduct then, when apprised of her 
 ^^^^' husband's danger, as accessary to the conspiracy, 
 he must have acted precisely as he did, in retiring 
 from court. When he perceived the tendency 
 of her aflfection for Bothwell, and their approach- 
 ing marriage, he would naturally solicit per- 
 mission to quit the kingdom, if he consulted 
 his own safety ; nor would the queen, on account 
 of his opposition to her former nuptials, refuse 
 his request. She required him however to pass 
 into France, where he remained till almost inter- 
 cepted as an hostage by her friends^*. His 
 departure previous to Bothwell's trial, is no proof 
 therefore that he procured an acquittal which 
 he was unable to prevent, but that he disap- 
 proved, and refused to sanction, an acquittal 
 procured by the collusion of the queen. 
 
 Before this period she must have received an 
 answer from Archbishop Beton, her ambassador 
 The queen at Paris. He explains in the most forcible 
 admoni"hJ tcmis, thc horror and execration which the mur- 
 *'*^* der had universally excited in foreign countries ; 
 
 announces the prevailing opinion of men, that 
 she herself was the principal cause, and that 
 nothing was done without her own consent; in- 
 timates even his ovt'n suspicions, that since she 
 was preserved by Providence, according to her 
 own declaration, to take a rigorous vengeance, 
 he must conclude, that unless such vengeance 
 '* Keith, Pref. 9. Buchanan's Hist. 360. Goodall's MSS. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 65 
 
 were actually taken, it vvoulcl be better far, in ^^.^^• 
 this world, that she had lost life and all; in- ""^""/^^ 
 forms her that the great virtue, magnanimity, 
 and prudence with which she was endued, should 
 now be exerted, to redeem from ol)loquy the 
 reputation which she had already acquired; and 
 exhorts her to do such justice as might attest her 
 innocence for ever to the world, and vindicate 
 her conduct from the sinister interpretations and 
 reproaches of Europe, which it were ow'r odious 
 for him to rehearse-^ Lennox, despairing- of 
 justice, had applied to Elizabeth, who wrote to 
 Mary upon the 8th, in haste, to defer the trial 
 beyond the 12th of April, at the request of the 
 father and the friends of her deceased husband, 
 who were well assured of a combination among 
 the guilty to accomplish by force what could 
 never be done by law. She exhorted Mary, for 
 the consolation of the innocent, to grant their 
 request, which, if denied, would subject her to 
 the worst suspicions ; and besought her earnestly, 
 in a case which touched her so nearly, to use 
 such sincerity and prudence, that the whole 
 
 ** Keith, Pref. 9. The archbishop's former letter, January 
 27th, was received on the llth of February, in fifteen days. 
 The present letter, in answer to the queen's letters of the 
 llth and 15th of February, as it is dated March the 0th, 
 arrived in all probability before the council on the 28th of 
 that mouth, and certainly before Bothwell's trial on the 12th 
 of April. 
 
 VOL. I. F 
 
65 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, world might pronounce her guiltless of a crime 
 
 so enormous as to blot her, if culpable, out of the 
 * rank of princes, and expose her, not without 
 reason, to the opprobrium of the vulgar ; " than 
 " which I would wish you an honourable se- 
 " pulchre, much rather than a contaminated 
 " life : And since you may see that I treat you 
 " as my daughter, which you have often desued, 
 " may God incline you to do what may redound 
 '* most to your own honour, and the consolation 
 " of your friends^/' When deterred from ap- 
 pearing, alone and unsupported, ag-ainst a potent 
 adversary who commanded the court, the town, 
 and the castle, Lennox himself, in a letter from 
 Stirling, April 11, conjured her again, as she 
 regarded her own honour and the justice of the 
 cause, to banish from her presence, and to com- 
 mit to sure custody, the persons named in his 
 former letter j required her to adjourn the trial 
 
 ^ Robertson, ii. 437. We cannot suppose that Elizabeth 
 would write in haste, on Tuesday the 8tb, to prevent the 
 trial on Saturday the 12th, if the letter could not arrive in 
 sulHcient time on the fifth day. Melvil, on the birth of 
 James, left Edinburgh at noon, reached Berwick that night, 
 and arrived on the fourth day at Loudon, in sufficient time 
 for Cecil to communicate the intelligence personally to 
 Elizabeth, at Greenwich, that same night. Melvil, 69. 
 Middlemore, travelling more at leisure, left London on 
 Wednesday at four in the afternoon, and arrived at Carlisle, 
 wliere Mary was, at the same hour on Saturday, Anderson, 
 iv. 80. 
 
1j67. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 67 
 
 that he niisflit have time sufficient to convene his chap. 
 friends, and to search for evidence; admoni:shed 
 the queen, that the suspected persons ** conti- 
 ** nuing- still at liberty, being- great at court, and 
 *' about iier majesties person," no just trial could 
 be taken, unless the day were deferred ; and 
 finally, demanded a warrant to apprehend those 
 who were present at the murder". It is in vain Grants a 
 
 II I I • T I collusive 
 
 to ulleg-e that there was no time to adjourn the trial, 
 trial ; or that the queen was not accessary to 
 the acquittal of Bothwell. In opposition to the 
 urgent remonstrances of Beton, of Elizabeth, 
 and of Lennox, not to spare the murderers, nor, 
 by a collusive acquittal, td connive at their es- 
 cape ; she acted in evident concert with Both- 
 well, when accused of the murder; admitted the 
 man, whom she must herself have suspected, to 
 her confidence and councils, and invested him, 
 previous to his trial, with the most exorbitant 
 power. In every measure preparatory to his 
 acquittal, she was guided by his influence ; even 
 her promise, in her last evasive letter to Lennox, 
 was previously violated ; and Bothwell's trial, 
 instead of being reserved for a convention of the 
 nobles, was hurried on by a privy council, at 
 which he assisted, in her presence, before the 
 parliament met on the approaching week. 
 
 6. The trial took place upon Saturday, April Morton's 
 12th, and Bothwell, who had returned on Thurs- ''^"'"" * 
 
 " Anderson, i. 52. 
 F 2 
 
68 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, day, with the queen from Seton, appeared with 
 armed retainers, and with a band of hired 
 
 the triai'ex- soldiers, who paraded the streets with their 
 Apdm. ensigns displayed ^^ The fact is now universally 
 believed, that Morton conducted the whole trial, 
 and appeared with Bothwell at the bar; but an 
 examination of this circumstance only serves to 
 illustrate the prog-ress of historical falsehood. 
 In the instructions from the lords and abbots of 
 Mary's party, her commissioners in England 
 are directed to plead, in answer to the marriage, 
 *• that most part of the nobility, and principally 
 ** of the usurpers, Morton, Semple, and Lindsay^ 
 " gave their consent to the Earl Bothwell, and, 
 " to remove all suspicion, had declared him in- 
 " nocent by a public assize, ratified in parlia- 
 " ment by the three estates." But the queen 
 herself, in her instructions to her commissioners, 
 and in their reply to Murray, during the con- 
 ferences at York, maintains only, that Bothwell 
 had received his acquittal from an assize of his 
 peers, confirmed in parliament by the nobility 
 present, her opponents and others ; and her an- 
 swer to the accusation at Westminster, that she 
 prevented the investigation and punishment of 
 the murder to which she was accessary, refers to 
 her former reply at York*^ Amidst the artful 
 
 '• Anderson, ii. 157. Keith, 405. 
 
 '» Goodall, ii. 163. 207—85. 342—61. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 69 
 
 fictions with which the simple fact of the bond chap. 
 is invested, no intimation was then g-iven of Mor- ^-^^/'■w 
 
 1567 
 
 ton's activity, or even of his presence at the trial, 
 or of the concern of his associates in the acquittal 
 of Both well. Two years afterwards, Lesly, in a 
 pamphlet published under a fictitious name, re- 
 sorts to the former Instructions of the lords and 
 abbots, and asserts explicitly, what he was 
 afraid even to hint obscurely, when confronted 
 with Morton and Lindsay at the conference ; 
 " that Morton, Semple, Lindsay, and their ad- 
 *• herents, especially procured, and with all 
 " diligence laboured his purgation and ac- 
 '* quittal, wluch the three estates confirmed 
 •* afterwards by act of parliament^"." An addi. 
 
 ' Anderson, i. 20. This last assertion, that Bothwell's 
 acquitt; I was ratified by the estates in parliament, is a gross 
 fic.:on, which may enable us to estimate the credit due to 
 the Instructions and to Lesly's Defence, to which Mary's 
 apologists perpetually appeal. The lords and abbots of 
 her party were conscious to a man, that his acquittal was 
 neither ratified nor introduced in parliament; but in repre- 
 senting the midnight bond, to be explained in the next 
 paragraph, as a legislative act of the estates in parliament, 
 they subscribe to a conscious falsehood, dictated by Lesly, 
 because it was convenient for their i)arty to do so. This 
 circumstance explains sufficiently Argyle's and Rothes's at- 
 testation of Lesly's interpretation of tiie Raid of Beith, and 
 the protestation concerning the conference at Craigmillar, 
 which Argyle and Huntley were desired to sign. When 
 such a direct and wilful falsehood is asserted uniformly by 
 a whole party, no reliance can be placed on a single fact in 
 
70 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, tional fact, unknown to Le.sly in Scotland, was 
 
 II 
 v-^-v^ brought forward in France (1572) by the auony- 
 
 '^^^' mous author of V Innocence de 3Iarie, that 
 Morton accompanied Bothwell before the judges. 
 Blackwood scrupled not to intimate, in 1587, 
 that Morton himself was one of Bothwell's 
 judges ; and in Maria Innocens, published abroad 
 (1588) under a fictitious name. Turner, a Scot- 
 tish priest and professor at Ingolstadt, affirms 
 without hesitation, that Morton actually pleaded 
 the cause of BotbwelP'. This last assertion is, 
 with some modifications, preferred by Camden, 
 that Bothwell's cause was sustained or conducted 
 
 their instructions or protestations ; much less upon Lesly's 
 veracity, who perseveres in the fiction, but forgets, in the 
 accusation of Morton, Seniple, and Lindsay, to explain his 
 own share in the privy council that directed the acquittal of 
 Bothwell. In fact, the accusation of Morton and his asso- 
 ciates must be rejected, when combined with such a wilful 
 perversion of truth. 
 
 2* Jebb, i. 403—63. ii. 216. That Murray's mother, the 
 Lady Lochleven, to whose care Mary was committed in 
 Lochleven Castle, pretended to have been married to 
 James V. depends entirely on the same authorities, and is 
 obviously framed to insinuate Murray's secret designs on the 
 crown. Jebb, i. 404 — 65. As a confirmation of the fact. 
 Turner adds, that Murray's mother dreamt at his birth, that 
 she was delivered of a serpent and a lion that fought toge- 
 ther, and although the serpent prevailed at first, the lion at 
 last was victorious. From this dream he terms Murray a 
 serpent; and Blackwood (Id. ii. 196.) infers, that the lion 
 sivas Scotland, which he oppressed for a time. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 71 
 
 by Morton ; and the fictions of an anonymous chap. 
 French writer, and of a Scottish refu^:ee, are ^-^v*^^ 
 eagerly snatched at hy modern aj)ologists, as his- 
 torical facts^-. But the real anthors of Both- Kot''"eii 
 
 acquitted 
 
 well's acquittal are easily ascertai ;ed. Arg-yle, i>y the 
 justice general, and Caithness, chancellor, or fntnds. 
 foreman of the jury, sat, with Bothwell, Lesly, 
 and Lethmgton, in the privy council that ap- 
 pointed the trial. That Pitcairn, commendator 
 of Dumfermline, Lord Lindsay, Macgill, and 
 Balneaves, sat as assessors to the justice general, 
 is another convenient assertion, for which there 
 is no foundation whatever". Three of the jury, 
 
 " Mortonio causain ejus sustincnte. Camden, 117. 
 Keith, 376. Tytkr, ii. 101. Stuart, i. 207. VVhitaker, 
 i. 302. This last writer creates some additional facts by 
 inference, that it was Morion who introduced tlie tluw into 
 the indictment, and provided the armed men to attend Both- 
 well and himself to the place of trial, &c. Ibid. 
 
 '^ Keilh, 375. A fact unknown to Lesly and to every 
 writer, till advanced by Keith without authority, should 
 have excitt'd the suspicion of those later authors quoted in 
 the preceding note, who transcribe the assertion without 
 inquiring into its truth. Assessors are mentioned, but their 
 names are not inserted in Bothweil's trial, the authenticated 
 copy of which, in the State Paper-office, has been examined 
 by Mr. Bruce, keeper of State Papers, to ascertain the fact. 
 Of course there is no foundation for Keith's assertion, 
 that those adherents of Murray and Morton sat as assessors 
 to the Justice-General upon Bothweil's trial. But Keith's 
 authority is easily discovered. Blackwood informs us that 
 Morton, " & la faction de Mourray, qui depuis ont poursuivy 
 
1567. 
 
 72 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Herreis, Boyd, and Gordon of Lochinvar, were 
 selected as Mary's commissioners in England ; 
 Rothes, Cassilis, Ross and others, subscribed the 
 bonds for her release, or defence, on her escape 
 from Lochleven ; and of the fifteen jurors, Semple 
 The trial alouc adhered afterwards to Murray^*. The trial, 
 
 conducted, 
 
 sa majeste de ctt acte detestable, sont commis k Tinstruction 
 & jugenient de son proces ;" which he explains on the mar- 
 gin, " Morton tt Mourra^ ses juges." Jebb, ii. 216. From 
 this hint, that the judges were of Murray's faction, who 
 afterwards accused Mary of the crime, Keith supplied the 
 omission of the assessors' names, from the list of the com- 
 missioners and assistants, her accusers in England. He 
 knew that neither Murray, Morton, nor Lethington, nor the 
 Bishop of Orkney, nor Buchanan, nor the Laird of Lochleven, 
 sat on Bothwell's trial ; and he concluded by a convenient 
 inference, that the remaining commissioners, Lindsay, Pit- 
 cairn, Balneaves, and Macgill, two lords of session, were 
 the judges or assessors, to whom Blackwood alludes. But 
 he durst not quote Blackwood's authority for such an 
 assertion. 
 
 '* Lord John Hamilton, commendator of Aberbrothick, 
 signed the bond at Dunbarton for the queen's release (Keith, 
 436.); and of the remaining jurymen, the Magter of Forbes 
 does not afterwards appear: the Lairds of Langton, Cambus- 
 kenneth and Barnbugle, signed the bond for supporting the 
 king's authority (Anderson, ii. 231) ; but on the queen's es- 
 cape from Lochleven, they hastened with Ogilvie of Boyne, 
 the last juryman, to subscribe the bond for her defence. 
 Keith, 475. Lord Caithness' eldest son was married to 
 Bothwell's sister, and Seton, Sinclair, and Huntley, were 
 connected with the family by former intermarriages. Dou- 
 glas's Peerage. 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 73 
 
 therefore, was directed or conducted by the Earls 
 of Argyle, and Caithness, by Lesly and his 
 coadjutors at the conferences in England; nor is 
 a vague imputation published by Lesly two years 
 afterwards, under a fictitious name, sufficient to 
 transfer the acquittal of Bothwell, from himself 
 and his coadjutors, to Morton and his friends. 
 The crown lawyers disclaimed, in effect, all share 
 
 On comparing the two bonds in Anderson and Keith, it 
 appears that many, in compliance with the ruling party, 
 signed the bond in 1567, who subscribed, afterwards, tlie 
 bond in 1568, for the queen's defence. Among others, 
 Michael Lord Carlisle, signs the former, " with the ISotary's 
 hand at the pen ;" whereas the latter is signed, according to 
 Douglas's Peerage, by J^/mt s Lord Carlisle, his supposed elder 
 brother, to whom he had not then succeeded. This circum- 
 stance has furnished Whitaker with a notable detection, that 
 the signatures to the bond for the king's support are mostly 
 forged. He knew not what little reliance can be placed on 
 Douglas's and George Crawford's Peerages, whose genealo- 
 gies are supported by proofs and MSS. that are often ficti- 
 tious. The bond for the queen's defence, to a copy of which, 
 in -the advocate's library, Douglas refers, is merely signed 
 Carleil, which Doaglas mistook for the signature of James, 
 instead of Michael, from a blunder in Crawford's Peerage, 
 who quotes a charter to Michael, the brother and heir of 
 James, in 1520, which, on searching the records, has no ex- 
 istence. Such is the only proof of the existence of James, the 
 elder brother of Michael Lord Carlyle; and on such visionary 
 authorities do those writers accuse the most public instru- 
 ments and records of forgery. Whitaker, iii, 58. 579. See 
 a paper by Lord Hailes in the Edinburgh Magazine for 
 November 1787, p. 359. 
 
1567. 
 
 74 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 in the prosecution, except their concurrence. No 
 evidence whatsoever was produced. On the 
 contrary, Lennox was cited as private accuser, to 
 support the charge, when Cunningham, a young 
 man of his household, unexpectedly appeared, and 
 excused his absence till his friends could be col- 
 lected to protect his person; required the trial to 
 be adjourned to procure support against the 
 greatness of his adversary, and protested for an 
 assize of wilful error, if the murderers should be 
 absolved. The demand was overruled, and the 
 jury acquitted BothweJl of all share in the nmr- 
 der; but their foreman protested, in opposition 
 to Cunningham, that no evidence was produced 
 to justify a different verdict, or to subject them to 
 , Tj ,. a trial for wilful error^*. From these circum- 
 '^j'b*'^the* stances it appears, that tiie trial was directed by 
 queen's Bothwcll hiuiself, and that his acquittal was 
 
 fnencu. ^ 
 
 managed and pronounced by the friends of the 
 queen. But whether conducted by Morton or 
 not, it is also evident, that from a collusive trial, 
 directed by Bothwell, with an armed force to 
 suppress the evidence, and to prevent the appear- 
 ance of the accuser against him, the queen could 
 never have considered him as innocent, when, in 
 the opinion of the whole nation, as weil as of 
 impartial posterity, the circumstances of his 
 acquittal, served only to establish the reality of 
 
 " Anderson, ii. 107. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 75 
 
 his ouiit. The plain, and indeed the only con- chap. 
 elusion is, that in consequence of the remon- ^--^'^'^^ 
 strances from France and England, she sought 
 in the trial for such a decent pretext, as might 
 justify rather to her friends abroad, than to her 
 subjects at home, her mnrriage with the man who, 
 when accused by public report, was acquitted 
 by a solemn judicial sentence of all share or 
 concern in the murder of her late husband. 
 
 7. The acquittal was no sooner pronounced, Pariia- 
 
 * ^ ment, 
 
 thanBothwell posted up a public challenge, offer- April ii. 
 int>- as a vin.lication of his innocence, to fight hand 
 to hand, with any person ol" good repule, who 
 should dare to maintain that he was guilty of the 
 murder ; but the challenge occasioned another 
 placard, in which the charge was renewed. As if 
 his innocence, however, were now incontestable, 
 he was appointed on Monday, the second day 
 after his trial, to carry the crown and sceptre, a 
 mark of distinguished favour, at the opening of 
 parliament. The commissioners for its opening, 
 and the lords of articles, viere selected from the 
 qiieen*s friends ; and if Morton's name appears in 
 the articles, we at the same time discover the Ab- 
 bots of Kiil winning and Aberbrolhick,Lesly and 
 Herreis, Bothwell and Argyle. No investigation 
 was attempted, nor the least notice taken of the 
 king's murder; but a severe act was passed 
 against the placards, that whosoever first disco- 
 vered and neglected to suppress them, should suf- 
 
1567. 
 
 76 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, fer the same capital or arbitrary punishment with 
 the authors themselves ^^ The surrender of Edin- 
 burgh castle, the custody of which the estates had 
 formerly conferred upon Mar, was confirmed in 
 parliament; and as some retribution to Botliwell 
 for his past services, dangers, and losses, which 
 are highly magnified, the grants and offices which 
 he derived from the queen, were approved and 
 ratified in the most ample terms. Murray's earl- 
 dom was also ratified, according to Mary's 
 promise before his departure ; and among others, 
 five of the jurors who acquitted Bothwell, obtain- 
 ed confirmations of their respective grants from 
 the crown'\ But an act intended to conciliate 
 the interest and support of the protestants, de- 
 monstrates the transcendant influence of a man 
 who could procure for the reformed religion, that 
 legal confirmation to which Mary hitherto had 
 
 ^* Taken literally by Balfour, or some civilian, from tiie 
 edict of Valentinian and Valens De Famosis Libellis. C. ix. 
 
 t. 36. 
 
 " Anderson, i. 113-17. ii. 157. Keith, 378. Crawford's MS. 
 Robertson, ii. 327. Crawford, Rothes, Caithness, Herreis, 
 Scrapie, Ogilvie of Boyne, obtained ratifications. Records 
 of Parliament. On the 17th of April, the Earl of Caithness 
 obtained from Mary, by Bothwell's means, an hereditary 
 orant of the office of justiciary, with power of life and death, 
 over Caithness and Sutherland, as the reward of his concern 
 in the murder of Daruley. Sir Robert Gordon, of Gordon- 
 stone's Hist, of the Sutherland Family, MS. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARN LEY. 77 
 
 refused her assent^^ The attainder of Huntley, chap. 
 and of his friends, was at last reversed. But as *^-v^^ 
 Huntley had already consented to Bothwell's numiey 
 divorce from his sister, and to his marriag-e with '^^^ 
 the queen, the inference, that such consent was 
 the consideration for which he was restored to his 
 paternal estate and honours, can admit of no 
 dispute. The queen's intended marriage with 
 Bothwell had been early reported through both 
 kingdoms : and Lord Herreis, it is said, had 
 repaired to court, well accompanied for his own 
 preservation, and had conjured the queen not to 
 listen to a dishonourable alliance, equally dan- 
 gerous to her own reputation, and to the safety 
 of her son. It appears, however, that this noble- 
 man was afterwards gained, by an extensive 
 grant, to promote the trial, the acquittal, and the 
 marriage; but Melvil had communicated a 
 letter from England, to dissuade the queen from 
 a disgraceful marriage with the reputed murderer 
 of her former husband ; all which she imparted 
 instantly to Bothwell, from whose sanguinary 
 fury Melvil was only preserved by flight^'. 
 
 " See Lord Hailes' Remarks on the History of Scotland, 
 155 ; and Robertson, i. 425, note. 
 
 '* Melvil, 78. Lord Herreis's lands, of Terreigles, had been 
 converted, in the late parliament, from ward and relief, into a 
 blanch tenure, the importance of which, will be understood 
 by those who are in the least conversant in the laws ofSf^ot- 
 land. Records of Parliament, MS. 
 
78 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 1567. 
 
 The confirmation of Bothwell's acquittal and in- 
 nocence, and the consent of the estates to his mar- 
 riage with the queen, which it was difficult, how 
 desirable soever, to procure in parliament, were 
 accomplished by stratagem. When the parlia- 
 Aprii 19. ment rose on Saturday, the nobility were invited 
 by Bothwell to supper, and at a late hour of 
 intemperate festivity, the marriage was proposed 
 by himself, and supported by such persons as 
 were privy to the design. The assent and signa- 
 tures of the nobility present, were obtained to a 
 bond, in w^hich they attested his innocence of the 
 king's murder, recommended him to the queen 
 as a suitable husband, and engaged to support the 
 marriage, if acceptable to her, with their united 
 forces, their lives and fortunes. We are told that 
 the tavern was filled and surrounded with armed 
 men; and that the queen's permission, upon be- 
 ing required in writing, was produced as a war- 
 rant to sign the bond, which, according to every 
 hypothesis, must have been obtained from the 
 nobility, on some assurance they had received, 
 or some persuasion whicli they entertained, that 
 it met with her approbati^ui and previous assent. 
 The example of Huntley, the chancillor, was 
 followed by Argyle, Caithness, Rothes, Mo; ton, 
 Cassilis, Boyd and Herreis, by the popish and 
 protestant lords present, who indiscriminately 
 subscribed. The bond was signed and attested 
 on the ensuing day by eight prelates, among 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 79 
 
 whom were Hamilton the primate, and Lesly, 
 Bishop of Koss*''; and it appears, that at this 
 
 '" Anderson, i. 177. Keith, 382. Goodall, ii. 141. Two 
 copies of tiie bond are preserved; the one communicated by 
 Reid, Buchanan's amanuensis, privately to Cecil, "with the 
 names of such of the nobility who subscribe the bond, as he 
 might remember ;" the other in the Scotch College at Paris, 
 a copy attested by Sir James Balfour, from the original in his 
 custody, and transmitted to Mary, in 1580-]. As Murray, 
 the first in Reid's list, had left the country ten days before 
 the bond, Keith and Anderson justly observe, that Reid's 
 memory might have been equally inaccurate in other names. 
 Whitaker, who prefers his list from memory, to Balfour's 
 attested copy from the original, supposes that Murray signed 
 the bond as an example to his adherents, before he left the 
 country; but that his name was afterwards suppressed by 
 Balfour. Whitaker, ii. 357. That Murray did not subscribe 
 the bond, is certain from the silence of Mary and her com- 
 missioners, Lesly, Boyd and Herreis, at York and Westmin- 
 ster, who must have observed, and remembered his name, as 
 the first signature, when the bond was shewn to her, or when 
 they subscribed it themselves. Ten years after Murray's 
 death, Balfour, previous to Morton's execution, could have 
 no inducement to suppress, but, on the contrary, every temp- 
 tation to insert his name in transmitting a copy of the bond 
 to Mary. In Balfour's copy, the subscribers are, the Arch- 
 bishop of St. Andrew's, the Bishops of Aberdeen, Galloway, 
 Dumblane, Brechin, Ross, Orkney, and the Isles, who, with 
 the Bishop of Dunkeld, were the only prelates present in 
 parliament; the Earls of Huntley, Argyle, Morton, Cassilis, 
 Sutherland, Errol, Crawford, Caithness, Rothes ; the Lords 
 Boyd, Glammis, Ruthven, Semple, Herreis, Ogilvie, and 
 Fleming, all of whom are marked as present in the rolls of 
 parliament. Reid's list from memory, omits the bishops, and 
 
 ld67. 
 
1567. 
 
 80 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, period an answer to the former letter from Eliza- 
 beth, before the trial, was returned by Mary, 
 intimating-, ** that Bothwell was acquitted by the 
 " laws and the sensament of parliament, and had 
 " further offered to assert his innocence by single 
 " combat, as a nobleman ought"." From the 
 
 Errol, Crawford, Glamrais, Ruthven, and Fleming, and adds, 
 Glencairn, Seton, Sinclair, Oliphant, Ross, Carlyle, Hume, 
 Innermeith, none of whom were present in parliament except 
 Ross and Seton. Balfour's copy is also dated the 20th. in- 
 stead ofthelOtb, as the bond was signed at midnight, after 
 supper; and, as a farther confirmation, we learn from Bu- 
 chanan, that the subscription of the bishops was obtained on 
 Sunday, when the date was probably added to the bond. 
 
 *' Anderson, i. 100. The letter is preserved only in her in- 
 structions to Melvil ; but its date must be ascertained, " It is 
 trew, that scho wrate to us, and we send her answer agane, 
 the copy quharoff we have deliveritt you heirwith. — In effect 
 it is this, that seing he wes acquite be oure lawes, and be 
 sensament of parlement, and had further ofFerit him reddie 
 to do all thing for triall of his innocency, that ony nobillman 
 in honour aucht, we thocht the former calumpny and accusa. 
 
 tioun and that we mycht weil aneuch tak him to 
 
 husband." Anderson, i. 106. This last clause is evidently no 
 part of the letter, but the queen's conclusion to Melvil, that 
 she might 'weil aneuch tak him to husband ;* 1. because she 
 instructs Melvil to excuse the sudden consummation of her 
 marriage, "not makand her deirest sister advertisement, nor 
 askand her advyss and counsall tharein;" a proof that the 
 letter was not written then : 2. because we cannot suppose 
 that Elizabeth's messenger was dismissed without an answer, 
 much less that the answer to her letter of the 8th of April, 
 was delayed till the 15th of May. As it was certainly not 
 
 1 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 81 
 
 reports circulated in both kingdoms, and from 
 the distinguished honours conferred upon Both- 
 well, the marriage was certainly not unlooked 
 for; and the assent of Huntley to the bond, was 
 sufficient of itself to assure the nobility of his 
 previous acquiescence in the divorce of his sister. 
 But without the queen's approbation and autho- 
 rity, such an obhgation could never have been 
 obtained from men of the most opposite parties, 
 some of whom were afterwards her most faithful 
 adherents, and others again her most violent 
 opponents. She could not be ignorant that the 
 proper business of parliament was the investi- 
 gation of the king's murder, which, however, had 
 not been once mentioned ; but, on the contrary, 
 that the act against placards was purposely 
 framed to suppress all evidence whatsoever 
 against the perpetrator of the crime. She must 
 have perceived, that the acts were calculated to 
 aggrandize the only person of eminence suspected 
 of the murder; and it is impossible to ascribe 
 to Morton, or to Murray's adherents, a bond sub- 
 scribed by her friends, the popish nobility and 
 
 written at Stirling or Dunbar, the acquittal of Bothwell by 
 the laws and scnsament of parliament, fixes its date indisput- 
 ably on Sunday, April 20th, when the bond, signed by the 
 nobility and bishops, could be urged as a confirmation of his 
 acquittal in parliament, but before it could be mentioned as 
 the consent and request of the estates for his marriage with 
 the queen. 
 
 VOL. I. O 
 
II. 
 
 1567, 
 
 82 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, the bishops, whose interest would have led them 
 to oppose a marriage with a protestant lord. An 
 eng-ag-emeut framed at table, in a public tavern, 
 had it been even transacted without her concur- 
 rence, could not have escaped her observation on 
 the succeeding day : the report must have spread 
 through the city, more especially upon Sunday ; 
 and Herreis, Boyd, and Lesly in particular, must 
 have informed their mistress of the whole trans- 
 action. But her answer to Elizabeth, " that 
 " Bothwell was acquitted by the laws, and the 
 " sensament of parliament,'* affords a convincing 
 proof of her knowledge of the bond, the only 
 substitute that was ever obtained for the sense of 
 parliament ; and as the distinguished favour, com- 
 mand, and influence with which Bothwell was 
 invested, had already sufficiently indicated the 
 man of her choice, we must conclude, that an 
 obligation from the nobility and popish bishops, 
 to support his marriage, could not have been 
 obtained without her approbation and consent. 
 Journey to 8. The queeu went to Stirling next day, to visit 
 April 21. her son : on Wednesday, she returned to Linlith- 
 gow; and from these two places her four last let- 
 ters to Bothwell were written. On the same day 
 that she returned from Stirling, Bothwell, who 
 had remained behind, to collect his retainers, left 
 Edinburgh under the pretext of an expedition to 
 Liddesdale, and advanced to Hatton with a thou- 
 sand horse. It would be difficult to conceive that 
 
 3 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 83 
 
 he could remain all night, accompanied by such chap. 
 a numerous party, within eioht miles of Linlith- ^-^^/^*^ 
 g"ow, unknown to the queen, whose suspicions his 
 recent conduct was sufficient to have excited; but 
 every circumstance conspires to demonstrate, 
 that she was conscious of his designs. He met her 
 on Thursday mori'.ing' at Cramond-bl•idge''^ and 
 while his attendants secured Huntley, Melvil, and 
 
 Ti- 1 -11 111 1 -xii Bothwell's 
 
 Ijethmg-ton, he seized her bridle, and, ^^lthout seizure ot 
 the least opposition, conducted her to Dunbar, petson,^"* 
 
 April 24. 
 
 " As each inch of ground is disputed in this controversy, it 
 is necessary to ascertain the precise place where tlie queen 
 was seized. It is fixed by Buchanan, ad Almonispontem, by 
 Birrell's Diary, at the bridge of Craumond, (on the river 
 Almond,) by Melvil, who was present, " on her back-coiuing 
 between Linlithgow and Edinburgh," and by a remission to 
 some ofBofhwell's attendants, proditorii raptus S.D.N. 
 RegincE ipsa proficissenti iter smim a hurgo de Linlithgou\ 
 ad hurgum de Edinburgh, 10 May, 1507. Privy Seal Re- 
 cord B. 3G, f. 97. Keith and Wjjitaker, however, have trans- 
 ferred the place from the Almond to the Avon, to the west- 
 ward of Linlithgow, and the latter converts HaUon, or Hat- 
 ton, inioWalton, a farm-house two miles north east of Lin- 
 lithgow ; in order that Botliwell, by remaining all night at 
 Walton, might surprise the queen, without her connivance, 
 on the same day that she returned from Stirling, at Linlith- 
 gow-bridge, before she entered the town, Keith, 382. Whit- 
 aker, iii. 408 — 26. The object of all this is to discredit 
 Murray's Diary, and the second series of letters, of which the 
 last is from Linlithgow; but Whitaker ought to have known, 
 from Keith's Catalogue of Scottish Bishops, that Hatton and 
 Halton are the same place. 
 
 G 2 
 
1567. 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 Such an outrag-e, to jud^e from her character, 
 and from her conduct on the assassination of Rizio, 
 must, if real, have excited her loudest indig-na- 
 tion; but Melvil was assured by on 3 of Both- 
 well's officers, that nothing- had been done with- 
 out her own consent. Birrell's Diary informs 
 us that " at the bridge of Craumont, the Earl 
 " of BothM'ell, being- well accompanied, raveshitt 
 " the queen, and so took her that same night 
 " to the Castell of Dunbar, not against her awen 
 " will." The Historic of James the Sext is 
 still more explicit. " Then Bothwell thinking 
 " thair was na contraversie asfainis him in 
 " Scotland, conveinit the number of aucht hun- 
 " dreche horsemen, and as the queen was 
 " cumand from the castell of Strivelinof, to have 
 " returned tp Edinburgh, he met her in the 
 " way ; and convoyit hir per force as appeirit 
 " to the castell of Dunbar, to the end he might 
 " enjoy hir as his lawful spous. And in the mean 
 " tyme causit divorcement to be led, and separa- 
 ** tion proceed betwixt him and his awen mariet 
 " lawful wyfe, the Lady Jean Gordoun, than 
 '* sister to George Earl of Huntlie. The friendly 
 " liufe was so hieghlie contractit betwixt this 
 " great princess toward her enorme subject, that 
 ♦* thair was na end thairof ; for it was con- 
 " stantly esteemit of all man that either of them 
 »* loued uther carnally : sa that shoe sufferit hir- 
 " self patiently to be led quhair the lover list. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 85 
 
 ** And all the way nather made obstacle, impe- chap. 
 ** dinient, clamour, nor resistance, as in sic acci- ^--^^-*«-' 
 
 1567. 
 
 " dents used to be, or that shoe might have done 
 " be hir princely auctoritie, being accompanyt 
 " with the noble Earl of Huntlie, and secretar 
 " Maitland of Lething-toun*^." If displeased, 
 she must have expressed some resentment at least, 
 to Lethington ; and Melvil, whom she had em- 
 ployed to raise the citizens on the murder of Rizio, 
 must, upon his release next day, have received 
 some intimation to solicit aid for her relief. But 
 it appears that she had already visited Dunbar on 
 the 2d, and one object of the seizure was soon 
 explained ; namely, the vindication of her preci- 
 pitate marriage to foreign courts. The first pre- f^o^^fh^is"* 
 cept of pai'tisin(/ in Both well's divorce, was grant- ^^^' ^ 
 ed upon Saturday, the second day after the sei- 
 zure, by the commissaries of Edinburgh, on the 
 procuratory formerly obtained from his wife, in 
 whose name the divorce was instituted. The pre- 
 cept, according to the forms of the commissary 
 court, is merely a warrant for the citation of wit- 
 nesses, for which the application must have been 
 made that same day ; and the summons upon which 
 it proceeded must have been issued therefore before 
 the seizure**. Next day, the consistorial jurisdic- -Aprils?. 
 
 " History of James VI, p. 13. 
 
 ** The form then in the commissary court, was to summon 
 the defendant against a day prefixed, and on the first term, or 
 diet of compearance, whether he appeared or not, the judge ap- 
 
85 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. tion,to which the Archbishop of St. Andrew's had 
 '"^"^ been restored by her signatm e, after the baptism, 
 was exerted for the first and only time, by a com- 
 mission which he granted to determine a counter 
 procass ah'eady commenced by Bothwell against 
 his wife, to annul their marriage, as contracted 
 within the prohibited degrees of blood*\ The 
 two suits, therefore, were instituted before the 
 seizure, and in different courts, to satisfy the pro- 
 testants as well as the papists, that the queen's 
 marriage with Bothwell was strictly legal. In 
 the protestant, or commissary court, the first ap- 
 
 Aprii29. pearance of counsel was on Tuesday the 29th, 
 when some witnesses were examined ; the second 
 
 May 1. was ou TluH'sday, May 1, and a divorce for Both- 
 well's adultery with his wife's maid w^s pro- 
 nounced upon Saturday the 3d, within eight days 
 after the litigation had commenced. A privy 
 council had been held at Dunbar, April 29, and 
 the queen's order for provisions to the household, 
 
 pointed a second term, and granted a precept, if necessary, 
 for tlie citation of witnesses. The summons of divorce must 
 have been raised before Saturday, the first term or diet of 
 compearance, when the precept was issued ; and it is extreme- 
 ly probable, that a blank summons, according to the prac- 
 tice then, was raised so early as the 5th of April Sir James 
 Balfour's Practics, 656-7. 
 
 ** Robertson, ii. 438. Murray's Diary, Appendix, No. 
 III. From Anderson's MS. copy of Bothwell's divorce, it ap- 
 pears that the commission was granted by, not to, the arch- 
 bishop, as erroneously printed in Robertson's Appendix, 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 87 
 
 superseding a former injunction at Setoii as inex- 
 pedient, refutes the idea of any personal con- 
 straint**^. " They had scarcely remainit," accord- 
 ing to the History of James VI. *' be the space 
 " of ten days in the castell of Dunbar, and 
 " na great distance being betvvix the queen's 
 " chalmer and Botlivvellis, quhan they thoucht 
 " it expedient to cum to Edinburgh-castell, and 
 «* be the way to shaw hirself to the people, 
 ** that Bothwell was ready to put hir to libertie 
 " againe, according to the dewtie of an obedient 
 *' subiect. Bot at the streit entry of the town, 
 " that leads to the castell, he maid semblance to 
 *' lead hir brydle, and sensibell people inter- 
 " pret the same as though he convoyit hir majes- 
 " tie as his captive to a castle quherin a substitute 
 " of his was, callit Sir James Balfour." They 
 returned to Edinburgh on Saturday the 3d, the 
 day that sentence of divorce was pronounced by Returns 
 the commissaries. On the same day the archbi- q,,een to 
 shop*s commission was presented by Both well's Aiay 3!"^^ ' 
 procurator to two of the commissioners, and the se- 
 cond precept of partisinr/, for the citation of the 
 party and witnesses, was issued by a consistorial 
 court erected for the express purpose of pronounc- 
 ing the divorce. On Monday and Tuesday, the 
 oth and 6th, the same counsel appeared as in the 
 protestant court, and the mariiage was annulled 
 
 " See Appendix, No. Vlll. 
 
88 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. 0n ti^e 7th, as contracted without a dispensation, 
 
 1567. 
 
 and within the prohibited degrees of blood*'. 
 When a divorce for adultery was commenced, by 
 Lady Both well, a papist, before a protestant 
 court, and another for consanguinity, by Both- 
 well, a protestant, before a popish tribunal creat- 
 ed for the occasion, it is absurd to maintain that 
 there was no collusion between them, because 
 the wife could have no interest to conspire against 
 herself*^ After the murder of the king, she 
 must have known and felt that her life would be 
 no obstacle to the queen's marriage if she should 
 refuse her consent and proxy to institute a di- 
 vorce in her own name. But the Hamiltons had 
 no such connexion as Huntley's, vi'ith Bothwell, 
 with whom the archbishop at least had no interest 
 to co-operate. The bond for Bothwell's marriage 
 had been signed by the prelate himself, and his 
 suffragans, with the queen^s approbation, as he un- 
 doubtedly conceived. Had he believed, however, 
 that the succeeding seizure of her person was 
 real, or rather had he not understood, and actually 
 
 *'' Robertson, ii. 438. 
 
 " Whitaker, iii. 350. " It appeareth," says Calderwood, 
 " that this process was led before the parliament time, and 
 that she was moved to pursue for divorcement, not only/or 
 fear of her life, but also, as the manuscript which I have seen 
 relateth, that the restitution of her brother to his father's 
 lands at the parliament might not be hindered." Calderw. 
 ii. 43. MS. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 89 
 
 known the fact, that it was altog-ether fictitious, chap. 
 
 II. 
 he never would have issued, as the first act of his v-^-^^i^ 
 
 revived jurisdiction, a commission to determine 
 Bothwell's divorce from his wife during the sus- 
 pension of justice, for the avowed ptirpose of his 
 marriage with the queen. When the bond for 
 Bothwell's marriage with Mary, was subscribed 
 by the nobility, the divorce from his wife was 
 sufficiently understood ; and the archbishop who 
 had signed the one, as he believed, with the 
 queen's approbation, must have issued his com- 
 mission for the other, three days after the seizure, 
 with her express consent. The revival of his 
 jurisdiction at the baptism, was subservient there- 
 fore to Bothwell's divorce, the sole purpose for 
 which it was ever exerted ; and we must con- 
 clude that the journey to Stirling was collusive, 
 that the seizure itself was a fictitious rape, and 
 that the archbishop was well assured of the 
 queen's approbation, and intended marriage, be- 
 fore he granted a commission for the divorce. 
 
 9. A privy council consisting of Huntley and The 
 the Bishops of Orkney and of Galloway (Hunt- marriage 
 ley's uncle), Balfour, the clerk register, and Bel- well. 
 lenden, the justice clerk, was held on the (ith, 
 and another on the 8th**. The banns were reluc- 
 tantly published, by the queen's order, on Friday 
 and Sunday, but in terms of such strong repro- 
 
 *" Records of Council, MS. 
 
t)0 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 bation, by Craig a minister, that she appeared hi 
 the court of session upon Monday the 12tb, in 
 presence of Huntley the chancellor, Hamilton 
 the primate, the Bishops of Galloway, Orkney, 
 Ross, and Dumblane, the Earls of Cassilis and 
 Caithness, Lord John Hamilton Abbot of Aber- 
 brothick, Gavin Hamilton Abbot of Killwinning', 
 the Lords Boyd and Seton^", whose names are 
 sufficient to intimate by what party the marriage 
 was promoted at court. Having again author- 
 ized the administration of justice, which had been 
 suspended by her seizure, she declared that al- 
 though commoved at first against the Earl of 
 Both well, yet from his good behaviour towards 
 her, from her knowledge of his past, and for a re- 
 ward of his future services, she freely forgave 
 him for the imprisonment of her person, and be- 
 ing now at full liberty, she intended to promote 
 him to further honours • of all which his counsel 
 demanded instruments of protest. The pardon 
 which the queen pronounced was never register- 
 ed, if it passed the seals ; but another object of 
 
 *° Here, and on other occasions, I do not enumerate the 
 subordinate olficers of state, Avliose attendance was merely 
 official, and whose adherence afterwards lo Murray, who 
 continued those whom he found in office, is no proof that they 
 were his adherents then. They submitted to Bothwell's ad- 
 ministration as ihey did to his, to preserve their places, from 
 a convenient maxim, that the government which is upper- 
 most is always best. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. gi 
 
 the seizure was now discovered, namely, that un- 
 der the pretext of having detained her person, 
 he should receive a pardon for treason and all 
 other crimes whatsoever^ in which the murder of 
 the king" was virtually contained^'. That no ap- 
 parent disparagement might be incurred from the 
 marriage, Bothvvell was created Duke of Ork- 
 ney, and invested with the jurisdiction, and the 
 crown-rents, of a county, without which, as she 
 stated afterwards in her testament, the royal 
 household could not well be supported^^ Her 
 marriage contract with this potent prince, as 
 he is now denominated, was signed on the 14th, May i4. 
 
 ^' Anderson, i. 87. ii. 279. iv. 61. Bothwell's motive is 
 denied by Whitaker, as his pardon never passed the great 
 seal, or, to speak more accurately, was never recorded, iii. 114. 
 Neither was his patent as Duke of Orkney ; but the queen's 
 declaration contains an express remission, and it is in vain to 
 deny the motive, because from his profound security, and sud- 
 den reverse of fortune, the pardon, like the piitent, if it pass- 
 ed the seals, was not presented for registration. Porteus, 
 Melrose, Sinclair and others his attendants, obtained a remis- 
 sion on the 10th, under the privy seal, pro arte ct parte cum 
 Jacobo comite de Bothwell, &c. proditorii rapliis nobilissimae 
 personce S. D. N. regiuae, &c. nor v.ould Bothwell be more 
 inattentive to himself. Such is the crimen rapius in Scotch, 
 the ravishing or forcible abduction of her person, described 
 in Bothwell's attainder; proditoria intercepllone, proditoria 
 etviolenta Incarceratione et detentione, sic nefaudum crimen 
 raptus in nobilissimam personam ipsius regime commitfondo ; 
 which is now converted into a positive rape. 
 
 " Robertson, ii. .328. 
 
92 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, and attested by the chancellor and subordinate 
 officers of state, the Archbishop of St. Andrew's, 
 
 and the Earls of Crawford and Rothes, the Bi- 
 shops of Ross and Galloway, the Lords Fleming- and 
 Herreis, all of whom were the queen's friends. 
 Their former bond for the marriage was pro- 
 duced, to which she annexed an obligation for 
 herself and her successors, never to impute it to 
 them or to their heirs as a crime". Melvil, 
 whether from design or forgetfulness, represents 
 the nobility as then induced to subscribe the 
 bond, " declaring that they judged it was much 
 *' the queen's interest to marry Bothwell, he 
 " having many friends in Lothian and on the 
 " borders that would cause order to be kept;" 
 to which he subjoins an additional motive, *' and 
 " then the queen could not but marry him, seeing 
 " he had ravished her and lain with her against 
 " her wilP." Such is the first intimation which 
 we receive of an actual rape ; but Melvil's nar- 
 rative gives us no reason to suppose that the 
 ravishment, as the seizure, or crhnen raptus is 
 styled in Scotch, was without her own consent. 
 It was meant, undoubtedly, to vindicate a pre- 
 cipitate marriage, without asserting a positive 
 rape; of which neither Mary, in her apology 
 to the French court, nor Lesly in his defence 
 
 " Anderson, i. 111. iv. 59. Goodall, ii. 61. 140. 
 ^ Melvil, 80. See Appendix, No. IX. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 93 
 
 of her honour, skives the least intimation". But chap. 
 Melvil or his editor, having- misplaced and mis- >^-«'v-w 
 represented the bond of the nobility, adds as an 
 apologetical and more adequate motive for the 
 marriage, what he could not conscientiously 
 assert as an historical fact, that Bothwell had 
 ravished, or carried her forcibly away, and lain 
 with her, ostensibly against her wdl. 
 
 Her marriage was publicly celebrated on the 
 15th, both in the popish and in the protestant ^p"' ^^^ 
 
 ** Lesljf's defence of the marriage is curious, " that 
 after the murder of her secretary and husband, the queen, 
 fearing some new stir and calamity if she should refuse her 
 nobility's request ; and never to that hour once admonished, 
 either publicly or privately after the earl's acquittal, that he 
 was guilty of the fact, and suspecting nothing thereof, 
 yielded to that which these crafty, colluding, seditious 
 heads, (Morton, Semple, Ruthven) and the necessity of the 
 times, as to her did seem, did in a manner force her." An- 
 derson, i. 27. Not a word either there, or in his instruc- 
 tions, of the collusive seizure which Lesly was suspected 
 and accused of having himself devised ; (Buchanan, Hist. 
 356.) much less of the pretended rape ; and he glides over, 
 or ascribes to her ignorance, to state necessity, and to her 
 adversaries who were not present, a marriage, to each step 
 of which he subscribed and attended in person. Blackwood's 
 and Con's defence is to the same effect, without the least 
 surmise of a rape, but with this additional fiction, that 
 Mary, before she would assent to the marriage, was assured 
 of Lady Bothwell's death (Jebb, ii. 31. 218.), whom she 
 acknowledges, in her apology to Elizabeth, to be still alive. 
 Anderson, i. 106. 
 
II. 
 
 1567. 
 
 94 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, form^'^, by Bothwell, the reformed Bishop of 
 Orkney ; and Mary's first care was to vindicate 
 her sudden choice to the French and English 
 
 *^ The marriage was publicly celebrated, according to 
 Murray's Diary, " after baith the sorts of kirks, reformed, 
 and unreformed:" and according to the association of the 
 confederate lords, June 16, 1567, it was " accomplished in 
 baith the fashions." Anderson, i. 136. The fact, which they 
 could not mistake, and wliich, within a month after the mar- 
 riage, they had no temptation to misrepresent, is contradicted, 
 as usual, by Whitaker, who maintains, on Melvil's authority, 
 that the marriage was confined to the protestant form. Whit, 
 iii. 134. Melvil mentions that the marriage was made in 
 the council hall, according to the reformed order, and not in 
 the chapel at the mass, as was the king's marriage. Memoirs, 
 80. But the improbability that Mary would acquiesce in 
 a protestant marriage, is alone sufficient to refute the asser- 
 tion. Melvil, writing from memory, in his old age, mentions 
 the protestant marriage, at which alone he was present. But 
 Birrell's Diary informs us, that they were married by the 
 same bishop, in the Chapel Royal, where, as mass was al- 
 ways performed there, the marriage must have been cele- 
 brated in the popish form. The reformed Bishop was not so 
 scrupulous as to refuse to officiate privately in his former ca- 
 pacity; and Calderwood's information contains a just ex- 
 planation of the fact. " The Bishop of Orkney, at the mar- 
 riage, made a declaration of the Earl of Bothwell's repent- 
 ance for his former offensive life, and how that he hadjoined 
 himself to the kirk, and embraced the reformed religion ;" 
 (having formerly temporized) " but this was only to gull the 
 people ; for the same day in the morning, they were first 
 married with a mass, as was reported by men of credit." 
 Calderwood, ii. 44. MS. 
 
courts. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 95 
 
 courts. Her instructions to the Bishop of Dum- 
 
 blane are drawn with the most characteristical 
 
 111 1 • 1^6^- 
 
 and matchless art, to excuse her marriage to Her apoio- 
 
 the court of France. She magnifies Both weirs lr?nch and 
 fidelity and good services to her mother and to , "^ '^ * 
 herself, from his early youth ; his valour, conduct 
 and enterprise in the wars with England ; his 
 strenuous and uniform support of her authority 
 on her return to Scotland ; and upon his recall 
 from an honourable exile, the address with 
 which he released her from a recent conspi- 
 racy, an important service which she could 
 never forget. Ascribing his steadfast obe- 
 dience to a sense of duty, she professes to have 
 shewn him the more favour, the same however 
 as to other noblemen attached to her service ; but 
 she adds, that since the decease of her late hus- 
 band, as the pretensions of Bothwell began to be 
 higher, she found his proceedings somewhat 
 strange, till nothing could reward him but the 
 queen herself: That the whole estates being as- 
 sembled in parliament, he had obtained a writing 
 under all their hands, not only to approve, but to 
 recommend and promote the marriage with their 
 lives and fortunes ; giving them to understand 
 that it was with her consent : That upon announc- 
 ing his intentions afar, when her answer was in 
 no degree correspondent to his desire, he had 
 resolved to prosecute lis good fortune; and on 
 her return from a visit to iier son at Stirling, 
 
1367. 
 
 96 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 had awaited her by the way with a great force, 
 and led her with all diligence to Dunbar. No 
 mention is made of any opposition upon the road ; 
 but the queen proceeds to state, that being at 
 Dunbar, she reproached Bothwell with his ingra- 
 titude, and " albeit we fand his doings rude," (in 
 the seizure) ** yet were his answers and words bot 
 " gentle;" that he was constrained as well by ne- 
 cessity as love, to carry her to one of her ov«'n 
 houses for the preservation of his life, as there 
 Mas no safety from the conspiracies of unknown 
 enemies, unless he were assured of her constant 
 favour, and that other assurance there was none, 
 unless she would condescend to receive him for 
 her husband : That she left it to her friends to 
 judge what cause she had for surprise when he 
 produced the bond; but that as no one appeared 
 for her relief, she had been compelled' to mitigate 
 her displeasure ; and that considering the factious 
 turbulence of a rebellious nation, which would 
 neither submit to a female reign, nor endure a 
 foreign prince for her husband, considering the 
 necessity therefore of a marriage with one of her 
 own subjects, among whom there was no one, 
 either for the reputation of his house, or for his 
 personal worth, wisdom, valour, or other quali- 
 ties, to be compared with Bothwell, she had been 
 content to accommodate herself to the consent 
 and wishes expressed by the estates : That by 
 these and other means, when Bothwell had partly 
 
15li7. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 97 
 
 extorted and partly obtained her promise, fear- chap. 
 inof ever some alterations, lie would not wait " as v,.^-v^^ 
 *' were maist reasonable," to consult the queen- 
 mother, the king-, or her uncle and friends in 
 France ; but *' as by a bravado in the beginning- 
 '* he had won the first point," (her consent to the 
 marriage) ".so ceased he never till by persuasion 
 *• and importunate suit, accompanied not the less 
 " by force, he lias finally driven us to end the 
 *• work begun at sic time and in sic form as might 
 *' best serve his turn"." 
 
 The force that not the less accompanied his 
 persuasion and importunate suit, is evidently the 
 same with that which had partly extorted, and 
 partly obtained her promise to receive him for a 
 husband ; and instead of implying an interme- 
 diate rape, is a mere apology to her friends, for 
 a precipitfite marriage without their consent. 
 Her instructions to Robert Melvil, her ambassa- 
 dor in England, contain the same arguments ; 
 the factious and frequent conspiracies of her tur- 
 bulent subjects, which would neither permit her 
 to remain a widow, nor endure a foreign prince 
 for her husband ; the consent and request of the 
 whole nobility assembled in parliament, that the 
 Duke of Orkney should be promoted to that honour ; 
 and lest her marriage with a man suspected, 
 and even accused of the murder of her husband^ 
 
 " Anderson, i. 89. 
 VOL. I. H 
 
1567. 
 
 98 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 should appear strange to her sister, she repeats 
 her former answer to Eliza!)eth's letter, that he 
 was acquitted by the law and sense of parliament, 
 and had offered all for trial of his innocence that 
 became a nobleman ; if the marriage should ap- 
 pear unlawful, because his first wife was still 
 alive, she observes that his former marriage was 
 dissolved for consanguinity and other determinate 
 causes, by a regular divorce. " Swa that being 
 " bayth free," she concluded that she might " weill 
 *' aneugh tak him in marriage;" which, as it was 
 now past and irrevocable, she requests the two 
 courts to excuse if precipitate; and to extend the 
 same friendship to her husband that they professed 
 for herself ^^. From the names of the members pre- 
 sent at the privy council, upon her return to town, 
 from the list of the nobility and churchmen who 
 attended the court of session on her appear- 
 ance there, or attested her marriage contract, and 
 obtained her approbation of their former bond, 
 it is evident that the marriage had been promot- 
 ed, not by the associates of Morton or of Mur- 
 ray, but by the queen's friends exclusively ; the 
 Hamiltons and the adherents of Huntley and 
 BothwelP^ From her long and artful apologies 
 
 " Anderson, i. 102. 
 
 ** On the 16th, the day after the marriage, the Archbishop 
 of St. Andrew's and Lord Oliphant were admitted members 
 of the privy council, and Lord Boyd, on the 17th, at which 
 time, Hepburn, Parson of Auldiiamstocks, who conducted 
 
T[^E MURDER OF DARNLEY. gg 
 
 to the two courts, exaofoferatins: Bothwell's ser- chap. 
 
 II. 
 
 vices before, and his ambitious pretensions since v-^-v"^ 
 
 ... 1367. 
 
 the decease of her husband; insinuating" that he 
 was absolved, and that the marriage was recom- 
 mended by the hail estates assembled in parlia- 
 ment ; and intimating that although the seizure 
 was rude, the persuasions were gentle, by which 
 he obtained her consent ; the conclusion drawn 
 by Robertson is also evident, not only that her 
 marriage with the person accused of the murder 
 of her husband, was in itself unjustifiable, but 
 that she herself was conscious that it could not 
 be justified. 
 
 10. The remaining facts may be more concisely Assoda- 
 explained. The queen, on the 28th of May, had the nobiii- 
 
 Bothwell's divorce, was appointed master of requests. The 
 members present on the I7th, were Huntley, Crawford, 
 Fleming, Herreis, the Archbishop of St. Andrew's, the Bishop 
 of Galloway, Boyd, and the Parson of Auldhamstocks ; on 
 the 19lh, Bothwell, Huntley, the archbishop, and Lesly 
 Bishop of Ross ; on the 22d, and again on the 23d, Both- 
 well, Huntley, Crawford, the Bishops of Ross and Galloway, 
 the secretary, the register and justice clerks, and Chalmers of 
 Ormond, Chancellor of Ross. Their names alone demon- 
 strate the party that attended at court to witness the mar- 
 riage ; and the truth of Buchanan's assertion, that almost all 
 but Bothwell's friends and relations had withdrawn to their 
 homes. Hist. Ixviii. 357. It is ridiculous now, to consider 
 Murray, Morton, or their associates, as the authors either of 
 the acquittal, or of the marriage, when it appears that none of 
 them, Semple, one of the jury, excepted, witnessed either, or 
 were present at a single preparatory measure. 
 
 h2 
 
1567. 
 
 100 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, summoned her subjects, under the pretext of an 
 expedition to Liddesdale, to attend in arms at 
 Meh'ose on the 15th of June ; and in consequence 
 of Bothwell's attempts to obtain possession of 
 the young prince, an association was secretly 
 formed for his preservation. It consisted of the 
 Earls of Argyle, Athol, Mar, Morton, and Glen- 
 cairn, the Lords Hume, Semple, Sanquhar, Ruth- 
 ven, Lindsay, and Boyd, the Lairds of Tullibar- 
 dine, Grange, and Lethington, whom Bothwell 
 had nearly assassinated at court; but the defec- 
 tion of Argyle and Boyd, betrayed their confede- 
 racy at Stirling to the queen*'". A declaration 
 June 1st. was issucd, June 1st, to dispel the general suspi- 
 cion which the expedition had excited, and to as- 
 sure her subjects of her tender regard for the safe- 
 ty of her son. Robert Melvil was dispatched as 
 her ambassador to England, on the 6th of June; 
 ^^J'- and leaving Edinburgh on the 7th, she remained 
 at Borthwick castle, while Bothwell passed to 
 Melrose, to arrange the intended exped ition agai nst 
 Lord Hume. The expedition for which her sub- 
 jects were summoned, was undoubtedly meant, as 
 on her former marriage, to defeat the efforts, and 
 to crush the power of the confederate lords, who 
 had foreseen, and were prepared to prevent the 
 11th. design. Early on the Uth, they appeared sud- 
 
 *> Melvil, 82. Crawford's MS. Birrell's Diary. Buclia- 
 aau's Hist. 361. Knox, B. v. p. 353. Keith, 394. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 101 
 
 denlv before Borthwick castle, from which Both- chap. 
 well, who had returned thither, fled precipitately ^-^^/-w 
 to Dunbar on the first notice of their approach*^'. 
 
 " Our late liistoriaus have been mostly misled by Melvil's 
 erroneous information, that Bothwell, on receiving notice of 
 a design to surround and seize him in Holyrood house, fled 
 to Borthwick, tiience to Dunbar, carrying the queen always 
 along with him. Melvil, 82. That Melvil is frequently erro- 
 neous, both in facts and dates, appears among other in- 
 stances, from his account of Bothwell's wound, and of the 
 queen's journey to Jedburgh, which his editor at least places 
 after the baptism, and misrepresents her sickness as a bruise 
 received on horseback, which confined her two days to Hume 
 castle. But Argyle's or Boyd's intimation of the associa- 
 tion, was evidently received in the interval between the two 
 proclamations of the 28th of May, and the 1st of June, after 
 which Bothwell remained at Edinburgh till the 7th. From dif- 
 ferent letters ; Mary to Throckmorton, (Mathew Crawford's 
 Collection,) June 5th, Bothwell to Elizabeth and to Cecil, 
 signed, J. D. (James Duke) Paper Office, June 5th, Lething- 
 tou to Cecil, ibid. June 6th ; it appears that Robert Melvil 
 was not dispatched till the 6th, when, according to Calder- 
 wood, (ii. 47. MS.,) " the queen and Bothwell went to Borth- 
 wick castle, with their artillery and men of war ;" or accord- 
 ing to Murray's Diary, on the 7th, when he rode forward to 
 Melrose, apparently to prepare for the forces summoned to 
 meet him on the 15th. That design the confederates pre- 
 vented on the 11th, when " the queene was in peaceable man- 
 ner reposing with hir new raariet husband in the castell of 
 Borthwick, nar to Edinburgh, they thought to have laid 
 violent hands on thame baith, bot were deceivit : for the 
 queen was premonisht, and escapit suddainlie to the castell 
 of Dumbarr." History of James VI. The fact is now con- 
 firmed by Beton's letter, Appendix, No. X. which contains 
 
102 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. When convinced of his escape they retreated to 
 "--'^v-*-' Edinburg-h, where Huntley and his uncle the 
 Bishop of Galloway, Boyd and Lesly, the primate, 
 and the Abbot of Killwinning, having in vain en- 
 deavoured to raise the citizens, retired into the 
 castle, and were afterwards permitted to depart 
 by Sir James Balfonr''^ At night the queen re- 
 tired secretly from Borthwick castle, booted and 
 spurred, in the disguise of a man ; and was receiv- 
 ed within a mile of the place by some of Both- 
 well's servants, and conveyed to Dunbar^^ Had 
 she remained at Dunbar, the confederates must 
 have dispersed. But when she advanced with 
 an army reluctantly assembled, to Carberry hill, 
 her forces refused to fight, and began to separate, 
 and as her retreat was intercepted by Grange, 
 
 the whole progress of events from the 11th to the 17th. But 
 the fact is evidently anticipated by Melvil, who transfers the 
 attempt to surprise and seize them in Borthwick castle, to 
 their departure from Edinburgh five days before. 
 
 " Buchanan, Hist. 362. Knox, B. v. 407. Calderwood, 
 MS. ii. 48. 
 
 " See Appendix, No. X, which confirms Buchanan, and 
 Murray's Diary, that the queen, veste virili siimpta (Hist. 361.) 
 *' followit Bothwell to Dumbar disaguised." Buchanan's as- 
 sertion, that the queen had a stamp made with Darnley's sig. 
 nature, which she committed to Rizio, to affix to public in- 
 struments, by which the king was excluded from all share in 
 business, (Hist. 343.) is also confirmed by a deed published 
 by Mr. John Davidson, to which Darnley's name has been 
 affixed by a stamp. 
 
 3 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 105 
 
 with a party of horse-, there was no resource for chap. 
 
 . .li- 
 
 the preservation of Bothwell, but to send liim '-''v-x-^ 
 
 away, and after his departure, and escape from Bothweii's 
 
 1^11 !• 1 r ^ 1 1/^ flight and 
 
 the held, to submit to the confederates herseit, the queen's 
 
 . , . p IT 1 imprison- 
 
 un some vag-ue stipulations tor obedience and re- mem. 
 spect. The insults which she suflfered from an 
 enraged populace, are sufficiently known; but 
 the grief, indignation, rage, and despair, with 
 which she was alternately agitated, attest how 
 differently she felt and suffered a real injury, 
 from the pretended seizure of her person by Both- 
 wtlP*. 
 
 11. Her attachment to Bothwell still conti- h«""«"«'^'»- 
 
 ment to 
 
 nued with unabated violence. After a full expla- Bothwell 
 
 contiaues. 
 
 nation of the dang^er to which the realm and her 
 son were exposed, when the lords required that 
 " she wald suffer and command the murther and 
 *' authors thairof to be punist, they fand sic un- 
 " towardness and repugnance thairto, that rather 
 " she apperit to fortifie and mentein Bothwell 
 " and his complices in their wickit crimes, nor to 
 *' suffer justice to pass forward; quhairthrow, gif 
 " hir hienes suld be left in that state, to follow 
 ** hir own inordinate passion, it wald not fail to 
 " succeed to the confusion and exterminatione of 
 " the haille realme." They determined, there- 
 fore, after mature deliberation, " to sequestrate 
 
 " Calderwood, ii. 48. Melvil, S3. Birrell's Diary. Bu- 
 chanan, 364. See Appendix, No. X. 
 
1567. 
 
 104 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 " her person in Lochleven castle, frae all societie 
 " of the Earl of Bothwell, and fra all gating of 
 *' intelligence with him or any others, quhairby 
 " he nnay gate any comfort to eschaip dew pa- 
 " nishment for his demerits^*." These circum- 
 stances in the order for her imprisonment, were 
 afterwards acknowledged by Lethington, when 
 her avowed partisan, at a conference which ex- 
 plains the |)roceedings of the confederate lords. 
 " Then said the secretary, I will shew you the 
 *' discourse of the proceedings hereof from the 
 " beginning : When we enterprised the taking of 
 ** the queen at Carberry hill, there were then 
 *' two chief occasions that moved us ; the one was 
 " to punish the king's murder, chiefly in my Lord 
 " Bothwell 3 the other was, that the unhappy 
 *' marriage contracted between the queen and 
 *' him might be dissolved, and to this end to se- 
 '* questrate her body from him, she was put in 
 *' Lochleven; and that these were the chief causes, 
 " the proclamations made at the time, and the 
 ** writings sent to other countries plainly declared. 
 " As I myself (said he), the same night the queen 
 " was brought to Edinburgh, made the offer to 
 " her grace, if she would abandon the Lord Both- 
 " well, she should have as thankful obedience as 
 " ever she had since she came in Scotland. But 
 ** no ways would she consent to leave my Lord 
 
 " See Appendix, No. XI. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 105 
 
 *' Bolhwell, and so she was put in Loclileven^^'* 
 Mclvil informs us, that she wrote that same night 
 a letter to Bothwell, full of tender solicitude for 
 his safety, promising" never to abandon or to forg-et June i6. 
 him; which determined the confederates, on in- 
 tercepting the letter, to confine the queen in Loch- 
 leven Castle. Such minute particulars, in which 
 the author could not well be mistaken, coincide 
 with the order to " sequestrate her person fra 
 *' all afettinof of intellioence with Bothwell;" and 
 the letter must have been genuine, as the queen 
 was unable to disown it to Grano•e^^ When 
 
 ^3 
 
 ** Calderwood, MS. ii. 245. This conference, which Ro- 
 bertson has quoted, ii. 339, is pronounced by Whitaker to be 
 a forgery of Craig's, *' the brother minister, and the full 
 brother of Knox in falsehood." And for this reason, that 
 Mary, a few hours before, had actually abandoned Bothwell, 
 whom she refuses, according to this conference, to abandon 
 for a husband. 
 
 ^^ Hume and Robertson suspect that the letter is a mis- 
 take of Melvil's, since it was neither mentioned to Throck- 
 morton, nor produced in England. Murray, however, in his 
 answer at York, alludes to her intelligence with Bothwell and 
 his fautors. Anderson, iv. 67. But the casket, discovered a 
 few days after, was the only evidence produced in England, 
 and the proofs contained in it of adultery and murder, to 
 tnhicli the confederates directed, or confined their charges, 
 were sufficient there, and in the negociations with Throckmor- 
 ton, to supersede any subordinate proofs of her aftectiou for 
 Bothwell. But Melvil, who repeats the contents of the letter 
 twice, is too particular to be mistaken. It was shewn to 
 
J 567. 
 
 106 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. SirNicholas Throckmorton arrived from England 
 II. . , ° . 
 
 to effect an accomiiiodation, the confederates uni- 
 formly maintained that Mary was still unalterably 
 attached to Bothwell, whonj, in her present dispo- 
 sition, she was firmly resolved, if restored to 
 liberty, to retain for her husband , and to strengthen, 
 to the imminent danger of her son, and the cer- 
 tain destruction of the confederate lords''^. The 
 assertions of her enemies are confirmed by 
 Throckmorton, who perceived that the principal 
 cause of her detention, and rigorous confinement 
 
 Grange, who was so much exasperated at tlie harsh treat- 
 ment and removal of the queen to Lochleven, that but for 
 the letter, he would have instantly left the confederates. On 
 receiving a letter from Mary, lamenting her harsh usage 
 and the breach of promise, he answered, that when he re- 
 proached the lords, " her letter to Bothwell, promising 
 among many otlier fair and cotjifortable words, never to 
 forget or aljaiidon him, had stopped his mouth ; marvelling 
 that her majesty never considered that he could never be her 
 lawful husband, though he had not been so hated for the 
 murder of the king; therefore requesting her majesty to put 
 him clean out of mind," &c. " It contained," says Mel- 
 vil, " many other loving and humble admonitions, which 
 made her bitterly to weep, for she could not do that so hastily 
 which process of time might have accomplished." Melvil, 84. 
 From her secret correspondence with Throckmorton, she had 
 undoubtedly the means of undeceiving Grange, had the letter 
 been forged ; but Melvil considers her attachment to Both- 
 well as deep-rooted, and to be surmounted only by time- 
 '' Keith, 419 49. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 107 
 
 was, " because that the queen will not by any chap. 
 *' means be induced to lend her authority to pro- v^*-^,-^^ 
 *' secute the murder, nor will not consent by any 
 " persuasion to abandon the Lord Bothwell for 
 " her husband, but avoweth constantly, that she 
 ** will live and die with him ; and sailh, that if it 
 " were put to her choice, to relinquish her crown 
 " and kingdom or the Lord Bothwell, she would 
 " leave her crown and kingdom to go as a simple 
 " damsel with him, and that she will never con- 
 " sent that he shall fare worse, or have more 
 " harm than herself." In his next dispatch, he 
 observes, that " she had yielded in words to the 
 *' prosecution of the murder ; but will by no 
 " means yield to abandon Bothwell for her hus- 
 " band, nor relinquish him ;" and having endea- 
 voured to persuade her, by a secret correspon- 
 dence, to acquiesce in a divorce, she returned for 
 answer, that she would rather die than consent 
 to that; pretending- that she was seven weeks gone 
 with child*'". Murray, in their subsequent interview 
 at Lochleven castle, accused the queen of per- 
 sisting in her excessive attachment to Buthwell. 
 He renewed the same accusation at York ; that 
 she was required, when conveyed to Edinburgh 
 from Carberry hill, to concur in (he punishment 
 of Bothwell and his associates for the murder 
 of the king, and in the dissolution of the marriage 
 
 *® Robertson, ii. 447-51. 
 
108 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, for the vindication of her own honour, and for 
 
 II. . . ' 
 
 ^-^.-^^ the security of her son ; " but no other answer 
 
 *' could be obtained but riyforous menaces on 
 
 ** the one part, avowing- to be revenged on all 
 
 *' them that had shewen themselves in that 
 
 " cause, and on the other part oft'eiing to leave 
 
 " the realme, and all, so she mig-ht be suffered 
 
 " to possess the murderer of her husband." 
 
 The reply which she made to this charge, is a 
 
 feeble and evasive admission of its truth ; " that 
 
 " it was no wonder, when rigorously treated, 
 
 " if she gave them quick and sharp answers; 
 
 " but that she was always content to leave 
 
 *' whatever was alleged by them, to be re- 
 
 " formed by the whole nobility and estates in 
 
 " her presence, which was utterly refused, and 
 
 *' made no offer to quit the realm for the pos- 
 
 " session of Bothwell." She neither denies her 
 
 attachment to Bothwell, nor her menaces against 
 
 his enemies, nor her refusal to consent to his 
 
 punishment or to her own divorce, but merely 
 
 that no formal and public offer was ever made by 
 
 herself to quit the kingdom for his sake'". That 
 
 instead of refusing to abandon, she had already 
 
 abandoned Bothwell, when she sent him away 
 
 from the field for the preservation of his life, is a 
 
 mere quibble upon the word abandon ". From 
 
 ""^ Anderson, iv. GO". 04. Goodal], ii. 145—65. 
 
 "' Whitaker, i. 274. See Appendix, No. X. where itap- 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 109 
 
 the passages already quoted, it sufficiently ap- 
 pears that the first cause of her removal, and of 
 her severe confinement to Lochleven Castle, was 
 her obstinate attachment to Bothwell, whom in- 
 stead of refusing to abandon, or in other words, 
 to renounce as her husband, and to subject to the 
 just punishment of his crimes, she was fully de- 
 termined to recall from the north on the first fa- 
 vourable opportunity that occurred^^ Had she 
 been innocent herself, and ignorant of the real 
 author of the death of her husband, the supposed 
 rape upon her person must have fixed her suspi- 
 cions instantaneously upon Bothwell. Her soul 
 would have recoiled from a marriage purchased 
 by the murder of her former husband, and had 
 she suffered any real violence from Bothwell, 
 her nuptials must have appeared the very con- 
 summation of his crimes. Or, if entangled, 
 whether by force or fraud, in a hateful marriage, 
 she must have rejoiced, if innocent, in an oppor- 
 
 pears from Beton's letter to his brother, the archbishop, that 
 " the queen having persuaded Bothwell to loup on horse-back, 
 and ryd his way, and he being rydden, as thay supposit, twa 
 myles or mair,.her Majestic ofFerit to render hirself," &c. 
 
 " Bothwell was then at Spinie, with his uncle the Bishop 
 of Murray. Had the queen joined him, or escaped from 
 Lochleven, the Hamiltons, the Gordons, and his other friends 
 who promoted the marriage, and were evidently more than 
 a match for the confederates, would have restored him to 
 power. 
 
10 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, tunitv to extricate herself from the embraces of a 
 ^^0^.^^ murderer, and to dissolve an infamous alliance, by 
 aveno'ino- her own honour, and her husband's 
 blood. But her ardent and inordinate attach- 
 ment to Both well, continued evidently to the last : 
 and as it could not originate after the seizure and 
 pretended rape, we must conclude that the same 
 criminal passion had uniformly subsisted from a 
 period long- prior to the death of her husband'^ 
 Conclusion |2. It appears thcu from the preceding' deduc- 
 tions, that our former conclusion coiicerning- the 
 guilt of Mary, is confirmed by each successive cir- 
 cumstance, subsequent as well as antecedent, and 
 conducive to the murder of Darnley. She was 
 conscious, and as appears from her letter to 
 Archbishop Beton, was fully aware of the impe- 
 rious obligation to discover the murderers, and 
 avenge his death ; hut all inquiry into the crime 
 was suspended, and the fate of her husband was 
 consigned at once to the most profound oblivion. 
 2. Her supine inattention to his memory, and 
 indifference to his fate, cannot be imputed to any 
 imbecility of judgment, or habitual submission 
 to the will of others; but if innocent herself, 
 she must unavoidably have suspected some one, 
 and her suspicions must necessarily have been 
 fixed upon Both well. 3. Instead of distrusting, 
 or even afiecting to distrust him, she invested him 
 
 " See Appendix, No. XII. 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1 1 1 
 
 five days after the murder with an important 
 grant, and when apprised of the vehement, un- 
 disguised suspicions which prevailed at home and 
 abroad, both of his guilt, and of her own con- 
 nivance, she at first endeavoured, by the most 
 evasive answers, to avoid an inquiry, refused to 
 arrest and commit him to custody, or to remove 
 him from her presence when he was accused by 
 Lennox; butprocured for him the commandof the 
 castle and city by the surrender of her son, and 
 then granted a collusive trial, when it could no 
 longer be refused, at a privy council where the 
 criminal was himself permitted to assist in her 
 presence, and to direct the proceedings for his own 
 acquittal. 4. No woman who felt the least re- 
 g-ard for her own character, would have suffered 
 a person publicly accused of the murder of her 
 husband to approach her person, much less to 
 share in her counsels, authority and favour. 
 But Mary had been sufficiently admonished by 
 Archbishop Beton, by Lennox and by Elizabeth, 
 of the conduct which she ought to adopt as a wife, 
 and as a sovereign : In opposition, however, to 
 their earnest remonstrances and solemn exhorta- 
 tions not to spare the criminals nor to connive at 
 their escape, but by a severe and exemplary ven- 
 geance, to vindicate her owst innocence from the 
 reproaches of Europe ; she hurried over a collu- 
 sive trial, conducted by Bothwell himself with an 
 armed force, before his accuser could have collect- 
 
1607. 
 
 112 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ed evidence, or even friends for his own preser-' 
 ^-•^^-"^ vation. 5. Contrasted with the rioforous and 
 speedy prosecution of the murderers of RiziOy 
 such an acquittal, the result of a trial at which 
 the accuser durst not appear in person, as it 
 could not possibly have persuaded Mary of Both- 
 well's innocence, leaves no room to doubt of her 
 intentions, and secret motives, when two days 
 afterwards, she selected the chief murderer of 
 her husband for the most distinguished honours 
 and rewards in parliament, and instead of insti- 
 tuting- a public investigation, passed an act to 
 suppress all evidence whatsoever of the crime. 
 6. The bond, recommending Bothwell for a hus- 
 band, and attesting his innocence, could not have 
 escaped her observation at the time ; nor was it 
 procured from the nobility and bishops without 
 her knowledge and consent. 7. The whole plan 
 of her journey to Stirling, and the seizure and 
 conveyance of her person to Dunbar, was con- 
 certed with Bothwell, whose divorce, the con- 
 sideration for which Huntley was restored in par- 
 liament, must have been conducted, both in the 
 popish and protestant courts, with her special ap- 
 probation, and whose flagitious nuptials were pro- 
 moted and attended by her friends alone. 8. In 
 these circumstances, ner marriage, under the thin 
 pretext of a fictitious rape, with a man so scan- 
 dalously and so recently divorced from his wife, 
 not a month after his collusive acquittal for the 
 
 3 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1 1 3 
 
 murder of her husband, is in fact, equivalent to a 
 full and open avowal of her guilt, and illustrates 
 every doubtful circumstance in her former con- 
 duct. The supposed rape, which, if real, must 
 have confirmed every former suspicion, and have 
 excited indignation, hatred, and the utmost ab- 
 horrence, would have deterred her from a mar- 
 riage with the only person of rank or eminence, 
 accused or suspected as the murderer of her hus- 
 band, and the marriage itseif, after such an out- 
 rage, must, in her eyes at least, have appeared a 
 voluntary participation in his crimes. 10. If 
 guiltless herself, she must have rejoiced at the 
 first opportunity to escape from his arms, and by 
 inflicting the most rigorous punishment on his 
 head, to dissolve an infamous marriage, and to 
 avenge at once her own honour and the death of 
 her husband. 11. On the contrary, she retained 
 her former attachment to Bothwell, which con- 
 tinued with the same violence even after their 
 separation ; and an attachment so ardent and 
 inordinate, as it cannot be imputed to a sudden 
 passion for a man whom she had known so long, 
 much less to the pretended rape upon her person, 
 must have subsisted previous to the death of her 
 former husband, and is to be received as the cause 
 from which all her crimes and misfortunes origi- 
 nated, 12, In opposition to these conclusions, her 
 formerbenignity and good conduct, of which, how- 
 ever, there is no evidence, are utterly insufficient 
 
 VOL. I. X 
 
1567. 
 
 114 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, to exempt her from the imputation of adultery 
 and murder, and may be answered decisively, to 
 use the words of Hume, " a woman who, in a 
 " critical and dangerous moment, had sacrificed 
 " her honour to a man of abandoned principles, 
 " might thenceforth be led blindfold by him to 
 " the commission of the most enormous crimes, 
 " and was in reality no longer at her own dispo- 
 ** sal ; and as it appeared that she was not after- 
 ** wards restrained either by shame or prudence 
 " from incurring the highest reproach and danger, 
 ** it was not likely that a sense of duty or hu- 
 ** manity would have a more powerful influence 
 ** over her'*." 
 
 ^ Hume, V. 417. From whom some other important 
 remarks are derived. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 115 
 
 1567. 
 
 CHAPTER III. 
 
 21ie Conferences at York and Westminster. 
 
 L^ROM the moral evidence which the conduct 
 of Mary affords, of her secret concern in the 
 murder of her liusband, her apologists are care- 
 ful to avert their eyes. They quibble concerning- 
 particular facts, but are afraid to contemplate the 
 whole in succession ; and under whatever name 
 their Examinations, Inquiries, and Vindications 
 are published, they begin invariably at the mid- 
 dle, with verbal and minute criticisms on the let- 
 ters, with partial observations on detached pas- 
 sages of the conferences in England, of which 
 they never venture to trace and state the entire 
 result. A minute and patient investigation there- 
 fore of the progress of the conferences at York 
 and Westminster, from their first origin to their 
 final termination, is still necessary to confirm or 
 to confute the conclusions we have already de- 
 duced. 
 
 1. On the 20th of June, Dalgleish, a servant Discovery 
 sent by Bothwell to Sir James Balfour, for a box ters. 
 of papers in the castle of Edinburgh, was inter- 
 cepted by Morton, before his return to Dunbar. 
 The box, which Bothwell had received from 
 
 l2 
 
1567. 
 
 116 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Mary, on the death of her husband, was a silver 
 casket, about a foot in length, gilt and marked 
 with the crown and initials of her first husband, 
 Francis 11., to whom it had belonged. It con- 
 tained her letters from Glasgow, Stirling, Lin- 
 lithgow, and the Kirk of Field ; a series of 
 twelve sonnets, and two contracts of marriage : 
 all written, except the last contract at Seton, in 
 her own hand. These important documents 
 were preserved by Both well, both as pledges of 
 her affection, and as proofs of her assent to the 
 murder and seizure' ; and the casket must have 
 been lodged among his other papers in Edinburgh 
 Castle, when he conducted the queen thither on 
 their return from Dunbar^. On his removal to 
 
 ' Tytler asserts that no sufficient reason can be assigned for 
 Bothwell's keeping, instead of destroying, such dangerous 
 letters, i. 78. Lord Hailes, in a marginal note on Tytler's 
 inquiry, assigns three sufficient reasons ; the care of vindi- 
 cating himself; the desire of preventing the queen from 
 drawing back; and the vanity of having received such letters, 
 from the finest woman in the world. But the true reason for 
 the preservation of the letters, has been assigned by Bucha- 
 nan, above two hundred years ago. Bothwellius, qui reginae 
 inconstantiam nossit, utcujus intra paucos annos plurimavi- 
 derat exempla, literas conservarat, ut siquid dissidii cum ea 
 incidisset, illo testiraonio uteretur, nee se regiae caedis auc- 
 torem, sed comitem fuisse, ostenderet. Hist. lib. xviii. p. 364. 
 
 * It appears that Bothwell actually kept his papers in the 
 castle, in a green velvet desk, wherein the casket was no 
 doubt deposited ; and where Balfour very probably found 
 
 1 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1 17 
 
 the palace before the marriage, and on his depar- ^^/t^' 
 ture afterwards to Borthwick Castle, he had no 
 apprehension of his future misfortunes ; the in- 
 terval between the approach of the lords, and his 
 flight from Carberry Hill, was too busy for 
 the casket even to occur to his mind ; and the 
 fidelity of Balfour, his deputy, by whose con- 
 nivance it was intercepted, was not as yet sus- 
 pected, when he sent his chamberlain not to de- 
 stroy, but to recover those letters that were so es- 
 sential for his vindication^. But at first the dis- 
 
 the bond of the nobility, and the bond devised by himself for 
 the murder of Darnley. Robertson, ii. 506. Cotton Library, 
 Caligula, C. 6. fol. 1—4. 
 
 ' The objections of Stuart, (Hist. i. 356.) and Whitaker, 
 (i. 224.) that Bothwell would neither have lodged the letters 
 in the castle, when he himself had been refused admittance 
 into it, upon his flight from Edinburgh, nor have sent for 
 them after his escape from Carberry hill, when Balfour 
 had openly declared against him, are refuted by the plain ex- 
 planation already given ; viz. that Bothwell did not fly from 
 Edinburgh when he went to Borthwick, and that Balfour had 
 neither refused to admit him into the castle, nor declared 
 against him when he sent for the casket. The letters were 
 evidently sent for, not to be destroyed, but to be preserved 
 for his vindication to the confederate lords. Calderwood, 
 who adopts Buchanan's account, asserts, apparently from 
 some older MS. that Hepburn, Parson of Auldhamstocks, 
 was the person sent for the casket. Calderwood, ii. 53. 
 From this I conclude, that Hepburn, his confidential procu- 
 rator in the divorce, was sent to recover the letters, and to 
 treat, perhaps, with the confederates, and that Dalgleish, a 
 
1567. 
 
 1 1 8 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 covery perplexed the confederate lords, Morton 
 and Lethington were both privy, Balfour and 
 Lethington had been accessary to the murder; 
 and we may be sure that they would not reveal 
 the discovery until the contents of the casket 
 were carefully examined. The confederates 
 had been joined by no one ; but were opposed 
 by a powerful combination of nobles, whom 
 they were anxious to conciliate for their own 
 security*. The French court was sufficiently 
 inclined to support the queen ; and Elizabeth 
 interposed avowedly for her relief. Without 
 either external aid, or domestic support, they 
 were careful not to exasperate her friends by 
 divulging- the letters; but their first design, to 
 keep her confined for a time, till divorced from 
 Both well, was altered by those indisputable 
 proofs which they had discovered of her guilt. 
 Throckmorton, soon after his arrival (July I2th), 
 perceived that she was in great fear of her life, 
 and was inclined to retire to a nunnery in France, 
 
 servant, vras merely employed to enter the castle, and to con- 
 vey them to Hepburn, in the neighbourhood of Edinburgh. 
 * " All which time," (when she was put in Lochleven) says 
 Lethington, " we hoped that all men should have assisted to 
 revenge the king's murder, but never one more came to us, 
 nor we were at Carberry hill ; on the contrary. Lord Huntley 
 and many others, rose up against us, so that they were the 
 greater party than we." Conference with Lethington, 1571. 
 Calderwood, MS. ii. 245. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1 19 
 
 or to the old dowager of Guise, her grandmother. ^^/J^' 
 On the 19th, he observes, that while Lethington ^^^ 
 alone was desirous that she should be restored July 19. 
 conditionally, to her former state, on her divorce 
 from Bothwell, some proposed that she should 
 resign the crown, and abjure the realm ; others 
 professed to prosecute justice against her, and 
 on her condemnation to crown her son, and to 
 confine her during the remainder of her life ; 
 others again, were willing to deprive her, by a 
 judicial trial and sentence, both of her crown 
 and life. It was not difficult to incorporate 
 these designs; and Throckmorton discovered 
 on the 21st, by certain intelligence, that the con- 
 federates had resolved to celebrate the corona- 
 tion of the young prince, with the queen's con- 
 sent, if it could be obtained, on condition not 
 to touch her life or honour, nor to institute any 
 judicial process against her; otherwise, they 
 were determined, in the event of her refusal, to 
 proceed against her publicly, by manifestation 
 of such evidence as they had obtained of her 
 
 •' 1 T 1 Employed 
 
 fi-uilt*. According" to his subsequent letters, Ijorcl to extort a 
 
 ^ resignation 
 
 * Throckmorton's Letters, July 16th ; See Appendix, No. 
 XIII. and July 19th, Keith, 420. He had written the 
 day before, that " altho' the lords and counsellors speak re- 
 verently, mildly and charitably of the queen, so as I cannot 
 gather from their speech any intention to cruelty or violence, 
 yet I do find by intelligence that the queen is in very great 
 
 of the 
 crown. 
 
120 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^^il\^' Lindsaj^ accoti^panied by Sir Robert Melvil, 
 ^'^'y-^^ was dispatched on the 24th, to intimate, that the 
 July a4. lords, considering her former misbehaviour, would 
 submit the government no longer to her misrule; 
 and to exhort her to a peaceable resignation of the 
 crown, in which case, " they would endeavour 
 " themselves to save both her life and honour, 
 " both which otherwise stood in great danger^y 
 Melvil informs us, that they sent Lord Lindsay, 
 " first to use fair persuasion, and if that failed, 
 ** they were resolved to enter into harder terms ;^* 
 that Athol, Mar, Lethington, Grange and Throck- 
 morton, employed his brother to " tell her the 
 ** verity ; and how that any thing she did in pri- 
 *' son could not prejudge her when restored to li- 
 ** berty, but that she refused to yield, till informed 
 " of Lord Lindsay's arrival in a boasting hu- 
 " mour," when she agreed to execute two deeds 
 
 peril of her life, by reason that the people assembled at this 
 convention do mind vehemently the destruction of her. It 
 is a public speech among all the people, and among all the 
 stales (saving the counsellors), that the queen hath no more 
 liberty nor privilege to commit murder nor adultery, than 
 any other private person, neither by God's laws, nor by the 
 laws of the realm." July 18th. Robertson, ii. 453. His 
 letter of the 19th assures us that her great peril was that 
 of a judicial trial ; and Elizabeth afterwards professed, that 
 her interposition at this period had preserved Mary's life, 
 Robertson, i. 445. Cotton Library, Caligula, C. 9. fol. 4. 
 * Keith, 424. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 121 
 
 for the appointment of a regency, and for the chap. 
 resig-nation of the crown'^. The Historie of ^^v«^ 
 James the Sext, assures us " that shoe nather ^ ' 
 ** could, nor durst. refuse, for the messenger was 
 " commandit, in case shoe had refusit, to de- 
 *' nunce punishment and death unto hir for the 
 " murder of hir lawful husband King Henry, ^* 
 In conformity with these authorities, Throck- 
 morton informs us that the assembly of the 
 church required the murder to be severely 
 punished without respect to persons, according to 
 the practice of the realm, and the laws of God 
 and of nations ; and he perceived, that if the con- 
 federates could not by fair means induce the 
 queen to assent, they meant to charge her with 
 the violation of the common and statute laws, 
 adultery with Bothwell, and with the murder of 
 her husband, " of which, as they said, they had 
 " siifficient evidence under her hand^." From the 
 whole tenor of Throckmorton's dispatches, it is 
 evident that she was exposed to no danger but 
 that of a judicial trial, in which her letters would 
 be produced as the proofs of her guilt; and 
 her friends had no reason to apprehend, that the 
 confederates would incur the public abhorrence, 
 and the united vengeance of France and England, 
 by an assassination worse than that of which 
 they accused the queen. The harder terms 
 
 ' Melvil, 85. ' Keith, 426. 
 
1567. 
 
 122 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, into which they were otherwise resolved to enter, 
 III. -^ . . 
 
 and the punishment which their messeng-er was 
 
 enjoined to denounce, jTor the murder of her hus- 
 band, must refer therefore to the same judicial 
 investigation ; the verity which Melvil's brother 
 was employed to explain, must imply the dang"er 
 attending- her life and honour if the casket were 
 produced; and the uniform silence of two con- 
 temporary memoirs concerning the letters, of 
 which Melvil and the author of the History of 
 James VI. could not possibly be ignorant, when 
 they were produced and published, indicates 
 clearly that these writers were unable to disavow 
 the authenticity of the letters, and chose rather to 
 conceal them entirely, than to pronounce them 
 g-enuine'. The consideration which the con- 
 
 ** Not a syllable concerning the letters is to be found either 
 in Melvil or in the History of James V[. Yet Melvil attended 
 the whole conference; enjoyed the regent's peculiar confi- 
 dence ; was entrusted with his secret communications with 
 Norfolk, and gives a ludicrous, and, as we know, a false ac- 
 count of the manner in which the accusation against Mary 
 was produced at Westminster; after which we hear no more 
 of the conference f and the production of the letters to verify 
 the accusation, is studiously concealed. Melvil, 96. The 
 accusation itself is represented as Elizabeth's sole object, 
 and alone sufficient to dishonour Mary, whom Melvil tacitly 
 considered as guilty, when he concealed her refusal to answer 
 the charge. At first I suspected that this part of his me- 
 moirs had been suppressed by the editor. But the History 
 of James VI. gives an accurate abstract of the conferences 
 at York ; abridges with sufficient precision the queen's com- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 123 
 
 federates offered for her resio-nation of the crown, chap. 
 
 '^ ' III. 
 
 " that they would endeavour lliemselves to save ^--^''^^ 
 " both her life and honour, both which otherwise 
 " stood in great danger," accounts in a satis- 
 factory manner for their silence afterwards con- 
 cerning the casket; and as Mary had no danger 
 to apprehend, except from a judicial investiga- 
 tion, nothing less than her letters, containing the 
 proofs of her guilt, could have induced her thus 
 to resign the crown. 
 
 2. About a fortnight after the coronation of Murray's 
 
 return, 
 
 the young king, the Earl of Murray returned to August lo. 
 Scotland, and before his acceptance of the re- 
 gency, he went with Athol and Morton to vivsit 
 the queen in Lochleven castle. A part of the 
 confederates were afraid that he mig^ht be inclined 
 to concur in her release at some subsequent 
 period ; others, among whom were Mar, Athol, 
 Lethington, Tullibardine, and Grange, advised 
 him to treat her with respect and tenderness, as 
 
 plaint agaiust Murray and Morton, their answer and her 
 reply ; explains the removal of the conference to Westminster^ 
 and then maintains an inviolable silence, to conceal the 
 accusation, and the proofs of her guilt. Melvil, and the 
 author of this History, could not possibly be ignorant of the 
 letters, especially when published and annexed to Buchanan's 
 Detection; and their cautious silence, at that critical part of 
 the conferences, when the letters or the accusation were pro- 
 duced against Mary, is a convincing proof that they were 
 careful not to mention the letters, in order to conceal, if 
 possible, what they could not disown. 
 
UK 
 
 1567. 
 
 124 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, her judgment, no longer influenced by evil 
 company, had already begun to repent of many 
 things, and the time might come when he would 
 wish to restore her again to power *^ His motives, 
 therefore, for this visit, which have never been 
 understood, were to examine her present dispo- 
 sition in person, that his future conduct might be 
 regulated by the result of his own observations ; 
 to produce, perhaps, a reformation in her mind 
 by his salutary remonstrances ; and finally to 
 procure her personal consent to his acceptance 
 of the government. At their first interview, be- 
 fore supper, she was dissatisfied with his reserve, 
 from which she could draw no presage of his 
 opinions or designs. At the second interview, 
 which continued till midnight, he disclosed, ap- 
 parently at her own request, his opinion of her 
 misconduct ; '* laid before her all such disorders 
 " as might touch her conscience, her honour, or 
 " safety ; and while he behaved like a ghostly 
 " confessor, sometimes she wept bitterly, some- 
 " times she acknowledged her unadvised mis- 
 " conduct ; some things she did plainly confess, 
 " some things excuse, and some extenuate," and 
 he left her that night to the mercy of God, as 
 her chief resource. At their next interview in 
 the morning, he consoled her with a conditional 
 assurance of her life, and " as much as in him lay, 
 " the preservation of her honour ; for her liberty, 
 
 '" Melvil, 87. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARN LEY. 125 
 
 " which lay not in his power, it was neither good ^"j^^' 
 " to seek, nor at that time to obtain it ;" and at ^-^'v-w 
 
 15 7 
 
 his departure she embraced him, and requested 
 him to assume the regency for the preservation 
 both of herself and her son". From this imperfect 
 report of the conference, the conditional assurance 
 of life which he gave to the queen, but which 
 depended not upon him alone, ** as the lords and 
 " others had an interest in the matter," can refer 
 only to a judicial trial if she attempted to disturb 
 the government, or retained her inordinate at- 
 tachment to Bothwell ; and his farther assurance 
 for the preservation of her honour, as much as in 
 him lay, can relate to nothing else than the letters 
 in Morton's custody, which the confederates re- 
 tained, and which they intended to produce, if 
 necessary,fortheir own vindication. Their silence 
 concerning the casket is sufficiently explained ; 
 since the letters which at first they were afraid 
 to divulge, lest it should preclude all terms of 
 accommodation with her friends, were afterwards 
 employed to extort a resignation of the crown, as 
 the tacit consideration for which they were con- 
 cealed. The discovery of the casket was there- 
 fore omitted in Dalgleish's Examination, whose 
 evidence was strictly confined to the murder; 
 and as there were no minutes of council taken 
 till a later period, no mention of the letters jcould 
 
 " Keith, 445-6. 
 
III. 
 
 1567. 
 
 126 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, occur in its records, till an act of council was 
 pronounced upon the subject^-. In the same 
 manner, Huntley's concern in the murder, as we 
 discover from a letter to Throckmorton, was sup- 
 pressed in the deposition of Hay of Talla (Sep- 
 tember 13th), as that powerful nobleman was then 
 on terms of submission to the regent". Argyle, 
 Boyd, Livingston, and Killwinning, had acknow- 
 ledged the young king, and the regent's autho- 
 
 '* Whitaker repeatedly objects, that in the minutes of 
 council on the 21sl and 27th of June, noi a word is said of 
 the letters, which are not mentioned till the 4th of Decemher. 
 Whitaker, i. 248. He should have known that no minutes 
 of council \vere'kept,.till the next century, and that the acts of 
 council, like those of parliament, are expressly confined to 
 the subjects upon which they are pronounced. 
 
 " " This day the Erll of Argill, the Lordis Boyd, Lewis- 
 toun and Kelwonynge, are partit of this towne, and weill 
 agreit with my L. Regent, proralsying to serve the kyng and 
 aknawledge hym as regent, and all the Hameltouns and the 
 Lord Herys hes sent the lyke offers, and the Erie of Huntlie 
 is seeking all the lueenys he cane to haif his dress, bot the 
 Lard of Tallaw quho is apprehendit dois blot the said erle 
 with the raurder ; quhat forder order beis takkyne with him 
 I am presentlie uncertane." R. Melvil's letter to Throck- 
 morton, Edinburgh, September 14th, 1507. M. Crawford's 
 MS. The letter is written the day after Hay's examination ; 
 but Huntley's share in the murder, and the letters, which it 
 was not then intended to divulge, were suppressed in the 
 Depositions of Hay and Dalgleish, for the same reason, be- 
 cause their depositions were taken as evidence to be produced 
 Judicially against themselves. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 127 
 
 rity: Herreis and all the Hamiltons had offered 
 to submit; and it was dan^-erous to prosecute, 
 
 1 567 
 
 on a single evidence, a chieftain with whom they 
 might still confederate. Their submission was 
 accepted, and to confirm the authority of the 
 new government, a parliament was then held by 
 the regent (December 15th), at which the lords 
 of each party were present, and the sword and 
 sceptre were borne by Huntley and Argyle". 
 
 The confederates were solicitous for a legal The letters 
 confirmation of their late transactions. An act the privy*" 
 of council, after long deliberation, had been lately *^""*^' ' . 
 framed (December 4th), declaring that they could 
 find no other means for their vindication, than to 
 reveal the whole truth from the beginning, into 
 which, as it was dishonourable to the queen, their 
 sovereign's mother, they were loath to enter, till 
 compelled for their security; and desiring the 
 parliament to find that their late proceedings were 
 in the queen's " awin default, in as far as, be 
 ** divers herprevie letters, written and suhscrivit 
 " with Mr awin hand, and sent be hir to James 
 " Earl of Bothwell, as well befoir themurder as 
 " thereafter, and by hir ungodlie and dishonour- 
 ** able proceeding in apriveit marriage with him 
 ** soddanlie and unprovisitlie thereafter, it is maist 
 " certain that she was previe, airt and pairt, of 
 
 " Anderson, ii. 228. Birrell's Diary, 13. Spottiswood, 
 214. 
 
128 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. " the actual devise and deid of the murder of the 
 >-«'^/"^ " king hir lawful husband *\" An act of par- 
 and^in ' liamcnt was accordingly passed, declaring, nearly 
 parliament, j^ ^^^ same tcrms, that the conduct of the confe- 
 derates, in taking arms, and in the detention of the 
 queen's person, was by her own default; " in as 
 ** far as by diverse her previe letters, written 
 ** halelie with Mr aiviu handy and sent be hir 
 ** to James, sometyme Earl of Bothwell, as weill 
 '* befoir the murther, as thereafter, and be hir nn- 
 ** godlie and dishonourable proceeding to ane 
 •* pretendit marriage with him, suddenly and un- 
 " provisatly therefter, it is maist certaine that she 
 ** was previe, airt and pairt of the actual devise 
 " and deid of the murthour of the king, hir 
 ** lawchful husband*^." From this difference 
 
 '* Haynes, 454. Goodall, ii. 62. This passage has been 
 perverted to a different sense, viz. that her letters to Bothwtll 
 were the cause of taking arras, and the detention of her per- 
 son, which, as the letters were not then discovered, was 
 absolutely false. Tytler, i, 86. Stuart, i. 561. The meaning 
 is obvious, that the occasion of their taking arms, and the 
 detention of Iter person, were in her own default, in as far as 
 it was most certain, both from her correspondence and 
 marriage with Bothwell, that she was accessary to the murder 
 of her late husband : in other words, that she could not 
 accuse their rising as rebellious, when their proceedings 
 were justified by her own crimes, as was manifest both from 
 her letters and marriage. Haile's Notes on Tytler, MS. 
 
 '* Goodall, ii. 66. Anderson, ii. 220. Keith, Appendix, 
 152. 
 
1561 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 129 
 
 between the acts of council and of parliament, of chap. 
 which Hume enables us to give a just explanation, 
 much despicable quibbling- has been employed to 
 prove that the letters were either fabricated in the 
 interval between the two acts, or v^ere originally 
 forged with the queen's signature, which was after- 
 wards withdrawn*''. But the casket, whether its 
 contents were authentic or not, was undoubtedly 
 produced in the privy council '^ : and as every legal 
 and conventional writing was termed a letter, her 
 letters, sonnets, and marriage contracts which 
 were all secret, were indiscriminately styled her 
 previe letters^^. As the letters, sonnets, and first 
 
 " Goodall, i. 43. Tytler, i. 87. Guthrie, vii. 97. Stuart 
 i. 371. Whit. i. 381. 
 
 '* Even this is denied by Guthrie, who as he cannot find 
 the actual production of the letters specified in the act, con- 
 cludes that the privy council took the matter for granted, 
 vii. 90. Neither is the production of the letters specified in 
 the act of parliament ; yet we know that they were exhibited 
 there, not only from Murray's information, but from the re- 
 luctant confession of Mary's friends, and we have no reason 
 to suppose that they were not exhibited in the same manner 
 in the privy council, where, after many days deliberation, 
 the act of parliament was first framed. Nothing can be more 
 captious and pedantic than to demand precision of language, 
 or correctness of judicial procedure, from an age and nation 
 accustomed to neither. 
 
 " Letters of horning, caption, lawburrows, intercommun- 
 ing, letters of slains, fire and sword, &c. were judicial writs ; 
 letters of tack, pension, &c. were conventional writs, in the 
 form of letters. Tytler and Whitaker suppose, that her privy 
 
 VOL. I. K 
 
1567. 
 
 130 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, contract in French, were written, nncl the second 
 III. ' 
 
 only was subscribed by the queen, they were un- 
 doul tedly described as " divers her previe letters, 
 " written or subscribed with her own hand ;" but 
 this clause, in the copy found by Haynes among* 
 the Cecil papers, has been converted, by a natu- 
 ral mislake of the pen or of the press, into 
 *' writ en 6(Wf/ subscribed with her own hand""." 
 In Murray's receipt for the box and letteis, when 
 carrit d to England, they are described as *' ane 
 •* silv. r box, owergilt wilh gold, with all missive 
 " letteris, con'ractis, or oblig-atiounis for mar- 
 " riage, s(»nnettis or luit'-ballettis, and all utheris 
 " letteris containit thairin, send and past betwix 
 " the queen and Bothwell ;" in Morton's receipt 
 (1570-1) as " an silver box owergilt with gold, 
 " with the missive letteris, contractis or obliga- 
 ** tiounis for marriage, sonneltis or luif-ballettis, 
 *' and utheris letteris thair in containit to the num- 
 " ber of XXI, send and past betvtix the queen and 
 "Bothwell^';" from which it appears, that ac- 
 cording to the language of the age, not only the 
 missives that wi re sent, but the sonnets and the 
 contracts that had |)assed between them, were 
 
 letters can relate only to her missive letters, as if the contracts, 
 and sonnets, when intlnded, as tliey are in the receipts, un- 
 der the denomination of letters, were not equally private. 
 Tytier, i. 90. Whit. i. 382-8. 
 
 *° See Appendix, No. XIV. 
 
 " Goodali, ii. 91. Anderson, ii. 257. i 
 
 2 
 
1567. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 131 
 
 comprehended under the general denomination 
 of letters. In Murray's declaration at Westmin- 
 ster that the letters were genuine, not only the 
 act of council is explained, but the clause in 
 question is literally transcribed. *' Quhairas we 
 " haif producit diverse missive letteris, sonnettis, 
 ** obligatiounis, or contractis for marriage be- 
 " twix the queen and Bothwell as writtin or 
 *' suhscrivit be hir hand, and we be the tenour 
 ** heirof, testifies, avoweis and affirms that the 
 " saidis hail missive writings, sonnettis, obliga- 
 " tiounis, or contracts are undoubtedly the said 
 " queen's proper hand write ; except the con- 
 " tract in Scottis of the dait at Seitown the 5th 
 " day of April 1567, written be the Earl of 
 " Huntlie, quhilkes also we understand and per- 
 " fectly knawes to be suhscrivit be hir^.'* Here 
 the distinction between the letters that were 
 written, and the contract that was only subscrib- 
 ed by her hand, is precisely explained : and from 
 these passages it appears that in the original 
 act of council, her missive letters, sonnets and 
 contracts vi'ere styled indiscrimiKately her letters, 
 
 ^ Id. 259. Goodall, ii. 92. In the same manner, in the 
 letter which Goodall ascribes to Cecil, on the publication of 
 Buchanan's Detection, " The very casket was here shewn, 
 and the letters and other ni numents opened and exhibited ; 
 and so much as is there said to be written or subscribed by the 
 said Lady Mary, the Earl of Bothwell, or others, hath been 
 testified to be written and subscribed as is there alledged." 
 Goodall, ii, 379. Anderson, ii. 265. 
 
 K 2 
 
1567. 
 
 132 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, and as they were all secret, " her previe letters, 
 " written or subscribed with her own hand." The 
 whole casket was produced in the privy council, 
 and attested, among many others, by Grange, 
 whose heroic attachment to Mary never would have 
 suffered him to promote the deceit. But in par- 
 liament, the whole casket was not produced. The 
 Scotch contract at Seton was undoubtedly with- 
 held, for this substantial reason, that it was writ- 
 ten by Huntley, one of the lords of Articles, and 
 when his peace was already made with the regent, 
 the contract never could have passed through 
 the committee of Articles, for the obvious pur- 
 pose of his impeachment in parliament. The let- 
 ters, SOI. nets, and perhaps the first contract, were 
 alone produced, and are therefore properly de- 
 scribed in the act, by the clerk of parliament, as 
 written halelie with her awin hand. The letters 
 at least were confessedly produced in parliament"^ 
 where Argyle, Huntley, and his uncle, the Bishop 
 of Galloway, the Bishop of Murray, BothwelFs 
 uncle, and the Earl of Caithness, whose son was 
 married to BothwelPs sister, were lords of Ar- 
 ticles, and where Herreis was present to defend 
 the honour of the queen^*. But Argyle, Hunt- 
 ley, Herreis, and others, protested, according 
 to their own account, not against the authenticity 
 of the letters, but against the resignation of the 
 
 ^ Robertson, ii. 484. Goodall, ii. 360. 
 '* Anderson, ii. 228. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 133 
 
 III. 
 
 1567. 
 
 crown ; that it should be deemed invalid if ex- ^^,'^^- 
 tortt'd iVom the queen without her free consent. 
 That a bond was signed to deprive lier of life, 
 if they opposed the act, is a vain, and obviously a 
 false pretext^*. No such bond was ever known, 
 or even supposed to exist, and as her sole danger 
 arose from a judicial investigation, to disprove 
 the evidence was the surest method to preserve 
 her life. But instead of attempting to disprove 
 the letters, Huntley, Argyle, and Herreis pro- 
 tested, that no blame should be imputed to 
 them for their past conduct in opposition to the 
 king, and when they received a pardon in public 
 from the regent-^, we can only conclude that 
 those letters must have been genuine which pass- 
 ed the Articles, and, on being produced in par- 
 liament, were approved and confirmed as au- 
 thentic, without opposition from her friends. 
 
 3. On her escape next year from Lochleven Origin and 
 
 object of 
 
 castle, and the defeat of her friends at the battle the confer- 
 
 . ences in 
 
 of Langside, she sought an asylum in England, England. 
 and was conducted to Carl}le with every mark of 
 external respect. Her first request on her arrival ^^^ ^^' 
 
 ^ Goodall, ii. 362. The bond, with the act of parliament 
 concerning Bothwell's acquittal and marriage, must be class- 
 ed among the many fictions in the instructions from the lords 
 and abbots of Mary's party. They mention none who sub- 
 scribed, or refused to subscribe it, and never once ventured to 
 mention it at York or Westminster. 
 
 ^^ Anderson, iv. 153. See Appendix, No. XV. 
 
134 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, was to obtain admission to Elizabeth's presence, 
 v^N^^' and sufficient aid against her rebellious subjects, 
 to restore her to her throne. From the presence 
 of an artful, intriguing- rival, who had once 
 challenged, and in the opinion of a numerous 
 party, possessed an indisputable title to the 
 crown, the situation of Elizabeth was certainly 
 embarrassing in the extreme; and it was equally 
 dangerous to permit Mary to pass into France, or 
 to return into Scotland, where the arrival of fo- 
 reign succours might renew her pretensions to 
 the throne of England. Two modes of proce- 
 dure remained ; but it is sufficient for my pur- 
 pose to explain, and unnecessary to vindicate, 
 the various motives of Elizabeth's conduct. The 
 reader will be able in the sequel to determine for 
 himself, whether, or to what extent, she was actu- 
 ated by a malignant animosity towards her former 
 rival, or by a sincere resolution to restore her, if 
 innocent, or guilty merely of culpable indiscre- 
 tions, to her throne or kingdom ; but if mani- 
 festly guilty of her husband's murder, to seclude 
 her person for ever from the world ; and in either 
 case, to prevent the introduction of a foreign 
 force into Britain, and the renewal of the former 
 alliance between the Scots and the French'^ 
 The private deliberations of Cecil uniformly pro- 
 ceed upon these suppositions : That it is neces- 
 
 '^ Anderson, iv. Part i. p» 40 — 2. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARN LEV. 135 
 
 sary to procure and to decl u'e to the Queen of *'^^^^- 
 
 Scots, the plain proofs of her concern in her ^-^^^^"^^ 
 
 husband's death, " to the end, if upon her an- 
 
 *' swer thereunto, it shall appea" that she is not 
 
 " culjDable of that wherewith she has been 
 
 " charged, then, by her majesty's means and 
 
 ** support, she may be restore*!, both to her 
 
 " honour and estate : But, it by her answer it 
 
 " shall not appear tut that she is culpable, then 
 
 ** her majesty may devise otherwise^ how to cover 
 
 ** the dishonour of the crime, and also to settle 
 
 " her in her realm, under such government as 
 
 *' miy preserve the same from the tyranny of 
 
 *' the French, and continue the good accortl be- 
 
 " twixtthe two realms." — " It her cause shall be 
 
 " heard, and duly examined, there must needs 
 
 *' follow an acquittal of the Queen of Scots from 
 
 -i* the infamy, or a condemnation for the whole, 
 
 " or some part of the crimes imputed to her: If 
 
 " acquitted, then for the benefit she shall re- 
 
 " ceive, good means may be devised to make an 
 
 "alliance betwixt both these realms: If her 
 
 " cause prove criminal, then either she is to be 
 
 ** restored to her country with some sure limita- 
 
 ** tions for the safety and succession of her son, 
 
 ** and the maintenance of the reyfent and his 
 
 ** party in Scotland ; or else, according to the 
 
 ** excess and quantity of the crime, she is to 
 
 " live in some convenient place, without pos- 
 
 " sessing of her kingdom, where she may not 
 
III. 
 
 1568. 
 
 136 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. " niove anv new trouble'^." In conformity with 
 
 T T T " •! 
 
 these deliberations, Lord Scroop and Sir Francis 
 Knolles were dispatched to cong^ratulate her on 
 her arrival in England. They informed her that 
 their mistress " could not, without her own dis- 
 *' honour, admit her to her presence, by reason 
 *' of the great slander of the murder whereof 
 *' she was not yet purged ;" but assured her that 
 their mistress " would be the gladdest in the 
 " world to see her grace well purged of this 
 " crime, that thereby she might aid her fully 
 " and amply for her advancement to her govern- 
 " ment royal again "^." The conditions, there- 
 fore, upon which alone she could expect assist- 
 ance from Elizabeth, or access to l^er presence, 
 were announced from the beginning ; but 
 alarmed at those dangerous proposals of excul- 
 pation and inquiry, she renewed her application 
 for admission and aid. A pointed and explicit 
 answer was returned to Lord Herreis, whom she 
 had sent to court : That considering' the many 
 notable crimes with which she was truly charged, 
 prior and posterior to the king's murder, to 
 which she was commonly reputed accessary; 
 her contempt for her husband, and attachment 
 to the man by whom he was afterwards mur- 
 dered i her protection of Bothwell, and neglect 
 to prosecute or investigate the murder ; her 
 
 " Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 36 — 8. 
 ^ Id, 52—5—9. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 137 
 
 punjshraent of those wlio accused him of the chap. 
 
 . . Ill- 
 
 crime ; her advancement of the chief murderer ^--•'v"^ 
 
 15G8 
 
 to new titles and estates, and in the end, her 
 marriage with him while his wife was yet liv- 
 ing;-^the queen's majesty was perplexed how 
 to act, and was unable, consistently with her 
 own honour, to receive her at court; but that 
 ghe would ag-ree to do whatever could be devised 
 to remove the very imputation of those crimes, 
 whereby the queen of Scots might be admitted 
 to her presence, and by the chastisement of her 
 adversaries, be restored to her former estate and 
 honour^'*. According" to Cecil's narrative, Her- Mary's of- 
 
 ,., , ,, ,, ..,,. fer to sub- 
 
 reis replied, *' that although her principal desire mit her 
 
 ,1 • . 1 • . , vindication 
 
 " was to have come into her majesty s presence, to Eiiza- 
 ** and to have present aid for her restitution, yet 
 " if that were not meet at present, and Elizabeth 
 "would take the understanding- of her cause in 
 " hand, she would wholly commit the same to 
 " be ordered by her majesty ; so that respect be 
 ** had to his mistress' behalf, that she should 
 " (not) submit herself in manner of any judg'- 
 "ment; nor that her subjects, whom she ac- 
 *' counted traitors, should come into the f^ealm, 
 " to be heard as Aer accusers ; and required that 
 " Murray should be enjoined to suspend liostili- 
 " ties against her friends ^\" Elizabeth's reply 
 deserves particular attention : " That she desired 
 
 ^° Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 7 — 9. 
 =" Id. 10. 
 
)6o8. 
 
 138 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. t( not of herself to deal in the cause of the crimes 
 " imputed to the Scottish queen, but only wished 
 " that some good means might he devised, that 
 ** her sister mig^ht be honourably acquitted there- 
 ** of; which if it mig^ht be, she should be surely 
 " restored with all princely honour, and ena led 
 ** to chastise her reb* Is ; and if it should not fall 
 " out so clearlif to all pvrpoaes^ as n'ere to he 
 " wished, yet her majesty meant not so to deal 
 " therein, as to animate, or g-ive comfort to any 
 *' subjects to proceed ag^ainst their sovereign, for 
 ^' any cause that could be aliedged, but would 
 " do her best, after the viaifer heard, to com- 
 " pound a\\ difficulties without bloodshed, and 
 " procure her quietness in her realm, and peace 
 ** among- her subjects : And as to any form or 
 " process, whereby her subjects should be re- 
 " puted accusers, the queen's majesty, so far 
 " from that, meant rather to have such of them 
 " as she (Mary) should name, called into the 
 " realm, to be charged with such crimes as she 
 " should object against them, and if any form of 
 "judgment should be used, it should be against 
 *' them ; and upon report made to her, by per- 
 " sons of honour deputed for the purpose, of 
 " what her subjects should answer for them- 
 " selves, as it should please her to declare her 
 " mind and answer to the queen's majesty, so 
 " would her majesty inform herself how Jar 
 ^^ forth she might understand the queen her 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 139 
 
 " sister to be clear from the crimes imputed; ^"|^,^* 
 " or horv, otherwise, if the causes should prove ^--'v^/ 
 *' doubtful, to prefer the queen's cause, and com- 
 " pound the whole to her best advantag^e and 
 " honour'^" 
 
 Middlemore was immediately dispatched to June lo. 
 Carlyle, with instructions to communicate the 
 answer to Mary, and to procure a suspension of 
 arms in Scotland. He informed her plainly, u. 
 " that being taxed as she is of so horrible a 
 " crime as the murdering of her husband, her 
 " majesty could not receive her before some 
 "justification; but since she had put herself 
 " into her majesty's hand, and made her the 
 " only judge of her cause, her majesty would 
 " take both her and her cause into her protec- 
 " tion; yea, and if after trial made, the justice 
 *' of her cause woidd bear it, she would so pro- 
 ** secute her adversaries, as that she would com- 
 *' pel them to do her right, and help to restore 
 " her to her honour, dignity, and govern- 
 " ment^V But the message was peculiarly 
 unacceptable to Mary, who perceived that her 
 subjects would, in effect, become her accusers, 
 whatever forms were ostensibly employed. She 
 declared with much passion, that she had no 
 other judge but God : acknowledged that she 
 had offered to make the queen her judge; but 
 
 ^' Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 11. 
 " Id. 13. 83—8. 
 
140 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 lu68. 
 
 Retracts 
 her offer. 
 
 men lit to utter such things to her as she had 
 ncvu done, nor would to any ; inveighed at 
 31urray and his party as traitors, unworthy to 
 appear as a party against her; •* but," said she, 
 " if they will needs come, desire my good sister 
 " the queen, to write that Lelhington and 3Ior' 
 *' torij who be two of the wisest and most able 
 " of them to say most against jne, may come, 
 " and then to let me be there, in their presence, 
 " face to face, to hear their accusations, and to 
 " be heard how 1 can make my purgations; 
 " but I lh!nk that Lethington would be very 
 " loath oi that commission." She had already 
 affirmed to Scroop and Knolles, that Lethington 
 and Morton were assenting to the murder, al- 
 though now they would seem to prosecute the 
 same^*: but her silence concerning Murray, and 
 her pointed selection of those two to be sum- 
 moned into England, indicate that she was fully 
 apprized of the particulars of their interview 
 with Bothwell at Whittingham, and was well 
 assured that they would not venture, at least in 
 her presence, to accuse her of a murder to 
 which they were privy themselves. She wrote 
 immediately to Elizabeth, to retract her offer, 
 desiring to be first restored to her throne, or 
 permitted to depart elsewhere; promising to 
 return in order to vindicate her innocence, when 
 
 Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 55. 90, 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 141 
 
 reinstated in her kingdom ; and protesting-, that 
 she neither would, nor could, reply to the false 
 accusations of her enemies, nor in form of a 
 process against her subjects, in which, unless 
 their hands were tied up, there was no equality 
 between her and them, and to which, while she 
 remained there, she would sooner die than sub- 
 mit^^ The privy council, before whom the June 20. 
 letter was laid, determined that it was dis- 
 honourable to restore her without a previous 
 trial and vindication of her conduct, and dan- 
 gerous to permit her to repair to foreign courts 
 for support. Upon Middlemore's return from 
 Scotland, with Murray's consent to the arbitra- 
 tion of the Queen of England as umpire, Her- 
 reis agreed that the conferences should begin 
 immediately in the north, in order to be finished 
 if possible before the month of August. A few 
 days afterwards, when the regent was already 
 summoned, he declared that his mistress would 
 make no answer whatsoever, to matters pro- 
 pounded by her own subjects, or to persons 
 deputed as commissioners, but to the queen 
 herself, concerning the crimes with which she 
 was charged ^^ 
 
 These passages are recited at greater length, 
 because her apologists availing themselves of a 
 few partial quotations from her Instructions to 
 
 ** Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 97. 
 =« Id. 18. 104. 
 
1568. 
 
 142 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, her Commissioners, have affirmed that whether 
 she were innocent or gnilty, the professed object 
 of the conference, whatever its issue mig-ht be, 
 was to restore her, nnanointed and nnannealed, to 
 her throne ". But the early deliberations of Cecil, 
 the very first intimations from Scroop andKnolles, 
 the pointed and explicit answer given to Herreis, 
 Elizabeth's message, and the Discourse of Mid- 
 dlemore, afford a full demonstration that Mary 
 could expect no assistance, nor liberty, till ab- 
 solved from those crimes of which she was ac- 
 cused. She was assured, that if her innocence 
 were fully vindicated, she should be restored 
 with honour to her former rank, and her rebels 
 chastised ; that if the causes were doubtful, or if 
 her innocence were not so clearly, and to all pur- 
 
 " Tytler, i. 102. Whitaker, i. 58. "That no doubt may 
 remain" of Mary's veracity, or " of the validity of her evidence 
 against Elizabeth," the latter produces this notable argument, 
 " that she must be the only evidence of what she only can 
 know, the contents of Elizabeth's letters to her:" Ibid. The 
 letters themselves, however, are an addition to the many fic- 
 tions interspersed through the controversy as matters of fact. 
 Mary and Lesly have undoubtedly chosen to misrepresent the 
 conference, as confined entirely to her restitution to the throne. 
 But the conference could have no proper object, if she was 
 to be restored at all events, whether innocent or guilty ; and 
 her boldest advocates will not venture to assert, that, on the 
 supposition of the fact being fully proved, of her being no- 
 toriously guilty of the murder of her husband, she was enti- 
 tled to be restored. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 143 
 
 poses, established as could be wished, (or, in other chap. 
 words, if she wereg^uilty of culpable indiscretions N^v^i* 
 merely) she should be restored by an accommo- 
 dation, as far as the justice of her cause would 
 bear; and the conclusion was obvious and suffi- 
 ciently understood, that if plainly guilty of her 
 husband's murder, she had no aid to expect from 
 Elizabeth against her disobedient subjects, nor 
 any relief to obtain from the perpetual confine- 
 ment due to her crimes. The first object, there- 
 fore, of the conference was, to vindicate her inno- 
 cence, under the form of an accusation against 
 her rebellions subjects, in order to restore her to 
 the throne. She had already offered to commit 
 her cause to Elizabeth's hands, and the intima- 
 tion, that she meant to utter such things to the 
 queen, as she had never done, nor would to any, 
 can allude only to some secret, or supposed design 
 of her husband's, not sufficient, even in her own 
 opinion, to vindicate her innocence, but of a ten- 
 dency perhaps to extenuate her guilt. But she 
 receded from the proposal, as soon as her subjects 
 were summoned to England : she refused to plead 
 or to attest her innocence, unless their hands 
 were tied up from accusation ; and as Herreis also 
 retracted his offer, the conference was deferred, 
 
 4. In submitting to the arbitration of Elizabeth, Murray's 
 
 ■»« I • 1 • • ■ 1 1- demands. 
 
 Murray, when required to justify the proceed mgs June 22. 
 of the confederates, had transmitted a note by 
 Middlemore, in which he observes, how danger- 
 
144 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, oils and prejudicial it would prove, to accuse the 
 queen, his sovereign's mother, -and " syne to enter 
 ** in qualification with her;" and if the accusation 
 should proceed, he desires to know what might 
 " follow thairupon in caise we preive all that we 
 " allege : utherwayis we sal be als incertaine 
 " after the caus concludit, as we are presentlie. 
 " Farther it may be that sic letteris as we haif of 
 *' the queene, that sufficientlie iti our opinion 
 " preives her consetiting to the murthour of the 
 " king hir husband, sal be callit in doubt by the 
 " juges constitute for the trial, quhether thay 
 " may stand or fall, pruifor not; thairfor sen our 
 " servant, Mr. J hone Wode" (then at London) 
 " hes the copies of the samen letteris, translatit 
 " in our lanouasfe, we vvald earnestlie desvre that 
 " thay may be considerit by the juges, that thay 
 " may resolve this far, in caise the principal agree 
 " with the copie, that then we pruif the caus in- 
 " deed^^" This first intimation of a Scottish 
 translation is important in the sequel ; but by a 
 strange misapprehension, or misrepresentation of 
 the fact, Murray's demand is represented as an 
 infamous proposal, to which Elizabeth acceded, 
 that the letters should be held as authentic evi- 
 dence of guilt, if they agreed with the copies, not 
 if actually written in Mary's hand^^. Murray, 
 
 ^ Goodall, ii. 75. 
 
 '^ Stuart, i. 304-30, and more explicitly by Whitaker, i. 68. 
 That the copies, deaired to be laid before the judges, when 
 
1668. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARN LEY. 145 
 
 naturally anxious concerning the conference, was 
 unwilling to accuse the queen, unless assured of 
 the result, and for his own security demanded to 
 know, 1. What consequence would ensue if his 
 accusation should be fully proved ? 2. Whether, 
 on inspecting- the copies then in England, if the 
 originals corresponded with those translations, 
 the letters would be sustained by judges, not as 
 authentic, but according to the Scottish law, as 
 relevant,'Or sufficient, if authenticated, to establish 
 her guilt. " For quhen we haif manifestid and 
 * shawen all, and yet sail haif na assurance that 
 " it we send sail satisfiefor probatiourif for quhat 
 ** purpois sail we ather accuse, or take care how 
 " to pruif, quhen we are not assurit quhat to 
 " pruij\ or when we haif ' preivit, quhat sail 
 " succeed.'^ The demand of a previous judg- 
 ment upon the relevancy of the letters, whether 
 they were sufficient, when produced as evi- 
 dence, to substantiate the charge, is intelligi- 
 ble to every Scotsman ; but Cecil's answer cor- 
 responds with the former assurances to Mary ; 
 That her majesty never meant to promote an 
 accusation, or to proceed to condemnation, but 
 to hear their defence, and to compound all dif- 
 ferences, nor allow therein any faults that might 
 appear in the queen ; and that no proofs would be 
 
 appointed, were actually delivered to Elizabeth, and remained 
 for three months in her hands, is also a gratuitous assertion. 
 Id. 77. 
 
 VOL. I. I. 
 
146 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, held sufficient, unless both i)arties were heard**. 
 
 in. . ' 
 
 ^■>*v-^ The most artful policy was undoubtedly employ- 
 Mary ac- ed to induce the queen to adhere to her original 
 conferelice^ offcr. On her removal to Bolton, all chance of 
 escape was precluded ; and after an ineffectual 
 application for her retnrn to Scotland, Lord 
 Herreis, on Elizabeth's assurance that she would 
 endeavour to procure some peaceful and honour- 
 able conclusion without delay, agreed that the 
 cause should be heard and determined by her ma- 
 jesty's appointment, as was at first intended. Eli- 
 zabeth's message was carefully repeated by Her- 
 reis, in the presence of Scroop and Knolles, 
 upon his return to Bolton ; that if the queen would 
 commit her cause to her highness' order, not as 
 judge over her, but as her cousin and friend, she 
 would surely restore her in this form again to her 
 throne : first, she would summon her adversaries, 
 for deposing their sovereign, and if they could 
 allege some reason (as her liighness thinks they 
 cannot do), then she should be restored condi- 
 tionally, that they might retain their honours, 
 state, and dignities: secondly, if they could al- 
 lege no reason for their proceedings, then the 
 queen should be absolutely restored, and if neces- 
 sary, by arms, upon condition of renouncing her 
 alliance with France, and her claim to the crown 
 
 *• Goodall, ii. 76-80. Anderson, iv. Part i. 107. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 147 
 
 of England during Elizabeth's life*'. Mary's 
 answer was returned on the same day : That 
 afraid, on account of false imputations, to entrust 
 her cause to others, yet relying upon her sister's 
 assurance, she was content that any two (com- 
 missioners) of sufficient rank should attend, whom 
 her majesty might depute for such an important 
 charge ; that Murray, or Morton, or both, as 
 principals to whom the cause was assigned 
 against her, should attend as desired ; that such 
 order should be taken with them as to her ma- 
 jesty seemed good ; but that they should use her 
 as their queen, without prejudice to her honour, 
 crown, estate, or right as Elizabeth's presumptive 
 heir*\ In this limited and reluctant consent, her 
 reliance was placed, not only on Elizabeth's pro- 
 mise to support her cause, but upon the discretion 
 of Morton, and on the gratitude and fraternal 
 affection of Murray, to which she appealed in a 
 letter intimating the many benefits which he had 
 received at her hands, and her surprise, that, at 
 a parliament recently held, he could find it in his 
 heart to pursue her life*^. She expected, not 
 
 "" Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 23. 109. ""Haynes, 467. 
 
 " Anderson, iv. 117. This parliament had been held oa 
 the 25th of June (Spottiswood, 217.), after Murray had been 
 summoned by Middlemore, and by Elizabeth's letter, to 
 answer for his conduct. Anderson, iv. 68. That he could 
 find it in his heart to pursue her life in the parliament, must 
 refer therefore to a resolution to accuse her in England. 
 
 l2 
 
148 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 111, 
 
 1568. 
 
 CHAP, without reason, that they would not venture to 
 accuse their sovereign, or if they did, she relied 
 upon the prudent reservation of her rank and 
 honour as a pretext to recede. But the professed 
 object of the conference was still the same ; 
 namely, under the form of an accusation against 
 her rebellious subjects, to vindicate her own in- 
 nocence against their allegations, before she could 
 be admitted to the presence of Elizabeth, or be 
 restored to her throne. It was stipulated that 
 she should be absolutely reinstated, if innocent, 
 and if necessary by arms : or if some reason 
 could be alleged by her subjects, (culpable indis- 
 cretion for instance, in her marriage with Both- 
 well) that she should be restored conditionally, 
 by a mutual accommodation, and that no faults 
 should be allowed in her conduct. The alterna- 
 tive, from different motives, was carefully avoided 
 by the two queens. But the conference was ex- 
 pressly instituted to vindicate her innocence, not 
 from faults or culpable indiscretions, but from 
 the imputed guilt of adultery and murder ; and 
 the alternative, which was unavoidable, must 
 have been tacitly understood by both, that if 
 plainly guilty of her husband's murder, she had 
 no claim upon Elizabeth for protection or relief. 
 Se t 12 ^' ^^® lords and abbots of her party met at 
 notiirof I^uttib3'''ton (September 12th), and appointed 
 the intend- commissioncrs at her request for the conferences 
 
 ed accusa- * 
 
 •ion, in England, with Instructions which have evi- 
 
III. 
 
 1568. 
 Sept. 18. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. I49 
 
 dently been framed by the Bishop of Ross**. On chap 
 the bishop's arrival at Bolton (September 18th j, 
 the queen, according" to his subsequent Confession 
 in the Tower, informed him of the object of the 
 conferences at York ; that Murray and his as- 
 sociates were summoned to answer for their 
 unjust and unnatural proceedings against her ; 
 on acknowledging which they would be pardoned 
 and received again into favour, and all differ- 
 ences between them should be compounded. She 
 had no expectation then of being absolutely 
 restored, in consequence of a complete vindica- 
 tion of her innocence ; but the sagacious Lesly at 
 once anticipated the result of the conference. 
 He regretted that she had agreed to any con- 
 ference wherein her adversaries were to be ac- 
 cused ; assured her that they would utter all 
 they could in their defence, though to her dis- 
 honour ; wished earnestly to treat first for an 
 accommodation, before entering into any accusa- 
 tion ; and for that purpose advised her to employ 
 her influence with her friends at court, or at 
 York. She replied that there was no such 
 danger, as she relied upon finding the judges fa- 
 vourable, especially as she was well assured of 
 the good will of the Duke of Norfolk, with whom 
 her marriage was already a topic of common 
 report, and by whom his friend Sussex would be 
 
 « Goodall, U. 351. 
 
150 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ruled; nor would Sadler, the third in the com- 
 
 III. . . . 
 
 ^-•^/-'w/ mission, withstand their advice : and that Nor- 
 
 tliumberland, his lady, and the many friends 
 whom she had in the country, would attend at 
 York, and would persuade the duke to favour 
 and promote her cause. Sir Robert Melvil ar- 
 rived, in the interim, with letters from Lething-- 
 and a copy ton, intimating, •' That Murray was wholly bent 
 ters. ** to utter all he could ag-ainst the queen, and to 
 
 " that effect had carried with him all the letters 
 " which he had to produce against her, for proof 
 " of the murder, whereof he," Lethington, " had 
 " recovered the copy, and had caused his wife to 
 " write them which he sent to the queen ;'' and 
 assuring her that he would not have come into 
 England with Murray, unless to mitigate the 
 rigours that were intended against her. As he 
 requested particular instructions by Melvil how 
 to serve her, she desired him to stai/ those rigorous 
 accusations^ and* to prepossess the duke in her 
 favour, by means of their former intimacy and 
 friendship". According to the explanation given 
 by Barram, the queen's sergeant, upon Norfolk's 
 trial, Lethington " stole the letters from Murray 
 " and kept them one night, howbeit the same 
 " were but copies translated out of French into 
 " Scotch, which when Lethington's wife had 
 " written, he caused them to be sent to the Scot- 
 
 « Murdia, 52. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 151 
 
 "* tish queen *^" She was tliprefore apprized of ^^j|^- 
 Murray's resolution to accuse her of the murder, '"<7X7^ 
 and had received fronj Lething-ton a copy of the 
 letters, trartshited into Scotch. Her instructions 
 to her comnissioners were framed according" to 
 these iatiinations, nearly in the same terms with 
 those from her party in Scotland, and contained 
 an obvious, and indeed the only defence which it 
 
 **Tlie f|ueen's '^er^eant adds, " that she laboured to trans- 
 late ihem again into French, as near as she could to the ori- 
 ginal, wherein she wrote thein ; but that was not possible to 
 do, but there was some variance of phrase; by which vari- 
 ance, as God would, the subtlety of that practice came to 
 light." State Trials, i. 92. This casual intimation of the pur- 
 pose for which Leliiingioti transmitted the copy to tht queen, 
 coincides with the Insiructions of the lords and abbots, that 
 there is " na plane menlion maid in it, be the quhilks her 
 hienes may be convict, albeit it were her grace's hand writt 
 as it is not, and als the same is cnllit by themselves in some 
 principal and substantious clau-e^.'' These substantious 
 clauses, were probably the nnies, or special points extracted 
 by the Scottish oommisiioners, (Anderson, iv. 71.) and the 
 subtlety of the practice Wcis undoubtedly this, that Lething* 
 ton should privately substitute or produce the queen's tran- 
 script instead of the originals, with the oaiission of those 
 criminal passages whi<h might then be opposed as interpo- 
 lated in the translation. When the expedient was proposed 
 in Scotland, Lesly inserted in the Instructions of the lords 
 and abbots that the letters were culled, (or garbled) by heir 
 accusers themselves in certain substantious clauses; but 
 when the expedient was found impracticable, he asserts in- 
 discriminately, in the queen's InstructionSj that tlte letterf 
 were forged. 
 
 2 
 
152 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ^vas possible to make, that the letters were forged. 
 
 ^-*-v-*-^ But it is observable in her confidential Instruct 
 tions to Lethington, that, instead of a plain dis- 
 avowal of the letters, she entreats him to prevent 
 or stop those rigorous accusations, and to con- 
 ciliate the favour of the principal judge. 
 
 Conference Q, The coufereuces besran at York on the 3d 
 
 at York, • • /• i 
 
 Octobers, of Octobcr. The comnaissioners for the Queen of 
 England were, the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of 
 Surrey, Sir Ralph Sadler; for the Queen of 
 Scots, the Lords Livingston, Boyd and Herreis, 
 the Bishop of Ross, and the Abbot of Killwinning, 
 Gordon of Lochinvar, and Cockburn of Skirling; 
 for the king, her son, the Earls of Murray and 
 Morton, Lord Lindsay, the Bishop of Orkney, and 
 the Abbot, or Comaiendator of Dumfermline, 
 with Lethington, Macgill, Balneaves, Buchanan, 
 and others, as assistants ; and as the nobility were 
 unwilling to undertake an invidious and dan- 
 gerous task, it is probable that the regent was 
 attended only by those who durst not dispute his 
 commands*^ The Instructions to Elizabeth's 
 commissioners, though extremely artful, were 
 strictly conformable to her former declarations. 
 If the regent should still be afraid to accuse the 
 queen, though possessed of sufficient evidence for 
 that purpose, they were instructed to assure him, 
 that if she proved to be plainly guilty of the mur- 
 
 *' Buchanan, Hist. lib. xi^, 372. Conference with Leth- 
 iogtoD, in Calderwood, MS. ii. 244. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1 55 
 
 der of her husband, their mistress, how desirous so- chap. 
 ever that she should be found innocent, would sure- ^--•-v-^ 
 ly hold her unworthy to reig-n : nor wouldshestain 
 her own conscience in the support of such wicked- 
 ness, by restoring her to her kingdom. Ifthe queen, 
 however, should not be accused, or should not ap- 
 pear to be guilty of aught but gross misconduct, in 
 her suspicious connexion and marriage with Both- 
 well, they were directed to promote an accommo- 
 dation on such strict conditions as might secure 
 the nation from her future misgovernment, and 
 dissolve its alliance and combination with France. 
 Her entire innocence, and of course her uncondi- 
 tional restoration to the throne, were not once 
 thought of, as likely to happen ; and on the 
 opening of the conference (October 8), her com- Octobers, 
 missioners were startled at a preliminary oath, 
 not only to advance nothing but the truth ; but 
 to conceal nothing which a just decision might 
 require to be known *^ When the conferences 
 began, her complaints were reduced to writing: 
 That her rebellious subjects, rising in arms, had 
 seized and imprisoned her person, and had 
 placed the crown upon her infant son ; that 
 Murray had usurped the supreme power under 
 the title of regent ; that he had defeated her 
 forces, after her escape from Lochleven Castle, 
 and had compelled her to retire into England for 
 refuge. The Duke of Norfolk, who began to 
 
 *' Anderson, iv. Part ii. p. 12, 13, 80. Goodall, ii. 116. 
 
154 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, aspire to a marriage with the Queen of Scots, had 
 
 in. 
 
 already conferred in secret, both with Lething- 
 ton and with Murray, whom he tried to dissuade 
 from the accusation, as a danjjerous measure, 
 never to be forgiven, if she should be restored to 
 authority- and to convince the regent that no 
 sentence of condemnation was intended, the duke 
 advised him, to require some previous assurance 
 that jiulgment would be pronounced, on the evi- 
 dence being produced *^. The confident assertions 
 of Mary's commissioners, that Elizabeth meant 
 at all events to restore her to her kingdom, con- 
 curred also with their offers of accommodation, 
 to deter the regent from any immediate accusa- 
 tion against the queen ^". Accordingly, when his 
 answer was required, he demanded a private in- 
 terview with the English commissioners (October 
 October 9. 9th), and desired to know, before he ventured to 
 accuse the king, his sovereign's mother, whether 
 they were authorized to pronounce upon her guilt 
 or innocence, and to proceed to an immediate 
 sentence according to the proofs ; whether she 
 would be delivered up, if guilty, or retained in 
 England for the security of the kingdom ; and 
 whether in that event, his proceedings would be 
 confirmed, and his authority maintained^'. While 
 these demands were transmitted to Elizabeth, he 
 
 *' Goodall, ii. 128. Anderson, iv. 52. Melvil, 95. 
 
 ^^ Anderson, iv. 77. GoodalJ, ii. 157. Robertson, ii. 472. 
 
 " Anderson, iv. 55. Goodall, ii. 130. See Appendix, 
 No. XVI. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 155 
 
 retarned a partial or ostensible answer, in which chap. 
 the proceedino;s of the nobility were deduced from ^-*-v^*^ 
 
 ... 1568. 
 
 Bothweirs great credit, and marriage with the 
 queen after the murder of Darnley : their opposi- 
 tion and her imprisonment were vindicated by the 
 necessity of secluding her person, and preserving 
 the young prince her son, from the murderer of his 
 father, her former husband ; and his own authority 
 as regent was established on her voluntary sur- 
 render of the crown to her son. An Eik^ or ad- 
 ditional answer, was expressly reserved ; and at 
 the same time his assistants, Lethington, Macgill, 
 Balneaves, and Buchanan, were sent to the 
 English commissioners to communicate in pri- 
 vate, as the proofs of Mary's participation in the 
 murder, a copy of the bond from the nobility to 
 Bothwell, with the queen's original warrant to 
 sign it ; the two contracts of marriage ; her 
 sonnets, and her letters, of which last a copious 
 account, if not a large extract from the Scot- 
 tish translation already mentioned, was trans- 
 mitted to court ^^. Her reply to Murray's defence October i6. 
 was rather plausible than just : She regretted, 
 and was ever desirous to punish the murder, but 
 had no suspicion of Bothwell being guilty, when 
 acquitted by a verdict confirmed in parliament, 
 and when recommended by the nobility, both 
 her adversaries and friends, as a husband ; and 
 
 »* Goiodail, ii. 139-50. Anderson, iv. 64. 71-6. 
 
1568. 
 
 156 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, the resiofnation of the crown was extorted from 
 
 HI. 
 
 her by the fear of death, on the assurance ot 
 Throckmorton and her friends, that nothing- was 
 valid to which she was compelled to assent in 
 prison *^. 
 
 While she triumphed, however, over her oppo- 
 nents in arg-ument, her commissioners secretly 
 trembled for the result. Norfolk, who had writ- 
 ten to court, that the matter appeared to the com- 
 missioners to be manifest and detestable, informed 
 Lesly that he had seen the letters and the regent's 
 other defences, " whereby there would such mat- 
 *' ter be proved against his mistress as would dis- 
 " honour her for ever ;" and he advised the bi- 
 shop to confer with Lethington upon some means 
 to prevent the intended accusation, in which he 
 himself might safely concur. Instead of at- 
 tempting to disabuse the duke, or to persuade 
 him that the letters were entirely a forgery, Lesly 
 tacitly acknowledg-ed their authenticity ; and 
 proposed a device of Lethington's, that the queen 
 should ratify her former resignation of the crown, 
 " for so should she stay the uttering of any mat- 
 " ters against her, and within six months she 
 " would be restored to her country with honour ;" 
 and the resignation might then be revoked as 
 of no more force than when she was imprisoned 
 in Lochleven ; to which the duke replied, " what 
 " of that were done to be quit of the present in- 
 
 " Anderson, iv. 80. Goodall, ii. 162. 
 
1568. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARK LEY. 157 
 
 ♦* famy and slander, and let time work the rest**.'' 
 After different consultations with Lethington, 
 Lesly, under the pretext of preparing- a reply to 
 Murray, rode to Bolton on the 13th to confer 
 with the queen, but before his return the con- 
 ferences were interrupted and iransferred to Lon- 
 don". The queen therefore was fully informed, 
 at an early period, not only of all that Murray 
 had communicated in private to the English com- 
 missioners, but of the impression which her letters 
 had produced upon Norfolk, and her other friends, 
 who believed them authentic; and of the dis- 
 honour and lasting" infamy which in their opinion 
 her character would incur, if the accusation should 
 proceed. 
 
 7. Whether Elizabeth was suspicious or not Conference 
 
 r at West- 
 
 of Norfolk's intrigues, it was soon perceived that min»'er. 
 no progress would be made at York. Sir Ralph 
 Sadler was ordered up to court for her informa- 
 tion. For the same purpose, Mary was desired 
 to dispatch two commissioners, Herreis and 
 Lesly, to whom Boyd and the Abbot of Killwin- 
 ning were added ; Murray was directed to send 
 Lethington and Macgill ; and at last the con- 
 ference was transferred to Westminster, under 
 an artful pretext, that the commissioners might 
 have better access to Elizabeth**'. Although Mary 
 
 " Murdin, 53. 
 
 " Id. Haynes, 483. Goodall, ii, 156—9. 
 
 " Goodall, ii. 171—6. Anderson, iv. 93. 
 
158 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, was still persuaded that the recent would not 
 in. ^ . ^ 
 
 proceed to accusation, she was secretly alarmed 
 
 at the intimation received from Norfolk, and in 
 her additional instructions (October 21st), had 
 enjoined her commissioners not to answer to any 
 new alleo-ations without her consent". But when 
 Murray, unwilling' to trust entirely to Lethington, 
 repaired to London with his colleagues, her fears 
 of the wor.st received new confirmation. In a 
 Nov. 22. letter to her commissioners (November 22d), 
 she declared that, as she meant to act the part 
 of a loving" mother towards her subjects, it was 
 not ** fit nor convenient to stand in presence of 
 * ane foreign judgment to accuse them, much 
 *' less to be accused by them, beinf/ offenders, 
 *' from which ri(jorous and extreme dealing no 
 " love nor reconciliation would ensue." There- 
 fore she authorized her commissioners to appear 
 in Elizabeth's presence, in order to extend her 
 clemency there to her disobedient subjects, and 
 to grant an accommodation for their past offences, 
 upon terms not detrimental to her honour, estate, 
 title, or authority, which she would refer to no 
 prince on earth; and if they should proceed 
 otherwise, she enjoined her commissioners to dis- 
 solve the present negociations^ and to proceed no 
 farther therein. An ostensible commission was 
 inclosed, of the same date, and to this effect : 
 
 " Goodall, ii. 350. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. I59 
 
 that, as Murray, and her adversaries, were per- chap. 
 
 . III. 
 
 niitted to come to Elizabeth's presence, from v,>»v^ 
 
 which she was still excluded, and in which they ^^^^' 
 had free access to accuse and condemn her, while 
 absent, her commissioners, unless she were also 
 admitted to answer in person, before the nobility 
 and foreign ambassadors, should break off, and 
 withdraw from the conference, protesting- against 
 all farther proceedings as void and nulP^ The 
 letter of instructions, to offer terms of accommo- 
 dation, otherwise to dissolve the negociations, was 
 therefore their private warrant, that contained her 
 secret motives ; the commission to demand ac- 
 cess for her to court, was their ostensible pretext 
 receding from the conference, if an accusation 
 touching her honour should be produced. The 
 commission accordingly was reserved for the last, 
 and the conference was resumed (November 25th), Nov. 25. 
 without opposition from her commissioners, who 
 were satisfied with an obscure and ambiguous pro- 
 test, that they submitted to no judicial authority 
 over their mistress, but were content to treat, 
 without prejudice to her person, honour, estate, 
 or crown^^ 
 
 In addition to the former commissioners, Eli- The queen 
 
 accused ot 
 
 zabeth had appointed the Earls of Leicester and her ims- 
 
 ' ' _ band'smur- 
 
 Arundel, Lord Clinton the Admiral, Secretary derj 
 Cecil, and Sir Nicholas Bacon, lord keeper, from 
 
 " Goodall, ii. 183—5. See Appendix, No. XVII. 
 ** Anderson, iv. 104. Goodall, ii. 195. 
 
1568. 
 
 160 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 whom the regent received, next day, a satisfac- 
 tory answer to his demands at York : That the 
 queen's majesty, though sincerely desirous of 
 Mary's innocence, yet if her guilt should appear 
 indisputable, would deem her ever after unwor- 
 thy of a throne ; in which case she should either 
 be delivered up or detained in England, in sure 
 custody, and the authority of the king and of the 
 Nov. 26. regent would be maintained. Upon these as- 
 surances, Murray and his colleagues, after a de- 
 cent protestation, how reluctantly they \Vere com- 
 pelled to criminate their sovereign, for their own 
 vindication, presented an Eiky or reserved ad- 
 dition to their former answers, affirming in plain 
 terms ; " That as Bothwell was the chief execu- 
 " tor and perpetrator of the murder of King 
 *• Henry, the queen's husband, so was she of the 
 " foreknowledge, council and device, persuader 
 '* and commander of the said murder, mnintainer 
 " and fortifier of the executors thereof^.'^ At 
 the next meeting, (Monday 29th), Lennox ap- 
 peared, as if in concert with the regent, to pro- 
 duce his former correspondence with Mary, and 
 to solicit justice for the murder of his son. The 
 accusation was communicated on the same day 
 to Mary's commissioners, who expecting Murray 
 to abstain from such extremity, withdrew to 
 peruse it, confounded and perplexed, and then 
 
 * Goodall, ii. 199. 203-6. Anderson, iv. 109-15-19. 
 1 
 
 29. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 161 
 
 returned, confessedly astonished, to request time ^"f,^ 
 to consider such a bold and unforeseen char^e*^\ ^^-^^-"^ 
 
 ^ 1568. 
 
 After two days deliberation, they appeared 
 again on the 1st of December, when Herreis de- Dec. i. 
 livered a: preposterous harangue; that the charge 
 was produced to excuse the usurpations and trea- 
 sons of the queen's opponents, who were them- 
 selves the first inventors and writers of the bond 
 for the conspiracy of Darnley's death ; and that 
 the very truth and cause of their usurpations, 
 which he proceeds to explain, was her majesty's 
 revocation of the crown-lands, of which they had 
 obtained two-thirds during her tender years. 
 Lesly, instead of defending her innocence, main- 
 tained, that as the queen was plaintifi^", the com- on which 
 missioners could determine only on the original missioners 
 complaint, not on such an atrocious charge ans"ver. 
 when alleged by way of defence or exception, and 
 as he and his colleagues could proceed no farther, 
 they required an audience in behalf of their 
 mistress^^ When summoned to court on the 3d, ^^c. 3. 
 they represented, in a petition to Elizabeth, the 
 protestation formerly lodged at the conference, 
 
 " Id. 122. According to Queen Mary's Register, (Cotton 
 Library, Titus, C. 12.) which Goodail has not published 
 either correctly or entire, her commissioners declared, " they 
 would not receive the same (eik) to make answer thairto, 
 because it past the bounds of their commission, but would 
 advise with their articles and instructions,, and return to thei.r 
 lordships again/' 
 
 " Anderson, iv. 129. Goodail, ii.213— 16, 
 VOL. T. M 
 
162 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^lu^' ^g'JiJi^st any judicial authority over their queen, 
 ^-'^^"*^ and ag-ainst all matters touching her person, 
 crown, estate, or honour ; and as Murray had al- 
 ready obtained an audience, and was admitted to 
 calumniate her honour before the commissioners, 
 they demanded the same access for their mistress, 
 in order to justify herself before the nobility, and 
 ambassadors from foreign powers*'^. When the 
 first, and uniform object of the conference was 
 to justify her innocence, before she could obtain 
 either aid or admission to Elizabeth's presence, 
 such a requisition, at that critical moment, when 
 accused of the murder, can admit only of one 
 interpretation. As she liad instructed her com- 
 missioners, if the proceedings were prejudicial to 
 her honour or dignity, to break off, and dissolve 
 the conference, under a different pretext, of ob- 
 taining the same access with Murray tp Eliza- 
 beth's presence ; so the protestation against mat- 
 ters touching her honour, and the demand of ac- 
 cess to Elizabeth's presence, which had been re- 
 fused from the beginning', were a mere subterfuge, 
 
 *^ Andersoo, iv. 133. Goodall, 218—23. Tytler observes, 
 " that Mary, being informed of the accusation, &c. instruct- 
 ed her commissioners, on the Hd of December, to demand in 
 her name, that as Elizabeth had given admittance, both in 
 private and public to her accusers, she might come in proper 
 person, &c. to vindicate herself:" (1.115.) whereas the in- 
 structions were sent on the 22d of November, seven days 
 before the accusation which they were meant to prevent, and 
 the application of her commissioners was made on the 3d. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 163 
 
 employed by her commissioners to evade the ac- chap. 
 cusation which she was unable to answer, and to ^--^/-^w 
 prevent the appearance of those letters of whicli 
 alone she was afraid. With the same view, they 
 proposed next day, in terms of her letter of the Dec. 4. 
 22d, that notwithstanding" Murray's odious accu- 
 sation, as their mistress was desirous from the be- 
 ginning- of an accommodation consistent with her 
 own honour, and the security of the adverse par- 
 ty, the whole matter should be compounded ac- » 
 cordingly, by her majesty's appointment : and 
 Lethington renewed his device or project at York, 
 to prevent the appearance of the letters, by a 
 confirmation of her former resignation of the 
 crown*'*. Elizabeth's answer was prompt and ex- 
 plicit : that it would be far better to reprimand 
 and chastise Murray for defaming his sovereign, 
 
 ** Tytler observes that " the proposal, as Ross and Herreis 
 declared, came not from the queen since the accusation had 
 been given in hy Murray, and however ill-timed the motion> 
 it would be harsh to infer from thence a presumption against 
 her." Tytler, i. 117. But the fact, though concealed in the 
 bishop's equivocating language, is, that the motion came from 
 Mary, not since, but before the accusation, which her letter of 
 the 22d, containing the proposal, was expressly written to 
 prevent. Mary's Register is quite silent on this private pro- 
 posal, (Goodall, ii. 221.) which is discovered only from the 
 journal of the privy council. Anderson, iv. 134. Elizabeth's 
 answer, which is quoted by Tytler and Whitaker, from Mary's 
 Register, that she thought it very reasonable " that scho 
 sould be heard in hir awin cause, but quhom befoir, quhen 
 and quhair, &c. I am not as yit resolvit ;" (Goodall, ii. 222.) 
 
 M 2 
 
III. 
 
 1568. 
 
 ie4t DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, than to propose any terms of accommodation so 
 dishonourable to the queen her sister when accus- 
 ed of the murder, unless it were supposed that he 
 could shew just causes for the accusation, which 
 she should be sorry to hear ; but as she had al- 
 ready refused to admit the queen to her presence 
 till acquitted of the slander, much less could she 
 now receive her, when accused of the crime. In 
 return to the commissioners, who answered that 
 it was unreasonable to require or to receive proofs 
 from the accusers, before their mistress had ap- 
 peared to shew that they could not be heard, she 
 replied, that she meant to reprehend them, not to 
 require proofs ; nevertheless, if they persisted in 
 their charge, she would receive whatever they 
 should allege in their defence^^. It is plain 
 from their own answer, that her commissioners 
 were fully aware, and afraid of the proofs, and 
 it appears from Elizabeth's reply, that they were 
 well assured that the letters and other evidence 
 were ready to be produced. Her answer was 
 
 is evidently a fiction of Lesly's ; for this reason, that Mary's 
 coramissioners did not dare to insert it in their subsequent pro- 
 test. Id. 229. Whi taker, i. 94. It is contradicted not only 
 by the journal of the privy council, containing a minute ac- 
 count of Elizabeth's answer, but by Lesly's negociations, 
 that " they could have no other answer from Elizabeth or her 
 council, but that she would not admit the queen to come to 
 her presence, nor to be publicly heard before the nobility, nor 
 treat, &c. unless by her commissioners." Anderson, iii. 32o 
 *^ Anderson, iv, 136—41. Goodall, ii. 224, 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 165 
 
 purposely framed to counteract their avowed de- m^ ' 
 sign, to prevent, or at least not to witness the ""Q^ 
 production of the letters. But when Murray ap- 
 peared upon Monday the 6th, to support the Dec. 6. 
 charge, Lesly and his colleagues required to be 
 first admitted ; as the queen's majesty meant to 
 receive probation before their mistress were heard 
 in her presence, they declared that they would 
 proceed no farther, nor assent to any pretended 
 proofs to be given in by her rebellious subjects : Dissolve 
 
 J , , 1 • 1 1 z' 1 ^^^ recede 
 
 tiiey protested that nothmg done thereafter should from the 
 prejudge her honour, estate, or person, and for 
 their part they dissolved and discharged the con- 
 ference ; inasmuch as their queen, if admitted 
 to Elizabeth's presence, " would declare her 
 ** innocence to her majesty's satisfaction, and 
 " make her rebellious subjects unworthy to ap- 
 " pear before a christian prince, to exhibit such 
 " contrived and inventit allegeance against their 
 " native sovereign, as hereafter to the world shall 
 *' plainly be known." Their protest was reject- 
 ed as a misrepresentation of Elizabeth's answer ; 
 and they withdrew, reiterating their verbal protest 
 that they would neither treat nor appear any 
 more at the conferences^. 
 
 *^ Goodall, ii. 227. Anderson, iv. 144. Tytler endea- 
 vours to conceal the fact, that the conference was broken off 
 (i. 171.) ; but Whitaker is absolutely silent on the subject, 
 (i. 98.) ; endeavouring to transfer the transactions of the 6th, 
 
1568. 
 
 166 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^m^' Murray and his colleagues were next ad- 
 •' mitted. They were informed that her majesty 
 was not a little surprised, that they should accuse 
 their native sovereign of such atrocious crimes, 
 as, if proved, would render her infamous to 
 princes, and were admonished, that although 
 they had forgotten the duty of good subjects, she 
 meant not to forget that of a friend and a sister. 
 They were then required to state what answer 
 they could make in their own defence. By 
 this artful device, the subterfuge employed to 
 prevent the exhibition of the letters, by dissolving 
 the conference, was effectually counteracted, and 
 Murray undertook to justify and to support the 
 
 to the 7th of December. Lesly himself informs us, that by the 
 special command of the queen, and by the advice of the foreign 
 ambassadors, and of the Dukeof Chattelherault, " we refused 
 to treat, or enter any further with them, and so the confer- 
 ence was dissolved and discharged on all hands, and no fur- 
 ther done therein, and by these means, these subjects were 
 frustrate of their intent, and of that glorious victory, where- 
 of they seemed to triumph before the victory." That glori- 
 ous victory which he endeavours afterwards to explain away, 
 was to convict the queen of the murder, by which alone they 
 could be declared good subjects, but of that intent they 
 were frustrated by the conference being thus dissolved. 
 Anderson, iii. 32. Her early apologists were more provident, 
 however, than her modern defenders, and whatever was in- 
 cumbent on the queen, but omitted by her commissioners, 
 they have supplied for her defence. Blackwood, in parti- 
 cular, provides them with a long answer to each article of 
 the accusation. Jebb, ii. 242. 
 
III. 
 
 1538. 
 
 THi: MURDER OF DARNLEY. 16?^ 
 
 accusation against which the queen had protested chap. 
 and refused to plead. He produced that same 
 day " a book of articles, &c. in five parts; or, 
 " a collection of the presumptions and circum- 
 *' stances from which it should appear, that as the 
 " Earl Both well was the chief murderer of the 
 " king-, so was the queen a deviser and maintain- 
 " er thereoff." Under this designation it is easy to 
 recognise the original of Buchanan's Detection, 
 which was written from the instructions of the 
 privy council of Scotland, andas we are wellassured 
 was produced at the conference. The 7th and 8th 
 of December, were appropriated to the production 
 of the letters, sonnets, and other evidence ; and 
 Boyd and Lesly returned upon the 9th, to renew 
 their protestation, which was received in a more 
 vmexceptionabie form^^ They must have known 
 that the letters, against the production of which 
 they protested, had been actually produced on the 
 preceding day ; but the admission of their queen 
 to Elizabeth's presence, which had been refused 
 from the beginning, was the more strenuously 
 urged, because they were well assured that it 
 could not be obtained^^ The demand itself 
 
 " Anderson, ii. 262. iv. 146—56, Goodall, ii. 231—9. 
 377. 
 
 ** Cabala, 157. Lesly and his colleagues, when they de- 
 manded on the 6th to be first admitted, evidently knew that 
 the letters were about to be produced ; but they returned on 
 the 9th to protest, obviously because the letters had been 
 produced on the 8th. Norfolk would give them every infor- 
 
1568. 
 
 \6S DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ^vas, however, absurd : to justify her innocence to 
 the satisfaction of Eiizab(3th and the foreijrn am- 
 bassadors, was impossible, before the proofs of 
 her g-iiilt were produced ; and could ordy serve, 
 as it was avowedly intended, to prevent the exhi- 
 bition of the letters, by declaring- her subjects un- 
 worthy to appear as accusers against their sove- 
 reiira. 
 
 It appears therefore, from this deduction, that the 
 orig-inal and sole object of the conference was for 
 Mary to exculpate herself, under the form of an ac- 
 cusation against her rebellious subjects, from the 
 pul)lic imputation of adultery and murder, before 
 she could be admitted to Elizabeth's presence, or 
 restored to her throne ; but that she refused to plead 
 when accused by Murray, and instructed her com- 
 missioners to dissolve the conference under a 
 false pretext, in order to prevent the appear- 
 ance of those letters of which she was previously 
 apprized. Had the letters, of which she receiv- 
 ed copies from Lething'ton before the conference, 
 been forged by her adversaries, her commissioners 
 must have been prepared to join issue in the de- 
 tection, the great object and the means of her 
 vindication; to disprove the hand-writing, or- 
 thography, or identity of the originals, which 
 Herreis had seen in the Scottish parliament ; and 
 to point out the supposed contradictions of time 
 
 mation of the commissioDers' proceedings, Lethingtun and 
 the two Melvils, of the regeuf s steps. 
 
15'>8. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. I59 
 
 and place, from which we are told that it was 
 impossible for the letters to be her's. Had the 
 letters, however, been g-enuine, and her hand- 
 writing- indisputable, her commissioners must 
 have acted precisely as they did : In the first 
 instance, they must have endeavoured to avert 
 the accusation, by the interposition of Norfolk ; 
 in the second they must have dissolved the con- 
 ference, while they offered an accommodation, to 
 prevent, if possible, the production of the letters. 
 But when Mary, on being actually informed of 
 the infamy which her character would incur if 
 the letters were exhibited, instructed her com- 
 missioners not to answer, but to dissolve the 
 conference ; her refusal to proceed, at that cri- 
 tical moment, when the letters were ready to be 
 produced against her, confirms their authenticity, 
 and amounts to a plain acknowledg-ment, that 
 they aflbrded the most incontestable proofs of 
 her guilt. 
 
 8. When Murray undertook, on the 6th of The letters 
 
 and sonnets 
 
 December, to support the accusation, the fatal toUotiiwdi 
 
 mi produced; 
 
 casket was to be produced n-xt day. Ihe mi- 
 nutes of the 7th are lost j but the fact appears 
 from the subsequent proceedings, that a part 
 of its contents, the letters, " tending to prove her 
 " hatred towards her husband to the time of the 
 " murder, wherein also might appear special ar- 
 ** guments of lier inordinaV love towards the 
 *' Earl of Bothvvell 3" the Scottish contract at 
 
III. 
 
 1S68. 
 
 170 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Seton, and an extract, or attested copy of Both- 
 well's trial were then produced'^^ Upon the 8th, 
 the reg"ent and his colleagues " came according 
 ** to the appointment yesterday, and for the fur- 
 " ther satisfaction of the queen's majesty and her 
 " commissioners, produced seven several writings, 
 " written in French in the like Romain hand 
 " with others her writings which were shewn 
 " yesterday, and avowed by them to be written 
 " by the queen ; which seven writings, heiny 
 *' copied, were read in French, and a due collation 
 " made thereof, as near as could be, by reading 
 ** and inspection, and made to accord with the 
 ** originals, which the said Earl of Murray re- 
 " quired to be re-delivered, and did thereupon de- 
 " liver the copies, being collationed^" : The tenor 
 
 *' The proceedings of the 7th are ascertained by the rela- 
 tive minutes of the 8th, the papers produced on the 7th, by 
 the journals of the privy council on the 14th and 15th, refer- 
 ring to the particular papers produced each day. Anderson, 
 iv. 150—73—4. Goodall, ii. 235—56—7. But Whitaker, on 
 the supposition of an error of the pen or press, assigns the mi- 
 nutes of the 6th to the 7th, as if the minutes could be ante- 
 dated both in Mary's register, and in the journals of the 
 commissioners and of the privy council. Whit. i. 98, n. The 
 long letter from Glasgow in particular, was produced on the 
 7th, as appears from the minutes of the 9th. Anderson, iv. 
 168. 
 
 '" Nothing can be clearer than this, that the letters being 
 copied, these copies were collated by the commissioners, and 
 made to accord with the originals, which last the privy council 
 
 2 
 
Ia69. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 171 
 
 *' of all which seven writings hereafter follow in 
 *' order ; the first being- in manner of a sonnet^\ 
 " O Dleux ayez de moi/' &c. The examinations, 
 or judicial depositions, and trial of the murderers, 
 the forfeiture of Both well, and the protestation 
 of Huntley, Argyle, and Herreis, in parliament, 
 
 collated afterwards with her former letters. But by garbling 
 the minutes, Whitaker concludes that the letters produced on 
 the 8th, were collated with others produced yesterday, on 
 the 7th, in the like Romain hand, and thus one forgery was 
 compared with another; whereas, the journal of the 14th 
 ought to have taught him, that the letters to Bothwell were 
 produced partly on the 7th, and partly on the 8th. Whitaker, 
 i. 103. 
 
 "' In the original MS. " the first being in the form of a 
 sonnet," is interlined by Cecil ; and along the margin of the 
 minute, eight references to the different writings, are marked 
 iu figures inclosed in circles. On the back of the minute, 
 the same references are repeated, in the same form, to the 
 number of seven, and in an adjoining column, seven other 
 references are marked with Roman numerals in a different 
 form. The first column in figures, refers evidently to the 
 seven French writings, the sonnet, and letters, which were 
 first produced ; the second column in Roman numerals, re- 
 fers to the seven English writings produced that day, of 
 which the four first contain the examination and trial of 
 the murderers; the fifth, Bothwell's attainder; the sixth, 
 the protestation of Argyle and Huntley in parliament ; the 
 seventh, the queen's declaration before the lords of session. 
 Of the eight references on the margin, the last is probably a 
 mistake, in proceeding to enumerate the first of the English, 
 among the French writings. Cotton Library, Caligula, C. i. 
 fol. 241. 
 
1568. 
 
 172 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 (December, 1567,) were next exhibited: and, 
 according- to the inaccurate lang-uage of the age, 
 being copied, imphes that the letters were ah'eady 
 copied, not that they were copied then upon the 
 spot; being copied, they tvere read in French, 
 signifies that the copies themselves were in a 
 different language ; and a due collation made 
 thereof^ is applicable, not to a mere transcript, 
 which may be rendered quite exact, but to a 
 translation made, by reading and inspection, to 
 accord as nearly as possible with the originals. 
 The copies were delivered by Murray, " being 
 ** (then) coUationed ;" the copies therefore were 
 produced along with the originals, which he 
 required to be delivered back, as was afterwards 
 done. These copies produced on the 8th, were 
 apparently the same with the Scottish translation, 
 mentioned in Murray's note to Middlemore, as 
 " copies of the letters translatit into our lan- 
 " guage ;" by Lesly, " as the cojyif which Le- 
 " thington recovered ;" by the queen's sergeant, 
 as " the letters which he stole for a night, to 
 " transcribe for the queen, howbeit the same 
 " were but copys, translated out of French into 
 " Scots j" and as the copy, in these instances, 
 implies the translation, so the same translation 
 had been communicated before, to the commis- 
 sioners at York, and was afterwards published, 
 from the copy thus produced, and left by Murray 
 in Cecil's hands. When Boyd and Lesly re- 
 
1568. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY, 17< 
 
 turned on the 9th, the commissioners " were oc- chap. 
 ** cupied in perusing' certain letters and sonnets, 
 " being duly translated into English, and other 
 " writings also exhibited yesterday to them by 
 " the Earl of Murray and his colleagues." From 
 this casual intimation, it appears, that the letters 
 being duly translated, were translated into En- 
 glish, not then, but in the interval since the 7th, 
 when the letters preceding the murder were pro- 
 duced'-. But the English translation, of which 
 two letters are still extant, must be distinguished 
 from the former, of which the language, and 
 Scottish orthography were confessedly obscure : 
 
 " The fact is more apparent from Ihe erasures and inter- 
 lineations of the minute, which was written originally thus: 
 " Being occupied in perusing and reading certain letters and 
 sonnets, wryttenin French, and ( translated into ) other wryt- 
 ings also (mentio ddyvcrit) yesterday to thera by the Earl 
 of Murray and his colleagues, (and now being, the said 
 French writings being translated into English) the Bishop of 
 Ross," &c. The passages within the parentheses are erased, 
 and " being duly translated into English," and " exhibited,'' 
 as quoted in the text, are interlined by Cecil. It appears, 
 therefore, from the original, ** and notv being, the said 
 French writings being translated into English," that the 
 French writings were not only translated in the interval, but 
 tliat the translation was different from the copies produced 
 on the 8th. It is necessary to observe, that nothing rearains 
 of the proceedings at Westminster, but the first rude 
 draughts of the minutes, nor are these entire. But the mi- 
 nutes, when corrected, were engrossed in the Acts of the 
 Sessions at Westminster, which have been suppressed, or 
 lost. 
 
111. 
 
 1568. 
 
 174 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. From the ig-norance or imperfect knowledge of 
 the French language, not only in the Scottish par- 
 liament, but in the English cabinet, where Cecil 
 himself was unable to write or to speak it with 
 facility, the two translations were respectively 
 necessary, in Scotch and English'"; and in- 
 numerable diflficulties, created b}'^ disputants, 
 are removed by this simple explanation of the 
 fact. 
 
 On the departure of Boyd and Lesly, Morton 
 delivered a written declaration of the manner 
 in which the casket came into his hands, and 
 the regent produced the parole evidence of Nel- 
 son, who had been preserved from the explosion 
 at the murder of the king ; and of Crawford, a 
 gentleman of the Earl of Lennox, who confirmed 
 some important particulars in the letters. On 
 the 12th of December, of which the minutes are 
 lost, a solemn declaration, signed by Murray and 
 his colleagues, was presented by their secretary 
 in Norfolk's presence, that " the letters, sonnets, 
 " and contracts, produced as written or sub- 
 " scribed by the queen, were undoubtedly her 
 *' proper hand-writing, except the Scottish con- 
 " tract at Seton, written by Huntley, which 
 " they also understood and perfectly knew to be 
 " subscribed by her." And on the 13th, the 
 minutes of which are also lost, another deposition 
 
 " Digges' Complete Ambassador, 146. Goodall, i. 114. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 175 
 
 of Crawford's was produced upon oath, con- chap. 
 cerning- certain answers made to him by Hay '•^^'v^^ 
 and Hepburn, two of the murderers, on the scaf- 
 fold immediately before their execution^*. 
 
 On the same day the privy council proposed ^xTmlfed 
 at Hampton Court, that, for the purpose of ex- ^ri,!!* coun- 
 aminins: the letters with dne solemnity, the rest c'i»an<ipro- 
 
 n J ^ nounced 
 
 of the earls summoned to town on account of the authentic. 
 trial, should be called together and informed of 
 the proceedings at Westminster, and " that the 
 " original letters and writings exhibited by the 
 " regent as the Queen of Scots' letters and writ- 
 " ings,should also he shewn, and conference there- 
 " of made in their sight with the letters of the 
 " said queen, long" since heretofore written with 
 *' her own hand and sent to the queen's majesty, 
 " whereby may be searched and examined what 
 " difference there is betwixt the same "." The 
 Earls of Northumberland and Westmorland, two 
 popish peers and the partisans of Mary, the Earls 
 of Shrewsbury, Worcester, Huntingdon, and 
 Warwick, were joined next day to the privy 
 council at Hampton-court, and the proceedings 
 at York and Westminster were read over and 
 explained. The book of articles, or Buchanan's 
 Detection, containing the whole series of events 
 as they happened, was first exhibited. " And 
 
 '* Goodall, ii. 141, 257—8—9. Anderson, iv. 168—75. 
 " Goodall, ii. 252. 
 
II h 
 
 1568. 
 
 175 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. « before these articles were read, there were 
 " produced sundry letters, written in French'^, 
 " supposed to be written by the Queen of Scots' 
 " own hand to the Earl of Bothvvell, and there- 
 " with also one long- sonnet, and a promise of 
 " marriage in the name of the said queen with 
 ** the said Earl of Bothwell, of which letters the 
 *' originals, supposed to be written with the Queen 
 " of Scots' own hand, were then also presently 
 " produced and perused -, and being read, were 
 *' duly conferred and compared for the manner of 
 " hand-writing, and fashion of orthography^ with 
 ** sundry other letters long since heretofore 
 ** written and sent by the said Queen of Scots 
 ^** to the queen's majesty; and next after those 
 " was produced and read a declaration of the 
 ♦' Earl of Morton, of the manner of finding the 
 *' said letters : In the collation whereof 7io differ- 
 " ence coidd be found. Of all which letters and 
 '* writings, the true copies are contained in the 
 
 " This at first might seem to imply that the copies pro- 
 duced on the 8th were in French ; hut the context would 
 then imply, that these copies, as well as the originals, were 
 supposed to be written in the queen's hand. The meaning 
 is not, that those copies, but that the letters themselves, 
 were (origiually) written in French ; and the inaccuracy pro- 
 ceeds from transcribing in the minute a part of the title pre- 
 fixed to the first letter in the Scottish translation, a " letter 
 written by hir from Glasgow to Bothwel, quhilk letter wis 
 written in French, and here eusueth translatit word for 
 word." 
 
THE MLRDER OF DAHNLEY. 177 
 
 *i Memorial of the acts of the sessions of the 7th chap, 
 
 in. 
 
 ^' and Sth of December '''." The depositions ^-"'v-^^ 
 were then produced, and as it was now late, the 
 confessions and remaining proofs were brought 
 forward next day. " And it is to be noted, that Dec. i.j. 
 " at the time of producing, shewing, and reading 
 " of all these foresaid writings, there was no 
 ** special choice nor regard had to the order of 
 " producing thereof, but the whole Vvritings, 
 ** lying altogether upon the council table, were, 
 " one after another, shewn rather by hap, as the 
 *' same did lie upon the table, than with any 
 •' choice made, as by the natures thereof, if time 
 " had so served, might have been." The writings, 
 therefore, were collated in the most unexception- 
 able manner, without any particular selection or 
 unfair arrangement ; and the time bestowed upon 
 the subject was certainly sufficient to enable a 
 jury to determine a plain fact ; Tliat the letters 
 being read over, were duly conferred and com- 
 pared, for the manner of hand-writing, and 
 fashion of orthography, with sundry others her 
 former letters, in the collation whereof no dif- 
 ference could be found. " When the said earls 
 " were made participant of the whole cause,'* 
 they were informed, " that the Queen of Scots' 
 " commissioners, being made privy to the accu- 
 " sation, had forborn to answer, and refused to 
 
 " Anderson, iv. 170-2. Goodall, ii. 25a. 
 VOL. I. N 
 
1568. 
 
 178 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 have any further conference in this matter, press- 
 ing- only to have their mistress permitted to 
 " come to Elizabeth's presence to make her an- 
 " swer, and otherwise to make no answer at all ; 
 " but the crimes for which she was at first denied 
 " admittance being- now apparent, her majesty 
 " cannot, without manifest blemish to her owu 
 " honour, admit her to her presence, till these 
 " are removed. The said earls severally made 
 •* answer, acknowledging themselves much bound 
 " unto her majesty, that it had pleased her to im- 
 ** part the state of that g-reat cause in so clear a 
 " manner as they did perceive it : wherein they 
 *' had seen such/ow/ matter as they thought tridy 
 " in their consciences that her majesty had just 
 " cause to make such an answer, being- as rea- 
 " sonable as the cause would bear '^" 
 
 In opposition to the solemn declaration of these 
 peers and of the privy council, we are told, that 
 in c mparing- the letters with others produced by 
 Elizabeth, one forgery was merely collated with 
 another; as if in these circumstances such 
 forgeries were as easily executed then, as asserted 
 at present". The privy council was well ac- 
 quainted with Mary's hand. Her letters to 
 Elizabeth were frequently laid before the privy 
 council, to whom she had formerly written ; and 
 
 7» Goodall, ii. 269, Anderson, iv. 177. 
 " Wbitaker, i. 112. 
 
IJOS. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 179 
 
 Bedford, who attended her court at the baptism, 
 Northumberland, Arundel, and Westmorland, 
 her secret partisans, Norfolk, Sussex, and Sir 
 Ralph Sadler, the commissioners at York, must 
 have known her hand-writing-, which they had 
 then every opportunity to ascertain. But thev 
 concur in the declaration ; That the original 
 letters were duly compared, for the manner of 
 writing- and fashion of orthography, with sundry 
 others heretofore written, in five collation whereof 
 no difference could he found. The commissioners 
 at York, in particular, who had thrice examined 
 the letters, had the strongest inducement to 
 ascertain their authenticity, when they declared 
 in the beginning, that " they discourse of some 
 " things unknown to any other than the queen 
 " and Bothwell, and as it is hard to counterfeit 
 " so many, so the matter contained in them was 
 " such as could harldly be invented or devised 
 " by any other than herself/' But Norfolk was 
 equally convinced with the rest, that the letters 
 were genuine, and his decided belief of the 
 queen's guilt, is attested by his own declarations 
 and letters. In his conversation with Lesly, he 
 informed him that he had seen the letters, which 
 would cover her with infamv, unless means were 
 found to prevent the accusation. In his letters 
 from York he wrote to Pembroke, Leicester, and 
 Cecil, " that if the fact shall appear as detestable 
 " and manifost to you, as, for ought we can 
 
 N 2 
 
1568. 
 
 180 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 " perceive, it seemeth here to us, that condign 
 " judgment and open declaration to the whole 
 " world may immediately appear; but if her 
 " majesty shall not allow of this, then to make 
 " such a composition as in so broken a cause 
 " may be^/' At the same time, he informed 
 Banister, his confidential servant, *' that upon 
 " examination of the matter it did appear that 
 " the Queen of Scots was guilty and privy to the 
 " murder of Lord Darnley her late husband; 
 " whereby I," says Banister, " verily thought that 
 " his grace could never join in marriage with 
 '* her^'." And Elizabeth in her subsequent in- 
 structions to Beal and Shrewsbury, observes that 
 " we saw the proofs, by the view of her own 
 ** letters, fall out sufficiently clear against her, as 
 " both Norfolk and Arundel did declare unto 
 " us, howsoever they were afterwards'drawn to 
 " cover her faults and pronounce her innocent^'." 
 To these deliberate and explicit declarations, 
 no objections can be derived from the answer 
 made by Norfolk previous to his trial, when in- 
 terrogated concerning his interview with Leth- 
 ington, in the fields, at York; *' that Lethington 
 " then told him he came thither, not against the 
 " Queen of Scots, but on her part, and 50 moved 
 " this examinant to think her not guilty ; and 
 
 »" Anderson, iv. 62-77. " Murdin, 134. 
 
 " Instructions to the Earl of Shrewsbury and Mr. Beal^ 
 April 6tli, 1583. Cotton Library, Caligula, C. 9. 
 
1568, 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 181 
 
 " then also he moved this examinant to like in^" 
 " of a marriag-e with the said queen, which 
 " offer he then refused utterly ^^" If Lethington 
 first moved the duke to think her innocent, then 
 moved him to like of a marriage, the word 
 move, to persuade or propose, must in both in- 
 stances receive the same interpretation; but it 
 never can signify that Lethington so moved, or 
 persuaded the duke to think her innocent, that he 
 also moved or persuaded, rather than urged or 
 importuned him, to like of that marriage, which 
 the duke utterly refused. But the word is evi- 
 dently used in an equivocal sense, by a faint de- 
 claration of her innocence to extenuate a marriage, 
 to which Norfolk was instigated by ambition, 
 when convinced of her guilt. Cecil, in a confi- 
 dential letter to Norris at Paris, expresses his pri- 
 vate opinion of her guilt with horror^*; and of 
 
 " Murdin, 1G4. 
 
 '* " The regent being here with the queea's majesty, vehe- 
 mently charged, was driven for his defence to disclose a full 
 fardel of the naughty matter, tending to convince the queen 
 as deviser of the murther, and the Earl of Bothwell her exe- 
 cutor; and now the queen's party finding the burthen so 
 great, refuse to make any answer, and press that their mis- 
 tress may come in person to answer the matter herself, before 
 the queen's majesty, which is thought not fit to be granted, 
 until the great blots of the marriage with her husband's 
 murtherer, and the evident charges by letters of her own, to 
 be the deviser of the murther, be somewhat razed out or co- 
 vered; for that as the matters are exhibited against her, it is 
 
 2 
 
15G8. 
 
 182 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, four commoners and t^xteen peers of the first 
 HI. , , . , . . , , 
 
 rank, to whose unbiassea exaramation the let- 
 ters were submitted, not one has leit the smallest 
 intimation thai tiieir authenticity was disputed 
 or suspected in council*^. At a subsequent 
 period, Lennox, to whom her hand-writing was 
 undoubtedly familiar, expressed his private con- 
 viction to his wife, that the letters were au- 
 thentic, which, as the casket was in his posses- 
 sion during his regency, he must have distinctly 
 known**. 
 
 far unseemly for any prince, or chaste ears, to be annoyed 
 with tlie filthy noise thereof ; and yet, as being a commissioner, 
 I must and will forhcar to pronounce any thing herein cer- 
 tainiy ; although as a private person I cannot but with horror 
 and trembling think thereof." Cabala, 157. 
 
 *^ The privy council of the 13th, consistt^d of the Duke of 
 Norfolk, the Marquis of Northampton, t Ik- Earls of Derby, 
 Bedford, Arundel, Sussex, Leicester, the Lords Clinton, Ad- 
 miral, Howard, Chamberlain, (to whom the six earls already 
 mentioned were added) the Lord Keeper Bacon, Secretary 
 Cecil, Sir Walter Mildmay, Chancellor of Exchequer, and 
 Sir Ralph Sadler, Chancellor of 'he Duchy of Lancaster. 
 Haynes, 492. Goodall, ii. 252. 
 
 *® Robertson, ii. 347. In opposition to this, one of Mary's 
 letters, two months after Lady Lennox's death, is quoted as a 
 proof, t!;atthe latter acknowledged her innocence while alive. 
 Lady Lennox's declaration would only prove, that as she 
 never saw the evidence, she thought better of Mary than her 
 husband did. But Mary's affirmation that Lady Lennox 
 believed and declared her innocent, amounts to no more 
 in the scale of evidence, than her own affirmation ofher inno- 
 cence, which she never failed to assert. Tyller, i. 246. 
 
THE MURDER OF D4RNLEY. 18! 
 
 9. The sequel of the conference remains -to be chap. 
 examined, as some partial quotations are selected ^---v-'w^ 
 to prove, that copies or the letters were uncondi- Sequei of 
 tionally refused, and that the queen was deprived ferences, 
 of the opportunity, and of the very means of de- 
 fence. Her commissioners attended on the I6th, Dec. 16. 
 to receive Elizabeth's definitive answer to their 
 former demands. They were informed that the 
 proofs produced by Murray should be communi- 
 cated to their mistress, if she would agree to make 
 a direct answer, in one or other of these three 
 ways ; either by her late commissioners at West- 
 minster, or by a confidential person properly au- 
 thorized, or personally to noblemen sent in order 
 to receive her defence. They were reminded, 
 that admission to Elizabeth's presence could not 
 be granted even when she was suspected, much 
 less when she was accused upon strong and ap- 
 parent presumptions of guilt. And they were 
 finally admonished, that if these three modes of 
 defence were rejected, the want of access to her 
 majesty would never be received by the world, as 
 an excuse for submitting to such imputations, nor 
 was there a surer method of procuring her own 
 condemnation, than the refusal to answer, and to 
 justify herself from such horrible crimes, Lesly, 
 instead of accepting the offer, presented a series 
 of articles ; in which he concluded that those per- 
 sons whose treason she had so often pardoned, 
 ought not to be received as competent accusers of 
 
184 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 in. 
 
 1388. 
 
 ^nt^' t^^"' oa^i^'G sovereign, nor an example admitted 
 so prejudicial to princes ; and required, that if not 
 restored to her crown, she should be permitted 
 to depart either for Scotland or for France. 
 According" to Mary's Register, Elizabeth replied, 
 that she would neither propose, nor esteem them 
 faithful, who could advise an accommodation 
 with men who had accused their sovereign, and 
 who should suffer severely if unable to prove their 
 charge ; but that she could make no return to the 
 other demand still certified from the queen herself, 
 whether she would answer, according to any one 
 Dec. 17. of the three methods proposed. Next day a long 
 memorial against the absolute admissibility of the 
 letters as evidence, was presented by Lesly ^\ 
 who deprecates, and expressly declines a compa- 
 rison of the hand-writing as fallacious, or as in- 
 sufficient to constitute legal proof, and implores 
 Elizabeth in the most suppliant terms to accom- 
 plish a reconciliation, or if that were not practi- 
 cable, either to restore the queen, or to suffer her 
 21- to depart. On the 21st Elizabeth wrote to Mary 
 a letter, in which she blamed the refusal of her 
 commissioners to answer, and their conduct in 
 dissolving the conference, as they said, by her 
 express command ; professed to suspend her own 
 judgment till an answer were returned; exhorted 
 
 ^ Goodall, ii. 392 ; where it is dated the 6th, instead of 
 the 17tb. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 185 
 
 her not to forbear to answer to the heavy matters ^JJ.^^- 
 W'th which she was charged, and recommended ^-'"v-^-' 
 
 1568. 
 
 Lesly, evidently as a proper person to undertake 
 her defence ^^ From a report spread by her 
 commissioners, that the regent and his company 
 were themselves guilty of the murder, Lord Lind- 
 say, who had offered to fig-ht with Bothwell at 
 Carberry hill, sent a challeno-e, on the 22nd Dec.22. 
 to Herreis; to which this remarkable answer was 
 returned, " that in respect they had accusit the 
 " queen their native sovereign, he has said, there 
 " is of that company present with the Earl of 
 " Murray, giltie of that abominable treason, of 
 " the foreknowledge and consent thereto; that 
 " Lindsay was guilty of the crime he knew not; 
 *' but let aught of the principals subscribe the 
 " like challenge, and he will point them out, and 
 "fight with some of the traitors therein ®V 
 Lindsay himself he expressly, the regent, he 
 tacitly acquits : and if the rest had been silent 
 concerning the crimes of the queen, no mention 
 would have been made of their guilt. But this 
 absurd challenge, in which Herreis is afraid to 
 specify whom it is that he defies, alludes either to 
 
 ** Anderson, iv. 179—83. Goodall, ii. 260—70. 
 
 ^ Goodall, ii. 272. This ridiculous challenge, in which 
 Lindsay is acquitted by name, and Murray by implication, 
 is quoted as a presumption of Murray's guilt, as if the accu- 
 sation sat not easy on him, before it was even preferred. 
 Tytler, i. 141. 
 
HI. 
 
 1568. 
 
 cusers. 
 
 186 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Lethinofton or to Morton, whom the queen had 
 formerly declared to be privy to the murder ; but 
 whom her commissioners dared not to accuse, nor 
 even to name, as the defence of their conduct 
 might have terminated in an additional proof of 
 her consent or command. 
 Mary re- 'p|)e immediate cause both of the report and 
 
 criminates * 
 
 onherac- of the challenge was instructions and answers 
 from Mary, dated the 19th of December, and 
 directing her commissioners then, and not till 
 then, to recriminate against Murray and his ad- 
 herents. On the tirst notice of this report, for 
 M'hich Lindsay, a hot and impetuous nobleman, 
 challenged the author, Murray, with greater 
 propriety, had applied, as conscious of his own 
 innocence, to the privy council of England: and 
 Lesly and Herreis, when summoned on the 24tb, 
 were required, and undertook to support the 
 charge. They produced and read next day, as 
 their only accusation against the regent, their 
 Instructions from Mary, containing her answers to 
 the Protestation and Eik presented about a month 
 before : ** that forasmeikle as Murray and his 
 " adherents had accused her of counselling and 
 " devising the murder of her husband, they had 
 " falsely lied, imputing to her maliciously the 
 " crime whereof they were the authors, inventers, 
 " doers, and some of them the proper executors 
 ** themselves®".'* The inspection of the letters and 
 »» See Appendix, No. XVIII. 
 
15ti8. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 187 
 
 copies of them were also demanded, which desire, 
 according to Mary's own register, her majesty 
 thought very reasonable, and was very glad that 
 her good sister would make answer for defence of 
 her honour, and desired an extract of the writing 
 to be given in. But the writing contained no 
 authority to renew the conference, nor any obli- 
 gation to answer directly to the proofs produced, 
 as required on the 16th : On the contrary, she 
 renewed her demands of admittance, if the ques- 
 tion should come to proof, to declare the justice 
 of her cause to her gud sister and na uther ; and 
 her commissioners adhered to their protestations 
 against any proceedings touching her honour ; 
 the pretext upon which the conference had 
 already been dissolved ^\No offer is made to sup- 
 port or to prove the vague recrimination against 
 
 *' These and the subsequent proceedings are to be found 
 only in Mary's Register, compiled by Lesly and Herreis 
 (Cotton Library, Titus, C. 12.), which, when compared with 
 the former proceedings in the Cecil papers (Caligula) is ob- 
 viously incorrect. Goodall, ii. 121 — 3 — Gl. Anderson is ac- 
 cused of suppressing Mary's Register, but the fourth volume 
 of his collections is incomplete, and I understand that the 
 printing was interrupted by his sudden death. Among his 
 papers I found a copy of Mary's Register, corrected from the 
 original with his own hand for the press, and as Goodall ge- 
 nerally adheres to the errors corrected in this copy, I am 
 persuaded that he obtained a transcript before it was correct- 
 ed, when employed as Anderson's amanuensis, in tran- 
 scribing the Charters of the Diplomata Scotiae. 
 
1569. 
 
 188 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. MiUTay or Lis friends: Lethington and Morton, 
 whij were ; >' vy to her guilt, are not once men- 
 tioned ; but the murder which she retorts on her 
 adversaries a month after she herself was accused, 
 should, if they were really guilty, have been the 
 January, first charge which she preferred at York. The 
 same indiscriminate accusation, and the same de- 
 mand, are renewed in a letter to her commission- 
 ers, dated January 2d, and presented on the 7th, 
 wherein " she is deliberate to gif them sic instruc- 
 ** tions shoitlie, that may make the samen mair 
 " manifest, as occasion serves ;" and requu'es 
 copies of ihe letters, " to the effect that they may 
 " be answered particularly, that Elizabeth and the 
 ** world may know, that her opponents were no 
 " less shameful liars, than by their unlawful ac- 
 " tions false traitors." It is observable that the 
 inslructions, which, instead of answering the ac- 
 cusation against herself, she was deliberate shortlie 
 to sendf were no other than the " Protestation of 
 " the Earls of Huntley and Argyle, touching the 
 " murder of the king," which was sent enclosed 
 to Hnnlley, to be signed and again returned to 
 this effect ; that Li tuingion and Murray, had, the 
 one proposed, and the other, assented, at Craig- 
 niillar, to her divorce from Darnley, from which 
 they conclude that these two were the authors of 
 the murder®^. In consequence of the applications 
 
 ®- It appears that the protestation and letter were inter- 
 cepted by Cecil, and answered on the 19th by Murray, who 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1 39 
 
 from Mary's commissioners in public and private, ^^^]^-- 
 to cover her honour by an accommoflation with ''-^^^'^»-^ 
 her sul)jccts, Elizabeth had already adopted the 
 device of Lethington's which was now proposed : 
 that she should resign the g-overnment and crown jan.7. 
 to her son, for although the regent and his com- 
 pany were accused as parties to the murder, or 
 to her unlawful marriage, that was no extenuation 
 
 vindicates himself on the same occasion from the bond for- 
 merly mentioned (Dec. 1st.) by Herreis for the murder of 
 Darnley. Anderson, iv. 185. Goodall, ii, 200. That bond, 
 however, is not once mentioned in the protestation, as Lesly 
 knew that it was signed by Huntley and Argyle, themselves. 
 Tytler quotes an assertion of Stranguage, that he had seen 
 and transcribed the original protestation, which Argyle and 
 Huntley sent to Elizabeth in their own hands, ii. 31. Stran- 
 guage merely copies Camden's words. Quid hac de re (the 
 murder, 1567) statini publice protestati sunt Georgius Comes 
 Huntleius, et Comes Argathelius, inter Scotiae proceres faci/2 
 principes, libet hie ex autographo ad Elizabetham, quod vidi 
 subtexere. Annals, 115. Rapiu observes, that Camden's 
 statim, immediately after the murder, was not till two years 
 afterwards, and that not knowing the precedence, he has not 
 ventured to annex the names of those peers to his Latin trans- 
 lation of the autograph which he had seen. But Tytler must 
 have been conscious, that neither Camden nor Stranguage 
 ever saw any original, but the one in the Cotton Library, 
 which is abridged along the margin by Cotton, to v^hom alone 
 we must impute the interpolation in Camden, of an auto- 
 graph protestation written or signed by Argyle and Huntley, 
 whom it never reached. 
 
1569. 
 
 190 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, of her guilt^^. An answer to her demands was 
 deferred, therefore, for a few days, till she finally 
 refused on the 9tb, to resign her crown as the last 
 proofs of her guilt ; for which this satisfactory 
 reason may be assigned, that the worst had al- 
 ready been done, when her letters were produced, 
 to prevent which, was her chief inducement to 
 resign the crown at Lochleven^*. At the same 
 time her commissioners renewed the hopeless pro- 
 posal of an accommodation and pardon; but Mur- 
 ray, impatient to secure his authority at home, was 
 admitted to the privy council next day, and, ac- 
 cording to his own account, the proceedings of 
 the confederates were fully approved, and the 
 
 ®' *' A memorial concerning the Q. Scots, of which some 
 part was sent to Mr. Vice-chamberlain," (Knoiles) is imperti- 
 nently entitled by GoodalJ, " Projects for terrifying the Q. 
 of Scots from insisting to answer and accuse Murray." 
 Goodall, ii. 300. Elizabeth's proposal had evidently arisen 
 from the applications made by Mary's commissioners " for 
 covering her honour by an appointment betwixt her and her 
 subjects, which is communed on," says Cecil, "secretly by 
 two or three manner of ways," Letter toNorris, January 3d. 
 Cabala, 157. And Lesly had actually made such application 
 in public, December 16lh, wh^n copies were offered ; and again 
 in private, in the memorial of the 17th. Goodall, ii. 265. 
 Haynes, 495. 
 
 ^* In her conference with Beal and Shrewsbury, 1583, 
 " touching the matter of her husband, she said the worst 
 Jiad been done that could be; as the printing Buchanan'* 
 book in England and France." Cotton Lib. Caligula, C. 9. 
 
 3 
 
III. 
 
 1569. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 191 
 
 authority of the king and of the regent was sus- chap. 
 tained. According- to Mary's register, he was 
 informed, " that as thair hes nothing bene deducit 
 *' agains him and his adherentis us yet, that may 
 " impair thair honour or alledgeances ; so on the 
 " uther part thair had nothing bene sufficiently 
 " proven nor schawin by thame against the queue 
 " their soverane, quiiairby the Queue of England 
 *' should conceave or tak any evil opinion of her 
 *' gude sister for any thing yit sene ;" and as their 
 return became necessary, from the disorders in 
 Scotland, she left them in the same state as before, 
 till she heard further of the Queen of Scots* an- 
 swer to such things as have been alleged against 
 her®^. By this artful declaration, it is supposed 
 that Elizabeth avoided a decision (which was 
 certainly not necessary when the conference was 
 dissolved), without either condemning or acquit- 
 ting Mary, till her answer should be received. 
 But it is observable, that the answer was neither 
 addressed nor communicated to Mary's commis- 
 sioners, who were not present; but was confined 
 to Murray, to whom Elizabeth had certainly no 
 occasion to exculpate their mistress ; and as the 
 only entry in Mary's register of the proceedings 
 held in their absence, is The Form of the Answer 
 given to Murray and his complices, we must con- 
 clude that this abstract in Scotch was framed from 
 
 «« Goodall, ii. 305—6, 
 
192 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, hearsay, and was inserted to restore her to a 
 balance with the resrent ; that as nothinor had 
 
 been deduced iigainst him, so nothing had been 
 sufficiently proven, and shewn ag-ainst the queen. 
 whom her Her Commissioners were conironted, the very 
 onTrswhen i^<3Xt day, at M'UTay's desire, with his colleagues, 
 arTunTbk ^^^^ assistauts and himself, in order to delerminey 
 jan^r^' hefore his departure, the accusation which they 
 had preferred. When interrogated whether they 
 would accuse the regent, or any of his company, 
 of the murder of the king, they declared that they 
 were expressly commanded by the queen to 
 accuse him, and others his adherents, and on 
 receiving copies of the letters were ready to de- 
 fend her innocence. But, " being also required, 
 *' if they or any of them, as of themselves, would 
 ** accuse the said earl in special, or any of his 
 " adherents, or thought them guilty thereoff,'* 
 they declined the task'^. Lesly, Herreis, and 
 Killwinning, on being challenged severally by 
 Murray, Morton, and Lindsay, declared to each, 
 that as they were innocent themselves, they knew 
 not who were the authors of the murder, till it 
 was publicly revealed long thereafter, by those 
 who suffered death for the crime : that although 
 some information had since reached their ears, 
 they came not there either to acquit or to condemn 
 the regent or others, but to accuse those whom 
 
 " Goodall, ii. 307. 
 
15G9. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 193 
 
 their mistress might accuse, and whom they were 
 ready to declare guilty whensoever she should 
 please to point out, and to accuse them by name. 
 Lesly in particular declared that he knew not 
 himself of the regent's guilt, though ready to 
 accuse him at the queen's command^^ In refer- 
 ring to the depositions of the murderers, he durst 
 not insinuate, as he had done in the Instructions 
 of the lords and abbots, that they who suffered on 
 the scaffold had acquitted the queen, and had 
 deposed that her accusers were the authors of the 
 murder; much less did he then assert, as in the 
 Defence of her Honour, that such were their last 
 confesssions, in the presence of five thousand, at 
 the place of execution. Herreis durst not renew 
 his challenge, when required to point out some of 
 the principals; nor when interrogated by Murray, 
 Morton, or Lindsay, did he venture to assert in 
 their presence, as he had done in their absence, 
 on the 1st of December, " that the accusers 
 ** themselves were the devisers and inventors of 
 " that develish band for the murder of Darnley, 
 " as was made manifest before ten thousand 
 ** people at the execution of the principal 
 ** offenders at Edinburg^h." It is evident from 
 
 ^ Goodall, ii. 307. Anderson, iii. 34. Whitaker, to con- 
 ceal the refusal, has suppressed the transactions of the 11th, 
 while Tytler introduces an absurd story of a Scotch appeal, 
 Whitaker, i. 143. Tytler, i. 52. 
 
 VOIi, I, o 
 
194 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^?r^^* his silence, that he was ignorant then of a fiction 
 afterwards uttered by Lesly; that a few days 
 after the crime was committed, Herreis accused 
 Murray at his own table, of informing- a nameless 
 servant, as he rode through Fife on the evening 
 preceding the murder, that " this night ere morn- 
 " ing the Lord Darnley shall lose his life^*.'* 
 Murray at last offered to proceed to Bolton, to the 
 queen's presence, to which her commissioners 
 objected^' J and his conduct was precisely that of 
 a person conscious of his own innocence, who 
 openly solicits the accusation which he defies. 
 But her commissioners, according to their own 
 account, were reduced to the disgraceful situa- 
 tion of men obliged to assert her innocence when 
 convinced of her guilt. They knew that Morton 
 was privy, and Lethington accessary to the 
 murder; but they endeavoured to transfer their 
 guilt to the innocent, whom they accused indis- 
 criminately, and without naming them, in order 
 to repel the accusation against the queen. But 
 when they were confronted with Murray, and re- 
 quired to substantiate the charge, they had no proof 
 whatsoever to produce; they could neither attest 
 their belief that the regent, or any one of his ad- 
 herents, was criminal, nor utter a single report to 
 his prejudice, nor even accuse those whom they 
 
 '* Tytler, i. 75— G. Goodall, ii. 233. 
 '' Id. 309. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 195 
 
 CHAP, 
 Hi. 
 
 1569. 
 
 knew to be gnilty, lest the proof of the queen's 
 guilt should be involved in their defence. 
 
 The reg- nt, iioainst whom there was no proof 
 nor presumption, oi)tained an audience of leave 
 next day. He remained, however, above a week 
 long-ertosecurehimself front assassination upon the 
 road, by listening to a negociution tor Norfolk's 
 marriage; and his life was preserved only by the 
 interposition of the duke with Mary, who, to 
 obtain possession, perhaps, of the letters, was 
 privy, and apparently instrumental to the de- 
 sign^T She hud neither accepted any one of the Their final 
 
 I \ r 1 r ■ 1 I /^ 1 refuaal to 
 
 three modes or defence as required on the loth, answer or 
 nor, in her demands of copies on the 25th of innocence^ 
 December, and on the 7th of January, had she 
 agreed to make a direct answer to the charge. 
 An answer to these demands had, therefore, been 
 deferred for a few days, in consequence of the 
 plan devised by Lethington, for the resignation 
 of her crown. As her refusal of this proposition 
 on the 9th, contained an offer, not to vindicate 
 her innocence, but to accommodate every dispute 
 with her subjects, her commissioners received on 
 the 13th an explicit answer hitherto unpublished, 
 which, as explanatory of Elizabeth's motives, is 
 inserted entire. 
 
 ""* The design was to murder Iiim near Northallerton, 
 to which it appears from Lesl^-'s confession, that Mary 
 was privy. Murdin, 46, 51 — 4. Melvil, 99. Robertson, ii, 
 481. 
 
 o2 
 
196 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. 
 
 in. 
 
 1569. Answer to the Q. of S. commissioners j hy the 
 council^ written hy Sir William Cecil, to the 
 demands of the Q. of S. to have such letter's 
 and other writings as wherewith the said Q. 
 hath been chargedy Jan. 13, 1568. 
 
 " Her majesty meaneth not to deny to the said 
 " Q. the sight of the true copies of the said writ- 
 " ings. But before the same be delivered, her 
 *' majesty of a very sincere good meaning to have 
 ** the said queen's cause come to the best effect that 
 ** it may for her commonweal, likewise her ma- 
 " jesty thinketh that such her ministers as have any 
 " inward care of her, without respect partially to 
 " any other, thinketh it good the said queen were 
 " seriously moved to consider, that the said writ- 
 •* ings delivered, she must of necessity make an- 
 ** swers without any cavillation, for lack of her 
 ** admittance to the presence of her majesty, and 
 " such like J and by that answer it must needs en- 
 " sue that the said queen shall be proved either 
 ** innocent or culpable of the horrible crimes 
 " whereof she is but as yet accused, and not con- 
 " victed. And if she should not by her answers 
 ** prove herself innocent, then of necessity the 
 " queen's majesty can never with her honour shew 
 '* her any favour ; and therefore this being con- 
 " sidered of by the said queen, with advice of such 
 ** as love her for herself, without other respect, if 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 197 
 
 " she mean rather to put the whole matter upon chap. 
 
 •* direct trial, than to have her cause otherwise v-«»^/-^^ 
 
 " ended, for her quietness and for her honour also, 
 
 " then so as she will by her hand-writing- to the 
 
 " Q. majesty declare her meaning to be that, if she 
 
 " will not prove herself clear and free from the 
 
 *' crimes imputed to her, that she will be content 
 
 " to forbear request of any favour of her majesty 
 
 " which her majesty desireth her to have in writ- 
 
 " ing, to the end, if the cause should so fall out, 
 
 ** then she might have good reason upon the said 
 
 " queen's ov^n contentation,to forbear her favour; 
 
 " and contrary ways her majesty is determined, 
 
 " if she may be proved free, to offer her as much 
 
 " favour as may be required reasonably : and for 
 
 " the inward troubles in the realm her majesty 
 
 " must needs (be) uncertain ^"\" 
 
 This answer is confirmed by Mary's Register, 
 which conceals only Elizabeth's visible reluctance 
 to proceed to conviction : ** That scho will not 
 *' refuis unto the queue, the doubles of all that 
 " was producit, but her hienes, that scho may be 
 " certifyit of her mind befoir the samen be de-* 
 " liverit, M'ill have a special writing, signet with 
 " hir awin hand, promising that scho will answer 
 ** to the writingis and thingis laid to her charge 
 " hot" (without) "any exception. And in case scho 
 " sail sufficientlie defend her innocence, then hir 
 
 "' Cotton Lib. Caligula, C. 1. vol.281. 
 
1569. 
 
 1C)8 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 " liienes will favour support and ayd hir accord- 
 " ingly, as the saoien requi:*is, and becomis ane 
 " prince to do to another. And in cais scho clere 
 " not her innocence, as God forbid, then your 
 " mistress sould luik for na farder supoort nor 
 " ayd at hir majesties handis. Ai.d after the 
 *' receipt of her writing- of the said tenour, then 
 " your mistress sali have tiie <iou!)ies of all the 
 " writinofs, to make answer as scho sail think 
 *' guid. The queen's ninjestie desires sic writing- 
 " bci uuse scho understandis that your commis- 
 " sion is expyrit, seen ye did discharge the con- 
 " ference at Westminster, and by your last 
 " writings ye resevit, have power to require the 
 " copies, bot not to make ansvvtr*"^" 
 
 These conditions are striclly conformable, not 
 only to the original object of the conference, but 
 to the definitive answer, on the 16ih of Decem- 
 ber, in which ihe first unsolicited offer of copies 
 was made. Her commissioners however replied 
 that the obligation was unnecessary, as the queen, 
 in her writings produced on the 25th of Decem- 
 •ber, and 7th of January, had offered, upon cer- 
 tain conditions therein expressed, to make answer 
 if she obtained inspection or copies of the letters : 
 " quhiik answer she wald only make for satis- 
 *' fving the queen's majesty hir gude sister : al- 
 *' beit quhatsomever thing was producit by hir 
 
 »"=' Goodall, ii. 310. 
 
1569. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 199 
 
 " rebellis sen the dischargim) the conference at 
 ** Westminster, the vi day of December last past, 
 " was bot inventit sclanderis uud private ivritinys 
 *' quhilk could not prejudge her in ony vvise*""^ ;" 
 The conditions therein expressed, were her ap- 
 pearance before the queen's majesty and foreign 
 ambassadors, and the reservation of the foriPiCr 
 protestations touching- her honour; but the in- 
 structions them-elves give no authority nor pro- 
 mise to answer as Elizabetli had required, with- 
 out w hich the conference would have been again 
 dissoJvevI, on the same, or on some new excep- 
 tion, when the copies were obtained. But her 
 commissioners, obviously to evade the offer, de- 
 clared further, that as Murray and his adherents, 
 when publicly 'k cused, were permitted to depart, 
 it appeared not convenient nor meet that their 
 sovereign should make any farther answer^"*, un- 
 
 '"^ The apologists for Mary, who, in opposition to Lesly 
 and to Mary herself, (Haynes, 504) niaintiiin Ihat the con- 
 ference was not dissolved on the 6th or 9th of December, 
 but prolonged till Murray's departure with the box and let- 
 ters, forget that as her commissioners protested on the 6th, 
 that they would no longer proceed in the conference, so 
 they met no more with the English commissioners, unless to 
 renew their protest on the 9th ; and that the subsequent 
 proceedings were before the privy council. Tytler, i. 173. 
 
 ^"* On this final refusal to answer, Tytler merely observes, 
 that the commissioners took hold of the opportunity to urge 
 another point (Murray's departure), i. 157 ; but Whitaker 
 is silent as the grave, i. 149. 
 
1569. 
 
 200 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, less her rebels were detained ; and they demand- 
 ed the same leave for their mistress and them- 
 selves to depart for Scotland. They were inform- 
 ed that Murray had engaged to return with his 
 colleagues when required by Elizabeth ; andthat 
 they might obtain *he same permission for them- 
 selves to depart, but that the queen's departure was 
 not admissible for different respects; to which 
 they replied that they could do no less than de- 
 sire their queen to be sent back to her own coun- 
 try, as they had oftentimes desired before ; and 
 instead of accepting the offer of copies, on the 
 condition of makinnf a direct answer to the let- 
 ters, without exception, they protested that no- 
 thing done by their mistress, while detained in 
 England, should prejudge her person, authority, 
 honour, or estate. The accusation against Mur- 
 ray and his associates, had no necessary con- 
 nexion with her innocence or defence, as their 
 guilt could neither disprove nor extenuate her's. 
 But as Murray remained in London above eight 
 days afterwards, the fairest opportunity was cer- 
 tainly afforded to renew the conference, and by 
 accepting the single condition upon which the 
 inspection, or copies, of the letters were offered, 
 to vindicate her innocence by a direct answer 
 and detection of the forgery, or to detain the re- 
 gent in England, if any serious accusation, or a 
 single proot of his guilt could be produced. Her 
 .dtifence might proceed in his absence, had he 
 
15o9. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. gOl 
 
 chosen to depart when the conference was re- 
 newed ; and her commissioners received a solemn 
 intimation, that she should obtain the support 
 due to her rank and misfortunes ; or, in other 
 words, that she should be restored to her throne, 
 if her innocence could be proved. The demand 
 of copies, without a reciprocal obligation to 
 answer to the letters, without exception, was 
 merely an ostensible pretext to object to their 
 relevancy f or to the competency of the accusers, 
 and can only signify that no direct answer was 
 intended to be made. But her commissioners, in 
 order to avoid the offer of copies, and the obliga- 
 tion to answer directly to the letters, renewed 
 their demand and protestation for her departure, 
 which they knew vi'ould not be granted, and they 
 absolutely refused to defend her innocence, be- 
 cause the regent, against whom they had no 
 proof nor charge to substantiate, was permitted 
 to depart "'\ Her conduct throughout, was the 
 reverse of the regent's, who, conscious of his own 
 innocence, twice challenged an accusation upon 
 the mere surmise and report of his guilt. In the 
 first instance, in order to prevent the production 
 of her letters, she instructed her commissioners to 
 dissolve the conference on the pretext of btiiig 
 refused admission to Elizabeth's presence to de- 
 clare her innocence before the ietteis were pro- 
 
 "* Goodall, ii. 313. 
 
1509. 
 
 202 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 dnced : in the second instance, when an oppor- 
 tunity to renew the conference, and to proceed 
 to an examination and detection of the letters 
 was twice offered, she declined the investigation 
 and offer of copies, evaded every ohlig-alion to 
 answer, and absohitely refused to defend her own 
 innocence, because her accuser, on whom she 
 attempted to recriminate without proof, was per- 
 mitted to depart. 
 
 10. When the conferences were finally con- 
 cluded, Mary transmitted to her partisans in 
 Scotland, letters filled witli the most chimerical 
 The fictions which the brain of an intrig-uing" woman 
 
 queen's fie- _ i 
 
 tionscon- could havc possibly devised. Not a word was 
 
 cerning the 
 
 •onference. mentioned of the accusation against herself; but 
 she asserted, that when the conferences were 
 transferred to Westminster, Murray had formed 
 a secret treaty with Elizabeth's ministers, to de- 
 liver up the person of the young- prince, and the 
 castles of Edinburgh, Stirling, and Dumbarton, 
 to the English ; to hold Scotland as a fief de- 
 pendant upon the crown of England, and by 
 means of letters of legitimation, to be called him- 
 self to the succession upon the death of her son. 
 By another league with the Earl of Hartford, 
 the latter, she said, was to marry one of Cecil's 
 daughters, in order to secure his succession to the 
 English throne ; and from the mutual support of 
 their respective pretensions, her son's life, if he 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 203 
 
 were delivered to Elizabeth, would be no obstacle ^^f"^- 
 to Murray's accession in Scotland, or to Hart- 
 ford's in England. When one of these letters 
 was intercepted on the borders and was shewn 
 to Mary, the ready pretext of forgery again oc- 
 curred ; *' that she suspected that a Frenchman, 
 *' now in Scotland, might be the author of some 
 " Scotch letters devised in her name'"^." The 
 same familiar pretext was afterwards employed 
 on her trial for treason ; that it was easy to 
 forge the hand-writing or the cipiier of another, 
 which she was afraid that Walking-ham had 
 practised tor her destruction ; although the most 
 incontestable proof remains, from her own letter, 
 that she had accepted Babington's oflfer to as- 
 sassinate the English queen ^*''. 
 
 11. Of these tedious deductions, in which it Conclusion 
 was necessary to state, or to recite at length, each 
 step of the controversy, the result is decisive : 
 1. The sole danger to which the queen was ex- 
 posed in Lochleven castle, was a judicial trial or 
 investigation in parliament, and the considera- 
 tion, therefore, for which she was required to re- 
 sign her crown, in order to preserve her life, and 
 if possible her honour, can refer to nothing else 
 than her letters and sonnets, the sole proofs that 
 endangered either. 2. The assurance given by 
 
 "" Haynes, 500 - 3. Robertson, ii. 47B. Whitaker, iii. 48. 
 "" Murdio, 533. Hume, v. Note Z. Stewart's Life of 
 Robertson. 
 
III. 
 
 J 569. 
 
 204 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Murray of her life, and as far as in him lay, the 
 preservation of her honour, must refer to the same 
 proofs of her g"uilt; and no adequate reason can 
 be assigned for her resigning" the crown to pre- 
 serve her life, and if possible her honour, but her 
 conscious dread and conviction of the evidence 
 that endangered both. 3. The whole casket was 
 exhibited in the privy council, and the letters in- 
 spected by the lords of articles, were produced in 
 open parliament, and confirmed as authentic 
 without opposition from her friends. 4. The 
 original and sole object of the conference in 
 England, was, under the form of an accusation 
 against lier rebellious subjects, to vindicate her 
 innocence from the public imputations of adultery 
 and murder, before she could be admitted to 
 Elizabeth's presence, or restored to her throne; 
 if innocent, she was to be restored, uncondition- 
 ally, by arms; if guilty merely of culpable in- 
 discretions, conditionally by an accommodation ; 
 and the conclusion was obvious, and sufficiently 
 understood, that if plainly guilty of her husband's 
 murder, she had no claim for protection or aid. 
 5. At first she receded, on perceiving that her 
 adversaries might become her accusers, and 
 was only induced to accede to the conference by 
 the vain expectation that they would not venture 
 to accuse their sovereign ; by the assurance of 
 Elizabeth's friendship, and from the despair of 
 otherwise obtaining her release. 6. She con- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 205 
 
 fined her accusations to their usurpation of the 
 government, when conscious herself that Morton 
 
 and Lethington were assenting to the murder^ 
 which they seemed to prosecute ; and employed 
 the latter, to whose guilt she was privy, to con- 
 ciliate the favour of the Duke of Norfolk, and to 
 prevent, by their joint intrigues, the accusation 
 intended by the regent, that she was the chief 
 author of her husband's murder. 7. When fur- 
 nished by Lethington with copies of the letters, 
 and when informed of the evidence communi- 
 cated to the English commissioners at York, and 
 of the infamy which in Norfolk's opinion her 
 character would incur if the letters were divulged, 
 she instructed her commissioners not to answer 
 at Westminster to any new allegations, but if the 
 proceedings touched her honour, to break off, 
 and to dissolve the conference, under the pretext 
 of Murray's admission to court. 8. Her com- 
 missioners, as a measure of precaution, introduced 
 accordingly an obscure protest, that they were 
 content to treat without prejudice to her honour j 
 but when the accusation was unexpectedly pre- 
 ferred against her, they refused to answer unless 
 their mistress was admitted to Elizabeth's pre- 
 sence, a favour which had been denied from the 
 beginning ; and while they applied privately for 
 an accommodation, in order to prevent the 
 charge, they protested against any future pro- 
 ceedings on the same day that the proofs were 
 
 I56y. 
 
206 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, exhibited ; and renewed their protestation that 
 the conference was dissolved, wh^-n they knew 
 that the letters were already produced 9. The 
 queen, at that critical moment, when accused of 
 the murder, shrunk from the charge, by dissolv- 
 ing- the conference, and ratified, in fact, the au- 
 thenticity of the letters, to which her refusal to 
 answer constitutes a full and direct acknowledg"- 
 ment of the proofs of her guilt. 10. The letters 
 exhibited to the commissioners, were examined 
 by the privy council, in presence even of her 
 own partisans, and were " compared for the 
 " manner of writing, and fashion of ortho- 
 " graphy, with sundry others, her letters to Eliza- 
 " beth, long since heretofore written, in the colla- 
 '* Hon whereof no difference could be founds 
 11. Elizabeth offered immediately to communicate 
 the evidence if she would agree to make a direct 
 answer, without exception ; instead of which she 
 attempted merely to recriminate upon Murray, 
 whom she should have accused had she believed 
 him guilty, but maintained a guarded silence 
 concerning Morton and Lethington, when con- 
 scious that the one was privy, and the other ac- 
 cessary to the murder. 12. The offer, on a vague 
 application for copies, was conditionally renew- 
 ed, if she would engage to answer by a written 
 obligation; but her commissioners absolutely re- 
 fused to answer, under the pretext that Murray, 
 against whom they had nothing to produce, was 
 
 3 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 207 
 
 permitted to return. 13. Instead of embracing- chap. 
 
 III. 
 
 1569. 
 
 the last opportunity to vindicate her innocence by 
 a detection of the letters, they declined the offer, 
 and broke off the investigation for ever, by a 
 peremptory demand for her departure from 
 England, which they were well assured would 
 not be obtained ; the plain and obvious conclu- 
 sion, therefore, that she recoiled from every in- ' 
 quiry into the proofs of her g^uilt, and thereby 
 attested the authenticity of the letters of which 
 she was conscious, can admit of no dispute. 
 
 12. The conclusion is confirmed, not invali- ^y"jjjjy,^ 
 dated, by her demand to be heard in person, be- *^^^^"'^^' 
 fore Elizabeth and the foreign ambassadors, as 
 the scope and nature of her defence, if admitted 
 to an audience, can be distinctly explained. Her 
 design was not to disprove the authenticity, but 
 to prevent if possible the production, of the letters, 
 and to declare her rebellious subjects incompe- 
 tent accusers, unworthy to be heard against their 
 sovereign prince. Lesly, in his protestation on 
 the 6th of December, represents it as a preposter- 
 ous order never used in any treaty or conference, 
 nor even in the extreme forms of criminal justice, 
 to receive probation before the other party were 
 heard to answer to the allegeance ; more espe- 
 cially in so weighty a cause''*^ Lesly, like other 
 churchmen of the age, was bred to the law, which 
 
 »» Goodall, ii. 22&. 
 
208 DISSERTATION OX 
 
 CHAP, he had studied or practised for twenty years'% 
 '-^'^r*^ and the demand is evidently founded on the Scot- 
 tish practice of determining* the relevancy before 
 the proof is received. A denial of the letters was 
 the obvious and indeed the only defence which it 
 was possible to make. But in Lesly's Instruc- 
 tions from the lords and abbots of Mary's party, 
 " gif it beis allegit that her majesty's writing-, 
 ** producit in parliament, suld preiff hir g-race 
 " culpabill, it may be answerit that their is na 
 " plane mention maid in it, be the quhilks her 
 " hienes may be convictit, albeit it were her 
 " awin hand write, as it is not, and als the same 
 - " is cuUit be thameselves in sum principal and 
 " substantious clauses ; and sic alleg-it privy writ- 
 " ing's can make na probatioun in criminal causes, 
 " quhilk suld be clearer nor the light of day; 
 " and swa be the said writing" nathing- can be 
 " inferrit agains hir majestic""." In these in- 
 structions, signed by Huntley, Arg'yle, and eight 
 others, present in parliament when the letters 
 were produced, the faint alternative, albeit it were 
 hir awin hand writef as it is not, is explained im- 
 mediately, not that the letters were forged, but 
 als the same is cullit (culled or garbled) in some 
 
 *® Goodall, 387. Anderson, i. 2. 
 
 "° Here and elsewhere, Goodall's inaccurate transcript 
 (ii. 361.) is corrected from Anderson's MS. collated with the 
 original of Mary's Register. Cotton Lib. Titus, C. 12. 
 
lotJ9. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 209 
 
 substantial clauses merely, by the accusers them- 
 selves. No reliance is placed, however, on this 
 feeble allesfation, but on the leg-al arsfnments 
 ag-ainst the relevancy ; that private letters bear no 
 faith in criminal causes, and that no plain men- 
 tion is made of the murder, to convict the queen. 
 The forgery is more explicitly asserted in her own 
 Instructions to her commissioners at York, on le- 
 ceiving- copies of the letters from Lethington ; 
 " In case thay allege thay have ony writings of 
 *' mine, quhilk may infer presumption againisme 
 " in that cause, ye shall desyre the principallis 
 *' to be producit, and that I myself may have in- 
 " spectioun thairoff and make answer thairto : 
 " For ye sail affirm in my name, I never writ ony 
 " thing- concerning that matter to any creature, 
 *' and gif ony sic writingis be, thay are false and 
 " fein/iet, forget and inventit be themselves, onlie 
 " to my dishonour and sclander : And thair is 
 " divers in Scotland, baith men and women, that 
 *' can counterfeit my hand-writing, and write 
 *' the like manner of writing quhilk I use, as 
 *' wel as myself: and principally sic as are in 
 " company with thameselves : And I doubt not 
 " gif I had remained in my awin realme, bot I 
 " wald have P:otten knawledjj-e of the inventors 
 " and writeris of sic writings or now, to the de- 
 " claration of my innocence and confusion of 
 " their falzet"^" 
 
 "' Goodall, 342. By the like manner of writing quhilke 
 VOL. 1. P 
 
1569. 
 
 210 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 A hand-writing' which sundry persons of erich 
 sex could counterfeit and write as well as le 
 queen herself, is an extravagant and absurd ob^ jc- 
 tion to every comparative proof of the letters. If 
 such persons were in the regent's company, the 
 queen could be at no loss to discover the indivi- 
 duals by whom the letters were forged ; and her 
 commissioners could have no motive to prefer the 
 safety of Morton, of Buchanan, or of Lethington, 
 to the defence of her honour. But the best expla- 
 nation of these, and of the former Instructions, 
 is Lesly's memorial to Elizabeth, December 
 17th, replete with all the quibbling objections of 
 a Scottish advocate to the relevancy of the letters 
 as legal evidence, and maintaining that nothing 
 can be alleged against her to verify the letters, 
 " but presumptions quae non sunt adeo vehement es 
 •< ut contra quos non admittatur pj'obatio in con- 
 " trarium, and these not so vehement but greater 
 " presumptions may be deduced to the con- 
 trary "^'^ The opposite presumptions which he 
 proceeds to state are the improbability that so 
 wise a princess, of such renown through Europe, 
 so prudent and circumspect in he; conduct, would 
 
 I use, Mary undoubtedly meant that many could write the 
 same Romain hand ; in imitation of Italic print. But her 
 commissioners' were left to assert, or to believe if they could, 
 that divers in Scotland, baith men and women, could counter- 
 feit her exact hand-writing, as well as herself. 
 »» Goodall, 387. 
 
1569. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 211 
 
 condescend to such a cruel and ung-odly deed ; 
 iiiurh less tliat a person of common prudence 
 would commit the fact to writing' ; as if prudence 
 were always the concomitant of great crimes: 
 That these and other presumptions of her inno- 
 cence being more vehement and probable than 
 those of her guilt, proniores debemiis esse ad ah- 
 solvandum quam adaccvsandam, especially in the 
 cause of princes, of whom Trajan would hear 
 no disparagement, even after their death j that 
 the contrary presumptions can have no strength, 
 since his mistress constantly affirms, that the 
 letters are forged by her adversaries to co- 
 lour their usurpation ; " as thair are sundry 
 " quha can counterfeit her hand-write quhilks 
 " hes bein brocht up in her companie, of 
 " the quhilk there is sum assistants to them- 
 " selves, as well of uther nationis as of Scottis ; 
 " as I doubt not hot your majesty and divers 
 *' others of your hienes court, hes seen sundrie 
 *' letters sent here from Scotland, quhilk wad 
 *' not be kend be her awin hand-write, as 
 " sail presentlie be made knawin that sic thingis 
 ** may be, and hes been usit : and it may be well 
 " presumit that they quha have put hands on their 
 " prince, imprisonet her person, and commitit sic 
 *' heinous crimes, gif a counterfeit letter be suf- 
 " ficient to save them, &c. will not leive the 
 " samen unforgit, cum si violanduin est Jus im- 
 " peril causes violandum est, and so it being dis- 
 
 p2 
 
lo69. 
 
 212 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. <c allowit be the allegit writer, the presumption 
 " sulci be the greater for her innocence nor to 
 ** repute her majestie culpabill for sic frivole and 
 *' vain allegit writingis"^." 
 
 If her hand-writing" had been counterfeited by 
 sundry Scots and others even of the regent's as- 
 sistants, a single proof of such forgery having 
 ever been practised, might have sufficed for her 
 vindication. But the strange assertion, that 
 Elizabeth and her court had doubtless seen 
 sundry letters from Scotland, not to be distinguish- 
 ed from her own hand-writing, amounts in fact 
 to a disavowal of every former letter with which 
 the present had been compared, in order to sup- 
 port the absurd conclusion, that her mere denial 
 should outweigh the opposite affirmation, that the 
 letters, produced as positive proofs of her guilt 
 were authentic, without examining whether they 
 were authentic or not. Lesly accordingly pro- 
 ceeds to depreciate all proofs whatsoever of the 
 letters. *' And in caise hir adversaries will affirm 
 " it to be hir awin hand-writing, they are nather 
 " lachful accuseris nor witnesses, being first ac- 
 *' cusit of sic greit crimes as imprisoning of 
 *' their prince, and sic other hainous doings as 
 *' they are culpabill of, and hir majestie wald lay 
 ♦* to their charge, gif hir hieness war present ; 
 ** quhairoff they sould first purge themselves or 
 
 '" Goodall, 388—89. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 213 
 
 ** ihev either by law or reason be admitted to chap. 
 . . . i^i- 
 
 *' accuse any private person, lat be their prince ; y.^>n>-y 
 
 " and gif thay wald press to verify the samen be 
 
 " comperison of letters, the samen is na way suf- 
 
 ** ficent, cum de jure faliacissimum genus prO' 
 
 " bandi fit per comparationeni Hterarum, quhilk 
 
 " requires mony infallibill reasouns, or it be found 
 
 *' sufficient to verify, as be authentick writings 
 
 *' publishit, undoubtit, and not denyit, with mony 
 
 *' utheris contenit in the laws quhilk in this case 
 
 " will not be found. For the allegit writings are 
 
 " na ways authentick, nor can make any kind of 
 
 ** faith or presumption, in respect thai are writ- 
 
 " ings in forme of missive letters or epistles, 
 
 ** quhilk makes na fixith, specially quhairin the 
 
 ** same, no words dispositing or giving express 
 
 ** command are contenit, as in this may be seen j 
 
 " and alswa they are not suhscribit by the allegit 
 
 ** writer thereoff, nor seillit nor signetit : and 
 
 " contains na dait of year month or day, nor yet 
 
 ** direct to na man ; and in the samen their is 
 
 " mention made of ane beerer, as is allegit, quha 
 
 " was never yet knawn, as did receive tham 
 
 " from hir, or delivered tham at hir command to 
 
 " any uther in the warld"*." 
 
 Here it appears that he knew minutely the 
 
 contents of the letters, from the copies which Le- 
 
 "* Goodall, 389. On this occasion Goodall's inaccuracies 
 are corrected from the original. 
 
1569. 
 
 214 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 thing^ton had transmitted to the queen. As the 
 day of the week (Saturday) is annexed only to a 
 single letter, he affirms that they contain no date 
 of year month or day (of the month) : as Paris is 
 only twice named ; and was not then apprehend- 
 ed, he asserts, that the bearer mentioned in the 
 letters was never yet known to have received 
 or to have delivered them by her command. To 
 her adversaries he objects, that they were neither 
 lawful accusers nor witnesses, till acquitted of 
 usurpation and other crimes of which the queen 
 would accuse them j when the letters were ex- 
 pressly produced as a complete exculpation from 
 those crimes. He declares that her hand-writ- 
 ing- had been frequently counterfeited, yet dares 
 not to specify by whom, or when; and he affirms 
 that the letters were forged, yet deprecates a 
 proof comparatione literarum, which as being fal- 
 lacious or insufficient to constitute legal evidence, 
 he expressly declines. His defence rests upon 
 the most contemptible objections to the relevancy ^ 
 or admission of the letters as evidence ; namely, 
 that deeds in the form of missive letters, bear no 
 faith in judgment, and that the letters in ques- 
 tion contain no dispositive clause, or express 
 command to commit the crime, and are destitute 
 of those legal solemnities or public forms which 
 the law requires ; that they are neither signed by 
 the alleged writer, nor sealed nor signeted (that 
 they had neither passed the great or privy seal, 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 215 
 
 III. 
 
 1569. 
 
 nor the royal signet), and are without date, direc- ^^^^^ 
 tion, or the name of the bearer, who was not yet 
 discovered ; and from letters deficient in those 
 legal forms, he infers that nothing can be proved 
 against a private individual, much less against a 
 sovereign prince. These, and other very probable 
 and reasonable defences, and accusations against 
 her adversaries, he concludes that his mistress 
 would propose, if admitted to Elizabeth's pre- 
 sence"*, from which we discover the scope and 
 extent of her whole defence. If admitted to an 
 audience, her defence would have terminated in 
 the most futile presumptions of her own inno- 
 cence ; the most frivolous objections to the pro- 
 duction of the letters or to comparison of them 
 with her former writings : and when these were 
 overruled, the conference would have been dis- 
 solved by a protest or appeal to the foreign am- 
 bassadors upon these grounds ; that private letters 
 were not admissible as legal evidence, and that 
 
 "^ He adds, " that albeit thair be sunislichtpresumptiounis 
 alledget, quhilk mucht seme to mak sumquhat againis my 
 soverane, zit the samen are not sufficient to induce ony kind 
 of pruif aganis hir majestic, especiallie quhair as vehement 
 and greiter presumptiounis appeir in the contrair." Goodall, 
 390, Those slight presumptions were, her letters to Bothwell ; 
 the more vehement presumptions to the contrary were, that 
 private letters are not like public instruments, legal evidence. 
 According to Lesly's argument, nothing less than letters 
 under the privy seal or signet, could convict the queen of 
 adultery and murder. 
 
1569. 
 
 216" DISSERTATION ON 
 
 her rebellious subjects were neither competent 
 accusers, nor worthy to be heard against a so- 
 vereign prince. In Lesly's Defence of Mary's 
 Honour, the same presumptions and objections 
 are resumed. He declares that the letters are 
 forgeries, yet maintains that they have nothing 
 criminal in them ; he demands, and at the same 
 time decries a proof eomparatione literarum, as 
 of all others the weakest and most inconclu- 
 sive"^ But the absurd arguments to which he 
 resorts, that missive letters bear no faith, espe- 
 cially as they contain no express injunction to 
 commit the murder, nor the solemnities requisite 
 in public deeds, are in fact the strongest attesta- 
 tion that the letters were genuine, of which he 
 declined a comparison with her former writings ; 
 of all others the most incontestable proof of their 
 authenticity, and undoubtedly the most obvious 
 means of detection. 
 
 "* Anderson, i. 21. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 217 
 
 H 
 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 
 The Letters, 
 
 ERE then I may securely rest. Instead of ^^^'^7 
 proceeding to a critical examination of the 
 
 I 1 X • 1 1 • i' I Pieliniina- 
 
 letters and sonnets, i might admit tor once, thatryobjec- 
 
 , -1 r > 1-1 1 • t'ons to the 
 
 whatsoever iVlary s apologists have asserted is letters 
 true, and whatever evidence her opponents have 
 produced is false. Let us therefore admit for 
 a moment, that her adversaries have produced 
 two caskets, when there was, in fact, but one, stated. 
 which instead of letters, sonnets, or contracts, 
 contained the jewels of which they had despoiled 
 the queen, on her removal to Lochleven\ Let 
 us admit that the letters were not intercepted on 
 the 20th of June, nor Dalgleish the supposed 
 bearer, apprehended till the 18th of July; because 
 his name is not once mentioned by Throckmorton 
 till then*. Let us believe that the idea of the for- 
 gery did not occur till the 24th of July, above a 
 month after the date assigned for the discovery 
 of the letters ; that the first design was to impli- 
 cate Mary in the murder of her husband, but that 
 it was altered in a subsequent draught of the let- 
 
 • Whitaker, i. 210. 
 » Id. 245-97. 
 
218 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ters, and confined entirely to her adultery m ith 
 
 IV. •' . '' 
 
 ^-^■v^w/ BothwelP. Let us also admit that the letters 
 
 were forged a third time on the 4th of De- 
 cember, when they were produced in the privy 
 council to the number of four or five, in the 
 Scottish language, with subscriptions, dates, di- 
 rections, but without the guard or imprisonment 
 of a seal, as Mary retained her own signet in 
 Lochleven Castle* : that they were forged anew, 
 before the parliament met on the I5th, in order 
 to withdraw the signatures and directions to 
 BothwelP; and that in July 1568, the same let- 
 ters were sent to England as translations from 
 the French, when the idea of a French original 
 was first adopted^ Let us suppose that the 
 French sonnets were forged in July, and the 
 contracts in September, to support the evidence 
 of the adulterous letters, and believe that these 
 letters were produced at York, to the number of 
 five, in their oriofinal Scotch, dated half at Glas- 
 gow, half at Stirling^ ; but that they were again 
 foroed in the interval between the two confer- 
 ences, and were produced at Westminster, in the 
 French language, and without any dates*. Let 
 us farther admit that their number was still five, 
 on the 8th of December, as of seven French 
 writings, then produced, there were five letters, the 
 
 » Whitaker, i. 348—72. « Id. 496, 
 
 * Id. 361—9—410. ' Id. 486—509—13. 
 
 » Id. 377—401. « Id. 415—95—511. 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 219 
 
 sonnets, and contract; butthat others just appeared *^^^^p- 
 on the 7th, and were ag"ain withdrawn ; and that 
 three additional letters were afterwards forged, as 
 eijL^ht letters were afterwards published^ In short, 
 let us allow with Goodall,that a man might easily 
 forg-e an hundred of the queen's subscriptions in 
 a single day^" ; or with Camden, that Lethington 
 privately intimated that he had counterfeited the 
 queen's hand more than once ; or with Whitaker, 
 that it was almost as easy to execute, and to re- 
 peat the forgery, as to assert that the letters had 
 been five times forged. Still, however, when 
 these assertions are all admitted, her refusal to 
 answer, unless to the relevancy., when copies had 
 been twice offered, if she would return a direct 
 answer to the letters themselves, constitutes a full 
 acknowledgment that the supposed forgeries 
 were her genuine hand-writing, the authenticity 
 of which she was unable to dispute. 
 
 1. But the supposition of such multiplied for- 
 geries is absurd. Her adversaries were too eager 
 and intent on her guilt, to involve themselves in a 
 long train and repetition of forgeries, so exposed 
 to detection, when a single concise fabrication 
 would have sufficed. A critical exaihination of 
 the letters, sonnets, and other evidence, is an un- 
 
 ^ Whitaker, i. 448 — 50 — 60, To those conclusions, stript 
 of all declamation, I have reduced the greater part of the 
 first volume of Whitaker's ViudicatioD. 
 
 '» Goodall, i. 61. 
 
220 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ofi'acious task which I would wish to decline ; but 
 
 IV. ° . . , 
 
 as every work ought to be complete in itself, I 
 eng-age with reluctance in a contest with writers 
 whose scurrilous invectives are founded upon a 
 perversion of the plainest facts. For instance, 
 nothing can be more distinct and explicit, than 
 the declaration' of Paris concerning" the two 
 caskets, with the exception of a short conversa- 
 tion the day after the murder, ** LaRoyne ne lui 
 " diet chose de consequence, jusques a ce qu'elle 
 *' voulloyt aller a Seton, alors elle luy comniendast 
 ** de prendre une cassette ou il y avoyt des corce- 
 " letz d'escns, que le thesaurier luy avoit ap[)orte 
 " de France, pour la porter k la chambre de Mon- 
 " sieur de Bodvvel, qui etoit a ceste heur la log-e 
 " dedans le palais, au dessus de la chambre la ou 
 ** se tenoit le conceil. Et puis apres lui comman- 
 ** dastde prendre soncoftVec?^* baijuesy et les fair 
 " po5ter,auchasteau,etles delivrer entre les mains 
 " du sieur de Skirling*, pour lors capitaine 
 " soubz Monsieur de Bodwel, chose qu'il feist"/^ 
 A casket containing French crowns was sent to 
 Both well's chamber, on the 21st of February, 
 when they went to Seton ; afterwards the box 
 with her jewels was sent to the castle, where the 
 Laird of Skirling commanded for the time; and 
 in this there is no contradiction whatsoever. The 
 one casket naturally introduced the idea of the 
 
 " Paris' second declaration. Appendix. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 221 
 
 other, which was lodged in the castle at a differ- 
 ent period, after their return from Seton ; and, as 
 we discover from Birrell's Diary, that the castle 
 was surrendered by the Earl of Mar, not to Sir 
 James Balfour, but to Cockbm-n of Skirling, 
 Both well's deputy, on the 21st of March*^ when 
 the box of jewels was deposited there, the cir- 
 cumstance supposed to discredit the confession of 
 Paris, is in fact a strong confirmation of its truth. 
 The casket of letters, as already shewn, was lodged 
 by Both well among his papers in the castle, when he 
 carried the queen thither from Dunbar; while the 
 box of jewels would necessarily be removed for the 
 decoration of her person, when she returned to the 
 palace on the eve of her marriage. As no minutes 
 of council were then taken, no mention of the box 
 of letters, or of Dalgleishthe bearer, could occur 
 in its records, till an act of council was pronounc- 
 ed upon the subject. But the deposition of Pow- 
 rie is dated on the 23d, that of Dalgleish on the 
 26th of June ; and a proclamation was issued, 
 on the same day, for apprehending Bothwell ; 
 " of the quhilk murther, 7iow he just tryell taiken, 
 " he is found, not onlie to have been the inventer 
 ** and deviser, but the executor with his awin 
 " hand, as his awin servantSy being in companie 
 
 "Birrell's Diary, 7. " Who was the wretch, "says Whitaker, 
 «• who had the coaiinand of the castle?" Sir James Balfour, 
 he replies ; and on this supposition, the whole confession is 
 rejected as forged, Whit. i. 226. 
 2 
 
222 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 c*J^P- " with him at that unworthie deid, hes testifiet." 
 
 IV 
 
 As another act of council was passed next day, 
 directing- the Blackaders and others, who had 
 confessed nothing-, and were certainly not gnilty, 
 to be put to the torture, the proclamation of the 
 26th can allude to nothing else than the testimonies 
 of Powrie and Daljjleish^-^. 
 They re- But Throckmorton, who did not arrive at 
 
 fute them- ^-, , . , 
 
 selves. Edinburgh till the 12th of July, takes no notice 
 till the 18th, of the seizure and confessions of 
 Dalgleish and Powrie : Therefore, they were not 
 apprehended till then^*. The letters, of which he 
 had previously obtained information, are first 
 mentioned in his dispatches of the 25th: There- 
 fore, they had no previous existence, nor did the 
 first idea of the forgery occur, till then '^ In the 
 same dispatches he observes " that the coufe- 
 " derates mean to charge the queen with incon- 
 " tinence, both with Bothwell and others, having 
 " as they say sufficient proof; and v/ith the 
 " murder of her husband, whereof they have as 
 " apparent proof as may be, by the testimony of 
 " her own hand-writing :" Therefore, the first 
 draught of the forgery was framed to charge her, 
 not with adultery, upon which they are now ex- 
 plicit, but with the murder of her husband, on 
 whici] they are silent ; since Lesly affirms that 
 
 " Anderson, i, 140. Keith, 407. 
 
 " Whitaker, i. 295. Robertson, ii. 438. 
 
 " Whitaker, i. 316—77. Keith, 426. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 223 
 
 they contain ho word dispositing, or giving ex- ^^^' 
 press command to coniniit the crime'^ The 
 letters, sonnets, and contracts produced in coun- 
 cil were (the former) written and (the last) 
 subscribed vvith the queen's hand: Therefore, 
 they were originally fabricated with subscriptions, 
 and as it was well known to whom they were 
 addressed, they were also forged with directions 
 to BothwelP^; as if, on the supposition, that the 
 letters were g'enuine, he apologists durst assert 
 that they were not addressed to Bothwell, or that 
 the queen was not guilty of adultery, nor acces- 
 sary to the murder. The four letters preceding 
 the murder, were evidently written at Glasgow, 
 and the Kirk of Field j the others at Stirling, or 
 on the road from thence ; but as Murray knew, 
 and as the commissioners at York were informed 
 in general, where they were written, they were 
 therefore originally forged with dates ^^ Lesly, 
 in his memorial to Elizabeth, and again in his 
 Defence of Mary's Honour, objects to the letters, 
 that missives destitute of the legal forms bear 
 no faith, especially if they are neither directed, 
 dated, nor subscribed by the writer, neither sealed 
 nor signeted'^3 (attested neither by the privy 
 
 " Whitaker, i. 364. " Id. 381. 401. 
 
 " Whitaker, i. 410—15. 
 
 '* It is written, signed, in the Defence of Mary's Honour; 
 a natural mistake of Dr. Good's, who, turning the Scotch 
 into English, could make nothing of signeted, a seeming 
 
 1 
 
IV. 
 
 224 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, seal, nor by the royal signet :) The letters were 
 therefore exhibited, as if they had been trans- 
 mitted open, without the common guard or pre- 
 caution of a seal*". As the language is not once 
 mentioned by Throckmorton, in the slight in- 
 timation which he gives of the letters; they were 
 therefore written originally in Scotch : as diverse 
 her privy letters are mentioned in the acts of 
 council and of parliament ; therefore there were 
 four or five at the utmost; and as the letters are 
 not expressly stated in those acts as written in 
 French, the language therefore was still Scotch^'. 
 They were sent to England as copies translated 
 from the French, but as the extracts made by the 
 
 repetition of sealed. He informs us, therefore, that the 
 letters were neither subscribed, sealed, nor signed. Ander- 
 son, i. 18. Pref. 11. Lesiy's objection is founded on the 
 legal forms observed then in Scotland, when private deeds 
 were both signed and sealed by the parties, and public in- 
 struments were subscribed by the writer, before they passed 
 under the privy seal or signet. 
 
 "* This absurd objection, which Goodall first suggested, 
 but was ashamed to explain (i. 43.), is caught at by Whitaker 
 (}. 369.), who distinguishes between seillet and signetit; that 
 the letters were neither attested by her seal at the bottom, 
 nor secured by her seal on the outside. These technical 
 words, of which he was ignorant, were better understood by 
 Blackwood, who translates Lesly's defence, " neither sealed 
 nor signed" (signeted) ny signees ny scellees, where scelle 
 applies only to the seals of chancery or courts of law. Jebb, 
 ii. 243. 
 
 =" Whitaker, i. 446—87. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 225 
 
 commissioners at York, were from the Scottish ^^^^• 
 copy, that hmguag-e was still the orig-inal ; and as '-^'>i'^>*^ 
 extracts were taken from three, and a fourth was 
 quoted, which is now supposed to be lost, their 
 mimbers therefore were still five at the utmost -^ 
 Their French garb, was not assumed tdl they 
 were forged anew, and produced at West- 
 minster^^; but according to the same argument, 
 Murray's receipt for the casket, on his leaving 
 Scotland, and his declaration on procuring the 
 letters at Westminster, should prove that those 
 French originals were still Scotch, as the language 
 is not once mentioned in either; and Morton's 
 receipt for the letters, two years afterwards, ought 
 equally to prove that they had returned to their 
 original Scotch again. 
 
 " Whitaker, i. 447 — 503—7. Here Whitaker mistakes the 
 ** Notes drawn forth of the queen's letters sent to the Earl 
 Bothwell" for the ** Abstract of matters shewed to the 
 queen's majestie's commissioners by the Scots." It is ob- 
 vious from the language, that the Notes drawn forth of the 
 queen's letters, are extracts made by the Scottish commis- 
 sioners, and whether they were produced at York or not, is 
 uncertain. But the abstract of matters, or " Brief note of 
 the chief and principal points of the Queen of Scots' letters 
 written to Bothwell, &c. as far forth as we could by the 
 reading gather," is the paper to which the English commis- 
 sioners refer as enclosed in their dispatches from York, 
 October the 11th. Anderson, iv. 63. See Appendix, No. 
 XXI. 
 
 »* Id, 510. Anderson, ii, 257—9. Goodall, ii. 91. 
 
 VOL. I. Q 
 
226 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. To state such arguments is sufficient for their 
 v-»-r-*^ refutation; and every difficulty so industriously 
 Removed created, may be removed by a fair explanation of 
 eJpbna"^ the fact. We have discovered an early copy of 
 flct.° ^ ^ the letters translated into Scotch, apparently for 
 the Scottish Parliament, and produced at West- 
 minster along with the French originals, with 
 which it was diligently collated and made to 
 accord. Murray had already intimated, in the 
 note transmitted by Middlemore, in June 1568, 
 that the originals were in French and the copy 
 in Scotch. That he should produce the Scottish 
 copy, however, as the originals .at York, and the 
 French as the originals, to the same commis- 
 sioners among others, at Westminster, is a sup- 
 position equally absurd with another j that Nor- 
 folk and his colleagues were unable, within the 
 space of two months, to distinguish the Scotch 
 that had been communicated as originals at York, 
 from the French originals produced at West- 
 minster. As additional absurdities, we are re- 
 quired to believe, that the sonnets were forged in 
 ^ French, to support the credit of the Scotch ori- 
 ginals produced at York ; and that the same 
 letters were produced in Scotch upon the 7th, 
 and in French upon the 8th of December, as 
 different originals, to the same commissioners, 
 who collated one forgery with another, without 
 detecting this double deceit**. But the Scottish 
 
 '' Whitaker, i. 103—557. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 227 
 
 copy, from which the extracts were taken, was 
 
 undoubtedly communicated as a translation, at 
 
 York as well as at Westminster, when *' Murray 
 
 " and his colleagues, according- to the appoint- 
 
 ** raent yesterday' (Tuesday, December 7th, of 
 
 which the minutes are lost), " came to the queen's 
 
 " majestie's commissioners, saying that as they 
 
 ** had yesternight, produced and shewed sundry 
 
 " writings tending to prove the hatred which 
 
 *' the Queen of Scots bare towards her husband 
 
 " to the time of his murder; wherein also they 
 
 " said might appear sundry arguments of her 
 
 " inordinate love towards the Earl Both well, so 
 
 " for the further satisfaction both of the queen's 
 
 " majesty and their lordships, they were ready 
 
 ** to produce and shew a great many other letters 
 
 " written by the said queen, wherein as they 
 
 " said might appear very evidently her inordinate 
 
 " lovetowardsthesaidEarlBoth well, with sundry 
 
 " other arguments of her guiltiness of the murder 
 
 " of her husband. And so thereupon they pro- 
 
 " duced seven several writings, written in French, 
 
 " in the like Remain hand as others her letters 
 
 " which were shewed yesterniyht^ and avowed 
 
 " by them to be written by the queen. Which 
 
 *^ seven writings, being copied, were read in 
 
 " French, and a due collation made thereof, as 
 
 *' near as could be, by reading and inspection, 
 
 " and made to accord with the originals, which 
 
 *• the said Earl of Murray required to be re- 
 
 a2 
 
 CHAP. 
 IV. 
 
238 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. « delivered, and did thereupon deliver the copies 
 " being collationed-\ The copies which Murray 
 delivered, of the seven writings read in French, 
 were the Scotch translation afterwards published ; 
 and if different from those that are described in 
 the minutes of the 9th, ** as duly translated into 
 ** English," they are the same with those produced 
 on the 14th to the privy council, along with the 
 originals; " of all which letters and writings, 
 " the true copies are contained in the memorial 
 " of the sessions of the 7th and 8th of Decem- 
 *' ber-"." The copies were therefore produced 
 with the originals at Westminster, upon the 7th 
 and 8th ; and the inference obviously is, that the 
 same copies, translated into Scotch, were com- 
 municated along with the originals at York. The 
 sundry writings produced upon the 7th, " tending 
 " to prove the hatred which the Queen of Scots 
 " bare towards her husband to the time of his 
 " death, wherein also might appear special ar- 
 " guments of her inordinate love towards the 
 " Earl of Bothwell," correspond with the titles 
 of the three first letters in Buchanan's Detection, 
 and are undoubtedly the same. The first is en- 
 titled, " Ane letter proving hir hate to hir hus- 
 " band and sum suspiciouns of practising his 
 " death;" the second, " concerning the hate 
 
 " AndersoH, i. 150. Goodall, ii. 235. 
 ^ Goodall, ii. 256. Anderson, iv. 172. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 229 
 
 « '* of hir husband and practise of his murder ;" 
 or the long- letter which we are assured was pro- 
 duced upon the 7th; the third, " concerning 
 *' certain tokens that she sent to Bothwell," or 
 rather, " of hir love to him," according to a 
 different arrangement in the Latin edition. In- 
 stead of being other letters just appearing, and 
 again disappearing, they were produced with the 
 Scotch contract written by Huntley, and with 
 Bothwell's trial, which is still extant ; and in the 
 minutes of the 14th, they are so expressly referred 
 to by the privy council, as produced and contained 
 in the minutes of the 7th, that it is impossible, 
 without an absolute perversion of the fact, to 
 represent them as a series of letters just appear- 
 ing and then suppressed ^^. The seven several 
 writings which, for farther satisfaction, were 
 produced upon the 8th, were the five remaining 
 letters, in the like Romain hand with those on 
 the 7th ; the sonnets, which were considered as one 
 writing in the manner of a sonnet, and the French 
 contract, which was also written in the queen's 
 hand. Eight letters were at least produced upon 
 the 7th and 8th; and the exact number after- 
 wards published, is attested by Murray's Instruc- 
 tions to the Abbot of Dumfermline, October the 
 15th, 1569. " We producit eight letteris in 
 *' French, written be the queen's awin hand, two 
 
 " Whitaker, i. 458. 
 
230 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 contractis, &c. ; the copies of all quhilk letteris, 
 " conferrit, red, and considerit, were deliverit to 
 " Mr. Secretary in quhais handis they remane^^" 
 The Scottish copy produced at York was deli- 
 vered by Murray when the originals were examin- 
 ed, and the same number of letters is discovered, 
 two years afterwards, in Morton's receipt for the 
 box, " with the missive letteris, contractis, or ob- 
 " lig-atiounis for marriag-e, sonnetis or luif bal- 
 *' lettis, and utheris letteris thairin contenit, to 
 " the number of XXI pecis within the samin•^" 
 Here the sonnets are enumerated in the plural; 
 and eleven sonnets, (the six concluding lines being 
 reckoned a part of the eleventh,) two contracts 
 and eight letters, form the exact number of 
 twenty-one pieces, contained in the box. It ap- 
 pears, therefore, from a fair explanation of the 
 fact, that the precise number of eight letters 
 afterwards published, were produced at West- 
 minster upon the 7th and 8th ; that the Scottish 
 translation communicated at York, was the copy 
 left with Cecil, from which the letters were 
 afterwards printed; and that after the originals 
 had been restored to Murray, the same number 
 of eight letters was still extant at the time of 
 his death, when the casket was transferred to 
 Lennox, and delivered to Morton (January 22, 
 1570-J) on his journey to England. 
 
 ^* Goodall, ii. 87—88. 
 " Goodall, ii. DJ, 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 231 
 
 2. It is impossible to fiK the supposed forgery chap, 
 upon any one of the different persons to whom <^v>*^ 
 it has been ascribed. As it was necessary forgeiytixed 
 Mary to disavow the letters, her commissioners 
 were instructed to affirm that they were forged, 
 and that there were diverse of each sex in Scot- 
 land, especially of those in company with her 
 adversaries, who could counterfeit and write the 
 queen's hand, as well as herself. This strange 
 assertion, so apparently false, is repeated in Les- 
 iy's memorial to Elizabeth^"; but of those who 
 could write and counterfeit the queen's hand, 
 none were ever named, even in his Defence of 
 her Honour. When the letters were published, 
 the anonymous author of L' Innocence de la Royne 
 d'Ecosse, affirmed, in 1572, that a certain name- 
 less lady then alive, had confessed in secret to 
 a nameless friend, that, at the instigation of 
 Murray, Morton, and others, to whose councils 
 she was then admitted, she herself had written, 
 framed, and composed the letters ; protesting 
 that whatever was said therein against the queen 
 was false, supposititious, detestable, and calum- 
 nious^'. Blackwood, improving upon these as- 
 sertions, assigns, in 1587, a long harangue to 
 Mary's commissioners, as the defence employed 
 for their mistress at the conference. In order to 
 
 '* Goodall, ii. 342—88. " Jebb, i. 524. 
 
232 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, disprove the authenticity of the letters to Both- 
 well, they affirm, according to this defence, that 
 when Huntley was imprisoned in Dunbar, Mur- 
 ray dispatched counterfeit letters, in the queen's 
 name, for his immediate execution : and having 
 actually produced these letters at the conference, 
 together with others of the same stuff, forged 
 by Murray and his associates, who were con- 
 founded and knew not what to reply% they pro- 
 
 ^* " Tenez & regardez, ie vous prie, voila les leltres. Et 
 en ce disant leur mirent lesdites lettres entre les mains, & 
 quelques autres de mesme estoflfe, contrefaites par Mourray 
 & ses complices, dont ils se trouverent bien confus & ne 
 sceurent que repliquer." Jcbb, ii. 243. Afterwards, to 
 prove the marriage with the murderer of her husband com- 
 pulsive, he tells us that Mary's commissioners produced at 
 the conference letters from Murray, ** Tenez, lisez, voila les 
 lettres de Mourray s'en allant en France," advising her to 
 marry Bothwell, and threatening the greatest inconvenience 
 if she refused ; and that they also produced, in the course 
 of their defence, the bond of the nobility to Bothwell, signed, 
 if not written, by her accusers themselves, id. 247. After 
 such gross and impudent fictions, it is ridiculous to appeal 
 to Blackwood's veracity, who adopts from U Innocence de 
 Marie, the forged warrant for Huntley's execution, which he 
 has not failed to introduce into the conference. Whitaker> 
 ashamed perhaps of such wretched authorities, quotes the 
 story from Crawford's Lives of the Officers of State, who 
 quotes it from Gordon of Straloch's MS., who had it from 
 his father, the Laird of Pitlurg, who lived at the time ; and 
 to reject such evidence is to reject half the history of man- 
 kind. Whitaker, iii. 5. That Murray procured a blank 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 233 
 
 ceed to state, that the hand-writing- of Mary chap. 
 Beton, one of her maids of honour, could not 
 possibly be distinguished from the queen's. 
 Blackwood had the best access to information 
 from Beton. her ambassador at Paris. But such 
 wretched fictions, stated as actual transactions 
 at the conference, demonstrate that for sixteen 
 years after the letters were published, the sup- 
 posed forgery could be fixed upon no particular 
 person, during Mary's life. The forgery is 
 ascribed by Blackwood, not to Mary Beton, 
 but, with some hesitation, to Sir James Balfour, 
 because the casket was left in his custody ^^; and 
 by others to Buchanan, because the letters were 
 published as an Appendix to his Detection of the 
 
 warrant, which he filled up with an order for Huntley's exe- 
 cution, appears from Marjoribank's Annals, (who died in 
 1591. MS. Advocate's Lib.) to have been a popular rumour 
 among Mary's adherents. That it was utterly false, appears 
 not only from Lesly's, but from Huntley's uniform silence, 
 in the Instructions of the Lords and Abbots, wherein he ac- 
 cuses Murray of having put some noblemen (his father) to 
 death ; " destroying their bairns, (his elder brother) their 
 houses and memory; caused others (Bothwell) to be banish- 
 ed the realm ; and put other noblemen (himself) in prison, 
 and detained them there." Goodall, ii. 358. Neither he 
 nor Lesly would have been silent on a story so injurious to 
 Murray, and essential to the queen's vindication, had they 
 known it then. 
 ^ Jebb , ii. 243. 
 
234 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Doings of Mary. But the learned Camden 
 '<^^^r^ first informed the world, in 1615, that Lething- 
 ton had privately hinted to the comniissioners 
 at York, that he himself had counterfeited the 
 queen's hand more than once. Camden*s infor- 
 mation is supposed to be confirmed by Craw- 
 ford's Memoirs, '* that it was notoriou'^ly known, 
 " Lething-ton, by his own confession, had often 
 " counterfeited h<r hand-writinjj;- ;" but Craw- 
 ford's is the only forgery concerning which there 
 can be no dispute. Neither the original ma- 
 nuscript of the History of James VI , nor Mel- 
 vil's Memoirs contain the least intimation of the 
 letters; and it now appears that the fact was 
 transciibed by Crawford from Camden's Annals, 
 and inserted in his Memoirs as the contemporary 
 evidence of some writer unknown^*. Camden, a 
 servitor at Magdalen College, Oxford, was not 
 then seventeen, and could possess no personal 
 knowledge of the fact, which is advanced in his 
 Annals, in the most apologetical form. " His 
 " auditis, (Murray's answer at York,) — quaecun- 
 " que hactenus prolata, testibus iion essent mu- 
 
 ** Crawford's Memoirs, 108. Such is the contemporary 
 evidence on which Tytler (i. 101.) and Whitaker (i. 108* 
 iii. 47.) rely so much for a proof of the forgery. Goodall 
 knew better than to appeal to Crawford's Memoirs, though 
 he made no scruple to promote that imposture, 
 
 2 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 235 
 
 " nita, sed suspectae fidei literulis ; et Liding- chap. 
 " tonius clam innuisset, se saepius reginse charac- 
 '* teres ementitum esse." — " Epistolis vero et 
 ** caraiiulbus (cum nomina, siibscriptiones, nota- 
 " tio teaiporis deessent, et ubique plures sint fal- 
 " sarii, qui aliorum characteres tarn scite assimi- 
 ** lare et exprimere norunt, ut veri ab ementitis 
 " non internoscantur) Elizabetha vix fidem ad- 
 ** hibuit^\" Camden could not venture directly 
 to assert that Lethington had actually acknow- 
 ledged the forgery in question. But he inti- 
 mates that Lethington gave the commissioners 
 secretly to understand, that he had often counter- 
 feited the queen's hand ; no doubt as an indirect 
 proof, that the letters might have been forged by 
 himself or others. Not relying, however, upon this 
 secret confession, Camden on his interpretation, 
 resorts to Lesl}''s absurd objections, in order to sup- 
 port an assertion of his own, that Elizabeth hardly 
 gave credit to the letters, as they had no address, 
 subscription, nor date, and as many persons were so 
 expert at forgery, that it was impossible to distin- 
 guish whether the letters were genuine or not. 
 But the sole authority hitherto discovered, for 
 Lethington*s confession, is Norfolk's apology for 
 his intended marriage, that Lethington " moved 
 " him to consider the queen as not guilty of the 
 " crimes objected." If Lethington had in fact 
 undeceived the duke, or had convinced him of 
 ^* Camden's Annals, 143-— 5. 1st edition. 
 
235 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 her innocence, he must have revealed the whole 
 forgery ; and whether he avowed the letters him- 
 self, or ascribed them to another, there was cer» 
 tainly no necessity, then or afterwards, to conceal 
 the author; but on the contrary, every induce- 
 ment to point him out, and denounce him by 
 name, for the vindication of the queen. That a 
 secret partisan, who had furnished Mary with a 
 copy of the letters^ should acknowledge the 
 fabrication, and at the siime time should repeat 
 the forgery again in French, is one of those 
 conclusions that confute themselves. But if it 
 were possible to believe, that during the confer- 
 ence at York, Norfolk and Lesly were more 
 anxious for Lethington^s safety, than for the 
 queen's reputation, there was no inducement at 
 Westminster to conceal his confession, when the 
 forgery was renewed in French ; much less after 
 his death, when Lesly, in 1580, republished his 
 Defence of Mary's title to the English throne. 
 3. Camden's authority may be traced distinct- 
 His Annals were begun in 1596, 
 at Cecil's desire, (though discontinued after the 
 death of Elizabeth), and from the original mate- 
 rials to which he was admitted, we may believe 
 that their complexion would have been very dif- 
 ferent, had they been published during the life of 
 that statesman. When the two first volumes of 
 Thuanus's history were published at Paris, Casau- 
 bon, whom James had invited into England, was 
 
 Camden's 
 
 authority . 
 
 examined, ly tO itS SOUrCC. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 237 
 
 directed to persuade that historian to retract the ^^^p- 
 errors derived from Buchanan, and Sir Robert 
 Cotton was employed to compile authentic me- 
 moirs for his use. Camden's unfinished Annals 
 were deliverd to Cotton, to be communicated to 
 James. It appears that they formed a principal 
 part of the memoirs of Elizabeth's reign, trans- 
 mitted to Thuanus in ten books to the year 1573, 
 in which each circumstance has been diligently 
 examined, and the whole revised, corrected, and 
 amended by the king himself ^^ No man living, 
 says Casaubon, was better instructed in those 
 transactions, and if there was any certainty in 
 human affairs, Thuanus had now obtained a sub- 
 stantial author, to whom he might give the most 
 implicit credit. He was assured that every cir- 
 cumstance in the ten books was indisputably 
 certain, and was desired to revise and amend 
 his history, in order to recall what was false, and 
 to insert in a new edition the true narrative of 
 Mary's conduct '\ But the king was incensed 
 
 =»« Thuanus, i. 44. London, 1733. 
 
 ^' " Rex ipse, quo nemo est hodie callentior istarum rerum, 
 singula recenset, atque ad exaclissimam veritatis trutinam 
 exigit, raissurus statira ad te, ut veram narrationem tuae his- 
 
 toriae inseras, falsarn et calumniarum plenam regicias. 
 
 Serenissimus rex, audito accepisse te historian! a se missam, 
 laetus ea nuntio, jussit serio tibi confirmare, omnia esse vera, 
 
 quze decern illis libris continentur. Ego illam videre non 
 
 potui ; sed constat mihi regem ipsum, quo nemo vivit hodie 
 
238 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, at an inaccurate report of Thuanus's answer; 
 that much of what he found in the memoirs, was 
 of doubtful credit, especially as Colvii, a Scottish 
 priest in whom he confided, called the whole in 
 question; neither could he persuade himself that 
 Murray was not a man of singular integrity and 
 prudence ; nor could he adopt the memoirs, 
 unless James himself should attest in writing 
 such facts as he was required to believe and to 
 transcribe. The king was particularly surprised 
 and indignant, that the testimony of a few rebels 
 and traitorous refugees, should have more weight 
 with Thuanus, than his own evidence and that of 
 all Scotland besides ; and Casaubon assured his 
 friend, tliat Buchanan's History and other libels 
 had been condemned by the Scottish parliament, 
 long before they were rejected by James ^*: nor 
 did he estimate Murray's character from uncer- 
 
 harum rerum perltior, omnia legisse, expendisse, correxisse. 
 Itaque si quid ia humanis rebus potest esse certi, habes auc- 
 torera locupletem, cujus fidem avocfM(pi^(^nTnrug sequi possis. 
 Optat ejus majestas, uttuain historiam recenseas, et quae ex 
 ista didiceris emendationis opus habere, eraendes." Id. 44-5. 
 "* " Buchanani historiam et id genus narrationes non a se 
 primo daninatas, sed, juvene se et vix dum decimura quartum 
 vel quintum annum agente, decreto parliamenti Scotici, uti 
 vocavit, et historiam illam et libellum ilium faraosum laesae 
 majestatis esse postulates et damnatos." James was then 
 within a month of eighteen, and in a letter written apparent- 
 ly under his own inspection, Casaubon, who repeats his words, 
 must have been purposely misinformed of his age, in order 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY, 239 
 
 tain rumours, or light conjectures ; but from trans- ^^]^^' 
 actions better known to himself alone, than to any 
 other man. He had inspected the public records 
 with care, had weighed and examined each cir- 
 cumstance diligently, in short had omitted no- 
 thing to detect the latent truth of events^'; and 
 Thuanus was admonished, that unless he adhered 
 to his engagement, to insert the memoirs in his 
 next edition, the king would print them him- 
 self, not only to vindicate the honour of his 
 mother, but to expostulate publicly upon the 
 injury which he had received. Thuanus en- 
 deavoured to explain his words to the king's satis- 
 faction *", and requested the continuation of the 
 memoirs in vain. He was informed privately by 
 
 to persuade Thuanus, that he had no personal influence in 
 the condemnation of Buchanan's works by the Scottish par- 
 liament. Id. 46. 
 
 ^' " Morraei ingenium et mores non aestimat rex ex incertis 
 rumoribus, aut frivolis conjecturis, sed ex rebus gestis.quarura 
 Veritas sibi uni melius sit coraperta, quam cuiquam morta- 
 lium. Acta publica se cum cura inspexisse, singula diligen- 
 ter expendisse, nihil denique praetermisisse, quo certius ad 
 veri saepe in abdito latitantis cubile perveniret." Ibid. 
 These passages ascertain the fact, that the memoirs transmit- 
 ted to Thuanus, were examined, corrected, and amended by, 
 James himself, 
 
 *> He had merely wished such passages to be pointed out 
 iu his History, as he was required to expunge or explain in a 
 new edition, which he doubted whether the printer would un- 
 dertake till the first shouia be sold ; and he had applied to 
 Colvil, as to a man who from religious animosity, was not 
 
240 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Casaubon, that the remaining history, which 
 Cotton composed in EngUsh, was translated into 
 Latin by Camden*' ; who has also explained, in 
 a letter to Thuanus, his own share in the former 
 
 likely to favour Murray, in order to know whether the latter 
 was suspected in Scotland of any concern in the murder. 
 It is evident that Thuanus, who had tried Buchanan's writ- 
 ings by the evidence of different Scotsmen present at the 
 transactions; "rem ut ex Scotorum, qui interfuerant, serraoni- 
 bus didici, ita literis mandavi ; et ad eorusn iidem scripta a 
 Buchananoexpendi," (id. 41) entertained the greatest distrust 
 of the memoirs which he received from James. Whether 
 he was deceived by Camden's first representation of Scottish 
 affairs, is an old and absurd controversy from which I ab- 
 stain. Camden had only recommended moderation in his 
 correspondence on the subject, but when Thuanus, in the 
 letter just quoted (August 1606, see Appendix, IV.) had vin- 
 dicated his view of Darnley's murder, by the most cogent 
 arguments, it is observable that Camden, so far from oppos- 
 ing, or blaming his nanalive, ^\rote, on perusing the volume; 
 " Temperanicntum in rerum Scoticarura narratione prudea- 
 ter sane servasti, dum calamum ab omni insectatione conti- 
 nueris. Rex tamen noster, Buchanano infensissimus, Ivlora- 
 vium noxse maxime damnat, utmaternae calamitatis lontemet 
 fundum, idque a secretorum eo eevo participibus edoctus, ut 
 fertur, auctorque est, ut inandio, cuidam, ut raatris vitam de- 
 scribat ; quam tamen editurum baud lacile credo." Id. 42, 
 November 1607. Camden apparently had not then differed 
 in opinion from Thuanus, but the opinions which he ascribes 
 to James are precisely those that were afterwards inserted in 
 his own Annals. 
 
 *' " Respondit (Cottonus) se totum in eo esse, ut coeptam 
 historiam absolvat, quam ipse Anglico sermone componit. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 241 
 
 Memoirs : That at the Earl of Northampton's <^^^ap- 
 request, the outlines of his unfinished Annals, 
 which he meant to have printed abroad, without 
 his name, for the benefit of Thuanus, had been 
 imparted to Cotton, above a year before (loll), 
 in order to be communicated to the king*^ : that 
 he had resigned them entirely to Cotton, to be 
 used at his discretion ; but he wished that they 
 had been transmitted to Thuanus in a more 
 polished form, as many passages, in a copy which 
 he had lately seen, were maimed and mutilat- 
 ed, with large chasms, and words altered by an 
 audacious transcriber; that Thuanus knew best, 
 from the king's instructions, to what purpose 
 they ought to be applied", nor did he expect the 
 
 Camdenus Latinatn facit." Id. 48. This is Cotton's answer, 
 not Casaubon's information merely. 
 
 '" " Commentarios D. Cottoni, quos tibi ab anno, quo 
 primus tuarum historiarum toraus primum prodierit, destinatos, 
 ad tuas manus bono fato pervenisse — tacitus gaudeo. — Illos, 
 (nee me composita fabulari existimes,) anno 1596, auclore 
 et suasore Cecilio Burghleio, Angliae quaestore, inclioavi, — 
 quos in Germania, nomine suppresso, imprimere, tibique in- 
 scribere destinavi, ut tu inde, quae visum, decerperes. Ecce 
 autem cum \'\\ prima lineamenta duxerim, necdum ad finem 
 pervenerim Comes Northamptonius mihi obvius rogavit, ut 
 protinus Roberto Cottono impertirem, qui regi-communicaret, 
 regem enim percupere ut legeret. Dicto obtemperavi, et 
 omnia, quae descripta habui, ne relecta quidcm, nedum recog- 
 nita, Cottono tradidi, et sui juris arbitriique feci;" id. 49. 
 " *' Plurinta observavi manca, mutila, biulca et verbula 
 
 VOL. I. R 
 
242 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^'Jv^* whole to be inserted, but believed that much 
 would be omitted, of what was amusing or in- 
 structive for his countrymen to learn. Thuanus 
 acknowledg'ed, what he knew not till then, that 
 the chief part of the Memoirs belonged to Cam- 
 den, on whose authority the most material pasr 
 sages of the present Annals were transferred into 
 a new edition of his history, not to supersede 
 the original narrative derived from Buchanan, 
 but to place before his readers the allegations 
 and arguments produced on the opposite side**. 
 But the king's anger was renewed, as Bucha- 
 nan's narrative was not expunged, nor his own 
 memoirs inserted entire. In a warrant address- 
 ed to Cotton and to Camden in conjunction, he 
 directs so much of the History of England as he 
 
 quzedara librarii audacia immutata. Quid de illis fiet, tu a 
 rege edoctus, optime nosti." Ibid. 
 
 *^ " Ad coramentarios D. CoUoni quod attinet — In lis Ife 
 priecipuam partem vindicare tunc nesciebatn, et habeo gra- 
 tias pro tam honorifica in ea re in me voluntate, quae utinam 
 suum sortitaesset efFectum, neque ex occasione, quam scribis, 
 mutasset. Interim iis usus sura, et pleraque in jam editis ex 
 illis supplevi, multa correxi, et ad anuos sues revocavi," 
 ibid. If an additional proof were wanting, of the identity of 
 Camden's Annals, and Cotton's Memoirs, which the king re- 
 vised, every passage which Thuanus transcribed from the 
 latter is to be found, nearly in the same words, in the Annals 
 afterwards published. A few facts from Buchanan, were ex- 
 punged b)' Thuanus ; but it is evident from his adopting the 
 Annals as the assertions, or arguments merely of the opposite 
 side, that he did not give implicit credit to Camden himself. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 243 
 
 had perused, from 1558 to 1588, to be printed and <^" ^p- 
 published ; upon which the first vohime of Cam- ^-"■v*"-' 
 den's vlnnals unexpectedly appeared**. 
 
 From these passaoes the fact appears to be ^^^ '^'^^^^^ 
 
 i- <3 A i^ to James, 
 
 indisputable, that the Memoirs transmitted to ^^i^osevera- 
 
 •^ city is 
 
 Thuanus were the same with the Annals that were brought to 
 
 the test. 
 
 afterwards published ; the joint production of 
 Cotton and Camden, revised, examined, corrected 
 and amended by the king- himself, whose vera- 
 city may be brought to an immediate test. As a 
 proof that Buchanan's Detection and History 
 abounded with falsehoods, Camden informs us, as 
 Casaubon had done Thuanus, that these books 
 were condemned by the Scottish parliaments^ 
 But Camden's interpolator forgets to add that 
 this condemnation was procured by the king's 
 influence, after the Raid of Ruthven, when the 
 presbyterians, under the administration of Arran, 
 were restrained and punished by the severest 
 
 « Camden's Annals. Pref. p. 6. edit. 1717, by Hearn. 
 
 ** Buchanan's History and Dialogue De Jure Regni, not 
 his Detection, were called in " to be purged of sundry offen- 
 sive and extraordinary matters, specified therein." Pari. 1534, 
 ch. 134. Camden knew the precise fact, which he states cor- 
 rectly, under the year 1584; but to disprove Buchanan's ve- 
 racity, the Annals assert in 1567, that his History and Detec- 
 tion were condemned of falsehood by the Scottish estates, 
 " quorum fidei plus tribuendum.'' Annals, 110. Other va- 
 riations from the fact, will appear in the sequel, and these I 
 coDbider as the interpolations of another pen. 
 R 2 
 
IV. 
 
 244 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. laws*'. He adds, what is uo\\ known, whether it be 
 advanced by J ames or by Camden, to be an absolute 
 fiction, that Buchanan frequently himented with 
 sighs, to the king his pupil, that he had written 
 with such virulence against the meritorious queen ; 
 and wished when dying, that he might survive in 
 order to restore the truth, and to obliterate even 
 with his blood, those aspersions which his malig- 
 nity had uttered; unless that were a vain attempt, 
 which, at his advanced age, might be ascribed to 
 dotage", Camden's information, upon which 
 
 " The parliament was held May 19, 1584, without being 
 indicted or summoned by proclamaliou. The lords of arti- 
 cles were sworn to secrecy, and the acts were ratified on the 
 22d, three days after the parliament met. These acts, ob- 
 tained with such secrecy and address, overturned the con- 
 stitution of the presbyterian church ; but James had then 
 surmounted his opponents, had dispersed the confederate 
 lords at Stirling, had driven the most popular clergymen 
 from Scotland, and had executed Gowrie, the last possessor 
 of the letters to Bothwell. In au act against defaming the 
 king or his ancestors, the order for recalling Buchanan's Dia- 
 logue and History, was inserted without condemning or spe- 
 cifying what passages were to be suppressed as oftensive ; 
 and in these circumstances, it is ridiculous to quote the au- 
 thority of the Scottish parliament for Buciianan's falsehood. 
 Robertson, ii. 113. Calderwood, iii. 365, MS. 
 
 " " Cum autem ille (Buchananus) partium studio, et Mo- 
 ravii munificentia abreptus, ita scripserit, utlibri isti falsitatis 
 damnati ab fuerint ordinibus regni Scotiae, quorum fidei plus 
 tribuendum, et ipse ingeniiscens coram rege cui fuit pasda- 
 gogus,subinde se leprehenderit (utaccepi) quod tarn virulen- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 245 
 
 Casaubon is silent, must have been derived, ^^^^• 
 through the intervention of Cotton, from James 
 
 loin calanKim in resinain bene meritatn strinxisset, moriens- 
 que optaverit, ut tantisper superesset donee maculas, quas 
 maledicentia filso asperserat, revocata veritate, vel sanguine 
 elueret, nisi (quod ipse dixit) hoc vanum esset, cum prse aetate 
 deiirare videretur." Camden, 110. Camden states the anec- 
 dote as he received it (ut accepi); but had he received it from 
 any other than James, his prudential caution would have ap- 
 plied for some confirmation of a fact which was known only 
 to the king himself. Whether it was contained in the Memoirs 
 transmitted to Thuanns is uncertain. But the following pas* 
 sage in Thuanus' manuscript, was retrenched from his History 
 before he received the Memoirs, in order to avoid offence to 
 James. " Cum autem morti proximus esset Buchananus, a 
 rege alumno rogatus, ut quoe de Maria parente nimis libere 
 scripserat revocaret, el infamiam ejus nomini scriptis suis in- 
 ustam insigni aliquo testimonio eliieret, nihil aliud respondif, 
 quam brevi fore, ut ipsius desiderio abunde satisfieret. Repe- 
 titis deiii vicibus per fidos cadein de re interpellatus, hoc 
 postremo responso regi satisfecit : se qusc ex anirai sententia 
 vere scripserat, revocare quidem non posse, ceterum, ubi ex- 
 piraveril, in regis potestate futurum, ut de scriptis illius pro 
 arbitrio suo statueret ; tantum quid in ea re acturus essef, 
 pro prudentia sua, ante mature consuleret, sciretque reges 
 cum soluta potestate a Deo constitutos nihil non posse : sed 
 veritatein quae a Deo vires sumit, quantum Deus hominibus 
 major est, tantum potentia adversus reges ipsos prjepollere.'* 
 Id. iv. 100, n. This passage, to which Varillas afterwards 
 referred, was restored by Wicquefort : Thuanus Restitutus, 
 1663. Whitaker k}\\. 447,) dreams of an auonymons enlarger 
 of Thuanus, to whom, as usual, he ascribes the forgery. 
 Having never looked into Bulkley's, or rather Carte's editioo 
 
 2 
 
IV. 
 
 246 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, himself, who revised the work, and to whom the 
 facts were better known than to any other person 
 whatsoever. But the two Melvils, clergymen 
 who visited the impenitent Buchanan on his death 
 bed, while his History was still in the press, urged 
 that his account of Rizio's burial, as it might stop 
 the work, was too severe for the times; when in- 
 stead of retracting those calumnies, which were 
 not yet published, he demanded whether he had 
 spoken the truth, and declared, " when going the 
 *' way of all weilfare," "then I will bide the king's 
 " fead and all his kins*^" That the opposite side 
 might be heard, Camden professes to explain the 
 whole with impartial brevity ; as far as he could 
 discover, not only from the letters of ambassadors 
 and others of the best credit, but from writings 
 published at the time, though suppressed in Eng- 
 land, out of favour to Murray, or animosity to the 
 Scottish queen^''. The writings suppressed in Eng- 
 land, were Lesly's and other anonymous vindica- 
 tions of Mary, in which there is no intimation 
 whatsoever of Lethington's confession, that he 
 had frequently forged the queen*s hand. The let- 
 ters are those in the Cecil collection, and the 
 Cotton library, which are equally silent; and we 
 must conclude that the author, whether Cotton, 
 
 of Thuanus, he knew not that the passage is still extant in 
 the original manuscript. 
 « See Appendix, No. XIX. *» Camden, 110. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 247 
 
 James, or Camden, improving- upon Norfolk's 
 apology, " that Lething-ton moved him to consider 
 " the queen as not guilty," has asserted gratui- 
 tously that Lethington acknowledged the whole 
 forgery, as he had already done, that Buchanan 
 frequently repented, especially on his death-bed, 
 of those calumnies in his Detection, which he 
 reprinted, and refused to retract in his History, 
 which was then in the press. Whoever examines 
 Camden's abrupt and mutilated account of the 
 conferences in England, must be satisfied that the 
 evidence of the Cecil, and Cotton papers, which 
 he had confessedly examined, has been suppressed 
 in his Annals, in which Norfolk's letters from 
 York, and the proceedings at Westminster, and 
 of the privy council at Hampton Court, are in- 
 dustriously concealed. 
 
 On perusing his Annals, in 1620, Lethington's 
 only son addressed him in a respectful, but digni- 
 fied letter from Brussels. He complained of the 
 imputations so injurious to his father's memory, 
 to the truth of which, he could by no means as- 
 sent ; and requested the inspection, or copies of 
 different papers, to which the Annals referred. 
 Among other passages for which he required evi- 
 dence, he demanded whether from personal know- 
 ledge, for what reason, or upon whose information, 
 Camden had asserted that Lethington had fre- 
 quently counterfeited the queen's hand ; nor did 
 he dissemble the intelligence which he had re- 
 
248 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ceived, that Camden*s name had been prefixed, 
 in order to give authority to the Annals, in which 
 many passages contrary to the freedom and truth 
 of liistory,had been arbitrarily inserted at the plea- 
 sure of others". It is not sufficient to affirm, that 
 
 *' " Clarissime Domine, hisce diebus dam Elizabethae 
 Annates perlegerem, in loca quaedam incidi, in quibus paren- 
 tis mei mentio non satis bonesta facta est ; jure factum nullo 
 inodo mihi possum persuadere. Quare lota quaedam, de 
 quibus maxime ambigebam, excerpsi, vestraeque Dominationi 
 censui mittenda, certiora, si fieri possit, exploratiirus, quorum 
 aliqua propria scientia, caetera literarura authoritate nixa 
 videntur. Quare et authoritatem vestram et animum meum 
 dubio plenissime exemeritis, si subsequentes hasce literas con- 
 spiciendas mihi transmiseritis." After enumerating the pa- 
 pers of which he required inspection or copious extracts ; 
 *' aliis quibusdam locis ejusdem facta est mentio, sed nuUo, 
 vel suppresso auctore, ut non aliena sed propria scientia niti 
 videamini. Quare gratiae loco sura habiturus, si subsequen- 
 tium locorum horum rationes a vubis plenius fuero edoctus : 
 scilicet, — Ef Lidingtonius clam innuisset, se sccpius Regime 
 characteres ementitum esse. — Haec praecipua sunt loca, de 
 quibus plenius cuperem edoceri, qua demum ratione quave 
 authoritate impulsi, libro vestro ea inserenda censueritis. Si 
 tamen alia quaedera sint, quae nominis ejus integritate possint 
 esse praejudicio, existimatione vaestrae consul ueritis, si una 
 cum uiter'ore eorum approbatioue mihi transmiseritis, et boo 
 eo solummodo fine, ut Veritas excussa magis enitescat. — 
 Neque dusimulabo quoruiiidam sermonibus certiorem me 
 factum, nomeu vestrum aaa>ilibus illis praefixum, quo illis 
 major auihoritas accederet, varia autem iisdem, pro aliorum 
 arbitrata, contra historiae libirtatem inserta. Haec si ita sint, 
 quid aequius quam est quisque laudis vetuperiique partem 
 pro meritis referat?" Camdeni Epist. 305. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 249 
 
 no answer appears, when there is no reason to chap. 
 
 ' ' IV. 
 
 belit^ve that any answer was ever returned. It was ^-^-v-^'^ 
 incumbent upon CunRien, when personally chal- 
 lenged on the suljjerl, to di.s;svow a report pre- 
 served during" the seventeenth century^^, that his 
 Annals had been altered and interpolated by James, 
 and, in particular, to authenticate Lethington's 
 confession, when questioned by his son. But the 
 copy enlarged and prepared for the press before 
 his death^, contains no disavowal whatsoever of 
 the report; nor any authority for Letiiington*s 
 confession : and we must conclude, that the sup- 
 posed forgery of the letters to Bothwell can be 
 
 " The same report that is mentioned by Lethington's son, 
 is preserved by t'u Moulin, Wood, and Burnet. DuMoulin's 
 evidence, " alium manum arcessisse, praeter baud dubio men- 
 tera authoris, uude opus foede commaeulatum fuit, in Aulae 
 Regioe adulatores," is rejected, because he was an inde- 
 pendent, or a creature of Cromwell's. Smith's Life of Cam- 
 den, Epist. 54. But Wood's account, " that several things 
 had before that time (1615) been expunged, especially such as 
 related to the story of Mary Queen of Scots," is certaiuly not 
 derived from Du Moulin, whom he contemned ; (Wood's 
 Athense Oxonienses) much less Burnet's account, " that James 
 would needs read the history himself, and as was well known 
 ID England, delivered it to Lord Northampton, Norfolk's 
 brother, by whom many things were expunged, and others 
 altered." Burnet's Reply to Varillas. These authorities attest, 
 at diflferent periods, the traditionary opinion preserved in 
 England, that Camden's Annals had been interpolated by 
 James. 
 
 " Beam's edit. pref. 
 
250 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ascribed to no one, with any appearance of his- 
 torical truth. As Camden's original design, before 
 his first volume was communicated to James, was 
 to print it in Germany without his name, so the 
 manuscript of the second, posthumous volume 
 was transmitted to De Puy , the friend of Thuanus, 
 to be published at Leyden, after his death. And 
 for this measure no satisfactory reason can be 
 assigned, but a wish to preserve the book from 
 being suppressed entirely, or from being inter- 
 polated like the first. 
 Progress of 4. Before we proceed to an examination of the 
 
 ♦ v^p letters • 
 
 to thepress. letters, it is necessary to trace their progress mi- 
 nutely to the press. It appears that Murray first 
 produced to the commissioners at Westminster, 
 " a book of articles in five parts, containing cer- 
 " tain presumptions, likelihoods, and circum- 
 " stances, whereby it should evidently appear that 
 " as Both well was the chief murderer of the 
 " king, so was the queen a deviser and maintainer 
 ** thereof." From the explanation given in Bu- 
 chanan's history, ibi cum et rerum, uti (jestce 
 fuerant, explicatus fuisset 07'dOj the book of arti- 
 cles corresponds, and was undoubtedly the same, 
 with the Detection of the Doings of Mary, con- 
 taining an historical detail of her actions, (rerum, 
 uti gestce fuerant oirloj, from the first appearance 
 of her antipathy to Darnley, till her marriage with 
 Bothwell ; addressed to Elizabeth as if present 
 in person, and produced at Westminster, as we 
 
THE MURDER OF DARN LEY. 25 1 
 
 are well assured^*. It was written by Buchanan, ^"j^-^- 
 originally in Latin; the diplomatic and universal ^-''v-*-^ 
 languag-e of the learned, which was almost as 
 familiar then as the French is at present. The 
 Defence of Mary's Honour was also written, or 
 enlarged at the conference, by Lesly, Herreis, 
 Boyd, and others; and in consequence of a Dis- 
 course published against her marriage with 
 Norfolk, it was printed at London, in 1569-70, 
 but was immediately suppressed. When Morton 
 returned to England with the letters, in January 
 1570-1, the negociations for her restoration were 
 again disappointed, and Lesly 's Defence of her 
 Honour was reprinted at Liege, 1571, asserting 
 her right to the crown of England, as exclusive 
 of Elizabeth's, and among other additions, con- 
 cluding with this notable falsehood ; That the 
 nobles appointed to examine her cause, had 
 actually found her innocent of the murder of her 
 husband, of which they deemed her accusers 
 guilty ; and having moved her to accept of Nor- 
 folk for a husband, they were ready to receive 
 and to serve her as their lawful prince". On the 
 discovery of Norfolk's conspiracy, and in answer 
 
 " Anderson, ii. 263. Camden, 144, where he distin- 
 guishes the Book of Articles from the Detection, of which no 
 separate mention is made in the minutes. 
 
 " Murdin, 14, 20—9. Cabala, 174. Anderson, i. 81. ii. 
 Pref. 3. Herbert's Edit, of Ames's Typographical Antiquities, 
 iii. 1626—7. 
 
25;^ DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ?v.^' to this offensive vindication of her title and 
 v^v-w i^Qj^Qyp jjQ injurious to Elizabeth, Buchanan's 
 
 Buchanan's •' 
 
 Latin lie- Detection was published at London before the 
 
 tection. * 
 
 1st of November, 1571, with the tliree first letters 
 translated into Latin. Li a letter of that date, 
 Cecil observes, that it is " newly printed in Latin, 
 " and I hear it is to be translated into Enghsh 
 *' with many supplements of the like condition^." 
 The Detection was p!il)li>he(i ni English before 
 the end of November", with the French sonnets, 
 and the ei<i^ht letters in Scotch, from the copy or 
 Scottish translation left in Cecil's hands. The 
 two editions, supj)Osed to be printed by John 
 Day, are without date, place, or printer's name; 
 in the English edition, the Detection is profess- 
 edly ** translatit out of the Latin, quhilk was 
 " written by G. B." (George Buchanan) ; but 
 the reader, perhaps, will be surprised to learn, 
 that the Actio contra 3Iariam, annexed to the 
 Detection, and the Latin translation of the three 
 letters inserted in the first edition, are not the 
 productions of Buchanan's pen. 
 The Action The Detection, or book of articles produced at 
 "°* '^" the conference, is entitled in Latin, " De Maria 
 *' S. Regina, totaque ejus contra Regem conjura- 
 " tione, faedo cum Bothwellioadulterio, nefaria ia 
 
 *« Diggs, 151. 
 
 " Goodall, ii. 371. Both editions had reached Scotland 
 before the 14th of December, Ibid. 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY, 253 
 
 " maritum crudelitate et rabie, horrendo insuper chap. 
 ** etdeterrimo ejiisdem parricidio : plena et tra- 
 "jica plane historia:'* in the English edition, 
 ** Ane detectioun of the diiinges of Marie Quene 
 *' of Scottes, touchand the murder of hir husband, 
 ** and hir conspiracie, adulterie and pretensed 
 " mariage with the Erie Bothwell : and ane de- 
 ** fence of the trevv Lordis, raainteineris of the 
 " Kingis graces actioun and authoritie." The 
 first is inconsistent with the characteristical sim- 
 plicity of Buchanan's works, of which the longest 
 Latin title, De jure regni apud ScotoSy exceeds 
 not five words, the second is derived from his 
 ** admonition direct to the trew lordis, main- 
 " tainers of justice and obedience to the king's 
 " grace," of which two editions were printed that 
 year'*, and it is evident that the two quibbling, 
 
 ^* By Lickprevick at Stirling. From the last edition of 
 the Adraoiiitioun to the Trew Lords, a passage coneerning 
 the Archbishop of St. Andrews, is transferred into the Action. 
 " In eas, (zedes Hamiltonioruni) comniigrat Archiepiscopus 
 Saneti Andrea?, semper antea in locis urbis frequentioribus 
 diversari solitus. Isquoque earn noct m qua Rex interemp- 
 tus est egit pervigilem," &c. Actio contra Mariam, 69, &c. 
 The Detection takes no notice of the fact, which was not 
 know 1 till afterwards, when the Admonition was written ; 
 but Wilson, who probably consulted the Admonition in MS. 
 (Caligula, c. 2.), discovered by his personal inquiries, some 
 additional circumstances unknown to Buchanan. " Itaque 
 lumina, quae ex aeditioribus urbis locis, tota nocte domi tuae 
 
2,54 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, catch-penny titles were adapted to another, for 
 ^-^r"*-' the London press. In a copy quoted by Her- 
 bert, the Latin title of the Detection is fol- 
 lowed by a manuscript annotation, " auctore 
 " Georgio Buchanan Scoto, 1572-3;" the 
 Actio contra 3Iariam S. R. in qua ream et con- 
 sciani esse earn hujiis jxiricidii, necessariis argu- 
 mentis evincitur, contains another note in the 
 same hand ; " Istas actiones scripsit Thomas 
 *' Smythus a secretis D. N. R. Elizabethae sicut 
 *' fama est, vel Thomas Wilsonus a supplicum 
 " libellis, quod mihi magis placet;" the Literce 
 Reo'inw Scot, has a third ; " Thomas Wilson 
 " creditur has literas e Gallico transtulisse, eum 
 " autem Gallicam phrasim vix credo intelligere; 
 " Thomas vero Smyth, hoc optime potuit praestare 
 *' eo quod legatus Parisiis diu est commoratus^^." 
 Dr. Wilson, then master of requests, succeeded, 
 on Sir Thomas Smith's death, (1579-80,) to the 
 office of secretory ; and as the date of the first 
 annotation, 1572-3, can neither refer to Bu- 
 chanan, nor to the edition in 1571, the notes 
 must have been written soon after the Detection 
 was published. From these annotations it ap- 
 pears, that although the Detection was written 
 by Buchanan, Action or oratioun of evidence 
 
 apparuerunt, turn demuin tanquam re bene gesta, sunt extinc- 
 ta." Id. 72. 
 
 *» Herbert, iii. p. 1629. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. Q55 
 
 was publicly ascribed to Sir Thomas Smith, hut chap. 
 by the annotator himself to Wilson, whom he ^-^ 
 seems to have known, and to whom the Latin 
 translation of the three first letters was also as- 
 cribed. The last is transferred to Smith without 
 sufficient reason, for the letters were translated 
 from the Scottish copy left with Cecil, not from 
 the French originals v*'hich Murray retained. 
 But the contemporary authority of the annotator, 
 in assigning- the Actio contra 3Iariam to Wilson, 
 is confirmed by the strongest external andintrinsic 
 proofs. Smith and Wilson were employed to in- 
 vestigate Norfolk's conspiracy, and the latter, a 
 keen and active partisan, was esteemed in nego- 
 ciations for his diligence and dispatch^**. He writes 
 in a letter to Cecil at court, " I do send to your 
 " honour inclosed, so much as is translated into 
 " handsome Scottish^ desiring you to send me 
 " Paris closely sealed, and it shall not be known 
 " from whence it cometh^'." The latter is dated 
 
 «<'Murdin, 68—88—95—101. Walton's History of English 
 Poetry, iii. 334. 
 
 ^' Murdin, 57. . In the same letter, Wilson mentions a con- 
 versation with Lesly, then in the Tower : " That the queen 
 his mistress is not fit for a hushand, for first he says, that she 
 poisoned her husband, the French king, as he has credibly 
 understood : again, she has consented to the murder of her 
 late husband, the Lord Darnley: thirdly, she matched with 
 the murderer, and brought him to the field to be murdered ; 
 and last of all, she pretended a marriage with tlie duke, with 
 whom, as he thinks, she would not long have kept faith, and 
 
256* DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^fy^' November 8, 157 1 , in the interval after the Latin, 
 and before the Enfjlisli eclnion was published: 
 " so much as is translated into handsome Scotch," 
 can refer only to the Scottish translation, either of 
 the Detection or cf the Action, that was to ac- 
 company the It tters in the same lang'uage : the 
 request to send him Paris closely sealed, must 
 relate to Paris's two declarations since the con- 
 ference ; and the assurance that it should not be 
 known from whence it comes, can allude to no- 
 thing- else than a political publication in which 
 the prime minister, who furnished the materials, 
 was unwilling to appear. The Detection left by 
 Buchanan in England, was translated therefore 
 into the Scottish dialect, and published by Wil- 
 son. The Detection is strictly confined to the 
 facts preceding th marriage with Bothwell, 
 which were known at the conference, and con- 
 cludes in a manner sufficient to assure us that the 
 author never meant to resume the detail. But 
 the Actio contra Mariam, enters largely into the 
 Archbishop of St. Andrews' concern in the mur- 
 
 the duke would not have had the best days with her. Lord, 
 what people are these ; what a queen, and what an ambassa- 
 dor !" Wilson plainly alludes to the first circumstance in his 
 Action, or oratio contra Mariam. " Nee rumoribus de ea per 
 Gallias sparsis in matrimonio priore accedo," p. 55; and the 
 letter is characterislical, not only of Wilson's prying curio- 
 sity, but of Lesly's timid servility, in uttering every informa- 
 tion or calumny, privately against his mistress, for his own 
 preservation. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. ^^'^ 
 
 der, a recent discovery to which Buchanan had iv. 
 alluded in his Admonition to the True Lords ; 
 and it resumes the detail of the same facts con- 
 tained in the Detection, with the tedious repeti- 
 tion incident to one author, in retracing" the 
 footsteps of another, whom he strives only to 
 surpass in violence : superadding such local de- 
 scription, and vulgar reports as a keen inquirer, 
 who had formerly visited Scotland in person, 
 might collect from Lesly, and other Scots, whom 
 he examined upon the subject. The Detection 
 is a concise historical deduction of facts ; a rapid 
 narrative, written with that chaste and classical 
 precision of thought and language, from which 
 each sentence acquires an appropriate idea, dis- 
 tinct from the preceding, and neither anticipated, 
 repeated, nor intermixed with others ; while the 
 style is so strictly historical, that the work is in- 
 corporated in Buchanan's History almost without 
 alteration. But the Action against Mary, is a 
 dull declamation, and a malig-nant invective, 
 written in professed imitation of the ancient ora- 
 tors, whom Buchanan has never imitated ; with- 
 out arrangement of parts, coherence, or a regu- 
 lar train of ideas ; and without a single passage 
 which Buchanan has deigned to transcribe into 
 his History^^. A man inured to extemporary elo- 
 
 ^^ Two or three facts are adopted from the Action, which 
 Buchanan, who transcribes his own Detection almost verba' 
 
 VOL. I. S 
 
258 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, quence, whose mind is accustomed only to popu- 
 •-•■v'*-^ lar arguments, and his tongue to prompt, and 
 loose declamation, never writes with such lucid 
 arrangement, with such accuracy of thought, 
 or compression of style, as a professed author, 
 who thinks no labour too great for what is be- 
 queathed to posterity ; and the virulent Action 
 against Mary has no more resemblance to Bu- 
 chanan's Detection, than the verbose ribaldry of 
 Whilaker, or the elegant yet diffuse rhapsodies 
 of Burke and Bolingbroke, have to the correct and 
 classical precision of Junius or of Hume. 
 The Action Upon this subjcct I might appeal to the taste 
 Wilson, and discernment of every impartial reader j but 
 there is a decisive proof in reserve, that the Ac- 
 tion could be written by no one but Wilson. Bu- 
 
 tim, abridges or alters as from another author, whom lie dis- 
 dains to transcribe. The sentiments are also the reverse of 
 Buchanan's. In the epilogue or conclusion of the Action ; 
 " qui vero regcm, qui vera est in terris Dei imago, non violat 
 dico, sed tirucidat : — nonne ipsum tibi Deum de caelo, quan- 
 tum in ipso est detrahere voluisse videatur ?" and the margi- 
 nal expiauation is in the same strain ; " princeps dei imaginem 
 refert in terris. Qui igitur magestatem laedit, deum laedit. 
 Qui vero occidit, perinde facit ac si Deum ipsum de caelo 
 detrahere gygantea audacia aggrediatur, nee veniadignus nee 
 vita/' Actio, 98. Tliis is what Wilson terms ia his Rhetoric, 
 Veritatis itiperlatio atque trajectio, or, Mounting above the 
 truth; but that kings were the true image of gods upon 
 earth, was the last argument, which Buchanan, who had re- 
 cently written De jure Regni apud Scotos, would have 
 wrged against Mary. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 1259 
 
 chanan in his Detection naturally adopted the 
 historical style as peculiarly his own, nor would 
 the same subject, upon which he had no occasion 
 to write anew, be resumed and reiterated, by the 
 same author, in the dull rhetorical declamation of 
 the schools. But Wilson had formerly (in 1553) 
 published *' the Art of Rhetorick for the use of 
 " all such as are studious of eloquence," recom- 
 mending" and illustrating, both by precept and 
 example, the rhetorical rules of amplification, 
 circumstantial description, the comely delinea- 
 tion of character, personification, the introduc- 
 tion of apt tales, for the pulpit and the bar ; 
 and in 1570 he published, with a dedication to 
 Cecil, a translation of seven orations of Demos- 
 thenes, three Olynthiacs, and five Philippics, pro- 
 fessedly to warn, and incite the English against 
 Philip of Spain. His declaration from Cheke, 
 ** that none ever was more fit than this orator to 
 " make an EngHshman tell his tale praise- 
 " worthily, either in parliament, pulpit, or other- 
 " wise :" his motives for the translation, " he that 
 " loveth his country, and desireih its welfare, he 
 " that seeketh common quietness, he that would 
 " gladly prevent evil to come, he that desireth to 
 *' serve his country abroad, let him read De- 
 " mosthenes day and night, and seeing Demos- 
 " thenes is so good a schoolmaster for men to 
 " decypher the devil and his ministers, I would 
 
 S2 
 
£60 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 " wish that all men would become his scholars*';'* 
 afford a convincing proof that the Action against 
 Mary, to be written by Wilson, would be written 
 in professed imitation of Demosthenes's style. 
 When employed by Cecil to prepare Buchanan's 
 Detection for the press, he seized the opportunity 
 to illustrate his own rules in his Artof Rhetorick, 
 so frequently republished ; and transfused the 
 style and spirit of his recent translation of De- 
 mosthenes, into a malignant philippic against 
 
 " Strype's Annals of the Reformation, i. 579. ii. 33. War- 
 ton's History of English Poetry, iii. 334. Herbert, i. 537. 
 ii. 835 — 7 — 94G. The circumstances, or common places 
 which Wilson recommends in bis Art of Rhetorick ; " Who 
 did the deed ? what was done ? where was it done 1 what 
 help had he to it? wherefore he did it? how he did it? at 
 what time he did it ?'' are all adopted in his Actio contra 
 Mariam. The rules of amplification in his Art of Rhetorick, 
 " mounting above the truth, veritatis superlatio atque tra- 
 jectio : asking others and answering ourselves, rogatio ; en- 
 larging examples by copy," &c. are implicitly followed, and 
 he considers Buchanan's part as the narrative, and his own 
 as the confirmation, and conclusion of the cause. " Of the 
 conclusion, or lapping up the matter," he observes, " the 
 conclusion is an apt knitting up of that which we have said 
 before;" (Art of Rhetorick, 185) and Buchanan's quam 
 brevissime Jieri potest, rem perstringemus, (Detectio, 1) be 
 translates, " we will knit up the matter as briefly as pos- 
 sible;" and his own, tarn mutuis viribus nixa sunt " sae 
 mutually knit together;'' (Actio, 31) the very word em- 
 ployed in his Art of Rhetorick. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY, 26 1 
 
 the Queen of Scots. A dull and scurrilous de- 
 clamation of seventy pages was thus annexed, 
 in Italic print, to Buchanan's Latin Detection of 
 thirty pag-es, which he considered as a mere 
 exordium to open the cause. The discovery is 
 important, not only as it exempts Buchanan from 
 the imputation of having written a malignant 
 invective, equalled only by the apologies for 
 Mary, but because it ascertains the Latin trans- 
 lator of the three letters subjoined to the Action 
 in the same Italic print. The letters are trans- 
 lated from the Scottish copy left with Cecil, in 
 which Buchanan, whose vernacular style is the 
 best of the age, never could have misunderstood 
 the most familiar terms in his native language, as 
 the translator has done. But when the note in 
 Herbert's copy, in which the Action is assigned 
 to Wilson, has been confirmed both by external 
 and by intrinsic evidence, the authority of the , 
 subsequent annotation can admit of no dispute, 
 that the three letters annexed to the Action, in 
 the same Italic character, were translated into 
 Latin by the same person. 
 
 The second edition, in which the Detection The Detec 
 and Action were translated by an Englishman iisi"edi'a 
 into handsome Scotch, was. printed in imitation "^" 
 of the Scottish dialect", and published towards 
 the end of November. A memorandum from 
 
 " See Appendix, No. XX. 
 
262 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Morton's declaration concerninoc the discovery 
 
 IV. . 
 
 ^^v^ of the casket, the second contract written at Seton, 
 the whole process of Bothwell's trial, a short ab- 
 stract of the confessions of the murderers, the 
 Fi'ench sonnets with a prose translation, the 
 eight letters in Scotch, from the Scottish copy in 
 Cecil's hands, were annexed to the Action ; and 
 as these papers have disappeared, together with 
 the minutes of the seventh and of the thirteenth of 
 December, when the second contract and the 
 confessions were produced, it is obvious that they 
 were lost when transmitted to the press by Wil- 
 son. The first sentence of the French originals 
 was prefixed to each of the eight letters, for 
 ■which this substantial reason may be assigned : 
 as they had no dates to ascertain their arrange- 
 ment, the initial French sentence was prefixed 
 to the translations, in order to indicate the re- 
 spective originals to which they belonged. Next 
 year this last edition was reprinted at St. Andrews, 
 
 In Scotch in the Scottish orthography and languasfe, in- 
 
 andFresch. & I J & & » 
 
 stead of the old Enghsh orthography, and the 
 obsolete words, which the English translator 
 had employed as Scotch. A French translation 
 from the two first editions was also published, 
 according to the title page, a Edimhourg par 
 Thomas Vvaltem 1572; accordmg to the colo- 
 phon at I he end, Acheve cCimprimer a^Edirnbourg 
 ville capitate d'Escosse^ le 13 de Feurier 1572, 
 par moi Thomas Vvaltem. The place and the 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. g63 
 
 printer^s name are confessedly fictitious ; but on ^^v.^' 
 this Frencli edition, much of the controversy ^-^^"^"^^ 
 concerning the letters depends. As it contains 
 the additional translation of a " Summary of the 
 *' Treasons of the Queen of Scots against Eliza- 
 ** beth," and refers to the execution of Mathers 
 and Burney, who suffered upon the llth of Fe- 
 bruary ®*,our modern apologists infer, from its date 
 on the 13th, that it must have been printed at 
 London, under Cecil's inspection, not atRochelle. 
 As the letters annexed were translated partly, at 
 least, from the Latin, and the Latin again from 
 the Scotch, they conclude that these last were 
 the original forgeries which Buchanan translated 
 into Latin, in order to be converted by the 
 French translator, into those French originals 
 produced at Westminster, which Cecil after- 
 wards published in the French edition. Now, 
 that Buchanan, having already forged the 
 French sonnets, should be employed to translate 
 the letters into Latin, for another to forge again 
 into French, is sufficiently absurd. But the 
 place and printer's name being confessedly ficti- 
 tious, it is impossible to consider the intermediate 
 date as more authentic than the rest; especially 
 when inserted to promote the deception, by the 
 interval allowed from the supposed day upon 
 which the printing was finished, to the first ap- 
 
 ** Digges, 166. 
 
264 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 pearance of the book in France. The anonymous 
 V Innocence de la Rayne cCEscossCt when trans- 
 lated and republished in France, 1572, informs 
 us in a prefatory advertisement, of the defamatory 
 libels, " esparset publiez partout: nomement un, 
 " imprime du 17 Ftbruier 1572, envoye secrete- 
 " tnentf et a cachette expose par la France; — 
 " premierment compose par G. Buchanan Es- 
 " cossais, et depuis traduite en lang"ue Francoise 
 " par un Huguenet, Poitevin (advocat de voca- 
 " tion) Camus soydisant g-entilhomme, et un des 
 " plus remarques seditieux de France, et depuis 
 " augmente d'un abrege d'un livret public en 
 " Anyleterre le 13 October Tan 1570 portant 
 " pour titre en Francoise, le Recueil des con- 
 " spirations faites par la Reine d'Escosse'"^." 
 According to the interpretation imposed on this 
 passage, the edition, printed in London, was 
 secretly exported, in order to be privately sold 
 in France; and Camus, an advocate of Poiteau, 
 has been arbitrarily transformed into a French 
 refugee, who assisted personally at the con- 
 ferences in England^'. But " envoye secretement 
 " et a cachette expose, par la France^ signifies, 
 not that the book was secretly exported, or sent 
 to France, but like espars et public partout, that 
 it was secretly dispersed or sent, and exposed 
 
 " Jebb, ii. 425. 
 
 ♦^ Goodall, i. 38. Tytler, i. 209. Whitaker, i. 531—34. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 9,65 
 
 clandestinely to sale, throurjh France^ and the chap. 
 anonymous author of L' Innocence de la Heine, 
 who mentions the date, and the translator's name, 
 but rejects the names of the printer, and of the 
 place, as fictitious, never would have concealed 
 the fact, that it was printed in England, like the 
 Summary of Treasons, which he must have known, 
 had Camus been a refugee. Blackwood, then a 
 counsellor and professor at Poitiers, must have 
 known m hether it was printed at Rochelle, or at 
 IJondon, or whether it was written by an ad- 
 vocate, a refugee from Poiteau. In his Apology 
 for Kings, 1580, he ascribed the translation itself 
 to Buchanan, but in his Marfi/re de 31arie, 1587, 
 " II a depuis adjouste k ceste declamation un 
 *' petit libelle de pretendu manage du Due de 
 " Norfolk, et de la facon de son proces, et le tout 
 " envoye aux freres a la Rochelle, lesquelsvoy ants 
 " qu'il pouvoit servir a la cause, I'ont traduit en 
 " Francois et iceluy fut imprime a Edimbourg, 
 ** c'est a dire a la Rochelle, par Thomas Walteni 
 " nom aposte et faict a plaisir*'*^." That it was 
 translated by Buchanan is thus expressly retract- 
 ed ; but though Blackwood was ignorant of the 
 translator's name, his information is otherwise ex- 
 
 " Blackwood's assertion in his Apologia pro Regibtis, 
 p. 28, " sed non fuit ea vis putidae illius oiationis quaui ex 
 Latino Gailicam reddidisti," is mere declamation ; and his 
 silence concerning Camus, disproves the imputation in the 
 L' Innocence de Maries which he must have seen. 
 
266 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, plicit, that it was printed at Rochelle, and tlie 
 v-^^/*"^ book itself contains internal evidence that it was 
 transiaUon printed in France. The date, place, and prin- 
 CheUe? ter's name would have been onntted, as in the 
 two first editions ; Edinburgh, at least, of which 
 Mary's friends were then in possession, would 
 not have t)een inserted, had it been printed in 
 London ; and Edimbourg ville capitale d'EcossCy 
 was an intimation not obvious to an English prin- 
 ter, though necessary abroad, where the name 
 wa> little known, or converted into Vldehoury. 
 The recent computation of the year, from the 
 first of January, which pievailed only in France, 
 is observed throughout ; whereas an English prin- 
 ter, in an edition assigned to Scotland, would 
 have dated the title, the colophon, and the exe- 
 cution of Mathers and Burney, Fevrier, 1571, 
 according to the old supputation from the 25th 
 of March, to which the whole island adhered at 
 the time*^^. No French work had been printed 
 
 *' This alone is decisive. The French began the year at 
 Easter, tili 1563, when the Chancellor L'Hospital altered it 
 to the 1st of January, by an edict, registered by the parlia- 
 ment of Paris, io 1564 ; and the alteration wa:> adopted in 
 the Gregorian Calendar in 1584. Wraxall's Hist. iii. 347. 
 The year began in Britain on the 25lh of March, till al:ered 
 in Scotland in 1599, and in England in 1751, when the Gre- 
 gorian Calendar was first introduced. The civil year was 
 retained, not only in the state papers but in the letters of the 
 age, which, if written between the 1st of January and the 25th 
 of March, are invariably dated, according to our present sup- 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. QS? 
 
 in England, the year books, Littleton and others chap. 
 in the Norman law langnag-e excepted^" ; but 
 y«altem, a corrruption of Walton, Bothwell, 
 Bothint't^are, Cart;rood, Lai;t;son, yi;entt;t;orth, 
 Fviltshire, are expedients to supply the want of W 
 in the French founts ; and whoever examines the 
 French edition, must be satisfied from the type, 
 from the general correctness of the language, 
 and from the peculiar corruption of proper 
 names, that it required not only a French 
 
 putation of time, in the preceding year, witbout the more re- 
 cent discrimination, 1571-2. See Digges, Forbes, Haynes^ 
 Murdin, &c. &c. Cecil's Letter, mentioning the execution of 
 Mathers and Burney, is dated February 11th, 1571. In the 
 French Detection, " au commencement de ceste annee 1572 
 estoit un Anglois, nomme Mather, lequel fut pendu avec nn 
 autre nomrae Barne qui avoit demeure quelque terns en 
 France." Afterwards, " le Caresme dernier, 1571," whicli 
 according to the English computation was in Lent 1570. 
 Norfolk's Attainder is dated, "le 16 du moisde Janvier der- 
 nier, 1572;" and the Colophon, " Acheue d'impriraer le 13 
 de Feurier 1572." Mathers and Burney are mentioned, not 
 as executed two days before, (Monday 11th,) but some time 
 about the beginning of the year in which the book was 
 printed. In the additions made to the Detection, a French 
 printer assigning a false date to the edition, would adhere to 
 his own computation of the year, without adverting to the 
 fact, that a different computation was observed in Scotland. 
 But an English printer would not have deserted his own, 
 to adopt the French supputation of time, in a book assigned 
 to the Scottish press. 
 
 '** Herbert's Typographical Antiquities passim. 
 
 2 
 
£68 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 translator but a French press". The translator, 
 in his preface, informs the reader that nothing in 
 antiquity equalled what had lately happened in 
 Scotland, but there were two reasons to render 
 it the less extraordinary : " L'unesi tu reg-ardes la 
 
 ■" It is supposed, from the type, that the two first editions 
 of the Detection were printed by John Day. But the French 
 edition is in a different, and to all appearance, in a French 
 type. De Furoribus Gallicis, Le Reveil Matin, and Junius 
 Brutus, have been quoted as books of which the title pages 
 profess to be printed at Edinburgh, though they were pub- 
 lished at London by the English Court, Goodall, i. 38. 
 But these were Huguenot productions on the troubles in 
 Franco, and the assertion that they were printed in London, 
 remains still to be proved. The first, De Furoribus Galli- 
 cis, a scurrilous pamphlet, according to Goodall, against the 
 massacre of Paris, was printed in octavo, 1573, professedly 
 at London, and very probably from the quarto edition dated 
 at Edinburgh, 1573, but printed abroad. Herbert, pp. 972, 
 1496. The second is another pamphlet against the massa- 
 cre, dedicated, in the Latin edition, to the States of Poland ; 
 with an epistle from Rheimes to the Duke of Guise, 1573, a 
 sufficient proof that it was not printed at London. The third, 
 Vindicice Contra Tyrannos, Stephano Junio Brulo auctore, 
 was undoubtedly written and printed abroad. The preface is 
 dated from Soleure ; and after a controversy to discover the 
 real author, greater than that concerning the English Junius, 
 this celebrated book appears to have been written by Hubert 
 Languet, and printed in 1579, at Lausanne. Bayle, Diet, and 
 Dissert, annexed. Herbert, p. 1497 — 1500. De Bure Bibl. 
 Instr. 1356. It was then the practice to date prohibited or 
 dangerous books from Edinburgh; but that these books were 
 not printed in London is evident, because tbey coataia no 
 allusion whatsoever to English affairB. 
 3 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. g69 
 
 ** maison dont ceste Royne est issue, au moins du ^l[^^- 
 " coste maternel, duquel n'y la cruaute, n'y Tira- 
 " pudicity n*ont jamais ete gueres esloingn^es. 
 " Et pour I'autre Teducation, et nourriture, qui 
 " souvent s'eschange au naturel, avec le bon con- 
 " ceil d'aucuns priucipaux de ses parens, et sur 
 ** tout de celui, qui est la source et origine de 
 " toutes les guerres, cruautez, et meurtres inhu- 
 '* mains ad Venus depuis 15 ou 16ans, en la plus- 
 " part de 1' Europe, et duquel je ne veux ici ex- 
 " primer le nom, tant pour etre assez cogneu, 
 " voire a tous par ses sinistres effects, que pour 
 " desire que j*auroye que quelqu'un (puis qu'il 
 " espere de son imortalite, et qu'il s'en tient 
 " honore) u' I'engrave, comme un second Eros- 
 " trateen son docte escrit/* His allusion to the 
 maternal descent and education of the queen, 
 from which she had inherited, or acquired 
 the cruelty and lust of the house of Guise, indi- 
 cates sufficiently that the translator was a Hugue- 
 not residing in France, who had been exasperat- 
 ed at her relations from the wars and persecutions 
 that prevailed through Europe, and above all at 
 the Cardinal of Lorrain, her maternal uncle, 
 whom he is afraid and refuses to name, during the 
 pacification that preceded the massacre of Paris. 
 The French edition was printed therefore by the 
 Huguenots, at Rochelle^^ in the interval be- 
 
 ■' Tytler asks how a libel against Norfolk, a staunch Pro- 
 testant, could serve the cause of the Hugueoots at Rocbelie, 
 
*t7Q DISSERTATION ON 
 
 tween its pretendtjd date aud the massacre, which 
 took pla<ce on the 24tb of August that same year. 
 Theietters Tiie trauslatof proceeds to uiform the reader, 
 from uie ** Au reste les epitres mises sur ja fitj, avoient ete 
 Scot"*^" " es»crites par la lioyne, partieen Francois, jiartie 
 " en lEscos.sois, et depuis traduictes entierement 
 ** en Latin, mais u'ayent coa<ioissance de la langue 
 '* fiscossoise, j'ay mieox aim^ exprimer tout ce 
 " que j'ay trouve eo Latin, que me monstrant 
 *' trop scrupuleuK au chang^ement d'une syllabe, 
 " te frustre de I'eccJaircissement que tu y auras 
 " jXMjr cog-noistre a qui la faut^ de I'execrable 
 *• meuitre, et autres enormit^s y contenues, doi- 
 ** vent etre imputees." That they were written 
 partly in French, partly in Scotch, appUes to the 
 letters and sonnets, which the translator terms 
 " autres letters en rime Francoise, quelle lui ec- 
 " crivit avant que de I'epousei ;" and imphes that 
 the epitres mms sur la Jin, were written partly 
 (the sonnets) in French, partly (the letters) in 
 Scotdi ; not as erroneously supposed, that the 
 queen wrote the initial sentence of each letter in 
 French and the rest in Scotch^^. The translator, 
 
 i.2L0. Elizabeth was coosidered as their protector by the 
 Hugueuots, to wiiOfii Mary's desiga to dethrone her was 
 odious of coujt* ; atid the Souiutiiry of Mary's Treasons 
 was translated and added to the Detection, to prove the 
 danger which Elizabetb, the head of the Protestants, incurred 
 froui the Papists. Jebb, i. 4&8 -73. 420. 
 '' Kobertsou, ii. S69. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. £71 
 
 who supposed that the letters were written ori- 
 ginally itt Scotch, necessarily mistook the initial 
 French sentences, for a partial translation, to 
 which he annexed his own ; and added, that they 
 were since translated entirely into Latin, an ex- 
 pression not relative to the whole of the letters, 
 any more than to the sonnets or letters in rhyme. 
 That he had no knowledge of the Scottish lan- 
 guage, implies that he was ignorant, not of 
 English, which he plainly understood^*, but of 
 the Scottish dialect, which induced him to trans- 
 late all that he found in Latin, rather than appear 
 too scrupulous to the alteration of syllables, to 
 disappoint the reader of the information which 
 he might thence derive. If the translation had 
 been executed in England, during the conference, 
 the supposed Camus, who understood English, 
 had no occasion for a Latin translation, when the 
 Scottish commissioners were present to explain 
 such words as it was difficult to comprehend. 
 Had the French edition been even printed at 
 London, still the translator would have added a 
 French version of the letters, the originals of 
 which were in Scotland, beyond his reach. But 
 , the fact is now indisputable, that the French edi- 
 tion was printed at Rochelle : and when the pre- 
 face itself announces, that the letters were trans- 
 lated from the Scotch, through the medium of 
 the Latin, nothing can be more impertinent than 
 
 '* Goodall, i. 107. 
 
272 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^fv ^' ^ parade of argument to prove that these letters 
 ^^'^'"^ are not the French originals, but are translations 
 
 from the Scotch. 
 aJgumlntT ^' Thesc preliminary observations are neces'- 
 sary, first, to refute tlie assertion that the letters 
 were repeatedly forged, with subscriptions, dates, 
 directions, in different languages, and in greater 
 numbers than were afterwards produced : se- 
 condly, to ascertain with what probabihty the 
 forgery has been ascribed to so many persons, 
 and what credit is due to the supposed confession 
 of Lethington : and thirdly, to determine the real 
 translator of the letters into Latin, and the time 
 and place at which the French translation was 
 printed abroad. We are now prepared to pro- 
 ceed to a critical and minute examination of the 
 lettevs themselves. The chief objection has al- 
 ready been stated ; that the French is translated 
 from ihe Scottish originals, through the medium 
 of the Latin ; an objection to which this plain 
 and direct answer is returned : That the initial 
 French sentences prefixed to the Scotch, and 
 adopted in the French version of the letters, so 
 far from being translated from the Latin, are a 
 part of the originals, from which the Scotch is a 
 literal translation ; and that the letters through- 
 out, are replete with French idioms, words, and 
 phrases, such as could result oidy from a literal 
 version, professedly translated, word for wordy 
 from the original French. It is not sufficient to 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 273 
 
 maintain in reply, that frequent Gallicisms, and 
 French words were introduced into Scotch, from 
 the former intercourse between the two nations. 
 If a few French terms were necessarily ndopted 
 with the arts and articles imported from France, 
 the lang-uage remained uninfected with French 
 idioms, and whoever examines the state papers 
 or compositions of this period, will be satisfied 
 that few or no Gallicisms had found their way 
 into style'\ But the real point in dispute is 
 this ; whether the initial French sentences are 
 translations from the Latin, or are a part of the 
 originals from which the Scotch is translated ; 
 and vVhether the letters contain those peculiar 
 idioms which are unavoidable in a literal transla- 
 
 "^ The education of a few uobleiueii, or the service of 
 some Stotch in France, or of French troops in Scotland, 
 could neither alter, nor add to, the language, any more than 
 the same causes could do at present. The names of fruits, 
 manufactures, and terms of art, &c. were imported with the 
 articles; but Tytler, (ii. 420.) gives a list of three-score 
 Scotch words, among which we discover horologe, bennison, 
 malison from malheur, ambri/ {dUuonry) from armoire, napery 
 from nappe, maltreat, vest, &c. as if these originally were not 
 English words. The very watch-word of Edinburgh is de- 
 rived from the French, (id. i. 222.) as if gard alow were not 
 plain Scotch ; or, as if the chambermaids had corrupted 
 into gare de Veau, the French exclamation gave I'eau, which 
 they acquired, no doubt, from the French troops. But 
 whoever examines Ruddimau's Glossary to Gawin Douglas's 
 Virgil, will be satisfied how few French words have been 
 introduced into Scotch. 
 
 VOL. T. T 
 
274 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, tion of the same forms of expression used in 
 ^•^*v*^ French. The proof will indeed be complete, if 
 it shall appear that the letters, when collated 
 with others, abound not only with Frenrh idioms, 
 words, and phrases, but with those peculiar ex- 
 pressions which Mary employed. 
 Firstietter. The letters are inserted in the Appendix^^, from 
 the Scottish translation, with an additional Enghsh 
 version of the first letter, to which, as " duly 
 " translated into English," the minutes of the 
 9th of December a})parently allude. This first, 
 or long letter from Glasgow, is indorsed by Cecil ; 
 and Elizabeth's initials, E. R. enclosed in tri- 
 angles, indicate that it was inspected by the queen, 
 for whose use perhaps it had been translated or 
 transcribed. The Scottish version is professedly 
 word for word from the French : the English 
 translation adheres more frequently to the sense 
 than to the idiom ; yet on some occasions it pre- 
 serves the idiom, where the other substitutes some 
 equivalent phrase. The collation of both with 
 the initial sentence will determine whether the 
 French was translated from the Latin, or was 
 on the contrary translated into Scotch and En- 
 glish, 
 initial sen- ^he initial sentence of the first letter is, 
 orShiai*^^ " Estant party du lieu ou j'avois laiss6 mon coeur, 
 trlnsut " il se peult aysement juger quelle estoit ma con- 
 
 tions. 
 
 « See Appendix, No. XXI. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLE^. 275 
 
 ** tenance, veu ce qui penlt un corps sans coeiir, chap. 
 
 " qui k este cause quejusques k la disnee je u'ay v-*'v>»i' 
 
 " pas tenu grand propos, anssi personne ne s'est 
 
 *' voulu advancer, jngeant bien qu'il n'y faisoit 
 
 " bon," &c. The Scotch translation is, " Beyng- 
 
 *' departit from the place qhaire I left my hart, 
 
 " it is easie to be judgit quhat was my counte- 
 
 " naunce, seing- that I was even as mickle as 
 
 *' ane body without ane hart, quhilke was the 
 
 " occasioun that quhile dinner time, 1 held pur- 
 
 " pois to na body, nor yit durst any present tham- 
 
 *' selfls unto me, judging that it was not gude so 
 
 " to do/' The Latin is, " Posteaquara ab eo loco 
 
 " discessi ubi reliquerani cor meum, facilis est 
 
 " conjectura qui mens fuerat vultus, cum plane 
 
 " perinde essem atque corpus sine corde. Ea fuit 
 
 " causa cur toto prandii tempore neque contulerim 
 
 *' sermonem cum quoquam, neque quisquam se 
 
 " offerre mihi sit ausus : ut qui judicarent id non 
 
 *' esse ex usu." And the English version is, 
 
 " Being gone from the place where I had left 
 
 " my heart, it may be easily judged what ray 
 
 " countenance was, considering what the body 
 
 " may without heart, which was cause, that till 
 
 " dinner, I had used little talk, neither would 
 
 " any body adventure himself thereunto, thinking 
 
 *' that it was not good so to do." 
 
 Here I might safely appeal to the taste and 
 judgment of every impartial reader, to determine, 
 without a comment, which is the original, and 
 
 t2 
 
276 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 which the translations. The very first phrase, 
 estant partie du lieu, demonstrates that it was not 
 derived from the Latin, posteaquam ah eo loco 
 cUscessi ; but constitutes the original of which the 
 Scotch andEng-lish," being departed," or," gone," 
 (estant partie) *' from the place," (du lieu) instead 
 of, having left the place, are successive transla- 
 tions. The whole clause estant partie du lieu 
 oufavois laisse mon cwur, is easj', tender and 
 unaffected in French ; but " being departed," or 
 " gone, from the place where I had left my 
 " heart,'^ is almost as harsh, constrained, and 
 unnatural, in Scotch and English, as ubi relique- 
 ram cor meum appears in Latin. The slight 
 variation of the English, " where I had (ou 
 ^^favois) left my heart," proves that it was not 
 transcribed from the Scotch, but was translated 
 literally from the original French. The next 
 clause, ilsepeut aisement Juger (facilis est conjee- 
 turaj could not possibly be suggested by the 
 Latin, but is almost literally translated in the 
 Scotch; " It is easy to be judgit quhat was my 
 " countenance," and more literally still in the 
 English ; *' It may be easily fpeut aisement) ^udg- 
 " ed what my countenance was." The context 
 is indisputably a French idiom ; quelle estoit ma 
 conte7tance, her personal appearance, deportment, 
 manner ; and the phrase itself, *' what was my 
 ♦' countenance," qui meus fuerat vultus, so sig- 
 nificant in French, and absurd in Latin, is 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 277 
 
 obscure, and hardly intelligible in English and chap. 
 Scotch. The third clause veu ce qui pent vn ^-'"v^^ 
 corps sans cceur, is neither derived from the 
 Latin, cum plane pcrinde essem atque corpus sine 
 corde, nor is it translated into Scotch, " seeing 
 '* that 1 was even as mickle as ane body without 
 *' ane heart." Whitaker creates an intermediate 
 Latin copy, in which the French editor read and 
 translated quantum potuit (as meikle as) into 
 veu ce que peu€^ ; but the whole clause consists 
 of original French idioms, which the English, 
 " considering what the body may without heart," 
 has, by a slight transposition, translated faithfully 
 as to the words, but without preserving the sense. 
 Having left the place where she left her heart, 
 the amorous Mary pursues the conceit. It may 
 be easily judged what my countenance, (personal 
 appearance or deportment) was, veu ce, seeing, 
 considering this, qui pent un corps sans cceur^ 
 what can the body (do) without the heart ; 
 phrases for which the supposititious Latin, /?enw<ie 
 essem, quantum potuit could suggest no prototype, 
 nor sense whatsoever. The last phrase also, un 
 corps sans cceur, is peculiai ly French ; and Ty tier, ' 
 
 who remarks that the same elegance occurs in 
 corpus sine corde, forgets that the latter is not 
 even a Latin idiom^^ but an obvious translation 
 
 " Whitaker, ii. 4. 
 "" Tytler, i. 216. 
 
278 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, in which the alliteration is fortuitousW preserved, 
 ^ as the words in each langiiag-e, corpus sine corde, 
 corps sans C(£ur, are originally the same. Mettre 
 corps et coeur, is a French proverb, to be rendered 
 only by a similar alliteration, with heart and 
 hand; and the same conceit recurs in one of 
 Mary's letters to Elizabeth, the very next year. 
 **.Ie vons envoye man cffur en bague et je vons 
 " ay apporte \e vraij et corp* ensemble"';" I send 
 you my heart in a ring-, and have brought you 
 the real one together with the body. To remove 
 ail doubts, however, which is the original, a son- 
 net in Queen Mary's hand-writing, lately discover- 
 ed in the State Paper Office, contains a strong and 
 unexpected confirmation of the letters. In the 
 beginning of the sonnet, which was certainly 
 written during her confinement in England, and 
 apparently towards the close of her long captivity, 
 the same conceit which she had formerly em- 
 ployed in her letter to Bothwell, qui peult un 
 corps sans cceur, very naturally recurs to her 
 mind. 
 
 Que suis ie helas ! et de quoy sert ma viel 
 Je ne suis fors q'un corps prive de ceeur. 
 
 That an alliterative conceit peculiar to the 
 French tongue, and afterwards so familiar to 
 Mary, but of which no instance is to be found in 
 
 ■' Anderson, iv. Part i. p. 49. 
 
 3 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 279 
 
 any preceding letter, coakl be fortuitously anti- chap. 
 cipated by the supposed forgers of the letters to 
 Bothwell, in a languag-e in which it is not even 
 significant, is a proposition too absurd to be 
 refuted or maintained by argument. The repeti- 
 tion, therefore, of the same conceit, at the distance 
 of many years, in a genuine sonnet in the queen's 
 hand-writing, is one of the strongest confirmations 
 that the letters could receive. 
 
 In the succeeding clause, qui a ete cause, is 
 not translated from eafuit causa, SLudjusque a la 
 disnee is the reverse of tofo prandii tempore. 
 Whitaker has aoain recourse to an intermediate, 
 or corrected copy of the Latin, in which the 
 French translator read usque ad prandium ; but 
 of such conjectures there is no end. Quhile still 
 signifies until ; and the obvious meaning of the 
 Scotch, " qiihilk was the cause that quhile din- 
 " ner time^," is confirmed by the English, " which 
 " was cause," quil d ete cause, *' that till dinner,'* 
 que jusque a la diner ; each a literal translation 
 of the French. The sequel, je nay pas tenii 
 grand propoSf is indisputably a French idiom, 
 
 «» Whitaker, ii. 5—7. Robertson, ii. 363. Whitaker dis- 
 tinguishing between quhill and quhile, appeals to Buchanan's 
 Detection, where the word invariably signifies while, because 
 the translator was an Englishman. In the glossary annexed 
 to his copy of Knox, he would have found, that while, in 
 Scotch, signifies untill, the only acceptation in which it is 
 found in the Letters and Confessions. 
 
280 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, not tleiived from the Latin, jieque contuJerim 
 ^^nr^-" sernwneni cum quoquam, but is translated, as lite- 
 rally, perhaps, into Scotch and English, as the 
 languaire would admit. We are told, indeed, 
 that the same idiom occurs repeatedly in one of 
 Randolph's letters : " After these purposes the 
 " council being dissolved : Of this purpose we 
 " had long talk : This purpose fell in upon the 
 " report of Levingstone : Tn long purpose of this 
 " matter:" And in Murray's answer to the in- 
 tended protestation ; " I haif already declairit 
 " the effect of the hail purposes spoken in my 
 " audience; and in caiseony man will affirm that 
 " I was present quhen ony purposes were halden 
 " at Craigmillar in my audience, or that ony 
 *' purpose was halden anent the subscribing of 
 " ony band by me®'." In these instances, if we 
 admit that the word is employed in a French 
 acceptation, which is at least doubtful, still the 
 English idiom is preserved in the phrase. But 
 the real point in dispute is this; whether the 
 French is translated from the Latin, or the Scotch 
 from the French. ** Quhile dinner time, / held 
 " purpois to na hudy^^ is an obvious translation 
 oijenaypas tenu grand propos^ with the omission 
 or addition of a few words, as a literal version, 
 (till dinner I held no great purpose,) was not 
 even intelligible. The English, " I had (jen'ay) 
 
 «' Whitaker, ii. 408. Keith, 195. Goodall, ii. 321. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 281 
 
 '^ used little talkj" (pas tenu grand propos) is a chap. 
 literal translation, not like the Latin, (contulerim ^-^-v^ 
 sernionem cum quoquam) from the Scottish ver- 
 sion, but from the French original, of which it 
 preserves the construction and the sense. And 
 the same phrase occurs in Mary's sonnet on the 
 death of her husband, Francis II. 
 
 Si je suis en repos, 
 Someillant sur ma couche, 
 J' oui qu'il me tient projjos. 
 
 In the last clause, Avssi ijersonne ne s'ent voulii 
 advancer, is neither translated from the Latin, 
 *' neque quisquam se offer re mihi sit ausus ;" nor 
 expressed correctly in the Scotch, " nor yet durst 
 " ony present themselfis unto me ;" but is more 
 faithfully rendered in the English version ; " nei- 
 *' ther would any body adventure himself there- 
 " unto," to converse with her on the road to 
 dinner. The remamder^ J ugeant Men quil rty 
 faisoit bon, of which the Scotch and English, 
 "judging, (thinking) that it was not good so to 
 ** do," are imperfect versions, is strictly idioma- 
 tical ; and is not translated from the Latin, " ut 
 " qui judicarent id non esse ex usu," that it was 
 not ad siiam ulilitatem, for their advantage or 
 interest. The French idiom implies that it was 
 not favourable, the Latin (ex usu) that it was not 
 profitable or useful to address the queen ; but on 
 this subject it is sufficient to appeal to every 
 
282 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, candid reader, whether jugeant Men quil 7iy 
 v-^-v**-^ faisoit bon, be translated from the Latin, " ut 
 " qui judicarent id non esse ex usu,'^ or whether 
 the Scotch "judging that it was not so good to 
 *' do," is not oVniously derived from the French 
 original. 
 
 To the same impartial decision, the question 
 may be referred, whether, in the French sentence 
 which we have just examined, " there is not a spirit, 
 " ease, and elegance to denote the original," for 
 which it is in vain to search in the three transla- 
 tions. On collating the whole together, estant 
 partiedu UeUy being departed, (or gone) from the 
 place, posteaquam ab eo loco discessi ; oufavois 
 laisse mon cceur, quhaire I (had) left my hart, ubi 
 reliqueram cor meum; il se pent aisementjuger 
 quelle etoit ma contenancey it is easy to be jugit, 
 (may be easily judged) what was my countenance, 
 facilis est conjectura qui meus fuerat vultus ; veu 
 ce qui pent un corj)s sans cceur, seeing that I was 
 even as mickle as ane body without ane hart 
 (considering what the body may without heart), 
 cum plane perinde essem atque corpus sine corde; 
 qui d ete cause quijusques d la dinee, quhilk was 
 the occasion, (which was cause), that quhile din- 
 ner time (till dinner), ea fuit causa cur toto 
 piandii tempore; je nai pas tenu grand propos, 
 1 held purpose to na body, (had used little talk), 
 
 " Robertson, ii. 363. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 28S 
 
 neque contulerim sermonein cum qiioquam ; chap. 
 
 IV. 
 
 aussi per Sonne ne s*est voidu advancer, nor yet 
 durst ony (neither would any body), present 
 themselfis unto me (adventure himself thereunto), 
 neque quisquam se offerre mihi sit ausus ;jii(/eant 
 bienquil nefaisoit boti, judging (thinking), that 
 it was not good so to do, ut qui judicarent id 
 non esse ex usu; whoever can believe that the 
 French is a version derived from the Latin, or 
 hesitate, on the evidence of these idiomatical 
 johrases, to pronounce it the common original, 
 from which the rest are translated, must be 
 equally ignorant both of Latin and of French. 
 
 Not a sinofle phrase in the French sentence pre- Sequel to 
 
 ' , . . 1 X • 1 *^® letter. 
 
 fixed to the Scotch, is derived from the Latin ; but 
 the very first step taken by the French editor, 
 betrays his servile reliance upon that translation. 
 The second sentence in Scotch is; " Fower myle 
 " ere I came to the towne, ane gentleman of the 
 *' Earle of Lennox came and made his commen- 
 " dations unto me, and excusit hym that he came 
 " not to meete me ;" in the English translation, 
 *' Four miles from thence, a gentleman of the 
 *' Earl of Lennox came and made his commenda- 
 " tions and excuses unto me, that he came not to 
 " meet me ;" in Latin, " Ad quatuor passuum 
 " millia antequam ad oppidum accessissem, homo 
 " honesto loco natus, a Comite Leveniae ad me 
 "■ venit, atque ejus nomine salntavit: Excusavit 
 " comitem quod non ipse obviam processisset;" 
 
284 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, in French, *' Estant encor a qnatre mille pas de la 
 ^-^^r^-^' " vilie, vint a moi un gentiliiomme envoye par 
 *' la Compte Lenos, qu'il me salua en son nomme, 
 " et I'excusa de ce qn'il ne ra'estoit venu au 
 *' devant." Here the transhitor adopts implicitly 
 the Roman idiom, quatuor mitlia passuum j ejus 
 nomine salutavit ; obviam processiaset ; and homo 
 honesto loco natus, is rig-htly translated un genlil- 
 homnie, the only explanation of which it was sus- 
 ceptible. Beyond the initial sentence our modern 
 apologists trace minutely, with the most prepos- 
 terous diligence, the translator's servile adherence 
 to the Latin ; aijd very logically conclude that 
 the letters must be forged, because a professed 
 translation is not the originaP^ The French 
 preface assures them in vain, that the letters were 
 translated through the Latin into French. 
 " How is it possible,'' they exclaim, " to fix men 
 " who, after having, for two hundred years, 
 " quoted and insisted on these letters as originals, 
 " have now recourse to other letters which they 
 " acknowlede to be lost^* ?" as if a single author 
 
 " " If it can be shewn, tliat instead of the French copies 
 being the originals, the Scotch copies are the true originals, 
 and that the French are apparently translations from Bucha- 
 nan's Latin, the conclusion phiinly follows, that these French 
 pretended originals, said to be written by Queen Mary, are 
 spurious. This Mr. Goodall has done." Tytler, i. 184. 
 Whitaker, ii. II. 
 
 '^Tjtler, i. 192. In another place, " Hume amd Robert- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 285 
 
 had ever maintained, in opposition to the trans- ^^y^' 
 lator*s preface, that the French version contained ^"^v"^ 
 the orio^inals. But the proper test of the letters, ^^sfrequent 
 
 o r 1 ' Gallicisms 
 
 the test of 
 
 son have been obliged fairly to acknovvledae, that the ^^^ authen- 
 
 ticity. 
 French letters now extant, are palpable translations from Bu- 
 chanan's Latin and Scotch copies, a concession the more re- 
 markable, as it was never made before, by any individual on 
 that side the question ; the present French copy being always 
 held to be the original, from the year 157*2, until the day that 
 Mr. Goodall published his Detection of this pretended ori- 
 ginal." Id. 188. Whether the concession was ever made, 
 is no part of the question, for the fact was never asserted, nor 
 dreamt of, that the French Detection contained the originals. 
 Such a mistake could only have arisen from Jebb's collection, 
 in which the French Detection is inserted without the preface ; 
 but no such mistake was committed by Anderson, nor by a 
 single writer from Buchanan down to Robertson and Hume. 
 Tytler (i. 232.) quotes a passage from Knox : •' In this ca- 
 binet had Bothvvell kept the letters of privacy he had from the 
 queen. These letters were after printed : they were in 
 French, with some sonnets of her own making.'' 410. Tytler, 
 who mistook Blackwood for a Frenchman, (i. 208-11.) and 
 Calderwood for a contemporary of Mary's, (ii. 12.) was igno- 
 rant that the fifth book of Knox's History, from which the 
 extract is taken, was not written by Knox himself, but was 
 compiled from his papers by David Buchanan, in 1G43 ; and 
 the passage does not signify that the letters were afterwards 
 printed in French, but that they, the originals, were in French 
 when taken. David Buchanan had undoubtedly seen the 
 Scotch and Latin Detection, (which, as it was printed in 
 England, Blackwood appears in his Apologia p7'o Regibus not 
 to have seen) but he certainly never saw the French Detec- 
 tion, which, as it was printed abroad, was so scarce in Bri- 
 tain, that Ruddiman was unable to procure a copy when he 
 
286 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, where the initial sentence terminates, is the pre- 
 
 petual recurrence of those Gallicisms in the Scotch, 
 which are unavoidable in a literal translation 
 from the French. To recite them at length were 
 to anticipate half the letters, which the reader 
 will be better pleased to peruse entire, and better 
 enabled, than from detached passages, to deter- 
 mine in what language they were originally 
 written. Such minute and verbal illustrations 
 will be more intelligible in short notes subjoined 
 to the letters, than inserted as a previous com- 
 ment in the text ; and as every purpose of confu- 
 tation or of proof may by these means be equally 
 served, I shall proceed to more general observa- 
 tions on the letters themselves. 
 Confirmed ^' The long letter from Glasgow has been 
 queen's Confirmed by the subsequent discovery of some 
 Beton ° secret circmstances to which it alludes. The 
 information given by Plighgate and Walker has 
 been partly explained. The latter had informed 
 the queen at Stirling, that her husband, assisted 
 by some of the nobility, intended to seize and 
 crown the young prince, and to assume the 
 government in his son's name ; " with sundrie 
 " utheris attemptis and purposis tending to this 
 " fyne ; and being pressed he nominate Hiegate 
 *' for his chief author, who had said that if he 
 
 published his edition of Buchanan. Ruddinian's Buchanan, 
 Pref. 19. 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 287 
 
 '* had the saraeti moyeii and credit with the qiiein ^^^^p- 
 " he would not omit to make her previe to sic 
 " purposes and biuitis as passis in the countries 
 " and said further, that the king could not content 
 " nor bear with su'n of the nobiliiie attending^ in 
 " our court, but other he or thay behuvit to leave 
 " the samen." Hig-hg-ate, his author, when sent 
 for and examined by the privy council, apparent- 
 ly on the queen's return with her son from Stir- 
 ling, denied the whole, but acknowledged that 
 he had heard from Caldwell, Lord Eglington's 
 servant, a report, " That the king suld be put in 
 " ward, quhilk was schawen by Hiegate to the 
 " Laird of Minto, quha again declairit it to the 
 " Erie of Lennox, and by him the king was maid 
 " participant thairoff, by quhas desire and com- 
 " mandement, Hiegate again, as he allegit, spake 
 " Caldwell ;" but Caldwell, when examined, de- 
 nied the whole. These circumstances, which 
 are only to be discovered in Mary's letter to Arch- 
 bishop Beton ^\ the day before her departure 
 for Glasgow, explain the contents of her long 
 letter to Bothwell, which were unknown to his- 
 torians till the former letter had been published 
 by Keith. The letter to Beton concludes with 
 
 « Supra. Keith, Pref. 8. The letter is in Scotch, in the 
 queen's hand ; but Whitaker mistakes the ori,q;inal for a 
 translation, and Madam Keralio's trroneous translation for 
 the original, which, in different passages, she did not even un- 
 derstand. Whitaker, ii, 45. Note, 
 
288 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, severe complaints of her husband's busy inquisi' 
 -•'^^r*^ iion into her actions, and with bitter reflections 
 on his father's inclination to disturb her govern- 
 ment; and her letter to Bothwell, commences 
 with an apolog-y from Lennox, who was afraid to 
 meet her, " because of the rude words she spake 
 " to Cuningham," and his desire to *' come to the 
 " inquisition of the matter she suspected liim of;" 
 which last is perversely applied to the murder of 
 Rizio, in order to deduce a proof of forgery from 
 a preposterous allusion to that remote event ^^ 
 But the passage refers, and in the queen's own 
 words, to the inquisition of Highgate, in which 
 Lennox was involved, and the rude words spoken 
 to Cunningham relate to a former message brought 
 by Cunningham, not to the subsequent letter from 
 Lennox to the queen on the day preceding the 
 trial of Bothvt'elj. Nothing surely can be more 
 probable than this, that Lennox, when implicated 
 in tiie inquisition of Highgate, would send his 
 confidential servant with letters from Darnley, 
 - to exculpate themselves from the imputation of 
 an intention to seize the government. Accord- 
 ingly the queen, on her first visit to her husband, 
 '* inquirit him of his letters, quhairintiil he play- 
 " neit of the crueitie of sum^^ ;" on her next visit 
 
 ''^ Whitaker, ii. 16—22. 
 
 '• Buchanan, without any view to confirm the long letter, 
 informs us of the queen's correspondence with Darnley. " Su- 
 periorura laensium suspicionibus, per frequentes et amicissirae 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 289 
 
 she asked, " why he would pass away in the In- chap. 
 " glisheshin," and then " inf(uirit him of the inqui- 
 " sitioun of Hieg-ate." His letters, and the Eng-- 
 lish ship, are again referred to his former letters 
 when he left the court in September, and had a 
 ship ready to quit the kingdom*^^ ; but these facts, 
 combined with the inquisition of Highgate, are 
 easily explained. It is properly termed the 
 inquisition of Highgate, who was examined 
 upon the information he had given to Wal- 
 ker; concerning a design to seize and crown 
 the young prince, and to usurp the govern- 
 ment ; which the king denied, till she " schewed 
 ** hym the very wordes was spoken. At quhilke 
 " tyme he said that Minto had adverteist hym®^ 
 
 scriptas literas (ut ipsa rebatur) satis perpurgatis :" (lib. xvii. 
 p. 350.) and Lesly's reason for her journey, " her bearing and 
 being advertised that he was repentant and sorrowful, and 
 that he desired her presence," implies a lettei: or message 
 from the king. Anderson, i. 12. 
 
 «^ Whitaker, ii. 50. 83—200. 
 
 *' To this passage the most preposterous objections are 
 made by Whitaker; that the king knew nothing of the in- 
 quisition ; that the words spoken (to usurp the government) 
 were reported by Walker, not by Highgate ; and that he 
 spoke to Highgate, not to Minto, on the design to put him 
 in ward, Whitaker, ii. 94. But the inquisition was made to 
 discover the supposed design to usurp the government ; 
 the French genitive, " I enquirit him of the inquisition of 
 Hiegate," (Je I'enquis de I'inquisition) signifies touching, con- 
 cerning the subject of that inquiry, which he denied, till 
 she " shewed him the very words spoken," by his father or 
 VOL. I. V 
 
290 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 " that it was sayd that sum of the counsel had 
 " brought her a letter to be subscrivit to put hym 
 " in pressoun, and to slay him if he made resist- 
 " ence," and that Minto " belevit the same to be 
 *' true." But that he " could not doubt of her 
 " in this porpoisof Hiegattes," being his " proper 
 " flesh, as weill as it was schawen that she refusit 
 ** to subscrive the same ;*' and Blackwood, with 
 his usual veracity, assures us that Murray first in- 
 formed her of the conspiracy of her husband and 
 the nobiUty at Glasgow, and urged her to hasten 
 thither with an army to prevent their designs***. 
 From this apology for the words spoken, the fact 
 is obvious : On the first notice from Minto, of a 
 design to put him in ward, he or his father had 
 uttered those rash expressions, which Highgate 
 communicated to Walker, that they would seize 
 
 himself; and the English version coincides minutely with 
 her letter to the Archbishop : " And then he said that Min- 
 to had sent him word (advertysit him, Scot,) that it was said 
 that some of the council had brought me a letter to sign 
 to put him in prison, and to slay him if he did resist, and 
 thaf he asked this of Minto himself, who said unto him, 
 ** that he thought it was true." According to the letter to 
 Beton, Minto informed his father, that is, sent him word of 
 the report, in consequence of which, he could not fail to in- 
 terrogate Minto himself, before he examined Highgate, Min- 
 to's author, or directed him to speak to Caldwell concerning 
 the truth of the report. 
 
 ^ Jebb, ii. 214. The sole foundation for Blackwood's fic- 
 tion, is Mary's letter to Archbishop Beton, which he must 
 have seea» as he quotes the archbisbop'^s answer. Id. 215, 
 2 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. §91 
 
 the person of the young* prince, and assume the ch\p. 
 government in his name : but on farther reflec- -^-^^^^^ 
 tion, as he was '• in great suspicion," even " of 
 " his life," he resumed the desig'n of passing- away, 
 not in the former ship for Flanders, which must 
 have lain in Forth, but in an English ship which 
 Buchanan informs us was then in the Clyde®^ 
 The first was a sufficient cause for the removal 
 of the young prince from Stirling, (January 14) 
 the second for the sudden expedition of the 
 queen to Glasgow, (January 2l) to prevent her 
 husband's escape. The object of her journey 
 undoubtedly was, to bring him to Edinburgh, 
 within her own power, by persuasion or by force; 
 and his intended departure seems to be obscurely 
 intimated in her letter to the archbishop ; that 
 either he, or the nobleman with whom he was 
 discontented, " behooved to leave the samen ;'* 
 by which Daruley probably meant the country, 
 not the court which he had already abandoned. 
 
 Her subsequent inquiries coincide exactly with Theirexact 
 her letter to Beton. " He is angry when I speak dence. 
 *' of Walcar; and sayis that he lyes," (in the 
 information of his design to usurp the govern- 
 ment) " for I inquirit him upoun that, and that 
 " he was angry wyth sum of the lordis and wald 
 " threaten them." The lords with whom he 
 
 ^' Buchanan, 350. Lethington's lettet to Beton, Appendix, 
 No. I. 
 
 U 2 
 
29i2 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^^y^- was discontented, are also named. " He inragis 
 ^■'"^^'^^ " when he hearis of Lethington, or of you, or of 
 " my brother (Murray) ; of your brother (Hunt- 
 " ley) he speikis nathyng : He speikis of the 
 "Erie of Ergyle ; I am in feir (of Argyle; 
 " afraid of him in the English version) when I 
 ** heare him speik, for he assuris himself that he 
 " hes not ane evill opinioun of him : He speikis 
 " nathing of tham, that is out, noutlier gude or 
 " evill, but fleis that point." The last passage, 
 of tham that is out, in the English version, those 
 abroad, is applicable, not merely to Morton, 
 Lindsay, and Ruthven, to whom, though still 
 prohibited to approach the court, a pardon had 
 been granted upon Christmas eve^^, but to those 
 from whom the pardon was still withheld. Among 
 others not included in the pardon, Ker of Faul- 
 donside, who forced Rizio from his mistress's 
 waist, and George Douglas, the late Earl of An- 
 gus's natural son, who inflicted the first wound 
 with the king's dagger, were excepted by the 
 queen ; but the passage applies peculiarly to the 
 latter, as the Countess of Lennox's brother, and 
 Darnley's uncle, and prime confidant, in concert- 
 ing the murder^^. But the supposed forgers, 
 Murray and Lethington, never would have intro- 
 duced themselves in conjunction with Bothwell, 
 
 " Whitaker, ii. 223. 
 
 " Calderwood, MS. ii. 14. Robertson, ii. 431. Melvil, 
 64. Murdin, 763. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 293 
 
 as the objects of Darnley's distrust or aversion, chap. 
 purposely to exculpate Argyle and Huntley ; and ^-^.'^^ 
 in another passage, " that he knew weill anewch 
 " that my bruther had she win me that thing- 
 " quhilk he had spoken in Striveling-, of the 
 " quhilk he denyis the ane half, and above all, 
 ** that ever he cum in his chamber ;" Murray 
 never would have represented himself as betray- 
 ing- Darnley's conversation and actions to the 
 queen. It is not sufficient to affirm that in order 
 to authenticate the letters, they availed themselves, 
 in these passages, of incidents sufficiently known 
 at the time. The coincidence of their supposed 
 forg"ery with a genuine letter, was unknown to 
 themselves, and was discovered only after the 
 letter to Beton had been published by Keith. 
 But the exact coincidence of the two letters, 
 which is altogether unaccountable on the sup- 
 position of forgery, was unavoidable to Mary, 
 in writing successively on the same subject, to 
 Beton and to Both well. A forger, who invaria- 
 bly addresses the public, would have entered 
 minutely into those facts to which Mary alludes 
 incidentally, as already known to Bothwell, but 
 which she explains at length in her letter to 
 Beton ; and for the same reason the answers of 
 her husband are minutely related as important 
 to Bothwell, to whom the facts themselves were 
 sufficiently known. 
 
294 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 The precise date of the letter remains to be as- 
 certained. Mary, who had left Edinburgh upon 
 diteof the Tuesday, January 21, and reached Glasgow on 
 first letter, xhursday 23, informs Bothwell that the king 
 sent for Joachim, according to the Scottish ver- 
 sion, yesternight, to discover the cause of her ar- 
 rival; and proceeds immediately to the particulars 
 of her first visit and conversation with Darnley, 
 before and after supper, when he had requested 
 her to return. On tlie last conversation concern- 
 ins: Hiohffate, she observes to Bothwell, " the 
 " morne I w ill speake to hym (Minto) upon thys 
 " point'*;" and concludestheir first night's conver- 
 sation thus: " He would not let me, depart from 
 " him, but desirit that I suld wake with him. 
 " I make it seeme that I beleve that all is true, 
 " and takes heed thereto, and I excusit my- 
 " self for this night that I could not wake. — 
 " Thys day hys father bled at the mouth and 
 " nose. — Thys is my first jiorney, (day's work) 
 " I sail end the same to-morrow. I am in doing 
 
 ^* The Scotch copy adds, " as to the rest of Willie Hie- 
 "aites he confessit it, but it was the moroe after my cum- 
 ming or he did it;" in the English, " the rest as Will Hie- 
 gate confesses, but that it was the next day that he came 
 hither;" from the diversity of which, nothing can be inferred. 
 From the indistinctness of Mary's hand, the first and third 
 persons, ie and it, seem to have been frequently confounded 
 in the two versions. 
 
IV, 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 295 
 
 ** of a werk here, that I halt greatly :" which chap. 
 the Enghsh veivion explains : *' but 1 had begun 
 " it (the letter) this morning. I am gangand 
 " to seek mine (repose) till the morne, quhen 
 '* I sail end my Bybill." The letter was begun 
 in the morning, and written thus far at least, 
 upon Friday the 24th, the day after her arrival 
 at Glasgow, to which, and to the incidents of the 
 preceding day, it is strictly confined. But she 
 proceeds, " I am irkit, and ganging to sleipe, 
 " yet / cease not to scribbill all this paper ^ inas- 
 " mikle as reslis thairof;" in the English, " I 
 " cannot forbear scribblino- as longf as there is 
 " any paper." Three sentences afterwards, ten 
 detached p.otes or memorandums occur, of which 
 nine relate in succession, each to a distinct topic 
 in the preceding part of the letter, and the tenth 
 " of Monsieur de Levingston" is resumed in the 
 postscript or continuation of the letter. " I had 
 <* almost forgot that. Monsieur de Livingstoun 
 ** sayd at suppar — and after suppar he sayd to me, 
 " ye cannot be sa welcum to thame (Darnley) 
 " as ye left sum body this day (Thursday) in 
 " regrait." Thus, instead of deferring her let- 
 ter till the next morning, she continues scribbling 
 till late at night, and when her paper failed, she 
 resumed the last topic of her notes, which she 
 bad almost forgotten, upon the sheet containing 
 those notes or memorandums of the preceding 
 day. She proceeds to the detached incidents of 
 
^96 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, the second day, and the remainder of the letter, 
 v.^^.v-,^ which had been besfun in the morning-, was 
 finished that night. *' I wroug-ht thys day quhilk 
 '* it wes twa houris npon thys bracelet;" and in 
 her haste to conclude what was considered at 
 York as the postscript to l»er letter^^ she gives 
 frequent credit to the bearer, " because I hadf 
 " over niikle to writ, and it is lait, I gief traist 
 " unto him upon your word. He desiris me to 
 " come and see liim ryse the morne betyme, and 
 " if I learne any thing heir, I vvyll make you 
 " memoriall«^ct;m;"in the English, "every night 
 ** a memorial thereof." She concludes, " it is 
 " lait, I desire never to ceissefra writyng to you, 
 " yet now after the kissing of your hands, I will 
 " end my letter ;'" which she had prolonged 
 beyond her intention, as long as her paper lasted, 
 on the additional sheets containing the memo- 
 randums of that, and of the preceding day. 
 This fact she explains herself : " Excuse my evill 
 "wryting, — and, excuse that that is scribbled, 
 " for I had no paper yesterday, quhen I wrayt 
 " (took, Eng.) that of the memorial^;'' of 
 
 •* Anderson, iv. Part ii. p. 72. 
 
 ^ The English may appear to be different, but the mean- 
 ing is the same. " Excuse also that I scribbled, for I had 
 yesternight no paper, when I took the paper of a memorial.'' 
 Faire un memoir is the French, " to take a memorandum," is 
 the English idiom; et quand Je Jis cela de memorial, seems 
 to have been variously translated, in the Scotch and Eng- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 297 
 
 which the only interpretation is, that she had used chap. 
 her letter paper for the memorandums of Thurs- v,«»-v-*-' 
 day night. The notes or memorial of yesterday, 
 containing the transactionsof Thursday, (•' yester- 
 " nig-ht the king- sent for Joachim") fix the date 
 of the letter on Friday, and its whole tenor de- 
 monstrates that it was begun and finished on the 
 same day. It concludes with another series of 
 notes, relating, all but on^, (" of his mother'^) to 
 the contents of the postscript ; and these are 
 either the notes of Friday, written after the let- 
 ter was begun in the morning, or the credit given 
 to the bearer, whom, from the next letter, the 
 commissioners at York understood to be Paris. 
 But the memorial of yesterday, are the notes in 
 the middle, of the transactions on Thursday, 
 when she was prevented from writing as she 
 watched with the king. *' She excusit herselithis 
 " nighty' Friday, and instead of '* ceasing to 
 " write when irkit, and ganging to sleep," at her 
 accustomed hour, she continued scribbliig till late 
 at night : the letter, therefore, instead of being 
 deferred till morning, much less till the next 
 evening, was finished at midnight, u[)on the same 
 day on which it was begun. 
 
 The objections to this explanation are of no 
 force. The memorial of yesterday relates, says 
 
 lish versions, when 1 wrayte, or took, that (paper) of the me- 
 morial. 
 
298 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP- Tytler'^, to a separate paper of credentials to the 
 v^v^^ bearer; as if that thing that is scribbled, were 
 not the memorial of yesterday, or required an 
 excuse distinct from that for her evil writing-, if 
 not inserted in the letter itself. But when the 
 notes in the middle, relate, all but the last, to 
 distinct topics in the preceding-, and the last is 
 resumed in the succeeding- part of the letter, it 
 is impossible to consider these as notes of the 
 credit given to the bearer, or to suppose that the 
 writer, at the close of each day, summed up the 
 contents to Bothwcll. The fact undoubtedly is^ 
 that Mary, writing till late at night, contimied 
 her letter when the paper failed, on ihe same 
 sheets upon which she had previously taken me- 
 morandums of its contents : and as she was a 
 ready writer, accustomed in England to sit up 
 writing- till past midnight^ there was sufficient 
 time for a letter of three or four sheets, begun in 
 the morning, to be finished that night. 
 
 Second let- 7. The second letter in the Latin, but the first 
 in the English edition, is dated " from Glasgow 
 " this Setterday in the mornying," and was sent 
 by Beton, one of her servants, who returned to 
 Edinburgh upon some business of his own. The 
 
 Initial sen initial French sentence is " II semble qu' avecques 
 
 tence. 
 
 " vostre absence soit ioynt I'oublie, veu qu' au 
 
 " Tytler, i. 273. Whitaker, ii. 143—232. 
 * Haynes, 511. 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 299 
 
 " partir vous me promistes de vos nouvelles : Et chap. 
 " toutesfois je nVn puis apprendre," &c. The 
 Scotch is ; " It appeal is that with your absence 
 " there is alsvva joinit forgetfulnes, seand that at 
 " your departing-, you promisit to make me ad- 
 " vertisemcnt of your newis from tyme to tyme :" 
 The Latin ; " Y idetur cum tua absentia conjuncta 
 ** esse obliviscentia, presertim cum intuo discessu, 
 " promiseras quod me certiorem faceres, si quid 
 ** incidisset tibi novi, per singula prope mementa." 
 Here the spirit, and superior elegance of the 
 French original are again conspicuous. // semble 
 qu avec voire absence soit Joint Voublie, is a natu- 
 ral and easy expression of gallantry ; but *' It 
 ** appearis that with your absence there is alswa 
 "joinit forgetfulnes," is almost as harsh and con- 
 strained in Scotch, as videtur cum tua absentia 
 conjuncta esse obliviscentia, is in Latin. " II sem- 
 " ble que, — soit joint," are not the same with 
 ** videtur cum tua, — conjuncta esse ;" but the ori- 
 ginals from which the Scotch, " II seems that,— 
 *' there is alswa joinit," are obviously derived ; 
 and the very inversion of the phrase, quavec votre 
 absence soit Joint Voublie, so familiar in French, 
 is uncouth and stiff in the translation ; " that 
 " with your absence there is alswa joinit forget- 
 " fulnes." The next clause, veu quau partir, is 
 not derived from presertim cum in tuo discesse, but 
 is translated into " seand that at your depart- 
 " ing/' in the Scotch; and vous ine promistes de 
 
300 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. I'os nouvelles, is an idiom peculiarly French, 
 ^-'v*^ which the translators and their commentator 
 have all mistaken. The Scotch translator has 
 recourse to a paraphrase, *' you promised to 
 " make me advertisement of your news -" and the 
 Latin still more circuitously, promiseras quod 
 me cerfiorem faceres si quid incidissef tihi novi j 
 from which the French nndouhtedly is not de- 
 rived. But the French translator, according- to 
 Whitaker, having- rendered promistes si quid 
 incidissel tihi novi, by promistes dcs vos nouvelles^ 
 guessed at the meaning of certiorem Jaceres, and 
 added et toutesfois je nen puis apprendre, as a 
 blundering- translation of what he did not com- 
 prehend®^ Neither Wilson nor W hitaker, it 
 seems, understood the common French phrase, 
 vous me promistes des vos nouvelles, you promised 
 to let me hear from you, or know how you did; 
 and Mary, who reminds Bothvvell of his promise, 
 on Thursday, that she should hear from him soon, 
 complains on Saturday, et toutesfois je n^en puis 
 apprendre, and yet I can learn nothing of them, 
 de vos nouvelles. The same idiom occurs in the 
 first letter ; "I am fashit that it stops me to write 
 "news of myself unto you;" in the English 
 version, " from writing unto you of news of my- 
 '* self;" de nouvelles de moimeme : Henry IV. 
 writes to his mistress, the Duchess of Beaufort; 
 
 " Whitaker, ii. 238. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 301 
 
 " J*ay recu ce matin a mon reveil devos nouvel- chap. 
 *' les :^* and Archbishop Beton, whose vernacular v-^-v«w 
 language, from his residence at Paris, was neces- 
 sarily infected with French idioms, employs the 
 same phrase in a letter to Mary; "yet can I not 
 "be out of feir while I heiv of your novellisJ'^ 
 The Scottish translator, transcribing the expres- 
 sion literally, de vos nouvelles, guessed at the 
 context, and from the first word, toutesfoiSf gave 
 us, " from tyme to tyme," which Wilson trans- 
 lated, " per singula prope mementa." But an 
 idioniatical French phrase, peculiar to the lan- 
 guage in which alone it is significant, demon- 
 strates beyond contradiction that the initial 
 sentence is a part of the original, of which the 
 Scotch and Latin are two successive, and servile 
 translations. 
 
 The same idiom pervades the whole letter. In Kemainder 
 the next sentence, for mstance, " 1 he awaytmg ter. 
 *' upon tham (vos nouvelles) yesterday, causit me 
 " to be almaist in sic joy as I wil be at your re- 
 *' turning, quhilk ye have delayit langer then 
 " your promise was." Whatever was the ar- 
 rangement of the original sentence, Bothwell 
 had promised, not to return, but, de ses nou- 
 velles, to let her hear from him, or rather, to 
 send her notice yesterday : but the initial sen- 
 tence no sooner fails, than the French trans- 
 lator adopts the obvious mistake of the Latin 
 and the Scotch ; " quern (reditum) distulisti ultra 
 
502 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. " quain promiseras:'' " votre venue; laquelle 
 ^-^^/'^ " vous aves differee plusque ne m'aviez piomis." 
 In a subsequent sentence, *' advertise me of your 
 *' news at leng-th,'' the Latin, fac me certiorem 
 de tuis rehus prolixe^ is translated literally, /htVe-s 
 moi savoir hien au long de vos affairs ; a sufficient 
 proof that the French translator was neither 
 ignorant of certiorem facere^ nor the author of 
 promistes de vos nouvelles in the initial sentence 
 of the French original. 
 On what The letter contains other idioms indisputably 
 
 occasion 
 
 written. Freuch : but the notice expected from Bothwell, 
 was, whether the king- should be carried to Craig- 
 millar, or to the Kirk of Field. Having dis- 
 patched her long letter over night by Paris, she 
 expected on Saturday morning to hear from 
 Bothwell, who had promised upon Thursday to 
 send her notice next day. She writes therefore 
 by Beton, a casual messenger, that " Howbeit 
 ** she had na further news from Bothwell, ac- 
 *' cording to her commissioun she would bring 
 " the man with her to Craigmillar upon Monday 
 " — gif she get na newes in the contrary, and 
 " prays him — advertise me of your newes (let 
 " me hear from you) at length, and quhat 1 sail 
 *' do in case you be nat returnit quhen I am come 
 " thare ;" which refers explicitly to the journey 
 intimated in her first letter ; " gif ye be in Edin- 
 " burgh at the receit of it, send me word sone/^ 
 That journey, so peculiarly important to Mary, 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 303 
 
 has already been explained ; and she prays Both- chap. 
 well to send her (/tide neives of his voyage (to v-^v^/ 
 procure an interview with Morton), which the 
 supposed forg"ers were so desirous to conceal. 
 
 8. The third and last letter in the Latin, but Third let- 
 the fourth in the English edition of the Detection, initiaUen- 
 begins " J'ay veille plus tard la haut que ie n'eusse *^"*^^* 
 " fait, si ce n'eust este pour tirer ce que ce porteur 
 " vousdira, que ie treuve la plus belle commodite 
 " pour excuser vostre affaire qui ce pourroit pre- 
 *' senter :" in the Scotch, " I have wakit laiter 
 " thair up then I wald have done, if it had nat 
 " bene to draw sum thing out of hym, quhilk this 
 " bearer will shew you, quhilke is the fayrest 
 " commoditie, that can be offerit to excuse your 
 " affaires :" in the Latin, " Duitius illic morata 
 ** sum quam volebam, nisi id factum fuisset, ut 
 " aliquid ex eo exculperem, quod hie tabellarius 
 " tibi indicabit, quae est bellissima occasio quae se 
 " poterat offerre ad excusandum nostra negotia/* 
 In this initial sentence, the Latin translator, who 
 was certainly not Buchanan, mistaking wakit for 
 wailed^ converted the first clause into Diutius 
 illic morata sum ; but in answer to this observa- 
 tion of Robertson's, Whitaker supposes, by a 
 double solution, that Buchanan read, / ivakit 
 laiter up thair, and that the intermediate, or cor- 
 rected copy of the Latin, contained Diutius illic 
 vigilavi sursus, from which the French, J'ay veille 
 
304 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 plus tard la haul was literally derived^'. It is 
 unnecessary to observe that an intermediate La- 
 tin copy, more correct than the press, is altoge- 
 ther imaginary, to obviate the derivation of the 
 Scotch from the French. But the man must be 
 ignorant of the language indeed, who perceives 
 not the genuine French idiom, ./Vy veille plus tard 
 la haul, (monler la haul) I watched later above 
 stairs, of which the Scotch, " I waikit laiter, la 
 " hauf, thairup'\ is a literal version, hardly intelli- 
 gible witliOut the French original, and utterly un- 
 intellisfible to the Latin translator. The context, 
 que ie neussefait/isno translation o{ quam voleham, 
 but is translated literally, " than I wald have 
 " done." Much less is the next clause, si ce neust 
 estejyour tircr ce que ce porleur vous dira^ deriv- 
 ed from the Latin, ut aliquid ex eo exculperem 
 quod hie tabellorius tibi indicabit. On the con- 
 trary, it is translated almost literally into Scotch, 
 " if it had not bene to draw sum thing out of 
 " him qi.'hilke this bearer will schew you ;" and 
 it is observable ih&i factum fuisset, is transferred 
 apparently from the former clause, queje neusse 
 fait, '*than I wald have done :" " sum ihmg out 
 ** of him," aliquid ex eo, is inserted in both ver- 
 sions to render t!)e sense of the original explicit; 
 and the licenious translations of vousdira, " shew 
 *• y^ u," is preserved in iihi indicabit, as a proof 
 
 »» Robertson, ii. 366. Whitaker, ii. 261. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 305 
 
 that the French original has been derived neither 
 from the Latin nor from the Scotch. In the next 
 clause, queje trouve la plus belle commodite, there 
 is no trace of the Latin, '* (j>;cb est hellissutia occa- 
 sio ;" pour excuser voire affair qui se pourroit 
 presenter f *• qusese poteratoti'erre ad excusandum 
 ** nostra neg^otia ;'' but the Scotch is as evidently 
 derived from the French as the Latin fram the 
 Scotch; *' quhilk is the fairest commodite that 
 ** can be ofterit to excuse your affairs," in which 
 la plus belle commodite, pour excuser voire affaire, 
 are French phrases literally transcribed. 
 
 To determine which is the original and which Collated 
 the translations, on collating them together, J ay transia- 
 veiUe plus tard la haut, I wakit laiter thair up, 
 diutius illic morata sum, qui ie neussefait, than 
 I wald have done, quam volebam, si ce neusse 
 este, if it had not bene, nisi id factum fuisset, 
 pour tirer ce que ce porteur vous dira, to draw 
 sum thing out of him quhilk this bearer will 
 schew you, ut aliquid ex eo exculparem quod hie 
 tabellarius tibi indicabit, qucje trouve la plus belle 
 commodite, quhilke is the fayrest commodite, quae 
 estbe\\\ss'invAoccaifi\o,pour excuser vostreaff'airequi 
 ce pourroit presenter, that can l)e offered to ex- 
 cuse your affairs, quae se poterat offene ad acca- 
 sandum nostra negotia; no doubt can remain 
 that the French, instead of being a translation 
 from the Latin, is the original from which the 
 Scotch and Latin were successively derived. 
 
 VOL, I, X 
 
306 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 The purport of this letter is explained by the 
 ^ commissioners at York. " After the device of 
 
 Its date and 
 
 purport as- " the murder was determined, they (the Scot- 
 
 certained. ,. \ > r 
 
 " tish commissioners) inferred upon a letter in 
 ** her own hand, that there was another mean 
 •* of a more cleanly conveyance devised to kill the 
 " king ; for there was a quarrel made betwixt 
 " him and Lord Robert of Holyiood-house, by 
 " carrying of false tales betwixt them, the queen 
 ** being the instrument, as they said, to bring it 
 " to pass: which purpose, if it had taken effect 
 " as it was very likely, for the one giving tlielye 
 *' to the other, they were at daggers drawing, it 
 " had eased them of the prosecution of this 
 ** devilish fact*°°." The letter from which this de- 
 vice was inferred, instead of being lost, as er- 
 roneously Supposed, appears to be the identical 
 letter now under review. The secret which she 
 remained till late above stairs to draw from the 
 king, was the intimation which he had received 
 from Lord Robert Stuart, her natural brother, 
 who according to Buchanan, " uxoris insidias 
 " ad eum deferre est ausus,'* according to Mel- 
 vil, " told him, (Darnley,) that if he retired not 
 " hastily out of that place, it would cost him his 
 ** life, which he told again to the queen'"*,'' whose^ 
 
 ""• Anderson, iv. Part 2tl. p. 61. 
 
 "" It is observable that the real cause of the quarrel, Lord 
 Robert's confidential infurniatiou to Darnley, of the designs 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. S07 
 
 inventive brain conceived, and represented it to ^^}^' 
 Bothwell " as the fairest commodity to excuse his 
 
 against his life, was concealed at York, and in Buchanan's 
 Detection, for which a sufficient reason will afterwards be 
 assigned. But Buchanan, writing without any controul, and 
 when the reasons for concealment had ceased, explains the 
 whole fact in his history: " Unus inventus est Robertas, Re- 
 ginae frater, qui sive facinoris atrocitate, sive adolescentis 
 misericordia niotus, uxoris insidias ad eum deferre est ausus, 
 sed ea lege, ut rem apud se tacitam contineret, ac suae in- 
 columitati, quam posset comraodissime consuleret. Id Rex 
 cum, pro sua consuetudine, Reginae indicasset, Robertusque 
 advocatus rem constanter negaret, alterque alterum mendacii 
 argueret, et-uterque ad arma manum admovisset, Regina, hoc 
 spectaculo laeta, quod sine suo labore et molestia, suorum 
 consiliorum exitum in propinquo videret, alterum fratrem 
 Jacobum ndvocat, velutad litem diriraendam: revera, utipse 
 quoque per occasionem tolli posset, nemo enim earum rerum 
 aderat arbiter, praeter^Hium Bothueliura, qui inferiorem po- 
 tius in eo certamine couficeret, quam dissentientes destine- 
 ret : quod adeo verbis testatus est, cum diceret ; nihil esse, 
 cur Jacobus tantopere properaret, ut homines non ita pug- 
 nandi cupidos dirimeret." Hist. p. 350, Above a century 
 after Buchanan's death, the principal facts were confirmed 
 by Melvil's Memoirs. " Yet Lord Robert, Earl of Orkney, 
 told him that if he retired not hastily out of the place, it 
 would cost him his life, which he told again to the queen ; and 
 my Lord Robert denied that ever he spoke it. This adver- 
 tisement moved the Earl of Bothwell to haste forward his 
 enterorise." Melvil, 78. It is obvious that the scene wliich 
 passed when Lord Robert was confronted with Daraley, and 
 denied the words, is suppressed by Melvil, or his editor, out 
 ^f tenderness for the queen. But the principal facts are 
 preserved ; that Darnley received and communicated the 
 
 x2 
 
308 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^?v^' " affairs." In the next sentence, she " promised 
 " to bring" him to him the morn," when she con- 
 fronted her brother with her husband upon Sa- 
 turday ; and she desires Bothwell to ** put order 
 " unto it if ye finde it gude," by inciting" some 
 quarrel between those fierce young men. The 
 letter therefore was written at the Kirk of Field, 
 upon Friday, the second night that the queen slept 
 in the lower apartment, when Paris informs us 
 that he carried letters that night to Bothwell ; 
 that she observed on Saturday morning to those 
 of her chamber, that there had been a quarrel 
 between the king and Lord Robert, who had a 
 fair opportunity to have killed him then, as none 
 were present to part them but herself; and that 
 she sent Paris in the evening" with a messag-e to 
 Bothwell, that it would be best to persuade her 
 brother to go with Blackadder to the king's 
 chamber, to do that which Bothwell knew, which 
 would cost him only a short imprisonment in the 
 castle'"-. Having: intimated what detained her 
 so late above, she proceeds to other topics, her 
 fears and jealousy of Bothwell's wife, whom she 
 compares indirectly to the " second lufe of Ja- 
 " son," as she claimed the merit of a prior and 
 
 iotelligence to the queen, which Lord Robert then denied ; 
 and that this advertisement hastened the execution of Both- 
 well's plan. Buchanan's veracity has been confirmed on the 
 most disputed facts, by subsequent discoveries in the cours^^. 
 of this work. 
 
 "' Paris's second confession. Appendix, XXIV. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 309 
 
 exclusive attachment herself. Not that she wald ^^^^• 
 compare him to one so unhappy as Jason, nor 
 herself to one so unpityful as Medea; " howbeit 
 " ye cause me to be sum quhat lyke unto hyr 
 ** in one thing that touchis you or may preserve 
 '* and keep yon unto her toquhom only ye apper- 
 " taine ; if it be sa that I may appropriate that 
 " quhilk is wonne through faythful yea only luf- 
 " fing- of you. ' The faithful or willing obedience 
 which she so frequently professes to Bothwell ; 
 " his gude grace of the quhilk her behaviour 
 '* sail assure her ;'* her constant fear to offend 
 him; ** now Syr I have broken my promise" 
 (not to write nor to send) " yet I haif not done 
 " this to offend you ; — though faythful yea only 
 " loving of you as I do and sail do all the days 
 " of my lyfe," are the same sentiments and al- 
 most the same words which occur in her subse- 
 quent letters to Norfolk. " I trust in God you 
 *' shall be satisfied with my conditions and be- 
 ** haviour and faithful duty to you. I wrote to 
 " you before to know your pleasure. Let me 
 " know your mind, and whether you are not of- 
 " fended at me, as I fear you are : I have sought 
 " to avoid displeasure for fear of you : — Believe 
 " him of all that he will assure you in my name, 
 " that is in effect that I will be true and obedi- 
 " ent unto you, as I have promised, as long as I 
 «»fljygio3 :»> In these we discover the same artful 
 
 "» Hardwicke State Papers, i. 191-2-3. 
 
310 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, professions of obedience, the same protestations 
 '^^'^r^^ of eternal constancy, to efface the impression of 
 her recent, or frequent change, the same affected 
 apprehensions to offend as in her letters to Both- 
 well ; with this difference, that the former are 
 addressed to a weak, but well-meaning- noble- 
 man ; the latter to a libertine, in obscure, but in- 
 delicate terms, on the subject of their guilty loves. 
 After these professions, to which Mary was so 
 peculiarly addicted, she returns to the first pur- 
 port of her letter, " advertyse me tyraely in the 
 *' morning, how ye have faren (succeeded with 
 " Lord Robert) for I will be in payne unto I get 
 " word. Make gude watch if the burd eschaip 
 " out of the caige, or without her mate, as the 
 " turtur 1 sail remayne alone for to lament the 
 " absence how schort that soever it be." In this 
 obscure sentence, the first clause relates to Darn- 
 ley's information from her brother, which she 
 had just discovered ; the second to herself; and 
 the third to Bothwell, whom she desires to make 
 gude watch, if the burd (her husband) eschaip 
 out of the cage (the Kirk of Field) or, as the 
 turture, without her mate she shall remain alone 
 to lament the absence; (of Bothwell her mate;) 
 in which she abandons the sense for a poetical 
 conceit from her favourite Ronsard. " This let- 
 " ter," she adds, " will do with a gude hart, that 
 " thing quhilk I cannot do myself, if it be not 
 " that! have /ear that ye are in sleeping ;" allud- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 311 
 
 ing distinctly to the murder, which Bothwell, as chap. 
 appears from Hay's deposition, had then in- ^-^v-w 
 tended to perpetrate upon Saturday night. '* I 
 *' durst not write this," she concludes, " before 
 *' Joseph, Bastian, and Joachim, that did but de- 
 *' part even quhen I began to write ;" and for 
 whom there was no accommodation at the Kirk 
 of Field, the place to which the whole letter in- 
 disputably refers. 
 
 9. The fifth letter in the Enoflish edition. Fourth let- 
 though apparently the third in the order of time, initial sen- 
 is still extant in the original French, of which 
 a copy, preserved in the State Paper office, is 
 inserted in our Appendix, with the two succes- 
 sive translations subjoined. The initial lines pre- 
 fixed to the Scotch, are adopted, as usual, in the 
 French translation, done at Rochelle. " Mon 
 '* coeur helas ! fault il que la follie d'une femme, 
 " dont vous cognoissez assez I'ingratitude vers 
 " moi, soit cause de vous donner desplaisir.'' 
 " My heart, alas ! must the follie of ane woman, 
 " quhose unthankfulnes toward me you do suf- 
 ** ficiently knaw, be occasion of displeasure unto 
 " you." Mon ceeur helas! &c. is an expression 
 of tender endearment peculiarly French, (mon 
 cceur, mon petit cceur, mon cher cceur), and is 
 addressed to Bothwell, to vi'hom the same epithet 
 is frequently applied in the sonnets ; 
 
 Par vous, mon cceur! et par votre alliance. 
 Mon coeur ! mon sang, mon ame, et mon souci. 
 
312 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. And in the letters of Henry IV. to the Dnchess 
 
 IV. "^ 
 
 v-^-v-^ of Beaufort, already quoted, " (Men cceur! j'uy 
 " resceu ce matin a mon reveil de vos nouvelles, 
 " cela me rend, &c.)" the same expressions, 
 mon coeur, mon cher ccEur, rejjeatedly occur. 
 But the Scotch translation, my heart alas! &c. 
 strikes us as an affected apostrophe to the queen's 
 own heart, at having" unconsciously incurred the 
 displeasure of Bothwell. The Latin edition con- 
 tains only the three first letters; hut as those 
 who affirm that the French has been uniformly 
 translated from an intermediate Latin version of 
 the Scotch original, now lost, must also main- 
 tain that the initial French sentence, Mon cceur 
 helas, is derived from a translation of My heart 
 alas ! into Latin ; Menm cor, eheu, &c. would be 
 a novelty indeed. But it is needless to inquire 
 which of these is the ori^^inal phrase, as the 
 initial sentence no sooner fails, than the French 
 ' translator betrays his departure from the original, 
 and his inrnoranceof the Scotch. 
 
 The sul>jv°ct of the letter is the dismission of 
 Margaret Garwood, the queen's confidential 
 maid, on the discovery of her being with child 
 to Bastian ; and the next sentence in the origi- 
 nal, " veu que je n'eusse sceu y remedier sans le 
 " scavoir et dcpuis que m'en suis apersue," is 
 translated verbatim, " considering that 1 cauld 
 " nat have remedy t thairunto without knawing 
 " it. And since that I perceavil it 1" &c. But 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 3I3 
 
 the French translation, " veil que ie n*y pouvoye 
 " mettre remede, sans la donner a cocjnoistre ;" 
 deviates [)oth in idiom and in sense from both; 
 and implies that she could not have applied a 
 remedy without occasioning- the discovery of 
 her maid*s dishonour. The subsequent miscon- 
 ceptions of the sense, and deviations from the 
 idiom, are referred to the Appendix, as too nu- 
 merous to be inserted in our text. 
 
 This letter, which we have postponed for con- 
 venience, appears to have preceded the former, 
 and was probably written upon Thursday night, 
 when the queen slept for the first time at the 
 Kirk of Field, and when Paris carried letters to 
 Bothwell at midnight. The jealousy which she 
 afterwards discovers, of Lady Both well's in- 
 fluence, corresponds with her previous conversa- 
 tion with Paris, whom Boihwell had forbidden 
 to mention, that his wife was with him; but the 
 queen, among other topics, urged him to speak 
 of Lady Bothwell that very night*''\ The same 
 
 "* Paris's second Confession; Appendix, XXVI. The 
 letter concerning Margaret Garwood, contains no reference 
 to the bearer. Accordingly Paris informs ns, that the first 
 letter with which he was sent on Wednesday or Thursday 
 night, was without any credence ; mais rien de creance. But 
 in mentioning incidentally that the queen slept again upon 
 Friday night at the Kirk of Field, and again sent him with 
 letters to Bothwell, he was immediately interrogated, if he had 
 heard nothing farther of the murder on Saturday morning. 
 This question appears to have diverted his attention, from the 
 
514 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, subject dwelling upon her mind, is very natu- 
 v.*-v-*-' rally introduced at length in her next letter upon 
 Friday night; (the preceding letter, which we 
 have already examined). In the present letter 
 she observes, " si vous ne me mandes ce soir ce 
 " que voiles que ien faise, je m'en deferay au 
 *' hazard de la fay re entreprandre, ce qui pour- 
 " roit nuirea ce a quoy nous tandons tousdeux." 
 What she would rid herself of at the hazard 
 of causing to be enterprised, was the dismission 
 and marriage of Margaret Garwood, " which 
 " might be hurtful to that, (their own union), 
 *' whereunto, both they did tend." " Et quant 
 " elle sera mariee je vous suplie donnes m'en une, 
 " ou ien prandray telles de quoy vous contanteres 
 " quant a leur conditions, mays de leur langue 
 " ou fidelite vers vous ie ne vous en respondray.** 
 His answer was returned that same night ; 
 and as it is evident that he was alarmed or 
 vexed at Margaret Garwood's indiscretion, or 
 dismission at that particular juncture, so it ap- 
 pears from Paris's first declaration, that she 
 ■was not only privy to the adultery, but was inti- 
 mately conscious of the designs against Darnley's 
 life^"". That she was possessed of such danger- 
 ous secrets, is farther confirmed by a pension of 
 
 credence to which the letter concerning Lord Robert refers, 
 to the queen's conversation on Saturday with those of her 
 chamber. 
 
 "** Piris's first Confession ; Appendix, XXVI. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 815 
 
 three hundred merks, for which she obtained the ^^,^^" 
 queen's signature the day thereafter; upon Satur- '-^^^^'^^ 
 day, the day preceding" her marriage, and the 
 ftiurder of the king^"^ 
 
 10. The four letters preceding the murder are chronoio- 
 therefore genuine, and every chronological ohjec- tions to the 
 
 , . , . 1-1-1 II lelteis pre- 
 
 tion to then* dates is removed. Jb rom the dates ceding the 
 preserved in the public records, of charters and ' 
 
 other instruments signed by the queen, Good all 
 maintained, that she did not leave Edinburgh till 
 Friday the 24th of January, nor arrive at Glas- 
 gow till Saturday the 25th, vt^hen the two first 
 letters, which must therefore be forgeries, were 
 already written. The fact is now ascertained 
 beyond dispute, that no such reliance can be 
 placed on the records, as the dates were arbitra- 
 rily annexed by the writer when the deeds were , 
 written, and the queen's signature was afterwards 
 obtained'"*. From a vague expression in Mur- 
 
 ^^ Supra, chap. i. 
 
 ">* Goodall, i. 122. Robertson, ii. 371. Goodall might 
 have been convinced, by his own extracts from the public 
 records, that the dates, though generally, were not always 
 correct, as the deeds were commonly written at Edinburgh, 
 and dated by the writer (unless when fraudently antedaffd) 
 at the place where the queen was supposed to be. Thus, 
 one signature is dated at Perth, June 20th, 15(jG, the day after 
 the queen was delivered in Edinburgh castle, of which the 
 only explanation is this, that it was written long afterwards, 
 and fraudulently antedated by guess, to give it the preference 
 •vcr other deeds. Another signature is dated at Hermitage, 
 
 3 
 
315 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, ray's Diary, Whitaker supposes that the four let- 
 ters preceding- the nuirder, were all from Glas- 
 gow ; and dividing the first letter into two parts, 
 which he assigns to Friday and Saturday night: 
 the second letter he appropriates to Saturday or 
 
 Oct. 16lh, when we know that the queen was taken ill at 
 Jedburgh oftlie sickness that endangered her life. Two sig- 
 natures are dated Nov. 15th, the one at Jedburgh, the other 
 at Dunbar, when, according to Lethington's letter in Keith 
 (353), the queen was at Wedderburn, and went to view Ber- 
 wick that day. Another signature is dated at Edinburgh, 
 Dec. 2 1 St, and a third, Dec. 22d, when the queen was at Stir- 
 ling, during liie solemnities of the baptism. The deeds dated 
 at Edinburgh on the 22d and 24th of January, were there- 
 fore antedated, and in fact are inserted in the records, after 
 other deeds in April and May. The deeds dated at Edin- 
 burgh, on the 22d and 24th of April, are in the same situa- 
 tion. Other deeds are dated at Stirling on the 22d and 23d, 
 and on the 24th the queen was seized by Bothwell, and car- 
 ried to Dunbar. T'* the improbability that Bothwell would 
 permit her to stop at Edinburgh, and transact business there, 
 Goodall, forgetting his own argument, that the seizure was 
 compulsive, replies that it would be necessary on such a long 
 journey to stop for refreshment, when the queen would have 
 sufficient time to sign such deeds. Goodall's MSS. Above 
 twenty signatures are dated at Dunbar from the 25th of 
 April to the 4th of May; but two are dated at Edinburgh, 
 April 27th, and a third, April 30, when she was certainly at 
 Dunbar; one at Edinburgh, and one at Dunbar on the 4th 
 of May and one at Hailesoa the 5th, when we know that 
 the queen was in Edinburgh Castle. Goodall, who collates 
 and comments on these dates in his MSS. had too much bi- 
 gotry to discern their import. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 31/ 
 
 Sunday morning-, and the third to Sunday even- 
 ing" ; and as the queen returned to Callender on 
 Monday, he concludes that it was absolutely im- 
 possible, for the four letters to be written from. 
 Glasgow within the period prescribed'°^ ^ But 
 as Murray had no means, till Paris was appre- 
 hended, to ascertain the precise date of the let- 
 ters, so the expression in the Diary, " and in this 
 " tyme wrayt her byble and ntheris letters to 
 " Bothwell," means no more than such other 
 letters as were written at Glasgow. There is no 
 necessity for the supposition, that the four letters 
 were all from Glasgow ; and we have proved al- 
 ready, from internal evidence, that the first was 
 begun and finished upon Friday, January 24tb, 
 that the second was written upon Saturday 
 morning ; and that the third and fourth belong 
 to the two nights on which the queen slept at the 
 Kirk of Field. 
 
 Another chronological objection to the letters, removed. 
 is the contradiction between Murray's Diary and 
 the second Confession, or Examination of Paris. 
 Bothwell, according to the Diary, " took journay 
 '* towards Liddesdale," on Friday night, and 
 " returned towards Edinburgh," on Wednesday 
 28th ; but, according to the Confession, Paris, on 
 his arrival with the long letter from Glasgow, 
 found Bothwell still at Edinburgh, and was dis- 
 
 '"» Whitaker, ii. 242—95. 
 
318 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^fv ^' patclied next day, after dinner, with letters to the 
 queen. On the authority of the Diary, Tytler 
 and Whitaker justly conclude that Mary never 
 would have dispatched four letters to Bothwell 
 at Edinburgh, when he was absent in Liddes- 
 dale"°; but the real object of this supposed 
 journey is not the least important discovery 
 which we have made. In a journal of Mary^s 
 transactions it was necessary to account for 
 Bothwell's conduct, and for his absence from 
 Edinburg-h, during- their separation. But the 
 Diary ascribed to Murray, from which Bu- 
 chanan's Detection has apparently been framed, 
 was not produced at the conferences, but was 
 probably communicated to Cecil as an unau- 
 thenticated paper, like the bond of the nobility, 
 by Buchanan's clerk. The real, and the only 
 journey made by Bothwell, was to Whittingham 
 in East Lothian, not to Liddesdale on the con- 
 fines of England. The pretext which he pro- 
 bably employed at the time, to conceal his secret 
 journey to Whittingham, was adopted in the 
 journal, t-o conceal his interview with Morton, 
 at which Lethington was present; and it is ob- 
 servable that he afterwards used the same pre- 
 text, of an expedition to Liddesdale, when he 
 left Ediubiirgh to intercept the queen on her 
 return from Stirling. From a strange entry con- 
 
 "" Whitaker, ii. 31 G. Tytler, i. 280. 
 
THE MURDER OF DA.RNLEY. 319 
 
 cerning- the Secretary's marriage, (" Januarii 6. chap. 
 " The Seeretarye was maryit ir. Strineling ;") 
 the journal appears to have been framed, or at 
 least revised by Lethington himself; and was 
 undoubtedly "the instructions given," or "the 
 " matter ministered" to Buchanan by the privy 
 council of Scotland, as it contains the facts and 
 dates and precise outlines of the Detection*", 
 BothwelPs departure was therefore necessarily 
 antedated in the journal, and his absence was 
 prolong-ed from Friday till Wednesday, in order 
 to allow sufficient time for an expedition to 
 Liddesdale, which Buchanan has silently re- 
 jected in his Detection, as a false pretext. 
 
 '" The Diary evidently contains the outlines of Buchanan's 
 Detection, which was written " according to the instructions 
 to bini given, by common conference of the lords of the privy 
 council of Scotland ; by him, only for his learning penned ; 
 but by them the matter ministered, the book overseen and 
 allowed, and exhibited by them." Anderson, ii. 263. The 
 Diary, therefore, was the matter ministered, with such expla- 
 nations as he received in his conferences with the lords. But 
 it is observable, that Murray was not in Edinburgh at the time, 
 and had no access to know of Lethington's and Bothwell's 
 interview with Morton, to whom the passage in the Diary 
 must be ascribed. Buchanan, in his History, had received 
 no information of that secret interview, but even in his Detec- 
 tion, l»e rejected the journey to Liddesdale, as a pretext of 
 which no sufficient explanation was given. And I conceive 
 that the Diary was delivered to Cecil, like the bond of the 
 nobility, by Reid, Buchanan's clerk, as a voucher for the 
 Detection. 
 
320 • DISSERTATrON ON 
 
 CHAP. Paris, therefore, the queen's chamberlain, re- 
 ^-^^r^ ceiving her dispatches al midnij^ht, and depart- 
 ing- early on Saturday morning', found Bothwell 
 in Edinhnrj^^h on his arrival in the afternoon; 
 and returning' upon Sunday, after dinner, or 
 before nnd-day, he would rejoin his mistress that 
 night at Glasgow. Beton, leaving Glasgow 
 upon Saturd.iy, would find Bothwell stiil at 
 Edinburgh, where, according to his message by 
 Paris, he had spent the whole (of Saturday) 
 night, in visiling and preparing the king's lodg- 
 ing. Of course he departed upon Sunday evening 
 for Hailes or Seton, on tlie road to Dinibar. 
 These facts are antedated in the Dary, *' and 
 " Bothwell this 21th day (Friday) was found 
 " werray tymus weseing the king's ludging, and 
 " the same nyght tuk journey towards Liddes- 
 " dale," to conceal his real journey to Whitting- 
 ham, in the >icinity of Dunbar; and this precise 
 anlicipation was necessary, because an interval 
 of two days was insufficient for his supposed 
 expedition to Hermitage Castle and his return 
 to Edinburgh. His itjterview, therefore, with 
 Morion took place upon Monday, his departure 
 from Edinburgh was oh Sunday evenijjg, the 
 day he visited the lodgings betimes: his return 
 was on Tuesday, which the Diary is cartful to 
 note; " the same day the Earl of Bothwell re- 
 " turned from Liddesdale towards Edinburgh.** 
 His journey to secure Morton's support, had 
 
 1 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 30I 
 
 been previously concerted with the queen herself, chap, 
 who, in her first letter, i . uncertain whether he v^-^vw 
 would be iu Edinburg-h at the receipt ol it; and 
 in the second, requests him to " send her (jood 
 " news of his voyage," on which the two sub- 
 sequent letters are silent, as posterior in date. 
 An expedition to Liddesdale had no visible object, 
 nor any probable interest; but his success with 
 Morton was important to the queen : and in 
 this short explanation, we discover a regular 
 train of events, that refutes every chronological 
 objection to the letters, and confirms their authen- 
 ticity by the strongest attestation ; namely, their 
 exact coincidence with those secret transactions 
 which her opponents themselves were so desirous 
 to conceal. 
 
 11. The second series of letters was prepa- Fifthiettej. 
 ratory to the seizure of her person by Bothwell. 
 The sixth letter in the English edition, but the 
 fifth in the order of time, was written upon 
 Monday April 21st, when she went to Stirling, 
 and was followed by Huntley, who endeavoured, 
 as she apprehended, to di'-isuade her from the 
 enterprise which he was charged to arrange. 
 She writes therefore in the utmost agitation, 
 " Monsieur helas ! pourquoy est vo<<tre fiance mise 
 " en personne si indigne, pour soup^onner ce qui 
 " est entierement vos^re. J'enrage, vous m'avez 
 " promis." «' Alas, my lord, why is your trust 
 ^' put in a person so unworthy, to mistrust that 
 
 VOL. I. Y 
 
322 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 which is wholly yours ? I am woodde. You 
 " had proniisit me ;" and the translation proceeds, 
 " that you would resolve all, and that you would 
 " send me word every day quhat I should doe." 
 In this initial sentence, the difference of arrange- 
 ment demonstrates that Monsieur j helas ! is not 
 derived from, but is translated into, " Alas, my 
 ** lord/' to avoid the quaint idiom, My lord, alas. 
 In the preceding letter the same idiom, mon 
 cceur helas, was necessarily rendered, " my heart, 
 •' alas," as less expressive in Scotch of her own 
 heart ; and the same phrase, so natural in French, 
 and familiar to Mary, occurs in a subsequent 
 letter to Elizabeth, inverted according to the 
 structure of the sentence : " Mais, helas Madam ! 
 " ou ouistes vous jamais un prince blasme pour 
 " ecouter en personne," &c. 
 
 And in the sonnet lately discovered, the 
 first line begins with the same idiomatic ex- 
 clamation, 
 
 Que suis je helas ! et de quoy sert ma vie. 
 
 The context pourquoi/, est vostrejiance iniseen 
 personne, is literally translated, " why is your 
 " trust put in a person" instead of, in one ; si 
 indigne, pour soupgonner ce, " so unworthy, (so 
 *' as) to mistrust that," in which the peculiar 
 import of pou7', to the eflfect of, in order to, ex- 
 pressed of old by the vulgar infinitive, Jbr to, 
 is lost in the translation ; and, ce qui est entire- 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 323 
 
 ^nent vostre, is rendered verbatim " that which chap, 
 " is wholely yours." J'enrage, vous maviez 
 promts, " I am woodde, you had promisit me:" 
 a French idicm, which occurs in the first letter, 
 *' he enrages when he hears of Lethington." 
 She was enrag-ed at the confidence so unwor- 
 thily placed in Huntley, as implying- a distrust 
 of herself; and her suspicions of Lady Bothwell's 
 brother were confirmed, as " he preachit unto 
 " her tliat it was a foolishe enterprise, and that 
 " with her honour she could never marry Both- 
 " well, seeing that being marryed he did carry 
 *' her away, and that his own folkis would not 
 *' suffer it, and that the lordis would unsay them- 
 " selfis, and would deny that thay had sayd." 
 Huntley, who had just been relieved from for- 
 feiture, was careful not to incur another attainder, 
 and was desirous to be taken prisoner along with 
 the queen. But the queen, expecting perhaps an 
 immediate seizure, was vexed at Bothwell's neg- 
 ligence, in leaving the manner, time, and place 
 to be concerted with his false good brother^ and 
 impatient at the new ceremonies which the 
 latter required. She sent a messenger of her 
 own to Bothwell, as she durst not entrust his 
 brother with the dispatch of her letters, and 
 nothing can be more natural than Huntley's dif- 
 ficulties, or the queen's distrust, vexation, grief, 
 or sickness; which last is represented as the 
 anticipation of a sudden pain with which she was 
 
 Y 2 
 
324 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, seized on her return from Stirling: ; as if it were 
 
 IV. . °/ 
 
 ^-^/^»^ impossible for the queen to be sick till then"^. 
 
 The fact itself, " that the lords would unsay 
 " themselves," was obvious to Huntley, who 
 had witnessed how their consent to the bond 
 had been obtained upon Saturday : but the 
 last circumstance whicii the supposed forgers 
 would have introduced into the letters, was an 
 allusion to the bond which they were so carefid 
 to conceal. 
 sjxthiettcr. 12. The sixth letter, apparently intended for 
 Huntley's inspection, was written upon more 
 mature deliberation on the following day. " Du 
 " lieu et de I'heure ie m'en rapporte k vostre 
 ** frere et a vous, ie le suivray et ne fauldray 
 " en rien de ma part. II trouve beaucoup de 
 t* difficultez." " Of the place and the time I 
 " remitte myself to your brother and to you. 
 *' I will folow him, and will fayle in na thing 
 "of my pairt: he findeth many difficulties." 
 In this initial sentence, du lieu et de Vheure., 
 an inversion strictly conformable to the French, 
 idiom, is translated word for word, " o/'" (in- 
 stead of, concerning, with respect to) " the place 
 " and the time ;'* Je men rapporte a vostre frere 
 et a vous, is rendered almost verbatim, I remit 
 myself (o/' the place and the time!) to your 
 brother and to you, to which the French would 
 
 "2 Wbitaker» ii. 383. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 525 
 
 have adhered, in adopting- Je men remets, as of 
 the same import, had it been derived from the 
 Scotch. Je le suivray, for accompaignery alter 
 avec, " I will follow him," el ne fauldray en rien 
 de ma parte, " and will fayle in nathing- of 
 " (instead of, on, or for) my part,^' are French 
 idioms literally translated. // irouve beaucoup 
 de difficuUesy " he jindelh money difficulties/' 
 The translation proceeds, " I think he doth ad- 
 " vertise you thereof; and quhat he desireth for 
 " the handling of himself:" a common English 
 expression at the time, apparently superinduced 
 at Westminster, as in a former letter, instead of 
 some French idiom which was unintelligible 
 in the translation. But it is again observable, that 
 the initial sentence no sooner terminates than 
 the French translator mistakes the phrase, 
 which he renders by guess, potir hien joxier son 
 personage. The queen proceeds to the hand- 
 ling of herself, according to the new cere- 
 monies that occasioned so much vexation on the 
 preceding night. " Me thinketh that your ser- 
 " vices, and the long amitie, having the gude 
 " wyll of the lordes, do well deserve a pardon, 
 " if above the duetie of a subject, you advance 
 " yourself, not to constrain me, but to assure 
 " yourself of such pi ice nigh unto me, that uther 
 " admonitions or forraine persuasions may not let 
 " me from consenting to that that you hope yom* 
 " serviceshall make you one day to attayne." The 
 
 CHAP. 
 IV. 
 
326 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, most plausible reasons are thus sug-g-ested for 
 v-^v"^ his obtaining a pardon if he should advance to 
 meet and intercept her upon the road ; and in 
 her instructions to the Bishop of Dunil>lain to 
 excuse her marriage to the French court, the 
 identical apologies contained in the letter, are 
 assigned to Bothvvell. '* He askit pardon for his 
 " bauldness to convey us toaneof our awin houses 
 " quhairinto he was dreven by force, alsw eilf as 
 " constrainit be lufe ; that from the conspiracies 
 ** of his enemies he could not find himself in sure- 
 *' tie, without he were assurit of our favour to 
 ** indure without alteration; and uther assurance 
 " thairoff could he not lippen in, without it wald 
 ** pleis us to do him that honour to take him to 
 " husband"^;" or, in the words of the letter, "And 
 ** to be short, to make yourself sure of the lordes 
 ** and free to marry ; and that you are constray- 
 ** nit for your surety, and to be abill to serve me 
 *' faithfully, to use an humble request, joinit to 
 " an importune action. And to be short, excuse 
 *' yourself, and persuade them the most you can, 
 <* that you are constraynit to make poursute 
 " agains your enemies : you shall say enough, if 
 " the matter or ground do like you, and many 
 " fay re words to Ledinton." To excuse him- 
 self to the lords, and to give fair words to Lething- 
 ton, are represented as indisputable proofs, that 
 
 '" Anderson, i. 96. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 39:7 
 
 Lethington, in fabricating- the letters, forg-ot the chap. 
 fact, that the lords had left Edinburgh on Sunday v-'-v^^ 
 morning, and that he himself was then with the 
 queen at Stirling'". But the fair wo -ds were to 
 be given to Lethington, not before, but after the 
 seizure, and the excuses were to be made, not to 
 the lords who had left Edinburgh two days before, 
 but to those who attended the queen at Stirling, 
 in order to reconcile them to the deed. Lething- 
 ton, like other courtiers, had concurred in the 
 murder, in order to release the queen from an 
 odious husband, not to exalt Both well to her throne 
 and her bed ; and these excuses she suggests as 
 necessary to his former associates, for an enterprise 
 to which he was instigated by her letters ; " if you 
 ** like not the deede, send me worde, and leave 
 ** not the blame of all unto me." She had left 
 Edinburgh after the seizure was devised by Lesly, 
 but the time and place depending upon circum- 
 stances, remained to be adjusted at Stirling ; and 
 from the new ceremonies, or difficulties which 
 occurred, and which she endeavoured to obviate 
 by the most plausible excuses, it is plain that she 
 was wstill suspicious of his being averse to the deed. 
 
 13. The seventh begins, " Monsieur depuis ma seventh 
 " lettre escrite, vostre beau frere qui fust, est 
 " venu k moi fort triste, et m'a demand e mon 
 
 "* Whitaker,ii. 387—9. 
 
328 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. « conceil de ce qu'il feroitapresdemain." " My 
 " Lord, since my letter written, your brother in 
 '• law that was, cam to me very sad, and hath 
 " askeit me my counsale, quhat he should do 
 *' after to-morrow." " His brother in law that 
 *' was," previous to his divorce from Huntley's 
 sister, is produced as an additional demonstration 
 of forgery *^* ; but the queen naturally anticipates 
 a collusive divorce, which was already concerted, 
 if not actually, commenced **^ As she had just 
 referred the time and place, a vostre frere et a 
 vous, to Bothwell and his brother, whom she had 
 formerly termed his false gude brother, vostre heau 
 frere quifut, " your gude brother that was," im- 
 plies a secondary, sarcastical sneer at Huntley's 
 late zeal, and sudden hesitation to connive at her 
 seizure, on the eve of his sister's divorce. But 
 the first clause affords the most indisputable proof 
 that the initial sentence is a part of the French 
 original, written by the queen. " Since my 
 " letter written,'* 2i literal translation of clepuis ma 
 lettre ecrite, is a French phrase peculiar to Mary, 
 and occurs not only in the sonnets, but in a post- 
 script which she had apparently dictated to a 
 letter written with her own hand. " Efter this 
 " our letter written we are concernit to give you 
 
 "* Whitaker, ii. 418. 
 
 "* By a blank summons, in all probability already raised 
 or instituted. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 329 
 
 *' warning' "^" . It occurs again in a postscript to chap. 
 her first letter to Elizabeth, on her arrival at Car- 
 lyie, *' J 'ay, depuis ma lettre escrit, resceu 
 ** advertisement pour certain "^" A third example 
 still more apposite, affords a full explanation of the 
 present letter. Having written to Elizabeth on 
 the 29th of July 1568, she begins another letter 
 without date, but evidently by the same convey- 
 ance, in the very words in question, " Madam, 
 " depuis ma lettre escritef j'ay telle preuve de la 
 '* doubte en quoi j'estays de la partialle faveur de 
 " vos miuistres vers mes enemis"^." Three exam- 
 ples of a colloquial French phrase, to be found in 
 Mary's letters alone, are sufficient to authenticate 
 the fourth, as her's, together with the letter in 
 which it appears. She had written to Bothwell on 
 Huntley's arrival upon Monday night, and again 
 on Tuesday April 22, referring the time and place 
 d votrefrere et d vons. When the last letter was 
 written, but before it was dispatched, Huntley 
 returned with some new difficulties, which re- 
 quired another confidential letter, and she writes 
 by the same bearer, depuis ma lettre escritey vostre 
 heaufrere qui fusty came very sad to demand her 
 counsel what he should do, apres demain, on 
 Thursday, the day of the seizure j a circumstance 
 which ascertains the date of the two letters on 
 Tuesday. His perplexity arose from the " many 
 
 "' Keitli, 299. "" Anderson, iv. Part I. p. 50. 
 
 "» Ha>ues, 4G9. 
 
330 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. « folkes here, and amongf otheris, the Erie of 
 
 IV. ® 
 
 *' Southedand, quho wald rather dye, consider- 
 " ing the gucle they haif sa lately receivit of her, 
 " than suffer her to be carryit away, they con- 
 " ducting her ;" and he was apprehensive on the 
 one hand, lest some trouble or conflict should hap- 
 pen, or on the other hand, tliat lie might be called 
 ungrateful in having betrayed the queen. These 
 doubts, she said, should have been resolved before- 
 hand ; and she advised him " to avoid those per- 
 " sons that were most mistrusted," and entreated 
 Both well to bring the greater force, as yesterday 
 they had more than three hundred horse of his 
 (Huntley's), and of Livingston's. Sutherland, 
 one of the Gordons whose attainder had been just 
 reversed, and Livingston, who resided at Callen- 
 der, were the noblemen most likely to have escort- 
 ed the queen on Monday to Stirling, with their 
 whole retinue, on their return from parliament. 
 But the objection is ridiculous, that these noble- 
 men, whom she advised Huntley to avoid if pos- 
 sible, were not then at Stirling, because they were 
 not with her on Thursday, at Cramond bridge, 
 when she was seized on her return to Edinburgh 
 with a slender train ^^°. 
 Eighth 14. On her return to Linlithgow, upon Wed- 
 
 nesday April 24, the last letter was written to 
 Bothwell, who had arrived at Hatton that same 
 
 '=" Whitaker, ii. 422—8. 
 
 letter. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 331 
 
 nio-ht. The letter is the third in the EnHish chap. 
 
 ... . ® IV. 
 
 edition, ami in Murray's Diary it was erroneously ^—^^-w 
 
 supposed to have been written previous to the 
 murder, on her former arrival at Linlithgow 
 with the king- from Glasgow. But it appears 
 from the examination of Paris, that Bothwell had 
 sent a secret message by Ormiston, to which the 
 queen returned an answer by Paris, who ac- 
 companied Ormiston to Hatton, that he might 
 bring back to her Bothwell's reply. The letter 
 itself, in which we discover a tone of tender 
 solicitude and affected complaint, was evi- 
 dently written on the eve of her seizure, the 
 necessary preliminary to her intended mar- 
 riage. " Monsieur si T ennuy de vostre ab- 
 " sence, celuy de vostre oubly, la crainte du dan- 
 " ger, tant prouve d'un chacun a vostre taut 
 " aymee personne." " My Lord, if the displea- 
 *' sure of your absence, of your forgettulness, the 
 " feir of danger so promisit by every one to your 
 *< so lovit person, may gif me consolation, I leif it 
 " to you to judge." As this letter was not in- 
 serted in the French Detection, the initial sentence 
 alone is extant in French. Had it been derived 
 from the Scotch, it would have adhered to the 
 precise words of its supposed original, and instead 
 of, V ennuy de vostre absence, celuy de vostre oubly, 
 would have given us, si le deplaisir de votre ab- 
 sence, de votre oublie, in conformity with, " the 
 « displeasure of your absence, of your iorgettui- 
 
IV. 
 
 332 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. " ness," in the Scotch. In translating, however, 
 from the French, the reverse would take place, 
 because there was no word in Scotch equivalent 
 to ennui. The translator, therefore, adopted dis- 
 pleasure, from the first sentence of the fourth 
 letter, in its French acceptation of vexation, cha- 
 grin, and adhering to the construction, de votre 
 absence, *' the displeasure r^your absence,'^ omit- 
 ted celiii, that " of your forgetfulness," which it 
 was difficult to retain, and at the same time, to 
 preserve the sense. For the same reason, la crainte 
 du danger taut prouve d'un chacun, was rendered 
 by a word adopted from the context, " so pro- 
 " mised by every one," as the fear of danger so 
 proved of every one, was unintelligble in the 
 translation. La crainte du danger, " the fear of 
 " danger," tant prouve a votre tant aimee per- 
 Sonne, " so promisit to your so lovit person," are 
 French idioms almost literally transcribed; and 
 the superior elegance and propriety of the whole 
 sentence, " Monsieur si I'ennuy de vostre absence, 
 " celuy de vostre oubly, la crainte du danger 
 " tant prouve d'un chacun a vostre tant aymee 
 " personne," demonstrate sufficiently which i)» the 
 original. In a strain of tender affectation she 
 complains of his absence and the danger to 
 which he was exposed ; of his forgetfulness, in 
 neglecting to write till then; of his promise 
 broken, to meet, or perhaps, to intercept her that 
 night; of the coldness of his writing, not cones- 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 333 
 
 ponding with the warmth of her affection ; and chap. 
 to testify how lowly she submits to his " com- --^--r^^ 
 " mands," she sends by Paris, in sig-n of homag-e, 
 a lock of hair, the ornament of the head, in- 
 closed in a ring, the emblem of her heart, *' in 
 " place quhairof, since she had ellis left it unto 
 " him," the ring was sent. The same conceit is 
 employed in her letter to Elizabeth already 
 quoted ; " Je voiis envoyes mon cceur en hagiie, 
 " et ie vous ay apporte le vray, et corps en- 
 " semble ;" and in return for a marriage contract, 
 or ring from Bothwell, it is evident that Mary, 
 then in mourning, had sent a mourning ring, or 
 " ane sepulture of hard stone, coulourit with 
 " black, sawen with tears and bones," which she 
 endeavours to accommodate to the occasion by 
 the most quaint conceits. " The stone I com- 
 *' pare to my hart, that as it is carvet in ane sure 
 " sepulture or harbor of your commandments, and 
 " above all, of your name and memorie, that are 
 " thairin inclosit, as is my hear in this ring, never 
 ** to come forth, quhilk death graunt unto you 
 " to ane trophee of victorie of my bones as the 
 " rino- is fullit." She continues to descant on 
 those strange conceits, which are necessarily 
 obscure when translated into Scotch, and in that 
 language were utterly unintelligible to the French 
 translator. Tneir extreme absurdity is no ob- 
 jection to the letter ; for nothing can be more 
 absurd than the device of a stalk of liquorice. 
 
futed. 
 
 334 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. \)^hich she assumed on the death of her first 
 
 ^^v^ husband, Francis II. or the motto embroidered 
 
 on her cloth of state, or the hand and sword cut- 
 
 tinsT vines on the cushion sent to the Duke of 
 
 Norfolk ; from which it appears that Mary was 
 
 strongly addicted to all the mystical devices and 
 
 conceits of the ag-e'^'. 
 
 Objections Thc Other obiections are, that the rin^^, accord- 
 to the last . ... , 
 
 letterre- ing" to Paris*s examination, was sent from Cailen- 
 der on her return from her former journey to Glas- 
 gow; and that the marriage (contract) which she 
 had received, and w hich she promised to retain in 
 
 '*' " Apres la mort du roy son mary (Francois) elle prit 
 I'arbrisseau de leglisier, duquel la racine est douce et tout la 
 reste hers de terre aniere, avec ces mots, dulce meum terra 
 tegit, la terre cache ma douceur ; par cette belle device, fort 
 propre a une vraye veuve, la bonne reyne d'Ecosse monstroit 
 que toutes ses joyes, tous ses plaisirs, et ses delices estoient 
 enfermes dans le tombeau du roy son premier epoux." 
 Les eloges es les Vies des Reynes, &c. avec explication de 
 ieur devices, &c. par F. Hilarion de Coste, ii. 527. edit. 
 Paris, 1647. *' In looking upon her cloth of state, I noted 
 this sentence embroidered. En ma fin est mon commencement, 
 which is a riddle I understand not." Haynes, 511. " One 
 Borthwick brought the pillow (a token to Norfolk) which was 
 wrought with the Queen of Scots' own hand, with the arms of 
 Scotland, and a hand with a sword in it, cutting vines, with 
 this sentence, virescit vulnere virtus ; declaring thereby her 
 courage, and willing the duke by such a watch sentence \6 
 take a good heart unto him." Murdin, 57. On any one of 
 these devices, how she would have descanted in a letter may 
 be easily conceived. 
 3 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 335 
 
 her bosom till the marriaofe of their bodies should chap. 
 
 ' IV. 
 
 be made in public, was afterwards found in the 
 possession of Both well'". The marriage contract 
 will be examined in the sequel. At the distance 
 of sixteen months, Paris might forget the time 
 when the ring was sent, or might confound it 
 with another; but the supposed forgers of an 
 Examination intended to coincide with a ring and 
 letter sent by Paris, never would have stated that 
 they were sent by a different messenger, and on 
 a former expedition. The plain fact appears to 
 be this : Having heard in general of a message 
 from Bothwell, by Hob Ormiston to the queen 
 at Linlithgow, her opponents assigned it, in 
 Murray's Diary, to her former journey from Glas- 
 gow, previous to the murder, and imagined that 
 the last letter, containing certain tokens, was 
 written at the same period, because it evidently 
 came from the same place. '* Januarie 28. The 
 " queen brought the king to Lynlythquow, and 
 " thair remaynit all morn quhile she gat word 
 " of my Lord Bothwell his returning toward;^ 
 " Edynbrough be Hob Ormistoun ane of the 
 " mnrtheraris; and on the 29th, she remayned all 
 «» day in Lynlythquow with the king, and wraytt 
 " from thence to Bothwell." When examined 
 concerning the ring and letter, on the journey 
 from Glasgow, Paris would have no recollection 
 
 '** Whitaker, ii. 444—8. 
 
336 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^^y^' either of a messag-e or letter at Linlithgow ; but 
 ^'^^^^'^^ remembered a man from Bothwell who brought 
 him a letter at Callencler, to be given to the 
 queen, and an answer, in which she inclosed a 
 ring-, to be delivered to the man. This messen- 
 g-er was not Ormiston, whom he» knew, and had 
 already named in his first declaration : and at the 
 distance of eighteen months, the interrogatories 
 concerning the ring and letter on the road from 
 Glasgow, would lead him to mistake, or to anti- 
 cipate an incident that had happened on the road 
 from Stirlinof. When he was afterwards interro- 
 gated concerning the journey from Stirling, his 
 evidence is explicit; that the night before the 
 seizure Monsieur cVOrmiston came and spoke 
 to -he queen very secretly, at Linlithgow, on 
 which she w rote and sent a letter by Paris, whom 
 0-miston conducted to Bothwell at Hatton. 
 Monsieur d'Ormiston seems to be Hob Ormiston, 
 as the . ther is tern. ed le Lard d' Ormiston in the 
 first declaration^"^, and we may be assured that 
 the ring and letter sent from Linlithgow, on the 
 
 '-^ " Le Lard d'Ormiston et son frere Hob." Hob, ac- 
 cording to the language of the age, was ii «• Laird of Ormis- 
 toii's fader hmther. Paris, who could make nothing of that 
 expression cal <■ ' him son frere; but had the declaration beeii 
 forged, he woui,: have been called son oticle. The reader un- 
 acquainted with a Scotch proof, must beware of the mistake, 
 that no interrogatories were put, where none are specified in 
 tile examination. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 33? 
 
 journey from Stirling-, were transferred by Paris chap. 
 to the journey from Glasgow, in consequence of ^—-y"^-' 
 such questions as made him confound the fact 
 with a former event. 
 
 15. The chronoloo-ical objections to the second chronoio- 
 
 ^ '' gicalobjec- 
 
 series of letters rfre also removed. The first letter t'ons re- 
 
 o< . . _- . moved. 
 
 was written at Stirling upon Monday evening, 
 April 21st; the second and third upon Tuesday 
 morning ; the fourth at Linlithgow, on Wednes- 
 day night; and the objection, that Huntley, who 
 followed the queen to Stirling, had not time suf- 
 ficient to return to Edinburgh with the first letter, 
 on Monday night, and to rejoin her on Tuesday 
 before the third was written, has no foundation 
 in point of fact*^*. The first letter implies the 
 very reverse of his return to Edinburgh, as he 
 pretended, on his arrival at Stirling, that Both- 
 well had *' will it him to write to you that I 
 " should say, and quhan you should cum to me, 
 " and that that you should do touchand him :'* 
 or, in other words, that he should arrange the 
 manner, time, and place of the seizure by letters. 
 But the first letter was dispatched by a messen- 
 ger of her own ; " I send this bearer unto you, 
 " for I dare not trust your brother with these 
 " letters, nor with the diligence." The second 
 was written for Huntley's inspection, and dis- 
 patched by his messenger ; as he advertised Both* 
 
 '" Whitaker, ii. 342—77. 421. 
 VOL. I. Z 
 
338 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, well, by her advice, of the difficulties that he 
 ^-*^^"*^ found. The third, on Huntley's return to her 
 presence with some new diihculties, is a more con- 
 fidential letter by the same bearer ; but his return 
 to Edinburgh on Monday ni^ht, is a fiction for 
 which the letters aflfbrd no foundation.. 
 General 16. Wlicu the letters themselves are impar- 
 
 observa- ^ , . , . . 
 
 tions on the tially examined, no doubts of their authenticity 
 
 letters. 
 
 can remain. It is in vain to contend that the 
 French and British languages were originally the 
 same ; or, that they were still the same in the 
 time of our Saxon ancestors, (because Augustine, 
 in his legation to Britain, obtained interpreters 
 from among the Franks 5) and that many idioms 
 in both languages must continue the same'^^. The 
 
 '" See Whitaker, ii, 399, who struggles hard to obviate 
 the French idioms produced by Hume. In limiting the 
 idioms quoted by Hume to the similarity of a single word, 
 he overlooked a plain proposition, that the idioms of a 
 language, may reside either in the peculiar use and accep- 
 tation, or in the peculiar collocation, arrangement, or con- 
 struction, of a word, or of a phrase. To make fault, make 
 breck, make gude watch, make me advertisement, make it seem 
 that I believe, are evidently translated from the French phrases, 
 /aire des faults, /aire breche, faire bonne garde, fairem'avertir, 
 faire semblant de la croire ; in which the construction of the 
 phrase, and the use or acceptation oi faire are peculiar to the 
 tongue. Have you not desire to laugh, the place will hold 
 untill the death, are derived also from French constructions ; 
 *' n'avez vous pas envie de rire; " la place tiendrajusque d la 
 mort;'' in the first of which, the article is omitted, in the 
 
 3 
 
IV. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 339 
 
 Complaint of Scotland, and Bellenden's transla- chap. 
 lation of Hector Boethius, the first prose compo- 
 sitions in Scotch, contain occasionally some 
 French words ; but the idioms of the lang-uage 
 are g-enuine Saxon, and in Pitscottie, Knox, 
 Buchanan, the History of James the sext, and 
 the state papers and letters of the period, no 
 gallicisms were afterwards introduced into style. 
 Every impartial reader who examines the letters, 
 and compares them with other contemporary 
 productions, will determine without a comment, 
 whether they are not replete throughout with 
 those French phrases, words, and idioms which 
 are unavoidable, and can only occur, in a literal 
 
 other inserted, in strict conformity with the French, and in 
 direct opposition to the Scottish idiom. He may not come 
 forth of the house this long time ; put order to it, *' il ne 
 pent pas sortir du logis de long terns;" mettez ordre d cela: 
 in which Whitaker searches in the word, for that idiom which 
 consists in the construction and acceptation of the phrases. 
 Discharge your heart ; this is my first journey ; deschargez 
 voire coeur, c'est ma premiere journee ; the first of which I 
 have never found in any letters of the period, and a Journey 
 for a day's work is, in Scotch or English, applied only to the 
 work done by horses or oxen. Such writers forget the ques- 
 tion ; that it is not whether a few French words, as moyen, 
 faschious, have crept into Scotch ; but whether a professed 
 translation, word for word, from the original French, con- 
 tains a literal transcript of such French idioms, as z journey 
 for a day's work, and a voyage for a journey. Whitaker, ii. 
 398. 400. Tytler, i. 226. n. 
 
 z 2 
 
340 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, translation from the French. Every impartial 
 reader of taste and judgment will also determine 
 whether they are not the genuine productions of 
 a female, and that female indisputably the queen. 
 Amidst the numerous and daily productions of 
 romance, no great discernment, or literary 
 acumen, would be necessary to pronounce upon 
 each novel that is published, whether the author 
 were a male, or some female letter-writer, whom 
 the most accomplished scholar would in vain 
 attempt to imitate in her incessant volubility and 
 easy chit-chat; in the habitual amplification of 
 the most trivial objects ; and in the quick and in- 
 coherent transitions of female sentiment, passions, 
 prejudices, intrigues, and pursuits. Nothing can 
 be more natural or characteristical than the flip- 
 pant loquacity of the letters to Bothwell ; the 
 exuberance of sentiment, and affected gallantry ; 
 the sudden vicissitudes of love, grief, indignation, 
 fear, dissimulation, jealousy, and hatred of Darn- 
 ley, intermixed with compunction at his ap- 
 proaching fate. The first letter in particular, 
 affords a curious spectacle of the secret workings 
 of the female heart. Nothing is explained of 
 which Bothwell was informed; nothing omitted, 
 of which he required information; and the murder 
 is darkly, yet indisputably intimated, as a deed 
 to which Mary was impelled by her lover, but on 
 which she could not venture to discourse, even 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. S41 
 
 with herself. But the letters subsequent to the chap. 
 murder contain no mention of her late husband, ^---y-*-' 
 to whom indeed the most remote allusion would 
 be carefully avoided, as a subject of conscious 
 and mutual guilt. As the letters were written 
 in a cultivated and refined language, in which 
 she excelled, the elegance as well as idioms of 
 the original breaks forth occasionally through 
 the rude medium of a homely translation ; and 
 every impartial reader, who compares them with 
 her subsequent letters to Elizabeth and others, 
 will determine, from the same loose and voluble 
 declamation, unrestrained invective, and pas- 
 sionate complaint, whether they are not the 
 genuine, indisputable productions of the Scottish 
 queen. 
 
 17. The very disappearance and loss of the oisappear- 
 
 '' '1 ance of the 
 
 originals, when conjoined with the preservation letters. 
 of the casket, which is still extant, affords a final 
 proof that the letters were genuine. During the 
 administration of the four Regents, they were 
 diligently preserved. From Murray, they passed 
 successively to Lennox, and to Morton ; and on 
 his execution, they were secretly conveyed, 
 through different hands, to the Earl of Gowrie, 
 one of the confederate lords, to whom Elizabeth, 
 in November 1582, made repeated a[)plicationsto 
 obtain the custody of the box and letters. It ap- 
 pears from Bowes, her ambassador's correspon- 
 dence with Walsingham, that the Duke of Len- 
 
342 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, nox, the young king's favourite, had also earnestly 
 \^/^>^ sought to obtain them ; and that Mary, to whom he 
 was entirely devoted, was anxious to get them de- 
 livered up or defaced. But it appears that the 
 letters were carefully retained by Gowrie, for the 
 vindication of the confederates ; and that he re- 
 sisted every application from Elizabeth, to deliver 
 them up, without the privity of those who had an 
 interest in them, and without the consent of the 
 young king, who was then informed of their being 
 in his hands'-^. In April, 1584, he was unex- 
 pectedly seized at Dundee, and was committed 
 to the custody of Captain James Stewart, the 
 temporary Earl of Arran, who sought impatiently 
 for his life and estate. His trial and execution 
 took place at Stirling, on the 4th of May ; and 
 from that period the letters have disappeared. 
 preserva- But the caskct was purchased from a Papist, by 
 casket. the Marchioness of Douglas, (a daughter of the 
 Huntley family) about the period of the restora- 
 tion. After her death, her plate was sold to a 
 goldsmith, from whom her daughter-in-law, Anne, 
 Heiress and Duchess of Hamilton, repurchased 
 the casket, which is still preserved in the Hamil- 
 ton family. There can be no doubt of its identity, 
 as it corresponds exactly with the description 
 given in the memorandum prefixed to the letters, 
 
 "® See Bowes's Letter on Robertson's Dissertation on the 
 murder of King Henry. History of Scotland, 376. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 345 
 
 in Buchanan's detection, and retains the secret 
 marks of the letter F. (the initial letter of Fran- 
 cis II.) surmounted with Fleurs de lis, and the 
 crown of France. There is no chance, however, 
 of the letters being- discovered in the archives of 
 the Hamilton family, after the frequent researches 
 that have been made, and the accurate inventory 
 that has been taken of its papers. And there is 
 no reason to suppose, from the written narrative 
 preserved with the casket'-^, that the letters were 
 contained .in it, when it was first purchased by 
 the Marchioness of Douglas. 
 
 It is here observable, that the letters could not Conclusion, 
 have been lost by accident merely, when the 
 casket that contained them, was preserved by a 
 Papist; since its historical importance, as a relic 
 of Queen Mary, was evidently well understood. 
 The English ambassador derived his information 
 from the Prior of Pluscardine, the son of Mary's 
 old adherent, Lord Seton, and afterwards Earl 
 ofDumfermline, and Chancellor to James. When 
 Lennox, therefore, applied to procure the letters, 
 it was openly known, and the king" himself was 
 already informed, that they were in Gowrie's 
 possession. At that early period, he became so 
 zealous for the honour of his mother, that within 
 three weeks after the execution of Gowrie, he 
 procured the condemnation in fact of Buchanan's 
 
 '" See last article of Appendix, No. XX. 
 
344 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. History in the Scottish Parliament, and a severe 
 IV. * . . . 
 
 act against words uttered to the dishonour of his 
 
 parents and progenitors, either publicly, in 
 sermons, &c. or privately, even in familar con- 
 ference. It is impossible, therefore, to suppose 
 that the letters could have escaped the inquiries 
 of James and his ministers, on the sudden seizure 
 and execution of Gowrie ; and we may be as- 
 sured of this, that if the Queen's hand had been 
 counterfeited in them, they would have been 
 preserved and produced, as the only vindication 
 which her honour required. But the final dis- 
 appearance and loss of the letters on the execution 
 of Gowrie, is explained by the careful preserva- 
 tion and discovery of the casket in the possession 
 of Papists ; and must be ascribed to the desire 
 of suppressing those authentic documents of the 
 Queen's guilt, which, unless they had been ge- 
 nuine, would neither have been retained by the 
 four Regents, nor destroyed by James. From 
 the same cause, the records of Justiciary, that 
 contained the trials of the murderers, the acts 
 or proceedings of the conferences at Westminster, 
 and the books of the privy council of England, 
 at that precise period, when the letters were 
 examined *^% have all disappeared ; and the evi- 
 dence of these proceedings is in fact i*educed to 
 
 '" See First Report of a Committee of the Houie of Com- 
 mons on the State of the Public Records, p. 75. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 345 
 
 such of the first loose dranafhts of the minutes chap. 
 
 IV. 
 
 as Cecil had retained, or Sir Robert Cotton 
 afterwards collected. But the loss of such 
 various records in both kingdoms, which never 
 can be considered as entirely accidental, confirms 
 our conclusion, that the letters so carefully pre- 
 served by Gowrie, were suppressed and destroyed 
 by James, or his ministers, in order to remove 
 those documents of his mother's guilt, which, if 
 her hand-writing had indeed been forged, would 
 have afforded the most incontestible and complete 
 vindication that her innocence could receive. 
 
546 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 The Sonnets. 
 
 CHAP. 1 . in'ROM the letters we proceed to the sonnets, 
 - which were published entire in the original 
 
 poetry French, with a literal translation into Scottish 
 prose. As the translation is destitute of numbers, 
 and adheres to the orig-inal, line for line, it is now 
 reluctantly admitted, that the sonnets were first 
 written in French. But their authenticity is still 
 disputed, on the authority of Brantome, who 
 asserts, that they were too gross and unpolished 
 to be the composition of Mary; and the forgery 
 is ascribed to Buchanan, because there was no 
 one in Scotland capable of writing French verse, 
 except himself or the queen. The sonnets, there- 
 fore, were originally forged in French, by Bu- 
 chanan, who was unable, however, to give a 
 French version of the letters which he translated, 
 as it seems, into Latin, for the supposed Camus 
 to convert into French ^ That the sonnets were 
 
 • Tytler, i. 254. Whitaker, i. 501—28. iii. 59—71. Bu- 
 chanan observes, in his History, that the sonnets are not in- 
 elegant. Carmen Gallicum non inehganter factum ; " a sure 
 proof that he forged them himself." ibid. Stuart's Hist. i. 
 396. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 347 
 
 first written in French, might have taught those cimp. 
 disputants to suspect that the letters were origi- 
 ginally composed in the same language. But 
 the grossness of the sonnets is a prevailing argu- 
 ment with those who either are ignorant of the 
 grossness of the age, or are persuaded with 
 Goodall, that Mary never once betrayed a single 
 foible from the cradle to the graved That her 
 verses were coarse and unpolished, may be de- 
 duced from the evidence of Brantome himself, 
 who informs us, " EUe se mesloit d'estre poete et 
 " composer des vers, dont j'en ay veu aucuns des 
 " beaux et tres bien faits, et nullement resem- 
 " blans a ceux qu'on lui a mis a sus avoir fait sur 
 " I'amour du comte de Bothveil ; ils sont trop 
 " grossiers et mal polis pour etre sortis d'elle. 
 " Mr. de Ronsard estoit bien de mon opinion en 
 " cela, ainsi que nous discourions un jour, et que 
 " nous lisions ensamble. EUe composit bien de 
 " plus beaux, et de plus gentilsy et promptement, 
 '* comme Je Tay veue souvent, comme elle se re- 
 '* tiroit a son cabinet, et sortoit aussitot, pour nous 
 " en montrer, a aucuns honneste gens que nous 
 " estions^" Brantome describes the futile poetry 
 of Charles IX. nearly in the same terms of 
 adulation : " II voulut scavoir la poesie et se mes- 
 
 ^ Gutta pallia nonfefellit una. Goodall Pref. 28. Hailes' 
 Remarks on the History of Scotland, 181. 
 = Brautome, ix. 112. Jebb, ii. 478. 
 
V. 
 
 348 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. « loit d'en escrire, et forte g-entiment — qn'il 
 " faisoit forte gentiment prestement et in promtUf 
 " sans songer, comme j*en ay ven plusiers qu'il 
 " daignoit bien quelque fois rnonstrer, en sortant 
 de son cabinet*.'' From such an extemporary 
 mode of composition, nothing better was to be 
 expected than the conversation verses which 
 Lord Hailes has so well explained ; and we may 
 be assured, that Mary's extemporary verses were 
 little superior to the fashionable prose in rhyme 
 of Charles IX. which Brantome has praised in 
 the same terms, and which Ronsard was not 
 ashamed to extol to heaven, and even to prefer 
 to his own. The only poems of Mary's extant, 
 are the verses preserved by Brantome, on the 
 death of Francis II.; the sonnets to Bolhwell in 
 Buchanan's Detection ; a sonnet to Elizabeth, in 
 the Cotton Library, in French and Italian ; and 
 a French sonnet, in the State Paper Office, writ- 
 ten during her confinement in England \ Of 
 these, the first is a short poem, written with care, 
 and in imitation of Ronsard, for the French 
 court; the third and fourth were written with 
 
 " Brantome, iv. 31. 
 
 ^ See Appendix, No. XXII. Anioug her poems I do not 
 include Sir Thomas Chaloners's Lalin translation of some 
 French verses sent with a ring to Elizabeth, (De Rep. Angl. 
 Instaurar, 353.) nor Blackwood's Latin translation of a 
 French poem, made during her imprisonment. Blackwood 
 Poemata. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEV. 349 
 
 the same care for the court of Elizabeth : but the chap. 
 
 V. 
 
 Second is a long and hasty effusion on the absence ^-^"vw 
 ofBothwell, to whdna alone it is addressed, and Bothweii. 
 whose rude taste, such conversation verses as she 
 retired to her cabinet, to produce promptement, 
 like Charles IX. sans son^er, were sufficient to 
 please. Her taste was formed on the quaint 
 and obscure conceits of Ronsard, whom she pa- 
 tronised % not on the natural ease of Marot, and 
 her verses on her first husband may vie with her 
 lufe balletf or sonnets to Bothweii, for poverty of 
 sentiment, and the most unintelligible bombast. 
 The love ballad is a regular series of connected 
 sonnets on the same subject, written apparently 
 at the same time : and the four first lines, 
 
 O Dieux ayez de raoy compassion, 
 Et m'eiiseignez quelle preuve certain, 
 Je puis donner qui ne luy semble vain 
 De mon amour et ferme aifection; 
 
 differ only in the greater length, and of course in 
 the greater mediocrity of the verse, from her first 
 stanza upon Francis II. 
 
 * Vie de Ronsard. " Mais sur tout elle aimoitla poesie, et 
 sur tout M. de Bellay et M. de Maison-fleur." Brantome, 
 ix. 112. The two last poets I have not met with, but I doubt 
 not that some conceits in her letters and sonnets may be 
 traced to their works, as to those of Ronsard. 
 
350 PISSERTATION ON 
 
 En iHon triste et doux chant, 
 D'un ton fort lamentable, 
 Je jette un ceil tranchant, 
 De perte incomparable; 
 Et en soupirs cuisans 
 Passe men meilleurs ans. 
 
 An address to the gods, to teach her what certain 
 proofs of affection she might g-ive to Bothwell, is 
 certainly not inferior in sentiment to the sad and 
 sweet song " d'un ton fort lamentable," in which 
 she throws, ** im oeil tranchant, de perte incom- 
 ** parable." The succeeding' verses of the son- 
 nets, 
 
 Las ! n'est 11 pas ia en possession, 
 Du corps, du coeur qui ne refuse paine, 
 Ny deshoneur, en la vie uncertaine. 
 Offense de parentz, ne pire affliction 1 
 
 may be compared with the second stanza of the 
 elegy, 
 
 Fut il un tel malheur, 
 De dure destinee, 
 Ny si triste douleur, 
 De Dame fortunee. 
 Que mon coeur et mon ceil, 
 Voit en biere et cercueil. 
 
 If " possession du corps du cceur, qui ne refuse 
 *' deshoneur," be considered as too gross and in- 
 
V. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. g^l 
 
 delicate for Mary, " tel malheur de dure destinee, chap. 
 " triste douleur de dame fortunee," must be re- 
 jected as too absurd and insipid, for her heart and 
 eye to perceive on the bier and in the coffin. 
 Pire affliction^ in the sonnets, is certainly not 
 worse than a subsequent stanza in the elegy : 
 
 Car mon pis et mon mieux 
 Sont les plus desert lieux. 
 
 Nor is it possible to extract any meaning from 
 the following verses. 
 
 Si par fois vers les cieux, 
 Viens a dresser ma veue. 
 La doux trait de scs yeux, 
 Je voy en une nue ; 
 Soudain le vois en I'eau, 
 Comme dans un tombeau. 
 
 We are told that every palace in France was 
 surrounded with water', in which Mary, who saw 
 the sweet traits of her husband's eyes in the 
 clouds, might perceive him again (by reflection) 
 as if in his tomb j or, as altered in the transla- 
 tion ; 
 
 His visionary form I see. 
 Pictured in orient clouds to me. 
 Sudden it flies and he appears. 
 Drowned in a watery tomb of tears, 
 
 ' Lord Elibank's Letter on Lord Hailes' Remarks. 
 
35Z DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. And I know not which is most unintelligible'. 
 The concluding- stanza is in the same tumid, in- 
 sipid strain. 
 
 Mets chacoD icy fin, 
 A si triste complainte, 
 Dont sera le refrin, 
 Amour vray et non feint. 
 Pour la separation- 
 N'aura diminution. 
 
 And lier 
 sonnet to 
 Elizabeth. 
 
 And her sonnet to Ehzabeth, in which her anxiety 
 to see her sister at once delights and torments her, 
 concludes with a comparison of a ship forced back 
 from its port by a sudden storm. 
 
 Ainsi je suis en soucy et en crainte 
 Non pas de vous, mais quante fois a tort 
 Fortune romps voille et cordage double. 
 
 From these specimens of Mary's verses, the 
 poetry which Brantome commends, as plus beaux 
 et phis (/entil, must be classed with our modern 
 Delia Crasca poetry, and with such courtly 
 strains as Pope's Song by a Person of Quality 
 was written to explode. 
 First 2. But the sonnets contain internal evidence, 
 
 ionnet. ... 
 
 that they were neither written, nor perhaps under- 
 stood by her opponents at the time. In the first 
 
 • Tytler, ii. 419. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 353 
 
 sonnet, she enumerates the proofs of her affection 
 to Bothwell; that he was already in possession, c?m 
 corps du cceuVj (the supposed g-rossness of which 
 disappears in the alliterative idiom) " qui ne re- 
 ** fuse paine," 
 
 Offence de parentz, ne pire affliction : 
 
 Pour luy tous mes amis i' estime moins que rien, 
 
 Et de mes ennemis ie veux esperer bien. 
 
 J'ay hazard^ pour luy et nom et conscience: 
 
 Je veux pour luy au monde renoncer ; 
 
 Je veux mourir pour luy avancer 
 
 Que reste il plus pour prouver ma Constance 1 
 
 Her relations (parents) in France, whose displea> 
 sure she incurred, are distinguished from the 
 friends whom she slighted in Scotland ; and her 
 enemies from whom she was willing to hope the 
 best, are the murderers of Rizio, to whom she had 
 been reconciled by Bothwell. Had the sonnets, 
 however, been forged, the mention of friends 
 whom she slighted, would have contained a more 
 pointed application to Murray j and Morton, who 
 seized the casket, and through whose hands the 
 forgery must have passed, never would have been 
 represented, with his associates, as enemies to 
 whom she was lately reconciled, and on whose 
 assistance she was disposed to rely. If the next 
 verse, ^''«^ hazardepour lui et nom et conscience^ 
 were applicable either to the adultery or to the 
 murder, the same allusion which Mary would 
 
 VOL. T. A A 
 
354 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, have avoided, the forgers would have been careful 
 to render explicit. But the same idea recurs in 
 the ninth sonnet : 
 
 Pour luy i'ay hazarde grandeur et conscience. 
 Pour luy tons mes parentz fay quite et amis ; 
 Et tous autres respects son apart mis : 
 
 and is well explained by Lord Hailes, as a feeling" 
 allusion to the offence given to her relations, 
 offense de parentz et pire affliction j and to the 
 danger of her own conscience, and of her esti- 
 mation abroad, from her marriage with a pro- 
 testant, without the consent or knowledge of the 
 house of Lorrain''. That her conscience was 
 endangered by a marriage with a protestant, was 
 a circumstance of which the supposed forgers 
 would have no conception. But it is ex- 
 plained in her Instructions to the Bishop of 
 Dumblain, to excuse her marriage to the French 
 court ; viz. that Bothwell, having obtained her 
 promise, would not wait, as was maist reasonable, 
 for the consent of her friends, but concluded the 
 marriage in the protestant form, " not weying 
 " quhat was convenient for us that hes bene 
 " norised in our awin religion, and never intends 
 " to leif the samen for him or any man upon 
 *' earth"/* 
 
 • Hailes's Remarks, 207. 
 
 " Hailes's Remarks, 208. Anderson, i. 99. To this the 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 355 
 
 §. But the most disputed, if not the most dif- ^^A^- 
 ficult point to ascertain, is to what period of her ^-'-v-*^ 
 connexion with Bothwell the sonnets must be as- w^^" ^^^ 
 
 sonnets 
 
 signed. On the supposition of their authenticity, werewrit- 
 her adversaries were necessarily ignorant of their 
 precise date ; and in the note prefixed to the son- 
 nets, it is supposed that they were written to 
 Bothwell " befoir hir mariage with him, and (as 
 " it is sayd) quhile hir husband ly vit, but certainly 
 " befoir his divorce from his wife/' Lord Hailes 
 proves that they were written after the restitution 
 of Huntley in parliament, April 19lh ; but he has 
 transferred them arbitrarily to the interval be- 
 tween her seizure and her marriage with Both- 
 well, in which Stuart concurs. And Whitaker 
 concludes that they can refer only to the sepa- 
 ration at Borthwick, when she remained behind, 
 while Both M' ell passed to Melrose before his 
 flight to Dunbar". As the sonnets were con- 
 fessedly written in Bothwell's absence, it is ne- 
 cessary first to determine upon what occasions 
 they were separated before their marriage. She 
 was attended without intermission by Bothwell, 
 from the birth of her son till her expedition to 
 
 usual answer is returned, that the author of the sonnets con- 
 sulted the instructions; (Stuart, i. 39G.)but the allusion is un- 
 intelligible in the sonnets, and is discovered only in the sub- 
 sequent instructions. 
 
 » Hailes's Remarks, 203. Stuart's Hist. i. 395. n. Whit- 
 aker, iii. 57. 143. Robertson of Dalmeny, Appendix, 35. 
 A A 2 
 
356 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Jedburgfh, and from her recovery after her visit 
 •^ to the Hermit;. ge, till her journey to Glasgow; 
 when the sonnets were certainly not composed. 
 From the murder of her husband, they were never 
 separated till her journey to Stirling, and the oc- 
 casional coincidence of the sonnets with the let- 
 ters is alone sufficient to ascertain their date. 
 The second sonnet begins. 
 
 Second 
 
 sonnet. 
 
 Entre ses mains et en son plein pouvoir, 
 Je raetz mon fi'z, raon honneur et ma vie, 
 Mon pais, mes subjects, mon ame assubjectie. 
 Est toutaluy, et n'ay autre vouUoir 
 Pour mon object. 
 
 In " his handis and in his full power, I put my 
 " Sonne, my honour, and my lyif,'* alludes parti- 
 cularly to an historical fact preserved by Bucha- 
 nan, to which, though unknown when he wrote 
 his Detection, he had peculiar access when his 
 History was composed; namely, that one object 
 of the journey to Stirling, was to obtain posses- 
 sion of the young prince, and to transfer the 
 custody of his person to Bothwell, which was 
 prevented by the vigilant precaution of the Earl 
 of Mar'^. But the recurrence of the same thought 
 
 " Buchanan's Hist. lib. xviii. p, 356. From his residence 
 at Stirling, in the Mar family, after the Detection was written, 
 he had access to this, and to many other circumstances in- 
 serted in his History, concierning the queen. In one sense 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. S57 
 
 and expression was unavoidable in a letter written chap. 
 on the same subject, at the same time, when her 
 mind was occupied and filled with the sonnets. 
 3Ion pais, mes subjects, mon ame, assubjectie, est 
 tout a /m?/, is translated, " my contry, my subjects, 
 " my soule al subdewit to him and has none uther 
 " will, for my scope ;" and in the last letter, 
 ** since I am ellis so far made yours, that that 
 " quhilk pleasis you is acceptable to me, and my 
 *' thoughts are so willingly subduit unto yours/* 
 is a repetition of the same sentiment, mon ame, 
 (mes pen.seesj assubjecties a vous, and an obvious 
 translation of the same phrase. From the proofs 
 of her attachment, she passes by a natural tran- 
 sition to Both well's wife, whose false tears and 
 feigned affection, of which there was no symptom 
 at the marriage, she contrasts with her own, in 
 the third sonnet, 
 
 EUe pour son honneur vous doibt obeyssance Third 
 
 ,, , ., . ... sonnet. 
 
 Moy vous obeyssant j en puis recevoir blasrae, 
 
 N'estant, ^ mon regret, comme elle vostre fenime. 
 
 The divorce of course was not then obtained, and 
 as Lady Bothwell was naturally the object of her 
 
 her marriage alone put her son and subjects in Bothwell's 
 power ; but the third sonnet, when written at Stirling, states 
 with precision, a fact unknown at Westminster ; "In his 
 hands I place (Je metz) my son," as she meant, and expected 
 to do, before she left that town. 
 
358 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. 
 V. 
 
 Fourth 
 sonnet. 
 
 jealous apprehension, she compares the interested 
 obedience of a wife, with her own disinterested, 
 and submissive attachment, so injurious to her- 
 self. 
 
 4. In the fourth sonnet, 
 
 Par vous, mon cwiir! et par vostre alliance, 
 
 EUe a remis sa nvaison en lionneur ; 
 
 Elle a jouy par vous la grandeur, 
 
 Dont tous les siens n'avent nul asseurance: 
 
 De vous nion bieu ! elle a eu la constance (I'accointance) 
 
 Et n'a perdu siuon la jouyssance 
 
 D'un fascheux sot quelle aymoit cherement. 
 
 On the murder of Rizio, Huntley, notwithstand- 
 ing his father's attainder, had been appointed 
 chancellor, by the interest of Bothwell, whose 
 marriage with his sister was the first step towards 
 his promotion. But the second line, " Elle a 
 " remis sa maison en honneur," refers directly 
 to the reversal of the attainder, and the restitu- 
 tion of his family in parliament, on Saturday 
 April 19th, to which the queen, in a sonnet 
 written three days afterwards, naturally alludes. 
 From the fascheux sot quelle aymoit cherement^ 
 it appears that Lady Bothwell's marriage was a 
 political, and perhaps a compulsive alliance, to re- 
 store her family ; and in all probability tlie 
 passage alludes to her kinsman Alexander Earl 
 of Sutherland, whom she afterwards married. 
 The fifth sonnet describes her cold returns to 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 
 
 359 
 
 Bothwell's affection, both before and after their ^"^p, 
 marriag-e ; when, 
 
 De vostre raorte ie ne vis la peaiir, 
 Que meritoit tel inary et seigneur. 
 
 The danger of his death, to which his wife was 
 indifferent, can alhide to nothing else than his 
 wound in Licldesdale, the only occasion on which 
 his life was endangered, and on which the queen's 
 superior attachment was so signally displayed. 
 The sixth sonnet describes Lady Bothweirs arti- 
 fices, by letters filled with a fictitious passion, 
 and tout fardez de scavoir^^ to retain her husband, 
 whose worth she then only began to discover, 
 and in the seventh sonnet, Mary returns to her 
 own affection, to which she is afraid that the re- 
 cent professions of her rival are preferred. 
 
 Sixth 
 sonnet. 
 
 Vous la croyer las ! trop ie I'appercoy, 
 Et vous doutes de ma ferme Constance, 
 O mon seul bien ! et mon seul esperance, 
 Et ne vous puis asseurer de raa foy. 
 
 Seventh 
 sonnet. 
 
 " From a beautiful copy of the Legenda Aurea edit. 1470, 
 in which her name is frequently inscribed, Lady Jean Gordon 
 appears to have been a woman "of some learning. She was 
 married to Bothweli at twenty, and in 1573 was again mar- 
 ried to Alexander Earl of Sutherland, whom she survived , 
 and was afterwards married to Ogilvie of Boyne. She died 
 in 1629, at the age of eighty-four, and was a woman of great 
 prudence, retaining her jointure out of Bothwell's estate, till 
 
36(5 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 Mon seul bien, as if to ascertain the date, is re- 
 pented in her last letter, ** my onlei/ wealth! resave 
 " thairfore in as gude part;'' and Lord Hailes*s 
 remark is undoubtedly just, that Bothwell's jea- 
 lous suspicions of her constant, and sincere at- 
 tachment, are unaccountable in a forger, who 
 would have represented their connexion, in all 
 its circumstances, as rank and flagitious in the 
 extreme'*. Such apprehensions were natural to 
 Mary, who was conscious that Bothwell, having 
 two strings to his boiv, might well despise an at- 
 tachment ^o lightly transferred from Darnley, or 
 suspect that it might be transferred to another, 
 with the same facility as from Darnley to him- 
 self. From the same apprehension, she is care- 
 ful, in her letters to Norfolk, to assure him of 
 her faithfulness ; and that she would be true and 
 obedient as, long as she lived". The remainder 
 of the sonnet, 
 
 Vous deffiant a trop grand tort de moy ; 
 Vous iguorez I'amour que ie vous porte, 
 Vous soup^onnez qu'autre amour me transporte, 
 Vous estimez mes paroUes de vent, 
 Vous depeignez de cire moa las coeur, 
 
 faer death, and managing the Sutherland estate, during the 
 minority of h» r son. Sir Robert Gordon, of Gordonstone's 
 Hist, of the Sutherland family. 
 
 " Hailes's Remarks, 216. 
 
 " Hardwicke's State Papers, i. 193. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 
 
 Vous rae pensez femme sans jugement, 
 Et tout cela augmente mon ardeur ; 
 
 coincides with her first letter from Stirling on 
 Huntley's arrival. " Monsieur, helas! pourquoy 
 " est Motive fiance mise en personne si indigne, 
 " pour soupgonner ce qui est entirement vostre. 
 *' J"" enraged 
 
 5. As these circumstances augment her passion, 
 the eighth sonnet describes its increase. 
 
 S6fl 
 
 CHAP. 
 V. 
 
 Mon amour croist, et plus en plus croistra, 
 Tant que ie vivray, et tiendray ^ grandheur, 
 Tant seulement d'avoir part en ce cceur. 
 Vers qui en fin mon amour paroistra 
 Sitres k clair que jamais n'en doustra. 
 
 D'avoir part en ce ccBur, means not that she was 
 content to divide his affection with her rivaP^ 
 but, as the context intimates, that she wanted only 
 a share, or place, in that heart lo convince him so 
 clearly of her love, as to efface all his doubts ; or 
 in other words to obtain the whole in return. For 
 him therefore she would struggle with misfor- 
 tune; for him search for grandeur 3 for him 
 expect good fortune ; 
 
 Pour luy i' attendz toute bonne fortune. 
 Pour luy ie veux garder sante et vie. 
 
 '" Whitaker, iii. 75. 
 
 Eighth 
 sonnet. 
 
362 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Pour luy toute vertu de suyvre i'ay envie. 
 
 Et sans changer me trouvera tout une. 
 
 The same train of ideas occurs in her last letter, 
 in which she enumerates, among the causes of her 
 uneasiness, ** the unhap that my cruel lot and con- 
 " tinuall misadventure hes hitherto promisit me, 
 " following the misfortunes and feares as weill of 
 " lait as of a lang tyme by past;" and pursuing 
 the same train of ideas, pour lui faltendz toute 
 honne fortune, she anticipates in the sonnets that 
 good fortune for the future which she had not 
 hitherto enjoyed. " Quhilk is the finall order 
 " that you promisit to take for the suertie of the 
 " only upliald of my' lyfe. For quhilk alone I 
 " will preserve the same ;" pour luij'e veux garder 
 sante et vie : " and without the quhilk I desire not 
 " but suddain death." *' Though my merits wer 
 " mekle greater then of the maist profite, that 
 " ever was, and sic as I desire to be, and sail take 
 " payne in conditions to imitate, for to be bestowit 
 " worthily under your regiment:" Pour luy toute 
 vertude suyvre fay envie. " That for ever dedi- 
 " cates unto you hir hart hir bodie, without any 
 " change — of quhilk you may hold you assurit 
 " that unto the deith sail na wayes be eschangit." 
 Et sans changer me trouvera tout une. 
 
 Ninth ^' '^'^^ ninth sonnet proceeds in the same 
 sonnet, strain. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARN LEY. S63 
 
 Pour luy aussi ie jette mainte larme, CHAP. 
 
 Premier quand il se fist de ce corps possesseur 
 
 Duquel alors il n'avoit pas le cosur ; 
 
 Puis me donna un autre dur alarme, 
 
 Quand il versa de son sang mainte dragme. 
 
 Dent de grief il me vint lesser doleur. 
 
 Qui m'en pensa oster la vie, et frayeur 
 
 De perdre las ! le seul rempar qui m'arme. 
 
 Each of these lines is suj3posed to be pregnant 
 with some latent historical fact. From the trans- 
 lation of the three first verses ; " For him also 
 " I poured out many tears, First when he made 
 " himself possessor of this body, Of the quhilk 
 ** then he had not the heart j" the forg-ers are 
 supposed to have inadvertently betrayed a fact 
 never known before, that her passion for Both- 
 well commenced after the adulterous act, as he 
 had not then her heart, and that the adultery 
 (after her husband's death) was perpetrated by 
 the commission of an actual rape upon her per- 
 son, when conveyed to Dunbar. The next line, 
 ** quhen he bled of his blude great quantitie," 
 discloses another scene from Clarissa; and the 
 queen was, it seems, so indignant, and her grief 
 so outrageous at the violence, that Bothvvell ac- 
 tually stabbed himself from commiseration or 
 despair. The succeeding lines discover an addi- 
 tional fact, that Mary had almost died of grief 
 during her confinement ; and these scenes of 
 historical romance, the rape and the queen's in- 
 
364 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, dignation and anguish, the wound inflicted by 
 ^^^/^^ Bothwell on himself, the grief and sickness that 
 endangered her life, and their mutual reconva- 
 lescence before their return to Edinburgh, of 
 which historians are ignorant, were all realized 
 during the nine days that they remained at Dun- 
 bar". 
 itsreaiex- Unfortunately for these new discoveries, the 
 p ana ion. ^^^^.^ ^j^.^ ^1^^ ^j^^^l wcrc for Bothwcll himself, 
 
 ffour lui aiissi: and it was his blood M'hen wound- 
 ed, that excited such grief and terror as to en- 
 danger her life. According to the preceding 
 interpretation, the two first lines, on the suppo- 
 sition even of a rape, must be referred to the 
 queen's lodging in the Cliekker -house ^ September 
 24, 1568, when she was first betrayed, at ipsa 
 dicehat, into Both well's arms ; " nam per hortum 
 " in cubicuium Regina) introductus earn invitam 
 " vi compressit, sed quam invitam tempus veri- 
 " tatis parens ostendit*^ In the two succeeding 
 
 " Whitaker, iii. 78. 83. 105. Robertson of Dalmeny's 
 Hist, of Mary. Appendix, 36. 48. 
 
 " Buchanan's Detection. Murray's Diary. Appendix, 
 No. III. Lord Hailes's explanation, in which I formerly con- 
 curred, that ce corps means that, instead of, this body, and 
 is ap|>licable to Lady Bothwell, not to the queen, must be 
 rejected as hardly consistent with ** duquel alors,'^ and " un 
 aut7-e dur alarm," in the context. Here it is observable, 
 how fond Mary was, of playing upon the French words, 
 corps et coeur, not only in her sonnets and letters to Both- 
 well, but in her subsequent letters to Elizabeth, and in the 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 365 
 
 lines she proceeds in the same train of incidents, chap. 
 to a subsequent event; "then he gave me an- ^---v-"*^ 
 *' other hard charge," un autre dure alarme, and 
 having already reproached Lady Bothwell, in 
 the fifth sonnet, with indifference to his death, she 
 now describes her own grief and consternation 
 on the same occasion, quatid il versa de son sang 
 mainte dragme: not the visionary scenes of 
 Clarissa, ravished by Lovelace, who falls upon 
 his own sword in despair, but the historical fact, 
 of Bothwell w^ounded by a ruffian in Liddesdale, 
 " when he bled of his blude great quantitie," 
 and when Mary flew to the Hermitage with such 
 anxiety to his relief. Accordingly in the three 
 next lines, she describes, as the consequence of 
 her grief and terror, qui men pensa oster la vie, 
 her severe sickness at Jedburgh, which had al- 
 most deprived her of life : and in these histori- 
 cal facts, we discover a full and rational expla- 
 nation of her verses, without resorting to any 
 historical romance. The two first lines relate to 
 tears shed for Bothwell before he was wounded ; 
 and if he obtained possession of Mary's person, 
 before he acquired her heart, such a constructive 
 rape, as it preceded his wounds in Liddesdale, 
 and her dangerous illness on that occasion, must 
 be referred to their first criminal intercourse at 
 
 sonnet written during her captivity in England. Hailes's 
 Remarks, 211. 
 
566 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, the Chequer-house, when Lady Reres betrayed 
 *.>N'-w/ her, as she said, into his arms. 
 
 The renoainder of the sonnet continues the train 
 of circumstances, from her sickness downwards to 
 their proposed alliance. 
 
 Pour luy depuis i'ay mesprise I'honneur, 
 Ce qui nous peult seul pourvoir de bonheur ; 
 Pour luy i'ay hazarde grandeur et conscience; 
 Pour luy tous mes parentz i'ay quite, et amis ; 
 Et tous autres respectz sont apart mis : 
 Brief de vous seul ie cerche I'ttlliance. 
 
 These circumstances are all depuis, since her ill- 
 ness, when Bothwell was wounded, and to the 
 astonishment of commentators, they are subse- 
 quent even to the pretended rape. 
 
 Tenth 7. The tenth sonnet begins 
 
 sonnet. 
 
 De vous ie dis, seul soustien de ma vie? 
 Tant seulement ie cerche I'alliance; 
 Et si ose de nioy tant presumer, 
 De vous gaigner maugre tout I'envie. 
 
 The first line is translated in Scotch, " Of yon I 
 " say, onhj vpholder of my life;'* and in the 
 eighth letter the same phrase occurs, in a passage 
 already quoted ; and again, in the same letter, 
 *' with as greit affectioun as I pray God, the 
 *' only uphold of my lyfe! fseulsouliin de ma vie) 
 " to git you lang and blessit lyfe, and to me 
 2 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 367 
 
 " your gude favour as the onlie gude that I chap. 
 *' desire, and to the quhilk I pretend/' The sen- ^^^^^ 
 timent is also the same in both ; to assure her- 
 self of him, in the sonnet, or to gain his good 
 favour in the letter, is her only desire, ta7it seuh' 
 mentje cherche, or the only good to which she 
 pretends. 
 
 Car c'est }e seul desir de vostre cher amie, 
 De vous servir et loyaument aymer; 
 Et tous malheurs moins que riens estitiier, 
 Et vostre volonte de la mien suivre, 
 
 ** Since that quhilk pleasis you is acceptable to 
 " me, and my thoughts are sa willingly suhduit 
 " unto yours, that all that commeth of you, pro- 
 " cedis of sic causis as / desire myselj.'* 
 
 Sans aymer rien que vous, soidz la subjection 
 De qui ie veux, sans nulle fiction, 
 Vivre et mourir, et a ce i' obteinpere. 
 
 *' The disdain that I cannot be in outward 
 " effect yours, as I am W\i\\o\jX feintness in hart 
 " and sprite, and of gude reason, for to be be- 
 " stowit worthily under your regiment." In these 
 passages the sonnet still occupied her mind, and 
 produced a repetition of the same sentiments and 
 phrases as in the letter. 
 
 8. But the last sonnet may enable us to deter- Eleventh 
 
 sonnet. 
 
 mine the date with precision. 
 
V. 
 
 ggg DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Mon coeur, mon sang, mon ame, et mon soucy, 
 
 Las ! vous m'avez promis qu'aurons ce plasir 
 De deviser avecque vous h loysir, 
 Toufe la nnict, ou ie languis icy, 
 Ayant la coeur d'extreme paour transy. 
 Pour voir absent le but de mon desir. 
 
 Precise In her last letter she accuses Bothwell per apO' 
 
 sonnets ^%-pliasvi\ " nouther will I accuse you of your litle 
 ** remembrance, and least of all of your promise 
 ♦'broken;" which was certainly different from 
 the promise mentioned in her letter on Monday, 
 that he would resolve all. Bat the promise broken 
 is explained in the sonnet, that toute la nuict que ie 
 languis icy, the whole ni^htthat she lang^uished at 
 Linlithg-ow, he had promised to pass with her, 
 pour deviser a loisir, in familiar conversation ; 
 instiad of which he had sent Ormiston with a 
 cold apology ; " the coldness of his writing," of 
 which she complained"/' From Monday night, 
 
 " From this and the subsequent explanation in the sonnets, 
 of the promise broken, compared with a fact preserved by 
 Buchanan in his History, it appears that Bothwell had pro- 
 mised Jo meet and iutertept her on Wednesday ; but that 
 she was seized with a sudden illness, which obliged her to 
 stop at a small hut on lier return from Stirling, and on her 
 recovery she reached Linlithgow that night. " Repentino 
 dolore cruciata in domuuculam paufterculam concessit, ad 
 qiialuor feime miUia pas^unm a Sterlino reraiftente se 
 deiud: d' lore, ad iter reversa, Limnuchum ea nocte venit. 
 Inde ad Bothuelium s< rip^ii, per Paridem, quid de raptu 
 fieri vellet :" Hist. 356. I conclude therefore that Bothwell, 
 
 3 
 
V. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 369 
 
 when her ag-itation subsided, or Tuesday morn- chap. 
 ing", when her letters from Stirling were written, 
 till Wednesday night, while her mind was un- 
 occupied with other objects, there was sufficient 
 time for the composition of such extemporary 
 sonnets; the last of which seems to have been 
 just finished, on receiving' Bothwell's letter at 
 Linlithoow. 
 
 Toute la iiuict ou ie languis icy, 
 Ayant le coeur d'extreme paour transy j 
 Pour voir absent le but de raon desir, 
 Crainte d'oublir un coup me vient h. saisir; 
 Et r autre fois ie crains que rendurcie 
 Soit centre moy vostre amiable coeur. 
 Par quelque dit d'un meschant rapporteur; 
 Un autre fois ie crains quelque aventure. 
 Qui par chemin detourne mon araant, 
 
 who had advanced from Edinburgh on Wednesday, finding 
 that she did not come forward, turned aside to the Laird of 
 Hatton's, and sent Orraiston forward with a message, to 
 which the queen's answer was returned by Paris. As the 
 time and place were not precisely fixed, her impatience would 
 expect him each moment to meet her beyond Linlithgow, 
 while his indiflFerence would induce him to wait for her as 
 near to Edinburgh as possible. But it is observable, that 
 Buchanan in his History, corrects, or avoids the error in the 
 Diary, that she sent Huntley to Bothwell next morning; as 
 he discovered from subsequent information, that she wrote 
 and sent a letter from Linlithgow, not on her former journey, 
 but by Paris that night. 
 
 vol.. I. B JB 
 
370 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. Par un fascheux et nouveau accident; 
 
 Dieu detourne toute malheureux accident. 
 
 In these verses the initial sentence of her last 
 letter is easily recog^nised : " Monsieur si I'ennuy 
 " de vostre absence, celuy de vostre oubly, la 
 " crainte da danger tant prouve d'un chacun a 
 " vostre tant ayme personne;" in which the 
 greater part of the sonnet is comprised. Before 
 she receives his message, her heart is chilled with 
 extreme terror at his absence, and alternately 
 agitated by the fear of his forgetfulness, the ap- 
 prehension that his amiable heart might be 
 hardened against her by some malicious report, 
 and the danger, lest some new accident, like the 
 wound to which she had twice alluded, should 
 occur on the road. On receiving his letter, her 
 terror at his absence is converted into " I'ennuy 
 " de vostre absence, celuy de vostre oubly ;" the 
 craint d'oublir, and vostre amiable coeur, into " la 
 " crainte du danger a vostre tant ayraee person- 
 " ne;" and her fear of some new accident on 
 the road, into the indiscriminate danger d'un 
 chaciin, from the unknown authors of the chal- 
 lenge and placards. That her apprehensions 
 were serious, there is no reason to believe. The 
 language of poetry was transferred to the letter, 
 which was written in the same strain of senti- 
 mental conceit. But the sonnets were reserved 
 for their meeting, and the concluding stanza of 
 
 Conclusion 
 of the 
 
 sonnets. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 3/1 
 
 six lines, was probably added after the letter was 
 written. 
 
 Ne vous voyant selou qu'avez promis, 
 J'ay mis la main au papier pour escrirc 
 D'un different que ie voulu transcrire; 
 Je ne scay pas quel sera vostre avis ; 
 Mais ie scay bien qui mieux aymer scaura ; 
 Vous rliiicz bien que plus y gaignera. 
 
 Not seeing- him according- as he promised, she 
 put her hand to the paper to write of a difference, 
 which (to complete the rhyme rather than the 
 sense) she was inclined to transcribe. These 
 lines were apparently added on receiving- his 
 letter at Linlithgov, or afterwards, when tlie 
 sonnets were presented to Bothwell, in order to 
 explain the occasion on which they were com- 
 posed. But the preceding- investig-ation ob- 
 viates every objection to their chronolog-y or 
 contents ; and the date assigned to tlie sonnets, 
 in the interval between her letters from Stirling- 
 and Linlithg'ow, is confirmed by their coincidence 
 with her last letter to Bothwell, on the eve of 
 the seizure. 
 
 CHAP. 
 V. 
 
 B B 2 
 
37!ii DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. VI. 
 
 Contracts of Marriage. 
 
 1. nr^HE contracts of marriag'e are to be ex- 
 -*- amined next'. The first is the short 
 contract in French ; a copy of which, found by 
 Welwood in the Cotton Library, was mistaken 
 foi the oriofina) ; but Dr. Fraser, and Matthew 
 Crawford, pronounced it a transcript. David 
 Crawford, the author of the spurious Memoirs, 
 availed himself however of Welwood 's mistake, 
 to represent it as a gross forg-ery of Queen Mary*s 
 hand-writing^ His assertion has been implicitly 
 
 ' See Appendix, No. XXIII. 
 
 ^ M. Crawford's MS. Col. Adv. Lib. W. 2. 22. " This 
 paper is pasted on the back of the preceding," (the Reply 
 and True Declaration, &c.) " Dr. Welwood told me, before 
 I saw it, that it was an original ; that before it was put into 
 this book (Caligula, C. 1.) he found it single in a corner of 
 Cotton-House, that he borrowed it from Sir John Cotton, 
 (he who gave the library to the public) that he brought it and 
 shewed it to the late Queen Mary, (William's wife) and that 
 the whole court owned it to be an original. As for myself, 
 I am persuaded, it is a forgery, and the grossest I ever saw ; 
 the subscription does not at all resemble that of the Queen of 
 Scots. I have seen some hundreds of her letters, all written 
 and signed with her own hand, but never found the M m 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 373 
 
 received and transmitted, by Ruddiman and chap. 
 
 ' -^ VI. 
 
 Goodall, to Stuart and Whitaker^ without any 
 farther examination of the pretended forgery, 
 from the inspection of which I am entitled to 
 pronounce, that it was never meant, when written, 
 to pass for orig-inal. It beg-ins like a transcript, 
 at the top of the pnge, without the least appear- 
 ance or form of an intended original : it is writ- 
 ten in the common secretary hand of the age, 
 which Crawford mistook for a chancery hand; 
 and it appears from the ink, and form of the 
 letters, to be very nearly, if not exactly, in the 
 same hand-writing with other papers given in 
 by the regent ; particularly the Eik, and the 
 declaration, that the letters were authentic*. The 
 words feu mary, have been dashed out as indis- 
 tinct or crowded, and are written anew in the 
 
 Marie longer than the a, or the r than the i or the e, all the 
 letters of her name are constantly of a size. And as for the 
 pajDer itself, nobody pretends it is done by her hand. It is 
 what they call in England, chancery hand. However, having 
 no date, it is of no value, and of small advantage to her ene- 
 mies, because it is presumable (allowing the paper genuine, 
 which it is not) that it was written the very night before the 
 marriage." D. Crawford of Drumsoy's Col. MS. v. iii. 
 Adv. Lib. 
 
 ^ Ruddiman's Notes on Buchanan, i. 462. Goodall, i. 126. 
 Stuart's Hist. i. 397. Whitaker, i. 430. 
 
 * Cotton Lib. Caligula, C. 1. f. 230. 260. Anderson, ii. 
 259. iv. 119. 
 
574 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP, course of the same line; and the whole contract 
 
 VI. 
 
 --'^v-'^ is evidently in the writer's usual hand, without 
 the least attempt at imitation or disguise. Mary's 
 Romain hand, as it was then styled, was formed 
 in imitation of Italic print, to which the secre- 
 tary hand, (now employed in engrossing- deeds) 
 has not the least resemblance; but the short 
 contract in French was professedly written in 
 the queen's own hand, which it is not even pre- 
 tended that the present copy endeavours to imi- 
 tate. The contract itself therefore contains no 
 marks whatsoever of imitation or of forgery ; and 
 the original produced at Westminster, was cer- 
 tainly neither dated nor signed by the queen*. 
 
 ' Appendix, No. XXIII. In the ktter from the English 
 commissioners at York, it is described as "a contract of the 
 queen's own hand, of the marriage to be had between her and 
 Bothwell, bearing no date, and whicli had not verba de pre- 
 senti, as the other had;" in the minutes of the English 
 privy council, Dec. 14, as "a promise of marriage in the 
 name of the said queen, with the said Earl of Bothwell;" 
 (Anderson, iv. 61. 173.) in Murray's instructions to the com- 
 raendator of Dumfermline, as " a little contract or obligation 
 written by the said queen's awin hand, promising to marry 
 the said Bolhwell;" ((ioodall, i. 87.) and in the memorandum 
 prefixed to the letters, in Buchanan's Detection, as a " writ- 
 yng written in Roniaine hand in French, to be avowit to be 
 writte by the sayd Queene of Scottes hir self, beying a pro- 
 mise of marriage to the sayd Bothwell." This part of the 
 memorandum was probably taken from the minutes of the 
 7th of December, when the contract was produced, which 
 
VI. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 375 
 
 It was inserted in Buchanan's Detection, with- chap. 
 out either date or signature ; to which last the 
 charge of forgery must now be confined. But 
 the signature annexed to the copy in the Cot- 
 ton library, has apparently been superinduced 
 at a later period, and in a different hand and ink 
 from the rest of the transcript, but without any 
 resemblance or imitation of the queen's signa- 
 ture. Her genuine signature was formed in the 
 slender Italian hand, without capitals j and the 
 letters, marieR are of the same size. The sig- 
 nature in question is in a strong secretary hand, 
 the very reverse of the Italian : the letters M 
 and R are lengthened as much as the others are 
 reduced in size ; and on the supposition of a for- 
 gery, it must have been fabricated by one who 
 had no prototype before him at the time, and 
 had never seen even a single signature of the 
 queen's name. Upon this subject, i\\efac similes 
 contained in the annexed plate will enable every 
 reader to determine, whether the signature 
 subjoined to the contract, exhibits an obvious or 
 intended imitation of Mary's hand-writing; or 
 whether the contract is not a mere copy engrosed 
 by a clerk, to which her name has been since 
 added, without any intention to imitate her hand. 
 
 were lost when sent to the press, by Wilson ; but in these 
 passages, there is no intimation that it was subscribed by the 
 queen, although the second contract is uniformly described. 
 in the same passages, as signed by her hand. 
 
576 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 ^^^^- The fact is that the original went back to Scot- 
 land, while a copy, most probably the present, 
 was left by Murray in CeciTs custody*. The 
 contracts or obligations of marriage, are speci- 
 fied in Morton's subsequent receipt for the box 
 and letters; and in addition to eight letters and 
 eleven sonnets, the two contracts are precisely 
 necessary to complete the number of twenty-one 
 pieces which the casket^ contained. 
 
 The memorandum prefixed to the letters in 
 Buchanan's Detection, observes, on the first con- 
 tract, " quhilk writying beying without date, 
 *' and though some words therein seme to the 
 " contrary, yet is upon credible grounds supposed 
 ** to have been made and written by her befoir 
 " the death of her husband." The words to tlie 
 contrary are, *' et puisque dieu a pris mon feu 
 " mary, Henry Stuart, dit Darnley, et par ce- 
 " moyen je suis libre." The omission of the 
 date, after " God had taken her late husband, by 
 " which means she was free to marry," is itself a 
 sufficient presumption that the contract was writ- 
 ten in the contemplation of his death. In the letters 
 and sonnets to Bothwell, subsequent to the mur- 
 der, every allusion to her late husband is careful- 
 ly avoided. But in a promise of marriage writ- 
 ten with her own hand as an assurance to Both- 
 well during her husband's life, instead of taking 
 
 * Goodall, ii. 88. ' Id. 91. Anderson, ii. 259. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 377 
 
 him directly for a husband, in the language of 
 civilians, joer verba de presenti, as in the second 
 contract, she promises indirectly, " de bonne 
 " foy, de n'avoir j'amais aultre espoux et mary 
 *' que hiy, et de le prendre pour tel, toute et 
 " qnante fois qu'il m'en requira." Instead of 
 enffaoinsr to celebrate the marriaoe on her hus- 
 band's death, the reverse is naturally introduced ; 
 " et puisque dieu a pris mon feu maty Henry 
 " Stuart dit Darnley, et que par ce moien je suis 
 " libre, n'estant soubs obeissance de pere ni de 
 " mere, des mayntenant je proteste, que luy 
 " estant en la mesne liberte, je seray preste et 
 " d'accomplir les ceremonies require au mar- 
 ** riage." But at the conclusion of the contract, 
 " et la presente signee de ma mayne escrit ce,'* 
 she stopped, and hesitated to annex either the 
 date or her name, apparently to conceal the fact, 
 that her late husband was still alive. " La pre- 
 " sente signe de ma mayne," is a proof that she 
 transcribed the form of another obligation not 
 autographical, but written and signed by differ- 
 ent persons, and in consequence of this clause, 
 signe de ma mayne, the subscription in the Cot- 
 ton copy, was probably added at a later period, 
 on the supposition that the original had been also 
 signed. In this view, the second contract is an 
 unfinished obligation to Bothwell, from whom a 
 counter obligation was probably received to the 
 
S7S DISSERTATION ON 
 
 same effect^ ; to celebrate the raairiage as soon 
 as they should both be at liberty, " luy estant en 
 " la mesne liberte," by the death of her husband, 
 and the divorce of his wife. 
 Second 2. The second contract written by Huntley 
 
 the chancellor, was signed at Seton, April 5th, 
 by the queen and Bothwell, who take each other 
 for husband and wife, and engage reciprocally 
 to complete the marriage, "how sone the pro- 
 " cess of divorce already begunne and intentit 
 " betvvix Bothwell and his pretensit spous, beis 
 " endit by the order of law." The date is con- 
 rirmed by a privy council held at Seton that 
 same day^; and as it actually preceded the pro- 
 cess of divorce, this apparent contradiction is 
 thus explained in Murray's Diary ; that Hunt- 
 ley " for his restoring againe the forfaltour'** 
 
 * This was Buchanan's opinion ; " primus (contractus) ante 
 parricidium, ipsius R,eginae manu scriptus, quo vehit syngra- 
 pha, spondet, ei ubi primum sui juris foret, se nupturam;" 
 Buchanan, Hist, lib. xix. 374. 
 
 ^ Keith, 374. 
 
 '" Three days afterwards, April 8th, Huntley procured 
 from Murray, the day before his departure from Scotland, 
 the bond at Whittingham, stating " that whereas Huntley 
 was to be restored to all things belonging to his progenitors 
 in consideration of his warranting certain transactions of 
 Murray's respecting the forfeited lands, the latter became 
 bound to set forward the reduction of the forfeiture to the 
 utmost of his power," in other words not to oppose it in par- 
 liament by Uiraself or his friends. See Appendix, No. Vlf. 
 
THE MURDER OF DARNLEV. 379 
 
 " had purchased ane procuratory, subscryevit chap. 
 " with his sister's hand," to sue for a divorce. 
 On the supposition of forgery, Murray or Morton 
 would have stated the action, as intended to be 
 instituted, not as actually *' begun and intentit ;" 
 but in a marriage contract framed expressly with 
 a view to the divorce, Huntley, on obtaining his 
 sister's procuratory to commence the action, 
 would state it by anticipation as actually com- 
 menced". His pretensit spouse, explains the 
 cntholick ideas of a marriage within the prohi- 
 bited degrees of blood. Bothwell's marriage 
 with his cousin had been contracted, in order to 
 be ratified afterwards by a papal dispensation, 
 without which their union, in the queen's opinion, 
 was an unlawful, if not a criminal intercourse, 
 prohibited by the canons as void and null. Hunt- 
 ley himself, a sincere catholic, must have con- 
 sidered it as illegal, and if there was then no 
 chance to procure a dispensation, would assent 
 the more readily for the restitution of his own 
 
 Huntley's restitution had been determined therefore on 
 the 5th, and the bond was evidently exacted from Mur- 
 ray, before he was permitted to quit the kingdom. In con- 
 sequence of his consent to the restitution of Huntley, he 
 seems to have obtained the queen's promise to confirm his 
 right to the earldom of Murray. See Robertson, ii. 327. 
 
 " Very possibly a blank summons, containing little else 
 than the pursuer's name, was already raised, to be libelled, 
 or the grounds of action inserted, when it was produced in 
 court. See Balfour's Practics. 
 
580 
 
 DISSERTATION ON 
 
 CHAP. 
 
 VI. 
 
 Third 
 contract. 
 
 family, toBothwell's divorce from liis pretended 
 spouse. The queen considered Lady Bothwell 
 as such ; but her adversaries regarded her own 
 union with Bothwell as a pretensit marriage, or 
 adulterous connexion with another wife's hus- 
 band'^ and the languag-e natural to Mary, or to 
 her chancellor, who studied to express her ideas, 
 required a refinement in forgery, of which her 
 opponents themselves were unconscious. 
 
 3. The two first were private contracts, unfit 
 for public inspection, but before the celebration 
 of the marriag-e, a third ostensible contract was 
 necessary, in which much additional matter re- 
 mained to be introduced. The bond of the no- 
 bility, recommending- Bothwell as a husband to 
 the queen ; the queen's approbation and choice 
 of a husband ; his new title of Duke of Ork- 
 ney ; the grant and tenure by which he held 
 those islands, had all occurred since the second 
 contract of marriage, the preamble of which 
 was that, " Hir Majestic now destitute of ane 
 *' husband, livyng solitary in the staite of wido- 
 " heid, in the quhilk she maist willingly wald 
 " continue, gif the weill of her relme and sub- 
 "jectis wald permit it ; but considering the in- 
 " conveniences may follow, and the necessite that 
 " hir majestic be couplit with ane husband, and 
 *• seeing quhat incommoditie may cum of ane 
 
 Keith, 418. See Appendix, No. XI. 
 
VI. 
 
 THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 381 
 
 " forein prince, she lies thought rather better to ^^,^p- 
 " to yield to ane of her awin subjectis, amangis 
 " quhome she findis none mair able nor endewit 
 " with better qualities than Bothwell." But 
 material alteration was now necessary in conse- 
 quence of the bond of the nobility, as she mar- 
 ried Bothwell ostensibly at their earnest recom- 
 mendation and desire. In the third contract 
 therefore, her majesty " being- destitute of ane 
 " husband, levand solitarie, in the state of wido- 
 " heid, and yet young and of flurishing aige, apt 
 ** and able to procreate ma childeren, lies bene 
 " pressit and humbly requirit to yield into sum 
 " mariage ; and mature deliberation being had 
 " towert the personnage, the maist part of her 
 " nobility thought better that she suld accept ane 
 " of hir awin borne subjectis nor ony foreigne 
 " prince; and they namand the said noble prince, 
 *• now Duke of Orkney, her majestic hes gra- 
 " ciouslie accordit thairunto/* These new pre- 
 texts for contracting the marriage, the princely 
 rank to which he was raised, and the feudal te- 
 nure by which he held the Orkneys, required, not 
 only a different date, but a contract altogether dif- 
 ferent from the former ; and if that second con- 
 tract were the marriage mentioned in her last 
 letter, as received on the eve of her seizure, the 
 appearance of it in the casket, and in Bothwell's 
 possession, may be easily explained". The pri- 
 
 " Whitaker, iii. 18G. 
 
382 DISSERTATION ON THE MURDER OF DARNLEY. 
 
 CHAP, vate contract, '* thonyh retained in her bosom 
 
 VI . . 
 
 ^,.»■v-^«/ " till tlie marriage of their bodies shonid be 
 
 " made in public,'^ must have been placed in 
 Huntley's hands in order to frame anoth r, be- 
 fore the marriage; and accordingly, when it was 
 restored to Bothwell with the public contract, the 
 one was found in his private repositories, while 
 the other was engrossed in the public records. 
 But the private, instead of being a copy, or ab- 
 stract from the public contract'*, is evidently the 
 original from which the latter was framed ; and 
 it is observable that the two first cofitracts writ- 
 ten by Mary, or under her inspection, are far su- 
 perior in delicacy to the last ; a circumstance in 
 vain imputed to the consummate art of the for- 
 gers, who were more desirous to aggravate, 
 than to extenuate, the grossness of her guilt. 
 
 " Whitaker is surprised that a. secret contract, not intended 
 for the public eye, should be written by the chancellor, and 
 seems disappointed that the supposed forger should omit 
 the bond of the nobility to Bothwell, and every fact poste- 
 rior to the date of the second contract. Id. 187. 
 
 END OF VOL. I, 
 
 B/^RNARD ANDFARLUr, 
 
 •^imier Street^ Lond»n. 
 
DUE DATE 
 
 Git 
 
 FEB 1 i 1' 
 
 mi 
 
 \ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Printed 
 In USA 
 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 
 
 0046298100 
 
 941.06 
 L 14 
 
 V. 1 
 
 Ul^l u 
 
 I35S