Andrew Lang.

A history of Scotland from the Roman occupation (Volume 2) online

. (page 16 of 60)
Online LibraryAndrew LangA history of Scotland from the Roman occupation (Volume 2) → online text (page 16 of 60)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


that Elizabeth and her Council thought the marriage prejudicial to
friendship with England. She has told Lethington that Mary may
marry any other English noble, but Lethington is "tied to his
message for Lord Darnley." Only if Mary takes Leicester will Eliza-
beth stir in the matter of the succession.^^ Meanwhile (April 28)
Bedford represented Murray as neutral on the Darnley marriage.^*
On May 4 Throckmorton started for Scotland : Lethington, con-
trary to express orders, returned with Throckmorton. Already "a
day of law" had been given to Bothwell. He had been in Scot-
land since March, " unlooked for, uninvited, the evil spirit of the
storm," says Mr Froude. He adds that Bothwell " reappeared at
Mary's Court ; she disclaimed all share in his return ; he was still
attainted, yet there he stood — none daring to lift a hand against
him — proud, insolent, and dangerous." ^^ As a matter of fact. Both-
well was not attainted, nor did he reappear at Mary's Court. The
statements are eminently picturesque : thus, perhaps, history ought
to be written, but not on this wise did facts occur. On March i
Randolph had reported that young TuUibardine arrived as an envoy
from Bothwell, asking either for his return from France or for
money. Mary was " not evil affected towards him," said Randolph ;
but while Arran remained a prisoner Bothwell could not return to



140 BOTHWELL EXILED.

favour. On March lo Bedford, from Berwick, reported that
Bothwell was skulking at Haddington and elsewhere: "he finds
no safety for himself anywhere." Lethington and Murray wished
him to be "put to the horn." He was accused of calling Mary
the mistress of her uncle, the Cardinal. On March 15 Randolph
wrote that the queen " now altogether mislikes his home-coming
without her licence." She had sent a sergeant-at-arms to summon
him to stand trial. On March 24 Bedford wrote that Bothwell
had been summoned for May 24.^^ In fact. May 2 was the date
of Bothwell's summons. Bedford feared that Mary secretly aided
Bothwell, whom he accuses of a hideous vice. A passage in the
confession attributed to Paris, after Darnley's murder, bears on
this charge, but such confessions are of dubious value. In
Liddesdale Bothwell. was abetted by the lawless reivers of the
country. But on the "day of law" Bothwell dared not face
Murray ; no marvel, as Murray brought some 6000 armed men
into Edinburgh. Such was the invariable Scottish method of
overawing justice. Bothwell fled back to France : he was con-
demned ; but apparently Mary did not allow him to be put to
the horn.^'' She was blamed for her lenity, the Protestants be-
lieving that she meant to use Bothwell as a bravo on fitting
occasion. ^s Such are the facts about Bothwell's uninvited visit
to Scotland. Murray used the great gathering of May 2 for
other purposes of intrigue, as we shall see.

Meanwhile Randolph, who had been perplexed by Elizabeth's
sending of Darnley, admitted that " a greater benefit to his queen's
majesty could not have chanced " than the Darnley marriage
(May 3).^^ Mary " is now in almost utter contempt of her people."
She was accused of saying that Murray desired the Crown, and
IMurray and Argyll never appeared at Court together for fear of
treachery. The Darnley party were Lennox, Ruthven, Atholl, and
Riccio. The preachers were demanding the abolition of Mary's
private mass. After Bothwell's " day of law " Murray joined Mary
at Stirling, where he declined to sign the contract for Darnley's
marriage. Darnley, he said, was rather an enemy to than a pro-
fessor of Christ's true religion. " He is now thought to be led
altogether by England," as no doubt he was. His motives remain
inscrutable, but were probably mixed. He hated Riccio. Darnley
had given him personal offence. He was constant to Protestantism,
and to Elizabeth (May 8).'^'^ Mary was to create Darnley Earl of



DARNLEY TO MARRY THE QUEEN. I4I

Ross : the nobles were assembled at Stirling for the conclusion of
his affair. But by May 12 Lethington, returning from London
against Mary's orders, had rested a night with Throckmorton at
Berwick, whence he wrote to Leicester. T^turray, he said, would
never consent to the wedding unless Mary turned Protestant.
Argyll declined to see the queen. On May 21, from Edinburgh,
Throckmorton reported the results of his mission."^^ It is of
little importance ; but if Lethington, as Throckmorton says, was
in Edinburgh with him on May 13, why was Lethington in Berwick
on May 15?^- He reached Stirling on the 15th, but was not ad-
mitted to the Castle till the ceremony of belting Darnley as Earl of
Ross was ended. When presented to Mary, he argued with her
about her conduct, and learned that Mary was sending a new envoy
to Elizabeth — Hay, Commendator of Balmerinoch. Throckmorton
thought that Elizabeth might still interfere, by force or by negotia-
tion. On the same day Randolph wrote to Cecil, expressing sincere
pity for Mary. He had hitherto found her worthy, wise, and
honourable, but now she has overthrown all for love of Darnley.
Randolph for some time harped on Mary's passion for Darnley,
which he even attributes to sorcery, just as Knox was said to have
bewitched his second bride. This absurd theory, held alike by
Protestants as to Darnley and by Catholics as to Knox, still
survives — in the superstition of the blacks of Australia. But
Randolph perhaps attributes the witchcraft to Ruthven, whom he
does not name, but whom Murray hated " for his sorceries." Any
man, he says, " that ever saw her, that ever loved her," would pity
Mary. Her very beauty is altered. Meanwhile, by bluster and
blows, Darnley had made himself detested.*^^ It is worth while to
note that Randolph regards Mary's passion for Darnley as over-
mastering, because by September 19 in the same year he had
begun to insinuate that Mary was Riccio's mistress, and presently
dropped the same hint as to her relations with Bothwell.^* That a
woman should have so many passions, in so short a space of time,
seems almost beyond possibility, unless Mary was a Messalina,
which is not proved or probable.

After this point the intrigues of the party of Murray and the party
of Mary become much entangled. On June 3 Randolph told Cecil
that a convention of the nobles was summoned to meet at Perth on
June 10. The purpose was "to allow the marriage with the Lord
Darnley." It was also understood that the next Parliament would



142 DARNLEY BRAVES ELIZABETH.

"establish a law for religion." Mary had never recognised the
illegal Reforming Parliament of August 1560, but had promised not
to interfere with the religion she found established. A new Parlia-
ment was to deal with the whole subject. The Protestants dreaded
a system of toleration, and already began to organise resistance.
Mary's party were also enrolling their friends, partly Northern and
Catholic lords — Atholl, Caithness, Erroll, Montrose, with Fleming,
Cassilis, Montgomery (Eglintoun), Home, Lindsay, " who shamefully
hath left the Earl of Murray," Ruthven, and Lord Robert Stuart.
It will be observed that private and family feuds and affections now
made a cross division. It was not a question of old faith and new
faith alone ; and Protestants like Lindsay and Ruthven were siding
with Lennox against Chatelherault, Murray, and Argyll. After
announcing these facts, Randolph ends his letter of June 3 with
the news that the Perth Convention of June 10 is put off in fear of
a hostile Protestant gathering. "^^

To this Mary appears to refer, later, in a letter to de Foix,
dated November 8, an account of recent events. She says that
Murray in April promised to secure her marriage if he was recog-
nised as chief Minister, and if Mary would utterly banish the
Catholic faith. He then went to Edinburgh for Bothwell's day
of law (May 2), and there arranged with his adherents to seize
Darnley and Lennox in the Convention at Perth and send them
into England. ]Mary, therefore, by Lethington's advice, postponed
the Convention. ^*^ Now it was, she adds, that Murray spread the
story that Darnley and Lennox intended to kill him.

By June 4 the English Council advised that Lennox and Darnley
should be recalled and Lady Lennox shut up. On June 8 Elizabeth
informed Randolph that she would assist the Protestants and friends
of England.*"^ On June i 2 Randolph reported the despatch of Hay,
Commendator of Balmerinoch, a Protestant and a friend of Murray,
from Mary to Elizabeth.^'^ On June 27 Elizabeth informed Mary
that Balmerinoch's message was unsatisfactory. Meanwhile Ran-
dolph had vainly presented Elizabeth's letters of recall to Lennox
and Darnley. They determined to brave her anger ; and Randolph
said that Darnley, it is to be feared, " can have no long life among
this people." Thus he wrote on July 2, after the postponed Con-
vention had been held at Perth. He dates the Perth Convention on
June 22. Murray and Chatelherault stayed at home, Argyll and Glen-
cairn went to the hostile General Assembly in Edinburgh on June



CHARGES OF TREACHERY. 143

24. Murray's excuse for non-appearance at Perth on June 22 was
that his assassination was plotted. Grant, a retainer of Murray, had
beaten Stuart, captain of Mary's guard. It was arranged that Stuart
should attack Grant, and that Murray should be killed in the scuffle.^^
]\Iurray had diarrhoea, says Knox's continuator, and that was why he
stayed away, at Lochleven.'^'' Buchanan, omitting the Convention,
says that Murray was invited to Perth, where the queen had only
a small train. He was to be involved in a dispute with Darnley,
and Riccio was to stab him.''^ Mary being at Perth, the General
Assembly, as we saw, was meeting at Edinburgh. Randolph had
received Elizabeth's letter of June 8, in which she promised to
assist the Protestants. He communicated the happy news to the
Protestant leaders, and the Assembly sent six demands to Mary at
Perth. The queen herself must abandon her " blasphemous mass,"
and Protestantism must be ratified by queen and Parliament. The
other articles refer to the stipends of the preachers, education, the
use of the property of the religious for the support of the poor and
schools, the punishment of adulterers, Sabbath-breakers, witches, and
murderers, and the release of farmers from tithes.*"^ Mary did not at
once reply : if Cecil's indorsement of her answers — July 29 — is
correct, she waited a month. Her answer was that, "as she did not
constrain the conscience of her subjects, she begged that they will
not press her to offend her conscience." The establishment of
rehgion must be deferred till Parliament meets. The other replies
were dilatory and evasive.'^

On July I Argyll and Murray, from Lochleven, informed Randolph
that they had met to decide on something of importance, and told
him its nature, verbally, by the bearer of their note."^ On July 2,
in his letter already cited, Randolph informed Cecil that " some
that already have heard of Lady Lennox's imprisonment like very
well thereof, and wish both father and son " (Lennox and Darnley)
" to keep her company. The question hath been asked me, Whether
if they were delivered unto us at Berwick, we would receive them ?
I answered that we would not refuse our own, in what sort soever
they came unto us." Clearly Argyll and "Murray on July i had
conspired to seize Darnley and Lennox.^^ So Tytler not unnaturally
infers ; but Dr Hay Fleming argues, from internal evidence, that
Randolph's letter of July 2 was mainly written before the end of
June. Consequently, the proposal to seize Darnley cannot have
been made by Argyll and Murray on July i. Again, it was pre-



144 THE RAID OF BAITH.

cisely on July i that Mary made a rapid ride, in armed company,
from Perth to Callendar House, because of a rumour that Argyll
and Murray meant to seize her and carry her to St Andrews, Darnley
to Castle Campbell, near Dollar. So writes Randolph on July 4.'^^
In fact, from Randolph's letter of July 4, it seems that when the
queen passed Murray's house at Lochleven, during her hasty ride of
July I, Murray lay ill, and Argyll came there from Castle Camp-
bell to dine with the queen and protest his loyalty. He missed
Mary, who had ridden on, but dined with Murray, and the pair
wrote their letter of July i to Randolph. That letter cannot,
then, have implied the design to seize Mary and Darnley on their
way, for they were out of danger when it was written, and were with
, Lord Livingstone at Callendar House. But Mary must have heard
of some such design to seize Darnley and Lennox as that hinted of
by Randolph in his letter dated July 2, but, according to Dr Hay
Fleming, mainly written in June. Mary herself accused Murray, as
she could prove by a hundred of his gentlemen, of intending her
capture and the murder of Lennox and Darnley as she went from
Perth to Edinburgh.'^ The story was generally current, and was
called The Raid of Baith."^ We can only conclude that, if any one
did aim at an attack, it was not of this affair that Argyll and Murray
deliberated at Lochleven on July i.

Mary kept nervously issuing reassuring proclamations. It was
slanderously said that she meant to interfere with religion. After
her marriage with Darnley she reissued these proclamations. Re-
ligion was to remain as she had found it, pending the meeting of
a Parliament which was constantly deferred by the growing troubles.
A safe-conduct for Murray, that he might make declaration about
the alleged conspiracy against his life at Perth, was issued on July
4.'^ A Protestant panic there was. During the General Assembly
in the last week of June the godly Brethren held an open-air meet-
ing near Salisbury Crags, and elected eight men to organise armed
resistance.^** Now, on July 10 a messenger was sent by Mary to
summon these eight captains before the Justice on July 26.
Knox's continuator declares that Mary bade the Provost appre-
hend four of them, and laid an embargo on their houses when
they were not taken. Randolph (July 4) says that her command
makes the people of Edinburgh fear that the town will be sacked !
All this because of the intended arrest of four men engaged in
organising an armed force. Amidst these alarms Argyll and Murray,



MURRAY DECLINES TO COME TO COURT. 1 45

by July 4, were intriguing with Randolph for aid from Elizabeth.
They asked for ^^3000.^^ Elizabeth's reply (July 10) was but
vaguely encouraging, and could not well inspire confidence. Mary
on July 13 tried to soothe the godly. She appointed a Parliament
for September i, and (July 15) issued a proclamation that her lieges
should not be disturbed for their religion ; but she summoned all
the loyal to attend her, armed, in a fortnight.^- " Armour," she
said in a circular, " was being taken on already," by the disloyal.
The reasons appear in two letters of Randolph's of July 16, to
Elizabeth and to Cecil.^^ To Elizabeth he reported that Mary had
secretly married Darnley on July 9. To Cecil he said that Mary
had told him she was free and could marry where she would. She
refused to conciliate Elizabeth by " making merchandise of her
religion." Lethington was still with her ; few others of her old ad-
visers. The Protestants had chosen July 1 5 for two meetings, one
at Perth, one at Glasgow; on the 15th INIary had forbidden these
meetings. They would assemble elsewhere. Argyll was invading
Atholl's lands. Mary, for this reason, summoned her loyal subjects,
as we saw, and wrote to Bothwell, asking him to return. He was
needed at last. While preparing for war, INIary tried to win Murray
over to peace. On the 19th Randolph wrote that she had gathered
her forces. Well she might ! The trial of the four ringleaders of
Edinburgh was for the 26th. Already, on the i8th, the hostile
lords had met at Stirling and appealed for aid to Cecil and Eliza-
beth.^* But Mary had, in search of peace, sent Balmerinoch to
Murray, assuring him of the goodwill of Darnley and Lennox. They
never planned his murder : Lennox would meet any accuser in
single combat. On July 1 7 this mission of Balmerinoch was decided
on. Murray and Argyll had falsely said that Murray's death had
been planned by Darnley " in the back-gallery of her highness's
lodging in Perth." Murray and Argyll must give up their informant
or be deemed guilty of a treasonable lie. On July 19 Balmerinoch
returned, and reported that Murray would come in if he got a safe-
conduct. Mary and the Privy Council, we know, had guaranteed
his safety. But Murray, finding his proposal accepted, declined to
abide by it, declined to appear. On July 28 another chance was
offered to him. Mary heard that he really wished to clear his
character, and offered safe-conduct for him and eighty of his friends.
Come he would not, and he was outlawed on August 6, and pro-
claimed a rebel.^^ But already, on July 29, Mary, clad in deep

VOL. II. K



146 MARY'S MARRIAGE.

mourning, had been wedded to Darnley, now Duke of Albanj', and
proclaimed as king. Against this marriage her brother, Murray,
was an open and avowed rebel. And why was he a rebel ? For
love of the Trew Kirk and the Protestant cause? A year ago
(July 13, 1564) Murray had written to Cecil that the Kirk was
in no danger from Lennox, " seeing we have the favour of our
prince, and liberty of our conscience in such abundance as heart
can wish."^*^ Liberty of conscience he still enjoyed, and, if he had
lost Mary's favour, his own conduct was to blame.



NOTES TO CHAPTER VI.



^ Calendar, i. 666-670. ^ Knox, ii. 334.

^ Spanish Calendar, Eliz., i. 314. * Cal. Ven., vii. 356.

^ Teulet, iii. 5. ® Knox, ii. 369. ^ Froude, vii. 48.

^ See all the evidence in Hay Fleming, pp. 312-315, and Pollen, Negotiations,
pp. 164-167.

^ Randolph to Cecil, February 2S, Calendar, i. 6S5.

^^ August 20, Calendar, ii. 19, 20. Spanish Calendar, Eliz., i. 332-334, 345,
347.

^^ Cf. Knox, vi. 540. ^2 Calendar, ii. 7.

1* Randolph to Cecil, February 28, Calendar, i. 6S5 ; ii. 11. Knox, ii. 373.

" Laing, Knox, ii. 374, note 2.

^' Act. Pari. Scot., ii. 534-545 ; Knox, in the Parliament, ii. 3S1, 385.

^^ Calendar, i. 693. Elizabeth to Mary in favour of Lennox, Calendar, ii. 14.

^^ Calendar, ii. 19. i^ Murray to Cecil, September 23, Calendar, ii. 22.

^^ Calendar, ii. 24, 25. ^^ Knox, ii. 391.

-^ October 8, Knox, ii. 395-397.

■^ Hume Brown, ii. .198. ^ Knox, ii. 394.

-■* Some have supposed a certain Mary Hamilton, hanged for infanticide at the
Court of Peter the Great, to be the heroine of the ballad ; but, for many reasons,
this appears impossible.

^ Calendar, ii. 113, 125 ; Knox, ii. 415. ^^ Calendar, ii. 133.

^ Laing, in Knox, ii. 415, note 3.

^ December 31, Randolph to Cecil, Calendar, ii. 33.

-^ Randolph to Cecil, February 21, 1564, Calendar, ii. 43.

'"' Knox to Cecil, October 6, 1563.

2^ Calendar, ii. 61. ^'- Hay Fleming, p. 96.

^^ Calendar, ii. 67, July 13. ^* Calendar, ii. 61, 62.

^' Froude, vii. 211; Tytler, vi. 299, 350 (edition 1837); For. Cal. Eliz., vii.
210 ; Calendar, ii. 76. Mr Froude adds, " Endorsed in Cecil's hand. ' The Queen's
Majesty's writing, being sick. September 23.' " The actual indorsement is, " 23rd
September 1564. At St James. The Q. wrytyng io me, being sick. Scotland."

•'^ October 7, Calendar, ii. S0-S2, Instructions.



NOTES. 147

^ Randolph to Cecil, October 6, 1564, Calendar, ii. 84.

^^ Randolph to Cecil, October 24, 1564, Calendar, ii. S5.

23 Randolph to Cecil, February 12, 1565, Calendar, ii. 95, 124, 125.

*" Calendar, ii. 125.

■*! Froude, vii. 235-237. ^' See authorities in Hay Fleming, pp. 337, 33S.

*^ Calendar, ii. 1 18-120. *■* Calendar, ii. 12S.

■*' Keith, iii. 330. A set of notes in Cecil's hand.

■*s For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 316, March 17, 1565. ^7 Keith, ii. 26S-275.

■** Calendar, ii. 133. ^' Knox, ii. 422.

^0 Bedford to Cecil, April 18, For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 33S.

51 Teulet, ii. 35, 36.

'- Labanoff, vii. 67. See Pollen, "Negotiations," pp. Ixxiv, Ixxv.

^ For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 349, 350. ^* For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 346.

^•' Froude, vii. 247.

^^ M. Philippson says that May 24 is a misreading for March 24, but, writing
himself on March 24, Bedford could not say "day" is given him to come by the

24th March (Philippson, ii. 333).

°'' Hay Fleming, p. 359. Dr Hay Fleming says that Bothwell was put to the
horn, citing Pitcairn's "Criminal Trials," i. 462*. But Knox's continuator and
Randolph (May 3, 1565, Cal. For. Eliz., vii. 351) declare that Mary prevented
the horning (Knox, ii. 479).

58 For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 306, 312, 314, 319, 320, 327, 340, 341, 347, 351.

5» For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 351. go Yot. Cal. Eliz., vii. 357, 358.

61 For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 369. 62 Yor. Cal. Eliz., vii. 366.

6' For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 366-372 ; Calendar, ii. 152-168.

^* For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 464. "5 Calendar, ii. 172-174.

^^ Labanoff, i. 300-302. 67 Calendar, ii. 175.

68 Calendar, ii. 1 75- 177. 6" Keith, ii. 300, Randolph's letter of July 2.

"" Knox, ii. 4S4. "i Buchanan, fol. 208.

'- Knox, ii. 485, 486; Calendar, ii. 178, 179.

"3 For. Cal. Eliz., vii. 414. "■* Stevenson, Illustrations, p. 118.

"5 Keith, ii. 307. ^6 Keith, ii. 309.

"'' Labanoff, i. 304, 305. "s See Hay Fleming, pp. 354-356.

'3 Privy Council Register, i. 341, 342. ^'> Knox, ii. 4S7.

81 Keith, ii. 317, 318. -'2 Keith, ii. 326, 327.

83 Calendar, ii. 181 ; Stevenson, p. 118. 84 p^r. Cal. Eliz., vii. 408.

^ Register of Privy Council, i. 349, 350. ^^ p-Qr. Cal. Eliz., vii. 176.



148



CHAPTER VII.

THE TWO MURDERS.
1565-1567-

The dances and delights of the marriage being ended, Mary had to
face Elizabeth's new envoy, Tamworth, and to secure support against
her rebel lords, now in Argyll. She strengthened herself by restor-
ing, in some degree, Huntly's son. Lord George, to Huntly's estate
and government in the North. She also recalled Bothwell, who did
not arrive till September 1 7, bringing with him, as shall be seen, the
beginnings of a feud with Lennox and Darnley. Just before Murray's
forfeiture Tamworth arrived in Edinburgh : on August 1 1 he reports
that " I must send to Berwick for the money I left there, and deliver
it to those here appointed by Murray to receive it." ^ As Elizabeth
later denied that she had aided Mary's rebels, it is well to prove her
mendacity out of her envoy's own mouth. Tamworth communicated
Elizabeth's remonstrances, partly as to Mary's personal treatment of
herself, partly against a change in religion. She declared that she
had heard of a plot to murder Murray, and bade Mary not to summon
him " before his mortal enemies." - Mary replied with spirit.^ She
thought no prince would "desire reckoning or account" of her
marriage. If Elizabeth behaved uncousinly, she had other friends
and allies, — other broken reeds, her foreign kindred. She had
never meddled with English affairs, and begged Elizabeth not to
meddle with hers. As to religion, she had made no innovation, nor
meant to make any, save by advice of her subjects. (Note that if
her good subjects, in Parliament, advised alteration, in a Catholic
direction, Mary might accept their counsel.) Murray, she said, was
her subject, and she warned Elizabeth not to interfere. She herself
had not interfered when Lady Lennox was imprisoned. Promises
followed. During Elizabeth's life, and that of her issue, Mary and



I



SCANDAL ABOUT RICCIO (1565). I49

Darnley would attempt nothing prejudicial to their title ; or intrigue
with English subjects, or receive English rebels, or confederate with
any foreign prince against England. Any fair alliance with England
they would accept. If they ever succeeded to the English Crown,
they would not alter the religion. All these promises, however, were
conditional. Elizabeth must recognise Mary, and failing her and her
issue, Lady Lennox and her issue, as her heirs, failing issue of Eliza-
beth's. Elizabeth must not deal with Scottish subjects, or abet
Scottish rebels, or ally herself with foreign Powers against Scotland.
Further details are left to commissioners.* Poor Tamworth, refus-
ing to accept a safe-conduct signed by Darnley as "king," was
arrested on the Border at Hume Castle.

Mary was now probably her own adviser. James Balfour, — later
Sir James, Knox's fellow-oarsman in the galleys, — with Riccio, is
spoken of as most potent in her councils, and later, he was one of
the basest of her betrayers. But probably she trusted to her own
high heart. She daunted Elizabeth, and after Knox had preached
at very enormous length against her in presence of Darnley, she
suspended, or tried to suspend, him from preaching for three weeks ^
(August 19). She reissued the proclamation against change in re-



Online LibraryAndrew LangA history of Scotland from the Roman occupation (Volume 2) → online text (page 16 of 60)