1566.—TheCraigmillar Conference.

THE QUEEN'S RECOVERY

[Mr. Small, in his "Queen Mary at Jedburgh" (p. 18), gives the following as the opinion of "a distinguished physician" on the illness:—"An attack of hæmatemesis, or effusion of blood into the stomach, subsequently discharged by vomiting; presenting also, possibly, hysterical complications, the whole induced by over-exertion and vexation."]

Marc Antonio Barbaro, Venetian Ambassador in France to the Signory, from Paris, Nov. 6, 1566.Venetian Calendar.

The Ambassador from Scotland came to me to-day with the good news that his Queen ... is so much better that it is hoped and almost believed that she is certain to live.

The illness was caused by her dissatisfaction at a decision made by the King, her husband, to go to a place twenty-five or thirty miles distant without assigning any cause for it; which departure so afflicted this unfortunate Princess, not so much for the love she bears him as from the consequences of his absence, which reduced her to the extremity heard of by your Serenity.

BUCHANAN ON CRAIGMILLAR CONFERENCE

Buchanan's Detection.

About the 5th November she returned from Jedburgh to a village called Kelso, and there she received letters from the King. When she had read these in the presence of the Regent, the Earl of Huntly, and the Secretary, with a sad countenance, she said that unless by some means she were freed from the King her life would not be worth living; and that if it could be done in no other way, rather than live in such misery, she would take her life with her own hand.... When, about the end of November, she came to Craigmillar, a castle about two miles from Edinburgh, she commenced a similar conversation in the presence of the Earl of Moray (afterwards Regent, and now himself dead), the Earl of Argyle, and the Secretary. She mentioned what seemed to her a satisfactory plan. She projected a suit of divorce against the King, and doubted not but that it could easily be done, since they were in that degree of consanguinity which is forbidden by Canon Law for the contraction of matrimony, although they had been by letters easily exempted from that law. At this point some one raised an objection, that, if it were so managed, their son would be illegitimate, being born out of matrimony, and the more so that neither of the parents was ignorant of the causes that rendered the marriage null. She considered that reply for a little, and recognised its truth. Not daring to enter upon a scheme which would thus affect her son, sheabandoned her project of a divorce, nor did she ever afterwards let slip any opportunity of getting rid of the King, as may be readily gathered from what remains to tell.

The Protestation of the Earls of Huntly and Argyll, 1568, Goodall's Examination, vol. ii. pp. 316-321, from Cott. Lib. Calig., vol. i. p. 282.

[The following "Protestation" was drawn up by Queen Mary's advisers during the Westminster Conference (infra,pp. 143et seq.), and was despatched to Huntly for his own and Argyll's signature. It was, however, seized and sent to Cecil, without its having reached its destination. It is placed here for the sake of comparison with Buchanan's account of the Conference. It may be noted here that in another document (Instructions and Articles to be advised on and agreed, so far as the Queen's Majesty, our Sovereign, shall think expedient, at the meeting of the Lords in England, committed in credit by ... her Grace's true faithful subjects—Goodall, vol. ii. p. 354), signed by Lords Huntly, Argyll, Crawford, Eglinton, Cassilis, Errol, Ogilvie, Fleming, and many others of Mary's supporters, the following sentence refers to this Conference:—"They caused make offers to our said Sovereign Lady, if her Grace would give remission to them that were banished at that time, to find causes of divorce, either for consanguinity, in respect they alleged the dispensation was not published, or else for adultery; or then {else} to get him convict of treason, because he consented to her Grace's retention in ward; or what other ways to despatch him; which altogether her Grace refused, as is manifestly known." The "Dispensation" is the Papal Dispensation for the Darnley marriage, Mary and Darnley being within the forbidden degrees.]

A CONFERENCE OF THE EARLS

In the year of God 1566 years, in the month of December, or thereby, after her Highness's great and extreme sickness, and return from Jedburgh, herGrace being in the castle of Craigmillar, accompanied by us above written {i.e.Huntly and Argyll}, and by the Earls of Bothwell, Murray, and Secretary Lethington; the said Earl of Murray and Lethington came into the chamber of us the Earl of Argyll in the morning, we being in our bed; who, lamenting the banishment of the Earl of Morton, Lords Lindsay and Ruthven, with the rest of their faction, said, that the occasion of the murder of David, slain by them in presence of the Queen's Majesty, was to trouble and impesche {prevent} the parliament; wherein the Earl of Murray and others were to have been forfeited and declared rebels. And seeing that the same was chiefly for the welfare of the Earl of Murray, it should be esteemed ingratitude if he and his friends in reciprocal manner, did not strive all that in them lay for relief of the said banished ones; wherefor they thought that we, of our part, should have been as desirous thereto as they were.

And we agreeing to the same, to do all that was in us for their relief, providing that the Queen's Majesty should not be offended thereat; on this Lethington proposed and said, "That the nearest and best way to obtain the said Earl of Morton's pardon, was, to promise to the Queen's Majesty to find a means to make divorcement between her Grace and the King her husband, who had offended her Highness so highly in many ways."

And then they send to my Lord of Huntly, praying him to come to our chamber.... And thereon we four, viz., Earls of Huntly, Argyll, Murray, and Secretary Lethington, passed all to the Earl ofBothwell's chamber, to understand his advice on the proposals; wherein he gainsaid no more than we.

THEIR PROPOSITION MADE TO THE QUEEN

So thereafter we passed altogether to the Queen's Grace; where Lethington, after he had remembered her Majesty of a great number of grievous and intolerable offences, that the King, as he said, ungrateful for the honour he had received from her Highness, had done to her Grace, and continued every day from bad to worse; proposed, "That if it pleased her Majesty to pardon the Earl of Morton, Lords Ruthven and Lindsay, with their company, they should find the means with the rest of the nobility, to make divorcement between her Highness and the King her husband, which should not need her Grace to meddle therewith. To the which, it was necessary that her Majesty take heed to come to a decision therein, as well for her own relief as for the good of the realm; for he troubled her Grace and us all; and remaining with her Majesty, would not cease till he did her some other evil turn."

After these persuasions and divers others, which the said Lethington used, besides those which every one of us showed particularly to her Majesty to bring her to the said purpose, her Grace answered: That under two conditions she might agree to the same; the one, that the divorcement were made lawfully; the other, that it were not prejudicial to her son; otherwise her Highness would rather endure all torments, and abide the perils that might befall her in her Grace's lifetime. The Earl of Bothwell answered, "That he doubted not but the divorcement might be made without prejudiceof my Lord Prince in any way," alleging the example of himself, that he failed not to succeed to his father's heritage without any difficulty, albeit there was a divorce between him and his mother.

THE QUEEN'S ANSWER

It was also proposed that, after their divorcement, the King should be alone in one part of the country, and the Queen's Majesty in another, or else that he should retire to another realm; and herein her Majesty said, "That peradventure he would change his course, and that it were better that she herself passed into France for a time, waiting till he acknowledged his fault." Then Lethington, taking the speech, said, "Madam, think you not we are here, of the principal members of your Grace's nobility and council, and that we shall find the means that your Majesty shall be quit of him without prejudice of your son. And albeit that my Lord of Murray here present be little less scrupulous for a Protestant, than your Grace is for a Papist, I am assured he will look through his fingers thereto, and will behold our doings, saying nothing to the same." The Queen's Majesty answered, "I will that ye do nothing through which any spot may be laid upon my honour or conscience, and therefore I pray you, rather let the matter be in the condition that it is, abiding till God of His goodness put remedy thereto; lest you believing that you are doing me a service, may possibly turn to my hurt and displeasure." "Madam," said Lethington, "let us guide the matter among us, and your Grace shall see nothing but good, and approved by Parliament."

So since the murder of the said Henry Stewartfollowed this, we judge in our consciences, and hold for certain and truth, that the said Earl of Murray and Secretary Lethington were authors, inventors, devisers, counsellors, and sources of the said murder, in whatever manner, or by whatsoever persons, the same was executed.

THE QUEEN AND DARNLEY

M. le Croc to the Archbishop of Glasgow, from Edinburgh.December 2, 1566.Keith's History, vol. i. p. 96.

The Queen is for the present at Craigmillar, about a league distant from this city. She is in the hands of the physicians, and I do assure you is not at all well; and do believe the principal part of her disease to consist in a deep grief and sorrow. Nor does it seem possible to make her forget the same. Still she repeats these words:I could wish to be dead. You know very well that the injury she has received is exceedingly great, and her Majesty will never forget it. The King, her husband, came to visit her at Jedburgh the very day after Captain Hay went away. He remained there but one single night; and yet in that short time I had a great deal of conversation with him.... I think he intends to go away tomorrow; but in any event I'm much assured, as I always have been, that he won't be present at the baptism. To speak my mind freely to you ... I do not expect, upon several accounts, any good understanding between them, unless God effectually put to His hand. The first is, the King will never humble himself as he ought; the other is, the Queencan't perceive any one nobleman speaking with the King, but presently she suspects some contrivance among them.

DARNLEY AND THE BAPTISM

M. le Croc to the Archbishop of Glasgow, from Glasgow.December 26, 1566.Keith's History, vol. i. p. 97.

The baptism of the Prince was performed Tuesday last, when he got the name of Charles James. It was the Queen's pleasure that he should bear the name James, together with that of Charles (the King of France's name). Everything at this solemnity was done according to the form of the Holy Roman Catholic Church. The King (Lord Darnley) had still given out that he would depart two days before the baptism, but when the time came on he made no sign of removing at all, only he still kept close within his own apartment. The very day of the baptism he sent three several times desiring me either to come and see him, or to appoint him an hour that he might come to me in my lodgings, so that I found myself obliged at last to signify to him that seeing he was in no good correspondence with the Queen, I had it in charge from the most Christian King to have no conference with him.... His bad deportment is incurable, nor can there ever be any good expected from him.... I can't pretend to foretell how all may turn; but I will say that matters can't subsist long as they are without being accompanied with sundry bad consequences.... The Queen behaved herself admirably well all the time of the baptism, and showed so much earnestness to entertain all the goodly company in the best manner, that thismade her forget in a good measure her former ailments. But I am of the mind, however, that she will give us some trouble as yet; nor can I be brought to think otherwise so long as she continues to be so pensive and melancholy.

AN INSULT TO THE ENGLISH

Melville's Memoirs, p. 171.

At the principal banquet there fell out a great flaw and grudge among the Englishmen, for a Frenchman called Bastien devised a number of men formed like satyrs, with long tails and whips in their hands, running before the meat, which was brought through the great hall upon a trim engine, marching, as it appeared, alone, with musicians clothed like maidens, playing upon all sorts of instruments and singing of music. But the satyrs were not content only to clear round, but put their hands behind them to their tails, which they wagged with their hands, in such sort as the Englishmen supposed it had been devised and done in derision of them, daftly {foolishly} apprehending that which they should not seem to have understood.... So soon as they saw the satyrs wagging their tails[17]... they all sat down upon the bare floor behind the backof the board, that they should not see themselves scorned, as they thought.

Laing, II., 77.from Privy Seal Record, bk. 35, fol. 99.

A letter made restoring and reproving our sovereign's well beloved and trusty councillor, John, Archbishop of St. Andrews, primate and legate of Scotland, to all and sundry his jurisdictions as well upon the south as north sides of the Forth within the diocese of St. Andrews, which pertained to the Archbishopric of the same, to be used by him and his commissaries in all time coming in the same manner and form of justice as it is now used.... At Stirling, this xxiii day of December, the year of God, 1566 years.

[The jurisdiction of the ecclesiastical courts had been abolished in 1560. It was the Archbishop who pronounced the sentence of divorce between Bothwell and his wife, either in virtue of this general warrant, or by means of a special commission to try the case. On the one side, this restoration of the Consistorial Court is regarded as pointing to Mary's collusion with Bothwell, while controversialists, on the other side, would connect it with the proposal, made at Craigmillar, of a divorce between Mary and Darnley.]

DARNLEY FALLS ILL

Buchanan's Detection.

Before he had passed a mile from Stirling all the parts of his body were taken with such a sore ache,as it might easily appear that the same proceeded not of the force of any sickness, but by plain treachery. The token of which treachery, certain black pimples, so soon as he was come to Glasgow broke out over all his whole body, with so great ache and such pain throughout all his limbs, that he lingered out his life with very small hope of escape: and yet all this while, the Queen would not suffer so much as a physician once to come at him.

BUCHANAN v. BEDFORD

The Earl of Bedford to Cecil, from Berwick, January 9, 1566.Foreign Calendar.

The King is now at Glasgow with his father, and there lies full of the small-pox, to whom the Queen has sent her physician.

Mary to the Archbishop of Glasgow, from Edinburgh, January 20, 1567.Keith's History, vol. i. p. 101.

For the King our husband, God knows always our part towards him; and his behaviour and thankfulness to us is semblablement well known to God and the world; specially our own indifferent subjects see it, and in their hearts, we doubt not, condemn the same. Always we perceive him occupied and busy enough to have inquisition of our doings, which, God willing, shall aye be such as none shall have occasion to be offended with them, or to report of us any way but honourably; howsoever he, his father, and their fautors speak, which we know want no good will to make us have ado, if their power were equivalent to their minds.

A WARNING TO THE QUEEN

The Archbishop of Glasgow to Queen Mary, from Paris, January 17, 1567.Keith's History, vol. i. p. 103.

I have heard some murmuring ... that there be some surprise to be trafficked in your country, but he {the Spanish ambassador} would never let me know of any particular, only assured me he had written to his master to know if by that way he can try any further, and that he was advertised and counselled to cause me haste toward you herewith.... Finally, I would beseech your Majesty right humbly to cause the captains of your guard be diligent in their office; for notwithstanding that I have no particular occasion wherein I desire it, yet can I not be out of fear till I hear of your news.... And so I pray the eternal Lord to preserve your Majesty from all dangers, with long life and good health.

Buchanan's Detection(First Scots translation, inAnderson's Collections, vol. ii. pp. 17-24).

[Buchanan's account of Queen Mary's visit to Glasgow should be supplemented by a comparison with Crawford's "Deposition" (pp. 208-213), with the Glasgow Letter (pp. 167-182), and with the passage from Nau's "Memorials" onp. 111.]

Herself goes to Glasgow; she pretends the cause of her journey to be to see the King alive, whose death she had continually gaped for the month before. But what was indeed the true cause of that journey, every man may plainly perceive by her letters to Bothwell. Being now out of care of her son, whom she had in her own ward, bending herself to theslaughter of her husband, to Glasgow she goes, accompanied with the Hamiltons, and other the King's natural enemies.

KIRK-OF-FIELD

Bothwell, as it was between them before accorded, provides all things ready that were needful to accomplish the heinous act; First of all, a house, not commodious for a sick man, nor comely for a King, for it was both riven and ruinous, and had stood empty without any dweller for divers years before, in a place of small resort, between old falling walls of two kirks, near a few almshouses for poor beggars. And that no commodious means for committing that mischief might be wanting, there is a postern door in the Town Wall, hard by the house, whereby they might easily pass away into the fields. In choosing of the place, she would needs have it thought that they had respect to the wholesomeness. And to avoid suspicion that this was a feigned pretence, herself the two nights before the day of the murder, lay there in a lower room, under the King's chamber. And as she did curiously put off the shows of suspicion from herself, so the execution of the slaughter she was content to have committed to another.

THE QUEEN GOES TO HOLYROOD

About three days before the King was slain, she practised to set her brother, Lord Robert, and him at deadly feud, making reckoning that it should be gain to her, whichsoever of them had perished. For matter to ground their dissension, she made rehearsal of the speech that the King had had with her concerning her brother; and when they both so grew in talk, as the one seemed to charge the other with the lie, at last they were in a manner come fromwords to blows. But while they were both laying their hands on their weapons, the Queen feigning as though she had been perilously afraid of that which she earnestly desired, called the Earl of Murray, her other brother, to the parting, to this intent, that she might either presently bring him in danger to be slain himself, or in time to come to bear the blame of such mischief as then might have happened....

THE MURDER

When all things were ready prepared for performing this cruel fact ... the Queen, for manners' sake, after supper, goes up to the King's lodging. There being determined to show him all the tokens of reconciled good will, she spent certain hours in his company, with countenance and talk much more familiar than she had used in six or seven months before. At the coming in of Paris, she broke off her talk and prepared to depart. This Paris was a young man born in France, and had lived certain years in the houses of Bothwell and Seton, and afterwards with the Queen. Whereas the other keys of that lodging were in custody of the King's servants, Paris, by feigning certain fond and slender causes, had in keeping the keys which Bothwell kept back, of the back gate and the postern. He was in special trust with Bothwell and the Queen, touching their secret affairs. His coming (as it was before agreed among them) was a watchword that all was ready for the matter. As soon as the Queen saw him, she rose up immediately, and feigning another cause to depart, she said, "Alas! I have much offended toward Sebastian this day, that I came not in a mask to his marriage." This Sebastian was an Avernois{Auvergnois}, a man in great favour with the Queen, for his cunning in music, and his merry jesting, and was married the same day. The King thus left, in manner, alone, in a desolate place, the Queen departs, accompanied with the Earls of Argyle, Huntly, and Cassilis, that attended upon her. After that she was come into her chamber, after midnight, she was in long talk with Bothwell, none being present but the captain of her guard. And when he also withdrew himself, Bothwell was there left alone, without other company, and shortly after retired into his own chamber. He changed his apparel, because he would be unknown of such as met him, and put on a loose cloak, such as the Swartrytters[18]wear, and so went forward through the watch to execute his intended traitorous fact. The whole order of the doing thereof may be easily understood by their confessions who were put to death for it.

Bothwell, after the deed was ended that he went for, returned, and as if he had been ignorant of all that was done, he gat him to bed. The Queen, in the meantime, in great expectation of the success, how finely she played her part (as she thought) it is marvell to tell; for she not once stirred at the noise of the fall of the house, which shook the whole town, nor at the fearful outcries that followed, and confused cries of the people (for I think there happened her not any new thing unlooked for) till Bothwell, feigning himself afraid, rose again out of his bed, and came to her with the Earls of Argyle, Huntly, and Athole, and with the wives of the Earlsof Mar and Athole, and with the Secretary. There, while the monstrous chance was in telling, while every one wondered at the thing, that the King's lodging was even from the very foundation blown up in the air, and the King himself slain; in this amazedness and confused fear of all sorts of persons, only that same heroical heart of the Queen maintained itself, so far from casting herself down into base lamentations and tears, unbeseeming the royal name, blood, and estate, that she matched, or rather far surmounted all credit of the constancy of any in former times. This also proceeded of the same nobility of courage, that she sent out the most part of them that were then about her, to inquire out the manner of the doing, and commanded the soldiers that watched to follow, and she herself settled her to rest, with a countenance so quiet, and mind so untroubled, that she sweetly slept till the next day at noon. But lest she should appear void of all naturalness at the death of her husband, by little and little, at length she kept her close, and proclaimed a mourning not long to endure.

MARY ON THE MURDER

Queen Mary to the Archbishop of Glasgow, February 11 [10?], 1567.Keith's History, vol. i. p. 101.

A PLOT AGAINST BOTH KING AND QUEEN

We have received this morning your letters of the 27th January by your servant Robert Dury, containing in one part such advertisement as we find by effect over true. Albeit the success has not altogether been such as the authors of that mischievous fact had preconceived in their mind, and had put itin execution, if God in His mercy had not preserved us and reserved us, as we trust, to the end that we may take a rigorous vengeance of that mischievous deed, which as it should remain unpunished, we had rather lose life and all. The matter is horrible and so strange as we believe the like was never heard of in any country. This night past, being the 9th February, a little after two hours after midnight, the house wherein the King was lodged was in an instant blown in the air, he lying sleeping in his bed, with such a vehemency, that of the whole lodging, walls, and other, there is nothing remained, no, not a stone above another, but all carried far away or dashed in dross to the very ground-stone. It must be done by force of powder, and appears to have been a mine. By whom it has been done, or in what manner, it appears not as yet. We doubt not but according to the diligence our Council has begun already to use, the certainty of all shall be used shortly; and the same being discovered, which we wot God will never suffer to lie hid, we hope to punish the same with such rigour as shall serve for example of this cruelty to all ages to come. Always whoever have taken this wicked enterprise in hand, we assure ourselves it was dressed as well for us as for the King; for we lay the most part of all the last week in that same lodging, and were then accompanied with the most part of the Lords that are in this town that same night at midnight, and of every chance tarried not all night, by reason of some mask in the Abbey: but we believe it was not chance, but God that put it in our head. We despatched thebearer upon the sudden, and therefore write to you the more shortly....

NAU'S ACCOUNT OF THE MURDER

Nau's Memorials, p. 33.

He {the King} went to Glasgow, where he was seized with the small-pox. He sent several times for the Queen, who was very ill, having been injured by a fall from her horse at Seton. At last she went, stayed with him, and attended him on his return to Edinburgh.... On his return to Edinburgh, the King lodged in a small house outside the town, which he had chosen in the report of James Balfour and some others. This was against the Queen's wishes, who was anxious to take him to Craigmillar, for he could not stay in Holyrood Palace lest he should give infection to the Prince. On his own account, too, he did not wish any one to see him in his present condition.... While he was in this house, the King was often visited by the Queen, with whom he was now perfectly reconciled. He promised to give her much information of the utmost importance to the life and quiet of both of them.... He warned her more particularly to be on her guard against Lethington, who, he said, was planning the ruin of the one by the means of the other.... That very night, as her Majesty was about to leave the King, she met Paris, Lord Bothwell'svalet-de-chambre, and noticing that his face was all blackened with gunpowder, she exclaimed in the hearing of many of the lords, just as she was mounting her horse, "Jesu, Paris, how begrimed you are!" At this he turned very red.

On the 10th of February 1567, about three orfour o'clock in the morning, a match was put to the train of gunpowder, which had been placed under the King's house. It was afterwards made public that this had been done by the command and device of the Earls of Bothwell and Morton, James Balfour, and some others, who always afterwards pretended to be most diligent in searching out the murder which they themselves had committed. Morton had secretly returned from England, to which he had been banished.

THE ORIGIN OF THE CRIME

This crime was the result of a bond into which they had entered. It was written by Alexander Hay, at that time one of the clerks of the Council, and signed by the Earls of Moray, Huntly, Bothwell, and Morton, by Lethington, James Balfour, and others, who had combined for this purpose. They protested that they were acting for the public good of the realm, pretending that they were freeing the Queen from the bondage and misery into which she had been reduced by the King's behaviour.... He was but deceiving the Queen, whom they often blamed for so faithfully having come to a good understanding with her husband; and they told her that he was putting a knife not only to their throats but to her own.

The King's body was blown into the garden by the violence of the explosion, and a poor English valet of his, who slept in his room, was there killed.... Earl Bothwell was much suspected of this villainous and detestable murder.... If we may judge by the plots, deeds, and contrivances of his associates, it would seem that after having used him to rid themselves of the King, they designed to makeBothwell their instrument to ruin the Queen, their true and lawful sovereign.

Their plan was this, to persuade her to marry the Earl of Bothwell, so that they might charge her with being in the plot against her late husband, and a consenting party to his death. This they did shortly after, appealing to the fact that she had married the murderer.

ANOTHER ACCOUNT BY BUCHANAN

Buchanan (Translated from History, xx. 35).

The Archbishop of St. Andrews, who lived nearest, willingly undertook the task of killing the King, when it was offered to him, both on account of old enmities, and in the hope of bringing the succession nearer his own family. He chose, accordingly, six or eight of the most abandoned of his retainers, and entrusted the matter to them, giving them the keys of the King's lodging. They entered very quietly into his chamber, strangled him as he lay sleeping, and carried his body through the postern into a garden beside the walls. Then, at a given signal, fire was applied to the house.

[The question as to the manner of Darnley's death has given rise to considerable discussion. The depositions of Hay, Hepburn, and Paris (videpp. 144,215-218) agree in representing that the King was killed by the explosion. On the other hand, Drury, who wrote to Cecil on 24th April {Foreign Calendar}, and Count Moretta, the agent of the Duke of Savoy, who was in Edinburgh {Labanoff, vii. 108}, state that he was strangled. The facts that the bodies of Darnley and his servant, Taylor, were found together, in the garden, at some little distance from the house, without violent injury; that Darnley's pelisse and slippers were found beside him; and that the other bodies were found among the ruins, must be taken into account in forming a judgment on the question.]

1.Introductory Note.2.Mary's seizure by Bothwell.(a)The Ainslie Bond.(b)Mary's description.(c)Description in the Diurnal of Occurrents.(d)Guzman de Silva to Philip II.3.The Bothwell Marriage.(a)The Divorce.(b)The Dukedom of Orkney.(c)The Marriage.(d)'s demeanour, as described by Du Croc and Drury.4.Carberry Hill.5.Mary in Lochleven.(a)Guzman de Silva on the nature of the Rebellion.(b)Elizabeth's intervention.(c)De Silva's conversation with Murray—the first suggestion of the Casket Letters.6.The escape from Lochleven.

LENNOX AND THE QUEEN

[The Register of the Privy Council tells that, on February 12th, the Queen offered to the first revealer of the crime, "although he be one culpable and participant of the saidcrime," a reward of two thousand pounds and "ane honest yeirlie rent." Public opinion pointed to Bothwell as the murderer, and anonymous placards appeared in the streets of Edinburgh accusing him. Lennox approached the Queen demanding a trial. On March 1st (in reply to his letter of February 26th) Mary wrote asking a list of names. He sent, on the 17th, the names of Bothwell, Sir James Balfour, David Chalmers, John Spens, Francis Bastian, John de Bourdeaux, and Joseph Riccio,—the last four were attendants on the Queen. On March 28th the Privy Council fixed the trial for April 12th. On the 11th, Lennox wrote asking a postponement of the trial and the imprisonment of the persons he had named, or whom he might suspect. The request was not granted, and the trial took place on the 12th. The Earl of Argyll, hereditary Lord-Justice, took his place as President of the Court, and the Earl of Caithness was Chancellor of the jury. Lennox put forward his demand for a postponement, which was refused, Bothwell urging that the Privy Council had fixed an early date in accordance with Lennox's own request. No witnesses were produced by the prosecution, and Bothwell was acquitted. He then challenged to single combat any one who might accuse him, and the challenge was not accepted. In the Parliament which met on the 16th, various confirmations of grants were made—the Castle of Dunbar to Bothwell, the Earldom of Angus to Bothwell's nephew, and various lands to Sir Richard Maitland of Lethington. No Parliament had assembled since Mary's marriage to Darnley, and, accordingly, the restoration of Murray and Morton to their titles and estates was confirmed by statute. Although Parliament thus put its seal on Bothwell's acquittal, by securing Dunbar to him, the popular impression of his guilt was in no way lessened.]

THE AINSLIE BOND

Anderson's Collections, vol. i. pp. 107-112, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. fol. 1.

We undersubscribing, understanding that although the noble and mighty Lord James, Earl Bothwell, ... being not only bruitit {reported} and calumniated by placards, privily affixed on the public places of the Kirk of Edinburgh, and otherwise slandered by his evil willers, as art and part of the heinous murther of the King, ... but also by special letters sent to her Highness by the Earl of Lennox, and debated {accused} of the same crime ... he by condign inquest and assize of certain noblemen his peers and other barons of good reputation is found guiltless and innocent of the odious crime objected to him ... and we considering the anciency and nobleness of his house, the honourable and good service of his predecessors, and specially himself to our Sovereign, and for the defence of this her Highness' Realm against the enemies thereof, and the amity and friendship which so long has preserved betwix his House and every one of us.... Therefore obliges us, and every one of us, upon our Faith and Honours, and Truth in our bodies, as we are noblemen, and will answer to God, that in case hereafter any manner of person or persons ... shall happen to insist farther to the slander and calumniation of the said Earl of Bothwell, as participant, act or part, of the said heinous murther, ... we ... shall take ... plain and upright part with him, to thedefence and maintenance of his quarrel.... Moreover, weighing and considering the time present, and how our Sovereign the Queen's Majesty is now destitute of a husband, in the which solitary state the Commonwealth of this Realm may not permit her Highness to continue and endure; ... and, therefore, in case the former affectionate and hearty service of the said Earl ... may move her Majesty so far to humble herself, as preferring one of her native born subjects unto all foreign princes, to take to Husband the said Earl, we, and every one of us undersubscribing, upon our Honours and Fidelity, obliges us, and promises, not only to further, advance, and set forward the marriage to be solemnised and completed betwix her Highness and the said noble Lord ... but in case any would presume directly or indirectly, openly, or under whatsoever colour or pretence, to hinder, hold back, or disturb the said marriage, we shall in that behalf, esteem, hold and repute the hinderers, adversaries or disturbers thereof as our common enemies and evil willers.... In witness of the which we have subscriyved these presents, as follows, at Edinburgh, the 19 Day of April, the year of God, 1567 years.

SIGNATORIES TO THE BOND

The names of such of the nobility as subscribed the bond, so far as John Read {a dependent of Murray} might remember, of whom I had this copy, being in his own hand, being commonly termed in Scotland, Ainslie's Supper.

The Earls—Murray, Huntly, Cassilis, Morton, Sutherland, Rothes, Glencairn, Caithness.

Lords—Boyd, Seton, Sinclair, Semple, Oliphant,Ogilvie, Rosse-Hacat, Carlisle, Herries, Hume, and Innermeith.

[This note is appended to Cecil's copy of the bond. It should be noted that Murray was not in Scotland at the time, and that his name does not appear in a copy of the bond in the Scots College at Paris, for which we have the authority of Sir James Balfour.]

THE QUEEN CAPTURED

Keith's History, vol. ii. p. 592.

In our returning he awaited us by the way, accompanied with a great force, and led us with all diligence to Dunbar.... And when he saw us like to reject all his suit and offers, in the end he showed us how far he was proceeded with our whole nobility and principals of our estates, and what they had promised him under their handwrites.... In the end, when we saw no esperance to be rid of him, never man in Scotland once making an attempt to procure our deliverance, ... so ceased he never till by persuasions and importune suit, accompanied not the less with force, he has finally driven us to end the work begun at such time and in such form as he thought might best serve his turn, wherein we cannot dissemble that he has used us otherwise than we would have wished, or yet have deserved at his hand.

Diurnal of Occurrents in Scotland.

And upon the twenty-fourth day of April, which was Saint Mark's even, our sovereign lady beingriding from Stirling, whereto she passed a little of before to visit her son, as said is, to Edinburgh, James, Earl of Bothwell, accompanied with seven or eight hundred men and friends, whom he caused believe that he would ride upon the thieves of Liddesdale, met our sovereign lady betwix Kirkliston and Edinburgh, at a place called the Bridges, accompanied with a few number, and there took her person to the castle of Dunbar.

BOTHWELL AND MARY AT DUNBAR

Guzman de Silva to the King, from London.May 3, 1567.Spanish State Papers.

On arriving six miles from Edinburgh, Bothwell met her with four hundred horsemen. As they arrived near the Queen with their swords drawn they showed an intention of taking her with them, whereupon some of those who were with her were about to defend her, but the Queen stopped them, saying she was ready to go with the Earl of Bothwell wherever he wished rather than bloodshed and death should result. She was taken to Dunbar, where she arrived at midnight, and still remains. Some say she will marry him, and they are so informed direct by some of the highest men in the country who follow Bothwell. They are convinced of this, both because of the favour the Queen has shown him, and because he has the national forces in his hands. Although the Queen sent secretly to the governor of the town of Dunbar to sally out with his troops and release her, it is believed that the whole thing has been arranged, so that if anything comes of the marriage, the Queen may make out that she was forced into it.

Back to Index Next