THE CONFERENCES AT YORK AND WESTMINSTER
_CONTENTS_
1. The Conference at York.
(_a_) Letter of Murray to Queen Elizabeth.
(_b_) Mary's Instructions to her Commissioners.
(_c_) The formal complaints and replies.
(_d_) The account of the private interview, with the "abstract of
matters" there shown.
(_e_) Sussex's opinion of the evidence.
2. The Conference at Westminster.
(_a_) Mary's Instructions.
(_b_) Murray's "Eik" or additional charge.
(_c_) The answer of Mary's Commissioners to the "Eik."
(_d_) Elizabeth's reply to (_a_).
(_e_) The Privy Council and suggestions for a compromise.
(_f_) Proofs produced at Westminster--the account of the production.
(_g_) Mary's own answer to the "Eik," and her request to see the
originals, with Elizabeth's reply.
(_h_) Mary's request for copies, with Elizabeth's reply.
(_i_) Dissolution of the Conference by Elizabeth.
_MARY IN ENGLAND_
The Conference at York.
[On Mary's arrival in England, Queen Elizabeth declined to meet
her, till she should be cleared from the suspicion of complicity in
the Darnley murder. Mary promptly accused Maitland and Morton of a
share in the crime, and accepted Elizabeth's proposal to have the
case tried at a Conference at York. The Queen of England appointed
as Commissioners, the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Sussex, and Sir
Ralph Sadler. The Scottish Queen was represented by Lords Boyd,
Herries, and Livingstone, the Abbot of Kilwinning, Sir John Gordon
of Lochinvar, Sir James Cockburn of Skirving, and John Lesley, the
Bishop of Ross. The Earl of Murray, the Earl of Morton, the Bishop
of Orkney (Adam Bothwell), the Abbot of Dunfermline, and Lord
Lindsay appeared in the name of the young James VI., along with
Maitland of Lethington, George Buchanan, James Macgill, and Henry
Balnaves, as assistants.
Many points of procedure and various formal questions occupied much
of the time of the Conferences. The extracts which follow have been
chosen out of regard to their bearing on the problem of Mary's
guilt or innocence, and especial care has been taken to include
references to the Casket Letters. The letters themselves, and the
depositions which were produced before the Commissioners, will be
found, by themselves, after the account of the Conferences.
The Conference met at York on October 8, and as Mary was, formally,
the plaintiff, her complaint against the Lords was first received.
Thereafter, Murray's reply and a rejoinder from Mary's
representatives were put on record. This was all the formal
business essential for our purpose. But, on October 11th,
Elizabeth's Commissioners received a private visit from Maitland,
Buchanan, Macgill, and Balnaves, who put before them, secretly,
certain documents to prove Mary's guilt. It will be seen from the
letter of the Commissioners to Elizabeth, and the quotations from
the "abstract of matters ... chosen by the Scots," that these
documents consisted of:--
1. A bond signed by the Lords, agreeing to Bothwell's marriage with
the Queen.
2. The Queen's warrant for the signature of the above-mentioned
bond.
3. Two contracts of marriage. (See pp. 201-203.)
4. Two letters arranging for the seizure of the Queen by Bothwell
(_i.e._ two of Letters, vi., vii., and viii., see pp. 190-194).
5. A letter arranging a duel between Darnley and the Lord Robert.
6. The two Glasgow Letters (i. and ii., see pp. 165-182).
7. The Love Sonnets (pp. 195-201).
8. The Letter in which the Jason and Medea comparison occurs.
(Letter iv., see pp. 185-189.)
This list should be compared with the recital of the productions at
Westminster (pp. 143 _et seq._). Maitland informed Queen Mary of
this secret visit, and she complained to Queen Elizabeth, who
summoned all the Commissioners to London, on the ground of greater
convenience.]
_MURRAY AND HIS PROOFS_
_Letter of the Earl of Murray, with information for the Queen
of England_, June 22, 1568. _Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 75, _from the
Paper Office_.
It may be that such letters as we have of the Queen, our Sovereign
Lord's mother, that sufficiently, in our opinion, prove her consenting
to the murther of the King her lawful husband, shall be called in doubt
... therefore, since our servant, Mr. John Wood, has the copies of the
same letters translated in our language, we would earnestly desire that
the said copies may be considered by the judges that shall have the
examination and commission of the matter, that they may resolve us thus
far, in case the principal agree with the copy, that then we prove the
case indeed; for when we have manifested and shown all, and yet shall
have no assurances that what we send shall satisfy for probation, for
what purpose shall we either accuse or seek to prove, when we are not
assured what to prove, or when we have proved, what shall succeed?
_MARY ASSERTS FORGERY_
1568.--September 9. Mary's Instructions to her Commissioners.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 337, from _Queen Mary's Register_ in Cotton
Library.
In case they allege they have any writings of mine, which may infer
presumption against me in that case, ye shall desire the principals to
be produced, and that I myself may have inspection thereof, and make
answer thereto. For ye shall affirm, in my name, I never wrote anything
concerning that matter to any creature; and if any writings be, they are
false and feigned, forged and invented by themselves, only to my
dishonour and slander. And there are divers in Scotland, both men and
women, that can counterfeit my handwriting, and write the like manner of
writing which I use, as well as myself, and principally such as are in
company with themselves. And I doubt not, if I had remained in my own
realm, but I should have gotten knowledge of the inventors and writers
of such writings ere now, to the declaration of my innocency, and
confusion of their falsity.
October 8. Complaint of the Queen of Scots against the Earl of Murray.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 128, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 197.
That James, Earl of Morton, John, Earl of Mar, Alexander, Earl of
Glencairn, the Lords Howe, Lindsay, Ruthven, Sempill, Cathcart,
Ochiltree, with others their assisters, assembled in arms a great part
of the Queen's grace's subjects, declared by their proclamations it was
for her Grace's relief, beset the road in her passage betwixt her
Grace's castles of Dunbar and Edinburgh, there took her most noble
person, committed her in ward in her own place of Lochleven, ... passed
to the castle of Stirling, and made there fashion of crowning of her son
the Prince....
James, Earl of Murray, took upon him the name of the Regent, ...
intromitted with the whole strengths, munitions, jewels, and patrimony
of the crown, as well property as casualty....
_MURRAY'S APOLOGY FOR THE REVOLUTION_
October 10. The Answer of the Earl of Murray.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 144, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 202.
_ACCUSATIONS AGAINST MARY_
It is notorious to all men, how umquhile {the late} King Henry, father
to our sovereign Lord, was horribly murdered in his bed. James, sometime
Earl of Bothwell, being well known to be the chief author thereof,
entered into so great credit and authority with the Queen, then our
sovereign, that, within three months after the murder of her husband,
the said Earl ... accomplished a pretended marriage betwix him and the
Queen, which strange and hasty proceeding of that godless and ambitious
man, ... with the ignominy spoken among all nations of that murther, as
though all the nobility had been alike culpable thereof, so moved the
hearts of a good number of them, that they thought nothing more godly
... than by punishing of the said Earl, chief author of the murther, to
relieve others causelessly calumniated thereof, to put the Queen to
freedom, forth of the bondage of that tyrant.... {From the Queen, after
Carberry Hill}, no other answer could be obtained, but vigorous
menacing, on the one part, avowing to be revenged on all them that had
shown themselves in that cause, and on the other part, offering to leave
and give over the realm and all, so she might be suffered to possess the
murtherer of her husband, which her inflexible mind, and extremity of
necessity compelled them to sequestrate her person for a season....
During the which time, she finding herself by long, irksome, and tedious
travail, taken by her in the government of the realm and lieges thereof
... vexed and wearied ... and for other considerations moving her at the
time, therefore demitted and renounced the office of government of the
realm and lieges thereof ... and constituted me, the said Earl of
Murray, I being then absent furth of the realm, and without my
knowledge, Regent to his Grace, the realm, and lieges....
_MARY'S REPLY_
1568.--October 16. Queen Mary's Commissioners' Rejoinder to Murray's
Reply.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 162, from _Queen Mary's Register_
in Cott. Lib. Titus, C. 12.
If he {Bothwell} was the principal author of the murder, the same was
never known nor manifested to her Highness, but the contrary did well
appear to her Grace, by reason the said Earl of Bothwell being
suspected, indited, and orderly summoned by the laws of that realm, was
acquitted by an assize of his Peers, and the same ratified and confirmed
by authority of Parliament, by the greatest part of the nobility ... who
also consented and solicited our said Sovereign to accomplish the said
marriage with him as the man most fit in all the realm of Scotland ...
and they nor none of them ... came to her Highness ... to find fault
with the said Earl concerning the murder foresaid, or yet in any ways
seemed to grudge or disallow the said marriage.... And at the presenting
of the said writings of demission of her crown to her Majesty by the
Lord Lindsay, he menaced her Grace, that if she would not subscribe, he
had command to put her presently in the Tower, and would do the same,
and counselled her to fulfil their desire or worse would shortly follow;
which her Highness subscribed with many tears, never looking what was
contained in the writings, declaring plainly thereafter, if ever her
Grace came to liberty, she would never abide thereat, because it was
against her Majesty's will.... If her Grace had willingly demitted the
same, as her Highness did not, her Highness could not have nominated the
said Earl of Murray Regent, for there were others to have been preferred
to him.
1568.--October 11. Letter to Queen Elizabeth from her Commissioners at
York.
[This letter is printed in the Appendix to vol. ii. of Hosack's
"Mary Queen of Scots, and her Accusers," from Cott. MS. Cal. c. i.
fol. 198. The words or letters within brackets, {}, have been
burnt, the margin being singed. "The words printed in italics,"
says Mr. Hosack, "are very carefully erased with the pen, and, in
some instances, are disguised with head and tail loops, to prevent
their being read, the alterations being written between the lines."
Without the alterations, the letter is printed in Goodall, vol. ii.
p. 139, and elsewhere.]
_THE PROOFS ARE SHOWN PRIVATELY_
_THE COMMISSIONERS' LETTER_
And so they {Moray and his colleagues} sent unto us the Lord of
Lethington, James Macgill, Mr. George Buchanan, and one other being a
Lord of the Session, which in private and secret conference with us, not
as Commissioners, as they protested, but for our better instruction,
afte{r} declaration of such circumstances as led and induced them to
vehement presumptio{n} to judge her guilty of the said murder, shewed
unto us a copy of a bond bear{ing} date the 19th of April 1567, to the
which the most part of the Lords and coun{cil} of Scotland have put to
their hands; and, as they say, more for fear, than any liking they had
of the same. Which bond contained two special points, the one {a}
declaration of Bothwell's purgation of the murder of the Lord Darnley
... and the othe{r} a general consent to his marriage with the Queen....
And yet, in proof that they did it not willingly, they procured a
warrant, which was now shewed unto us, bearing date the 19th {of} April,
signed with the Queen's hand, whereby she gave them licence to agree to
the same.... There was also a contract shewed unto us, signed with the
Queen's hand, and also with Bothwell's, bearing date the fifth of
April.... There was also a contract shewed unto us, of the Queen's own
hand, of the marriage to be had between her and Bothwell, bearing no
date, which had not _verba de praesenti_, as the other had, bearing date
the 5th of April. It appeared also unto us by two letters of her own
hand, that it was by her own practice and consent that Bothwell should
take her and carry her to Dunbar.... After the device of the murder was
determined, as it seemed by the sequel, they inferred upon a letter of
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
the Lord Robert of Holyrood-house, by carrying of false tales betwixt
them, the Queen being the instrument, as they said, to bring it to
pass.... Afterwards they shewed unto us one horrible and long letter of
her own hand, as they say, containing foul matter, and abominable to be
either thought of, or to be written by a Prince, with divers fond
ballads, and other writings before specified, were closed in a little
coffer of silver and gilt heretofore given by her to Bothwell.... And
these men here do constantly affirm the said letters and other writings,
which they produce of her own hand, to be of her own hand in deed; and
do offer to swear and take their oath thereupon, _as in deed_ the matter
contained in them being such as could hardly be invented or devised by
any other than by herself; for that the discourse of some things which
were unknown to any other, than to herself, and Bothwell, _doth the
rather persuade us to believe that they be in deed of her own
handwriting_. And as it is hard to counterfeit so many, _and so long
letters_, so the matter of them, and the manner how these men came by
them, is such, as it seemeth that God (in whose sight murder and
bloodshed of the innocent is abominable) would not permit the same to be
hid or concealed. In a paper here inclosed we have noted to your Majesty
the chief and special points of the said letters, written (as they say)
with her own hand, to the intent it may please your Majesty to consider
of them, and so to judge whether the same be sufficient to convince her
of the detestable crime of the murder of her husband; which in our
opinions and consciences, if the said letters be written with her own
hand, _as we believe_
_they be_, {is very hard to be avoided.
{_is plain and manifest_....
T. NORFOLK.
T. SUSSEX.
R. SADLER.
Abstract of Matters showed to the Queen's Majesty's Commissioners by the
Scots, sent the 11th of October.
_Goodall_, pp. 148-153.
... She wrote to Bothwell, that according to her commission, she would
bring the man with her; praying him to work wisely, or else the whole
burden would lie on her shoulders; and specially to make good watch,
that the bird escaped not out of the cage. {Letter iv., see pp.
185-189.}
_QUOTATIONS FROM THE LETTERS_
Notes drawn forth of the Queen's Letters sent to the Earl Bothwell.
... _Item._ ... We are coupled with twa fals racis; the devill syndere
us, and God mot knit us togidder for ever for the maist faithful cupple
that ever he unitit. This is my faith, I will die in it.
... _Item._ ... Wareit {cursed} mocht this pokishe man be, that causes
me haif sa meikill pane, for without hym I wald haif ane far mair
plesant subject to discourse upoun. He is not oer meikle spilt, bot he
has gottin verray mekill; he has almaist slane me with his braith; it is
war nor your unclis, and zeit {yet} I cum na neirar bot sat in ane cheir
at the bedfute, and he beand {being} at the uther end thairof.
... _Item._ ... Send me advertisement quhat I sall do, and quhatsumever
sall cum thairof I sall obey you; advys to with yourself. Yf ye can fynd
out any mair secreit inventioun be medecein, and the baith in
Craigmillar.
... _Item._ ... "For certaintie he suspectis that thing ye know, and of
his lyif: bot as to the last, how sone I speak twa or thrie guid wordis
unto hym, he rejois and is out of doubt."
... _Item._ ... Sie not his quhas fenzeit tearis suld not be sa mekill
praysit, nor estemyt, as the trew and faythfull travaillis quhilk I
sustene to merit hir place, for obteyning of quhilk, againis my
naturall. I betray thame that may impesche me. God forgive me, and God
gif you, my onlie luif, the hope and prosperitie that your humble and
faythfull luif desyris unto yow, quha hoipis schortlie to be ane uther
thing unto yow. {Letter, ii. pp. 167-182.}
... _Item._ ... As to me, howbeit I heir no farther newes from yow.
According to my commission, I bring the man with me to Craigmillar upon
Munday, quhair he will be all Wednisday. {Letter i., pp. 165-6.}
... _Item._ ... In ane uther lettre, "I pray you, according to your
promeis, to discharge your hart to me, utherwayis I will think that my
malheure, and the guid composing of thame, that hes not the third part
of the faythfull and willing obedience unto yow that I beyre, has wyne,
againis my will, that advantage over me quhilk the secund luif of Jason
wan; not that I wolde compair yow to ane soe unhappie as he was, nor yit
myself to ane soe unpetifull a woman as she...." {Letter iv., p. 185.}
_COMMISSION REMOVED TO WESTMINSTER_
The Conference at Westminster.
[At the beginning of the Westminster Conference, Mary found herself
"ever straiter and straiter kept from liberty," and demanded to be
allowed to appear in person. Her request and Elizabeth's reply will
be found on pp. 145, 148. On the 26th November, Murray made his
"eik" or additional charge. For the relevant portions of this
document, and of the reply of Mary's Commissioners, see pp. 146-7.
On December 6th, Mary's representatives protested that they would
withdraw from the Conference if their mistress's demand were not
granted. Cecil declined, on a formal point, to receive the protest.
On the 6th, 7th, and 8th, Murray produced his proofs. On the 9th,
the protest was accepted, and Mary's Commissioners withdrew. After
their retirement further evidence was received. It may be of use to
enumerate the documents produced at Westminster:--
_PRODUCTIONS AT WESTMINSTER_
The Book of Articles.
Acts of Parliament ratifying the proceedings of the insurgent
Lords.
Two contracts of marriage, and record of Bothwell's trial and
divorce.
Five of the six letters produced at York, three additional letters,
and the sonnets (pp. 162-201).
Recognition of the Regent's Government by Huntly, Argyll, and
Herries (pp. 154-5).
Depositions and confessions of Hay, Hepburn, Powrie, Dalgleish,
Nelson, and Crawford.
Murray's "Journal or Diary of Events."
The Book of Articles is a document of considerable length. It is a
summary of the charges against the Queen of Scots, but contains no
important charge which is not to be found elsewhere. The reader is
already in possession of its essential allegations. It formed the
material for Buchanan's "Detectio," with which it is, at times,
almost identical. It is printed, from the Hopetoun MS., in Hosack's
"Mary," I. App. B. For the depositions of Nelson and Crawford, see
pp. 207-213. The depositions of Hay, Hepburn, Powrie, and Dalgleish
do not directly accuse the Queen of the murder, beyond stating that
the powder was placed in her room, and they have therefore been
omitted. The question of the position of the powder is discussed in
Hosack, vol. i. pp. 247-8, and the reader is referred to the
authorities there quoted, and to Mr. Hay Fleming's "Mary Queen of
Scots," pp. 435-6 (_cf._ also pp. 219-220). The confession of
Hepburn (English edition of Buchanan's "Detection") contains the
following sentence:--"He said, let no man do evil for counsel of
great men ... for surely I thought that night that the deed was
done, that although knowledge should be gotten, no man durst have
said it was evil done, seeing the handwriting and acknowledging the
Queen's mind thereto." No question was put to Dalgleish regarding
the casket found in his possession.
A quotation from Murray's "Diary," so far as it bears on the
murder, will be found on pp. 213-215.]
_The Earl of Sussex to Sir William Cecil_, October 22, 1568.
_Lodge: Illustrations of British History._
This matter must at length take end, either by finding the Scotch Queen
guilty of the crimes that are objected against her, or by some manner of
composition with a show of saving her honour. The first, I think, will
hardly be attempted, for two causes, the one, for that if her adverse
party accuse her of the murder by producing of her letters, she will
deny them, and accuse the most of them of manifest consent to the
murder, hardly to be denied; so as, upon the trial on both sides, her
proofs will judicially fall best out, as it is thought. The other, for
that their young King is of tender and weak years and state of body; and
if God should call him, and their Queen were judicially defaced ...
Hamilton, upon his death, should succeed; which Murray's faction utterly
detest.
_MARY'S REQUEST_
1568.--November 22. Mary to her Commissioners.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 185, _from Queen Mary's Register_,
Cott. Lib., Titius C. 12.
Ye shall afore our sister, her nobility, and the whole ambassadors of
strange countries, desire, in our name, that we may be licensed to come
in proper person afore them all, to answer to that which may or can be
proposed and alleged against us by the calumnies of our rebels, since
they have free access to accuse us.... And now the said Earl of Murray
being permitted to come into her presence, which if the like be not
granted us, as is reasonable, and yet our sister will condemn us in our
absence, not having place to answer for ourselves, as justice requires;
in consideration of the premisses ye shall break off your conference,
and proceed no further therein, but take your leave and come away.
_THE REGENT'S "EIK"_
1568.--November 26. Murray's "Eik" or Additional Charge.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 206, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 230.
Whereas in our former answer, upon good respects mentioned in our
protestation, we kept back the chiefest causes and grounds, whereupon
our actions and whole proceedings were founded, wherewithal seeing our
adversaries will not content themselves; but by their obstinate and
earnest pressing we are compelled, for justifying of our cause, to
manifest the naked truth. It is certain, and we boldly and constantly
affirm, that as James, sometime Earl of Bothwell, was the chief executor
of the horrible and unworthy murder, perpetrated in the person of
umquhile King Henry of good memory, father to our sovereign Lord, and
the Queen's lawful husband, so was she of the foreknowledge, counsel,
device, persuader and commander of the said murder to be done,
maintainer and fortifier of the executors thereof, by impeding and
stopping of the inquisition and punishment due for the same, according
to the laws of the realm, and, consequently, by marriage with the said
James, sometime Earl Bothwell, delated and universally esteemed chief
author of the above-named murder. Where through they began to use and
exercise an uncouth and cruel tyranny in the whole state of the
commonwealth, and with the first (as well appeared by their proceedings)
intended to cause the innocent Prince, now our Sovereign Lord, shortly
follow his father, and so to transfer the crown from the right line to a
bloody murderer and godless tyrant. In which respect the estates of the
realm of Scotland finding her unworthy to reign, decreed her demission
of the Crown, with the coronation of our sovereign Lord, and
establishing of the regiment of that realm, in the person of me, the
Earl of Murray....
JAMES, REGENT.
PATRICK, L. LINDSAY.
MORTON.
AD. ORKAD.
DUNFERMLINE.
_ANSWER TO THE "EIK"_
1568.--December 1. The Answer of Queen Mary's Commissioners to the
"Eik."
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 213, _from Queen Mary's Register_.
My Lords,--We are heartily sorry to hear that our countrymen should
intend to colour their most unjust, ingrate, and shameful doings.... Her
Highness made the greatest of them of mean men, if they had used their
own calling, Earls and Lords, and now, without any evil deserving on her
Grace's part to any of them in deed or word, to be thuswise recompensed
with calumnious and false invented bruits {rumours}, slandered in so
great a matter, to her reproach, whereof they themselves, that now
pretend herewith to excuse their own treasons, were the first inventors,
writers with their own hands of that devilish band, the conspiracy of
the slaughter of that innocent young gentleman, Henry Stewart, late
spouse till our sovereign, and presented to their wicked confederate,
James, Earl Bothwell, as was made manifest before ten thousand people at
the execution of certain the principal offenders at Edinburgh....
_MARY AND ELIZABETH_
The Queen's Highness, our and their native sovereign, ... gave them in
her youth ... the twa part (two-thirds) of the patrimony pertaining to
the Crown of Scotland, and seeing that her successors, Kings of that
realm, might not maintain their estate upon the third part ... for their
evil deservings and most proud contemption ... caused her use the
privilege of the laws always granted to the Kings of that realm before,
and make revocation before her full age of xxv. years, ... so that it
was not the punishment of that slaughter that moved them to this proud
rebellion, but the usurping of their Sovereign's supreme authority, and
to possess themselves with her great riches....
... Our desire is most earnestly that it should be the Queen's Majesty's
pleasure that our Sovereign may be admitted to come into the presence of
the Queen's Highness of this realm, her whole nobility, and also in
presence of the ambassadors of foreign countries, for more true
declaration of her innocency.
1568.--December 4. Elizabeth's Answer.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 222, _from Queen Mary's Register_.
I think it very reasonable that she should be heard in her own cause,
being so weighty; but to determine whom before, when and what, any time
before I understand how they will verify their allegation, I am not as
yet resolved.
_THE PRIVY COUNCIL_
1568.--Dec. 4. Proceedings of the Privy Council.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 223, _from the Journal of the
Privy Council of England_.
Die Sabbati, 4 Decembris 1568, Hora prima post meridiem.
_Present._
THE QUEEN'S MAJESTY.
The Lord Keeper {Sir Nicholas Bacon}.
Duke of Norfolk.
Marquis {of Northampton}.
Lord Steward {Pembroke}.
Earl Essex.
Earl Bedford.
Earl Leicester.
Lord Admiral {Lord Clinton}.
Lord Chamberlain {Lord Howard of Effingham}.
Sir William Cecil.
Sir Ralph Sadler.
Sir Walt. Mildmay.
The said Bishop {of Ross} and his colleagues, before they came to the
Court, sent a message to the Earl of Leicester and Sir William Cecil,
requiring to speak with them two apart.... And thereupon the said
Commissioners came into the Earl of Leicester's chamber, where the said
Bishop in the name of the rest said ... That although the Earl of Murray
and his complices had delivered in writing a grievous accusation against
the Queen, their Sovereign, and that they were prohibited to make any
further answer to any such matter, but only to desire the Queen of Scots
might come in person to the presence of the Queen's Majesty to make any
further answer to any such matter; yet they having considered with
themselves their mistress's intention to have been always from the
beginning, that these causes should be ended by the Queen's Majesty by
some such good appointment betwix her and her subjects, as might be for
her Grace's honour and the common weal of the country, with surety also
to the Earl of Murray, and his party ... thought good to declare thus
much to the said Earl and Sir William Cecil....
_COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS_
After the said Bishop had reiterated the said motion, as above is
mentioned, the Queen's Majesty said: "... Trusting and wishing that the
Queen, her sister, should be found innocent, ... she thought it better
for her sister's honour and declaration to the world of her innocency,
to have the Earl of Murray and his complices charged and reproved for
this their so audacious defaming of the Queen, their sovereign, and to
receive that which was due for their punishment, than to have it ended
by appointment, except it might be thought that they should be able to
show some apparent just causes of such an attempt, whereof her Majesty
would be sorry to hear. And as for the Queen of Scots coming in person
to her Majesty to make answer hereunto, the same being of no small
moment to her honour, but rather likely to touch her in reputation, in
that it might be thought the accusation so probable, as it not to be
improved {disproved} by any other, but that she should be forced to come
herself, being a Queen, in person to answer for herself, her Majesty
said she would not have the Queen's honour and estate in that matter
endangered without this their accusation might first appear to have more
likelihood of just cause than she did find therein....
Hereunto the Queen of Scots' Commissioners said that this last motion
for an appointment came not from the Queen since the accusation given in
by the Earl of Murray, and so also the Queen's Majesty assented thereto,
but of their own consideration."
_PRODUCTION OF THE PROOFS_
1568.--Dec. 6. Proofs produced at Westminster.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 231, _from the Journal of the Commissioners_.
... They {Murray and others} would show unto her Majesty's Commissioners
a collection made in writing of the presumptions and circumstances, by
the which it should evidently appear that as the Earl Bothwell was the
chief murtherer of the King, so was the Queen a deviser and maintainer
thereof; the which writing followeth thus. Articles containing certain
conjectures, &c. {the Book of Articles. See _supra_, p. 144}.
After the reading hereof they also said that according to the truth
contained in the same, the three estates of Parliament, called by the
King, now present, their whole actions and proceedings from the murther
of the late King were ratified and approved to be lawful....
_Hosack I., App. C., from State Papers_ (_Mary, Queen of Scots_),
1568, vol. ii. p. 61, December 7, 1568.
... The Queen's Majesty's Commissioners having heard the foresaid Book
of Articles read unto them ... entered into a new hearing of the Book of
Articles, whereof having heard three of the chapters or heads, the Earl
of Murray and his colleagues, according to the appointment, came to the
said Commissioners and said: 'They trusted that, after the reading of
the Book of Articles, and specially upon the sight of the Act of
Parliament, wherein the whole cause wherewith their adversaries did
charge them, were found, declared, and concluded to be lawful; their
Lordships would be satisfied to think them clear and void of such crime
as her Majesty did charge them withal.... They required to know whether
their Lordships were not now satisfied with such things as they had
seen, and if they were not, and that it would please them to show if in
any part of these Articles exhibited they conceived any doubt, or would
have any other proof, which they trusted, needed not.... {The
Commissioners declined to give any opinion on this point.}
_THE CASKET_
And so they produced a small gilded coffer of not fully one foot long,
being garnished in many places with the Roman letter F set under a Royal
Crown, wherein were certain letters and writings, and as they said and
affirmed to have been written with the Queen of Scots' own hand, to the
Earl Bothwell, which coffer, as they said, being left in the Castle of
Edinburgh by the said Earl Bothwell before his flying away, was sent for
by one George Dalgleish, his servant, who was taken by the Earl of
Morton, who also thereto sitting presently as one of the Commissioners
avowed upon his oath the same to be true, and the writings to be the
very same without any manner of change, and before they would exhibit
the sight of these letters they exhibited {the two marriage
contracts}.... After this the said Earl and his colleagues offered to
show certain proofs, not only of the Queen's hate towards the King, her
husband, but also of unordinate love towards Bothwell, for which purpose
they produced a letter written in French and in Roman hand, which they
averred to be a letter of the said Queen's own hand to Bothwell when she
was at Glasgow with her husband, at the time she went to bring him to
Edinburgh, the tenour of which letter hereafter followeth: Il semble que
avecques ure absence, &c. {Letter i. p. 165.}
_ITS CONTENTS_
After this they produced for the same purpose one other long letter
written also with the like hand, and in French, ... the tenour of all
which letter followeth hereafter: Estant party du lieu, &c. {Letter ii.
p. 167.}
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 235, _from the Journal of the Commissioners_,
December 8.
They produced seven several writings written in French in the like Roman
hand, as others her letters which were shewed yesternight and avowed by
them to be written by the said 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 redelivered, and
did thereupon deliver the copies being collationed, the tenour of all
which seven writings hereafter follow in order, the first being in
manner of a sonnet,
"O Dieux, ayez de moy," &c.
[This is the first line of the first of the collection of sonnets,
which will be found on pp. 195-201. The other six "writings" are
Letters iii.-viii., on pp. 162-195.]
_DEPOSITIONS_
After this they did produce and show three several writings in English,
subscribed and signed by Sir John Bellenden, Knight, Justice-Clerk in
Scotland, whereof the first contained two several examinations, the
first of John Hay, the younger of Talla, the 13th of September, anno
1567, the second of John Hepburn, called John of Bolton, being examined
upon the murder of the King, the 8th of December 1567. The third writing
containeth the examination of one George Dalgleish, the 26th of June in
the same year, 1567. All which writings ... were delivered to the said
Commissioners, the true tenour whereof hereafter followeth, _Apud
Edinburgh_, 13 die mensis Septembris.
After this they produced and showed forth in writing, subscribed
likewise by the said Justice-Clerk, a copy of the process, verdict, and
judgment against the foresaid John Hepburn, John Hay, William Powrie,
and George Dalgleish, as culpable of the murder of the said King, which
being read, was also delivered, and the tenours thereof hereafter
followeth, _Curia justiciariae S. D. N. regis_, &c. After this they
produced and shewed forth a writing in a long paper, being, as they
said, the judgment and condemnation by Parliament of the Earl Bothwell,
James Ormiston, Robert Ormiston, Patrick Wilson, and Paris, a Frenchman,
Sym, Armstrong, and William Murray, as guilty sundry ways of treason for
the murder of the King. The tenour whereof thus followeth: _In the
Parliament holden at Edinburgh, the 20th day of December_.
After this they produced and showed a writing signed by Mr. James
Macgill, Clerk of the register, containing a request, by way of
protestation, by the Earls of Huntly and Argyle, and the Lord Herries,
by the which they require to have no fault imputed unto them for not
doing their duty since the 10th of June 1567, until the 29th of December
then following, for the which, by order of Parliament, they were
acquitted....
_THE FINDING OF THE CASKET_
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 239, from _Journal of the Commissioners_,
Cott. Lib. Calig., c. i. p. 252, Dec. 9, 1568.
The Queen's Majesty's Commissioners being occupied in perusing and
reading certain letters and sonnets written in French, being duly
translated into English, and other writings also exhibited yesterday to
them by the Earl of Murray and his colleagues.... After this the Earl of
Murray and his colleagues came ... and first the Earl Morton said, that
where heretofore he had declared by speech, the manner how he came to
the little gilt coffer with the letters, sonnets, and contracts of
marriage therein found, and heretofore exhibited: he had caused the same
to be put in writing, which also he produced subscribed with his hand,
and desired to have it read: which being done, he avowed upon his
honour, and the oath which he already took, the same to be true, the
tenor whereof followeth, _The true declaration and report_, &c. (see p.
203).
After this the Earl of Murray required that one Thomas Nelson, late
servitor to the King that was murdered ... might be heard upon his oath
to report his knowledge therein, who, being produced, did present a
writing in form of answer of himself to an examination, which being read
unto him, he did by a corporal oath affirm the same to be true ... (see
p. 207) ...
_CRAWFORD'S EVIDENCE_
The like request was made that one Thomas Crawford, a gentleman of the
Earl of Lennox, might be also heard upon his oath, who was, as they
said, the same party of whom mention is made in a long letter written in
French, and exhibited the 7th of this month.... Whereupon the said
Thomas Crawford ... did present a writing, which he said he caused to be
made according to the truth of his knowledge, which being read he
affirmed upon his corporal oath there taken to be true, the tenour
whereof hereafter followeth. The words betwixt the Queen, &c.... The
said Crawford said ... that he ... was secretly informed by the King of
all things which had passed betwixt the said Queen and the King, to the
intent he should report the same to the Earl of Lennox his master ...
and that he did, immediately at the same time, write the same word by
word as near as he possibly could carry the same away ... (see p. 208).
_Journal of the Privy Council of Hampton Court_,
December 14, 1568. _Goodall_, ii. 254.
There were produced sundry letters written in French, supposed to be
written by 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 writing and fashion of orthography, with sundry other
letters long since heretofore written, and sent by the Queen of Scots to
the Queen's Majesty. {The attestation of Morton and the depositions were
then read.} ... And forasmuch as the night approached, it was thought
good to defer the further declaration of the rest until the next day
following.
_Ibid._, December 15.
[The Book of Articles, depositions, and contracts were produced,
along with Acts of the Scottish Parliament.]
And it is to be noted, that, at the time of the producing, shewing, and
reading of all these foresaid writings, there was no special choice nor
regard had to the order of the producing thereof, but the whole writings
lying all together upon the Council table, the same were one after
another showed 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.
_MARY'S PERSONAL ANSWER_
1568.--December 19. Queen Mary's own Answer to the "Eik."
_Mary to her Commissioners. Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 288,
from Cott. Lib. Calig., b. ix. p. 287.
We have received the eik given in by the Earl of Murray and his
complices. And where they have said thereintill, or at any time, that we
knew, counselled, devised, persuaded, or commended the murther of our
husband, they have falsely, traitorously, and meschantlie lied; imputing
unto us the crime whereof they themselves are authors, inventors, doers,
and some of them proper executors. And where they allege we stopped
inquisition, and due punishment to be made on the said murther; and
siclike {similarly} of the sequel of the marriage with the Earl
Bothwell; it is sufficiently answered in the reply given in at York to
their two points.... And where they charge us with unnatural kindness
towards our son, alleging we intended to have caused him follow his
father hastily: Howbeit the natural love the mother bears to her only
bairn is sufficient to confound them, and misteris {requires} no other
answer. Yet, considering their proceedings by-past, who did wrong him in
our womb, intending to have slain him and us both, there is none of good
judgment but they may easily perceive their hypocrisy, how they would
fortify themselves in our son's name, till their tyranny were better
established.
_DEMAND TO SEE ELIZABETH_
And to the effect our good sister may understand we are not willing to
let their false invented allegations pass over with silence, adhering to
your former protestations, ye shall desire the inspection and doubles of
all that they have produced against us; and that we may see the alleged
principal {original} writings, if they have any, produced; and with
God's grace we shall make our answer thereto, that our innocence shall
be known to our good sister, and to all other Princes; and similarly
shall charge them as authors, inventors, and doers of the said crime
they would impute to us, and prove the same sufficiently, so that we may
have our good sister's presence, as our adversaries have had, and
reasonable space and time to get such verification as appertains
thereto. And protest that we may add thereto as time place and need
shall require.
[In accordance with these instructions, Mary's Commissioners made
the request before Elizabeth and her Council on 25th December, and
received the following reply:--]
Which desire her Majesty thought very reasonable, and declared her to be
very glad that her good sister would make answer in that manner for
defence of her honour. And to the effect her Majesty might be the better
advised upon their desires, and give answer thereto, desired an extract
of the said writing to be given to her Highness. (Goodall, p. 282, from
"Queen Mary's Register," as before.)
_HAMPTON COURT_
1569.--January 7. Proceedings at Hampton Court.
_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 297, from _Queen Mary's Register_.
The which day the said Bishop of Ross, Lord Herries, and Abbot of
Kilwinning, passed to the presence of the Queen's Majesty of England,
her Highness's council being also present, and declared, that they had
presently received writings from the Queen's Majesty of Scotland, their
sovereign, by the which they were of new commanded to signify unto her
Majesty, that she would answer to the calumnious accusation of her
subjects, and also would accuse them as principal authors, inventors,
and executors of that deid for the which she was falsely accused by
them, conform to the writings presented of before in her name, and
therefore desired the writings produced by her inobedient subjects, or,
at the least, the copies thereof, to be delivered unto thame, that their
mistress might fully answer thereto as was desired.
And the Queen's Majesty of England took to be advised therewith, and
promised to give answer within two or three days.
_ELIZABETH'S DECISION_
1569.--January 10. At Hampton Court.
_Ibid._ (p. 305).
The which day the said Earl of Murray, and his complices, came before
the Queen's Majesty of England, where Sir William Cecil, secretary, at
the Queen's Majesty's command, and her Highness's council, gave them
such answer in effect as follows:--
Whereas the Earl of Murray, and his adherents, come into this realm, at
the desire of the Queen's Majesty of England, to answer to such things
as the Queen their sovereign objected against them, and their
allegiances; for so much as there has been nothing deduced against them,
as yet, that may impair their honour or allegiances; and, on the other
part, there had been nothing sufficiently produced nor shown by them
against the Queen, their sovereign, whereby the Queen of England should
conceive or take any evil opinion of the Queen, her good sister, for
anything yet seen; and there being alleged by the Earl of Murray the
unquiet state and disorder of the realm of Scotland, now in his absence,
her Majesty thinketh meet not to restrain any farther the said Earl and
his adherents' liberty; but suffer him and them, at their pleasure to
depart, relinquishing them in the same estate in the which they were of
before their coming within this realm, till she hear farther of their
Queen of Scotland's answer, to such things as have been alleged against
her.
_MARY'S PROTEST_
[Next day, Mary's Commissioners protested and again demanded
"copies of the pretended writings given in." On the 13th they
repeated their demand, and received a promise "that she {Elizabeth}
will not refuse unto the Queen, her good sister, to give the
doubles of all that was produced." (Goodall.) The copies not being
forthcoming, Mary applied to the French ambassador, La Mothe
Fenelon, for help. Elizabeth promised that they should be produced
immediately, but, when Fenelon again approached her on the subject,
he was informed that Mary had, in a letter, accused the English
Queen of partiality. (Fenelon, i. 133 and 162.) The matter was
forgotten in the negotiations for Mary's marriage with the Duke of
Norfolk, and in the conspiracy which followed.]