CHAPTER XXXVIII.

Produced by David Widger and the Online Distributed

Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net

THE HISTORY OF ENGLAND

FROM THE INVASION OF JULIUS CÆSAR

TO THE END OF THE REIGN OF JAMES THE SECOND,

BY DAVID HUME, ESQ.

1688

London: James S. Virtue, City Road and Ivy Lane

New York: 26 John Street

1860

And

Philadelphia:

J. B. Lippincott & Co.

March 17, 1901

In Three Volumes:

VOLUME ONE: The History Of England From The Invasion Of Julius Cæsar To

The End Of The Reign Of James The Second............ By David Hume, Esq.

VOLUME TWO: Continued from the Reign of William and Mary to the Death of

George II........................................... by Tobias Smollett.

VOLUME THREE: From the Accession of George III. to the Twenty-Third Year

of the Reign of Queen Victoria............... by E. Farr and E.H. Nolan.

VOLUME ONE

Part D.

From Elizabeth to James I.

CHAPTER XXXVIII.

[Illustration: 1-442-elizabeth.jpg ELIZABETH]

ELIZABETH.

CONTEMPORARY MONARCHS.

EMP. OP GERM. K. OF SCOTLAND. K. OF FRANCE. K. OF SPAIN.

Ferdinand..1564 Mary abdicates.1567 Henry II....1559 Philip II.1598

Maximilian.1576 James VI. Francis II..1560 Philip III.

Rodolph II. Charles IX..1574

Henry III.. 1589

Henry IV.

POPES.

Paul IV.... 1558

Pius IV.... 1565

Pius V..... 1572

Gregory XIII.1585

Sixtus V... 1590

Urban VII.. 1590

Gregory XIV. 1591

Innocent IX. 1591

Clement VII.

{1558.} In a nation so divided as the English, it could scarcely be

expected that the death of one sovereign, and the accession of another,

who was generally believed to have embraced opposite principles to those

which prevailed, could be the object of universal satisfaction: yet so

much were men displeased with the present conduct of affairs, and such

apprehensions were entertained of futurity, that the people, overlooking

their theological disputes, expressed a general and unfeigned joy that

the sceptre had passed into the hand of Elizabeth. That princess had

discovered great prudence in her conduct during the reign of her sister;

and as men were sensible of the imminent danger to which she was every

moment exposed, compassion towards her situation, and concern for her

safety, had rendered her, to an uncommon degree, the favorite of the

nation. A parliament had been assembled a few days before Mary’s death;

and when Heathe, archbishop of York, then chancellor, notified to them

that event, scarcely an interval of regret appeared; and the two houses

immediately resounded with the joyful acclamations of “God save Queen

Elizabeth: long and happily may she reign.” The people, less actuated

by faction, and less influenced by private views, expressed a joy

still more general and hearty on her proclamation; and the auspicious

commencement of this reign prognosticated that felicity and glory which,

during its whole course, so uniformly attended it.[*]

Elizabeth was at Hatfield when she heard of her sister’s death; and

after a few days she went thence to London, through crowds of people,

who strove with each other in giving her the strongest testimony of

their affection. On her entrance into the Tower, she could not forbear

reflecting on the great difference between her present fortune and that

which a few years before had attended her, when she was conducted to

that place as a prisoner, and lay there exposed to all the bigoted

malignity of her enemies. She fell on her knees, and expressed her

thanks to Heaven for the deliverance which the Almighty had granted her

from her bloody persecutors; a deliverance, she said, no less miraculous

than that which Daniel had received from the den of lions. This act of

pious gratitude seems to have been the last circumstance in which

she remembered any past hardships and injuries. With a prudence and

magnanimity truly laudable, she buried all offences in oblivion, and

received with affability even those who had acted with the greatest

malevolence against her. Sir Henry Benningfield himself, to whose

custody she had been committed, and who had treated her with severity,

never felt, during the whole course of her reign, any effects of her

resentment.[**] Yet was not the gracious reception which she gave,

prostitute and undistinguishing. When the bishops came in a body to

make their obeisance to her, she expressed to all of them sentiments

of regard; except to Bonner, from whom she turned aside, as from a man

polluted with blood, who was a just object of horror to every heart

susceptible of humanity.[***]

* Burnet, vol. ii. p. 373.

** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 374.

*** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 374. Heylin, p. 102.

After employing a few days in ordering her domestic affairs, Elizabeth

notified to foreign courts her sister’s death, and her own accession.

She sent Lord Cobham to the Low Countries, where Philip then resided;

and she took care to express to that monarch her gratitude for the

protection which he had afforded her, and her desire of persevering in

that friendship which had so happily commenced between them. Philip,

who had long foreseen this event, and who still hoped, by means of

Elizabeth, to obtain that dominion over England, of which he had failed

in espousing Mary, immediately despatched orders to the duke of Feria,

his ambassador at London, to make proposals of marriage to the queen;

and he offered to procure from Rome a dispensation for that purpose. But

Elizabeth soon came to the resolution of declining the proposal. She

saw that the nation had entertained an extreme aversion to the Spanish

alliance during her sister’s reign; and that one great cause of the

popularity which she herself enjoyed, was the prospect of being freed by

her means from the danger of foreign subjection. She was sensible that

her affinity with Philip was exactly similar to that of her father with

Catharine of Arragon; and that her marrying that monarch was, in effect,

declaring herself illegitimate, and incapable of succeeding to the

throne. And though the power of the Spanish monarchy might still be

sufficient, in opposition to all pretenders, to support her title, her

masculine spirit disdained such precarious dominion, which, as it would

depend solely on the power of another, must be exercised according

to his inclinations.[*] But while these views prevented her from

entertaining any thoughts of a marriage with Philip, she gave him an

obliging, though evasive answer; and he still retained such hopes of

success, that he sent a messenger to Rome, with orders to solicit the

dispensation.

* Camden in Kennet, p. 370. Burnet, vol. ii. p. 375.

The queen too, on her sister’s death, had written to Sir Edward Carne,

the English ambassador at Rome, to notify her accession to the pope; but

the precipitate nature of Paul broke through all the cautious measures

concerted by this young princess. He told Carne, that England was a fief

of the holy see; and it was great temerity in Elizabeth to have assumed,

without his participation, the title and authority of queen: that being

illegitimate, she could not possibly inherit that kingdom; nor could

he annul the sentence, pronounced by Clement VII. and Paul III., with

regard to Henry’s marriage: that were he to proceed with rigor, he

should punish this criminal invasion of his rights, by rejecting all her

applications but being willing to treat her with paternal indulgence,

he would still keep the door of grace open to her, and that if she would

renounce all pretensions to the crown, and submit entirely to his will,

she should experience the utmost lenity compatible with the dignity of

the apostolic see.[*] When this answer was reported to Elizabeth,

she was astonished at the character of that aged pontiff; and having

recalled her ambassador, she continued with more determined resolution

to pursue those measures which already she had secretly embraced.

The queen, not to alarm the partisans of the Catholic religion, had

retained eleven of her sister’s counsellors; but in order to balance

their authority, she added eight more, who were known to be inclined

to the Protestant communion: the marquis of Northampton, the earl of

Bedford, Sir Thomas Parry, Sir Edward Rogers, Sir Ambrose Cave, Sir

Francis Knolles, Sir Nicholas Bacon, whom she created lord keeper, and

Sir William Cecil, secretary of state.[**]

* Father Paul, lib. v.

** Strype’s Ann. vol. i. p. 5.

With these counsellors, particularly Cecil, she frequently deliberated

concerning the expediency of restoring the Protestant religion, and

the means of executing that great enterprise. Cecil told her, that the

greater part of the nation had, ever since her father’s reign, inclined

to the reformation, and though her sister had constrained them to

profess the ancient faith, the cruelties exercised by her ministers

had still more alienated their affections from it: that happily the

interests of the sovereign here concurred with the inclinations of the

people; nor was her title to the crown compatible with the authority of

the Roman pontiff: that a sentence, so solemnly pronounced by two popes

against her mother’s marriage, could not possibly be recalled without

inflicting a mortal wound on the credit of the see of Rome; and even if

she were allowed to retain the crown, it would only be on an uncertain

and dependent footing: that this circumstance alone counterbalanced all

dangers whatsoever; and these dangers themselves, if narrowly examined,

would be found very little formidable: that the curses and execrations

of the Romish church, when not seconded by military force, were, in the

present age, more an object of ridicule than of terror, and had now as

little influence in this world as in the next: that though the bigotry

or ambition of Henry or Philip might incline them to execute a sentence

of excommunication against her, their interests were so incompatible,

that they never could concur in any plan of operations; and the enmity

of the one would always insure to her the friendship of the other:

that if they encouraged the discontents of her Catholic subjects,

their dominions also abounded with Protestants, and it would be easy to

retaliate upon them: that even such of the English as seemed at present

zealously attached to the Catholic faith, would, most of them, embrace

the religion of their new sovereign; and the nation had of late been

so much accustomed to these revolutions, that men had lost all idea of

truth and falsehood in such subjects: that the authority of Henry VIII.,

so highly raised by many concurring circumstances, first inured the

people to this submissive deference; and it was the less difficult for

succeeding princes to continue the nation in a track to which it had so

long been accustomed; and that it would be easy for her, by bestowing on

Protestants all preferment in civil offices and the militia, the church

and the universities, both to insure her own authority, and to render

her religion entirely predominant.[*]

The education of Elizabeth, as well as her interest, led her to favor

the reformation; and she remained not long in suspense with regard to

the party which she should embrace. But though determined in her own

mind, she resolved to proceed by gradual and secure steps, and not to

imitate the example of Mary in encouraging the bigots of her party to

make immediately a violent invasion on the established religion.[**]

She thought it requisite, however, to discover such symptoms of her

intentions as might give encouragement to the Protestants so much

depressed by the late violent persecutions. She immediately recalled

all the exiles, and gave liberty to the prisoners who were confined on

account of religion. We are told of a pleasantry of one Rainsford on

this occasion, who said to the queen, that he had a petition to present

her in behalf of other prisoners called Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John:

she readily replied, that it behoved her first to consult the prisoners

themselves, and to learn of them whether they desired that liberty which

he demanded for them.[***]

* Burnet, vol. ii. p. 377. Camden, p. 370.

** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 378. Camden, p. 371.

*** Heylin, p. 103.

Elizabeth also proceeded to exert in favor of the reformers some acts

of power which were authorized by the extent of royal prerogative

during that age. Finding that the Protestant teachers, irritated by

persecution, broke out in a furious attack on the ancient superstition,

and that the Romanists replied with no less zeal and acrimony, she

published a proclamation, by which she inhibited all preaching without a

special license;[*] and though she dispensed with these orders in favor

of some preachers of her own sect, she took care that they should be the

most calm and moderate of the party. She also suspended the laws so far

as to order a great part of the service; the litany, the Lord’s prayer,

the creed, and the gospels; to be read in English. And having first

published injunctions, that all the churches should conform themselves

to the practice of her own chapel, she forbade the host to be any more

elevated in her presence; an innovation which, however frivolous it may

appear, implied the most material consequences.[**]

These declarations of her intention, concurring with preceding

suspicions, made the bishops foresee with certainty a revolution in

religion. They therefore refused to officiate at her coronation; and

it was with some difficulty that the bishop of Carlisle was at last

prevailed on to perform the ceremony. When she was conducted through

London, amidst the joyful acclamations of her subjects, a boy, who

personated truth, was let down from one of the triumphal arches, and

presented to her a copy of the Bible. She received the book with the

most gracious deportment; placed it next her bosom; and declared that,

amidst all the costly testimonies which the city had that day given her

of their attachment, this present was by far the most precious and

most acceptable.[*] Such were the innocent artifices by which Elizabeth

insinuated herself into the affections of her subjects. Open in her

address, gracious and affable in all public appearances, she rejoiced

in the concourse of her subjects, entered into all their pleasures and

amusements; and without departing from her dignity, which she knew

well how to preserve, she acquired a popularity beyond what any of her

predecessors or successors ever could attain. Her own sex exulted to see

a woman hold the reins of empire with such prudence and fortitude: and

while a young princess of twenty-five years, (for that was her age at

her accession,) who possessed all the graces and insinuation, though not

all the beauty of her sex, courted the affections of individuals by

her civilities, of the public by her services; her authority though

corroborated by the strictest bands of law and religion, appeared to be

derived entirely from the choice and inclination of the people.

* Heylin, p. 104. Strype, vol. i. p. 41.

** Camden, p. 371. Heylin, p. 104. Strype, vol. i. p 54.

Stowe, p. 635.

*** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 380. Strype, vol. i. p. 29.

A sovereign of this disposition was not likely to offend her subjects

by any useless or violent exertions of power; and Elizabeth, though she

threw out such hints as encouraged the Protestants delayed the entire

change of religion till the meeting of the parliament, which was

summoned to assemble. The elections had gone entirely against the

Catholics, who seem not indeed to have made any great struggle for the

superiority;[*] and the houses met in a disposition of gratifying the

queen in every particular which she could desire of them. They began

the session with a unanimous declaration, “that Queen Elizabeth was, and

ought to be, as well by the word of God, as the common and statute

laws of the realm, the lawful, undoubted, and true heir to the crown,

lawfully descended from the blood royal, according to the order of

succession settled in the thirty-fifth of Henry VIII.”[**]

* Notwithstanding the bias of the nation towards the

Protestant sect, it appears that some violence, at least

according to our present ideas, was used in these elections:

five candidates were nominated by the court to each borough,

and three to each county; and by the sheriff’s authority the

members were chosen from among these candidates. See state

papers collected by Edward, earl of Clarendon, p. 92.

* I Eliz. cap. 3.

This act of recognition was probably dictated by the queen herself and

her ministers; and she showed her magnanimity, as well as moderation, in

the terms which she employed on that occasion. She followed not Mary’s

practice in declaring the validity of her mother’s marriage, or in

expressly repealing the act formerly made against her own legitimacy:

she knew that this attempt must be attended with reflections on her

father’s memory, and on the birth of her deceased sister; and as all the

world was sensible, that Henry’s divorce from Anne Boleyn was merely the

effect of his usual violence and caprice, she scorned to found her title

on any act of an assembly which had too much prostituted its authority

by its former variable, servile, and iniquitous decisions. Satisfied,

therefore, in the general opinion entertained with regard to this fact,

which appeared the more undoubted, the less anxiety she discovered in

fortifying it by votes and inquiries; she took possession of the

throne both as her birthright, and as insured to her by former acts

of parliament; and she never appeared anxious to distinguish these

titles.[*]

The first bill brought into parliament with a view of trying their

disposition on the head of religion, was that for suppressing

the monasteries lately erected, and for restoring the tenths and

first-fruits to the queen. This point being gained without much

difficulty, a bill was next introduced, annexing the supremacy to the

crown; and though the queen was there denominated “governess,” not

“head,” of the church, it conveyed the same extensive power which under

the latter title had been exercised by her father and brother. All the

bishops who were present in the upper house strenuously opposed this

law; and as they possessed more learning than the temporal peers, they

triumphed in the debate; but the majority of voices in that house, as

well as among the commons, was against them. By this act, the crown,

without the concurrence either of the parliament, or even of the

convocation, was vested with the whole spiritual power; might repress

all heresies, might establish or repeal all canons, might alter every

point of discipline, and might ordain or abolish any religious rite or

ceremony,[**]

* Camden, p. 372. Heylin, p. 107, 108

** I Eliz. cap. 1. This last power was anew recognized in

the bill of uniformity I Eliz. cap 2.

In determining heresy, the sovereign was only limited (if that could be

called a limitation) to such doctrines as had been adjudged heresy by

the authority of the Scripture, by the first four general councils, or

by any general council which followed the Scripture as their rule, or

to such other doctrines as should hereafter be denominated heresy by

the parliament and convocation. In order to exercise this authority,

the queen, by a clause of the act, was empowered to name commissioners,

either laymen or clergymen, as she should think proper; and on this

clause was afterwards founded the court of ecclesiastical commission;

which assumed large discretionary, not to say arbitrary powers, totally

incompatible with any exact boundaries in the constitution. Their

proceedings, indeed, were only consistent with absolute monarchy; but

were entirely suitable to the genius of the act on which they were

established; an act that at once gave the crown alone all the power

which had formerly been claimed by the popes, but which even these

usurping prelates had never been able fully to exercise without some

concurrence of the national clergy.

Whoever refused to take an oath acknowledging the queen’s supremacy, was

incapacitated from holding any office; whoever denied the supremacy, or

attempted to deprive the queen of that prerogative, forfeited, for the

first offence, all his goods and chattels; for the second, was subjected

to the penalty of a præmunire; but the third offence was declared

treason. These punishments, however severe, were less rigorous than

those which were formerly, during the reigns of her father and brother,

inflicted in like cases.

A law was passed confirming all the statutes enacted in King Edward’s

time with regard to religion:[*] the nomination of bishops was given

to the crown, without any election of the chapters: the queen was

empowered, on the vacancy of any see, to seize all the temporalities,

and to bestow on the bishop elect an equivalent in the impropriations

belonging to the crown. This pretended equivalent was commonly much

inferior in value; and thus the queen, amidst all her concern for

religion, followed the example of the preceding reformers in committing

depredations on the ecclesiastical revenues.

The bishops and all incumbents were prohibited from alienating their

revenues, and from letting leases longer than twenty-one years or three

lives. This law seemed to be meant for securing the property of the

church; but as an exception was left in favor of the crown, great abuses

still prevailed. It was usual for the courtiers, during this reign,

to make an agreement with a bishop or incumbent; and to procure a

fictitious alienation to the queen, who afterwards transferred the lands

to the person agreed on.[**] This method of pillaging the church was not

remedied till the beginning of James I. The present depression of the

clergy exposed them to all injuries; and the laity never stopped till

they had reduced the church to such poverty, that her plunder was no

longer a compensation for the odium incurred by it.

A solemn and public disputation was held during this session in presence

of Lord Keeper Bacon, between the divines of the Protestant and those of

the Catholic communion. The champions appointed to defend the religion

of the sovereign were, as in all former instances, entirely triumphant;

and the Popish disputants, being pronounced refractory and obstinate,

were even punished by imprisonment.[***]

* I Eliz. cap. 2.

** Strype, vol. i. p. 79.

*** Strype, vol. i. p. 95.

Emboldened by this victory, the Protestants ventured on the last

and most important step, and brought into parliament a bill[*] for

abolishing the mass and reestablishing the liturgy of King Edward.

Penalties were enacted, as well against those who departed from this

mode of worship, as against those who absented themselves from the

church and the sacraments. And thus in one session, without any

violence, tumult, or clamor, was the whole system of religion altered,

on the very commencement of a reign, and by the will of a young woman,

whose title to the crown was by many thought liable to objections; an

event which, though it may appear surprising to men in the present

age, was every where expected on the first intelligence of Elizabeth’s

accession.

The commons also made a sacrifice to the queen, more difficult to

obtain than that of any articles of faith: they voted a subsidy of four

shillings in the pound on land, and two shillings and eightpence on

movables, together with two fifteenths.[**] [1] The house in no instance

departed from the most respectful deference and complaisance towards the

queen. Even the importune address which they made her on the conclusion

of the session, to fix her choice of a husband, could not, they

supposed, be very disagreeable to one of her sex and age. The address

was couched in the most respectful expressions, yet met with a refusal

from the queen.

* 1 Eliz. cap. 2.

** See note A, at the end of the volume.

{1559.} She told the speaker, that, as the application from the house

was conceived in general terms, only recommending marriage, without

pretending to direct her choice of a husband, she could not take offence

at the address, or regard it otherwise than as a new instance of their

affectionate attachment to her: that any further interposition on their

part, would have ill become either them to make as subjects, or her

to bear as an independent princess: that even while she was a private

person, and exposed to much danger, she had always declined that

engagement, which she regarded as an encumbrance; much more, at present,

would she persevere in this sentiment, when the charge of a great

kingdom was committed to her, and her life ought to be entirely

devoted to promoting the interests of religion and the happiness of her

subjects: that as England was her husband, wedded to her by this pledge,

(and here she showed her finger with the same gold ring upon it

with which she had solemnly betrothed herself to the kingdom at her

inauguration,) so all Englishmen were her children, and while she was

employed in rearing or governing such a family, she could not deem

herself barren, or her life useless and unprofitable: that if she

ever entertained thoughts of changing her condition, the care of her

subjects’ welfare would still be uppermost in her thoughts; but should

she live and die a virgin, she doubted not but divine Providence,

seconded by their counsels and her own measures, would be able to

prevent all dispute with regard to the succession, and secure them a

sovereign who, perhaps better than her own issue, would imitate her

example in loving and cherishing her people; and that for her part, she

desired that no higher character, or fairer remembrance of her should be

transmitted to posterity, than to have this inscription engraved on

her tombstone, when she should pay the last debt to nature: “Here lies

Elizabeth, who lived and died a maiden queen.”[*]

After the prorogation of the parliament,[**] the laws enacted with

regard to religion were put in execution, and met with little opposition

from any quarter. The liturgy was again introduced in the vulgar tongue,

and the oath of supremacy was tendered to the clergy. The number of

bishops had been reduced to fourteen by a sickly season which preceded:

and all these, except the bishop of Landaff, having refused compliance,

were degraded from their sees: but of the inferior clergy throughout all

England, where there are near ten thousand parishes, only eighty

rectors and vicars, fifty prebendaries fifteen heads of colleges,

twelve archdeacons, and as many deans, sacrificed their livings to their

religious principles.[***]

* Camden, p. 375. Sir Simon d’Ewes.

** It is thought remarkable by Camden, that though this

session was the first of the reign, no person was attainted;

but on the contrary, some restored in blood by the

parliament; a good symptom of the lenity, at least of the

prudence, of the queen’s government; and that it should

appear remarkable, is a proof of the rigor of preceding

reigns.

*** Camden, p. 376. Heylin, p. 115. Strype, vol. i. p. 73,

with some small variations.

Those in high ecclesiastic stations, being exposed to the eyes of

the public, seem chiefly to have placed a point of honor in their

perseverance; but on the whole, the Protestants, in the former

change introduced by Mary, appear to have been much more rigid and

conscientious. Though the Catholic religion, adapting itself to the

senses, and enjoining observances which enter into the common train of

life, does at present lay faster hold on the mind than the reformed,

which, being chiefly spiritual, resembles more a system of metaphysics,

yet was the proportion of zeal, as well as of knowledge, during the

first ages after the reformation, much greater on the side of the

Protestants. The Catholics continued, ignorantly and supinely, in their

ancient belief, or rather their ancient practices: but the reformers,

obliged to dispute on every occasion, and inflamed to a degree of

enthusiasm by novelty and persecution had strongly attached themselves

to their tenets; and were ready to sacrifice their fortunes, and even

their lives, in support of their speculative and abstract principles.

The forms and ceremonies still preserved in the English liturgy, as

they bore some resemblance to the ancient service, tended further to

reconcile the Catholics to the established religion; and as the queen

permitted no other mode of worship, and at the same time struck out

every thing that could be offensive to them in the new liturgy,[*]

even those who were addicted to the Romish communion made no scruple

of attending the established church. Had Elizabeth gratified her own

inclinations, the exterior appearance, which is the chief circumstance

with the people, would have been still more similar between the new and

the ancient form of worship. Her love of state and magnificence, which

she affected in every thing, inspired her with an inclination towards

the pomp of the Catholic religion; and it was merely in compliance with

the prejudices of her party, that she gave up either images, or the

addresses to saints, or prayers for the dead.[**] Some foreign princes

interposed to procure the Romanists the privilege of separate assemblies

in particular cities, but the queen would not comply with their request;

and she represented the manifest danger of disturbing the national peace

by a toleration of different religions.[***]

* Heylin, p. 111.

** Burnet, vol. ii. p. 376, 397. Camden, p. 371.

*** Camden, p. 378. Strype, vol. i. p. 150, 370.

While the queen and parliament were employed in settling the public

religion, the negotiations for a peace were still conducted, first at

Cercamp, then at Chateau-Cambresis, between the ministers of France,

Spain, and England; and Elizabeth, though equally prudent, was not

equally successful in this transaction. Philip employed his utmost

efforts to procure the restitution of Calais, both as bound in honor to

indemnify England which merely on his account had been drawn into the

war; and as engaged in interest to remove France to a distance from

his frontiers in the Low Countries. So long as he entertained hopes of

espousing the queen, he delayed concluding a peace with Henry; and even

after the change of religion in England deprived him of all such

views, his ministers hinted to her a proposal which may be regarded

as reasonable and honorable. Though all his own terms with France were

settled, he seemed willing to continue the war till she should obtain

satisfaction; provided she would stipulate to adhere to the Spanish

alliance, and continue hostilities against Henry during the course

of six years:[*]* but Elizabeth, after consulting with her ministers,

wisely rejected this proposal. She was sensible of the low state of her

finances; the great debts contracted by her father, brother, and sister;

the disorders introduced into every part of the administration; the

divisions by which her people were agitated; and she was convinced that

nothing but tranquillity during some years could bring the kingdom again

into a flourishing condition, or enable her to act with dignity and

vigor in her transactions with foreign nations. Well acquainted with

the value which Henry put upon Calais, and the impossibility, during the

present emergence, of recovering it by treaty, she was willing rather to

suffer that loss, than submit to such a dependence on Spain, as she

must expect to fall into, if she continued pertinaciously in her present

demand. She ordered, therefore, her ambassadors, Lord Effingham, the

bishop of Ely, and Dr. Wotton, to conclude the negotiation, and to

settle a peace with Henry on any reasonable terms. Henry offered to

stipulate a marriage between the eldest daughter of the dauphin, and the

eldest son of Elizabeth; and to engage for the restitution of Calais as

the dowry of that princess;[**] but as the queen was sensible that this

treaty would appear to the world a palpable evasion, she insisted upon

more equitable, at least more plausible conditions.

* Forbes’s Full View, vol. i. p. 59.

** Forbes’s Full View, vol. i. p. 54.

It was at last agreed, that Henry should restore Calais at

the expiration of eight years; that in case of failure, he

should pay five hundred thousand crowns, and the queen’s

title to Calais still remain; that he should find the

security of seven or eight foreign merchants, not natives of

France, for the payment of this sum; that he should deliver

five hostages till that security were provided; that if

Elizabeth broke the peace with France or Scotland during the

interval, she should forfeit all title to Calais; but if

Henry made war on Elizabeth, he should be obliged

immediately to restore that fortress.[*] All men of

penetration easily saw that these stipulations were but a

colorable pretence for abandoning Calais; but they excused

the queen on account of the necessity of her affairs; and

they even extolled her prudence in submitting without

further struggle to that necessity. A peace with Scotland

was a necessary consequence of that with France.

* Forbes, vol. i. p. 68. Rymer, tom. xv. p 505.

Philip and Henry terminated hostilities by a mutual restitution of

all places taken during the course of the war; and Philip espoused the

princess Elizabeth, eldest daughter of France, formerly betrothed to his

son Don Carlos. The duke of Savoy married Margaret, Henry’s sister,

and obtained a restitution of all his dominions of Savoy and Piedmont,

except a few towns retained by France. And thus general tranquillity

seemed to be restored to Europe.

But though peace was concluded between France and England, there soon

appeared a ground of quarrel of the most serious nature, and which

was afterwards attended with the most important consequences. The two

marriages of Henry VIII., that with Catharine of Arragon, and that with

Anne Boleyn, were incompatible with each other; and it seemed impossible

that both of them could be regarded as valid and legal: but still the

birth of Elizabeth lay under some disadvantages to which that of her

sister Mary was not exposed. Henry’s first marriage had obtained the

sanction of all the powers, both civil and ecclesiastical, which were

then acknowledged in England; and it was natural for Protestants as

well as Romanists to allow, on account of the sincere intention of the

parties, that their issue ought to be regarded as legitimate, But his

divorce and second marriage had been concluded in direct opposition to

the see of Rome; and though they had been ratified by the authority

both of the English parliament and convocation, those who were strongly

attached to the Catholic communion, and who reasoned with great

strictness were led to regard them as entirely invalid, and to deny

altogether the queen’s right of succession. The next heir of blood was

the queen of Scots, now married to the dauphin; and the great power of

that princess, joined to her plausible title rendered her a formidable

rival to Elizabeth. The king of France had secretly been soliciting at

Rome a bull of excommunication against the queen; and she had here been

beholden to the good offices of Philip, who, from interest more than

either friendship or generosity, had negotiated in her favor, and had

successfully opposed the pretensions of Henry. But the court of France

was not discouraged with this repulse; the duke of Guise and his

brothers, thinking that it would much augment their credit if their

niece should bring an accession of England, as she had already done of

Scotland, to the crown of France, engaged the king not to neglect the

claim; and, by their persuasion, he ordered his son and daughter-in-law

to assume openly the arms as well as title of England, and to quarter

these arms on all their equipages, furniture, and liveries. When the

English ambassador complained of this injury he could obtain nothing

but an evasive answer; that as the queen of Scots was descended from

the blood royal of England, she was entitled, by the example of many

princes, to assume the arms of that kingdom. But besides that this

practice had never prevailed without permission being first obtained,

and without making a visible difference between the arms, Elizabeth

plainly saw that this pretension had not been advanced during the reign

of her sister Mary; and that, therefore, the king of France intended, on

the first opportunity, to dispute her legitimacy, and her title to

the crown. Alarmed at the danger, she thenceforth conceived a violent

jealousy against the queen of Scots; and was determined, as far as

possible, to incapacitate Henry from the execution of his project. The

sudden death of that monarch, who was killed in a tournament at Paris,

while celebrating the espousals of his sister with the duke of Savoy,

altered not her views. Being informed that his successor, Francis

II., still continued to assume, without reserve, the title of King of

England, she began to consider him and his queen as her mortal enemies;

and the present situation of affairs in Scotland afforded her a

favorable opportunity, both of revenging the injury, and providing for

her own safety.

The murder of the cardinal-primate at St. Andrew’s had deprived the

Scottish Catholics of a head whose severity, courage, and capacity had

rendered him extremely formidable to the innovators in religion; and

the execution of the laws against heresy began thenceforth to be more

remiss. The queen regent governed the kingdom by prudent and moderate

counsels; and as she was not disposed to sacrifice the civil interests

of the state to the bigotry or interests of the clergy, she deemed

it more expedient to temporize, and to connive at the progress of a

doctrine which she had not power entirely to repress. When informed of

the death of Edward, and the accession of Mary to the crown of England,

she entertained hopes that the Scottish reformers, deprived of the

countenance which they received from that powerful kingdom, would lose

their ardor with their prospect of success, and would gradually return

to the faith of their ancestors. But the progress and revolutions of

religion are little governed by the usual maxims of civil policy; and

the event much disappointed the expectations of the regent. Many of the

English preachers, terrified with the severity of Mary’s government,

took shelter in Scotland, where they found more protection, and a milder

administration; and while they propagated their theological tenets, they

filled the whole kingdom with a just horror against the cruelties of the

bigoted Catholics, and showed their disciples the fate which they

must expect, if ever their adversaries should attain an uncontrolled

authority over them.

A hierarchy, moderate in its acquisitions of power and riches, may

safely grant a toleration to sectaries; and the more it softens the zeal

of innovators by lenity and liberty, the more securely will it possess

those advantages which the legal establishments bestow upon it. But

where superstition has raised a church to such an exorbitant height as

that of Rome, persecution is less the result of bigotry in the priests,

than of a necessary policy; and the rigor of law is the only method of

repelling the attacks of men who, besides religious zeal, have so many

other motives, derived both from public and private interest, to engage

them on the side of innovation. But though such overgrown hierarchies

may long support themselves by these violent expedients, the time comes

when severities tend only to enrage the new sectaries, and make them

break through all bounds of reason and moderation. This crisis was

now visibly approaching in Scotland; and whoever considers merely the

transactions resulting from it, will be inclined to throw the blame

equally on both parties; whoever enlarges his view, and reflects on the

situations, will remark the necessary progress of human affairs, and the

operation of those principles which are inherent in human nature.

Some heads of the reformers in Scotland, such as the earl of Argyle, his

son Lord Lorne, the earls of Morton and Glencarne, Erskine of Dun, and

others, observing the danger to which they were exposed, and desirous

to propagate their principles, entered privately into a bond or

association; and called themselves the “congregation” of the Lord, in

contradistinction to the established church, which they denominated

the congregation of Satan. The tenor of the bond was as follows: “We,

perceiving how Satan, in his members, the Antichrist of our time, do

cruelly rage, seeking to overthrow and to destroy the gospel of Christ

and his congregation, ought, according to our bounden duty, to strive in

our master’s cause, even unto the death, being certain of the victory

in him. We do therefore promise, before the majesty of God and

his congregation, that we, by his grace, shall with all diligence

continually apply our whole power, substance, and our very lives, to

maintain, set forward, and establish the most blessed word of God

and his congregation; and shall labor, by all possible means, to have

faithful ministers, truly and purely to minister Christ’s gospel and

sacraments to his people: we shall maintain them, nourish them, and

defend them, the whole congregation of Christ, and every member thereof,

by our whole power, and at the hazard of our lives, against Satan, and

all wicked power who may intend tyranny and trouble against the

said congregation; unto which holy word and congregation we do join

ourselves; and we forsake and renounce the congregation of Satan, with

all the superstitious abomination and idolatry thereof; and moreover

shall declare ourselves manifestly enemies thereto, by this faithful

promise before God, testified to this congregation by our subscriptions.

At Edinburgh, the third of December, 1557.”[*]

* Keith, p. 66. Knox, p. 101.

Had the subscribers of this zealous league been content only to demand

a toleration of the new opinions, however incompatible their pretensions

might have been with the policy of the church of Rome, they would

have had the praise of opposing tyrannical laws, enacted to support an

establishment prejudicial to civil society: but it is plain that

they carried their views much further; and their practice immediately

discovered the spirit by which they were actuated. Supported by the

authority which they thought belonged to them as the congregation of the

Lord, they ordained that prayers in the vulgar tongue[*] should be used

in all the parish churches of the kingdom; and that preaching and the

interpretation of the Scriptures should be practised in private houses,

til God should move the prince to grant public preaching by faithful

and true ministers.[**] Such bonds of association are always the

fore-runners of rebellion; and this violent invasion of the established

religion was the actual commencement of it.

Before this league was publicly known or avowed, the clergy, alarmed

with the progress of the reformation, attempted to recover their lost

authority by a violent exercise of power, which tended still further

to augment the zeal and number of their enemies. Hamilton, the primate,

seized Walter Mill, a priest of an irreproachable life, who had embraced

the new doctrines; and having tried him at St. Andrew’s, condemned him

to the flames for heresy. Such general aversion was entertained against

this barbarity, that it was some time before the bishops could prevail

on any one to act the part of a civil judge, and pronounce sentence upon

Mill; and even after the time of his execution was fixed, all the shops

of St. Andrew’s being shut, no one would sell a rope to tie him to the

stake and the primate himself was obliged to furnish this implement.

The man bore the torture with that courage which, though usual on these

occasions, always appears supernatural and astonishing to the multitude.

The people, to express their abhorrence against the cruelty of the

priests, raised a monument of stones on the place of his execution; and

as fast as the stones were removed by order of the clergy, they were

again supplied from the voluntary zeal of the populace.[***] It is in

vain for men to oppose the severest punishment to the united motives

of religion and public applause; and this was the last barbarity of the

kind which the Catholics had the power to exercise in Scotland.

* The reformers used at that time King Edward’s liturgy in

Scotland. Forbes, p. 155.

* Keith, p. 66. Knox, p. 101.

* Knox, p. 122.

Some time after, the people discovered their sentiments in such a manner

as was sufficient to prognosticate to the priests the fate which was

awaiting them. It was usual on the festival of St. Giles, the tutelar

saint of Edinburgh, to carry in procession the image of that saint; but

the Protestants, in order to prevent the ceremony, found means, on the

eve of the festival, to purloin the statue from the church; and they

pleased themselves with imagining the surprise and disappointment of

his votaries. The clergy, however, framed hastily a new image, which in

derision was called by the people young St. Giles; and they carried it

through the streets, attended by all the ecclesiastics in the town and

neighborhood. The multitude abstained from violence so long as the queen

regent continued a spectator; but the moment she retired, they invaded

the idol, threw it in the mire, and broke it in pieces. The flight and

terror of the priests and friars, who, it was remarked, deserted, in

his greatest distress, the object of their worship, was the source of

universal mockery and laughter.

Encouraged by all these appearances, the congregation proceeded with

alacrity in openly soliciting subscriptions to their league; and

the death of Mary of England, with the accession of Elizabeth, which

happened about this time, contributed to increase their hopes of final

success in their undertaking. They ventured to present a petition to

the regent, craving a reformation of the church, and of the “wicked,

scandalous, and detestable” lives of the prelates and ecclesiastics.[*]

They framed a petition which they intended to present to parliament,

and in which, after premising that they could not communicate with the

damnable idolatry and intolerable abuses of the Papistical church, they

desired that the laws against heretics should be executed by the civil

magistrate alone, and that the Scripture should be the sole rule

in judging of heresy.[**] They even petitioned the convocation, and

insisted that prayers should be said in the vulgar tongue, and that

bishops should be chosen with the consent of the gentry of the diocese,

and priests with the consent of the parishioners.[***] The regent

prudently temporized between these parties; and as she aimed at

procuring a matrimonial crown for her son-in-law the dauphin, she was,

on that as well as other accounts, unwilling to come to extremities with

either of them.

* Knox, p. 121.

** Knox, p. 123.

*** Keith, p. 78, 81, 82.

But after this concession was obtained, she received orders from France,

probably dictated by the violent spirit of her brothers, to proceed with

rigor against the reformers, and to restore the royal authority by some

signal act of power.[*] She made the more eminent of the Protestant

teachers be cited to appear before the council at Stirling; but when

their followers were marching thither in great multitudes, in order

to protect and countenance them, she entertained apprehensions of an

insurrection, and, it is said, dissipated the people by a promise[**]

[2] that nothing should be done to the prejudice of the ministers.

Sentence, however, was passed, by which all the ministers were

pronounced rebels, on account of their not appearing; a measure which

enraged the people, and made them resolve to oppose the regent’s

authority by force of arms, and to proceed to extremities against the

clergy of the established religion.

In this critical time, John Knox arrived from Geneva, where he had

passed some years in banishment, and where he had imbibed, from his

commerce with Calvin, the highest fanaticism of his sect, augmented by

the native ferocity of his own character. He had been invited back to

Scotland by the leaders of the reformation; and mounting the pulpit at

Perth, during the present ferment of men’s minds, he declaimed with

his usual vehemence against the idolatry and other abominations of the

church of Rome, and incited his audience to exert their utmost zeal for

its subversion. A priest was so imprudent, after this sermon, as to open

his repository of images and relics, and prepare himself to say mass.

The audience, exalted to a disposition for any furious enterprise, were

as much enraged as if the spectacle had not been quite familiar to them:

they attacked the priest with fury, broke the images in pieces, tore the

pictures, overthrew the altars, scattered about the sacred vases; and

left no implement of idolatrous worship, as they termed it, entire or

undefaced. They thence proceeded, with additional numbers and augmented

rage, to the monasteries of the Gray and Black friars, which they

pillaged in an instant: the Carthusians underwent the same fate: and the

populace, not content with robbing and expelling the monks, vented

their fury on the buildings which had been the receptacles of such

abomination; and in a little time nothing but the walls of these

edifices were left standing. The inhabitants of Coupar, in Fife, soon

after imitated the example.[***]

* Melvil’s Memoirs, p. 24. Jebb. vol. ii. p. 446.

** See note B, at the end of the volume.

*** Spotswood, p. 121. Knox, p. 127.

The queen regent, provoked at these violences, assembled an army, and

prepared to chastise the rebels. She had about two thousand French under

her command, with a few Scottish troops; and being assisted by such of

the nobility as were well affected to her, she pitched her camp within

ten miles of Perth. Even the earl of Argyle, and Lord James Stuart,

prior of St. Andrew’s, the queen’s natural brother, though deeply

engaged with the reformers, attended the regent in this enterprise,

either because they blamed the fury of the populace, or hoped by their

own influence and authority to mediate some agreement between the

parties. The congregation, on the other hand, made preparations for

defence; and being joined by the earl of Glencarne from the west, and

being countenanced by many of the nobility and gentry, they appeared

formidable from their numbers, as well as from the zeal by which they

were animated. They sent an address to the regent, where they plainly

insinuated, that if they were pursued to extremities by the “cruel

beasts” the churchmen, they would have recourse to foreign powers for

assistance; and they subscribed themselves her faithful subjects in all

things not repugnant to God, assuming, at the same time, the name of the

faithful congregation of Christ Jesus.[*] They applied to the nobility

attending her, and maintained, that their own past violences were

justified by the word of God, which commands the godly to destroy

idolatry, and all the monuments of it; and though all civil authority

was sacred, yet was there a great difference between the authority and

the persons who exercised it;[**] and that it ought to be considered,

whether or not those abominations, called by the pestilent Papists

religion, and which they defend by fire and sword, be the true religion

of Christ Jesus. They remonstrated with such of the queen’s army as had

formerly embraced their party, and told them, “that as they were already

reputed traitors by God, they should likewise be excommunicated from

their society, and from the participation of the sacraments of the

church which God by his mighty power had erected among them; whose

ministers have the same authority which Christ granted to his apostles

in these words, ‘Whose sins ye shall forgive shall be forgiven, and

whose sins ye shall retain shall be retained.’”[***]

* Knox, p. 129.

** Knox, p. 131.

*** Knox, p. 133.

We may here see, that these new saints were no less lofty in their

pretensions than the ancient hierarchy: no wonder they were enraged

against the latter as their rivals in dominion. They joined to all these

declarations an address to the established church; and they affixed this

title to it: “To the generation of Antichrist, the pestilent prelates

and their ‘shavelings’[*] in Scotland, the congregation of Christ Jesus

within the same sayeth.” The tenor of the manifesto was suitable to the

title. They told the ecclesiastics, “As ye by tyranny intend not only to

destroy our bodies, but also by the same to hold our souls in bondage

of the devil, subject to idolatry, so shall we, with all the force

and power which God shall grant unto us, execute just vengeance and

punishment upon you: yea, we shall begin that same war which God

commanded Israel to execute against the Canaanites; that is, contract of

peace shall never be made till you desist from your open idolatry,

and cruel persecution of God’s children. And this, in the name of the

eternal God, and of his Son Christ Jesus, whose verity we profess, and

gospel we have preached, and holy sacraments rightly administered,

we signify unto you to be our intent, so far as God will assist us

to withstand your idolatry. Take this for warning, and be not

deceived.”[**] With these outrageous symptoms commenced in Scotland that

cant, hypocrisy, and fanaticism which long infested that kingdom, and

which, though now mollified by the lenity of the civil power, is still

ready to break out on all occasions.

The queen regent, finding such obstinate zeal in the rebels, was content

to embrace the counsels of Argyle and the prior of St. Andrew’s, and

to form an accommodation with them. She was received into Perth, which

submitted, on her promising an indemnity for past offences, and engaging

not to leave any French garrison in the place. Complaints, very

ill founded, immediately arose concerning the infraction of this

capitulation. Some of the inhabitants, it was pretended, were molested

on account of the late violences; and some companies of Scotch soldiers,

supposed to be in French pay, were quartered in the town; which step,

though taken on very plausible grounds, was loudly exclaimed against by

the congregation.[***]

* A contemptuous term for a priest.

* Keith, p. 85, 86, 87. Knox, p. 134.

* Knox, p. 139.

It is asserted that the regent, to justify these measures, declared,

that princes ought not to have their promises too strictly urged upon

them; nor was any faith to be kept with heretics: and that for her part,

could she find as good a color, she would willingly bereave all these

men of their lives and fortunes.[*] But it is nowise likely that such

expressions ever dropped from this prudent and virtuous princess. On the

contrary, it appears that all these violences were disagreeable to her;

that she was in this particular overruled by the authority of the

French counsellors placed about her; and that she often thought, if the

management of those affairs had been intrusted wholly to herself, she

could easily, without force, have accommodated all differences.[**] [3]

The congregation, inflamed with their own zeal, and enraged by these

disappointments, remained not long in tranquillity. Even before they

left Perth, and while as yet they had no color to complain of any

violation of treaty, they had signed a new covenant, in which, besides

their engagements to mutual defence, they vowed, in the name of God, to

employ their whole power in destroying every thing that dishonored his

holy name; and this covenant was subscribed, among others, by Argyle and

the prior of St. Andrew’s.[***]

* Knox, p. 139. Spotswood, p. 123.

** See note C, at the end of the volume.

*** Keith, p 89. Knox, p. 138.

These two leaders now desired no better pretence for deserting the

regent and openly joining their associates, than the complaints, however

doubtful, or rather false, of her breach of promise. The congregation

also, encouraged by this accession of force, gave themselves up entirely

to the furious zeal of Knox, and renewed at Crail, Anstruther, and other

places in Fife, like depredations on the churches and monasteries with

those formerly committed at Perth and Coupar. The regent, who marched

against them with her army, finding their power so much increased,

was glad to conclude a truce for a few days, and to pass over with her

forces to the Lothians. The reformers besieged and took Perth; proceeded

thence to Stirling, where they exercised their usual fury; and finding

nothing able to resist them, they bent their march to Edinburgh, the

inhabitants of which, as they had already anticipated the zeal of the

congregation against the churches and monasteries, gladly opened their

gates to them. The regent, with the few forces which remained with her,

took shelter in Dunbar, where she fortified herself, in expectation of a

reënforcement from France.

Meanwhile, she employed her partisans in representing to the people the

dangerous consequences of this open rebellion; and she endeavored to

convince them, that the Lord James, under pretence of religion,

had formed the scheme of wresting the sceptre from the hands of the

sovereign. By these considerations many were engaged to desert the army

of the congregation; but much more by the want of pay, or any means

of subsistence; and the regent, observing the malecontents to be much

weakened, ventured to march to Edinburgh, with a design of suppressing

them. On the interposition of the duke of Chatelrault, who still adhered

to her, she agreed to a capitulation, in which she granted them a

toleration of their religion, and they engaged to commit no further

depredations on the churches. Soon after, they evacuated the city; and

before they left it, they proclaimed the articles of agreement; but they

took care to publish only the articles favorable to themselves, and they

were guilty of an imposture, in adding one to the number, namely, that

idolatry should not again be erected in any place where it was at that

time suppressed.[*] [4]

An agreement concluded while men were in this disposition, could not be

durable; and both sides endeavored to strengthen themselves as much as

possible against the ensuing rupture, which appeared inevitable. The

regent, having got a reënforcement of one thousand men from France,

began to fortify Leith; and the congregation seduced to their party the

duke of Chatelrault, who had long appeared inclined to join them, and

who was at last determined by the arrival of his son, the earl of Arran,

from France, where he had escaped many dangers from the jealousy, as

well as bigotry, of Henry and the duke of Guise. More French troops soon

after disembarked under the command of La Brosse, who was followed by

the bishop of Amiens, and three doctors of the Sorbonne. These last

were supplied with store of syllogisms, authorities, citations, and

scholastic arguments, which they intended to oppose to the Scottish

preachers, and which, they justly presumed, would acquire force,

and produce conviction, by the influence of the French arms and

artillery.[**]

* See note D, at the end of the volume.

** Spotswood, p. 134. Thuan. lib. xxiv. c. 10.

The constable Montmorency had always opposed the marriage of the dauphin

with the queen of Scots, and had foretold that, by forming such close

connections with Scotland, the ancient league would be dissolved; and

the natives of that kingdom, jealous of a foreign yoke, would soon

become, instead of allies, attached by interest and inclination, the

most inveterate enemies to the French government. But though the event

seemed now to have justified the prudence of that aged minister, it is

not improbable, considering the violent counsels by which France

was governed, that the insurrection was deemed a favorable event; as

affording a pretence for sending over armies, for entirely subduing the

country, for attainting the rebels,[*] and for preparing means thence to

invade England, and support Mary’s title to the crown of that kingdom.

The leaders of the congregation, well acquainted with these views, were

not insensible of their danger, and saw that their only safety consisted

in the vigor and success of their measures. They were encouraged by

the intelligence received of the sudden death of Henry II.; and having

passed an act from their own authority, depriving the queen dowager of

the regency, and ordering all the French troops to evacuate the kingdom,

they collected forces to put their edict in execution against them. They

again became masters of Edinburgh; but found themselves unable to keep

long possession of that city. Their tumultuary armies, assembled in

haste, and supported by no pay, soon separated upon the least disaster,

or even any delay of success; and were incapable of resisting such

veteran troops as the French, who were also seconded by some of the

Scottish nobility, among whom the earl of Bothwell distinguished

himself., Hearing that the marquis of Elbeuf, brother to the regent,

was levying an army against them in Germany, they thought themselves

excusable for applying, in this extremity, to the assistance of England;

and as the sympathy of religion, as well as regard to national liberty,

had now counterbalanced the ancient animosity against that kingdom, this

measure was the result of inclination no less than of interest.[**]

[5] Maitland of Lidington, therefore, and Robert Melvil, were secretly

despatched by the congregation to solicit succors from Elizabeth.

* Forbes, vol. i. p. 139. Thuan. lib. xxiv. c. 13.

** See note E, at the end of the volume.

The wise council of Elizabeth did not long deliberate in agreeing to

this request, which concurred so well with the views and interests of

their mistress. Cecil in particular represented to the queen, that the

union of the crowns of Scotland and France, both of them the hereditary

enemies of England, was ever regarded as a pernicious event; and her

father, as well as Protector Somerset, had employed every expedient both

of war and negotiation to prevent it: that the claim which Mary advanced

to the crown rendered the present situation of England still more

dangerous, and demanded on the part of the queen the greatest vigilance

and precaution; that the capacity, ambition, and exorbitant views of the

family of Guise, who now governed the French counsels, were sufficiently

known; and they themselves made no secret of their design to place

their niece on the throne of England: that deeming themselves secure of

success, they had already, somewhat imprudently and prematurely, taken

off the mask; and Throgmorton, the English ambassador at Paris,

sent over, by every courier, incontestable proofs of their hostile

intentions:[*] that they only waited till Scotland should be entirely

subdued; and having thus deprived the English of the advantages

resulting from their situation and naval power, they prepared means for

subverting the queen’s authority: that the zealous Catholics in England,

discontented with the present government, and satisfied in the legality

of Mary’s title, would bring them considerable reënforcement, and would

disturb every measure of defence against that formidable power: that the

only expedient for preventing these designs, was to seize the present

opportunity, and take advantage of a like zeal in the Protestants of

Scotland; nor could any doubt be entertained with regard to the justice

of a measure founded on such evident necessity, and directed only to the

ends of self-preservation: that though a French war, attended with great

expense, seemed the necessary consequence of supporting the malecontents

in Scotland, that power, if removed to the continent, would be much less

formidable; and a small disbursement at present would, in the end,

be found the greatest frugality: and that the domestic dissensions of

France, which every day augmented, together with the alliance of Philip,

who, notwithstanding his bigotry and hypocrisy, would never permit the

entire conquest of England, were sufficient to secure the queen against

the dangerous ambition and resentment of the house of Guise.[**]

* Forbes, vol. i. p. 134, 136, 149, 150, 159, 165, 181, 194,

229, 231, 235--241, 253.

** Forbes, vol. i. p 387 Jebb, vol. i. p. 448. Keith,

Append. 24.

Elizabeth’s propensity to caution and economy was, though with some

difficulty,[*] overcome by these powerful motives and she prepared

herself to support by arms and money the declining affairs of the

congregation in Scotland. She equipped a fleet, which consisted of

thirteen ships of war; and giving the command of it to Winter, she sent

it to the Frith of Forth: she appointed the young duke of Norfolk her

lieutenant in the northern counties; and she assembled, at Berwick, an

army of eight thousand men under the command of Lord Gray, warden of

the east and middle marches. Though the court of France, sensible of the

danger, offered her to make immediate restitution of Calais, provided

she would not interpose in the affairs of Scotland, she resolutely

replied, that she never would put an inconsiderable fishing-town

in competition with the safety of her dominions;[**] and she still

continued her preparations. She concluded a treaty of mutual defence

with the congregation, which was to last during the marriage of the

queen of Scots with Francis, and a year after; and she promised never to

desist till the French had entirely evacuated Scotland.[***] And having

thus taken all proper measures for success, and received from the Scots

six hostages for the performance of articles, she ordered her fleet and

army to begin their operations.

* Forbes, vol. i. p. 454, 460.

** Spotswood, p. 146.

*** Knox, p. 217. Haynes’s State Papers, vol. i. p. 153.

Rymer, tom. xv. p. 569.

{1560.} The appearance of Elizabeth’s fleet in the frith disconcerted

the French army, who were at that time ravaging the county of Fife;

and obliged them to make a circuit by Stirling, in order to reach Leith,

where they prepared themselves for defence. The English army, reënforced

by five thousand Scots,[*] sat down before the place; and after two

skirmishes, in the former of which the English had the advantage, in the

latter the French, they began to batter the town; and, though repulsed

with considerable loss in a rash and ill-conducted assault, they reduced

the garrison to great difficulties. Their distress was augmented by two

events; the dispersion by a storm of D’Elbeuf’s fleet, which carried a

considerable army on board,[**] and the death of the queen, regent, who

expired about this time in the Castle of Edinburgh; a woman endowed with

all the capacity which shone forth in her family, but possessed of much

more virtue and moderation than appeared in the conduct of the other

branches of it. The French, who found it impossible to subsist for want

of provisions, and who saw that the English were continually reënforced

by fresh numbers, were obliged to capitulate; and the bishop of Valence

and Count Randan, plenipotentiaries from France, signed a treaty at

Edinburgh with Cecil and Dr. Wotton, whom Elizabeth had sent thither for

that purpose. It was there stipulated, that the French should instantly

evacuate Scotland; that the king and queen of France and Scotland should

thenceforth abstain from bearing the arms of England, or assuming the

title of that kingdom; that further satisfaction for the injury

already done in that particular should be granted Elizabeth; and that

commissioners should meet to settle this point, or, if they could not

agree, that the king of Spain should be umpire between the crowns.

Besides these stipulations, which regarded England, some concessions

were granted to the Scots; namely, that an amnesty should be published

for all past offences; that none but natives should enjoy any office in

Scotland; that the states should name twenty-four persons, of whom the

queen of Scots should choose seven, and the states five, and in the

hands of these twelve should the whole administration be placed during

their queen’s absence; and that Mary should neither make peace nor war

without consent of the states.[***] In order to hasten the execution of

this important treaty, Elizabeth sent ships, by which the French forces

were transported into their own country.

* Haynes, vol i. p. 256, 259.

** Haynes. vol. i. p. 223.

*** Rymer, tom. xv. p. 593. Keith, p. 137. Spotswood, p.

147. Knox, p. 229.

Thus Europe saw, in the first transaction of this reign, the genius and

capacity of the queen and her ministers. She discerned at a distance

the danger which threatened her; and instantly took vigorous measures

to prevent it. Making all possible advantages of her situation, she

proceeded with celerity to a decision; and was not diverted by any

offers, negotiations, or remonstrances of the French court. She stopped

not till she had brought the matter to a final issue; and had converted

that very power, to which her enemies trusted for her destruction, into

her firmest support and security. By exacting no improper conditions

from the Scottish malecontents, even during their greatest distresses,

she established an entire confidence with them; and having cemented

the union by all the ties of gratitude, interest, and religion, she now

possessed an influence over them beyond what remained even with their

native sovereign. The regard which she acquired by this dexterous and

spirited conduct, gave her every where, abroad as well as at home, more

authority than had attended her sister, though supported by all the

power of the Spanish monarchy.[*]

The subsequent measures of the Scottish reformers tended still more

to cement their union with England. Being now entirely masters of the

kingdom, they made no further ceremony or scruple in fully effecting

their purpose. In the treaty of Edinburgh, it had been agreed, that a

parliament or convention should soon be assembled; and the leaders of

the congregation, not waiting till the queen of Scots should ratify

that treaty, thought themselves fully entitled, without the sovereign’s

authority, immediately to summon a parliament. The reformers presented

a petition to this assembly, in which they were not contented with

desiring the establishment of their doctrine, they also applied for

the punishment of the Catholics, whom they called vassals to the Roman

harlot; and they asserted, that among all the rabble of the clergy--such

is their expression--there was not one lawful minister; but that they

were all of them thieves and murderers; yea, rebels and traitors to

civil authority, and therefore unworthy to be suffered in any reformed

commonwealth.[**] The parliament seem to have been actuated by the same

spirit of rage and persecution. After ratifying a confession of faith

agreeable to the new doctrines, they passed a statute against the mass,

and not only abolished it in all the churches, but enacted, that whoever

any where either officiated in it, or was present at it, should be

chastised, for the first offence, with confiscation of goods and

corporal punishment, at the discretion of the magistrate; for the

second, with banishment; and for the third, with loss of life.[***]

* Forbes, vol. i. p. 354, 372. Jebb, vol. ii. p. 452.

** Knox, p. 237. 238.

*** Knox, p. 254.

A law was also voted for abolishing the papal jurisdiction in Scotland:

the Presbyterian form of discipline was settled, leaving only at first

some shadow of authority to certain ecclesiastics, whom they called

superintendents. The prelates of the ancient faith appeared, in order to

complain of great injustice committed on them by the invasion of their

property, but the parliament took no notice of them; till at last these

ecclesiastics, tired with fruitless attendance, departed the town. They

were then cited to appear; and as nobody presented himself, it was voted

by the parliament, that the ecclesiastics were entirely satisfied, and

found no reason of complaint.

Sir James Sandilands, prior of St. John, was sent over to France to

obtain the ratification of these acts; but was very ill received by

Mary, who denied the validity of a parliament summoned without the

royal consent; and she refused her sanction to those statutes. But the

Protestants gave themselves little concern about their queen’s refusal.

They immediately put the statutes in execution; they abolished the

mass; they settled their ministers; they committed every where furious

devastations on the monasteries, and even on the churches, which they

thought profaned by idolatry; and deeming the property of the clergy

lawful prize, they took possession, without ceremony, of the far greater

part of the ecclesiastical revenues. Their new preachers, who had

authority sufficient to incite them to war and insurrection, could not

restrain their rapacity; and fanaticism concurring with avarice, an

incurable wound was given to the papal authority in that country. The

Protestant nobility and gentry, united by the consciousness of such

unpardonable guilt, alarmed for their new possessions, well acquainted

with the imperious character of the house of Guise, saw no safety for

themselves but in the protection of England; and they despatched Morton,

Glencarne, and Lidington, to express their sincere gratitude to the

queen for her past favors, and represent to her the necessity of

continuing them.

Elizabeth, on her part, had equal reason to maintain a union with

the Scottish Protestants; and soon found that the house of Guise,

notwithstanding their former disappointments, had not laid aside the

design of contesting her title, and subverting her authority. Francis

and Mary, whose counsels were wholly directed by them, refused to

ratify the treaty of Edinburgh and showed no disposition to give her

any satisfaction for that mortal affront which they had put upon her, by

their openly assuming the title and arms of England. She was sensible

of the danger attending such pretensions; and it was with pleasure she

heard of the violent factions which prevailed in the French government,

and of the opposition which had arisen against the measures of the duke

of Guise. That ambitious prince, supported by his four brothers, the

cardinal of Lorraine, the duke of Aumale, the marquis of Elbeuf, and the

grand prior, men no less ambitious than himself, had engrossed all the

authority of the crown; and as he was possessed of every quality which

could command the esteem or seduce the affections of men, there appeared

no end of his acquisitions and pretensions. The constable, Montmorency,

who had long balanced his credit, was deprived of all power: the princes

of the blood, the king of Navarre, and his brother, the prince of Condé,

were entirely excluded from offices and favor: the queen mother herself,

Catharine de Medicis, found her influence every day declining; and

as Francis, a young prince, infirm both in mind and body, was wholly

governed by his consort, who knew no law but the pleasure of her uncles,

men despaired of ever obtaining freedom from the dominion of that

aspiring family. It was the contests of religion which first inspired

the French with courage openly to oppose their unlimited authority.

The theological disputes, first started in the north of Germany, next

in Switzerland, countries at that time wholly illiterate, had long

ago penetrated into France; and as they were assisted by the general

discontent against the court and church of Rome, and by the zealous

spirit of the age, the proselytes to the new religion were secretly

increasing in every province. Henry II., in imitation of his father,

Francis, had opposed the progress of the reformers; and though a prince

addicted to pleasure and society, he was transported by a vehemence,

as well as bigotry, which had little place in the conduct of his

predecessor. Rigorous punishments had been inflicted on the most eminent

of the Protestant party; and a point of honor seemed to have arisen,

whether the one sect could exercise, or the other suffer, most

barbarity. The death of Henry put some stop to the persecutions; and the

people, who had admired the constancy of the new preachers, now heard

with favor their doctrines and arguments. But the cardinal of Lorraine,

as well as his brothers, who were possessed of the legal authority,

thought it their interest to support the established religion; and when

they revived the execution of the penal statutes, they necessarily drove

the malecontent princes and nobles to embrace the protection of the new

religion. The king of Navarre, a man of mild dispositions, but of a weak

character, and the prince of Condé, who possessed many great qualities,

having declared themselves in favor of the Protestants, that sect

acquired new force from their countenance; and the admiral, Coligny,

with his brother Andelot, no longer scrupled to make open profession of

their communion. The integrity of the admiral, who was believed sincere

in his attachment to the new doctrine, and his great reputation both

for valor and conduct, for the arts of peace as well as of war

brought credit to the reformers; and after a frustrated attempt of the

malecontents to seize the king’s person at Amboise of which Elizabeth

had probably some intelligence,[*] every place was full of distraction,

and matters hastened to an open rupture between the parties. But the

house of Guise, though these factions had obliged them to remit their

efforts in Scotland, and had been one chief cause of Elizabeth’s

success, were determined not to relinquish their authority in France,

or yield to the violence of their enemies. They found an opportunity

of seizing the king of Navarre and the prince of Condé; they threw

the former into prison; they obtained a sentence of death against the

latter; and they were proceeding to put the sentence in execution, when

the king’s sudden death saved the noble prisoner, and interrupted the

prosperity of the duke of Guise. The queen mother was appointed regent

to her son Charles IX., now in his minority: the king of Navarre was

named lieutenant-general of the kingdom: the sentence against Condé was

annulled: the constable was recalled to court: and the family of

Guise, though they still enjoyed great offices and great power, found a

counterpoise to their authority.

* Forbes, vol. i. p. 214. Throgmorton, about this time,

unwilling to intrust to letters the great secrets committed

to him, obtained leave, under some pretext, to come over to

London.

{1561.} Elizabeth was determined to make advantage of these events

against the queen of Scots, whom she still regarded as a dangerous

rival. She saw herself freed from the perils attending a union of

Scotland with France, and from the pretensions of so powerful a prince

as Francis; but she considered, at the same time, that the English

Catholics, who were numerous, and who were generally prejudiced in favor

of Mary’s title, would now adhere to that princess with more zealous

attachment, when they saw that her succession no longer endangered the

liberties of the kingdom, and was rather attended with the advantage of

effecting an entire union with Scotland. She gave orders, therefore, to

her ambassador, Throgmorton, a vigilant and able minister, to renew his

applications to the queen of Scots, and to require her ratification

of the treaty of Edinburgh. But though Mary had desisted, after her

husband’s death, from bearing the arms and title of Queen of England,

she still declined gratifying Elizabeth in this momentous article; and

being swayed by the ambitious suggestions of her uncles, she refused to

make any formal renunciation of her pretensions.

Meanwhile the queen mother of France, who imputed to Mary all the

mortifications which she had met with during Francis’s lifetime, took

care to retaliate on her by like injuries; and the queen of Scots,

finding her abode in France disagreeable, began to think of returning to

her native country. Lord James, who had been sent in deputation from the

states to invite her over, seconded these intentions; and she applied to

Elizabeth, by D’Oisel, for a safe-conduct, in case she should be obliged

to pass through England;[*] but she received for answer, that, till she

had given satisfaction, by ratifying the treaty of Edinburgh, she could

expect no favor from a person whom she had so much injured.

* Goodall, vol. i. p. 175.

This denial excited her indignation; and she made no scruple of

expressing her sentiments to Throgmorton, when he reiterated his

applications to gratify his mistress in a demand which he represented

as so reasonable. Having cleared the room of her attendants, she said to

him, “How weak I may prove, or how far a woman’s frailty may transport

me, I cannot tell: however, I am resolved not to have so many witnesses

of my infirmity as your mistress had at her audience of my ambassador

D’Oisel. There is nothing disturbs me so much, as the having asked,

with so much impunity, a favor which it was of no consequence for me to

obtain. I can, with God’s leave, return to my own country without

_her_ leave; as I came to France, in spite of all the opposition of her

brother, King Edward: neither do I want friends both able and willing to

conduct me home, as they have brought me hither; though I was desirous

rather to make an experiment of your mistress’s friendship, than of the

assistance of any other person. I have often heard you say, that a good

correspondence between her and myself would conduce much to the security

and happiness of both our kingdoms: were she well convinced of this

truth, she would hardly have denied me so small a request. But perhaps

she bears a better inclination to my rebellious subjects than to me,

their sovereign, her equal in royal dignity, her near relation, and the

undoubted heir of her kingdoms. Besides her friendship, I ask nothing at

her hands: I neither trouble her, nor concern myself in the affairs of

her state: not that I am ignorant, that there are now in England a great

many malecontents, who are no friends to the present establishment. She

is pleased to upbraid me as a person little experienced in the world: I

freely own it; but age will cure that defect. However, I am already

old enough to acquit myself honestly and courteously to my friends and

relations, and to encourage no reports of your mistress which would

misbecome a queen and her kinswoman. I would also say, by her leave,

that I am a queen as well as she, and not altogether friendless: and,

perhaps, I have as great a soul too; so that methinks we should be upon

a level in our treatment of each other. As soon as I have consulted the

states of my kingdom, I shall be ready to give her a seasonable answer;

and I am the more intent on my journey, in order to make the quicker

despatch in this affair. But she, it seems, intends to stop my journey;

so that either she will not let me give her satisfaction, or is resolved

not to be satisfied; perhaps on purpose to keep up the disagreement

between us. She has often reproached me with my being young; and I must

be very young indeed, and as ill advised, to treat of matters of such

great concern and importance without the advice of my parliament. I have

not been wanting in all friendly offices to her; but she disbelieves or

overlooks them. I could heartily wish that I were as nearly allied to

her in affection as in blood; for that indeed would be a most valuable

alliance.”[*]

* Caballa, p. 374. Spotswood, p. 177.

Such a spirited reply, notwithstanding the obliging terms interspersed

in it, was but ill fitted to conciliate friendship between these rival

princesses, or cure those mutual jealousies which had already taken

place. Elizabeth equipped a fleet on pretence of pursuing pirates, but

probably with an intention of intercepting the queen of Scots in her

return homewards. Mary embarked at Calais; and passing the English fleet

in a fog, arrived safely at Leith, attended by her three uncles, the

duke of Aumale, the grand prior, and the marquis of Elbeuf, together

with the marquis of Damville and other French courtiers. This change of

abode and situation was very little agreeable to that princess. Besides

her natural prepossessions in favor of a country in which she had been

educated from her earliest infancy, and where she had borne so high a

rank, she could not forbear both regretting the society of that

people, so celebrated for their humane disposition and their respectful

attachment to their sovereign, and reflecting on the disparity of the

scene which lay before her. It is said, that after she was embarked at

Calais, she kept her eyes fixed on the coast of France, and never turned

them from that beloved object till darkness fell, and intercepted it

from her view. She then ordered a couch to be spread for her in the open

air; and charged the pilot, that, if in the morning the land were still

in sight, he should awake her, and afford her one parting view of that

country in which all her affections were centred. The weather proved

calm, so that the ship made little way in the night-time; and Mary had

once more an opportunity of seeing the French coast. She sat up on her

couch, and still looking towards the land, often repeated these words:

“Farewell, France, farewell, I shall never see thee more.”[*] The first

aspect, however, of things in Scotland was more favorable, if not to her

pleasure and happiness, at least to her repose and security, than she

had reason to apprehend. No sooner did the French galleys appear off

Leith, than people of all ranks, who had long expected their arrival,

flocked towards the shore with an earnest impatience to behold and

receive their young sovereign. Some were led by duty, some by interest,

some by curiosity; and all combined to express their attachment to her,

and to insinuate themselves into her confidence on the commencement of

her administration. She had now reached her nineteenth year; and

the bloom of her youth and amiable beauty of her person were further

recommended by the affability of her address, the politeness of her

manners, and the elegance of her genius. Well accomplished in all the

superficial but engaging graces of a court, she afforded, when better

known, still more promising indications of her character; and men

prognosticated both humanity from her soft and obliging deportment, and

penetration from her taste in all the refined arts of music, eloquence,

and poetry.[**] And as the Scots had long been deprived of the presence

of their sovereign, whom they once despaired ever more to behold among

them, her arrival seemed to give universal satisfaction; and nothing

appeared about the court but symptoms of affection, joy, and festivity.

* Keith, p. 179. Jebb, vol. ii. p. 483.

** Buchan. lib. xvii. c. 9. Spotswood, p. 178, 179. Keith,

p. 180. Thuan. lib xxix. c. 2.

The first measures which Mary embraced confirmed all the prepossessions

entertained in her favor. She followed the advice given her in France

by D’Oisel and the bishop of Amiens, as well as her uncles; and she

bestowed her confidence entirely on the leaders of the reformed party,

who had greatest influence over the people, and who, she found, were

alone able to support her government. Her brother, Lord James, whom she

soon after created earl of Murray, obtained the chief authority; and

after him Lidington, secretary of state, a man of great sagacity, had a

principal share in her confidence. By the vigor of these men’s measures,

she endeavored to establish order and justice in a country divided by

public factions and private feuds; and that fierce, intractable people,

unacquainted with laws and obedience, seemed, for a time, to submit

peaceably to her gentle and prudent administration.

But there was one circumstance which blasted all these promising

appearances, and bereaved Mary of that general favor which her agreeable

manners and judicious deportment gave her just reason to expect. She

was still a Papist, and though she published, soon after her arrival, a

proclamation enjoining every one to submit to the established religion,

the preachers and their adherents could neither be reconciled to a

person polluted with so great an abomination, nor lay aside their

jealousies of her future conduct. It was with great difficulty she could

obtain permission for saying mass in her own chapel; and had not the

people apprehended, that if she had here met with a refusal, she would

instantly have returned to France, the zealots never would have granted

her even that small indulgence. The cry was, “Shall we suffer that idol

to be again erected within the realm?” It was asserted in the pulpit,

that one mass was more terrible than ten thousand armed men landed

to invade the kingdom:[*] Lord Lindesey, and the gentlemen of Fife,

exclaimed, “that the idolater should die the death;” such was their

expression. One that carried tapers for the ceremony of that worship was

attacked and insulted in the court of the palace. And if Lord James and

some popular leaders had not interposed, the most dangerous uproar was

justly apprehended from the ungoverned fury of the multitude.[**]

* Knox, p. 287.

** Knox, p. 284, 285, 287. Spotswood, p. 179.

The usual prayers in the churches were to this purpose: that God would

turn the queen’s heart, which was obstinate against him and his truth;

or if his holy will be otherwise, that he would strengthen the hearts

and hands of the elect, stoutly to oppose the rage of all tyrants.[*]

Nay, it was openly called in question, whether that princess, being an

idolatress, was entitled to any authority, even in civil matters.[**]

The helpless queen was every moment exposed to contumely, which she bore

with benignity and patience. Soon after her arrival, she dined in the

Castle of Edinburgh; and it was there contrived, that a boy, six years

of age, should be let down from the roof, and should present her with

a Bible, a Psalter, and the keys of the castle. Lest she should be at a

loss to understand this insult on her as a Papist, all the decorations

expressed the burning of Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, and other

punishments inflicted by God upon idolatry.[***] The town council

of Edinburgh had the assurance, from their own authority, to issue a

proclamation banishing from their district “all the wicked rabble of

Antichrist the pope, such as priests, monks, friars, together with

adulterers and fornicators.”[****] And because the privy council

suspended the magistrates for their insolence, the passionate

historians[v] of that age have inferred that the queen was engaged, by

a sympathy of manners, to take adulterers and fornicators under her

protection. It appears probable, that the magistrates were afterwards

reinstated in their office, and that their proclamation was

confirmed.[v*]

* Keith, p. 179.

** Keith, p. 202.

*** Keith, p. 189.

*** Keith, p. 192.

v Knox, p. 292. Buchan. lib. xvii. c. 20. Haynes, vol. i.

p. 372.

v* Keith, p. 202.

But all the insolence of the people was inconsiderable in comparison

of that which was exercised by the clergy and the preachers, who took

a pride in vilifying, even to her face, this amiable princess. The

assembly of the church framed an address, in which, after telling her

that her mass was a bastard service of God, the fountain of all impiety,

and the source of every evil which abounded in the realm, they expressed

their hopes, that she would ere this time have preferred truth to her

own preconceived opinion, and have renounced her religion, which, they

assured her, was nothing but abomination and vanity. They said, that the

present abuses of government were so enormous, that if a speedy remedy

were not provided, God would not fail in his anger to strike the head

and the tail, the disobedient prince and sinful people. They

required, that severe punishment should be inflicted on adulterers

and fornicators. And they concluded with demanding for themselves some

addition both of power and property.[*]

The ringleader in all these insults on majesty was John Knox; who

possessed an uncontrolled authority in the church and even in the civil

affairs of the nation, and who triumphed in the contumelious usage of

his sovereign. His usual appellation for the queen was Jezebel; and

though she endeavored by the most gracious condescension to win his

favor, all her insinuations could gain nothing on his obdurate heart.

She promised him access to her whenever he demanded it; and she even

desired him, if he found her blamable in any thing, to reprehend her

freely in private, rather than vilify her in the pulpit before the whole

people: but he plainly told her, that he had a public ministry intrusted

to him; that if she would come to church, she should there hear the

gospel of truth, and that it was not his business to apply to every

individual, nor had he leisure for that occupation.[**] The political

principles of the man, which he communicated to his brethren, were as

full of sedition, as his theological were of rage and bigotry. Though

he once condescended so far as to tell the queen that he would submit to

her, in the same manner as Paul did to Nero,[***] he remained not long

in this dutiful strain. He said to her, that “Samuel feared not to slay

Agag the fat and delicate king of Amalek, whom King Saul had saved;

neither spared Elias Jezebel’s false prophets, and Baal’s priests,

though King Ahab was present. Phineas,” added he, “was no magistrate;

yet feared he not to strike Cosbi and Zimri in the very act of filthy

fornication. And so, madam, your grace may see that others than chief

magistrates may lawfully inflict punishment on such crimes as are

condemned by the law of God.”[****] Knox had formerly, during the reign

of Mary of England, written a book against female succession to the

crown: the title of it is, “The first blast of the trumpet against

the monstrous regimen of women.” He was too proud either to recant the

tenets of this book, or even to apologize for them; and his conduct

showed that he thought no more civility than loyalty due to any of the

female sex.

* Knox, p. 311, 312.

** Knox, p. 310.

*** Knox, p. 288.

**** Knox, p. 326.

The whole life of Mary was, from the demeanor of these men, filled with

bitterness and sorrow. This rustic apostle scruples not, in his history,

to inform us, that he once treated her with such severity, that she lost

all command of temper, and dissolved in tears before him: yet so far

from being moved with youth, and beauty, and royal dignity reduced to

that condition, he persevered in his insolent reproofs; and when he

relates this incident, he discovers a visible pride and satisfaction

in his own conduct.[*] The pulpits had become mere scenes of railing

against the vices of the court; among which were always noted as

the principal, feasting, finery, dancing, balls, and whoredom, their

necessary attendant.[**] Some ornaments, which the ladies at that time

wore upon their petticoats, excited mightily the indignation of the

preachers; and they affirmed, that such vanity would provoke God’s

vengeance not only against these foolish women, but against the whole

realm.[***]

Mary, whose age, condition, and education, invited her to liberty and

cheerfulness, was curbed in all amusements by the absurd severity of

these reformers; and she found every moment reason to regret her leaving

that country, from whose manners she had in her early youth received

the first impressions.[****] Her two uncles, the duke of Aumale and the

grand prior, with the other French nobility, soon took leave of her: the

marquis of Elbeuf remained some time longer; but after his departure,

she was left to the society of her own subjects; men unacquainted

with the pleasures of conversation, ignorant of arts and civility, and

corrupted, beyond their usual rusticity, by a dismal fanaticism, which

rendered them incapable of all humanity or improvement. Though Mary

had made no attempt to restore the ancient religion, her Popery was a

sufficient crime: though her behavior was hitherto irreproachable, and

her manners sweet and engaging, her gayety and ease were interpreted as

signs of dissolute vanity. And to the harsh and preposterous usage which

this princess met with may, in part, be ascribed those errors of her

subsequent conduct which seemed so little of a piece with the general

tenor of her character.

* Knox, p. 332, 333.

** Knox, p. 322.

*** Knox, p. 330.

**** Knox, p. 294

There happened to the marquis of Elbeuf, before his departure, an

adventure which, though frivolous, might enable him to give Mary’s

friends in France a melancholy idea of her situation. This nobleman,

with the earl of Bothwell and some other young courtiers, had been

engaged, after a debauch, to pay a visit to a woman called Alison Craig,

who was known to be liberal of her favors; and because they were denied

admittance, they broke the windows, thrust open the door, and committed

some disorders in searching for the damsel. It happened that the

assembly of the church was sitting at that time, and they immediately

took the matter under their cognizance. In conjunction with several

of the nobility, they presented an address to the queen, which was

introduced with this awful prelude: “To the queen’s majesty, and to her

secret and great council, her grace’s faithful and obedient subjects,

the professors of Christ Jesus’s holy evangil, wish the spirit of

righteous judgment.” The tenor of the petition was that the fear of

God, the duty which they owed her grace, and the terrible threatenings

denounced by God against every city or country where horrible crimes

were openly committed, compelled them to demand the severe punishment of

such as had done what in them lay to kindle the wrath of God against the

whole realm; that the iniquity of which they complained was so heinous

and so horrible that they should esteem themselves accomplices in it, if

they had been engaged by worldly fear, or servile complaisance, to pass

it over in silence, or bury it in oblivion: that as they owed her grace

obedience, in the administration of justice, so were they entitled to

require of her, in return, the sharp and condign punishment of this

enormity, which, they repeated it, might draw down the vengeance of God

on the whole kingdom: and that they maintained it to be her duty to lay

aside all private affections towards the actors in so heinous a crime,

and so enormous a villany, and without delay bring them to a trial,

and inflict the severest penalty upon them. The queen gave a gracious

reception to his peremptory address, but because she probably thought

that breaking the windows of a brothel merited not such severe

reprehension, she only replied, that her uncle was a stranger, and that

he was attended by a young company; but she would put such order to him

and to all others that her subjects should henceforth have no reason to

complain. Her passing over this incident so slightly was the source of

great discontent, and was regarded as a proof of the most profligate

manners.[*]

* Knox, p. 302, 303, 304. Keith, p. 509.

It is not to be omitted, that Alison Craig, the cause of all the uproar

was known to entertain a commerce with the earl of Arran, who, on

account of his great zeal for the reformation, was, without scruple,

indulged in that enormity.[*]

Some of the populace of Edinburgh broke into the queen’s chapel

during her absence, and committed outrages; for which two of them were

indicted, and it was intended to bring them to a trial. Knox wrote

circular letters to the most considerable zealots of the party, and

charged them to appear in town and protect their brethren. The holy

sacraments, he there said, are abused by profane Papists; the mass has

been said; and in worshipping that idol, the priests have omitted no

ceremony, not even the conjuring of their accursed water, that had ever

been practised in the time of the greatest blindness. These violent

measures for opposing justice were little short of rebellion; and Knox

was summoned before the council to answer for his offence. The courage

of the man was equal to his insolence. He scrupled not to tell the queen

that the pestilent Papists who had inflamed her against these holy men

were the sons of the devil; and must therefore obey the directions of

their father, who had been a liar and a manslayer from the beginning.

The matter ended with the full acquittal of Knox.[**] Randolph, the

English ambassador in Scotland, had reason to write to Cecil, speaking

of the Scottish nation, “I think marvellously of the wisdom of God, that

gave this unruly, inconstant, and cumbersome people no more power nor

substance; for they would otherwise run wild.”[***]

* Knox.

** Knox, p. 336, 342.

*** Keith, p. 202.

We have related these incidents at greater length than the necessity of

our subject may seem to require; but even trivial circumstances, which

show the manners of the age, are often more instructive, as well as

entertaining, than the great transactions of wars and negotiations,

which are nearly similar in all periods and in all countries of the

world.

The reformed clergy in Scotland had at that time a very natural reason

for their ill humor; namely, the poverty, or rather beggary, to which

they were reduced. The nobility and gentry had at first laid their hands

on all the property of the regular clergy, without making any provision

for the friars and nuns, whom they turned out of their possessions.

The secular clergy of the Catholic communion, though they lost all

ecclesiastical jurisdiction, still held some of the temporalities of

their benefices; and either became laymen themselves and converted them

into private property, or made conveyance of them at low prices to the

nobility, who thus enriched themselves by the plunder of the church. The

new teachers had hitherto subsisted chiefly by the voluntary oblations

of the faithful; and in a poor country, divided in religious sentiments,

this establishment was regarded as very scanty and very precarious.

Repeated applications were made for a legal settlement to the preachers;

and though almost every thing in the kingdom was governed by their

zeal and caprice, it was with difficulty that their request was at

last complied with. The fanatical spirit which they indulged, and

their industry in decrying the principles and practices of the Romish

communion, which placed such merit in enriching the clergy, proved now

a very sensible obstacle to their acquisitions. The convention, however,

passed a vote,[*] by which they divided all the ecclesiastical

benefices into twenty-one shares: they assigned fourteen to the ancient

possessors: of the remaining seven they granted three to the crown;

and if that were found to answer the public expenses, they bestowed the

overplus on the reformed ministers. The queen was empowered to levy all

the seven; and it was ordained that she should afterwards pay to the

clergy what should be judged to suffice for their maintenance. The

necessities of the crown, the rapacity of the courtiers, and the small

affection which Mary bore to the Protestant ecclesiastics, rendered

their revenues contemptible as well as uncertain; and the preachers,

finding that they could not rival the gentry, or even the middling rank

of men, in opulence and plenty, were necessitated to betake themselves

to other expedients for supporting their authority. They affected a

furious zeal for religion, morose manners, a vulgar and familiar, yet

mysterious cant; and though the liberality of subsequent princes put

them afterwards on a better footing with regard to revenue, and thereby

corrected in some degree those bad habits, it must be confessed that,

while many other advantages attend Presbyterian government, these

inconveniences are not easily separated from the genius of that

ecclesiastical polity.

* Knox, p. 296. Keith, p. 210.

The queen of Scots, destitute of all force, possessing a narrow revenue,

surrounded with a factious, turbulent nobility, a bigoted people,

and insolent ecclesiastics, soon found that her only expedient for

maintaining tranquillity was to preserve a good correspondence with

Elizabeth,[*] who, by former connections and services, had acquired such

authority over all these ranks of men.

* Jebb, vol. ii. p. 456.

Soon after her arrival in Scotland, Secretary Lidington was sent to

London, in order to pay her compliments to the queen, and express

her desire of friendship and a good correspondence; and he received

a commission from her, as well as from the nobility of Scotland, to

demand, as a means of cementing this friendship, that Mary should, by

act of parliament or by proclamation, (for the difference between these

securities was not then deemed very considerable,) be declared successor

to the crown. No request could be more unreasonable, or made at a more

improper juncture. The queen replied, that Mary had once discovered

her intention not to wait for the succession, but had openly, without

ceremony or reserve, assumed the title of Queen of England, and had

pretended a superior right to her throne and kingdom: that though her

ambassadors and those of her husband, the French king, had signed a

treaty, in which they renounced that claim, and promised satisfaction

for so great an indignity, she was so intoxicated with this imaginary

right, that she had rejected the most earnest solicitations, and

even, as some endeavored to persuade her, had incurred some danger, in

crossing the seas, rather than ratify that equitable treaty: that her

partisans every where had still the assurance to insist on her title,

and had presumed to talk of her own birth as illegitimate: that while

affairs were on this footing; while a claim thus openly made, so far

from being openly renounced, was only suspended till a more favorable

opportunity; it would in her be the most egregious imprudence to fortify

the hands of a pretender to her crown by declaring her the successor:

that no expedient could be worse imagined for cementing friendship than

such a declaration; and kings were often found to bear no good will to

their successors, even though their own children; much more when

the connection was less intimate, and when such cause of disgust and

jealousy had already been given, and indeed was still continued, on the

part of Mary: that though she was willing, from the amity which she

bore her kinswoman, to ascribe her former pretensions to the advice of

others, by whose direction she was then governed, her present refusal to

relinquish them could proceed only from her own prepossessions, and was

a proof that she still harbored some dangerous designs against her:

that it was the nature of all men to be disgusted with the present,

to entertain flattering views of futurity, to think their services ill

rewarded, to expect a better recompense from the successor; and she

should esteem herself scarcely half a sovereign over the English, if

they saw her declare her heir, and arm her rival with authority against

her own repose and safety: that she knew the inconstant nature of the

people; she was acquainted with the present divisions in religion;

she was not ignorant that the same party, which expected greater favor

during the reign of Mary, did also imagine that the title of that

princess was superior to her own: that for her part, whatever claims

were advanced, she was determined to live and die queen of England; and

after her death it was the business of others to examine who had the

best pretensions, either by the laws or by right of blood, to the

succession: that she hoped the claim of the queen of Scots would then be

found solid; and, considering the injury which she herself had received,

it was sufficient indulgence if she promised, in the mean time, to do

nothing which might in any respect weaken or invalidate it: and that

Mary, if her title were really preferable--a point which, for her own

part, she had never inquired into--possessed all advantages above her

rivals; who, destitute both of present power and of all support by

friends, would only expose themselves to inevitable ruin, by advancing

any weak, or even doubtful pretensions.[*]

These views of the queen were so prudent and judicious, that there was

no likelihood of her ever departing from them: but that she might put

the matter to a fuller proof, she offered to explain the words of the

treaty of Edinburgh, so as to leave no suspicion of their excluding

Mary’s right of succession;[**] and in this form she again required her

to ratify that treaty. Matters at last came to this issue, that Mary

agreed to the proposal, and offered to renounce all present pretensions

to the crown of England, provided Elizabeth would agree to declare her

the successor.[***] But such was the jealous character of this latter

princess, that she never would consent to strengthen the interest and

authority of any claimant by fixing the succession; much less would

she make this concession in favor of a rival queen, who possessed

such plausible pretensions for the present, and who, though she might

verbally renounce them, could easily resume her claim on the first

opportunity.

* Buchanan, lib. xvii. c. 14-17. Camden, p. 385. Spotswood,

p. 180, 181.

** Spotswood, p. 181.

*** Haynes, vol. i. p. 377.

Mary’s proposal, however, bore so specious an appearance of equity and

justice, that Elizabeth, sensible that reason would, by superficial

thinkers, be deemed to lie entirely on that side, made no more mention

of the matter; and though further concessions were never made by either

princess, they put on all the appearances of a cordial reconciliation

and friendship with each other.

The queen observed that, even without her interposition, Mary was

sufficiently depressed by the mutinous spirit of her own subjects;

and instead of giving Scotland for the present any inquietude or

disturbance, she employed herself, more usefully and laudably, in

regulating the affairs of her own kingdom, and promoting the happiness

of her people. She made some progress in paying those great debts which

lay upon the crown; she regulated the coin, which had been much debased

by her predecessors; she furnished her arsenals with great quantities of

arms from Germany and other places; engaged her nobility and gentry to

imitate her example in this particular; introduced into the kingdom the

art of making gunpowder and brass cannon; fortified her frontiers on

the side of Scotland; made frequent reviews of the militia; encouraged

agriculture, by allowing a free exportation of corn; promoted trade and

navigation; and so much increased the shipping of her kingdom, both by

building vessels of force herself, and suggesting like undertakings to

the merchants, that she was justly styled the restorer of naval glory,

and the queen of the northern seas.[*] The natural frugality of her

temper, so far from incapacitating her for these great enterprises, only

enabled her to execute them with greater certainty and success; and

all the world, saw in her conduct the happy effects of a vigorous

perseverance in judicious and well-concerted projects.

* Camden, p. 388. Strype, vol. i. p. 230, 336, 337.

It is easy to imagine that so great a princess, who enjoyed such

singular felicity and renown, would receive proposals of marriage from

every one that had any likelihood of succeeding; and though she had made

some public declarations in favor of a single life, few believed that

she would persevere forever in that resolution. The archduke Charles,

second son of the emperor,[*] as well as Casimir, son of the elector

palatine, made applications to her; and as this latter prince professed

the reformed religion, he thought himself, on that account, better

entitled to succeed in his addresses. Eric, king of Sweden, and Adolph,

duke of Holstein, were encouraged by the same views to become suitors:

and the earl of Arran, heir to the crown of Scotland, was, by the states

of that kingdom, recommended to her as a suitable marriage.

* Haynes, vol. i. p. 233.

Even some of her own subjects, though they did not openly declare their

pretensions, entertained hopes of success. The earl of Arundel, a person

declining in years, but descended from an ancient and noble family, as

well as possessed of great riches, flattered himself with this prospect;

as did also Sir William Pickering, a man much esteemed for his personal

merit. But the person most likely to succeed, was a younger son of the

late duke of Northumberland, Lord Robert Dudley, who, by means of his

exterior qualities, joined to address and flattery, had become in

a manner her declared favorite, and had great influence in all her

counsels. The less worthy he appeared of this distinction, the more was

his great favor ascribed to some violent affection, which could thus

seduce the judgment of this penetrating princess; and men long expected

that he would obtain the preference above so many princes and monarchs.

But the queen gave all these suitors a gentle refusal, which still

encouraged their pursuit; and thought that she should the better attach

them to her interest, if they were still allowed to entertain hopes of

succeeding in their pretensions. It is also probable that this policy

was not entirely free from a mixture of female coquetry; and that,

though she was determined in her own mind never to share her power with

any man, she was not displeased with the courtship, solicitation, and

professions of love, which the desire of acquiring so valuable a prize

procured her from all quarters.

What is most singular in the conduct and character of Elizabeth is, that

though she determined never to have any heir of her own body, she was

not only very averse to fix any successor to the crown, but seems, also,

to have resolved, as far as it lay in her power, that no one who had

pretensions to the succession should ever have any heirs or successors.

If the exclusion given by the will of Henry VIII. to the posterity of

Margaret, queen of Scotland, was allowed to be valid, the right to the

crown devolved on the house of Suffolk; and the lady Catharine Gray,

younger sister to the lady Jane, was now the heir of that family. This

lady had been married to Lord Herbert, son of the earl of Pembroke; but

having been divorced from that nobleman, she had made a private marriage

with the earl of Hertford, son of the protector; and her husband, soon

after consummation, travelled into France. In a little time she appeared

to be pregnant, which so enraged Elizabeth, that she threw her into

the Tower, and summoned Hertford to appear, in order to answer for his

misdemeanor. He made no scruple of acknowledging the marriage, which,

though concluded without the queen’s consent, was entirely suitable to

both parties; and for this offence he was also committed to the Tower.

Elizabeth’s severity stopped not here: she issued a commission to

inquire into the matter; and as Hertford could not, within the time

limited, prove the nuptials by witnesses, the commerce between him and

his consort was declared unlawful, and their posterity illegitimate.

They were still detained in custody, but by bribing their keepers, they

found means to have further intercourse; and another child appeared to

be the fruit of their commerce. This was a fresh source of vexation to

the queen; who made a fine of fifteen thousand pounds be set on Hertford

by the star chamber and ordered his confinement to be thenceforth more

rigid and severe. He lay in this condition for nine years, till the

death of his wife, by freeing Elizabeth from all fears, procured him his

liberty.[*] This extreme severity must be accounted for, either by the

unrelenting jealousy of the queen, who was afraid lest a pretender

to the succession should acquire credit by having issue; or by her

malignity, which, with all her great qualities, made one ingredient

in her character, and which led her to envy in others those natural

pleasures of love and posterity, of which her own ambition and desire of

dominion made her renounce all prospect for herself.

* Haynes, vol. i. p. 369, 378, 396. Camden, p. 389. Heylin,

p. 154.

There happened, about this time, some other events in the royal family

where the queen’s conduct was more laudable. Arthur Pole and his

brother, nephews to the late cardinal, and descended from the duke of

Clarence, together with Anthony Fortescue, who had married a sister of

these gentlemen, and some other persons, were brought to their trial

for intending to withdraw into France, with a view of soliciting

succors from the duke of Guise, of returning thence into Wales, and of

proclaiming Mary queen of England, and Arthur Pole duke of Clarence.

They confessed the indictment, but asserted that they never meant to

execute these projects during the queen’s lifetime: they had only deemed

such precautions requisite in case of her demise, which some pretenders

to judicial astrology had assured them they might with certainty look

for before the year expired. They were condemned by the jury; but

received a pardon from the queen’s clemency.[*]

* Strype, vol. i. p. 333. Heylin, p. 154.