The pest broke out again in Dundee, Perth, and other parts of the
country.--_Ab. C. R._
The Privy Council refer to ‘a very ancient and lovable custom,’ of
giving a blue gown, purse, and as many Scotch shillings as agreed with
the years of the king’s age, to as many ‘auld puir men’ as likewise
agreed with the king’s years; and seeing it to be ‘very necessary and
expedient that the said custom should be continuit,’ they give orders
accordingly.--_P. C. R._
The ‘auld puir men’ so favoured were called the King’s Bedesmen, and
were privileged to go about the country as beggars, notwithstanding
any general enactments that might exist against mendicancy. Their
blue cloak bore a pewter badge which assured them of this right. They
were expected to requite the king’s bounty by their prayers; and,
doubtless, as they had such an interest in the increase of his years,
their intercessions for his prolonged life must have been sincere.
The distribution of their cloaks and purses used to take place on the
king’s birthday, at the end of the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, till a time
not long gone by.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JUNE 30.]
A sad account is given of the country of Athole. This province, ‘whilk
of auld was maist quiet and peaceable, and inhabit be a number of civil
and answerable gentlemen, professed and avowed enemies to thieves,
robbers, and oppressors,’ is described as having ‘now become very louss
and broken,’ ‘ane ordinary resett for the thieves and broken men of
the north and south Hielands;’ moreover, a great number of the native
people, ‘sic as John Dow M’Gillicallum and his complices,’ shaking off
all fear of God and reverence for his majesty and the laws, ‘are become
maist insolent, committing wild and detestable murders, open reifs,
privy stouthrie, barbarous houghing and goring of oxen, and other
enormities,’ without hinderance or challenge.
[Sidenote: AUG.]
The Privy Council ordered the immediate reappointment of a guard or
watch for the country, such as was customary. James Gordon of Lesmoir
undertook to apprehend John Dow and his brother Allaster; and when many
attempts had failed, ‘in end lichtit upon the limmers.’ ‘After a lang
and het combat, and the slauchter of four or five of the principals
of them, the said Allaster was apprehendit, and John, being very evil
hurt, by the darkness of the night escaped.’ Allaster, who had many
murders on his head, was brought to Edinburgh, and laid in irons in
the Tolbooth, notwithstanding many offers from his friends for his
liberation. He was in due time tried and executed.--_P. C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1607.]
David, Master of Crawford, was noted as a wicked and lawless man.
In the course of his violent proceedings in the district where he
possessed influence--Forfarshire--he had slaughtered (October 25, 1605)
Sir Walter Lyndsay of Balgavies. This brought out the violent feelings
of the young Laird of Edzell, whom we have already seen engaged in
matters of blood. Young Edzell and his brother determined to avenge the
slaughter of their uncle, Sir Walter, upon the Master of Crawford, who
was also their near relation.
[Sidenote: JULY 5.]
One summer evening, between nine and ten o’clock, the Master of
Crawford was walking up the High Street of Edinburgh, accompanied by
his uncle, Alexander, Lord Spynie, and Sir James Douglas of Drumlanrig.
Lord Spynie was a popular character, a favourite courtier of King
James, and uncle to both the Master of Crawford and young Edzell.
Knowing the revengeful design of the latter person, he had been
endeavouring to bring about a peace between him and the Master; but
his well-meant efforts were destined only to result in his own death.
At this very time young Edzell was lying in wait with eight armed
men to attack the Master. The three gentlemen approach, and are in a
moment beset by the ambushed party; sword-strokes and pistol-shots are
exchanged; the Master and Drumlanrig are severely wounded, and Lord
Spynie receives mortal hurt. Young Edzell then withdrew his party.
Drumlanrig recovered from his wounds with difficulty; Lord Spynie died
of his in eleven days. Thus the innocent alone suffered from this
attempt at ‘wild justice;’ the very kind of event which wild justice is
most apt to bring about, and for which it is chiefly to be condemned.
Young Edzell fled, with the dismal pain upon his conscience of having
caused the violent death of his own uncle, whom he had ever regarded
with affection. To escape justice, he was compelled to retire to
the remotest parts of his paternal property in the Braes of Angus.
Meanwhile, his father suffered great harassment from the law on his
account, and was soon brought down in sorrow to the grave. It cost the
son a good estate and ten thousand merks to settle matters ultimately
with the heirs of Lord Spynie.[325]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JULY.]
A tragical event, which now occurred at Dornoch in Sutherland, is
related in a characteristic manner by Sir Robert Gordon.
[Sidenote: 1607.]
‘About the year 1585, there came into Sutherland one called Mr William
Pape, a reasonable good scholar, and of a quick and ready wit. This man
was first admitted to be schoolmaster in the town of Dornoch; then he
was appointed to be resident minister in that same place; and withal
he came to be chanter of Caithness. In progress of time, by his virtue
and diligence, he became wealthy, and of good account in the county
of Sutherland. His two brethren, Charles and Thomas, perceiving his
good success, came also thither out of Ross, where they were born,
thinking to settle their fortunes with their elder brother. Thomas
Pape was made chancellor of Caithness, and minister at Rogart. Charles
Pape was a public notary, and a messenger-at-arms; who, being of an
affable and merry conversation, did so behave himself that he procured
the love of his master, the Earl of Sutherland, and the good liking of
all his countrymen, so that in the end he was made sheriff-clerk of
Sutherland. These three brethren married in Sutherland, and anchored
their fortunes in that country; but as wealth and prosperity often
beget pride, so doth pride bring with it a certain contempt of others.
These brethren, dwelling for the most part in Dornoch, being both
provident and wealthy, thought by progress of time to purchase and buy
the most part of the tenements of that town, and drive the ancient and
natural inhabitants from their possessions; which the townsmen in end
perceiving, they grudged in their hearts, though they could take no
just exceptions thereat, seeing that these brethren did purchase the
same with their money; yet they concluded with themselves to utter
their hatred and revenge when occasion should serve. So at last, upon a
particular quarrel which began between one of these brethren, and one
of the inhabitants of the town, their ruin thus followed:
[Sidenote: 1607.]
‘Every man being departed from the town of Dornoch unto this convention
at Strathullie [to resist an invasion of the Earl of Caithness], except
William Moray, a bowyer, and some few others, who were also ready to
go away the next morning. Mr William and Mr Thomas Pape, with some
others of the ministry, had a meeting at Dornoch concerning some of the
church affairs. After they had dissolved their meeting, they went to
breakfast to an inn or victualling-house of the town. As they were at
breakfast, one John Macphail entered the house and asked some drink for
his money, which the mistress of the house refused to give him, thereby
to be rid of his company, because she knew him to be a brawling fellow.
John Macphail, taking this refusal in evil part, reproved the woman,
and spoke somewhat stubbornly to the ministers, who began to excuse
her; whereupon Thomas Pape did threaten him, and he again did thrust
into Thomas’s arm an arrow with a broad-forked head, which then he held
in his hand. So being parted and set asunder at that time, Mr William
and his brother Thomas came the same evening into the churchyard, with
their swords about them; which John Macphail perceiving, and taking
it as a provocation, he went with all diligence and acquainted his
nephew, Hutcheon Macphail, and his brother-in-law, William Moray the
bowyer, therewith; who being glad to find this occasion whereby to
revenge their old grudge against these brethren, they hastened forth,
and meeting with them in the churchyard, they fell a quarrelling,
and from quarrelling to fighting. Charles Pape had been all that day
abroad; and at his return, understanding in what case his brethren
were, he came in a preposterous haste to the fatal place of his end
and ruin. They fought a little while; in the end, Charles hurt William
Moray in the face, and thereupon William Moray killed him. Mr William
and Thomas were both extremely wounded by John Macphail and his nephew
Hutcheon, and were lying in that place for dead persons, without hope
of recovery; but they recovered afterwards beyond expectation. The
offenders escaped, because there was none in the town to apprehend
them (except such as favoured them), the inhabitants being all gone
to the assembly at Strathullie. John Macphail and his nephew Hutcheon
have both since ended their days in Holland. William Moray yet lives
(reserved, as I should suppose, to a greater judgment). Mr William
Pape and his brother Thomas thereupon left the county of Sutherland,
and settled themselves in Ross, where Thomas now dwelleth. Mr William
died in the town of Nigg, where he was planted minister. Thus did these
brethren begin and end in this country; which I have declared at length
to shew us thereby that man in full prosperity should never think too
much of himself, nor contemn others, upon whom it hath not pleased God
to bestow such measure of gifts and benefits.’--_G. H. S._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AUG. 5.]
[Sidenote: 1607.]
A parliamentary enactment had appointed the 5th of August to be kept
as a holiday, on account of the king’s escape from the Gowrie treason.
On this occasion, the day ‘was solemnly kept in Edinburgh. The king’s
scoll [health] was drunk by the duke his commissioner, and some other
noblemen, at the Cross of Edinburgh, which was covered for the greater
solemnity. Bacchus was set up, and much wine drunk, and sweetmeats cast
about; much vanity and pastime, beside ringing of bells, and setting on
of balefires. _The pest brake up soon after._‘--_Cal._
The death of the late Lord Maxwell in the battle of Dryfe’s Sands left
a feeling of deadly bitterness in his son’s mind against the name of
Johnston. A series of turbulent proceedings, marking the untamable
spirit of the young lord, ended in his being warded in the Castle of
Edinburgh, where he had for a fellow-prisoner a Hebridean magnate of
similar character and history--Sir James M‘Connel or Macdonald.
[Sidenote: DEC. 4.]
‘Seeing not how he was to be relieved, he devises with Sir James
M’Connel and Robert Maxwell of Dinwoodie, what way he and they might
escape. So, he calls ane great number of the keepers of the Castle into
his chalmer, where he drinks them all fou.’ Pretending to act a sort
of play, he asked them for their swords as part of the performance;
and having thus armed himself and his two companions, he passed out
with them, locking the door behind him. The three passed to the inner
gate, where a servant stood in the way, holding the porter in parley.
The latter, an old man, tried to make resistance. ‘False knave,’ cried
Maxwell, ‘open the yett, or I shall hew thee in blads’ [pieces]. He did
strike the man in the arm, and likewise wounded another keeper in the
hand. Then he and Sir James ‘passed to the west castle-wall that goes
to the West Port of Edinburgh,’ and climbing over it, leaped down, and
disappeared amongst the suburbs. Robert Maxwell, however, was locked in
and detained. The insular chieftain, who had irons upon him, was seized
in an attempt to conceal himself in a dunghill, while Lord Maxwell
escaped on a horse which had been kept in readiness for him. ‘The king
was very far offended, and made proclamation that nane should reset him
under the pain of death.’[326]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV.]
‘A vehement frost continued from Martinmas till the 20th of February.
The sea froze so far as it ebbed, and sundry went into ships upon ice
and played at the _chamiare_ a mile within the sea-mark. Sundry passed
over the Forth a mile above Alloa and Airth, to the great admiration of
aged men, who had never seen the like in their days.’--_Cal._
[Sidenote: 1607.]
The keenness and duration of this frost was marked by the rare
occurrence of a complete freezing of the Thames at London, where
accordingly a fair was held upon the ice. In Scotland, rivers and
springs were stopped; the young trees were killed, and birds and beasts
perished in great numbers. Men, travelling on their affairs, suffered
numbness and lassitude to a desperate degree. Their very joints were
frozen; and unless they could readily reach a shelter, their danger
was very great. In the following spring, the fruit-trees shewed less
growth than usual; and in many places the want of singing-birds was
remarked.--_Jo. Hist._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1608.]
[Sidenote: APR. 6.]
‘The Lord Maxwell, being proclaimed traitor after the breaking out of
ward in the Castle of Edinburgh, and thereupon driven to great straits,
sent to the Laird of Johnston, craved a meeting, pretending he would
now be heartily reconciled with him, and not for the fashion, as he was
before at the king’s pleasure, because he perceived he did not trouble
him now, being an outlaw, as he looked for. They meet at the place
appointed, Maxwell and one with him, Johnston and another with him;
and Sir Robert Maxwell of Spotts (near cousin to the Lord Maxwell, and
brother-in-law to the Laird of Johnston), who was employed by Maxwell
to draw on the tryst. They meet on horseback, and salute each other
heartily in outward show, and went apart to confer together. While
Johnston and Maxwell are conferring apart, Maxwell’s second began to
quarrel Johnston’s second, [and] shot a pistolet at him, whereupon he
fell. Johnston, hearing the shot, cried “Treason!” and, riding from
Maxwell to the two gentlemen, to understand what the matter meant,
Maxwell shooteth him behind the back. So Johnston fell, and died of the
shot. Soon after, proclamation was made at the Cross of Edinburgh, that
none, under pain of death, transport or carry away the Lord Maxwell
out of the country, in ship or craer, seeing the king and Council was
to take order with him, for the traitorous murdering of the Laird of
Johnston and his other offences.’--_Cal._
‘The fact was detested by all honest men, and the gentleman’s
misfortune sore lamented; for he was a man full of wisdom and
courage, and every way well inclined, and to have been by his too
much confidence in this sort treacherously cut off, was a thing most
pitiful. Maxwell, ashamed of that he had done, forsook the country, and
had his estate forfeited.’--_Spot._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1608.]
Horse-racing was early practised as a popular amusement in Scotland. In
1552, there was an arrangement for an annual horse-race at Haddington,
the prize being, as usual, a silver bell. Early in the reign of James
VI., there were races at both Peebles and Dumfries. The Peebles race
was accustomed to take place on Beltane-day, the 1st of May; it was the
chief surviving part of the festivities which had from an early period
distinguished the day and place, and which were celebrated in the old
poem of _Peebles to the Play_.
[Sidenote: APR. 28.]
The great difficulty attending such popular festivals arose from the
tendency of the people to mark them with bloodshed. Men assembled
there from different parts of the country, each having of course his
peculiar enmities, and the object of similar enmities in his turn;
and when they met and had somewhat inflamed themselves with liquor,
it was scarcely avoidable that mutual provocations should be given,
leading to conflicts with deadly weapons. So great reason was there now
for fearing a sanguinary scene at Peebles, that the Lords of Council
thought proper to issue a proclamation forbidding the race to take
place.[327]--_P. C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: MAY 8.]
[Sidenote: 1608.]
This day commenced an unfortunate adventure of the king for obtaining
silver in certain mines at Hilderstone in the county of Linlithgow.
Some years before, a collier, named Sandy Maund, wandering about the
burn-sides in that district, chanced to pick up a stone containing
veins of a clear metal, which proved to be silver. A gentleman of
Linlithgow, to whom he shewed it, recommended him to go to Leadhills,
and submit it to Sir Bevis Bulmer, who was engaged in gold-seeking
there. The consequence was, that a search was made at Hilderstone for
silver, and, some very hopeful masses of ore being found, a commission
was appointed by the king, with the consent of Sir Thomas Hamilton,
his majesty’s advocate, the proprietor of the ground, for making a
search for silver ore, with a view to trying it at the mint. In January
1608, thirty-eight barrels of ore, weighing in all 20,224 pounds, were
won, packed, and sent to the Tower of London. It is said that this
ore gave about twenty-four ounces of silver to every hundredweight,
while some gave double this quantity. Samuel Atkinson, who was engaged
in working the mine, tells that on some days he won as much silver
as was worth £100. The shaft, indeed, received the name of _God’s
Blessing_, as expressive of its fertile character. The whole results
appearing favourable, the king’s cupidity was excited, and he easily
fell into the proposal of his astute councillor, Hamilton, to become
the purchaser of _God’s Blessing_ for the sum of £5000, and work it
at the public expense. Bulmer, created a knight, was its governor.
There were ‘drawers up of metal, drawers up of water, and lavers up
of water to the pumps under the ground, shedders and washers, washers
with the sieve, dressers and washers with the buddle, and washers with
the canvas, quarriers, shoolmen,’ and many other workers of different
kinds. A mill for melting and fining the metal was established at
Leith.[328] Another fining-mill and a stamp-mill, with warehouses,
were built on the water running out of Linlithgow loch. Some Brunswick
miners were brought to give the benefit of their skill. All, however,
was of no avail. From the time of the transference of the mine into
royal hands, it did no more good. After a persevering effort of two
years and a half, the king gave up the adventure, with a loss of a
considerable sum of money.
The same mine was granted, in 1613, to Sir William Alexander, Thomas
Foulis, and Paulo Pinto, a Portuguese, to be wrought by them on the
condition of their paying a tenth of the refined ore to the crown. What
success attended this adventure is not known.
The scene of the mining operations is still traceable in a hollow
place to the east of Cairn-apple Hill, four miles south of Linlithgow.
A neighbouring excavation for limestone is named from it the
_Silver-mine Quarry_: such is the only local memorial of the affair now
existing.[329]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: MAY 31.]
[Sidenote: 1608.]
Margaret Hertsyde had entered the service of the queen in a humble
capacity in Scotland, and accompanying her majesty to England, was
there considerably advanced, and received from the queen many marks
of favour. Enriched with the royal liberality, she returned to her
native country as a great lady, attended by her husband, John Buchanan,
who had been a servant of the king. The pair attracted an invidious
attention by the high airs they gave themselves, affecting by the
purchase of land to become persons of quality, appearing in a carriage
drawn by white horses, and apparently wholly forgetful of their humble
origin. It was therefore with no great regret that the public learned
that Margaret was apprehended, on suspicion of having taken jewellery
from her royal mistress, to the value of upwards of £400 sterling. The
unfortunate woman confessed her guilt to the queen; but on her being
brought to trial at Linlithgow, some technical difficulties arose as
to how far a person could be considered guilty of theft who had only
withheld unaccounted for certain articles of which she had been in
trust. A direct conviction could not therefore be recorded. In these
circumstances, by an irregularity which marks the character of the age,
the king interfered with an order that Margaret Hertsyde be declared
infamous and banished to Orkney. She was also adjudged to pay £400
sterling to the commissioner upon her majesty’s dotarial estate of
Dunfermline. A grave historian of that day moralises upon the case as a
sad example of the mutability of fortune.
In 1619, ‘her doom having been humbly and with great patience embraced
and underlain by her, and her behaviour continually sin syne having
been very dutiful,’ Margaret so far succeeded in obtaining the king’s
grace as to have the reproach of infamy removed.--_Pit._ _Jo. Hist._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JUNE.]
By slow and safe steps, King James was constantly working for the
subjection of Scottish ecclesiastical matters to an episcopal model. At
this time, his favourite Scottish minister, the Earl of Dunbar, came
down from London, accompanied by two eminent English divines, Dr Abbot
(subsequently Archbishop of Canterbury) and Dr Higgins, while a third,
named Maxy, came by sea.
[Sidenote: JULY 1.]
[Sidenote: 1609.]
On the approach of the earl and his clerical associates, ‘the noblemen,
barons, and councillors that were in Edinburgh went out to accompany
him into the town. So he entered in Edinburgh with a great train. The
chancellor, then provost, the bailies, and many of the citizens, met
him at the Nether Bow Port. It was spoken broadly that no small sums of
money were sent down with him to be distributed among the ministers and
sundry others. The English doctors seemed to have no other direction
but to persuade the Scots that there was no substantial difference
in religion betwixt the two realms, but only in things indifferent
concerning government and ceremonies.’--_Cal._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JULY 5.]
Dundee is described as suffering under ‘the contagious sickness of
the pest, and a great many of the houses are infectit therewith,
and greater infection like to ensue in respect of the few number of
magistrates within the same, and the little care and regard had of the
government thereof, ane of the said magistrates being departit this
life, and ane other of them visited with disease and infirmity, and not
able to undergo sae great pains and travels in his person and otherwise
as is requisite at sae necessar a time.’ For these reasons, the Privy
Council appointed three citizens to act as assistant-magistrates.--_P.
C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JULY 13.]
We hear at this time of one of the last attempts to settle a dispute by
regular combat; and it is the more remarkable, as several persons were
concerned on each side. On the one part stood ‘the Lord Sinclair, David
Seton of Parbroth, and John Sinclair elder and John Sinclair younger,
sons to the said Lord Sinclair;’ on the other were George Martin of
Cardone and his three sons. A mutual challenge had passed between the
parties, ‘with special designation of time, place, form, and manner of
the combat,’ and the rencontre would have, to all appearance, taken
place, had not some neighbours interfered to prevent it. The parties
were summoned before the Privy Council, to answer for their conduct.
Martin and his sons were denounced as rebels for not appearing (July
21).--_P. C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1608.]
The slaughter of Captain James Stewart by Sir James Douglas of
Parkhead, in 1596, had not been allowed to pass unnoticed by the
Ochiltree family, to which the murdered man belonged. At that time,
however, a man of rank was not to be punished as a malefactor in
Scotland. His offence was expiated by an assythment, or the king
interposed to reconcile the friends of the deceased to the culprit and
his friends, as if the affair had been merely an unfortunate quarrel.
For years there stood a variance between the Ochiltree Stewarts
and the murderer of their relation, and from time to time they had
to come under heavy sureties to keep the peace towards each other,
Lord Ochiltree and Sir James Douglas (now called Lord Torthorald) in
£5000 each; and the brothers and nephews of Stewart in lesser sums.
This arrangement had been last renewed on the 30th of May, to endure
for a year. All seemed composed--a General Assembly was sitting in
Edinburgh--no one seems to have been apprehensive of any immediate
quarrel or trouble, when a terrible incident suddenly fell out.
[Sidenote: JULY 14.]
Lord Torthorald was walking one morning, between six and seven o’clock,
in the High Street, below the Cross, unaccompanied by any friend or
servant, dreading no harm, when William Stewart, nephew of the man he
had slain twelve years before, observing him, was unable to restrain
the rancorous feeling of the moment, and pulling out a short sword he
carried, stabbed him in the back, so that he fell to the ground and
instantly died.
William Stewart escaped, and we hear no more of him. The Privy Council,
horror-struck at the outrage, had two meetings on the same day to
consider what should be done. At the first, before noon, they ordered
that the Earl of Morton, James commendator of Melrose, Sir George and
Sir Archibald Douglas, his uncles, ---- Douglas now of Torthorald,
William Douglas, apparent of Drumlanrig, Archibald Douglas of Tofts,
and Sir James Dundas of Arniston--all friends of the deceased, and
presumably eager to revenge his slaughter--should be confined to their
lodgings. Lord Ochiltree, on whom the Douglases might be apt to vent
their fury, was likewise commanded to keep within doors. At the second
meeting, after noon, they gave an order for the apprehension of the
culprit.
There is a remarkable connection of murders recalled by this shocking
transaction. Not only do we ascend to Torthorald’s slaughter of Stewart
in 1596, and Stewart’s deadly prosecution of Morton to the scaffold in
1581; but William Stewart was the son of the Sir William Stewart who
was slain by the Earl of Bothwell in Blackfriars’ Wynd in 1588. This,
however, is the last open murder of one gentleman by another which we
have to record as taking place on a street in Edinburgh.
Lord Torthorald lies buried under a carved slab in Holyrood Chapel,
where the guide reads his name daily to hundreds of visitors, few of
whom know what a series of tragic circumstances in old Scottish history
lies concentered in the body of him who sleeps below.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1608.]
[Sidenote: JULY.]
The progress of persecution against the Catholics may be traced all
through this period by the equal progress of the king’s measures for
introducing the episcopal system into the church. A General Assembly,
which met at Linlithgow in December 1606, was brought by court
influence to give a consent to the principle of permanent moderators
for presbyteries--a necessary step to the assumption of entire power
over dioceses by the bishops. They sent the act to court, with a
petition for fresh securities against the Catholic nobles of the north,
and their ladies. James affected to listen to their desires, and
promised well, but does not seem to have taken any decisive steps till
he found that the act for constant moderators, as interpreted by him,
met considerable resistance. He then called another General Assembly,
mainly for the purpose of taking ‘strait order’ with the adherents of
the proscribed faith.
This reverend body professed to consider the country as in unexampled
danger from popery. It is found complaining that Jesuit and seminary
priests were allowed to traffic within the land, that papistical books
were brought from abroad, and that persons in authority often shewed
favour to traffickers and excommunicated papists, ‘such as the abbot of
New Abbey and other mass priests, demitted, as is thought, out of ward,
not without reward [bribery], and without all warrant of his majesty,
and presently tolerated in this country without pursuit.’ Amongst some
objects petitioned for from the king, were--that papists of rank be
imprisoned, and only Protestants have access to them; that orders be
given for down-casting of the Laird of Gight’s chapel, and the house
of John Cheyne in Kissilmonth, who receipted all Jesuits and seminary
priests; and that order be taken with the pilgrimages--namely, to the
Chapel called Ordiquhill, and the Chapel of Grace, and to a well in the
bounds of Enzie upon the south side of Spey.
[Sidenote: 1608.]
The most important of their actual measures bore reference to the
Marquis of Huntly, and the Earls of Angus and Errol, who were
considered as the prime supports of popery in the northern section
of the kingdom. Huntly we have seen (June 1597) received formally
and publicly into the Presbyterian Church, with all appearances
of sincerity on his part, while the truth was that he only gave a
lip-obedience in order to save his estates and place in the country,
of which otherwise he would have been deprived. The hollowness of
his professions was soon after sufficiently apparent, for he built a
popish chapel in his house, and he continued, as before, to ‘reset’
priests. The Presbyterian tutors imposed on his family may be presumed
to have made little progress in their work, as his children all grew up
Catholics. Processes had been raised against him in the church-courts
for ‘relapse in popery;’ and though the king had tried to screen
him from the vengeance he had incurred, it was ineffectual. It was
now necessary for James, if he would make way with his episcopal
innovations, that he should give proof of sincerity in Protestantism,
by leaving his old friend and councillor to the mercy of the General
Assembly.
Accordingly, the business being ripe for instantly proceeding, the
moderator--being the same Bishop Law who had promised such a sore
‘handling’ of the Catholics to James Melville and his friends in
London (see under November 7, 1606)--pronounced the sentence of
excommunication ‘after a very solemn manner;’ while the Earl of Dunbar,
the king’s commissioner, promised that, ‘forty days being expired from
the pronouncing of the sentence, the civil sword should strike without
mercy or favour to him or his; and although some of his friends should
come and buy his escheat, it should be refused.’--_Cal._ Arrangements
were made for taking the same measures with Errol and Angus, Dunbar
promising the like severity with them.
While the Assembly continued sitting, a gentleman came on behalf of
the Marquis of Huntly, pleading for a little extension of time ‘till
he had perfyter resolution,’ shewing that he was not _opiniâtre_, as
had appeared from his ‘yielding to have conference,’ and from his
‘going to the kirk;’ he entreated to be heard for himself before final
condemnation. But the petition was set aside as frivolous, and because
he had failed to fulfil his promise given by solemn bond a month ago to
communicate before a certain day.--_Cal._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AUG. 29.]
The plague broke out in Perth, and continued till the ensuing May,
‘wherein deit young and auld five hundred persons.’--_Chron. Perth._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SEP. 1.]
[Sidenote: 1608.]
It was reported to the Privy Council that a quarrel had arisen between
John Napier of Merchiston, and the sons and daughters of the late
Sir Archibald Napier of Edinbellie, regarding the right to the teind
sheaves of the lands of Merchiston for the crop of the present year.
‘Baith the said parties,’ says the record, ‘_intends to convocate their
kin, and sic as will do for them in arms_, for leading [home-bringing],
and withstanding of leading, of the said teinds; whereupon further
inconvenients are like to fall out.’ To prevent breach of the peace,
William Napier of Wrightshouses, a neutral person, was ordered
to collect the teind sheaves of Merchiston, and account to the
Council.--_P. C. R._ ‘Whilk order,’ says John Napier, ‘is guid eneuch
for me, and little to their contentment;’ that is, to the contentment
of his Edinbellie relatives.[330]
This, it must be owned, is a new light in which to view the inventor of
the logarithms. It is, however, worthy of observation, that a dispute
between other parties on the same grounds is described in precisely
similar terms, and the same arrangement made to preserve the peace.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SEP.]
‘In the beginning of September, the Duke of Wirtemberg, a prince in
Germany, a young man of comely behaviour, accompanied with twenty-four
in train, came to see the country. He was convoyed from place to place
by noblemen, by the king’s direction, and weel enterteened. His train
were all clothed in black.’--_Cal._
The duke was a great friend and ally of the king, who, soon after his
accession, sent Lord Spencer with a splendid ambassage to Stuttgart, to
invest his serene highness with the Order of the Garter.
* * * * *
The records of Privy Council are still full of instances of assaults
made by men of rank and others with deadly weapons upon persons
against whom they bore hatred. It would be wearisome to enumerate even
those which occur throughout a single year. It is to be remembered
there were famous acts of parliament against going armed defensively
or offensively; yet in every case we find the guilty parties set
about their vengeful proceedings in steel bonnets, gauntlets, and
plait-sleeves, and with swords and pistolets.
[Sidenote: 1608.]
As an example--one Gavin Thomson, burgess of Peebles, was held at
hatred by Charles Pringle, another burgess; we do not learn for what
cause. One day in September 1608, as Gavin was walking in sober and
quiet manner along the High Street of the burgh, Charles Pringle,
accompanied by nine or ten persons, all armed with lances and
whingers, set upon and ‘cruelly hurt and wounded the said Gavin upon
the left hand, drave him perforce back, and housit him within the
dwelling-place and lock-fast yetts of Isobel Anderson; and were it not
by the providence of God, that the Person and Minister of Peebles,
accompanied with some others weel-affected persons to the peace of the
said town, and knawing the said Gavin his innocency, come forth to
the redding,[331] they had not failit, as they had begun, with great
jeists, trees, and fore-hammers, to have surprised and strucken up the
yetts and doors of the said dwelling-house, and within the same to have
unmercifully slain and murdered the said Gavin.’
For several subsequent months, Pringle and his associates had lain in
wait at divers times to kill Gavin, so that he had been prevented from
attending kirk or market, or going about the business of his farm.
At length, on the 2d of December, as he was walking peaceably on the
street, they attacked him again, armed as before. ‘Being informit that
he had come furth of his house, they first bostit and menaced him
aff the hie street, and he retiring himself hame again in quietness,
they all followit and pursewit him with drawn swords,’ when one of
the party, Alexander Dalmahoy, ‘by his sword, with ane great stane of
aucht pund wecht in his hand, hurt the said Gavin his thie-bone.’ The
assailants ‘hurt and woundit William Murray of Romanno and divers other
gentlemen redders, and in end fiercely pursewit Gavin and housit him
within the dwelling-house of the close yetts of William Elliot, and
cryit for jeists and fore-hammers, and had not failit to have strucken
up the doors and yetts thereof, and to have slain the said Gavin within
the same, were not timous relief come at hand.’ The active parties in
this wickedness were denounced rebels by the Council.--_P. C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: OCT.]
William Turnbull of Airdrie lived in Edinburgh, having in his family
a daughter, Elizabeth, eleven years of age. He admitted to his
house, and often civilly entertained Robert Napier son of William of
Wrightshouses--a gentleman who has just been under our notice. On the
4th of October, Turnbull complained to the Privy Council that, on the
29th of September, Robert Napier had by craft and violence taken away
his daughter, under cloud of night, and now keeps her in some obscure
place, refusing to render and deliver her up to her father. The Council
caused Robert Napier to be denounced as a rebel for this fact.
[Sidenote: 1608.]
The abduction of women, of which some examples were formerly given,
was still an offence of frequent occurrence. On the subsequent 8th
of December, there is a complaint before the Council from Margaret
Stewart, widow, that as she was walking home from her booth to her
dwelling-house in Edinburgh, between seven and eight o’clock in the
evening of the 5th of the same month, accompanied by her orphan
grandchild, Katherine Weir, fourteen years of age, a young citizen,
named William Geddes, had beset her with six men armed like himself
with swords, gauntlets, steel bonnets, and plait-sleeves, and violently
took the child from her, ‘without pity of her manifold exclamations and
crying.’ Geddes was likewise denounced rebel.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV. 8.]
‘There was an earthquake at nine hours at night, sensible enough at
St Andrews, Cupar, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Dundee, but more sensible at
Dumbarton; for there the people were so affrayed, that they ran to the
kirk, together with their minister, to cry to God, for they looked
presently for destruction. It was thought the extraordinar drouth in
the summer and winter before was the cause of it.’--_Cal._
At Perth, this earthquake shook the east end of the Tolbooth, insomuch
that ‘many stones fell aff it.’--_Chron. Perth._
At Aberdeen, where the shock excited great alarm, the kirk-session met,
and accepting the earthquake as ‘a document that God is angry against
the land, and against this city in particular, for the manifold sins of
the people,’ appointed a solemn fast to be held on the ensuing day, and
‘the covenant to be renewed by the haill people with God, by halding
up of their hands publicly before God in his sanctuary, and promising
by his grace to forbear in time coming from their sins.’ There was
one particular sin which was thought to have had a great concern in
bringing about the earthquake--namely, the salmon-fishing practised on
the Dee on Sunday. Accordingly, the proprietors of the salmon-fishings
were called before the session, and rebuked. ‘Some,’ says the session
record, ‘promist absolutely to forbear, both by himselfs and their
servands in time coming; other promised to forbear, upon the condition
subscryvant; and some plainly refusit anyway to forbear.’[332]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: DEC. 1.]
[Sidenote: 1608.]
‘The Earl of Mar declared to the [Privy] Council that some women were
ta’en in Broughton, as witches, and being put to ane assize, and
convict, albeit they persevered constant in their denial to the end,
yet they were burnt quick [alive], after sic ane cruel manner, that
some of them deit in despair, renuncand and blasphemand, and others,
half burnt, brak out of the fire, and was cast in quick in it again,
while [till] they were burnt to the deid.’[333]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1609.