314 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

II. 'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAIND NAN T AGAINST THE BOOK OP COMMON PRAYER (OTHERWISE LAUD'S LITURGY), THE BOO E PRELATESP CANONSO KTH D AN , , 18TH OCTOBER 1637. BY D. HAY FLEMING, LL.D., F.S.A.ScoT.

This remarkabl importand an e t document would l probabilityal n i , , have crosse e Atlanticdth found an , a permanend t homet i there d ha , not been for the foresight of Mr George P. Johnston and the open-handed patriotism of Dr W. B. Blaikie. Thanks to the Secretary for Scotland, deposites wa Registee t f Decembei th o n di h 7t r e Housrth 1925n o ed ,an there it is safe for all time coming.; Historical students will find the beautiful full-sized facsimile, which Dr Blaikie has generously had made, quite sufficien r workinfo t g purposes e originath t bu ;l itsel s opei f o nt all reasonable inspection in the Register House. The three grievances petitioned against were (1) The Book of Common Prayer, better s Laud'knowa w sno n Liturgye Book f Th Canons,o ) (2 , and (3) the and . To understand how in these the shoe pinched s necessari t i , looo t y ke earl bacth yo kt histor cond yan - stitution of the Reformed . A Confession Johns—Knoxx f si Faitho e th drawy b p u n, Wynram, Spottiswoode, Willock, Douglas Row—wad an , s approve ratified an d y db Parliament on the 17th of August 1560—that is, four months before the meeting of the First General Assembly. The same six Johns drew up the First Book of Discipline, which, in the opinion of Professor Hume Brown, is " the most interesting and, in many respects, the most im- portan f publio t c document e historth n f si Scotland." o y Ordere Th f 1o , Englise useth n di h congregatio t Geneva n f whicao h Knos xwa a , was adopted by the Reformed Church of Scotland, and, as enlarged, became its Book of Common Order. If not partly prepared by Knox, it was certainly sanctioned by him.. Its prayers were optional; and, as David Laing has said, " in no instance do we find Knox himself usin t formgse prayer."f so 2 Neither in the Confession of Faith, nor in the First Book of Discipline, nor in the Book of Common Order, is Prelacy expressly condemned; but truthes i t eyI thaleav . n tharooit o i t n er tm fo Confession f Faitho this passage occurs t : tha e thin"No w t ke thae polecian an td an e ordou ceremonien i r appointie b l aigesn al ca r s ,fo t tymes d placesan , ,

1 History of Scotland, 1902. 74 ,. volp . ii . 2 Laiug's Knox's Works, vol. vi . 283p . . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 16375 18 .31 . for as ceremonies (sic as men have devysit) ar bot temporal!, so may and auch t changeite thab o yt , quhaii thay rather foster superstitioun than that thay edifie the Kirk using the same." It has been argued that this lefn opea t e introduction th doo r fo r f PrelacyI o nbee n d a n Ha . Episcopalian I would have resented this as derogatory, grossly derog- atory, to the office of a , as if he were merely a ceremony or point of policy. The Commissioners of the Church of Scotland, when in London in 1644, wrote of our first Reformers: " They intended and designed from beginnine th e governmength Churce th f assembliey o th b presbyd an s - teries, although they could not attain that perfection at first in the infancy of , but gave place to necessity, which in such cases is universall."J And Bishop Maxwell put it more briefly thus: " The goodly order and government of the Church was shouldred out."2 There was a gradation of church-courts from the first. Of these the kirk-session was the earliest. In a kirk-session was in full swin Octobey gb r 1559—tha monthn te , is t s before Parliament abolished e papath l authorit suppressed yan e massdeacone dth Th . wels a ss a l kirk-sessione th e eldern i th t sa s ; arid s prescribea , Firste th n di Book of Discipline, both deacons and elders were elected annually, a much more democratic arrangement than the present. The first meeting of

e Generath l Assembl Decemben i s ywa r three-and-twentrfo 1560d an , y 3 years thereafte t i usuallr t twicyme a eyear . Thertraco a n f s o ei e moderator in the first six Assemblies, and thus a love of parity, utterly inconsistent with Prelacy s exemplifiedwa , . Whe a nmoderato s wa r chosen in December 1563, it was explained to be " for avoyding confusion in reasoning."4 Neither synods nor presbyteries are mentioned in the First Book of Discipline. But in December 1562 the General Assembly ordered the

Reformation1The Church-Governmentof Scotlandin cleered from some Mistakesand Prejudices, . Principa11 1644 . p , l o Leekne e wh histore ,wReformeth th f o y d Churcf o h Scotland as few have ever known it, could not "discover any just foundation" for the opinion earls thatit n yi , years affairs it , s were "conducte modifiea f i s da d syste Episcopacymf o , instead strice oth f t Presbyterian discipline beed ha , n intende establishee b o dt d " (Lee's Lectures, 1860, vol. i. p. 301). Burdene Th 2 of Issachar,. 164628 . p , "Privie 3Th e Kir ,f ko " privatwhicn i t h me efields e houseelderth d n i ha d , r san so deacons (Laing's Knox, vol. ii. p. 151). 4 Booke of the Universall KirTc, vol. i. p. 38. In March 1573-4 it was claimed "that sen the tymblessed Go e d this countrey wite Evangelle lighth th hf o t e hailth , l Kirk maist godlie Parliamenf o appointit t same Ac th e ed b tan , authorized, thagodlia tw t e Assemblie haile th lf so General Kir f thiko s realme soul evee db zeirk il r , asweil l memberal f o l s therol estateal n i f s as of the ministers: the whilk Assemblies hes bein sen the first ordinance continually keipit in sic sort, tha mose tth t nobl ehieste theth f r o estat joynis ehe t themselve theie sb r awin presence Assembliee inth s membersa bodye an f ,s o concurreand , voteand authorizand an , l thingal n di s their proceiding with their brether" (Ibid., vol. i. p. 292). 316 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

superintendent holo st d their synods twic yearea Aprin ,i Octoberd lan , the minister with an elder or deacon from each congregation attending "consulo t t upo e comoth n n affaires"; Junn i d e an 1561 t 3ordainei d that anyone deeming himself injured by the kirk-session could appeal e superintendent'th o t se Assembly. synodth froo d t an t m,i 2 The germ of the presbytery may be found in the weekly meetings known as " the exercise," which in the First Book of Discipline are characterise s "da mos t necessarin i e Churchthiy d th da sr Go fo ef eo Scotland," and were deemed to be most expedient in every town where there "were schools "and repair of learned men." The ministers of the neighbouring landward churches were to attend, and so were readers, within a circuit of six miles, if they had any gift of interpretation.3 Though primarily intended for Bible study, such gatherings could hardly take place week by week—as Professor Mitchell pointed out—without such cases as came before the kirk-sessions being occasionally discussed Marcn i d d advisehAn an 1572- . e Generadon 3th l Assembly thought t necessari y thae Assembl Acte th copa tth f o sf yo y shoul givee db o nt every exercise, and that matters happening betwixt the meetings of the e 'assemblieth f synodo d san s shoul e "headeb d d noti an dt evera t y exercise 20 dayes befor the Generall Assemblie, that the brethren may be ripely advised with the samine." When the country was regularly

divided into presbyterie 1581n i s , "the 4 exercises previously existinn gi particular towns were merged in and their work devolved on these."6 Our Reformers were greatly hampered by the dearth of ministers. Of forty-twe th oe firs th namee rol tf th o General n o s l Assembly, onlx ysi are entered as ministers. But the high standard of necessary qualifica- t lowereno tion s e Firstn thath do wa s n ti accountBook, f so o d an ; Discipline, besides the three permanent offices of ministers, elders, and deacons o temporartw , y onee recognisedar s , namely, readerd an s superintendents. Readers chosee werb o et n fro"n m me mose "t th ap t who could distinctly read the prayers and the Scriptures; and, if they develope necessare dth y giftgracesd an s , they promotee werb o et o dt the ministry.0 As for the superintendents, the framers of the First Book of Discipline say: " We have thocht it a thing most expedient for this tyme," that twelve or ten men should be selected and each set over a province "to plant and erect churches, to set ordour, and appoint ministeris." In their visitations they were to preach thrice a week at least, to examine " the life, diligence behavioud an , ministeris,e th f ro ordee "th theif ro r churches,

1 BooTce e Tfniversalloth f Kirk, . 29 . volp . . "i . Ibid.,33 , 32 . volpp . i . 3 Laing's Knox, vol. ii. pp. 242-4. ' Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. i. p. 265. '" Mitchell's , . 160p . 6 Laing's Knox, . 195 volpp ,. 196ii . , 199. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 16377 18 .31 . ane manner th de people th f o s . Whe residencn ni thein ei r principal towns, they were likewise to preach and edify the Church. Ten provinces or dioceses were designed,1 but only five superintendents were ever appointed, and occasionally ministers had the same duties temporarily assigned to them. Spottiswoode s Historye Churchhi th n i f , o f Scotland,o when dealing with the First Book of Discipline, calmly wrote : " Because this will fall to be often mentioned, and serveth to the clearing of many questions which were afterwards agitate Churche th n di I ,hav e thought meet, word by ^vord, here to insert the same, that the reader may see what wer e groundth e s laid dowe governmenth t firsnr a e fo t th f o t Church e shal e w bette th o l s , r decere changeth f no s that followed."

Instea f reproducindo t "gi wor word,y db tooe "h k grave 2 liberties with it, so much so that, in Principal Lee's opinion, " his account might almost appear to have been intended for the purpose of misleading negligent inquirers." 3 From his curtailed passages concerning the superintendents, meano n y b s s obvioui t i s that their officintendes wa temporarye b o dt . t difficulno s foreseeo t twa t I 1560n i , , that there woul scarcita e db f yo ministers for a good many years to come, hence the directions for the choosin superintendentf go s after " thre yeiri passed."e sb 156n I 7 there

were about 1080 churches and only 257 ordaine4 d ministers ; in 1574 there were 988 churches and only[ 289 ministers; and in 1596 there were " above

foure hundreth paroch kirks destitute o8 f the ministrie of the Word, by and attour the kirks of Argyle and the Yles."6 Attempts have frequently been mad identifo et office a super yth f o e - intendent as substantially the same as that of a bishop. David Laing put mattee sth r very briefly: " This employmen f superintendento t s swa beyond all question only a temporary expedient. They were elected and admitted in the same manner as ordinary pastors; and while they were, equally witothey han r ministe e Churchth f o r , subjec censurede b o t t , suspended, or deposed by the Assembly, the office itself conferred on them no precedence or superiority over their brethren. . . . Neither could they exercis ecclesiasticay an e l jurisdiction withou e consenth t t of the provincial assemblies."7 Not only so, but they were subject to censure and correction by the ministers and elders of the provinces of which they were the overseers.8 Dr Grub, writing from the Episcopal

Laing's Knox, . 201-8 volpp . .ii . Spottiswoode's History, Spot. Soc. ed., vol. i. p. 331. Lee's Lectures, principae . 151p volTh . i . l alteration d omissionan s n Spottiswoode'i s s versio pointee Laing'nn ar i t dou s Knox, 588. volpp , . 589ii . . Laing's Knox, . 206 volpp , . 208ii . . 6 Wodrow Miscellany, . 326p . BooTce Universalle oth f Kirk, vol. iii 876. .p . ' Wodrow Miscellany, 322. p . Laing's Knox, . 207 volp . .ii . 8 31 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY, 192610 TH F .Y O S MA ,

poin viewf o t , says that, althoug scheme hth beed eha n fully carriet dou and regarded by its promoters as more than a temporary arrangement, " it bore only a faint external resemblance to the hierarchy." l e autumth n I f 156no 6 Knox receive da lette r from Beza expressing a desir obtaio et n fro e Churcmth f Scotlano h s approbatiodit e th f no Second Helvetic Confession then recently published ministere Th e . th f so neighbourhood promptly assembled at St Andrews, read that Confession, considere t dchaptei chaptery rb , diligently examined everything, leaving nothing unexplored e replth o Beza t yn I . , l signepresenal y d b d an t bearin e universitgth y seal, they say impossibls i : "t I 'expreso et e th s exceeding delight we derived from that work, when we clearly perceived that in your little book was most faithfully, holily, piously, and indeed divinely explained, and that briefly, whatever we have been constantly teaching these eight years, and still by the grace of God continue to e areW ,teach therefore. . . . , altogether compelledr ou s wel a ,y b l conscience s froa s msensa f dutyeo undertako t , s patronageeit t no d an , onl expreso yt approvalr sou t alsexceedinr ,bu o ou g commendation." The sincerity of this hearty approbation was emphasised by their taking exception "o what s writtei e 24tt th hn i nchaptee th f o r aforesaid Confession concerning the ' festivals of our Lord's nativity, circumcision, passion, resurrection, ascension d sendinan , e Holth g y Ghost upon His disciples,'" which festivals " obtain no place among us; for we. dare not religiously celebrate any other feast-day than what the divine oracles have prescribed. Everything else, as we have said, we teach, approve, and most willingly embrace."2 e eighteentNowth n i , h chapte f thao r t Confession, s clearli t i y laid down that all ministers are equal in power and commission, and that bishop d presbyteran s s were originall e samyth office.n ei 3 This cuts off Prelac e verth yt ya roots . Among those who signed this letter were John Douglas, Principal of St Mary's College, John Rutherford, Principal of St Salvator's College, John Duncanson, Principa t Leonard'S f o l s College, Johns hi Kno d xan colleague , three of the superintendents, viz. Wynram, Erskine of Dund Spottiswoodean , , four professors d othean , r twenty-nine

ministers including John Row of Perth, Robert Hamilton of St Andrews, Grub'1 s Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 99. Superintendents are mentioned in Article xxxiie Confessionth f o . f Faitho enacte e firsth t y dNationab l Synoe Reformeth f do d Churches of France in 1559 (Quick's Synodicon, vol. i. p. xiii). The National Synod, held at Gap in 1603, explained that the word superintendent in that article "is not to be understood of any superiority of one pastor above another, but only in general of such as have office and charge in the Church" (Ibid., vol. i. p. 227); and that explanation was confirmed by the National Synod held at Rochell in 1607 (Ibid., vol. i. p. 266). 2 Laing's Knox, . 544-8 pp vol . .vi . 3 SchafFs History of the Creeds of Christendom, vol. i. p. 412 ; vol. iii. p.- 283. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1687. 319 David Fergusso f Dunfermlineno , William Christiso f Dundeeo n , Adam Heriot of Aberdeen, of Leith, John Duncanson of Stirling, Andrew Simpso f Dunbaro n d Johan , n Bran f Holyroodo d - house.1 When the General Assembly met in December it approved Font's translation of that Confession, and ordered it to be printed; but wit margie hnota th n ei n wher five eth e festival days were mentioned.

Although Parliamen o difficultn d n ha formalli ty y ratifyine th g 2 Confession of Faith in 1560, it did not ratify the First Book of Discipline. The nobles perused it many days. Some approved; others objected for various reasons. Sensualists dreaded the proposals for the suppression of vice. Those who had acquired church lands or revenues were loath disgorgeo t e schemthes th ,a yd wouleha beeo d dno t hav accepted eha d for endowin universitiee gth s fro temporalite mth e Churchth f yd o ,an sustaining the ministers, the schools, and the poor from the teinds. Those who signified their approva theiy lb r signaturecondition o o s d nsdi that the bishops, , , and other beneficed men, who had already joined the Protestants, should enjoy the revenues of their benefices for life, they sustaining the ministers and ministry.3 e O15t f th nFebruaro h y 1561-2 e Privth , y Council resolved that aule "th d possessouris e beneficeth l al f s"o shoul allowee db retaio dt n two-thirds of the revenues of their respective benefices, and that the other third shoul e Queen' th usee db r dfo s expenser sustaininfo d an se gth preacher readers.d san Knox denounced this scheme— partia tw e s se "I

freely given t4 o the devill, and the thrid maun be devided betwix God and the devill: weill, bear witnes to me, that this day I say it, or [i.e. ere] it be long the devill shall have three partis of the thrid; and judge you then, what Goddis portioun shal be."5 Knox's prophec r forecaso y s fulfilled e wa ministert Th . s wero s e wretchedly paid that some of them gave up their work. Speaking for himself and other ministers in 1562, David Fergusson of Dunfermline said: "The greatest nomber of us have lived in great penurie, without all stipend some tuelf moneth, some eight, and some half-a-year, having nothin meanetime th n gi susteano et e ourselve familier ou t thad sbu an t which freindes hav ed tha givean t, whicus n e havw h e borrowef o d cheritable persones until God send it us to repay them."6 On the 17th of September 1566, the Privy Council owned that, by a great number of "schiftis and inventionis," her Majesty's liberality had been "sa planelie abusi unsaciabile b t gredid an l e askeris e " thridith f o "f o stha w no t

1 Laing's Knox, 548-50. pp vol . .vi . ' Booke Universalle oth f Kirk,. 90 . volp . i . Laing's Knox, vol. ii. pp. 128-30, 218, 222, 257, 258. .

3 4 Register Privye th f o Council, . 199 volpp ,. i .201 , 202. 5 Laing's Knox, vol. ii. p. 310. 6 Fergusson's Tracts, Ban. Club, p. 11. 0 32 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH .F Y O S MA , benefices, commoun kirkis, freris landis, and rentis, lytill or nathing is left undisponit, owther to the sustentatioun of hir Hienes hous and uther neidful sustentatioue th o t l t effarise ministeris,yi th r f nno o , thered "an - fore, with consen r councilhe f formalle o t sh , y revoke annulled dan l dal these gifts.1 Mr Patrick MacClane, who had royal letters for provision to be made e abbacth e bishoprif f o th Icolmkill o y e Isle f d th o an sf m o c hi , o t realising his physical inability to discharge the duties, transferred his right Joho st n Carswell (the Superintenden e Isles)f Argylo tth n d o , ean condition thayearl a gave h tm ehi y pension Queene Th . , understanding that Carswell was hereby obliged " to paye the stipendis of the ministeris plantit within the boundis foirsaidis, and to releif the Quenis Majestie and hir comptrollare thairof," assigned and disponed to him for life all e rentsth , profits, teinds e sai, th etcd f bishoprio . abbacyd can comd an , - manded her comptroller to desist from craving the thirds and from otherwise troubling Carswell "in brouking thairof. thin I "s document, whic s datei h d 12th January 1564-5, Carswel t designateno s i l d super- intendent t simpl,bu y " Maister Johnne Carswell, seved "an n times merely " Maister Johnne."2 This arrangement seems reasonabl , accordineas Keitho gt , MacClane's predecessor, John Campbell, had dilapidated most of the benefice of the bishopric in favour of his relations, and had conveyed some heritable jurisdictions to his own family of Calder.3 Under the Queen's signature of 12th January 1564-5, Carswell should have had ample power to deal with the revenues of the bishopric and abbacy; but he may have feared tha righs imperilleds thi twa t reduced Privno e f th ,i y b , Council's Ac f 17to t h September 156624tn O h. March 1566-7 e Queeth , n made, constituted, and created him and of Icolmkill, with power to. deal with the lands, benefices, teinds, fruits, rentis, etc., in all respects, causes, and conditions as if he had been provided in the Cour f Romeo t f courseO . , fro e ecclesiasticamth l poin f viewo t e sh , could not make' him either a bishop or an abbot, and consequently he was as much or as little of the one as of the other.4 In this creation there is no reference to Patrick MacClane; and Carswell's right for life is declared to date from all the years and terms that have elapsed since his first intromission, notwithstandin actsy gan , statutes revocatior o , o nt the contrary. The comptroller was not to demand the thirds from him, and he was to use them for sustaining the ministers at their proper

1 Register of the Privy Council, vol. i. p. 478. ' MS. Registrum Secreti Sigilli, vol. xxxii. fol. 126. Keith's Catalogue, 1824 ed.,.p. 307.

extracte Se •3 s quoted below from Erskin Dun'f eo s Regenlettee th o t r t Mar. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 321

churches.1 In Bishop Keith's opinion, " all this provision was, no doubt, made wit hviea w tha mighe th t dilapidat temporalite eth famile th o yt y of Argyle." date f thieTh o 2 s creatio leny ndma some suppor Keith'o t s opinion, as it was exactly six weeks after Darnley's murder, and seven and a half before the Queen's marriage to Bothwell. Carswell does not appear to have been a regular attender at the General Assemblies presens wa e Juln h i t t yreproves , bu 156 "d wa 9an d for acceptin e bishopricgth e Isleth sf ko withou t makin e Assemblgth y forseen; and for riding at and assisting of the Parliament holden by the Queen after the murther of the King."8 Decemben I r 1567—tha monthx si , is t s after Queen Mar sens s ywa a t a prisoner to Loch Leven—Parliament, considering that " the ministeris hes bene lang defraudit of thair stipendis, sua that thay ar becumin in greit poverti necessitie,d an e " ordained that haile "th l thriddie th f o s haill benefice thif so s realme instantliel tyme saiw al no ln cumi o st d ,an , first be payit to the ministeris of the Evangell of Jesus Christ, and thair successouris."4 This was not given effect to; and as benefices became vacant, by the death or forfeiture of their Roman Catholic holders, they were frequentl f rewaro yy givefavour dwa o y nb utterlo t r y unqualified men Marcn I . h 1570-1 Generae th , l Assembly sent commissionere th o t s Regent and Privy Council to plead "that no disposition of any benefice or presentation be made of any person, without the admission and collation of the Kirk following upon just presentations."5 aftes Eare wa th rf Morto t lo I n returned fro missios mhi Englando nt , in April 1571, that he was, on account of his expenses in the public service, "rewarded with the bishoprick of Sanct Andrewes now vacant by the death of Johne Hammiltoun."6 "Reserving to himself the profite," Morton transferred the title to John Douglas, of St Andrews University and Provost of St Mary's College.7 Following Richard Bannatyne, Calderwood gives the 18th August as the date of Douglas's . RegistrumMS 1 Secreti Sigilli, e 15t th vol hn .DecembeO xxxvi . 69 , . ff68 r. 1564 e Queenth , , wit e advicThree hth th f eeo Estates ordained ,ha r futurd he tha l eal t confirmation f infefto s - ments of kirk-lands should be as lawful and of as great strength and avail " as gif the samin had bene obtenit and purchest fra the Pape or sate of Rome" (Acts of Parliament, vol. ii. p. 545). The infant James exercised the same right in 1570 (Ibid,., vol. iii. p. 418). 2 Keith's Catalogue, . 308p . 5 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. i. p. 144. As Bishop of Sodor (or the Isles) he sat in the Parliamen 14te th ht n whicAprio t hlme 1567 (Acts of Parliament, . 545-7) volpp . ii .. 4 Acts of Parliament, vol. . iii24 . .p B Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. i. pp. 185-8. ' Calderwood's History, vol . Randolph. iii67 . .p Englise th , h Ambassador saids havo t wa , e use influencs dhi Morton'n eo s behalf (Sir James Melville's Memoirs, Mait. Club . 236pp ,, 240)n I . October 1570 "the Eri Glencarnef eo , bein thin gi s toun, wal t assisdno thio t t s Parliamentt bo , depairtit of Edinburgh, becaus my Lord Regent wald nocht give to him the archbishoprick of Glasgow " (Diurnal of Occurrents, p. 191). 7 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. p. 156. • • ' VOL. LX. 21 322 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10. 1926.

presentation.1 But the precept in his favour is dated, at Leith, 6th August 1571. By it he was to have, for life, the archbishopric, both temporality spiritualityd an , subjec a pensio o t t Jameo nt s Halyburton, Provosf o t Dundee, or his cousins George or Andrew Halyburtons. The see was declare vacane b forfeiture e deato dt th th s wel a tf y Johy ho b b l s na e [Hamilton], the last archbishop, or by the forfeiture and death of Gavin [Hamilton], Commendato f Kilwimiingo r s pretendehi , d successor.n I 2 September, Douglas sat in the Parliament at Stirling as Archbishop of t Andrews.S 3 Wynram e Superintendenth , f Fifeo t , forbade him, under pai f excommunicationno e Kirkth f eo tile soule ,h l an voi "o e t s db a t admitted be the Kirke:" and "Mortoun commandit him to voit (as Bischope of Sanct Androis) undir the paine of treasone."4 Writing fro t AndrewsmS Augusn i , te Genera 1571th o t , l Assembly t Stirlinga , Knox thus "warne s membersdit : " Unfaithful traitourd an l s to the flock sail" ye be before the Lord Jesus, if that, with your consent, directli indirectlier eo suffee y , r thruse unworthib o intt n i e t n oth eme ministrie of the Kirk, under quhat pretence that ever it be. Remember the Judge befor quhom ye must make account, and resist that tyrrannie as ye wald avoyd hell's fyre. This battell, I grant, will be hard; bot in the second it will be harder; that is, that, with the lyke uprightnes and strent Godn hi gainstane y , mercilesse dth e devourer e patrimonith f so e of the Kirk."5 That Assembly sent commissioners to plead the cause before Parliament.0 They did so on the 31st August. " But their petitions were rejected ministere Th . s were called proud knaves d receavean , d manie injurious words from the lords, speciallie from Morton, who ruled all. He said he sould lay their pride, and putt order to them."7 While that Parliament was in session, the Regent Lennox was assassinated. To his successor, the Regent Mar, Brskine of Dun, Superintenden f Anguso t , e 10twrotth hn o eNovember greateA " : r offence or contempt of God and His Kirk can no prince doe than to sett Calderwood's History, vol. iii. p. 135 ; Bannatyne's Meinoriales, p. 178.

21 MS. Registrum Secreti Sigilli, vol. xxxix. fol. 117. Provost Halyburton's pension was £1000 yeara , hal whicf o f fros abbace hmwa th othee Sconef yth o d r hal,an f fro bishoprie mth Moraf co y when it should "vaik" by the death of Patrick Hepburn; but, on 5th September 1570, the latter half was made over to George and Andrew Halyburtons and was to be uplifted from the arch- bishopric of St Andrews (Ibid., vol. xxxix. fol. 7). In two writs of 9th February 1571-2, reference s madi thio e t e contracs th pension o appointmend t an td an , t between Georg Andred an e w Halyburtons and John Douglas (Ibid., vol. xl. ff. 94, 119). See Acts of Parliament, vol. iii. . 417pp , 418; Sookee Universal!th f o Kirk, . 233volp . .i . John Hamilto beed nha n hanget da Stir ing on 7th April 1571, and Gavin had been slain in a skirmish on the 16th of the follow- ing1 June. ' Acts of Parliament, vol. . 65 iii. p . * Bannatyne's Memoriales, . 183p . Laing's Knox, . 605 p vol . ; vi . Calderwood's History, vol. iii . 134p . .

61 Booke e Universall oth f Kirk, . 200 volpp ,. i .201 . 7 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. pp. 137, 138. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 323 up by his authoritie men in spirituall offices, as to creat bishops and pastors of the Kirk. . . . They maybe called bishops but are not bishops . . . for they enter not by the doore, but by another way, and therefore are not pastors, sayeth Christ, but theeves and robbers. I cannot but, lament from veriy em e heart that great misorder use Stirlinn di e th t ea last Parliament creatinn ,i g bishops, placing them givind an , g them vote Parliamenn i s bishopsa t despit n i ,e Kir higd th kf an he o contempf o t God. .. hearI . e some were offended wit commissionere hth Kire th kf so at that time, but without caus; for they passed not the bounds of their commission ; and the whole Kirk will affirme their proceedings, and insist farther in that mater." After that Parliament rose, a number of barons

othed an r zealous Protestantsl remonstrated wit Regene hth Priv d an t y Council poorr : "Ou e minister . wit . . sh dolorous heart theie sse r wives, childrein, and familie sterve for hunger, and that becaus your Grace and greedie courteours violentlie reave and unjustlie consume that which just law and good order hath appointed for their sustentatioun; to witt, thride th f beneficesso . Erle. lord. d . san s become bishop abbotsd san ; gentlemen, courteours, babes, and persons unable to guide themselves are suchpromoteo t u eyo beneficey db requirs sa e learned preachers.' When such enormitei fosterede sar saye w , , wha Kira faca t f eo k sailooke lw e lone b gt i withie foer r n this realm "e? 2 A scheme was now introduced, professedly to put the sustentation e ministeroth f a secur n o s eobviato t basi d an se certain objectiono t s recent procedure. A Convention of the Church, which met at Leith on 12th January 1571-2, after resolving that it should have the strength, force, and effect of a General Assembly, gave full power, on the 16th, to seven commissioners, or any four of them, to compear before the Regent s mana d y an Lord f Privo s y Counci deemee h s a l d meet confeo t , d an r conclud certain eo n articles reporo Generae t th d o t an , l Assembly next March.3 On the same 16th January, the Regent nominated Morton seved an n others fouy f whoan ,o r m might meet wit e Churchth h com- missioners to advise, treat, and conclude with them, " anent all matters tending to the ordering and establishing the policy of the Kirk, the sustentatio e ministersth f no d suppor e King'an ,th f o ts Majestd an y common affairee realmeth f o so continut , n suci e h orde s shala r e b l agreed upon while [i.e. until s Highness']hi perfect age whilr o , same eth e be altere abolished d an Thre e th e deb Estate Parliament."n si 4 The elaborate "article d formes,an s " doubtless drafted beforehand, 1 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. pp. 158-61; Bannatyne's Memoriales, pp. 200-2; Wodrow's Lives Reformers,e oth f Mait. Club . 38-40, volpp . i .. Calderwood's History, vol. . 145ill.pp , 146; Bannatyne's Memoriales, . 181pp , 182.

2 3 Booke e Universalloth f Kirk, . 204 volpp ,. i .205 , 208. 4 Ibid., . 207volp . .i . 324 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

which they agreed upon, were approved by the Regent in the King's name on 1st February. They provide " for support of the scoles and incres of letters," for the support of the poor " in a part," for the names and titles of archbishops and bishops being retained, for the abolition of pluralities, for the exclusion of unqualified persons from benefices, for the sustenance of the ministry, for the deprivation of all claiming to be ministers of the Word, or possessing spiritual livings, t subscribno wh o od e Confessioneth f Faith.o They also provide that no one be admitted to the ministry under twenty-three years of age; that those found worthy and qualified to be ministers and preachers be planted throughout the whole realm; and that no one should leave that vocation or his appointed place above forty days in a year without a lawful impediment and permission. They further provide for the nomination of bishops and archbishops, who shall not be under thirty years of age, and, as far as may be, shall possess the qualities specified by Paul in his epistles to Timothy and Titus, and " sail exerce na farther jurisdictioun in spirituall functioun nor the superintendentis hes and presently exerces quhil e sam th lagreie eb t upoun. registeA o t " s wa r b el signatureal kep f o t s and other grant f spirituao s l promotionr o , matters concerning the same; " and na letters to pas [the seals] with blankes." The commissioners for the Kirk agreed to certain sums from the thirds being assigned for the support of the King and common affairs of the realm, etc.1 According to Calderwood, the lords who met the Church commissioners at Leith " were hunting for fatt kirk-livings." And Morton, who wished

to curtail the powers of the General Assembly,2 3 did not wait until the commissioners gave in their report to it, but at once took steps, by acting on these " article formes,d san mako "t pecuniars ehi t S f o ye interesse e th n i t Andrews technically secure. He arrived in St Andrews on 28th January; and on 3rd February an edict, dated at Leith 24th January, was posted Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. i. pp. 209-36. Erskine of Dun, in his letter to the Regent

Mar said 1 dha ,: " I understan bishoda superintendenr pofficeo e wherd on an ont ;e eeth bu e b o t is the other is " (Calderwood's History, vol. iii. p. 160); and so, from his point of view, it was practi- cally unnecessar stipulato yt e tha bishope tth s should hav moro en e jurisdictio spirituan ni l func- tions tha superintendente nth s had. stipulatioe Ther th nees r ewa dfo n regarding letters with . RegistrumMS blankse th n I .Secreti Sigilli, vol. 'xxxix. ther, folprecepa 66 .s ei lettea f o t r of donation and provision of the archbishopric of Glasgow, as well temporality as spirituality, in favour of [blank] dated 26th January 1570-1. The bishoprics of Moray and Dunkeld were granted by Henr Mard y an persono yt s unname lettern di s undated (Ibid., vol. xxxv. ff. 85-7) alsd an o, the priory of Whlthorn (Ibid., vol. xxxiii. fol. 107). The order signed by Mary and Henry, com- mandin Keepee Prive gth th f yo r Sea seao Whithort e l th l n grant, althoug person'e hth s name noche "b t expremit samie thairiutillth t nzi daitit,r no , s bee"ha n pasted int Registere oth d an , is dated October 1565. 2 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. p. 170. James Melville's Autobiography d Diary,an Wodrow Society . 61p , ; Calderwood's History^ vol3. iii. 306.pp , 393, 394 . Bannatyne'R ; a Memoriales, . 206pp , 207, 323. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT. 18, 1637. 325

on the church-door and on the ahbey-yett, summoning certain ministers, appointed " to represent the chapter in the Reformed Kirke," to be presen Februaryh 6t n o t , chus"o t uthee ean r archbischop pastored ean ; vacane seae naturallw th th no t e db deathe lasth t f archbischope.o 1 " On the 6th John Douglas " gave specimen doctrine ... in the oppin pulpet," Morton bein Patrich 8t g e presentkth n ConstantinO . e (alias Adamson) preached thereafted ,an e beed rth ha thosn n i o cite t ewh dme abbey, and after " meikle ressoning," Douglas was elected, although many of " the godly ministeris wer against it." Morton was again presene 10tth hn "wheo t s then Knoxwa n o livint AndrewsS wh , n gi , preached, but " refuised to inaugurat the said bischope."2 Wynram, however, on that day admitted him, and in doing so followed the "Forme and Ordour of the Electioun of the Superintendents."3 Douglas read his answers to the questions, and one of the bailies responded for the people. Robert Stewart ( and Commendator of St Andrews Priory), Spottiswoode (Superintendent of Lothian), and David Lyndsay (minister of Leith), " laid thair handis [on] embracedd an " Douglas s admissiontoken i ,hi f no . " Being askedf gi , any simoniacall pactione was made or yit to be made with ony? Answered, that none was nor suld be made. Being requyred, gif he sould be obedien e Kirketh thad o soule t tan , h t d usurp poweo en r ovee th r same? Answered, that he wald take no moir power nor the Counsall and Generall Assemblie of the Kirke sould prescryve." Morton left the city next day.4 In this way, what Bishop Keith called " a new kind of Episcopacy,"5 Williad an m Scot (born 1558) calle "da gallimaufrey, obtrudes " °wa d upon

edice fore thas th f 1mTh wa tt o provide Leite th hn di Articles (BooTce Universall e oth f Kirk, vol. i. p. 218). In one of the writs under the signet, dated at Leith on 9th February, the see is said to be vacant "per mortem naturalem ultimi archiepiscopi ejusdem " (MS. Registrum Secreti Sigilli, vol . folxl . . 94). mila This d swa descriptio hangingf no ! . Bannatyne'R 2 s Memoriales, . 222pp , 223. This For Orded Laing'mn an i s ri s Knox, . 144-50 volpp . ii . . 3 K. Bannatyne's Memoriales, pp. 223, 224. In one of the two writs under the signet, dated 1 t Leita Februaryh h9t , instruction givee sar n that Douglaconsecratee b y Bishoe ma s th y df b p o Caithness, and the Superintendents of Angus, Fife, and Lothian, or other lawful bishops or superintendents within the kingdom, or any two of them (MS. Registrum Secreti Sigilli, vol. xl. fol. 94); but, in the other writ, it is any three of them (Ibid., vol. xl. fol. 119). Robert Stewart, brothe Regene th f ro t Lennox, receive administratioe dth e Churcth f no f Caithnes ho s froe mth Pope in January 1541-2, was elect and confirmed by 1544, does not appear to have ever received the priesthood, joined the Reformers, "and, though never consecrated, retained the title of Bishop of Caithness till his death in 1586" (Dowden's Bishops of Scotland, pp. 249, 250). In the First Book f Discipline,o "the impositiou handisf no judges "wa d unnecessary (Laing's Knox, vol. ii. p. 193). Ritual was disdained : "It is neathir the clipping of thair crownes, the crossing [?greasing] of thair flngaris, nor the blowing of the dum doggis, called the bischopis, neathir yit the laying on of thair handis, that maketh thame treu ministeris of Christ Jesus" (Ibid., p. 255). 5 Keith's Catalogue, 1824, p. 261. " Scot's Apologetical Narration, p. 24. 326 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

the Reformed Church of Scotland. Richard Bannatyne, Knox's devoted servitor, testifies that the inauguration of John Douglas was " altogether against the mynd of Mr Knox, as he at that tyme oppinly spake in pulpet, he gritlie invyed [i.e. inveighed] against sic ordour and doingis as then s uset.wa " John Rutherfurd, Provos t Salvator'S f o t s College, alleged that Knox opposed the election " becaus he gat not the bischoprike himself." Next Sabbath Knox declared e pulpitth n d i ,, ha tha e h t refused a greater bishopric which he might have had with the favour of greater men; and that he opposed this election "for discharge of his conscience; and that the Kirke of Scotland suld not be subject to that ordore which thes usednwa , considderin e Lordigth f Scotlano s d dha subscryvit d alsan o, confirme Parliamentn i d e ordoreth , alreadid an e long agoe appointed in the Buike of Discipline."1 There may be differences of opinion as to what is implied in the word "ordour" or "ordore" in the above quotation, whether it refers to the orde r officea bishop(o r f o ) r merele o orde, th r manner (o o rt y f o ) Douglas's appointment. James Melville, the nstudena t AndrewsS t a t , says: " I hard Mr Knox speak against it, bot sparinglie because he lovit the man; and with regrat, saying,' Alas! for pitie to lay upone an auld, weak man's back that quhilk twenti e besth tf eo gift s culd nocht bear. It will wrak him and disgrace him!'" William Scot of Cupar (who may

be identified as one of James Melville'2 s fellow-students)3 affirmed that Knox n ope"i , n audienc f manyo e . denounce . . , d 'anathemae th o t ' giver, and ' anathema' to the receiver."4 As already mentioned, many of the nobles and barons had subscribed the First Book of Discipline in January 1560-1. And in December 1567 Parliament had approved of n e articleffeca th o tt e tha l presentationsal t , since August 1560o t , benefices having the charge of souls, otherwise than is appointed by " the ordoure of the Buke of Discipline," should " vaik," so that " the Kirk may be deliverit frome unproffitable pastouris."5 now became a zealous preacher against bishops. James Melville heard him in a sermon, a week after the inauguration of Douglas, distinguish three kinds of bishops. "' My lord bischope,' said he, ' was in the Papistrie: my lord's bischope is now, when my lord getts the benefice, and the bischope serves for na thing bot to mak his tytle sure: and the Lord's bischope is the trew minister of the Gospel!.'"6

1 Bannatyne's Memoriales, pp. 256, 257. Six months after the death of Edward the Sixth, Knox explained that he had refused the high promotions offered to him, because of his " foresight of trouble to come " (Laing's Knox, vol. iii. p. 122). a Melville's Diary,. 31 . p 3 Early Records of St Andrews University, Scot. Hist. Soc., p. 279. 4 Scot's Apologetical Narration, . 25 . p * Acts of Parliament, vol. . iii37 . .p 6 Melville's Diary, p. 32. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 327

A calf's skin stuffed with straw, place induco do t t besidr w ehe co ea give milk, was known as a " tulchan," and so the new bishops were con- temptuously and appropriately called " Tulchans."J If Bishop Keith was right in his opinion concerning the motive behind Carswell's appointment as Bishop of the Isles, then that superintendent was really the first of the Tulchan line. On 30th March, Douglas archbishopas , , too oatkthe h prescribethe din Articles of Leith. The pope is not mentioned, but is included in " all forayne jurisdictionis, poweris, superioritei authoriteisd an s " emphati- cally renounced e archbishoprith d an s possession, it d can avowedle sar y held, " under God s Majestie, onlihi f eo d Crou an , n Royal f this o l hi s realme."2 The General Assembly March 6t ,n whicho (1571-2t t Andrewshme S n )i , had appointed a committee to convene in Knox's house to consider the Leith Article e o reporAssembly.t th d o t tan s reporo N 3 recordeds i t . Perhap e conferenc th st held f thino O s . Marcwa e h Assembly James Melville says: " Thair amangs uther thiiigis was motioned the making of bischopes, to the quhilk Mr Knox opponit himselff directlie and zealuslie."4 It allowed Douglas to retain the provostship of the New College till next Assembly. In connection with this Richard Bannatyne heading—"Johne th s ha e Knoxis protestatioune against this.proceiding, especiallie against the electione of this bischope." Unfortunately, the protestation has not been copied into the MS.6 The Assembly, in August 1572, appointed a committee to " oversee and consider " the Leith Articles and to report " what they find therein either to be retained or altered."6 Objection was taken to the names—archbishop, , archdean, chancellor chapterd ,an appearins a , g soun"o t Papistrie.o dt whole Th "e Assembly, including those who had been commissioners at Leith, protested that by such names they did not intend to consent to any kind of Papistry or superstition and wished the names changed to inoffensive ones. They also unanimously protested tha Articlee th t s should onl receivee yb d s "a ane interim untill farder and more perfyte ordour be obtainit at the King'hande th f so s Majestie's Regen nobilitied an quhilte th r kfo ; they will prease as occasion sail serve."7 To this Assembly Knox sent a short letter in which he says : " I have communicated my mind with thir two dear brethren [John Wynrarn and Robert Pont], Hear them and doe as ye will answer before God." These

1 Melville's Diary, . 31 . p 2 Register of Privy Council, . 129 volpp , . 130ii . . Books Universalle oth f Kirk, 238. vol p ' Melville'. .i . s Diary,. 31 . p

. Bannatyne'R 3 5 s Memoriales, . 228p . 6 Booke e Universall oth f Kirk, vol . 244p . .i . 7 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. i. p. 246. 328. PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926-

words appea implo t r y that Knox expected Wynra Pond m an stato t t e or explain his opinion orally; but they were also the bearers of a paper articlen ofte . s whic e usuallhar y understoo havo dt e been sen him.y b t

It has been held that, in these articles, he approve1 d of the restoration of the bishops as proposed by the Leith Convention. On the other hand, Dr M'Crie, the ablest and most painstaking of his biographers, maintained that " all that can be fairly deduced from these articles is, that he desired e conditionth limitationd an s s agreed upo thay b n t Conventioe b o t n strictly observed in the election of bishops, in opposition to the granting of bishoprics to laymen, and to the simoniacal pactions which the ministers made,wit e noblehth receivinn o s g presentations."2 n preachinI g befor e Regenth ed nobilit an t t Leithya Januarn i , y e Conventio 1571-2e th tim th f o et a , r Assemblyo n , David Fergusson complained that that which ought to maintain the ministers and the poobeins rwa g " gevi prophano nt e men, flattereri courtn si , ruffianed an s hyrelingis," whil pooe eth r were oppressed with hunger kirke th , s decay- schoole th d ingsan , utterly neglected. Juln i d y 1572lettea An 3 n i ,o t r r JohSi n Wishar f Pittarrowo t , Knox condemns bot e Queen'hth s party latte e King'se th says e th f h rd O .:an "f the I havn kire yca eth k lands to be annexed to their houses, they appeare to tak no more care of the instructiou e feedin e ignorante flockth th th f f f f o Jesuo o ne o g d san , Christ tha e Papists."n th e circumstance eved th di rn I 4 s hardli t i s y surprising that he should manifest anxiety that the conditions and limitations of the Leith scheme should be rigidly observed, so that as mucorae Th l hmessage . gooit s possiblf a do f o t , ou e t mighgo e b t which Wynram and Pont were the bearers, may have been an expres- sion of his dislike of the scheme. Principan I l Lee's opinion— obviouss i t "I , indeed, tha Churce tth d hha this constitution forced upo s acquiesencit nd itan ; e cannot fairle b y construed into a voluntary acceptance of the scheme, which the Govern- ment had determined to impose. The new bishops had little power and little honour among their brethren."5 It does not follow that Knox was enamoured of Episcopacy becau'se bese th fiv tf beelifd es yearo ehi ha n f sspeno Englann ti d under bishops, t attemp slightese no th d di n i tfo e h rt degre introduco et e them inte oth Reformed Church of Scotland when its foundations were being laid in

1 Booke Universalle oth f Kirk, . 247-9 volpp . i .. 2 M'Crie's Lifef Knox,o e article th 185 f o 5 se ed. . 262desirep On , . s "that all bishopricks vacand may be presented, and qualified persons nominat thereunto, within a year after the vaiking thereof, according to the order taken in Leith." By that order, be it remembered, bishops had no further jurisdiction in spiritual matters than the superintendents. " Fergusson's Tracts, . 72 . p * Laing's Knox, . 617 p vol . . vi . 6 Lee's Lectures,. 7 . p vol . ii . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 329

1560. That five years' service, despit s antipathhi e e Englisth o t y h Liturgy, mighe 1h t have justifie groune th n do d that althoug Churce hth h of England was not reformed up to his standard, it was tending to reformation. s latehi rd experiencAn 2 n Genevei doubo n a t influenced him.3 The Conventio Estatesf no March 5t n h,o 1574-5, appointe dcommittea e of sixteen (laymen and clergymen) to " confer, ressoun and put in forme ecclesiasticale th l polici ordourd governine ean th f Kirke o th thas f ga ,o y sail find maist aggreabill to the trewth of Goddis Word and maist con- venient for the estate and people of this realme." 4 The General Assembly, o daytw whics t laterme h , namef o d e brethreno seveth tw f o ny an , whom the Regent might accept to concur and reason with his committee. Andrew Melvillereturned ha o dwh , fro e Continenmth e precedinth n i t g seven.e th thif f O o s5e Assemblon July s ,wa y " James [Boyd] Bischof po Glasgow" was moderator. No other bishop had that honour conferred upo untim nhi l 1608. At the Assembly, in August 1575, Boyd was exhorted to be diligent in preaching—a duty which he had neglected. thereupon pro- tested tha triae bishotth s la p shoul t prejudgdno e reasonth e s whice hh and others had for opposing the office and name of bishop.6 At a later session of this Assembly, a committee of six, including , was appointed to reason and confer upon the question—Whether the bishops, as they now are in the Kirk of Scotland, have their functions fro Wore e chaptermth th f God do f i r creatinr ,o s fo g them oughe b o t tolerated in this Reformed Kirk.7 This committee, renewed from time to time, produced the Second Book of Discipline which was very largely due to the zeal and pains of Andrew Melville, who acquired the title of— " the Flinger out of bischopes."8 They were flung out in July 1580, when "the haill Assemblie of the Kirk in ane voyce" found and declared "the office of a bischop, as it is now usit and commounly takin within this realme," to be " unlaufull in the selfe, as haveand neither fundament, ground nor warrant within the ordained an " ; d WorGo d f personc "do tha si l tal bruikss sa sair o , l bruik 1 Laing's Knox,. 12 . volp . vi . For this distinction, see Ibid., vol. ii. pp. 189, 255.

2 When Knox was one of the ministers of the English congregation at Geneva, Miles Coverdales , Bisho foue kirk-sessioe th f Exeterth pr o f n eldero i e t sa on ,s s electena Decemben di r 1558 (Livre des Anglois, p. 50). After John Douglas had sat in Parliament as archbishop, he was re-electe kirk-sessioe elden da th n i r n (Register t AndrewsoS f Kirk-Session, vol. 350)p . .i . ' Acts of Parliament, vol. . iii89 . .p 6 BooTce of the Universall Kirk, vol. i. pp. 325, 326. • Ibid., vol. i. p. 331. Ibid., vol. 340 p M'Crier . D i .. , following James Melville, attribute appointmene sth f thio t s

committe7 e to the preceding Assembly in March (Life of Andrew Melville, 1824, vol. i. p. 110). 8 Melville's Diary, p. 52. 0 33 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH Y F .O S MA ,

heirafter, the said office sal.be chargeit simpliciter to demitt, quyt and siclyk d sameine leavan th . f desiso et . o ceasd . , an t e fro l preachmal - ing, ministratio sacramentse th f office no th pastorsf y eo r usinwa , o y ,gan quhill they receiv novoe ed admission fro Generale mth l Assemblie, under the paine of excommunicatioun." * " Most of the bishops complied with minute e ordere th th t bu ;s containing their submission were afterwards torn out of the Register by the ."2 When five volume Registee th f so r were produce e Generath n di l Assembl Junn yi e 1587, it was found that " a great part" had been " mankit;" and Patrick

Adamson, who had succeeded John Douglas as Archbishop o3 f St Andrews, afterwards owned that, with his consent, some leaves had been torn out, and things against the estate of bishops destroyed.4 157y e GeneraMa 8th n I l Assembl d presentee yha cop. th f yo MS da Second Book f Disciplineo e Kingth o t , then barely twelve years oldd an , supplicatioe th o t n accompanyin gave h t egi "a ver y comfortabld an e good ansuer"; and on 28th April 1581 the Assembly resolved that,

having been agree6 d to before in divers Assemblies, the Book should now be recorde e Registe th e Kirkt bee th n dye i f nt ,o r althougno d ha t hi approve attempn "a w Magistrate.e no madeth s o y s twa db d , witAn 0 h consen e Crownth f o t , regularl divido yt countre eth y into presbyteries. These, however, though markepapen o t than ri dou t year, wer poinn ei t of fact only gradually set up."7 e Secondth n I Book f 'Disciplineo s statei t i d that ther e fouar e r ordinary function Churche r officeo sth n i se pastor ,th viz) (1 . , minister, alsy r bishop callee o e doctorob ma th ) o d (2 , prophetwh , , bishop, elder, catechiser e presbyte th e deacon) th (3 , ) foud r (4 elderro an ;d r an ,sort s of Assemblies, viz. (1) those of particular kirks and congregations, one or more thos ) a province (2 , f eo thos) whola (3 , f eo e thosnation) (4 f ed o an , l nationsal explaines i t I . d tha e Nationath t l Assembl callee b y d yma Generale "th l Elderschi haile th lf pKiro k withi realme,e nth " commonly called " the Generall Assemblies." It is a rather curious fact that there is only one reference to " the Presbyteries or Elderschippis," and one to " the Presbyterie," while ther e Provinciaeighe th ear o t t l Assemblieso t e on , the Synodal Assemblies, five to the Particular Eldership, two to the Common Eldership nearld an , e Eldershi yscora th o et r Eldershipso p . alss i ot I explained tha twoorde "th e Scriptouriseldere th n ,i , sumtyms ei

1 Booke Universalle oth f Kirk, . 453volp . .ii . * Lee's Lectures,. 19 . volp . ii . 3 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. Ii. p. 697. For gaps, see Ibid., pp. 405, 417, 424, 461, 465, 474. 4 Row's History, Wodrow Society, p. 123. 5 Booke e Universall oth f Kirk, . 409 pp vol ,. 414ii . . 8 Ibid., . 487 volpp . , 488ii . . 7 Mitchell's Scottish Reformation, p. 229. For a list of the presbyteries, see Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. ii. pp. 481-7. At the close of the list they are referred to as " elderships." SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 331 name th e of aige, sumtym f office"eo whed "ths i an ; t ni e e naman f eo office, sumtyme it is takin learglie, comprehending alsweill the pastouris and doctouris as thame quha ar commonlie callit seniouris and eldaris." " Bischoppis, gif the name e-n-io-KOTros be propirlie takin," " ar all ane with name th f superioritit eo no s i ministeri t i r efo an. . d s. lordschipf o t bo , office and watcheing ;" and because " in the corruptioun of the Kirk this name s utherisa , cannoe w bens , he , be likets i alloo abusedt et zi wd an , the faissoun of thais new chosin bischoppis, nather of the chapteris that are the electouris of thame." " Trew bischoppis sould addict thameselffis to ane particulare flok (quhilk sindrie of thame refuises); nather sould thay usurp lordschi r thaipow rinheritance bretherineth r ow f d eo an , Christ as these men do." The abusers of the patrimony of the Kirk should not have a vote in Parliament nor sit in the Council " under the name of the Kirk and kirkmen." Unmeet men, who do not intend to e servChurchth n ei , admittee shoulb r t fa dno o beneficeso dt s n i d an ; as, in the Order of the Leith Convention, it appears that such may be admitted if found qualified, "ather that pretendit Ordour is aganis all guid ordour r ellio ,t i muss e understandib t f thamo t eno t thae b t qualifei warldlio t t e effeari r qualefiia s servo t a s c Courtn o ei t si t t bo , teache Goddis Woorde, haifand thair lauchfull admissioun of the Kirk." The benefits that would be derived by all Estates, if this Book were acte ds concludint fort it uponse n i he ar , g chapter. These include ease and commodity to the whole of the commons, who would be relieved fro e buildinmth upholdind gan f theigo r kirks, buildin f bridgesgo d ,an other similar works; to the labourers of the ground in the payment of their teinds ;schortlid " an l theial sn ei thingis, quhairunto thay have bene hitherto rigorouslie handlit be thame that wer falslie callit kirkmen, thair takkismen, factouris, [chamerlanes extortioneris."d ]an l By the death of James Boyd in June 1581, the see of Glasgow became vacant. Duke LennoTh f eo x havine gifth tt presenteggo Robero t dt i t

Montgomery2 , minister of Stirling;3 who, according to Spottiswoode, had formerly been fervently oppose acceptebishopso w dt no t e offerdth bu , , after it had been refused by several " because of the condition required," the condition being that he should dispone to the Duke and his heirs the land whatsoeved san r else belonge e seeth , o d t foyearle th r y paymenf o t £1000 Scots with some horse-cor poultryd nan . Spottiswoode righteously denounced this as "a vile bargain," "for which justly he ought to have been repulsede Churchth t Bu ,. passing this point, made quarrem hi o t l for accepting the bishopric, which the King would not acknowledge to

1 Bookee Universallth f o Kirk, . 488-512 volpp . ii . ; Dunlop's Confessions, vol. iii. 759-805pp . ; Calderwood's History, vol. iii. pp. 529-55. 2 Keith's Catalogue, 1824, p. 261. 3 Calderwood's History, vol. iii . 577.p . PROCEEDING S E SOCIETY, 1926O10 TH F .Y MA ,

be a reason sufficient."1 In so acting, the Church was consistently carrying out the Act of the Assembly of July 1580; and the King's refusing to agree to this action was an additional proof of his dislike of that Act of Assembly. As Professor Hume Brown puts it: "James now took up the ground from whic nevere hh consentn , ow wit s hhi , receded—tha e Churcth t h should be ruled by bishops, and that it belonged to him to appoint them. ... It was evident that his preference for Episcopacy was mainly dictated by the fact that, through the agency of bishops of his own choosing, he would be materially assisted towards the attainment of that extended prerogativ es persisten whichi s hfrowa m momene ai tm th e h t began to think for himself."2 Despite the King, the Duke, and the Privy Council, the Church excommunicated Montgomery durins wa course t I gth .f thieo s contest that John Durie, for his freedom of speech in the pulpit, was ordered leavo t e Edinburgh thad an , t , Walter Balcanquald an , David Lindsay, for the same, were also dealt with by the Privy Council.3 Unde e guidanc th e rKing' th f o se unworthy favourites, Lennod an x Arran e Privth , y Council sanctione droyaa l proclamatio Juln ni y 1582, threatening to punish such freedome with all rigour.4 In the following Septembe e Ruthven-Raith r d Government s Professoa , r Masson term, sit issued explanationn a , which, unde e guisth rf beineo g "mera e caution against misinterpretation" of the July proclamation, allowed the ministers liberty of speech enough.5 It was in June of that year that Andrew Melville sermos hi n i , n befor Generae eth l Assembly, " inveyghed against the bloodie guillie of absolute authoritie, whereby men intended pulo e crowt th l Christ'f nof s s wrino headt Hi e scepted f gth o an , t ou r hand."6 The Ruthven-Raid Government lasted only ten months. In February 1583-4, Andrew Melville appeared befor e Privth e y Council concerning some statement madd sermona ha n ee i deniee h s H . d having usee dth words attributed to him ; but affirmed that, although a minister's speech in the pulpit was alleged to be treason, he ought, in the first place, to be tried by the Church. On being charged to "enter his persoun in waird" withi e Castlth n f Blacknesso e e fleh o England.,t d 7 James Lawson and Walter Balcanqual made " the pulpit1 of Edinbruche to sound e detestatiomightelith r Androe praiso t M th d f n eo i ef an ,n o

1 Spottiswoode's History, vol. ii. pp. 281, 282. 2 History of Scotland, vol. ii. pp. 185, 186. Calderwood's History, vol. iii. pp. 620-3.

3 ' Register of Privy Council, vol. iii. pp. 492-4 ; Calderwood's History, vol. iii. pp. 780-4. 5 Register of Privy Council, vol. iii. Iiipp ., 513. 6 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. p. 622. 7 Register of Privy Council, vol. iii. pp. 631, 632; Calderwood's History, vol. iv. pp. 3-14. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 833 e facth t e Counsal[i.e.e deedth th f o ] l that hai proceidia ds t against him; also, they prayit for him in particular, at all thair ordinar sermontes, quhilk move peiple dth e verie mikle gallid Court."e an , tth 1 An unsuccessful attempt was made in April 1584 to hold a General Assembly in St Andrews.2 Next month Parliament passed several Acts •which cut very deep. One confirmed and ratified the royal power and authority " over all statis, alsweill spirituall as temporall," and ordained that the King and his Council should be judges competent to all his subjects without exception in all matters, which competency could only be declined under pain of treason. Another discharged " all jugementis and jurisdictionis, spiritual r temporall,o l t approve no "e Kin th y gb d and Parliament, until allowed by them, and ordained that none of his subjects should convocate " for halding of counsellis, conventionis, or assembleis," to consult and determine in any " mater of estate, civill or ecclesiasticall (excepe ordinarth n i t e jugementis)," withou s speciahi t l command or express license. Another was directed against slanderous speeches, in private or public, "in sermonis, declamationis or familiar conferences, e reproac th e King th o t s " Counci f hi ,o h d theian l r pro- e ceedingsdishonouth s Majesto t s progenitorshi r hi f o , o r o yt i d an ; forbad l meddlinal e g "is estate.e effairis Hienenhi th hi y d f o B s"an s another, Archbishop Adamson King'bishope e th ,th d s san commissioner s in ecclesiastical causes were empowered to " direct and put ordour to l material caussid san s ecclesiasticall within their dioceissis. stild lAn " another annulle e excommunicatiodth f Bishono p Montgomery.3 When these Acts—known as the Black Acts—were proclaimed at e market-crosth f Edinburgho s 25tn o , h May, Robert Pon Walted an t r Balcanqual appointmeny b , e brethrenth f o t , protested wit l legaal h l formalities against them, in so far as they prejudged the former liberties of the Church.4 Through dread of them, kirk-sessions were afraid to meet without special warrant;5 and the General Assembly did not meet agai Novembed n 2n unti 1586y n O lMa . r 1585—tha dayo tw s, beforis t e they were allowe enteo dt r Stirling Castle—the Exiled Lords sai thein di r declaration e wholth : f "eO ancient form f justico e d policiean e , receaved fro r antecessorsmou , remaineth nothing, nathe spiritualn i r l

1 Melville's Diary, p. 145. 2 Ibid., p. 166. 3 Acts of Parliament, vol. iii. pp. 292, 293, 296, 303, 311, 312. Patrick Adamson was credited with being a chief deviser of these Acts. For his declaration of their intention and meaning, see Calderwood's History, Andrer . 254-69fo pp vold . wiv an ;. Melville's answer Ibid.,e se , vol. .iv . 274-94pp . 4 Calderwood's History,. 65 . p vol . iv . 5 , 73Ibid.,72 ; . Register pp t vol Andrews. S iv .f o Kirk-Session, . 529 pp vol e . , 530ii . Th . archbishop assure t AndrewdS s kirk-session thaKine Parliamend th t gan t intended " onlio t e erectiinhibeiw ne e t presbittreis.tth signee H minutee " dth promised an , obtaio dt King'e nth s warrant. 334 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

nor temporall estat, but the naiked shadow and counterfoote maske therof."1 When the Assembly met in the Royal Chapel of Holyrood in May 1586beford an , moderatoa e beed ha rn elected Kine th , g explained that "he thought goo calo dt l that Assembly," tha e mighh t t manifess hi t perseveranc d soundnesan e n religioni s , satisfy thoso suspectewh e d him, and get the judgment of the ministers concerning the discipline of the Kirk, adding that " he purposed to establish that throughout his realme, which, by conference amongst them, should be found most agreeable to the Word of God." Robert Pont, who as Moderator of the previous Assembly presided, said to him: " Sir, we praise God that your Majestie, bein a gChristia n Prince, hath decore r Assemblou d y with your own presence, and we trust your Majestie speaketh without hypocrisy."2 t untino s l Junwa t eI 1592 that Parliament abolishe Acte th sl al d contrary to the true religion, and established Presbytery, with its general assemblies, provincial assemblies (or synods), presbyteries, and kirk-sessions. Although the Second Book of Discipline is not mentioned in this Act, several of its leading propositions are ratified and embodied.3 Presbytery thus established was gradually undermined and at length overthrow trickeryy nb , treachery, tyranny briberyd an , . In the General Assembly which met at Dundee on 7th March 1597-8, e Kinth g "declared •what greaadorno t d benefid t ha ean care e th eth patrimonr he restor o Kirkr t d he ,an o e yt [and: ] that ,effectuatin e foth r g of this, it "was needfull that ministers have vote in Parliament, without whicli the Kirk could not be vindicat from poverty and contempt. ' I mind not,' said the King, ' to bring [in] Papisticall or Anglican bishops, but only to have the best and wisest of the ministery, appointed by the Generall Assembly, to have place in Counsell and Parliament, to t uposi stano nt theimatterst n dno ow ralwaydooe d th an , r t a slik e poor supplicants, despised and nothing regarded.'" The King might

t havno e carrie s poin Andred hi ha t w Melville been presente h t bu , 4 s debarrewa ordered dan o leavdt e towth e n under pai f horning.o n

" Whe s callede rol nth wa r Gilberl M , t Bodie drunkea , n Orkne6 y asse, was first called on numbea ; f Northlano r d ministers followed l foal ,r e negativ e th body th t e belld ye th ;e an yvoter s were overcome only d overcom n voicesha te d y e affirmativean b , eth f barreni , s wanting

1 Calderwood's History, . 383volp . . iv . ! Booke of the Universall Kirk, 646. volp . ..ii 3 Acts of Parliament, vol. iii . 541.pp , 542. Thi t alssoAc ratifie libertiee th l dprivilegeal d san s previously grante tree hald "o dth t w an y kirk presentlie establishit within this realme,d "an

specially the Act of 1581 and all the Acts therein mentioned. 4 Scot's Apologetical Narration, . 102p . * Ibid., . 100p . Hornin outlawrys gi . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 335

commission had not voted with them."1 And so " the said questioun. bein t veriga e great lenth reasoni debaittid tan utramquen i t partem,. . . the Generall Assemblie . . . concludis that it is necessar and expedient for the weill of the Kirk, that the ministrie, as the thrid Estate of this realme Kirkname n i , th f e,o have vot Parliament."n ei 2 precedine e 16tOth th n hf o g December, Parliamen statutd ha t d ean declared that such pastors and ministers as at any time his Majesty " sail plei o provyit e soffice th o ,t d place, titld dignitie an ean f o e bischoip, abbot r utheo t r prelat l tym, al sai t ea l heirefter haif voitn i t Parliament, siclyk and als frelie as ony uther ecclesiasticall prelat had at ony tyme bigane."3 One of the many cautions or regulations, adopted by the General Assembly in March 1600, for controlling the ministers appointe voto dt Parliamenn ei thas wa t they callee werb o t ed com- missioners. " Thus," says Calderwood Troja,e "th n hors, Episcopaciee th ,

was brough4 t in busked and covered with caveats, that the danger and deformitie might not be seene." Archbishop Spottiswoode avows that

" it was neither the King's intentio5 n nor the minds of the wiser sort havo t e these caution havo t s t estan bu matter . forcn di . . e; s peace- ably ended, and the reformation of the policy made without any noise, e Kinth thesgo t gavy e ewa conceits." conferenca t A 6 r conventioo e n in Holyrood Palace, in October 1600, three ministers, David Lindsay of Leith, Peter Blackburn of Aberdeen, and George Gladstanes of St Andrews were nominated to vote in Parliament.7 Soon afterwards they were appointed bishops respectively of Boss, Aberdeen, and Caithness. The King's desire to have Prelacy established in Scotland was whetted by the obsequious reverence paid to him by the English bishops. He t beeno nd Kinha f Englano g n monthte d s whe declaree h ne th t da Hampton-Court Conference : " It is my aphorism, ' No bishop, no king,'"8 and alleged that Scottish Presbytery " agreeth as well with monarchy as God and the devil." 9 Taking off his hat, he said : " Blessed be God's gracious goodness hato hwh , brough inte e promisem to th d land, where religio s pureli n y professed, wher t amongssi I e t grave, learnedd an , 1 Scot's Apologetical Narration, p. 103. James Melville (Diary, p. 440) and Calderwood {His- tory, vol. v. p. 695) also apply that opprobrious designation to Bodie. He was minister of Homle from 1590 until he was drowned in 1606 (Scott's Fasti, vol. iii. p. 383). 2 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. p. 945. 3 Acts of Parliament, vol. iv. p. 130. ' Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. p. 956. 5 Calderwood' e Bookee Universalls th th caveate History, f n i Th o e . ar s20 . Kirk,p vol . vi . vol. iii. 955-6pp . , 959; Calderwood's History, . 18-21 volpp . ;vi . Spottiswoode's History, vol. iii. pp. 74-5 ; Scot's Apologetical Narration, pp. 108-10.

6 Spottiswoode's History, vol. . 75 iii . p . 7 Scot's Apologetical Narration, . 116pp , 117. 8 Fuller's Church History f Britain,o 1845, . 280volp . .v . 9 Ibid., vol. v. p. 296. 336 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

reveren ds before a men t no ;, elsewhere kina , g without state, without honour, without order, where beardless boys woul face."e d th brav o t s eu

r AM'CriD s s pointeha e d out ,carefua l compariso f Kinno g James' 1 Trew Law of Free Monarchies (1598) and his Basilicon Doron (1599) not only throws much light on the history of the time, but reveals the real ground of his strong antipathies to the Presbyterian ministers, and explain e meaninsth s favourithi f go e aphorism ,bishop o "n king."o n , 2 s entitlee powe th iden wa f e ao ow wielrh o d t s summes dHi i hin i sp du phras a freabsolutd e" an e e monarch s e peopledutiehi th f d eo s " ,an ; in " fearing him as their judge; loving him as their father; praying for him as their protectour, for his continuance if he be good, for his amend- ment if he be w eked; following and obeying his lawfull commaunds, eschewin flyind s unlawfull hi gan s fur ghi n i y , without resistanct ebu by sobbe d teare an e reasoneds h o God." t s, If , parity were "once

established in th3 e ecclesiasticall government, the politicke and civill estate shoul drawee db like thereford th e an o "nt ; instructee h e d Prince Henry (the nmera e child)s successorhi s a , , tha shoule th t allodno e wth principal Puritan remaio wishee st lane a h e th t b f d resti n o ndi t ; but, as a " preservative against their poison," should " entertaine and advance e godlyth , learnee ministerieth f modesd o dan n me ,t who f (Gomo e db praised) there lacketh not a sufficient number; and by their provision to bishopricke beneficed shale t onelan sye no . l . y . sbanis h their con- ceited paritie, . . . but ye shall also re-establish the olde institution of three Estate Parliamentn si ,otherwis o Avhicn n ca h e donet eb Bu . thisparn d i dayesse hopI Go e rn f makfairea (i o ) t u ee yo entrie, alwayes where I leave, follow ye my steps." 4 Before the second edition of Basilicon Doron was published in 1603, Jame begud sha mako nt "s fairehi e entrie. conscientioue Th " s refusal five oth fe Edinburgh minister o entirelst y endors versios e ehi th f no Gowrie conspiracy furnished an excuse for banishing Robert Bruce for a time and harassing the other four. At the Assembly held at Montrose,

in March 1600, Andrew Melville, althoug 5 beed ha n e represena h s a t - sentative of his presbytery, " -was commanded to keep his lodging."6 lettea r rFo whic e Generawrote h th o t e l Assembl t Burntislanya d in May 1601, of Prestonpans was confined to his house 1 Fuller's Church History of Britain, vol. v. pp. 267, 268. 2 M'Crie's Life of Andrew Melville, 1824, vol. ii. p. 79. The Workes of the Most High and Mighty Prince, James, by the Grace of God, Kinge of Great3 Brittaine, France Ireland,d an 1616 . 194,pp , 200, 201. 4 Ibid., pp. 160-1. 5 Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. pp. xxiii-xxviii, xxxvii. On 12th August, 1600, all the five were forbidden to preach or speak publicly in any part of the realm under pain of death, and were ordered, unde like rth e penalty quio t , t Edinburg neighbourhoos it d han d (Ibid., . 149)p . Scot's Apologetical Narration, . 113p . 6 SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 163718 .7 33 . and " his owne yaird adjacent thereto." *• In July 1602 Andrew Melville, for speaking of the corruptions of the Church, was confined to the precincts of the New College, until, on the Queen's intercession, the limis extendewa t a radiu mile6 o dt f o ss fro t AndrewsmS . Thusn i , November 1602, neither could attend the Assembly at Holyrood. When

in April 1603 the King left for England, he refused to relax th2 e con- finemen f Davidsoo t d Melville an no allot r wo , Bruc o re-entet e r Edinburgh.3 The Act of Parliament of 1592 declared that it should be lawful for e Generath l Assembl meeo t y t leasa t t onc yeara e oftened an , r when required, providing that the King or his Commissioner, when present, should, before the dissolving, nominate the time when and appoint the place where the next should be held; and, if neither the King nor his Commissione than i s t towwa r n helds whewa , t nthe i Assemble nth y itself should nominate the time and appoint the place for the next.

Thwhey t alloe realisee wa no Kin nh s wstano d t hi gdi t thi n ddi sAc 4 that orden ,i s schemes carro hi t r t ymuse ou h ,abl e b tcontroo et e th l Assemblies. Assemble Th y havo whict s e hwa bee n hel t Aberdeeda n

in July 15995 , he altered, by proclamation, to Montrose in March 1600; the next he altered from St Andrews in July 1601, to Burntisland in May 1601; the next from St Andrews in July 1602, to Holyrood House Novemben i nexte r th 1602 ,d havo whict an ; s e hwa bee n Aberdeeni n on 31st July 1604, he postponed, apparently sine die. The three repre- sentatives from St Andrews duly appeared in St Nicholas' Parish Church, Aberdeen 31sn ,o t July, presented their commission fro presbyterye mth , formalld an y protested.6 This action of the St Andrews representatives incited ministers in other parts to move in the matter. To put a stop to this agitation, the King by proclamation, in September 1604, forbade all extraordinary meetings, " specialli e ministrie,th f eo " under inflictepaine b o t s d " with l rigoual d extrenietie."an r 7 Actin allegen go d instructions froe mth King's Commissione d fro e Moderatoan mrth e Holyroodhousth f o r e Assembl f 1602yo , presbyteries sent representative n Assembla o t s t ya Aberdeen in July 1605. The missives directed to the North gave the 2nd

1 Calderwood's History, vol. vi. pp. 125, 126 ; Register of Privy Council, vol. vi. pp. xxxili, 243. 2 James Melville's Diary, . 545p ; Calderwood's History, . 157 volpp ,. 186vi . , 222. 3 Scot's Apologetical Narration, p. 124; Calderwood's History, vol. vi. p. 223. Bruce lived unti neves l 1631wa t r allowe,bu resido dt e near Edinburg preaco t t againr i h o n hi . 1 Acts of Parliament, vol. iii. p. 541. thir Fo s6 action, Scot blame splotter e "th Episcopacie,r sfo " because they were accountablo et the Assemblies (Apologetical Narration, pp. 126, 127). 6 BooJcee Universallth f o Kirk, vol. iii. 948.pp , 962, 973,1008-1 2; Calderwood' s History, vol. .vi . 264-8pp ; James Melville's Diary, 560-5. pp . 7 Register of Privy Council,. vol14 , .13 vii . .pp 2 2 VOL . LX . 338 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

July as the day of meeting, while those directed to the South gave the 5th. Only nineteen ministers were present when the Assembly opened on the 2nd; but John Forbes of Alf ord was elected moderator and a clerk was appointed. Sir Alexander Straiten of Lauriston, the King's Com- missioner, produced a letter from the Privy Council urging those present to " suffer this meeting to desert" and to appoint no new meeting of Assembly without first acquainting the King. In deference to his Majest Assemble yth y agreed dissolv"o t e present,e foth r t ordaine"bu d presbyterie warnee b o t so sent d d commissioner n Assembla o t s t a y Aberdeen on 24th September. Straiton thereupon protested that the presen a lawfut t meetinno l s assembly gwa Forben o d san ; protest- ing, in name of the brethren, that it was a lawful assembly, Straiton charged those presen suffeo t t deser"o i rt t unde paine rth f horning.eo " Nine ministers fro Southe mth , who spitn ,i f spateeo f waterso , arrived 5the th ,y approveb whaf do t their brethre done.d nha 1 f Julyo d Befor, en Joh e eth n Forbe Johd san n (Knox'r WelsAy f ho s son-in-law) were in Blackness dungeon, and in a few days other four ministers were with them. 2.othed Thesan rx esi eigh t gavjoina n ei t declinato e Privth o yt r Council e 24t f th October o hn o , , denyine gth competency of any civil court to try them in such a purely ecclesiastical matter as the holding of a general assembly.3 The King held that this frox s higsi m wa he Blacknestreason;th o s d an 4s were trie than o d t charge at Linlithgow5 on 10th January 1606. Twenty of the Lords of Privy Council assiste Justice dth assessors.s ea 6 Befor jure th ey retired to consider their verdict, Forbes, addressing the Earl of Dunbar, who d comha e from Englan superinteno dt e trialth d , adjured e himth y ,b living God remino t , punishmene e Kinth dth f go t which fell upon Saul and his house for violating the oath which the Gibeonites had deceitfully e heavth obtained, f yo waro t wrat m d d judgmennhi an 7hd an Go f o t which would assuredly fall upon him and his posterity and the whole landwere h f ei , induced theid an , r lordship lane th d d consentedsan o t , violatioe th greae th f tno oat l madh al trute the stano d et th yhha y db

o maintait d an e disciplinnth e Kirkth f .o e James s Melvillewa o wh , Booke1 of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. pp. 1013-7; Calderwood's History, vol. vi. pp. 279-85, 437-44; Scot's Apologetical Narration, . 131-6pp ; Forbes' Certaine Records, 380-97. pp . 3 Calderwood's History, . 286-8 volpp . .. vi Bishop Lindsay declared that Forbe Welsd san h were being more straitly used than Jesuits or murderers (Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. p. 105). They were kept in separate rooms (Certaine Records, p. 406). ' Calderwood's History, 34 . volp 7. Melville'; vi . s Diary, 615. pp , 616. ' 1 Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. p. 164 n. When brought to the Palace, the Countess of Linlithgow, although then " an obstinat Papist,. . . 5. receaved them verie courteouslie, and, after good interteanement, caused convoy them to a chamber " (Calderwood's History, vol. vi. p. 375). Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, . 496volp . .ii . 76 Joshua ix. 3-27; 2 Samuel xxi. 1-9. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 889

present whicn ,i saiy hd wa Forbe thae th t s applie e dKing th thi o ,t s anterrible dth e threatening, astonishe hearere dth madd san e their hair stan end.n do 1 By a majority of three the jury found them guilty. In Professor Masson's opinion this " was one of the greatest constitutional trials in Scottish history."2 Lord Balmerino, the Secretary of the Privy Council, in reporting the result to the King, said: "Yf the Erll of Dunbar had t ben no pairtlid es dexterti an withi , y hus b e advyseinn ei g whas we t fittesdone b everin ei o t t e thing pairtlid e authoriti,an th d y eb ha e eh over his freindis, of whome a greate many past upoun the assise [i.e. the jury] pairtlid an , r thaefo t some stoo s presencehi df o [in w ,a ] knawing that he wald mak fidell relatioun to your Majestie of every manis parte, t frame turne no th weld o s dblissi, eha eas Gode tb t hes."i , Thomar Si 3 s Hamilton, the King's Advocate, in writing to his Majesty the day after the trial, also praised Dunbar for his management of this most difficult case, and expressed the earnest hope that there might be as few more cases of that kind as might possibly stand with the King's service.4 Despite these warning Privlettee s Kinge th hi sth o yn rt i , Council, thus refers to the other eight ministers, "it is absolutelie oure will that, with all convenient speede, thay be putt to the lyke tryale."5 The Privy Councit positivelno d di l y refusthis, o t thed bu o yet urge difficultiee dth s that would have to be overcome and the dangers that might arise if they tried to do so. Some members of Privy Council would not have been present at the trial had they known the errand; and the jury had incurred so much odium that they would not willingly serve again. This fire, " kendlit amang few,sa overspreadins "wa whole gth e countryd an , subjects of all degrees were discontented with the result of the trial. The Council practically advise satisfiee Kine b d th o gt d with their having proveverdice f Parliamenth o t y db t Ac t tha beee no f 158th t o nt d 4ha limited by the Act of 1592 as had been supposed.0 Next month, by proclamation, all the lieges were forbidden, under pain of death, to utter, either publicly or privately, "ony sclanderous speiches" agains e Privth t y Counci r e triaJustico lth f theso lr fo e

1 Forbes' Certaine Records, pp. 490-2; Melville's Diary, p. 625; Calderwood's History, vol. vl. pp. 386, 387; Row's History, Wodrow Society, p. 239.. 2 Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. p. 164 n. 3 Ibid., vol. vii. p. 480. 1 Hailes' Memorials and Letters, Reign of James, 1766, pp. 1-4. Of this letter Lord Hailes says: "We see here the prime minister, in order to obtain a sentence agreeable to the King, addres judgee sth s with promise threatsd san , pac jurye thed kth an ,n deal with them without scrupl ceremony.r eo lettee Th alss "ri o printeMelrose Th n di Papers, Abbotsford Club, vol. i . pp. 10-12 ; and in Original Letters relating to the Ecclesiastical Affairs of Scotland, Bannatyne Club, vol. i. pp. 31-3. 5 Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. p. 483. • Ibid., vol. vii. pp. 483-6. 340 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH F Y .O S MA ,

ministers. Septemben i d An 1e Kin th r g authorised another proclama- tion, forbidding all ministers, under pain of death, to refer, either in their sermons or prayers, to the Aberdeen-Assembly imprisoned ministers "excepdisalowinn i e b t i t f thaigo r proceidingis." 23rn O d2 Octobee th r six, in accordance with explicit instructions from the King, were con- demned to banishment from his dominions; and if they did not depart within a month, wind and weather serving, they were to suffer death as traitors; and if they returned without the King's licence, they were " to incur the pane of death, and all uther panes usuallie inflictit upone persones convic f tressone."o t s Before they embarke t Leithda , Welsh prayepiers e th Hi .n do r " bred great motioun heartie th n ei f so all the heareres"; and as the ship receded from the shore, friends were cheered by the comforting strains of the 23rd Psalm.4 The punishment e otheoth f r eight had 24tn ,o h October 1605, been specially reserveo dt the King;6 and on the 26th of the following September he ordered them to be confined in certain remote islands and districts of Scotland and deparo t t no t therefrom under pai f deathno . There they were "to keip wair exercd d an functioue eth thaif no r ministerie."6 In March 1586-7 the King, with consent of the Privy Council, had rehabilitated James a ConventioBetoun, t a e nobilitd th an 7 f d no yan estates in June 1598 he was restored " to his heritagis, honoris, digniteis, benefices, offices, lands," etc. tymy , whicon e t evih"a r perteinim hi o t t of befoir withi e realth n f mScotland."o s 8 hi When o e Kin s nth gwa Londoo t crownee y b o wa t n e hearh d f Betoun'do e th s o deatht d an , archiepiscopal see of Glasgow, thus rendered vacant, he nominated , then ministe f Calder-Comitis.o r a meetin e t th A 9 f go Syno f Lothiao d n Augusni t 1604, Spottiswood d Jamean e s Law, then ministe f Kirklistonro , were " charged for their indirect dealin overo gt - thro e disciplinwth e Kirkth f .o e They purged themselve n oppii s n assemblie, protesting they had no suche intentioun, but onlie to recover e kirk-rentsth d theraftean , r they sould submit e samth t e unte th o Assemblie." They again subscribed wit e brethrehth e Confessionnth f o Faith of 1580-1, printed by Henry Charteris in 1596.10 Law was after- wards Bisho Orkneyf po succeeded an , d Spottiswood Glasgown ei .

1 Register of Privy Council, vol. vii . 181p . . 2 Ibid., vol. . 257viipp . , 258. Pitcairn's Criminal Trials, vol. ii. pp. 503, 504. 1 4 Melville's Diary, . 669-70pp ; Calderwood's History, . 590 volpp , . 591.vi . 5 Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. p. 137. " Ibid., vol. vii. pp. 261, 262. 7 Registrum Magni Sigilli, . 1168 volNo . . v . 8 Acts of Parliament, provides wa . 170t I p vol. .d iv . that "the said archibischo l nawyipsa s be subjec makine th eonfessioue o th t t f go faith.s hi f no " Keith's Catalogue, 1824, p. 263; Scott's Fasti, vol. i. p. 174.

109 Calderwood's History, vol. vi. pp. 268, 269; Scot's Apologetical Narration, p. 126. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 341 As the stipends of these titular bishops were insufficient to maintain their families, far less to bear the charges of their rank in Parliament and General Councils, Parliament in July 1606 repealed the Act of 1587 by which the temporalities of their benefices had been annexed to the Crown. protesA t against this " restitutio nestate oth f f bischoppieo s "

was signe1 d by Andrew Melville and other forty-one ministers. Andrew Melville with difficulty got access; but when he rose to protest he was commanded to depart, which " he did not till he made all that saw and heard him understand his purpose." It was earnestly hoped that the caveats of March 1600 would be inserted in the obnoxious Act, but this was not obtained.2 In a long list of reasons drawn up in 1606 against this restitution of the bishops, one was that they would be more easily misled by " an evill prince" than the other Estates—"Becaus they have their lordship and living, their honou estimatiound ran , profit commoditid ean Kine th gf eo by [i.e. more than] others Kine sety Th casd gtma . thean t p themu m doun, give the d takman e froms hi them t a ,t putou td thean n mi pleasure. And therefore they must be at his directioun, to doe what liketh him; and, in a word, he may doe with them by [i.e. without] law, becaus they are sett up against law."3 Six years afterwards Archbishop Gladstanes provide dstrikina g confirmatio e lette a f this th no n I o t r. King he declared that " no Estate can say that they ar your Majestie's sayy creaturethero s ,ma e nons ei w s esa whose standin slipperieo s s gi , when your Majestie shall frowne, as we, for at your Majestie's nodd we either must stan r fall.do " * 160 y Kine 6send th Ma gha f to Towardmissived en e eigho th sst f o t e staunchesth t Presbyterian ministers (including bot Melvillee hth d an s Sco f Cupar) o t15t y b h repaim o Septembert , hi o t r treao t , t with others of their brethren concerning the peace of the Church of Scotland. By the end of August they were in London. The brethren they met there included both archbishops (Gladstane d Spottiswoode)an s , Jamew La s (Bisho f Orkney)o p , (afterwards Bisho f Galloway)o p , and Straiten of Lauriston. After being kept there for eight months, Andrew Melville darinr fo , writo gt Latiea n epigra e ornamentth n mo s e King' e altath o th fn i sr chapel, r wasHumD s ,a e Brown modestly expressed it, by " a monstrous stretch of the prerogative," thrown into

Acts of Parliament, vol. iv. p. 281-5. *1 Calderwood's History, vol. vi. pp. 485-94. Three of those who signed the protest became bishops afterwards (Scot's Apologetical Narration, p. 159). 3 Calderwood's History, . 530 volpp . , .531Coursevi e Th ; of Conformitie, . 162245 . ,p • Original Letters, Ban. Club earlien ,a . 295volp n I . i .r lette calle rKinh e sth "earthls ghi y creator" (Ibid., vol. i. p. 206); and he thought that a man should be hanged for speaking " undewtifullie and irreverendlie " of his Majesty (Register of Privy Council, vol. ix. p. 302). 342 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY, 192610 TH Y F .SO MA , s kepwa t e e Towerthereih th d r fouan fo n; r years beforwa e h e allowed to go into exile! In May James Melville was ordered to New- castle-on-Tyri moro g mile) o staeo t et 10 that y? s( no therfron 2 d mean t undei r pai f rebellionno othee werx Th si .r e permitte returo dt o nt Scotland, four of them to be confined to their own parishes, one to be confined at Cockburn's Path, arid another at Lauder.1 Having so many of the leading Presbyteria.ns under restraint, the King summone a conferencd r assemblo e o meet y t Linlithgoa t n wi December 1606. In his missives to the presbyteries he named the minister shoulo swh sent. e dt b thi A 2s Assembl explaines wa t yi d that it was his Majesty's desire that, until " Papists Avere repressed and jarres removed out of the Kirk, a constant moderatour might be appointed for everie presbitrie, thad "an t moderatioe "th provinciale th f no l assemblie ... be committed unto the bishop." Even with such an Assembly as this, it was found necessary, as a contemporary said, " to gull the simple." It wa wayesy declare an s Majestie n hi si t dno thass purpostwa "t i d ean intentio subvero nt t and overthro e presenwth t disciplin Kire th f kf o eo Scotland"; and the bishops " declarit that it was not their intention to usurpe and exerce any tyrannous and unlawfull jurisdiction and power over the brethren, nor to ingyre themselves any wayes unlawfullie in the Kirk's government." Thirteen cautions or caveats were introduced into s adoptet beforwa Ac t thiy i e eb d th s convention. e King'Th 3 s com- missioners attribute unlooked-foe dth r succes theio t s r declaratios hi f no "constant favou tho t l rgodlie al d Kirdewtifuld ean k an l ministers"; "the unexpected weill offere thamo t d youn ei r Majesties name"d an ; his " most gracious letter directe Assemblie."e th o dt 4 " Many blinded before did see, immediately after that convention, that the constant moderators were (as was sayd at that time) the little theeves entrin narroe th t ga w windowes mako t , e ope dooree greae nth th o tt s theeves." Januard 3r n O 6y 160 e Kin7th g instructe e Privdth y Council f theso o e 1Tw confessor s wrote account f theio s r experiences. James Melville's hi n i s i s Diary, . 634-7pp , 644-6, 653-68, 672-83, 688-700, 705-11. Willia s Apologeticalmhi Scot'n i s i s Narration, pp. 165-78, 194. Calderwood gives many details. And Dr M'Crie, in his Life of Andrew Melville, does ample justice sufferersth e missivo t e Th . e which Scot receiven i s i d Original Letters, Ban. Club, vol. i. pp. 48-50. Dr Hume Brown says that Andrew Melville was kept in the Tower for three years (History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 246). It was four years. Not only does Sco fouy sa t r years (op. imprisonmens cit., hi . 194) p t bu , t bega 26tn no h April 1607 (Melville's Diary, p. 708) and terminated on 19th April 1611 (M'Crie's Melville, 1824, vol. ii. p. 276). 1 Booke Universalle oth f Kirk, vol. iii. 1020pp . , 1021. 3 Ibid., vol. iii. pp. 1027-35; The Course of Conformitie, pp. 49, 50. 4 Original alleges wa Letters, t I d tha. 72 t . vol 40,00p . i . 0 merks were distribute Eare th ly db of Dunbar amongst the most needy and clamorous of the clergy, and that his accounts proving this were shown to Charles the First in 1639 (Balfour's Historical Works, vol. ii. pp. 18, 19). Un- fortunately, there is a gap in the Treasurer's Accounts between July 1606 and May 1610. I have found nothing in the surviving Treasury Papers relating to this alleged payment. Coursee Th 6 f Conformitie,o . 50 . p SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 16373 18 .34 . o chargt e presbyterieth e accepo t s t these constant moderators under pai horningf no thosd an , e nominate accepo dt t unde same rth e penalty.1 Sturdy oppositio evokeds nwa althougd an ; h strenuous efforts were made to enforce the Act, its precise terms were kept secret until the following August. When it did appear, its accuracy was challenged. It was alleged thae wordth t s tyrannous unlawfulld an beed ha n afterwards inserted, as also the provisions, that bishops should be moderators of the provincial assemblie synods)r s(o tha d moderatore an ,tth presbyterief so s should be members of the General Assemblies.2 Earl 161n ys royae Kingi hi th 0 y l ,b prerogative, erecte Courto dtw s of High Commission, one for the province of St Andrews, the other for that of Glasgow. Spottiswoode and his fellow-prelates had been pressing somr fo e establishmenm th timhi r efo f machinero t f thiyo s kindn I . worde th Professof so r Massonmoste th s extensiv:wa "t I e advance that Episcopaw ne e th lt madsysteye Scotlandn ed i mha , empowerint i s ga did either of the two archbishops, with any four of those clergymen or laymen associated with him in the Act, to be a court for the trial of all kinds of ecclesiastical offences, whether among the clergy or the laity, superseding all other courts hitherto concerned with such offences, and to punish such offences not only with the spiritual censures of suspension, deprivation, excommunication, etc. t alsbu ,o with imprisonmentfind an e , the Privy Council itself to aid and serve in carrying out the sentences."3 According to Archbishop Spottiswoode it was because "the King by his letters was now daily urging the bishops to take upon them the administratio l Churcal f no h affairs d theyan , , unwillin mako gt y ean change withou e knowledgth t d approbatioan e e ministersth f o n n a , Assembly to this effect was appointed to hold at Glasgow," * in June 1610. The King's missiv lettea d f Archbishoo rean p Gladstanes prove that presbyteries were instructed whom to appoint as members.5 In his letter to the Assembly, the King stated that he had imparted his pleasure and mind to the Earl of Dunbar and the Archbishop of St Andrews, to whom credit shoul givene b d d tha e intendedan h ;t e report th n o ,s which these two gave him, " to take special notice of every one's affection, and forwardness in this service, and thereupon to acknowledge and

1 Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. 299-302pp . . 2 Calderwood's History, 624. p vol. ; vi .Soot' s Apologetical Narration, . 193p ; Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. pp. Ixi-lxviii. 3 Register of Privy Council, vol. viii. pp. 417-22. After Spottiswoode became Archbishop of St Andrews, the King (December 1615) united the two Courts (Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. pp. 1108-13). "So the Acts of unlawfull Assemblies are violentlie obtruded upon the Kirk by a judicatori eKira whict kno judicatories hi bishope th d san ; overrul Kire powea eth y kb r never given Kir e theth kmy "b (Calderwood's History, vol. vii . 210)p . . 4 Spottiswoode's History, vol. iii . 205p . . 5 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. pp. 1083, 1084. 344 :... PROCEEDING F THO S E SOCIETY, 192610 Y . MA ,

remember them hereafter, as any fit occasion for their good shall occurre."l Besides these promises of future preferment there was down- right bribery. Scot says: " Money was given largely to such as served the King and the bishops, under pretence of bearing their charges. The constant moderators got their 100 pounds which was promised at the pretended Assembly holden at Linlithgow, anno 1606. To some was promised the augmentation of their stipends. He that voted non liquet t nothinggo , becausd don o serviceha n e e r Johh e M .ns hi Hall r fo , service pension."a got , 2 Spottiswoode, who, as moderator and otherwise, really knew what was done, puts it thus: " These conclusions taken [i.e. After the Acts had been carried], it was complained in behalf of the moderators of presbyteries, whserved oha d sinc yeae eth r 1606 ' tha, t notwithstandin promise th f go e mad t theiea r acceptin chargee gth , the received yha paymeno n d l al t ta stipene oth f d allowed.' Whic Eare h th Dunbaf lo r excuse absencs hi y db e forth of the country, affirming, ' that unto that time there was never any motion made thereof to him, and that before the dissolving of that Assembl shoule yh d cause satisfactio givee b time o theo th nt t e r mfo past.' . . . Which he did also see performed, some five thousand pounds Scots being distributed by the treasurer's servants among those that had born e chargeeth . Certai e discontenteth f no a interpre d e ddi b o t t i t sor f corruptiono t , givin tha' t t gou s donthi r obtaininwa sfo e e th g ministers' voices'; howbeit the debt was known to be just, and that no motio s mad nwa f tha eo t business befor e foresaith e d conclusions were enacted."3 This statement of the Archbishop's is worse than disingenuous. It implies that the money which was distributed was given only to the constant moderator f presbyterieso s o thet d mpaymenn i an ,e th f o t stipends which had been promised, and that the matter was only brought before Dunbar after the Acts of that Assembly had been enacted. Now e las f th ,thes o t e Conclusion r Actso s recorde Spottiswoody db e wat enacteno s d unti e afternooth l f llto n he ver Juneth yd nexan ; t day he signed an acquittance, attested by two witnesses, acknowledging d " ressaviha tha e h t t r WilliafrM a m Broun, servitou riche th to t r nobil d potenan l t Lord, George Erl f Dunbaro l , Heigh Thesauref o r Scotland s lordship'hi n i s command, hi se b nam e sowmd th ,an e f o e sevin thousand fyve hundrieth thri n merkisete scord an ,e Scottis

1 BooTce e Universall oth f Kirk, vol. . 1094,1095iii.pp . 2 Scot's Apologetical Narration, . charg224e p Th . s corroborateei Calderwooy db d (History, vol. vii. pp. 97, 98) and by Row (History, pp. 274,276, 281), who give other details. The King disponed on 20th November 1611 a yearly pension of 1000 merks Scots to Mr John Hall, minister at Edinburgh (Treasury Papers, Precepts and Receipts, in the Register House). 3 Spottiswoode'a History, vol. iii. 207p . . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 345

money, quhil Majestis khi e ordani distributie b o moderatourie t t th r tfo s bipast feis, and for the support of the chairgeis of certane utheris of the ministrie that convenit at the Generall Assemblie of Glasgw." 1 Of course, in those days (when there were no telegraphs, telephones, r wireless)o o sent , d word from Glasgo s Majesthi o w t lltn o yh June and have 12t repls utterls th ehi hn wa yo y impossible t thers Bu .e wa no need to send word to his Majesty, for on the 8th of the preceding May, in a letter to Dunbar, he had given " expres command, that aganis this ensewing Assemblye keipbe ourat tto , e city Glasgoweof sai,you l nai n reddynei f e sowmn thousanth ste f o e d markes, Scottis money, to be devydeit and dealt amonge such personis as you sail holde fitting by the advyise of the Archbishoppis of St Androis and Glasgoive."2 The words tha I havt e italicise vere dar y suggestive. In the King's letter (or warrant) there is not the slightest reference stipende th e constan o th t f so t moderators, whic e Archbishohth p would fain mak e destinatiot i appeaeth s e fivth wa re f thousanno d pounds Scots "distributed by the treasurer's servants." It is quite likely that Dunbar agreed to allow part of the 10,000 merks to go to the con- stant moderators, whose services e Assemblth n i y doubtless deserved to be rewarded; but Spottiswoode's acquittance shows that the £5046, 13s . whic .s 4d distributehwa (nom hi Dunbar'y tb y db s servants) did not all go for that. In the unprinted Treasurers Accounts, 1610-1, a pag verso) 5 n thi(3 o e s i headed— paymenm hi o e expensit t "Th s debursit in his Majestie's effairis, and directionis of his Hienes Counsall, in the moneth of Junii 1610." On another page (42 recto) under a similar headin r Octobefo g r 1610 ther this i e s entry: Majesties " Itehi e mb s warrand to James, Bischop of Orknay, moderator of the Generall Assemblie at Linlithgow, in the moneth of [blank] 1608, to be distributit e saibeth d reverend fathe certano t r e constant moderatoui'i f presbiso - tereis and uthers ministers, according to his Majestie's directioun gevin theranent e samyth s na , warrand producit beiris, , iiiso lib.mx d "An this £301 s distributewa 0 Bishoy b d p Dunbar'y Lawb t ,no s servants. These two sums, distributed by Spottiswoode and Law, amount to 12,085 merks—that is, 2085 more than the King's warrant of 8th May authorised e extr. th Perhaps a amounwa t i s t e gives thath wa o tnt constant moderators letterA . , dated Whitehall, 24th October 1610, addresse e " Auditourith o t dr Bxchecke ou r Kingdomf o ou s f o r f o e Scotland," intimates that the Earl of Dunbar has, " by speciall warrand and directioun frome us, deliverit unto the reverend father in God, James, Bischop of Orknay, moderatour of the Generall Assemblie of

1 Treasury Papers, Precepts and Receipts, in the Kegister House. Original Letters, . 425volp . i .; Register of Privy Council, vol. viii . xxviipp . , 844. 2 346 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

e Churchth , conveni t Linlithgow,a t n 1608i " ,e sowm"th f threo e e thousand ten punds, money of that our kingdome, to be distributit e saith d y b reverend fathe o certant r e constant moderatourif o s presbiteries d otherisan , ministeris, accordin r directiouou o t g n geven theranent, d direct an "e auditor th s o "t s defeas allowd an esaie "th d treasuree suth nexms o t hi tn ri accounts. 1 n obvioua r fo s s reasowa t I ns History hi tha n i t Spottiswoode ignore e othedth r ministers acquittancen mentioneow s e hi th n n di i , Treasurer's Accounts,King'e th n i s d lettean 24tf ro h October. Dunbar managed this Assembly with great dexterity. By an over- whelming majority it acknowledged that the calling of General Assemblies pertained "to his Majestie be the prerogative of his royall crowne. t resolveI " d tha sentenco tn excommunicatiof eo absolutior no n therefrom should be pronounced without the approval of the bishop of the diocese; that all presentations should in future be directed to the bishop; that every minister at his admission should •'"sweare obedience to his Majestie and his Ordinar"; that any minister who absented himself fro visitatioe mth e Diocesath f no n Assembly, without just cause and lawful excuse, should be suspended, and, if he amended not, deprived; that the bishop, if present, should preside at the weekly exercis e ministersth f eo thad ministero an ;n t preachinn i e , th n i r go public exercise, spea r reasoko n agains e Act th tf thi o s s Assemblr o y disobey the same, or treat in the pulpit " the questioun of equalitie and inequalitie in the Kirk," under pain of deprivation. Dr Cook pointed

History,s t thathi ou n ,i Spottiswoode, though moderato thif ro s Assembly 2 and with full access to the official record, not only misrepresented some of the articles and suppressed some clauses, but entirely omitted two of the articles, and that " this was not the effect of accident or of negligence is evident from the nature of the alterations and omissions." The two articles omitted are: "Item, The bishops sal be subject, in all things concerning thair lyfe, conversatioun, office, and benefice e censureth e Generalo t th , f so l Assemblie; and being found culpable, with his Majestie's advyce and consent, to be deprivit. " Item, That no bischop be electit but quho hes past the age of fourtie zeirs compleit, and quho at the leist hes bein ane actuall teaching minister for the space of ten zeirs."3 r CooD k proceede e suppos w o say t df "I :e thae Historyth ts wa printed exactly as it was written by the author, the conduct of Spottis- woode cannot be too severely reprobated; for he was attempting to

1 Royal Letters, 1579-16%4, Exchequer, Registee th n i r House. 1 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. pp. 1095-8, 1101. * Ibid., vol. iii. pp. 1097, 1098. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 347

mislead posterity supporto t unfain d a an r y ,fals o b ,r e representation, e authorit e powere th Scottisth th d f o san y h prelates."1 Fully thirty years after Dr Cook wrote, Spottiswoode's History was printed for the Spottiswoode Society fro e manuscripmth t " whic Archbishoe hth p him- self prepared for the press." On this matter the authentic text does not help the Archbishop's reputation in the slightest degree; and of cours r GrueD b knew this whe e candidlnh y said suppressioe : "Th f no those portions which limited the powers of the episcopate deserves the severe censure whic r Coo hD bestowes kha d upon it."2 Eight days afte Assemble th r y ros eroyaa l proclamatio issueds nwa , inhibitin s Majesty'hi l al g s subjects t "speciallibu , l teicheinal e r o g preicheing ministeri lecturind an s g reidaris, within this kingdome, that non f thamo e e presom k upotita r no e hand, athe n thaii r r sermonis publictlie, or in privat conferenceis, to impugne, deprave, contradict, condemne, or utter thair disallowance and dislyke of ony point or article of those most grave and wyse conclusionis of that Assembley, endit with suche harmonic s tha,a y will answe contrare th o t r t thaiya r heichest perrel charge."d lan 3 "Thus," say r GrubD s , "afte n intervaa r f forto l y years a polit, y simila thao t r t whic beed ha hn agree t Leita o dt h durin regence gth y of Mar was again established. . . . But there was yet wanting that without which, so far as the Church was concerned, all the rest was comparatively unimportant." And so Archbishop Spottiswoode, Bishop Lamb of Brechin, and Bishop Hamilton of Galloway " were consecrated, accordin Englise e forth th n m i o hgt Ordinal, e chapeth f n Londoi o l n House Sundan o , e twenty-firsyth f Octobero y da t e Bishop, 1610th y ,b s of London, Ely, Rochester Worcester.d an , " Soon after their returo nt Scotland the three Scotch prelates imparted the consecration to their fellow-bishops.4 On 23rd October 1612 Parliament ratified " the Acts and Conclusionis set downe and agreed upoun in the Generall Assemblie of the Kirk, kepi n Glasgoi t e monetth n wi f Jun o h e 1610; togithe- rex wite an h planatioun [madee Estateth y e article f b ]some same. th o s th f f o e o s" In this ratification the Acts and Conclusions of the Assembly are pro- fessedly only give n "i o narticle substanc tw e sd effect"th an ed an ;

1 Cook's History Church e oth f of Scotland, 1815 . ,235-7 volpp . .ii . * Grub's Ecclesiastical History, 1861, . 294voJp . .ii . ' Register of Privy Council, vol. viii. 472-3pp . . A. goodly numbe proclamatioe th f o r n must have been issued, for Robert Charteris received £5 for printing it in June 1610 (Unprinted Treasurer's Accounts, 1610-1, folverso).5 3 . ' Grub's Ecclesiastical History, vol. ii. pp. 294-8. For Principal Lee's views on this, see his Lectures, vol. ii. pp. 185-7. Cf. Calderwood's History, vol. vii. p. 152; Original Letters, Ban. Club, vol. i. p. xxvii. 8 34 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY, 192610 TH Y F . O S MA ,

omitted by Spottiswoode are ignored. Some of the explanations are lengthy. Everything ratified is to be obeyed and observed by all the subjects "as inviolable lawis in all tyme cuming." The Act of 1592 is expressly annulle rescindedd dan alsd l othean ,oal r Act f Parliamentso , laws, sentences, and customs, in so far as they are contrary to or derogatory of any of the articles hereby ratified. On the day that this ratification was passed, two archbishops and eight bishops sat in Parlia- ment.1 Scot says tha y thib ts ratificatio e Glasgo th e Act th f no s w Assembly were perverted rather than ratified.2 Calderwood, who quotes the ratification, gives a collation of it with the Acts of that Assembly.

Six years after that Glasgow Assembly the bishops petitioned 3 the King for leave to hold another, as they "found that nothing is more expedient" for " preventing and suppressing" the "grouth of Popery, and for reforming of the dissorders and abuses flowing therefra "; and there- for e ordereo meeh et n 13te o t on dh August 161 t 6Aberdeen.a n I 4 accordance wit instructione hth s thas Commissioner gave hi h t o et e th , Ear Montrosef lo , this Assembly ordained that hereafter, throughoue th t whole kingdom l shalal ,e bounb l o sweat d d subscribw an r ne e th e Confession of Faith, especiall clerge yth acceptinn yo g office studentd an , s at colleges; that " ane uniforme ordour of Liturgie or Divyne Service be sett down, to be red in all kirks on the ordinarie dayes of prayer, and every Sabbath day befor the sermoun "; and that " a Booke of Canons be made, published in wryte, drawin foorth of the bookis of former Assemblies, and, quher the same is defective, that it be supplied be the Canon f Counsello s d Ecclesiasticalan s l Conventioun formen i s r tyme."5 Whe e Actnth s wer formn i e presented t " an "pu s Majesty hi o t de h , directed five article insertee b o st d amon e Canon gChurche th th f so n I . a " humble letter" Spottiswoode let him know that that could not be done, as the articles had "at no time been motioned in the Church, nor f theiproponeo y r an meetings. n di e KinTh "g forbor o prest e s their adoption for a time, but only for a time.6 In the address to the reader prefixed to Basilicon Doron, the King had said: "I exhor sonnbeneficiale y b m t o t ee th !f o unt e goon oth me d ministrie; praising God there, that there is presently a sufficient number of good men of them in this kingdome; and yet are they all knowne to be against the forme of the English Church."7 Now it was very different.

1 Acts of Parliament, vol. iv. pp. 467, 469, 470. 2 Scot's Apologetical Narration, p. 237. Calderwood's History, vol. vii. pp. 16&-73.

3 4 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. p. lllo. 6 Ibid., vol. iii . 1123.pp , 1124, 1127, 1128. ThiConfessionw ne s f Faitho s engrossei e th n i d Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. iii. pp. 1132-9. Spottiswoode's History, vol . 236-8 iiipp . . ...

e WorkesTh 70 of King James, . 144p . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 1687.18 9 34 . Professor Masson says battle : "beed Th eha n shar vehementd pan t bu ; the King, by adhering to his system of always marking out his individual opponents, striking them down wit hstrona g hand inflictind an , g punish- ment on them till they yielded or the sight of their sufferings made others yield, had been conspicuously victorious." His Majesty, however,

had not entirely relied on force and tyranny. Hl e had worked upon the noble lavisy sb h gift f Church-lands,o s and s show,a n above d bribeha , d

the baser section of the clergy2 . Not content with having entirely changed the government of the Church, he was now determined to assimilate its worship to that of the Churc f England ho e Genera th n I .l Assembly n 1590i , , "his Majesty praiseth God that he was born in such a time as in the time of the light of the Gospell, to such a place as to be King, in such a Kirk, the sincerest Kirk in the world. The Kirk of Geneva, said he, keepeth Pasche and Yuile [i.e. Easter and Christmas]. What have they for them ? They have no institution. As for our neighbour Kirk in England, it is ane evill said messe in English, wanting nothing but the liftings. I charge you ... to stan youo dt r samepuritye exhorI o t th d d people o an ;d th an t, o t e forsooth lonI brooko s ,s ga cround lif y ean m , shall maintai same nth e agains l deadly."tal proclamationa y B 3 f 26to , h Septemberd 1605ha e h , denounced the " malicious spiriteis," who had affirmed that he intended to suddenly lay upon his native country " the rittes, cerimoneis, and [haill ecclesiastijcall ordoure Churcth f f o England.o "h 4 These exhalation y havma se conveniently escape s memorhi d y befors hi e " salmonlyke instinct" brough bacm Scotlano hi tkt e summeth n di f o r 1617; but in his letter of 15th December 1616 to the Privy Council, he assured them tha e woulh t e loatb d troublo ht e s goohimselhi dd an f subjects with alterations in the civil or ecclesiastical government which generale "o th wer t t eno l lykin applausd gan people.s hi ef "o The arriva Chapel-Royae e organth th f r o l sfo 5l roused suspiciond an , the carved images of the apostles and evangelists caused consternation. people "Th e murmured, fearing great alteration religion."n a si s wa t I 6 current saying—" The organs came first, now the images, and ere long they should hav e mass. Bishoe th Th " f Gallowayp o s deaf wa no o wh , chapele th , entreate Majestys dhi , "fo offence rth e thataken,s wa t o "t stoe erectio e statuespth th Kine f o nTh g. gave n anger.wayi t bu ,7 On Friday, 16th May 1617, he arrived in Edinburgh with Laud in his train, and next day "the English service was begunne in the 1 Register of Privy Council, vol. viii. p. xviii. 2 Ibid., vol. i. 2nd series, pp. cxliv-cxlvii. 3 Booke of the Universall Kirk, vol. ii. p. 771. * Register of Privy Council, vol. vii. p. 126. 6 Register of Privy Council, vol. x. pp. 685, 686. * Calderwood's History, vol. vii . 242pp . , 244. ' Spottiswoode's History, vol. iii. p. 239; Original Letters, vol. ii. pp. 497-9. 0 35 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH F Y .SO MA ,

Chappell-Royall, with singin f quiristoursgo , surplices d playinan , n go organes." Ten days later Parliament met, and the nobles, counsellors, and bishop town i s n were commande Palace repaio dt th Whitn o t ero - sunday, " wher communioe celebrate th eb o t s e nwa afte Englise th r h forme." Some communicated kneeling. Three noble wero swh e present t communicatno d di d an e wer enexo warnes o t d Lord' o dt e sth dayf O . nobles in town barely one-half complied.1 Acte Onth f thi so f eo s Parliament keipie l tymb ,al "o cum,t n o ei t " gave permission to the dean and chapter of a cathedral kirk, when the see became vacant conveno t , e "for chusin bischope an same"e f gth o o et ; but they were to " chuse the persoun quhome his Majestie pleased to nomina recommend.d an t " 2 It was proposed to the Lords of the Articles that Parliament should enact "that whatsoever conclusion was taken by his Majesty, with advice e archbishopoth f bishopsd an s mattern i , f externao s l policy e samth , e should hav e powee th strengtd an r ecclesiastican a f ho l law." Fifty-five ministers agree a protestatio o t d n agains f theo t o mthis Tw wer. e deprived, and one ()- was both deprived and exiled. The article was modified, but the King caused it to be passed by " as a thing no way necessary, the prerogative of his crown bearing him to more than was declared by it."3 The motive of • this article soon became apparent. At the King's desire the bishops and some six-and-thirty t AndrewS n i minister13tn m o s hi h t Julyme s , whe e reverteh n o t d the five articles which he had in the previous year arrogantly ordered to be inserted amon e canondesiree Churchw gth th no f knoo so d dt ,an w what their scruples were theid an , r reasons f the ,i thesany d y yha wh ,e articles admittede shoulb t dno tole H d. them plainly that unless they gave him a reason which he could not answer, he would not regard their opinion. The ministers most meekly besought him to let them have a General Assembly, where the articles might be discussed and received by common consent reluctantle H . y consente Assembln a o dt y being held on the 25th of the following November.4 The articles briefly were (1) kneelin receivine th sacramentae t ga th f go l element communione th t sa , (2) private communion, (3) private baptism, (4) confirmation, (5) com- memoratio f Christ'o n s birth, passion, resurrection, ascensione th d an , sending down of the Holy Ghost. This t AssemblAndrewsS t a t yme . " Afte readine King'th e r th f go s letter, wherei e willeh n d the o confor mt s desire hi o mt , otherways

1 Calderwood's History, vol. vii . 246pp . , 247, 249. 2 Acts of Parliament, vol. iv. p. 529. Spottiswoode's History, vol. iii. 241-7.pp ; Calderwood's History, vol. vii . 251-82.pp .

3Spottiswoode's History, vol. iii. 240.pp , 247; Calderwood's History, vol. vii . 271.pp , 272. 4 SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 16371 18 . 35 . declared he would use his own authority, the brethren of the conference were chosen. Ther s somewa e reasoning e Kin d bishopsth t an g bu , ' purpos withstoods ewa prive , botth yn h i e publicconferencth n i kd an e assembly."1 According to Spottiswoode there was much calmness and formal reasoning; but on a motion to delay the decision to another Assembly, " tha ministere th t s might have tim inforo et people mth f eo the equity of the articles, the greater part went that way, and almost l a delay."crie al r report o e proceedingdfo th Tw 2f o s s were promptly Lor y Kinge b senth e d o archbishopBinningo on t ,t tw e othee th th , y b rs and three bishops. The latter confessed that, owing to the absence of the Bishops of Moray and Orkney, and of ministers and commissioners from the far North and West, they were afraid to put much to the vote. Lord Binning explained that a great part of the ministers wished the matter deferred, so that they might have leisure, by reading the Fathers and Councils, to decide whether, "with gude conscience and without scandall of inconstancie to the Kirk and thameselfis, thay might yeild to the alterations and novelties which they imagined the articles to imply. alse H o" stated that Spottiswoode' King'e s th fea f o rs displeasure by dela o passionatliy "s mad m hi e e instant e coulh s da , scaircelie b e induced be any persuasion to accept any dowtfull or dilatorie ansuer, and moved him to threaten thame with your Majestie's resolution to ordane actie penald b , an s l proclamations agani e contravenarsth s o t , have all these articles undelayedlie obeyed."3 His sacred Majesty was furious. To the archbishops he wrote: "We will have you know that we are come to that age as we will not be witd contenfe h thin e d broathb an o k. t t . thi . , s your doin gdisgraca e no less tha protestation.e nth " Unde highesrs paihi f no t displeasuree h , commanded the m"o t kee p Christma preciselyy sda , yourselves preaching chuseind an g your texts accordin time.e th o g"t They were als diso ot - charg e modificatioeth f stipendno ministers,o t s 4 sav thos o et hao dewh trie furtheo dt e acceptancth r e fivhandn th e ow f articleso e-s hi n I . writin addee gh wordse dth : " Since your Scottish Churchr hatfa o hs contemned my clemency, they shall now find what it is to draw the anger

1 Booke e TIniversall oth f Kirk, vol. iii . 1140.p . 1 Spottiswoode's History, vol. iii. p. 248. 3 Original Letters relating to the Ecclesiastical Affairs of Scotland, Ban. Club, vol. ii. . 520-3pp . 4 Spottiswoode say s same thatth t ea , time Kine th , g -wrotPrive th o yet Council, " inhibiting e paymen rebellioue th th f o f stipend o t y san ministero st s refuser e saith d f o articless , either in burgh or landward, till they did show their conformity, and that the same was testified by e subscriptionth th f so r ordinareo y bishop" (Spottiswoode's History, vol. iii . 250)p . . This letter is not in the Register of Privy Council. His Majesty thus beat them "by the belly " is Heylyn's way of putting it (Life and Death of Laud, 1719, part i. p. 47). James had tried this, plan with some succes 158n si 4 (Register of Privy Council, vol. . 701-704)iiipp . . 352 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH Y F . O S MA ,

okina f g upon them. wrats s increaseHi " hwa d rather than appeased, when he received from the clerk of the Assembly an extract of its resolutions concerning private communio e useb e for th do mt d an n t receivina e sacramentth g . Thes o Acts e tw intimateeh , n llto dh December, were to be "altogether suppressed."1 And on 14th January he enjoined the Privy Council to issue a proclamation "commanding all people, ... in all tyme comeing, to absteene frome all kynd of husbandrie and handie labour on the holie dayis of Christmas, Goode Fryday, Easter, Whitsonday, and Ascensioun-day, to the end thay may the better attend the holie exercises quhilkis we, by advise of the bishopps, will appoin keepe b t o thost a t e Churchee tymeth n i s ; with certificatioun to the contraveneris, that thay sal be punished with all rigour as diss- obedien d rebelliouan t s personis."2 Shortly before Good Fridae th y Edinburgh magistrates were commanded by the King to see that the inhabitants observed that day in conformity with the proclamation.3 The bishops prevailed upon the King to call another General Assembly adopto fiv the Pertetat articles25thon met h AugusIt . t 1618. Means were take paco nt e Assembly kth e syno th t d t A Andrew.S hel t da s on 14t thochs h Apriwa t t "i lexpedien e tnomina b tha l sa t sucn t hme furthe of evrie presbyterie as ar wyse and discreit, and wil give his Majestie satisfaction anent theis articles propone s Highneshi e b d ' commissioner e laitth t n i sGeneral ! Assemblie haldit Androis."S t a n 4 Writin Joho gt n Murra f Lochmabenyo s Majesty'hi f o , s bed-chamber, five days afte close th rthif eo s Perth Assembly, Archbishop Spottiswoode says: "noblemee Manth f yo d baron nan s Majestihi s e sent letter, to s for assisting the service, cam not, excusing tham selfis by sicknes and il dispositioun; but I think thair myndes wer moir seik than thair bodyis, notm su e s Majesti t t hi plesise no f i o e t t tb e Bu . stilo . s . .r a d an upon thame and remember it, he provydis il for the service of tyms followinge. At the least I wil pray yow that I may half letters of thankis to suche as cam and attendit, qhairof I half gifen the Dean of Wincheste memorandum."a r e beareKing'e th th Dea e s f o rTh s nwa 5 letter to the Assembly. In that letter his Majesty was pleased to say: "Wee will not have you to thinke, that matters proponed by us, of that nature whereof these article t withous no are y ,tma suc a hgeneral l consen enjoynee b tr authoritieou y b d ; this wer emisknowina f yougo r 1 Original Letters, . 524-6 volpp n Professo I . .ii r Masson's words, "The Assembld yha evaded the first article, nibbled cautiously at the second, and postponed the rest" {Register of Privy Council, vol. xi. p. 271 n.). Original Letters, vol. ii. p. 542. The proclamation was duly made (Register of Privy Council,

. 296pp vol ,. 297)1 xi . . 3 Calderwood's History, vol. vii . 297.p . * Selections from the Minutes of the Synod of Fife, Abbotsf ord Club, p. 88. * Original Letters, . vol580p . .ii . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 163718 . . 353 places, and withall a disclayming of that innate power which we have by our calling from God. . . . Wee will content ourselves with nothing, but with a simple and direct acceptation of these articles in the forme by us sent unto you now a.long time past." After the royal letter had been

twice read, Spottiswoode, wh taked ochaiha e nth r withou1 t being elected, " resumed the heads of the same, shewing how acceptable their acceptance would bee e othe, andth n r o , side, what inconvenients their refuse might bring upo Churche nth : hee declared also unto the thew myho shoule dbe well advised before they thrust themselves wilfully in danger, because . . . after they had tasted of the troubles of banishment a little, [they] would, as others had done, seeke home againe, and acknowledge their oversights."2 Lord Binning begins his report thus: "At oure cumming to this towne, finding thae mostth t precis wilfuld an e l Puritane r chosiswe n commissionars be manie of the presbiteries, speciallie of Lowthain and Fyfe, I wes extreamlie doubtfull of the succes of your Majestie's religious and just desires." For the result he gives great credit to Spottiswoode, who everyn i , way, " expressed great wisdome, learnin autoritied gan , well beseimin s placeghi ; delaye e votindth e secungth d day, thae h t and his brethren might have sum tyme to dispose thingis to ane wished end"; and " ordaned this proposition onlie to be voted, Whether the Assemblie wald obey your Majestie, in admitting the articles proponed be your Majestie, or refuse thame. Sum insisted to have thame severallie voted, bot both he and the Deane of Winchester . . . declaired that your Majestie wald ressave none, if all wer not granted; and so, being put votino t thesn gi e termes, fourescoi allowex se articlesd e dth an r , fourtie and one refused thame, and three wer non liquet."s e minorityWilliath f o e m five ,on Scosay th s e f f Cuparsto o wa o wh , articles: " Their best defence was taken from the authority of the King's sword, which was of greater weight than his Majestie's judgment." And e recordh s that Spottiswoode " certified those that were present, that whosoever voted, against the articles, his name should be marked and s Majesty.hi o t sen p "u t Further e allegeh , s that some voteo wh d lacked commissions; that whicn i , calledthrougs role y hth lwa wa e , hth some voted twice, d soman e were pretermitted d expressean ; e th s opinion that, if none had been allowed to vote except those who were entitled, " the sincerer sort had prevailled." 4 1 Original Letters, 569. volp . ..ii 2 Bishop Lyndesay's True Narration, 1621. ,54 par. p . ti 3 Original Letters, vol. ii. pp. 573-6; Hailes' Memorials, Reign of James, 1766, pp. 87-92. As the Assembly which passed the obnoxious articles met at Perth they have been called The Five Article Perthf so . ' Scot's Apologetical Narration, pp. 261-4. There is no official record of the proceedings of this Assembly. That given in the Sooke of the Universall Kirk (vol. iii. pp. 1143-67) is compiled from Bishop Lyndesay's True Narration, d froan m Calderwood's Perth Assemblys hi d an histories. Principal Lee gives a trenchant account of it in his Lectures, vol. ii. pp. 198-213. VOL. LX. 23 354 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH .F Y O S MA ,

On 21st October, by the King's instructions, the Privy Council issued a proclamation ratifying and confirming the five acticles agreed upon at Perth Assembly, and ordaining "the same to have the force and strenth of lawis in all tyme comeing, and to have effect and execu- l placeitioual n nf i thi o s s kingdome md an ;special l thate thaib l sa r a cessatioun and abstinence frome all kynd of labour and handiworke upoun the fyve dayis abone writtin, quhilkis are appointit to be dedicat to Godis service"; and that contraveners shall be punished " in thair personis and guidis with all rigour and extremitie to the terrour of utheris."1 " In spite of the royal proclamations and the episcopal admonitions, the people in general refused to conform. . . . The citizens of Edinburgh at Christmas would not desist from their common employments. . . . The churches of those who adhered to the ancient mode of worship were crowded, while those of the conformists all over the country were almost completely deserted somn I . epeople placeth . . e . safte r being seated at the communion-table, and being required to kneel, remon- strated wit e ministerth h , and, whe e woulnh t satisfdno y them, rose from the table and went home. . . . Some of the recusants were sum- moned before the High Commission, and a few were removed from their ministry and put in close confinement."2 AugusOh n4t t 1621 Parliament ratifie five th de articles. There were

seventy-eight votes for and fifty-one against.43 Eight days afterwards the triumphant King wrote to the archbishops and bishops: " The greatest matter the Puritanes had to objecte against e church-governmenth t ther thas ewa t your proceeding with thes mwa warranted by no law, which now by this Parliament is cutte shorte. . . . t I restet e encourageb o ht therefod w comfortean yo d n i rthiy b ds happie occasiono lost o mor n ed ean , tim n procurini e a gsetle d obedience to God and us. ... The sword is now putte in your handes; d lett an t i -rust , hav w it o longe n therefoyo gn ee o l us ti r o t r perfited the service trusted unto yow; for otherwise we muste use it bote fals b r faint ho eu themd agains yo f an anieI f u .o e yo l to al r hearted, wee are hable aneugh (thankes be to God) to putte others in your places."5 As Principal Lee has said, the Church of Scotland has little cause to . ' Register of Privy Council, vol. xi. pp. 451-6. 1 Lee's Lectures, vol. ii. pp. 213-4. For the measures adopted to enforce conformity, see Register.of Privy Council, . Ixviii-lxxiv volpp . .xi ; vol. xii . Ix-lxviiipp . . 3 Acts of Parliament, vol. iv. pp. 596, 597. 1 Original Letters, vol. ii. p. 661. Professor Masson makes the numbers 85 to 59 (Register of Privy Council, vol. xii. pp. 558-9). 6 Original Letters, continuee th r 663 . volp Fo . . .ii d pressing of the five articles Lee'e ,se s Lectures* vol. ii. pp. 217, 218; Register of Privy Council, vol. xii. pp. Ixxxix-xcii; vol. xiii. pp. Ixix-lxxx. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637.

rever e memorth e f Jameyo e Sixth.th s 1 Afte s deathi r h (27th March rumoures wa 1625 t i ) d tha s successohi t r intende mako dt e some altera- tion on the form of church-government established by his father, and was not inclined to urge the observance of the five articles. To dispel these "foolishe rumouris, e calleh s a d" them, Charles Julyd 3r - in ,n o , structed the Privy Council to have it proclaimed at the market-crosses chiee th l f oburghsal f resolves , thawa e th maintaio dt n that government and policy, and, so far as the laws allow, he would " punish ony persone tha r sei disturbda to k t peace eth e athe f relligiouro r prsesenno t church- governament."2 When "the communio e Greas giveth nwa n nti Kirk f Edinburg"o h at Easter (25th March) 1627 "there were not above six or seven persons in all the toun that kneeled, also some of the ministers kneeled not." At Easter (13th April) 1628 " the communion was not given in Edinburgh t all.ministerse a "Th ' Kinge letteth o ,t r beseechin "tm oghi give them leav celebrao t e e communioth t n without kneeling," greatly displeased him. On 21st April he wrote to Spottiswoode, bidding him convene these

person3 s before him, and to inflict such condign punishment upon the chief authors as would " mak all others forebeare to doe the like heirefter."4 On Saturday 15th June 163 e Kin3th g arrive n Edinburghi d d an , bishopo "s tw goodlihi e n si th f eLaudo traine on , f attendents,eo " was that day " sworn counsellor of Scotland." Charles was crowned at Holyrood on the 18th, and Laud enters in his Diary: " I never saw more expressions of joy than were after it."5 At his coronation the King swore, with "willina g harte," tha woule h t d " defen bischopes dhi d s "an maintai e churche e th clerg th nd yan s committe o theidt r chargen i , their "haill right previlidged san s justice." d accordinan w la 6 o gt In reconstituting the Privy Council in March 1626, his Majesty had included both Archbishop e Bishopth d f an sDunkelds o , Aberdeen, Ross, Dunblane, and Winchester; and in the list of forty-seven members "Johnne Archibishop of St Androis" stands first. Sir James Balfour

states that the King, in his letter of 12th July 16267 to the Privy Council,

1 James manifeste s zea r Prelacdhi fo l anotheyn i r way n NovembeI . r 161 grantee 2h d five thousand e payimerkb o ts Majestie' "t southi f o e s cofferis r hel fo f ,reparatiou po e th f o n Cathedrall Kirk of Glasgw." Payment was to be made to the archbishop, "to be imployed be 161y 6e Ma necessai Spottiswoodeth hih mo 4t t foirsaid.e n s theo us r wa d n o ArchAn "wh , - bishop of St Andrews, signed an acquittance for five thousand merks Scots, which he had received "for reparatioun of the Castell of Sanctandrois," which was his official residence (Treasury Papers in the Register House). 2 Register of Privy Council, seriesd 2n . ,92 vol. p . i . 3 Row's History, Wodrow Society, pp. 343, 345, 346. 4 Earl of Stirling's Register of Royal Letters, vol. i. pp. 271, 272. 5 Balfour's Historical Works, . 193-95 volpp . ii . ; History of Laud's Troubles, . 169548 . ,p

Balfour's Historical Works, . 393volp . . iv . ' 6 Register of Privy Council, seriesd 2n , vol249. p . .i . 356 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

commanded that Spottiswoode should have precedence "befor the Lord Chancele f Scotlando r consequentlo s d an , y befo l others."al r f thisO 1 , Professor Masson says: " That such a letter must have been sent to the Privy Council seems indubitable on Lord Lyon King Balfour's authority; remarkabls i t i t bu e tha extan s Council'e i recoro th n t i n n f i tdo ow s Register."2 A copy of the letter, however, has been preserved.3 Not- withstanding the King's order, " the Lord Chanceler Hay, a gallant, stout man," would never condescen r givo eo dt plac Spottiswoodeo et e th n O . coronation morning Majests hi , y sene Lorth t d e ChancelloLyoth o nt r (who barely a month before had been created Earl of Kinnoul) to ask hi cedmo Archbishoe t s plac th ehi o et r thaday e pgave fo on e H t . eth " verey bruske anssuer," that, as " his Majesty had beine pleased to con- than i tine tm woffichi f Chancelero e l redes humilital , wa .. n yi e h . y to lay it doune at his Majestie's feete; bot since it was his royall will he should enjoy it with the knowen preevilidges of the same, never a ston'd preist in Scotland should set a foott s bloo hi loneo s s befodga m hi r wes hotte." In the same month that he reconstituted the Privy Council,

e Kinth g appointe4 d Spottiswood e Presidenb e Exchequero t eth f o t — "the first and last president," says Balfour, "that ever the Exchequer of Scotland had."5 Thafte y coronatios eda hi r Kine nth g rod staten ei , wit nobilits hhi y and estates, from Holyrood to Parliament.0 The way in which the Lords of the Articles were chosen gave a preponderance of influence to the prelates. schood e ministerol Th e 7l th prepare f o s da pape f grievo r - ancest nevei t t beyongo bu ;r t Articlese thaLorde th dgo th tf t i o s f i , length.8 Whe e Acte votin t camni th th Parliamentn i sn o t go e e th , King " taketh a pen and with his awin hand (an uncouth practise) noted the votes, whereby (no doubt) many were afraid to vote as otherwise they intended to doe."9 Not only so, but " he expressed now and then a grate deal f spleeneo l ; this unseiml ys Majestie' acthi f eo s bre dgrata e hearte burning in maney against his Majestie's proceidinges and governi- ment."10 "Fifteen earls and lords, and forty-four commissioners for buroughs, with some barons, hav Kirkr e vote ou Kina facn r i ,f dfo o eg

Balfour's Historical Works, . 141volp . .ii . 1- Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. i. p. 345 n. " The Earl of Stirling's Register of Royal Letters, vol. i. p. 62. Balfour's Historical Works, vol. ii. pp. 141, 142. 54 Ibid., . 134volp . .ii .

e Ibid., . 199 p vo . ii l. 7 Scot's Apologetical Narration, . 337pp , 338; Stevenson's History, 1753 86, 85 ;, . volHilpp l. i Burton's History, revised edition, vol. vi. pp. 86-8. 8 Balfour's Historical Works, vol. ii. pp. 206-16; Soot's Apologetical Narration, pp. 330-6. 9 Bow's History, . 366p . Balfour's Historical Works, vol. ii. p. 200. 10 SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 857 who, with much awe and terror, with his own hand, wrote up the voters foagainsr o r t himself."1 In the opinion of the Lyon King, this Parliament was led on by " the Episcopall and courte faction," which "proved to be that stone that afterwardes crusht them in pieces, and the fewell of that flame wich sett all Brittane a-fyre not longe therafter." Nearly all its Acts, he thought, "wer most hurteful e liberte subjecte.th th o f o t o yl Tw " he specially mention s causina s g most displeasure—Act III., "Anent his Majesties royall prerogative and apparrell of kirkemen"; and Act IV., "Ratification l Acteal f o es mad formen i e r Parliaments touching religion"; and he believed that it was "to bind the subjects the more, to observe thesse" that "his Majestie's General Revocation wa% ratiffied."2 William Haig brothe,a Laire th f Bemersidef do ro , penne dpetitiona " e Kinth go t entitled— Humble "Th e Supplicatio greaa f no t numbef o r nobilite th othersd yan , commissioner late th e n Parliament.i s " - Iex t pressed dislik Actsf eo III IV.informed d .an ,an madthae m h e df hi ti e us of these Act introduco st noveltiey ean mattern si religionf so mighe ,h t los hearte eth f mans subjectsso hi f yo ; arid tha takins hi t ge notth f eo names of those who opposed the Acts, and refusing to hear the reasons of thosdissentedo wh e , made them very apprehensiv f innovationo e s being introduced into the Church. Lord Balmerino gave this petition to the Earl of Rothes, that he might present it to the King, who, however, declined to accept it. Balmerino afterwards gave a copy to a Dundee notary, who made another copy and lent it to Peter Hay of Naughton, which he "furthwith caried" to Archbishop Spottiswoode, who "imedi- atly sene expressan t e Courteth e o witt , t i hexaggerattin s hi o t g Majesty that if he suffred suche ane affront and indignity, he might onlnot y become ridicoulou hito s s subjects governimenhis bot , t wold assuredly be vilipendit." Haig escaped to Holland. Balmerino was thrown into afted an ,lona r g confinemen s triedwa t , and by a majority of one found "guilty of the hearing of the said infamou e concealins th t revealinlibel d no e saian r ,d th dM an gf go William Haig." He was sentenced to death; but the execution was delayed unti e King'th l s pleasur s knownwa e . Balfour says thae th t 1 Samuel Rutherfurd's Letters, 1863, vol. ii. pp. 142, 143. The King's noting the votes is also referred to by Scot in his Apologetical Narration, p. 339; by Bishop Burnet in his History of his Own Time, supplicatioe th 1823 n i , Kin . d e 37volp th an :. i .go nt penne Williay db m Haig. 2 Balfour's Historical Works, . 199volpp ,. 200Actse ii . f Se Parliament,.o , 21 , 20 . volpp . .v King'e 23-7Th . s General Revocatio f grantso n , mad s himsely s minoritb ehi hi y n b i fr o y predecessors s beeha , n very fully discusse Professoy db r Masson (Register f Privyo Council,d 2n series , xxixx ,. , xli volpp ,. i .xlii , xlvii, civ-cciii) s Majesty'hi n I . s s emphaticallnamwa t ei y denied that the Revocation was procured by "the present prelates, who in this were as innocent as the thing itselfe " (The King's Large Declaration, 1639, p. 7). 8 35 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH Y F . O S MA , dela s carrieywa d sore agains e bishopsth t ' will"rageo wh , d lyka e tempestuous sea therat," and that the King, by the mediation of the Ear f Traquailo othersd an r , grante pardon.a d 1 Bishop Burnet alleges that Traquair' knowledge th s o t mediatio e du e s tha populace nwa th t e were determined to force, the prison, and, failing that, to revenge Balmerino's death on the judges and convicting jurymen. "The ruin of the King's affairs in Scotland was in a great measure owing to that prosecution."2 "The peopl d lonha eg felt thae administratioth t f o n justice was partial and corrupt; but the nobility now discovered that o protection ther s wa er themselve fo n s froe resentmenmth e th f o t prelates and the power of the Crown."3 161n I 0 Jame e Sixt appointeth sd hha d Archbishop Spottiswoodn ea extraordinary Lor f Sessione Loro dth dd Chancellorshian ; p having become vacant, by the death of the Earl of Kinnoul, Charles bestowed t upoi n him 14tn o , h January 1635. This e greatesth , t office beed ha n, churchmao n hel y b d n sinc e Reformation;th e Spottiswoode'd an 4 - ex s altatio t mak morno m d ehi endi popular wit noblese hth . So littl e doings heare committeth th e wa f f do o s e appointee th y db General Assembly, in 1616, to revise and supplement the Book of Common Or.der, that Scot of Cupar was under the impression that it never com- pleted its work.5 On the other hand, it is emphatically affirmed that frameds wa send t i Kino an t ,t g James, who, wit advice hth held ean p of some person n Englandi s , made "additions, expunctions, mutations, accomodations," before returnin o Archbishot t i g p Spottiswooded an , that it would undoubtedly have been accepted by the Scottish Church haKine dth g lived probabllonger.s wa t I 6y welld advanceen e th y db

of June 1619, when a license to print it for nineteen years was granted Tryals1 r Highfo Treason, 1720 ,184-93. volpp . .i ; Balfour's Historical Works, . 216 volpp -. .ii 20.; cf. Row's History, pp. 375-90. According to Row, although the bishops had in this prosecution the help of Laud, he became a chief instrument in procuring Balmerino's liberty. In the memoir of matter "e b propone o st Kine Laudd th d go "an t , writte subscribed nan Spottiswoodey db e on , was "anent Balmerinoc lybells hi d h"an (Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. 429)p . .i . Burnet's History of his Own Time, vol. i. p. 43. 2 3 Malcolm Laing's History f Scotland,o 1804, vol. e iiiris. 113p .Th k. that Balrnerind ha o sann ru k deep int hearte partys oth hi f so , "and exasperated them agains e bishopth t s more than before" (Bishop Guthrie's Memoirs, 1702, p. 11). 1 Crawfurd's Officers of the Crown, 1726, pp. 167,177. In recording Spottiswoode's appointment Lora s Sessiof a do 1610n ni , Calderwood say directls s thawa t i ty contrar articln a o yt e given ni by his father to the Assembly—" that the preaching of the Word, and administratioun of civill justice, were not compatible in one man's person" (Calderwood's History, vol. vii. p. 54). But

sons do not always walk in their fathers' footsteps. 5 Scot's Apologetical Narration, . 245p . 8 The King's Large Declaration, pp. 16, 17. Dr Sprott edited two previously unprinted liturgies as "Scottish Liturgies of the Reign of James VI." The larger of the two was, he "thought, "the draft completed in the reign of James." If so, it must have been altered subse- prayere r " th e Queene Kinf fo b o th quently s i y sr e g fo on , ma Charles, e thas e a ,on sh t d an " made "a happie mother of successfull children." SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 359

Gilbero t t Dick Edinburgn a , h bookseller.1 Laud also appear havo st e drafted a liturgy for the Church of Scotland, for, in speaking of him to Archbishop Williams, King James said :hate "H hrestlesa s spiritd an , canno whee se t n matter -welle sar . .. t r randoI speaa . fo t . . kno m . when, three years obtained since e ha Assembl th I , f do f Pertyo o ht consent to five articles of order and decency in correspondence with this Church of England, I gave them promise, by attestation of faith made, tha twoulI theiy dtr r obedienc furtheo en r anent ecclesiastic affairr no s put them out of their own way . . . with any new encroachments. . . . hatt n thiYe shma presse invito t e edm thenearea mo t r conjunction wit liturgye hth canond an f thio s s nation I bacsen m t hi ktbu ; again with the frivolous draught he had drawn. . . . For all this he feared not mine anger, but assaulted me again with another ill-fangled platform, to make that stubborn Kirk stoop more to the English pattern."2 Accordin Clarendono gt , although James returned from Scotlann di 1617 "without making any visible attempt" to introduce the English Liturgy there, he retained that intention till his death.3 Bishop Guthrie allege deferencn i s sbishope t thapresseth wa no o t t i e ts s dthawa t i t in King James' time; becaus e Articleth e f Perto s h " - proveun o s d welcome to the people, that they thought it not fit nor safe at that time to venture upon any farther innovations."4 Unfortunately, Charles was much more under the influence of Laud than his father had been. Clarendon testifies tha "proposee h t d nothing mor himselo et f than to unite his three kingdoms in one form of God's worship and public devotions" d thaan ;t ther s "greai e t reaso o believet n "s thathi n i , journey into Scotlan crownede b o dt ,carrie e "h resolutioe dth witm hhi n to finish that important business in the Church at the same time." Laud, who was then Bishop of London, went with him for that purpose. The bishops, however, "applied all their counsels secretly to have the matter more maturely considered e wholth d e an ;desig s nevewa n r consulted but privately, and only some few of the great men of that nation bishopse somd th ,an f eo , advise Bishoe dKinth e witd th pgy an h b of London." Even those who heartily wished to have a liturgy, and who approved of the English ceremonies, " had no mind that the very liturgy e Churcoth f f Englanho d shoul proposee db r accepteo o dt them.y db " Laud, " who was always present with the King at these debates, was

1 Lee's Memorial Biblee th r Societies,fo . Of xx App . RegisterNo . of Privy Council, vol. xi . p. 455. 2 Bishop Hacket's Scrinia Reserata, e promisTh . 1693 e64 e Marqui . madth ,p y b ef o s Hamilton King'e th n i , s name, when Parliament ratifie e fivth de Article f Perthso y 1621n i , ma , be seen e Metros inth Papers, . vol415p mord . .ii , an e full Calderwood'n i y s History, vol. vii. p. 496. Dr Grub doubts the Williams story (Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 376).

Clarendon's History, 1826. vol. i. p. 145, Guthrie's Memoirs, 1702, p. 16.

a 4 360 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH F Y .O S MA ,

exceedingly trouble t thia d s delay. obviato T " e objectioth e n thao t t press the liturgy without any alteration " would look like an imposition from England," the King "committed the framing and composing such a liturgy as would most probably be acceptable to that people, to a select numbe e bishops.th f o r " Before leavin "e g h erecte d Edinburgh into a bishopric," but " the people generally thought that they had too many bishops before, and so the increasing the number was not like to be very gratefu themo t bishope l Th d indee. ha s d very little interest in the affections of that nation."1 Booke f Th Canons,o also projecte e Generath y b d l Assembl 1616n yi , s readwa y befor s e printeLiturgyth ewa Rabay d db an , f Aberdeeno n in 1636. It is a quarto pamphlet of 43 pages, entitled: " Canons and Constitvtions Ecclesiastical Governaformee n l i th gathere t r pu fo , d - dan ment of the Church of Scotland. Ratified and approved by his Majestie's Royall Warrand, and ordained to be observed by the Clergie, and all others whom they concerne. Publishe y Authoritie.b d e royaTh "l warrant bears that the canons, orders, and constitutions are ratified and confirmed "by our prerogative royall, and supreme authoritie, in causes ecclesiastical thad ! "an ;t "wee comman r authoritiou y db e royall diligentlie ..same be .th o et e observe executed. d clerge dan th d y An " straitle ar y this,o charget e t sparin "se no o dt executo gt penalties.e eth " In this little manual it is decreed and ordained that: Whosoever shall impeac y pare " an royalth t n i h l supremaci n causei e s ecclesi- asticall" is to be excommunicated. Whosoever shall affirm that the for f worshim o e Bookth f Commono n i p Prayer; e rited cereth an s - monies of the Church; its government, " under his Majestie," by arch- bishops, etc.; the form of making and consecrating archbishops, etc., as now established; "doe contayn n theei m anie thing repugnane th o t t Scriptures, or are corrupt, superstitious, or unlawful in the service and worshi excommunicatede b f God,p o o t s "i . persoo "N n shall hereafter bee receaved into holie orders, nor suffered to preach, catechise, reade divinitie, ministe e sacramentesth r r executo , e anie other ecclesiasticall function, unlesse hee first subscrybe to bee obedient to the canons of e Church.th " Every presbyter, eithe himsel y anothey b r b r o f r person lawfully called, shall " read r causeo e divine servic donee b o et , according to the forme of the Book of Common Prayer, before all sermons."2 The 1 Clarendon's History, 146-54. vol Walter pp . .Si i . r Scott put t morsi e strongly: " James had, with infinite difficulty, after long intriguing nevey b d r lettinan , g sli pfavourabla e opportunity, establishe Scotlann i d e ordeth d f bishopso r , who, conscious that they were detestee th y b d inferio rcommo e clergyth d an n people, clun raised r suppor e gKingha fo th o d o thet wh t, mo t their tottering dignity " (Secret History of the Court of James the First, 1811, vol. ii. p. 83). 2 Chapter III. provides tha l presbyteral t preacherd san s shall mov people eth joio t e n with them in prayer, "using some fewe and convenient wordes: and shall alwayes conclude with the Lord's Prayer." And Chapteby , r XI., none permittewerbe eto d read"to coneeaveor e publioke SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 1637.18 1 36 .

Lord's Supper shal lreceavee "be d wit e bowin e knee."hth th o f go N * secret meetings shall "bee kept by presbyters, or anie other persons whatsoever r consultinfo , g upon matters ecclesiastical!" ;2 ecclesiastical contraveners to be suspended for the first offence, excommunicated for seconde th , deprive e thirdth offendery r firse la ;dfo th t r e faulb fo s o t t admonished e seconth r dfo , excommunicated proe e thirb th -o dt r fo , ceeded against by the laws of the kingdom. Any person affirming that Nationaa l Synod ,Majesty's callehi y b d s authoritye ,be "ougho t t no t obeyed," shall be excommunicated. Canon 4 of Chapter VIII. merits special attention. Whosoever shall affirmy s lawfuan i tha r t i tfo l presbyter or layman, jointly or severally, to make rules, orders, or con- stitutions in causes ecclesiastical, or to add or detract from things now established, withou royae th t l authority, shall be excommunicated.t "Bu forasmuc o reformation s a h n doctrini n r disciplino ee mad be en ca e perfect at once in anie Church, therefore it shall and may be lawfull for the Church of Scotland, at anie tyme, to make remonstrance to his Majestic or his successoures, what they conceave fit to bee taken in farther consideration, in and concerning the premisses. And if the King shall thereupon declare his lyking and approbation, then both clergie anshaly dla l yeeld thei lawfule rt be shali obediencer t t fo l no l Bu . . . . bishope th s themselves Nationaa n i , l Synod r otherwyseo , alteo t ,y an r rubricke, article, canon doctrinall or disciplinarie, whatsoever; under the payne above mentioned, and his Majestie's farther displeasure." " Lastlie: In all this Sooke of Canons, wheresoever there is no penaltie expresslie set downe, it is to bee understood that (so the cryme or offence bee proved) the punishment shall bee arbitrarie, as the ordinarie shall thinke fittest." Among the documents which afterwards fell into the hands of the were fourtee f Laud'o n s letter o Adat s m Bannatynr (o e Bellenden), Bishop of Dunblane; letters of Laud, of Juxon, Bishop of

e Ear th f LondonStirling o f l o d Maxwello an t , , Bisho f Rosso po tw ; 3 memoirs by Archbishop Spottiswoode; and two manuscript copies of the Book of Canons. Effectiv f thes o s made ewa us e "Thn e i e Charge th f eo prayers in the Church, unlesse hee bee in holie orders and lawfullie authorised by the bishop." Chapte . provideIX r s "thal meetingal n i t r divinsfo e worship before sermo whole nth e prayers according to the Liturgie bee deliberatelie and distinctlie read." And that neither "any presbyter or reader bee permitted to conceave prayers ex tempore, or use anie other forme in the publicke LiCurgi servicr eo e tha prescrybes ni d; unde payne rth deprivatiof eo n fro benefics mhi cure.r eo " e Lordth f f Sessioo so w 1Fe n appea havo t r e obeye King'e th d s orde communicatiny b r n gi the Royal Chapel; and so, on 13th May 1634, he instructed them to prepare themselves, their advocates, clerks writersd an , participato t , e there twic eyeara , "fo wile t suffew r no l r youo ,wh should precede others by your good example, to be leaders of our other subjects to contemn and disobey the orders of the Church " (Hailes' Memorials, Reign of Charles, pp. 1, 2). 2 This included meetings "fo expoundine rth Scripture.f go " 3 Of the letters to Bannatyne, one at least was written after he became . 362 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

Scottish Commissioners against Canterburie," presented to the English Parliament, in which they said that they were ready to exhibit all these documents, and so " put the matter out of all debate."1 One of the MS. e copieBoohth f Canonsf o o s s " writtewa n upon e sidthon ee onely, wit othee hth r side blanke r correctionsfo , , additions puttind n an ,i l gal better order." Laud's alterations were interliningsy "b , marginallsd an , filling up of the blanke page with directions sent to our prelates." The other copy was a clean one in Spottiswoode's handwriting, carefully embodying all Laud's alterations and additions; and had been sent to England to procure the King's warrant, which was obtained, but with some canons added, and a paper of other corrections. The spirit of

Laud's alterations is pointed out under eight heads. " 4.2 Our prelates in divers places witnesse their dislike of Papists. . . . But, in Canterburie's edition, the name of Papists and Popery is not so much as mentioned. 5. Our prelates have not the boldnesse to trouble us in their canons with altars, fonts, chancels, readin a lon f go leiturgie before sermon, etc. But Canterbur s punctualyi peremptord an l l these.al seeme n yi H " o st have been specially well pleased with Cano f Chapteo n4 r VIII. true ,th e meanin f whichgo saide h , , "remaines still unde curtaine.e th r t kepI " t e dooth r ope r furthenfo r innovations originae Th . Booe l th titl kf eo was—"Canons agreed proponeupoe b e severalo nt th o dt l synode th f so Kir f Scotland.ko t pleas no t tha d eBu di "t wasi Laud e ,H too.o wh , introduced the arbitrary penalty. And he was blamed for the taking down of " galleries and stone-walls in the kirks of Edinburgh and Saint r altar fo d adoratioo mak t y an s t Androiswa e bu otheo n d n r en r fo , toward e eastth s , which, besides other evills, mad smalo n e l noisd an e disturbance amongs e peopleth t , deprived hereb f theio y r ordinary accomodation for publique worship." He denied that he commanded the galleries to be taken down in St Andrews; and, as for Edinburgh, wha dons twa e therKing'e dons th ey wa e b s command.3 1 This charge was drafted by , and abridged and polished by Alexander Henderson (Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 280). It was printed, with the charge against Stratford, etc., as a quarto pamphlet, in London, in 1641; and reprinted by Prynne, in that year, in the Antipathie of the English Lordly Prelacie, part ii. chap. vii. pp. 344-55. Laud had been translate e archbishoprith o dt f Canterburco 19tn yo h September 1633. impeaches Whewa e nh d of high treason in the House of Lords in December 1640, the Scots charge against him (which had been completed a few days before) was read, and he was "committed to the Black Rod" (White- locke's Memorials, f nexo ; Laud't t9 1732 1s lodges Marc3 e . e wa th p , s th e n Diary]:dhi n h o d an Tower. e letter Ninth f o es which survive a memorandum d an , e printee Appendiar ,th n i d o t x Laing'2 s Baillie's Letters, n inventor . vola 428-40 pp r . .i Fo .f them yo Ibid.,e se , . 474volp . ..ii . They were partly printe Lory db d Haile Memorialss hi n si Letters,d an Eeicjn of Charles, . 3-19pp . statemene Th t about Bellenden's preaching whico t , h Hailes drew doubtles s attentiowa , 6) . sn(p missine th f o e gbase letterson n alse do oSe .Rushworth' s Collections, . 206parp . .tii 3 The alterations in St Giles were by the King's orders of 6th October 1633 (Earl of Stirling's Register of Royal Letters, vol. ii. p. 684); but Laud, no doubt, was the instigator. In the course SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 363 Laud -was abl o deliveet a printer de Book copth f Canonso f yo o t the King on 16th February 1636j1 but the Book of Common Prayer, whic t enjoinedhi t publishe no s wa , d until full yeaa y r later. 20tn O h2 December 1636, e King'actinth n go s instruction f 18to s h Octobere th , Privy Council ordained that by public proclamation all the lieges should be commanded "to conforme thameselffes to the said publict forme, quhile onelith s ki e forme quhil s Majestiekhi , having takee nth counsel s clergiehi f o l , thinke usee s b n God'fitdi o t t s publict worship heir" d thae clergan th ;t y should take special car s dule thawa y t i t observe d contravenerdan s condignly censure d punisheddan thad an ;t every parish should procur t leasa eo copie tw t s before next Easter. His Majesty, who doubted not that all his subjects, "both clergie and others, will receav e samth e e with such reverenc s apperteanneth,"a e 8 was doomed to be deeply disappointed. On the 13th June 1637, the Privy Council deeme t i necessard o ordait y n lettere issuedb o t s, " chargin e wholgth e presbyter ministerd an s s within this kingdonie, that f thethamd everio yan e ean e provid d furnishan e e thameselffes for the use of their parishes with twa of the saidis bookes of publict servic r commoueo n prayer, within fyftene dayes nixt afte chargee th r , under the pane of rebellion," etc.4 When King James wished to introduce innovations, he tried to make it appear that he was carrying the Church with him. There was

s lonelaboratod hi f gan e defence agains e ChargScottise th tth f o e h Commissioners sayse h , : "His Majesty having, in a Christian and princely way, erected and indowed a bishoprick in Edinburgh ; he resolved to make the great church of St Giles in that city a cathedral; and to this end gave order to have the galleries in the lesser church, and the stone-wall which divided them, taken down. For of old, they were both one church, and made two by a wall built up at the west end of the chancel; so that that which was called the lesser church was but the chancel of St Giles with galleries round about it; and was for all the world like a square theater, without any shew of a church" (History of Laud's Troubles and Tryal, 1695, pp. 96, 97). By the King's orders referre aboveo dt ,eas e " th saie t walth dground razee e n b churchi th l o o dt t s , and"wa . also "the west wall therin," before Lammas 1634. -"I e beginninth n yeare th f ego 1634e ,th magistrate f Edinburgho s s thea , y were commanded d causdi , e demolis e partitioth h n wall betui Greae xLittlth d an t e Kirk " (Row's History, lette370). a p n 1634I 13ty f . r o Kin e hMa , th g says that he had given orders for "decoreing St Geill's, by dimolisching of the wester wall and the walls of the yles therof, the goldsmyth chopes and song schooll, with the walls of the vesterie, wher it is disjoyned from the church, and restoreing the vesterie therunto" (Earl of Stirling's Register of Royal Letters, vol. ii. p. 751). These extracts completely upset the idea that merely the choir was fitted up as a cathedral (cf. Registruin Cartarum Ecclesie Sancti Egidii, . Iv)p . ' Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 439. 2 Baillie says that "the books •wer t printeno e d till Aprile [1637whil a pasts d ]wa e an , there- after " (Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 16); and, again, " it was well near May thereafter ere the books were printed: for, as it is now perceaved by the leaves and sheets of that booke, which was give t athornou e shoppeth t f Edinburgho s o covet , r spyc d tobaccoan e editioe on , t leasna t destroyes wa d : howhar fo t t caus cannoe ew t learne" (Ibid., , 32)31 .. volpp . i 3 Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. pp. 352, 353. 4 Ibid., . 448pp , 449. PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

no pretence of that now. The General Assembly had not met for nine- tee ne slightes th years t d therno an t;s i ereaso believo nt e thae th t synods were consulted concerning either the Book of Canons or the Book f Commono Prayer. Clarendon though t a fata thas ltwa "t i inadvertency that these canons, neither befor after no e r they were sent e King th d eve o ha ,t r bee e nAssembl th see convocatioy y b nan r yo n clergye oth f ,strictl o whics s hywa oblige e observatioth o dt f them.no " Moreover e ,sam "therth s e affectewa e d premeditatean d d omission" concerning the Liturgy, "the clergy not at all consulted in it, and which was more strange, not all the bishops acquainted with it."1 Bishop Guthrie alleges that this provoked even most of those ministers favoureo wh d Episcopacy. Wha people th t e though t sooi f o nt became 2 apparent. It was resolved to introduce it in Edinburgh on 23rd July. The e tumulth resul s twa t which r morfo , e thao centuriestw n s beeha , n associated with the immortal name of Jenny Geddes.3 Five weeks later, William Annand, for defending the Liturgy in a synod sermon at Glasgow s assailewa , d with railin d cursingan y thirtb g r fortyo f o y r honestes"ou t women, presencn "i archbishoe th f eo magistratesd pan , as he left the church; and in the evening " some hundredths of inraged women l qualities,al f o , " attacke "witm hi d h iieaves d stavean d , an s peats," beasorem hi t , and ren s cloakhi t , ruffhatd an ,. "This tumult wa t thoughgreao s no s t thawa t t meei t searcho t t , eithe plottern i r s actor or foit, r numberof s besthe t sof qualitie ' would have been found guiltie."4 In November, when Bishop Whitfurd was using the Service- Book in his own church of Brechin, "the people gat up in ane mad humour detesting this sor f worschipo t , and' perseuischarplio s m hi t e that hardlie he escaipit out of there handis onslayne, and forsit for saiftie of his lyff to leave his bishoprik and flic the kingdome."6 e Thth f ee o prayer-boo patt th f t smootheAc ho no e s th kwa y b d Privy Council of 14th March 1637, forbidding the printing and import- ing of " the old psalmes," to make way for the revised version, attached 6 prayer-bookw ne e th bearind o t an , misleadine gth g title— Psalmee "Th s 1 Clarendon's History, . 185volpp ,. . i 186 , 191. That Scotce somth f eo h t bishopseeno n d sha Liturge th y publishe s beforwa t i e mentiones di Lauy db d with disapproval (Rushworth's His- torical Collections, part ii. p. 398). 2 Guthrie's Memoirs, pp. 18, 19. r thiFo 3s tumult Rothese se , ' Relation, . 198-200pp ; Gordon's History f Scotso Affairs, vol. .i . 7-11pp ; Bishop Guthrie's Memoirs, 2, 0; Wariston'19 . pp s Diary, . 265p . Laing's Baillie's Letters,. 21 vol . p . .i

1 Spalding's Memorialls, Spald. Club, vol. i. p. 82. '5 Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. pp. 409, 410. The. Act was in accordance wit hwarrana t marginafroe Kinge th m th t bu ; e printel notth n i ed Register wrongly sum- Psalmd ol marise orderind e "forbiddinth s an a f Psalmt o si w e g ne us tha sun e e e sb th tgth g in all the churches." This error is repeated in the Introduction, p. ix. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 5 163718 36 . .

of King David: translated by King James."1 One objection to the new Aversion was, that "the people hath been lono es g acquented d ol wit e hth meeter, tha t leasa t r som o t sin n e Psalmel maneca gth al f yo s with- out buik."2 The popularity of the old version had been strikingly manifeste huge th ey db crow d accompanying John Duriereturs hi n no , to Edinburgh, in September 1582, singing, from the Nether Bow to St Giles, in four parts the 124th Psalm—"Now Israel may say."

o entrietw Her e s ar efro m Laud's Diary (anno 1637): " Junii, 14. 3 This day Jo. Bastwick, Dr of Physick, Hen. Burton, Batch, of Divinity, and Will. Prynne, Barrister-at-law were censured for their libells agains hierarche th t Churche th f yo , etc." "Juni Friday. 30 i abovee th , - named three libellers lost their ears."4 Besides having "their eares clos t off,cu e "e thre s th fineeac f wa eo hd £5000 d Prynnan ,s wa e branded on both cheeks with a hot iron. They were kept close prisoners, and deprived of pen, ink, and paper. In Prynne's opinion, this star- chamber procedure was a moving cause of the Jenny Geddes tumult. " This transcenden kindw f Prelaticalne te o l tyranny, wherewith Canter- bury imagine terrifio dt appald ean Scotse eth , commin theio gt r eares, wrought quite contrary effects, stirring them up with greater animosity resiso t prelatese th t ' encroachments both upon their consciences, lawes, liberties, and established discipline."5 According to Rushworth, the news of this brutal treatment of Bastwick, Burton, and Prynne " flew quickly into Scotland," and the Scots expected that they too would be getting a star-chamber to strengthen the power of the bishops.6 On 24th July (the day after the tumult in St Giles), the Privy Council ordaine Lyoe dth n Heral proclaio dt market-crose th mt a Edinburgf so h triee raison o t dtumuly e churche y an eth tha an n i f t i tr church o s - yards railer o , spokd dan e agains Service-Booke th t penalte ,th deatf yo h would be executed upon them without favour or mercy.7 On the 27th and 28th e Privth , y Council took step secureo t s , throug e provoshth d an t magistrate f Edinburghso e "peaceablth , e exercis Service-Bookee th f eo , securitid an persone th f eo s imploye sai o presene b lwh assisr d do an t t at the practise thairof."8 On the 29th, Spottiswoode reported that he and e otheth r bishops thought that there shoul e "b da surceasse th f o e Service-Book," until the King signified his pleasure as to the punish- 1 Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. Hi. p. 531. 2 Bannatyne Miscellany, vol. i. p. 243. 3 Calderwood's History, vol. iii. p. 647. * History of Laud's Troubles and Tryal, p. 54. 5 Whitelock's Memorials, . 26p ; Prynne's Antipathie Englishe th f o Lordly Prelacie, par. ii t chap. vii. pp. 341, 342. 6 Rushworth's Historical Collections, 1680 sentenca , y . 385parstar-chambere p B . th . ii tf eo , Prynne's ears had been cut off in 1633; the] stumps were now rather sawn off than cut off (Ibid., p. 382). It vexed Laud that the victims were allowed to speak freely in the pillory, and thousands permitted to greet them on their way to prison (Strafford's Letters, vol. ii. p. 99). Register of the Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. p. 483. * Ibid., pp. 486, 487, 489. 7 366 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926. e author mentumulte th th f o tf tha d o sbishops'hae an ;tth d appointed that, in the interim, neither the old service nor the new should be used. h AugustO4t n e Privth , y Council receive e King'sth d ' letter

of 30t1 h July ordering them to endeavour to discover and punish those who too k e tumult o helt th pare clerg th pd n i t settlinn an ;yi e gth servic Edinburgn i e elsewherd han e when required e majoritTh . f o y the bishops present at the Council, on 5th August, reported that the use e Service-Boooth f k could not, unti e 13thth l convenientle ,b y resumed in Edinburgh; but on the 9th the bailies declared that, even by the 13th, they coul t providdno e competent clerk readersd an sPrive Th .y Council ordained that the magistrates, and their successors in office, should protec e bishoth td ministeran p s of Edinburg d otheran h s officiatin e divinth n i ge servic prescribedw eno keepiny b , g them, their wives, servants d familiean , s " harmless d skaithlessean e " frol mal danger, peril, and trouble, at all times until the discontentment of the people was removed.2 Laud, whose connection with the Service-Book did not end with its publication, wrote, on 7th August, a lengthy letter to the Earl of Traquair, Lord High Treasurer, expressin e King'gth s displeasured an , criticising what had been done, not forgetting " the interdicting of all divine service" till his Majesty's pleasure was further known. He

was somewhat mollified by the letter which the Edinburgh bailies3 sent to him on the 19th, lamenting the tumult "in our churches, that day of inbringin e Service-Book"th f o g ; tellin tham hi gt "althouge th h povert f thihave o y t w bees no et cit ne greatye b y . wantin . . , o t g offer good means, above our power, to such as would undertake that service," and assuring him " of obedience upon our part."4 The Register of Privy Council shows who were present at its meet- ing on the afternoon of 23rd August; but gives no indication of the natur ebusinese oth f s befor . Froit e me Kinglettea th o ,t r however, dated 25th August signed an , nineteey db memberse th f no learne s i t i , d tha meetine tth expressls gwa y hel consideo dt bese rth t mean advancf so - •ing the Service-Book. They explain that " wee found ourselves, farre by expectationr ou , surprised wit clamoure hth s and feare youf so r Majestie's subjects from almost all the partes and corners of the kingdome; arid that even of these who otherwayes hes heretofore lived in obedience d conformitian o yout e r Majestie's lawes, both n ecclesiasticai e d an l civile bussinesse. e "urgin e practic Th th e "Service-Book th f o gf o e " had caused such a general murmuring and grudging "in all sortes of

1 Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. p. 490. * Ibid., pp. 509-15. 3 Rushworth's Historical Collections, part ii. pp. 389, 390. 4 Ibid., . 393 parpp ,. 394ii t . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 367

people" that the Council did not dare to hide it any longer from him, or to dive further either into the cause or the remedy, until he should " prescrive the way after hearing of all the particulars, either by calling some of your Majestie's Councell, bothe clergie and laitie, to your Majestie's owne presence," or otherwise. In a letter of 27th August to

the Marquis of Hamilton, the Earl of Traquai1 r recommended that, if the King wishe clerge th consulo f thidt n yo i sy matteran t wisese th ,d an t calmest should be selected, for " some of the leading men amongst them violeno s d forwarde ar an t d manan , y times without groun r truo d e judgment, that their wan f righo t t understandin compaso t w gho s busi- nes thif so s natur weighd ean t does often bree mans du y difficulties."

t a thi s s afternoowa t I n meetin e Privth f yo g Council n 23ro , d 2 August, that three Fife ministers—Alexander Henderson of Leuchars, George Hamilton of Newburn, and James Bruce of Kingsbarns—gave theiin r supplication. thre Eacbeethe ehad hof n willin receivto g ea copy of the Service-Book to see what it contained before promising to practise it; but had been charged by letters of horning to buy two. Their petition embodied five reasons why the charges should be sus- pended, and was accompanied by a paper of information.3 Although neithe petitioe informatioe th rth r nno mentiones i n e Registerth n i d , 25the resule e Councith th th , for,n o is t, l graciously explained thae th t f Councio t n whicAc o l e hlettersth thed an y, proceeded, extended " allanerli e buyine saidth th sf o t eo gfarther."bookeso n d n an ,I 4 other words, the petitioners were only bound to buy, not to practise. Laud a lette n i f ,4t o rh Septembe o Spottiswoodet r , criticisem hi s for relying too much on his clerical brethren, ignoring the lay lords of Prive th y Council King'e th conveyd m an s; hi permissio e o st th e us o nt sharper measure e desireh s d with non-compliant ministers. Fros mhi epistle of the llth to Traquair, it is learned that it was the hated Bishop of Bosproposeswho temporardthe y " interdictio Service-Bookthe n "of : that Lau showd dha e " vernth y fair, discreet lette e Edinburgth rf "o h bailies to the King, who bade him thank them very heartily; that his Majesty had "carefully looked over arid approved every word in this

Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. pp. 451, 452. The subscribers of this letter include Spottis-

wood1 e and the Bishops of Edinburgh, Galloway, Boss, and Brechin; but Sir James Balfour

laso omitttw (Historicale sth Works, . 231) p vol . .ii . z Burnet's Memoires of the Dukes of Hamilton, 1677, p. 31. Traquair was not singular in his estimate. " Some other lords spoke favourabl Councin yi supplicantse th f o l passionateld an , y rebuked the bishops " (Bishop Guthrie's Memoirs, p. 23). Rothes' Relation, Ban. Club, pp. 5, 45-47. 43 Register f Privyo Council, seriesd 2n , vol. . 521vipp . , 694. There were other petitioners to the Council that day besides the three ministers from Fife (Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 19); and many noblemen by letters, and gentlemen orally, canvassed the members of Council (Ibid., vol. i. pp. 19, 20; Rothes' Relation, pp. 5, 6, 11). 8 36 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH Y F .O S MA , Liturgy, d thatan " , therefore n Laud'i , s opinion, "it would mightily dishonou Kinge th r ameno "t d it.1 When the Privy Council met on 20th September, it derived little guidance from the King's reproachful letter of the 10th. It was not fit, he thought, to send for any of the Council, but it was his pleasure that e bishopeacth f ho s should caus e Service-Booeth n ow s reae hi b n di o k t diocese, as Ross and Dunblane had already done; that the burghs should not choose magistrates for whose conformity they could not answer; and that a sufficient number of the Council should remain in or near Edinburgh during the vacation "till the Service-Book be settled."2 The perplexed Council delayed givin answen mane ga th yo t r petitions pre- sented that day, imtil his Majesty signified " his gracious pleasure thereanent," and intreated the Duke of Lennox, who was repairing to Court o remonstra"t , s Majestihi o e t tret th ew e bussine estath f o t s with the manie pressing difficulteis." In the letter sent to the King,

plainlis it y stated thagenerathe t l dislik "beenthihas eday s e more 3 fullie evidence e numerouth y db s confluenc l degreeal f rankd o e an s f so persones," who, earnestl humblyd yan sixty-eighn i , t petitions, opposed the acceptance of the Service-Book. Copies of three were forwarded to the King; one from nobles, barons, and gentlemen; one from the minister e exercisth f so f Auchterardeo e e diocesth n i f rDunblane o e , "where your Majesti s informei e e servicth d s practised"ei e on d an ; fro e cit mf Glasgowth yo e otheth lisf A ro .t sixty-fiv alss oewa sent.4 Of the supplicants present that day there were a score of nobles, a great many barons, commissioners from the West, and over eighty ministers. In an interview at this time with Rothes, Spottiswoode,

banteringl5 y no doubt, said: " What neidit this resistance ? If the King wold turne Papist behovee w : obey o dt coulo wh :d resist princes?"6 On 23rd September Prive th , y Council recommende e magistratedth s of Edinburg consulo ht Towe th t n Council " anen mose th t t conduceable meanes for satling the Service-Booke within thair kirks in a peaceable way," and to report their resolution on Monday next. They did not repor Mondayn o t thereford an , e the Lords recommended them "to

1 Rushworth's Historical Collections, part ii. pp. 397-9. Later, the King proclaimed that there s nothin e Bookwa th f Commono n gi Prayer t seeapproved no nan d thaha de h t"befor e th e sam s eithewa e r divulge r printedo d " (Large Declaration, . . 48)Salp Cf e. Cataloguee th f o Hamilton Library, 1884y t 316Ma ,lo . ' Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 452. The Lyon King described the King's letter as " perem- torey and bitter" (Balfour's Historical Works, vol. ii. pp. 231, 232). 3 Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. pp. 528, 529. Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 453. For the three petitions sent to the King, see Rothes'

Relation,4 pp. 47-9. In the first of the three, the phrase "a neidless noise" was borrowed from King'e th s lette 10tf ro h September probabls wa d yan , suggeste Traquaiy db r (Ibid.,. 9) . p Ibid., pp. 7-10; Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 33. Rothes' Relation, p. 10. 6 e SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 369 advise upo ndewtifula satisfactorid an l e answer." Nex (thy da te 26th), impelled by the importunity of the citizens, they handed in a petition desiring that they e presseshoulb t receivo no dt e Service-Booth e k until his Majesty signified his pleasure. On the same day they wrote to Laud, excusing themselves and begging his "grace's favour and inter- cession with his Majestic."1 Whe e Privth n y n 17tCouncio ht Octoberme l t i mus, t have been sadly chagrined by the King's curt letter of the 9th. He thought it t fitanswero "t tno t thia , s time," eithe petitionse s letteth it r r o rd an , was "not resolved for the present when to doe it"; but commanded that this meeting of Council should be dissolved, in so far as it concerned that business thatd proclamationy an ;comd b , ha atteno et o wh d l al , to that business should be commanded to return to their own dwellings under pai f horningno , except thos coulo ewh d show " just cau f stao s y for thair particular affaires." And the Council was to use its best endeavour d punisan e stirrers-ut fino t th hs ou de latth e f po tumult s in Edinburgh and Glasgow. His Majesty also sent warrants for other proclamationso tw removine on ; e meetinggth f Councio s Sessiod an l n from Edinburgh e otheth d r an orderin, d copie ha l thos f gal o o s ewh the book entitled—" A Dispute against the English-Popish ceremonies obtruded upo e Kir nth f Scotland, ko brino "t g ordee then i b , mo t in r publicly burned.2 The petitioners, having learned that this meetin f Councigo o t s wa l be held, hurried to Edinburgh in great numbers. "Beside the increase o t fbee noblemenno nd formerlha o ,wh y there, ther shireo n er wero s w efe e e Grampiosoutonth th f ho n Hills, from which cam t gentlemeneno , burghers, ministers and commons."3 Wariston states that, on the 17th, Craid an f Riccartonge o h commissionerss a , , gavsupplicatioa n ei r nfo Currie agains e Service-Bookth t thad an , t "huga ther s ewa number of uthers."4 Baillie put e numbeth s f commissionero r f parisheo s o swh 1 Rothes' Relation, p. 12; Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. pp. 532-4; The King's Large Declaration, pp. 29, 30,32. The Edinburgh citizens did not rest long satisfied with this mild petition. On 18th October they mobbed Bishop Sydserf, who was believed to wear a crucifix, and successfully insiste thein do r magistrates petitionin restoratioe th r gfo theif no r ordinary prayers (i.e.Booke th f Commono Order},f thei o ministero d tw r an beed readed ha n san o silencedrwh . r ThomaSi s Hope call t "i s a greter tumult" (Diary, . 66)p ; Traquair says, "the likneves eha r been seen in this kingdom " (Hardwick's State Papers, vol. ii. p. 96). Of. Ancram and Lothian Correspondence, , 9695 ; Large. volpp . i . Declaration, . 34-pp 8Rothes; . 20 ', Relation,19 , 15 . pp For the reader's ordinary service, see Bishop Cowper's Workes, 1626, p. 680. 2 Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. pp. 536-8; Rush worth's Historical Collec- tions, . 401s muc pp par ,wa . 402 ii htt I easie. buro t r n tha answeo nt r this boo f Georgo k e Gillespie's f whico , h ther three ear e editions, 1637, 1660 1844d ,an . "The effect f thio s s proclama- e book th o mack t n othero r et no moe fo itselfs etion a r t th , revr e bu we curious,e yon o et kno contente wth s therof consequentld an , macko yt mercate eth stationere bettee th th t r rfo " (Gordon's History of Scots Affairs, Spaldiug Club, vol. i. p. 20). ' Wariston'* Guthrie's Diary,s 1632-9Memoirs, . 270. p ,24 . .p VOL. LX. 24 370 PROCEEDING E SOCIETY, 192610 TH F Y . O S MA ,

gav n supplicationei s "abova s hundreth.o tw e e petitionerTh " w no s proceeded to deliberate on the situation; the nobles in one house, the gentr anothern yi e ministerth , a thirdministerse n i sTh . were f thei e y on disapprove y b aske e e Service-Bookon dth f do . l did"Al , bot r mattefo h d mannean r f imposeino r g it." While thus engaged, they were informed that, by proclamation, they were commanded to leav e toweth n within twenty-four hours.1 Thos faileo ecomplwh o t d y denouncee werb l theio et al e horn th d r rebelss do movabla an ,t t pu , e goods escheated to the King's use.3 The nobles resolved to meet this by drawin "p formala gu l complaint agains bishopse th t authors a , f so s like trouble folloo th et wa l it. d n al Booe w o s"an d th thad kan ha t Lord Balmerin Alexanded oan r Henderson were e instructeth n pe o dt complaint wero s ed Loran , d Loudo David nan d Dickson. " That night," says Baillie, " thes t sleeeno foupd di much.r " Nexo tw t e dayth f ,o forms noblee th , Loudosy b preferre e Dicksond on nan e dth , whics hwa immediately subscribed somy "b e twenty-four earle d lordsan s , some two three hundred gentlemen of quality," and in the afternoon was taken to the ministers, some of whom signed it without either reading it or hearing it read. Baillie would have had less difficulty in signing s term iit fd bee ha sn more general e thoughH . t that "the penners were much more happie than wise."3 "e Historicalth n I l Informatioune " Rothedrawy b revised p nu an s d by Wariston e formath , l complain s designatei t e " supplicatione,th d " s saii havo dt d an e bee r DavinM drawy db Dick[sonp nu d onlan ]y looked upo s dony Loudonb nwa e t e hastilieb coul"I o s .t d dno an , done ornatlie and so advysedlie. They did draw up one copie in paper e Counsellfoth r d anothean , n parchmeni r o subscryvet t , thar ou t hands being at it mycht testifie -who joyned with that petitione. Ther handwa 0 t thai 50 s t a st same nycht. coverinA " g lette draws rwa p nu by Loudon, showing that many of them had other business in the town, and referring to the supplication.4 In his. Diary, Wariston puts it more briefly: "The nobilitie apairt e gentrith , e apairt e burroueth , s apairt, the ministerie apairt, met, advysed, and consulted, and at the last subscryved every on[e] the supplication against the Service-Book, canons, and bischops themselves, and presented it to the Counseil."5 The Council read the letter "and gave twentie-four hours more for convenient dispatche of the petitioners out of toun"; but when they

Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. pp. 34, 35.

21 Register of Privy Council, seriesd 2n , vol. vi. 537p . . Those were excepte shoulo dwh d make known to the Lords of Council "just caus of thair stay for thair particular affaires." 3 Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. pp. 35, 36. 4 Rothes' Relation, . 16-9pp . Dickson signe supplicatioe dth "ministes na Irwin.f ro "

Wariston's Diary, . 270-1pp . 5 SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 1637.18 1 37 .

opened the supplication and found that it concerned Kirk matters, they declined to read it. This was on the 18th October.1 The text of the Supplication and the signatures follow:— e glorith f Jesur eo "Fo s Chrys preservatiound an t f truo e e religioune e honouth r f Kingfo ,o r e Charlese goodth d e an , of thi nativs s hi anciend ean t kingdome. " This underwrittin is the just coppie of the Supplication and Com- plaint presenti name r Secreie Lorde ou th th f n o i st o s t Counsall, October 18,1637; and becaus no particular persons compleneris ar havo wh e l namedentereal d an ,s [into the—deleted] e grevth n -i ances contein t dattend therino t y musbo ,n ma t appoint somw efe of ther numbe waio t rr ansuer tfo ; Therfor, leas Lorde th t s reject the Supplication and Complaint for the want of the supplicants' and compleners' names, We have subscrivit this present double, to shawie b Lorde • th no f thet si y sail happi same.e th cal o nr t lfo

" My Lords of Secreit Counsall2 , Unto your Lordships humblie meanes d schawean , undersubscryversWe s , Noblemen, Barrens, Burgesses, Ministers, and Commouns,3 That, wheras we war, in all humilitie * and quyit manner, attending a gratious ansuer of our former supplications agains e Servicth t e Booke impose readid an upo , o schaet nus e wth great inconvenience which upon the introduction therof must insue, We , withouar y knowian tr expectationou n y deserb r fa t , surpryzed an d charged, by publict proclamation, to departe of the toune within tuentie four hours therefter, under paine of rebellion. By which peremptorie unusuald an l charge r feare mora ou , f so e sumnar stricd ean t coursf eo proceedin thin gi r mater augmentits si e coursr supplicath ou d f eo ,an - tions interrupted. Quherfor, we ar constrained, out of the deap greef of our hearts, humblie to remonstrat that, wher the archbishops and bishop f thiso s realme, being intrusti s Majestihi y b t e wit e governhth - e e Kiraffairmenth th f Scotland kf o f o o st , have drawid setan t p nu furth, or caused be drawin up and sett furth, and injoyned upon the subject e wherofon o bookes e tu s th , callen i ,Bookee Th df Comouno Prayer, t onli no r sowea e e seednth f divero s s superstitions, idolatrie falsd an e doctrine, contrai true th e o religiot r n establishe thin di s realme by divers Act f Parliamento s t alsServicee bo , oTh Booke f Englando s i so abused, especiallie in the matter of the communion, by additions, sub- stractions, interchangein f wordgo d sentencesan s , falsefein f tittleso g , and misplaceing of collects, to the disadvantage of reformation, as the 1 Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. 38p ;. .i Rothes' Relation,. 17 . p 2 Iii the Kirkcudbright copy (No. 333) this paragraph is omitted. hers words—e ha eth 3 33 Presbyterie . th f No *"o Kirkcudbright.f eo " 4 For all humilitie, No. 333 has almitie. 372 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

Romish Masse is, in the mayne and substantiall points, made up therin (as we offer to instruct in tyme and place convenient), closs contrair unto r ranversinfo d e gratiouan th f go s intentio e blesseth f no d Reformers of religion in England. In the uther booke, called Canons and Constitu- tions for the Government of the Kirk of Scotland, they have ordeaind that whosoevir sail affirme that the forme of worship conteand in The Booke f Comouno Prayer d administratioan e sacramentth f no s (wherof muse w heirtofor tw justlino d ee an compleane ) doth conteane anie thing repugnan Scripturese th o t t r ao ,r corrupt, superstitiou r unlauo s f uln i l the service and worship of God, sail be excommunicated, and not be restored bot by the bishop of the place, or archbishop of the province, efte s repentanchi r d publican e t revocatio f this o nwicki hi s t error: beside an hundreth canons moe, manie of them tending to the reviveing and fostering of abolished superstitions and errors, and to the overthrow of our church discipline established by Acts of Parliament, opening a door r whafo e t farder innovatio f religiono n they plei o makt s d an , stoppinwhicy beforwa w he la allod gth edi w unt fos ou r suppressing* of erro superstitiond an r ordainind an ; g that, whe e canon anith n i rf eo s ther is no penaltie expreslie sett doun, the punishment sail be arbitrarie e bishopth s a s sail think fitest l whicAl . h canon r neviswe r seer nno allowed in anie Generall Assemblie, bot ar imposed contrair to order of law appointed in this realme for establishing of maters ecclesiastick. Unto which tuo bookes the foirsaids prelats have, under trust, procured his Majestie's royall hand and letters patent for pressing the same upon us his loyall subjects, and yit ar they the contryvers and devysers of e sameth , as doth cleirlie appear e frontispicth Bookee y eb Th f o eof Comoun Prayer, and ar begun to urge the acceptance of the same, not onlie by injunctions gevin in provinciall assemblies, bot also by opin proclamation and charges of horning, wherby we ar drivin in such straits as we must ather, by process of excommunication and horning, suffer the ruine2 of our estates and fortunes, or els, by breach of our covenant f tru o forsakeind ey an religionwitd wa e hGo gth , fall under

the wrath3 of God which unto us is more grevous than death. Wherfor, WE, being perswaded that these ther proceeding r contraia s ouo t r r gratious soverane his pious intention, who, out of his zeale and princele 1 For suppressing, No. 333 has surpryseing. 2 For ruine, No. 333 has rueing. reference e ban th Th r covenan do o t s i e t first swor Januarn ni y 1580-1, agai Februarn ni y 1587-83 , and again in 1590. In that covenant, the Pope's "wicked hierarchic" is specially detested and refused; and the swearers promise, "by the great name of the Lord our God, that we shall continue in the obedience of the doctrine and discipline of this Kyrk, and shal defend the same,, according to our vocation and pouer, all the dayes of our lyves under the panes conteyned in the law, and danger both of body and saule in the day of Godis fearfull judgement" (National MSS* of Scotland, part . 70)iii..No SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1637. 373 cair of the preservation of true religion established in this his auncient kingdome, hes ratifeit the same in his Henes Parliament, i m. vic thretie Majestis hi highlie o threeb s o d t e ean ; wrong saide th sy db prelats o ,wh have so farr abused ther credite with so gude a King as thus to insnare his subjects, rent our Kirk, undermynde religion in doctrine, sacraments, and discipline, move discontent betuix the King and his subjects, and discord betuix subject and subject, contrair to several! Acts of Parlia- ment, DOE (out of bundin dewtie to God, our King, and native countrie) compleane of the foirsaid prelats, humblie craveing that this mater may tryallo t t thesd br pairtiepu ean , ou e s takin order with accordino gt the lawes of the realme; and that they be not suffered to sitt anie more r judgeou s a s untill this cau tryee sb decided dan d accordin justiceo gt . An f thidi s sail seeni youo et r lordship matea s f higheo r r importance then ze •will condiscend unto, before his Majestie be acquainted ther- with, then we humblie supplicat that this our grevance and complaint fullie b y e representima s Majestiehi o t t , that, fro e influencmth s hi f o e gratious government and justice, thir wrongs may be redressit, and we hav e happineth e o injot se religio th yt i hath s na ' bene reformen i d this land. "J. Southerland. Montrose. Rothes. Eglintoun. Lindesay. Cassillis. Home. Lothian. Dalhousie. . HMontgoinbrieL . . Plemyng. Elcho. Sin- clare. Boyd. (? J. L.) Ogiluy.1 Loudoun. Burghly. (PM.)Ogiluy. Wemyss. J. Dramlangrig.2 A. Forbes. J. L. Coupar. Balmerino. Tester. J. Crans- toune. Forrester. Johiistoun. (?R.)Dalyell. Elphingstone.3 Ma. of Maderty. R. Arbuthnot of that ilk. George Douglas of Penzerie. James Dowglas, Mowsheld. Patrik .... W. Caprintown. S. D. B. Cullerny. S. L. Hows- toun. Andrw Agnew. Dunda f thaof s t ilk r JamiSi . s Lokhair f Leyo t . S. D. Sibbald. Arthur ^9Ersken. Patrik Hepburne of Wauchtune. James Melvil f Halhillo . AyttounJ . thaf eo t ilk. (?SKennedy) A. . . LiuingstoneJ . . Win. Cokburne. (?S. J.) Murray. Erleshall. W. Scott. J. Wemyss. (?H.) Park. Fullartoun. J. Arnott of Ferny. Williame Cathcart of Wattirheid. Alexander Leslie. Edward Hamilto f Balgrayno . Keiris. Lundow f thao e t ilk. Blair of that ilk. R. Caldwall. Kersland. D. Home, Wedderburne. . CraiT f Rickartouno g . Fergus McCubeine. John Cathcart . RiddellW . . (?J.) Ramsay. D. Blair (?of Adamtoune). Alexr Levingtone. (?J. Renton.) Ma. Wallace . GourlayT . . Ballinhard. Corsslayes. Achincorse. Robert Stewart of Barscube. R. Hamilton. S. A. Schaw of Sauchie. G. Hoome. 1 In the list of nobles contributing voluntarily to the covenanting cause (2nd March 1638) there is an Ogilvie (Rothes' Relation, p. 81); but when James, Lord Ogilvie (afterwards first Earl of Airlie) was asked by Montrose, in February 1639, to sign the Covenant, he refused to do so (Spalding's Memorials, Spald. Club, vol. i. p. 135). 1 James, Lord Drumlanrig, whose father, William Douglas, had been created Earl of Queena-

berr 1633n yi . lessef o Som1 n r enotme e have crowde thein di r signature frontn si Elphinstone'sf o . 374 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

Ch. Araot. Murray of Touchadam. (?. . . Burton.) (? J. Corinall.) H. Ster- ling. John Fullartoun of Carltoun. Wm. Broun of Dolphingtoun. Harie Elphinstoune of Caderhall. (?H.) Moncreif of Tibbermallo. J. Hepburne. Charles JErskine. Williame Wallace of (? Johnston). Dauid Kennedy of Bal- limor. Kirkmichaell, yonger. (?A1.) Hessilheid . BruceM . R . . (?J.) Hepburne. Patrik Inglis. W. Frouch. Johne Eccles, yunga f Kildonano r . Johne Quhytfuird r GilberSi . t Kennedi f Ariowlandeo . Al. Logane. Johne Fer- gussone of Corroghow. J. Garthland. J. S. Craigbarnatt. J. Kilbirny. J. Lockhartt off Bar. S. G. Baillie, Locliend. (? Arn)estone. Knok. J. Hamil- tone. J. Lowell of Canzeoqwhie. Alexander Gordowne of Erlistowne. Rot. Gordoun of Knokbrex. Johne Hammilton. Johne Gordoun. D. Makgill. J. Kingancleuche. Robert Colueill . CesnokH . . Dauid Craufur Kersf do . Dauid Dunba . Adairf o EntirkinrWm r . M Millanderdail. , zonger. (?W.) McAulay of Ardngcaple. Colgrane. Dauid Wemyse. S. J. Kincaid. James Edmonstoune, tutor of Duntereath. Mr Williame Hamiltone. M. R. Pit- cairne. Jhone Monereiff. George Gordu n Garlurgi n . Gloratt. (?Hildoun.) Stretherli. A. Porterfeild of that ilk. Halpland. W. S. Fouluod. W. Sempill, younge f Fowluodo r . William ) DalzelMenteathJ. . r DouglasA (o . . T . . Ramferlie. Geo. Douglas. (?M. Henry Home.) Auchinlek . GaitgirthC . J . . M ) .Cunyngham P. (?D r o . . Langschaw. Neulistoune. Killmaheu. Pa: Hume . HepburneJo . . ConinghameA . . James Maxuell . NobilW .f o l Ardarden. S. Alex. Touris. J. Hamilton .of Preston. M. J. Scheuez of Kembak. William Forbes. Johne Hamiltoun. (PCl)atto. W. Carbistoun. . CongiltounPa r JameM . s (?Phin) . BuchanaJo . r Drymenfo n . (?R. Mac- nair.) Robert BruiceCokburne) P. ? ( . Pebli. Ro Maynshillf . so Dalyel: o Th . l of Bynes. Dauid Brou f Fynmuntho n . JohnS . e Prestoun. Wairiston. Gilmiliscroft, zoungar. Touch. Sir G. Keir. W. Cunynghamheid. (?S. P.) M°Kie off Larg. George Rei f Daldillingdo . William Cuningham f Laiglandeo . Rot. Gordoun, Gallouay. George Bell, Linlythgow. Robert Bruce. Mr And. Hammiltou f Vtterwod.no Tho. Bruce, proueist r Sterlingfo , . Johne William- son Kirkaldier efo Jamer M . s Campbel Dumbartaner fo l . Walter Stirlinr gfo Glasgow . MoncreifJ r Si . . Mongo Bosual f Duncanzemuro l ) DurT. r - (o . Jo . hame, Peirh. R. Creichtoune, baillyie of Qhuthome. J. Bonnar of Lumquhat. James Rig f Carberrieo e . John Kenned . CuninghamR . r Ayr.M yfo r efo Kingorne. A. Menzeis of Comries. Robert Pitersone for Cuper. George Bruce for Culrose Gourla. G . r Culroseyfo . SymsonD . r . DysertCorsanefo Jo r M .e for Drumfres. J. Cochrane for Edinburgh. J. Smith for Edinburgh. James Fletcher, Dondie. Walter Lyel Montroisr lfo . George Gairdi r Bruntilandnfo . Villiame Meikiljone, Brintiland . LyouW r Breichine. nfo . Walter Airthr efo Pettinwem. James Andersoune . MichelhillW . , Selkirk. Johne Dauidsone. J. Bethone off Creich. P. Campbell of Edinampill. Lamingtoun. James Blair for Jrwing. W. Glendonyng for Kirkcudbryt. J. Reid for Dumfer[l]ing. Williame Walke r Dunfermlingefo r . Allexr. Strang. Alexr. Mc Kir Wigefo - toune. Gedion Jac r Lanerkfo k . AndersonJa . r Hadingtonefo e . Robert Symsone for Jedburgh. Warn. Cokbvrnne for Dvnbar. George Home for SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 1637.18 5 37 .

Norberwik. Johne Myl r Forfarnfo . Thomas Patersone . ThomsonPa . r fo s Peblis. D. Hunter, prouest.1 P. Porbes for Banfe. Mr A. Home for Lauder. J. Somervell for Ranfrew. S. J. Murray. Robert Hamilton of Binning. Ro' Drummond, Anstruther Wester RamsayA. M. . , ministe Edinburghat r Mr . Adam Colt, minister at Inueresk. M. Robert Murray, minister at Methven. M. W. Row, minister at Forgunde.2 M. Will. Arthure, minister. Mr Johne Dunlop, minister at Ratho. M. W. Colvill, minister at Cramund. M. A. Neiitoun, minister at Duddiston. Mr Johnne Reid, minister at Muirkirk. M. B. Sandersone at Keir. M. Gilbert Power, minister at Stanykirk. M. , minister of Irwin. M. A. Blakhall, minister at Aberladye. M. Richard Dicksone, minister at Kinneill. Mr Johne Aird, preicher at Newbotle. M. Rob. Knox, minister at Kelsoo. Mr Robert Roche, minister at Imierkething. M. W. Justice, minister at Gargunnok. Mr James Edmonstone, minister at S' Ninians . SymsonJ . , ministe t Bathgaita r Johr M .. Cragingelt, ministet a r Alloway.3 H. Guthrie, minister at Sterline. M. E. Wright, minister at Clak- mannan. Mr Thomas Strahan, minister at Dollor. Mr Rofc Brounlie, minister at Kirktoun. Mr Jhon Duncan, minister at Culros. M. (?D.) Dik, minister off (? Crumal).4 Mr James Symson, minister of Kirkcaldi. Mr William Jamesone, minister at Langnewtoun. M. Birsbane, minister at Killellen.6 Mr George Hamiltone, minister at Newbirne. Mr James Robertson, minister at Crans- toun Jamer M . s Ker, ministe t Abbatroulla r . (?M. . DuncansoneA ) , minister at Lessudden.6 Mr Thomas Wilkie, minister at Graining. M. W. Edmond- stoun, ministe t Kilmadokea r Jamer M . s Porteous, ministe t Lessvadea r r M . William Dalgleish, ministe t Kirkm°breka r Johnr M . e Fergushil, ministet a r Ochiltrie . KnoxJ . M ., minister, Carington Alexrr M . . Anderson, ministet a r Carnweth . RoberM . t Bruce, ministe f Aberbdoureo r . KerJo . , ministet a r Saltprestoun.' M. R. Watsoun, Cardrose. M. Ja: Row, minister at Muithil. . CastellawW , ministe t Ste[warton]a r Johr M n. Charteris, ministe t Curriea r . Mr Harie Livingstone, ministe t Kippeneat r r JameM . s Kirk, ministef o r Abirfoyll . DavisonP . Airdf Robere. o M . t Bell, ministe t Dairy.ra Jhonr M e Cornuall, at Linlitgow. Hew Mackaile, minister at Perstoime.8 Maister Robert Tran, Eglishame . BrucJa . t K[ings]barnesa M e . . ColtO . , M ministe. t a r Inverask . SharpeJa r M ., ministe . t DoiiglasGovana rA . M . , ministet a r Quhittingham. M. R. Montgomery, minister at Symontoun. Mr Williame Weir, minister at Hopkirk. Mr Andrew Auchinlek, minister at Largo. Mr Walter Swintoun, minister at Swintoun. M. J. Guninghame, Cumnok. Mr Thomas Suyntoune, ministe t Bathanes.S t at r 9 Entirkin, zownger Davir M .d Home, ministe t Ladykirka r : KnoxJo . ,M ministe. t Bowdonea r . HammilR . - toun, minister, Moonkton. Mr J. Moncreiff at Cullessie. M. R. Cuningham 1 David Hunter, provost of Forfar, was a member of the Glasgow General Assembly in 1638 (Peterkin's Records, . 110)p . 2 Forgandenny. 3 Alloa. 4 At this time David Dick was minister of Cromdale. 5 Matthew Birsbane, Mworde . ATh .s t Killelle"a differena n i ne "ar t hand. 6 Lessudde ' Prestonpans nos ni Boswellswt S . . 8 Percietown. ' Abbey St Bathans. 6 ..37 . PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH .Y F O S MA ,

t Hawika Thoma, Mr . s Abernethy, ministe t Bckfuirda r . Johne Dicksone, minister at Kells. M. Jo. Home, minister at Eymouthe. M. A. Keir, minister at Cariddin. Mr Robert Balcan[qual,] Tranent. M. A. Hamilton, minister at Hadinton . MelvillT r M ., ministe t Kinglassiea r Johnr M . e Moray, minister at Stramiglo. M. J. Porsythe, minister at Leinzie. Mr Alexr. Somer(uil), minister at Dolphugton. M. Ro. Wilkie, Glasgw. M. A. Porbes, Campsey. M. H. Wilkie, minister, Portmook. M. Gilbt. Ross, minister, Calmouell. . J Gaitts, ministe t Bonclea r r ThoM . . Ramsa t Drimfreisa y r GeorM . g Young, minister at Mauchlin. Mr Robert Montgomery, minister at Sanct Kevox. Wr M m1 Russell, ministe t Kilbirniea r . ElphinstounD . M . , minister at Dunbarton. M. R. Baylie,2 minister of Kilwining. M. P. Carmichael, ministe t Keniquhy.ra Jamer M 3 s Fleming, ministe t Bothanns.ra . DaliellJ 1 , ministe t Hauch. a r. SmithJ . M 5, ministe t Lesliea r r RoberM . t Douglas, minister at Kirkaldie. .M. Johne Ostiald, minister at Pencaitland. Mr Mongo Law, minister at Dysert. J. Bonar, minister at Mayboill. Mr Harie Makgill, ministe Dunfermlinef ro Williar M . m Lindsa t Dreghorneya Jhonr M .e Schaw at Auchihlek . Maner. . . . [Oback.e nth ] "WE UNDERSUBSCRIBERS ASSENTS AND ADHERES TO THE WITHIN WRITTEN PETITION. "Lyone . BrskinA . f Dunof e . Tho: Pothringha f mPowrieo . Prederik Lyone Ruthvns. C . J . . Jhone Neway, fea thaf o r t Lindesay. ilkDa . . George Symmer. J. Carnegy, Ethie. Bonytoune. A. Lindesay, fiar off Edzell. William Durha f Graingemo . Wm Sterlin f Ardochegof . Lareiice Oliphant. Carnegy ) . GuthrieJ L. . S ? ( .. Hercules Cramond ,. CarnegyelderA . S . , Bal- namone Graham. D . Pyntrief eo . Robert Arbuthnott . GrahamJ . Orchillf eo . J. Grahame. Alexr. Murray of Strowan. S. G. Muschet. S. J. O. Inuercharitie. (?D.) Ogiluy of Glasuall. Johnn Ramsay. Dauid Lyndsay, Balgays. Jhone Ogiluy of (? Galie). Dauid Ogiluy of Persie. R. Grame of Morphie. Balthyok. . MoraA . S Balvairdf yo . William Pergusoun f Craigdarroeo . CampbellD . S . . J. Campbell of Ardchattan. Mr Harie Rollok, minister at Edinburgh. M. Alexr. Henderson, ministe t Leucharsa r Andrer M . w Cant, ministe t Peta r - sligo. (?J.) Wyshart . OgiluieT . . Thomas Lyon, fief Cossins.o r . BethuD 6 n of Balfowr. Thomas Myrtone of Cambo. (PRires.) D. Carmichall, Balmedie. Johne Martyn f Lathoniseo Pitcairn) D. ? ( . e ... . PatersonR . f Dunmureeo . James Lyndesa f Kilquhisyo . MoncreiW . f Randerstouno f . David Moncreiff 1 St Quivox. 2 Author of Letters and Journals, edited by David Laing. Of his works published in his own lifetime only two need be mentioned here—Ladensium, third edition augmented, 1641; Parallel,A d an Briefr o e Comparison Liturgiee oth f with Masse-Book,e th 1641. 1 Kennoway. 4 Bothans is now Yester. 5 Hauch is now Prestonkirk. * A. fiar (or fier, or feir, or fear) is one who has the reversion of a property. He whose pro- pert burdenes yi liferena y db r law-languaget ou "is n i , , called the/far" (Erskine's Institute, t responsiblno 1812 . m 374)p a , r I the. efo . explanation feuar introduced intselectee oth d list which I made of these signatures. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 16377 .18 37 .

of Cragy. D. Lyndesay, Kirkforther. G. Hamiltoune. James Stewart. Ja. Logan Coustonf eo Dudingstou. S . S[an]dfurdf no . SetounJ . , fei Lathriskf o r . Michael Balfour of Grange. Jhon Leslie. S. J. Monupenne. R. Borthuik. S. J. Moucreif. Heiirie Maule. D. Clepheane. Robert Innes. Mr J. Wemyss, minister at Kyiinaird. Mr Richard Melvvine, minister at M[aryton]. M. A. Bisset, ministe t Brechinra Jamer M . s Liclitone, ministe t Duner a Andro r M . u Allan, minister at Pinewin.1 M. T. Couper, minister at Menmuir.2 Mr Ja. Lyon, ministe t Inclibrayoka r Daui. M . d Campbell, ministe t Carraldstownera . Mr George Pogow, minister at Edzell. Mr Thomas Montgomerie, minister at Logy-Montrois and Perte. M. Laurence Skinner, minister at Navarr. Mr George Symmer, minister at Feme. (? . . . .)3 of Kilmound, commissioner for Cowall. M. E. Camerone, minister at Dunoone, commissioner for the ministrie of Cowall. Mr Nicoll McCalmau, minister at Kilmore4 and commissioner for the ministers of Lome. M. Dug: Campbell, persone of Knapdail, commis- sioner for the ministrie of Argyle. Mr Tho: Meluill, minister of Tereglis. A. Wedderburne. Johne ^Erskine. T. R. of Preiland. Mr Jo: Adamson, priucipal Edinbrugf lo h College Andre. M . w Stevensone, regen f Edinburgho t e Colledge. Francis Durhame of Duntarwie. Lag. Jo: Cheisholme, Cromleis. Allexr. Hwme. George Hoome. Williame Hume. James Lentron, portioner of Kinkepill. George Leslie of that ilk. J. McLeod of Dunvegane. S. J. Wauchope . BurnetT . S .f Leyiso t . Alexr. Straquhi f Glenkindieno . Simon Prase f Inverlochtieo r . CoupeJ . Gogarf . HamiltonJ of r. S . .RollokJ . S . . M. CampbellJ . . NicolsounJa . S . f Colbrandspetho e . (?S . Home.J . ) John Home. Alexr. Setoune. H. Nisbett. Williame Home. S. J. Hamilton, Rid- hous. W. Riccartoune . RamsayG r Si . . Robert Drummouiide . CrictD . S -. toune. Robert Maitland of Eckiles. Jo: Rollok of Bannokburn. D. Grahame. . CampbellJ . S Gram. G .Inchebrekief eof . Dauid Alexande r Ansteruthefo r r Ester. Alexander Bruc Alvyf . SterlineJ o . S . Gardeinf go . Thomas Dalyell.6 r (?Si Williame) Pyff . BruicA . f Bangowreo . DundaG . f Dudingstoneso . J . Cochrane of Burbuthlaw. J. Hamiltoun of Vdstoun. A. Redhuche off Culti- bragane. George Dowglas. Androw Toshoch of Munyuaird."

1 Finhaven. editiod ol e Scott'f nth o n I 1 s Fasti (vol. iii 841). .p , Thomas Coupe sais ri havdo t e been admitted to Menmuir " to 22nd August" 1639; and in the new edition (vol. v. p. 407), "before 2nd April 1639." This signature show thers s thawa ee earlierth . woule On 3 d expec fino t t d her e nameth e Archibald Campbell (of. Begistrum Magni Sigilli, 1634-1651, Nos. 132 and 1528; Peterkin's Records, p. 110); but there is little more than a puzzling monogram. editiod ol e Scott'f no th n I 4 s Fasti (vol. iii 61). .p , Nicol M'Calma sais ni hav o dt e been " removed Kilmoro t e befor editiow e "ne ) Novbefore n94 th . (vol p n . i e . 163 .21sd iv 8an " t; Nov. 1638." future 5th This e swa Genera notorioud an l s persecuto Covenanterse th f ro fathes Hi . r signs on the front as "Tho: Dalyell of Bynes." Both of them signed the Linlithgowshire copy of the National Covenant Covenante (not Giles)th S wn n i O son'e . th , s signature, immediately under- neath his father's, is " Thomas Dalyell, younger of Binnes." A comparison of the two signatures e e SupplicatioCovenanonth th n o o t tw wit ne makehth t absoluteli s y certain that they were written by the same two men. The younger Dalyell "was one of the witnesses to an important protestatio e supplicantsth f no e market-crosth t a , f Edinburgho s e 22nth dn o ,Februar y 1638 (Kothes' Relation, . 89)p . 8 87 PROCEEDING E , SOCIETY192610 TH Y F .O S MA , In all there are only 482 signatures, and so the statement in Rothes' Relation that there were " 500 hands at it that same nycht" is inaccurate. That estimat s probablwa e e resula wile th y f th do t l guessal r fo , signatures were not adhibited on 18th October. That evening, after supper, it was resolved " that the petitione shall be subscryved on both syds; and, when it is full, another copie to be drawin, to receave sub- scriptions, in parchement; and sum paper copies to be made, wherto far different presbetries may put their hand for the present."l As the bac s onlki y about half full that other parchmen t requirt no cop d ydi e madee b o t . Accordincope th n yi f e memorandu o th d o gt en e th t ma the Wigton Papers, the nobles, barons, and gentlemen who signed numbered 400, the burghs 21, and the ministers 120, making a total of 541. e nobleth e namef Onlo ar s 9 n tha1 yi d t memorandum. a lette n I 2r written at intervals, Baillie says of the petition: "There are at it now above 38 nobles, gentlemen without number. . . . All the townes have subscryved except Aberdeen, whom they suspect."3 According to the Earl of Lothian, on the 18th of October "there were at least

1 Rothes' Relation, . Perhap21 . p wore sth d different printer'a s i s erro distant.r rfo Among' Miscellaneoue th s Papers relatin e Registerth o t g f Privyo Council, 1635-7, preservee th n i d Register House, ther e forty-seveear n petitions agains Service-Booke th t f theseo 333. e No ,, On . parchmenn io s t measurin inches 5 s gfro i 2 e "noblemen 31t y mth I b J . , barrens, burgesses, ministeris and commounes of the presbyterie of Kirkcudbright." It is practically the same as f 18to e h Octobeon e th r printe footnotey dm n abovei whico d t s an chiee , th h f variatione ar s pointed out. Of the 452 persons who signed, many, including twenty of the parishioners of e notariese namey subscriberAnwothb th th e texo f d s o s Th an td .e di printe, e ar s th n di Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. pp. 709-15. The forty-six which are on paper petition agains Service-Booe tth k only t againsno , Booke th t of Canonsprelates9 e th 28 r . no No . supplicatioe th s i f 20tno h Septembe e Introductioth r n 1637i d , an xii. n (p wrongls ) i y assigned to December (cf. Rothes' Relation, p. 47). Two of them (Nos. 313 and 321) point out that the Service-Book was printed long after the proclamation of December 1636, and the consequent uncertainty authorisede whethe samee refer7 on th e whol29 s n part i n o i . ,th si t t i rs r No a ,eo . the Privy Council as " this honorable tabill,"and Nos. 299, 306, 308, 312, and 316 refer to it as this honorable " table." The supplicants had not then chosen those commissioners, or committees, sub- sequently know s "thna e tables" (Rothes' Relation, , 23,'2417 . , pp 34 ; Peterkin's Records,. pp 142, 145; Row's History, p. 486). This use of the word " table " in those six petitions is rather earlier tha Scottisy nan h example Oxfore give Englishth w n ni Ne d Dictionary. petitioe Th n fro e Presbytermth f Stirlinyo g (No. 335 s signe. GuthrieH )e . wa GuthriJ y th b dt n i no , s ea printed Register (p. 716). Of the 47, only 15 have signatures ; only 1 (No. 326) is dated. Maitland Club Miscellany, vol. 413p . ..ii e burghsSomth f o e wil s a ,noticedo e b l tw d ha ,

representatives2 . Nearle ministerth l yal s were master followine f artsso t describTh . no o gd e themselve ministers sa s: Willia m Arthu Wesf o r t t Cuthbert'sKirS r ko , Bernard Sandersof no Keir, Robert Tra Eagleshamnof , James Bruc Kingsbarnseof , Robert Cunningham Hawickeof , Alexander Forbe Campseyf so , Thomas Ramsa Dumfriesf yo severad an , l others. Laing's Baillie's Letters, . Writin 37 31se vol. p th . ti .n Octobego r 1637, Gavin Young says

d subscribeha 0 tha80 3 t a dsupplicatio e Councith o t n l agains e Servicth t e Book (Laing Manuscripts, f keeo n nvol . 198)convictionsp ma . .i a s .ministet Younwa no e s H f o g.rwa Ruthwell from 1617 to 1671. When asked how he reconciled himself to live under the different forms of church-government, he replied: "Wha wad quarrel wi' their brose for a mote in them ?" (Scott's Fasti, Marcd vol 2n . 625) p n h . O i 163. 8 there were thirty-fou e lisf th o t n i r voluntarily contributing noblecovenantine th o st g cause (Rothes' Relation, . 81)p . SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATION AND COMPLAINT, OCT. 18, 1687. 379

200 supplications against this [Service] Booke from presbiteried an s parishes and shires, and as many the day before."1 The signatures are all autograph. It will be noticed that many of the subscribing lairds merely put down their territorial designation, as, for example, Bruc f Earlshalo e l simply signs "Erleshall, d Grierso"an f no Lag only writes " Lag." Other t theispu r initials befor name eth theif eo r lands, and so William Sempill of Foulwood signs " W. S. Fouluod"; Sir William Cunninghame of Caprington signs " W. Caprintown." Knights and baronets usually put "Sir" or "S." before their initials, and so Sir David Barclay of Collairney signs "S. D. B. Cullerny," and Sir John Ogilvie of Inverquharity signs " S. J. O. Inuercharitie." Ministers who were masters of arts, instead of writing "M.A." after their names, wrote ""r "beforM o r "M e them. Thercustoa s e wa thosm n i e day workinf so g the "S" or the "M" and the initials into a monogram, and these are frequently very difficult to decipher. Where there is uncertainty I have queried the reading. In making out many of the most puzzling ones, I have been greatly indebted to Mr Henry M. Paton. Five have com- pletel foud yan r partiall parchmene sidee yth t f baffleTh so no . e dus tar straight s greatesIt . t widtinchesf 28 greates d s hi an , t dept inches1 h2 . Montrose, apparently, was not one of the noblemen who signed the Supplication on 18th October. He was not one of the twenty who were present at the meeting on 20th September;2 nor is he one of the nineteen subscribing nobles nameWigtoe th n di n Papers n RothesI . ' Relation he first appears as one of the twenty-two who met on the 15th November. Bishod An 3 p Guthrie (who signe e Supplicatiodth s na " H. Guthrie, minister at Sterline "), in referring to that day, says " among other nobles (who had not been formerly there) came at that diet the Earl of Montross, which was most taken notice of." He sat as an elder

Glasgoe inth w Assembly.5 4 The Supplication not only marks a crisis in the long struggle between the Crown and the Church, but it reveals the strength of the Church in the hold which it had on the community as it had never been revealed before. Baillie characterise "magne th s a t sai charta nobility.e th f "o 6 No prelates were at the meeting of Privy Council on 21st December, when Loudon, after "ane eloquent speache," presented copies of the Supplication f 20tso h September (No . 18td 289han ) October Councie Th . l agreed to submit them "to his Majestei's royall consideration."7 The

Supplication of 18th October had, however, been previously sent to the 1 Ancram and Lothian Correspondence, Boxburghe Club, vol. i. p. 97. 2 Kothes' Relation, p. 8. 3 Ibid., p. 32. 4 Guthrie's Memoirs, p. 27. 6 Peterkin's Records, p. 110. 6 Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. p. 38. ' Balfour's Historical Works, vol. ii. pp. 240-9; Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. p. 554; Laing's Baillie's Letters, . 455-8pp vol. i .. 0 38 PROCEEDING E SOCIETYTH 10F Y O S, MA 1926, .

King by the Council. - He, finding in it " no signe of repentance for, or disavowing of, their late tumults," decided "to delay the answering of their petition, but in the meanetime commanded " the Council " to signifie to all our good subjects our aversnesse from Poperie, and detestation of superstition." Henc proclamatioe eth December.h 7t f no 1 "Upon the 1st March 1638, they being all assembled in the Gray- Friers Churc d church-yardan h e Covenanth , t (having been prepared beforehand s publicklwa ) y read subscribedd an , they b l wit mal h much

joy and shouting. The Archbisho2 p of St Andrews being then returned from Sterling to Edinburgh, when he heard what was done said: Now all that we have been doing3 these 30 years past is thrown down at once; and, fearing violence presentle h , y fled awa Londoo yt n (wher nexe eth t year he died), so did also such other of the bishops as knew themselves most ungracious to the people; only four of them stayed at home, whereof three delivered their person fortuned an s s from sufferingy b s their solemn recantations." In a letter, written from St Andrews on

26th January 1646, it is 4 related that, a few years before, the Arch- bishop's " coatch (himself then bein Englandn gi broughs )wa t fros mhi castle thorow the whole city, with the hangman sitting in it, to the same very place markee of.th t crosse pieces." n reni d l an , tal 5 His Majesty was so displeased with the citizens of Edinburgh that nearly three months befor Covenane eth t "was sworn Eare ,th Traquairf lo , the Lord High Treasurer,,thought that " the keyes of the toun and charter of their liberties [should be] delyvered to the King, and six commissioners from the toun [should] publictlie prostrate themselves befoir the King as he wes goeing to the chappell at Whytehall tuo severall dayes; and upone the thrid day, upone the Scots Counsellors that wer at court their prostrating themselves wit commissionere hth s befoi Kinge th rKine ,th g

Large Declaration, pp. 42-6; Register of Privy Council, 2nd series, vol. vi. pp. 546-7. subscribine Th 21 Nationae th f go l Covenan discusses i t eighte th n di h chapte Moif ro r Bryce's History Greyfriarsd Ol e oth f Church. subscribine Th g begachurce th n 28ti n ho h February. In two MS. copies of Guthrie's Memoirs in my possession, both of which are older than the

earlies3 t printed edition wore th , d biiilding uses i d instea . copief doing.do MS othen I so tw r •which I have examined the word is also building. Guthrie's Memoirs, p. 30. The Marquis of Hamilton informed the King that, of the prelates, Maxwell4 , Bisho f Ross po s "th wa , e most hate f allgeneralld do ,an ally yb " (Hardwick's State Papers, vol. ii. p. 114). This hatred is said to have been due to his zeal for the Service-Book. In retreating from his see, when " crossing the Firth of Ardirsheer, which partes Rosse from Murreye despighn i , theo t r bishopp people th , e tor peecen ei s such coppye Service-Booke th f so e as he had established for publicke use in the Chanrye church of Rosse, and threw the leaves therof into the sea, which, by the wynde, flotted after the passage boate (wher the bishopp was) upon the topp of the water " (Gordon's History of Scots Affairs, Spalding Club, vol. i. pp. 60, 61). Instea attendinf do meetine gth Privf go y Counci t Marc1s promisedn d o lh ha 1638e h s ,a , Spottis- woode sen excusen appeare a t h e sederunt t th Junbu h n ; i s 12td 6t ef an hso June (Registerf o Privy Council, seriesd 2n 21), vol20 . , 7 . vii. pp . 5 Treason Rebelliond an justly Rewarded, 1646. SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 16371 18 . 38 . wold redelyver their keye d chartean s f theio r r libertie d pardosan n them."1 Edinburgh was not in a mood to undergo such an abject humiliation. Julh O4t ny a proclamatio1638 y b , e market-crosth t na f Edino s - burgh e Kinth , g n thatassureme :l e wil"al dW r l neitheno w no r hereafter press e practic th e foresai th f eo d Canon d Servican s e Book, r anythinno f thago t nature sucn i t s hshalfaira legala d bu , y an el lwa satisfie all our loving subjects that we neither intend innovation in religion or lawes. And to this effect have given order to discharge all Acts of Councel made thereanent. And for the High Commission, we shal rectifio s l , wit eit hele hth Privir f advic po ou f eeo Councel, that i t shall never impugn a jus e tlawes e be grievanc eth r r loyalno , ou o lt e subjects -whad fardeAn s i t . r fittin agitate b o gt Generaln ei l Assemblies d Parliamentan e e gooKirk d peacth th d peaceabl an dr f an ,o e fo , e government of the same, in establishing of the religion presently profest, shall likewis takee eb n intr royaloou l consideration frea n ei , Assembly and Parliament, which shall be indicted and called with our best convenience."" This proclamation in other two forms was signed by the King. One of these was penned by Traquair, the other by the Marquis of Hamilton. In neither is there the slightest reference to a General Assembly or to Parliament.8 But, through Laud, the King instructed Hamilton to add " some general words giving hopes of an Assembly and Parliament." In

a letter of llth June to Hamilton, the King had given him "leav4 e to flatter them [i.e. the Covenanters] with what hopes you please, so you againsengage m groundt y em no t s (an particulan i d r thaconsenu tyo t neither to the calling of Parliament nor General Assembly untill the Covenan disavowee b t gived dan n up); youn wi r chieo t beind w en f gno time. .. wilI . l rathe thae rdi n yiel thoso dt e impertinen damnabld tan e demands (as you rightly call them); for it is all one as to yield to be no kinvera n gyi short time t expecaffaire no th .nowe o s ..d ar tsA I ,. thashoulu tyo d declar adherere Covenanth ee th o st t traitors, untiI s l(a have already said havu )yo e heard fro tha e fleemy m tm t hat t saihse l for Scotland."5 Immediately aftee proclamatioth r d beeha nnmarkete th rea t a d - Julyh cros4t protestation ,a so reas e behaln o namth n wa di f d o fean Covenanters, which mad t sufficientlei y clea rCoure thatth f Higs o ta , h Commissio beed nha n erected withou consene tth Parliamentf o t t mus,i t be abolished t merelno , y rectified whild an ;t ereiteratei desire dth e for 1 Rothes' . Relation,44 , 43 . pp * Large Declaration,. 97 , 96 . pp 3 Burnet's Memoirs e Dukesth f f Hamilton,o o thirA . d44 form, 167743 . , ,pp penne y b d Spottiswoode t asidpu s e46), (Ibid.,wa ,45 . . pp 4 Ibid., p. 62. 5 Ibid., pp. 55, 56. 382 PROCEEDINGS OF THE SOCIETY, MAY 10, 1926.

"the present indiction of a free General Assembly and Parliament," it claime shald leasome an db ls i tha t "i et o appointuntt s ou , hold an d . Assemblieus . e. Church."e th f so l Greatly against his will the King was constrained to climb down. On 22nd September, three proclamations were made by his authority. One rescinded all acts and proclamations for establishing " the Service Booke, Book f Canonseo Higd an , h Commission"; dispensed wit practice hth f eo the Five Articles of Perth, " notwithstanding of any thing contained in the Acts of Parliament or General Assembly to the contrary"; and commande subjects hi l d al subscrib o st rened e an Ban e wth Covenanr do t of 1580-1, wit e Generahth l Ban f 1589-90do . Anothe e proclamath f o r - tions indicted "frea e General Assembl hele b t y Glasgoda o " t 21sn wo t November; and the third appointed a Parliament to be held in Edinburgh on 15th May 1639.2 The Assembl yGlasgon i dult yme w Cathedra e appointeth n o l d day. A week later the Royal Commissioner, the Marquis of Hamilton, in his Majesty's name longer,y dischargean t undet si bu ;guidance o th rt t di e of the Moderator, Alexander Henderson of Leuchars, it continued its sessions condemne d untiha t li annulled dan Assembliee dth 1606,1608f so , 1610, 1616, 1617 d 161,an s 8"a pretended Assemblies "; condemne e th d Service-Book, Boo f Canonsko , Boo f Ordinationko e Higth hd Coman , - missio n; depose excommunicated dan d both archbishop bishopsx si d san , and deposed the other six bishops, respectively described as " pretended " archbishops and bishops; declared Episcopacy to have been abjured in e Banth r Covenando f 1580-1o t ; declare Five dth e Article f Pertso o ht have bee removede nb abjureo t d d;an restore e judicatoriedth e th f so Kirk; condemned the civil places and power of kirkmen; and ordained humbla e supplicatio Kinge sene th closinn b I o .t to n t Assemblye gth , on 20th December, the Moderator said: " We have now cast down the walls of Jericho: let him that rebuildeth them beware of the curse of Hie Bethelite."e lth 3 Hamilton informe e Kinth d g that some member f thio s s Assembly could "neather wrytt nor read, the most part being totallie voyd of learning." 4 Principa weno l Leewh t ,thoroughl y int mattere oth , formed

1 Large Declaration, pp. 98-106. Emphatic language was not monopolised by the King and Hamilton. Wariston characterised the proclamation as a "damnable peice" ; and, in the after- noon, with David Dickson's help, he drew up twenty-four animadversions of its "damnable points." Next morning he re-wrote "the protestation conforme to the proclamation" to his own satisfaction "and contentmen f utherso t " (Wariston's Diary, . 360)p . This re-writins gwa doubtless for the press, and it may perhaps be inferred that he improved the phraseology. 2 Large Declaration, protestatioe . 137-47th r pp Fo . replyn i Ibid.,e . se 157-73, pp . Principall Acts of the Generall Assembly at Glasgow, pp. 7-51; Peterkin's Records, pp. 109-

93;3 Laing's Baillie's Letters, vol. i. pp. 118-76. 4 Hamilton Papers, Camden Society, p. 59. ERRATA.

. 831P ,r "Dunlop' notfo , 1 e s Confessions, vol. iii. pp . 759-805;" read "Dunlop's Confessions, vol. ii. pp. 759-805;" P. 383, note 6, for "at least years afterwards," read " at least six years afterwards," SCOTLAND'S SUPPLICATIO COMPLAINTD NAN , OCT , 163718 .3 38 .

a very different opinion.1 Interest in the proceedings was such that the Cathedra crowdeo s s wa ld with people heard an ,e keethase e o th ntt member gread ha s t difficult reachinn i y g their seats. Baillie refero t s these peopl e multitudes "a th e "d rascals,an " d sayan "s that they " without shame grean i , t numbers, maks such dimclamoud e an i th n i r house of the true God, that if they minted to use the like behaviour in my chamber contene b I coul, t no dt till they were dow e stairs."th n 2 Dr John Buchan, who quotes this inaccurately (probably at second- hand), applies it to the members of Assembly!3 The Bishop of Ross and Dean Balcanqual (the reputed author of the King's Large Declaration) sent accounts of the Assembly to Laud.4 Heylyn alleges that Laud had such confidenc n Traquaii e r tha e ordereh t d "the archbishopd an s thiny bishopan go f Scotland withouo s o t t s privitdno hi t direcd yan - tion." 5 Nine days after the Assembly closed Laud wrote: " I am con- gond fidenha el wellal t enough f Traquaii , dond e dutys h ha r et hi bu : thought he had all in a string, and out of a desire to disgrace some bishops, did not only suffer, but certainly underhand do, some things, which let all loose. ... I have been as careful of this business as possibly I could to the utmost of that poor understanding which God hath given me."6 Although Charles the Second had, on two occasions, sworn and subscribed both the National Covenant and the Solemn League and Covenant, he re-erected Prelacy in 1662; but while he and his obsequious Parliaments acted very arbitrarily in various matters, they did not attemp o introduct t e e Service-Bookprimateth th e d di ,r JameNo . s Sharp, venture to ride the ford where his predecessor had been drowned. 1 Peterkin's Records, . Illpp , 112. 2 Laing's Baillie's Letters, . 123 volpp ,. 124i . . 3 The Marquis of Montrose, 1913, pp. 33, 34. Professor Terry has fallen into the same error (History of Scotland, 1920, p. 340). * Hamilton Papers, pp. 61, 63. 5 Deathd Lifean of Laud, 1719. 65 , . parp . ii t Strafford's Letters d Dispatches,an . 264 volpp ,. 265ii . . Laud certainl s utmoshi d n ydi i t 6 muco s t heartd lettecausa ha e ha th n 28tf I e ro e.h h February 1634 saye h , showd s thaha e nth his Majesty the paper of those of the Session as did not conform at the communion (Rushworth's Collections, part ii. pp. 205, 206). This probably relates to the Lords of Session (supra, p. 361, n. 1). King Jame ordered ha s d every membe f Privo r y Counci communicato t l e kneeling n "thi , e Heich Kirk of Edinburgh," at Easter 1619, under pain of deposition from the Council (Maitland Miscellany, vol. ii. p. 400). It is no wonder that men of spirit resented such methods of introduc- changeg in religioun si s matters intensite Th . feelinf yo 163 n gi re-expresseds 7wa t leasa , t years afterwards Montrose'n i , s Remonstrance:— natior reduces "Ou nwa almoso dt t irreparable eviy lb the perverse practices of the sometime pretended prelats; who, having abused lawful authority, did not only usurp to be lords over God's inheritance, but also intruded themselves in the prime places of civil government; and, by their Court of High Commission, did so abandon themselves, to the prejudice of the Gospel, that the very quintessence of Popery was publicly preached by Arminians, and the life of the Gospel stollen away by enforcing on the Kirk a dead Service-Book, brooe bowele Whore th th f th do f sBabelf o eo prejudic e alsos a th ; countrye o ,t th f eo , finind gan confinin t theiga r pleasure sucn i , h sort that, trampling upo e neckl whosnth al f so e conscience could not condescend to be of their coin, none were sure of life nor estate " (Memorials of Montrose and his Times, Maitland Club, vol. i. pp. 216, 217).