Chapter VII: Section VI: The Conferences at York and Westminster

_CONTENTS_

1. The Conference at York.
(_a_) Letter of Murray to Queen Elizabeth.
(_b_) Mary's Instructions to her Commissioners.
(_c_) The formal complaints and replies.
(_d_) The account of the private interview, with the "abstract of
matters" there shown.
(_e_) Sussex's opinion of the evidence.

2. The Conference at Westminster.
(_a_) Mary's Instructions.
(_b_) Murray's "Eik" or additional charge.
(_c_) The answer of Mary's Commissioners to the "Eik."
(_d_) Elizabeth's reply to (_a_).
(_e_) The Privy Council and suggestions for a compromise.
(_f_) Proofs produced at Westminster--the account of the production.
(_g_) Mary's own answer to the "Eik," and her request to see the
originals, with Elizabeth's reply.
(_h_) Mary's request for copies, with Elizabeth's reply.
(_i_) Dissolution of the Conference by Elizabeth.

_MARY IN ENGLAND_

The Conference at York.

[On Mary's arrival in England, Queen Elizabeth declined to meet
her, till she should be cleared from the suspicion of complicity in
the Darnley murder. Mary promptly accused Maitland and Morton of a
share in the crime, and accepted Elizabeth's proposal to have the
case tried at a Conference at York. The Queen of England appointed
as Commissioners, the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Sussex, and Sir
Ralph Sadler. The Scottish Queen was represented by Lords Boyd,
Herries, and Livingstone, the Abbot of Kilwinning, Sir John Gordon
of Lochinvar, Sir James Cockburn of Skirving, and John Lesley, the
Bishop of Ross. The Earl of Murray, the Earl of Morton, the Bishop
of Orkney (Adam Bothwell), the Abbot of Dunfermline, and Lord
Lindsay appeared in the name of the young James VI., along with
Maitland of Lethington, George Buchanan, James Macgill, and Henry
Balnaves, as assistants.

Many points of procedure and various formal questions occupied much
of the time of the Conferences. The extracts which follow have been
chosen out of regard to their bearing on the problem of Mary's
guilt or innocence, and especial care has been taken to include
references to the Casket Letters. The letters themselves, and the
depositions which were produced before the Commissioners, will be
found, by themselves, after the account of the Conferences.

The Conference met at York on October 8, and as Mary was, formally,
the plaintiff, her complaint against the Lords was first received.
Thereafter, Murray's reply and a rejoinder from Mary's
representatives were put on record. This was all the formal
business essential for our purpose. But, on October 11th,
Elizabeth's Commissioners received a private visit from Maitland,
Buchanan, Macgill, and Balnaves, who put before them, secretly,
certain documents to prove Mary's guilt. It will be seen from the
letter of the Commissioners to Elizabeth, and the quotations from
the "abstract of matters ... chosen by the Scots," that these
documents consisted of:--

1. A bond signed by the Lords, agreeing to Bothwell's marriage with
the Queen.

2. The Queen's warrant for the signature of the above-mentioned
bond.

3. Two contracts of marriage. (See pp. 201-203.)

4. Two letters arranging for the seizure of the Queen by Bothwell
(_i.e._ two of Letters, vi., vii., and viii., see pp. 190-194).

5. A letter arranging a duel between Darnley and the Lord Robert.

6. The two Glasgow Letters (i. and ii., see pp. 165-182).

7. The Love Sonnets (pp. 195-201).

8. The Letter in which the Jason and Medea comparison occurs.
(Letter iv., see pp. 185-189.)

This list should be compared with the recital of the productions at
Westminster (pp. 143 _et seq._). Maitland informed Queen Mary of
this secret visit, and she complained to Queen Elizabeth, who
summoned all the Commissioners to London, on the ground of greater
convenience.]

_MURRAY AND HIS PROOFS_

_Letter of the Earl of Murray, with information for the Queen of England_, June 22, 1568. _Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 75, _from the Paper Office_.

It may be that such letters as we have of the Queen, our Sovereign Lord's mother, that sufficiently, in our opinion, prove her consenting to the murther of the King her lawful husband, shall be called in doubt ... therefore, since our servant, Mr. John Wood, has the copies of the same letters translated in our language, we would earnestly desire that the said copies may be considered by the judges that shall have the examination and commission of the matter, that they may resolve us thus far, in case the principal agree with the copy, that then we prove the case indeed; for when we have manifested and shown all, and yet shall have no assurances that what we send shall satisfy for probation, for what purpose shall we either accuse or seek to prove, when we are not assured what to prove, or when we have proved, what shall succeed?

_MARY ASSERTS FORGERY_

1568.--September 9. Mary's Instructions to her Commissioners.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 337, from _Queen Mary's Register_ in Cotton Library.

In case they allege they have any writings of mine, which may infer presumption against me in that case, ye shall desire the principals to be produced, and that I myself may have inspection thereof, and make answer thereto. For ye shall affirm, in my name, I never wrote anything concerning that matter to any creature; and if any writings be, they are false and feigned, forged and invented by themselves, only to my dishonour and slander. And there are divers in Scotland, both men and women, that can counterfeit my handwriting, and write the like manner of writing which I use, as well as myself, and principally such as are in company with themselves. And I doubt not, if I had remained in my own realm, but I should have gotten knowledge of the inventors and writers of such writings ere now, to the declaration of my innocency, and confusion of their falsity.

October 8. Complaint of the Queen of Scots against the Earl of Murray.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 128, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 197.

That James, Earl of Morton, John, Earl of Mar, Alexander, Earl of Glencairn, the Lords Howe, Lindsay, Ruthven, Sempill, Cathcart, Ochiltree, with others their assisters, assembled in arms a great part of the Queen's grace's subjects, declared by their proclamations it was for her Grace's relief, beset the road in her passage betwixt her Grace's castles of Dunbar and Edinburgh, there took her most noble person, committed her in ward in her own place of Lochleven, ... passed to the castle of Stirling, and made there fashion of crowning of her son the Prince....

James, Earl of Murray, took upon him the name of the Regent, ... intromitted with the whole strengths, munitions, jewels, and patrimony of the crown, as well property as casualty....

_MURRAY'S APOLOGY FOR THE REVOLUTION_

October 10. The Answer of the Earl of Murray.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 144, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 202.

_ACCUSATIONS AGAINST MARY_

It is notorious to all men, how umquhile {the late} King Henry, father to our sovereign Lord, was horribly murdered in his bed. James, sometime Earl of Bothwell, being well known to be the chief author thereof, entered into so great credit and authority with the Queen, then our sovereign, that, within three months after the murder of her husband, the said Earl ... accomplished a pretended marriage betwix him and the Queen, which strange and hasty proceeding of that godless and ambitious man, ... with the ignominy spoken among all nations of that murther, as though all the nobility had been alike culpable thereof, so moved the hearts of a good number of them, that they thought nothing more godly ... than by punishing of the said Earl, chief author of the murther, to relieve others causelessly calumniated thereof, to put the Queen to freedom, forth of the bondage of that tyrant.... {From the Queen, after Carberry Hill}, no other answer could be obtained, but vigorous menacing, on the one part, avowing to be revenged on all them that had shown themselves in that cause, and on the other part, offering to leave and give over the realm and all, so she might be suffered to possess the murtherer of her husband, which her inflexible mind, and extremity of necessity compelled them to sequestrate her person for a season.... During the which time, she finding herself by long, irksome, and tedious travail, taken by her in the government of the realm and lieges thereof ... vexed and wearied ... and for other considerations moving her at the time, therefore demitted and renounced the office of government of the realm and lieges thereof ... and constituted me, the said Earl of Murray, I being then absent furth of the realm, and without my knowledge, Regent to his Grace, the realm, and lieges....

_MARY'S REPLY_

1568.--October 16. Queen Mary's Commissioners' Rejoinder to Murray's Reply.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 162, from _Queen Mary's Register_ in Cott. Lib. Titus, C. 12.

If he {Bothwell} was the principal author of the murder, the same was never known nor manifested to her Highness, but the contrary did well appear to her Grace, by reason the said Earl of Bothwell being suspected, indited, and orderly summoned by the laws of that realm, was acquitted by an assize of his Peers, and the same ratified and confirmed by authority of Parliament, by the greatest part of the nobility ... who also consented and solicited our said Sovereign to accomplish the said marriage with him as the man most fit in all the realm of Scotland ... and they nor none of them ... came to her Highness ... to find fault with the said Earl concerning the murder foresaid, or yet in any ways seemed to grudge or disallow the said marriage.... And at the presenting of the said writings of demission of her crown to her Majesty by the Lord Lindsay, he menaced her Grace, that if she would not subscribe, he had command to put her presently in the Tower, and would do the same, and counselled her to fulfil their desire or worse would shortly follow; which her Highness subscribed with many tears, never looking what was contained in the writings, declaring plainly thereafter, if ever her Grace came to liberty, she would never abide thereat, because it was against her Majesty's will.... If her Grace had willingly demitted the same, as her Highness did not, her Highness could not have nominated the said Earl of Murray Regent, for there were others to have been preferred to him.

1568.--October 11. Letter to Queen Elizabeth from her Commissioners at York.

[This letter is printed in the Appendix to vol. ii. of Hosack's
"Mary Queen of Scots, and her Accusers," from Cott. MS. Cal. c. i.
fol. 198. The words or letters within brackets, {}, have been
burnt, the margin being singed. "The words printed in italics,"
says Mr. Hosack, "are very carefully erased with the pen, and, in
some instances, are disguised with head and tail loops, to prevent
their being read, the alterations being written between the lines."
Without the alterations, the letter is printed in Goodall, vol. ii.
p. 139, and elsewhere.]

_THE PROOFS ARE SHOWN PRIVATELY_

_THE COMMISSIONERS' LETTER_

And so they {Moray and his colleagues} sent unto us the Lord of Lethington, James Macgill, Mr. George Buchanan, and one other being a Lord of the Session, which in private and secret conference with us, not as Commissioners, as they protested, but for our better instruction, afte{r} declaration of such circumstances as led and induced them to vehement presumptio{n} to judge her guilty of the said murder, shewed unto us a copy of a bond bear{ing} date the 19th of April 1567, to the which the most part of the Lords and coun{cil} of Scotland have put to their hands; and, as they say, more for fear, than any liking they had of the same. Which bond contained two special points, the one {a} declaration of Bothwell's purgation of the murder of the Lord Darnley ... and the othe{r} a general consent to his marriage with the Queen.... And yet, in proof that they did it not willingly, they procured a warrant, which was now shewed unto us, bearing date the 19th {of} April, signed with the Queen's hand, whereby she gave them licence to agree to the same.... There was also a contract shewed unto us, signed with the Queen's hand, and also with Bothwell's, bearing date the fifth of April.... There was also a contract shewed unto us, of the Queen's own hand, of the marriage to be had between her and Bothwell, bearing no date, which had not _verba de praesenti_, as the other had, bearing date the 5th of April. It appeared also unto us by two letters of her own hand, that it was by her own practice and consent that Bothwell should take her and carry her to Dunbar.... After the device of the murder was determined, as it seemed by the sequel, they inferred upon a letter of her own hand, that there was another mean of a more cleanly conveyance devised to kill the King; for there was a quarrel made betwixt him and the Lord Robert of Holyrood-house, by carrying of false tales betwixt them, the Queen being the instrument, as they said, to bring it to pass.... Afterwards they shewed unto us one horrible and long letter of her own hand, as they say, containing foul matter, and abominable to be either thought of, or to be written by a Prince, with divers fond ballads, and other writings before specified, were closed in a little coffer of silver and gilt heretofore given by her to Bothwell.... And these men here do constantly affirm the said letters and other writings, which they produce of her own hand, to be of her own hand in deed; and do offer to swear and take their oath thereupon, _as in deed_ the matter contained in them being such as could hardly be invented or devised by any other than by herself; for that the discourse of some things which were unknown to any other, than to herself, and Bothwell, _doth the rather persuade us to believe that they be in deed of her own handwriting_. And as it is hard to counterfeit so many, _and so long letters_, so the matter of them, and the manner how these men came by them, is such, as it seemeth that God (in whose sight murder and bloodshed of the innocent is abominable) would not permit the same to be hid or concealed. In a paper here inclosed we have noted to your Majesty the chief and special points of the said letters, written (as they say) with her own hand, to the intent it may please your Majesty to consider of them, and so to judge whether the same be sufficient to convince her of the detestable crime of the murder of her husband; which in our opinions and consciences, if the said letters be written with her own hand, _as we believe_

_they be_, {is very hard to be avoided.
{_is plain and manifest_....

T. NORFOLK.
T. SUSSEX.
R. SADLER.

Abstract of Matters showed to the Queen's Majesty's Commissioners by the Scots, sent the 11th of October.

_Goodall_, pp. 148-153.

... She wrote to Bothwell, that according to her commission, she would bring the man with her; praying him to work wisely, or else the whole burden would lie on her shoulders; and specially to make good watch, that the bird escaped not out of the cage. {Letter iv., see pp. 185-189.}

_QUOTATIONS FROM THE LETTERS_

Notes drawn forth of the Queen's Letters sent to the Earl Bothwell.

... _Item._ ... We are coupled with twa fals racis; the devill syndere us, and God mot knit us togidder for ever for the maist faithful cupple that ever he unitit. This is my faith, I will die in it.

... _Item._ ... Wareit {cursed} mocht this pokishe man be, that causes me haif sa meikill pane, for without hym I wald haif ane far mair plesant subject to discourse upoun. He is not oer meikle spilt, bot he has gottin verray mekill; he has almaist slane me with his braith; it is war nor your unclis, and zeit {yet} I cum na neirar bot sat in ane cheir at the bedfute, and he beand {being} at the uther end thairof.

... _Item._ ... Send me advertisement quhat I sall do, and quhatsumever sall cum thairof I sall obey you; advys to with yourself. Yf ye can fynd out any mair secreit inventioun be medecein, and the baith in Craigmillar.

... _Item._ ... "For certaintie he suspectis that thing ye know, and of his lyif: bot as to the last, how sone I speak twa or thrie guid wordis unto hym, he rejois and is out of doubt."

... _Item._ ... Sie not his quhas fenzeit tearis suld not be sa mekill praysit, nor estemyt, as the trew and faythfull travaillis quhilk I sustene to merit hir place, for obteyning of quhilk, againis my naturall. I betray thame that may impesche me. God forgive me, and God gif you, my onlie luif, the hope and prosperitie that your humble and faythfull luif desyris unto yow, quha hoipis schortlie to be ane uther thing unto yow. {Letter, ii. pp. 167-182.}

... _Item._ ... As to me, howbeit I heir no farther newes from yow. According to my commission, I bring the man with me to Craigmillar upon Munday, quhair he will be all Wednisday. {Letter i., pp. 165-6.}

... _Item._ ... In ane uther lettre, "I pray you, according to your promeis, to discharge your hart to me, utherwayis I will think that my malheure, and the guid composing of thame, that hes not the third part of the faythfull and willing obedience unto yow that I beyre, has wyne, againis my will, that advantage over me quhilk the secund luif of Jason wan; not that I wolde compair yow to ane soe unhappie as he was, nor yit myself to ane soe unpetifull a woman as she...." {Letter iv., p. 185.}

_COMMISSION REMOVED TO WESTMINSTER_

The Conference at Westminster.

[At the beginning of the Westminster Conference, Mary found herself
"ever straiter and straiter kept from liberty," and demanded to be
allowed to appear in person. Her request and Elizabeth's reply will
be found on pp. 145, 148. On the 26th November, Murray made his
"eik" or additional charge. For the relevant portions of this
document, and of the reply of Mary's Commissioners, see pp. 146-7.
On December 6th, Mary's representatives protested that they would
withdraw from the Conference if their mistress's demand were not
granted. Cecil declined, on a formal point, to receive the protest.
On the 6th, 7th, and 8th, Murray produced his proofs. On the 9th,
the protest was accepted, and Mary's Commissioners withdrew. After
their retirement further evidence was received. It may be of use to
enumerate the documents produced at Westminster:--

_PRODUCTIONS AT WESTMINSTER_

The Book of Articles.

Acts of Parliament ratifying the proceedings of the insurgent
Lords.

Two contracts of marriage, and record of Bothwell's trial and
divorce.

Five of the six letters produced at York, three additional letters,
and the sonnets (pp. 162-201).

Recognition of the Regent's Government by Huntly, Argyll, and
Herries (pp. 154-5).

Depositions and confessions of Hay, Hepburn, Powrie, Dalgleish,
Nelson, and Crawford.

Murray's "Journal or Diary of Events."

The Book of Articles is a document of considerable length. It is a
summary of the charges against the Queen of Scots, but contains no
important charge which is not to be found elsewhere. The reader is
already in possession of its essential allegations. It formed the
material for Buchanan's "Detectio," with which it is, at times,
almost identical. It is printed, from the Hopetoun MS., in Hosack's
"Mary," I. App. B. For the depositions of Nelson and Crawford, see
pp. 207-213. The depositions of Hay, Hepburn, Powrie, and Dalgleish
do not directly accuse the Queen of the murder, beyond stating that
the powder was placed in her room, and they have therefore been
omitted. The question of the position of the powder is discussed in
Hosack, vol. i. pp. 247-8, and the reader is referred to the
authorities there quoted, and to Mr. Hay Fleming's "Mary Queen of
Scots," pp. 435-6 (_cf._ also pp. 219-220). The confession of
Hepburn (English edition of Buchanan's "Detection") contains the
following sentence:--"He said, let no man do evil for counsel of
great men ... for surely I thought that night that the deed was
done, that although knowledge should be gotten, no man durst have
said it was evil done, seeing the handwriting and acknowledging the
Queen's mind thereto." No question was put to Dalgleish regarding
the casket found in his possession.

A quotation from Murray's "Diary," so far as it bears on the
murder, will be found on pp. 213-215.]

_The Earl of Sussex to Sir William Cecil_, October 22, 1568. _Lodge: Illustrations of British History._

This matter must at length take end, either by finding the Scotch Queen guilty of the crimes that are objected against her, or by some manner of composition with a show of saving her honour. The first, I think, will hardly be attempted, for two causes, the one, for that if her adverse party accuse her of the murder by producing of her letters, she will deny them, and accuse the most of them of manifest consent to the murder, hardly to be denied; so as, upon the trial on both sides, her proofs will judicially fall best out, as it is thought. The other, for that their young King is of tender and weak years and state of body; and if God should call him, and their Queen were judicially defaced ... Hamilton, upon his death, should succeed; which Murray's faction utterly detest.

_MARY'S REQUEST_

1568.--November 22. Mary to her Commissioners.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 185, _from Queen Mary's Register_, Cott. Lib., Titius C. 12.

Ye shall afore our sister, her nobility, and the whole ambassadors of strange countries, desire, in our name, that we may be licensed to come in proper person afore them all, to answer to that which may or can be proposed and alleged against us by the calumnies of our rebels, since they have free access to accuse us.... And now the said Earl of Murray being permitted to come into her presence, which if the like be not granted us, as is reasonable, and yet our sister will condemn us in our absence, not having place to answer for ourselves, as justice requires; in consideration of the premisses ye shall break off your conference, and proceed no further therein, but take your leave and come away.

_THE REGENT'S "EIK"_

1568.--November 26. Murray's "Eik" or Additional Charge.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 206, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 230.

Whereas in our former answer, upon good respects mentioned in our protestation, we kept back the chiefest causes and grounds, whereupon our actions and whole proceedings were founded, wherewithal seeing our adversaries will not content themselves; but by their obstinate and earnest pressing we are compelled, for justifying of our cause, to manifest the naked truth. It is certain, and we boldly and constantly affirm, that as James, sometime Earl of Bothwell, was the chief executor of the horrible and unworthy murder, perpetrated in the person of umquhile King Henry of good memory, father to our sovereign Lord, and the Queen's lawful husband, so was she of the foreknowledge, counsel, device, persuader and commander of the said murder to be done, maintainer and fortifier of the executors thereof, by impeding and stopping of the inquisition and punishment due for the same, according to the laws of the realm, and, consequently, by marriage with the said James, sometime Earl Bothwell, delated and universally esteemed chief author of the above-named murder. Where through they began to use and exercise an uncouth and cruel tyranny in the whole state of the commonwealth, and with the first (as well appeared by their proceedings) intended to cause the innocent Prince, now our Sovereign Lord, shortly follow his father, and so to transfer the crown from the right line to a bloody murderer and godless tyrant. In which respect the estates of the realm of Scotland finding her unworthy to reign, decreed her demission of the Crown, with the coronation of our sovereign Lord, and establishing of the regiment of that realm, in the person of me, the Earl of Murray....

JAMES, REGENT.
PATRICK, L. LINDSAY.
MORTON.
AD. ORKAD.
DUNFERMLINE.

_ANSWER TO THE "EIK"_

1568.--December 1. The Answer of Queen Mary's Commissioners to the "Eik."

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 213, _from Queen Mary's Register_.

My Lords,--We are heartily sorry to hear that our countrymen should intend to colour their most unjust, ingrate, and shameful doings.... Her Highness made the greatest of them of mean men, if they had used their own calling, Earls and Lords, and now, without any evil deserving on her Grace's part to any of them in deed or word, to be thuswise recompensed with calumnious and false invented bruits {rumours}, slandered in so great a matter, to her reproach, whereof they themselves, that now pretend herewith to excuse their own treasons, were the first inventors, writers with their own hands of that devilish band, the conspiracy of the slaughter of that innocent young gentleman, Henry Stewart, late spouse till our sovereign, and presented to their wicked confederate, James, Earl Bothwell, as was made manifest before ten thousand people at the execution of certain the principal offenders at Edinburgh....

_MARY AND ELIZABETH_

The Queen's Highness, our and their native sovereign, ... gave them in her youth ... the twa part (two-thirds) of the patrimony pertaining to the Crown of Scotland, and seeing that her successors, Kings of that realm, might not maintain their estate upon the third part ... for their evil deservings and most proud contemption ... caused her use the privilege of the laws always granted to the Kings of that realm before, and make revocation before her full age of xxv. years, ... so that it was not the punishment of that slaughter that moved them to this proud rebellion, but the usurping of their Sovereign's supreme authority, and to possess themselves with her great riches....

... Our desire is most earnestly that it should be the Queen's Majesty's pleasure that our Sovereign may be admitted to come into the presence of the Queen's Highness of this realm, her whole nobility, and also in presence of the ambassadors of foreign countries, for more true declaration of her innocency.

1568.--December 4. Elizabeth's Answer.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 222, _from Queen Mary's Register_.

I think it very reasonable that she should be heard in her own cause, being so weighty; but to determine whom before, when and what, any time before I understand how they will verify their allegation, I am not as yet resolved.

_THE PRIVY COUNCIL_

1568.--Dec. 4. Proceedings of the Privy Council.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 223, _from the Journal of the Privy Council of England_.

Die Sabbati, 4 Decembris 1568, Hora prima post meridiem.

_Present._

THE QUEEN'S MAJESTY.

The Lord Keeper {Sir Nicholas Bacon}.
Duke of Norfolk.
Marquis {of Northampton}.
Lord Steward {Pembroke}.
Earl Essex.
Earl Bedford.
Earl Leicester.
Lord Admiral {Lord Clinton}.
Lord Chamberlain {Lord Howard of Effingham}.
Sir William Cecil.
Sir Ralph Sadler.
Sir Walt. Mildmay.

The said Bishop {of Ross} and his colleagues, before they came to the Court, sent a message to the Earl of Leicester and Sir William Cecil, requiring to speak with them two apart.... And thereupon the said Commissioners came into the Earl of Leicester's chamber, where the said Bishop in the name of the rest said ... That although the Earl of Murray and his complices had delivered in writing a grievous accusation against the Queen, their Sovereign, and that they were prohibited to make any further answer to any such matter, but only to desire the Queen of Scots might come in person to the presence of the Queen's Majesty to make any further answer to any such matter; yet they having considered with themselves their mistress's intention to have been always from the beginning, that these causes should be ended by the Queen's Majesty by some such good appointment betwix her and her subjects, as might be for her Grace's honour and the common weal of the country, with surety also to the Earl of Murray, and his party ... thought good to declare thus much to the said Earl and Sir William Cecil....

_COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS_

After the said Bishop had reiterated the said motion, as above is mentioned, the Queen's Majesty said: "... Trusting and wishing that the Queen, her sister, should be found innocent, ... she thought it better for her sister's honour and declaration to the world of her innocency, to have the Earl of Murray and his complices charged and reproved for this their so audacious defaming of the Queen, their sovereign, and to receive that which was due for their punishment, than to have it ended by appointment, except it might be thought that they should be able to show some apparent just causes of such an attempt, whereof her Majesty would be sorry to hear. And as for the Queen of Scots coming in person to her Majesty to make answer hereunto, the same being of no small moment to her honour, but rather likely to touch her in reputation, in that it might be thought the accusation so probable, as it not to be improved {disproved} by any other, but that she should be forced to come herself, being a Queen, in person to answer for herself, her Majesty said she would not have the Queen's honour and estate in that matter endangered without this their accusation might first appear to have more likelihood of just cause than she did find therein....

Hereunto the Queen of Scots' Commissioners said that this last motion for an appointment came not from the Queen since the accusation given in by the Earl of Murray, and so also the Queen's Majesty assented thereto, but of their own consideration."

_PRODUCTION OF THE PROOFS_

1568.--Dec. 6. Proofs produced at Westminster.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 231, _from the Journal of the Commissioners_.

... They {Murray and others} would show unto her Majesty's Commissioners a collection made in writing of the presumptions and circumstances, by the which it should evidently appear that as the Earl Bothwell was the chief murtherer of the King, so was the Queen a deviser and maintainer thereof; the which writing followeth thus. Articles containing certain conjectures, &c. {the Book of Articles. See _supra_, p. 144}.

After the reading hereof they also said that according to the truth contained in the same, the three estates of Parliament, called by the King, now present, their whole actions and proceedings from the murther of the late King were ratified and approved to be lawful....

_Hosack I., App. C., from State Papers_ (_Mary, Queen of Scots_), 1568, vol. ii. p. 61, December 7, 1568.

... The Queen's Majesty's Commissioners having heard the foresaid Book of Articles read unto them ... entered into a new hearing of the Book of Articles, whereof having heard three of the chapters or heads, the Earl of Murray and his colleagues, according to the appointment, came to the said Commissioners and said: 'They trusted that, after the reading of the Book of Articles, and specially upon the sight of the Act of Parliament, wherein the whole cause wherewith their adversaries did charge them, were found, declared, and concluded to be lawful; their Lordships would be satisfied to think them clear and void of such crime as her Majesty did charge them withal.... They required to know whether their Lordships were not now satisfied with such things as they had seen, and if they were not, and that it would please them to show if in any part of these Articles exhibited they conceived any doubt, or would have any other proof, which they trusted, needed not.... {The Commissioners declined to give any opinion on this point.}

_THE CASKET_

And so they produced a small gilded coffer of not fully one foot long, being garnished in many places with the Roman letter F set under a Royal Crown, wherein were certain letters and writings, and as they said and affirmed to have been written with the Queen of Scots' own hand, to the Earl Bothwell, which coffer, as they said, being left in the Castle of Edinburgh by the said Earl Bothwell before his flying away, was sent for by one George Dalgleish, his servant, who was taken by the Earl of Morton, who also thereto sitting presently as one of the Commissioners avowed upon his oath the same to be true, and the writings to be the very same without any manner of change, and before they would exhibit the sight of these letters they exhibited {the two marriage contracts}.... After this the said Earl and his colleagues offered to show certain proofs, not only of the Queen's hate towards the King, her husband, but also of unordinate love towards Bothwell, for which purpose they produced a letter written in French and in Roman hand, which they averred to be a letter of the said Queen's own hand to Bothwell when she was at Glasgow with her husband, at the time she went to bring him to Edinburgh, the tenour of which letter hereafter followeth: Il semble que avecques ure absence, &c. {Letter i. p. 165.}

_ITS CONTENTS_

After this they produced for the same purpose one other long letter written also with the like hand, and in French, ... the tenour of all which letter followeth hereafter: Estant party du lieu, &c. {Letter ii. p. 167.}

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 235, _from the Journal of the Commissioners_, December 8.

They produced seven several writings written in French in the like Roman hand, as others her letters which were shewed yesternight and avowed by them to be written by the said Queen, which seven writings, being copied, were read in French, and a due collation made thereof as near as could be by reading and inspection, and made to accord with the originals, which the said Earl of Murray required to be redelivered, and did thereupon deliver the copies being collationed, the tenour of all which seven writings hereafter follow in order, the first being in manner of a sonnet,

"O Dieux, ayez de moy," &c.

[This is the first line of the first of the collection of sonnets,
which will be found on pp. 195-201. The other six "writings" are
Letters iii.-viii., on pp. 162-195.]

_DEPOSITIONS_

After this they did produce and show three several writings in English, subscribed and signed by Sir John Bellenden, Knight, Justice-Clerk in Scotland, whereof the first contained two several examinations, the first of John Hay, the younger of Talla, the 13th of September, anno 1567, the second of John Hepburn, called John of Bolton, being examined upon the murder of the King, the 8th of December 1567. The third writing containeth the examination of one George Dalgleish, the 26th of June in the same year, 1567. All which writings ... were delivered to the said Commissioners, the true tenour whereof hereafter followeth, _Apud Edinburgh_, 13 die mensis Septembris.

After this they produced and showed forth in writing, subscribed likewise by the said Justice-Clerk, a copy of the process, verdict, and judgment against the foresaid John Hepburn, John Hay, William Powrie, and George Dalgleish, as culpable of the murder of the said King, which being read, was also delivered, and the tenours thereof hereafter followeth, _Curia justiciariae S. D. N. regis_, &c. After this they produced and shewed forth a writing in a long paper, being, as they said, the judgment and condemnation by Parliament of the Earl Bothwell, James Ormiston, Robert Ormiston, Patrick Wilson, and Paris, a Frenchman, Sym, Armstrong, and William Murray, as guilty sundry ways of treason for the murder of the King. The tenour whereof thus followeth: _In the Parliament holden at Edinburgh, the 20th day of December_.

After this they produced and showed a writing signed by Mr. James Macgill, Clerk of the register, containing a request, by way of protestation, by the Earls of Huntly and Argyle, and the Lord Herries, by the which they require to have no fault imputed unto them for not doing their duty since the 10th of June 1567, until the 29th of December then following, for the which, by order of Parliament, they were acquitted....

_THE FINDING OF THE CASKET_

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 239, from _Journal of the Commissioners_, Cott. Lib. Calig., c. i. p. 252, Dec. 9, 1568.

The Queen's Majesty's Commissioners being occupied in perusing and reading certain letters and sonnets written in French, being duly translated into English, and other writings also exhibited yesterday to them by the Earl of Murray and his colleagues.... After this the Earl of Murray and his colleagues came ... and first the Earl Morton said, that where heretofore he had declared by speech, the manner how he came to the little gilt coffer with the letters, sonnets, and contracts of marriage therein found, and heretofore exhibited: he had caused the same to be put in writing, which also he produced subscribed with his hand, and desired to have it read: which being done, he avowed upon his honour, and the oath which he already took, the same to be true, the tenor whereof followeth, _The true declaration and report_, &c. (see p. 203).

After this the Earl of Murray required that one Thomas Nelson, late servitor to the King that was murdered ... might be heard upon his oath to report his knowledge therein, who, being produced, did present a writing in form of answer of himself to an examination, which being read unto him, he did by a corporal oath affirm the same to be true ... (see p. 207) ...

_CRAWFORD'S EVIDENCE_

The like request was made that one Thomas Crawford, a gentleman of the Earl of Lennox, might be also heard upon his oath, who was, as they said, the same party of whom mention is made in a long letter written in French, and exhibited the 7th of this month.... Whereupon the said Thomas Crawford ... did present a writing, which he said he caused to be made according to the truth of his knowledge, which being read he affirmed upon his corporal oath there taken to be true, the tenour whereof hereafter followeth. The words betwixt the Queen, &c.... The said Crawford said ... that he ... was secretly informed by the King of all things which had passed betwixt the said Queen and the King, to the intent he should report the same to the Earl of Lennox his master ... and that he did, immediately at the same time, write the same word by word as near as he possibly could carry the same away ... (see p. 208).

_Journal of the Privy Council of Hampton Court_, December 14, 1568. _Goodall_, ii. 254.

There were produced sundry letters written in French, supposed to be written by the Queen of Scots' own hand, were then also presently produced and perused; and being read were duly conferred and compared, for the manner of writing and fashion of orthography, with sundry other letters long since heretofore written, and sent by the Queen of Scots to the Queen's Majesty. {The attestation of Morton and the depositions were then read.} ... And forasmuch as the night approached, it was thought good to defer the further declaration of the rest until the next day following.

_Ibid._, December 15.

[The Book of Articles, depositions, and contracts were produced,
along with Acts of the Scottish Parliament.]

And it is to be noted, that, at the time of the producing, shewing, and reading of all these foresaid writings, there was no special choice nor regard had to the order of the producing thereof, but the whole writings lying all together upon the Council table, the same were one after another showed rather by hap, as the same did lie upon the table, than with any choice made, as by the natures thereof, if time had so served, might have been.

_MARY'S PERSONAL ANSWER_

1568.--December 19. Queen Mary's own Answer to the "Eik."

_Mary to her Commissioners. Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 288, from Cott. Lib. Calig., b. ix. p. 287.

We have received the eik given in by the Earl of Murray and his complices. And where they have said thereintill, or at any time, that we knew, counselled, devised, persuaded, or commended the murther of our husband, they have falsely, traitorously, and meschantlie lied; imputing unto us the crime whereof they themselves are authors, inventors, doers, and some of them proper executors. And where they allege we stopped inquisition, and due punishment to be made on the said murther; and siclike {similarly} of the sequel of the marriage with the Earl Bothwell; it is sufficiently answered in the reply given in at York to their two points.... And where they charge us with unnatural kindness towards our son, alleging we intended to have caused him follow his father hastily: Howbeit the natural love the mother bears to her only bairn is sufficient to confound them, and misteris {requires} no other answer. Yet, considering their proceedings by-past, who did wrong him in our womb, intending to have slain him and us both, there is none of good judgment but they may easily perceive their hypocrisy, how they would fortify themselves in our son's name, till their tyranny were better established.

_DEMAND TO SEE ELIZABETH_

And to the effect our good sister may understand we are not willing to let their false invented allegations pass over with silence, adhering to your former protestations, ye shall desire the inspection and doubles of all that they have produced against us; and that we may see the alleged principal {original} writings, if they have any, produced; and with God's grace we shall make our answer thereto, that our innocence shall be known to our good sister, and to all other Princes; and similarly shall charge them as authors, inventors, and doers of the said crime they would impute to us, and prove the same sufficiently, so that we may have our good sister's presence, as our adversaries have had, and reasonable space and time to get such verification as appertains thereto. And protest that we may add thereto as time place and need shall require.

[In accordance with these instructions, Mary's Commissioners made
the request before Elizabeth and her Council on 25th December, and
received the following reply:--]

Which desire her Majesty thought very reasonable, and declared her to be very glad that her good sister would make answer in that manner for defence of her honour. And to the effect her Majesty might be the better advised upon their desires, and give answer thereto, desired an extract of the said writing to be given to her Highness. (Goodall, p. 282, from "Queen Mary's Register," as before.)

_HAMPTON COURT_

1569.--January 7. Proceedings at Hampton Court.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 297, from _Queen Mary's Register_.

The which day the said Bishop of Ross, Lord Herries, and Abbot of Kilwinning, passed to the presence of the Queen's Majesty of England, her Highness's council being also present, and declared, that they had presently received writings from the Queen's Majesty of Scotland, their sovereign, by the which they were of new commanded to signify unto her Majesty, that she would answer to the calumnious accusation of her subjects, and also would accuse them as principal authors, inventors, and executors of that deid for the which she was falsely accused by them, conform to the writings presented of before in her name, and therefore desired the writings produced by her inobedient subjects, or, at the least, the copies thereof, to be delivered unto thame, that their mistress might fully answer thereto as was desired.

And the Queen's Majesty of England took to be advised therewith, and promised to give answer within two or three days.

_ELIZABETH'S DECISION_

1569.--January 10. At Hampton Court.

_Ibid._ (p. 305).

The which day the said Earl of Murray, and his complices, came before the Queen's Majesty of England, where Sir William Cecil, secretary, at the Queen's Majesty's command, and her Highness's council, gave them such answer in effect as follows:--

Whereas the Earl of Murray, and his adherents, come into this realm, at the desire of the Queen's Majesty of England, to answer to such things as the Queen their sovereign objected against them, and their allegiances; for so much as there has been nothing deduced against them, as yet, that may impair their honour or allegiances; and, on the other part, there had been nothing sufficiently produced nor shown by them against the Queen, their sovereign, whereby the Queen of England should conceive or take any evil opinion of the Queen, her good sister, for anything yet seen; and there being alleged by the Earl of Murray the unquiet state and disorder of the realm of Scotland, now in his absence, her Majesty thinketh meet not to restrain any farther the said Earl and his adherents' liberty; but suffer him and them, at their pleasure to depart, relinquishing them in the same estate in the which they were of before their coming within this realm, till she hear farther of their Queen of Scotland's answer, to such things as have been alleged against her.

_MARY'S PROTEST_

[Next day, Mary's Commissioners protested and again demanded
"copies of the pretended writings given in." On the 13th they
repeated their demand, and received a promise "that she {Elizabeth}
will not refuse unto the Queen, her good sister, to give the
doubles of all that was produced." (Goodall.) The copies not being
forthcoming, Mary applied to the French ambassador, La Mothe
Fenelon, for help. Elizabeth promised that they should be produced
immediately, but, when Fenelon again approached her on the subject,
he was informed that Mary had, in a letter, accused the English
Queen of partiality. (Fenelon, i. 133 and 162.) The matter was
forgotten in the negotiations for Mary's marriage with the Duke of
Norfolk, and in the conspiracy which followed.]