Chapter XXXVIII: Act 131: , Par. 8, K. Ja. 6, and the subjects’ liberties, who ought (35)

We received your Lordships Letter of the twenty seventh of June from the Lord Lowdon, whose Relief out of Prison gives us occasion (before we answer your Lordships Letter) to acknowledge the same as an Act of his Majesties Royal Justice and Goodness, although the pretended Cause of his Imprisonment was but a Malicious Calumny of the Enemies of the Kings Honour and our Peace, forged to engage both his Majesties Kingdoms in a National War. As we cannot but regret that any Neglect of his Majesties Officers, or absence of his Commissioner, whose presence we did both desire and expect, should hinder the interposing his Royal Authority to these Acts of Parliament, which were found most necessary for establishing Religion and the Peace of this Kingdom, and which, according to the Acts of Pacification, his Majesty was Graciously pleased to promise; so we have and shall still endeavour to give demonstration of that tender respect we have of his Majesties Honour and Royal Power. And whereas your Lordships Letter doth imply, that we should take some other way for the more easie obtaining of his Majesties Approbation, which also, by several reasons, hath been most instantly pressed by the Lord Lowdon; yet we conceive that Parliamentary way which was taken by the Estates convened by his Majesties Special Warrant, to have been most Legal and Necessary, and no wayes Derogatory to his Majesties Power in Parliament, nor contrary to the Duty of good Subjects, who are warranted by the Articles of Pacification under his Majesties hand, to Determine all Civil Questions, Ratifie the Conclusions of the Assembly, and remove the present Distractions of this Kingdom, as is more abundantly demonstrated by their Declaration in Parliament hereabout; so that we dare not take any other course, which may entrench upon their Parliamentary Power or Proceedings, nor will we (being so few in number appointed to stay here) presume of our selves, in a matter of so great moment, to return a more full and particular Answer, till there be a more frequent meeting of those appointed by Parliament, which will be shortly; and then your Lordship shall be acquainted, that you may shew his Majesty their resolutions and humble desires; and we shall remain

Your Lordships Affectionate Friends
and Servants,

_Signed_, Lindsay,
Balmerino,
Burghly,
Napier,
J. Murray,
G. Dunglass,
Ja. Sword,
J. Forbes,
Ed. Eggar.

Edinburgh, July 7, 1640.

1640.

10. _Principal Baillie’s Account of the Aberdeen Assembly, in a Letter to the Rev. William Spang_.[255]

Our assembly at Aberdeen was kept with great peace. We found a great averseness, in the hearts of many, from our course, albeit little in countenance. D. Sibbald, Forbes, and Scroggie, were resolved to suffer martyrdom before they subscribed anything concerning Episcopacy and Perth articles; but we resolved to speak nothing to them of these matters, but of far other purposes. We found them irresolute about the canons of Dort, as things they had never seen, or at least considered. They could say nothing against any clause of the book of canons, liturgy, ordination, high commission. D. Forbes’s treatises, full of a number of Popish tenets, and intending directly reconciliation with Rome, farther than either Montacute, or Spalato, or any I ever saw among their hands, and the hands of their young students, together with a treatise of Bishop Wedderburn’s, and an English priest, Barnesius, all for reconciliation. D. Sibbald, in many points of doctrine, we found very corrupt; for the which we deposed him, and ordained him, without quick satisfaction, to be processed. The man was there of great fame. It was laid upon poor me to be all their examiner, and moderator to their process. Dr Scroggie, an old man, not very corrupt, yet perverse in the covenant and service book. D. Forbes’s ingenuity pleased us so well, that we have given him yet time for advisement. Poor Barron, otherwise an ornament of our nation, we find has been much in _in multis_ the Canterburian way. Great knavery and direct intercourse with his Grace we found among them, and yet all was hid from us that they could. I got my cause delayed to the next general assembly; yet Mr Robert Ramsay was ordained to transport to Glasgow, and Mr Andrew Cant to Aberdeen, sore against his mind; his patron Lothian will vehemently oppose it. Thir violent transportations will at once offend many. I am like to be more than boasted with a divinity-profession in Aberdeen. The work is so far mistaken. Better for me to be dumb or dead than so far miserable. Much of our ten days sitting spent in causes of transportations, and plantations of churches, where patrons, presbyteries, and people had their contests. All which came before us were at last peaceably settled. Many good overtures were made, which ye will see at once in print. That which troubled us most was a passage of Mr Henry Guthrie’s, which, because it may be the occasion of farther din, I will relate to you particularly, so far as I understand. Our countrymen in Ireland, being pressed there by the bishops to countenance the liturgy and all the ceremonies, did abstain from the publick worship, and in private, among themselves, their ministers being all banished, did, in that time and place of persecution, comfort themselves with prayer and reading, and other exercises of religion, whiles in the night, whiles in the day, as they had occasion. Sundry of them intending a voyage to New England, inclined towards the discipline of these churches; yea, some Brownists, insinuating themselves among them whileas their ministers were away, did move divers towards their conceits. The most of thir good people flying over to us, were heartily embraced of us all. Their private meetings were overlooked. Some of their conceits, though they were spreading, we let alone, till the Lairds of Leckie, one who had suffered much by the bishops, was marked, using his Irish form of private exercises in Stirling, and in his prayers, some expression which were prejudicial to Mr Harry Guthrie, minister of the said town, and other ministers of the land, who did not affect their ways. At once Mr Harry, with the brethren of that presbytery, and magistrates of that town, did begin with vehemency, and some violence, to suppress these private meetings; and to point out in very black letters all the singularities they knew or heard of in Leckie, or these who affected their ways. They, on the other side, failed not to render to Mr Harry and the brethren the like. The last assembly of Edinburgh were perplexed with this matter. Mr Harry made very loud complaints of their novations, both in word and writ. Sundry being conscious what in divers parts of the country was broaching, was in some fear. Divers of our chief ministers tendering very much the credit of these very pious people, were loth that anything concerning them should come in publick. We had sundry private meetings with the chief that were thought to incline that way. Mr Henderson vented himself at many occasions, passionately opposite to these conceits. We found among ourselves great harmony of judgement; yea, Leckie declaring his mind in a writ, was found to differ nothing considerable from us. Once we agreed for the framing of an act for the preveening of such questions. Both sides laid it on me to form it. All were pleased with the draught, only one not liking my conclusion of precise discharging of all novations till in a general assembly they were allowed, persuaded to leave off making of an act, lest our adversaries should triumph in our so hasty disputations, if not divisions; and did assure, by quiet denting, to smother all farther reasoning of such purposes: only we concluded, for satisfaction of all, that Mr Harry should preach for advancement of religious exercises in every family, and Mr Robert Blair, Mr John Maclellan, Mr John Livingston, against night meetings, and other abuses which were complained of. Mr Blair, in his sermon, did not so much cry down these meetings as was expected, wherefore Mr Guthrie refused to preach at all. Some citizens of Edinburgh declared themselves not well satisfied with Mr Henderson’s zeal against their practice. One Livingston, a trafficker with the English who were affected to our reformation, but withal to the discipline of New England, in his letters to his friends abroad, did write very despitefully of Mr Henderson. This being intercepted, did grieve, not only the man himself, but us all, of all ranks, who had found him the powerful instrument of God, fitted expressly much above all other, to be a blessing to our church, in this most dangerous season. For preveening of all farther inconvenience, it was thought meet to press, in all the kingdom, religious exercises in families, according to a draught which Mr Henderson, with the unanimous consent of all, gave out in print. This family worship was expected a sufficient remedy against the feared evils of other private meetings. But when it was not found so, these that would have kept on foot amongst us some of the Irish novations, foreseeing their severe condemnation by the ensuing general assembly, thought good to flee from that discreditable stroke, and drew together in Edinburgh, in time of the parliament, to a privy conference. On the one side, Mr Henderson and Mr Eleazar Borthwick; on the other, Mr Blair and Mr Dickson; these four agreed on a paper of caveats, limiting these private meetings; which being opened to the rest of the brethren there conveened, did please all. The report of this gladed all the land, hoping that these disputations had been at a point. I heard no more of them till the synod, at the beginning whereof, as the custom is, a list being given up for preaching in the town, Mr Guthrie was one. He finding himself, as he avowed, indisposed in body, and unable without more books and leisure than there he could have, and unwilling, since the provost of the town required he should be heard, having, as he heard, a mind to get him transported to that town, refused peremptorily to preach at all, and that with some words of headiness more than it became to us, in the face of an assembly; those who bare him at small good will, finding him in this snare, whether to punish him for bygone businesses, or to dash him for attempting in that assembly any farther matter about Leckie’s meetings, which they suspected was his main errand to that place, urged straitly the publick censure of his presumption. When he was removed, all those who had relation to the Irish business, lighted so sharply upon him, that many did think their censure was not so much for his present behaviour, as for some bygone quarrels. He took the moderator’s reproof submissively enough; but whether on that irritation, or preceding resolution, he set himself with all earnestness to have these matters concluded in the assembly, which some of us were afraid so much as publickly to name. Privately he had solicited the whole northern ministers and elders, putting them in a great vehemency against all these things he complained of. It was one of my overtures for ordering the house at the beginning of the assembly, that no motion should come in publick, till first it was considered in private by the committee appointed for things of that nature whereof it was, unless the committee refused to receive it. Whereby Mr Harry his first motion in publick, though he had alledged it had been proponed by him to the committee of overtures and not received, was remitted again to the committee. By this means he was holden off some days; but by no means could be gotten diverted from proponing these questions, which we were afraid should trouble us all. Account was taken of all the commissioners of the kingdom, in the face of the assembly, of settling of family exercise in ilk house of their presbytery; it was avowed to be everywhere pretty well advanced; but this was not water for the fire in hand. It was the advice of the committee, to propone Mr Henderson’s paper before Mr Harry was heard. This advice, in my mind, was wholesome; for likely all would have applauded to that paper, and no more needed for the settling of these questions; but some, whether because they were loth, though privily they assented to that paper, that yet it should go on in a publick act, or being varied with a clean contrair spait, were wilful to have Mr Harry to vent himself in publick, to the uttermost of his passions, would not let the committee determine any thing in that affair. Mr Harry being permitted at last to speak in the assembly, a long discourse proclaimed what he was able to say of Leckie, and those meetings. Truly he uttered many things very odious, if true. Mr James Simpson of Bathgate shewed also many scandalous things of that sort of people. A commissioner from Galloway declared a number of uncouth passages, reflecting on Mr Samuel Rutherford, Mr John Livingstone, and Mr Maclellan. Presently all went to a heat and confused din; the whole north, especially the Earl of Seaforth, a well-spoken man, but whose honesty in our cause ever has been much suspected, passionately siding with Mr Harry; some others freting to hear pious people so shamefully, as they thought, calumniated. In the midst of this clamour, I took leave, sharply to regret that we did rush in a greater evil than any was complained of: the confused misorder of a general assembly was the spoiling of the only remedy of that and all other diseases; but no possibility of order and silence. The moderator had neither weight in his discourse, nor dexterity in guiding. We missed much Mr Henderson, or some of our respected nobles. At last the confusion ended in a committee for the preparing of overtures to remeid these evils. The committee was for the most part of men at Mr Harry’s devotion. After much jangling and repetition, with many evils, of odious, whether true or fabulous, narrations, sundry of us inclined to have that forenamed paper passed in an act. But my Lord Seaforth, and Mr Harry, by no means could hear of that motion. They told ever, that caveats brought in the bishops; that this paper, though never so full of limitations, would be at least introductive of the thing limited. Mr Rutherford all the while was dumb; only, in the midst of this jangling, he cast in a syllogism, and required them all to answer it. “What scripture does warrant, an assembly may not discharge; but privy meetings for exercises of religion, scripture warrants, James v. 16. _Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another;_ Mal. iii. 16. _Then they that feared the Lord, spake often one to another,_ &c.: _Ergo_, thir things could not be done in publick meetings,” A number greedily haunsht at the argument, Mr Andrew Ramsay, Mr J. Adamson, and others; but came not near the matter, let be to answer formally. Mr Harry and Seaforth would not have Mr Samuel to trouble us with his logick syllogisms. The truth is, as I conceive, Mr Harry intended to have all meetings private _simpliciter_ abolished; also Mr Rutherford I know, in a treatise, defended the lawfulness of those meetings in greater numbers, and for moe purposes than yet we have heard practised: also Mr Dickson had written, and practised, and countenanced some things in these meetings, that now both of them finding the inconveniences, and seeing the great opposition they got from many good men, and especially by Mr Henderson, were content to pass from, at least to be silent of. We closed that night with this overture, That five of our number should draw up every one of us our conception, by way of act, to present to-morrow to the committee, Mr David, Mr Harry, Mr David Lindsay, Mr Alexander Peter, and I. In my act I strove, so cunningly as I could, to canvass Mr Henderson’s paper shortly, with some of my own conceptions. I communicated it to the chief opposers of Mr Harry, Mr David Dickson, Mr Samuel Rutherford, William Rig, and others, and got them at last to acquiesce. When we came to the committee, all the five Acts were read: the question came betwixt mine and Harry’s. Mine was liked by all; only Mr Harry disliked it, and conceived that under every word a dangerous serpent did lie. There was no remeid: his contentment was the contentment of the body of the assembly. Since he misliked my draught, I set myself to persuade that his draught might be accepted; for truly it had nothing that was controverted. It consisted of three articles. The 2d article was, That read prayers was not unlawful. Mr Dick did enlarge, that it should be lawful to read prayers both in private and publick. The 3d article was, That it should not be permitted to any to expone scripture to people, but only ministers, and expectants approven by Presbyteries. No man did contradict the 1st article, which was, That family-worship should be declared to be of persons of one family, not of divers. Here was all the question. I did declare publickly, oft without contradiction, that the meetings whereof he complained were not family-meetings, but another kind specially differing from the other: so that his article of family-meetings would never touch any abuse of these meetings, were they never so many and foul. Yet because this was Mr Harry’s own draught, and he alledged that the people with whom he had to do, did take their conventicles only for family exercises, he required no more than the declaration of the assembly, that family-meetings extended no farther than to persons of the same family. This, though no man could refuse, yet these that liked nothing that came from him, did question much more than they needed, and very violently urged to have, in that article, limitations which in my judgement were very needless, and did farther Mr Harry’s design more than his own words. Always Mr Harry was made content to accept of one exception, which was the practice of people’s flocking to their minister’s family-exercise; but of any moe exceptions he would not hear, and more they pressed upon an argument that did much amaze my mind, that except they got another conceit, they had a written protestation ready against that act of the synod; the thing that the devil was seeking, and would have been sweet pastime to that town of Aberdeen, and our small favourers in the north, who were greedily gazing on the event of that broil. Always at last the prayers of the land for God’s blessing to that assembly prevailed, and in a moment God made the minds of these who differed to agree, to the great joy of all when they heard it. There was but five of us then in private, Mr Harry, Mr David, as parties, Belhelvie for Mr Harry, the moderator, and I, betwixt them. Mr David at last acquiesced to my request, to let Mr Harry’s article pass as it stood; and Mr Harry, after once and again I had inculcate to him, that all his act was but a blephum if you put not in that clause you see it has against novations, was at last content to put it in; so with great difficulty, the act being agreed upon in private, and in the committee, when it came to be voted in the assembly it had no contrair voice. All of us did think that then the storm was close over and gone; yet when least we expected, it does blow up again as boisterously as ever. Some that were grieved and fretted that their purpose should have got so much way, desiring to have some order of him, did give in a writ, requiring, since so many vile abuses were in the assembly alledged to have been committed by Leckie; and others, in divers parts of the country, it were expedient that a committee were ordained for the trial and severe punishment of all these misorders; and that this committee should sit in Edinburgh, and consist of those whom the assembly had appointed commissioners for the parliament, with so many other as the assembly thought meet to join with them. This bill was read near the end of the synod by Mr James Bonner, moderator of the bills, as newly given to him, by whom he knew not. Upon the hearing of it, at once there arose such an heat and universal clamour, that it was marvellous. Mr John Maclellan was found the ingiver of it; while he began to be hissed at, Mr Andrew Cant, and Mr D. Dickson did speak for the reasonableness of it, and some few other ministers and gentlemen who had been on the council of it; but they were so overwhelmed with the multitude of criers, Away with it, Away with it, that they were forced to be silent and let it go. I much grieved to see the tumultuous disorder of our assembly; and had I been on Mr David’s council, I would have dissuaded him to my power from such a motion, which, if it had been assented to, was like to have fired our church more than any other brand that Satan at this time, in all his wit, could have invented: so, by God’s goodness, water was cast on that fire for the time: the embers yet seem to smoke; but we hope God will see to the peace of our church, which is but a brand newly taken out of the fire, or rather yet in the midst of the flame of war and great danger.

* * * * *

11. _Laud’s Service Book, and the English Liturgy._[256]

In addition to the objections which the Scots had to various parts of the English Liturgy, they complained of the following alterations made on it in Laud’s Service Book, as savouring of Popery:—

1. In the order of the administration of the Lord’s Supper, instead of the Rubrick in the English Liturgy—“The table, at the Communion time, having a fair white linen cloth upon it, shall stand _in the body of the church_, or in the chancel, where morning and evening prayer are appointed to be said”—Laud’s Service Book has the following:—“The holy table having, at the communion time, a carpet, and a fair white linen cloth upon it, _with other decent furniture, meet for the high mysteries there to be celebrated_, shall stand at the _uppermost part of the chancell_ or church, where the Presbyter, standing at the north side or end thereof, shall say,” &c.

2. Having thus removed the Priest, as far as possible, out of the hearing of the people, (in conformity with the Romish rites,) the Service Book, in a second Rubrick, immediately before the consecration, orders him to turn his back to the people, which he must have done according to the following direction:—“Then the Presbyter, standing up, shall say the prayer of consecration, as follloweth, _but then, during the time of consecration, he shall stand at such a part of the holy table, where he may, with the more ease and decency use both his hands._”

3. They objected to the phrase _consecration_, which, though it appears in the modern editions of the English Liturgy, had no place in the edition used at that time in England; but their chief objection to the prayer of consecration, in Laud’s book, was the following sentence, which never was allowed a place in the English Liturgy:—“We most humbly beseech thee, and of thy almighty goodness vouchsafe so to blesse and sanctifie, with thy word and holy spirit, these thy gifts and creatures of bread and wine, _that they may be unto us the body and blood of thy most dearly beloved Son._”

4. After the prayer of _consecration_, there follows, in Laud’s book, the prayer of _oblation_, which two prayers the Popish writers call the _heart_ and the _head_ of the mass, and both of which were carefully removed by the English Reformers, the former being altered, and the latter rendered innocent, by being placed as a thanksgiving after receiving the communion. In the Service Book, the oblation is replaced, under the title of a “Memoriall or Prayer of Oblation,” beginning with, “We, thy humble servants do celebrate and make here before thy divine Majestie, with these thy holy gifts, the memoriall which thy Son hath willed us to make, and humbly beseeching thee, that whosoever shall be partakers of the holy communion, _may worthilie receive the most precious bodie and blood of thy Son_, Jesus Christ, and be fulfilled with thy grace and heavenly benediction, and made one bodie with him, that he may dwell in them and they in him.” After this, the Lord’s prayer, which, in the English Liturgy, is not introduced till after the communion has been received, is brought in with the presumptuous preface of the missal, _Audemus dicere_—“We are bold to say.”

5. What was formerly called “the holy table,” and, in the English Liturgy, “the Lord’s table,” is now, after the consecration, in the Service Book, termed “God’s board.” “Then shall the Presbyter, kneeling down at _God’s board_, say,” &c.

6. In delivering the bread, the Minister is required, by the English Liturgy, to say—“The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. _Take and eat this in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on him in thy heart, by faith with thanksgiving._” This last sentence, added by the English Reformers to qualify and explain the former, is wholly _omitted_ in Laud’s book, which gives us merely the words of the missal—“_The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life._” In like manner, when delivering the cup, the words “Drink this in remembrance that Christ’s blood was shed for thee, and be thankful,” are expunged from the Service Book, as savouring too much of Protestantism; and the Priest is simply required to “say this benediction—_The blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was shed for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life._ Here the party receiving shall say, Amen.”

7. The fair linen cloth, with which the elements are covered, after communicating, is called, in Laud’s book, the “corporall.”

8. Besides this, in the order for the communion, in Laud’s Liturgy, the _Offertory_, which, it would appear, was almost wholly expunged, name and thing, from the ancient copies of the English Liturgy, as having been the Popish sacrifice for the quick and the dead; is introduced in nearly all its former glory. Passages of Scripture, omitted in the English book as identifying it with Jewish oblations, are restored; and it was strongly suspected, from the Commentaries of Couzins, who openly defended the practice, that prayers for the dead, and for the honour of the saints, were insinuated under such expressions as, “We also bless thy holy name for all those thy servants, who, having finished their course in faith, do now rest from their labours—all thy saints, who have been choice vessels of thy grace, and the lights of the world in their several generations—most humbly beseeching that, at the day of the general resurrection, we, and all they which are of the mystical body of thy Son, may be set on his right hand,” &c, nothing like which is to be found in the corresponding prayer in the English Liturgy.

Various other objectionable points, in the Service Book of 1637, are noticed by Robert Baillie in his treatise “Ladensium Autokatakrisis, the Canterburians Self-Conviction,” published without his name in 1640. But the same writer has treated the subject at greater length, and in a more learned and elaborate publication, entitled, “A Parallel or brief Comparison betwixt our Scottish Booke and the Missal, the Breviarie, and other Popish ritualls this day in use at Rome, according to the Canons of Trent;” included in his MS. letters and journals, which are now being printed by the Bannatyne Club. It is needless to add, that the suspicions of the Covenanters, as to the intentions of Laud and his Clergy, in the construction of the Service Book, to bring the Church of England, as well that of Scotland, into closer conformity with the Church of Rome, were greatly strengthened by the publications and proceedings of the party in England, who wen carrying matters such a length as to disgust and alarm the rational and sober portion of the English Clergy. See, for example, Laud’s Consecration of St Catherine Creed Church, which made a great noise at the time—Rushworth, vol. ii, p. 76. See also Bennet’s Memorial of the Reformation p. 165, and Neale’s History of the Puritans.

* * * * *

THE
GENERAL ASSEMBLY,
AT ST ANDREWS AND EDINBURGH, 1641.

In resuming our narrative of events connected with the Church of Scotland, we may state, that Wentworth, (created Earl of Strafford in the close of the preceding year,) was intrusted with the chief command of the King’s forces to be employed against the Scotch; the Earl of Northumberland, who was named General, being in a state of health which did not admit of his taking the active charge of it. Strafford had acquired the confidence of the King, by his zealous and energetic services in Ireland, and proved the sincerity of his devotion to his master’s cause, by subscribing £20,000 to the fund for carrying on the war. Before adverting to the military movements of the English army, it may be proper to notice those of the Scottish, who, on this occasion, took steps in advance of their antagonists.

Early in the year 1640, (25th February,) a reinforcement of 300 men had been sent into Edinburgh Castle, with large stores of munitions for its defence, under General Ruthven, created Lord Ettrick. In May, however, the Scottish Estates having mustered their forces in sufficient number, beleaguered the Castle, and, in June and July, bombarded it with such effect as ultimately to force its surrender. About the same time, Argyle took the Castle of Airlie, and plundered all the tenantry on the lands of Lord Ogilvie; scoured Athol, and apprehended the Earl, and other leading men, whom he sent to prison; and levied most severe contributions: and Monro carried terror into the north, by taking prisoners a great number of persons disaffected to the Covenant at Aberdeen, and by other severities; including, among the prisoners, the Bishop of Moray, whose Castle of Spynie he seized and garrisoned. He also took Strathbogie Castle, plundered the Marquis of Huntley’s lands fearfully, and, on the 2d of Aug., “he marches to Banffe,” says Balfour, “quher he playes the devill, and demolishes the Lord Banffes house, which wes both fair and staitly, and an ornament to that pairt of the Kingdome.”

Such were the preludes to the meeting of the General Assembly in the north, which sat from the 28th of July till the 6th of August 1640, in the midst of all these manifold desolations and ravages around them. Meanwhile, the main army of the Covenanters was mustering in Edinburgh, under old Leslie, as General; the Earl of Callander, Lieutenant-General; Baillie, Major-General; Sir Alexander Hamilton, General of Artillery; and Colonel John Leslie, Quartermaster-General. Under the guidance of these commanders, and above a dozen of the Nobility and their sons, and many experienced officers, the Scottish army moved towards the Border. They returned to their old quarters at Dunse Law, and, after about three weeks’ training and preparation, they crossed the Tweed on the 20th or 21st of August.[257] thus deviating from their former tactics, and assuming the aggressive course. Balfour states it as consisting of 200 companies of foot, 4,000 cavalry, and 2,500 baggagers. We leave the pacific correspondence to be gleaned from the documents annexed, and follow briefly the military operations.

The van of the Covenanters was led by Montrose, who was the first to plunge into the river at Coldstream, at the head of his battalions—his secret alienation from the cause of the Covenant not having yet been discovered. In order to break the force of the current, and lessen its pressure on the infantry who waded it, Sir Thomas Hope, the King’s Lord Advocate, at the head of the College of Justice troop of cavalry, passed the river a little above them; and, having forded the river in two columns, (one of them a little below the other,) the Scottish army entered England as open enemies of their King. They encamped that night at Hirslaw, whence, next morning, they marched southwards, and encamped on Misfield Moor, and in the adjacent villages. On the 22d of August, they marched to Middleton Haugh, near Wooller, where they were attacked by some of the King’s troops from Berwick; but these were speedily repulsed, and some of them taken prisoners. Next day, (23d,) being a Sunday, they moved to Branton Field, after sermon; and, next day, encamped on a hill betwixt the new and old towns of Eglingham or Eglintown. On the 25th, they marched from thence, and encamped at Nether Wotten—on the 26th, at Criech—and, on the 27th, at Newburn-upon-Tyne, about four miles west from Newcastle. It may here be noticed, that, on entering England, the Covenanters published certain “Considerations,” in justification of their expedition.[258]

Not expecting, perhaps, such decisive courses as the Covenanters had now taken, the English levies were not yet fully prepared for the rencontre. In the month of July, the army was quartered chiefly in Yorkshire, on its route northward to Newcastle, where Lord Conway had his headquarters. On the 15th of August, that officer, who was General of the Cavalry, but at this time in the chief command, received intelligence of the intentions of the Scotch, and immediately wrote in great haste to Secretary Windebanke, warning the King of their certain approach.[260] On the 20th, the King set out hurriedly from London, in consequence of this information, and issued a proclamation the very day the Scotch had entered England, declaring that “all those of Scotland who have already entred, or hereafter shall presume to enter in an hostile manner into any part of the kingdom of England, and their adherents, assistants, and others, who shall supply them with money, &c., shall be adjudged traitors against his Majesty, his crown and dignity, and incur the penalties of high treason;” but declaring that he would forgive them if they would return to obedience, “and professeth it before God and the world, as often formerly and in his late declaration he hath done, that he never did nor will hinder his subjects of Scotland from the enjoying of their religion and liberties, according to the ecclesiastical, civil, and municipal laws of that kingdom, and according to his promise and their desires, subscribed by themselves at the Pacification,”[259] &c. This proclamation just left matters precisely as they stood, on a vague foundation, such as they were under the pacification of the last year, but gave no sanction, on the part of the King, to the sweeping enactments of the Estates in Scotland; and it had no effect.

On the 27th of August, the King, as well as Strafford, being then at York, exerting themselves to raise the requisite supplies of money, the latter dispatched a pacquet of instructions to Conway at Newcastle, the Scotch army being posted in its vicinity. Rushworth, the compiler of the Historical Collections, accompanied the courier who bore the pacquet, and he states that, on their arrival at Newcastle, they learnt that Conway had gone to the army near Newburn, whither they immediately went and found the General holding a Council of War with his Field Officers, about half a mile from the troops. On opening his dispatches, these contained orders to prepare the army for an engagement with the Scotch; and while the Council was in deliberation, a herald arrived “in all haste from the army, to acquaint the Lord Conway and Council of War, that the army was already engaged with the Scots, which seemed strange to them, because orders were given not to fight but upon the defence; but the Council of War suddenly broke up and hastened to the army.”[260]

When the Scotch army reached Newburn, on the 27th, a drummer had been sent to the English cantonments with certain despatches, but was driven back with them before reaching Newcastle; and the same evening the Scotch pitched their tents on Heddon-Law, above Newburn, from whence there was a declivity towards the river. During the night, they set fires all around their camp, which gave it the appearance of a vast extent; and, during the same night, a part of the King’s army, consisting of 3000 foot and 1500 horse, was drawn up in a meadow on the south side of the Tyne, called Newburn-Haugh, or Stella-Haugh, to oppose the Scotch passing the river during the night. There were two breastworks raised by the English, opposite to the two fords which the Scotch might pass at low water; and in each of these sconces were 400 men, with four field pieces. During all that night and the following day, the English troops were under arms, guarding the passage of the river, until an engagement commenced in the following manner:—the Scotch, having the vantage position, could see from their heights the whole force and disposition of the English army, they planted cannon in Newburn church steeple, and their infantry in the church, houses, lanes, and hedges.

While the opposing hosts were thus watching each other, and preparing for the fray, the horses from both armies were watered in the river during the forenoon of the 28th, without molestation on either side. But a Scotch officer, well mounted, with a feather in his hat, having gone to the river to water his horse, an English soldier, who had noticed that the officer eyed the sconces, fired upon and wounded him. He fell from his horse; on which the Scotch Musqueteers opened a fire on the English, and speedily the artillery on both sides, as well as the musketry, was brought into full play.

The fight continued till the tide had ebbed, and the river was left fordable; and, by this time, the Scotch cannon had made a breach in one of the breastworks, and many of the English were killed. Finally, notwithstanding the utmost efforts of the English officers, the men threw down their arms and fled, being exhausted with unintermitted service all the day and previous night, under arms and in the battle. The Scotch commander, seeing from his height, this discomfiture of his antagonists at one point, ordered a forlorn party of twenty-six, being gentlemen of the College of Justice troop, to pass the river, which they did rapidly, their orders being to discover the plight of the other breast-work not yet silenced. But a brisk fire was kept up on it; and at length the English were compelled to retreat from it also; on which more cavalry, commanded by Sir Thomas Hope, and two regiments of foot, commanded by Lords Crauford-Lindsey and Loudoun, waded through the river. Simultaneously with this movement, Leslie opened a battery on the English cavalry, exposed to the range of his guns; and speedily a retreat was sounded. A portion of the cavalry attempted to cover the retreat up Ritan and Stella Banks; but the Scotch having now passed the ford in sufficient numbers, overpowered and took them prisoners. The loss in this skirmish was inconsiderable—only about sixty of the English having been killed, although, doubtless, many were wounded. The accounts, however, on this point do not agree.

The English army effected its retreat to Newcastle; and at midnight a council of war was held, when it was resolved that the whole army should retreat to Durham, which it did next morning (29th) at five o’clock, leaving Newcastle unprotected and open to the Scotch troops. During the afternoon of that day, Douglas, Sheriff of Teviotdale, went with a trumpet and some troops of cavalry to the gates of Newcastle, demanding a surrender; and being threatened with some batteries of ordnance, the Mayor, after some parly, opened the gates. “Next day, being Sunday, fifteen [Scotch] Lords and Douglas came and dined with the Mayor—drank a health to the King—had their sermons that day by their own divines;” and on Monday, Leslie, pitched his camp on Gateside hill, in the vicinity of Newcastle.[261]

Having thus obtained decisive success in their first enterprise, and an advantageous position, the Scotch leaders availed themselves of their victory, but with moderation. They agreed for supplies, which they required, but gave money in part, and security for the balance. Their occupation of Newcastle, however, and the retreat of the King’s army, produced the greatest consternation. Of the ten thousand persons employed in the coal mines, not a man was to be seen. Four or five hundred vessels, employed in the coal trade, either sailed from the river, or refrained from entering it, when they discovered the state of matters; and for several days all the shops were shut, and many families fled, leaving their houses and property at the mercy of the Scotch. The panic spread to Durham, where the shops were all shut, and not one house in ten was occupied by its possessors, who had fled for safety. The English army continued its retreat from Durham towards York. The Bishop and clergy of Durham, too, all fled; among whom was Dr Balcanquell, who had no desire, it is to be presumed, to experience the tender mercies of the Sheriff of Teviotdale and Lord Kirkcudbright, or the spiritual consolations of “Master Andro Cant.”

The news of this defeat reached Strafford at Darlington the day after. He was on his way to join the army before any engagement should take place. But he now sent orders to the troops, in full retreat, to rally and concentrate in Yorkshire. The King had, at that time, reached Northallerton on his way to the army; but, on learning the unfortunate issue of the first conflict, he immediately returned to York; and next day Strafford issued an order to the soldiers to destroy all millstones on their retreat.

When the Royal army was mustered at York, it was found to amount to 17,383; and, on the 31st of August, the King issued a summons to all the Lords, spiritual and temporal, and other Nobles, to attend his Majesty at York, and, the same day, issued an order to the Earl of Craufurd to engage a hundred Scotch officers in his service.

On the 4th of September, his Majesty received a Petition from the Commissioners of the late Parliament in Scotland, in a letter to the Earl of Lanerick, to which an answer was next day returned;[262] and, on the 7th, a writ was issued summoning a council of the Peers at York, upon, the 24th of the month.[263] Upon the 8th, the Scotch Commissioners sent a second letter to Lanerick; and, on the 9th, they sent another to the Lord Mayor and Aldermen of London, setting forth the objects and purposes of their expedition; and, about the same time, the Earl of Essex and other Noblemen, and the Citizens of London, also applied, by petition, to his Majesty to call a Parliament, which last the Privy Council endeavoured, in vain, to quash. The purport of all these documents, will be most satisfactorily seen in the writings themselves;[264] and the result of the whole was, that the King appointed Commissioners to meet others from the Scotch at Rippon, to treat of peace, and called a Parliament for the 3d of November. The negotiations were afterwards transferred to London; and the combined movements of the English and Scottish malcontents ultimately ended in a great revolution throughout the British empire, of which it is difficult, even in later times, to predicate whether the evils or the benefits preponderated.

The negotiations at Rippon commenced on the 1st of October, and, on the 23d of that month, were transferred to London, that the English Noblemen might attend the Parliament summoned to meet there, in the beginning of November; and a cessation of hostilities was agreed on.[265] It is needless here to enumerate all the points of treaty, which were necessarily very numerous and complicated. From that affair, therefore, we turn, for a brief space, to the proceedings in the Long Parliament of England, which was opened by the King on the 3d of November, and in which, the discontented party having a preponderance, proceeded at once to the most decisive courses.

Strafford, by his energy and decision of character, although he had governed Ireland for eight years with great advantage to the State, became peculiarly obnoxious to the malcontents, English, Scottish, and Irish, by reason of his devotion to the King’s service, and his high talents and vigour. Whenever, therefore, he appeared in London, a vehement and preconcerted attack was made upon him in the House of Commons, on the 11th of November. Pym led on the attack, imputing it to Strafford that he was one of the chief among those who had formed a deliberate plan for changing the form of Government, and subverting the ancient laws and liberties of the kingdom; and, after various elaborate invectives, it was moved that he should be immediately impeached for high treason. This motion was unanimously adopted, nor was even one man found who had the moral courage to utter a word in his defence. The impeachment was instantly voted and carried to the upper house, where Strafford, who had just entered, unaware of what had been secretly carried through in the other house, and who had come to London under a royal guarantee that the Parliament should not touch a hair of his head, was ordered into custody; and soon after Laud was similarly treated, and, with Strafford, sent to the Tower.

It belongs to the History of England to trace these and other proceedings of the Long Parliament to their issues; but one of the immediate effects was a close alliance betwixt the leaders of the Opposition and the Scottish Commissioners then in London, with whom they made common cause against the King and his supporters. Rothes, Loudoun, and other Scottish Statesmen, with an auxiliary force of clergymen, availed themselves of this alliance; and, while in London, busied themselves, not exclusively in effecting a favourable conclusion to the treaty, but in preaching and intriguing for the subversion of the English hierarchy and planting Presbytery in its stead; and they joined their moiety of accusations against Strafford and Laud, before the English Parliament, as incendiaries and prime causes of all their own grievances. They were not inattentive, however, to the business of their mission, and made various demands in the negotiations, of very considerable importance:—That the Acts of the late Parliament of Scotland should be ratified and published by the King; that public incendiaries, who had excited hostilities betwixt the two kingdoms, should be referred to the judgment of the respective Parliaments, and not afterwards exempted from the punishments which might be awarded; and these, with some subordinate matters about indemnification for losses, &c., constituted the particulars for which they contended. To these demands the King was, at length, (15th December,) constrained to yield by the necessity of his circumstances; and thus his favourite Episcopacy was not only overthrown in Scotland, but shaken to its foundation in England; the royal prerogatives were virtually relinquished; and the whole power of the State vested in the democratic oligarchies of both kingdoms, under the guidance of aristocratical leaders; and every man who had hazarded life and fortune, in what he deemed a loyal adherence to his Sovereign, was thus delivered over to the arbitrary power of these semi-republican Conventions. Among other boons conferred on the Scottish by the English Parliament, was the sum of £300,000 for “brotherly assistance”—a subsidy which was by many understood, not merely as an indemnification for the expense of their expeditions, but as a consideration, for similar instances of fraternal aid, should the malcontent party in England require it on some future occasion.[266]

The final pacification, however, was not concluded till the 7th of August, 1641, when both armies were immediately disbanded; but during the dependence of the treaty, the General Assembly, of the year 1641, met at St Andrew’s, on Tuesday the 20th of July—John Earl of Weymes being the King’s Commissioner. A deputation from the Parliament having craved that its sittings should be transferred to Edinburgh, their request was complied with; and an adjournment to that city, where its next sederunt was appointed to be held on the 27th, took place. At the adjourned meeting, Mr Alexander Henderson was once more chosen Moderator.

We may just remark, that, during the protracted negotiations now alluded to, the Scottish Commissioners and Ministers, in the moat indecent manner, exerted themselves to overthrow the Church of England. Henderson and Gillespie wrote and published tractates against it. They openly approved of what was called the “Root and Branch Petition” of the English nonconformists, and went the length of presenting to the King a paper, in which they demanded “unity of religion and uniformity of Church government”—in other words, the adoption of the Presbyterian Covenant, and the coercive edicts for its adoption; thus violating their duty as negotiators for the affairs of Scotland only, and invading the rights and privileges of an independent nation; fostering the spirit of intolerance and revolution; and propelling the movement in which the Throne and both the Protestant Churches were, for many sad years, involved in one common ruin.

This intrusion, by the Scotch Covenanters, into the internal affairs of England, and their zealous exertions for the overthrow of its ecclesiastical establishment, and the destruction of Strafford and Laud, is one part of their conduct of which we have never seen any tenable defence, and which, on every sound principle of international law, was altogether unwarrantable, and incapable of justification. Whatever be the relative merits of Episcopacy and Presbytery, whatever the misdemeanours of Strafford, of Laud, or of other English counsellors of the King—these were matters with which the Scottish Commissioners, in their diplomatic character as the ambassadors of Scotland, had no earthly warrant to intermeddle. Strafford and Laud were the sworn Privy Councillors of England; and whether the advice they gave in that capacity, or the services which they rendered to the King, were, in the opinion of these Scotchmen, right or wrong—they were responsible only to their Sovereign, and not amenable to the English Parliament at the instance of any knot of foreigners, who had no title, under any theory of the law of nations ever yet recognised, to impeach men in such circumstances. The whole proceedings against Strafford were an utter disgrace to the Parliament of England. He was not accused of any single offence which subjected him, under the well-defined law of England, to the penalties of high treason, wherewithal a bill of attainder charged him; and the first principles of all civilized jurisprudence were grossly outraged in the judgment by which, although each item of imputed offence was found insufficient, yet, by accumulating them all, they were _construed_ to amount to that crime. But Strafford was a doomed man; the first victim of that reign of terror which thus commenced—consigning to the scaffold a brave, loyal, and splendid man, in violation of every principle of universe as well as of municipal law—robbing the monarch of his brightest attribute—and plunging the two kingdoms into the vortex of a fierce democracy, which henceforward filled the land with tyranny and hypocricy under the mask of Religion and Liberty. In the guilt of that foul judicial murder, the leaders of the Scotch Covenanters were deeply implicated; and we record the fact with shame and sorrow, upon grounds of historical evidence which we believe cannot be shaken.

Before reprinting the Acts of Assembly 1641, it may be proper to note, cursorily, the general proceedings of the previous year, which either do not appear at all, or but partially, in the printed Acts of that Assembly.

1. The greater part of the Assembly’s time was occupied in the transportation of ministers, about which the patrons, presbyteries, and parishes had many keen contests. Amongst others, Andro Cant was removed from Newbottle to Aberdeen, and Robert Ramsay to Glasgow.

2. Rigorous proceedings were adopted against the Aberdeen Doctors who had repudiated the Covenant. Dr Sibbald was deposed for alleged heterodoxy and contumacy, and was ordained to be further proceeded against, if he did not give speedy satisfaction. Doctors Forbes and Scroggie were found guilty of Arminianism, &c., but were allowed a year to repent; and a new Commission on the College was appointed.

3. Besides passing Acts against the profanation of the Sabbath, witches, and idolatrous monuments, the Elders and Magistrates of Burghs were directed to attend the Presbyteries of the Church, for the more effectual enforcement of their decrees by the concurrence of civil authority.

4. The controversy was agitated about Private Conventicles, of which Baillie gives a minute account.[267]

* * * * *

THE PRINCIPALL ACTS
OF THE GENERALL ASSEMBLY HOLDEN AT ST ANDREWS
AND EDINBURGH, 1641.

Sess. I. 20 July 1641.

Iohn Earle of Weymes, His Majesties commissioner, presented His Majesties Letter to the Assembly, whereof the tenor followeth.

CHARLES R.