Chapter XXV: The Covenanting Struggle (2)

Presbyterians have long looked back to the General Assembly of 1638, as the date of their Second Reformation, though it cannot be compared to the Revolution of 1560. Its proceedings were somewhat violent, like all revolutionary movements which are the result of the preceding and existing states of society――the outcome of its dominant thought and sentiment and feeling. As explained in the second volume, the degree of violence connected with a revolutionary change originated amongst the people, depends upon the state of their civilisation at the time of its occurrence.¹ In this instance, the amount of violence which ultimately flowed from the hostile movement in Scotland against the King and his government was not by any means entirely attributable to the Scots; as England, Ireland, and even more distant lands participated in the struggle.

¹ Mackintosh’s _History of Civilisation in Scotland_, Volume
II., pages 94‒95.

The firm establishment of Presbyterianism in Scotland was the end and aim of the Covenanters, and the movement was watched with interest by the adherents of a similar polity in England. Indeed, in the circumstances of Europe at the time, the cause of the Scots appeared to be the cause of Protestantism, which had so recently been everywhere placed at a disadvantage by the defeat of Nordlingen. In 1637 the arms of the Catholics had asserted their supremacy on the Rhine and in the Netherlands; and the marked advance which Catholicism was once more making roused the Protestant spirit to the utmost vigilance.

We are now arrived at the time when an intimacy sprang up and mutual relations were formed between the Covenanters and a vigorous party opposed to the policy of the King in England, both being prompted by a common dislike to Episcopacy. The ruling motive in the policy of Charles I., was to maintain and complete the Tudor principles of government in Church and State in England, and to extend them to Scotland. The Scots met him in an attitude of opposition as yet unexampled in any other monarchy. He hoped, and had vainly tried, to crush them by the strength of his influence in England. The results of his action were that the movement spread to England itself.

The origin and cause of the Covenanting struggle having been indicated at some length, it would be superfluous to burden this work with the details of the civil war which ensued, save in so far as is requisite for a proper understanding of the sequence of leading events.

After the conclusions of the Glasgow Assembly, civil war became inevitable, and both parties actively prepared for it. The Covenanters began to buy arms and to enlist men. At this time, fortunately for them, the fury of the war on the Continent was abated; and many Scotchmen who had been engaged in it, were returning home, where the signs of the coming contest were already unmistakable. One of the most distinguished of these military adventurers was General Alexander Leslie, who became leader of the Covenanting armies. He was a man of comparatively humble birth, but in the German wars he had attained to rank, and gained much experience. He speedily organised a Scottish army, and equipped it for the field. The Covenanters seized the Castles of Edinburgh and Dumbarton, and other important posts, and made every preparation for the approaching conflict.¹

¹ Spalding’s _Memorials of the Troubles_, Volume I., page 130;
Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_, Volume I., pages 111,
195‒198.

The King had ordered his army to muster and meet him at York, in April, 1639; and though the English clergy naturally contributed largely to the support of the army, still the war was unpopular. Charles proposed to lead his army in person, and sent a fleet into the Firth of Forth, under the command of the Marquis of Hamilton, to interrupt trade, to threaten Leith, and to favour the rising in the north under the Marquis of Huntly, who had received a royal commission of lieutenancy on the 16th of March.

Huntly mustered his followers, and on the 25th of March he was at Inverurie with a force of five thousand men. When he received tidings that the Covenanters were marching to the north under the command of the Earl of Montrose, Huntly knew that without assistance from England, he could not face the enemy. He called a council of war, and on its advice, disbanded his troops, leaving Aberdeen open to the Covenanters. A number of the leading citizens, accompanied by some of the Doctors, fled from the city to offer their services to the King; while others found refuge in houses in the vicinity of the town. Montrose marched into Aberdeen on the 30th of March at the head of six thousand men; and the Covenanters of the surrounding country joined him with other three thousand men. Leaving a garrison in the city, he advanced on Inverurie, where he quartered his troops on the opponents of the Covenant. Huntly, seeing no hope of aid from the South, then sought an interview with Montrose; and on the 5th of April a compromise was effected, by which the Catholics, who were not to be pressed to sign the Covenant, agreed to maintain the laws and liberties of Scotland. Huntly was permitted to return to Strathbogie. A few days after, he was invited to Aberdeen, under a safe conduct signed by Montrose and the other leaders, and arrived there on the 12th of April. Montrose’s object was soon apparent. He had entrapped Huntly, and made him a prisoner. The Marquis and his eldest son, Lord Gordon, were immediately conveyed to Edinburgh. On arriving at the capital, Huntly was pressed to take the Covenant, but replied, “for my own part, I am in your power; and resolved not to leave that foul title of traitor as an inheritance upon my posterity. You may take my head from my shoulders, but not my heart from my Sovereign.” Thus the King’s hope of a rising in his favour in the North was blasted.

In fact, ere Charles arrived at York the whole of Scotland was in the hands of the Covenanters. In the end of May, the Covenanting army was encamped at Dunse Law, while Charles had advanced to Berwick, and posted his force on the opposite side of the Tweed. The two armies thus lay for some days watching each other, both seeming unwilling to strike. The Covenanters knew their advantages, but if they could have induced the King to grant their requests without battle, they would have been glad. In the words of Baillie:――“We sought no crowns; we aimed not at lands and honours; we desired but to keep our own in service of our prince, as our ancestors had done; we loved no new masters. Had our throne been vacant, and our votes sought for the filling of Fergus’s chair, we would have died ere any other had sitten down on that fatal marble but Charles alone.” He gives an interesting account of the Scottish Covenanting army as it lay encamped. “It would have done you good to have cast your eyes athort our brave and rich Hill, as I oft did, with great pleasure and joy; for I was there among the rest, being chosen preacher by the gentlemen of our shire, who came late with my Lord Eglinton. I furnished to half-a-dozen good fellows muskets and pikes, and to my boy a broadsword. I carried myself, according to custom, a sword, and a couple of Dutch pistols at my saddle; but I promise, for the offence of no man, except a robber by the way; for it was our part to pray and preach for the encouragement of our countrymen, which I did to the utmost of my power cheerfully. Our hill was garnished on the top, towards the south and east, with our mounted cannon, nearly to the number of forty, great and small. Our regiments lay on the sides of the hill, almost round about: the place was not a mile in circle, a pretty round rising in a declivity, without steepness, to the height of a bowshot; and on the top somewhat plain; about a quarter of a mile in length, and as much in breadth, and capable of containing tents for forty thousand men.... Our captains, for the most part, were barons or gentlemen of good note; our lieutenants almost all soldiers who had served abroad in good charges; every company had, flying at the captain’s tent-door, a brave new colour, stamped with the Scottish arms, and this――‘For Christ’s Crown and Covenant,’ in golden letters.... The councils of war were held daily, in the castle at the foot of the hill; the ecclesiastical meetings in Rothes’ tent. The general came nightly for the setting of the watch on their horses. Our soldiers were lusty and full of courage; the most of them stout young ploughmen; and a great cheerfulness in the face of all: the only difficulty was to get money to pay them. None of our gentlemen were any the worse of lying some weeks together in their cloak and boots on the ground, or standing all night in arms in the greatest storm.

“Our soldiers grew in experience of arms, in courage, and in favour daily; every one encouraged another; the sight of the nobles and their beloved pastors daily raised their hearts; the good sermons and prayers, morning and evening, under the roof of heaven, to which their drums did call them for bells; the remonstrance very frequent of the goodness of their cause, of their conduct hitherto, by a hand clearly divine; and also Leslie, his skill and fortune, made them all as resolute for battle as could be wished. We were afraid that emulation among the nobles might have done harm, when they should be met in the fields; but such was the wisdom and authority of that old, little, crooked soldier, that all, with an incredible submission, from the beginning to the end, gave over themselves to be guided by him, as if he had been Great Solomon. Certainly the obedience of the nobles to that man’s orders was as great as their forefathers’ wont to be to their king’s commands: yet this was the man’s understanding of our Scots humours, that gave out, not only to the nobles, but to the meanest gentleman, his directions in a very homely and simple form, as if they had been but the advices of their neighbour and companion; for, as he rightly observed, a difference should be used in commanding soldiers of fortune and of volunteers; and of the latter the greater part of our camp consisted.

“Had you lent your ear in the morning, or especially at even, and heard in the tents the sound of some singing psalms, some praying, and some reading scripture, you would have been refreshed. True, there was swearing, and cursing, and brawling in some quarters, whereat we were grieved; but we hoped, if our camp had been a little settled, to have taken some way of dealing with these disorders.”¹

¹ Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_, Volume I., page 215.
_Letters_, Volume I., pages 211‒214, 245. Baillie himself
made his will before he joined the army.

Negotiations were shortly after opened, which led to the following arrangement: the King published a declaration, stating that the religious matters in dispute were to be referred to a General Assembly to be held at Edinburgh on the 6th of August, 1639, and to a Parliament to meet on the 20th of the same month. The King promised to recall his fleet and disband his army; the Covenanters were to disband their forces within forty-eight hours, to restore the castles to the Crown, and to hold no public meetings except those authorised by the law. This treaty was accompanied with explanations which afterwards caused much dispute. Peace was proclaimed in the English and in the Scottish camps, on the 18th of June; but mutual confidence between the King and the Scots was not fully restored.¹

¹ Balfour’s _Annals_, Volume II., pages 324‒332; Baillie’s
_Letters and Journals_, Volume I., pages 218‒221; Rushworth,
III., 944.

The General Assembly met at Edinburgh, on the 12th of August, 1639, and the Earl of Traquair attended as Royal Commissioner. The Assembly again condemned Episcopacy in clear and emphatic terms, and the King’s Commissioner concurred. The Covenanters now felt themselves strong, and the proceedings of the committees appointed by the Glasgow Assembly, touching the deposition of ministers, were approved, with a statement that those deposed merely for signing the bishops’ declinature, or receiving the Liturgy, might be restored on their repentance and submission. The Assembly renewed the Covenant, and requested the Commissioner and the Privy Council to pass an act commanding every one in the nation to subscribe it. The Council agreed to this, and passed the desired enactment. Thus the Covenant was becoming an instrument of intolerance. On the 30th of August, the last day of the Assembly, the members presented a petition to the Royal Commissioner against a book entitled “Large Declaration Concerning the Late Tumults in Scotland,” lately published in the King’s name. They requested the King to recall this book, and to grant authority to summon and bring to Scotland all Scotsmen, who were known or suspected to have been concerned in its composition, especially Walter Balcanqual. The Commissioner promised to place the petition before the King, and to report the result.¹ The Assembly appointed its next meeting to be held at Aberdeen, in July 1640.

¹ Peterkin’s _Records_. The book which gave so much offence
to the Assembly is the one often referred to in the notes
of the preceding pages of this volume――_Large Declaration_:
it is well known to all students of Scottish history, and it
contains valuable historical papers and documents about the
troubles in Scotland; though, of course, it presented many
remarks and reflections which were extremely offensive to the
Covenanters.

Parliament met on the day after the Assembly rose, but it accomplished very little. Bills concerning the abolition of Episcopacy passed the Lords of the Articles, but they were not brought up for the sanction of the House. Time passed, and messages went between the Royal Commissioner and the King. Charles’s fatal policy of always insisting on retaining something, which he imagined might be of use to him in the future, led him to maintain the position, that he would not consent to any act of Parliament rescinding the existing laws by which Episcopacy had been established. This frustrated the object for which Parliament had met. At length Parliament was prorogued to the 14th of November, and then till the 2nd of June, 1640, nothing having been settled. The Covenanters rightly thought that the King was trifling with the important matters in dispute, and thus the causes of dissension were continued and intensified.

Charles again resolved to chastise the rebellious Scots. He still desired to act as a despotic King, and hoped to extinguish all opposition in Scotland. He summoned his English Parliament, which met in April, 1640. A majority of this Parliament refused to grant supplies till they had obtained redress of their grievances; but rather than submit, the King dissolved Parliament in anger, after a session of three weeks. Charles now decided to raise money and an army by other modes――such as benevolences, forced loans, commission of array, or in any other way by which he could muster a force to fight against the Scots. But difficulties were fast thickening around him, and when the 2nd of June came, he again sent a Commissioner to prorogue the Scottish Parliament. In carrying this out, however, a formal mistake was made, which the Estates instantly seized upon; and accordingly they proceeded to business. They enacted that henceforward the nobles, the barons, and the burgesses should be considered as constituting the three Estates of the kingdom, and all former acts permitting churchmen to sit and vote in Parliament were repealed. The Acts of the last General Assembly were ratified; and it was commanded that all His Majesty’s subjects should sign the Covenant. It was also enacted that a Parliament should meet every three years; and before separating they appointed a permanent committee of the Estates, to act when Parliament was not sitting.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., pages
288‒292, 299‒303. This parliament condemned the King’s _Large
Declaration_, “as full of untruths and lies, derogatory to
his Majesty’s honour and to his loyal subjects,” and they
ordered the authors of it to be punished, according to the
laws of the kingdom. Page 302.

The General Assembly met at Aberdeen in the end of July, 1640; but no commissioner appeared to represent the King. The Aberdeen doctors and several other northern ministers were tried before the Assembly, and some of them deposed from the ministry. Acts were passed against the revilers of the Covenant; against witches and charmers; and for abolishing the monuments of idolatry. The Assembly had also under consideration the practice of private meetings, but there was a difference of opinion on this point among the members. Ultimately an act was passed for the regulation of family worship, by which private meetings, if held at improper hours, or composed of more than one family, were forbidden.¹

¹ Peterkin’s _Records_; Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_,
Volume I., pages 248‒255.

But the Covenanters did not trust merely to the acts of the Assembly and of Parliament to secure their rights and further their ends. Throughout the spring and summer they had been actively engaged in organising their army; and had even sought to strengthen themselves by soliciting the assistance of France. In the north war was already declared against all the enemies of the Covenant. The Scots sent two manifestoes into the North of England, one a broadside for popular distribution, and the other in the form of a small pamphlet, in which they protested that the matter should be brought to an issue; as they could not afford to continue in arms for an indefinite period. Therefore, they were coming to England to ask redress of their grievances from the King; although they could scarcely hope for redress from him, but rather from a Parliament. Copies of the Scottish manifesto were freely circulated in London on the 12th of August; and Charles at a Council held on the 16th of August, announced his intention to proceed in person to York, and to assume the command of his disorganised army. On the 20th the King began his march from London to York, which he reached on the 23rd. His army consisted of about twenty-two thousand foot and three thousand cavalry, but they were neither well disciplined nor well led. On the 21st of August a Scottish army of twenty-five thousand men under the command of General Leslie, advanced southward, and crossed the Tweed at Coldstream. As soon as they entered English territory, a manifesto was issued explaining the object of the expedition and justifying it. The Scots advanced and forced the passage of the Tyne, defeating the royal troops; and on the 30th they took Newcastle and occupied it. They next advanced on Durham, and occupied the line of the Tees. On the 4th of September the Scots petitioned the King to listen to their grievances, and with the concurrence of the English Parliament to arrange a lasting peace. Charles ordered Hamilton, the Secretary for Scotland, to intimate to the Scots that the King had summoned the Peers to meet at York on the 24th of September; and if they would then express their demands more definitely, he would give them a fitting answer; and meantime he desired them not to advance farther. In reply the Scots restated their demands thus;――that his Majesty would be pleased to ratify the acts of the last Parliament; that the Castle of Edinburgh, and other fortresses, should be occupied only for the security and defence of the country; that Scotsmen in England and Ireland should not be molested for having signed the Covenant; that the incendiaries, who had caused the troubles, should be brought to trial; that the expense incurred by the war, should be refunded, with the advice and concurrence of the English Parliament.

About this time, a number of the English nobles also petitioned the King to summon a Parliament. His difficulties daily increasing he offered to negotiate with the Scots, and summoned the English Parliament to meet at Westminster, on the 3rd of November, 1640. This assemblage was afterwards known as the Long Parliament. Within a few weeks after it met, Stafford was impeached.

The Commissioners appointed by the King and by the Covenanters met at Ripon on the 2nd of October, 1640, and agreed that the Scottish army should remain inactive at Newcastle; for this they were to receive eight hundred and fifty pounds a-day. Thus matters remained for some time, till the place of negotiation was transferred to London. After the 26th of October, the Scottish commissioners and the ministers who accompanied them, took an active interest in the policy of the English Parliamentary party. After long and very difficult treating, terms of peace were agreed upon, and ratified on the 10th of August, 1641. The main points of the agreement were that the acts of the Parliament of 1640 should be ratified; that the Castle of Edinburgh and other fortresses should be restored and used for the defence of the kingdom, with the advice of Parliament; that the King should not appoint men to office who had been declared disqualified by Parliament. “And whereas unity in religion and uniformity in Church government has been desired by the Scots, as a special means of preserving peace between the two kingdoms, his Majesty, with the advice of both Houses of Parliament, does approve of the affection of his subjects of Scotland, in their desire of having conformity of Church government between the two nations; and as the Parliament has already taken into consideration the reformation of Church government, so they proceed therein in due time as shall best conduce to the glory of God, the peace of the Church, and the good of both kingdoms.”¹ The Scots desired the abolition of Episcopacy in England, and their Commissioners argued for a union in religion between the two Kingdoms. On the 17th of May 1641, this matter was debated in the House of Commons, and a resolution in favour of conformity in Church government was carried. Yet, the House of Commons, though willing to overthrow Episcopacy, had no enthusiasm for Scottish Presbyterianism. At this time, the King wished to please the Scots, and make them contented, and thereby to separate their cause from that of the English. To promote this end, he resolved to visit Scotland. Accordingly he arrived in Edinburgh on the 14th of August, 1641.

¹ Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_, Volume I., page 263; _Acts
of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., page 341 _et
seq._, pages 371‒382.

The Estates had been sitting in Edinburgh since the middle of July; and the King attended a meeting of the House on the 18th of August, and delivered a speech. He spoke of the differences which had arisen between him and his subjects, and of his anxiety to settle them; of his love to his native country, which had caused him to face and to overcome many difficulties in order to be there at that time. He referred to the royal power which had descended to him through one hundred and eight descents, and which they had so often professed to maintain. In short, he said, “the end of my coming is to perfect all that I have promised; and withal to quiet those distractions which have, and may fall out amongst you; and this I am resolved fully and cheerfully to do; for I can do nothing with more cheerfulness than to give my people content and a general satisfaction.”¹

¹ Balfour’s _Annals_, Volume III., pages 40‒41; _Acts of the
Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., page 362 _et seq._

Parliament sat long, and occupied itself with many things. It passed three hundred and nine acts, which touched upon many points of a personal and social character, as well as political and religious matters. It enacted that no one should sit in Parliament till he gave in his adherence to the Covenant. The acts of the Parliament of June 1640, were ratified, and received the royal assent; the prerogatives of the Crown were diminished; and in several points, the constitution of Parliament itself was changed. The King seems to have thought that he would be able to manage the English, if he could only pacify the Scots. He left Edinburgh for England on the 18th of November. But the breach between him and his English subjects was daily widening. His interference with the freedom of the members of Parliament aroused intense excitement, and he found the city of London an unsafe place for him. Accordingly he removed his court thence to York in the spring of 1642.¹

¹ _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume V., pages
338‒660.

The Covenanters might now have been satisfied, as they had obtained all that they demanded; but other views and aims had entered into their minds, and they desired to give their principles a wider range of application, therefore when the opportunity for this presented itself, it was natural for them to embrace it. While England was entering on the struggle of civil war――the Parliamentary party and the King’s party each preparing for the contest――it was impossible for the Scots to remain passive observers of the momentous conflict.¹

¹ Carlyle, in his _Letters and Speeches of Cromwell_, gives
a vivid sketch of the proceedings of the King at this time.
“January 10, 1642, the King and his court quit Whitehall, the
five members and parliament proposing to return to-morrow,
with the whole city in arms round them. He left Whitehall;
never saw it again till he came to lay down his head there.

“On the 9th of March, 1642, he is at York, where his Hull
Magazine, gathered for service against the Scots, is lying
near; where a great Earl of Newcastle and other northern
potentates will help him; where at least London and its
parliament, now grown so fierce, is far off.

“There we will leave him, attending Hull Magazine in vain;
exchanging messages with his parliament, messages, missives,
printed and written papers without limit. Law-pleadings of
both parties before the great tribunal of the English nation,
each party striving to prove itself right, and within the
verge of Law; preserved still in acres of typography, once
thrilling alive in every fibre of them; now a mere torpor,
readable by few creatures, not rememberable by any. It is
too clear his Majesty will have to get himself an army,
by commissions of array, by subscriptions of loyal plate,
pawning of crown jewels, or how he can. The parliament by
all methods is endeavouring to do the like. London subscribed
horses and plate, every kind of plate, even to women’s
thimbles, to an unheard of amount; and when it came to
actual enlisting, in London alone there were four thousand
enlisted in one day. The reader may meditate that one fact.
Royal messages, parliamentary messages, acres of typography
thrilling alive in every fibre of them――these go on slowly
abating, and military preparations go on steadily increasing
till the 23rd of October next. The King’s commissions of
array for Leicestershire came out on the 12th of June,
commissions for other counties followed at convenient
intervals; the parliament’s ordinance for the militia, rising
cautiously pulse after pulse towards clear emergence, had
attained completion the week before. The question puts itself
to every English soul, which of these will you obey?――and
in all questions of English ground, with swords getting
out of their scabbards, and yet the constable’s baton still
struggling to rule supreme, there is a most confused solution
of it going on.”――Volume I., pages 163‒164.

The General Assembly met at St. Andrews on the 27th of July, 1642, the Earl of Dunfermline presenting himself as royal Commissioner. Another power requested the friendship of the Assembly, the English Parliament having addressed a message to it, touching their quarrel with the King. Success had rapidly enlarged the scheme of the Scotch Presbyterians; as flattering opportunities appeared to be opening before their view, they began to assume an aggressive attitude, and to entertain hopes of establishing their polity throughout England. A powerful party in England was intently bent on overthrowing Episcopacy, and the Parliamentary leaders easily secured the assistance of the Covenanters. In the Assembly’s answer to the English Parliament, the question was stated at length; by a union of the Churches of the two kingdoms, they might hope for a time when war and heresy should cease in the Island, and truth and peace reign supreme. The Assembly appointed a large committee, including a number of the nobles and the most distinguished ministers, with power to forward the work which the Church had undertaken, to consult with the King, and with the Parliament, and if necessary, to prepare a confession, a catechism, a directory, and a form of polity. This commission was renewed in subsequent Assemblies. At the same time, the Assembly despatched an address to the King, professing their loyalty, but urging unity in religion, and uniformity in Church government.¹

¹ Peterkin’s _Records_; _Baillie’s Letters and Journals_,
Volume II., pages 50‒55.

The letters of the Assembly were quickly answered, both by the King and by the Parliamentary party. The latter announced the agreement of their views with those of the Scots. They desired to see unity of religion throughout his Majesty’s dominions; they stated that Episcopacy was wrong in itself, and ought to be abolished; they intimated their intention of calling an Assembly of learned divines to deliberate on the subject, and invited some of the Scottish ministers to London to assist at this Assembly on the 5th of November, 1642. This was exceedingly satisfactory to the Covenanters. Shortly after, the English Parliament passed an act abolishing Episcopacy; but, when Parliament overthrew one form of Church polity, it did not establish another in England¹――a result which the Covenanters failed to foresee. Their sympathies went with the Puritans and the Parliamentary party; but, knowing as they did the feeling of the King, they naturally distrusted him. Thus they became closely associated with the leaders of the Long Parliament. There was still, however, a small party in Scotland who remained loyal to the King.

¹ Peterkin’s _Records_; Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_,
Volume II., page 55.

The swell of feeling among the Scots, joined with their deepest religious sentiments and convictions, rose higher and higher; and it was resolved to hold a convention of the Estates. The King at first refused his consent; but the Estates met at Edinburgh on the 22nd of June, 1643, and Charles then agreed to sanction it, if it would keep within prescribed limits. The convention, however, declared itself free to do anything which it thought fit. This meeting was attended by a larger number of members than usually assembled in a Scotch Parliament; and the people were prepared for it by a solemn fast. A remonstrance was read from the Commission of the General Assembly, stating the dangers to which religion and the kingdom were exposed, and urging that the nation should put itself in a position of defence, and that they should look upon the cause of their brethren in England as their own, and assist the English Parliament. This proposal was well received; but the King’s party attempted to advance his interest. There followed a hot and long debate on the question, as to whether the Scots should actively intermeddle in the affairs of England.¹

¹ Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_, Volume II., pages 75‒80.
This minister says――“At the day, June 22nd, was a most
frequent meeting of Estates, never a parliament so great; all
the barons and burghs were for the Commonweal”――that is, for
assisting the English parliament. _Acts of the Parliaments of
Scotland_, Volume VI., pages 3‒4, 6, 8, 9, 13‒15, 24, 36‒38,
_et seq._

The General Assembly met at Edinburgh on the 2nd of August, 1643, and Sir Thomas Hope, the Lord-Advocate, appeared as the royal Commissioner. On the opening day the members of the Assembly prepared themselves for their task by fasting. On the 7th of August, four Commissioners from the Long Parliament, one of whom was Sir Henry Vane, landed at Leith, and a few days after they were introduced to the Assembly. They stated in the Assembly that they warmly appreciated the energy of the Scottish Church in extinguishing popery; that they were anxious to have this reform completed among themselves; that they had already removed the High Commission, expelled the bishops from the House of Lords, abolished Episcopacy, and summoned an Assembly of divines, which had now met at Westminster. They therefore earnestly entreated the Scots to assist their brethren in England, then so hardly pressed by the King’s forces, and exposed to the utmost peril. The proposals of the English were much discussed in committee; but there were differences of opinion in the Assembly. Some of the members thought that they should mediate between the King and the parliament, without committing themselves; but the opposite arguments of Johnston of Warriston and others at last prevailed, and they agreed to cast in their lot with the leaders of the Long Parliament. More debate took place concerning the tenor of the agreement. The English commissioners proposed that a civil league between the two nations should be formed, but the Scots would listen to nothing save a religious covenant. The English then suggested that toleration should be given to the Independents, as far as England was concerned; but the Assembly would not agree to tolerate anything, except presbyterianism in both kingdoms. After a long debate, the document known as the “Solemn League and Covenant” was laid before the Assembly, and unanimously accepted. The Estates also sanctioned it in August, 1643. All the parties to this Covenant bound themselves to preserve the reformed religion in Scotland, and to labour for the reformation of religion in the kingdoms of England and of Ireland, in doctrine, in worship, in discipline, and in polity, according to the word of God and the example of the best reformed Churches; to struggle to bring the Churches of God in the three kingdoms to the closest uniformity in religion, faith, polity, and form of worship; and without respect of persons, to endeavour to extinguish popery, episcopacy, heresy, schism, profaneness, and everything opposed to sound doctrine and the power of godliness; and with equal constancy to endeavour to preserve the rights and privileges of the parliaments and the liberties of the kingdoms, and to preserve and defend the King’s person and authority, that it may be manifest to the world that they had no intention of diminishing his Majesty’s just power and greatness. With the same faithfulness they promised to pursue and bring to condign punishment all incendiaries and malignants who hindered the reformation of religion, divided the King from his people, or one of the kingdoms from the other, or formed factions among the people to defeat the ends of this League and Covenant.¹

¹ Peterkin’s _Records_; Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_,
Volume II., pages 88‒90, 95; _Acts of the Parliaments of
Scotland_, Volume VI., pages 41‒43.

The Solemn League and Covenant was carried to London, the 22nd of September, 1643, being appointed for signing it. On that day the members of the House of Commons, the House of Lords, and the Westminster Assembly of divines signed the League and Covenant; and it was afterwards subscribed by many in every county of England. “The House of Commons and the Assembly of divines take the Covenant, the old Scotch Covenant, slightly modified now into a Solemn League and Covenant, in St. Margaret’s Church, Westminster. They lifted up their hands _seriatim_, and then stept into the chancel to sign. Oliver Cromwell signs, and next after him young Sir Henry Vane. There signed in all about 220 honourable members that day. The whole parliamentary party, down to the lowest constable or drummer in their pay, generally signed. It was the condition of assistance from the Scots, who were now calling out all fencible men from sixteen to sixty, for a third expedition into England. A very solemn covenant, a vow of all the people, of the awfulness of which we in these days of Custom-house oaths, loose regardless talk, cannot form the smallest notion. Duke Hamilton, seeing his painful Scotch diplomacy end all in this way, flies to the King at Oxford,――is there put under arrest, sent to Pendennis Castle near the Land’s End.” The immediate result of this League was that a Scottish army of twenty thousand men crossed the Tweed, to assist the Parliamentary army, and to seek conformity of religion amid the scenes of civil war.¹

¹ Baillie’s _Letters and Journals_, Volume II., pages 99, 102;
Carlyle’s _Letters and Speeches of Cromwell_, Volume I., page
189.

The theocratic ideas which I noticed in the second volume, had now attained their greatest influence; the government of Scotland had become a sort of theocracy. The power of the King was gone; the power of the Estates was partly in abeyance; the General Assembly being the ruling body. The ministers and elders constantly asserted that they derived their authority from Jesus, the King and the Head of His Church. Every act assumed a religious character; the war was religious, which was proved by the fact that in the Old Testament the wars of God’s people were called the wars of the Lord; and the hand of the Lord of Hosts was on the side of the Covenanters. These ideas were associated with the old Jewish exclusiveness and intolerance; and the Covenanters were apt to regard themselves as the chosen people, and their own Church as the only true one: to be a good Christian, it was necessary to be a Covenanter. Romanism and Episcopacy were equally hateful to them; and being firm and settled in their own convictions and opinions, they gave no countenance to toleration.¹

¹ Peterkin’s _Records_; _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_,
Volume VI., pages 66‒68, 70, _et seq._

Seven Scotsmen attended the Assembly of divines at Westminster as Commissioners from the Church of Scotland, viz.:――Henderson, Baillie, Rutherford, and Gillespie, ministers; and Lord Maitland, Johnston of Warriston, and Lord Cassillis. It has to be observed, that the Assembly of divines, as constituted by the English Parliament, had no authority in Scotland. The Scotch Commissioners declined to sit in the Assembly as voting members; they preferred to take the position of representatives of the Church of Scotland, and in London there was a committee from the Scotch Estates to instruct and support them. As representing Scotland, they might propose any point to the Assembly; but their nation could not be compromised by the conclusions of the Assembly. During their attendance at the Assembly, the Scots acted with vigour and wisdom.

Baillie’s account of their introduction to the Assembly, and of their proceedings in it, is interesting. “On Monday morning, the 20th of December, 1643, we sent to both Houses of Parliament for a warrant for our sitting in the Assembly. This was readily granted, and by Mr. Henderson presented to the Prolocutor, who sent out three of their ministers to convey us to the Assembly. Here no mortal man may enter to see or hear, let be to sit, without a written order from both Houses of Parliament. When we were brought in, Dr. Twisse made a long harangue for our welcome, after so long and hazardous a voyage by sea and land in so unseasonable a time of the year. When he ended, we sat down in those places which we have since kept.... We sit commonly from nine in the morning to one or two in the afternoon.... Ordinarily there were present about three score of the divines. These are divided into three committees; in one whereof every man is a member. No man is excluded who pleases to come to any of the three. Every committee, as the Parliament gives order in write to take any purpose into consideration, takes a portion, and in the afternoon meeting prepares matters for the Assembly, sets down their minds in distinct propositions, and backs their propositions with texts of Scripture.... No man is called upon to speak, but who stands up of his own accord, and speaks as long as he pleases without interruption.... They follow the forms of their Parliament.

“When our commissioners came up, they were desired to sit as members of the Assembly; but they wisely declined to do so, since they came up as Commissioners for our National Church to treat for uniformity, they required to be dealt with in that capacity. They were willing as private men to sit in the Assembly, and upon occasion to give their advice on debated points; but, for the uniformity, they required that a committee might be appointed from the Parliament and the Assembly to treat with them on this subject. All this, after some sharp enough debates, was granted.” In regard to the office of ruling elders――laymen, “many a very brave dispute have we had upon them these ten days. I marvel at the great learning, quickness, and eloquence, together with the great courtesy and discretion in speaking, of these divines.... This is a point of high consequence, and upon no other we expect so great difficulty, except alone on Independency; wherewith we purpose not to meddle in haste till it please God to advance our army, which we expect will much assist our arguments.

“It was my advice, which Mr. Henderson presently applauded and gave me thanks for it――to eschew a public rupture with the Independents till we were more able for them. As yet a presbytery to these people is conceived to be a strange monster. It was for our good therefore, to go on hand and hand so far as we did agree against the common enemy, hoping that in our differences, when we behoved to come to them, God would give us light. In the meantime we would essay to agree upon the Directory of Worship, wherein we expected no small help from these men to abolish the great idol of England――the Service book――and to erect in all the parts of worship a full conformity to Scotland in all things worthy to be spoken of.”¹

¹ _Letters and Journals_, Volume II., pages 107‒110, 111, 117.

The great difficulty was Church government. The Assembly of divines proposed the presbyterian scheme; but the Long Parliament adopted it only on the condition of its subordination to Parliament. The Independents though few in number were powerful in Parliament; owing to their strength of will, their intellect, and their energy of character, they wielded much influence both in the army and in the senate. The politicians of the Long Parliament, though they had abolished Episcopacy, were unwilling to give independent power to any form of Church organisation. The Scots Covenanters then began to see that there was little hope of establishing their polity over the British dominions. When the Westminster Assembly closed in 1648 its great scheme of Church government practically ended with it.

This Assembly was constituted by an ordinance of the Long Parliament, on the 12th of June, 1643; Parliament named the members, and when difficulties and disputes arose, they were to be referred to Parliament. The Assembly sat long, and executed much laborious work; the general drift of which, when completed, was decidedly Calvinistic. They framed “A Form of Church Government,” “A Directory for Public Worship,” “A Confession of Faith,” and two Catechisms. The Directory was brought to Scotland by Baillie and Gillespie, and the General Assembly, in 1645, sanctioned it, enjoining it to be observed by all the ministers of the kingdom. The Westminster Confession of Faith was adopted by the General Assembly in 1647, and in the following year the Assembly sanctioned the Larger and Shorter Catechisms. The Scotch Parliament ratified this Confession and the acts of the General Assembly.¹

¹ _Abridgements of the Acts of the General Assembly_, 138,
345; _Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland_, Volume VI., page
364, in the year 1649. No mention is made in the Act of the
Assembly “of the old Confession of 1560. It may be supposed
that the Assembly held both their old Confession and their
new to be true, and therefore consistent with each other; but
this is not stated. Whether in any sense they held the old
Confession to be still binding is a more difficult matter.
As the new one is to be a Confession for the three kingdoms,
it may be argued that the old Scottish Confession might
still continue as a municipal or domestic authority; but
as the change is founded on the obligation to uniformity
in religion, the presumption seems rather in favour of the
exclusive authority of the new Creed.”――Innes’ _Law of Creeds
in Scotland_, page 63.

But it should be mentioned that this Confession and the Catechisms were not sent into Scotland for observance by any command of the Assembly of divines, or by any authority in England; the Church of Scotland examined and approved them of her own accord. The body of doctrine contained in this Confession, and abridged in the Longer and the Shorter Catechisms, has long been the Creed of the Church of Scotland; and has largely influenced the opinions and the character of the people.

While the Covenanters’ army was in England assisting the English Parliamentary party, the government of Scotland was managed by a committee of the Estates and the commission of the General Assembly. Some of the nobles and others formed a Royalist party. The Earl of Montrose who had been for some years an ardent Covenanter, now turned round to the King’s side; and was commissioned by his Majesty to raise the royal standard in Perthshire, in August, 1644. He was soon at the head of three thousand men, many of whom were Irish Roman Catholics. His short career and exploits have often been detailed at length, and can only be concisely handled here; besides, his temporary victories over undisciplined bodies of men merely added to the suffering of the war, and had little influence on the main stream of history.

Montrose’s force consisted of one thousand five hundred men, Irish and Scots, who sailed from Ireland under Alaster Macdonald, and landed in Ardnamurchan early in July 1644, and a number of Highlanders who rose at the call of Montrose to fight for the King. Montrose concentrated his men at Blair Athole. There were three bodies of armed men in the field against him. Argyle was advancing from the west, another army was stationed at Aberdeen, and a third, under Lord Elcho, consisting of the men of Fife and the lower parts of Perthshire, to keep him in check if he attempted to advance along the valley of the Tay. Lord Elcho had about six thousand men, including seven hundred horse and some artillery, and they were drawn up in the valley three miles west of Perth to oppose the advance of Montrose. They were accompanied by Covenanting preachers, who endeavoured to stir up their enthusiasm. Montrose had three thousand men, and he knew well how to use them to the best advantage. He drew up his men three deep and extended his line to the utmost, and presented a front as long as the enemy’s. On the afternoon of September 1st, 1644, he attacked the Covenanters under Lord Elcho, and the first onset of the Highlanders threw them into confusion, and in an instant Elcho’s army was routed and flying in all directions. Two thousand of the Covenanters were slain in the pursuit. In the evening Montrose was master of Perth.

On the 4th, Montrose commenced his march for Aberdeen. In his progress northward, the Earl of Airlie and some of the gentry of Angus joined his standard, and added to his force a small party of horsemen. The Marquis of Huntly could not make up his mind to follow Montrose, while two of his sons, Lord Gordon, the eldest, and Lord Lewis, the youngest, were in the Covenanting army through the influence of their mother’s brother――Argyle. The Covenanting force of two thousand foot and five hundred horse were posted on the side of a height in advance of the city. On the morning of the 13th of September, Montrose reached the vicinity of Aberdeen, on the west side of the town. He summoned the magistrates to surrender the town, but they declined. He then prepared for battle, and placed his horse on the wings of his line. Montrose began the attack, and after a severe engagement, the Covenanters were completely defeated and fled in confusion. Montrose’s army entered the town, massacred the unarmed citizens on the streets, and sacked the city. This proceeding greatly heightened the hatred of the Lowland people against Montrose.

He appealed to the Gordons for assistance, but they refused to move, and he was forced to betake himself to the hills as Argyle was in pursuit of him. Montrose marched westward to Rothiemurchus, and there buried the cannon which he had taken at Aberdeen, and thence he winded his way back to Blair Athole. But Argyle was advancing behind him, so Montrose moved eastward, and then turned westward, crossed the Dee and Don, and took up a position at Fyvie Castle. Argyle thought that he had at last an opportunity of crushing his enemy. The Castle was then surrounded on the north, the west, and the south by bogs, through which only a narrow strip of ground allowed approach to an enemy; so Argyle made his attack on the eastern side, where there were no obstacles. Montrose posted his men on a hilly ridge, and when Argyle’s men advanced to the attack, they were warmly received, and after a severe contest were driven back. This gave Montrose an opportunity of retiring, Argyle following him to Blair Athole, and back again from west to east, but he failed to overtake his foe. Argyle then returned to Edinburgh and delivered up his commission to the Committee of Estates.

The Macdonalds and other clansmen advised Montrose to make a raid into the territories of Argyle, and plunder his valleys round Inveraray. On the 13th of December, 1644, Montrose entered the district of Argyle and proceeded to waste it. Cattle and sheep were destroyed, and homesteads burnt to the ground; no quarter was given, and every man of the name of Campbell who fell into their hands was ruthlessly slain. Leaving a desert behind him, he marched slowly through the valley of the great lakes. When he reached Loch Ness he ascertained that his progress was barred by the Earl of Seaforth, at the head of five thousand men, mustered from the northern counties. Montrose had Seaforth’s army before him, while Argyle had summoned two Lowland regiments to his assistance, and with these and the remnant of his own clansmen who had escaped, he took up his position with three thousand men at Inverlochy. Thus it appeared that Montrose was at last caught in a trap――an army in front of him and another in his rear. He had only about one thousand five hundred men around him, yet he at once resolved to attack Argyle. In order to prevent the Campbells from retreating, he turned to the left, and advanced through the rugged pass of Corryarrick. On the night of the 1st of February, 1645, by the bright light of the moon, Montrose saw the Campbells in front of him, between the mountain and the shore.

On the morning of the 2nd February, Argyle had no alternative but fight, as his enemy was too near for retreat. Argyle had dislocated his shoulder by a fall from his horse, and he was easily persuaded to take refuge in a vessel lying in the loch, while he gave the command of his army to Sir Duncan Campbell of Auchinbreck, an experienced soldier. Montrose had a small company of horsemen, and at the moment when he began the attack, he ordered the trumpeter to sound the cavalry charge, which carried dismay into the enemy’s ranks. He then led his whole force against Argyle’s centre. For a short time the Campbells fought bravely; but at last they wavered, broke, and fled in utter confusion. To the Lowland men quarter was given, but to the Campbells no quarter, and about one thousand five hundred of them were slain under the eyes of Argyle. For some time the Campbells ceased to be a power in the western Highlands. Montrose was greatly elated by the victory, and imagined that he would soon subdue the whole kingdom.