Introduction

INTRODUCTION.

It will be remembered that by the death of the Regent Mar, on the 28th of October 1572, the "great matter" entrusted to Henry Killigrew in the secret document, dated 10th September 1572, could not be proceeded with until the appointment of a new Regent, and that shortly after the Convention of the 15th of November 1572 James, Earl of Morton, was chosen to fill the Earl of Mar's place in the Regency.

On the 18th of July 1574 (fn. 1) Walsingham wrote to Killigrew that he did not think it convenient to move her Majesty for his return till he informed her how he found the Regent affected touching the "great matter" he had commission to deal in, and therefore thought it fit that he accompany the Regent—who was about to start on his journey northwards—until he be revoked. Morton started for Aberdeen on the 3rd of August. (fn. 2) Walsingham had been informed by Killigrew, in a letter dated 21st of June 1574, that "for the great matter" he could write nothing yet. On the 26th of July (fn. 3) Walsingham writes to Burghley that a man of his, whom he lent Mr. Killigrew, has arrived from Scotland with the Regent's answer touching the "great matter," but what it is, he knows not, for the packet is directed to his fellow (Leicester), who has not yet returned from Oxford. What this document contained, in all probability, will never be known for certain, as no evidence of the contents of the "packet" has been found.

Four days after the receipt of this packet, in a letter addressed to Killigrew from Walsingham, (fn. 4) the latter was instructed to deal thoroughly with the Regent touching the matter he wrote of to the two Lords (Leicester and Burghley), and that if he will take upon him the safe keeping of the Queen of Scots, with such conditions as were propounded by him, she will be content to send the Queen of Scots, and will not demand hostages for the performance of the said conditions till such time as the Queen is delivered, on condition that he will promise to send hostages then.

Morton's letter of the 16th of August (fn. 5) to Elizabeth contains no reference to this matter, and those to Leicester and Burghley (fn. 6) of the same date show nothing more than that he had committed the matter verbally to Killigrew. Two memoranda, dated the 16th of August, (fn. 7) were brought with the three letters of the same date by Killigrew on his return to London shortly after; in the first of which there is no mention of the matter whatever, and in the latter he merely requested him to ask Elizabeth what further is to be looked for in that which passed between them at Aberdeen touching "the matter of greatest moment."

No further documents with regard to the "great matter" have been found. Thus for a time the negotiations for getting rid of Mary by the hands of her own subjects were postponed, and thus the English were obliged to retain as a prisoner the Queen whom they alleged to be guilty of the foul deed at Kirk-o'-Field, and whose blood had been sought since a few days after the news of the massacre of St. Bartholomew's Day reached England.

There are various letters of interest with reference to Mary's imprisonment in this Calendar. Shrewsbury, writing to Walsingham on the 12th of July 1574, mentions that he has delivered certain open letters to her, and requested her answer, which was given to the effect that she never heard of Leslie's marriage; and the next day she sent him a packet for Lord Burghley and the Earl of Leicester. (fn. 8) In another letter to him on the 19th of July, after repudiating some personal charges as to his loyalty, he thanks him for having got, at her Majesty's hand, a warrant for the Scottish Queen's diet, and sends him a packet from her. (fn. 9)

The next letter we have from Shrewsbury was written to Walsingham on the 13th of September, in which he says "this Lady shall be forthcoming at her Majesty's devotion," and that "this Lady" shows herself very willing and desirous to please her Majesty. (fn. 10)

Mary misliked Shrewsbury's method of obtaining information by getting her letters from her secretary, Raulet, and complained to Walsingham. (fn. 11)

Shrewsbury, according to Elizabeth's commandment, wrote to her on the 4th of December 1574 mentioning that Mary was safe, and at her commandment. (fn. 12)

On the 29th of February 1574–5 Walsingham wrote to Shrewsbury informing him that confession had been made that Alexander Hamilton, Nevill Sandes, Watkyn Davyes, and one Jackson, servants of his, were conveyers of letters and messages to the Queen of Scots, and requesting him to send them up guarded. (fn. 13) This confession was made by Henry Cockin after denial first. (fn. 14)

Raulet, Mary's secretary, having died, Elizabeth allowed Mons. De Nau to supply his place, and by her letter to Shrewsbury, dated the 29th of March 1575, she commanded him to receive him into her company, and to suffer him to serve her. At the same time he was to remind De Nau of the caution which the King of France had given her for him, and also of his own promise. (fn. 15)

In consequence of the discovery of so much correspondence between Mary and her friends, Walsingham wrote to Elizabeth on the 14th of April 1575 pointing out that there could be no long-continued union in England or Scotland unless she took order in time for restraining Mary from practice. (fn. 16)

Alexander Hamilton, Nevill Sands, and Watkyn Davyes, according to Walsingham's request, were sent up to London by Shrewsbury on the 4th of May following. (fn. 17) In a postscript to Shrewsbury's letter to Walsingham informing him that he was sending him these three men, he mentions that the Queen of Scots' tailor has arrived at Sheffield with his letter, and regrets that Elizabeth had not directed him more particularly in the using of him. He had searched him, but could only find two or three closed letters directed to Mary and her folks for their affairs. Some apparel is being made by the Queen of Scots' device for Elizabeth, and therefore he has thought fit, and less danger for practices, to permit him to remain within the house, rather than to suffer him to lie abroad.

On the 27th of May 1575 (fn. 18) Henry Killigrew received instructions from Elizabeth to proceed to Scotland to declare to the Regent the reason for her having so long delayed in sending him an answer with regard to the mutual league against foreign or inward attempts, and other things. In those instructions she most thankfully accepts Morton's advice with regard to the safe custody of the Scottish Queen, and purposes to be more watchful over her, and to restrain her from some part of that liberty which heretofore she has granted to her, and on her part has not been a little abused. (fn. 19)

John Chisholm, who had been in France for some years trying to obtain money for Mary's supporters, appears by his letter to her, from Paris, dated the 7th of July 1575, (fn. 20) to have fallen into a miserable state, as he begs her "to bestow some little piece of silver" on him besides his pension of 200 francs yearly, granted to him amongst other her faithful servants. He also reminds her that he proposed, and she liked well, that he should have returned to remain beside her with his wife, who would be found "right proper" to serve her. She is a young gentlewoman having no bairns yet, and he dares answer for her affectionate mind.

The Laird of Farnyhurst, having been supplied with money by the Archbishop of Glasgow, and having borrowed 500l. from Englishmen, writes to Mary on the 8th of July (fn. 21) : "But seeing I have no other refuge except to your Highness, I will most humbly crave that I may be considered and acknowledged by your liberality with the means to acquit myself at the hands of these Englishmen only, and as for the rest of my debts in Scotland, I will leave off to burden your Majesty anywise therewith till God sends a better time, and your Grace further commodity." Shortly after this letter the Archbishop of Glasgow writes to Mary (fn. 22) that he caused 500 crowns to be delivered to the Laird of Farnyhurst, and without her favour he will be 500 livres in arrear.

On the 12th of October 1575 Mary wrote to Gregory XIII. in favour of the Bishop of Ross. (fn. 23)

Margaret, Countess of Lennox, who began to fear that Mary might return to power in Scotland—and, perhaps, in England, too—had, about the beginning of 1573, become reconciled to Mary, and had contrived to bring about the marriage between her son, Lord Charles Stewart, and Elizabeth Cavendish, daughter of the Countess of Shrewsbury. There is a letter, (fn. 24) dated the 10th of November 1575, from Margaret, Countess of Lennox, with a postscript by her daughter, showing that tokens and letters had passed from Mary to them. In the former, Lady Arbella Stewart, the only offspring of this ill-fated marriage, is referred to as their "sweet and peerless jewel." Mary is besought to trust in God that all shall be well. The younger Countess calls herself "your poor servant," and beseeches her to accept the good heart of the writer, "who loves and honours your Majesty unfeignedly."

In December 1575 Mary made requests through the King of France to Elizabeth to allow her to go to Buxton, for her doctor, an apothecary, and another to assist her, and to grant a passport for Mdlle. de Rallay and an embroiderer to go to her. (fn. 25) These requests were all granted. On the 30th of June 1576 she writes to Elizabeth (fn. 26) that she has received benefit by her sojourn at Buxton, and thanks her for the apothecary's boy, who is with her at Sheffield. Her first physician had also visited her, and given her great hope. On this occasion she sends Elizabeth a present of a casket and a light coiffure, and mentions a former present, all made by one of her people. She also requests a passport for her Chamberlain to come to her about her affairs, which are in a bad state since the death of the Cardinal of Lorraine.

The dowry which had been granted to Mary in France had been to a great extent withdrawn, and her revenues were now scarcely sufficient to meet the enormous demands made on her by her pensioned servants and those who were exiled for her cause. In 1576 the Duchy of Touraine, which had been granted to her by Francis II., was taken from her and assigned to the King's brother, in recompense for which other lands were assigned to her, which turned out not to amount to the value of the Duchy; and instead of granting her compensation for this encroachment, she was dispossessed of two Duchies in order to satisfy the Duchess of Montpensier, of whom the King had borrowed money. (fn. 27)

Her Chancellor, Mons. Du Vergier, appears to have arrived at Sheffield in April 1577. Shrewsbury writes to Walsingham on the 26th of April: "This Queen and her chancellor are daily occupied about her reckonings. When this will end, I know not." (fn. 28) Du Vergier was still at Sheffield on the 9th of May, (fn. 29) as Shrewsbury had orders that day not to remove to Chatsworth till he was gone.

Mons. De Nau mentions in a letter to his brother, on the 31st of August 1577, (fn. 30) that the Queen of Scots is discontented with regard to her dowry and her chamberlain Dolu's service.

With a view to alleviating Elizabeth's anxiety with regard to the rumours which had reached her towards the close of August 1577 with reference to an attempt to be made to assist Mary to escape, Shrewsbury informed Walsingham on the 2nd September that he had thought good to advertise her Majesty that his "vigilant care for her safety shall never diminish, but always increase." (fn. 31)

The next day Elizabeth wrote to Shrewsbury (fn. 32) informing him that she had been advertised from abroad of rumours that Mary's escape would be attempted, and warning him to "carry a more heedful eye towards her." In greater apprehension than at any time before, she also authorised him thenceforth to use his own discretion as well in restraining her as he shall think expedient, as also in removing altogether or restraining for a time from her all such persons as he shall find or suspect to be practisers and instruments for her to do evil offices. Shrewsbury had told Leicester and Burghley that he might a great deal better warrant her safe keeping if such discretion was committed to him. (fn. 33)

In consequence of Mary's financial troubles, a letter was drawn up by her on the 6th of November 1577 (fn. 34) to the Archbishop of Glasgow setting forth her discontentment at the Pope's apathy with regard to her appeal to him for assistance. He is asked to inform the Pope that what remains of her dower is not sufficient for the maintenance of her domestic servants and the necessity of the banished English and Scotch, whom she is obliged to assist. Money was also required to assist in carrying James VI. out of Scotland. Information had reached Mary that it had been suggested to remove her from Shrewsbury's custody and place her in the hands of the Earl of Huntingdon or the Earl of Bedford. In the same letter she sends peremptory command to Dolu to deliver up certain money, and indignantly remarks that she does not find him the same at Paris as at Sheffield. The Archbishop is urged to obtain for her some man of substance who may advance her by raising some considerable sum.

In the beginning of February 1577–8 instructions were drawn up for the Earl of Shrewsbury and Sir Henry Nevill to remove Mary farther from the north, (fn. 35) but although this document is couched in most careful terms, and the Sheriffs of Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire, and Leicestershire were commanded to aid Shrewsbury and Nevill in case of need, the matter never seems to have proceeded further than the drafting of the necessary letters. The explanation of these instructions appears in a letter from Shrewsbury to Elizabeth, dated the 17th of March following. (fn. 36) He is advertised that bruits have been given out that there is want of due respect to his charge, and that he is too much at the devotion of the Queen of Scots, and thereupon some consideration was thought meet to be had for disposing of her elsewhere out of his custody. The wisest and noblest Queen on earth, and in all excellent gifts and virtues of body and mind without comparison, is the only judge of his service. For ten years he has served her truly and faithfully in this charge. No person can touch him with the least spot of infidelity. Before he parts with her otherwise than may stand with her Majesty's pleasure, he will lay her life to gage if she puts it to some proof, and if he keeps her not safe, let her Majesty give him the reward of a traitor.

Simultaneously with these rumours with regard to Shrewsbury a very important event was taking place in Scotland which necessitated immediate attention, and most probably owing to this event—the acceptance of the Government upon himself by James VI.—it was found impossible to remove Mary to the custody of the Earl of Huntingdon, whose presence could not be spared from the Council of the North.

On the 30th of May 1578 Elizabeth sent an order to Shrewsbury not to permit the embroiderer's wife, who had gone to Sheffield with her child, to have any speech with Mary. (fn. 37)

A request was made to Elizabeth by Mary on the 22nd of July 1578 (fn. 38) for permission for Mons. Dolu or Du Vergier to bring her 2000 crowns they agreed to send her every year for her expenses and the wages of her officers who served her in her captivity; that she may be allowed to replace her old servants; that another physician be allowed her in place of her present one, who is 80 years of age; in place of Mdlle. de Rallay, aged 70 years, she wishes to have the Laird of Farnyhurst's daughter, aged only thirteen or fourteen years, about whom they could have no suspicion; that she may be allowed an officer of the kitchen; and that Alexander Scott, groom of the pantry, may return to her. The passport for Dolu or Du Vergier was refused. (fn. 39)

On the 2nd of January 1578–9 Mary sent a long explanation to Elizabeth with regard to charges made against her for carrying on intrigues. (fn. 40)

On the 18th of January she wrote to the Bishop of Ross telling him that the suspicions and machinations of her enemies never were sharper, and never were less occasions given by her. (fn. 41)

Du Vergier sent certain things to Mary in a box, an inventory of which was made on the 21st of July 1579. (fn. 42) Amongst the articles are watches and a gilt alarm-clock.

On the 5th of September she wrote to Walsingham complaining of delay in conveying her letters to Elizabeth, and on the same day to Elizabeth warning her of the strait captivity in which her son was being kept. (fn. 43)

Mary's physician writes to the French ambassador in England on the 1st of May 1580, from Sheffield, that her Majesty's health is in as bad a state as can be. Everything possible has been done by her physicians for her recovery from the infirmity that afflicts her. He has done what his art can devise for her whole body and the pain in her side. The baths of Buxton gave her comfort before. Cannot permission be obtained for her to return there? (fn. 44)

The next day Mary herself wrote to Elizabeth begging her to deliver her out of prison, or to allow her to go to Buxton, as she is extremely tormented with the complaint in her side. (fn. 45) She also sent a letter to the Privy Council at the same time to tell them that the blame would rest on them if she died in this prison. (fn. 46) No answer having been received, Mary again wrote to Elizabeth on the 21st of June 1580 pointing out to her how illdeserved her severe treatment of her was, and how very necessary it was for her to proceed to the baths for her health. (fn. 47)

In sending this last letter to the French ambassador to be presented to Elizabeth, she protests that she has no practice or secret negotiation with the English rebels or any other to the prejudice of the Queen of England. She is only allowed 2000 crowns by the year, by Elizabeth's permission, and is indebted in more than 40,000l. As far as the expense Elizabeth is put to for her in this prison, it not being at her request or for her good, but at the price of her liberty, she cannot incur any obligation to her. If she pretends any obligation, she is ready to free herself by payment in ready money of all that has been provided up to the present for her expense. She begs him anew to demand some reply to what she has written, to entreat her to take some better order for her state here, and to allow her to go to Buxton, where she has always had less liberty than any other place in England. (fn. 48)

Permission was given for Mary to go to Buxton, and by a letter from Shrewsbury to Burghley, dated the 16th of August 1580, from that place, some idea may be formed of the extreme straitness of the incarceration she underwent there. It has pleased her Majesty to give him in charge to look circumspectly to his great charge. For her safe keeping he has been at this point with her—never to keep any common order with her or her people whereby they might ascertain any certainty at his hands, but has been as careful of her and her people as though the enemy were present to assail him. As for her now being at Buxton, there is not so much as a beggar in the town. Her people have not stirred forth of the doors but when they have asked him leave, and then they have gone no farther than the close of the wall, and guarded by his soldiers. Neither has he suffered the simplest of them at any time these seven years to walk abroad, no, not to stir out of his doors without being guarded by his soldiers, nor will he. Since she came hither she has applied the well, and only came forth one evening to take the air in the close about the house, where none were but his people. On Wednesday next he returns to Sheffield. (fn. 49)

The next letter we have from Shrewsbury is one to the Earl of Leicester, which is dated at Sheffield the 21st of August. (fn. 50) This only refers to money due to him for the Queen of Scots' diet.

One Marten, an attendant of Shrewsbury's, was removed at Elizabeth's instance for suspicious dealing. This man had been well watched by Shrewsbury owing to his being discovered making love to Jane Kenyte, Mary's woman. (fn. 51) The letter to Burghley which gives the account of this matter is dated 28th of November 1580.

A translation is given of the well-known "Religious Reflections by Mary." (fn. 52) The document is much defaced by alterations and decay. It is entirely in Mary's handwriting, and appears to be only part of an address to some potentate.

There is a letter from James VI. to Mary, the probable date of which is the 29th of January 1580–1, in which he tells her that it is not with his goodwill that her secretary has returned without having given him her letter and made known what she commanded him to tell him. He has received a ring sent to him by her, which he will keep well from honour to her. (fn. 53)

Certain declarations were made towards the end of January 1580–1 by Mary touching her right in succession to the crown of England, to be presented to Elizabeth and the English Parliament. (fn. 54)

That pensions by the English Queen were much coveted by some of the Scottish nobility there can be no doubt, and possibly some of the demands of those made towards the end of June 1574 (fn. 55) could not be refused. Amongst those commended for pensions by the Regent Morton is Adam Gordon, (fn. 56) the Earl of Huntly's brother, concerning whom, about six months before, he wrote to Burghley: "I hear from France that the Earl of Huntly's brother, Adam Gordon, under pretence of seeking his own promotion, offers and takes in hand, being supported with men and money, to alter the State here; wherein, I doubt not, if he proceed, it shall turn to his own confusion, and little to the contentment of such as give ear to him, although the Earl, his brother, by her Majesty's means, has received great favour and ease, and is bound in that respect to her Majesty. . . . Herewithal, I pray your Lordship that her Majesty's ambassador now 'liand' in France may be admonished to take good heed to the dealing and usage of the said Adam Gordon and others of this nation now remaining in that country, known enemies to the present state of both these kingdoms." (fn. 57) On the 23rd of June 1574 Henry Killigrew, writing to Walsingham from Edinburgh, amongst the "Observations and Occurrents," mentions that he hears that Adam Gordon did less to Scotland in France than if he were at home, "and it is thought it were fitter for him to be in Italy than there or here." (fn. 58)

It would undoubtedly have been a great relief to Morton had he been able to secure the friendship and aid of this powerful man, yet he hesitated to accept the only offer of reconciliation that was made to him. Killigrew tells Walsingham in a letter of the 12th of July 1574 that the Regent does not yet resolve what advice to give touching Adam Gordon's desire to come to England to be reconciled to him by her Majesty's means.

After the surrender of Edinburgh Castle Scotland was at peace. The period 1573 to May 1575 was marked by no incident of an unpleasant nature. The people of Scotland were in a state of tranquillity. There was nothing to disturb the industry required for the cultivation of the soil. Morton was, no doubt, anxious to make this state of tranquillity as lasting as possible, and for this purpose he drew together an army of about 4000 men, being sufficient to deal with the Borders, which required looking after.

On the 30th of August 1573 (fn. 59) Morton wrote to Burghley that he had "so travailed these days past with our disordered people inhabiting the frontiers, that I hope good fruits shall follow thereon to the comfort of the good people of both the countries." The Scottish Border inhabitants received a severe chastisement for the pillaging they had been carrying on during the time of the civil war.

Henry Killigrew's mission to Scotland to carry out the instructions of the 22nd of May 1574 continued up till the 16th of August of that year. His duties during that period were to search out what alteration had happened since his last being in Scotland, and particularly whether the Regent continued constant in his affection to the Queen of England, how his manner of proceeding in his Government was liked, what party Mary had there, touching the ordnance in Hume Castle, the proposed contract for the maintenance of religion, the league for mutual defence, and the Regent's request for money for himself and pensions for some of the nobility. (fn. 60)

Killigrew arrived at Berwick on the 5th of June. (fn. 61) There he heard of the death of Charles IX. Some Englishmen informed him that the Regent had great complaints made to him of Scotchmen being spoiled by English pirates about Scarborough, Flamborough Head, and Ferne Island. On the 17th of June (fn. 62) he wrote to Walsingham that, what by sickness and the Regent's urgent affairs, he had not been able to do anything to purpose. He has again heard of spoils committed by English pirates. The Regent is grieved with the escape from Berwick of a man who coined false money in Scotland. On the 21st of June (fn. 63) Walsingham is informed by Killigrew, amongst other things: "For the great matter, I can yet write nothing, for I shall not till to-morrow have occasion to deal in it, and I must alter my course in that matter. For all this, if we would do soundly, they would be brought in tune again, although the luck-strings be waxen loose and slack. Very shortly you shall have a full and resolute despatch."

The first minute report with regard to Scottish affairs was despatched by Killigrew to Walsingham on the 23rd of June 1574. (fn. 64) It is a lengthy document covering the whole of his instructions of the 22nd of May. He has a suspicion that there is some less affection than he left behind him in 1572. This is accounted for by the want of the league and the piracies. French practices are begun by Mons. Molins and George Douglas, and are nourished by the archers of the Scottish Guard and others. Letters had been sent to Scotland by the Archbishop of Glasgow and the Bishop of Ross. Morton's government he sees, in outward show, well liked and obeyed. There has been some little grudging towards the Regent by the clergy and those zealous in religion, especially those of Edinburgh. Who should be Regent if Morton were gone, he knows not. Some would have Atholl; but the Protestants mislike him altogether. Some would have Glencairn; but he is too old, weak, and poor. Others would have Angus; but he is too young. The Bishop of Caithness is of small credit. Killigrew thinks "the Hamiltons' blood and their friends would rule, or else give strokes for it." He is going to search for those to whom pensions should be given, and for this men must be chosen out who may be likeliest to serve to purpose. The Regent is at great charges; for he keeps in pay 100 footmen and 24 horsemen, who attend on his person. He incloses a document to show what order the Regent took for reforming the abuses in the Colleges, and also how far the Commissioners who sat about the framing of a Christian policy for the Church have proceeded. Grange's wife has been put to the horn. English minstrels had sung a vehement ditty against Catherine de Medicis and the House of Guise for the massacre at Paris. Lords Maxwell and Herries, the Abbot of Newbottle, and the Laird of Lochinvar had visited him from the Regent about Border matters.

The success of Killigrew's mission depended very much upon his manner of dealing with all the parties he came in contact with, and that he was a most popular ambassador there can be no doubt. Morton writes to Burghley of him on the 24th of June 1574 (fn. 65) that he is "a man unchanged in love and affection towards this State, and myself in particular, and so shall he find himself friendly and familiarly dealt with here in such things as he has in charge from her Highness."

The next day Killigrew wrote to Walsingham begging for his revocation in case he perceives that Elizabeth will give ear to no league or pension, for he shall do her Majesty no service in Scotland, but undo himself. (fn. 66) He also mentions that Sir William Livingston, Laird of Kilsyth, was re-examined upon letters that were taken, "sent to him from some love of his out of England, wherein there was a toy to wear about his neck to preserve love."

With the same letter there is an inclosure containing the examination of certain English pirates, whose chief was Robert Istead, of Hastings. It appears that these pirates arrived at Montrose on the 15th of June 1574 with two prizes, which they affirmed to have taken from Papists of the Low Country, but they brought none of the owners prisoners. It happened, however, that a ship of Leith, coming from Dantzic, overtook a Norwegian ship which had on board the owners and mariners of the two prizes. Three of these were taken on board the Scottish ship, which was, by chance, driven into the port of Montrose. Some of the pirates were stayed by the officers of the town, but those on board made sail and went to sea, leaving thirteen or fourteen of the pirates together with their captain behind. One of these pirates, Peter Fisher by name, was executed at Leith on the 22nd of July, "and is to hang in chaynes to the example of others." (fn. 67) A list of the others, who were sent to Leith to be executed, is enclosed with a letter from Killigrew to Walsingham of the 18th of July. But it appears that they were all executed at Leith on the 1st of July, except the two boys, who were sent back to England. In the last-mentioned letter Killigrew mentions that the two boys had been sent to him, and that he means to send them home as soon as he can.

Information had been given to Walsingham that one Alexander Hamilton had been in communication with Mary. As the most effectual means of securing Hamilton, an order was sent to Shrewsbury to send him up to London, and accordingly this was done. Shrewsbury writes to Walsingham on the 6th of June 1574. "I have forthwith sent up Alexander Hamilton by this bearer, a servant of mine, as you willed, whom I retained schoolmaster to two of my youngest children a year and a half since, or thereabouts, for these respects, his religion and honesty, being recommended to me by you and some other my friends when you were ambassadors in France, from whence he was newly come." (fn. 68) Alexander Hamilton's apprehension was followed by that of Henry Cockyn, Thomas Morgan, Doctor Atslow, and others, whose examinations and confessions will be found amongst the Papers calendared in the present volume.

Killigrew paid the King of Scots a visit, in her Majesty's name, about the 27th of June. The King seemed very glad to hear from her Majesty, and could use pretty speeches, as, how much he was bound to her, yea, more than to his own mother. He found him well grown in body and spirit since he was last in Scotland. He speaks the French tongue marvellously well. He was able to translate a chapter of the Bible from Latin into French, and from French into English, so well that few men could have added anything to his translation. His schoolmasters made him dance before him, which he did with a very good grace. (fn. 69)

In the same letter, addressed to Walsingham, he mentions that he cannot learn of any practice to transport the King to France, but there is a sister of Lord Livingston's about him much suspected to be French, and his schoolmasters are desirous to have him from the handling of women, by whom he is yet guided and kept, saving when he goes to his book.

On his return from Stirling he met Robert Melville, who desired him to yield his most humble thanks to her Majesty for saving his life. (fn. 70)

Another case of piracy is mentioned by Killigrew in his letter to Walsingham, dated the 18th of July 1574. One Higgins brought a prize into Caithness without any men in her, and was apprehended together with his ship and thirty-eight men.

A letter from Killigrew to Burghley, dated the 3rd of August 1574, mentions that a letter of Grange's to Mary, written not two days before his death, had come to the Regent, making mention of his devotion to her, and of his service, and declaring where all her jewels were, and how many Sir William Drury had in gage for 600l., which the Regent proposes to demand again. (fn. 71) As has been mentioned before, Killigrew's mission to Scotland ended on the 16th of August 1574.

Meanwhile a dispute had arisen between the Regent Morton and the Earl and Countess of Argyll as to certain jewels which belonged to the Crown of Scotland. The Countess of Argyll retained possession of these jewels after the Regent Murray, her first husband, had been murdered, alleging that she had a lawful right to do so until certain money was paid to her which the Earl of Murray had disbursed in the King's service. Morton caused the Earl and Countess of Argyll to be put to the horn for detaining the jewels, and only offered to release them from that punishment on condition that they should produce the jewels to be valued, at the same time showing any manner of cause, tending to reason, why they should detain them, and giving all caution to be answerable for them to the King's use. (fn. 72) The matter was eventually settled.

On the 1st of April 1575 Morton writes to Walsingham that the occasion of controversy with the Earl and Countess of Argyll is removed. (fn. 73)

On the 22nd of September 1574 Morton informs Huntingdon that servants had arrived in Scotland from the Bishops of Glasgow and Ross, and Adam Gordon, whose mission, he understands, is to enquire of the noblemen of the Queen of Scots' faction if their yielding to the King of Scots' obedience is voluntary or through compulsion, and they are to assure them that the King of France and his mother will seek the Queen of Scots' liberty and restoration, and that upon knowledge of those noblemen's minds a person of credit shall be expressly sent to Scotland. (fn. 74)

During the latter part of the year 1574 and the first few months of 1575 very little correspondence appears to have passed between Morton and the English statesmen, and such letters as are extant refer chiefly to Border matters, of little historical value.

On the 1st of April 1575 Morton, in a letter to Walsingham, says, "our country here, praised be God, is in good quiet, and has not been in better state for a long time by gone," and that there was a reconciliation of all differences at the late Convention, and chiefly with the Duke of Chastelherault's sons, who are accepted, and as obedient as any others in the realm.

Towards the beginning of the year 1574–5 a cloud had begun to arise which threatened an abrupt termination to the peace between Scotland and England. Walsingham had observed it for some time, and on the 15th of January he laid the whole case before Elizabeth in a memorable letter. (fn. 75)

It was not till the 27th of May 1575 that instructions were drawn up for Henry Killigrew, who was about to be sent into Scotland. The purport of this document has already been given. Mr. William Davison, who went with him to Scotland in 1566 as his secretary, was again to accompany him, and was to remain there as Elizabeth's "agent" after Killigrew had done all things according to the purport of these instructions. Davison, who claimed to be of Scottish descent, was, perhaps, the most suitable person for such a matter. His connection with the closing scene of Mary's life will be mentioned in a later volume.

On the 14th of June 1575 Elizabeth wrote to Morton reminding him of the despatch delivered to Killigrew on the occasion of his last being in Scotland. She adds, "and whereas, perhaps, you may find our long stay in sending somewhat strange, we doubt not but when you shall understand by him whereupon the same has proceeded, you will rest content with that which we have given him in charge to impart to you."

News, however, reached Killigrew just as he was about to cross the Border of the affray which broke out on the 7th of July, known as the "Redswire Raid." A dispute arose at a Border Warden Court between Sir John Foster, Warden of the Middle Marches, and Sir John Carmichael, Keeper of Liddesdale, which led to bloodshed. Sir John Foster, Sir Francis Russell, some other gentlemen, and about 300 men were taken prisoners by the Scots and brought to the Regent at Dalkeith. Morton detained Sir John Foster and the gentlemen, but sent all the others home. The Regent treated the Lord Warden with great hospitality, and wrote to Elizabeth offering apologies and redress for the accident.

Elizabeth, in the beginning of September, sent a letter to Henry Killigrew commanding him to charge the Regent with certain points. The detention of her Warden is a thing that wounds her honour to the eye of the whole world. Killigrew himself is censured: he shows himself not so careful of her service as in duty he is bound. (fn. 76)

By the 13th of September this "accident" was settled, at Foulden, by articles concluded and accorded upon between the Regent and Lord Lindsay of Byres, commissioners for Scotland, and the Earl of Huntingdon and Lord Hunsdon, commissioners for the Queen of England. (fn. 77)

Hereupon Morton took the first opportunity of entering into friendly communication with Elizabeth's Secretary. (fn. 78) The late accident had not only interrupted such other things as they had to deal in, but hindered their correspondence. Sir John Carmichael, the principal on the ground when the trouble happened, was the bearer of the letter, dated the 20th of September.

Walsingham's answer was sent to Morton on the 14th of October. (fn. 79) His Grace's doings have manifoldly shown to the world how free he was from evil meaning or any intention to have done what might offend her Majesty. Elizabeth herself has already given him such assurance of her satisfaction that he needs not to give any further testimony thereof.

Robert Bowes, Treasurer of Berwick, was despatched by Elizabeth to the Regent in December 1577 in consequence of a quarrel between the latter and the Earl of Atholl. Her desire was that all occasions of misliking between Atholl and the Regent might be removed, and that an accord might be maintained amongst the nobility and principal members of Scotland. (fn. 80) Bowes had kept Leicester informed of any news he could obtain with regard to the internal affairs of Scotland. In a letter to him, dated the 9th of October 1577, he says: "Your Lordship, I trust, understands by my letters, and Captain Case, whom I moved especially to inform your Lordship, all my doings and success in Scotland. Whereas, albeit those matters are for a season wrapped up, yet it is not unlikely that without wise handling, and with sore charge to her Majesty, the fire will be readily kindled again. For although the Regent and the best affected in religion and to the welfare of the King and realm presently embrace the amity with her Majesty as a thing most profitable to them, yet many malcontents lie in wait to alter this course, casting in such practices as offer great peril in the same." Bowes' opinion was that the readiest way to preserve Scotland in quietness was "to appease and quench all the griefs betwixt the Regent and others of the realm, and by friendly reconcilement and union, to make him gracious amongst them." With becoming modesty he suggests the employment of some "very sufficient person" in these delicate negotiations. (fn. 81)

Notwithstanding the plea of insufficiency which he put in in order to be relieved from this matter, we have already seen that he was the man selected to proceed to Scotland.

On the 25th of February 1577–8 Thomas Randolph joined Bowes in his embassage to Scotland. (fn. 82) The instructions to Thomas Randolph are to ascertain the state of the King's health, to express Elizabeth's comfort at his great towardliness, to per suade those who have best credit with the King to nourish a good opinion in him to her, to let the Regent know such matters as she delivered to him by speech, to persuade the Regent to grow to speedy composition with the Earls of Argyll and Atholl, to beg the Regent to prevent persons from having intelligence with the rebels in Ireland, to exhort the Regent to have regard to the government, and to recommend the Countess of Lennox's causes to the Regent. (fn. 83)

2000l. was sent the next day to Robert Bowes to be given in pensions in Scotland. (fn. 84) Further instructions were given to Thomas Randolph on the 7th of February with regard to a mutual contract of amity for the common defence of the two realms against foreign attempts, according to a memorial given by the Regent to Henry Killigrew in 1573. (fn. 85) No evidence has come to light amongst the Papers the Editor has dealt with to show why such a long period elapsed between the date of the first instructions and Randolph's arrival at Edinburgh; but from the heading of those instructions it is evident that it was intended he should leave that day.

The case was extremely urgent. Matters were assuming a gloomier aspect every day. On the 10th of March 1577–8 the King accepted the administration on himself. (fn. 86) The swiftness of such a stroke had never been anticipated by Randolph and Bowes, and all they could do was to inform Elizabeth of the exact state of affairs. In her letter to the two Ambassadors, dated the 18th of March, (fn. 87) she says the advertisement has not a little astonished her, and blames the Earls of Atholl and Angus as the two principal workers of the change.

The chief historical events which succeeded this revolution were the appointment of a Council of twelve, with Argyll at the head, and the ejection of Sir Alexander Erskine from Stirling Castle. (fn. 88)

Elizabeth at this juncture was unwilling to lose the services of Morton altogether, so she wrote to him on the 20th of May 1578 reminding him how great a wrong he would offer to the King if he should retire into private life, and telling him that she had written to the King in his favour. (fn. 89)

On the same day she wrote to the Earls of Argyll and Mar (fn. 90); to the former, asking him to be a mean to the King and the rest of the nobility for calling Morton as a Councillor, an office to which he was afterwards appointed; to the latter, admonishing him to have an especial respect for the King's safety, since the custody of his person is now committed to him.

To Sir Alexander Erskine was allotted the captaincy of Edinburgh Castle. On the 17th of June 1578 the Commendator of Dunfermline, the Scottish Secretary, was sent as Ambassador to Elizabeth, chiefly to continue the negotiations with regard to the league for mutual defence. (fn. 91)

The apprehensions of Lords John and Claud Hamilton expressed to Elizabeth in a joint letter of the 7th of July 1578 (fn. 92) with regard to their own surety were not without foundation. Although open hostility against them did not break out till the 4th of May 1579, (fn. 93) there can be no doubt that they were being watched carefully. Lord John Hamilton escaped to France immediately after the fall of Hamilton Castle, and Lord Claud eventually went to England, where he was hospitably received by Elizabeth. Space will not permit of the long correspondence with reference to these two noblemen being mentioned in detail here.

In concluding the summary of the events in connection with Morton, it will be sufficient to add that he was arrested at Holyrood House on the 31st of December 1580 on various charges of treason, the chief charge being his alleged part in the murder of Darnley. (fn. 94) From Holyrood House he was removed to Edinburgh Castle, and eventually to Dumbarton. The rest of the history of this nobleman and his ultimate fate must be reserved for the next volume.

Before closing this Introduction the Editor feels that it is necessary for him to make a few brief observations on some of the documents calendared in this volume which bear upon the history of, perhaps, the most remarkable man of the period, Esmé Stewart, sixth Seigneur of Aubigny, who was the chief instrument in bringing about the downfall of Morton.

Shrewsbury, in a letter to Leicester, dated the 2nd of August 1578, mentions that D'Aubigny was seeking to prevent Lady Arbella Stewart from obtaining the earldom of Lennox.

On the 5th of March 1579–80 he was created Earl of Lennox, Lord Darnley, D'Aubigny, and Dalkeith, and on the 5th of August 1581 Duke of Lennox. After the flight of Lord John Hamilton the abbacy of Arbroath was bestowed on him by the King.

It is almost certain that D'Aubigny arrived in Scotland on the 8th of September 1579, and that he at once became a great favourite with the young King of Scots owing to his personal accomplishments and graceful appearance, and it is quite evident that he was nothing less than idolized by him. It required but few days for all kinds of rumours to be spread throughout Scotland and England with regard to the purport of his visit. He was accompanied to Scotland by his wife's kinsmen, Mons. Montbirneau and Mr. Henry Keir, the presence of the latter adding much to the suspicion already attached to the visit.

Elizabeth had received information that D'Aubigny intended to pay the King of Scots a visit, and in a letter to Captain Errington, dated the 14th of September 1579, she commands him to inform himself whether D'Aubigny be looked for there, and what accidents and alterations are thought may grow upon his coming. (fn. 95)

On the 10th of October Errington writes to Walsingham that the King is much delighted with Mons. D'Aubigny's company, that he is likely to be Earl of Lennox and to have some part of the Hamiltons' lands, and that he meant to abide in Scotland that winter. (fn. 96) About the same time evidence is at hand that he had brought letters from Henry III. to the Scottish Lords. The Earl of Argyll gives to him the best countenance and entertainment, and the King has great liking of him. It is thought, verily, that he shall be the second person there, by consent, if he will become religious. (fn. 97) On the 31st of December news arrives that he means to "set down his staff in Scotland." (fn. 98)

Amongst some of the important offices bestowed on D'Aubigny was the custody of Dumbarton Castle. (fn. 99)

Apprehension of the result of the power which D'Aubigny was rapidly obtaining excited Elizabeth's jealousy, and many were the impatient messages sent to her ambassador and friends there to supply her with every detail of his actions.

Nicholas Errington's letters in the beginning of 1580, and Robert Bowes' at the same period, and on to 1581, are full of information with regard to him and the state of affairs in Scotland generally. Various attempts were made to reconcile D'Aubigny. and Morton, who had never been on friendly terms, but without avail.

The documents which remain to be calendared in the next volume will contain the closing scene of Mons. D'Aubigny's history; but it must not be supposed that because mention has not been made in this Introduction of other papers there are not other materials in the text requiring careful examination.

The following is an addition to Letter No. 182 [page 174] of sufficient interest to be more fully stated than in the text:—

He [Killigrew] is very desirous to come home, because he thinks his coming away would hasten the Regent the sooner to end this matter, and that his wife is sick, his house visited with the plague, and he has now no deputy in his office. Therefore, for the surety of her majesty's money, he had need to be at home in the term. As he [Smith] can perceive, her majesty is inclined also that he should come home.

His lordship has reason, seeing he hears no word either of Vernon or of Sir Valentine Browne, that there should be sought out and named to her majesty some other fit man to take the charge at Michaelmas, and him also to be forewarned thereof, and his consent known. But if Vernon should go forward with his bargain and find good sureties, it is no reason he should be disappointed. This matter shall be moved to my Lords now at Worcester, and to her majesty also.

Here is talk that the Count remains here till Saturday, and then some talk that her majesty goes again to Shrewsbury. Trusts that will not be true, but rather, straight to Woodstock. Men are weary, the way and the weather foul, the country sore vexed with carriage.

Sends such packets of letters as are directed to his lordship, and things in an hose sent by his men.