Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

of the mass. "Mary was pensive and melan- I mentioned as being the first in the order of succholy;" Darnley did not appear at all, and his absence was much noticed. The fact was, he had stayed away to save his pride, for Elizabeth had strictly charged the Earl of Bedford and the Englishmen in his company not to treat him as king; and to avoid the mortification of being refused the royal title before the whole court, he kept away from the christening.

But, between the birth and the baptism of James, Darnley had become more than ever estranged from the queen, while the Earl of Bothwell had obtained complete possession of the royal favour. It was against the Earl of Moray, however, that the wrath and machinations of the weak king-consort were now directed.

Most of the contemporary writers assert that Darnley really had a design against the life of the queen's half-brother, and Moray was not a man likely to forgive him this intention. At the same time, the friends and dependants of Morton and Ruthven entertained a deadly hatred against Daruley for his behaviour after the murder of Rizzio; and they said, among themselves, that he deserved to die the death of a coward and traitor for sacrificing men whom he had induced to stain their hands in blood. In short, Darnley had enemies in all quarters, and friends in none; and it may have been fear which made him embrace at one moment the project | of travelling on the Continent.

The birth of James tended in more ways than one to increase the ill-humours and jealousies of Elizabeth. It revived the spirit of Mary's partizans in England, who were mostly, but not all, Catholics. These men, seeing the English queen still unmarried, and likely for ever to remain so, began to calculate as a certainty on the succession falling, if not to Mary, to her son; for at this time the line of Suffolk had almost dropped out of notice. It appears to have been this English party that got up an alarm as to the unsettled state of the succession; but as the danger in case of Elizabeth's death, was so great and so obvious, all parties soon joined in pressing for some settlement, either by Elizabeth's marriage or otherwise. It was scarcely possible for Mary to be indifferent to this question, and in an unlucky hour she again pressed her rival to name her successor, and obtain from the parliament a recognition of her own rights. In fact, during some stormy debates in both houses,' Mary was

Cecil notices "certain lewd bills thrown abroad against the queen's majesty, for not assenting to have the matter of succession proved in parliament; and bills also to charge Sir W. Cecil with the occasion thereof." See Cecil's curious Journal, extending from November, 1542, to January, 1597, as published by Murden, at the end of his collection of the Burghley State Papers. This journal contains an authentic summary of the

cession after Elizabeth. But this extraordinary woman stopped further proceedings, by declaring that she intended to marry, and to have, by God's grace, an heir of her own body. These debates occupied a considerable part of the months of October and November, and both lords and commons showed a determined spirit to which they had long been strangers-the commons even proposing that the question of supplies and that of the succession should go hand in hand. Then our old friend, Sir Ralph Sadler, with a serious face told the commons that he had heard the queen's majesty declare, in solemn manner, that she would take a husband for the good of her people. As the house was in all probability not quite convinced by Sir Ralph, Elizabeth ordered Secretary Cecil, Sir Francis Knollys, Sir Ambrose Carr, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and Sir Edward Rogers, comptroller of her household, to make the same declaration. The commons, however, seem to have been still unconvinced; they joined the question of the marriage with the question of settlement, and were proceeding with earnestness when Elizabeth commanded them not to proceed further in that matter. This imperative order gave great discontent; but the commons had not as yet settled what were their privileges; and Paul Wentworth, the member that showed more spirit, ventured only to doubt whether such an interference on the part of the crown were not an infringement of the liberties and privileges of the house. Cecil endeavoured to restore good humour and a confidence which he scarcely felt himself, by assuring them that Elizabeth pledged to the house the word of a queen that she would marry; after which he made some statements which confirm, what ought never have been doubted by historians, that Elizabeth had been a most troublesome prisoner in the days of her sister Mary. Speaking in the name of her majesty, Cecil told the house, that the naming of a successor must be attended with great danger to her own person; that she had herself experienced, during the reign of her sister, how much court was usually paid to the next heir, and what dangerous sacrifices men would make of their present duty to their future prospects; and that, therefore, she had delayed the naming of any successor. But still the commons were restive-some of them even declaring that the queen was bound in duty to secure them against the chances of a civil war and a disputed succession; that, by persisting in her present conduct, she would show herself the stepmother, not the natural parent of her people, and would seem to desire that England should subsist no great events of Elizabeth's reign; but the entries are, unfortunately, very succinct-mere memoranda.

[ocr errors]

the treaty of Edinburgh, which had been deferred, as she said, "upon account of some words therein prejudicial to the queen's right and title before all others, after us." But a compliance with this would have been nothing less than a renunciation on Mary's part of all rights to the English succession (for so much was implied in the treaty of Edinburgh), only softened by a promise from one whose merit in promise-keeping had not been very conspicuous. It might, indeed, have been better for Mary had she gratified her imperious

longer than she should have the glory and satisfaction of governing it. Never had the commons been so bold. Elizabeth was alarmed into civility she called up the speaker to court, as sured him that she was sincere in her intention of marrying, but repeated her prohibition as to the debates still going on. The members, however, showed a determination not to obey this command; upon which she was graciously pleased to revoke it, and to allow the house the liberty of debate. The latter wise measure cooled their heat, and they voted the supplies without hamp-rival in this particular; but her refusal was ering them with conditions. Soon after this, the queen dissolved the parliament; but it was not consistent with her temper and her notions of prerogative to permit them to depart without a lesson. As it was Elizabeth's policy never to do anything unpopular with one hand without performing some popular act with the other, she remitted payment of part of the supplies voted to her, making that memorable and captivating speech that money in the purses of her subjects was as good to her as in her own exchequer.'

?

On the 9th of November, while the debates were at the warmest in the English parliament, Mary addressed a letter to Elizabeth's privy council, calling to mind that her hereditary right, as had lately been mentioned in parliament, was indisputable. "And, albeit," continues Mary, "we be not of mind to press our good sister further than shall come of her own good pleasure, to put the matter in question, yet likewise we will be judged by the laws of England. We do affectuously require you to have respect to justice with indifferency, whenever it shall please the queen to put it in deliberation." As the English parliament was actually engaged on the matter, and seemed determined to press Elizabeth to a decision, nothing could well be more a matter of course than Mary's mentioning her own claims at such a moment. But the measure evidently chagrined her rival, who was further irritated by a request urged by Melville-"to cause certain persons, now living, to be examined of their knowledge of the manner of the last testament of King Henry." The will of Henry VIII., which barred in the most irregular manner the Scottish line, was indeed the only obstacle to Mary's hereditary claim, and this will was suspected to have been a forgery. Elizabeth, who was resolved to do no such thing, instructed the Earl of Bedford to tell Mary that she meant to examine her father's will as soon as she should find it convenient; but, on the other hand, he was to request the Scottish queen fully to confirm

[ocr errors]

1 Camden: D'Ewes. Cecil says briefly in his journal, "In this parliament time the queen's majesty did remit a part of the offer of a subsidy by the commons, who offered largely to the end to have had the succession stablished." 3 Ibid.

Harl. MS. 4645, as quoted by Raumer.

neither unjust nor unreasonable, but perfectly consistent with an honest diplomacy. Elizabeth, however, was furious. We have not evidence to prove the full extent to which her conscience permitted her to go, but it is certain that she threw more activity into intrigues and proceedings which had never been interrupted, and sought to preserve tranquillity at home, and to avoid naming an odious successor, by stirring up fresh troubles in Scotland. Her agents at Edinburgh had continual conferences with Moray: the lords who had murdered Rizzio were taken under her special and avowed protection: and when the Earl of Bedford attended at the christening of James, he was instructed by his sovereign and Secretary Cecil to take advantage of that happy moment to plead to Queen Mary in their favour. Mary, as we have seen, was not happy or cheerful at that moment; yet, at the petition of Bedford, she granted the murderers a free pardon; and within a few days the Lords Morton, Ruthven, and Lindsay, with seventy-five other conspirators, chiefly the followers of Morton, returned into Scotland, where, within six months, they disgraced and dethroned their forgiving sovereign. Darnley, who was in Stirling Castle, quitted that place for Glasgow as soon as he heard that the queen had caused the privy seal to be put to the pardon of Morton, a man whom he had good reason to dread. According to John Knox, Darnley left the queen abruptly, "without good night." Bothwell, on the contrary, testified great joy at the recal of the exiles, and even went to meet Morton, with whom he had a long conference at Whittingham, on the Scottish borders; where, according to Morton's confession, when his own hour came, he was admitted into the secrets of a conspiracy for murdering Darnley. At the same time the Earl of Moray, who

According to the French ambassador, she behaved admirably well at the baptism and at the entertainment given to all that goodly company, but yet could not conceal her unhappiness. He says "She sent for me yesterday, the 22d of December (five days after the ceremony), and I found her laid on the bed, weeping I am much grieved for the many troubles and vexations she meets with."-Letter of Le Croc, quoted by Keith. 5 This is what Melville calls a quiet friendship. "The Farl of Bothwell," he says, "picked up a quiet friendship with the Earl

sore....

Morton.'

had pleaded for the exiles in England, conducted | and her short sea voyages. For two days after the Earl of Bedford to his house in Fife, and there treated him "with much honour, great cheer, and courteous entertainment," things which we are entitled to surmise, were but a cover to more serious transactions.

It should appear that Bothwell, whose audacity was equal to anything, conceived the notion of marrying the queen, building confidently on her affection for his person. Yet this scheme must have been recent and sudden, as also the love of the queen, upon which it is said to have been founded. Bothwell, not six months before, had married the sister of the Earl of Huntly, and, though he got rid of this incumbrance, he would scarcely have taken a wife if he had then contemplated a union with the queen. Mary, on the other hand, seems to have given no very striking proof of an ardent and headlong passion. Some little circumstances usually cited against her admit of a very different explanation from the one generally given. We must here descend to minutiæ otherwise unworthy of a place in history. On the 27th July, Mary set sail in a vessel, manned by Bothwell, for Alloa, about thirty miles up the Forth. This was called by her enemies a going away with the pirates and with Bothwell; but that earl, as lord high-admiral, was the proper person to attend to such a voyage, and the pirates were Scottish sailors under his command. The queen, who was recovering from the effects of child-bearing, was too weak to travel on horseback, and it appears that she had no wheel-carriage. But even if there had been a carriage and good roads (which were altogether wanting), a voyage by sea was preferable under all circumstance's. The queen was going to visit the Earl of Mar, a most honourable and devout man, according to the showing even of his enemies; and that nobleman, together with Moray and most of her officers of state, besides Bothwell, accompanied her. Darnley, it is true, chose to go by land; but Darnley, besides being in different case from his convalescent wife, was at open enmity with the Earl of Moray, and was besides, wayward and capricious, like a spoiled boy. On the 29th of July the queen returned to Edinburgh to meet the French ambassador, who had arrived to congratulate her upon her safe delivery; and, on the 1st of August, she ascended the Forth again to Alloa, when her husband joined her and remained two nights with her. During this time Secretary Maitland, who had absconded after Rizzio's assassination, in the arranging of which he had played a foremost part, was pardoned in spite of Bothwell. On the 4th of August Mary again descended the Forth, and took up her abode at Holyrood, to all appearance much improved in health by her stay at Alloa

VOL. II.

her return she and her husband agreed well together, and when dissensions broke out the name of Bothwell was not mentioned; but it was said that Darnley was offended with the queen for keeping so much company with Moray, | her half-brother, and then her prime minister; and it was at this moment that Darnley is accused of threatening to make away with Moray. In spite, however, of these broils, Mary and her husband, attended by Huntly, Moray, and other nobles, hunted together in Peeblesshire for three or four days, and returned in company to Edinburgh on the 20th of August. On the 22d of the same month Mary and Darnley went to Stirling, carrying with them Prince James. Leaving their infant in Stirling Castle, they went together to hunt for a few days in Glenartney, in Perthshire. On the 31st of August they returned to Stirling, where they remained together, with their child, nearly a fortnight. On the 12th of September Mary went to Edinburgh to attend public business, and Darnley refused to accompany her. On the 21st of the same month the queen returned to her husband. Two days after she repaired alone to Edinburgh, having in vain endeavoured to make her wayward husband go with her. It was at this crisis that Darnley spoke of going abroad: his own father, the Earl of Lennox, informed the queen of this strange design. Mary instantly laid Lennox's letter before her privy council, and, on that same night at ten o'clock, Darnley arrived at Edinburgh; but he would not enter Holyroodhouse unless three of the chief nobles who were there should be dismissed. These were, according to one account, the Earls of Moray, Argyle, and Rothes; according to another, Moray, Rothes, and Secretary Maitland. In no contemporary account is there mention made of Bothwell, and, in addition to his old grounds of jealousy and enmity against Moray, it is mentioned that Darnley was at this moment enraged because he could not obtain such things as he sought-to wit, the dismissals of Secretary Maitland, the justice clerk, and the clerk of registry. the morrow, when Darnley came to his senses, the queen, in presence of the privy council and the Bishop of Ross, took him by the hand and conjured him to say whether she had ever given him offence, and to state the true cause of his discontent. He declared that the queen had never given him any cause of complaint, and that he had no real intention of quitting the kingdom; and yet, when he returned from the council, he said to the queen, "Adieu, madam, you shall not see my face for a long space." He went to Glasgow to his father and hired a vessel, and kept it in readiness as if he really meant to

121

[ocr errors]

abscond. Hence also he wrote a letter to the queen, stating grievances which he would not mention before; and yet in these grievances there is no mention of Bothwell, or hint of any jealousy on his account. Darnley complained, first, that the queen did not trust him with so much authority, nor was at such pains to advance him, and to make him be honoured by the nation, as formerly; secondly, that nobody attended him. and the nobility avoided his company. To these avowed grievances Mary replied that she had conferred so much honour on him as had rendered herself very uneasy; and that he had abused her favours by patronizing a conspiracy against her; but, notwithstanding this, she had continued to show him such respect that, though those who entered her chamber with him and murdered her faithful servant, had named him as their chief, yet she had never accused him thereof, but excused him, as if she had not believed the fact. (This passage proves, what has scarcely ever been doubted, that Mary was not deceived by Darnley's protestations of innocence, and that his share in the murder of Rizzio was a crime she could never forget or really forgive, however much she may have been disposed, for the sake of appearances, to live on friendly terms with her husband.) Thirdly, that as to his not being attended, the fault was his own, as she had always offered him her own servants, and could not compel the nobles to wait upon him since it was his own deportment and want of courtesy which drove them from him This reply was drawn up by the privy council; and a letter addressed to the Queen-mother of France, declaring that Darnley had no ground of complaint, but, on the contrary, the best reason to look upon himself as one of the most fortunate princes of Christendom-if he had only known his own happiness and made a proper use of his good fortune was signed by Huntly, Argyle, Moray, Athole, Caithness, Rothes, Secretary Maitland, the Archbishop of St. Andrews, the Bishops of Galloway, Ross, Orkney, and Dunkeld. And Le Croc, the French ambassador, wrote at this very moment:-" "It is in vain to imagine that Darnley shall be able to raise any disturbance, for there is not one person in this kingdom that regards him any further than as agreeable to the queen; and I never saw her majesty so much beloved, esteemed, and honoured, or so great harmony amongst all her subjects as at present, by her own conduct." During part of these transactions Bothwell was not at court, and Darnley's petulance was not directed against him, but against Moray and Maitland, two men who were seldom insulted with impunity, or disappointed in carrying any scheme they proposedKeith; Chalmers.

men of consummate craft, who could always turn the fiercer villainies of others to their own purpose. In the afternoon of the 6th of October, Bothwell, in discharge of his duties as warden of the marches, left Edinburgh for the Borders, which were, as usual, in a disturbed state. On the 8th of the same month Mary, according to a purpose declared many weeks before, went to Jedburgh to hold Justice Ayres, or to superintend the proceedings of the circuit courts, a common practice, at the regular seasons, with Scottish sovereigns. On the same day that Mary set out for the Borders, Bothwell was wounded at Hermitage Castle by an outlaw of those parts named Eliott of Park, whom he had attempted to make prisoner with his own hand. The news of this affray reached Mary at Jedburgh, where she was attended by most of her officers of state. It has been stated by an elegant, but not very correct historian, that she instantly flew on the wings of love to Bothwell; but it is proved by the most authentic documents that she did not quit her duties and engagements at Jedburgh until eight days had elapsed. This materially changes the aspect of the story. “A journey undertaken," says Walter Scott, "after such an interval, has not the appearance of being performed at the impulse of passion, but seems rather to have flowed from some political motive; and the queen's readiness to take arms in person, both previously to the battle of Corrichie and at the Round-about Raid, may account for her dauntlessly approaching a disturbed district in her dominions without supposing her to be acting upon the impulse of a guilty passion, or even an inordinate favour for her wounded officer."3 On the 16th of October Mary rode on horseback from Jedburgh to Hermitage Castle, to visit the wounded Bothwell. The distance between the two places was about twenty English miles; but she rode back to Jedburgh on the same day, not stopping to sleep at Hermitage, which was her castle and not Bothwell's. Historians in general are not good horsemen: they have considered this journey as something much more remarkable than it really was in a spirited, active woman of four-and-twenty, who was a most excellent horsewoman, and they have fancied that no motive short of an amorous one could possibly make the queen ride forty statute miles in one day! But Mary was likely to ride forty miles in a long autumn day for mere pastime, and in the present case there was a sufficiently strong motive in her desire to investigate the cause of an outrage committed on one who, by right of office, represented her royal authority, and who, in her eyes, even without love, may have appeared as an active and deserving lieutenant. 7 Robertson, Hist. Scot.

3 Hist. scut.

But, again, if the journey had been so terrible and Mary so lost to shame as they represented, she would scarcely have been at the trouble of riding back to Jedburgh before night set in. In the enfeebled state of her health the long ride did, however, prove somewhat serious, for, on the following day, the 17th of October, the queen was seized with a dangerous fever, which, in conjunction with uneasiness of mind, caused partly by her husband, and her apprehension of some fresh conspiracy, or of some murder like that of Rizzio, brought her almost to the point of death, and kept her during ten whole days in a very doubtful state. Intelligence of the queen's illness was sent immediately, to Darnley, who was then no farther off than Glasgow, and who showed great indifference on the receipt of it. The French ambassador and the Bishop of Ross both wrote to Paris, relating the dangerous state of the queen, and complaining of her husband's neglect. Darnley at last took the road to Jedburgh, but he did not arrive there till the 28th of October. The queen, now convalescent, received him but coolly, and the very next day he left her again. It should appear, however, that Darnley stood in dread of Moray and Maitland, who were almost constantly with his wife, and who

But,

wild districts." Melville, who was of the party, adds, "The king followed her about where she rode, getting no good countenance, and therefore he passed to Glasgow, where he fell sick for displeasure, as was alleged, not without some bruit of an ill drink by some of his servants." according to all other accounts, Darnley had gone straight to Glasgow after his short visit to the queen at Jedburgh. On the 19th of November Mary proceeded to Tantallon Castle, and thence, on the following day, to Craigmillar. Here, according to Le Croc, the French ambassador, she was sick and melancholy, and in the hands of the physician. About a week after her arrival at Craigmillar, Darnley, whose conduct

[graphic]

CRAIGMILLAR CASTLE.-From a view by Hearne.

had taken measures during her illness to exclude him and his father from all share in the government in case the disease should prove mortal.' On the 9th of November Mary, having finished the business of the Ayres, left Jedburgh for Kelso, where she held a council on the following day. "She then returned by the Merse, and being desirous to see Berwick afar off, she ascended Halidon Hill, being well escorted by troops of Borderers on horseback. The English garrison of Berwick honoured her with many shots of artillery; and Sir John Forster, one of the wardens of the English border, came with other officers out of Berwick, and conferred with her majesty as to the keeping of good order in those

Melville says, "that during the stay of the court at Jed burgh, there was another dark plot on foot, and that the Earls of Bothwell and Huntly enterprised the slaughter of the Earl of Moray, but the Lord Hume came there with forces and prevented that enterprise." Keith, on the other hand, makes it rather probable that there was a purpose entertained to murder Bothwell!

can be reduced to no rational rule, came to visit her, and remained a week! The queen was attended by nearly her whole court. Moray was there, and so also were Argyle, Huntly, Bothwell, and Maitland. In the beginning of December Maitland and Moray, after conferring with Argyle, Huntly, and Bothwell, resolved that the queen should be divorced from her unsuitable husband. It appears that all these lords were perfectly agreed as to this plan, but that Moray kept in the back ground, leaving the principal management of the affair to the adroit and eloquent Maitland, who bore a personal and bitter hatred to Darnley. But when the plan was laid before the queen, she rejected it without hesitation, saying that such a measure could not be adopted without throwing discredit on her own character and doubts on the legitimacy of her child; nor could the eloquence of Maitland and the earnestness of Bothwell overcome this

2 Melville.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »