horted the estates to give relief to his Roman Catholic subjects, and offered, in return, a free trade with England and an amnesty for political offenses. A committee was appointed to draw up an answer. That committee, though named by Murray, and composed of privy counselors and courtiers, framed a reply, full, indeed, of dutiful and respectful expressions, yet clearly indicating a determination to refuse what the king demanded. The estates, it was said, would go as far as their consciences would allow to meet his majesty's wishes respecting his subjects of the Roman Catholic religion. These expressions were far from satisfying the chancellor; yet, such as they were, he was forced to content himself with them, and even had some difficulty in persuading the Parliament to adopt them. Objection was taken by some zealous Protestants to the mention made of the Roman Catholic religion. There was no such religion. There was an idolatrous apostasy, which the laws punished with the halter, and to which it did not become Christian men to give flattering titles. To call such a superstition Catholic was to give up the whole question which was at issue between Rome and the reformed churches. The offer of a free trade with England was treated as an insult. "Our fathers," said one orator, "sold their king for southern gold, and we still lie under the reproach of that foul bargain. Let it not be said of us that we have sold our God!" Sir John Lauder, of Fountainhall, one of the senators of the College of Justice, suggested the words, "the persons commonly called Roman Catholics." "Would you nickname his majesty?" exclaimed the chancellor. The answer drawn by the committee was carried, but a large and respectable minority voted against the proposed words as too courtly.* It was remarked that the representatives of the towns were, almost to a man, against the government. Hitherto those members had been of small account in the Parliament, and had generally been considered as the retainers of powerful noblemen. They now showed, for the first * Fountainhall, May 6, 1686. time, an independence, a resolution, and a spirit of combination which alarmed the court.* The answer was so unpleasing to James that he did not suffer it to be printed in the Gazette. Soon he learned that a law, such as he wished to see passed, would not even be brought in. The Lords of Articles, whose business was to draw up the acts on which the estates were afterward to deliberate, were virtually nominated by himself; yet even the Lords of Articles proved refractory. When they met, the three privy counselors who had lately returned from London took the lead in opposition to the royal will. Hamilton declared plainly that he could not do what was asked. He was a faithful and loyal subject; but there was a limit imposed by conscience. "Conscience!" said the chancellor; "conscience is a vague word, which signifies any thing or nothing." Lockhart, who sat in Parliament as representative of the great county of Lanark, struck in. "If conscience," he said, "be a word without meaning, we will change it for another phrase which, I hope, means something. For conscience let us put the fundamental laws of Scotland." These words raised a fierce debate. General Drummond, who represented Perthshire, declared that he agreed with Hamilton and Lockhart. Most of the bishops present took the same side.† *Fountainhall, June 15, 1686. + Citters, May 11, 1686. Citters informed the States that he had his intelligence from a sure hand. I will transcribe part of his narrative. It is an amusing specimen of the piebald dialect in which the Dutch diplomatists of that age corresponded. "Des konigs missive, boven en behalven den Hoog Commissaris aensprake, aen het Parlement afgesonden, gelyck dat altoos gebruyckelyck is, waerby Syne Majesteyt nu in genere versocht hieft de mitigatie der rigoureuse ofte sanglante wetten van het Ryck jegens het Pausdom, in het Generale Comitée des Articles (soo men het daer naemt) na ordre gestelt en gelesen synde, in 't voteren, den Hertog van Hamilton onder anderen klaer uyt seyde dat hy daertoe niet soude verstaen, dat hy anders genegen was den konig in allen voorval getrouw te dienen volgens het dictamen syner conscientie: 't gene reden gaf aen de Lord Cancelier de Grave Perts te seggen dat het woort conscientie niets en beduyde, en alleen een individuum vagum was, waerop It was plain that, even in the committee of articles, James could not command a majority. He was mortified and irritated by the tidings. He held warm and menacing language, and punished some of his mutinous servants, in the hope that the rest would take warning. Several persons were dismissed from the council board. Several were deprived of pensions, which formed an important part of their income. Sir George Mackenzie, of RoseHe had long haugh, was the most distinguished victim. held the office of lord advocate, and had taken such a part in the persecution of the Covenanters that to this day he holds, in the estimation of the austere and godly peasantry of Scotland, a place not far removed from the unenviable eminence occupied by Claverhouse. The legal attainments of Mackenzie were not of the highest order; but as a scholar, a wit, and an orator, he stood high in the opinion of his countrymen, and his renown had spread even to the coffee-houses of London and the cloisters of Oxford. The remains of his forensic speeches prove him to have been a man of parts, but are somewhat disfigured by what he doubtless considered as Ciceronian graces, interjections which show more art than passion, and elaborate amplifications, in which epithet rises above epithet in wearisome climax. He had now, for the first time, been found scrupulous. He was, therefore, in spite of all his claims on the gratitude of the government, deprived of his office. He retired into the country, and soon after went up to London for the purpose of clearing himself, but was refused admission to the royal presence.* While the king der Chevalier Locquard dan verder gingh; wil man niet verstaen de betyckenis van het woordt conscientie, soo sal ik in fortioribus seggen dat wy meynen volgens de fondamentale wetten van het ryck." There is, in the Hind let loose, a curious passage, to which I should have given no credit but for this dispatch of Citters. "They can not endure so much as to hear of the name of conscience. One that was well acquainted with the council's humor in this point told a gentleman that was going before them, I beseech you, whatever you do, speak nothing of conscience before the lords, for they can not abide to hear that word.'" *Fountainhall, May 17, 1686. was thus trying to terrify the Lords of Articles into submission, the popular voice encouraged them to persist. The utmost exertions of the chancellor could not prevent the national sentiment from expressing itself through the pulpit and the press. One tract, written with such boldness and acrimony that no printer dared to put it in type, was widely circulated in manuscript. The papers which appeared on the other side of the question had much less effect, though they were disseminated at the public charge, and though the Scottish defenders of the government were assisted by an English auxiliary of great note, Lestrange, who had been sent down to Edinburgh, and had apartments in Holyrood House.* At length, after three weeks of debate, the Lords of Articles came to a decision. They proposed merely that Roman Catholics should be permitted to worship God in private houses without incurring any penalty; and it soon appeared that, far as this measure was from coming up to the king's demands and expectations, the estates either would not pass it at all, or would pass it with great restrictions and modifications. While the contest lasted, the anxiety in London was intense. Every report, every line from Edinburgh was eagerly devoured. One day the story ran that Hamilton had given way, and that the government would carry every point. Then came intelligence that the Opposition had rallied, and was more obstinate than ever. At the most critical moment orders were sent to the post-office that the bags from Scotland should be transmitted to Whitehall. During a whole week not a single private letter from beyond the Tweed was delivered in London. In our age such an interruption of communication would throw the whole island into confusion; but there was then so little trade and correspondence between England and Scotland that the inconvenience was probably much smaller than has been often occasioned in our own time by a short delay in the arrival of the Indian mail. While the ordi * Wodrow III., x., 3. nary channels of information were thus closed, the crowd in the galleries of Whitehall observed with attention the countenances of the king and his ministers. It was noticed, with great satisfaction, that, after every express from the north, the enemies of the Protestant religion looked more and more gloomy. At length, to the general joy, it was announced that the struggle was over, that the government had been unable to carry its measures, and that the lord high commissioner had adjourned the Parliament.* If James had not been proof to all warnings, these events would have sufficed to warn him. A few months before this time the most obsequious of English Parliaments had refused to submit to his pleasure. But the most obsequious of English Parliaments might be regarded as an independent and high-spirited assembly when compared with any Parliament that had ever sat in Scotland; and the servile spirit of Scottish Parliaments was always to be found in the highest perfection, extracted and condensed, among the Lords of Articles. Yet even the Lords of Articles had been refractory. It was plain that all those classes, all those institutions, which, up to this year, had been considered as the strongest supports of monarchical power, must, if the king persisted in his insane policy, be reckoned as parts of the strength of the Opposition. All these signs. however, were lost upon him. To every expostulation he had one answer: he would never give way, for concession had ruined his father; and his unconquerable firmness was loudly applauded by the French embassy and by the Jesuitical cabal. He now proclaimed that he had only been too gracious when he had condescended to ask the assent of the Scottish estates to his wishes. His prerogative would enable him not only to protect those whom he favored, but to punish those who had crossed him. He was confident that, in Scotland, his dispensing power would not be ques May 2 June 7' Citters, June, June, 1686; Fountainhall, June 15; Luttrell's Diary, June 2, 16. 1 |