That the Proteftant nobility pretended at this time to be much alarmed for the fecurity of the reformed faith, may be true; for they affected fuch alarms through the whole of this fhort and difaftrous reign; but it is hardly conceivable, that thofe alarins could have been increased by the profpect of the Queen's marriage to Darnley. He was no independent fovereign, who could add to her power; and, as the nobles had difcovered the narrownefs of his understanding, they had nothing to dread from his political addrefs. It does not indeed appear that the marriage was difagreeable, either to a great majority of the nobles, or to the nation at large; and Knox fays exprefsly, that it was brought about by the providence of God! That Murray difapproved of it, is certain; and he would have difapproved of any marriage that the Queen could have propofed, not from zeal for the reformed faith, but for other reafons which are here fuppreffed. These reafons are given at length by Tytler, who has laid open the nature and object of the alliance of Murray and his faction with England; an alliance which, whatever had been its object, we are furprised that a lawyer could mention without cenfure. Does Mr. Laing indeed think, that even for the prefervation of religion, private perfons, let them be of the highest rank, have a right to enter into alliance with a foreign ftate, without the knowledge of their own fovereign? But this alliance was made against their fovereign.

The able and elegant writer juft referred to has proved*, by the teftimony of Throckmorton, the English Ambassador in France; by the teftimony of Elizabeth herself; by the atteftation of nineteen Scottish Lords, eight Bishops, and eight Abbots; and by a letter from Randolph, the Englifh refident in Scotland, to the Prime Minister Cecil; that the object of the faction's alliance with Elizabeth was, to prevent Mary's return from France to Scotland; and to place. her baftard brother, afterwards Earl of Murray, at the head of the government. Randolph, whofe letter is dated only a fortnight before Mary's arrival, writes thus: "I have shown your Honour's letter unto the Lord James (Murray), Lord Morton, and Lethington; they with, as your Honour doth, that the (Mary) might be flayed yet for a fpace; and, if it were not for their obedience fake, fome of them care not though they never faw her face."

Murray is admited, as well by the friends as by the enemies of Mary, to have been a man of great talents, and ftill

An Enquiry, biorical and critical, into the Evidence against Mary, Queen of Scots, &c. 4to edit. vol. i. pp. 353, &c.

greater

greater ambition; he was not, therefore, likely to abandon the object on which he had fo long fet his heart; and which his own addrefs, the zeal and intereft of the reformers, and the power of Elizabeth, feemed to have brought within his reach. He had, with confummate ability, crushed a rebellion, headed by Huntly, for which his deluded fovereign had la vifhed on him both riches and honours; but he had retired in difguft from the court, because forfooth the Queen feemed more attentive to the man whom he meant to make her hufband than to himself; and in his retirement he meditated plans for preventing a marriage which he could not but perceive muft baffle all his hopes.

"He refused", fays this author, "to fign an approbation of the marriage, and being apprehenfive of fome attempt on his life, abfented himfelt, under the pretext of fickness, from a convention of estates which was held at Perth. When informed of a defign to intercept Darnley and herself, in their return from Perth, the queen passed precipitately to Calender, acrofs the Forth; while Murray remained in Lochleven caftle, Argyle at Caftle Campbell, and Hamilton at Kinneil. The Raid of Beith, as their confpiracy was termed, and the oppofite project to affaffinate Murray, muft remain uncertain; and although the reformers had actually affembled at Edinburgh, and Randolph had been founded on the delivery of Lennox and his fon to the English, the most probable fuppofition is, that each was a falfe, or premature alarm." P. 5.

The evidence from which Mr. Laing infers that each plot was a falfe and premature alarm, is negative and partial. He admits that Melvil adopted the common report of the Queen's party, refpecting the confpiracy of Murray and his faction; but Melvil, he fays, wrote in his old age; and that circumftance, it seems, renders his teftimony incredible! He promifes to examine the evidence of Argyle and Rothes afterwards; and refts his caufe at prefent on the filence of Randolph, the English. refident, who, in his dispatches to Cecil,

There is fomething extremely favage and ungrateful in Murray's refufal. The Queen", fays Knox, "infifted upon him, faying, the greatest part of the nobility were there prefent (at Stirling), and content with the marriage; wifhed him to be fo much a Stuart, as to confent to the keeping of the crown in the family, and the furname, according to their father's will and defire, as was faid of him a little before his death. But he refused, because, faid he, it is required neceffarily, that the whole nobility be prefent, at least the principal, and fuch as he himself was poflerior unto, before that fo grave a matter fhould be advised and concluded." This fact, as Tytler obferves, fpeaks aloud.

gives no intimation of any design to feize the Queen and Darnley.

This mode of weighing evidence feems to be new. If Melvil was not in his dotage when he wrote, his age, and the opportunities which time had given to feparate truth from falfehood, furely add ftrength to the report which he had adopted from the Queen's party; and even common report is not to be fet afide by the mere filence of any individual. But was Randolph indeed filent concerning this confpiracy of Murray and his faction? No! His letters point fo directly to fome confpiracy at this time, that it is impoffible to mistake their meaning, or to entertain a doubt of an affociation being formed to feize the Queen and Darnley on the firft opportunity; to precipitate her from the throne; and either to put him to death, or to fend him prifoner to England. Our limits will admit of but fhort extracts from two or three of these letters, publifhed by Tytler, whofe proofs of this reality of the Raid of Beith are fuch as we are furprised that even this author could refift*.

On the 3d of June, the English refident thus writes to Cecil: " People have but fmall joy in this their new mafter; and find nothing, but that God must find him a fhort end, or them a miferable life. The dangers of thofe he now hateth are great; but they find fome fupport, that what he intendeth to others may light upon himself."

Randolph does not indeed mention here the Kirk of Beith as the place where that which Darnley intended to others might light upon himself; and for the beft reafon poffible; because it is not to be fuppofed that he knew the precile time and place fixed on by the confpirators for carrying their defigns into execution. It is not indeed to be fuppofed that the confpirators themselves had fixed on any time or place, for feizing the perfons of their fovereign and her betrothed hufband, when they had their conferences with the English refident; because the opportunity for carrying into effect so hazardous an attempt, they knew, must be embraced whenever it fhould occur, and could not by them be fixed at a distance. The language, however, is fufficiently plain; and, when the reader has compared it with the following extract from a letter of the 2nd of July, he will probably wonder, as we do, at the audacity which could affirm, that in Randolph's confidential difpatches to Cecil there is "no intimation of any preparation or design to feize the Queen and Darnley.'

See his Enquiry, &c. vol. i. p. 371, &c.

Darnley's

"Darnley's behaviour", fays Randolph, "is fuch, as he is run in contempt of all men, even of thofe that were his chief friends: what fhall become of him I know not; but it is greatly to be feared, that he can have no long life among this people."

Why was this to be feared? Mr. L. we are perfuaded, will not attempt to answer the queftion; but his friend Randolph, who on this fubject did not fpeak without book, has anfwered it for him.

"The queftion", fays the refident, "has been asked me, whether, if they (Darnley and his father) were delivered to us at Berwick, we would receive them? I answered, we would receive our own*, in what fort foever they come to us";

that is, as Tytler juftly observes, dead or alive. Yet Randolph gives no intimation of any defign to feize the Queen and Darnley! And the Raid of Beith, and the oppofite project of Darnley to affaffinate Murray, were both" falfe or premature alarms"! Robertfon, however, thought otherwife, and has admitted them both to have been real. Whether, on this account, he has loft any degree of credit with the author of the Differtation, we know not; but we obferve, that though he.was formerly fiyled "the most faithful of hiftorians", he is now confidered as only one of the most faithful; yet it was not on flight evidence that he admitted the confpiracy of Mur. ray. The Earls of Argyle and Rothes, with the Lord Boyd, who were deeply engaged in that confpiracy, returning afterwards to their allegiance, and being pardoned by the Queen, declared that Murray, at this time, confpired the flaughter of the Lord Darnley, and to have imprifoned her Highness in Lochleven, and ufurped the government."+

This is the evidence which the author is afterwards to examine; and in the examination of which we fhall accompany him. In the mean time, he contents himself with affirming, that "no ferious belief could be entertained by the Queen of the Raid of Beith", because, when fhe fummoned Murray, who had retired with his followers to Stirling, to appear at Edinburgh," to anfwer", as Robertfon fays, "to fuch things as fhould be laid to his charge", no mention was made of this confpiracy. He was charged, not with a treasonable attempt to furprife and feize the perfon of their fovereign, but merely

Lennox had an eftate in England, where Darnley was born. Both father and fon therefore were Elizabeth's fubjects, or Englishmen, which is the reason that Randolph calls them our own.

Tytler, vol. i. p. 377

with uttering calumnious reports againft Darnley to excite difcontent; therefore, argues the author, the Queen and her fecret council did not really believe that he had entered into the confpiracy called the Raid of Beith!

To what, let us afk, does this reafoning amount? Obvi oufly to nothing more, than that had Mr. Laing been in the Queen's place, or directed her counfels, he would have charged Murray and his affociates with treafon, had he believed them guilty of treafon; that what he would have done, Queen Mary and her council would have done; and that therefore, as they did not charge the faction with treafon, they did not ferionfly believe the flory of the Raid of Beith! But with all due deference to fo great authority, Mary might have had many reafons for not charging Murray with treafon, even fuppofing her to have had no doubt of his guilt. She might be unwilling to fhed the blood of a man who had rendered her fome important fervices; and whom, though a baftard, the respected as the fon of her father. She might have been aware, that it would be difficult to bring legal evidence of the treafon; for Argyle and Rothes had not then made their confeffion, nor was the privy to the correfpondence of Randolph; and yet the and her council might, in their own minds, be firmly perfuaded of his guilt. There is furely within the author's recollection one trial for treafon, when the perfon accused was legally, and therefore properly, acquitted; though there has fince been brought to light complete proof that he was as truly guilty then as he is now, when heading a divifion of the army deftined to invade his country. Such may have been the cafe of Murray and his affociates; and fuch, we confefs, it appears to have been, from all the evidence that we have yet examined, and which feems to be fully and fairly flated by Tytler.

(To be continued.)

ART. III. Analytical Effays towards promoting the chemical Knowledge of Mineral Subftances. By Martin Henry Klaproth, Profeffor of Chemistry, &c. &c. Vol. II. Tranf lated from the German. 8vo. 6s. 267 pp. Cadell and Davies. 1804.

THE HE contents of two volumes of Profeffor Klaproth's Effays were tranflated into Englifh, and were publifhed in one volume, in the year 1801. That volume, which con

S

BRIT. CRIT: VOL. XXV. MARCH, 1805.

tains