GIFT, WHIT- Some of the bigoted ministers moved strongly for maintainAbp. Cant. ing the process, confirming the sentence, and protested against the accommodation agreed by the majority. Idem. The laity not to vote in MS. Acts of the At this assembly there was a motion for censuring the ministers who had subscribed their approbation of the statutes made in the year 1584. But upon inquiry, the number of these subscribers was found so considerable, that it was thought prudential to connive at some difference of sentiment, and not press the matter any further. At this general assembly, which met May the 10th, 1586, the general the number of the presbyteries was settled, and the places assemblies. of session fixed, by the lord clerk of the register, at the request of the divines. By this synod none are allowed to fol. 1056. vote in the general assemblies, but such as the Scriptures Spotswood, have appointed "governors of the Church of God; that is, Libell. p. 56. pastors, doctors, and elders." As for other persons who Assembly, Refutat. Id. MS. Acts of the have any cause depending, or any business to propose in the assembly, they have the liberty of being present: that is, they may give in their petitions, and hear a business argued, but neither the laity nor deacons have any privilege of suffrage. To go on with the assembly, and give their own words: "There are four ordained offices," say they, "set down to us by the Scripture; to wit, pastors, doctors, elders, and deacons and the name of a bishop ought not to be taken, as it hath in Papistry, but is common to all pastors and ministers." The manuscript mentions a conference between the king's council and some commissioners of the assembly at Holyrood house. The matter debated was concerning the authority of bishops. And here the Church committee agreed some privilege should remain to the bishops. Now the assembly refusing to stand to the agreement of their own agents, the king's commissioners came into the house, and protested against their proceedings, and declared every thing null which was done by them. That which the assembly insisted on was, that since a bishop was but an ordinary pastor, any exceptions to the regularity of his life, or the doctrine maintained by him, should be tried by the presbytery and synod and as to his commission in Church affairs, he should be under the jurisdiction of the general assembly. It was upon these heads the commissioners disagreed with BETH. them, and entered their protestation. And thus the meet- ELIZAing being upon the point of breaking up, they sent three of their members to the king, relaxed a little, and agreed upon this temper: "That bishops and others commissionated to 599. visit churches, should only be subject to the jurisdiction and censure of the general assembly, or their delegates. And that where bishops were resident, they should preside in the The bishops to preside in meetings of presbyteries and synods." Fife was excepted the synods. in this compromise, in favour of Mr. Robert Wilkie, who was to moderate at the presbytery of St. Andrew's till the next synod. Upon this settlement the king is said to allow Spotswood, their scheme for adjusting the limits and number of their Libell. &c. presbyteries. Refutat. p. 56. ters refuse to pray for the the queen of Scots. The king of Scots being informed they were consulting in England about taking away the queen his mother's life, ordered the divines to recommend her to God's protection in their public devotions. This common office of humanity, which might have been performed to an heathen, was absolutely refused. And when the order was repeated, and the form drawn up, none but Mr. David Lindesay, at Leith, The minisand the court-clergy could be brought to compliance. And t at Edinburgh, which ought to have been exemplary to rest of the kingdom, the disobedience was most public and provoking. The king, upon this, ordered Adamson, bishop of St. Andrew's, to perform the office; he was likewise to make a sermon upon the occasion; and a day was appointed for the solemnity. The ministers being informed of this preparation, prevailed with one Cowper, a young man, unor- Cowper's dained, to seize the pulpit, and keep it against the bishop. haviour. The king coming to the cathedral at the hour appointed, and seeing Cowper in the pulpit, told him that place was designed for another; however, in case he would obey the order, and pray for the queen mother, he might go on. To this Cowper, with an unusual confidence, replied, he would do as the Spirit of God should direct him. Upon this he was commanded down; but managing as if he intended to keep his place, the captain of the guards stepped forward to pull him out; upon which he threw out this expression, "this day shall be a witness against the king in the great day of the Lord." And then denouncing judgment to the miste burghers of Edinburgh, he came down, and the bishop of St. Andrew's preached and performed the office. In the afternoon Cowper was ordered to appear before the council; Walter Balcanquel and William Watson, ministers, came along with him, where, for some unbecoming language, they were forbidden preaching at Edinburgh, during the king's pleasure: as for Cowper, he was sent prisoner to Blackness. In June, this year, a league, offensive and defensive, was concluded between England and Scotland, at Berwick. The same month this alliance was finished, a desperate plot against queen Elizabeth was discovered. I shall mention some little of it from Cambden, who formed his narrative from the confession of the criminals. Some Englishmen in the seminary at Rheims were so bigoted to the court of Rome, so overset with the Italian doctrine of the papal supremacy, that they believed Pius V.'s excommunicating bull little less than the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. The next advance in their belief made the despatching excommunicated princes a meritorious action; and that it was martyrdom to miscarry in the enterprize. This opinion was strongly pressed by Dr. Gifford, Gilbert Gifford, and Hodgkinson, priests; and one John Savage, a man of a military genius, was so thoroughly proselyted to this doctrine, that he readily undertook to kill the queen. At the same time they published a sort of pastoral letter to the English Roman Catholics, not to disturb the government, or attempt any thing against the prince; that they should have recourse to no other expedient but prayers and tears; that these were the only justifiable preparations for Christian subjects; and that fasting and devotion are the proper defences against persecution. These men got a report spread that George Gifford, a gentleman in the queen's guards, had sworn to assassinate her majesty, and received a great sum of money from the duke of Guise for this purpose. Somewhat before this time, one Ballard, a seminary priest, was sent into France to concert an expedition against England. The invasion was to be furnished by the pope, the king of Spain, the Guises, and the prince of Parma. This Ballard being despatched into England, to make an interest for the enterprise, was discovered by Maud, one of BETH. Scots. Walsingham's spies, who travelled along with Ballard, and ELIZAhad been trusted to an intimacy by him. Ballard coming to London, and going under the name of Captain Foscue, opened the business to Babbington, a young gentleman of Derbyshire. He was a person of a good family and fortune, and of a promising genius. The enlargement of the queen of Scots was part of their undertaking. This princess being weary of her confinement, is said to have exchanged some letters with Babbington; but that this correspondence reached to any attempt against queen Elizabeth's life, was always denied by her. However, the worst being believed, or at least suspected, queen Elizabeth awarded a commission for her trial. The instrument 4 commission for is directed to the archbishop of Canterbury, now one of the trying the privy council; to Sir Thomas Bromley, lord chancellor; to queen of the lord treasurer Burleigh, to the marquess of Winchester, to the earls of Oxford, Shrewsbury, Kent, Derby, Wor- Idem. cester, Rutland, Pembroke, Warwick, Leicester, and Lincoln, with several barons, and other members of the privy council, with five of the judges. The queen of Scots was The queen of tried at Fotheringay castle, in Northamptonshire, where she Scots tried was then imprisoned. When notice was given her, she cap. 1. refused at first to appear in court, and insisted on the independency of her condition, and declared she had rather die a thousand times over, than do any thing which might injure her royal character, and imply that she owned herself a subject. However, she condescended so far as to say she was ready to make her defence in a free and full parliament. At last she was prevailed with to drop this resolution, and come into the court. But here she was not wholly unprovided 1586. with an expedient. For to guard her sovereignty, she entered a protestation in writing against the authority of her judges. She behaved herself with an air of majesty becoming her station, and replied to the articles objected with great strength and presence of mind. She was pressed hardest with the evidence of her secretaries, Nave and Curle; but neither of them were brought into the court, Idem. which she desired. In short, her defence not giving satis- The archfaction, she was found guilty. By the way, it may not be improper to observe, that the at the head archbishop of Canterbury's being put in the commission for mission. upon 27 Elix. Oct. 14, bishop of Canterbury of the com wr trying the queen of Scots, is a clear evidence that the privy council and the judges, who may well be supposed to have perused this instrument, were of opinion, that a bishop's judging in capital causes was not inconsistent either with his character, or the English constitution. It is true the archbishop did not act. neither was there any necessity for his doing so for by the tenor of the commission, a majority of those nominated were empowered to try the prisoner, and give sentence. D Ewes Journai, p. xi. D'Ewes Journals Soon after the trial was over, the parliament met at Westminster. The queen's business not giving her leave to come to the house of Lords, the archbishop of Canterbury, the lord treasurer Burleigh, and the earl of Derby, bord Steward, or any two of them, had a commission under the great seal to open the parliament, and to hold, adjourn, or prorogue it, as long as they thought fit. On the 12th of November some of the Lords and Commous waited upon the queen with an address from both houses for the execution of the queen of Scots. And here, to gain her majesty's consent, John Puckering, serjeant-atlaw, and speaker to the house of Commons, made a long discray's mind, course to reinforce the address. And since Sir Simon D'Ewes commends him for using many solid and excellent reasons," the reader shall have some of them. One of his reasons is drawn from the danger of the Protestant religion, Picany's if the queen of Scots were suffered to live. But to suggest that difference of religion, or fears of persecution, are warrantable grounds to proceed against a sovereign princess, and send the heir apparent of the crown into the other world by way of prevention; to suggest this, I say, looks like mysterious arguing. Whether reasoning in this manner is not consulting ease further than conscience, and “choosing iniquity rather than affliction," (Job xxxvi. 21,) the reader must judge. The speaker charges the queen of Scots with a sanguinary temper, and says she is acquainted with blood. But this is misrepresentation; for this princess allowed her subjects a toleration, disturbed nobody upon the score of conscience, and governed with remarkable clemency, as hath been already related. He puts the queen in mind, that the queen of Scots held up her claim to the crown of England, and believed herself rightful sovereign at present. But the |