Thereafter, on the fourth of September, a day or two before the murder of Lord Kilpont, a proclamation of the Committee of Estates was issued at the cross of Aberdeen, again declaring that the deed of William Forbes was good and loyal, and prohibiting all the lieges from saying any thing against it," but laudibly to praise and approve the same in all places and conferences, as occasion do offer, under great pains. Yet the godly had their own thoughts." The reward was also assigned to this murderer.*

There can be no question then, that it was the system of the covenanting Government, in other words, of Argyle, not merely to afford protection to those who assassinated any distinguished adherent of the cause of royalty, but to hold out premiums, and to confer rewards for such deeds. It is also unquestionable, upon the evidence adduced, that whoever had assassinated Montrose at this time, would have been received with open arms by Argyle, and publicly complimented and rewarded, however mean and atrocious the manner of perpetrating the act. Nor was it from the pulpits of the covenanting Church that the people would learn that such deeds were an offence in the sight of God. The Reverend Robert Baillie thus comments upon the incident we have illustrated: Kilpont's treachery is revenged by his death, justly inflicted.” †

66

* Forbes did not escape the just reward of his crime, however; for after the Restoration he was hanged for the same. At the time it was considered a judgment upon him, that, the year after he shot Alexander Irving, he blew his own hand off with a musket.

+ Letter to Spang dated 25th October 1644.

CHAPTER XII.

HOW MONTROSE DEFEATED BURLEIGH AT ABERDEEN, REPULSED ARGYLE AND LOTHIAN AT FYVIE, BAFFLED THEM AT STRATHBOGIE, CHASED ARGYLE FROM INVERARY, AND DESTROYED HIM AT INVERLOCHY.

Montrose was deeply affected by the death of his friend Lord Kilpont, the consequences of which were as severe upon his enterprise as the perpetrators had anticipated. Repeatedly he embraced the lifeless body, and with sighs and tears relinquished it to the followers of this hapless chief, to be carried home to his parents, and the tombs of his ancestors. * Thus, besides the men of Athol who returned to deposit their spoil, the best part of four hundred of his most efficient men departed from the Royal Lieutenant even in the hour of victory. It was with a diminished force of less than two thousand followers, of whom a small proportion were cavalry,† and some field-pieces taken at Tippermuir, that he again found himself in front of an enemy, not many days after having destroyed the army of Elcho. In

* Dr Wishart says, that to Montrose Kilpont was endeared as a man famous for arts and arms and honesty, being a good philosopher, a good divine, a good lawyer, a good soldier, a good subject, and a good man."

† Dr Wishart says that when Montrose marched upon Aberdeen, he had just 1500 foot, and 44 horse. Spalding over-rates his forces at 3000 foot, and 8 score horse, probably not making allowance for the departure of a great proportion of the Athol men, and the followers of Lord Kilpont. Bishop Guthrie says, that Montrose gained the battle of Aberdeen with foot scarce 1600, and of horse 44. In the account sent to the Marquis of Ormonde, it is said, we had then about 80 horse," but the number of foot are not mentioned.

the meanwhile he had marched through Angus and the Mearns, to give all in that quarter who were loyally inclined an opportunity of joining him. In vain he endeavoured to redeem Marischal from the influence of Argyle, by sending to him at Dunnotter a letter explaining the object of the present expedition, and inclosing one from the King to that Earl. But the old Earl of Airly, and his gallant sons, Sir Thomas and Sir David Ogilvy, (Lord Ogilvy being still a prisoner,) came instantly to the Standard, which they ever continued to support, with a fearless patience and unshrinking fidelity only second to Montrose's. To these

were added others of the loyal names of Ogilvy and Graham, and a few lowland noblemen and gentlemen whose intentions were better than their military means, or, as it proved, than their capacities for enduring such fatigue and privations as the miraculous achievements of this little army involved. But the most efficient aid now brought to it was in the person of Montrose's old opponent in the north, Colonel Nathaniel Gordon, followed by about thirty well appointed horse

men.

By this time another covenanting lord had assembled an army, which was also expected to destroy Montrose. Lord Burleigh having summoned the northern Covenanters, and rallied the scattered remnants of the Fife regiments defeated at Perth, now occupied Aberdeen with a force of about 2500 foot, 300 horse, and some artillery. Montrose, notwithstanding his own diminished forces, did not hesitate to meet him, and on the thirteenth of September utterly routed Lord Burleigh at the expence of little loss to the royal army, and great slaughter of the Covenanters. Upon this occasion, however, the slaughter was not confined to the battle,

and pursuit in the fields. The citizens of the unfortunate town of Aberdeen suffered dreadfully within its walls. But the circumstances require some illustration, because to the alleged appetite of Montrose for such scenes of blood and cruelty, have the sufferings in question been clamorously imputed by his enemies, while his admirers have but coldly defended him from as gross a caluinny as any that affects his memory. "Montrose," says Sir Walter Scott, "necessarily gave way to acts of pillage and cruelty which he could not prevent, because he was unprovided with money to pay his half-barbarous soldiery. Yet the town of Aberdeen had two reasons for expecting better treatment; first, that it had always inclined to the King's party; and secondly, that Montrose himself had, when acting for the Covenanters, been the agent in oppressing for its loyalty, the very city which his troops were now plundering on the opposite score." This defence of Montrose is just, so far as it extends; but it is too slight, and the implied reproof is unmerited, as we proceed to illustrate.

With no inclination to oppress or inflict pain upon any individual, if without doing so the armies of the Covenant could be dispersed, and the country redeemed from rebellion, Montrose crossed the Dee on the 11th of September. That night, after having summoned the Laird of Leys to surrender, with a bonhommie the very antipodes of Argyle's conduct on such occasions, he transformed his enemy into his host, by supping in his house, and though he took from thence some arms and horses, he nobly refused a sum of money proffered to him by Sir Thomas Burnet. * On the following day

"The Lieutennand (Montrose) himself, with his gaird, soupit with

Montrose encamped within two miles of Aberdeen, and next morning, being Friday the 13th, he sent a drummer with a flag of truce, and a commissioner with a letter to the magistrates, in which he required them to allow peaceable entry to the Royal Lieutenant, that he might issue his Majesty's proclamations, and refresh his troops for a day. Assurance was added that no injury would be done to the town, or its inhabitants, unless he was compelled to force an entrance, in which case Montrose warned them to remove all aged men, women, and children to places of safety, and take the peril on themselves." The magistrates," adds Spalding, " caused the commissioner and drummer drink hardly.” The result will be best told in the following extract from the town-council records, yet extant in Aberdeen.

"It is to be remembered, but never without regret, the great and heavy prejudice and loss which this burgh did sustain by the cruel and bloody fight, and conflict which was fought betwixt the Crabstane and the Justice Mylne's, upon the thirteenth day of September instant, betwixt eleven hours, before noon, and one afternoon, occasioned by the approaching of James Marquis of Montrose, with three regiments of Irishes, and [blank] of Atholmen, Stratherne men, and some others their adherents. The said James Marquis of Montrose having required the town to be delivered up to him, and having sent a Commissioner with a drummer for that ef

the Laird of Leyis efter he had summoned him to render his house. He did no harm, but took some arms and horse, and promise of some men. Leyis offered him 5000 merkis of money, which he nobly refused.” Spalding. This must have happened in a castle, about eight miles from Aberdeen, belonging to Sir Thomas Burnet of Leys. I take the opportunity of correcting a mistake in the previous volume, p. 295, where" Lord Muchalls" is explained as meaning Burnet of Leys. This, however, was a title of the Lord Fraser's, and that nobleman it was, and not Sir Thomas Burnet, who urged Montrose to burn Aberdeen in 1639.