XV. A.D. 1645-1649…

XV. A.D. 1645-1649

BRITISH SOVEREIGN:--Charles I., 1625-1649.

Huntly refuses to join Montrose--Aboyne joins and shortly deserts him--Executions by the Covenanters--Montrose has an interview with Huntly--Defeat of the Campbells at Callander--Meeting of the covenanting Parliament--Trials and Executions--Movements of Montrose and Huntly--General Middleton’s movements--The King escapes to the Scots army--Orders Montrose to disband his army--Montrose corresponds with the King--Interview with Middleton--Disbands his army--Embarks for the Continent--The Scotch and the King--Proceedings of General Leslie--Defeats Sir Alexander Macdonald--Surrender of Dunaverty Castle--Leslie in the Western Isles--Apprehension of Huntly--Risings in Scotland in behalf of the King--Movements of royalists under Hamilton--Rising in the West--Enter Edinburgh--Capture of Stirling and flight of Argyle--Cromwell arrives in Edinburgh--Trial and Execution of the King--Also of Hamilton and Huntly.

Montrose appeared among his Athole friends at a time the most unfavourable for obtaining their aid. Many of them were engaged in the occupation of the harvest, securing, for the support of themselves and their families, the scanty and precarious crops which were then upon the ground, and which, if neglected to be cut down in due time, might be destroyed by unfavourable weather. It was, besides, little more than a month since they had left him at Bothwell, for the purpose partly of repairing the damages which had been committed by Argyle’s men upon their houses, and the interval which had since elapsed had not been sufficient for accomplishing their object. Yet, notwithstanding these drawbacks, Montrose succeeded in inducing about 400 of the men of Athole to join him immediately, and to follow him to the north in quest of additional reinforcements; and he obtained a promise that, on his return, the whole of the Athole Highlanders would join him in a body.

While in Athole, Montrose received promises both from Lord Aboyne and Sir Alexander Macdonald, that they would speedily join him with considerable reinforcements; but, growing impatient at Aboyne’s delay, he resolved to proceed north himself to ascertain in person the cause of it, and to urge that nobleman to fulfil his promise. Crossing, therefore, the Grampians, he marched with great haste through Aberdeenshire, and had an interview with Lord Aboyne, whom he expected to rouse from his apathy. Montrose, however, soon perceived, that whatever Lord Aboyne’s own intentions were, he was thwarted by his father, the Marquis of Huntly, who, on hearing of Montrose’s success at Kilsyth, had left his retreat in Strathnaver, where he had passed a year and a half in absolute supineness, and returned to his own country. The marquis appears to have been filled with envy towards Montrose, and although, being a royalist in his heart, he did not care to expose the crown and monarchy to danger to gratify his spleen and vanity, yet he could not endure to see a man whom he looked upon as his inferior in rank, monopolize the whole power and authority in Scotland.

“He was,” says Bishop Wishart, “a man equally unfortunate and inconsiderate; and, however much he would seem, or was really attached to the king, yet he often betrayed that interest through a pride and unaccountable envy he had conceived against Montrose, whose glory and renown he endeavoured rather to extenuate than make the object of his emulation. He durst not venture to depreciate Montrose’s actions before his own people, who had been eye-witnesses of them, and were well acquainted with his abilities, lest it might be construed into a sign of disaffection to the king himself. However, he gave out that he would take the charge of commanding them himself during the remainder of the war; and in that view he headed all his own vassals, and advised his neighbours, not without threats if they acted otherwise, to enlist under no other authority than his own. They remonstrated against being asked to disobey the commands of Montrose, who was appointed by the king his deputy-governor and captain-general of all the forces within the kingdom. Huntly replied, that he himself should in no way be wanting in his duty to the king; but, in the meantime, it tended no less to their honour than his own that it should appear to the king and the whole kingdom how much they contributed to the maintenance of the war; and this, he said, could never be done, unless they composed a separate army by themselves. He spoke in very magnificent terms of his own power, and endeavoured as much as possible to extenuate that of Montrose. He extolled immoderately the glory and achievements of his ancestors, the Gordons; a race, worthy indeed of all due commendation, whose power had for many ages been formidable, and an overmatch for their neighbours; and was so even at this day. It was therefore, he said, extremely unjust to ascribe unto another, meaning Montrose, the glory and renown acquired by their courage, and at the expense of their blood. But, for the future, he would take care that neither the king should be disappointed of the help of the Gordons, nor should they be robbed of the praise due to their merit.”

Notwithstanding Huntly’s reasoning, some of his clan perceived the great danger to which the king’s affairs would be exposed by such conduct, and they did everything in their power to induce him to alter his resolution. It was, however, in vain that they represented to him the danger and impropriety of dividing the friends of the king at such a crisis, when union and harmony were so essentially necessary for accomplishing the objects they had in view, and when, by allowing petty jealousies to interfere and distract their councils, they might ruin the royal cause in Scotland. Huntly lent a deaf ear to all their entreaties, and instead of adopting the advice of his friends to support Montrose, by ordering his vassals to join him, he opposed him almost in everything he proposed by underhand means, although affecting a seeming compliance with his wishes. Seeing all their efforts fruitless, those friends who had advised Huntly to join Montrose declared that they would range themselves under Montrose’s banner, as the king’s lieutenant, regardless of consequences, and they kept their word.

The author of the history of the family of Gordon, and Gordon of Ruthven, author of Britane’s Distemper, endeavour to defend Huntly from these charges made against him by Wishart. They assert that Wishart has given only one side of the case, and that Huntly acted as he did from a genuine desire to serve the highest interests of the king, and through no envy towards Montrose. They lament that any misunderstanding should ever have arisen between these two eminent royalists, as it undoubtedly tended materially to prejudice the cause of the king. No doubt Huntly sincerely wished to serve the royal cause: but we are afraid that jealousy towards Montrose helped considerably to obscure his mental vision and prejudice his judgment.[336]

Among other reasons which induced Montrose to take the speedy step he did of marching north himself, was a report which had reached him that the king was to send from England a large body of horse to support him, and he was most anxious to collect such forces as he could to enable him to be in a condition to advance to the south, and unite with this body. In fact, the king had given orders to Lord Digby and Sir Marmaduke Langdale to proceed to Scotland with a body of 1,500 horse; but they were, unfortunately, completely defeated, even before Montrose’s departure to the north, by Colonel Copley at Sherburn, with the loss of all their baggage. Digby and Langdale, accompanied by the Earls of Carnwath and Nithsdale, fled to Skipton, and afterwards to Dumfries, whence they took ship to the Isle of Man.

Notwithstanding the evasions of the Marquis of Huntly, Montrose succeeded in inducing the Earl of Aboyne to join him at Drumminor, the seat of Lord Forbes, with a force of 1,500 foot and 300 horse, all of whom appeared to be actuated by the best spirit. To remove every unfavourable impression from the mind of Montrose, Aboyne assured him with great frankness, that he and his men were ready to follow him wherever he should be pleased to lead them; that they would obey his orders; and that his brother, Lord Lewis, would also speedily join him, as he soon did, with an additional force.

On receiving this reinforcement, Montrose turned his face to the south, and marched towards Mar, where he was to be joined by forces which Lord Erskine had raised there; but he had not proceeded far, when Lord Lewis Gordon, under some pretence or other, returned home with a considerable party of horse, promising to return to the army the following day. The desertion of Lord Lewis had a most pernicious influence upon the remainder of Aboyne’s men, who, before the army had reached Alford, were greatly diminished by desertion. As the remainder showed great unwillingness to march forward, and as the desertions continued, Aboyne requested leave of absence, alleging as his reason, that his father had expressly commanded him to return to defend his possessions against a party of the enemy who were in Lower Mar, and who were threatening an attack. The demand of Aboyne excited the astonishment of Montrose, who remonstrated with him, and gave many reasons to induce him to remain. He showed that Aboyne’s apprehensions of danger were groundless, as, with the exception of a few troops of the enemy’s horse quartered in Aberdeen, there were no other forces in the north which could disturb his father’s possessions, and that these horse were too weak to attempt any thing--that by marching south, the seat of war would be transferred from the north country, and that, in this way, the Marquis of Huntly would be relieved altogether of the presence of the enemy--that it would be impossible to join the royalist forces, which were on their way from England, without crossing the Forth, and that it was only by adopting the latter step that they could ever expect to rescue their brave friends from the fangs of the Covenanters, and save their lives.

Aboyne did not attempt to answer these reasons, which were urged with Montrose’s peculiar energy, but he requested him to send some persons who had influence with his father to acquaint him with them. Donald, Lord Reay, at whose house Huntly had lived during his exile in Strathnaver, and Alexander Irvine, younger of Drum, Huntly’s son-in-law, both of whom had been indebted to Montrose for their liberty, were accordingly sent by him to the Marquis of Huntly, as the most likely persons he could select to induce Huntly to allow Aboyne to remain with the army. But all their arguments and entreaties were to no purpose. Lord Reay was so heartily ashamed at the failure of his mission, that he declined to return to Montrose; and Irvine, who brought some evasive letters from Huntly, frankly declared to Montrose, that he could obtain no satisfactory explanation from his father-in-law of his real intentions, farther, than that he remained fixed in his resolution that Aboyne should return home immediately. After declaring that he parted from Montrose with reluctance, and promising to join him within a fortnight with a force even larger than that which he had lately brought, Aboyne left the army and returned to his father.

Montrose then continued his march through Braemar and Glenshee into Athole, where he obtained an accession of force. He next proceeded to Strathearn, where he was met by two messengers,--Captain Thomas Ogilvie, younger of Pourie, and Captain Robert Nisbet,--who arrived by different routes, with orders from the king, desiring Montrose to join Lord George Digby, near the English border, as soon as possible. On receiving these commands, Montrose immediately sent the messengers north to the Marquis of Huntly, to acquaint him with the king’s wishes, in the expectation that the use of his majesty’s name would at once induce him to send Aboyne south with reinforcements.

While Montrose lay in Strathearn waiting for reinforcements, intelligence was brought to him that the Covenanters were about to imbrue their hands in the blood of his friends who had been taken prisoners after the battle of Philiphaugh. The committee of Estates, which had accompanied the covenanting army to Glasgow, had now determined upon this bold and illegal step, for which hitherto, with the recent exceptions of O’Kean and Laughlane, no example had been set by either of the belligerent parties in Scotland since the commencement of the war. They had wisely abstained from staining the scaffolds with blood, but from different motives. Montrose, in general, refrained from inflicting capital punishment, and, as we have seen, often released his prisoners on parole. The heads of the Covenanters had been deterred by fear alone from carrying their bloody purposes into execution; but considering that they had now nothing to fear, they soon appeared in their true colours.

Besides the committee of the Estates, a committee of the kirk held sittings in Glasgow at the same time, which sittings were afterwards transferred to Perth, where, after deposing some ministers who were considered disaffected to the Covenant, because they had not “mourned” for Montrose’s victory at Kilsyth, they “concerned” themselves, as Guthry observes, about “the disposition of men’s heads.” Accordingly, thinking the committee of Estates remiss in condemning and executing the prisoners, they appointed Mr. William Bennet, who acted as Moderator in the absence of Mr. Robert Douglas, and two others of their number, to wait upon the committee of Estates, and remonstrate with them for their supineness. Guthry relates, that the deputation reported on their return, in his own hearing, that some of the lords of the committee slighted the desire of the committee of the kirk, and that they were likely to have obtained nothing had not the Earl of Tulliebardine made a seasonable speech to the effect, “that because he had a brother among those men, it might be that their lordships so valued his concurrence with them in the good cause, that for respect of him they were the more loth to resolve upon the question. But that, as for himself, since that young man had joined with that wicked crew, he did not esteem him his brother, and therefore declared that he would take it for no favour if upon that account any indulgence was granted him.”[337],[338] This fratricidal speech made those members of the committee, who had disliked the shedding of blood, hang down their heads, according to Bennet’s report, and the committee, thereupon, resolved that 10 of the prisoners should be executed, viz., the Earl of Hartfell, Lord Ogilvie, Sir Robert Spottiswood, the Honourable William Murray, brother to the Earl of Tulliebardine, Alexander Ogilvie of Inverquharity, Sir William Rollock, Sir Philip Nisbet, Colonel Nathaniel Gordon, Adjutant Stewart, and Captain Andrew Guthry.

Apprehensive, however, that Montrose might still be in a condition to avenge the blood of his friends, the committee did not venture to carry their sentence into immediate execution upon any of them; but hearing of the division between Montrose and Huntly, and the desertion of the Gordons, they thought they might now safely venture to immolate a few victims at the shrine of the Covenant. Accordingly three of the prisoners were ordered for execution, viz., Sir William Rollock, Sir Philip Nisbet, chief of that name, and Alexander Ogilvie, younger of Inverquharity, a youth not quite 18 years of age, who had already given proofs of ability. This excellent young man was sacrificed to gratify the malignant animosity of Argyle at the Ogilvies. Sir William was executed at the market cross of Glasgow, on the 28th of October, and Sir Philip and Ogilvie suffered at the same place on the following day. Wishart relates a circumstance connected with Sir William Rollock’s condemnation, which exhibits a singular instance of the ferocity and fanaticism of the times. He says, that the chief crime laid to Sir William’s charge was, that he had not perpetrated a deed of the most villanous and atrocious nature. Having been sent by Montrose, after the battle of Aberdeen, with some despatches to the king, he was apprehended by the enemy, and would undoubtedly have been immediately executed, but for Argyle, who used all his endeavours to engage him to assassinate Montrose, and who at length, by threatening him with immediate death, and promising him, in case of compliance, very high rewards, prevailed on him to undertake that barbarous office, for which, however, he secretly entertained the utmost abhorrence. Having thereby obtained his life and liberty, he returned straight to Montrose and disclosed the whole matter to him, entreating him, at the same time, to look more carefully to his own safety; as it could not be supposed that he, Sir William, was the only person who had been practised upon in this shameful manner or that others would equally detest the deed, but that some persons would undoubtedly be found who, allured with the bait, would use their utmost industry and pains to obtain the promised reward.[339] Another instance of fanaticism is related by Guthry, of David Dickson the “bloody preacher,” who, on witnessing the execution of Nisbet and Ogilvie, was heard to utter the barbarous expression--“The work goes bonnyly on,” an expression which afterwards became proverbial.

About the time this tragedy was performing, Montrose crossed the Forth and entered Lennox with a force of 300 horse and 1,200 foot, and took up his quarters on the lands of Sir John Buchanan, an ardent Covenanter, whence he sent out his cavalry every day, who hovered about Glasgow, and plundered the neighbouring country without opposition, although the Covenanters had a force of about 3,000 cavalry in Glasgow and the neighbourhood. When Montrose heard of the execution of his friends, his heart was filled with the most poignant grief, and he longed for a suitable opportunity to avenge their deaths, but he was too weak to venture upon an immediate attack. He sent repeated messengers from his present head-quarters to Sir Alexander Macdonald to join him; but after hovering several weeks about Glasgow, like a hawk ready to pounce upon its quarry, he had the mortification to find, that Macdonald had no intention of ever again returning to him, and that his expectations of being joined by the Earl of Aboyne were to be equally disappointed.

Under these untoward circumstances, therefore, and as the winter, which turned out unusually severe, was far advanced, Montrose resolved to retire into the north where he could remain undisturbed. With this view he began his march from the Lennox on the 19th of November, and crossing the hills of Monteith, which were covered with snow to a considerable depth, he entered Strathearn, and crossing the Tay, marched into Athole. Here Montrose received the melancholy news of the death of his brother-in-law, Archibald Lord Napier of Merchiston, whom he had left behind him in Athole on account of indisposition; a man, says Bishop Wishart, “not less noble in his personal accomplishments than in his birth and descent; a man of the greatest uprightness and integrity, and of a most happy genius, being, as to his skill in the sciences, equal to his father and grandfather, who were famous all the world over for their knowledge in philosophy and mathematics, and in the doctrine of civil prudence far beyond them.” Montrose had been accustomed from his earliest years to look up to this gifted nobleman with feelings of reverential and filial awe, nor were these feelings impaired as he advanced in life. He was interred in the Kirk of Blair with becoming solemnity by Montrose.

When Montrose arrived in Athole, he there found Captain Ogilvie and Captain Nisbet, who had just returned from the north to give an account of their embassy to the Marquis of Huntly. They reported that they found him quite inflexible in his determination not to send assistance to Montrose, that he had spoken disdainfully to them, and even questioned the authenticity of the message which they brought from the king. It was truly grievous for Montrose to see the cause for which he had fought so long, and for which he had encountered so many personal risks, thus endangered by the apparently wilful and fatal obstinacy of an individual who had abandoned his country and his friends in the most trying circumstances, and skulked in Strathnaver, without showing any inclination to support the tottering throne of his sovereign. But Montrose did not yet despair of bringing the marquis to a due sense of his duty; and as he considered that it was more expedient, in the present conjuncture, to endeavour to soothe the wounded pride of the marquis than to use the language of menace, he sent Sir John Dalziel to Huntly with a message of peace and reconciliation; intending, if necessary, as soon as circumstances permitted, to follow him, and enforce by his personal presence, at a friendly conference, which Sir John was requested to ask from the marquis, the absolute necessity of such a reconciliation.

As Dalziel was quite unsuccessful in his mission, and could not prevail upon Huntly to agree to a conference with Montrose, the latter hastened to put into effect his intention of paying a personal visit to Huntly, “that nothing might be unattempted to bring him to a right way of thinking,” and “by heaping favours and benefits upon him, force him even against his will, to a reconciliation, and to co-operate with him in promoting the king’s affairs.”[340] Montrose accordingly left Athole with his army in the month of December, and marching into Angus, crossed the Grampians, then covered with frost and snow, by rapid marches, and arrived in Strathbogie, before Huntly was aware of his movements. To avoid Montrose, Huntly immediately shut himself up in his castle of Bog of Gicht, on the Spey, but Montrose having left his head-quarters with a troop of horse, unexpectedly surprised him very early in the morning before he had time to secrete himself. Instead of reproaching Huntly with his past conduct, Montrose spoke to him in the most affable manner, and apparently succeeded in removing his dissatisfaction so far, that a plan for conducting the future operations of the army was agreed upon between them. The reduction of the garrison of Inverness, which, though strong and well fortified, was but scantily stored with provisions, and an attempt to induce the Earl of Seaforth to join them, were the leading parts of this plan. Accordingly, while Montrose was to march through Strathspey, on his way to Inverness, it was agreed that Huntly should also advance upon it by a different road along the sea-coast of Morayshire, and thereby hem in the garrison on both sides.

In prosecution of this design, Montrose proceeded through Strathspey, and sat down before Inverness, waiting for the arrival of Huntly. When marching through Strathspey, Montrose received intelligence that Athole was threatened with a visit from the Campbells--a circumstance which induced him to despatch Graham of Inchbrakie and John Drummond, younger of Balloch, to that country, for the purpose of embodying the Athole Highlanders, who had remained at home, in defence of their country. The inhabitants of Argyle, on hearing of Sir Alexander Macdonald’s arrival in their country, after the battle of Kilsyth, had fled to avoid his vengeance, and concealed themselves in caverns or in the clefts of the rocks; but being compelled by the calls of hunger to abandon their retreats, they had been collected together by Campbell of Ardkinlass to the number of about 1,200, and had attacked the Macgregors and Macnabs for favouring Montrose. Being joined by the Stuarts of Balquidder, the Menzieses, and other partisans of Argyle, to the number of about 300, they meditated an invasion of Athole, and had advanced as far as Strathample, with the intention of carrying their design into execution, when intelligence was brought to Inchbrakie of their approach. Inchbrakie and Balloch had by this time collected a body of 700 able-bodied men, and, with this force, they immediately proceeded to meet the Campbells. These had laid siege to Castle Ample; but, on being apprised of the advance of the Athole-men, they retired to Monteith, whither they were hotly pursued by the Athole-men, who overtook them at Callander, near the village of Monteith. After crossing the river Teith, they halted and prepared for battle, having previously stationed a large party of musketeers to guard the ford.

Having ascertained the strength and position of the Campbells, Inchbrakie ordered 100 of his men to advance to the ford, as if with the intention of crossing it, in order to draw the attention of the Campbells to this single point, while, with the remainder of his men, he hastened to cross the river by another ford, higher up, and nearer the village. This movement was immediately perceived by the Argyle-men, who, alarmed at such a bold step, and probably thinking that the Athole-men were more numerous than they really were, abandoned their position, and fled with precipitation towards Stirling. As soon as the Athole party, stationed at the lower ford, saw the opposite bank deserted, they immediately crossed the river and attacked the rear of the retiring Campbells. They were soon joined in the pursuit by the party which had crossed the higher ford; but, as the Athole-men had performed a tedious march of ten miles that morning, they were unable to continue the pursuit far. About 80 of the Campbells were killed in the pursuit. They loitered about Stirling for some time in a very pitiful state, till visited by their chief, on his way to Ireland, who, not knowing how to dispose of them, led them into Renfrewshire, under the impression that as the inhabitants of that district were friendly to the Covenant, they would be well received; but the people of Renfrewshire, instead of showing sympathy for these unfortunate wanderers, threatened to take arms and cut them down, unless they departed immediately. The marquis, thereupon, sent them into Lennox, and quartered them upon the lands of Lord Napier and other “malignants,” as the royalists were called.[341]

The support of General Leslie’s army being heavily felt by the people, complaints were made to the Committee of Estates for retaining such a large body of men in Scotland, without any necessity, and whose habits and mode of living were so different from those of the inhabitants of North Britain. The Committee sent Leslie back to England, retaining only a small brigade under General Middleton, to watch the motions of Montrose.

The Covenanters, emboldened by recent events, had summoned a parliament to meet at St. Andrews, which accordingly assembled on the 26th of November, 1645; and, that the ministers might not be behind their lay brethren in zeal for the blood of the “malignants,” the general assembly of the church also met at the same time and place. It is truly humiliating to find men, no doubt sincerely believing they were serving the cause of religion, demanding the lives of their countrymen as a sacrifice which they considered would be well-pleasing to God; yet, whilst every unprejudiced mind must condemn the fanaticism of the Covenanters, it must be remembered that the unconstitutional attempts of the king to force Episcopacy upon them--a system which they detested,--the severe losses which they had sustained from the arms of Montrose, and the dread of being subjected to the yoke of prelacy, and punished for their resistance, had aroused them to a state of frenzy, over which reason and religion could have little control.

As a preparative for the bloody scenes about to be enacted, Sir Archibald Johnston of Warriston, on the day the parliament met, addressed the house in a long harangue, in which he entreated them to “unity amongst themselves, to lay all private respects and interests aside, and to do justice on delinquents and malignants; showing that their dallying formerly had provoked God’s two great servants against them--the sword and plague of pestilence--which had ploughed up the land with deep furrows: he showed that the massacre of Kilsyth was never to be forgotten, and that God, who was the just Judge of the world, would not but judge righteously, and keep in remembrance that sea of innocent blood which lay before his throne, crying for vengeance on these bloodthirsty rebels, the butchers of so many innocent souls. He showed, likewise, that the times required a more narrow and sharp looking into than formerly, in respect that the house of parliament was become at this present like to Noah’s ark, which had in it both foul and clean creatures, and therefore he besought the Estates there now convened by God’s especial permission and appointment, before that they went about the constitution of that high court of parliament, that they would make a serious search and inquiry after such as were ears and eyes to the enemies of the commonwealth, and did sit there as if there was nothing to say to them; and, therefore, he humbly desired that the house might be adjourned till to-morrow at two o’clock in the afternoon, and that the several Estates might consider what corrupted members were amongst them, who had complied with the public enemy of the state, either by themselves or by their agents or friends.”[342]

On the 4th of December, a petition was presented to the parliament from the prisoners confined in the castle of St. Andrews, praying to be tried either by their peers, the justice-general, or before the whole parliament, and not by a committee, as proposed; and they very properly objected to Sir Archibald Johnston’s sitting as a judge, he having already prejudged their case; but the house, “in one voice,” most iniquitously rejected the petition, reserving, however, to the prisoners still to object to Sir Archibald before the committee, “if they had not any personal exception against his person.”[343]

As the ministers considered the parliament tardy in their proceedings against the royalists, the commissioners of the general assembly presented, on the 5th of December, a remonstrance, praying them “for justice upon delinquents and malignants who had shed the blood of their brethren,” and on the same day, four petitions and remonstrances to the same effect were presented to the parliament, from the provincial assemblies and from Fife, Dumfries, Merse, Teviotdale, and Galloway, by a body of about 200 persons. The parliament, says Balfour, by their president, answered, that they had taken their “modest petitions and seasonable remonstrances very kindly, and rendered them hearty thanks, and wished them to be confident that, with all alacrity and diligence, they would go about and proceed in answering the expectations of all their reasonable desires, as they might themselves perceive in their procedure hitherto; and, withal, he entreated them, in the name of the house, that they would be earnest with God to implore and beg his blessing to assist and encourage them to the performance of what they demanded.”[344]

Notwithstanding the entreaties of the ministers to proceed with the condemnation of the prisoners, the parliament postponed proceedings till the 17th of January, 1646; but, as a peace-offering, they ordered, in the mean time, some Irish prisoners, composed partly of those who had been taken at Philiphaugh, and who had escaped assassination, and partly of stragglers who had been picked up after that battle, and who were confined in various prisons throughout the kingdom, especially in those of Selkirk, Jedburgh, Glasgow, Dumbarton, and Perth, to be executed without trial, “conform to the treaty betwixt both kingdoms.”[345] A more illegal act it is scarcely possible to conceive, but in these times even the forms of justice were set aside.

The Committee of Estates, when sitting in Glasgow, had condemned the Earl of Hartfell and Lord Ogilvie to death, along with Sir William Rollock, Sir Philip Nisbet, and Alexander Ogilvie; but, for some reason or other, their execution was deferred. So that, with the exception of Adjutant Stuart, who escaped while under the charge of General Middleton, there remained only four persons of any note for condemnation, viz., Colonel Nathaniel Gordon, Sir Robert Spottiswood, the Honourable William Murray, and Captain Guthry. It appears from the parliamentary register of Sir James Balfour, that these four prisoners pleaded exemption from trial, or rather from condemnation, on the ground of “quarters;” but after three hours’ debate, on the 10th of January, the parliament overruled this defence; and the committee having, of course, found them all “guilty of high treason against the states of the kingdom,” they fixed the 16th of that month for taking into consideration the punishment to be inflicted upon them.

The first case taken up on the appointed day, was that of Colonel Nathaniel Gordon, who, after a debate of three hours’ duration, was sentenced to be beheaded at the cross of St. Andrews, on Tuesday, the 20th of January, at twelve o’clock, noon, and his lands and goods were declared forfeited to the public. The lord chancellor declined voting. Similar sentences were pronounced upon the Honourable William Murray and Captain Guthry, by a majority of votes, a few of the members having voted that they should be imprisoned during life. Mr. Murray’s brother, the Earl of Tulliebardine, absented himself. These three fell under an act passed the preceding year, declaring that all persons who, after having subscribed the Covenant, should withdraw from it, should be held as guilty of high treason. But the case of Sir Robert Spottiswood, who had not subscribed the Covenant, not falling within the scope of this ex-post-facto law, the committee had stated in a special report the grounds on which they found Sir Robert guilty of high treason, namely, 1st, that he had advised, docketed, signed, carried, and delivered to Montrose the commission appointing him “lieutenant-governor and captain-general” of all his majesty’s forces in Scotland; and 2dly, that he had been taken in arms against the country at Philiphaugh. After a lengthened debate, the parliament decided that both these charges were capital offences, and accordingly Sir Robert was condemned by a large majority to lose his head.[346]

It was the intention of the parliament to have ordered the Earl of Hartfell and Lord Ogilvie to be executed along with the other prisoners; but on the evening of the 19th of January Lord Ogilvie effected his escape in the following way. Pretending sickness he applied for, and obtained, though with considerable difficulty, liberty to his mother, wife, and sister, to visit and attend him in prison. On entering his chamber the sentinels retired out of respect to the ladies; and, as soon as the door was shut, his lordship jumped out of bed, and attired himself in his sister’s clothes, who, on undressing, took the place of her brother in bed, and put on his night-cap. After spending some time together to prevent suspicion, the two other ladies and his lordship, after opening the door ajar so as to be seen by the guards, pretended to take a most affectionate and painful leave of the unfortunate bed-ridden prisoner, and drawing the door after them, passed the sentinels without interruption. This happened about eight o’clock in the evening; and as horses had been prepared for his lordship and two companions who were waiting to escort him, he immediately mounted, and was out of all danger before next morning, when the deception was discovered. The escape of Lord Ogilvie highly incensed Argyle, who hated the Ogilvies, and who, it is said, longed for the death of his lordship. He could not conceal the chagrin he felt on the occasion, and even had the audacity to propose that the three ladies should be immediately punished; but the Hamiltons and Lord Lindsay, who, on account of their relationship to Lord Ogilvie, were suspected of being privy to his escape, protected them from his vengeance. The escape of Lord Ogilvie was a fortunate occurrence for the Earl of Hartfell, for whose life it is alleged the Hamiltons thirsted in their turn; and to disappoint whom Argyle insisted that the earl’s life should be spared, a concession which he obtained.[347]

Of the four prisoners, Colonel Nathaniel Gordon, “a man,” says Wishart, “of excellent endowments both of body and mind,” was the first that suffered. He had been long under the ban of the church for adultery; but on signing a paper, declaratory of his repentance, he was absolved from the sentence of excommunication. He died expressing great sorrow for the vices and follies of his youth; but vindicated himself for the part he had taken in the troubles of his country, professed the most unshaken loyalty to his king, and declared that if there were any thing in the instrument he had signed which might be construed as dishonourable to the king, or repugnant to his authority, he completely disowned it.

Colonel Gordon was followed to the scaffold by Sir Robert Spottiswood, a man of spotless integrity, and one of the most profound scholars of the age. He was the eldest son of Archbishop Spottiswood, and had, by his rare endowments and great merit, been noticed with distinction by King James and his successor Charles. James conferred on him the order of knighthood, and made him a privy councillor, and Charles promoted him to the high situation of lord president of the court of session; and, upon the desertion of the Earl of Lanark to the Covenanters, the king appointed him principal secretary of state for Scotland instead of that nobleman. This appointment drew down upon him the hatred of the leading Covenanters, but still there were some among them who continued to respect him on account of his worth and shining talents; and when the vote was taken in parliament whether he should suffer, the Earls of Eglintoun, Cassilis, Dunfermline, and Carnwath, voted that his life should be spared; and the lord chancellor and the Earl of Lanark, by leave of the house, declined voting. “Though many liked not his party, they liked his person, which made him many friends even among the Covenanters, insomuch, that after his sentence was read, some of the nobility spoke in his behalf, and entreated the house to consider the quality and parts of that excellent gentleman and most just judge, whom they had condemned, and begged earnestly his life might be spared. But an eminent knowledge and esteem, which, in other cases, might be a motive to save a criminal, was here only the cause of taking an innocent man’s life--so dangerous is it, in a corrupt age, to be eminently constant and virtuous. The gentlemen who spoke were told that the authority of the established government was not secure while Sir Robert’s life was spared. Whereupon the noblemen who presided at the meeting of the estates at Glasgow, and in the parliament at St. Andrews, openly declared, when they signed the respective sentences, that they did sign as preses, and in obedience to the command of the estates, but not as to their particular judgment.”[348]

After he had mounted the scaffold, still reeking with the blood of Colonel Gordon, Sir Robert surveyed the terrific scene around him with singular composure, which, added to his naturally grave and dignified appearance, filled the breasts of the spectators with a feeling of compassion. Sir Robert had intended to have addressed the people, and had prepared a written speech for the occasion; but on turning round to address the spectators, he was prevented from proceeding by the provost of St. Andrews, formerly a servant of Sir Robert’s father, who had been instigated to impose silence upon him by Robert Blair, one of those ministers who, to the scandal of religion, had dishonoured their profession by calling out for the blood of their countrymen. Blair’s motive in occasioning this interruption is said to have arisen from a dread he entertained that Sir Robert would expose the designs of the Covenanters, and impress the bystanders with an unfavourable opinion of their proceedings. Sir Robert bore the interruption with the most unruffled composure, and, as he saw no chance of succeeding, he threw the manuscript of his speech amongst the crowd, and applied himself to his private devotions. But here again he was annoyed by the officious impertinence of Blair, who rudely asked him whether he (Blair) and the people should pray for the salvation of his soul? To this question Sir Robert answered, that he indeed desired the prayers of the people; but knowing the bloodthirsty character of the man he was addressing, who had come to tease him in his last moments, he told him that he “would have no concern with his prayers, which he believed were impious, and an abomination unto God; adding, that of all the plagues with which the offended majesty of God had scourged the nation, this was certainly by far the greatest, greater than even the sword, fire, or pestilence; that for the sins of the people God had sent a lying spirit into the mouths of the prophets.”[349] This answer raised the fury of Blair, who assailed Sir Robert with the most acrimonious imputations, and reviled the memory of his father by the most infamous charges; but Sir Robert was too deeply absorbed in meditation to regard such obloquy. Having finished his devotions, this great and good man, after uttering these words, “Merciful Jesus! gather my soul unto thy saints and martyrs who have run before me in this race,” laid his neck upon the fatal block, and in an instant his head was severed from his body.

After Sir Robert Spottiswood’s execution, Captain Guthry, son of the ex-bishop of Moray, was next led to the scaffold. The fierce and unfeeling Blair, who had already officiously witnessed, with the most morbid complacency, the successive executions of Colonel Gordon and Sir Robert, not satisfied with reviling the latter gentleman in his last moments, and lacerating his feelings by heaping every sort of obloquy upon the memory of his father, vented the dregs of his impotent rage upon the unfortunate victim now before him; but Guthry bore all this man’s reproaches with becoming dignity, and declared that he considered it an honour to die in defence of the just cause of his sovereign. He met his death with the fortitude of a hero and the firmness of a Christian.

In consequence of an application to the parliament by the Earl of Tulliebardine, the execution of his brother, William Murray, was delayed till the 23d of January. The case of this unfortunate young man excited a strong feeling of regret among the Covenanters themselves, and some writers have not scrupled to blame the earl as the cause of his death, that he might succeed to his patrimony. Some countenance is afforded to this conjecture from the circumstance that the earl not only made no exertions to save his brother from condemnation, but that he even absented himself from parliament the day that his brother’s case came to be discussed, when, by his presence or his vote, he might have saved his brother’s life. Nor is this supposition, it is contended, in any shape weakened by the attempt he afterwards made to get off his brother; for he must have known that the parliament had gone too far to retract, and could not, without laying itself open to the charge of the grossest partiality, reprieve Mr. Murray, and allow their sentence to be carried into execution against the other prisoners. If true, however, that the earl delivered the speech imputed to him by Bennet, there can be no doubt of his being a participator in the death of his brother, but, it would be hard to condemn him on such questionable authority. To whatever cause it was owing, Mr. Murray was not, during his last moments, subjected to the annoyances of Blair, nor was he prevented from delivering the following speech to the persons assembled to witness his execution. He spoke in a loud tone of voice as follows: “I hope, my countrymen, you will reckon that the house of Tulliebardine, and the whole family of Murray, have this day acquired a new and no small addition of honour; that a young man, descended of that ancient race, has, though innocent, and in the flower of his age, with the greatest readiness and cheerfulness, delivered up his life for his king, the father of his country, and the most munificent patron and benefactor of that family from which he is sprung. Let not my honoured mother, my dearest sisters, my kindred or my friends, lament the shortness of my life, seeing that it is abundantly recompensed by the honour of my death. Pray for my soul, and God be with you.”[350]

Many prisoners, but of less note, still remained to be disposed of; but the parliament, either averse to shed more blood, or from other considerations, took no steps against them. The committee of the kirk, however, being actuated by other motives, pressed the parliament to dispose of some more of the “malignants;” but the bloody zeal of these clerical enthusiasts was checked by the better sense of the parliament; and in order to get rid of their importunities for blood, a suggestion was made to them by the leading men in parliament to lay before them an “overture,” proposing some more lenient mode of punishment. The “godly” brotherhood soon met, but a considerable difference of opinion prevailing as to the nature of the punishment to be submitted to parliament in the proposed overture, the moderator asked David Dickson what he thought best to be done with the prisoners, who answered “in his homely way of speaking, ‘shame them and herry (plunder) them.’” This proposal, being adopted, was made the subject of an overture, which was accordingly presented to parliament; and to meet the views of the ministers, a remit was made to a large committee, which was appointed to meet at Linlithgow, on the 25th of February, to fix the amount of the fines to be imposed upon the different delinquents.

While the proceedings before detailed were going on at St. Andrews, Montrose was ineffectually endeavouring to reduce the garrison of Inverness, the acquisition of which would have been of some importance to him. Had the Marquis of Huntly kept his promise, and joined Montrose, its capture might have been effected; but that nobleman never made his appearance, and as Inverness was thus left open on the side which it was intended he should block up, the enemy were enabled to supply themselves with provisions and warlike stores, of which they stood in great need. Huntly, however, afterwards crossed the Spey, and entered Moray with a considerable force; but instead of joining Montrose, who repeatedly sent for him, he wasted his time in fruitless enterprises, besieging and taking a few castles of no importance.

As Huntly probably did not think that the capture of a few obscure castles was sufficient to establish his pretensions as Montrose’s rival, he resolved to seize Aberdeen, and had advanced on his way as far as Kintore, where he was met by Ludovick Lindsay, Earl of Crawford, who had retired from the Mearns, where he had been stationed with Montrose’s horse, on hearing of the approach of the parliamentary army under the command of General Middleton towards Aberdeen. This intelligence was quite sufficient to induce the marquis to desist from his enterprise. Lindsay then marched into Buchan, and burnt the town of Fraserburgh. He, thereafter, went to Banff, but was compelled to retire hastily into Moray with some loss in February 1646, by a division of Middleton’s army under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Montgomery and Major David Barclay.[351]

About this time intelligence was brought to Montrose that General Middleton had arrived at Aberdeen with a force of 600 horse and 800 foot. He now renewed his entreaties to Huntly to join him immediately, that they might either reduce Inverness or march jointly upon Aberdeen and attack Middleton; Huntly, however, refused to accede to Montrose’s request. This refusal exasperated Montrose to such a degree that he resolved to have recourse to force to compel compliance, as he could no longer endure to see the authority of the sovereign, whose deputy he was, thus trampled upon and despised. As he had already brought over to his side the Earl of Seaforth, who had induced the heads of some of the principal clans to form a confederation for obtaining a national peace, he was fully in a condition to have reduced Huntly to obedience. Montrose having got a new commission, sent a copy of it to Huntly, and, as governor and general of the royal forces, charged him to come without delay, with his whole force to Inverness, and there receive further orders. Huntly appears to have made preparations for complying with this order, but Middleton’s sudden advance on Inverness induced him to alter his purpose.[352]

Wishart relates rather an incredible story respecting an alleged piece of treachery on the part of Lord Lewis Gordon on this occasion. He states that, as Montrose had no reliance on Huntly, and as he began now to think it high time to look more carefully to his own safety, lest Huntly’s malice might at last carry him the length even to betray him, he sent three troops of horse to the fords of the Spey to watch the motions of the enemy, with orders, if they approached, to send him immediate intimation of their movements. This body, it is said, occupied the most convenient stations, and watched with very great diligence for some time, till Lord Lewis, who then kept the castle of Rothes, having contrived his scheme of villany, assured the officers who commanded the horse, that the enemy was very far distant, and had no intention to pass the river; he, therefore, advised them to cease watching, and having invited them to the castle where they were sumptuously entertained by him, plied with wine and spirits, and detained till such time as Lord Middleton had crossed the Spey with a large army of horse and foot, and penetrated far into Moray, he dismissed his guests with these jeering remarks--“Go, return to your general Montrose, who will now have better work than he had at Selkirk.” Gordon of Ruthven, however, contradicts this very improbable story, and attributes Middleton’s unmolested crossing of the Spey to the negligence of the troops who guarded the passage; asserting that Lord Lewis knew nothing of it till Mortimer, one of the captains in command of the troops, appeared at Rothes to tell him that Middleton was on the other side of the Spey on his way to Inverness. Moreover such a statement carries its own condemnation upon the face of it, for even supposing that Montrose’s officers had acted the stupid part imputed to them, they would certainly not have forgotten their duty so far as to order their men to abandon their posts.

It was in the month of May, 1646, that General Middleton left Aberdeen at the head of his army, on his way to Inverness. He left behind him in Aberdeen a regiment of horse, and another of foot, for the protection of the town, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Montgomery. Middleton made a rapid march, and arrived in the neighbourhood of Inverness on the 9th of May, driving before him the few troops of horse which Montrose had stationed on the Spey to watch his motions. On being warned of Middleton’s approach, Montrose drew his troops together, and took up a position at some distance from the town; but having ascertained that Middleton was strong in cavalry, he hastily crossed the river Ness. Middleton, thereupon, despatched two regiments of cavalry after him, who attacked his rear, cut off some of his men, and captured two pieces of cannon and part of his baggage. Montrose continued his retreat by Beauly into Ross-shire, whither he was pursued by Middleton, who, however, suffered some loss in the pursuit. As Montrose’s forces were far inferior, in point of numbers, to those of Middleton, he avoided coming to an engagement, and as Seaforth’s men, who had joined Montrose at Inverness, under their chief, began to desert him in great numbers, and as he could not depend on the population by which he was surrounded, Montrose turned to the right, and passing by Lochness, marched through Strathglass and Stratherrick to the banks of the Spey. Middleton did not follow Montrose, but went and laid siege to the castle of the Earl of Seaforth in the canonry of Ross, which he took after a siege of four days. He behaved towards the Countess of Seaforth, who was within the castle, with great politeness, and restored it to her after taking away the ammunition which it contained.

The absence of Middleton from Aberdeen afforded Huntly an opportunity of accomplishing the design which he formerly entertained, till prevented by the approach of Middleton from the south, of taking Aberdeen, and accordingly he ordered his men to march from Deeside to Inverury, where he appointed a general rendezvous to be held on the 10th of May. Colonel Montgomery being aware of his motions, beat up his quarters the same night at Kintore with a party of horse, and killed some of his men. But Montgomery was repulsed by Lord Lewis Gordon, with some loss, and forced to retire to Aberdeen. The marquis appeared at the gates of Aberdeen at 12 o’clock on the following day, with a force of 1,500 Highland foot and 600 horse, and stormed it in three different places. The garrison defended themselves with courage, and twice repulsed the assailants, in which contest a part of the town was set on fire; but a fresh reinforcement having entered the town, under Lord Aboyne, the attack was renewed, and Montgomery and his horse were forced to retire down to the edge of the river Dee, which they crossed by swimming. The covenanting foot, after taking refuge in the tolbooth and in the houses of the Earl Marischal and Menzies of Pitfoddles, craved quarter and surrendered at discretion. Although, the city of Aberdeen had done nothing to incur Huntly’s displeasure, he allowed his Highlanders to pillage it. About twenty officers were taken prisoners, among whom were Colonels Hurry, Barclay, and David Leighton; besides Sir William Forbes of Craigievar, and other country gentlemen, particularly of the name of Forbes; but they were all released next day on their parole of honour not to serve against the king in future. There were killed on the side of the Covenanters, Colonel William Forbes, Captain Lockhart, son of Sir James Lockhart of Lee, and three captains of foot, besides a number of privates; but Huntly lost only about twenty men.

As Huntly’s force was considerably reduced by the return of the Highlanders, who had accompanied him, to their own houses, with the booty which they had collected in Aberdeen, and, as he was apprehensive of the immediate return of Middleton from the north, he remained but a short time in Aberdeen. Marching up the north bank of the Dee, he encamped in Cromar; but the sudden appearance of Middleton, who, on hearing of Huntly’s advance on Aberdeen, had retraced his steps and re-crossed the Spey, made him retire into Mar. Middleton, after pursuing him for a short distance, returned to Aberdeen, which he found had suffered severely from Huntly’s visit.

After an ineffectual attempt by Montrose to obtain an interview with Huntly at the bog of Gight, whither he had gone after Middleton’s return to Aberdeen, Montrose resolved to make a tour through the Highlands, in the hope that he would be able, by his personal presence, and by promising suitable rewards, to induce the clans to rise in defence of their sovereign; but with the determination, in case of refusal, to enforce obedience to his commands. This resolution was not taken by Montrose, without the concurrence of some of his best friends, who promised to aid him by every means in their power, in carrying it into effect. In pursuance of his design, Montrose was just about setting out on his proposed journey, when, on the last day of May, a messenger arrived with a letter from the king, requesting him to disband his forces, and to retire, himself, to France, where he would receive “further directions.” After the disastrous battle of Naseby, which was fought on the 14th of June, 1644, between the English royalists and the parliamentary forces, the campaign in England, on the part of the king, “presented little more than the last and feeble struggles of an expiring party.”[353] The king had been enabled, in consequence of the recall of the horse, which had reached Nottingham, on their way to Hereford, under General David Leslie, after the battle of Kilsyth, to drive the parliamentary infantry back from the siege of Hereford; but the surrender of Bristol to the forces of the parliament, on the 10th of September, and the defeat of the royalists at Chester, on the 23d of the same month, completed the ruin of the king’s affairs. Having shut himself up in Oxford, for the last time, in November following, Charles, after the discovery of the secret treaty with the Catholics of Ireland, which had been entered into by the Earl of Glamorgan, endeavoured to negotiate with the English parliament in the expectation that if he could gain either the presbyterians or independents over to his side, by fair promises, he would be enabled to get the upper hand of both.[354] That negotiation, however, not succeeding, another was set on foot, through the medium of Montrevil, the French envoy, with the Scots army before Newark, the leaders of which offered an asylum to the king on certain conditions. At length Charles, undetermined as to the course he should pursue, on hearing of the approach of the parliamentary army, under Fairfax, left Oxford at midnight, on the 27th of April, 1646, in the disguise of a servant, accompanied by Mr. Ashburnham and Dr. Hudson, a clergyman, and, after traversing the neighbouring country, arrived at Southwell on the 5th of May, where he was introduced by Montrevil to the Earl of Leven, the commander of the Scots army, and the officers of his staff. The arrival of the king seemed to surprise the officers very much, although it is generally supposed that they had been made previously aware of his intentions by Hudson, who had preceded him, and they treated him with becoming respect, the commander tendering his bare sword upon his knee;[355] but when Charles, who had retained Leven’s sword, indicated his intention to take the command of the army, by giving orders to the guard, that crafty veteran unhesitatingly thus addressed him:--“I am the older soldier, Sire, your majesty had better leave that office to me.”[356] The king was, in fact, now a prisoner. As soon as the intelligence reached the capital, that the king had retired to the Scots camp, the two parliamentary factions united in accusing the Scots of perfidy, and sent a body of 5,000 horse to watch their motions; but the Scots being desirous to avoid hostilities, raised their camp before Newark, and hastily retired to Newcastle, carrying the king along with them.

On arriving at Newcastle, the king was waited upon by the Earls of Lanark and Callander, and Lord Balmerino, who paid their respects to him. As Callander was understood to be favourably inclined to the king, Lanark and Balmerino were desirous to get rid of him, and accordingly they prevailed upon his majesty to send Callander back to Edinburgh with a letter, which they had induced his majesty to write to the Committee of Estates, expressive of his desire to comply with the wishes of the Scots parliament, and containing instructions to them to order Montrose, Huntly, and Sir Alexander Macdonald to disband their forces. And it was also at the desire of these two noblemen that the king wrote the letter to Montrose already referred to.

After Montrose had read this letter he was filled with deep amazement and concern. All those visionary schemes for accomplishing the great object of his ambition, which a few minutes before had floated in his vivid imagination, were now dispelled. He was now placed in one of the most painful and difficult situations it is possible to conceive. He had no doubt that the letter had been extorted from the king, yet he considered that it would neither be prudent nor safe for him to risk the responsibility of disobeying the king’s orders. Besides, were he to attempt to act contrary to these instructions, he might thereby compromise the safety of the king, as his enemies would find it no difficult affair to convince the army that Montrose was acting according to private instructions from the king himself. On the other hand, by instantly disbanding his army, Montrose considered that he would leave the royalists, and all those friends who had shared his dangers, to the mercy of their enemies. In this dilemma, he determined to convene a general meeting of all the principal royalists, to consult as to how he should act--a resolution which showed his good sense, and kind and just feeling towards those who had been induced by his means to risk their lives and fortunes in the cause of the king. Notwithstanding the many slights which had been put upon him by the Marquis of Huntly, Montrose, anxious to preserve a good understanding with him, sent Sir John Hurry and Sir John Innes to Huntly, to invite him to attend the proposed meeting, and that there might be no appearance of dictation on the part of Montrose, the time and place of meeting was left to Huntly’s own choice. But this nobleman answered that he himself had received orders similar to those sent to Montrose, which he was resolved to obey immediately, and, therefore, he declined to attend any meeting on the subject.

In this situation of matters, Montrose considered that his best and wisest course would be to keep his army together till he should receive another communication from the king, in answer to a letter which he sent by a messenger of his own, in which he begged his majesty to acquaint him with the real situation of matters, whether he considered his person safe in the hands of the Covenanters, and if he could be of any farther service to him. Montrose begged also to be informed by the king, if he persevered in his resolution to disband an army which had fought so bravely in his defence, and that at a time when his enemies, in both kingdoms, were still under arms; and if so, he wished to be instructed by his majesty as to the course he should pursue, for the protection and security of the lives and fortunes of those brave men, who had encountered so many dangers, and had spent their blood in his defence, as he could not endure the idea of leaving such loyal subjects to the mercy of their enemies.[357] The king returned an answer[358] to this letter, by the former messenger, Ker, in which he assured him that he no less esteemed his willingness to lay down arms at his command, “for a gallant and real expression” of his zeal and affection to his service than any of his former actions; but he hoped that Montrose had not such a mean opinion of him, that for any particular or worldly respects he would suffer him (Montrose) to be ruined,--that his only reason for sending Montrose out of the country was that he might return with greater glory, and, in the meantime, to have as honourable an employment as he (the king) could confer upon him,--that Ker would tell him the care he had of all Montrose’s friends, and his own, to whom, although he could not promise such conditions as he would have wished, yet they would be such, all things considered, as were most fit for them to accept. “Wherefore,” continues his majesty, “I renew my former directions, of laying down arms, unto you, desiring you to let Huntly, Crawford, Airly, Seaforth, and Ogilvy, know, that want of time hath made me now omit to reiterate my former commands unto you, intending that this shall serve for all; assuring them, and all the rest of my friends, that, whensoever God shall enable me, they shall reap the fruits of their loyalty and affection to my service.”

These ‘conditions,’ which consisted of several articles, and in the drawing up of which the king probably had no concern, were far from satisfactory to Montrose, who refused to accede to them. He even refused to treat with the Covenanters, and sent back the messenger to the king to notify to him, that as he had acted under his majesty’s commission, he would admit of no conditions for laying down his arms, or disbanding his army, which did not come directly from the king himself; but that if his majesty imposed conditions upon him, he would accept of them with the most implicit submission. The king, who had no alternative but to adopt these conditions as his own, put his name to them and sent back the messenger with them, with fresh instructions to Montrose to disband his army forthwith under the pain of high treason. Besides Ker, the king despatched another trusty messenger to Montrose with a private letter[359] urging him to accept of the conditions offered, as in the event of his refusal to break up his army, his majesty might be placed “in a very sad condition,” such as he would rather leave Montrose to guess at than seek himself to express. From this expression, it would appear that Charles already began to entertain some apprehensions about his personal safety. These commands of the king were too peremptory to be any longer withstood, and as Montrose had been informed that several of the leading royalists, particularly the Marquis of Huntly, Lord Aboyne, and the Earl of Seaforth, were negotiating with the Estates in their own behalf, and that Huntly and Aboyne had even offered to compel Montrose to lay down his arms in compliance with the orders of the king, he immediately resolved to disband his army.

As Middleton had been intrusted by the Committee of Estates with ample powers to negotiate with the royalists, and to see the conditions offered to Montrose implemented by him in case of acceptance, a cessation of arms was agreed upon between Montrose and Middleton; and in order to discuss the conditions, a conference was held between them on the 22d day of July, on a meadow, near the river Isla, in Angus, where they “conferred for the space of two hours, there being none near them but one man for each of them to hold his horse.”[360] The conditions agreed upon were these, that with the exception of Montrose himself, the Earl of Crawford, Sir Alexander Macdonald, and Sir John Hurry, all those who had taken up arms against the Covenanters would be pardoned on making their submission, and that Montrose, Crawford, Hurry, and Graham of Gorthy, should transport themselves beyond seas, before the last day of August, in a ship to be provided by the Estates. This arrangement was ratified by the committee of Estates, but the committee of the kirk exclaimed against it, and petitioned the Committee of Estates not to sanction it.

Preparatory to disbanding his army, Montrose appointed it to rendezvous at Rattray, in the neighbourhood of Coupar-Angus, at which place, on the 30th of July, he discharged his men, after addressing them with feeling and animation. After giving them due praise for their faithful services and good behaviour, he told them his orders, and bade them farewell, an event no less sorrowful to the whole army than to himself; and, notwithstanding that he used his utmost endeavours to raise their drooping spirits, and encourage them with the flattering prospect of a speedy and desirable peace, and assured them that he contributed to the king’s safety and interest by his present ready submission, no less than he had formerly done by his military attempts; yet they concluded, that a period was that day put to the king’s authority, which would expire with the dissolution of their army, for disbanding which, they were all convinced the orders had been extorted from the king, or granted by him on purpose to evite a greater and more immediate evil. And, upon whatever favourable conditions their own safety might be provided for, yet they lamented their fate, and would much rather have undergone the greatest fatigue and hardships than be obliged to remain inactive and idle spectators of the miseries and calamities befalling their dearest sovereign. Neither were their generous souls a little concerned for the unworthy and disgraceful opinion which foreign nations and after ages could not fail to conceive of the Scots, as universally dipt in rebellion, and guilty of defection from the best of kings. Their sorrow was likewise considerably augmented by the thoughts of being separated from their brave and successful general, who was now obliged to enter into a kind of banishment, to the irreparable loss of the king, the country, themselves, and all good men, at a time when they never had greater occasion for his services: And falling down upon their knees, with tears in their eyes, they obtested him, that seeing the king’s safety and interest required his immediate departure from the kingdom, he would take them along with him to whatever corner of the world he would retire, professing their readiness to live, to fight, nay, if it so please God, even to die under his command. And not a few of them had privately determined, though at the evident risk of their lives and fortunes, to follow him without his knowledge, and even against his inclination, and to offer him their service in a foreign land, which they could not any longer afford him in their own distressed native country.[361]

Such is the account of the affecting farewell between Montrose and the few remaining brave and adventurous men who had shared with him all the dangers and vicissitudes of the battle-field, as related by a warm partisan of fallen royalty; yet there is no reason for supposing that he has given an exaggerated view of the feelings of the warlike and devoted band at parting, under existing circumstances, with their beloved commander who had so often led them to victory, and whose banishment from his native country they regarded as the death-blow to their hopes.

Upon the dissolution of Montrose’s army, the Scots officers and soldiers retired to their homes, and the Irish troops marched westward into Argyle, whence they embarked for their own country, being accompanied thither by the Earl of Crawford, who from thence went to Spain. Montrose, along with the few friends who were to follow him abroad, took up his abode at his seat of Old Montrose, there to wait the arrival of the vessel destined to convey them to the continent. The day fixed for Montrose’s departure was the 1st of September, and he waited with impatience for the arrival of the expected vessel; but as the month of August was fast expiring without such vessel making its appearance, or any apparent preparation for the voyage, Montrose’s friends applied to the committee of the Estates for a prorogation of the day stipulated for his departure, but they could obtain no satisfactory answer.

At length, on the last day of August, a vessel for the reception of the marquis entered the harbour of Montrose, in which he proposed immediately to embark, but he was told by the shipmaster, “a violent and rigid Covenanter,” that he meant to careen his vessel before going to sea, an operation which would occupy a few days. In the course of conversation, the shipmaster bluntly stated to his intended passengers, that he had received express instructions to land them at certain ports. The behaviour of the captain, joined to the information he had communicated, and the fact that several English ships of war had been seen for several days off the coast, as if watching his embarkation and departure, created a strong suspicion in Montrose’s mind that a plan had been laid for capturing him, and induced him to consult his own safety and that of his friends, by seeking another way of leaving the kingdom. The anxiety of Montrose and his followers was speedily relieved by the arrival of intelligence, that a small vessel belonging to Bergen, in Norway, had been found in the neighbouring harbour of Stonehaven; and that the master had engaged, on being promised a handsome freight, to be in readiness, on an appointed day, to sail with such passengers as should appear.

Accordingly, after sending off Sir John Hurry, John Drummond of Balloch, Graham of Gorthy, Dr. Wishart, and a few other friends by land to Stonehaven, on the 3d of September 1646, he himself left the harbour of Montrose in a small boat, disguised as the servant of James Wood, a clergyman, who accompanied him; and the same evening went safely on board the vessel, into which his friends had embarked, and setting sail with a fair wind, arrived in a few days at Bergen, in Norway, where he received a friendly welcome from Thomas Gray, a Scotsman, the governor of the castle of Bergen.[362]

It is beyond the province of this history to give a detailed account of the transactions which took place between the Scotch and English concerning the disbanding of the Scottish army and the delivery of the king to the English parliament. Although the Scotch are certainly not free from blame for having betrayed their king, after he had cast himself upon their loyalty and mercy, still it must be remembered, in extenuation, that the king was merely playing a game, that his giving himself up to the Scotch army was his last desperate move, and that he would not have had the least scruple in outwitting, deceiving, and even destroying his protectors. In September, 1646, an agreement was come to between the Scotch commissioners and the English parliament, that the army should be disbanded, on the latter paying £400,000 as payment in full of the arrears of pay due to the army for its services. There was no mention then made of the delivery of the king, and a candid examination of the evidence on both sides proves that the one transaction was quite independent of the other. “That fanaticism and self-interest had steeled the breasts of the Covenanters against the more generous impulses of loyalty and compassion, may, indeed, be granted; but more than this cannot be legitimately inferred from any proof furnished by history.”[363]

While the negotiations for the delivery of the king were pending, Charles, who seems to have been fully aware of them, meditated the design of escaping from the Scots army, and putting himself at the head of such forces as the Marquis of Huntly could raise in the north. In pursuance of this design, his majesty, about the middle of December, sent Robert Leslie, brother of General David Leslie, with letters and a private commission to Huntly, by which he was informed of his majesty’s intentions, and Huntly was, therefore, desired to levy what forces he could, and have them in readiness to take the field on his arrival in the north. On receipt of his majesty’s commands, Huntly began to raise forces, and having collected them at Banff, fortified the town, and there awaited the king’s arrival.[364] But the king was prevented from putting his plan into execution by a premature discovery, and was thenceforth much more strictly guarded.

After the delivery of the king to the English, on the 28th of January, 1647, the Scots army returned to Scotland. It was thereupon remodelled and reduced, by order of the parliament, to 6,000 foot, and 1,200 horse; a force which was considered sufficient not only to keep the royalists in awe, but also to reduce the Marquis of Huntly and Sir Alexander Macdonald, who were still at the head of some men. The dispersion, therefore, of the forces under these two commanders became the immediate object of the parliament. An attempt had been made in the month of January, by a division of the covenanting army stationed in Aberdeenshire, under the command of Major Bickerton, to surprise the Marquis of Huntly at Banff, but it had been obliged to retire with loss; and Huntly continued to remain in his position till the month of April, when, on the approach of General David Leslie with a considerable force, he fled with a few friends to the mountains of Lochaber for shelter. Leslie thereupon reduced the castles belonging to the marquis. He first took that of Strathbogie, and sent the commander thereof, the laird of Newton-Gordon, to Edinburgh; then the castle of Lesmore; and lastly, the Bog of Gicht, or Gordon castle, the commander of which, James Gordon of Letterfurie, and his brother, Thomas Gordon of Clastirim, and other gentlemen of the name of Gordon, were sent to Edinburgh as prisoners. Leslie next took the isle of Lochtanner, in Aboyne, which had been fortified by Huntly.[365] Quarter was given to the men who garrisoned those different strengths, with the exception of the Irish and deserters, who were hanged immediately on their capture.[366]

Having taken these different places, Leslie, in quest of the marquis, next marched into Badenoch, where he captured the castle of Ruthven. Thence he proceeded into Lochaber, and took the fortress of Inverlochy. Huntly disbanded his forces in Badenoch, reserving only a few as a body-guard for himself and his son; “showing them that he was resolved to live an outlaw till provident heaven should be pleased to change the king’s fortune, upon whose commandments his life and fortune should always depend.”[367] The covenanting general, thereupon, marched to the south with a part of his forces, leaving the remainder in the north, under the command of Middleton, and encamped in Strathallan, he himself taking up his head-quarters in Dunblane. Here he remained till the middle of May, when he was joined by the Marquis of Argyle, and ordered to advance into that nobleman’s country to drive out Sir Alexander Macdonald. Accordingly, he set out on the 17th of May, and arrived at Inverary on the 21st. Sir Alexander Macdonald was at this time in Kintyre, with a force of about 1,400 foot and two troops of horse, which would have been fully sufficient to check Leslie, but he seems not to have been aware of the advance of the latter, and had taken no precautions to guard the passes leading into the peninsula, which might have been successfully defended by a handful of men against a considerable force. Having secured these difficult passes, Leslie advanced into Kintyre, and after skirmishing the whole of the 25th of May with Macdonald, forced him to retire. After throwing 300 men into a fortress on the top of the hill of Dunaverty, and in which “there was not a drop of water but what fell from the clouds,”[368] Macdonald, on the following day, embarked his troops in boats provided for the occasion, and passed over into Islay.

Leslie, thereupon, laid siege to the castle of Dunaverty, which was well defended; but the assailants having carried a trench at the bottom of the hill which gave the garrison the command of water, and in the storming of which the besieged lost 40 men, the latter craved a parley, in consequence of which Sir James Turner, Leslie’s adjutant-general, was sent to confer with the garrison on the terms of surrender. Leslie would not grant “any other conditions than that they should yield on discretion or mercy. And it seemed strange to me,” continues Sir James Turner, “to hear the lieutenant-general’s nice distinction, that they should yield themselves to the kingdom’s mercy, and not to his. At length they did so, and after they had come out of the castle, they were put to the sword, every mother’s son, except one young man, Maccoul, whose life I begged to be sent to France, with 100 fellows which we had smoked out of a cave, as they do foxes, who were given to Captain Campbell, the chancellor’s brother.”[369] This atrocious act was perpetrated at the instigation of John Nave or Neaves, “a bloody preacher,”[370] but, according to Wodrow, an “excellent man,” who would not be satisfied with less than the blood of the prisoners. As the account given by Sir James Turner, an eye-witness of this infamous transaction, is curious, no apology is necessary for inserting it. “Here it will be fit to make a stop, till this cruel action be canvassed. First, the lieutenant-general was two days irresolute what to do. The Marquis of Argyle was accused at his arraignment of this murder, and I was examined as a witness. I declared, which was true, that I never heard him advise the lieutenant-general to it. What he did in private I know not. Secondly, Argyle was but a colonel then, and he had no power to do it of himself. Thirdly, though he had advised him to it, it was no capital crime; for counsel is no command. Fourthly, I have several times spoke to the lieutenant-general to save these men’s lives, and he always assented to it, and I know of himself he was unwilling to shed their blood. Fifthly, Mr. John Nave (who was appointed by the commission of the kirk to wait on him as his chaplain) never ceased to tempt him to that bloodshed, yea, and threatened him with the curses befell Saul for sparing the Amalekites, for with them his theology taught him to compare the Dunaverty men. And I verily believe that this prevailed most with David Leslie, who looked upon Nave as the representative of the kirk of Scotland.” The fact of Sir James and David Leslie’s repugnance to shed the blood of those defenceless men is fully corroborated by Bishop Guthry, on the authority of many persons who were present, who says that while the butchery was going on, and while Leslie, Argyle, and Neaves were walking over the ancles in blood, Leslie turned out and thus addressed the latter:--“Now, Mr. John, have you not once got your fill of blood?” The sufferers on this occasion were partly Irish, and partly belonging to the clan Dougal or Coull, to the castle of whose chief, in Lorne, Colonel Robert Montgomerie now laid siege, while Leslie himself, with a part of his forces, left Kintyre for Islay in pursuit of Macdonald.

On landing in Islay, Leslie found that Macdonald had fled to Ireland, and had left Colkittoch, his father, in the castle of Dunniveg, with a force of 200 men to defend the island against the superior power of Leslie. The result turned out as might have been anticipated. Although the garrison made a brave resistance, yet, being wholly without water, they found themselves unable to resist, and offered to capitulate on certain conditions. These were, that the officers should be entitled to go where they pleased, and that the privates should be sent to France. These conditions were agreed to, and were punctually fulfilled. Old Colkittoch had, however, the misfortune not to be included in this capitulation, for, before the castle had surrendered, “the old man, Coll,” says Sir James Turner, “coming foolishly out of the house, where he was governor, on some parole or other,[371] to speak with his old friend, the captain of Dunstaffnage castle, was surprised, and made prisoner, not without some stain to the lieutenant-general’s honour. He was afterwards hanged by a jury of Argyle’s sheriff-depute, one George Campbell, from whose sentence few are said to have escaped that kind of death.”

Leaving Islay, Leslie “boated over to Jura, a horrible isle,” says Sir James Turner, “and a habitation fit for deer and wild beasts; and so from isle to isle,” continues he, “till he came to Mull, which is one of the best of the Hebrides. Here Maclaine saved his lands, with the loss of his reputation, if he ever had any. He gave up his strong castles to Leslie, gave his eldest son for hostage of his fidelity, and, which was unchristian baseness in the lowest degree, he delivered up fourteen prettie Irishmen, who had been all along faithful to him, to the lieutenant-general, who immediately caused hang them all. It was not well done to demand them from Maclaine, but inexcusablie ill done in him to betray them. Here I cannot forget one Donald Campbell, fleshed in blood from his very infancie, who with all imaginable violence pressed that the whole clan Maclaine should be put to the edge of the sword; nor could he be commanded to forbear his bloody suit by the lieutenant-general and two major-generals; and with some difficulty was he commanded silence by his chief, the Marquis of Argyle. For my part, I said nothing, for indeed I did not care though he had prevailed in his suit, the delivery of the Irish had so irritated me against that whole clan and name.”

While Leslie was thus subduing the Hebrides, Middleton was occupied in pursuing the Marquis of Huntly through Glenmoriston, Badenoch, and other places. Huntly was at length captured by Lieutenant-Colonel Menzies, in Strathdon, in December, 1647. Having received intelligence of the place of the marquis’s retreat, Menzies came to Dalnabo with a select body of horse, consisting of three troops, about midnight, and immediately entered the house just as Huntly was going to bed. The marquis was attended by only ten gentlemen and servants, as a sort of body-guard, who notwithstanding the great disparity of numbers, made a brave attempt to protect the marquis, in which six of them were killed and the rest mortally wounded, among whom was John Grant, the landlord. On hearing that the marquis had been taken prisoner, the whole of his vassals in the neighbourhood, to the number of between 400 and 500, with Grant of Carron at their head, flew to arms to rescue him. Lieutenant-Colonel Menzies thereupon carried the marquis to the castle of Blairfindie, in Glenlivet, about four miles from Dalnabo, where the latter received a notice from Grant and his party by the wife of Gordon of Munmore, that they had solemnly sworn either to rescue him or die to a man, and they requested him to give them such orders to carry their plan into effect as he might judge proper. But the marquis dissuaded his people from the intended attempt, and returned for answer that, now almost worn out with grief and fatigue, he could no longer live in hills and dens; and hoped that his enemies would not drive things to the worst; but, if such was the will of heaven, he could not outlive the sad fate he foresaw his royal master was likely to undergo; and be the event as it would, he doubted not but the just providence of God would restore the royal family, and his own along with it.[372]

Besides the gentlemen and servants about Huntly’s person, there were some Irish who were quartered in the offices about Dalnabo. These were carried prisoners by Menzies to Strathbogie, where Middleton then was, who ordered them all to be shot. In consequence of an order from the committee of Estates at Edinburgh, Menzies carried the marquis under a strong guard of horse to Leith, where, after being kept two days, he was delivered up to the magistrates, and incarcerated in the jail of the city. The committee had previously debated the question whether the marquis should be immediately executed or reprieved till the meeting of parliament, but although the Argyle faction, notwithstanding the Marquis of Argyle withdrew before the vote was taken, and the committee of the church did every thing in their power to procure the immediate execution of the marquis, his life was spared till the meeting of the parliament by a majority of one vote.[373] The Earl of Aboyne and Lord Lewis Gordon had the good fortune to escape to the continent. The first went to France, where he shortly thereafter died--the second took refuge in Holland. A reward of £1,000 sterling had been promised to any person who should apprehend Huntly, which sum was duly paid to Menzies by the Committee of Estates.[374]

There appears to be no doubt that Argyle was highly gratified at the capture of Huntly. It is related by Spalding, that taking advantage of Huntly’s situation, Argyle bought up all the comprisings on his lands, and that he caused summon at the market-cross of Aberdeen by sound of trumpet, all Huntly’s wadsetters and creditors to appear at Edinburgh in the month of March following Huntly’s imprisonment, calling on them to produce their securities before the lords of session, with certification that if they did not appear, their securities were to be declared null and void. Some of Huntly’s creditors sold their claims to Argyle, and having thus bought up all the rights he could obtain upon Huntly’s estate at a small or nominal value, under the pretence that he was acting for the benefit of his nephew, Lord Gordon, he granted bonds for the amount which, according to Spalding, he never paid. In this way did Argyle possess himself of the marquis’s estates, which he continued to enjoy upwards of twelve years; viz., from 1648, till the restoration of Charles II. in 1660.

When the king, who was then a prisoner in Carisbrook castle, heard of the capture of Huntly, he wrote a letter to the Earl of Lanark, then in London, earnestly urging him to do all in his power in behalf of the Marquis. The earl, however, either from unwillingness or inability, appears to have paid no attention to this letter.

Shortly before the capture of the Marquis of Huntly, John Gordon of Innermarkie, Gordon, younger of Newton-Gordon, and the laird of Harthill, three of his chief friends, had been taken prisoners by Major-General Middleton, and sent to Edinburgh, where they were imprisoned. The two latter were condemned to die by the Committee of Estates, and although their friends procured a remission of the sentence from the king, they were, notwithstanding, both beheaded at the market-cross of Edinburgh.

While the hopes of the royalists, both in England and Scotland, seemed to be almost extinguished, a ray of light, about this time, darted through the dark gloom of the political horizon, which they fondly imagined was the harbinger of a new and, for them, a better order of things; but all their expectations were destined to end in bitter disappointment. The Duke of Hamilton, who had lately formed an association to release the king from his captivity, which went under the name of the “Engagement,” prevailed upon the parliament, which met in March, 1648, to appoint a committee of danger, and to consent to a levy of 40,000 men. The bulk of the English population, with the exception of the army, had grown quite dissatisfied with the state of matters. Their eyes were now directed towards Scotland, and the news of the Scots’ levy made them indulge a hope that they would soon be enabled, by the aid of the Scots auxiliaries, to throw off the military yoke, and restore the king on conditions favourable to liberty. But Hamilton, being thwarted by Argyle and his party, had it not in his power to take advantage of the favourable disposition of the English people, and instead of raising 40,000 men, he found, to his great mortification, that, at the utmost, he could, after upwards of three months’ labour, only bring about 15,000 men into the field, and that not until several insurrections in England, in favour of the king, had been suppressed.

It was the misfortune of Hamilton that with every disposition to serve the cause of his royal master, he had neither the capacity to conceive, nor the resolution to adopt bold and decisive measures equal to the emergency of the times. Like the king, he attempted to act the part of the cunning politician, but was wholly unfitted for the performance of such a character. Had he had the address to separate old Leslie and his nephew from the party of Argyle, by placing the direction of military affairs in their hands, he might have succeeded in raising a force sufficient to cope with the parliamentary army of England; but he had the weakness, after both these generals had joined the kirk in its remonstrance to the parliament that nothing should be done without the consent of the committee of the general assembly, to get himself appointed commander-in-chief of the army, a measure which could not fail to disgust these hardy veterans. He failed in an attempt to conciliate the Marquis of Argyle, who did all in his power to thwart Hamilton’s designs. Argyle went to Fife and induced the gentry of that county not only to oppose the levies, but to hold themselves in readiness to rise on the other side when called upon. He was not so successful in Stirlingshire, none of the gentlemen of that county concurring in his views except the laird of Buchanan, Sir William Bruce of Stenhouse, and a few persons of inferior note; but in Dumbartonshire he succeeded to the utmost of his wishes. After attending a meeting with the Lord Chancellor, (Loudon,) the Earls of Cassilis and Eglinton, and David Dick and other ministers, at Eglinton’s house, on the 29th of May, Argyle went home to raise his own people.

Several instances of opposition to the levy took place; but the most formidable one, and the only one worthy of notice, was in Ayrshire, where a body of armed insurgents, to the number of 800 horse and 1,200 foot according to one writer,[375] and 500 horse and 2,000 foot according to another,[376] headed by several ministers, assembled at Mauchline; but they were defeated and dispersed, on the 10th of June, by Middleton, who had been appointed lieutenant-general of horse, with the loss of 80 men.

There are no data by which to ascertain the number of men raised in the Highlands for Hamilton’s army; but it must necessarily have been very inconsiderable. Not a single man was of course raised in Argyleshire, and scarcely any in the adjoining part of Inverness-shire, to which the influence or power of Argyle extended. The Earl of Sutherland, who had been appointed a colonel of foot in his own division, declined the office, and Lord Reay was so disgusted with “Duke Hamilton’s failure,” that he took shipping at Thurso in the month of July, and went to Norway,[377] where he was appointed governor of Bergen, and received the colonelcy of a regiment from the King of Denmark, whom he had formerly served. The only individual who could have benefitted the royal-cause in the north was the Marquis of Huntly, but by a strange fatality the Duke of Hamilton, who could have easily procured an order from the parliament for his liberation from prison, allowed him to continue there, and merely contented himself with obtaining a warrant for changing the marquis’s place of confinement from the jail to the castle of Edinburgh.

In consequence of the many difficulties which occurred in collecting his troops, and providing the necessary matériel for the use of the army, the duke was not able to begin his march till the 8th of July, on which day he put his army in motion towards the borders. His force, which amounted to about 10,000 foot and 4,000 horse, was composed of raw and undisciplined levies, and he had not a single field-piece. He entered England by the western border, where he was met by Sir Marmaduke Langdale and a body of 4,000 brave cavaliers, all devotedly attached to the king. At this time Lambert, the parliamentary general, had invested Carlisle, and Hamilton was induced by the English royalists, contrary to his own views, to march upon Carlisle, and force Lambert to raise the siege. That general, who had received orders from Cromwell not to engage the Scots till he should join him, accordingly retired, and Carlisle was delivered up next day to Hamilton by the English royalists, who also put him in possession of Berwick.

It is unnecessary to enter into details concerning this mismanaged and unfortunate expedition, the result of which is well known to every reader of English history. Sir Marmaduke Langdale was defeated by Cromwell at Preston on the 17th of August, and on entering the town after the defeat, was mortified to find that his Scotch allies had abandoned it. Langdale having now no alternative but flight, disbanded his infantry, and along with his cavalry and Hamilton, who, refusing to follow the example of his army, had remained in the town, swam across the Ribble.

The Scotch army retired during the night towards Wigan, where it was joined by the duke next morning, but so reduced in spirits and weakened by desertion as to be quite unable to make any resistance to the victorious troops of Cromwell, who pressed hard upon them. The foot, under the command of Baillie, continued to retreat during the day, but were overtaken at Warrington, and, being unable either to proceed or to resist, surrendered. The number which capitulated amounted to about 3,000. Upwards of 6,000 had previously been captured by the country people, and the few who had the good fortune to escape joined Munro and returned to Scotland. These prisoners were sold as slaves, and sent to the plantations.

The duke, abandoning Baillie to his fate, carried off the whole cavalry; but he had not proceeded far when his rear was attacked by the parliamentary army. Middleton made a gallant defence, and was taken prisoner; but the duke escaped, and fled to Uttoxeter, followed by his horse, where he surrendered himself to General Lambert and Lord Grey of Groby, who sent him prisoner to Windsor. The Earl of Callander, having effected his escape, went over to Holland, disgusted at the conduct of the duke.

As soon as the news of the defeat of Hamilton reached Scotland, the Covenanters of the west began to bestir themselves, and a party of them, under the command of Robert Montgomery, son of the Earl of Eglinton, attacked a troop of Lanark’s horse, quartered in Ayrshire, killed some and routed the rest. The Committee of Estates, apprehensive that the spirit of insurrection would speedily spread, immediately ordered out all the fencible men in the kingdom to put down the rising in the west. A difference, however, arose in the committee in the choice of a commander. The Earl of Lanark and the Earl Marischal were proposed by their respective friends. Lanark’s chief opponent was the Earl of Roxburgh, who, (says Wishart,) “in a grave and modest speech, earnestly entreated him, for the sake of their dear sovereign and their distressed country, not to insist in demanding that dignity, which was extremely unseasonable and ill-judged at that time.”[378] Roxburgh’s remonstrance had no effect upon Lanark, who, on a vote being taken, was found to have the majority, and so anxious was he to obtain the command of the army that he actually voted for himself.[379] He had even the indiscretion to declare, that he would not permit any other person to command in his brother’s absence. This rash and imprudent behaviour on the part of Lanark so exasperated Roxburgh and his friends, who justly dreaded the utter ruin of the king’s affairs, that they henceforth withdrew altogether from public affairs.

As soon as Lanark had been appointed to the command of the new levy, he set about raising it with great expedition. For this purpose he sent circulars, plausibly written, to every part of Scotland, calling upon all classes to join him without delay. These circulars had the desired effect. The people beyond the Forth, and even the men of Fife, showed a disposition to obey the call. The Earl of Seaforth raised 4,000 men in the Western Islands and in Ross-shire, whom he brought south, and the Earl of Morton also brought into Lothian 1,200 men from the Orkneys. In short, with the exception of Argyle, there were few places in Scotland from which considerable bodies of men might not have been expected.

Before the defeat of Hamilton’s army, Lanark had raised three regiments of horse, which were now under his command. These, with the accessions of force which were daily arriving from different parts of the kingdom, were quite sufficient to have put down the insurrection in the west; but instead of marching thither, Lanark, to the surprise of every person, proceeded through East Lothian towards the eastern borders to meet Sir George Munro, who was retiring upon Berwick before the army of Cromwell. The people of the west being thus relieved from the apprehensions of a visit, assembled in great numbers, and taking advantage of Lanark’s absence, a body of them, to the number of no less than 6,000 men, headed by the chancellor, the Earl of Eglinton, and some ministers, advanced upon the capital, which they entered without opposition, the magistrates and ministers of the city welcoming their approach by going out to meet them. Bishop Wishart describes this body as “a confused rabble, composed of farmers, cow-herds, shepherds, coblers, and such like mob, without arms, and without courage,” and says, that when they arrived in Edinburgh, “they were provided with arms, which, as they were unaccustomed to, were rather a burden and incumbrance than of any use,”--that “they were mounted upon horses, or jades rather, which had been long used to the drudgery of labour, equipped with pack saddles and halters, in place of saddles and bridles.”[380] This tumultuary body, however, was soon put into proper order by the Earl of Leven, who was invested with the chief command, and by David Leslie, as his lieutenant-general, and presented a rather formidable appearance, for on Lanark’s return from the south, he did not venture to engage it, though his force amounted to 4,000 or 5,000 horse and as many foot, many of whom were veterans who had served in Ireland under Munro.

In thus declining to attack Leslie, Lanark acted contrary to the advice of Munro and his other officers. According to Dr. Wishart, Lanark’s advanced guard, on arriving at Musselburgh, fell in with some of Leslie’s outposts, who defended the bridge over the Esk, and Lanark’s advanced guard, though inferior in number, immediately put them in great disorder, and killed some of them without sustaining any loss. This success was reported to Lanark, and it was represented to him, that by following it up immediately, while the enemy continued in the state of alarm into which this affair of outposts had thrown them, he might, perhaps, obtain a bloodless victory, and secure possession of the city of Edinburgh and the town of Leith, with all the warlike stores, before sunset.

Leading his army along the base of the Pentland hills, Lanark proceeded to Linlithgow, which he entered on the evening of the 11th of September, where he almost surprised the Earl of Cassilis, who, at the head of 800 horse from Carrick and Galloway, had taken up his quarters there for the night; but a notice having been sent to him of the Earl of Lanark’s approach by some friend, he fled precipitately to Queensferry, leaving the supper which was cooking for him and his men on the fire, which repast was greedily devoured by Lanark’s troops.

Ever since Lanark’s march to the borders to meet Munro, the Marquis of Argyle had been busily employed in raising men in his own territory to assist the insurgents, but it had been so much depopulated by the ravages of Montrose and Macdonald, that he could scarcely muster 300 men. With these and 400 more which he had collected in the Lennox and in the western part of Stirlingshire, he advanced to Stirling, entering it upon the 12th of September at eleven o’clock forenoon. After assigning to the troops their different posts in the town, and making arrangements with the magistrates for their support, Argyle went to dine with the Earl of Mar at his residence in the town. But while the dinner was serving up, Argyle, to his infinite alarm, heard that a part of Lanark’s forces had entered Stirling. This was the advanced guard, commanded by Sir George Munro, who, on hearing that Argyle was in possession of the town when only within two miles of it, had, unknown to Lanark, who was behind with the main body of the army, pushed forward and entered the town before Argyle’s men were aware of his approach. Argyle, as formerly, having a great regard for his personal safety, immediately mounted his horse, galloped across Stirling bridge, and never looked behind till he reached North Queensferry, where he instantly crossed the Frith in a small boat and proceeded to Edinburgh. Nearly 200 of Argyle’s men were either killed or drowned, and the remainder were taken prisoners.

A negotiation for peace immediately ensued between the two parties, and on the 15th of September a treaty was entered into by which the Hamilton party agreed to refer all civil matters in dispute to a Parliament, to be held before the 10th of January, and all ecclesiastical affairs to an assembly of the kirk. It was also stipulated that both armies should be disbanded before the 29th of September, or at farthest on the 5th of October, that the adherents of the king should not be disturbed, and that all the prisoners taken in Scotland should be released. Munro perceiving that the king’s affairs would be irretrievably ruined by this compromise, objected to the treaty, and would have stood out had he been backed by the other officers; but very few seconding his views, he addressed the troops, who had accompanied him from Ireland, in St Ninian’s church, and offered to lead back to Ireland such as were inclined to serve under their old commander, Major-General Robert Munro; but having received intelligence at Glasgow that that general had been taken prisoner and sent to London, he disbanded the troops who had followed him thither, and retired to Holland.

According to the treaty the two armies were disbanded on the appointed day, and the “Whigamores,” as the insurgents from the west were called, immediately returned home to cut down their corn, which was ready for the sickle. Argyle’s men, who had been taken prisoners at Stirling, were set at liberty, and conducted home to their own country by one of Argyle’s officers.

The Marquis of Argyle, Loudon the chancellor, the Earls of Cassilis and Eglinton, and others, now met at Edinburgh, and formed themselves into a body under the title of the Committee of Estates, and having arranged matters for the better securing their own influence, they summoned a parliament to meet on the 4th of January. In the meantime, Oliver Cromwell, who, after the pursuit of Munro, had laid siege to Berwick, was waited upon by Argyle, Lord Elcho, and Sir Charles Erskine, to compliment him upon his success at Preston, and after making Ludovick Leslie deliver up Berwick to him, they invited him and Lambert to Edinburgh. Cromwell took up his residence in the House of Lady Home in the Canongate, where he received frequent visits from Argyle, Loudon, the Earl of Lothian, Lords Arbuthnot, Elcho, and Burleigh, and the most noted of the ministers. It is said, that during these conferences, Cromwell communicated to his visitors his intentions with respect to the king, and obtained their consent.[381]

In the meantime the Independents were doing their utmost to induce the English parliament to bring the king to trial for high treason. They, having in the meantime been disappointed in their views by the presbyterians, prevailed upon Fairfax to order Hammond, the governor of the Isle of Wight, to attend him at Windsor, and to send Colonel Eure with orders to seize the king at Newport, where he was conferring with the commissioners, and imprison him again in Carisbrook castle; but Hammond having declined to allow Eure to interfere without an order from the parliament, Eure left the island without attempting to fulfil his instructions. Hammond, however, afterwards left the island with the commissioners, and committed Charles to the custody of one Major Rolfe, a person who, only six months before, had been charged with a design on the life of the king, and who had escaped trial because only one witness had attested the fact before the grand jury.

The king seemed to be fully aware of the danger of his present situation, and on the morning of the 28th of November, when the commissioners left the island, he gave vent to his feelings in a strain of the most pathetic emotions, which drew tears from his attendants; “My lords,” said he to the commissioners, “I believe we shall scarce ever see each other again, but God’s will be done! I have made my peace with him, and shall undergo without fear whatever he may suffer men to do to me. My lords, you cannot but know, that in my fall and ruin you see your own, and that also near you. I pray God send you better friends than I have found. I am fully informed of the carriage of those who plot against me and mine; but nothing affects me so much as the feeling I have of the sufferings of my subjects, and the mischief that hangs over my three kingdoms, drawn upon them by those who, upon pretences of good, violently pursue their own interests and ends.”[382] As soon as the commissioners and Hammond had quitted the island, Fairfax sent a troop of horse and a company of foot, under the command of Lieutenant-Colonel Cobbett, to seize the king, who received notice of the approach of this body and of its object next morning from a person in disguise; but although advised by the Duke of Richmond, the Earl of Lindsay, and Colonel Coke to make his escape, which he could easily have accomplished, he declined to do so, because he considered himself bound in honour to remain twenty days after the treaty. The consequence was, that Charles was taken prisoner by Cobbett, and carried to Hurst castle.

The rest of this painful tragedy is well known. After the purified house of commons had passed a vote declaring that it was high treason in the king of England, for the time being, to levy war against the parliament and kingdom of England, his majesty was brought to trial before a tribunal erected pro re nata by the house called the high court of justice, which adjudged him “as a tyrant, traitor, murderer, and public enemy to the good people of the nation, to be put to death by the severing of his head from his body,” a sentence which was carried into execution, in front of Whitehall, on the 30th of January 1649. The unfortunate monarch conducted himself throughout the whole of these melancholy proceedings with becoming dignity, and braved the terrors of death with fortitude and resignation.

The Duke of Hamilton, who, by his incapacity, had ruined the king’s affairs when on the point of being retrieved, was not destined long to survive his royal master. In violation of the articles of his capitulation, he was brought to trial, and although he pleaded that he acted under the orders of the Scottish parliament, and was not amenable to an English tribunal, he was, under the pretence that he was Earl of Cambridge in England, sentenced to be beheaded. He suffered on the 9th of March.

The Marquis of Huntly had languished in prison since December 1647, and during the life of the king the Scottish parliament had not ventured to bring him to the block; but both the king and Hamilton, his favourite, being now put out of the way, they felt themselves no longer under restraint, and accordingly the parliament, on the 16th of March, ordained the marquis to be beheaded, at the market-cross of Edinburgh, on the 22d of that month. As he lay under sentence of ecclesiastical excommunication, one of the “bloody ministers,” says the author of the History of the family of Gordon, “asked him, when brought upon the scaffold, if he desired to be absolved from the sentence;” to which the marquis replied, “that as he was not accustomed to give ear to false prophets, he did not wish to be troubled by him.” And thereupon turning “towards the people, he told them that he was going to die for having employed some years of his life in the service of the king his master; that he was sorry he was not the first of his majesty’s subjects who had suffered for his cause, so glorious in itself that it sweetened to him all the bitterness of death.” He then declared that he had charity to forgive those who had voted for his death, although he could not admit that he had done any thing contrary to the laws. After throwing off his doublet, he offered up a prayer, and then embracing some friends around him, he submitted his neck, without any symptoms of emotion, to the fatal instrument.

FOOTNOTES:

[336] History of the Family of Gordon, vol. ii. p. 495. Britane’s Distemper, p. 166.

[337] Memoirs, p. 164.

[338] This report fortunately appears to be belied by the following entries in Balfour’s Annals, 17th and 19th January, 1646. “The earl of Tulliebardine humbly petitions the House that they would be pleased to pardon his brother, William Murray’s life, in respect he averred on his honour, that he was not compos mentis, as also within age.” “The earl of Tulliebardine again this day gave in a humble petition to the House for prolonging the execution of that sentence pronounced against his brother.” Vol. iii. pp. 362, 363.

[339] Wishart p. 223.

[340] Wishart, p. 227.

[341] Guthry, p. 172.

[342] Balfour, vol. iii. pp. 311, 312.

[343] Balfour, vol. iii. p. 323.

[344] Balfour, vol. iii. p. 325.

[345] Ibid. p. 341.

[346] Balfour, vol. iii. pp. 356-61.

[347] Wishart, p. 238; Guthry, p. 168.

[348] Life prefixed to Sir Robert’s work, entitled Practicks, folio, printed in 1706.

[349] Wishart, p. 242.

[350] Guthry, p. 245.

[351] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 531.

[352] Britane’s Distemper, p. 182.

[353] Lingard, vol. vi. p. 539, 4to.

[354] Lingard, vol. vi. p. 543.

[355] Kirkton.

[356] Rushworth, vi.

[357] Wishart, p. 262.

[358] June 15, 1646.

[359] July 16, 1646.

[360] Guthry, p. 179.

[361] Wishart, pp. 264-5.

[362] Wishart.

[363] Lingard, vol. vi.

[364] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 536.

[365] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 537.

[366] Guthry.

[367] Britane’s Distemper, p. 200.

[368] Turner’s Memoirs.

[369] Turner’s Memoirs.

[370] Guthry.

[371] Spalding says that Col Kittoch came out of the castle to treat for a surrender on an assurance of personal safety.

[372] Gordon’s History of the Family of Gordon, vol. ii. p. 546.

[373] Guthry, p. 207.

[374] See the Act of Sederunt of the committee in the appendix to Gordon’s History of the family of Gordon, vol. ii. p. 537.

[375] Baillie.

[376] Guthry.

[377] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 541.

[378] Memoirs, p. 311.

[379] Guthry, p. 327.

[380] Memoirs, p. 316.

[381] Guthry.

[382] Appendix to Evelyn’s Memoirs, vol. ii. pp. 128, 390. Clarendon, vol. iii. p. 234.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us

XVI. A.D. 1649-1650

Commonwealth, 1649-1660; including Protectorate of Oliver Cromwell, 1653-1658.

Negotiations with Charles II.--Proceedings of Montrose --Pluscardine’s Insurrection--Landing of Kinnoul and Montrose in Orkney--Montrose’s Declaration--Montrose advances southwards --Is defeated at Carbisdale--Montrose captured and sent to Edinburgh--His reception there--Trial and Execution.

While the dominant party in England were contemplating the erection of a commonwealth upon the ruins of the monarchy they had just overthrown, the faction in Scotland, with Argyle at its head, which had usurped the reins of government in that country, in obedience to the known wish of the nation, resolved to recognise the principle of legitimacy by acknowledging the Prince of Wales as successor to the crown of Scotland. No sooner, therefore, had the intelligence of the execution of the king reached Edinburgh, than the usual preparations were made for proclaiming Charles II., a ceremony which was performed at the market-cross of Edinburgh, on the 5th of February, with the usual formalities.

This proceeding was contrary to the policy of Argyle, whose intentions were in exact accordance with those of the English Independents; but, as the melancholy fate of the king had excited a feeling of indignation in the Scottish nation, he was afraid to imitate the example of his English friends, and dissembling his views, adopted other measures without changing his object. At the instigation of Argyle it was agreed in parliament to propose certain conditions to the prince as the terms on which alone he should be entitled to sway the sceptre of his father. These were, in substance, 1st, that he should sign the Covenants, and endeavour to establish them by his authority in all his dominions; 2d, that he should ratify and confirm all the acts of the Estates, approving of the two Covenants, the directory, confession of faith, and the catechism, that he should renounce episcopacy and adopt the presbyterian form of worship; 3d, that in all civil matters he should submit to the parliament, and in things ecclesiastical to the authority of the general assembly; and, lastly, that he should remove from his person and court the Marquis of Montrose, “a person excommunicated by the church, and forfaulted by the parliament of Scotland, being a man most justly, if ever any, cast out of the church of God.”

These conditions, so flattering to popular prejudice and the prevailing ideas of the times, appear to have been proposed only because Argyle thought they would be rejected by the youthful monarch, surrounded as he then was by counsellors to whom these terms would be particularly obnoxious. To carry these propositions to Charles II., then at the Hague, seven commissioners from the parliament and kirk were appointed, who set sail from Kirkcaldy roads on the 17th of March,[383] arriving at the Hague on the 26th. His court, which at first consisted of the few persons whom his father had placed about him, had been lately increased by the arrival of the Earl of Lanark, now become, by the death of his brother, Duke of Hamilton, the Earls of Lauderdale and Callander, the heads of the Engagers; and by the subsequent addition of Montrose, Kinnoul, and Seaforth. The following graphic sketch is given by Dr. Wishart of the appearance and reception of the commissioners:--“When these commissioners, or deputies from the Estates were admitted to their first audience of the king, their solemn gait, their grave dress, and dejected countenances, had all the appearance imaginable of humility; and many who were not acquainted with the temper and practices of the men, from thence concluded that they were about to implore of his majesty a general oblivion and pardon for what was past, and to promise a perfect obedience and submission in time coming; and that they were ready to yield every thing that was just and reasonable, and would be sincere in all their proposals of peace and accommodation. They acted in a double capacity, and had instructions both from the Estates and from the commission of the kirk, in both of which the Earl of Cassilis was the chief person, not only in what they were charged with from the Estates, as being a nobleman, but also from the commission of the kirk, of which he was a ruling elder. Their address to the king was introduced with abundance of deep sighs and heavy groans, as if they had been labouring, as Virgil says of the Sibyl, to shake the ponderous load from off their breasts, after which they at last exhibited their papers, containing the ordinances of the Estates, and acts of the commission of the kirk, and pretended that the terms demanded in them were moderate, just, and reasonable, and absolutely necessary for settling the present confusions, and restoring the king; with which, if he complied, he would be immediately settled upon his father’s throne by the unanimous consent of the people.”[384]

The king, after vainly endeavouring to induce the commissioners to modify the conditions to which his acceptance was required, and to declare publicly their opinions of the murder of his father, to which they had made no allusion, declined to agree to the terms proposed. He at the same time stated, that as he had been already proclaimed king of Scotland by the Committee of Estates, it was their duty to obey him, and that he should expect the Committee of Estates, the assembly of the kirk, and the nation at large, to perform their duty to him, humbly obeying, maintaining, and defending him as their lawful sovereign.[385] The commissioners having got their answer on the 19th of May, returned to Scotland, and Charles went to St. Germain in France, to visit Queen Henrietta Maria, his mother, before going to Ireland, whither he had been invited by the Marquis of Ormond to join the royalist army.

During the captivity of Charles I., Montrose used every exertion at the court of France to raise money and men to enable him to make a descent upon the coast of England or Scotland, to rescue his sovereign from confinement; but his endeavours proving ineffectual, he entered into the service of the Emperor of Germany, who honoured him with especial marks of his esteem. He had been lately residing at Brussels engaged in the affairs of the emperor, where he received letters from the Prince of Wales, then at the Hague, requiring his attendance to consult on the state of his father’s affairs; but before he set out for the Hague, he received the news of the death of Charles I. He was so overwhelmed with grief at this intelligence, that according to Bishop Wishart, who was an eye-witness, he fainted and fell down in the midst of his attendants, and appeared for some time as if quite dead. When he had sufficiently recovered to give full vent to his feelings, he expressed a desire to die with his sovereign, as he could no longer enjoy, as he said, a life which had now become a grievous and heavy burden. But on Wishart remonstrating with him upon the impropriety of entertaining such a sentiment, and informing him that he should be rather more desirous of life that he might avenge the death of his royal master, and place his son and lawful successor upon the throne of his ancestors, Montrose replied with composure, that in that view he should be satisfied to live; “but,” continued he, “I swear before God, angels, and men, that I will dedicate the remainder of my life to the avenging the death of the royal martyr, and re-establishing his son upon his father’s throne.”

On arriving at the Hague, Montrose was received by Charles II. with marked distinction. After some consultation, a descent upon Scotland was resolved upon, and Montrose, thereupon, received a commission, appointing him Lieutenant-governor of Scotland, and commander-in-chief of all the forces there both by sea and land. The king also appointed him his ambassador to the emperor, the princes of Germany, the King of Denmark, and other friendly sovereigns, to solicit supplies of money and warlike stores, to enable him to commence the war. Thus, before the commissioners had arrived, the king had made up his mind as to the course he should pursue, and being backed by the opinion of a man of such an ardent temperament as Montrose, the result of the communing between the king and the commissioners was as might have been expected.

Connected probably with Montrose’s plan of a descent, a rising took place in the north under Thomas Mackenzie of Pluscardine, brother of the Earl of Seaforth, Sir Thomas Urquhart of Cromarty, Colonel John Munro of Lumlair, and Colonel Hugh Fraser, who, at the head of a number of their friends and followers, entered the town of Inverness, on the 22d of February, expelled the troops from the garrison, and demolished and razed the walls and fortifications of the town. The pretext put forward by Mackenzie and his friends was, that the parliament had sent private commissioners to apprehend them; but the fact appears to be, that this insurrection had taken place at the instigation of the king, between whom and Pluscardine a correspondence had been previously opened.[386] General David Leslie was sent to the north with a force to suppress the insurgents, who, on his approach, fled to the mountains of Ross; but he was soon obliged to retrace his steps, in consequence of a rising in Athole under the direction of Lord Ogilvie, General Middleton, and others, in favour of the king. Leslie had previously made terms with Urquhart, Munro, and Fraser, but as Mackenzie would not listen to any accommodation, he left behind him a garrison in the castle of Chanonry, and also three troops of horse in Moray under the charge of Colonel Gilbert Ker, and Lieutenant-colonels Hacket and Strachan, to watch Pluscardine’s motions. But this force was quite insufficient to resist Pluscardine, who, on the departure of Leslie, descended from the mountains and attacked the castle of Chanonry, which he re-took. He was thereupon joined by his nephew, Lord Reay, at the head of 300 well-armed able-bodied men, which increased his force to between 800 and 900.

Having suppressed the rising in Athole, Leslie was again sent north by the parliament, accompanied by the Earl of Sutherland; but he had not proceeded far, when he ascertained that Mackenzie had been induced by Lord Ogilvie and General Middleton, who had lately joined him, to advance southward into Badenoch, with the view of raising the people in that and the neighbouring districts, and that they had been there joined by the young Marquis of Huntly, formerly Lord Lewis Gordon, and had taken the castle of Ruthven. Leslie thereupon divided his army, with one part of which he himself entered Badenoch, while he despatched the Earl of Sutherland to the north to collect forces in Ross, Sutherland, and Caithness, with another part, consisting of five troops of horse, under the command of Ker, Hacket, and Strachan. To hinder the royalists from retiring into Athole, Leslie marched southward towards Glenesk, by which movement he compelled them to leave Badenoch and to march down Spey-side towards Balveny. On arriving at Balveny, they resolved to enter into a negotiation with Leslie, and accordingly Pluscardine and Middleton left Balveny with a troop of horse to meet Leslie, leaving Huntly, Reay, and Ogilvie, in charge of the forces, the former of whom sent his brother Lord Charles Gordon to the Enzie, to raise some horse.

While waiting for the return of Pluscardine and Middleton, the party at Balveny had not the slightest idea that they might be taken by surprise; but on the 8th of May at day-break, they were most unexpectedly attacked by the horse which had been sent north with the Earl of Sutherland, and which, returning from Ross, had speedily crossed the Spey. Seizing the royalist sentinels, they surprised Lord Reay at the castle of Balveny, where he and about 900 foot were taken prisoners and about 80 killed. Huntly and Ogilvie, who had their quarters at the church of Mortlach, about a mile from Balveny castle, escaped. Colonel Ker at once dismissed all the prisoners to their own homes on giving their oaths not to take up arms against the parliament in time coming. He sent Lord Reay along with some of his kinsmen and friends and Mackenzie of Redcastle and other prisoners of his surname to Edinburgh; all of whom were imprisoned. Huntly, Ogilvie, Pluscardine, and Middleton, on giving security to keep the peace, were forgiven by Leslie and returned to their homes. Colonel Ker afterwards returned to Ross, took Redcastle, which he demolished, and hanged the persons who had defended it. Thus ended this premature insurrection which, had it been delayed till the arrival of Montrose, might have been attended with a very different result.[387]

The projected descent by Montrose upon Scotland, was considered by many persons as a desperate measure, which none but those quite reckless of consequences would attempt; but there were others, chiefly among the ultra-royalists, who viewed the affair in a different light, and who, although they considered the enterprise as one not without considerable risk, anticipated its success. Such, at least, were the sentiments of some of the king’s friends before the insurrection under Mackenzie of Pluscardine had been crushed; but it is very probable that these were greatly altered after its suppression. The failure of Pluscardine’s ill-timed attempt was indeed considered by Montrose as a great misfortune, but a misfortune far from irreparable, and as he had invitations from the royalist nobility of Scotland, requesting him to enter upon his enterprise, and promising him every assistance in their power, and as he was assured that the great body of the Scottish nation was ready to second his views, he entered upon the task assigned him by his royal master, with an alacrity and willingness which indicated a confidence on his part of ultimate success.

In terms of the powers he had received from the king, Montrose visited the north of Europe, and obtained promises of assistance of men, money, and ammunition, from some of the northern princes; but few of them fulfilled their engagements in consequence of the intrigues of the king’s enemies with the courtiers, who thwarted with all their influence the measures of Montrose. By the most indefatigable industry and perseverance, however, he collected a force of 1,200 men at Gottenburg, about 800 of whom had been raised in Holstein and Hamburg, and having received from the Queen of Sweden 1,500 complete stands of arms, for arming such persons as might join his standard on landing in Scotland, he resolved, without loss of time, to send off this armament to the Orkneys, where, in consequence of a previous arrangement with the Earl of Morton, who was favourable to the king, it was agreed that a descent should be made. Accordingly, the first division of the expedition, which consisted of three parts, was despatched early in September; but it never reached its destination, the vessels having foundered at sea in a storm. The second division was more fortunate, and arrived at Kirkwall, about the end of the month. It consisted of 200 common soldiers and 80 officers, under the command of the Earl of Kinnoul, who on landing was joined by his uncle the Earl of Morton and by many of the Orkney gentlemen. Kinnoul immediately laid siege to the castle of Birsay, which was soon surrendered to him; and he proceeded to raise levies among the Orcadians, but was checked in his progress in consequence of a difference with Morton, who claimed the privilege, as superior of Orkney, of commanding his own vassals, a claim which Kinnoul would not allow. Morton felt the repulse keenly, and died soon thereafter of a broken heart, as is believed. His nephew, perhaps hurt at the treatment he had given his uncle, speedily followed him to the grave.

The news of Kinnoul’s landing reached Edinburgh about the 14th of October, when General David Leslie was despatched to the north with seven or eight troops of horse to watch him if he attempted to cross the Pentland Frith; but seeing no appearance of an enemy, and hearing of intended commotions among the royalists in Angus and the Mearns, he returned to the south after an absence of fifteen days,[388] having previously placed strong garrisons in some of the northern strengths.[389]

Montrose himself, with the remainder of the expedition, still tarried at Gottenburg, in the expectation of obtaining additional reinforcements or of procuring supplies of arms and money. It appears from a letter[390] which he addressed to the Earl of Seaforth, of the date of 15th December, that he intended to sail for Scotland the following day; but owing to various causes he did not leave Gottenburg till about the end of February 1650. He landed in Orkney in the beginning of March, with a force of 500 men, accompanied by Lord Frendraught, Major General Hurry, and other gentlemen who had attached themselves to his service and fortunes.

To prepare the minds of the people of Scotland for the enterprise he was about to undertake, Montrose, about the close of the year, had circulated a “Declaration” in Scotland, as “Lieutenant-governor and Captain-general for his Majesty of the Kingdom of Scotland,” in which, after detailing the proceedings of those whom he termed “an horrid and infamous faction of rebels within the kingdom of Scotland,” towards his late majesty, he declared that his present majesty was not only willing to pardon every one, with the exception of those who upon clear evidence should be found guilty “of that most damnable fact of murder of his father,” provided that immediately or upon the first convenient occasion, they abandoned the rebels and joined him, and therefore, he expected all persons who had “any duty left them to God, their king, country, friends, homes, wives, children, or would change now at last the tyranny, violence, and oppression of those rebels, with the mild and innocent government of their just prince, or revenge the horrid and execrable murdering of their sacred king, redeem their nation from infamy, restore the present and oblige the ages to come, would join themselves with him in the service he was about to engage.”

This declaration which, by order of the Committee of Estates, was publicly burnt at the market cross of Edinburgh, by the hands of the common hangman, was answered on the 2d of January, by a “declaration and warning of the commission of the General Assembly,” addressed to “all the members of the kirk and kingdom,” which was followed on the 24th of the same month, by another “declaration” from the Committee of Estates of the parliament of Scotland, in vindication of their proceedings from “the aspersions of a scandalous pamphlet, published by that excommunicate traitor, James Graham, under the title of a ‘Declaration of James, Marquis of Montrose.’” The last of these documents vindicates at great length, and apparently with great success, those whom Montrose had designated the “infamous faction of rebels,” not because the committee thought “it worth the while to answer the slanders and groundless reproaches of that viperous brood of Satan, James Graham, whom the Estates of parliament had long since declared traitor, the church delivered into the hands of the devil, and the nation doth generally detest and abhor;” but because “their silence might be subject to misconstruction, and some of the weaker sort might be inveigled by the bold assertions and railing accusations of this impudent braggard, presenting himself to the view of the world clothed with his majesty’s authority, as lieutenant-governor and captain-general of this kingdom.” These declarations of the kirk and Estates, backed as they were by fulminations from all the pulpits of the kingdom against Montrose, made a deep impression on men’s minds, highly unfavourable to him; and as the Committee of Estates discharged all persons from aiding or assisting him under the pain of high treason, and as every action and word of those considered friendly to him were strictly watched, they did not attempt, and had they attempted, would have found it impossible, to make any preparations to receive him on his arrival.

Such was the situation of matters when Montrose landed in Orkney, where, in consequence of the death of Morton and Kinnoul, little progress had been made in raising troops. He remained several weeks in Orkney, without exciting much notice, and having collected about 800 of the natives, which, with the addition of the 200 troops carried over by Kinnoul, made his whole force amount to about 1,500 men, he crossed the Pentland Frith in a number of boats collected among the islands, and landed without opposition at the northern extremity of Caithness, in the immediate vicinity of John o’Groat’s house. On landing, he displayed three banners, one of which was made of black taffeta, in the centre of which was exhibited a representation of the bleeding head of the late king, as struck off from the body, surrounded by two inscriptions, “Judge and avenge my cause, O Lord,” and “Deo et victricibus armis.” Another standard had this motto, “Quos pietas virtus et honor fecit amicus.” These two banners were those of the king. The third, which was Montrose’s own, bore the words, “Nil medium,” a motto strongly significant of the uncompromising character of the man.[391] Montrose immediately compelled the inhabitants of Caithness to swear obedience to him as the king’s lieutenant-governor. All the ministers, with the exception of one named William Smith, took the oath, and to punish Smith for his disobedience, he was sent in irons on board a vessel.[392] A number of the inhabitants, however, alarmed at the arrival of foreign troops, with whose presence they considered carnage and murder to be associated, were seized with a panic and fled, nor did some of them stop till they reached Edinburgh, where they carried the alarming intelligence of Montrose’s advance to the parliament which was then sitting.

As soon as the Earl of Sutherland heard of Montrose’s arrival in Caithness, he assembled all his countrymen to oppose his advance into Sutherland. He sent, at the same time, for two troops of horse stationed in Ross, to assist him, but their officers being in Edinburgh, they refused to obey, as they had received no orders. Being apprized of the earl’s movements, and anticipating that he might secure the important pass of the Ord, and thus prevent him from entering Sutherland, Montrose despatched a body of 500 men to the south, who obtained possession of the pass. The next step Montrose took, was against the castle of Dunbeath, belonging to Sir John Sinclair, who, on Montrose’s arrival, had fled and left the place in charge of his lady. The castle was strong and well supplied with provisions, and the possession of it was considered very important by Montrose, in case he should be obliged to retreat into Orkney. The castle, which was defended by Sir John’s lady and a few servants, surrendered to General Hurry, after a short resistance, on condition that persons and property should be respected. Hurry put a strong garrison in the castle, under the command of Major Whiteford.

Having secured this important strength, Montrose marched into Sutherland, leaving Henry Graham, his natural brother, behind him with a party to raise men for the service. While in Caithness, the only persons that proffered their services to Montrose, were Hucheon Mackay of Skoury, Hugh Mackay of Dirlet, and Alexander Sinclair of Brims, whom he despatched to Strathnaver, to collect forces, but they appear to have neglected the matter. On the approach of Montrose, the Earl of Sutherland, not conceiving himself in a condition to resist, retired with his men, and putting strong garrisons into Dunrobin, Skelbo, Skibo, and Dornoch, and sending off a party with cattle and effects to the hills to be out of the reach of the enemy, he went himself into Ross with 300 of his men. Montrose continued to advance, and encamped the first night at Garty and Helmsdale, the second at Kintredwell, and the third night at Rhives. In passing by Dunrobin, a part of his men went between the castle and the sea, some of whom were killed, and others taken prisoners, in a sortie from the garrison. On the following day, Montrose demanded the prisoners from William Gordon the commander of Dunrobin, but his request was refused. Montrose encamped at Rian in Strathfleet the fourth night, at Gruidy on the fifth, and at Strathoikel on the sixth. He then marched to Carbisdale, on the borders of Ross-shire, where he halted a few days in expectation of being joined by the Mackenzies. While reposing here in fancied security and calculating on complete success, he sent a notification to the Earl of Sutherland to the effect, that though he had spared his lands for the present, yet the time was at hand when he would make his own neighbours undo him. Little did Montrose then imagine that his own fate was so near at hand.

As soon as intelligence of Montrose’s descent was received in Edinburgh, the most active preparations were made to send north troops to meet him. David Leslie, the commander-in-chief, appointed Brechin as the place of rendezvous for the troops; but as a considerable time would necessarily elapse before they could be all collected, and as apprehensions were entertained that Montrose might speedily penetrate into the heart of the Highlands, where he could not fail to find auxiliaries, Lieutenant-Colonel Strachan, an officer who had been particularly active in suppressing Pluscardine’s insurrection, was despatched, in the meantime, to the north with a few troops of horse, for the purpose of keeping Montrose in check, and enabling the Earl of Sutherland, and the other presbyterian leaders in the north to raise their levies. These troops, which were those of Ker, Hacket, Montgomery, and Strachan, and an Irish troop commanded by one Collace, were joined by a body of about 500 foot under the Earl of Sutherland, Ross of Balnagown, and Munro of Lumlair, all of whom were assembled at Tain when Montrose encamped at Strathoikel. This movement brought the hostile parties within twenty miles of each other, but Montrose was not aware that his enemy was so near at hand. Strachan, who had early intelligence brought him of Montrose’s advance, immediately called a council of war to deliberate, at which it was resolved that the Earl of Sutherland should, by a circuitous movement, throw himself into Montrose’s rear, in order to prevent a junction between him and Henry Graham, and such of the Strathnaver and Caithness men as should attempt to join him. It was resolved that, at the same time, Strachan with his five troops of horse, and the Munroes, and Rosses, under Balnagown, and Lumlair, should march directly forward and attack Montrose in the level country before he should, as was contemplated, retire to the hills on the approach of Leslie, who was hastening rapidly north with a force of 4,000 horse and foot, at the rate of thirty miles a-day.

It was Saturday the 27th of April, when Strachan’s officers were deliberating whether they should move immediately forward or wait till Monday, “and so decline the hazard of engaging upon the Lord’s day,”[393] when notice being brought that Montrose had advanced from Strathoikel to Carbisdale, a movement which brought him six miles nearer to them, they made arrangements for attacking him without delay. Strachan advanced without observation as far as Fearn, within a mile and a half or two miles of Montrose, where he concealed his men on a moor covered with broom, whence he sent out a party of scouts under Captain Andrew Munro, son of Munro of Lumlair, to reconnoitre Montrose. Munro soon returned and reported that Montrose had sent out a body of 40 horse to ascertain their movements. In order to deceive this body, Strachan ordered one troop of horse out of the broom, which being the only force observed by Montrose’s scouts, they returned and reported to Montrose what they had seen. This intelligence threw Montrose completely off his guard, who, conceiving that the whole strength of the enemy consisted of a single troop of horse, made no preparations for defending himself.

In the meantime, Strachan formed his men into four divisions. The first, which consisted of about 100 horsemen, he commanded himself; the second, amounting to upwards of 80, was given in charge to Hacket; and the third, also horse, to the number of about 40, was led by Captain Hutcheson. The fourth division, which was composed of a body of musketeers belonging to Lawer’s regiment, was commanded by one Quarter-master Shaw.[394]

The deception which had been so well practised upon Montrose by Strachan, in concealing the real amount of his force, might not have been attended with any serious effect to Montrose, but for another stratagem which Strachan had in reserve, and which proved Montrose’s ruin. Strachan’s scheme was first to advance with his own division to make it appear as if his whole strength consisted of only 100 horse, and while Montrose was impressed with this false idea, to bring up the other three divisions in rapid succession, and thus create a panic among Montrose’s men as if a large army were about to attack them. This contrivance was crowned with the most complete success. Montrose little suspecting the trick, was thrown quite off his guard, and alarmed at the sudden appearance of successive bodies of cavalry, he immediately gave orders for a retreat to a wood and craggy hill at a short distance in his rear; but before Montrose’s men could reach their intended place of retreat, they were overtaken when almost breathless, by Strachan’s troopers, who charged them violently. The foreign troops received the charge with firmness, and, after discharging a volley upon the horse, flew into the wood; but most of the Orcadians threw down their arms in terror and begged for quarter. The Munroes and Rosses followed the Danish troops into the wood and killed many of them. 200 of the fugitives in attempting to cross the adjoining river were drowned.

Montrose for some time made an unavailing effort to rally some of his men, and fought with his accustomed bravery; but having his horse shot under him, and seeing it utterly impossible longer to resist the enemy, he mounted the horse of Lord Frendraught, which that young and generous nobleman proffered him, and galloped off the field; and as soon as he got out of the reach of the enemy, he dismounted, and throwing away his cloak, which was decorated with the star of the garter, and his sword, sought his safety on foot.

The slaughter of Montrose’s men continued about two hours, or until sunset, during which time ten of his best officers and 386 common soldiers were killed. The most conspicuous among the former for bravery was Menzies younger of Pitfoddles, the bearer of the black standard, who repeatedly refused to receive quarter. Upwards of 400 prisoners were taken, including 31 officers, among whom were Sir John Hurry and Lord Frendraught, the latter of whom was severely wounded. Among the prisoners taken were two ministers. This victory was achieved almost without bloodshed on the part of the victors, who had only two men wounded, and one trooper drowned. After the slaughter, the conquerors returned thanks to God on the open field for the victory they had obtained, and returned to Tain, carrying the prisoners along with them.[395] For several days the people of Ross and Sutherland continued to pursue some unfortunate stragglers, whom they despatched. The result was most calamitous to Orkney, as appears from a petition and memorandum by the gentlemen of Orkney to Lord Morton in 1662, in which it is stated, that there was scarcely a gentleman’s house in that country “but lost either a son or a brother.”[396]

Montrose, accompanied by the Earl of Kinnoul, who had lately succeeded to the title on the death of his brother, and six or seven companions, having, as before stated, dismounted from his horse and thrown away his cloak and sword, and having, by the advice of his friends, to avoid detection, exchanged his clothes for the more homely attire of a common Highlander, wandered all night and the two following days among bleak and solitary regions, without knowing where to proceed, and ready to perish under the accumulated distresses of hunger, fatigue, and anxiety of mind. The Earl of Kinnoul, unable, from exhaustion, to follow Montrose any farther, was left among the mountains, where it is supposed he perished. When upon the point of starvation, Montrose was fortunate to light upon a small cottage, where he obtained a supply of milk and bread,[397] on receiving which he continued his lonely and dangerous course among the mountains of Sutherland, at the risk of being seized every hour, and dragged as a felon before the very man whom, only a few days before, he had threatened with his vengeance.

In the meantime, active search was made after Montrose. As it was conjectured that he might attempt to reach Caithness, where his natural brother, Henry Graham, still remained with some troops in possession of the castle of Dunbeath, and as it appeared probable, from the direction Montrose was supposed to have taken, that he meant to go through Assynt, Captain Andrew Munro sent instructions to Neil Macleod, the laird of Assynt, his brother-in-law, to apprehend every stranger that might enter his bounds, in the hope of catching Montrose, for whose apprehension a splendid reward was offered. In consequence of these instructions, Macleod sent out various parties in quest of Montrose, but they could not fall in with him. “At last,” says Bishop Wishart, “the laird of Assynt being abroad in arms with some of his tenants in search of him, lighted on him in a place where he had continued three or four days without meat or drink, and only one man in his company.” The bishop then states, that “Assynt had formerly been one of Montrose’s own followers; who immediately knowing him, and believing to find friendship at his hands, willingly discovered himself; but Assynt not daring to conceal him, and being greedy of the reward which was promised to the person who should apprehend him by the Council of the Estates, immediately seized and disarmed him.”[398] This account differs a little from that of the author of the continuation of Sir Robert Gordon’s history, who, however, it must be remembered, represents the Earl of Sutherland and his friends in as favourable a light as possible. Gordon says, that it was one of Macleod’s parties that apprehended Montrose, and is altogether silent as to Assynt’s having been his follower; but both writers inform us that Montrose offered Macleod a large sum of money for his liberty, which he refused to grant. Macleod kept Montrose and his companion, Major Sinclair, an Orkney gentleman, prisoners in the castle of Ardvraick, his principal residence. By order of Leslie, Montrose was thence removed to Skibo castle, where he was kept two nights, thereafter to the castle of Braan, and thence again to Edinburgh.

In his progress to the capital, Montrose had to endure all those indignities which vulgar minds, instigated by malevolence and fanaticism, could suggest; but he bore every insult with perfect composure. At a short interview which he had with two of his children at the house of the Earl of South Esk, his father-in-law, on his way to Edinburgh, he exhibited the same composure, for “neither at meeting nor parting could any change of his former countenance be discerned, or the least expression heard which was not suitable to the greatness of his spirit, and the fame of his former actions. His behaviour was, during the whole journey, such as became a great man; his countenance was serene and cheerful, as one who was superior to all those reproaches which they had prepared the people to pour out upon him in all the places through which he was to pass.”[399]

At Dundee, which had particularly suffered from his army, a very different feeling was shown by the inhabitants, who displayed a generosity of feeling and a sympathy for fallen greatness, which did them immortal honour. Instead of insulting the fallen hero in his distress, they commiserated his misfortunes, and prevailed upon his guards to permit him to exchange the rustic and mean apparel in which he had been apprehended, and which, to excite the derision of the mob, they had compelled him to wear, for a more becoming dress which had been provided for him by the people of Dundee. The sensibilities of the inhabitants had probably been awakened by a bold and ineffectual attempt to rescue Montrose, made by the lady of the laird of Grange, at whose house, in the neighbourhood of Dundee, he had passed the previous night. The author of the Memoirs of the Somervilles gives the following characteristic account of this affair:--

“It was at this ladye’s house that that party of the Covenanters their standing armie, that gairded in the Marques of Montrose, efter his forces was beat and himself betrayed in the north, lodged him, whom this excellent lady designed to sett at libertie, by procureing his escape from her house; in order to this, soe soon as ther quarters was settled, and that she had observed the way and manner of the placeing of the guairds, and what officers commanded them, she not only ordered her butlers to let the souldiers want for noe drink, but she herself, out of respect and kyndnesse, as she pretended, plyed hard the officers and souldiers of the main-guaird, (which was keeped in her owne hall) with the strongest ale and acquavite, that before midnight, all of them, (being for the most part Highlandmen of Lawer’s regiment) became starke drunke. If her stewarts and other servants had obeyed her directions in giving out what drinke the out-gairds should have called for, undoubtedly the business had been effectuat; but unhappily, when the marques had passed the first and second centinells that was sleeping upon their musquets, and likewayes through the main-gaird, that was lying in the hall lyke swyne on a midding, he was challenged a little without the outmost guaird by a wretched trouper of Strachan’s troupe, that had been present at his taking. This fellow was none of the guaird that night, but being quartered hard by, was come rammelling in for his bellieful of drinke, when he made this unluckie discovery, which being done, the marques was presently seized upon, and with much rudenesse (being in the ladye’s cloaths which he had put on for a disguize) turned back to his prisone chamber. The lady, her old husband, with the wholl servants of the house, were made prisoners for that night, and the morrow efter, when they came to be challenged before these that had the command of this party, and some members of that wretched Committee of Estates, that satt allways at Edinbrough (for mischief to the royall interest,) which they had sent for the more security, to be still with this party, fearing the great friends and weill-wishers this noble heroe had upon the way he was to come, should either by force or stratageme, be taken from them. The ladie, as she had been the only contryver of Montrose’s escape, soe did she avow the same before them all; testifying she was heartily sorry it had not taken effect according to her wished desyre. This confidence of hers, as it bred some admiratione in her accusors, soe it freed her husband and the servants from being farder challenged; only they took security of the laird for his ladye’s appearing before the Committie of Estates when called, which she never was. Ther worships gott something else to thinke upon, then to conveen soe excellent a lady before them upon such ane account, as tended greatly to her honour and ther oune shame.”

The parliament, which had been adjourned till the 15th of May, met on the appointed day, and named a committee to devise the mode of his reception into the capital and the manner of his death. In terms of the committee’s report an act was passed on the 17th of May, ordaining “James Graham” to be conveyed bareheaded from the Water Gate (the eastern extremity of the city) on a cart, to which he was to be tied with a rope, and drawn by the hangman in his livery, with his hat on, to the jail of Edinburgh, and thence to be brought to the parliament house, and there on his knees to receive sentence of death. It was resolved that he should be hanged on a gibbet at the cross of Edinburgh, with the book which contained the history of his wars and the declaration which he had issued, tied to his neck, and after hanging for the space of three hours, that his body should be cut down by the hangman, his head severed from his body, fixed on an iron spike, and placed on the pinnacle on the west end of the prison; that his hands and legs should also be cut off, the former to be placed over the gates of Perth and Stirling, and the latter over those of Aberdeen and Glasgow; that if at his death he showed any signs of repentance, and should in consequence be relieved from the sentence of excommunication which the kirk had pronounced against him, that the trunk of his body should be interred by “pioneers” in the Gray Friars’ churchyard; but otherwise, that it should be buried by the hangman’s assistants, under the scaffold on the Boroughmuir, the usual place of execution.[400]

The minds of the populace had, at this time, been wrought up to the highest pitch of hatred at Montrose by the ministers, who, during a fast which had lately been held in thanksgiving for his apprehension, had launched the most dreadful and bloody invectives against him, and to this circumstance perhaps is to be attributed the ignominious plan devised for his reception.

On the day following the passing of the act, Montrose was brought up from Leith, mounted on an outworn horse, to the Water Gate, along with 23 of his officers, his fellow-prisoners, where he was met about four o’clock, P.M., by the magistrates of the city in their robes, followed by the “town guard,” and the common executioner. Having been delivered by his guards to the civic authorities, whose duty it now was to take charge of his person, Montrose was, for the first time, made acquainted with the fate which awaited him, by one of the magistrates putting a copy of the sentence into his hands. He perused the paper with composure, and after he had read it he informed the magistrates that he was ready to submit to his fate, and only regretted, “that through him the king’s majesty, whose person he represented, should be so much dishonoured.”[401]

Before mounting the vehicle brought for his reception, Montrose was ordered by the hangman to uncover his head; but as the mandate was not immediately attended to, that abhorred instrument of the law enforced his command with his own hands. He thereupon made Montrose go into the cart, and placing him on a high chair fixed upon a small platform raised at the end of the cart, he pinioned his arms close to his sides by means of cords, which being passed across his breast, and fastened behind the vehicle, kept him so firmly fixed as to render his body immoveable. The other prisoners, who were tied together in pairs, having been marshalled in front of the cart in walking order and uncovered, the hangman, clothed in his official attire, mounted one of the horses[402] attached to the cart, and the procession thereupon moved off at a slow pace up the Canongate, in presence of thousands of spectators, who lined the long street, and filled the windows of the adjoining houses. Among the crowd which thronged the street to view the mournful spectacle was a great number of the inferior classes of the community, chiefly females, who had come with the determined intention of venting abuse upon the fallen hero, and pelting him, as he proceeded along the street, with dirt, stones, and other missiles, incited thereto by the harangues of the ministers on occasion of the late fast; but they were so overawed by the dignity of his demeanour, and the undaunted courage of soul which he displayed, that their feelings were at once overcome, and instead of covering him with reproaches, they dissolved into tears of pity at the sight of fallen greatness, and invoked the blessings of heaven upon the head of the illustrious captive. A result so totally unlooked-for, could not be but exceedingly displeasing to the enemies of Montrose, and particularly to the ministers, who, on the following day (Sunday), denounced the conduct of the people from the pulpits of the city, and threatened them with the wrath of heaven.

But displeasing as the humane reception of Montrose was to the clergy, it must have been much more mortifying to Argyle, his mortal enemy, who, contrary to modern notions of decency and good feeling, surrounded by his family and the marriage party of his newly-wedded son, Lord Lorn, appeared publicly on a balcony in front of the Earl of Moray’s house[403] in the Canongate, from which he beheld undaunted the great Montrose, powerless now to do him personal harm. To add to the insult, either accidentally or on purpose, the vehicle which carried Montrose was stopped for some time beneath the place where Argyle and his party stood, so that they were able to take a leisurely view of the object of their hate and fear, and it would appear that they took advantage of their fallen foe’s position to indulge in unseemly demonstrations of triumph and insult. For the sake of humanity and the honour of tender-hearted woman, we would fain disbelieve the statement that the Marchioness of Argyle had the effrontery to vent her hatred toward the fallen enemy of her house by spitting upon him. Whatever were the inward workings of Montrose’s soul, he betrayed no symptoms of inquietude, but preserved, during this trying scene, a dignified demeanour which is said to have considerably discomposed his triumphant rival and his friends.

Although the distance from the Water Gate to the prison was only about half a mile, yet so slow had the procession moved, that it was almost seven o’clock in the evening before it reached the prison. When released from the cart Montrose gave the hangman some money for his services in having driven so well his “triumphal chariot,”[404] as he jocularly termed the cart. On being lodged in jail, he was immediately visited by a small committee appointed by the parliament, which had held an extraordinary meeting at six o’clock in the evening. Balfour says, that the object of the committee, which consisted of three members and two ministers, was to ask “James Grahame if he had any thing to say, and to show him that he was to repair to the house to receive his sentence.” The house remained sitting till the return of the deputation, who reported that Montrose had refused to answer any of the questions put to him till he was informed upon what terms they stood with the king, and whether they had concluded any agreement with him. In consequence of this information, the parliament delayed passing sentence till Monday the 20th of May; and, in the meantime, appointed seven of their members to wait upon the marquis and examine him on some points respecting “Duke Hamilton and others;” and to induce him to answer, the deputation was instructed to inform him, that an agreement had been concluded between the commissioners on the part of the estates and his majesty, who was coming to Scotland.[405] Montrose, however, excused himself from annoyance by stating, that as his journey had been long, and as “the ceremony and compliment they had paid him that day had been somewhat wearisome and tedious,” he required repose;[406] in consequence of which the deputation left him.

Montrose meant to have spent the whole of the following day, being Sunday, in devotional exercises suitable to his trying situation; but he was denied this consolation by the incessant intrusions of the ministers and members of parliament, who annoyed him by asking a variety of ensnaring questions, which he having refused to answer, they gave vent to the foulest reproaches against him. These insults, however, had no effect on him, nor did he show the least symptoms of impatience, but carried himself throughout with a firmness which no menaces could shake. When he broke silence at last, he said that “they were much mistaken if they imagined that they had affronted him by carrying him in a vile cart the day before; for he esteemed it the most honourable and cheerful journey he had ever performed in his life; his most merciful God and Redeemer having all the while manifested his presence to him in a most comfortable and inexpressible manner, and supplied him by his divine grace, with resolution and constancy to overlook the reproaches of men, and to behold him alone for whose cause he suffered.”[407]

Agreeably to the order of parliament, Montrose was brought up by the magistrates of Edinburgh on Monday at ten o’clock forenoon to receive sentence. As if to give dignity and importance to the cause for which he was about to suffer, and to show how indifferent he was to his own fate, Montrose appeared at the bar of the parliament in a superb dress which he had provided for the purpose, after his arrival in Edinburgh. His small clothes consisted of a rich suit of black silk, covered with costly silver lace, over which he wore a scarlet rochet which reached to his knee, and which was trimmed with silver galloons, and lined with crimson taffeta. He also wore silk stockings of a carnation colour, with garters, roses and corresponding ornaments, and a beaver hat having a very rich silver band.[408]

Having ascended “the place of delinquents,” a platform on which criminals received sentence, Montrose surveyed the scene before him with his wonted composure, and though his countenance was rather pale, and exhibited other symptoms of care, his firmness never for a moment forsook him. Twice indeed was he observed to heave a sigh and to roll his eyes along the house,[409] during the virulent invectives which the lord-chancellor (Loudon) poured out upon him, but these emotions were only the indications of the warmth of his feelings while suffering under reproaches which he could not resent.

The lord-chancellor, in rising to address Montrose, entered into a long detail of his “rebellions,” as he designated the warlike actions of Montrose, who, he said, had invaded his native country with hostile arms, and had called in Irish rebels and foreigners to his assistance. He then reproached Montrose with having broken not only the national covenant, which he had bound himself to support, but also the solemn league and covenant, to which the whole nation had sworn; and he concluded by informing Montrose, that for the many murders, treasons, and impieties of which he had been guilty, God had now brought him to suffer condign punishment. After the chancellor had concluded his harangue, Montrose requested permission to say a few words in his own vindication, which being granted, though not without some difficulty, he proceeded to vindicate his conduct, showing that it was the result of sincere patriotism and devoted loyalty.

“He had,” he said, “not spilt any blood, not even that of his most inveterate enemies, but in the field of battle; and that even in the greatest heat of action he had preserved the lives of many thousands; and that as he had first taken up arms at the command of the king, he had laid them down upon his orders, without any regard to his own interest, and had retired beyond the seas.

“With regard to his late invasion, he said, he had undertaken it at the command and by the express orders of the present king, (to whom they all owed duty and allegiance, and for whose long and happy reign he offered his sincere and earnest prayers,) in order to accelerate the treaty which was then begun betwixt him and them--that it was his intention, as soon as the treaty had been concluded, to lay down arms and retire at the call of his majesty; and such being his authority and determination, he might justly affirm, that no subject ever acted upon more honourable grounds, nor by a more lawful power and authority than he had done in the late expedition.

“In conclusion, he called upon the assemblage to lay aside all prejudice, private animosity, and desire of revenge, and to consider him, in relation to the justice of his cause, as a man and a Christian, and an obedient subject, in relation to the commands of his sovereign, which he had faithfully executed. He then put them in mind of the great obligations which many of them were under to him, for having preserved their lives and fortunes at a time when he had the power and authority, had he inclined, of destroying both, and entreated them not to judge him rashly, but according to the laws of God, the laws of nature and nations, and particularly by the laws of the land--that if they should refuse to do so, he would appeal to the just Judge of the world, who would at last judge them all, and pronounce a righteous sentence.”[410]

This speech was delivered without affectation or embarrassment, and with such firmness and clearness of intonation, that, according to a cavalier historian, many persons present were afterwards heard to declare, that he looked and spoke as he had been accustomed when at the head of his army.[411] The chancellor replied to Montrose, in a strain of the most furious invective, “punctually proving him,” says Balfour, “by his acts of hostility, to be a person most infamous, perjured, treacherous, and of all that this land ever brought forth, the most creuell and inhumane butcher and murtherer of his natione, a sworne enimy to the Covenant and peace of his countrey, and one quhosse boundlesse pryde and ambition had lost the father, and by his wicked counsells done quhat in him lay to distroy the sone lykwayes.”[412]

Montrose attempted to address the court a second time, but was rudely interrupted by the chancellor, who ordered him to keep silence, and to kneel down and receive his sentence. The prisoner at once obeyed, but remarked, that on falling on his knees, he meant only to honour the king his master, and not the parliament. While Sir Archibald Johnston, the clerk-register, was reading the sentence, Montrose kept his countenance erect and displayed his usual firmness. “He behaved all this time in the house with a great deal of courage and modesty, unmoved and undaunted.”[413] The execution was fixed for three o’clock the following day.

The feelings of humanity and the voice of religion, now demanded that the unfortunate prisoner should be allowed to spend the short time he had to live, in those solemn preparations for death, enjoined by religion, in privacy and without molestation; but it was his fate to be in the hands of men in whose breasts such feelings were stifled, and whose religion was deeply imbued with a stern and gloomy fanaticism, to which charity was an entire stranger. However, it would be unfair and uncharitable to look upon the conduct of these men as if they had been surrounded with all the advantages of the present enlightened age. We ought to bear in mind their recent escape from the most intolerant of all religions, of whose persecuting principles they had not yet got rid; the hard treatment to which they had been subjected by the late king and his father; and the fact that they really believed they were doing their duty to God and serving the best interests of true religion. It is indeed difficult to be charitable to the uncharitable, tolerant to persecutors.

No sooner had Montrose returned to prison, than he was again assailed by the ministers, who endeavoured to induce him to submit to the kirk, no doubt considering the conversion of such an extraordinary malignant as Montrose, as a theological achievement of the first importance. To subdue his obstinacy, they magnified the power of the keys, which they said had been committed to them, and informed him that unless he reconciled himself to the kirk and obtained a release from the sentence of excommunication which had been pronounced against him, he would be eternally damned. But Montrose, regardless of their threats and denunciations, remained inflexible. Besides the ministers, he was frequently waited upon by the magistrates of the city, with whom he entered into conversation. He told them that he was much indebted to the parliament for the great honour they had decreed him,--that he was prouder to have his head fixed upon the top of the prison, than if they had decreed a golden statue to be erected to him in the market-place, or ordered his portrait to be placed in the king’s bed-chamber,--that so far from grieving for the mutilation which his body was about to undergo, he was happy that the parliament had taken such an effectual method of preserving the memory of his loyalty, by transmitting such proofs of them to the four principal cities of the kingdom, and he only wished that he had flesh enough to have sent a piece to every city in Christendom, as a testimony of his unshaken love and fidelity to his king and country.[414] But annoying as the visits of the ministers and magistrates undoubtedly were, Montrose was still farther doomed to undergo the humiliation of being placed under the more immediate charge of Major Weir, who afterwards obtained an infamous notoriety in the annals of criminal jurisprudence. This incestuous wretch, who laid claim to superior godliness, and who pretended to be gifted with the spirit of prayer, of which he gave proofs by many extemporary effusions, gave Montrose great uneasiness by smoking tobacco, to the smell of which he had, like Charles I., a particular aversion.

During the night, when free from the intrusion of the ministers, Montrose occupied himself in devotional exercises, and even found leisure to gratify his poetic taste, by composing the following lines which he wrote upon the window of the chamber in which he was confined.

“Let them bestow on every airth a limb, Then open all my veins, that I may swim To thee, my Maker, in that crimson lake, Then place my parboiled head upon a stake; Scatter my ashes, strow them in the air. Lord, since thou knowest where all these atoms are, I’m hopeful thou’lt recover once my dust, And confident thou’lt raise me with the just.”

On the morning of the 21st of May, 1650, the city of Edinburgh was put into a state of commotion by the noise of drums and trumpets, which was heard in every quarter of the city. The sound attracted the notice of Montrose, who inquired at the captain of the guard the cause of it. The officer told him that the parliament, dreading that an attempt might be made by the mob, under the influence of the malignants, to rescue him, had given orders to call out the soldiers and citizens to arms. “Do I,” said the marquis, “who was such a terror to these good men when alive, continue still so formidable to them, now that I am about to die? But let them look to themselves; for even after I am dead, I will be continually present to their wicked consciences, and become more formidable to them than while I was alive.”

After partaking of a hearty breakfast, Montrose entered upon the business of the toilet, to which he paid particular attention. While in the act of combing his hair, he was visited by Sir Archibald Johnston, the clerk-register, one of his most inveterate foes, who made some remarks on the impropriety, as he thought, of a person in the dreadful situation of the marquis, occupying some of the precious moments he had yet to live in frivolous attentions to his person. The marquis, who knew well the character of this morose man, thus addressed him with a smile of contempt, “While my head is my own, I will dress and adorn it; but to-morrow, when it becomes yours, you may treat it as you please.”

About an hour before the time fixed for his execution, Montrose was waited upon by the magistrates of the city, who saw him conveyed to the scaffold on the same vehicle on which he had been carried into the city. In addition to the dress which he wore on that occasion, he was now habited in a superb scarlet cloak, ornamented with gold and silver lace, which his friends had provided him with. Long before his removal from prison, an immense assemblage of persons had congregated around the place of execution in the High-street, all of whom were deeply affected on Montrose’s appearance. As he proceeded along, he had, says Wishart, “such a grand air, and so much beauty, majesty, and gravity appeared in his countenance, as shocked the whole city at the cruelty that was designed him; and extorted even from his enemies this unwilling confession, that he was a man of the most lofty and elevated soul, and of the most unshaken constancy and resolution that the age had produced.”

It had always been the uniform practice in Scotland to permit all persons about to suffer the last penalty of the law to address the assembled spectators, and on mounting the scaffold Montrose was proceeding to avail himself of this privilege; but the magistrates, who probably had received their instructions from the parliament, refused to allow him to harangue the multitude. His friends, however, anticipating this, had hired a young man, skilled in stenography, who, having stationed himself near the scaffold, was enabled to take down the substance of some observations which Montrose was permitted to make in answer to questions put by some persons who surrounded him.

He began by remarking that he would consider it extremely hard indeed if the mode of his death should be esteemed any reflection upon him, or prove offensive to any good Christian, seeing that such occurrences often happened to the good at the hands of the wicked, and often to the wicked at the hands of the good--and that just men sometimes perish in their righteousness, while wicked men prosper in their villanies. That he, therefore, expected that those who knew him well would not esteem him the less for his present sufferings, especially as many greater and more deserving men than he had undergone the same untimely and disgraceful fate. Yet, that he could not but acknowledge that all the judgments of God were just, and that the punishment he was about to suffer was very deservedly inflicted upon him for the many private sins he had committed, and he therefore willingly submitted to it;--that he freely pardoned his enemies, whom he reckoned but the instruments of the Divine will, and prayed to God to forgive them, although they had oppressed the poor, and perverted judgment and justice.

That he had done nothing contrary to the laws of the kingdom, and that he had undertaken nothing but in obedience to the just commands of his sovereign, when reduced to the greatest difficulties by his rebellious subjects, who had risen up in arms against him--that his principal study had always been to fear God and honour the king, in a manner agreeable to the law of God, the laws of nature, and those of his own country; and that, in neither of these respects, had he transgressed against men, but against God alone, with whom he expected to find abundant mercy, and in the confidence of which, he was ready to approach the eternal throne without terror--that he could not pretend to foretell what might happen, or to pry into the secrets of Divine Providence; but he prayed to God that the indignities and cruelties which he was that day to suffer might not be a prelude of still greater miseries which would befall his afflicted country, which was fast hastening to ruin.

That with regard to the grievous censure of the church, which he was sorry some good people thought it a crime in him to die under, he observed, that he did not incur it from any fault of his own, but in the performance of his duty to his lawful prince, for the security of religion, and the preservation of his sacred person and royal authority--that the sentence of excommunication, so rashly laid upon him by the clergy, gave him much concern, and that he earnestly desired to be released from it, so far as that could be done, agreeably to the laws of God, and without hurting his conscience or allegiance, which, if they refused, he appealed to God, the righteous judge of the world, who, ere long, was to be his impartial judge and gracious redeemer.

In answer to the reproaches of some persons who had endeavoured to destroy the marquis’s character and reputation by spreading a report that he had laid the whole blame of what he had done upon the king and his royal father, he observed that such a thought had never once entered into his breast--that the late king had lived a saint and died a martyr, and he prayed to God, that as his own fate was not unlike his, so his death might be attended with the same degree of piety and resignation; for if he could wish his soul in another man’s stead, or to be conjoined with it in the same condition after this life, it would be his alone.

He then requested that the people would judge charitably of him and his actions, without prejudice and without passion. He desired the prayers of all good men for his soul; for his part, he said he prayed earnestly for them all; and with the greatest seriousness, submission and humility, deprecated the vengeance of Almighty God, which had been so long awakened, and which was still impending over his afflicted country--that his enemies were at liberty to exult and triumph over the perishing remains of his body, but the utmost indignities they could inflict should never prevail on him, now at his death, to swerve from that duty and reverence to God, and obedience and respect to the king, which he had manifested all his life long. “I can say no more,” concluded the marquis, “but remit myself to your charity, and I desire your prayers. You that are scandalized at me, give me your charity; I shall pray for you all. I leave my soul to God, my service to my prince, my goodwill to my friends, and my name in charity to you all. I might say more, but I have exonered my conscience; the rest I leave to God’s mercy.”[415]

A party of ministers who occupied the lower end of the scaffold now attempted, partly by persuasion and partly by threats, to induce Montrose to yield to the kirk by acknowledging his own criminality; but he denied that he had acted contrary to religion and the laws of the land, and, of course, refused to accept of a reconciliation upon such terms. Finding him inflexible, they refused to pray for him as he desired, observing, that no prayers could be of any avail to a man who was an outcast from the church of God. Being desired to pray by himself apart, he told them that if they would not permit the people to join with him, his prayers alone and separately before so large an assembly would perhaps be offensive both to them and him--that he had already poured out his soul before God, who knew his heart, and to whom he had committed his spirit. He then shut his eyes, and holding his hat before his face with his left hand, he raised his right in the attitude of prayer, in which posture he continued about a quarter of an hour in silent and fervent prayer.

As the fatal hour was fast approaching when this unfortunate nobleman was to bid a last adieu to sublunary things, he desired the executioner to hasten his preparations. This gloomy functionary, accordingly, brought the book of Montrose’s wars, and his late declaration, which, by the sentence, were ordered to be tied round his neck with a cord. Montrose himself assisted in carrying this part of his sentence into execution, and while the operation was performing, good-humouredly remarked, that he considered himself as much honoured then by having such tokens of his loyalty attached to his person as he had been when his majesty had invested him with the order of the garter.[416]

Hitherto, Montrose had remained uncovered; but, before ascending the ladder that conducted to the top of the gibbet, which rose to the height of thirty feet from the centre of the scaffold, he requested permission to put on his hat. This request was, however, refused. He then asked leave to keep on his cloak; but this favour was also denied him. Irritated, probably at these refusals, he appears for a moment to have lost his usual equanimity of temper, and when orders were given to pinion his arms, he told the magistrates that if they could invent any further marks of ignominy, he was ready to endure them all for the sake of the cause for which he suffered.

On arriving at the top of the ladder, which he ascended with astonishing firmness, Montrose asked the executioner how long his body was to be suspended to the gibbet. “Three hours,” was the answer. He then presented the executioner with three or four pieces of gold, told him he freely forgave him for the part he acted, and instructed him to throw him off as soon as he observed him uplifting his hands. The executioner watched the fatal signal, and on the noble victim raising his hands, obeyed the mandate, and, it is said, burst into tears. A feeling of horror seized the assembled multitude, who expressed their disapprobation by a general groan. Among the spectators were many persons who had indulged during the day in bitter invectives against Montrose, but whose feelings were so overpowered by the sad spectacle of his death that they could not refrain from tears.[417] Even the relentless Argyle, who had good feeling enough to absent himself from the execution, is said to have shed tears on hearing of Montrose’s death, but if a cavalier writer is to be believed, his son, Lord Lorne, disgraced himself by the most unfeeling barbarity.[418]

Thus died, at the early age of thirty-eight, James Graham, Marquis of Montrose, who had acquired during a short career of military glory greater reputation than perhaps ever fell to the lot of any commander within the same compass of time. That partisans may have exaggerated his actions, and extolled his character too highly, may be fairly admitted; but it cannot be denied that Montrose was really a great commander, and that there were noble and generous traits about him which indicated a high and cultivated mind, in many respects far superior to the age in which he lived. But however much the military exploits of Montrose may be admired, it must never be forgotten that his sword was drawn against his own countrymen in their struggles against arbitrary power, and that although there was much to condemn in the conduct of the Covenanters, subsequent events, in the reign of the second Charles and James, showed that they were not mistaken in the dread which they entertained of the extinction of their religious liberties, had Charles I. succeeded in his designs.

Among Montrose’s officers five of the most distinguished were selected for execution, all of whom perished under ‘the Maiden,’ a species of guillotine, introduced into Scotland by the Regent Morton, to which he himself became the first victim. The officers who suffered were Sir John Hurry,[419] Captain Spottiswood, younger of Dairsie, Sir Francis Hay of Dalgetty, Colonel William Sibbald, and Captain Charteris, a cadet of the ancient family of Amisfield. All these met death with extraordinary fortitude. Sir Francis Hay, who was a Catholic, “and therefore,” as a cavalier historian quaintly observes, “not coming within the compass of the ministers’ prayers,”[420] displayed in particular an intrepidity worthy of his name and family.[421] After a witty metaphorical allusion to “the Maiden,” he kissed the fatal instrument, and kneeling down, laid his head upon the block. Colonel Sibbald exhibited a surprising gaiety, and, “with an undaunted behaviour, marched up to the block, as if he had been to act the part of a gallant in a play.”[422] An instance of the unfeeling levity with which such melancholy scenes were witnessed, even by those who considered themselves the ministers of the gospel, occurred on the present as on former occasions. Captain Spottiswood, grandson of the archbishop of that name, having on his knees said the following prayer:--“O Lord, who hath been graciously pleased to bring me through the wilderness of this world, I trust at this time you will waft me over this sea of blood to my heavenly Canaan;” was rebuked by a minister who was near him in the following words:--“Take tent (heed), take tent, sir, that you drown not by the gate!” (way). Spottiswood replied with great modesty that “he hoped he was no Egyptian,” an answer which forced the base intruder to retire among the crowd to conceal his shame.

The execution of Captain Charteris (the last who suffered) was a source of melancholy regret to his friends, and of triumph to the ministers. He was a man of determined mind; but his health being much impaired by wounds which he had received, he had not firmness to resist the importunities of his friends, who, as a means of saving his life, as they thought, prevailed upon him to agree to make a public declaration of his errors. This unhappy man, accordingly, when on the scaffold, read a long speech, which had been prepared for him by the ministers, penned in a peculiarly mournful strain, in which he lamented his apostacy from the Covenant, and acknowledged “other things which he had vented to them (the ministers) in auricular confession.”[423] Yet, notwithstanding the expectations which he and his friends were led to entertain that his life would be spared, he had no sooner finished his speech than he was despatched.

FOOTNOTES:

[383] Balfour, vol. iii. p. 393.

[384] Memoirs, p. 351.

[385] Balfour, vol. iii. p. 405.

[386] See Appendix to Wishart’s Memoirs, p. 440.

[387] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 547, et seq.

[388] Balfour, vol. iii. p. 432.

[389] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 551.

[390] Appendix to Wishart’s Memoirs, p. 441.

[391] Balfour, vol. iii. p. 440.

[392] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 552.

[393] Balfour, vol. iv. p. 9.

[394] Balfour, vol. iv. p. 9.

[395] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 555.

[396] Vide the document in the Appendix to Peterkin’s Notes on Orkney and Zetland, pp. 106, 107.

[397] Gordon’s Continuation, p. 555.

[398] Memoirs, p. 377.

[399] Memoirs, p. 380.

[400] Balfour, vol. iv. pp. 12, 13.

[401] Wishart, p. 385.

[402] According to Montrose Redivivus, p. 181, the cart was drawn by four horses.

[403] Now the Free Church Normal School.

[404] Wishart, p. 386.

[405] Balfour, vol. iv. p. 14.

[406] Wishart, p. 386.

[407] Wishart, p. 387.

[408] Balfour, vol. iv. p. 16, note to Kirkton’s Church History, p. 124. Relation of the execution of James Graham, London, 1650.

[409] Balfour, vol. iv. p. 16.

[410] Wishart, p. 391.

[411] Monteith’s Hist. of the Troubles, &c., p. 514.

[412] Annals, vol. iv. p. 15.

[413] Idem, p. 16.

[414] Wishart, p. 393.

[415] Wishart, p. 399. Balfour, vol. iv. p. 22.

[416] Wishart, p. 400.

[417] Montrose Redivivus.

[418] “’Tis said that Argyle’s expressions had something of grief in them, and did likewise weep at the rehearsal of his death, (for he was not present at the execution). Howsoever, they were by many called crocodiles’ tears, how worthily I leave to others’ judgment. But I am sure there did in his son, Lord Lorne, appear no such sign, who neither had so much tenderness of heart as to be sorry, nor so much paternal wit as to dissemble, who, entertaining his new bride (the Earl of Moray’s daughter) with this spectacle, mocked and laughed in the midst of that weeping assembly; and, staying afterwards to see him hewn in pieces, triumphed at every stroke which was bestowed upon his mangled body.” Montrose Redivivus, edition of 1652. Note to Wishart’s Memoirs, p. 401.

The dismembered portions of Montrose’s body were disposed of in terms of the sentence. Lady Napier, the wife of Montrose’s esteemed friend and relation, being desirous of procuring his heart, employed some adventurous persons to obtain it for her. They accomplished this object on the second day after the execution, and were handsomely rewarded by her ladyship. The heart was embalmed by a surgeon, and after being enshrined in a rich gold urn, was sent by her to the eldest son of the marquis, then in Flanders. The family of Napier possess a portrait of Lady Napier, in which there is a representation of the urn.--Kirkton’s History of the Church of Scotland, note, p. 125; edited by the late C. K. Sharpe, Esq.

After the restoration, the trunk was disinterred, and the other remains collected, and on 11th May, 1661, were deposited with great solemnity by order of Charles II., in the family aisle in St. Giles’ church. The remains of Sir Francis Hay of Dalgetty were honoured with a similar mark of respect on the same day. For an account of the ceremonial, see Nos. 27 and 28 of the Appendix to Wishart’s Memoirs.

[419] Hurry was at first condemned by the parliament to perpetual banishment, “but the commission of the kirk voted he should die, and thereupon sent ther moderator, with other two of their number, to the parliament house, who very saucilly, in face of that great and honourable court, (if it had not been then a body without a head) told the president and chancellor that the parliament had granted life to a man whom the law had appointed for death, being a man of blood, (citing these words of our blessed Saviour to Peter,--‘All they that take the sword shall perish by the sword;’) whereas, it was very weill knoune, all the blood that that unfortunate gentleman had shed in Scotland was in ther quarrell and defence, being but then engaged in his master’s service, when he was taken prisoner, and executed at the kirk’s instigatione.

“The parliament was sae farre from rebuking ther bold intruders, or resenting those acts of the commission of the kirk, now quyte besyde ther master’s commissione, as they will have it understood, and ther owne solemne professione not to meddle in secular affairs, that they rescinded their former act, and passed a sentence of death upon him, hereby imitating ther dear brethren, the parliament of England, in the caice of the Hothams.”--Memoirs of the Somerville Family.

[420] Wishart, p. 412.

[421] “His constancy at death show well he repented nothing he did, in order to his allegiance and Majesty’s service, to the great shame of those who threatened him with their apocryphal excommunications, to which he gave no more place than our Saviour to the devil’s temptations.”--Relation of the True Funerals of the Great Lord Marquesse of Montrose.

[422] Wishart.

[423] Wishart, p. 413.--The practice of auricular confession seems to have existed to a considerable extent among the Covenanters. It is singular that had it not been for the evidence of the minister of Ormiston, to whom the noted Major Weir had communicated his secrets in auricular confession, he would not have been convicted.--See Arnot’s Criminal Trials.

Spotted a typo or a problem in this chapter? Tell us