tenet in the political creed of the Stuarts, and eventually issued in tragical results.

It was then certain that when the King had the power, he would carry his opinion into practice; and the influence of the union of the Crowns was soon felt in the affairs of Scotland. In the hands of a really wise ruler, this union might have been rendered highly beneficial to both nations; but James had too much faith in his own notions and in his royal prerogatives, and his adherence to these in the face of adverse elements of thought and feeling among the people, led on to a course of policy which ended in the ruin of his dynasty.

Shortly after the accession of James to the throne of England steps were taken to introduce and to establish better order upon the borders of the two kingdoms. Some of the inhabitants were drafted off to fight in the wars of the Continent. The debatable lands were divided and apportioned to each kingdom; and gradually those parts of the country which had been so long the scene of strife and petty warfare, became as peaceful as any other part of the nation.

One of the King's earliest projects was a proposal that the English and the Scots should agree to an incorporating union of the two kingdoms; but neither nation was as yet prepared for this consummation. There were proceedings touching this matter both in England and in Scotland; but all that resulted from them was the abolition of hostile laws, and a proposition that all persons born in Scotland after the union of the Crowns in 1603, should be entitled in England to all the rights of Englishmen.

If the King was anxious to constitute a civil union of the two kingdoms, he was still more bent on establishing conformity in Church government throughout his dominions. While only King of Scotland, he had struggled hard to introduce Episcopacy, and now, with the resources of England at his command, he resolved to complete his long cherished scheme of Church polity; always following the underhand mode of attaining his

end which was characteristic of his nature. The General Assembly had been prorogued owing to the accession; and it was postponed in the succeeding year, pending the adjustment of the proposed union. The leading Presbyterian ministers had begun to dread that attempts would be made to enshrine the hierarchy in Scotland, and to assimilate their polity to that of the Church of England; and the Presbytery of St. Andrews met and took such steps as were deemed requisite to keep intact the right of holding General Assemblies. They easily foresaw that their Assemblies would soon be disused, if interrupted by the discretion of the King; and so a number of the Presbyteries and Synods resolved to hold a General Assembly at Aberdeen, on 2nd of July, 1605, the day fixed by the last prorogation.

On the appointed day, nineteen ministers met at Aberdeen and proceeded to form the Assembly; but the meeting was prohibited by the authority of the Privy Council, and ordered to dissolve. The members after naming another day and place for the next General Assembly, obeyed and immediately separated. There was no illegality in this meeting, it was quite within the recognised rights of the Church. But the King had the power in his hands, and he determined to crush all encroachments on his supreme and divine claims. By his explicit command a number of the ministers were imprisoned, and the Privy Council proceeded to prosecute them. Out of thirteen who hesitated to disclaim the lawfulness of the Assembly, Forbes, minister of Alford, Welsh, Dury, and three others were selected for an exemplary punishment. When cited before the Privy Council, they declined its jurisdiction on the question in dispute. For this they were indicted before the Court of Justiciary on a charge of treason. They were ably defended, but the influence of the Crown prevailed, and they were convicted of treason, for denying the jurisdiction of the civil court in spiritual matters. They were then remitted to prison till the King should notify his pleasure touching their punishment.

At last, their sentence was announced to be banishment from the King's dominions for life; and they retired to the Protestant Churches of France and Holland. The other seven ministers, without any trial, were banished to the most remote quarters of the kingdom-the Western Islands and the Highlands.1

The King summoned a Parliament to meet at Perth, in July, 1606, and appointed the Earl of Dunbar as his commissioner to manage it. The first act of this Parliament exhibited an unusual spirit of servility, in its remarkable acknowledgment of the powers of the King; and it may be taken as an authoritative statement of what James considered as his rights and prerogatives. After the Estates had passed this act, it was not likely that they would oppose the King's schemes till their own special interests were touched.2

1 Melville's Diary, pp. 570-575; Forbes's Records, pp. 463, 496; Hailes' Memorials on the Affairs of Great Britain in the reign of James VI.

2 The following are the chief points of the act-"God has indued His Majesty with so many extraordinary graces, and most rare and excellent virtues, as it is not only known by daily and manifest experience in matters of greatest difficulty and consequence, to the unspeakable comfort of all his faithful subjects, to be capable of the happy government of his kingdoms; but also by his most singular judgment, foresight, and princely wisdom, worthy to possess, and able to govern far greater kingdoms and numbers of people. And in respect thereof, the Estates plainly perceiving that by His Majesty's exaltation, not only in preeminence and power, but also in all royal qualities requisite for the happy discharge thereof, God has manifestly expressed His heavenly will to be, that His Majesty's imperial power, which God has so graciously enlarged, should not by them, in any way, be impaired, prejudiced, or diminished, but rather reverenced and augmented so far as they possibly can. Wherefore the whole body of this Parliament unanimously, humbly, and faithfully, with united heart and mind-consent and truly acknowledge His Majesty's sovereign authority, princely power, royal prerogative, and privilege of his Crown, over all ranks, persons, and causes whatever, within this kingdom. . . Likewise annuls, abrogates, retracts, rescinds, all things attempted, enacted, done, or hereafter to be done or intended, to the violation, hurt, derogation, impairing, or prejudice of his sovereign authority, royal prerogative, and privilege of his Crown, or any point or part thereof, in any time to come. And the whole Estates for themselves and their successors faithfully promises perpetually to acknowledge, obey, maintain, defend, and to advance the life, the honour, the safety, the dignity, the authority, and the royal prerogative of his sacred Majesty, his heirs and

This Parliament passed an act restoring the bishops to their ancient honours, dignities, privileges, livings, lands, rents, thirds, and estates, as these were before the act of annexation in 1587. Touching the honours and dignities there was little difficulty; but the restoration of the revenues of the Sees was a tougher matter to settle. The party of the clergy who were opposed to Episcopacy endeavoured to defeat the measure, but their efforts were unavailing. Although the bishops were legally restored, still the hierarchy was incomplete; they were not yet invested with spiritual supremacy in the Church.

We have already seen that on the Reformation itself, and on the history of Protestantism in Scotland, the disposal of the property of the old Church had much influence in determining the results. The attempt which followed upon this act, to restore what remained of the Church domains to the several bishoprics, was almost a complete failure. The Estates were ready to acknowledge the absolute power of the king in so many words, but when it came to the practical issue of slackening their own hold of the revenues of the old Church, they manifested a remarkable pertinacity in maintaining the supremacy of themselves. The bishops were continually bewailing their poverty, and the utter hopelessness of retaining their position upon the small funds which fell to their lot.

The King wished to stifle the leaders of the Presbyterian party, that he might more easily complete his scheme. Andrew Melville, his nephew James Melville, and six of the other ministers were summoned to the English court, in September 1606. The aim of the King was to engage the Scotch Presbyterian ministers and the English bishops in a conference con

successors, and the privilege of his Highness' Crown, with their lives, their lands, and their goods, to the utmost of their power, constantly and faithfully to withstand all persons and powers who shall presume, press, or intend in any way to impugn the same, directly or indirectly, in all time coming"-Acts Parl. Scot., Vol. IV.

cerning the superior merits of Episcopacy, and to dazzle the fancy of the north countrymen with the splendour of the English ritual. By the command of the King, these ministers attended a course of sermons preached by four English divines -on the bishops, the supremacy of the Crown, and the absence of all authority in Scripture and in antiquity for the office of lay elders. This performance was held in the King's chapel at Hampton Court. The King himself attended several conferences; and at one of these, before a company of bishops and Scottish nobles, he asked their opinion touching the lawfulness of the Aberdeen Assembly, and the best way of obtaining a peaceable Assembly to restore order to the Church. All the bishops condemned the Assembly as turbulent and illegal; but Andrew Melville, after some questioning, replied that the Assembly had authority from the Word of God, and from the laws of the kingdom; and the other Presbyterian ministers concurred in this opinion. When reference was made to other matters which had arisen out of it, as the trial of the six ministers for treason, and teasing questions were put as to whether they sympathised with, or prayed for, their brethren who had been convicted of treason, they at once protested against this treatment as illegal and unjust, and asked to be allowed to return to Scotland; but this was not granted to them.

It soon became manifest that the King and his bishops had entirely failed to produce any change on the convictions of the Scottish ministers. They heard the sermons of the English bishops with silent contempt. The service was caricatured by Andrew Melville in a Latin epigram, which chanced to come under the notice of the Privy Council, and he was summoned to answer for it before that august tribunal. Melville in a moment of passion lost all command of his temper, and when delivering a vehement invective against the hierarchy, seized and shook the white sleeves of Bancroft, the Archbishop of Canterbury, at the same time calling them "Romish rags". For this offence he was imprisoned in the Tower of London for