Every act assumed a religious character; the war was religious, which was proved by the fact that in the Old Testament the wars of God's people were called the wars of the Lord; and the hand of the Lord of Hosts was on the side of the Covenanters. These ideas were associated with the old Jewish exclusiveness and intolerance; the Covenanters were apt to regard themselves as the chosen people, and their own Church as the only true one: to be a good Christian, it was necessary to be a Covenanter. Romanism and Episcopacy were equally hateful to them; firm and settled in their own convictions and opinions, they left no room for toleration.45

Seven Scotsmen attended the Assembly of divines at Westminster as commissioners from the Church of Scotland: Henderson, Baillie, Rutherford, and Gillespie, ministers; Lord Maitland, Johnston of Warriston, and Lord Cassillis.46 This

45 Peterkin's Records; Acts Parl. Scot., Vol. VI., pp. 66-68, 70, et seq.

46 It has to be observed, that the Assembly of divines, as constituted by the English Parliament, had no authority in Scotland. The Scotch Commissioners declined to sit in the Assembly as voting members; they preferred to take the position of representatives of the Church of Scotland, and in London there was a committee from the Scotch Estates to instruct and support them. As representing Scotland, they might propose any point to the Assembly; but their nation could not be compromised by the conclusions of the Assembly. During their attendance at the Assembly, the Scots acted with vigour and wisdom.

Baillie's account of their introduction to the Assembly, and of their proceedings in it, is interesting. "On Monday morning, the 20th of December, 1643, we sent to both Houses of Parliament for a warrant for our sitting in the Assembly. This was readily granted, and by Mr. Henderson presented to the Prolocutor, who sent out three of their ministers to convey us to the Assembly. Here no mortal man may enter to see or hear, let be to sit, without a written order from both Houses of Parliament. When we were brought in, Dr. Twisse made a long harangue for our welcome, after so long and hazardous a voyage by sea and land in so unseasonable a time of the year. When he ended, we sat down in those places which we have since kept. We sit commonly from nine

.

Ordinarily there were

in the morning to one or two in the afternoon. present about three score of the divines. These are divided into three committees ; in one whereof every man is a member. No man is excluded who pleases to come to any of the three. Every committee, as the Parliament gives order in write to take any purpose into consideration, takes a portion, and in the afternoon meeting prepares matters for the Assembly, sets down their minds in distinct propositions, and backs their propositions with texts of Scripture. No man is called

Assembly was constituted by an ordinance of the Long Parliament, on the 12th of June, 1643; Parliament named the members, and when difficulties and disputes arose, they were to be referred to Parliament. The Assembly sat long, and executed much laborious work; and the general drift of it when completed was decidedly Calvinistic. They framed “A Form of Church Government," "A Directory for Public Wor

upon to speak, but who stands up of his own accord, and speaks as long as he pleases without interruption. . . . They follow the forms of their Parliament.

"When our commissioners came up, they were desired to sit as members of the Assembly; but they wisely declined to do so, since they came up as Commissioners for our National Church to treat for uniformity, they required to be dealt with in that capacity. They were willing as private men to sit in the Assembly, and upon occasion to give their advice on debated points; but, for the uniformity, they required that a committee might be appointed from the Parliament and the Assembly to treat with them on this subject. All this, after some sharp enough debates, was granted." In regard to the office of ruling elderslaymen, "many a very brave dispute have we had upon them these ten days. I marvel at the great learning, quickness, and eloquence, together with the great courtesy and discretion in speaking, of these divines. This is a point of

high consequence, and upon no other we expect so great difficulty, except alone on Independency; wherewith we purpose not to meddle in haste till it please God to advance our army, which we expect will much assist our arguments.

"It was my advice, which Mr. Henderson presently applauded and gave me thanks for it—to eschew a public rupture with the Independents till we were more able for them. As yet a presbytery to these people is conceived to be a strange monster. It was for our good, therefore, to go on hand and hand so far as we did agree against the common enemy, hoping that in our differences, when we behoved to come to them, God would give us light. In the meantime we would essay to agree upon the Directory of Worship, wherein we expected no small help from these men to abolish the great idol of England-the Service book-and to erect in all the parts of worship a full conformity to Scotland in all things worthy to be spoken of."—Letters and Journals, Vol. II., pp. 107-110, 111, 117.

The great difficulty was church government. The Assembly of divines proposed the presbyterian scheme; but the Long Parliament adopted it only on the condition of its subordination to Parliament. The Independents though few in number were powerful in Parliament; owing to their strength of will, their intellect, and their energy of character, they wielded much influence both in the army and in the senate. The politicians of the Long Parliament, though they had abolished Episcopacy, were unwilling to give independent power to any form of Church organisation. The Scots Covenanters then began to see that there was little hope of establishing their polity over the British dominions. When the Westminster Assembly closed in 1648 its great scheme of church government practically ended with it.

ship," "A Confession of Faith," and two Catechisms. The Directory was brought to Scotland by Baillie and Gillespie, and the General Assembly, in 1645, sanctioned it, and enjoined it to be observed by all the ministers of the kingdom. The Westminster Confession of Faith was adopted by the General Assembly in 1647, and in the following year the Assembly sanctioned the Larger and the Shorter Catechisms. The Scotch parliament ratified this Confession and the acts of the General Assembly.47

But it should be mentioned that this Confession and the Catechisms were not sent into Scotland for observance by any command of the Assembly of divines, or by any authority in England; the Church of Scotland examined and approved them of her own accord. The body of doctrine contained in this Confession, and abridged in the Longer and the Shorter Catechisms, has long been the Creed of the Church of Scotland; and has influenced the opinions and the character of many of the people.

When the Covenanters' army was in England assisting the English Parliamentary party, the government of Scotland was managed by a committee of the Estates and the commission of the General Assembly; and then some of the nobles and others formed a Royalist party. The Earl of Montrose had been for some years an ardent Covenanter, but had turned round to the King's side; and he was commissioned by his Majesty to raise the royal standard in Perthshire, in August, 1644. He was

47 Abridgement of the Acts of the General Assembly, 138, 345; Acts Parl. Scot., Vol. VI., p. 364, in the year 1649. No mention is made in the Act of the Assembly "of the old Confession of 1560. It may be supposed that the Assembly held both their old Confession and their new to be true, and therefore consistent with each other; but this is not stated. Whether in any sense they held the old Confession to be still binding is a more difficult matter. As the new one is to be a Confession for the three kingdoms, it may be argued that the old Scottish Confession might still continue as a municipal or domestic authority; but as the change is founded on the obligation to uniformity in religion, the presumption seems rather in favour of the exclusive authority of the new Creed." -Innes' Law of Creeds in Scot., p. 63.

soon at the head of three thousand men, part of whom were Irish Roman Catholics. His short career and exploits have often been detailed at length, and it is needless to repeat them here; and, besides, his temporary victories over undisciplined bodies of men merely added to the suffering of the war, and had no marked influence on the main stream of history.

Since the battle of Marston Moor, on the 2nd of July, 1644, in which the Covenanting army took an active part, under David Leslie, the King's cause had been falling lower and lower; and at the end of the year 1645 he was hardly able to keep the field. At last, driven to despair, he fled to the Scotch army at Newark, in May, 1646. To conquer the King had been an extremely difficult task; but to make a treaty with him afterwards proved to be an impossible operation. He was received by the Scots with every mark of respect, but he soon found that his kingly powers were gone. The English parliament demanded that the Scots should surrender the King, but this they declined to do. They were still eager to extend Presbyterianism to England, and directly attempted to work upon the King. He was asked both by the Scots and by the English Presbyterians to abolish Episcopacy, to ratify the proceedings of the Westminster Assembly of divines, to sign the Covenant himself, to compel others to sign it, and to establish a Church in harmony with its principles. This Charles on his conscience declined to do, as he had a firm conviction of the divine right of Episcopacy. The Episcopal party in England was crushed, and the struggle for supremacy now lay between the Independents and the Presbyterians. The latter were anxious to come to terms with the King; and if he had agreed to their conditions, he might still have had a chance of saving his crown and his life, and of reigning as the head of a limited monarchy. Commissioners from the Long Parliament, and from the Scotch Estates implored the King to yield, but in vain. Charles pleaded that his conscience would not allow him; and it may be admitted that this was a redeeming feature of the King's character. This

attitude of the King proved favourable to the power of the Independents, as most of them desired the complete overthrow of the monarchy, and were directly opposed to the establishment of Presbyterianism in England. 48

While this tedious treating was still proceeding, the Long Parliament intimated that there was no longer any need for the Scotch army in England; while the Scots announced that they were ready to retire as soon as their arrears were paid. In this matter of pay, however, there was a serious difficulty, as between the amount claimed by the Scots, and the amount which the English admitted as due, there was a difference of many hundred thousands of pounds. The difference between the two accounts in a large degree related to provisions, which the English charged in full, but the greater part of which the Scots asserted never came to them, having been taken by the enemy at sea, part lost, and part damaged. The English charged in full a levy of twenty thousand pounds per month, which the Scots averred never yielded half that sum; the English charged ammunition and arms furnished, which the Scots contended should have been supplied at the English expense, as they were used in their service and so on of other items in the accounts. The sum claimed by the Scots was nearly two millions, of which they acknowledged the receipt of seven hundred thousand, but which by the English mode of accounting, as indicated above, was made out to be fourteen hundred thousand-thus leaving more than eight hundred thousand of a difference between the sum claimed by the Scots and the sum admitted as due by the Long Parliament. So at this time the arrears due to the Scots, according to their own reckoning, amounted to more than a million. A long wrangle between the parties ensued; every item in the account being minutely examined and hotly debated, till at last the Scots offered to accept a gross sum of five hundred thousand pounds. On this there was a vehement debate in the Long Par

48 Burnet's Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, pp. 274-283; Baillie's Letters and Journals, Vol. II., pp. 400, 406-417.