MAITLAND, a surname of
Norman origin, in early times written Matulant, Mautalent, or
Matalan. Nisbet, in mentioning the name. (Heraldry, vol. i. p. 292,)
adds, quasi mutilatus in Bello, as if it had been first given to one
maimed or mutilated in war. There can be no doubt that among the
followers of William the Conqueror when he came into England, was
one bearing this name, whatever may have been its derivation.
The first on record
in Scotland was Thomas de Matulant, of Anglo-Norman lineage, the
ancestor of the noble family of Lauderdale. He flourished in the
reign of William the Lion, and died in 1228. The early history of
the family, like that of most of the Anglo-Norman incomers, relates
chiefly to the acquirement of lands and donations to some particular
abbey or religious house, for they were all great benefactors to the
church, and the ‘Matulants’ formed no exception. Like many
Anglo-Norman and Anglo-Saxon families, they settled in Berwickshire.
Thomas’ son, William de Matulant, was witness to several of the
charters of King Alexander II., which proves that he must have been
much about the court of that monarch. He died about 1250, leaving a
son, Sir Richard Matulant, who, in the reign of Alexander III., was
one of the most considerable barons in Scotland, being the owner of
the lands and baronies of Thirlestane, Blythe, Tollus, Hedderwick,
and other properties, all in the shire of Berwick. To Dryburgh
abbey, which had been founded little more than a century before, he
gifted several lands, “for the welfare of his soul, and the souls of
Avicia his wife, his predecessors and successors.” His son, William
de Mautlant of Thirlestane, confirmed these gifts. He was one of the
patriots who joined King Robert the Bruce as soon as he began to
assert his right to the crown, and died about 1315.
The son of this
baron, Sir Robert Maitland, possessed the lands of Thirlestane in
his father’s lifetime. Among other charters he had one of the lands
of Lethington from Sir John Gifford of Yester, confirmed by King
David II., 17th October, in the 17th year of his reign (1345). Just
a year afterwards, on the same day of the month, he fell at the
battle of Durham, with a brother of his, whose Christian name is not
given. By his wife, a sister of Sir Robert Keith, great marischal of
Scotland, who was killed in the same battle, he had three sons,
John, William, and Robert. The latter married the heiress of Gight,
Aberdeenshire, and was ancestor of the Maitlands of Pitrichie.
The eldest son, John,
got a safe-conduct to go to England in 1363. He obtained from
William, earl of Douglas, upon his own resignation, a charter of the
lands of Thirlestane and Tollus, to himself and his son, Robert, by
his wife, the Lady Agnes Dunbar, daughter of Patrick, earl of March,
and died about 1395. His said son, Sir Robert Maitland, got the
charge of the castle of Dunbar, from his uncle, George, earl of
March, when that rebellious nobleman withdrew into England, in 1398,
in consequence of the contract of marriage between his daughter,
Lady Elizabeth Dunbar and David, duke of Rothesay, being cancelled,
through the intrigues of Archibald, earl of Douglas, surnamed the
Grim. In conjunction with Hotspur and Lord Talbot, the earl soon
after returned across the border, and laid waste the lands which,
having been forfeited, he could no longer call his own. His nephew,
Sir Robert Maitland, having surrendered the castle of Dunbar to the
earl of Douglas, escaped being involved in his ruin. He and his
family were afterwards designed of Lethington. He died about 1434,
leaving three sons. Robert, the eldest, was one of the hostages for
James I., on his liberation from England in 1424, when his annual
revenue was estimated at 400 merks. As he predeceased his father,
without issue, William, the second son, succeeded to the family
estates. James, the third son, married Egidia, daughter of James
Scrymgeour of Dudhope, constable of Dundee, and from his grandson,
John, descended the Maitlands of Eccles and other families of the
name.
The second but elder
surviving son, William Maitland of Lethington and Thirlestane, was
the first to change the spelling of his name to its present form. He
had a charter from Archibald, duke of Turenne and earl of Douglas,
to himself and Margaret Wardlaw, his wife, of the lands of Blythe,
Hedderwick, Tollus, and Burncleugh, dated at Linlithgow, 23d March
1432, his father being then alive. His only son, John, died before
1471. His successor, William Maitland of Lethington, was father of
William Maitland of Lethington, described as a man of great bravery
and resolution, who was killed at Flodden, with his sovereign, James
IV., with whom he was in high favour. By his wife, Martha, daughter
of George Lord Seton, he had a son, Sir Richard Maitland, the
celebrated collector of the early Scottish poetry, after whom the
Maitland Club has been called, and a memoir of whom is given
afterwards. Sir Richard married Mary, daughter of Sir Thomas
Cranstoun of Crosbie, and with four daughters, had three sons, the
eldest being William, the personage so well known in the history of
the reign of the unfortunate Mary, as “Secretary Lethington.” Sir
John, the second son, was lord high chancellor of Scotland and first
lord Maitland of Thirlestane. Of both these brothers memoirs are
given subsequently. Thomas, Sir Richard’s third son, was prolocutor
with George Buchanan, in his treatise De Jure Regni apud Scotos. The
daughters, named Helen, Isabella, Mary, and Elizabeth, all married
Berwickshire barons.
Secretary Lethington
was twice married. By his first wife, Janet Monteith, he had no
issue. By his second wife, Mary, a daughter of Malcolm Lord Fleming,
he had, with a daughter, Mary, the wife of the first earl of
Roxburgh, a son, James, who, being a Roman Catholic, went to the
continent, and died there, without issue. He sold his estate of
Lethington, which had been restored to him by a rehabilitation under
the great seal, 19th February 1583-4, to his uncle, Sir John
Maitland, who carried on the line of the family. A letter from this
James Maitland to the learned Camden, is dated from Brussels in
1620.
Sir John, first Lord
Maitland of Thirlestane, married Jean, only daughter and heiress of
James, lord Fleming, lord high chamberlain of Scotland in the reign
of Queen Mary, and by her had a son, John, second Lord Maitland and
first earl of Lauderdale (see LAUDERDALE, earl of) and a daughter,
Anne, married to Robert, Lord Seton, son of the first earl of
Winton.
Connected thus, by
frequent intermarriages, with the Seton and Fleming families, who
were the most distinguished among the nobles of Scotland for their
unswerving attachment to the beautiful and ill-fated Mary, it was no
wonder that the Maitlands also signalized themselves by their
faithful adherence to her interests, even when her fortunes were at
the lowest, and when at last they did transfer their allegiance to
her son, they served him with equal truth and loyalty
_____
The family of Gibson
Maitland of Clifton Hall, Mid Lothian, possesses a baronetcy, first
conferred, 30th November, 1818, on the Hon. General Alexander
Maitland, fifth son of the sixth earl of Lauderdale. Sir Alexander
died 14th February 1820. He had, with two daughters, four sons,
viz., Alexander Charles, second baronet, William, a midshipman on
board the Portsmouth East Indiaman, drowned in the Bay of Bengal in
1781; Augustus, an officer in the army, mortally wounded at Egmont-op-Zee,
6th October, 1797; and Frederick, of Hollywich, Sussex, a general in
the army, a member of the board of general officers, a commissioner
of the Royal military college, and colonel of the 58th regiment.
General Frederick Maitland was married and left a family.
Sir Alexander Charles
Maitland, second baronet, born 21st November 1755, married Helen,
daughter and heiress of Alexander Gibson Wright, Esq., of Clifton
Hall, a scion of the Gibsons of Durie in Fifeshire, and with her
obtained that estate, and assumed in consequence the name of Gibson.
He had, by her, six sons and five daughters. Alexander Maitland
Gibson Maitland, the eldest son, an advocate at the Scottish bar,
died in September 1828, leaving, by his wife, Susan, eldest daughter
of George Ramsay, Esq. of Barnton, four sons and two daughters.
On the death of the
second baronet, 7th February 1848, his grandson, Sir Alexander
Charles Maitland Gibson Maitland, born in 1820, succeeded as third
baronet. He married in 1841, Thomasina Agnes, daughter of James
Hunt, Esq. of Pittencrieff, Fifeshire, with issue.
_____
The Maitlands of
Dundrennan Abbey and Compstone, in the stewartry of Kirkcudbright,
and Hermand, in Mid Lothian, are descended from an early branch of
the Lauderdale family. Their immediate ancestor was William
Maitland, a distinguished Scots ecclesiastic during the latter part
of the 17th century, who acquired considerable estates in the
stewartry of Kirkcudbright.
Thomas Maitland, a
lord of session by the judicial title of Lord Dundrennan, born 9th
October 1792, passed advocate in 1813, and was solicitor-general for
Scotland, under the Whig administration in 1840 and 1841, and again
from 1846 till the beginning of 1850, when he was appointed a lord
of session. In 1845 he was chosen M.P. for Kircudbrightshire, and
died 10th June, 1851. He married, in 1815, Isabella Graham, 4th
daughter of James Macdowall, Esq. of Garthland, with issue. His
brother, Edward Forbes Maitland, Esq., advocate, was appointed in
1855, and again in 1859, solicitor-general for Scotland. He had
previously been depute advocate.
_____
Of the name of
Maitland there have been many distinguished naval and military
officers. Rear-admiral John Maitland, second son of Colonel the Hon.
Sir Richard Maitland, third son of the sixth earl of Lauderdale and
uncle of Rear-admiral Sir Frederick Lewis Maitland, first saw active
service in the West Indies, when he was midshipman on board the
Boyne of 98 guns, the flagship of Sir John Jervis, and distinguished
himself by his gallantry at Martinique, Guadaloup, &c. He was
afterwards lieutenant of the Winchelsea frigate; from which he
removed into the Lively, and was in that ship when in 1795 it
captured, after an action of three hours, the French ship La
Tourterelle. In 1797 he was appointed to the Kingfisher, and on the
1st July succeeded in quelling a mutiny on board his ship, by, with
his officers, attacking the mutineers sword in hand, and killing and
wounding several of them. This spirited conduct was called “Doctor
Maitland’s recipe.” By the earl of St. Vincent, who recommended its
adoption to the fleet on similar emergencies. In command of the
Boadicea, he saw much service in the Channel, and on board the
Barfleur of 98 guns he served with the Mediterranean fleet until the
conclusion of the war with France in 1815. In 1821 he attained the
rank of rear-admiral, and died in 1836.
For a memoir of his
cousin, Rear-admiral Sir Frederick Lewis Maitland, to whom the
emperor Napoleon surrendered on board the Bellerophon after the
battle of Waterloo in 1815, see LAUDERDALE, Earl of.
MAITLAND, SIR
RICHARD, a distinguished poet, lawyer, and statesman, the
collector of the early poetry of Scotland, was the son of William
Maitland of Lethington, and Martha, daughter of George, second Lord
Seton, as already mentioned. He was born in 1496, and having
finished the usual course of academical education at the university
of St. Andrews, he went to France to study the law. After his return
to Scotland, he recommended himself to the favour of James V., and
was employed in various public commissions by that monarch, and
afterwards by the regent Arran and Mary of Guise. In March 1551 we
find him taking his seat on the bench as an extraordinary lord of
session, and soon after he was knighted. He was frequently sent as
commissioner to settle matters on the borders, and in 1559 concluded
the treaty of Upsettlington, afterwards confirmed by Francis and
Mary.
As early as October
1560, Sir Richard had the misfortune to lose his sight, but his
blindness did not incapacitate him for business. In November 1561 he
was admitted an ordinary lord of session, when he took the title of
Lord Lethington. Shortly after he was sworn a member of the privy
council, and on 20th December 1562 he was nominated lord privy seal.
He continued a lord of session during the troublous times of Queen
Mary and the regents, in the minority of James VI. His advice to
Queen Mary was that of a judicious and faithful counselor, that she
must see her laws kept, or else she would get no obedience.
(Douglas’ Peerage, vol. ii. P. 67).
In 1563 he was
appointed one of the commissioners to whom the rights of individuals
to the act of oblivion were to be referred, and on 28th December of
that year he was one of the committee chosen to frame regulations
for the commissaries then about to be established for the discussion
of consistorial causes. In 1567 he resigned the office of lord privy
seal, in favour of his second son, John, prior of Coldingham,
afterwards created Lord Maitland of Thirlestane. On the 1st July
1584, his great age compelled him to resign his seat on the bench,
in favour of Sir Lewis Bellenden of Auchnoull, being allowed the
privilege of naming his successor. He had been more than seventy
years employed in the public service, and the letter from the king
to the court of session on occasion of his retirement from the
bench, recorded in the Books of Sederunt, states that he “hes dewlie
and faithfully servit our grandshir, gud sir, gud dam, muder, and
ourself, being oftentimes employit in public charges, quherof he
dewtifullie and honestlie acquit himself, and being ane of you
ordinar number thir mony yeiris, hes diligentlie with all sincerity
and integrity servit therein, and now being of werry greit age, and
altho’ in spreit and jugement able anew to serve as appertenis; be
the great age, and being unwell, is sa dibilitat that he is not able
to make sic continual residens as he wald give, and being movit in
conscience that be his absence for laik of number, justice may be
retardit and parties frustrate, hes willinglie demittit,” &c. Sir
Richard died March 20, 1586, at the advanced age of 90. For his
marriage and children see above.
With the single
exception of a passage in Knox’s History, which imputes to him the
having taken bribes to assist Cardinal Bethune to escape from his
imprisonment at Seton, but for which it would appear there was no
good ground, Sir Richard Maitland is uniformly mentioned by
contemporary writers with respect. He collected the “Decisions of
the Court of Session from December 15, 1550, to the penult July,
1565,” the manuscript of which is preserved in the Advocates’
Library. His Collections of Early Scottish Poetry, in two volumes, a
folio and a quarto, were, with other MSS., presented by the duke of
Lauderdale to Samuel Pepys, Esq., secretary of the admiralty to
Charles II. And James II., and the founder of the Pepysian Library
at Magdalene college, Cambridge, in which they now remain. A
selection from these will be found in Pinkerton’s valuable
collection of ‘Ancient Scottish Poems,’ published in 1796. Sir
Richard’s own Poems were for the first time printed in 1830, in a
quarto volume, for the MAITLAND CLUB, which takes its name from him.
The best of his poetical pieces are his ‘Satyres,’ ‘The Blind
Baron’s Comfort,’ and a ‘Ballat of the Creatioun of the World,’ the
latter of which was inserted in Allan Ramsay’s ‘Evergreen.’ Sir
Richard’s ‘Cronicle and Historie of the House and Sirname of Seaton
unto the moneth of November ane thousand five hundred and fifty
aught yeires,’ with a continuation by Alexander, Viscount Kingston,
was printed for the Maitland Club in 1829.
MAITLAND, WILLIAM,
accounted the ablest statesman of his age, historically known as
“Secretary Lethington,” eldest son of the preceding, was one of the
principal characters of his time in Scotland. He was born about
1525, and after being educated at the college of St. Andrews, he
traveled on the Continent, where he studied civil law. In his youth,
instead of following the usual pursuits and amusements of young men
of his rank, he applied himself to politics, and became early
initiated into all the craft and mystery of statesmanship. Though
his political career was vacillating and unsteady, his enterprising
spirit, great penetration, and subtle genius are mentioned with
admiration by contemporary writers of every party.
He was one of the
first to attend the private preaching of John Knox at Edinburgh,
about the end of 1555, when he became a convert to the reformed
doctrines. When Knox began to reason against the mass, Erskine of
dun invited the Reformer to supper, to resolve some doubts on the
subject, “where were assembled,” says Calderwood, (v. i. p. 305)
“David Forresse, Mr. Robert Lokhart, John Willocke, and William
Matlane of Lethington, younger.’ All their objections against giving
up the mass were so fully answered by Knox that Maitland said, “I
see perfytely that thir shifts will serve for nothing before God,
seing they stand us in so small stead before men.” So the mass,
which had been attended by many from custom, and “the eschewing of
slander,” was disowned by the Reformed party from that time.
On 4th December 1558,
during the regency of Mary of Guise, Maitland was, by that princess,
appointed secretary of state. The violent proceedings of the queen
regent against the Reformers, and fears for his life, from his being
known to favour the reformed doctrines, induced him, in October of
the following year, to join the lords of the congregation, who had
taken possession of Edinburgh. The queen regent and the Romish party
withdrew to Leith, but within a month the lords fled to Stirling,
and the regent re-entered the capital in triumph. Calderwood says,
“William Matlane of Lethington, younger, secretarie to the queen,
perceiving himself to be suspected as one that favoured the
congregatioun, and to stand in danger of his life if he sould
remaine at Leith, because he spaired not to utter his minde in
controversies of religioun, conveyed himself out of Leith, a little
before Allhallow Eve, and rendered himself to Mr. Kirkaldie, Laird
of Grange. He assured the lords there was nothing but craft and
falsehood in the queene.” (Hist. of the Kirk of Scotland, vol. i. p.
553.) He was gladly received by the lords, who marked their sense of
this his open adhesion to their cause, by sending him to England to
lay their position and prospects before Queen Elizabeth, and to
crave her aid. She at once sent a fleet to the firth of Forth, to
prevent farther assistance being sent from France to the regent, and
gave secret instructions to the duke of Norfolk to meet with the
Scots commissioners at Berwick, to arrange the conditions on which
her assistance was to be given. The commissions appointed by the
lords of the congregation to represent them at Berwick on this
occasion were, lord James Stewart, afterwards the Regent Moray, Lord
Ruthven, the masters of Maxwell and Lindsay, the laird of Pitarrow,
Henry Balnaves of Hallhill, and the secretary Maitland. After a
great deal of negotiation, a treaty was concluded between Elizabeth
and the leaders of the congregation, called the treaty of Berwick,
in consequence of which, on the 28th March, an English force under
Lord Grey marched into Scotland, and joined the army of the
congregation.
Maitland acted as
speaker of the parliament in August 1560 which abolished the power
and supremacy of the Pope in Scotland, Huntly the chancellor having
declined to attend. It is well known that when Queen Mary in the
following year was about to sail direct from France to Scotland,
Elizabeth dispatched a fleet into the Channel, with the avowed
purpose of clearing the sea from pirates, but really with the view
of intercepting Mary and carrying her prisoner to England. Secretary
Maitland and the queen’s brother, Lord James Stewart, are charged
with recommending this measure to the English minister. On Mary’s
arrival, however, they were chosen her principal advisers, and on
12th November of the same year (1561) Maitland was made an
extraordinary lord of session. According to Calderwood (vol. ii.
160), the ratification of the Book of Discipline by the queen met
with strong objections from Maitland, who, when it was proposed,
sneered, and asked “how many of those who had subscribed it would be
subject to it.” It was answered, “All the godly.” “Will the duke?” (Chatelerault),
said Maitland. “If he will not,” said Ochiltry, “I wish he were
scraped out, not only out of that book, but also out of our number
and company; for to what purpose shall travail be taken to set the
church in order, if it be not kept, or to what end shall men
subscribe, if they never mean to perform?” Maitland answered, “Many
subscribed them, in fide parentum, as the bairus are baptized.” “Ye
think that stuff proper,” said Knox, “but it is as untrue as
unproper. That book was read in public audience; and the heads
thereof reasoned upon diverse days, as all that sit here know very
well, and yourself cannot deny. No man, therefore, was desired to
subscribe that which he understood not.” The ratification, however,
was refused.
Soon after Maitland
was sent as Mary’s ambassador to the court of Elizabeth, to salute
the latter in his mistress’ name, and to make known her good will
towards her. After his return to Scotland, he accompanied the queen,
in August 1562, in her expedition to the north against the earl of
Huntly and the Gordons. On their arrival at Old Aberdeen, we are
told there was such a scarcity of accommodation that he and
Randolph, the English ambassador, were obliged to sleep together in
the same bed. He was present at the battle of Corrichie where Huntly
was defeated. On this occasion he exhorted every man to call upon
God, to remember his duty, and not to fear the multitude, and made
the following prayer: “O Lord, thou that ruleth the heaven and the
earth, look upon thy servants whose blood this day is sought, and to
man’s judgment is sold and betrayed. Our refuge is now unto thee,
and our hope is in thee. Judge then, O Lord, this day betwixt us and
the earl of Huntly. If ever we have sought unjustly his or their
destruction and blood, let us fall on the edge of the sword. If we
be innocent, maintain and preserve us, for thy great mercy’s sake.”
A short time after
this Maitland was again sent ambassador to England, and in his
absence the nobility blamed him for serving the queen to the
prejudice of the commonwealth. On his return therefore he deemed it
necessary to strengthen his hands by making friends to himself, and
by endeavouring to shake the credit of the earl of Moray at court.
In 1563, when Knox appeared before the queen and council to answer a
charge of treason, for writing a circular letter to the principal
protestant gentlemen, requesting them to meet at Edinburgh, to be
present at the trial of two men for a riot at the popish chapel at
Holyrood, Mr. Secretary Maitland conducted the prosecution against
him. On this occasion he showed himself bitterly hostile to the
reformer. When Knox was acquitted by the council, Maitland, who had
assured the queen of his condemnation, was enraged at the decision.
He brought her majesty, who had retired before the vote, again into
the room, and proceeded to call the votes a second time in her
presence. This attempt to overawe them incensed the nobility.
“What!” said they, “shall the laird of Lethington have power to
command us? Shall the presence of a woman cause us offend God? Shall
we condemn an innocent man against our conscience, for the pleasure
of any creature?” And greatly to the mortification of the queen and
the discomfiture of the secretary, they indignantly repeated their
former votes, absolving Knox from the charge.
He seems after this
to have thought that the reformed clergy assumed too much in their
public rebukes, and after a sermon of Knox’s colleague, Mr. Craig,
against the corruptions of the times, Lethington, says Calderwood,
“in the presence of many, gave himself to the devil, if after that
day he should regard what should become of ministers, but should do
what he might that his companions have a skaire with him, let them
bark and blow as much as they list.” Knox declaimed against him from
the pulpit, on which Maitland mockingly said, “We must recant, and
burn our bill, for the preachers are angry.”
At a conference with
the leading members of the General Assembly, held in June 1564, a
long debate ensued between Maitland and Knox, on those points of the
reformed doctrines which gave offence to the court, but chiefly as
regards the Reformer’s mode of prayer for the Queen, and on
obedience to her authority. In this memorable disputation, although
Maitland had the worst of the argument, he is acknowledged to have
acquitted himself with all the acuteness and ingenuity of a
practiced disputant. An account of this conference will be found at
length in Calderwood’s History of the Kirk of Scotland, vol. ii. p.
252-280.
In January 1565,
Maitland was appointed an ordinary lord of session, and in April the
same year he was dispatched to England, to intimate to Elizabeth the
intention of Mary to marry the Lord Darnley. In 1566 he joined the
conspiracy against Rizzio, “partly finding himself prejudged by this
Savoyard in the affairs of his office as secretary, and partly for
the favour he then carried to the earl of Moray, then in exile.”
After Rizzio’s murder, he was, for his participation in it, deprived
of his office of secretary, and obliged to retire into concealment
in Lauderdale, while the other conspirators fled to England, but,
before the end of the year, he was restored to favour and allowed to
return to court.
On the night of
Sunday, February 9, 1567, occurred the murder of Darnley, by the
blowing up of the house of the Kirk of Field, which had been
procured by Maitland for the King’s accommodation, he having been
won over by the earl of Bothwell to his designs. With the earl of
Morton he solicited and obtained from several lords of Moray’s
faction, and from eight bishops a declaration in writing, avowing
their belief of Bothwell’s innocence of the murder, and recommending
him as a proper husband for the queen. It is alleged that the queen
had previously consented to this marriage; but her defenders deny
this, and aver that the writings which she was said to have signed
was a forgery of the secretary Maitland. He joined the confederacy
of the nobles for the removal of Bothwell, and after the surrender
of the queen at Carberry Hill, and her imprisonment in the castle of
Lochleven, he wrote to her, offering his service, and using as an
argument the apologue of the mouse delivering the lion taken in the
net. He also proposed that, after providing for the safety of the
young prince and the security of the protestant religion, the queen
should be re-established in her authority. He, however, attend4ed
the coronation of King James VI., on 29th July 1567, and although he
was one of the secret advisers of the escape of the queen from
Lochleven castle, he yet fought against her on the field of Langside.
In September 1568,
when the regent Moray was called to the conferences at York,
Maitland was one of the nine commissioners chosen to accompany him.
The regent, says Spottiswood (Hist. p. 218,) was unwilling to take
him, but more afraid to leave him in Scotland. On the other hand,
Calderwood says, (vol. ii. p. 429,) Secretary Lethington was very
reluctant to go, but he was induced by fair promises of lands and
money, “for it was not expedient to leave behind them a factious
man, that inclined secretly to the queen.” While in England so great
was his duplicity that, we are told, almost every night he had
secret communication with Mary’s chief commissioners, and forewarned
them of the regent’s intentions. He went out to the fields with the
duke of Norfolk, under the pretence of hunting, but in reality to
consult with him as to the best means of forwarding the queen’s
interests, and he it was who first conceived the fatal project of a
marriage between Mary and the duke, as a probable means of restoring
her to liberty, if not of replacing her on the throne.
He was one of the two
commissioners selected by Moray, about the end of October, to
proceed to London to Queen Elizabeth, Mr. James Mackgill of
Rankeillour being the other, and he was sent with him not so much to
assist him as to watch his proceedings. After his return to
Scotland, by his secret intrigues he prevailed upon Lord Home,
Kirkaldy of Grange, and several of his former associates, to join
the queen’s faction, and retired to Perth for a time with his friend
the earl of Athol. The regent, suspecting him to be the contriver of
all the plots and conspiracies, in favour of Mary, in England and
Scotland, sent to him to attend a council at Stirling, and while
sitting in council he was arrested, on 3d September 1569, by Captain
Thomas Crawford, a retainer of the earl of Lennox, on the charge of
being accessory to the murder of the king’s father, Lord Darnley.
Security to answer the charge having been offered and refused, he
was committed a prisoner to the castle of Stirling, whence he was
removed to Edinburgh, and given into the custody of Alexander Hume
of North Berwick. Kirkaldy of Grange, governor of the castle, went
to Hume’s house at night, and by pretending a warrant from the
regent, induced him to deliver Maitland to him, when he was carried
to the castle.
On the 21st November,
the day appointed for Maitland’s trial, a great number of his
friends came to Edinburgh, and he not being forthcoming, the regent
found himself compelled to postpone his trial. Kirkaldy offered to
produce him, if there were any one present to accuse him, and, as
none appeared, the secretary’s brother, John, afterwards Lord
Maitland of Thirlestane, protested that as there was no prosecutor
he was entitled to his liberty.
After the murder of
the regent Moray in January 1570, the lords assembled to consult
upon the affairs of the country, when Maitland had the address to
obtain from them a declaration acquitting him of all the charges
against him. The Lord Ochiltree desired him to give his oath for
their greater satisfaction, which he did. He and Kirkaldy now
exerted themselves to effect a compromise between the rival
factions, but all their endeavours were unavailing. He was the
author of the letter sent by the queen’s lords to Elizabeth, towards
the end of March, in behalf of Mary, and among the signatures
appears his as “William Matlane, Comptroller.” At this time he was
the life and soul of the queen’s party, and there was great resort
to him of all who favoured her cause. His house was, therefore,
called the school, and himself the schoolmaster, and such as
repaired to him his disciples.
Retiring into Athol,
he attended the council of the queen’s friends held there, which was
called the council of Ballach. He and two of his brothers were
summoned to take their trial at Edinburgh, but as they did not
appear, they were denounced rebels. He was deprived of his office of
secretary by the regent Lennox, who sent troops to ravage his lands
as well as those of his father, Sir Richard Maitland. At this time
he himself was corresponding with Mary, sending her letters to be
subscribed by her and forwarded to the kings of France and Spain,
the emperor of Germany and the Guises, that they might exert
themselves on her behalf. He now resolved to join Kirkaldy in
Edinburgh castle. He therefore arrived at Leith, the 10th April
1571, and was carried up to the castle by six workmen, says
Bannatyne in his Journal, (p. 130) “with sting and ling, (that is,
by poles like a litter,) and Mr. Robert Maitland (dean of Aberdeen
and a lord of session) holding up his head; and when they had put
him in at the castell yeat, ilk ane of the workmen gat iii shil:
which they recevit grudginglie, hoping to have gottin mair for their
labouris.”
In a parliament held
at the head of the Cannongate, May 14, 1571, Maitland was proclaimed
a traitor to his country, and attainted, with his two brothers, John
and Thomas. He was the principal speaker on the queen’s side in the
discussion which, soon after, took place with certain of the king’s
party, who had gone to the castle with the view, if possible, of
bringing the two factions to an agreement, but which came to
nothing. It was by his fatal counsels that Kirkaldy of Grange
resolutely held out that fortress for Queen Mary, in the hope of
receiving succours from France, even after the Hamiltons, with
Huntly, and the other nobles friendly to her cause, had submitted to
the regent. He, also, like the deluded but chivalrous knight of
Grange, brought “a railing accusation” against Knox, as a short time
before the Reformer’s death, he sent to the kirk session of
Edinburgh, a complaint against him, for having publicly in his
sermons and otherwise, slandered him as an atheist and enemy to all
religion; in that he had charged him with saying in the castle that
there was neither heaven nor hell, which were only devised to
frighten children, “with other such language, tending to the like
effect.” His letter thus continues:
“Which words, before
God, never at anie time proceeded from my mouth; nor yitt anie other
sounding to the like purpose, nor whereof anie suche sentence might
be gathered. For, praised be God, I have beene brought up from my
youth, and instructed in the feare of God; and to know that he hath
appointed heaven for the habitation of the elect, and hell for the
everlasting dwelling place of the reprobate. Seing he hath thus
ungentlie used m4e, and neglected his ductie, vocatioun, the rule of
Christian charitie, and all good order, maliciouslie and untruelie
leing on me, I crave redresse therof at your hands: and that yee
will take suche order therewith, that he may be compelled to nominat
his authors, and prove his alledgance (or allegation); to the end
that, if it be found true, as I am weill assured he sall not be able
to verifie it in anie sort, I may worthily he reputed the man he
painteth me out to be. And if (whereof I have no doubt) the
contrearie fall out, yee may use him accordingly: at least, that
hereafter ye receave not everie word proceeding from his mouth as
oracles; and know that he is but a man subject to vanitie, and manie
times doeth utter his owne passiouns and other men’s inordinate
affections, in place of true doctrine. It is convenient that,
according to the Scriptures, yee believe not everie spirit, but that
yee trie the spirits whether they are of god or not. (Signed)
WILLIAM MATLANE.”
In his reply, given
literally from his deathbed, and verbally, Knox declared that the
works of Maitland and those who acted with him testified that they
denied there was any God, or heaven or hell, wherein virtue should
be rewarded or vice punished. He declined to name his authors, as
required by Maitland, and referring to that part of his complaint
which affirmed that he was “a man subject to vanity,” and that the
words from his mouth should not be received as oracles, &c., he said
that the words which he had spoken would be found as true as the
oracles which had been uttered by any of the servants of God before;
for he had said nothing but that whereof he had a warrant out of the
word, namely, that the justice of God should never be satisfied till
the blood of the shedders of innocent blood were shed again, or God
moved them to unfeigned repentance. He added that Maitland was the
chief author of all the troubles raised both in England and
Scotland. When Mr. David Lindsay went to the castle, by Knox’s
request, to communicate the Reformer’s memorable dying prediction to
Kirkaldy, Maitland sent out the sneering message to him, “Go, tell
Mr. Knox he is but a dirty prophet.” Lindsay reported this to Knox,
who said, “I have been earnest with my God anent the two men. For
the one (meaning Kirkaldy) I am sorry that so shall befall him, yet
god assureth me that there is mercy for his soul. For the other
(meaning Maitland) I have no warrant that ever he shall be weill.”
Just a week thereafter, Knox died.
At length, the castle
being closely besieged by the regent Morton, and an English force
under Sir William Drury, marshal of Berwick, surrendered to the
latter, after a month’s obstinate resistance, May 29, 1573. Kirkaldy
and his brother were hanged at the cross of Edinburgh, but Maitland
escaped this ignominious fate by dying in prison in Leith, June 9th,
1573. Calderwood (vol. iii. p. 285) says he “poisoned himself, as
was reported,” and Melville (p. 256) “that he died at Leith befor
that the rest wer delyuerit to the shamles; some supposing he took a
drink, and died as the auld Romans wer wont to do.” He is said to
have lain so long unburied that the vermin came from his corpse,
creeping out under the door of the house where he was lying.
Calderwood (vol. iii.
Page 285) thus sums up his character: “This man was of a rare witt,
but sett upon wrong courses, which were contrived and followed out
with falsehood. He could conforme himself to the times, and
therefore was compared by one, who was not ignorant of his courses,
to the chameleon. A discourse went from hand to hand, before the
siege of the castell, intituled, The Chameleon, wherein all his
syles and tricks were described.” He thus concludes, after showing
that he had trafficked with all parties: “At the parliament holdin
after the taking of the queene, he, with some others, partakers of
the murther (of Darnley), would have had her putt to death. When
that purpose wrought not, he solicited some private men to hang her
in her owne bed, with her belt, that he, and his partners in the
murther, might be out of feare of suche a witnesse. When this
counsel was not heard, then he turned himself to flatter the queene,
and sent to Lochlevin the apologue of the lyoun delivered by the
mouse out of the snare.”
Buchanan it was who
portrayed the character of Secretary Lethington in his tract called
‘The Chameleon.’ Bannatyne calls him “the father of traitors,” and
designates him “Mitchell Sylie,” a corruption doubtless of
Machiavelli.
Maitland of
Lethington.
The “Spectator” (April 5). in a review of “Maitland
of Lethington, the Minister of Mary Stuart: A Study of his Life and
Times,” by E. Russell (1912) (pdf), says: —
Lethington’s career has none of the swift romance of Montrose’s. lie
was single-hearted enough in his aims, but not in his methods, and
though he was tenacious and firm beyond any man of his age, he
showed his quality in prosaic fields like councils and embassies and
an interminable correspondente. Into his forty-five stormy years he
crowded activities enough for ten men. The son of an East Lothian
laird, he was so admirably educated that Queen Elizabeth, no bad
judge, called him “the flower of the wits of Scotland.” At
twenty-six he became a privy councillor and secretary of State to
the Regent, Mary of Guise, and began the long negotiations with
England which ended only with his death. He was a “persona grata” to
Elizabeth’s advisers, who appreciated the sincerity of his
friendship for their country; and it was largely due to his efforts
that the English alliance was formed and the French influence of the
Regent, counteracted. The death of Mary of Guise saw the end of the
old Franco-Scottish pact and the beginning of Knox’s supremacy over
Scottish minds. The Pope’s jurisdiction was formally destroyed by
Act of Parliament, the old heresy laws were annulled, and the saying
or hearing of Mass was prohibited. Lethington’s first attempt at the
union with England was his proposal that Elizabeth should marry
Arran, the prospective heir to the Scottish throne. Elizabeth
refused, and the death of the French King left the Scots with a
young Queen, a devout Catholic, whose personality threatened to
upset all calculations. The main problem at the outset of Mary’s
reign was that of the English succession, with which that of her
marriage was closely bound up. Her first desire was to wed Don
Carlos, of Spain, and Lethineton seems to have furthered the scheme
in the hope of using it as a lever to compel the recognition by
Elizabeth of the Queen of Scots as her successor. Then came the
proposal for a match with Leicester, and finally Mary's
counterstroke of the marriage with Darnley. After that, tragedy
began to thicken about the luckless Queen. Lethington dropped out of
her council, and he dropped out also of the confidence of Moray and
Knox. Henceforth he was to play his own game in politics. He was
undoubtedly an accomplice in the murder of Riccio, and he had
foreknowledge of the grievous tragedy of Darnley’s death. Lethington
stood by the Queen through the events which followed, for he was
convinced that only through the Queen could the union he desired be
accomplished.
In the remaining six years of his life he fought for the Queen till,
as happens to obstinate men, he had almost forgotten his original
reasons, and fought as if he were a blind legitimist. He intrigued
unsuccessfully on her side at the inquiries at York and Westminster.
To him, permanent deposition seemed a punishment beyond her deserts,
besides being a hindrance to the union of Britain; and therein he
differed from Moray and Knox and the nobles, who began to form the
party of the young King. Moreover, he had a deep-seated love of
power, as he saw that as he had played his cards he could only hope
to exert his supreme influence through Mary’s restoration. He wished
to safeguard the Reformation settlement, but he believed that the
now chastened Queen would be no obstacle. The death of Moray—“the
most just and magnanimous ruler that Scotland had had since the days
of Bruce,” Mr Russell calls him —removed one difficulty; but
Lethington had under-rated the strength of the King’s party, which
now, through Knox’s influence, had obtained the support of the great
body of the lairds and burgesses. He went into open opposition, and
intrigued for French support against his Scottish opponents and
Elizabeth, he would have defended his apparent inconsistency by
maintaining that his ends were still the same as when he had opposed
Mary of Guise Whereas he had formerly sought the union of the realm
by friendship with Elizabeth, he was now compelled to seek it by
coercing her, which was impossible without foreign aid.” He was
prepared to bo reconciled at once with the English Queen if she
would recognise the Scottish rights to the English succession.
In the end he and the rest of the Queen’s party were forced to make
an armed stand in Edinburgh Castle. The tale of the long siege. till
Morton with English aid forced a capitulation shows that Lethington
possessed, at any rate an indomitable courage. Tormented with bodily
ailments, he never wavered, though his party fell away daily, and
Hamilton and Huntly and creatures like Sir James Balfour went over
to the other side. With the gallant and Quixotic Kirkaldy of Grange
he kept his flag flying to the last, striving by his old subleties
to sow dissension among his opponents, and never losing hope till
the enemy were through the gates. He and Kirkaldy in the end were
deserted by everybody, even by France; they fought on in their
hopeless fight out of sheer pride and stubbornness. Kirkaldy died on
the scaffold, but it must have been a relief to the Scots nobles, as
well as to Elizabeth and Burghley, that Lethington died a natural
death before his trial. There is a kind of magnificence in his last
desperate resolution which is lacking in the far wiser and more
successful dexterity of his earlier career. He is one of the few
cases of the “politique" who in the last resort could attain to the
simpler heroism of the enthusiast.
MAITLAND, SIR JOHN,
a distinguished statesman, the first Lord Maitland of Thirlestane,
second son of Sir Richard Maitland, the poet, and younger brother of
the preceding, was born in 1537. After being educated at home by his
father, he was sent, as was the custom in those days, to France,
where he studied the law. On his return, through the influence of
his brother, the secretary, he obtained the abbacy of Kelso in
commendam, which he soon exchanged with Francis Stewart, afterwards
earl of Bothwell, the queen’s nephew, for the priory of Coldingham.
The queen’s ratification of this transaction took place in February
1567. On the 20th April of the same year, he was appointed lord
privy seal, on his father’s resignation of that office in his
favour, and he was confirmed in it by the regent Moray on the 26th
of the following August. On the 2d June 1568, he was constituted one
of the spiritual lords of session.
Like his brother,
Secretary Lethington, the prior of Coldingham ranged himself on the
regent’s side, on the dethronement of Queen Mary, but after Moray’s
assassination he joined the lords who met on the queen’s behalf at
Linlithgow, and thereafter remained steady in his attachment to her
cause. He was denounced rebel by the king’s faction in the end of
1570, and forfeited, with his two brothers, in the parliament which
met in the Canongate in the following May. He was deprived of the
office of lord privy seal, which was given to George Buchanan, while
the priory of Coldingham was bestowed on George Home of Manderston.
He then retired to the castle of Edinburgh, then held by Kirkaldy of
Grange for the queen, and continued with him till its surrender on
29th May 1573. The regent Morton sent him prisoner to Tantallan
castle, on the sea-coast of Haddingtonshire, where he was confined
for nine months. His ward was then enlarged, and he was allowed to
reside at Lord Somerville’s house of Cowthally, with the liberty of
two miles around it, under a penalty of £10,000, if he went beyond
these bounds. He was subsequently permitted the range of the
counties of Ayr and Renfrew.
On the fall of
Morton, he was set at full liberty by an act of council in 1578. He
then went to court, and soon obtained the favour of the king. On
26th April, 1581, he was restored to his seat on the bench. He was
shortly afterwards knighted and sworn a privy councilor, and 18th
May 1584 made secretary of state. His forfeiture was rescinded in
the parliament which met on the 22d of that month, and in the
following year, he succeeded, greatly to the satisfaction of the
king, in effecting a reconciliation with the exiled nobles, on their
return to Scotland. On 31st May 1586 he was appointed
vice-chancellor of the kingdom.
IN 1587, Sir John
Maitland was accused by Captain Stewart, some time earl of Arran,
and then chancellor, to whom he had at one time adhered, but had
latterly deserted, of being accessory to the execution of Queen Mary
and of intending to betray the king into the hands of Elizabeth.
Stewart was ordered to enter within the palace of Linlithgow, there
to abide the issue of his accusation, but disobeyed the command. He
was, in consequence, deprived of the office of lord high chancellor,
which was immediately conferred upon Maitland.
Two years afterwards,
the earls of Huntly, Crawford, and Bothwell, personal enemies of the
chancellor, formed a design to march, with their followers, to
Holyrood-house, make themselves masters of the king’s person, and
put the chancellor to death. On the night in which it was to be
carried into effect, however, the king remained in the same house
with the chancellor, and thus frustrated their intentions. All their
subsequent plots against him were likewise defeated. On the 22d
October of the same year (1589) Sir John Maitland, as chancellor,
embarked with the king at Leith, on his voyage to Norway, to bring
home his bride, the princess Anne of Denmark, who had been driven in
there by contrary winds. The royal party spent the ensuing winter at
Copenhagen, where Maitland became intimately acquainted with Tycho
Brahe, the celebrated Danish astronomer, to whom he addressed
several complimentary verses. While in Denmark, he wrote some
letters on state affairs to Mr. Robert Bruce at home, to whom had
been intrusted the care of the country in the king’s absence. These
letters, as well as those of James to the same faithful and
energetic minister, were dated from the castle of Cronenburgh, and
the last of Maitland’s from Elsinore.
He returned with the
king and queen on the 1st of May 1590, and on the 17th of the same
month, the coronation day of the latter, he was created a peer, by
the title of Lord Maitland of Thirlestane. In the procession to the
abbey kirk, where the ceremony took place, he carried the queen’s
matrimonial crown. The title was granted to him and the heirs male
of his body, by letters patent, dated 18th May 1590. The following
year he resigned his office of secretary of state, which was
conferred on his nephew, Sir Richard Cockburn of Clerkington. IN
February 1592 occurred the murder at Donibristle in Fife of the
“bonny earl of Moray” by the earl of Huntly. The king and the
chancellor were suspected of having been previously aware of
Huntly’s intention, and Maitland is said to have “hounded on” that
nobleman to the cruel deed. “Camden in his annals,” says Calderwood,
(vol. iv. p. 145) “layeth the whole burden upon the chancellor to
clear the king; but it is known that these his annals were composed
at the king’s direction and pleasure.” So great was the murmuring of
the citizens of Edinburgh on the occasion that the king and the
chancellor found themselves obliged to go, for a time, to Lord
Hamilton’s house of Kinneil in Linlithgowshire, and it was with
great difficulty that the provost and magistrates restrained the
crafts of the city from taking arms to prevent their departure. The
pay of the soldiers of the king’s guard being in arrear, they seized
the chancellor’s trunks and coffers, which had been placed on
horseback, and did not restore them till a solemn promise was made
that they should be duly paid all that was due to them.
The turbulent earl of Bothwell, who kept the king and court in
constant fear and turmoil, and whose bitter hostility had frequently
been directed against the chancellor, had favourers even in the
palace, and the queen herself was brought to lend her powerful
influence against Maitland. On the penult day of March 1592, he was
commanded to remove from court, on which he retired to Lethington,
but was soon restored to favour. It was principally by his advice
that the king was induced to consent to the act of parliament,
passed in June of the same year, for the ratification of the liberty
of the Presbyterian church, in other words, for its legal
establishment. His object in persuading the king to this measure is
said to have been to ingratiate himself with the ministers and
people, and to strengthen himself against his enemy Bothwell. With
the queen he had a dispute relative to the lands of Musselburgh,
which caused his retirement from court for a whole year. On her
coming to Scotland, the abbey of Dunfermline, with its lands and
privileges, had been conferred upon her by the king. Among these was
the manor of Musselburgh, a grant of which had been made to the
abbey of Dunfermline by David I., that “sair saunt to the croon.”
The regality of Musselburgh and the property connected with it had,
some years before the queen’s marriage, come into the possession of
Chancellor Maitland, and as he refused to resign them to the queen,
her animosity was but the more increased against him. By the king’s
advice he passed the following year in the country, but in May 1593,
he returned to court and was restored to the exercise of his office.
The vast estate, it may be stated, of the lordship of Musselburgh,
or of the whole of the ancient Great Inveresk and Little Inveresk,
continued in the family till 1709, when it was purchased by Anne,
duchess of Buccleuch, the widow of the duke of Monmouth, from John,
fifth earl of Lauderdale, who died the following year. Subjoined is
the chancellor’s portrait, from an engraving in Smith’s Iconographia
Scotica:
[portrait of Sir John Maitland]
The keeping of the
young prince Henry had been intrusted by the king to the earl of
Mar, but as the queen whished to remove him from Mar’s charge, the
chancellor, willing to make a friend of her majesty, entered into
her plans. This roused the anger of James, who reproved him very
sharply for his interference in a matter with which he had nothing
to do. Deeply mortified, he retired to Lauder, where, after two
months’ illness, he died, October 3d, 1595. He was visited on his
deathbed by Andrew Melville and his nephew, Robert Bruce, and had he
lived it is thought that the evils with which, soon after, the
national church was assailed, would have been averted. The king
regretted him much, and composed an epitaph to his memory.
Lord Thirlestane,
like his father, has obtained a high character from his
contemporaries, for his eminent abilities and amiable disposition.
Spotswood says: “He was a man of rare parts and of a deep wit,
learned, full of courage, and most faithful to his king and master.
No man did ever carry himself in his place more wisely, nor sustain
it more courageously against his enemies.”
Besides a satire
‘Against Slanderis Tongues,’ and ‘An Admonition to the Earl of Mar,’
published by Pinkerton, and described by him as the best state poem
which he had ever read, he wrote several Latin epigrams, inserted in
the second volume of the ‘Delitiae Poetarum Scotorum.’ The poems
attributed to him have been printed with those of his father, Sir
Richard Maitland, by the Maitland Club, in a volume issued in 1829.
MAITLAND, JOHN,
second earl and only duke of Lauderdale. (see LAUDERDALE).
MAITLAND, WILLIAM,
an historical and antiquarian writer, was born at Brechin about
1693. His original occupation was that of a hair merchant, in which
character he travelled in Sweden, Denmark, and Germany, and by his
business he appears to have acquired some wealth. At length,
settling in London, he turned his attention to the study of
antiquities, and produced several compilations, which were well
received at the time, but are now of small repute. In 1733, he was
elected a member of the Royal Society, and in 1735 a fellow of the
Antiquarian Society, but resigned the latter honour in 1740, on his
return to Scotland. He died at Montrose, July 16, 1757. His works
are:
The History of
London, from its foundation by the Romans, to the year 1739. Also
Westminster, Middlesex, Southwark, and other parts within the Bills
of Mortality. Illustrated with numerous plates. London, 1739, fol.
The same, continued to the year 1760. Lond. 1760, 2 vols. Fol. An
edition considerably enlarged and improved, was published in 1765, 2
vols, fol. By Mr. Entick.
The History of
Edinburgh, from its foundation to the present time; containing a
faithful relation of the public transactions of the citizens;
accounts of the several Parishes; its Government, Civil,
Ecclesiastical, and Military; Incorporations of Trades and
Manufactures; courts of Justice; state of Learning; Charitable
Foundations, &c.; with the several Accounts of the Parishes of the
Canongate, St. Cuthbert, &c.; and the ancient and present state of
Leith. In nine books, with plates. Edin. 1753, fol.
The History and
Antiquities of Scotland. Lond. 1757, 2 vols. Fol.
Of the Number of
Inhabitants in London. Phil. Trans. Abr. Vii. 257. 1738.
Genealogical and Historical Account of the Maitland Family
Compiled from Charters, Deeds, Parish Registers, Wills, and other
Authentic Evidences by George Harrison Rogers-Harrison, Windsor
Herald (1864) (pdf)
