|
MAXWELL PLANS A MEETING BETWEEN JOHNSTONE AND HIMSELF – THE INTERVIEW
DESCRIBED – ITS TRAGICAL TERMINATION – MAXWELL SHOOTS JOHNSTONE, AND THEN
TAKES TO FLIGHT – THE HUE AND CRY RAISED AGAINST THE ASSASSIN – HE BIDS
HIS NATIVE LAND “GOOD NIGHT” – LEGAL PROCEEDINGS ARE COMMENCED AGAINST HIM
IN HIS ABSENCE – HE IS SENTENCED TO DEATH – AFTER SOME YEARS OF EXILE, HE
RETURNS TO NITHSDALE, IS PURSUED, SEEKS REFUGE IN THE NORTH OF SCOTLAND,
AND IS BETRAYED BY HIS OWN KINSFOLD TO THE GOVERNMENT – MAXWELL PLEADS FOR
HIS LIFE WITHOUT EFFECT – HIS EXECUTION.
IT was when Lord Maxwell was in the harassing and perilous circumstances
indicated by the correspondence given in the preceding chapter, that a
memorable meeting was brought about between him and the man who had
occasioned the slaughter of his father at Drye-Sands. An opinion prevails
that Maxwell made the overtures that led to it, and that he planned the
interview to secure an opportunity of gratifying his desire for vengeance.
While it appears to us very evident that he cherished this murderous
intent, and longed for a chance of carrying it into effect, it seems not
the less true that Johnstone of his own accord, and for objects of his
own, took steps to secure a meeting with Maxwell.
Sir Robert Maxwell of Spottes, or Orchardtoun, declared in his deposition
on the subject before the Privy Council, that “the Laird of Johnstoun
desyrit the deponar (being in his house of Lochwood for the tyme) to speik
the Lord Maxwell quhen he fand the opportunitie, to sie iff the deponar
could mak a [all] good in the materis betuix them.” Sir Robert, however,
declined the mission, assigning as his reasons that the matter was too
weighty for him to take in hand: “that the Lord was a perellous man to
haif ado with,” and the Maxwell “haid evir a mislyking of him becaus he
(the deponar) maryed Johnstone’s sister.”
Accordingly, Maxwell of Spottes did not, in the name of his
brother-in-law, bring the subject before Lord Maxwell; but he stated
further in his deposition, that at the instance of Maxwell he met with the
latter, who besought his advice and influence with the view of securing a
pardon from the King; upon which “the deponar” told Maxwell “that he sould
keipe him quiet, and do not thing quhilk micht offend the Kingis Majestie
farder nor he had done; and the he (the deponar) wald move the noblemen,
who were his friendis at Court and Counsell, to report the best of him to
his Majestie and Counsell.” A question from Sir Robert Maxwell as to the
relations in which his lordship stood toward his neighbouring barons,
turned the conversation on the Laird of Johnstone – Lord Maxwell asking
“quhat he micht lood for att his handis in tyme comeing?” Sir Robert
appears to have evaded this question, and ultimately it was arranged that
his lordship should write out the heads of an agreement between himself
and Johnstone. At parting, “the deponar said to my Lord: ‘If this be a
mater that your lordship thinks in your hairte ye can tak up and remett to
the Laird, I will very willinglie travell in the mater, and do the best I
can; otherwise, I desire nocht to mell [meddle] in it.’”
Honest-looking and plausible was Maxwell’s reply, to the effect that, “if
he saw ony willingnes in the Laird to do dewtie to him, he wald willinglie
pas it over, and if he resavit ane ressonnable answer of the Laird, he
wald be content to meete with him, at ony convenient place; and promest
that he sould keepe honnestlie, for his pairt, and these that were with
him, providing it war keepit quiet for boith their weillis.”
We learn from the rest of the deposition that the articles of agreement
drawn up by Lord Maxwell had a suspicious mistiness about them; that at a
second audience given by him to the Laird of Spottes, the latter inquired
as to their true meaning, and was answered by his lordship that he was
“not a good wreater,” and would not again put his wishes upon paper, but
he had “not bene a dealer aganis him in tyme bigane,” and “what he micht
look for at his handis in tyme comeing;” that Sir Robert, bearing his
relative’s written answer to this verbal message, met Maxwell a third time
in the forest bowers, beside the Abbey of Holywood; that the latter read
the reply, and was “weill content thairwith;” and that then “the deponar”
arranged for an interview, as agreed to by Jonstone, the same to take
place upon the following Wednesday afternoon, between three and four
o’clock, near the House of Beal, his lordship to be accompanied only by
one attendant – Robert Maxwell of the Tower – Johnstone also to have but
one companion, and “the deponar” to be present as a sort of umpire between
the principals. Finally, Sir Robert states that, as a security that this
“tryst” should be truly kept, and that neither Maxwell nor his man should
be guilty of foul play, received “my Lordis faithfull promeis, with my
Lordis hand strekit in the deponaris hands,” that all their proceedings in
the matter should be faithful and honest, even should his projected
agreement with Johnstone prove a failure.
If this “deponar” is to be received as a trustworthy witness, the
Annandale chief was desirous of being reconciled to the son of the
nobleman whose death he had occasioned, and was willing to secure that end
by pleading for him with the King; while, on the other hand, the son
seemed ready to forgive the slaughter of his sire, provided he should,
through his good offices, regain the royal favour. If, however, they
mutually desired to meet with each other, there is room for suspecting
that the motives of one of the parties – Maxwell – were very different
from those he professed to entertain. The result, we think, proves clearly
that, under the guise of peace and forgiveness, he cherished implacable
hatred; that he intended the interview to have a fatal issue to the enemy
of his house; and that the circumstances associated with it were artfully
contrived beforehand, for the purpose of making the foul murder look like
an untoward accident, or, at worst, an unpremeditated case of
manslaughter. So much by way of prologue: let us now endeavour to
reproduce the scene itself.
On the afternoon of April 6, 1608, William Johnstone of Lockerbie visited
his chief at Lochwood, by whom he was cordially welcomed. “Cousin,” said
the Laird, “ye must this day do a greater turn for me than ever I asked at
your hands before. I am to meet with the Lord Maxwell, and ye shall go
with me: push forward, then, to Little Lochwood, where I will join you
presentlie; but let no one ken where ye are riding to, or on what errand
ye are bound.” William Johnstone does as required; and, whilst on the
road, is overtaken by two men on horseback – one of whom proved to be Sir
Robert Maxwell of Spottes, and the other Sir James Johnstone (whom he had
left a few minutes before), but whom he did not at first recognize, as he
was differently apparelled than usual, and, for “secrecie of the tryst,”
was riding upon an old nag, only fit for bearing a hind of low degree.
After brief converse, the three went on together, and ere long descried in
the far distance the Lord of Nithsdale, attended by Charles Maxwell,
“hoofing” on horse-back to meet them. Whereupon Maxwell of Spottes,
bidding his companions bide where they are until he returned to them, or
gave them a sign to advance, rides forward – meets Lord Maxwell –
remonstrates with him that he is accompanied by such an ill-conditioned
individual as Charlie Maxwell, instead of Maxwell of the Tower, and is
told by his lordship that he will be answerable for his relative’s good
faith; and he renews his own promise (suspiciously protesting too much)
that, so far as both are concerned, there will be nothing but fair play.
The good-natured, well-meaning mediator, though only half assured,
resolves to risk the interview. Tying a napkin on his riding-switch, he
displays it as a signal; and, thus summoned, the Laird of Johnstone and
his kinsman advance. Johnstone, though informed that Maxwell has with him
an unlooked-for companion, seems well content, and to be troubled with no
misgivings. “Ye need have no fear of the Lord Maxwell himself, at any
rate,” said Sir Robert, “for I have taken his oath and promise, upon his
faith and honour, that he will meet fairlie and part fairlie, whether a
paction is made between ye or not; and,” added the good knight, “I must
take from you the same oath and pledge.” These are freely given; and ere
five minutes more elapse, the rival chiefs meet at a place called
Auchmanhill – exchange friendly greetings – ride slowly on, accompanied by
their mutual friend, who, with characteristic prudence, keeps between them
as they (both directing their speech to him) begin to talk about their
long fierce feuds, and the propriety of forgetting them henceforth; though
one of the parties, while indulging in honied words, is brimful of bitter
hatred, and bent on shedding blood before that pacific period shall come
to pass.
Whilst the principals are thus engaged, the two subordinates wait near
each other, as instructed by Sir Robert Maxwell, and the following
dialogue ensues between them: - “Gif I had known of this tryst,” said
Charles Maxwell in a querulous tone, “the Lord Maxwell neither could or
should have brought me here.” To which remark his companion replies: “I
hope in God, Charlie, ye do not rue of coming here for so good an object!
for thir twa noblemen have been lang at variance, and I hope now they
shall agree, and be gude friends.” To which the other, working himself
into a rage, retorts: “Agree! impossible! The Laird of Johnstone is not
able to mak amends for the great skaith and injury he has done to the
house of Maxwell!” “But,” said Johnstone, soothingly, “our chief can come
in his lordship’s will, and do all he is able to satisfy him and his
friends.” “Not so,” said the other, waxing more furious, or, at all
events, getting seemingly into a tempest of passion; “and as for this
tryst, it is only made for our prejudice; and that man” – pointing to
Dunskellie – “has sought his wraik, and we should never have met you; for
ye are all traitors! – all traitors!”
Most provoking language this; but Johnstone, knowing how all-important it
is to avoid a quarrel at such a critical period, patiently protests that
he would not enter into any altercation that day. “But,” he added, his
Border blood warming at the insulting language addressed to him, “send
your man to me in a day or twa, and I shall satisfy you.” No answer in
words is retuned to this remark: Charlie replies to it with a pistol shot.
Johnstone raises his pistol to return the fire, but it flashes in the pan;
and then, at the pitch of his voice, he shouts, “Murder! treason!” Sir
James Johnstone, hearing the alarming cry, turns round to ride back; so
does Lord Maxwell; the latter at the same time drawing a pistol, and
preparing to take aim at Sir James. “Fie, my Lord!” cries Sir Robert
Maxwell, in terror, “mak not yourself a traitor and me both.” “Upbraid me
not,” answers his Lordship, “I am wyteless!” Yet he follows the
unsuspecting Laird of Johnstone – fires – the shot takes fatal effect –
for a minute or more the dying man retains his seat – then the weak old
nag below him flounders – its girths give way – prone to the earth falls
the ill-fated chief, treacherously slain in the flower of his age – life’s
sands ebbing rapidly away. His faithful friend vainly endeavours to get
him borne off on his own powerful steed. While thus employed, Charles
Maxwell, with superfluous malignity, fires another pistol at the bleeding
victim, who, after dolefully exclaiming, “I am deceived!” and fervently
praying, “Lord have mercy on me! – Christ have mercy on me!” breathes his
last, and is beyond the reach of the fiendish hate that plotted his ruin,
and the help of the strong human love which his kinsman manifests by
ineffectual sobs and tears!
“Come away! let us be off!” cried Lord Maxwell, when the butchery was
completed. “My lord,” remonstrated his demoniac emissary, “will ye ride
away and leave this bludie thief, Johnstone of Locherbie, behind?” “What
wreck of him!” quoth his lordship, “since the other has had enough!” and
with these words both rode away from the dismal scene, and soon
disappeared. Such is the picture obtained of this fearful tragedy from the
legal depositions made by those who witnessed it, and who had no motive
for depicting it otherwise than correctly.
It may be received as perfectly authentic, and it is sufficiently horrible
without the aggravations given to it by Shawfield, whose manuscript
account of the murder closes as follows: - “Sir James, hearing the shott
and his man’s words, turning about to see what was past, immediately shot
him behind his back with ane pistol chairgit with two poysonit bullets, at
which shott the said Sir James fell from his horse. Maxwell, not being
content therewith, raid about him ane lang tyme, and pursued him farder,
vowing to use him more cruelly and treacherouslie than he had done; for
which it is known sufficiently what followed.” We have never seen any
evidence to support the allegation that Maxwell used poisoned bullets in
order to render his shot more deadly; but the “dittay,” or indictment,
charged him with having done so, the words used being “humerum duabus
glandibus plumbeis venetatis.” Maxwell and his colleague in crime were
allowed to ride away without being called to account by the two friends of
the murdered nobleman, which remissness on their part may be accounted for
by supposing that they were in some measure deprived of their
self-possession by the suddenness of the attack, and were but
indifferently armed. Sir James Johnstone, thus barbarously slaughtered,
was a brave, accomplished knight – “full of wisdom and courage,” says
Spottiswoode; and his death was “severely lamented,” and the manner of it
“detested by all honest men.”
The murder of Dunskellie created a most painful sensation throughout
Annandale: it existed the indignation of the Government; and the whole
machinery of the law as it then existed, local and general, was set in
operation in order to bring the criminal to justice. The kinsmen of the
deceased clamoured for the life of Maxwell; and it was felt by the King
and his Councillors that the measure of his cup was now filled, and that
he must be severely – mercilessly dealt with. He had committed a crime of
the highest magnitude (that of treasonable murder, as slaughter under
trust was then termed), and must be called to expiate it with his life. He
was sought for in Nithsdale and on the Border, without success; a hue and
cry for him was raised throughout the realm, with the same result. He
durst not stay in any nook or corner of broad Scotland; and, uttering his
“Good-night!” as attributed to him by the old balladist from whose lines
we have already quoted, he sought for refuge in France. The supposed
feelings of the fugitive are so beautifully expressed by the minstrel,
that we make no excuse for again borrowing from his verse: -
“Adieu! madame, my mother dear,
But and my sisters three;
Adien! fair Robert of Orcharstane!
My heart is wae for thee;
Adieu! the lily and the rose,
The primrose fair to see;
Adieu! my lady and only joy!
For I may not stay with thee.
“Though I hae slain the Lord Johnstone,
What care I for their Feid?
My noble mind their wrath disdains:
He was my father’s deid.
Both night and day I laboured oft
Of him avenged to be;
But now I’ve got what lang I sought,
And I may not stay with thee.
“Adieu! Dumfries, my proper place,
But and Carlaverock fair;
Adieu! my Castle of the Thrieve,
Wi’ a’ my buildings there:
Adieu! Lochmaben’s gates sae fair,
The Langholm-holm where birks there be;
Adieu! my lady and only joy!
For I may not stay with thee.
“ ‘Lord of the land,’ that ladye said,
‘O wad ye go wi’ me
Unto my brother’s stately tower,
Where safest ye may be!
There Hamiltons and Douglas baith
Shall rise to succour thee,’
‘Thanks for thy kindness, fair my dame,
But I may not stay with thee.’”
No! Maxwell durst not trust for safety even to the princely Haniltons (a
daughter of whose house he had married), nor to the doughty Douglasses, to
whom he was also related; and so –
“The wind was fair, the ship was clear,
The good Lord went away;
The most part of his friends were there
To give him a fair convey.
They drank the wine, they did na spare,
Even in that gude Lord’s sight –
Sae now he’s o’er the floods sae gray,
And Lord Maxwell has taen his good-night.”
Meanwhile, legal proceedings were instituted against him; the relatives of
the murdered knight pressing on the trial with pardonable eagerness. In
accordance with a precept from King James, dated Greenwich, John 6th,
1609, a Parliamentary Commission sat at Edinburth, on the 24th
of the same month, to try the case – Sir Thomas Hamilton of Bynnie, the
King’s Advocate, conducting the prosecution. The indictment was in the
form of a Summons of Treason and Forfeiture, drawn up in the Latin
Language, which set forth the several points of “dittay” laid to his
charge, and was prefaced by an announcement to the effect that the summons
had been found relevant by the Lords of the Articles, and Lord Maxwell
been thrice called at the Tolbooth Wynd to answer it, but that he did not
“compear;” that thereupon the Advocate had been allowed to establish his
case against the said Lord; and that for this purpose the depositions of
the witnesses examined in the case before the Lords of the Articles and
the Lords of Secret Council were read over, as also the Acts of Parliament
bearing on the case, and the “Lettre of Horning aganis the said Lord
Maxwell, for nocht compeirance befoir the Lordis of Secret Counsaill, to
ansuer befior thame for his breking of waird furth of the Castell of
Edinburcht, for the buring made be him at Dalfeble, and for the slaughter
of the Laird of Johnestoun; that lylykwayes the said Advocat producit in
presence of the said Lord Commissionar, and haill estaitts, Lettres of
Relaxatioun, beirand the said Johne, Lord Maxwell, to be relaxit be James
Dowglas, Messinger, fra for the process of all horningis at the Mercatt
Crosses of Lochmaben and Dumfreise, upon the xv. day of March, 1609 years,
and at the mercat Croce of Edinbur, be Johne Moneur, Messinger, upon the
xxiii. day of Marche, the yeir of God above writtin.” It is then stated
that the summons having again been read on June 24th, in
presence of the Commissioner and the Estates, and Lord Maxwell having
again failed to appear in answer to it, his Majesty’s Advocate desired the
Estates to declare if the reasons of the summons were relevant; and they,
having found that they were so, and having again heard the evidence, at
his instance gave a verdict, finding that – “The said Johne, Lord Maxwell,
committit and did open and manifest Tressoun, in all the pointis,
articles, and maner, contenit in the said Summondis: and thairfoir it wes
geven for dome, be the mouth of David Lyndsay, Dempster of Parliament, in
manner and forme as follows: Sentence. – This Court of Parliament schawes
for law, the said JOHNE, LORD MAXWELL, to have committit and done all the
foirsaidis crymes of Treassoun and Lesemajestie, be him self and others of
his causing, command, assistance, and retihavitioun, aganis oure said
Soverane Lord and his authoritie; and that he is and wes giltie and
pairtaker, airt and pairt, of the samin crymes of Treassoun; all in maner
at lenth contenit in the ressounes of the said summondis: And thairfoir
Decernis and Declairis, that the said Johne, Lord Maxwell, aucht and sould
underly and suffer the paynis competent to the saidis crymes of Treassoun
and Lesemajestie, to witt the tynsall and confiscatioun of his lyfe, and
all his guidis, moveable and unmoveable, landis, tenementis, dignities,
offices, richtis, and all utheris thingis belanging to him; and all the
saidis landis, rowmes, and all gudis moveable and unmoveable, digniteis,
offices, richtis, and all utheris belanging and pertening to the said
Johne, Lord Maxwell, and quhilkis may ony way belang and pertene to him,
to be confiscatt, to pertene to the said Soverane Lord, and to remane with
his Majestie for evir in propertie.”
Such are the terms of the sweeping judgment passed upon the Nithsdale
chief; the grim official who pronounced it finishing as usual with the
emphatic words, “And this I give for doom!”
Years passed away; and the expatriated lord began to cherish a hope that
the lapse of time had deadened the Johnstones’ desire for vengeance, and
that he might venture back to Scotland, and his crime be overlooked, if
not forgiven. He had bidden his native land “good-night;” but he shrunk
from the idea of continuing a perpetual exile, and seeing Nithsdale no
more. He thought, with the emigrant in the song, that though the sun shone
fair in France, it had not the same sweet “blink” as in his own country.
Mingling with regret for his guilt and its results (remorse would perhaps
be too strong a term), and dread of judicial punishment, came overpowering
thoughts of home – a yearning that would not be said nay – to revisit the
hills and dales among which he first drew breath. Yielding to its
influence, he, in 1612, returned to Scotland. The news of his arrival
could not be kept a secret; and whilst lurking in the Border district, he
was hunted like a wild animal by his old enemies, and was making ready to
embark for Sweden, when George, Earl of Caithness, offered him an asylum
in the North. Thither the wearied Lord Maxwell went, dreading no harm, as
the Countess was a cousin of his own. By a singular retribution, he who
had slaughtered the Laird of Johnstone under trust, was, while under
trust, betrayed by his own near relative to the Government. For the
purpose of currying favour with the King, the Earl of Caithness, who had
by fair promises lured Maxwell to Castle Sinclair, basely gave him up to
the officers of the law; and from that day forth he and death were brought
face to face.
A short time afterwards, the Lords of the Privy Council addressed a letter
to his Majesty, asking him how they were to deal with their prisoner. It
is dated 28th April, 1613, and is in the following terms: “Most
Gracious Soverane, - According to your Majestie’s directioun we [did]
wryte for the Laird of Johnestoun his moder and goode dame, to understand
of thame gif they wald persest in the persute of that petitioun, exhibite
unto your Majestie in their names, whairby they craved justice to be
execute upon the forfeeted Lord Maxwell for the slauchter of the laite
Laird of Johnstoun? They come all to this burgh, and the Laird of
Johnnston with his moder and tutour presentit tham selffis before us and
declairit that thay wald insist in that persute and prosequutioun of that
mater according to tennour of thair petitioun. The Auld Lady Johnnstoun,
through seiknes and inabilitie of hir persone, being unable to compeir
before us, haveing with grite difficultie come to this burgh for this same
errand, we directit and send the Bishop of Caithnes, the Lord Kildrymmie,
and Lord Prevey Seale to hir, to understand thir will and pleasure in this
mater; unto quhome scho declairit, that scho come heir purposelie for that
mater, and that scho wald insist according to the tennour of the petitioun;
sua that now thair restis no farder bot youre Majestei’s will haif to be
done; wherein, althought the conclusione of your Majestei’s lettre beiris
that we sould proceid to the administratioun of justice, yitt in respect
of a word cassin in the preface of the lettre, beirin that your Majestie
had not as yitt gevin a direct ansuer to their petitioun, we haif presumd
first to acquent your Majestie afoir we proceid ony farder; and whatever
it sall pleis your Majestie to direct in this mater sall be immediatlie
and without delay execut. Thair was a petitioun gevin in this day unto us
be Robert Maxwell, brother to the said laite Lord, with some offeris to
the partie; bot becaus the mater concernit not us, we wald not mell tharin;
alwyse, we haif heirwith send the same to your Majestie, to be considderit
of as your Mahestie sall thinke goode.”
In the petition or supplication of Lord Maxwell’s brother, here referred
to, the Lords of the Council are entreated to use their endeavours to get
certain offers made by Maxwell to the Laird of Johnstone and his relatives
laid properly before them. Some of the ministers of Edinburgh had been
solicited to undertake this duty, but they declined; the bishops were then
applied to, with the same result: neither presbyters nor prelates wishing
to be troubled with the case of the condemned man, unless authorized to
interfere in it by the Council; “Sa that now,” his brother wrote, “thair
restis no menis quhairby the offeris may cum to the pairteis handis except
your lordships will athir appoint sum persones to present the same, or
other wayis that your lordships wald convene the pairtie before your
lordships, that the same in your lordships’ audiens may [be] red and
delyverit to thame. Theirfoir I maist humblie beseik your lordships to
haif consideratioun of the premises, and that your lordships wald gif
directioun to sum of the ministrie of this burgh to present the said
offeris, or otherwayes that your lordships wald call the pairtie in your
presence to the effect foirsaid.”
The “Offiers of Submission by Lord Maxwell for the settlement of all
differences between him and the surviving relatives of Sir James Johnstone
of that Ilk, Knight,” which no one of note would agree to lay before the
proper parties, and which never were bought under their consideration,
were set forth in the subjoined letter: - “This offeris following ar maid
be me, Johnne, sumtyme Lord Maxwell, for my self, and in name of my kyn
and friendis, to . . . now Laird Johnstoun, and his Tutouris and
Curatouris, Dame Sara Maxwell, Ladie Johnstoun, younger for the tyme, his
mother, Dame Margarret Scott, Ladie Johnstoun, elder, his guddame, and to
thair kyn and friends for the unhappy slauchter of umquhile Schir James
Johnstoun of that Ilk, Knyte, committit be me.
“In the FIRST, I humblie confes my offens to God, the Kingis Majestie, and
to the foirsaidis persones, for the said unhappie slauchtir, and declairis
my selff to be maist penitent thairfoir; craveing first, mercie at the
Almichty God for the same, nixt favour and grace of the Kingis Majestie,
my soverane lord, and forgifnes of the great offens done to the foirsaidis
persones; testifeing be my solemne aith, upon my salvatioun and
condempnatioun, that the foirsaid unhappie slauchter was nawayis committit
be me upone foirthocht, fellonie, or sett purpois, bot upone meir
accident: Lyk as for clearing thairof, I am content to purge my selff be
my greit aith in pubblict, quhair it pleissis the parties to appoint and
do quhat farder homage sall be thocht expedient.
“SECONDE: I am content, not onlie for my selff, but for my haill kyn and
friendis, to forgiff the slauchter of umquhile Johnne Lord Maxwell, my
father, committit be the said umquhile Laird of Johnestoun and his
complices, and to mak all persones quha wes ather gyltie, culpabill, or
airt and pairt of the said slauchter, in securitie thairfoir, sua that
thai nor nane of thame sall nevir be trublit for the same be me nor be
nane of my kyn and friendis, directly nor indirectly, in tyme cuming; and
for that effect, sall mak sik forme of securitie as sall agrie with
reasoun.
“THIRDLIE: Becaus . . . Johnstoun, dochter to the said umquhile Sir James,
wes by the suddant and unhappie slauchter of hir said umquhile father,
left umprovydit of ane sufficient tocher, and for the better avoyding of
all inmitie that may arryse betuix the houssis of Maxwell and Johnstoun,
and for mair suir establisching of friendschip amangis thame in tym cuming,
I am content to marie and tak to my wyffe the said . . . without ony
tochir. [Lord Maxwell was at this time a widower; Lady Maxwell –
heart-broken, it may be – having died when he was in exile.]
“FOURTHLIE: I desyre that the Laird of Johnstoun may be mareit to Dame . .
. [The blanks in all these instances occur in the original; Lord Maxwell
having, it would seem, been ignorant of the Christian names of the parties
he wrote about.] Maxwell, eldest dochtir of Johne, Lord Hereis, and sister
dochtir to me, quha is a person of lyke aige with the Laird of Johnstoun.
Lyk as I sall be obleist to pay to the said Laird of Johnstoun, in name of
tochir with my said sister dochtir, twentie thowsand merk Scottis; and
quhat farder sall be thocht expedient, be the sicht of freindis.
“FYIFTLIE, and last: I am content, for the farder satisfactioun of the
house of Johnstoun, to be Banischit his Majestei’s dominions for the space
of sevin yeiris, and farder at the will and plesour of the Laird of
Johnstoun.
“The Offeris to be augmentit at the sicht and discretioun of newtrall
freindis, to be chosyn to that effect. Under protestatioun alwayis, that
thir offerris befoir wryttin maid unto the partie, be nawayis offensive to
the King’s Majestie, nor to his hienes Counsall.”
It is to be regretted that Lord Maxwell’s declaration, that the death of
Sir James Johnstoun was accidental, is not supported by a particle of
evidence. Had it been so, or had his crime assumed any aspect short of
deliberate murder, the Government would gladly, we doubt not, have
commuted the sentence in spite of the Johnstone family. The matrimonial
offers made by the doomed lord would be amusing, were not the accompanying
circumstances so sad. It seems clear to us that the simple references in
his lordship’s “Submission,” under the second head, to the slaughter of
his father, ought finally to dispose of the outrageous legend which
represents Dame Johnstone of Kirkton as having beaten the suppliant’s
father to death with a key at Dryfe-Sands. If the lady had really acted
such a diabolical part, it would certainly have been pleaded by Lord
Maxwell as in some degree a set-off to his own “unhappie” deed.
This document must have been penned by Maxwell when in prison; and on the
18th of May, less than a fortnight afterwards, the magistrates
of Edinburgh visited him there, to say that his appeal for mediation and
mercy had been disregarded, and that upon the following Friday, the 21st,
he must be prepared to die. Their authority to this effect was given by
the Privy Council, in the subjoined minute: - “Maij 18, 1613. – Ane
Warrant past and exped to the Provost and Balyies of Edinburghe, to tak
the lait Lord Maxwell to thair mercat croce, upon xxj. of this instant,
and thair to caus strik his head from his body. The delay of tua dayis wes
thocht meit to be grantit, to the effect that he micht have leaser to be
resolved; and that the ministeris micht have tyme to confer with him for
his better resolutioun.” The prisoner received the dread announcement with
composure, professed to the magistrates his willingness to abide the
pleasure of God and the King, and then requested liberty for such of his
friends as he named to visit him, which was readily granted. “He had,”
says the writer of the Donmylne MSS., “diverse conferences with sindrie of
them, in presence of ane of the Balyies, but refuised to ressave ony
assistance or comfort from the ministeris, professing him selff not to be
of thair religioun, bot ane Catholik Romane.” When the fatal day arrived,
we learn from the same author, that, whilst the unfortunate nobleman was
being conveyed to the scaffold, he declared that as he had justly deserved
to die, so he was ready patiently to meet his fate, asking mercy of God
for his sins, and anxiously wishing that his Majesty might be graciously
pleased to accept his life’s blood as a sufficient atonement for his
offences, and not punish his house further, but be pleased to restore his
brother Robert to the rank and place that had been forfeited by himself.
On arriving at the place of execution, he prayed that he might receive
forgiveness from the Laird of Johnstone, his mother, and other relatives;
acknowledging “the wrong and harme done to them, with protestatioun that
it was without dishonour or infamie (for the worldlie pairt of it – for so
wer these his wordis reported to me).” He also craved pardon of Pollok,
Calderwood, and other friends present, bewailing that, though he ought to
have promoted their honour and safety, he had brought to them nothing but
discredit and harm. Then, drawing near to the block, he kneeled in prayer,
turned to take leave of his friends, and the officials had his eyes
covered with a handkerchief; and offering his head to the axe, the weapon
fell, and all was over in a moment. [The chief authority drawn upon for
the incidents of this chapter is Pitcairn’s Criminal Trails.]
Thus ignominiously perished the ninth Lord Maxwell. He merited his awful
doom; but it was deplored by a host of mourners, many of whom looked upon
his crime as a legitimate piece of feudal revenge. In the halls of
Carlaverock and Terregles, in the Burghal residences of Dumfries, and
throughout all the borders of Nithsdale, there was much lamentation and
woe on account of his cruel and untimely end. His own kinsmen and people
did not view him in the light of a malefactor brought to justice: they
pitied him as one who had been more unfortunate than guilty. He was their
chief, the representative of an ancient and honoured house, who, whatever
might have been his faults to others, had done nothing to forfeit their
affection; and how could they do otherwise than sorrow for his fate? The
execution of Lord Maxwell was, however, followed by beneficial
consequences. “It put a final end,” as Sir Walter Scott remarks, “to ‘the
foul debate’ betwixt the Maxwells and Johnstones, in the course of which
each family lost two chieftains: one dying of a broken heart, one in the
field of battle, one by assassination, and one by the sword of the
executioner.” It also tended to the pacification of Dumfriesshire. As
Dryfe-Sands was the deadliest party conflict ever waged in the County, so
it was the last by which its tranquility was disturbed. Four years after
Lord Maxwell suffered at Edinburgh, the forfeiture included in his
sentence was reversed; and as he left no issue, his estates and honours
devolved on his younger brother, Robert.
In 1620, Robert, Lord Maxwell, was created Earl of Nithsdale – a new
peerage conferred upon him in lieu of that of Morton, which, as we have
seen, was given to his father in 1581, but afterwards restored to the
Douglasses. It is deemed probable that the Nithsdale earldom was obtained
through the influence of the Duke of Buckingham, as Robert Lord Maxwell’s
wife, Elizabeth Beaumont, was cousin to the Countess of Buckingham, mother
of the Duke. [The Maxwells of Pollok, Preface, p. 12.] |
