|
QUEEN MARY IMPRISONED IN ENGLAND – LORD HERRIES REMONSTRATES, WITHOUT
EFFECT, AGAINST THE TREATMENT GIVEN TO HER – WARLIKE MEASURES TAKEN BY HIM
AND THE DUKE OF CHATELHERAULT ON MARY’S BEHALF – THE LAST DAYS OF LORD
HERRIES – AN ENGLISH ARMY, UNDER LORD SCROPE, ENTERS DUMFRIESSHIRE IN
ORDER TO PUNISH THE QUEEN’S ADHERENTS – UNSUCCESSFUL EFFORTS MADE TO
ARREST ITS MARCH – SCROPE DEFEATS THE DUMFRIESIANS, AND BURNS THE TOWN –
HE DEMOLISHES THE CASTLES OF DUMFRIES, CARLAVEROCK, AND OTHER FORTRESSES –
JOHN, THE EIGHTH LORD MAXWELL, INCURS THE HATRED OF THE REGENT MORTON, BY
CLAIMING THE EARLDOM OF THAT NAME – OUTBREAK OF A FEUD BETWEEN THE
MAXWELLS AND JOHNSTONES – CONTEST BETWEEN THEM FOR THE PROVOSTSHIP OF
DUMFRIES – DESTRUCTIVE PROGRESS OF THE FEUD – ARRAN, THE NEW REGENT,
ENDEAVOURS TO CRUSH LORD MAXWELL – MAXWELL AND OTHER BARONS, AT THE HEAD
OF A DUMFRIESSIRE FORCE, SURPRISE AND OVERTHROW THE REGENT – AN ANMESTY
GIVEN TO MAXWELL FOR ALL PAST OFFENCES – AN ACT OF GRACE PASSED IN FAVOUR
OF THE BURGH – TRAGICAL FATE OF ARRAN – MAXWELL AGAIN FALLS INTO DISFAVOUR
WITH THE GOVERNMENT, BY CELEBRATING MASS IN LINCLUDEN COLLEGE.
IN a small fishing-boat, with about twenty attendants, the hapless Queen
sailed from a creek in the parish of Revwick (since called Port Mary) to
the Cumberland coast, on the 16th of May, landing at the place
which received from her the name of Maryport: thence she was conducted by
the local authorities, with many tokens of respect, to Carlisle. From that
city Mary penned several letters to Elizabeth, soliciting her protection
and assistance. On the 5th of July she wrote to her sister
sovereign: “I am come to make my moan to you, the which being heard, I
would declare unto you mine innocency, and then require your aid.” In the
same letter the Queen, sighing in heart for the presence of a true friend,
said, “In meantime, I beseech you to send to me my Lord Herries, for I
can’t be without him.” A few days afterwards Mary was removed, in spite of
her complaints and remonstrances, to Lord Scrope’s castle at Bolton, on
the borders of Yorkshire, where she could only with difficulty maintain
correspondence with her friends in Scotland, and from which she had no
chance of making her escape.
A remarkable letter from Lord Herries, addressed by him on the Queen’s
behalf to Lord Scrope and Sir Francis Knollys, is preserved in the State
Paper Office, in which he inveighs strongly against the detention of his
royal mistress, and exposes the duplicity of Elizabeth. The following
characteristic passage is well worth quoting: - “Now, my Lords,” he
argues, “gif the Queen’s Majesty of that realm [England], upon quhais
promise and honour my maistress came there, as I have said, will leave all
the French writings, and French phrases of writings, quhilks amongis them
is over meikle on baith the sides unfit, and plainly, according to the
auld true custom of England and Scotland – quherein be a word promist
truth was observ’d – promise in the name of the eternal God, and upon the
high honour of that nobill and princely blude of the Kings of England,
quhereof she is descendit, and presently wears the diaden, that she will
put my mistress in her awin country, and cause her as Queen thereof, in
her authority and strength, to be obeyit; and to do the same will appoint
an certain day (within two months at the farthest), as we understand this
to be our weil [for our welfare] sua will we, or the maist part of us, all
follow upon it, leaving the Frenchmen and their evil phrases togidder. And
therefore, and for the true perpetual friendship of that realm [England]
will condition, and for our part, with the grace of Almighty God, keep sic
heads and conditions of agreement, as noble and wise men can condescend
upon for the weill of this haill island.” The letter concludes in these
terms: - “This is plainly written, and I desire your lordships’ plain
answer; for in truth and plainness langest continues gud friendship,
quhilk in this matter, I pray God, may lang continue, and have your
lordships in his keeping. Off Dumfreis, the 3d day of September, 1568.
Your lordships at my power to command leifully. – HERRIS.”
A short time before the date of that letter, the writer of it was
forfeited in Parliament; but the Regent, from motives of policy, caused
the execution of the sentence to be delayed. Lord Herries continued to be
a prominent character till the day of his death. Proceeding to London, in
the autumn of 1568, he there, with earnestness and ability, pleaded the
cause of the Queen of Scots. Soon afterwards he went to advocate her
interests at the French Court, and returned with Arran, Duke of
Chatelherault, to assist the latter in making good his commission from the
Queen to be Lieutenant-General of the kingdom, in opposition to the Regent
Murray. Hostilities were averted at an interview between the rival
claimants; the Duke agreeing to acknowledge King James, on condition that
the sentence of forteiture should be removed from those who had supported
Queen Mary. With the view of cementing the friendship thus somewhat
hastily formed, Arran and Herries were entertained at a splendid banquet
by the Regent in presence of King James; but in the course of a few days,
Murray’s suspicions being aroused against them, they were both, by his
order, committed to Edinburgh Castle; from which, however, they were soon
released, on the barbarous assassination of Murray, in January, 1570. Some
months afterwards, Lord Herries joined with the Duke of Chatelherault, the
Earl of Hamilton, and others, in a last attempt to promote the cause of
Queen Mary by force of arms. To give a show of legality to their
proceedings, the Duke summoned a meeting of the Estates. Only a very
partial response was given to this citation; but, of six burghs which sent
commissioners, Dumfries was one. This small Parliament (according to the
author of the Diurnal) [Diurnal, p. 220.] sat in the Tolbooth of
Edinburgh, and sustained a supplication, tabled in the Queen’s name,
setting forth that she still claimed the crown, her surrender of it having
been extorted by force. On the failure of this movement, Herries, in the
summer of 1571, laboured to effect a reconciliation between the contending
parties, and with such success, that a convention for this purpose was
signed by the chiefs on both sides, early in the following year.
Lord Herries, towards the close of life, embraced the Protestant faith,
which he was so nearly doing at the outset of his public career; and he
was honoured with the confidence of King James. He died suddenly, at
Edinburgh, on Sabbath the 20th of January, 1582, under the
following circumstances, as related by Calderwood [Appendix to octavo
edition, vol. viii., p. 232.]: - When at dinner, he remarked that he found
himself so weak that he durst not trust himself to go to the afternoon’s
preaching. He then went out, with the intent of going “to an upper chamber
in William Fowler’s lodging, to the boys bicker.” On the way, he “fell
down by little and little,” exclaiming feebly, to a woman that followed
him, “Hold me; for I am not weale:” after which he expired, four years
before the execution of the unfortunate Queen, to whose cause, so long as
it was in the last degree hopeful, his services had been devoted. John,
fourth Lord Herries, was one of the ablest Scotchmen of his day; and while
on some occasions he was vacillating and inconsistent, his character
exhibited many points of excellence which we cannot but admire.
In 1570, Dumfriesshire, owing to the support given by some of its leading
men to the cause of Mary, was ravaged by an armed force, sent by her rival
Elizabeth, under Lord Scrope. John, eighth Lord Maxwell, nephew of Lord
Herries, Lord Carlyle, and several other chiefs, mustered their followers,
in order to resist the invaders, and were opportunely joined by a large
body of burgesses from Dumfries, who, responding to their gathering cry of
“A Loreburn!” appeared armed at the usual place of rendezvous, headed by
the magistrates of the town. Scrope was enjoined not to injure the tenants
or friends of Drumlanrig, “as he favoured the King’s faction, and the
Queen’s Majesty of England.” The allied force of military retainers and
warlike merchants and tradesmen, appears to have exhibited a creditable
amount of prowess. Repeated attacks were made by them upon the enemy’s
cavalry with varying results; but, inferior in number and equipments, they
were eventually repulsed, with the loss of some prisoners, including the
bailies of the Burgh.
Lord Scrope forwarded an account of the affair [Cabala, p. 164.] to the
English Government, under date Carlisle, 21st April, 1570, the
substance of which we subjoin. After announcing that he had entered
Scotland, and encamped at “Heclefeagham” [Ecclefechan] he states that
Simon Musgrave had, at his instance, “burned the towns of Hoddame, Maynes,
Troltrow, Revel, Calpoole, Blackshaw, Sherrington, Bankend, Lowgher,
Lougherwood and Hecklefeugham;” that the said Simon Musgrave and his
company having come to Old Cockpool, “there was the Lord Maxwell with his
forces, and the inhabitants of Drumfriese assembled, who skirmished with
the couriers, and compelled them to retire; thereupon the said Simon
marched into Blackshaw, where the Lord Maxwell was, and, with a hundred
horsemen, did give the charge to Maxwell, and made him flee, in which
flight there were a hundred prisoners taken, whereof the principal was the
aldermen of Drumfriese, and sixteen of the burgesses. The chase was
followed within one mile of Dumfriese. After which the said Simon returned
to Blackshaw, and burnt it, and seized a great number of cattle;” and as
he was proceeding to inflict a fiery visit of the same kind on “Bankend,
Lowgher, and Lougherwood,” Lords Maxwell and Carlyle, and the Lairds of
Holmends, Closeburne, Lagg, Hempsfield, Cowhill, and Tenoll [Tinwald], at
the head of four hundred horsemen and six hundred footmen, charged
Musgrave’s forces very sore, forcing them to alight, and draw their
company to a strong place, and to abide the charge of their enemies; and
so they remained till the said Simon came to them, and alighted, and put
company in order, and set his horses between his company and the sea, and
so stood in order to receive the enemy:” and in this sort continued,
charging and receiving their changes, the space of three hours. I being at
Cembretreys [Cunnertress], sent my band of horsemen with my brother
Edward, and a hundred and fifty foot with Mr. Audley and Mr. Herbert, to
their relief.” Thus reinforced, Musgrave compelled the Scots to flee, and
captured a hundred of them, including some petty lairds – Maxwell,
Carlyle, Johnstone, and the other chiefs only escaping “by the strenthe of
the Laird of Cockpool’s house, and a great wood and morass near
adjoining.”
The writer states in a postscript, that though, according to order,
Drumlanrig’s tenants had been spared, “they were as cruel against us as
any others;” and he closes with the ominous intimation that he had applied
for five hundred men, with whom to march against Dumfries, “and lie in
that town and burn and spoil it; for the open receipt of her Majesty’s
rebels is there manifeste.”
Scrope, on being joined by a fresh body of soldiers, under the Earl of
Sussex, executed his mission mercilessly. The sweep of his vengeance took
in a wider field than was at first intended; but it fell always with
double force on the estates of Lords Maxwell and Herries, Murray of
Cockpool, and such other noblemen as were noted for their attachment to
Queen Mary. Dumfries suffered terribly: it had audaciously harboured “the
English Queen’s rebels;” and did it not deserve, on that account, to be
razed to its foundations? The English leaders thought the town merited no
forbearance, and they showed it none. Its desolated Castle, its flaming
houses, leaving but “the blackness of ashes” to mark where the populous
streets once stood, proved how well the marauders had done their work.
Similar evidences of their destructive expedition were visible in many
parts of the surrounding country: its results being summed up in the dry
formal report made by Scrope to the English Government, setting forth that
he had “took and cast doun the Castles of Carlaverock, Hoddam, Dumfries,
Tinwald [The old place of Tinwald, situated in what was formerly a part of
Lochar Moss, and a seat of a branch of the Maxwell family, seems to have
been well fitted for a place of defence. Till within a few years, part of
the old building remained. It is now (1834) entirely demolished, and the
materials have been removed. – Statistical Account, p. 44.], Cowhill
[Cowhill Tower, says Grose (vol. i., p. 146) stood upon an eminence
commanding a charming prospect of the Vale of Nith, from Friars’ Carse to
Dumfries: it had long been the seat of the Maxwells, cadets of the noble
family of Nithsdale. In the year 1570, the old castle being burned by the
English, this tower was built in 1579. Grose took a sketch of the second
tower, and a few weeks afterwards it was taken down by George Johnstone,
Esq. of Conheath, who had purchased it from the previous proprietor in
order that he might erect a stately mansion on its site.], and sundry
other gentlemen’s houses, dependers on the house of Maxwell, and, having
burnt the toun of Dumfries, returned with great spoil into England.” James
Douglas, fourth Earl of Morton, became Regent in 1572 [He was the second
son of Sir George Douglas of Pittendriech, younger brother of Archibald,
sixth Earl of Angus.]; and he having, with the aid of an English force,
reduced Queen Mary’s only remaining stronghold, Edinburgh Castle, the
civil war was brought to a close, and Dumfriesshire was for a season
relieved from the presence of a foreign enemy.
Soon afterwards, however, a deadly feud broke out between its two leading
families, the Maxwells and Johnstones, originated by a circumstance
connected with the personal history of the eighth Lord Maxwell. In right
of his mother, he was heir to one-third of the earldom of Morton [In the
Scottish Nation, vol. iii., p. 208, it is stated that the title was taken
from the lands of Mortoune, in the parish of East-Calder, Mid-Lothian; but
it is far more probable that it was derived from the old Castle of Morton
(once the seat of Dunegal), in the parish of that name, both of which were
conferred on the Black Douglas when he married the Princess Egidia. The
writer of the article “Morton,” in the Statistical Account, says: -
“Douglas, Earl of Morton, was proprietor of the whole parish, with the
exception of the Mains of Morton, lying north-west of the castle, which
belonged to James Douglas, Laird of Morton. The last of this family was
Captain James Douglas, who died at Baitford, Penpont, about the beginning
of last century. The Earl of Morton sold his whole property and interest
in this parish to Sir William Douglas of Cashoggle, who erected a house a
little south of Thornhill, where he sometimes resided; but the Earl of
Queensberry having obtained from Cashoggle all his lands, as well as the
lands of Morton Mains from the other family, and being lord of the
regality of Hawick, he obtained authority to translate that regality to
Thornhill in 1610, and called it New Dalgarnock.” (Page 95.)]; he had
acquired right to another third from Margaret, her elder sister, with
consent of her husband, the Duke of Chatelherault; and he was also heir
apparent of the youngest and only other sister, who died childless. Lord
Maxwell considered, therefore, that he had the best claim to the earldom –
that certain entails executed upon the estates by the Regent were illegal;
and he insisted on both the title and property being made over to him. A
contemporary historian states that the Regent, as if conscious that he had
no legal right to call himself Earl of Morton, “pressed by all means that
Lord Maxwell should renounce his title thereto.” The latter refused; and
the Regent, instead of submitting the question at issue to Parliament,
consigned his rival to the Castle of Edinburgh, and then to the Castle of
Blackness, in the latter of which he lay for several months, till he was
liberated in March, 1573. As Maxwell continued to urge his claim to be
recognized as Earl of Morton, he was further punished for his pertinacity,
by being deprived of the wardenship of the Western Marches: an office of
great trust and profit, and which for ages had been held by members of the
Maxwell family. [“The Scottish Wardens were allowed by the Crown forage
and provisions for their retinue, which consisted of a guard of horsemen,
by which they were constantly attended. These were levied from the royal
domains on the Border. They had also a portion of the ‘unlaws’ or fines
and forteits imposed in the Warden Courts; and no doubt had other modes of
converting their authority to their own advantage, besides the
opportunities their situation afforded them of extending their power and
influence.” – Border Antiquities, Introduction by Sir Walter Scott, p.
90.] This degrading blow fell with double effect, as the office, when
taken from Maxwell, was conferred upon the head of a rival house – the
Laird of Johnstone.
On the execution and attainder of the Regent Morton, in 1581, the
wardenship was restored to Maxwell; and, as representative of his mother,
he obtained a charter of the coveted earldom. Thus raised in rank, he rose
at the same time rapidly into favour at Court, till, as a result of the
treasonable Raid of Ruthven, he had to flee with the Duke of Lennox,
against whose influence it was directed. Towards the close of 1581, we
find him accompanying the Duke in an aggressive movement against the
capital, which, however, was not persevered in. Eventually the attainder
passed on the deceased Regent was rescinded by royal letter, under the
Great Seal, and the heir of entail, Archibald, Earl of Angus (grandson of
Bell-the-Cat), thus succeeded to the old title of Earl of Morton; and thus
the Scottish peerage exhibited the curious anomaly of having two noblemen
possessing the same title; for though Maxwell had been concerned in
treasonable proceedings, he was Earl of Morton still, in virtue of the
patent granted to him in 1581. Soon a new embroglio arose, in which Lord
Maxwell was involved through the cupidity of Captain James Stewart, who,
upon the downfall of the Regent, received a grant of his estates, was
created Earl of Arran, and obtained the chief direction of affairs – all
through the unmerited favour of the King. The lands of Pollok and
Maxwellhaugh, in Lanarkshire, which belonged to the Nithsdale baron, lay
temptingly near those just acquired by the lucky adventurer, who, on that
account, took a fancy for them, which he hastily assumed Maxwell would be
ready to indulge. But Maxwell would not part with his patrimony, even when
offered an equivalent for it: a decision which offended Arran’s pride, as
well as disappointed his acquisitiveness. In revengeful mood, therefore,
he resolved to break the power of Maxwell, since he could not bend him to
his wishes.
As one step towards this result, the Regent endeavoured to weaken the
Maxwell interest in Dumfries. The Provostship was held by an uncle of the
Nithsdale chief, Maxwell of Newlaw [Not Maxwell of Newbie, as stated by
Chalmers and some other historians.]; and with the view of getting it
taken out of his hands, the Laird of Johnstone was brought forward as a
rival claimant for the office; he being selected not simply on account of
his local connection with the Burgh, but also because Lady Johnstone was a
favourite at the Court. [Spottiswoode, vol. ii., [. 325.] Accordingly, the
whole machinery of the Government, short of absolute force, was set in
operation to secure the return of Arran’s protég at the Michaelmas
election of 1584. In due time a royal rescript was received by the
merchant councillors and deacons of incorporations, who formed the
electoral body, exhorting them to discard Maxwell, and choose Johnstone as
their municipal chief. What effect this arbitrary edict would have had
upon the Town Council, had it been left to influence them, it is
impossible to say, as the Provost of the Burgh took effectual means to
render it a dead letter, and secure his re-election in defiance of the
Laird of Lochwood, the Earl of Arran, and the Court. When Johnstone, with
a few retainers, appeared on the day of election in the vicinity of the
town, he was kept from entering it by a powerful body of the Maxwells,
drawn up in battle array under the leadership of their lord; and after the
crestfallen Annandale laird had departed without the “blushing honours” he
had aspired to, Newlaw was once more chosen Provost of Dumfries. [Ibid.,
vol. ii., p. 326.]
Arran was not slow to support the complaints made by Johnstone regarding
the conduct of his rival; and between them a new charge was trumped up
against the Lord of Nithsdale, the nature of which he learned by a precept
issued in the King’s name, accusing him of intromitting with and
protecting the predatory Armstrongs. By way of sequel, a sentence of
outlawry was pronounced upon Lord Maxwell; and a commission was given to
the Laird of Johnstone to pursue him with fire and sword, as a
contumacious rebel who deserved no mercy – to assist in which congenial
work a band of mercenaries, under the notorious Captain Lammie, was sent
into Dumfriesshire by the Earl of Arran. Maxwell was composed of sterner
stuff than to be daunted by these preparations. Mustering his followers,
he made ready to return at least blow for blow. A detachment of them,
under his natural brother, Robert Maxwell of Castlemilk, encountered the
Government soldiers at the head of Nithsdale, and thoroughly defeated them
– killing Lammie, and taking Cranston, another officer, prisoner.
[Spottiswoode, vol. ii., p. 326.] The war, thus initiated, raged for
months over the County. It seemed as if it would only end in the ruin of
one or both of the great families thus relentlessly pitted against each
other. When the Regent Morton tossed the wardenship, like a tennis-ball,
from Maxwell to Johnstone, he little knew what a bone of contention it
would prove; but the Earl of Arran seems to have been quite conscious,
when he introduced new elements of discord between them, that a fearful
collision would be the consequence; and he undoubtedly expected that it
would prove fatal to the man against whom he had formed an inveterate
dislike. Maxwell, however, had not the worst of it in this the first stage
of the deadly struggle. Some of his houses were burned, and some of his
estates were devasted by the Johnstone party; but he retaliated by setting
Lochwood in a blaze [The immense strength of this castle, and its position
among impassable bogs and marshes, have already been noticed. A remark has
been attributed to James VI. respecting Lochwood, to the effect that the
man who built it, “though he might have the outward appearance of an
honest man, must have been a knave at heart.” We can scarcely think that
our British Solomon ever uttered such a foolish saying. Lochwood was
erected in a warlike and turbulent age; and if made impregnable, was on
that account an evidence of the wisdom, and not the knavery, of its
builder. Soon after being burned by Maxwell, it was repaired; and it was
inhabited till three years after the death of the first Marquis of
Annandale, in 1721, when it was deserted by the family, and allowed to
fall into decay.] – “that Dame Johnstone might have light to set her hood
by,” as with savage humour he remarked – and also by laying waste many
roods of fertile land belonging to his rival; and, worst of all, by taking
him prisoner at the close of a fierce skirmish between the parties. A
compromise was afterwards effected, in virtue of which Johnstone was set
at liberty, though he died soon after from illness occasioned by his
confinement, and a breathing time of peace was then agreed to by the
combatants. Arran, thus baulked in his design, resolved on accomplishing
it by a more direct way. Having, at a convention of the Estates, succeeded
in obtaining a vote of £20,000 for the sole purpose of levying war against
Lord Maxwell, a proclamation was forthwith issued, requiring all the
King’s loyal subjects on the southern side of the Forth to meet him in
fighting array and march into Nithsdale. A deadly pestilence, which broke
out at Edinburgh, decimated the royal army, and saved Maxwell and
Dumfriesshire from the threatened attack. [Spottiswoode, vol., p. 326.]
Seeing that the Nithsdale chief was marked out for ruin by the King’s
minion, it is not surprising when a league was formed, by Angus and other
fugitives, against Arran, that it was joined by Maxwell. The associated
lords aimed at nothing less than the expulsion of the royal favourite by
force. With this object in view, they raised a large body of men, to meet
whom there was a new muster of Government troops, who, however, were
prevented from proceeding southward by the representations of the English
ambassador, whose policy it was to keep Arran in check. Maxwell and his
allies, however, boldly took the initiative. They made a hurried march to
Stirling, with two thousand followers; beset the castle, in which the
Court at that time resided, before daybreak on the 2nd of
November, 1585, and took the fortress after a two days’ siege. This act,
not less patriotic than daring, was accomplished chiefly by the men of
Nithsdale. It was productive of important results. Though Arran secured
his personal safety by flight, he was deprived of his title and estates,
and his pernicious domination was thoroughly overthrown. At a Parliament
held a few days afterwards, an act was passed granting to Lord Maxwell,
his servants and friends, entire indemnity for all their irregular or
unlawful doings in the realm, since April 1569; and through his means
special provision was made for giving the town of Dumfries the full
benefits of the pacification. Of the men named in the amnesty, about six
hundred were from Maxwell’s estates in Nithsdale and Galloway; about the
same number from his estates in Eskdale, Ewisdale, and Wauchopedale –
mostly Beatties, Littles, and Armstrongs; three hundred and forty from
Lower Annandale – chiefly Bells, Carrutherses, and Irvings; and about
three hundred and fifty better organized soldiers, in three companies of
infantry, and two troops of cavalry – one being furnished by Nithsdale and
Galloway, under John Maxwell of Newlaw, Provost of Dumfries, the other by
Annandale, under George Carruthers of Holmains, and Charles Carruthers his
son.
The Act referred to “in favour of the towne of Dumfreis,” sets forth “that
the King’s Majesty, with the advice of the Three Estates of the present
Parliament, understanding that his trustie cousin and counsellor, John,
Earl of Morton, Lord Maxwell, with his haill kin, friends, and servants,
during the time of the feid and trubles betwixit him and Sir John
Johnstone of Dunskellie, knight, maid their special repair into the towne
of Drumfreis, stuffit and garnissit with men of armes, victual, and all
uther funitor neidfull for thair defense, quherento the inhabitants of the
said Burgh might not oppose thame selffis in consideratioun of the said
noble Lordis frendis dwelling round about, and within the said Burgh.”
This wordy preamble is followed by a provision absolving the armed
intruders and their successors from the legal consequences of any blame
that might be thrown upon them by the Burgh; and also extending pardon to
such of the inhabitants as had resetted, intercommoned with, or otherwise
assisted them. Intimation is then made that the King out of his “special
favour and clemencie” extends to “his lovittes, the Provest and Baillieis,
Counsal, and Comonitie of the said Burgh, the lyk benefite, favour, and
guid-will” that are contained in the Acts of abolition and general
pacification, granted to Angus, Morton, and their colleagues; the Act
closing thus: - “And furder declairis the electioun of Johnne Maxwell, of
Newlaw, Provest of the said Burgh, to be guid and sufficient in its self,
and to stand for him, and his successors, sua long as the saide Johnne
Maxwell sal be authoriset be common election or consent of the inhabitants
thairof; discharging quhmsumevir utheris rychtis, and securitie maid at
any time bypast, or to be maid to any other persoun of the samyne to the
contrair.” [Acts of Scot. Parl., vol., pp. 398-9.]
Stewart, no longer either earl or captain, took refuge in the wilds of
Western Ayrshire, where he lived secretly for many years, till, in 1596,
lured by the delusive hope of regaining the King’s favour, he passed to
the neighbourhood of Dumfries on his way to Court. He was, it is said,
encouraged to take this rash step by a “spaewife” whom he consulted. “Low
as ye are now, and high as ye aince were, yere head will be raised higher
yet,” was the oracular response on which he acted; but he was warned by
some one who did not effect the possession of superior wisdom, to beware
of the Douglasses – whose leader, Morton, he had brought to the block –
and more especially to avoid the dead Regent’s nephew, James Douglas of
Torthorwald. [The barony of Torthorwald had been acquired a short time
previously by a branch of the Angus Douglasses.] To this warning Stewart
returned a reply that would have been foolish anywhere, and became the
very essence of folly when uttered – as it was – almost beneath the shadow
of the old keep occupied by Morton’s kinsman: “Fear the Douglasses who
may, I shall not go out of my road for any of their blood and name.” Yes;
but Torthorwald will go out of his way, in order that he may take revenge
on the man who could thus add impotent contempt to foul wrong. Accompanied
by three retainers, Douglas, hurrying after the discarded favourite, slew
him with a spear; and the weird woman’s promise was “kept to the ear, but
broken to the hope,” when, soon afterward, Stewart’s gory head, elevated
on a lance, was displayed, like a grisly ensign of death, from the
battlements of Torthorwald. The chief actor in this tragedy suffered for
it after the lapse of twelve years. Captain William Stewart, encountering
Douglas on the High Street of Edinburgh, in 1608, ran him through the body
in revenge for the slaughter of his uncle, the ex-Regent. [Wood’s Peerage,
vol. i., p. 423.]
As has already been mentioned, the progress of the Reformation in Dumfries
was impeded by the Maxwells. They still clung to the old faith; and in
1584 the fifth Lord Herries was accused of openly defying the law, by
causing mass to be publicly celebrated in the town, and compelling the
Protestant ministers to leave its bounds. [Spottiswoode, vol. ii., p.
381.]
His kinsman, Lord Maxwell, on the Christmas which followed the receipt of
the royal amnesty, also signified his adherence to Romanism in the same
illegal way. About this time the Castle of Dumfries was beginning to rise
anew, by his order, out of the ruins in which it had been left by Lord
Scrope fifteen years before; and it was probably at the chapel attached to
it that he summoned a meeting of followers and ecclesiastics, for the
purpose of making a defiant display of his religion. A gathering of this
kind at all events was held in Dumfries on the 24th of
December, 1585; and, after those composing it had been arranged as a
procession, they marched to the neighbouring College of Lincluden, going
doubtless by the Causeway Ford over the Nith, nearly opposite to the
Castle. [Naturally the river is still shallow at this place – a bed of
sand stretching from the right or Nithside bank till within a few yards of
the Dumfries side. When, early in the spring of 1867, the Caul below the
old bridge was ruptured by the breaking up of ice, the water was reduced
to such a small volume that the tract of the ford was distinctly
traceable. In ancient times the ford led to the Castle, and also along the
left shore or Upper Sand Beds to the foot of the Vennel, and to the
bridge. The ford was made passable on foot, when the river was of moderate
size, and was fenced from assailing floods by stakes of wood. Hence the
name Stakeford. It is called Chapel-rack Ford in some documents of last
century’s date.] On arriving at the College, mass was performed in the
ancient fane with unusual splendour and effect. [Calderwood’s version of
the matter (page 225) is in the following terms: - “The Lord Maxwell was
committed to ward in the beginning of the years 1586, for having masse
openly in the Kirk of Glencluden at the Christmas before.”] For six
hundred years Lincluden, first as an abbey and next as a collegiate
institution, had been the scene of such religious rites; but the choral
swell with which the venerable walls rung on this occasion, was as the
dying requiem of the ancient faith – mass never having been since said or
sung in the house of Uchtred. It threatened at first to cost Lord Maxwell
a heavy price. He was summoned to appear before the King in Council, to
answer for the daring offence of celebrating mass contrary to the statute;
and on his proceeding to Edinburgh, he was consigned to the Castle, where
he lay for several months: but he was set at liberty without being
subjected to any formal trial – the King probably not wishing to press
with severity one who had done the State some service, and from whom he
expected future favours. |
