such rude harshness, that he turned out Hamilton's wife in a cold winter's night into the fields; in consequence she became dangerously ill and even insane. Hamilton looked on Murray as the author of all her misfortunes, and hatred preponderating over gratitude, he shot him from a window as he was passing through Linlithgow, on his way from Stirling to Edinburgh, on the 23d of January, 1570.

There are few men on whom the judgments of Historians are so conflicting as on Murray. While some say he concealed his ambition under the cover of sincere piety; that he had a cold, false, ungrateful heart, capable and guilty of all kinds of deceit, crimes, and baseness; others describe him as a man of extraordinary talents for war or peace, as the noble deliverer of his country from temporal and spiritual tyranny; who had justly withstood the flattering allurements of his criminal half-sister, had preferred truth to falsehood, the pure doctrine to priestly delusions, and governed the kingdom disinterestedly and judiciously for his nephew. The praise of Murray's abilities is unquestionably just; he was handsome, courageous, prudent, acute, benevolent, humane to the vanquished in a barbarous age, and a friend to the sciences, while many of those about him despised them, and scarcely one had any real knowledge of them. To his friends he was invariably faithful, and his generosity flowed from his natural disposition. That he was

sincerely attached to the Protestant religion and for that very reason inclined to England, we will no more impute to him as a fault, than blame the friends of Catholicism for looking to France. Yet there was certainly at that time less moderation and good sense in that kingdom, than with the Queen of England. Whether, and in what degree, religious convictions, civil duties, and personal ambition, were combined together in Murray, it is not easy to weigh and to decide; and if we allow that a difficult union of conflicting duties place him in an equivocal, unfavorable light, as the accuser of his sister, he might, at an earlier period in Scotland, have caused more severe resolutions against her; and undoubtedly the greatest fault, the crime, is not on his side, but that of Mary. For her, Murray's death was no great gain, as her adversaries accused her of having indirectly participated in the murder, or led to it. Long afterwards, for the times did not improve, the people called Murray the good Regent.

Mary's friends now made incursions into the English border, partly in reliance on foreign aid, partly in hopes that Elizabeth would have recourse to violent measures, and thereby revive the ancient hatred of the Scotch against England. The Queen, however, contented herself with accusing the partisans of Mary as the sole authors of the troubles, and with supporting the friends of James,

so that his grandfather, the Earl of Lennox, became Regent.(91)

About this time, namely, in October, 1570, new negociations were opened for the release of Mary. She was to renounce all claims upon England in favour of Elizabeth and her heirs, (92) to give up all alliances with France, and all connection with the English malcontents, to admit no foreign troops into the kingdom, to give an indemnity for the damage done on the frontiers, to punish the murderers of Darnley and Murray, never to marry without Elizabeth's consent, and till she had herself wholly resigned the Scotch throne, to have her son educated in England, and give hostages for the performance of all the conditions. The opinion that all these negociations were carried on with no sincere intention on the part of Elizabeth of coming to a conclusion is not proved, and is even improbable, for on such conditions she might very well have sent Mary back to Scotland. There is more reason to blame the latter who, relying on foreign assistance, or hoping that Elizabeth would give way, and too mindful of her former situation as a Queen, made many objections, which, in themselves, were not indeed unfounded, but gave the Scotch time and opportunity to raise new difficulties. Thus, for instance, on the safety of James, the guilt of Mary, the right of removing unworthy sovereigns, the maintenance of religion,

the necessity of consulting Parliament on all these matters, &c., Elizabeth, after every attempt to come to an agreement had failed, considered herself as justified to foreign powers, if (as her own safety and that of England required,) she kept Mary still longer in confinement; but she persisted in her design of sending her away, as soon as it should be practicable and advisable to do so. (93)

Mary was very indignant and afflicted at this result. She wrote secretly to France, and received from that country, as was discovered, articles of dress, on which secrets were written with sympathetic ink: when the prospect of assistance from that quarter grew fainter, she applied, more eagerly than before, to the Pope, Spain, and the Duke of Norfolk. The latter was arrested on this account on the 7th of September, and accused of having, contrary to his solemn promise, renewed, without Elizabeth's knowledge, the negociations for a marriage with the Queen of Scotland, of intending to release her by means of an army to be sent from the Netherlands, and, if not of overthrowing Elizabeth's government, yet of traitorously compelling her to submit to whatever conditions should be proposed to her. Norfolk confessed that he had, contrary to his word, renewed the negociations, and received letters from the Pope, but denied all other connections and intentions. Being asked how he could have conceived the idea of marrying

Mary, whereas in the official reports of the commission at York he had called her an undoubted adulteress and murderess; he answered," at that time I did not think of the marriage." This expression, and the circumstance that Norfolk and Mary had never seen each other, sufficiently prove that ambitious views alone were at work, and a writer justly says of Mary's letters to the Duke, they are political love letters, from an extremely artful woman to a very weak man. Norfolk was certainly privy to the dangerous plans of the conspirators, and was silent; how can this be reconciled with his assertion that he was as true to Elizabeth as any man on earth! Mary too affirmed that her attempts had aimed solely at the recovery of her liberty, on which Elizabeth declared that she did not see in this any ground for complaint, but in Mary's endeavouring again to excite rebellion in England; (94) for it had been intended to use force, to distribute money received from the Pope, and to bring the Duke of Alba into the country. Elizabeth and her counsellors, at least, conceived all this to be so notorious, and proved, that she imprisoned the bishop of Ross, Mary's Ambassador, as an accomplice in these intrigues; ordered the Spanish Ambassador to quit London on the 24th of September, 1571, and on the 16th of January, 1572, gave directions to bring the Duke of Norfolk to trial. (9