suspicion, and he wrote, on the 24th of December, 1575, in his defence to the Earl of Shrewsbury: "I know and do understand, that I am in this contrary sort, maliciously depraved, on the one part, that I am the most dangerous enemy and evill willar to the Queene of Scots; on the other syde, that I am also in secret well willar to hir and hir title, and that I have made my party good with her."

He he is a faithful servant to his Queen, and no enemy says to Mary, as God knows, but "If she shall intend any evill, I must and well meane to impeach hir, and therin I may be hir unfrend or worss. Lodge, vol. II., p. 132. It had probably appeared singular to Elizabeth that Burghley, Leicester, Lady Essex, Lady Norris, and many Catholics, visited, or proposed to visit, Buxton that summer. Lodge, vol. II., pp. 150—161— 171-189. Nares, vol. III., p. 50.

(12) Page 311. Mary complained of the manner in which France treated her, and that her uncle the Cardinal of Lorraine disposed, at his pleasure, of her income in France, so that no part of it came into her hands. Lodge, vol. II., p. 96.

(13) Page 312. The French Ambassador had gained over many persons in England, and wrote to Henry III. that he was able to excite disturbances; but the King ordered him to proceed with caution, and not to give ground for suspicion. Letters from Henry III. to M. de Mauvissière, May 17, 1585. Pinart dépêches, vol. 8811.

(14) Page 314. Letter of M. de Mauvissière to Henry III., Dec. 19, 1583. Bibl. Harl., No. 1582, fol. 329. On another occasion Elizabeth, conversing in Latin with the bishop of St. Andrew's, said, "I am more afraid of making a mistake in Latin than I am of the King of Spain, France, and Scotland, or of the Queen of Scotland:" and to the Duke of Guise, Mauvissière wrote, on the 4th of May, 1534," Believe me, Queen Elizabeth now fears nothing that may happen to her, and well

knows how to meet effectually every danger." Bibl. Harl., No. 1582, fol. 355.

(15) Page 315. Camden, p. 421. Even the French Ambassador, Count Harley de Beaumont, a Catholic, declared against the Jesuits, and said, "It is not necessary to be a bad subject, in order to be a good Christian. Obstinacy, perversity, indiscreet zeal for the Catholic religion, have been the ruin of that sect in England. They not only refused to acknowledge and obey the Queen, but even engaged in conspiracies against her person, and entered into alliances with the enemies of the kingdom, in order to effect her overthrow. Thus instead of obtaining, through her indulgence, protection and support, they have so provoked the Queen, that she has been compelled, out of regard to her own safety, to use severity, and to deprive them of all liberty."

(16) Page 315. It is highly probable that most of them might have obtained pardon, had they been prepared distinctly to abandon the deposing power of their chief. Vaughan's Mem. of the Stuarts, vol. I., p. 37. But undoubtedly every one who recognised the right of the Pope to depose Elizabeth, was not a good subject of the existing government.

(17) Page 316. It was certainly severe for a Queen, but she was not always so badly off as she herself describes at a later period. Thus in the year 1577, she had still thirty servants: Nares, vol. II., p. 512, vol. III., 277. Lettres de Marie Stuart à son Ambassadeur Glasco, (Glasgow in France, in the MS. at Aix, No. 105,) and in the sequel, at least sixteen. "The Earl of Shrewsbury complains of the very great consumption of wine for drinking and bathing, and says that Mary's servants purposely put out of the way or destroy much." Lodge's Illus., vol. II., p. 21-52-71-238. The lodging, of which she complains in the year 1586, was assigned her only for a short time, and her description is certainly exaggerated. But in proportion

as she was restricted in a political view, the more agreeable ought her life to have been made to her, and every ground of complaint avoided. Mary's complaints, here alluded to, are contained in a letter, the original of which is in Fond Bethune Mscr., 8691, dated Tuthbury, September 6, 1586, and was printed by Lord Bridgewater, but not published by him. It is inserted in M. Raumer's Illustrations of the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries.

(18) Page 318. Holinsh., vol. IV., p. 630. Rymer, vol. VI., p. 4–184. Collins, Sydney Papers, vol. I. Leicester's letters from the Netherlands shew that he was impetuous in his temper, but not without ability in the conduct of affairs. Burghley himself took his part in some particulars, and declared to the Queen that he would rather lay down his office, because, in the way that was proposed, disgrace and danger was inevitable. Miscell. State Papers, vol. I., p. 297–324.

(19) Page 318. Holinsh., vol. IV., p. 916-923. Camden, p. 471. Thuanus, LXXXVI., p. 8. Wolf's History of the Jesuits, vol. I., p. 389. Turner, p. 632. Outvying each other in fanatic zeal, some proposed to set fire to the shipping, to plunder London, and murder the most distinguished men. State Trials, vol. IV., p. 151.

(20) Page 318. Yet the people testified no compassion, so well deserved did they consider the punishment to be. The executions took place on the 7th and 8th of September, 1586. According to the State Trials, vol. IV., p. 166, Elizabeth gave orders, after the first cruel executions, only to hang the guilty, and not to proceed to the operation of quartering till after death, (21) Page 319. There are proofs in Mary's letters in the library at Aix, and in the correspondence between her and M. de Mauvissière in the Harleian library, that she had greatly esteemed Nau and Curl, and believed them to be faithful. (22) Page 320. Thuanus, LXXXVI., p. 9.

When Mary,

during the investigation, called Burghley her enemy, he replied, "Yes, I am an enemy to the enemies of Elizabeth." State Trials, vol. IV., p. 184.

(23) Page 328. According to Aubery Mem. Pref. Bellièvre had secret instructions, which were directly contrary to his ostensible mission, and urging the execution of Mary as an enemy to both kingdoms. This statement seems hardly credible when we read Bellièvre's earnest and able representation in the Negociations d'Angleterre, vol. XXXIV., p. 383 and sq. Bibl. Roy. Chambre des Levant. Sixtus V. also had given Bellièvre full powers to speak in favour of Mary. Tempesti vita de Sisto V. vol. I., p. 315. Turner, p. 643.

(24) Page 329. Journal de Henri III., p. 500. Johnst. p. 118. Khevenh., vol. II., p. 480. Aubigné, vol. III, p, 134, says, (but it is improbable,) that Henry IV. and the Huguenots in France, on Elizabeth's application, gave their opinion in favour of capital punishment.

(25) Page 329. Birch's Memoirs, vol. I., p. 52. M'Crie, Life of Melvil, vol. I., p. 366, endeavours to prove from Courcelles' Dispatches, that James by no means earnestly endeavoured to save his Mother. He did not wish to risk his right to the succession, feared a war with England, and said, "If I did not speak earlier of the liberation of my mother it was because she had sent me word not to do it, and I will not do service to any ungrateful person!

(26) Page 334. That hopes had been held out to Babington of Mary's hand, is related by Thuanus, LXXXVI., p. 8, and Camden, p. 521.

(27) Page 335. Burghley said, "If Elizabeth died, such matter would drive me to the end of my wits." He and others considered Mary to be wholly unworthy of the throne. Hallam, vol. III., p. 184.

(28) Page 337. Several historians relate, "Elizabeth caused

Amias Paulet to be invited to murder Mary, but that the nobleminded man rejected the proposal with indignation."

The conviction that nothing should be taken on credit that concerns the relations of the two Queens, induced me to enter on new investigations, the result of which I will here communicate. The account is founded on two letters, the first of which is addressed by Davison and Walsingham to Paulet and Drury, who were the keepers of Mary; the second contains the answer of these two men. In the former it is stated, that Elizabeth had said, she wondered that none of her subjects (not even of those also who had united for her especial protection,) delivered her from a justly condemned, and dangerous enemy: that, on the contrary, the whole burden was laid on her, though it was well known how unwillingly she shed blood, and above all that of a Queen, who was allied to her; nay, did not the danger of her servants and subjects move her more than her own, she would not now give her sanction to the infliction of such penalty. Here follow more particular allusions to the situation of Paulet with respect to Mary, and what he might easily do. The letter concludes with these words: "We have thought fit to make you acquainted with these words lately spoken by the Queen, and leave the rest to your judgment."

Paulet replied that he would not shed blood without right and authority, and thereby disgrace himself and his posterity: he hoped that Elizabeth would not be displeased at this answer, from one who would yield to none in affection, loyalty, and obedience to his Queen.

If these letters are genuine, it follows that Elizabeth, excited by the difficulties with which she was surrounded, wished for the death of Mary, and considered that it would be justifiable to put her out of the way, she being condemned, whereas a public execution seemed to be attended with great difficulties. But momentary impulses of this kind could by no means lead her to give to Paulet, either herself or through others, authority