1639 THE PACIFICATION. 41 Assembly of Glasgow, he was pleased that all ecclesiastical matters should be determined by Assemblies, and all `civil matters by Parliaments and other legal judicatories. On August 6 a free General Assembly was to be held at Edinburgh, and on August 20 a Parliament was to follow. In this Parliament, in addition to other acts, an act of pardon and oblivion was to be passed.1 the North. The pacification of Berwick came just in time to save from extinction the last remnants of a Royalist party in the North. The war in On the very day on which the treaty was signed, Montrose fell upon Aboyne at the Bridge of Dee close to Aberdeen. Though Aboyne's Highlanders withdrew in terror before the mother of the musket, as they styled Montrose's cannon, the men of Aberdeen and the Royalists of the Northern Lowlands held out firmly, and it was not till the afternoon of the second day that the position was forced.2 The storming party was led by Middleton, a rude soldier for whom a strange destiny was reserved. June 19. Storming of the Bridge of Dee. He lived to receive an earldom without any special merits of his own, to preside over the execution of Argyle, and over the reverent consignment to Christian burial of the shrivelled remains of the body of Montrose. Montrose Aberdeen. For the third time the Covenanting army entered Aberdeen. Montrose had brought with him orders to sack the again spares town. He disobeyed the pitiless injunction, and Aberdeen was saved. The arrival of news of the Treaty of Berwick put an end to all further hostilities. As soon as it was known in England that a treaty had been signed, the utmost satisfaction was expressed. It was known 1 Rushworth, iii. 944. 2 It is generally supposed that Colonel Gun, who had been sent with Aboyne by Hamilton, was a traitor, and helped on the defeat. We have not his defence, and he may have been simply a methodical soldier, unused to Montrose's dashing ways. He had been recommended by Elizabeth for service, which would hardly have been the case unless he bore a good reputation abroad. Hamilton's double-dealing naturally brought suspicions upon him of any kind of villany. See Baithe, i. 186; Gordon, ii. 269; Spalding, i. 209. Satisfaction in England at the news of the treaty. Project of sending a Scottish army to Germany. that the peace had been to a great extent the work of the English nobility,' and few were aware how powerfully the King's financial difficulties had contributed to the result. For Henrietta Maria the mere cessation of danger to her husband was enough, and those who looked in her beaming face could see her happiness there.2 The King's sister Elizabeth had reasons of her own for being equally well satisfied. She fondly hoped that something would at last be done for the Palatinate. So assured were Leslie and the Covenanting leaders that all danger was past, that they offered to provide ten or twelve thousand Scottish soldiers for the service of the Elector Palatine. Charles was merely to furnish ships to transport them to the Continent, and to provide them with provisions till they reached their destination. Immediately on the signature of the treaty, Charles assured Leslie that he would agree to these terms. Before long, however, Leslie came to the conclusion that such conditions were insufficient. He required that Charles should ask the Scottish Parliament to provide pay for the army, and this request Charles refused to make.3 By this time indeed the prospect of a good understanding had already been clouded over. In accepting the King's declaration the Scots had been guided rather by Vagueness of the declara- their wishes than by their intelligence. Two capital points had been entirely passed over. Nothing was said in it either of the constitution of the future Assembly, or tion. 1 "Il Conte di Olanda . . . parla . .. con grand' avantaggio delle ragioni che mossero li Scozzesi all' armi in modo che bisogna attribuire le buone conditioni date al loro non tanto all' affetto del Rè verso la patria, quanto all' inclinatione della nobiltà Inglese alla causa loro, essendo vero che eccettuato il generale et il Conte di Bristo, quasi tutti gli altri hanno favito alle pretensioni de' Scozzesi vergognosamente." Con to Barberini, July Add. MSS. 15,392, fol. 191. 15' I ... 2 Con to Barberini, July, Add. MSS. 15,392, fol. 182. Elizabeth to Roe, July 2, II. Cave to Roe, July 11, S. P. Germany. Salvetti's News-Letter, July 5 1639 Ecclesias. FRESH DIFFICULTIES. 43. of the course to be pursued if the Assembly came to resolutions obnoxious to the King. With a man of Charles's character, ever ready to claim all his formal rights, such omissions were likely to lead to serious consequences. The Scots had probably taken it for granted that he was merely seeking a decent veil to cover the reality of his defeat. They asserted that he had used words which implied as much, having assured them that he would not prelimit and forestall his voice, but he had appointed a free Assembly which might judge tical difficul- of ecclesiastical matters, the constitutions whereof he would ratify in the ensuing Parliament.' The accuracy of the paper which contained these words was indeed denied by the King, but it is not probable that the statement contained in it was substantially untruthful. The difficulty vanishes if we suppose that the King regarded the exercise of his veto as a most important part of the legislation of the Assembly, and that his subjects imagined that no such veto was to be heard of. Nor is it at all unlikely that Charles really believed that if the question of Episcopacy were seriously discussed, his views of the matter would gain the upper hand.2 ties. Political The ecclesiastical difficulty was dangerous enough. The political difficulty was still more dangerous. With the best possible intentions, the Scottish people could not difficulties. restore that fabric of ancient authority which had crumbled into dust. If Charles was ever to exercise power in Scotland again, he would have to toil painfully at its reconstruction. Either he must throw himself, as the too subtle Hamilton recommended, on the side of a nobility which was certain to have cause enough of discontent under the sway of 1 Peterkin's Records, 230. ... 2 Rossingham, who picked up the news floating in the camp, tells us. that 'There was much ado whether there should be bishops, yea' or no. The King pressed to have bishops, and the Scotch Commissioners . . most humbly presented it to His Majesty that the order of bishops was against the law of the land which His Majesty had promised to maintain; wherefore at last, as I hear, His Majesty was graciously pleased to have that about the bishops to be disputed in their next Assembly.' NewsLetter, June 25, Add. MSS. 11,045, fol. 31 b. the Presbyterian clergy; or else, as Montrose not long afterwards advised, he must accept the ecclesiastical settlement now proposed as final, in order to win back the goodwill of the nation itself by trying to promote its welfare within the lines of its own conceptions. Charles would hear nothing of either plan. He claimed authority as a right, not as the ripe fruit of helpful labour. He could not understand that resistance to himself had given rise to a new political organisation which could not at once drop out of remembrance for any words which might be inserted in a treaty. He looked for reverence and submission where he should have looked for an opportunity of renewing that bond between himself and his subjects which, through his own fault, had been so unhappily broken. In spite of Charles's hopefulness, the difficulties in the way of the execution of the Treaty of Berwick were not long in disclosing themselves, and not a few of them were June 24. Hamilton at Owing to his own inconsiderate action. On June 24, Edinburgh. indeed, Hamilton received the keys of Edinburgh Castle, and installed General Ruthven, a stout soldier and a The Castle firm Royalist, as its governor. Yet it was difficult to make the policy of surrender intelligible to the Edinburgh citizens. When Hamilton visited the Castle he was followed by four or five hundred persons, who jostled him in an unseemly manner. Scornful cries of "Stand by Jesus Christ!" were raised, and the Lord Commissioner was branded as an enemy of God and his country.1 surrendered. Charles at Charles was still at Berwick. At first, he intended to preside in person over the Assembly and Parliament which he was about to summon, but before long he saw reason to change his purpose. The first serious offence came from himself. On July 1 a proclamation ordering fresh elections for an Assembly which was to meet at Edinburgh was read at the Market Cross of that town. It invited all archbishops and bishops to take their places there. As might have been expected, the proclamation was met by a protestation. Once more the two parties stood 1 Burnet, 144. Norgate to Read, June 27, 30, S. P. Dom. ccccxxiv. 77, 96. July 1. Bishops summoned to the Assembly. 1639 RESISTANCE IN SCOTLAND, 45 opposed in mutual defiance.' Charles might have argued that Episcopacy was not as yet legally abolished, and that the presence of the bishops was necessary to the fair discussion which he contemplated. He did not understand that he was called on to sanction the results of a revolution, not to preside over a parliamentary debate. July 3. Riot at Edinburgh, If the proclamation took for granted the illegality of the acts of the Glasgow Assembly, the protestation took for granted their legality. The feelings of the populace were expressed in a rougher fashion. Aboyne, who unwisely ventured to show himself in the capital, was chased through the streets by an angry mob. Traquair's coachman was beaten. His Treasurer's staff was broken, and his coach pierced with swords. One of the judges, Sir William Elphinstone, was struck and kicked.2 Charles's displeasure may easily be imagined; but he was even less prepared to carry on war now than he had been in June. Hamilton told him plainly that the Scots July 5. The King's would have no bishops. If he meant to force Episcopacy on the nation, he must summon an English Parliament, and be prepared for all the consequences which might flow from that step. displeasure, July 6. Believes himself to have been misrepre. sented. Charles was the more angry because he discovered that a paper had been circulated in Scotland, purporting to be a report of conversations held with himself, in which he was said to have consented tacitly to abandon the bishops. Possibly the account may have been too highly coloured. Possibly, too, his own recollection may have fallen short of his actual words. At all events, he believed himself to have been foully misrepresented. Abandons His feeling was rather one of astonishment than the intention of anger. "Why," he complained to Loudoun, “do you use me thus ? " 3 Yet, if he had no choice but to give up the bishops, he could not bring himself to proProclamation and Protestation, July 1, Peterkin's Records, 230. of going to Edinburgh. 2 Baillie, i. 220. Borough to Windebank, July 5, S. P. Dom CCCCXXV. 22. 3 Unsigned letter, July 11, S. P. Dom. ccccxxv. 51. |