that it was necessary to keep them [the bishops] under, by making them depend absolutely on the king.-He made the nobility see they needed fear no more the insolence of the bishops, if they were at mercy, as this would make them. Sharp did not like it, but durst not oppose it. Leighton was against any such act-yet he gave his vote for it. He farther says, At that time there was no apprehensions of the danger of popery. Many of the best of the episcopal clergy, Nairn and Charteris in particular, were highly offended at the act. They thought it plainly made the king our pope.' So far the doctor. It is easy then for the reader to imagine what the sentiments of all true presbyterians must be. I shall make no farther remarks on this act, then to observe, that the Earl of Tweeddale protested to Dr Burnet, as he tells us himself, that his chief end in it was to justify the indulgence, which was certainly granted contrary to several laws then in force; and consequently, as this indulgence flowed from the supremacy, so nothing but the act of supremacy, renewed and extended, could screen the members of council in granting it to ministers who had the laws against them; and this was one reason why their acceptance was condemned.

The next act that passed related to the militia, wherein the power of arming the subjects, and raising them in arms, is likewise placed among the inherent rights of the crown. Burnet says, It was enacted, that the militia should still be kept up, and be ready to march into any of the king's dominions, for any cause in which his majesty's authority, power or greatness should be concerned; and that the orders should be transmitted to them from the council-board, without any mention of orders from the king. Upon this great reflections were made; for, when the jealousies broke out in England of the ill designs that lay hid under this matter it was thought, that, if the king should call in the Scottish army, it would not be necessary that he himself should send any orders for it; but, that upon a secret intimation, the council might do it without order, and then, if the design should miscarry, it should not lie on the king, but only on the council, whom, in that case the king might disown, and so those about the king would be blameless.

The 5th act was for the security of the persons of the clergy, ratifying the proclamations of the council the 25th of March and 6th of June 1667.

By the eleventh act, concerning the forfeiture of persons in the late rebellion, what the council and justiciary had formerly done, was ratified and approved of, so that now there is a parliamentary forfeiture of these persons in absence. The par

liament rose the 23d of December.

Mean while, on the 9th of December the following five mi

nisters were indulged, viz. Messrs James Veitch late at Mauchlin, there; Alexander Blair late at Galstoun, there; John Primrose late at Queensferry, there; David Brown late at Craigie, there; and John Crawford late at- at Lamington. But the same day the council being informed that- -Hamilton of Kinkell, John Balcanqual brother to the laird of that ilk, and John Geddie steward to the town-clerk of Fife, had been present at a conventicle in that shire, they were summoned to appear on the 16th instant, under the pain of rebellion; but no more is mentioned concerning them.

However, on that day the council, considering that Mr Matthew Ramsay, who was appointed to be minister at Paisley, was not able, by reason of his bodily infirmities to officiate, did, with the consent of the patron and of Mr Ramsay, appoint Mr John Baird, late minister at Innerwick, to the church of Paisley; so that this year there were thirty-five indulged by the council in consequence of the king's letter.

Some time in this month, Sir William Cuningham of Cuninghamhead, Sir William Muir of Rowallan, Sir George Maxwell of Nether-pollock, Sir James Stewart and Sir John Chiesly, were all set at liberty.

Much about this time a letter came from the king laying aside the archbishop of Glasgow from acting any more in that station. The historian of his own time says, "That by the act of supremacy, the king was now master, and could turn cut bishops at pleasure. This had its first effect on Burnet, who was offered a pension if he would submit and resign, and was threatened to be treated more severely if he stood cut. However, he complied, and retired to a private state of life, and bore his disgrace better than he had done his honours. This change was very agreeable to the presbyterians who suffered exceedingly at the instigation of this man. I now proceed to

CHAP. IX.

Of the indulged, the proceedings against conventicles, the actings of the western committee, Leighton's accommodation, the laws and acts of parliament; with an account of, the second indulgence, and other things, till the end of the year 1673.

THE

HE indulgence granted last year afforded, doubtless, some relief to those who could accept of it, while others were still exposed to the hardships of the times though not to that rigour as when Burnet was archbishop of Glasgow.

On the 1st of January 1670, Mr William Tullidaff, late miister of Dunboig, was indulged to officiate at Kilbirnie; the

VOL. I.

same day the council ordered the stipends to be paid to the indulged ministers.

On the 6th of January the commissioner signified to the council that the archbishop of Glasgow had resigned his office and dignity, and desired his name might be taken out of the rolls of council, as being no more a member of it. At the same time the dean and parson of Glasgow were reprimanded by the council, but afterwards were pardoned and restored to their charges. The archbishop was after some years, restored, as we shall relate in its proper place.

The same day the council being informed that Mr Robert Boyd, curate of Carmonnock, had been robbed by persons unknown, ordered letters to be directed against the heritors of the parish. Accordingly, the parish being fined in the sum of 501. sterling, Sir Archibald Stewart of Castlemilk paid the fine, which was given to Mr Boyd. This, with such like attempts, gave rise to the western committee, of which we shall hear in its place.

Meanwhile the indulged ministers soon found themselves in more straitening circumstances than at first they apprehended. Thus when they received their licences, they agreed among themselves to keep up the practice of lecturing, or expounding a portion of Scripture before the forenoon's sermon, which had been out of use since the establishment of episcopacy. But the bishops complaining of this, as an innovation, the council, on the 13th of January, passed an act forbidding this useful and edifying exercise, and signifying, that whoever used it should be discharged the exercise of their minstry within the kingdom. Though, according to the indulgence, ministers were to preach and perform the other functions of the ministry, yet they were forbidden to expound the scriptures; how consistent this was with their licence the reader must judge.

It is not to be denied but the indulgence was granted as the most effectual method to suppress conventicles, and therefore the same day the military received new instructions, upon information of a numerous conventicle kept since last November, to apprehend the minister and the most considerable heritors and tenants, and upon their refusing to give security for their appearance before the council by a certain day, to send them in prisoners with a party, together with a list of persons to witness against them. This not only made the soldiers severe, but likewise obliged both ministers and people to repair to the fields, where they could, with the greater ease, disperse themselves, and excited some to take arms with them to defend themselves and their ministers?

The same day a very good proclamation was issued by the council against papists, but little or no pains was taken to put

it in execution, the great thing being to bear down the protestant non-conformists.

Accordingly, the very next day, being January the 14th, Mr Andrew Mortoun, minister at Carmonnock, was by the council's order, committed prisoner to Edinburgh, for preaching in the said parish, and was afterwards sent to Stirling, where he continued under confinement till November, when, by reason of his bodily indisposition, he was set at liberty; only he must remain at his own house at Glasgow during pleasure. He preached there almost every day to such of the citizens as came to hear him, except on Wednesdays, which he reserved for those of his own congregation, who, being but four miles distant, came in great numbers. Much about the same time Mr Hugh Archibald, minister at Strathaven, and Mr John Rea minister at Symingtoun, were apprehended and sent prisoners to Edinburgh, and afterwards to Stirling, for preaching and baptizing in houses.

was,

Mr Alexander Wedderburn late minister at upon the 27th of January, indulged to officiate at Kilmarnock, and,

On the 34 of February, Kersland was sent from Edinburgh to Dumbarton-castle. When this gentleman was forfeited, he thought proper to retire for safety to Utrecht, where he continued with his family some time, till his friends thought necessary he should come home, though as private as possible. His lady came over about the latter end of last year, and he followed her in a little time; but when he came to Edinburgh he found her in a fever. She lodged with a gentlewoman who was a well-wisher to the suffering cause, and he lodged in a more retired place, and generally came to see her in the evenings; which being observed by Cannon of Montdrogat, the chancellor got information, and an order was procured from Lauderdale, then in town, to apprehend Mr Welsh for a conventicle he kept in lady Kersland's chamber, though the chief design was upon Kersland himself. Accordingly a party was sent, and finding no conventicle there, the officer begged the lady's pardon, and retired. But Montdrogat having informed one of the party, that Kersland usually concealed himself behind the bed, he went and apprehended him. His lady behaved with a becoming calmness, comforted him, and intreated him to do nothing to wound his conscience, for her sake or his children's, repeating that scripture, No man having put his hand to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of God. He was imprisoned at Edinburgh, and this day was sent to Dumbarton, where he remained near a year and a half.

The same day a very severe proclamation was agreed upon in council against conventicles; by virtue of which, not only

the magistrates, but also the officers of the militia, were impowered to search out such meetings, and apprehend the preachers and principal persons who attended upon them. These violent measures obliged ministers and people to take to the fields, and defend themselves the best way they could.

On the 10th of February, the council being informed of two numerous conventicles about Kirkintilloch near Glasgow, ordered Mr Hamilton and Mr Mitchel the preachers to be apprehended and sent to Edinburgh. Sometime after one Robert Burns of Glasgow was fined in 100 merks for being present. The beginning of next month the magistrates of Edinburgh renewed their bond concerning conventicles. And,

at

On the 3d of March the following ministers were indulged, viz. Messrs John Lauder late at Dalziel, there'; George Ramsay late at at Kilmawers; John Spalding late at Dreghorn; Thomas Black late at -, at Newtyle; Andrew M'Lean late at at Killaro and Kilquhanan; Andrew Duncanson late at, at Kilchattan in Lorn. These were the last who reaped the benefit of the first indulgence, who were in all forty-two; but, as we have already observed, they soon found themselves abridged in the liberty they expected, particularly by the act of council against lecturing.

Mr Gilbert Burnet, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, having been chosen professor of divinity in the university of Glasgow, tells us, that the clergy came and laid their grievances and complaints before him, and that the gentlemen of the country made such complaints of the vices, irregularities, and indiscretions of the clergy, that though he could not believe all, yet it was impossible not to believe a great deal. He says farther, that they were very ill used; and it is not unlikely this might be the case of some, for the people were generally set against them. And therefore he proposed that a committee of the council might be sent round the country to examine matters, and give such orders as were at present necessary for the public quiet, and prepare a report against the next session of parliament, that proper remedies might be found out.

Accordingly, on the 7th of April, the Duke of Hamilton, the Earls of Linlithgow, Dumfries, Kincairdin, Dundonald, the lord clerk-register, and lieutenant-general Drummond, or any four of them, received a commission from the council to execute, the laws against the keepers of conventicles, to examine into the abusive attempts committed against the orthodox ministers, to call before them such persons as they shall be informed have transgressed the acts of parliament, &c. And, among particular instructions, they were to inquire into the affair of the ininister of Maybole, the abuse done to Mr Irvine, minister at

other