Eliz. "rebels, was a clear evidence, how little fhe defired to pre1560. "ferve a good understanding between the two kingdoms: "that it was matter of aftonithment to her, that the queen "of England fhould obftruct the return of her near relation, and moft certainly prefumptive heir, into her own country: that he could have no pretence for this, fince she could "not accufe her of meddling with the affairs of England, "tho' the difcontent of the English gave her an opportunity." She added, "fhe was a queen as well as Elizabeth, and not deftitute of friends when they should be wanted: that the treaty of Edinburgh was made in the life-time of her hufband, and if he delayed to fign it, he alone ought to bear "the blame that fince fhe was a widow, neither the council of France, nor her uncles, had concerned themselves with "the affairs of Scotland: that the Scots about her were pri vate perfons, whom fhe neither could nor ought to confult "in fo important an affair; but as foon as he had advised "with the states of Scotland, fhe would return a fuitable "answer that therefore fhe was haftening her return into Scotland, but Elizabeth intended to ftop her journey, and "fo alone was the caufe of the delay the complained of." She concluded with faying, "fhe had never offended Eliza"beth, and prayed the ambaffador to tell her the reafon of her anger." Throckmorton replied, his order was only to receive her anfwer concerning the treaty of Edinburgh: but fince the defired it, he would for a moment lay afide the ambassador, and give her his fentiments as a private man. Then he told her, the queen his mistress was very much offended at her affuming the title and arms of England, which he had not done in queen Mary's reign, and left her to judge, whether a greater indignity could be offered to a crowned head. Mary anfwered, fhe did it by the exprefs command of Henry II. her father-in-law, and of Francis her husband, whom the was obliged to obey; but upon the death of her husband, she had, when mistress of herfelf, quitted both the title and arms: that however, fhe being a queen, and grand-daughter to Henry VIII's eldeft fifter, did not believe it injurious to any perfon to bear the arms of England, which had been done by others more remotely allied, without any noise. Camden, from whom this is taken, does not mention Throckmorton's reply. It wold however be strange, that he should be fatiffied with fuch weak reafons. Elizabeth did not only demand that Mary fhould quit the title and arms of England, but allo fhould declare in the moft exprefs manner, that the never had had any right to affume them. Nay, the expected a folemn Eliz. reparation for the incroachment, as appears by the treaty of 1560. Edinburgh. Now Mary's quitting the title and arms of England, without owning the had no right to affume them, was very far from contenting Elizabeth, who would not have had any other perfon but herself pretend to the title of queen of England. Mary's alledging that others had borne the fame. arms, without any offence, pointed to the marquis of Exeter and the duchefs of Suffolk. But there were three remarkable differences between them and Mary. The firft was, they bore the arms by the king's fpecial grant. The fecond, that they did it with a limb or border for diftinction. The third, that they never affumed the title of king and queen of Eng land. Mary. All this made Elizabeth fufpect the queen of Scotland was Elizabeth forming fome dangerous defign, and in quitting the title and lupicious of arms of England intended only to amufe her, fince the refused Camden. to own the injuftice of affuming them. In fhort, Mary, being determined to return into Scotland without Elizabeth's fafeconduct, fent for Throckmorton to Abbeville, and demanded of him what was to be done to fatisfy Elizabeth. Throckmorton answered, fhe had only to ratify the treaty of Edinburgh, as he had often told her before. She replied, fhe could not conceive why fhe was thus urged to ratify a treaty already executed: that the articles concerning the Scots had been really performed: that as fhe had quitted the title and arms of England, fhe could not be accused of feeking evafions not to ratify the treaty, fince a treaty already executed did not want a ratification: that the Scots could not complain of being treated with too much rigour, but that fhe perceived the person who would prevent her return into Scotland, would prevent their enjoying the effects of her clemency. added, fhe would write to the queen of England with her own. hand, and defired the ambaffador rather to compose than aggravate matters. But the letter fhe writ on this occafion, did not give Elizabeth the fatisfaction fhe believed to have reafon to expect. As the ufurpation of the arms and title of Elizabeth, and the refufal to ratify the treaty of Edinburgh, were the bafis and foundation of the differences between these two queens, and had a conftant influence upon this reign, it will not be unneceffary to add fome obfervations to what has been faid, in order to fet in a clearer light the reasons and interefts of both. Q4 She Eliza Eliz. two queens to the treaty of Edin burgh, Elizabeth, in France and all the catholick countries, was 1560. deemed illegitimate. It was upon this foundation, that Henry II. obliged the dauphin his son, and the queen of Scotland, Theinterefts the dauphin's wife, to affume the title of king and queen of and political views of the England, and that after his death they continued to bear the fame. Elizabeth was not so void of understanding, as not to with regard perceive that this pretence would be more than fufficient to deprive her of the crown, fhould it ever come to be supported by force. On the other hand, the could not doubt that such a defign was formed by Mary and her friends. Of this, her having affumed the title of queen of England was a clear indication. It was therefore neceflary to provide for her fafety. The civil war in Scotland naturally prefenting itself, the affifted the malecontents, and whereas France was refolved to invade her from that quarter, gave Francis and Mary cause to apprehend the would deprive them of Scotland. This produced the treaty of Edinburgh, which was never ratified by Francis; and after his death Mary perfifted in her refusal, contenting herself with only quitting the title of queen of England. But this was not a fufficient fecurity for Elizabeth. As Mary had quitted the title without giving any reason, she could refume it the first opportunity; and this was what Elizabeth defired to prevent, and the more, as Mary's obftinate refufal gave her caufe to believe it was really intended. 1561. Mary on her fide had ftrong reafons to elude this ratification. She was perfuaded Elizabeth was not the legitimate daughter of Henry VIII, and that neither his will nor an act of parliament could give her a right which nature denied. Upon this fuppofition, Mary believed the crown of England was fallen to her, as next heir to the deceafed queen; and though Elizabeth had poffeffion, fhe did not defpair of wresting it from her, with the affiftance of France, Spain, the pope, and the English catholicks. But if, by ratifying the treaty of Edinburgh, the owned herself in the wrong to affume the title of queen of England, and promised with an oath never to bear it more, fhe had caufe to fear her friends would grow very cool. To what purpose then did Francis order his plenipotentiaries to fign a treaty, which he did not intend to ratify? To this the answer is easy. He could not otherwife draw his forces out of Scotland, where they were befieged, nor oblige Elizabeth to recall her's. As to the breach of his word, it did not then much trouble the French court. Now as Mary was at that time in fubjection to a husband, the threw upon him whatever was amifs in that conduct. The The second reason Mary had to refuse the ratification was Eliz. ftill of more force. The plenipotentiaries of France, in 1561. figning the treaty, made a wrong ftep, for want of fufficient knowledge of the English affairs. They fuffered to be inferted in the treaty, without any reftriction, this general clause, "That for the future Francis and Mary fhould not "affume the title of king and queen of England." Now Mary had reason to fear, that these words, for the future,' might be a fnare to make her renounce for ever the crown of England, on account of her religion. This fear feemed the more juft, as the English had fufficiently difcovered their intention, to regulate the fucceffion by Henry the Eighth's will, where the pofterity of Margaret queen of Scotland was omitted, and the dutchefs of Suffolk placed next to Elizabeth. It feemed therefore to her, that a ratification of the treaty Edinburgh would give occafion to fay, fhe complied with the will of Henry VIII. which could not but be to her extremely prejudicial. It is fcarce to be doubted, that Elizabeth thought the fame thing, fince afterwards, when Mary, preffed by the neceffity of her affairs, offered to ratify the treaty with this alteration of the claufe in difpute, "That during the life of "Elizabeth fhe would not take the title of queen of Eng"land," Elizabeth was not fatisfied. This is an evident fign, that her intention was to make use of the ratification to deprive Mary of her birth-right, or at leaft, to hold her in fubjection, by keeping her in a perpetual uneafinefs concerning her fucceffion. There was then infincerity in both their proceedings. Mary, in evading the ratification of the treaty, on pretence of the prejudice it might do her, refufed in effect to acknowledge fhe had done amifs in affuming the title of queen of England during the life of Elizabeth, and thereby preferved all her claim to be afferted on occafion; for it was not till fome years after, that the offered the forementioned reftriction. On the other hand, Elizabeth, under colour of defiring Mary only to renounce a right which fhe had affumed to her prejudice, meant to engage her to fign an equivocal claufe, which might have deprived her of all her rights. These remarks will hereafter appear not to be entirely ufelefs. rives in Scotland, Mary, though he had no fafe-conduct from Elizabeth, Mary arput to fea, and happily arrived in Scotland. Some fay, fhe st efcaped the English fleet in a fog, which waited to intercept Auguft 21. her. But this is only a bare conjecture, without any alley. That queen Elizabeth intended to intercept the queen of Scots, is not pofi Buchanan proof. Blackwood. tively afferted by the Scottish hiftorians. The Roman catholicks project to refore their religion in Scotland. Eliz. proof". It is however very likely, that as affairs ftood be1561. tween her and Elizabeth, if she had been taken fhe would have been detained in England, at least till fhe had ratified the treaty of Edinburgh. She was received in her kingdom with great demonftrations of joy, both by the nobles and people w. But he had the mortification to fee the reformation eftablished by laws fo fevere, that only herself was allowed the liberty to have mafs in her own chapel, but without any pomp or oftentation. Nevertheless, fome lords ftill perfifted in the old religion, and hoping to restore it by her authority, made their court to her with great application. Of this number were George Gordon earl of Huntley, the Buchanan. earls of Athol, Crawford, Sutherland, with fome bishops. It was not poffible to determine, what was the religion of the duke of Chateleraut, his conduct had been hitherto fo ambiguous. The lords I have named were very confiderable by their birth, their riches, and their vaffals. And yet they would never perhaps have thought of reftoring the ancient religion, had they not depended upon the queen's favour, who could alone counter-ballance the power of the proteftants. Their first project was to try to alienate her from thofe of the proteftants, who had the moft credit with her and in the kingdom. James Stuart her natural brother was the principal object of their hatred, on account of his adherence to the proteftant religion. Befides, the queen having at her arrival committed to him the adminiftration of affairs, it would be very difficult for them to undertake any thing Endeavours without oppofition from him, while he continued in that poft. to fupplant For this reafon, they omitted nothing that could ferve to ruin him with the queen. But it is not neceffary to be more circumftantial in these intrigues; it fuffices to show the situation of the court of Scotland, because this is abfolutely neceffary for the fequel. James prepared a great fleet on pretence to u It is true, there arofe a great fog in luft. p. 130.) But that does not prove fhe was pursued by the English fleet. Rapin. w And at first, following the counfel of her friends, fhe behaved herself humanely to them all, committing her affairs to her brother the prior of St. Andrew's, and to the fecretary Leth ington, or Lidingtoun, as meetest both to hold the country at her devotion, and alfo to beget a ftrict friendship between her and the queen of England. Melvil. p. 32. The |