[merged small][ocr errors]

féen, in the most public manner, That it was nor a judicial confefby all the world, and even tacitly fion, is evident: The paper itself disavowed by himself.

does not bear any fuch mark; nor As for the pretended declaration does it mention that it was taken of the gth of Auguft, since that on- in presence of any person, or by any ly charges the earl of Bothwell, and authority whatsoever ; and, by comnor the queen, with any accession to paring it with the judicial examinathe murder, it does not fall within tions of Dalgleish, Hay, and Hepmy plan, altho? liable to the fame burn, in page 146, it is apparent, objections with the above pretended that it is destitute of every formaliconfeffion against the queen; be ty requifite in a judicial evidence fides, Mr. Goodall has, with very In what dark corner, then, this good reason, shewn it likewise to be strange production was generated; an impofture*

our author may endeavour to find Before we conclude, we must a- out, if he can. gain beg leave to take notice of As to his second assertion; that it Mr, Hume's arguments in support was regularly and judicially given in, of this nored piece of evidence of and therefore ought to have been Paris : " It is in vain (says he) at canvassed by Mary during the con" present to seek for improbabilities ferences; we have already seen “ in Nicholas Hubert's dying con- that this likewise is not fact: the “ fession, and to magnify the small- conferences broke up in February “ est difficulties into a contradic- 1569: Nicholas Hubert was not "tion. It was certainly a regular hanged till August thereafter, and judicial paper, given in regularly his dying confeffion, as Mr. Hume " and judicially, and ought to have calls it, is only dated the roth of “ been canvafled at the time, if the that month. How then can this

persons, whom it concerned, had gentleman gravely tell us that this “ been affured of their innocencet.” confession was judicially given in;

Here we see a short, but very po- and ought to have been at that very fitive decision against all and eve: time canvassed by queen Mary and ry objection that possibly can be her commissionerse Such positive brought against Paris's confeffion. altertions, apparently contrary to But upon what does this author fact, are unworthy the character of ground his sentence ? Upon two an hittorian, and may very juftly very plain reasons, first, That the render his decision, with respect to confeflion was a judicial one, that evidences of a higher nature, very is, taken in riesence, or by autho- dubious, In aniwer then to Mr. rity of a judge. And secondiy, That Hume: As the queen's accusers din it was regularly and judicially given dot chuse to produce in ; that must be underliood during witness, Paris, whom the time of the conferences before and in their hands queen Elizabeth and her council, in ration or confef presence of Mary's commissioners ; critical and at which time the ought to have it can affed canvassed it, says our author, if she hend our knew her innocence.

fairly be

* Good. v, 1. po 137.

it is in vain at present to support the and the management of the fucimprobabilities and absurdities in a ceeding part of the scheme to his confession, taken in a clandestine friends Morton and Lethington, who, way, no body knows how; and pro by their rebellion and imprisonment duced after Paris's death, by no bo of the queen, secured for him the dy knows whom: and from every regency of the kingdom. appearance deftitute of every furma It must still, however, he aclity requisite and common to such knowledged, that all this amounts fort of evidence: for these reasons, to no direct proof of Murray's beI am under no sort of hesitation to ing an actor in the murder of lord give sentence againit Nicholas Hu Darnley: but when the whole of beri's confeffion, as a gross imposture his conduct, which we have traced, and forgery.”

and detected, is considered, there The fifth chapter is a well drawn appears the strongest prefumptive summary of the arguments on both evidence, of his being accessary to, fides, and the sixth is taken up in and in the knowledge of the whole tracing out the views, designs, and affair. The close, fubtle, and deep connections of Murray, Morton, and part which he was to play in the Lethington, That the two last catastrophe, was to place himself named, were the tools and instru- concealed behind the curtain, while ments or Murray's ambition is ap- the bloody work was a doing, to parent. That they were both of look through his fingers thairta, and to them at least privy io the murder is behold the doings, Jaying nothing to not to be doubted, and as they were, the fame t. How faithfully he kept so it is not easy to suppose Murray to this plan, we have already shewn. their principal could be ignorant of Whoever then shall consider the it. But that Bothwell was guilty is whole of Murray's conduct, his repot a question. Whether the queen bellions, plots, and conspiracies, was altogether innocent every man and that by a constant and invariable will after all judge for imself. prosecution of this plan, he at length That her marriage with Bothwell obtained the full completion of his was imprudent, no one can doubt. scheme, by dethroning his sovereign, Our author, in what we think a poflefling himself, of the reins of masterly manner, brings the several governinent, and by that means facinora of Murray, Moreton, and having it in his power, to smother Lethington, into one point of view, and put out of the way all proof or and makes this his conclusion. evidence that might tend to discover

? Such is the complicated evi- his own guilt, with the remarkable dence, that appears against the joint caution observed by him, in taking confederates, Murray, Morton, and care to withdraw himself from the Lethington, preceding lord Darn- scene, at the precise time always ley's murder, in which the earl of when the decisive events were ready Murray is plainly pointed out to to fall out, muft, for these reasons, have been at the head, and in the plainly fee, that the foregoing predirection of the whole conspiracy; fumptive proof against Murray, from until the very period of the king's circumstances, is the only one which, murder, that he withdrew himself, from the nature of things, can at and foon after left the kingdom, this day be expected. To this,

howeve † Vide p. 189. of this enquiry.

however, we may add a direct proof That as it is proved, that the of his using false evidence agairit confederates, for iaking away the the queen, in the case of Nicolas king's life, were Morton and LeHubert, or French Paris's confer. thington, the very persons who affion, which we have demonstrated terwards brought an acculation to be false, and that the same against queen Mary for that very came directiy from the hand of crime; therefore she herself could Murray +

not have been in that confederacy, The evidence is much stronger, nor guilty of that crime however, with regard to his two 2dly. As it is proved that Murassociates, Morton and Lethington: ray, Morton, and Lething on had the fame presumptive proof as against been, from the queen's coming to Murray, not only appears against Scotland, joint confedera:es in a them, but we have likewise a poli. series of plots, conípiracies, and retive proof joined to it, against each bellions, againit her and her hurof these associates, viz. The mu band, uniil the very eve of the Eual retorted accusation of each of king's murder : as they had with them against the other, joined to the one voice publickly accused the act of forfeiture against Lething'on, queen, of that very crime, of which, by the regent Lennox, and the in- it is proved, that, at least, Moreton diament, verdict, and sentence, past and Lethington were themselves ac. by the peers of the kingdom against complices : and, as in fupport of Morton, as an accomplice in the their accusation, this triumvirate king's murder, together with his had produced furioas and forged own confession (as given us by his writings; and by all these means particular friends in the manner they had dethroned their sovereign, and chose themselves) that he was in the possessed themselves of the governknowledge of the murder. So full ment: for these reasons, therefore, and direct is the proof of their guilt. the three confederates, Murray,

From all which, it is submitted Morton, and Lethington, must be to the judgment of the reader, held, one and all of them, as focii whether the conclusions in the two criminis, guilty of the crime of which propofitions, mentioned in the be- they had unjustly accused queen. ginning of this chapter, do not na- Mary. turally follow, viz.

† We have alrcady seen that Murray was at St. Andrews at Paris's condemnation and execution ; and that the only copy of this fpurious confeflion is fubscribed by Hay, clerk of Murray's council ; and we have fill extant the instructions by Murray himself to the abbot of Dunfermline, his envoy to the Englith court, 15th of October 1569, in there words : " And if further proof be required, we have sent with you the depositions of Nicolas Hubert, alias Paris, a Frenchman, one who was present at the commitring of the faid murder, and of late execute to the death for the fame.” Good. v. 2. p. 83.

We may now judge with what justice Mr. Hume has given sentence in the case of Murray: “ That there is not the least presumption to lead us to suspect him as an accomplice in the murder." We need not wonder therefore, that this same judge, who has acquitted Murray of every prcsumption of guilt, should give as positive a sentence against


the queen,




H Ả P. : p Reliminary remarks. Treaty proposed and entered into by the belligerant

powers. Mr. Stanley sent to Paris; and Mr. Busy to London: French machinations in Spain. Difficulties in the negotiation. Design of the campaign in Hese, and of the expedition to Belleille.

[1] CH A P. II. Prince Ferdinand's plan. Allies enter into Hefe and Thuringia. French retire. Hereditary prince repulfed at Fritzlar: Fritzlar taken.

magam zines taken. Blockade of Marpurg and Ziegenhayn. Siege of Cafel. Battle of Langensaltze. Broglio reinforced from the Lower Rhine. Hereditary prince defeated at Stangerode. Siege of Casel, &c. raised. Allies retire bebind the Dymel.

[7] CH A P. III. The negotiation continued. Proposition of uti poffidetis. Debate concerning

the periods. Belleisle described. English repulsed at Lochmaria bay. They make good their landing. Palais besieged. Town abandoned. Citadel capitulates.

[13] CH A P. IV: England and France agree to treat of a separate peace. Epochas proposed by

England. Court of Vienna agrees. Objeets of the negotiation. Proposals of France with regard to Europe, Asia, Africa, and America. French memorial concerning Spain. Indignation of the English minifter. English answer to the French memorial.

(11) CHAP. V. Motions of the French and allied armies. General Sporken attacked. French

pass the Dymel. Skirmishes. Position of prince Ferdinand. Junction of Broglio and Soubile. Battle of Kirch Denkern. French defeated. French threaten Hanover. Prince Henry of Brunswick killed. Taking of Dorften. Various movements of the armies Deflruction of Schartsfelt-caftle. Prince Xavier of Saxony takes Wolfenbuttle, and invests Brunswick. Detachments from prince Soubise take and abandon Embden. Attempt ori Bremen. Suf. ferings of Lower Wetphalia.

[24] CH A P. VI. Condition of the king of Pruffia. His inaction. Motions of the Ruffians and

of Laudolm. Breslau cannonaded. Tottleben removed. Colberg befieged. Rufian 'magazines in Poland destroyed. War transferred to Pomerania, King of Pruffia quits bis strong camp. Schweidnitz taken by a coup de main. General Platen repulfed. General Knoblock made prisoner at Trope Vol. IV.



tow. Prince Wurtenburg retreats. Colberg taken. Rufians winter in Pomerania.

(31) CH A P. VII. The negotiation resumed. French concessions. Difference concerning the German

alliance. Difference concerning the captures antecedent to the declaration of war. Treaty breaks off Messieurs Stanley and Bully recalled. (37)

CHA P. VIII. Conduct of Spain during the negotiation. Spanish minister's memorial. Treaty

between France and Spain. Difference in the English ministry. Mr. P. resigns. Mr. P. Letter. Dispute concerning the resignation. Addresses, Parliament meets. The German war continued.

(41) CH A P. IX. Dispute with Spain. Representation of the earl of Bristol. Disposition of the

court of Madrid. Treaty between France and Spain. England defires a communication. Court of Spain refuses. The ministers mutually with draw. A rupture.

[49] CH A P. X. Blockade of Pondicherry. Distress of the French. Fleet dispersed in a ftorke

Fleet returns. Town surrenders.. Mahie taken. Enterprises of Mr. Law. Mogul army defeated by major Carnac. Nabob of Bengal deposed. Coaft of Sumatra ravaged by the count d'Estainge. Dominica taken by Lord Rollo and Sir James Douglas.

[54] THE CHRONICL E. [59] On the late tranfit of Venus offer the Sun.

(1921 King Henry the seventh's instructions to his ambassadors at Naples. (1981 Claims at the coronation of king James II.

[201] A full account of their majesties nuptials.

[205] of their majesties coronation.

(215) Another account from a gentleman in London to his friend in the country. [2291 The lord mayor's foow, and the entertainment at Guildhall.


His majesty's Speech to both houses of parliament, March 3d, 1761.
His majesty's speech to both houses of parliament, March 19th, 1761.
His majefly's speech on opening the present parliament, Nov. 6, 1761.
The addrels of the lords.
The addrefs of the commons.
The earl of Halifax's speech to the parliament of Ireland.
A short view of the cause and conduct of the war, &c.
M. Vaudreuil's letter to the duke de Choiseul.
Memorial presented to the States General, &c.
The declaration of the French king to the court of Sweden, & Co
Memorial presented by the French ambasador at Stockholm.
Declaration of the empress queen of Hungary and Bobemia.
Translation of M. de Boreel's Speech to the king.
The Horto Gen. Yorke's Speech to the States General

(243) [244] (246) [248] [249] [251] [253] [267] [268] [269] [270] (272) [273]

ibido [274) Answer

« 前へ次へ »