1. The Conference at York.

(_a_) Letter of Murray to Queen Elizabeth.

(_b_) Mary's Instructions to her Commissioners.

(_c_) The formal complaints and replies.

(_d_) The account of the private interview, with the "abstract of matters" there shown.

(_e_) Suss.e.x's opinion of the evidence.

2. The Conference at Westminster.

(_a_) Mary's Instructions.

(_b_) Murray's "Eik" or additional charge.

(_c_) The answer of Mary's Commissioners to the "Eik."

(_d_) Elizabeth's reply to (_a_).

(_e_) The Privy Council and suggestions for a compromise.

(_f_) Proofs produced at Westminster--the account of the production.

(_g_) Mary's own answer to the "Eik," and her request to see the originals, with Elizabeth's reply.

(_h_) Mary's request for copies, with Elizabeth's reply.

(_i_) Dissolution of the Conference by Elizabeth.

_MARY IN ENGLAND_

The Conference at York.

[On Mary's arrival in England, Queen Elizabeth declined to meet her, till she should be cleared from the suspicion of complicity in the Darnley murder. Mary promptly accused Maitland and Morton of a share in the crime, and accepted Elizabeth's proposal to have the case tried at a Conference at York. The Queen of England appointed as Commissioners, the Duke of Norfolk, the Earl of Suss.e.x, and Sir Ralph Sadler. The Scottish Queen was represented by Lords Boyd, Herries, and Livingstone, the Abbot of Kilwinning, Sir John Gordon of Lochinvar, Sir James c.o.c.kburn of Skirving, and John Lesley, the Bishop of Ross. The Earl of Murray, the Earl of Morton, the Bishop of Orkney (Adam Bothwell), the Abbot of Dunfermline, and Lord Lindsay appeared in the name of the young James VI., along with Maitland of Lethington, George Buchanan, James Macgill, and Henry Balnaves, as a.s.sistants.

Many points of procedure and various formal questions occupied much of the time of the Conferences. The extracts which follow have been chosen out of regard to their bearing on the problem of Mary's guilt or innocence, and especial care has been taken to include references to the Casket Letters. The letters themselves, and the depositions which were produced before the Commissioners, will be found, by themselves, after the account of the Conferences.

The Conference met at York on October 8, and as Mary was, formally, the plaintiff, her complaint against the Lords was first received.

Thereafter, Murray's reply and a rejoinder from Mary's representatives were put on record. This was all the formal business essential for our purpose. But, on October 11th, Elizabeth's Commissioners received a private visit from Maitland, Buchanan, Macgill, and Balnaves, who put before them, secretly, certain doc.u.ments to prove Mary's guilt. It will be seen from the letter of the Commissioners to Elizabeth, and the quotations from the "abstract of matters ... chosen by the Scots," that these doc.u.ments consisted of:--

1. A bond signed by the Lords, agreeing to Bothwell's marriage with the Queen.

2. The Queen's warrant for the signature of the above-mentioned bond.

3. Two contracts of marriage. (See pp. 201-203.)

4. Two letters arranging for the seizure of the Queen by Bothwell (_i.e._ two of Letters, vi., vii., and viii., see pp. 190-194).

5. A letter arranging a duel between Darnley and the Lord Robert.

6. The two Glasgow Letters (i. and ii., see pp. 165-182).

7. The Love Sonnets (pp. 195-201).

8. The Letter in which the Jason and Medea comparison occurs.

(Letter iv., see pp. 185-189.)

This list should be compared with the recital of the productions at Westminster (pp. 143 _et seq._). Maitland informed Queen Mary of this secret visit, and she complained to Queen Elizabeth, who summoned all the Commissioners to London, on the ground of greater convenience.]

_MURRAY AND HIS PROOFS_

_Letter of the Earl of Murray, with information for the Queen of England_, June 22, 1568. _Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 75, _from the Paper Office_.

It may be that such letters as we have of the Queen, our Sovereign Lord's mother, that sufficiently, in our opinion, prove her consenting to the murther of the King her lawful husband, shall be called in doubt ... therefore, since our servant, Mr. John Wood, has the copies of the same letters translated in our language, we would earnestly desire that the said copies may be considered by the judges that shall have the examination and commission of the matter, that they may resolve us thus far, in case the princ.i.p.al agree with the copy, that then we prove the case indeed; for when we have manifested and shown all, and yet shall have no a.s.surances that what we send shall satisfy for probation, for what purpose shall we either accuse or seek to prove, when we are not a.s.sured what to prove, or when we have proved, what shall succeed?

_MARY a.s.sERTS FORGERY_

1568.--September 9. Mary's Instructions to her Commissioners.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 337, from _Queen Mary's Register_ in Cotton Library.

In case they allege they have any writings of mine, which may infer presumption against me in that case, ye shall desire the princ.i.p.als to be produced, and that I myself may have inspection thereof, and make answer thereto. For ye shall affirm, in my name, I never wrote anything concerning that matter to any creature; and if any writings be, they are false and feigned, forged and invented by themselves, only to my dishonour and slander. And there are divers in Scotland, both men and women, that can counterfeit my handwriting, and write the like manner of writing which I use, as well as myself, and princ.i.p.ally such as are in company with themselves. And I doubt not, if I had remained in my own realm, but I should have gotten knowledge of the inventors and writers of such writings ere now, to the declaration of my innocency, and confusion of their falsity.

October 8. Complaint of the Queen of Scots against the Earl of Murray.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 128, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 197.

That James, Earl of Morton, John, Earl of Mar, Alexander, Earl of Glencairn, the Lords Howe, Lindsay, Ruthven, Sempill, Cathcart, Ochiltree, with others their a.s.sisters, a.s.sembled in arms a great part of the Queen's grace's subjects, declared by their proclamations it was for her Grace's relief, beset the road in her pa.s.sage betwixt her Grace's castles of Dunbar and Edinburgh, there took her most n.o.ble person, committed her in ward in her own place of Lochleven, ... pa.s.sed to the castle of Stirling, and made there fashion of crowning of her son the Prince....

James, Earl of Murray, took upon him the name of the Regent, ...

intromitted with the whole strengths, munitions, jewels, and patrimony of the crown, as well property as casualty....

_MURRAY'S APOLOGY FOR THE REVOLUTION_

October 10. The Answer of the Earl of Murray.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 144, from Cott. Lib. Calig., C. i. 202.

_ACCUSATIONS AGAINST MARY_

It is notorious to all men, how umquhile {the late} King Henry, father to our sovereign Lord, was horribly murdered in his bed. James, sometime Earl of Bothwell, being well known to be the chief author thereof, entered into so great credit and authority with the Queen, then our sovereign, that, within three months after the murder of her husband, the said Earl ... accomplished a pretended marriage betwix him and the Queen, which strange and hasty proceeding of that G.o.dless and ambitious man, ... with the ignominy spoken among all nations of that murther, as though all the n.o.bility had been alike culpable thereof, so moved the hearts of a good number of them, that they thought nothing more G.o.dly ... than by punishing of the said Earl, chief author of the murther, to relieve others causelessly calumniated thereof, to put the Queen to freedom, forth of the bondage of that tyrant.... {From the Queen, after Carberry Hill}, no other answer could be obtained, but vigorous menacing, on the one part, avowing to be revenged on all them that had shown themselves in that cause, and on the other part, offering to leave and give over the realm and all, so she might be suffered to possess the murtherer of her husband, which her inflexible mind, and extremity of necessity compelled them to sequestrate her person for a season....

During the which time, she finding herself by long, irksome, and tedious travail, taken by her in the government of the realm and lieges thereof ... vexed and wearied ... and for other considerations moving her at the time, therefore demitted and renounced the office of government of the realm and lieges thereof ... and const.i.tuted me, the said Earl of Murray, I being then absent furth of the realm, and without my knowledge, Regent to his Grace, the realm, and lieges....

_MARY'S REPLY_

1568.--October 16. Queen Mary's Commissioners' Rejoinder to Murray's Reply.

_Goodall_, vol. ii. p. 162, from _Queen Mary's Register_ in Cott. Lib. t.i.tus, C. 12.

If he {Bothwell} was the princ.i.p.al author of the murder, the same was never known nor manifested to her Highness, but the contrary did well appear to her Grace, by reason the said Earl of Bothwell being suspected, indited, and orderly summoned by the laws of that realm, was acquitted by an a.s.size of his Peers, and the same ratified and confirmed by authority of Parliament, by the greatest part of the n.o.bility ... who also consented and solicited our said Sovereign to accomplish the said marriage with him as the man most fit in all the realm of Scotland ...

and they nor none of them ... came to her Highness ... to find fault with the said Earl concerning the murder foresaid, or yet in any ways seemed to grudge or disallow the said marriage.... And at the presenting of the said writings of demission of her crown to her Majesty by the Lord Lindsay, he menaced her Grace, that if she would not subscribe, he had command to put her presently in the Tower, and would do the same, and counselled her to fulfil their desire or worse would shortly follow; which her Highness subscribed with many tears, never looking what was contained in the writings, declaring plainly thereafter, if ever her Grace came to liberty, she would never abide thereat, because it was against her Majesty's will.... If her Grace had willingly demitted the same, as her Highness did not, her Highness could not have nominated the said Earl of Murray Regent, for there were others to have been preferred to him.

1568.--October 11. Letter to Queen Elizabeth from her Commissioners at York.