[305] Goodall, ii. 222-227. But compare her letter of Nov. 22, p. 265, supra.
[306] Bain, ii. 565, 566.
[307] Goodall, ii. 229.
[308] In my opinion the book is by George Buchanan, who presents many coincident passages in his Detection. On February 25, 1569, one Bishop, an adherent of Mary’s, said, under examination, that ‘there were sundry books in Latin against her, one or both by Mr. George Buchanan,’ books not yet published (Bain, ii. 624). Can the Book of Articles have been done into Scots out of Buchanan’s Latin?
[309] When Goodall and Laing wrote (1754, 1804) the Minutes of December 7 had not been discovered.
[310] Bain, ii. 569, 570.
[311] Bain, ii. 571-573. (Cf. pp. 254, note 3, and 271, supra.)
[312] See [Appendix E], ‘The Translation of the Casket Letters.’
[313] The extant copy is marked as of December viii. That is cancelled, and the date ‘Thursday, December 29’ is given; the real date being December 9. (Bain, ii. 576, 593, 730, 731.) This Declaration was one of the MSS. of Sir Alexander Malet, bought by the British Museum in 1883. The Fifth Report of the Historical MSS. Commission contains a summary, cited by Bresslau, in Kassetenbriefen, pp. 21, 23, 1881. In 1889, Mr. Henderson published a text in his Casket Letters. That of Mr. Bain, ut supra, is more accurate (ii. 730 et seq.). Mr. Henderson substitutes Andrew for the notorious Archibald Douglas, and there are other misreadings in the first edition.
[314] See ‘The Internal Evidence,’ [pp. 302-313].