Records of the Kirk of Scotland / containing the Acts and Proceedings of the General Assemblies from 1638 downwards, as authenticated by the clerks of assembly.

by Church of Scotland. General Assembly

Greatly as we admire the talents, the courage, and the piety of many individuals in the Assembly of 1638, we do not deem it necessary to canonize their errors, or to ascribe a sort of plenary inspiration to all their proceedings. That in their great objects, they were right, and that much good resulted from their stern and intrepid course, we most willingly admit; but (if we may be permitted to express any opinion of our own) we should say, that the true and only justification of some Acts, which were ultra vires of a church assembly, is, that in fact they were partly a political as well as an ecclesiastical body, constrained, by the necessity of the case, to resist and to resent the assumption of arbitrary power, which by its stretches had virtually broken up the fabric of society in Scotland, and reduced it nearly to its primary elements. The Covenanters had but too much reason to apprehend that their civil as well as their religious liberties were in the utmost jeopardy; and, therefore, it is by no means surprising if, in the tumult of emotions by which the nation was at that time convulsed, they in some points passed beyond the strict line of demarcation which separates the spiritual from the civil authorities in peaceful and well-ordered states—Inter arma silent leges.

Such was the position of the parties—the King and the Kingdom of Scotland—in the beginning of the year 1639, after the Assembly of 1638 had terminated its labours.

Immediately after the dissolution of the Assembly, the several Commissions which it had appointed proceeded to “purge out” all persons who, either by adherence to Prelacy, or for other causes, were obnoxious to the now ruling power: and Baillie informs us that “many ministers who remained obstinate in scandals were deposed at Edinʳ, St Andrews, Dundee, Irvine, and elsewhere.”[143] We learn, however, from the Acts of 1639 that these depositions were to be relaxed, (except in the case of gross faults,) upon submission to the new order of things.[144] The members of the late Assembly, according to its injunctions, had made known to their several parishes the nature of its proceedings; but at Aberdeen, where there was a stiff opposition to its authority, Dr Guild was deterred from doing so; and Lundie, the Commissioner from King’s College, was summoned before the Senatus Academicus, and threatened with deprivation for having continued in the Assembly after it was dissolved by the Commissioner.[145]

But the attention of the Covenanters was called from such matters to others of more serious importance. Hamilton had, on the 17th of December preceding, put forth a full proclamation, containing his reasons for dissolving the Assembly. His health had suffered much from mental anxiety and the exertions which he had been called on to make; and it was not until the 28th of that month that he proceeded on his journey to London.[146] Previously to his final departure from Scotland, however, the chiefs of the Covenanters waited on him, to solicit his good offices at Court; but we are told that he replied to them—“You must not think to use your Kings now as you did formerly, when they were only Kings of rebels: the King has now another royal and warlike nation at his command, and you shall soon feel it to your cost.”[147] Hamilton reached Whitehall on the 5th of January, when he found the King highly exasperated, and resolved, by force of arms, to subdue his obstreperous subjects, the Covenanters of Scotland.

The plan of operations designed for carrying this object into effect was, that an English army of 30,000 horse and foot, under the immediate command of Charles, should invade Scotland on the eastern borders—that Carlisle and Berwick should be strongly garrisoned—that 5000 men should be landed in the north, to co-operate with Huntly and his followers—that the Earl of Antrim should land in Argyleshire—that Strafford, with such forces as he could withdraw from Ireland, should enter the Clyde—that another fleet should enter the Forth, and scour the eastern coast—and thus, by a simultaneous attack on all sides, distract and overwhelm the Covenanters. And had this well-devised plan of operations been fully and promptly carried into effect, there can be but little doubt that it would have been attended with at least temporary success.

The King, though hampered by increasing discontents among his English subjects, and weakened by many errors in policy, both foreign and domestic, roused “the might of England.” He had effected a saving of £200,000 in his Exchequer; he obtained loans from the Episcopal Clergy of England, and from the Papists by means of the Queen and the priests; he had ample stores of arms, and a formidable train of artillery; and he summoned the English nobility to assemble, with their followers, at York, on the 1st of April.[148]

Of these designs on the part of the King, the Covenanters did not long remain ignorant; and, indeed, they had anticipated them so far that they had previously procured arms and munitions secretly from the Continent, and had secured the services of Alexander Lesly, and other veteran soldiers, trained to war in the army of the celebrated Gustavus Adolphus, King of Sweden. The King’s summons to the English nobility was promulgated on the 26th of January, and the ground on which it proceeded was a statement that the Scotch intended to invade England. Even before this public document appeared, the Covenanters were made aware of the King’s hostile intentions, from the circumstance of all Scotchmen at Court being required upon oath to renounce the Assembly, and to promise assistance when required against the Covenanters. Being anxious to propitiate the good opinion of the English people, and thereby to weaken the King’s hands, they had circulated extensively “a printed sheet or two” of information to the people of England, “for vindicating their intentions and actions from the unjust calumnies of their enemies.” It was dated 4th February, and, on the 27th of that month, Charles issued “A proclamation and declaration to inform the kingdom of England of the seditious practices of some in Scotland, seeking to overthrow his regal power under the false pretence of religion.”[149]

The deputies of the Covenanters, who assembled in Edinburgh about the middle of February, resolved to make a reply to this proclamation, which was drawn up by Henderson, and entitled, “The Remonstrance of the Nobility, Barons, Burgesses, Ministers, and Commons, within the Kingdom of Scotland, vindicating them and their proceedings from the crimes wherewith they are charged by the late proclamation in England,” &c. “These three or four most dainty sheets of paper of Mr Henderson,” says Baillie, “made such an impression, that we, over all England, began to be much more pitied than before, and our enraged party, [antagonists,] the Bishops, to be more detested.” These, and various other tracts by Henderson, Baillie, and others, on the “lawfulness of our defence in arms,”[150] and which were distributed extensively through England by pedlers and otherwise, had a powerful moral influence in that kingdom; in which, besides, there was a growing discontent, occasioned by the King’s arbitrary disuse of Parliaments, and other grievances peculiar to themselves.

“When we had done diligence,” says Baillie, “to inform our neighbours of England, and make sure the courage of all our friends at home, in the third place we took course for a real opposition to our enemies.” On the 7th of March, a full meeting of the deputies and leaders of the Covenant was held, at which, resolving not to depend on any foreign auxiliaries, a general committee of the nobles, barons, and burgesses, and two senators of the College of Justice, being twenty-six in number, was appointed, (thirteen being a quorum,) to give out orders, receive intelligence, levy troops, raise money, &c.; and, exercising all the functions of a supreme, legislative, and executive body, this “Committee of Estates” issued an edict that every fourth man should be armed and trained: local committees of war were appointed, and a complete plan of military organization was established in every burgh and county in Scotland; and we have Bishop Burnet’s authority for stating, that “these committees found small resistance, and no difficulty, of levying men—greater numbers being offered than could be either armed or maintained.”[151] Thus, the chimera of royal and indefeasible prerogative was reduced in Scotland to a nonentity; and the nice metaphysical problem of the lawfulness of resistance by subjects, was practically solved by the entire Kingdom appearing in arms, to resist the undefined and unlimited claims of the first Charles Stuart, to absolute power over all estates in the realm, when about to be enforced by foreign invasion.

While these transactions were in progress, the Court of Session, it appears, had remonstrated strongly with their Sovereign against his belligerent purposes. Their earlier communications on the subject appear to have been intercepted, probably by the incendiary courtiers; but, in the month of March, their Lordships sent another remonstrance to his Majesty by the Lord Justice-Clerk, which we have not observed in any of the common histories or printed collections, and which we, therefore, subjoin among the documents hereto appended, being a piece of evidence entitled to great weight, as emanating from the supreme civil judicatory of Scotland.[152]