The said Bishop {of Ross} and his colleagues, before they came to the Court, sent a message to the Earl of Leicester and Sir William Cecil, requiring to speak with them two apart.... And thereupon the said Commissioners came into the Earl of Leicester's chamber, where the said Bishop in the name of the rest said ... That although the Earl of Murray and his complices had delivered in writing a grievous accusation against the Queen, their Sovereign, and that they were prohibited to make any further answer to any such matter, but only to desire the Queen of Scots might come in person to the presence of the Queen's Majesty to make any further answer to any such matter; yet they having considered with themselves their mistress's intention to have been always from the beginning, that these causes should be ended by the Queen's Majesty by some such good appointment betwix her and her subjects, as might be for her Grace's honour and the common weal of the country, with surety also to the Earl of Murray, and his party ... thought good to declare thus much to the said Earl and Sir William Cecil....
COUNCIL PROCEEDINGS
After the said Bishop had reiterated the said motion, as above is mentioned, the Queen's Majesty said: "... Trusting and wishing that the Queen, her sister, should be found innocent, ... she thought it better for her sister's honour and declaration to the world of her innocency, to have the Earl of Murray and his complices charged and reproved for this their so audacious defaming of the Queen, their sovereign, and to receive that which was due for their punishment, than to have it ended by appointment, except it might be thought that they should be able to show some apparent just causes of such an attempt, whereof her Majesty would be sorry to hear. And as for the Queen of Scots coming in person to her Majesty to make answer hereunto, the same being of no small moment to her honour, but rather likely to touch her in reputation, in that it might be thought the accusation so probable, as it not to be improved {disproved} by any other, but that she should be forced to come herself, being a Queen, in person to answer for herself, her Majesty said she would not have the Queen's honour and estate in that matter endangered without this their accusation might first appear to have more likelihood of just cause than she did find therein....
Hereunto the Queen of Scots' Commissioners said that this last motion for an appointment came not from the Queen since the accusation given in by the Earl of Murray, and so also the Queen's Majesty assented thereto, but of their own consideration."
PRODUCTION OF THE PROOFS
1568.—Dec. 6. Proofs produced at Westminster.
l. ii. p. 231, from the Journal of the Commissioners.
... They {Murray and others} would show unto her Majesty's Commissioners a collection made in writing of the presumptions and circumstances, by the which it should evidently appear that as the Earl Bothwell was the chief murtherer of the King, so was the Queen a deviser and maintainer thereof; the which writing followeth thus. Articles containing certain conjectures, &c. {the Book of Articles. See supra, [p. 144]}.
After the reading hereof they also said that according to the truth contained in the same, the three estates of Parliament, called by the King, now present, their whole actions and proceedings from the murther of the late King were ratified and approved to be lawful....
Hosack I., App. C., from State Papers (Mary, Queen of Scots), 1568, vol. ii. p. 61, December 7, 1568.