Charters and Documents Relating To the City of Glasgow 1175-1649 Part 1. Originally published by Scottish Burgh Records Society, Glasgow, 1897.
This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.
On 4th February, 1580–1, the king, by two precepts under his privy seal, directed to the bailies, burgesses, and communities of Renfrew and Rutherglen, and all others whom it effeired, prohibited them from troubling any of the lieges coming with goods and merchandice to Glasgow. (fn. 1)
On 28th May, 1581, archbishop Boyd, chancellor of the university, with consent of the chapter, granted a deed of mortification in favour of the college, by which, in order that the yearly duty paid to it from the customs of Glasgow might not be impaired but rather augmented, he mortified to it all the customs of the tron, great and small customs, and those of fair or market, and of measure and weight, within the burgh, to be held of him and his successors in all time coming. (fn. 2) This document was confirmed by the king on the 17th of June thereafter, by a letter under his privy seal, (fn. 3) and both were ratified by parliament on 29th July, 1587. (fn. 4)
On 5th August, 1581, the earl of Lennox was created duke of Lennox, earl Darnlie, lord of Aubigny, Tarboltoun, and Dalkeith; (fn. 5) and on 13th December following he received another charter of the earldom and lordship of Lennox, &c., the office of sheriff of Dunbarton, the lands of Cruikisford, Inchinan, and others specified in the charter of 5th June, 1581, above referred to, all of which lands were incorporated in one free dukedom, lordship, barony, and regality, to be called the dukedom of Lennox. (fn. 6)
On 3rd October a leet of eleven persons was submitted to the archbishop, and he selected three to be bailies for the next year, but no reference is made in the records of the council to the election of the provost, (fn. 7) though he is referred to in acts of the town council dated 5th October, and subsequently. On 17th November, however, Sir Matthew Stewart is named as provost, and on 16th June, 1582, a letter from the duke is engrossed, in which he refers to the laird of Mynto as provost. (fn. 8)
The execution of the earl of Morton had placed what was practically absolute power in the hands of the earl, afterwards duke of Lennox, and captain Stewart, who was now earl of Arran. The duke, as has been mentioned, had made profession of adherence to presbytery, but nevertheless he, along with a large proportion of the nobility, warmly sympathised with the desire of the king to establish episcopacy. This desire was, however, opposed to repeated acts of the general assembly, and to the feeling of the great mass of the burghers, and middle and lower classes of the people. But on the death of archbishop Boyd, on 21st June, 1581, the king was induced by Lennox to appoint Mr. Robert Montgomery, minister of Stirling, to the archbishopric, (fn. 9) and in connection with that appointment a struggle between the crown and the kirk took place, which lasted till the close of 1585. In that struggle Lennox and Arran warmly supported the views of the king, and otherwise made themselves obnoxious to a large number of the nobility, of whom Gowrie, Mar, Lindsay, and others, were the leaders. A league was accordingly entered into to remove the king from their influence, and, towards the end of August, 1582, advantage was taken of his being on a hunting expedition at Ruthven castle,—while Lennox was at Dalkeith and Arran at Kinneil,—to take possession of his person and to restrain his liberty. On hearing of the king's seizure, Arran hastened to his relief, but was seized and imprisoned, first at Ruthven and afterwards at Duplin. Assured of the sympathy, and if necessary, of the support of Elizabeth, the leaders of the revolution, which was known as the "raid of Ruthven," rejected the overtures of Lennox to come to terms, and advised the king, who resented the proceedings of the raiders, and meditated escape and revenge, to command Lennox to return immediately to France. At the same time they required the duke to deliver up Dunbarton castle, to leave the country within twelve days, and meanwhile, to confine himself to either of his houses of Aberdour or Dalkeith. Notwithstanding these orders, however, Lennox fled to Dunbarton, but on 1st September applied for an extension of the time within which he was to leave the country. This was granted, under certification that if he remained beyond the time so extended, he would be pursued as a traitor with fire and sword. (fn. 10) He did not leave, however, at the time so assigned, or till the end of December, when he passed through England into France. He died at Paris on 26th May, 1583. (fn. 11)
On the return of the annual period for electing the provost and magistrates of Glasgow, leets of the bailies were prepared, and on 2nd October, 1582, sent to the archbishop's castle, but he was not there, and the council thereupon elected John Graham, Master Adam Wallace, and Hector Stewarde to fill the office. (fn. 12) Graham and Stewarde, however, appeared on the following day, and intimated that if the council would relieve them of the office they would demit it, otherwise Graham protested that the office which he held at the request of the provost, Sir Mathew Stewart, should "na wayes tend to the alteratioun of the libertie of the toune in his former electioun, nor be na preparative in time coming to do the like." The provost, therefore, "be the aduice of the priour of Blantyre, his brother, direct from the king's maiestie, with commission to the nominatioun of the bailies for this year," nominated William Cuningham, Master Adam Wallace, and Robert Stewarde, for the following year. Thereafter the prior requested his brother, Sir Mathew, "conform to his credit and commissioun of the king's maiestie, to accept the provostrie upon him for this year to cum," and he answered that "he walde be aduysit." On the 4th Graham and Stewarde protested that nothing connected with their election should prejudice the liberty of the town. Cuningham and Wallace also made similar protestation. (fn. 13)
On 9th October the general assembly met at Edinburgh, and not only cordially approved of the raid, but directed every minister to explain to his congregation the imminent perils from which it had delivered the nation, and to institute proceedings against all who expressed a different opinion. (fn. 14)
During these months the king had been secretly chafing against the restraint in which he was held by the raiders, and anxious, so long as Lennox lived, to secure his restoration. The intelligence of his death, and the message which the duke, on the last day of his life, sent him, affected the king deeply, and embittered his feelings towards the raiders. Concealing his intentions, however, he succeeded, on 25th June, 1583, in making his escape to St. Andrews, whither he summoned his supporters, and so effected a counter revolution, which completely overthrew the power of the confederate lords. The leaders of the raid, who had held him in restraint during the previous ten months, fled, and Arran was recalled to power. A royal proclamation was issued, declaring the raid to have been treason, and a convention of the estates held on 7th December passed an act declaring the raid to be "a crime of high treason of pernicious example, and meriting severe punishment," (fn. 15) and appointing the act of parliament of 19th October, 1582, approving of the raid, (fn. 16) to be deleted. This act of convention was confirmed by parliament on 22nd May, 1584. (fn. 17)
On 30th September, 1583, a new election of provost and magistrates took place. John, earl of Montrose, (fn. 18) lord Graham, &c., appeared before Sir Mathew Stewart, provost, and the bailies and council of the previous year, and presented a letter from the king nominating him to be provost for the following year. This nomination was accepted, and the earl admitted provost accordingly. Two days later leets for the bailies were prepared and sent to the castle, but the archbishop was not there, and the bailies of the preceding year were re-elected. (fn. 19)
After the king had succeeded in emancipating himself from the control of the raiders, he recalled Arran, who presented himself at court on 5th August, and the management of the public business passed into his hands. His administration had, however, become so hateful to a large number of the nobility and people of Scotland that a new rebellion was secretly organised, with the connivance of Elizabeth and her agents, and the earl of Gowrie, who had been pardoned for his participation in the former conspiracy, took an active part in secretly arranging the plans of the contemplated insurrection. Of his movements and schemes, and those of the other conspirators, Arran seems to have been fully informed, and he allowed the plot to be matured till his enemies had taken the field and committed themselves to an overt act of rebellion. He then seized Gowrie at Dundee and carried him a prisoner to Edinburgh, where the royal levies to crush the rebels were being collected. With an army of twelve thousand men the king advanced to Stirling, but the rebels, unable to meet this force, fled to England, leaving a small garrison in the castle of Stirling, which speedily surrendered. Gowrie was then brought to trial at Stirling on 2nd May, 1584, and, being condemned, was executed on the same day. (fn. 20)
Meanwhile, on the 8th of November, 1583, the king and the privy council passed an act of revocation, more comprehensive and peremptory than had previously been issued, of all gifts and grants out of the property of the crown. From this revocation, however, were excepted, among others, the assignations of the thirds of the bishopric of Caithness and priory of St. Andrews to Robert, earl of March, and the thirds of the abbey of Arbroath assigned to Ludovick, duke of Lennox, eldest son of Esme, the former duke. (fn. 21) Ludovick, at this time a lad of about thirteen years of age, was then on his way from France, by invitation of the king, and arrived at Leith on the 13th, accompanied by the master of Gray and five or six other attendants. On the following day the earls of Huntly, Crawford, Montrose, and others, met and escorted him to Kinneil, where the king was. James received him gladly, (fn. 22) and restored him to his father's honours and estates, but, in respect of his youth, committed him to the government of the earl of Montrose, (fn. 23) and on 9th December the earl, who had been constituted, by royal commission, sheriff of Dunbarton, and bailie of the dukedom and earldom of Darnley, "and havand commandiment of the manrent of all and sindrie his hienes lieges inhabitantes of the said dukrie and erledome and of the baronie and cietie of Glasgow, voluntarlie and benevolentlie" demitted these honours, "seing the noble and michtie lord Lewes, now duke of Lennox, is now becum in this realme, and sesit and enterit in the said duikrie and erledome, with all honouris, offices, and possessiones quhilkis pertenit to his umquhile fader, now resting with God, and Robert, erll of Marche, his greit-uncle and lauchfull tutour, in his name, be thameselffes and his deputtes, may bruke and enjoy the saides offices and manrent." Proclamation was thereupon ordered to be made at the market cross of Glasgow charging the inhabitants of the dukedom, earldom, barony, and city, to obey the duke and his tutor in these offices and manrent. (fn. 24)
The execution of Gowrie and the flight of his co-conspirators left Arran in possession of practically unrestrained power in Scotland, and he heartily co-operated with the king in his determination to maintain episcopacy. He obtained the command, first of the castle of Stirling, and afterwards also of the castle of Edinburgh, and on 15th May, 1584, secured a gift of the reversion of the office of chancellor of the kingdom, then held by Colin, earl of Argyle, who died in October of that year. (fn. 25) On the 20th of the same month parliament passed acts confirming the power of the king over all his states and subjects; declaring the supreme power, dignity, and authority of the three estates; discharging all jurisdictions and judgments not approved by parliament, and all assemblies and conventions without the king's special licence; prescribing the mode of deposing ministers and other beneficed persons; prohibiting ministers from being judges or exercising any other functions which might abstract them from their office; ratifying the declaration by the king and the estates regarding the raid of Ruthven and its aiders; disinheriting the posterity of the earl of Gowrie; annexing forfeited lands and rents to the crown; ratifying the king's revocation; annulling the proceedings of the ecclesiastical courts by which archbishop Montgomery had been excommunicated, and ordaining that he might enjoy all honours, dignities, and benefices as if these proceedings had never been taken. (fn. 26) Against the action of this parliament the kirk vehemently protested as an invasion of its rights. (fn. 27) The protest was presented to the king at the parliament held in December, 1585, and within twenty-four hours the king drew up with his own hand an answer in which he explained and vindicated his action. (fn. 28) Another session of parliament was held in August of the same year, and at it Arran's rule was confirmed, and acts were passed disinheriting the posterity of such persons as had been, or might afterwards be, convicted of the treasonable proceedings at Stirling in April; ordaining all beneficed persons—ministers, readers, and masters of colleges and schools—on being required by their bishop or commissioner, to subscribe an obligation to give dutiful submission and fidelity to the king, to obey the statutes of the previous parliament, and to give obedience to their bishop or commissioner in the exercise of spiritual jurisdiction, under pain of deprivation of their benefices, livings, and stipends; annulling the title to the possessions of abbeys, priories, and nunneries obtained from the king "in the troublous times of his minority;" annexing forfeited lands and rents to the crown; requiring all feus of kirk lands or long tacks set since 8th March, 1558, to be confirmed by the king under pain of nullity; and ratifying to the earl and countess of Arran all grants of lands, lordships, baronies, and others, made by the king to them. (fn. 29) A large portion of the forfeited estates was divided among Arran and his supporters; and Montrose, who had been made lord treasurer, received the lordship of Ruthven. (fn. 30) On the 5th of October, in the same year, Arran procured his election to the provostship of Edinburgh, (fn. 31) and, as if all this had not been enough, he was declared general lieutenant over the whole kingdom. "In a word," says Spottiswoode, "whatever he pleased was done, and without him nothing could be done." (fn. 32)
After the annulment by parliament in May, 1584, of the sentence of excommunication pronounced against him by the ecclesiastical courts, archbishop Montgomery resumed his functions, and on 7th October of that year leets for the bailies were presented to him, from which he selected three, George Elphinstone, William Conyngham, and Robert Rowat, and they were duly elected. At the same time he presented Sir William Livingstone of Kilsyth to be provost, and the requisite commission was granted to him by the bailies and council. Sir William, his son William, and Alexander Livingstone of Burnside, were afterwards made burgesses, and two days later Sir Matthew Stewart of Mynto and twenty-six other persons were elected councillors. (fn. 33) At the annual period for the election of magistrates, on 5th October of the following year, the archbishop appeared personally in the council and nominated Sir William for election, and he was elected accordingly. From a leet of eight persons submitted at the same time to the archbishop he selected three to be bailies, Robert Rowat, John Graham, and Robert Steward, and they also were appointed. Four days later Sir Matthew Stewart and thirtythree others were appointed councillors, the provost protesting that, the number being in excess of the accustomed number, the "ancient liberty of the town in choosing a reasonable number in time coming according to the number before observed" should not be prejudiced. (fn. 34)
The indignation with which the arrogance and rapacity of Arran were generally regarded throughout the country prepared the way for the exiled lords, including the Hamiltons, who were supported and encouraged by Elizabeth, returning to Scotland, and endeavouring to overthrow his influence and government. Leaving Berwick about the 17th of October, 1585, and advancing in two sections by Kelso and Peebles, they joined at Falkirk on 31st October, about 8,000 strong. On learning the movements of the invaders, whose object he well knew was the overthrow of his power, Arran, who was in ward at Kinneil in connection with the slaughter of lord Russell, which he was charged with having instigated, joined the king and the privy council at Stirling. A proclamation was immediately issued requiring all loyal subjects to meet the king at Crawford Castle in order to crush the rebellion, but this was met by a counter proclamation in which the invaders declared their object to be the defence of the reformed religion, the deliverance of the king from corrupt councillors, and the preservation of amity with England. After a short rest at Falkirk, the insurgent force advanced to Stirling, where the king then was in the castle, and attacked and captured the town. Arran, however, made his escape, but Montrose, Crawford, and others, retired within the castle. (fn. 35) Negotiations were then opened with the king by the beseiging lords, and on 4th November, Hamilton, Angus, Mar, and other chiefs of the insurgent party had an audience, with the result that a proclamation was issued announcing Arran's rule to be at an end, and Scotland to be under a new government. (fn. 36) John, lord Hamilton, the earls of Angus and Mar, and Mr. Thomas Lyoun of Balduky, master of Glammis, were appointed privy councillors on the 7th of that month. (fn. 37) Arran was thereupon deprived of his title, which belonged to the Hamiltons, and it was resumed by the head of that family. Between the 4th and the 10th of the following month of December a parliament was held at Linlithgow, and a number of acts were passed to adjust matters to the altered circumstances created by the revolution. An act of the estates for a league with England was ratified; the banished lords and their adherents were restored and their forfeitures abolished; special acts of favour and indemnity to lords John and Claud Hamilton, the earl of Morton (lord Maxwell), the master of Glammis, and others were passed; the family of the earl of Gowrie were restored to their estates and rights, and the ministers and masters of schools and colleges who had been exiled or displaced during Arran's administration were repossessed. An act was also passed for establishing the privy council, and, as so constituted, it included the names, among others, of John, lord Hamilton, the earls of Angus, Huntly, Mar, Rothes, Morton, Patrick Adamson, archbishop of St. Andrews, and lord Claud Hamilton, commendator of Paisley. The ordinary officers of state, continued or newly appointed, included Thomas Lyon, master of Glammis, treasurer, Sir John Maitland of Thirlstane, secretary, and Walter Stewart, prior of Blantyre, keeper of the privy seal. (fn. 38)
In all the proceedings connected with the changes thus effected, the king was very careful that nothing should be done to prejudice the precedence of the young duke of Lennox, and lord John Hamilton—who by reason of his nearness to the throne was named first in the new council, and curator of his insane brother who was now recognised as the true and sole earl of Arran—seems to have yielded much to the king in this particular. Much also was yielded to him in regard to his episcopal predilections, as these had been exhibited during the ascendancy of the now degraded Arran. "James' notions of kingly power," as Professor Masson observes, "were now fully formed; he was eager to give effect to them in speech and argument with those about him, and also, as far as he could, in action; and his resentment of the past severities of the presbyterian clergy in their dealings with himself, of their pulpit freedoms, and of their interferences with state affairs, had settled into an antipathy to the presbyterian system itself and a resolution to uphold the order of bishops. Hence, when the returned lords came round him, they had found him unmanageable on that point, and had been obliged to temporise or else resort to measures of compulsion which seemed undesirable in the circumstances. In vain had the two Melvilles and the other clerical leaders of the presbyterian cause admonished them of their duty. They answered, they behoved first to be settled in their own places, and then they would work wonders." (fn. 39)
About this time Montgomery seems to have entered into arrangements with the king and William Erskine, (fn. 40) parson of Campsie, and commendator of Paisley, a follower of the earl of Mar, under which he surrendered his right to the archbishopric, which was conferred on Erskine, with entry to the fruits for the year 1585, by a charter under the great seal, dated 25th December, 1585. In this charter, however, no reference is made to Montgomery, and the office is stated to be "vacant by the decease of Mr. James Boyd, the lait archbishop, or by the forfeiture of James [Beaton], sometime archbishop." (fn. 41)
While these things were being done in Scotland, the position of queen Mary was becoming more and more perilous. She had now been eighteen years a captive in England. Imprisoned there in violation of every principle of law and justice, it was her right and duty to attempt by all means to effect her escape, and if the means which she adopted to secure her liberty included negotiations with foreign powers to invade England, or plots with English subjects to subvert their sovereign, who subjected her to such restraint, she only exercised a right for which there is abundant justification. But the protracted drama was nearing its close, and the unfortunate queen was brought to trial. After consultation with her minister, Lord Burghley, on 24th September, 1586, a commission was issued by queen Elizabeth on 5th October to the archbishop of Canterbury, the lord chancellor Bromley, the lord treasurer Burghley, and forty-three other persons, peers, privy councillors, and judges to try the captive queen. (fn. 42) The demand of the French ambassador that she should have counsel assigned for her defence—a demand recognised in the case of the meanest criminal—was refused, and Elizabeth wrote Mary a letter requiring her to submit to trial and to make answer to whatever was objected against her. Against this command, as Mary regarded it, she made an indignant and dignified protest, and, on the arrival of her judges, she declined their jurisdiction. Finally she did appear before them in the great hall at Fotheringhay, on the 14th and 15th of October, and on the latter day the court adjourned till the 25th of the same month. On that day they again met at Westminster and heard witnesses, in the absence of the accused, after which they pronounced sentence against her. (fn. 43) The intelligence of this reached Scotland in the beginning of November, and two ambassadors were despatched to England to seek her release, but, as no satisfactory answer could be got to their representations, James wrote Elizabeth threatening vengeance if his mother were executed. Her ministers and parliament, however, pressed upon her the necessity, not only in her own interest, but in that of England, for having the sentence carried into effect, and on 22nd November it was intimated to Mary, and afterwards published by order of Elizabeth. Strenuous efforts were also made by the king of France to save Mary, but on 1st February, 1586–7, Elizabeth signed and delivered the warrant of execution, with incomprehensible levity, to Mr. Secretary Davison, who, by the queen's order, showed it to Walsingham, and both despatched a letter to Paulet, Mary's jailor at Fotheringhay, suggesting that he should do Elizabeth the service of putting Mary to death privately. This odious suggestion, however, Paulet immediately and peremptorily refused to execute, and Davison had to communicate the refusal to Elizabeth, who passionately declared that she would have her work executed by one Wingfield. Meanwhile, however, the privy council despatched the warrant to Fotheringhay on the 4th of February, and on the 7th its arrival was intimated to Mary. She then requested to have the services of her priest and almoner, but her request was refused. With supreme dignity and resignation she spent the night in making preparation for the tragedy of the following morning, and met her fate with a heroism which has done much to deepen the romance of her whole life. (fn. 44)
The announcement of Mary's death seems to have given rise in the mind of Elizabeth to conflicting feelings—satisfaction at the removal of a hated rival, apprehensions as to the consequences and the effect which the intelligence would produce on the civilized world, and possibly, also, remorse on account of her own action towards one who had appealed to her protection. But, with scandalous duplicity, she affected to disapprove and deeply to lament the execution; she professed indignant anger towards those who had only carried out her own commands, and overwhelmed in disgrace and ruin the unhappy Davison, who, as her secretary, had obeyed her behests.
When the intelligence of his mother's execution reached James, seven days after her death, he refused to receive the English ambassador who came to announce it; but at a meeting between two members of the Scottish privy council and the ambassador, the latter declared that the execution had been effected without the knowledge of Elizabeth, who was willing, he urged, to grant the king whatever satisfaction he might require. This offer the Scottish commissioners met by a demand for the names of the persons who had taken Mary's life, in order that they might be subjected to condign punishment. The king also determined to appoint archbishop Beaton, who had so long acted as queen Mary's faithful and trusted minister at the court of France, to perform similar service for him. Accordingly an act of the privy council, dated 17th March, 1586–7, explains that, while he had presented Erskine to the archbishopric of Glasgow, he, "meaning to imploy James, sumtyme archiebischop of Glasgow, in his service," had "restorit and reponit in integrum the said James aganis the sentenceis of foirfaltour and barratrie gevin contrare him for all offenssis and crymes thairin contenit, and utheris committit be him bipast quhairwith he may be chargeit, and to all his landis, beneficeis, rowmes, possessiounes, broukit and possesit be him at ony tyme befoir the saidis sentenceis, and as the saim had nevir bene gevin." To reconcile this with the appointment of Erskine to the archbishopric, the act declared that Erskine should have right to all the revenues of the archbishopric intromitted with by him or by others on his behalf previous to that date and in future till Beaton was fully restored by the king and parliament, until which time, however, Erskine's provision should receive effect as fully as if the king's letters had not been granted to Beaton. (fn. 45) On 20th June Erskine's appointment to the archbishopric—which had been accepted by the presbytery of Glasgow, who had admitted him, "although he was a laic and bore no charge in the church"—was submitted to the general assembly of the kirk, presided over by Mr. Andrew Melville, but was unanimously disallowed, and ordered to be annulled by the presbytery before the following Michaelmas. (fn. 46)
Reference has been made to the fact that on 6th September, 1577, archbishop Boyd granted a lease of the customs of the tron to Matthew Boyd for nineteen years. Eleven years, however, before its termination, Gavin Hamilton, as heir of his father Archibald Hamilton of Hill, captain of Arran, claimed to be in right of a prior lease, of which he was said to have been dispossessed by the archbishop, and the king directed letters to the magistrates setting forth Gavin's claim, upon which letters Archibald Heygait, townclerk, took instruments on 11th January, 1585–6. (fn. 48) Gavin then appears to have prevented the masters and regents of the college, who were uplifting these customs, in virtue of archbishop Boyd's deed of mortification of 28th May, 1581, previously referred to (fn. 49), from continuing to do so. The college authorities accordingly, on 25th January, 1585–6, raised letters under the signet to have their claim sustained, and the magistrates ordained to continue them in its exercise till a decision was given as to the rights of the parties. Under the proceedings thus instituted the college was successful, and on 25th June, 1586, Gavin Hamilton, Allan Herbertson, and Matthew Boyd were ordained to cease from uplifting the customs, or from intromitting with them. (fn. 50) Subsequently, on 29th April, 1587, Matthew Boyd assigned his tack, which he had got from the archbishop, to Gavin Hamilton, (fn. 51) and no further reference to the dispute appears. But on 3rd November, 1595, the college granted a tack of the casualties of the tron and others to Alexander Hamilton of Haggs for nineteen years. (fn. 52)
On 8th July, 1587, a parliament was held at Edinburgh, at which it was declared that the king had attained "the lawful and perfect age" of twentyone years, (fn. 53) and the liberty of the kirk was ratified. (fn. 54) An act was also passed, on the 29th of the same month, annexing to the crown—to remain therewith in all time coming—all lands, lordships, baronies, castles, &c., burghs of regality and barony, annual rents, commodities, profits, and emoluments, as well to burgh as to land, which at that date belonged to any archbishop, bishop, prelate, or other ecclesiastical or beneficed person, or to any abbey, convent, cloister, friars, nuns, monks, or canons, or to any college kirk founded for singing, or to any prebend or chaplainry within the realm. The execution of the act in the levying of the profits was appointed to take effect as at Martinmas, 1587 ; and the king was empowered to set in feu farm such kirk lands as were not so set before. From this annexation a variety of subjects were excepted, and specially certain kirk lands which had been granted to different persons; the castles, mansions, and gardens of archbishops, bishops, and other prelates; all lands and other subjects granted for the support of masters and students in colleges and grammar schools; and for the sustentation of ministers in burghs where no other stipend was appointed to them; and all lands and other subjects granted by the king and his predecessors before the date of the act, or by any other persons to hospi tals or maison-dieus within the realm, for the benefit of the poor and needy. Burghs of regality and barony, which had previously been held of prelates, were thereafter appointed to be held of the king, in the same way as they had been held of ecclesiastical superiors. (fn. 55) On the same day also, two other acts were passed—(1) one containing the king's general revocation, by which, inter alia, he revoked all infeftments made by him in his minority, and by his governors and regents in his name, of any kirk lands, friars' lands, nuns' lands, or common lands, which in any way fell and came into his hands as crown property; except such infeftments as were made by queen Mary or himself for erecting and sustaining hospitals and ministers within burghs where no assignation or allowance of stipend was made out of the thirds of benefices for the support of these ministers; (fn. 56) (2) another by which he ratified an act passed on 10th December, 1585, rescinding and reducing all processes and dooms of forfeiture, and sentences, criminal and penal, led against any persons for acts and offences, other than murders and certain specified crimes, committed since his coronation, or contained in sentences of forfeiture led since that event, at whatsoever time these acts or offences were alleged to have been committed; and such persons were fully reponed and restored to their possessions and offices, and to their honours and dignities, as if the sentences had never been pronounced. (fn. 57) This act evidently included archbishop Beaton, as it did expressly the bishops of Ross and Dunblane, and accordingly, Robert, lord Boyd, for himself and others, protested that the benefit of pacification and restitution granted to Beaton should in no degree prejudice them in regard to any right granted to them by archbishop Boyd or any of his predecessors. (fn. 58) A similar protestation was made by John Beaton of Balfour, and also on behalf of the widow of archbishop Boyd. (fn. 59)
On the same day (29th July) the king granted a charter under the great seal to the college of Glasgow, (fn. 60) by which he conveyed to it—(1) the rectory and vicarage of Govan, with the teinds and other emoluments disponed to it on 13th July, 1577 ; (fn. 61) (2) the lands, houses, and revenues which formerly belonged to any order of friars, or to any chaplainry or altar within the town of Glasgow, disponed to it by the magistrates and council on 8th January, 1572–3, and ratified by the king and parliament on the 26th of the same month; (fn. 62) (3) the customs of the tron, granted by archbishop Boyd on 28th May, 1581, and confirmed by royal letters, dated 17th June, 1581; (fn. 63) and (4) immunity from taxation, confirmed by the king's letter of 26th May, 1579. (fn. 64) Paliament, also, on the same day, passed acts (a) ratifying to the college the charters and letters Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4, above referred to, and also a charter granted by queen Mary to the magistrates of Glasgow on 16th March, 1566–7; (fn. 65) and (b) granting commission to Robert lord Boyd, Walter prior of Blantyre, the provost and bailies, and other persons, to take order for relief of the decay and necessity of that part of the city above the Greyfriar Wynd, either by appointing the market for salt to be at the Over Port, or the bear and malt market to be at the Wynd Head, or such other part thereabout as the commissioners might think most expedient. This commission was granted on a supplication of the inhabitants, setting forth that the part of the city above the Greyfriar Wynd, which, previous to the reformation, had been upheld by the resort to it of the bishop, parsons, vicars, and others of the clergy, had then become ruinous and nearly wholly decayed, and that the heritors and possessors were greatly impoverished—wanting the means not only to uphold it, but to entertain themselves, their wives, children, and family. This condition of matters, however, they alleged, might be remedied if the common weal of the city were respected, and an equality used by the magistrates and others to whom such things properly appertained. The supplicants, therefore, urged that the various markets, which were then concentrated about the Cross, should be scattered over the town. It also set forth that the part of the city above the Greyfriar Wynd was the only ornament and decoration of the town, by reason of the great and sumptuous buildings of great antiquity, very proper and meet for the reception of the king and nobles at such times as they might repair thereto; and that it was lamentable "to sie sic gorgeous policie [left] to decay, that otherwys mycht be sustenit without hurt of his hienes subiectis." (fn. 66) Under this commission the salt market was placed above the Wynd Head. (fn. 67) But in 1594 a change was again made in the locality of the market, which will be afterwards referred to.
In this parliament the Scottish nobles gave expression to their indignation at the execution of queen Mary, and vowed to hazard their lives and fortunes in avenging it. (fn. 68)
In France and Spain also the intelligence of the queen's execution excited profound indignation, and quickened the preparations of the latter for the invasion of England. So menacing became the political aspect, that Elizabeth realised the necessity of conciliating the Scottish king and people. She therefore wrote James, professing profound sorrow for what she called "the miserable accident" of his mother's death. Whatever his real feelings were, he, with a view to the succession to the English crown, fully recognised the imprudence of pushing matters to extremity, and, instead of allying himself with catholic Spain, as he was urged to do by Huntly and others of his nobles, he resolved to support the doctrines of the reformation and associate himself with protestant England.
On 3rd November, 1587, the king granted a charter under the great seal in favour of Walter Stewart, commendator of Blantyre, by which, on a recital of the act annexing the church lands to the crown, at the general revocation, (fn. 69) and the dissolution made by parliament for feuing them out, he, for the services done to him by the commendator, conveyed in feu farm and regality to Stewart, his heirs and assignees, the lands and barony of Glasgow, the city and burgh of regality of Glasgow, with all lands and houses within it, and all rights, duties, and privileges therewith connected, and also the other lands and baronies therein specified, and all other lands which had belonged to the archbishop within Scotland (excepting the lands and baronies of Stobo and Eddleston, with their bailiaries, which had been disponed to Maitland of Thirlstane, lord chancellor, and the barony of Carstairs and its bailiary, which had been disponed to Sir William Stewart, son of Sir Andrew Stewart of Ochiltree), with all patronages which had belonged to the archbishop, and the offices of bailiary and justiciary of the whole regality, as well property as tenandry (excepting as above). He also empowered the commendator to hold courts of bailiary and justiciary for the tenants and inhabitants and others whom it concerned; to cause suits to be called; to amerce absents; to punish transgressors; to uplift and receive issues, amerciaments, bloodwites, and escheats of these courts, and all other escheats falling within the regality, for whatever crimes might be committed by the inhabitants or any others within its bounds, crimes of treason only excepted; to uplift and apply these for their own use, and to dispose thereof at pleasure; to repledge and bring back to the privilege and freedom of the regality all its tenants and inhabitants before whatsoever judge or jurisdiction, spiritual or temporal, they might be attached and arrested; to create deputies, with other necessary officers and members of court, for whom the commendator and his successors should be answerable; and, generally, to do all things which might be necessary. The king also granted to the commendator and his successors £200 Scots yearly of fee for exercising the offices of bailiary and justiciary, which sum was to be retained by them out of the first and readiest duties therein specified; and erected the whole lands so conveyed into a temporal lordship to be called the barony of Glasgow, of which the castle of Glasgow was appointed to be the principal messuage. Farther, the commendator and his successors were empowered to set to the ancient and native tenants the lands and baronies so conveyed in feu farm; and it was declared that if the commendator or his successors should happen at any time to be forfeited, and the infeftments of the tenants to be thereby brought into question or damage, such forfeiture should in no wise prejudice these infeftments. The feu-duty payable for the lands and others thus conveyed was declared to be £500 Scots, with a duplication of that amount in the first year of the entry of heirs and successors. (fn. 70) This charter was confirmed by the king, after he had attained majority, by another under the great seal, dated 26th August, 1591. (fn. 71) Under the powers thus conferred the lands of the barony were feued out chiefly to the old rentallers, who thus became owners in fee of the properties which they had formerly rented, the annual rent being converted into a feu-duty. From such beginning dates the rise of many families which became eminent in the subsequent history of the city. (fn. 72)