Historical preface
1603-8

Sponsor

Institute of Historical Research

Publication

Author

J.D. Marwick (editor)

Year published

1897

Supporting documents

Pages

205-250

Citation Show another format:

'Historical preface: 1603-8', Charters and Documents relating to the City of Glasgow 1175-1649: Part 1 (1897), pp. CCV-CCL. URL: http://www.british-history.ac.uk/report.aspx?compid=47909 Date accessed: 21 October 2014.


Highlight

(Min 3 characters)

Contents

1603–8

On 25th July, 1603, James was crowned king of England, France, and Ireland in Westminster Abbey, along with his queen; and from the commencement of his reign manifested a strong desire to effect a union between the two kingdoms, and to extend that union into the domain of church government by the establishment of a common episcopal system. Five days before his coronation he had issued his letter of nomination of Spottiswood to the archbishopric of Glasgow, and Spottiswood became thereafter his chief adviser as to the measures by which the hierarchy was to be re-established. Moreover, Andrew Graham, having resigned the see of Dunblane, was succeeded by George Graham, minister of Scone. Bishop Gladstone was translated from Caithness to St. Andrews, and Alexander Forbes, minister of Fettercairn, was appointed bishop of Caithness. With a view also to unite the two sections of the church in England, the king held a conference with representatives of both, at Hampton Court, on 14th January, 1604, and his conduct then not only shows how hollow must have been his professions, when in Scotland he expressed his belief that the church there was the purest church in Christendom, but also furnishes a key to much of his subsequent conduct with reference to ecclesiastical matters. At this conference he declared his adherence to the maxim—"no bishop, no king,"—and the puritan representatives obtained but small concessions. When the report of the result of the conference reached Scotland the presbyterians openly expressed their sympathy with their English friends, and prayed that their country might be preserved from the contagion of English superstition. (fn. 1) One remarkable advantage to the whole English-speaking race resulted, however, from a suggestion made at this conference by Dr. Reynolds, a puritan representative;—the king resolved that a new translation of the Bible should be undertaken; and by the labours of fifty-seven of the most learned men in England, the present authorised version was completed, and gradually came into use equally by churchmen and dissenters. A few years later, as Dr. Cunningham observes, "this would have been impossible; sectarian jealousy would have prevented it, and every sect would have had its own bible, as it has its own hymn-book and catechism." (fn. 2) On 19th March, 1604, the English parliament met, and the king immediately propounded his policy of a union with Scotland, with the result that twenty-eight commissioners,—of whom one half were lords and the other half commoners,—were appointed to treat with a similar body to be appointed by the Scottish parliament. (fn. 3) The latter parliament met in Perth on 3rd July of the same year, and in like manner appointed commissioners to treat with those of England. (fn. 4) It also ratified the acts in favour of the kirk and of religion, and especially the acts made against Jesuits, papists, and their resetters, and declared that the commissioners for the union should not have power to confer about the religion professed in Scotland. (fn. 5) Among the commissioners so appointed for Scotland were the archbishop of Glasgow, the bishops of Ross and Caithness, and the prior of Blantyre.

The royal project of an incorporating union of the two kingdoms came before the Convention of Burghs at its meeting in Perth on 10th July, 1604, when it was agreed that the burghs should bear a proportional part of the expenses of such burghal representatives as might be sent to England on the mission. The commissioner for Glasgow, James Forret, then desired that his burgh should be allowed to nominate one of eight persons to represent the burghs, and the commissioner for Dundee intimated that his burgh had nominated a representative. (fn. 6) The claim of neither burgh was, however, recognised; but Glasgow was appointed one of nine burghs to frame directions to the four commissioners selected to proceed to London. Sixteen thousand merks were ordered to be raised by tax to defray expenses, and 2,000 merks were allowed to each commissioner; but the representatives of Glasgow and Ayr dissented from the payment of the shares allocated upon their burghs, on the ground that they had no authority to consent to any taxation, and that none of the burghs in the west country was represented in the commission to England. Having so dissented, they refused to sign the convention minute or to show cause for further refusal, and the respective burghs were in consequence fined £20. (fn. 7) As the result of the negotiations which followed in England, articles were agreed upon by the English and Scotch commissioners, on 6th December, 1604, "to be propounded to the parliaments of both kingdoms at next session." (fn. 8) But it was not till 1606 that these conditions received full discussion, and were warmly supported by Bacon, then filling the office of Solicitor-General for England. "Nothing practical came out of them, however," says Burton, "and the project gradually dropped out of the parliamentary proceedings of both countries, for neither of them was very anxious for the incorporation." (fn. 9) Notwithstanding the protest made on behalf of Glasgow at the convention in July, 1604, it had to contribute its proportion of the expense of the Scottish commissioners. An act of the town council, of date 30th November, 1605, sets forth that sundry persons had refused to pay their stent for relief of the town's part of the taxation for "reiking out of the commissionaris to Ingland anent the union, but pretendis exemptioune thairfra, specially medicineris, chirurgiounis, barbouris, procuratouris, messingeris, notteris, and sic utheris," wherefore the council ordained "that all sick persounis quha usis ony frie libertie within this burgh by thair awin calling salbe subject to pay stent, and that thai and all utheris burgessis quha will nocht pay the samin be ather hornit, poindit, or wairdit thairfoir." (fn. 10)

In July, 1604, the duke of Lennox committed the management of his extensive estates in Scotland to Archibald Stuart of Castlemilk, Hugh lord Loudon, Walter Stuart, commendator of Blantyre, Sir William Stuart of Traquair, and Sir Mathew Stuart of Minto. The commission in favour of these persons was recorded in the Books of Session on 17th February, 1606. (fn. 11)

In the summer of 1604, the plague broke out in several parts of Scotland, and raged with great violence there, (fn. 12) and in the following year throughout England. (fn. 13) In consequence, the town council, on 17th June, 1605, prohibited the inhabitants of Lanark, Peebles, and Jedburgh from repairing to the town or being received within it for one month, under a penalty of £20. The ports of the burgh were also ordered to be kept, and every burgess who, after being warned, failed to watch the ports armed with a halbert, was subject to a fine of £5. (fn. 14) This was followed on 27th July by an act which, in consequence of the "greit infectioun of the plaig in Leith and Linlithgow," prohibited the admission of the inhabitants of these places into the city till it had ceased. (fn. 15) On 10th August the increase of the plague in Edinburgh and other parts of the country induced the council to pass an act appointing the Stablegreen port, the Kirkport, Gallowgate, Trongate, and the Schoolhouse Wynd port, to be watched daily by the inhabitants of the quarters, according to old custom, and to be locked every night. All the other ports, and all passages and yard ends were also appointed to be shut, and the ports to be kept by the masters of the houses, personally, from 5 o'clock a.m. to 9 o'clock p.m. In view, moreover, of the increase of the plague in Edinburgh, Leith, Linlithgow, Queensferry, Cramond, Borrowstoness, Bonhard, Winchburgh, Kincavill, Manirstown, Milntown, and other places in the neighbourhood, all cadgers and travellers coming from these places, or from other suspect places in the neighbourhood, were prohibited to be received within the burgh for a period of fifteen days. All inhabitants of Glasgow were also forbidden to repair to these places for the same period, under a penalty of £20, and banishment from the burgh. (fn. 16) Seven days later a night watch was appointed to be kept during the time of harvest, (fn. 17) and, on the 31st of the same month, the council, being informed regarding the pest in Edinburgh and Leith, prohibited, under a penalty of £20, all persons from going to these towns for a period of fifteen days, and all persons coming from them from being received within Glasgow for a similar period. (fn. 18)

In October, 1604, Sir George Elphinstoun of Blythswood was reappointed provost, William Anderson, John Anderson, and Thomas Muir were elected bailies, Mathew Turnbull was appointed dean of guild, and Robert Rowat and others were elected councillors. (fn. 19)

On 3rd February, 1605, the magistrates and council made an addition to the seal of cause granted by them to the craft of skinners on 28th May, 1516, (fn. 20) and by this addition they enacted that no one within the burgh (1) should do skinner work except skinners' freemen, under a penalty of £10, to be paid, one half to the hospital and the crafts, and the other to the craft; (2) should either by himself or by his servants fringe or decorate gloves with lace or horn points, or shape or make purses, under a similar penalty; (3) should either by himself or by his servants pull any skins to sell the wool and the skin. Freemen and freemen's wives were, however, declared to have liberty to pull skins, and with the wool of these to make clothes exclusively for their own use. (fn. 21)

In Glasgow, as in other towns in Scotland, a strong feeling of jealousy existed between those of the merchant rank and the craftsmen. Writing in 1736, M'Ure says that about the year 1600 the latter were far more numerous than the former, and, in consequence, claimed an equal share, not only in the government of the city, but in the seafaring trade. This claim was resisted by the merchants, on the ground that merchandise was their proper business, and that every man should hold to his own trade. These differences occasioned "terrible heat, strifes, and animosities, which threatened to end in bloodshed, for the craftsmen rose up in arms against the merchants." Under these circumstances, the magistrates and ministers of the city intervened, with the result that on 8th November, 1604, each of the parties appointed commissioners to endeavour to bring about an amicable arrangement; (fn. 22) and a submission was entered into on 10th November, (fn. 23) which resulted in a decree arbitral, or letter of guildry, being signed on 6th February, 1605. (fn. 24) This decree, or letter, was submitted to the town council on the 9th of the same month, and was ordered to be registered in the burgh court books,—the magistrates and council interponing their authority thereto, and ordaining it, with all the privileges and liberties therein contained, to be observed in all time coming.

The letter of guildry enacted, inter alia, by articles 1 and 2 that the dean of guild should be annually elected by the council from among those holding the rank of merchant, and in the manner therein specified, and should not bear office for a longer period than two years. Article 3 enacted that the dean's council should be composed of four merchants and four craftsmen, all guild brethren, the four merchants being chosen annually by the dean and twenty-four persons of merchant rank, and the four craftsmen by the deacon-convener and the deacons of crafts and their assistants. Article 6 provided that the dean of guild should always be an ordinary councillor of the town council. Articles 9, 10, 11, 12, and 13 declared that the dean and his council should have power (1) to judge and give decrees in all actions between merchant and mariner, and other guild brethren, in matters of merchandise and other such causes; (2) to decern in all questions of neighbourhood and lining within the burgh, and that no neighbour's work should be stayed but by him; (3) to discharge, punish, and fine all unfreemen who used the liberty of a freeman within the burgh, and to pursue before the conditions of admission to the guildry of the sons of guild brothers, the husband of daughters of guild brethren, and the children of freemen and burgesses who had died within the previous ten years. Article 18 conferred on the widows of burgesses the same privileges during their widowhood as if their husbands were alive, and fixed the payments to be made by such widows. Articles 19, 20, and 21 prescribed the conditions of the admission of apprentices, and of admission to the guildry of merchants or craftsmen out of town who were neither burgesses nor freemen of the burgh, and of persons who—not being burgesses and freemen—entered afterwards as burgesses gratis. Article 22 provided for the application of the entry-moneys of guild brethren, both of merchant rank and craft rank. Article 23 prohibited all burgesses and guild brethren, entered under the requirements of the letter of guildry, from selling tar, oil, butter, eggs, fruit, and a variety of other articles so small as not to be "agreeable to the honour of the calling of a guild brother." Article 24 prohibited such persons as entered burgesses without becoming guild brethren from selling silk, silkwork, spices or sugars, drugs or confections, lawns or cambric stuffs, and stuffs above twenty shillings per ell, foreign hats, or hats with velvet or taffety brought from France, Flanders, England, or other foreign parts, hemp, lint, or iron, brass, copper, or ache, wine in pint or quart, great salt, wax, woad, grain, indigo, or any other kind of dye, and from buying or selling in great (wholesale), within the liberties of the burgh, salt beef, salmon, or herring, and from salting any of these articles to sell over again, but only for their own use; and from buying plaiding or cloth wholesale to sell again within the liberty of the burgh, or from buying tallow in greater quantity than two stones weight, except in the case of candlemakers to supply the town, or of honest men for their own use; and from buying sheepskins to dry and sell again, or hides to salt and sell again, or wild skins, such as tod (fox) skins, above five in number, otter skins above three in number, and other such skins. It also prohibited such burgesses and guild brethren from selling any kind of woollen cloth above 33s. 4d. per ell, and linen cloth above 13s. 4d. per ell, except such cloth as was made in their own houses, which they might sell as they best could; as also from buying wool to sell over again within the burgh, and linen yarn to sell over again or to transport out of the town, either in great or small parcels, except in the case of weavers of the burgh who bought yarn to make cloth and sell again. Article 25 prohibited creamers [stanceholders] from setting any creams on the High Street, except on Wednesdays and fair days, or from using any ware save such as was permitted to be sold by single burgesses. Article 26 prohibited simple burgesses or guild brethren from buying with other men's money, under colour and pretence that it was their own, any wares within the liberty of the burgh, to the prejudice of the freemen of the burgh. Article 27 prohibited the keeping of creams on the High Street by persons having shops, save such as sold Scotch cloth bonnets, shoes, iron work, and such like handiwork used by craftsmen. Article 28 prohibited unfreemen from holding stands on the High Street for the sale of anything belonging to crafts or handiwork, save between 8 o'clock a.m. and 2 o'clock p.m. Tappers (sellers) of linen and woollen cloth might, however, sell all kinds of vivers (victuals) from morning till evening. Unfreemen who sold white bread were required to keep the appointed hours. Article 29 prescribed the payments to be made by burgesses entering freemen and simple burgesses giving up their names to be merchants. Article 30 provided that no merchant or assistant should be made a burgess till it had been ascertained by the dean of guild that he had free goods worth £100 Scots; and if a craftsman or assistant, till he had been found by the deacon-convener to have free gear worth £20 Scots, besides his craft, and till he had paid the usual burgess fees. Article 31 provided that the dean and his council should have power to fix unlaws and penalties, and to make laws and statutes to be observed for the weal of the town, of all which the magistrates and council should approve. Article 32 appointed all unlaws exigible under the letter of guildry, and under any laws or statutes made by the dean and his council, to be applied one-half to the dean and his council, and the other half by the dean and his council and the deacon-convener to such good and pious work as they thought fit. Articles 33 and 34 empowered the dean and his council annually (1) to elect one of their number to be treasurer or collector of all entry-moneys and unlaws exigible by them, and (2) to choose an officer for poinding and putting to execution all acts and statutes and all decreets pronounced by the dean and his council, and for gathering in and poinding for all rents and duties belonging to the merchants' hospital; and the officer so chosen was to be allowed by the magistrates and council, who should be assisted by the town officers in the execution of his office. Article 35 empowered the dean of guild to convene all the merchants and their assistants at such times as he thought expedient for ordering the hospital and other necessary affairs. Article 36 provided that the annuals of the back almshouse, belonging to the town, behind the bishop's hospital, should be equally divided in future between the merchants' and crafts' hospital. Article 37 appointed a common metster (measurer) of woollen cloth to be appointed annually by the deacon and his council, which metster should measure (1) all packs or loads of woollen cloth coming from Galloway, Stewarton, and other parts, to be sold within the burgh; (2) all other woollen cloth bought in small or in great; (3) all sorts of plaiding sold in great, i.e., above 20 ells; (4) all kinds of unbleached cloth, linen, or harn (coarse cloth made of hards, or refuse of flax), when required by a buyer or seller to do so. If any person, in defraud of the common metster's interest, measured such cloth or plaiding, the seller or buyer might, on complaint to the dean, be made to pay to the metster double the charges which he was authorised to exact. Article 38 provided that such further acts as the dean and his council might make should be ratified by the magistrates and council before they could receive effect,—a like number of merchants and craftsmen being present in the council at such ratification. The dean was also taken bound once a year, when required, to produce his book containing his whole acts and statutes to the magistrates and council for consideration. By article 39, Matthew Turnbull, merchant, was appointed dean of guild, to hold office till fifteen days after the first annual election of magistrates. By article 40 a deacon-convener, of the rank of craftsman or assistant, was appointed to be elected yearly, eight days after the election of the bailies, and the mode in which his election was to be conducted was prescribed. His tenure of office was limited to two years, and he was ex officio to be a member of the town council. Article 41 prescribed the conditions under which apprentices to craftsmen were to be admitted, and the payments to be made by apprentices and others out of town when made freemen. Article 42 empowered the deacon-convener, with the advice of the rest of the deacons and their assistants, to elect collectors for ingathering the rents, annuals, and duties belonging to the crafts' hospital; and the deaconconvener was taken bound to produce to the magistrates and council annually, when required, his book containing the whole acts and statutes set down by him, and to crave their ratification of these, without which ratification such acts and statutes were to be of no effect. By article 43 Duncan Semple, skipper, was appointed deacon-convener till eight days after the first annual election of bailies. Article 43 appointed a visitor of maltmen and mealmen to be elected annually on the same day on which the deacon-convener was chosen; and prescribed the mode in which his election was to be made. Article 45 prescribed the duties of the visitor. He was (1) to take special notice of those of his calling who profaned the Sabbath-day by cleaning, receiving, or delivering meal, bear, corn, or malt, carrying of steep water, kindling of fire in kilns, or such like; (2) to try all meal and bear, either in kiln-houses or shops, except freemen's bear, meal, or malt, coming to their own houses for their own use, and which he should have power to visit, if so required by the buyer, or in the markets; and when such stuff was found to be insufficient—hot, rotten, or frosty—either mixed among good stuff or by itself; and likewise when good stuff was found by him to have been spoilt in the making, he was required to report the same to the bailies, and it was declared that the owners should get no more for such stuff than what the visitor and two or three of his assistants considered it to be really worth. If, however, any countryman seller refused the price so fixed, he was entitled to take it away with him, paying the custom of the ladles of the town. When bear, on examination, was found to be "flourished" with good above and bad beneath, the owner was liable to a fine to the bailie and to the visitor. When malt was found to be rotten, or spoiled in the making, or mixed with good and bad together, it was the duty of the visitor to report its value to the bailie, and if the owner was pleased with that value he might sell the malt, or brew it himself, or transport it to any other place, paying always forty shillings for every making; and if any such spoiled stuff was found by the visitor belonging to men not living in the town, they had to pay 16s. for every mask (infusion), one-half to the bailie and the other half to the visitor. Article 46 prohibited maltmen and others from buying malt, meal, or bear in town, either before or in time of market, to tap (sell) over again. Article 47 prohibited all persons from buying any stuff coming to the market on horseback or otherwise till first presented to the market, except stuff bought by freemen for their own use only, and being first spoken for or bought before, Freemen might, however, during seed time, buy their seed at any time. If any stuff was kept or hid in kilns, houses, shops, or under stairs, for wet or foul weather, the contravener of the letter of guildry, both seller and buyer, was liable in a penalty. Cake bakers found buying meal before 11 o'clock, conform to the town's acts, were liable to a penalty both to the bailies and visitor. Articles 48, 49, 50, 51, and 52 contained provisions as to the making and sale of malt. Article 53 required the visitor annually, if required, to produce to the magistrates the book containing all acts and statutes afterwards made by him, so that the same might be allowed or disallowed. And article 54 concluded that John Wallace, maltman, should bear office as visitor to the maltmen and mealmen till eight days after the bailies were elected. (fn. 25)

Seven days after the letter of guildry was accepted and confirmed by the magistrates and council, viz., on 16th February, 1605, (fn. 26) they passed an act by which, being careful that all future mutiny, controversies, questions, and debates should be removed furth of the commonweal, especially betwixt the merchant rank and rank of craftsmen, and that the letter of guildry might take happy effect without any particular respect either to merchant or craftsman, they, with consent of the dean of guild and deacon-convener, for themselves and the remnant of their ranks, ordained that in all musters, weaponshawings, and other lawful assemblies, there should be no question, strife, or debate between merchant and craftsman for prerogative or priority, but that all should rank and place themselves together, without distinction, as they happened to fall in rank, and otherwise as should be thought expedient by the magistrates for the time. And it was declared that if any merchant or craftsman made question, mutiny, or tumult for his rank, by prerogative or priority, and repined at the determination of the provost, he should be punished as a seditious person. Further, in the event of any question or quarrel between merchants and craftsmen falling out judicially or by way of deed, the dean of guild and deacon-convener, and their respective ranks were enjoined not to show themselves particularly affected to either party, in respect that one was a merchant and the other a craftsman, nor to assist either tumultuously in judgment or otherwise, but to see the offender condignly punished. This act further set forth that because several burgesses, when they committed disturbances with their neighbours, boasted themselves, and vaunted their friends, to the great trouble of the burgh and its judgment seat, by convoking their friends out of town to assist them, it was therefore ordained that whatever burgess committed disturbance and fell out with his neighbour, and made convocation of his friends without the town to take part with him, and to make further tumult without the town and in judgment, should be deprived of his freedom, and never afterwards be esteemed worthy to enjoy the liberty of a freeman. All meetings and conventions of the dean of guild and convener were also appointed to be "for putting of their statutes into execution, and exercising the liberties and privileges granted to them by the magistrates and councillors." (fn. 27)

On the 16th of the same month of February, the magistrates and council granted a seal of cause to the websters' craft (weavers), by which, on the narrative that the fines levied under the provisions of their former seal of cause, dated 4th June, 1528, (fn. 28) were applied of old to certain superstitious uses, to which, since the reformation, they could not be applied, but should be devoted to good and godly uses, they ratified and approved the following articles:—(1 and 2) that apprentices should serve for five years, if freemen's sons, should pay at their entry thirteen shillings and fourpence, and, if not freemen's sons, should pay forty shillings; (3) that no one should set up booth till he had been found sufficiently expert, and had paid, if an outtownsman and not an apprentice in town, twenty pounds; if an apprentice, twenty merks; and if the son of a burgess, four pounds—all to be applied in support of decayed brethren; (4) that no one should take another man's servant until he was free of his former master, under a penalty of sixteen shillings; (5) that every freeman holding a house or booth within burgh should pay twopence weekly towards the upkeep of the hospital newly erected by the craftsmen; (6) that no one should undertake work until he was provided with good and sufficient worklooms; (7) that no one should take another man's work which he had warped without permission of the deacon; (8) that any out-oftown weaver taking work out of the burgh should pay each time twopence, and give a free dinner to the deacon and masters, or pay twenty-six and eightpence in lieu of the dinner, and also pay six shillings and eightpence instead of the pound of wax appointed by the old letter of deaconhood; (9) that any out-of-town weaver bringing work into the town should pay each time twopence, and should also pay twopence for every web brought by him to the market; (10) that the craftsmen should choose a deacon yearly; (11) that any one disobeying the deacon should pay forty shillings to the craft, and an unlaw of sixteen shillings to the magistrates; and (12) that an officer of the craft should have power, along with an officer of the town, to poind for the unlaws authorised by the seal of cause. (fn. 29)

On 7th March, 1605, archbishop Spottiswood must have been in possession of the parsonage and vicarage of Glasgow, in succession to Mr. David Wemyss, minister of the cathedral, who was presented to it by the king on 11th December, 1601, for on the former date the archbishop granted an obligation by which he and his successors to the benefice became bound to pay (1) to Mr. Robert Scott, one of the ministers of the burgh, 300 merks of money, and 28 bolls of victual yearly, beginning with crop 1604; (2) to Mr. John Bell, his colleague, 28 bolls of victual yearly, in augmentation of his stipend, "swa lang as the saidis twa ministeris servis the cuir of the said kirk" within the burgh. But it was provided that the acceptance of the money and stipend should not prejudice the two ministers with regard to any benefit that might accresce to them through the decease of Mr. David Wemyss, or otherwise. (fn. 30) And on the 18th of April, the king granted letters under his privy seal in favour of the archbishop conferring the parsonage and vicarage upon him during his lifetime, for his service and the provision of the remanent ministers serving the cure at the kirk of the city. The benefice, it was stated, was then vacant in the king's hands, and at his disposal, by the demission of Wemyss. (fn. 31)

The General Assembly had been fixed to meet at Aberdeen on the last day of July, 1604, but the king prorogued it till the following year. Nevertheless, Andrew Melville and the other commissioners of the presbytery of St. Andrews resolved to assert the independence of the kirk by attending at the appointed time and place, and there publicly protesting. (fn. 32) In the following year many of the presbyteries elected representatives to the Assembly which was to meet in July, 1605, but it was again prorogued by the king. Nevertheless, nineteen ministers appeared and chose a moderator, when a letter from the Scottish Privy Council was presented, requiring them instantly to dissolve and not fix any day for their next meeting without the royal authority. The order to dissolve was forthwith obeyed, but the last Tuesday of the following September was appointed as the date of the next meeting. (fn. 33) This action gave great offence to the king, by whose command the privy council committed the moderator and several of the ministers to prison in Blackness, whence fourteen of them were brought before the Privy Council on 24th October to answer for their conduct. They, however, declined the jurisdiction of the court, but their declinature was repelled, and they were recommitted to prison, (fn. 34) whence they were brought to trial on 10th January, 1606, and found guilty of high treason, though, after six hours' consultation, six out of the fifteen jurymen refused to acquiesce in the verdict. (fn. 35) The condemned ministers were afterwards sent back to prison till the king's pleasure should be ascertained as to their punishment.

On 3rd August, 1605, the deacon-convener, the deacon of crafts, and the visitor of the maltmen and mealmen, executed a deed by which, on the narrative that they had acquired a decayed hospital outside of the North Port, founded by Sir Rolland Blacadyr, (fn. 36) and that they intended to build it anew for the comfort of poor decayed craftsmen, they became bound to contribute for that object twopence weekly for each craftsman, thirteen shillings and fourpence for the upset of each apprentice, the half of all fines levied by them, eightpence for each making of malt, twenty shillings for each burgess' son who entered to make malt to sell, and twenty merks for each unfreeman who became free and made malt, and also a yearly payment varying from thirty pounds to fifty-three shillings from each craft. The poor placed in the hospital were to be required to render daily prayers for the king and queen, the magistrates, council, and community of the burgh and its craftsmen. To this deed the magistrates—who, on the 3rd of the previous month, had conveyed to the crafts an additional piece of adjacent ground for the same purpose—interponed their authority, and appointed it to be registered in the court books of the burgh. (fn. 37) At the same time, and with a view to the erection of an hospital for the poor of the crafts, the craftsmen acquired part of the site of the manse which formerly belonged to the rector of Morebattle, adjoining St. Nicholas' hospital, and upon the ground so acquired an almshouse was erected which existed till the beginning of the present century. After several transmissions, a part of this site was included in the site of the present Barony church. (fn. 38)

On 3rd August, 1605, William Anderson, bailie, Mathew Trumble, dean of guild, Robert Rowat, and three others, were appointed by the council to accompany the provost to Edinburgh "for outreding and ending" of the town's "liberty" granted by the king, and the provost and they were empowered to "conclude and set down the heads, articles and clauses of the liberty." (fn. 39) This deputation appears, however, to have been unable to obtain the desired document, for, on the 27th of the same month, the provost was earnestly desired to ride to London and get the king's signature to the grant and the chancellor authorised to pass it through the great seal. The provost's expenses were authorised to be paid, and the town-clerk was directed to prepare letters to be presented by the provost to the king, to the duke of Lennox, and to the earl of Dunbar. (fn. 40) On this occasion the provost was entertained to a banquet as a "guidnicht," and on 12th December the treasurer was ordered to pay to Marion Bell £24 10s. Scots (£2 0s. 10d. sterling) as the cost of it. (fn. 41)

As the result apparently of the provost's mission to London, the king, on 27th September, granted a letter, dated at Hampton Court, in which he stated that, on consideration of the estate of the city, which he declared to be, "in quantity, and number of trafficers, and other inhabitants," inferior to few cities and burghs of the kingdom, he had been moved to induce the duke to surrender his claims in regard to the election of the magistrates, but the duke feared that, in consequence of the obscurity of the writing which the king had granted, it might be interpreted in a manner different from what was intended. The king accordingly declared that all that was intended by his previons writing to be "overgiven" was the duke's claim of superiority "in the nomination or election" of the magistrates, and that the citizens were to enjoy as great freedom of election of their own magistrates yearly, as any other free burgh or city within the kingdom. It was, however, declared that the duke should continue to exercise and enjoy his right of justiciary and bailiary of regality within and about the city conform to his infeftments and rights. In token of the duke's surrender of his superiority rights in regard to the election of the magistrates, he subscribed the king's letter, which was presented to the privy council by the king's advocate on 4th November, and ordained to be registered in their books, ad futuram rei memoriam. (fn. 42)

In recognition of the special services thus rendered by Sir George Elphinston to the burgh, and of the goodwill which he and his "foirbears" had shown to it, the council, on 2nd October, re-elected him to be provost for the following year, and he, for the "weill and profeit" of the burgh, granted to the common use of the town "all maner of unlawis competent to him as proveist, to wit, all bluidis, deforcementis, and all other unlawis that may perteine to him as proveist be vertew of the libertie of this burgh to be grantit be his Majestie, and speciallie be vertew of the justiciarie and regall power." On the same day the provost, old bailies, and council agreed that all kinds of unlaws to which they were entitled by virtue of their offices, or as sheriffs of the burgh in time of fairs, should be uplifted by the burgh treasurer, and be accounted for by him. It was also agreed that the bailies to be chosen for the following and future years should remain in office only for a year, and not be eligible for re-election. Upon this footing William Anderson, Mathew Trumbill, and Robert Rowat were elected, under the declaration that they should retain office for one year only, and should not, for a period of two years after retiring from office, be eligible for re-election. (fn. 43) Three days later James Forret of Barrowfield and twenty-four others were elected councillors. (fn. 44) On the 8th of the same month eighteen representatives of each of the merchants and craftsmen met to elect a deacon-convener and visitor for the following year. In conformity with the letter of guildry produced by the deacon-convener to the provost and to the other persons then assembled, a leet of three was presented, from which James Braidwood was, by a plurality of votes, elected deacon-convener for the following year. Five persons were also put on leet for the visitorship, when John Wallace, old visitor, was elected. (fn. 45) On 15th October, again, the provost, bailies, sixteen merchants, and sixteen craftsmen met for the election of the dean of guild, when a leet of three was proposed, and, by a plurality of votes, Archibald Faulds was elected. (fn. 46) At this time, also, a collector was appointed to collect the common unlaws, which had previously been drawn by the provost and bailies, but had been assigned by them to the common use, and his salary was fixed at £10. (fn. 47)

The condition of the "calsayis" at this time received the attention of the council, and, on 5th November, 1605, they agreed with John Otterburn to "work and big" them for a year. He also undertook to provide another builder, as sufficient as himself, with a servant, to assist him. The payment for this work was fixed at five merks (5s. 62/3d. sterling) for each rood, and it was also agreed that Otterburn should receive a burgess fine at the end of the year in bounty. To meet the expenditure thus agreed upon every resident burgess was required to pay annually ten shillings, in respect of his being relieved of the ordinary burden of the minstrel's meat. This arrangement was appointed to endure for a year, and such further time as the necessities of the calsayis required. (fn. 48) The conditions of this employment were further embodied in a minute of council dated 24th November, (fn. 49) and arrangements were made with carters for carting stones required for the purpose. (fn. 50)

On 24th November the council ordained the treasurer of the burgh to pay to James Tennent, of Linhouse, chamberlain of the archbishop, the sum of forty-eight merks (£2 13s. 4d. sterling), being the burgh maills for the years 1603, 1604, and 1605. (fn. 51)

Considerable opposition appears to have arisen to the changes proposed to be made on the constitution of the burgh, and sanctioned by the king, and the carrying into effect of which had been committed to George, earl of Dunbar and lord Hume of Berwick, lord treasurer, (fn. 52) for an act of the town council, dated 28th December, states that by reason of untrue reports put forward by enemies of the commonweal who intended to withstand the liberty of the burgh, "and bring the samin in perpetuall miserie and slaifrie," the king, the duke of Lennox, and the earl had been informed that it was not the desire of the community and the honest rank of the burgh to have the liberty conferred which the king proposed. The council therefore unanimously resolved, with body and goods, to suit the perfecting of their liberties, conform to his majesty's grant, as a matter not only profitable for them and their posterity, and a liberation from slavery, but also most expedient for the surety and advancement of his majesty's service. It was also agreed that the magistrates and council should ride to Edinburgh in their own persons, under a penalty of £20 each, to obtain the liberties sought. At the same time it was ordained that each burgess and freeman who did not ride on this mission should be taxed according to his ability to supply the charges of those who did ride. (fn. 53) This expedition seems, however, to have been ineffectual, for, on 10th January, 1606, the council resolved to appeal to the provost to go to court and endeavour to obtain the desired liberty. They accordingly proceeded from the council house to the house of the provost, and urged him to undertake this duty, which he agreed to do, accompanied by Matthew Turnbull, one of the bailies, and James Braidwood, deaconconvener. It was accordingly ordered that their expenses should be allowed "most honorabilie," and letters were ordained to be directed by the bailies and clerk to the king and to the duke of Lennox. (fn. 54) An act of council, dated 6th March, 1605, ordaining a letter of hearty thanks to be sent to the king in response to a letter received from his majesty probably has reference to this matter. (fn. 55)

On 23rd May, 1606, the archbishop, in name of the duke of Lennox, appeared before the provost, Mathew Turnbull, bailie, and certain of the council, and produced a letter granted by the duke to Robert Rowat, one of the bailies, empowering him, as justice-depute, to hold justice courts within the burgh till Martinmas thereafter. Rowat accepted this commission, the provost, bailies, and council giving their concurrence. At the same time the archbishop promised that the commission should endure till a new commission was granted by the duke, "conform to the appointment done betwixt his grace, the archbishop, and commissioners of the burgh. (fn. 56) On 10th June Alexander Reid, merchant, was elected treasurer of the burgh, and Thomas Pettigrew was continued master of works, both for the following year. (fn. 57)

In view of the suspected existence of the plague in Edinburgh and St. Andrews, the council, on 28th June, ordered the master of works, with all diligence, to inspect the ports and make them sure and lockfast; and all persons at the ends of yards and closes were appointed to make the same secure after being so required by tuck of drum, under a penalty of £5. All persons, also, who were warned to keep watch by day and night in their own persons were required to do so under a penalty of forty shillings toties quoties. Inhabitants of the town were prohibited from going to Edinburgh until they had informed the bailies of their intention to go there. On the same day a letter from the provost was read, and in reply the clerk was directed to inform him that no commissioner to the parliament—which had been convened to meet in Edinburgh in June, 1605, and had, after several adjournments, been appointed to meet on 1st July, 1606—had been appointed by the council, or was entitled to appear on their behalf, and the provost was exhorted to continue "careful in perfecting the work of their liberty in the parliament." (fn. 58)

As the result, probably, of the action of the provost and the other representatives of the council in London, the king, on 7th July, superscribed the draft of an act, which he remitted to the next session of parliament. This document set forth that the king and the estates, considering that the city of Glasgow, being at the beginning a very mean and simple town, without either traffic or number of inhabitants, was accustomed on the election of its magistrates to demand the assent and approbation of the archbishop thereunto; but that the estate of the city having so far "mendit," as not only to be well peopled and to have great trade and traffic, but also to have, through its commissioners in parliament, general conventions and conventions of burghs, special place and voice as a free city, and to bear taxations, subsidies, and other burdens answerable in proportion with many of the best towns of the realm—very few excepted—there was no reason why the citizens should, in the nomination of their magistrates, acknowledge any subject whatsoever, seeing they were in duty and allegiance immediately under the sovereign, and subject to burden like other cities and burghs. The draft act, therefore, proposed to declare that the city in all time coming should have as free liberty in electing its magistrates yearly at the accustomed times as any other city or burgh within Scotland, and that the approbation, either of its archbishop or any other subject, should not be requisite, and that such elections should stand effectual in all respect without their consent asked or demanded thereto. (fn. 59)

The success which had thus far attended the efforts of the town council to secure municipal freedom appears, however, to have been regarded with dislike by Sir Mathew Stewart of Minto, who, under the duke of Lennox, had held the office of depute bailie of the regality, and with his friends had also long enjoyed a practical monopoly of the municipal offices. With a view therefore to perpetuate the old condition of affairs, they set themselves to foster division in the town by persuading some of the deacons of crafts that the liberty of free election obtained from the king "was nothing else but ane manifest thraldom and tyrannie aganis the craftis, and ane heretable establischeing of offices and jurisdictioun in the personis of ane few members." Accordingly, when the commissioners of the burgh to the parliament in Perth endeavoured to get the royal grant ratified, a number of the Minto faction, including the deacon-convener and the deacons of the cordiners, bakers, weavers, skinners, and fleshers, and several other burgesses, assembled a few days previously in Glasgow, without the authority of the magistrates, and were induced by Sir Mathew Stewart, who was present, to prepare a petition to the lords of the articles to stay the ratification of the liberty. This petition was presented to the lords by John Ross, James Braidwood, and Ninian Anderson, and, in consequence, the ratification was stopped. Such action exposed Sir Mathew and his friends to the penalties prescribed by statute against unlawful assemblies, to avoid which they, by misrepresentation, obtained from the lords of council and session an exemption in their favour from the magistrates' jurisdiction; and afterwards, to the number of three or four score of persons, came to the market cross of the burgh armed with targets, swords, and other weapons, climbed in over the cross, and proclaimed the exemption. The magistrates and council were sitting at the time, and had they intervened to prevent this riotous action would have been exposed to serious personal injury. (fn. 60) They appear, therefore, not to have interfered but to have "bided their time."

Meanwhile, the parliament, to which reference has been made, was held at Perth on 9th July, 1606, by the Earl of Montrose, as the king's commissioner, and was attended by both the archbishops and eight bishops. The most important business of this meeting was to pass acts declaring the king to be superior over all persons and causes; to annul the act of annexation; to restore the estate of the bishops, with all their ancient rights and privileges; and to erect a number of prelacies into temporal lordships. (fn. 61) The latter of these acts set forth that the king, having considered the feuars of the barony of Glasgow to be numerous, and so poor as not to be able to furnish the ordinary charges for renewing their infeftments, had dispensed with the renewal of their feus by such of those feuars as had taken feus without a diminution of the rental and conversion of victual and other duties in silver, and as should obtain a ratification from the archbishop of their feus and rights before the feast of Allhallowmas next to come. Farther, the feus lawfully set to those persons were declared to be valid and effectual,—their heirs, successors, and assignees being always bound to enter with the archbishop as their immediate superior, to their possessions, by brieves raised out of the archbishop's chancellary, precepts of clare constat, resignations and confirmations as use was, and to pay their feu maills, ferms, multures, cains, and other duties, to the archbishop and his successors in all time thereafter. This provision was, however, declared to be without prejudice to the letters of gift and pensions granted to the Duke of Lennox, Sir George, Sir James, and Sir Archibald Erskines furth of the fruits of the archbishopric. (fn. 62)

On 19th July the town council found that a great contempt had been done to it by John Ross, calling himself the common procurator, in proceeding along with Braidwood and Anderson to Perth with the petition to have the ratification by parliament of the king's letter stopped. To prevent similar seditious actings in future, it was accordingly ordained that whoever did the like in future should be declared perjured, and unworthy to bear office, credit, or public charge in the burgh, have his freedom cried down, and never afterwards be admitted freeman. Farther, the council resolved "with all their hearts," and at the hazard of their bodies, goods, and gear, to fortify and maintain the liberties granted to them by the king. For Ross' action in the matter, for his contemptuous behaviour to the provost in Perth, and for his seditious doings against his oath of fidelity, he was deprived of his freedom and discharged of the council and of all other liberty within the burgh. The 23rd of July was also fixed for dealing with the other subscribers of the petition, and the 26th of that month for proceeding against Braidwood and Anderson. (fn. 63) Two days previously, however, viz., on 21st July, the deacons of the tailors, smiths, wrights, mealmen and maltmen, and masons, appeared before the council, and, having referred to the action of those persons who had procured delay in having the liberties of the town ratified, and had seditiously exempted themselves from the jurisdiction and authority of the magistrates—engaged to fortify and defend these liberties with their bodies, goods, and gear, and to concur and assist the magistrates to that effect. (fn. 64)

Perceiving that "this intestine divisioune and fyre amongis themselfis wes like to draw ane great desolation upoun the citie, and being careful to foirsie and prevent all inconvenientis, and to get unto the common multitude contentment and satisfactioun, and to lat thame sie and understand thair awne errour, and how far they had been abused to thair awne prejudice and discredite," (fn. 65) the magistrates appointed a meeting with the dissentient deacons and conveners on 24th July. Sir Walter Stewart and his friends, however, fearing the result, took means to prevent it. This they did by organising a riot on the 22nd of July. The provost then, by the authority of his office, commanded Sir Walter to depart, but he not only did not do so but, with a company of armed men, to the number of about forty, drove the provost and his friends to the Castle Port. Sir Walter was afterwards joined by a number of the town's people, who resumed the attack on the provost, but the earl of Wigton, the master of Montrose, and the laird of Kilsyth, all privy councillors, were there and protected him. These councillors then charged the rioters to disperse, but they speedily returned in increased numbers to the Castle Port with the intention of assaulting the provost, who, however, had sought safety in the house of the earl of Wigton. They would have attacked that house also, but were resisted by the privy councillors at the hazard of their lives. (fn. 66) In consequence of these proceedings the magistrates proceeded to deal with the rioters, and, four days afterwards, security was found for six persons appearing on twenty-four hours warning, to answer to the charge against them, under a penalty of five hundred merks (£25 15s. 6d. sterling), in respect of each person who failed to appear. (fn. 67) The privy council also took action in the matter, and on 31st July, issued a proclamation in which, after referring to the statutes for staying tumults and unlawful meetings and conventions within burghs, it was stated that the privy council were informed of the existence of great trouble and unquietness within the city "by the procurement of a number of factious, seditious, and unquiet spirits within the same," who, not content with living in peace, under obedience to the king and his officers, had raised a faction against the magistrates, and held unlawful conventicles and meetings at their pleasure; had subscribed bonds for disturbing the government and estate of the city; and had even tumultuously and seditiously risen in arms against the magistrates, and had invaded and pursued them of their lives. A charge was accordingly ordered to be given to all the inhabitants to lay aside their armour, to contain themselves in quietness, and to behave themselves as modest, quiet, and peaceable citizens, forbearing to assemble upon any occasion, under any pretext, without the licence of the magistrates so to do, and not to attempt anything prejudicial to the laws, statutes, and constitution of the city. Contraveners of this order, it was intimated, would be punished as factious and seditious persons. In the event of any meetings or conventicles being held without the permission of the magistrates, or of any tumult taking place in the city, "all magistrates within the same" were commanded to assist the magistrates and officers of the city in apprehending the tumultuous persons, and bringing them to punishment, and also to repress the tumults, under pain of being held maintainers of these unlawful meetings, and punished in their persons and goods. (fn. 68) This proclamation, it will be observed, was directed against such persons as, in disregard of the authority of the magistrates, broke the peace of the town on 22nd July; but an act of the privy council, dated 9th August (fn. 69) sets forth that Sir Mathew Stewart of Minto, Sir Walter Stewart his son, and a number of other persons, on the one part, and Sir George Elphinstoun of Blythswood, James and John Elphinstoun his brothers, and a number of accomplices, on the other part, "forgetful of the presence in the city of certain members of the privy council, had assaulted one another, with the effect of disturbing the peace of the city and dividing it into two factions." The provost and his supporters were thus referred to as a "faction" equally with the laird of Minto and his supporters, and both were subjected to imprisonment under the orders of the members of the privy council who were in Glasgow at the time of the riot,—the lairds of Minto, elder and younger, in the castle of Dunbarton, and the provost and James Forret, one of the councillors, in the castle of Glasgow. (fn. 70) How the provost and Forret were thus dealt with as rioters is inexplicable. No doubt in reporting their action to the privy council, its members, who ordered the imprisonment of both the parties, explained that they had done so "for pacifying the trouble and commotioun between them." But their action placed the provost, whose duty it was to suppress disorder in the town, and whom, indeed, they had protected, on the same footing as the rioters. It is all the more peculiar, in respect that on the same day, the privy council, differentiating the action of the parties, set forth that there was a number of "factious, seditious, and unquiet personis within the citie," who, "not contenting thamselffis to live in strict christiane and godly harmony, quhilk becometh peciable and dewtiful citizens," had of late "raisyt a verie grite factioun within the said citie, keepis unlauchful conventicles, assembleis, and meittingis within the same at thair pleasure," had "maid and subscryvit bandis aganis thair magistratis for disturbance of the government and estait of the said city," and in the end "had sa fer proceidit in thair factious and tumultuous behaviour" as to rise in arms against the magistrates and to pursue them to the danger of their lives, disregarding the authority and commandment of some members of the privy council who were present at the time, and by their power and forces withstood the rioters. A number of these rioters were accordingly ordered to enter in ward, some in the burgh of Perth, and others in the burgh of Dundee, all within four days after being so charged, and there to remain till relieved by the privy council, under pain of rebellion. (fn. 71) It is to be noticed, moreover, that a deputation from the town council, consisting of a bailie and two others, was, on 6th August, appointed to attend the privy council and set forth the disturbance. (fn. 72) They, it may be presumed, would represent the interests of the provost and magistrates, yet, in possession of the facts, as is indicated in their own minute of 9th August, the privy council, on the same day, while ordering the lairds of Minto to be transferred from Dumbarton to Stirling, where they were to remain in ward under caution to keep the peace, the senior in £5,000 Scots (£416 13s. 4d. sterling), and the junior in 5,000 merks (£277 15s. 6d. sterling), also ordered the ward of the provost and Forret to be changed from Glasgow to Stirling, under similar caution, the former in 5,000 merks (£277 15s. 6d. sterling), and the latter in £1,000 Scots (£83 6s. 8d. sterling). All these persons were also ordained to appear before the privy council at Stirling, on the 26th of August, to answer to the charges against them, under pain of rebellion. Others of the rioters were charged to enter in ward, some in Perth and some in Dundee, for their factious and seditious conduct. (fn. 73) In consequence of the plague in Stirling, however, the diet was changed to Linlithgow, but the trial actually took place in Edinburgh on the 27th of August. On that day, accordingly, the town council preferred its complaint against Sir Mathew Stewart, his son, and their abettors, when, after hearing the parties, the privy council found the complaint proved; declared the persons complained against "to have committed a verie grit insolence and ryot;" and ordered them to be warded in the burgh of Linlithgow till the king's will was made known concerning them. (fn. 74) Sir Walter Stewart of Arthourlie, the laird of Minto's son, at the same time preferred a complaint against the provost and his supporters for having assaulted him and his friends, but the privy council dismissed the complaint, (fn. 75) and on the following day ordered a proclamation to be made, setting forth that they had, after trial, "found that the magistrates did nothing impertinent to their office," and that the commons "committed a verie great insolence and ryot in the persute of thair provest and lauchful magistrates," for which offence "a grete number quha wer principall actouris in that insolence ar moist justlie and worthilie wairdit quhill farder ordoure be tane anent thair punischement," while "some otheris, upoun hoip of thair amendiment and moir dewtifull behaviour in tyme cuming ar dimittet and send hame." Intimation was further made, at the market cross, that all persons within the city who should commit the like "insolence" in future would be most severely punished, and all and sundry were charged "to reverence, acknawledge, and obey" their magistrates, and attend "each thair awne calling," as they should answer at their highest peril. (fn. 76) The proceedings in connection with the riot were briefly reported to the king in a letter dated Linlithgow, 27th August, (fn. 77) and on 1st October he replied, reflecting on their report as insufficient to enable him to discriminate between the offenders. Nevertheless, he ordered the lairds of Minto, elder and younger, to be retained in ward in Linlithgow till his further pleasure was intimated. Such of the other offenders as were imprisoned there, and could find caution for their future good behaviour and obedience to the magistrates, were to be allowed to return home; but if the return of any of them would occasion discontent in the city, then the privy council were empowered to retain them either as prisoners or within specified bounds, subject to its orders. In a postscript to this command he required that those prisoners who were to be allowed to return home should be taken bound under heavy pecuniary penalties to give due obedience to the magistrates, and that heavy fines (to be reported to him for his approval) should be imposed on the lairds of Minto, who should still be retained in ward. (fn. 78) On 30th August two persons warded in Linlithgow for the disturbances, having made confession of their fault and appealed to the town council, the magistrates were authorised to arrange with the privy council for their relief, it being conditioned that, if liberated, they should appear before the town council and make confession of their fault. Several other persons were dealt with in connection with this disturbance. On 9th September, Archibald Paterson, weaver, was convicted for convening his craft in the high kirk without the sanction of the magistrates and contrary to the tenor of the king's proclamation; on 13th September, James Gillespie, servant to the provost, was made a burgess and freeman for his good service in defending the provost and bailies on the night when they were pursued by the lairds of Minto. John Boyd, mariner, was also made burgess and freeman for his services in pacifying a disturbance made during the absence of the provost, bailies, and council at Linlithgow before the privy council. Similarly, Mathew Cameron, one of the town's officers, was made a burgess and freeman for his good service on the night when the provost, bailies, and council were pursued by the lairds of Minto. (fn. 79) On 11th October a number of persons found caution to behave dutifully thereafter to the magistrates of the city. (fn. 80)

The prevalence of the plague and the necessity of taking precautionary measures to avert or mitigate it induced the town council, on 20th August, 1606, to divide the ports and parts of the town into nine districts, (fn. 81) each to be placed under a bailie and quartermasters, who were required to oversee the ports for fifteen days, and to pass through them every morning; to inquire into every sudden death or sickness; and to visit all ports and yard ends. The quartermasters were also empowered to poind for £5 every person who failed to keep the ports, and to build up the close foots and yard ends, and who broke the statutes made in regard to the pest. The Greyfriars port, the Drygate port, the Rattownraw port, and other entrances were ordered to be closed, and the keys given to some honest man, who would be answerable to open and close them. Each councillor, as warned in turn by the officer, was ordered to set the town's watch at 9 o'clock p.m., two watchmen being placed at the new tower, two at the vennel above the Cross, two to keep the Cross, two at the Stockwell head, and two at the lodge at the Bridgend. Quartermasters who disobeyed the orders of the bailies and neglected the ordinance of the council in inspecting their quarters and ports were subject to a fine of £5, and to have their freedom cried down. The officers of the town were also ordered to give ready obedience to the quartermasters in all things concerning this act, under pain of immediate deprivation of office. It was at the same time ordered that, "during this tyme of great infectioune of the pest in sundrie partes of the countrey," no traveller or cadger coming out of suspected places should be received in the town, and that all persons coming from other places should not be received without a testimonial. Townspeople were also prohibited from going to suspected places or from going to unsuspected places without a testimonial. Such persons as received cadgers contrary to this act were declared to be subject to a penalty of £5, and to be banished from the town. (fn. 82)

At the annual period for electing magistrates, on 30th September, 1606, a letter from the king was presented to the council, in which he required them to defer the election till 3rd November. Meanwhile he continued the provost and bailies then in office. This continuation of office they accepted, without prejudice to their ancient privileges, and in obedience to the king's command. (fn. 83) On 1st October, however, he addressed a letter from Hampton Court to the bailies and council, in which, after referring to the offence which had been given him by the "bygane disorder and ryotte within the citie," and the evidence which it afforded of distraction "in factionis and parteis" among the citizens, one of the greatest causes of which he understood to be "the stryfe and competencye betuix sum persouns for the plaice of the provestrie," he, in order to take away any occasion of misdemeanour in future, required the council to elect Mathew Turnbull, Thomas Muire, and Robert Rowatt to be bailies for the ensuing year. At the same time he mentioned that the archbishop had consented to the election of these persons, and he also intimated that he did not intend to appoint a provost until further advice. (fn. 84) This letter was transmitted to the old bailies and council by the archbishop on 3rd November, when the council by a plurality of votes, deemed it expedient "to be adwysit with his Hienes' lettre quhill the eleventh day of November, incais the same may preiuge thame in ony soirt of thair libertie and privelege grantit to thame be his Majestie of befoir." (fn. 85) They, however, continued in office the magistrates of the previous year till that day. (fn. 86) On 13th November the council again continued the matter till the following day, when they met in presence of the archbishop, and after "reasoning," they, "for establishing a solid order in choosing the magistrates in future," proposed that the leets of the bailies should be presented to the archbishop as of old to the effect that he, out of them, might choose three to be bailies, and that he should propose and present to the bailies and council "twa or thrie of the counsale, that ane of thame may be acceptit to be their provest, or that the bailies and counsale sall propose and present to the archbishop twa or thrie of thair counsal that his lordship may name ane of thame to be thair provest." The archbishop undertook to acquaint the king of this proposal, and till his Majesty's pleasure was known concerning it the bailies of the previous year were continued in office. From this resolution, however, two members of the council dissented till they had advised with the deacons. (fn. 87) On the 28th of the same month the king addressed a letter from Whitehall to Robert Rowat, Mathew Turnbull, and Thomas Muire, in which he declared that, having understood the chief ground of the differences in the city to be a question as to the equality of merchants and craftsmen in the government of the town, he, for removing thereof and reducing the city to quietness, had chosen them to be bailies for the ensuing year. He accordingly required them, as having special interest in the election of the council, to make such election "of the most tried, discreet, and peaceable men of the city," one-half being merchants and the other half craftsmen, according to a rule which he enclosed in his letter. (fn. 88) This document was produced by the archbishop to the town council on 22nd December, when the three persons therein named were elected bailies for the following year, "conforme to the auld use and privilege observit of befoir," without prejudice to the liberty previously granted to the burgh by the king. Leets were also ordained to be put "furthe conforme to thair auld use, without prejudice lykwayis of the act maid quhair the balleis of the present brwck nocht office for twa yeir togidder." (fn. 89)

On 31st October the archbishop granted a charter to the town, by which he ratified a feu right, obtained from the king, of Archibald Lyons' mill on the Kelvin, for payment of the feu duty therein set forth. (fn. 90)

Upon the verdict given against the ministers on 10th January, 1606, (fn. 91) they might have been executed, but the king was anxious to effect an arrangement with the presbyterians of the north, and, with this view, he invited Andrew Melville, his nephew James Melville, and six other influential ministers to London to a conference, to which he also summoned five of the Scottish bishops. These ministers arrived in London in September, and were cordially received by the king and the English prelates. They attended various services, at which four English divines preached on the supremacy of the crown, the rights of the episcopate, and the absence of all authority in scripture and antiquity for the office of lay elders; and they were summoned again and again before the members of the Scottish privy council then in London. When, however, all these proceedings were found to be unavailing in detaching them from Presbyterianism the tactics were changed. Andrew Melville had imprudently written a Latin epigram reflecting upon the practices of the English church, and this was made the ground of proceedings against him before the English privy council, under which he was committed to the tower, and deprived of the principalship of the new college in St. Andrews. He remained in prison for three years, and was then allowed to accept a professorship of divinity at Sedan, where he spent the remainder of his days, dying in 1622. James Melville was ordered to reside, first in Newcastle, and afterwards in Berwick, where he died in April, 1614. (fn. 92) The other ministers who had been condemned in Scotland were transported to France, while those who had attended the assembly were banished to remote districts of Scotland. (fn. 93)

Having thus, as it was believed, crushed the opposition to his schemes in Scotland, the king in the beginning of December caused a royal missive to be sent to the several presbyteries requiring them to appoint specified individuals to meet with various noblemen and others at Linlithgow, on the 10th of that month, to take steps for suppressing popery and removing disagreements from the church. Thirty-three noblemen, barons, and other laymen, and one hundred and thirty-six ministers responded to the call, and the assembly was presided over by the earl of Montrose, as royal commissioner. At this meeting a letter from the king was read, in which he recommended that a perpetual moderator of every presbytery should be appointed, with a salary of £100 Scots; and to appease the alarm which such a proposal was sure to excite, it was suggested that these moderators should have no further power than their predecessors had possessed, and should be subject to the provincial synods. The ministers were, it is said, at first staggered at the proposal, but under the royal influence it was accepted by the convention, which appointed the bishops to be moderators of the presbyteries at their several seats, but under conditions restricting their powers, and subjecting them to censure by synods and the general assembly. (fn. 94) The subserviency of the convention was not, however, reflected throughout the country, and loud murmurs were heard from every quarter. To suppress these, and overawe the dissentients, a royal proclamation was issued requiring each presbytery to accept the perpetual moderatorships and the persons who had been appointed to them; but several of the presbyteries continued their resistance till they were compelled to submit in sullen indignation. Some of the persons appointed to the moderatorships, moreover, declined to accept the office, and even the king and his advisers were obliged to recognise the popular opposition to their action. (fn. 95)

On the 24th of the same month of December the new and old bailies being convened for the election of councillors, the bailies nominated by the king, in obedience to a letter from his Majesty produced by the archbishop, admitted eleven craftsmen and twelve merchants, subject to the declaration that the admission of so many craftsmen should not entitle the crafts to have more members of the council in future than they were in use to have according to custom and acts of parliament. At the same time Thomas Pettigrew was appointed master of works and Alexander Reid treasurer. Against the election of the craftsmen thus appointed dissents were entered by one of the old bailies and by the merchant councillors; while the deacon-convener protested that the election of the bailies and council so appointed should not prejudice the claim of the craftsmen to an "equality of government conforme to thair burding." A letter was afterwards ordered to be written to the king, declaring the council's obedience to his command, and earnestly desiring him to perfect their liberties. (fn. 96) Five days later James Braidwood was appointed deacon-convener and James Lychtbodie visitor, and on 3rd January, 1607, Archibald Faulis was elected dean of guild. (fn. 97) Two months later the council —convened in the presence of the archbishop, of principal Patrick Sharpe and the city ministers, to give answer to the king's letter as to the election of the bailies—resolved, while giving obedience to it, to declare that they could not find any security in the grant which it made, nor could they agree among themselves as to the "accepting and using thereof." They were, therefore, willing to pass from the grant and to be content with their ancient form of election, except to this extent, that whereas it was previously the custom for the archbishop to appoint the provost at his pleasure, it was now desired that two burgesses, councillors, should be nominated by the archbishop, of whom the council might select one. As regarded the bailies they were content that the election should be made as heretofore. To these resolutions the archbishop replied that he could only urge the council to obey the king's letter, and would not do anything without his Majesty's consent. Personally, however, he would be pleased to accede to their desire if it were agreeable to both the king and the duke of Lennox that a burgess should be elected provost, with the consent of the archbishop and the council. Till the king's pleasure could be ascertained, however, the bailies then in office should, under their commission from the council, continue to exercise their office. As to the arrangements thus come to, two of the deacons reserved their decision till they had consulted their brethren of the crafts. (fn. 98)

On 2nd May, 1607, the council considering that ships and boats from England and Ireland, the Highlands and other parts, came frequently with victual within the liberty of the Clyde, and with a view to secure that such traffic might accrue to the profit of the freemen and neighbours, and not be applied to the private use or profit of any one man, ordained that victual so brought within the river should be first taken to the Broomielaw and sold for the use of all the freemen and neighbours in one or more bolls; or otherwise to any one freemen, subject, however, to the obligation on him to give a part to such freemen as desired to have it before or at delivery. Such victual was also ordered to be measured at the Broomielaw, and to remain there for twenty-four hours after being purchased. The buyer was also appointed to be answerable for the custom of the ladle in respect of his purchase. All persons were also prohibited, under a penalty of £20, from buying any kind of hides, skins, plaiding, or tallow, brought to the town for sale until the articles had been first cellared. (fn. 99)

On the 26th of the same month, Thomas Pettigrew was continued master of works, and Alexander Pollok was elected treasurer, both for the ensuing year. (fn. 100)

In August of this year a parliament was held at Edinburgh, and the duke of Lennox sat as royal commissioner. Among the acts which it passed were one against the sayers and hearers of mass, (fn. 101) and another empowering the archbishop of St. Andrews to constitute a chapter. (fn. 102) This latter act, according to Balfour, practically gave a similar power to all bishops, and, "indeed, was the werey restitutioun of bischopes anent form of chapters." (fn. 103)

A letter from the king as to the privilege of the archbishop in regard to the election of the magistrates, dated at Greenwich, 3rd June, 1607, was submitted by a messenger from the archbishop to the council on 11th July, but its consideration was delayed till the archbishop could be present. He attended accordingly on 19th September, when, after deliberation, the council agreed, in obedience to the letter, and for the avoiding of future tumult, that the provost and bailies should in future be nominated by the archbishop according to the old custom, and that he should be acknowledged in all his privileges in relation to the election of these magistrates. (fn. 104) Following upon this arrangement the archbishop, on 6th October, appeared in the council along with the duke of Lennox—who had been previously in the council on 20th August—and, by writing, nominated John Houston of Houston to be provost for the ensuing year. (fn. 105) This nomination the council forthwith accepted, and Houston gave his oath of fidelity to the king and the archbishop. Leets for the bailies were then presented to the archbishop, who nominated Mathew Turnbull, James Inglis, and James Braidwood to be bailies, and they ratified the arrangement under which, in 1605, the unlaws and "bluidwytes" which belonged to the provost and bailies were applied to the common use of the burgh, and specially for forming the "calsayis." Protestations were afterwards made by the dean of guild and Braidwood that the changes made in the election should not prejudice the rights of the merchants or craftsmen, and then the council was elected. It consisted of twelve of the merchant class and eleven of the craft class. George Huchesoun was appointed common procurator, Thomas Pettigrew master of works, and Alexander Pollok treasurer. (fn. 106) Four days afterwards Ninian Anderson, cordiner, was elected deacon-convener, James Lichtbodie visitor, and William Symmer dean of guild. (fn. 107)

On 13th May, 1608, the king addressed a letter to the Scottish privy council, in which, after reflecting on the "small regard" they had to his orders to confine such noblemen as were "suspect of religion," and their too great readiness, on every light cause, to grant liberty to those that were confined, he commanded them, among other things, to confine William, tenth earl of Angus, within the city of Glasgow, there to remain till the king's special license to leave had been received. (fn. 108) This order the privy council obeyed on 21st May. (fn. 109) But the earl's ward appears not to have been very strict, for on 6th September he addressed a letter from Glasgow to the laird of Polwarth, in which he requested the laird to get him "tarsell of falcon or goss halk to slea partrikis [partridges] to help me to pas my malincolius houris heir in ward." (fn. 110) Having subsequently had the option given him of imprisonment at home or exile, he went to France. (fn. 111)

On the 17th of the same month John Alexander, merchant, was elected treasurer, and Thomas Pettigrew master of works, for the ensuing year. (fn. 112)

On the 24th of May the king, by his charter under the great seal, granted to archbishop Spottiswood, in life-rent, the archbishopric of Glasgow and benefice of the same, with lands, churches, patronages of benefices, &c., and with the privileges of regality within all the bounds of the same, as these had been resigned by the archbishop; as also the parsonage and vicarage of the parish church and parish of Glasgow, with manses, teinds, &c., which Mr. David Wemyss, parson and vicar of the same, had resigned with the consent of the dean and chapter of Glasgow. Moreover the king, for the service rendered to him by the archbishop in private and public transactions, gave these several subjects to him of new, with the patronage of the churches, parsonages and vicarages of Ancrum, Ashkirk, Stobo and Eddilstoun, Kilbryde, and Torrens; and suppressed the parsonage and vicarage of Glasgow, uniting the same indissolubly to the archbishopric. (fn. 113)

In the following June, the town council having been charged to assist in the preparation for a contemplated raid to the Isles, and to furnish vessels and boats, with victuals and drink, to the army, on the 15th of that month appointed James Inglis, bailie, and George Huchesoun to proceed to Edinburgh and negotiate with the chancellor for the substitution of a money payment. They were also directed to advise with the archbishop on the subject. At the same time, however, they arranged with the owners of a vessel to prepare it for furnishing the army with victuals and drink, salt, and other necessaries. (fn. 114) But these owners afterwards failed to fulfil their engagement, and on 2nd July were ordered to be warded in the castle. (fn. 115) On 27th June the council agreed, apparently under arrangement with lord Ochiltree, the commander of the expedition, to furnish twenty hagbutters to the force, under the command of John Sterling, deacon of the hammermen. Each soldier was appointed to have £15 per month during his service and the captain £40. (fn. 116) Towards meeting the expenses of the expedition it was arranged on 2nd July to impose a stent on the inhabitants of £500. (fn. 117) On the 29th of the same month, the number of men to be contributed to the expedition was increased to twenty-five, and the bailies were directed to provide them with hagbuts and flassis. (fn. 118) This they were authorised to do by the simple process of borrowing these instruments, and also bandoleers from all such persons within the town as had them, and of taking them from such owners as refused to lend them. (fn. 119) Subsequent acts of council on 3rd and 4th August set forth how the articles so obtained were distributed and payments were made to members of the expeditionary force. (fn. 120) A payment of £16 10s. for powder and lead supplied to the men appears in the treasurer's account for the year to Whitsunday, 1609. (fn. 121) On 22nd October a further taxation of £600 was ordered to be levied to pay the Glasgow contingent and "transporting of them afeild and hameward." At the same time James Stirling, its commander, appeared and produced a testimonial by lord Ochiltree, setting forth the fidelity and efficiency of his service. This writing was accepted as sufficient warrant for Stirling's exoneration, and was appointed to be preserved. (fn. 122) On 31st December the council granted Stirling a burgess fine "of his awn seiking to be admittit quhen he is offirt." (fn. 123)

The condition of Glasgow bridge and of the Clyde was such at this time as to induce the council on 30th June, 1608, to appoint James Inglis, bailie, to attend the convention of burghs to be held at Selkirk in the following month, and apply for assistance towards the repair of the bridge and the cleansing of the river, and also to seek license to let the common good for relief of the town's debt. (fn. 124) On 5th July, accordingly, he made the requisite application to the convention, and Glasgow, Dumbarton, and Renfrew were ordered to prepare and submit to the next parliament an article providing for the cleansing of the river, and the punishment of such persons as polluted it by throwing into it carion "buckeis" and other filth hurtful to the fishing. (fn. 125) This was reported by Inglis to the town council on 16th July, when, in consideration of the immediate necessity for preserving the bridge, a bulwark or butress was ordered to be built before the farthest pillar save one of the structure, and the most skilful masons were ordered to be employed on the work. (fn. 126)

At the same convention a letter from the king was presented by Sir John Drummond of Hawthornden, in which be required that special attention should be given to several matters specified in his instructions to Sir John, who was commanded to report the result to his Majestie. These had reference to the provision of inns in every burgh and to the distinguishing of them by signs; to the cleansing of the streets; and to the attire of women. To these requirements dutiful replies were made, (fn. 127) and on the return of Inglis to Glasgow, he reported the king's letter and instructions and the orders of the convention in regard to them, whereupon the council prohibited the laying of any kind of fulzie on the "foregait" or any part of the burgh, under a penalty of £5; and further ordered all fulzie which was lying on the "gait and closes" to be removed within fifteen days, under the like penalty and escheat of the fulzie. The owners of such swine as were allowed to go loose within the burgh or the burgh roods, or did injury to neighbours, were made liable to a penalty of £10, and the swine were ordered to be escheated to the common use. Watered lint was also prohibited to be dried or handled on the streets under a similar penalty. (fn. 128)

On the 26th July, 1608, a general assembly—to which James Inglis had been appointed commissioner for Glasgow (fn. 129) —was held at Linlithgow, and the earl of Dunbar attended as royal commissioner. The bishop of Orkney was elected moderator, and showed much zeal in the suppression of popery. (fn. 130) The proceedings of this assembly were reported to the king on 10th September by a deputation from it; and a letter from his Majesty, dated 2nd October, ordered proclamation to be made of his approval, and his concurrence in the assembly's action in decreeing vigorous measures against Roman Catholicism in Scotland. (fn. 131)

On 9th August James Tennent of Linhouse appeared before the town council and explained that the archbishop was so engaged in public service to the king as to be unable to attend at Michaelmas to nominate bailies for the following year. He therefore requested that after the leets had been chosen the nomination of the bailies should be delayed till his return. This request was agreed to by the council, and the magistrates then in office were continued till the archbishop nominated others, it being declared that the liberty of the town in future should not thereby be prejudiced. (fn. 132)

The re-appearance of the plague in Perth, Dundee, Kinghorn, and Burntisland, induced the council on 5th September, to prohibit persons from these places being received in Glasgow without the permission of the magistrates, or Glasgow persons from going to these places without a similar license. The Stablegreen port, the Stockwellhead, the Gallowgate port, and the Bridgend, were also ordered to be kept night and day. (fn. 133) This prohibition was renewed on 29th October, (fn. 134) and, on 28th September, an act was passed against "insolent and prophain persons" who walked at night on the streets "abusing themselves and the neighbours." This act prohibited all persons from walking on the streets after ten o'clock and the ringing of the ten hours' bells, under a penalty of £10 and imprisonment at the discretion of the magistrates. (fn. 135)

On 4th October, leets for the bailies were prepared, but the election of these officers was postponed till the "hamecuming" of the archbishop, and John Houston, then provost, with the three existing bailies, were continued in their respective offices till the archbishop's return. (fn. 136) On the 12th of the following month a letter from the archbishop was produced, recommending the re-election of Houston as provost, and he was elected accordingly. (fn. 137) Afterwards the provost and bailies continued the then existing council in office till the election of bailies on the nomination of the archbishop was duly made. (fn. 138) On 26th November George Muir was appointed dean of guild, Ninian Anderson deacon-convener, and James Fisher visitor, all for the following year. (fn. 139) The archbishop having returned to Glasgow, the council, on 9th December, appointed a deputation to present to him the leets for the bailies, (fn. 140) and on 13th December he nominated Mathew Turnbull, James Inglis, and James Braidwood, who were accordingly duly elected. (fn. 141) Four days later the provost and bailies elected twenty-five persons to be the council for the following year. (fn. 142)

On 10th December the ports of the town being reported to be greatly hurt, the master of works was appointed to have them repaired immediately; and they were ordered to be shut from 10 p.m. to 4 o'clock, a.m. (fn. 143)

The collection of the ancient laws of Scotland, known as the Regiam Majestatem, was, by the act 1607, c. 16, authorised to be prepared by Sir John Skene of Curriehill, clerk of register, and printed for behoof of the kingdom; and for defraying the cost, a commission was appointed to allocate the expense and charge the various contributories for their respective proportions. (fn. 144) The work was published in 1609, and the proportion of the cost applicable to Glasgow was £100. Having been charged to pay this amount, the town council resolved, on 25th February of that year, to borrow the amount till it could be provided for by a stent on the inhabitants. (fn. 145)

On 29th December, 1608, the archbishop granted a tack to James Master of Blantyre during his lifetime and that of his heir male, and thereafter for the space of twice nineteen years to the heir male of the longest liver of these two, of the teind sheaves and other teinds of the parsonage of Glasgow, together with the teind herring and other teind fish of the water of Clyde, belonging to the vicarage thereof, for an annual rent of three hundred merks Scots. The lessees became bound to relieve the archbishop of the repair of kirks and other impositions, and be to relieve them of the minister's stipend and the furnishing of the elements of bread and wine for the communion, in consideration of receiving fifteen chalders of victual then reserved to him out of the teind sheaves of the burgh acres, St. Tenewis croft, Broomielaw croft, Paleowne croft, Ramshorn, Meadowflat, Swanisyett, Crubbis, Deanside, Provandside, Langcroft, Dowhill, Eaglesham croft, Cropnestock, Kincleyth, Heucroft, Roundcroft, certain yards adjacent to the city, Partick Mylne, and Garroch. (fn. 146) This tack was assigned by Alexander, lord Blantyre, to the magistrates and council on 21st February, 1648.

Footnotes

1 Neal's History of the Puritans, I., pp. 414-419. Calderwood, VI., pp. 241-246.
2 Cunningham, I., p. 460. Burton, V., pp. 430, 431.
3 Gardiner's History of England, I., p. 178.
4 1604, c. 1. Acts of the Parliament of Scotland, IV., p. 264.
5 1604, c. 2. Ibid.
6 Convention Records, II., pp. 182, 183.
7 Convention Records, II., pp. 184, 186.
8 The Scotch duplicate of this document is preserved in the General Register House, and a facsimile of it, with all its signatures, is given in the third volume of the National Manuscripts of Scotland issued by the Lord Clerk Register.
9 Burton, V., p. 407.
10 Council Records, I., p. 241.
11 Stuart's Genealogical History of the Stewarts, p. 263.
12 Balfour's Annals, II., p. 1.
13 Ibid., p. 5.
14 Council Records, I., p. 227.
15 Ibid., I., p. 229.
16 Ibid., I., p. 231.
17 Ibid., I., p. 231.
18 Council Records, I., p. 232.
19 Reference to these officers is made in Acts of Council, dated 4th and 13th July, 1605. Council Records, I., p. 228, and M.S. Council Records.
20 Antea, p. lvi. Abstract of Charters, No. 306. After the abstract was printed off, the original Seal of Cause of 1516 was discovered in the repositories of the Trades' House.
21 Original in the Archives of the Skinners' Incorporation. Annals of the Skinners' Craft in Glasgow, 1875, p. 119. Abstract of Charters, No. 446, p. 48.
22 M'Ure's History of Glasgow, pp. 161, 162. Gibson's History, pp. 334, 335: View of the Merchants' House, pp. 55, 56.
23 M'Ure, p.163. Gibson, p. 336. View, p. 57.
24 Ibid., p. 166. Ibid., p. 338. Ibid., p. 59. Curiously enough, though merchant guilds existed in Scotland as early as the reign of William the Lion, and one of his statutes, passed in 1209, ordained the merchants of the realm to have their guild, with liberty to buy and sell in all places within the bounds of the liberties of burghs, the merchants of Glasgow seem, down to this period, to have possessed no definite constitution. That they were influential, and had a recognised place in municipal administration; that they claimed rights which were resisted by the craftsmen; and that their mutual jealousies and disputes divided the townsmen of the ancient city, is obvious. But the merchant class does not seem to have possessed, either by statute or by seal of cause, a definite constitution and rights such as were long previously enjoyed by the various classes of craftsmen in the city. Acts of Parliament in 1424, 1427, 1457, 1473, 1485, 1489, 1493, 1496, 1551, and 1555, referred to and regulated the different classes of craftsmen in Scotland, and Queen Mary and James VI. granted letters under the great seal or privy seal conferring privileges upon them. It was not till 1584 that the latter sovereign— acting as oversman in a reference between the merchants and craftsmen of Edinburgh—issued a decree arbitral which adjusted their respective interests, and gave the craftsmen a recognised right to have a voice in the election of magistrates, in the management of the property and patronage of the burgh, and in voting extents and contributions. A similar adjustment of like questions in Glasgow was not, however, effected till 1605, though about ten years after the date of the king's Edinburgh decree arbitral the Convention of Burghs tried to effect the establishment of a guild court there on the model of that in the capital. The power and jurisdiction of dean of guild courts in burghs, as these were used in Edinburgh, were recognised by statute on 21st July, 1593, and the judgment of the dean and his council in all actions concerning merchandice was appointed "to have full strenth and effect in all tyme, according to the lovable forme of jugement usit in all the guid townis of France and Flanderis, quhair bourses ar erected and constitute, and speciallie in Paris, Rowen, Burdeaux, and Rochelle" [1593, c. 38. Acts of Parliament, IV., 30]. Other burghs also seem to have established similar courts, and, on 1st July, 1595, the convention of burghs ordered a missive to be sent to the town council of Glasgow, setting forth that the whole burghs were not a little offended that Glasgow did not conform itself to the comely action of other burghs by having a dean of guild, and electing guild brethren. The council were, therefore,
25 Confirmed (1) by Act of Parliament on 11th September, 1672 [c. 129; Acts of Parliament, VIII., 186], and (2) by Charter under the great seal, granted by William and Mary, dated 4th January, 1690 [MS. Register of Great Seal], and ratified by the Act 1690, c. 18 [Acts of Parliament, IX., p. 153].
26 M'Ure's History, p. 193. Gibson's History, p. 359. View of Merchants' House, p. 84.
27 The original of this award disappeared long ago, and it is a curious circumstance that not only the minute book of the town council, in which the letter is said to have been recorded, but also the minute books of both the Merchants' House and Trades' House for the same period, have disappeared. In the minute book of the Incorporation of Bonnetmakers and Dyers, however, there is what bears to be a transcript of the document engrossed at the time, and it is given in the appendix. See also M'Ure's History of Glasgow, p. 192. Gibson's History, p. 359. View of the Merchants' House, p. 84.
28 Antea, p. lxiii. Abstract of Charters, No. 313, p. 14.
29 Original in the Archives of the Incorporation of Weavers. Abstract of Charters, No. 449, p. 51.
30 Original Obligation in the Archives of the City. Abstract of Charters, No. 450, p. 52. Wemyss died on 10th September, 1615; Scott on 18th January, 1629; and Bell on 25th March, 1641. Fasti Ecclesiæ Scoticanæ, Part III., 3, 4, 10.
31 Original in the Archives of the City. Abstract of Charters, No. 452, p. 52.
32 Calderwood, VI., pp. 264–268.
33 Calderwood, VI., p. 282.
34 While the ministers were in prison, the English Parliament was appointed to meet on the 5th of November, 1605, but the Gunpowder Plot was discovered previous to the meeting. [Gardiner's History of England, I., ch. 6. Balfour's Annals, II., pp. 11–13.
35 Calderwood, VI., 342–391. Spottiswood, III., 161-163].
36 See pp. lvii., lix.
37 Original in the possession of the Andersonian University.
38 Abstract of Charters, Nos. 406, 456, 457, 458, and 459, pp. 53-55.
39 Council Records, I., p. 230.
40 Ibid., I., pp. 231, 232.
41 Council Records, 1., p. 242.
42 Inventure of Writs and Evidents (1696), p. 3, A1 b. No. 10. Privy Council Register, VII., p. 141. Charters and Documents relating to the City, Part II., p. 269, No. LXXXIX.
43 Council Records, I., pp. 234, 235.
44 Ibid., I., p. 235.
45 Ibid., I., pp. 235, 236.
46 Council Records, I., p. 236.
47 Ibid., I., p. 239.
48 Council Records, I., pp. 240–2.
49 Ibid., I., pp. 240–2.
50 Ibid.
51 Ibid., I., p. 241.
52 George Hume, the second son of Alexander Hume of Manderston, was a great favourite of king James. He was first made a gentlem an of the bedchamber, then master of the wardrobe, and, after being knighted, was appointed lord high treasurer on 5th September, 1601. Accompanying the king to England, he became one of his most trusted favourites, and was sworn of the English privy council. On 7th July, 1604, he was raised to the English peerage by the title of lord Hume of Berwick. On 3rd July, 1605, he was created earl of Dunbar in Scotland, and was appointed chancellor of the English exchequer —retaining at the same time the lord treasurership of Scotland. The earl largely
53 Council Records, I., p. 244.
54 Ibid., I., 245. It was doubtless to meet this expense that the provost, bailies, treasurer, and council granted an obligation, dated 7th June, 1606, to Mathew Trumble, one of the bailies, for £400 Scots (£33 6s. 8d. sterling), which he had borrowed in name of the council from John Buchanan, servitor to the king, "for outredding our commoun effaires coummitted to our commissioneris direct to his Majestie for liberties in London." By this deed the granters undertook to repay the sum borrowed at Whitsunday, 1607, but it was not repaid till 15th February, 1612. The obligation was recorded in the Books of Council and Session on 2nd June, 1607. Original in the Archives of the City.
55 Council Records, I., 245.
56 Council Records, I., p. 247.
57 Ibid., I., p. 248.
58 Council Records, I., p. 249. Among the lords of the articles appointed on the 3rd of July, James Forret is entered as commissioner for Glasgow. Acts of Parliament, IV., p. 280.
59 Glasgow Charters, No. XC., p. 271.
60 Privy Council Register, VII., pp. 240, 243.
61 1606, c. 1 and 2. Acts of Parliament, IV., pp. 281–4.
62 Privy Council Register, VII., p. 284.
63 Council Records, I., pp. 249, 250.
64 Council Records, I., p. 250.
65 Privy Council Register, VII., p. 213.
66 Ibid., VII., pp. 241, 246.
67 Council Records, p. 251.
68 Privy Council Register, VII., pp. 230, 231.
69 Ibid., VII., p. 234.
70 Privy Council Register, VII., p. 233.
71 Privy Council Register, VII., pp. 234, 235.
72 Council Records, I., p. 221.
73 Privy Council Register, VII., pp. 233– 235.
74 Privy Council Register, VII., p. 247.
75 Ibid.
76 Privy Council Register, VII., pp. 249, 250.
77 Ibid., VII., p. 500.
78 Privy Council Register, VII., p. 501.
79 Council Records, I., p. 253.
80 Ibid., I., pp. 253, 254.
81 Privy Council Register, VII., pp. 657, 658.
82 Council Records, I., pp. 251, 242. These were as follows:—(1) Drygate, Rattownraw, and Stablegreen and Kirk ports; (2) frae the Wyndheid to the Blakfreiris; (3) frae the Blakfreiris to the Croce; (4) the Galowgait; (5) the Trongait; (6) the Saltmarket; (7) the Brigait; (8) the Stokwell, St. Tenuis gait to the Wast port; and (9) the thrie Wyndis.
83 Council Records, I., pp. 251, 252.
84 Ibid., I., p. 255.
85 Original in Archives of City.
86 In a letter from the archbishop to the king narrating the negotiations which took place between him and the council in reference to the election, he states that the interval between the date at which the king's letter was received by the council, on 3rd November and the 11th, when it was to be considered, was spent by parties, who are not indicated, "in animating the burgesses against the directions" of the letter, "wherein some of the factions so prevailed, that in the morning of that 11th day it was noised that all the people of the city would meet at the Tolbooth, and oppose themselves by taking protestations in contrair of the letter. Certain, also, were put out to warn me (the archbishop) that it was not expedient I should come to the Council, because, in opposition there might fall out some things that might not be so easily redressed. Suspecting the counsel that was given me, I answered that as I had delivered your letter, so I would not cease to urge the obedience thereof; and if any man would be unruly I would be patient; therefore I would keep the place to bear witness of any man's doing. This heard, they resolved not to meet at all; and when I was come to the Tolbooth, abiding there from ten to twelve, none appeared. Certain of the ministers of the town, the principal of the college, and some other gentlemen were with me, in whose presence I took documents in the hands of three notars, of this their refusal, witnessed by their wilful absence, and certified that I would advertise your Highness. The conscience of their misbehaviour and fear of complaining, drew them to intercede with me in the evening, by their pastors, that I would not be hasty to advertise; promising, at my desire, to conveen the next day and give a reverend answer, which they did, taking the course that your Majesty will perceive in their act of council, subscribed by the clerk of the town and three ministers as witnesses. The crafts that had not place to meet with them in council convened apart also, professing their obedience, with an humble acknowledgment of your Majesty's favours unto those of their number that were detained in ward, and desiring the elec
87 Council Records, I., p. 256.
88 Council Records, I., pp. 256, 257.
89 Council Records, I., p. 256. View of the Merchants' House, p. 86.
90 Council Records, I., pp. 257, 258.
91 Original in archives of the city. Antea, p. cxlvii.
92 Antea, pp. ccxxi., ccxxii.
93 Calderwood, VI., pp. 559–591. Melville's Diary (Wodrow Society Edition), pp. 644, et seq. Spottiswood, III., 176–183. M'Crie's Life of Melville, 254–265; 272–285; 313–331; 332–339.
94 Book of the Universal Kirk, pp. 567–574. Calderwood, VI., pp. 601–627. Row's History, pp. 241, 242. Spottiswood, III., pp. 185–189. Grub, II., p. 209. Balfour, II., pp. 17, 18. Cunningham, I., pp. 471, 472.
95 Spottiswood, III., pp. 188, 189.
96 Council Records, I., pp. 258, 259.
97 Council Records, I., p. 260.
98 Council Records, I., pp. 261, 262.
99 Ibid., I., p. 263.
100 Council Records, p. 265.
101 1607, c. 2, Acts of Parliament, IV., p. 371.
102 Ibid., c. 3, p. 372.
103 Balfour, II., pp. 21, 22.
104 Council Records, I., pp. 268, 269.
105 Council Records, I., p. 270.
106 Ibid., I., pp. 270, 271.
107 Ibid., I., p. 272.
108 Privy Council Register, VIII., pp. 505, 506.
109 Ibid., p. 94.
110 Marchmont Muniments. Historical MSS. Com., 14th report, App., part III., p. 107.
111 4 Privy Council Register, VIII., p. xxxii. It is somewhat curious to find the king complaining to the convention of burghs at Selkirk, on 7th July, 1608–through Sir Robert Dennelstoun, conservator of Scottish privileges in the Low Countries, who attended that convention—of the coldness of the burghs in not reporting to his Majesty the frequent resort of Papists and Jesuits to this country. In consequence the burghs gave the king great thanks "for that he hes sic memorie of walkening them of thair cauldness," and praying him "to hald hand to the debarring of the saidis papistis furth of the realm," and to urge the executive officers of the crown to more vigilant care to do their duty in that respect. [Convention Records, II., pp. 260, 261.]
112 Council Records, I., p. 280.
113 Great Seal Register, 1593–1608, p. 761, No. 2084.
114 Council Records, I., p. 282.
115 Ibid., I., p. 285.
116 Ibid., I., p. 283.
117 Council Records, I., p. 284.
118 Flassis: possibly frames on which to rest the hagbuts. Ibid., I., pp. 286–7.
119 Council Records, I., p. 287.
120 Ibid., I., p. 287.
121 Council Records, I., p. 476.
122 Ibid., I., p. 294.
123 Ibid., I., p. 297.
124 Council Records, I., p. 284.
125 Convention Records, II., p. 251.
126 Council Records, I. p. 286.
127 Convention Records, II., pp. 252, 255.
128 Council Records, I., pp. 285–6.
129 Council Records, I., p. 286.
130 Calderwood, VI., pp. 751, 774. Row, pp. 249, 252. Spottiswood, III., pp. 193, 197. Grub, II., p.291. Cunningham, I., pp. 472, 474.
131 Privy Council Register, VIII., p. 172.
132 Council Records, I., pp. 287, 288.
133 Ibid., I., p. 288.
134 Council Records, I., p. 295.
135 Ibid., I., p. 292.
136 Ibid., I., p. 293.
137 M'Ure states that Houston died in 1609, and was the last country gentleman who was provost of the city [p. 249].
138 Council Records, I., p. 295.
139 Ibid., I., p. 296.
140 Ibid., I., p. 296.
141 Ibid., I., p. 296–7.
142 Ibid., I., p. 297.
143 Ibid., I., p. 296.
144 Acts of Parliament, IV., pp. 378, 379.
145 Balfour's Annals, II., p. 20. Council Records, I., p. 300. The history of this compilation is given fully by Mr. Cosmo Innes in his preface to the Lord Clerk Register's edition of the Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, I., pp. 25, 28.
146 Original in the Archives of the City. Abstract of Charters, p. 62, No. 489.