Historical preface: 1588-99

Pages cxlv-clxxxiv

Charters and Documents Relating To the City of Glasgow 1175-1649 Part 1. Originally published by Scottish Burgh Records Society, Glasgow, 1897.

This free content was digitised by double rekeying. All rights reserved.



The council records for the period between 27th April, 1586, and 22nd October, 1588, are awanting, and there is no record of the election of the provost and magistrates in October, 1586, and in October, 1587, nor any information as to how the stirring national events which took place during that period affected the burgh. Doubtless, however, the strong presbyterian sympathies of the citizens led them to approve of the friendly attitude which the king assumed towards Elizabeth, an attitude which enabled her to concentrate all the energies of her kingdom in organising resistance to the meditated invasion by Spain, the preparations for which were being actively pushed forward by Philip. By the middle of April, 1588, he had concentrated a force of 60,000 men in the Low Countries, with ships sufficient for the transport across the channel of the invading force under the command of the Prince of Parma; and a month later the armada, known as the "invincible armada," sailed from the Tagus to meet at Calais the expedition from the Low Countries, but was driven back by foul weather. On 20th July, however, the armada—containing an army of about 20,000 men—was descried off the Devonshire coast on its way to Calais, which it reached on 27th July, followed and harassed by the English fleet under Howard, Drake, Hawkins, and Frobisher. But the coasts of Holland were blockaded by the Dutch fleet, and Parma's transports were unable to get out. This encouraged the English. admirals to operate on the armada by means of fire-ships, and the Spaniards were compelled to put to sea. There they were subjected to incessant attack by the English fleet, and suffered greatly also from storms which compelled them to abandon their plan of invasion and to attempt to return to Spain by passing round the north of Scotland. Meanwhile, in view of the invasion, Elizabeth sent an ambassador to Scotland to crave the aid of 10,000 men, (fn. 1) and on 5th August proclamation of the imminent danger was made at Edinburgh. The lieges were also required to be in readiness to rise, to have beacons or bale-fires provided on the tops of hills for signalling purposes, and to hold weaponshawings in town and country. (fn. 2) In the North Sea the armada sustained great loss on the coast of Norway and in rounding the north of Scotland. Misfortune followed them along the west of Scotland and on the Irish coast in September, and only a crushed and broken remnant of the mighty expedition succeeded in effecting its return to Spain. So ended the enterprise of Philip, who, had it succeeded, would have claimed the crown of England as the catholic heir of Mary Stuart.

On 22nd October, 1588, Sir Mathew Stewart of Mynto was elected provost, and James Fleming, Robert Rowat, and James Stewart were appointed bailies for the ensuing year, (fn. 3) and their efforts seem to have been anxiously directed to the adoption of precautions against the pest which raged in Paisley and the districts in the vicinity of the city.

On 20th May, 1588, Walter, commendator of Blantyre, as "lord feu farmer of the barony and lordship," granted a document titled "a Rental," setting forth that the town was rentalled in the mill on the water of Kelvin, with the houses, yards, dam, and water, in place of Archibald Lyon, who, as rentaller of the archbishop, had, on 22nd January, 1577–8, conveyed these subjects to the town. (fn. 4) But this rental right was, on 9th November, 1588, converted into a feu holding by a charter granted by the commendator, as "lord feu farmer," to the magistrates and council, for the annual payment as feu-duty of the four merks previously paid as rent, with the addition of twelve pennies Scots. (fn. 5) On this charter the town was infeft on 20th March, 1588–9. (fn. 6) After the king attained majority, he confirmed the commendator's rights by a charter, dated 26th August, 1591; (fn. 7) and, in order that the town might receive the benefit of that confirmation, the commendator, on 17th November of the same year, granted a second feu charter ratifying that of 1588. (fn. 8) On this second charter the town was infeft on 18th December, 1591. (fn. 9)

Subsequently the commendator granted a charter whereby he resigned the superiority of the mill in the hands of the king, who, on 2nd January, 1595–6, granted a charter to the town confirming its rights. The effect of these deeds was that the town held its property of the king as superior, and became liable to the crown for payment of the feu-duty. Neither the charter of resignation nor the confirmation by the king are among the city's titles, but a ratification of the confirmation by the Archbishop, on 31st October, 1606, is still preserved. (fn. 10)

On 28th December, 1588, the town council, with a view "to the decoration of the town," resolved to transfer, with all convenient speed, the West Port, then ruinous and about to be repaired, to the Stockwell head, and to include "the haill rew and houses betwix and thair within the town." (fn. 11)

Notwithstanding the failure of the projected invasion of England by the king of Spain, the popish earls of Huntly, Errol, Crawfurd, and others, entered into renewed negotiations with Spain and Rome, from which large sums of money were received to aid in furthering an intended rebellion. Letters were, however, intercepted by Burleigh, which disclosed their intentions, and these letters were forwarded to the king, who, while he imprisoned Huntly for a time, gave little credence to them till the whole of the north of Scotland was on the eve of revolt. Then, when the magnitude of the plot revealed itself, the king acted with a degree of decision and courage wholly unusual. Supported by the protestant nobles, an army was hastily summoned, and, with the king at its head, pushed on by Perth, Brechin, and Dundee, to Aberdeen. Huntly surrendered himself prisoner; Slaines, the principal castle of the Earl of Errol, was taken and garrisoned; the other leaders of the rebellion submitted; and the earl of Bothwell surrendered, and was imprisoned. (fn. 12) The leaders of the kirk clamoured for the death of the papists, but, though Huntly, Crawfurd, and Bothwell were convicted of treason, they all escaped with imprisonment. In connection with this expedition, which extended over the months of April and May, 1589, Glasgow was called on to supply contingents to the royal service. On 12th April, the council, being requisitioned to provide sixty hagbutters, found that they could not, without "grit hurt," raise so many. They, however, resolved to provide forty, with their commanders, and appointed a tax of £500 to be raised for equipping the contingent. (fn. 13) Three days later another royal charge was sent from Dundee, but, on the 19th, the council found that it was met by the arrangement previously made. (fn. 14) The Glasgow contingent would appear to have returned previous to the 10th of May, on which day the town council met to consider how the men might be remunerated for their services, which had been commended by the king. The council accordingly resolved that the contingent should be paid one hundred merks, in addition to the daily wage of ten shillings, to each of the men composing it. William Stewart and Thomas Pettigrew, the two commanders, were appointed to be also "gratefeit according to the provest and baillies discretioun." (fn. 15) This gratification to these officers took the form, on 3rd June, of "thrie burges fynes of thair awin findyng out, besydis thair ordinar wage and daylie allouance sett doun to thame." (fn. 16)

Subsequently the town, along with other burghs, appears to have been charged "to pas fordward to the north to await upon his majesties service thair," and the magistrates and council, considering that the king was then at Hamilton, on 21st June, 1589, appointed a deputation to go there and see the king and the chancellor, with a view to obtain a license to "abyd fra this present raid." (fn. 17)

After the Reformation the cathedral seems to have been allowed to fall into decay, and an act of the town council, of date 21st August, 1574, refers to its then ruinous condition by reason of the removal of the lead, slates, "and other graith thereof," and states that this "greit monument" will utterly fall down and decay unless some remedy were provided. Accordingly, while declaring that the repair and maintenance of the building formed no charge on the town, the council imposed a tax of £200 for this purpose, (fn. 18) and on 27th May in the following year, they admitted a slater to be a burgess and freeman in consideration of the "labours done be him to the hie kirk." (fn. 19) Seven years later, viz., on 10th December, 1581, "the ruin and decay" of the building occupied the attention of the dean of faculty and principal of the college and other members of the kirk, who represented the matter to the town council, (fn. 20) and on 27th February, 1582–3, they considered repair to be necessary, but repudiated legal liability. (fn. 21) An application for assistance appears to have then been made to the convention of burghs, which at that time, and long afterwards, was in the practice of making grants in aid of public works in the several burghs. The application was before it on 18th June, 1583, (fn. 22) but was continued till the next convention, and no farther reference to the subject occurs in its records. On 29th May, 1589, however, the necessity for having repairs on the building executed was again under the consideration of the council, and on 26th July they had before them a complaint on the subject by the ministers, elders, deacons, and others of the kirk session. The bailies then present offered to provide the whole of a taxation of 1,500 merks, and for their own part 600 merks, provided the parishioners outside the burgh and parsonage would provide 900 merks. They also offered that if the parsonage and parishioners outside the burgh would give the council security for payment of the 900 merks within six months after the repair was commenced, the council would undertake and complete the work. This offer was confirmed by the town council, and the commendator attended the meeting on the same day and engaged to contribute 400 merks towards the cost of the repair. (fn. 23) Of the sum to be advanced by the town for this purpose, 400 merks were appointed on 8th August to be borrowed, and to be repaid out of the first proceeds of the taxation. (fn. 24)

It has been seen that in July, 1587, parliament passed an act of pacification and restitution, which applied, among others, to archbishop Beaton and the bishops of Ross and Dunblane. But after the suppression of the rebellion in the north the feeling of the king and his advisers seems to have changed, for on 29th May, 1589, the privy council passed an act, by which, considering "how it has bene maist prudentlie and wyslie providit, be divers actis of parliament and secreit counsaill respective, that na maner of persone sustenand the processis of foirfaltrie, barratrie, or excommunicatioun for nocht professing of his majesties obedience, and geving the confessioun of thair faith, in his minoritie, suld be ressavit agane to his majesties obedience or enjoy ony benefitt within this realme, quhill thair lauchfull relaxatioun and absolutioun fra the saidis sentenceis, and acknaulegeing of his majesties obedience, his authoritie, and trew religioun, publictlie professit and be law establissit within this realme, and how that, notwithstanding of the saidis actis, the bischoppis of Glasgu (James Beaton), Ros (John Leslie), and Dunblane (William Chisholm), and divers utheris personis aganis quhome the sentenceis of foirfaltour, barratrie, or excommunicatioun hes bene led, hes obtenit certane pretendit retreitingis of the saidis sentenceis, at the leist dispensationis of the nocht geving of the confessioun of thair faith, be ressoun of thair absence furth of the cuntrey, ordining thame to be answerit of thair levingis in the meantyme, and the lordis of sessioun to proceid and minister justice in all thair caussis, nochtwithstanding the nocht geving of thair saidis confessionis, quhilk hes bred na small inconvenient and trouble amangis the legis of the countrey sensyne, to the grite greiff of his majestie, and disquieting of the present estate and trew religioun: For remeid quhairof" the king, with advice of his privy council, ordained these acts of parliament to stand effectual in all time coming as well against the three bishops as against all other persons against whom such sentences of forfeiture, barratry, or excommunication had been led; and all dispensations or other indulgences obtained by these persons contrary to the tenor of these acts, for not giving confession of their faith during their absence, were simpliciter discharged. (fn. 25)

In 1585 a good deal of negotiation had taken place as to the marriage of king James with the eldest daughter of Frederick II., king of Denmark; but James had shown so much coolness in the matter, that the princess had been assigned to the duke of Brunswick. Negotiations were, however, resumed with the Danish court in 1588 for the hand of the princess Anne—then fifteen years of age—second daughter of the king; (fn. 26) and Frederick having died and been succeeded by his son Christian IV., George Keith, earl Marischall, was, in June, 1589, despatched as ambassador-extraordinary, with a noble retinue, to the then king, to complete the marriage by proxy. The marriage was accordingly so solemnised on 20th August, and preparations were immediately made for bringing the queen to Scotland. But after sailing, the ship in which she was, with the attendant fleet, was driven back by severe storms; and on the 10th of October a messenger from Denmark arrived in Scotland to explain the delay, which was causing the royal bridegroom intense anxiety. The king—then in his twenty-fourth year—thereupon resolved to proceed to Norway, where the queen's fleet had taken refuge, and bring her home himself. In preparation for that journey and the absence of the king, which was estimated to extend over three weeks, the duke of Lennox was appointed president of the council, and arrangements for the continual presence of sections of that body in the capital were made. (fn. 27) The king sailed from Leith on 22nd October, accompanied by the chancellor, Maitland, and a retinue of 300 barons and gentlemen. On 19th November he reached the Norwegian town of Opsloe—now known as Christiania, the modern capital—and on Sunday, the 24th of that month, he was "married in proper person" to Anne, by his own chaplain, Mr. David Lindsay, minister of Leith, who had accompanied him. At the suggestion of the Danish council, the return of the king and his bride to Scotland was postponed till the winter was past; and on the invitation of the Danish queen-mother and king Christian, they, on 22nd December, left Opsloe for Denmark, and by easy stages reached Kronburg castle, where they were received on 21st January, 1589–90. There they were royally entertained, and after being present at the marriage, in April, of the queen's eldest sister to the Duke of Brunswick, (fn. 28) they, accompanied by a Scottish fleet which had arrived to bring them home, (fn. 29) sailed from Denmark on the 1st of May, and arrived in Leith on the 1st of July, where they were received with great rejoicings. Proceeding to Holyrood on the 6th, the queen was crowned in the Abbey Church there on the 17th of that month. (fn. 30)

Till about 1588 the protestant churches of Scotland and England had preserved most amicable relations with each other, and that amity had extended to the other protestant churches of Europe. But, in that year, Dr. Bancroft, afterwards successively bishop of London and archbishop of Canterbury, preached a sermon before the English parliament at St. Paul's Cross, in which he not only asserted the divine right of episcopacy, but attacked the Scottish presbyterian church. This attack, which neither queen Elizabeth nor the king did anything to counteract, and was aggravated by subsequent aggressive publications, gave great offence in Scotland, and laid the foundation of permanent disturbance of the harmony which had previously existed between the two churches. (fn. 31)

On 30th September, 1589, the commendator, as lord feuar of the lordship and regality, "haifand power to nominat the prouest, conform to his infeftment," nominated the right honourable Sir Mathew Stewart of Mynto, knight, to that office, and he was appointed accordingly. On the same day also, leets for the bailies were submitted to the lord feuar, who selected William Cuningham, Robert Rowat, and James Stewart, and they were duly elected to that office. On 2nd October, James Flemyng and twenty-one other persons were appointed councillors for the following year. (fn. 32)

In the light of existing conditions, it is curious to find Glasgow and Dunbarton entering into an agreement, which is set forth in a formal indenture dated at Renfrew, 9th October, 1590, concerning "the using, keeping, and observing of the privileges and freedoms granted in all time bygone to these towns by the king and his progenitors, anent all merchandise of ships coming in at the west sea in the water of Clyde, and other waters or lochs." By that deed it is agreed that when such ships or vessels came from foreign countries into the Clyde, or any other waters or lochs, the bailies of Dunbarton should, at the expense of Glasgow, immediately advise its magistrates and community of the arrival of such merchandise, and, after such advice, they should appoint certain merchants to proceed with all haste to Dunbarton "to commune and advise of the said merchandice, and the availls of the samyne." The magistrates of Dunbarton were then to select certain merchants to pass with those from Glasgow "for the buying of the said merchandice to the commoune weillfare and availl" of Glasgow and Dunbarton, and to share equally in all profits of such merchandise, and in paying the costs of the same. The magistrates of both burghs also engaged to defend the rights and freedoms of each whenever it might be necessary to do so; and if any question should arise between them in regard to the buying and paying for such merchandise, or the breaking of the privileges and freedoms of either place, it was agreed that six discreet persons of each burgh should meet within Renfrew for "reformatioun of the said faltis and punishing of the brekers and discord makers." The breaking by either burgh of the arrangement then come to subjected the breaker to a payment of £100 Scots, £40 of which was appointed to be paid to the king, £20 to the kirk work of the Laigh Kirk (fn. 33) of Glasgow, and £40 to the community which did not break the agreement. (fn. 34)

A general assembly of the church, which met on 21st May, 1592, resolved to take action to secure a repeal of the statutes of 1584 regarding discipline and the ratification of the liberties of the church, and the time was opportune, for the country was distracted by the turbulent conduct of the earl of Bothwell, and the suspicions entertained regarding the murder of the young earl of Murray had made the king unpopular. James was naturally anxious to strengthen his government, and he and his advisers doubtless thought that this object would be secured by making concessions to the demands of the leaders of the church. Accordingly, when parliament assembled at Edinburgh on the 5th of the following month, acts were passed which ratified (1) the liberties of the kirk, as declared in the acts 1579, c. 6, 7; 1581, c. 1, etc.; (2) the government of the kirk by general assemblies, provincial synods, presbyteries, and kirk sessions—the duties of each of which were set forth; and (3) the jurisdiction and discipline of the kirk as agreed on by the king in conference with certain of the ministry. It also repealed all acts in favour of the papistical kirk and prejudicial to the liberty of the true kirk; declared that the act 1584, c. 2, confirming the royal power, should not derogate from the privileges of spiritual office-bearers concerning matters of religion; repealed the act 1584, c. 20, granting commission to bishops to receive presentations and to collate to benefices, and transferred the power to presbyteries. (fn. 35) "This settlement," says Dr. M'Crie, "was not without its defects," to which he alludes, but the act, which still continues to be the charter of Scotland's liberties, has always been regarded by Presbyterians in an important light, and as a great step in national reformation. It repealed several statutes which were favourable to superstition, and hostile to the independence of the kingdom. It reduced the prerogative of the Crown, which had lately been raised to an exorbitant height; and, by legally securing the religious privileges of the nation against arbitrary encroachments, it pointed out the propriety and practicability of providing similar securities in behalf of political rights. It gave the friends of the Presbyterian constitution the advantage of occupying legal ground, and enabled them, during a series of years, to oppose a successful resistance to the efforts of the court to obtrude on them an opposite system. And as often as the nation felt disposed to throw off the imposed yoke of Episcopacy, they appealed to this charter, and founded upon it a "claim of right" "to the recovery of their ancient liberties." (fn. 36) Principal Cunningham, referring to this act, says, "It was tantamount to the entire subversion of the Episcopal polity, and the re-establishment of the National Church upon a Presbyterian basis. It is frequently spoken of as the Magna Charts of the Church. . . The act of annexation, however, was not repealed, and all hope of the Church recovering its lost lands was gone." (fn. 37) Alluding to the ample terms in which the privileges of the church were ratified by this act, Dr. Grubb points out the incompleteness of the church's triumph:—"The Book of Discipline itself was not alluded to, and its provisions, as a whole, remained destitute of parliamentary sanction; the civil rights of the bishops and other prelates continued as before; and the law regarding the patronage of ecclesiastical benefices was expressly confirmed." (fn. 38)

At the convention of burghs held in Kirkcaldy on 15th June, 1592, the commissioner for Lanark complained that Glasgow uplifted from its neighbours a ladleful of each load of victual, and a handful of each weight of wool, or a fleece of each pack. Glasgow was appointed to answer this complaint at the next general convention, (fn. 39) and, at the following convention held at Dysart on 12th June, 1593, the consideration of the complaint was resumed, and both burghs appeared by their respective commissioners. Glasgow denied "the uptaking of the said fleice," and consented to a decerniture accordingly, but the other parts of the complaint were continued till the next convention. (fn. 40) On 28th June, 1594, accordingly, the case was again considered by the convention at Stirling, when the commissioners for Glasgow produced a decree by the Court of Session, finding that the burgh was entitled to take a ladleful of each load of victual. The convention accordingly assoilzied Glasgow from that part of the complaint, and remitted to proof the allegation of the commissioner for Glasgow that the burgh had been in use beyond memory to uplift, without question, the handful of wool. (fn. 41) Portions of the minutes of the subsequent convention are destroyed, and no reference to the subject appears in what remains.

On 10th May, 1593, the town council acquired from Donald Cuningham of Aikinbar, and his wife, at the price of two hundred merks, the chapel and house called St. Mungo's chapel, with the kirk-yard and pertinents, situated beyond the Gallowgate bridge, in order that it might be converted into an hospital for the poor. (fn. 42)

On 21st July, 1593, an act of parliament was passed, by which all infeftments granted, or which might be granted, by the king, containing the gift and disposition of the right of any patronage, advocation, and donation of benefice, should be of no avail. But he was empowered to except from this act, inter alia, the infeftments granted "to Walter, prior of Blantyre, keipar of the privie seal, in favor and to the behuif of Ludouik, duke of Lennox, &c., of the aduocatioun, donatioun, and richt of patronage of all and sindrie kirkis, personages, and vicarages belanging and pertaining to the archebishoipric of Glasgow." (fn. 43) On the same day also an act was passed in favour of the duke, (fn. 44) by which, on the narrative that the greatest number of the vassals, free tenants, and heritable feuars of the temporal lands belonging to the archbishopric, were of so mean rent and quality that they were not able to bear the expense of resignations into the hands of the king and entries thereto from the chancelry, and that, in consequence, many of the feuars were unable to obtain entries into their lands, the duke was vested during his lifetime in the right of superiority of the whole temporal lands and rights of the archbishopric, and he and his commissioners were empowered during his lifetime to receive all resignations to be made by the heritable tenants, vassals, or feuars of these temporal lands, and to grant to them, or their heirs and successors, entries to the lands, which should be as valid to the receivers as if granted by the king or his chancellor, notwithstanding the act of annexation of all ecclesiastical lands to the crown by the act 1587, c. 8. (fn. 45) The effect of this statute is not very clear, but, as far as can be ascertained, the rights conferred by it on the duke did not encroach on those of the commendator of Blantyre. In virtue of it the duke probably drew the feu-duty payable by the commendator to the crown, and also the casaulties payable by such vassals as obtained charters from him instead of from the crown.

On 19th February, 1593–4, four years after her marriage, the queen gave birth, in Stirling castle, to a son, (fn. 46) who was named Frederick Henry, and active preparations were forthwith made to celebrate the baptism of the young prince and heir apparent with befitting splendour. Invitations to be represented at the ceremony were transmitted by special envoys, or by the ambassadors at the several courts, to the queen of England, the king of France, the estates of Flanders, the dukes of Brunswick and Mecklenberg, and other high dignitaries. Those portions of the king's marriage tocher of £100,000 which had been lent to Edinburgh, Perth, Dundee, St. Andrews, Glasgow, and other burghs, and to private individuals, were called up to provide suitable furnishings on the occasion, (fn. 47) and the burgh of Stirling was required by formal proclamation to entertain suitably the foreign ambassadors and others who were to attend the ceremony, which took place, after several postponements, on 4th September, 1594. (fn. 48) The baptism was celebrated by David Cunninghame, bishop of Aberdeen, a circumstance which, Dr. M'Crie observes, "may be viewed as indicating that the court had altered its intentions as to the government of the church, and already meditated the gradual restoration of the episcopal order." (fn. 49)

On 8th June, 1594, the parliament, which met at Edinburgh on the 30th of the previous month, passed an act by which, on the narrative that various rents and commodities which had been gifted to chaplains and priests serving in the New Kirk of the college of Glasgow, had, after the reformation, been gifted to the magistrates and community of the city for the purpose of being employed in hospitality and the uses of piety; that the magistrates, for the advancement of literature, had gifted the subjects so granted to them to certain bursaries founded within the college, "to be haldin at the scuill thereunto, and that of the purest of the town quha vtherwayes had nocht the moyen to remane at the scuilles;" but that such had been the abuse in times past, that the sons of the richest men of the town had been sustained on the rents of these subjects, and not those for whom the grant was intended. The magistrates and council being, therefore, desirous that the endowment should be applied to better objects, had diverted it from the entertainment of bursars and applied it to the support of the ministry within the city. This application the king, with the advice of the states, ratified and ordained to have effect in all time coming. (fn. 50) It would accordingly appear that, under the changes introduced by the magistrates and council, and ratified by parliament, part of the revenues given to the college in 1572–3 was resumed, and the grant then made was revoked to that extent. The accounts of the city for some years after 1594 are awanting, but the account for 1607–8 shows that the "haill annuelles of the New Kirk" collected for that year, and handed over to John Bell, minister, amounted to £250 Scots. (fn. 51)

It has been seen that, in virtue of a commission issued by parliament on 16th March, 1566–7, (fn. 52) the salt market of Glasgow was placed above the Wyndhead. But this situation seems to have proved unsuitable, by reason of its distance from the bridge and river, "quhair the salt is maist vsit," and the expense to which the merchants and fishers who bought the fish were put in carrying the salt from the Wyndhead to the bridge, upwards of a. mile. Moreover, it appeared that the sellers of the salt, for the same reason, removed to the site of the old market, near the bridge. This condition of matters seems to have led to a representation being made to the commissioners by freemen resident above the Greyfriar Wynd, and to have been favourably considered. The representation, indeed, states that the commissioners had been "myndit" to place the bear and malt market above the Wyndhead, instead of the salt market, if the commission had not been terminated by the decease of lord Boyd, who died on 3rd January, 1589. Accordingly, on 8th June, 1594, a commission was granted to Walter, prior of Blantyre, Robert Boyd of Badinhaith, David Forsyth of Dykes, the ordinary ministers of the city, and the provost and bailies—or the most part of them —to remove the bear and malt market to a position above the Wyndhead, and also to remove the salt market to its old position, and generally to do what might be necessary for the execution of the latter commission. (fn. 53)

The council records from 31st July, 1590, to 5th October, 1594, are amissing, but on the latter date the lord feuar appointed Sir Mathew Stewart of Mynto to be provost, and, from a leet of eight submitted to him by the council, nominated Robert Chirnside, William Cuningham, James Stewart, and Robert Rowatt, the four old bailies of the previous year, to be bailies for the year to come, and they were elected accordingly. On the same day twenty-eight councillors were appointed. (fn. 54)

On 19th October, 1594, the council resolved to divide the town into four quarters, each being assigned to a bailie, whose duty it was to see to the statutes of the town being enforced within it. (fn. 55)

On 20th March, 1594–5, the king, by letter, after narrating the act 1567, c. 14 and 17, (fn. 56) for repressing the vice of fornication, and prescribing the punishment to be inflicted, and referring to the prevalence of the vice within the city and parish, constituted the provost, bailies, and session of the kirk of the city and parish, judges in that part to all persons accused or suspected of the vice committed or to be committed within the city and parish. And the judges so appointed were empowered to levy the fines specified in the act from all persons convicted of the offence, and to apply the same, at their discretion, to pious uses, viz., to the poor of the city or other indigent persons, or otherwise to such other common works of the city as they might think most expedient. (fn. 57)

The first reference in the records of the burgh to the establishment of a night-watch is dated 22nd March, 1594–5. It ordains that, for staunching of night-walkers "misvseand the towne," a watch of eight persons nightly should be established, two at the Wyndhead, two at the Blackfriars, two at the Cross, and two at the Nether Barresyett. They were required to go up and down the streets, and apprehend night-walkers and bring them to the tolbooth. One of the town's officers was appointed to accompany the watch, and the bailie of each quarter was empowered to appoint a master of the watch within his quarter. Failure to attend the watch after summons subjected the absentee to twenty shillings of unlaw, which was appointed to be paid the master of the watch and his company on the night of the failure. The watch thus appointed was authorised to search suspected houses, and, if necessary, to break open doors. The watchmen were required to be sufficiently armed, and were allowed either to go in company or singly as they considered best, and to be on duty from 9 p.m. till 3 a.m., or such longer period as might be determined. Failure on the part of a watchman to obey the master of the watch subjected him to an unlaw of twenty shillings, which was bestowed on the company. (fn. 58)

At a general assembly held in Edinburgh on 7th May, 1594, vigorous measures were adopted for the suppression of popery, and on the 30th of the same month, parliament, which also assembled there, passed acts with the same object, and commissioned the earl of Argyle, then young and inexperienced in warfare, to pursue the catholic lords with fire and sword. In the beginning of October he proceeded to the north to execute this commission, but was met and defeated at Glenlivet, on 4th October, by the earls of Huntly and Errol. The king himself had previously gone forward to Dundee, where he was joined by Argyle, and he afterwards advanced to Aberdeen. In this expedition James practically crushed the disaffected lords, and destroyed both Huntly's castle of Strathbogie and Errol's castle of Slanes. These lords left the country in March, 1595, and their adherents were heavily fined.

On 18th June, 1595, William Fleming appeared before the town council, and produced a feu charter by the provost, bailies, and council to Sir John Stewart of Mynto, of a portion of the commonty, described as extending to the Balgray dykes on the north, to the great hill [probably Garngadhill] on the south, the high gait to the Bishopsbriggs on the west, and to the little common moss on the east. (fn. 59)

On 30th September, 1595, a leet for the bailies was prepared to be submitted to the commendator of Blantyre, as lord feuar, with a view to his nominating three, that being considered a sufficient number. On 3rd October he appointed his relative, Sir Mathew Stewart, to be provost; and on the same day the leet for the bailies was presented to him, with a request that he might select three, and it was protested that, if he nominated more, such nomination should not prejudice the liberty of the town. The commendator answered that he considered it to be as necessary to have four bailies that year as in the two previous years; but he promised not to "prejuge thair libertie in ony yeir to cum, bot efter reasoning sa mony as aucht to be electit in tyme cumyng at the optione of the provest, bailies, and counsale." He thereafter nominated William Cuningham, Hector Stewart, John Anderson, and Thomas Muir to be bailies, and they were appointed accordingly. (fn. 60) On 8th October twenty-five persons were elected councillors, with the addition, as "extraordineris," of John Bornes, treasurer, and Thomas Glen, master of work. (fn. 61) On the 8th of the following month it was resolved to renew the watching of the town, and a bailie and two town officers were assigned to each of four specified districts. (fn. 62)

By a charter, dated 2nd January, 1595–6, granted by the king, under his privy seal, in which it is narrated that the rights to certain lands belonging to the archbishopric had been resigned in his hands by the commendator (fn. 63) and the duke of Lennox, he confirmed to the magistrates of Glasgow the mill, known as Archibald Lyon's mill, on the Kelvin; to George Hutcheson the lands of Lambhill; to Thomas Hill, son of Sir James Hill, parson of Erskine, a part of the lands of Ibrox; and to certain other feuars of the archbishopric various feu-rights granted to them. (fn. 64)

On the 5th October, 1596, (fn. 65) the council resolved to request the duke of Lennox to nominate only three bailies for the following year, because a fourth bailie had been elected for the two previous years "for extraordinar caussis." A leet of eight was then prepared, and was presented on the 13th to the duke, "having power by the king's grace to the nominatioun of the bailleis." He was first, however, asked to nominate the provost, and he appointed Sir Mathew Stewart of Mynto to the office. He afterwards selected William Cuningham, Hector Steuart, and Robert Rowatt, to be bailies, and they were accordingly elected. Two days later twenty-seven persons were elected councillors. The document authorising the duke to make these nominations, which had previously been made by the commendator of Blantyre, is not recorded in either the great seal register or privy seal register, and cannot now be traced. At the previous election, as has been seen, the commendator nominated the magistrates, but in the interim he had been appointed lord high treasurer, (fn. 66) and it is possible that; in the interchange of offices, the administration of the regality had devolved on the duke of Lennox. It will afterwards be seen that, on 17th November, 1600, the duke got a formal grant of the right of electing the magistrates, and of exercising jurisdiction over the temporalities of the archbishopric; while on 7th April, 1603, he obtained a charter of the lordship of Glasgow.

On a report by certain commissioners that a creek in Little Comray would be a sufficient harbour for ships and other vessels for the town of Irvine, and that the cost of repairing and completing it would amount to £4,773 6s. 8d., the privy council, on 29th July, 1596, found that not only the inhabitants of Irvine, but of all the counties adjacent thereto, would be accommodated by the harbour. The council and community of Irvine were accordingly empowered, for a period of five years, to levy an impost on all sorts of merchandise, therein specified, entering or passing furth of the ports of Ayr, Glasgow, and Dunbarton, or passing up and down "the saidis watteris or ony parte to and fra the samin townis and watteris, or betwix the saidis townis, alsweill the hielands as laulandis." (fn. 67)

The general assembly again met in Edinburgh on 24th March, 1595–6, and was attended by the king in person. Its attention was prominently directed to the prevailing corruption of all the estates, and the laxities of the court itself were strongly criticised. At this meeting, moreover, the king was urged to authorise the minister and kirk session of every parish to organise military musters, and he deemed it expedient to conciliate the kirk by promising to devise a scheme under which every congregation should have a minister, and every minister a stipend. (fn. 68) Exulting over the position which the kirk had thus attained, Calderwood says she had "come to her perfection and the greatest purity that ever she attained unto, both in doctrine and discipline, so that her beauty was admirable to foreign nations. The assemblies of the saints were never so glorious nor profitable to every one of the true members thereof." (fn. 69) In the letter of the law, says Burton, they had gained everything. Their presbyterian polity and discipline were established by act of parliament; their supremacy in things spiritual was admitted; the state became their servant, bound to enforce their decrees by denouncing their contumacious subjects as felons, and driving them beyond the pale and protection of the law. Lastly, the extent of their authority—the boundary line at which the spiritual ended and the secular began—was a matter for their own settling; at least they would certainly have allowed no other hand to draw such a line. It was not in human nature that they should not find occasion to try the practical strength of this nominal power. (fn. 70) The opportunity for doing so speedily presented itself. On 12th August (1596) a convention of the estates met at Falkland, and a petition was presented to it by the popish earls praying to be allowed to return to Scotland. This application roused the hostility of the kirk, and negotiations took place between the court and the ministers to endeavour to arrange terms on which the consent of the kirk might be obtained, with the result that, after a stormy meeting, it was agreed that, if the kirk and king were satisfied, it was best to recall the lords. (fn. 71) They accordingly returned to Scotland under an arrangement that they should be allowed to remain till May of the following year, in the hope that by that time they would be reconciled to the kirk. (fn. 72)

Meanwhile new complications between the king and the clergy were originated through the action of one of the ministers of St. Andrews, named David Black, who, in October, delivered a philippic against both the king and Queen Elizabeth in terms so outrageous as to lead the English ambassador to make a formal complaint to the king. Black was accordingly summoned before the privy council on 18th November, but, acting on the advice of the commission of the church then sitting in Edinburgh, he declined its jurisdiction, and claimed to be subject only to the ecclesiastical courts. (fn. 73) The privy council, nevertheless, proceeded with his trial, and, on 2nd December, found the crimes charged in the libel, and proved against him, to be treasonable and seditious, and ordered him to enter himself in ward, and to remain there during the king's pleasure. (fn. 74) Against this sentence the ministers protested, a fast was proclaimed, and the king was denounced as a persecutor. This action the king resented. The ecclesiastical commissioners were banished from Edinburgh, (fn. 75) and twenty-four burgesses who supported the ministers were ordered to leave the town within twenty-four hours. (fn. 76) Walter Balcanquhal, one of the ministers of the city, thereupon convened a meeting to determine a course of action, and that meeting, held on 17th December, appointed a deputation to submit its grievances to the king. He was at the time in the upper Tolbooth engaged with the privy council, and, after a stormy interview with the deputation, he retreated to the room in the lower Tolbooth, (fn. 77) in which the judges were holding courts, and after a time was able to pass down the Canongate to the palace. (fn. 78) This outrage exasperated the king. He proceeded next morning to Linlithgow, having previously issued a proclamation forbidding the courts of law to sit in Edinburgh, and appointing them to be ready to remove to such other place as he might appoint. (fn. 79) Two days afterwards, viz., on the 22nd, he issued a declaration that the tumult was an act of treason, and that the perpetrators were guilty of that crime, (fn. 80) and at the same time he seems to have contemplated the removal from Edinburgh of the judicatories of the country, for the lord treasurer addressed a communication to the magistrates of Glasgow, enquiring "what offer and conditions the town would make to the king in case he could be moved to transfer the session and college of justice to the city." The magistrates and council, however, unanimously agreed, on 24th December, to represent that they were not able to give any money contribution, but offered their services, and appointed two commissioners to ride to Linlithgow or Stirling with the town's answer. (fn. 81) On 23rd December certain ministers and inhabitants of Edinburgh, having failed to appear before the privy council on that day, were ordered to be denounced rebels, and their property was escheated, (fn. 82) and this was followed by the arrest of some of the offenders who had not taken flight. The king also refused to accept the submission of a deputation of the inhabitants who waited upon him; (fn. 83) and the aspect of affairs became so threatening that the citizens were anxious to make peace with him on any terms. The king seized the opportunity thus afforded of repressing the turbulence of the church, and asserting his authority. Returning to Leith on the 31st, he issued thence a proclamation of his intention to enter the city on the following day, and ordered some of the nobles to take measures for guarding it during his stay. (fn. 84) On 1st January, 1596–7, he accordingly entered the city as a conqueror, and was received by the magistrates on bended knees, and, with protestations of innocence, they offered to do their utmost to discover and punish the insurgents. After a religious service in the High Kirk, the king denounced the action of the ministers. Conventions of the estates were afterwards held at Holyrood, and of new the rioters were pronounced to be guilty of treason; the king was vested with power to interdict ministers from preaching, or church courts from meeting, when he saw cause; the houses of the Edinburgh clergy were taken from them and bestowed upon the crown; and the magistrates of the city were held bound either to produce the originators of the riot, or to enter their own persons in ward by the 1st of February. "By this show of firmness," adds Dr. Cuningham, "both the church and the city were completely overawed." (fn. 85)

The complete success with which the high-handed action of the ministers was defeated by the king, and their supporters were humiliated and crushed, enabled him to make advances towards the realisation of a scheme for introducing into the church an episcopal system of polity. The observation of Tacitus, quoted by Spottiswoode in regard to these events, that "every conspiracy of the subject which fails advances the sovereign," was fully verified. Summoning a meeting of the general assembly at Perth for the 28th of February, 1596–7, he prepared and circulated a paper containing fiftyfive queries in regard to points of church discipline, and these, with the answers to them from synods, presbyteries, and individual ministers, were submitted to the assembly, which was attended by an unusual number of members from the central and northern districts of the country. These members, on their arrival, were graciously received by the king, and prepared by the courtiers to resist the ultra-presbyterianism of Fife and the Lothians. Declaring itself, after keen debate, to be a lawful extraordinary General Assembly, entitled to determine all ecclesiastical matters brought before it, the assembly ultimately resolved, as stated by Dr. Cunningham, that it was lawful for his majesty to propose to the general assembly any matter affecting the external government of the church which he might wish to see discussed or reformed; that no minister was to reprove the king's laws till he had first sought a remedy through the church courts; that no man's name was to be mentioned in pulpit rebukes unless his sin was notorious, and notoriety was defined to consist in the person being fugitive, convicted by an assize, excommunicated, or contumacious; that every summons issued by the church courts was to mention the cause and the crime; that ministers were not to hold any meetings beyond the ordinary sessions, presbyteries, and synods; and that in all the principal towns the ministers were to be chosen with the consent of the congregation and the king. Thereafter the assembly appointed a committee to deal with the popish earls with a view to their being received by the church, and petitioned the king to extend indulgence to the fugitive ministers and to the city of Edinburgh. (fn. 86) Following up the advantages thus secured, another meeting of assembly was summoned at Dundee for 10th May. It also was largely attended by ministers from the north, and enacted that the royal sanction to the acts of all future assemblies was necessary; that all ministers should be set apart to their work by the imposition of hands; that all church courts should keep regular accounts of their proceedings, which should be subject to the supervision of the superior courts; that presbyteries should only interfere with matters purely ecclesiastical; that every person interested in matters forming the subject of processes in ecclesiastical courts should be entitled to extracts of such processes; and that summary excommunication should be suspended till regulations in regard to it were made. The king also appeared in person, and—after expressing his desire that provision should be made for the establishment of churches and ministers, with proper provision for their support in every district—suggested the appointment of commissioners to confer with him as to these and other matters affecting the interest of the kirk. A commission embracing the names of a number of the strongest ministers was thereupon appointed. (fn. 87) This commission, which was stigmatised by James Melville and Calderwood, formed, according to Dr. Cunningham, "a kind of college of presbyter-cardinals, out of which the future bishops were to be chosen; and as every man began to look for promotion, he began to be subservient." (fn. 88) As the result of conference between members of the commission and the popish earls the latter abjured popery, acknowledged the reformed church of Scotland to be the true church, and were received into its communion at Aberdeen on 25th June. In little more than five months afterwards parliament assembled in Edinburgh, and by its first act, on 16th December, reduced the forfeitures of the earls thus received into the church, (fn. 89) and, on the application of the commissioners appointed by the assembly, passed an act declaring that such pastors and ministers as at any time the king should please to provide to the office, place, title, and dignity of a bishop, abbot, or other prelate, should at all time thereafter have vote in parliament in the same way and as freely as any ecclesiastical prelate had ever had. But it was declared that whatever bishoprics were then in the king's hands undisposed of, or might afterwards become vacant, should be conferred only on actual preachers and ministers in the kirk, or on such other persons as should be found apt and qualified to exercise the office and functions of ministers and preachers, and should undertake to perform its duties. (fn. 90) All that now remained to be done was to have this enactment accepted by the church itself. A general assembly was accordingly summoned to meet at Dundee on the first Tuesday of March, 1598, and after it had sat for a week the enactment came up for consideration. The king himself was present and took part in the discussions. Bruce, Davidson, James Melville, and other leading ministers strongly opposed it, but when the vote was taken the assembly, by a majority of ten, adopted a resolution to the effect that "it was necessary and expedient for the welfare of the church, that the ministry, as the third estate of the realm, in name of the church, have a vote in parliament," that the number should be the same as in the time of popery, and that the election of these should belong partly to the king and partly to the church. (fn. 91)

The records of the town council between 29th May, 1597, and 21st November, 1598, are unfortunately awanting.

On 29th October, 1597, the bonnet-makers of the burgh received a seal of cause, by which they were authorised to elect annually on 22nd September a deacon, who should have power to appoint masters to examine all bonnets, wylicoats, (fn. 92) woollen socks or hose, &c., made or brought into the town for sale, and to punish insufficient work by a fine of twenty shillings, which was applicable to the support of poor decayed brethren and common charges. Admission of the sons of strangers or unfreemen was prohibited until they became freemen; paid an upset of £5; and provided a banquet and "assay" drink, at a cost not exceeding £5. Freemen's sons or sons-in-law had to pay thirty shillings of upset, with a banquet and drink as above. Freemen were to pay one penny weekly to the craft. Apprentices, and servants who had not been apprentices, were to pay ten shillings on entry. Freemen and servants were at their entry to pay two shillings to the officer of the craft. All persons using the craft were to give their oath of fidelity to the king, and to the magistrates and council, and of obedience to the deacon; and any one disobeying the deacon or officers was to pay a fine of ten shillings for the first offence, twenty shillings for the second, forty shillings for the third, and so on, doubling the fine for each offence. No unfreeman was to stand with his wares between a freeman's stand and the cross at market time; the deacon and masters were empowered to choose an officer yearly, and to make statutes; and one of the town's officers was to concur with the officer of the craft in poindings. This document bears the signatures of Mynto, provost, Hector Steuart and John Anderson, bailies, David Hall, and Thomas Muir. (fn. 93)

On 16th December, 1597, an act of parliament in favour of the duke of Lennox conveyed to him, during his lifetime, the superiority of the archbishopric of Glasgow, (fn. 94) in terms similar to those of the act 1593, c. 55. (fn. 95)

On 29th June, 1598, an act of the convention of estates was passed, by which, in consideration of the great service done by archbishop Beaton, not only to queen Mary, but to the king; of the affection which the archbishop bore to the king and to Scotland; of his lengthened services as the Scottish ambassador; of the king's intention to employ him in that capacity in other weighty matters, but of the archbishop's inability since the queen's death— by which he had been deprived of the greatest part of the means—to sustain his office of ambassador; and of the king's inability, consistently with his honour, to employ the archbishop without providing him with sufficient estate to sustain the burden and rank of ambassador, which provision could only be made by restoring him to his honours, dignities, and benefices,—the king and estates restored him to all the heritages, honours, dignities, benefices, offices, &c., which had previously belonged to him in Scotland, notwithstanding any sentence of forfeiture, decree of barratry, horning, acts of parliament or council, and sentence of excommunication. This act further dispensed with the statute 1592, c. 18, and declared that the archbishop should enjoy his whole heritages and benefices, though he had never made confession of his faith, or acknowledged the religion professed in Scotland. (fn. 96)

On 30th June, 1598, the inhabitants of Glasgow, with those of Dunbarton, Ayr, and others, were ordered by the privy council to meet the king at Dunbarton on the 20th of August, and accompany him to Kintyre and other parts of the islands and highlands, to compel the obedience of the inhabitants of these parts. (fn. 97)

On 21st July, 1599, the town council, after prolonged reasoning on the desire of the ministers that the town should be divided into two parishes, so that they "might acknowledge their own flock," agreed to such division, but were careful to provide that the town should not be burdened with the repairing and building of kirks, nor the providing of more ministers than already existed. (fn. 98) At the same time the deacons, who then formed part of the having reported the result of the voting by the crafts, and the ministers having renewed their application, the resolution previously come to was affirmed, subject to the proviso then expressed. Nothing seems to have appointed "that day eight days to that effect," (fn. 99) but their records do not set forth what was done.

With a view to the election of magistrates for the following year, a leet of eight persons to be submitted to the duke of Lennox for the nomination by him of three to be appointed bailies was prepared on 2nd October, 1599, and it was agreed to request his grace to nominate first a provost, "quha suld be and is the first member to be nominate." The duke made his selection, and three days later Sir Mathew Steuart, of Mynto, knight, was appointed provost, and James Tempill, Thomas Glen, and Robert Rowatt were elected bailies. Subsequently the provost, with the old and new bailies, appointed the council, consisting of twenty-seven persons. On the same day also the council enacted that whosoever should be appointed "to ryde, gang, or accept any office" concerning the common weal of the town, and refused to do so without cause deemed by the council to be reasonable, should forthwith be deprived of his office for the year in which he had been appointed to act as councillor, and, if a bailie, should pay £10 of penalty toties quoties, the penalty to be applied towards the common work of the town. (fn. 100)

On 29th November, 1599, the king granted a letter of gift, under his privy seal, to "Mr. Peter Low, our chirurgiane, and chief chirurgiane to prince Henry, (fn. 101) with the assistance of Mr. Robert Hamiltoune, professor of medicine, and their successesores, indwelleris of our citie of Glasgow," whereby, for avoiding inconveniences and securing good order within the burgh and barony, he empowered them to call before them all persons professing the "art of chirurgerie," and to examine them as to their literature, knowledge, and practice, and, if found worthy, to license them according to their art and knowledge to practise, receiving their oaths, and authorising them as accorded, but discharging them from "onie farder nor they have knawledge passing their capacity, laist our subjectes be abusit." This letter further declared that no person within the burgh and barony should be permitted to exercise medicine without a testimonial of a famous university in which medicine was taught, or without the leave of the king or Low, or to sell drugs within the city unless permitted to do so by those duly licensed. The sale of "rottoun poysoun" was also prohibited, except by apothecaries, who were bound to take caution of the buyers for any injury or damage which might result. The persons so licensed, with their brethren and successors, were required to convene on the first Monday of every month, at some convenient place, to visit and give counsel to poor diseased people gratis.

On 17th December, 1599, the privy council passed an act by which—on the narrative that in all well-governed countries other than Scotland the first day of the year begins on the 1st of January, and that the king and council were desirous that a similar custom should be adopted in Scotland,—it was ordained that from and after the first day of January, 1600, the year should be held to begin on 1st January annually. (fn. 102) This order, accordingly, received effect, though England still adhered to the old custom of not beginning the year till 25th March—a custom which endured till 1st January, 1752. (fn. 103)


  • 1. Moysie, p. 70.
  • 2. Moysie, p. 70. Privy Council Register, IV.,306, 307.
  • 3. Council Records, I., p. 118.
  • 4. Original in the City Archives. Inventure,p. 39, B. C., b. 12, No. 10.
  • 5. Ibid. Inventure, p. 39, B. C., b. 12, No. 7.
  • 6. Ibid. Inventure, p. 39, No. 8, B. C., b. 12.
  • 7. No. LXXX. Great Seal Register, IV., p.652, No. 1932.
  • 8. Original in the City Archives. Inventure, p. 40, B. C., b. 12, No. 13.
  • 9. Ibid. Inventure, p. 40, B. C., b. 12,No. 14.
  • 10. Original in the City Archives. Inventure,p. 40, B. C., b. 12, No. 15.
  • 11. Council Records, I., 125–6.
  • 12. Balfour, I., 393.
  • 13. Council Records, I., pp. 131, 132.
  • 14. Ibid., I., p. 132.
  • 15. Ibid., I., p. 135. In recognition of "the vse and plasour" which one Andrew Wilson in Perth showed to the town's hagbutters in their passage north on this occasion, the town council made him a burgess of Glasgow, and remitted to him his fines. [Ibid.]
  • 16. Ibid., I., p. 139.
  • 17. Ibid., I., p. 139. This order, doubtless, had reference to a muster appointed to take place at Brechin on the 30th of June, to attend the king in his intended visit for administration of justice to the northern parts of his kingdom. [Privy Council Register, IV., pp. 394, 395.] He arrived in Aberdeen on 2nd July, 1589 [Ibid., p. 400], and after remaining there some days, visited the chanonry of Ross, Inverness, and Cromarty on hunting expeditions, after which he returned to Aberdeen on 31st July, where he stayed five days before going south. [Ibid., p. 407.]
  • 18. Council Records, I., 20.
  • 19. Ibid., I., 37.
  • 20. Ibid., I., 92.
  • 21. Ibid., I., 100.
  • 22. Convention Records, I., 180.
  • 23. Council Records, I., 141.
  • 24. Ibid., 142.
  • 25. Privy Council Register, IV., 388. The restoration of the archbishop appears to have been intimated by proclamation at Edinburgh. [Bain's Calendar of Border Papers, II., 252; No. 499, p. 265; No. 528.]
  • 26. To defray the expenses of the king's marriage, the estates, on 4th April, 1588, appointed a sum of £100,000 to be raised by taxation [Acts of Parliament III., 513]; and on the same day commissioners were appointed to set the taxation [Ibid., III., 124. Privy Council Register, IV., 269.] The burghs had previously advanced £6,000 for this purpose. Of this £100,000 the commissioners appointed £50,000 to be raised by the spiritual estate, £33,333 6s. 8d. by the barons and feu-holders, and £16,666 13s. 4d. by the burghs. [Privy Council Register, IV., 344–5.] A particular convention of burghs, held on 30th August, 1589, and attended by Mr. John Ross as commissioner for Glasgow, appointed the burgh's proportion to be uplifted for all the burghs according to their general extent roll. [Convention Records, I., 309.] The collection of Glasgow's proportion of the tax was intrusted to Archibald Faulds, merchant, to whom, on 11th December, the council gave "ane burges fyne of his awin seiking out for his panes in collecting and ingaddering of the tounes stent of thair pairt of the taxatioun of £20,000 condiscendit vpoun be the burrowis to the kingis majestie for furtherance of his hienes mareage." [Council Records, I., 147–8.] As showing the relative proportion payable by the more important burghs in respect of each £100 of taxation imposed previous to 1583, in 1583, and in 1594, the following entries from the tax rolls are subjoined [Convention Records, I., 173 and 451]:—
    Edinburgh (with Kinghorn and Inverkeithing, in and previous to 1583), Previous to 1583. In 1583. In 1594.
    £30 0 0 £32 0 0 £28 15 0
    Aberdeen, 9 9 0 9 9 0 8 0 0
    Dundee, 11 0 0 10 3 4 10 15 0
    Perth, 6 0 0 5 4 0 6 6 8
    St. Andrews, 4 0 0 4 10 0 3 0 0
    Stirling, 2 6 8 2 6 8 2 0 0
    Glasgow, 3 10 0 4 15 6 4 10 0
    Dysart, 2 0 0 2 10 0 2 7 8
  • 27. Privy Council Register, IV., 423–431.
  • 28. Calderwood, V., 81, 82.
  • 29. Privy Council Register, IV., 469.
  • 30. Ibid., IV., 480, 481. Balfour, I., 388.
  • 31. For many years after the reformation, says Dr. Cunningham, the utmost harmony and goodwill seems to have prevailed among all the Protestant Churches. There was but one Papal Church and one Protestant Church. The ministers of one Reformed nation were freely admitted into the pulpits of another; the nationality of Churches was still unknown. Knox ministered in England, in Geneva, in Scotland. His church was wherever Protestantism was. When there was persecution in England, many of its preachers came into Scotland; when there was persecution in Scotland, they returned to England. Geneva was ever the refuge of all. The General Assembly formally gave its sanction to the Helvetian Confession, with some trifling exceptions. But when the Presbyterian constitution of Scotland became more clearly defined, and when the Assembly cast out bishops and declared Episcopacy to be a sin, a chasm broad and deep began to form between the two Churches. The irritation of the Anglican dignitaries was increased by the rise of Puritanism at their own door. The Puritans were already numerous in the south; they held opinions almost identical with the northern Presbyters, and the bishops naturally transferred the dislike with which they regarded the one to the other. Had there been nothing akin to Presbyterianism in England, the lordly prelates would have looked at it across the border with condescending kindness. Had there been no attempt to force Episcopacy upon Scotland, bishops would never have been spoken of as the bastards of Popery. We can view other forms of church government than our own in the distance with perfect complacency; it is only when they are brought near us that our equanimity is disturbed. The first hostile blow was struck by England. The earliest Reformers of the Anglican Church had held that there were but two orders of ecclesiastical office-bearers mentioned in the New Testament —bishops and deacons—the presbyter and bishop having been originally the same, and the superiority of the bishop an arrangement of after growth. Dr. Bancroft, on the 9th of February, 1588, preached a sermon at St. Paul's Cross before the parliament, in which he startled all England by pleading for the divine right of Episcopacy. In this sermon the future archbishop railed against the Puritans, and, turning from them, he next railed against the Scotch Presbyterians. He abused their great Reformer as a man of contentious humour; he abused their church courts as laboratories of treason; he lauded the king for having put them down. This attack naturally provoked antagonism. The Presbytery of Edinburgh appointed a committee to write to Elizabeth, complaining of the evil treatment they had received, and to draw up a refutation of Bancroft's sermon. The letter and refutation were prepared, but never sent; and the only answer the English polemic received was contained in a small pamphlet by Davidson, and entitled "Bancroft's rashness in railing against the Church of Scotland." The author presented a copy to the king, but the king was greatly troubled at it, and would have done anything to suppress it. But though the battle was almost entirely on one side, it was continued. Bancroft carefully collected new calumnies against the northern Church, and published two pamphlets, one of which was entitled "Dangerous Positions, or Scottish Genevating and English Scottising for Discipline." The title indicated the tender part; it was the Puritans who were troubling him. Unhappily the jealousy which has too long prevailed between the sister Churches of England and Scotland was begun. Independency entered Scotland while the war between Episcopacy and Presbytery was being waged, and so the three great rival schemes of Church government were brought for the first time face to face upon the field. [Cunningham's Church History of Scotland, I., 412–414. See Neal's History of the Puritans, I., 301–305.]
  • 32. Council Records, I., 144.
  • 33. i.e., the Tron Church, which was rebuiltabout this time.
  • 34. Inventure, pp. 25, 26, A. 2, b. 4, No. 2;No. LXXIX., pp. 225–227.
  • 35. 1592, c. 8. Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, III., 541, 542. This statute was repealed by the act 1612, c. 1 [Acts of Parliament IV., 470], and revived by the act 1640, c. 20 [Acts of Parliament, V., 277].
  • 36. Life of Melville (1856 edition), pp. 148, 149.
  • 37. Church History of Scotland, 1., 388, 389.
  • 38. Ecclesiastical History of Scotland, II.,260, 261.
  • 39. Convention of Burghs, I., 381.
  • 40. Ibid., I., 398.
  • 41. Convention Records, I., 433.
  • 42. Original Conveyance in the city archives. Inventure, p. 63, D. E., b. 32, No. 2. This chapel was built in 1500 by David Cunningham, official of Glasgow, and rector of the college, and he also endowed it. A plan of the site of the chapel and the surrounding ground, which was used as a burying-ground, is given by Dr. Gordon in his "Glasghu Facies" [p. 829]. The chapel appears to have subsequently fallen into decay and the kirkyard into disuse, and both were conveyed to Archibald Lyon, by whom they were disponed to his daughter Marion, and her husband, Donald Cunningham of Aikinbar, who, on 19th May, 1593, sold them to the town to be used as an hospital for the poor. Reference to the chapel as "St. Mungo's Kirk, on the north side of the Gallowgate," appears in the Council Records in 1600, when the council ordered the whole materials of stone and timber and the growing trees to be taken down and transplanted to the aisle of the New Kirk [Trongate Church] for the repair of that kirk; and also ordained the kirkyard to be set in feu to those who would pay most therefor [Council Records, I., 202]. The kirkyard was, however, in the possession of the town in August, 1601, when the council, with the advice of the deacons, appointed it to remain a burial-place in time coming, and to be enclosed with a wall [Ibid., I., 225]. On 30th May, 1635, the grass of the kirkyard was set to John Barnes, dean of guild, for the crop of that year, at a rent of ten merks [Ibid., II., 28]; and on 27th February, 1647, the council ordered the dyke of the kirkyard to be built with all diligence [Ibid., II., 113]. The grass of the yard seems to have been annually sold for small amounts, which appear to have been usually paid over to the city officers as drink-money or dinner-money [Ibid., II., 57, 71, 78, 229, 266, 289, 315, 338, 367, 446, 465, 488]. On 22nd November, 1754, the council sold the burying-ground to Robert Tennent, gardener and vintner, for payment of a ground annual of £5, which still forms part of the town's revenues, and on the condition that he should build on the ground "a commodious and convenient inn, all of good hewn stone, three stories high, with a sufficient slated roof, and with all other conveniences and accommodations proper for an inn." Tennent was also allowed to pull down the East Port, which adjoined the site on the west, and to use the stones, for which he was to pay £10 sterling [MS. Council Records, Vol. XXVI., p. 461]. In this inn, which was called "The Saracen's Head," Dr. Samuel Johnson stayed two nights, on his return from his tour to the Hebrides, and he there entertained the professors of the university [Boswell's Journal, p. 385]. Notwithstanding the improved accommodation which the inn afforded, however, and the patronage under which it was conducted, it proved unsuccessful, and Tennent became bankrupt and died. His widow afterwards carried on the inn till her death in 1768, when the property was acquired by James Graham, vintner, who also died bankrupt about 1777. Graham was succeeded by his widow, who prospered so far as to pay off her husband's debts. She afterwards married James Buchanan, who, through building speculation, became insolvent; and the inn was sold, in 1792, to William Miller of Slatefield, who converted it into shops and dwelling-houses.
  • 43. 1593, c. 19. Acts of Parliament, IV., 19–20.
  • 44. 1593, c. 55. Acts of Parliament, IV., 38.
  • 45. No. LXXIV., pp. 192–207.
  • 46. Moysie's Memoirs, p. 113. Spottiswood,II., 747.
  • 47. It would appear that £4,000, part of "the king's tocher" of £100,000, was lent by him, with the advice of the privy council, to William Symmer and Mr. John Ross, as commissioners of the city, at ten per cent, interest. This sum was, however, called up in 1594, to provide for the expenses of the baptism of the prince, and "other urgent and wechtie affairs." Repayment appears to have been duly made, and, on 31st July, 1594, a discharge was signed by the king. [Privy Council Register, V. 160, 161, 171.]
  • 48. The rejoicings and entertainments on the occasion are described by Moysie [pp. 118, 119; Spottiswood, II., 455, 456; Calderwood v., 342, 346.]
  • 49. Balfour, I., 396. Life of Melville (1856),p. 174.
  • 50. 1594, c. 39. Acts of Parliament, IV., 73, 74. No. LXXI., pp. 242, 243.
  • 51. Council Records, I., 473.
  • 52. Antea, p. cxliii.
  • 53. 1594, c. 56. Acts of Parliament, IV., 79, No. LXXXII., pp. 243, 244.
  • 54. Council Records, I., 157.
  • 55. Ibid. The division of towns into quarters or wards seems to have been an ancient arrangement, corresponding to the division of the great rural associations of the shire into four quarters [Robertson's Scotland under the Early Kings, I., 298]. The act of the town council referred to in the text is the first mention of such a division of Glasgow; but "quartermasters" are alluded to in an act of the town council of Edinburgh on 10th August, 1498, and this seems to indicate the existence of a similar division of that burgh into quarters [Printed Records of Edinburgh (Burgh Records Society), I., 73]. A more distinct reference to such division occurs, however, in an act of the council, dated 14th October, 1512, when quartermasters are again mentioned in connection with a division of the town into three parts [Ibid., 137], and on 4th October, 1514, when the town was appointed to be divided into four quarters —each under the charge of a bailie and quartermaster [Ibid., 149]. These arrangements appear to have been made in the capital to enable the magistrates to deal with the plague, and subsequently quartermasters were appointed in other burghs in Scotland for a similar purpose. The existence of quarters, and the appointment of quartermasters, is often afterwards referred to in many acts of the town council of Edinburgh in connection with watching, taxation, and other municipal purposes [Marwick's History of the High Constables (1865), p. 31]. The division of burghs into wards seems to have existed also in many other places, as, for example, in Peebles, in 1465 and 1468 [Extracts from the records of that burgh (Scottish Burgh Records Society), p. 53, and Chambers's Peeblesshire, p. 82]; in Aberdeen, in 1505 and 1604 [Report on burghs in 1793, p. 47; Selections from Kirk-session Records of Aberdeen, pp. 40–68; Kennedy's Annals of Aberdeen, I., 381; Extracts from Records of Burgh (Spalding Club), I., 433]; in St. Andrews, in 1574 [Cox's Sabbath Laws, p. 299; in Lanark, in 1595 [Extracts from the records of that burgh (by Renwick), p. 111; in Stirling, in 1544 [Extracts from the records of that burgh (by Renwick), I., 59]; in Canongate, in 1568 [Miscellany of Spalding Club, II., 313]; in Perth, in 1582 [Excerpts from Kirk-session Records of Perth (Spottiswood's Miscellany, II., 243]; in Kirkcaldy, in 1584 [Extracts from Council Records, by A. Gibson]; in Crail, in 1597 [Churchyard Memorials of Crail, by E. Beveridge, p. 269]; in Dunfermline, in 1646 [Extracts from Kirk-session Records of Dunfermline, by Henderson, pp. 19, 20]; in Prestwick, previous to 1730 [Records of Prestwick, p. 89]. Burghal officers, known as quartermasters, existed in other burghs which do not appear to have been divided into quarters, e.g., in Dysart, in 1606; and in Hawick two representatives of each of the seven incorporations of the town were termed quartermasters [Origines Parochiales Scotiæ, I., 340; Municipal Corporation Reports, voce Hawick]. The division of burghs into quarters seems to have existed in the old Roman towns, and to have been continued in many English towns of Roman origin, such as Lincoln, Chester, Colchester, &c. Counties also seem to have been similarly divided. Thus Forfarshire had four such divisions—Dundee, Kirriemuir, Brechin, and Arbroath—each under a mair or officer to whom the sheriff looked for the execution of his writs [Pref. to Brechin Chartulary, by Cosmo Innes, p. 21; Scotland in the Middle Ages, by Innes, Pref., xviii.]. The sheriffdom of Fife had four corresponding divisions—the quarters of Eden, Leven, Inverkeithing, and Dunfermline—besides the Constabulary of Crail [Notices of Inverkeithing, by Ross; Scotland in the Middle Ages, Pref., p. xix.]. Perthshire was also divided into the quarters of Stormont, Athol above Isla, Athol below Isla, and Strathavon [Scotland in the Middle Ages, Pref., p. xix.]. The recommendation of the framers of the First Book of Discipline in regard to education, to the effect that the minister, elders, and other learned men in every town were to examine every quarter to ascertain what progress the youths therein had made, seems also to indicate that in 1560 the division into quarters was general [Lees' History of the Church of Scotland, I., 194]. Devon and Cornwall, in England, were also divided into four quarters, each of which had its leet [Palgrave's English Commonwealth, I., 121]. Somewhat similar divisions existed in Scandinavian counties, where each "Hard" or "Haerred" was divided into quarters, and, according to the Swedish laws, each quarter behoved to send six suitors to the Haerredthing or court of the Haered [Ibid., I., 96]. Iceland was similarly divided into four quarters or Fierdyngs [Ibid., I., 115; II., cxcvii.].
  • 56. Acts of Parliament, III., 25, 38, ratified by 1581, c. 1. Ibid., III., 210.
  • 57. Privy Seal Register, LXVII., fol. 94, No. LXXXIII., pp. 245–247.
  • 58. Council Records, I., 163. The duty of watching and preserving order in burghs was imposed on burgesses in very early times. It was recognised and acted upon in England under the Anglo-Saxon law [Palgrave's English Commonwealth, I., 200]; and the laws of William the Conqueror (A.D. 1066) provided that all cities and burghs, castles, hundreds, and wapentakes, should be watched every night and kept in turn against evil doers and enemies [Ancient Laws and Institutes of England, I., 491]. The rendering of this service remained an essential condition of burgess-ship in England, and was expressly recognised in London under FitzAlwyn's assize of 1189 [Turner's Domestic Architecture, I., 24]. It was also invariably recognised in the burghs of Scotland. Thus the laws of the Four Burghs (A.D. 1124–1153), which probably contained little more than a declaration of the law as even then settled by common consent and immemorial usage, began with providing that each burgess should pay yearly to the king, for every "borrowage" which he defends and holds of him, "for every rood of land four pennies"—a holding precisely the same as that referred to in Doomsday-book [Burgh Laws, Acts of Parliament, I., 21]. Chapter 74 again refers to the watchers and keepers of the town [Ibid., I., 36]; and chapter 81 requires one watchman to come forth of each house, "quhen the wakstaff gais fra dure to dure, quha sal be of eylde, and sal gang till his wache wyth tua wapyns at the ryngyng of the courfew, and sua gate sal wache wysely and besily till the dawyng of the daye. And gif ony hereof failye he sal pay iiijd. outtane wedous" [Ibid., I., 37]. The Articuli Inquirendi— believed to be of the latter half of the reign of Robert I.—directs inquisition to be made of the bailies of each burgh, "si vigilie sufficienter custodianter in burgo, et si currant hostiatum. Et si vidue compellantur ad vigilandum" [Ibid., I., 318]. So also in the Mode of Procedure in the Chamberlain Ayre—a document apparently of the end of the fourteenth century—inquiry is ordered to be made whether the bailies "ger nocht walk the burgh on the nycht be sufficient walkaris;" and whether "thai ger pur folk walk and nocht rich" [Ibid., I., 331]. In like manner, a decree of the Court of Four Burghs, held at Stirling on 4th October, 1405, ordained that the bailie may "ilk day, except it be ane halie day, cognosce and correct . . . the rebelles and perturbers within the burgh als oft as necessitie requyres and complaint is made" [Ibid., I., 340], implying the existence of watching arrangements in burghs at this early period. The acts of Parliament, 1592, c. 75 [Ibid., III., 578], and 1597, c. 46 [Ibid., IV., 141], also refer to watching and warding as proper burdens on the inhabitants, and recognise and regulate the exercise by the magistrates of royal burghs of a power which must have existed from the earliest period of town life to impose and levy local taxes for these and other purposes [General Report of Commissioners on Municipal Corporations in Scotland (1835), p. 44]. Watching and warding are also referred to as part of the unquestionable duty of burgesses in numerous acts of the town councils of royal burghs. Thus, in Edinburgh, acts of council, dated 24th November, 1442, 10th August, 1498, and many others subsequently, recognise the duty of watching as incumbent on every burgess. It is also recognised in many acts of the Convention of the Royal Burghs [Printed Records of the Convention, I., 4, 99, 122, et seq. See also Marwick's History of the High Constables of Edinburgh, pp. 20, 25, 27, 28, 31, 41, 66]. The watching arrangements there referred to were, no doubt, those of royal burghs. But the provisions of the burghal codes mentioned, were, at a very early period, also recognised and operative in burghs of barony and regality.
  • 59. Council Records, I., p. 167.
  • 60. Ibid., I., pp. 170, 171.
  • 61. Ibid., p. 171.
  • 62. Ibid., p. 173.
  • 63. On 6th March, 1595–6, the king, by a charter under the great seal, granted to the commendator, for his lifetime, the office of treasurer, then vacant by the demission of Sir Thomas Lyon of Auldbar, knight, with an annual salary of £1,000, payable out of the first crown casualties and compositions, beginning the first payment for the year 1595. [Great Seal Register V., 141, No. 415. Crawford, p. 395.]
  • 64. On the 17th of the following month of February, the king also executed a charter under the great seal, by which he confirmed feu-rights granted by the commendator to thirty-four persons, of lands in the barony of Ancrum and sheriffdom of Roxburgh, subject to payment of the feu-duties and augmentations specified in the charter. Farther, the king of new granted these lands to the respective vassals, in feu farm, for payment to the crown of the feu-duties and duplications therein set forth. This charter proceeds on the narrative that these lands formed part of the temporality of the archbishopric, and had, after the act of annexation, been disponed by the king to the commendator, who, at the desire of the king, had conveyed them to the several persons mentioned, "natives or kindly rentallers of the same, in feu farm, after the lands had been resigned by Ludovic, duke of Lennox, &c., and after they had been resigned ad remanentiam by the commendator." [Great Seal Register, V., pp. 137, 138, No. 406.] On the 8th of the following month of March the king, by a similar charter, ratified to Thomas, lord Boyd, also one of the native tenants of the archbishopric, a feu-charter granted by the commendator to him, his heirs male and assignees, of the ten merk lands of old extent of Badley and Mollanis, the piece of land called Provost's Haugh, and four acres of meadow land called Cunninglaw, all in the barony and regality of Glasgow. [Ibid., V., p. 142, No. 417.] Other charters of a similar nature were granted about the same time—one, dated 24th March, 1595–6, confirming the feu-rights to lands of the barony of Glasgow, situated in the barony of Lilliesleaf, and county of Roxburgh, granted by the commendator to seventeen persons [Ibid., V., pp. 143, 144, No. 422]; another, dated 10th July, 1596, granting in feu, to William Murehead, the six shilling and eightpenny land of Byres, in Partick, and barony of Glasgow [Ibid., V., p. 154, No. 451]; and a third, dated 5th November, 1596, also granting in feu, to John Maxwell of Nether Pollok, the lands of Haggis, Govanshiels, and Titwood, in the barony and regality of Glasgow and sheriffdom of Renfrew. These lands are described as having formerly belonged to the archbishopric, and having reverted to the king by the resignation of the commendator, then lord treasurer [Ibid., V., p. 163, No. 480].
  • 65. Council Records, I., p. 181.
  • 66. Privy Council Register, V., 43.
  • 67. Ibid., V., p. 305.
  • 68. Calderwood, V., pp. 387–420.
  • 69. Ibid., V., p. 387.
  • 70. Burton, V., 296.
  • 71. Cuningham, I., p. 432.
  • 72. Calderwood, V., p. 543.
  • 73. Calderwood, V., pp. 454–6, 457–9. Privy Council Register, V., pp. 326, 327.
  • 74. Privy Council Register, V., pp. 340–2.
  • 75. Ibid., V., p. 332. Calderwood, V., pp. 466–8.
  • 76. Calderwood, V., pp. 510–12.
  • 77. The upper and lower Tolbooth were situated in the west end of the church of St. Giles. In the former, called the Session or Senate House, the college of justice met, and the lords of session held their courts. In the latter the magistrates of the burgh held their courts. The situation of these courts forms the subject of an interesting paper by Mr. Peter Millar, formerly one of the magistrates of Edinburgh, appended to "Our Journal into Scotland" in 1629, by C. Lowther, R. Fallow and Peter Mauson (1894).
  • 78. Calderwood, V., pp. 513, 514.
  • 79. Privy Council Register, V., pp. 349–52.
  • 80. Acts of Parliament, IV., 103. Privy Council Register, V., p. 352.
  • 81. Council Records, I., 183.
  • 82. Privy Council Register, V., p. 353.
  • 83. Calderwood, V., p. 530.
  • 84. Privy Council Register, V., pp. 355, 356.
  • 85. See Acts of Convention on 1st, 6th, 7th, 8th, 10th, 12th, and 17th January, and Act of Privy Council, 9th February, 1596–7. Privy Council Register, V., pp. 349–411. Spottiswood, III., pp. 19–39. Calderwood, I., pp. 459–535. Maitland's History of Edinburgh, pp. 47–55. Arnot's History of Edinburgh, pp. 44–50. M'Crie's Life of Melville, pp. 180–202. Cuningham's Church History, I., p. 440. Burton, V., pp. 309–12.
  • 86. Book of the Universal Kirk, 1597. Calderwood, V., 606–623. Grub, II., 272–4. Cunningham, I., 442. Burton, V., 314. Glasgow was represented at this assembly by James Bell.
  • 87. Book of the Universal Kirk.
  • 88. Calderwood, V,, 628–647. Spottiswood, III., 58–60. Cunningham, I., 443.
  • 89. 1597, c. 1. Acts of Parliament, IV., 124– 130.
  • 90. 1597, c. 2. Acts of Parliament, IV., 130–1. Calderwood, V., 668–670. Spottiswood, III., 67–69. This, it will be noted, says Dr. Burton, made no interference with the internal discipline of the church; the prelate was to be a lord of the secular parliament, but the act gave him no spiritual jurisdiction or precedency over the clergy. It contained one clause on which they might act. None but actual ministers were to be promoted to the new dignities; and it would rest with the church itself to decide whether it would permit the acceptor of such a dignity to remain in its bosom. [V., 314–5.]
  • 91. Book of the Universal Kirk, 1598. Calderwood, V., 683–709.
  • 92. i.e., undervests, generally worn during winter.
  • 93. Original Seal of Cause in Archives of the Incorporation of Bonnet-makers and Dyers.
  • 94. 1597, c. 49. Acts of Parliament, IV., 146.
  • 95. See p. clviii.
  • 96. 1598, c. 14. Acts of Parliament, IV., 169, 170.
  • 97. Acts of the Parliaments, IV., 172, 173. Privy Council Register, V., 466.
  • 98. In connection with this proposal it may be proper to mention that although, under the authority of the church courts, what is called the City Parish proper and the Barony, or landward part of the parish, have been separate charges for nearly three hundred years, no legal disjunction of the two sections of the original parish has ever been effected. So far as the levying of stipend out of the teinds is concerned, the original parish remains entire. The minister of the cathedral is the successor of the first parson of Glasgow, whose charge extended over the whole parish; and, in the existing "Locality," is termed the "first minister of the Barony Parish of Glasgow," while the minister of the Barony, or landward part of the parish, is termed the "second minister." These two ministers are alone entitled to draw their stipends from the teinds of the parish. But, though this is the case, the districts over which their charges extend are confined within comparatively narrow limits by the division of the original parish into parishes quoad sacra, under a decreet of disjunction, erection, and division, by the court of session on 7th June, 1820. At that time ten churches existed in the city—(1) the High Church, St. Mungo's Church, or the Cathedral, which was a collegiate charge. (2) St. Mary's Church, council, resolved to consult with the brethren of the crafts on the subject, and to report their answer in eight days. On 27th July accordingly the consideration of the matter was resumed by the council, when the deacons or the Tron Church, also collegiate. The site of this church was conveyed to James Fleming and his wife on 2nd August, 1570, for payment of a feu-duty of £5 6s. 8d. Scots, but was afterwards reacquired by the town, though the deeds evidencing this have not been found. The conveyance to the Flemings and the sasine following upon it—which would fall to be delivered along with the deed of reconveyance —are, however, still preserved in the charter room of the city. An entry in the council records, dated 8th February, 1594–5, in which it is mentioned that a composition accepted for arrears of annuals for one of the New Kirk yards is to be applied for "relieff of ane parte of the tua hunder merkes awand to William Flemyng and James Flemingis barnes," refers, no doubt, to the settlement of the price of the reacquired site [Council Records, I., 161]. This is made clear by an entry dated 7th June, 1595, in which the common procurator is ordained to pay to William Flemyng and Margaret Fleming, his spouse, one hundred merks "for redemption of their part of the New Kirk" out of the "byrun duties and entry money received for the New Kirk yards" [Ibid., I., 165]. The council records for the period from 31st July, 1590, to 5th October, 1594, are, however, awanting, so that the particulars as to the rebuilding and repairing of the church are not known; but in the charter by Charles I., dated 16th October, 1636 [No. CX., pp. 375–395], under which the magistrates, councillors, and community were appointed patrons, it is stated that it was built and repaired by the town. The reconstructed Tron Church was opened in 1592, and used till 8th February, 1793, when it was destroyed by fire. (3) The Blackfriars Church, or College Church, which belonged originally to the University, was rebuilt in 1622; conveyed to the city on 4th June, 1635, under an obligation to uphold it; destroyed by fire during a violent storm in 1666, and rebuilt in 1699. (4) The Outer High Church, also a collegiate charge, which was fitted up in the nave of the Cathedral in 1648, but was abandoned on the erection of St. Paul's Church in 1835. (5) The Wynd Church, which was opened as a meeting-house in 1687, and received as a city church in 1691, but, having been condemned as insufficient, the congregation, previous to 1761, removed to St. Andrew's Church, which had been founded in 1739, but was only finished in 1756. (6) The North-West, or Ramshorn Church, built in 1720, and opened in 1721; rebuilt in 1825, and opened on 15th January, 1826, under the changed name of St. David's Church. (7) The Wynd, or West Church, which, after having been closed and lying several years in ruins, was rebuilt in 1761 as the church of the West Parish. On the erection of St. George's Church, however, in 1807, the congregation removed to it. (8) St. Enoch's Church was founded on 12th April, 1780, and opened in 1782, but was removed and another church built on its site in 1827. (9) St. John's Church was founded on 21st April, 1817, and opened on 26th September, 1819. (10) St. James' Church was acquired to form the church of St. James' Parish, which was erected by the Lords Commissioners for Plantations on 7th June, 1820, when the city and parish of Glasgow was erected into ten separate and distinct parishes, quoad sacra. To each of these parishes was allotted one of the ten city churches above mentioned. Notwithstanding this division, it was expressly declared "that the unity of the city and royalty of Glasgow as one parish, quoad civilia, should be reserved entire." While the minister of the High Church draws his stipend from the teinds of the entire original parish, the ministers of the other nine parishes, quoad sacra, receive their stipends out of the common good or general property of the burgh, into which the seat rents of all the churches— including the High Church — have been regularly paid since seat rents were first levied. At the time of the reformation the population of the city is said to have been only four thousand five hundred, and for nearly thirty years afterwards (1561–1587) David Wemyss appears to have been the only minister of the parish. But on 28th February, 1587, he had associated with him John Cowper, who was translated from Edinburgh, and had charge of the eastern district of the city and parish. Wemyss appears to have held his charge till 1605, when he demitted the parsonage and vicarage in favour of the king, and Cowper held his charge till his death on 25th December, 1603. In 1592, the increase of population led to the repair of the church of St. Mary, which became known as the Tron Church, and to the appointment to that charge, previous to 24th September, 1594, of John Bell, one of the regents in the University, and minister of Cardross. He held the charge till his death on 25th March, 1641. The parish known as the Barony Parish was, by the authority of the church courts alone, as has been noticed, disjoined from the City Parish and erected into a separate parish in 1595, and in October, 1596, Alexander Rowatt was appointed by the synod to minister to the parishioners. He was admitted to that charge on 23rd November in the same year, but was translated to Cadder in 1611. The congregation of the Barony Parish had the crypt of the Cathedral set apart for their use. The provision made for the ministers of the City and Barony Parishes may now be noticed. The Rev. Dr. Hugh Scott states that Wemys's stipend was 240 merks (£13 6s. 8d. sterling), paid by the town, and that from Beltyn (Whitsunday), 1569, it was £200 Scots (£16 13s. 4d.), paid from the thirds of the archbishopric [Fasti Ecclesiæ Scoticaniæ, vol. II., part I., p. 3]. The thirds of church benefices, it may be explained, was the fund set apart primarily for the payment of the stipends of ministers after the Reformation. The records of the town council for this period have not been preserved, so that Dr. Scott's statement cannot be verified from that source, but the privy council records rather throw doubt on its accuracy. By an act, dated 7th May, 1567 [Privy Council Records, I., 508–9], which recites the setting apart by the crown of a portion of the thirds of benefices for the support of the ministry and the disposition to the several burghs of the kirk-livings within them, the magistrates of Glasgow were ordained to pay to their minister £80 Scots (£6 13s. 4d. sterling) out of their own proper goods, beginning at Whitsunday, 1567, and for their relief they were empowered to tax all the inhabitants of the city according to their ability. The rest of the minister's stipend and the charges of readers and other affairs of the kirk were appointed to be paid out of the readiest of the annuals disponed by queen Mary to the town on 16th March, 1566–7 [Preface, pp. lxxxix-xci, Charter No. LIX]. But on 8th January, 1572–3, the town conveyed to the college all the property contained in that charter, with the exception of followed on this resolution till 13th October, when the three ministers of the town desired that it should be put to execution. The council thereupon the site of the old church of St. Mary, which had been feued by the former to James Fleming and his wife in 1570. The earliest preserved account of the city is that for 1573, and no payment of minister's stipend occurs in it. The parsonage of Glasgow had been bestowed by the Regent Murray on Archibald Douglas, one of the senators of the college of justice, but the "kirk, minister, and superintendents in that part" refused to admit him to the benefice, on the ground that he could not personally perform the duties. The matter came before the privy council on 8th September, 1571, and it sustained his title [Privy Council Records, II., 79, 80], but it was subquently arranged, on 23rd January, 1571–2, that he should receive the fruits, subject to payment of £200 Scots of yearly stipend to Wemys and his successors, ministers of Glasgow [Ibid., II., 114, 115]. A few years afterwards, viz., on 1st June, 1586, Douglas set the teinds on tack to lord Blantyre and his heirs, for payment of a yearly tack-duty of 300 merks (£16 13s. 4d. sterling), and under burden of paying to two ministers 800 merks (£44 8s. 102/3d. sterling) yearly. This stipend was, under a decree arbitral pronounced by the provost and bailies and the brethren of the presbytery of Glasgow, on 24th October, 1587, apportioned thus:—To David Wemys, as first minister, and his successors, 500 merks (£27 15s. 62/3d. sterling); and to John Cowper, as second minister, and his successors, 300 merks (£16 13s. 4d. sterling). The decree farther directed lord Blantyre to assign to each of the ministers the teinds of certain lands which they were entitled to in respect of the stipend allotted to them, and contains the following stipulation as to the appointment of the second minister—"And siclyke, we ordaine the said Walter (lord Blantyre) to have his awine particular woitt and electioune of the said second minister with us, judges above written, as becumis." Douglas was deposed from the parsonage on 13th March, 1593, for non-residence and neglect of duty, but retained its emoluments till 4th July, 1597 [Fasti Ecclesiæ, III., p. 3], and on 8th November of that year his demission was intimated to the presbytery. On 1st December, 1601, the king issued a presentation to Wemys of the parsonage and vicarage of the parish kirk and whole parish of Glasgow, with the manse, glebe, teind sheaves, and other teinds, as well great as small, parsonage, vicarage, &c., belonging thereto. Wemys thus became entitled to the tack duty payable by lord Blantyre, whose tack from Douglas he shortly afterwards ratified, on condition that the tacksman should give fifteen chalders of victual over and above the tack duty for the better provision of the minister. How the tack duty and additional fifteen chalders were apportioned among the ministers has not been ascertained. Excepting the payment of £80 Scots (£6 13s. 4d. sterling) ordered by the privy council in 1567, the first instance which has been noticed of the town paying stipend out of the common good is referred to in an act dated 2nd May, 1590 [Council Records, I., 150]. By this act the "provost, bailies, and counsell, for the speciall luif and favour quhilk they haif and beris to Maister John Couper, thair minister, as also for the better sustenying of him vnto his charge, of thair meir liberalitie," granted "him yearly 50 merks (£2 15s. 6d. sterling), with foure dousane burges ladis coilis," and £20 (£1 13s. 4d. sterling) for his house mail. John Bell's stipend as minister of the Tron Church was, to the amount of £250 Scots (£20 16s. 8d. sterling), paid out of certain annuals which had belonged to the church prior to the Reformation [No. LXXXI., pp. 242–3], and had been gifted to the town, which bestowed them on the minister of the "New" or Tron Kirk [Council Records, I., p. 473. See p. clxx.]. When Alexander Rowatt was appointed minister of the Barony Parish in 1595, the town council agreed to pay him £20 Scots (£1 13s. 4d. sterling) yearly for house mail. [Ibid., I., 169.] But the council records do not show from what source his stipend was paid. There can be little doubt, however, that it was paid from the teinds. In 1599 the proposal, mentioned in the text, to have the city divided into two parishes, was made [Council Records, I., pp. 195–9].
  • 99. Ibid., I., 195, 196, 199.
  • 100. Ibid., I., 197, 198. On 4th October the kirk session enacted that whosoever should be elected provost or bailies should be enrolled as elders of the kirk for the year to come.
  • 101. Low, whose name appears, apparently for the first time in the council records, on 17th March, 1598–9 [I., 191], was a Scotchman, probably a native of Glasgow or of the West of Scotland; had practised as a surgeon in France, Flanders, and elsewhere, for twentytwo years; had afterwards been "chirurgiane-major to the Spanish regiments at Paris for two years (1589–90);" and had followed the king of France in his wars for six years, during which, according to his own account, he "took commoditie" to practise all points and operations of chirurgarie. He was probably in London in 1596 and 1597, and came, apparently in the spring of 1598, to practise in Glasgow, where for some reason not known he incurred the displeasure of the kirk session, and was required to stand in the "piller" three times. Contrasting the state of medical science in Glasgow with that in Paris, he seems to have used his influence with king James to obtain the letter referred to in the text. This letter, which is printed in full in Dr. James Finlayson's Account of the Life and Works of Maister Peter Lowe [(1880) Ap. pp. 66–68], was ratified by the Act 1672, c. 127. It, however, erroneously stated the date of the letter to be 29th November, "1699." [Acts of Parliaments, VIII., 184.] Previous to the date of the letter, says Dr. Weir, it is not likely that the members of the medical profession were very numerous in Glasgow, and still less so that there was any thing like a united body of practitioners, as was no doubt the case with many of the trades and handicrafts, and with the professions of law and theology. The number of inhabitants was very small, about 7,000 only, and the medical profession, it is probable, consisted merely of a few regularly trained practitioners and their servants or apprentices, who performed the minor operations of surgery under their directions. The well educated and well informed general medical practitioners did not come into existence for many years afterwards. [Address on the origin and early history of the Faculty of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow, 11th March, 1864.] The first meeting of the faculty thus instituted was held in the Blackfriars Kirk, on 3rd June, 1602, when Low and Hamilton appeared before Sir George Elphinstoun of Blythswood, knight, provost, and the three bailies, presented the king's letter of gift, and obtained the authority of the magistrates to exercise the powers conferred on them by that document, and to conjoin with them as brethren six persons named in the minute of meeting. Hamilton was then elected deacon till the following Michaelmas, and nominated a clerk and officer, both of whom gave their oaths. On the 22nd of the same month Mr. Peter Low and three others were elected quarter-masters, and, at a third meeting on 22nd June, acts were passed to regulate the admission of new members, the examination to which they were to be subjected, and the fees to be paid on admission,—differentiating those exigible from the sons of burgesses, apprentices of members, and strangers. Some indication of the conditions of medical practice in Glasgow during the latter half of the sixteenth and the former half of the seventeenth centuries is afforded by the records of the town council during that period. Thus, on 17th May, 1577, the town council granted a yearly pension of ten merks to one Alexander Hay, "chirurgiane," in consideration of his remaining in the town, and serving it, "in his craft and art." [Council Records, I., 58.] On 7th March, 1580–1, a payment was ordered to be made to Thomas Mylne, "chirurgiane, for the curing of Thomas Muir, hurt in the townes besynes" [Ibid., I., 83. See also p. 124]. On 23rd April, 1596, Allaster M'Caslan, "chyrurgiane," received a burgess fine for his services "in curing sundry poor persons in the toune" [Ibid., I., 178]; and on 17th March, 1598–9, the following entry appears:— "It is aggreit of new and contractit betuix the toune and Dr. Low for iiijxx merks money be yeir" [Ibid., I., 191]. On 14th April, 1599, the magistrates, at the desire of the kirk session, being informed of mediciners and chirurgeons who resorted to the town and remained there, though not able to discharge their duty therein by reason of want of knowledge and skill, and being desirous to remedy the "inconveniences" that might follow, appointed the three bailies to concur with the ministry, certain members of the session, and others, "cunyng men of the arte," in examining and trying such persons as practised medicine within the town in future [Ibid., I., 193]. To what extent this action may have been stimulated by Low, or how far it may have contributed to getting the desired royal authority, does not appear; but on 9th February, 1600, the magistrates and council, with eleven others, having advised as to the privileges and statutes conferred by the king's letter, agreed to fortify and maintain the liberties so granted in all points, provided that neither the letter nor any acts made in virtue of it should prejudice the commonweal and liberty of the town [Ibid., I., 202]. Subsequent acts indicate that the council continued to subsidise medical practitioners, for, on 9th April, 1636, one Mitchelsone, a surgeon, who had come to dwell in the town, was admitted a burgess gratis [Ibid., II., 42], and on 21st October, 1638, the council "becaus of the neid that the toune stands in of some qualifiet chirurgeone, and that there is ane large commendatione gevin to Arthour Tempill, ane of that professionne," admitted him burgess and guild brother [Ibid., II., 152]. Again, on 30th June, 1649, an act sets forth that, "in regard of the tounis neid that they stand in of ane expert and skilful chirurgeon for themselfs and for the countrey, and how vsefull one micht be for the poor, and considering the ample testimonie gevin to Arthour Temple, chirurgeon, of his qualification in that calling," the dean of guild was ordained to receive him as burgess and guild brother. Farther, "in regard he hes vndertakine to doe the pairt of ane chirurgeon to the haill poor of this brugh for fyve yeirs to come without any payment therefor," the town engaged "to enter him frie with the calling of chirurgeounes, and to pay him ane hundrethe merkis be yeir these fyve yeirs." It also declared that he should be free of all public burdens, taxes, watchings, and wardings, during that time [Ibid., II., 169–170]. On 7th September, 1652, the council ordered John Hall, chirurgeon, to be paid £30 for ten weeks' attendance curing a poor woman, "ane burges bairne, quha had the knap of hir elbow struken from hir be ane of the sojouris quha came from Aire about the maissones" [Ibid., II., 242–3]. On 23rd April, 1653, £20 were ordered to be paid to Andrew Muir, chirurgeon, "for his helpe and supplie in this his present distressit estate" [Ibid., II., 264], and on 30th December in the following year, Archibald Grahame, "ypothecare," was admitted burgess and guild brother gratis, subject to "this provisioun that he visie the seik poore of the towne and helpe them in all things relateing to his calling, they paying for the medicaments" [Ibid., II., 303]. A few months later a question seems to have been raised with the chirurgeons, and to have been brought in some way under the cognizance of the council, by whom, on 3rd March, 1655, the former were ordered to produce their gift [Ibid., II., 307], but the result does not appear. On 26th January, 1656, a small committee of the council was appointed "to speick with Doctor Souter anent his burgeschipe and help of the poore whai standis in neid of his calling [Ibid., II., 326]; and on the 2nd of the following month he was admitted a burgess, for service done and to be done be him [Ibid., II., 327]. A few months later the faculty of physicians and surgeons opened negotiations with the town council to have the king's letter of gift supplemented by a seal of cause, and on 9th August, 1656, it was agreed to give it to them. Bailie Walkingschaw, the dean of guild, and deacon convener, were accordingly appointed to consider "as to the artakles to be contenit thairintill" [Ibid., II., 340], and on the 16th of the same month a Letter of Deaconhead was granted to "the chirurgianes and barbouris," residenters within the city, on the application of John Hall, their "headisman or dekine," for himself and in name and behalf of the said "chirurgianis and barbouris." This document states that for fifty-seven years, "since the patent granted of the date 29th November, jm vc, fyftie [ninety] nine years, by the deceist king James," they had been in use yearly to elect a deacon and overseer, and then sets forth ten distinct provisions for the future government of the "calling" [Ibid., II., 341– 344]. This would seem to imply, what is certainly not expressed, in the king's letter, and was probably far from the intention either of Peter Low or of the king and privy council, that the terms "chirurgeans and professors of medicine" included barbers, and that the power which it conferred on the grantees, "to call before them all persons professing the art of chirurgerie and to examine them as to their literature, knowledge, and practice, and, if found worthy, to license them according to their art and knowledge to practice," was never meant to extend to barbers. But, until a recent date, many persons who could not, in a modern sense, be regarded as surgeons or physicians, or even professional men of any kind, did act as phlebotomists, i.e., bloodletters. Barbers were of this class, and were probably, in consequence, associated with surgeons and physicians. It is to be observed, however, that though so associated, and entitled annually to vote in the election of the visitor or deacon, the member elected to that office had to be "ane of the most fite and qualified and worthiest of the said calling, ane chirurgiane and burgess of the brughe." Farther, the ninth article of the seal of cause expressly provided "that no brother within the said calling presume to meddill with any mae poynts of chirurgianrie nor thai is fund qualified of at their admissione and conforme as they are booked." Only a few months elapsed, however, before the chirurgeons and barbers were in collision. One Thomas Lockhart, apothecary, was elected deacon, and a section of the body appealed to the council to have the election declared to be illegal on the ground that Lockhart was not a chirurgeon, but an apothecary. Much procedure followed on this appeal [Acts of Council, 5th September, 1657; Ibid., II., 377. 1st November, 1659; Ibid., 430. 22nd November, 1659; Ibid., 432. 3rd December, 1659; Ibid., 433], and ultimately the council declared Lockhart's election to be invalid and liberated "the bretherin of that calling fra giveing to him any obedience as becometh ane deacon in tyme coming" [Ibid., II., 438]. While the dispute was in progress, the council, on 23rd January, 1658, arranged with James Frank, chirurgeon, to return to the burgh and exercise his calling there, undertaking to pay him annually one hundred merks Scots of fee, "he being bound to have the care of curing such poor people of the town as the magistrates might direct to him." The town was, however, to pay for the drugs and medicaments, and also £10 stg. towards the expense of transporting him to the city [Ibid., II., 390]. In little more than a year later, viz,, on 14th May, 1659, the Doctor Souter referred to on 26th January, 1656, was appointed to be dealt with to make his residence within the town; to be made burgess and guild brother; and to be paid £40 a year—he contracting to cure the poor in the town who should be recommended to him by the magistrates [Ibid., II., 420]. Again, on 21st March, 1661, the council engaged to pay one hundred merks Scots to one Evir M'Neill, "that cutis the stone," and he undertook "to cut all the poor for that frielie" [Ib., II., 460]. It can only here be added that, as might be expected, the union between the surgeons and barbers became a source of mutual misunderstanding, and ultimately of differences which were submitted to the magistrates, who, on 7th November, 1719, issued an act determining the questions between them [MS. Council Records, XX., pp. 194–7]. The surgeons were so dissatisfied, however, with the result that they renounced their privileges under the letter of deaconry, and this renunciation was accepted by the council on 22nd September, 1722 [Ibid., pp. 546–51]. On the same day, the council granted a letter of deaconry to the barbers, by which they were authorised to convene and act as a free trade and incorporation, and obtained various privileges, including the right to meet and elect a deacon for themselves. On 10th October thereafter, the council received the deacon so elected. [Ibid., XXI., p. 10.] It may be added that the council's practice of subsidising medical practitioners appears to have endured till 1684, when a minute of 27th October sets forth that the sad condition of the town through its "great debt" necessitated its discontinuance. "If," therefore, added the minute, "any person who is unwell, and deserves to be cured," applied to a magistrate, he would recommend the applicant to any physician he thought fit. [Council Records, XII., p. 112.] The council appears, however, to have continued to retain the services of a person skilled in lithotomy, for Evir M'Neill, above referred to, having become unfit through infirmity to operate on the poor, one Duncan Campbell was appointed, on 27th March, 1688, to do so. [Ibid., p. 296.]
  • 102. Privy Council Register, VI., 63.
  • 103. The corresponding change in England was effected in virtue of the Act 24 George II., cap. 23 (1750–1). Full information as to the times at which the year commenced in the various countries of Europe is given by Sir H. Nicolas in his Chronology of History, pp. 40–48.