Volume II Part 7 (2/2)

[14] Melville, p 192

[15] The Ruthven here spoken of is the son of the Lord Ruthven, who took so active a part in the murder

[16] Chalmers, vol ii p 175 and 342

[17] Keith--Preface, p viii

[18] Keith, p 364

[19] Keith, p 151--Laing, vol ii p 76--Chal to prove (vol ii p 322) that the Catholic Ecclesiastical Courts had never been deprived of their jurisdiction, and that, consequently, there was no _restoration_ of power to the Archbishop of St Andrews, evidently takes an erroneous view of this matter In direct opposition to such a view, Knox, or his continuator, has the following account of the transaction:--”At the same time, the Bishop of St Andrews, byfrom the Queen's Majesty, to be obeyed within the Diocess of his Jurisdiction, in all such causes as before, in time of Popery, were used in the Consistory, and, therefore, to discharge the new Coh in January, having a co to take possession according to his gift lately obtained The Provost being advertised thereof by the Earl of Murray, they sent to the Bishop three or four of the Council, desiring him to desist froht rise thereupon; whereby he was persuaded to desist at that time”--Knox, p 403 This account is not quite correct, in so far as the Earl of Murray alone, unsupported by Mary's authority, is described as having diverted the Archbishop from his purpose

[20] Chalmers, vol i p 199; and vol ii p 176

[21] Keith, Preface p viii

[22] Anderson, vol iv p 165--Goodall, vol ii p 76

[23] Goodall, vol ii p 76--et seq

[24] Birrel's Dairy, p 6--Laing, vol i p 30

[25] Keith, p 364--Anderson, vol ii p 67--Goodall, vol ii p

244--Chal, vol i

p 30--and vol ii p 17--Whittaker, vol iii p 258, and 283--Arnot's History of Edinburgh, p 237 Whittaker hasthe House of the Kirk-of-Field He describes it as er than it really was; and,in one part of the old wall, and which Arnot supposed had been the postern-door in the gavel of the house, he fixes its situation at too great a distance froe, and too near the Infirmary Sir Walter Scott, in his ”Tales of a Grandfather,” (vol iii p 187) has oddly enough fallen into the error of describing the Kirk-of-Field, as standing ”just _without_ the walls of the city”

[26] Morton's Confession in Laing, vol ii p 354; and Archibald Douglas's Letter, ibid p 363

[27] Idem

[28] Lesley's Defence in Anderson, vol i p 75--Buchanan's History, p

350--Laing, vol ii p 34

[29] Or, vol ii p 322

[30] Paris's Confession in Laing, vol ii p 298-9

[31] Paris's Deposition in Laing, vol ii p 296

[32] Laing, vol ii p 282 and 370