One replied, "The Bishop got little thanks for that."

Q. "Think you it lawful to rise against a State that is not of your opinion? Will you go to Bothwell again?"

These questions they gave him not leave to answer, but ordered him to be taken away, asking, "If he was a captain at Bothwell?" which he assented to.

IS ANSWERS before the Council, April 17.

[These answers have been compared with Wodrow, and one or two clauses added from his version.-ED.]

Omitting what he answered at his former appearance, which needs not be repeated (these questions being always the same), they asked, "Is Bothwell re

bellion or not?"

A. "No; it being for the defence of the harmless, who [were set upon for their lives] for hearing a preaching and defending themselves; and the Confession of Faith [The Scots Confession of 1560, chap. xiv., 'What works are reputed good before God.'-ED.] contained in your Test says, 'It is good work to defend the life of the harmless.'

Q. "Then you approve of the Test? Will you take it?"

A. "I am not speaking of the Test, but of the Confession of Faith therein contained."

Q. "Think you it lawful to rise against magistracy?"

A. "Will you condemn the Reformation from Popery carried on by John Knox ?"

"We are not come here," said they, "to answer questions, but to ask."

"But," replied he, "the answering of that to me would be a full answer by me to your question."

Then said the Bishop [Paterson], "The Reformation was good, but the way of carrying it on was ill."

A. "That is a marvellous thing, to think God would approve the actors in such actions, and yet the method be ill, and they to have a most solid peace [before God] in these actions, and to have such a mouth to defend it, as all the wits in their days could not be

able to withstand, as will be clear to any that read the history of the Reformation."

"O," said they," he has read the history of the Reformation. Ay, but you will not find it in the Scripture," said they, "that the people may resist the prince; for then they take the magistrate's part on them, and therein declare themselves to be above their prince.”

A. "The people resisted Saul, and would not let him kill Jonathan (1 Sam. xiv. 45)."

The Bishop [Paterson] said, "The people were in the wrong." A. "The Scripture never condemns the deed."

Q. "Do you own authority?"

A. "Authority may be taken several ways: 1. For the simple command of the prince; 2. For the more public command of the prince and people; 3. For a power a prince may be clothed with by a people; 4. For a prince's right to govern. In all which ways Gouldman's Dictionary, the ordinary expositor of words, takes it. And in the first two senses, since many both of the prince's edicts and public Acts of Parliament are directly against Presbyterians and Presbyterian government, to own it in these senses, I should deny myself to be a Presbyterian. In the third sense, since the people have clothed the king with the headship of the Church, I cannot own that; because the eleventh article [chapter] of the Confession of Faith, contained in the Test, says, 'That office pertains properly to Christ alone, and that it is not lawful for man or angel to intrude therein.' As for the last sense of authority, his right to govern, I have not seen through it [or, I have not seen through the denial of it.]"

Q. "Will you venture your life on these things?"

A. "My life is in God's hand."

After these questions, they set down that he was a captain at Bothwell, and an imperfect recital of his words, which they desired him to subscribe; but he refused.

At his last appearance before the Criminal Court, the Advocate accosted him thus, "Though, sir, you have been a rebel, and though you studied to draw that poor man Laurie to the gallows, yet you see how merciful the king is to these men (which were four who swore the Test), and there is place left to you for mercy, if you will not obstinately persist in your opinion."

He answered, "I have neither done any deed, nor given you an account of any opinion, but what I have justified from the Confession

of Faith, which you have lately sworn from the ancient Reformation, (which ye cannot condemn), and from the concessions of your own. doctors."

"What!" says Perth, "will you justify your taking arms at Bothwell?"

A. "Your own Test justifies the defence of the life of the harmless." The Advocate says, "All the Indulged, yea, almost all Presbyterians condemn it; then," says he, "will ye bond before sentence? for there is no place left for the king's mercy after sentence."

A. "I will not; but remember, that one day all sentences will be canvassed before the great Judge of heaven and earth."

OLLOW some REASONS of his ANSWERS, and Reflections made thereupon by himself.

"When I was on my journey betwixt Edinburgh and Lanark, and several times before having considered the bold testimony of Stephen, ' Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart' (Acts vii. 51, 52); and Peter's testimony, 'Whom ye slew, and hanged on a tree' (Acts v. 30); and his desire that with all boldness they might make mention of the name of Jesus; and lastly, that promise, In nothing terrified by your adversaries' (Phil. i. 28); I say, considering these, I resolved to use the utmost of freedom with the Council; but being come to this town, and

"1. Having considered that the Council desired to pick such quarrels with any in our condition as might give the least umbrage to the world of the justice of their dealings;

"2. Considering that by many professed friends we were judged imprudent; yea, so far condemned, that they stick not to say, that we have a hand in our own death;

"3. Their own public proclamations still bearing that our design was not religion, but covetousness to possess ourselves of the government : "For eviting [i.e., avoiding] of these, I resolved to be as cautious as I could, without prejudice to truth. So that, taking my answers for defensive arms out of the Test which they had sworn, from the concessions of their greatest doctors, and from the deed of their predecessor Council, whereof some present were members, I thought

it had been a ridiculous thing to make me condemn that which they had ratified by an oath, [which] their great doctor had yielded, and their predecessor Council had approven. But that I might have God's approbation in demeaning myself so, and do what I did therein in faith, I took that rule, 'Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear' (1 Pet. iii. 15). And as I thought I had reason to bless God that had guided my tongue so, that I was not a whit concerned either with shame or fear; so I came back to prison with a heart sorry that I should have left these two questions of the Chancellor's unanswered, viz., Thought I it duty to rise in arms against a Stat not of my opinion?' In answer to which question, I thought, if ever I had occasion, I would have been punctual in telling them [that] the question was wrong stated; for the right state of the question was, 'When a state destroys the true profession of godliness sworn to by the land, and persecutes the owners thereof.' The second question, 'If I would have gone to Bothwell again?' I thought, if such a question came in my way, I would have told them, that I behoved to be at God's call; and likewise, I was sorry that I had not been nimble enough to have taken opportunity, when the question anent authority was moved, to have testified against the ecclesiastical Headship and sinful acts against God's Church; I say, my omission, occasioned through their confused asking, bred me humiliation after I returned to prison.

"As to my second examination, as I had desired opportunity to testify against the Headship of the Church, and other sinful acts destroying God's work, so I got opportunity, and so I discharged my conscience. But yet there was something left to exercise me with; and that was

"1. When the Bishop [Paterson] said, 'that were a distracted act for the king to alienate the kingdom to strangers,' that I said not, it was an act of more distraction to destroy religion.

2. That, in citing the words of the 11th article of the Confession against the Headship, I should have said simply, it was unlawful to presume to intrude on that office; whereas the Confession itself calls them blasphemers; and thereby mincing the word.

"3. When the Bishop said, it were a Turkish way to carry on reformation by the sword, I had not opponed [i.e., opposed] their present practice and violence in pressing men's consciences; and have said, since they looked upon conscience as so tender a thing, to beware

of squeezing it so by oppression. I know I have an infirmity in answering off-hand, anent which I hope all God's people will observe the rule of bearing one another's infirmities.

"Next, I am sure that the Lord hath not supplied me as to these answers for my further exercise.

"As to the reason why I said, I could not see through the denial of authority in the last sense (for, though I could not see through it, yet, it being such an abominable stating of themselves in a continual opposition to God and godliness, I scunnered [i.e., loathed] to own it) the reason that moved me to say that I could not see through it was, I desire to tread the paths of our old Reformers, who delayed the casting off authority, till they had a probable power to back it; yet, afterwards considering his breach of covenant to us, and these deeds done by that authority, that, in any well guided commonwealth, would annul his right, I thought I had worded authority ill in the last sense, and that it had been more proper [if] I had said, 'I could not see through the denying of obedience to such commands as were indifferent, or according to God's word.' And, indeed, till God had furnished us with a probable power, I could never see through this; and I am verily of that opinion, that we, having lusted for a king, got him in God's wrath; and that since we have entered in Covenant with him, God will take His own way to take him away in His displeasure, and will not let it be by our hand: though I grant that his breach of paction to us looseth us, our paction being still conditional, to own him in defence of religion; and my earnest desire is, there may be no difference among Presbyterians anent this; for I have a strong opinion, that God will take that question out of the way shortly.

"As for the Bishop's death, I could not call it murder; because of Jael, Ehud, and Phineas, their facts; Jael using that expression, 'Turn in hither;' and that there was peace betwixt Heber the Kenite and Jabin ;' Jael being of that family, and, whatever might be alleged against these as extraordinary acts, and that to do such deeds is to take the magistrate's power. I am sure Phineas was a priest, and it was none of his office to kill any man and yet his fact is commended. Next, Knox his preaching to and biding. [i.e., remaining] with the killers of Cardinal Beaton; and Calderwood's History, which was approven by the Assembly, calling them men of courage and resolution, whom God stirred up. Next, the Lord Ruthven and others killing a companion that abused Queen Mary by his ill counsel [Rizzio], and yet approven in Knox's history. There