of Ayrshire, John Douglas, Paul Methven, and others. In December, 1557, a number of the nobles came out on the side of the Reformation movement, and joined in a bond, known as the First Covenant, by which they agreed to assist each other in advancing the reformation of religion, in "maintaining God's true congregation, and renouncing the congregation of Satan." Among those who subscribed this document were Archibald Campbell, Earl of Argyle, and his son Archibald (Lord Lorne), Alexander Cunningham, Earl of Glencairn, James Douglas, Earl of Morton, and John Erskine of Dun. The leaders of this movement came to be known as "the Lords of the Congregation."

In April, 1558, Walter Mill, an old man of over eighty years, formerly a priest, was accused of heresy, and imprisoned at St. Andrews. He was tried before a gathering of bishops, abbots, and other Romish dignitaries, and condemned to be burned. They sought to make him recant by brutal threatenings. "I will not recant the truth," he said, "for I am corn, and not chaff; I will not be blown away by the wind nor burst by the flail, but will abide both." This old man's heroic attitude in his extremity forms a marked contrast with that of Archbishop Cranmer, who was also an old man when he was burned in England some two years before. The people of St. Andrews heaped a cairn of stones on the spot of Walter Mill's martyrdom, "in testification," says John Knox, "that they would his death should abide in recent memory. The bishops and priests, thereat offended, caused once or twice to remove the same, with denunciation of cursing, if any man should there lay any stones; but in vain was that wind blown; for still was the heap made, till the priests stole away by night the stones to build their walls."

As a result of the preaching of William Harlaw and others in Edinburgh, some of the young men of that city took the image of St. Giles and threw it into the North Loch. It was afterwards drawn out and burned. This affair made a great sensation. Through the influence of the bishops with the queen regent, four of the chief preachers were cited to appear before the justiciary court at Stirling, on May 10, 1559. The preachers resolved to answer the summons, but first appeared in Edinburgh. With them came their Protestant friends from the West, composed largely of the followers of the Campbells from Argyle and the Cunninghams and Douglases from Ayrshire, Dumfries, and Galloway. At the instigation of a shrewd counsellor in the bishops' party, proclamation was made by the regent that all who had come to town without requisition by the authorities should proceed to the Borders, and there remain fifteen days, to take their tours of frontier duty. The Protestants felt that such a thing was not to be considered, as it would leave their preachers at the mercy of the bishops. Accordingly, some of the leaders made their way into the chamber where the queen regent was sitting in council with her bishops. James Chalmers of Gadgirth, one of the Western barons, a bold and zealous man, stood forth and spoke. “Madam," he said, "we know that this is the malice of the bishops. We

They trouble our preachers, and

Shall we suffer this any longer? No, madam,

vow to God we shall make a day of it. would murder them and us. it shall not be." Forthwith, every man put on his steel bonnet. The regent promised to withdraw the citation; but she broke her word. The accused preachers were summoned, and failing to appear, were proclaimed rebels.

Meanwhile, shortly before St. Giles's day, the bishops gave an order to the town council of Edinburgh that they should either recover the old image of St. Giles, or make a new one. The council answered, that "nowhere in God's word could they find commandment given to set up images, though in several places they did find commandment to break them down." The priests thereupon borrowed an image from the Grey Friars, which they set upon a shoulder-high barrow. Priests, friars, canons, and their followers then formed a procession, which was led by the queen regent herself. The crowd soon began to jostle the saint's bearers, and caused the image to wobble on its barrow. A cry arose, "Down with the idol! Down with it!" and it was pulled down. A man in the crowd took hold of the saint by the heels and battered the head to splinters on the cobble-stones.

John Knox had landed at Leith on May 2d, and proceeded to join his friends. On the eleventh of May, after Knox had preached a vehement sermon against the mass in the parish church of Perth, a priest was so imprudent as to uncover an altar in order to say mass. A youth exclaimed at the top of his voice: "This is intolerable, that when God, by His Word, hath plainly damned idolatry, we shall stand and see it used in despite." The priest gave him a blow. He threw a stone at the priest, which struck the tabernacle and broke one of the images. Instantly the people began to cast stones, to tear down the altars and images, and to destroy every vestige of the ornaments of the church. The mob then proceeded to sack the monasteries of Grey Friars, Black Friars, and Charterhouse. Such was the destruction that "within two days," says Knox, "the walls only did remain of all these great edifications." This example was followed in other places, and in a short time most of the religious houses in the kingdom were despoiled of their altars, images, and monuments.

When the queen regent learned of the riot at Perth, she threatened to destroy the town, "man, woman, and child, to burn it with fire, and salt it in sign of perpetual desolation." The Reformers who were assembled in the town accordingly called upon their friends for assistance. Letters were written to their western brethren in Cuningham and Kyle. These are the two districts of Ayrshire which afterwards furnished so much of the Scottish population of Ulster. The people of Kyle met at the kirk of Craigie, to Some were faint-hearted, and hesitated.

hear the letters read. Alexander Cunningham, Earl of Glencairn, standing before the congregation, said, "Let every man serve his conscience. I will, by God's grace, see my brethren in St. Johnstown [Perth]; yea, although never man should accompany me, I will

go, if it were but with a pike on my shoulder; for I had rather die with that company than live after them." These brave words so stirred his hearers that they immediately set forth for Perth. Twelve hundred mounted men and as many more on foot was the number that reached there. With them were Glencairn, Lords Ochiltree and Boyd, and brave James Chalmers of Gadgirth -the same who had forbidden the queen regent to harm the preachers.

The Lords of the Congregation were now supported by a considerable force. The regent's French troops marched upon Perth and advanced as far as Auchterarder. Here an arrangement was made by which the queen regent bound herself to allow the people of Perth the free exercise of their religion. But later she again broke faith. The Lords, proceeding rapidly, invaded St. Andrews. The primate fled. The regent's army then approached; another treaty was made; and this she also failed to keep. She was expecting reinforcements from France, and parleyed for delay. Failing to obtain peace, the Congregation took more vigorous measures. One division of its army entered Perth on June 25th; another, under Argyle and the Prior of St. Andrews (who meanwhile had joined the Reformers), took possession of Edinburgh on the 29th. The regent proceeded to Dunbar. The Protestant army demolished the monasteries of the capital, and seized the coining irons of the mint.

THE

CHAPTER XXVII

THE DAYS OF KNOX

HE queen regent retreated to Leith. During August and September a number of French troops disembarked and began to fortify that port. The Lords of the Congregation had already laid siege to the town, but the Frenchmen soon made the fortifications so strong that the siege was raised, and the Protestants returned to Edinburgh. Skirmishing immediately began between the two armies, in which the French were generally victorious. The Scots were forced out of Edinburgh, and retired to Stirling.

At John Knox's suggestion, negotiations were now opened with England for the despatch of reinforcements, and in January, 1560, a treaty was concluded at Berwick between the Protestants and the English. Within a few weeks an English fleet, with from six to eight thousand men, appeared in the Firth of Forth. The united Scotch and English forces then besieged Leith, and on the sixth of July that city capitulated. An arrangement was made which resulted in the withdrawal of the French and English forces from Scotland, with the agreement that the Scottish monarch should not make peace or war except with the consent of the Estates of the Kingdom; that none of the high offices of the realm should be deputed to aliens; that churchmen should not hold the offices of treasurer and comptroller; and that a Parliament should assemble in August. Peace was proclaimed on July 8, 1560, and a few days after the French and English troops departed. Meantime, the death of the queen regent had taken place on the tenth of June.

Parliament assembled in August. Among its enactments were measures abolishing the jurisdiction of the pope in Scotland, prohibiting the mass, and adopting a Confession of Faith for the Reformed Church.

Francis II. of France, husband of the young Queen of Scots, died in December, 1560. In the following August, Mary returned from France to Scotland. Four days after her arrival, arrangements were made for the celebration of mass in the queen's chapel. Such an outcry arose amongst the people that the chapel door had to be guarded, and order was with difficulty preserved. On the following Sunday John Knox declaimed against the mass. Mary took him to task for stirring up her subjects against their ruler, and for teaching sedition. Knox appeared before the queen. The following is his account of their interview:

Whether it was by counsel of others, or of the Queen's own desire, we know not, but the Queen spake with John Knox, and had long reasoned with him; none being present, except the Lord James [brother to Mary]; two gentlemen stood in the one end of the room. The sum of their reasoning was this: The Queen accused him, that he had raised a part of her subjects

against her mother and herself; that he had written a book against her just authority (she meant the treatise against the regiment of women), which she had, and would cause the most learned in Europe to write against; that he was the cause of great sedition and great slaughter in England; and that it was said to her, that all that he did was by necromancy.

To the which the said John Knox answered: "Madam, it may please your majesty patiently to hear my simple answers: and first," said he, "if to teach the word of God in sincerity; if to rebuke idolatry, and to will a people to worship God according to his word be to raise subjects against their princes, then cannot I be excused . but, madam, if the true knowledge of God and his right worshipping, be the chief causes which must move men to obey their just princes from their heart (as it is most certain that they are), wherein can I be reprehended?

"But yet," said she, "you have taught the people to receive another religion than their princes can allow; and how can that doctrine be of God, seeing that God commandeth subjects to obey their princes?" “Madam, said he," as right religion took neither original nor antiquity from worldly princes, but from the eternal God alone, so are not subjects bound to frame their religion according to the appetite of their princes; for oft it is, that princes are the most ignorant of all others, in God's true religion. If all the seed of Abraham should have been of the religion of Pharaoh, to whom they had been a long time subjects, I pray you, madam, what religion should there have been in the world? Or if all men in the days of the apostles, should have been of the religion of the Roman emperors, what religion should have been upon the face of the earth? and so,

madam, ye may perceive that subjects are not bound to the religion of their princes, albeit they are commanded to give them obedience."

Yea," quoth she, none of these men raised their sword against their princes.' "Yet, madam," quoth he, "ye cannot deny but they resisted; for those that obey not the commandments given, in some sort resist.' "But yet," said she, "they resisted not by the sword."

God," said he, "madam, had not given them the power and the means. "Think you," said she, "that subjects, having power, may resist their princes?" "If princes do exceed their bounds," quoth he, "madam, and do against that wherefore they should be obeyed, there is no doubt but they may be resisted, even by power; for there is neither greater honor, nor greater obedience to be given to kings and princes than God hath commanded to be given to father and mother; but so it is, that the father may be stricken with a frenzy, in the which he would slay his own children; now, madam, if the children arise, join themselves together, apprehend the father, take the sword or other weapon from him, and, finally, bind his hands, and keep him in prison till that his frenzy be overpast, think ye, madam, that the children do any wrong? Or, think ye, madam, that God will be offended with them that have staid their father from committing wickedness? It is even so, madam, with princes that would murder the children of God, that are subject unto them. Their blind zeal is nothing but a very mad frenzy; and therefore, to take the sword from them, to bind their hands, and to cast them into prison, till that they be brought to a more sober mind, is no disobedience against princes, but just obedience; because that it agreeth with the word of God.'

At these words, the Queen stood, as it were, amazed, more than a quarter of an hour; her countenance altered, so that the Lord James began to intreat her, and to demand, "what hath offended you, madam ?" At length,