“KING-JAMES’ SECRET”

Manawatu Times, Volume LIII, Issue 6537, 20 February 1928, Page 4

“KING-JAMES’ SECRET”

COULD HE HAVE SAVED QUEEN MARY? SON’S DOUBLE DEALING. The cause of the Jacobites has never wanted enthusiasts even in the remotest parts of the world and as these in New Zealand pay such tribute to their faith as to publish a journal, they'will without doubt take the keenest interest in a new volumn issued by Nisbet and Conlpany, called “King James’ Secret.” It is written by Professor Bait, who is Historiographer Royal for Scotland, and as such has written most charming and distinctive books about Scottish life and history, which have made him our foremost authority to-day. Professor Bait has acted as editor while the research for- his book has been done by Mites Annie X Cameron, M.A, ■■ Professor Bait explains that the new documents published provide material for ah appreciation of the attitude adopted by James VI. of Scotland towards the, trial, .condemnation, and execution -of his mother Queen Mary. When he first realised that her life was in peril, he instructed Archibald Doug-

las, his, ambassador in, England, that Scotland ..and England could not remain in terms of alliance if she should ambassadors, Sir Robert Melville and bo put to death, and he sent a special messenger to plead for her life. But his two representatives were also instructed: to secure that nothing in her trial and sentence should impair their master ’s ’ claim to the succession to Elizabeth's throne. These facts have long been known, and the incompatibility of the twofold negotiations, which, was recognised by the ambassadors themselves, has been accepted as sufficient evidence that the Scottish King was not whole-hearted in his subsequent efforts to save his mother’s life. That conclusion derives ample confirmation from the documents printed in this book. James believed that he had to choose between Mary’s life and the English succession; the approaching conflict with Spain rendered the existing Scottish alliance a matter of great importance to England, and a threat of opening Scottish harbours to- Spanish ships might well restrain Elizabeth from taking her cousin’s life; but, on the other hand, the English statesmen who were most friendly to James wore determined that Mary should dip in Elizabeth’s lifetime, and ho would have alienated them, as well as popular English feeling, by the successful employment

of such a menace for such a purpose. He came near to threats, but, at the :(amo .time,, indicated quite plainly that ho would bo content with verbal protests. The new evidence now printed includes tho following points:—(1) After learning from- Archibald Douglas that ho had told the Earl of Leicester that a report that Mary’s execution would involve a rupture of the Anglo-Scottish League was unfounded, James wrote to Leicester to modify a letter'in which he had just made a strong 1 plea for his mother. He feaid that ho ’himself would be infatuated if he wore to. prefer his mother to the claim to the succession. This expression may possibly not have meant all that the words taken by themselves imply, but it was followed by the cold assurance that the King’s religion moved him to hate his mother’s policy,..though his honour constrained him to insist for her life. This letter convinced Elizabeth and her Ministers that they might, put Mary to death without imperilling the Scottish alliance, and James’ ambassadors, when they attempted to threaten, were, thereafter, invariably checkmated by confident assertions that the 'King of Scots was not really in earnest, and, once the deed’was done,, would easily “digest” the injury to his feelings. (2) When two specially accredited

the Master of Gray,., were making a final appeal for Mary’s life, they reported that Sir Alexander Stewart, who had been sent with them by James was informing tho English Ministers that he had secret instruction from Ms master, who was really indifferent to Mary’s fate and they insisted that Stewart’s assertion had revived an impression, which they had hoped they had destroyed that tho Scottish King was not in earnest. James expressed great indignation with Stewart, but took no steps to punish him when he returned to Edinburgh. (3) At tho last moment Elizabeth personally seemed to show signs of yielding. Gray and Melville believed that Mary might be saved if the Queen was convinced of the earnestness of her son’s pleading, and begged James to disavow Stewart’s interpretation of his attitude. It was with this in his knowledge - that James wrote his final letter to Elizabeth. He contented himself with an assurance that his accredited ambassadors alone knew his mind and deliberately' refrained from uttering any threat.. (4) In spite of a large amount of evidence, that Archibald Douglas had betrayed Mary ’s cause, and had treacherously dissociated himself from his fellow ambassadors, James continued to employ him for years after Mary’s death.