the castle, and the bush secure the cow." Than such a resolution as this, nothing could have been wiser or more praiseworthy, and he certainly did all he could, and probably more than he ought, to accomplish the desirable end which the
sentiment proposed; but he seems to have been somewhat indiscriminating in his vengeance. This indiscrimination may be only apparent, and may derive its character from the imperfectness of the history of that period; but as we- judge of the good by what is upon record, we are bound to judge of the bad by the same rule; and it would be rather a singular mischance, if error and misrepresentation were always and exclusively on the side of the latter. It is, at any rate, certain, that a remarkable humanity, or any remarkable inclination to the side of mercy, were by no means amongst the number of James's good qualities, numerous though these assuredly were. With the best intentions towards the improvement of his kingdom, and the bettering of the condition of his subjects, James had yet the misfortune to excite, at the commencement of his reign, a very general feeling of dissatisfaction with his government.
This, amongst the aristocracy, proceeded from the severity with which he threatened to visit their offences; and amongst the common people, from his having imposed a tax to pay the ransom money stipulated for his release from captivity. This tax was proposed to be levied at the rate of twelve pennies in the pound on all sorts of produce, on farms and annual rents, cattle and grain, and to continue for two years. The tax was with great difficulty collected the first year, but in the second the popular impatience and dissatisfaction became so general and so marked, that the king thought it advisable to abandon it; and the consequence was, as already remarked, that the debt was never discharged. The reluctance of the nation to pay the price of their prince's freedom may appear ungenerous, and as implying an indifference towards him personally; but this is not a necessary, nor is it the only conclusion which may be inferred from the circumstance. It is probable that they may have considered the demand of England unreasonable and unjust, and it certainly was both, seeing that James was no prisoner of war, but had been made captive at a time when the two kingdoms were at peace with each other. To make him prisoner, therefore, and make him pay for it too, seems indeed to have been rather a hard case, and such it was probably esteemed by his subjects. The policy which James proposed to adopt, was not limited to the suppression of existing evils or to the prevention of their recurrence in time to come, but extended to the punishing of offences long since committed, and of which, in many instances, though we are told the results, we are left uninformed of the crime. At the outset of his reign he had ordered the arrest of Walter, eldest son of. Murdoch, duke of Albany, the late regent, together with that of Malcolm Fleming of Cumbernauld, and Thomas Boyd of Kilmarnock; and soon afterwards, taking advantage of the circumstance of a meeting of parliament at Perth, which he had convoked probably for the purpose of bringing them within his reach, he ordered the arrest of Murdoch himself, his second son, Alexander Stewart, the earls of Douglas, Angus, and March, and twenty other gentlemen of note.
The vengeance, however, which gave rise to this proceeding, was followed out only in the case of Albany; at least his punishment only is recorded in the accounts given by our historians of this transaction, while all the others are allowed to drop out of sight without any further notice of them in connexion with that event. Indeed the whole of this period of Scottish history is exceedingly obscure; much of it is confused, inconsistent, and inexplicable, and is therefore indebted almost wholly to conjecture for any interest it possesses, and perhaps no portion of it is more obscure than that which includes the occurrence which has just been alluded to. The king's vengeance is said to have been
