LINDSAY, JOHN, tenth Lord Lindsay of the Byres, first Earl of Lindsay, and afterwards known as John Crawford-Lindsay, seventeenth Earl of Crawford (1596–1678), son of Robert, ninth lord Lindsay of the Byres, and Lady Christian Hamilton, daughter of Thomas, earl of Melrose, and afterwards first earl of Haddington [q. v.], was born in 1596. He received ‘a noble education both at home and in foreign parts’ (Crawford, manuscript Hist. of the Lindsays, quoted in Lord Lindsay's Lives of the Lindsays). On 1 Oct. 1616 he was served heir to his father, and 8 May 1633 was created Earl of Lindsay and Lord Parbroath, but, on account of his opposition to the measures of the court, the patent was delayed till 1641. He was one of the leaders of the covenanting party, but his influence was due rather to his rank than his abilities, either political or military. Burnet describes him ‘as a sincere but weak man, passionate and indiscreet’ (Own Time, ed. 1838, p. 71); and if this estimate of his talents be too low, it probably is more accurate than the one which attributes his political course chiefly to a somewhat unscrupulous ambition. From the first he took a firm stand against the ecclesiastical policy of Charles in Scotland. He was prominent in his opposition to the introduction of the Service Book in 1637, and and was one of the four members of the committee of nobles appointed to take measures against it (Robert Baillie, Letters and Journals, i. 44). Along with the Earl of Hume he publicly protested at Stirling against the king's proclamation in 1638 (ib. i. 50; Balfour, Annals, ii. 250; Gordon, Scots Affairs, i. 32; Spalding, Memorialls, i. 85). On 3 Oct. of the same year he also presented to the Marquis of Hamilton a complaint of the presbyterian nobles against the attempts to compel the people to subscribe the king's covenant (Balfour, ii. 295–6; Gordon, i. 122). Lindsay was one of the covenanting nobles whom the king on his visit to Scotland in 1641 deemed it advisable to reconcile; and he now obtained the grant of his earldom, with precedence from the date of the warrant, and was also made an extraordinary lord of session and one of the commissioners of the treasury. He accompanied General Leslie into England in 1643 (Spalding, ii. 220), and distinguished himself at Marston Moor, 2 July 1644 (ib. p. 383). After the battle he sent a letter to the estates suggesting a general thanksgiving for the victory (Balfour, iii. 214). On the expiry of the commission of the treasury he was, on 23 July of this year, appointed lord high treasurer till the next parliament (ib. p. 231). Sentence of forfeiture having been passed against Ludovic, earl of Crawford, the title and dignities of Earl of Crawford were on the 25th of the same month ratified to Lindsay (ib. p. 237), in accordance with Crawford's patent of 15 Jan. 1641–2 [see Lindsay, Ludovic, sixteenth Earl of Crawford]. On 26 Jan. 1644–5 he succeeded Lauderdale as president of the parliament (ib. p. 256; Spalding, ii. 442).
Crawford was one of the committee chosen to direct General Baillie in his movements against Montrose, and he also held command of a number of reserve forces which were stationed at Newtyle to protect Perth and the lowlands. Montrose, on marching south to attack him, found his forces too strongly fortified to compel an engagement, and returned to the highlands (ib. ii. 479). Soon afterwards Crawford rejoined Baillie, and, having exchanged a thousand of his raw recruits for a like number of Baillie's veterans, returned to Angus, and entering Atholl burnt and ravaged the country. Baillie after his defeat by Montrose at Alford, on 2 July 1645, united the remnant of his defeated troops with Crawford's forces. The latter, with the other members of committee, counselled Baillie, against Baillie's own judgment, to abandon his advantageous position at Kilsyth and risk the battle on 2 July 1645, which resulted in his utter rout. Crawford made his escape to Berwick.
After the surrender of Charles to the Scots at Newark in 1646, Crawford was sent, with other deputies, to Newcastle to induce him to accept the Westminster propositions. Although as president of the parliament he signed the warrant for the surrender of Charles to the English, he at the same time, in his private capacity, entered his protest against it (statement presented by Crawford to the Restoration parliament in Acta Parl. Scot. vii. 11). After the king's imprisonment at Carisbrooke, Crawford, along with the Duke of Hamilton, headed the ‘engagers’ who initiated measures for the king's rescue. Matters between Crawford and Argyll became so strained that a duel was arranged between them on the links of Stonyhill, near Musselburgh, 25 March 1648, but owing to the dilatoriness and supposed timidity of Argyll, it did not take place (Guthry, p. 261; Balfour, iii. 395). Both were summoned by the commission of the kirk to make their repentance. Argyll consented, acknowledging that he had made a ‘scriptural desertion,’ but Crawford declined to admit himself in fault. The defeat of the Scottish army under the Duke of Hamilton at Preston led to the return to power of
