The Calendar of Scottish Crime. yidecl he made this false confession, although they were acting contrary to law in dealing with a minor in the absence of his curators. Only one shred of palliation can be found for the conduct of James V. in these pro ceedings, and it consists in the ignoble ex cuse that his timid nature had been so wrought on by the enemies of the house of Douglas that he really believed his life was in jeopardy so long as one of them remained alive. Also, there can be no doubt that his mind had been imbued by the detestable principles of Machiavelli, by which it was taught, to use the words of the Duke of Alva to Philip II., "that the négociations of kings depend upon different principles from those of us private gentlemen who walk the world." Seven years before, King James had not blushed to put these principles in practice in order to entrap Johnnie Armstrong of Gilnockie. Now the case of Lady Glamis and her son has been dwelt on at somewhat dispropor tionate length, not only on account of its heinousness, but because, until Pitcairn cleared it up, one historian after another had repeated the fable that Lady Glamis was pun ished for witchcraft; but that crime was never alleged against her. The idea must have arisen out of the earlier charge, which was abandoned, of administering enchanted potions to her first husband, conjunctly with the sentence that she should be burnt at the stake. By the old law of Scotland burning was the statutory method of putting to death all women convicted of treason, witchcraft, or murder, just as those convicted of theft and minor offences were drowned, which was considered more merciful than hanging. Yet one cannot overlook one hideous trace of the King's hatred of the Douglas in the execution of Lady Glamis. It was very unusual that the victim should be burned "quick" — i.e. alive. The ordinary form of "doom" was that the culprit "be tañe to the Castell hill of Edinburgh [or elsewhere],
285
and thair to be wirreit [strangled] at ane stake to the deid [to death]; and hir body tliaircfter to be brunt in asches; and all hir moveabill guidis to be escheit," &c. But Lady Glamis was burnt alive. A strangely dramatic piece of retribution fell on one of the jurors on the trial of Lady Glamis. Sir John Melville of Raith.a gentle man of high repute, having been one of those who returned the fatal verdict, not only on Lady Glamis, but also on her son and Lord Forbes, became himself the victim of a judi cial murder. To follow this case brings the reader down to that time when a novel form of offence had made its appearance in the records of the High Court. The first recorded instance of a melancholy series of prosecutions for entertaining views favorable to doctrines of the Reformed religion, and especially of "haifing and vsing of sic bukes as ar suspect of heresy and ar défendit be the Kirk"—i. e., the translated Scriptures — occurs in 1 5 39. But aprelatical Parliament had not succeeded in crushing entirely the spirit of the Scottish people. Prosecution for religious opinion brought the Government into direct conflict with the love of freedom innate in the masses, and the entries in the records of such pro ceedings during the reign of Queen Mary are far fewer than might have been expected, considering what is known of the events which heralded the Scottish Reformation. Pitcairn suggests that some of the entries may have been purposely expunged by the authorities as forming awkward precedents for those who, in later years, were charged with administering justice upon persons for professing the very opinions which former Governments had upheld and attending ser vices in the "auld and abhominabell Papish manner." Be that as it may, there can be little doubt that many of the prosecutions directed by the Regent Arran and his brother, the Arch bishop of St. Andrews, against certain of the barons and gentry, were really aimed at them
