Page:Dictionary of National Biography volume 36.djvu/401

Mary of Guise and the kirkmen, no longer thought it necessary to protect the protestants from the prelates, or to keep her promises of some definite toleration in which he had at one time thought her sincere ( Works, i. 298, 315). It is certain that in March 1559 Henry II sent Mary of Guise instructions to suppress heresy in Scotland. She ordered daily attendance at mass, and summoned the principal preachers to appear before the council at Stirling (ib. p. 813). On the other hand, Melville, a confidant of the Constable Montmorency, represents her as remonstrating against the orders which she carried out (Melville, p. 77; Michel de Castelnau in Jebb's Collection, ii. 446). But when reminded of her promises to the protestants she is said to have answered that princes could not be tied down to their promises, and that the ministers should be banished though they preached as truly as St. Paul (Spotiswood, p. 121). A conflict with Knox and his followers ensued [see Knox, John]. They occupied Perth, and destroyed the monasteries there, including the Charterhouse with the royal tombs. This act Mary treated as open rebellion (Works, i. 324). Huntly promised her assistance, and she advanced upon Perth ; but Argyll, one of the protestant leaders, negotiated an agreement on 29 May, by which the reformers agreed to disperse on receiving a promise that no French troops should be introduced into Perth, and that a parliament should settle the religious question (Stevenson, i. 822). But the agreement was broken almost as soon as made, the congregation 'reformed' Fife, accused the regent of evading the compact by introducing a Scottish garrison paid with French money into Perth, and soon gathered in such numbers that the regent's commanders avoided a battle at Coupar Moor on 1 3 June by agreeing to evacuate Fife (ib. pp. 843, 868). The lords of the congregation at St. Andrews were already secretly contemplating seeking assistance from Elizabeth (ib. p. 848). On 29 June they entered Edinburgh in great force, the regent retiring to Dunbar {ib. p. 893). But the catholic gentry of the Merse and Teviotdale rallied round her, and she forced her French officers to march upon Edinburgh (Thorpe, i. 114 ; Teulet, i. 326). The lords of the congregation, unable to keep their forces together, or to count upon immediate help from England, consented on 23 July to evacuate Edinburgh, assurances of mutual religious toleration until 10 Jan. following being exchanged (Stevenson, i. 1052).

But both parties more or less secretly prepared for the renewal of the contest. The Guises, who after July ruled France in the name of the new king, Francis II, promised to send their brother, the Marquis d'Elbœuf, with a large force to relieve Mary, 'who was not like to live long,' as soon as their difficulties at home would permit (ib. i. 1349). Meanwhile they sent her a few men and two ambassadors, De la Brosse and Nicholas de Pelleve, bishop of Amiens, who were to try and assuage the Scottish troubles (ib. p. 1399 ; Teulet, i. 344 sqq.) On their arrival about the beginning of September she began to fortify Leith, not feeling secure in Edinburgh. She had intelligence that the protestants had never ceased communication with Cecil, who on 10 Sept. smuggled Arran into Scotland (Stevenson, i. 1357). Chatelherault at once joined his son and the lords of the congregation at Hamilton, and on the 19th signed their protest against the French occupation and fortification of Leith (ib. i. 1342, 1365). The regent replied that it was as lawful for her daughter to fortify in her own realm as for him to build at Hamilton Sib. i. 1377). The arrival of Arran and deletion of Chatelherault was a severe blow to her, but Bothwell and Seaton still held by her, and Huntly and Morton remained neutral (ib. ii. 45, 175; Teulet, i. 355). Accusations of a settled design on her part to subvert the liberties of Scotland and of intended usurpation on the part of Chatelherault and Arran were exchanged and denied. On Wednesday, 18 Oct., the lords occupied Edinburgh, and she retired into Leith (Stevenson, ii. 42, 97, 102). Next day they called upon her to evacuate Leith, in a letter which she described in her reply of the 21st as appearing to come from a prince to his subjects (ib. ii. 94, 107). She expressed herself ready for concord if they would obey their superiors. On the same day ' the nobility and commons of the protestants of the church of Scotland ' suspended her from the regency, chose a council of thirteen, and ordered the siege of Leith (ib. ii. Ill, 116, 120). But they could not keep their men together; the English help, in spite of their entreaties, was still confined to money; and Both well's capture of one of the subsidies on 31 Oct. exposed their connection with England, and so dismayed them that the garrison of Leith made two successful sallies, and on 6 Nov. the congregation evacuated Edinburgh (ib. ii. 183, 211). Mary, as Sadler acknowledged, ' used no extremity ' in Edinburgh, and was disposed, it was thought, to admit the lords to grace if they would put away the intriguers Balnaves and Lethington (ib. ii. 272).

Before the end of the month (November 1559) Mary, whose health had long been