of Kilmorack, that his name is Alexander and not John, and that he himself (Mr. Chisholm), is a blood relation to said Alexander Fraser's Wife (See f. 1619).

Robert Fraser, A.M.

(From The Lyon in Mourning, ed. cit., II, p. 260 ƒ.)

199. Bond Given by the Young Pretender

The Lyon in Mourning

The conditions of the bond given by Prince Charles to Hepburn of Kingstoun were hardly calculated to give it value, save as a curiosity, but it well illustrates the manner in which money was raised for the Stuart cause. The original was preserved by Mr. John Goodwillie, who attested the copy under the name of Benevole - a punning translation of his name in Latin.

L. S. We, Charles Prince of Wales, etc., Regent of the kingdoms of Scotland, England, France, and Ireland, and the dominions thereunto belonging, Whereas Patrick Hepburn of Kingstoun in the County of Haddington hath advanced to us by the hands of Collonel Lauchlan M'Lauchlan of that Ilk the sum of seven hundred and fourty pounds sterling in numerate money of Britain, we therefore hereby authorise and appoint our treasurer for the time to repay the aforsaid sum of seven hundred and fourty pounds to the said Patrick Hepburn, his heirs and assigneys whomsoever, and that how soon we shall arrive at our Palace of St. James, London, our Royall Father settled upon the throne of our royall ancestors, and our said kingdoms in peace and tranquillity, under our government. Given at our Palace of Holyroodhouse, the seventeenth day of October, 1745

The following letter, written by a spectator of the execution of the rebel lords, furnishes a fitting conclusion to the extracts concerning the Jacobite uprisings, which in 1715 and 1746 threatched the throne of the Protestant Succession.

LETTER DESCRIBING THE EXECUTION OF THE REBEL LORDS IN

1746, COPIED FROM THE ORIGINAL

August 20th (1746). — Dear Sir, As you and Mrs. Grimstone attended the Lords' tryal, I thought it would not be disagreeable to you to have an account of their exit or the last act of their tragedy, especially as I saw part of it, and heard the rest from one who was on the scaffold. The sheriffs came there between 9 and 10 to see if everything was prepared. The scaffold was nine feet above ground, with a rail and black bays hanging from it. On the floor (which was covered with sawdust) was fixed the block, 2ft. 2in. high and 3 inches broad: near it lay red bags to receive the heads, and two white sheets to wrap the bodies in, and on each side were the coffins with coronets and inscriptions, and on the ground two hearses. The executioner was in blew with gold buttons and a red waistcoat (the cloaths of Fletcher executed by him): the ax that of a carpenter.

At 11 the Lords came: Kilmarnock attended by Foster and a young clergyman. Balmerino was dressed in blew turned up with red (his uniform). Going into the house prepared for them, a spectator asked which was Balmerino; to which he replied, "I am he at your service." Then turning to Kilmarnock, he told him he was sorry he was not the only sacrifice, and asked the sheriffs if they were ready, for he longed to be at home, and said he was asham'd for some of his friends, who shed tears when Lord Kilmarnock came on the scaffold. The bays was turned up that all might see, and the executioner put on a white waistcoat. My Lord had a long discourse with Foster, who pressed him to own there what he had told him privately, a detestation of the fact for which he suffered; which he did and which Foster has advertised.

The executioner was a great while fitting him for the block, my Lord rising several times; and when down on his knees, it was six minutes before he gave the sign, when his head was nearly severed from his body by one blow; a slight cut finished the execution, and the body fell on its back....

The scaffold being cleared, and the executioner having put on a clean shirt, Lord Balmerino mounted the stage, and immediately walked to his coffin, and read the inscription, and then called up a warder, and gave him his tye wig, and put on a Scotch plaid cap, and then read a paper denying

the Pretender's orders for no quarter, commending him very much but being interrupted, he desired (briskly) to go on, and said he should lay down his head with pleasure on that block, pointing to it, and desiring those between him and it to remove. He reflected very much upon General Williamson, but said he had received the Sacrament that morning, and was told it was not proper for a person of his condition to say more of him, but referred for his character to Psalm 109, from verse 5th to 15th. He said the Pretender gave him leave to enter our service, but soon as he could be of service to him, he left us. He talked to the executioner, took the ax in his hand, and tried the block, and told and showed him where to strike (near his head), and gave him three guineas (all he had); kneeled down and presently gave the sign. The first blow did not strike his head off, so that the assistants were forced to lift up his body to receive a second, but the third finished him.

I own I was a great deal more moved when I called on my friend Mr. Gill in the afternoon, and found him in great pain and given over by his Doctor, than I was with what I saw in the morning.

The Guards attending were 1,000, and I am sure the spectators were 100 to 1 of the Guards.

I am yours and Mr. and Mrs. Grimstons

Most obliged servant,

R. Graham.

(Diaries of a Lady of Quality (Miss Wynn), ed. by A. Hayward Q.C.

London, 1864, p. 142.)

CHAPTER XXVII

JOHN WILKES

201. No. 45 of the "North Briton"

We cannot better introduce the following paper than by quoting the words of Sir THOMAS ERSKINE MAY, in his Constitutional History of England:

"On the 23rd of April, 1763, appeared the memorable number of the North Briton,' commenting upon the king's speech at the prorogation, and upon the unpopular peace recently concluded. It was at once stigmatized by the court as an audacious libel, and a studied insult to the king himself; and it has since been represented in the same light, by historians not heated by the controversies of that time. But however bitter and offensive, it unquestionably assailed the minister rather than the king. Recognizing, again and again, the constitutional maxim of ministerial responsibility, it treated the royal speech as the composition of the minister."

The result of the publication was the prosecution of Wilkes for libel in the Court of King's Bench. A verdict was easily obtained, but the people considered Wilkes their champion, and the illegal proceedings against him made him a hero. He was punished by imprisonment, but finally triumphed by being seated in that Parliament which had ousted him from their midst as a thing unclean.

THE NORTH BRITON

No. XLV, Saturday, April 23, 1763.

Genus orationis atrox, et vehemens, cui opponitur lenitatis et mansuetudinis.

CICERO.

The King's Speech has always been considered by the legislature, and by the public at large, as the Speech of the

Minister. It has regularly, at the beginning of every session of parliament, been referred by both houses to the consideration of a committee, and has been generally canvassed with the utmost freedom, when the minister of the crown has been obnoxious to the nation. The ministers of this free country, conscious of the undoubted privileges of so spirited a people, and with the terrors of parliament before their eyes, have ever been cautious, no less with regard to the matter, than to the expressions, of speeches, which they have advised the sovereign to make from the throne, at the opening of every session. They well knew that an honest house of parliament, true to their trust, could not fail to detect the fallacious arts, or to remonstrate against the daring acts of violence, committed by any minister. The speech at the close of the session has ever been considered as the most secure method of promulgating the favourite court creed among the vulgar; because the parliament, which is the constitutional guardian of the liberties of the people, has in this case no opportunity of remonstrating, or of impeaching any wicked servant of the crown.

This week has given the public the most abandoned instance of ministerial effrontery ever attempted to be imposed on mankind. The minister's speech of last Tuesday, is not to be parralleled in the annals of this country. I am in doubt, whether the imposition is greater on the sovereign, or on the nation. Every friend of his country must lament that a prince of so many great and amiable qualities, whom England truly reveres, can be brought to give the sanction of his sacred name to the most odious measures, and to the most unjustifiable, public declarations, from a throne ever renowned for truth, honour, and unsullied virtue. I am sure, all foreigners, especially the king of Prussia, will hold the minister in contempt and abhorrence. He has made our sovereign declare, My expectations have been fully answered by the happy effects which the several allies of my crown have derived from this salutary measure of the definitive Treaty. The powers at war with my good brother, the King of Prussia, have been induced to agree to such terms of accomodation, as that great prince has approved; and the success which has attended my negociation, has necessarily and immediately diffused the blessings of peace through every part of Europe. The infamous fallacy of this whole sentence is apparent to all mankind: for it is known, that the King of Prussia did not barely approve, but absolutely dic