difficulty of determining whether Buchanan's patron, who was also Mary's Prime Minister, or the Historian himself, possessed the superior talent for misrepresentation. [160] Birrel's Diary.--Keith, p. 351.--Goodall, vol. i. p. 302.--Chalmers, vol. i. p. 190, vol. ii. p. 109 and 224. [161] Buchanan's History, book xviii.; and in his, "Detection," he repeats the same story, with still more venom. [162] Both of these Registers are quoted by Chalmers, vol. i. p. 181. [163] Miss Benger's observations upon this subject are judicious and forcible. "It was not till the 16th, the Queen, with her Officers of State, passed to hermitage Castle, twenty miles distant, whether to confer with Bothwell on business, respecting the motives for the late outrage on his person, or purely as a visit of friendship and condolence, a respectful, and as it should seem, well-merited acknowledgement of his loyal services, must be left to conjecture. It is, however, not improbable, since the Earl of Morton was, at that time, known to be in the neighbouring March of Cessford, that Mary might be anxious to ascertain from Bothwell's lips, whether he ascribed the attack on his person to that nobleman's instigation. In Morton's behalf she had long been importuned by Murray, by Elizabeth, and Maitland, and, at a proper time, meant to yield to their solicitations; but the discovery of a new treason, would have altered her proceedings; to ascertain the fact was, therefore, of importance. By whatever considerations Mary was induced to pay this visit, there appears not (when calumny is discarded), any specific ground for the suspicion, that she then felt for Bothwell a warmer sentiment than friendship; in all her affections, Mary was ardent and romantic, and though it should have been admitted, that she had gone to Hermitage Castle, merely to say one kind word to the loyal servant, whose blood had lately flowed in her service, she had, two years before, made a far greater effort to gratify a _female_ friend, when she rode to Callender, to assist at the baptism of Lord Livingston's child, regardless of the danger which awaited her, from Murray and his party."--Memoirs, vol. ii. p. 289. We have dwelt too long on a calumny unsupported by any respectable evidence. [164] Chalmers, vol. ii. p. 224.