From the above interesting muniment, various important points in our history may be established. In the first place, it seems evident, that Wallace and Murray, _up to the 11th October 1297_, acted only as “duces exercitus regni Scotie,” in behalf of the _community of said kingdom_; and that _the commission from John Baliol_, authorizing them to act under his sanction, must have been received by them _on their march to England_, or _during the time the devastation of that country was going forward_; that is to say, between the 11th _October_ and 7th _November_, on which day the charter was granted to the monks of Hexham,[88] where we find “the name of the illustrious Prince John, by the Grace of God King of Scotland,” is added to the authorities mentioned in the above letter. And again, that between the 7th _November_ 1297, and the 29th _March_ 1298, _another commision_ must have been forwarded from _Baliol_ to _Wallace_ constituting him the _sole Regent of the Kingdom of Scotland_, as we find him on _that day_ at Torphichen granting, in that capacity, a charter to Alexander Scrimgeor, and affixing to it the _seal of Baliol_; which circumstance is mentioned in the charter, while no mention is made of any seal being used in that at Hexham.[89] From the circumstance of Andrew Murray’s name having precedence in the letter to the Hanse Towns, and in the charter of Hexham, it may with great probability be inferred, that these two documents were either written by Wallace himself, or under his direction. That he was qualified for the task is evident, from the care which had been bestowed on his education; first by his uncle, and afterwards at the seminary of Dundee. If Murray had either written them, or ordered them to be written, it is not likely that he would have placed his own name before one whose merits were so generally acknowledged, as to procure him the appointment of Regent in so short a time afterwards; while Wallace, in placing, or causing the name of Murray to be placed, before his own, appears acting in perfect consistency with those amiable traits in his character which we have already noticed. As these writings are also free from that monkish pedantry, and mystification which pervades in the literature of that age, they may with great probability be considered as the composition of the talented Liberator.[90] It may be remarked, that the envy which a number of the magnates of Scotland entertained towards the Guardian, seems to have arisen after his appointment to the Regency. How Sir Andrew Murray demeaned himself on the occasion, does not appear; but the conduct and feelings of Cumyn, his near relation,[91] were too unequivocally expressed to be misunderstood.