The History of England in Three Volumes, Vol. I., Part D.: From Elizabeth to James I.
David Hume · en
The count d’Aubigney, of the house of Lenox, cousin-german to the king’s
father, had been born and educated in France; and being a young man of
good address and a sweet disposition, he appeared to the duke of Guise
a proper instrument for detaching James from the English interest, and
connecting him with his mother and her relations. He no sooner appeared
at Stirling, where James resided, than he acquired the affections of the
young monarch; and joining his interests with those of James Stuart, of
the house of Ochiltree, a man of profligate manners, who had acquired
the king’s favor, he employed himself, under the appearance of play
and amusement, in instilling into the tender mind of the prince new
sentiments of politics and government. He represented to him the
injustice which had been done to Mary in her deposition, and made him
entertain thoughts either of resigning the crown into her hands, or of
associating her with him in the administration.[*] Elizabeth, alarmed
at the danger which might ensue from the prevalence of this interest
in Scotland, sent anew Sir Robert Bowes to Stirling; and accusing
D’Aubigney, now created earl of Lenox, of an attachment to the French,
warned James against entertaining such suspicious and dangerous
connections.[**]
* Digges, p. 412, 428. Melvil, p. 130.
** Spotswood, p. 309.
The king excused himself by Sir Alexander Hume, his ambassador; and
Lenox, finding that the queen had openly declared against him, was
further confirmed in his intention of overturning the English interest,
and particularly of ruining Morton, who was regarded as the head of it.
That nobleman was arrested in council, accused as an accomplice in the
late king’s murder, committed to prison, brought to trial, and condemned
to suffer as a traitor. He confessed that Bothwell had communicated
to him the design, had pleaded Mary’s consent, and had desired his
concurrence; but he denied that he himself had ever expressed any
approbation of the crime; and in excuse for his concealing it, he
alleged the danger of revealing the secret, either to Henry, who had no
resolution nor constancy, or Morton, who appeared to be an accomplice in
the murder.[*]
* Spotswood, p. 314, Crawford, p. 333. Moyse’s Memoirs,
Spotswood, p. 312. t Digge, p. 359. 373.