The History of England, from the Accession of James II Volume III Part 32

[Footnote 367: As to the battle, see Mackay's Memoirs Letters, and Short Relation the Memoirs of Dundee; Memoirs of Sir Ewan Cameron; Nisbet's and Osburne's depositions in the Appendix to the Act. Parl. Of July 14. 1690. See also the account of the battle in one of Burt's Letters.

Macpherson printed a letter from Dundee to James, dated the day after the battle. I need not say that it is as impudent a forgery as Fingal.

The author of the Memoirs of Dundee says that Lord Leven was scared by the sight of the highland weapons, and set the example of flight. This is a spiteful falsehood. That Leven behaved remarkably well is proved by Mackay's Letters, Memoirs, and Short Relation.]

[Footnote 368: Mackay's Memoirs. Life of General Hugh Mackay by J.

Mackay of Rockfield.]

[Footnote 369: Letter of the Extraordinary Amba.s.sadors to the Greffier of the States General, August 2/12. 1689; and a letter of the same date from Van Odyck, who was at Hampton Court.]

[Footnote 370: Memoirs of Sir Ewan Cameron; Memoirs of Dundee.]

[Footnote 371: The tradition is certainly much more than a hundred and twenty years old. The stone was pointed out to Burt.]

[Footnote 372: See the History prefixed to the poems of Alexander Robertson. In this history he is represented as having joined before the battle of Killiecrankie. But it appears from the evidence which is in the Appendix to the Act. Parl. Scot. of July 14. 1690, that he came in on the following day.]

[Footnote 373: Mackay's Memoirs.]

[Footnote 374: Mackay's Memoirs; Memoirs of Sir Ewan Cameron.]

[Footnote 375: Memoirs of Sir Ewan Cameron.]

[Footnote 376: Memoirs of Sir Ewan Cameron.]

[Footnote 377: See Portland's Letters to Melville of April 22 and May 15. 1690, in the Leven and Melville Papers.]

[Footnote 378: Mackay's Memoirs; Memoirs of Sir Ewan Cameron.]

[Footnote 379: Exact Narrative of the Conflict at Dunkeld between the Earl of Angus's Regiment and the Rebels, collected from several Officers of that Regiment who were Actors in or Eyewitnesses of all that's here narrated in Reference to those Actions; Letter of Lieutenant Blackader to his brother, dated Dunkeld, Aug. 21. 1689; Faithful Contendings Displayed; Minute of the Scotch Privy Council of Aug. 28., quoted by Mr.

Burton.]

[Footnote 380: The history of Scotland during this autumn will be best studied in the Leven and Melville Papers.]

[Footnote 381: See the Lords' Journals of Feb. 5. 1688 and of many subsequent days; Braddon's pamphlet, ent.i.tled the Earl of Ess.e.x's Memory and Honour Vindicated, 1690; and the London Gazettes of July 31.

and August 4. and 7. 1690, in which Lady Ess.e.x and Burnet publicly contradicted Braddon.]

[Footnote 382: Whether the attainder of Lord Russell would, if unreversed, have prevented his son from succeeding to the earldom of Bedford is a difficult question. The old Earl collected the opinions of the greatest lawyers of the age, which may still be seen among the archives at Woburn. It is remarkable that one of these opinions is signed by Pemberton, who had presided at the trial. This circ.u.mstance seems to prove that the family did not impute to him any injustice or cruelty; and in truth he had behaved as well as any judge, before the Revolution, ever behaved on a similar occasion.]

[Footnote 383: Grey's Debates, March 1688/9.]

[Footnote 384: The Acts which reversed the attainders of Russell Sidney, Cornish, and Alice Lisle were private Acts. Only the t.i.tles therefore are printed in the Statute Book; but the Acts will be found in Howell's Collection of State Trials.]

[Footnote 385: Commons' Journals, June 24. 1689.]

[Footnote 386: Johnson tells this story himself in his strange pamphlet ent.i.tled, Notes upon the Phoenix Edition of the Pastoral Letter, 1694.]

[Footnote 387: Some Memorials of the Reverend Samuel Johnson, prefixed to the folio edition of his works, 1710.]

[Footnote 388: Lords' Journals, May 15. 1689.]

[Footnote 389: North's Examen, 224. North's evidence is confirmed by several contemporary squibs in prose and verse. See also the eikon Brotoloigon, 1697.]

[Footnote 390: Halifax MS. in the British Museum.]

[Footnote 391: Epistle Dedicatory to Oates's eikon Basiliki]

[Footnote 392: In a ballad of the time are the following lines]

"Come listen, ye Whigs, to my pitiful moan, All you that have ears, when the Doctor has none."]

These lines must have been in Mason's head when he wrote the couplet]

"Witness, ye Hills, ye Johnsons, Scots, Shebbeares; Hark to my call: for some of you have ears."]

[Footnote 393: North's Examen, 224. 254. North says "six hundred a year." But I have taken the larger sum from the impudent pet.i.tion which Gates addressed to the Commons, July 25. 1689. See the Journals.]

[Footnote 394: Van Citters, in his despatches to the States General, uses this nickname quite gravely.]

[Footnote 395: Lords' Journals, May 30. 1689.]

[Footnote 396: Lords' Journals, May 31. 1689; Commons' Journals, Aug.

2.; North's Examen, 224; Narcissus Luttrell's Diary.]

[Footnote 397: Sir Robert was the original hero of the Rehearsal, and was called Bilboa. In the remodelled Dunciad, Pope inserted the lines]

"And highborn Howard, more majestic sire, With Fool of Quality completes the quire."]

Pope's highborn Howard was Edward Howard, the author of the British Princes.]

[Footnote 398: Key to the Rehearsal; Shadwell's Sullen Lovers; Pepys, May 5. 8. 1668; Evelyn, Feb. 16. 1684/5.]

[Footnote 399: Grey's Debates and Commons' Journals, June 4. and 11 1689.]

[Footnote 400: Lords' Journals, June 6. 1689.]

[Footnote 401: Commons' Journals, Aug. 2. 1689; Dutch Amba.s.sadors Extraordinary to the States General, July 30/Aug 9]

[Footnote 402: Lords' Journals, July 30. 1689; Narcissus Luttrell's Diary; Clarendon's Diary, July 31. 1689.]

[Footnote 403: See the Commons' Journals of July 31. and August 13 1689.]

[Footnote 404: Commons' Journals, Aug. 20]

[Footnote 405: Oldmixon accuses the Jacobites, Barnet the republicans.

Though Barnet took a prominent part in the discussion of this question, his account of what pa.s.sed is grossly inaccurate. He says that the clause was warmly debated in the Commons, and that Hampden spoke strongly for it. But we learn from the journals (June 19 1689) that it was rejected nemine contradicente. The Dutch Amba.s.sadors describe it as "een propositie 'twelck geen ingressie schynt te sullen vinden."]

[Footnote 406: London Gazette, Aug. 1. 1689; Narcissus Luttrell's Diary.]

[Footnote 407: The history of this Bill may be traced in the journals of the two Houses, and in Grey's Debates.]