with their lordships leave, would take notice of fome particulars: Mr. Boyle received certain intelligence, the 23d of February, that the armament of Dunkirk was intended for Scotland; and the queen, on the 25th, impowers her privy-council there to put her forces, forts and garrisons in the best order. There were not at that time above fifteen hundred men of regular forces in Scotland. Though this was an infufficient strength, and though the parliament raised the establishment, December 20, 1707, from two thousand eight hundred and thirty-four, to five thousand nine hundred and thirty-two, yet there was little or no augmentation made, nor had the council one fhilling for neceflary expences the 11th of March, nor fo much as one penny ordered tillthe 13th, neither was the establishment fettled till after the invafion. He then proceeds to fhew, that when Scotland was in this defenceless condition, what affiftance they had from Oftend, England, and Ireland. The transports from Oftend, did not arrive at Tinmouth bay, till ten days after the enemy were seen on the Scotch coaft, so that the dif pute, had there been any, would have been over before they could come up. As to the troops from England, they had not orders to march till the 14th of March, which, confidering the length of the march from hence to Edinburgh, was certainly too long a delay. As for the troops from Ireland, the very orders to provide tranfports were not given by the lord Sunderland till the 12th of March here, nor by the lord lieutenant of Ireland, for the troops to be in a readiness till the 13th. Now, confidering what time would be taken up in providing neceffaries for tranfporting the troops, it seems very evident, that the queen was not truly acquainted with the danger fhe was in, and that these forces muft arrive in Scotland very late. He then took notice of the wretched state of the garrifons, particularly of the caftles of Stirling, Blacknefs, and Dumbarton, and concluded with faying, "I will not trouble you farther: I think "this matter is now very plain before your lordships; I "could wifh I had not faid one word of truth in what I "have faid to you, but the vouchers fhew it to be fo; and, "if all this be true, it is a very ftrange, a very furprising, ❝and a very aftonishing truth. "I fhall not move any thing to your lordfhips farther in "this matter: I believe there has been enough now faid, "to justify those lords for moving this inquiry, and shalt add but this word, that if there be no greater care taken << for the future than there was at this time, of such im"minent H 4 1708. 1708. "minent danger, it will be the greatest miracle in the world, "if, without a miracle, the pretender be not placed upon "that throne." The com mons proceedings about the invafion. Pr. H. C. This is the fubftance of what was observed by lord Haverfham, though there happened fome interlocutions between him and another lord; and fome observations were made upon the papers as they were read. The duke of Buckingham and feveral peers fpoke to the fame purpose. Upon which it was ordered, that the affair fhould be con-' fidered the Tuesday following in a full houfe. But all ended in a joint addrefs, as will presently be seen. During thefe debates in the house of lords, the commons hid alfo taken the affair of the invafion into confideration. Pursuant to an addrefs they had prefented to the queen, Mr. Boyle laid before the house a state of the whole matter of the defigned invafion of North-Britain; the proceedings against the late lord Griffin, and others taken in open rebellion, and also an account of the names of all those that were taken up, and the proceedings against them; and, in what pofture of defence the caftles and garrifons of NorthBritain were at that time, and now are. Not long after the commons refolved to present another address to the queen, That there might be laid before them a lift of the fhips of war employed on account of the late invafion under vice-admiral Byng and rear-admiral Baker, and of the names of the captains, who were employed in that expedition, and what journals had been delivered in, relating to the fame.' But after all these addreffes, when the papers, relating to this affair, came to be confidered, the house at length refolved, First, That orders were not iffued for the marching of the troops in England until the fourteenth day of March, it being neceffary for the fecurity of her majesty's person and government, that the " troops in this part of the kingdom fhould not march into Scotland, till there was certain intelligence that the enemy intended to land in that part of the united kingdom. Se< condly, That timely and effectual care was taken by those employed under her majefty, at the time of the intended invafion of Scotland, to disappoint the defigns of her majefty's enemies both at home and abroad, by fitting out a fufficient number of men of war, ordering a competent number of troops from Flanders, giving directions for the forces in Ireland to be ready for the affiftance of the nation, and by making the neceffary and proper difpofitions of the forces in England.' Purfuant to thefe refolutions, 1 an an address was drawn up, and prefented to the queen with 1708. the concurrence of the lords (k). with fome obfervations that Iwere made in the houfe of commons, and true copies of • authentic papers, in a letter ⚫ from a gentleman in South-Bri ་ tain, to his friend in North'Britain,' obferves, p. 20, &c. That the fame papers being laid before the house of commons, pursuant to their addrefs, produced the like obfervations there, and that the Scots gentlemen concurred with the English, in blaming the conduct of the miniftry; affirming it was such as gave great encouragement to the • enemies of the government; ⚫ while its friends look on their country to be perfectly given 6 up. This, they faid, was their general fenfe. In the house ⚫ of commons, some observations were also made upon the imprifoning many perfons in Scotland at that time; feveral lords and gentlemen of the best • quality and eftates were apprehended and feized, by virtue ⚫ of warrants fent from hence for fufpicion of treafon and • treasonable practices; though it does not appear from the that there was any papers, caufe to fufpect; nor that any ⚫ of their countrymen (who were The the propereft perfons to be advifed with on this occafion) were confulted in it. For the ⚫ earl of Mar, in his letter to the earl of Leven, March 9, writes, That he, with the dukes of Queenfberry and Montross, the earls of Loudon and Seafield, were fummoned to the cabinet, and were told there, that 'fince both houfes had, for fecuring fufpected perfons, fufpended the Habeas Corpus act, it was fit perfons in Scotland fhould be apprehended; and a lift was read to them, which they took down in writing, and warrants were ready drawn. This was certainly a very extraordinary way of proceeding, and the more extraordinary, because the greatest part of the lords and gentlemen, taken up by these warrants, had given undoubted • teftimonies ever fince the revolution (in which fome of ⚫ them had been very active and inftrumental) of their fidelity and good affection to the government; they had taken all • oaths that have been enjoined for their fecurity; they had fat in parliament; and fome ⚫ of them had been in offices and • employments of great trust in the reign of king William and of her majefty. Others, under the like circumftances, were taken up by warrants, bearing date the 29th of March, when the danger was over; which • made the Scots gentlemen very free in declaring, that the taking them up could be for no • other 1708. on the act trials of treafon in Scotland. The confideration of the state of the nation, with refpect to the late invasion, gave occafion to a bill concerning trials Proceedings of treafons in Scotland, under the title of an act for imconcerning proving the union of the two kingdoms.' This bill caused very great and long debates, and sprung from the proceedings against the fufpected perfons in Scotland, and particuPr. H. L. larly from a trial of fome gentlemen of that kingdom, who had left their houses, when the pretender was on the fea, and had gone about armed, and in fo fecret and fufpicious a manner, that it gave great cause of jealousy. There was no clear evidence to convict them; but there were very ftrong, if not violent prefumptions against them. Some forms in the trial had not been observed, which the criminal court judged were neceffary, and not to be dispensed with. Burnet. ⚫ were brought upon their trials, and acquitted. After all the • obfervations made upon the papers, the confideration of in the papers against any ofwill bear. Accordingly, they them. There was indeed fome • evidence of high-treafon pretended against five gentlemen, taken up by warrants from the privy-council of Scotland; but that was fuch, as the lord advocate writes, neither he, nor • the other advocates employed for her majefty, did think would convict them; and therefore humbly offered it as their opinion, that it would be more for the honour and fervice of her majefty, and of her government, that they should not ⚫ be profecuted. The earl of Sunderland, in his anfwer, acquainted him, he had laid his memorial before her majesty, who was well fatisfied with • what he had done, in procuring ‹ evidence against the prisoners; them ended in the house of 'commons, in the refolution ⚫ above-mentioned. The gen⚫tlemen that were against this ⚫ refolution, defired that all the papers laid before the house, relating to the intended invafion of Scotland, might be printed, that the world might fee and judge, how wellgrounded it was. But thofe, who had juftified the miniftry ' in their debates, and voted for ⚫ the refolution, would not fuf . fer the papers to be printed, 'fo that the question was carried in the negative.' But But the queen's advocate, Sir James Stuart, was of another mind. The court thought it was neceflary, by their laws, that the names of the witneffes fhould have been fignified to the prisoners fifteen days before the trial. But the queen's advocate had not complied with this, as to the chief witnesses, so that the court could not hear their evidence. He did not upon that move for a delay; and therefore the trial went on, and the gentlemen were acquitted. Severe expoftulations paffed between the queen's advocate and the court. They complained of one another to the queen, and both fides juftified their complaints in print. Upon this it appeared, that the laws in Scotland, concerning trials in cafes of treason, were not fixed nor certain. For which reafon a bill was brought into the house of commons to fettle that matter; but it was fo much opposed by the Scots members, that it was dropped in the committee. It was taken up and managed with more zeal by the lords. 1708. It confifted of three heads: all crimes, which were high- The heads treafon by the law of England, and these only, were to be of the act high-treafon in Scotland. The manner of proceeding fettled in England was to be observed in Scotland; and the pains and forfeitures were to be the fame in both nations. The Scotch lords oppofed every branch of this act. They moved, that all things, that were high-treafon by the law of England, might be enumerated in the act, for the information of the Scots nation; otherwise they must study the book of statutes, to know when they were fafe, and when they were guilty. To this it was anfwered, that direction would be given to the judges, to publish an abstract of the laws of high-treafon, which would be a fufficient information to the people of Scotland in this matter. That nation would by this means be in a much fafer condition than they were now; for the laws they had, were conceived in fuch general words, that the judges might put fuch conftructions on them, as fhould ferve the ends of a bad court; but they would by this act be reftrained in this matter for the future. The fecond head in this bill occafioned a much longer The forms debate it changed the whole method of proceedings in of proceeding in ScotScotland. The former way there was, the queen's advo- land. cate figned a citation of the perfons, fetting forth the special matter of high-treafon, of which they were accufed. This was to be delivered to them, together with the names of the witneffes, fifteen days before the trial. When the jury was impannelled, no peremptory charges were allowed: reafons |