with complacency. Her half-brother, the lord James Stuart, prevented an unjustifiable interference with her religious observances, but she had to listen to the strong expressions of Knox and others against idolatry. She bitterly resented this, disclosing, without hesitation, her determined resolution to uphold popery. Thus Mary at once placed herself on ill terms with her subjects, who could not but contrast her conduct with that of the English queen, with whom also Mary seemed desirous of being on ill terms. She again refused to ratify the treaty of Edinburgh, refusing to withdraw the assumption of a present right to the English throne, unless Elizabeth would recognise her as being entitled to the succession. This could not be listened to. The English nation were not inclined to hear that another popish Mary was likely to be their queen, while to recognise her title would have given fresh energy to the partisans of popery. But although Elizabeth, from prudential motives, refused to recognise Mary as her successor, she never sought to set aside her claim to be lawfully so considered; while Mary clearly displayed her opinion, that she had a title to the English throne, not as the successor of Elizabeth, but in preference to that princess, whom her popish views led her to consider an usurper of her rights.

The state of affairs in Scotland became more troubled. The persecutions to which the Protestants had been subjected, with the determination to restore popery to its full extent, evinced by Mary's councillors before her arrival, and by herself afterwards, obliged the Reformers to take an active part in the affairs of the nation. Thus Knox and others, of whose piety there can be no doubt, were brought into direct collision with the queen. It is usual to speak in strong terms of censure respecting the conduct of Knox, in daring to remonstrate boldly with queen Mary respecting her proceedings. But the state of things was too serious to admit of trifling, or of close adherence to courtly forms. Not only the lives, but the souls of his

countrymen were at stake. Knox was placed in a situation of responsibility. A deep sense of this enabled him firmly to pursue what he considered to be his duty. Those who have studied the character and writings of this intrepid servant of God, will not be inclined to censure him, any more than the prophet Elijah for reproving Ahab and his idolatrous queen. But many a nominal Christian of our day would doubtless censure that prophet, for what they would call his harsh and uncourtly conduct towards Jezebel! Mary, like the wife of Ahab, as supreme ruler of Scotland, had to answer for the blood of the prophets of the Lord, who were slain by those who governed in her name, and whose acts she had not disavowed: but she was ready to resume the persecutions. Was such a character not to be told the truth? Was she only to have smooth things prophesied to her? And it is not for Mary's advocates to censure the boldness with which Knox spoke from the pulpit. At the very same time, popish preachers in France and elsewhere used much stronger language, openly stirring up subjects to rebellion. Her proceedings against Knox forced him to oppose her authority. In December, 1563, she caused him to be brought before her council on a charge of treason, for having written to some leading Protestants, requesting their presence at the trial of some persons charged with felony, for having rebuked a popish priest, when about to celebrate mass during the queen's absence from Edinburgh. The queen herself attended the council, and when she perceived Knox standing as a criminal, she burst into loud laughter, saying, "That man had made her weep, and shed never a tear himself; she would now see if she could make him weep." She interfered repeatedly against him; but the lords, after an inquiry, unanimously pronounced that he had not been guilty of any breach of the laws. The vindictive spirit of Mary has not been sufficiently noticed. It accounts for many of her actions, while it shows why no confidence could be

placed in her promises. She was an apt scholar of the princes of the house of Guise.

The administration of Elizabeth presented a striking contrast to that of her sister Mary. Having obtained peace with the surrounding nations, she gave encouragement to the arts of peace, and to commerce, according to the views then entertained. She was especially anxious to provide the necessary expenses of the government, with the least possible charge to her subjects; while, being threatened both by Spain and France, she had to adopt precautions against enemies both at home and abroad. This was accomplished by strict frugality. Her favourites complained, and her parsimony was carried too far; but it was better that a few individuals should lack reward, than that the nation should be impoverished, to gratify the vanity and folly of royal favourites.

In 1562, the Protestants in France were openly persecuted. A considerable number were massacred, when assembled for public worship at Vassy, a town governed in the name of Mary Stuart, as late queen of France, who received an income from its inhabitants. The duke of Guise, and his brother the cardinal, directed this massacre, upon receiving a complaint against the number of Protestants in that neighbourhood, from an aunt of the queen of Scots. Other deeds of violence followed, which caused the French Protestants to apply to Elizabeth for assistance; she gave them aid, well knowing her own danger if the popish party prevailed, but avoided engaging in direct warfare, except by occupying Havre as a place of security for her forces.

The disposition of the English papists to trouble Elizabeth had been shown already on several occasions. In June, 1561, the steeple and roof of St. Paul's Church, in London, were destroyed by fire kindled by lightning, or the carelessness of a plumber, when some papists circulated papers, alleging this to be a Divine judgment, because the popish services in that cathedral were discontinued. Pilkington, bishop of Durham,

answered this libellous statement in a tract, which exposed the gross superstitious observances and other evil practices and cruelties committed within that building in the days of popery. The public freely came forward with contributions for the repairs; a temporary roof was completed before winter, and the whole secured the next year; but the steeple, the summit of which was 520 feet from the ground, was never rebuilt. The seditious and treasonable practices of the papists increased; this caused an act to be passed, early in 1563, whereby a second refusal of the oath of supremacy, and maintaining the authority of the pope in England, were declared

to be treason. This cannot be considered as persecution against the Romanists for religion. It in no way interfered with their religious views, but only restrained them from proceedings against the queen's authority; a course which every ruler must pursue for self-preservation. The fears of a disputed succession induced the House of Commons again to petition the queen to marry, or to name her successor: to the first she was decidedly averse, the second would involve her in danger. She, therefore, returned an evasive answer. About this time she showed her sensitiveness on this subject, by causing lady Catherine Grey to be imprisoned, on account of a secret marriage with the earl of Hertford. This unfortunate lady was next in succession by the will of Henry VIII., but was not so near by descent as Mary, queen of Scots. The proceedings of Elizabeth in this matter cannot be justified, especially as the lady Catherine was kept a prisoner till her death about fourteen years afterwards, and her marriage was not allowed to be lawful till the following reign.

The surviving brothers of the Pole family also planned to dethrone Elizabeth, but their plot in favour of Mary Stuart was discovered, and they were convicted, though not put to death.

The death of the duke of Guise, with the interference of Elizabeth, caused the French court to grant terms to the Huguenots, as the Protestants in that country were called; but they did not support their ally. The English troops were withdrawn from Havre, after a fruitless attempt to retain that place as an equivalent for Calais.

An act passed in the parliament this year, provided that the Bible should be translated into Welsh, and that the religious services in that country should be in the native tongue. Well would it have been had similar provision been made for religious services in those parts of Ireland where English was not understood; but, unhappily, the only alternative given there was English or Latin: thus the people were kept in ignorance; and one of the worst errors of popery,