1S06.] 



certain Points of Scottish Tlistori/. 



125 



knowen to tlitnn, tliat they could maJt no 

 tiirder futte for lier cltlyvei yc ; and per- 

 haps grytar rigour inicht ciilhew to her 

 pcrfoune; therefore he advyled me to 

 confer with Litlilngtoun, aad yet betwix 

 him and uio, we aiii^ht tiuil iuiu nieeiies 

 to (tay the risiouriiiteudit; and proinill'ed 

 wJiat ijc could do to yat eti'ett be Lithiiii^- 

 ton's afh'ertilement he would do it. I 

 replyeft^- that Lit/iiiigtoiin wold have her 

 to ratiiie the diniillion made at York 

 for a tynie, for he alfonued that could 

 Ijurt her no more now, beinue keped 

 prilbner in higland, nor that uiuth was 

 done in Lothlcevln, for fo iliuld ilie (iay 

 the uttering of any meterls agains her, 

 and witiiin lix moucthis (lie \^old be re^ 

 ftored to her euutrev with honor, and fo 

 niiclit revoke all done be her. To tliis the 

 Duke anfwcred, what \i tbat war alone 

 to be quitic of the prtjenl. iiifamie and 

 Jlunder, and let tyme work the relh" 



Such is the paHoge to wliicb Mr. Laing 

 appeals for the truth of his all'ertion that 

 Lelhe " tacitly cicknonlcd^ed the authen- 

 ticity of'tiK; letters, and pi-opoftd a de- 

 vice of Lethiiigtun's that the Queen 

 ftiould ratify her former refignation of 

 her crown !" But 1 fay now, as I faid 

 before, that it " contains nothing which 

 the moft perverfe ingenuity can conftrue 

 into fuch an acknowltdg/iicnt," or inch a 

 jpropojhl by Leslie ; whillh the other paf- 

 fage whicli I quoted from that iiluiirious 

 prelate, fliews the extreme improbability 

 of his having cx^er made luch a propol'al 

 as that which is here made by Lethi no- 

 ton, and approved by the Duke of Nor- 

 rOLK. It is apparent from the whole 

 converfation between the Duke of Nor- 

 folk and the Biihop of Rofs, as it is, re- 

 ported in the 53d page of Murdjn's C.ol- 

 le(^tion, that tliey had tliCu met conii- 

 dentialiy for Xh.efrjl time ; that the con- 

 ferences at York wnse not then regularly 

 opened; that it was at Leith and not &t 

 York, tiiat the Duke had talked icith 

 Murratf and Lethingfon, and jitn the 

 letters ; and that as Lcllie had neither 

 fecn ttiem nor been made acquainted 

 wth their contents, he could not, as an 

 honed man, admit their authenticity, 

 nor as a man of common fenfe attempt 

 to perfuade the Duke that " they were 

 entirely a forgery." He liltened however 

 to tiie propolial of Lethington and Nor- 

 folk, not becaufe he thought, as Mr. 

 l^ing more than iiiiinuatcs, his beloved 

 nallrefs guilty, but btcuvj'e the propofal 

 was rtprefcnted to him as neceiiary to 



• Not frofejcJ, u Mr. Lainj affirms in tiis 

 Difl'crtativiv 



prevent her from V)cing cuhmninted at 

 foreign courts ; to arert the greuler ri' 

 gour intended agaiiil't her perjlm ; and to 

 open the uuy for her rejiorution to her 

 country xcUh honour-. 



Such are the fpecimcns which Mr^ 

 Laing has chofen to give of a review 

 " tilled (as he fays) througiiout with the 

 moll calumnious inlinuations againft his 

 charatter and credit as an hiftorian ;" 

 " fuch," as he expreft'ed himfelf in hi* 

 private correipondence with Mr. Nares, 

 " are the infults, pubhc and deliberate 

 infults, which I have oft'ered to liis cha- 

 ratter; and fuch is the tnalignunt and 

 fcurrilous tenor of the whole review." 

 This, no doubt, is the more provoking 

 tliat he, good man, tiir fiom offering any 

 infalt to tl;c characters of VVhitaker, 

 Stuart and i'ytler, or ticating any one of 

 them with malignant J'curriiity, expreffea 

 lus diflent from the opinions witii pecu- 

 liar modcfty, and candidly oHous to each 

 the merit w hich he poffelff d ! ! ! It is 

 true that he has accufed them all oi fcvr' 

 riloufly pcrvci ling every hijiorical fu6l ; 

 and lias faid of VVhitaker, that he ha« 

 written uhfurd'y, ridiiiuloiijly, and witii 

 artifice ; of Stuart that he was intluenced 

 not by the love of truth, but by perfunal 

 rej'entment to Hobertfon ; and of I'ytler, 

 that he concealed the truth, tinder/iood 

 not the controverj'y, and wrote as a lauyer 

 pleads from his brief ! But Mr. Laing 

 I'.as, perhaps, a licence for all this ; 

 v/hihl a writer in the " Britiih Critic," 

 "ho may iind himlelf involved with his 

 friends in the general charge of having 

 fcurrilc\itly perverted every hiftorical 

 fa<ht*, cannot retort the charge without 

 being guilty of the moft unpardonable 

 otjence ! 



]Mr. Lains proceeds to det ct and 

 ftate, as he lays, my fomier maJisnity in 

 other journals, and begins his ftatemeiit 

 with giving a very garbled and unfair ac- 

 count of a matter which has no concern 

 whatever with the review of his, or any 



* It appears that Mr. Laing has turned 

 over the volumes of the Encyclopredia Bri- 

 tannica. It is therefore fo.Tiewhat dilHcuIt to 

 conceive, liow he could ("ail to difcover, in 

 1797, that / lurryte the Biografiical Sketch of 

 Mary S^^ecn of Scoti, whicli is juiblirtied in 

 that work. He afTures us, however, that he 

 never heard of me till May 1800> chough he 

 lived much in Edinburgh, where the Ency- 

 clopiEdii was carrying on, and attratlcd fome 

 notice ! He has, indeed, been fingularly un- 

 lucky in hearing nothing of reeiut events. 

 He had heard nothing of the revival of the . 

 Clan Mac-Grsgor in 1793 ! ! ! 



other 



