86 Memoir of John Napier, 



opinion, theydidnot sufficiently persecute. Napier belonged 

 to the Synod of Fife, the most violent of the whole of them. 

 He formed one of the deputies whom the Synod, and then 

 the General Assembly at Edinburgh chose, to carry to the 

 King a solemn deliberation, by which it was declared that 

 " his faithful subjects irrevocably determined to risk even 

 their lives in order to be delivered from the idolatry and 

 the society of the Bloody Papists : that Lords Huntly, Angus, 

 &c, (here follows a list of the proscribed persons, among 

 whom is the father-in-law of Napier), by their idolatry, 

 heresy, blasphemy, apostasy, and enmity to Jesus Christ 

 and his church in this kingdom of Scotland, have cut them- 

 selves off from Christian Society, and thus, deserve to be 

 effectually excommunicated, separated from the Church of 

 Christ, and delivered into the hands of Satan, whose slaves 

 they are ; until they learn, if it please God, not to blaspheme 

 Christ and his gospel," &c. Such were the holy pretensions 

 of the pious Presbyterians. It is to be observed that excom- 

 munication comprehended the confiscation of the property of 

 the wicked persons ; property which devolved upon the 

 King to distribute among " God's Saints," as these worthy 

 people termed themselves. The poor King, in vain, made use 

 of the strongest and wisest efforts to prevent these shameful 

 proclamations from being carried into effect ; he was obliged 

 to admit the deputies from the General Assembly into his 

 presence. It is curious to observe, even in our day, the 

 traditional effect of the old puritanical spirit upon the mind 

 of the Scotch biographer. He is delighted with the promi- 

 nent position given to Napier in these fanatical transactions: 

 " Our philosopher," says he, (p. 162), " must have been 

 particularly remarkable in this Assembly, (that of Edin- 

 burgh), which confirmed the excommunication of his father- 

 in-law." (It was the father of his second wife, for he lost 

 his first in 1579). 



Then pursuing without hesitation the consequences of 

 this act, "If the family," adds he, " of Napier was present 

 at divine service, on the day when this was made public, his 

 own children must have tended to exclude their grandfather 

 from the benefits of the church, and of all the blessings 

 attached to human society." Subsequently, he notices the 

 powerful effect which must have been produced on James, 



