POLITICAL HISTORY 



such men our brother of Scotland might shake the firmest throne in 

 Europe.' Buccleuch always asserted, and in this he was supported 

 by Scrope, that he was assisted in his exploit by the Grahams, and 

 that he could have done nothing without their co-operation, 1 naming 

 more especially Francis Graham of Canonby and Walter of Netherby, 

 the chief leaders of that clan. The Grahams at that time were a 

 constant thorn in the side of Lord Scrope. In 1596 he proposed 

 that a ' straight ' letter should be addressed to him by the Privy 

 Council, commanding him to send up some of them, whose names he 

 specified, without letting them know the cause beforehand, and on their 

 appearance to commit them to prison. He added that he would amply 

 justify the step, and that it would greatly contribute to the common 

 benefit and peace of the district. 3 But the family was too powerful and 

 its position too assured to be thus summarily dealt with. Scrope's 

 language about them was vigorous ; he called them ' caterpillars,' 

 ' a viperous generation,' * malignant humours,' and such like terms. 3 

 The northern authorities seem to have been of Lord Scrope's opinion, 

 for in 1600 the gentlemen of the county presented a petition to the 

 Council, in which they affirmed that the Grahams, their clan and 

 children, were the chief causes of the decay of the country, 4 and in 1606 

 the English commissioners informed the Earl of Salisbury that the 

 people of Cumberland abhorred and feared the name of Graham. 6 There 

 was wisdom in the advice tendered to Cecil that they ought not to be 

 lost if they could be kept on reasonable terms. Elizabeth, who took a 

 personal interest in the affairs of the Border, refused her sanction to 

 extreme measures, to Lord Scrope's great annoyance. 



Carlisle was at this time the meeting place of a commission 

 appointed to consider the grievances under which the Border suffered 

 and to suggest a remedy. It was composed of delegates, representative 

 of both countries, who drew up an agreement called the Treaty of 

 Carlisle. The principal recommendations were that good ministers 

 should be planted in every Border church, to inform the lawless people 

 of their duty and to watch over their manners ; no warden or keeper 

 should ride in hostile manner in the opposite realm without special 

 command under royal hand and seal ; no borderer should keep about 

 him idle persons such as remain in village alehouses ; Border councils 

 should be appointed to enrol all notorious thieves and to put them to 

 death after the first conviction." The Bishop of Durham, who was 

 chairman of the commission, told Burghley on 2 June 1597, in justifica- 

 tion of the severity of some of the articles of the treaty, that ' I have 

 found by experience many years in these parts that levity does little 

 good and severity no harm, and that however it prevailed elsewhere, 

 fearful proceeding is no policy here.' T One of the chief grievances, the 



i Border Papers (Scot. Rec. Pub.), ii. 367-8. ' Ibid. ii. 120. 



3 Ibid. ii. 160, 486, etc. 4 Ibid. ii. 690-1. 



8 Hist. A/SS. Com. Rep. (Muncaster MSS.), x. App. iv. 248. 



Nicolson, Leges Marchiarum, 149-69 ; Border Papers (Scot. Rec. Pub.), ii. 316-7. 



7 Ibid. ii. 332-4. 



II 28l 36 



