iffue, in the year 1575, was fucceeded by Sir Colin Campbell of Glenurchie, who was Lord High-chancellor of Scotland, from the year 1579 to his death, which happened in the year 1584. His eldest fon Archibald was no lefs diftinguifhed for his bravery than for his attachment to his fovereign, whofe forces he commanded, against the Earls of Huntley and Errol, at the battle of Glenlivet, in the year 1594. He afterwards obtained a grant of the country of Kintyre, for his faithful fervices in fuppreffing an infurrection of the M'Gregors, in 1603, and a more formidable one by the M'Donalds, in 1614. He was twice married: first to Anne, daughter and heir of William Earl of Morton. His fecond wife was daughter of Sir William Cornwallis of Brome, by whom he had a fon, who was firft treated Lord Kintyre, by James VI. in 1622, and dignified by Charles I. with the title of Earl of Irvine in 1642. Of his first wife he had four daughtèrs and one fon, Archibald, whom we have chofen as the subject of the following memoir ". ARCHIBALD CAMPBELL, Earl and Marquis of Argyle, was born in the year 1598, with the title of Lord Lorn, which belonged to the heirs apparent of his family. He was educated in the profeffion of the Proteftant religion, according to the ftricteft rules of the church of Scotland, as it tras established at the Reforma tion, and was fo firmly attached to it, that he maintained, as long as he lived, the principles with which his tender mind had been imbued. Few periods in the hiftory of Scotland have been more critical than that at which he appeared. The doctrines of the reformation had lately been introduced; and every thing that bore the fmallest resemblance to the church of Rome, was looked up on with abhorrence by the great mafs of the people. Not only were the * Crawford's Peerage. Popish Lords pursued with inflexible refentment, Prelacy was viewed only as a modification of that church, which had fo long tyrannifed over the civil and religious liberties of the nations of Europe. Men have always been apt to run from one extreme to another, and to overfhoot the boundary where their progrefs fhould have terminated.— Thus it happened about the end of the 16th century. From a dread of the abfurd and fuperftitious doctrines by which the Papal See impofed on the credulity of mankind, the reformers wifhed at once to deftroy every veftige of idolatry, and to remove from their fight whatever bore the least resemblance to their antient worhip. They contracted fuch a deep rooted averfion to Epifcopal government, that neither the foothing arts of the court, nor the dread of perfe cution, were able to make them relinquith it. King James, on the other hand, firmly attached to Prelacy, did every thing in his power to establish, in his own country, that form of ec clefiaftical government and difcipline, which he confidered as the pillar that fupported the ftability of his throne. Befides, neither the prerogative of the king nor the liberties of the fubject were fo fully examined, or fo ac curately fixed, as they have been in modern times. The progrefs of let ters had already opened the eyes of men to a clearer perception of their juft rights and privileges, than they had hitherto poffeffed; but experience had not yet taught them that moderation which is the fecurity and happinefs of a well regulated government. The fovereign, unwilling to relinquish any part of that power which his ancestors had enjoyed, had to ftruggle with the violence of popular fury, and ftem the torrent of innovation and diforder. Hence, from the keen oppofition maintained betwixt those who favoured the measures of the court, and those who favoured the measures of the people, originated thofe troubles and and commotions which agitated thefe kingdoms, in a greater or lefs degree, from the period of the Reformation to the revolution in 1688. Such was the fituation of things when Argyle was born, a fituation peculiarly fitted for nourishing that caution for which he was diftinguish. ed through the whole progrefs of his life. His Lordship had very early engaged in the fervice of his country. He accompanied his father in his expedition against the Macdonalds in the weft, when he was only fixteen years of age, and conducted himself in fuch a manner as to merit the favour and approbation of his Sovereign. From this time, we find little mention made of him till the year 1626, when he was raised to the office of a privy councillor, on account of "his great learning, fingular judgment, and other endowments." This promotion was the more honourable, as his father was ftill alive, and he himself confequently not a lord of parliament t. Ambition feems not to have been a leading feature in the character of Argyle, fince, inftead of grafping at power or preferment, in the attainment of which his high rank might have afforded him the moft flattering hopes of fuccefs, in the year 1628, he refigned the office of jufticiary of all Scotland, which had continued in his family from the time of Colia Earl of Argyle, who flourished in the reign of James V. He still referved to himself, and his heirs, however, the jufticiary of Argyle, and of the western ifles, which was afterwards ratified by an act of parliament. On the death of James VI. in the year 1625, Charles I. had afcended the throne of his father, and found his fubjects fubmiffive to his governHe began his reign in as favourable circumftances as he could reasonably expect. While the people entertained the moft favourable expectations from his adminiftration, ment. • Crawford's Peerage. Biographia Brit. VOL. LXV. their quarrels were, for a time, fuf pended, and the nation enjoyed a confiderable degree of tranquillity. In this ftate of affairs, he refolved to make a journey to the north, and to be inaugurated in his native country. He arrived in Scotland on the 12th of Auguft 1633, and was received at Edinburgh with all the expreflions of the most profound refpect, and joyful congratulation. After three days of public rejoicings, he was crowned, in the abbey church, by the celebrated Dr Spottifwood, archbishop of St Andrews; upon which occafion, Dr Lindsay, bishop of Bres chin, preached a fermon upon thefe words," And all the people faid, God fave King Solomon." At this time, Lord Lorn ftood high in his Majefty's efteem, of which there cannot be a ftronger proof than the decifion given in his favour, in the quarrel that had lately arifen betwixt him and his father. The ori gin of the quarrel we have not been able to learn; the fact itself, however, refts on the authority of Clas rendon, a cotemporary hiftorian *. The truth of this fact is doubted by the author of the life of Argyle, in the Biographia Britannica; but, on the fup pofition of its truth, he endeavours to account for it in the following manner. "It is neceffary to obferve, that the old Earl of Argyle had been the best part of his life a very warm and zealous Proteftant, had fought against the Huntley family, and afterwards against the Macdonalds, partly on account of religion: yet, drawn afide by his English lady, who was a Papist herself, and defcended of a rebellious family, he went abroad into the Spanish fervice, commanded their troops in the low countries, and was even fufpected of carrying on fome correfpondence with the Macdonalds, whom he had difpoffeffed of their lands for treafon, and had received fome grants of them from the crown. By this means, he totally loft King James's favour, who, as Archbishop Spottilwood fays, could not endure an apollate Papist, and was publicly denounced a rebel. It might very well happen, that when this old lord returned home, which he did after an abfence of ten years, he might be very angry with his fon, and yet that fon be in no great fault, unless adhering to the ProThe B The Earl was fo incenfed at his fon, that he wished to difpofe of his fortunes in fuch a manner, that, after his death, the fon fhould enjoy little more than the bare honours of his family. By the interpofition of the king, however, the old man was com pelled to leave to his fon all his eftate, referving to himself a fufficient provifion for fupporting him according to his rank. Had his Lordship, at this time, been fufpected of infidelity, or difaffection to the government, there is every reafon to believe, that, in the prefent inftance, a very different decifion would have been given by his Majefty. But while Argyle continued faith ful to his fovereign, and enjoyed a proportional share of his favour, he was not forgetful of what he owed to his country. Unlike thofe fycophants of a court, who flatter but to destroy, and who can fubmit to almoft any compliances that they think will promote their own private views, he fteadily oppofed thofe innovations which the overbearing and intolerant Laud wifhed to introduce into the church of Scotland. He had early imbibed the principles of the reformers, and he still continued to cherish them, amidst all the changes of his external condition. But they were regulated by wifdom, and by a defire of preferving the public tranquillity. When, in the year 1637, the people were flocking to Edinburgh in great numbers, in order to petition for a redress of their grievances, he endeavoured to check their fury, and preferve them within the bounds of dutiful fubmiffion. In conjunction with the Treasurer, and the Earl of Lauderdale, he wrote to the nobles, at that time affembled, endeavouring to perfuade them, that their frequent teftant religion, and the conftitution of his country, were faults." Perhaps, too, he might wish to beflow his poffeffions upon his other fon, who was at this time on the continent, and who had been created Lord Kintyre, in 1622. + Hift. of the Rebellion, p. 42. and numerous meetings were informal, diforderly, and illegal. Soon after, Lord Lorn, along with the Earl of Southefk, were chofen by the Privy Council as the most fit perfons for treating with the commiffioners appointed by the ftates, about a petition which they prefented for a redress of grievances t. But matters were now ripening for an event which, for a confiderable time, convulfed and divided the nation. A covenant was contrived, as the only measure which could fave the people from fpiritual tyranny. That this tranfaction may be more clearly understood, it may be proper to ftate briefly its nature and defign. The firft national covenant of Scotland was fubfcribed at Edinburgh on the 28th of January 1581, on account of the dangers apprehended from Popery. In it all the corruptions of the church of Rome, both refpecting doctrine and outward rites, were folemnly abjured. All ranks of men were enjoined, by a royal mandate, to fubfcribe it, and the injunction was fanctioned by an act of the general affembly. Although the young king complied in this inftance with the defires of the nation, yet, as he grew up, he became more and more defirous of curbing that bold and innovating fpirit, which the progrefs of the Reformation had diffused among his fubjects. He was afraid of the confequences to which it might lead, and was anxious that it should be confined within the limits of Epifcopal government. Hence he was led, with unwearied perfeverance, to endeavour to procure the establishment of Prelacy in his dominions, till, in the year 1612, he with difficulty effected his purpose. In Scotland, this eftablifhment met with a keen oppofition, as might have been expected from a people, whose sentiments upon church-government were completely different from thofe which it required. It was therefore neceffary to † Stevenson's Church History. employ employ force in fupporting it. A court of high commiffion was erected, for the punishment of thofe who offended against the new constitution. This court was the fource of many troubles; it gave the bishops a power which they were extremely apt to abufe, and kindled into a flame the refentment of the people. It was, however, but of fhort duration; for, in June 1592, the church obtained a ratification of her liberties, of her provincial fynods, and feffions. But, in 1606, the bithops were reftored to their antient honours, privileges, and livings, and plans were contrived to abolish for ever the Presbyterian form of government, and likewife to unite the two crowns of Scotland and England, which was the favourite object of James VI. For this end, a liturgy was prepared for the church of Scotland; and, in an affembly held at Perth, in 1618, five articles, known by the articles of Perth, were paffed, and afterwards ratified by parliament, in 1621. While the king was thus profecuting his plan of eftablishing a uniformity in religion among all his fubjects, he died in the year 1625. His fucceffor, Charles I. began to profecute the plan which his father had left unfinished. In the year 1637, by the inftigations of Laud, archbishop of Canterbury, a book of canons was impofed upon the church of Scotland, the defign of which was to establish Prelacy, and to root out Presbyterianism. The Scots had fubmitted, with fome degree of patience, to former encroachments upon their religious liberties; but the impofition of the canons was a burden altogether intolerable. When they faw themselves fubjected to the power of the bishops, and, in confequence of disobedience, the thunder of excommunication ready to fall upon their heads, they were alarmed at their danger, and began to contrive meafures for guarding againft it. They refolved to enter into a strict union, or covenant, by which they should engage themselves, to defend the king's perfon and government, to maintain the purity of religion against the ufurpations of the church of Rome; and to adhere inviolably to the confeffion of faith fubfcribed first by the king and his household in 1580, afterwards by perfons of all ranks in 1581, and again, in 1590, by an act of council, with the approbation of the general affembly. This refolution being made on the ift of March 1638, the covenant was fubfcribed in the Old Grey-Friars Church, at Edinburgh, by all the nobles who were then in Scotland, (the lords of privy council, and four or five others excepted), by commiffioners from almost all the fhires and burghs in the kingdom, and by a great concourfe of private perfons, whofe zeal had brought them to Edinburgh, to affift and support their commiffioners upon that occafion †. Copies of the covenant were fent to all the parifhes in the kingdom, and the number of those who refused to fubfcribe was extremely fmall, compared with the covenanters. When the king was informed of this tranfaction, he was highly offended, and refufed to receive the petition which the covenanters had fent him, as a vindication of their conduct, and an accufation of the bishops. He wrote first to the Lords Treasurer and Privy Seal, and afterwards to Lord Lorn, to come to court, and ordered the moft eminent Scottish lawyers to be confulted, concerning the legality of entering into covenant, without his permillion. The report of the lawyers was favourable to their countrymen; and it was fufpected that the covenanters had hitherto acted by the advice of Lorn, in the moft intricate fteps of their management . Whatever grounds there might be for this fufpicion, it is certain, that, when the bishops ufed all their influence with his majefty to make him force the Scots to fubmiffion, his lordship boldly flated the grievances of his countrymen; and declared, that he would never concur in bringing upon them burdens, of which they had just reafon to complain and to petition redrefs. The king having determined to employ peaceful measures with the Scots, appointed Hamilton his commiffioner, to treat with them. When he arrived in Scotland, three months had now elapfed fince the date of the covenant. The terms of agree ment he propofed to the covenanters were rejected with difguft, and they refufed to liften to an accommodation, till, having gone to court, he returned with an affurance, that the king had granted all they defired. Immediately he propofed that King James's covenant fhould be renewed, which was fubfcribed by Lorn, along with the rest of the lords of council, the 22d day of September, 1638. Lorn, however, refufed to fubfcribe it, till a clause was inferted, imply ing, that it was fubfcribed according to the meaning it bore when it was firft fworn. This covenant, however, far from fatisfying the covenanters, appeared to them to be an artifice of the court to divide and weaken them. Being capable of different interpretations, the court party confidered it as a ratification of the exifting government of the church, and with this view were eager to circulate it. Meanwhile, an affembly was convened at Glasgow, on the 21ft of November, which excited, throughout the kingdom, an uncommon intereft. A great acceffion of the nobility and gentry gave it a degree of authority, to which it could not otherwise pretend. But it had fitten only a very fhort time, when the commiffioner, weary of its proceedings, diffolved it, in the name of the king, and prohibited it from all further proceedings. The affembly, however, ftill continued to fit, and obtained the concurrence of Lorn (now Earl of Argyle, his father having died a fhort time before.) The acceffion of the Earl of Argyle, at that time the moft powerful of the Scottish nobility, added no fmall ftrength to the party of the coveuant. Various reafons have been affigned to account for his condu& upon this occafion; his envying the Marquis of Hamilton in being appointed commiffioner; his refentment at the preference of Spottifwood to the office of chancellor; the report of an intended invafion from Ireland, upon that part of the island where his eftates lay; and the expectation of increafing his power and fortune, as his ancestors had done at the Reformation, have all been affigned as reafons why the Earl of Argyle openly. revolted from the measures of the court. Thefe reafons might have fome influence upon his mind, but it is far more probable that he acted from principle, with a view of maintaining the privileges of his country, and of preferving his countrymen from being fubjected to burdens, which, of all kinds of flavery, they confidered as the most intolerable. About the beginning of the year 1639, the Marquis of Hamilton went to court, and gave the king a full account of the proceedings of the Scots. The difobedience of the general affembly, in continuing to fit after they were diffolved, and the approbation of the people, which, on this account, they received, determined Charles to put in immediate execution the defigns he had already formed, of curbing the licentioufnefs of the covenanters *. He began to The defign of the king is thus ftated by Burnet: "His majefly was to raise an army of 30 oco horfe and foot, and to lead them in perfon towards Scotland. He was to write to all the nobility of England to wait upon him to the campaign: he was to put strong garrifons in Berwick and |