[M1661/1/41]*[print] [email] [cite] [preceding] [following]
The rolls called.
[Sir John Fletcher], lord advocate, declared as he had done the day preceding that he insists in the first place on those articles of the indictment since the year 1650, which begins with the 11th article; which being read in the indictment, with the answers, replies and rejoinders thereto in open parliament, the lord advocate gave in a note of members of this parliament whom he will use in the articles of the indictment, namely: to words spoken in the parliament in 1649: [Robert Balfour], lord [Balfour of] Burleigh, [James Elphinstone], lord Coupar, [John MacLellan], lord Kirkcudbright, and [James Campbell], earl of Loudoun.
[James Carnegie], earl of Southesk for the accused's countenancing of Cromwell's proclamation.
For the accused's words and compliance with Cromwell at Mordington, [William Douglas], lord Mordington and Sir Robert Douglas [of Blackerston].
For the joining with the English usurpers, [William Douglas], duke of Hamilton, [John Murray], earl of Atholl, lords [James Baillie, lord] Forrester, [Angus MacDonald, lord] MacDonnell and Walter Watson, provost of Dumbarton.
For the words spoken at London and James Masterton's house, [James Livingstone], earl of Callander, [Sir James Foulis of] Colinton, [Charles Gordon], earl of Aboyne, [George Livingstone], earl of Linlithgow, earls [James Home, earl of] Home and [James Livingstone, earl of] Callander.
For the burning of Menstrie, [William Scott], laird of Ardross.
For his actings at Lochhead and Danovertie, Colonel Home of Prenderguest.
And therefore the lord advocate declared he was content that those members of parliament whom he intended to lead as witnesses in these particulars might be excused to vote in discussing the relevancy of the same particulars respectively.
According to which, the said duke and others to be cited as witnesses for proving the said 11th article, being laid aside in the debating and voting the signature of process therein, the parliament rejects the dilatory defences against the said article, and finds that the same article falls under the compass of the law of Scotland and acts of parliament against committers of treason, namely the 25th act of the sixth parliament of King James II. And also rejects the whole defences, and finds the said article as it is libelled jointly relevant, reserving, after probation of the whole branches thereof or of so many of them as shall be proven, consideration how far the same shall infer the crime and pain of treason libelled, in case the whole is not proven. And further rejects the defences founded upon the English act of indemnity, which the estates find not to extend to the subjects of and in Scotland.
Thereafter the 12th article of the indictment being read, with the defences, replies and rejoinders thereto, and considered and debated upon, the estates of parliament reject the defences; and notwithstanding thereof find the said 12th article of the indictment founded upon the accused's accepting a commission and sitting and voting in the pretended parliament of England by virtue thereof relevant to infer the pain contained in the 25th act of the sixth parliament of King James II, and the other two branches as assisting the proclamation and receiving a precept to be aggravations of his guiltiness.
The lord commissioner continues the parliament until tomorrow at 9 o'clock.