foreseen that Leicester would be rejected.

I think,'

he said, writing on the 26th of November to Sir Thomas Smith, 'that no marriage is more likely to succeed than -, if it may come from them.'

The name omitted was doubtless Darnley's. De Silva, in describing the conference to Philip, said that the English commissioners had given the Scots the alternative of Leicester, Norfolk, or Darnley.' Of Norfolk at that time there had been little mention or none. Darnley perhaps Elizabeth would have consented to allow if the Queen of Scots would ask for him; for in giving way to Mary Stuart's wishes she could have accompanied her consent with restrictions which would render the marriage innocuous; while the Queen of Scots on the other side would have accepted Darnley had Elizabeth offered him; for Elizabeth would have been unable to shackle her own proposal with troublesome stipulations.

No matter what promises Elizabeth might make, no matter to what engagements she might bind herself, the Queen of Scots had long resolved to agree to nothing which would alienate the Catholics. As Maitland had told the Bishop of Aquila, she could have no confidence that any engagement would be observed unless she was supported by a force independent of Elizabeth; and if she married Darnley it was necessary for her to keep unimpaired her connection with the party of insurrection, and with the foreign Catholic powers.

Thus neither side would be the first to mention Darn

1 De Silva to Philip, December 18: MS. Simancas.

ley. The arguments played round the mark but never reached it; and at last, when there was no longer a hope of a satisfactory end, the commissioners found it was useless to waste time longer. They parted without a quarrel, yet without a conclusion, Maitland summing up his own demands in the following words :

:

'That the Queen of England would permit his mistress to marry where she would, saving in those royal houses where she desired her to forbear; that her Majesty would give her some yearly revenue out of the realm of England, and by Parliament establish unto her the crown, if God did his will on her Majesty, and left her without children; in so doing her Majesty might have the honour to have made the marriage, and be known to the world to have used the Queen of Scots as a dear and loving sister.'1

Immediately after the breaking up of the conference Mary Stuart wrote to request that Lord Darnley might be allowed to join his father in Scotland, and assist him in the recovery of the Lennox estates. Had Elizabeth anticipated what would follow she would probably, instead of complying, have provided Darnley with a lodging in the Tower. But the reports from Scotland were contradictory; Lennox said openly that 'his son should marry the Queen;' yet Randolph 'knew of many, by that which had been spoken of her own mouth, that the marriage should never take effect if otherwise she might have her desire.' Lennox had succeeded imperfectly in

Report of the Conference at Berwick: Cotton. MSS., CALIG. B. 10.

making a party amongst the lords; and Darnley's elevation to the Crown of Scotland would wake a thousand sleeping feuds. The requested permission was suspended without being refused; while Elizabeth began again as usual to play with thoughts of the Archduke. Cecil sent to Germany to urge Maximilian to propose in form for her hand; while stranger still, Catherine de Medici meditated an alliance between Elizabeth and her son Charles the Ninth. Elizabeth was twenty-nine and Charles not more than fourteen; but political convenience had overruled more considerable inequalities; and though Elizabeth affected to laugh at the suggestion as absurd, de Silva reminded her that the difference of age was scarcely greater than that between Philip and her sister; while the Queen-mother of France made the proposal, as will presently be seen, in perfect seriousness. On their return to Edinburgh from Berwick, Maitland and Murray wrote a joint letter to Cecil, in which they recapitulated their arguments at the conference and put forward again the demand on behalf of their mistress with which Maitland had concluded. They dwelt on the marriages abroad which were offered to her acceptance-far exceeding in general desirableness that which was proposed by Elizabeth. They expressed themselves however deferentially, and professed a desire which both of them really felt for a happy termination of the difficulty.

December.

1

Cecil's answer was straightforward, consistent, and

Roger Strange to Gaspar Pregnyar, February 1, 1565: HAYNES, vol. i. 2 De Silva to Philip, October 9: MS. Simancas.

honourable. He was glad to perceive from their letter, he said, that they were beginning to comprehend the Queen of England's real feelings. If they persisted in the tone which they had first assumed they would alienate England altogether. They talked of proposals to marry their mistress in this place and that; there were proposals for his own mistress as well, and they would do better in confining themselves to the subject which was immediately before them. They professed to desire to know the Queen of England's real wishes. They knew them already perfectly well. His mistress had never

varied either in her words or in her intentions. She wished well to the Queen of Scots. She had no objection to the Queen of Scots' recognition as second person if England could be satisfied that its liberties would not be in danger.

'And now,' Cecil said, 'in return for this you propose that the Queen's Majesty should permit your Sovereign to marry where she would, saving in some places prohibited, and in that consideration to give her some yearly revenue out of the realm of England, and by Parliament establish the succession of the realm to her; and then you add that it might be the Queen's Majesty's desire would take effect. Surely, my Lord of Ledington, I see by this-for it was your speech-you can well tell how to make your bargain. Her Majesty will give the Earl of Leicester the highest degree that any nobleman may receive of her hand; but you look for more-you would have with him the establishment of your Sovereign's title to be declared in the second place to the Queen's

Majesty. The Queen's Majesty will never agree to so much of this request, neither in form nor substance, as with the noble gentleman already named. If you will take him she will cause inquisition to be made of your Sovereign's rights; and as far as shall stand with justice and her own surety, she will abase such titles as shall be proved unjust and prejudicial to her sister's interest. You know very well that all the Queen's Majesty mindeth to do must be directed by the laws and by the consent of the three Estates; she can promise no more but what she can with their assent do. The Queen of England, if trusted as a friend, may and will do what she will never contract or bargain to do or submit to be pressed to do. It is a tickle matter to provoke sovereigns to determine their succession.

'Wherefore, good my Lords,' Cecil concluded, 'think hereof, and let not this your negotiation, which is full of terms of friendship, be converted into a bargain or purchase; so as while in the outward face it appears a design to conciliate these two Queens and countries by a perpetual amity, in the unwrapping thereof there be not found any other intention but to compass at my Sovereign's hands a kingdom and a crown, which if sought for may be sooner lost than gotten, and not being craved may be as soon offered as reason can require. Almighty God assist you with His spirit in your deliberation upon this matter to make choice of that which shall increase His glory and fortify the truth of the gospel in this isle.'1

'Cecil to Maitland and Murray, December 16: Scotch MSS. Rolls House.