deed, after "laturi," and by connecting "indomiti and integri" with it, so as to make the sense, shall we, all entire and unsubdued as we are, not likewise obtain liberty for the present?" we may please ourselves with our own ingenuity, which, however, will probably be mistaken by the judicious and thinking scholar for absurdity.

In the first book of Livy's History, and about the middle of the 34th chapter, the following statement is made: The historian is speaking of the elder Tarquin, who, under the designation of Lucumo, had removed, along with his wife, Tanaquil, from Tarquinii to Rome. Hereupon, he observes, "Has opes cogitationesque secum portantes, urbem ingressi sunt, domicilioque ibi comparato Lucium Tarquinium Prisum edidere nomen."

Upon this sentence there is no note or observation in any one of the classical commentations which I have had an opportunity of consulting; and yet it appears to me not a little odd, and even absurd, that Livy should state Lucumo as assuming a name which bears a reference to another person not yet known or heard of. In fact, Lucumo could not now assume the appellation or cognomen of "Priscus," as posterity, and they alone, had the opportunity of knowing whether or not there should ever appear another Tarquin less ancient than this one. It is in vain to say that Tarquin, as an aged individual, assumed this title; there is no evidence of his great age at this time; and, in fact, from the circumstances of his previous life, and from the length of his future reign, it appears that he was "not aged," whilst his son, Tarquinius Superbus, who at tained, in all probability, to an age infinitely more advanced, was never designed by such an appellative.

Had Livy been barely stating any event which took place under Tarquinius Superbus' reign, and merely in reference to that reign, the case had indeed been different; he might have said, that such and such improvements were made at Rome in the reign of T. Superbus, in the same manner as we say every day, that the Lady of the Lake was writ

ten by Sir Walter Scott, and that Sir Henry Raeburn painted such and such "chefs d'œuvre." But when Livy states circumstantially an act of Lucumo himself, in changing his own name for another, which he then thought proper to assume, he was bound, in common sense, to give the name which he actually did assume and appropriate to himself; and that name was not "Priscus," nor could it be so, but was undeniably merely L. Tarquinius, from Tarquinii, whence he came to Rome.

Besides, on other similar occasions, and even when the slip would imply no such absurdity, Livy shews himself peculiarly wary and accurate. If any instance can be more apposite than another, it must be that of the younger Tarquin, who was afterwards designed "Superbus." In this case, the words of Livy, at the beginning of the 49th chapter, are,

Inde L. Tarquinius regnare occepit cui Superbo cognomen facta indiderunt.' Had Livy, in this instance, merely stated, "Inde Lucius Tarquinius Superbus regnare occepit," no one would have found much fault with him, as this mode of inaccuracy is sanctioned by every day's usage; but he is quite distinct and accurate, and gives you the circumstances which, in his opinion, led to the cognomen afterwards given of "Superbus." The same observations apply to the case of Caius Martius, who, from the taking of Corioli, was afterwards designated Coriolanus; he is not introduced at once" slap dash," under his most distinguished and honourable_title, but the statement is made in Livy's usually distinct and accurate manner. Lib. 2. c. 33. "Erat tum in castris inter primores juvenum C. Martius, cui cognomen postea Coriolano fuit."

Of the same kidney is the following statement in the 31st chapter of the 5th book: "Creati consules L. Valerius Potitus, M. Manlius, cui Capitolino postea etiam fuit cogno

men.

In the history of Lucius Tarquinius, by Dionysius, there is no mention made of the cognomen Priscus at all. Tarquin's original coming to Rome, and the changing of his name from Lucumo to "Lucius," is nar

Commissionars; Mr Johne Craig Minister at Halieruidehouse, John Hart and William Oswald, Commissionars; Williame Harlaw Minister of St. Cuthbert's Kirk, Johne Barroun Minister of Mussilburgh, Mr Thomas Cranstoun Minister at Tranent, Alexander Forrester Minister of Libertoun, Mr George Fuird Minister of Dummanie, Mr David Weymis Minister of Ratho, David Cunninghame Minister of Lanerick, James Walker Minister of Steinston, Paul Methven Minister of Jedburgh, Mr George Hay Minister at Eddilstoun, Christopher Gudman Minister at St. Andrew's, Mr George Leslie Minister at Straithmiglow, Richard Melvill Minister at Inchbruock and Marit; Johne Douglas of Pumfrestoun, and Johne Douglas in Howden Commissionars of the Kirk of Calder; the Laird of Spot Commissionar for Dunbar, and diverse in the Merse; James Fleyming Elder and Commissionar of Glasgow, the Laird of Lye Commissionar of Lanerick, the Laird of Barre Commissionar of Kyle, Johne Cathcart of Cariltoun Commissionar of Carrick, Mr Robert Pont Elder and Commissionar of St. Andrew's, Thomas Scott of Hayning Commissionar for Selcraig and Mel

ros.

In this roll, the designation of "Mr" is not indiscriminately employed, but seems to be confined to those who had received an academical degree; and this circumstance may serve to shew, that the charge which has been brought against the first reformed ministers in Scotland, as being, in general, men of no education, is not well founded. The reader will observe, that some of the Ministers are styled Ministers" of," while others are styled "at," their particular parishes or churches. Whether this distinction be accidental or designed, and, if designed, upon what it is founded, does not appear. As only two of the Commissioners are called "Elders," it would seem that this was not then a necessary qualification for becoming a member of the Assembly. Indeed there is some reason to think, that at first it was not, as now, a representative court, but open to all the members of the Church. A roll of those present is very seldom inserted either

VOL. XV.

in the Buik of the Universal Kirk, or in the MS. Calderwood. But in many of the subsequent Assemblies, mention is made, not only of Superintendents, Ministers, and Commissioners, but also of Barons, Burgesses, and Gentlemen; and in a supplication presented by the Church to the Regent, in 1574, is the following passage: "It is not unknown to your Grace, that, since the time God hath blessed this country with the light of the Evangell, two Godly Assemblies of the whole general kirk of this realme should be ilk year, as well of all the members thereof in all estates, as of the Ministers.” But the inconvenience of this mode of meeting was soon felt, and in the Assembly which forms the subject of the present sketch, the attendance of the Ministers was ordained to be limited by the calls of business, and the discretion of the Superintendents. It may be proper, however, to take a regular survey of its proceedings.

The first meeting of this Assembly was held in the house of "Mr Hendrie Law." Who this person was it may now be difficult to discover. Calderwood Large MS. Vol. I. p. 289.) has preserved some very minute and interesting particulars concerning the "first face" of a Church among the Reformers in Edinburgh, and has commemorated some of the most eminent members; but the name of Law does not appear. It is obvious, however, that he must have been a person of reputation and zeal, or his house would not have been thus honoured by the Refor

mers.

The first Session was opened with prayer, and the Assembly proceeded to lay down a series of regulations for conducting their inquiries into the general state of the Church, and the life and doctrine of its Ministers and members. Trial was first to be had of the Superintendents,—a regulation which, of itself, is sufficient to disturb all the parallels which have been drawn between this class of Ministers and Bishops. Balfour, in his MS. Memoirs, Vol. I., p. 244., says, that, at first, "the Scots were not resolved whether to embrace the Reformation of England, or that of Geneva." But it would be difficult to bring any proofs of their want of

Rr

resolution upon this point, from the history of the times. The appointment of Superintendents is always represented, in the First Book of Discipline, as a temporary expedient; and from the very beginning, those who exercised the office were subject to the General Assembly, composed of Presbyters, Elders, and lay Commissioners. If they had felt, or fancied in themselves, any peculiar or episcopal authority, they would never have submitted to such uncanonical handling.

After trial was taken of the Superintendents, the Elders of every par ticular kirk were to be charged, in God's name, to declare what they knew touching the life and doctrine of their Minister. After the Ministers, the Elders of every kirk were to be tried concerning such things as might be laid to their charge. While the inquiry was going on, the person who was the subject of it, whether Minister or Elder, was to be removed and in the event of his being convicted of what was alleged against him, he was to have no vote till he satisfied the Assembly. The Superintendents, with the Ministers and Elders within their bounds, were then to declare the general state of the kirks under their inspection, and the offences which they knew to prevail, that measures might be taken accordingly.

In this Session, it was also ordained, "that if Ministers be disobedient to Superintendents, in anie thing belonging to edification, they must be subject to correctione." At the same time, intimation was appointed to be made throughout the whole church, of the order which had now been es tablished for the discipline of all its servants; and all who had any thing to lay to the charge of Superintendents, Ministers, Elders, or Deacons, were required to do so at the next Assembly, to be held in December. Ministers, however, were admonished" not to leave their flocks for coming to the said Assembly, except they have complaints to make, or ellis be complained upon, or at the least be warned thereto be the Superintendent."

In the Second Session of this Assembly, which was held on the last day of June, Alexander Gordon, who

had been Bishop of Galloway, but who now professed the reformed creed, seems to have presented a petition, praying that he might be admitted Superintendent of the district included in his former diocese. The Assembly replied; 1st, That they had no evidence of his being nominated by the people, or presented by the Privy Council to the province of Galloway; and, 2d, That although he might have a presentation from the Council, he had not observed the order laid down for the election of Superintendents, and could not therefore be acknowledged by them at present. They promised him their aid, however, if the kirks of Galloway should hereafter solicit, and the Lords of Council present him to the office. In the meantime, he was required to subscribe the Book of Discipline, and letters were sent to the kirks of Galloway to learn their opi nion and wishes in the matter. It would appear that some of the more zealous Reformers were doubtful of the sincerity of Gordon's professions, and ascribed them to a wish to preserve the fruits of his benefice, more than to any concern for the interest of the church; and that they would rather have had some person whose principles were more decided to watch over that district. In a visit which he made to that part of the country soon after the rising of this Assembly, Knox carried with him Mr Robert Pont, and left him in the house of the Master of Maxwell; with a view, it has been thought, to his being proposed as Superintendent of Galloway. But the piety and learning of Pont were not duly ap preciated by the people of that district, who continued long subject to the superstitions of popery. In the following Assembly, indeed, he was put upon the leet for the office. But Gordon was appointed, with the power of a Commissioner, to admit Ministers, Exhorters, and Readers, and "to do such other things, as war before accustomed in planting of kirks."

In this Session the Assembly renewed their injunctions upon Ministers to be "subject to the Superintendents in all lawful admonitions." It was also enacted, that all Ministers regularly admitted to their Kirks shall remain, unless they can be

proved criminal in life or doctrine. But such as have been serving with out a formal admission, may be received or refused by their respective Kirks, as they can shew cause. And the trial of those who have not been already examined was appointed to be in the presence of the Superintendent, and the best-reformed kirk within the bounds. To these regulations, tending so manifestly to establish the independence and respectability of the Ministers, was added an injunction, that Superintendents, at the time of their visitation, "tak' accompt what bookes the Ministers have in store, and how they doe profite from time to time in reiding and studying the samen." The only other business transacted in this Session, was the taking order with some charges which had been brought against particular Ministers. In the Third Session, which was held on the first day of July, it was ordained, that Elders refusing to assist Ministers in correcting offences, should, after admonition, be excommunicated, and that Magistrates professing the reformed faith should be dealt with in the same manner. It was also concluded, that, in future, no Minister should be admitted with out nomination of the people, and due examination and induction by the Superintendent. Those who had been otherwise "intrused" since 1558, were to make supplication for their provision according to the regulations laid down in the former Session. Ministers, Exhorters, and Readers, having complained of the smallness of their stipends, it was ordered, that, before the end of September, they should give in to their respective Superintendents their particular cases, specifying the amount of their stipend, and assigning the reasons of its insufficiency, that suplication for suitable aid may be made to the Queen and Council. In the mean time, it was agreed, that as the stipends of the Ministers were in many cases not paid, from the Queen having granted remission of the thirds due from those who possessed benefices, a supplication should immediately be presented to her Highness upon this point, and also for providing stipends to the Ministers

of burghs where the thirds were insufficient. The restoration of manses and glebes to the Ministers, the reparation of decayed kirks, and some provision for maintaining schools in every parish, and for supporting the poor, were points upon which it was also agreed to make supplication.

The Fourth Session, which was held on the second day of July, was devoted to arrangements for a more regular and extensive dispensation of the word and sacraments. Mr John Scharp, who (according to Knox, p. 311,) had left the ministry for some more profitable vocation, was charged to return to the sacred office. In compliance with the request of the Town Council, it was ordained, that Mr John Craig, at this time Minister at Holyroodhouse, should be associated with Knox in the Ministry of Edinburgh. Several Popish priests had come over in the retinue of the Queen, and, since her arrival, the service of the mass had been regularly performed in the chapel. Under such circumstances, the labours of Craig were not likely to be either acceptable or useful. On the other hand, the duty of preaching three times during the week, and twice on Sunday, was too much for the declining years of Knox, who, by his previous exertions, had merited every expression of respect and gratitude. Some delay seems to have taken place, from want of sufficient funds; but the measure was soon after accomplished, and Craig officiated as colleague to Knox for nine years. The rest of this Fourth Session was occupied in appointing Ministers to preach in those districts where kirks were not yet planted.

The transactions of the Fifth Session are briefly recorded, both in Calderwood and the Buik of the Universal Kirk, as follows: "David Forrest was requested to take on the Ministrie; Mr Johne Scharp and Robert Wilson war ordained to serve in such kirks as the Assemblie sould appoint in the next Session."

In the next Session, it was agreed that Mr John Scharp should serve in any kirk which the Superintendent of Lothian might appoint. No farther mention is made of Wilson's case; but an answer, which had been