ATTEMPTS OF EDWARD THE FIRST TO SUBJUGATE SCOTLAND. CHAUCER observes, "that there is no guise so new that it has not been old," and those may be probably of the same opinion who compare the crafty devices of Edward when eager for the throne of Scotland, with the vows of friendship to the Spanish royal family paraded on a memorable occasion by the late Emperor of France. Nor are the causes, owing to which these powerful and ambitious men fell short of their purpose, when they appeared most secure of it, without more than one point of coincidence. First, success. and the self-opinion attendant upon it, had elevated both Plantagenet and Napoleon above consideration of the extensive tasks which their ambition had cut out for them; and as the latter might, in all likelihood, have achieved the conquest of Spain had he not been called back to Austria and afterwards to Russia, so Edward would, it is scarcely to be doubted, have completed the subjugation of Scotland but for the necessity of carrying his arms into France. condly, neither the one nor the other of these haughty sovereigns calculated justly or truly upon the energy with which a free and high-spirited people will turn on their oppressors, or what degree of misery they will be willing to endure rather than yield in a struggle so holy. Thirdly, in either case, the Almighty armed in the cause of suffering freedom one of those men Se of rare talent who determine the fate of nations; nor, though fortunate in a much more extensive scale of exertion, will the character of the English general be injured by comparing it to that of the Scottish king. The first champion of Scottish freedom was, indeed, of a different and somewhat ruder moulding. He was that Sir William Wallace of whom history can say little, and tradition can never be silent. This formidable hero was placed by his countrymen at the head of an insurrection which swept Scotland, defeated King Edward's delegates, and regained almost all the national fortresses. But, though almost adored by the people, he could not maintain his interest among the nobility; they were arrogant and jealous, and the champion of Scotland was irascible, and intolerant of restraint and contradiction. In war he was merciless and cruel, witness the description by Henry the minstrel,-who, though he exaggerates and adds to his adventures, seems to have had a just idea of his character,—of his burning the church of Dunottar, built upon those sea-girdled rocks where the castle of the same name now stands. The passage is not without poetical merit :— "Wallace on fire gard* set all hastily, Burnt up the court, and all that was therein, Caused. † Around. + The rest When this was done, fele* fell on knees soon, Wallace said, laughing-'I forgive ye all; Our brave barons when that they hanged there.' "— Wallace, book vii. He Edward marched to victory and vengeance. engaged Wallace at Falkirk, where the nobility, or such of them as with their followers composed the Scottish line of cavalry, left the field without fighting, and abandoned the infantry, who fought with even more than wonted obstinacy, to the fury of the English. Wallace, after the loss of this battle, retired from the office of guardian of the kingdom. After an honour able but ineffectual resistance on the part of Sir John Comyn and Sir Simon Fraser, the nobles and wealthier part of the gentry submitted to the conqueror. Wallace alone, who never would accept the slightest boon at the hands of Edward's lieutenants, or consent to truce or parley of any sort, was still in obscure but constant opposition to the southron. He was, at length, betrayed, taken, and executed.† * Many; German, viel. "Stow gives the following curious account of the trial and execution of this celebrated patriot :-' William Wallace, who had oft-times set Scotland in great trouble, was taken and brought to London, with great numbers of men and women wondering upon him. He was lodged in the house of William Delect, a citizen of London, in Fenchurch Street. On the morrow, being the eve of St Bartholomew, he was brought on horseback to Westminster. John Legrave and Geffrey, knights, the mayor, sheriffs, and aldermen of Lon The people of Scotland had been compelled to submission; but it is probable that, even whilst serving under these engagements, they designed the evasion and breach of their oaths to Edward. The conqueror, on the other hand, did his best to draw close these fragile bonds of allegiance, and strengthen them by the rules of civil polity. Since the reign of Canmore, the feudal system had been gradually making its way into Scotland. To the great vassals it was recommended by the clear and concise form in which it placed their don, and many others, both on horseback and on foot, accompanying him; and in the great hall at Westminster, he being placed on the south bench, crowned with laurel, for that he had said in times past that he ought to bear a crown in that hall, as it was commonly reported; and being appeached for a traitor by Sir Peter Malorie, the king's justice, he answered that he was never traitor to the King of England; but for other things whereof he was accused, he confessed them; and was after headed and quartered.'-Stow, Chr. p. 209. There is something singularly doubtful about the mode in which Wallace was taken. That he was betrayed to the English is indubitable; and popular fame charges Sir John Menteith with the indelible infamy. 'Accursed,' says Arnold Blair, 'be the day of nativity of John de Menteith, and may his name be struck out of the book of life.' But John de Menteith was all along a zealous favourer of the English interest, and was governor of Dumbarton Castle by commission from Edward the First; and therefore, as the accurate Lord Hailes has observed, could not be the friend and confidant of Wallace, as tradition states him to be. The truth seems to be, that Menteith, thoroughly engaged in the English interest, pursued Wallace closely, and made him prisoner through the treachery of an attendant, whom Peter Langtoft calls Jack Short."-Notes to Lord of the Isles. right of possession; and to kings it was acceptable on account of the flattering doctrine on which it rested, -that all the land of the kingdom belonged originally to the crown, and was only to be inherited as holding more or less directly of the sovereign, and as reverting to him in case of any act of disobedience. It was the policy of Edward to introduce this system into Scotland to the exclusion of all others; so that whilst the natives, on the one hand, were subjected to laws similar to those of England, they should be, on the other, deprived of those ancient customs which preserved the memory of their independence. While Edward was preparing for the future legislation of Scotland, in a manner calculated to unite the people with those of England, the hopes of the Scots had again found a leader, of a character more formidable than had yet arisen. Robert Bruce, the young Earl of Carrick (grandson of him who had been a competitor for the crown), had, during the civil wars previous to 1305, repeatedly changed sides from the patriots to the English invaders, with a versatility more wavering than any person of the period. In that memorable year Le had the rashness or misfortune to stab Sir John Comyn, a nobleman of the highest rank, before the altar of the Dominican church of Dumfries; and a sense of the desperate state to which he had thus reduced himself, raised him from the condition of a sacrilegious homicide to that of the candidate for the crown, which was his rightful inheritance, and of a patriot labouring for the freedom of his country. His forces, when compared to those which assailed him, were like a drop of water in the ocean, and his complicated misfortunes of defeat, exile, death |