ed it to the king's authority, and Hepburn was left constable of this important fortress. In a parliament assembled at Perth, on the 10th January 1434-5, George was accused, not for any treason committed by himself, but for holding his earldom and estates, which had been forfeited by his father's tergiversation. "In vain did he plead," says Robert Douglas, "that his father had been pardoned and restored by Albany;" it was answered," that a forfeiture incurred for treason could not be pardoned by a regent;" and the parliament, in compliance with this reasoning, having heard Sir George Dunbar, knight, on his part, adjudged, “ that, in consequence of the attainder of George de Dunbar, formerly earl of March and lord of Dunbar, every right both of property and possession in all and each of those estates in the earldom of March and lordship of Dunbar, and all other lands which he held of our said lord the King, with all and each of their appurtenances, did and does exclusively belong and appertain to our lord the King." Thus it was found that the earldom and estates of the earl of Dunbar were now vested in the crown. These harsh proceedings may safely be attributed to an envious ministry. James could not soon forget the interest the earl of Dunbar had taken in his liberation; and, according to Fordun, he created him earl of Buchan, as some atonement for this cruel decision; or, as it. was otherwise said, he had an assignment on the earldom of Buchan, which being found inadequate, on the death of James, 400 merks yearly were granted out of his ancient inheritance till James II. came to the crown. There was little policy in thus removing this illustrious nobleman from the borders. He was certainly a severe check on the Douglases, who seem to have contributed to his overthrow, and whose family soon proved an ungovernable burden to the crown. After this reverse, the earl and his son retired with their families to England, to hide their former splendour in obscurity. By a charter granted in 1457, it appears that Patrick Dunbar, son of George, earl of March, possessed the lands and barony of Kilconquhar, in Fife, which being held under the bishop of St Andrews, were not involved in the forfeiture to the king. The earl of Dunbar is supposed to have been twice married. By his first wife, Beatrix, he had a son, the before-mentioned Patrick; and, in 1421 he obtained a dispensation for his espousals with Halysie, daughter of the late William de Haya, knight, lord of Vhestyr, permitting him to marry, notwithstanding they were related in the fourth de gree of consanguinity, and Beatrix, his first wife, was in the second degree of consanguinity to this lady. But whether this last marriage took place is uncertain, as Alicia, daughter of Sir William Hay of Yester, married Sir Gilbert Hay of Errol. James I. was destined to fall the victim of those nobles who had planned the destruction of this potent family. On the night of the 21st February, Stewart and Graham, with seven of their accom plices, forced their way into the king's apartment in his favourite Carthusian monastery at Perth. Having slain Straiton, the only domestic in waiting, they burst into James's chamber, while he sat at supper, and assassinated him before the queen. Her majesty, who had vainly interposed herself to the murderers' daggers, was wounded in the scuffle. Sir David Dunbar, (brother to the earl,) on receiving intelligence, hastened from the town, and in his attempt to rescue the king, and intercept the retreat of the assassins, he was severely wounded in the arm, and left for 'dead on the floor. The last exploit we have to record of this now subdued family, happened in 1446; when Jane Seymour, the queen-mother, flying during the tumult raised by the barons to Dunbar Castle, now held by Sir Patrick Hepburn, Archibald Dunbar took the castle of Hailes, and put the garrison to the sword.* Patrick Dunbar, son and heir of the last earl of Dunbar, possessed the barony of Kilconquar in Fife. His charter runs thus: "Patricii Dunbar, filii et herede Georgii Comitis de March, terrarum baroniæ de Kilconquhar, circa annum 1457." These lands were enjoyed by his posterity for several generations, till the last of them dying in the reign of Queen Mary, left their memory but a name, and their grandeur but a dream. * Lindsay's Chron. CHAPTER X. Ah me! I see the ruin of my house; Upon the innocent and awless throne. RICHARD III. The Duke of Albany. FOR Some time, the estates of Dunbar and March, now vested in the crown, were held by the Homes and Hepburns conjunctly, as stewards. In 1448, the earl of Northumberland invaded the eastern borders, and burnt and ravaged Dunbar,* On the death of the queen-mother, Hepburn delivered up the castle to the king.t The lordship of Dunbar was bestowed by James II. on his second son, Alexander, duke of Albany, in his infancy. After the marriage of James III. in 1471, the duke, his brother, is introduced to us, by the Chronicler of Pitscottie," as one well proportioned in all his members; yet he was broad-faced, red-nosed, great-eared, and of very awful countenance, when he pleased to shew himself to his unfriends." This amiable personage was also "very wise and manly," and loved nothing so well as able men and good horses; " and was held in such estimation by the lords and barons of Scotland, that they durst never * Lindsay of Pitscottie. + Holinshed. rebel against the king, so long as he rang in peace with his brother." To his grace was awarded the castle of Dunbar with the living pertaining thereto; he was also appointed captain of Berwick, and lieutenant of the eastern borders. Albany, as a natural consequence, soon incurred the displeasure of Lord Home, who had enjoyed the chamberlainship of Dunbar and March during the reign of James II. The duke heedless of the pretensions of his lordship, drew the profits and duties of these lands himself, which exasperated Home so much that he joined in league with the Hepburns; but as Albany resided in the castle of Dunbar, and had the men of the eastern marches at his command, the border chieftains were unsuccessful in their opposition. Finding their combined forces could not thwart the duke, they devised means to ruin him in the opinion of the king. One Cochran, an architect, had at this time gained a wonderful ascendency over the mind of James. To this favourite the injured party addressed themselves; and as the duke was no less odious to this upstart than to the barons of the Merse, he soon found means to poison the mind of his majesty against his brother. The powers of darkness were conjured up to aid in this work of iniquity, and a witch being ushered into the royal presence, predicted, that "the king should be suddenly slain by one of the nearest of his kin !"* James's suspicions "More than once a reconciliation was patched up between them; and on one of these occasions, James III. having mounted a hackney to ride from the castle to Holyrood Abbey, refused to move on till his brother had mounted behind him, when they rode on the |