Fencibles, which of them he does not know; that it was not a fingle fhot, but a running fire. Serj. Rofs, of the South Fencibles, depones, That he was at Leith upon the 20th of April laft, during the mutiny; where he faw two of the prifoners, Williamfon and Maciver; Williamfon very active, promo ting the mutiny: That Williamson was much ia liquor: That the deponent, by the orders of Sir James Johnston, went up to expoftulate with the mutineers in the Erfe language; and that when he was going on that errand, Williamfon defired him not to come for ward, and pushed his bayonet again and again at the deponent; when Maciver defired Wil liamfon to let the deponent alone; to which Williamfon replied, that he wanted none of their corps to come near him; fill pufhing his bayonet at the deponent. Some me after that, the deponent heard a fhot from the right of the Highlanders: That 3o ferjeants of the South Fencibles came p, and laid hold of Maciver, who ftruggled with them in order to get rid of them, when fhot came from fome of Maciver's party pon his left, which wounded the deponent: That, before this happened, the deponent was telling the mutineers, fo far as they ould hear, that, by orders of Sir James Johnston, he informed them, that the Fenables were provided in ammunition, and heir guns all loaded; and that they had better defift, because they would be forced o imbark; who answered, That they would lie before they would wear breeches; and old the deponent, that they were provided ammunition. Being interrogate for the foners, At what distance from the two arifoners of the 42d the firing began? He hinks about twenty yards from their left: That, about two or three minutes before the iring began, a Highlander from amongst the mob called to the Highlanders, "Why don't you fire?" To which Maciver anfwered, He would not be the first that would fire. James Home, foldier in the South Fenci bies, depones, That the witnefs was along with Capt. Mansfield when the Highlanders began to fire from their right, the evidence aving heard them fay before, that they could prime, load, and fire, as fast as the Fencibles could do: That Capt. Mansfield fpoke with the Highlanders, endeavouring to pacify them, and quell the mutiny; when the Highlanders charged their bayonets, and puthed at him; when he, retreating to the divifion that he commanded, a Highlander fred upon and fhot him; upon which the evidence took aim at the man who did fo, and thot him, ed, and likewise a cartridge-box with shot, but cannot afcertain whether it belonged to the Highlanders or to the Fencibles. Robert Mudie, fhipmafter in Leith, depones, That he was on the top of the pier, on the left of the Fencibles, oppofite to the right of the Highlanders, whom he faw ftanding with their bayonets charged, from which he retired farther to the right of the Fencibles, fearing danger of a fhot from the Highlanders: That he saw a fhot from the right of the Highlanders, which was the first flot that was fired, and afterwards another from the left of their centre. Before the fecond hot was fired from the left of the Highlanders centre, he obferved Capt. Mansfield, who was upon the right of the Fencibles, protecting with his fword one of his foldiers who was attacked by the Highlanders; and, upon a fhot being fired, the mob called out that Capt. Mansfield was killed; and the witness retreated. Capt. Rutherford, of the South Fencibles, depones, That he heard a fhot come from the Highlanders, and, jumping into his place, obferved a corporal on the right of the divifion mortally wounded. Heads of the proof for the prisoners. The question, Whether he heard any order or paper read or explained to the Highlanders on the links of Leith, relative to their being imbarked, or draughted into the 83d regiment? was put to Serj. Ralfton and Corp. Buchanan, both of the 71ft; and they both anfwered in the negative. Capt. Innes, alfo of the 1ft, being interrogated, If, on the links of Leith, he read or explained to them fuch a paper or order? declared, He did not, as he thought it would have been improper. Serj. Ralfton being interrogated, Did not the Highlanders complain of this ufage? anfwered, That after they came to the pier of Leith, Hugh Muir, of the 71ft, amongst others, faid, That if an offer had been made to them of a voluntary draught into the 83d, in the manner that the 31ft regiment's men were draughted, he would have been a mong the first that would have offered himfelf; but that they were going to boat them like a parcel of fheep; and, fince that was the cafe, he would stand out to the last. Serj. A. Rofs, of the South Fencibles, being interrogated, What meffage he delivered to the Highlanders from Sir James Johnston in the Erfe language? declares, That Sir James ordered him to go to the Highlanders, and ufe every gentle method and perfuifion to parify them, and to get them to comply. with the order for imbarkation. Being a Corp. G. Little, of the South Fencibles, ed, If he told the Highlanders, from Sir depones, That he examined feveral of the James, what they were to expect on their Highlanders muskets, which he found load-refufal to imbark ? declares, That Sir James 094 told 308 Mutiny-trial: Fencibles orders, Sentence, &c. Anecdote. Vol.4?: told the deponent, that his orders were, either to force them to imbaik, or bring them prifoners to the caftle: That the witness communicated thefe orders to the Highland ers. Sir James Johnston, Major of the South Fencibles, declares, That he did command a detachment of the above regiment which were ordered to Leith to feize the Highland ers: That he now produces the faid order, which is of the following tenor. "SIR, Head Quarters, April 20. 1779. The draughts of the 71ft regiment having refufed to imbark, you will order 200 men of the South Fencibles, under command of a field officer, to march immediately to Leith, feize the mutineers, and march them prifoners to the caftle of Edinburgh, to be detained there till further orders-Iam, &c. JA. ADOLPHUS OUGHTON. (Addreffid) To Governor Wemyss of Edinburgh cafe or the commanding officer of the South Fencible regiment." The witness further declares, That when he gave orders to Serj Rots to go and fpeak to the mutineers, in order to pacify them, that Williamfon, one of the prifoneis, more than once prefented his piece to the declarant; and that the declarant once thought he was actually to fire upon him; but that he was as oft prevented by Maciver, another of the prifoners, by faying fomething to Williamfon, which the deponent did not understand, but upon which Williamfon took down his piece; and the declarant thinks he Con his life to Maciver for fo doing. Capt. Inres fhowed to the court an attewhich he faid was in the uniform " 'e of the atteftations for that regiment; it bo e exprefsly, That the perfon thereatrefted was to ferve in the 71ft regiment, amanded by Maj. Gen. Simon Frafer; . at they were to ferve for three years or during the continuance of the pre WAT. Though the court-martial pronounced eir judgement on the 8th of May, it was not made public till the 28th. In 1 forenoon of that day, the regiment of Wet Fencibles, then quartered in the fuburbs of Edinburgh, having been marched up to the Canle-hill; the three prifoners were brought down from the catle; the Fencibles formed around them; the prifoners were ordered to kneel; and then the Major read as follows. "Head Quarters, 26th May, 1779. GENERAL ORDERS. AT a General Court Martial held in Edinburgh Caftle on Thursday the 6th day of May, and the two following days, whereof Lieutenant-Colonel Dundas, of the 11th dragoons, was Prefident, for the trial of Charles Williamson and Archibald Maciver, foldiers of the 42d regiment, and Robert Budge, foldier of the 71ft regiment, accufed of being guilty of a mutiny at Leitb, upon Tuesday the 20th day of April 1779, and of infti. gating others to do the fame; the Court unanimoufly found the prifoners guilty of mutiny, being a breach of the 2d, 3d, 4th, and 5th articles of the fecond fec. tion of the articles of war; and having duly confidered the evil tendency of mutiny and fedition, especially when carried to fuch enormous lengths as in the prefent cafe, did adjudge the aforefaid Charles Williamfon, Archibald Maciver, and Robert Budge, to be shot to death. Which fentence having been tranfmitted to the King, his Majefty has been pleafed to fignify his royal pleasure, that his Majefty, having regard to the former commendable and diftinguished beha viour of the 42d regiment, to which the two firft-mentioned prifoners belong; and remarking that the third prifoner, Robert Budge, who is reprefented to be now only recovering from the wounds received in the affray, does not appear to have had any forward part in the ma tiny, is most graciously pleafed to grant to the faid Charles Williamfon, Archibald Maciver, and Robert Budge, a free pardon, in full confidence that they will endeavour, upon every future occafion, by a prompt obedience and orderly demeanour, to atone for this unpremedita ted but atrocious offence. leafed, and join their respective compa The prifoners are therefore to be renies. ROBERT SKENE, Maj. Gen." The prifoners then joined a small party of their corps, who were on the bill. Anecdote of the Earl of Southampton. When Spencer had finished his famous poem of the Fairy Queen, he car ried it to the Earl of Southampton, the great patron of the poets of those days. The manufcript being fent up to the Earl, he read a few pages, and then ordered his fervant to give the writer 201.— Reading on, he cried in rapture," Carry that man another 201." Proceeding fill, be faid, "Give him rol. more." But, at length, he loft all patience, and faid, "Go turn that fellow out of the boufe, for if I read on I fhall be ruined.” On On the Penal Laws against PAPISTS. Rev. Dr M'Farlan in Canongate. I rife p, Moderator, to offer a motion, which hope will be generally acceptable, be ing not merely of my own accord, but with the advice and concurrence of fome of the moft refpectable members of this Houfe. Before I proceed to this, I beg leave to make a few preliminary obfervations, which I trust will not be thought foreign to the fubject, and which may be of ufe in the fubsequent debate. In almost every queftion which comes before this affembly, there will be a difference of opinion. I should be forry to fee a perfect unanimity. This would ndicate either a fervile timidity, or a hameful indifference to the fubjects fubmitted to our judgement. In the great -objects which we have in view, the interefts of religion, and of our national church, I hope we are all of one mind. We differ only with respect to the partitular manner by which thefe interefts may be most effectually advanced. On the prefent fubject of our confideration, we may expect a variety of opinions. Some are of opinion, that the interefts of religion will be best promoted by granting an unlimited toleration to all fects and denominations of Chriftians: others think, that this would be highly inexpe. tient, and even dangerous to fociety and religion. The arguments on both fides are fo plaufible, and, in fome refpects, fo well founded, that I can believe a man to be perfectly fincere whichever of thefe opinions he embraces or defends; and we can allow him to differ from us, without fufpecting that he is tainted by any bad principles. I therefore hope, that we fhall hear one another with candour, and not impute that to party fpit, or meaner influence, which arifes, t is to be fuppofed, from the full conviction of our own minds. We cannot help, however, to obferve at this time, and I think it a proper occafion to do so, that the clergy, and oher gentlemen, who have appeared on oth fides of this question, have been ery ill treated by the populace, in the igher as well as in the meaner ftations f life. There is, on one hand, a fet of men, hofe zeal feems greatly to exceed their feretion; who intending, it is to be oped, to support the Proteftant intereft, have been but too fuccefsful in inflaming the minds of the people. I mean not by this to reflect on thofe affociations of men, whatever their rank in life may be, who have thought it their duty to declare their attachment to our religious conftitution, and their defire to defend thofe laws by which it is protected. It is the privilege of every British fubject to declare his mind where he believes his intereft to be concerned. I am even pleafed our countrymen knew their pri vilege, and had the courage to use it. Neither do I confine my reflections to thofe lawlefs mobs, compofed only of the meaneft of the people, who, by wantonly deftroying and plundering private property, have difgraced the caufe which, in the blindness of their zeal, they meant to ferve. I have thofe of better stations chiefly in view, who, not fatisfied with declaring their own fentiments, have thrown out the moft virulent complaints against every one who ventured to differ from them in opinion. It was with much regret that we have heard the most illiberal abufe vented against fome of the moft refpectable members of this House. One in particular, long diftinguished by his fuperior parts, has been held forth in the most odious light, and exposed to popular infult, merely because his fenti. ments in fome things differed from those of the people. I think it my duty at this time to declare, that fince I have had the honour to know him, he has acted with a degree of candour and moderation feldom to be found in the head of a party; yea, further, I may venture to fay, that I do not believe this country to contain a founder Proteftant; nor is there in the church one more zealous to promote what he believes to be its intereft. He can defpife this mean abuse; but we regret it, as it difhonours the caufe in which we are interested. We are happy, however, to obferve, that there are few or none of the clergy chargeable with fuch a conduct as is now complained of. I believe there are few inftances of fuch a general ferment about religion, where fo great a body have given fo little ground of cenfure. They have declared their fentiments, but the have done it with caution. They have met with their people, not with a view to inflame, but to moderate their zeal. We hope, therefore, we fhall not be ranked in the fame clafs with thofe whofe zeal has fo far exceeded the bounds of discretion. But The affembly have already heard feve ral overtures from provincial fynods, and feem to be of opinion, that fomething fhould be done. As the measure of standing committee feems to be already given up, I fhall now offer a motion which, I hope, will be more generally ac ceptable. It is moved, That the Venerable Affem bly fhould take into their confideration the alarm which has been excited in this country by the intention of repealing the penal laws now in force against Papifts and make a public declaration of their fentiments on this subject. That our meaning may be more fully understood, I fhall now alfo read the form of a declaration and refolution, which we fubmit to the judgement of the Houfe. But if we condemn the intemperate, we hope, that, by our conduct on this fpirit of one party, it is no lefs reafona- occafion, we fhall be able to wipe off ble that we fhould condemn the fame ex. fome of these unjuft afperfions. While treme where it appears in the other. It is we are firm in maintaining our our own not without good caufe that we fay we have principles, and active in doing what we net with the moft unjuft cenfure and il- believe to be our duty to our religion, Jiberal abufe from thofe who profefs libe- and to our country, we fhall, at the rality of fentiment, and who ftyle them- fame time, act with that moderation and felves the friends of univerfal toleration. temper which fhould procure us the ap It is a queftion which furely will admit probation of every wife and thinking of fome doubt, Whether we fhould all mind. at once abolish those laws enacted by our forefathers to fupprefs a religion which once threatened the ruin of our country? It will admit of some confideration, whether it be prudent to grant an unlimited toleration to a fet of men who are even now fuccefsful in propagating the tenets of a religion which we think grofsly corrupted, and which devotes to perdition all who do not fubfcribe its errors? Yet, because we have ventured to mention our doubts; because we have not approved of a repeal which we think highly inexpedient; becaufe we have done what we thought to be our duty; therefore the appellations of fanatical, enthufiaftic, illiberal, ignorant, perfecuting, and narrow-minded, have been thrown out on us in open handfuls; and this not merely by the bigots of the oppofite party, but by thofe from whofe education and avowed principles we did expect a very different treatment. The most unjust representation of our conduct has not only been carefully circulated in our own country, but fent to the most diftant corners of the kingdom; they have been heard even in the great council of the nation. The friends of Popery are, at the fame time, permitted, in their pamphlets, to affert the most notorious falfehoods, to deny the best-eftablifhed truths, to mifreprefent the plaineft facts, and even to load us with the moft injurious reflections; yet they are not blamed; their zeal for their religion is pleaded for their excufe; they are regarded with favour as a perfecuted peo ple. But if we prefume to detect their falfehoods, to maintain known truths, or even to defend our own conduct, we are immediately marked out as feditious pamphleteers, who wish to raife a frame in the country, or revive the fpirit of perfecution. We have reafon to complain of this injuftice; but hope, that when the prefent ferment has fubfided, our conduct will appear in a more fa vourable light. In a particular manner that adopted by the Affembly [279.], a few [This was almost literally the fame with corrections only being made, and the last pait, from a motion offered by Principal Roragraph, respecting new erections, added to bertfon.] I fhall not now enter into the generat queftion respecting the repeal of the penal ftatutes, but confine myfelf to the fupport of the motion we have now made. I am aware of the objections which may be offered against this motion. It may be faid, that tho' there was once a defign to introduce a bill for the repcal of the penal ftatutes, yet, as we bare now received affurances that this defig is entirely laid afide, which has already quieted the minds of the people, there fore it is now not only unneceffary, but inexpedient, to refume the confideratica of this fubject, which may have a tendency to revive the alarm, and rekindle the flame which fo lately appeared. If! did apprehend any such consequence, or did not fee real good ends which migh be antwered by it, I fhould be the perfon to make this motion. But I mu obferve, that, even fuppofing our cant dering dering this subject should answer no good purpose, yet it is neceffarily brought before us by overtures from provincial fynods; fo that we must come to fome determination, and have it not in our power to wave the confideration of it. I muft further obferve in support of it, that though we have received affurances from miniftry of their laying afide this defign, yet they will not be fufficient entirely to quiet the minds of the people. It is known, that it is in the power of a ny member to bring in a bill into parliament, and that this bill would be fupported by many in that Houfe, even in oppofition to miniftry. Representations have also been made, that fuch a bill would create no disturbance in this country. But as we prefume, that the great body of this affembly are fully convinced that fuch a repeal would be highly inexpedient at this time, fo it is the duty of Every well-wisher to his country to do what lies in his power to prevent it. This we confider to be, in a particular manber, the duty of this affembly, conftituted legally, by the highest authority, not only a fupreme court of judicature, but of ecclefiaftical legiflation, and whose bafinefs it specially is to watch over the interefts of religion, to guard againft e very danger which may threaten it, and apply every remedy which their wifdom can fuggeft. If we understand the words of our commiffion, we are, in doing this, fo far from exceeding, that we keep within the ftrict line of duty. Should we, when fuch an alarm threatens, take to notice of it, or ufe no means to prevent its caufe, we might be juflly charged with the most culpable negligence, We are more more loudly called to do fo, when we confider the ufe which was made of the filence of laft affembly, when this fubject was moved. Then they dedeclined to take up the confideration of a bill depending, and which they had not feen, more especially as they were affured it did not extend to this part of the kingdom; and I think they did right at that time. What ufe was made of this? Their filence was confidered by the friends of Popery as an approbation of the bill of repeal, and as fuch was urged by them in fupport of their caufe. As we have the beft reafon to believe that this was far from being the mind of that affembly, fo now it is the more neceflary taat we should declare our fentiments. Another reafon for fuch a declaration, of ftill greater force, is, that there is no other public meeting where the fentiments of this part of the kingdom on this fubject can be fo fully given. We are not to confider this affembly as a general meeting only of the clergy; but, by the admiffion of lay-elders from every part of the country, from royal boroughs and univerfities, it is a complete delegation of the whole body of the people. If we agree in our opinions, as I hope we fhall, fuch a declaration may be juftly confidered as expreffing the fenfe of this part of the kingdom. This, publicly and explicitly given, cannot fail to have the greatest influence in preventing fuch a repeal as has been propofed. What government would force fuch a bill, in oppofition to the declared fentiments of a people who have thown their loyalty, and have been the uniform friends of civil and religious liberty? We are also fully perfuaded, that our taking this subject under our confideration, and taking proper fteps to oppose a repeal, will be fo far from reviving the alarm, or rekindling the flame, that, on the other hand, fuch a declaration and refolution as is now propofed, will have the hap pieft tendency to remove those fears and apprehenfions which are still entertained by many. The people will more naturally confide and repose a greater degree of confidence in this affembly, and their commiflion, than in any private affociations of men little known, however great their number, and however fervent their zeal. For thefe reafons, we with the affembly to unite in fuch a declaration and refolution as is now offered to them. I Rev. Mr Chifley at Corstorphine. mean not to take fo wide a field in this debate as most of the fpeakers before me. I mean not either to give a long detail of my fentiments of Popery, or to enter deep into the question, Whether the granting fuch a toleration to Papis in Scotland as has been lately granted in England and Ireland, is a meature proper in itself? Suffice it to fay, on the first point, That I am as little difpofed to favour the church of Rome as any member of this Houfe. Her grofs fuperftition. her earthly wisdom, her ufurped domination, her perfecuting fpirit, I cannot bear, That her deluded votaries may be reclaimed, and that our people may be guarded against her errors, thould be |