Get Full Test Bank Downloads on testbankbell.

com

Introduction to Java Programming Comprehensive

Version 10th Edition Liang Test Bank

http://testbankbell.com/product/introduction-to-java-
programming-comprehensive-version-10th-edition-liang-test-
bank/

OR CLICK BUTTON

DOWLOAD EBOOK

Download more test bank from https://testbankbell.com

More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Test Bank for Introduction to Java Programming and Data

Structures Comprehensive Version, 12th Edition, Y.
Daniel Liang

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-introduction-to-
java-programming-and-data-structures-comprehensive-version-12th-
edition-y-daniel-liang/

Solution Manual for Introduction to Java Programming

and Data Structures Comprehensive Version, 12th Edition
Y. Daniel Liang

https://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-
introduction-to-java-programming-and-data-structures-
comprehensive-version-12th-edition-y-daniel-liang/

Solution Manual for Introduction to Java Programming,

Brief Version, 11th Edition, Y. Daniel Liang

https://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-
introduction-to-java-programming-brief-version-11th-edition-y-
daniel-liang/

Test Bank for Introduction to Java Programming,

Comprehensive Version, 9/E 9th Edition : 0133050572

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-introduction-to-
java-programming-comprehensive-version-9-e-9th-
edition-0133050572/
Test Bank for Intro to Java Programming, Comp Version,
10/E 10th Edition : 0133813460

https://testbankbell.com/product/test-bank-for-intro-to-java-
programming-comp-version-10-e-10th-edition-0133813460/

Solution Manual for Intro to Java Programming, Comp

Version, 10/E 10th Edition : 0133813460

https://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-intro-to-
java-programming-comp-version-10-e-10th-edition-0133813460/

Solutions Manual to accompany Introduction to Java

Programming 9th edition

https://testbankbell.com/product/solutions-manual-to-accompany-
introduction-to-java-programming-9th-edition/

Solution Manual for Revel for Introduction to Python

Programming and Data Structures, Y. Daniel Liang,

https://testbankbell.com/product/solution-manual-for-revel-for-
introduction-to-python-programming-and-data-structures-y-daniel-
liang/

Introduction to Programming Using Visual Basic 10th

Edition Schneider Solutions Manual

https://testbankbell.com/product/introduction-to-programming-
using-visual-basic-10th-edition-schneider-solutions-manual/
 chapter2.txt
Introduction to Java Programming Comprehensive
Version 10th Edition Liang Test Bank
full chapter at: https://testbankbell.com/product/introduction-to-java-
programming-comprehensive-version-10th-edition-liang-test-bank/
Chapter 2 Elementary Programming

Section 2.3 Reading Input from the Console

1. Suppose a Scanner object is created as follows:

Scanner input = new Scanner(System.in);

What method do you use to read an int value?

a. input.nextInt();
b. input.nextInteger();
c. input.int();
d. input.integer();
Key:a

#
2. The following code fragment reads in two numbers:

Scanner input = new Scanner(System.in);

int i = input.nextInt();
double d = input.nextDouble();

What are the correct ways to enter these two numbers?

a. Enter an integer, a space, a double value, and then the Enter key.
b. Enter an integer, two spaces, a double value, and then the Enter key.
c. Enter an integer, an Enter key, a double value, and then the Enter key.
d. Enter a numeric value with a decimal point, a space, an integer, and then the
Enter key.
Key:abc
#
6. is the code with natural language mixed with Java code.

a. Java program
b. A Java statement
c. Pseudocode
d. A flowchart diagram
key:c

#
3. If you enter 1 2 3, when you run this program, what will be the output?

Page 1
import java.util.Scanner; chapter2.txt

public class Test1 {

public static void main(String[] args) {
Scanner input = new Scanner(System.in);
System.out.print("Enter three numbers: ");

Page 2
 chapter2.txt
double number1 = input.nextDouble();
double number2 = input.nextDouble();
double number3 = input.nextDouble();

// Compute average
double average = (number1 + number2 + number3) / 3;

// Display result
System.out.println(average);
}
}

a. 1.0
b. 2.0
c. 3.0
d. 4.0
Key:b

#
4. What is the exact output of the following code?

double area = 3.5;

System.out.print("area");
System.out.print(area);

a. 3.53.5
b. 3.5 3.5
c. area3.5
d. area 3.5
Key:c

#
Section 2.4 Identifiers
4. Every letter in a Java keyword is in lowercase?
a. true
b. false
Key:a

#
5. Which of the following is a valid identifier?
a. $343
b. class
c. 9X
d. 8+9
e. radius
Key:ae

Page 3
 chapter2.txt
Section 2.5 Variables
6. Which of the following are correct names for variables according to Java
naming conventions?
a. radius
b. Radius
c. RADIUS
d. findArea
e. FindArea
Key:ad

#
7. Which of the following are correct ways to declare variables?
a. int length; int width;
b. int length, width;
c. int length; width;
d. int length, int width;
Key:ab

#
Section 2.6 Assignment Statements and Assignment Expressions
8. is the Java assignment operator.
a. ==
b. :=
c. =
d. =:
Key:c

#
9. To assign a value 1 to variable x, you write
a. 1 = x;
b. x = 1;
c. x := 1;
d. 1 := x;
e. x == 1;
Key:b

#
10. Which of the following assignment statements is incorrect?
a. i = j = k = 1;
b. i = 1; j = 1; k = 1;
c. i = 1 = j = 1 = k = 1;
d. i == j == k == 1;
Key:cd

#
Section 2.7 Named Constants
11. To declare a constant MAX_LENGTH inside a method with value 99.98, you write
a. final MAX_LENGTH = 99.98;
Page 4
 chapter2.txt
b. final float MAX_LENGTH = 99.98;
c. double MAX_LENGTH = 99.98;
d. final double MAX_LENGTH = 99.98;
Key:d

#
12. Which of the following is a constant, according to Java naming conventions?
a. MAX_VALUE
b. Test
c. read
d. ReadInt
e. COUNT
Key:ae

#
13. To improve readability and maintainability, you should declare
instead of using literal values such as 3.14159.
a. variables
b. methods
c. constants
d. classes
Key:c

#
Section 2.8 Naming Conventions
60. According to Java naming convention, which of the following names can be
variables?
a. FindArea
b. findArea
c. totalLength
d. TOTAL_LENGTH
e. class
Key:bc

#
Section 2.9 Numeric Data Types and Operations
14. Which of these data types requires the most amount of memory?
a. long
b. int
c. short
d. byte
Key:a

#
34. If a number is too large to be stored in a variable of the float type, it
.
a. causes overflow
b. causes underflow

Page 5
 chapter2.txt
c. causes no error
d. cannot happen in Java
Key:a

#
15. Analyze the following code:

public class Test {

public static void main(String[] args) {
int n = 10000 * 10000 * 10000;
System.out.println("n is " + n);
}
}
a. The program displays n is 1000000000000
b. The result of 10000 * 10000 * 10000 is too large to be stored in an int
variable n. This causes an overflow and the program is aborted.
c. The result of 10000 * 10000 * 10000 is too large to be stored in an int
variable n. This causes an overflow and the program continues to execute because
Java does not report errors on overflow.
d. The result of 10000 * 10000 * 10000 is too large to be stored in an int
variable n. This causes an underflow and the program is aborted.
e. The result of 10000 * 10000 * 10000 is too large to be stored in an int variable
n. This causes an underflow and the program continues to execute because Java does
not report errors on underflow.
Key:c

#
16. What is the result of 45 / 4?
a. 10
b. 11
c. 11.25
d. 12
Key:b 45 / 4 is an integer division, which results in 11

#
18. Which of the following expression results in a value 1?
a. 2 % 1
b. 15 % 4
c. 25 % 5
d. 37 % 6
Key:d 2 % 1 is 0, 15 % 4 is 3, 25 % 5 is 0, and 37 % 6 is 1

#
19. 25 % 1 is
a. 1
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4

Page 6
 chapter2.txt
e. 0
Key:e

#
20. -25 % 5 is
a. 1
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
e. 0
Key:e

#
21. 24 % 5 is
a. 1
b. 2
c. 3
d. 4
e. 0
Key:d

#
22. -24 % 5 is
a. -1
b. -2
c. -3
d. -4
e. 0
Key:d

#
23. -24 % -5 is
a. 3
b. -3
c. 4
d. -4
e. 0
Key:d

#
30. Math.pow(2, 3) returns .
a. 9
b. 8
c. 9.0
d. 8.0
Key:d It returns a double value 8.0.

Page 7
 chapter2.txt
30. Math.pow(4, 1 / 2) returns .
a. 2
b. 2.0
c. 0
d. 1.0
e. 1
Key:d Note that 1 / 2 is 0.

#
30. Math.pow(4, 1.0 / 2) returns .
a. 2
b. 2.0
c. 0
d. 1.0
e. 1
Key:b Note that the pow method returns a double value, not an integer.
#
31. The method returns a raised to the power of b.

a. Math.power(a, b)
b. Math.exponent(a, b)
c. Math.pow(a, b)
d. Math.pow(b, a)
Key:c

#
Section 2.10 Numeric Literals
15. To declare an int variable number with initial value 2, you write
a. int number = 2L;
b. int number = 2l;
c. int number = 2;
d. int number = 2.0;
Key:c

#
32. Analyze the following code.

public class Test {

public static void main(String[] args) {
int month = 09;
System.out.println("month is " + month);
}
}
a. The program displays month is 09
b. The program displays month is 9
c. The program displays month is 9.0
d. The program has a syntax error, because 09 is an incorrect literal value.
Key:d Any numeric literal with the prefix 0 is an octal value. But 9 is not an octal

Page 8
 chapter2.txt
digit. An octal digit is 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, or 7.

#
15. Which of the following are the same as 1545.534?
a. 1.545534e+3
b. 0.1545534e+4
c. 1545534.0e-3
d. 154553.4e-2
Key:abcd

#
Section 2.11 Evaluating Expressions and Operator Precedence
24. The expression 4 + 20 / (3 - 1) * 2 is evaluated to
a. 4
b. 20
c. 24
d. 9
e. 25
Key:c

#
Section 2.12 Case Study: Displaying the Current Time
58. The System.currentTimeMillis() returns .
a. the current time.
b. the current time in milliseconds.
c. the current time in milliseconds since midnight.
d. the current time in milliseconds since midnight, January 1, 1970.
e. the current time in milliseconds since midnight, January 1, 1970 GMT (the
Unix time).
Key:e

#
24. To obtain the current second, use .
a. System.currentTimeMillis() % 3600
b. System.currentTimeMillis() % 60
c. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 % 60
d. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 / 60 % 60
e. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 / 60 / 60 % 24
Key:c

#
24. To obtain the current minute, use .
a. System.currentTimeMillis() % 3600
b. System.currentTimeMillis() % 60
c. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 % 60
d. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 / 60 % 60
e. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 / 60 / 60 % 24
Key:d

Page 9
 chapter2.txt

#
24. To obtain the current hour in UTC, use _.
a. System.currentTimeMillis() % 3600
b. System.currentTimeMillis() % 60
c. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 % 60
d. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 / 60 % 60
e. System.currentTimeMillis() / 1000 / 60 / 60 % 24
Key:e

#
Section 2.13 Augmented Assignment Operators
24. To add a value 1 to variable x, you write
a. 1 + x = x;
b. x += 1;
c. x := 1;
d. x = x + 1;
e. x = 1 + x;
Key:bde

#
25. To add number to sum, you write (Note: Java is case-sensitive)
a. number += sum;
b. number = sum + number;
c. sum = Number + sum;
d. sum += number;
e. sum = sum + number;
Key:de

#
26. Suppose x is 1. What is x after x += 2?
a. 0
b. 1
c. 2
d. 3
e. 4
Key:d

#
27. Suppose x is 1. What is x after x -= 1?
a. 0
b. 1
c. 2
d. -1
e. -2
Key:a

Page 10
 chapter2.txt
28. What is x after the following statements?

int x = 2;
int y = 1;
x *= y + 1;

a. x is 1.
b. x is 2.
c. x is 3.
d. x is 4.
Key:d

#
29. What is x after the following statements?

int x = 1;
x *= x + 1;

a. x is 1.
b. x is 2.
c. x is 3.
d. x is 4.
Key:b

#
29. Which of the following statements are the same?

(A) x -= x + 4
(B) x = x + 4 - x
(C) x = x - (x + 4)

a. (A) and (B) are the same

b. (A) and (C) are the same
c. (B) and (C) are the same
d. (A), (B), and (C) are the same
Key:a

#
Section 2.14 Increment and Decrement Operators
21. Are the following four statements equivalent?
number += 1;
number = number + 1;
number++;
++number;
a. Yes
b. No
Key:a

Page 11
 chapter2.txt
#
34. What is i printed?
public class Test {
public static void main(String[] args) {
int j = 0;
int i = ++j + j * 5;

System.out.println("What is i? " + i);

}
}
a. 0
b. 1
c. 5
d. 6
Key:d Operands are evaluated from left to right in Java. The left-hand operand of a
binary operator is evaluated before any part of the right-hand operand is evaluated.
This rule takes precedence over any other rules that govern expressions. Therefore,
++j is evaluated first, and returns 1. Then j*5 is evaluated, returns 5.

#
35. What is i printed in the following code?

public class Test {

public static void main(String[] args) {
int j = 0;
int i = j++ + j * 5;

System.out.println("What is i? " + i);

}
}
a. 0
b. 1
c. 5
d. 6
Key:c Same as before, except that j++ evaluates to 0.

#
36. What is y displayed in the following code?

public class Test {

public static void main(String[] args) {
int x = 1;
int y = x++ + x;
System.out.println("y is " + y);
}
}
a. y is 1.
b. y is 2.

Page 12
 chapter2.txt
c. y is 3.
d. y is 4.
Key:c When evaluating x++ + x, x++ is evaluated first, which does two things: 1.
returns 1 since it is post-increment. x becomes 2. Therefore y is 1 + 2.

#
37. What is y displayed?

public class Test {

public static void main(String[] args) {
int x = 1;
int y = x + x++;
System.out.println("y is " + y);
}
}
a. y is 1.
b. y is 2.
c. y is 3.
d. y is 4.
Key:b When evaluating x + x++, x is evaluated first, which is 1. X++ returns 1 since
it is post-increment and 2. Therefore y is 1 + 1.

#
Section 2.15 Numeric Type Conversions
38. To assign a double variable d to a float variable x, you write
a. x = (long)d
b. x = (int)d;
c. x = d;
d. x = (float)d;
Key:d

#
17. Which of the following expressions will yield 0.5?
a. 1 / 2
b. 1.0 / 2
c. (double) (1 / 2)
d. (double) 1 / 2
e. 1 / 2.0
Key:bde 1 / 2 is an integer division, which results in 0.

#
39. What is the printout of the following code:

double x = 5.5;
int y = (int)x;
System.out.println("x is " + x + " and y is " + y);
a. x is 5 and y is 6
b. x is 6.0 and y is 6.0

Page 13
 chapter2.txt
c. x is 6 and y is 6
d. x is 5.5 and y is 5
e. x is 5.5 and y is 5.0
Key:d The value is x is not changed after the casting.

#
40. Which of the following assignment statements is illegal?
a. float f = -34;
b. int t = 23;
c. short s = 10;
d. int t = (int)false;
e. int t = 4.5;
Key:de

#
41. What is the value of (double)5/2?
a. 2
b. 2.5
c. 3
d. 2.0
e. 3.0
Key:b

#
42. What is the value of (double)(5/2)?
a. 2
b. 2.5
c. 3
d. 2.0
e. 3.0
Key:d

#
43. Which of the following expression results in 45.37?
a. (int)(45.378 * 100) / 100
b. (int)(45.378 * 100) / 100.0
c. (int)(45.378 * 100 / 100)
d. (int)(45.378) * 100 / 100.0
Key:b

#
43. The expression (int)(76.0252175 * 100) / 100 evaluates to .
a. 76.02
b. 76
c. 76.0252175
d. 76.03
Key:b In order to obtain 76.02, you have divide 100.0.

Page 14
 chapter2.txt
#
44. If you attempt to add an int, a byte, a long, and a double, the result will
be a value.
a. byte
b. int
c. long
d. double
Key:d

#
Section 2.16 Software Life Cycle
1. is a formal process that seeks to understand the problem and

document in detail what the software system needs to do.

a. Requirements specification
b. Analysis
c. Design
d. Implementation
e. Testing
Key:a
#
1. System analysis seeks to analyze the data flow and to identify the

system’s input and output. When you do analysis, it helps to identify what the
output is first, and then figure out what input data you need in order to produce
the output.
a. Requirements specification
b. Analysis
c. Design
d. Implementation
e. Testing
Key:b

#
0. Any assignment statement can be used as an assignment expression.
a. true
b. false
Key:a

#
1. You can define a constant twice in a block.
a. true
b. false
Key:b
#
44. are valid Java identifiers.
a. $Java
b. _RE4
Page 15
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
 That they acted, even in a political view, in the very best manner
that their circumstances admitted, is, I think, demonstrable. They
showed to the people that it was not the fleece but the flock that
had been the object of their care, and imprinted upon their minds a
sense of the worth of the truth for which they were contending,
beyond what they could have done in any other manner; and that
truth was one written as with a sunbeam throughout the whole New
Testament—that Christ is the king and head of his church, and that
whatever form of church government does not acknowledge this, is
essentially antichristian. It is not less evident, that the prelatists, as
well as the papists, gave that dignity and power to another; and the
solemn and universal testimony which so many godly men lifted up
at once against acknowledging such unholy usurpation, has not lost
its effect even unto this day—an effect it never could have had, had
the ministers resisted and allowed themselves to have been thrust
out one by one.
From Glasgow, Middleton and his Episcopalian reformadoes
pursued their route, confirming their churches in the south, through
Galloway as far as Wigton; and, upon the last day of October,
returned to Holyrood-house.
On his arrival, the Commissioner was assailed by what was to him
unexpected intelligence, that the whole south and west were thrown
into confusion; and, enraged to find that both the archbishop and
himself had so entirely miscalculated, he expressed his astonishment
at the unaccountable conduct of the “madmen” with a volley of
oaths and execrations—the now fashionable dialect of the court—
and, on the first meeting of council, caused letters be sent off
express to his lordship and the primate, requesting their presence
and advice. Meanwhile, they proceeded in the usual course of
endeavouring to intimidate the humbler refractory by their rigour to
the more eminent. Mr Hugh M’Kail, chaplain to Sir James Stewart of
Kirkfield, a youth of high promise, was forced into voluntary exile
because he had defended in a sermon what he considered the
scriptural mode of church government. Mr John Brown of Wamphrey,
well known by his historical, controversial, and practical writings, not
less respected for his piety than for his learning, having reproved
some ministers for attending the Archbishop of Glasgow’s diocesan
synod, styling them perjured, was banished to Holland—at that time
the asylum of the persecuted; there he remained for many years,
and, by his seasonable publications, strengthened the hands of the
sufferers in his native land, and proved a thorn in the side of their
tyrannical government.
Mr John Livingston, more honoured of God as the means of
converting sinners to Christ than almost any minister of the church
of Scotland since the Reformation, then minister at Ancrum, because
he would not promise to observe the 29th of May as an holyday, nor
take the oath of allegiance without any explanation, was subjected
to a like punishment, as were Messrs Robert Traill of Edinburgh,
Neave of Newmills, and Gardner of Saddle. Mr Livingston, in the true
spirit of a Christian patriot, after sentence was pronounced, thus
replied—“Well! although it be not permitted me to breathe my native
air, yet into whatsoever part of the world I may go, I shall not cease
to pray for a blessing to these lands, to his majesty, the government,
and the inferior magistrates thereof; but especially for the land of
my nativity!” In the same excellent spirit, having been denied the
privilege of paying a farewell visit to his wife, children, and people,
he addressed a pastoral letter to the flock of Jesus Christ in Ancrum.
Their sins and his own, he told them, had drawn down this severe
stroke; and, while it was their part to search out and mourn for
them, “it is not needful,” he adds, “to look much to instruments, I
have from my heart forgiven them all, and would wish you to do the
like, and pray for them that it be not laid to their charge. For my
part, I bless his name I have great peace in the matter of my
sufferings. I need not repeat, you know my testimony of the things
in controversy:—Jesus Christ is a king, and only hath power to
appoint the officers and government of his house. It is a fearful
thing to violate the oath of God, and fall into the hands of the living
God. It could not well be expected,” he proceeds to remark, and the
remark is applicable in all similar cases when religion has been in
repute among a people—“there having been so fair and so general a
profession throughout the land, but that the Lord would put men to
it; and it is like it shall come to every man’s door, that, when every
one according to their inclination, may have acted their part—and he
seems to stand by—He may come at last and act his part, and
vindicate his glory and truth. I have often showed you that it is the
greatest difficulty under heaven to believe that there is a God and a
life after this; and have often told you that, for my part, I could
never make it a chief part of my work to insist upon the particular
debates of the time, as being assured that if a man drink in the
knowledge and the main foundations of the Christian religion, and
have the work of God’s spirit in his heart to make him walk with
God, and make conscience of his ways, such an one shall not readily
mistake Christ’s quarrel, to join either with a profane atheist party or
a fanatic party. There may be diversity of judgment, and sometimes
sharp debates among them that are going to heaven; but, certainly,
a spirit guides the seed of the woman, and another spirit the seed of
the serpent.”
Several of lesser note were treated with not much less harshness,
being ordered to confinement in distant places of the country,
without the means of subsistence, and debarred from preaching in
the rugged and barren districts to which they were banished.
Such, however, was the outcry the wide desolation of the church
had occasioned, that the council were convinced they had acted with
unwise precipitation, and endeavoured in some measure to retrace
their steps. The author of the mischief, Fairfoul, though repeatedly
called upon, does not appear to have assisted their deliberations,
which were protracted, till the month of December, when a
proclamation was issued, extending the time allowed ministers for
procuring presentations and collocation to the 1st of February, but
ordering those who neglected to do so to remove from their parishes
and presbyteries; and such of them as belonged to the dioceses of
St Andrews and Edinburgh, to go into banishment beyond the Tay.
The older ministers, who had not been touched by the Glasgow act,
and had hitherto remained exercising their parochial duties among
their people, because they had not attended the diocesan meetings,
were confined to their parishes. The people who left the hirelings
intruded upon them, travelling sometimes twenty miles to hear the
gospel, were now ordered to attend their parish churches, under a
penalty of twenty shillings for every day’s absence; and because in
those places where the ministers, in view of separation from their
flocks, had celebrated the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper to
multitudes assembled from the surrounding districts—and much of
the divine presence had appeared among them—these were
stigmatized as unlicentiate confluences of the people; and the
discourses delivered under such circumstances, with more than
ordinary fervour, and accompanied with more than ordinary power,
abused as the extravagant sermons of some ministers of unquiet
and factious spirits—special engines to debauch people from their
duty, and lead them to disobedience, schism, and rebellion:
therefore every incumbent was prohibited from employing more than
one or two of his neighbours at a communion without a license from
the bishop, or admitting the people of any other parish to participate
of the sacrament without a certificate from his curate.
This was the last of Middleton’s acts in Scotland. His rival,
Lauderdale, had so well employed the access he had to the king to
undermine his influence, that he was called to court to answer
charges of having encroached upon the royal prerogative by the
balloting act, and defrauded the royal treasury by appropriating the
fines. While the affair was under discussion, Lauderdale procured an
order to delay levying the fines due the first term and dismiss the
collector. Middleton, who saw that this was a deadly blow at his
interest in Scotland, countermanded the royal letter upon alleged
verbal authority, which Charles either never gave, or found it
convenient to disown; and this completed his ruin. His rashness and
inconsideration were too palpable to be denied; but, by the interest
of his friends, Clarendon and the Bishop of London, his fall was
softened, and he was sent into a kind of honourable banishment as
governor of Tangiers. There he continued to indulge his habits of
intemperance, and, falling down a stair in a fit of intoxication, broke
his right arm so severely, that the bone protruded through the flesh,
and, penetrating his side, a mortification ensued, which terminated
his life.
Middleton, who never appears to have had any serious religion,
was the friend of Lord Clarendon—a statesman bigoted to
Episcopacy, rather on account of its political than its spiritual
advantages—and employed by him for rearing in Scotland, upon the
ruins of Presbytery, which he detested, an establishment more in
accordance with those high notions of the prerogative which,
notwithstanding the melancholy example of the first Charles, were
adopted and cherished by the court of his son. Well calculated for
carrying through the most despotic measures by force, he must be
acquitted of the mean duplicity of Charles’s letter to the ministers of
Edinburgh, the obloquy of which rests upon the crafty politics of
Sharpe. When first shown it, he considered it as opposed to
Episcopacy, and expressed his regret; but when told that, upon
rescinding all the laws in favour of Presbytery, then Episcopacy
remained the church government settled by law, he observed, “that
might be done; but for his part he was not fond of making his
majesty’s first appearance in Scotland to be in the character of a
cheat.” Once, however, fairly embarked, he never hesitated, and
concurred with the bishops in their every project, however
treacherous or oppressive. He first overturned the Presbyterian
church government, which had been settled under as solemn
sanctions, and as strong legal guarantees, as can ever possibly be
devised to secure any religious establishment, and then sent to the
scaffold, from motives of avarice and revenge, the noblest
ornaments of that religion, whose only crime was, adhering to a
profession he himself had, with uplifted hand, sworn to support.
In council, he unwarrantably extended the tyrannical acts of his
servile parliament, and wantonly laid waste hundreds of peaceable
and flourishing congregations. With a cunning worthy the priesthood
of Rome, he invited numbers of unsuspecting ministers from distant
parts of the country to Edinburgh, as if to consult them on the
affairs of the church, then ensnared them by insidious questions,
and punished their unsuspecting simplicity with deprivation,
imprisonment, and exile. Without any shadow of law, and without
the form of a trial, he turned ministers from their congregations—
prohibited them from preaching, praying, or expounding the
Scriptures, and sent them to the most distant corners of the land, or
forced them to seek an asylum in foreign countries—then intruded
on the desolated parishes worthless and incapable hirelings—and
concluded his career by commanding the people to attend upon their
ministrations under a severe and oppressive penalty. His own
expatriation to the barren coast of Africa was looked upon by the
sufferers as a righteous retribution, and his melancholy end as an
evident mark of divine displeasure; nor could the coincidence
between his own rash imprecation and the manner of his death fail
to strike the most careless. Like many other political hypocrites, with
a zeal as furious as false, he had sworn and subscribed the
covenants when it was the fashion of the time to do so; and, on
retiring from the place where he had taken these vows upon him, he
said to some of those who were with him, “that that was the
pleasantest day he had ever seen; and if ever he should do any
thing against that blessed work, he had been engaging in,” holding
up his right arm, “he wished that it might be his death!” The
enormous fines he imposed, he never was empowered to exact;
and, in return for impoverishing his country, he died an exile and a
beggar.
Lauderdale having succeeded in removing his formidable
antagonist, from thenceforth for a number of years almost solely
directed Scottish affairs. The Presbyterians, who believed that he
was secretly attached to their cause, anticipated better days under
his protection; but ambition was his master-passion, and to it he was
prepared to sacrifice all his early attachments and principles. While
religion appeared the only road to power in the state, he had been
foremost in the ranks of the covenanters; and, by the warmth of his
professions, and the consistency of his conduct, had gained the
confidence of those who were sincerely devoted to the cause; but
when the path of preferment on Charles’s restoration struck off in an
opposite direction, he deserted to the prelates, and evinced the
sincerity of his change by at once forsaking his sobriety of manners,
and apostatizing from his form of religion; and, as he understood
well the principles he betrayed, and at one time certainly had strong
convictions of their truth, his opposition was proportionably
inveterate, and he became outrageously furious at whatever tended
to remind him of his former “fanaticism.”
 BOOK IV.

DECEMBER, A.D. 1662-1664.

State of the West and South—Bishops—Curates—Their reception—Tumult at

Irongray—Commission sent to Kirkcudbright and Dumfries—Field-preaching—
Rothes and Lauderdale arrive in Scotland—Parliament—Warriston’s arrest and
execution—Principal Wood of St Andrews and other ministers silenced and
scattered—Troops ordered to enforce the Acts of Parliament—Their outrages—
Sir James Turner—High Commission Court—Its atrocities—Privy Council—Its
exactions—Prohibits private prayer-meetings or contributing money for the
relief of the sufferers—William Guthrie of Fenwick laid aside—Donaldson of
Dalgetty’s case—Death of Glencairn—Political changes.

While these struggles were going forward at court, the affairs of

Scotland were in a state of the most woful confusion. Almost the
whole parishes in the west and south had been deprived of their
ministers; and as their own churches remained vacant, the people in
crowds flocked to those where the few old Presbyterian ministers
were yet allowed to officiate. These assemblies having been
denounced by the council’s proclamation, attracted the attention of
the soldiers; and numerous parties patrolled the country to disturb
the meetings and levy the fines to which offenders were liable.
When the vacant charges came to be filled, (1663,) new sources
of disturbance arose. No preparation had been made for such an
exigence as bad now arisen. The regular candidates for the ministry
were too few; and of these but a small proportion were willing to
pursue their studies under the direction of the bishops, or accept of
Episcopal ordination. The north was therefore ransacked, and a
great number of ignorant, uneducated young men, not more
deficient in talents and acquirements than in decent common moral
conduct,[31] were hastily brought forward to supply the places of the
ejected ministers, who in general were both pious, learned, and of
respectable abilities; many of them eminently so, and all laborious in
the discharge of their duties, exemplary in their lives, and dear to
their people. These presentees, who were contemptuously styled by
the people “bishops’ curates,” when intruded upon them without any
regard to their wishes or choice, were received in many places with
the most determined opposition; in some, they were compelled to
retire; and, in others, obliged to enter by the windows, the doors
being built up; and thus literally to display the scriptural
characteristic of spiritual thieves and robbers. The Presbyterian
ministers had uniformly classed prelacy and popery together; and, at
the settlement of the new clergy, the prelates justified the charge by
employing the military to enforce their ecclesiastical appointments,
and ordaining their parsons at the point of the sword. The patrons,
in most cases, had allowed their rights to devolve upon the bishops;
and thus the whole undivided obloquy rested on their consecrated
heads, which was not lessened when some of the careless or
profane heritors, to ingratiate themselves with the rulers, feasted the
clergy at their settlements, and, aping the loyalty of their superiors,
conducted their entertainments with an equally jovial disregard of
decency and temperance.
31. Bishop Burnet, himself an Episcopalian, thus characterizes them:—“They
were the worst preachers I ever heard. They were ignorant to a reproach;
and many of them were openly vicious. They were a disgrace to their order
and the sacred function, and were indeed the dregs and refuse of the
northern parts. Those of them who were above contempt or scandal, were
men of such violent tempers, that they were as much hated as the others
were despised.”
But there was also an opposition of a more solemn and impressive
nature offered by the serious part of the people in different parishes,
who received the intruders when they came among them with tears,
and entreated them earnestly to be gone, nor ruin the poor
congregations and their own souls. Neither of these methods,
however, had any effect; the thoughtless wretches entered upon
that awful charge—the care of souls—as if they had been taking
forcible possession of an heritable estate to which they had a legal
right.[32]
32. The following appears to have been the clerical mode of infeftment:—At the
admission of Mr John Ramsay to the parish of Sconie, in Fife, “Mr Jossia
Meldrum, minister of Kingorne, after sermon ended, he tooke his promise to
be faithfull in his charge of that flock: and ther was delivered to him the
bibell, the keys of the church doore, and the bell-tou.” Lamont’s Diary, p.
192.

As the south had been favoured with remarkably faithful pastors,

the strongest resistance appeared there. Irongray was the first
settlement where open “tumultuating” took place. The curate not
being able to obtain peaceable admission, returned with a party of
soldiers to force an entrance, when a band of women, led on by a
Margaret Smith, attacked the guard with stones, and triumphantly
beat them off the field. Margaret, the fair heroine, was brought to
Edinburgh, and sentenced to slavery in Barbadoes; but she “told her
tale so innocently,” that the managers, not yet steeled to
compassion, permitted her to return home. The parish was not,
however, allowed to escape with impunity. Upon hearing of this
disturbance, and a similar one at Kirkcudbright, the privy council, as
if the country had been in an actual state of rebellion, appointed the
Earls of Linlithgow, Galloway, and Annandale, with Lord Drumlanrig
and Sir John Wauchope of Niddry, to proceed on a commission of
inquiry to that district, attended by an hundred horse and two
hundred foot of the king’s guard, with power to suppress all
meetings or insurrections of the people, if any should happen.
At Kirkcudbright, the commission held several diets, and examined
a number of witnesses. Of about thirty-two women whom they
apprehended, five were sent to Edinburgh; and Bessie Laurie, with
thirteen others, were bound over to keep the peace. Lord
Kirkcudbright—who had declared if the minister came there he
should come over his body, and that he would lose his fortune
before he should be preacher there; but at the same time admitted,
that, if the minister had come in by his presentation, he could have
raised as many men as would have prevented a tumult—was
transmitted under a guard to Edinburgh. James Carson of Fenwick,
the late provost, although not in power, and John Ewart, who had
refused to accept the office, because they had declined interfering
upon the occasion, were also sent prisoners to the capital, where
they were kept in confinement several months;[33] besides, in
addition, being severely fined. The five women were sentenced to
stand at the cross of Kirkcudbright two hours on two market days,
with labels on their foreheads denoting their crimes, and thereafter
to find bail to keep the peace. New magistrates were appointed for
the burgh, who, on accepting the nomination, signed a bond in their
own name and that of the haill inhabitants of the place, binding and
obliging them, and ilk one of them, during their public trust, and all
the inhabitants, to behave themselves loyally, and in all things
conform to his majesty’s laws, made and to be made, both in civil
and ecclesiastical affairs! and besides, to protect the Lord Bishop of
Galloway, the minister of the burgh, and any other ministers that
were or should be established by authority.
33. The following singular order was issued by the council on this occasion; and
it deserves to be noted, that it was issued the very first meeting after the
archbishops had taken their seats as members:—“June 23d. The lords of
council being informed that ministers and other persons visit the prisoners
for the riot at Kirkcudbright, now in the tolbooth of Edinburgh, and not only
exhort but pray for the said persons to persist in their wicked practices,
affirming that they are suffering for righteousness’ sake, and assure them
that God will give them an outgate—recommend it to the keeper to notice
who visits them, and what their discourse and carnage is when with them.”
Wodrow, vol. i. p. 188.
At Dumfries, the commission also examined witnesses, but the
mighty insurrection dwindled into a “great convocation and tumult of
women;” yet the whole party, horse and foot, were quartered upon
the parish, and a bonus levied for remunerating the clerks. The
whole heritors were likewise compelled to sign a bond of passive
obedience to laws known and unknown, in terms similar to that of
the magistrates of Kirkcudbright.[34]
34. The council ordered to be advanced for this expedition, the sum of £500 to
the soldiers as part of their pay, £120 to the Earl of Linlithgow, and £50 to
the Laird of Niddry for their expenses; so that probably these petty
squabbles would cost the two parishes not much under one thousand
pounds sterling, equivalent to nearly five in later times.

Instead of reconciling the people, or terrifying them back to the

churches, these severities exasperated them; nor was it to be
expected that they would willingly attend the ministrations of men,
whose preaching they despised, and who were thus ushered in.
Outrageous expressions of dislike were not, however, approved of by
the godly and judicious Presbyterians, they mourned in private over
the desolation of the church, and sought, by attending the family
exercises of the younger ministers who were “outted,”[35] but
sojourned among them, to receive that instruction, and enjoy that
social worship, of which they were so tyrannically deprived!
Sometimes the numbers who assembled to enjoy this privilege were
so great, that a house could not contain them, and the minister was
constrained to officiate without doors; till at length they increased so
much that they were under the necessity of betaking themselves to
the open fields; and, like him whose servants they were, beneath
the wide canopy of heaven, preached the gospel of the kingdom to
multitudes upon the mountain’s side. Mr John Welsh and Mr Gabriel
Semple began the practice of field-preaching, which quickly
increased, and, to the great alarm of the bishops, had pervaded
almost every quarter of the country, when the political arrangements
being completed, Rothes arrived as commissioner to open the
parliament.
35. “Outted,” turned out of their churches.

Lauderdale accompanied the Earl to Scotland, professedly to

inquire into the origin of that conspiracy against his majesty’s royal
prerogative—the balloting act;—in reality to secure his own
ascendancy in Scotland, and, by pushing to the utmost the
advantage he had gained over the Middleton faction, to prevent any
attempt being made against him from that quarter for the future.
The Chancellor made some feeble show of opposition, but the
universal spirit of submission to the will of the crown which pervaded
the higher classes, and their selfish eagerness to obtain a share in
the spoils of their unhappy country, not only blighted every
appearance of patriotism, but precluded every plan of association
among the aristocracy themselves for maintaining their own rank
and station independent of the minions of the court. The
Presbyterians who rejoiced in Middleton’s fall, soon found that they
had gained very little by the change. At the first diet of council,
(June 15, 1663,) the two archbishops were admitted, with Mr
Charles Maitland, Lord Hatton, Lauderdale’s brother; but Crawford
having refused the declaration, was deprived of the treasurership,
and Rothes, the commissioner, that same day was appointed to
succeed him in the office.
On the 18th, parliament met, and, by an alteration in the method
of appointing the Lords of the Articles—allowing the spiritual lords
first to name eight temporal lords, then the temporal lords to choose
eight spiritual; and these sixteen, or such of them as were present,
to elect the representatives of the barons and burghs—they virtually
gave up the privilege of nominating this important committee, to the
servants of the crown, and surrendered the last check they had upon
the prerogative. The tyranny of the council was next legalized, and a
practice introduced which continued till the Revolution:—the most
oppressive acts of the former sessions, together with the acts of
council, enlarging and explaining their vindictive clauses, were
approved of by a retrospective declaratory enactment; and every
mode of persecution which had been adopted upon trial since last
session, was incorporated into the statute law of the kingdom. Thus
an act against separation and disobedience of ecclesiastical authority
—introduced early in the session—besides recapitulating all the
penalties to which the non-conforming ministers had been previously
subjected, ordained those who still dared to preach in contempt of
law, or did not attend the diocesan meetings, to be punished as
seditious persons, and despisers of the royal authority. Absence from
church on Sundays—a finable offence—was now denounced as
sedition; and whoever wilfully should withdraw from the
ministrations of the parish priest, however incapable he might be,
were, if noblemen, gentlemen, or heritors, to lose the fourth part of
their yearly income—if yeomen, tenants, or farmers, such proportion
of their moveables, after payment of their rents, as the council
should think fit, not exceeding a fourth part—but if a burgess, his
freedom, along with the fourth of his moveables, and, in addition,
the council was authorized to inflict such corporeal punishment as
they should see proper. The declaration was ordered by another act
to be taken by all who exercised any public trust; and persons
chosen to be councillors or magistrates of burghs, if they declined to
subscribe, were declared for ever incapable of holding any office, or
exercising any occupation, trade, or merchandise. To complete the
organization of the hierarchy, an act was passed for the
establishment and constitution of a National Synod, bearing the
same resemblance to the estates of Scotland that the Houses of
Convocation did to the English parliament: both emanated from his
majesty’s supremacy, and consisted of the bishops and their
satellites, only the Scottish assembly was to meet in one place, and
was even more servilely abject than their elder Episcopalian sister,
and could not be constituted without the presence of the king or his
commissioner. The balloting act was, after long investigation,
rescinded with every mark of detestation, the parliament declaring
they had never consented to any such thing! and, that it might not
appear in judgment against them, was ordered to be erased from
their minutes. Sensible that the measures now pursued in Scotland
must necessarily lead to insurrection, and that a military force would
be requisite to carry them into effect, Lauderdale procured from this
servile crew the offer of an army of twenty thousand foot and two
thousand horse, to be raised for his majesty’s service when required,
under the ridiculous pretence of preserving Christendom against the
Turks!! This number never was demanded; and it was alleged that
the secretary had carried the measure to ingratiate himself with the
king, and to show him what assistance he might derive from
Scotland in any attempt to destroy the liberties of England. From the
beginning, the Scots had been harassed by the king’s guard, but
from this date the troopers were more unsparingly employed to
enforce clerical obedience, while the act hung in terrorem over the
hands of the dissatisfied Presbyterians, and afterwards became the
foundation of the militia.
 Arrest of Lord Warriston anno 1662.

Vide page 103

Edinr. Hugh Paton, Carver & Gilder to the Queen, 1842

Middleton’s first session set in blood; Rothes closed under as deep

a stain. Sir Archibald Johnston, Lord Warriston, had been forfeited
and condemned by parliament when Argyle and Guthrie were
arraigned, but escaping to the Continent, had remained concealed in
Holland and Germany, chiefly at Hamburgh, till most unadvisedly, in
the latter end of 1662, he ventured to France. Notice of this having
been carried to London, the king, who bore him a personal hatred
for his free admonitions when in Scotland,[36] sent over secretly a
confidential spy, known by the name of “Crooked Murray,” to trace
him out and bring him to Britain. By watching Lady Warriston,
Murray soon discovered her lord’s retreat at Rouen in Normandy, and
had him seized while engaged in the act of secret prayer. He then
applied to the magistrates, and, showing them the king’s
commission, desired that they would allow him to carry his victim a
prisoner to England. The magistrates, uncertain how to act,
committed Warriston to close custody, and sent to the French king
for instructions. When the question was debated in council, the
greater part were for respecting the rights of hospitality, and not
giving up his lordship till some better reasons were shown than had
yet been given; but Louis, who was extremely desirous to oblige
Charles, and sympathized cordially in his antipathies against the
Protestant religion and liberty, ordered him to be delivered to the
messenger, who carried him to London and lodged him in the tower
in the month of January 1663. While the parliament was sitting in
June, he was sent to Scotland with a letter from the king, ordering
him “to be proceeded against according to law and justice,” and
landed at Leith on the 8th, whence, next day, he was brought
bareheaded to the tolbooth of Edinburgh. Neither his wife, children,
nor any other friend, were permitted to see him, except in presence
of the keeper or guard, and that only for an hour, or at farthest two
at a time, betwixt eight o’clock in the morning and eight at night.
Here he was detained till July 8th, when, no more trial being
deemed necessary, he was brought before parliament to receive
judgment. His appearance on this occasion was humiliating to the
pride of human genius, debilitated through excessive blood-letting
and the deleterious drugs that had been administered to him by his
physicians,[37] the faculties of his soul partook of the imbecility of his
body, and, on the spot where his eloquence had in former days
commanded breathless attention, he could scarcely now utter one
coherent sentence. The prelates basely derided his mental
aberrations, but many of the other members compassionated the
intellectual ruin of one who had shone among the foremost in the
brightest days of Scotland’s parliamentary annals. When the
question was put, whether the time of his execution should be then
fixed or delayed? a majority seemed inclined to spare his life, which
Lauderdale observing, rose, and, contrary to all usage or propriety,
in a furious speech, insisted upon the sentence being carried into
immediate effect; the submissive legislators acquiesced, and he was
doomed to be hanged at the cross of Edinburgh on the 22d of the
same month, and his head fixed upon the Nether Bow Port, beside
Mr Guthrie’s.
36. “The real cause of his (Warriston’s) death, was not his activity in public
business, but our king’s personal hatred, because when the king was in
Scotland he thought it his duty to admonish him because of his very wicked,
debauched life, not only in whoredom and adultery, but he violently forced a
young gentle-woman of quality. This the king could never forgive, and told
the Earle of Bristol so much when he was speaking for Warriston.” Kirkton’s
Hist. of the Church of Scot. p. 173.

37. “Through excessive blood-letting and other detestable means used by his
wicked physician, Doctor Bates, who they say was hired either to poison or
distract him, and partly through melancholy, he had in a manner wholly lost
his memory.” Kirkton’s Hist. p. 170. Mr C. K. Sharpe, the editor, thinks his
mental imbecility was occasioned in some measure by fear, and quotes a
passage from one of Lord Middleton’s letters to Primrose. “He pretends to
have lost his memory,” &c. “He is the most timorous person ever I did see in
my life,” &c. Note. But it was not to be expected that Middleton would allude
 in the most distant manner to any thing that could be supposed to
countenance in the least the then general belief.

Mr James Kirkton, author of the “History of the Church of

Scotland,” who visited him, says—“I spake with him in prison, and
though he was sometimes under great heaviness, yet he told me he
could never doubt his own salvation, he had so often seen God’s
face in the house of prayer.” As he approached his end, he grew
more composed; and, on the night previous to his execution, having
been favoured with a few hours’ profound and refreshing sleep, he
awoke in the full possession of his vigorous powers, his memory
returned, and he experienced in an extraordinary degree the strong
consolations of the gospel, expressing his assurance of being clothed
with a white robe, and having a new song of praise put into his lips,
even salvation to our God, which sitteth upon the throne, and to the
Lamb!
Before noon, he dined with great cheerfulness, hoping to sup in
heaven, and drink of the blood of the vine fresh and new in his
father’s kingdom. After spending some time in secret prayer, he left
the prison about two o’clock, attended by his friends in mourning,
full of holy confidence and courage, but perfectly composed and
serene. As he proceeded to the cross, where a high gibbet was
erected, he repeatedly requested the prayers of the people; and
there being some disturbance on the street when he ascended the
scaffold, he said with great composure—“I entreat you, quiet
yourselves a little, till this dying man deliver his last words among
you,” and requested them not to be offended that he used a paper
to refresh his memory, being so much wasted by long sickness and
the malice of physicians. He then read audibly, first from the one
side and then from the other, a short speech that he had hurriedly
written—what he had composed at length and intended for his
testimony having been taken from him. It commenced with a
general confession of his sins and shortcomings in prosecuting the
best pieces of work and service to the Lord and to his generation,
and that through temptation he had been carried to so great a
length, in compliance with the late usurpers, after having so
seriously and frequently made professions of aversion to their way;
“for all which,” he added, “as I seek God’s mercy in Christ Jesus, so I
desire that the Lord’s people may, from my example, be the more
stirred up to watch and pray that they enter not into temptation.”
He then bare record to the glory of God’s free grace and of his
reconciled mercy through Christ Jesus—left “an honest testimony to
the whole covenanted work of reformation”—and expressed his lively
expectation of God’s gracious and wonderful renewing and reviving
all his former great interests in these nations, particularly Scotland—
yea, dear Scotland! He recommended his poor afflicted wife and
children to the choicest blessings of God and the prayers and favours
of his servants—prayed for repentance and forgiveness to his
enemies—for the king, and blessings upon him and his posterity,
that they might be surrounded with good and faithful councillors,
and follow holy and wise councils to the glory of God and the
welfare of the people. He concluded by committing himself, soul and
body, his relations, friends, the sympathizing and suffering witnesses
of the Lord, to his choice mercies and service in earth and heaven,
in time and through eternity:—“All which suits, with all others which
he hath at any time by his spirit moved and assisted me to make,
and put up according to his will, I leave before the throne, and upon
the Father’s merciful bowels, the Son’s mediating merits, and the
Holy Spirit’s compassionating groans, for now and for ever!”
After he had finished reading, he prayed with the greatest fervour
and humility, thus beginning his supplication—“Abba! Abba! Father,
Father, accept this thy poor sinful servant, coming unto thee through
the merits of Jesus Christ.” Then he took leave of his friends, and
again, at the foot of the ladder, prayed in a perfect rapture, being
now near the end of that sweet work he had been so much
employed about, and felt so much sweetness in through life. No
ministers were allowed to be with him, but his God abundantly
supplied his every want. On account of his weakness, he required
help to ascend the ladder. Having reached the top, he cried with a
loud voice—“I beseech you all who are the people of God not to
scorn at suffering for the interest of Christ, or stumble at any thing
of this kind falling out in these days. Be encouraged to suffer for
him, for I assure you, in the name of the Lord, he will bear your
charges!” This he repeated again while the rope was putting about
his neck, forcibly adding—“The Lord hath graciously comforted me.”
Then asking the executioner if he was ready to do his office, and
being answered that he was, he gave the signal, and was turned off,
crying—“Pray! pray! praise! praise!” His death was almost without a
struggle.
Sir Archibald Johnston, Lord Warriston, was an early, zealous, and
distinguished covenanter, and bore a conspicuous part in all the
remarkable transactions of the times, from 1638 till the Restoration.
The only blemish which his enemies could affix to his character was,
what he himself lamented, his accepting office under the usurpers,
after having previously so violently opposed this in others, when yet
every prospect of restoring the Stuart family seemed hopeless, and
when numbers of his countrymen and of his judges themselves had
submitted to a tolerant commonwealth, that did not burden the
conscience with unnecessary oaths, or require any compliances
which might not, in the circumstances of the case, have been
considered venial, if not justifiable. His talents for business were of
the first order. His eloquence was ready, and his judgment clear. He
was prompt and intrepid in action, and adhered steadily to his
Presbyterian principles, notwithstanding his officiating under a liberal
government of a different persuasion—conduct we now allow to be
not incompatible with integrity. His piety was ardent, and, amid a life
of incessant activity, he managed to spare a larger portion of time
for private devotion than many of more sequestered habits. He
habitually lived near to God, and died in the full assurance of hope.
Parliament having sat upwards of three months, rose on the 9th of
October. Even during its sitting, the council never intermitted their
oppressive acts; and, so far was this branch of the legislature from
interfering to check their immoderate abuse of power, that they had
shown themselves upon every occasion the willing instruments of
their oppression, ready when called upon to legitimate without a
murmur their foulest usurpations. On the other hand, the executive
acted as the humble tools of the prelates, ready to support their
most arrogant assumptions or gratify their cowardly and cruel
revenge. St Andrews, the primate’s seat, first required to be
thoroughly cleansed; and all who would not countenance the
archbishop in his treachery, were of necessity removed as
unwelcome remembrancers of his former profession. Mr James
Wood, principal of the Old College, pious, learned, and assiduous in
his duty, who had been an intimate friend and companion of
Sharpe’s, and one of the many excellent men who had been his
dupes, was, on the 23d of July, summoned before the council and
required to show by what authority he came to be principal. Without
being suffered to offer any remarks, when he acknowledged “that he
was called by the Faculty of the College at the recommendation of
the usurpers,” the place was declared vacant, and he was
commanded to confine himself within the city of Edinburgh till
further orders.
Yet such was the estimation in which he was held, that his enemy,
though by falsehood, endeavoured to shelter his apostacy under the
shadow of his name. Not long after this, when Mr Wood was on his
deathbed, March 1664, and greatly weakened by disease, Sharpe
called once or twice upon him; and he having said, as a dying man
in the immediate view of eternity, that he was taken up about
greater business than forms of church government, and that he was
far more concerned about his personal interest in Christ than about
any external ordinance, Sharpe took occasion to spread a report that
he had said Presbyterian government was a matter of no
consequence, and no man should trouble himself about it, which
coming to the sufferer’s ears, he emitted a declaration before
witnesses of his unshaken attachment to Presbytery as an ordinance
of God, and so precious that a true Christian is obliged to lay down
his life for the profession thereof, if the Lord should see meet to put
him to his trial.
Along with Mr Wood, a great number of ministers from every
quarter of the country, were removed from their charges, some
confined to Edinburgh, others banished beyond the river Ness—all
forbid to preach the gospel under the threatening of severer
penalties. Heavy were the complaints of the clergy; the ministers
refused to attend their synods, and the people persisted in
neglecting their sermons. The council, therefore, appointed “the
Lords Archbishops of St Andrews and Glasgow, the Marquis of
Montrose, the Lord Secretary and Register, to wait on the Lord
Commissioner, his Grace, to think on a general course what shall be
done, as well anent those ministers that were admitted before 1649,
and carry themselves disobediently to the laws of the kingdom, as
those who were admitted since.” While the committee were
deliberating, the evil increased; and, on the 30th of the same month,
six of the west country ministers were before the council to answer
the heavy charge of “convocating great multitudes of his majesty’s
subjects for hearing their factious and seditious sermons, to the
great scandal of religion and prejudice of the government of the
church.” To shorten their labours, however, and probably upon a
report of the archbishops and their assistants, a most harassing and
contradictory act was passed, commanding all “outted” ministers,
under pain of sedition, i.e. being processed criminally, to remove
themselves and their families twenty miles from the bounds of their
own parishes, six miles from every cathedral, and three miles from
every royal burgh, thus depriving them of any means of support they
might have derived from their own industry or that of their families,
in the only places of trade or traffic, and scattering them among
strangers, far from the bounty or assistance of their friends. But as
one “outted” minister only could reside in one parish, the act,
besides, involved an alternative of death or apostacy; for the whole
of Scotland could not have accommodated the sufferers, and no
relaxation could be obtained but from the privy council or the bishop
of the diocese. The older ministers, who still continued to preach,
but withdrew from the synods, were now to be treated as
contemners of his majesty’s authority.
To enforce their acts, the privy council ordered the Earl of
Linlithgow to send as many troops to Kirkcudbright as, with those
already there, would make up the number of eightscore footmen
with their officers in that district. Sir Robert Fleming was directed to
march two squads of his majesty’s life-guards to the west, and to
station one in Paisley and the other in Kilmarnock. The object of
these military missionaries was to episcopalize the refractory south
and west, by collecting the fines and compelling subjection to the
bishops and their curates. Sir James Turner, who had signalized
himself by his zeal in fighting for the covenant, was singled out to
superintend the pious service in the south, which he performed so
much to the satisfaction of his employers, that, on the 24th of
November, a letter of thanks was recommended to be written him
“for his care and pains taken in seeing the laws anent church
government receive due obedience.” The excesses which were
committed under sanction of these orders and commendations, were
never attempted to be justified, though the parties afterwards
mutually endeavoured to shift the blame from themselves. When it
was deemed necessary to make the General the scape-goat, it was
asserted that he had exceeded his instructions; but he averred, and
with greater probability of truth, that he had not even acted up to
their tenor.[38] The exactions were enormous; and, as the fines for
non-attendance were generally appropriated by the soldiers, they
were summarily levied, and not unfrequently to far more than the
legal amount. The process against non-conformists, in places where
there were Episcopalian incumbents, was short. The curates were
the accusers—the officers of the army, or sometimes even private
sentinels, the judges—no proof was required—and no excuse was
received, except money. If a tenant or householder were unwilling or
unable to pay, a party was quartered upon him, till ten times the
value of the fine was taken, and he was ruined, or, as they termed it,
“eaten up;”[39] then, after every thing else was gone, the household
furniture and clothes of the poor defaulters were distrained and sold
for a trifle.
38. “Sometimes not exceeding a sixth part, seldom a halfe.” Turner’s Memoirs, p.
114.

39. To understand the meaning of this phrase, it is necessary to recollect the

situation of the rural tenantry in Scotland about this time. They lived almost
 entirely upon the produce of the lands they rented, and kept usually a small
stock of oatmeal, cheese, and salted provisions, as public markets were
almost wholly unknown.
The soldiery employed in this execrable work, were the lowest and
most abandoned characters, who readily copied the example of their
officers—measured their loyalty by their licentiousness, and
considered that they served the king in proportion as they annoyed
the Whigs. Religion was the object of their ridicule. In the pious
hamlets where they quartered, family worship was interrupted by
mockery or violence; and “The Cottar’s Saturday Night,” not only
treated with derision, but punished as a violation of the laws of the
land! Upon the Sabbath, the day peculiarly devoted by the
covenanters to holy rest, and the quiet performance of their sacred
duties—for the covenanters made conscience of the moral obligation
of the Sabbath—a scene of dismay and distress hitherto unknown
was commonly exhibited; and the day to which they had in other
times looked forward as the glory of the week, was now dreaded as
the signal of their renewed torments. Multitudes were brutally driven
to church, or dragged as felons to prison; and hesitation or
remonstrance provoked only additional insult or blows. Lists of the
parishioners were no longer kept for assisting the minister in his
labours of love, but were handed over to the troopers, with
directions for them to visit the families, and to catechise them upon
their principles of loyalty and their practice of obedience to their
parsons. After sermon, the roll was called by the curate, when all
absent without leave were delivered up as deserters to the mercy of
the military. At churches where the old Presbyterian ministers were
yet allowed to remain—for a few still continued to preach at their
peril, or through the interest of some influential person—the outrage
and confusion were indescribable. As they were generally crowded,
the forsaken bishops and their underlings were enraged, and the
soldiers were instigated to additional violence. Their custom was to
allow a congregation peaceably to assemble, while they sat
carousing in some alehouse nigh at hand, till public worship was
nearly over; then they sallied forth inflamed with liquor, and, taking
possession of the church-doors or churchyard-gates, obliged the
people, whom they only suffered to pass out one at a time, to
answer upon oath whether they belonged to the parish; if they did
not, although their own parish had no minister of any kind, they
were instantly fined at the pleasure of the soldiers; and if they had
no money, or not so much as would satisfy them, their Bibles were
seized, and they were stripped of their coats if men, or their plaids if
women; so that a party returning from such an expedition, appeared
like a parcel of villanous camp-followers, after an engagement,
returning from a battle-field, laden with the spoils of the wounded
and slain.
To such an extent had these plunderings been carried, that even
the privy council found it necessary to interfere. Towards the end of
the year, they issued an explanation of their former acts, and
restricted the exactions of the soldiery, “allenarly to the penalty of
twenty shillings Scots, from every person who staid from their parish
churches on the Sabbath days.”[40]
40. Three of the prelates died in course of the past year. Bishop Mitchell of
Aberdeen, who was succeeded by Burnet; Sydeserf, who was succeeded in
the bishopric of Orkney by Mr Andrew Honeyman, formerly minister of St
Andrews; and Archbishop Fairfoul of Glasgow, who was succeeded in the
arch-episcopate by Bishop Burnet of Aberdeen, Dr Scougall being appointed
to that see.

[1664.] Even this symptom, small as it was, of moderation, was

not at all agreeable to the prelates. Like all upstarts, suddenly raised
beyond their expectations, their arrogance became insupportable,
and could brook no opposition. Glencairn, in particular, who had
been so instrumental in their rise, began to feel the truth of what he
had been repeatedly told—“that the bishops would never rest
content with being second in the state, and that moderate
Episcopacy was all a jest.” He had said to Rothes that “it was the
noblemen’s interest to repress the growing power of bishops,
otherwise they would be treated by them now as they had been
before 1638.” This remark being carried to Sharpe, he treated the
Chancellor with great hauteur, and publicly threatened to destroy his
interest at court—an affront that Glencairn could never forget, and
which is said to have preyed upon his spirits to his dying day.
Fearing a relaxation of “the wholesome severities,” the primate
hastened to London with heavy complaints against many of the
noblemen, for their backwardness in executing the laws made in
favour of the church; and, through the influence of the English
bishops and high churchmen, prevailed upon the king to re-establish
in Scotland the most detested of all the arbitrary courts that had
been abolished—the High Commission Court.
His majesty, by virtue of his royal prerogative in all causes and
over all persons, as well ecclesiastic as civil, granted the most
exorbitant powers to that antitype of the Inquisition. It consisted of
thirty-five lay members,[41] and of all the prelates, except Leighton,
who had the honour to be excluded from the nomination; and any
five constituted a quorum, provided always an archbishop or bishop
was of the number. Under pretext of seeing all the acts of parliament
and council in favour of Episcopacy put in vigorous execution, they
were authorized to suspend or depose, fine, and imprison all
ministers who dared to exercise any of their sacred functions without
the license of a bishop—who should preach in private houses or
elsewhere—who should keep meetings for fasts or for the
administration of the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper not approven
by authority: to summon, call before them, and punish all who
should speak, preach, write, or print to the scandal, reproach, or
detriment of the government of the church or kingdom as now
established—and all who should express any dissatisfaction at his
majesty’s authority. The commanders of the forces and militia, the
magistrates of every description, were required to apprehend and
incarcerate delinquents upon their warrants, and the privy council to
direct letters of horning for payment of the fines—one half of which
was appropriated to defray the expenses of the court, and the other
to be employed for such pious uses as his majesty should appoint.
And by a final comprehensive clause, the High Commission, or their
quorum, were authorized to do and execute whatever they should
find necessary and convenient for his majesty’s service—for
preventing and suppressing of schism and separation—for planting
of vacant churches—and for procuring of reverence, submission, and
obedience to the ecclesiastical government established by law.
41. The following were the lay members:—The Chancellor, Treasurer, Duke of
Hamilton, Marquis of Montrose, Earls of Argyle, Atholl, Eglinton, Linlithgow,
Home, Galloway, Annandale, Tweeddale, Leven, Moray; Lords Drumlanrig,
Pitsligo, Fraser, Cochrane, Halkerton, Bellenden, the President of the Session,
the Register, the Advocate, Justice-Clerk; Charles Maitland, the Laird of
Philorth, Sir Andrew Ramsay, Sir William Thomson; the Provosts of St
Andrews, Aberdeen, Glasgow, Ayr, and Dumfries, Sir James Turner, and the
Dean of Guild of Edinburgh. From among these, the primate, who managed
the whole, could easily pick out a quorum to suit his purposes; and thus he
got rid of all the members of the privy council who had either the spirit or
the policy to resist his unbounded presumption—a presumption heightened
by his being now ordered to take precedence of the Chancellor, the nobility,
and all the officers of state.
By this instrument the whole kingdom was laid at the feet of the
prelates; for no quorum of the Commission could be complete
without a bishop, while five bishops could form a quorum without a
layman. The practice was agreeable to the constitution of the court,
and such as may always be expected where churchmen are intrusted
with civil authority. True ministers of Christ would never in their
ministerial capacity accept it, and worldlings who have assumed that
sacred office to serve purposes of ambition, have ever been the
greatest curse of Christendom. The records have been mislaid or
lost, but the cases that remain, amply justify the epithets bestowed
upon this nefarious tribunal by all who have mentioned it.
James Hamilton of Aikenhead, near Glasgow, was among the first
brought before them, accused of not hearing Mr David Hay, curate of
the parish—Cathcart—-in which his estate was situate. His defence
was, the unclerical and ungentleman-like conduct of the clergyman.
In collecting his stipend, which he did rigorously, Mr Hay had borne
particularly hard upon some of Mr Hamilton’s tenants, and, in
consequence, a quarrel had ensued, in which the curate had
descended to very intemperate and abusive language, and in return
had been not less roughly answered. Mr Blair, the “outted” minister,
happening accidentally to be upon the spot, interfered, and rescued
Hay from the hands of his furious parishioners. When the affray was
over, Mr Blair spoke seriously to the curate, and represented how
opposite it was to his own interest for him to turn informer against
his people. Hay, in return, thanked him for his kindness and advice,
and gave him his solemn promise that he would follow it; yet within
a very short time, he went to Glasgow and “delated” (i. e.
denounced) them to the archbishop, who immediately dispatched Sir
James Turner, then in the west, with a party of soldiers, to seize the
delinquents. When Mr Hamilton came to be informed of the
circumstances of the affair, he considered the low prevaricating
conduct of Hay as so base, that he would never again enter the
church door, and he kept his promise; for this he was fined a fourth
part of his yearly rent. When he had paid the fine, the court was so
fully sensible of the misconduct of Hay, that the Archbishop of
Glasgow came forward and promised that he would be removed, but
insisted that Mr Hamilton should come under an obligation to hear
and acknowledge the minister he meant to place in his room; and,
upon refusing to do any such thing till he knew who that person
should be, he was mulcted another fourth of his income, and
remitted to the archbishop to give him satisfaction as to his loyal and
peaceable behaviour. The prelate, however, not being satisfied, he
was again summoned before the court, upon some vexatious
charges of keeping up the church utensils and session-books from
the curate. Offering to swear he knew nothing at all about them, he
was accused of not assisting the curate in the session when called
upon, and suffering some of his family to absent themselves from
church! Whether he might have been able to acquit himself of these
heinous crimes is uncertain, for Rothes cut the business short, by
telling him he had seen him in some courts before, but never for any
thing loyal, and therefore tendered him the oath of allegiance. He
had no objections, he replied, to take the oath of allegiance, were it
not mixed up with the oath of supremacy. Sharpe, interrupting him,
said “that was the common cant, but it would not do.” Then he
requested to be allowed to explain, but was politely answered by the
president—“he deserved to be hanged!” and, upon refusing to