26.03.2013 Views

Volume 1 - Electric Scotland

Volume 1 - Electric Scotland

Volume 1 - Electric Scotland

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

EKMISSION TO SIR JAMKS JOHKSTOKE, 1G05. cxlix<br />

stronger pledge than tliat then in force. The only other quarter Sir James<br />

could look to v,-a5; the government. He therefore made application for a<br />

remission of all past crimes committed hy him and his clan against the<br />

Maxwells. A remission under the great seal was granted by the king to<br />

Sir James Johnstone and fifty -nine other persons, nearly all of the surname<br />

of Johnstone, for art and part i\i burning the church of Lochniaben, the<br />

slaughter of John, Lord Maxwell; and, in tiic case of Sir James, for breaking<br />

ward from the castle of Edinburgh. The remis.siou, vrhich extended to tlie<br />

lifetime of the parlies, is dated at AVliitehall, 2Sth September 1605.^<br />

This remission was in the ensuing April followed by a royal warrant<br />

which in efl'ect was another remission in favour of Johnstone, and shows,<br />

with the former one, how willing the king was to serve him. The war-<br />

rant, which is superscribed by the king, discharged his justices to give<br />

process in any criminal pursuits against Sir James Johnstone and his<br />

friends and servants for whom he was answerable, for crimes alleged to have<br />

been coinmitted by them before the month of April 1G03 when the king<br />

repaired to England." Sir James produced this warrant in the High Court<br />

of Justiciary on 21st Jaiuiary 1C07, when the justice depute continued the<br />

admitting of it to the -Itli of February.^<br />

On the day after Sir James Johnstone presented the king's warrant in his<br />

favour to the High Court of Justiciary, he and James Johnstone of '^Vestraw<br />

were warded upon forty-eight hours' notice in St. Andrews. Tlie council<br />

who pronounced the order do not appear to have known why he was warded.<br />

At any rate they place the responsibility of their act upon the king by stating<br />

that their order proceeded upon instructions from him for causes known<br />

to him. It does not transpire what these causes were. Nor does it appear<br />

1 Charters of this work, pp. 79, SO. ' On 4th February 1G07 Johnstone was<br />

fined sixteen hundred merks for the uonentry<br />

' ritcairn's Criminal Triah, vol. ii. pi. Oil. of certain persons for whom he h.id become<br />

Warrant subscribed at Whitehall, Cth April pledge and security. [Pitcaim's Criminal<br />

1606. Trials, vol. ii. pp. 521, 522.]

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!