Treaty and Charles ll
He was not to be too long in adminstering the affairs of his new church before he was called again to the forefront.
The Scottish Parliament and Church representatives had met with the future King Charles ll at The Hague in Holland in 1649. Whilst Cromwell had the overall control in England, the Scots felt they could possibly negotiate with the future King as to him assuming the throne north of the border.
This meeting failed to agree terms for his return. However a fresh approach was arranged for the following year, 1650. Six people were nominated by Parliament, Earl of Cassilis, Earl of Lothian, Alexander Brodie of that Ilk, three Lords of the Session - George Winram, John Smith and Alexander Japhray. Five were chosen by the Church: John Livingstone, James Wood, and George Hutcheson; Cassilis and Brodie in their capacities as ruling elders. Only the government representatives were allowed to vote on the issues. Livingstone was a reluctant nominee for he felt that ministers should not be involved in such matters He also felt that the majority of the delegation would accept the King on his terms.
In his own words," My own insuffiency, haveing ane naturall antipathy from publick imployment and state matters, and haveing some scruple that ministers medled too much therein, and knowing my own unacquaintedness and inability in such things, and my softness of disposition, ready to condescend too easily and dispute any business, so that I feared I should be ane grief and shame to these that sent me, beside that I could not promptly speak the latine tongue, which was requisite among foreign divines."
With the exception of Cassilis, Brodie and Japhray, he had no confidence in the others of being able to conclude a treaty on terms which were acceptable other than to the King and his supporters. He knew of Lothian`s previous sympathy with the "Engagement": Liberton, he suspected, wished the King`s return at any price; Sir John Smith, he doubted his ability.
His third reason was that the King merely had to agree tp the terms without swearing some words of evidence "that it was done from the heart." All of these doubts contributed to his determination to refuse the commission but after intense pressure from some of his friends and advisors prevailing him to reconsider, he relented.
Foolishly he left them with the following words for which many times later, he regretted.
"That ere I condescend to goe, and to have ane hand in the consequences that I apprehend will follow, I will choose rather to condescend , if it were the Lord`s will, to be drouned in the waters by the way."
First Meeting
At the first meeting in Breda, Holland, Livingstone was chosen to deliver a speech on behalf of the Church. This required vetting by the other delegates beforehand. It was returned to Livingstone severely edited. They had thought it was too harsh in its contents. It contained deletions of things thought too harsh and additions of some he thought to savoury towards the King and his court.
He told them he thought their decision to alter his speech`s contents unfair, but he was ordered not to show his own mind but theirs. It was with severe reluctance that he delivered it. His thoughts were, " ....so dangerous it is for ane man of a simple disposition to be yoked with these who by witt, authority, and boldness, can overmaster them."
Cassilis was chosen as president, and although this seemed to be advantageous to Livingstone in the beginning, it was not to be. The president was only furnished with one vote, the casting vote in the event of a tied decision. With the other five representatives split, three of the opinion of Lothian, Liberton and Smith, the other, Brodie and Japhray were denied the support of Cassilis, hence the casting vote never required.
The negotiations overran their scheduled thirty days limit by a further ten days.
The Treaty was not to be negotiated orally, rather it was prepared by papers presented back and forth. The first were drawn up by Mr Brodie for the State and Mr James Wood for the Church. These were then presented to the KIng.
The replies to these were returned when Lothian, Liberton and Smith had gone to Antwerp and Brussells. As a result a reply was delayed for several days.
Livingstone suspected a successful outcome would have been achieved much sooner if, as he put it, "...all our number had dealt alike earnestly, especially Lothian and Liberton, who most frequently and privately resorted to court, but most of all Liberton, that the King at the first had granted all our desyres fully."
He felt the King was not compelled as he might have been, alleging, "..those of our number in debate at our meetings argued that he should not be so much pressed in them." This was referring to the points the King was reluctant to concede.
Infrequently the ministers of the Church visited the King, always together or at least two of them. They always found him courteous and tractable and open to frank debate. Once when asked if he had any scruples with the Covenant or other matters relating to it, he expressed no concern.
At one meeting, Livingstone failing to attend due to an attack of migraine, the King shocked them when he queried how many people knew the scriptures were the word of God except for what they were told by the Church.
There were two factions at work in the court, each advising the King to contrary decisions with regards to the Treaty.
Livingstone, aware of this alongwith the others, agreed with his friend, Mr Hutchinson, that he would be glad if the Treaty broke off, and, even saddened if it appeared to succeed.
No great haste was shown in the pursuit of a Treaty for the first four weeks, but as the fortieth day approached, it was urged that it be concluded by any means available. When the final paper was drafted and the invitation to the King was drawn up for subscribing, the ministers, having no vote, were asked for their opinions.
Livingstone asserted he as a minister had a duty to express any misgivings he might have felt at the outcome of the talks, although he conceded it was not a minister`s place to interfere in an agreement between State and King. Later he regretted not speaking out more fully in expressing his opposition to the Treaty. His concerns were numerous and strongly felt.
In the end Charles was invited to assume the throne in Scotland after assurances that he would acknowledge the Presbyterian system of worship in Scotland. Livingstone was not one of those who were in sympathy with it. He always felt the man could not be trusted.
At the time of the Treaty, one James Graham, 1st Marquis of Montrose, having invaded Scotland at the head of an army, was captured and brought to Edinburgh. He was hanged at the Mercat Cross without trial as he had been sentenced to death two years earlier in 1644 when he took up arms against the Covenant, which he had been one of the first to sign. Among his personal papers was found a commission from the King. This was not divulged at any meeting.
Another, "In some debates when they (commissioners) were upon granting of some of the things which were not in their instructions, it was many a time alleadged that they had private instructions, yet at last when some desyred ane sight of them, it was confessed they had not any, only some words had been spoken by some prime men in some private conference."
When it was urged upon the commissioners that the Parliament in Scotland might feel obliged to acknowledge the treaty as presented, with points agreed to which were outside their mandate, the reply was given;
"...that they had heads and estates to lose, and that the Parliament might call them to ane account for what they did, but both the Parliament and Kingdom of Scotland would be bound to all which they had concluded in their names."
These and other things were to the dissatisfaction of Livingstone and which he spoke out against in his own blunt way but, as he put it, " ...had not the abilities or hardiness to debate or argue any of these things."
Accident
His general mental discomfort at the way the proceedings slowly wound their way to an unsatisfactory conclusion in his eyes, was further compounded by news from home informing him of an accident which had befallen his wife while out horse riding.
According to her letter, the "unskillfulness" of her servant, who was riding ahead of her, brought her the mishap. Passing the Mill of Nether Ancrum, she fell into the dam and was carried along until her body came to rest against the outer wheel. "then going fast".
With the water of the dam cascading over her, she became lodged at a point where the wheel was depleted of a piece of paddle. This stopped the mill and it was only the passing of a stranger that prevented her from drowning. He alerted others to enter the mill and, by hand, to turn the wheel back enabling him to pull her free. She was taken home and, for three days, lay severely bruised, suffering from a sore fever.
As Livingstone recalled, "It pleased the Lord she recovered, and wrote to me in Holland, that she thought she was therein ane emblame of what our Treaty was like to bring to the land."
Treaty Finalised
When the Treaty was finalised, Mr James Dalrymple, secretary to the commissioners, was sent back to Scotland to deliver it for scrutiny. Livingstone noted, that although there was great haste in closing the Treaty, there was no great haste in returning home.
The Saturday before the King was due to leave Breda for the voyage home, the commissioners for the Church were notified that he would take communion according to the Five Articles of Perth, with kneeling.
Livingstone and his fellow clergymen pointed out to him both by letter and by word of mouth their concern and stressed how it would be construed by his enemies. Further, it was contrary to the agreed terms negotiated at some length. Some could accuse him of "dallying with God and us."
Charles replied that he would not give in to their insistence, stressing that he was only following his father`s example. He proceeded to kneel despite their pleas.
It came to the notice of the commissioners that it was the intention of all the malignants and other on the fringe of Charles`s court to accompany the monarch on his return. Before the departure date on the following Saturday, news came from Scotland expressing dissastifaction at some of the contents of the Treaty. Unless specified modifications were inserted, and certain individuals left in Holland, the Treaty would be considered void.
Livingstone and his sympathisers were speechless with delight at this late news. Others not so. Despite this, the King and his followers repaired on board before any further treatying could be made. The three ministers were yet ashore and were reluctant to join the others.
Meanwhile news arrived that twenty two English ships were awaiting to intercept them when they put to sea, Brody and Hutchinson decided to go aboard but despite their pleas, Livingstone remained determined not to accompany them.
He reasoned they were taking the "plague of God" to Scotland in joining the "prophane and malignant company" on board.
He would return to Rotterdam alone and find his way home by other means. His friends in the commission desired him, if he would not board the ship, then at least he should draw alongside it in the boat so that they might speak a little with him and take their leave. He reluctantly agreed to this, When the boat drew up to the ship, the others climbed aboard leaving Livingstone alone in the cutter with its crew.
Cassilis and Hutchinson called to him to join them as it would unseemly for commissioner of the realm to be seen conversing in an open boat. He would only be required to come to the gun room for a shortwhile and then he would be free to return.
Instructing a young man who was accompanying him to remain with the tied vessel until he returned, he was shortly informed that it had cast off without him. Livingstone looked upon himself as a virtual prisoner having been so gullible to have fallen for the ruse.
That evening, the commissioners discussed the proposed amendments to the Treaty, with Lothian and Liberton proposing that any further overture to the King should be put off until they reached Scotland. It was determined that this should not be so, and further papers were prepared and presented to the King.
Much further debate took place with the King realising his position was becoming more untenable at every turn. His offer at the last moment to subscribe to the Covenant was greeted suspiciously by the ministers.
Parliament in its last instructions had not stipulated this condition; rather an obligation that it would be considered at a later date.
Oath to the Covenant
It was ordained that John Livingstone would conduct the service on board at which the King would give his oath to the National Covenant and the Solemn League and Covenant. This was not to Livingstone`s liking, rather it should have been delayed until they landed in Scotland or else others should do it.
He was prevailed upon, again with much agitation to him, with the warning that honest men should be dissastisfied if, on offering to take the oath, the King was rebuffed.
Before the sermon on the Sunday, Charles made it known to him that he wished to add some words as he took the oath to the Covenant. In essence, he did not want to infringe the laws of the English Kingdom and by adding to the oath, he swore he would be bound to confirm any acts, bills or ordinances of the English Parliament ratifying the Solemn League and Covenant.
These were said to have expired with the death of his father, Charles l. Livingstone carried this news to the other commissioners and it was agreed the King`s proposals were not acceptable. A single word to the oath would declare it no oath; this despite the instructions they received before they left Scotland desiring the business be completed before their return.
This was conveyed to Charles immediately. He pressed hard and long that he may be allowed to do so, so much that Livingstone held out hope that the swearing would be put off for another day.
The King at last relented, yet he was asked by Livingstone to delay the swearing as both were in "some heat and distemper."
This plea went unheeded, and with the commissioners` agreement, they went ahead. The outward ceremony of swearing and appending signatures proceeded smoothly. Yet, Livingstone was indeed uncomfortable at the whole affair.
He felt aggrieved at the guilt of all parties to it, State, Church and commissioners for allowing all their predetermined terms for the King`s installation to be ignored.
No evidence of any real change in his heart; not forsakeing former principles, counsels, and company; the undisclosed papers found on Montrose at the time of his apprehension confirming same. Despite these, he was admitted to excercise his government. With the exception of two or three, all who had been debarred from accompanying the King on his homeward journey, did in fact do so. The instruction for the latter had in fact been kept from the King until they had been back in Scotland for two days.
Cassilis was to declare later that he was always dissastisfied with Parliament`s control of the proceedings from a distance, without the commission being present to answer for itself.
The negotiations had lasted for three months after which they returned home on the Sluidam of Amsterdam, coming to anchor at the mouth of the Spey on June 23rd, 1650. On the same day while still aboard ship, Livingstone penned the following letter to Mr Robert Douglas in which he reported the King`s acceptance of all the conditions contingent to his ascendance to the throne, his own suspicions barely veiled.
Letter
"All the particulars mentioned in your last letters are holpen; and the King hath granted all desyred, and this day hath sworne and subscribed the two Covenants in the words of your last declaration , and with assurances to renew same at Edinburgh when desyred. What difficulties we have had, and what deliveries, we hope to impart at meeting. For the heart, the Lord judgeth, but for the outward part, I think you shall not desiderat anything. I say no more."
These four closing words echoed his deep conviction of the sovereign`s duplicity. After landing, Livingstone was never to see the King or court again after taking his leave at Dundee. Being alone with him at this time he begged to be allowed to express some opinions to him. This he was granted.
Opinions
Livingstone pointed out that the English army, buoyed by numerous victories was about to enter Scotland knowing that he was about to resume the throne. He should, without implying weakness in his claim to the throne of England, show for the present that he was not intent on prosecuting his case by the sword. He felt that in time, the people of England would call him, especially if a period of good government in Scotland was achieved. Charles replied, " I am not pleased to cherish that motion, and I hope you do not wish me to sell my father`s blood."
Livingstone took this to heart and gathered he was not meant to meddle in State matters. especially at a later date he was to find his advice similarly ignored, this time by the Protector, Oliver Cromwell.
Report Back
At an Assembly meeting in Edinburgh , Hutchinson and Livingstone were called upon to give a report on the proceedings of the Treaty which they had drawn up. They commented on the King`s insistence on kneeling and the paper on the above events which had been given him later. The Assembly forbade mention of the paper or anything which might make the King`s government seem odious. This the two ministers accepted.
It was patently obvious, Livingstone never did trust Charles and soon afterwards he identified himself with those, the Protesters, which opposed the Coronation, which took place at Scone in 1651, and the conduct of the Government in general.
Livingstone was present at a meeting of the Assembly in St Andrews on July 1st where James Guthrie, James Simpson and Patrick Gillespie were deposed, being leaders of the Protesters, and although he was a strict adherent to the principles of this faction, he escaped the consequence. He reported in a letter to a "Person of Quality" of the despair he felt at the praise heaped on the Restoration but he was confident that, "...the hope and joy of the hypocrit in these dayes uses not to last long, and those that be indeed sincere will not ere long rew their not joyning with them."
Two of the Protesters, Robert Traill and Patrick Gillespie, were appointed by a meeting of ministers (Protesters) in Edinburgh onOcccctober 1651 to confer with Robert Blair, a Regent of the College of Glasgow, to discuss "anent the present unhappy differences,"
Blair was not sympathetic to this view, being a moderate, but his influence in line with his senior status would have made him a powerful ally if won over.
Livingston and Blair Dialogue
Livingstone was absent from the meeting in Edinburgh at which he had been delegated to accompany Traill and Gillespie to Glasgow. Unaware of this until later, Livingstone was not present at the meeting with Blair, but he apologised to his former mentor and friend of long standing in a communication addressed to him in November.
In his letter, Livingston told his friend that he would not have accepted the appointment, in any case, had he been present. He went on, "...because as you know better than any other, I am most unfitt for debating any thing, if that business should requyre debates, and the more unfitt toward you, seeing the impression I had in the colledge (which I cannot get shaken off while I live) of being your disciple, make I could not well have the face coram to enter into any contradiction."
From this it was plainly evident, despite his anti-restoration stance, he could not bring himself into verbal conflict with his friend over it. Since his father had died he had more respect for him, Blair, than any man on earth.
However, this did not prevent him from expressing his sadness at Blair`s stance. He continued, "....blindness and bitterness is the plague of this tyme, but I cannot conceal that your accession to the bypast publick resolutions hath been, in my accompt, the saddest thing I have seen in my tyme.....and I have had more bitterness in that respect now these severall months, than ever I have since I could discern what bitterness meant."
With this aired, he finished the letter in a more optimistic vein with the hope that God would bring great, great good from out of it all and that they would be more fitting to receive them because of the events.
On December 2nd, 1651, Blair wrote back expressing his own grief at that which had afflicted his one time student, carefully avoiding a compromise in his own stand in the "resolution" debate.
"Reverend and dear brother, length of tyme and distance of place doeth not a little weaken the fellowship of the sones of me. He that is not straightened in sending his spirit knows how without difficultie to keep his grip better. It was no small matter of grief to me. With the singular testimonies of your love and respect, to read from your hand the acknowledgement of your five years great grief for me."
So Blair acknowledged and appreciated the esteem Livingstone held him in. With the niceties over, he preambled before describing the meeting with Traill and Gillespie, although failing to identify them by name.
"Extearations are but soule destroying tricks the least miscarriage before our holie Lord is fearfull and I dar not liberat myself, but which my weakness is not able to write being wearied with wryting my mind more fullie to our dear friend." This referred to a letter to their mutual friend, David Dickson.
He continued, "Theis lettir hath been ane day`s work to me. I still labour to be a reconciler among brothers and once we were near to it at St Andrews but our sinnes stood in the way therof and have brought their judgements upon us. In our conferences heir we spake of some things houlden matters from growing worse but our brethern (Traill and Gillespie) heir declined to enter upon the grounds of difference knowing that in sundrie things I differed from them.
This was an obvious impasse in their discourse which Blair chose to ignore at this point in the letter but commenced to upbraid Livingstone as he went on, "Your papers I am unsatisfied with in sundrie things as much as with former resolutions, the ever wise Lord pitie us and preserve us in this reiling that our differences be not extended to the things wherein the Kingdom of God directs the stands.
"The Spirit of Grace be multiplied upon you and yours.
"My wife with me heartilie salutes you both.
"Your loving brother R Blair."
Postscript, "This six weeks I have not been out of doores. This daye I am put in hopees to get a start of my sweet Lord`s work. I bless His holie Name for His covenanted mercie endureth for ever."
The Protesters` hope of winning over Blair to their viewpoint was not successful and to Livingstone it must have been a severe jolt but it was not to affect their relationship. It would endure.
Meeting with Cromwell
Once he felt established in Scotland, Charles eyed the lost kingdom of England. He felt he had to avenge his father`s lost crown and indeed his own. He later led an army into England but was forced back to Dunbar where he was defeated. Livingstone had been asked to accompany it but had declined. The winter after it he stayed at home.
For a while he had some unwelcome guests at his house. Cromwell had invaded Scotland mean while and some of his soldiers were billeted with Livingstone.
Livingstone asserted that all the time they were within his house, he never ate or communicated with them. Cromwell did invite him to Edinburgh to speak with him but he declined the opportunity excusing his absence.
In 1654 he was called to London along with others to meet with Cromwell. This visit gave him the opportunity of asking the Protector to remove the heavy fines that he had placed on several people in Scotland. Cromwell agreed but his Council, reaping a share of these, thought otherwise.
His agreement in going to London in the first place afforded him the opportunity of evading the moss-troupers whom he believed were after him and his safety in doubt.
He returned home by himself after receiving no satisfaction to his overtures.
Four more children had come along, albeit, an early death to a further John had taken place.
This was the third son that had been baptised with that name,and it was obvious this was a sore disappointment to Livingstone with the frequency he had bestowed it.
Johanna would seem to have been so christened with the female equivalent; such would seem his desperation to have a namesake.
On 21st June 1649, Barbara was born, followed by the unfortunate John on 29th January, 1652. Andrew was born in August 1653 with Robert making his appearance on 13th August, 1654.
In 1657, on January 7, their fifteenth and final child Elizabeth was born. She would survive for ten years.
A further visit to Killinchy in Ireland was undertaken by Livingstone in 1656. For the period of nine weeks in which he stayed there, he was disappointed to find few of his former parishioners remaining. A call to minister a charge in Dublin was turned down by him on the pretext that he was as yet minister of Ancrum.
