of James I. which is omitted by the author in his Latin work.

"The saide Lady Margaret was marriet w ye dolphin of fraunce before ye deceis of the king her fadir in ye town of towr in ye yeir of god 1436, and being honorablie interteneit wth her husband and king charles ye sevint his father. She sent for twa of hir sisteris to cum in fraunce to remane

w hir quhill thay shold haue bene honorablie mariet. And quhen thay war cu to flanders in thair Jornay, Thay war thair advertesed that the quene thair modir was deceissit in Scotland and madame the dophins

wif thair sister was deceisit also in the toun of chailons in champagny, quhais body was erdit in the cathedral kirk thairof, bot quhou sone Levis the elevint her husband com to be king after ye deceise of his fadir, he causit transport her body to the kirk and abbay of Laon of thouars in poytow. alwaies the said twa young ladies war convoyeit to the king of france quhair thay war honorablie receivit and interteit, quhill thay war boeth marieit, the ane vpon ye duke of Britanye and the vther vpon ye duke of Austriche."

That part of the MS. which contains the history from 1455 to the death of James II. is wanting. In his printed history, the author has wisely omitted the verses, which the MS. says, were written on the "doun casting" of the castles of Roxburgh and Wark:

Quadringentenis decies sex mille sub anis, Roxburt wark solo precipitata lego.”

Under the year 1474, the MS. states the following fact, not contained in the printed history.

"In the same Parliament it was thoucht expedient that the king suld send comissione to his fadir ye king of Denmark to mak and bind confideratioun and allyance wh ye Empero exceptand thair first allyance, quhilk wes treatit schortelie thaireftir and thair seallis interchenged thairvpon betwix the empirour and Scotland."

Under the year 1481, an Act of Parliament is engrossed in the MS. in which the three estates, after narrating the injuries received from England, promise to stand by their sovereign (James III.) in defence of his most nobill persoun, &c.*

After the account of the marriage of James IV. with Margaret, daughter of Henry VII. of England, the following paragraph is added in the MS.

"The King & Quene all the rest of this yeir (1503) past throch the principalle townes in ye south partis of ye realme and

• Printed in the Black Acts, and in the Acts of the Parlts. of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 138.

abby placeis quhair gryit Interteynment wes maid to yame and sindrie gudely propynels and giftis was giffin to the quene in tokin of bleithnes. for ye vse obseruit in Scotland was at yat tyme as it was mony yeiris befoir, That the king the quene & thair trayne Traivaillit for ye maist part of ye yeir throch ye Realme, and loged in ye Abbay placeis, or wh ye bishops and prelats quhair thay war weille Intertayneit certane dayis and at thair departing the bischop or abbot master of ye place gave ane purse to the king and ane vther to the quene wth certane quantitie of gold contenit thairintill qlk extendit yeirly to ane gryit sowm.'

The letter sent by James IV. to Henry VIII. before engaging in the unfortunate expedition which issued in the defeat of the Scots at Flodden Field, is inserted at large in the MS. The printed history gives merely a summary of its contents.

The Bishop, in his printed History (pp. 378-9, edit. ut sup.), has passed a very high eulogium upon Gawin Douglas's Translation of the Æneid. The MS. speaks of it in more moderate terms, in noticing the death of its author.

"Maister Gawin dowglas bischop of Dunkeild, hering of this extremite begun be ye duik, for feir fled into ingland and remanit in London in ye place of ye sawoy, quhair he deceissit, & is buryit in ye kirk yairof he wes ane Learned man and ane guid poet translatit ye xii buicks of ye æneads of virgill in Scottis metir almost ansring in verses to ye Latine, and made ye palice of hono! w dyuers vyers notable werks in o scottis Language qĺks ar extant in thir of dayis."

History of Scotland, which occurs in The following character of Boece's the MS. under 1530, may be compared with the tribute which Lesley has paid to that historian in his printed work, pp. 413-4.

"In thir daies a singulare wele learned Clark called hector Boetius doctor in Theologie and principalle of the vniuersitie of aberdene a man of gryit erudicione in all

ye

liberall sciences wreit ye hole historie of

Scotland in ye Latin tongue from the beginninge y of to ye death of king James the first in ye yeir of ye natiuite of Christ Im XXXVI in so eloquent stile so truelie and diligently collected yat none of all ye wreittaries at yat tyme wreitt better as ye wark it self bearis record, qlk wes eftiruart translated in ye scottishe Language be Mr Johne ballanden and recited to ye greit furderance and comoune weill of ye hole natione."

There is a chasm in the MS. including the history from the year 1539 to 1543. The attentive reader of Lesley's History must have observed, that he

embraces every opportunity of speaking to the commendation of the House of Huntly. After mentioning the generosity of the Earl in relieving the prisoners taken at the battle of Pinkie, the MS. records an anecdote descriptive of the attachment borne to that nobleman by his followers.

"And heir is worthie to be remembred the gret favor qlk ane certane of the said erlis friendis and gentill men to the number of ane hundreth or thairby bure towart him the time of his extremitie, and wald on no wyis leave him quha perceaving ye hoil army of Scotland to have gevin backis [at Pinkie] and gret slauchter maid on euerie pairt be ye Inglismen in the chase, and ye said erle being on fuit charged w ane weich tie stand of harnes, quhairw! he had travelled so far on fuit yat he had no breath, and theairfoir gawe frome him his heid pece for fear that he should haif bene w ye hatt y of discomfitte. Quhilk moued one of his trustie gentill men called dauid dumbar to giue him his owin steill bonet qlk he pat on the erlis heid for his sauftye and remaned him self bairheidit. but suddentlie the said dauid for laik of the samin wes slayne be the straik of ane masse apoun the heid. The rest faucht stoutlie for sauftie of ye erle and slew syndrie of the Inglismen quha first did assailye thame, bot in ye end ye most pairt of theme all wer slayne, in the erlis presence be quhais defence his lyf was saufeit, or ellis he had gone the same way throw ye gret furie and rage qlk pntlie was vsed be ye inglismen."

The Scottish work is often more minute than the Latin in detailing the skirmishes and sieges during the warfare which followed the battle of Pinkie. For example, the defeat of the English in Fife by the Laird of Weems, which is referred to in p. 472 of the printed History, is very circumstantially described in the MS.

In relating the journey of the Queen Dowager to France, in 1551, the MS. gives an account of a conspiracy to poison the young Queen of Scots, which is not mentioned in the printed work, nor, as far as I recollect, in any of our histories.

"Quhill ye quene Regent was in france thair was ane treassonable practise devised & interprised to be execut for poysoning of the quene of scotland in france. qlk was tryed fur and reveled be ane scottisman callit James hendersoun at that tyme resident in Ingland be quhais advertisment the princepall auch (author?) callit stewart being ane archear (archer ?) of ye king of france gard quha had takin upon land (hand) to execut ye same was aprehendit in ye towne of blaisse in france and efter dyvers tor

mentis was hangit and quarterit for ye same."

To this may be added the following notice respecting a learned native of Scotland.

"During the tyme that ye Quene douarier and Lordis Thair came ane ye nobilitie of scotlande was in france* doctour phisitiane callit ramsay scottisman fur! of turing in pyedmount to france being of gret aige and guid lerninge and experience quha seruit all the nobill men of scotland and thair hoill cumpanye w sic things as was necessar for yame frelie apoun his awin charges moved onely for ye zeill he bure toward his countrey swa that he wald not suffer yame to cum onder ye cuir and medicine of strangers, in case thay my haif hapinit in sum onrecoverabill incōvenient ather be euill droggis or onlerned mixto yairof as hapinit to ye nobill men quha come to the mariage of the quene in france in the fiftie aught yeiris of god thaireftir."”

There is a marked difference between the manner in which the ProLatin and in the Scottish work. We testant opinions are spoken of in the are at no loss to perceive that the author of the MS. is attached to the Roman Catholic religion; but he preserves far greater moderation on this topic in it than he has done in his printed history. To account for this, it is perhaps sufficient to recollect, that the former was written in Scotland or in England, whereas the latter was composed and printed at Rome, and dedicated to the Sovereign Pontiff. This circumstance may also serve, in part, to account for the different way in which the author has expressed himself in the two works, respecting the death of Queen Mary of England and the succession of Elizabeth. the printed history, after recording the deaths of great men, and the prodigies which prognosticated "the overthrow of every monument of religion in both kingdoms, by the audacity and fury of the heretics," the Bishop says, 66 On the 15th of the calends of December, Mary Queen of England, a woman adorned with every virtue, and every way worthy to be admitted to divine bliss upon leaving this world, rendered her soul to God, to her great advantage, but to the unspeakable loss of the church. Upon this, Elizabeth, the daughter of Henry VIII. by Anne

In

The transcriber has here repeated some words and transposed others. The sentence should run thus: "During the tyme that the Quene Douarier and Lords of Scotlande was in France, thair came ane," &c.

Boleyn, assumed the government; and having induced many good men to believe that she was friendly to the Catholic religion, was consecrated with oil, and with the other ceremonies of the church, by the hands of Catholic bishops. But soon after, contrary to what was expected by many, she used every effort to overthrow the Catholic religion, and to establish the monstrous Luthero-Calvinian doctrine," &c. In the MS. the Bishop describes the same events in the following terms:

"About ye middis of the monethe of November Marie quene of Ingland partlie throuche gret maloncalie for the lose of calice and partlie throt cosumptione of seiknes endit hir lyf the xvij day of the same monethe and in hir place ane beutifull & verteous princes Lady Elizabethe was proclamed quene of Inglande quha Jvyses ye

same to thir daies."

REMARKS ON THE REVIEW OF MR STEWART'S DISSERTATION IN THE

QUARTERLY REVIEW.

If the writings of Mr Stewart be really entitled to the kind of approbation which is usually bestowed upon them in this part of the world, as being not merely the best metaphysical works of the present day, but almost the only works in which the true object of the Philosophy of the Human Mind is distinctly and accurately laid down, and the method of attaining it steadily and systematically pursued, it may seem like doubting of the ultimate prevalence of truth over error, to betray any anxiety in regard to their fate, or to undertake their defence against any attacks to which they may be exposed.

The observations which follow, on some of the reasonings contained in the Review of his last work in the Quarterly Review, are not, however, stated with the hope either of strengthening his philosophy, or of converting his antagonists, but merely with the view of taking off, in some degree, the impression which so elaborate, and in some respects able, an article may have made on that portion of the public whom inclination or business prevent from taking more than a cursory view of metaphysical controversies.

The animadversions on Mr Stewart's writings, contained in the ReVOL. II.

view, are made with so much courtesy, and accompanied with so many expressions of respect for his talents, and good will towards himself, as call for a similar return on the part of any one who attempts their defence; and in this respect at least, the following observations will not, I hope, be thought unworthy of a disciple of one who represents "unconquerable candour" as essential to true philosophy.

I beg leave, in the first place, to say two words on the objection so often brought against the Philosophy of the Mind; and which, though not urged in the article under consideration, is discussed at some length in a former article, to which reference is made,~ that it is of little or no practical utility. According to Mr Stewart's principles, the present would not seem to be an age in which this question can be brought to the test of experience. The minds of men are too much occupied with active concerns, and accustomed to strong interests;-metaphysicians are too busy in settling the foundations of their science, and defining its appropriate objects; erroneous ideas, on the last subject, have still too strong a hold of the public mind; metaphysical controversies, of no practical use, are in consequence too frequent; and the mode of inquiry, and kind of knowledge, in regard to the mind, on which Mr Stewart rests his hopes of the ultimate usefulness of the study, are too rare, to allow us the means of judging with confidence on the subject.

But I think it may be farther observed, on this point, that as the moving spring of philosophical inquiry is not the desire of happiness, but the principle of curiosity, so the first object of philosophy is not power, but knowledge. Every part of the works of nature, which it is in the power of the human understanding to explore, is an object of curiosity to the mind; and when it finds itself unable to gratify this desire, then the limits of the understanding themselves become an object of equal interest. In pursuing these objects, it is not to be expected, and it is surely still less to be wished, that the mind will ultimately be restrained by any consideration whatever, save only the consciousness of its own imperfection.

The interest which has in all ages been taken, not indeed by the bulk of H

mankind, but by thoughtful and contemplative men, in the Philosophy of the Mind, is at once a proof of the existence of a strong curiosity upon this subject, and a pledge for the disposition of future generations in regard to it; and whoever has really been instrumental, either in fixing the limits, or in extending the range, of this department of science, however much his labours may be obscured by the clouds of ancient prejudice, or neglected amid the splendour of passing events, acts under the assurance that the value of these labours will be duly appreciated by after ages, when the progress of time and of knowledge shall have brought them into view. The sublime sentiment of Kepler,-I may well be an age without a reader, since God Almighty has been six thousand years without an observer like me-was uttered by almost the only individual of the human race who could utter it without unpardonable presumption; but enough of the spirit which dictated those words remains, to animate, in all time to come, the exertions of those philosophers who outstrip their contemporaries, and leave their fame to posterity.

The first and heaviest charge which is brought against Mr Stewart, in the article in question, relates to the " errors which are conceived to be mixed up in his very conception of the proper aim of metaphysical philosophy." In proof of this, we are referred, first, to a former article in the same Review, and next, to a subsequent passage in the same article. In the Review of the 2d Volume of Mr Stewart's Elements, there are many objections stated to particular doctrines contained in that work; but the only arguments which can be considered as directed against the object, and the method of his philosophy in general, are contained between p. 287 and p. 291 of the 12th Volume of the Review, and these I shall now consider.* "In any inquiry into the Natural History of the Human Understanding," it is said," it is plain that two paths present

* In order to abridge this article as much as possible, I quote only those sentences from the Review which seem to me to con

tain the substance of the arguments; but as I refer to the places where the arguments are contained at length, it is in the power of the reader to judge whether in any point I have misunderstood them.

themselves to our choice: Either we may consider the mind as it is in itself, or as it is in the objects about which it is conversant. The first may be termed, the method by inquiry into the subjects of our consciousness; the latter, the method by inquiry into the objects of it. In the one case, to use the phraseology of Mr Stewart, our aim is, to ascertain the simple and uncompounded faculties, or the simple and uncompounded principles,' of which the mind consists; in the other case, it is to ascertain the nature, the certainty, and the limits of object of our inquiry, in the first of these the knowledge which it possesses. As the instances, is real existence, it would seem at first sight to be a proper subject for experimental or inductive reasoning. In the other instance, however, the immediate end which we propose to ourselves is not real existence, but abstract truth; and accordingly it is evident that our investigations in this direction must be carried on, not by obserrelations in which all the objects of human vation of facts, but by tracing the various knowledge stand to us and to each other. In both cases, real existence may be considered as the basis of our reasoning, but in other respects they are extremely different; in the one, our inquiry terminates with the establishment of a fact, whereas it is precisely at this point that it commences in the other. For example, when we have ascertained that all persons possess the notions of solidity, extension, motion, and so forth, the object of philosophy is so far accomplished, according to Mr Stewart; but according to Mr Locke, the existence of these notions is taken for granted, and the nature of them, the origin of them, and so forth, is the point at which metaphysical philosophy would here begin. Which of these question; our aim at present is to shew, views may be the more correct, is another that the idea of applying the inductive logic to this science depends entirely upon a particular theory as to the proper objects of it."

I have quoted this paragraph entire, because, after all the attention I have been able to bestow on it, I am not satisfied that I understand the nature of the distinction here stated between the subjects and the objects of our consciousness. By the former term, I conclude, from some subsequent passages, that we are to understand the powers or faculties which have been ascribed to the mind. But the precise meaning of the term, Objects of Consciousness, I do not comprehend; and the difficulty is much increased by the account given in another passage, of the "objects about which the understanding is conversant," which term appears to be used as synonimous with the other.