The Sun.
London, England, 1845-12-08 00:00:00

DOLMAN'S MAGAZINE.

In the present number Mr. Leicester S. F. Bucking-
ham brings his paper, entitled " Mary Queen of Scots
and Lord Brougham," to a conclusion. It is evident that
Mr. Leicester Buckingham is an enthusiast in the cause
of Mary, and, like all enthusiasts, he suffers his feelings
to run away with his judgment, and is rather eloquent
than logical. The greater part of the present portion of
his paper is devoted to the consideration of the Babington
conspiracy ; and Mr. Buckingham, admitting that Mary
was aiding and abetting that conspiracy as far as it re-
lated to the dethronement of Elizabeth, denies that she
was cognizant of the plot connected with it for the as-
sassination of the Queen, grounding this assertion upon
the allegation that the decipherment of Mary's letter,
which was given is evidence, contained " an interpola-
tion in the convicting passage." Now, although Mr.
Buckingham has, in our opinion, completely failed in
proving that this was the case, we will not now go into
any argument with him on that point, because he him-
self gives other evidence which proves that Mary knew
of the intention of the conspirators to assassinate Eliza-
beth. Speaking of the declaration made by Nau (Mary's
secretary) to James 1., as given by Lingard, he says—

" The boldness of this declaration, consistent as it is in
every point with his former remonstrance to Elizabeth, and
the entire absence from his deposition of any point in the
smallest degree inculpating Mary, may surely justify us in
claiming him as a witness in her defence."
Be it so. We give Nau to Mr. Buckingham, as a witness
for the defence, and therefore it is not in the mouth of
the defender to impugn the credibility of his own wit-
ness. Now what is the evidence of this witness, whose
deposition contains not " any point in the smallest
degree inculpating Mary," as reported by Mr. Bucking-
ham himself, from Von Ramer?—

" The defence of Mary clearly points to an interpolation in
the convicting passage of the letter, since she vehemently de-
clared that the points of the letters that concerned the
Queen's Majesty's person were never by her written, nor of
her knowledge; the rest, for invasion and for escaping by
force, she would neither affirm nor deny.' (Cecil to Davison,
Cott. MSS. Calig. c. ix. f. 433.) And this is fully con-
firmed by the statement which Nau addressed to Elizabeth
from the Tower, in which he stated that 31ary had received from
Babington an intimation of the design upon Eiizabeth's life ;
but that she took no notice of it in her reply, because it was a
thing she neither desired nor intended; though she did not think
herself bound to betray the confidence of her friends, by
divulging their plans to the Queen."

An intimation of the intended assassination was con-
veyed to Mary ; she did not remonstrate with the con-
spirators agaiHst it. It is absurd to suppose that, in
such a case as this, silence is not consent. " She took
uo notice of it in her reply," and, therefore, upon Mr.
Buckingham's own showing, she was accessory before
the fact to the crime of murder. But it would seem as

though Mr. Buckingham held the creed that in some
eases assassination was not only lawful, but meritorious ;
for in speaking of the assassination of the Regent Mur-
ray, he designates it an " appropriate fate, drawn upon
him by his own cruelty and injustice." Now, surely a
gentleman who could suffer his feelings so far to get the
better of his prudence as to use such language in rela-
tion to a deliberately planned murder, is not one on
whose judgment any reasoning man would be inclined
to place implicit reliance. On Elizabeth he pours out
all the vials of his wrath, but in his anger he forgets that
he is affording her the best of all possible apologies for
her conduct, by showing that the existence of Mary was
absolutely incompatible with Elizabeth's personal safety,
and that, in self-defence, she was obliged to act as she
did. Re denies the legitimacy of Elizabeth—he denies
her right to the throne ; and, speaking of the English
Roman Catholics, he says, " their honest indignation
could no longer be contained, and they watched with
eagerness for an opportunity to defend the rights of the
lawful heir against the claim of the sanguinary usurper."
Harder words these, Mr. Leicester Buckingham, but
there is one great fact which you have overlooked ;
Elizabeth was sovereign de facto. and an unsuccessful
attempt to dethrone a sovereign de facto, even although
made by, end on behalf of, an individul claiming the
sovereignty de jure, is, by the laws of every civilized
nation, considered and punished as treason. Mary and
Babingten, with a full knowledge of the chances, chose
to play a desperate game. They staked their lives and
fortunes against the lives and fortunes of Elizabeth and
her supporters. No human being has ever yet ventured
or uo
from
d theirhas e
et ox
aeextpe rde spsa
md
eolu,
tb
of
ft
adversaries ; they lost, and they have no right to thhaet'sthaakde te theyth ewuo uttermost r theymoys
com-
plain that payment to the uttermost was exacted fry m
them. We have devoted so much space to the examina-
tion of Mr. Buckingham's paper, that we can only allude
to the remaining contents of this number very cursorily.
The " Chapter on Music" is admirable, and should be
attentively perused by every one who wishes well to the
cause of the progress of musical science in Enland.
" The Manor of Summerdale" is a simple tale, beautiful
from its very simplicity ; it might have been written by
is a
Wordsworth. " Social England and its Clergy" -
plea fur the celibacy of the clergy, written in a truly
Catholic and tolerant spirit, and which proves that, how-
bneoitnigmppooslesimbliecatlo. write
Thereco
isn -
et
rvoevr e difficultr
i a l d divinityyv,bieliotuits
not a paper in the present number of Dolman which does
not bear upon it the impress of talent.