he
bishop's brother, and ere ever Mr. Mitchel was aware, he caused a
certain number of his servants (armed for that purpose) lay hold on him,
and apprehend and commit him to prison; and on the 10th of February was
examined by the lord chancellor, lord register and lord Halton; he
denied the assassination of the arch-bishop, but being taken apart by
the chancellor, he confessed (that it was he who shot the bishop of
Orkney while aiming at the arch-bishop), upon assurance of his life,
given by the chancellor in these words, "Upon my great oath and
reputation, if I be chancellor, I shall save your life." On the 12th he
was examined before the council, and said nothing but what he had said
before the committee. He was remitted to the justice-court to receive
his indictment and sentence, which was, To have his right hand struck
off at the cross of Edinburgh, and his goods forfeited; which last part
was not to be executed, till his majesty had got notice; because, says
lord Halton, in a letter to earl Kincardine, assurance of life was given
him upon his confession.

However, he was, on the second of March, brought before the lords
judiciary, and indicted for being concerned at Pentland, and for the
attempt on the arch-bishop of St Andrews; but he pleaded not guilty, and
insisted that the things alledged against him should be proved: The
lords postponed the affair till the 25th; meanwhile, the council made an
act March 12, specifying that Mr. James Mitchel confessed his firing the
pistol at the arch-bishop of St. Andrews, upon assurance given him of
life by one of the committee, who had a warrant from the lord
commissioner and secret council to give the same, and therefore did
freely confess, &c. In the said act it was declared, That, on account
of his refusing to adhere to his confession, the promises made to him
were void, and that the lords of justiciary and jury ought to proceed
against him, without any regard to these. About the 25, he was brought
before the justiciary; but as there was no proof against him, they with
consent of the advocate protracted the affair, and he was again remanded
to prison.

Thus he continued until Jan. 6th, 1676, that he was ordered to be
examined before the council by torture, concerning his being in the
rebellion (as they formed it) in the year 1666. Accordingly he was
brought before them upon the 18th, about six o'clock at
night;--Linlithgow, being preses, told him, He was brought before t