advice, I should have prayed for him in the words of David, Psalm
109, from the 6th to the 15th verse. I forgive him and all my
enemies. I hope you will have the charity to believe I die in peace
with all men; for yesterday, I received the Holy Eucharist from the
hands of a clergyman of the Church of England, in whose communion I
die as in union with the Episcopal Church of Scotland.

"I shall conclude with a short prayer."--(Here a prayer is mentioned
much the same as in Wm. Ford's account.)

[394] The account which I have given of Lord Kilmarnock's behaviour and
fate, and also of Lord Balmerino's, is taken from the following works,
to which I have not thought it necessary separately to refer. Foster's
Account of the Behaviour of Lord Kilmarnock; and the Vindication of
Foster's Account from the misrepresentations of some Dissenting
Teachers: London, 1746. Account by T. Ford, Under-Sheriff at the
Execution, in the State Trials, vol. xviii. p. 325. Horace Walpole's
Letters to Geo. Montagu, and to Sir H. Mann. Scots' Magazine for 1746;
and Buchan's Life of Marshal Keith; also a Collection of Tracts in the
British Museum, relating to the Rebellion, 1746, and chiefly published
during that year.

[395] For both these letters, hitherto unpublished, I am indebted for
the courtesy of Mrs. Craufurd of Craufurdland Castle.

[396] Forbes's Life of Beattie, vol. ii. p. 351.

[397] Journey to the Hebrides, p. 108

[398] Bayley's History of the Tower, p. 122.

CHARLES RADCLIFFE.

The fate of Charles Radcliffe has been regarded as one of the most
severe, and his death as one of the most unjustifiable acts inflicted on
those who suffered for their adherence to the Stuart cause.

This unfortunate man was the third son of Francis Earl of Derwentwater,
by the Lady Mary Tudor, the daughter of Charles the Second, and was born
in 1693. He was the younger brother of James Earl of Derwentwater, who
suffered in 1716, for his adherence to the Stuart cause. There was also
another elder brother, Francis, who died unmarried, not taking any
apparent interest in the politics of the day.

The family of Radcliffe were not regarded by the descendants of their
common ancestor, Charles the Second, in the light of kindred whom the
rules of decorum, and the usages of society might induce them to
disclaim, or at all events, to acknowledge with shame or reluctance; the
vitiated notions of the day attached a very