icating a determination to
refuse what the King demanded. The Estates, it was said, would go as far
as their consciences would allow to meet His Majesty's wishes respecting
his subjects of the Roman Catholic religion. These expressions were far
from satisfying the Chancellor; yet, such as they were, he was forced
to content himself with them, and even had some difficulty in persuading
the Parliament to adopt them. Objection was taken by some zealous
Protestants to the mention made of the Roman Catholic religion. There
was no such religion. There was an idolatrous apostasy, which the laws
punished with the halter, and to which it did not become Christian men
to give flattering titles. To call such a superstition Catholic was
to give up the whole question which was at issue between Rome and the
reformed Churches. The offer of a free trade with England was treated as
an insult. "Our fathers," said one orator, "sold their King for southern
gold; and we still lie under the reproach of that foul bargain. Let
it not be said of us that we have sold our God!" Sir John Lauder of
Fountainhall, one of the Senators of the College of Justice, suggested
the words, "the persons commonly called Roman Catholics." "Would you
nickname His Majesty?" exclaimed the Chancellor. The answer drawn by
the committee was carried; but a large and respectable minority voted
against the proposed words as too courtly. [140] It was remarked that
the representatives of the towns were, almost to a man, against the
government. Hitherto those members had been of small account in the
Parliament, and had generally, been considered as the retainers of
powerful noblemen. They now showed, for the first time, an independence,
a resolution, and a spirit of combination which alarmed the court. [141]

The answer was so unpleasing to James that he did not suffer it to be
printed in the Gazette. Soon he learned that a law, such as he wished to
see passed, would not even be brought in. The Lords of Articles, whose
business was to draw up the acts on which the Estates were afterwards to
deliberate, were virtually nominated by himself. Yet even the Lords of
Articles proved refractory. When they met, the three Privy Councillors
who had lately returned from London took the lead in opposition to the
royal will. Hamilton declared plainly that he could not do what was
asked. He was a faithful and loyal subject; but there was a limit
imposed by conscience. "Conscience!" said the