ocates' library, A. 3, 28,
p. 314, from Cott. lib. Calig. c. 9. Indeed, the duke's full persuasion
of Mary's guilt, without the least doubt or hesitation, could not
have had place, if he had found Lidington or the bishop of Ross of a
different opinion, or if they had ever told him that these letters
were forged. It is to be remarked, that Lidington, being one of the
accomplices, knew the whole bottom of the conspiracy against King Henry,
and was, besides, a man of such penetration, that nothing could escape
him in such interesting events. 14. I need not repeat the presumption
drawn from Mary's refusal to answer. The only excuse for her silence is,
that she suspected Elizabeth to be a partial judge. It was not, indeed,
the interest of that princess to acquit and justify her rival and
competitor; and we accordingly find that Lidington, from the secret
information of the Duke of Norfolk, informed Mary, by the bishop of
Ross, that the queen of England never meant to come to a decision; but
only to get into her hands the proofs of Mary's guilt, in order to blast
her character. See State Trials, vol. i p. 77. But this was a better
reason for declining the conference altogether, than for breaking it
off, on frivolous pretences, the very moment the chief accusation was
unexpectedly opened against her. Though she could not expect Elizabeth's
final decision in her favor, it was of importance to give a satisfactory
answer, if she had any, to the accusation of the Scotch commissioners.
That answer could have been dispersed for the satisfaction of the
public, of foreign nations, and of posterity. And surely after the
accusation and proofs were in Queen Elizabeth's hands, it could do no
harm to give in the answers. Mary's information, that the queen
never intended to come to a decision, could be no obstacle to her
justification. 15. The very disappearance of these letters is a
presumption of their authenticity. That event can be accounted for no
way but from the care of King James's friends, who were desirous
to destroy every proof of his mother's crimes. The disappearance of
Morton's narrative, and of Crawford's evidence, from the Cotton library,
(Calig. c. I,) must have proceeded from a like cause. See MS. in the
Advocates' library, A. 3, 29, p. 88.

I find an objection made to the authenticity of the letters, drawn from
the vote of the Scotch privy council, which affirms the letters to be
written and subscribed by Queen Mary's own