ng's murderer. See
Anderson, vol. iv. part 2, p. 192. It is a sure argument, that these
earls knew no better proof against Murray, otherwise they would have
produced it, and not have insisted on so absurd a presumption. Was not
this also the time for Huntley to deny his writing Mary's contract with
Bothwell, if that paper had been a forgery?

Murray could have no motive to commit that crime. The king, indeed, bore
him some ill will; but the king himself was become so despicable, both
from his own ill conduct and the queen's aversion to him, that he could
neither do good nor harm to any body. To judge by the event, in any
case, is always absurd; especially in the present. The king's murder,
indeed, procured Murray the regency; but much more Mary's ill conduct
and imprudence, which he could not possibly foresee, and which never
would have happened, had she been entirely innocent.]

[Footnote 14: NOTE N, p. 111. I believe there is no reader of common
sense, who does not see, from the narrative in the text, that the author
means to say, that Queen Mary refuses constantly to answer before the
English commissioners, but offers only to answer in person before Queen
Elizabeth in person, contrary to her practice during the whole course of
the conference, till the moment the evidence of her being an accomplice
in her husband's murder is unexpectedly produced. It is true, the
author, having repeated four or five times an account of this demand
of being admitted to Elizabeth's presence, and having expressed his
opinion, that as it had been refused from the beginning, even before
the commencement of the conferences, she did not expect it would now be
complied with, thought it impossible his meaning could be misunderstood,
(as indeed it was impossible;) and not being willing to tire his reader
with continual repetitions, he mentions in a passage or two, simply,
that she had refused to make any answer. I believe, also, there is no
reader of common sense who peruses Anderson or Goodall's collections,
and does not see that, agreeably to this narrative, Queen Mary insists
unalterably and strenuously on not continuing to answer before the
English commissioners, but insists to be heard in person, by Queen
Elizabeth in person; though once or twice, by way of bravado, she says
simply, that she will answer and refute her enemies, without inserting
this condition, which still is understood. But there is a person that
has written an Inquiry,