s studies either in law or philosophy to
recognise the folly of a man in disgrace venturing to measure swords
with one of fortune's favourites. And Sir James at the time of his
quarrel with Claverhouse was in disgrace. At the close of 1681 he had
been dismissed from the office of President of the Court of Session for
refusing the Test Act; and for some while previously he had been coldly
regarded for his advocacy of gentler measures than suited Lauderdale and
his creatures. The Dalrymples were strict Presbyterians; and though the
men were too cautious to meddle openly with treasonable matters, their
womenfolk were notoriously in active sympathy with the rebels. All
through Claverhouse's letters of this time run allusions to some great
personage whom it might be wise to make an example of, and he himself
had taken an early opportunity of impressing on Sir James the necessity
of caution.[39] But the latter would not be warned. He set himself
against Claverhouse at every opportunity, both openly and in secret. He
wrote long querulous letters to Edinburgh, complaining of the latter's
disrespect. Finally, when he found it prudent to leave the country for a
while, his son carried the business to a height by bringing a formal
charge against Claverhouse of extortion and malversation. The latter saw
his opportunity, and at once carried the war into the enemy's country.
He preferred a specific bill of complaint against Sir John, in the
course of which it came out that he had been offered a bribe both by
father and son not to interfere with their hereditary jurisdictions;
and, notwithstanding the exertions of Sir George Lockhart and
Fountainhall, the most eminent counsel of the Scottish bar, utterly
defeated him on every point. The Court found that Sir John Dalrymple had
been guilty of employing rebels and of winking at treasonable practices:
of not exacting the proper fines by law ordained for such misdemeanours:
of stirring up the country-folk against the King's troops; and, finally,
of grossly misrepresenting Claverhouse to the Council. For these
offences he was sentenced to pay a fine of five hundred pounds and the
whole costs of the proceedings, and to be imprisoned in the Castle of
Edinburgh till the money should be paid. Claverhouse, on his side,
received not only a full and most complimentary acquittal from all his
adversary's charges, but also a signal proof of the royal favour in the
presentation to a regiment of cavalry r