ch there was no expectation while he remained in
the hands of his Scottish subjects.[*]

* State Trials, vol. i. p 138.

Even this part of the charge she took no pains to deny, or rather she
seemed to acknowledge it. She said that she had no kingdoms to dispose
of; yet was it lawful for her to give at her pleasure what was her own,
and she was not accountable to any for her actions. She added, that she
had formerly rejected that proposal from Spain; but now, since all
her hopes in England were gone, she was fully determined not to refuse
foreign assistance. There was also produced evidence to prove, that
Allen and Parsons were at that very time negotiating, by her orders, at
Rome, the conditions of transferring her English crown to the king of
Spain, and of disinheriting her heretical son.[*] [21]

It is remarkable, that Mary's prejudices against her son were at this
time carried so far, that she had even entered into a conspiracy against
him, had appointed Lord Claud Hamilton regent of Scotland, and had
instigated her adherents to seize James's person, and deliver him into
the hands of the pope, or the king of Spain; whence he was never to be
delivered, but on condition of his becoming Catholic.[**] [24]

The only part of the charge which Mary positively denied, was her
concurrence in the design of assassinating Elizabeth. This article,
indeed, was the most heavy, and the only one that could fully justify
the queen in proceeding to extremities against her. In order to prove
the accusation, there were produced the following evidence: copies taken
in Secretary Walsingham's office of the intercepted letters between
her and Babington, in which her approbation of the murder was clearly
expressed; the evidence of her two secretaries, Nau and Curle, who had
confessed, without being put to any torture, both that she received
these letters from Babington, and that they had written the answers by
her order; the confession of Babington, that he had written the letters
and received the answers,[***] and the confession of Ballard and Savage,
that Babington had showed them these letters of Mary, written in the
cipher which had been settled between them.

* See note U, at the end of the volume.

** See note X, at the end of the volume.

*** State Trials, vol. i. p. 113.

It is evident, that this complication of evidence, though every
circumstance corroborates the general conclusion, resolves itself
finall