work was published at an important crisis, immeediately after the battle of Pinky. The principles of the Reformation had already made considerable progress in that country; and the opposition of private interests soon assumed the appearance of a religious contest. But if we regard the influence of religion on the political relations of Scotland, instead of mentioning the Catholic and Protestant parties, we may with propriety speak of the French and English factions. The prevalence of the Protestant interest, which, in the most early struggles, had been chiefly supported by the assistance of England; and afterwards, the union of the Crowns, in the person of James VI., tended to moderate that spirit of rancour which reiterated injuries and insults had produced between the sister kingdoms, and which pervades the Complaynt of Scotland in all its acrimony. These causes conspiring, may, without the intervention of a proscription, have sunk this political and satirical work into that neglect, in which it continued for 160 years. The first person by whom the Complaynt of Scotland is mentioned, is James Watson, who published, from his own press, a short history of printing in 1713; but as he assigns, as its date, 1540, in contradiction to the work itself, the composition of which, from a calculation which it contains, is undeniably referred to 1548, it is doubtful whether he intended the present work, or some other, of the same title. The Complaint of Scotland seems to have been a common title about this period. One of the divisions of Lindsay's Dreme, addressed to James V, is denominated "The Complaint "of the Commounweill of Scotland," and may probably be the work alluded to by Watson. A ballad, entitled, entitled, "The Complaint of Scotland," occurs in Major Pierson's Collection, which, according to Ames, is printed on one side, has no date, and exhibits the name of neither author nor printer. In the Gentleman's Magazine for November 1791, a copy of this Poem is given from a black letter sheet, which the transcriber J. R. conjectures to have been printed at Edinburgh in 1567 by R. Lekpreuik. It apparently relates to the murder of Henry Stewart, Lord Darnley, and consists of twenty-four stanzas of five lines; beginning, "Adew all glaidness, sport, and play; "Allace, to graif is gone my deir!" It is not probable that Watson alluded to this performance; but if he intended the real Complaynt of Scotland, the date must have been an error of the printer. That he might have seen a copy, is extremely probable; for he seems to have been acquainted with some books, of which no copies are known at present to be extant. Of this kind, is the Tale of Rauf Collyear. If compositions be neglected by the learned and curious, and not calculated to attain popularity among the lower classes, an impression almost vanishes in the lapse of a century. Accident may preserve a few straggling copies a little longer; but, if not deposited in a public library, a second century almost unavoidably terminates their existence, The next person who mentions the Complaynt of Scotland, is Dr Mackenzie, in his Lives, vol. iii. p. 42. 1722. He assigns it, without hesitation, to Sir James Inglis, Knight. In Catalog. Bibl. Harlcianæ, 1742-5, the the same work is mentioned twice, and, in both instances, assigned to Vedderburn or Wedderburn. It occurs, first, in vol. i. N° 8371.; and afterwards, vol. iv. N° 12,070. These slight and contradictory notices constitute all the information which has been as yet discovered concerning the author. Mr Pinkerton, who discovered the copy in the British Museum, assumes the position, that Wedderburn is the author, on the authority of the Harleian Catalogue. But such an authority as that on which he depends, is just better than no authority at all, and can never be deemed satisfactory. The only argument that can be deduced from it, amounts to no more than a slight probability. Because the compiler of the Harleian Catalogue gives Vedderburn as the name of the author, a presumption arises, that the copy, from which he extracted the title, had a title-page bearing the name of the author; though at the same time it must be admitted, that no perfect title-page exists in any copy known to be extant. But if this can be presumed in the case of the Compiler of the Harleian Catalogue, the argument will apply with still greater force to Dr Mackenzie, who is a more ancient authority, and who peremptorily ascribes it to Sir James Inglis, Knight. Herbert' suggests, that probably both Mackenzie and the Compiler transcribed from written title-pages, or perhaps from tradition. This supposition is strengthened by the fact, that though Mackenzie, and the Compiler of the Harleian Catalogue, seem, from the phraseology, to have copied the same title, they not only vary in the orthography, but the two titles in the Harleian Catalogue differ considerably from each other, as appears undeniably from a comparison. Ames, Typogr. Antiq. p. 1481. Νο N° 8371. "Vedderburn's Complainte of Scotlande, "vyth ane exortatione to the thre estaits to be vigi"lante in the deffens of their public veil, 1549." N° 12,070. “Vedderburn's Complainte of Scotland, "with ane exortatione to the three estates to be vi gilant in defence of their public weel, 1549.' Mackenzie gives "Scotland's Complaint against her "three Sons, the Nobility, Clergy, and Commons. Imprinted at St Andrews in 1548. " any conclusion can be deduced from this discrepancy, it must militate strongly against the accuracy of both Mackenzie and the Compiler of the Harleian Catalogue. Herbert adds, " Is it not highly probable, consi66 dering the subject and the time, that the book should be "printed privately; and, if the printer was in danger, was "it not necessary for the author to conceal his name? "If the author's name was mentioned on the title, page, what occasion to omit it at the end of the de"dication? This copy in the Museum, is so packed "and cooked, that it cannot reasonably be pronounced "a second edition; especially as the contents given by "Mackenzie, appear evidently to have been taken "from a copy of this edition, and his quotations of "the songs and herbs from the interpolated leaves, though not so correctly as might have been. May "not the title-page, as the book is so neatly printed, "have had as neat a compartment, and so have been "transposed into collections of that sort; the subject "of the book, as to the main intention, becoming "obsolete, on the happy union of the two nations; "though the book itself, as long as it can be preserv"ed, will ever remain, in point of language, customs, " &c. a curious relic of antiquity, a genuine Scotish "classic?" "classic" The conjecture, of the suppression of the title-page, however, is contradicted, by a fragment of one being preserved in the copy in the possession of the Duke of Roxburgh, which, I am informed, only contains The Comp. Had it been customary to transpose the title-page, or any of the chapters, into collections of a similar kind, it is dif ficult to conceive, that both the book, and the fragments of it, should have become so extremely rare, that in the year 1800, only four copies should be known; and that neither the work itself, nor its mutilated fragments, should have fallen into the hands of collectors, or have been mentioned by the curious. The observations of Herbert concerning the interpolated leaves, apply, not only to the Museum copy, which he consulted, but, with equal force, to the three other copies which are known to be extant; and, as these copies coincide in the leaves which seem to have been cancelled, as well as in the erroneous numbering of the pages, they rather excite a presumption, that the Complaynt of Scotland never appeared in any other form than that of a single edition, in 1548, according to Mackenzie, and according to a calculation in the work itself, P. 55.; or in 1549, according to the Compiler of the Harleian Catalogue. The question concerning the author of the Complaynt, rests upon two contradictory assertions, each of them completely devoid of collateral evidence. As neither Mackenzie, nor the Compiler of the Harleian Catalogue, adduce any authority for their different assertions, we should next examine whether Sir James Inglis, Knight, or Wedderburn, be the more probable author, from the nature of their respective political and religious principles, and from the complexion |