28th of May

St Caraunus (Cheron), martyr, 5th century. St Germanus, Bishop of Paris, 576.

Born. – James Sforza, the Great, 1639, Cotignola; Thomas Moore, poet, 1780, Dublin
Died. – St Bernard of Savoy, 1008; Admiral de Tourville, 1701, Paris; Madame de Montespan, mistress of Louis XIV., 1708; Electress Sophia of Hanover, 1714; George [Keith] Earl Mareschal, 1778, Potsdam; William Erskine (Memoirs of Emperor Baber, &c.), 1852, Edinburgh.

On this Day in Other Sources.

Bishop John had been a tutor to King David, and was for some time his Chancellor. He had a long contest with Thurstan, Archbishop of York, by whom he was put under sentence of suspension in 1122. He then went to the Holy Land; but the next year, by order of the Pope, returned to his see. In 1125, he went to Rome to endeavour to obtain the pallium for the Bishop of St. Andrews, against the influence of the Archbishop of York. He is said to have retired among the Benedictine monks, and he did not return to Glasgow till recalled to his diocese by Alberic, the legate, in 1138. He died 28th May 1147. 

– Sketches, pp.29-70.

The latter [George Heriot] being bred to his father’s business, to which in that age was usually added the occupation of a banker, was admitted a member of the Incorporation of Goldsmiths on the 28th May, 1588. In 1597 he was appointed goldsmith to Queen Anne, and soon after to the king. Several of the accounts for jewels furnished by him to the queen are inserted in Constable’s “Life of Heriot,” published in 1822. 

– Old and New Edinburgh, pp.174-182.

Under date 28th May, 1588, we find the kirk session intimating to the presbytery that the “exercise” of the latter cannot be permitted in the Blackfriars on Friday, because it “interfeirs with the preaching” on that day, and the presbytery is desired “to alter the day of their exercise.” The presbytery yielded, and there is an intimation afterwards “that preaching, with consent of session and presbytery, is to be in the Blackfriars Wednesday and Friday.” 

– Old Glasgow, pp.189-215.

The Scotish Queen remained in charge of Mr. Lowther on the 28th day of May 1568, when Lord Scroope, and Sir Francis Knollys arrived, to assume that trust. On the same day, the Earl, and Countess of Lennox, demanded justice against the Scotish Queen. This seems to be connected with certain imaginations, how to restore the Scotish Queen; one whereof is, that it is both honourable, and fit, for the Queen of England, to hear, and decide, any controversy, moved for the crown of Scotland; for that, of ancient right, it appertaineth, to the crown of England. This last hint led on to a question, which was put, by the English commissioners, to the Scotish: If they acknowledge what was in itself untrue. Had this question been answered, in the affirmative, it would have shortened the enquiry: They needed, only, to have indicted the Scotish Queen, as a subordinate feudary of England, for the murder of her husband: Murray, and Morton, and their associates, would have proved her guilt, upon their honours, and consciences, whereof they had none; and Elizabeth would have had only the simple ceremony of ordering her execution, and then punishing her secretary, for obeying her formal orders. All this was prevented, by the denial of the Scotish commissioners; as they knew, that they could not have returned to Scotland, if they had acknowledged the feudal superiority of the one kingdom over the other. 

– Life of Mary, pp.206-234.

[John Nicoll] informs us that on the 28th of May [1650] ‘there rained blood the space of three miles in the Earl of Buccleuch’s bounds, near the English border; whilk was verified in presence of the Committee of State.’ 

– Domestic Annals, pp.278-301.

    … The Scots members being met the next day, and their deputies having made their report of her Majesty’s answer, it was unanimously agreed, that, before they proceeded further, they should lay their grievances before the House of Lords. Accordingly on the 28th of May, [1713,] after the Lords had adjourned the debate about the 8th and 9th articles of the treaty of commerce, the Earl of Finlater made a motion, that some day might be appointed to consider the state of the nation; whereupon the Lords appointed the 1st of June, when all the Lords in town were summoned. Between one and two o’clock the debate began, opened by the Earl of Finlater, who represented the grievances of the Scottish nation, and concluded by moving, ‘That leave be given to bring in a Bill for dissolving the said union, and securing the Protestant succession to the house of Hanover, the Queen’s prerogative in both kingdoms, and preserving an entire unity and good correspondence between the two kingdoms.’

– Morning Chronicle, Monday 17th July, 1843.

– Treaty of Union Articles, 1800-1850.

Leave a Reply