quiz Search

  independence for Scotland    


The Treaty (or Act) of Union , 1707

What follows is the full text of the so called Act of Union 1707. The notes preceding it come from two sources. Those notes in ( bold typeface ) are comments of Dr Ivan Bishop, however the bulk of the text is the work of Mr. Peter Ross, a Scotsman who lived in the late 19th century in New York USA. [ Scotland and the Scots, The " Scottish American " Office, New York. 1889]
His insight and illustrations offer an invaluable clarification of what this most undemocratic of treaties really represents.

What Royal Scottish Burghs Said About This Demeaning Act in 1707

" Seeing, by the articles of Union, now under the consideration of the Honourable Estates of Parliament, it is agreed that Scotland and England shall be united into one kingdom; and that the united kingdoms be united by one and the same Parliament, by which our monarchy Is suppressed, our parliament extinguished, and in consequence our religion, church government, claim of right, laws, liberties, trade and all that is dear to us, daily in danger of being encroached upon, altered or wholly subverted by the English In a British Parliament, wherein the mean representation allowed for Scotland can never signify in securing to us the interest reserved by us, or granted to us by the English. "

1.1) Where did Scottish pride go and self reliance go ?

How did the Scottish nation lose its way and its pride? Westminster has told us for so long that we are incapable of running our own economy and nation that we now believe it. The " Constitutional Convention ", a collection of London appointed and approved lackies, comprising the same mix of Church, business and questionable politician, would sell the Scots Nation all over again, in the same way as those so called " Nobles " and churchmen did in the early 1700's. Read on, will Scotland learn from its past, or continue to believe that Labour or Tory parties and this corrupt union can ever lead to anything but subservience to London?

1.2) " Braveheart " close to the truth: Englands armies.

The modern history of Scotland dates from the adoption of the treaty of Union. In fact, that historic document must be regarded as the central point in the entire history of the ancient kingdom, for as we read the records of the country's progress prior to 1707 in the light of its subsequent story, we find that every event led up to some such treaty being drawn between Scotland and England.

So far as opinion in England was concerned, however, the idea of union was always associated with that of conquest. Scotland was considered as simply a province somewhat larger than Northumbria, and its geographical position as well as feudal ties and engagements, were adduced in support of the theory. It was long seen, although not often expressed, that England could not fully develop itself while on its northern frontier lay a brave, watchful, and ruthless enemy, in close alliance with France, and ready on every chance to cross the Tweed. The only way by which this national weakness could be overcome was by crushing the spirit of the northern land and placing it under the control of the English Government, a conquered province. From a southern point of view, and in connection with this theory, no English sovereign showed more true statesmanship than did Edward I or " Edward Longshanks," as the Scots dubbed him. He appreciated the fact that it was absolutely necessary for the island to be under on Edward's assaults on Scotland, beyond the fact that wise statesmanship showed the necessity of the two countries being united, had no plea for their justification. The old fables of homage and allegiance, the contemptible spirit shown by the nobility, the oaths of John Baliol, or the political necessities of the times, did not, even when taken together, form sufficient warrant for the forcible annexation of a sister nation.

Edward's Scottish campaigns were characterized by excessive cruelty and destruction, and whenever a section of the country was in the power of his troops he ruled it with an iron hand. But there is every evidence that, after he had demonstrated his power to the people, he intended taking them into the English commonwealth on " reasonably favourable and honourable terms ". This is the only really redeeming feature which the history of his Scottish campaigns presents to us, and proves him to have been more than merely a tyrannical and bloodthirsty conqueror. According to his arrangement, the country was to be governed by a lieutenant directly representing the monarch, with the advice and assistance of a council composed of the nobility and clergy.( This still made Scotland an English colonial output of course! )
The two named estates were, of course, loyal to Edward at that epoch, and would have obeyed his behests or agreed only upon such legislation or enactments as would be inspired by him or which were certain to meet his approval.
( This is much like the much vaunted devolved partliament that Labour supports - it would do as London and the London run Scottish office TOLD it. It would NOT be independent)

The immediate result of such an arrangement was certain to strengthen the personal power of the English king, but its weakest point was that if, in times to come, the nobility and clergy became more patriotic, they had the opportunity of weakening and harassing that power (No chance of this with a devolved " parliament " in Scotland - both Tory and labour would make it vanish faster than snow in August if that body ever showed signs of not towing the London line)

However, it was a step in the direction of popular government, a certain amount of gain, although useless for the time. But Edward did more than this, for he gave Scotland a direct, although small, representation in the English Parliament. Four barons, four churchmen, and two members of the House of commons were to form the Scottish contingent, and these ten deputies actually did attend one Parliament in London. One of the two members of the House of Commons represented that part of Scotland which lay south of the firths of Forth and Clyde, while the other was supposed to be the mouthpiece of all to the north of those estuaries.
(True the Scottish are now over represented by labour MPs in London- but what of it? They are always towing the line for London, for an English led clique. There have been 90 odd Scottish MPs for the Tory torture years, what good has that done us. The huge majority of right wingers in the South of England merely sneer at Scottish issues, now as they alway have and always will But the Scots did not take kindly to Edward's manifestations of good intentions. The reforms which came to them on the points of English arrows, and as the result of cowardice and selfishness on the part of their own national leaders, failed to gild or soften the yoke which the southern king had placed upon them, and another rebellion burst it asunder.

(Now the Scots have been brainwashed into thinking they cannot govern themselves. How arrogant of Westminster to say so, and how cowardly and naieve of the Scottish to believe it!)

Edward II. tried to complete his father's work, but the defeat at Bannockburn settled the question so far as he was concerned. Edward III. essayed the role of his grandfather, but although he overrun part of the kingdom, crowned a Baliol, and accepted his allegiance, his efforts bore no lasting fruit and Scotland remained as free and as threatening as ever. After his time no serious attempt to subjugate the country by force of arms was made by England, but diplomacy did not abandon the hope of accomplishing alone what it failed to do when assisted by the sword. The marriage of James IV. to Margaret Tudor was hailed as a forecast of a golden era of international peace and so it certainly proved, although not exactly as was expected; for on sea as well as on land Scotsmen carried on war with England, and the battle of Flodden was the last event in James reign. But through this marriage the great-grandson of James IV became the recognized heir to the English throne and ascended to it in 1603 as king over the whole island of Britain.

1.3) James VI : King of England - traitor to Scotland

In Scotland, Until it became probable that King James VI would be the successor of Queen Elizabeth, such a thing as a close political, indissoluble union was never thought about, or if it did enter the brains of some northern statesmen they took care never to give it expression. As conquest was the watchword on the southern side of the Tweed, so independence was the rallying cry on the north, and the heavier the blows of the English hammer the more stubborn and unyielding became the Scottish determination to maintain the national liberty. Commercial union, except to a very limited extent, was never attempted, for the ancient alliance between Scotland and France interfered and hampered any efforts or negotiations in that direction. The Continent formed a better field for the buying and exchanging of merchandise than Scottish merchants could find in England.

(Now we are here again, the arrogant English and those too poorly informed to understand, will stand by whilst our links to a stronger trade Besides. the maintenance of close relations with the " auld ally " was often necessary to prevent too unscrupulous advances on the part of the auld enemy.

When James VI ascended the English throne and became James I of Great Britain, the rejoicing in Scotland was great. A Scotsman, a descendant of Bruce, ruled over the English, and fulfilled the old prophecy about the old coronation stone of Scone, which had been stolen and carried to Westminster Abbey by Edward I One of the versions of the prophecy was:

Wherever fate this stone may bring
There a Scotsman shall be king

and so it proved. Then the long war was over, the danger of the country being devastated or the towns despoiled or burned by invading armies was at an end; the Borders were no longer to be a " debatable land " where warlike weapons were oftener in use than agricultural implements, and where feud, foray, raid, assault, greiving, rueing, and quarreling made up the daily routine of life. It was thought that the whole of England lay at the feet of Scotland, and that the mercantile progress of the country was assured. With two such fields of operations as France and England, the prospects of the Scottish merchants seemed to be of the most glowing description. They would enjoy all the benefits of a complete union with England without losing one iota of their country's independence, or without political interference from the new ally, and the national vanity was gratified by seeing a Scottish king wielding the sceptre of Edward I . The union for which Longshanks fought had come to pass, but Scotland was the victor

1.4) James VI : Embraces London - and forgets Scotland

But it was a dream. The pleasant anticipations had really no foundation, and the discovery was made that two countries might have the same king without having their individual interests thereby amalgamated. Neither in England or Scotland could it be said that the king was the State, although James VI. and his successor foolishly believed that such was the case. In Scotland the first result of James' accession to the throne of England was the impoverishment of the country. Most of the nobility followed him in his progress to the South, the court was deserted, the adventurous spirits tried their luck in London, trade was dispersed, and instead of English gold flowing into Scotland,the opposite was the case.

Scottish merchants did not fare very well in the dealings they attempted with their new southern allies, and in every way possible the latter showed their contempt for their northern fellow-subjects. Scotland gained nothing from the good fortune of the king but peace, and was a loser in many essential points.

Had James been a statesman instead of a conceited pedant, things might have been very different, but his notions, practice, and policy, seemed rather to separate the nations than to draw the bonds of fraternity and friendship around them. He affected to despise the Scottish people and joined readily in the laughter of his new courtiers at their poverty and ignorance, compared with the wealth and wisdom of London and other centres in England

(And so it continues to this day. Rich " Scottish Lords " in the pockets of Westminster interest groups, schooled in Eton, steeped in Sandhurst and left with attitudes that would make the Bruce and any Scottish patriot sick to the stomach.) The poverty of the nobility of the North and their eagerness for choice positions in the court of the British Soloman were in marked contrast to the munificence of the Southern barons, while the subserviency of the Episcopal priesthood, as well as the semi-papal magnificence of the Episcopal ritual and churches, were more pleasing to the silly mind of the monarch than the cold, bleak kirks north of the Tweed, or the haranguings, disputations, criticisms, and fault-findings of the Presbyterian clergy. King James really did attempt in one way to unite both countries, but his base of operations, interfering with the religious liberty of the Scottish people, was wrong, and he adopted the old English theory of submission and conquest. He desired one form of religion to prevail over the entire island, and the form which found favor in his eyes was that which obtained in England and of which he was the supreme head. James had always been in favour of an Episcopal form of Church government. In 1606, however, after he was firmly seated on the English throne, James got the Scottish Parliament to pass an act restoring the bishoprics, and three new bishops: Glasgow, Brechin and Galloway, were at once consecrated. From this act sprung the Covenanting movement, which made the relations between the countries as severely strained as ever, and gave to Scottish history many of its grander and nobler incidents, although it caused havoc and bloodshed all over the land. In the wars between Charles I and his parliaments, Scotland bore her share, and the trickery of that king often led her into positions which her own devotion to the Royal House of Stuart on one hand, and her love of political liberty on the other, could not harmonize, much less justify.

The people became divided between sentiment and duty, and the result of the division was that Cromwell completely overran the country and reduced it to a greater degree of subjection than did any of the Plantagenets.

Cromwell understood the requirements of a real union better than the divine right rulers, and , after tranquilizing the country by force, he put his statesmanlike ideas into action. His scheme of union was ratified in 1654, and by it thirty members of the British Parliament were to be chosen in Scotland. Free trade was established between the two countries , and feudal dues and restrictions were abolished.

(Its a pity current " Clan chiefs " who clear tennant farmers off " their " land do not realise they are treating human beings like peasants 300 hundred years ago. Still, these " chiefs " have the ingrained arrogance of the Southern English loving nobles from the Scottish 17th century)

Under this firm rule trade and commerce revived, public confidence in the stability of government increased, civil wars and private broils were at and end, and the middle and lower classes were better off han they had been for several generations.

But, as usual, Scotland had to pay dearly for her " whustle " The taxation of the protectorate was excessive - often as high as ten thousand pounds a month, and the presence of English soldiers and some English judges caused a feeling of humiliation to sadden the otherwise pleasant outlook.

( Sounds familiar. Its a gauling sight to see the " Union Jack " flying over Edinburgh Castle. Its Scotlands capital, and this flag symbolises the continuing dominance and interference that London enforces on Scotland. What is worse is the Tories admit they have robbed Scottish tax payers of 27 billion pounds (40 billion dollars) over the last 18 years or so in tax.... what changes? They thieve as much now from the Scots as they did 300 years ago
The big question is, will the Scottish people keep their heads in the sand and keep scrambling for crumbs that fall from Westminster's lofty, laden tables, or realise they have a strong economy and destiny to follow separate from that interference.)

The restoration of Charles II dissipated all the good that the wise measures of Cromwell had inaugurated. The Navigation Act rescinded the free trade privilege, Episcopacy was re-established, the covenant persecution became bitter and cruel. The " Drunken Parliament " passed a law in 1662 which forced 350 Presbyterian ministers to resign their charges rather than violate the dictates of their consciences.
The Sanquhar " declaration " of Richard Cameron and Donald Cargill, in which it was widly stated that King Charles had forfeited the crown by his treachery, and that it was perfectly justifiable for anyone to kill him or his brother and heir-apparent, the Duke of York, expressed the views of the most extreme sect among the Covenanters' as to the cause for the terrible condition of things under which the country suffered. But all classes of people were more or less discontented, except perhaps a few nincompoop noblemen and courtiers whose consciences were as weak and whose debaucheries were as disgusting as their divine-right master's. Under the misgovernment of Charles, the entente cordiale between the two countries was wiped out of existence, and such sanguinary encounters as Drumclog and Bothwell Bridge made the question of union become as visionary as it was in the days of James V. Charles' brother did not mend matters during the three years he was permitted to occupy the throne, and the Under the guidance of Principal Carstaires the government of William and Mary commenced well in Scotland. Episcopacy was again pulled down and what is known as the Revolution Settlement made Presbyterianism paramount north of the Tweed. William probably intended to give Scotland a good and generous administration in which justice, peace and civil and religious liberty were to be the features. But the wild although brilliant campaign of Dundee showed him that the main hope for the security of his crown lay in England. His ignorance of the country caused his administration to be disgraced by many mistakes, of which the massacre of Glencoe was the most famous and most glaring, while his leaning towards England governed his conduct in connection with the Darien scheme.

William and his advisers, however, saw that such a condition of ill-feeling could not long exist between the two countries without open warfare being the result, especially as James II and his son were in France, ready to seize any emergency which pointed to restoration, and the question of a complete political and commercial union became a foremost topic in the court.

(Beware of Westminster politicians decrying the European Union, they are more concerned about their power being diluted than the well being of the people they represent. Sir James Goldsmith, multi millionaire, money made in Europe is a noted anti-European, what does he and others like him know they will lose when all Europe trades as one tighter knit unit?)

1.5) The English give their throne to the House of Hanover

Just as the English Parliament began seriously to consider the question King William died, March 8, 1701. The death of the king was not regarded as a calamity m Scotland. William had died from the effects of a fall from his horse, which stumbled on a mole-hill, and the innocent mole was toasted in Scotland very kindly by Whigs as well as Jacobites as "the little gentleman in the black velvet coat " whose work had brought a Stuart again to the throne.

But the accession of Queen Anne, although it pleased all parties, brought the question of union or no union home to both countries in a very direct and importunate fashion. The queen was childless, and on the happy settlement of the succession to the throne depended the future peace and prosperity of the island. Remembering the past, and especially with the Darien fiasco foremost in contemporary history, the Scottish Estates determined to maintain their entire independence of England. In 1700, the year before William's death, the English Parliament passed an Act of Settlement, by which the crown, upon the death of Anne without heirs, was to go to the Princess Sophia, Electress Dowager of Hanover, and her heirs. It was expected that the Scottish Estates would follow the example of the Southern Parliament and pass a similar law, seeing that the electress was the direct descendant of James VI., and that thus the crowns would remain united and peace continue to prevail.

(Now we have the Windsors, who, with a family name change, sit upon the English throne. Not an English nor Scottish family at root, but a family whose predecessors murdered Mary Queen of Scots.)

But neither the Scottish Estates nor the Scottish people were willing to follow the English lead in this important matter, and, instead of an Act of Settlement, an Act of Security was passed. This enactment provided that should Anne die without leaving any children, the whole power of the crown was to be centred in the Scottish Parliament until it had chosen a successor to her, and the said successor was to be of the royal line and of the Protestant religion. The new sovereign was to rule only under such conditions as would preserve the independence of the crown and the nation from any English or other foreign intrigues or machinations, and was not to be permitted to wear the crowns of the two countries unless the Scots were to have equal trading and navigation privileges with England.

(Here we touch upon taxes that Westminster imposes on Scotland illegally, including the tax on Whisky production!)

The act also made provision for the raising of an army of such size as to make its requirements be respected whenever occasion should arise. This act was favourably received by all sections of the community, and a general sentiment in favor of entire separation from England was openly expressed unless entire commercial equality was to prevail between the countries. In the South the act was regarded in the light of a defiance, and such it certainly was, and several enactments of the English Parliament tended to widen the breach between the peoples. An inopportune incident also happened just at that critical juncture which might have resulted in absolute separation, had not the queens advisers acted with a degree of shrewdness which Englishmen had seldom if ever before shown in connection with Scotch affairs.

1.6) Blockaded ports, Trade wars: England seeks domination. Why not make Scotland a colony?

The Scottish ship Annandale, which was lying in the Thames ready to start on a trading voyage to India, was seized in 1704 by the English East India Company,as the latter did not care to have Scottish merchants interfering with the trade of a country which they held in monopoly.
The act aroused much indignation in Scotland, and was taken as an evidence that the English would not permit Northern traders to have equal commercial rights with them even in territories subject to the common sovereign, and made the idea of any union or surrender of rights be further away than ever. Soon after a chance for reprisal offered Itself when the English vessel Worcester, another India trader, was forced into the Forth Estuary, off Edinburgh, by stress of weather. The vessel was seized, and, from some remarks made when in liquor by one of the crew, it was soon believed that they had been concerned in the murder of the captain and crew of one of the Darien vessels which was missing. Captain Thomas Green, of the Worcester,his mate and crew, fifteen men in all, were arrested and tried before the Court of Admiralty in Edinburgh burgh for their lives. Popular feeling ran high against them, and the facts that the Worcesterwas better armed than was usual with vessels of her class, and that among her papers a cipher was found, made it clear to the agitated minds of the people that the ship was a pirate instead of a trader. When the trial came off it was found that there was really no evidence against Captain Green, and had his crew not contained several cowards it is questionable If the court would have convicted any one. But one person testified that the Worcester on the Coromandel coast had boarded and captured a vessel bearing a red flag and manned by people speaking the English language. They threw the crew overboard and sold the ship and cargo. Hearsay evidence was given by another crewman and by the ship's surgeon, the supercargo's mate, the ship's cooper, and a seaman, and a local witness testified that Captain Green had shown him a seal having the arms of the Scottish African and Indian Company. The entire evidence was of the most flimsy description, but the jury turned every surmise into a fact and answered the popular clamour for the blood of the prisoners by bringing in a verdict finding, them all guilty. A disposition was shown in several quarters to obtain a reprieve from the crown for the condemned, but the very suggestion aroused the populace to frenzy and the effort was not persisted in. In April, 1705, Captain Green, his mate, and a gunner were conveyed to Leith amidst the curses of the people and executed. This consummation seemed to allay the popular wrath, and no effort was made to bring about the execution of the others.

Of course all this aroused a strong feeling in England but it shoved the statesmen on both sides of the Tweed the necessity for a complete union, and that such a union could only be accomplished by concessions from both parties. The English wished to retain their colonial and continental trade; the Scottish were determined to retain their own laws and their own independence. To illustrate the condition of affairs by a modern example, the Scots were in favor of commercial union, the English favored annexation pure and simple.

(This sounds familiar too. Westminster sees its hold over Scotland failing but it plays the Europeans as a common enemy as they no longer have the power to annex anything!)

To harmonize these diverse interests was the task of the hour, and, hurried on by the events connected with the fate of Captain Green, Queen Anne and her ministry, headed by Godolphin, essayed to solve it. The entire matter was referred to a body of English and Scottish commissioners selected by the queen's advisers, care being taken to appoint only those who were known to be in favor of a close union between the countries.

(This scenario has been played out again by those who would keep Scotland a subdued nation by the self appointed quango called the constitutional convention, including church men, whose predecessors in the 17th century sold their nation JUST to keep their church. Their views, report and proposals can be no more trusted those sycophants appointed by Anne three centuries ago.)

1.7) Scotland the Bribed (1706) - Treachery in the Cloisters

Into the details of the negotiations and discussions between the commissioners there is no need of entering here, and a Scotsman could hardly chronicle them without a feeling of shame. No matter how much the treaty may have benefited Scotland, there is no doubt that the Scottish commissioners agreed to many of its provisions after being liberally bribed by the English, and gold and fair promises of future honors and promotions caused a majority of the Scottish Estates to ratify the treaty. The nobility of Scotland in the reign of Queen Anne were just as ready to sell their country as were their predecessors in the time of Wallace and at other critical epochs in the history of the land. Of course there were honorable exceptions such as Lord Belhaven - whose speech against the union was a noble and unanswerable piece of eloquence, although Lord Marchmont, with a bribe of 1104 pounds in his pocket, pronounced it a dream but the exceptions were not numerous enough to save the roll of (The lesson to be learned here for the Scottish people is plain. Trust no one who tells you how good the " union " is. Trust no one whose " noble " family background appears to lend support to their pro-unionist views. Trust no Englishman who says Scotland cannot stand as a nation, free and unfettered once again. And certainly do not trust the Tory and unionist controlled media, who with the noted and splendid exception of Grampian TV, is firmly in the grasp, and perhaps bank account, of those who deny Scotland its right to self determination.)

The only section of the community which came out of the negotiations with any degree of honour was the Church, and at its behest an act for securing Presbyterianism in the land was passed ant appended to the treaty. The entire Union measure, however, was received with the utmost abhorrence by the people. Riots in Glasgow, Edinburgh and elsewhere made many tremble lest the populace would overrule the law and overturn the government unless military measures were resorted to, and many of the leading advocates and signers of the treaty had to resort to flight or concealment to protect their lives.

1.8) What Robert Burns: Poet and Patriot said

The following lines by Robert Burns, fairly express the sentiments entertained in Scotland regarding the treaty and its advocates:

Fairweel  to a' ou Scottish fame, 
Fareweel our ancient glory;
Fareweel e'en to the Scottish name, 
Sae famed in martial story.
Now Sark runs o'er the Solway sands,
And Tweed runs to the ocean
To mark where England's province stands
---> Such a parcel of rogues in a nation.   <----
What force or guile could not subdue
Through many warlike ages
Is wrought now by a coward few
For hireling trators' wages.
The English steel we could disdain,
Secure in valor's station,
But English gold has been our bane
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation.
O would, or I had seen the day
That treason thus could sell us
My auld grey head had lain in clay
Wi'  Bruce an' loyal Wallace.
But pith and power, till my last hour
I'll make this declaration,
----> we're bought and sold for English gold <-----
Such a parcel of rogues in a nation. 

( This poem says it all. There was no " Act of Union " . It was a foul act perpetrated on the Scottish people, paid for in gold and favours. Burns says he'd rather rest in peace with Scotlands true and honoured patriots than live on in a land whose so called nobility had sold their country for English gold )

The treaty itself, which, with the rider referring to the Church, is here given in full, is deserving of careful study at the present day, when the air is full of rumours as to political changes, and when the development of home-rule theories and the evident growth of a sentiment in favor imperial confederation may lead to movements or encourage legislation in which what is left of the distinct nationality of Scotland may be swept away or be still further obscured. In the notes I have endeavoured briefly to throw light upon various provisions of the treaty, and incidentally to illustrate the cowardice and knavery of the Scotch commissioners:

(If nothing in this treaty or its description raises your interest, this should. Westminster has been blocking, through idle chat, Scotlands return as a nation state for many a year. They were talking about devolved parliaments in 1898! Imagine, you voted Labour to get a parliament that London will control, you have wasted your vote....)

2.1) The preface of the Act of Union


The Estates of Parliament considering that articles of Union of the Kingdoms of Scotland and England were agreed on the 22nd of July 1706 years, by the commissioners nominated on behalf of this kingdom, under Her Majesty's Great Seal of Scotland, bearing date the 27th of February last past, in pursuance of the fourth Act of the third Session of this Parliament, and the commissioners nominated on behalf of the kingdom of England, under Her Majesty's Great Seal of England, bearing date at Westminster the 10th day of April last past, in pursuance of an Act of Parliament made in England the third year of Her Majesty's reign, to treat of and concerning a union of the said kingdoms; which articles were, in all humility, presented to Her Majesty upon the 23rd of the said month of July, and were recommended to this Parliament by Her Majesty's royal letter of the date the 31st day of July, 1706; and that the said Estates of Parliament have agreed to, and approven of the said Articles of Union, with some additions.

That the two kingdoms of Scotland and England shall, upon the Ist day of May next ensuing the date hereof, and for ever after, be united into one kingdom by the name of Great Britain,[*] and that the ensigns armorial of the said United Kingdom be such as Her Majesty shall appoint, and the crosses of St. Andrew and St. George be conjoined in such manner as Her Majesty shall think fit, [**] and used in all flags, banners, standards and ensigns, both at sea and land.

[*] This clause in the treaty, it is claimed by the Scot, has virtually become a dead letter as far at least as the English are concerned. Everything is " English " Scotland is ignored and Great Britain is seldom talked about. " The English Parliament," " the English army" are the usual terms in which the British House of Commons and British soldiers are mentioned. This has naturally aroused much indignation in Scotland, and public protests on the platform and the press are frequent. There is no doubt that there is good ground for complaint, but candour compels me to acknowledge that the Scots are equally great sinners in this regard. If a Scot becomes famous either in the army, the navy, literature, science or art, the Scottish newspapers and public speakers do not call him a Briton, but glory in the fact that he is a Scot The best result of the agitation on this theme is to keep alive a popular knowledge pn both sides of the Tweed that the treaty of union between the two kingdoms really [**] This was suggested by the Scots commissioners as being the readiest way of settling a matter which, although trivial in itself, might have caused considerable trouble.

(The Union Jack, a flag that many colonials learned to fear during the imperial past! the last real colonies being Hong Kong and Scotland. Remember, you now know these so called commissioners were paid for their support, they did not represent the views of the Scottish public. Many historians point to the Jacobite as the seperatists, however, the act of union fired riots in lowland Scotland - very few Scotsmen agreed with it.)

II  That the succession to the monarchy of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, and of the dominions thereunto belonging, after Her Most Sacred Majesty, and in default of issue of Her Majesty, be, remain, and continue to the most Excellent Princess Sophia, Electoress and Duchess Dowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants, upon whom the crown of England Is settled by an Act of Parliament made in England in the twelfth year of the reign of His late Majesty King William III., entltuled, "An Act for the further Limitation of the Crown, and better securing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject :" And that all Papists, and persons marrying Papists, shall be excluded from, and for ever incapable to inherit, possess, or enjoy the Imperial Crown of Great Britain, and the dominions thereunto belonging or any part thereof, and in every such case the Crown and Govermnent shall, from time to time, descend to, and be enjoyed by such person, being a P
III  That the United Kingdom of Great Britain be represented by one and the same Parliament, to be styled the Parliament of Great Britain.[***]

[***]The Adoption of this article did away with an office - that of Lord Chancellor off Scotland which had existed since the time of Alexander 1 (an old Scottish King), and had been held by many of the brightest men In the country. The Lord Chancellor presided over the Scottish Parliament was the head of the judicial system, the chief adviser of the King and keeper of the great seal. The Lord Chancellor at the time the treaty was passed was the Earl Of Seafield. He was a zealous advocate in its favor and gladly accepted his share of the plunder which was distributed among noblemen of his stamp. On April 22nd, 1707. when the Scottish Parliament broke up for the last time, Seafield, In his glee at the fulfillment of a work in which he took such a prominent part, said with grim humour, " There is the end of an auld sang." A brother of this ignoble scoundrel characterized his conduct at the time in fitting terms. Seafield had objected to his brother trading in cattle as being derogatory to the family rank. " Take your own tale hame," said the brother; " I only sell nowt (cattle), but you sell nations ".

IV  That all the subjects of the United Kingdom of Great Britain shall, from and after the Union, have full freedom and intercourse of trade and navigation, to and from any port or place within the said United Kingdom, and the dominions and plantations thereunto belonging, and that there be a communication of all other rights, privileges, and advantages which do or may belong to the subjects of either kingdom, except where it is otherwise expressly agreed in these articles.

. That all ships or vessels belonging to her Majesty's subjects of Scotland, at the time of ratifying the Treaty of Union of the two kingdoms in the Parliament of Scotland, though foreign built, be deemed and pass as ships of the build of Great Britain. The owner, or, where there are more owners, one or more of the owners, within twelve months after the 1st of May next, making oath that at the time of ratifying the Treaty of Union in the Parliament of Scotland, the same did, in whole or in part, belong to him or them, or to some other subject or subjects of Scotland, to be particularly named, with the place of their respective abodes, and that the same doth then, at the time of the said deposition, wholly belong to him or them, and that no foreigner, directly or indirectly, hath any share, part, or interest therein; which oath shall be made before the chief officer or officers of the customs, in the port next to the abode of the said owner or owners; and the
VI  That all parts of the United Kingdom forever,from and after the Union, shall have the same allowances, encouragements, and drawbacks, and be under the same prohibitions, restrictions, and regulations of trade, and liable to the same customs and duties on import and export; and that the allowances, encouragements, and drawbacks. prohibitions, restrictions, and regulations of trade, and the customs and duties on import and export settled in England, when the Union commences, shall, from and after the Union, take place throughout the whole United Kingdom **** excepting and reserving the duties upon export and import of such particular commodities from which any persons, the subjects of either kingdom, are specially liberated and exempted by their private rights, which after the Union are to remain safe and entire to them, in all respects, as before the same; and that, from and after the Union, no Scots cattle carried into England shall be liable to [****]This clause was bitterly opposed by Scottish merchants. who thought it involved the ruin of their own trade with the Continent, as it brought them to a level with the competition of Southern traders. They did not see the use of having free-trade with England while their own foreign trade was to be imperilled by restrictions, regulations and payments from which it had hither to been free

VII  That all parts of the United Kingdom be forever from and after the Union, liable to the same excises upon all excisable liquors, excepting only that the thirty four gallons English barrel of beer or ale, amounting to twelve gallons Scots, present measure, sold in Scotland by the brewer at 9s. 6d. sterling, excluding all duties, and retailed, including duties and the retailer's profit, at 2d. the Scots pint, or eighth part of the Scots gallon, be not, after the Union, liable, on account of the present excise upon excisable liquors in England, to any higher imposition than 2s sterling upon the aforesaid thirty-four gallons English barrel, being twelve gallons the present Scots measure, and that the excise settled in England on all other liquors, when the Union commences, take place throughout the whole United Kingdom.***** WHISKY WHISKY WHISKY......
[****] This section was regarded with popular disfavour in Scotland. Prior to the Union the excise in Scotland was farmed out in the different districts, and the collections were easy and were made according to the convenience of those who had to pay. The business was really transacted by neighbours in a neighbourly fashion. After the Union the Boards of excise controlled from London introduced a stricter regime, with severe penalties for infringement of the law or delinquency in payments.
VIII  That, from and after the Union, all foreign salt which shall be imported into Scotland shall be charged, at the importation there, with the same duties as the like salt is now charged with, being imported into England, and to be levied and secured in the same manner. But in regard the duties of great quantities of foreign salt imported may be very heavy on the merchants importers, That therefore all foreign salt imported into Scotland shall be cellared and locked up under the custody of the merchant importer and the officers employed for levying the duties upon salt; and that the merchant may have what quantities thereof his occasion may require, not under a weigh of forty bushels at a time, giving security for the duty of what quantity he receives, payable in six months; but Scotland shall, for the space of seven years from the said Union, be exempted from paying in Scotland for salt made there the duty or excise now payable for salt made in England; [*****] Taken as a whole, the commercial clauses in th Treaty were eminently fair, and, if anything, Scotland had the advantage. The English commissioners were not merchants and probably held commerce as a secondary consideration to whatever political advantages they might gain. (Now we have come to the close of the 20th century with Europe facing the brightest future in its history. The very real possibility of stable and predictable financial transactions - heralded by a single European currency appears to frighten off the Tories, whose main concern now is appears to be that the bank of England would lose its iron grip on the English and Scottish economies...)

IX  That whenever the sum of £ 1,997,763 8s. 4½d. shall be enacted by the Parliament of Great Britain, to be raised in that part of the United Kingdom now called England, on land and other things usually charged in Acts of Parliament there for granting an aid to the Crown by a land tax, that part of the United Kingdom now called Scotland shall be charged by the same Act with a further sum of £ 48,000 free of all charges, as the quota of Scotland to such tax, and so proportionally for any greater or lesser sum raised in England by any tax on land, and other things usually charged, together with the land; and that such quota for Scotland, in the cases aforesaid, be raised and collected in the same manner as the cess now is in Scotland but subject to such regulations in the manner of collecting as shall be made by the Parliament of Great Britain.******

[******]That is to say, Scotland agreed to pay one fortieth of the direct taxation of the United Kingdom,and , on the ground that representation should be regulated by taxation, many hold that the English commisioners were particularly generous in allowing the Scots the number of parliamentary representatives they did. (And again, at the end of the 20th Century, the Scots do still have a good proportion of MPs in Westminster. However, the Scots are being robbed blind with taxes as the treasury has admitted, and those Scottish MPs can never sway the view of the 400 or so English MP's to pay any particular attention to Scottish issues, unless of course they dare to mention the break up of this most unfair and subtly oppressive union!)

That during the continuance of the respective duties on stamped paper, vellum, and parchment, by several Acts now in force in England, Scotland shall not be charged with the same respective duties

XI  That during the continuance of the duties payable in England on windows and lights, which determines on the 1st day of August, 1710, Scotland shall not be charged with the same duties.

XII  That during the continuance of the duties payable in England on coals, culm, and cinders, which determines the 30th day of September, 1710, Scotland shall not be charged therewith for coals, culm, and cinders consumed there, but shall be charged with the same duties as in England for all coal, culm, and cinders not consumed in Scotland.

XIII  That during the continuance of the duty payable in England on malt, which determines the 4th day of June 1707, Scotland shall not be charged with that duty

XIV  That the kingdom of Scotland be not charged with any other duties laid on by the Parliament of England before the Union, except those consented to in this Treaty, in regard, it is agreed, that all necessary provisions shall be made by the Parliament of Scotland for the public charge and service of that kingdom for the year 1707, provided nevertheless, that if the Parliament of England shall think fit to lay any further impositions by way of customs or such excises, with which, by virtue of this Treaty, Scotland is to be charged equally with England, in such case Scotland shall be liable to the same customs and excises, and have an equivalent to be settled by the Parliament of Great Britain; with this further provision, that any malt to be made and consumed in that part of the United Kingdom now called Scotland shall not be charged with any imposition upon malt during this present war. And seeing it cannot be supposed that the Parliament

(Here we have a splendid example of how Westminster has broken the law, and imposed an illegal tax on the people of Scotland. Margaret Thatcher, may be a recognised statesman , however, under her regime the poll tax was enforced in Scotland at least 15 months BEFORE anywhere else in the " UK ". This ws in direct violation of the " Act of Union " you are now reading. Does anyone know of some aggressive, bright young lawyers anywhere in Europe who would like to investigate a class action suite filed against Westminster, on behalf of the people of Scotland who were damaged by this illegal tax? It would make the headlines and make brilliant careers for those who could make the point, let alone secure damages, even if they be one penny....)

[******] This article,and the four preceding,were merely introduced for the temporary protection of Scotland.

XV  Whereas by the terms of this Treaty the subjects of Scotland, for preserving an equality of trade throughout the United Kingdom, will be liable to several customs and excises now payable in England, which will be applicable towards payment of the debts of England contracted before the Union, it is agreed that Scotland shall have an equivalent for what the subjects thereof shall be so charged towards payment of the said debts of England in all particulars whatsoever in manner following, viz., that before the union of the said kingdoms the sum of £ 398,085 10s. be granted to Her Majesty by the Parliament of England for the uses after mentioned, being the equivalent to be answered to Scotland for such parts of the said customs and excises upon all excisable liquors with which that kingdom is to be charged upon the Union as will be applicable to the payment of the said debts of England, according to the proportions which the present customs in Scotland, [*]Most of the public debts herein referred to were arrearages of salary to public officials.

This article is the keystone of the treaty, and but for it the document would never have become law, It provided a fund from which the Scottish commissioners and others might be bribed to consent to all its provisions, either directly or indirectly.

Men who sold their country out

Scottish " nobles " who sold out their country
NAME Amount of Bribe £
Duke of Montrose 200
Duke of Athole 1000
Duke of Roxburgh 500
Marquis of Tweeddale 1000
Earl of Marchmont 1104
Earl of Cromarty 300
Earl of Balcarres 500
Earl of Dunmore 200
Earl of Eglinton 200
Earl of Forfar 100
Earl of Glen Cairn 100
Earl of Kintore 200
Earl of Findlater 100
Earl of Seafield 490
Lord Prestonhall 200
Lord Ormiston 200
Lord Anstruther 300
Lord Fraser 100
Lord Polwarth 50
Lord Forbes 50
Lord Elibank 50
Lord Banff 11 !!!!
Provost of Ayr 100

Well may we exclaim, " Such a parcel of rogues in a nation." That a peer should sell his vow and his country for £ 11 may be regarded as about the most contemptible transaction on record. Even the provost of Ayr got £ 100. The Lords Ordinary were to receive £ 500 a year instead of £ 100 and all the law servants of the crown received gratuities or increased salaries. When the story of this wholesale bribery became partly known the people were furious, and when the money was taken to Edinburgh to be divided the citizens could only be kept from destroying it by sheer force of arms. They regarded the gold in the closely guarded wagons as being the price paid in exchange for the delivery of the liberty of the kingdom into the hands of the English. Possibly had they realized that the money was to be repaid by Scotland into the British treasury, even the protection of the military we old have been insufficient to prevent the coffers and their contents being thrown into the Nor' Loch. As Sir The Darien scheme, the stock in which was largely held by the Scotch commissioners, the members of the Scottish Parliament, and the upper classes generally This was one of the most thoughtful schemes for making the bribery in connection with the Union be as widespread as possible that could be imagined. Even the Royal Burghs were stockholders.

XVI  That, from and after the Union, the coin shall be of the same standard and value throughout the United Kingdom as now in England, and a Mint shall be continued in Scotland under the same rules as the Mint in England; and the present officers of the Mint continued, subject to such regulations and alterations as Her Majesty, her heirs or successors, or the Parliament of Great Britain, shall think fit.

(Here we have another anomaly. Many English businesses will give you look if you try to use banknotes from a Scottish bank. They do realise that they have to accept the money under this treaty.
Also, I noticed at least two American banks give you less for a £ 20 Scottish banknote than a bank of England note!)

XVII  That, from and after the Union, the same weights and measures shall be used throughout the United Kingdom as are now established in England, and standards of weights and measures shall be kept by those burghs in Scotland to whom the keeping the standards of weights and measures, now in use there, does of special right belong; all which standards shall be sent down to such respective burghs from the standards kept in the exchequer at Westminster, subject, nevertheless, to such regulations as the Parliament of Great Britain shall think fit.

XVIII  That the laws concerning regulation of trade, customs, and such excises to which Scotland is, by virtue of this Treaty, to be liable, be the same in Scotland, from and after the Union, as in England, and that all other laws in use within the kingdom of Scotland do, after the Union, and notwithstanding thereof, remain in the same force as before (except such as are contrary to or inconsistent with this Treaty), but alterable by the Parliament of Great Britain; with this difference betwixt the laws concerning public right, policy, and civil government, and those which concern private right, that the laws which concern public right, policy, and civil government may be made the same throughout the whole United Kingdom, but that no alteration be made in laws which concern private right, except for evident utility of the subjects within Scotland.

XIX  That the Court of Session, or College of Justice, do, after the Union, and notwithstanding thereof, remain in all time coming within Scotland, as it is now constituted by the laws of that kingdom, and with the same authority and privileges as before the Union, subject, nevertheless, to such regulations, for the better administration of justice, as shall be made by the Parliament of Great Britain ; and that hereafter none shall be named by Her Majesty, or her royal successors, to be ordinary Lords of Session, but such who have served in the College of Justice as advocates, or principal clerks of Session, for the space of five years, or as Writers to the Signet for the space of ten years, with this provision, that no Writer to the Signet be capable to be admitted a Lord of the Session, unless he undergo a private and public trial on the civil law before the Faculty of Advocates, and be found by them qualified for the said office two years before he be name (The privy council appears to have been replaced by the Scottish office, which is of course a puppet of Westminster on a set of very tight strings. It implements Westminster policy in Scotland, but generally (although not always) does litlle to promote Scotlands interests. The Scottish Enterprise board is far more pro-active in supporting Scottish investment, but of course, the profits end up in Westmisters purse, see the £ 27 billion that Westminster has siphoned from Scotland in less than 20 years )

XX  That all heritable offices, superiorities, heritable jurisdictions, offices for life, and jurisdictions for life, be reserved to the owners thereof, as rights of property, in the same manner as they are now enjoyed by the laws of Scotland, notwithstanding of this Treaty.*

[*]The main purpose of this article was to continue the peers and their dependents in honourary or lucrative positions

XXI  That the rights and privileges of the royal burghs in Scotland, as they now are, do remain entire after the Union, and notwithstanding thereof.**

[**]The Royal Burghs did not appreciate the favor thus shown them, for as soon as the provisions of the treaty were made public they denounced it in unmeasured terms,. In a petition to the Queens commissioners and the Parliament, the Convention of Royal Burghs said: " Seeing, by the articles of Union, now under the consideration of the Honourable Estates of Parliament, it is agreed that Scotland and England shall be united into one kingdom; and that the united kingdoms be united by one and the same Parliament, by which our monarchy Is suppressed, our parliament extinguished, and in consequence our religion, church government, claim of right, laws, liberties, trade and all that is dear to us, daily in danger of being encroached upon, altered or wholly subverted by the English In a British Parliament, wherein the mean representation allowed for Scotland can never signify in securing to us the interest reserved by us, or granted to us by the English.
And by these articles our poor people are made liable to the English taxes which is a certain unsupportable burden, considering that the trade proposed is uncertain, involved and wholly precarious, especially when regulated as to export and import by the laws of England, and under the same prohibitions and restrictions, customs and duties. And considering that the most considerable branches of our trade are differing from those of England, and are, and may be yet more discouraged by their laws and that all the concerts of trade and our interest are, after the Union, subject to such alterations as the Parliament of Great Britain shall think fit:
We therefore supplicate your Grace [the Queen's representative] and the Honourable Estates of Parliament, and do assuredly expect that ye will not conclude such an Incorporate Union, as is contained in the articles proposed, but that ye will support and maintain the true Reformed Protestant Religion and Church Government, as by law established, the sovereignty and independency of this crown and kingdom, and the rights and privileges of (Scottish) Parliament. "

(Of course, the provost of Ayr {amongst others} was a man controlling a major burgh town. He and others like him sold Scottish nationhood for English gold! However, many of the Burghs soon realised how devisive the " union " was and tried, in vain, to scrap the act. Of course it was by then too late. )

XXII  That, by virtue of this Treaty, of the Peers of Scotland at the time of the Union, sixteen shall be the number to sit and vote in the House of Lords,*** and fortyfive the number of the representatives of Scotland in the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain; and that when Her Majesty, her heirs or successors, shall declare her or their pleasure for holding the first or any subsequent Parliament of Great Britain, until the Parliament of Great Britain shall make further provision therein, a writ do Issue under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom, directed to the Privy Council of Scotland, commanding them to cause sixteen Peers, who are to sit in the House of Lords, to be summoned to Parliament, and forty-five members to be elected to sit in the House of Commons of the Parliament of Great Britain, according to the agreement in this Treaty, in such manner as by a subsequent Act of this present session of the Parliament of Scotland [***] This article probably aroused a more bitter opposition than any other. The Scots did not anticipate in consenting to a single parliament that Scotland's representation in it would be so meagre. The Scottish Commoners thought that all their peers would get seats in the British House of Lords, and that their share in the House of Commons should be 170 at least. The English at first placed the figures at 16 Lords And 30 Commoners, and for a time it seemed as though all negotiations were at an end. The compromise of 45 Commoners was finally accepted.

On this point Sir Walter Scott writes: " It was loudly urged that a kingdom resigning her ancient independence, should at least obtain in the great national council a representation bearing the same proportion the Population of Scotland did to that of England, which was one to six. If this rule, which seems the fairest that could be found, had been adopted, Scotland would have sent sixty-six members to the United Parliament. * * * The Scottish peerage were to preserve all the other privileges of their rank, but their right of sitting in parliament and acting as hereditary legislators, was to be greatly limited
Only sixteen of their number were to enjoy Seats in the British House of Lords and these were to be chosen by election from the whole body. Such peers as were amongst the number of Commissioners were induced to consent to this degradation of their order by the assurance that they themselves should be created British peers, so as to give them, personally, by charter, the right which the sixteen could only Acquire by election. "

The English view is thus stated by Hallam, in his " Constitutional History of England ":
" The ratio of population would indeed have given Scotland About one eighth of the legislative body, instead of something less than one twelfth, but no government, except the merest democracy, is settled on the sole basis of numbers; and If the comparison of wealth and of public contributions was to be admitted it may be thought that a country which stipulated for itself to pay less than one-fortieth of direct taxation, was not entitled to a much greater share of the representation than it obtained. Comparing the two ratios of population and property there seems little objection to this part of the union."

(Of course the argument is academic nowadays. Although Scotland is well represented in the number of MPs (parliamentary members) it returns to Westminster in London, they are always outnumbered by non-Scottish MPs. The two major " UK " parties, Labour and Conservative (Tory)- have little to no interest in Scotlands welfare. The Labour party has many Labour voters and seats it wants to keep in Scotland, so they pay lip service to Scottish nationhood. The Tories do not give a hoot what the Scottish want or think, they regard Scotland as a backwater, a colony which can be manipulated and treated as any colony was in Imperial days. Both Labour and Tory use the Scottish office to exert Westminsters will on the Scottish people. Only the Scottish Nationalist Party understands the truth, but the media does not give it TV air time or press coverage to explain to the Scots how they are being degraded and exploited. Of course the media and press are comfortably in the pocket of Westminster. Who knows what " incentives " are offered to the owners and editors NOT to promote, and actually stifle the truth)

XXIII  That the foresaid sixteen peers of Scotland, mentioned in the last preceding article, to sit in the House of Lords of the Parliament of Great Britain, shall have all privileges of Parliament which the peers of England now have, and which they or any peers of Great Britain shall have after the Union, and particularly the right of sitting upon the trials of peers; and in case of the trial of any peer in time of adjournment or prorogation of Parliament, the said sixteen peers shall be summoned in the same manner and have the same powers and privileges at such trial as any other peers of Great Britain. And that, in case any trials of peers shall hereafter happen when there is no Parliament in being, the sixteen peers of Scotland who sat in the last preceding Parliament shall be summoned in the same manner and have the same powers and privileges at such trials as any other peers of Great Britain. And that all peers of Scotland, and their successors to the
XXIV  That, from and after the Union, there be one Great Seal for the United Kingdom of Great Britain, which shall be different from the Great Seal now used in either kingdom; and that the quartering the arms and the rank and precedency of the Lyon King of Arms of the kingdom of Scotland, as may best suit the Union, be left to her Majesty; anti that, in the meantime, the Great Seal of England be used as the Great Seal of the United Kingdom, and that the Great Seal of the United Kingdom be used for sealing writs to elect and summon the Parliament of Great Britain, and for sealing all treaties with foreign princes and states, and all public acts, instruments, and orders of state which concern the whole United Kingdom, and in all other matters relating to England, as the Great Seal of England is now used; and that a seal in Scotland, after the Union, be always kept, and made use of in all things relating to private rights or grants, which have usually passed th [*]A new office was appointed in carrying out this article, that of Keeper of the Great Seal in Scotland. The sent was formerly kept by the Lord Chancellors of the kingdom
XXV  That all laws and statutes in either kingdom, so far as they are contrary to or inconsistent with the terms of these articles, or any one of them, shall, from and after the Union cease and become void, and shall be so declared to be by the respective Parliaments of the said kingdoms.

Church of Scotland paid off for signing up to the Treaty of Union 1707

follows the tenor of the aforesaid Act for securing the Protestant Religion and Presbyterian Church Government in Scotland **

Our Sovereign Lady and the Estates of Parliament, considering that, by the late Act of Parliament for a Treaty with England for an Union of both kingdoms, it is provided, That the Commissioners for that Treaty should not treat of or concerning any alteration of the worship, discipline, and government of the Church of this kingdom, as now by law established; which Treaty being now reported to the Parliament, and it being reasonable and necessary that the true Protestant religion, as presently professed within this kingdom, with the worship, discipline, and government of this Church, should be effectually and unalterably secured;
(Here is where the Scottish Church sold its countrymen, history and Nationhood for its faith, why believe those ministers now in the so called " constitutional convention "? )
therefore Her Majesty, with advice and consent of the said Estates of Parliament, doth hereby establish and confirm the said true Protestant religion, and the worship, discipline, and government of this Church to continue without any alteration to the people of this land in all succeeding generations; and more especially, Her Majesty, with advice and consent foresaid, ratifies, approves, and forever confirms the fifth Act of the first Parliament of King William and Queen Mary, entitled " Act Ratifying the Confession of Faith, and Settling Presbyterian Church Government," with the whole other Acts of Parliament relating thereto, in prosecution of the Declaration of the Estates of this kingdom, containing the Claim of Right, bearing date the 11th of April, 1689; and Her Majesty, with advice and consent foresaid, expressly provides and declares that the foresaid true Protestant religion contained in the above-mentioned Confession of Faith, with the form and purity of worship presently in use within this Church And further, Her Majesty, with advice foresaid, expressly declares and statutes, That none of the subjects of this kingdom shall be liable to, but all and every one of them forever free of any oath, test, or subscription, within this kingdom, contrary to or inconsistent with the foresaid true Protestant religion and Presbyterian Church government, worship, and discipline, as above established; and that the same, within the bounds of this Church and kingdom, shall never be imposed upon, or required of them in any sort. And lastly, that after the decease of Her present Majesty (whom God long preserve), the sovereign succeeding to her in the Royal Government of the kingdom of Great Britain shall, in all time coming, at his or her accession to the Crown, swear and subscribe that they shall inviolably maintain and preserve the foresaid settlement of the true Protestant religion, with the government, worship, discipline, right, and privileges of this Church, as above established by the laws of this kingdom, in pr of the Claim of Right. And it is hereby statute and ordained, that this Act of Parliament, with the establishment therein contained, shall be held and observed, in all time coming, as a fundamental and essential condition of any Treaty of Union to be concluded betwixt the two kingdoms, without any alteration thereof, or derogation thereto, in any sort forever. As also, that this Act of Parliament, and settlement therein contained, shall be insert and repeated in any Act of Parliament that shall pass, for agreeing and concluding the foresaid Treaty of Union betwixt the two kingdoms; and that the same shall be therein expressly declared to be a fundamental and essential condition of the said Treaty of Union, in all time coming. Which articles of Union, and Act immediately above written, Her Majesty, with advice and consent foresaid, statutes, enacts, and ordains to be, and continue, in all time coming, the sure and perpetual foundation of a complete and entire Union of the two kingdoms of Scotland and England
Professor Herbert Story writes: " The commission of the General Assembly represented the Church (of Scotland) during the progress of the Treaty with calmness and dignity, and in its address to Parliament temperately stated those points the measure which were considered defective. The Commission complained of the English Sacramental text as the condition of holding civil and military offices, and urged that no oath or text of any kind, inconsistent with Presbyterian principles, should be required from Scottish churchmen. They recommended that an obligation to uphold the Church of Scotland should be embodied in the coronation oath. They represented the necessity of a 'Commission for the Plantation Kirks and Valuation of Teinds' and they concluded their fullest and most formal representation with intimation that , knowing, as they did that twenty-six bishops sat in the House of Lords which on the conclusion of the Treaty, Would have jurisdiction in Scottish affairs they desired to state with all respect, b "These representations had their due effect. The bench of bishops of course, could not be removed The operation of the test act in England though its scandal and injustice were undeniable, could not be meddled with, but as a kind of equivalent for this grievance, and to guard the Scotch universities and schools against the dreaded infection of prelacy, it was enacted that every professor and teacher should' ere his admission, subscribe the Confession of Faith as being the confession of his faith and bind himself in the Presbytery's presence to conform to the discipline and worship of the Established Church. It was provided that the unalterable establishment and maintenance of the Presbyterian Church should be stipulated by an act prior to any other act, that should ratify the Treaty, and should then be embodied in the Act of Ratification; and that the first oath the British Sovereign should take on his accession should be an oath to maintain the government, worship, discipline, rights and privileges of the

So ends the unabridged tale of the sale of Scotlands dignity, pride and economy into the hands of the English (as Westminster is still dominated by them), by so called " nobles " for money and a dram of power which they never received, and by the Scottish church, which did fasten its doctrine firmly in Scotland- at the price of selling of the nation.
Those same " nobles " , that same church, and wealthy businessmen with interests in London, formed the core of the " constitutional convention ". This self appointed tribe of non-descripts had the audacity to pontificate over Scotlands political and economic future. Their sights were fixed on maintaining his illegal and unfair union, flying in the face of popular Scottish public desire and economic reality that clearly points to an independent Scottish state would be an incredibly strong economy that would surely be accepted into the European Union.
The Church of Scotland need not tow the union line anymore. They have the religious freedom they desire. Why then do they insist on following the unionist line? Who can say.
Also, I firmly believe that England has every right to keep its pounds, pints and inches, it can (foolishly) pull out of the European Union if it must, but Westminster has NO right to pull Scotland into that mess with them.