discuss religious matters. Only her French advisers were on the side of
the Regent. "The matter is pacified for the time," and in case of the
Regent's death, Chatelherault, d'Oysel, and de Rubay are to be a
provisional committee of Government, till the wishes of the King and
Queen, Francis and Mary, are known. Again, in her letter of May 16 to
Henri II. of France, she stated that she was in very bad health, {96a}
and, at about the same date (May 18), the English ambassador in France
mentions her intention to visit that country at once. {96b} But the
Revolution of May 11, breaking out in Perth, condemned her to suffer and
die in Scotland.

This, however, does not amount to proof that no plan of persecution in
Scotland was intended. Throckmorton writes, on May 18, that the Marquis
d'Elboeuf is to go thither. "He takes with him both men of conduct and
some of war; it is thought his stay will not be long." Again (May 23,
24), Throckmorton reports that Henri II. means to persecute extremely in
Poitou, Guienne, and Scotland. "Cecil may take occasion to use the
matter in Scotland as may seem best to serve the turn." {96c} This was
before the Perth riot had been reported (May 26) by Cecil to
Throckmorton. Was d'Elboeuf intended to direct the persecution? The
theory has its attractions, but Henri, just emerged with maimed forces
from a ruinous war, knew that a persecution which served Cecil's "turn"
did not serve _his_. To persecute in Scotland would mean renewed war
with England, and could not be contemplated. If Sir James Melville can
be trusted for once, the Constable, about June 1, told him, in the
presence of the French King, that if the Perth revolt were only about
religion, "we mon commit Scottismen's saules unto God." {97} Melville
was then despatched with promise of aid to the Regent--if the rising was
political, not religious.