The State Paper Office contains a rather different version of this interview, which it will be interesting to compare with that of Bourgoyne. It is as follows:—
“Relation of an interview between Sir Walter Mildmay, Sir Amias Paulet, and Edward Barker, and the Queen of Scots:—
“Upon the repair of Sir Walter Mildmay, Sir Amias Paulet, and Edward Barker to the Scottish Queen, and the delivery of Elizabeth's letters, the Scottish Queen read the same and thereupon said she was very sorry that the Queen her good sister was so evil informed of her after so many offers made on her behalf. Notwithstanding any assurance given to Elizabeth by her and her friends, she found she was neglected, and that though she had forewarned things dangerous to Her Majesty and the State, she was not believed but contemned. This grieved her much, she being Her Majesty's nearest kinswoman, saying that the association made here and the Act thereupon passed in Parliament gave her sufficient understanding what was intended against her. She added that she saw well whatever danger should happen to Her Majesty, either through the instrumentality of foreign princes, the discontent of private persons, or matters of religion, it would all be laid upon her, for she had many enemies. After some other words to the same effect, and a recital of a long-endured captivity and of some supposed unkindnesses offered to her, she said that a league had been made between Her Majesty and the King her son without her consent or knowledge. For answer to Her Majesty's letter she said she found it very strange that Her Majesty wrote in such sort, for it was in the nature of a command and that she should answer as a subject; but for her part she was born a Queen, and she would not prejudice her rank and state, nor the blood whereof she was descended, nor her son who was to follow her, nor would give so prejudicial a precedent to foreign princes, as to answer according to the desire of those letters. For her heart could not yield to any compulsion. She referred to the protestation which she had already made to the Lord Chancellor, the Lord de la Warr, and others, adding that she was ignorant of the laws and statutes of the realm, that she was destitute of counsel and knew not who were her competent peers, also that her papers were taken from her and that nobody dared or would speak on her behalf. After this she solemnly protested that she was innocent and had not procured or encouraged any hurt against Elizabeth, and that she was not to be charged but by her word or writing, as she was sure that neither the one nor the other could be shown against her, confessing notwithstanding, that after so many offers made by herself and not accepted by Elizabeth, she remitted herself and her cause to foreign princes.”