parliament which met in July 1681, and he industriously opposed the measures of Lauderdale's successor, the Duke of York. Sir John Dalrymple, in a statement seemingly unsupported (pt. i. bk. i. p. 39), asserts that Fletcher broached the successful proposal to make a profession of presbyterianism part of the test which was imposed by that parliament (cf. Wodrow, iii. 298, and Burnet, ii. 301–2, who differ materially as to the early history of the test). Certainly he had the courage with only one other member to record a protest against the provision of the act which made subscription to the test imperative on county electors, as well as on their representatives (Acts of the Parliaments of Scotland, viii. 245). He is said to have addressed to members of the parliament anonymous letters beseeching them to oppose the Duke of York's succession (Fountainhall, Hist. Observes, p. 209). In April 1682, as a commissioner of cess and excise, he, with some colleagues, was again brought before the privy council on a charge of not having levied a local tax to be applied in supplying the soldiery with corn (Fountainhall, Hist. Notices, i. 352). Fletcher took part in the exodus of Scotch malcontents which followed the condemnation of Archibald, ninth earl of Argyll [q. v.], for refusing more than a qualified acceptance of the test. It is said (Fountainhall, Hist. Observes, p. 214) that when he was about this time an exile at Brussels the Duke of York asked the Spanish governor there to have him arrested. Hearing of this Fletcher came secretly to London and was taken into the confidence of Monmouth, Russell, and Sydney, who were planning their movement for a change in the system of government. With its collapse and Monmouth's flight to Holland, Fletcher left England and was for a time in Paris, where Lord Preston, Charles II's envoy extraordinary to Louis XIV, wrote to Halifax, 5 Oct. 1683: ‘Here is one Fletcher, laird of Salton, lately come from Scotland. He is an ingenious but a violent fanatic, and doubtless hath some commission, for I hear he is very busy and very virulent’ (Appendix to Hist. MSS. Comm. 7th Rep. 343 b). Fletcher is next heard of as in Holland, and as one of the most intimate associates and advisers there of Monmouth, from whom he hoped for at the very least the convocation of a ‘free parliament’ in England. In spite of his impetuosity Fletcher was earnest in dissuading Monmouth from imprudent enterprises. He was strongly opposed to Argyll's disastrous expedition to Scotland, and to Monmouth's own expedition to England (Burnet, iii. 25, from Fletcher's own information; Ferguson, p. 210). To Lord Grey of Wark's argument in its favour, founded on the success of Henry VII's expedition, Fletcher replied that Henry reckoned, as Monmouth could not, on the support of a strong party of powerful English nobles (Burnet, ib.)
Fletcher nevertheless sailed with Monmouth and landed at Lyme 11 June 1685. On the 13th he was to have been joined with Lord Grey in the command of a troop of horse in an expedition to Bridport. He rode, or insisted on riding, a fine charger brought in that day by one Dare, who also accompanied the duke to England. Dare, formerly a disaffected goldsmith and alderman of Taunton, joined the refugees in Holland, and made himself useful to them and to Monmouth by aiding them to communicate with their friends in England. After having been Monmouth's secretary he was appointed paymaster of the expeditionary force, and much benefit to the enterprise was expected from his knowledge of the district and his old connection with Taunton. Dare angrily disputed Fletcher's claim to the use of his horse, and after having reviled him for some time shook a switch at him, on which Fletcher drew a pistol and shot him dead. Monmouth was forced to part with Fletcher, who embarked on board the vessel which had been hired to bring the expedition to England, and the papers of which were made out for Bilbao. According to Lord Buchan (p. 18) Fletcher told his friend Keith, the earl marischal, that he quitted Monmouth, not on account of the Dare incident, but out of disgust at Monmouth's proclamation of himself at Taunton as king. But the Dare catastrophe occurred on 13 June, and Monmouth was not proclaimed king at Taunton until the 20th. The contemporary authorities, while differing more or less as to details, agree that the death of Dare alone produced Fletcher's separation from Monmouth. Fletcher was incapable of falsehood. Keith must have misunderstood or misreported him (cf. Buchan, ib.; Burnet, iii. 44–5; Roberts, i. 272–4; Ferguson, 221–2; State Trials, xi. 1055).
According to the earl marischal's further reports of conversations with him (see Buchan, pp. 19–23) Fletcher was thrown into prison soon after he landed at Bilbao, and his extradition was demanded by the English minister at Madrid. He is represented to have made a romantic escape from prison, and then to have wandered through Spain in disguise, viewing the country and the people, studying in the conventual libraries, and purchasing rare and curious books, some of which found their way to his library at Salton. When his Spanish wanderings were over, he went to Hungary and fought as a volunteer
