Mr. Burns had no manse,
but he had a most delightful house, which he had built for himself on
the Barony glebe, then a pleasant, out-of-the-way country place,
although now standing in the midst of a populous neighbourhood.
One of the most unselfish and simple-hearted of men, he had brought up a
large family upon a very small stipend, refusing for a long time to ask
for any augmentation, until his scruples were overborne by the pressing
entreaties of his “heritors.”
How Hr. Burns “got his augmentation” in 1826, is worth the telling,
because it gives us a glimpse into a curious phase of Church life and
history. The tiends of the Burgh and Barony of Glasgow belonged at one
time to the Church, and subsequently to the Crown, which, ever since the
abolition of Episcopacy in 1G90, granted leases to the magistrates of
Glasgow, renewable every nineteen years. Eor a long period the “tack
duty”* was merely nominal, but at Martinmas, 1798—the year when the
crypt in which Dr. Burns preached was pronounced unfit for public
worship, and it was resolved to build a Barony Church—a lease of
nineteen years was given to the magistrates “on the following terms,
viz. (1) To pay the stipends of the ministers of the Cathedral and
Barony Churches; (2) To furnish Communion elements for both Churches;
(3) To pay one thousand marks for repairs on the Cathedral; and (4) Two
hundred pounds Scots as tack duty.”
When the new tack for nineteen years was obtained, Dr. Burns was too
modest to think of asking for an increase from the tiends of the parish,
but Principal Taylor, of the Inner High Church, who had hitherto been
paid his stipend out of the Corporation Funds in common with the other
Glasgow ministers, made application for an augmentation. Then a wise
councillor uprose and said, “Why does Dr. Taylor apply to us? He is only
one of the Barons parish; let him go to the heritors and get what he
wants from them.”
This put the heritors of the Barony parish on their mettle. Forthwith
they called a meeting, and, after the manner of the times, their
trumpets gave no uncertain sound. They said, "Here is 'our own minister”
(as they were pleased to call Dr. Burns) “who has never in his life
asked for an augmentation. Why should we pass him by for Dr. Taylor? No,
fair is fair; whatever Dr. Taylor succeeds in getting, Dr. Burns shall
have.” Then James Hill, a descendant of the Rev. Laurence Hill, the
predecessor of Dr. Burns, being learned in the law, rose to his feet and
said, "No man has a higher respect for Dr. Burns than I have; but he is
getting to be an old man, and although he will never trouble you as long
as he lives, his successor may, and may come upon you and claim from the
tiends what you give, or even more than what you give, to Dr. Burns. My
advice, therefore, is this, raise an amicable suit in the Court of
Tiends, and that will fix the period to nineteen years before another
increase can take place.”
This course was approved; Dr. Taylor and Dr. Burns both went into Court,
and both got an equal augmentation. Later on Dr. Taylor obtained a
further addition, but Dr. Burns did not apply again, being content with
the first decision of the Tiend Court.
Since that time great changes have taken place. The Barony Glebe became
eligible for feuing, Whether the income of Dr. Burns was larger or
smaller, his home was always the brightest and happiest place in the
world to his children. When George was a youth, it was undergoing the
inevitable changes experienced in family life. Of Dr. Burns' nine
children, four had died young. John, the eldest son (Dr. John Burns,
P.B.S., the first Professor of Surgery in the University of Glasgow),
was married and living in a house in Spreulds Land in the Trongate;
Elizabeth was married to a well-known citizen, Mr. David MacBrayne;
Allan was lecturing on anatomy, writing the books that made him famous,
and spending much of his time in traveling, on account of his failing
health; while James and George were at home.
But, in one sense, the whole family was always at home: their affections
and memories clustered round it, all their interests were centred in it,
and they loved, as they had ever loved, its pleasant and helpful
associations. A more united family it would have been difficult to find
anywhere; they loved one another “with pure hearts fervently,” they took
unselfish delight in each other's successes, they sought to help one
another in their multifarious undertakings, and all their affection was
based on Christian principle.
Although George was so much the junior of his brothers and sisters, they
took him into their full confidence even as a boy, and as there were
elements in his character that theirs lacked, they were apt, even in his
youthful days, to consult him. John was contemplative, although in
conversation abounding in forcible expression, and at times indulging in
great humour and jocularity, Allan was erudite, James was gentle and
easy-going, while George was brisk, energetic, and business-like, with a
shrewd judgment of men and things.
Every member of the family delighted in the home life and in the company
at the Barony Glebe. It was a “house of call” for all the ministers and
notable men of Glasgow, who were sure of a pleasant “crack” whenever
they dropped in.
Hospitality has been a characteristic of the Burns family from the
earliest times of their history—that good old-fashioned hospitality
which, as Washington Irving says, is “an emanation of the heart breaking
through the chills of ceremony and selfishness, and thawing every spirit
into a genial flow.”
There was no standing in the hall, hat in hand; no waiting in the
drawing-room for some one to arrive and coldly discuss the weather; but,
almost simultaneously with the knock at the door, there was the genial
“Hey man, come awa’,” the warm welcome, and the snug corner by the
fireside.
Such hospitality died in England years and years ago; it still survives
in Scotland, and it is possible, even now, to get a flavour of the good
old sort that was common in Dr. Burns’ day.
There was much more enjoyment in company in those times than in these.
Men were not spoiled by newspapers and reviews and magazines. They
talked over the events of their day, and thought out for themselves the
problems of current history, instead of having all their thinking done
for them by the penny press. They told good stories one to another with
a hearty relish impossible in these days of so-called “comic" papers.
Let us take a glance at some of the frequent visitors, old and young,
who enjoyed the hospitality of Dr. Burns when George was a hoy; and
first of all the “ministerial brethren.”
There was, Dr. Balfour of the Outer High Church, an erudite, but withal
a genial, pleasant man; and Dr. Love, very eminent but very sombre.
Attached to the Barony parish were four chapels-of-ease, but there was
no seat carried by them at that time into the Ecclesiastical Court. Dr.
Love ministered at one of these chapels. Afterwards he laboured for some
years in London, and had a principal hand in the formation of the London
Missionary Society. His sermons, which were published in two volumes in
1829, four years after his death, were considered valuable. Although
they went deeply into theological lore, they were anything but
interesting to ordinary hearers or readers. George Burns tells of a man
coining out of Dr. Love’s church and saying to his neighbour, “Was not
that sermon deep?” “Yes,” answered the other, “as deep as a dungeon, and
about as gloomy.” No circle of friends wrould be complete without a
sombre man in it, and Dr. Love was a capital foil.
One day he and Balfour and others were dining at Dr. Burns’ house, and
when the guests rose to go, Love sat still and silent. Seeing that he
did not move, Balfour went up to him, and throwing his arms about him
said, “Let brotherly Love continue!”
Dr. Burns was very intimate with Dr. Balfour, and they spent much of
their time together. Once they went on an excursion to England In
company, and chanced to be in Whitehaven, where they heard a Scotch
minister, named Musliet, preach. They kept as much as possible out of
sight, neither of them wishing to take any part in that or in any other
service while they were travelling. But Mr. Musliet had his eye upon
them, and in his concluding prayer asked “that the Lord might bless the
preaching of one of the ministers who had popped in amongst them, and
who would take the service in the afternoon!” He carried his point, and
“one of the ministers” (Dr. Balfour), preached. Strange to say, this
same Mr. Musliet was afterwards appointed to Shettleston, one of the
four chapels-of-ease in the Barony parish. One of the heritors, Mr.
MacNair, said to a neighbour, “I wish you’d come and hear our new
minister; he’s a strange mixture of grace and glaikitry.” It was an
accurate description, and Mr. Musliet became a valuable acquisition, as
possessor of these qualities, to the ministerial circle.
It was the practice in the early Church of Scotland on sacramental
occasions for the ministerial brethren to assist one another. Thursday
was the Bast Day, Saturday the Preparation Day, Sunday the Sacramental
Day, Monday the Thanksgiving Day. There was a “running dinner” on all
the days, but on Monday there was something special; and the “Monday
dinner” was always looked forward to as an occasion when there should be
free, happy, and unrestrained conversation and innocent amusement. On
these days every minister was supposed to tell his best ancedotes.
Few things delighted young Burns more than to hear the stories told on
these occasions. Here are a few of the crumbs which fell from that
table:—
At one of these dinners I remember there was present the Rev. George
Logan, of Eastwood, who related how at a similar Monday dinner they had
cold punch—a great Glasgow drink—and the beadle attended as servant.
When he was carrying in the punch he had the ill-luck to let it fall,
whereupon George Logan exclaimed, ‘Sir transit glorious Monday!’
Another minister who was always present at my father’s sacramental time,
the Rev. Adam Foreman, of Kirkintilloch, told how on one occasion when
he had his ministerial friends staying with him, they had, as usual,
prayers at breakfast-time. Just as they were about to kneel down to
prayers, a parrot, which had been taught to speak, remarked
sententiously, ‘That’s good boys!’ which upset the gravity of those
Scottish ministers!
My father used to tell many stories of the minister of Balfron, near
Loch Lomond, showing how strong the feeling of Scotch people was
regarding the sanctity of the Sabbath and its strict observation, which
prevented many from shaving on that holy day. One was that the minister
was shaving late on a Saturday night, when the clock gave warning that
it was about to strike twelve. Running to the top of the stairs, he
called out hurriedly to the servant, ‘Betty, Betty, put back the clock
five minutes!’
Another story of the same man was this:— A farmer came to him with a
beautiful dog as a present. The minister asked him why he was parting
with it? ‘Oh!’ said he, 'whenever we “tak’ the books” the dog always
sets up a howling.’ ‘Ay,’ said the minister, ‘and ye think that I don't
“tak’ the books” and ye may give the beast to me.’
We must not leave the ministers without introducing the session clerk
and parish schoolmaster for the Barony parish, Mr. Clugston. He was a
good-looking, well-informed old man of most gentlemanly bearing, and
very highly esteemed. He knew a good sermon when he heard it, and he
could recognize a sermon that he had heard before. His son was
commissary under Wellington in the Peninsular War, and on one occasion
young Clugston took the old gentleman to London to see the sights and to
hear some of the great preachers. Coming out of one church the
commissary said to him, “That was a good evangelical sermon; did you not
enjoy it?” “Very much, very much. A most excellent, sound, gospel
sermon, but I read the whole of it in the Christian Observer as we came
in the smack from Leith to London!”
The circle of Dr. Burns’ ministerial friends was not limited to any
section of the Church. Although of the Evangelical type, he was a very
liberal-minded man. In his day there was no evening service in the
Church of Scotland—only morning and afternoon and he took the
opportunity of worshipping at the Episcopalian chapel whenever there was
any eminent English clergyman preaching in the evening. This was an
unusual mark of liberality of sentiment, and it was accentuated by the
fact that he took his young son George with him. This was a privilege
and a pleasure felt both then and afterwards, for it gave the youth the
opportunity of hearing such men as Mr. Simeon, of Cambridge; Mr.
Saunders, of St. Ann’s, Blackfriars; Henry Venn, the Secretary of the
Church Missionary Society, and many other celebrated Evangelicals.
Dr. Burns had known Toplady, the hymn writer, who had given him a list
of the supposed Evangelical clergymen in his day in the Church of
England, and the number was under forty!
But we must not linger with the ministers. There was another and even a
wider circle of frequent visitors at the Barony Glebe.
Amongst the oldest and most intimate friends were Dr. Cleland and his
family. He was a man of great ability, and was rising into eminence when
George Burns was a boy. Early in the century he commenced those
inquiries which he afterwards embodied in "The Annals of Glasgow” and
other important works. He was one of the leading statists of the day,
the first to draw public attention to the value of regular mortuary
tables; and he held a number of public offices, not the least important
being that of Superintendent of Public Works. Withal he was a plain,
straightforward, and unaffected man, always a welcome visitor.
Much as young George Burns liked Dr. Cleland, he liked his daughter
Jeanie better, and having no young sister of his own, he found in her a
companion and friend from comparatively early years. Later on, as the
two families were so intimate, he thought he could not do better than
incorporate them. But at the time of which we are writing, he was only a
boy, and, as they say in novels, “we must not anticipate.”
Time would fail to tell of the Duncans, the Stevensons, the Finlays, the
Campbells, the Bairds, the Balnianos, and a host of others we need not
even mention here, as we shall meet with them again in the course of
this narrative; but we may gather up in this place a few of George
Burns’ reminiscences of those we have named.
Mr. Duncan was Mr. Balfour’s son-in-law, and son of the Rev. Mr. Duncan,
of Alva parish, near Stirling. My brother, the doctor, married his
sister, consequently there was close family intercourse. He was much in
society. He once told me he had an introduction to Mr. Bolton, of Bolton
and Watt (James Watt), of Birmingham. Mr. Bolton invited him to his
country house, and Mr. Duncan, who was then a young man, thanked him for
doing so, but said he was sorry to give him any trouble. Mr. Bolton at
once replied, ‘It will not give me any trouble, but it may my
housemaid.’ Mr. Duncan said to me, ‘George, when any gentleman asks you
to visit him, take care not to say anything about the trouble it may
give.’
One of my uncles, Captain Allan Stevenson, was at the taking of
Martinique in 1786. He retired from the army in order to marry a
Hamilton lady. This intention he carried out, and built a house at
Hamilton, where he lived for many years. Afterwards he came to Glasgow
for a short time, and then went down to Rothesay, where he built a
house, the first ever erected in Craigmore, a suburb of Rothesay. At
that time juries were made up chiefly of country gentlemen, and it was
always my delight, as a young man, when he was summoned, because he then
came to my father’s house. He was kind and genial, and his war and other
stories, and his interesting conversation, had a great charm for me. He.
like all others of that class, wore high top-boots.
The brother of Captain Allan Stevenson was also in the army, and he
settled in a house of his own in Hamilton. The son of the latter was
born on the same day that I was, viz., the 10th of December, 1707, and,
like myself, was named George. I was born in the morning, and he in the
afternoon, and I used to say to him,
‘You’ll take care, George, to understand that I am your senior'. He
entered the army as a boy, and it was a great disappointment to me, when
I saw him with his uniform on, that I could not enter also. I was very
anxious to get in, but I aimed at nothing higher than being a player on
the triangle!
Mr. Kirkman Finlay, member for the boroughs of Glasgow, of which there
were five, was always very kind to my father, who was intimately
acquainted with his father, Mr. James Finlay. My father baptized all Mr.
Finlay’s children. It was customary on the occasion of marriages or
baptisms to present the minister with a little compliment, such as a
pair of silk gloves for use in the pulpit. On a particular occasion,
when my father baptized one of Dr. Cleland’s children, he sent him, as a
present, a cocked hat, at that time an article of clerical dress among
many ministers. My father, however, declined the gift. On another
occasion, not in connection with either wedding or baptism, but as an
ordinary compliment, Mr. Kirkman Finlay sent him a present of six dozen
bottles of claret.
Claret, although formerly drunk in Scotland, had been very much shut out
by the Continental wars. My brother Allan, the surgeon, had Dr. Gordon
and several other medical men from Edinburgh dining at our house, and as
claret was not then so common as it is now, they were enjoying it to
their hearts’ content, when a note was handed to my father from Mr.
Finlay, saying that his butler had made a‘mistake in sending claret
instead of port; and believing that my father would prefer the latter,
he sent to suggest an exchange! What happened to the claret drinkers I
cannot tell; but, at all events, it served the purpose of raising a good
laugh.
I could tell you stories about many old Glasgow families, with some of
whom I was familiar in my youth and some in later life. Let me specify
one or two. There was Dr. Balmano, for example, after whose name one of
the streets in Glasgow is called. He had a sister who was well known in
Glasgow, and was famous for her smartness of intellect and of repartee.
On one occasion at a dinner party she sat next to a Mr. Kingliam, a man
not particularly noted for his love of religion or its observances. In
those days a round of toasts was common at the dinner-table, and, what
was still more troublesome and perplexing, a round of ‘sentiments.’ When
it came to the sentimental part, Miss Balmano said to Kingham,
'Give me a sentiment.’ He said, Give “Honest men and bonnie lasses.”
’She promptly replied, 'No, no; that’ll neither suit yon nor me.’
Another well-known family was that of the Bairds, the great
iron-masters. Two of the brothers were in Parliament. Alexander Baird,
commonly called Sandy, had a great deal of mother-wit, and was
remarkably quaint and natural in the way in which he made use of it.
Upon one occasion he had a party at dinner, including a well-known and
respected citizen, the head of a great warehouse, whose name if I gave
it would be recognized and esteemed, and Colonel Lockhart of Milton
Lockhart, then commanding the 92nd Highlanders, who were quartered in
Glasgow, the brother of John Lockhart, Sir Walter Scott’s son-in-law,
sons of the Rev. Dr. Lockhart, for nearly fifty years minister of the
Blackfriars Church in Glasgow.
Colonel Lockhart was a remarkably courteous man, and very polite
according to the old school of manners. Mr. Baird was a bachelor, and in
the drawing-room, when dinner was announced, he asked Colonel Lockhart
to go out first; but the colonel demurred.
'No, no,’ he said, ‘Seniores priores.’ Mr. Baird’s reply was, ‘Na, na;
warriors before weavers!’
On another occasion, when Mr. Baird was one of a party at dinner in a
friend’s house, while he was having his great-coat taken off in the
hall, his arrival was announced, one of the servants calling to another,
'Mr. Baird' and the other servants repeating it on the different
landings of the stairs, so as to announce his name in the drawing-room.
On hearing his name being repeated, and thinking that the flunkeys were
hailing him to come up the stairs, Sandy called out, 'Haud yer whisht;
I’m comin’ as fast as I can!’
We must not lose sight of George Burns in the midst of his own and his
father’s friends, but this somewhat digressive chapter will perhaps
assist the reader to understand more clearly his subsequent history and
his personal surroundings. |