Matthew Ross, a very
distinguished person, and Dean of the Faculty of Advocates, died in
October 1823. As it is not the custom for our Deans to die, it having
never happened before (as was said), we ran little risk from the
precedent of an official funeral, with which therefore he was honoured.
He was a most curious creature. A worthy innocent man, and a very great
chamber counsel, but with not a particle of worldly knowledge except
what he got from law cases, and from novels, of which he was a great
devourer. He had very extensive practice with the pen and the head,
which brought him a respectable fortune. His tongue never produced a
guinea, for he equalled his blushing brother Holland in bashfulness.
Learned in every department of the law, a clear and rather elegant legal
writer, and of the deepest and most inventive ingenuity, our judicial
records contain no arguments more deserving of study by any one who is
anxious to instruct his understanding, or to improve his taste, from the
fountains of a great master. He was one of the Pundits who cannot be
pushed forward. Office, even on the bench, had no attractions for a
legal monk, who dined in solitude at least 360 times a year, and who
could not be looked at without his face becoming pink. He was so
distressingly shy and awkward, that, when George the Fourth was here, he
had to be deposed for the nonce from the Dean-ship in favor of Lord
Lauderdale, because the attempt to deliver an address from the Faculty
must have killed him. The rough and changing world got tired of his
timidity, and his practice left, him while his powers were still entire.
His glory and his luxury was in a legal doubt. Sir Harry Mon-creiff once
made him give two opposite opinions in one day, on the same case, by
changing the names, and hinting a difficulty. Matthew instantly followed
the false scent, and without seeing that the cases were identical,
hunted himself down. How often have I seen the little short body, with
his thin powdered hair, his silk-clad bits of legs and silver-buckled
toes, sitting in his evening chair, in his little room in Queen Street,
with his blushing cheeks and cunning eyes, reasoning himself into no
result except that the matter on which he was consulted was all doubts,
on each of which he would have a still finer and deeper doubt, till at
last he would good-naturedly acquiesce in some practical man’s proposal
that we should all keep our thumbs on these doubts, and that neither the
Court nor the opposite party would dream of them — which they very
rarely did.
In 1823 Lord Bannatyne resigned his seat on the bench, and John Clerk
was announced as his successor. With his crotchets, and his tendency to
torpidity when not excited, Clerk could not perhaps have made a safe
judge at any time ; but it was a severe trial to be promoted in his
sixty-fifth year, and when his vigour had begun to ebb. He had drawn
more money than any man had ever done at the Scotch bar, probably not
under £100,000 in the last twenty years of his energy. But pictures,
books, hospitality, charity, and general bad management left him a poor
man after all. People could not believe their ears when they heard that
John4 Clerk was to go, or was to get, upon the bench. They could not
think of him except as a man who was born to tear and snarl at judges.
In the wiry uncombed locks, breaking out from below the wig, and the
shrewd sensible face, the contracted limb, and the strong arms, they saw
the traces of a thousand tough battles; and could not believe that these
were all over, and that John was henceforth only to be seen seated,
decorously, on a high place. The Court was unusually crowded when he
took his seat. As he was limping from the floor to the bench, an old
agent, who remembered other days, was overheard ejaculating to
himself—“Eh! is he gaain’ up amang them!” He expected a worry the
instant that the wolf got among the lambs. Clerk was a warning to all
counsel to beware of leaning on violent energy as their permanent staff.
It is attractive to clients, and therefore does vulgarly well for a
certain time. But, among other misfortunes, it is necessarily temporary.
It does not become grey hairs ; and though it did, old blood can’t keep
it up. Clerk did not increase, as Blair did, in awfulness and weight
with age. This is the ripening of wisdom. He let himself settle into the
habit of having little intellect except under excitement; and this age
must always chill. Energy of thought may last as long as the lamp burns
: but fierce vehemence dies out, and the lamp is quenched before its
time.
The Court of Session was now doomed to stand its trial again, for the
third or fourth time within twenty years. The object in view in 1807,
and effected, was to cut the old court into two- divisions. The
introduction of civil juries was the problem of 1815. And now came the
examination of its forms of proceeding. Each of these was a natural and
necessary step in the process of fitting the tribunal to modern
circumstances.
This last inquiry was by sixteen Eoyal Commissioners; including our four
heads—namely Hope Lord President, Boyle Justice-Clerk, Shepherd Chief
Baron, and Adam Chief Commissioner, with the Dean, the Lord Advocate,
and the Solicitor-General, Baron Hume, the Depute-Keeper of the Signet,
and four English lawyers. These four were Tindal afterwards Chief
Justice of the Common Pleas, William Alexander afterwards Chief Baron of
England, Littledale afterwards a judge, and Courtenay afterwards Earl of
Devon. They began work in 1823, and the invaluable statute of 1825 was
the result of their labours, These were two years of as great
excitement, and as keen discussion, as legal reform ever produces. The
great points considered and resolved upon in the Commission were—1. The
introduction of a system of pleading, particularly by Becords; 2. The
diminution of writing, and the consequent extension of oral debate; 3.
The earlier finality of judgments; 4. The maintenance of civil juries.
What was called the country, that is, the country as represented by town
councils and lairds was nearly unanimous against this reform. These
persons never exhibited themselves more discreditably. They knew
nothing, and indeed were incapable of being made to know anything, of
the subject; but being at all times saturated with aversion to
innovation they gave their voices to certain professional persons who
misled them. These persons had the usual professional addiction to the
things they had lived by and their zeal was most extraordinary. Thus
instructed, resolutions against trial by jury, and in favor of the
system under which all evidence was taken on commission, records were
unknown, no single judgment, however solemn, was final, and all
statements and arguments were in writing, were passed by almost every
burgh and every county in Scotland! All this ignorant hubbub was met, on
the part of Government, by the single fact, that every Commissioner had
set his hand to the Report. Of all the flights of pamphlets with which
the air, throughout these two years, was darkened, there were only two,
or rather only one, now worth being looked at. This was an "Explanation"
addressed by George Joseph Bell to the Lords Committee— an admirable
sketch, containing a clear exposition of our old forms, and a powerful
defence of the proposed new ones. The other consisted of two letters,
published anonymously, but understood to be written by Lord Rosslyn.
These judicial shakes remind one of James the Fifth’s letter to the
judges about a fortnight after the institution of the Court ending, "And
we’ll be at ye, peradventure, sum day whan ye nocht think."
It was in 1823, I think, that the last fragment of our Royal Botanical
Garden was removed from its situation on the west side of Leith Walk,
and that the transplantation of the whole to its present site at
Inverleith was completed. No garden could he made to walk a mile with
less injury to its health. Scarcely a single plant or tree was lost, and
after recovering from their first sickness, they looked fresher and
prouder than ever. Dr. Graham, the Professor, was a respectable
botanist, and a good teacher, and in his first lieutenant, Macnab, he
had a most admirable practical man. That chair is one of the best
botanical prizes in Britain. Few things of the kind are more enviable
than a taste for that science, with such a garden, such funds, and such
a class. It was nearly about the same time that "The
Horticultural Society,” which had been set up in 1809, opened its
kindred and adjoining “Experimental Garden.” Conducted, as it was at
first, by such men as Ellis and Neill it could scarcely fail, and has
always done as well as low funds allow. But Flora and poverty make but a
bad match.
Recent events provoked me to write an article in the Edinburgh Beview on
the nature of the office of Lord Advocate and this, in about a year,
forced me in self defence to answer a plausible pamphlet ascribed to one
of the Lord Advocate’s deputes. The institution of a public prosecutor
is certainly a very valuable part of our system, and the duties of the
office cannot be better performed than they have long been in Scotland,
in ordinary cases. But this is surely quite consistent with its being a
dangerous office, when its holder is employed as a political agent. My
object was to explain the causes and temptations which may make his
position injurious to his purely accusative virtues. Yet I now see that,
under the feelings of the period, I stated the expediency of keeping the
Lord Advocate to the public prosecutor’s desk far too strongly. His
being in Parliament, and considered as a high public officer, and
intrusted with a liberal direction of all matters connected with our
legal polity, is essential both to the dignity and to the practical
usefulness of his place. I am also wrong—grossly wrong, in saying a word
in favor of grand juries. The disclosure of an inclination to tolerate
such an incumbrance in a country with a public accuser, shews the
desperate remedies that the misconduct of these days had driven us in
quest of.
The Fox dinner was held on the 26th of January 1824, under the
presidency of Lord Archibald Hamilton and Mr. Ferguson of Raith, with
about 300 present. Jeffrey made one of his noblest bursts in admiration
of the good parts of the constitution of America.
In the following month, Abercromby moved for leave to introduce a bill
for reforming the representation of Edinburgh. He was defeated of
course; but only by 99 against 75. The amount of the minority, and the
admission of the majority that, taken by itself.’ the Scotch
representation was indefensible, but that we were under the shelter of
the representation of England, confirmed us in our resolution to
persevere. He renewed his motion on 13th April 1826. It was then
supported by 97, but opposed by 122. The increase on the vote was good:
but the admission by Canning that, if any change had been expedient, the
idea that articles of Union could be held up as an insuperable obstacle,
as had been urged, ought to be u scouted ”was still better."
Leonard Horner and I had often discussed the causes, and the remedies,
of the decline of classical education in Scotland; and we were at last
satisfied that no adequate improvement could be effected so long as
there was only one great classical school in Edinburgh, and this one
placed under the town council, and lowered, perhaps necessarily, so as
to suit the wants of a class of boys to more than two-thirds of whom
classical accomplishment is foreseen to be useless. So one day on the
top of one of the Pentlands—emblematic of the solidity of our foundation
and of the extent of our prospects—we two resolved to set about the
establishment of a new school. On taking others into council we found
that the conviction of the inadequacy of the High School was far more
general than we supposed. Scott took it up eagerly. The sum of £10,000
was subscribed immediately; and soon afterwards about £2000 more. We
were fiercely opposed, as we expected, by the town council; and, but not
fiercely, by a few of the friends of the institution we were going to
encroach upon. But, after due discussion and plotting, our contributors
finally resolved to proceed, and in 1823 the building was begun. It was
opened, under the title of "The Edinburgh Academy,” on the 1st of
October 1824, amidst a great assemblage of proprietors, pupils, and the
public. We had a good prayer by Sir Harry Moncreiff, and speeches by
Scott and old Henry Mackenzie, and an important day for education in
Scotland, in reference to the middle and upper classes. Mackenzie’s
vigour was delightful. Though about eighty he made an animated address,
exulting in the rise of a new school upon a reformed system. About a
month before this he one day appeared at Bonaly to breakfast, played
bowls most part of the forenoon, had a party at dinner in his own house,
where Richardson and I left him predominating in full talk to a larger
party at eleven. He almost admitted that a report of his being under
temptation by a bookseller to write a volume of his personal
reminiscences was correct. I hoped the temptation would prevail; for he
has seen all the curious men of a bye-gone age. Yet it is nearly
impossible for an old good man to remember truly. Whatever it is amiable
to soften or to forget, is forgotten or softened, the angularities of
nature are smoothed down, and everything is coloured by the haze of
tenderness. He told us many interesting anecdotes that day 5 but on our
hoping to see them in the book, we got a shake of the head. I suspect
there was a good deal of prosaic truth in the account which a Highland
gentleman, who had marched all the way to Derby with the Pretender, gave
him of that romantic adventure. Mackenzie asked him whether he did not
always think the idea of dethroning the House of Hanover absurd? "Na,
Sir! I ne’er thoeht aboot it. I just ay’ thoeht hoopleesant it wad be to
see Donald riflin’ Lon’on.”
Another luminary, which for several years had been attracting notice,
was now fixed in our Scottish sky—I mean Thomas Chalmers. I have known
him long, and pretty well. There can scarcely be a more curious man.
When I first became acquainted with him, he used to leave his parish of
Kilmany twice or thrice a week to lecture in St. Andrews on chemistry.
And not confining himself to physical science, he stored his mind during
this first stage of his course by a general study of the principles of
moral and political philosophy. In this position, of an indifferent
minister, and a lecturer rather ardent than exact, he produced a strong
impression of his energy and ability on all who were within his range.
But it was only on being elevated by the deep religious feelings which
afterwards took possession of him that his powers were developed in
their full -force. From that moment he was a new creature; and devoted
himself, as if with new faculties, to the moral and religious
improvement of his countrymen. The high station which he soon attained
wakened his ambition, and has dignified his powers. Of the result, in so
far as it is contained in a constant and copious stream of published
composition and of public exertion, any one can judge. But eloquence
records its character feebly. He is awkward, and has a low rough husky
voice, a guttural articulation, a whitish eye, and a large dingy
countenance. In point of mere feature, it would not be difficult to
think him ugly. But he is saved from this, and made interesting and
loveable, by singular modesty, kindness, and simplicity of manner, a
strong expression of calm thought and benevolence, a forehead so broad
that it seems to proclaim itself the seat of a great intellect, a love
of humour, and an indescribable look of drollery when anything ludicrous
comes over him.
In spite of the external disadvantages of a bad figure, voice, gesture,
and look, and an unusual plainness of Scotch accent, he is a great
orator; for effect indeed, at the moment of speaking, unapproached in
our day. Yet he seldom utters an extemporaneous word. His habit is to
have every thing written, to the very letter. The success of the very
few attempts at unprepared speaking which he has ever been obliged to
make removes all doubt of his power, if he had chosen to practise it.
But it is not his way. He feels stronger in building up before hand, and
giving the public the mere recitation. But then he premeditates and
composes with an exact anticipation of his speaking position; and,
neither in recollecting nor in reading, could any one unacquainted with
his system discover that his memory or his eye were particularly engaged
; and he does truly glow with the warmth of present conception. Still,
the habit impairs his power of reply. But it does not impair his general
impressiveness. On the contrary, by withdrawing him from the temptations
of personality, and the little tricks and idle flashes of what is
commonly called debate, it leaves him freer for his own loftier range,
into which he rarely fails to put views and statements, which, in truth
though not in form, are answers to all that can be said on the opposite
side. But neither devotional fervour, nor enlightened philosophy, nor
vivid language, nor luminous exposition could produce the effect he
does, without the aid of his manner. I have often hung upon his words
with a beating heart and a tearful eye, without being brought to my
senses till I read, next day, the very syllables that had moved me to
such admiration, but which then seemed cold. The magic lies in the
concentrated intensity which agitates every fibre of the man, and brings
out his meaning by words and emphasis of significant force, and rolls
his magnificent periods clearly and irresistibly along, and kindles the
whole composition with living fire. He no sooner approaches the edge of
his high region, than his animation makes the commencing awkwardness be
forgotten, and then converts his external defects into positive
advantages, by shewing the intellectual power that overcomes them; and
getting us at last within the flames of his enthusiasm, Jeffrey’s
description, that she buried his adversaries under the fragments of
burning mountains, is the only image that suggests an idea of his
eloquent imagination and terrible energy. Personally, he appears to me
to be simple, affectionate, and true, devoted to useful objects, and
utterly unspoiled by applause. I was so much struck with the wisdom and
energy of his system for the management of the poor, that I wrote an
article in explanation and defence of it
In June 1824 a noble range of houses, forming the upper end of the south
side of the High Street, and the north-eastern corner of the Parliament
Close, was burnt to the ground. This was talked of at the time as the
most extensive conflagration remembered in this stony city. But it was
soon eclipsed by what have ever since been referred to as "The Great
Fires.”
These fires broke out on the evening of Monday the 15th of November
1824, on the south side of the High Street about half way between the
Tron Church and St. Giles’ Cathedral; and before morning a range of
houses six or seven stories high, with fifteen windows in front, and
extending back almost to the Cowgate—as dense a mass of buildings as was
perhaps in the world, was a burnt shell. People thought this bad enough
*, especially as the adjoining ruins of the June fire were still
untouched. But about noon next day an alarm was given that the Tron
Church was on fire. We ran out from the Court, gowned and wigged, and
saw that it was the steeple, an old Dutch thing, composed of wood, iron,
and lead, and edged all the way up with bits of ornament. Some of the
sparks of the preceding night had nestled in it, and had at last blown
its dry bones into flame. There could not be a more beautiful firework;
only it was wasted on the day-light. It was one hour’s brilliant blaze.
The spire was too high and too combustible to admit of any attempt to
save it, so that we had nothing to do but to admire. And it was
certainly beautiful. The fire seized on every projecting point, and
played with the fretwork, as if it had been all an exhibition. The outer
covering boards were soon consumed, and the lead dissolved. This made
the strong upright and crossbeams visible; and these stood, with the
flame lessened, but with the red fire increased, as if it had been a
great burning toy. The conflagration was long presided over by a calm
and triumphant gilded cock on the top of the spire, which seemed to look
on the people, and to listen to the crackling, in disdain. But it was
undermined at last, and dived down into the burning gulf, followed by
the upper half of the steeple. The lower half held out a little longer;
till, the very bell being melted, this half came down also, with a world
of sparks. There was one occurrence which made the gazers start. It was
at a quarter before twelve, when the minute hand of the clock stood
horizontally. The internal heat—for the clock was untouched outwardly—
cracked the machinery, and the hand dropped suddenly and silently down
to the perpendicular. When the old time-keeper’s function was done,
there was an audible sigh over the spectators. When it was all over, and
we were beginning to move back to our clients, Scott, whose father’s pew
had been in the Tron Church, lingered a moment, and said, with a
profound heave, “Eh Sirs! mony a weary, weary sermon hae I heard beneath
that steeple! ”
About nine that evening I went over to the old town to see what was
going on. There were a good many people on the street, but no appearance
of any new danger. I had not been home again above half an hour, when it
was supposed that the sky was unnaturally red. In spite of Hermand’s
remonstrances, whose first tumbler was nearly ready, I hurried back, and
found the south-east angle of the Parliament Close burning violently.
This was in the centre of the same thick-set population and buildings;
but the property was far more valuable. It was almost touching Sir
William Forbes’ bank, the Libraries of the Advocates and of the Writers
to the Signet, the Cathedral, and the Courts. Of course the alarm was
very great; but this seemed only to increase the confusion. No fire ever
got fairer play. Judges, magistrates, officers of state, dragoons,
librarians, people described as heads of bodies were all mixed with the
mob, all giving peremptory and inconsistent directions, and all, with
angry and provoking folly, claiming paramount authority.
It was said to have been mooted, and rather sternly discussed, on the
street—whether the Lord Provost could order the Justice-Clerk to prison,
or the Justice the Provost, and whether George Cranstoun, the Dean of
the Faculty, was bound to work at an engine, when commanded by John Hope
the Solicitor-General to do so, or vice versa. Then the firemen were few
and awkward, and the engines out of order; so that while torrents of
water were running down the street, nobody could use it. Amidst this
confusion, inefficiency, and squabble for dignity, the fire held on till
next morning; by which time the whole private buildings in tbe
Parliament Close, including the whole east side, and about half of the
south side, were consumed.
On going to Court that morning, I found that an adjournment had taken
place; and that the College, Arthur Seat, and all the southern and
eastern objects which had been screened for ages were now seen over the
fallen ruins. The only remaining danger was from two walls, standing
alone, which it was thought a breeze might make smother everything near
them. Both were brought down on the Saturday (20th Nov. 1824), one by
ropes, and one by powder. The one that was subdued by ropes was near the
east end of the south side of the square. It was part of the tallest
house in Edinburgh, and was then probably the tallest self-standing wall
in
Europe—being, from tlie Cowgate, about 130 feet high. It was pulled down
by a party of sailors from a frigate in Leith Eoads, who required two
days to get it within their toils.
The dissolution of the other was a grand thing. It had formed nearly the
whole east side of the square, and was steadied by a piece of wall
standing at a right angle to it, which acted like a buttress. Five
holes, or mines, were sunk in this buttress, into each of which a pound
of powder was put. Two of these failed to explode, and two exploded too
late, so that one shot did the business. In going off this made a dull
noise like a thump—as if to warn the spectators, on the house tops, that
the time was come. In a second or two, during which hardly a breath was
drawn, the buttress fell across the main wall, which stood alone,
staring with its windows. But seeing its old associate down, it bent
slowly and slightly forward, as if turned on a hinge at the ground,
bringing with it its windows and grates, and other vestiges of recent
order and comfort, without the least noise, or any visible fracture, but
with awful steadiness and tenacity. This scarcely lasted above a second
or two when every stone dropped from its place, and falling straight
down, the whole mass disappeared in a shower of fragments, which after
dashing themselves on the ground sent up a thick fog of lime dust, that
powdered every coat on the top of the Outer House, where I stood; while
the shout of the people was heard through the white gloom. It was
sublime. I can never forget the emotion when the large scorched screen,
beholding all its old companions gone, and not another stone in its
place on that side of the square, bent forward, and laid itself in chaos
on the ground.
Jeffrey presided at the Fox dinner on the 24th of January 1825 ;
Moncreiff was croupier. It was a new position for Jeffrey; but he
adorned it by great thought, and great beauty of diction. This, I think,
was the last of these festivals. They were never meant to be perpetual;
but were only resorted to for political union and excitement during the
stage that we had now passed through. Public meetings of all kinds soon
became so common that, as substantive events, they are not worth
recording. These Fox dinners did incalculable good. They animated, and
instructed, and consolidated the Whig party with less trouble and more
effect than anything else that could have been devised. A kindred
gathering upon a larger scale was held on the 5th of April 1825, when a
public dinner was given to Brougham upon his first return to Edinburgh.
About 850 were present; being more, I believe, than had ever attended a
public political dinner in Scotland. Of these about fifty were known,
and other fifty understood, to dissent from the political creed of the
meeting, and to have been attracted by curiosity, or by personal regard
to Brougham. But there certainly were 750 persons there openly
professing Whiggism. I had the misfortune to be in the chair. When the
waiters were clearing the tables, and the talking time was approaching,
Brougham told me that he thought the most alarming moment of life was,
when the Speaker, after settling himself into his chair for an important
debate, paused for an instant before calling up the mover; but that he
would rather endure that a hundred times than rise and address the
audience before him, which, he said, was the largest he had ever spoken
to under a roof. If this was the feeling of that practised orator, I
need not be ashamed to confess that I felt very uneasy. However it was,
on the whole, a successful and impressive meeting.
We were now in a pretty keen conflict about the Edinburgh Improvements,
a subject which blazed for a good many years after this. It all related
to the creation of the new southern access by George the Fourth's
Bridge, and of the new western access by the west approach along the
Castle Hill. There were three parties—1st. Those who would be taxed for
nothing. 2d. Those who, being personally interested, insisted to have
themselves and everybody else taxed to any extent. 3d. Those (of whom I
took the lead) who were willing to be taxed, provided new statutory
securities were given for the perpetual openness of Princes Street and
the Mound. This last party finally prevailed: and had it not been for
its efforts, Edinburgh would have been destroyed. These statutory
precautions may possibly be all disregarded hereafter. This will be the
loss and the disgrace of the people themselves, of whom, from their
ordinary apathy about the beauty of their city, I certainly forebode no
good. But meanwhile we did our duty, by both giving them the means of
new improvement, and of saving what excellence they already have. Some
people let their picturesque taste get so sickly that they sigh over the
destruction of every old nuisance or incumbrance. But they never try to
live among these fragments, nor think of the human animals who burrow
there. Everything that has an old history, or an old ornament, or an old
peculiarity, if it can be preserved, ought to be preserved in spite of
all living inconvenience. In these matters mere anti* Scott’s Monument
has since been erected on Princes Street; and the Art Galleries are
rising on the Mound; and a railway pollutes the valley. But the last of
these perfidies was irresistible; and the other two abatements of the
strict exemption that was obtained were consented to, and were quite
right.
Quity is better entitled to be respected than existing comfort. It is
not once in a thousand times that the two are really incompatible. But
it does not follow that present necessities and tastes are to be
sacrificed for the preservation of every tottering gable that would look
well in one of Weirrotter's etchings. That the new approaches are
immense improvements cannot be doubted. That the assessment was too
high, and that there was jobbing, and mismanagement, and trick, and ill
humour, and folly, is true. But this bad was temporary, and the good is
permanent. And it is also true that the south approach might have been
joined to the New Town at a better level, and in a far more handsome
manner. But still what we got was better than nothing.
There was at this period, and for some years both before and after, a
very pretty quarrel between the people of Leith and the town council of
Edinburgh. The council was the proprietor of the harbour, and superior
of the town of Leith; and, as such, had the entire mismanagement of that
place. The result consequently was that the docks were bankrupt, and
that though Leith was then even baser in its politics than its masters,
the masters had scarcely a friend in that town. At last, after a long,
and now incomprehensible, but most rancorous jumble which, whatever its
details, was in principle a struggle for liberation on the one side, and
for power on the other, Edinburgh fell into a pit dug by itself. It
proposed to sell the harbour and the docks to a joint-stock company,
which was to pay the debt, and to make money by imposing higher rates.
The shares were speedily sold, and a bill to legalize the transaction
was brought into Parliament. But the opposition to it was made
irresistible by the discovery that several of the town council were
shareholders; that is, that the public trustees had sold the subject of
the trust to themselves for individual profit. After this truth had
transpired, Abercromby had little difficulty in getting this municipal
job quashed. The merchant company of Leith, a strongly Tory body,
thanked him and their other parliamentary supporters—almost all Whigs,
for u defending the rights of an unrepresented trading port against the
influence of a great city having powerful parliamentary friends.” The
expression of this truth, that Leith had suffered from want of
representation, was worth the whole struggle. The conflict raged for a
long time: but its result was that, bit by bit, Leith was successful;
till at last, though not a royal burgh, it, like some other places, was
included in the general measures that were adopted in a few years after
this for the cleansing of those chartered abominations. Throughout the
course of the dispute, the parties were fairly enough matched in point
of intemperance and unreasonableness; and if Leith had the advantage in
coarse violence, Edinburgh was compensated by its superiority in
disdainful insolence. In the eyes of quiet observers, the true value of
the affair lay in its aiding the growth of independence in Leith. The
town council actually succeeded in creating a public spirit in that
prostrate place.
The opening of the year 1826 will ever be sad to those who remember the
thunderbolt which then fell on Edinburgh in the utterly unexpected
bankruptcy of Scott, implying the ruin of Constable the bookseller, and
of Ballantyne the printer. If an earthquake had swallowed half the town,
it would not have produced greater astonishment, sorrow, and dismay.
Ballantyne and Constable were merchants, and their fall, had it reached
no further, might have been lamented merely as the casualty of commerce.
But Sir Walter! The idea that his practical sense had so far left him as
to have permitted him to dabble in trade, had never crossed our
imagination. How humbled we felt when we saw him—the pride of us all,
dashed from his lofty and honourable station, and all the fruits of his
well-worked talents gone. He had not then even a political enemy. There
was not one of those whom his thoughtlessness had so sorely provoked,
who would not have given every spare farthing he possessed to retrieve
Sir Walter. Well do I remember his first appearance after this calamity
was divulged, when he walked into Court one day in January 1826. There
was no affectation, and no reality, of facing it; no look of
indifference or defiance; but the manly and modest air of a gentleman
conscious of some folly, but of perfect rectitude, and of most heroic
and honourable resolutions. It was on that very day, I believe, that he
said a very fine thing. Some of his friends offered him, or rather
proposed to offer him, enough of money, as was supposed, to enable him
to arrange with his creditors. He paused for a moment; and then,
recollecting his powers, said proudly—“No! this right hand shall work it
all off! ” His friend William Clerk supped with him one night after his
ruin was declared. They discussed the whole affair, its causes and
probable consequences, openly and playfully; till at last they laughed
over their noggins at the change, and Sir Walter observed that he felt u
something like Lambert and the other Regicides, who, Pepys says when he
saw them going to be hanged and quartered, were as cheerful and
comfortable as any gentlemen could be in that situation.”
*Scott says in his Diary, 17th January 826, “I felt rather sneaking as I
came home from the Parliament House—felt as if I were liable monstrari
digito in no very pleasant way,” etc. (Lockhart’s Life, c. 66). Very
natural for him to feel so; but it was the feeling of nobody else.
In spite of great mercantile depression, this was the period of the most
violent Joint-Stock mania that ever seized this kingdom. I conld not
have conceived that madness could he so universal. There was no peculiar
temptation, from high profits, for men not regular merchants to
adventure in trade; nor were purses too heavy with unemployed guineas
nor was any new field suddenly discovered. It was a mere Joint-Stock
epidemic. Wofully were those who relied on the prudence of the Scotch
deceived. Neither the Parisians during the Mississippi insanity, nor the
English under the South Sea delusion, exceeded the folly, or the
knavery, of the cautious and moral Scot under his excitement of 1825 and
1826. The newspapers of the day contain little else than advertisements
and recommendations of Joint-Stock Associations, in not one out of five
hundred of which was there either plausibility or honesty. Everything
unattainable, or useless if attained, was to be made easy and valuable,
provided people would only take shares; which the ignorant, the excited,
and the deceived by gambling directors or by paid secretaries and
agents, took—to no other effect than enabling fraudulent speculators to
make gain in the market by crazy prices, paid by fools, for what did not
exist. The schemes were so numerous, that after exhausting every subject
to which they could be applied, there was actually a joint-stock company
instituted for the purpose of projecting and organising joint-stock
companies. The fever lasted about a year. Not one honest penny was made
out of all this villainy and folly. The loss was enormous.
Among other remedies for the prevailing commercial distress, Government
proposed to check the unlimited circulation of small notes by the Scotch
banks. Whether this was wise or not, there can be no doubt that the
matter was taken up by the ministry in a narrow, ignorant, and
exclusively English spirit. This country was instantly in a blaze from
one end to the other, I never saw Scotland unanimous before. It was
really refreshing to see the spirit with which the whole land rose as
one man. Even the Tories were for a season reconciled to resistance and
public meetings. The Lord Provost of Edinburgh presided at an assemblage
of the lieges, where there was more violence, though the meeting was
composed solely of what are technically called respectable persons, than
in all the past gatherings of the Whigs put together. Scott, tempted by
the bankers, came forward, under the name of Malachi Malagrowther, in
the new character of a political pamphleteer. Poets may be excused for
being bad political economists. If a nice question of monetary or
commercial policy could be settled by jokes, Malachi would be a better
economist than Adam Smith. His lamentations over tlie loss of Scotch
sinecures was very injudicious, and did neither him nor such of these
things as remained any good. He was mentioned in Parliament by his own
friends with less respect than one would ever wish to be shewn him.
The opening in 1826 of an establishment called the New Town Markets at
Stockbridge recalled some curious, though not distant, recollections of
Edinburgh. It was only about fifteen or twenty years before that our
only fish market was in the Fish Market Close, a steep, narrow, stinking
ravine. The fish were generally thrown out on the street at the head of
the close, whence they were dragged down by dirty boys or dirtier women;
and then sold unwashed—for there was not a drop of water in the place
—from old, rickety, scaly, wooden tables, exposed to nil the rain, dust,
and filth; an abomination the recollection of which greatly impaired the
pleasantness of the fish at a later hour of the day. Yet when the market
was removed to its present situation below the North Bridge, there was
an outcry as if hereditary nastiness, like other abuses, had been made,
by time, necessary for comfort. I doubt if there was a single fish shop
in Edinburgh so early as the year 1822. Our vegetables had to pass
through as bad a process. They were entirely in the hands of a college
of old gin-drinking women who congregated witli stools and tables round
the Tron Church. A few of the aristocracy of these ladies—the burgo-mistresses,
who had established a superior business—the heads of old booths—marked
their dignity by an awning of dirty canvas or tattered carpet; and every
table had its tallow candle and paper lantern at night. There was no
water here either, except what flowed down the gutter, which however was
plentifully used. Fruit had a place on the table, but kitchen vegetables
lay bruised on the ground. I doubt if there was a fruit shop in
Edinburgh in 1815. All shops indeed meant for the sale of any article,
on which there was a local tax or market-custom, were discouraged by the
magistrates or their tacksman as interfering with the collection of the
dues. The growth of shops of all kinds in the New Town is remarkable. I
believe there were not half a dozen of them in the whole New Town, west
of St. Andrew Street, in 1810. The dislike to them was so great, that
any proprietor who allowed one was abused as an unneighbourly fellow.
At the east end of what was formerly u The Physic Garden”—the low flat
ground between the North Bridge and Leith Wynd, stand two venerable
relics—Trinity Church, the best, and almost the only, ancient Gothic
edifice in Edinburgh; and Trinity Hospital, a very curious place.
More than fifty years ago, this Garden was the favourite open-day haunt
of the literature and polite flirtation of Edinburgh. But, in those days
the Assembly-room was in a close (still called the Assembly Close) in
the High Street; St. Cecilia’s Hall was in the Cowgate; the Canongate
was occupied by the nobility and gentry; the ploughed fields now covered
by the New Town were no more thought of than the fields of Fife. Ever
since the Physic Garden was removed to Leith Walk—where it was called
the Botanical, and from whence it has made another move to its present
situation at Inverleith, the old place has been gradually falling every
year into a more neglected and squalid condition. Although probably the
North Loch, with its bad drainage and burghal sediments, was seldom an
inoffensive neighbour, yet in spite of its lowness this must have been
rather a good site originally, when there were no buildings to the north
or east. The Calton Hill, with its rockiest face, stood right in front
on the north; the sea must have been visible on the east; the Castle
rose on the west; and the ridge of the Old Town bristled up to the
south. Holyrood had not a better position.
The Hospital is for the benefit, not of common paupers, but of old men
and women once in the prospect of a better fate. A few of them are
presented by the heirs of donors. All the rest must be burgesses of
Edinburgh, or of burgesses’ families; and they are selected by the Town
Council. There are generally about thirty-five or forty in the house,
and many more out, of it. The institution was founded in 1462 by Mary of
Gueldres; but the building underwent considerable alteration about 1587.
It would not be easy to produce anything meaner than its outside. It
consists merely of a respectable common-place house, at right angles to
which there runs a long, thin, two-storied building like a long
granary—all cased in dingy rough-cast, without any attempt at ornament
or proportion. There is a bit of garden about a hundred feet square; but
it is only turf, surrounded by a gravel walk. An old thorn and an old
elm, destined never to be in leaf again, tell of old springs and of old
care. And there is a wooden summer-house, which has heard many an old
man’s crack, and seen the sun soften many an old man’s wrinkles.
But the door is no sooner opened, than antiquity is seen standing within
it. Narrow stone stairs, helped out by awkward bits of wooden ones; oak
tables of immoveable massiveness high-backed carved chairs with faded
tapestry on their seats and elbows; a few strong heavy cabinets;
drawers, and leaves, and bolts, and locks, and hinges, once the pride of
their inventors, and now exciting a smile at ancient carpentry; passages
on miscalculated levels ; long narrow halls, and little inaccessible
odd-shaped rooms; these and other vestiges of the primary formation
arrest and delight the visitor. All the apartments except four are very
small.
Of these four, one seems to be their academic grove. It is a long place,
apparently for mere lounging, for it contains nothing except a large
shelved press, which is the library. This library consists, so far as I
can guess by the eye, of about 500 or 000 volumes. Many of them are
suitable for the readers; many not. There are several beautiful books of
the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. These, some think, it would be
no disrespect to the ancient donors to sell for the purchase of more
useful works. The chaplain, however, with a just pride in his
antiquities, is shocked at the proposal; and he is right. There is
sometimes a good deal of reading among these aged students; at present
very little. It comes in fits like other fashions. A second of these
long apartments is used as a chapel and banqueting room. There are two
long tables, with chairs, and a passage between the tables. The
pensioner’s position is the same, whether he is at dinner or at sermon.
An old low pulpit stands at the end of the room; and before the pulpit
there is a black article, said to be positively u John Knox’s
sacramental table.” The third of these rooms seems to extend the whole
length of the building. It is about ninety or a hundred feet long, and
was originally about thirty or thirty-five feet wide. But its width has
been contracted by operations, which have converted it into a city for
human beavers. Along one side a range of ten wooden cabins projects into
the room. It is just a range of wooden boxes, placed on the floor, along
one side of the wall. Each box is about seven feet square, detached from
its neighbour, and with its own door and window—all the windows looking
into the room. These cabins, each of which houses a pensioner, narrow
the room to the extent of their own depth, on the one side. On the
opposite side, it is narrowed by a partition reaching from the floor to
the ceiling. Between this partition and the outer wall there are two
rows of cabins, one above the other. The lower row is entered by doors
opening into the long room. The upper row is reached by neat wooden
stairs. There are five of these stairs; and most picturesque they are.
They project into the room, all to the same extent—probably three feet,
and all with the same curve to the left, not unlike outer stairs to hay
lofts. Each of the five leads to a small landing place, off which are
two cabins.
There are thus thirty cabins in that room; ten in the form of boxes, on
the floor, on one side; and twenty within the partition on the opposite
side, ten of which are below and ten above; these last ten reached by
the five outside wooden stairs. And between these lines of pigmy palaces
there is a space of about fifteen or eighteen feet left free, along the
whole length of the room. These human pigeonholes have immemorially been
termed "arks”— a name which, holding ark to mean chest, describes them
very correctly. Each ark contains the bed, chair, table, and little
mirror, of its single inhabitant, and any other article of comfort or
decoration that the occupier may happen to have. They are all neat and
comfortable. Several contain chests of drawers; and some are gay with
ornament. One duenna had her cupboard, with her own books, and her
umbrella hanging from a brass hook, and every "coigne of vantage" graced
by shells, and human figures, and trees, and animals—all cut by herself,
out of pasteboard, and gloriously painted. Several others have carried
with them into these sad though kindly retreats similar articles;
plainly once the pride of their better days.
The fourth long apartment is lined on one side by another row of cabins;
and there is space for an opposite row if required. Besides these
roosts, which being both the parlour and the bed-chamber are truly the
ark of each occupant, there are common rooms, with fires and carpets,
where the inmates repair when they want talk, heat, or a social doze.
The walls of the chapel are entirely covered with wooden tablets,
containing inscriptions in gilt letters on black grounds, immortalizing
the memories of the various donors of merks or pounds Scots. The name of
many a citizen, illustrious in his day, is there; the title of many a
family, once green bay trees, now dead roots. I observe one donation in
1632; and, no doubt, there are some still older.
The community is presided over by a chaplain and a governess. The
chaplain spends most of his day there, and may reside constantly if he
pleases. However, he can never be long absent; for besides worship twice
a day, he has to ask a blessing on all their meals. His drawing-room is
scarcely ten feet square. But it is dignified by old chairs, an old
table, an old desk, an old mirror, besides books and prints. The little
cheerful round incumbent talks so happily of his own position, and so
affectionately of every individual pensioner, that a bishopric, nay even
a Scotch kirk, could scarcely increase his delight. The elysium of the
queen is fully as tiny, and as old, and as nice. Besides being graced by
various achievements of her own needle, it is enlivened by a blue
parrot, on a bright perch, and a canary in a brass wire cage with doors
and windows like a cathedral. On my last visit she insisted on my
entering her bed-room—smaller than even the parlour; but what a coverlet
of patch-work! Cheerfulness beamed from her face, and pride elated her
heart. How cruel that, with such a pair, celibacy is the law of the
place.
The subjects of these two sovereigns seem to be as happy as age, when
combined with final destitution and with the recollection of more
hopeful days, can probably ever be. They are decent in their apparel,
clean in their domicile, and, so far as a stranger can discover, are
kindly used, and kindly thought of. That they are followed into the last
asylum that can ever shelter them bv grateful recollections, and even by
some friendships, as well as by discontent, jealousy, quarrels, and all
other passions that cling to the still beating heart, is certain. They
are human. They doubtless have their magnates, their disputed
principles, their wrongs, intrigues, and factions. The dulness of their
day is, no doubt, relieved by occasional dissention and ingratitude. But
there is as little of this, I understand, as generally enlivens
hospitals. And certainly their bodies are not ill cared for. Every one
seems proud of his own ark. They sit in these retreats, and come out,
and go in—opening and shutting their own front doors, as if each felt
that it was he who had got the state room.
One of the present female pensioners is ninety-six. She was sitting
beside her own fire. The chaplain shook her kindly by the hand, and
asked her how she was. u Very weel—-just in my creeping ordinary.” There
is one Catholic there—a little merry woman; obviously with some gentle
blood in her veins, and delighted to allude to it. This book she had got
from Sir John Something; her great friend had been a Lady Something
Cuningham; and her spinet was the oldest that had ever been made; to
convince me of which she opened it, and pointed exultingly to the year
1776. Neither she, nor the ninety-six year old, was in an ark, but in an
ordinary small room. On overhearing my name, she said that she was once
at Miss Brandon’s boarding school in Bristo Street, with a Miss Matilda
Cockburn, a 44 little pretty girl.” I told her that I remembered that
school quite well, and that that girl was my sister; and then I added,
as a joke, that all the girls at that school were said to have been
pretty, but all light-headed and much given to flirtation. The tumult
revived in the vestal’s veins. Delighted with the imputation, she rubbed
her hands together, and giggled till she wept, and exclaimed, and pro-testedr
and giggled more, and appeared to force back recollections that made her
blush. She said she liked her fellow pensioners, “but no’ their
religion; an’ they dinna like mine.” Of the last fact I had a tolerable
proof, on going into a room where several of the women were. One of them
asked me if I could tell them the name of a bird they had just got, and
which was in a cage there. I told them it was a cardinal. On which the
presbyterian sybils burst out into a jocular, but not ill-natured,
roar—“A caardinal! hear that! a caardinal! od ou’ maun send it doon to
the Caatholic!” This is Trinity Hospital. Time, in its course over
Edinburgh, has left no other such picturesque deposit.
In a short time, the place shall know it no more! But the public will be
gratified by a railway station. Trinity College Church too—the last and
finest Gothic fragment in Edinburgh, though implored for by about four
centuries, will disappear for the accommodation of a railway! An outrage
by sordid traders, virtually consented to by a tasteless city, and
sanctioned by an insensible Parliament. I scarcely know a more curious
instance of ignorant insensibility than the apology that is made for
this piece of desecration. It is said that the edifice is to be
replaced, exactly as it is, in some better situation. And it is really
thought that the Pyramids would remain the Pyramids, or Jerusalem
Jerusalem, provided only their materials were replaced in London. Oxford
would be Oxford, though in Manchester, if its stones were preserved.
These people would remove Pompeii for a railway, and tell us they had
applied it to a better purpose in Dundee.
Lord Hermand having retired, Cranstoun succeeded him, and took his seat
on the bench in November 1826. His removal was a great loss to the bar,
which he had long adorned, and where he had the entire confidence of the
public. And though his judicial qualities, at least the most difficult
ones, were of the highest order, it was seen that a long apprenticeship
in the obscurity of the Outer House might prevent his real eminence from
being soon felt. One of the great obstacles with which a Scotch judge
has to contend is, that so little is done publicly, in open court, and
on expositions of fact or of argument which the whole audience may
understand. Everything, even talent and learning, is buried under
perplexed incomprehensible written statements, through which the highest
legal luminousness may often struggle in vain to shine with any
splendour visible except to the few who know the case.
Moncreiff was appointed Dean in place of Cranstoun; and at his election
made a characteristic address, warm in heart, and solid in honesty.
Cranstoun’s name had been placed after that of Hope, the
Solicitor-General, in the Commission for the visitation of the
Universities of Scotland issued in 1826. This induced Cranstoun to put a
protest on the proceedings of the Commission, claiming precedence for
the Dean of Faculty over the Solicitor-General. As soon as Moncreiff’s
address was done, therefore, the Solicitor, to make all sure rose and
stated that though, from courtesy, he intended to yield the professional
precedency to the present, as lie had done to the last, Dean, he still
claimed it as the right of his office, and meant to put his claim by
protest on the Faculty records. This was irresistible to the
combativeness of Moncreiff; who sprung on the point like a tiger, and
said firmly— u And gentlemen, I shall certainly answer that protest. For
I do solemnly aver and assert that your Dean has precedence over his
Majesty’s Solicitor-General.” It was all a very gratifying scene; marked
by much kindness and liberality on all sides. Everybody felt the justice
of MoncreifFs triumph 5 a man who had fought his way, every inch, purely
by his own exertions. I thought of the feelings of Sir Harry.
It was in April 1827 that the hearts of those who had been long
labouring for the liberation of Scotland, and had watched and directed
the course of improved public opinion, and had been sometimes encouraged
by its progress to hope that their country might see better days, were
at last cheered by the advance of the liberal party, under the
administration of Canning. The retirement of Lord Melville from the
government of Scotland was not an event for which, in itself any candid
Scotch Whig could rejoice; because no man, individually, could have
conducted the affairs of the country with greater good sense and
fairness, or with less of party prejudice or bitterness. But, his
ceasing to be in power was the mark of a change absolutely necessary for
the elevation of this part of the kingdom; and accordingly it was viewed
first with stupid dismay, and then with abuse of his want of skill, by
those to whom the idea of this elevation was unbearable. Abercromby
opened his mind fully to Canning on the state of Scotland; particularly
on the necessity of letting it be governed by the ministry, or by some -
known and responsible part of it, specially assigned to the duty by
constitutional office, instead of handing us over as a province to some
proconsul, and taking no more thought of us. Previous to this
communication, Canning had, in his ignorance, proceeded on the notion
that this was the established system for the government of Scotland, and
had consented “to let Lord Binning have Scotland.” But the remonstrances
of Abercromby, Kennedy, and other Scotch members, put an end to this,
and the reign of the new vicegerent, which began upon Saturday, ended by
a formal abdication on the following Tuesday.
But Canning’s death, which took place in the autumn of 1827, greatly
alarmed us; the more so, from the undisguised expectation of those whom
aversion to the liberality of his principles had half excluded from
power, that they would be restored again to their ordinary omnipotence.
But after a few weeks of fearful doubt, they were disappointed; and, in
so far as regarded Scotland, matters were rather worse for them than
before; because Lord Lansdowne, a steady Whig, and in the confidence of
the leaders of that party in Scotland, became Home Secretary, with
Abercromby and Kennedy as his chief Scotch advisers. The extent to
which, so long as there was any doubt which party was to prevail, both
seemed inclined to coalesce, afforded an example of the meaning of the
policy, by which kings are said sometimes to play one faction off
against another, by giving none any ground for despair. The Whigs,
thankful for every approach towards a better system, and wisely
considering that each step facilitated the next one, gave their aid,
honestly, to the improved Government. The Tories, thankful for not being
altogether excluded, but alarmed at every infusion of Whiggism,
concurred, though with a deep inward grudge, in that apparent
approbation which could not safely be withheld. And so, for a season
both were amiable and reasonable; but always with the material
difference that the one was gay and hopeful, the other gloomy and
desponding. The result over the community, on the whole, was a very
great rise of confidence in the ultimate, and not very distant, triumph
of the principles, which it had for so long-been nearly the sole object
of the Tory party to resist; and a consequent increase of the boldness
and openness with which those principles were pushed, not merely by
their known and established friends, but by many who had never come
forward on such matters.
There could scarcely have been a better example of this than in a little
bit of rebellion which broke out even in the peaceful and loyal Society
of Writers to his Majesty’s Signet. Mr. Colin Mackenzie, the
deputy-Keeper, having resigned, William Dundas, the principal Keeper,
wished to appoint a son of the Lord President. It is said that the
President objected to this on the ground of his son’s youth; he being,
if major, not much more, and not yet a member of the Society. It was
then resolved to associate him with my schoolfellow Kichard Mackenzie of
Dolphinton, a sensible and honourable man; and a commission was issued
in favor of them both. The Writers took this to be a mere veil, and not
a thick one, for putting a boy over them, and got into a blaze, and
expectorated in resolutions and protests; after which, obtaining no
redress, they resolved (18tli January 1828) not to allow the offensive
deputies to preside at their meetings. This brought the matter into
Court, where, I believe, it was afterwards found that the Keeper, and in
his absence the deputy-Keeper, was ex officio chairman of all meetings
of the Society. This outbreak was after only a few months of an improved
government. A similar impatience of domination was evinced in every town
council, every corporation, every court of freeholders, and in general
in all meetings over the country. The Faculty of Advocates would not
have behaved with such vigour. But we have no pure corporation spirit;
and the Writers are full of it. Our merit is personal, and we care
little for the body. Their professional glory arises from that of their
order, and it is the idol. And I doubt if the Writers, indignant as they
were, would have been seized with so unusual a fit of virtue, if they
had suspected what happened within one single week; which was, that the
political scene was suddenly changed, and the old hands restored to
their old work. Huskisson and the other friends of Canning who, on his
death, had joined the Whigs to exclude the Tories, found it convenient
to prove false to their dead master, and now joined the Tories to
exclude the Whigs. Lansdowne and his party withdrew from the Government.
The restored seemed to be perfectly aware of the increased strength
given to any party by its return to power after a short and abortive
exclusion. Our fears were not much less than their hopes. Neither of us
saw with sufficient certainty liow strongly the course of public opinion
was setting in towards reform.
When the repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts was under discussion
this spring, we had an excellent public meeting* in aid of the first
great modern triumph. Sir John Dalrymple was in the chair; Sir James
Moncreiff f and the Bev. Dr. McCrie were the principal speakers.
Moncreiff's speech was most excellent; nervous, well informed, and
breathing in every word his deep and pious honesty. The Assembly Boom
was crowded by people of the middle ranks of all sects and
parties—except one. I did not observe a single adherent of Government.
Their absence said little for their discretion; the crowd little for the
security of their power.
On the 11th of June 1828 Dugald Stewart died, at the age of about
seventy-five. He was the last of his illustrious class. Though enfeebled
for some years, the decline of his life, down almost to the very last
day, was personally comfortable, and in reference to his philosophy
splendid. His intellect continued so entirely unbroken, that the period
between his first attack of palsy in 1821, and his last on the day
before his death was employed in the revision and improvement of his
works, which he could not touch without having the favourite occupations
of his earlier days recalled to him in their original freshness. His two
last volumes, of which he even corrected the press himself within a very
few months of his death, are so tinged with his lectures, that I cannot
read them without thinking I hear his pleasing voice. He was buried in
the north-west angle of the Canongate churchyard. The magistrates and
professors attended; but there was no attempt to make it a public
funeral. 1 could not resist going to the Calton Hill, and contemplating
a ceremony which awakened so many associations. The very Canongate has a
sort of sacredness in it. Independently of more distant historical
recollections, such as its once containing the residences of many of the
nobility of Scotland, by whose titles its principal places are still
marked, and its being the avenue to our Palace, Parliament House, and
Castle, what an interest is imparted to its old ridgy back and smoky
chimneys by the still unchanged houses of Smith, Karnes, Moriboddo, and
of him whose ashes were that day committed to its soil!
A meeting of his friends was held on the 9 th of July; when it was
resolved to erect a monument to his memory. The Lord Chief Commissioner
(Adam), who was in the chair, stated that he himself was then the only
person alive who had heard Stewart first read his essay u on Dreaming/'
This was at a literary society when the author was under twenty. The
prevailing, though not the unanimous, feeling was that the monument
should be architectural, and placed on the Calton Hill; which was this
very summer (1828) relieved of a horrid old rubble dike which used to
surround the Observatory, and was adorned by a handsome wall,
protecting, yet disclosing, the astronomical building and the monument
of John Playfair. There has always been an opinion with some that
nothing should have been built on the Calton Hill, and that it should
have been left to what is called nature—that is, as a piece of waste
ground for blackguards and washerwomen. Those who think so must of
course have objected to the Temple of Minerva on the Acropolis of
Athens. So as the prospects are preserved, it cannot be too much
ornamented by handsome stairs, broad level walks, sculptured stone
benches, and above all monumental buildings. The silent beauty of
architecture, if consecrated to great names, would make that eminence
the noblest cemetery of immortals in Europe. But no edifice connected
with common habitation ought to be permitted. The nearest tolerated
approach to the living ought to be the Observatory, holding communion
with the heavens, and the Parthenon, used as a receptacle of art. And no
building, not even a monument, ought to be tolerated, except at a price
implying a high order of merit, and probably expressing the
contributions of public gratitude. If anything under £2000 be admitted,
we shall have the tombs of Provosts. The air of the place ought to be
kept pure, and its associations inspiring.
In September 1828, Richardson and I visited Scott for a few days at
Abbotsford, and had the rare good fortune to find him nearly alone ; and
nothing could be more delightful. His simplicity and naturalness after
all his fame are absolutely incredible. I remember him when he was
famous for almost nothing except imitating Eskgrove (a power which
fortunately he has never lost), and his manners are the same now that
they were then. No bad idea will be formed of Scott's conversation by
supposing one of his Scotch novels to be cut into talk. It is not so
much conversation as a joyous flow of anecdote, story, character, and
scene, mostly humorous, always graphic, and never personal or ill
natured. His habits at this time were these. He rose about six; wrote
from about half-past six till nine—the second series of the Tales of a
Grandfather being then the work; breakfasted and lounged from nine to
eleven wrote from eleven till about two; walked till about four; dined
at five, partaking freely, but far from immoderately, of various wines ;
and then, as soon as the ladies withdrew, taking to cigars and hot
whisky-toddy ; went to the drawingroom soon, where he inspired everybody
with his passion for Scotch music, and, if anxiously asked, never
refused to recite any old ballad or tell any old tale. The house was
asleep by eleven. When fitted up for dinner, he was like any other
comfortably ill-dressed gentleman. But in the morning, with the large
coarse jacket, great stick, and leathern cap, he was Dandy Dinmont, or
Dick Hattrick—a smuggler or a poacher. Would that his money and his care
had' been given to a better subject than Abbotsford.
I was much amused by his account of an early anticipation of Cranstoun’s
professional success. Within a few weeks after he, Scott, and William
Erskine had put on the gown, being in Selkirkshire, they were all
invited to dinner by an-old drunken Selkirk writer, who had—what was
worth three young advocates’ attention—a great deal of bad business.
Cranstoun, who was never any thing at a debauch, was driven off the
field, with a squeamish stomach and a woful countenance, shamefully
early.
Erskine, always ambitions, adhered to the bowl somewhat longer; but
Scott who, as he told us, "was at home with the hills and the whisky
punch,” not only triumphed over these two, but very nearly over the
landlord. As they were mounting their horses to ride home, the
entertainer let the other two go without speaking to them; but he
embraced Scott, assuring him that he would rise high, "And I’ll tell ye
what, Maister Walter—that lad Cranstoun may get to the tap o’ the bar if
he can; but tak ma word for’t—it’s no be by drinking.”
A deep sensation of horror was excited at the end of the year by the
exposure of what are called u The West-Port Murders.” It was only for a
single murder that Burke and Macdougal were tried; but it was nearly
certain that, within a year or two, Burke and Hare had murdered about
sixteen people, for the sale of their bodies to anatomists; and after
his conviction Burke confessed this. Mon-creiff and I were drawn into
the case by the junior counsel. The evidence against Burke was far too
clear to be shaken by even Moncreiff’s energy and talent; but the woman,
who had been assigned to my care, escaped, because there were some
material doubts in her favor.0 We carried two important points, after a
battle with the Court, which would probably have been decided otherwise,
if the leaning of their lordships had been feebly resisted. These were—
our right to have each murder tried separately, and to impeach the
credit of the accomplices by questioning them about their accession to
other murders or crimes. No case ever struck the public heart or
imagination with greater horror. And no wonder. For the regular demand
for anatomical subjects, and the high prices given, held out a constant
premium to murder; and when it was shewn to what danger this exposed the
unprotected, every one felt himself living in the midst of persons to
whom murder was a trade. All our anatomists incurred a most unjust, and
a very alarming, though not an unnatural odium Dr. Knox in
particular, against whom not only the anger of the populace, but the
condemnation of more intelligent persons, was specially directed. But
tried in reference to the invariable, and the necessary practice of the
profession, our anatomists hag!”—“the gudgeons swallow it!” and I
suppose that a credulous quaker, whose work (on the principles of
morality) was reviewed in that article, believes this, and, as I
understand, comments upon it as a piece of professional fraud. It is
utterly untrue. No one could be more honestly convinced of any thing
than I was, and am, that there was not sufficient legal evidence to
warrant a conviction of Helen Macdougal. Therefore, no such expressions
or sentiment could be uttered. At any rate none such, and none of that
tendency, were uttered.
Except that he murdered, Burke was a sensible, and what might be called
a respectable, man ; not at all ferocious in his general manner, sober,
correct in all his other habits, and kind to his relations. Though not
regularly married, Helen Macdougal was his wife; and when the jury came
in with the verdict convicting him, but acquitting her, his remark was—u
Well! thank God you’re safe!”
In March 1829 we had a magnificent meeting in the Assembly Boom to
assist Wellington and Peel, in their tardy and now awkward Emancipation
necessity, by a petition in favor of the Catholics. A shilling a head
was taken at the door, and about 1700 shillings were got. As from the
confusion several passed untaxed, there must have been about 2000
present; and there were at the least double that number outside, who
could not get in. It was a union of both the ordinary political parties.
Sir William Arbuthnot, a strong Tory, and who had been Provost when
George the Fourth was here^ was in the chair. The speakers were
Moncreiff, Dr.Maclagan, Jeffrey, Murray, tlie Solicitor-General (Hope),
Chalmers, and myself. No meeting could be more successful*, and the
combination of persons in general so repugnant, gave it great weight
over the country. It must have suggested a striking contrast to those
who remembered that it was in this very city that, only about forty
years ago, the law had not strength to save the houses and chapels of
the Catholics from popular conflagration. There were, as there still
are, some who, if they could have done it, would have thought the
repetition of that violence a duty; and there were many even at this
meeting who had no better reason for their support of emancipation than
that it implied the support of ministry. Those, whose religious horror
of Catholicism made them think the application of the principles of
civil toleration to that faith a sin, did not appear; but procured
signatures to an opposite petition by harangues and placards borrowed
from Lord George Gordon. The petitions exhibited a striking proof of the
strong Anti-Popish taste of the people of Scotland. The one in favor of
toleration, notwithstanding every fair exertion, was only signed by
about 8000 persons ; while the one to the Commons against it was signed
by about 13,000, and the one to the Lords (which lay a little longer for
signature) by about 18,000. The 8000 were a higher and more varied class
than ever concurred in any political measure in Edinburgh.
Government had for some years been lopping our two Scotch Revenue Boards
of Customs and Excise, and preparing for their final eradication; and
all being ready, in 1829 the last vestige of them was obliterated. This
was the first of a series of reductions, some of which more reasonable
men than Malagrowther lament as hurtful and degrading to Scotland. No
doubt, in point of respectability, we were much the better of all our
ancient establishments—had there been any decent pretence of their still
being of use. But simple uselessness was not their only defect. Very
useful for corruption, they were systematically employed for that
purpose. Considering how far beyond the successful applicant the
influence of patronage reaches, the offices in these two Boards alone,
skilfully distributed among our few freeholders, were sufficient to
purchase a shamefully large extent of servility. Their being abolished
notwithstanding this quality, was the strongest possible proof of their
indefensibleness; and the preference of economy to such power of
corruption was the true merit of Government.
The death of David Cathcart, Lord Alloway, in 1829, made two important
changes in the local leaders of the Whig party, by the promotion of
Moncreiff and Jeffrey.
Alloway was an excellent and most useful man; kind in private life, and
honest in the discharge of his public duties. Without learning or
talent, and awkward in expressing himself either orally or in writing,
he was a good practical lawyer, and remarkably knowing in the management
of the common business of life; and having more sense and modesty than
to aim at objects he could not reach, experience and industry gave him
no competitor within this not very high, but most useful, range. He was
one of the many examples indeed of the moderate degree in which ability,
learning, or accomplishments are necessary in the composition of a good
practical puisne judge. Devotion to duty, zeal to be and to do right,
blandness, industry, and practical skill made his want of the higher
qualities of talent and general knowledge perfectly immaterial, and
indeed scarcely observed. He was deeply involved in all the affairs of
the Whig party during his whole life, till he became a judge; after
this, his sole object was to justify his appointment.
Moncreiff succeeded Alloway, and Jeffrey became Dean of Faculty instead
of Moncreiff. This was not the first time that Peel had raised one of
his opponents to the bench. No doubt Cranstoun, Fullerton, and Moncreiff
could not have been passed over without flagrant injustice, and an
obvious sacrifice of the public interest. But these considerations are
not always conclusive on such occasions; and at any rate it is the
highest praise of a minister that he prefers justice and the public to
his party. There is no other person whose government of Scotland can be
expounded by so honourable a fact as these four promotions. The
advancement of Moncreiff and Jeffrey—the Preses of the Pantheon meeting,
and the Editor of the Edinburgh Review—made those whose memories went
back a few years feel as if they had got into a new world. Jeffrey
expressed a wish that I should second his nomination as Dean; which I
did. What a crowd of recollections and feelings did that scene awaken!
In deference to others who might think that the Dean of Faculty should
not conduct a party publication, he gracefully gave up the editorship of
the Review, the ninety-eighth number of which was his last.
The Arts suffered their severest loss, in the summer of 1829, in the
death of my friend Hugh Williams; by far the most beautiful painter in
water colours that Scotland has yet produced. But, warm-hearted and
honourable, of singular modesty, and almost feminine gentleness, our
affection for the man exceeded even our admiration of the artist.
The heroic and gentle
cheerfulness with which he endured several months of pain and weakness,
under a certainly fatal disease, was a striking example of the power of
a brave and gay spirit over the greatest bodily suffering. Speaking to
me, within three days of his death, of the coming event, he lamented his
separation from his living friends, but said it would be temporary, "and
in the mean while, I shall see Gordon." Delighted with the splendid
prospects of art which he thought he saw opening to Scotland, he urged
me, nearly to the very last, never to relax till I had completed the
reformation of the Academy, which was then in progress ; and which was
effected shortly after his death.
The formation of the "Scottish Academy of Painting, Sculpture, and
Architecture,” lately completed, was one of the most important
occurrences in the progress of Scotland. There is an advanced state of
art at which probably all artificial associations of artists are
useless, if not hurtful. But in an infant stage, during which the public
taste requires to be excited and educated, and artists need importance
and protection by formal brotherhood, such unions are nearly
indispensable. The only thing of the kind that existed in this country
was the "Institution for the encouragement of the Fine Arts,” which had
done little good. It excluded all artists from its management, without
substituting more reasonable men in their room ; and this produced
jealousies and dissensions ; which induced the artists to swarm off, and
begin the Academy.
When it was first formed it consisted merely of the artists who were
particularly displeased with the Institution for the Promotion of the
Fine Arts; the majority, and the best, of their brethren still adhering
to that body. After about two years’ more experience of the system of
management in the Institution, it was found by the adherents that there
could be no cordial union between them and it, and not even a
comfortable endurance of each other. Each, as usual, blamed the other;
and I, who know the whole facts, think that though there was
unreasonableness on both sides, the artists had the least of it. It was
plain however that they must part; but the original members of the
academy objected to be swamped by a gush of so many acceders all at
once. This for a while threatened to be insuperable; till the one party
referred it all to the Solicitor-General (Hope), and the other party to
me; and we married them in a week. This left the Institution without an
artist, and united all the considerable ones, to the number of
forty-two, in the Scottish Academy,*
The new building at the north end of the Mound was opened in 1826, under
the title of "The Royal Institution.” The building, though pleasing, is
not what it ought to have been. It should have been set on a higher
table. But this was not allowed; and thus which, if not distracted by
the jealousies of the profession itself, may render Scotland as
illustrious in art as in other walks of genius.
Amidst many of the improvements under which Edinburgh was still growing
in beauty, there was a scheme by my country neighbour Alexander Trotter
of Dreghom, to which there was only one objection —that it was too
magnificent for execution. Its object was to join the New Town to the
Old, worthily. And this was to be done by sinking the upper end of the
Mound to the level of Princes Street; and, avoiding Bank Street, to
carry that end of the Mound eastward along the north of the Bank of
Scotland, and then south to the High Street, by an opening right upon
St. Giles’ Cathedral. He illustrated the general effect, and all the
details, in captivating views, and working plans; and combined, as it
was to be, with much subordinate decoration, it would have been a very
handsome terrace. But we have no Pericles. The next best project—the
object being to get from the one town to the other controlled, the
architect, William Playfair, did all that taste and the funds admitted
of. Strictly, it ought to have been named after the old historical Board
of Trustees for the improvement of manufactures; because it was by their
money, and for their accommodation chiefly, that it was made; and “The
Trustees' Hall" had been the title, ever since the Union, of the place
in the old town where they had met.
In January 1830, Sir Samuel Shepherd resigned his Chief-Baronship; and
James Abercromby, to his amazement, was sent for by the Duke of
Wellington, and offered the place; which, after great hesitation, he
accepted. Nobody could dream of making judicial work out of our
Exchequer sufficient to give occupation even to a single judge; and
therefore all the good that Abercromby’s friends look for is the
pleasure of his society. Publicly he is thrown away here. Soon after
this the Lord Advocate explained to Parliament the measures which
Government had extracted out of the report of the last Committee on the
Scotch Courts. They all resolved into economy; and their result was to
be a saving of about £23,000 yearly by the abolition of nineteen
offices, including the Lord Chief Commissioner and the two jury
judges—that Court ceasing ; two judges of the Court of Session; two
Barons; the Judge Admiral; the four Consistorial judges; the
Justice-General (at least his salary); and two Clerks •• of Session.
Vigorous pruning; resorted to by Government from mere economy ; and
submitted to by our judges, undoubtedly, in order to strengthen the
claim for a rise of salary. But it was all right in itself; though if it
had been suggested by any one a few years ago, he would have been
treated as a lunatic or a rebel.
George the Fourth died in summer. The first important public occurrence
in Edinburgh under his successor was a meeting (20th August 1830) of
congratulation to the French on their revolution of u The Three Days,”
which drove Charles the Tenth from his throne, and confirmed the
principles of their constitutional charter. Whatever was afterwards
thought of this successful outbreak, no similar event was ever so
generally hailed in this country. Many even of the most sensitive Tories
found it impossible to withhold their cheer from an act of popular
resistance that was just, gallant, as bloodless as was possible, and
completely effective. Their fright at the former revolution revived, and
they were grateful to the Parisians for not repeating its horrors. The
requisition for our meeting contained about a hundred names, of which
about twenty were those of persons to whom not merely revolutions, but
popular assemblies, were abhorrent. Even Sir Walter Scott said to John
Richardson, u Confound these French Ministers! I can’t forgive them for
making a Jacobin of an old Tory like me.” And the Lord Provost was so
far seduced from the usual habit of his place and his party as to
preside though it was known that Joseph Hume was to be present. Similar
assemblages took place over all the country—assemblages, in Scotland,
where a .revolution, which had just dethroned a monarch, was applauded,
openly, and with no opposition or disapprobation ! Who could fail to see
the indication of our own state which this fact implied?
On the 8th of October there was another public meeting about slaves. The
Lord Provost was again in the chair. Jeffrey made a speech and moved
certain resolutions. The Eev. Df. Andrew Thomson, very imprudently,
opposed them, because they pointed at gradual, and not at immediate,
emancipation. This produced an unexpected and awkward discussion, in the
course of which a decent looking man, who agreed with Thomson, said u
Fiat justitia, ruat coelum,” On this the chairman, anxious perhaps to
repair the error of presiding at the “Three Days” meeting, started up
and declared—“ as Provost of this city I cannot sit and hear such
sentiments.” He then walked off; and nobody having sense to take the
chair, the meeting broke up in disorder ; being the first accident of
the kind in Edinburgh. On the 19th Thomson and his friends met again,
and after a powerful speech from him, carried everything their own way.
And after all, the whole difference was verbal; for immediate, as
explained, meant only with all practicable speed, which was exactly what
the cautious meant by gradual.
This autumn wrote an article on the Parliamentary Eepresentation of
Scotland.* This was preparatory to a renewal of the subject in
Parliament. I certainly did not imagine that we were within a few weeks
of a great change. But innumerable and conclusive circumstances shewed
that the public mind was advancing rapidly towards some important
result. It was the certainty that, in reference to the state of public
feeling, the discussion was well-timed that induced me to revive it.
And now the year 1830 is just closing in the *Edinburgh Review No. 103,
art. 10.—Oct. 1830.
Midst of events which will perhaps affect all the future course of my
life, and will certainly he deeply marked in the page of history. In the
beginning of December, the Whigs came into power; avowedly on the great
principle, and for the great object, of Parliamentary Reform. Their
return has as yet been hailed with very general joy. The Tories, seem
struck by a thunderbolt. They can ascribe what is going on to no
political trick, court intrigue, or temporary accident; but reflect with
alarm, that this is the third time within these two years that Whiggism
has been recognised in the cabinet; and that its triumph now is the
natural result of deep-seated causes.
I close this page by saying that Jeffrey has been made Lord Advocate,
and I Solicitor-General, under the ministry of Earl Grey. We have come
upon the public stage in a splendid, but perilous scene. I trust that we
shall do our duty. If we do, we cannot fail to do some good to Scotland.
In the abuses of our representative and municipal systems alone, our
predecessors have left us fields in which patriotism may exhaust itself. |