|
Part I
A Sketch of the
Moral and Physical Character, and of the Institutions and Customs of the
Inhabitants of the Highlands of Scotland
Sketches of the Highlanders
Section X.
Abolition of Hereditary
Jurisdiction— Suppression of the Highland Garb.
The alarm occasioned by
this insurrection, determined government to dissolve the patriarchal
system in the Highlands, the nature, as well as the danger of which, had
the power of the clans been properly directed, was now exhibited to the
country. It would appear that it was considered impracticable to effect
this dissolution of clanship, fidelity, and mutual attachment, between the
Highlanders and their chiefs, by a different and improved modification of
the system and state of society; and, unfortunately, no course was pursued
short of a complete revolution. For this purpose, an act was passed in
1747, depriving all chiefs and landholders of their jurisdictions and
judicial powers; and in August of the same year, it was also enacted, that
any person in the Highlands, possessing or concealing any kind of arms,
should be liable in the first instance, to a severe fine, and be committed
to prison without bail till payment. If the delinquent was a male, and
unable to pay the fine, he was to be sent to serve as a soldier in
America, or, if unfit for service, to be imprisoned for six months; if a
female, she was, besides the fine and imprisonment till payment, to be
detained six months in prison. Seven years' transportation was the
punishment for a second offence.
The Highland garb was
proscribed by still severer penalties. It was enacted, that any person
within Scotland, whether man or boy, (excepting officers and soldiers in
his Majesty's service,) who should wear the plaid, philibeg, trews,
shoulder belts, or any part of the Highland garb; or should use for great
coats, tartans, or party coloured plaid, or stuffs; should, without the
alternative of a fine, be imprisoned, on the first conviction, for six
months without bail, and on the second conviction be transported for seven
years. [Considering the severity of the law against this garb, nothing but
the strong partiality of the people could have prevented its going
entirely into disuse. The prohibitory laws were so long in force, that
more than two-thirds of the generation who saw it enacted had passed away
before the repeal. The youth of the latter period knew it only as an
illegal garb, to be worn by stealth under the fear of imprisonment and
transportation. Breeches, by force of habit, had become so common, that it
is remarkable how the plaid and philibeg were resumed at all.]
The necessity of these
measures is the best apology for their severity; but, however proper it
may have been to dissolve a power which led to such results, and to
deprive men of authority and their followers of arms, which they so
illegally used, the same necessity does not appear to extend to the garb.
"Even the loyal clans," says Dr Johnson, "murmured with an appearance of
justice, that, after having defended the king, they were forbidden to
defend themselves, and that the swords should be forfeited which had been
legally employed. It affords a generous and manly pleasure, to conceive a
little nation gathering its fruits and tending its herds, with fearless
confidence, though it is open on every side to invasion; where, in
contempt of walls and trenches, every man sleeps securely with his sword
beside him, and where all, on the first approach of hostility, come
together at the call to battle, as the summons to a festival show,
committing their cattle to the care of those, whom age or nature had
disabled to engage the enemy; with that competition for hazard and glory,
which operate in men that fight under the eye of those whose dislike or
kindness they have always considered as the greatest evil, or the greatest
good. This was in the beginning of the present century: in the state of
the Highlanders every man was a soldier, who partook of the national
confidence, and interested himself in national honour. To lose this
spirit, is to lose what no small advantage will compensate, when their
pride has been crushed by the heavy hand of a vindictive conqueror, whose
severities have been followed by laws, which, though they cannot be called
cruel, have produced much discontent, because they operate on the surface
of life, and make every eye bear witness to subjection. If the policy of
the disarming act appears somewhat problematical, what must we think of
the subsequent measure of 1747, to compel the Highlanders to lay aside
their national dress? It is impossible to read this latter act, without
considering it rather as an ignorant wantonness of power, than the
proceeding of a wise and a beneficent legislature. To be compelled to wear
a new dress has always been found painful." [Dr Johnson's Journey to the
Highlands.] So the Highlanders found; and it certainly was not consistent
with the boasted freedom of our country, (and in that instance, indeed, it
was shown that this freedom was only a name) to inflict, on a whole
people, the severest punishment short of death, for wearing a particular
dress. Had the whole race been decimated, more violent grief, indignation
and shame, could not have been excited among them, than by being deprived
of this long inherited costume. This was an encroachment on the feelings
of a people, whose ancient and martial garb had been worn from a period
reaching back beyond all history or even tradition.
[Some opinion may be formed
of the importance which Government attached to the garb by the tenor of
the following oath, administered in 1747 and 1748 in Fort William and
other places where the people were assembled for the purpose; those who
refused to take it being treated as rebels: "I. A. B., do swear, and as I
shall answer to God at the great day of judgment, I have not, nor shall
have, in my possession any gun, sword, pistol, or arm whatsoever, and
never use tartan, plaid, or any part of the Highland garb; and if I do so,
may I be cursed in my undertakings, family and property,—may I never see
my wife and children, father, mother, or relations,—may I be killed in
battle as a coward, and lie without Christian burial in a strange land,
far from the graves of my forefathers and kindred; may all this come
across me if I break my oath." The framers of this oath understood the
character of the Highlanders. The abolition of the feudal power of the
chiefs, and the disarming act had little influence on the character of the
people in comparison of the grief, indignation and disaffection occasioned
by the loss of their garb.]
The obstinacy with which
the law was resisted, proceeded no less from their attachment to their
proscribed garb, than from the irksomeness of the dress forced upon them.
Habituated to the free use of their limbs, the Highlanders could ill brook
the confinement and restraint of the Lowland dress, and many were the
little devices which they adopted to retain their ancient garb, without
incurring the penalties of the act, devices which were calculated rather
to excite a smile, than to rouse the vengeance of persecution. Instead of
the prohibited tartan kilt, some wore pieces of a blue, green, or red thin
cloth, or coarse camblet, wrapped round the waist, and hanging down to the
knees like the fealdag. [The fealdag was the same as the philibeg, only
not plaited. The mode of sewing the kilt, into plaits or folds, in the
same manner as the plaid, is said to have been introduced by an Englishman
of the name of Parkinson, early in the last century, which has given rise
to an opinion entertained by many, that the kilt is modern, and was never
known till that period. This opinion is founded on a memorandum left by a
gentleman whose name is not mentioned, and published in the Scots
Magazine. To a statement totally unsupported, little credit can of course
be attached; and it may, surely with as much reason, be supposed, that
breeches were never worn till the present cut and manner of wearing them
came into fashion. As the Highlanders had sufficient ingenuity to think of
plaiting the plaid, it is likely they would be equally ingenious in
forming the kilt; and as it is improbable that an active light-footed
people would go about on all occasions, whether in the house or in the
field, encumbered with twelve yards of plaid, (to say nothing of the
expense of such a quantity), I am less willing to coincide in the modern
opinion, founded on such a slight unauthenticated notice, than in the
universal belief of the people, that the philibeg has been part of their
garb, as far back as tradition reaches.
Since the publication of
the former editions, several friends have represented to me, that a more
decided contradiction ought to be given to the story of Parkinson and his
supposed invention of the kilt, which, they say, is totally unfounded. The
truth is, the thing is not worth contradicting. If the story were true,
which it is not, the whole would amount to this,—that in the reign of
George II. the Highlanders began to wear four yards of tartan instead of
twelve, as was their practice in former reigns. This is one of the
arguments brought forward by some modern authors, to prove that the
Highland garb is of recent introduction.]
The tight breeches were
particularly obnoxious. Some who were fearful of offending, or wished to
render obedience to the law, which had not specified on what part of the
body the breeches were to be worn, satisfied themselves with having in
their possession this article of legal and loyal dress, which, either as
the signal of their submission, or more probably to suit their own
convenience when on journeys, they often suspended over their shoulders
upon their sticks; others, who were either more wary, or less submissive,
sewed up the centre of the kilt, with a few stitches between the thighs,
which gave it something of the form of the trowsers worn by Dutch
skippers. At first these evasions of the act were visited with
considerable severity; but at length the officers of the law seem to have
acquiesced in the interpretation put by the Highlanders upon the
prohibition of the act. This appears from the trial of a man of the name
of M'Alpin, or Drummond Macgregor, from Breadalbane, who was acquitted, on
his proving that the kilt had been stitched up in the middle. [This very
strong attachment to a habit which they thought graceful and convenient,
is not singular among an ancient race, proud of their independence,
manners, customs, and long unbroken descent. It is in every one's memory,
that a dangerous mutiny was produced at Vellore, in the East Indies, by
insisting on an alteration in the dress of the native troops, in the
adjustment of their turbans, and in the cut of their whiskers. There was,
perhaps, a religious feeling mixed with this opposition; yet whiskers and
turbans seem of less importance than a whole garb, such as that the use of
which the Highlanders were prohibited.] This trial took place in 1757, and
was the first instance of relaxation in enforcing the law of 1747.
[Although the severity of this "ignorant wantonness of power" began to be
relaxed in 1757, it was not till the year 1782 that an act, so ungenerous
in itself, so unnecessary, and so galling, was repealed. In the session of
that year, the present Duke of Montrose, then a member of the House of
Commons, brought in a bill to repeal all penalties and restrictions on the
Celtic garb. The motion was seconded by the Earl of Lauderdale, then Lord
Maitland, and passed without a dissenting voice.]
The change produced in the
Highlands, by the disarming and proscribing acts, was accelerated by the
measures of government for the abolition of hereditary jurisdictions, and
the consequent overthrow of the authority of the chiefs. This was the last
act of government which had any influence upon the Highland character.
Subsequent changes are to be traced to causes, which owe their existence
chiefly to the views and speculations of private individuals. Into the
order of these causes, and their practical operations and effects, I shall
now shortly inquire. |
