pleasure of God. Robert Dalyell, natural son to the
Laird of Dalyell, was struck through the body with ane lance, who cried
that he was slain; and some twa or three men was strucken through their
clothes with lances, sae that the haille company thought that they had
been killed, and then thought it was time for them to begin to defend
themselves; whereupon Robert Douglas and three or four of his folk being
hurt, was put to flight, and in flying, the said Robert fell, where the
Laird of Drumlanrig chancit to be nearest him; wha, notwithstanding the
former offer Robert made to him with the hagbut, not only spared to strike
him with his awn hands, but likewise discouraged all the rest under pain
of their lives to steir him.’ One of the Cashogle party was slain.
Such an occurrence as this in the
south of Scotland, and amongst men of rank and property, shews strikingly
that the wild blood of the country was yet by no means quieted. There was
a mutual prosecution between the parties; but they contrived to make up
the quarrel between themselves out of court, and, private satisfaction
being, as usual, deemed enough, the law interfered no further.
Amongst other symptoms of advancing
civilisation proper to this period, was an effort towards the correction
of unauthorised medical practice. ‘Persons without knowledge of the
science of medicine’ were everywhere practising, ‘to the great and evident
hazard of the lives and healths of many of our subjects;’ so declared the
king. Drugs were also sold by ignorant persons. Another document refers to
the judicatories of the kingdom for an account of ‘the frequent murders
committed by quacks, women, gardeners, and others.’ The king, desiring to
put a check on these evils, ordered the parliament to frame an act for the
erection of a College of Physicians in Edinburgh, to be composed of seven
doctors and professors of medicine, who should be incorporated, and
without whose warrant no one should practise medicine in or near the city;
three of their number to have the duty of superintending the sale of
drugs. From various causes, this good design did not take practical effect
till a later age.—An. Scot.
May
‘About this time there was a great earthquake in the town of Montrose and
thereabouts, to the great terror of the inhabitants, so that many fled out
of the town. Some was slain with the thunder there.’—Cal.
Some foreign vessels trading for
coal and salt having been shipwrecked, during the severe storms of the
past winter, on the. ‘blind craigs’ (that is, concealed rocks) in the
Firth of Forth, it was proposed, by the enterprising coal and salt
proprietor, Sir George Bruce, that he should be allowed to erect beacons
at those dangerous spots, and reimburse himself by a small tax on the
foreign vessels frequenting the Firth during the ensuing year. Hearing of
this proposal, the other coal-proprietors in Fife and the Lothians felt
that they were much concerned, seeing that ‘no stranger-ships come that
way but either for coal or salt,’ and they considered that ‘the payment of
this duty wald carry with it a very great reproach and scandal to the
country, as if such a small piece of work in the most eminent river in the
kingdom could not be gotten done without the contribution and help of
strangers.’ For these reasons, they themselves undertook to set up the
required beacons.—M. S. P.
This movement may be regarded as
another mark of the enlightened attention now beginning to be paid to
things in which the material interests of the people were concerned. How
far the proposal of Sir George Bruce was carried out we do not learn; but
the probability is that he did not allow his plan to fall asleep. It bears
out our view of the spirit beginning to manifest itself in Scotland, that
the royal burghs, a few years later (September 1631), contemplated having
lights erected on the Isle of May in the mouth of the Firth of Forth, and
on ‘the Skairheids’ (P. C. R.), and soon after one was actually put
upon the May, being the first known to have been formed in connection with
the Scottish coasts, and for generations a solitary example on those of
the island generally. A Fife laird, Alexander Cunningham of Barns—a
relative, it would appear, of the wife of the poet Drummond—had the merit
of establishing this useful protection for shipping. Obtaining the proper
authority from Charles I., he, in 1635, erected on the isle ‘a tower forty
feet high, vaulted to the top, and covered with flag-stones, whereon all
the year over,’ says Sir Robert Sibbald, writing in the reign of Charles
II., ‘there burns in the night-time a fire of coals for a light; for which
the masters of ships are obliged to pay for each ton two shillings [twopence
sterling]. This sheweth light,’ he adds, ‘to all the ships coming out of
the Firths of Forth and Tay, and to all places between St Abb’s Head and
Redcastle near Montrose.’
Through a. natural antagonism, we
may suppose, between the powers of darkness and the interest here
concerned, the architect of the May light-tower was drowned on his return
from the isle in a storm believed to have been raised by witches, who were
in consequence burnt. The fire was duly kept burning by the successors of
Cunningham till the erection of a regular light-house on modern principles
by the Commissioners of Northern Lights. It required three hundred and
eighty tons of Wemyss coal annually, that kind being selected on
account of the clearness of its flame. In 1790, the tack or lease of this
privileged light, with its tax of three-halfpence a ton on Scottish, and
threepence on foreign shipping, rose from £280 to £960, and in 1800 it was
let at £1500, ‘a striking proof,’ as Mr Adamson justly remarks, ‘of the
increase of the trade of this country’ during the period.
Aug 4
This was a day of great concern and sorrow to the earnest Presbyterians of
Scotland, as on it the parliament sitting at Edinburgh ratified the Five
Articles introducing Episcopalian fashions into the church. At the moment
when the commissioner, the Marquis of Hamilton, rose to apply the sceptre
to the bills, thus giving them symbolically the royal assent, a flash of
lightning burst into the house, followed by a second and a third, and
these by loud thunder. A heavy darkness ensued. The discharge of rain was
so great, that the ceremonial return to Holyroodhouse could not be
effected, and all rushed home in confusion. The people, affected by these
signs and wonders, called the day Black
Saturday.
The weather had been bad during the
whole summer, and the harvest was likely to be late and meagre. A
Presbyterian historian, after relating what happened at the ratification
of the Five Articles, adds: ‘That very day made the greatest alteration of
prices of victual within eight days, that ever was heard of in so short a
space in Scotland, except the ill-windy Bartle-day in anno 159—.’—Row.
It appears that wheat rose to £12 per boll, and the price might have
been higher but for the coming in of foreign grain. The autumn was
distinguished by heavy rains, carrying away the crops of extensive haughs
or meadows. And of such as were preserved, scarcely any was ‘won’—that is,
secured—before Hallowmass. The wetness of the season was also unfavourable
to the winning of peat-fuel. ‘Never was greater fear of famine, nor
scarcity of seed to sow the ground. Every person was careful to ease
himself of such persons as he might spare, and to live as retiredly as
possibly he might. Pitiful was the lamentation not only of vaiging
beggars, but also of honest persons.’—Cal.
Aug 28
‘Because there was a new brood and generation of the Clan Gregor risen up,
who are begun to go in troops and companies about the country, armed with
offensive weapons, there was a proclamation published that none who carry
the name of Macgregor shall wear any armour, but ane pointless knife to
eat their meat with, under the pain of death.’ —Ba!.
The Chronicle of Perth notes
the holding of a justice court there, May 10, 1624, by the chancellor Sir
George Hay, ‘where many compeirit and were clengit by assize; only three
hangit— Macgregors!’ A few months later, the same authority tells
us of ‘Robert Abroch, ane Macgregor, ane great limmer, wha had been ance
or twice forgiven and remitted by his majesty, for his oppression, upon
hope of amendment, yet continued still in his knaveries; after there was
mickle searching made for him in the Highlands, and all his friends
chargit to apprehend [him], [he] came to Perth this day, being Tuesday,
ane preaching-day, after sermon, and fell down on his knees, and ane tow
about his neck, and offerit his sword by the point to the Chancellor of
Scotland, wha refusit to accept of it, and commanded the bailies to ward
him; like as they instantly warded him, and put baith his feet on the
gaud, where he remainit.’—Chron. Perth.
‘This year, Sir William Alexander of
Menstrie undertook a plantation in a part of America, which was then
called New Scotland [Nova Scotia], where he intended to send a colony. Sir
Robert Gordon, Tutor of Sutherland, joined himself in this enterprise, and
did indent and contract with Sir William to send thither some men out of
Sutherland, weel provided with corns, cattle, weapons, and other provision
fit and sufficient for that journey, who should have a good portion
of that country allotted them to inhabit. The Earl Marischal of Scotland,
the Earl of Melrose, the Earl of Nithsdale, the Viscount of Dupplin, Sir
Robert Gordon of Lochinvar, Sir Alexander Gordon of Cluny, James Gordon of
Lesmoir, with divers other nobles and gentlemen, were likewise partners in
this plantation. And for further advancement of this plantation, his
majesty concluded to make heritable knights-baronets in Old Scotland;
which honour should be bestowed upon the choicest undertakers of that
enterprise, and upon such as were of best quality for vertue, birth, and
means among the gentry.’—G. H. S.
Oct 12
This day, Friday, commenced a remarkable flood in the Tay, which lasted
for three or four days, and caused extensive destruction. The beautiful
bridge, newly completed across the river at Perth, was swept away,
excepting one arch only. In the middle of the second night, the water had
then so high, that the people living in low houses near the Castle Gavel
Port in Perth, were obliged to remove to higher houses. The town was so
environed with water, that no one could enter or leave it for several
days. Children were let down from upper windows into boats, in order to be
carried to places presumably safer. Household stuff and provisions were
destroyed. The rain was accompanied by a violent wind from the east, which
would somewhat help to maintain the waters of the river at a high
elevation. The water flowed in the High Street and the Speygate ‘like
mill-sluices;’ and one Charles Rollock became a distinguished public
benefactor by going about in a boat through those streets, and rescuing
people who were in danger of drowning—a service for which he afterwards
received a double angel in recompense.
The people were thrown into a state
of extreme consternation, looking for nothing but the entire destruction
of their fair city. ‘Whereupon Mr John Malcolm, minister, powerfully
endued with God’s spirit, caused ring the preaching-bell on Sunday at
seven hours in the morning, and the haill inhabitants came to the kirk.
And there he exhorted them to repent of their sins, which had provoked the
said judgment of God to come upon the city; assuring them that if they
were truly penitent therefor, and would avow to God to amend their lives
in time coming, God would avert his judgment, and give them deliverance.
Whose powerful exhortations moved the people to cry to God with tears,
clamours, and cries, and to hold up their hands to God, [promising that
they would] amend their lives, and every one of them to abstain from their
domestic sins. The like humiliation of men and women has not been seen
within Perth before. Fasting, preaching, and praying continued all that
week The waters began somewhat to decrease after noon on Sunday; but after
daylight passed, there arose a greater tempest of wind and rain than at
any time before, which so affrighted the people that night, that they
looked for nothing but [that] the waters should have arisen to greater
height [than] they were before. Notwithstanding thereof, miraculously,
through the mercy of God, by [past] all men’s expectation, the waters
greatly in the meantime decreased, which in the morning moved the people
in the kirk and all other places to give hearty thanks to God for his
mercy toward them."
One of the remarks current among the
more serious class of people on this occasion, was that the inundation was
sent as a judgment on Perth, on account of the five Episcopalian articles
passed there by the General Assembly three years before, though how this
vengeance should have fallen on the innocent people living in the place of
that assembly, and not upon the churchmen who passed the articles, or
rather the majority of them as apart from the minority, it is not easy to
reconcile to a sense of either Divine wisdom or Divine justice. It chances
that Perth is built on the meadow or haugh close to a river—namely,
what is properly its flood-course; a kind of situation where no human
habitations should ever be built. It is of course more or less inundated
at every considerable flood, and thus exposed to no small inconvenience,
as well as damage. These evils may be considered as the natural punishment
inflicted on the people for the solecism against nature which they have
committed. It may be safely presumed that, while their town stands there,
it will be liable to such disasters as that here described, whether
general assemblies reform upwards or downwards within its walls, and in
whatever spirit the inhabitants may regard their consequent sufferings.
They are, however, not alone in this respect, as, unfortunately, the low
banks of rivers are the seats of many towns and parts of towns in all
parts of the world.
It is remarkable that, though there
had been a bridge across the Tay at Perth so early as the beginning of the
thirteenth century, the structure now destroyed was not replaced till the
erection of the present beautiful fabric in 1771, the intercourse during
the intermediate hundred and fifty years being maintained by ferry-boats.
Nov
The Record of Privy Council at this time gives an example of the conduct
of a north-country gentleman under ban of the law. George Meldrum of
Haltoun had been put to the horn and denounced rebel for some failure of
duty towards James Crichton of Frendraught and other persons; and it
became necessary for the Marquis of Huntly, as sheriff of Aberdeen, to
send a force for the capture of his person. James Gordon of Knockespock
and George Gordon of Gowie went with a band for this purpose.
At their approach, Meldrum was out
in the fields; but he no sooner saw them, than, surmising their design, he
fled to his house, closed the gates, and prepared to stand a siege. They,
anxious to vindicate the royal authority, beleaguered the house, resolved
not to leave it till they should have reduced the occupant to his
majesty’s obedience. They had lain about the place forty-eight hours, when
John Innes of Crombie, hearing of what was going on, came to them in the
utmost possible haste, mounted on his best horse, declaring to them his
desire to deal with George for the purpose of inducing him to submit. ‘He
entreated the deputies that, with their allowance, he might go and confer
with the said George thereanent; whereunto they very gladly yielded,
seeing they sought nought but obedience.... The Laird of Crombie in the
meantime seemed very busy in going and coming to and frae the said George,
feeding the deputies with false conceits and hopes, and sometimes with
vain promises that he himself wald be cautioner for the said George, for
the satisfaction of all his creditors . and so, under this false pretext,
having abused the . . . . deputies their sincere and upright meaning
making them to believe all that he spak, and sae to be so much the more
careless of looking to the house, he then brought the said George out of
the house, set him upon his best horse, and put him away, to the great
contempt and mocking of justice.’ For this conduct, the Laird of Crombie
was denounced as a rebel.
1622, Mar 20
Margaret Wallace, the wife of John Dinning, a clothier in Glasgow, was
tried before the Court of Justiciary in Edinburgh, for sundry acts of
witchcraft, and as a common practiser of that nefarious art. She was
reported to have been a friend and confederate of one Christian Graham, a
notorious witch of the same city, who was tried, condemned, and burnt in
the preceding year. There is something singular in Mrs Dinning’s case, for
some of the acts of criminality urged against her were cures for which no
other than a humane motive was or could be imputed. The case is also
curious on account of the remarkable resemblance of some of the means or
modes of cure to the proceedings of the modern mesmeric hospital.
It was alleged of Margaret, that she
had been a witch for eight or nine years. It was evident that she looked
up to Christian Graham as her preceptress and superior. About four years
before the time of her trial, being in the house of one Vallance, in
Glasgow, she had taken a sudden fit of sickness, and sent for Graham, who
came immediately to her relief. Taking Margaret tenderly in her arms, and
kissing her, Graham said: ‘Nothing shall ail my dear bird;’ then led her
down stairs, and conducted her to her own house, where she completely
recovered. The two women coming back to Vallance’s house, found a little
child of his, named Margaret, at the bottom of the stair, and it was
alleged that they threw the sickness upon her. The child was found by her
mother crying dismally; and all that night she lay in horrible pain, with
pitiful screeches, shouts, and cries, apparently deprived of the power of
her body. Margaret Wallace, coming next day to see the child, ‘declarit it
was the sudden trance or disease that she had ta’en the day before, and
wified the bairn’s mother to send for Christian Graham to cure her and
relieve her thereof.’ The mother ‘having absolutely refused sae to do,
saying she wald commit her bairn to God, and not mel with the devil or ony
of his instruments, Margaret Wallace maist blasphemously answered again,
that "Christian Graham could do as mickle in curing of that disease, as
gif God himself wald come out of heaven and cure her—and, albeit the deid-strake
were laid on, she could tak it aff again— and without her help there could
be nae remeed to the bairn!" Thereafter, without the mother’s knowledge,
Christian Graham was brought in by Margaret Wallace to the bairn; at whase
coming, Margaret lifted up the bairn’s head, and Christian took her by the
shackle-bane [wrist], and brought the bairn forth of her bed where she was
lying in great pain before; and thereafter, setting her down upon ane
stool, with some crosses and signs made upon her, and by uttering of
divers words, restored her to her health.’
It is quite evident here that
Margaret was honourably candid, as against herself, in the view she took
of the cause of the child’s ailment, and her subsequent conduct in trying
to restore the child’s health, was creditable to her feelings. In another
point of her dittay, however, feelings of a different kind came out.
It was alleged that Margaret had
conceived a deadly hatred against Cuthbert Greig, a cooper, because of
certain opprobrious speeches he had uttered against Christian Graham. ‘She
avowed that she should make Cuthbert, within few days thereafter, not of
ability to work or win himself ane cake of bread.’ According to this
devilish threat, Cuthbert was soon after ‘visit and troublit with ane
strange, unnatural, and unknawn disease,’ attended by continual sweating
for fifteen days together, till in the end he was reduced to the utmost
degree of weakness. It appeared that the man’s friends endeavoured to
induce Margaret to interfere for his recovery; but she long persisted in
refusing. At length, coming to his house, ‘she, to manifest her skill for
his help, took him by the shackle-bane with the ane hand, and laid her
other hand upon his breast, and, without ony word-speaking, save only by
moving of her lips, passed frae him at that instant.’ Returning next
morning, ‘she took him by the arm and bade him rise, wha at that time and
fifteen days before, was not able to lift his legs without help.’ ‘She,
having urged him to rise, and taking him by the hand, brought him out of
his bed, and led him butt the house’ [into the outer apartment], where he
‘walkit up and down the floor, without help or support of ony.’ From that
time, it is stated, he quickly recovered from his illness. Here, too, it
must be owned, Margaret came ultimately to act a humane part.
Another child having an uncouth
sickness, Wallace associated with Graham in a practice for her cure. They
went under cloud of night ‘to the yard of James Finlay, burgess of
Glasgow, where they remained the space of ane hour together practising
sorcery and witchcraft, for curing of the bairn by unlawful means,’ and
‘that same night the sickness was ta’en all the bairn and she convalesced
thereof.’ For this, the two practitioners got a goose and a pint of wine.
On another occasion, Wallace was alleged to have inflicted deadly sickness
on a child, and allowed her to die.
Margaret had good counsel at her
trial, and a stout defence was made; but all in vain. She was sentenced to
be worried at a stake and burnt on the Castle Hill—Pit.
May 22
A Dunkirk ship, belonging to the king of Spain, came up to Leith pursued
by two Dutch waughters, but both were quickly driven out of the Firth of
Forth by a west wind. A few days thereafter, the same vessels came back to
Leith, ‘where they had ane great fecht, frae twelve at night till four in
the morning, and many men slain.' The magistrates of Edinburgh interfered
to prevent further hostilities, and the three vessels lay there inactive
for half a year, the Dunkirker not being able to get away for fear of the
superior metal of her enemies. At length, the king ordered that the
Dunkirker should be allowed to go out, without being followed by the
waughters for a couple of tides. On the 4th of May 1623, this vessel left
the harbour accordingly, but it ran upon the Mussel-scap, ‘within two pair
of butt-lengths to the Bulwark,’ and thus in due time became liable to the
attack of the waughters. While these were playing their guns upon her, the
authorities in the city, knowing well the king’s favour for Spain, whose
Infanta his son was at this time courting, mustered forces and cannon, and
came hastily to the rescue. Finding that the Dutch had boarded her, and
put up the Prince of Orange’s colours, they sent men on board to put up
the flag of the king of Great Britain. The people shewed themselves ill
affected to the object. ‘Some few went down, with their swords, and their
cloaks about them. The president, chiding the provost and bailies, said:
"I always said to his majesty that Edinburgh was but a nest of traitors. I
shall write to his majesty of this your rebellion." It was answered:
"Edinburgh is not bound to serve in such a service without their burgh
roods." An effort was made to secure the vessel within the harbour—’ it
was sport to see the lords and their gentlemen hailing St Ambrose with a
rope into the harbourie. But they laboured in vain, for the water begun to
fall.’ The end of the business was, that, one night, the Dutch, after
respectfully removing the guard and flag, set the vessel on fire, and
having destroyed it, set sail for their own seas.’
May 29
‘The Landgrave of Hesse’s eldest son, of the second marriage, came to
Edinburgh. His lodging and entertainment was not looked to with that
respect that became.’ —Cal.
June 3
'...there was a fiery dragon, both great and long, appeared to come from
the south to the north, spouting fire from her, half an hour after the
going to of the sun.’—Cal.
This was a wretched summer. A fast
was ordered at Aberdeen, July 21st, on account of ‘the felt wrath of God
by this present plague of dearth and famine, and the continuance thereof
threatened by thir tempestuous storms and inundations of weets likely to
rot the fruits on the ground.’—A. K.
S. R.
The usual consequence is recorded:
‘About the harvest, and after, there was such ane universal sickness in
all the country as the like has not been heard of—but specially in this
burgh, that no family in all the city was free of this visitation. There
was also great mortality among the poor.’—Chron. Perth.
July
An act of Privy Council of this date aims at a restriction of the
importation of wine into the Western Islands—’ with the insatiable desire
whereof the said islanders are so far possest, that when there arrives ony
ship or other vessel there with wines, they spend both days and nights in
their excess of drinking, sae lang as there is any of the wine left; sae
that, being overcome with drink, there falls out mony inconveuients amangs
them, to the break of his majesty’s peace.’’
July 30
The Privy Council had the subject of that ‘infective weed callit tobacco’
under their attention. The king had formerly, upon good reasons of policy,
forbidden its importation into the country; but this decree had been sadly
evaded, insomuch that ‘the country was ever universally filled with
tobacco, and public and common merchandise made of the same.’ Then his
majesty had tried the restraining effect of a duty (20s Scots, or 1s. 8d.
English per pound); but the tobacco-merchants had learned the trick of
smuggling, and it was not likely they would let it lie unfruitful when
they could thereby save the payment of a tax. It had now, accordingly,
become necessary to impose a new restraint; and the importation was again
prohibited, under pain of the goods being confiscated to his majesty’s
use.—P. C. R.
An act of the Privy Council in the
subsequent November explained that the king did not mean by this restraint
‘to deprive his loving subjects of the orderly sale and moderate use of
tobacco,’ but only to prevent the abuse or excessive use of the herb. It
was no part of his design to interfere with the patent which had been
granted [November 7, 1616] to the late Captain William Murray, giving him
the sole privilege of importing tobacco for the space of twenty-one years.
He therefore now ordered proclamations to be issued, to the effect that
the prohibition only held good against such as did not possess a licence
under favour of Murray’s patent.—P. C.
P. In the ensuing March, it was arranged
that importers of tobacco should pay Murray’s representatives a duty of
twenty shillings Scots per pound.
In 1624, the widow and daughter of
Captain Murray resigned their relative’s patent into the hands of
commissioners, for his majesty’s use, on their becoming bound to pay
twenty thousand pounds Scots (£1666, 13s. 4d.) at three half-years terms.’
The prejudice of King James against
tobacco was a strong feeling, partaking much of the character of
antipathy. He published anonymously, and afterwards acknowledged the
quaint pamphlet, A Counterblast to Tobacco, in which he argues
against the use of the herb as a physical as well as moral corruption.
Baker’s Chronicle states that the expedition of Sir Francis Drake,
on its return in 1585 [6], passed by Virginia, ‘a colony which Sir Walter
Raleigh had there planted;’ ‘from whence Drake brings home with him Ralph
Lane, who was the first that brought tobacco into England, which the
Indians take against crudities of the stomach.’ This does not comport with
the ordinary notion entertained in England, which uniformly represents
Raleigh as the first introducer of the Nicotian herb. Lane became a
despised man on account of his pusillanimity in giving up the colony; and
there seems all reason to believe that to him King James alludes in the
following passage from the Counterblast: ‘It is not so long,’ says
he, ‘since the first entry of this abuse amongst us here, as this present
age cannot well remember both the first author and the form of the first
introduction of it amongst us. It was neither brought in by king, great
conqueror, nor learned doctor of physic. With the report of a great
discovery for a conquest, some two or three savage men were brought in,
together with a savage custom. But the pity is, the poor barbarous men
died, but that vile barbarous custom is yet alive, yea, in fresh vigour;
so as it seems a miracle to me how a custom, springing from so vile a
ground, and brought in by a father so generally hated,
should be welcomed upon so slender a warrant.’
If a tradition existing in 1667 is
.to be believed, King James was fain on one occasion to get over his
antipathy to tobacco; but, to be sure, the compelling cause was a powerful
one. ‘The smoke of it’ [tobacco], says a writer of that date, ‘is one of
the wholesomest scents that is, against all contagious airs, for it
o’ermasters all other smells, as King James, they say, found true, when
being once hunting, a shower of rain drove him into a pigsty/or
shelter, where he caused a pipefull to be taken on purpose."
May 18
A trafficking Jesuit, named George Mortimer, had lately been detected in
the house of one Haddow, in Glasgow, and he and Haddow were both taken
into custody. The king lost no time in ordering a court of justice to be
held in Glasgow for the trying of Haddow and his wife for the crime of
resetting Jesuits, certifying that, if found guilty, they should be
banished the kingdom—as the impunity of the offence ‘might hearten that
wicked and pernicious sort of people more bauldly to go on in perverting
good subjects in religion, and withdrawing them from their dutiful
obedience to us.’ He at the same time wrote to the principal
ecclesiastical authorities, desiring them to consult about the best means
of checking the present ‘new growth of popery,’ that ‘thereby the world
may see that we strike with the sword of justice equally against the
papist and puritan, that thereby no just imputation may be laid upon our
proceedings as a cause of the increase of popery.’
In September, we learn that Mortimer
lay a prisoner at Glasgow, ‘so heavily diseased, as it is feared he shall
hardly if ever escape.’ The king—’ because we do not desire the lives of
ony of that sort of people, if we may be secured from ony harm which they
micht do by the perversion of ony of our guid subjects in their duty to
God and us ‘—was now pleased to order that he should be committed to some
ship sailing to a foreign port, ‘with certification to him, that gif at
ony time hereafter he shall return, it will be capital unto him.’—P. C.
R.
This and some other instances of
lenity towards Romish clergymen were ill looked on by the zealous
Presbyterians, and there arose a
fama to the king’s prejudice. On the 30th of
October, he wrote from Hitchinbrooke to his Scottish councillors, in great
indignation at a report which had gone abroad, in consequence of some late
circumstances, to the effect that he intended to ‘tolerate or grant
liberty of conscience!’ ‘The foolish apprehension thereof’ had ‘given
occasion both to papist and puritan to tak heart and grow insolent, the
one vainly boasting of the said pretendit liberty, and the other with a
seeming fear thereof.’ ‘God knows,’ says the king solemnly, ‘that what
proccedit in that course concerning the papists here was without ony such
intention.’ It was ‘groundit upon good reasons of state, in the deep and
mystery whereof every man is not to dive nor wyda’ His conscience and his
works alike bore witness of his constancy in the right course. So he
‘could not but marvel how ony of our subjects can be possest with so
unjust ane opinion of us.’ The Council was enjoined immediately to
consult with the Archbishop of St Andrews as to the best measures for the
‘curbing of insolent papists and disconform preachers.’ In case any of the
former had shewn themselves in consequence of the pretended liberty, they
were to be severely punished, as an example and terror to others. The
Council, acknowledging his majesty’s ‘most religious and upright
disposition towards the suppression of popery,’ communicated accordingly
with the archbishop, requesting him to have a care to give his majesty
satisfaction.—P. C. B.
Oct
George Earl Marischal, a noble of great wealth and influence, who has
already been under our notice, was now approaching the end of his earthly
pilgrimage. After his death, his countess, who had hastily re-married, was
accused of having been concerned, along with the gentleman whom she took
for her second husband—Sir Alexander Strachan of Thornton, knight—in
stealing forth of his lordship’s house of Benholm a green coffer belonging
to him, containing money and other valuables, besides the furniture of the
house, and a bag containing evidents of property. James Keith of Benholm
was accused of having a share in the same crime.
The case is worthy of notice,
chiefly on account of the list of articles contained in the
coffer—evidencing as they do a degree of wealth which few will be prepared
to find belonging to a Scottish nobleman of that age. There were—’of
Portugal ducats and other species of foreign gold to the avail of twenty
thousand pounds or thereby; thretty-sax dozen of gold buttons; ane rich
jewel all set with diamonts, whilk the earl resavit as ane gift given to
him the time he was ambassador in Denmark, worth sax thousand merks; the
Queen of Denmark’s picture in gold, set about with rich diamonts, estimat
to five thousand merks; ane jasp stane for steming of bluid, estimat to
five hundred French crowns; ane chenyie of equal pearl, wherein was four
hundred pearls great and small; twa chenyies of gold, of twenty-four unce
wecht; ane other jewel of diamonts set in gold worth three thousand merks;
ane great pair of bracelets, all set with diamonts, price thereof five
hundred crowns; the other pair of gold bracelets, at sax hundred pounds
the pair; ane turcas ring worth ten French crowns; ane diamont set in ane
ring, price twenty-eight French crowns; with ane number of other small
rings set with diamonts and other rich stanes in gold, worth three hundred
French crowns; mair sixteen thousand merks of silver and gold ready-cunyit,
whilk was within the said green coffer; together with the haill tapestry,
silver-work, bedding, and other guids, geir, and plenishing, being within
the said place.’—Pit.
The king, in a letter to the
Chancellor Hay, dated 22d August 1624, alludes to a recommendation he had
formerly sent, that this injury to his esteemed councillor the Earl
Marisehal should be inquired into, and adds: ‘Whereas we are informed
that, in a later letter under our hand, we have shewn to you that it was
not our pleasure nor meaning in ony former letters to hurt the said Lady
Marischal or ony other person, these are now expressly to mak it known to
you, that we nather gave direction to insert any sic clause in our
letters, nather, at the putting of our hand to the samen, did talc heed
thereto, nor never meant ony sic favour to her who hath so ill deserved of
one for whose sake we were only to respect her.’ And then he added a
command to proceed with the case against the peccant lady.—An. Scot.
1623, Jan
‘Lord Colville took journey to France, to crave the re-establishment of
the Scots Guard and Company of Scottish Men at Arms, according to their
first institution and the French king’s promise often made to that
effect.’—Bal.
The Scots Guard of the French king
was an old institution, and for a long time past the command had passed
from generation to generation of the Sieurs D’Aubigné (Earls and Dukes of
Lennox). Louis XIII. readily agreed to the proposed revival of the corps,
and designed to confer the command on Ludovick, Duke of Richmond and
Lennox, the favourite councillor of King James. It chanced, however, that
the duke was suddenly cut off by apoplexy (February 1624), ‘beloved and
lamented’ beyond all remembered example, ‘because he was naturally
inclined to do good without distinction of persons.’—G. H.
S. The honour was therefore transferred to his nephew, Lord Gordon, son of
the Marquis of Huntly.
In July 1625, Lord Gordon made his
first muster of the corps on the Links of Leith, in presence of several
officers deputed by the French king for that purpose. These gentlemen had
been conducted to Edinburgh by Sir Robert Gordon, Tutor of Sutherland;
they were there entertained in the handsomest manner by the Lord Gordon
and other nobles, ‘and sent home again to their master, the French king,
in great satisfaction and content.’ Lord Gordon’s younger brother, Lord
Melgum, was his lieutenant, and the first gentleman of the company was Sir
William Gordon, son of George Gordon of Kindroch, a branch of the family
of Pitlurg.—G. H. S.
June 20
'.....the king’s picture in the hall of the palace of Linlithgow fell . .
. . and brake in pieces. The like befell the king of France’s picture, in
that same place, six weeks before his death.’—Cal.
Such incidents were then invariably
noted with superstitious awe. Aubrey tells us that on the first day of the
sitting of the Long Parliament, the picture of Archbishop Laud fell in his
closet, by the breaking of the string.’
George, Earl of Caithness, was one
of the most unruly spirits of his age. The almost uncontrolled power which
he possessed in his own remote country, was generally employed by him in
advancing base and selfish purposes, and half his life was passed in a
state of outlawry. Sometimes he is found at war with the Sutherland
family, sometimes with his neighbours the Mackays of Strathnaver. One
year, he is proclaimed a rebel; the next, he is found honoured with a
royal commission against some other rebel. (See the account of the case of
the Earl of Orkney in 1615.) He was overwhelmed with debt, yet did not
regard it much. His son, Lord Berriedale, having become responsible for
him, lay five years in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh, as a prisoner to the
earl’s creditors, while Caithness himself passed a pleasant life in his
sea-cliff fortalices of Girnigo and Aikergill, in the far north. There
must have been something plausible about this singular noble.
Notwithstanding all the injuries he had inflicted on the Sutherland
family, and the badness of his general character, he contrived, in 1619,
to patch up a reconciliation with Sir Robert Gordon, a most respectable
man, a friend and servant of the king, and who represented the interests
of that great family. He had on that occasion visited Sir Robert in
Sutherland, and Sir Robert in his turn spent several days with the earl at
Girnigo. The truce, however, was not of long continuance, for the Earl of
Caithness’s outrages were incessant. It was felt by the Privy Council as a
scandal to the country, that such a hardy rebel against the ordinary
authorities of the land should exist, and they looked about for the means
of putting him down. The usual expedient of the age was resorted
to—namely, to employ some other great man against him—thus accomplishing
by a kind of private war what ought to have been the business of a force
of their own. Sir Robert was the man they pitched upon.
Behold, then, this courtier of St
James’s and Newmarket, leaving those scenes in the south where he was
accustomed to meet Bacon and (not many years ago) Shakspeare, and coming
down to the land of Mackays, Guns, and Sinclairs, in order to conduct an
army against one of those rude grandees who could even trouble a king. He
had a strange associate in the enterprise; Lord Berriedale had been
liberated from prison, on a paction with the creditors, that he might do
what he could to bring his heartless father within the grasp of the law.
Sep 3
Sir Robert’s forces were the Clan Sutherland and their friends, a
selection of the most active and hardy, and all well armed. Assembling in
Strathullie, and having been properly arranged and officered, they lost no
time in setting forth to cross the Ord. A company of the Clan Gun went
before to clear the ground and prevent surprise. Before they had advanced
far into Caithness, they learned that the earl, unable to withstand so
great a force, had deserted the country, and taken refuge in Orkney,
intending to go thence to Norway. At Latheron, James Sinclair of Murkle,
Sir William Sinclair of Mey, the Laird of Forss, and some other Caithness
magnates, came to yield their obedience and offer their assistance. Sir
Robert received them with great civility, but ‘gave small trust to some of
them; neither suffered he any of the inhabitants to come in or go out of
the army after the setting of the sun until sunrising.’
Passing Wick, he conducted his
troops to Girnigo, a castle so strongly placed on the verge of a lofty
cliff overhanging the sea, that there might have been some difficulty in
taking it. The keys, however, were at once rendered up, and so the army
took quiet possession of the fortress. They went forward, and, in like
manner took Aikcrgill and Keiss, two forts which the earl had abandoned in
succession. Meanwhile, Sir Robert had spies throughout all Caithness to
report to him about the dispositions of the people. They were said to be
quiet, but angry that any of the House of Sutherland should be charged
with such a commission against their lord.
Learning that Lady Caithness, who
was his cousin-german, had removed to a house a few miles distant, Gordon
went to pay his respects to her. She pleaded for her husband, on the
ground that he was not attempting any resistance; but Sir Robert left her
no hopes of his being speedily pardoned. He proceeded with deliberation to
settle Lord Berriedale in possession of the country and its fortresses,
and made various other arrangements for its benefit; after which he
returned in triumph to Dunrobin, and dismissed his men. ‘Thus you see how
the Earl of Caithness, having attained to the top of fortune’s wheel, and
to the height of his desires, by his service in Orkney, did by his own
misdemeanours, and wicked actions, fall into this extremity, which a man
of his life and conversation could not escape. Neither could the Earl of
Orkney’s example, which was recent before his eyes, divert him from the
course which brought him to this misery. A notable example to posterity.’—G.
H. S.
During the earlier half of this
year, Scotland suffered under a famine of extreme severity. There was a
vast increase to the usually inordinate number of beggars, in consequence
of many of the poorer class of tenants throwing their farms in the hands
of their landlords, and wandering forth in search of food. And it is
remarked that the condition of these new mendicants was the most miserable
of all, ‘because they, being for the most part ashamed to beg, underlies
all the extremities wherethrough the pinching of their bellies may affect
them; whereas, by the contrair, strong and sturdy beggars, by their
importunity and crying, and sometimes by extorting of almous, are in some
measure relieved.’ The administrators of the state are found in alarm
that, unless something be done to enable the poor to tide over till the
new harvest should be realised in September, ‘numbers of them will betake
themselves to live by stowth or [ere] they will starve through hunger,
whilk will not only produce a foul imputation agains the whole land, but
the wrath and anger of God will be wakened.’ At the date noted, therefore,
the Privy Council took measures for bringing the principal men together in
their respective county towns to arrange for a taxation according to means
and substance, in order to procure victual, for the poor. A hundred merks
for every thousand pounds of substance was the rate recommended.
In July, the famine ‘increased
daily, till at last many, both in burgh and land, died of hunger. Many
poor came to Edinburgh for succour, of which number some died in the
streets.’ A fast was held on account of the calamity; ‘the sermons began
every day in the week at seven hours, and ended at nine. Immediately after
the fast was ended, that same night, 7th of July, there was such a fire in
the heaven, with thunder and fire-flaught, that the hearers and beholders
thought verily that the day of judgment was come.’—Cal.
‘There was this harvest-time ane
great mortality . . . . ten or twelve died ordinarily every day [in Perth]
from midsummer to Michaelmas’ [September 29].—Chron. Perth.
It was probably to this famine that
a story told by Wodrow refers. While the poor people were dying in great
numbers in the fields, ‘some people passing by saw a young child about
seven years old, lying and dying by a dike-side—which could not but move
their pity, though they could give it no relief. They observed the child
to get up to its feet, and looking up cheerfully towards heaven, clapping
its hands, making a tripping and dancing motion with its feet, they heard
it cry: "O! Lamb’s days for evermore! O! Lamb’s days for evermore! I see
heaven! Lamb’s days for evermore!" And with that it presently fell down
and died. I had this from my mother, who had it from her mother, and that
it was told as a certain truth.’—W. A.
July 10
Bessie Smith, of Lesmahago, appeared before the presbytery of Lanark, and
confessed sundry dealings with unlawful arts. She had ‘charmed the
heart-fevers.’ The patients, kneeling under her direction, asked their
health ‘for God’s sake, for Sanct Spirit, for Sanct Aikit, for the nine
maidens that died in the boortree in the Ladywell Bank—This charm to be
buik and beil to me, God grant that site be.’ She also ‘appointed them the
wayburn leat, to be eaten nine mornings.’—R. P. L.
