diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'old/68956-0.txt')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/68956-0.txt | 9402 |
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 9402 deletions
diff --git a/old/68956-0.txt b/old/68956-0.txt deleted file mode 100644 index 05b0d00..0000000 --- a/old/68956-0.txt +++ /dev/null @@ -1,9402 +0,0 @@ -The Project Gutenberg eBook of The companions of Pickle, by Andrew -Lang - -This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and -most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions -whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms -of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at -www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you -will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before -using this eBook. - -Title: The companions of Pickle - Being a sequel to 'Pickle the spy' - -Author: Andrew Lang - -Release Date: September 10, 2022 [eBook #68956] - -Language: English - -Produced by: MWS and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at - https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images - generously made available by The Internet Archive/American - Libraries.) - -*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE COMPANIONS OF -PICKLE *** - - - - - - -THE COMPANIONS OF PICKLE - - - - -BY THE SAME AUTHOR. - - -PICKLE THE SPY; or, The Incognito of Prince Charles. With 6 Portraits. -8vo. 18_s._ - -ST. ANDREWS. With 8 Plates and 24 Illustrations in the Text by T. Hodge. -8vo. 15_s._ _net_. - -THE MAKING OF RELIGION. 8vo. 12_s._ - -MODERN MYTHOLOGY: a Reply to Professor Max Müller. 8vo. 9_s._ - -HOMER AND THE EPIC. Crown 8vo. 9_s._ _net_. - -CUSTOM AND MYTH: Studies of Early Usage and Belief. With 15 -Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 3_s._ 6_d._ - -LETTERS TO DEAD AUTHORS. Fcp. 8vo. 2_s._ 6_d._ _net_. - -BOOKS AND BOOKMEN. With 2 Coloured Plates and 17 Illustrations. Fcp. 8vo. -2_s._ 6_d._ _net_. - -OLD FRIENDS. Fcp. 8vo. 2_s._ 6_d._ _net_. - -LETTERS ON LITERATURE. Fcp. 8vo. _2s._ 6_d._ _net_. - -GRASS OF PARNASSUS. Fcp. 8vo. 2_s._ 6_d._ _net_. - -ESSAYS IN LITTLE. With Portrait of the Author. Crown 8vo. 2_s._ 6_d._ - -COCK LANE AND COMMON-SENSE. Crown 8vo. 3_s._ 6_d._ - -THE BOOK OF DREAMS AND GHOSTS. Crown 8vo. 6_s._ - -ANGLING SKETCHES. With 20 Illustrations. Crown 8vo. 3_s._ 6_d._ - -A MONK OF FIFE: a Story of the Days of Joan of Arc. With 13 Illustrations -by SELWYN IMAGE. Crown 8vo. 3_s._ 6_d._ - - LONGMANS, GREEN, & CO., 39 Paternoster Row, London - New York and Bombay. - - - - -[Illustration: _Walker & Boutall, ph. sc._ - -_The Earl Marischal_ - -_1717._] - - - - - THE - COMPANIONS OF PICKLE - - _BEING A SEQUEL TO ‘PICKLE THE SPY’_ - - BY - ANDREW LANG - - WITH FOUR ILLUSTRATIONS - - LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. - 39 PATERNOSTER ROW, LONDON - NEW YORK AND BOMBAY - 1898 - - All rights reserved - - - - -PREFACE - - -The appearance of ‘Pickle the Spy’ was welcomed by a good deal of clamour -on the part of some Highland critics. It was said that I had brought a -disgraceful charge, without proof, against a Chief of unstained honour. -Scarcely any arguments were adduced in favour of Glengarry. What could -be said in suspense of judgment was said in the _Scottish Review_, by -Mr. A. H. Millar. That gentleman, however, was brought round to my view, -as I understand, when he compared the handwriting of Pickle with that of -Glengarry. Mr. Millar’s letter on the subject will be found in this book -(pp. 247, 248). - -The doubts and opposition which my theory encountered made it desirable -to examine fresh documents in the Record Office, the British Museum, and -the Royal Library at Windsor Castle, while General Alastair Macdonald -(whose family recently owned Lochgarry) has kindly permitted me to read -Glengarry’s MS. Letter Book, in his possession. The results will be found -in the following pages. - -Being engaged on the subject, I made a series of studies of persons -connected with Prince Charles, and with the Jacobite movement. Of these -the Earl Marischal was the most important, and, by reason of his long -life and charming character—a compound of ‘Aberdeen and Valencia’—the -most interesting. As a foil to the good Earl, who finally abandoned -the Jacobite party, I chose Murray of Broughton, who, though he turned -informer, remained true in sentiment, I believe, to his old love. His -character may, perhaps, be read otherwise, but such is the impression -left on me by his ‘Memorials,’ documents edited recently for the Scottish -History Society by Mr. Fitzroy Bell. - -In Barisdale, whose treachery was perfectly well known at the time, and -was punished by both parties, we have a picture of the Highlander at -his worst. Culloden made such a career as that of Barisdale for ever -impossible. - -In the chapters on ‘Cluny’s Treasure’ and ‘The Troubles of the Camerons’ -I have, I hope, redeemed the characters of Cluny and Dr. Archibald -Cameron from the charges of flagrant dishonesty brought against them by -young Glengarry. Both gentlemen were reduced to destitution, which by -itself is incompatible with the allegations of their common enemy. - -‘The Uprooting of Fassifern’ illustrates the unscrupulous nature of -judicial proceedings in Scotland after Culloden. A part of Fassifern’s -conduct is not easily explained in a favourable sense, but he was -persecuted in a strangely unjust and intolerable manner. Incidentally it -appears that public indignation against this sort of procedure, rather -than distrust of ‘what the soldier said’ in his ghostly apparitions, -procured the acquittal of the murderers of Sergeant Davies. - -‘The Last Days of Glengarry’ is based on a study of his MS. Letter Book, -while ‘The Case against Glengarry’ sums up the old and re-states the new -evidence that identifies him with Pickle the Spy. - -The last chapter is an attempt to estimate the social situation created -in the Highlands by the collapse of the Clan system. - -I have inserted, in ‘A Gentleman of Knoydart,’ an account of a foil to -Barisdale, derived from the Memoirs of a young member of his clan, John -Macdonell, of the Scotus family. The editor of _Macmillan’s Magazine_ has -kindly permitted me to reprint this article from his serial for June 1898. - -A note on ‘Mlle. Luci’ corrects an error about Montesquieu into which I -had fallen when writing ‘Pickle the Spy,’ and throws fresh light on Mlle. -Ferrand. - -It is, or should be, superfluous to disclaim an enmity to the Celtic -race, and rebut the charge of ‘not leaving unraked a dunghill in search -for a cudgel wherewith to maltreat the Highlanders, particularly those -who rose in the Forty-five.’ This elegant extract is from a Gaelic -address by a minister to the Gaelic Society of Inverness.[1] I have not -raked dunghills in search of cudgels, nor are my sympathies hostile to -the brave men, Highland or Lowland, who died on the field or scaffold -in 1745-53. The perfidy of which so many proofs come to light was in -no sense peculiarly Celtic. The history of Scotland, till after the -Reformation, is full of examples in which Lowlanders unscrupulously -used the worst weapons of the weak. Historical conditions, not race, -gave birth to the Douglases and Brunstons whom Barisdale, Glengarry, -and others imitated on a smaller scale. These men were the exceptions, -the rare exceptions, in a race illustrious for loyalty. I have tried -to show the historical and social sources of their demoralisation, so -extraordinary when found among the countrymen of Keppoch, Clanranald, -Glenaladale, Scotus, and Lochiel. - -I must apologise for occasional repetitions which I have been unable to -avoid in a set of separate studies of characters engaged in the same set -of circumstances. - -My most respectful thanks are due to Her Majesty for her gracious -permission to study the collection of Cumberland Papers in her library -at Windsor Castle. Only a small portion of these valuable documents -has been examined for the present purpose. Mr. Richard Holmes, Her -Majesty’s Librarian, lent his kind advice, and Miss Violet Simpson aided -me in examining and copying these and other papers referred to in their -proper places. Indeed I cannot overestimate my debt to the research and -acuteness of this lady. - -To General Macdonald I have to repeat my thanks for the use of his -papers, and the Duke of Atholl has kindly permitted me to cite his -privately printed collections, where they illustrate the matter in hand. - -Sir Thomas Gibson Carmichael was good enough to lend me, for -reproduction, his miniature of the Duke of York and Prince Charles. - -The earlier portrait of the Earl Marischal is from the Scottish National -Museum, the later (of 1752?) is from the National Portrait Gallery. It -gives a likeness of one of the good Earl’s menagerie of young heathens. -The miniature of Prince Charles (p. 140) is a copy or replica of one -given by him to a Macleod of the Raasay house in September, 1746. The -Royal Society of Edinburgh kindly permitted me to have copies made -of several of the Earl Marischal’s letters to David Hume, in their -possession. In some of these (unprinted) the Earl touches on a theme for -which _le bon David_ frankly expresses his affection in a letter to the -Lord Advocate. - - - - -_CORRIGENDA_ - - -P. 12, note, _for_ twenty-two in 1716, _read_ twenty-three - -P. 17, note, _for_ 33,900 _read_ 33,950 - -Transcriber’s Note: These corrections didn’t need making: presumably the -printers did it, but neglected to remove this list. - - - - -CONTENTS - - - PAGE - - I. THE LAST EARL MARISCHAL 1 - - II. THE EARL IN RUSSIAN SERVICE 42 - - III. MURRAY OF BROUGHTON 69 - - IV. MADEMOISELLE LUCI 92 - - V. THE ROMANCE OF BARISDALE 97 - - VI. CLUNY’S TREASURE 129 - - VII. THE TROUBLES OF THE CAMERONS 147 - - VIII. JUSTICE AFTER CULLODEN 158 - - IX. A GENTLEMAN OF KNOYDART 176 - - X. THE LAST YEARS OF GLENGARRY 198 - - XI. THE CASE AGAINST GLENGARRY 216 - - XII. OLD TIMES AND NEW 254 - - APPENDIX - - I. PICKLE’S LETTERS 289 - - II. MACLEOD 294 - - INDEX 297 - - - - -ILLUSTRATIONS - - - THE EARL MARISCHAL (1717) _Frontispiece_ - - THE EARL MARISCHAL (_circ._ 1750) _to face_ p. 60 - - PRINCE CHARLES (_circ._ 1744) ” 140 - - THE DUKE OF YORK AND PRINCE CHARLES (_circ._ 1735) ” 184 - - - - -THE COMPANIONS OF PICKLE - - - - -I - -THE LAST EARL MARISCHAL - - -In a work where we must make the acquaintance of some very unfortunate -characters, it is well to begin with a _preux chevalier_. If there -was a conspicuously honest man in the eighteenth century, one ‘whose -conscience might gild the walls of a dungeon,’ as an observer of his -conduct declared, that man was the Earl Marischal, George Keith. The name -of the last Earl Marischal of Scotland haunts the reader of the history -of the eighteenth century. He appears in battles for the Stuart cause in -1715 and 1719, he figures dimly in the records of 1745, and of Charles -Edward, after the ruin of Culloden. We find him in the correspondence -of Voltaire, Rousseau, Hume, and Frederick the Great, and even in -Casanova. He is obscurely felt in the diplomacy which ended in Pitt’s -resignation of office. Many travellers describe his old age at Potzdam, -and d’Alembert wrote his _Éloge_. He was the last direct representative -of that historical house of Keith whose laurels were first won in the -decisive charge of Bruce’s handful of cavalry on the English archers at -Bannockburn. Though the Earl Marischal of the confused times after the -death of James V. was a pensioner of Henry VIII., like so many of the -Scottish _noblesse_, the House was Royalist, and national as a rule. -Yet, after a long life of exile as a Jacobite, the last Earl Marischal, -always at heart a Republican, reconciled himself to the House of Hanover. -The biography of the Earl has never been written, though few Scottish -worthies have better deserved this far from uncommon honour. - -Materials for a complete life of the Earl do not exist. We are obliged -to follow him by aid of slight traces in historical manuscripts, -biographies, memoirs, and letters, published or unpublished. Even in -this unsatisfactory way, the Earl is worth pursuing: for if he left -slight traces on history, and was never successful in action, he was -a man, and a humourist, of singular merit and charm, a person almost -universally honoured and beloved through three generations. This last of -the Earls Marischal of Scotland was certainly one of the most original -and one of the most typical characters of the eighteenth century. -Losing home, lands, and rank for the cause of Legitimism, the Earl was -the reverse of a fanatical Royalist; indeed he seems to have become a -Jacobite from Republican principles. These were strengthened, no doubt, -by his great experience of kings; but even when he was a young man his -bookplate bore the motto _Manus hæc inimica tyrannis_. Then probably, as -certainly in later life, he loved to praise Sidney, and others who (in -his opinion) died for freedom. Yet the Earl was ‘out,’ for no Liberal -cause, in 1715, and in 1719: while he was plotting against King George -and for King James, till 1745. He was admitted to the secret of the -rather Fenian Elibank Plot in 1752, and only reconciled himself with the -English Government in 1759. On his death-bed he called himself ‘an old -Jacobite,’ while, for twenty years at least, his favourite companions had -been the advanced thinkers, prelusive to the Revolution, Rousseau, Hume, -d’Alembert, Voltaire, Helvetius. - -All this appears the reverse of consistent. The Earl gave up everything, -and risked his life often, for the White Rose, while his opinions, -religious and political, tended in the direction of the Red Cap of -Liberty and the Rights of Man. The explanation is that the Earl, when -young, a patriotic Scot, and a persecuted Episcopalian, saw ‘freedom’ -in the emancipation of Scotland from a foreign tyrant, the Elector of -Hanover; in the Repeal of the Union, and in the relief of his religious -body from the tyranny of the Kirk. Till his death he was all for liberty, -and could not bear to see even a caged bird. These were the unusual -motives (these, and the influence of his mother, a Jacobite by family and -sentiment) which converted a born Liberal into a partisan of the King -over the Water. Thus this representative of traditional and romantic -Scottish loyalty to the Stuarts was essentially a child of the advanced, -and emancipated, and enlightened century which succeeded that into which -he was born. - -Original in his political conduct, the Earl was no less unusual in -personal character. He was one of those who, as Plato says, are -‘naturally good,’ naturally examples of righteousness in a naughty -world. Nature made him temperate, contented, kind, charitable, brave, -and humorous—one who, as Montaigne advises, never ‘made a marvel of his -own fortunes.’ His virtue, as far as can be learned, owed nothing to -religion. He was ‘born to be so,’ as another man is born to be a poet. He -had a native genius for excellence. - -He was ruined without rancour, and all the buffets of unhappy fortune, -all the political and social vicissitudes of nearly a century, could not -cloud his content, or diminish his pleasure in life and the sun. He was -true to his exiled Princes, till they, or one of them at least, ceased -to be true to themselves. He was perhaps the only friend whom Rousseau -could not drag into a quarrel or estrange, and the only companion whom -Frederick the Great loved so well that he never made experiments on him -in the art of tyrannical tormenting. Familiar, rather than respectful, -with Voltaire, the Earl, who remembered Swift in his prime, was fond of -gossiping with Hume and of bantering d’Alembert. Kind and charitable -to all men, he was especially considerate and indulgent to the young, -from the little exiled Duke of York to the soured Elcho, and the still -unsuspected Glengarry. One exception alone did the Earl make (unless we -believe Rousseau): he could not endure, and would not be reconciled to, -Prince Charles. If in this he may seem severe, no other offence is laid -to his charge, though modern opinion may condemn his cool acquiescence -in desperate plots which he probably never expected to be carried into -action. Otherwise the Earl presents the ideal of a good and wise man of -the world, saved from all excess, and all disappointment, by the gifts -of humour and good-humour. When we add that ‘the violet of a legend,’ of -unfortunate but life-long love, blows on the grave of the good Earl, it -will be plain that, though not a hero, like his brother, Marshal Keith, -he was a character of no common distinction and charm. His life, too, is -almost an epitome of the Jacobite struggle from 1715 to 1757. The Earl -was ever behind the scenes. - -Though tenth Earl (the first of the hereditary Marischals to be ‘belted -earl’ was William, in 1458), George Keith was apt to mock at hereditary -_noblesse_. _Stemmata quid faciunt?_ He had a story of a laird who -grumbled, during a pestilence, ‘In such times a gentleman is not sure of -his life.’ The date of his birth was never known. In old age he cast an -agreeable mystery about this point. He was once heard to say that he was -twenty-seven in 1712; if so, he died at ninety-three (1778). Others date -his birth in 1693, others in 1689; d’Alembert says (on the authority of -one who had the fact from Ormonde) that he was _premier brigadier_ of -that general’s army in 1712. An engraving from a portrait of the Earl -as a young man represents him as then twenty-three years of age. If the -engraving was done in Paris, as seems probable, in 1716, he would be born -in 1693. Oddly enough the pseudo-Memoirs of Madame de Créquy (who is made -to speak of him as her true love) throw a similar cloud over the year of -her birth. Concerning the Earl’s father, Lockhart of Carnwath writes that -he had great vivacity of wit, an undaunted courage, and a soul capable of -great things, ‘but no seriousness.’ His mother, of the house of Perth, -was necessarily by birth a Jacobite. The song makes her say: - - I’ll be Lady Keith again - The day the King comes o’er the water. - -The Earl’s tutor was probably Meston, the Jacobite wit and poet. - -The Earl succeeded his father in 1712. His own first youth had been -passed in Marlborough’s wars; from 1712 to the death of Queen Anne, and -the overthrow of hopes of a Restoration by the Tories, he lived about -town, a brilliant colonel of Horse Guards, short in stature and slight in -build, but with a beautiful face, and dark, large eyes. So we see him in -the portrait of about 1716. - -The following letter, the earliest known letter of the Earl, displays him -as a disciplinarian. Conceivably the mutinous Wingfeild was a Jacobite, -but, by September 12, 1714, the chance for a rising of the Guards for -King James had passed, Queen Anne was dead, and the Earl was still -colonel in the army of George I. - - _To Lord Chief Justice Parker_ - - Stowe MSS. 750, f. 58. - - ‘September 12, 1714. - - ‘My Lord,—As soon as I heard that your Lordship had granted - a Habeas Corpus for Thomᵃˢ Wingfeild one of the private men - of His Majesties Second Troop of Horse Grenadier Guards under - my Command, I sent a Gentleman to wait upon your Lordship and - to acquaint you with the reasons for my ordering Wingfeild to - be confin’d to the Marshall of the Horse Guards according to - the practice of the Army, but your Lordship was not then at - your Chambers; I now take the liberty to inform you that the - Prisoner has not only been guilty of uttering menacing words & - insolently refusing to comply with the establisht Regulations - of the Troop, (to which Regulations he has subscribd) but has - also been endeavouring to raise a mutiny therein, which crimes - among Soldiers being of dangerous Consequences I did intend to - have him try’d by a General Court Martial, that he might have - been exemplarily punisht as far as the Law allows to deter - others from the like practices: but as there is no warrant for - holding a Court Martial for the Horse Guards extant, & I being - unwilling to trouble their Excellᶜⁱᵉˢ the Lords Justices on - this occasion, I had ordered my officers to hold a Regimental - Court Martial upon him yesterday in order to break him at - the head of the Troop, which is the only punishment they can - inflict, but they did not proceed then on accoᵗ of the Habeas - Corpus; this I thought fit to acquaint your Lordship with and - to assure you that I am &c. - - ‘MARISCHALL.’ - -From Lockier, Spence got the familiar anecdote of the Earl’s conduct -at Queen’s Anne’s death, before the projects for a Restoration of the -Chevalier were completed. Ormonde, Atterbury, and the Earl met, when -Atterbury bade Marischal go out (with the Horse Guards) and proclaim King -James. Ormonde wished to consult the Council. ‘Damn it,’ says Atterbury -in a great heat (for he did not value swearing), ‘you very well know -that things have not been concerted enough for that yet, and that we -have not a moment to lose.’ That moment they lost, and a vague anecdote -represents the Earl as weeping, after the battle of Sheriffmuir, over the -many dead men who might have been alive had he taken Atterbury’s advice. -D’Alembert, who does not mention Atterbury, attributes the idea of an -instant stroke for the King to the Earl himself.[2] - -When the rising of 1715 was in preparation, the Earl, according to -d’Alembert, wrote to James, telling him that ‘a sovereign deprived of -his own must share the dangers of those who risked their lives for his -sake,’ and so made him ‘leave his retreat’ at Bar-le-Duc. But James’s -natural brother, the Duke of Berwick, on July 16, 1715, had already -given the same advice. ‘Your honour is at stake, your friends will give -over the game if they think you backward.’ James replied that he hoped -to be at Dieppe by the 30th of the month. Within five days Berwick was -crying off from the task of accompanying his brother, who replied with a -repressed emotion, ‘You know what you owe to me, what you owe to your own -reputation and honour, what you have promised to the Scotch and to me.... -I shall not, therefore, bid you adieu, for I expect that we shall soon -meet.’ - -It was now not the King who turned laggard, but Berwick who advised -delay. ‘_I find Rancourt_’ (the King), he says, ‘very much set on his -_journey_.’ In brief, it was Berwick and Bolingbroke who kept James -back, though with great difficulty. He needed no urging (as d’Alembert -suggests) by our Earl. ‘I fear I shall scarce be able to hinder him from -passing the sea,’ says Berwick (August 6). - -Then Louis XIV. died, all was confusion, and the Regent Orléans detained -Berwick in France, exactly at the time when Mar went to raise the -Highlands. What with Bolingbroke, Berwick, the death of Louis XIV., and -the intrigues of Orléans in the Hanoverian interest, James, travelling -disguised through an Odyssey of perils, did not leave France for Scotland -till mid-December. A month before (November 13) Mar had been practically -defeated at Sheriffmuir, and Forster, Mackintosh, Derwentwater and -Kenmure had surrendered at Preston. The King thus came far too late, but -certainly by no lack of readiness on his part. - -D’Alembert makes the Earl utter a fine constitutional speech on the -duties of a king when he proclaimed James at Edinburgh. Unluckily, on -this occasion James was never proclaimed at Edinburgh by anybody. The -_Éloge_ of d’Alembert is eloquent, but it is not history. It has been the -chief source for the Earl’s biography. - -The Earl had doubtless been won over by Mar to resign his English -commission, and desert King George for King James. The story is told -that, as he rode North from London in 1715 to join Mar in the Highlands, -he met his young brother James riding South to take service with King -George. He easily induced his brother to share his own fortunes, and -Prussia ultimately gained the great soldier thus lost to England. The -Covenanting historian, Wodrow, avers that ‘Marischal was bankrupt,’ -and therefore eager for _res novæ_. But he would have been a Jacobite -in any case. As to the Earl’s conduct when Mar’s ill-organised and -ill-supplied rising drew fatally to a head at Sheriffmuir, his brother, -the Field-Marshal of Prussia, in his fragmentary Memoir, tells all that -we know. The Earl, with ‘his own squadron of horse’ and some Macdonalds, -was sent to occupy a rising ground, the enemy being, as was thought, -in Dunblane. From the height, however, the whole hostile army was seen -advancing, and the Earl sent to bid Mar bring up his forces. There was -much confusion, and the Earl’s squadron of horse was left in the centre -of the line. Mar’s right with the Earl routed Argyll’s left, while -Argyll’s left routed Mar’s right. ‘In the affair neither side gained much -honour,’ says Keith, ‘but it was the entire ruin of our party.’ Half of -Mar’s force, having thrown down their plaids,[3] were now unclothed: many -had deserted; the evil news of the Preston surrender came, the leaders -were at odds among themselves, 6,000 Dutch troops were advancing from -England. Seaforth and Huntly took their followers back to the North, and -when King James arrived at Perth, late in December, he found a wintry -welcome, soldiers few and dispirited, and dissensions among the officers. -The army wasted away while Cadogan, Argyll, and the Dutch troops, greatly -outnumbering the Jacobites, advanced on Perth through the snow. - -James’s army now beat a retreat, with no point to make for, as Inverness -was in the hands of the enemy. Mar, therefore, advised James, who had not -ammunition enough for one day’s fight (thanks to Bolingbroke, said the -Jacobites), to take ship at Montrose. If he stayed, the enemy would make -their utmost efforts to come up with and capture him. If he departed, -the retreating Highlanders would be less hotly pursued. James consulted -Marischal, who wished to offer no opinion, alleging ‘his age and want of -experience,’ says Keith.[4] Finally, he privately admitted to Mar that -‘he did not think it for the King’s honour, nor for that of the nation, -to give up the game without putting it to a tryall.’ Powder enough for -one day’s fight could be got at Aberdeen; he hoped to gain recruits as -they went North, and, at worst, James, if beaten, could escape from the -West coast. ‘Mar seemed to be convinced of the truth of this’ (very like -Bobbing John); ‘however, a ship was already provided,’ and James, with -Mar, Melfort, and others, eloped; the King characteristically leaving -all his money to recompense the peasants who had suffered by the war. -James was no coward, he had charged the English lines repeatedly, at -the head of the Royal Household, in the battle of Malplaquet, where he -was wounded. In his journey from Lorraine to the coast he had run the -gauntlet of Stair’s cut-throats. But a Scottish winter, a starveling -force, no powder, and Mar’s advice, had taken the heart out of the -adventurer. - -According to Mar, the Earl had orders to sail with the King, ‘who waited -on the ship above an hour and a half, but, by what accident we yet -know not, they did not come, and there was no waiting longer.’[5] ‘The -King and we are in no small pain to know what is become of our friends -wee left behind.’ D’Alembert says that the Earl refused to sail. ‘Your -Majesty is to protect yourself for your friends. I shall share the -sorrows of those who remain true to you in Scotland, I shall gather them, -and shall not leave without them.’ If Mar tells truth, the Earl can -have made no such speech. A modest man, he remained at his duty without -rhetoric. - -The dispirited and deserted Highland army moved North, and the Earl was -sent to ask Huntly whether he would join them—in which case they would -fight at Inverness—or not. ‘He easily perceived by Huntly’s answer -that nothing was to be expected from him.’ They, therefore, marched -to Ruthven, whence they scattered, Keith and the Earl fared westwards -with Clanranald’s men, and made for the Islands. Hence they sailed in a -French ship on May 1, and reached St. Pol de Léon on May 12. There were -a hundred officers of them together, and all this destroys d’Alembert’s -romance, modelled on the adventures of Prince Charles, about the Earl’s -dangers and the noble behaviour of the crofters among whom he was -wandering. An English force was, indeed, at one time within thirty miles -of the fugitives, but there was nobody to whom Clanranald’s men could -have been betrayed, not that any one was likely to betray them, and the -Earl Marischal and James Keith with them. In truth, d’Alembert confused -this occasion with another, after Glenshiel fight, in 1719. - -Many of the fugitives went to James at Avignon, but Keith stayed in -Paris, where Mary of Modena received him well. ‘Had I conquered a kingdom -for her she could not have said more.’ She gave him 1,000 livres, while -James granted what he could, 200 crowns yearly. Keith does not say that -the Earl was in Paris, where his portrait was probably painted at this -date. There, however (as is known from an unpublished MS.), he certainly -was, and he might even, by Stair’s mediation, have obtained his pardon. -But he supposed that the cause would presently triumph, and declined to -make any advances to George I. He was now in correspondence with General -Dillon, James’s military representative in Paris. In August, 1717, Dillon -writes to him about one ‘Prescot,’ who is suspected of intending to -murder James in Italy; he refers to Lord Peterborough, who was arrested -on this impossible charge at Bologna in September 1717.[6] In 1719 the -Earl and his brother went to Spain. There was then war between Spain and -England, Ormonde was with Alberoni, and was to be employed. Keith would -have gone thither earlier, but ‘I was then too much in love to think of -quitting Paris.’ - -Here, in Paris, 1717-18, if ever, would have to be fixed the Earl’s -legendary romance with Mademoiselle de Froullay (Madame de Créquy). The -story, a very pretty one, is given in this lady’s Mémoires, an ingenious -but fraudulent compilation. - -An author best known for his plagiarisms seized on Madame de Créquy as a -likely old person to have left memoirs behind her. By aid of gossip and -books he patched up the amusing but mythical records which he attributed -to the lady. Why he selected the Earl as the lover of her girlhood we can -only guess; but dates and facts make the pretty tale incredible, though -it has found its way into Chambers’s account of the Earl’s career. Thus, -for example, it is averred by Sainte-Beuve, on the authority of her man -of business, M. Percheron, that Madame de Créquy was born in 1714. The -love story of 1717, told in her Memoirs, beginning in the Earl’s attempt -to teach her Spanish and English, and interrupted by the fact that he was -a ‘Calvinist,’ is therefore improbable. The lady was but three years old -when her affections, according to her apocryphal Memoirs, were blighted. -The lovers met again, when the Earl was Prussian Ambassador at Versailles -in 1753. ‘We had not had the time to discover each other’s faults, we -had not suffered each by the other’s imperfections, both remained under -that illusion which experience destroyed not: we were happy in the sweet -thought of ineffable excellence, and when we met in the wane of life, -and either saw the other’s white hair, we felt an emotion so pure, so -tender, and so solemn, that no other sentiment, no other impression -known to mortals, can be compared to it.’ All this is charming, but it -cannot conceivably be true! The Earl composed his one madrigal under the -influence of this elderly emotion (say the pseudo-Memoirs), a tear stole -down his withered cheek, and he assured Madame de Créquy that they would -meet in Heaven. ‘I loved you too much not to embrace your religion.’ So -runs the romance of the pseudo-Madame Créquy. - -In fact, the Earl remained a member of the persecuted Episcopal Church -in Scotland. In Rome a priest tried to convert him, beginning with the -Trinity. ‘Your Lordship believes in the Trinity?’ ‘I do,’ said the Earl; -‘but that just fills up my measure. A drop more and I spill all.’ - -Madame de Créquy’s Mémoires are obviously a daring forgery, but the -‘violet of a legend’ has a fragrance of its own. The Earl was in 1716, -as his portrait shows, a singularly handsome young man, with large hazel -eyes and an eager face, with a complexion like a girl’s beneath his brown -curls. Madame de Créquy is made to say, by way of giving local colour, -that he greatly resembled a portrait of _le beau Caylus_, a favourite of -Henri III. The portrait was in her family. - -In 1719, to return to facts, the two Keiths were received in Spain by the -Duc de Liria, son of the Duke of Berwick, who had heard of an intended -expedition to England. In Barcelona the splendour of their welcome, they -travelling incognito, amazed them. They had been, in fact, mistaken for -their rightful King and one of his officers, who were expected. From -Barcelona they went to Madrid, whence Alberoni sent the Earl posting all -about the country after Ormonde, who was to command the invading forces. -Ormonde was a kind of figure-head of Jacobite respectability. He was -presumed to be the idol of the British army at the time of Queen Anne’s -death; he had added his mess to the general chaos of Tory imbecility in -1714, and, in place of playing Monk’s part in a new Restoration, had fled -abroad. A few of his letters of 1719 to the Earl survive: he hopes for -‘the justice which the Cause deserves,’ and when his fleet is scattered -in the usual way, reports the uneasiness of James about the Earl.[7] - -The Earl in Spain arranged what he could with the Cardinal, while -Keith passed through France, then hostile to Spain, and met the exiled -Tullibardine in Paris. Here all was confusion, the Jacobites—Seaforth, -Glendarule, and Tullibardine—being deep in the accustomed jealousies. -They sailed, however, and reached the Lewes, where Keith met his -brother, the Earl; but here divided counsels and squabbles about rank -and commissions arose. The Earl succeeded in bringing the Spanish -auxiliary forces to the mainland, and was for marching at once against -Inverness. The other faction, that of Seaforth and Tullibardine, dallied: -the ammunition, stored in a ruinous old castle on an island, was mostly -seized by English vessels. News arrived that Ormonde’s fleet, sailing -from Spain, had been dispersed on the seas, and the Highlanders came in -very reluctantly. The Jacobites landed at the head of Loch Duich, and -were posted on a hillside in Glenshiel, commanding the road to Inverness. -Hence the English forces drove them to the summit of the mountain, and -night fell. They had neither food, powder, nor any confidence in their -men, so the Spaniards surrendered, the Highlanders dispersed, and Keith -thus began his glorious military career in a style somewhat discouraging. - -Lord George Murray, later the general in the Rising of 1745, was also in -this rather squalid engagement. Keith was suffering from a fever, and -he with his brother ‘lurcked in the mountains.’ On this occasion, no -doubt, the Earl profited by the loyalty of his countrymen, among whom -(says an anonymous informant of d’Alembert’s) he moved without disguise. -He is even said to have been present when a proclamation was read aloud -offering a reward for his apprehension. His adventures increased his love -for his own people: indeed, he certainly espoused the Jacobite cause as a -national Scottish patriot, not for dynastic reasons. - -Keith and his brother, after ‘lurcking’ for months in the Northern -wilds, escaped from Aberdeen to Holland, in September 1719. Thence they -made for Spain, intending to enter France by Sedan. But as they had no -passports they were stopped in France and imprisoned. Keith hit on an -ingenious way of getting rid of their Spanish commissions, which would -have been compromising, and a letter to the Earl from the Princesse de -Conti served as a voucher for their respectability, and procured their -release. They reached Paris when the fever of the Mississippi Scheme -was at its height. Jacobites as needy as they, the Oglethorpe girls -and George Kelly, probably got hints from Law, the great financial -adventurer, and founder of the Mississippi Scheme. The young Jacobite -ladies bought in at par and sold at a huge premium. They thus won their -own _dots_, and married great French nobles. Even poor George Kelly had -a success in speculation. He was, at this time, Atterbury’s secretary, -and being involved in his fall, passed fourteen years in the Tower. In -1745 he was one of the famed Seven Men of Moidart, but none the dearer -on that account to the Earl, who never trusted him, and, in 1750, caused -him to be banished from the service of the Prince. All these adventurers, -Law, the Oglethorpes, Olive Trant, Kelly, and the Keiths, may have met in -Paris, after Glenshiel. But the Earl and his brother did not make their -fortunes in the Mississippi Scheme. They had no money, and Keith frankly -expresses his contempt for the speculations after which all the world -was running mad. The brothers passed to Montpellier, Keith attempted to -enter Spain by Toulouse, the Earl by the Pyrenees. Months later Keith -tried the Pyrenees passes, and there, at an inn, met his brother, who had -been arrested and imprisoned for six weeks. The King of France had just -set him free, with orders to leave the kingdom, and the wandering pair -of exiles went to Genoa, then a focus of Jacobite intrigue, whence they -sailed to Rome, to see ‘the King, our Master.’ - -Jacobites lived in an eternal hurry-scurry. James had been driven -from France to Lorraine; then to Avignon, where Stair planned his -assassination;[8] then to Urbino, Bologna, and Rome. Sailing for Spain, -in 1719, he had been obliged to put in near Hyères, and there to dance -all night—the melancholy monarch—at a ball in a rural inn. Spain could do -nothing for him, and he returned to Rome, whither Charles Wogan brought -him a bride, fair, unhappy Clementina Sobieska, just rescued from an -Austrian prison. Keith says nothing of her, but tells how, at Cestri -de Levanti, his brother called on Cardinal Alberoni, now fallen from -power and in exile. The Earl, with some lack of humour, wanted to tell -the Cardinal all about the Glenshiel fiasco, but was informed that the -statesman had no longer the faintest concern with the affairs of Spain or -interest in the gloomy theme. - -From Leghorn the brothers went by land through Pisa, Florence, and -Siena to Rome. The King, ‘who knew we were in want of money,’ sent Hay -to borrow 1,000 crowns from the Pope, ‘which was refused on pretence of -poverty; this I mention only to shew the genious of Clement XI., and -how little regard Churchmen has for those who has abandoned all for -religion.’ His Majesty, therefore, raised the money from a banker. The -exiled King’s chief occupation was providing for his destitute subjects: -most of his letters were begging letters. - -The point for which the Keiths had been making ever since their escape -from Scotland was Spain. Baffled in attempting to cross the Pyrenees, -and penniless, they reached Spain by taking Rome on their way, James -providing the funds with the difficulty which has been described. From -Civita Vecchia they sailed back to Genoa. Now, Jacobite privateers, under -Morgan, Nick Wogan, and other wandering knights, were rendering Genoa -unluckily conspicuous by making the harbour their head-quarters. The tiny -squadron for years hung about all coasts to aid in a new rising. - -The English Minister, D’Avenant, threatened to bombard the town if the -Keiths were not expelled, while, if they _were_, the Spanish Minister -said that he would insist on the banishment of all the Catalan refugees -in Genoa. To oblige the Senate of Genoa in their awkward position, -Keith and the Earl departed, and coasted from the town to Valentia in a -felucca, sleeping on shore every night. - -It is probable that the brothers were suspected of a part in that form -of the Jacobite plot which chanced to exist at the moment. From 1688 -to 1760, or later, there had been really but one plot, handed on from -scheming sire to son, and adapting itself to new conditions as they -happened to arise. The study of the plot is, indeed, a pretty exercise -in evolution. The object being a Restoration, the most obvious plan is -a landing of foreign troops in England, with a simultaneous rising of -the faithful. First France is to send the foreign troops; and she did -actually despatch them, or try to despatch them, at various times—witness -La Hogue, Dunkirk, and Quiberon Bay. When France will not stir, other -Powers are approached. Sweden would have played this part, in 1718, but -for the death of Charles XII. Then Spain made her effort, in 1719, with -the usual results. There were hopes, again, from Russia, as from Sweden, -and from Prussia in 1753. - -After each failure in this kind, the Jacobites tried ‘to do the thing -themselves,’ as Prince Charles said, either by assassination schemes -(which Charles Edward invariably set his foot on), or by a simultaneous -rising in London and the Highlands, or by such a rising aided by Scots -or Irish troops in foreign service landed on the coast. From the failure -at Glenshiel to 1722 this was the aspect of the plot. Atterbury, Oxford, -Orrery, and North and Grey were managers in England, Mar and Dillon in -Paris, while Morgan and Nick Wogan commanded the poor little fleet.[9] -Ormonde, in Spain, was to carry over Irish regiments in Spanish service. -The Jacobites had the ship prepared years before for the expedition of -Charles XII., with two or three other vessels. The gallant Nick Wogan, -who, as a mere boy, had been pardoned, after Preston, for rescuing a -wounded Hanoverian officer under fire, was hovering on the seas from -Genoa to the Groin. George Kelly was going to and fro between Paris -and London, ‘a man of far more temper, discretion, and real art’ than -Atterbury, says Speaker Onslow. - -When the scheme for Ormonde’s amateur invasion failed, a mob-plot of -Layer’s followed it; but all was revealed. Kelly and Atterbury were -seized; Atterbury was exiled, Kelly lay in the Tower, and Layer was -hanged. - -Keith says nothing of any part borne by his brother or himself in these -feeble conspiracies. One Neynho, arrested in London, averred that the -Earl Marischal had been in town on this business, in disguise, and had -shared his room. Neynho merely guessed that his companion was the Earl, -who certainly was on friendly terms with Atterbury. Long afterwards he -wrote (1737): ‘I was told in Italy that Pope had thought of publishing -a collection of familliair letters, particularly of ye Bishop; as I was -honoured with Many, I sent copys of a part and parts (_sic_) to Pope.’ -These, however, could not have been political epistles. The originals -must have perished when the Earl burned all his papers, as d’Alembert’s -authorities report, in 1745.[10] - -On the whole, it seems certain that Keith, at least, was not in the plots -of 1720-22; Keith, indeed, lay ill in Paris in 1723-24, suffering from a -tumour. The Earl now held a commission from Spain, which secured for him -a pension, irregularly paid; but, being a Protestant, he never received -an active command, except once, in an affair with the Moors. There was -no harm, it seemed, in sending a heretic to fight against infidels. His -great friend in Spain was the Duchess of Medina Sidonia, who was anxious -to convert him. - -‘She spoke to him of a certain miracle, of daily occurrence in her -country. There is a family, or caste, which, from father to son, have -the power of going into the flames without being burned, and who by dint -of charms permitted by the Inquisition can extinguish fires. The Earl -promised to surrender to a proof so evident, if he might be present and -light the fire himself. The lady agreed, but the _questadore_, as these -people are called, would never try the experiment, though he had done so -on a former occasion; he said that fire had been made by a heretic, who -mingled charms with it, and that he felt them from afar.’ - -This was unlucky, as these families whom fire does not take hold on -exist to-day in Fiji, as of old among the Hirpi of Mount Soracte. - -The Earl had no trouble with the Inquisition, being allowed to have what -books he pleased, as long as he did not lend them to Spanish subjects. -‘His religious ideas were far from strict ... but he could not endure -to hear these questions touched on when women were present, or the -poor in spirit: it was a kind of talk which in general he carefully -avoided,’—except among _philosophes_.[11] Hume tells us that the Earl -Marischal and Helvetius thought they were ascribing an excellent -quality to Prince Charles when they said that he ‘had learned from the -philosophers at Paris to affect a contempt of all religion.’ It seems -improbable that the Earl was more ‘emancipated’ than Hume, but his -wandering life had made him acquainted with the extremes of Scottish -Presbyterianism, with the Inquisition in Spain, the devotions of his King -in Rome, the levities of Voltaire and Frederick, and all the contemptuous -certainties of the Encyclopédistes. The Earl rather loved a bold jest -or two, in philosophic company, and his _mots_ were not always in good -taste. As a Norseman’s religion was mainly that of his sword, the Earl’s -appears to have been that of his character, which was instinctively -affectionate, indulgent, and charitable. If he had neither Faith nor -Hope, which we cannot assume, he was rich in Charity. - -It is, perhaps, no longer possible to trace all the wanderings of the -Earl after his brother entered the Russian service in 1728. In those -years the exiles were mainly concerned about the quarrels between -James and his wife, which had an ill effect on their Royal reputation -in Europe. The Courts chiefly solicited for aid at this period were -those of Moscow and Vienna. Spain did not pay her pension to James with -regularity, and the Earl Marischal, then as later, may have suffered from -the same inconvenience. This may account for his return to Rome, where he -resided in James’s palace, about 1730-34. ‘He has the esteem of all that -has the honour to be known to him, and may be justly styled the honour -of our Cause,’ writes William Hay to Admiral Gordon, who represented -Jacobite interests in Russia (Feb. 2, 1732). The little Court at Rome -was as full of jealousies as if it had been at St. James’s. Murray, -brother of Lord Mansfield, was Minister, under the title of Lord Dunbar, -while James’s other ‘favourite’ Hay (Lord Inverness) was at Avignon out -of favour, and had turned Catholic. The pair were generally detested by -the other mock-courtiers. These gentlemen had formed themselves into an -Order of Chivalry, ‘The Order of Toboso,’ alluding to their Quixotry. -Prince Charles (aged twelve) and the Duke of York (a hero of seven) were -the patrons. ‘They are the most lively and engaging two boys this day on -earth,’ writes William Hay. The Knights of the Order sent to Gordon in -Russia their cheerful salutations, signed by ‘Don Ezekiel del Toboso’ -(Zeky Hamilton), ‘Don George Keith’ (the Earl), and so on. They declined -to elect Murray, because he had ‘the insolence to fail in his respect to -a right honourable lady who is the ever honoured protectress of the most -illustrious Order of Toboso,’ Lady Elizabeth Caryl. A number of insults -to Murray follow in the epistle.[12] - -All this was rather dull, distasteful work for the Earl. He received -from James the Order of the Thistle (‘the green ribbon’); but, except -perhaps at Rome, he would not wear a decoration not more imposing than -that of the Toboso Order. Writing to his brother, he drew a pretty -picture of the little Duke of York, who was fond of the Earl, and used -to bring his weekly Report on Conduct to be criticised and sent on to -Keith, far away in Russia. Keith was asked to comment on it, or, if he -did not, the Earl was diplomatist enough to do so in his name. Prince -Charles the Earl seems to have disliked from the first. He had already, -at the age of thirteen, ‘got out of the hands of his governors,’ the Earl -writes, and indeed the Prince’s spelling alone proves the success with -which he evaded instruction. But, to please the little Duke, the Earl -sent for a sword from Russia. The Duke was a pretty child, and wept from -disappointment when his elder brother, in 1734, went off to the siege of -Gaeta, while he, a warrior of nine, remained in Rome. - -The Earl disliked the tiny jealous Court; the impotent cabals, the -priests who tried to convert him. Writing to David Hume long afterwards, -in 1762, he said, ‘I wish I could see you, to answer honestly all your -[historical] questions: for, though I had my share of folly with others, -yet, as my intentions were at bottom honest, I should open to you my -whole budget.’ When he wrote thus he had made his peace with England. Why -he did so we shall try to point out later. - -Always scrupulously honest (except when diplomatic duties forbade, and -even then he hated lying), the Earl told his brother that he found the -Jacobite Court at Rome no place for an honest man. He does not give -details, but he seems to hint at some enterprise which, in his opinion, -was not honourable. James, moreover, was sunk in devotion, weeping and -praying at the tomb of Clementina. From this uncongenial society the -Earl departed, and took up his abode at the Papal city of Avignon, -where Ormonde now resided. He liked the charming old place, and thought -it especially rich in original characters. By 1736, however, he had -returned to Spain, where, as he said, he was always sure to find ‘his -old friend, the Sun.’ News of the Earl comes through some very harmless -correspondence, intercepted at Leyden, in 1736, by an unidentified -spy.[13] Don Ezekiel del Toboso (Hamilton) was now out of favour with -James, which, judging by his very foolish letters, is no marvel. He -resided at Leyden, corresponding with Ormonde and George Kelly. George, -after fourteen years of the Tower, since Atterbury’s Plot, had escaped in -a manner at once ingenious, romantic, and strictly honourable. Carte, the -historian, was another correspondent; but gossip was the staple of their -budgets—gossip and abuse of James’s favourites, Dunbar and Inverness. In -Spain the Earl officially represented James, but his chief employments -were shooting and reading. His Spanish pension was unpaid (he had a -small allowance from the Duke of Hamilton), and he was minded ‘to live -contentedly upon a small matter,’ he says, rather than to ‘pay court in -anti-chambers to under Ministers whom I despise.’ ‘I wo na gie an inch -o’ my will for an ell o’ my wealth,’ he remarks, in the Scots proverbial -phrase. A Protestant canton in Switzerland would suit him best, where a -little money will furnish all that he requires. ‘I am naturally sober -enough, as to my eating, more as to my drinking, I do not game, and -am a Knight Errant _sin amor_, so that I need not great sums for my -maintenance.’ A Knight _sin amor_ the Earl seems usually to have been. -He must have been over forty at this time, and he had not yet acquired -his celebrated fair Turkish captive. The Earl, however, had not given up -all hope of active Jacobite service. ‘I propose to try if I can still do -anything, or have even the hopes of doing something.’ He had a ‘project,’ -and, as far as the hints in his letters can now be deciphered, it was -to remove James, or, at all events, Prince Charles, from Rome (a place -distrusted by Protestant England), and to settle one or both of them—in -Corsica! - -The Earl was interested, as a patriotic Scot, in the hanging of Porteous -by the Edinburgh mob. ‘It’s certain that Porteous was a most brutal -fellow; his last works at the head of his Guard was not the first time he -had ordered his men to fire on the people. I will not call them Mobb, who -made so orderly an Execution.’ - -To this extent may Radical principles carry a good Jacobite! The Earl -should have written the work contemplated by Swift, ‘A Modest Defence of -the Proceedings of the Rabble, in All Ages.’ - -A quarrel with the Spanish Treasurer, who was short of treasure, ended -in somebody assuring the official that the Earl was a man of honour, -‘who would go afoot eating bread and water from this to Tartary _con -un doblon_.’ To Tartary, or near it, the Earl was to go, though he had -been invited by Ormonde to Avignon. Till the end of the year 1737, Kelly -and others hoped to settle Prince Charles in Corsica, with the Earl for -his Minister. Marischal was expected by Ormonde at Avignon, in the last -week of December, and thither he went for a month or two, leaving for -St. Petersburg in March, to visit his brother. Keith had been severely -wounded at the assault on Oczakow, and the Earl found him insisting -that he would not have his leg amputated. The Earl took his part, and -brought Keith to Paris, where the surgeons saved his leg, but where he -had to suffer another serious operation. Thence the devoted brothers -went to Barège, where Keith recovered health. He returned to Russia, -leaving in the Earl’s care Mademoiselle Emetté, a pretty Turkish captive -child, rescued by him at the sack of Oczakow, and Ibrahim, another True -Believer. These slaves, says a friend who gave information to d’Alembert, -were treated by the Earl as his children. He educated them, he invested -money in their names (probably when he was in the service of Frederick -the Great), and he cherished a menagerie of young heathens, whom his -brother had rescued in sieges and storms of towns. One, Stepan, was a -Tartar: another is declared to have been a Thibetan, and related to the -Grand Lama. The Earl was no proselytiser, and did not convert his Pagans -and Turks. It is said that he was not insensible to the charms of pretty -Emetté. - -‘Can I never inspire you with what I feel?’ he asked. - -‘_Non!_’ replied the girl, and there it ended. - -The Earl made a will in her favour, in 1741, and she later—much -later—married M. de Fromont. The love story is not very plausible, before -1741, as Emetté was still a girl when she accompanied the Earl to Paris, -during his Embassy, in 1751. - -The movements of the Earl are obscure at this period, but in 1742-43 -he was certainly engaged for the Jacobite interest in France, residing -now at Paris, now at Boulogne. The unhappy ‘Association’ of Scottish -Jacobites had been founded in 1741. Its promoters were the inveterate -traitor, Lovat, and William Macgregor, of Balhaldie, who, since 1715, had -lived chiefly in France, and was a trusted agent of James. Balhaldie’s -character has been much assailed by Murray of Broughton, who was himself -connected with the Association. As far as can be discovered Balhaldie was -sanguine, and even of a visionary enthusiasm, when enterprises concocted -by himself were in question. The adventures of other leaders, especially -adventures not supported by France, he distrusted and thwarted. The -loyal Lochiel and the timid Traquair were also of the Association, which -Balhaldie amused in 1742 with hopes of a French descent under the Earl -Marischal. Balhaldie had promised to the French Court ‘mountains and -marvels’ in the way of Scottish assistance, and the Earl ‘treated his -assertion with the contempt and ridicule it deserved,’ says Murray of -Broughton. The Earl’s own letters show impatience with Balhaldie and Lord -Sempil, James’s other agent in Paris. Thus, on February 12, 1743, the -Earl writes from Boulogne to Lord John Drummond, whose chief business -was to get Highland clothes wherein the Duke of York might dance at the -Carnival. The Earl protests, in answer to a remark of Sempil’s, that he -‘has more than bare curiosity in a subject where the interest of my King -and native country is so nearly concerned (not to speak of my own), where -I see a noble spirit, and where I am sensible a great deal of honour -is done me, and I add, that I still hope these gentlemen will do me the -honour and justice to believe that I shall never fail either in my duty -to my King and country, my gratitude to them for their good opinion, -or in my best endeavours to serve.’ All this was in reply to Sempil’s -insinuation that the Scottish Jacobites thought the Earl lukewarm. Murray -confirms the Earl by telling how Balhaldie tried to stir strife between -the Earl and the Scots, who revered him, though Balhaldie styled him ‘an -honourable fool.’[14] - -Lord John Drummond suggested to James’s secretary, Edgar, that the Earl -should supersede Balhaldie, ‘who had been obliged to fly the country in -danger of being taken up for a Fifty pound note.’ Lord John’s advice -was excellent. The Earl, and he alone, was the right man to deal with -the party in Scotland, who could trust his sense, zeal, and honour. But -James, far away in Rome, could never settle these distant and embroiled -affairs. He went on trusting Balhaldie, who was also accepted by the -party in England. Had James cashiered Balhaldie and instated the Earl, -matters would have been managed with discretion and confidence. The -Earl was determined not to beguile France into an endeavour based on -the phantom hosts of Balhaldie’s imagination. Had he been minister, it -is highly probable that nothing would have been done at all, and that -Prince Charles would never have left Italy. For Balhaldie continued to -represent James in France, and Balhaldie it was, with Sempil, who induced -Louis XV. to adopt the Jacobite cause, and brought the Prince to France -in 1744. While his father lived, Charles never returned to Rome. - -On December 23, 1743, James sent to the Duke of Ormonde, an elderly -amorist at Avignon,[15] his commissions as General of an expedition to -England and as Regent till the Prince should join. The Earl received -a similar commission as General of a diversion, ‘with some small -assistance,’ to be made in Scotland. The Earl was at Dunkirk, eager -to sail for Scotland, by March 7, 1744, and Charles was somewhere, -_incognito_, in the neighbourhood. But the Earl, as he wrote to -d’Argenson, had neither definite orders nor money enough; in short, as -usual, everything was rendered futile by French shilly-shallying and -by the accustomed tempest. D’Alembert and others assert that Charles -asked the Earl to set forth with him alone in a sailing-boat, to which -the Earl replied that, if he went, it would be to dissuade the Scottish -from joining a Prince so brave but so ill-supported. It is certain that -d’Argenson told Marshal Saxe that the Prince ought to retire to a villa -of the Bishop of Soissons, with the Earl for his _chaperon_. The Earl -was still anxious for an expedition in force, but d’Argenson distrusted -his information on all points. Charles declined to go and skulk at the -Bishop’s, and wrote that ‘if he knew his presence unaided would be useful -in England he would cross in an open boat.’[16] - -On this authentic evidence the Earl was anxious to make an effort, and -Charles’s remark about going alone in an open boat was conditional—_s’il -savait que sa présence seule fut utile en Angleterre_. But no energy, -no hopes, no courage, could conquer the irresolution of France. By -April Prince Charles was living, _très caché_, in Paris. Thus his long -habit of hiding arose in the _incognito_ forced on him by the Ministers -of Louis XV. The Prince, as he writes to his father (April 3, 1744), -was ‘goin about with a single servant bying fish and other things, and -squabling for a peney more or less.’ He was anxious to make the campaign -in Flanders with the French army, ‘and it will certainly be so if Lord -Marschal dose not hinder it.... He tels them that serving in the Army -in flanders, it would disgust entirely the English,’ in which opinion -the Earl may have been wrong. Charles accuses the Earl of stopping the -Dunkirk expedition (and here d’Alembert confirms), ‘by saying things that -discouraged them to the last degree: I was plagued with his letters, -which were rather Books, and had the patience to answer them, article by -article, striving to make him act reasonably, but all to no purpose.’[17] - -It was not easy to ‘act reasonably,’ where all was a chaos of futile -counsels and half-hearted French schemes. They would and they would not, -in the affair of the expedition of March 1744. We find the Earl now -urging despatch, now discouraging the French, and, on September 5, 1744, -he writes to James, from Avignon, ‘there was not only no design to employ -me, but there was none to any assistance in Scotland.’[18] The Earl -believed that the Prince’s incognito was really imposed on him by the -devices of Balhaldie and Sempil, ‘to keep him from seeing such as from -honour and duty would tell him truth.’ - -Through such tortuous misunderstandings and suspicions on every side, -matters dragged on till Charles forced the game by embarking for Scotland -secretly in June 1745. The Earl Marischal was the man whom he sent to -report this step to Louis XV. ‘I hope,’ Charles writes to d’Argenson, -‘you will receive the Earl as a person of the first quality, in whom I -have full confidence.’ The Earl undertook the commission.[19] On August -20, 1745, he sent in a _Mémoire_ to the French Court. Lord Clancarty had -arrived, authorised (says the Earl) to speak for the English Jacobite -leaders, the Duke of Beaufort, the Earl of Lichfield, Lord Orrery, Lord -Barrymore, Sir Watkin Williams Wynne, and Sir John Hinde Cotton. They -offered to raise the standard as soon as French troops landed in England. -When they made the offer, the English Jacobites (who asked for 10,000 -infantry, arms for 30,000, guns, and pay) did not know that Charles -had landed in Scotland. D’Argenson naturally asked for the seals and -signatures of the English leaders, as warrants of their sincerity. He -could not send a _corps d’armée_ across the Channel on the word of one -individual, and such an individual as the profane, drunken, slovenly, -one-eyed Clancarty. The Earl, on October 23, 1745, tried to overcome the -scruples of d’Argenson, but in vain.[20] Clancarty, it is pretty clear, -came over as a result of the persuasions of Carte, the historian, in whom -the leading English Jacobites had no confidence. ‘The wise men among them -would neither trust Lord Clancarty’s nor Mr. Carte’s discretion in any -scheme of business,’ says Sempil to James (September 13, 1745). - -Sempil was ever at odds with the Earl, who, says Sempil, ‘insists on -great matters.’ French policy was to keep sending small supplies of -money and men to support agitation in Scotland. The Earl did not want -mere agitation and a feeble futile rising; he wanted strong measures, -which might have a chance of success. ‘He can trust nobody,’ says Sempil, -‘and is persuaded that the French Court will sacrifice our country, if -his firmness does not prevent it.’ The Earl was right; what he foresaw -occurred. Sempil, however, was not far wrong, when he observed that the -Prince was already engaged, and a little help was better than none. ‘I -am sorry to see my old friend so very unfit for great affairs,’ writes -Sempil. The Earl had ever been adverse to a wild attempt by the Prince, -as a mere cause of misery and useless bloodshed. He probably thought that -no French support and a speedy collapse of the rising were better than -trivial aid, which kept up the hearts of the Highlanders, and urged them -to extremes. - -By October 19 the Duke of York was flattered with hopes of sailing at -the head of a large French force. The force hung about Dunkirk for six -months, doing nothing, and then came Culloden. The Duke was prejudiced -against Sempil and his friend Balhaldie, and already there was a split in -the party, Sempil on one side, the Earl Marischal on the other. George -Kelly returned from Scotland, as an envoy to France, but Sempil would -not trust him even with the names of the leading English Jacobites. The -secrecy insisted on by Sir Watkin Williams Wynne, Lord Barrymore, the -Duke of Beaufort, and the others was kept up by Sempil even against -Prince Charles himself. This naturally irritated the Earl, and, what with -Jacobite divisions in France, and French irresolution, Marischal had -to play a tedious and ungrateful part. James expected him to join the -Prince, but he, for his part, gave James very little hope of the success -of the adventure.[21] James himself, with surprising mental detachment, -admitted that the best plan for the English Jacobites was ‘to lie still,’ -and make no attempt without the assistance from France which never came. - -The Earl disappears from the diplomatic scene, on which he had done no -good, in the end of 1745. He obviously attempted to settle quietly in -Russia with his brother. But the Empress ‘would not so much as allow -Lord Marischal to stay in her country,’ wrote James to Charles, in April -1747. Ejected from the North, he sought ‘his old friend, the sun,’ in -the South, at Treviso, and at Venice. The Prince, in August 1747, wrote -from Paris imploring the Earl to join him, for the need of a trustworthy -adviser was bitterly felt. The Earl replied with respect, but with -Republican brevity, pleading his ‘broken health,’ and adding, ‘I did not -retire from all affairs without a certainty how useless I was, and always -must be.’ - -At Venice the Earl entertained a moody young exile, who tells a story -illustrating at once his host’s knowledge of life, the strictness of -his morality, and his freedom from a tendency to censure the young and -enterprising.[22] - -From Venice the much-wandering Earl retired to his most sure and -hospitable retreat. He joined his brother, who had now entered the -service of Frederick the Great. He reached Berlin in January 1748. -Frederick, asking first whether his estates had been confiscated, made -him a pension of 2,000 crowns. Frederick loved, esteemed, sheltered, and -employed the veteran, ‘unfit for affairs’ as he thought himself. No doubt -Frederick’s first aim was to attach to himself so valuable an officer -as Keith, by showing kindness to his brother. But the Earl presently -became personally dear to him, as a friend without subservience, and a -philosopher without vanity or pretence. In his new retreat the Earl was -not likely to listen to the prayers of Prince Charles, who, being now a -homeless exile, implored the old Jacobite to meet him at Venice. Henry -Goring carried the letters, in April 1749, and probably took counsel -with the veteran. Nothing came of it, except the expulsion from the -Prince’s household at Avignon of poor George Kelly, a staunch and astute -friend, who was obnoxious to the English Jacobites. Since 1717 Kelly -had served the Cause, first under Atterbury, then—after fourteen years’ -imprisonment—in France, Scotland, and as the Prince’s secretary. He had -been Lord Marischal’s ally in 1745, but Rousseau says that the Earl’s -failing was to be easily prejudiced against a man, and never to return -from his prejudice. Kelly’s letter to Charles might have disarmed him. -‘Nobody ever had less reason or worse authority than Lord Marischal for -such an accusation; for your Royal Highness knows well I always acted -the contrary part, and never failed representing the advantage and even -necessity of having him at the head of your affairs.... His Lordship may -think of me what he pleases, but my opinion of him is still the same.’ -There seems to be no doubt that the Earl had written to Floyd (whom he -commends to Hume as an honest witness) to say that ‘from a good hand’ he -learned that Kelly ‘opposed his coming near the Prince,’ and had spoken -of him as ‘a Republican, a man incapable of cultivating princes.’ The -Earl _was_ ‘incapable of cultivating princes,’ and Rousseau esteemed -him for the same. But it was under Kelly’s influence that Charles, in -1747, tried to secure the society and services of the Earl. He had been -prejudiced (as Rousseau says he was capable of being), probably by Carte -the historian. Years afterwards, when the Earl had disowned Charles, -Kelly returned to the Prince’s household. He never had a stauncher -adherent than this Irish clergyman of exactly the same age as his father. -History, like the Earl Marischal, has been unduly prejudiced against -honest George Kelly.[23] - - - - -II - -THE EARL IN PRUSSIAN SERVICE - - -About the Earl’s first years in the company of the great Frederick little -is known or likely to be known. _Deus nobis hæc otia fecit_, he may have -murmured to himself while he refused the Prince’s insistent prayers for -his service, and put his Royal Highness off in a truly Royal way, with -his miniature in a snuff-box of mother-of-pearl. The old humourist may -have reflected that men had given lands and gear for the cause, and now, -like the representative of Lochgarry, have nothing material to show for -their loyalty, save an inexpensive snuff-box of agate and gold. No, the -Earl would not travel from Venice in 1749 to meet the Prince. - -His name occurs in brief notes of Voltaire, then residing with Frederick, -and quarrelling with his Royal host. Voltaire kept borrowing books from -the Scottish exile, books chiefly on historical subjects. If we may -believe Sir Charles Hanbury Williams, then at Berlin, the celebrated -Livonian mistress of Keith caused quarrels between him and his brother, -and even obliged them to live separately.[24] The Earl gave much good -advice to Henry Goring, the Prince’s envoy at that time, and if he was -indeed on bad terms with his brother (these bad terms cannot have lasted -long), he may have been all the better pleased to go as Frederick’s -ambassador to Versailles in August 1751. Thither he took his pretty -Turkish captive, and all his household of Pagans, Mussulmans, Buddhists, -and so forth. I have elsewhere described the Earl’s relations with Prince -Charles, then lurking in or near Paris; his furtive meetings with Goring -at lace shops and in gardens, his familiarity with Young Glengarry, who -easily outwitted the Earl, and his unprejudiced tolerance of a perfectly -Fenian plot—the Elibank Plot—for kidnapping George II., Prince Fecky, -and the rest of the Royal Family. The Earl merely looked on. He gave no -advice. His ancient memories could not enlighten him as to how the Guards -were now posted. ‘What opinion, Mr. Pickle,’ he said to Glengarry, ‘can I -entertain of people that proposed I should abandon my Embassy and embark -headlong with them?’ The Earl had found a haven at last in Frederick’s -favour. He was willing to help the cause diplomatically, to send Jemmy -Dawkins to Berlin, to sound Frederick, and suggest that, in a quarrel -with England, the Jacobites might be useful. He was ready enough to dine -with the exiles on St. Andrew’s Day, but not to go further. When Charles -broke with the faithful Goring in the spring of 1754, the Earl broke with -_him_, rebuked him severely, and never forgave him. He had never loved -Charles; he now regarded him as impossible, even treacherous, and ceased -to be a Jacobite. - -The nature of his charges against the Prince will appear later. -Meanwhile, as the Prince had behaved ill to Goring, who fell under his -new mania of suspicion, as he declined to cashier his mistress, Miss -Walkinshaw, in deference to English and Scottish requests, as he was a -battered, broken wanderer, _sans feu ni lieu_, the Earl abandoned him -to his fate, and even, it seems, officially ‘warned the party against -being concerned with him.’ After forty years of faithful though perfectly -fruitless service, the Earl apparently made up his mind to be reconciled, -if possible, to the English Government. Though his appointment as -ambassador had been a direct insult to Frederick’s uncle, George II., -the great diplomatic revolution which brought Prussia and England into -alliance was favourable to the Earl’s prospects of pardon. - -He probably accepted the Embassy not without hopes of being able to -do something for the Cause. James certainly took this view of the -appointment. But the end had come. The retreat of Charles in Flanders -had been detected at last by the English. The English dread of Miss -Walkinshaw, and the quarrel over that poor lady, made themselves heard of -in the end of 1753. By January 17, 1754, we find Frederick writing to the -Earl that he ‘will secretly be delighted to see him again.’ Frederick -bade Marshal Keith send an itinerary of the route which the Earl ‘will do -well to follow’ on his return to Prussia. On the same day Keith wrote to -his brother the following letter, which shows that their affection, if -really it had been impaired, was now revived:—[25] - - ‘17 January, 1754. - - ‘I’m glad my dearest brother says nothing of his health in the - letter ... 27th Dec., for Count Podewils had alarmed me a good - deal by telling me that you had been obliged more than once to - send Mr. Knyphausen in your place to Versailles, on occasion of - incommoditys; and tho’ I hope you would not disguise to me the - state of your health ... yet a conversation I had some days ago - with the King gives me still reason to suspect that it is not - so good as I ought to wish it. He told me that for some time - past you had solicitated him to allow you to retire ... and at - your earnest desire he had granted your request, but at the - same time had acquainted you how absolutely necessary it was - for his interest that you should continue in the same post till - the end of harvest, by which time he must think of some other - to replace you; he asked me at the same time if your intention - was to return here; to which I answer’d ... it was, tho’ I said - this without any authority from you ... he told me that in that - case he thought you should keep the time of your journey and - route as private as possible, and that after taking leave of - the Court of France you should give it out that your health - required your going for some time to the S. of France, that - it was easy on the way to take a cross road to Strasbourg and - Francfort, and after passing the Hessian dominions to turn into - Saxony, by which you would evite all the Hanoverian Territories - and arrive safely here. Everything he said was more like a - friend than a sovereign, and showed a real tenderness for your - preservation....’ - -Frederick did not wish his friend to run any risk of being kidnapped -in Hanoverian territory, by the minions of the Elector. The Earl could -not be allowed to return at once, for the clouds over Anglo-Prussian -relations were clearing, while England was at odds with France, both -about the secret fortifying of Dunkirk, contrary to treaty, about the -East Indies, and about North America. So Frederick philosophised, in -letters to the Earl, concerning the disagreeable yoke he had still to -bear, and about the inevitable hardships of mortal life in general. He -also asked the Earl to find him a truly excellent French cook. On March -31, Frederick offered the Earl the choice of any place of residence -he liked, and expressed a wish that he could retire from politics. He -foresaw the crucial struggle of his life, the Seven Years’ War. ‘But -every machine is made for its special end: the clock to mark time, the -spit to roast meat, the mill to grind. Let us grind then, since such is -my fate, but believe that while I turn and turn by no will of my own, -nobody is more interested in your philosophical repose than your friend -to all time and in all situations where you may find yourself.’ - -Frederick is never so amiable as in his correspondence with the old -Jacobite exile. - -At this period, Frederick gave the Earl information of Austrian war -preparations, for the service of the French Ministry. Saxony and Vienna -excited his suspicions. He did not yet know that he was to be opposed -also to France. He was occupied with dramatists and actors, ‘more amusing -than all the clergy in Europe, with the Pope and the Cardinals at their -head.’ He has to diplomatise between Signor Crica and Signora Paganini, -but hopes to succeed before King George has had time to corrupt his new -Parliament. Happier letters were these to receive than the heart-broken -appeals which rained in from Prince Charles, letters which the Earl had -hoped to escape by retiring from his Embassy. Here his negotiations -‘had embroiled him with the cooks of Paris,’ but he had acquired the -friendship of d’Alembert, whom he introduced to Frederick. The King -thought d’Alembert ‘an honest man,’ and agreed with the Earl’s preference -for heart above wit. ‘They who play with monkeys will get bitten,’ which -refers to Frederick’s quarrel with Voltaire. The Earl warned the wit that -some big Prussian officer would probably box his ears if he persisted in -satirising his late host. ‘Rare it is,’ says Frederick, ‘to find, as in -you, the combination of wit, character, and knowledge, and it is natural -that I should value you all the more highly.’ - -In May 1754, the Earl, while still pressing to be relieved from duty, was -eager to undertake any negotiations as to an _entente_ between Prussia -and Spain, a country which he loved. There was an opportunity—General -Wall, of an Irish Jacobite house, being now minister in the Peninsula. - -The Earl left Paris in the end of June (carrying with him to Berlin -poor Henry Goring, who was near death), and accepted the Government of -Neufchâtel. While (February 8, 1756) Frederick’s throne was ‘threatened -by Voltaire, an earthquake, a comet, and Madame Denis,’ the Earl was -trying to soothe Protestant fanaticism, then raging in his little realm. - -‘They will tell you, my dear Lord,’ writes Frederick, ‘that I am rather -less Jacobite than of old. Don’t detest me on that account.’ It is -known, from a letter of Arthur Villettes, at Berne (May 28, 1756), to -the English Government, that the Earl was making no secret of his desire -to be pardoned.[26] The Earl spoke of the Prince, now, with ‘the utmost -horror and detestation,’ declaring that since 1744 ‘his life had been one -continued scene of falsehood, ingratitude and villainy, and his father’s -was little better.’ - -Such, alas! are the possibilities of prejudice. The Earl accused Charles -of telling the Scots, previous to his expedition in 1745, that the -Earl approved of it. There is no evidence in Murray of Broughton that -Charles ever hinted at anything of the kind. Charles’s life, from 1744 -till he returned to France, is minutely known. He had not been false and -villainous. He had been deceived on many hands, by Balhaldie (as the -Earl strenuously asserted), by France, by Macleod, Traquair, Nithsdale, -Kenmure, by Murray of Broughton, and he inevitably acquired a habit of -suspicion. Lonely exile, bitter solitude, then corrupted and depraved -him; but the Earl’s remarks are much too sweeping to be accurate, -where we can test them. In the case of James we can test them by his -copious correspondence. His letters are not, indeed, those of a hero, -but of a kind and loving father, who continually impresses on Charles -the absolute necessity of the strictest justice and honour, especially -in matters of money, ‘for in these matters both justice and honour is -concerned’ (‘Memorials,’ p. 372, Aug. 14, 1744). As to politics, James -was absolutely opposed to any desperate adventure, any hazarding, -on a slender chance, of the lives and fortunes of his subjects. His -temper, schooled by long adversity, made him even applaud the reserve -of his English adherents, and excuse, wherever it could be excused, -the conduct of France, and attempt, by a mild tolerance, to soothe the -fatal jealousies of his agents. No Prince has been more ruthlessly and -ignorantly calumniated than he whose ‘ails’ and sorrows had converted him -into a philosopher no longer eager for a crown too weighty for him, into -a devout Christian devoid of intolerance, and disinclined to preach. - -The Earl was justified in forsaking a Cause which Charles had made -morally impossible. But he believed, in spite of Charles’s contradiction, -that he had threatened to betray his adherents. This prejudice is the -single blot on a character which, once animated against a man, never -forgave. - -The correspondence of Frederick with his Governor of Neufchâtel is -scanty: he had other business in hand—the struggle for existence. On -July 8, 1757, he writes from Leitmentz, thanking the Earl for a present -of peas and chocolate. On October 19, 1758, he sends the bitter news -of the glorious death of Marshal Keith, and on November 23 offers his -condolences, and speaks of his unfortunate campaign. - -_Probus vixit, fortis obiit_, was the Earl’s brief epitaph on his -brother. His one close tie to life was broken. That younger brother, who -had fished and shot with him, had fought at his side at Sheriffmuir, had -shared the dangers of Glenshiel and the outlaw life, who had voyaged -with him in so many desperate wanderings, to save whom he had crossed -Europe—the brother who had secured for him his ‘philosophic repose’—was -gone, leaving how many dear memories of boyhood in Scotland, of common -perils, and common labours for a fallen Cause! - -And there followed—oh philosophy!—a squabble with Keith’s mistress about -the frugal inheritance of one who scorned to enrich himself! ‘My brother -had just held Bohemia to ransom, and he leaves me sixty ducats,’ wrote -the Earl to Madame Geoffrin. In December 1758, Frederick determined to -send the Earl to Spain, where ‘nobody is so capable as you of making -himself beloved.’ He wanted peace, but peace with honour. The Earl was -merely to watch over Frederick’s interests, and to sound Spain as to her -mediation. The King feared a separate Anglo-French peace, with Prussia -left out. - -By January 6, 1759, Frederick was trying to secure the Earl’s pardon in -England, and wrote to Knyphausen and Michell in London. The death of Lord -Kintore, the Earl’s cousin, devolved an estate upon him. This Marischal -wished to obtain, but he had not changed sides in hope of gaining these -lands. Andrew Mitchell wrote to Lord Holderness, on January 8, 1759, from -Breslau, saying that Frederick had remarked, ‘I know Lord Marischal to be -so thorough an honest man that I am willing to be surety for his future -conduct.’ He enclosed a letter to be discreetly submitted to George II., -submitting Frederick’s desire for the Earl’s pardon. By February 5, news -reached Prussia that George had graciously consented. - -There must have been a delay caused by formalities, for the Earl did not -send his letter of thanks from Madrid to Sir Andrew Mitchell ‘gratefully -acknowledging the goodness of the King’ till August 24, 1759. - -So there was ‘the end of an auld sang.’ Charles was hanging about the -French coast, for the expedition under Conflans was preparing to carry -him, as he hoped, to England: James, in Rome, was receiving his sanguine -letters. It was 1744 over again; but the Earl was now of the other -party, and James must have felt the loss severely. The bell which was -regularly rung at home for the Earl’s birthday, cracked when the news -came to Aberdeenshire. ‘I’ll never say “cheep” for _you_ again, Earl -Marischal!’—so some local Jacobite translated the broken voice of the old -bell. But the Earl manifestly did not win his pardon by discovering and -betraying the secret of the family compact between France and Spain, as -historians have conjectured. Dates render this, happily, impossible.[27] - -The Earl took a humorous view of Jacobite French adventures. ‘The -conquest of Ireland by M. Thurot has miscarried,’ he writes to Mitchell -(April 2, 1760).[28] Thurot had but two small ships. - -The Earl now desired to visit England on his private affairs, and -Frederick granted permission. He went in peace, where he had gone in war, -but Scotland no longer pleased him. True, his Bill was carried through -Parliament, admitting him to the Kintore estates, and, from the Edinburgh -newspapers, he heard of a new honour—he was elected Provost of Kintore! - -‘I had for me all the blew bonnets to a man, and a Lady whose good heart -I respect still more than her birth, tho it be the very highest, she made -press me (_sic_) to ask a pension, assuring me it would cost but one -word. I excused myself as having no pretention to merit it. She bid me -not name her, in leaving you to guess I do not injure her. She said the -same also to Baron Kniphausen.’ - -Years later, from Neufchâtel, he wrote to Andrew Mitchell, ‘The Provost -of Kintore presents his compliments,’ adding some congratulations on -Mitchell’s pension. - -Not even the Provostship of Kintore reconciled the Earl, a changed man, -to a changed Scotland. Conceivably he was not welcomed by the Jacobite -remnant around the cracked bell. Bigotry, hypocrisy, and intolerable -sabbatarianism were what the Earl disliked in his own country. He was -also resolute against marrying, declined _faire l’étalon_, as Frederick -delicately put it. Early in 1761, he made up his mind to return to -Neufchâtel, and to compose the quarrels of Protestants and heretics. -At Neufchâtel the Earl made an acquaintance rather disagreeable to -most English tastes, the moral and sensible Jean-Jacques Rousseau. The -philosopher’s account of the Earl is in his ‘Confessions.’ According to -him, Marischal, beginning life as a Jacobite, ‘se dégoûta bientôt,’ which -is not historically accurate. ‘La grande âme de ce digne homme toute -républicaine’ could not endure ‘l’esprit injuste et tyrannique’ of King -James! The wicked people of Neufchâtel, whom the Earl ‘tried to make -happy,’ ‘kicked against his benevolent cares.’ A preacher ‘was expelled -for not wanting many persons to be eternally damned.’ - -Rousseau went to Neufchâtel to escape the persecution which never ceased -to attack this virtuous man. Frederick allowed him to hide his virtues in -this hermitage, and made some rather slender offers of provision (twelve -_louis_, says Rousseau), which exasperated the sage. On seeing the Earl -his first idea was to weep (Jean-Jacques perhaps followed Richardson in -his tearfulness), so extremely emaciated was the worthy peer. Conquering -his ‘great inclinations to cry,’ with an effort, Rousseau admired the -Earl’s ‘open, animated, and noble physiognomy.’ Without ceremony, and -acting as a Child of Nature, Jean-Jacques went and sat down beside the -Earl on his sofa. In his noble eye Rousseau detected ‘something fine, -piercing, yet in a way caressing.’ He became quite fond of the Earl. -Wordsworth has justly remarked that you seldom see a grown-up male -weeping freely on the public highway. But, had you been on the road -between Rousseau’s house and the Earl’s you might have seen the author -of the ‘Nouvelle Héloïse’ blubbering as he walked, shedding _larmes -d’attendrissement_, as he contemplated the ‘paternal kindnesses, amiable -virtues, and mild philosophy of the respectable old man.’ - -I know not whether I express a common British sentiment, but the tears -of Jean-Jacques over our Scottish stoic awaken in me a considerable -impatience. The Earl was incapable, for his part, of lamentations. -Jean-Jacques was too ‘independent’ to be the Earl’s guest. Later, he -conceived in that bosom tingling with sensibility that the Earl had -been ‘set against him’ by Hume—‘Ils vous ont trompé, ces barbares; -mais ils ne vous ont pas changé.’ It was true, the Earl could break -Prince Charles’s heart, but he always made allowances for Jean-Jacques. -Rousseau, not knowing that the Earl’s heart was true to him, writes: ‘Il -se laisse abuser, quelquefois, et n’en revient jamais.... Il a l’humeur -singulière, quelque chose de bizarre et étrange dans son tour d’esprit. -Ses cadeaux sont de fantaisie, et non de convenance. Il donne ou envoie -à l’instant ce qui lui passe par tête, de grand prix, ou de nulle valeur -indifféremment.’ Nevertheless the Earl was the cause of Rousseau’s ‘last -happy memories.’ - -The Earl left Neufchâtel; he arranged for Rousseau’s refuge in England. -David Hume, who was dear to the Earl, arranged the reception of Rousseau -in England, and every one has heard of Rousseau’s insane behaviour, and -of the quarrel with Hume. Rousseau wanted to write the History of the -Keiths, and asked the Earl for documents. Jean-Jacques was hardly the man -to write Scottish family history, and the documents were never entrusted -to him. - -Here follows the letter on the topic of Rousseau, which the Earl wrote to -Hume:— - - ‘Jean Jaques Rousseau persecuted for having writ what he thinks - good, or rather, as some folks think, for having displeased - persons in great power who attributed to him what he never - meant, came here to seek retreat, which I readily granted, - and the King of Prussia not only approved of my so doing, - but gave me orders to furnish him his small necessarys, if - he would accept them; and tho that King’s philosophy be very - different from that of Jean Jaques, yet he does not think that - a man of an irreprochable life is to be persecuted because his - sentiments are singular, he designs to build him a hermitage - with a little garden, which I find he will not accept, nor - perhaps the rest which I have not yet offered to him. He is - gay in company, polite, and what the French call _aimable_, - and gains ground dayly in the opinion of even the clergy here; - his enemys else where continue to persecute him, he is pelted - with anonimous letters, this is not a country for him, his - attachment and love to his native Toune is a strong tye to its - neigbourhood, the liberty of England, and the character of - my good and honored friend D. Hume F⸺i D⸺r[29] (perhaps more - singular than that of Jean Jaques, for I take him to be the - only historian impartial) draws his inclinations to be near to - the F⸺i D⸺r, for my part, tho it be to me a very great pleasure - to converse with the honest savage, yet I advise him to go to - England, where he will enjoy _Placidam sub libertate quietem_. - He wishes to know, if he can print all his works, and make some - profit, merely to live, from such an edition. I entreat you - will let me know your thoughts on this, and if you can be of - use to him in finding him a bookseller to undertake the work, - you know he is not interested, and little will content him. If - he goes to Brittain, he will be a treasure to you, and you to - him, and perhaps both to me (if I were not so old). - - ‘I have offered him lodging in Keith Hall. I am ever with the - greatest regard your most obedient servant - - M.[30] - - ‘Oct. 2, 1762.’ - -Rousseau never went so far north, never took Keith Hall for a hermitage, -nor scandalised the Kirk Session. After his quarrel with Hume, the Earl -did not write freely to him, saying that he wrote little to anyone. -He thought, he tells another correspondent, of ‘turning bankrupt in -letters.’ ‘My heart is not the dupe of these pretences,’ sighs Rousseau. -He took money from the Earl, he took money at many hands. He sent a -long deplorable lamentation to Marischal: the Earl has been deceived, a -phantom has been exhibited to him as his fond J.-J. R. Probably there was -no answer, but the Earl bequeathed to him his watch as a _souvenir_. -‘Jean Jacques est trop honête home pour ce monde, qui tâche a tourner en -ridicule sa delicatesse,’ so the Earl had written from London to Hume in -Paris. - -He appears, when in England, to have met Hume at Mitcham, and he was -devoted to the stout, smiling sceptic, whom he called ‘_Defensor Fidei_.’ - -In 1764 the Earl left Neufchâtel for Potsdam, where Frederick built him a -house. This he describes in a letter to Hume. The following note (1765) -clearly refers to Hume’s report of Helvetius’s absurd anecdote, that -Prince Charles showed the white feather on starting for Scotland, and had -to be carried on board, tied hands and feet, by Sheridan, George Kelly, -and others of the Seven Men of Moidart. Hume repeated this incredible -nonsense in a letter to Sir John Pringle, who clearly distrusted the -evidence.[31] This appears to be the ‘certain history’ which the Earl -asks Hume to get from Helvetius, who had been ‘assured of the fact.’ By -whom? - -To disseminate this fourth-hand scandal of his former master—scandal -which, if true, he himself was in a better position to have heard than -Helvetius—was perhaps the least worthy act of the Earl. - -The David Floyd of whom he writes occurs often in the Stuart -Correspondence. He was of the old St. Germains set, being the son of that -Captain Floyd, so much disliked by Lord Ailesbury, who came and went -from England to James II., after 1688. - -In another letter the Earl advises Hume to consult Floyd on events ‘of -which you took a confused note from me at Mitcham.’ Among these facts -may be the story, given by Hume on the Earl’s authority, of Charles’s -presence at the coronation of George III. No other evidence of this -adventure exists. - -Here follows the letter:— - - ‘29 Aprile. - - ‘In answer to your question, the Don quixotisme you mention - never entered into my head. I wish I could see you to answer - honestly all your questions, for tho I had my share of follys - with others, yet as my intentions were at bottom honest, I - should open to you my whole budget, and lett you know many - things which are perhaps not all represented, I mean not truly. - I remember to have recommended to your acquaintance Mr. Floyd, - son to old David Floyd, at St. Germains, as a man of good - sense, honor, and honesty: I fear he is dead, he would have - been of great service to you in a part of your history since - 1688. _A propos of history when you see Helvetius, tell I - desired you to enquire of him concerning a certain history._ I - fancy he will answer you with his usuall Frankness.’ - -This, then, must refer to Helvetius’s lie about the Prince’s cowardice. - -[Illustration: _Walker & Boutall, ph. sc._ - -_The Earl Marischal_ - -_circ. 1750._] - -The following letters to Hume illustrate the rather blasphemous -_bonhomie_ of the Earl, who, because of Hume’s genius and fatness, was -wont to speak of him as ‘_verbum caro factum_.’ He writes of his new -hermitage at Potsdam, of his garden, his favourite books (just what -we might expect them to be—Montaigne, Swift, Ariosto), of Voltaire, -d’Argens, and d’Alembert. He incidentally shows, _à propos_ of a fabled -discovery, that Mr. Darwin’s theory would not have astonished him much:— - - ‘Potsdam, ce 11 Sep. 1764. - - ‘Le plaisir de votre lettre, et l’assurance d’amitié de Madame - Geauffrin et de Monsieur d’Alembert, a été bien rabattu par - ce que vous me dites de l’etat de la santé de M. d’Alembert; - sobre comme il est a table, comment peut il avoir des meaux - d’estomac: il faut qu’il travaille trop de la tête à des - calculs, ou qu’il allume sa chandelle par les deux bouts, c’est - cela sans doute. Renvoyez-le ici a mon hermitage, je le rendray - à sa, ou ses, belles frais, reposé, se portant a merveille. - - ‘A propos de mon hermitage dont Mʳ de Malsan vous a fait la - description, il a voyagé avec Panurge, et a été chez _Oui-dire - tenant école de temoignerie_, primo, ma petite maison ne - subsiste pas, par consequence mon grand hôte ne pouvoit m’y - honorer de sa presence. - - ‘2ᵒ. Elle ne sera pas si petite, ayant 89. pieds de façade, - avec deux ailes de 45. pieds de long; le jardin est petit, - assez grand cependant pour moy, et j’ay une clef pour entrer - aux jardins de Sans-Soucy. Il y aura une belle salle avec une - vestibule, et un cabinet assez grand pour y mettre un lit, tout - a part des autres appartements, si d’Alembert venoit il pouvoit - y loger et prendre les eaux, mais il est plus que probable que - le Grand Hôte me disputeroit et emporteroit cet avantage. En - attendant son arrivee, j’y logerais mon ancien ami Michel de - Montagne, Arioste, Voltaire, Swift, et quelques autres. - - ‘Saul et David y seront aussi, quoyque j’aimerais mieux David - F⸺i D⸺r—m, surtout en persone, car le Verbum j’ay, la Caro me - manque. Je regrette bien de n’avoir pas sçu que Mᵉ de Boufflers - étoit en hollande quand j’y ay passé, j’aurois été heureux de - la connoitre, par tout le bien que tout le monde dit d’elle. - Son ami et le mien Jean Jaques à été en chemin pour les eaux en - Savoye. - - ‘Voltaire est un antichretien entousiaste, j’en ay connu plus - d’un et qui plus est sans étre poête: je ne sais rien de son - dictionaire que j’ay cherché ici inutilement, il viendra, - toutes les choses nous vienent, un peu plus tard a la vérité - par ou vous étes; mais la Société dont vous avez le bonheur de - jouir ne nous viendra pas: comme je suis tres vieux, lourd, - pesant, bon a rien, il ne faut que Placidam sub libertate - Quietem; mon hôte, pour me la donner plus entierement, me - batit ma maison; elle sera achevée en trois mois; meublée au - printems: et j’y pourray loger Octobre 1765. - - ‘Faites moy envisager comme pas impossible que vous pourriez y - venir, que je serois bien content, bon soir. - - ‘Mes respects a Madame Geauffrin. - - ‘Dites a d’Alembert que j’ay une vache pour lui donner de - bon lait, cela le tentera plus que le cent mil roubles qu’on - lui à offert. N’a pas bon lait qui veut, et vir sapiens non - abhorrebit eam, come disoit Maitre Janotus de ses chausses.... - - ‘d’Argens est parti hier chercher le soleil de Provence, avant - que de se mettre en voyage, il se fit tâter le poux par son - medecin a plusieures reprises, le priant toujours bien fort de - le dire de bon foye s’il etoit en etat de faire le voyage, les - chevaux étoient deja au carosse. Il dit qu’il reviendra, et - n’en sait rien; le soleil ne le guerira pas de sa hipocondrie, - il reviendra chercher le froid, s’il ne creve pas, ce qui - est a craindre, son corps est trop delabré. Son frere, grand - Jesuite, sa vieille mere, et les Jansenistes Provençeaux tout - cela le genera, il soupirera aprés la liberté de philosopher - a Sans-Soucy, quoiqu’il se plaint quand il y est; si on lui - dit qu’il se porte bien surtout il se fache. Il seroit fort a - souhaiter que votre plume fusse employée a nous instruire de la - verité, au lieu des disputes sur l’I(l)e de la Tortuga, que je - crois l’occupe un pen a présent, mais si vous ne vous mettez - pas a écrire de votre proprement mouvement, et non pas par - complesance pour un autre, ne faites rien; il faut y étre tout - entier. - - ‘Le Chevalier Stuart m’a parlé des decouvertes par le - Microscope, par un certain Needham, prêtre, j’ay cherché - inutilement cette brochure. Voici le fait come le chevalier - Stuart me l’a dit. Il prit un gigot de mouton, le fit rotir - presqu’a brûler, pour detruire les animalcules ou leur œufs qui - pouvoient y étre: il en pris le jus, le mit dans une bouteille - bien bouchée, le fit cuire des heures dans l’eau bouillante, - pour detruire toute animalcule ou œuf que pouvoit si étre - introduite par l’air en mettant le jus dans la bouteille: - au bout de quelque tems le jus fermenta, et produisit des - animalcules. - - ‘Needham pretend que toute generation ne vient qu de - fermentation. Je vous dis mon autheur, vous le connoissez; il - ne parle legerment. - - ‘Cette decouverte me paroit valoir la peine a examiner; ce - pourroit étre du gibier, come dit Montagne, de M. Diderot. - Si la fermentation dans une petite bouteille produit un tres - petit animal: celle de tous les élements de notre globe, ne - pourroit elle produire, un chêne, un élephant. Je proteste que - je parle avec toute soumission à David Hume F—i D⸺i, et à la - sainte Inquisition, s’il trouve que quelque chose cloche dans - ce sistême, que je ne fais que raporter. bon soir.’ - -Other letters to Hume occur in 1765, and are preserved in the Library -of the Royal Society of Edinburgh. ‘I am going down hill very fast, but -easily, as one that descends the Mont Cenis _ramassé_, without pain -or trouble.’ He mentions the frost and snow at Berlin as severe to _un -pobre viejo Cristiano Español_. He sends turnip seed, a bucolic gift, to -Helvetius, and to Madame de Vassé, the lady who concealed Prince Charles -in the Convent of St. Joseph.[32] - -He mentions that he sups every night with the King, and wishes Hume to -share these festivals. - -The Earl was infinitely happier with Frederick and the gay freethinkers -at Potsdam than in Scotland, where so many friendly heads had fallen, -where every sight recalled unhappy things; where the lairds drank too -much, and the ministers preached too long, and wits were scarce, and -people wanted him to marry and beget heirs (here he had Frederick’s -sympathy), and still the cracked old bell kept up its peevish lament, -_Disloyal, Loyal, Loyal, Disloyal!_ - -Such was the Earl’s correspondence with Hume; they are the letters of a -kind, good, humorous old pagan. To d’Alembert also he wrote freely. ‘I -have read with much pleasure four volumes of your works, and was really -pleased with myself when I found that I could understand them. I want -to use my rights as an old fellow, and tell anecdotes.’ Then he gives a -Scotch story, which would be more amusing in Scots than in his French. Of -Frederick, he says that (unlike Carlyle) he is ‘gey easy to live wi’,’ -_l’homme du monde le plus aisé à vivre_. He announces ‘David Hume is -elevated to the sublime dignity of a Saint, by public acclamation: the -street where he dwells is entitled La rue de _St. David_. Vox populi, -vox Dei. Amen.’ Again,—the old sinner!— - -‘I have received an inestimable treasure, plenary indulgences _in -articulo mortis_, with power to bestow some of them on twelve elect -souls. One I send to good David Hume; as I wish you all good things in -both worlds, I offer you a place among my chosen.’ - -The philosopher took a simple pleasure in drolleries which no longer -tempt us—we have now been so long emancipated. - -The Earl said that in Spain he would have felt obliged to denounce -Frederick to the Inquisition. Frederick has given the old exile medicines -to make him love him, as Prince Hal did to Falstaff. ‘If he had not -bewitched me, would I stay here, where I only see a spectre of the sun, -when I might live and die in the happy climate of Valencia?’ - -So he slipped down the hill in a happy, kind old age. In summer he rose -at five, read for an hour, wrote his letters, and burned most of those -which he received. Then he had his head shaved, and washed in cold water, -dressed, took a drive, or pottered in his garden. Heaven made gardens, -surely, for the pottering peace of virtuous eld. At twelve he dined, -chiefly on vegetables, taking but one glass of sherry. He had always four -or five guests, and, after dinner, left them ‘to make the coffee’—that -is, to enjoy a _siesta_. He never remembered to have remained awake a -moment when once his head touched the pillow. Then he took coffee, played -piquet, pottered again in the garden, supped on chocolate, and so to bed -early. He read much, and thanked a slight loss of memory for the pleasure -of being able to read all his favourite authors over again. Rabelais, -Montaigne, and Molière were his favourites in French, in English, -Shakspeare and the old dramatists. Terence and Plautus he studied in -Latin, the Greek writers ‘in cribs.’ Tragedy he could not abide; mirth -he loved, and d’Alembert’s informant had come on him laughing aloud when -alone. He was full of anecdote, and, having known everybody of note for -some seventy years, his talk was delightful. For music, he preferred the -pibroch in a strange land, as did Charles, alone and old in Italy. One -touch of nature! - -He was kindness itself, and loved giving; from Rousseau he met, we are -told, the usual amount of gratitude after the quarrel with Hume. But, -judging from what Rousseau himself says, on this occasion he was not -ungrateful. If he heard, in conversation, a tale of misery, he made no -remark, but sought out and succoured the person in distress. To every one -who visited him he insisted on making some little present. He maintained -a poor woman in comfort; nay, ‘down to spiders and frogs, he was the -friend of all created things.’ Being a piquet player of the first force, -he would only stake halfpence, and, when his winnings accumulated, laid -them out in a feast of fat things for Snell, his big dog. Like Lionardo -da Vinci, he could not bear to see a caged bird. - -In his last years he was drawn about in a garden chair, his legs failing -him. His mortal agony was long and patiently borne: never before had he -been ill. ‘Can your physic take fifty years off my life?’ he asked the -doctor. He died merely of long life, on May 25, 1778. In 1770 he had -described himself to his kinsman, Sir Robert Murray Keith, as ‘nearly -eighty.’ In 1778, then, he cannot have been ninety-two, as Mr. Carlyle -supposed—probably he was about eighty-five. Years of trouble and sorrow -these years would have been to another, but ‘a merry heart goes all the -way.’ Physically, and mentally, and morally, the Earl had ever been an -example of soundness. In his latest illness he was never peevish. Once -‘he wished he were among the Eskimo, for they knock old men on the head.’ - -The Earl was not a great man. In conspiracy, in war, in government, in -diplomacy, he was a rather oddly ineffectual man. He had, in short, -a genius for goodness, and an independence of spirit, a perfect -disinterestedness, an inability to blind himself to disagreeable facts, -and to the merits of the opposite side—a balance, in fact, of temperament -and of humour—which are inconsistent with political success. We may wish -that his taste in jokes had been less that of the _philosophes_. We may -wish that, if the Cause was indeed hopeless, he had deserted it without -reproaching his old master. He might have abstained from disseminating -the tattle of Helvetius. There is very little else which mortal judgment -can find to reprehend in brave, honest, generous, humorous, kind George -Keith, who was, without Christian faith, the pattern of all the Christian -virtues. He was of two worlds—the old Royalist world, and the Age of -Revolution—yet undisturbed in heart he lived and died, - - Vetustæ vitæ imago, - Et specimen venientis ævi.[33] - - - - -III - -MURRAY OF BROUGHTON - - -In black contrast to the name, the character, the happy life and -peaceful, kindly end of the good Earl Marischal stand the infamy, the -ruined soul, the wretched existence and miserable death of John Murray -of Broughton. ‘No lip of me or mine comes after Broughton’s!’ said the -Whig father of Sir Walter Scott, as he threw out of window the teacup -from which the traitor had drunk. Murray was poisonous; was shunned like -a sick, venomed beast. His name was blotted out of the books of the -Masons’ lodge to which he belonged; even the records of baptisms in his -Episcopal chapel attest the horror in which he was held for thirty years, -for half his life. Yet this informer remained, through that moiety of his -degraded existence, true in heart to the Cause which the Earl Marischal -forsook and disdained, true to his affection for his Prince; and it is -even extremely probable that, after he became titular King, Charles, on a -secret expedition to England, visited Murray in his London house. - -The vacant, contemned years, when his beautiful wife had ceased to share -his infamy, were partly beguiled in the composition of the ‘Memorials,’ -which Mr. Fitzroy Bell has edited, with reinforcements from the Stuart -MSS., the papers in the Record Office, and the archives of the Quai -d’Orsay. In these we find a spectacle which is rare: a traitor convicted, -exposed, detested, yet still clinging to the Cause which he wrought for -and sold, still striving to batter himself into his own self-respect, and -to extenuate or bluster out his own dishonour. The Earl Marischal has -left us no memoirs; a manuscript which he gave to Sir Robert Murray Keith -has been lost. But Murray’s papers are still in the possession of his -great-grandson by a second marriage, Mr. George Siddons Murray, who has -generously sanctioned their publication. - -John Murray, of Broughton, in Peeblesshire, was born in 1715, being -descended from a cadet of the house of Murray of Philiphaugh. His -father, Sir David Murray, was out in the Fifteen, but afterwards lived -peacefully, developed the lead mines of Strontian, and died before the -Forty-five. His son, educated at Edinburgh and Leyden Universities, -visited Rome in 1737-8, carried thither his ancestral politics, and -inflamed them at the light of Prince Charles’s eyes, ‘the finest I -ever saw.’[34] He found Charles ‘the most surprizingly handsome person -of the age,’ a description not borne out by the miniature in enamel -which he gave to his admirer in a diamond snuff-box.[35] Here we see -‘the complection that has in it somewhat of an uncommon delicacy;’ we -see large brown eyes, an oval face, and the bright hair hanging down -below the perruque, that hair which is treasured in a hundred rings, -sleeve-links, and lockets. But genuine portraits of the Prince do not -account for his epithet of ‘bonnie,’ and for his almost involuntary -successes with women. He had ‘an air,’ and was, indeed, a good-looking -boy enough; but he was no Adonis, the lower part of his face tending -early to overfulness. However, he won Murray’s heart, and he never lost -it. - -Returning, in 1738, to Broughton, on the Tweed, Murray found himself a -near neighbour of Lord Traquair, then residing in his ancient château, -which lent its bears to Tully Veolan. The house has a legend of an avenue -gate never to be opened till the King comes again; but Lord Traquair, a -Jacobite from vanity, did nothing to promote a Restoration. He feebly -caballed, and at Traquair Murray may have drunk loyal healths enough -to float a ship. Inclined for more active measures, he succeeded old -Colonel Urquhart as Scottish correspondent of Edgar, the King’s secretary -in Rome. The appointment was approved of by the Duke of Hamilton, who, -dying in 1743, left the Garter, the gift of King George, and the Thistle, -the gift of King James! The new Duke was Jacobite enough to subscribe -1,500_l._ to the Cause and to accept James’s commission just before the -Prince landed, but he held aloof from the Rising. - -Murray went into his business as Jacobite organiser with a cool and -clear head. He knew the value of documentary evidence, and when he -could he secured the signatures of adherents. In 1741 the ‘Association’ -was formed, by Traquair, Lovat, Macgregor or Drummond of Balhaldie -(described in the essay on the Earl Marischal), the bankrupt Campbell -of Auchenbreck, father-in-law of Lochiel, and Lochiel himself, the -only honest man of the cabal. In March 1741, Murray was introduced to -Balhaldie. That chief promised mountains and marvels, including 20,000 -stand of arms already stocked. Visionary weapons were these, as the -swords which fell from heaven into Clydesdale in 1684. Murray was invited -to trust Lovat, which he was disinclined to do, having heard from Lochiel -and from general rumour of that rogue’s unfathomable and capricious -treachery. Murray yielded, however, and the Association was launched. -First came the question of supplies. The Scots were loyal, but, as a -rule, would not part with a bawbee. Hay of Drumelzier kept a good grip of -the gear; Lockhart of Carnwath had no money by him; the Duke of Hamilton -evaded the question; and Lovat and Balhaldie opposed the recruiting of -new associates, who, if brought in, would have rebelled against such -incompetent or treacherous managers. - -Nothing occurred till, in December 1742, Balhaldie sent some of his -Ossianic prophecies of a French invasion to Traquair. Murray did not -believe in the predictions, and only the feeblest attempts at organising -the country into districts were made. Auchenbreck was to manage -Argyllshire, Traquair was responsible for Scotland south of Forth. -Neither brought in an adherent. Weapons were lacking, and Balhaldie gave -no information about a plan of campaign. It was absolutely necessary to -know what France really intended, and, at the end of 1712, Murray himself -set out for Paris. In London he heard of the death of Cardinal Fleury—a -great blow to the cause. He found in Paris that Balhaldie was beguiling -France with exaggerated accounts of what the stingy and disorganised -Scots were prepared to do. Murray was merely mocked by Cardinal Tencin, -and from Amelot got only vague expressions of goodwill, and the warning -that ‘such enterprizes were dangerous and precarious.’ Yet Balhaldie -seemed much elated, and returned to England with Murray to put heart into -the English adherents. In England Murray found Colonel Cecil as little -satisfied with Balhaldie as himself, but the Celt hurried about with a -great air of business, and sent for Traquair to come to town. - -Traquair did go to town, carrying a letter of Murray’s, to be forwarded -to the Earl Marischal. By the advice of Balhaldie (who was the last man -that ought to have seen the letter) Traquair burned it. This was a new -offence, and, in brief, the feud between Murray and Balhaldie became -inveterate. - -In London Traquair did nothing. He never wrote to the party in Scotland, -and he brought back nothing but the names of the English leaders, the -Duke of Beaufort, Lord Orrery, Lord Barrymore, Sir John Hinde Cotton, and -Sir Watkin Williams Wynne. When Murray, in turning informer, divulged -these names, except that of Beaufort, he told Government nothing which -every man who cared did not know. But the English were thrown ‘into a -mortal fright,’ as Balhaldie found so late as 1749. They were always in a -mortal fright, always insisted that their Scottish allies should not even -know who they were. Thus concerted movements were made impossible. Murray -was dashed by the discovery that the English party was a mere set of five -or six _nominum umbræ_. Doubtless there were plenty of Squire Westerns, -who were ready to drink healths. - - Were our glasses turned into swords, - Or our actions half as great as our words, - Were our enemies turned to quarts, - How nobly we should play our parts. - The least that we would do, each man should kill his two, - Without the help of France or Spain, - The Whigs should run a tilt, and their dearest blood be spilt, - And the King should enjoy his own again![36] - -There may have been more serious intentions. In a Devonshire house -I saw, once, a fine portrait of James III., and learned that the -great-grandfather of the owner had burned compromising papers. Such -papers of English Jacobites, if any existed, seem always to have been -destroyed. - -Traquair had done nothing; from Barrymore he got a promise of 10,000_l._, -from the rich Welsh baronet he got only excuses. Lovat, according to -Murray, said, in the Tower, that Beaufort had promised to raise 12,000 -men, ‘whereby he exposed before the warders a nobleman to the resentment -of Government whom I had been at great pains to represent ... as no ways -privy to or concerned in our scheme.’ - -The year 1743 ended, and at its close (December 23) James announced to -Ormonde and to the Earl Marischal the French King’s resolution to help -him. Balhaldie brought the Prince to France, early in 1744. Nothing -was done, nothing was concerted. An attempt to engage the Cameronians, -through Kenmure and Sir Thomas Gordon of Earlstoun, was a predestined -failure. After Midsummer, 1744, Murray determined to visit France, -watch Balhaldie, and see the Prince. He casually discovered that a Mr. -Cockburn left the Jacobite cypher lying loose on his window seat, or -under a dictionary! These were pretty characters to manage a conspiracy; -but we have seen equal stupidity in ‘Jameson’s Raid.’ In London Murray -saw Dr. Barry, whom he later betrayed, as far as in him lay. He crossed -to Flanders, and met Balhaldie gambling in the Sun tavern at Rotterdam. -Balhaldie vapoured about buying arms, though ‘he had not credit for a -_louis d’or_,’ and bragged about the travelling chaise (the Prince’s -famous _chese_) which he had designed for his Royal Highness. Not to -pursue these chicaneries, Murray exposed Balhaldie and Sempil to Charles, -whom he met secretly behind the stables of the Tuileries. The Prince took -it very coolly, without loss of temper or excitement, but announced his -intention to visit Scotland next summer (1745) if he came with a single -servant. Murray replied that his arrival would ever be welcome, ‘but I -hoped it would not be without a body of troops.’ Murray then pointed out -that, in such an adventure, ‘he could not positively depend on more than -4,000 Highlanders, _if so many_,’ and that even these would infinitely -regret the measure. - -Murray has been accused, by Maxwell of Kirkconnell, of putting Charles -upon this enterprise. In fact, his error lay in not formally and -explicitly warning the Prince from the first. Later he did send warning -letters, but Traquair did not try to deliver them, and Young Glengarry -failed in the attempt. - -The result of Murray’s disclosures, and of a written Memorial which -he sent in, was to undeceive Charles as to Sempil and Balhaldie. His -letters to James are proofs of this, and now the split in the party was -incurable. Murray went to and fro, undermining Balhaldie. Balhaldie, at -the end of 1744, sent Young Glengarry from France, to work against Murray -on the mind of Lochiel. That chief brought the two future traitors, -Glengarry and Murray, together, and the Celt came into the Lowlander’s -bad opinion of Balhaldie. This was early in 1745. Murray now made the -mistake of trying to pin men to a declaration, in writing, that they -would join Charles, even if he came alone. His duty was to discourage any -such enterprise, which, unaided by France, could only mean ruin. On the -other hand, he actually engaged Macleod, the chief of the Skye men. With -Stewart of Appin, Macleod chanced to be in Edinburgh. Murray gave him a -letter from Charles, and described the character of that Prince. ‘Macleod -declared, in a kind of rapture, that he would make it his business to -advance his interest as much as was in his power, and would join him, let -him come when he would.’ This occurred at a meeting in a tavern attended -by the persons already mentioned, with Traquair, Glengarry, and Lochiel. -Of these men, Appin did not come out, Traquair skulked, Macleod turned -his coat, Glengarry became a spy, Murray was Murray, and only Lochiel -saved his honour. Next day, by Murray’s desire, Lochiel extracted from -Macleod a written promise to raise his clan, even if Charles came unaided -and alone. - -How Macleod kept his promise we know. He sent his forces to join Loudon’s -detachment in Hanoverian service; the whole array was frightened back -in an attempt to surprise and capture Charles. They all ran like hares -from the blacksmith of Moy, with one or two gardeners and other retainers -of Lady Mackintosh, and the only man slain was Macrimmon, Macleod’s -piper, the composer of the prophetic lament, ‘Macleod shall return, but -Macrimmon shall never!’ Murray comments with great severity on Macleod’s -treason, and, in his promise, and that of others, finds justification -for Charles’s adventure, and an answer to the question, ‘Why he made -an attempt of such consequence with so small a force?’ All this leaves -Murray in a quandary.... To send such promises (as he did) was to -encourage Charles in a desperate project. To be sure Murray, later, did -attempt to stop Charles; but he should never have sent him these signed -encouragements, both from Macleod and Stewart of Appin. But Murray, he -says, now changed his mind; he made out a journal of all his proceedings, -showing Charles (most inconsistently) that all the party, except the -Duke of Perth, ‘were unanimous against his coming without a force.’ -These papers Murray entrusted, for Charles, to Traquair, who was going -to England, and meant to proceed to France, using this very singular -expression, ‘that he would see the Prince, _though in a bawdy house_. The -present Earl of Weymss and Laird of Glengarry [Pickle] can vouch this. -The latter has since repeated it to me in my house in London.’ - -Traquair now went to London, but he never went to France, nor did he -transmit the warning to Charles. Meanwhile Murray extracted 1,500_l._ -from the new Duke of Hamilton (a new fact), and the Duke of Perth paid an -equal sum, and even offered to mortgage his estate. Hamilton also gave -a verbal promise to join Charles ‘with all the forces he could raise.’ -Murray again wrote to Charles, saying that he must bring at least 6,000 -men. Perth, Elcho, and Lochiel signed this letter. This letter was sent -by one John Macnaughten. Did it ever arrive? In the Stuart Papers is a -letter signed ‘J. Barclay,’ and undated. It is clearly from Murray to -Charles, and announces the journal entrusted to Traquair, but contains no -warning.[37] - -In a letter of March 14, 1745, to James, Charles refers to this letter -announcing the journal and other despatches, which had not arrived—as -Traquair never sent them. On April 9, Charles appears to refer to -Macnaughten’s budget of letters as not yet deciphered.[38] - -From London Traquair sent only a note of doubtful and, at best, of -insignificant meaning. Nothing whatever was settled or arranged. Then -came Sir Hector, chief of the Macleans, to Scotland, where he was -arrested. Now, Murray reflected that the epistle sent by Macnaughten -‘contained rather a wish than an advice, and might not be sufficient to -prevent the Prince’s coming.’ Murray therefore sent, as a final warning, -that set of papers which Traquair had not forwarded, entrusting it to -Young Glengarry, at the end of May 1745. But Glengarry did not succeed in -seeing Charles, who was thus left without warning not to come. Perhaps no -warning would have stopped him; at all events he received none, and the -die was cast. The Prince embarked on June 22. - -Murray’s whole book is one of self-justification. He may clear himself of -having suggested the unaided enterprise to Charles. But, partly through -the frivolity of Traquair, partly through the zeal of Murray, Charles was -left without decisive admonition. He saw his party distracted: for a year -and a half France had treated him ‘scandalously’ (as even the patient -James averred), and he determined to force the hands both of France and -the Jacobites. He pawned the Sobieski rubies—‘the Prince would wear them -with a very sore heart on this side of the water’—he put his life to -the hazard. If ever an attempt was to be made at all, Charles did well. -England was empty of troops. A success or two, the Prince reckoned, must -unite the distracted party on the one hand, and tempt or compel France -to action on the other. His motto was _de l’audace_! If all men had been -Lochiels, if the Duke of Hamilton, Macleod, Traquair, Lovat, Beaufort, -Barrymore, Orrery, and the rest, had honour and truth, if France had -such a thing as a policy, and could seize an opportunity, Charles would -have won the Crown. But many men are not Lochiels, and, if France had -a policy, it was not to restore the Stuarts, but to use them as a mere -diversion. - -By the end of May Macnaughten returned, with news that Charles would be -in Scotland by July. This caused Murray much chagrin, but he at once -warned Perth, Lochiel, and Macleod. To the Duke of Hamilton he gave the -Prince’s commission, ‘which he accepted with great cheerfulness.’ Murray -then went to Lochiel, who remarked that every man of honour was bound to -rise, and who quite trusted Lovat and Macleod. He leaned on broken reeds. -Lovat temporised, Macleod turned his coat. Here Murray’s MS. breaks off, -and he continues the history of the Rising ‘from Moidart to Derby.’ - -The military part of Murray’s ‘Memorials’ is full of reflections on -Charles’s ‘unparalleled good nature and humanity,’ and his strategic -skill. Murray had desired to be an aide-de-camp: he clearly thinks -himself a good judge of warfare. He was obliged to be Secretary, but did -not covet that office. He, alone, had any previous personal knowledge -of Charles, with whom he was such a favourite as to excite the jealousy -of Lord George Murray and of Maxwell of Kirkconnell. These jealousies -were of perilous consequence. Maxwell, writing after Murray was the -most detested man on earth, charges heavily against him: ‘He began by -representing Lord George as a traitor to the Prince; he assured him -that he had joined on purpose to have an opportunity of delivering him -up to Government.’ Lord George heard of this, and was deeply affected. -Prestonpans nearly opened Charles’s eyes, but Lord George’s ‘haughty and -overbearing manner prevented a thorough reconciliation, and seconded the -malicious insinuations of his rival.... He now and then broke into such -violent sallies as the Prince could not digest....’ - -Now the loyalty of Lord George is beyond all shadow of suspicion. -Till his death, in 1760, he was the faithful and devoted subject of -King James. Even Murray, in his MSS., does not breathe a word against -him. But, if Murray did, at first, conceive suspicions, and suggest -precautions, it is impossible to blame him. What was Lord George’s -position? He had been out, at Glenshiel, in 1719, with his brother, -Tullibardine. He was pardoned, and was residing in Scotland. He never -appears as a Jacobite in the negotiations of 1740-45. His brother -William, who, but for his steady Jacobitism, would have been Duke of -Atholl, came over with Charles. The actual Duke, _de facto_, Lord -George’s brother James, deserted Blair Atholl on the approach of the -Highlanders, and went to London. Tullibardine (William) assumed the title -of Duke, and occupied Blair. Lord George also joined the Prince. But -Murray had to ask himself, was Lord George in earnest? Murray knew the -treachery of the times, and had employed James Mohr Macgregor, known to -be a Hanoverian spy, to beguile Cope and the Lord Chief Justice. Was Lord -George, Murray would think, playing James Mohr’s part on the other side? - -Murray had reason for suspicion. As late as August 20, 1745, after the -standard was raised at Glenfinnan, Lord George wrote to the Lord Advocate -from Dunkeld. He announced that, on the following day, he and Old -Glengarry would wait on Cope at Crieff. Cope was marching North to fight -the Prince. Lord George talked of ‘the Pretender,’ and sent information. -He _did_ wait on Cope. As late as September 1, he was corresponding with -his Hanoverian brother, Duke James, but, on September 3, he announced -to his brother that he was about to join the Prince. ‘Duty to King and -Country overweighs everything.’[39] - -As a matter of fact, Lord George simply, if rather suddenly, changed -his mind, engaging, like Lord Pitsligo, ‘without enthusiasm,’ and it -seems without hope. He thought that honour called him. But to Murray -Lord George’s conduct in first colloguing with Cope, and then rallying -to Charles, must have seemed suspicious. It _was_ suspicious: to Cope it -must have appeared the blackest treason. ‘Lord George,’ Murray would say, -‘is betraying somebody; now, whom is he betraying?’ - -A curious piece of gossip has lately come to light. It was said that one -of the Highland army, in England, had a squabble with a wayfaring man, -and broke his staff, in which was found a letter from the Whig brother -Duke James, to Lord George, suggesting that, in a battle, he should -desert, carrying over the Atholl men. Probably the story is false, and -based on the sending _to_ Duke James of letters, by one of his servants, -concealed in the shank of a whip. In any case, Lord George was never -really reconciled to Murray, and Charles (after Lord George counselled -retreat at Derby, retreat at Stirling, and the abandonment of the -surprise at Nairn) never trusted, never forgave him, wished to imprison -him in France, and shut his door against him. James in vain remonstrated, -Charles was implacable. - -At Carlisle, on the march southwards, there was a great quarrel. Lord -George resigned his commission, offering to serve as a volunteer. -Charles accepted the resignation. The Duke of Perth was acting as -commander-in-chief. He was a Catholic, and Lord George deemed that this -would have an ill effect, besides he himself was a much senior and -infinitely more experienced officer. Lord George also urged that Murray -‘took everything upon him, both as to civil and military.’ The Duke of -Perth then resigned his command, apparently on the advice of Maxwell of -Kirkconnell, who praises his magnanimity. Murray also, he himself tells -us, withdrew from the councils of war, ‘which seemed to quiet Lord George -a good deal.’ Lord George became general in chief, and distinguished -himself by skill and personal bravery. But the quarrel was never -reconciled. Unluckily Murray gives no account of the decision to retreat -from Derby. Then no more councils were held, and ‘little people’ (that -is, Murray) were allowed to advise: till Lord George and the chiefs sent -in a remonstrance. - -Murray breaks off in his narrative at Derby, and does not resume it till -after Culloden. He had fallen ill at Elgin, in March 1746, where Charles -also had a severe attack of pneumonia.[40] - -Murray was carried across country to Mrs. Grant’s house in Glenmoriston. -Everything fell into worse confusion after his departure, his successor, -John Hay of Restalrig, being incompetent. At Glenmoriston Murray heard -from Archibald Cameron of the defeat at Culloden. In the shape of a -letter from a friend of Mr. Murray of Broughton, he describes and -justifies his own conduct after ‘the wicked day of destiny.’ - -It is, perhaps, less easy to justify the conduct of his master. The -irredeemable point in Charles’s behaviour in Scotland was his withdrawal -from the remnant of his army, which met at Ruthven. There is much -obscurity as to the details, as to whether a place of rendezvous had been -fixed upon or not. But Charles knew where the army and officers were; he -received a scolding letter from Lord George, and he declined to return to -the forces. His distrust of Lord George had revived; he knew that there -were men who would not scruple to win their pardon by betraying him, and, -with Sheridan, O’Sullivan, O’Niel, and others, he made for the islands. - -Murray, after news came of the defeat, was carried to Fort Augustus, and -thence to Lochgarry’s house. Hoping even yet to rally a force, he met -the wounded and outworn Duke of Perth at Invergarry, to no result. He -then was carried to Lochiel’s country, and Lochiel determined to wage a -guerilla war in the hills, expecting French assistance. Murray sent Archy -Cameron to Arisaig to get news of Charles, but Archy learned from Hay of -Restalrig that the Prince had already taken boat for the Isles. Archy -disbelieved Hay, but Charles had really gone, or was on the very point -of going (April 26). Certain news reached Murray and Lochiel; the chief -determined to remain with his clan, on a point of honour, and Murray -stood by Lochiel, as also did Major Kennedy. They could have fled in the -French vessels which landed the gold of the fatal treasure, but they were -resolute to stand by each other.[41] Those who departed were the dying -Duke of Perth, a sacrifice to his own chivalrous devotion: Lord Elcho, -who presently tried to gain his pardon; old Sir Thomas Sheridan, who soon -afterwards died, heart-broken, at Rome; Lord John Drummond, Lockhart of -Carnwath, and Hay of Restalrig. - -Murray now arranged for the burial of the French gold, and then -Glenbucket, with the poet-soldier John Roy Stewart, Clanranald, -Lochgarry, Barisdale, Young Scotus, and Lovat, held a council. Lovat -proposed holding out in the hills, and promised the aid of his son, -Simon, and 400 Frazers. Murray suspected the old fox, and proposed that -all should sign a ‘band’ of mutual fidelity. Lovat would not sign! - -The allies were to rendezvous in ten days at Loch Arkaig, and, later, the -meeting was deferred for another week. But the Master of Lovat ‘was never -so much as heard of’ at the tryst; Lochgarry brought but 100 men, and -Murray accuses him of treacherous intentions, this on the suggestion of -Barisdale. Now Lochgarry left, and did not return, nor did his sentinels -bring in news of an approaching English force. Of all this Lochgarry says -nothing in his report to Young Glengarry, published by Mr. Blaikie. But, -as we know with absolute certainty that Barisdale was an infamous coward, -liar, and traitor, while Lochgarry was loyal to his death, we need not -accept Barisdale’s evidence against a cousin whom he detested. However -it happened, no news came from Lochgarry, and, if Murray himself had not -sent out scouts, the whole party, with Lochiel, would have been taken -near Loch Arkaig.[42] - -The game being now up, Murray made his way South, in exceedingly bad -health, aggravated by exposure and fatigue. His idea was to get a ship on -the East Coast, where Lochiel would join him, and to escape. But Murray -was captured, through information given by a herd-boy, at the house of -his sister, Mrs. Hunter of Polmood. He certainly did not intend to be -captured, and he says that, even after he was taken, he tried to arrange -about a ship for Lochiel. He also vindicates the conduct of his wife, -who was about to bear a child, and he justifies his honesty in money -matters. Now in money matters Murray’s hands were clean, and there is no -real ground for the charges against poor Mrs. Murray. But what Murray -does not say, is that, as soon as he was approached, after his capture, -by the Lord Justice Clerk, he promised ‘to discover all he knew.’[43] -He did not tell _all_ he knew, but on August 13, being examined in the -Tower, he told a great deal. About Traquair he spoke out: he named the -English Jacobite leaders, he told his tale about Macleod in the tavern -meeting, he sheltered Macdonald of Sleat, and even screened Lovat as far -as he dared: in fact, he took revenge on half-hearted Jacobites, and, for -some reason, did his best to hang Sir John Douglas. He sent in an account -of the Clans, in substance much like that in the MS. of 1750.[44] He -betrayed the secret of the Loch Arkaig treasure, and asked to be allowed -to go to the spot, and point it out to the agents of Government. In reply -to Murray, Traquair and Dr. Barry lied firmly, under examination, and Sir -John Douglas refused to answer any questions. They suffered imprisonment, -but escaped with life for lack of corroboration. Some legal jugglery was -needed before Murray could be accepted as King’s Evidence, but the trick -was played, and the Laird of Broughton publicly ‘peached’ at Lovat’s -trial. He declares that he peached with economy. ‘The utmost care was -taken to conceal everything that was not known by his own letters, of -which he was so sensible that he sent me thanks by Mr. Fowler (Gentleman -Gaoler of the Tower), for my forbearance, and said he was not the least -hurt or offended by anything I had said.’ - -Such are Murray’s excuses. He could have told more, and Lovat might have -died without his testimony, on the evidence of various Frazers. Murray -was pardoned in June 1748. He tried to provoke Traquair to a duel and -vapoured with cloak and sword behind Montague House. He associated with -Young Glengarry, whom he very probably thought an honest man, and his -visits a privilege. Glengarry doubtless got from Murray information -about the Loch Arkaig treasure, and, perhaps, picked up a few crumbs -of intelligence for his employers. His wife had not left Murray, in -1749, when he reconciled his lady to the loss of her repeater, pawned -by a priest named Leslie for the relief of Young Glengarry, who was -starving.[45] When Mrs. Murray left her intolerable lord is not exactly -known, nor is anything certain about her later fortunes. In May 1749, -Stonor tells Edgar that Murray’s ‘late actions have not only the -appearance of a knave but a madman, and it is the opinion of most -people he is really also the latter, several of his family having been -disordered in their senses, and his present situation sufficient to -cause it in him, as he can’t but feel the sting of such a conscience, -finds himself the outcast of mankind, and _is in circumstances extremely -indigent_.’ It follows that he did not keep the money buried in the -garden of Menzies of Culdares, some 4,000_l._[46] Traquair had Murray -arrested by a warrant of the Lord Chief Justice, for provoking a breach -of the peace.[47] - -In 1764, Murray sold Broughton. His agent was Sir Walter Scott’s father, -and, as we all know, Mr. Scott threw the cup from which Murray had drunk -out of the window. The younger Dumas, probably by a chance coincidence, -uses this in his play, ‘L’Étrangère.’ After selling Broughton, Murray -is said to have lived in London, and family tradition avers that he -was visited by Charles, whom he introduced to his little boy as ‘your -_King_.’ This ought, then, to be dated 1766, or later. Murray is said to -have justified Stonor’s letter, already cited, by dying in a madhouse, -on December 6, 1777. He was sane enough, certainly, when he wrote his -‘Memorials.’ Such was Murray of Broughton, in spite of his treachery a -devoted believer in the Cause; till his capture, a brave, loyal, and -constant supporter of the Cause; a man by nature honourable, and a lover -of honour in others, as in Lochiel and the Duke of Perth. He sinned, when -he did sin, in violation of every tradition of education, and, in turning -Informer, wrenched every fibre of his moral nature. His servant, a poet -of the time remarks, set his master an example. - - Behold, the menial hand that broke your bread, - That wiped your shoes, and with your crumbs was fed, - When life and riches, proffered to his view, - Before his eyes the strong temptation threw, - Rather than quit integrity of heart, - Or act, like you, th’unmanly traytor’s part, - Disdains the purchase of a worthless life, - And bares his bosom to the butcher’s knife. - -But Murray renounced honour and lingered on the scene. - - And whither, whither, can the guilty fly - From the devouring worms that never die? - -‘Lead us not into temptation.’ The view of death brought Murray face to -face with a self in his breast, which, it is probable, he had never known -to exist: that awful contradictory self to which each of us has yielded, -though few in such extremity of surrender. - - - - -IV - -MADEMOISELLE LUCI - - -In ‘Pickle the Spy’ mention was frequently made of ‘Mademoiselle Luci,’ -the mysterious young lady who, from 1749 to her death in 1752, was the -French Egeria of Prince Charles. An exile, without a roof to cover his -head in any land but the States of the Pope, to which he declined to go, -the Prince was sheltered in the Parisian convent of St. Joseph by Mlle. -Luci and the lady styled _La Grande Main_ in the cypher of the Prince’s -correspondence. By dint of some research, I discovered that Mlle. Luci -was Mlle. Ferrand, while La Grande Main was her devoted friend, Madame -de Vassé. Both were very intimate with a person always alluded to in -the Prince’s correspondence as _le philosophe_. As Montesquieu lived -in the same street (the Rue Dominique) as these ladies (who directed -the Prince’s philosophical studies), as he was on friendly terms with -Charles, Lord Elibank, Bulkeley, and other Jacobites, I concluded that -the _philosophe_ of the correspondence was probably the author of -‘L’Esprit des Lois.’ This was a blunder which criticism should have -detected. The _philosophe_ was not Montesquieu, but the Abbé Condillac. -The proof is in the preliminary chapter of his ‘Traité des Sensations;’ -he there dedicates that important psychological work to Madame de Vassé, -and deplores the death of their beloved Mlle. Ferrand. Condillac, -clearly, was their friend, _le philosophe_. Mlle. Ferrand, it seems, -was the instructor of Condillac, as well as the protector and literary -adviser of Prince Charles. - -‘You know, Madame,’ says Condillac to Madame de Vassé, ‘to whom I owe -the light which at length scattered my prejudices. You know what part -she had in this book, that lady so justly dear to you, so worthy of your -friendship and esteem. I consecrate my work to her memory, and I address -you that I may share the pleasure of speaking about her and the pain of -our common sorrow. May this book be the monument of your friendship, and -preserve it unforgotten.’ - -A volume on the relations of sense and thought, like Condillac’s, is not -the place to which one naturally turns in search of information about a -girl who loyally served a proscribed Prince and a forsaken Cause. Yet -it is Condillac who attests for us ‘the keenness, the just balance, of -Mlle. Ferrand’s intellect, and the vivacity of her imagination, qualities -apparently incompatible, when carried to the pitch at which she displayed -them.’ - -The scheme of Condillac’s psychology cannot be discussed in this place, -but he says that he owed everything to Prince Charles’s friend. ‘She -enlightened me as to the principles, the plan, and the most minute -details, and I ought to be the more grateful, as she had no idea of -instructing me, or of making a book. She did not remark that she was -becoming an author, having no design beyond that of conversing with me -on the topics in which I was interested.... Had she taken up the pen, -this work would be a better proof of her genius. But there was in her -a delicacy which forbade her even to contemplate authorship.... This -treatise is, unhappily, but the result of conversations with her, and I -fear that I may have sometimes failed to place her ideas in their true -light.’ - -Had Mlle. Ferrand survived, Condillac thinks that she would not have -allowed him to acknowledge her influence on his work. ‘But how can I, -to-day, deny myself the pleasure of this act of justice? Nothing but this -remains to me, in our loss of a wise adviser, an enlightened critic, and -a true friend. You, Madame, will share the pleasure with me, you who will -not cease to regret her while you live.’ The philosopher speaks of ‘the -intellect, the loyalty, the courage, which formed these ladies for each -other.’ Loyalty, courage, wit, these women laid them at the feet of a -Prince not their own, and solely recommended to their tenderness by his -misfortunes. - -‘Your friend, in dying, had this one consolation, Madame, that she was -not to survive you. I have seen her happy in this reflection. “Speak -sometimes of me with Madame de Vassé,” she said to me, “and let it be -with a kind of pleasure.”’ Such was the girl, so brilliantly endowed, -so brave, so affectionate, who did Prince Charles’s marketing, bought -him novels and razors, directed his choice of books, was the channel -through which his secret correspondence passed, was jealously regarded -by his mistress, Madame de Talmond, and died before the end of all hope -had come, before the Prince was renounced even by his own. To the angry -Madame de Talmond she wrote, ‘I am strongly attached to your friend [the -Prince] and for him would do and suffer anything short of stooping to an -act of baseness.’ - -There must have been something in Charles, beyond his misfortunes, to win -so much devotion from a woman of the highest intellect. - -Mlle. Ferrand died, after a long illness, in October 1752. Her memory -is preserved only by a note in Grimm’s correspondence, by the touching -tribute of Condillac, and by the discovery of her kindness to a -proscribed Prince. While she protected and advised him, she was inspiring -a renowned philosopher, and keeping a secret which every diplomatist in -Europe was eager to learn. We naturally desire to know whether Mlle. -Ferrand was beautiful as well as talented and kind. But researches in -France have not brought to light any portrait either of Mlle. Ferrand, -or of Madame de Vassé, who long survived her friend, and was in -correspondence, about 1760, with the Earl Marischal.[48] - - - - -V - -THE ROMANCE OF BARISDALE - - -While the Lowlanders, for nearly fifteen hundred years, had cast on -Highland robbers the eyes of hatred and contempt, Sir Walter Scott -suddenly taught men to think a cateran a very fine fellow. The -unanimity of a non-Highland testimony had previously been wonderful. -‘The Highlanders are great thieves,’ says Dio Cassius, speaking for -civilisation as early as A.D. 200-230. Gildas, in the sixth century, -calls the Highlanders (Picti) ‘a set of bloody free booters, with more -hair on their thieves’ faces than clothes to cover their nakedness.’ -Early mediæval writers talk of the _bestiales Picts_ (‘the beastly -Picts’), and later Lowland opinions to a similar effect are too familiar -for quotation. To Scott was left the discovery of the virtues of the -honest cateran, who looked on cattle-stealing as an ennobling occupation -in the intervals of war. - -Sir Walter’s opinion ran through Europe like the Fiery Cross. His -grandson, Hugh Littlejohn, stirred up by the ‘Tales of a Grandfather,’ -dirked his small brother slightly with a pair of scissors in a childish -enthusiasm! Even the moral Wordsworth, moved by Scott, had a good word -for Rob Roy. Yet about that hero Sir Walter cherished no illusions. He -knew Rob’s Letter of Submission to General Wade, after 1715. Rob, of -course, had been out for King James, but he coolly says to Wade: ‘I not -only avoided acting offensively against his Majesty’s’ (King George’s) -‘forces, but, on the contrary, sent His Grace the Duke of Argyle all the -intelligence I could from time to time of the strength and situation of -the Rebels; which I hope his Grace will do me the justice to acknowledge.’ - -‘All the _demerits_ ascribed to him by his enemies are less to his -discredit than this one _merit_ which he assumes to himself,’ says -Jamieson.[49] The double-faced traitor, Rob’s son, James Mohr, one of the -bravest of men, _chassa de race_. The truth is that a life of plunder, -however romantic and however little regarded as immoral or degrading -by Highland opinion, really did foster, in educated men, the most -astonishing perfidy. This is the last vice we look for in the generous -cateran; and, indeed, the outlaws of Glen Moriston were as loyal to their -Prince as Lochiel. But the prevalent opinion that robbery, sanctioned by -tradition, does not degrade the general character, can be proved to be -an error. We read about Cluny that, in 1742-5, he held the usual belief. -‘He was certain it’ (the habit of robbery) ‘proceeded only from the -remains of barbarism, for he had many convincing proofs that in other -respects the dispositions of the people in these parts were generally -as benevolent, humane, and even generous, as those of any country -whatever.’[50] - -Cluny was right about the untutored mass of the people, but he was wrong -about a few educated chiefs, who encouraged and lived on an unfortunate -tradition. Thus Sir Walter Scott writes about the thief whose history we -are to narrate, Macdonnell of Barisdale: ‘He was a scholar and well-bred -gentleman. He engraved on his broadswords the well-known lines: - - Hae tibi erunt artes, pacisque imponere morem, - Parcere subjectis, et debellare superbos.’[51] - -Barisdale knew what was right; his following knew only his will. He was -the blackest of traitors; they were true as steel. - -The specially robber tribes in 1715-45 were those of the dispossessed -Macgregors, whose hand was, necessarily, against every man’s hand; of -the Macdonnells in Knoydart; and of some of the Camerons in Lochaber and -Rannoch. Old Lovat, too, discouraging schools, kept up sedulously the -ancient clan ideas. No other sections of the Highlanders are accused, -even by Whigs, of robbery. Mackays, Mackenzies, Grants, Mackintoshes, -Macphersons, Macleans are not blamed, and such gentlemen of the Camerons -and Macdonnells as Lochiel, Scothouse, and Keppoch are specially -exculpated. Lochiel was a reformer within his clan. The gallant Keppoch -had forsworn the predatory habits which, in 1689, made his people -threaten Inverness. Of Scothouse we shall hear the most excellent report. -Now, it cannot be by a mere fortuitous coincidence that all the Highland -traitors, James Mohr, Old Lovat, Glengarry, Barisdale, and some others, -come precisely from the homes of cattle thieves, and from a factitious -hothouse of old clan ideas; from the Macgregor country, Knoydart, the -worst part of Lochaber, and Rannoch. Yet, so strange was the condition of -the North, that we find Barisdale, the meanest wretch of all, recognised -as an acquaintance by so high a Lowland dame as the ‘Great Lady of the -Cat,’ the Countess of Sutherland. - -We now proceed to the story of the chief who loved a Virgilian quotation. - -In the army of Charles Edward there was no man more detested and feared -than Col Macdonell of Barisdale. According to a curious tract, ‘The Life -of Archibald Macdonell of Barisdale, who is to Suffer for High Treason -on the Twenty Second of May, at Edinburgh, By an Impartial Hand,’[52] -Col of Barisdale was son (? grandson) of the second brother of Alastair -Dubh Macdonnell of Glengarry, the hero of Sheriffmuir, being thus a -cousin of Glengarry. He was a man of prodigious muscular force, six feet -four inches in height. He is said to have caught and held a roedeer; -and, on one occasion, to have heaved a recalcitrant cow, probably -stolen property, into a boat. There lay, in the present century, on -the gravel-drive before Invergarry House, a large boulder, and beside -it a short pin of iron was fixed into the ground. Only a very powerful -man could lift the boulder on to the pin, a few inches in height, but -Barisdale could heave it up to his knees. So write, from tradition, the -two ‘Stuarts d’Albanie,’ in ‘Tales of the Century’ (1847). They add that -Barisdale’s courage did not match his strength, and that he yielded in -single combat to Cluny. - -Returning to our ‘Impartial Hand’ (by his minute local knowledge a -native of Ross or Moray), we find him nowise partial to Barisdale. -‘Colonel Ban,’ as he calls him, married a Miss Mackenzie of Fairburn, -and, having a small estate in Ross-shire, could raise two hundred of the -clan. He thus, says Murray of Broughton, declared himself independent of -Glengarry, his chief, an indolent drunkard. Being acquainted with the -Mackenzie estates, he used his knowledge in the surreptitious acquisition -of cattle. He would then throw the blame on the Camerons; and that, says -our author, is precisely the cause of the bad name for cattle-stealing -which the Camerons have unhappily acquired. One day Barisdale, with his -Tail, met Cameron of Taask, with _his_ Tail, and was charged by Cameron -with his misdeeds. Words grew high, claymores were drawn, and a finger of -Cameron’s left hand was nearly lopped off. The intrepid chieftain, acting -on the Scotch proverb, ‘Better a finger off than aye wagging,’ tore the -injured limb from his hand, bound the wound with a handkerchief, ‘and so -fell to work on Barisdale,’ whom he sliced on the pate. ‘The skin and a -lock of his hair hung down,’ and their devoted tenants, anxious observers -of the fray, separated the infuriated chieftains. Barisdale was presently -arrested on a charge of theft, but his Tail perjured themselves manfully, -and he got off on an alibi. - -The neighbours, finding the hero so stubborn, paid him ‘black meal’ -(_sic_), in return for which he promised to protect their herds. But his -genius pointed out to him a more excellent way, and Barisdale became -the Jonathan Wild (as Waverley says) of Lochaber and Knoydart. He was a -thief-catcher, and also an accomplice of thieves, as interest directed -or passion prompted.[53] He kept his tenantry, or gang, in rare order, -and ‘had machines for putting them to different sorts of punishment.’ -One machine was merely the stocks, where, outside of the chieftain’s -drawing-room windows (which commanded a fine view of the sea), many a -poor thief sat for twenty-four hours, with food temptingly placed just -out of his reach. Thus Barisdale struck terror, inspired respect, and -accumulated wealth. - -A more cruel engine than the stocks had Barisdale, a triumph of his own -invention. In ‘The Lyon in Mourning,’ Mackinnon, who helped Prince -Charles to escape from Skye, says that Captain Fergusson (noted for his -ferocity) threatened him with torture. ‘The cat or _Barisdale_ shall make -you speak,’ said the Captain. The engine is described as one in which no -man could live for an hour. The Impartial Hand’ gives this account of it: -‘The supposed criminal’ (that is, any man who would not give Barisdale a -share of his booty) ‘was tied to an iron machine, where a ring grasped -his feet, and another closed upon his neck, and his hands were received -into eyes of iron contrived for that purpose. He had a great weight upon -the back of his neck, to which, if he yielded in the least, by shrinking -downwards, a sharp spike would infallibly run into his chin, which was -kept bare for that very purpose.’ Barisdale was also apt to waylay -herring-fishers, and make them pay, as toll, a fifth of what they had -captured, alleging certain seignorial rights. - -‘It is well known,’ says the author of 1754, ‘that, from the month of -March to the middle of August, some poor upon the coast have nothing but -shell-fish, such as mussels, cockles, and the like, to support them. -Poverty reigns so much among the lower class that scarce a smile is to be -seen upon their faces.’ Barisdale also reigned upon the coast. - -Such was life in the Highlands in the golden days of the Clans, before -sheep, Lowlanders, evictions, emigration, and deer forests brought, as -we are told, discontent and destitution. The poor lived on mussels and -cockles, some tenants eked out a scanty livelihood by stealing their -neighbours’ cows, and the genial Barisdale kept all in good order. For -Barisdale’s prowess we are not obliged to rely on the ‘Impartial Hand’ -and the Gartmore MS. alone. In ‘The Highlands of Scotland: a Letter -from a Gentleman at Edinburgh to a Friend in London,’ we meet our Col -again. This manuscript[54] is in the King’s Collection, 104, in the -British Museum. The author is an _enragé_ Whig and Protestant, but a -close observer. From him we learn how cattle-stealing paid; for at first -blush it looks like the practice of those fabled islanders ‘who eke out a -livelihood by taking in each other’s washing.’ The business was extended -over a wide area; the Macdonells did not merely harry the Mackenzies and -Rosses. - -Speaking of Knoydart, our author says: ‘Coll. Macdonell of Barisdale, -cousin-german of Glengarry, took up his residence here, as a place -of undoubted security from all legal prosecution. He entered into a -confederacy with Lochgarry and the Camerons of Loch Arkaig, with some -others as great villains in Rannoch. This famous Company had the honour -to introduce theft into a regular trade; they kept a number of savages -dependent on them for the purpose, whom they out-hounded’ on predatory -expeditions. - -They robbed from Sutherlandshire to Perthshire, Stirlingshire, and -Argyle. When the thieves were successful these gentlemen had a dividend -of the spoil. When unsuccessful, the thieves lived on the country which -they traversed. To denounce them was ill work. A gentleman, known to -our author, was nearly ruined by Barisdale & Co. He caught two of the -Macdonalds, who were hanged. Fifteen years later his son, going to Fort -William, vanished. The tribe, says our author, demanded ‘blood for blood.’ - -By these devices Barisdale compelled his neighbours to pay, in blackmail, -‘above double their proportion of the land-tax in Seaforth’s, Lovat’s, -and Chisholme’s country.’ He captained a kind of ‘Watch.’ But Barisdale’s -‘Watch’ was expensive and unsatisfactory to his subscribers. As early as -1742 we have found Cluny setting up an opposition in business. Cluny’s -Watch is described at great length by the author of a kind of memoir -of the chief, written in France in 1755-1760. The writer’s object is -to show how much Cluny lost by his loyalty to the Stuarts, and how -much he deserves the encouragement of Louis XV. He established, for -the discouragement of theft, ‘a watch or safeguard of his own trusted -followers.’ The nobility and gentry ‘were surpris’d at Cluny’s success, -and enveyed so much his happiness, that they applyed to him with one -accord, to take them under his protection, and cheerfully offered to join -in a voluntary subscription....’ Among the subscribers are the Duke of -Gordon, the Earl of Airlie, the Earl of Aberdeen, Forbes of Culloden, -the Mackintosh, Grant of Grant, and even the Duke of Argyll. These facts -attest the extent of Barisdale’s raids. - -Cluny was highly successful, rescuing ‘even those who had never applyed -to him.’ The subscriptions amounted to 20,000 livres, and the Dukes of -Atholl and Perth, with Seaforth, were about to join. It was now that a -preacher, thundering against theft, was interrupted by a listener who -‘desired him to save his labour upon that point, for Mons. de Cluny alone -would gain more souls to heaven in one year, than all the priests in the -highlands could ever do in fifty.’ - -The English Ministry, hearing of Cluny’s fame, now sent him, unasked, a -captain’s commission in Loudon’s regiment, worth 6,000 livres yearly. But -he threw up his new commission when he joined Prince Charles. Cluny’s -spirited behaviour, says MS. 104, ‘took the bread out of their mouths,’ -the mouths of Barisdale & Co. But ‘Barisdale, by the former trade (theft) -and the latter expedient (blackmail), lived at a very high rate, and -mortgaged a large sum of money on Glengarry’s estate,’ where he was a -wadsetter. - -Cluny’s opposition may have led to his duel with Barisdale, as reported -by the Stuarts d’Albanie. Barisdale was, as we have seen, like Lochgarry, -a wadsetter of Glengarry’s; that is, he received from Glengarry certain -lands, redeemable after a specified interval of time, in exchange for -money paid, or bills, or perhaps for cattle, which he was skilled -in procuring. We do not find that the chief, Glengarry, could or did -exercise any authority in controlling the excesses and depredations of -his independent cousin Col. For this he is blamed by the author of the -Gartmore MS., but his Mackenzie following made Col too strong for his -chief. - -Ignorant, perhaps, of the character of Barisdale, unwilling, at least, to -dispense with his aid, Prince Charles visited him in August 1745, made -him a colonel, and gave a major’s commission to his son, young Archibald -Macdonnell of Barisdale, a lad of twenty in 1745. Our ‘Impartial -Hand’[55] declares that Coll, though at Prestonpans, was not under fire, -which seems improbable. Barisdale may have been with the Prince in the -second line (fifty yards behind the first, says the Chevalier Johnstone), -or, in the oblique advance of the first line, Lochiel and James Mohr may -have routed the English before Barisdale could engage. But, in a letter -of Thomas Wedderburn to the Earl of Sutherland, we read (September 26, -1745), ‘Three troops that were making their way for Berwick were pursued -by Barisdale, and 150 men, who all stript to their shirts, on foot, who -overtook the dragoons, I suppose by turning a hill and gaining ground -that way, and made them prisoners, for which Barisdale was made a knight -bannarett’[56]—knighted, that is, like Dalgetty, on the field. - -After Prestonpans, according to the Impartial one, confirmed by the -‘Culloden Papers,’ and by Broughton’s ‘Memorials,’ Barisdale, by -Sheridan’s advice, was sent north, to work on Old Lovat. Sheridan -reckoned that no man was likely to have so much influence with that -subtle schemer as the bluff Barisdale, with ‘his devouring looks, his -bulky strides, his awful voice, his long and tremendous sword, which he -generally wore in his hand, with a target and bonnet edged broad upon -the forehead.’ Barisdale, thus accredited, worked both on Lovat and Lord -Cromarty, who raised his peaceful tenants by threats of burning their -cottages and cattle.[57] Cromarty might have reported, like a Highland -recruiting officer in later days, ‘The volunteers are ready; they are -all lying bound hand and foot in the barn.’ Many of the Highlanders did -not want to fight, though they fought so well. Barisdale also sent ‘the -bloody cross,’ we are told, through the Frazers, who marched reluctantly -under the Master of Lovat, a St. Andrews student, himself as reluctant as -he was brave. At Falkirk, Barisdale is said to have been with the second -line, and later ‘he set out to collect the public money, the greater part -of which he kept to himself.’ - -Just before Culloden, Barisdale was engaged in the not uncongenial duty -of reducing the shires of Ross and Sutherland. In the latter county -Lord Reay, with the Mackays and the Earl of Sutherland, were for King -George; Lord Loudon also was quartered with his force in Ross-shire. Lord -Cromarty, with the Mackenzies, Mackintoshes, Mackinnons, Macgregors, and -Barisdale’s Macdonnells, did little, retiring to his own house. Barisdale -was anxious to burn the house of Ross of Balnagoun, but Lochiel, who had -arrived with Lord George Murray, intervened. At Dornoch, Barisdale went -to church, where the Rev. Mr. Kirk, a gentleman connected with the Duke -of Argyll, had the courage to pray for King George. Barisdale leaped up, -swaggered, fumed, and, it is rather absurdly said, threatened to put -Mr. Kirk in his famous engine of torture. The chivalrous Duke of Perth -protected Mr. Kirk, saying that all brave men were his friends, and -asked the clergyman to dinner.[58] Lord George Murray, finding Cromarty -incompetent, and Barisdale mainly occupied in burning granaries, now took -the command, and Loudon crossed the Firth into Sutherland. Perth then led -the Prince’s forces across the Firth, and Loudon hastened to withdraw -into central Sutherland. - -Neither side was anxious to come to blows. Macdonnell of Scotus, a man -‘brave, polite, obliging, of fine spirit and sound judgment,’ says the -Chevalier Johnstone, had a son with Lord Loudon, and was reluctant to -engage. Later, to his intense joy, he took this son a not unwilling -prisoner. Meanwhile Barisdale, on March 20, captured the Castle of -Dunrobin. The Earl of Sutherland fled, under cover of a fog, and escaped -to an English ship. The Countess stayed at home; she was a daughter of -the Earl of Wemyss by his third wife, was a young lady, of twenty-eight, -and had a young nephew, Lord Elcho, with the Prince. According to the -‘Sutherland Book’ (i. 420), one of Barisdale’s officers threatened her -with a dirk, and, some one jogging his elbow, she was actually scratched. -To this the Countess, as we shall see, herself bears witness. But it is -by no means certain that the lady, coming of a Jacobite family, was an -unwilling prisoner of the Prince’s men. It was irksome to her, no doubt, -to see her rooms littered with hay on which the Highlanders slept, and -to observe the robbery of her plate. But the two following intercepted -letters, from the Cumberland Papers, display the Countess as an adorer of -Prince Charles, and Barisdale as a _preux chevalier_. - - _Letter from The Countess of Sutherland to the Young - Pretender, written with MacDonell of Barisdale’s - own Hand._ - - ‘March 26, 1746. - - ‘The treatment I mett with Friday Last oblidges me to presume - to oCoast your Royall Hyness For a protection to prevent the - Lyke Usadge in the Future. However my Lord Sutherland Acted, - It’s known over the most of this Kingdome my particular - attachment to your Royall Hyness’ Family, and were itt - ordinaire in one of my sex to go to the Field to Fight For - my Prince and Country, I would make as aerly ane appearance - as anie, and hade not my Coch horses and sadle horses being - caryed away I woud presume the Honnaire to waith of your - Royall Hyness. Least my letter be too tediouse I will only - give one Instance of my usadge, a man holding a drawn durk to - my brest gave a scrach of a wound which merk itt well beare: - but this day Barisdale coming here, being my aquaintance, in - his presence I sent a gentleman to all the men of my Lord - Sutherland’s that were in arms desiring them to disperse and - return to their homes in order a proper Draught be made of them - For your royall Hyness service. My success I can not determine - as I can not Depend upon much assistance, but if matters were - further att my Disposall all the Fensable men in Sutherland - woud be on your Royall Hyness armie as I am quite affrighted. - From the Hylanders I beg to petition your Royall Hyness - protection how Soone pasable and I always am and ever will,’ &c. - -On March 27, 1746, from Tarbat House Lord Cromarty writes in answer to -the Countess of Sutherland, acknowledging her letter, and promising -protection to all her people who submit. - -Then we have Barisdale’s _billet_ to the lady: - - _Col McDonell to Lady Sutherlande_ - - ‘Ardmore: March 27, 1746. - - ‘My Faire Prisoner,—I presume these with the offer of my most - Respectfull humble Duty to my Lady Sutherland, my Regiment - is ordered back againe to Sutherland For which I am verrie - sorrie, if anie hardships must be used, itt shoud in the Least - Fall to my Shaire. I will have one Certaine pleasure in Itt - that it well give the oportunity of being For once more my - Lady Sutherland’s Saife guard. I Forwarded your Ladyship’s - letter by one Captt Lewlessnent, and sent itt Inclosed to - his Grace, and held Forth my Lady Sutherland’s zeall For our - Cause, and the Friendship she particullarlie expected From - him, and represented the Horses taken away, and pleaded For - her Interest to have them, att Least my Ladys Favourites, - returned. I go this Day to Inverness myself and shall talk to - His Royall Hyness in regard to what my Lady Sutherland woud - Exspect off Favours From our side, and what is Actuallie Deue - to her. After my return, shall have the pleasure of waitting - off your Ladyship att Dunrobine, and allways will be Nott onlie - your Lady’s prisoner in the strictest Confinement, but your - Ladyships most obdtt. and most humble sertt. while - - ‘COL. MCDONELL.’[59] - -An odious tale is told by the ‘Impartial Hand,’ about Barisdale’s conduct -to his wife’s young sister. We do not trust the Impartial one where -we have not corroboration, and, to his fair prisoner, Lady Sutherland, -Barisdale certainly displays a tender gallantry. But she may not have -regretted that her Barisdale was occasionally absent. Cumberland was -approaching, and, on the eve of Culloden, Lord Cromarty was captured -in ‘The Battle of Golspie,’ while dallying over his _adieux_ to ‘his -favourite Amazon,’ the Countess of Sutherland, as the Impartial one -invidiously declares. - -The Countess must have managed her diplomacy adroitly, for the -Whig author previously cited says, ‘It is a pity the present Earl -of Sutherland should be such a weak man, but his lady behaved very -honourably, though her brother (nephew) the Lord Elcho, was engaged in -the Rebellion.’[60] The lady’s letter to Prince Charles was not known to -our author. - -Barisdale, leaving his fair prisoner, marched south, and halted at -Beauly, on the night before Culloden. ‘He might easily have reached the -field, had he been any way resolute or brave.’ But like the Master of -Lovat and Cluny, Barisdale came up too late. The fugitives passed through -Inverness, under his eyes, and Barisdale also made off. - -He was at the Meeting of the Chiefs at Murlagan, on May 8, when it was -determined to rally in a week, and a treaty was made, that all should -hold together, in spite of the Prince’s defection.[61] When the week -ended, nobody came to the tryst but Lochgarry, who retired at once, -Lochiel, and Barisdale, with three or four hundred of their clans. -But the Rev. John Cameron, in ‘The Lyon in Mourning’ (i. 88) accuses -Barisdale of promising to return next day, as a blind, and of sending -instead two companies of infantry in English service, to capture Lochiel. -They were recognised by their red crosses, and Lochiel escaped, ‘which -was owing to its not being in Barisdale’s power’—to catch him, ‘rather -than to want of inclination,’ says Mr. Cameron. Murray of Broughton -represents Barisdale as accusing his cousin and enemy, Lochgarry, of -treachery, and believes that both were equally guilty, but Lochiel -was as incapable of suspecting as of being guilty of treason. In his -Letter to the Chiefs, of May 26, he says that Clanranald’s men refuse -to leave their own country, that Glengarry’s men have yielded up their -arms (induced thereto, we shall see, by Old Glengarry), that Lochgarry -promised to return, but did not, and that, ‘trusting to Lochgarry’s -information, we had almost been surprized.’ But he never hints at a -suspicion of Barisdale.[62] - -On June 10, says the ‘Impartial Hand,’ Barisdale and Young Barisdale -both surrendered to Ensign Small, in a cave. But Barisdale, it is known, -got a protection, on his promise to deliver up Prince Charles. He laid -several schemes to this end, and had two companies to seize the Prince at -Strathfillan. Sheridan, however, ‘who had a talent for reading men with -as great freedom and judgement as others do books,’ warned the Prince, -who kept out of Barisdale’s clutches.[63] So says the Impartial Hand. - -His story of the protection for Barisdale was true, as witness the -following letters from the Cumberland Papers, at Windsor Castle. - - _From G. Howard to Col. Napier, A.D.C. to D. of C._ - - ‘July 5th.... - - ‘A person passed me here yesterday morning whom I took to be - lawful Prey, but, to my great concern, he produced a Pass-port - for himself and 4 servants with their arms &c., syned by Sir - E. Faulkner: it was dated only the day before yesterday. The - person was McDonald of Barisdale, who is so particularly - zealous for hanging our officers. I asked him if he had seen - H.R.H. (Cumberland). He said no, but that a friend got him his - Protection.’ - - _Lord Albemarle to Duke of Cumberland_ - - ‘July 26th. - - ‘The Complaint is universal against Barisdale, therefore I - shall not renew his protection, but drive and burn his country - to punish him for having made such a bad use of your goodness. - Glengarry is much commended for his behaviour.’ - -Finally, Barisdale had already induced several Macdonnells to lay a -written information against Old Glengarry, their chief. - -How did Barisdale, who had played a part so conspicuous, manage to obtain -a protection from Sir Everard Faulkner? That is the point which we shall -later find him explaining with singular candour. Protected he was, and, -in pursuit of information, he had the singular impudence to venture, with -his son, in September 1746, on board the ship which was to carry the -Prince, Lochiel, Lochgarry, and other gentlemen to France. They could -not but be aware that Barisdale had made his submission, and was come -on no good errand. Lochgarry was his bitter enemy. They therefore put -Barisdale and his son in irons, shut them down under hatches, carried -them to France, and there imprisoned these gentlemen of Knoydart on a -charge of treason. Mr. Fraser Mackintosh, a very innocent writer, thus -describes the high-handed outrage: ‘Barisdale was so unpopular with -the Camerons, that, without the slightest warrant, they took it on -themselves to deport Coll Macdonnell, and his son Alexander [Archibald?] -to France.’ Mr. Fraser Mackintosh attributes this unwarrantable action to -‘the Camerons,’ with whom Barisdale was generally ‘unpopular.’ But, of -course, the seizure was warranted by Charles, Prince Regent, who is said -to have knighted Barisdale on a stricken field. The seizure was more than -justified, and was not due to poor Col’s ‘unpopularity.’ - -Col languished in a French prison till 1749. In March he ventured back -to Scotland, finding himself, after his release, very ‘unpopular’ in -Flanders. He was promptly culled like a flower by his old captor, -Ensign Small, and was brought before Erskine for examination. Erskine -writes that he found the tall bully ‘under visible terror.’ France had -imprisoned him. England was likely to give him what ‘he wad be nane the -waur o’’—a hanging. His house was left unto him desolate; he would flirt -no more with fair captive Countesses: no one trembled at his frowning -brows: it was Barisdale’s turn to tremble, as he did. He was locked up in -Edinburgh Castle, where, at least, he was safe from avenging dirks. He -there penned the following explicit confession, in hopes of a pardon, and -pay as a spy. Perhaps Cumberland refers to Barisdale’s earlier services -in this capacity, in a letter of August 2, 1749. Cumberland speaks of -‘the goodness of the intelligence’ now offered to Government. ‘On my part -I bear it witness, for I never knew it fail me in the least trifle, and -have had very material and early notices from it.’[64] - -Here, then, follows Barisdale’s confession to the Justice Clerk in -Edinburgh. It entirely disposes of Mr. Fraser Mackintosh’s suggestion -that the Camerons seized Barisdale because he was ‘unpopular.’ - - _Narrative given in by Barrisdale to the Justice Clerk_ - - (_H. O. Scotland. Bundle 41. No. 13. State Papers. Domestic_) - - April 10th, 1749. - - ‘His Royal Highness, the Duke of Cumberland, sent a protection - by Sir Alexr. Macdonald to Barisdale, upon delivering to him - of which, he told him, in Consequence of the Favours the Duke - intended for him, he should cause all such as he would have any - Influence with, surrender their arms directly, which Barisdale - did at the Barracks of Glenelg immediately thereafter; by - which the Concert of those that imagined to make any further - resistance was broke, and he gave all the Assurances Sir Alexr. - desired of him, to be a good faithful subject, yt would give - all obedience to the Government, which Since he has perform’d. - _But from that time the Jacobite party design’d to ruine - Barisdale_, and endeavoured, with all Calumny’s, to make him - odious to all partys and all Persons. The Pretender’s Son - having returned from the Isles to the Continent (mainland), Sir - Alexr. Macdonald wrote to Barisdale, desiring to inform him - of some particulars, which he did very distinctly, and soon - after his R. Highness [Cumberland] left Fort Augustus, my Lord - Albemarle, then Commander in Chief, desired Sir Aler. McDonald - to send for Barisdale to Fort Augustus. Sir Alexr. Macdonald - wrote to him, and accordingly Barisdale waited of my Lord - Albemarle at Fort Augustus, at Sir Alex. McDonald’s Lodgings, - where before Sir Alex. McDonald, his Lordship told Barisdale, - as the Pretender’s Son was now returned from the Isles to - the Continent (mainland), if he hop’d for the Continuance of - his R. Highness’s Favours, he must lay himself out in giving - Assistance to have the Person of ye Pretender’s Son sez’d. - - ‘Barisdale answered, in Sir Alexander’s Presence, that Sir - Alexr. never made any such Proposal to him from his R. Highness - (Cumberland); and if he was a Man supposed formerly in the - Jacobite Interest, and _upon getting a better Light_, to - forsake them it would be very inconsistent wth. Honour, for a - Man so supposed, to go such Lengths. But for his share, were - he to do his utmost to comply with his Lordship’s desire, he - could expect little success in it, since all the Jacobite Party - were upon their Guard, even the meanest Highlander, to give no - Intelligence to any he had Influence with. - - ‘His Lordship and he parted that Day: my Lord Loudoun, Sir - Alexr. McDonald, and Barisdale, being at a Bottle that night, - resumed all that past at that Communing—Loudoun said, “I own - what his Lordship desires of you, may not be easy for you to - perform, but such Information as you can best receive, you can - transmit to his Lordship and you can make an Observe upon each, - according to the Credite you give yourself to the Information.” - - ‘My Lord Albemarle, the next day, at Sir Alexander’s Lodgings, - insisted as the Day before; and Barisdale agreed, such - Informations as he could learn, he would transmit them, wt. - Remarks upon them of the Credite he thought they deserved—My - Lord Albemarle gave a Continuance upon the Protection for ten - Days more, which was a short time for Barisdale to go to his - country, and find Informations and then transmit them to Fort - Augustus. - - ‘However he sent two different Informations wt. Remarks upon - them: is not certain which of the two, my Lord Albemarle or - my Lord Loudoun’s Hands they came to, as the Bearer of them - brought back no Answer in writing: But at the End of the Ten - Days of my Lord Albemarle’s Protection, B. was rather more - distrest than any who were not before protected. - - ‘Some few days thereafter, being at Sir Alexr. McDonald at - Slaite, hearing two French ships coming to Ariseg, Sir Ar. - McDonald desired Barisdale to go to these Ships, in order to - learn some things he wanted to be inform’d of, and Barisdale - coming to the shore before the Ships, under Pretension of - great Friendship was invited aboard, there being at the Ships - severals he was acquainted with; But soon after he was aboard, - found his Mistake, would not be allow’d afterwards to come - ashore, was carried to St. Malos, seated upon the River La - Luare where he was prisoned about 2 years and four months. The - 7th. of February last, with a Sentence of Banishment to leave - France in a few Days, was liberated: which Sentence is now in - the hands of the Governor of Fort Augustus. - - ‘The Accusations laid against him by the Pretender’s son and - likewise laid before the Court of France were sent to Barisdale - enclosed in a Letter, wrote and signed by George Kelly, the - Pretender’s Son’s Secretary, of which there is a Copy herewith.’ - - He now offers services unconditionally[65]—‘but is sorry to - be prevented in his Design of going to London as he entended - to throw himself in his R. Highness the Duke of Cumberland’s - Hands, hoping, as he still does, for his Highness’ Protection - and Friendship, as promised to him by Sir Alexander MacDonald - in his R.H’s. Name at their first Conference, when he delivered - to him the protection, in the obtaining of which Barisdale - will be capable, as he is most willing, of doing essential - Services to his R. Highness and the Government in the North of - Scotland:—and says ‘it may appear most reasonable, however, - for the Family he is descended from, or the Clan he is of, - have been attach’d to the Pretender’s Family, that his cruel, - uncommon, and severe usage from that Family will not only - make him most faithfull to the Government, but as stiff an - Enemy as that Family have upon Earth. For it is well known the - Pretender’s Son exprest at Paris to some of the Scots, who - were sorry for Barisdale’s treatment, that while it was in his - power, Barisdale woud never recover his Liberty, at least while - he was in France, for that he was well assured, if ever he - return’d to Scotland, being well assured B. being both resolute - and Revengefull, he woud prove a very destructible Instrument - to his Interest.’ - -Here are the Jacobite charges against Barisdale:— - - _Copy of George Kelly, the P.’son’s Secretary’s Letter_ - - ‘Paris, May 3rd, 1747. - - ‘... Did you not own publickly, that upon his R.H’s. Approach - to Inverness, you advertised the Lord President and the Lord - Loudoun of the same, and advised them for their further Safety - to retire from thence?... Did you not, without asking their - Advice or Approbation, Surrender yourself to the Enemy, and - enter into certain Articles with them?... - - ‘Whether, after receiving a Protection from the Enemy, you did - not engage and promise to apprehend the Person of H.R.H. and - deliver him up to them within a limited time?... - - ‘Whether or not you did not impose on several Gentlemen of - Glengary’s Family, by asserting that he had promised to - deliver them up to the Enemy, and that he was to receive - 30_l._ sterling Premium for Each Gentleman he should put into - their Hands? Did these gentlemen sign an information against - Glengary? And were his letters ordering them to take up arms - delivered up to Lord Albemarle, upon which your Cousine, - Glengary, was apprehended?’ - -And now the whole truth is out, as concerns Col, third of Barisdale. -His cruelties, his thefts, his swaggerings, have ended in deliberate -treachery, and this worthy chieftain is found endeavouring to do what -the humblest peasant disdained even to contemplate, to deliver up the -fugitive Prince. - -Barisdale took no profit by his iniquity. The Ross people, whom he had -harried, burned his famous stocks, and his house, with its ‘eighteen -fire-rooms, and many others without fires, beautifully covered’ (roofed) -‘with blue slates.’ - -He himself died in 1750, in Edinburgh Castle; six soldiers, with no -mourners, carried his bulky and corpulent carcase to a grave ‘at the foot -of the _talus_ of the Castle.’ - -So says the Impartial Hand. Of Barisdale’s classical lore, and of his -courtesy to a fair captive, we have seen proof. For the rest, a more -worthless miscreant has seldom stained the page of history. It was time -that such a career as his should be made impossible. - -Young Barisdale skulked for years in the Highlands, a kind of Hereward, -pursued by the English troops. He was usually accompanied by five or six -of his Clan, armed, and in the prohibited Highland dress. He supported -life in his father’s fashion, mainly by robbing the herring fishers of a -fifth of their takes, under some pretence of a legal claim. His tenants, -spoiled by the English troops, probably could contribute little to his -maintenance. He is often mentioned in the Cumberland Papers, and, after -he had been the guest of young Glengarry’s uncle, Dr. Macdonnell, that -physician talked indiscreetly as follows. - -On Sept. 30, 1751, Captain Izard, of the Fusiliers, writes: ‘Dr. -Macdonald, brother of Glengarry, living at Cailles on Loch Nevis, told -that young Barisdale lay at his house the Monday before, and took boat -thence to carry his sister home, and he proposed going to the Isle of -Skey’ (Skye).[66] - -He was taken at last on July 18, 1753, in a wood near Lochourn in Morar, -and was tried in Edinburgh on a charge of High Treason, on March 11, -1754. With him was Macdonald of Morar, five or six other Macdonalds, and -Mackinnons, a MacEachan, and others. He disputed the indictment, which -described him as ‘of Barisdale,’ on the score that his grandfather had -only been ‘a moveable tenant of Glengarry’s, without any right in writing -whatsoever.’ This plea was disregarded, and he was condemned to be hanged -on May 22, bearing his sentence ‘with great composure and decency.’ Being -respited, he lay in the Castle till 1762, when he took the oaths, and was -released. - -By a curious freak of fortune, young Barisdale’s son Col, in 1788, ‘held -a Commission to regulate the Fisheries. This, in the height of the -fishing season, was no easy task, and required a firm hand. Not only -were there disputes among the fishermen themselves, but, apparently, -thieves made it a regular trade to attend, and pick up what they -could.... The poor fishermen now suffer from piracy in another form. -If there were officials like Barisdale armed with sufficient powers, -trawling within the limits would soon be extirpated,’ writes Mr. Fraser -Mackintosh.[67] The fishermen have never been fortunate. Before trawling -came in they had to do with the portentous Col of Barisdale. Perhaps, of -the two, they may prefer the trawlers. - -Thus, in a generation, the son of Archibald and grandson of Col, the -former a brigand and thief alike of cattle and herrings, became a -peaceful subject, and protector of the very class of fishermen whom his -grandsire had plundered. We may drop a tear over old romance, but reality -has its alleviating features. There is absolutely no kind of villainy of -which Col of Barisdale was not eminently guilty. Oppression, cruelty, -cowardice, theft, and treachery were all among his qualities, were all -notorious, yet, till after Culloden, Col could laugh at the law, and was -not shunned by society. - -We have seen that Col accuses Sir Alexander Macdonald of Sleat of -corrupting his honour, and advising him to sell himself. This may, or -may not, be true. The sympathies of Sir Alexander had been Jacobite, -before 1745, but Murray of Broughton states that in 1741 he was very -angry when Balhaldie put his name on a list of adherents presented to the -French Court. ‘He declared he had never given him any authority to do -so.’ A statement to the contrary effect will be found in Mr. Mackenzie’s -‘History of the Macdonalds,’ page 234. In 1744, Murray represents him as -ready to rise if French troops were landed. Murray repeats, in justice, -that Sir Alexander’s promises were purely contingent; they depended on -the existence of a ‘well-concerted scheme,’ and there was none. But -Sir Alexander not only did not come out, he was won over by Forbes of -Culloden to the Hanoverian Cause. ‘I should be sorry,’ says Murray, -‘to have so bad an opinion of mankind as to think any of them cappable -of attempting an apologie for him.’ Murray, in his examination, lied -in Sir Alexander’s interests, saying ‘he always absolutely refused to -have anything to do with the Pretender.’ But, after Preston Pans, Sir -Alexander, moved by that victory, said, in the hearing of Malcolm Macleod -of Raasay, that he would now raise 900 of his clan and march south -to fight for King James. Next morning, however, he received a letter -from Forbes of Culloden, and instantly ‘was quite upon the grave and -thoughtful, and dropt the declared resolution of his own mind.’[68] In -fact, he turned Hanoverian. - -Later, in the crisis of the Prince’s wanderings, Sir Alexander was not -at home when his wife, Lady Margaret, connived with Flora Macdonald -to secure Charles’s escape from Skye. Lady Margaret wrote to Forbes -of Culloden that Flora was ‘a foolish girl,’ and thanked God that -_she_ knew nothing of the Prince’s being in hiding near her house. Sir -Alexander, on the other hand, confessed to Forbes that Flora put his -wife ‘in the utmost distress by telling her of the cargo she had brought -from Uist.’[69] It was fortunate for everybody, himself included, that -Sir Alexander was away from home. He wrote the following letter to -Cumberland, confessing nothing:— - - _From Sir Alexander McDonald to H.R.H. giving - intelligence of Pretender’s movements_ - - ‘Sconsar, Isle of Sky, 1746. - - ‘Sir,—This morning Capt. Hodgson remitted to your R. Highness - all the intelligence I had then got; in rideing a few miles I - was informed of the Pretender’s whole progress since he landed - in this island. By the letter remitted to your R.H. he was left - at Portree, 14 miles from my house near which he landed; at - Portree he met one Donald McDonald, who was in the Rebellion, - and who put him into a boat belonging to the Isle of Rasay, - which feryd him into that island; after staying there 2 nights - he returned in the same small boat to the neighbourhood of - Portree, attended by one Malcolm McLeod. That night he and his - companion lay in a byre; next day (the Pretender in shabby - man’s apparel since he left Portree) they found their way - into a part of MacKinnon’s estate, and having found MacKinnon, - though disguised and lurking himself, he found a boat which - next day convey’d the Pretender, MacKinnon, and one John - MacKinnon, into Moror. They sail’d from this island on Saturday - last. MacKinnon was taken in Moror by a party from Sky, and - John McK. was this day seized ... they are both on board the - Furnace and confirm to a trifle the above relation. - - ‘ALEX. MACDONALD.’[70] - -The Baronet tells as little as may be; he does not implicate Flora, and, -of course, shields his wife. His own position was awkward. - -Sir Alexander died in November 1746, when about to visit Cumberland in -England. It is to his credit that he did his best to protect the loyal -Kingsburgh. But his vacillations were extreme, and if he really helped to -corrupt Barisdale, his behaviour is without excuse. ‘Were I to enumerate -the villains and villainies this country abounds in I should never have -done,’ wrote Cumberland to the Duke of Newcastle. ‘Some allowance must be -made for Sir Alexander’s behaviour in the Forty Five,’ says Mr. Fraser -Mackintosh. It was not precisely handsome. The epigram on his death, -which has variants, ran thus: - - If Heaven be glad when sinners cease to sin, - If Hell be glad when traitors enter in, - If Earth be glad when ridded of a knave, - Then all rejoice! Macdonald’s in his grave. - - - - -VI - -CLUNY’S TREASURE - - -The bayonets of Cumberland scarcely dealt a deadlier blow at Jacobitism -than the spades which, in gentle and unaccustomed hands, buried the -treasure of French gold at Loch Arkaig. About this fatal hoard, which set -clan against clan, and, literally, brother against brother, something -has been elsewhere said. But the unpublished reports given by spies and -informers in the Cumberland Papers and the Record Office throw a great -deal of unexpected light on the subject. - -Our purpose is, first to offer what may be called official statements as -to the original amount and hiding places of the treasure. Next we shall -examine the stories as to the disposition and diffusion of the money. -These will indicate that the charges of ‘embezzlement’ and ‘villainy’ -brought by Young Glengarry against men so noted for their loyalty as -Dr. Cameron and Cluny Macpherson are false. In our evidence will occur -the testimony of informers, whose names, as they were persons of no -historical importance, it seems needless to reveal. But their revelations -were employed by Government in securing the condemnation and banishment -of Lochiel’s brother, Cameron of Fassifern. - -On the whole subject of the hoard we have several statements by Murray of -Broughton. The least copious is contained in a tract which professes to -be written by a friend of Murray; really it is from his own pen.[71] - -Murray, who had been in very bad health since the Prince was in Elgin -before Culloden, found himself skulking with Lochiel in a wood near Loch -Arkaig. He heard at the same moment of Charles’s flight to the isles, -which he condemned, and of the arrival of French ships with money. Most -of the party resolved to scatter, but Lochiel declared ‘that to desert -his Clan was inconsistent with his honour and their interest,’ and, by -his desire, Murray remained with him, ‘unable to refuse the desire of -a person for whom he had such a regard, and with whom he had lived so -many years in the strictest intimacy.’ Major Kennedy, too, though, like -other officers in French service, he might have surrendered safely, most -generously clave to Lochiel. In later years Kennedy recovered for the -Prince a remnant of the French _louis d’or_. - -Murray was next carried to the bay opposite Keppoch, where the French -ships were lying. They had been attacked by British vessels of war, but -had previously landed 35,000 _louis d’or_ in six (seven?) casks. One -cask, however, was already missing. The five casks were conveyed to -Murray, and of the stolen cask all but one bag of gold was recovered. -Next day the Duke of Perth, who was dying, with his brother, Lord John -Drummond, Elcho, old Sir Thomas Sheridan, the Prince’s tutor, the younger -Lockhart of Carnwath, and others sailed for France in the ships. Murray -paid Clanranald, Barisdale, and others their arrears, with allowances -for widows and wounded men, out of the French gold. He then sent off the -remainder of the hoard under Archy Cameron’s care, and returned to Loch -Arkaig. Fifteen thousand louis were buried ‘in three several parcels in -the wood,’ and the empty casks were filled with stones, and carried about -with Murray, ‘so as to give no Jelousy to the other Clans of his having -more confidence in the Camerons’ than in them. Near the foot of Loch -Arkaig, Murray caused Dr. Cameron to bury 12,000 louis, reserving about -5,000 for expenses. - -Murray travelled south and was captured in Tweeddale. On August 27, -1746, when in the Tower, he wrote to an English official, ‘last time -I had the honour to see you, I offered to lay my hand upon the 15,000 -_louis d’or_, and am still certain I can do so, but as the season is now -advancing, and the parties will probably soon be called in, it is not in -that event impossible but the money may be raised.’ (It was ‘raised’ by -Dr. Cameron.) In his Examination (August 13, 1746) Murray had already -betrayed the secret of the casks of gold. But the English could never -discover the treasure. - -Elsewhere, in a paper of accounts, Murray tells, in defence of his -pecuniary honesty, all about the disposition of the _louis d’or_. - -He accounts for various sums, including 40_l._ to Lochiel, who, like -the gallant gentleman he was, had given every penny in his possession -‘to his own people about.’ Mr. Murray ‘chided him for being too easy to -give money to whoever asked it.’ A sum of 3,868_l._ was buried in the -garden of Mrs. Menzies of Culdairs. This, we presume, was the bulk of the -5,000 louis reserved. Murray corroborates (as in his tract) an anonymous -informant’s story, presently to be given, about the stealing of a cask -of money, and restitution made after confession to Father Harrison. The -penitent however, an Irishman, kept 700_l._, as stated in the anonymous -information. Murray reckons at 15,000_l._ a sum buried near Loch Arkaig, -by Dr. Archibald Cameron, Young Macleod of Neuck, Sir Stewart Threipland, -and Major Kennedy. There were fifteen bags containing 1,000_l._ each; -one parcel was put under a rock, in a burn, and two in holes, near at -hand, dug by the four gentlemen. Another sum of 12,000_l._, in two -parcels, was carried by Dr. Cameron and Mr. Macleod, from Lochiel’s -house of Achnacarry, and buried near the _lower_ end of Loch Arkaig. -Lochiel received 1,520_l._ for the Prince’s immediate needs, and the rest -is scrupulously accounted for the unhappy Secretary. His stories are -consistent throughout.[72] - -Another description of the arrival and burial of the gold has never been -published. It is from the Cumberland Papers, and must have been written -about 1749-1750. This is proved by the writer’s mention of Barisdale -as still alive, and in prison. Now young Barisdale (Archibald) is not -meant, for he was not taken till 1753.[73] His father, Coll Macdonnell -of Barisdale, on the other hand, was taken in March 1749, and died in -Edinburgh Castle on June 1, 1750.[74] - -We now offer this anonymous intelligence of 1749-1750, as to the arrival, -burial, and later fortunes of the French gold. - - ‘_Intelligence sent to Col. Napier from Scotland about Seven - Casks of Money for the Rebels_ - - Cumberland Papers. Memoir for Col. Napier. - - ‘Soon after the Battle of Culloden a french privateer anchored - in Loch Nonha in Arisaig, where Doctor Cameron, Brother to - Lochiel, Cameron of Dungallen, prisoner in Edr. Castle, and - many other Rebels were then sculking. One of his Majesties’ - 20 gun Ships and 2 Sloops were cruising on the West Coast, - immediately got intelligence of the privateers, and came up - and attacked them, but before the action began they had landed - 7 Casks of money and committed it to the Charge of Doctor - Cameron, who was upon the shore wth. a great many others of the - Camerons and Mc.Donalds, who flocked from all Corners to see - the engadgement, and among others Mc.Donald of Barrisdale, now - prisoner, was also present and Alexd. Mc.Lachlan in Lidderdale - and Aide-de-Camp to The Pretender. - - ‘When the action was over, The Commander of the Privateers, - having heard of the Battle of Culloden, insisted to have - the money put on board again. _But the Rebells beg’d to be - excused_, and Doctor Cameron conveyed away six of the Casks - to Loch Morrer, 3 miles from Loch Nonha: (The 7th Cask - being stole) and there he got a boat and went wth. it to - the head of ye Loch and from thence got in to Loch arkick; - And having dismissed all the Country people, He wth. Major - Kennedy, a french Officer, and Alexd. McLeod son to Mr. John - McLeod advocate, took the money out of the Casks, and put it - underground in the head of Locharkick, in the midle of a Wood. - - ‘There was £6 or 7,000 st. in each Cask, All put up in separate - Bags, £1,000 in Each bag. They afterwards carried away the - empty Casks themselves (none being present but the 3 persons - above named) and when at a considerable distance from the place - where the Money was hid, They caused the Country people put - them under ground in a different place in order to deceive. - - ‘After this was over, All persons were employed to enquire - after the Cask that was stole during the engadgement. And by - the Assistance and authority of a priest (Father Harrison) - who is great in that country (all Roman Catholics) the money - was recovered except £700, and That is still amissing, ... It - is not well known what became of this broken Cask afterwards - But Dr. Cameron had the Manadgement of it and all the rest, - and it is imagined That The money divided at the meeting with - Lovat, at the head of Loch arkick, was part of it, and £3,000 - was given to one Donald Cameron at Strontian to Conceal, wch - he again delivered to The Doctor, but got not one shilling - for himself. [Is this the money hidden at Culdares?] Severals - of the Country people got each a Louis d’or and some of their - gentlemen got each 2 or 3 and that was all the Distribution - made among the Camerons. - - ‘His Majestie’s troops afterwards search’d the woods of - Locharkick for this money, and were often round the place - where it was, and missed very narrowly finding it, for being - hid by Gentlemen, not used to work, it was very unskilfully - done, and the stamps and impression of their feet visible - about the place. But as soon as Dr. Cameron found a proper - opportunity, He went and took up the money and hid it in two - different places of the wood. In one of them he put 12,000_l._, - wch he shewed to his own son, and another man, That in case - he was taken, it might not be lost altogether, and the other - part he put in a place which he shewed to nobody. And thus it - remained till a Ship arriv’d in Loch Nonha to carry off the - Pretender &c. When the above Ship arriv’d He (the Pretender) - was sckulking in one of the Glens of Brad Badenoch where he - had been for some time conceal’d in a place under ground, with - Lochiel, Cluny Mcpherson, and some other person. Upon receiving - Intelligence of the arrival of this Ship, It seems it was - concerted That Cluny should remain in Scotland and have the - Charge of the money. And having come all together from Badenoch - to Locharkick, they got Dr. Cameron, who went and shew’d Cluny - the 2 different places where the money was: Left him in that - Country, and the rest went and embarked with the Pretender in - Loch Nonha. Whether there was any of the bags then taken up (as - is probable) carried with them, or how many, is what I am not - informed of. - - ‘But Certain it is that Cluny immediately after Carried the - £12,000 to Badenoch And there were in Company wth. him Angus - Cameron (of Downan) a Rannoch Man, brother to Gleneavis, - McPherson of Breachy (Breakachy), a brother in Law of his own, - and his piper. - - ‘The other part of the money, was shew’d to no Living but - himself, and he either did not find an opportunity, or did not - think convenient to come for it, untill a month afterwards, - when he came and carried it also away, but I am not justly - Informed who were wth. him, nor how much was of it, tho’ It is - generally believed That he got betwixt £20 and £30,000 in all. - - ‘It is said by Cluny’s Friends that the Pretender, after - embarking, sent a note to Cluny with particular instructions - how he was to manadge the money and to whom he was to give - any part of it,[75] and _they say that he has conformed in - the most exact manner to his Instructions_, but The other - Rebells in the highlands grumble egregiously That he has not - done them justice. I have only heard That he gave £100 to Lady - Keppoch[76] and have reason to think That if he made any other - distributions it was to some other of the principall Gentlemen - of The Different Clans, to be given away among their people, - and that those have thought fit to retain all to themselves. - - ‘I know it is strongly suspected that Cameron of Gleneavis, - whose Brother (Angus) was wth Cluny at Carrying away the - £12,000, has received a Large proportion by some means or - other, and there is great reason to think so, as he was almost - bankrupt before the rebellion and is now shewing away in a very - different manner, particularly This year about a month ago, - there were 120 Louis d’ors sent from him to a man in Locharkeek - to buy Cattle for him; and some of the Camerons having lately - threatened to be resented of him for his behaviour about yt - money, he met with them, and parted good friends, which is - supposed to have been done by giving them considerably. - - ‘Barrisdale tells that Cole or Major Kennedy was to embark much - about the same time yt he came from France, was to land on the - West Coast in order to meet with Cluny, and carry away the - money, but I have not yet learned any thing wth regard to him, - And am apt to believe That he has rather landed on the Eastern - Coast and my reasons for this Conjecture are: That one Samuel - Cameron (Brother to The above men’d Cameron of Gleneavis) Major - in the Regt. which was Lochiel’s in the French Service, was at - Edr. and came in a Chaise with the famous Mrs. Jean Cameron - to Stirling, where they parted, and she came to her house in - Morvern about the middle of March, and he took some different - route: It is supposed That he came over on a message wth. - regard to that money, and I the rather believe it as his two - brothers seem to have been concerned in it, and I am apt to - think that Kennedy and he have come together, but this is only - my own conjecture. Another reason which induces me to believe - That he would Chuse to land on the E. coast is That Cluny would - not probably Like to march with that money or trust himself - among the highlanders, who would probably not let it pass - without partaking liberally. - - ‘It has been said That the French Officer Cameron came to Mrs. - Jean Cameron’s, but I am certain he has not come, else I would - have got Intelligence of him, for I have had a sharp look - out for him and all others of that Kind. And I think he would - not probably venture so near the Command and specially after - hearing of Barrisdale’s fate’ (taken in March 1749). - - ‘It is said That his Two Brothers and Cluny have differed - about the money, and therefore Cluny would not see this French - Officer nor trust him wth anything and some say He is gone back - again, but how far This is true I can’t positively determine. - - ‘The above is all that I have been able to learn wth regard to - that money from first to last, and I am much convinced that the - Substance of it is true.’ - - [Unsigned.] - -Even before the probable date of this intelligence, Government knew that -Cluny’s fidelity to his trust had embittered his relations with the -Camerons of Glenevis and Glengarry’s people. There is a curious anonymous -note of January 26, 1748,[77] written by a man who could spell, and was -something of a scholar. ‘_Scyphax_,’ he says, ‘is still in the country -and there are disturbances between him and the _Dorians_ and _Ætolians_ -over the goods left by the _Young Mogul_.’ Scyphax is Cluny, the Dorians -are the Camerons, the Ætolians are the Glengarrys; the Young Mogul is -Prince Charles: ‘Nothing but stealing and plundering prevails in all -quarters here.’ The writer may have been a Presbyterian minister. - -The author of the long letter of intelligence is unknown, but he can -hardly have been an English officer, like Ensign Small, who did much -secret service in the Highlands. _His_ name is always signed to his -Reports, as when he tried to catch Lochgarry on shipboard, in 1753. -The information, however obtained, is accurate, and, so far, entirely -exculpates Cluny from the various unpleasant accusations brought by his -enemies.[78] Major Kennedy really went from France to Newcastle, and -received 6,000_l._ for Charles, a sum conveyed to him, at what peril we -may imagine, by Macpherson of Breakachy.[79] - -We now consider the various accounts given of embezzlement by Dr. Cameron -and Cluny. It is certain that, in November or December, 1749, Young -Glengarry, Lochgarry, and Dr. Cameron were in Cluny’s country, that -they handled the treasure, that they quarrelled, and that they carried -their dispute before the exiled James in Rome. Dr. Cameron accused -Young Glengarry of obtaining the money by a forged order from James; -while Glengarry charged Cluny and the Doctor with ‘embezzlement’ and -‘villainy.’ Cameron, he said, declared that the Royal Family had given -up all hopes of a restoration, and told the Highlanders that they must -now shift for themselves. He also took 6,000 louis d’or of the Prince’s -money, ‘and I am credibly informed,’ says Glengarry, ‘that he designs to -lay this money in the hands of a merchant in Dunkirk, and enter partners -with him.’[80] Again, in an undated letter to Charles, of about March -1751, Glengarry denounces the embezzlement and ‘villainy’ of Cluny and -Dr. Cameron.[81] He acknowledges having taken ‘a trifle’ himself. Another -account, clearly from a Macdonnell source, occurs in old Gask’s hand, -among his papers.[82] Dr. Cameron is here, as by Glengarry, credited -with absorbing 6,000_l._, while Cameron of Glenevis is said to have -‘intercepted’ 3,000_l._, and Cluny, ‘for his estate’ gets 10,000_l._ This -reads like a variant of Young Glengarry’s tale told to Bishop Forbes in -April 1752. According to that version, Cluny and Lochiel took security -from Charles for the full value of their estates before they joined the -Royal Standard. This full value is the 10,000_l._ which Cluny is said to -have ‘embezzled.’ - -[Illustration: _Walker & Boutall, ph. sc._ - -_Prince Charles_ - -_circ. 1747._] - -Now the only independent evidence against Dr. Cameron is contained in -a letter of his uncle, Cameron of Torcastle, to Prince Charles.[83] -In this Torcastle denies that he himself touched the money, and avers -that he knew nothing of it, till Dr. Cameron ‘told it himself at Rome, -where I happened to be at the time’ (1750). This letter is singularly -inconsistent with another unpublished letter from Douay, of August -28, 1751. The epistle was intended for Cameron of Glenevis, but was -intercepted by Colonel Crawfurd, Governor of Fort William. The Colonel -attributed its authorship to Cameron of Torcastle, and if the attribution -be correct, the letter contradicts Torcastle’s accusations of his -nephew, Dr. Cameron. Whoever the author of the Douay letter may be, he -speaks of ‘the industrious malicious designs and scandalous untruths, -publicly handed about against Lochiel’s family by Gl⸺ry.’ ‘Chalmers (Dr. -Cameron) knows very well that when truth comes out, these people will -fall with scandal into the trap they have contrived for others.... All -that Chalmers (Dr. Cameron) saw or had access to _was his expenses_.’ The -writer then speaks of the ‘unprecedented method Gl⸺ry &c. took to get att -their sinister ends,’ and about Gl⸺ry’s misrepresentations of Chalmers -to Mr. Young,’ the Prince. Singular irritation against Lochgarry is also -expressed.[84] - -On this showing Dr. Cameron got no 6,000_l._, but only his expenses. Now, -that Dr. Cameron should receive his expenses was perfectly legitimate. -But, if he took 6,000_l._, as Young Glengarry declares, his character -is lost. In 1750, 6,000_l._ was a fortune. Dr. Carlyle, writing of -that time, speaks about a minister who married a lady with a tocher of -4,000_l._, which then was equivalent to an estate. When executed in -June 1753, Dr. Cameron left his family destitute. Consequently he cannot -have helped himself to 6,000_l._, and put it into commerce, as Glengarry -alleged. That he did nothing of the sort, we have the very curious -evidence of an Informer in 1753. This man, declaring that he is afraid of -being informed against by Young Glengarry, informs against him. He says, -in his information: - -‘In Sep. 1749 Dr. Cameron told him (the Informer) he had come over to get -some money on behalf of Lochiel’s Family; That Fassfarn got from Clunie -£6,000, took it to Edinburgh the following winter, and put it in the -hands of John Mc.Farlane, W.S.[85] Dr. Cameron at the same time got £350: -and Fassfarn £400 more to be employed in making good certain claims on -the estate of Lochiel. - -‘Says he saw Dr. Cameron a day or two after, who denied either he or -Fassfarn had got any money, alledging that Cluny would not give it -without orders from the Old Pretender: That the Doctor was off to Rome -(1750) to get these, with only £100 for expenses. That the following -winter he (the Informer) met Young Glengarry, who disproved this by -giving him a copy of the Accounts in Clunie’s writing of all the money.’ - -Here follows Young Glengarry’s _alleged_ copy of Cluny’s accounts:— - -‘_A State of Clunie McPherson’s Intromissions_ - - £ s. d. - - ‘By Cash given Dr. Cameron and Fassfern, _secured - with Fassfern for use of young Lochiel_ 6,000 0 0 - ” sent to Lochiel by Angus Cameron and - Donald Drummond, brother to Bohaldie 1,000 0 0 - ” given the Dr. when last in Scotland to carry - his Charges to and from Rome 350 0 0 - ” at 2 different times by Angus Cameron to - the Clan Cameron and others needy 800 0 0 - ” charged by Clunie for his Estate 5,000 0 0 - ” ” ” for his Commission 1,000 0 0 - ” ” ” for 30 Men from September - 1746-Sep. 1749. 1,627 10 0 - ” charged by Clunie as his pay, at half a-guinea - per diem during said time 542 10 0 - ” charged by Clunie as Maintenance of his Family 1,400 0 0 - ” charged by Clunie for Brechachow (Breakachie) 800 0 0 - ” given to young Glengarry Nov. 1749 300 0 0 - ” given by Clunie to his Clan 500 0 0 - ” ” Fassfern to pay Publick Burdens - on Lochiel’s Estates, viz. Cess - and Teinds due by the Tenants 200 0 0 - ” given Fassfern to defray the Expences in - carrying on the Claims on Lochiel’s Estate 100 0 0 - ” Alleged by Clunie to be in Angus Cameron’s hands 500 0 0 - ” in Clunie’s hands 4,880 0 0 - ------------ - £25,000 0 0 - ============ - - ‘N.B.—Young Glengary got £1,900 at Edinburgh from Mr. Mc.Dougald - at the sight of Mr. John Mc.Cleod of Nuck, Advocate, of which - Glencarney got £80 and Glencoe £50. But this money had no - connection with Clunie’s Intromissions, having been carried - to the South by Mr. John Murray.’[86] [Part of the 5,000 louis - kept by Murray?] - -According to this statement, said to be produced as Cluny’s, Dr. Cameron -did _not_ receive 6,000_l._ for himself. The money went to the support of -the exiled family of Lochiel, who had died in 1748. The large claims made -by Cluny rest, as before, on the word of Young Glengarry. - -In May 1753, Fassifern himself, then a prisoner in Edinburgh Castle, -was examined. He declined to give any evidence against anybody on any -charge. He admitted that in 1749 he received 4,000_l._ from Evan Cameron -of Drumsallie, now dead, for Lochiel’s family. He asked no questions, but -deposited it with Mr. Macfarlane, W.S., who lent it out to Wedderburn of -Gosford, in Fassifern’s name. Fassifern acted as a near relation for his -exiled nephew, Lochiel’s son. - -Thus the money which Dr. Cameron is said to have seized, was used for -the support of Charles’s best friends, the family of his most renowned -adherent. So vanishes the charge that Dr. Cameron speculated with the -money.[87] - -As to Cluny’s retention of money, the same difficulty occurs as in the -case of Dr. Cameron. He arrived in France a destitute exile, when, by -Charles’s command, he ceased to skulk in the caves of Ben Alder, and -crossed to join the Prince in 1754. There is no trace of the value of an -estate in his possession, though Charles, in ordinary gratitude, owed -him much more than he is said to have claimed. Thus it is certain that -Archibald Cameron did not help himself to the Prince’s money; while the -story about Cluny is inconsistent both with his honourable poverty and -with figures, for these accounts make no allowance for 6,000 louis, -certainly conveyed to Charles by Major Kennedy. The whole scandal rests -merely on the word of Young Glengarry.[88] - - - - -VII - -THE TROUBLES OF THE CAMERONS - - -This affair of the treasure caused endless calamities, especially -involving Cameron of Glenevis, a place within two or three miles of -Fort William. The relationship of this family to the head of the clan, -Lochiel, stands thus: Archibald Cameron of Dungallon, who died in 1719, -was the husband of Isabel Cameron of Lochiel. By her he left two sons and -three daughters, of whom Jean married Dr. Archibald Cameron of Lochiel, -the last Jacobite martyr; while Mary married Alexander Cameron of Glen -Nevis.[89] Glenevis, or Glen Nevis, was not out in the Rising of 1745, -but he was imprisoned in 1746, and released in 1747.[90] - -The house of the Camerons of Glenevis, according to Mr. Mackenzie’s -‘History of the Camerons,’ was of very ancient standing. It was -‘generally at feud with Lochiel, and this feeling of antagonism came down -even to modern times. Indeed, it has been maintained that the Glenevis -family were _originally not Camerons at all, but Macdonalds_, who -settled there under the Macdonalds of the Isles, before the Camerons had -any hold on the district.’ They are also spoken of as Macsorlies. However -this genealogical point may be settled, there was no love lost between -Glenevis and Young Glengarry. - -The Glenevis family, though not overtly engaged for the Cause, suffered -from the brutalities of the victors. In spite of Glenevis’s abstinence -from the Rising, his family was persecuted. Mrs. Archibald Cameron -communicated to Bishop Forbes a lamentable story of how her sister, -Glenevis’s wife, was stripped by Cumberland’s men, under Caroline Scott, -and only permitted to keep a single petticoat. Her little son’s gold -buttons and gold lace were cut off his coat, and the child was wounded -by the knife.[91] This story, which has contemporary evidence from the -lips of Lady Glenevis’s sister, Mrs. Archibald Cameron, has received the -usual picturesque embroidery of Highland tradition. Dr. Stewart (‘Nether -Lochaber’) got the tale from some ladies named Macdonald, in this -fashion: the infuriated soldiery, finding none of the plate and jewels -which Lady Glenevis had buried, observed a bulky object under her plaid. -Slashing with swords at the plaid, to discover the supposed treasure, -they wounded the lady’s baby, a child of a few months old. Mrs. Cameron’s -less romantic version, if either, is correct.[92] The brothers of -Glenevis were Allan, who fell at Culloden—_felix opportunitate mortis_; -Angus of Dunan or Downan, in Rannoch; and that unhappy Samuel, called -Crookshanks, whom Dr. Cameron, before his execution, denounced as ‘the -basest of spies.’ He was in French service, but was drummed out, after -Dr. Cameron’s death. - -In October 1751, Colonel Crawfurd, commanding at Fort William, received -from head-quarters information about Glenevis’s and Angus’s share in -the treasure. Fassifern, Lochiel’s brother and representative, was also -denounced. The Colonel took to the duties of policeman with a will, and -the following letter from him describes his arrest of the accused:— - - _From Lieut.-Col. Crawfurd to Churchill_ - - Cumberland Papers. - - Fort William: Oct. 12, 1751. - - ... ‘When I received the Packet from the Express, I without - hesitation affected a surprise and concern at receiving the - news of our Cloaths being stranded, and pretended to consult - him about the nearest way through the Hills to Aberdeen, near - which Place I saw the misfortune had happened; this answerd - extremely well in blinding our good Neighbours in the Town of - Maryburgh,[93] who are for the greatest part ready enough to - give Intelligence to the Country, of any Movements made by the - Garrison. I then employed Captn. Jones to execute the warrant - upon Fassifarn, and that he might be at no loss in not knowing - the Man or the Country, I sent Mr. Gardiner along with him, - whose zeal and readiness to assist you are no strangers to. - They pretended to go in the German Boat on a fishing scheme, - and turning up Lochiel, they soon got to his house, and secured - him and every Thing of Paper Kind, bringing all to the Garrison. - - ‘As soon as they were set out for Fassifarn I pretended to take - a walk out of the Garrison, to see if I coud make a purchase - of Hay for my Horses, and taking Mr. Douglas, the Sheriff - substitute, out with me,[94] by way of shewing me the Road and - Country, I allowed only two more officers to accompany me, that - we might give no suspicion of our Intentions, which would have - been soon discovered had I allowed more or sent a Party. - - ‘However, notwithstanding these precautions, we were told - at going to the House, that Glen Nevis was walk’d out with - his Brother in Law, Dungallon, and still persisting that - we shoud be glad to see Glen Nevis, to talk with him about - his Hay, I prevailed on his wife to send a messenger for - him into the Fields, which having done I took care, that - no other Intelligence should go from the House, and then - proceeded to search for his Papers: but I soon perceived that - a Consciousness of Guilt, had made him secrete almost every - Paper, and the hearing that Dungallon[95] had come to his - House in the Middle of the preceeding Night, confirmed me - in my suspicions that we should see no more of Glen Eves or - Dungallon. I then ordered the Parties who were in readiness to - go round the Hill, and come down upon the Head of the Glen, - making a strict search, but it was to no purpose. You’ll please - to observe that Dungallon, by way of blinding Douglas, had - wrote him on the Wednesday, that it woud be some Days before he - coud be in this part of the Country, and yet that very night, - near the middle of it, did he come to Glen Eves’ house, and for - what Intention may be easily guessed. - - ‘It is however some satisfaction that notwithstanding the pains - they have been at, to conceal their treasonable practices, - yet by their remissness I have found some Old Letters among - Cloaths, which will greatly help to put their transactions - in a proper light, and part of wch I have now enclosed for - your perusal. [The letters enclosed are not in the Cumberland - Papers.] The Letter I have marked No. 1. is a Letter from Glen - Evis to his brother Angus Cameron, in the beginning of which - you’ll see that Fassifarn and he are not in concert, and that - Fassifarn complains of them both, as I imagine for having got - too great a share of the money, and Glen Eves’ hint to Angus - is, not to look upon Fassifarn as his friend. - - ‘In No. 2. You see Angus in his proper Colours appointing the - Congress with Cluny (in December 1749); and it would not be - amiss that the Name of the Place, Catlaick, should be well - observed on that worthy Gentleman’s Account. You see that - Loch Gary was in the Country, and on what accounts; likewise - the errand of young Glengary. Whether the “Crookshanks” there - aludes to Cluny as a Cant word for his having a wry Neck, or to - a Brother of Glen Evis [Samuel, the spy] who is an officer in - the French Service, and has crooked legs, I am not certain, but - I believe it is to the Latter. - - ‘You will likewise observe by this letter that a correction is - to be made in the key of your Intercepted Letter, that Angus is - Brother to Glen Eves and not to Fassifarn. I daresay you are no - stranger to the part that Angus has Acted from the beginning in - relation to the great Money Affair, and that no one excepting - Cluny knows more of it. I am fully persuaded that Mrs. Chalmers - (Mrs. Archibald Cameron) is charged with orders upon his Bank - stock, however unwilling he may be to part with it⸺’ - -On October 14, Glenevis tired of hiding, and surrendered himself to -Crawfurd. No harm was found in Fassifern’s papers, which had been seized, -and he, with Angus MacIan, a brother (or half-brother) of Lochgarry, was -admitted to bail. - -On October 22, Colonel Crawfurd wrote an account of Glenevis’s -examination to Churchill, who forwarded it to the Duke of Newcastle. Now -we must ask how Government, which in 1749-50 knew only the anonymous -account of the treasure already quoted, was, in 1751, informed that -Lochgarry, Young Glengarry, Cameron of Glenevis, and his brother Angus, -had meddled with the spoil in December 1749? Readers of ‘Pickle the Spy’ -will remember that Pickle (that is, _ex hypothesi_, Young Glengarry) -dates his services as a paid informer from 1750-51. Young Glengarry, -then, may have been himself the source of the intelligence about the -plunder, and that, as we shall see, was the strong opinion of Glenevis. - -In any case this is the earliest hint of suspicion against the honour -of Young Glengarry which we have encountered. The eternal feud of -Macdonnells and Camerons may have suggested the notion of Glengarry’s -treachery to the mind of Glenevis; Cluny being out of the question, and -he not knowing any one out of prison, except Young Glengarry, who had the -necessary information. Glenevis’s brother, Angus, and Angus MacIan were -in prison with himself, and Lochgarry was with his regiment in France. - -Crawfurd says of Glenevis, and his suspicions: - -‘He seems to think that all the Intelligence procured against him has -been by means of Young Glengary: this you may believe I am at no great -pains to desuade him from, as the greater Enmity gives the better chance -of your coming at truth. He does not deny but that his brother, (Angus) -Lochgary, Young Glengary, Angus Mc.Ian and he went into Badenoch in the -winter 1749, after the Troops were gone from thence, with a view of -meeting Clunie, but that while Lochgary, and young Glengary had their -Interview at a sheiling opposite to Dalwhinnie, he was desired by Clunie -to keep at the House of Dalwhinnie till sent for; and that neither Angus -nor he coud be allowd to speak with him, tho he sent repeated messages -by Clunie’s Piper, and a young Brother of Clunie’s. That he lay in the -same Room with Young Glengary at Dalwhinnie, and early in the morning, -the young Brother of Clunie brought Glengary a Bag which might contain -two or three Hundred guineas, and counted them out to him, and that he -understood Glengary got, in the whole, by that expedition about Two -Thousand;[96] he farther says that the money remitted abroad by Cluny -was carried away by his Brother in Law Mc.Pherson of Brechachie to Major -Kennedy in the North of England....’ (So Gask also says.) - -On October 31, Crawfurd again writes to Churchill. He had recommended on -October 21, that Angus Cameron ‘should be allowed the quiet enjoyment -of his treasure.’ He now remarks that Glenevis has been admitted to -bail. ‘He says, in the Scotch phrase, that _it is hard, to have both the -skaith and the scorn_’—that is, to be molested, though he has not got -much of the French gold. ‘He blames his brother Angus for having acted -a weak and foolish part in quitting (parting) with so great a share of -the money that had fallen into his hands, which, he says, did not exceed -£2,500, tho’ most people call it £3,000, and of which he knew his brother -had paid £1,000 for the use of Lochiel soon after his going to France’ -(1746). Next we find a repetition of Glenevis’s charges against Young -Glengarry, as his betrayer. The accusation, too, that Young Glengarry -forged King James’s name (alluded to by James in a letter to the Prince, -March 17, 1750, as a story reported by Archy Cameron) is urged by -Glenevis. - -‘He (Glenevis) still continues full of resentment against Young Glengary, -believing that he is the Author of all the information against him and -his Brother Angus, not being able to account for our knowledge of the -Badenoch meeting in any other way. He confirms what I wrote of the young -Gentleman in my last, only that the £2,000 was not of Clunie’s money, but -of what was left by the Secretary Murray in the hands of Mr. Mc.Douel -his brother in Law, and that his credentials for receiving the money was -from the old Pretender, _but that he was sure they were forged_.’ They -certainly _were_ forged. - -One thing is to be observed about Glenevis’s doubts of Young Glengarry. -In this year, 1751, and onwards, that hero was allowed by Government to -live in London, in Beaufort Buildings, Strand, whence he communicated -with Charles and James, as a strenuous Jacobite agent. His letters are -printed by Browne from the Stuart MSS. Yet Government, if only from -Glenevis’s evidence just given, knew that Glengarry was at least as -guilty as Glenevis and his brother of the only crime charged against them -on this occasion—namely, dealing with French gold that had been landed -for the use of Prince Charles. Where the treason to King George came in, -unless they were using the money for Jacobite purposes, or depriving his -Majesty of spoils of war, or of treasure trove, does not appear. Yet -the Camerons, Glenevis, Dunan, Fassifern, were all kept in durance at -Port William, while Young Glengarry, implicated in their vague offence, -was permitted to live, and even to make love, in London. To this point -we return later (p. 207). Government had their own reasons for sparing -Glengarry, while punishing his accomplices. These accomplices, again, -averred that Glengarry had ‘peached’ upon them, as doubtless he had. The -Camerons were released, but before very long, they and Fassifern were -all imprisoned again in Edinburgh Castle, on a charge of treasonable -dealings with the attainted. This was part of a plan of Government’s for -‘uprooting’ Fassifern, who represented the exiled Young Lochiel in the -eyes of the Clan. The action of Government makes another chapter in the -history of the sufferings after Culloden. Meanwhile the casks of louis -d’or had done their task, and sown among the Clans the dragon’s teeth -of distrust and of calumny. We cannot tell where the remainder of the -gold went, though Cluny probably took what was left over to France, in -1754, as Charles commanded him to do, getting no more for his trouble, -perhaps, than did poor Duncan Cameron in Strontian—‘not a shilling.’ As -for Glenevis and his brother, they seem to have finally been fobbed off -with the skaith and the scorn, and with very little else but the company -of Colonel Crawfurd, so anxious to talk about their hay crop. - -Such is an example of Highland life after Culloden. There are midnight -meetings at lonely sheilings, there is digging and delving by hands that -knew the claymore better than the spade. Letters are opened in the post -office, secret murmurs fly about carrying charges of indefinite guilt, -reported by unknown spies. No man can put confidence in another: each -neighbour _may_ have been bullied or bribed into babbling, and, when -the laird sees the English colonel saunter along the avenue, Highland -hospitality struggles in his heart with a natural inclination to drop -out of a back window, and steal up the glen into the hills. A gentleman -is apt to be less often on his estates than in Fort William prison or in -Edinburgh Castle. No wonder that many joined the new Highland regiments -when they were raised, and preferred King George’s pay to domiciliary -visits from King George’s colonels! - - - - -VIII - -JUSTICE AFTER CULLODEN - -_The Uprooting of Fassifern_ - - -The years 1752-1754 were full of trouble for Highlanders. The Prince was -intriguing desperately with Scotland, and with Prussia. The Elibank Plot -was matured and betrayed. Dr. Cameron and Lochgarry were stirring up -the Clans. Cluny remained as untakable as Abd-el-Kader. The Government -were alarmed at once by Pickle, by their ambassadors abroad, and by -Count Kaunitz. The Forfeited Estates had been nationalised, ‘for the -improvement of the Highlands,’ factors had been appointed to raise and -collect rents: evictions were threatened; agrarian discontent had been -aroused; Campbell of Glenure had been shot in the wood of Lettermore.[97] -The reports of all these things flew from township to township, from -strath to strath, as fleetly as the fiery cross. The Highlands, in 1752, -were boiling like a caldron. Old tenants were being turned out that men -of a hostile Whiggish clan might occupy their hereditary holdings. -Ensign Small, an officer who knew Gaelic, and was engaged in secret -service, found murmurs of a rising even in the Islands. The Duke of -Newcastle was jotting down alarmed notes, ‘to be at any expense in order -to find out where the Young Pretender is. Lord Anson to have Fregates -upon the Scotch and Irish coast.’[98] - -The consequence of this official flutter was a crowd of arrests and -trials. James Stewart, on a charge of being accessory to Glenure’s -slaying, was, to speak plain words, judicially murdered. He was confined -in Fort William, and denied access to his advisers; the charges and -evidence against him were kept from him till too late, he had a jury of -hostile Campbells at Inveraray, the Duke on the bench, and he was hanged -as accessory to a murder in which the alleged principal was not before -the Court. Political necessities and clan hatred killed James Stewart -(1752). - -In 1753 Dr. Cameron was caught, and hanged in London, denouncing as -informer his kinsman, Samuel Cameron. The famed Sergeant Mohr Cameron -was taken (by treachery, General Stuart hints and tradition proclaims; -both are right), and he ‘died for the law.’ His alleged crime was cattle -theft, but, as a sergeant in French service, he was probably regarded as -a Jacobite agent. The Sergeant was captured in mid-April, 1753: a few -days later Angus Cameron, brother of Glenevis, was taken at the same -place, his house of Dunan or Downan, in Rannoch. On May 6 Fassifern, -Charles Stewart, writer in Banavie, Fassifern’s agent, and Glenevis, -were lodged, with Angus Cameron, in Edinburgh Castle. On July 7 Young -Barisdale, Young Morar, and others, were culled like flowers at Lochourn, -while Young John Macdonnell, ‘Spanish John,’ was also arrested. - -Of all these, the most important prisoner was Fassifern. He had been -taken, as we saw, in October 1751, and released, as nothing could be -found against him in the affair of the Cluny Treasure. He was Lochiel’s -brother and representative, and consequently chief, for the time, of the -Camerons. He had not been out in Forty-five. A man of commerce, a burgess -of Glasgow, he had tried to dissuade Lochiel from exposing himself to the -dangerous charm of the Prince. But he was naturally anxious to save as -much as possible of Lochiel’s estate for the family. There were several -lawful claims on it, which Government was bound to respect and he to -press. Moreover he, with ‘Glenevegh’ (Glenevis), had been denounced -by Pickle as agents between the Southern and Northern Jacobites.[99] -In addition to all this, Fassifern was trying to keep the old Cameron -tenants, Jacobites, in their holdings, and evict tenants who had the bad -taste to be Whigs. - -As early as May 1751 he had been denounced for these offences by Captains -Johnston and Mylne, of the Buffs, in garrison at Inversnaid. ‘He falls -on ways,’ writes an informer whose letter they forward, ‘of turning out -any from their possessions, who he knows to be well affected to His -Majesty.’ He encourages Jacobites to settle near the forts, for the -purpose of a sudden assault.[100] He has ‘plenty of the Pretender’s -money’ to use for these purposes. Clan sentiment, not Jacobitism, may -have influenced Fassifern, and Glenevis, at least, was hardly the man to -play the part of Jacobite agent. - -The original charge against Fassifern in May 1753 was that of -‘correspondence with persons attainted.’ But the game of the Government -was to get rid of him on any pretext. Colonel Crawfurd had come from Fort -William to Edinburgh, and, on June 4, 1753, wrote a long letter to the -Lord Justice Clerk. ‘The uprooting of Fassifern,’ he says, with candour, -‘is what we ought chiefly to have in view.’[101] He has found witnesses, -or rather has heard of them (it seems kinder to omit the names of these -gentlemen), who avow that Fassifern tampered with them to threaten -the late Glenure’s wife, and to murder Glenure. That unlucky man was -factor for Lochiel’s as well as for Ardsheil’s forfeited estate, and was -expected to evict Cameron tenants. ‘The Lord Advocate said that, if this -did not hang Fassiefairn, it would at least send him to Nova Scotia.’ -Perhaps, the Colonel thinks, Breakachie may be induced to inform against -Fassifern! That culprit has only sent 100_l._ to Lochiel’s family in -France, and has made Lochiel’s tenants work on his estate, instead of on -the county roads. - -These last were not hanging matters. And, somehow, Breakachie, a -perfectly loyal gentleman, and kinsman of Cluny’s, did not give the -desired information. The witnesses as to the suborning of Glenure’s -murder by Fassifern would not kiss the book, or, perhaps, had never -promised their evidence at all. Angus Cameron and Glenevis were -discharged on bail, on July 3. No proof of treasonable correspondence, -or suborned murder, or anything else existed, or could be found -against Fassifern. Pickle, of course, could not be produced in Court. -The Colonel does not conceal the discomfort of his reflections, and -Government is perplexed as to the details of the process of ‘uprooting’ -the representative of Lochiel. On June 10 Fassifern and Charles Stewart -petitioned that they might be put on their trial. But what were they to -be tried for? It was an awkward situation. - -The resources of civilisation, however, were not exhausted. On August 6 -the Duke of Argyll came to Edinburgh and, next day, took his seat in the -Court of Session. - -That day the Lord Advocate sprang a fresh charge on the accused. -They might not have been holding treasonable correspondence, or even -suborning murder, but they had been mixed up in—forgery! The Lord -Advocate suspected that certain deeds had been forged, to substantiate -claims made by Fassifern on Lochiel’s estate. These claims rested on -old papers and bonds of various dates, from 1713 to 1748. There was -‘credible information’ (how obtained we shall learn) that five of these -deeds were forged. Fassifern’s lawyer, Mr. Macfarlane (husband of pretty -Mrs. Macfarlane who shot the Captain), had no longer the vouchers, the -original papers from which he drew up the claims. These vouchers had been -in a bag at Mr. Macfarlane’s house; but ‘some time in Summer’ (1752) -Fassifern (being in Edinburgh) had sent for the bag, and had returned it -in a few hours. - -The papers were no longer in it. Fassifern, being examined, could -remember having abstracted no such deeds as interested the Court. Next -day Fassifern asked for a copy of his statement, ‘as he was apprehensive -he might have inadvertently fallen into some mistakes in the hurry of -the examination, which he was extremely desirous to rectify.’ The Lords -refused his petition: he might have a copy of his examination ‘when he -is brought upon trial.’ Next day he was charged with being guilty, or -‘art and part in forging the deeds, or of using them, knowing them to be -forged.’ He was to be detained in prison till his trial. - -He protested that he had already lain in prison for three months, on -a charge (Pickle’s) of ‘being privy to unlawful designs carried on by -disaffected persons’—namely, a rising to follow on the kidnapping of -the Royal Family. He ‘has reason to believe that no such prosecution -is seriously intended,’ which is pretty obvious, Pickle not being -producible, but absent, at that very hour, in France, with Prince -Charles! Moreover Fassifern was not told on whose information he was -examined, though he was ‘heckled’ for several hours. - -The charge of forgery was, in fact, based, as usual, on the evidence of -an Informer, whom we need not name. Here is a report of his accusations:— - -‘... Says he has been certainly informed that Fassfarn caused Forge -several Grounds of Debt, in Order to be the Foundation of Claims upon the -Estate of Lochiel, some of which were written by Charles Stewart present -prisoner in the Castle, and Lochiel’s name was Forged by one Allan -Cameron of Landavrae, who could write like him, and there were Forced -Discharges by Lochiel to his Tenants for Crops in 1746 and Proceedings in -Order to prevent the Government from getting payment of the Rent of 1746 -and arrears.’ - -Says on knowing this he ‘instantly told Crawfurd’! - -Now even the Government’s plea against Fassifern says no word of ‘forged -discharges of Lochiel to his tenants!’[102] - -The interest of this case is partly the mystery—had Fassifern really -been concerned in tampering with documents?—partly the procedure, which -we know had political motives, and was iniquitous in method. As to -Fassifern’s guilt, if any, we are not likely to learn the truth; as to -the kind of justice he got—there can only be one opinion. - -On August 10 Fassifern was ‘ordained’ to receive a full copy of his -examination. He was anxious that the evidence of an aged solicitor, -Alexander Stewart, in Appin, a man over eighty, and unable to travel, -should be taken by commission. This Stewart had written, or witnessed, -several of the old disputed deeds, and was the only person alive able -to testify, of his own knowledge, to their authenticity. Fassifern also -remonstrated against being described, in the Lord Advocate’s charge, -as ‘the immediate younger brother of Donald Cameron, late of Lochiel, -attainted.’ He ‘ventures to hope that this is not meant to make a point -of dittay.’ It was obviously meant to suggest prejudice. He asked for -bail, after his already long imprisonment. Bail was refused by the Lords -of Session, nor would they examine Alexander Stewart by commission; -but they promised to remove Fassifern from the Castle to the Tolbooth. -The full charges, or ‘improbatory articles’ against him, he was not to -receive. - -On August 24 the prisoner once more protested against ‘the practice of -dropping out charges one after the other,’ which unpleasantly resembles -the system of Titus Oates. If the Government, as appears certain, had -this accusation of forgery pigeon-holed before they locked up the -prisoner in May, why did they not bring it forward at first? Fassifern’s -imprisonment, he justly remarks, ‘approaches to a kind of torture.’ He is -denied the free use of pen and ink, so necessary in his preparation of a -defence. An armed sentinel is in his room day and night. This petition -was so far successful that pen and ink were given, but what he wrote was -inspected, and even his lawyer’s chief clerk, Mr. Flockhart, could only -visit him by special license. He was allowed to take the air, under a -guard, but he seems to have been detained in the Castle, at least the -Deputy-Governor is charged to remove the armed sentinel. - -In January 1754 articles of accusation were placed before the Lords of -Session, and witnesses were examined, including old Alexander Stewart, -who was brought from Appin ‘in a chaise.’ He attested that, as early as -1713, he had written and witnessed some of the deeds, and again in 1728. -Appin (whom one of the deeds especially concerned) gave evidence as to -the authenticity of others, and quoted Lochiel’s remarks to him, in 1746, -about 1,000_l._ borrowed from Fassifern in 1741, and a bond given for the -money by himself. He averred that Charles Stewart, writer in Banavie, -accused now of forging that instrument, had really written and witnessed -it, with Torcastle (in exile) and others (Culchenna and Lundavra), now -dead. On these grounds Fassifern petitioned for bail. He had lain in -prison for ten months, and his eyes were so impaired that he could not -see to read. He must sink _sub squalore carceris_, and be ‘uprooted’ in -earnest. - -To all this plea it was replied ‘that many persons, even of those who -would not do injustice in private affairs, are too easily induced to -countenance an injustice done to the public’—that is, by getting public -money out of the forfeited estates. Fassifern, with his ‘connections and -influence, might, if at liberty, use means to prevent discoveries.’ There -is thus one law (an unpleasant law) for the rich, and another for the -poor. Finally Fassifern’s ‘coolness and silence on the loss of papers -of such consequence, notwithstanding his being confessedly a sensible -careful man, were mentioned as very suspicious circumstances.’ - -No doubt they _are_ suspicious, but that a ‘sensible careful man,’ of -the best family, should, as charged, forge a bond of 90_l._ from his -own gardener, still in his service, is also a very improbable kind of -accusation. Fassifern and Charles Stewart were, therefore, left _sub -squalore carceris_ (March 6, 1754). - -In August 1754 they again petitioned for bail. They had lain in gaol for -fifteen months on no capital charge. ‘There is not one of the deeds under -challenge that does not seem to be supported by unimpeachable evidence,’ -as of Appin, a man of honour, and old Alexander Stewart. ‘They have -suffered punishment beyond bounds already, without example, and since The -Happy Revolution, neither heard of nor dreamed of in our neighbouring -country,’ England. - -Bail was not granted, and the Lord Advocate told a very extraordinary -and, it may be said, inconsistent tale. His witnesses, he alleged, ‘have -thought fit to stand a second diligence for compelling them to appear, -and, though wrote to, have not given any answer.’ Of course there may -be two interpretations of this reluctance, or even three. The witnesses -may be coerced by local sentiment, or may not care to take oath to their -evidence, or may have reason to suppose that they are not really wanted, -as the Crown manifestly merely wishes to keep Fassifern out of his -own country. The evidence of one informer has been given as to forged -discharges of Lochiel’s. The Government, however, dropped that slander, -while keeping up other charges, not supported by evidence given in Court. - -The Advocate then carries back the origin of the trouble to the Loch -Arkaig treasure. In some quarrel about this, a person was ‘heard to -declare, that, in self defence, he would make known to persons in the -King’s service what he knew, or had learned, concerning forged deeds -prepared by Fassfern and Charles Stewart.’ This information he actually -gave to Colonel Crawfurd. This was certainly one of the witnesses who -would not answer to his subpœna, or come to the trial in spite of -repeated ‘diligences.’ Lochaber was not likely to be a happy home for -him afterwards; _Lochaber no more!_ would probably be the burden of his -song. Even Glenevis had three shots fired at him, in November 1752, -between Fort William and his own house. So he alleges in a memorial, or -petition, in the State Papers. The Colonel then sent for Charles Stewart, -who had been introduced to him as a fit person for managing prosecutions -against wearers of the philabeg. Charles Stewart, before the arrest of -Fassifern, gave Colonel Crawfurd, at Fort William, a written set of -Remarks on Fassifern’s claims, impeaching the authenticity of those to -which Appin and Charles Stewart had sworn, including the gardener’s -90_l._ But Charles Stewart, when examined before the Lords, withdrew all -this, and vowed that he had already denied it to the Colonel. When shown -the written statement, he acknowledged that it was in his hand, but that -he had written it ‘to pacify the Colonel, who was then in a great rage.’ -For, in early summer, 1752, ‘a very hot inquiry was going on touching -the murder of Glenure.’ Relations of Charles Stewart were imprisoned, -and Colonel Crawfurd, interrogating Charles on the claims of Fassifern, -told him that _he_, Charles, ‘was suspected of some accession to -Glenure’s murder, and was to be imprisoned if he did not speak out, and -make discoveries against the claims upon Lochiel’s forfeiture.’ Charles -‘cannot affirm’ that he did _not_ ‘soothe Col. Crawfurd, who appeared to -be in great passion,’ by telling tales against the claims, but rather -suspects that he did. But, if he did, he admits that he lied, ‘in the -confusion and terror he was then in.’ So far, the evidence before the -Court is that of a witness who declines to be sworn, and of a prisoner -who withdraws testimony extorted by threats. - -The Lord Advocate next quoted a letter to Fassifern, from his Edinburgh -agent, Mr. Macfarlane, of December 1751—that is, shortly after -Fassifern’s release in the affair of the treasure. Mr. Macfarlane -obscurely warns him in this letter ‘not to be carried, for the sake of a -small paultry sum of money into difficulties.’ ‘Mines were to be sprung,’ -‘odd appellations are given,’ phrases which may, or may not, refer to the -business of the French gold. - -The Advocate then told how Fassifern, in summer, 1752, a year before his -arrest in 1753, got his bag of papers from Mr. Macfarlane and returned -it, since when no mortal has seen the incriminated deeds. This, of -course, is the crucial point; but Mr. Macfarlane had himself prepared -Fassifern’s claim from the very deeds which, having disappeared, are now -said to have been recently forged. Mr. Macfarlane can have seen nothing -suspicious in them, or he would not have made them the basis of a claim -drawn up by himself. His suspicions of 1751 would have revived, and he -would have abandoned the case. He still acts daily for Fassifern, but -Fassifern has not recovered the documents, nor tried seriously to recover -them. - -On these grounds bail was again refused. - -No decision was arrived at by the Lords of Session till January 1755. By -that time all danger from Jacobitism was over. Charles was deserted by -Prussia, by the Earl Marischal, and by his English adherents. The Lords -found Fassifern guilty of abstracting his own papers, from the bag in Mr. -Macfarlane’s custody. These papers it was inferred, were forged. He was -sentenced to ten years of banishment, which he passed at Alnwick. Charles -Stewart was deprived of his office of notary public. ‘Some of the Lords -were of opinion that there was not a proof of guilt sufficient to infer -any punishment. But others were of a different opinion.’ In Fassifern’s -plea he complained of Colonel Crawfurd’s frequent examinations of Charles -Stewart, and of a present of 10_l._ made by him to that notary. - -Innocent or guilty, Fassifern was ‘uprooted, which is what we ought -chiefly to have in view,’ to quote Colonel Crawfurd. The gross -oppressiveness of the proceedings, the unexplained delays, the series -of charges ‘dropped out,’ the bullying and cajoling of prisoners under -examination, the unconcealed political motive, and the rewards of farms -which, we learn, were given to the informers, are all characteristic of -justice in Scotland after Culloden. The improbability of the charge, -against ‘a sensible careful man,’ must be set against the mystery of the -disappearance of the papers. In that disappearance the ‘uprooters’ had, -of course, no less interest than the accused. After nearly two years _sub -squalore carceris_, Fassifern was condemned for suborning the forgery of -papers not in evidence. In fact, after all the schemes for his uprooting, -he was (in cricketing phrase) ‘given out’—several of the Fifteen -dissenting—‘for obstructing the field.’ What is the legal name for this -offence? - -This affair had lingered on from May 1753 to January 1755 before the -Fifteen, the Lords of Session. It is probable that a jury, disgusted by -the military methods of extorting evidence, would have made short work -of the case, and acquitted Fassifern. Of this temper in a jury we have a -curious contemporary instance. Sir Walter Scott printed for the Bannatyne -Club the trial, in June 1754, of Duncan Terig, or Clerk, and Alexander -Bain Macdonald, for the murder of Sergeant Davies, of Guise’s regiment, -in 1749, on Christie Hill, in Braemar. There was really no doubt of the -guilt of the accused. Scott, who knew one of their counsel, says that -they themselves were convinced of the fact. But two Highland witnesses -told a story of the murdered sergeant’s ghost, which appeared to them in -1750. By making fun of this apparition, the advocates for the defence, -Scott says, secured an acquittal in face of the evidence. - -Probably the jury had another motive—namely, indignation at military -extortion of evidence. A certain Ensign Small has been mentioned. He -seems to have been an astute and energetic man. We find him everywhere -in the Cumberland Papers. He it was who, soon after Culloden, arrested -the Barisdales in a cave, and took their swords. In 1749 he arrested -Barisdale on his return from France. He pursued Lochgarry (after Dr. -Cameron’s arrest) into England, and searched the vessels leaving the -ports of the East Coast. We find him in the Islands, mixing with the -people in disguise, and reporting their murmurs and their curses on the -Chiefs and the Prince. In Knoydart he notes that the commons have lost -their taste for a rising. Small was rewarded by a factorship on the -forfeited estates of Cluny and Robertson of Strowan, and exerted himself -to procure the condemnation of the murderers of Sergeant Davies. - -Now on June 14, 1754, Mr. Alexander Lockhart, one of the counsel for the -accused, laid a complaint against Small before the Court of Session. By -Small’s instigation, Lockhart said, Terig and Macdonald were charged -with the crime. Small had sought out and privately examined witnesses, -‘giving them an obligation to stand between them and any hazard they -might incur thereby’—such protection was very necessary. ‘He endeavoured -to intimidate such as would not say such strong things as he wished, or -expected.’ Lockhart asks ‘how far these practices’ (the very practices -employed to ‘uproot’ Fassifern) ‘should be tolerated?’ Moreover, Small -had been swaggering with a sword, had stopped Lockhart in the Parliament -Close, had insulted, challenged him, and shaken a stick over his head: -‘which, if he meant to resent, he would be at no loss to find out where -the said James Small lived.’ - -Small replied that, after doing his best to bring Clerk and Macdonald to -trial, his character had been blackened by Lockhart before the jury, as -having pursued the accused for private reasons of malice. As an officer -and a gentleman, believing in his heart that the accused were guilty -(which they undoubtedly were), he had resented the license of Lockhart. - -Small was found guilty of contempt, bound over to keep the peace, and -obliged to apologise. - -Meanwhile General Bland, Governor of Edinburgh Castle, justified -Ensign Small in a letter to the English Ministry. Lockhart, the -General denounces as a ‘famous foul-mouthed Jacobite advocate.’ He -had ‘concerted’ his abuse of the Ensign in court ‘with his Jacobite -fraternity.’ The Ensign had very properly ‘taken him by the nose, and -called him a scoundrell. He took it quietly.’ If Lockhart is not warned, -his bones will be broken. The General has used his influence with the -judges to secure easy terms for the loyal Ensign.[103] - -The docile judges, ‘the Fifteen,’ had accepted evidence extorted -by military violence in what was really a political case, that of -Fassifern. But it is clear that the jury, in the case of the Sergeant’s -murder, had resented such intimidation, as denounced by Lockhart, and -this resentment, rather than the ghost story, probably procured the -acquittal of two undeniable robbers and murderers, Terig, or Clerk, and -Macdonald.[104] - -Another curious instance of the methods of Government occurs in the case -of James Mohr. It was generally suspected that Government connived at -his escape from Edinburgh Castle in the disguise of a cobbler (November -16, 1752). The Government, however, broke the lieutenants of the guard, -deprived the sergeant of his stripes, and whipped the porter. - -But we find a remarkable letter of General Churchill’s,[105] saying that -‘James Mohr had been taken up on the abduction charge,’ and was extremely -anxious to make disclosures. That his recent behaviour cannot allow him -to be believed unless he is allowed to suppose ‘his life is at stake.’ -That ‘should your Grace think proper to employ him, the great difficulty -is to bring about his liberation without raising a suspicion of the -Cause, _nor can it be so effectually done as by giveing private orders to -a Party of the Troops employed in escorting him to favour his escape_.’ - -If this suggestion was acted on later, if James was allowed to escape -from Edinburgh Castle that he might become a spy, as he did, the -lieutenants, the sergeant, and the porter were very scurvily treated. The -game of justice was not played with much scrupulousness by the English -Government. - - - - -IX - -A GENTLEMAN OF KNOYDART - - -The modern autobiographical romance of adventure has perhaps been -overdone. The hero is always very young and very brave; he is mixed up -with great affairs; he is a true lover; he marries the heroine, and he -leaves his Memoirs (at six shillings) to posterity. Stereotyped as is the -method, and mechanical as are most of the novels thus constructed, it is -interesting to compare with them a set of genuine Memoirs, which actually -are what the novels pretend to be. - -Colonel John Macdonell, the author of the Memoirs, was of the Scottos -family, a branch of the House of Glengarry. Indeed, in the male line the -chiefs of Clan Donald are now represented by the head of the Scottos -branch, not to enter on the old controversy as to the chiefship of Clan -Ranald. Our Colonel was born in 1728, and was therefore a boy of eighteen -in 1746. He had already been conversant with great adventures; he had -seen Rome and his King, had been thrice wounded in one engagement of the -Italian wars, and had relinquished his excellent prospects in the Spanish -service to fight for the White Rose. An emissary between the Duke of -York (not yet Cardinal) and the Prince, the bearer of a treasure in gold, -our hero arrived in the Highlands just after Culloden. Robbed by the -wicked Mackenzies, associated with the last rally of the loyal clans, -betrayed by a cousin to a Hanoverian dungeon, young Macdonell must needs -fall in love, at this juncture, with his future wife. He insults his -enemies, cows the traitor who denounced him (or another traitor), marries -his lady, retires to Canada, and, dying in 1810, leaves his Memoirs to -his children. - -What more can be asked from a hero? ‘Oh, Colonel Macdonell and Mr. -Robert Louis Stevenson, which of you imitated the other?’ the critic is -tempted to exclaim. But, if the real Colonel John ‘does it more natural,’ -the fictitious David Balfour ‘does it with the better grace.’ The good -Colonel never, of course, discourses to us about his contending emotions, -or dilates, like Mr. Balfour, on the various trains of casuistry which -meet in his simple soul. He never describes a place, nor a person, -not even when he meets his King, the Duke of York, or the Duc de -Fitzjames; he only describes action, vividly enough. He leaves out the -love-interest, with the merest allusion; and thus, though the Colonel -played a heroic part in romantic occurrences, he did not write a romance. -He arranges his recollections ill, ignoring essential facts, and, later, -dragging them in very awkwardly. His Memoirs are such as an elderly -warrior of his period would naturally pen; they illustrate the chaotic -condition of Highland morals and manners in 1745-54, and introduce us to -figures familiar in the Prince’s campaign of Scotland.[106] - -Scotus, Scottos, or Scothouse, the estate of the Colonel’s family, lies -in the south of Knoydart, and on the north side of the entrance to Loch -Nevis, just opposite to the Aird of Sleat in Skye. On the north of -Knoydart, and on the south shore of Loch Hourn, is Barisdale, the seat of -the Colonel’s cousin, Col of Barisdale, the tallest man and the greatest -robber, ruffian, and traitor of Clan Donald. Universal testimony, from -that of the Chevalier Johnstone to the Whig Manuscript of 1750, applauds -the family of Scottos as brave gentlemen, honest in the midst of ‘a den -of thieves’ (says our Whig author), loyal when loyalty had most to tempt -or discourage it. Our Colonel’s father was a younger son of old Scottos. -He resided at Crowlin; concerning his means of life we learn nothing, -but the Colonel was always well supplied with money in his boyhood. The -clan were Catholics, and John’s father, in 1740, sent the boy, then aged -twelve, to be educated at the Scots College in Rome. He was accompanied -by a lad of fourteen, Angus Macdonald, of the Clan Ranald family. From -Edinburgh they sailed to Boulogne, and in Paris were entertained by Mr. -George Innes, head of the Scots College and brother of Thomas Innes, the -first really critical writer on early Scottish history. From Paris the -pair of boys went, partly by water, partly in a _calèche_, to Avignon -and Marseilles, whence they embarked for Toulon. Here they met with the -following adventure, which may be given as an example of the Colonel’s -style in narrative, though it had no sequel. Most of his adventures led -to nothing, unlike the course of fiction:— - -‘One night, as we walked through the streets and were cracking nuts, -my comrade, who was somewhat roguish, observed a Monsieur with a large -powdered wig, and his hat under his arm, going past us; he took a -handful of nuts from his pocket and threw them with all his force at the -Frenchman’s head, which unfortunately disordered his wig. Monsieur turned -upon and collared him; by good luck a Spaniard was of our party, who -instantly ran to the relief of my comrade and gave the Frenchman a severe -drubbing. We then adjourned to a tavern, when our Spaniard, calling for a -bottle of wine, brought me to a private room, and after bolting the door, -to my great terror and surprise, drew a stiletto with his right hand from -his left bosom, and made me to understand by signs that with that weapon -he would have killed the Frenchman, if he had proved too strong for him. -He then took a net purse out of his pocket wherein there appeared to be -about a hundred Spanish pistoles, and made me an offer of a part: I -made him a low bow, but, not standing in need of it, would not accept of -his liberality, for I thought I had enough, being always purse-bearer -for myself and companion. My friend made sometimes free with my pockets, -merely to try if I should miss anything, and was happy to find that I -made a discovery of his tricks by immediately missing what he took in -that way.... I bought out of our stock two large folding French knives, -by way of carvers, in case of any sinister accident.’ - -Such an accident of travel presently occurred. A Mr. O’Rourk of -Tipperary, on his way to study at Rome, introduced the boys to a certain -Mr. Creach, late of the Irish brigade in Spanish service. Mr. Creach, -finding Master Macdonell alone in his room, tried to rob him. Macdonell -flew at the man; Angus Macdonald entered; the pair threw Creach on the -ground, and John had his ‘carver’ out, with a view to cutting Creach’s -throat, when O’Rourk interfered with this wild Celtic justice. Arrived in -Rome, the boys found that the fame of their exploit had preceded them and -done them good service, as they were reckoned lads of spirit. - -John, though the youngest pupil in the lowest class of the seminary, was -advancing rapidly in his studies when, in the winter of 1743, Prince -Charles rode out of Rome to a hunting-party, and, disguised as a Spanish -courier, continued his course as far as Antibes. France had invited him, -though, when he arrived, she neglected him. John now conceived that, -in the event of the Prince’s landing in England, ‘My clan would not be -the last to join the young Charles.... This set my brains agoing, which -were not very settled of themselves. I got disgusted with the life of a -student, and thought I would be much happier in the army.’ - -John, therefore, contrived to get ‘introduced to King James by noblemen -attending on that Prince, who inquired of me particularly about my -grandfather and granduncles [Glengarry and Barisdale, apparently], with -all of whom he had been acquainted personally in the year 1715,’ when -Glengarry distinguished himself so brilliantly, avenging the fallen Clan -Ranald, at Sheriffmuir. A recommendation for John was sent to General -Macdonnell (of the Antrim family), then commanding the Irish of the -Spanish forces in Italy, and, though the Cardinal Protector demurred -to John’s change of service, our hero was equipped with a sword by the -Rector of his College. ‘Presenting me with the sword, his eyes filled, -and he told me that I should lose that sword by the enemy, which was -verified in seven or eight months after.’ The Rector had the second sight! - -Mr. Macdonell, a sage of sixteen, was now horrified by the ethical ideas -which he surprised in the conversation of the young Italian gentlemen -who rode with him to join the Spanish army. They assured him that his -military value depended on his emancipation from the prudish notions of -‘a parcel of bigots,’ but he was destined to refute this theory. General -Macdonnell admitted his young clansman to his own table, and put him in -the way of seeing fire. He thus describes his first view of that element; -probably his emotions are common to recruits:— - -‘I’ll tell you the truth, I felt myself rather queer, my heart panting -very strong, not with bravery, I assure you. I thought that every bullet -would finish [me], and thought seriously to run away, a cursed thought! -I dare never see my friends or nearest relations after such dastardly -conduct. My thoughts were all at once cut short by the word of command, -“Advance quick!” We were at once within about one hundred paces of the -enemy, to whom we gave so well directed a fire, that their impetuosity -was bridled. The firing on both sides continued until dark came on, which -put a stop to the work of the evening. The enemy retreated some distance -back, and we rejoined our own army. I went to Genl. McDonnell, who asked -me if I had smelled powder to-day; I told him I had plentifully. “What, -Sir,” said he, “are you wounded?” “No, please your Excellency.” “Sir, -you will never smell powder until you are wounded.” I got great credit -from the officers commanding the party I belonged to for my undaunted -behaviour during the action, but they little knew what past within me -before it began.’ - -The smell of powder was soon in our hero’s experience. The Neapolitan -general who commanded on alternate days with the French leader, withdrew -his troops from a strong position on the heights above Velletri, which -was attacked by Prince Lobkwitz and the famous General Brown, with -forty-five thousand Austrians. There was daily fighting, and General -Macdonnell was stopped by his superior officer while in the very act of -driving the Austrians from the deserted heights, which they, of course, -had occupied. An Austrian surprise cut off Macdonell’s regiment from the -main force, and he thus describes what occurred: - -‘For my own share I was among the last that gave way, but when I once -turned my back, I imagined that the enemy all aimed at me alone, and -therefore ran with all my might, and thought there was a weight tied to -each of my legs, till I had outrun everyone, and looking behind, saw the -whole coming up. I halted and faced about, every one as he came up did -the same, we soon formed a regular line, and resolved to revenge our dead -comrades and to fight to the last; but found our situation to be as bad -as before.... Reduced to extremity we offered to capitulate on honourable -terms, but could obtain no condition except surrendering at discretion, -rather than which we resolved to fight while powder and ball remained -among the living or the dead. Our officers and men fell very fast. I -among the rest got a ball through my thigh which prevented my standing; I -crossed my firelock under my thigh and shook it, to try if the bone was -whole, which finding to be the case, dropped on one knee and continued -firing. I received another shot, which threw me down; I made once more an -attempt to help my surviving comrades, but received a third wound, which -quite disabled me. Loss of blood and no way of stopping it soon reduced -my strength, I however, griped my sword to be ready to run through the -first enemy that should insult me. - -‘All our ammunition being spent, not a single cartridge remained amongst -the living or the dead, quarters were called for by the few that were -yet alive. Many of the wounded were knocked on the head, and I did not -escape with impunity. One approached me; at first I made ready to run him -through, but observing five more close to him, I dropt the sword, and was -saluted with _Hunts-foot_,[107] accompanied with a cracking of muskets -about my head. I was only sensible of three blows and fainted; I suppose -they thought me dead. On coming to myself again, I found my clothes were -stripped off, weltering in my blood, and no one alive near me to speak -to, twisting and rolling in the dust with pain, and my skin scorched by -the sun. In this condition a Croat came up to me with a cocked pistol -in his hand, and asked for my purse in bad Italian. I told him that I -had no place to hide it in, and if he found it anywhere about me to take -it. “Is that an answer for me, you son of a b—ch?” at same time pointing -his pistol straight between my eyes. I saw no one near, but the word -_quarter_ was scarcely expressed by me, when I saw his pistol-arm seized -by a genteel young man dressed only in his waistcoat, who said to him, -“You rascal, let the man die as he pleases; you see he has enough, go and -kill some one able to resist.” The fellow went off. Previous to this a -Croat, taking my gold-laced hat and putting it upon his own head, coolly -asked me how he looked in it. He then with his sabre cut off my queue and -took it along with him.’ - -A civilised scalp! - -[Illustration: _Walker & Boutall, ph. sc._ - -_The Duke of York and Prince Charles_ - -_circ. 1735_] - -The Austrians, after all, lost the day, and a certain Miles Macdonnell -rescued our hero, and had him carried into hospital. Recovering, he -returned to Rome, and was welcomed in a flattering manner both by his -King, who presented him with a sum of money, and by the young Duke of -York. After seeing some service on the Po, young Macdonell obtained -leave to go to France and join a detachment which was to aid Prince -Charles in Scotland. At Lyons they heard of the Prince’s defeat of Hawley -at Falkirk, but at Paris the news was worse, and of all the Jacobite -volunteers (who were Irish) John Macdonell alone persevered. He urged -that, as the Prince’s affairs went ill, ‘It was ungenerous not to give -what aid we were capable of, but I could not prevail on any of them to -be of my opinion.’ In fact, it was now plain that France did not mean to -lend any solid assistance to the Cause. The Duke of York since Christmas -had been waiting at Dunkirk and Boulogne, expecting permission to sail -for England with a large force, but delay followed delay. Young Macdonell -now went to Boulogne, where he met the Duke, and was introduced by him -to the Duc de Fitzjames and to Lally Tollendal. Here the good Colonel’s -memory deceives him, for he avers that Lally wished to take him to -Pondicherry. Now Lally was deep in the Scottish rising, and did not leave -France for India till ten years after 1746.[108] Young Macdonell, in -these weeks of hope deferred, lived with the Duke of York at Boulogne, -Dunkirk, and St. Omer. Finally, he set sail from Dunkirk with several -Irish officers on the very day of Culloden, April 16. - -Here the Colonel is guilty of an artistic blunder in his narrative. It -is plain, from his later statements, that the Duke of York made him -the bearer of a letter, and a sum of 1,500_l._ or 2,000_l._ in gold, -to Prince Charles. But we do not hear, till later, of the money or the -missive. The little company with Macdonell rounded the Orkneys, landed -in Loch Broom, and at once heard the fatal news of Culloden. Macdonell’s -uncle, Scottus, had fallen with twenty of his men, ‘and nobody knew what -was become of the Prince.’ Colonel Macdonell never gives dates, but he -must have arrived in Loch Broom between May 8 and May 12, 1746. On May 8, -a meeting of chiefs was held at Murlagan, and a tryst appointed at Loch -Arkaig, in Lochiel’s country, for May 15.[109] Our hero heard something -of this at Loch Broom, and determined to join the rallied clans. He first -went to Laggy, at the head of Little Loch Broom, where he found Colin -Dearg Mackenzie of Laggy, with several other Mackenzie gentlemen, and -sixty of the clan. ‘We thought ourselves as safe [he and his friend, -Lynch, an Irish officer,] as in the heart of France.’ - -Now began the purely personal romance of the Colonel. The Mackenzies -entertained him and Captain Lynch at dinner in a dark and crowded room; -he noticed that men gathered suspiciously behind him, and he remembered -that they had remarked on the weight of his portmanteau. He therefore -rose more than once from table to inspect that valise, but, while the -company were drinking the Prince’s health, Colin Dearg walked out. -Absent, too, was the portmanteau, when the guests left the table, but -Colin explained that he had packed it on the back of our Colonel’s horse. -There, indeed, it was, but when the Colonel stopped at Dundonell, and -opened his valise in search of a pair of shoes, a canvas bag containing -1,000_l._ was missing. A gentleman of the Mackenzie clan had slashed open -the portmanteau and stolen the money of the Prince whose health they were -drinking! It was the affair of the Loch Arkaig hoard on a smaller scale. -The situation of our injured hero was the more awkward, as Dundonell, -where he found, himself, was the estate of a Mr. Mackenzie, nephew to -the thief, Colin Dearg. Mr. Mackenzie was absent; Mrs. Mackenzie was -at home, but in bed. However, she saw Macdonell, who told her what had -occurred, and entrusted to her another bag of five hundred guineas: ‘If -killed, I bequeath it to your ladyship. God be with you! I wish you a -good morning.’ Accompanied by Lynch, Macdonell now returned to Laggy. He -dared not use force against Colin Dearg, for, if he fell, Colin would win -his own pardon by producing a letter from the Duke of York to Charles, -which our hero was carrying, though he now mentions it for the first -time. Accused by Macdonell of taking the money, Colin Dearg denied all -knowledge of it, and, as he was attended by a tail of armed clansmen, -Macdonell had no resource but in retreat. - -He breakfasted at Dundonell with ‘the most amiable lady,’ took up the -500 guineas, and, after fatiguing marches, reached Loch Arkaig. On the -shores of the remote and lonely loch our Colonel met, and recognised, -his gigantic kinsman, the truculent Col of Barisdale. Col said that -Lochiel and Murray of Broughton were at Achnacarry; he himself and -Lochgarry were mustering men, ‘to try what terms could be got from the -Duke of Cumberland.’ This must have been on May 14. At Achnacarry the -wounded Lochiel received our hero kindly, and Mr. Murray of Broughton -took charge of the remaining 500 guineas and the letter from the Duke -of York to the Prince. Lest any one should think that the Colonel is -romancing, there exists documentary evidence to corroborate his tale. The -unhappy Murray of Broughton, in his accounts of the Prince’s money after -Culloden, writes: ‘From a French officer who had landed upon the East -Coast, £1,000. N.B.—This French officer was charged with 2,000 guineas, -but said he had 1,000 taken from him as he passed through the Mackenzies’ -country, and gave in an account of deductions from the other thousand.’ -Murray adds that he has charged himself with 1.000_l._, ‘tho’ he still -thinks he did not receive quite so much.’ He must have received the -500_l._ (perhaps in _louis d’or_, which he reckons as guineas), and some -loose cash. Murray was writing from memory, so was Colonel Macdonell. -Murray calls him a French officer, and really he was in French service. -There cannot have been two such officers who, at the same time, were -robbed of 1,000_l._ by the Mackenzies, and reported the loss just after -Culloden.[110] - -Macdonell slept at Achnacarry and was wakened by the pipes playing _Cogga -na si_. News had just arrived of an attempted surprise by Cumberland, -whose forces were actually in sight; Barisdale was accused of having -concerted the surprise, but the story is improbable. Eight hundred -Camerons and Macdonalds now retreated by the west end of Loch Arkaig, and -our hero, with Captain Lynch, made for Knoydart. Lynch later returned -to French service, carrying Macdonell’s report to the Duke of York, and -soon fell at the battle of Lafeldt, where the Scots and Irish nearly -captured Cumberland. As for Macdonell, ‘I had put on a resolution,’ he -says, ‘never to leave Scotland while Prince Charles was in the country.’ -The death of Macdonell’s father, and the infirmity of old Scottos, also -made his presence at home necessary to his family. So, he says, ‘I waved -the sure prospect I had of advancing myself both to riches and honour,’ -in the service of Spain. - -Knoydart, during the winter of 1746-47, must have been in a state of -anarchy. Old Glengarry, accused by Barisdale, was a prisoner in Edinburgh -Castle; Young Glengarry was in the Tower. Col Barisdale and his son were -captives in France, on a charge of treason to King James. Lochgarry had -fled to France with the Prince. Old Scottos was decrepit. No rents were -paid; the lands had been wasted by the English; clansmen were seizing -farms at will.[111] In these melancholy circumstances our Colonel marched -alone into the Mackenzie country, to hunt for the money stolen by Colin -Dearg. Then this odd adventure befell him:— - -‘I went to take a solitary turn and met a well-dressed man in Highland -clothes also taking the morning air. After civil salutations to each -other, I entered into discourse with him about former transactions in -that country. He of himself began to tell me about French officers -that came to Lochbroom—how the 1,000 guineas had been cut out of one of -their portmanteaus by Colin Dearg, Major Wm. McKenzie of Kilcoy,[112] -and Lieutenant Murdoch McKenzie from Dingwall—all officers of Lord -Cromartie’s regiment, being all equally concerned; and how not only those -who acted the scene, but all the people in that part of the country, had -been despised and ridiculed for their mean and dastardly behaviour; but -that had his (McKenzie’s, who was speaking to me) advice been taken, -there should never have been a word about the matter. The following -dialogue then ensued:—_Question._ “And pray, Sir, what did you advise?” -_Answer._ “To cut off both their heads, a very sure way indeed!” _Q._ -“What were they, or of what country?” _A._ “The oldest, and a stout-like -man, was Irish. The youngest was very strong-like, was a Macdonell of the -family of Glengarry.” _Q._ “How was the money divided?” _A._ “Colin Dearg -got 300 guineas, William Kilcoy got 300 guineas, and Lieutenant Murdoch -McKenzie got 300 guineas.” _Q._ “What became of the other hundred?” _A._ -“Two men who stood behind the Irish Captain with drawn dirks ready to -kill him, had he observed Colin Dearg cutting open the portmanteau, got -25 guineas each; and I and another man, prepared in like manner for the -young Captain Macdonell, got 25 guineas each.” _Q._ “You tell the truth, -you are sure?” _A._ “As I shall answer, I do.” _Q._ “Do you know to -whom you are speaking?” _A._ “To a friend and one of my own name.” “No, -you d—d rascal,” seizing him suddenly by the breast with my left hand, -at the same instant twitching out my dirk with the right, and throwing -him upon his back, “_I am that very Macdonell_.” I own I was within an -ace of running him through the heart, but some sudden reflection struck -me—my being alone, and in a place where I was in a manner a stranger, -among people which I had reason to distrust, I left the fellow upon his -back, and re-entered the house (Torridon) in some hurry. My landlord, -Mr. McKenzie of Torridon, met me in the entry, asked where I had been. -I answered, “Taking a turn.” “Have you met anything to vex you?” “No,” -I returned smiling. “Sir,” says he, “I ask pardon, you went out with an -innocent and harmless countenance, and you came in with a fierceness in -your aspect past all description.” “Mr. McKenzie,” said I, “none of your -scrutinizing remarks; let us have our morning!” “With all my heart,” he -replied. Soon after, being a little composed, I related to him my morning -adventure. He remarked that the man was a stranger to him, and had been a -soldier in Lord Cromartie’s regiment. That very day I quitted that part -of the country and returned home, where I continued sometime.’ - -The _some time_ must cover the years from 1747 to the autumn of 1749. Old -Glengarry was released at that date from Edinburgh Castle. To him, at -Invergarry, Colonel John told the story of his wrongs, and from his chief -he obtained an escort of five men. With these at his heels, he marched -to Dundonell, and told Mr. Mackenzie that he desired a meeting with -Colin Dearg. Colin came, but his escort consisted of some thirty-five -men armed with dirks and clubs. The Colonel, however, was determined to -beard his enemy, and devised the following tactics. He himself would sit -between Colin Dearg and Dundonell: two of his five men would slip out -and guard the door with drawn swords; meanwhile the Colonel would insult -the Mackenzies. If they raised a hand he would pistol Colin and dirk -his host, Dundonell; his three retainers would fire the house, and the -Macdonells would escape in the confusion or perish with their foes. It -was a very pretty sketch for a _camisado_. - -‘After a short pause Dundonell mentioned the cause of our present meeting -_in as becoming a manner as the subject would admit of_; to which an -evasive answer was returned by his uncle, Colin Dearg, pretending to deny -the fact. I then took him up, and proved that he himself was the very -man who with his own hands had taken the gold out of my portmanteau, -after cutting it open with some sharp instrument. This I said openly in -the hearing of all present. To which I got no other reply than that “the -money was gone and could not be accounted for.” I returned that “If the -cash was squandered the reward due to such actions was yet extant”—and -being asked what that was, I answered, “The gallows.” At this expression -the whole got up standing, and seeing them all looking towards me, I drew -my dirk and side pistol, and presenting one to my right and the other -to my left, swore that if any motion was made against my life, I would -despatch Dundonell and his uncle, who seeing me ready to put my threat -in execution, begged of their people for the love of God to be quiet, -which was directly obeyed. In the meantime my men had taken immediate -possession of the outside of the door and were prepared to act according -to my orders. I called to them to stay where they were, but none of the -people in the house knew what they had gone out for.’ - -The money was gone, no man dared to touch our hero, and he and Dundonell -went peacefully home together! Our hero had dominated and insulted the -Mackenzies and was obliged to be satisfied with that result. - -In the following years (1751-54) Knoydart and Lochaber were perfectly -demoralised. The hidden treasure of Loch Arkaig had set Macdonalds -against Camerons; cousins were betraying cousins, and brothers were -blackmailing brothers. The details (much veiled in this work) are to be -found in the Duke of Cumberland’s MSS. at Windsor Castle. The murder of -Campbell of Glenure by Allan Breck, or by Sergeant Mohr Cameron, and the -reports of Pickle, James Mohr, and a set of other spies, had alarmed -the Government with fears of a rising aided by Prussia. Consequently -arrests were frequent and no man knew whom he could trust. Col of -Barisdale, a double-dyed traitor, was dead in gaol, but his eldest son -was being hunted on island, loch, and mountain. Now in a letter from an -English officer, Captain Izard, dated September 30, 1751, and preserved -at Windsor, he says: ‘Dr. Macdonald, living at Kylles, and brother of -Glengarry, told that young Barisdale lay at his house the Monday before -and proposed going to the Isle of Skye.’ - -The giver of this information was not a man in whom to confide. Our hero, -however, confided. Disguised as a rough serving-man he went fishing for -lythe with ‘my relation, Dr. Macdonell of Kylles, an eminent physician.’ -An English vessel, the _Porcupine_, under the notorious Captain -Fergusson, came in sight. Dr. Macdonell insisted on taking our hero on -board her, and there, as he sat over his punch, informed the English -officers that the servant who accompanied him was a gentleman. Fergusson -arrested Macdonell at once on suspicion of being young Barisdale, and -he lay for some time a prisoner in Fort William. Now the Doctor may -only have blabbed in his cups, but, taken with Captain Izard’s report, -his behaviour looks very odd. Our hero, however, does not suspect his -relation, the Doctor, but denounces his cousin, Captain Allan Macdonald -of Knock, in Sleat, as his betrayer, and ‘the greatest spy and informer -in all Scotland.’ However it be, the betrayal of Colonel John was -apparently a family affair. - -A long list of charges, doubtless of Jacobite dealings, was brought -against him, and a midshipman on the _Porcupine_ assured him that Allan -Macdonald of Knock was the informer. So the Colonel was locked up in Fort -William, then, or just before, crowded with prisoners, such as Lochiel’s -uncle Fassifern, his agent, Charles Stuart, Barisdale’s second son, and -Cameron of Glenevis, with his brother Angus. The date must have been June -or July, 1753, for young Barisdale was taken in July, and the Colonel -was then a prisoner. Young Barisdale just escaped hanging; Fassifern was -exiled; Stuart was accused of the Appin murder; Sergeant Mohr Cameron -was betrayed and executed; the traitors were clansmen of the victims, -and, though our Colonel says nothing of all this, the facts gave him -good cause for anxiety. It is fair to add that no mention of his enemy, -Macdonald of Knock, seems to occur in the Cumberland Papers, where so -many spies hide their infamy. - -Our hero escaped by aid of Mr. Macleod of Ulnish, sheriff-depute of Skye, -‘being both my friend and relation as well as the friend of justice.’ -This gentleman suppressed the only good evidence against the Colonel, -which indeed merely proved his wearing the proscribed kilt. After nine -months of gaol the Colonel was released and seized the first opportunity -to challenge Knock, who would not face him. - -So ends the Colonel’s adventure. ‘I was then in love with your mother,’ -he says simply, and on this head he says no more. He had ‘kept the bird -in his bosom,’ a treasure lost by many of his kin, and among them, -one fears, by Allan of Knock. A certain Ranald Macdonell of [_in_] -Scammadale and Crowlin, who, born about 1724, married in May 1815, -and died in November of the same year, aged ninety, is said to have -‘severely punished that obnoxious person known as Allan of Knock, over -whose remains there was placed an inscription not less fulsome than -false.’[113] Allan, whether he betrayed the Colonel or not, has obviously -a bad name in Knoydart. - -The Colonel lived happily on his property till 1773, when he settled in -Schoharie County, New York. When the American rebellion broke out he -served in the King’s Royal Regiment of New York, and, after the final -collapse of the British, he retired to Cornwall in Ontario. As General -Macdonnell wrote of him in 1746, ‘He has always behaved as an honourable -gentleman and a brave officer, irreproachable in every respect.’ - - - - -X - -THE LAST YEARS OF GLENGARRY - - -Readers who have followed the adventures of Pickle the Spy may care to -know what were the later fortunes of his inseparable companion, Young -Glengarry. These fortunes were not answerable to the expectations of -the Chief. The death of Henry Pelham, in March 1754, blighted, as we -shall learn, the hopes which Glengarry, like Pickle, had founded on the -promises of the Prime Minister, and left him a debtor to Government -for claims on his lands. That Young Glengarry, on reaching his estates -in November 1754, behaved with oppressive dishonesty to his smaller -wadsetters, men holding portions of his land in pawn, we learn from the -report of Colonel Trapaud, who, for some sixty years, was Governor of -Fort Augustus. Early in 1755, we find Glengarry at Inverness, where he -signs a tack, or lease, on January 24. A copy of an undated letter from -Pickle represents Glengarry as ‘making a grand tour round several parts -of the Highlands, and having concourse of people from several clans -to wait of him.’ Glengarry himself speaks, in a letter to be quoted, -about such a gathering. In 1755, we find General Bland objecting to -Glengarry’s journeyings (when Pickle went to London), and on May 18, -1757, Captain John Macdonnell, of General Frazer’s regiment, departing -for America, makes Glengarry his ‘factor and attorney,’ also his executor -and general legatee.[114] This Captain Macdonnell was the younger -Lochgarry, who accompanied Pickle in Edinburgh, in September 1754. ‘I -hope, in case of accident, you’ll take care of Young Lochgary,’ writes -Pickle.[115] Captain Macdonnell was later Colonel of the 76th, says -General Stewart, and a previous owner of my copy of the General’s book -notes in the margin that ‘he was wounded on the Heights of Abraham.’ -Critics who think that Glengarry was personated by Pickle will observe -that Young Lochgarry knew both gentlemen and could not be deceived. He -was Pickle’s companion in Edinburgh when Pickle had just lost his father, -a Highland chief. In 1757 he makes Glengarry (who had suffered a similar -bereavement at the same time as Pickle), his factor and legatee. There -is, of course, no reason to suppose that Young Lochgarry had ever heard -of such a mysterious personage as Pickle. - -We know nothing else of Glengarry’s life from 1755 to 1757, when his -manuscript letter book throws a melancholy light on his closing years. -There is a draft of a letter of 1757 and several drafts of 1758-1759, -in a stitched folio wherein he entered the _brouillons_ of his -correspondence, not always in his own hand. On April 28, 1757, he wrote -from London, probably from his rooms in Beaufort Buildings, Strand. He -writes to his Edinburgh agent, Mr. Orme, W.S., on a variety of business. -His action in settling his estates was much impeded by the retention of -his charters and family papers by Sir Everard Falkner (or Faulkner), an -English officer. ‘I have prevailed,’ he says, ‘upon Mr. Brado, how (who) -is a principal man amongst the Jewes, to endeavour to recover my charters -from Sir Everard.’ He expects to redeem all the wadsets on his lands, and -to compound for a few of the most pressing of his father’s debts. But -he must have been disappointed, for on his death, in 1761, more of his -estate was in the hands of wadsetters than in his own. He must, however, -have secured proof of ‘my propinquity to those of my predecessors left -infeft,’ for he was formally inducted into his property before an -Inverness jury in 1758. He mentions that, when he left Scotland, ‘the -appearance of a famine threatened then the whole north,’ and ‘his friends -were buying meal in Buchan.’ A wet summer and autumn always meant dearth -in the Highlands. He alludes to some military oppression of one of his -retainers: ‘the attempt is so flagrant that it would not pass unpunished -amongst the hotentots.’ An unfinished draft appears to be addressed to -General Frazer, son of Old Lovat. With him (if it is Frazer) he wants ‘to -settle family differences _à l’aimable_.’ His correspondent is leaving -Scotland after recruiting. - -In June 1758, Glengarry was in correspondence with persons concerned -in the affairs of his sister-in-law, widow of his brother Æneas, -accidentally shot at Falkirk, in 1746. Æneas must have married very -young: he was not twenty when he died, but he left a son and a daughter. -For some unknown reason Glengarry was on ill terms with his brother’s -widow, as will appear, and she would not permit her children to visit -their uncle. To this business the following letter refers: - - ‘_To Rory McLeod._ - - ‘(Dated Greenfield, 22nd June, 1758.) - - ‘Dear Sir,—I am favour’d with yours by the last post, and am - not a little surprized to understand by it that Mr Robison - should have wrott either to Mr Drummond or you that I intended - to dispose of my nephew contrar to the present system of moral - education, all I said to Mr Robison that if I sent him abroad - I could have him educated for nothing, but that I did not - myself aprove of this frugall method, but that I would advise - with Mr Drummond how to Dispose of him when I would be at - Edinburgh, that if he inclin’d a military life, I might have - interest to get him a pair of Colours, but then I would insist - the best _moitié_ of his patrimony should be assigned to his - sister, but that what I inclined he should follow was the - law, if he had genius for that profession, and that in that - case if Mr Drummond aprovd of it, I would send him for the - sake of the language to some country schooll in England. This - was all that passed upon honour, and Desired to send over the - boy that I might make him acquaint in the country, and should - only Detain him two months, I had a Double view in this as I - had the countrey about that time all convened, it would have - been fifty pounds in his way, and this I told Mr Robison; and - at the same time, as the lassie had no English, I would Keep - her all winter with my sister so that in spring she might be - presentable, when I would send her for a little time to my - sister’s Dr Chisolme at Inverness. Mr. Robison approved of all - this, particularly of the lassy’s coming, and, that he might - not be blamed for retaining them, sent them to their Mother’s, - where the Girle has ever been, and laid the whole blame to - her charge. I have still Mr Robison’s letter, but he has his - views which I am resolved to frustrate.... I will shew you my - brother’s discharge to my father, and I have living witnesses - that delivered him Cattle in payment of interest, and part - principall, and as one of them is his father’s brother, how - would go all lengths for him, that there can be no objection to - his evidence as Discharges have been burned or Destroyed after - the Castle was blown up.... - - ‘Your affect. Cousine and humble servant, - - ‘MACKDONELL.’ - -Burt says that ‘to have the English’ was the mark, among the Highlanders, -of a gentleman’s children. Glengarry’s niece had as yet no English; her -education had doubtless been neglected in the distresses consequent on -the Rising. Probably, too, her mother was poor, her husband’s portion -having been partly paid in cattle. These very cattle may have been among -the 20,000 plundered by Cumberland’s men after Culloden, as a volunteer -writes in his little book of ‘A Journey with the Army into Scotland’ -(1747). - -In a letter to Mr. Orme, of unknown date, Glengarry says that his -sister-in-law ‘is infamous.’ On the same affair of the nephew he writes -again:— - - [No date.] - - ‘Sir,—I have been frequently since my father’s death abused - in the good opinion conceived in former days of those that - ought and were generally believed steadfast friends to this - familly, but I must confess I least of all expected it from any - of yours, and least of all from yourself personally. I had a - letter lately from Robison of Ballnicaird acquainting me that - Provost Drummond and you, despairing of the amicable agreement - twixt my nephew and me, intended to push matters to the utmost, - this was strange proceedings, without ever acquainting me, and - in any event a strange procedure between me and my nephew when - the opinion of any one or two eminent in the law might in a few - moments decide the whole without further expences, and when - they come to the age to judge for themselves I believe they - will be little oblidged to their present directors, Mr Drummond - only excepted. I sent for my nephew and niece, their not - arriving is laid to your advice, tho up to that time I little - believed it, and from that Instant foresaw Mr Robison and their - infamous mother’s drift. As Mr Drummond is so very good as take - the trouble to look after any so very near connections, least - by others’ drift he should be Deceived, I must act the needful - to have a near relation of the father’s side subjoined with - him to take care of the whole, and their Education, and bring - their Mother and Mr Robison to account for their intermissions - with his effects and moveables, most of which he received as - payment, and at his Death were very considerable, there are - still living witnesses that can prove this, and I have which - I believe may be in my Agent’s custody, his discharge or Bond - for 6000 merks, pay’d by his father of his bond of patrimony. - Should this stand in law, as it ought in equity, and Justice, - I will refer any differences of this kind to any named by Mr - Drummond, and another by me. - - ‘... Acquaintance, friendship, and blood connection might - expect a friendly demand, not by a Sheriff Officier. - - ‘But as the world has taken a turn, and that men of business - are not to mind such punctilios, I have nothing to say but - that I hope it may not be long when a blood relation and - connection with this family may be claimed both as an honour - and protection, it was so formerly, and may be still the same.’ - - (He adds that he wishes proceedings stayed still he comes to - Edinburgh, and refers to his ‘late violent indisposition.’) - - ‘Your sincere friend and affect. Cousine.’ - -This undated letter is probably of 1758, though early in 1759 Glengarry -had another very severe illness, from which it may be doubted if he ever -entirely recovered. He writes to Mr. Orme, ‘I am drinking goat-whey and -milk, that is my diet.... I shall be soon upon my leggs, and see you -soon.’ - -The following is an important letter, undated in the draft, to the Chief -of the Macleods:— - - [Undated. Really of June 21, 1758. - - ‘Dear Macleod,—I thought to have had the pleasure some months - ago of drinking a glass with you at White House. But a Severe - fitt of sickness of which I am now getting the better prevented - me. I have settled my affairs in the country as well as my - present situation and the circumstances of my tenants could - admitt, but as their whole [property] was once destroyed, and - that they have not recovered yet quite in their stock I was - oblidged to give them a longer delay than I expected.’ - -He therefore asks Macleod to ‘go conjunct with me in security for -borrowing 400_l._’—an invitation which Macleod declined. If Macleod will -not help him, ‘I cannot be active in making aplication to be discharged -of the claims the Government has against my estate, _which I was once -made sure of, but that vanished with those then at the helme_.’ - -Such a promise, broken on the change of the hand at the helm, is several -times referred to—by Pickle. He writes to the Duke of Newcastle, ‘he -bitterly complains that nothing has been done for him, of what was -promis’d him in the strongest terms, and which he believes had been -strickly performed had your most worthy Brother (Henry Pelham) his great -friend and Patron, survived till now.’[116] - -Among the many odd coincidences between Pickle and Glengarry, this is -not the least curious. Both the spy and the chief entertained great -expectations from Government, and both confess that these hopes ‘vanished -with those then at the helme,’ obviously, that is, with Henry Pelham’s -death. - -Glengarry goes on, in his letter to Macleod, ‘_but to be explicit -on this_’ (namely, on his ‘being made sure’ of the abandonment of -Government’s claims on his estate) ‘and the confusion my father and the -late unluckie troubles left this estate would draw to tow great lenth, I -will therefore reffer it till meeting.’ He ends with compliments ‘to Lady -Macleod, and the two lovely little Misses.’ - -It would have been pleasant to hear Glengarry when, over a bottle, he -was ‘explicit’ on the reasons for which Henry Pelham promised to abate -the demands on his estate. Government knew that Glengarry was in the -affair of Loch Arkaig. They arrested his accomplices in 1751, but left -him free. Government knew, by their spies, that Glengarry frequented the -Earl Marischal in Paris in 1752, and that, in 1753, he was perpetually -running over, as a Jacobite agent, to Paris. But they then arrested -Glenevis and Fassifern, while they promised to abate their claims on -Glengarry’s estate! To explain all this to Macleod ‘over a magnum,’ as -Glengarry elsewhere convivially remarks, could not be an easy task. His -letter, in the draft, is undated, but on the same page is a letter to his -solicitor, Mr. Orme, W.S., dated ‘Greenfield, 21 June, 1758.’ In this -letter he speaks of that just cited as having been sent ‘by this very -post.’ Macleod was in Edinburgh, but left before Glengarry’s appeal could -reach him. Now, without the 400_l._ the Chief could not go to town. He -therefore wrote again to Macleod, repeating his supplication, and being -‘explicit’ indeed as to his former patron in the Government, though not -as to the reasons for his patronage. - -‘An absolute discharge of the heavie claim the Government has against me -I was once promised, but those that was then at the helme _are no more_.’ - -The only person of those ‘then at the helme’ who was now, in 1758, ‘no -more’ was precisely Henry Pelham. He died in March 1754. Pickle was his -‘man.’ Pickle had received promises from him which were never fulfilled. -So, oddly enough, had Glengarry! We know what Pickle’s services to Henry -Pelham had been; we can guess at those of Glengarry. But after Henry -Pelham’s death—in fact, at the very time of his death—Prince Charles’s -party broke up for ever in England, and the Earl Marischal quarrelled -irreconcilably with the Prince. The services of Pickle were therefore -no longer needed. Pelham’s engagements with him were not kept, and the -promise to Glengarry, by a coincidence, was also broken by the faithless -English Government. - -People who maintain that Glengarry was not Pickle may be asked to produce -a theory which will account for the singular series of coincidences in -the fortunes of the Chief and the spy. Even in this new coincidence -alone, it will be interesting to see how they explain the circumstance -that Glengarry, like Pickle, found his expectations blasted, and the -promises made to him unfulfilled, in consequence of the death of -Pickle’s employer, the brother of the Duke of Newcastle. What possible -claim could a professed Jacobite agent, known for such to Government, -as young Glengarry was, have on the good offices of the First Lord of -the Treasury? It has been fondly suggested that Pickle was an unknown -miscreant, personating Glengarry. That will be shown to be physically -impossible; but, granting the hypothesis, why was Glengarry, no less than -Pickle, favoured by Henry Pelham? No other person can be meant by the -phrase ‘those at the helme,’ now ‘no more.’ Newcastle, indeed, was out of -office in 1756, if ‘no more’ is explained as ‘out of office.’ But when -Glengarry wrote to Macleod in 1758 Newcastle was again at the Treasury. - -Macleod would not back Glengarry’s bill for 400_l._ His agents advised -him against this measure. In February 1760 Pickle, who was anxious to -go to London, asked the Duke of Newcastle to send him a bill, payable -at sight, ‘for whatever little sum is judged proper for the present.’ -The Duke’s answer, with the bill payable at sight for the little sum to -defray Pickle’s travelling expenses, is to be directed by his Grace - - ‘To Alexander Mackdonell of Glengary by Foraugustus.’ - -Apparently, then, Pickle had some means of getting at Glengarry’s -correspondence. The two gentlemen spell ‘Fort Augustus’ in the same -singular way. On September 11, 1758, Glengarry wrote to Mr. Orme’s -subordinate:— - -‘Will you dow me the favour to order me the “Calledonian Mercury” -regullarly every post to the care of Mr. William Fraser, merchant at -forAugustus?’ - -The almost unvarying uniformity in bad spelling which marks Pickle and -Glengarry will be commented on later. - -The last years of Glengarry were disturbed by the legal results of an -early piece of domestic slyness. His father, old Glengarry, commonly -described as a weak, indolent man, married, first, a lady named -Mackenzie, of the Hilton family. As his eldest son was not of age in -January 1745 the marriage may have been in 1723 or 1724. After bearing -a second son, Æneas, and apparently a daughter, Isobel, Lady Glengarry -died (1727). In a deed of 1728 we find Old Glengarry already remarried -to a daughter of Gordon of Glenbucket, who in 1724 was nearly murdered -by evicted Macphersons. The stepmother of Young Glengarry was a managing -woman, and ‘factrix’ of her husband’s estates. Now, in 1738 Old Glengarry -pawned or ‘wadsetted’ his lands of Cullachy to his kinsman Lochgarry. The -wadsetter paid 2,000 merks in money and gave bills for the rest. But in -January 1745, when Alastair was in Scotland on furlough from his French -regiment, Old Glengarry formally ‘disponed’ his estates to his eldest -son. Doubtless this was done with an eye to the chances of a rising; in -any case, the transaction was kept a secret from Glengarry’s wife and -factrix. - -Hence arose trouble, for the pawned estate of Cullachy had been -redeemed. Lochgarry had been paid his 2,000 merks, or they were set -off against another debt, but his bills were not returned to him. They -lay in Lady Glengarry’s custody, and she could not be asked for them -without revealing the secret transference of the whole property to -Young Glengarry in 1745. He therefore gave Lochgarry a written promise -that the bills should never be used against him. But Lochgarry being -attainted, after 1745, and exiled, his possessions were forfeited to the -Crown. Government therefore demanded, in 1758, that Glengarry should -redeem from them Lochgarry’s wadset of Cullachy. He pleaded that it was -already redeemed before 1745, but of this he could bring no evidence. He -writes to his Agent on August 2, 1758, that he is not certain of the year -of the wadset (really 1738), as he was not then in the kingdom; he was in -France. ‘Lochgarry being more in debt to the familly than the [amount of -the] mortgage, he delivered up his contract of wadsett, which I thought -was all the seremony necessary; and the signature being tore from it was -laid, according to custom, among the family papers, which were carried -off, and are now in Sir Everard Falconer’s custody.’ He knows little of -estate affairs, ‘as I was always abroad.’ His rental of 1744 was burned -with the house of his factor, Donald McDonell, Younger of Scotus. - -After the Rebellion, he did not meddle in matters of the property, till -his father’s death (1754). ‘The tenants could hardly pay what would -subsist him.’ - -‘Every tenant took possession of what farme he pleased.’ In 1746 ‘Mrs. -Mc.Donell of Lochgary being destitute of all suport, having a numerous -family of young children, came from Badenoch, took possession of -Cullachy, and there lived untill she followed her Husband abroad.’ - -‘The lands of Cullachie was only set till lately from year to year, the -tenants were frequently removed, I know of no written rentall, it is -not customary ... Discharges were not formerly required, nor were they -necssary.’ - -Glengarry explains all this to his Agent on January 6, 1759:— - -‘When I got disposition to my Father’s estate I was then under age, at -this time Lady Glengarry, _how_ [who] then had so much to Say with her -husband, the Disposition Grant was concealed from her, and as the Bill -granted by Lochgarry was in her Custody, had they demanded it would have -Discovered the Scheme in my favours, I granted my Obligatory to Lochgery -that these Bills should never make against him.’ - -The sense can be puzzled out of the anacoloutha. - -On February 3, 1759, he repeats his story:— - -‘I will only observe that the reason of the bills not being cancelled -or retired by Lockgerry, was that they were then in Lady Glengarry’s -custody, and that the disposition of my Father’s estate in my favour was -keept secret from her, which would have been discovered had Lochgerry -demanded his bills, and this occasioned my giving him my obligation they -should never make against him.’ - -The whole affair is a specimen of the informal manner in which Highland -business was done. The frequency of ‘removals’ of tenants also throws -doubt on the theory that Evictions were a novelty introduced by the -Commissioners of Forfeited Estates. The anarchy after Culloden is shown -by the squatting of tenants on whatever farms they chose to select. -The Judges could not be induced to accept Glengarry’s account of the -redemption of Cullachy, as he had no documentary evidence, and Cullachy -appears, after the Chiefs death, among his mortgaged lands.[117] - -The latest of the drafts in Glengarry’s Letter Book are of December 1758, -January 1759. He appears much aggrieved by Colonel Trapaud, Governor -of Fort Augustus, for the following cause: his ground-steward had been -claimed, unjustly it seems, as a deserter from the army. A party of -soldiers then acted in the manner described in the following draft, which -has no date or address:— - -‘The party in the dead of night was posted round my hutt, of which I was -ignorant untill my servants were stopped from going from door to door. -Alarmed at this, I suspected some straglers were come to break open some -valts in the old Castle, which was formerly Done.’ - -The indignant chief drafts the following remonstrance to Colonel Trapaud:— - - ‘I never thought to have reason to write you in so cooll a - strain. My own Behaviour, not to mention the pollitess showen - to you by my friends in Generall since you lived in this - countrey claimd a more Gentle return, and as our Actions are - always above Board It depends upon yourself that the same - Harmony Should allways subsist, and I will be very happie still - to remain, - - Sir, - - Your sincere friend and Humble servant.’ - -Trapaud’s behaviour, Glengarry writes, is ‘picking,’ and Pickle also -spells _pique_ ‘pick.’ The worst of it is that Glengarry ‘is lick to -lose the use of his eyes,’ for at the time of this assault in his ‘hutt’ -he was exceedingly ill. ‘I am now writting,’ he says to Colonel Lambert -(January 6, 1759) ‘in this confus’d stile with only the fowrth part of -one eye open, beeing near losing my life with a plague of a distemper, -which, when recovered, seised my eyes.’ On January 15, 1759, he tells -Captain Forbes that he can hardly see. On February 24, 1759, he expresses -a civil surprise at Macleod’s refusal to back his bill for 400_l._ On -February 3, he was still ‘hardly able to crall,’ but intended to go -south; his sister Bell was going to Edinburgh. Macleod’s persistent -refusal probably made the journey to London impossible, where Glengarry -expected ‘to be off or on with the Government claim against my estate.’ - -There are no later drafts in the Letter Book, but Pickle, at all events, -had the use of _his_ eyes when he wrote to the Duke of Newcastle on -February 19, 1760,[118] offering to raise a regiment. Glengarry, six -weeks later, urged the same proposal through the Duke of Atholl. - -On April 21, 1761, Glengarry made his will. He recommends his sister and -sole executrix to seal up his cabinet, which is not to be opened ‘till -the friends of the family meet.’ The Macdonnells of Greenfield, Leek, and -Cullachy are then ‘to see all the political and useless letters among my -papers burnt and destroyed, as the preservation of them can answer no -purpose.’ - -Mr. Fraser Mackintosh, who publishes these extracts, adds, ‘why Glengarry -who lived several months after the execution of his will, did not himself -destroy the papers above alluded to, can be conjectured by people for -themselves—all that need be said here is that their destruction was a -pity, and the reason given unsatisfactory.’[119] His affairs ‘were found -to be in a deplorable state.’ It may be conjectured that Glengarry clung -to his papers, which must have been compromising enough. If his malady -again affected his eyes, he might be unable to select the documents which -it was wiser to destroy. Nor could he well endure to entrust ‘my sister -Bell’ with the task of selection. She must not know her brother’s guilt. -That secret must have oozed out, for it has left traces in tradition.[120] - -Thus closed miserably a singular career. Impoverished, dying in a ‘hutt,’ -beside the ruins of his feudal castle, distrusted, not even permitted to -see his young nephew and heir, Glengarry reaped the harvest sown by his -mysterious attendant, Pickle. - - - - -XI - -THE CASE AGAINST GLENGARRY - - -Of all the companions of Pickle, the most inseparable was Glengarry. Now, -since the appearance of ‘Pickle the Spy,’ the author has been denounced -before the Gaelic Society! Amidst ‘applause’ a Celtic gentleman, the -news-sheets say, accused me of bringing a charge of an odious nature, -_without any proofs_. Of course, if I have no proofs, nobody who thinks -so need argue against what I, myself, regard as a chain of irrefragable -circumstantial evidence. Nor am I aware that any arguments, beyond -clamour, have been advanced, in favour of Glengarry’s innocence, except -those which I shall presently examine. But first I must meet the charge -of wresting facts to suit my ‘prepossessions.’ - -I had no prepossessions: how should I? If I knew so much as that there -was any young Glengarry, before I read the Pickle letters, it was -the limit of my information. These documents were pointed out to me, -several years ago, by Sir E. Maunde Thompson, when I was in search of -a manuscript to print for the Roxburghe Club. I began to read them, -where they are to be found, scattered through five or six volumes of the -Pelham Papers, in the British Museum. They are not all in sequence in -one volume, nor in chronological order. On a first hasty examination, -nothing appeared to indicate their author. I therefore had transcripts -made of the Pickle Letters, and, after reading them, arranged them -chronologically, being helped, where dates failed, by their allusions to -public events: such as the death of Frederick, Prince of Wales, the death -of Henry Pelham, and so forth. - -On a first glance at the originals, I had no hope of detecting the spy -called Pickle. He might be a servant, secretary, or retainer of any -Jacobite family. But indications as to his identity kept occurring, -when once the papers were sorted, and the hunting instinct awoke in -the reader, the fever of the chase. Pickle was apparently no ‘paltry -vidette,’ for he was in close relations with the Prime Minister, Henry -Pelham, and, later, with the Duke of Newcastle. Now a lacquey may, as -Sir Charles Hanbury Williams’s dispatches show, report to an Ambassador, -but a Prime Minister is less easy of access. Next, Pickle was, or had -succeeded in persuading Pelham that he was, a person of the first -importance in the Highlands. A critic has replied that, of course, a -spy would pretend to be important, and, naturally, would be accepted as -such. Ministers are scarcely so gullible. They do not accept a casual -stranger’s identity without inquiry. - -Presently it appeared, from a letter of the Court Trusty, or Secret -Service man, Bruce,[121] who attended Pickle in Edinburgh, that he -now, by his father’s death, was head of a great clan. Pickle’s father’s -death occurred in September 1754. Now, on examination, it appeared -that Old Glengarry, and no other Chief, died on September 1, 1754, in -Edinburgh, where we find Pickle, with Young Lochgarry, in mid September. -Pickle, writes Bruce, the Court Trusty (signing ‘Cromwell’) is adulated -by military society in Edinburgh, where he stays for at least a month. -He is to be observed, when he goes North, by the Governor of Fort -Augustus, near which lie Glengarry’s lands. The Governor (Trapaud) writes -unfavourably of the new Glengarry (December 13, 1754), and Pickle writes -that he will, if not permitted the use of arms, prevent officers from -shooting over his lands. - -Pickle then is, or affects to be, a young Chief, just come, by his -father’s death at Edinburgh, in September, into estates near Fort -Augustus. He is also, or pretends to be, the chief of the Macdonnells, -for he says (April 1754), ‘there could be no rising in Scotland without -the Macdonnells: he is sure that he shall have the _first_ notice of -anything of the kind; and he is sure that the Young Pretender would do -nothing without him.’ Finally (as stated on p. 209), writing to the Duke -of Newcastle (Feb. 19, 1760), he speaks of Pickle in the third person, -says that he is ready to raise a Highland regiment (which only a Chief -could do), and ends, ‘Direction’ (of reply) ‘To Alexander Mackdonnell, -of Glengary, by Foraugustus.’ Before I read that line, I had said to a -Highland friend, ‘The traitor is a Macdonald.’ ‘Not Clanranald, I hope,’ -he answered, and then Pickle’s last letter gave me the clue to Glengarry. - -Thus there was, and could be, no ‘prepossession’ on my part. The -circumstances all pointed direct to Glengarry, or to a personator of his, -and to no one else. Thus it became a ‘working hypothesis’ that Pickle -either was, or was personating, Glengarry: a Chief on terms of perfect -intimacy with Prince Charles. He was, or affected to be, a Macdonnell, -a Chief, with lands near Fort Augustus, to which he succeeded by his -father’s death in September 1754, the date of the death of Old Glengarry. - -Taking Pickle’s identity, natural or feigned, with Young Glengarry, as -a working hypothesis, it became necessary to trace the career of that -chief. At every stage, in every detail and date, after 1750, whatever -was true of Young Glengarry was found to be true of Pickle. Every gleam -of light that revealed the long forgotten incidents of Young Glengarry’s -career, after 1750, fell also on the sinister features of Pickle. My -hypothesis thus ‘colligated’ all the facts. New facts from MSS. came -into view after my book was published; my hypothesis colligated these -also. Everything fell into its place: everything coincided in the -identification of Pickle with Young Glengarry. - -To upset the evidence of a long series of coincidences, all pointing in -the same direction, some hypothesis other than the hypothesis that Pickle -is Glengarry must be advanced. Only one alternative suggestion has been -ventured, as far as I am aware—namely, that Glengarry was _personated_ -throughout, for ten years, by some unknown ‘inward’ or close intimate, -calling himself ‘Pickle.’ That hypothesis I shall prove to be not only -morally but physically impossible, to demand a physical and moral -miracle. We are left, then, with the equation, Pickle = Glengarry.[122] - -To the _a priori_ objection, that it is morally inconceivable that -a Highland Chief, of character hitherto unsuspected, should sink so -low, I need hardly reply. Too many Chiefs, from the death of Malcolm -MacHeth, had been in the same _galère_. Young Glengarry, moreover, _was_ -suspected by several independent witnesses. We have also read the story -of Barisdale, Glengarry’s cousin. _A priori_ improbability there is none. -We therefore proceed to examine the career of Young Glengarry, and to -show how his comings and goings, his entrances and exits, the changes in -his fortunes, his unconsidered private letters, his spelling, and his -handwriting, all combine to identify him with the author of the Pickle -Correspondence. - -About the early years of Alastair Ruadh Macdonnell of Glengarry it is -unnecessary to write at great length. Born apparently about 1725, for -he was not of age in the beginning of 1745, Young Glengarry had one -brother of the full blood, Æneas, accidentally shot at Falkirk in 1746. -He had also a sister, Isobel. Before 1728 his mother died. Wodrow says -that she was imprisoned by her husband on an islet, and died of hunger -(1727). Young Glengarry now received a stepmother, a daughter of Gordon -of Glenbucket. He does not seem to have been attached to this lady, who -bore two sons to Old Glengarry. According to Murray of Broughton, Young -Glengarry ‘was most barbarously used by his father and mother-in-law’ (p. -441). Alastair, at all events, was sent to France as early as 1738, where -he was not likely to learn English orthography. His own, though pretty -consistent in its blunders, is of the kind which Captain Burt found -prevailing in the Highlands. - -Alastair’s boyhood was probably unluxurious. Burt tells the following -curious anecdote on this head. After 1715, the Castle of Invergarry, -which had been adorned by the father of the Glengarry of Shirramuir, was -gutted by the English soldiery. It was refurnished and made inhabitable -by the agent of a Liverpool Company, who smelted iron in the district. -Glengarry, meanwhile, ‘inhabited a miserable hut of turf, as he does to -this day’ (1735?). To this manager, a Quaker, a number of gentlemen -of the clan paid a visit. After receiving them hospitably, the Quaker -observed that they would always be welcome in ‘my house.’ - -‘God d—n you, Sir, your house! I thought it had been Glengarry’s house.’ -They then assaulted the Quaker, who was rescued by his workmen.[123] -Alastair was better lodged in France, where, in 1743, he got a Company -in the Royal Scots. In 1744 he was with Pickle’s friend, the exiled Earl -Marischal, at Dunkirk, meaning to start with the futile French expedition -from Gravelines. - -How that expedition was ‘muddled away’ we have told in the essay on the -Earl Marischal. At this time the Earl in France, and Murray of Broughton -in Scotland, gravely distrusted James’s agents in France, Sempil and -Balhaldie. Now Balhaldie was a connection of Lochiel, and was aware that -Murray held him in suspicion. He, therefore, after the collapse of the -expedition of 1744, sent over to Lochiel Young Glengarry, ‘freighted with -heavy complaints’ against Murray. Lochiel next, in the spring of 1745, -brought Murray and Young Glengarry together. The young Chief told Murray -that Balhaldie accused him of bidding the Prince come to Scotland, with -or without French assistance, and ‘seat himself on the throne, and leave -the King at Rome’ (which was precisely what James desired and Charles -repudiated).[124] Glengarry was therefore to warn the party against -Murray. Murray told Glengarry the real facts—namely, that Balhaldie -was too imaginative, and Glengarry seemed quite satisfied. Indeed, he -produced a letter to the same effect as regards Balhaldie from Æneas -Macdonald, the banker, and, later, the informer. - -Glengarry and Murray presently met at that strange tavern gathering in -Edinburgh, where, out of the company, Traquair, Lovat, Glengarry, Murray, -Macleod, and Lochiel, Lochiel alone preserved his honour. Glengarry then -went to the Highlands with letters for Sir Alexander Macdonald of Sleat -and other gentlemen. In January 1745 Glengarry had induced his father -secretly to dispone to him his lands, an action which became a serious -trouble to him later. In May 1745 Murray sent him with despatches to the -Prince in France, and with reasons why Charles should not come unless -accompanied by a French force. Late in 1745 Young Glengarry was taken at -sea, and lodged in the Tower. - -Charles, meanwhile, was loyal enough to his imprisoned adherent. On -November 4, 1746, Charles wrote to d’Argenson, ‘there are three prisoners -in London, sir, in whom I take a warm interest. These are Sir Hector -Maclean, Glengarry, and my secretary, Mr. Murray of Broughton. All three -hold French commissions, the first was born at Calais.... I implore you, -sir, to take every means to secure their exchange, and will regard it as -a personal obligation.’ - -These gentlemen, however, were not naturalised French subjects, like -Nicholas Wogan, who, after fighting when a boy at Preston in 1715, and -after losing an arm at Fontenoy, took part in the campaign of 1745, and -later saw Cumberland’s back at Laffeldt fight. Nicholas may have been -exchanged, in 1746, as a French prisoner; for Murray and Glengarry this -plea was unavailing. The Prince, however, did his best for both men, and -ill they rewarded him.[125] - -Glengarry told Bishop Forbes the same story in 1752. He was the bearer of -a letter from the Chiefs, imploring the Prince not to come over without -arms, money, and auxiliary forces.[126] But he could not find Charles, -who was incognito, ‘lurking for a spring.’ Towards the end of 1745 -Alastair was captured, as we saw, while conveying a piquet of the Royal -Scots to join the Prince. He pined in the Tower, he says, for twenty-two -months, and was then released. His fortunes were frowning. His father lay -in Edinburgh Castle, a written information having been laid against him -by a number of the gentlemen of his clan who had been out in the Rising. -His lands and cattle had been destroyed and driven away by the English -soldiery. Men squatted on what farm they chose, and could only pay rent -enough to ‘subsist’ his father. The French Government made demands on him -for money advanced to him while in the Tower, and stopped his pay. His -grant from the Scots Fund (1,800 livres) was inadequate. The Prince could -not procure for him a regiment. In these gloomy circumstances Alastair -took a step which nobody can blame in itself. He attempted to reconcile -himself to the English Government. The following letter is from a friend -sincerely anxious for his success:—[127] - - (State Papers, Domestic, Scotland, Bundle 38 (1747), No. 6.) - - ‘Roterdam, Oct. 17, 1747. - - ‘Sir,—I take this opportunity of my worthy friend an officer of - the Royals of informing you how I have had severall letters on - the following Subject from Mr. Macdonell Junior of Glengary who - desires me to charge you with this letter. He has frequently - and seriously reflected on the many good Advices given him - by you and Maj. White when he was Prisoner at the Tower, to - abandon that party and the service of France. I am thorrowly - convinced that he is determined so to do if it is agreeable - to the Ministry, and that he will give the Duke of Argyle and - them all the assurances that a man of honour can give of his - behaving as a peaceable Subject, if they will allow him to - wait upon them in London. Let me beg of you for God’s sake to - persuade these great men to accept of this young Gentleman’s - offer, by which at once you’ll detach him from that party that - has given birth to all the Calamitys that both his Clan and - Country has suffered this age past: as I shall be some months - here before my affair is Negociated you’ll have time to send me - answer, which I pray God may be favourable. Please write me as - soon as you can. I am with my Compliments to your family, - - ‘Sir, your most obedt. oblidged humble Sert. - - ‘WILL: BAILLIE. - - ‘P.S.—The young man depends very much on the Duke of Argyle’s - interest. - - ‘To Major Macdonald at London.’ - -On September 20, 1748, Glengarry wrote from Amiens, telling James that -he ‘waited an opportunity of going safely to Britain,’ on his private -affairs. In December he asked James to procure for him the colonelcy -vacant by the death of Lochiel. Young Lochiel, a boy, had been appointed. -James could do nothing, and was too poor to send money. But, on -Glengarry’s request, he dispatched ‘a duplicate of your grandfather’s -warrant to be a peer’—Lord Macdonnell and Aros. Glengarry often signs -‘Mackdonell,’ without Christian name.[128] - -On June 8, 1749, Glengarry explained his circumstances to Cardinal York -and to Lismore, James’s agent at Versailles. ‘I shall be obliged to -leave this country, if not relieved.’ Presently he went to London, with -Leslie, a priest suspected of treachery by the Jacobites.[129] Leslie -says, ‘Glengarry did not intend to appear publicly’ in London, ‘but to -have advice of some counsellors about an act of the Privy Council against -his returning to Great Britain.’ He was so poor that Leslie pledged for -him, to Clanranald, a watch of Mrs. Murray’s of Broughton, wife of the -notorious traitor. He had already ‘sold his sword and shoe-buckles.’ -This must have been the very nadir of his fortunes, and four years later -Campbell of Lochnell told Mrs. Archibald Cameron that now, in 1748 or -1749—the lady could not remember which—Glengarry offered his service, -‘in any shape they thought proper,’ to the English Government and Henry -Pelham.[130] Without pausing to discuss the value of Mrs. Cameron’s -evidence (given on January 25, 1754) we return to what is actually -known of Glengarry in 1749. He had left London, probably little the -better for his visit. On September 23, 1749, Glengarry wrote to Lismore -from Boulogne. He has been in London, by advice of his friends, ‘ces -Messieurs croyant que je ne ferai point de difficulté de me conformer aux -intentions du Gouvernement, mais étant toujours determine de ne me point -égare[r] des principes de mes Ancêtres, ne du devoir que je dois a mon -Roy je [de?] me lui tenir, je puis retire [retirais?].’ If not relieved, -he must return to England.[131] We know what his protestations of -loyalty were worth. We do not know what occurred to Glengarry, in London, -at this time. - -Starving in July or August 1749, Glengarry appears (according to Æneas -Macdonald, the banker) to ‘have plenty of cash’ at the end of the year -(December). In October his father had been released from Edinburgh -Castle, a point of no evidential importance, as several other gentlemen -were also simultaneously set free. His estates were not forfeited, though -remonstrances on this head were addressed to the English Government. They -exist in the State Papers. - -Before Æneas Macdonald met Glengarry in December, and earlier in the -winter of 1749, Young Glengarry and Archy Cameron went North, and helped -themselves to the Treasure of Cluny, the gold of Loch Arkaig.[132] On -January 16, 1750, Glengarry reported his journey to Edgar, and accused -Archibald Cameron of taking 6,000 louis d’or, and damping all hearts -in the Highlands.[133] Cameron, on his side, appears to have accused -Glengarry of obtaining the money by forging a letter from James. James, -writing to Charles about Cameron’s charge, leaves a blank for the -name (March 17, 1750). But Æneas Macdonald supplies the name of Young -Glengarry (October 12, 1751). - -That Young Glengarry was concerned in the looting of the treasure in -winter, 1749, is certain from his own admission to Charles, corroborated -by the confession of Cameron of Glenevis to Colonel Crawfurd, in October -1751. In that confession appears the earliest charge of treachery against -Glengarry, who, Cameron vows, must have betrayed him (p. 153). At about -the same time (November 30, 1751, February 14, 1752) Holker (of Ogilvie’s -French Scots Regiment) and Blair anonymously warned young Edgar against -Glengarry. He is a friend of Leslie, ‘an arrant rogue,’ and is ‘known -to be in great intimacy with Murray’—of Broughton, the traitor, an -acquaintance which is proved by Murray’s own ‘Memorials,’ already cited. -Even if we discount Mrs. Cameron’s story, with those of Archy Cameron and -Glenevis, as Camerons were at feud with Macdonnells, we have no reason to -suspect hostile animus in Young Edgar, Blair and Holker.[134] They remark -(February 14, 1752) that ‘Mr. Macdonald of Glengarrie says that he is -charged with the affaires of his Majesty,’ in London. - -Now, what was, in 1751 the real situation of Young Glengarry? He had left -Rome in September 1750. In January 1751 he was in Paris, and wrote to -Edgar, asking for money. He was confined to bed by a severe cold.[135] -At an uncertain date, probably April 1751, he was residing publicly in -London, for he thence announced to Charles his approaching marriage ‘with -a lady of a very Honourable and loyall familie in England,’ after which -he will repay his share of the Loch Arkaig gold. On this head he has -satisfied James. He discloses the embezzlements of Cluny![136] On July -15, 1751, he wrote from London to James, and to Edgar, with political -and loyal observations. Yet, in 1751, Glenevis believed, for very good -reasons, that Glengarry was already an informer. If the suspicions of -Glenevis were correct, Glengarry was an informer in 1751, the date -assigned by Pickle to the beginning of his own service is about 1750. - -Thus, in 1751, Glengarry was tolerated in London by the English -Government, though still professing loyalty to James. As late as October -1754 he had not ‘qualified’ or taken the oaths. He must, therefore, -have made his peace with England—otherwise! He had resigned his French -commission. Moreover, while his accomplices in the Loch Arkaig affair, -the Camerons, were arrested, Glengarry, the ‘unqualified,’ was allowed to -go about London, and travel to France and Scotland, though the English -Ministry knew that he was at least as guilty as Glenevis and Downan. - -The inferences are obvious. Government had a motive for sparing -Glengarry. Again, quite apart from the Pickle letters, Glengarry is -assuredly betraying one or the other party. To James he poses as an -active conspirator. To the English Government he poses as, at least, ‘one -peaceable subject,’ for they allow him to live, and love, in London, and -to go where he pleases. He was in Edinburgh in April, 1752, and dined -with Bishop Forbes. Later, he seems to have gone to Lochaber, which -Government knew, from an Informer. - -We now come to the Elibank Plot, to kidnap the Royal Family. It flickered -from November 1752 to summer, 1753. Glengarry, writing from Arras on -April 5, 1753, gives Edgar, James’s secretary, a veiled account of the -affair. ‘The day was fixt,’ on, or for, November 10, 1752, but the -English shuffled, and did not act. ‘The concert in Novr. was,’ says -Glengarry, ‘that I was to remain in London, as I had above four hundred -Brave Highlanders ready at my call, and, after matters had broke out -there to sett off directly for Scotland, as no raising would be made -amongst the Clans without my presence.’[137] He then alludes to ‘my leate -illness at Paris,’ which has left him ‘still very weake’—a phrase used at -the same time by Pickle. - -Now the Pickle letters begin on November 2, 1752, and Pickle speaks -of himself, to his English employers, in precisely the same terms as -Glengarry uses about himself when writing to Edgar. Pickle says that, -among his Jacobite friends, he explains his supplies of English money as -remittances from ‘Baron Kenady.’ Now, in Lord Advocate Craigie’s letters -of 1745,[138] we read ‘in most things Young Glengarry is advised and -directed by Baron Kennedy,’ a Baron of the Scottish Exchequer. Thus, if -Pickle is Glengarry, he would naturally represent his chief adviser, -Baron Kennedy, as the source of his supplies. He announces (Boulogne, -November 2, 1752) ‘you’l soon hear of a hurly burly,’ and he must make -a long journey, first to Paris, then South, as he writes on November 4 -to Henry Pelham.[139] The hurly burly is the Elibank Plot. ‘I will see -my friend’ (Henry Pelham) ‘or that can happen.’ To Pelham he says, ‘I -will lay before you _in person_ all I can learn.’ Pelham knew Pickle -_personally_, and could not be deceived as to his identity, as to his -being a Chief, as he represented himself. In December 1752 Pickle, in -London, informed against Archibald Cameron and Lochgarry, whom Charles -had sent to Scotland, also against Fassifern and Glenevegh (Glenevis) as -agents for Charles with the Southern Jacobites. Pickle has seen Charles, -and, in town, Lord Elibank, who ‘surprised me to the greatest degree by -telling me that all was put off for some time.’ He has promised Charles -‘to write nothing to Rome,’ which Glengarry actually did, in April 1753. -In later letters to his English employers, Pickle speaks much of a severe -illness, at Paris, which ‘nearly tripped up his hiells,’ and left him, -like Glengarry at the same date, ‘very weake.’ He had caught a cold, with -a relapse at the masked ball of the Lundi Gras, where he met the Prince. -‘They now believe Pickle could have a number of Highlanders even in -London to follow him.’ Nothing can be transacted in the Highlands without -his knowledge, as his Clan must begin the play.’[140] The scheme is a -night attack on the Palace of St. James’s. Pickle has often discussed it -with his friend, the Earl Marischal, Frederick’s ambassador to the French -Court.[141] - -Here, then, are the following points shared in common by Pickle and -Glengarry. (1.) Both in November 1752 are engaged in a deep Jacobite -Plot. (2.) Both are expected to lead a force of Highlanders, ‘even in -London.’ (3.) No rising can take place among the Clans without each of -them. (4.) Both are in correspondence with Rome. (5.) Both suffer from a -severe illness at the same time, and are left very ‘weake’. (6.) Both are -friends of Baron Kennedy. (7.) Both frequently visit the Earl Marischal -in Paris. - -That Glengarry visited the Earl in 1753 I cannot prove by independent -evidence. But I can show, by independent evidence, that he, as well as -(by his own statement) Pickle, did so at an approximate date. Glengarry -had known the Earl since 1744. Here is another spy’s undated testimony -(1752-1754) to Glengarry’s familiarity with the Earl Marischal in Paris, -about this date, when Pickle haunts the old exile.[142] - -‘Macdonald of Glengarry, goes by the first of these names, lives at a -_Baigneur’s_ in the _Rue Guenegaud_, and keeps one Servant out of Livery, -and two in Livery. When he first came to Paris he kept a _Carosse de -Remise_ by the month, but now only hires one occasionally to make his -visits, which are chiefly to - -Lord Ogilvie - -Mr. Ratcliffe - -Mrs. Carryl of Sussex - -Mrs. Hamilton (Lord Abercorn’s Cousin who has changed her Religion and -lives with Mrs. Carryl) - -The 3 Messrs. Hayes (who are cousins and lodge at the _Hotel de -Transylvanie, Rue Conde_) - - Macloud } at Roisins, a Coffee House in the Rue Vaugirard - Fitzgerald } - -Lord Pittenweemys, the Earl of Kelly’s Son, at the _Hotel d’Angleterre, -Rue Tarrane_ - -Sir James Cockburn, at the _Caffe de la Paix_, in the _Rue Tarane_. - - Lord Hallardy } at a _Baigneur’s_ on the Estrapade where - Mr. Gordon } they keep themselves conceal’d, - Mr. Mercer } - L. Cromarty } - -Frequently to the Jesuits’ College. - -‘_And never fails going to Lord Marshal_, whose Coach is often lent him -when he has none of his own. - -‘N.B.—Tuesday 9th. Janry. Macdonald waited in his own Coach from ten -o’clock at night till past eleven, in the _Rue Dauphine_, when a Person -took him up in a Chariot, who, by the description, is believed to be -Lord Marshal. It is about that time that the Pretender’s Son is suppos’d -to have been in Paris.’ - -Thus Glengarry undeniably frequented the old Earl Marischal, no less than -Pickle did, and the English Government knew it. Yet they did not arrest -him, as they arrested Glenevis, Downan, Fassifern, Archy Cameron, and -tried to arrest Lochgarry, on all of whom Pickle had informed. Moreover -Glengarry, in Paris, is not starving, but has a servant out of livery, -and two in livery, keeps or hires a carriage, or uses that of the Earl -Marischal. - -I respectfully submit that these seven common notes of Pickle and of -Glengarry cannot possibly be explained, except on one of two hypotheses. -Either Pickle is Glengarry, or he is audaciously personating Glengarry, -not only by letter, but bodily. For he promises to visit Henry Pelham ‘in -person,’ and Henry Pelham, with the English officials and police, cannot -but have known the aspect of Glengarry, a man who, for twenty-two months, -was an important state prisoner in the Tower, and had, later, lived -openly in London, though, as we shall see, under surveillance. - -That point I prove thus: on August 12, 1753, Charles, in hiding at Liège, -and elsewhere in the Netherlands, desired, as he notes in a draft, an -interview ‘with G.’[143] In August, or September, 1753, Pickle sent -in accounts of his interview with Charles, in whose company he had -travelled from Ternan to Paris. The Prince asked Pickle to allow arms to -be landed on his estate, which Pickle refused, ‘nobody knowing as yet in -what manner the forfeited estates would be settled.’[144] Pickle himself -is now in England. - -Now we know, from a report in the State Papers, that, in 1753, the -English Government received intelligence from a spy on Glengarry. ‘Mr. -McDonald of Glengarry has been several times in France within these three -weeks, and is suspected to be an agent for the Young Pretender, who, it -is believed, has been lately in Paris, incog. N.B.—The above-mentioned -Mr. McDonald lodges at the second House on the right hand side of the way -in Beaufort Buildings, in the Strand, and is a young, fair, full-made -man.’[145] - -Thus, just when Charles wishes to meet ‘G,’ Glengarry is coming and -going from France to England, suspected by a spy to be a Jacobite -agent, while Pickle is reporting to the English Government on his own -simultaneous journeys and interviews with the Prince. Yet the English -Government, though independently informed of Glengarry’s movements, and -his familiarity with the Earl Marischal (whom they know to be intriguing -for the Jacobites with Prussia), arrest Clanranald, arrest Fassifern, but -never touch Glengarry! - -This is not the limit of their favours. Far from incommoding Glengarry, -Henry Pelham promises that Government will remit all their large claims -on his estate. For this, as least, we have Glengarry’s written word, as -has been shown already in ‘The Last Days of Glengarry.’[146] - -The Celtic believers in Glengarry’s innocence may explain why, when -Pelham was arresting Jacobites all over Scotland, in 1753, he not only -allowed Glengarry, who had not ‘qualified,’ and against whom he had -copious information, to go free, but also ‘promised an absolute discharge -of the heavie claims the Government has against me.’ He made similar -promises to Pickle, who complains of their non-fulfilment. And, on the -hypothesis of Glengarry’s guilt, his motive is now transparent. In -addition to payments of ready money, sorely needed, his estates escaped -forfeiture, _and he was promised remission of the fines_. These facts, of -course, were unknown before I had access to Glengarry’s MS. Letter Book. -My hypothesis colligates the new facts as well as the old, which is the -note of a good working hypothesis. - -To the seven common points between Pickle and Glengarry, in 1752-53, -we now add an eighth: both have been disappointed by Henry Pelham’s -promises, broken after his death. Such coincidences cannot be fortuitous, -and Glengarry’s friends must explain why he, a known Jacobite agent, was -so endeared to Henry Pelham. - -At this time, the autumn of 1753, James Mohr Macgregor made his absurd -‘revelations,’ about an Irish plot to invade Scotland. He, his chief, -Balhaldie, and a Mr. Trant, were particularly concerned. Government had -also news, from Pickle, Count Kaunitz, and other sources, of Frederick’s -tampering with the Jacobites, through the Earl Marischal, the friend both -of Pickle and of Glengarry. It would have been natural to arrest and -examine Glengarry, who, as Government knew, was a familiar friend of the -Earl Marischal. In place of doing that—they consulted Pickle! The Duke of -Newcastle wrote a paper of Memoranda, proving his agitation, and making -a note that Henry Pelham should collogue with ‘the person from whom he -sometimes receives information.’[147] That person was Pickle. - -Here are Pickle’s answers! - - (_Private intelligences concerning some particular persons._) - - ‘He says Mr. Trent told him there was a Collection already made - for the Pretender of about £40,000, and that his friends here - said he should [not] want for money, tho’ it were £200,000. - - ‘Mr. Trent and he were very familiar formerly, but as he is - here grown a great man, he does not see so much of him. Trent - is not gone, but is expected to go every day. This Mr. Trent is - son of Olive Trent [once mistress of the Regent d’Orléans, and - complained of by Bolingbroke]. - - ‘He does not know, nor believe, any one has come from Lord - Marshal hither lately with authority. He is sure no Arms have - come to Scotland this year, if there had, he must have known - it. [James Mohr said arms had come.] He says Sullivan’s Brother - has been twice at Rome lately, but does not know his errand. - - ‘Bohaldie [James Mohr’s Chief] was an Agent of the Pretender - with the late Lord Temple (Sempil?), but the Irish got him - turnd off, and he is sure Lord Marshal would never trust him, - because he will never believe him. [James Mohr had alleged that - the Earl was engaged with Balhaldie.] - - ‘_MacGregor was a Spy of both sides, and will never be trusted._ - - ‘When he [Macgregor] escaped to Bulloigne he was very poor, but - Lord Strathallan etc took compassion upon him, and he knows the - Old Pretender sent him £20.’ - -This report damaged poor James Mohr; he was dismissed, and, in -a few months, died a destitute exile. General Stewart of Garth -claims our sympathy for James, who ‘rejected an employment which he -considered dishonourable in itself, and detrimental to the good of his -country.’[148] Alas! his employers rejected James! - -We now reach the crucial point of the hypothesis that Pickle _personated_ -Glengarry. ‘Whoever Pickle was, it was clearly his intention to personate -Glengarry,’ says Mr. A. H. Millar.[149] Now on this point, I need -scarcely recapitulate what is said at the beginning of this chapter. On -September 14, 1754, we find the bereaved Pickle, an orphan now, but also -a Chief, by his father’s death, in Edinburgh with Young Lochgarry, who -cannot but have known Young Glengarry, his Chief. For this presence of -the orphan in Edinburgh, we have not only his written word, but that of -Bruce (‘Cromwell’), the ‘Court Trusty’ who accompanied him. We have his -testimony to Pickle’s enhanced pride. He it is who tells us how ‘the Army -people make up to Pickle, thinking to make something of him,’ how General -Bland (unconscious of guile) suspects _him_, as a friend of Pickle’s; -how Pickle is going North, to his estates, and how the Governor of Fort -Augustus, hard by, is ‘to try his hand upon Pickle.’[150] - -All this Pickle himself confirms, in two letters of one of which only -the briefest analysis has hitherto been given.[151] But these dull -confirmatory letters may be relegated to an appendix. Briefly, we -learn from his letters how Pickle has hurried to Edinburgh, for some -reason of his own, on the news of a death which coincides with that -of Old Glengarry. Coincidently, too, Pickle’s family affairs are in -great disorder. He writes again from Edinburgh (October 10, 1754), and -this letter is in his feigned hand.[152] In his second epistle from -Edinburgh Pickle confirms all that Bruce, the Court Trusty, has said -about his approaching journey North, whence Colonel Trapaud, Governor -of Fort Augustus, gives a bad account of Glengarry as swindling his -wadsetters.[153] Pickle also confirms Bruce’s account of the jealousy of -General Bland. - -That Young Glengarry, as well as Pickle, was a week’s distance from -town after his father’s death (September 1, 1754) I now confirm by the -following letter to himself, where he is supposed to be interested in Old -Lochgarry. It is probably from the Major Macdonald who, while he was a -prisoner in 1747, persuaded him to conform to the English Government. - - ‘London: Sept. 12, 1754. - - ‘My dear Cuss,—I have duely received the Honour of yours of 3d - current. I must own that the melancholly news [Old Glengarry’s - death] gave me an inexpressible shock, the only thing that - abates my greife is that my dear late friend is so well - represented in your dear person. I pray that all the powers - above may combine to make you shine even above your noble - Ancestors. I hope that Hevon will long preserve and prosper - you for the protection of a poor name that seems at present in - a very tottering and abject condition; No doubt this accident - will naturally retard your coming to this place [London] yet I - can’t think otherwise than that your interest calls you hither - has soon you may have settled your domestique concerns. - - ‘I have a line from Samer [probably St. Omer] by which I - understand that the whole Coy [Corps?] seem’d determined to - get ride of Loch[garry] at all events surely he’s a most - incorrigible man, and if a certain person [the Prince] does not - interpose he must fall a sacrafice to his enemies’ resentment - and to his own folly. Mrs. Macdonald and the young folks join - in compliments, our friendes of Crevan street salute you, and I - ever am, My dear Cous, - - ‘Yours whilst J. M. - - ‘London: Sept. 12, 1754. - - ‘I did not receive your note dated wednesday till Thursday 12 - o’clock.’[154] - -Thus, all Pickle’s movements at this solemn hour of Old Glengarry’s -decease tally with those of Young Glengarry. Pickle is adulated by the -army people, and goes North to his estates near Fort Augustus, whence the -Governor reports on—Glengarry. - -Can Pickle, then, while Glengarry is in Scotland, after his father’s -death, be posing in Edinburgh as himself a young, newly orphaned chief, -going to his lands near Fort Augustus; personating Glengarry, in fact—for -no other Chief had just lost his father? - -Mr. Millar says: ‘Whoever Pickle was, it was clearly his intention -to personate Glengarry.... It is hardly possible to imagine that an -impostor could have deceived the Edinburgh folks, to whom Glengarry must -have been well known,’ and whom, hurrying to his father’s funeral, and -to arrange his affairs, he must just have visited, for Old Glengarry -died in Edinburgh. I venture to call such an impersonation a physical -impossibility, prolonged, as it was, for some six weeks. It is -_physically impossible_ that, both in London and Edinburgh, many men who -knew Young Glengarry should have supposed another person—Pickle—to be -that hero. Yet, if the personation was played off, it was not discovered, -then or later; for Pickle continued to be the informer, and to be the -shadow of Glengarry. As soon as it is admitted that Pickle is feigning -to be Glengarry, the case for that Chief’s innocence is given up. -The personation, among people who knew Glengarry intimately well, is -_impossible_. - -Pickle’s day of usefulness had gone by. On April 24, 1755, an official -gave in a report of a conversation with the Chief, ‘the head of a great -Clan of his name,’ who wanted money.[155] In April 1756 Pickle again came -to London, and dunned the Duke of Newcastle: ‘not the smalest article -has been perform’d, of what was expected and at first promised. I am -certain my first friend’ (Pelham) ‘mentioned me to the King....’[156] In -an undated letter he speaks of being on an ‘utstation’ in the Highlands, -and talks of Glengarry in the third person.[157] He tells of Glengarry’s -greatness, of Jacobite overtures to him, and repeats his usual fond -demands. - -In 1758, 1759, we know, from his own letters, that Glengarry was eager to -go to London, to make terms about the fines on his estate. But Macleod -would not back his bill for 400_l._ On February 19, 1760, Pickle wrote -the last letter to Newcastle extant in the Pelham Papers. He speaks -of Pickle in the third person, but he writes in Pickle’s hand. Pickle -wants to give information; Pickle wishes to raise a regiment (and so did -Glengarry), if he gets ‘the Rank of full Colonel, the nomenation of his -Officers, and suitable levie money:’ also ‘a bill payable at sight’ for -travelling expenses. He ends, ‘Mack mention of _Pickle_. His Majesty -will remember Mr. Pelham did, upon former affairs of great consequence. -Direction—_To Alexander Mackdonell of Glengary, by Foraugustus_.’[158] - -A reply from Newcastle directed to Glengarry would be opened by -Glengarry, and then, if Glengarry did not write Pickle’s epistle of -February 19, 1760, where is Pickle? Mr. Millar suggests that, ‘if Pickle -were a traitor in Glengarry’s family, he must have been in a position -to intercept the reply to this letter, or the whole plot would have -been exposed.’ This is a romantic hypothesis. There is no trace of any -gentleman (such as Pickle was) eternally in attendance on Glengarry. And -why did the hypothetical traitor offer to raise a regiment, which only -Glengarry could do? There is no conceivable motive for writing such a -letter on the part of any one but Glengarry, who was terribly pressed for -money, and could raise a regiment. Besides, the physical impossibility of -Pickle’s supposed personation has already been demonstrated. Glengarry, -who had long been in very bad health, died on December 23, 1761. The -nature of his will has been explained. - -The internal evidence of identity in the authorship of Pickle’s and -Glengarry’s letters remains to be considered. Both write the same -shambling style. In an age of bad spelling both have a long list of -blunders in common. I give a few:— - - 1. aquent acquaint. - - 2. estime esteem. - - 3. tow two. - - 4. dow do. - - 5. sow so. - - 6. triffle trifle. - - 7. { jant } jaunt. - { chant } - - 8. { utquarters out quarters. - { utstation out station. - - 9. pick pique. - - 10. { Foraugustus } Fort Augustus. - { forAugustus } - - 11. how who. - - 12. lick like. - - 13. supplay supply. - - 14. relay rely. - - 15. puish push. - -Of these, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 12, 13, 14 occur, sporadically, in other -Scotch writers of the age, as in the Gask Correspondence. Pickle combines -them all. But I have not elsewhere met 7, 8, 9, 10, 15. ‘How’ for ‘who’ -(11) I have met in Macleod of Raasay’s letters in the ‘Lyon in Mourning,’ -and in one letter of 1725, while ‘howse’ for ‘whose’ occurs in a Scotch -epistle in the Cumberland MSS. The _accumulation_ of these fifteen -mis-spellings is the common note of the orthography of Pickle and of -Glengarry. It constitutes a note of identity of authorship. - -But, believers in personation may say, ‘Pickle had carefully studied and -adroitly copied Glengarry’s orthography, as, _ex hypothesi_, he wished to -pass for that Chief.’ - -Then why did he not also imitate Glengarry’s handwriting? - -Glengarry wrote two hands; one is a sprawling scrawl, sloped much to the -right, in his rough drafts of letters, preserved in his Letter Book; the -other is merely the same hand written smaller, closer, not so sloped, in -his letters, for example, to James and Edgar. The Windsor Letters, the -neater and more careful, I could not compare with those of Pickle at the -British Museum. But I took Glengarry’s Letter Book, or folio of scrawled -drafts, thither, and Mr. Millar (author of the criticism in the _Scottish -Review_) kindly compared the two sets of documents, he having much -experience in such studies. I append what is essential in his report, -contributed to the _Dundee Advertiser_ of April 28, 1897. - - ‘Mr. Lang has come into possession of much new evidence upon - the subject. Amongst other documents he has the Letter-book - in which Glengarry frequently copied his letters with his own - hand and signed them. This book comes from an unchallengeable - source. By Mr. Lang’s invitation I had to-day the pleasure of - comparing the handwriting of Glengarry in this book with the - Pickle letters in the British Museum. At the first glance one - would say that the manuscripts are so unlike superficially - that they were not both written by the same person. Glengarry - wrote a wide, sprawling hand, with a very distinct slope - towards the right. The Pickle letters are all written in - the vertical style, and the lines are small and neat. When - examined more closely, however, there is a striking similarity - in the details. Having selected Pickle letters that contained - similar words to those in the Letter-book, I have made a - careful comparison of them minutely. It is beyond question - that whoever Pickle was he wrote in a feigned handwriting to - prevent identification should any letter miscarry. If Glengarry - wished to feign another hand than his own, the most obvious - way of effecting his purpose would be to change the sloping - style into the upright style. When Pickle wished to disguise - his hand he used the upright style. There are several letters - which Glengarry wrote in a very peculiar manner. The capital - letter “T,” for instance, was distinctly Glengarrian. But - the capital “T” written repeatedly by Pickle is absolutely - identical with that used in the Glengarry book. Such words as - “most,” “humble,” “Sir,” “I,” and “Tho’” are precisely the same - in form in both cases, the only difference being the change of - the slope. There is only one curious fact which comes out after - careful examination. When Glengarry is writing adjectives that - begin with the letter “d” he generally uses a capital. Tickle - never does this, but uses the small “d” instead, yet that small - “d” is exactly similar in form to the same letter written by - Glengarry. This is certainly minute criticism, and might not - be sufficient alone to establish the case against Glengarry; - but when the other fact is borne in mind, that Pickle and - Glengarry make the same errors in the spelling of uncommon - words, the confirmatory proof is very strong. It is not likely - that any letter exists in which Glengarry fully acknowledges - his treachery, and the main evidence must therefore be - circumstantial. If Mr. Lang had now to begin writing his book - with all the additional evidence before him which he has - obtained since its publication, he would probably find few - who would dissent from his conclusion that Pickle the Spy - was no other than Alastair Macdonnell of Glengarry. There may - be coincidences in events in the lives of two men; but it is - incredible that Pickle, when disguising his handwriting, should - fall into the same formation of many of the letters which was - peculiar to Macdonnell of Glengarry. Though begun upon a mere - surmise by Mr. Lang, extended research seems to confirm his - notion as to the identity of these two personages. It is not - a pleasant conclusion for any one who believes that all the - Highlanders engaged in the Rising of 1745 were indomitable and - patriotic heroes. There were blacklegs in the army of Prince - Charles Edward, as there are in every movement of the kind; but - there were also noble characters prepared to shed their blood - and sacrifice their prospects in support of what they believed - to be the rightful cause. Glengarry, apparently, must now take - his place among the execrated traitors.—I am, &c. - - ‘A. H. MILLAR. - - ‘London: April 26, 1897.’ - -I am no expert in handwriting, and I offer no opinion, except that -Pickle’s confessedly feigned hand is more like Glengarry’s careful hand, -in the Stuart Papers, than like his sloping scrawl, meant only for his -own eyes (and these nearly blind) in his Letter Book. The Duke of Atholl -has compared letters from Glengarry, in his possession, with those of -Pickle, and has arrived at the same conclusion as Mr. Millar. Pickle’s -hand is Glengarry’s, disguised. - -Such is my chain of evidence towards proving the personal identity of -Pickle and Glengarry. Both men, it is hardly worth while to add, had been -officers in French service. I am aware of not one discrepant feature -to discredit the identity which Pickle practically asserts, when he -declares himself (corroborated by Bruce) to have become, by his father’s -death, Chief of the Macdonnells, just when Old Glengarry died, and Young -Glengarry succeeded to the headship of the clan. To sum up the whole case: - -Young Glengarry’s conduct, as far as we know, is stainless, till, after -endeavouring to ‘conform’ in October 1747, he presently poses as a -religiously faithful subject, or devotee, of James in January 1748. He is -starving in London, which he visits in July 1749, his father being soon -after released from Edinburgh Castle. Young Glengarry, in the winter of -1749, visits Cluny at Dalwhinnie, in company with Glenevis, Lochgarry, -and Angus MacIan. Glengarry obtains, by his own admission, a share of -the treasure, and then formally charges Archy Cameron with looting 6,000 -_louis d’or_. Archy accuses him of forgery; they carry their quarrel -before James in Rome. Early in 1751 Glengarry, though he is not known -to have taken the oaths, is allowed to reside in London, and announces -his approaching marriage with an English lady. But Glengarry is already -suspected, and he knows it; for when Leslie, the priest, is charged -with treason by the Jacobites, Glengarry says that the blow is aimed -at _him_. Nothing is proved against Leslie, but stories of Glengarry’s -intimacy with Murray the traitor, and the spy Samuel Cameron, called -Crookshanks, are anonymously brought by Blair and Holker. In October 1751 -Samuel’s brother, Glenevis and Downan, arrested for their share with -Glengarry in the matter of the French gold, accuse Glengarry of informing -against them. They lie in gaol in Fort William; Glengarry (though the -Government know him to be their accomplice) lives freely in London, and -travels where he pleases. - -In November 1752, April 1753, we have the affair of the Elibank Plot. On -one side is Pickle, who is to lead Highlanders in London; Pickle, without -whom his clan, and the North, can do nothing; Pickle, a friend of Prince -Charles, and a correspondent of the exiled King in Rome; Pickle, who is -‘very weake’ after a serious illness in Paris (February-March, 1753); -Pickle, the constant associate of the Earl Marischal; and on the other -side is Glengarry, who claims every one of these notes for himself. Both -Pickle and Glengarry are friends of Baron Kennedy’s. Glengarry is known -to Government to be a trafficker with France, and with the dreaded envoy -of Prussia, the Earl Marischal, but Government consults Pickle in place -of arresting Glengarry. Pickle has had great promises made to him by his -employer, Henry Pelham, so has Glengarry. Both complain of the breach of -these promises after Pelham’s death. Pickle comes and goes to Prince -Charles in France in August 1753. Glengarry is accused, to Government, of -visiting France at the same time as a Jacobite agent. Jacobites are being -arrested all over the country, but not a finger is laid on Glengarry. - -Pickle and Glengarry both leave London for Edinburgh on the news of Old -Glengarry’s death, both are then bereaved young chiefs going to their -northern estates near Fort Augustus. In this capacity Pickle, for some -six weeks, is the centre of military attention in Edinburgh. Pickle -wishes Bruce to assist him in drawing up a judicial rent-roll. Bruce -surveys the lands of Glengarry. Pickle now, like Glengarry, remains in -the North, where both are magnates, but both are poor. Pickle offers to -raise a Highland regiment, and asks the Duke of Newcastle to direct his -answer to Glengarry. The spelling of Pickle and Glengarry is identical in -a score of peculiarities, and Pickle’s handwriting is that of Glengarry -in a simple disguise. - -What makes Pickle’s design to raise a regiment especially interesting is -the fact, now to be proved, that _Glengarry entertained the same wish at -the same moment_. He wrote to the Duke of Atholl to that effect, on April -5, 1760, and his letters are printed in the Duke of Atholl’s ‘Chronicles -of the Atholl and Tullibardine Families’ (iii. 476-477). Thus Pickle and -Glengarry were inseparable to the last. - -Whoever is unconvinced by this array of circumstantial evidence -against Glengarry must, at least, suggest an alternative hypothesis -which will colligate the facts. The hypothesis of a personation of -Glengarry by Pickle has been proved absurd and impossible. Recent -research, after the publication of ‘Pickle the Spy,’ has added to the -original evidence proof of Glengarry’s insincerity as a Jacobite; the -Glenevis affair; the promises made to Glengarry, as to Pickle, by Henry -Pelham; the identification of ‘Cromwell’ (Bruce); the relations of -Glengarry with Pickle’s friend, Baron Kennedy; a few new similarities -of Pickle-Glengarry spelling; the identity of their handwriting; and -their simultaneous desire to raise a regiment. All these facts confirm -the previous conclusion. A false hypothesis is not apt to be strongly -confirmed by facts unknown when it was framed, nor would a jury regard -the charge against Glengarry as ‘without any proof in the world.’ To -say so, as has been audaciously done, is to illustrate prejudice, not -to enlighten criticism. In truth, the game was up as soon as the person -calling himself Pickle offered to raise a clan regiment, and asked the -Duke of Newcastle to reply to Glengarry. More than one interpretation -of that fact there could not logically be. But what is logic? A Lowland -pedantry! - - - - -XII - -OLD TIMES AND NEW - - -Some years ago, when fishing in Loch Awe, I found a boatman, out of -Badenoch, who was a charming companion. It may be the experience of -others also that an English keeper usually confines his conversation, -at least with strangers, to the business in hand, whereas a Scottish -or Highland attendant will talk about Darwinism, Mr. Herbert Spencer, -history, legend, psychical research, religion, everything. The boatman -had a store of legends, and one day we fell to conversing on the old -times, in the Highlands, and the new. He voted for the old. Among the -advantages, he mentioned the game; and then, with sparkling eyes, the -plunder! Property, of old, had been _les vaches d’autrui_, the cattle of -Lowlanders and of other clans. - -Often, since that day, one has reflected on the old times and the new. -The old were not wholly what is supposed. Thus Mr. Mackenzie, in his -‘History of the Camerons,’ contrasts the manly sport of the past with -the modern driving up of deer to be shot down by ‘drawing-room’ gunners. -Stalking is more common now, but the drawing-room way was the old way! -‘The tenants drive everything before them, while the laird and his -friends are waiting with their guns to shoot the deer.’ So writes Burt, -between 1726 and 1740. ‘When the chief would have a deer only for his -household,’ he does not stalk it himself; ‘the gamekeeper and one or two -others are sent into the hills, ... where they often lie night after -night to wait an opportunity of providing venison for the family.’[159] - -I have seen in the Highlands heart-breaking destitution. I have seen an -old shivering woman gathering nettles for food near Tobermory. On one -side of a river I have seen scantily clad girls hanging about listless, -in the rain, beside hovels more like the nests of birds than human -habitations. On the other side of the water were comfortable cottages and -thriving crops. The former was the Protestant, the latter the Catholic -side of the stream, which the Reformation did not cross. In the bleak -cold of June, on Haladale, I have said, ‘Who would stay here that could -go away?’ The gillie observed that he had been in America, running the -blockade, but he vastly preferred Haladale. He numbered his horses and -kine; he was a man of substance. But, poverty for poverty, give me -nettles and shell-fish in the North, before fried fish (and too little of -that) in the New Cut. - -Moved by the extreme wretchedness in which some Highland cotters seem -to live, by the cry of ‘congested districts,’ by the laments of the -evicted, and by the belief in ‘good old times’ behind the Forty-five, -a Lowland observer naturally asks himself if the old times were really -so good? In one respect, and that essential, they bear the palm: the -people, as a rule, loved and revered their Chiefs, and the Chiefs adopted -at least the airs of popularity among the people. Even Young Glengarry, -not a model Chief, resented the oppression of tenants falsely accused, -as he maintained, of being deserters.[160] Moreover, the poor did not -live, generally speaking, in view of the luxurious rich. Clanranald and -Glengarry had castles which must have been built at the expense of the -undefined ‘services’ of their people long ago; but the warrior Glengarry -of Killiecrankie discouraged refinement and delicacy of living. The -smaller lairds lived plainly, even poorly. Occasional feasts were given -to the Clan. Every man ‘was treated as a blood relation.’ Consequently, -if destitution existed, it did not provoke social hatred and discontent. -This, at least, is quite certain. - -On the other hand, the presence of extreme poverty, of famines, by no -means rare, of exactions which Lowlanders considered tyrannical, and the -occurrence of evictions, before 1745, seem equally well established. -Ignorance was one safeguard against discontent, and in the absence of -schools, in the rarity of the Presbyterian clergy, with their innate -democratic ideas, ignorance flourished. Over-population was encouraged, -by minute subdivision of lands, for the purpose of increasing the Chief’s -military following. Thus poverty was artificially fostered, and, with it, -idleness and habits of plunder and of tippling. - -This little picture of a Highland home is given in a book of 1747:[161] -‘I have seen in their Huts, when I have been walking, and forced to -retreat thither for Shelter from the Rain, their Children, sometimes many -in a Hut, full of the Small Pox and [at?] their Heighth, they having been -lying and walking about in the Wet and Dirt, the Rain at the same time -beating through the Thatch with Violence; so that I used to get from one -End of the House to the other to keep dry; but it was all in vain, the -Rain soon following me. These children at the same time seemed hearty, -drinking Whey and Butter-milk, Wet and Cold with the Inclemency of the -weather, and yet so well!’ - -This sketch was drawn somewhere in the country between Inverness and Fort -William, after Culloden. - -The raising of the early Highland regiments (1756-62) relieved the -population, but also diffused knowledge, while the Chiefs’ power, as -sanctioned by law, was destroyed. The soldiers, who had seen the New -World, whether gentry and officers or privates, did not incline to -stay at home when rents were raised. They emigrated to America, almost -by clans, in years of famine, as in 1782. The Chiefs were alarmed and -indignant; they were also needy. They screwed up rents, introduced sheep, -moved populations to the coast, or evicted them. Voluntary emigration -(the wisest policy) was succeeded by the removal of clansmen who were -reluctant to go, or who could not afford to go, their poor goods not -being marketable. Many even sold themselves into voluntary slavery for -their passage fare. - -Some chiefs became opulent for a generation; their families were ruined -by their following of George, Prince Regent; their estates fell into -English hands, and forests were made at the expense of new evictions. - -This is a brief and gloomy account of what followed Culloden. An example -may be given in the case of the great Glengarry family. - -On the death of Glengarry, in 1761, his affairs were found, as was -natural, in a lamentable condition. To study them and the later changes -on his estate is to gain a view into the heart of Highland grievances. -Fortunately materials for this examination exist, and have been published -by Mr. Fraser Mackintosh in his ‘Antiquarian Notes’ (1897). - -Perhaps it may be best to begin by giving a brief account of the way in -which such estates as Glengarry’s were usually occupied by the clansmen. -The Chief let to tacksmen, or leaseholders, gentlemen of his clan, part -of the lands which he did not hold in his own hand. Part of his ‘tack,’ -again, the tacksman cultivated; part he let out to cotters, ‘under which -general term may be included various local denominations of _crofters_, -mailers, &c.... Frequently they have the command only of a small share of -their own time to cultivate the land allowed them for maintaining their -families. Sometimes the Tacksman allows a portion of his own tillage -field for his cotter; sometimes a small separate croft is laid off for -him, and he is likewise allowed, in general, to pasture a cow, or perhaps -two.’[162] - -‘The Tacks,’ says Dr. Johnson, ‘were long considered as hereditary,’ -but, in his time, strangers would make larger offers, and the hereditary -tacksman was apt to be dispossessed, with cotters, crofters, and all. As -to the tyrannical and oppressive conduct of the tacksmen, much will be -reported later. According to Young Barisdale’s plea (1754), Old Barisdale -held possession, from Glengarry, without a line of written paper. The -tacksmen, in war, were officers of the Clan regiment, and led, or drove, -the tenants to the field. - -Apart from tacksmen and their cotters, were ‘small tenants’ holding -direct from the Chief. They usually occupied, in townships, a farm in -common: the shares may once have been equal, but, by 1738, one man might -hold a fourth, another but a fifteenth. They dwelt in a hamlet near the -arable crofts, of which the division might vary from year to year. They -had also grazing, and, money being very scarce, their chief wealth was -their cattle. Interest and part principal of his patrimony were paid, in -cattle, to Glengarry’s younger brother Æneas.[163] Cotters, who acted as -labourers, were scattered among the little communities of small tenants. -Rents were mostly paid in kind, and in ‘services,’ little money passed. - -Another system was that of ‘wadsets.’ A chief simply _pawned_ a farm to -a clansman, say Glengarry to Lochgarry, for a certain period, and for a -certain sum of money. When he repaid the money, he recovered the farm. -The wadsetter might build and improve, but no money was returned on -redemption. The wadsetter sublet to tenants of either class, and either -he or the Chief might make the better thing of the bargain. There were -many poor wadsetters on a small scale. Colonel Trapaud accuses Glengarry -of bullying his small wadsetters in Knoydart out of their wadsetts, and -making them ‘accept of common interest.’[164] ‘The principal wadsetters -refused, on which he ordered them out of his presence.’ - -Such was the system of a Highland estate; of its working more will be -said later. On Glengarry’s death, his heir was his nephew, Duncan, a -minor: Glengarry and the boy’s mother had been on the worst terms. In -actual money, Glengarry’s rents, at the day of his death, were but -330_l._ yearly. The rent ‘uplifted’ by his wadsetters was larger. There -were heavy debts, both on the estate and personal: the amount of the -claims of Government I have nowhere found stated. Trustees ruled for -the heir, who, however, must have been of age when Morar was sold to -the Master of Lovat (Simon of the Forty-five) in 1768. This cleared the -personal debts. In 1772, the new Glengarry wedded Miss Marjory Grant, -eldest daughter of Sir Ludovick Grant of Dalvey. Mr. Fraser Mackintosh -says that ‘regardless of sufferings, she strove with success to clear off -the debts, to raise the rents, and generally to aggrandise the position -of the Glengarry family.’ - -The wadsetts were paid off: the wadsetters must now be tenants, on -increased rents, or go. Most of them emigrated to the New England States. -Bad years came: the small tenants fell into arrears. In 1782, a year -of famine, arrived the first sheep farmer from the Border. In 1785, -fifty-five tenants were warned and removed, ‘say 300 souls.’ In 1786, 500 -people emigrated under their priest, a Macdonnell of the Scothouse or -Scotos family. They settled in Canada. They had fled from famine, as much -as from increased rents. - -Duncan Macdonnell died in 1788; his son was Sir Walter Scott’s Glengarry, -‘the last of the Chiefs,’ in costume and demeanour, but, it seems, a -great evictor. The French war made Highland recruits desirable, and -emigration slackened, but there was an exodus in 1802, the settlers -peopling Glengarry County in Ontario; sentiment apart, a very happy -change. - -We have seen Alastair’s free rent in 1761; it was 330_l._ in money. -In 1802 the rental was 5,090_l._! The eccentric history of Scott’s -friend, Glengarry (for whom he wrote a Death Song) is well known. He was -accidentally killed in 1828, and Glengarry was sold some years later. -It has changed hands twice, since the first sale, and, says Mr. Fraser -Mackintosh, ‘It is a fact not less painful than preposterous that at -the present day (1894), some dozen crofters (all remaining) cannot get -sufficient land out of the tens of thousands of acres at Knoydart, to -maintain them, without the intervention of the Crofters Commission.’[165] -Yet in 1753, Lochgarry, perhaps in a sanguine way, reckoned the Macdonald -claymores, ‘by Young Glengarry’s concurrence only,’ at 2,600.[166] - -This is a typical specimen of the fortunes of a large Highland estate, -compromised in the Rising of 1745. There are, of course, happier -examples; but, in this instance, we see every stage of the revolutionary -changes in the condition of the Highland people. - -Now an Englishman, or a Lowlander, asks himself, did the good old times -contain the germs of these social maladies, exhibiting themselves in -other forms, under other conditions? To this conclusion we appear to -be forced by the evidence. If Chiefs were callous and selfish after -the Forty-five, if the land could not, or did not, support the people -properly after Culloden, these misfortunes, moral and material, existed -before the starving and ill-arrayed clansmen died on the English -bayonets. There had been no reason to expect better treatment than the -Clans have actually received, from several of the powerful families. -Extreme destitution had prevailed; evictions had occurred, and had -sometimes been bitterly avenged. There had been ‘Agrarian outrages’ -before Culloden, attacks on men, and mutilation of cattle. - -Our evidence, as to the state of the Highlands, comes from various -sources. We have Lowland, English, and Anglified witnesses. The Duke of -Argyll cites a Highlander, Forbes of Culloden, but he was a Whig, and -President of the Court of Session. Yet there was no juster, more fair, -or more wise and tolerant man in the North. We have Captain Burt, author -of ‘Letters from Scotland,’ written between the Rebellions of 1715 and -1745. Some modern Highlanders call him their foe: he certainly looks with -English eyes, but he tries to be fair, and is far from unsympathetic. His -tenderness for the poor is remarkable. We have the Gartmore MSS. (_circ._ -1748), which is Whiggish, and ‘MS. 104,’ in the King’s Library. It is, -apparently, of 1749-50. All these witnesses agree as to the oppression -of the people, their involuntary idleness, their dependence on tacksmen, -chamberlains and factors, their destitution, while their liability to -raised rents and evictions are, by some of these witnesses, insisted -upon. But all are writing from the Whig point of view; their desire to -improve the popular condition is part of their desire to reduce the power -of the Jacobite Chiefs. - -On the other side is General Stewart of Garth, enthusiastically Highland, -anxious to keep up population for military purposes, as well as from -honourable sympathy, and decidedly inclined to overlook the poverty, -plundering, enforced idleness, tippling, and blackmail of the good old -times. We have also Mr. Fraser Mackintosh, who, while he delights to -tell a story against Cluny, for example, maintains that there were no -evictions before 1745. Unluckily, we have no authoritative treatise from -the Jacobite and ‘old times’ side, written between 1747 and 1790. The -best evidence might be found in Gaelic poetry, which, in general, proves -one important point. - -Whatever the material condition of the Highland people, whatever their -lack, in many parishes, of elementary education, they possessed, in -legends, _Märchen_, traditional poems, and the living art of popular -song, a native culture—rich, dignified, and imaginative—which newspapers -merely destroy. This great element of happiness, where it survives, is -the bequest of the good old times. - -Such is our evidence; and now, having described its nature, we may turn -to the details. - -A considerable portion of the people were terribly destitute. We have -heard what the biographer of Young Barisdale says, about a diet of -shell-fish from March to August, about the faces that never wear a -smile. Franck, writing in 1654-1660, tells us how, when Monk held -Scotland, the Strathnaver crofters bled their cows in winter, and fed -on blood mixed with oatmeal.[167] Burt and Knox testify to the same -practice, a century later and more. ‘This immoderate bleeding reduces -the cattle to so low a plight that in the morning they cannot rise from -the ground, and several of the inhabitants join together to help up each -other’s cows.’[168] ‘The gentry may be said to be a handsome people, but -the commonalty much otherwise; one would hardly think, by their faces, -they were of the same species, or, at least, of the same country, which -plainly proceeds from their bad food....’[169] - -The old times were not so good; the peasants, who protected and -concealed him, could not give Lord Pitsligo salt to his porridge: -‘Salt is dear.’ But people who have seen nothing better are not -discontented. The gentry—not chiefs, but tacksmen—as we have said, did -not live luxuriously. Examples may be given. ‘Although they have been -attended at dinner by five or six servants, they have often dined upon -oat-meal varied several ways, pickled herrings, or other such cheap -and indifferent diet.... Their houses are _sometimes_ built with stone -and lime’ (like Barisdale’s palace), but other houses of the gentry -‘are built in the manner of the huts.’ Burt mentions one such house, -with beasts dwelling under the roof of the owner, or tacksman. For many -years Old Glengarry dwelt in a hut, his castle being occupied by an -English commercial gentleman. The laird’s children were ‘dirty and half -naked’—this is on hearsay—and it was a common proverb that ‘a gentleman’s -bairns are known by their speaking English.’ Glengarry’s niece, daughter -of Æneas, shot at Falkirk, ‘had no English,’ when she could not have been -under thirteen years of age.[170] - -Thus there was no very great gulf, in some cases, between gentry and -peasantry, where comfort was concerned. The difference of appearance -between them, as between beings ‘of a different species,’ is the less -intelligible. But herrings and game are more nutritious than nettles, -cows’ blood, and shell-fish, especially where all are scarce. - -As to rents, payments to chief or tacksman, how did things fare? -Conservatives, like Dr. Johnson and Sir Walter Scott, have written about -the chiefs ‘degenerating from patriarchal rulers to rapacious landlords.’ -The Duke of Argyll, on the contrary, speaks of the sub-tenants, in the -good old times, as ‘holding at the will of the lease-holders or tacksmen, -and complaining bitterly of the oppressions under which they laboured.’ -This is on the evidence of Sheriff Campbell of Stonefield, speaking of -Mull, Morven, and Tyree, in 1732.[171] ‘It was only beginning to be felt -these poor people that even a bare subsistence could not be secured when -plunder had been stopped, and before industry had begun.’ What were the -‘oppressions,’ not including, of course, such exceptional outrages as -those of Barisdale? Well, Burt tells us that a tenant’s improvements, in -1730-1740, meant an instant rise of rent. ‘What would the tenant be the -gainer of it’ (enclosures and improvements on his farm), ‘but to have -his rent raised, or his farm divided with some other?’[172] The division -would serve to recruit another swordsman for the Chief. The writer of a -MS. of 1747, in the possession of Graham of Gartmore,[173] says, ‘The -practice of letting many farms to one man’ (the tacksman, say Lochgarry -or Barisdale), ‘who, again subsetts them to a much greater number than -these can maintain, and at a much higher rent than they can afford to -pay, obliges these poor people to purchase their rents and expences by -theifts and robberys.’[174] - -In the good old days, something like the iniquitous Truck System existed, -we learn from the same authority, on some Highland estates. ‘Some of the -substantial Tacksmen play the merchant, and supply the common people.... -As the poor ignorant people have neither knowledge of the value of their -purchase, nor money to pay for it, they deliver to these dealers (the -tacksmen) ‘cattle in the beginning of May for what they have received; by -which traffick the poor wretched people are cheated out of their effects -for one half of their value.’ This is a mournful aspect of the good old -times. The MS. 104 confirms the statements, and describes the thriftless -agricultural methods. - -Each of these (the tacksmen) ‘possesses some very poor people under him, -perhaps five or six on a farm, to whom he lets out the skirts of his -possession, these people are generally the soberest and honestest of the -whole. Their food all summer is milk and whey mixed together without any -bread, the little butter or cheese they are able to make is reserved for -winter provision, they sleep away the greatest part of the summer, and -when the little Barley they sow becomes ripe, the women pull it as they -do flax, and dry it on a large wicker machine over the fire. Then burn -the straw, and grind the corn upon Quearns or hand mills. In the end of -Harvest, and During the winter they have some Flesh, Butter, and cheese, -with great scarcity of Bread. All their business is to take care of the -few Cattle they have. In spring, which is their only season in which they -work, their whole food is bread and gruel without so much as salt to -season it. - -‘About twenty years ago Lochiel erected two or three Water Mills, but by -reason of the great distance of many of the people from them, and their -natural Laziness, with the prejudice in favour of the old Custom of -burning the straw, they were made very little use of. The custom has been -given up some time except by the Camerons and Macdonalds, some McLeans, -and some of the people of Skye.’ - -It is not safe, of course, to argue from a report about the state of the -people in one part of the Highlands to a conclusion about their condition -everywhere. A river may divide comfort from destitution. And it is -certain that reports by Lowlanders, Englishmen, or Highlanders, like the -famous Forbes of Culloden, who practically defeated the Rising of 1745, -will not please some Highland reasoners.[175] - -Forbes reported in 1737 on the Duke of Argyll’s lands in Morven, Mull, -and Tyree. He speaks of the ‘tyranny’ and ‘unmerciful exactions’ of -the tacksmen, large leaseholders who sub-let to smaller tenants. Hence -the lands lie waste, and ‘above one hundred families have been reduced -to beggary and driven out of the island.’ This is precisely the modern -complaint against the bad new times, a complaint with which we all -sympathise. Tacksmen, according to Culloden, were as bad as factors. - -Culloden, therefore, suggested the granting to the sub-tenants of -nineteen years’ leases if they would ‘offer frankly for their farms such -rent as fairly and honestly they could bear.’ Such leases he had power -to offer, and did offer. ‘No takers!’ Culloden was surprised, but he -need not have been. The weight of the tacksmen would be against him; -also the conservatism of the people. A fixed rent was a new crude hard -thing: a system of shuffling along, above all as the general policy was -to find room for swordsmen—was an old endurable thing. Culloden, however, -persuaded some sub-tenants to offer. On the tacksmen he put pressure. -He had with him some tacksmen from the mainland, better acquainted with -farming methods. _They_ offered for the insular tacksmen’s farms, whereon -the insular tacksmen also offered. Fixed now were rents, and fixed the -duration of tenancy. - -One Culloden lease to a kind of village community of six people in -portions of land of different sizes is dated April 18, 1739, from Stoney -Hill.[176] The lease of 1739 is for nineteen years, ‘and that in full -satisfaction of all casualitys, and other prestations and services -whatsomever,’ except for services in repairing harbours, mending -highways, or repairing miln-leads, for the general benefite of the -Island (Mull). The tenants were to pay cesses, ministers’ stipends, -schoolmasters’ salaries, &c., ‘freeing and relieving the Duke’ from these -burdens. Failure of rent meant removal, and made the lease null and void; -the tenants having leave, however, to take over the share of a defaulter -or choose a substitute for him. - -What the sub-tenants gain is freedom from a tacksman, secure possession -while they pay, and freedom from all but the stated customary services -and ‘casualties.’ One of these was military service in a Jacobite rising. -A tenant in Mull could not now lose his holding if his tacksman ordered -him to join the Prince and he refused. As to the other ‘services,’ the -Duke of Argyll regards them as indefinite and oppressive. He selects -examples from Sinclair’s paper for the Board of Agriculture in 1795. -Rent was mainly paid in kind, chickens, cattle, grain, _plus_ ‘tilling, -dunging, sowing, and harrowing a part of an extensive farm in the -proprietor’s’ (or tacksman’s) ‘possession.’ Peats, thatching, weeding, -cartage, harvesting, and so forth, were exacted, with implements, eggs, -butter, cheese, a tithe of fish and oil, woollen yarn, and so forth. -These services might easily be made oppressive, and did not conduce to -improvement in agriculture. - -The exact weight and money value of these services must have varied -widely. The author of MS. 104 proposes that, in future, all services -shall be definitely stated in writing when a tenant takes a farm. -‘Extravagant services are still required’ (_circ._ 1750) ‘and performed, -which the landlord would be ashamed to commit to writing.’ He also, -like Culloden, advocates the compulsory granting of leases for not less -than twenty years. But he has already said that the people, accustomed -to hereditary entry on farms from father to son, refuse to take written -leases. - -As to ‘services,’ Mr. Fraser Mackintosh, on the other side, tells us how -the Lochiels, in exile, ‘regularly received part of the rent.’ That he -only sent 100_l._ to Lochiel’s children in France, and made the tenants -work on his lands instead of on the county roads, is a charge made by -Colonel Crawfurd against Lochiel’s brother, Fassifern.[177] Mr. Fraser -Mackintosh comments on the loyalty of Lochiel’s tenants, but adds ‘in -former times rent in the form of money was a minor easy consideration, -the real burden or tax being services’—especially ‘the almost intolerable -burden’ of war. Thus the exile of the Chief became ‘really no hardship -to the people,’ enabling them ‘to pay a double (money) rent now and then -with comparative ease.’[178] - -Thus, in this author’s opinion, ‘the real burden or tax’ was ‘services,’ -not money rent. Happily he gives a case of commutation of services for -money on Glengarry’s estate. The commutation was ‘apparently quite -disproportionate and oppressive. For instance, in the case of Dugald -Cameron, late cowherd to Glengarry, afterwards tenant of Boline, while -his rent was 11_l._ 4_s._ 3_d._, the converted services amounted to 3_l._ -2_s._ 8_d._’ Well, if services were ‘the real burden,’ where is the -‘oppressive disproportion’?[179] This seems absurd. - -If it be agreed that ‘services’ were the main part of rent, how -oppressive a hostile tacksman, say Barisdale, might make them is easily -conceived.[180] Whatever we may think of the advantages of a definite -Culloden rent, it is pretty plain that the people did not like it. But -the old kind of rent and services was of scarce any value to a probably -non-resident proprietor, who could get high returns on the new system -from large farmers or graziers. He did not want hens and cheese, and had -now no use for claymores. The consequences were raised rents, emigration, -evictions, the Highland grievances. - -But were there no evictions, and removals, and forced migrations in the -good old times? - -Mr. Fraser Mackintosh says, ‘The Commissioners on the Forfeited Estates, -or, more properly, their Factors, were the first evictors in the -Highlands, and they were guilty of favouritism to such a degree in -favour of strangers, that many of the tenants emigrated voluntarily.’ - -Indeed, Glenure was shot, by Allan Breck or another, because, as factor -for the forfeited estates of Lochiel and Ardsheil, he had evicted Cameron -or Stewart tenants, and preferred Campbells. But Mr. Fraser Mackintosh -ought to know that the Commissioners were _not_ the first evictors. Who -drove a hundred families from Mull and Tyree about 1738, as Culloden -tells us? Who ‘removed’ James Stewart of the Glens before Campbell of -Glenure did? Why Ardsheil, whose bastard brother he was. Who evicted some -and threatened to evict all Macphersons from the Duke of Gordon’s lands -in Badenoch in 1724? Why the Duke and his factor, Gordon of Glenbucket. - -The story is told in a letter of Cluny to the Earl Marischal.[181] -The Macphersons held lands in Badenoch ‘as feuars, woodsellers, or -kindly tenents to the Duke of Gordon.’ He however ‘vexes and reduces -us by perpetuall lawsuits,’ and ‘_has taken it into his head to root -us intearly out of our own country_.’ He therefore feued most of his -Badenoch lands to Glenbucket ‘for the half of its value, or, I may -say, a third, meerly out of design to take it out of the hands of the -Macphersons.’ Glenbucket, ‘in order to begin the work of extirpating us, -has turned out the tenants of six farms.’ Their high offers of rent -were refused, so they dirked Glenbucket, ‘in a most barbarous manner.’ -The operation can scarcely be performed in a gentle fashion. ‘They very -luckily missed their aim by the favour of a buff belt he had about him,’ -also by the favour of a claymore that, was lying convenient. The Duke now -threatened to ‘extirpate’ or evict ‘the whole name of Macpherson,’ which -he proceeded to do ‘with a body of a thousand men, foot and horse.’ All -parties were Jacobites, and King James settled _hæc certamina tanta_. -_He_ had no objections to eviction. He writes to the Duke of Gordon, -‘I am far from blaming you for any steps you may have taken which are -authorised by the law of the land, but there are only a few offenders, -and, politically, the _eviction_ disunites loyal clans.’[182] - -Indeed the more one thinks of Mr. Fraser Mackintosh’s assertion that -the Commissioners were the first evictors in the Highlands, the more -grotesque does it appear. We turn to the manuscript ‘Letter of a -Gentleman’ whose sympathies are with ‘the wretched commons,’ not with the -Chiefs.[183] ‘The gentlemen of the name of Mackenzie,’ says our author, -‘are frugal and industrious.... They have screwed up their rents to an -extravagant height, which they vitiously term improving their estates, -without putting the tenants upon a proper way of improving the ground, -to enable them to pay that rent, which makes the common people little -better than slaves and beggars.’ - -No ‘screw’ but eviction could be used by these Mackenzie landlords, -frugal and industrious. - -Here is a case among the Camerons from the same MS.:— - -‘To shew the present disposition of that Clan,’ described as ‘lazy, -silent, sly, and enterprizing people,’ ‘I will relate an instance of -their barbarity which happened since the year 1725. The possessor of a -farm belonging to the Duke of Gordon, of the tribe of the Macmartins, -about three miles to the North of Fort William, demanded an abatement of -the usual rent, which the Duke refusing, he left the farm, boasting that -no man would dare to succeed in it. For some years it was untenanted, -till at last the Duke prevailed on Mr. Skeldoich, who was then minister -of the parish, who could not find a place to reside in, to take this -farm. The former possessor lay still till the minister had plentifully -stocked the farm with cattle and built a house on it, then, with some -other rogues, finding that the cattle were carefully watched, went to -the place where the calves were kept, and with their durks cut off their -heads, and cut the skins so that they would not be of any use.’ - -They also destroyed the Duke’s salmon nets on the Lochy. Later, watching -till the minister chanced to be away from home, ‘they pulled down part -of his house, and fired several shots towards the place where his -wife lay.’ The worthy clergyman then thought it time to move into Fort -William. Our author adds that cadets of Highland houses have possessed -farms ‘for ages’ without leases, and when they are not able to pay their -rents, _and are turned out_, they look upon the person who takes the farm -after them as usurping their right. These people have often refused to -take a written lease, thinking that, by so doing, they gave up the right -of possession. - -All this, written about 1749, is hardly congruous with Mr. Fraser -Mackintosh’s bold statement that the Commissioners of Forfeited Estates -were the first evictors in the Highlands. We learn that, ‘by reason -of the great poverty and slavery of the commons,’ on the Mackenzie -estates, out of the clan levy of 3,000 men, ‘a third are but dross.’ -Let us add that the Campbells evicted the Macdonalds from Kintyre, by -cutting their throats; that every defeated clan was likely to be, more -or less, evicted; and that all the Macgregors were evicted. These were -operations of clan warfare, though not much more enjoyable for that. But -when a sub-tenant held from a tacksman, on a ‘precarious tenure,’ does -Mr. Fraser Mackintosh maintain that he was never evicted? Why did Robin -Oig shoot Macfarlane at the plough tail? He did so simply for the old -agrarian reason. - -In Prestongrange’s speech for the Crown, at the disgraceful trial which -ended in the judicial murder of James Stewart of the Glens, he says that -‘a delusion in a peculiar manner prevailing in the Highlands,’ is that -‘a cause of mortal enmity arises if a man should be removed by another -from his farm or possession which he hath no manner of title to hold or -retain.’[184] ‘The delusion,’ he says, ‘prevails elsewhere,’ but is ‘in a -particular manner prevalent in the Highlands.’ - -How could a popular delusion of this kind come into existence if the -Commissioners of Forfeited Estates were ‘the first evictors in the -Highlands’? Demonstrably they were nothing of the kind. There were -evictions in the good old times. - -On the other hand, evictions had probably not been much practised with -a view to obtaining higher rents or making improvements, but for other -reasons. Claymores, not money, had been in request from tenants before -1745. - -Once more, according to Burt, a Lowland authority, the Chief ‘must free -the necessitous from their arrears of rent, and maintain such who, by -accidents, are fallen to a total decay.’ Far from throwing a lot of -small farms into a large one, or a sheep-walk, ‘if, by increase of the -tribe, small farms are wanting for the support of such addition, he -splits others into lesser portions, because all must somehow be provided -for.’[185] - -This policy is the precise reverse of the Culloden lease, which -terminates, _ipso facto_, when rent falls into arrears. A Chief, bound -by consanguinity to treat all his tenants as gentlemen, might practise -shooting at them, like Clanranald with his famous piece, ‘the Cuckoo,’ -but certainly was not apt to evict often for arrears of rent. He lived -at home, he built a great castle like Glengarry’s (probably by aid of -‘services’), he fed on the sheep, kine, butter, milk, of his tenants, but -he shook them by the hand, perhaps forgave arrears, held clan feasts, and -was a god on earth. When he raised rents, united farms in one hand, did -not shake that of every clansman, but rather evicted them, discontent was -natural, inevitable. Holders of land, proud free men, must emigrate, or -become labourers or artisans in towns. Who does not sympathise with their -emotions? - -On the other side, the Chief must subdivide and subdivide, in the good -old times, ‘because all must somehow be provided for.’ But all could -not be and were not ‘provided for.’ We have seen the pictures of cruel -exquisite poverty from Franck in 1654, to the Gartmore MS. in 1747, and -the Culloden Report in 1738, and the ‘Life of Barisdale’ in 1754, and -Burt’s Letters of about 1735. It seems reasonable to suppose that all -arable lands were eagerly cultivated as far as the implements and skill -of the people availed to cultivate them. It was the interest of the -chiefs to increase their bands of warriors and the sentiment, if not the -interest, of the clansmen urged them to stay on the land. - -But the land could not maintain them! The younger gentry pushed their -fortunes abroad as men of the sword or in commerce. But the commons were -often at the starving point; we hear of famines. Glengarry writes of a -great scarcity, when meal had to be bought in the Lowlands. Burt tells -of no meal in Inverness. ‘A house, grass for a cow or two,’ and ‘as much -land as will sow a boll of oats,’ rocky land, needing spade culture, -was a cottar’s ‘only wages of his whole labour and service,’ says the -Gartmore MS. The author reckons that there is not in the Highlands -employment for more than half the population, even when land has been -remorselessly sub-divided. Many earned a harvest wage in the Lowlands. -Others ‘sorned’ on their kindred. Armies of tramps were supported by -the generosity of the poor; nay, Lowland beggars came North, allured -by the open hands of the Highlanders. Whisky shops were everywhere; -here men sauntered and drank. Plunder was habitual; a captain of a -‘Watch’ like Barisdale was at once thief and thief-taker. ‘They live -like lairds, and die like loons,’ says Franck, speaking not of all the -Highlands (as Macaulay quotes him), but chiefly of Lochaber. ‘Upon this -fund’—blackmail—the Captain ‘employed one half the thieves to recover -lost cattle, and the other half of them to steal.’ Lochiel laboured to -reform his clan in this respect. The exactions of tacksmen, ‘sub-letting -farms to a much greater number than they can maintain, and at a much -higher rent than they can pay, obliges these poor people to purchase -their rents and expences by theifts and robberys,’ of cattle; for the -Highland honesty about portable property is extolled by Burt. - -As to the moral iniquity of cattle robbing, all morality is local, and a -man who does not sin against the local standard is no extreme criminal. -The Macdonalds held a simple creed of communism. ‘They say that the -Cattle are God’s creatures, made for the use of man, for which the -earth yields grass and herbs in plenty, without the labour of man, and -that therefore they Ought to be common’—that is, ought to belong to the -Macdonalds.[186] The same ideas had prevailed on the Border: - - If every man had his ain cow, - A richt poor clan Buccleugh’s wad be. - -Dr. Carlyle shows that Border cattle thieves, though not encouraged by -the gentry, were a powerful class about 1740. - -This is not a picture of a golden age, and Bailie Nicol Jarvie, in -‘Rob Roy,’ sums up this theory of what the age was really like. But, -if we turn to Stewart of Garth,[187] we find the real condition of the -Highlands in times past revealed in a rosy haze. Blackmail is only -extorted from _Lowlanders_, as if Barisdale had Lowland neighbours![188] -The game and fish were ‘free to all’—a palpable error as regards salmon, -at all events, while one doubts if every clansman was made free of -Cluny’s forest. We do not read of grouse and venison in cotters’ huts. -‘Cottagers and tradesmen were discouraged from marrying.’[189] Yet -the surplus population was very large. A young amorous Highlander set -himself up for marriage by ‘thigging’—that is, by begging among friends -for cows, sheep, and seed-corn.[190] They did not discourage him. ‘The -extinction of the respectable race of tacksmen ... is a serious loss -to the people.’[191] Mr. Fraser Mackintosh, however, speaking of Skye, -says, ‘large tacksmen ... could be relied on to assist (each other) -or keep aloof, if the oppressed were below their class or set.’[192] -The author of MS. 104 would reduce the power of tacksmen by making all -tenants leaseholders for terms not under twenty years, and would pay off -all wadsetts on forfeited estates, ‘because the gentlemen who had them -were great oppressors of the Poor, and most of them, though they did not -themselves take arms, were very active in forcing the people into the -late Rebellion.’ - -An association had been made by Sutherland farmers in General Stewart’s -time to suppress sheep-stealing. He objects to the new social state which -made this association necessary. Previously ‘crimes had been so few that, -from 1747 to 1810, there was only one capital conviction for theft.’ This -may have been so in Sutherland, and the MS. Letter already cited makes -it probable. ‘The Mackays of Lord Reay’s country,’ though previously -reckoned ‘the wickedest clan,’ now ‘abhor thieving.’ But ‘the common -people who dwell along the East Coast are next to the Caithness people -for poverty, slavery, and dwarfish stature, while the people further up -the country towards Strathnaver’ (where Franck found them bleeding their -cattle for food) ‘live better.’ A third of the Earl of Sutherland’s levy -‘are mean, despicable creatures.’ Thus one county showed very different -conditions: however, like the Mackenzies, the Sutherland men ‘abhor -thieving.’ Elsewhere in the Highlands, hangings for theft occupy a good -deal of the old _Scots Magazine_. Many pretty men ‘died for the law,’ as -every one knows. - -General Stewart, objecting to the new farmers’ association, seems not to -have observed that blackmail and ‘Highland Watches’ were old-fashioned -associations for protecting property.’ Complaints are made by him of -‘cutting down farms into lots,’ as if the old Chiefs had not infinitely -subdivided the soil.[193] The old extreme poverty is left out of notice -by General Stewart, with the old tippling, loafing, ‘sorning,’ thieving, -‘thigging’ habits. Much land could be and was cultivated, he says, which -is now pasture, the harvest only failing ‘in cold and wet autumns.’[194] -These not being unknown in the Highlands, but, on the other hand, very -common, famines followed often, notably in 1782. - -If the Lowlanders, the English, and the Anglified Highlanders, like -Culloden, paint too gloomy a picture of the good old times, General -Stewart may be regarded as erring in the opposite direction. His charge -against the new Chiefs and landlords is the callous hurry with which -they seized their pecuniary advantage, ‘which proved ruinous to their -ancient tenants.’[195] This is also Scott’s opinion, in his _Quarterly -Review_ article of 1816. He, too, a Tory of the Tories, condemns the -heartless greed of evicting landlords.[196] General Stewart records -cases of delicate consideration and honourable sagacity on the side of -the landlords. But often we find either a well-meaning hurry to make -sweeping ‘improvements,’ and benefit people in a way they detest and do -not understand (as by giving them leases), or a mere hasty desire to save -such a ruined estate as war had left to Glengarry, by raising rents, -causing, with the aid of frequent famine years, wholesale emigration. -This policy was, indeed, far unlike what Burt reports: ‘the poverty of -the tenants has rendered it customary for the Chief, or Laird, to free -some of them every year from all arrears of rent; this is supposed, upon -an average, to be about one year in five of the whole estate.’ - -These habits vanished with the change in the Highlands; the old ‘arts -of popularity’ were no longer practised by the Chiefs: clan affection -became clan hatred. If we may believe a tithe of our Whig or Lowland -information, it should have done so long before 1745. Cattle, sheep, -red-deer, grouse, now occupy the place of the swords of the North: the -banker, brewer, or upholsterer shoots the Chiefs game, or misses it. - -Truly money is the root of all evil. When specie was scarce in the -North, a guinea a thing seldom seen, the fatal treasure of Loch Arkaig -produced, or evoked, the moral consequences of hatred, malice, treachery -and slander. Twenty years later the lack of money hardened the hearts -of Chiefs (which had not been so very soft before). Clansmen had to -emigrate, and they were wisest who sailed first from a land of famine. -Their descendants, or some of them, dwell happily in a realm of forests, -hills, and streams, deer and salmon, still retaining Highland courtesy, -Highland speech, Highland courage, and Highland hospitality. They seem to -have chosen the better part, and to be more fortunate than their cousins -in the new times, or their fathers in the old days that were not really -golden. - -On the whole, a distressed Highlander need not, it seems, conceive that -the old times were free from distress, or that Chiefs were really always -humane. They acted in accordance with their immediate interests. They -kept rents low when it paid to have a following, and they screwed rents -up when money was more desirable than men. The two policies might be -contemporary; this among Mackenzies, that among Macdonalds. Ensign Small -reported[197] that, among the Macdonalds, ‘the gentry are fond of a -rising, the commoners hate it.’ The author of MS. 104 represents the -Macdonalds as ‘cursing their Prince and their Chiefs.’ - -The world, to its disadvantage, allows interest to override sentiment, -which we only find here and there, as in the noble words of Lochiel. -When he arrived with Prince Charles in France, in the autumn of 1746, -he was, of course, very poor. The Prince, according to Young Glengarry, -in a conversation with Bishop Forbes, was obliged to give Lochiel a -full security for his estates before the Chief would raise his clan. -Consequently Charles felt bound, said Glengarry, to secure a French -regiment first of all for Lochiel. This, in Lochiel, would have been a -singular piece of caution! But let us hear his own words, in a letter -to King James.[198] ‘I told H.R.H. that Lord Ogilby or others might -incline to make a figure in France, but my ambition was to serve the -Crown, and serve my Country, or perish with itt. H.R.H. say’d he was -doing all he could’ (to return with forces to Scotland), ‘but persisted -in his resolution to procure me a Regiment. If it is obtained, I shall -accept it out of respect to the Prince, but I hope Yr. M. will approve -of the resolution I have taken _to share in the fate of the people I -have undone_, and, if they must be sacrificed, to fall along with them. -It is the only way I can free myself from the reproach of their blood, -and shew the disinterested zeal with which I have lived, and shall dye, -Your Majesty’s most humble, most Obedient, and most faithfull subject and -servant, - - ‘DONALD CAMERON.[199]’ - -There speaks a man who makes real the ideal of the Clan system. But -the ideal, though a hundred times illustrated in the conduct of the -commons, has left less conspicuous examples in the behaviour of some -Chiefs. ‘My brother-in-law, Major Grant, pretended that the man,’ (a -recruit) ‘I sent from this country, _I sold_, which is false,’ says Old -Lovat to Cluny.[200] Major Grant, his brother-in-law, knew Old Lovat. -He, like Barisdale, was an example of the kind of chief who, till after -1745, was not impossible. He throve wickedly on the survival of a kind -of society, the tribal society with its usages, which was in no sense -exclusively Celtic, but originally prevalent all over Europe. In parts -of the Highlands tribal society outlived its day, and gave to Lovat the -opportunities which he abused. - - - - -APPENDIX - - - - -I.—_PICKLE’S LETTERS_ - - -These two letters of Pickle’s, not published in full in _Pickle the Spy_, -illustrate ‘The Case against Glengarry’ in this volume. In the letter -dated Edinburgh, 14th September, 1754, we find that, immediately on -hearing of his father’s death, the writer sent a note to Gwynne Vaughan, -an English official, and went to Edinburgh, writing from Newcastle on his -way North. His ‘family affairs are in confusion.’ Now Old Glengarry died -in Edinburgh, on September 1, 1754, and, as has been elsewhere shown, -Young Glengarry at once repaired to the North. No reader of these letters -can doubt that their writer is, or is feigning to be, Young Glengarry. -Now no such pretence could possibly succeed in Edinburgh, where Young -Glengarry, a man eminently well known, happened to be at the moment. For -the rest, the letters are mainly concerned with the Informer’s proposed -terms of payment, now that his ‘situation is greatly altered,’ by the -death of his father, obviously Old Glengarry. Further comment seems -needless, the evidence being beyond suspicion, and capable of but one -interpretation. - - Dr. Sir,—I have receivd the pleasur of yours of 20 Septr, but - have been of late so hurried that I had no time to return a - proper answer. I thought I was pritty pointed in my last in - regard to a certain stipulation, but as by yours I imagen I was - not so well understood, I beg leave to be now more explicite. - I waited patiently four years (since 1750) without making - the least demand, but for Journy expences, which fell so fare - short that I spent all my owne ready Mony, and ran in debt - eight hundred £st. Now, Sir, I expect that your friend will pay - this sume by way of gratification, which will make me free of - all debt contracted during my several trips, for I expect to - be considered for what is past, as well as for times coming: - I _had had his worthy Brother’s[201] paroll for this as well - as a promise of his countenance, and protection, in all my - other claimes, as I will not varrie the least in my demand, - notwithstanding my situation is greatly altered_, I will only - mention £ five hundred St. yearly, twice regularly payd by - Grandpapa, for I won’t absolutely have to dow with any other. - If Mr. _Kenady_ (Duke of Newcastle) whose friendship I have a - right to Claim, in vertue of his Brother’s promise, will obtain - this for me, there is nothing honourable he can think of, but - I am able to perform. Only I beg he be not prejudic’d by that - swarm of Videts that dally infest him. The Services I can be of - are pritty well known, and as I am embark’d I am determin’d to - percevere, but then I expect that Mr. Kenady (D. of N.) will - fulfill his worthy Brother’s promise to me, which was to clear - me of the Debts contracted in my new way of lief, when that - is done, and a certain thing yearly fixt, Mr. _Kenady_ shall - dispose of me in what shape he pleases. Young Swift (Lochgarry) - is arrived, and upon his waiting of _20_ (Genl. Bland) was - not recevd as was promis’d he should. When I waited of him, - he did not receve me as I expected, haughtly refusd the use - of a fulsie without I should qualifie. I smiling answr’d, if - that was the case, I had then a right without his permission, - but that he could not take it amiss that I debar’d all under - his comand the pleasure of hunting upon my grounds, or of any - firing, which they can’t have without my permission, so that I - thought favours were reciprocall. _20_ (Genl. Bland) and his - Club pretends to be well inform’d of the minutest transaction - in the Grand Monark’s Cabinet, _O rare polliticians, Poor 21 - (Bruce) is greatly to be pityed, for my old friends are mad at - my consulting him in all my affairs, and 20 (Bland) and some - about him spoke very injurious of him to me_. I think this - ought to be put to rights. _I go North in a few days_, I hope - to prevail on _21_ (Bruce) to follow in order to assist me - in making a Judicial rent roll.[202] My stay will not exceed - a month, and his not a fortnight, so that if you expect me - up, write under _21_ (Bruce’s) cover, and I shall obey your - comands. But Mr. _Kenady_ (D. of N.), your friend, must enable - me to go about it in a proper manner, and I am sure I will - performe the business to his entire satisfaction. Young Swift, - (Lochgarry) has verbally communicated to me most of _Miss - Philips_ (Young Pretender’s) amours. She has turn’d adrift all, - or most of her former companions and galants. (This refers to - the rupture between Prince Charles and his English adherents.) - My presence is much wanted, and ardently wished for by hir, and - hir present conductors. But I cant hear any thing materiall - till old _Swift_ (Lochgarry) return from hir. What I mentiond - concerning _Black Cattel_ is fact, but I hate repetitions, and - at any rate must deffer further particulars till my return - from the North. I will expect the pleasure of hearing to - satisfaction and pointedly from you—I will beg the continuance - of your good Offices, and will conclude by making offer of my - Compts. to Mr. _Kenady_ and assures him that all now depends - upon himself, as Every thing is in his option. - - I ever remain, Dear Grandpapa - - Your most obedient and most oblidged humble Servt. - - ALEX GUTHRY. - - Edinbr. 10. Octr. 1754. - - (Pickle to G. V.) (Gwynne Vaughan) - - Add. 32,736. f. 525. - - Edinbr. 14 Septr. 1754. - - Dr. Sir,—I am vastly uneasy not to receive the least answer - to either of my letters from Newcastle, or that which I wrote - immediately upon my Father’s death;[203] but, as I have the - greatest confidence in your friendship, I perswade myself that - nothing prevents my receiving apointed answer to every article - in both my last, but the multiplicity of weighty Affairs daily - crouding upon the Duke of Newcastle; therefore without any - suspicion or diffidence I am determined to continue firm to our - Concert, untill you acquaint me if he agrees to my Proposals, - which if he does, he may safely rely upon everything in my - power, and I think I can’t give stronger proof of my sincerity - than by this offer, _in the confusion of my Family affairs, - which in its present situation, demands all my attention_. - I have heard fully from Lochgary, who acquaints me that the - Young Pretender’s affairs take a very good turn, and that he - has lately sent two expresses to Lochgary earnestly intreating - a meeting with Pickle, and upon Lochgary’s acquainting him of - the great distance Pickle was off, he commanded Lochgary to a - rendezvous, and he set out to meet me the 4th. Instant, and is - actually now with me. - - I shall very soon have a particular account of the present - plan of operation. I have now the ball at my foot, and may - give it what tune I please, as I am to be allowed largely, if - I fairly enter in co-partnership. The French King is in a very - peaceable humour, but very ready to take fire if the Jacobites - renew their address, which the Young Pretender assures him - of, and he will the readier bestirr himself, as the English - Jacobites hourly torment him. Troops, Scotch and Irish, are - daily offered to be smuggled over: _but I have positively yet - refused to admit any_. The King of Spain has lately promised - to add greatly to the Young Pretender’s patrimony, and English - Contributors are not wanting on their parts. - - I suspect that my letters of late to my friends abroad are - stopt, pray enquire, for I think it very unfair dealings. I am - in a few weeks to go north to put some order to my affairs. - I should have been put to the greatest inconveniency if _21_ - (Bruce) had not lent his friendly assistance; but as I have - been greatly out of pocket by the Jants I took for Mr. Pelham, - I shan’t be in condition to continue trade, if I am not soon - enabled to pay off the Debts then contracted. I have said on - former occasions so much upon this head to no effect that I - must now be more explicit, and I beg your friendly assistance - in properly representing it to the Duke of Newcastle. If he - thinks that my services, of which I have given convincing - proofs, will answer to his advancing directly eight hundred - Pounds, which is the least that can clear the Debts of my - former Jants, and fix me to the Certain payment yearly of - Five hundred at two several terms, he may command anything in - my power upon all occasions. I am sorry to be forced to this - explanation, in which I always expected to be prevented. I am - so far from thinking this extravagant, that I am perswaded it - will save them as many thousands, by discarding that swarm of - Videts, which never was in the least trusted. If the Duke of - Newcastle’s Constituent (the King) was acquainted with this, - I dare say he would esteem the demand reasonable, considering - what he throws away upon others of no interest or power on - either side. I beg you’ll acquaint me with the soonest of - the Duke of Newcastle’s answer, and assure him of my ready - obedience to his commands. I have referred to _21_ to enlarge - further upon this, and other subjects I have been conversing - with him some days ago, _as he can inform you of my great - hurry and confusion for this fortnight past_,[204] which will - be all the apology I will make for this hurried scrawl, and I - beg you’ll be fully convinced of the great esteem etc. etc. etc. - - P.S. Pray let me not be denied the Arms I wanted, and I hope - in case of accidents, you’ll take care of young Lochgary. I - am just this instant informed that _Mr. Nordly_ has left the - King of France for the summer season, and is residing now in - England, but can’t learn in what particular place—_21_ is - supposed to be the Watchman: whose letter will explain what he - hints of Lochgary. - -_Mr. Nordly_ is not deciphered yet. - -(Copy of Pickle’s letter to G. V. (Gwynne Vaughan) deciphered. R. Oct. -16th, 1754.) - - - - -II.—_MACLEOD_ - - -‘The Rebels had an implacable Illwill and Malice against Him (Macleod) as -they alledged, and many of them believed, that he not only deserted, but -betrayed their Cause: what truth there is in this I will not take upon -me to determine.’ So says the writer of the MS. 104, ‘The Highlands of -Scotland in 1750.’ - -‘Surely never did man so basely betray as did Macleod, whom I shall leave -for the present to the racks and tortures of a guilty conscience, and -the just and severe judgement of every good man.’ Thus writes Murray of -Broughton, after narrating how Macleod gave a written promise to aid -Prince Charles whenever he landed. What he _did_ was to send information -to Forbes of Culloden, ‘it is certain that the pretended Prince of Wales -is come into the coast of South Uist and Barra.’ He begs that his name -as informant may be kept secret.[205] - -Macleod can thus avoid the charge of betraying the Cause, only by -disproof of Murray’s allegation that he gave a written promise to rise. -But this allegation is confirmed by family tradition. ‘Miss Macleod -of Macleod, Dunvegan Castle, remembers having seen in the family -charter-chest an interesting correspondence between His Royal Highness -and Macleod, in which Norman “invited the Prince to come over, several -months before he arrived,” but the letters have since disappeared, and -the family knows nothing as to where they have gone to.’[206] - -On the showing of Miss Macleod, as reported by Mr. Mackenzie, in the -passage just cited, Murray might well cry ‘never did man betray so basely -as did Macleod.’ Despite his written promise to Prince Charles, Macleod -was the first to send information against ‘the pretended Prince of -Wales.’ After Prestonpans, ‘it would appear,’ writes Mr. Mackenzie, ‘that -Macleod was taking lessons in duplicity from Simon,’ Lord Lovat. Macleod -scarcely needed instruction in treachery; but, if Mr. Mackenzie is right, -he now meant to send Young Macleod with the clan to join the Prince, -while he stayed at home, and said that he could not help it.[207] This -domestic arrangement was not carried into effect. - -Macleod was born in 1706, and inherited the family lands with 60,000_l._ -He died in 1772, leaving 50,000_l._ of debt. He is still spoken of -in the traditional history of his family as _An Droch Dhuine_, or -‘the Wicked Man,’ partly because of his extravagance, partly ‘for his -cruel treatment of his first wife and Lady Grange.’[208] When we add -his treachery to the Prince, we see in Macleod a character far from -exemplary. His grandson speaks of him as ‘always a most beneficent and -beloved chieftain, whose necessities had lately induced him to raise his -rents.’... ‘The Jacobites treated him as an apostate, and the successful -party did not reward his loyalty.’[209] He reaped as he had sown. - - - - -FOOTNOTES - - -[1] _Literature_, July 30, 1898, p. 93. - -[2] There is a brief sketch of the Earl in his brother’s Memoirs -(Spalding Club), which cites d’Alembert, and puts the Earl’s birth in -1687. - -[3] Plaids worn by the Earl and his brother are preserved in a house in -Fifeshire. - -[4] This remark makes it probable that the Earl was really a young man. -If born in 1693, as some thought, he would be twenty-three in 1716. (As, -indeed, one of d’Alembert’s authorities says that he was.) If a year or -two older, he could scarcely have pleaded youth as a reason for silence. - -[5] Mar to ‘H. S.’ From France, February 10, 1716. - -[6] Mr. Eliot Hodgkin’s MSS., _Hist. MSS. Com._ xv. ii. Appendix, p. 230. - -[7] Add. MSS. 33,950. 1718-1719. British Museum. - -[8] There are copies of his correspondence with the would-be murderer in -the Gualterio MSS., British Museum. - -[9] The author hopes to tell the story of Mr. Wogan, a charming -character, on another occasion. - -[10] Hist. MSS. Commission, x. i. Appendix, p. 475. - -[11] Letter from Musell Stosch to d’Alembert, _Œuvres_, v. 457. - -[12] Hist. MSS. Commission, x. i. Appendix, p. 184. - -[13] Hist. MSS. Commission, x. i. Appendix, p. 452. - -[14] The Earl’s letter is in Browne, ii. 448, from the Stuart Papers. - -[15] The Rev. George Kelly was a constraint on the old Duke’s amours with -Madame de Vaucluse! - -[16] Papers from French Foreign Office. In Murray of Broughton’s -_Memorials_, pp. 499-501. - -[17] Charles to James, May 11, 1744. Stuart Papers in Murray of -Broughton’s _Memorials_, p. 368. - -[18] Stuart Papers. Browne, ii. 476. - -[19] Compare Villettes’ letter, _postea_, p. 48. - -[20] Stuart Papers, in Murray of Broughton’s _Memorials_, pp. 513-514. - -[21] James to the Duke of York. November 8, 1745. Browne, iii. 452, where -all the correspondence is printed. - -[22] The Memoirs of the exile in question, unhappily, have never been -printed, and I do not feel at liberty to anticipate any points of -interest in these curious papers. - -[23] Letters in Browne, iv. 64-66. Conceivably it was Goring who -prejudiced the Earl against Kelly; he may have conveyed the ideas of -Carte and the English party. - -[24] See Sir Charles’s letter of February 6, 1751, in _Pickle the Spy_, -p. 117. - -[25] These letters are from the printed Correspondence of Frederick. - -[26] Ewald, _Charles Edward_, ii. 223. - -[27] The story was believed, however, by a contemporary who knew the Earl -well. - -[28] Mr. Bisset has printed these letters from the originals in the Add. -MSS. British Museum. - -[29] Fidei Defensor. - -[30] From the correspondence of Hume. MSS. in the collection of the Royal -Society of Edinburgh. - -[31] Hill Burton’s _Hume_, ii. 464-6. - -[32] _See_ ‘Mlle. Luci,’ later. - -[33] In the papers of Ramsay of Ochtertyre occurs perhaps the only -unkind reference to the Earl. Ramsay reports that, being told about the -destitution of the child of his nurse (who had sold her cow and sent him -the money in 1719), he made no remark. A reference to p. 66, _supra_, -will show that silence followed by kind deeds was the Earl’s way when he -heard a story of distress. Ramsay mentions that he sold his lands cheap -when he finally left Scotland. - -[34] Murray to a lady. Quoted in _Genuine Memoirs of John Murray, Esq._ -(London: 1747), p. 9. - -[35] The diamond box has gone; the miniature, published by Mr. Fitzroy -Bell, is in my possession. - -[36] _A Collection of Loyal Songs._ Printed in the year 1750. - -[37] Browne, ii. p. 476. - -[38] Stuart Papers, in Murray of Broughton’s _Memorials_, pp. 392-395. - -[39] _Chronicles of the Atholl and Tullibardine Families_, iii. pp 8, 17. -(Privately printed: edited by the Duke of Atholl.) - -[40] Charles was nursed at Thunderton House, by Mrs. Anderson (_née_ -Dunbar) of Arradoul. In some mysterious way Charles was able to -secure for Mrs. Anderson’s son an appointment under the English -Government. So says a tradition preserved by Miss Janet Lang, a -great-great-granddaughter of Mrs. Anderson. - -[41] See ‘Cluny’s Treasure,’ _postea_. A writer in the _Athenæum_ (July -9, 1898) appears to think (as was thought at the time) that Murray now -intended to turn informer, and keep what he could of the French gold. -This is not my impression. - -[42] See ‘A Gentleman of Knoydart,’ _postea_. - -[43] Lord Justice Clerk to Newcastle, July 10, 1746. Murray’s -_Memorials_, p. 418. - -[44] _The Highlands in 1750._ Blackwood, 1898. - -[45] Leslie. Paris, May 27, 1752. Browne, iv. 101. - -[46] See ‘Account of Charge’ in Chambers’s _Rebellion_, p. 522; and, -later, ‘Cluny’s Treasure.’ - -[47] Stuart Papers. Browne, iv. 59. Mr. Fitzroy Bell does not remark on -all this evidence. - -[48] Unable, at first, to learn even the real name of Mlle. Luci, I -appealed, in despair, to a lady who occasionally sees ‘visions’ in -crystals. ‘What can you see of Mlle. Luci?’ I asked, by letter, giving -no hint of any kind as to the lady’s date or connections. The seeress -replied that, in an ink-bottle on her writing-desk, she saw a girl of -about twenty-eight, dark, handsome, rather like Madame Patti in youth. -Her dress was that of the middle of the eighteenth century. On her -shoulder was laid another lady’s hand, a long, delicate, white hand, with -a ‘marquise’ diamond ring. ‘_La Grande Main_,’ I exclaimed, ‘the hand of -La Grande Main!’—whom we later discovered to be Madame de Vassé. - -The coincidence was certainly pretty, but, unless a portrait of Mlle. -Ferrand can be discovered, we must remain ignorant as to whether she was -correctly represented in the ink-picture; whether a true refraction shone -up from the dead past, the afterglow of a romance. - -[49] _Burt’s Letters_, ii. p. 334. - -[50] MSS. in the Cluny Charter Chest. Privately printed, 1879, p. 16. - -[51] _Waverley_, i. p. 161 (1829). - -[52] London: 1754. - -[53] This is confirmed by the Gartmore MS. in Burt; by MS. 104, in the -King’s Collection; and by Murray of Broughton, in his paper on the Clans. - -[54] Published (1898) as _The Highlands in 1750_ (Blackwood). - -[55] He is a Lowlander, and avers that Scotland rarely lost a battle -except when the Highlanders were engaged, as at Flodden. - -[56] _Sutherland Book_, ii. 256. - -[57] MS. 104 says that they went out most reluctantly. - -[58] The Impartial Hand. - -[59] These letters are in the Cumberland MSS. at Windsor Castle. - -[60] MS. 104. King’s Library. - -[61] See Mr. Mackenzie’s _History of the Camerons_, pp. 233-244, where -the documents are given. - -[62] _History of the Camerons_, p. 236. - -[63] Sheridan can scarcely have been Charles’s adviser at this time. It -may have been O’Sullivan. - -[64] _Pickle_, p. 160. I at first conjectured that this letter might -refer to Pickle himself, but Barisdale, who was in touch with Cumberland -in 1746, just after Culloden, is more probably the person hinted at. - -[65] This does not look as if the Duke alluded to him in the letter of -August 9, where he talks of the price of information. - -[66] Cumberland MSS. See ‘A Gentleman of Knoydart,’ _postea_. - -[67] _Antiquarian Notes_, pp. 152, 153. - -[68] _Lyon in Mourning_, i. 147. - -[69] _Culloden Papers_, pp. 290-292. - -[70] Cumberland MSS. - -[71] _Memorials of Murray of Broughton_, p. 270, _et seq._ - -[72] Chambers’s _Rebellion_ of 1745. Appendix. But compare _Memorials_, -p. 286, where Murray represents himself as poor, though he had the 5,000 -_louis_, unless he had sent them on in front. - -[73] _Scots Magazine_, July 1753, p. 362. - -[74] _Ibid._, 1750, p. 254. - -[75] This is accurate. The note exists to this day. - -[76] This was by the Prince’s desire. - -[77] Scots Papers. Record Office. - -[78] See p. 141, note 2. - -[79] Letters between the Major and the Prince are published in _Pickle -the Spy_. - -[80] Glengarry to Edgar, Jan. 16, 1750. Browne, iv. p. 66. - -[81] Browne, iv. p. 79. - -[82] _Jacobite Lairds of Gask_, p. 276. - -[83] Nov. 21, 1753. Browne, iv. 117. - -[84] Scots Affairs. Record Office. - -[85] The husband of the lady who pistoled the English Captain after 1715. - -[86] State Papers, Scotland, 1753. - -[87] S.P.S. Bundle 44, No. 28-29. - -[88] It is plain that the account given on p. 144, and said by the -Informer to be ‘in Clunie’s writing,’ is absolutely wrong, cannot be -by Cluny, and is meant to incriminate that chief. Not only are the -6,000 louis carried to Charles by Kennedy omitted, but the ‘treasure’ -intercepted by Downan and Glenevis does not appear, while 2,000 of -the 27,000 louis are left out of the reckoning. ‘The State of Clunie -McPherson’s Intromissions,’ in short, is a fraudulent document. It bears -traces of confused manipulation in various interests. - -[89] _Lyon in Mourning_, i. 310. _Antiquarian Notes_, by C. Fraser -Mackintosh, p. 225. - -[90] _Lyon in Mourning_, i. 147. - -[91] _Lyon_, i. 309-10. - -[92] _Nether Lochaber_, pp. 188, 189. - -[93] Now Fort William. - -[94] This Mr. Douglas gets a very bad character from John Macdonnell, of -the Scotus family, in his Memoirs. - -[95] Dungallon had only been released from Edinburgh Castle in October -1749. - -[96] This includes the money got by Glengarry in Edinburgh, out of -Murray’s original 5,000 _louis_, entrusted to his brother-in-law, Mr. -Macdougal. Compare Murray’s _Memorials_, p. 304, where he denies that -Mrs. Murray brought any large sum from the Highlands. The reverse is -stated by Ramsay of Ochtertyre, and it is plain that, by Mrs. Murray’s -means, or otherwise, a large sum was conveyed by Murray to Edinburgh. - -[97] See Mr. Stevenson’s _Kidnapped_ and _Catriona_ and the printed Trial -for the Appin Murder. - -[98] Add. MSS. 32,995, 6, 33. - -[99] December 1752. _Pickle_, p. 176. - -[100] State Papers, MS., April 15, 1751. - -[101] Cumberland Papers. - -[102] _Scots Magazine_, July 1753, p. 362. - -[103] June 18, 1754, State Papers. - -[104] _Scots Magazine_, June 1754. The details of Fassifern’s -imprisonment and condemnation are taken from the _Scots Magazine_ of -1753-1754. - -[105] No. 48 S. P. S. From Churchill to Newcastle, Nov. 19, 1751. The -story of the ghostly evidence in Sergeant Davies’s case will be found in -the author’s _Book of Dreams and Ghosts_. - -[106] Written before 1810, the Memoirs are published in the _Canadian -Magazine_ of 1828. Mr. McLennan has founded on these papers his excellent -romance, _Spanish John_. - -[107] _Hunts-foot_ (_sic_), _i.e._ leg of a dog, a term of reproach with -the Germans. - -[108] Lally’s adventures were romantic, and are only touched on by M. -Humont in his _Lally Tollendal_, pp. 32-5. - -[109] Mackenzie’s _History of the Camerons_; see documents on pp. 233-44. - -[110] Murray of Broughton in Chambers’s _Rebellion of 1745_; edition of -1869, p. 515. - -[111] Letter-Book of Alastair Ruadh, MS. - -[112] William, fourth son of Donald the fifth of Kilcoy. He married Jean, -daughter of Mackenzie of Davochmaluag, and died without issue. _History -of the Mackenzies_, p. 585. - -[113] _Antiquarian Notes_, by C. Fraser Mackintosh, p. 156. - -[114] Laing MSS., Edinburgh University Library. - -[115] _Pickle_, p. 282. - -[116] February 19, 1760, _Pickle_, p. 312: also p. 266, April 8, 1754: -‘Since the loss of my worthy great friend [Henry Pelham] on whose word I -wholly relay’d, everything comes far short of my expectations.’ - -[117] _Antiquarian Notes_, p. 123. - -[118] _Pickle_, pp. 312-314. - -[119] _Antiquarian Notes_, pp. 120, 121. - -[120] The tradition of Glengarry’s treachery has reached me both from -Scotland and America, under dread secrecy! - -[121] In 1749 a Mr. Bruce was appointed to survey the forfeited and -unforfeited estates of the Highlands, including Glengarry’s. Pickle -speaks of employing ‘Cromwell’ (Bruce) to draw up for him a judicial rent -roll. The two Bruces, the surveyor and the Court Trusty, are obviously -the same man, and he is probably the writer of the tract, _The Highlands -in 1750_. (MS. 104. King’s Library.) - -[122] It is needless to consider the theory that Pickle was James Mohr -Macgregor, who died in 1754. - -[123] Burt, i. 265-267. - -[124] Murray of Broughton’s _Memorials_, p. 107. James’s letter to Louis -XV., p. 508. - -[125] Charles knew of Murray’s ‘rascality’ by April 10, 1747. Letter of -the Prince to James. Stuart Papers, _Memorials_, p. 398. - -[126] _Lyon in Mourning_, iii. 119. The anecdote is also given by Robert -Chambers in _Jacobite Memorials_. - -[127] This letter was published, from my transcript, by Mr. A. H. Millar, -in the _Scottish Review_ for April 1897. - -[128] Stuart Papers. Browne, iv. 100, iv. 22, 23, 51. - -[129] Browne, iv. 98-102. - -[130] _Ibid._ iv. 118. - -[131] _Ibid._ iv. 64. - -[132] Newton to Waters, March 18, 1750, _Pickle_, p. 93; Lord Elcho’s -Diary; Glengarry to Prince Charles, admitting the fact, 1751; Browne, iv. -79; ‘Cluny’s Treasure,’ _supra_. - -[133] Browne, iv. 66. - -[134] _Pickle_, p. 161. - -[135] Stuart Papers, Windsor Castle. - -[136] _Pickle_, p. 162. - -[137] _Pickle_, p. 180. - -[138] Jesse’s _Pretenders_, Appendix. - -[139] _Pickle_, pp. 170-175. - -[140] _Pickle_, pp. 191-194. - -[141] _Ibid._ p. 190. - -[142] MSS. 33,050; f. A25. - -[143] _Pickle_, p. 210. - -[144] _Pickle_, p. 219. - -[145] State Papers, Scotland, Bundle 44, No. 67. - -[146] Glengarry’s Letter Book, MS., p. 207, _supra_. - -[147] Add MSS. 32,955, f. 38. - -[148] _Highlanders_, ii. xvi. Appendix. - -[149] _Scottish Review_, April, 1897, p. 223. - -[150] _Pickle_, p. 283. - -[151] _Ibid._ p. 284. - -[152] See Appendix. - -[153] December 13, 1754. _Pickle_, p. 285. - -[154] This letter, with a draft of Glengarry’s reply, written on the -back, is in the possession of General Macdonald, the owner of Glengarry’s -Letter Book. - -[155] _Pickle_, pp. 288-289. - -[156] Add. MSS. 32,804, f. 137. - -[157] _Pickle_, pp. 290-291. - -[158] _Ibid._ pp. 312-314. - -[159] _Letters from the Highlands_, ii. 70 (1818). - -[160] Glengarry’s Letter Book, MS. (1758-9). - -[161] _A Journey through part of England and Scotland, Along with the -Army, &c._ By a Volunteer. Osborne, London: 1747, p. 176. - -[162] Lord Selkirk, _State of the Highlands_, p. 42 (1805). - -[163] Glengarry’s Letter Book, MS. - -[164] November-December, 1754. _Pickle_, p. 285. - -[165] _Antiquarian Notes_, pp. 120-134. - -[166] _Pickle_, p. 217. - -[167] _Northern Memoirs._ This author does not speak of drinking the -blood of the _living_ cow. See _op. cit._ p. 209, and note, p. 372. This -correction applies to p. 283. - -[168] Burt, ii. p. 31. - -[169] _Ibid._ p. 26. - -[170] Glengarry’s Letter Book, MS. - -[171] _Scotland as it was and as it is_, p. 245. - -[172] Burt, ii. 51. - -[173] The Gartmore MS. is denounced as full of ignorant Lowland -prejudice, by General Stewart of Garth. - -[174] Burt, Appendix, ii. 357. - -[175] We have another statement by Culloden: ‘From Perth to Inverness, -and thence to the Western Sea, including the Western Islands, ... no part -is in any degree cultivated, except some spots here and there in straths -or glens, by the sides of rivers, brooks, or lakes, and on the sea-coast. -The grounds that are cultivated yield small quantities of mean corns not -sufficient to feed the inhabitants, who depend for their nourishment -on milk, butter, cheese, &c., the product of their cattle.... Their -habitations are the most miserable huts that ever were seen.’ _Culloden -Papers_, p. 298. - -[176] This is the house near Musselburgh, which the wicked Colonel -Charteris lent to Culloden, who had defended him from a charge of rape. -In one room (when I was a boy) you saw in the centre a great black -blotch, and black marks as of footsteps tiptoeing out to the door. A -gruesome room! - -[177] Cumberland Papers, 1753. - -[178] _Antiquarian Notes_, p. 207. - -[179] _Antiquarian Notes_; compare pp. 126 and 207. - -[180] Here is a formal rent from Burt (ii. 56):— - - _Donald Mac Oil vic ille Challum._ - Money £8. 10. 4. Scots £0. 5. 10⅛. - Butter 3 lb. 2 oz. - Oatmeal 2 bushels 1 Peck 3 Lip. - Sheep ⅛ and ⅟₁₆. - -Other tenants paid in shares the rest of the sheep. Then there would be -‘services,’ engaging Donald’s time and labour. - -[181] ‘Cluny, May 10, 1724.’ _Stuart Papers_, p. 113, Appendix, pp. -100-105. - -[182] James to the Duke of Gordon, August 27, 1724. - -[183] British Museum. The King’s Library, 104. - -[184] _Scots Magazine_, 1753, p. 498. - -[185] Burt, ii. 5, 6. - -[186] MS. 104. - -[187] _Sketches_, 1822. - -[188] _Ibid._ i. 40. - -[189] _Op. cit._ i. 84, 85. - -[190] Burt, ii. 107. - -[191] _Sketches_, i. 185, _note_. - -[192] _Antiquarian Notes_, p. 284. - -[193] _Sketches_, i. 150. - -[194] _Ibid._ ii. Appendix, xliv. - -[195] _Sketches_, i. 139. - -[196] See also the Introduction to _The Legend of Montrose_. - -[197] Cumberland Papers, 1753. - -[198] January 16, 1747. - -[199] Browne, iii. p. 477. - -[200] March 26, 1740. _Gleanings from Cluny Charter Chest_, p. 4. - -[201] Henry Pelham’s. - -[202] One Bruce did survey the Forfeited Estates and others. - -[203] At Edinburgh, Sept. 1, died Old Glengarry. - -[204] On account of Old Glengarry’s death. - -[205] Dunvegan, August 3, 1745. _Culloden Papers_, p. 204. - -[206] _History of the Macleods._ By Alexander Mackenzie, F.S.A., p. 129. -Inverness, 1889. - -[207] _Ibid._ p. 133. - -[208] _Ibid._ p. 149. - -[209] Mackenzie, pp. 150, 151. - - - - -INDEX - - - Aberdeen, Earl of, 105 - - Ailesbury, Lord, 58 - - Airlie, Earl of, 105 - - Albemarle, Lord, 115, 118, 119, 120 - - Alberoni, Cardinal, 14, 17 - - Amelot, his warning to Murray of Broughton, 73 - - Anderson, Mrs., of Arradoul, nurses Prince Charles, 85 _note_ - - Ardsheil, his estates, 274 - - Argyll, Duke of, at Sheriffmuir, 11; - cited, 106, 162, 226, 263, 271 - - Arkaig, Loch, French gold buried at. _See_ French treasure - - Association of Scottish Jacobites, the, foundation of, 32 - - Atholl, Duke of, his comparison of Pickle’s and Glengarry’s letters, - 249 - - Atholl, James, Duke of, 82, 83, 106, 214 - - Atterbury, Bishop, urges proclamation of King James, on Anne’s death, - 8; - conspiring, 22 - - - Baillie, William, letter on Glengarry’s reconcilement to the - Government, 226 - - Balhaldie (chief of the Macgregors), 72; - his Ossianic prophecies of a French invasion, 73; - in Paris, 73; - in Flanders, 75; - working against Murray of Broughton, 76; - cited, 32, 33, 34, 36, 222, 238, 239 - - Barisdale, Colonel (grandson of Macdonell of Barisdale), 124 - - Barisdale, Macdonell of, physical powers, 100; - marriage, 101; - fight with Cameron of Taask, 101; - arrested for theft, 102; - thief-catcher, 102; - cruelty, 103; - joins a confederacy for theft, 104; - devices for levying blackmail, 105; - captain of a ‘Watch,’ 105; - wadsetter of Glengarry’s, 106; - duel with Cluny, 106; - made a colonel by Charles, 107; - at Prestonpans, 107; - made a knight banneret, 108; - raising the clans, 108; - reducing the shires of Ross and Sutherland, 109; - letter to Lady Sutherland, 112; - too late for Culloden, 113; - and Lochiel, 114; - endeavours to seize Charles, 115; - gets a ‘protection,’ 115; - his protection rescinded, 115; - with his son put in irons by Charles, 116; - in a French prison, 117; - imprisoned in Edinburgh Castle, 117; - his narrative to the Justice Clerk, 118-121; - Jacobite charges against him, 122; - dies in Edinburgh Castle, 123; - family seat, 178; - cited, 86, 87, 131, 133, 134, 138, 139, 188, 190, 195, 259 - - Barisdale, Young (son of Macdonell of Barisdale), in a French prison, - 117; - a fugitive in the Highlands, 123; - takes the oaths, 124; - cited, 160, 190, 195, 196, 259 - - Barry, Dr., betrayed by Murray of Broughton, 75, 88 - - Barrymore, Lord, 36, 38, 74, 75 - - Beaufort, Duke of, 36, 38, 74, 75 - - Berwick, Duke of, urges James to join his adherents, 9; - then advises delay, 9; - detained by the Regent Orléans in France, 9 - - Blair (an agent of James), 229 - - Bland, General, Governor of Edinburgh Castle, 174, 198, 240, 241, - 290, 291 - - Bolingbroke, 9 - - Brado, Mr. (Jew), 200 - - Breck, Allan, 194, 274 - - Bruce (Court Trusty), 217, 218, 240, 241, 291 - - Burt, Captain, 221, 263, 265 - - - Cameron, Allan (brother of Glenevis), dies at Culloden, 149 - - Cameron, Allan, of Landavrae, 164 - - Cameron, Alexander, of Glenevis, 147; - genealogy, 148; - brutality of Cumberland’s men to his wife, 148; - Colonel Crawfurd’s attempt to arrest, 150; - surrenders to Crawfurd, 152; - believes that Young Glengarry gave information against him, 153; - in Edinburgh Castle, 156; - cited, 141, 142, 146, 168, 196, 229, 230, 232 - - Cameron, Angus, of Downan, 136, 146, 149, 151, 153, 154, 156, 159, - 160, 196 - - Cameron, Archibald, of Dungallon, 133, 147, 150, 151 - - Cameron, Dr. Archibald (brother of Lochiel), entrusted with French - treasure, 131; - buries a portion at Loch Arkaig, 131; - accuses, and is accused by, Young Glengarry of embezzlement, 140, - 141; - vindicated in a letter from Douay, 142; - also by an informer, 143; - Cluny Macpherson’s alleged accounts, 144; - innocent of malversation of the Prince’s money, 146; - relationship to Lochiel, 147; - accusations from and of Young Glengarry about the French treasure, - 228; - cited, 85, 86, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 159, 232 - - Cameron, Donald, 135 - - Cameron, Dugald (cowherd), 272 - - Cameron, Duncan, 156 - - Cameron, Evan, of Drumsallie, 145 - - Cameron, Mrs. Archibald, 148, 227 - - Cameron, Mrs. Jean, 138 - - Cameron of Lochiel. _See_ Lochiel - - Cameron of Taask, 101 - - Cameron of Torcastle, 141, 142 - - Cameron, Rev. John, 114 - - Cameron, Samuel (brother of Cameron of Glenevis; Major in Lochiel’s - regiment in French service), 138; - cited, 149, 159 - - Cameron, Sergeant Mohr, hanged, 159; - cited, 194, 196 - - Campbell of Auchenbreck (father-in-law of Lochiel), 72, 73 - - Campbell of Glenure, murdered, 158, 161, 194, 274 - - Campbell of Lochnell, 227 - - Campbell, Sheriff, of Stonefield, 266 - - Carlyle, Dr., 142 - - Carte, the historian, 29, 37, 41 - - Caryl, Lady Elizabeth, 27 - - Cecil, Colonel, 73 - - Charles Edward, Prince, disliked by the Earl Marischal, 5; - repudiates assassination schemes, 22; - affected contempt for all religion, 25; - proposal to settle him in Corsica, 30; - offers to go alone with the Marischal to Scotland, 34; - living concealed in Paris, 35, 43; - anxious to join the French army in Flanders, 35; - implores the Earl Marischal to meet him at Venice, 40, 42; - breaks with Goring, 43; - declines to cashier his mistress, Miss Walkinshaw, 44; - his retreat in Flanders detected by the English, 44; - appeals to the Earl Marischal, 47; - his life of exile, 49; - absurd anecdote of his want of courage, 58; - story of his presence at the coronation of George III., 59; - his personal appearance, 70, 71; - Murray of Broughton’s attachment to him, 71; - Murray exposes Balhaldie and Sempil to him, 76; - avows his intention of visiting Scotland, 76; - warned against this intention, 76, 78, 79; - embarks for Scotland, 36, 80; - believes in Murray of Broughton, 81; - anger with Lord George Murray on the march southwards, 83, 84; - attacked with pneumonia, 85; - behaviour after Culloden, 85, 86; - kindness shown him by Mlle. Ferrand and Mme. de Vassé, 92-96; - makes Barisdale a colonel, 107; - warned by Sheridan against Barisdale, 115; - puts Barisdale and his son in a French prison, 116; - account of his escape from Skye, 127; - instructions about French treasure at Arkaig, 137; - directs the remainder of the French gold to be brought to France, - 156; - deserted by his adherents, 171; - invitation from France, 180; - break up of his party in England, 208; - loyalty to his adherents, 223, 224; - interview with Young Glengarry in France, 235, 236; - collection made for him, 238; - cited, 286, 291, 292, 294, 295 - - Charteris, Colonel, 270 _note_ - - Churchill, General, 175 - - Clancarty, Lord, 36, 37 - - Clanranald, after Sheriffmuir, 13, 14; - cited, 86, 131, 227, 236, 256 - - Clement XI., 21 - - Cluny’s treasure. _See_ French treasure - - Cockburn, his carelessness with the Jacobite cypher, 75 - - Cole, 138 - - Condillac, Abbé, his tribute to Mlle. Ferrand and Madame de Vassé, - 93, 94, 95 - - Conti, Princesse de, 19 - - Cope, General, 82, 83 - - Cotton, Sir John Hinde, 36, 74 - - Craigie, Lord-Advocate, 231 - - Crawfurd, Colonel (Governor of Fort William), 142; - arrests Fassifern, 149; - Glenevis surrenders to him, 152; - examines Glenevis concerning the French gold, 154, 155; - urges the ‘uprooting’ of Fassifern, 161; - induces Charles Stewart to lie about Fassifern’s claims, 169, 171; - cited, 229, 272 - - Creach (in the Irish Brigade), 180 - - Créquy, Madame de, pseudo-Memoirs of, 6; - her love affair with the Earl Marischal, 15; - fraudulent compilation of her Memoirs, 15 - - Cromarty, Lord, 108, 109, 111, 113 - - Crystal-gazing, 96 _note_ - - Culloden, 85 - - Cumberland, Duke of, 117, 118, 119, 121, 128, 189, 190 - - - D’Alembert, quoted, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 12, 13, 14, 18, 24, 34, 35, 47, - 60, 61, 62, 64 - - D’Argens, 60, 62 - - D’Argenson, 34, 36, 37, 223 - - D’Avenant, threatens to bombard Genoa if the Keiths are not expelled, - 21 - - Davies, Sergeant, murder of, 172, 173 - - Dawkins, Jemmy, 43 - - Dillon, General, 14, 22 - - Douglas (Sheriff-substitute), 150 - - Douglas, Sir John, 88 - - Drummond, Lord John (brother of Duke of Perth), 32, 33, 86, 131 - - Drummond, of Balhaldie. _See_ Balhaldie - - Drummond, Provost, 201, 202, 203, 204 - - Dumas the Younger, his dramatic use of an incident in Murray of - Broughton’s career, 90 - - Dunbar, Lord, 26 - - - Edgar (James’s secretary), 83, 71, 89, 228, 229, 230, 231 - - Elcho, Lord, 79, 86, 110, 131 - - Elibank, Lord, 232 - - Elibank Plot, the, 43, 231, 232 - - Emetté, Mlle. (Turkish captive), 31 - - Erskine, 117 - - - Fassifern (Lochiel’s brother), 143; - examined as to the French treasure, 145; - arrested by Colonel Crawfurd, 149; - in Edinburgh Castle, 156; - denounced by Young Glengarry, 160; - Colonel Crawfurd’s accusations, 161; - charged with suborning Glenure’s murder, 162; - accused of forging deeds of Lochiel’s estate, 163; - evidence of an informer against him, 164; - protests against points in his indictment, 165; - petitions for bail, 166, 167; - bail refused, 168; - Charles Stewart on his claims, 169; - Macfarlane’s preparation of claims from missing deeds, 170; - found guilty of abstracting his own papers, 171; - ‘uprooted,’ 171; - cited, 151, 196, 232, 235, 236 - - Faulkner, Sir Everard, 115, 116, 200, 211 - - Fergusson, Captain, 103, 195 - - Ferrand, Mademoiselle (Mlle. Luci), kindness to Charles, 92; - influence on Condillac, 93; - character, 94; - death, 95; - crystal-gazing in research of her identity, 96 _note_ - - Fire-charming, 24 - - Fitzjames, Duc de, 186 - - Fleury, Cardinal, death of, 73 - - Floyd, Captain, 41, 58 - - Floyd, David (son of Captain Floyd), 58, 59 - - Forbes, Bishop, 141, 148, 224, 231, 286 - - Forbes, Captain, 214 - - Forbes of Culloden, 106, 126, 127, 263, 269, 294 - - Fowler, Mr. (gentleman gaoler of the Tower), 89 - - Frazer, General (son of Old Lovat), 200 - - Frederick the Great, his esteem for the Earl Marischal, 4; - employs him, 40; - concerned at his health, 45; - asks the Marischal to find him a good French cook, 46; - foresees the oncoming of the Seven Years’ War, 46; - loses Marshal Keith, 50; - sends the Marischal to Spain, 51; - surety with George II. for the Marischal’s conduct, 51; - patronises Rousseau, 56; - tampers with the Jacobites, 238 - - French treasure, in aid of Charles’s expedition, 129; - Murray of Broughton’s and Archibald Cameron’s disposition of it, - 181; - burial of a portion in the garden of Mrs. Menzies of Culdairs, 132; - burial of major part at Loch Arkaig, 132; - intelligence sent to Colonel Napier about, 133-139; - Cameron’s accusation of Young Glengarry, 140; - Glengarry charges Cluny and the Doctor with embezzlement, 140, 141; - Cameron of Torcastle’s statement, 141; - a letter from Douay, 142; - evidence of an Informer, 143; - Cluny Macpherson’s intromissions, 144; - Fassifern’s admissions, 145; - Glenevis under examination concerning, 154, 155; - Young Glengarry’s dealings with it, 155, 156; - causes dissensions among the clans, 156; - Knoydart and Lochaber demoralised by it, 194 - - Froullay, Mlle. de. _See_ Créquy, Mme. de - - - Gardiner, Mr. (an agent of Crawfurd’s), 150 - - Gartmore MSS., 263 - - Gask, the Laird of, 141 - - Geoffrin, Madame, 51 - - George II., pardons the Earl Marischal, 51 - - George III., story of Charles’s presence at his coronation, 59 - - Glendarule, 17 - - Glenevis. _See_ Cameron of Glenevis - - Glengarry, Æneas (brother of Young Glengarry), 201, 221, 260 - - Glengarry, Duncan, 260 - - Glengarry of Killiecrankie, 256 - - Glengarry, Old (father of Pickle), 82, 114, 116, 181, 190, 210, 224, - 228, 266 - - Glengarry, Young. _See_ Pickle - - Glenshiel, the conflict at, 18, 19 - - Gordon, Admiral, 26 - - Gordon, Duke of, 105, 274, 275, 276 - - Gordon of Glenbucket, 86, 210, 274, 275 - - Gordon, Sir Thomas, of Earlstoun, 75 - - Goring, Henry, 40, 43, 48 - - Grant, Major, 287 - - Grant, Miss Marjory (daughter of Sir Ludovick Grant of Dalvey), 261 - - Grant, Mrs., 85 - - Grant of Grant, 106 - - Grey (English Jacobite), 22 - - - Hamilton, Duke of, 71, 72; - contributes monetary aid to Charles’s cause, 79; - accepts Charles’s commission, 81 - - Harrison, Father, 132, 135 - - Hay, John, of Restalrig, 21, 85, 86 - - Hay of Drumelzier, 72 - - Hay, William, cited, 26 - - Helvetius, 25, 58, 59 - - Highlanders, character of, 97 - - Highlands, the, the old times and the new in, 254; - deer driving, 254; - poverty, 255; - ignorance, 256; - a Highland home in 1747, 257; - emigration of the clans, 257; - the Glengarry estate a typical instance of clan holding, 258-262; - evidence concerning, 263, 264; - poetry, 264; - Strathnaver crofters, 265; - living cows’ blood mixed with oatmeal for food, 265, 283; - hardness of living, 265; - rents, 266; - the truck system, 267; - thriftless agricultural methods, 268; - tyranny of the tacksmen, 269; - Forbes of Culloden’s leases, 270; - customary services and ‘casualties,’ 271, 272; - rent paid in kind, 271; - commutation of services for money, 272; - copy of a formal rent, 273 _note_; - evictions, 273; - the eviction of the Macphersons from Badenoch, 274; - the Mackenzies as landlords, 275; - the Camerons as tenants, 276; - evictions a part of clan warfare, 277, 278; - obligations of the chiefs to the necessitous, 278, 279; - times of scarcity, 280; - blackmail, 280, 281; - the creed of communism, 281; - association of Sutherland farmers to suppress sheep-stealing, 282; - attitude of landlords, 284; - clan affection becomes clan hatred, 284; - old times contrasted with new, 285 - - Hodgson, Captain, 127 - - Holderness, Lord, 51 - - Holker (of Ogilvie’s regiment), 229 - - Howard, G., letter on Barisdale’s protection, 115 - - Hume, David, 55; - letter from Marischal concerning Rousseau, 56; - disseminates an anecdote reflecting on the courage of Charles, 58; - letters from Marischal, 59-64 - - Hunter, Mrs., of Polmood, 87 - - Huntly, 11, 13 - - - Ibrahim (the Marischal’s Turk), 31 - - Innes, George (head of the Scots College), 179 - - Innes, Thomas (historian), 179 - - Inverness, Lord, 26 - - Izard, Captain, 124, 195 - - - James (the Third, Chevalier de St. George), urged to quit France and - join his adherents, 9; - his wintry welcome at Perth, 11; - after Sheriffmuir, 12; - escapes from Scotland, 12; - at Avignon, 14; - his assassination planned by Stair, 20; - his bride, 20; - endeavours to relieve his destitute followers, 21; - pension from Spain, 26; - at the tomb of Clementina, 28; - his trust in Balhaldie, 33; - believes in ‘lying still,’ 39; - opposed to desperate ventures, 49; - deserted by the Earl Marischal, 52; - announces the French King’s resolution to help him, 75; - appealed to about the French treasure, 140; - his name forged by Young Glengarry, 155; - cited, 27, 181, 182, 222, 226, 228, 230, 275 - - Johnson, Dr., quoted, 259, 266 - - Johnston, Captain, 160 - - Johnstone, Chevalier, 107, 109, 178 - - Jones, Captain, 149 - - - Kaunitz, Count, 238 - - Keith, George, Earl Marischal of Scotland, his place in contemporary - history, 1; - ancestry, 2; - political views, 2, 3; - personal character, 4; - date of birth, 5; - parentage, 6; - Colonel and disciplinarian, 6; - neglects the chance on Anne’s death of proclaiming King James, 8; - urges James to join his adherents, 9; - induces his brother James to join the Jacobite cause, 10; - at Sheriffmuir, 11; - remains with the defeated army, 13; - ships to France, 13; - in Spain, 14; - legendary romance about Mlle. de Froullay (Créquy), 15; - portrait in 1716, 16; - at the Lewes with a Spanish force, 17; - in Holland, 19; - in Rome, 20; - communicates the Glenshiel fiasco to Alberoni, 20; - vicissitudes, 21; - friendship with the Duchess of Medina Sidonia, 24; - investigates fire-charming, 24; - religious ideas, 25; - receives from James the Order of the Thistle, 27; - dislike of Prince Charles, 5, 27; - finds the Jacobite Court at Rome no place for an honest man, 28; - at Avignon, 28; - modesty of his requirements, 29; - on the hanging of Porteous, 30; - at St. Petersburg, 30; - Turkish captives in his custody, 31; - impatient with Sempil and Balhaldie, 32; - accused of being lukewarm, 33; - appointed General of a diversion in Scotland, 34; - asked by Charles to set forth with him in a sailing boat, 34; - accused of stopping the Dunkirk expedition, 35; - tries to influence Louis XV. for French aid, 36, 37; - at odds with Sempil, 37; - averse from Charles’s unsupported expedition, 38; - disappears from the diplomatic scene, 39; - at Venice, 39; - at Berlin, 40; - in the service of Frederick the Great, 40; - distrust of George Kelly, 40, 41; - Frederick’s ambassador to Versailles, 43; - tolerance of the Elibank Plot, 43; - breaks with Charles, 43, 44; - letter from his brother, Marshal Keith, 45; - Frederick’s generous offers, 46, 47; - Prince Charles appeals to him, 47; - seeks pardon from the English Government, 48; - his judgment of Charles too severe, 49; - death of his brother, 50; - squabble with Keith’s mistress, 50; - sent by Frederick to Spain, 51; - succeeds to Lord Kintore’s estate, 51; - pardoned by George II., 51; - visits England,52; - Provost of Kintore, 52; - dislikes Scotland and returns to Neufchâtel, 53; - acquaintance with J. J. Rousseau, 53; - leaves Neufchâtel and secures Rousseau an asylum in England, 55, 56; - at Potsdam, 58; - disseminates a scandalous anecdote about Charles, 58, 59; - letters to Hume, 59-64; - his life at Berlin, 64; - attachment to Frederick, 65; - character, tastes, and habits, 66; - death, 67; - cited, 208, 223, 234, 236, 238 - - Keith, Marshal James, joins the Jacobite cause, 10; - account of Sheriffmuir, 11; - escapes to France, 13, 14; - reception by Mary of Modena, 14; - in Spain, 14, 17; - meets Tullibardine in Paris, 17; - brings a Spanish force to Scotland, 17; - defeated by the English forces, 18; - in Holland, 19; - in Rome, 20; - vicissitudes, 21; - ill in Paris, 24; - enters the Russian service, 26; - wounded, 30; - his Turkish captives, 31; - in the service of Frederick, 40; - his Livonian mistress, 42; - letter to the Earl Marischal, 45; - his death, 50 - - Keith, Sir Robert Murray, 67 - - Kelly, Rev. George (one of the Seven Men of Moidart), imprisoned in - the Tower, 19; - escapes therefrom, 29; - cited, 23, 30, 34 _note_, 38, 40, 41, 58, 121 - - Kennedy, Major, concerned with the French treasure, 86, 130, 132, - 134, 138, 140, 154 - - Keppoch, 100 - - Keppoch, Lady, 137 - - Kingsburgh, 128 - - Kintore, Lord, 51 - - Kirk, Rev. Mr., 109 - - Knyphausen, 45, 51 - - - Lambert, Colonel, 214 - - Law, founder of the Mississippi scheme, 19 - - Layer, his mob-plot, 23; - hanged, 23 - - Leslie (priest), 227 - - Lichfield, Earl of, 36 - - Liria, Duke de (son of the Duke of Berwick), 17 - - Lismore (James’s agent), 226, 227 - - Loch Arkaig, French treasure buried at. _See_ French treasure - - Lochgarry, in a thievish confederacy, 104; - accused of treachery, 114; - handling French treasure, 140; - wadsetter of Old Glengarry’s lands of Cullachy, 210-212; - possessions forfeited to the Crown, 211; - in Edinburgh with Pickle, 240, - cited, 86, 153, 172, 188, 190, 232, 235, 290, 291, 292, 294 - - Lochiel (head of the Cameron clan), extracts from Macleod of Skye a - promise to raise his clan, 77; - believes every man of honour should rise, 81; - determines to wage guerilla war after Culloden, 86; - clan relationships, 147; - cited, 32, 72, 100, 107, 109, 132, 130, 136, 141, 145, 147, 188, - 222, 223, 268, 272, 286 - - Lockhart, Alexander (counsel), 173, 174 - - Lockhart of Carnwath, 6, 72, 86 - - Lockhart of Carnwath (the younger), 131 - - Loudon, Lord, 109, 110, 119, 120 - - Louis XIV., death of, 9 - - Louis XV., induced to adopt the Jacobite cause, 34, 36 - - Lovat, Lord, one of the ‘Association,’ 72; - his betrayal of the Duke of Beaufort, 75; - after Culloden, 86, 87; - cited, 32, 99, 100, 108, 135, 257 - - Lovat, Master of, 108, 113, 261 - - Luci, Mademoiselle. _See_ Ferrand, Mademoiselle - - Lynch, Captain (Irish Jacobite), 187, 188, 189, 190 - - - Macdonald, Æneas (banker), 223, 228 - - Macdonald, Alexander Bain, trial of, for murder of Sergeant Davies, - 172, 173, 174 - - Macdonald, Angus (of the Clanranald family), 178, 179 - - Macdonald, Captain Allan, of Knock, in Sleat, 195, 196, 197 - - Macdonald, Flora, assists Charles to escape, 127 - - Macdonald, Lady Margaret, of Sleat, connives at Charles escape from - Skye, 127, 128 - - Macdonald, Major, 241 - - Macdonald of Morar, 124 - - Macdonald, Sir Alexander, of Sleat, 18; - Jacobite and Hanoverian, 126; - letter to Cumberland on Pretender’s movements, 127; - epigram on his death, 128; - cited, 118, 119, 120, 121, 223 - - Macdonell, Archibald (son of Barisdale), 107 - - Macdonell, Colonel John, of Knoydart, 176; - early life, 176; - his Memoirs, 177; - family and estate, 178; - educated in Rome, 178; - an adventure at Toulon, 179; - Creach’s attempt at robbery and his repulse, 180; - introduced to King James, 181; - presented with a sword and a prediction, 181; - horrified by the ideas of his comrades, 181; - his baptism of fire, 182; - wounded in battle with the Austrians, 183, 184; - goes in aid of Charles to Scotland, 185, 186; - arrives after Culloden, 186; - robbed of part of money destined for Charles, 187; - reaches Loch Arkaig, 188; - meets Barisdale, 188; - hands remainder of money to Murray of Broughton, 189; - makes for Knoydart, 189; - adventure while in search of money stolen by Colin Dearg, 190-192; - confronts Colin Dearg on the subject, 193, 194; - arrested by Captain Fergusson, 195; - denounces his cousin Captain Allan Macdonald, 195; - imprisoned in Fort William, 196; - released, 196; - challenges Macdonald of Knock, 196; - in America, 197 - - Macdonell, Dr., of Kylles, 195 - - Macdonell of Barisdale. _See_ Barisdale - - Macdonell, Ranald, 197 - - Macdonnell, Æneas (brother of Young Glengarry), 201, 221, 260 - - Macdonnell, Alastair Ruadh (Young Glengarry). _See_ Pickle - - Macdonnell, Dr. (Young Glengarry’s uncle), 124 - - Macdonnell, General (of the Antrim family), 181, 182, 183, 197 - - Macdonnell, Isobel (Young Glengarry’s sister), 221 - - Macdonnell, John (Spanish John), 160 - - Macdonnell, Miles, 185 - - Macdonnell of Scotus, 109 - - Macfarlane (Fassifern’s lawyer), 163, 170 - - Macgregor, James Mohr, 82, 98, 100, 107, 175, 238, 239 - - MacIan, Angus, 152, 153 - - Mackenzie, Colin Dearg, of Laggy, 187, 188, 191; - accused by Colonel John Macdonell of robbery of the Prince’s money, - 193 - - Mackenzie, Mrs. (niece of Colin Dearg), 188 - - Mackenzie of Dundonell, 193, 194 - - MacKinnon, 103, 128 - - Mackintosh, Fraser, quoted on Highland history, 116, 118, 215, 261, - 264, 272, 273, 275, 277, 282 - - Mackintosh, The, 106 - - Maclean, Sir Hector, arrested in Scotland, 79; - cited, 223 - - Macleod, Malcolm, of Raasay, 126, 127 - - Macleod, Norman, 294, 295 - - Macleod of Raasay, letters of, 246 - - Macleod of Skye, 77; - sends his forces to join Loudon’s in Hanoverian service, 77; - turns his coat, 81; - Young Glengarry asks him to join in a loan, 205; - cited, 88, 206, 207, 214, 223 - - Macleod (Young) of Neuck, 132 - - Macnaughten, John, 79, 80 - - Macpherson, Cluny, his watch or safeguard of followers, 105; - joins Prince Charles, 106; - duel with Barisdale, 106; - alleged copy of his intromissions, 144; - cited, 98, 99, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 143, 154, 156, 158, 230 - - Macpherson of Brechachie, 136, 140, 154, 161, 162 - - Macrimmon (Macleod of Skye’s piper), 77 - - Mar, Earl of, defeat of, at Sheriffmuir, 10, 11, 12; - cited, 22 - - Mary of Modena, 14 - - Maxwell of Kirkconnell, 76, 81, 84 - - McDonald, Donald, 127 - - McDonell, Donald (Younger), of Scotus, 211 - - McFarlane, John, W.S., 143, 145 - - McKenzie, Lieut. Murdoch, 191 - - McKenzie, Major William, of Kilcoy, 191 - - McKenzie of Torridon, 192 - - McLachlan, Alexander, 134 - - McLeod, Alexander, 134 - - McLeod, Rory, letter from Young Glengarry, 201 - - Medina Sidonia, Duchess of, 24 - - Menzies, Mrs., of Culdairs, 132 - - Menzies of Culdairs, treasure buried in his garden, 90 - - Meston (Jacobite wit and poet), 6 - - Millar, Mr., on the handwriting of Pickle and Young Glengarry, 247-249 - - Mitchell, Sir Andrew, 51, 52, 53 - - Montesquieu, 92, 93 - - Morar, Young, 160 - - Morgan, 21, 22 - - Murray, George Siddons (great-grandson of Murray of Broughton), 70 - - Murray, John, of Broughton (traitor), connected with the Association - of Scottish Jacobites, 32; - faithful to Prince Charles Edward, 69; - his ‘Memorials,’ 70; - birth, family, and education, 70; - opinion of the Prince’s personal appearance, 70; - at Traquair, 71; - Scottish correspondent of Edgar, 71; - Jacobite organiser, 72; - his associates, 72; - reception in Paris, 73; - feud with Balhaldie, 32, 73; - betrays names of English leaders, 74; - denounces Balhaldie and Sempil to Charles, 76; - impolicy of his methods of securing adherents to Charles, 77; - on Macleod’s treason, 78; - dissuades Charles’s visits to Scotland without an armed force, 78, - 79; - his self-justification, 80; - believes in his own military skill, 81; - suspicious of Lord George Murray, 81, 82, 83; - on the march southwards with Charles, 84; - illness, 85; - after Culloden, 85; - stands by Lochiel, 86; - in charge of money for Charles, 188, 189; - arranges for the burial of the French gold, 86; - captured, 87; - justifies personal honesty in money matters, 88; - character of his confessions, 88; - betrays the secret of the Arkaig treasure, 88, 130; - accepted as King’s evidence, 89; - pardoned, 89; - tries to provoke Traquair to a duel, 89; - sells Broughton, 90; - dies in a madhouse, 90; - summary of his character, 91; - cited, 27, 101, 102 _note_, 114, 126, 221, 222, 229, 294 - - Murray, Lord George, defeated at Glenshiel, 18; - represented by Murray of Broughton as a traitor to Charles, 81; - his loyalty, 82; - equivocal action, 83; - general-in-chief of Charles’s expeditionary forces, 84; - anger with Charles after Culloden, 85; - cited, 109 - - Murray, Mrs. (wife of Murray of Broughton), 88, 89 - - Murray of Philiphaugh, the descendants of, 70 - - Murray, Sir David (father of Murray of Broughton), 70 - - Murray, William (brother of Lord George), 82 - - Mylne, Captain, 160 - - - Napier, Colonel, A.D.C. to the Duke of Cumberland, 115, 133 - - Needham, 63 - - Newcastle, Duke of, 159, 206, 209, 214, 218, 238, 290, 291, 292, 293 - - Neynho, 23 - - North (English Jacobite), 22 - - - Ogilby, Lord, 286 - - O’Niel, a follower of Charles, 85 - - Orléans, Regent, intrigues in Hanoverian interest, 9 - - Orme, Mr., W.S., 200, 203, 205 - - Ormonde, Duke of, action on Anne’s death, 8; - cited, 14, 17, 18, 23, 28, 34, 75 - - O’Rourk, Mr., of Tipperary, 180 - - Orrery, Lord, 22, 36, 74 - - O’Sullivan, a follower of Charles, 85 - - Oxford, English Jacobite, 22 - - - Parker, Lord Chief Justice, the Earl Marischal’s letter to, 7 - - Pelham, Henry, 198, 206, 207, 208, 232, 235, 237 - - Percheron, M., 15 - - Perth, Duke of, resigns the command of Charles’s expeditionary - forces, 84; - wounded, 86; - cited, 78, 79, 106, 109, 131 - - Peterborough, Lord, 14 - - Pickle (the spy; Young Glengarry), obtains from Murray of Broughton - information of the Loch Arkaig treasure, 89; - Leslie’s aid, 89; - his alleged copy of Cluny Macpherson’s Intromissions, 144; - treachery to Glenevis, 153; - forges King James’s name, 155; - permitted by the Government to reside in London, 155, 156; - denounces Fassifern, 160; - treatment of his wadsetters, 198; - Young Lochgarry’s intimacy with, 199; - letters to Mr. Orme, W. S., on business, 200, 203, 205; - letter to Rory McLeod on family matters, 201; - his niece, 203; - letter to the Chief of the Macleods asking him to go conjunct with - him in a loan, 205; - writes to the Duke of Newcastle complaining, 206; - Pelham’s promise to abate demands on his estate, 207; - those promises never fulfilled, 208; - series of coincidences in Pickle’s fortunes and those of Glengarry, - 208; - their uniformity of bad spelling, 209, 214; - Young Glengarry’s estate troubles, 210-213; - remonstrance to Colonel Trapaud, 213; - illness and bad sight, 214; - his offer to raise a regiment coincident with Young Glengarry’s, - 214; - Young Glengarry’s will, 214; - the Pickle letters, 217; - his close relations with Henry Pelham, 217; - coincidence of his father’s death with that of Old Glengarry, 218; - claims to be chief of the Macdonnells, 218; - the clue to his identity with Glengarry, 219; - his career identical with that of Glengarry, 219; - suggestion that Glengarry was personated by an unknown intimate - calling himself Pickle, 220; - his early life, 221; - usage by his stepmother, 221; - in France, 222; - meets Murray of Broughton, 222, 223; - in the Tower, 223; - released, 224; - attempts reconciliation with the Government, 225; - asks James for a colonelcy vacant by the death of Lochiel, 226; - at the nadir of his fortunes, 227; - offers his services ‘in any shape’ to the English Government, 227; - helps himself to the treasure of Cluny, 228; - earliest charge of treachery against Glengarry, 229; - Edgar warned against him, 229; - his real situation in 1751, 229, 230; - account of the Elibank Plot, 231; - he and Young Glengarry both receive remittances from Baron - Kennedy, 231; - Pelham’s personal knowledge of him, 232; - date of his illness and that of Young Glengarry, 232; - points shared in common by Pickle and Glengarry, 233; - a spy’s evidence, 233-235; - interview with Charles in France, 235; - Young Glengarry in France same date, 236; - mutual promises from Pelham, broken after Pelham’s death, 237; - consulted by Government on Frederick’s tampering with Jacobites, - 238; - the hypothesis that Pickle personated Glengarry, 239; - hurries to Edinburgh on the death of Old Glengarry, 240; - Young Glengarry near at hand on his father’s death, 241; - impersonation physically impossible, 243; - duns the Duke of Newcastle, 243, 244; - internal evidence of identity of authorship of Pickle’s and - Glengarry’s letters, 245, 246; - Mr. Millar’s criticism, 247-249; - the Duke of Atholl’s conclusion, 249; - summary of the case proving identity, 250-253; - two letters incriminatory and confirmatory, 289-294; - cited, 43, 76, 77, 78, 79, 140, 142, 143, 190, 199, 256, 286 - - Pitsligo, Lord, 83, 265 - - Podewils, Count, 45 - - Porteous, hanged by the mob, 30 - - ‘Prescot,’ suspected of intending to murder James, 14 - - Pringle, Sir John, 58 - - - Reay, Lord, 109 - - Rob Roy, letter to General Wade, 98 - - Robison of Ballnicaird, 201, 202, 203, 204 - - Ross of Balnagoun, 109 - - Rousseau, Jean Jacques, meeting with and impressions of Marischal, - 53-55; - wants to write the history of the Keiths, 55; - cited, 4, 5, 40, 41, 66 - - - Saxe, Marshal, 34 - - Scott, Sir Walter, 97, 172 - - Scott (Sir Walter’s father), his sentiment regarding John Murray of - Broughton, 69, 90 - - Scotus (Old), 190 - - Scotus (Young), 86 - - Seaforth, 11, 17, 18, 106 - - Sempil, Lord, 32, 36, 37, 38, 76, 222 - - Sheridan, Sir Thomas (Prince Charles’s tutor), 58, 85, 86, 108, 131 - - Skeldoich, Mr. (minister), 276 - - Small, Ensign, 117, 140, 159, 172, 173, 174, 285 - - Sobieska, Clementina, 20 - - Spence, cited, 8 - - Stewart, Alexander (solicitor), 165, 166, 167 - - Stewart, Charles (writer in Banavie), 160, 166, 167, 168, 169, 171 - - Stewart, General, 199, 239, 264, 281, 282, 283, 284 - - Stewart, James, hanged for the murder of Campbell of Glenure, 159; - cited, 274, 275 - - Stewart, John Roy, 86 - - Stewart of Appin, 77, 78, 166, 167, 169 - - Stonor, cited, 89, 90 - - Strathnaver crofters, bleeding their cows for sustenance, 265 - - Sutherland, Earl of, 107, 109, 110, 113 - - Sutherland, Countess of, letter to the Young Pretender, 110; - Barisdale’s letter to her, 112; - her clever diplomacy, 113 - - Stuart, Charles (Fassifern’s agent), 196 - - - Tacksmen, 259, 268, 269, 282 - - Talmond, Madame de, Charles’s mistress, 95 - - Tencin, Cardinal, 73 - - Terig (or Clerk), Duncan, 172, 173, 174 - - Thompson, Sir E. Maunde, 216 - - Threipland, Sir Stewart, 132 - - Thurot, M., 52 - - ‘Toboso,’ the Order of, 26 - - Tollendal, Lally, 186 - - Trant, Mr., 238 - - Trapaud, Colonel (Governor of Fort Augustus), 198, 213, 218, 241, 260 - - Traquair, Lord, feebleness of his Jacobite sentiment, 71; - one of the ‘Association,’ 72; - responsible for Scotland south of Forth, 73; - in London, 73, 74; - skulks from the rising, 77; - fails to transmit the warning to Charles against his visit to - Scotland, 78, 79; - causes Murray of Broughton to be arrested for breach of peace, 90; - cited, 32, 88, 223 - - Tullibardine, William (brother of Lord George Murray), 17, 18, 82 - - - Urquhart, Colonel, Scottish correspondent of Edgar, 71 - - - Vassé, Madame de (La Grande Main), 64, 92, 93 - - Vaughan, Gwynne, 289, 292 - - Villettes, Arthur, 48 - - Voltaire, 42, 47, 61 - - - Wade, General, 98 - - Wadsets, 260 - - Walkinshaw, Miss, Charles Edward’s mistress, 44 - - Wall, General, 48 - - Wedderburn, of Gosford, 145 - - Wedderburn, Thomas, 107 - - Wemyss, Earl of, 78, 110 - - White, Major, 225 - - Williams, Sir Charles Hanbury, 42 - - Wingfeild, Thomas (trooper), 7 - - Wodrow, cited, 10 - - Wogan, Charles, 20 - - Wogan, Nicholas, 21, 22, 23, 224 - - Wynne, Sir Watkin Williams, 36, 38, 74, 75 - - - York, Duke of, 38, 185, 186, 188 - - - PRINTED BY - SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE - LONDON - -*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE COMPANIONS OF PICKLE *** - -Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will -be renamed. - -Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright -law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works, -so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the -United States without permission and without paying copyright -royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part -of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm -concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark, -and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following -the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use -of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for -copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very -easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation -of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project -Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may -do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected -by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark -license, especially commercial redistribution. - -START: FULL LICENSE - -THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE -PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK - -To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free -distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work -(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full -Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at -www.gutenberg.org/license. - -Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to -and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property -(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all -the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or -destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your -possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a -Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound -by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the -person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph -1.E.8. - -1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be -used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who -agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few -things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See -paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this -agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below. - -1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the -Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection -of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual -works in the collection are in the public domain in the United -States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the -United States and you are located in the United States, we do not -claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing, -displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as -all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope -that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting -free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm -works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the -Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily -comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the -same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when -you share it without charge with others. - -1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern -what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are -in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States, -check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this -agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, -distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any -other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no -representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any -country other than the United States. - -1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg: - -1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other -immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear -prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work -on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the -phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, -performed, viewed, copied or distributed: - - This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and - most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no - restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it - under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this - eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the - United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where - you are located before using this eBook. - -1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is -derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not -contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the -copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in -the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are -redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project -Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply -either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or -obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm -trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted -with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution -must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any -additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms -will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works -posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the -beginning of this work. - -1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm -License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this -work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm. - -1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this -electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without -prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with -active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project -Gutenberg-tm License. - -1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary, -compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including -any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access -to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format -other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official -version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website -(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense -to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means -of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain -Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the -full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1. - -1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying, -performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works -unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9. - -1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing -access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works -provided that: - -* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from - the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method - you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed - to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has - agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid - within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are - legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty - payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project - Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in - Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg - Literary Archive Foundation." - -* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies - you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he - does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm - License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all - copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue - all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm - works. - -* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of - any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the - electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of - receipt of the work. - -* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free - distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works. - -1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than -are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing -from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of -the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set -forth in Section 3 below. - -1.F. - -1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable -effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread -works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project -Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may -contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate -or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other -intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or -other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or -cannot be read by your equipment. - -1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right -of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project -Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project -Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all -liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal -fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT -LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE -PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE -TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE -LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR -INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH -DAMAGE. - -1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a -defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can -receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a -written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you -received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium -with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you -with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in -lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person -or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second -opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If -the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing -without further opportunities to fix the problem. - -1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth -in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO -OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT -LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE. - -1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied -warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of -damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement -violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the -agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or -limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or -unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the -remaining provisions. - -1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the -trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone -providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in -accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the -production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm -electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, -including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of -the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this -or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or -additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any -Defect you cause. - -Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm - -Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of -electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of -computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It -exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations -from people in all walks of life. - -Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the -assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's -goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will -remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project -Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure -and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future -generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see -Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at -www.gutenberg.org - -Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation - -The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit -501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the -state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal -Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification -number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by -U.S. federal laws and your state's laws. - -The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West, -Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up -to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website -and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact - -Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg -Literary Archive Foundation - -Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without -widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of -increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be -freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest -array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations -($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt -status with the IRS. - -The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating -charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United -States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a -considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up -with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations -where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND -DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular -state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate - -While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we -have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition -against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who -approach us with offers to donate. - -International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make -any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from -outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff. - -Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation -methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other -ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To -donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate - -Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works - -Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project -Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be -freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and -distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of -volunteer support. - -Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed -editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in -the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not -necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper -edition. - -Most people start at our website which has the main PG search -facility: www.gutenberg.org - -This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm, -including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary -Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to -subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks. |