SCOTTISH GIPSIES, DOWN TO THE YEAR 1715.
That the Gipsies were in Scotland in the year 1506 is certain, as
appears by a letter of James IV, of Scotland, to the King of Denmark, in
favour of Anthonius Gawino, Earl of Little Egypt, a Gipsy chief. But
there is a tradition, recorded in Crawford's Peerage, that a company of
Gipsies, or Saracens, were committing depredations in Scotland before
the death of James II, which took place in 1460, being forty-six years
after the Gipsies were first observed on the continent of Europe, and it
is, therefore, probable that these wanderers were encamped on Scottish
ground before the year 1460, above mentioned. As I am not aware of
Saracens ever having set foot in Scotland, England, or Ireland, I am
disposed to think, if there is any truth in this tradition, it alludes
to the Gipsies.[51] The story relates to the estate and family of
McLellan of Bombie, in Galloway, and is as follows:
[51] There is no reason to doubt that these were Gipsies. They were
evidently a roving band, from some of the continental hordes, that had
passed over into Scotland, to "prospect" and plunder. They would, very
naturally, be called Saracens by the natives of Scotland, to whom any
black people, at that time, would appear as Saracens. We may,
therefore, assume that the Gipsies have been fully four hundred years
in Scotland. I may mention, however, that Mediterranean corsairs
occasionally landed and plundered on the British coast, to as late a
period as the reign of Charles I.--ED.
In the reign of James II, the Barony of Bombie was again recovered by
the McLellans, (as the tradition goes,) after this manner: In the same
reign, says our author of small credit, (Sir George McKenzie, in his
baronage M.S.,) it happened that a company of Saracens or Gipsies, from
Ireland,[52] infested the county of Galloway, whereupon the king
intimated a proclamation, bearing, that whoever should disperse them,
and bring in their captain, dead or alive, should have the Barony of
Bombie for his reward. It chanced that a brave young gentleman, the
laird of Bombie's son, fortunated to kill the person for which the
reward was promised, and he brought his head on the point of his sword
to the king, and thereupon he was immediately seized in the Barony of
Bombie; and to perpetuate the memory of that brave and remarkable
action, he took for his crest a Moor's head, and 'Think on' for his
motto.[53]
[52] Almost all the Scottish Gipsies assert that their ancestors came
by way of Ireland into Scotland.
[This is extremely likely. On the publication of the edict of
Ferdinand of Spain, in 1492, some of the Spanish Gipsies would likely
pass over to the south of Ireland, and thence find their way
into Scotland, before 1506. Anthonius Gawino, above referred to,
would almost seem to be a Spanish name. We may, therefore, very
safely assume that the Gipsies of Scotland are of Spanish Gipsy
descent.--ED.]
[53] Crawford's Peerage, page 238.
As armorial bearings were generally assumed to commemorate facts and
deeds of arms, it is likely that the crest of the McLellans is the head
of a _Gipsy_ chief. In the reign of James II, alluded to, we find "away
putting of _sorners_, (forcible obtruders,) fancied fools, vagabonds,
out-liers, masterful beggars, _bairds_, (strolling rhymers,) and such
like runners about," is more than once enforced by acts of
parliament.[54]
[54] Glendook's Scots' acts of parliament.
But the earliest authentic notice which has yet been discovered of the
first appearance of the Gipsies in Scotland, is the letter of James IV,
to the King of Denmark, in 1506. At this period these vagrants
represented themselves as Egyptian pilgrims, and so far imposed on our
religious and melancholy monarch, as to procure from him a favourable
recommendation to his uncle of Denmark, in behalf of one of these
"Earls," and his "lamentable retinue." The following is a translation of
this curious epistle:
"Most illustrious, &c.--Anthonius Gawino, Earl of Little Egypt, and the
other afflicted and lamentable tribe of his retinue, whilst, through a
desire of travelling, and, by command of the Pope,[55] (as he says,)
pilgriming, over the Christian world, according to their custom, had
lately arrived on the frontiers of our kingdom, and implored us that we,
out of humanity, would allow him to approach our limits without damage,
and freely carry about all things, and the company he now has. He easily
obtains what the hard fortune wretched men require. Thus he has
sojourned here, (as we have been informed,) for several months, in
peaceable and catholic manner. King and uncle, he now proposes a voyage
to Denmark to thee. But, being about to cross the ocean, he hath
requested our letters, in which we would inform your Highness of these,
and at the same time commend the calamity of this tribe to your royal
munificence. But we believe that the fates, manners, and race of the
wandering Egyptians are better known to thee than us, because Egypt is
nearer thy kingdom, and a greater number of such men sojourn in thy
kingdom.--Most illustrious, &c."[56]
[55] Mr. Hoyland makes some very judicious remarks upon the capacity
of the Gipsies, when they first appeared in Europe. He says: "The
first of this people who came into Europe must have been persons of
discernment and discrimination, to have adapted their deceptions so
exactly to the genius and habits of the different people they visited,
as to ensure success in all countries. The stratagem to which they had
recourse, on entering France, evinces consummate artifice of plan, and
not a little adroitness and dexterity in the execution. The specious
appearance of submission to Papal authority, in the penance of
wandering seven years, without lying in a bed, contained three
distinct objects. They could not have devised an expedient more likely
to recommend them to the favour of the ecclesiastics, or better
concerted for taking advantage of the superstitious credulity of the
people, and, at the same time, for securing to themselves the
gratification of their own nomadic propensities. So complete was the
deception they practised, that we find they wandered up and down
France, under the eye of the magistracy, not for seven years only, but
for more than a hundred years, without molestation."
Mr. Hoyland's remarks cover only half of the question, for, being
"pilgrims," their chiefs must also assume very high titles, to give
them consideration with the rulers of Europe--such as dukes, earls,
lords, counts and knights. To carry out the character of pilgrims, the
body would go very poorly clad; it would only be the chiefs who would
be flashily accoutred. It is, therefore, by no means wonderful that
the Gipsies should have succeeded so well, and so long, in obtaining
an entrance, and a toleration, in every country of Europe.--ED.
[56] Illustrissime, &c.--Anthonius Gawino, ex Parva Egypto comes, et
cætera ejus comitatus, gens afflicta et miseranda, dum Christianam
orbem peregrinationes studio. Apostolicæ sedis, (ut refert) jussu,
suorum more peregrinans, fines nostri regni dudum advenerat, atque in
sortis suæ, et miseriarum hujus populi, refugium, nos pro humanitate
imploraverat ut nostros limites sibi impune adire, res cunctas, et
quam habet societatem libere circumagere liceret. Impetrat facile quæ
postulat miserorum hominum dura fortuna. Ita aliquot menses bene et
catholice, (sic accepimus,) hic versatus, ad te, Rex et avuncule, in
Daciam transitum paret. Sed oceanum transmissurus nostras literas
exoravit; quibus celsitudinem tuam horum certiorum redderemus, simul
et calamitatem ejus gentis Regiæ tuæ munificentiæ commendaremus.
Ceterum errabundæ Egypti fata, moresque, et genus, eo tibe quam nobis
credimus notiora, quo Egyptus tuo regno vicinior, et major hujusmodi
hominum frequentia tuo diversatur imperio. Illustrissime, &c.
From 1506 to 1540, the 28th of the reign of James V, we find that the
true character of the Gipsies had not reached the Scottish court; for,
in 1540, the king of Scotland entered into a league or treaty with "John
Faw, Lord and Earl of Little Egypt;" and a writ passed the Privy Seal,
the same year, in favour of this Prince or _Rajah_ of the Gipsies. As
the public edicts in favour of this race are extremely rare, I trust a
copy of this curious document, in this place, may not be unacceptable to
the reader.[57]
[57] I have taken the liberty of translating the various extracts from
the Scottish acts of parliament, quoted in this chapter, as the
original language is not very intelligible to English or even Scottish
readers. For doing this, I may be denounced as a Vandal by the ultra
Scotch, for so treating such "rich old Doric," as the language of the
period may be termed.--ED.
"James, by the grace of God, King of Scots: To our sheriffs of
Edinburgh, principal and within the constabulary of Haddington, Berwick,
Roxburgh, &c., &c.; provosts, aldermen, and baillies of our burghs and
cities of Edinburgh, &c., &c., greeting: Forasmuch as it is humbly meant
and shown to us, by our loved John Faw, Lord and Earl of Little Egypt,
that whereas he obtained our letter under our great seal, direct you all
and sundry our said sheriffs, stewarts, baillies, provosts, aldermen,
and baillies of burghs, and to all and sundry others having authority
within our realm, to assist him in execution of justice upon his company
and folk, conform to the laws of Egypt, and in punishing of all them
that rebel against him: nevertheless, as we are informed, Sebastiane
Lalow Egyptian, one of the said John's company, with his accomplices and
partakers under written, that is to say, Anteane Donea, Satona Fingo,
Nona Finco, Phillip Hatseyggaw, Towla Bailyow, Grasta Neyn, Geleyr
Bailyow, Bernard Beige, Demeo Matskalla (or Macskalla), Notfaw Lawlowr,
Martyn Femine, rebels and conspirators against the said John Faw, and
have removed them all utterly out of his company, and taken from him
divers sums of money, jewels, clothes and other goods, to the quantity
of a great sum of money; and on nowise will pass home with him, howbeit
he has bidden and remained of long time upon them, and is bound and
obliged to bring home with him all them of his company that are alive,
and a testimony of them that are dead: and as the said John has the
said Sebastiane's obligation, made in Dunfermline before our master
household, that he and his company should remain with him, and on nowise
depart from him, as the same bears: In contrary to the tenor of which,
the said Sebastiane, by sinister and wrong information, false relation,
circumvention of us, has purchased our writings, discharging him and the
remnant of the persons above written, his accomplices and partakers of
the said John's company, and with his goods taken by them from him;
causes certain our lieges assist them and their opinions, and to fortify
and take their part against the said John, their lord and master; so
that he on nowise can apprehend nor get them, to have them home again
within their own country, after the tenor of his said bond, to his heavy
damage and _skaith_ (hurt), and in great peril of losing his heritage,
and expressly against justice: Our will is, therefore, and we charge you
straightly and command that . . . . . . . . . . ye and every one of you
within the bounds of your offices, command and charge all our lieges,
that none of them take upon hand to reset, assist, fortify, supply,
maintain, defend, or take part with the said Sebastiane and his
accomplices above written, for no body's nor other way, against the said
John Faw, their lord and master; but that they and ye, in likewise, take
and lay hands upon them wherever they may be apprehended, and bring them
to him, to be punished for their demerits, conform to his laws; and help
and fortify him to punish and do justice upon them for their trespasses;
and to that effect lend him your prisons, stocks, fetters, and all other
things necessary thereto, as ye and each of you, and all other our
lieges, will answer to us thereupon, and under all highest pain and
charge that after may follow: So that the said John have no cause of
complaint thereupon in time coming, nor to resort again to us to that
effect, notwithstanding any our writings, sinisterly purchased or to be
purchased, by the said Sebastiane on the contrary: And also charge all
our lieges that none of them molest, vex, unquiet, or trouble the said
John Faw and his company, in doing their lawful business, or otherwise,
within our realm, and in their passing, remaining, or away-going forth
of the same, under the pain above written: And such-like that ye command
and charge all skippers, masters and mariners of all ships within our
realm, at all ports and havens where the said John and his company
shall happen to resort and come, to receive him and them therein, upon
their expenses, for furthering of them forth of our realm to the parts
beyond sea, as you and each of them such-like will answer to us
thereupon, and under the pain aforesaid. Subscribed with our hand, and
under our privy seal at Falkland, the fifteenth day of February, and of
our reign the 28th year."[58]
[58] Ex. Registro Secreti Sigilli, Vol. XIV, fol. 59. Blackwood.
Appendix to McLaurin's Criminal Trials.
This document may well be termed the most curious and important record
of the early history of the Gipsy race in Europe; and it is well
worthy of consideration. The meaning of it is simply this: John Faw
had evidently been importuned by the Scottish Court, (at which he
appears to have been a man of no small consequence,) to bring his
so-called "pilgrimage," which he had undertaken "by command of the
Pope," to an end, so far, at least, as remaining in Scotland was
concerned. Being pressed upon the point, he evidently, as a last
resource, formed a plan with Sebastiane Lalow, and the other "rebels,"
to leave him, and carry _off_, (as he said,) his property. To give the
action an air of importance, and make it appear as a real rebellion,
they brought the question into court. Then, John could turn round, and
reply to the king: "May it please your majesty! I can't return to my
own country. My company and folk have conspired, rebelled, robbed, and
left me. I can't lay my hands upon them; I don't even know where to
find them. I must take them home with me, or a testimony of them that
are dead, under the great peril of losing my heritage, at the hands of
my lord, the Duke of Egypt. However, if your majesty will help me to
catch them, I will not be long in taking leave of _your_ kingdom, with
all my company. In the meantime, your majesty will be pleased to issue
your commands to all the shipowners and mariners in the kingdom, to be
ready, _when I gather together my folk_(_!_) to further our passage to
Egypt, for which I will pay them handsomely." The whole business may
be termed a piece of "thimble-rigging," to prolong their stay--that
is, enable them to remain permanently--in the country. Our author, I
think, is quite in error in supposing this to have been a real quarrel
among the Gipsies. If it had been a real quarrel, the Gipsies would
soon have settled the question among themselves, by their own laws; it
would have been the last thing, under all the circumstances of the
case, they would have thought of, to have brought it before the
Scottish court. The Gipsies, according to Grellmann, assigned the
following reason for prolonging their stay in Europe: "They
endeavoured to prolong the term (of their pilgrimage) by asserting
that their return home was prevented by soldiers, stationed to
intercept them; and by wishing to have it believed that new parties of
pilgrims were to leave their country every year, otherwise their land
would be rendered totally barren."
The quarrel between the Faas and the Baillies, for the _Gipsy crown_,
in after times, did not, in all probability, arise from this business,
but most likely, as the English Gipsies believe, from some marriage
between these families. The Scottish Gipsies, like the two Roses, have
had, and for aught I know to the contrary, may have yet, two rival
kings--Faa and Baillie, with their partisans--although the Faas, from
the prominent position which they have always occupied in Scottish
history, have been the only kings known to the Scottish public
generally.
In perusing this work, the reader will be pleased to take the above
mentioned document as the starting point of the history of the Gipsies
in Scotland; and consider the Gipsies of that time as the progenitors
of all those at present in Scotland, including the great encrease of
the body, by the mixture of the white blood that has been brought
within their community. He will also be pleased to divest himself of
the childish prejudices, acquired in the nursery and in general
literature, against the name of Gipsy; and consider that there are
people in Scotland, occupying some of the highest positions in life,
who are Gipsies; not indeed Gipsies in point of purity of blood, but
people who have Gipsy blood in their veins, and who hold themselves to
be Gipsies, in the manner which I have, to a certain extent, explained
in the Preface, and will more fully illustrate in my Disquisition on
the Gipsies.--ED.
This curious league of John Faw with the Scottish king, who acknowledges
the laws and customs of the Gipsies within his kingdom, was of very
short duration. Like that of many other favourites of princes, the
credit which the "Earl of Little Egypt" possessed at court was, the
succeeding year, completely annihilated, and that with a vengeance, as
will appear by the following order in council. The Gipsies, quarrelling
among themselves, and publicly bringing their matters of dispute before
the government, had, perhaps, contributed to produce an enquiry into the
real character and conduct of these foreigners; verifying the ancient
adage, that a house divided against itself cannot stand. But the
immediate cause assigned for the sudden change of mind in the king, so
unfortunate for the Gipsies, is handed down to us in the following
tradition, current in Fife:
King James V, as he was travelling through part of his dominions,
disguised under the character of the Gaberlunzie-man, or Guid-man of
Ballangiegh, prosecuting, as was his custom, his low and vague amours,
fell in with a band of Gipsies, in the midst of their carousals, in a
cave, near Wemyss, in Fifeshire. His majesty heartily joined in their
revels, but it was not long before a scuffle ensued, wherein the king
was very roughly handled, being in danger of his life.[59] The Gipsies,
perceiving at last that he was none of their people, and considering him
a spy, treated him with great indignity. Among other humiliating
insults, they compelled his royal majesty, as an humble servant of a
Tinkler, to carry their budgets and wallets on his back, for several
miles, until he was exhausted; and being unable to proceed a step
further, he sank under his load. He was then dismissed with scorn and
contempt by the merciless Gipsies. Being exasperated at their cruel and
contemptuous treatment of his sacred person, and having seen a fair
specimen of their licentious manner of life, the king caused an order in
council immediately to be issued, declaring that, if _three_ Gipsies
were found together, one of the three was instantly to be seized, and
forthwith hanged or shot, by any one of his majesty's subjects that
chose to put the order in execution.
[59] The Gipsies assert that, on this occasion, the king attempted to
take liberties with one of their women: and that one of the male
Gipsies "came crack over his head with a bottle."--ED.
This tradition is noticed by the Rev. Andrew Small, in his antiquities
of Fife, in the following words. His book came into my hands after I had
written down my account of the tradition.
"But, surely, this would be the last tinker that ever he would dub (a
knight). If we may judge from what happened, one might imagine he,
(James V,) would be heartily sick of them, (tinkers,) being taken
prisoner by three of them, and compelled to stay with them several days,
so that his nobles lost all trace of him, and being also forced, not
only to lead their ass, but likewise to assist it in carrying part of
the panniers! At length he got an opportunity, when they were bousing in
a house at the east end of the village of Milnathort, where there is now
a new meeting-house built, when he was left on the green with the ass.
He contrived to write, some way, on a slip of paper, and gave a boy
half-a-crown to run with it to Falkland, and give it to his nobles,
intimating that the guid-man of Ballangiegh was in a state of captivity.
After they got it, and knew where he was, they were not long in being
with him, although it was fully ten miles they had to ride. Whenever he
got assistance, he caused two of the tinkers, that were most harsh and
severe to him, to be hanged immediately, and let the third one, that was
most favourable to him, go free. They were hanged a little south-west of
the village, at a place which, from the circumstance, is called the
Gallow-hill to this day. The two skeletons were lately found after the
division of the commonty that recently took place. He also, after this
time, made a law, that whenever three tinkers, or Gipsies, were found
going together, two of them should be hanged, and the third set at
liberty."[60]
[60] Small's Roman Antiquities of Fife, pages 285 and 286. Small also
records a song composed on James V dubbing a Tinker a knight.
The following order in council is, perhaps, the one to which this
tradition alludes:
"Act of the lords of council respecting John Faw, &c., June 6, 1541. The
which day anent the complaint given by John Faw and his brother, and
Sebastiane Lalow, Egyptians, to the King's grace, ilk ane plenizeand
. . . . upon other and divers faults and injuries; and that it is agreed
among them to pass home, and have the same decided before the Duke of
Egypt.[61] The lords of council, being advised with the points of the
said complaints, and understanding perfectly the great thefts and
_skaiths_ (hurts) done by the said Egyptians upon our sovereign lord's
lieges, wherever they come or resort, ordain letters to be directed to
the provosts and baillies of Edinburgh, St. Johnstown (Perth), Dundee,
Montrose, Aberdeen, St. Andrews, Elgin, Forres, and Inverness; and to
the sheriffs of Edinburgh, Fife, Perth, Forfar, Kincardine, Aberdeen,
Elgin and Forres, Banff, Cromarty, Inverness, and all other sheriffs,
stewarts, provosts and baillies, where it happens the said Egyptians to
resort.[62] To command and charge them, by open proclamation, at the
market crosses of the head burghs of the sheriffdoms, to depart forth of
this realm, with their wives, children, and companies, within xxx days
after they be charged thereto, under the pain of death; notwithstanding
any other letters or privileges granted to them by the king's grace,
because his grace, with the advice of the lords, has discharged the same
for the causes aforesaid: with certification that if they be found in
this realm, the said xxx days being past, they shall be taken and put to
death."[63]
[61] It would seem that John Faw had become frightened at the mishap
of one of his folk "coming crack over the king's head with a bottle,"
and that, to pacify his majesty, he had at once gone before him, and
informed him that he had prevailed on his "rebellious subjects" to
_pass home_, and have the matter in dispute decided by the _Duke of
Egypt_. This would, so far, satisfy the king; but to make sure of
getting rid of his troublesome visitors, he issued his commands to
the various authorities to see that they really did leave the
country.--ED.
[62] It would appear, from the mention that is made here of the
authorities of so many towns and counties, "where it happens the said
Egyptians to resort," that the race was scattered over all Scotland at
this time, and that it must have been numerous.--ED.
[63] M. S. Act. Dom. Con. vol 15, fol. 155.--_Blackwood's Magazine._
This sharp order in council seems to have been the first edict banishing
the Gipsies as a whole people--men, women, and children--from Scotland.
But the king, whom, according to tradition, they had personally so
deeply offended, dying in the following year, (1542) a new reign brought
new prospects to the denounced wanderers.[64] They seem to have had the
address to recover their credit with the succeeding government; for, in
1553, the writ which passed the privy seal in 1540, forming a sort of
league with "John Faw, Lord and Earl of Little Egypt," was renewed by
Hamilton, Earl of Arran, then Regent during the minority of Queen Mary.
McLaurin, in his criminal trials, when speaking of John Faw, gravely
calls him "this peer." "There is a writ," says he, "of the same tenor in
favour of this peer from Queen Mary, same record, 25 April, 1553; and 8
April, 1554, he gets remission for the slaughter of Ninian Small." In
Blackwood's Magazine it is mentioned that "Andro Faw, Captain of the
Egyptians,[65] and twelve of his gang specified by name, obtained a
remission for the slaughter of Ninian Small, committed within the town
of Linton, in the month of March last by past upon suddenly." This
appears to be the slaughter to which McLaurin alludes. The following are
the names of these thirteen Gipsies: "Andro Faw, captain of the
Egyptians, George Faw, Robert Faw, and Anthony Faw, his sons, Johnne
Faw, Andrew George Nichoah, George Sebastiane Colyne, George Colyne,
Julie Colyne, Johnne Colyne, James Haw, Johnne Browne, and George
Browne, Egyptians."
[64] It is perfectly evident that the severe decree of James V against
the Gipsies arose from the personal insult alluded to, owing to the
circumstance of its falling to the ground after his death, and the
Gipsies recovering their position with his successor. Apart from what
the Gipsies themselves say on this subject, the ordinary tradition may
be assumed to be well founded. If the Gipsies were spoken to on the
subject of the insult offered to the king, they would naturally reply,
that they did not know, from his having been dressed like a beggar,
that it was the king; an excuse which the court, knowing his majesty's
vagabond habits, would probably receive. But it is very likely that
John Faw would declare that the guilty parties were those rebels whom
he was desirous to catch, and take home with him to Egypt! This Gipsy
king seems to have been a master of diplomacy.--ED.
[65] The Gipsy chiefs were partial to the title of Captain; arising, I
suppose, from their being leaders of large bands of young men employed
in theft and robbery. [In Spain, such Gipsy chiefs, according to Mr.
Borrow, assumed the name of Counts.--ED.]
From the edict above mentioned, it is evident that the Gipsies in
Scotland, at that time, were allowed to punish the criminal members of
their own tribe, according to their own peculiar laws, customs and
usages, without molestation. And it cannot be supposed that the
ministers of three or four succeeding monarchs would have suffered their
sovereigns to be so much imposed on, as to allow them to put their names
to public documents, styling poor and miserable wretches, as we at the
present day imagine them to have been, "Lords and Earls of Little
Egypt." Judging from the accounts which tradition has handed down to us,
of the gay and fashionable appearance of the principal Gipsies, as late
as about the beginning of the eighteenth century, as will be seen in my
account of the Tweed-dale bands, I am disposed to believe that Anthonius
Gawino, in 1506, and John Faw, in 1540, would personally, as
individuals, that is, as Gipsy Rajahs,[66] have a very respectable and
imposing appearance in the eyes of the officers of the crown. And
besides, John Faw appears to have been possessed of "divers sums of
money, jewels, clothes and other goods, to the quantity of a great sum
of money;" and it would seem that some of the officers of high rank in
the household of our kings had fingered the cash of the Gipsy pilgrims.
If there is any truth in the popular and uniform tradition that, in the
seventeenth century, a Countess of Cassilis was seduced from her duty to
her lord, and carried off by a Gipsy, of the name of John Faa, and his
band, it cannot be imagined, that the seducer would be a poor, wretched,
beggarly Tinkler, such as many of the tribe are at this day. If a
handsome person, elegant apparel, a lively disposition, much mirth and
glee, and a constant boasting of extraordinary prowess, would in any way
contribute to make an impression on the heart of the frail countess,
these qualities, I am disposed to think, would not be wanting in the
"Gipsy Laddie." And, moreover, John Faw bore, on paper at least, as high
a title as her husband, Lord Cassilis, from whom she absconded. It is
said the individual who seduced the fair lady was a Sir John Faw, of
Dunbar, her former sweetheart, and not a Gipsy; but tradition gives no
account of a Sir John Faw, of Dunbar.[67] The Falls, merchants, at
Dunbar, were descended from the Gipsy Faas of Yetholm.
[66] _Rajah_--The Scottish Gipsy word for a chief, governor, or
prince.
[67] The author, (Mr. Finlay,) who claims a Sir John Faw, of Dunbar,
to have been the person who carried off the Countess of Cassilis,
gives no authority, as a writer in Blackwood says, in support of his
assertion. Nor does he account for a person of that name being any
other than a Gipsy. Indeed, this is but an instance of the ignorance
and prejudice of people generally in regard to the Gipsies. The
tradition of the hero being a Gipsy, I have met with among the English
Gipsies, who even gave me the name of the lady. John Faw, in all
probability the king of the Gipsies, who carried off the countess,
might reasonably be assumed to have been, in point of education, on a
par with her, who, in that respect, would not, in all probability,
rise above the most humble Scotch cow-milker at the present day,
whatever her personal bearing might have been.--ED.
It is pretty clear that the Gipsies remained in Scotland, with little
molestation, from 1506 till 1579--the year in which James VI took the
government into his own hands, being a period of about seventy-three
years, during which time these wanderers roamed up and down the kingdom,
without receiving any check of consequence, excepting the short
period--probably about one year--in which the severe order of James V
remained in force, and which, in all probability, expired with the
king.[68]
[68] During these seventy-three years of peace, the Gipsies in
Scotland must have multiplied prodigiously, and, in all probability,
drawn much of the native blood into their body. Not being, at that
time, a proscribed race, but, on the contrary, honoured by leagues and
covenants with the king himself, the ignorant public generally would
have few of those objections to intermarry with them, which they have
had in subsequent times. The thieving habits of the Gipsies would
prove no bar to such connections, as the Scottish people were
accustomed to thieving of all kinds.--ED.
The civil and religious contests in which the nation had been long
engaged, particularly during the reign of Queen Mary, produced numerous
swarms of banditti, who committed outrages in every part of the country.
The slighter depredations of the Gipsy bands, in the midst of the fierce
and bloody quarrels of the different factions that generally prevailed
throughout the kingdom, would attract but little attention, and the
Gipsies would thereby escape the punishment which their actions merited.
But the government being more firmly established, by the union of the
different parties who distracted the country, and the king assuming the
supreme authority, which all acknowledged, vigorous measures were
adopted for suppressing the excess of strolling vagabonds of every
description. In the very year the king was placed at the head of
affairs, a law was passed, "For punishment of strong and idle beggars,
and relief of the poor and impotent."
Against the Gipsies this sweeping statute is particularly directed, for
they are named, and some of their practices pointed out, in the
following passage: "And that it may be known what manner of persons are
meant to be strong and idle beggars and vagabonds, and worthy of the
punishment before specified, it is declared that all idle persons going
about the country of this realm, using subtle, crafty and unlawful
plays--as jugglery, fast-and-loose, and such others, the idle people
calling themselves Egyptians, or any other that fancy themselves to have
knowledge of prophecy, charming, or other abused sciences, whereby they
persuade the people that they can tell their weirds, deaths, and
fortunes, and such other fantastical imaginations."[69] And the
following is the mode prescribed for punishing the Gipsies, and the
other offenders associated with them in this act of parliament: "That
such as make themselves fools and are _bairds_, (strolling rhymers,) or
other such like runners about, being apprehended, shall be put in the
king's ward, or irons, so long as they have any goods of their own to
live on, and if they have not whereupon to live of their own, that their
ears be nailed to the tron or other tree, and cut off, and (themselves)
banished the country; and if thereafter they be found again, that they
be hanged."[70]
[69] In this act of parliament are denounced, along with the Gipsies,
"all minstrels, songsters, and tale-tellers, not avowed by special
licence of some of the lords of parliament or great barons, or by the
high burghs and cities, for their common minstrels." "All _vagabond
scholars_(_!_) of the universities of St Andrews, Glasgow, and
Aberdeen, not licenced by the rector and dean of faculty to _ask
alms_." It would seem, from this last extract, that the Scottish
Universities granted diplomas to their students to beg! The Gipsies
were associated or classed with good company at this time. But beggar
students, or student-beggars, were common in other parts of Europe
during that age.--ED.
[70] Glendook's Scots Acts, James VI, 6th Par. cap. 74--20th Oct.
1579.
This statute was ratified and confirmed in the 12th parliament of James
VI, cap. 147, 5th June, 1592, wherein the incorrigible Gipsies are again
referred to: "And for the better trial of common _sorners_ (forcible
obtruders,) vagabonds, and masterful beggars, fancied fools, and
counterfeit Egyptians, and to the effect that they may be still
preserved till they be compelled to settle at some certain dwelling, or
be expelled forth of the country, &c." The next law in which the Gipsies
are mentioned, with other vagabonds, was passed in the 15th parliament
of the same reign, 19th December, 1597, entitled, "Strong beggars,
vagabonds, and Egyptians should be punished." The statute itself reads
as follows: "Our sovereign lord and estates of parliament ratify and
approve the acts of parliament made before, against strong and idle
beggars, vagabonds, and Egyptians," with this addition: "That strong
beggars and their children be employed in common works, and their
service mentioned in the said act of parliament, in the year of God,
1579, to be prorogate in during their life times, &c."[71]
[71] By the above, and subsequent statutes, in the reign of James VI,
"Coal and salt-masters might apprehend, and put to labour, all
vagabonds and sturdy beggars." The truth is, these kidnapped
individuals and their children were made slaves of to these masters.
The colliers were emancipated only within these fifty years. It has
been stated to me that some of the colliers in the Lothians are of
Gipsy extraction. [Our author might have said _Gipsies_; for being "of
Gipsy extraction," and "Gipsies," are expressions quite synonymous,
notwithstanding the application by the public of the latter term to
the more original kind of Gipsies only.--ED.]
All the foregoing laws were again ratified and enforced by another act,
in the same reign, 15th November, 1600. The following extract will serve
to give some explanation how these statutes were neglected, and seldom
put in force: "And how the said acts have received little or no effect
or execution, by the oversight and negligence of the persons who were
nominated justices and commissioners, for putting of the said acts to
full and due execution, so that the strong and idle beggars, being for
the most part thieves, _bairds_, (strolling rhymers,) and counterfeit
_limmers_, (scoundrels,) living most insolently and ungodly, without
marriage or baptism, are suffered to _vaig_ and wander throughout the
whole country."[72] "But," says Baron Hume, "all ordinary means having
proved insufficient to restrain so numerous and so sturdy a crew, the
privy council at length, in June, 1603, were induced to venture on the
more effectual expedient, (recommended by the example of some other
realm,) of at once ordering the whole race to leave the kingdom by a
certain day, and never to return under the pain of death.[73] A few
years after, this proclamation was converted into perpetual law, by
statute 1609, cap. 13, with this farther convenient, but very severe,
provision toward the more effectual execution of the order, that it
should be lawful to condemn and execute them to the death, upon proof
made of the single fact 'that they are called, known, repute and holden
Egyptians'!" As this is the only statute exclusively relating to, and
denouncing, the Gipsies, I shall give it at length.
[72] If Fletcher of Saltoun be correct, when he states that, in his
time, which was about the end of the 17th century, there were two
hundred thousand people, (about one-fifth of the whole population,)
begging from door to door in Scotland, it would be a task of no little
difficulty, for those in power, to put in force the laws against the
Gipsies, and vagabonds generally. The editor of Dr. Pennicuick's
history of Tweed-dale, thinks Fletcher's is an over-charged picture.
Some are of opinion that, when he made his statement, he included the
greater part of the inhabitants of the Scottish Border, and also those
in the north of Scotland; for, he said, the Highlands "was an
inexhaustible source of beggars," and wished these banditti
transplanted to the low country, and to people the Highlands from
hence.
[73] The records in which this order is contained are lost.
"13. Act anent the Egyptians. Our sovereign lord and estates of
parliament ratify, approve, and perpetually confirm the act of secret
council, made in the month of June or thereby, 1603 years, and
proclamation following thereupon, commanding the vagabonds, _sorners_
(forcible obtruders), and common thieves, commonly called Egyptians, to
pass forth of this kingdom, and remain perpetually forth thereof, and
never to return within the same, under pain of death; and that the same
have force and execution after the first day of August next to come.
After the which time, if any of the said vagabonds, called Egyptians, as
well women as men, shall be found within this kingdom, or any part
thereof, it shall be lawful to all his majesty's good subjects, or any
one of them, to cause take, apprehend, imprison, and execute to death
the said Egyptians, either men or women, as common, notorious, and
condemned thieves, by one assize only to be tried, that they are called,
known, repute and holden Egyptians: In the which cause, whosoever of the
assize happen to _clenge_ (exculpate) any of the aforesaid Egyptians
pannelled, as said is, shall be pursued, handled and censured as
committers of wilful error: And whoever shall, any time thereafter,
reset, receive, supply, or entertain any of the said Egyptians, either
men or women, shall lose their escheat, and be warded at the judge's
will: And that the sheriffs and magistrates, in whose bounds they shall
publicly and avowedly resort and remain, be called before the lords of
his highness' secret council, and severely censured and punished for
their negligence in execution of this act: Discharging all letters,
protections, and warrants whatsoever, purchased by the said Egyptians,
or any of them, from his majesty or lords of secret council, for their
remaining within this realm, as surreptitiously and deceitfully obtained
by their knowledge: Annulling also all warrants purchased, or hereafter
to be purchased, by any subject of whatsoever rank within this kingdom,
for their reset, entertaining, or doing any manner of favour to the
said Egyptians, at any time after the said first day of August next to
come, for now and ever."[74] In a subsequent enactment, in 1617,
appointing justices of the peace and constables, the destruction of the
proscribed Egyptians is particularly enjoined, in defining the different
duties of the magistrates and their peace officers.[75]
[74] Glendook's Scots Act.
[75] Ib.
But so little respected was the authority of the government, that in
1612, three years after the passing of the Gipsy act, his majesty was
under the humiliating necessity of entering into a contract with the
clan Scott, and their friends, by which the clan bound themselves "to
give up all bands of friendship, kindness, oversight, maintenance or
assurance, if any we have, with common thieves and broken clans, &c." It
is certain there would be many bonds of the same nature with other
turbulent clans throughout the kingdom. That Scotchmen of respectability
and influence protected the Gipsies, and afforded them shelter on their
lands, after the promulgation of the cruel statute of 1609, is manifest
from the following passages, which I extract from Blackwood's Magazine,
for 1817; the conductor of which seems to have been careful in examining
the public records for the documents quoted by him; having been guided
in his researches, I believe, by Sir Walter Scott.
"In February, 1615, we find a remission under the privy seal, granted to
William Auchterlony, of Cayrine, for resetting of John Faw and his
followers.[76] On the 14th July, 1616, the sheriff of Forfar is severely
reprimanded for delaying to execute some Gipsies, who had been taken
within his jurisdiction, and for troubling the council with petitions in
their behalf. In November following appears a proclamation against
Egyptians and their resetters. In December, 1619, we find another
proclamation against resetters of them; in April, 1620, another
proclamation of the same kind, and in July, 1620, a commission against
resetters, all with very severe penalties. The nature of these acts will
be better understood from the following extract from that of the 4th
July, 1616, which also very well explains the way in which the Gipsies
contrived to maintain their footing in the country, in defiance of all
the efforts of the legislature to extirpate them." "It is of truth that
the thieves and _limmers_ (scoundrels), aforesaid, having for some short
space after the said act of parliament, (1609,) . . . dispersed
themselves in certain secret and obscure places of the country . . .
they were not known to wander abroad in troops and companies, according
to their accustomed manner, yet, shortly thereafter, finding that the
said act of parliament was neglected, and that no enquiry nor . . . was
made for them, they began to take new breath and courage, and . . .
unite themselves in infamous companies and societies, under . . .
commanders, and continually since then have remained within the country,
committing as well open and avowed _rieffis_ (robberies) in all parts
. . . murders, . . . _pleine stouthe_ (common theft) and pickery, where
they may not be mastered; and they do shamefully and mischievously abuse
the simple and ignorant people, by telling fortunes, and using charms,
and a number of juggling tricks and falseties, unworthy to be heard of
in a country subject to religion, law, and justice; and they are
encouraged to remain within the country, and to continue in their
thievish and juggling tricks and falseties, not only through default of
the execution of the said act of parliament, but, what is worse, that
great numbers of his majesty's subjects, of whom some outwardly pretend
to be famous and unspotted gentlemen, have given and give open and
avowed protection, reset, supply and maintainance, upon their grounds
and lands, to the said vagabonds, _sorners_, (forcible obtruders,) and
condemned thieves and _limmers_, (scoundrels,) and suffer them to remain
days, weeks, and months together thereupon, without controulment, and
with connivance and oversight, &c." "So they do leave a foul, infamous,
and ignominious spot upon them, their houses, and posterity, that they
are patrons to thieves and _limmers_, (scoundrels,)" &c.[77]
[76] The nature of this crime in Scotch law is fully explained in the
following extract from the original, which also appears curious in
other respects. The pardon is granted "pro receptione, supportatione,
et detentione supra terra suas de Belmadie, et infra eius habitationis
domium, aliaq. edificia eiusdem, _Joannis Fall_, _Ethiopis_, _lie
Egiptian_, eiusq. uxoris, puerorum, servorum et associatorum; Necnon
pro ministrando ipsis cibum, potum, pecunias, hospicium, aliaq.
necessaria, quocunq. tempore vel occasione preterita, contra acta
nostri Parliamenti vel secreti concilii, vel contra quecunq. leges,
alia acta, aut constitutiones huius nostri regni Scotiæ in contrarium
facta." Regist. secreti sigilli vol. lxxxiii, fol. 291, _Blackwood's
Magazine_.--ED.
[77] The same state of things existed in Spain. Charles II. passed a
law on the 12th June, 1695, the 16th article of which, as given by Mr.
Borrow, enacts: "And because we understand that the continuance of
those who are called Gitanos has depended on the favour, protection,
and assistance which they have experienced from persons of _different
stations_, we do ordain that whosoever against whom shall be proved
the fact of having, since the day of the publication hereof, favoured,
received, or assisted the said Gitanos, in any manner whatever,
whether _within their houses_ or without, _provided he is a noble_,
shall be subjected to the fine of _six thousand ducats_, . . . . and
_if a plebeian_, to a _punishment of ten years in the galleys_." Such
an enactment would surely prove that the Gipsies in Spain were
_greatly_ favoured by the Spanish people generally, even two centuries
after they entered the country.
The causes to which may be attributed this toleration, even
encouragement, of the Gipsies, are various. Among these may be
mentioned a fear of consequences to person and property, tinkering,
trafficking and amusement, and corruption on the part of those in
power. But in the character of the Gipsies itself may be found a
general cause for their escaping the effects of the laws passed
against them, viz., _wheedling_. The term Gitano has been variously
modified in the Spanish language, thus:
Gitano. _Gipsy_, _flatterer_; Gitanillo, _a little Gipsy_; Gitanismo,
_the Gipsy tribe_; Gitanesco, _Gipsy-like_; Gitanear, _to flatter_,
_entice_; Gitaneria, _wheedling_, _flattery_; Gitanamento, _in
a sly, winning manner_; Gitanada, _blandishment_, _wheedling_,
_flattery_.--ED.
From their first arrival in the country till 1579, the Gipsies, as
already mentioned, appear to have been treated as a separate people,
observing their own laws and customs. In the year 1587, such was the
state of society in Scotland, that laws were passed by James VI,
compelling all the baronial proprietors of lands, chiefs and captains of
clans, on the Borders and Highlands of Scotland, to find pledges and
securities for the peaceable conduct of their retainers, tenants,
clansmen, and other inhabitants of their respective estates and
districts.[78] In the same parliament another act was passed, allowing
vagabonds and broken and unpledged men to produce pledges and securities
for their good conduct. The Gipsies, under these statutes, would remain
unmolested, as they would readily find protection by becoming,
nominally, clansmen, and assuming the surnames, of those chieftains and
noblemen who were willing and able to afford them protection.[79]
Indeed, the act allowing vagabonds to find sureties would include the
Gipsy bands, for, about this period, they seem to have been only
classed with our own native vagabonds, moss-troopers, Border and
Highland thieves, broken clans and masterless men. It appears by the act
of 1609, that the Gipsies had even purchased their protection from the
government. The inhabitants of Scotland being at this period still
divided into clans, would greatly facilitate the escape of the Gipsies
from the laws passed against them. The clans on the Borders and
Highlands were in a state of almost constant warfare with one another;
and frequently several of the clans were united in opposition to the
regular government of the country, to whose mandates they paid little or
no regard. The Gipsies had no settled residence, but roamed from place
to place over the whole country; and when they found themselves in
danger in one place, they had no more to do but remove into the district
inhabited by a hostile clan, where they would immediately find
protection. Besides, the Borderers and Highlanders, themselves
plunderers and thieves, would not be very active in apprehending their
brother thieves, the Gipsies. Even, according to Holinshed, "the poison
of theft and robbery pervaded almost all classes of the Scottish
community about this period."
[78] There were 17 clans on the Borders, and 34 clans in the
Highlands, who appear to have had chiefs and captains over them. There
were 22 baronial proprietors connected with the Borders, and 106
connected with the Highlands, named in a roll, who were likewise
ordered to find pledges.--_Glendook's Scots Acts._
[79] It sometimes happened, when an internal quarrel took place in a
clan, portions of the tribe left their chief, and united themselves to
another, whose name they assumed and dropped their original one.
The excessive severity of the sanguinary statute of 1609, and the
unrelenting manner in which it was often carried into effect, were
calculated to produce a great outward change on the Scottish Gipsies.
Like stags selected from a herd of deer, and doomed to be hunted down by
dogs, these wanderers were now singled out, and separated from the
community, as objects to whom no mercy was to be shown.[80] The word
Egyptian would never be allowed to escape their lips; not a syllable of
their peculiar speech would be uttered, unless in the midst of their own
tribe. It is also highly probable that every part of their dress by
which their fraternity could be recognized, would be carefully
discontinued. To deceive the public, they would also conform
_externally_ to some of the religious rites, ceremonies, observances,
and other customs of the natives of Scotland. I am further inclined to
think that it would be about this period, and chiefly in consequence of
these bloody enactments, the Gipsies would, in general, assume the
ordinary christian and surnames common at that time in Scotland. And
their usual sagacity pointed out to them the advantages arising from
taking the cognomens of the most powerful families in the kingdom, whose
influence would afford them ample protection, as adopted members of
their respective clans. In support of my opinion of the origin of the
surnames of the Gipsies of the present day, we find that the most
prevailing names among them are those of the most influential of our
noble families of Scotland; such as Stewart, Gordon, Douglas, Graham,
Ruthven, Hamilton, Drummond, Kennedy, Cunningham, Montgomery, Kerr,
Campbell, Maxwell, Johnstone, Ogilvie, McDonald, Robertson, Grant,
Baillie, Shaw, Burnet, Brown, Keith, &c.[81] If, even at the present
day, you enquire at the Gipsies respecting their descent, the greater
part of them will tell you that they are sprung from a bastard son of
this or that noble family, or other person of rank and influence, of
their own surname.[82] This pretended connexion with families of high
rank and power has saved some of the tribe from the gallows even in our
own time. The names, however, of the two principal families, Faw, (now
Faa,) and Bailyow, (now Baillie,) appear not to have been changed since
the date of the order in council or league with James V, in the year
1540, as both of these names are inserted in that document.
[80] The reader will see that the Gipsies, at this time, were not
greater "vagabonds" than great numbers of native Scotch, if as great.
But, being strangers in the country, sojourners according to their own
account, the king would naturally enough banish them, as they seem
always to have been saying that they were about leaving for "their own
country." Their living in tents, a mode of life so different from that
of the natives, would, of itself, make them obnoxious to the king
personally.--ED.
[81] The English Gipsies say that native names were assumed by their
race in consequence of the proscription to which it was subjected.
German Gipsies, on arrival in America, change, at least modify, their
names. There are many of them who go under the names of Smith, Miller,
and Waggoner. Jews frequently bear names common to the natives of the
countries in which they are to be found, and sometimes, at the present
day, assume Christian ones. I knew two German Jews, of the name of
Cohen, who settled in Scotland. One of them, who was a priest,
retained the original name; but the other, who was a watchmaker,
assumed the name of Cowan, which, singularly enough, the priest said,
was a corruption of Cohen.--ED.
[82] It is stated by Paget, in his Travels in Hungary, that the
Gipsies in that country have a profound regard for aristocracy; and
that they invariably follow that class in the matter of religious
opinions. Grellmann says as much in regard to the Gipsy's desire of
getting hold of a distinguished old coat to put on his person.--ED.
Baron Hume, on the criminal law of Scotland, gives the following
account of some of the trials and executions of the Gipsies:
"The statute (1609) annuls at the same time all protection and warrants
purchased by the Egyptians from his majesty's privy council, for their
remaining within the realm; as also all privileges purchased by any
person to reset, entertain, or do them any favour. It appears, indeed,
from a paper in the appendix to McLaurin's Cases, that even the king's
servants and great officers had not kept their hands entirely pure of
this sort of treaty with the Egyptian chiefs, from whom some supply of
money might in this way be occasionally obtained.
"The first Gipsies that were brought to trial on the statute, were four
persons of the name of Faa, who, on the 31st July, 1611, were sentenced
to be hanged. They had pleaded upon a special license from the privy
council, to abide within the country; but this appearing to be clogged
with a condition of finding surety for their appearance when called on,
and their surety being actually at the horn, for failure to present
themselves, they were held to have infringed the terms of their
protection.
"The next trial was on the 19th and 24th July, 1616, in the case of
other two Faas and a Baillie, (which seem to have been noted names among
the Gipsies;) and here was started that plea which has since been
repeated in almost every case, but has always been overruled, viz: that
the act and proclamation were temporary ordinances, and applicable only
to such Egyptians as were in the country at their date. These pannels,
upon conviction, were ordered by the privy council to find caution to
the extent of 1,000 merks, to leave Scotland and never to return; and
having failed to comply with this injunction, they were in consequence
condemned to die.
"In January, 1624, follows a still more severe example; no fewer than
eight men, among whom Captain John Faa and other five of the name of
Faa, being convicted, were doomed to death on the statute. Some days
after, there were brought to trial Helen Faa, relict of Captain Faa,
Lucretia Faa, and other women to the number of eleven; all of whom were
in like manner convicted, and condemned to be drowned! But, in the end,
their doom was commuted for banishment, (under pain of death,) to them
and all their race. The sentence was, however, executed on the male
convicts; and it appears that the terror of their fate had been of
material service; as, for the space of more than 50 years from that
time, there is no trial of an Egyptian."
But notwithstanding this statement of Baron Hume, of the Gipsy trials
having ceased for half a century, we find, twelve years after 1624, the
date of the above trials, the following order of the privy council:
"Anent some Egyptians. At Edinburgh, 10th November, 1636. Forasmuch as
Sir Arthur Douglas of Quhittinghame having lately taken and apprehended
some of the vagabond and counterfeit thieves and _limmers_,
(scoundrels,) called the Egyptians, he presented and delivered them to
the sheriff principal of the sheriffdom of Edinburgh, within the
constabulary of Haddington, where they have remained this month or
thereby: and whereas the keeping of them longer, within the said
tolbooth, is troublesome and burdensome to the town of Haddington, and
fosters the said thieves in an opinion of impunity, to the encouraging
of the rest of that infamous _byke_ (hive) of lawless _limmers_
(scoundrels) to continue in their thievish trade: Therefore the lords of
secret council ordain the sheriff of Haddington, or his deputies, to
pronounce doom and sentence of death against so many of these
counterfeit thieves as are men, and against so many of the women as want
children; ordaining the men to be hanged, and the women to be drowned;
and that such of the women as have children, to be scourged through the
burgh of Haddington, and burned in the cheek; and ordain and command the
provost and baillies of Haddington to cause this doom be executed upon
the said persons accordingly."[83]
[83] Blackwood's Magazine.
"Towards the end of that century," continues Baron Hume, "the nuisance
seems to have again become troublesome. On the 13th of December, 1698,
John Baillie and six men more of the same name, along with the wife of
one of them, were indicted as Egyptians, and also for sundry special
misdeeds; and being convicted, (all but the woman,) they were ordered
for execution. But in this case it is to be remarked, that the court had
so far departed from the rigour of the statute as not to sustain a
relevancy on the habit and repute of being an Egyptian of itself, but
only 'along with one or other of the facts of picking and little
thieving;' thus requiring some proof of actual guilt in aid of the fame.
In the next trial, which was that of William Baillie, June 26th, 1699, a
still further indulgence was introduced; for the interlocutor required a
proof, not of _one_ only, but of _several_, of the facts of 'picking or
little thieving, or of several acts of beating and striking with
invasive weapons.' He was only convicted as an Egyptian, and of _one_
act of striking with an invasive weapon, and he escaped in consequence
with his life.
"This lenient course of dealing with the Gipsies was not taken, however,
from any opinion of it as a necessary thing, nor was there any purpose
of prescribing it as a rule for other times, or for further cases of the
kind where such an indulgence might seem improper, as appears from the
interlocutor of relevancy in the case of John Kerr, and Helen Yorkston,
and William Baillie and other seven; in both of which the simple fame
and character of being an Egyptian is again found _separatum_ relevant
to infer the pain of death, (10th and 11th August, 1714.) Kerr and
Yorkston had a verdict in their favour; Baillie and two of his
associates were condemned to die; but as far as concerns Baillie, (for
the others were executed,) his doom was afterwards mitigated into
transportation, under pain of death in case of return.
"As early as the month of August, 1715, the same man, (as I understand
it,) was again indicted, not only for being found in Britain, but for
continuing his former practices and course of life. Notwithstanding this
aggravation, the interlocutor is again framed on the indulgent plan, and
only infers the pain of death, from the fame and character of being
an Egyptian, joined with various acts of violence and sorning, to
the number of three, that are stated in the libel. Though convicted
nearly to the extent of the interlocutor, he again escaped with
transportation.[84]
[84] This, and part of the preceding paragraph, will be quoted again,
under the chapter of Tweed-dale and Clydesdale Gipsies.
"Nor have I observed that the court, in any later case, have thought it
necessary to proceed upon the repute alone, unavouched by evidence of,
at least, one act of theft or violence; so that, upon the whole,
according to the practice of later times, this sort of charge seems to
be reduced nearly to the level of the charge of being habit and repute a
thief at common law."
It is noticed by Baron Hume that the Faas and the Baillies were noted
names among the Gipsies. Indeed, the trials referred to by him are all
of persons bearing these two surnames, except two individuals only. The
truth is, the Faas and the Baillies were the two principal families
among the Gipsies; giving, according to their customs, kings and queens
to their countrymen in Scotland. They would be more bold, daring, and
presumptuous in their conduct than the most part of their followers;
and, being leaders of the banditti, government, in all probability,
would fix upon them as the most proper objects for destruction, as the
best and easiest method of overawing and dispersing the whole tribe in
the country, by cutting off their chiefs. As I have already mentioned,
these two principal clans of Faw and Bailyow appear to be the only Gipsy
families in Scotland who have retained the original surnames of their
ancestors, at least of those whose names are inserted in the treaty with
James V, in 1540.
It will be seen, under the head Tweed-dale and Clydesdale Gipsies, that
tradition has represented William Baillie, who was tried in 1714 and
1715, as a bastard son of the ancient family of Lamington, (his mother
being a Gipsy). It appears to me that the Gipsy policy of joining
themselves to some family of rank was, in Baillie's case, of very
important service, not only to himself but to the whole tribe in
Scotland.[85] The extraordinary lenity shown to him by the court, after
such repeated aggravation, cannot be accounted for in any other way than
that great interest had been used in his behalf, in some quarter or
other; and that, by creating a merciful precedent in his case, it was
afterwards followed in the trial of all others of the race in Scotland.
[85] From the time of arrival of the Gipsies in the country, in 1506,
till 1611, the date of the first trials of the tribe, as given by
Baron Hume, a period of 105 years had elapsed; during which time there
had doubtless been five generations of Gipsies added to the
population, as Scottish subjects; to put whom to death, on the mere
ground of being Egyptians, was contrary to every principle of natural
justice. The cruelty exercised upon them was quite in keeping with
that of reducing to slavery the individuals, and their descendants,
who constituted the colliers, coal-bearers, and salters referred to in
the following interesting note, to be found in "My Schools and
Schoolmasters," of Hugh Miller.
"The act for manumitting our Scotch colliers was passed in the year
1775, forty-nine years prior to the date of my acquaintance with the
class of Niddry. But though it was only such colliers of the village
as were in their fiftieth year when I knew them, (with, of course, all
the older ones,) who had been born slaves, even its men of thirty had
actually, though not nominally, come into the world in a state of
bondage, in consequence of certain penalties attached to the
emancipation act, of which the poor ignorant workers under ground were
both too improvident and too little ingenious to keep clear. They were
set free, however, by a second act passed in 1799. The language of
both these acts, regarded as British ones of the latter half of the
last century, and as bearing reference to British subjects living
within the limits of the island, strikes with startling effect.
'Whereas,' says the preamble of the older act--that of 1775--'by the
statute law of Scotland, as explained by the judges of the courts of
law there, many colliers, and coal-bearers, and salters, are in a
state of _slavery or bondage_, bound to the collieries or salt works,
where they work _for life, transferable with the collieries or salt
works_; and whereas, the emancipation,' &c., &c. A passage in the
preamble of the act of 1799 is scarcely less striking: it declares
that, notwithstanding the former act, 'many colliers and coal-bearers
_still continue in a state of bondage_' in Scotland. The history of
our Scotch colliers would be found a curious and instructive one.
Their slavery seems not to have been derived from the ancient time of
general serfship, but to have originated in comparatively modern acts
of the Scottish Parliament, and in decisions of the Court of
Session--in acts of Parliament in which the poor ignorant subterranean
men of the country were, of course, wholly unrepresented, and in
decisions of a court in which no agent of theirs ever made appearance
in their behalf."
What is here said of a history of Scotch colliers being "curious and
instructive," is applicable in an infinitely greater degree to that of
the Gipsies.--ED.