ON THE PHYSICAL POWERS OF MAN.
The mechanical construction of MAN is admirably adapted to his
destination. His body is neither too large nor too small; but of that
convenient size which fits him for the station in which he is placed.
Were it larger, his activity, and even his strength in proportion to his
bulk, would be diminished; and he would thus be deprived of many of those
enjoyments which contribute so much to his happiness.--He would lose the
services of some of the most useful of the inferior animals; especially
those of the Horse, whose power is limited to a degree of strength not
much exceeding the carriage of the weight of a man. On the other hand, a
diminutive race could neither accomplish those great undertakings which
are required for their comfort, nor, perhaps, be able to maintain the
dominion of the earth against the beast of the forest. But man enjoys
every advantage which can be derived from the exact adjustment of his
capacity to his duty; and if he be “fearfully and wonderfully made,” it
is in perfect consistency with that wisdom which is displayed in all the
works of nature.
As, in this world, man has been placed in the first rank of created
beings, his mental powers are not only incomparably beyond those of other
animals, but his physical strength also exceeds that of most of them.
An ingenious Frenchman ascertained the strength of the human frame, by
placing on every part of a man’s body, standing upright, a number of
weights in such a manner, that each part supported as much as it could
bear relatively to the rest; and it was found by this contrivance, that a
man could stand under two thousand pounds.
The bulk of the body of a horse is to that of a man as six or seven are
to one; so that, if his strength were proportionate to that of our
species, he ought to bear a load of twelve or fourteen thousand pounds;
but no horse could carry such a weight; and his strength, therefore,
allowing for the difference of size, is not equal to that of man.
In a memoir presented to the National Institute of France, M. Coulomb
suggested the idea of ascertaining the quantity of daily action which
men are able to furnish by individual labour, according to the different
modes in which they employ their strength. And it has been said that, if
all the strength a man could exert in a day, were united into a single
effort, he could lift (one foot from the ground,) a weight equal to one
million seven hundred and twenty-eight thousand pounds, without injuring
himself.
The DYNANOMETER, of _M. Regnier_, has afforded some curious results
regarding the strength of the people of different nations. In the years
1800-1-2-3, and 4, M. Peron sailed on a voyage of discovery with Captains
_Baudin_ and _Hamelin_, in the French ships _Le Geographe_, and _Le
Naturaliste_; and in the first volume of his _Voyage de Decouvertes
aux Terres Australes_, he gives an account of some experiments he made
with this new instrument to ascertain the comparative strength which
individuals are capable of exerting.
According to the Dynanometer, M. Peron found, that the inhabitants of the
countries under-mentioned, were capable of exerting a force as follows,
viz.
Strength of the Hands. Do. Loins.
Killegrammes. Myriagrames.
SAVAGES.
Of Diemen’s Land, 50 6 0 0
Of New Holland, 51 8 14 8
Of Timor, 58 7 16 2
EUROPEANS.
French, 69 2 22 1
English, 71 4 23 8
From the above experiments it appears, that men in a savage state, are
not so strong as those under the influence of civilization; “and thus it
is demonstrated, that the improvement of social order does not impair our
physical powers, as some persons have imagined.” And it is also evident,
that Englishmen possess more strength than Frenchmen; a fact that has
been proved as often as our soldiers have charged the French army with
the bayonet.
The strength and activity of the human frame arise from the muscular
conformation of its parts, and their constant EXERCISE.--Those habituated
to carry burdens will bear a load of from six to eight hundred pounds;
while other men, of the same weight and apparent strength, would
find it difficult to carry more than one hundred and fifty, to two
hundred pounds. This difference is the effect of practice; as nature
proportionally augments the power of those parts of the body which are
most exerted.
From the same cause, watermen, fishermen, and sailors, who are accustomed
to the use of the oar, acquire great strength in their arms; but, indeed,
the position of the rower is the best calculated of any, for exerting and
increasing the muscular power of the body, as every part must be employed
at the same time. Accordingly, that hardy race of men whose occupation
leads them to ply the oar on our rivers, and along the sea coast, are the
strongest and most robust of our species.
Pedestrianism also depends on practice; for the citizen, whose excursions
are limited to six or seven miles on a holiday, would be as much fatigued
by a walk of double that distance, as a person in the country who is
accustomed to travel, would be, by the accomplishment of a journey of
fifty or sixty miles. Such is the nature of our physical and intellectual
faculties, that they can be improved only by calling them into action, or
what is the same thing, they can only be invigorated by the resistance
they offer to the pressure of difficulties, and acquire power, therefore,
in proportion to the obstacles which they have to overcome.
The strength and activity of men who are inured to the exercise of
walking, are truly astonishing. They will travel farther for a week or a
month than a horse, and, if habituated to hunting, they will outrun him,
and continue the chace much longer. The American Indians, it is said
by travellers, pursue the elk with such rapidity, that they are able to
fatigue and secure him, although he is as swift as the stag. It is also
related of those men, that they will go journies of a thousand leagues in
six weeks or two months; or at the rate of about sixty miles a day, over
the most rugged mountains, and through tractless countries.
But feats more astonishing than those performed by the Indians, or
any other nation, have been accomplished of late years in Britain.
Captain Barclay walked one hundred and ten miles in nineteen hours and
twenty-seven minutes; and Glanville went a hundred and forty-two miles
in twenty-nine hours. In the pages of this volume, we have recorded many
examples of the almost incredible strength, agility, and perseverance of
modern pedestrians. And as EXERCISE, particularly on foot, is attended by
so many advantages to mankind, the Author thinks, he cannot conclude this
work with any observations more apposite to the subject than those of
the amiable CHRISTOPHER CHRISTIAN STURM. “Man, (says he,) in a state of
civilization, does not know how much strength he possesses; how much he
loses by effeminacy, nor how much he can acquire by frequent exercise. We
cannot but regard with pity those indolent beings, who pass their lives
in idleness and effeminacy; who never exert their strength, nor exercise
their powers, for fear of injuring their health, or shortening their
lives.”
“Let us, in future, therefore, exert all our powers and faculties
for the good of our fellow creatures, according to our situation and
circumstances; and, if necessity require, let us cheerfully earn our
bread by the sweat of our brow; even then our happiness is greater than
that of thousands of our fellow men;” and “the more happy we find our
lot compared with [that of] the unfortunate victims of LUXURY, the more
seriously ought we to apply ourselves to fulfil our duties.”--_Sturm’s
Reflections, Sept. XV._
APPENDIX.
No. I.
GENEALOGY OF THE FAMILY OF BARCLAY OF MATHERS AND URY, IN THE COUNTY OF
MEARNS.
Robert Barclay Allardice, Esq. of Ury, in Kincardineshire, is descended
from an ancient and honourable family. We can trace his progenitors so
far back as to the third year of the reign of Alexander I. son to Malcolm
III. king of Scotland; and the tenth of Henry I. son to William the
Conqueror; or, to the year 1110.
In the time of William the Lion, there were four eminent persons in
Scotland, of the name of _Berkeley_, or _Berkelai_, sprung from the same
stock, and united by consanguinity, viz. _Walter_, _William_, _Humphrey_,
and _Robert_. The two first were great chamberlains of the kingdom.
_Walter_ is so designed in a donation granted by him to the monks of
_Aberbrothwick_, of the church of _Innerkelder_, in the county of Angus,
which is confirmed by William the Lion, and still preserved in the
Advocates’ Library of Edinburgh, and also in the _Charter of Aberdeen_,
which remains in perfect preservation in the Record Office of that city.
_William_ is likewise designed chamberlain, in a deed granted by the king
to the monks of the _Cistertian_ order, which is copied from the original
by _Anderson_, in his _Independency_ of Scotland.
Walter de Berkeley was one of the pledges for William the Lion, to
Henry the Second of England, as mentioned in Abercrombie’s history. He
was appointed chamberlain in 1165, and was one of those who returned
to Scotland with William, about the close of the year 1174[33]. Walter
left two daughters only, one of whom, according to Nicols’ Peerage, was
married to _Seten_ of _Seton_, the predecessor of the Earl of _Winton_.
From these circumstances, it is a natural deduction, that the Berkeley
family must have been settled in Scotland long previously to this period.
They enjoyed the confidence of the king, and held the highest offices in
the state, which would not probably have been the case with men of low
extraction, or who had recently emerged from obscurity.
But it appears by charters of confirmation from William the Lion,
that Walter de Berkeley of Innerkelder, was cotemporary with, and
cousin-german to, Humphrey, the son of _Theobald de Berkeley_, the
original of the family of _Mathers_, in the county of Kincardine.
Theobald lived in the time of Alexander the First, and David the First,
kings of Scotland, having been born about the year 1110; and he had two
sons, Humphrey and John. Humphrey, being in possession of a large domain
in the county of Kincardine, granted a donation to the abbot and monks of
Aberbrothwick, from the lands of _Balfeith_, _Monboddo_, _Glenfarquhar_,
&c. which is witnessed by _Willielmo et Waltero Capellanis dom. regis,
Willielmo Cummin, Willielmo Gifford, Phillipo de Moubray, Dom. de
Arbuthenot, Phillipo de Mallevill, Johanne de Monfort, Waltero Scot, et
Waltero filio suo, Agatha sponsa mea, cum multis aliis_. This donation
was confirmed by William the Lion, before these witnesses: _Waltero et
Willielmo Capellanis nostris, Will. Cummin, Phillipo de Moubray, Roberto
de Lunden, Roberto de Berkeley, cum multis aliis; apud Forfar, XXVI.
Martii_.
Humphrey’s donation was renewed and augmented by _Richenda_, his only
child and daughter, with consent of her husband, _Robert_, the son of
_Warnebald_, ancestor to the Earl of _Glencairn_. The witnesses to this
deed were, _Dom. J. Wishart, vicesm. de Mernis, et Johanne filio ejus;
Dom. Duncano de Arbuthenot, et filio ejus; Humphreo de Middleton, cum
multis aliis_. This second grant was confirmed by Alexander II.; the
witnesses being _A. Abbato de Melross, Ro. Abbato de Newbottle, Tho. de
Hay, Alex. de Seton, cum multis aliis, vicesimo die Martii, anno regni
nostri, vicesimo quarto_. After the death of Robert the son of Warnebald,
the monks prevailed on his widow, Richenda, to dispone these lands to
them for the third time; _et ad majus hujus rei testimonium, in posterum
una cum sigillo meo huic scripto, sigillum venerab. patris nostri R.
Abredonensis episc. et sigillum Domini Anselm Cammel feci apponi coram
his test. Dom. A. Archide Brechin, Dom Nigello de Moubray, Dom. Roberto
de Montealto, et Dom. Will. de Hunyter, cum multis aliis_. This third
deed was confirmed by Alexander II. at Aberbrothwick, the 7th March,
(anno 1236,) and thirty-second year of his reign. _Coram test. venerab.
patr. Ro. Epis. Abre; Willielmo Comite de Marr, Waltero de Moravii, R. de
Montealto_.
These six documents, viz. the three donations, and the three respective
confirmations, were extracted from the Chartulary of Aberbrothwick, which
still remains in the Advocates’ Library of Edinburgh, and they may,
therefore, be deemed quite authentic.
_Humphrey_, and his daughter _Richenda_, having died without male issue,
_John de Berkeley_, the brother of Humphrey, succeeded, and, being
dissatisfied with the alienations they had made, he turned the abbot and
monks out of all their possessions in his domains. But he was obliged to
compromise the matter with them; and, with the concurrence of his heir
_Robert_, he gave them the mill of _Conveth_, with its appurtenances, in
_lieu_ of the lands of which he dispossessed them, burdened, however,
with the yearly payment of thirteen merks of silver to him and his heirs.
This agreement was not only signed and sealed by the abbot and monks of
Aberbrothwick; by John, and his heir, Robert de Berkeley; but also, _una
cum sigillis vener. virorum Greg. Episco. Brechin_, et, _Dom. Willielmo
de Bosco, Dom. Regis Can. et Dom. de Lunden, fratris illustr. Regis Alex.
apponi procururerent; coram test. Willielmo Capellaro, Dom. Episco.
Brechin, Mag. Andrea de Perth, Mag. Hugo de Milbourn, cum multis aliis_.
This deed was confirmed at Dundee, by King Alexander II.; _coram test.
Greg. Episco. Brechin, Willielmo de Bosco, nostro cancellario; Ro. de
Lunden, nostro fratre; Hugo Cameron, cum multis aliis_. These deeds have
been preserved in the Chartulary of Aberbrothwick, from which they were
extracted; and they sufficiently establish, that _Theobald_, _Humphrey_,
and _John_, must have lived in the time of _Alexander I._ _David I._
_Malcolm IV._ _William the Lion_, and _Alexander II._ kings of Scotland,
who were cotemporary with _Henry I._, _Stephen_, _Henry II._ the first of
the Plantagenets; _Richard I._ and _John_, kings of England.--Upon the
demise of _John_, the son of Humphrey, he was succeeded by his son,
(3.) _Robert de Berkeley_, who, as it is already observed, consented
to the agreement between his father, and the abbot and monks of
Aberbrothwick. He was succeeded by his son,
(4.) _Hugh de Berkeley_, who obtained a charter from King _Robert Bruce_,
upon _Westerton_, being lands lying near the mill of _Conveth_, in
Kincardineshire.
(5.) _Alexander de Berkeley_ succeeded his father, _Hugh_, and to
the paternal estates added _Mathers_, in consequence of his marrying
_Catharine_, sister to _William de Keith_, marischal of Scotland, as
vouched by a charter, dated anno 1351, granted by _William de Keith_,
“with consent (as the deed expresses it) of _Margaret_, my wife, to
_Alexander de Berkeley_, and _Catharine_, my sister, his spouse, and the
longest liver of them two, and the heirs male of their bodies, my lands
of _Mathers, datum apud mansum capitale nostrum de Strathekin, die Martii
inventione sanctæ crucis, anno 1351. Coram test. reverendo in Christo
patr. Dom. Philippo, Dei gratia, Episc. Brechin. Dom. Willielmo eædem
gratia Abbato de Aberbrothwick, David de Fleming, Willielmo de Liddel,
militibus; Johan. de Seton, et aliis._” This charter is confirmed by
King _David Bruce_, at Perth, the 18th of March, and twenty-first of his
reign: _coram test. Roberto seneschallo, nepote nostro_, (the first king
of Scotland of the Stewart race,) _Tho. Seneschal, comite de Angus, Tho.
de Moravii panacri nostro Scotiæ, Roberto de Erskine, et Tho. de Falside,
militibus._
The original charter from William de Keith, and the confirmation by David
Bruce, are both in the possession of Mr. Barclay of Ury.
(6.) _David de Berkeley_, 2d of _Mathers_, succeeded to his father
_Alexander_; and he married the daughter of _John de Seton_, who
witnessed the above charter from William de Keith. His son,
(7.) _Alexander de Berkeley_, 3d of _Mathers_, was his successor, and he
married _Helen_, the daughter of _Græme_ of Morphy. Their son,
(8.) _David de Berkeley_, 4th of _Mathers_, succeeding, built the castle,
called the _Keim_ of _Mathers_. He married _Elisabeth_, the daughter of
_Strachan_ of _Thornton_, then an ancient and flourishing family in the
_Mearns_.
(9.) _Alexander Barclay_, 5th of _Mathers_, succeeded his father, _David
de Berkeley_: and he was the first of the family who spelled the name as
it is done at present. He married _Catharine Wishart_, the daughter of
_Wishart_ of _Pitarrow_, and was succeeded by his son,
(10.) _David Barclay_, 6th of _Mathers_, who married _Janet_, daughter
of _Irvine_ of _Drum_, then one of the most considerable families in the
shire of Aberdeen. His eldest son was
(11.) _Alexander Barclay_, 7th of _Mathers_, who married _Marjory_,
daughter of _James Auchinleck_ of _Glenbervie_. Auchinleck obtained
the estate of Glenbervie, by marrying the daughter of _Melvil_, the
proprietor, who was sheriff of the Mearns, and murdered by the barons.
James Auchinleck had two daughters, but no male heir; and the elder was
married to _Sir William Douglas_, the second son of the famous Earl of
_Angus_, called _Bell the Cat_. By this marriage, the Douglasses got the
estate of Glenbervie.
Alexander Barclay sold the lands of _Slains_ and _Falside_ in the Mearns,
to _Andrew Moncur_ of _Knapp_, to whom he granted a charter to be held
of himself and his heirs, dated anno 1497. He also granted a precept
of _Clare constat._ to _Sir James Ogilvie_ of _Deskford_, predecessor
to the Earl of _Findlater_, for infesting him in the lands of _Durn_,
of which he was superior. This precept bears date the 29th April 1510,
at _Kirktonhill_, which was then the principal seat of the family of
Mathers. _Alexander_ was succeeded by his son,
(12.) _George Barclay_, 8th of _Mathers_, who married _Marjory_,
daughter of _Sir James Auchterlony_, of _Auckterlony_ and _Kellie_, then
a considerable family in the shire of _Angus_.--His son’s name was,
(13.) _David Barclay_, 9th of _Mathers_, who married first _Mary_,
daughter to _Rait_ of _Halgreen_, by whom he had _George_, who succeeded
him. He married for his second wife, _Catharine Home_, and had by her a
son named _John_, to whom he gave the lands of _Johnston_ in the Mearns,
as established by Barclay of Johnston’s first charter, dated anno 1560.
_Barclay_ of _Balmaquean_ is a cadet of the Johnston family. David
Barclay was succeeded by his first son,
(14.) _George Barclay_, 10th of _Mathers_, who married _Mary Erskine_,
daughter to _Sir Thomas Erskine_ of _Brechin_, secretary of state to
_James V._ of Scotland. He married for his second wife, _Margaret_,
daughter to _Wood_ of _Bonnington_ in _Angus_, afterwards baronets, and
now represented by James Wood, Esq. of Woodburnden, in the county of the
Mearns; and by her he had a son, to whom he gave the lands of _Bridgeton_
and _Jackstown_, in the _Mearns_. His first son succeeded to the estate,
and his name was
(15.) _Thomas Barclay_, 11th of _Mathers_, who married _Janet_, daughter
to _Straiton_ of _Lauristown_ in the _Mearns_, a very ancient and
honourable family. Thomas Barclay died before his father, leaving only
one son,
(16.) _David Barclay_, 12th of _Mathers_, who was born anno 1580. He
was polite and accomplished, and lived much at Court; but a taste for
show and extravagance, led him to indulge in every fashionable expense,
by which he greatly impaired his property, and he sold five valuable
estates. He was twice married: first, to _Elizabeth_, the daughter of
_Livingston_ of _Dunnipace_, by whom he had five sons and a daughter;
second, to _Margaret Keith_, grand-child to Earl Marischal. To his
daughter he gave a handsome fortune, and to his sons a liberal education.
The two eldest died when young: _David_, the third son, became eminently
conspicuous: _Robert_, the fourth, was rector of the Scots College at
Paris; and _James_, the youngest, was a captain of horse, and was killed
at the battle of Philiphaugh, on the 13th September 1645, where he
gallantly signalized himself.
(17.) _Colonel David Barclay_, the first of _Ury_, and third son
of _David_ of _Mathers_, was born at _Kirktonhill_ in the county
of Kincardine, in the year 1610. After being instructed in every
accomplishment of the age, he went to Germany, and entered a volunteer
in the Swedish service, under the great Gustavus Adolphus. His manly
and elegant appearance soon attracted the attention of his majesty,
and he acquired a high reputation for courage and bravery. He merited
and obtained the distinguished favour of Adolphus. But his fame as an
active and experienced soldier having reached his native country, he was
pressingly solicited by his friends to return home to take a part in the
civil wars with which Scotland was then distracted.
Accordingly, in the year 1646, as a proof of his character and high
merit, we find him colonel of a regiment of horse, and at the head of an
army quelling an insurrection raised by the Earl of Crawford, who, with
a number of Scots and Irish troops had burned several towns, and ravaged
the northern parts of the kingdom. The colonel came up with the earl
at Banff, entirely routed him, and committed great slaughter among the
Irish, who had perpetrated many acts of wanton barbarity throughout the
country. In the same year, General Middleton and the colonel were sent
with an army to relieve the town of Inverness, at that time besieged by
the renowned Marquis of Montrose, and Earl Seaforth. Colonel Barclay,
at the head of his regiment, forced the ford of the river Ness, where
the enemy was strongly posted; and, being well supported by Middleton,
attacked and drove them to the mountains, taking all their cannon and
baggage. Inverness being thus relieved, the army retired to the south
country; but the Marquis of Huntly taking advantage of its absence,
attacked the town of Aberdeen, and became master of it, although bravely
defended by the citizens and two regiments under the command of _Colonel
Harry Barclay_, a relative of Colonel David’s, who was taken prisoner,
with twenty of his officers. To dispossess Huntly, the parliament, in
April 1647, sent Middleton and the colonel again to the north; but
the marquis did not think proper to wait their approach, and hastily
retreated to the Highlands. To prevent his return, however, they took
possession of his strong holds, in which they placed garrisons. Colonel
Barclay was appointed governor of Strathbogie and Middleton, of the Bog
of Gight, now _Castle Gordon_.
In the following year, the colonel found leisure to attend to his
domestic concerns, and married _Catharine_, eldest daughter of _Sir
Robert Gordon_ of _Gordonston_, who was second son of the Earl of
Sutherland, by Jane, daughter of the Marquis of Huntly. Sir Robert Gordon
was cousin to King James the Sixth of Scotland, by his grandmother, Lady
Helen Stewart, his majesty’s grand-aunt; and being a man of great parts,
was highly esteemed at Court. As the different estates which formerly
belonged to the Barclays of Mathers, were now nearly all disposed of by
the colonel’s father, he entered into a contract with Earl Marischal for
the barony of URY, where he fixed the future residence of the family,
which has since been designed by the name of that property.
Colonel Barclay being an active and experienced officer, and perfectly
devoted to the cause in which he had engaged, was appointed to command
in the shires of Ross, Sutherland, and Caithness. The nation at that
time was much interested in the fate of Charles I.; and the parliament
of Scotland sent an army to his assistance in England, under the Duke of
Hamilton; and the internal protection of the kingdom was committed to
the Earl of Lanark, the _laird_ of Gartland, and Colonel Barclay. The
whole country to the north of the Tay, including the town of Perth, was
placed under the colonel’s authority; and he executed this important
commission with vigour and fidelity. But the Duke of Hamilton’s overthrow
at Preston, destroyed the hopes of his friends; and the opposite party
gaining the ascendancy, through Cromwell’s means, Colonel Barclay, and
many other officers, were deprived of their commands.
From this time, it appears that the colonel laid aside his military
character, and lived for several years in retirement at Gordonston,
in Morayshire, the seat of his father-in law. But his friend, Earl
Marischal, having been taken prisoner by General Monk at Elliot in Angus,
and his estates seized, the barony of Ury was included in the forfeiture,
on the pretence that it was not fully conveyed by the earl. Colonel
Barclay was advised to obtain a seat in the Scots parliament, which would
afford him the only means of recovering his property. He was accordingly
elected for Sutherlandshire, through the interest of his cousin, the
Earl of Sutherland; but he was returned to the next parliament by the
counties of Angus and Mearns, through his own influence. He became so
popular indeed, by his services, to the nobility and gentry of these
districts, that he received their public thanks; and as a mark of their
entire satisfaction with his conduct, they again elected him their
representative in the year 1656. The colonel obtained the reversal of
the forfeiture of his estate, and continued in parliament, successfully
exerting himself in behalf of his friends and the distressed loyalists.
For several years, nothing remarkable occurred in Colonel Barclay’s
life that deserves our particular consideration; but in 1663, he was
unexpectedly arrested and thrown into Edinburgh Castle, by an order from
Government. As no crime was alleged against him, he was soon liberated;
but it does not appear that he received any compensation for the injury.
His arrest was the more surprising, as he had suffered so much in the
royal cause, and his principles were well known to be favourable to the
Restoration. It is probable, indeed, that this event arose from the
resentment of some personal enemy; for malevolence often pursues the best
of men, and those eminent for their virtues are by no means exempted from
its baneful effects.
Colonel Barclay’s military and political career had now drawn to a close;
and his future life was devoted to study, religious abstraction, the
practice of charity, and all the benevolent and amiable pursuits of the
human mind. In the year 1666, he joined the sect called _Quakers_, and
became as eminent for piety and zeal, in private life, as he had before
been distinguished for courage and intrepidity in the field. Religious
disputes, however, running high in the country, his life was checquered
by many indignities and insults. Those who had caressed him, while at the
head of an army, by every flattering mark of respect, now forgot their
benefactor, and cruelly sought to embitter his days by persecution. But
he steadily adhered to his principles; for it could scarcely be supposed,
that a man who had been bred in the camp of the great Adolphus--who had
fought for liberty of conscience, and had braved all the dangers of
war--could be either intimidated, or diverted from his purpose by the
assaults of power, or the threatening clamour of a senseless rabble.
The colonel now generally resided at Ury, enjoying the society of his
friends, and disseminating among his neighbours the doctrines of the
Quakers. Many of “good account” embraced their tenets; and weekly and
monthly meetings of these peaceable and religious people were held at
Ury, for devotional exercises. But the clergy looked on them with an
eye of jealousy, and stirred up against them the malicious passions
of weak and intolerant men. And in the month of March 1676, Colonel
Barclay and others, were indicted at Aberdeen, before a committee of the
privy-council, for holding meetings contrary to a statute enacted against
armed field conventicles, which, under every latitude of interpretation,
could not be applied to Quakers. They were, however, found guilty, and
amerced in a fine to the amount of a fourth part of their respective
valued rents, and committed to prison until payment should be made.
The colonel’s son, the celebrated Apologist, was at that time in London,
and having much interest at Court, obtained his father’s liberation. But
the magistrates of Aberdeen were so enraged that he should thus escape
from their power, that they illegally granted a warrant to distrain his
goods, and sent a Captain Melvill to put it in execution, although,
his residence being in another county, he was evidently beyond their
jurisdiction. Melvill was a low fellow, who had formerly been a trooper
in the colonel’s regiment, and was therefore personally known to him;
but he had acquired all the insolence of office, and, presuming on the
support of the magistrates, drove off the cattle and horses at Ury. In
June 1677, he was again imprisoned, along with his son, in the chapel
prison of Aberdeen; for the magistrates pursued him and his friends with
no moderate degree of malignancy. They were, however, relieved by an
order from the Court, in which the magistrates were severely reprimanded
for their oppressive conduct.
On this occasion, a friend of Colonel Barclay’s could not avoid
regretting the difference of times, and contrasting his present
situation, with that when he rescued the city of Aberdeen from the
oppressions of Huntly. But this worthy man replied, “that, although the
magistrates usually came miles to meet him when he had the command of an
army, and, to gain his favour, conducted him amidst the acclamations of
the people to an entertainment prepared for him in the town-hall, yet he
was more proud, and felt more real satisfaction, in his sufferings for
the cause of religion and virtue, than in all the fleeting honours with
which they had then distinguished him.”
From this time, Colonel Barclay enjoyed a state of calm and dignified
repose. His latter days were sweetened by family endearment, and all the
charms of a country life. This brave, sincere, and religious man, died,
anno 1686, in the 77th year of his age, and was buried in a cemetery at
Ury, which he had caused to be constructed for himself and his posterity.
In this humble mausoleum his grave is still to be seen, and it is
distinguished for its length; for he was one of the tallest, strongest,
and most handsome men in the kingdom.
Colonel Barclay had five children, viz.
_Robert_, the Apologist, his heir and successor.
_Jean_, married to Sir Evan Cameron of Locheill.
_David_, who died on his passage to East Jersey.
_Lucy_, who died in April 1687, aged 33.
----, who died in East Jersey, in 1731.
(18.) _Robert Barclay_, generally known by the title of the _Apologist_,
was born on the 28th of December 1648, at Gordonston in Morayshire,
the seat of his maternal grandfather. After being educated in the best
schools in Scotland, he was placed under the tuition of his uncle, who
was rector of the Scots College in Paris. He gave early presages of great
genius, and acquired much proficiency in all the learned sciences and
elegant accomplishments of the times. He soon became conspicuous, and
was particularly noticed for his vivacity and acuteness in the public
disputations of the seminary, where he gained many prizes. His uncle was
extremely solicitous to detain him in France; but his mother, on her
death-bed, had strongly enjoined his removal from the college, lest he
should imbibe the errors of popery. In obedience to parental authority,
he returned home in 1664, and thus lost his uncle’s fortune and favour,
to gratify his father’s conscientious compliance with the prejudiced but
pious notions of his mother. Though destitute of wealth, he possessed
what was more valuable, for his mind was deeply fraught with the riches
of literature.
Soon after his return to Scotland, he joined the society called Quakers,
and became their greatest ornament and ablest advocate. Previously,
however, to his embracing the opinions of that sect, he visited his
friends of all religious persuasions, to canvass their doctrines, that he
might adopt a system of faith corresponding to the truths of the gospel;
and, by conviction alone, as we are informed, he was guided in his
choice. But probably, when in France, he had formed an attachment to the
Quietists, who were the Quakers among Roman Catholics.
In the year 1670, he married _Christian Molison_, of the family of
_Lachintully_, the grand-daughter of the celebrated Colonel Molison,
who so much signalized himself in the defence of Candia against the
Turks. About this time, he first appeared as an author, by a work,
entitled, “_Truth cleared of Calumnies_,” which is an answer to “_A
Dialogue between a Quaker and a Stable Christian_,” written by William
Mitchell, a preacher, and printed at Aberdeen. A keen controversy then
subsisted between the clergy of Aberdeen and the Quakers, relative to the
doctrines of the latter, which, warmly interesting Barclay, called forth
his talents as a polemical writer; and in the same year, he published
a postscript in the form of questions. Mitchell replied to “_Truth
cleared of Calumnies_,” and our author again answered him in a work,
entitled, “_William Mitchell unmasked_,” which was published in 1672. In
this controversy, Robert Barclay discovers the variety of his learning,
and that he was well acquainted with ecclesiastical history; but above
all, he shews with how much judgment and dexterity he could apply his
knowledge in support of his religious opinions.
In 1673, he published “_A Catechism and Confession of Faith_,” which
is an exposition of the doctrines and principles of the Quakers,
supported by an appeal to Scripture testimony. His next publication is
the “_Theses Theologicæ_,” which were addressed “to the clergy of what
sort soever,” and contain fifteen propositions, on which he gives his
sentiments, and explains them in conformity to the principles of his
sect. He vindicated his _Theses_ from the strictures of Nicolas Arnold,
professor in the university of Franquer in Friesland, by a Latin treatise
printed at Amsterdam, in 1675. In the same year, he published an account
of a disputation between the students of divinity of the university of
Aberdeen and the Quakers, in which he bore a conspicuous part; but, like
most religious controversies, it terminated without satisfaction to
either party. The students also published an account of this conference,
in a pamphlet entitled, “_Quakerism canvassed_,” which occasioned a
reply, entitled, “_Quakerism confirmed_,” in two parts, both printed in
1676.
Previously to this time, he generally resided at Ury with his father;
but in this year he went to London, and thence to Holland, accompanied
by William Penn, the celebrated and amiable proprietor of the province
of Pennsylvania. These religious men travelled in Holland and Germany,
visiting their friends, and disseminating their doctrines. They waited
upon Elizabeth, princess-palatine of the Rhine, at her residence at
Herwerden, and were kindly received. She seems to have adopted their
doctrines, for she openly patronised the Quakers; but her friendship for
Barclay was sincere and unfeigned, and lasted during life. She frequently
wrote to him with her own hand; and always promoted his views at the
court of England, as far as her influence could be of service to him
or his friends. When he returned to London, he learned that his father
and other Quakers were imprisoned in Aberdeen, for holding meetings in
that city. He therefore presented a memorial in their behalf to Charles
II. which was delivered by himself into the king’s own hand, who caused
his secretary of state, the Duke of Lauderdale, to underwrite upon it a
favourable reference to the council of Scotland, which had the desired
effect, as they soon after obtained their liberty.
In this year, (1676,) he published “_The Apology for True Christian
Divinity_,” in Latin, at Amsterdam, which is the most celebrated of
his works. It is dedicated to King Charles II.; and the dedication
is remarkable for the freedom and boldness of sentiment and language
in which his majesty is addressed. “Thou hast tasted,” he says, “of
prosperity and adversity; thou knowest what it is to be banished thy
native country, to be over-ruled as well as to rule, and sit upon the
throne; and, being oppressed, thou hast reason to know how hateful the
oppressor is both to God and man. If, after all these warnings and
advertisements, thou dost not turn to the Lord with all thy heart, but
forget him who remembered thee in thy distress, and give up thyself to
folly, lust, and vanity--surely great will be thy condemnation.”--The
_Apology_ is reared on the “_Theses Theologicæ_,” being an exposition of
the fifteen propositions contained in that work. The author’s general
plan is, to state the position he means to establish, and to support
it by Scripture quotations applicable to the case, or to deduce it
by an argument in the form of a syllogism. By this learned work, he
acquired great celebrity as a deep theologian, profoundly skilled in the
scriptures, the fathers, and church history. His next publication, which
also appeared this year, is entitled, “_The Anarchy of the Ranters_,”
and it is a vindication of the society from the imputation of disorderly
practices in their discipline, of which they were accused by their
adversaries.
About the end of September, the Apologist returned to Ury; and although
he had obtained his father’s release from confinement, yet he was not
able to protect himself. On the 7th November 1676, he was committed
to prison in Aberdeen, along with several other Quakers, for holding
meetings for public worship, and did not regain his liberty until the
9th of April 1677. While in prison, he wrote a treatise, entitled,
“_Universal Love considered and established upon its right foundation_,”
which was published after his release.
He left Ury in May, and went to London to exert himself for the
deliverance of the Quakers of the north country, who were still
harassed by imprisonment and fines, for holding meetings at Aberdeen, in
contravention, as it was alleged, of a statute enacted against “_armed
field conventicles_,” which evidently did not apply to these peaceable
people. From “_Theobalds near London_,” he wrote to the princess-palatine
on this subject, in which he gives an account of a conversation that
passed between him and the Duke of York relative to the sufferings of
the Quakers. It appears by this letter, that he had addressed his royal
highness in very plain language, for he says, “I told him, I understood
from Scotland, that, notwithstanding Lauderdale was there, and had
promised to do something before he went, yet our friends’ bonds were
rather increased, and that there was only one thing to be done which
I desired of him, and that was to write effectually to the Duke of
Lauderdale, in that style wherein Lauderdale might understand that he was
serious in the business, and did really intend the thing he did write
concerning should take effect; which I knew he might do, and I supposed
the other might answer; which, if he would do, I must acknowledge as a
great kindness. But if he did write, and not in that manner, so that
the other might not suppose him to be serious, I would rather he would
excuse himself the trouble:--desiring withal, to excuse my plain manner
of dealing, as being different from the court way of soliciting: all
which he seemed to take in good part, and said he would write as I
desired.”--He soon after returned to Ury, and was permitted to enjoy the
full exercise of his religion unmolested, until the 9th of November
1679, when he was taken out of a meeting at Aberdeen, as well as several
of his friends but they were discharged in a few hours, and never after
wards disturbed by the magistrate.
The “_Apology_,” which had become widely circulated in six different
languages, was rudely assailed by John Brown, in a work, entitled,
“_Quakerism the path-way to Paganism_.” To this abusive performance,
Barclay replied in vindication of his doctrines; which is the last of his
polemical writings that are published. From this period, he was occupied,
for the most part, in travelling in England, relative to the concerns of
the society; and, when in London in 1682, he was honoured with a public
appointment, having received a commission as governor of East Jersey in
America. An extensive tract of land in that province, was, at the same
time, granted to him and his heirs in fee. Charles II. confirmed his
government for life; and the commission is expressed in terms highly
flattering to this good man:--“Such are his known fidelity and capacity,”
it says, “that he has the government during life; but that every governor
after him shall have it for three years only.” He was authorised to
appoint a deputy-governor, with a salary of L 400 sterling per annum; and
Gavin Laurie, a merchant in London, was accordingly appointed to that
office. Having arranged these matters, he returned to Ury; but in summer
1683, he again visited his friends in London. Towards the close of that
year, however, he came home and occupied himself in shipping stores,
provisions, and other necessaries, from Aberdeen, to the colony of East
Jersey, in the prosperity of which he was extremely interested.
In 1685, he went again to London relative to the concerns of the society;
but soon returned, and remained at home till April 1687, when, at the
earnest solicitation of George Fox and other friends, he set off for
court, to exert his influence on behalf of the Quakers. As the king
honoured him with his friendship, he had access to his majesty at all
times; and on this occasion, he presented an address from the Quakers in
Scotland, expressive of their gratitude for his majesty’s proclamation,
permitting liberty of conscience, which was graciously received. The
Apologist seems to have stood on a footing of great intimacy with the
king, and to have conversed with him candidly and freely on the business
of the state. Considering the intricacy of his majesty’s affairs at that
time, the opinion or advice of a sincere and honest, yet clear-headed
man, was, no doubt, highly valued by James. Having accomplished the
object of his journey, he returned home.
In November 1688, he was again in London, and embraced that opportunity
to take leave of his majesty, with whose misfortunes he was greatly
affected. At his last interview with the king, (while they were
standing at a window in the palace conversing together,) James looked
out and said, “The wind is fair to bring over the Prince of Orange;”
the Apologist remarked, “It was hard that no expedient could be fallen
upon to satisfy the people.” His majesty replied, “He would do any
thing becoming a gentleman, but never would part with his liberty of
conscience.” This sentiment, being so consonant to the Apologist’s mind,
and corresponding so closely with his own principles and practice, drew
forth his approbation; and with mutual regret they parted, to meet no
more.
In the month of December he arrived at Ury, and lived retired for nearly
two years, enjoying domestic happiness in the bosom of his family. But
having gone to Aberdeen about the end of September 1690, to attend a
meeting of Quakers, he caught cold while returning home, and, being
seized with a fever, it put a period to his life on the 3d of October,
after a short but severe illness.
With a mind naturally strong and vigorous, he possessed all the
advantages of a regular and classical education; and his writings
evidently shew the profundity of his research, as well as the extent and
variety of his learning. His mild temper, benevolent heart, and sprightly
conversation, gave him influence with men in elevated stations, which he
employed not for the benefit of his friends alone. From motives of pure
benevolence, he often successfully exerted himself in behalf of others,
as well as for the members of the society to which he belonged. If,
on one occasion, he inconsiderately betrayed a fervour of zeal in his
profession of a preacher, by exposing himself in sackcloth on the streets
of Aberdeen in the year 1672, we must concede to him, at least, the merit
of sincerity, and, in justice, make every allowance for the ardour of a
youthful mind. Although his feelings were warm, yet his passions were
subdued by strict discipline; and the practical observance of the rules
of moral duty, strengthened and invigorated every virtuous sentiment.
Cheerful, yet serene, he withstood the shocks of adversity with fortitude
and firmness. Ever active and indefatigable, he composed one of his
best works within the walls of a prison; and, in all situations, he was
constantly occupied with what he conceived to be for the good of mankind.
Considering the shortness of his life, and the time he employed in
travelling, it is astonishing that he could write so much and so well.
But his works have outlived him; and, in three volumes, the scattered
opinions of the society to which he belonged, are collected, arranged,
and exhibited to the whole world in elegant uniformity; and throughout
Europe and America, “_The Apology for True Christian Divinity_,” is to be
found in the libraries of the wise and the learned[34].
* * * * *
The Apologist had nine children, and was succeeded by his second son,
_Robert_; the first son, _David_, having died on a voyage to East Jersey,
at the age of fifteen. After the family of Ury had embraced the tenets
of the amiable society of FRIENDS, it is not to be expected that it
could make any conspicuous figure in the transactions of the times. The
pursuits of the Quakers being solely directed to objects of benevolence,
they are precluded by both principle and practice, from interfering in
civil or military contests. During the turbulent periods of 1715 and 45,
the Barclays, therefore, took no concern in public affairs, but remained
silent spectators of the passing events.
The Apologist’s son, _Robert_, had seven children, and died anno 1747. He
was a man of such polite manners, that he obtained the appellation of the
_Gentleman_, and was distinguished among his cotemporaries by his good
sense and affability. He was succeeded by his eldest son,
_Robert_, who had three sons and one daughter. The grandson of the
Apologist was known in the county by the title of the _Strong_, having
possessed great muscular power. He died in the year 1760, and was deemed
the richest commoner in the county of Kincardine, having left a free
estate and a considerable sum of money to his family. He was succeeded by
his eldest son, _Robert_, the father of Capt. Barclay.
From these three families a numerous race has sprung, and the descendants
of the Apologist, at the present time, exceed three hundred. The late Mr.
David Barclay of Walthamstow in Essex, (the grandson of the Apologist,)
says, “I believe there are more than three hundred of you who call me
uncle or cousin.” Those respectable families which claim their descent
from the Apologist, are principally settled in England; and, while they
have enriched themselves by their industry, they maintain the highest
respectability of character.
It does not, however, suit our object to follow the family of Ury
through all its branches: it is enough that we take notice of the heir
of succession; and the late Mr. Barclay deserves to be particularly
mentioned, on account of his great celebrity as an agriculturist.
He was born anno 1731, and succeeded his father, 1760. He received a
liberal education, and was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. He was
a noted pedestrian, and frequently walked to London. On one occasion,
he walked from London to Ury, (510 miles,) in ten successive days; on
another, he walked 210 miles in three days, or at the rate of 70 miles a
day. He also went 81 miles in about 16 hours. He never walked to London
after he was elected a member of parliament, as erroneously reported;
but he had frequently done so before that time. His ordinary pace was
six miles an hour. His height was six feet. He was athletic, and of the
handsomest form. The vigour of his mind was conspicuous throughout a
laborious and active life; and his improvements in agriculture, entitle
him to the warmest eulogy of his countrymen.
Mr. Robertson, the intelligent author of the ‘Survey of Kincardineshire,’
has devoted 27 pages of his work to illustrate Mr. Barclay’s agricultural
improvements; and, from his account, as there can be no better testimony,
we shall extract the following particulars.
‘The man,’ says Mr. Robertson, ‘who exerted himself most for the
improvement of the county--whose labours were the most strenuous and best
conducted--and whose example had the most extensive influence--was the
late Mr. Barclay of Ury. His, indeed, were no common powers. Endowed with
the most ardent, energetic, and comprehensive mind, he employed his great
talents as an agriculturist with unwearied perseverance, and to the most
beneficial results. The subject he had to improve, or rather to subdue,
was of the most obdurate nature; but difficulties tended only to excite
his activity, and, adhering tenaciously to his own pre-conceived and
well-adjusted plans, he was ultimately successful.
‘The estate of Ury, the chief object of his improvements, lies on
both sides of the rivulet of Cowie, and extends from Stonehaven in a
north-westerly direction, for nearly five miles. The mansion-house is
situated about a mile and a half from the efflux of the Cowie, on its
northern bank.--When Mr. Barclay succeeded to the estate, there was
scarcely a shrub of any value on the whole property, excepting a few old
trees around the house.
‘The arable land was divided into a number of small farms. The tillage
was superficially performed, with very imperfect implements. Almost every
field was incumbered with obstructions of one kind or another; such as,
pools of stagnant water or quagmires, where the cattle were ever in
danger of losing their lives; great baulks of unploughed land between the
ridges; but, above all, stones abounded, not only on the surface, but
through the whole depth of the soil. There were no inclosures. No lime
was used as a manure and the only crops were bear and oats. There was
neither cart nor wheel carriage of any kind; nor was there even a road.
In short, no place, at that time, abounded more in the evils attending
the ancient system, or enjoyed fewer of the advantages of modern
husbandry than the lands of Ury.’
Mr. Barclay, who had acquired his ideas of agriculture on the fertile
plains of Norfolk, could ill brook a state of husbandry like this.
As soon, therefore, as he succeeded to the estate, he set about its
improvement in a stile that was both radical and permanent. To accomplish
this object, he took under his own management all the farms in the
vicinity of the mansion-house, as the leases expired; besides retaining
those lands which had always been in the natural possession of the
family. In the course of thirty years, he thoroughly improved 2000 acres
of arable land, and planted about 1500 acres of wood. Of the arable
land, there were 800 acres originally marsh or heath. Of the remainder,
which was let to tenants, about one-fourth part consisted of baulks,
wastes, and marshes, interspersed through every field. Mr. Barclay thus
meliorated about 2000 acres, and brought them to a correct state of
culture, and they are now in a high degree of fertility.
The laborious measures by which Mr. Barclay improved the estate of Ury,
are particularly detailed in the valuable work previously mentioned; but
it would carry us beyond our limits to enter minutely into them: and
perhaps it may suffice to say, that, from a rugged and barren surface, he
produced the most beautiful place in North Britain. He was considered
the father of agriculture in the north of Scotland: His example has been
everywhere imitated; and his memory is held dear by all the lovers of
this first and most important _art_.
Mr. Barclay represented the county of Kincardine in three parliaments,
having been unanimously elected; which is highly creditable to his
talents and his virtues. He was the intimate friend of William Pitt, and
always distinguished himself by his loyalty, and attachment to the best
interests of his country.
It is only necessary to add to this account, that, while Capt. Barclay is
descended from respectable ancestors of the ancient family of Barclay,
he has an undoubted right, by the mother’s side, to the title of Earl of
Monteith and Airth, being the representative of Lady Mary Graham, the
eldest daughter of the last Earl of Monteith and Airth, who was descended
of David, Earl of Strathern, the eldest son of Robert II. by his queen,
Euphemia Ross.
THE END.
D. CHALMERS & CO. Printers, Aberdeen.
FOOTNOTES
[1] Its height was sixty-eight feet; its breadth, ninety-five; and its
length, two hundred and thirty.
[2] Pausanias, lib. v.
[3] Pausanias, lib. vi.
[4] West’s Dissertation on the Olympic Games, p. 61.
[5] West’s Dissertation, p. 176.
[6] West’s Dissertation.
[7] The odes of Pindar, which have been handed down to us, were made for
these occasions.
[8] Gillies’ History, vol. i. c. 6.
[9] West’s Diss., p. 243.
[10] Gillies’ Hist. chap. vi.
[11] Rollin, vol. v. p. 54.
[12] Dissertation on the Olympic Games, last paragraph.
[13] Edgeworth’s Essays on Professional Education, p. 166.
[14] Genuine Guide to Health.
[15] Chap. vii. p. 447.
[16] Code of Health, vol. i. p. 494.
[17] It is a curious fact remarked by Mr. Jackson, and founded on the
experience of all swift runners, that “for the first two or three hundred
yards one feels very much distressed, but after that a _second wind_
comes, which lasts until one is spent with bodily fatigue.”--_Code of
Health_, vol. ii. p. 100.
[18] See Appendix.
[19] A learned antiquary has obligingly communicated to the author the
following etymon of the name _Barclay_:
“_Barclay_ is a compound word, and pure Gaelic. _Bar_ is borrowed
from the Gaelic, and adopted into the English language. In both,
the signification is the same, i. e. the bar or bolt of a door,
gate, &c. _Clay_ is the Gaelic _Cladh_, pronounced _clay_, and
signifying a sword. Every one knows that _Cladh Mor_, pronounced
_Claymore_, signifies the _great_ or _broad_ sword. As _C_ and
_G_ are commutable letters in the Gaelic, it is generally written
_Cladh_, though, sometimes _Gladh_. _Gladh_ is the radix of the
Latin _Gladius_; and _Cladh_, perhaps, of the Latin _Clades_. The
name _Barclay_, then, literally imports, ‘_The Bar Sword_,’ or
‘_Sword of Defence_.’
“Previous to the use of gunpowder, when every thing depended on
personal strength and individual exertion, the single arm of a
hero often decided the fate of the battle. Many of our ancient
families derived their names from feats of prowess; and there is
no doubt that the Barclays received their name from some singular
act of heroism performed with the sword.”
[20] Mr. Molyson has often walked thirty-six miles to breakfast, and
thirty farther to dinner. He attended Capt. Barclay when he went to Dr.
Grant’s house at Kirkmichael, in August 1800, (_see page 108_); and
in less than three days walked one hundred and eighty miles, without
sleeping during that time. Mr. Molyson was then forty-eight years of
age; but his athletic powers are astonishing, and he is a true lover of
gymnastic sports.
[21] See page 124.
[22] Code of Health, vol. ii. p. 118.
[23] Code of Health, vol. ii. p. 120.
[24] Ibid. p. 121.
[25] Code of Health, vol. ii. p. 84.
[26] Code of Health, vol. ii. p. 89.
[27] It is not so generally known as it ought to be, that a salt,
introduced into medical practice by Dr. George Pearson of London, is as
excellent a purge as Glauber’s salt, and has none of the nauseous taste
which renders that purge so disagreeable to many persons. The _Phosphat
of Soda_ is very similar to common salt in taste, and may be given in a
basin of gruel or broth, in which it will be scarcely perceptible to the
palate, and will also agree with the most delicate stomach.
[28] “It may serve as a preliminary rule, that _fresh meat_ is the
most wholesome and nourishing. To preserve these qualities, however,
it ought to be _dressed_ so as to remain tender and juicy; for
it is by this means, it will be easily digested, and afford most
nourishment.”--_Willich on Diet and Regimen_, p. 313.
[29] “Broths and soups require little digestion; weaken the stomach, and
are attended by all the pernicious effects of other warm and relaxing
drink.”--_Willich on Diet, &c._ p. 304.
[30] Bell’s Anatomy, vol. i. p. 12.
[31] Code of Health, vol. ii. p. 103.
[32] Code of Health, vol. ii. p. 123.
[33] Annals of Scotland, vol. i. p. 184.
[34] The above account of the Apologist was drawn up by the author for
the Edinburgh Encyclopædia, where it is published.