We get some idea of the difficulties which beset the people of a
country before time and means have been obtained for forming roads,
bridges, and other public works of utility, from a petition presented
to the Privy Council by the minister of Rattray regarding the river
Ericht, a well-known stream which debouches from the Highlands in
his neighbourhood, amidst a scene truly romantic to the gaze of the
modern tourist, but formerly pregnant with trouble to the people of the
country. A much-frequented road or line of communication between the
north and south parts of the kingdom crossed this stream at Craighall
without a bridge. In a time of stormy weather, this river runs with
such force that there is no ford, ‘and very oft for the space of aucht
days together all passage at that water, either by coble, horse, or
foot, is interrupted, to the great hinder of his majesty’s subjects,
and to the extreme hazard of many of their lives, of whom, during the
short time the supplicant has attended the kirk of Rattray, auchteen
persons to his knowledge have perished in that water.’ An order was
given for a general subscription to build a bridge.--P. C. R.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: MAR. 31.]
There being a scarcity at this time on the continent, while Scotland
possessed a considerable quantity of wheat, the Privy Council,
considering these facts, and, moreover, that wheat is not ‘the common
grain wherewith the whole lieges are ordinarily fed,’ granted licence
for the exporting of 4000 bolls.--_P. C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: APR. 10.]
[Sidenote: 1631.]
The Town Council of Edinburgh forbade the wearing of plaids by women
in the streets, under pain of corporal punishment. The plaid was the
Scottish _mantilla_, and, serving to hide the face, was supposed to
afford a protection to immodest conduct. A few years later (1636), the
Council found that women were still addicted to the use of the plaid,
or went about with their skirts over their heads, ‘so that the same
is now become the ordinar habit of all women within the city, to the
general imputation of their sex, matrons not being able to be discerned
from loose-living women, to their awn dishonour and scandal of the
city.’ For these faults, heavy fines were announced.
It is amusing to find ladies subjecting themselves to false
imputations, by following this denounced fashion, when they had only to
walk about with their faces exhibited in order to refute or repel all
scandal.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JULY 16.]
Died this day Francis, eighth Earl of Errol, noted about forty years
before for his concern in the various papist rebellions, by which the
reign of King James was so much troubled. ‘He was buried in the church
of Slaines, in the night, convoyed quietly with his own domestics and
country friends with torch-light. It was his will to have no gorgeous
burial, nor to convocate his noble friends with making great charges
and expenses, but to be buried quietly, and such expenses as should
be wared prodigally upon his burial, to give the same to the poor.
This was a noble man, of a great and courageous spirit, who had great
troubles in his time, which he stoutly and honourably still carried,
and now in favour died in peace with God and man, and a loyal subject
to the king, to the great grief of his kin and friends.’--_Spal._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JULY.]
When word came to Scotland regarding the seven hundred Protestants
expelled from the Palatinate, and who had arrived in Nuremberg in great
distress, there was a strong feeling excited in their behalf, and a
collection for their relief was resolved on. It appears that, within
a twelvemonth, one thousand pounds sterling was collected and sent to
London; to which was afterwards added five hundred more. A considerable
sum, considering the time, means of the people, and the object.--_P. C.
R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: AUG.]
[Sidenote: 1631.]
A levy of 6000 Scots passed to Germany for the assistance of Gustavus
Adolphus of Sweden against the emperor. They were under the command
of James Marquis of Hamilton, who appeared to have raised them on his
own account, and without any sanction from the king, though in reality
Charles was interested in the expedition, as calculated to favour the
restoration of his brother-in-law the Elector Palatine of the Rhine.
This body of troops contributed to the great victory of Leipzig, which
threw the whole of Northern Germany into the power of Gustavus, and it
afterwards helped in the recovery of Magdeburg; but bravery and zeal
could not save it from the diseases which afflicted a country reduced
by war to the last extremity of wretchedness. A year saw it the mere
shadow of what it originally was, while the marquis was recalled in
disgust to his own country. Nevertheless, the remains of the force
adhered to the Swedish service.
Monro, in his confused way, gives a list of the Scottish officers who
were under the command of Gustavus in the latter part of 1632, adding
in some instances particulars of their subsequent career. It may be
transferred to these pages, as the memorial of a brave and honourable
movement of the Scottish nation, and because the very names of these
Monroes, Leslies, and Ramsays of two hundred years ago, can scarcely be
read in such an association of ideas without exciting some interest in
a Scottish bosom.[35]
‘_Field Officers._--The Marquis of Hamilton, general of the British
army; Sir James Spence, general over Scots;[36] Sir Patrick Ruthven,
governor of Ulm, and since general;[37] Sir Alexander Leslie, governor
over the cities along the Baltic coast, and since field-marshal over
the army in Westphalia [subsequently Earl of Leven]; Major-general
James King, since lieutenant-general;[38] Sir David Drummond,
general-major and governor of Stettin, in Pomerania;[39] Sir James
Ramsay, general-major, had a regiment of Scots, and since was governor
of Hanau.[40]
[Sidenote: 1631.]
‘_Colonels that served then of Scots._--My Lord of Reay ( M‘Kay),
colonel to a brigade of Scots; Sir John Hepburn, colonel, succeeded
to command the Scottish brigade, and since was slain in France; Sir
John Ruthven, colonel to a brigade of Dutch, and since general-major;
Sir James Lumsden, colonel to a regiment of Scots; Alexander Ramsay,
colonel and governor of Creutzenach; Robert Leslie, colonel to a
regiment of Scots; Robert Monro, baron of Foulis, colonel of horse
and foot over Dutch, and since died of his wounds at Ulm; John Monro
of Obstell, colonel to a regiment of Scots, and since slain on the
Rhine at Weteraw; Ludovick Leslie, colonel to a regiment of Scots,
which was Sir John Hamilton’s; Robert Monro, colonel to a regiment of
Scots, which was my Lord of Reay’s; James Kerr, colonel to a regiment
of Scots, and since general-major; Sir Frederick Hamilton, colonel
to a regiment of Scots and Irish; the Master of Forbes, colonel to a
regiment of Scots;[41] Alexander Hamilton, colonel to a regiment of
Scots;[42] the Earl of Crawfurd-Lindsay, colonel to a foot-regiment of
Dutch, and since slain;[43] William Baillie, colonel to a regiment of
foot of Dutch; Sir William Ballantyne, colonel to a foot-regiment of
English; Sir James Ramsay, colonel to a foot-regiment of English, and
since died at London; Alexander Forbes, called Finnesse Forbes, colonel
to a regiment of Finnes; Walter Leckie, colonel to foot.
‘_Scots Colonels that served this time in Sweden, Liefland, and
Spruce._--James Seaton, colonel to foot of Swedes; Colonel Kinninmond,
colonel to foot of Swedes, since dead; Colonel Thomson, colonel to foot
of Swedes, since dead; Colonel Scott, colonel to foot of Finnes, since
dead; William Cunningham, colonel to foot of Scots, in Spruce; Francis
Ruthven, colonel to foot of Dutch, in Spruce; Sir John Meldrum, colonel
in Spruce to foot.
‘_Lieutenant-colonels._--Thomas Hume of Carolside, ---- Douglas, Henry
Muschamp, Alexander Leslie, Alexander Cunningham, ---- Vavasour,
William Gunn, John Leslie, Finnesse Forbes, Alexander Forbes, called
the Bald, Robert Stewart, Hector Monro, Sir George Douglas, George
Leslie, John Lindsay of Bainshow, ---- Monypenny, Alexander Lindsay,
John Sinclair, William Stewart, Henry Lindsay, William Lindsay, James
Henderson, Sir Arthur Forbes, Robert Weir, John Lyell, James Dickson,
---- Sandilands, William Borthwick, ---- Macdowgal, James Hepburn,
Robert Hannan, John Monro, Robert Lumsden, William Herring, Sir James
Cunningham, William Spence, John Ennis, Poytaghee Forbes, John Forbes
of Tulloch, George Forbes, Alexander Hay, David Leslie [Lord Newark].’
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SEP.]
[Sidenote: 1631.]
The persecution of the Catholics had, in 1629, reached a pitch of
keenness which it was not possible to maintain. The king occasionally
ventured to interfere with special letters in favour of certain
Romanists of rank, his personal friends, allowing them to stay in the
country on hope of conversion, or else permitting them a temporary
return from exile to see after their private affairs. The Privy Council
itself could not always keep up the proper degree of severity. Being
partly a lay-body, it would now and then take a mild view of a case,
though in a hesitating manner.
Sir John Ogilvy of Craig, after enduring imprisonment for a time in
Edinburgh Castle, was allowed to live in Edinburgh and in St Andrews
under a modified restraint. Finally, he was permitted to go home to
his dwelling-house of Craig, ‘upon promise of ane sober and modest
behaviour without scandal or offence to the kirk.’ ‘Nevertheless,’ as
the Council proceeds to remark, ‘Sir John, since his going home, has
behaved himself very scandalously, daily conversing with excommunicat
persons, privately resetting seminary and mass priests, and restraining
his bairns and servants from coming to the kirk, to the heigh offence
of God and disgrace of his majesty’s government.’ For this reason, he
was ordered (September 22) to go into ward in St Andrews, ‘until he be
freed and relaxed by the Lords.’
[Sidenote: 1631.]
A supplication presented by Sir John, some weeks later, to the Council,
complained of his having been condemned without a hearing, and while
he was ‘innocent of these imputations.’ He went on to say that he had
nevertheless done his best to yield obedience to their order. He ‘took
journey from his awn house [in Forfarshire] toward St Andrews, being
heavily diseased by reason of a dizziness in his head, so that he was
not able to travel on horseback for fear of falling from his horse, and
therefore was compelled, although with great pain and travel, to make
journey upon his foot, being led all the way with two men. At last he
atteined with great trouble to the town of Dundee,’ where, however,
sickness stopped him. He petitioned, for the sake of his health, to
be allowed to return to Craig, ‘where, if he die, he may have the
presence and comfort of his wife and children.’ The Lords yielded to
this supplication, on condition of his giving a bond that ‘he sall
cause his eldest son and the remanent of his children and domestics,
resort to the kirk every Sabbath when possibly they may; that he sall
not travel on the Sabbath from his own house, or profane the same by
any slanderous behaviour in his own person, nor in any that is in his
power; that he sall remain in his awn house and twa mile about the
same; and that he sall not reset priests, nor be found reasoning
against the religion presently professed.’
On the 17th of November 1631, the Privy Council, considering that the
Earl of Nithsdale is ‘vehemently suspected in his religion, and that
the remaining of Lord Maxwell, his son, in his company, may prove very
dangerous to the youth, and now in his tender years infect and poison
him with opinions wherefra it will be difficult thereafter to reclaim
him,’ ordered his lordship to ‘exhibit’ his son, that ‘direction may
be given for his breeding and education in the true religion.’--_P. C.
R._ When we remember that the Earl of Nithsdale was the most powerful
man in the southern part of the kingdom, and had so lately as 1625
acted as the royal commissioner to parliament, and since conducted a
large auxiliary force for the service of the king’s brother-in-law
in Germany, the character of this interference with his domestic
arrangements becomes the more noticeable.
Patrick Con of Achry, having early yielded to the orders of Council,
and retired from the country, was nevertheless excommunicated by
the presbytery of Aberdeen; in consequence of which, those left in
charge of his estate appropriated it and threw him into destitution.
He presented a petition to the king for permission to return for a
time, and to have the benefit of a temporary relaxation of the pains
of excommunication, in order that he might recover his property; and
this permission, extending to a twelvemonth, was granted, on condition
‘that, during the said space, he give no scandal or just offence to the
kirk nor government.’ We shall presently see something more of Patrick.
In February 1632, Gordon of Craig petitioned the king for what the
Council had some time before refused; and his majesty, ‘conceiving his
demand to be very reasonable, and (in respect of his age and infirmity
of body) to require our princely commiseration,’ enjoined the Council
either to allow him to join his son abroad or live in such part of
Scotland as he himself chose. The Lords found it ‘no ways fitting’ that
Gordon should be allowed to leave the country, but gave him a licence
to take his choice of a place of residence within the country.
[Sidenote: 1631.]
At length the interferences of the king in behalf of the proscribed
papists produced in his Scottish councillors a degree of disapprobation
which could no longer be repressed. A diocesan assembly met at
Aberdeen, and elected Mr William Gould as a commissioner to proceed
to lay their views before the Privy Council (July 1632). It was
represented by this venerable person, that, when the exiled papists
were allowed to return temporarily, all of their profession were
‘thereby encouraged, upon expectation of finding the like liberty, to
return to the country when they sall be reduced to the same extremity.’
Some who had been brought to the point of yielding obedience, were now
become once more ‘so obstinate that they will abide the last dint of
excommunication.’ The returned exiles had ‘come not alone;’ but through
their means, priests were introduced in great numbers, and ‘going about
the houses of simple ones, perverts them.’ The hands and hearts of
pastors were much discouraged when they found that, after their great
trouble with the process of excommunication, and in urging the Council
to the execution of the laws, all ended in a licence to return from
banishment, ‘in ane increase of obstinacy.’ The petition concluded
with a wish that the Council would lay their grievances before the
king, with a view to inducing him to be more strict with the papists.
The Council complied with this request, and at the same time (July
12, 1632) caused two of the returned exiles, Dr William Leslie and Mr
Robert Irving, to be brought before them to exhibit their licences--a
movement, however, which was not attended with any remarkable result.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV. 17.]
The Privy Council heard of the apprehension of one Andrew Anderson,
‘are busy and trafficking papist,’ believed to be engaged at and about
Dumfries in arranging for the conducting of gentlemen’s sons beyond
sea, that they might be educated in the popish religion. Immediately
on his apprehension, he had been committed to the Pledge-chamber
in Dumfries. The Lords sent for him, that he might be subjected to
examination in Edinburgh; but before any progress had been made in his
case, he died in the Tolbooth. The Council could only issue an order to
the provost and bailies to inquire into the ‘form, manner, and cause of
his death.’--_P. C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1631.]
Serious people in Scotland were at this time much scandalised by
reports from England, regarding clergymen who openly preached
Arminianism, and others who wrote in favour of a lax observance of the
Sabbath. At home, the bishops and other leaders of the church were
manifestly departing from the old Scottish observances. ‘The house
of one Dickson in the Potterrow, in the suburbs of Edinburgh, was,
to some of them, their place of recreation on Sabbath afternoons. It
was remarked of Spottiswoode, and some other of the bishops, that
they sojourned [travelled] more on that than on other days. And Mr
Thomas Foster, minister at Melrose, having but one hutt of corn in
his barn-yard, would needs shew his Christian liberty, by causing his
servants cast it in upon that holy day. Thus fast were we hastening to
destruction.’[44]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1632.]
Witches being so numerous at this time, it was not surprising that
‘John Balfour in Corshouse’ took upon him the profession of a
discoverer of witches, ‘by remarking the devil’s mark upon some part
of their persons, and thristing of preens in the same.’ ‘Upon the
presumption of this knowledge,’ say the Privy Council, he ‘goes athort
the country abusing simple and ignorant people for his private gain and
commoditie.’ Measures were taken for looking into John’s pretensions to
such knowledge, ‘and how and by what means he has the same.’--_P. C. R._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1633.