One Grieve, a maltman at Kirkcaldy, was deliberately murdered by his
son, in consequence of family quarrels. The wretched youth took some
cunning measures for concealing the murder, but in vain. ‘He is had to
the corpse; but the corpse did not bleed upon him (for some affirm that
the corpse will not bleed for the first twenty-four hours after the
murder): however, he is keepit, and within some hours after, he is had
to the corpse again, and, the son taking the father by the hand, the
corpse bleeds at the nose; but he still denies. Also, the man’s wife is
brought, and they cause her touch her husband; but he did not bleed.’
The lad afterwards confessed, and was hanged.--_Lam._
* * * * *
This was a year of uncommon abundance, in both grain and fruit, ‘the
like never seen heretofore.’ ‘The streets of Edinburgh were filled full
of all sorts of fruits ... sold exceeding cheap.’--_Nic._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JULY 3.]
Decision was given in the Court of Session of a singular case, in which
several of the peers of the realm were concerned. ‘Lord Coupar, sitting
in parliament, taking out his watch, handed it to Lord Pitsligo, who
refusing to restore it, an action was brought for the value. Lord
Pitsligo said, that Lord Coupar having put his watch in his hand to
see what hour it was, Lord Sinclair putting forth his hand for a sight
of the watch, Lord Pitsligo put it into Lord Sinclair’s hand, in the
presence of Lord Coupar, without contradiction, which must necessarily
import his consent. Lord Coupar answered that, they being then sitting
in parliament, his silence could not import his consent. The Lords
repelled Lord Pitsligo’s defence, and found him liable in the value of
the watch.’[207]
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1662.]
The check lately imposed on the cruelty of proceedings in witch cases
was not everywhere effectual; but in one instance of alleged wizardry
in the Highlands, the tyranny of the usual process was controlled in
a most characteristic manner. A group of poor people, tenants in the
parish of Kilmorack and Kiltarnity, in Inverness-shire--namely, Hector
M‘Lean; Jonet M‘Lean, his spouse; Margaret M‘Lean, sister of Jonet; and
ten or twelve other women of indescribable Highland names--had been
apprehended and imprisoned for the alleged crime of witchcraft, at the
instance of Alexander Chisholm, of Commer; Colin Chisholm, his brother;
John Valentine, and Thomas Chisholm, cousins of Alexander. The women
had been put into restraint in Alexander Chisholm’s house, while Hector
M‘Lean was confined in the Tolbooth of Inverness. Donald, a brother of
John M‘Lean, was searched for as being also a wizard, but he kept out
of the way. The Chisholms then set to torturing the women, ‘by waking
them, hanging them up by the thumbs, burning the soles of their feet in
the fire,’ drawing some of them ‘at horses’ tails, and binding of them
with widdies [withes] about the neck and feet.’ Under this treatment,
one became distracted, another died; the rest confessed whatever
was demanded of them. Upon the strength of confessions extorted by
‘tortures more bitter than death itself’--such is the language of the
sufferers--the Chisholms had obtained a commission for trying the
accused.
It was alleged in a petition from M‘Lean and the other prisoners, that
the whole of this prosecution arose from inveterate hatred on the part
of the Chisholms, because they could not get them in a legal way put
out of their lands and possessions, where they had been for between
two and three hundred years past--so early was the fashion of eviction
in the Highlands. And here comes in the characteristic feature of the
case. These M‘Leans, though so long removed from the country of their
chief and dwelling among strangers, were still M‘Leans, owning a fealty
to their chief in his remote Mull fastness, and looking for protection
in return. Accordingly, we have this insular chief, Sir Rory M‘Lean of
Dowart, coming in with a petition to the Privy Council in behalf of
these poor people, setting forth their case in its strongest light, and
demanding justice for them. The Council ordered proceedings under their
commission to be stopped, and sent to require the Chisholms to come
before them along with the prisoners.
How this matter ended we do not learn; but it is evident that the clan
feeling was effectual in saving the M‘Leans from further proceedings of
an arbitrary and cruel nature.--_P. C. R._
[Sidenote: 1662.]
Early in the ensuing year, there occur a number of petitions to
the Council from individuals who had been confined a long time on
charges of witchcraft, either untried for want of evidence, or who
had been tried and acquitted, but were further detained in hope of
evidence being obtained. One of these was from a burgess of Lauder
named Wilkison, in favour of his wife, who was kept in a miserable
condition in prison, even after her accuser had expressed penitence
for ‘delating’ her! The Council generally shewed a disposition to
liberate such persons on petition; but there were cases which lay long
neglected. We hear in January 1666 of a poor woman named, Jonet Howat,
who had been a prisoner in Forfar jail on suspicion of witchcraft for
_several years_, and was now ‘redacted to the extreme of misery,’ never
having all the time been subjected to trial.[208] Jonet was ordered to
be liberated, if her trial could not be immediately proceeded with. It
is rather remarkable to find in the ill-reputed government of this time
traits of a certain considerateness and humanity towards women under
charges of witchcraft--for example, taking care that they should not
be tortured by unauthorised persons, and making sure that even their
voluntary confessions should appear as proceeding from a sane mind;
thus shewing a feeling which was to all appearance unknown during the
late _régime_.
* * * * *
[Sidenote: JULY.]
[Sidenote: 1662.]
Jon Ponthus, a German, styling himself professor of physic, but who
would now be called a quack-doctor, was in Scotland for the third
time, having previously paid professional visits in 1633 and 1643.
His proceedings afford a lively illustration of the state of medical
science in our island, and of the views of the public mind regarding
what is necessary to a good physician. Erecting a stage on the High
Street of Edinburgh, he had one person to play the fool, and another
to dance on a rope, in order to attract and amuse his audience. Then
he commenced selling his drugs, which cost eighteenpence per packet,
and Nicoll allows that they ‘proved very good and real.’ This honest
chronicler seems to have been much pleased with the antics of the
performers. Upon a great rope fixed from side to side of the street, a
man ‘descended upon his breast, his hands loose and stretched out like
the wings of a fowl, to the admiration of many.’ Most curious of all,
‘the chirurgeons of the country, and also the apothecaries, finding
thir drugs and recipes good and cheap, came to Edinburgh from all
parts of the kingdom and bought them,’ for the purpose of selling them
again at a profit. ‘Thir plays and dancings upon the rope continued
the space of many days, whose agility and nimbleness was admirable to
the beholders; ane of these dancers having danced sevenscore times at
a time without intermission, lifting himself and vaulting six quarter
heigh above his awn head, and lighting directly upon the tow, as
punctually as gif he had been dancing upon the plain-stones.’--_Nic._
The quack subsequently exhibited in like manner at Glasgow, Stirling,
Perth, Cupar, and St Andrews.--_Lam._
‘About the same time, another mountebank, a High German, had the like
sports and commodities to gain money. He was at Edinburgh twice, as
also at Aberdeen and Dundee. He likewise had the leaping and flying
rope--viz., coming down ane high tow, and his head all the way
downward, his arms and feet holden out all the time; and this he did
divers times in one afternoon.’--_Lam._
In December 1665, a doctor of physic, named Joanna Baptista, acting
under his majesty’s warrant, ‘erected a stage [in Edinburgh] between
Niddry’s and Blackfriars’ Wynd head, and there vended his drugs,
powder, and medicaments, for the whilk he received a great abundance of
money.’--_Nic._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: SEP.]
‘It pleased the king’s majesty at this time to raise [five] companies
of foot-soldiers, weel provided in arms, able stout Scotsmen, by and
attour those of the life-guard, wha attended his majesty’s service in
and about Edinburgh, ever ready to attend the king’s pleasure and the
parliament’s direction.’--_Nic._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: OCT. 15.]
Died, the Earl of Balcarres, a boy. ‘The lady, his mother, caused open
him, and in his heart was found a notched stone, the bigness of one’s
five fingers, Dr Martin and John Gourlay [apothecary] being present at
his embalming.’[209]--_Lam._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: NOV.]
The clergymen of Edinburgh, five in number, were all displaced for
non-conformity to the new Episcopal rule, excepting one, Mr Robert
Lowrie, who consequently obtained the name of the _Nest Egg_. He became
Dean of Edinburgh. The inhabitants of the city, not relishing the new
ministers, began to desert the churches and go to worship elsewhere. At
the same time, the Monday’s sermon, which had for some years been in
use, was discontinued.
[Sidenote: 1662.]
In the new church establishment the chief object held in view was to
get the church courts controlled by bishops and the royal supremacy.
Matters of worship and discipline were left much as they had been. No
ceremonies of any kind, nor any liturgy, were attempted. ‘The reading
of Scriptures was brought in again, and the psalms sung with this
addition: “Glory to the Father, to the Son, and to Holy Ghost,” &c.’
That was all. While the famous Perth articles were left in oblivion,
it was felt to be necessary that there should be some respect paid
to the day of the Nativity. Accordingly, the next Christmas-day was
solemnly kept in Edinburgh, the bishop preaching in the Easter Kirk (St
Giles) to a large audience, in which were included the commissioner,
chancellor, and all the nobles in town. ‘The sermon being ended,
command was given by tuck of drum, that the remanent of the day should
be spent as a holiday, that no work nor labour should be used, and no
mercat nor trade on the streets, and that no merchant booth should be
opened under pain of £20 in case of failyie.’--_Nic._
There was also a kind of volunteer effort in certain classes to get up
an observance of the day consecrated to the national saint. November
30, a Sunday, being St Andrew’s Day, ‘many of our nobles, barons,
gentry, and others of this kingdom, put on ane livery or favour, for
reverence thereof. This being a novelty, I thought good to record,
because it was never of use heretofore since the Reformation.’--_Nic._
* * * * *
[Sidenote: 1663.