Produced by Susan Skinner, Ted Garvin and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net
MEMOIRS
OF
THE JACOBITES
OF 1715 AND 1745.
BY MRS. THOMSON,
AUTHOR OF
"MEMOIRS OF THE COURT OF HENRY THE EIGHTH,"
"MEMOIRS OF SARAH, DUCHESS OF MARLBOROUGH," ETC.
VOLUME II.
LONDON:
RICHARD BENTLEY, NEW BURLINGTON STREET,
Publisher in Ordinary to Her Majesty.
1845.
LONDON:
Printed by S. & J. BENTLEY, WILSON, and FLEY,
Bangor House, Shoe Lane.
CONTENTS
TO
THE SECOND VOLUME.
PAGE
WILLIAM MAXWELL, EARL OF NITHISDALE
(with a Portrait of the Countess of Nithisdale) 1
WILLIAM GORDON, VISCOUNT KENMURE 71
WILLIAM MURRAY, MARQUIS OF TULLIBARDINE 92
SIR JOHN MACLEAN 124
ROB ROY MACGREGOR CAMPBELL 155
SIMON FRASER, LORD LOVAT (with a Portrait) 208
MEMOIRS OF THE JACOBITES.
WILLIAM MAXWELL, EARL OF NITHISDALE.
It is happily remarked by the editor of the Culloden Papers, with regard
to the devotion of many of the Highland clans to the exiled family of
Stuart, that "it cannot be a subject requiring vindication; nor," adds
the writer, "if it raise a glow on the face of their descendants, is it
likely to be the blush of shame." The descendants of William Maxwell,
Earl of Nithisdale, have reason to remember, with a proud interest, the
determined and heroic affection which rescued their ancestor from
prison, no less than the courage and fidelity which involved their chief
in a perilous undertaking, and in a miserable captivity.
The first of that ancient race, who derived their surname from the
Lordship of Maxwell, in the county of Dumfries, was Robert de Maxwell of
Carlaverock, who, in 1314, was killed at the battle of Bannockburn,
fighting under the banners of King James the Third. From that period
until the seventeenth century, the house of Maxwell continued to enjoy
signal proofs of royal favour; it was employed in important services and
on high missions, extending its power and increasing its possessions by
intermarriages with the richest and noblest families in Scotland. An
enumeration of the honours and privileges enjoyed by this valiant race
will show in how remarkable a degree it was favoured by the Stuarts, and
how various and how forcible were the reasons which bound it to serve
that generous and beloved race of Scottish monarchs.
Herbert, who succeeded John de Maxwell, was one of the Commissioners
sent by Alexander the Second to England, to treat for a marriage with
one of the daughters of that crown; and, having concluded the
negotiation favourably, was endowed with the office of Lord Great
Chamberlain of Scotland, which he held during his life-time, and which
was afterwards bestowed on his son.
Eustace de Maxwell, in the time of Robert de Bruce, was among those
patriots who adhered to the Scottish King. The Castle of Carlaverock,
one of the most ancient possessions of the brave Maxwells, stands a
memento, in its noble ruins, of the disinterested loyalty of its owners.
The remains of Carlaverock afford but a slight notion of its former
strength. The importance of its situation is, however, undoubted.
Situated on the south borders of the Nith, near to Glencapel Quay, it
constituted a stronghold for the Scottish noble, who scarcely feared a
siege within its walls, and when the army of Edward advanced to invest
it, refused to surrender; "for the fortress was well furnished," says
Grose, "with soldiers, engines, and provisions."
But this defiance was vain; after sustaining an assault, Carlaverock was
obliged to capitulate; when the generosity of Edward's measures excited
the admiration of all humane minds. The troops, only sixty in number,
were taken into the King's service, as a token of his approval of their
brave defence; they were then released, ransom free, and received each a
new garment, as a gift from the King.
Carlaverock was, some time after, retaken by the Scotch, and Sir Eustace
de Maxwell resumed his command over the garrison. It was again invested
by King Edward; but, on this occasion, Eustace drove the English from
the attack, and retained possession of the fortress.
Afterwards, of his own free will, he demolished the fortress, that no
possession of his might favour the progress of the enemy. He was
rewarded by several grants of lands, and twenty-two pounds in money.
In the fifteenth century, Herbert de Maxwell marrying a daughter of the
Maxwells of Terregles (Terre Eglise), the son of that marriage was
ennobled, and was dignified by the title of Lord de Maxwell. His
successor perished at Flodden, but the grandson of the first Lord had a
happier fortune, and was entrusted by James the Fifth to bring over
Mary of Guise to Scotland, first marrying her as the King's proxy.
The house of Maxwell prospered until the reign of James the Sixth; by
whom John, Lord Maxwell, was created Earl of Morton, and made Warden of
the Marches: but a reverse of fortune ensued. From some court intrigue,
the Warden was removed from office, and his place supplied by the Laird
of Johnstones; all the blood of the Maxwells was aroused; a quarrel and
a combat were the result; and, in the scuffle, the new-made Earl of
Morton was killed. The injury was not forgotten, and John, who succeeded
the murdered man, deemed it incumbent upon him to avenge his father. In
consequence, the Laird of Johnstone soon fell a sacrifice to this notion
of honour, or outbreak of offended pride. The crime was not, however,
passed over by law; the offender was tried, and executed, in 1613, at
the Cross in Edinburgh; and his honours were forfeited. But again the
favour of the Stuarts shone forth; the title of Morton was not restored,
but Robert, the brother of the last Earl of Morton, was created Earl of
Nithisdale, and restored to the Lordship of Maxwell; with precedency, as
Earl, according to his father's creation as Earl of Morton.
This kindness was requited by a devoted loyalty; and, in the reign of
Charles the First, the Earl of Nithisdale suffered much, both by
sequestration and imprisonment, for the royal cause.
In 1647, in consequence of failure of the direct line, the title and
estates of the Nithisdale family devolved on a kinsman, John Lord
Herries, whose grandson, William, the subject of this memoir, proved to
be the last of the Maxwell family that has ever enjoyed the Earldom.
He was served heir male, and of line male and entail of his father, on
the twenty-sixth of May, 1696; and heir male of his grandfather, the
Earl of Nithisdale, on the sixteenth of the same month.[1] At his
accession to his title, the Earl of Nithisdale possessed no common
advantages of fortune and station. "He was allied," says the Scottish
Peerage, "to most of the noble families in the two kingdoms." His
mother, the Lady Lucy, was daughter to the Marquis of Douglas; his only
sister, Lady Mary Maxwell, was married to Charles Stewart, Earl of
Traquair; and he had himself wedded a descendant of that noble and brave
Marquis of Worcester who had defended Ragland Castle against Fairfax.
In addition to these family honours, Lord Nithisdale possessed rich
patrimonial estates in one of the most fertile and luxuriant counties in
Scotland. The Valley of the Nith, from which he derived his title, owned
his lordship over some of its fairest scenes. Young, rich, and happily
married, he was in the full sunshine of prosperity when, in the year
1715, he was called upon to prove the sincerity of that fidelity to the
house of Stuart for which his family had so greatly suffered, and for
which it had been so liberally repaid.
It is remarkable that the adventurers in the unfortunate cause of the
Chevalier St. George were, with rare exceptions, men of established
credit, men who had vast stakes in their country, and who had lost no
portion of their due consideration in the eyes of others by extravagance
or profligacy. This fact marks the insurrection of 1715, as presenting a
very different aspect to that of other insurrections raised by faction,
and supported by men of desperate fortunes. So early as the year 1707,
it appears by Colonel Hooke's secret negotiations in favour of the
Stuarts, that the bulk of the Scottish nobility had their hearts engaged
in the cause, and that their honour was pledged to come forward on the
first occasion. In the enumeration given by one of the agents employed
in traversing the country, Lord Nithisdale and his relatives are
mentioned as certain and potent allies. "In Tweedale," writes Mr.
Fleming to the Minister of Louis the Fourteenth, "the Earl of Traquair,
of the house of Stuart, and the Laird of Stanhope are powerful. In the
shires of Annandale, Niddesdale, and Galloway, are the Earl of
Niddesdale, with the Viscount of Kenmure, the Laird of Spinkell, with
the numerous clan of the Maxwells; and there is some hope also of the
Earl of Galloway; Thus the King's party is connected through the whole
kingdom, and we are certain of being masters of all the shires, except
Argyleshire, Clydesdale, Renfrew, Dumbarton, and Kyle."[2] "An affair
of this nature," adds Mr. Fleming, "cannot be communicated to all the
well affected; and it is a great proof of the zeal of those to whom it
is trusted, that so many people have been able to keep this secret so
inviolably." Such was the commencement of that compact which, held
together by the word of Scotchmen, was in few instances broken; but was
maintained with as scrupulous a regard to honour and fidelity by the
poorest Highlander that ever trod down the heather, as by the great
nobleman within his castle hall.
Among the list of the most considerable chiefs in Scotland, with an
account of their disposition for or against the Government, the Earl of
Nithisdale is specified by contemporary writers as one who is able to
raise three hundred men, and willing to employ that force in the service
of the Pretender.[3]
In the resolution to carry the aid of his clansmen to the service of
either side, the chieftain of that day was powerfully assisted by the
blind devotion of the brave and faithful people whom he led to battle.
Unhappily, the influence of the chief was often arbitrarily, and even
cruelly exerted, in cases of doubtful willingness in their followers.
It will be interesting to scrutinize the motives and characters of those
who occupied the chief posts in command, upon the formation of this
Southern party in favour of the Chevalier. Although some of these
chiefs have obtained celebrity in history, yet their efforts were
sincere; their notions of patriotism, be they just, or be they
erroneous, deserve a rescue from oblivion; their sufferings, and the
heroism with which they were encountered, show to what an extent the
fixed principle to which the Scotch are said ever to recur, will carry
the exertions, and support the fortitude, of that enduring and
determined people.
To William Gordon, Viscount Kenmure and Baron of Lochinvar, was
entrusted, in a commission from the Earl of Mar, the command of the
insurgents in the south of Scotland. This choice of a General displayed
the usual want of discernment which characterized the leaders of the
Rebellion of 1715. Grave, and as a contemporary describes him, "full
aged;" of extraordinary knowledge in public affairs, but a total
stranger to all military matters; calm, but slow in judgment; of
unsullied integrity,--endowed, in short, with qualities truly
respectable, but devoid of energy, boldness, and address, yet wanting
not personal courage, there could scarcely have been found a more
excellent man, nor a more feeble commander. At the head of a troop of
gentlemen, full of ardour in the cause, the plain dress and homely
manners of Lord Kenmure seemed inappropriate to the conspicuous station
which he held; for the exercise of his functions as commander was
attended by some circumstances which required a great combination of
worldly knowledge with singleness of purpose.
George Seaton, the fifth Earl of Wintoun, was another of those noblemen
who raised a troop of horse, and engaged, from the very first
commencement of the rebellion, in its turmoils. The family of Seaton, of
which the Earl of Wintoun was the last in the direct line, "affords in
its general characteristics," says a celebrated Scottish genealogist,
"the best specimen of our ancient nobility. They seem to have been the
first to have introduced the refined arts, and an improved state of
architecture in Scotland. They were consistent in their principles, and,
upon the whole, as remarkable for their deportment and baronial
respectability, as for their descent and noble alliances."[4]
In consequence of so many great families having sprung from the Seatons,
they were styled "_Magnæ Nobilitatis Domini_;" and their antiquity was
as remarkable as their alliances, the male representation of the family,
and the right to the honours which they bore, having been transmitted to
the present Earl of Eglintoun, through an unbroken descent of seven
centuries and a half.
The loyalty of the Seatons was untainted. The first Earl of Wintoun had
adopted as one of his mottoes, "_Intaminatis fulget honoribus_," and the
sense of those words was fully borne out by the testimony of time. The
Seatoun Charter Chest contained, as one of their race remarked, no
remission of any offence against Government, a fact which could not be
affirmed of any other Scottish family of note. But this brave and
ancient house had signal reason for remaining hitherto devoted to the
monarchs of the Scottish throne.
Four times had the Seatons been allied with royalty: two instances were
remarkable. George Seatoun, second Earl of Huntly, married the Princess
Annabella, daughter of James the First, and from that union numerous
descendants of Scottish nobility exist to this day: and George, the
third Lord Seaton, again allied his house with that of Stuart, by
marrying the Lady Margaret Stuart, daughter of the Earl of Buchan, and
granddaughter of Robert the Second. In consequence of these several
intermarriages, it was proverbially said of the house of Seaton, "the
family is come of princes, and reciprocally princes are come of the
family." And these bonds of relationship were cemented by services
performed and honours conferred. The devotion of the Seatons to Mary,
Queen of Scots, has been immortalised by the pen of Sir Walter Scott.
George, the seventh Lord Seaton, attended on that unhappy Princess in
some of the most brilliant scenes of her eventful life, and clung to her
in every vicissitude of her fate. He, as Ambassador to France,
negotiated her marriage with the Dauphin, and was present at the
celebration of the nuptials. He afterwards aided his royal mistress to
escape from Lochleven Castle, in 1568, and conducted her to Niddry
Castle, his own seat. When, in gratitude for his fidelity, Mary would
have created him an Earl, Lord Seaton declined the honour, and
preferred his existing rank as Premier Baron of Scotland. Mary
celebrated his determination in a couplet, written both in French and in
Latin:
"Il y a des comtes, des rois, des ducs aussi,
Ce't assez pour moy d'estre Signeur de Seton."
The successor of Lord Seaton, Robert, judged differently from his
father, and accepted from James the Sixth the patent for the Earldom of
Wintoun; distinguishing the new honour by a courage which procured for
him the appellation of "Greysteel."[5]
George, the fifth Earl of Wintoun, and the unfortunate adherent to the
Jacobite cause, succeeded to the honours of his ancestors under
circumstances peculiarly embarrassing. His legitimacy was doubted: at
the time when his father died, this ill-fated young man was abroad, his
residence was obscure; and as he held no correspondence with any of his
relations, little was known with regard to his personal character. In
consequence partly of his absence from Scotland, partly, it is said, of
an actual hereditary tendency, a belief soon prevailed that he was
insane, or rather, as a contemporary expresses it, "mighty subject to a
particular kind of caprice natural to his family."[6]
The Viscount Kingston, next heir to the title of Wintoun, having
expressed his objections to Lord Wintoun's legitimacy, the young man, in
1710, took steps to establish himself as his father's heir. Two
witnesses were produced who were present at the marriage of his
parents, and bonds were found in the family chests, designating Lord
Wintoun as "our eldest lawful son," by Dame Christian Hepburn Countess
of Wintoun, "our spouse." This important point being established, Lord
Wintoun served himself heir to his father and became the possessor of
the family estates, chiefly situated in East Lothian, their principal
residence being the palace of Seaton, so recognized in the royal
charters, from its having been the favourite resort of royalty, the
scene of entertainment to Mary of Scots, and her court, and the
residence of Charles the First, when in Scotland in 1633. It was
afterwards the place of meeting for the Jacobite nobles, and their
adherents.[7]
Differing from many of his companions in arms, Lord Wintoun was a
zealous Protestant; but without any regard to the supremacy of either
mode of faith, it appears to have been a natural consequence of his
birth and early associations that he should cling to the house of the
Stuarts. One would almost have applied to the young nobleman the term
"recreant," had he wavered when the descendant of Mary Stuart claimed
his services. But such a course was far from his inclination. It was
afterwards deemed expedient by his friends to plead for him on the
ground of natural weakness of intellect; "but," says a contemporary,
"Lord Wintoun wants no courage, nor so much capacity as his friends find
it for his interest to suggest."[8] He was forward in action, and
stimulated the military ardour of his followers, as they rushed with
their ancient cry of "Set-on" to the combat. The earliest motto borne on
these arms by the Seatons, "Hazard, yet forward," might indeed be
mournfully applied to all who engaged in the hopeless Rebellion of 1715.
Lord Wintoun, like Lord Derwentwater, was in the bloom of his youth when
he summoned his tenantry to follow him to the rendezvous appointed by
Lord Kenmure. He took with him three hundred men to the standard of
James Stuart; but he appears to have carried with him a fiery and
determined temper,--the accompaniment, perhaps, of noble qualities, but
a dangerous attribute in times of difficulty.
Robert Dalzell, sixth Earl of Carnwath, was another of those Scottish
noblemen whose adherence to the Stuarts can only be regarded as a
natural consequence of their birth and education. The origin of his
family, which was of great antiquity in the county of Lanark, but had
been transplanted into Nithisdale, is referred to in the following
anecdote. In the reign of Kenneth the Second, a kinsman of the King
having been taken and hung by the Picts, a great reward was offered by
Kenneth, if any one would rescue and restore the corpse of his relation.
The enterprise was so hazardous, that no one would venture on so great a
risk. "At last," so runs the tale, "a certain gentleman came to the
King, and said, 'Dalziel,' which is the old Scottish word for 'I dare.'
He performed his engagement, and won for himself and his posterity the
name which he had verified, and an armorial bearing corresponding to the
action."
To James the First and to Charles the First the Dalziels owed their
honours, and had the usual fortune of paying dearly for them, during the
Great Rebellion, by sequestration, and by the imprisonment of Robert,
first Earl of Carnwath, after the battle of Worcester, whither he
attended Charles the Second. Undaunted by the adversities which his
house had formerly endured, Robert Dalzell, of Glenæ, sixth Earl of
Carnwath, again came forward in 1715 to maintain the principles in which
he had been nurtured, and to assist the family for whom his ancestors
had suffered. During his childhood, the tutor of this nobleman had made
it his chief care to instil into his mind the doctrine of hereditary
right, and its consequent, passive obedience and non-resistance. At the
University of Cambridge, young Dalzell had imbibed an affection for the
liturgy and discipline of the Church of England; whilst his attainments
had kept pace with the qualities of his heart, and the graces of his
deportment. He was, in truth, a young man of fair promise, and one whose
fate excited great interest, when a sombre tranquillity had succeeded to
the turbulence of rebellion. Gentle in his address, affable,
kind-hearted, Lord Carnwath had a natural and ready wit, and a great
command of language, to which his English education had doubtless
contributed. He was related by a former marriage between the families to
the Earl of Wintoun, whose troop was commanded by Captain James Dalzell,
the brother of Lord Carnwath. This young officer had served in the army
of George the First, but he threw up his commission at the beginning of
the Rebellion,--a circumstance which saved him from being shot at
Preston as a deserter.[9]
Robert Balfour, fifth Earl of Burleigh, was among the chiefs who,
shortly after the outbreak, avowed their adherence to the Pretender's
party. He was one of the few Jacobites whose personal character has
reflected discredit upon his motives, and disgraced his compeers: his
story has the air of romance, but is perfectly reconcilable with the
spirit of the times in which Lord Burleigh figured.
When a very young man he became attached to a girl of low rank, and was
sent abroad by his friends in hopes of removing his attachment. Before
he quitted Scotland, he swore, however, that if the young woman married
in his absence, he would kill her husband. Upon returning home, he found
that the unfortunate object of his affections had been united to Henry
Stenhouse, the schoolmaster at Inverkeithing. The threat had not been
uttered without a deep meaning: young Balfour kept his word, and
hastening to the school where Stenhouse was pursuing his usual duties,
he stabbed him in the midst of his scholars. The victim of this
murderous attack died twelve days afterwards.
Nearly eight years had elapsed since the crime had been perpetrated, and
the wretched murderer had encountered, since that time, his trial, in
the Court of Justiciary, and had received sentence of death by
beheading; but he escaped from prison a few days previously, by
exchanging clothes with his sister. He was then a commoner; but in 1714,
the title of Lord Burleigh, and an estate of six hundred and
ninety-seven pounds yearly, devolved upon him. When the Rebellion broke
out, his restless spirit, as well, perhaps, as the loss of reputation,
and the miseries of reflection, impelled him to enter into the contest.
Such were the principal promoters of the insurrection in the south of
Scotland; they were held together by firm bonds of sympathy, and their
plans were concerted in renewed conferences at stated periods.
The twenty-ninth of May was, of course, religiously observed by this
increasing and formidable party. During the previous year (1714) the
Jacobite gentry had met at Lochmaben, under pretence of a horse-racing;
and, although it does not appear that the Earl of Nithisdale was among
those who assembled on that occasion, yet several of his kinsmen
attended. The plates which were the prizes had significant devices: on
one of them were wrought figures of men in a falling posture; above them
stood one "eminent person," the Pretender, underneath whom were
inscribed the words from Ezekiel, xxi. 27, "I will overturn, overturn,
overturn it: and it shall be no more, until he come whose right it is,
and I will give it him." When the races were ended, Lord Burleigh, then
Master of Burleigh, led the way to the Cross of Lochmaben, where, with
great solemnity, drums beating, and colours displayed, those there
colected drank to "_their King's health;_" the Master of Burleigh
giving the toast, and uttering an imprecation on all such as should
refuse to pledge it. These meetings had been continued for several
years, and, during the reign of Queen Anne, without any molestation from
Government.[10] Lord Nithisdale took a decided part in all these
measures, and was one of those who were considered as entirely to be
trusted by the Earl of Mar, with regard to the projected arrival of the
Pretender in Scotland. On the sixth of August, 1715, that project was
communicated by Mar to the Earl of Nithisdale, through the medium of
Captain Dalzell, who was despatched likewise to Lord Kenmure, and to the
Earl of Carnwath. Lord Nithisdale obeyed the summons, and met the great
council of the Jacobite nobles at Braemar, where the decisive and
irrevocable step was taken.
Lord Nithisdale, in common with the other members of what was now termed
the Jacobite Association, had been diligently preparing the contest.
Meetings of the Association had been frequent, and even public. The
finest horses had been bought up at any cost, with saddles and
accoutrements, and numbers of horse-shoes. Many country gentlemen, who
were in the habit of keeping only two or three saddle-horses at a time,
now collected double the number; and a suspicion prevailed that it was
the intention of some, who were Jacobites, to mount a troop. But no
seizure had been made of their property in the last reign, there being
few justices of the peace in Dumfriesshire, nominated by Queen Anne, who
were not in the service of the Chevalier.[11] Trained bands were,
however, soon raised by the well-affected gentry of the county for the
protection of the neighbourhood; and Nithisdale was traversed by armed
bands,--Closeburn House, then the residence of Sir Thomas
Kirkpatrick,[12] being a frequent point of union for the friends of the
Hanoverian interests to assemble.[13] At Trepons, in the upper part of
Nithisdale, was the first blood drawn that was shed in this disastrous
quarrel, Mr. Bell of Nimsea, a Jacobite gentleman, being there shot
through the leg by one of the guards, on his refusing to obey
orders.[14] The occurrence was typical of the remorseless cruelty which
was afterwards exhibited towards the brave but unfortunate insurgents.
By a clause in the act "for encouraging loyalty in Scotland," passed on
the thirtieth of August, power was given to the authorities to summon to
Edinburgh all the heads of the Jacobite clans, and other suspected
persons, by a certain day, to find bail for their good conduct. Among
the long list of persons who were thus cited to appear, was the Earl of
Nithisdale. Upon his non-appearance, he was, with the rest, denounced,
and declared a rebel.[15] This citation was followed by an outbreak on
the part of Lord Kenmure and his followers, simultaneous to that on
which the Northumberland Jacobites had decided. And the borders now
became the chief haunts of the insurgents, who continued moving from
place to place, and from house to house, in order to ripen the scheme
which involved, as they considered, their dearest interests.
The loyal inhabitants of Dumfries were engaged, one Saturday, in the
solemnities of preparation for the holy sacrament, when they received
intimation of a plot to surprise and take possession of the town on the
following sabbath, during the time of communion. This project was
defeated by the prompt assembling of forces, notwithstanding that Lord
Kenmure, with one hundred and fifty-three horsemen, advanced within a
mile and a half of the town, on his march from Moffat. Upon being
advised of the preparations made for defence, this too prudent commander
addressed his troops, and said, "that he doubted not there were, in the
town, as brave gentlemen there as himself, and that he would not go on
to Dumfries that day." He returned to Lochmaben, where, on the following
Thursday, the Pretender's standard was proclaimed: Lochmaben is a small
market-town about fifteen miles from Dumfries; it served for some time
as the head-quarters of the Jacobite party. "At their approach," relates
the historian of that local insurrection, "the people of that place had
put their cattle into a fold to make room for their horses; but the
beasts having broken the fold, some of them drew home to the town a
little before day; and a townsman, going to hunt one of 'em out of his
yeard, called on his dog nam'd 'Help.' Hereupon the sentries cried
'Where?' and apprehending it had been a party from Dumfries to attack
them, gave the alarm to the rebels, who got up in great confusion."
Lord Kenmure, attended by the Jacobite chiefs, and Lord Nithisdale, soon
quitted the town of Lochmaben; and proceeding to Ecclefechan, and thence
marching to Langholme, reached Hawick on the fifteenth of September, and
determined on proceeding from that place into Teviotdale. Meantime
measures were taken by the Duke of Roxburgh, who was Lieutenant Governor
of Dumfriesshire, to prevent the Castle of Carlaverock being made
available for the Jacobite forces. The Duke gave orders that the back
bridge of the isle should be taken off, and a communication thus cut off
between the Papists in the lower part of Galloway and the rebels in the
borders. The inhabitants of the parish of Carlaverock were also strictly
watched, being tenants, mostly, of the Earl of Nithisdale; and the same
precaution was taken with regard to his Lordship's tenantry in Traquair,
Terregles, and Kirkcunyean; yet, according to the statement of Mr. Reay,
a most violent partisan against the Jacobites, the humble dwellers on
these estates were but little disposed to follow their chieftain, who
took, so the same account declares, "only two or three domestic servants
with him."[16] This, however, is contradicted by the assertion of Mr.
Patten, who specifies that Lord Nithisdale was followed by three hundred
of his tenantry; and also by the expectations which were founded, upon
a close survey and scrutiny, by the agents of the Chevalier before the
outbreak.[17]
Lord Nithisdale had now taken a last farewell of the beautiful and
smiling country of his forefathers; with what bright hopes, with what
anticipations of a successful march and a triumphant return he may have
quitted Terregles, it is easy to conjecture. Unhappily his enterprise
was linked to one over which a man, singularly ill-fitted for the office
of command, presided: for it was decreed that the Jacobite forces, under
the command of Lord Kenmure, should proceed to the assistance of Mr.
Forster's ill-fated insurrection in the north of England.
The history of that luckless and ill-concerted enterprise has been
already given.[18] The Earl of Nithisdale was taken prisoner after the
battle of Preston, but little mention is made of his peculiar services
at that place.
Lord Nithisdale was, with other prisoners of the same rank, removed to
London. The prisoners of inferior rank were disposed of, under strong
guards, in the different castles of Lancaster, Chester, and Liverpool.
The indignities which were wreaked upon the unfortunate Jacobites as
they entered London have been detailed in the life of Lord Derwentwater.
Amid the cries of a savage populace, and the screams of "No warming
pan," "King George for ever!" an exclamation which proves how deeply the
notion of spurious birth had sunk into the minds of the people, the
Earl of Nithisdale was conducted, his arms tied with cords, and the
reins of his horse taken from him, with his unfortunate companions, into
the Tower. He arrived in London on the 9th of December, 1715.[19]
Of the manner in which the State prisoners of that period were treated,
there are sufficient records left to prove that no feeling of compassion
for what might be deemed a wrong, but yet a generous principle of
devotion to the Stuarts, no high-toned sentiment of respect to bravery,
nor consideration for the habits and feelings of their prisoners,
influenced the British Government during that time of triumph. The mode
in which those unfortunate captives were left in the utmost penury and
necessity to petition for some provision, after their estates were
escheated, plainly manifests how little there was of that sympathy with
calamity which marks the present day.[20]
But if the State prisoners in London were treated with little humanity,
those who were huddled together in close prisons at Preston, Chester,
Liverpool, and the other towns were in a still more wretched condition.
In the stores of the State Paper Office are to be found heartrending
appeals for mercy, from prisoners sinking under dire diseases from too
close contiguity, or from long confinement in one apartment. Consumption
seems to have been very prevalent; and in Newgate the gaol fever raged.
For this rigorous confinement the excuse was, that it had been found
impossible to give the prisoners air, without risk of escape. In
Chester, the townspeople conspired to assist the poor wretches in this
endeavour; and perhaps, in regard to those of meaner rank, the
authorities were not very averse to the success of such efforts, for the
prisons were crowded, and the expense of even keeping the unfortunate
captives alive began to be a source of complaint on the part of
Government.
The great majority of the prisoners of the north were country gentlemen,
Roman Catholics, from Cumberland and Northumberland,--men who were
hearty and sincere in their convictions of the righteousness of their
cause--men, whose ancestors had mustered their tenantry in the field for
Charles the First. To those whose lives were spared, a petition was
recommended, and taken round for signature, praying that their sentence
of death or of imprisonment might be exchanged for transportation. But,
whether these high-spirited gentlemen expected that another insurrection
might act in their favour, or whether they preferred death to a final
farewell, under circumstances so dreadful, to their country, does not
appear. They mostly refused to sign the petition, which was offered to
them singly: and the commandant at Preston, Colonel Rapin, in his
correspondence with Lord Townshend, expresses his annoyance at their
obstinacy, and expatiates on the inconvenience of the numbers under his
charge at Preston. At length, after Captain John Dalzell, brother to the
Earl of Carnwath, had signed the petition, a large body of the
prisoners were ordered to be transported without their petitioning, and
to be put in irons. They were hurried away to Liverpool, to embark
thence for the Colonies, gentlemen and private soldiers mingled in one
mass; but orders were afterwards sent by Lord Townshend to detain the
gentlemen. Three hundred and twenty-seven prisoners had, however, been
already shipped off. Those who remained were not permitted to converse,
even with each other, without risk,--one Thomas Wells being appointed as
a spy to write to the Jacobites, and to discourse with them, under the
garb of friendliness, in order to draw out their real sentiments.[21]
From this digression, which may not be deemed irrelevant, since it marks
the spirit of the times, we return to the unhappy prisoners in the
Tower, which was now thickly tenanted by the fallen Jacobites.
Lord Nithisdale had the sorrow of knowing that many of his friends and
kinsmen were in the same gloomy and impenetrable fortress to which he
had been conducted. It is possible that the Jacobite noblemen were not
hopeless; and that remembering the clemency of William the Third to
those who had held a treasonable correspondence with the Court of St.
Germains, they might look for a similar line of policy from the reigning
monarch.
It must be acknowledged, however, that Government had been greatly
exasperated by acts of violence and of wanton destruction on the part of
the Jacobites throughout the country; and that the general disaffection
throughout the North, and, in particular, the strong Tory predilections
at Oxford, must have greatly aggravated the dangers, and consequently,
in a political view, have enhanced the crimes of the Chevalier's
adherents. "The country," writes Colonel Rapin to Lord Townshend, "is
full of them [the Jacobites], and the same spirit reigns in London."
"Oxford," writes an informant, under the name of _Philopoliticus_, "is
debauched by Jacobitism. They call the Parliament the Rump; and riots in
the street, with cries of 'Down with the Rump!' occur daily." Even the
fellows and heads of the colleges were disposed to Jacobite opinions;
and the Jacobites had expected that the city would become the
Chevalier's head-quarters as it had been that of Charles the First.[22]
But that which hastened the fate of the Earl of Nithisdale and of his
friends, was the landing of James Stuart, at Peterhead, in Scotland, on
the twenty-second of December,--an event which took place too late for
his friends and partisans, and fatally increased the calamities of those
who had suffered in his cause. On Monday, the ninth of January, he made
his public entry into Perth, and, on the same day, the reigning monarch
addressed his Parliament.[23]
"Among the many unavoidable ill consequences of this Rebellion," said
the King, "none affects me more sensibly than that extraordinary burden
which it has, and must, create to my faithful subjects. To ease them as
far as lies in my power, I take this first opportunity of declaring that
I freely give up all the estates that shall become forfeited to the
Crown by this Rebellion, to be applied towards defraying the
extraordinary expense incurred on this occasion." As soon as a suitable
address had been returned by both Houses, a debate concerning the
prisoners taken in rebellion ensued, and a conference was determined on
with the House of Lords. Mr. Lechmere, who was named to carry up the
message to the Lords, returned, and made a long and memorable speech,
concerning the rise, depth, and extent of the Rebellion; after which it
was resolved, _nemine contradicente_, to impeach the Earl of
Derwentwater, William Lord Widdrington, William Earl of Nithisdale,
Robert Earl of Carnwath, George Earl of Wintoun, William Viscount
Kenmure, and William Lord Nairn, of high treason.
The same evening, a committee was appointed to draw up articles of
impeachment; and so great was the dispatch used, and so zealous were the
committee, that in two hours the articles were prepared, agreed to, and
ordered to be engrossed with the usual saving clause. During this time,
the Lords remained sitting, and before ten o'clock the articles were
presented before that assembly.
On the following day, the prisoners were conducted before the Bar of the
House, where the articles of impeachment were read to them, and they
were desired to prepare their replies on the sixteenth day of the month.
Thus only six days were allowed for their answers; upon application,
however, two days more were granted. The prisoners were allowed to
choose counsel, and also to have a free communication with any persons,
either peers or commoners, whom they might name.
On the twenty-first of January, the King again addressed his Parliament,
and referred to the recent landing of the "Pretender" in Scotland. The
reply of the two Houses to this speech emphatically declares, "that the
landing of the Pretender hath increased their indignation against him
and his adherents, and that they were determined to do everything in
their power to assist his Majesty, not only in subduing the present
Rebellion, but in destroying the seeds and causes of it, that the like
disturbance may never rise again to impair the blessings of his
Majesty's reign."[24]
On the ninth of February the six impeached lords were brought, at eleven
in the morning, to the Court erected in Westminster Hall, wherein both
Lords and Commons were assembled. The ceremonial of opening this
celebrated Court was conducted in the following manner:--
The Lords being placed on their proper seats, and the Lord High Steward
on the woolsack, the Clerk of the Crown in the Court of Chancery, after
making three reverences to the Lord Steward, presented, on his knees,
the King's commission; which, after the usual reverences, was placed on
the table. A proclamation for silence was then heard. The High Steward
stood up and addressed the Peers, "His Majesty's commission is going to
be read; your Lordships are desired to attend."
The Peers hereupon arose, uncovered themselves, and stood while the
commission was being read. The voice of the Sergeant-at-arms exclaimed,
"God save the King!" The Herald and Gentleman Usher of the Black Rod,
after three reverences, kneeling, then presented the White Staff to his
Grace, the High Steward; upon which his Grace, attended by the Herald,
the Black Rod, and Seal Bearer, removed from the woolsack to an armed
chair which was placed on the uppermost step but one next to the throne.
The Clerk of the Crown ordered the Serjeant-at-arms to make another
proclamation for silence; and amidst the stillness, the Lieutenant of
the Tower brought in, amid an assembly of their compeers, his prisoners.
Lord Wintoun was alone absent; for he had obtained a few days of
delay.[25]
The Earl of Nithisdale pleaded guilty, with his companions in
misfortune. On Thursday, the nineteenth of January, when called upon for
his answer, his defence was couched in the following terms: "It is with
the greatest confusion," he began, "the said Earl appears at your
Lordships' Bar, under the weight of an impeachment by the Commons of
Great Britain for high treason." He went on to declare that he had ever
been a zealous assertor of the liberties of his country, and never
engaged in any design to subvert the established Government and good
laws of the kingdom.
When summoned by those who were entrusted with the administration of the
government in Scotland to Edinburgh, he did, he alleged, not obey the
summons, being assured that if he went thither he would be made a close
prisoner. He was therefore forced to abscond; for being at that time in
ill-health, a confinement in Edinburgh Castle would have endangered his
life. The Earl also stated that he had remained in privacy, until
several of the persons mentioned in the impeachment had appeared in arms
very near the place where they had lain concealed. He then
"inconsiderately and unfortunately" joined them, with four domestics
only, and proceeded in their company to the places named in the
indictment; but knew nothing of the intended insurrection until the
party "were actually in arms." After some expressions, stating that he
was deeply sensible of his offence, he confessed, with "a sorrow equal
to his crime," that he was guilty; "but referred to his hopes of mercy,
grounded on his having capitulated at Preston, where he performed the
duty of a Christian in preventing effusion of blood; and on his reliance
on his Majesty's mercy."
On being further asked by the Lord High Steward whether he had anything
to say "why judgment should not pass upon him according to law," Lord
Nithisdale recapitulated the points in his answer in so weak a voice,
that the Lord Steward reiterated the former question: "Have you pleaded
anything in arrest of judgment?" "No, my Lord, I have not," was the
reply.
The Earl of Nithisdale received the sentence of condemnation with the
other Lords; and, like them, had the misery of hearing his doom prefaced
by a long and admired harangue. The sentence was then pronounced in all
its barbarous particularities; the law being in this, as the Lord High
Steward declared, deaf to all distinctions of rank, "required that he
should pronounce them." But his Grace intimated the most ignominious and
painful parts of the sentence were usually remitted.
Lord Nithisdale, unlike Lord Widdrington and Lord Kenmure, who had
referred in terms of anguish to their wives and children, had made no
appeal on the plea of those family ties, to which few of his judges
could have been insensible. He returned to the Tower, under sentence of
death, to be saved by the heroism of a woman; according to some
accounts, of his mother;[26] but actually, by the fearless, devoted
affection of his wife.
Winifred, Countess of Nithisdale, appears, from her portrait by Kneller,
to have conjoined to an heroic contempt of danger a feminine and
delicate appearance, with great loveliness of countenance.[27] She was
descended from a family who knew no prouder recollection than that
their castle-towers had been the last to welcome the unhappy Charles the
First in the manner suited to royalty. Her mother was the Lady Elizabeth
Herbert, daughter of Edward, the second Marquis of Worcester, and author
of "The Century of Inventions." Lady Nithisdale was therefore the
great-granddaughter of that justly honoured Marquis of Worcester whose
loyalty and disinterestedness were features of a character as excellent
in private life, as benevolent, as sincere, as it was conspicuous in his
public career. Yet, so universal, so continual has been the popular
prejudice against Popery in this country, that even the virtues of this
good man could scarcely rescue him from the imputation, as Lord
Clarendon expresses it, of being "that sort of Catholics, the people
rendered odious, by accusing to be most Jesuited."
The maternal family of Lady Nithisdale were, therefore, of the same
faith with her husband, and, like his family, they had suffered deeply
for the cause of the Stuarts; and it is remarkable that, with what some
might deem infatuation, many descendants of those who had seen their
fairest possessions ravaged, their friends and kindred slain, should be
ready to suffer again. It is impossible for any reasoning to dispel the
idea that this must be a true and fixed principle, independent, in many
noble instances, of the hope of reward,--a far less enduring motive, and
one which would be apt to change with every change of fortune.
Lady Nithisdale, on her father's side, was descended from the Herberts
of Powis Castle, who were ennobled in the reign of James the First. She
was the fourth daughter of William, Marquis of Powis, who followed James
the Second, after his abdication, to France, and was created by that
monarch Duke of Powis, a title not recognised in England.[28] The
titular Duke of Powis, as he is frequently called in history, chose to
remain at St. Germains, and was at length outlawed for not returning
within a certain period. He died at St. Germains in 1696. Upon the death
of her father, Lady Winifred Herbert was placed with her elder sister,
the Lady Lucy, in the English convent at Bruges, of which Lady Lucy
eventually became Abbess. A less severe fate was, however, in store for
the younger sister.
Under these adverse circumstances, so far as related to the proper
maintenance of her father's rank in England, was Winifred Herbert
reared. How and where she met with Lord Nithisdale, and whether the
strong attachment which afterwards united them so indissolubly, was
nurtured in the saloons of St. Germains, or in the romantic haunts of
Nithisdale, we have no information to decide, neither have the
descendants of the family been able even to ascertain the date of her
marriage.
It is not improbable, however, that, before his marriage, Lord
Nithisdale visited Paris and Rome, since the practice of making what was
called "the grand tour" not only prevailed among the higher classes, but
especially among the Jacobite nobility, many of whom, as in the case of
Lord Derwentwater, were educated abroad; and this is more especially
likely to have been the case in the instance of Lord Nithisdale, since,
as Lady Nithisdale remarks in her narrative, her husband was a Roman
Catholic in a part of Scotland peculiarly adverse to that faith, "the
only support," as she calls him, "of the Catholics against the
inveteracy of the Whigs, who were very numerous in that part of
Scotland."