It has been said that no trace can be found of a printed _Secret
Commonwealth_ before 1815. The present editor is inclined to believe
that in 1699 the work was still in manuscript. In a letter of Lord
Reay’s to Mr. Samuel Pepys (Oct. 24, 1699), he says, “I have got a
manuscript since I last came to Scotland, whose author, though a
parson, after giving a very full account of the Second Sight, defends
there being no sin in it.... With the first opportunity I shall send
you a copy of his books.” This description answers very well to Mr.
Kirk’s treatise, and to no other contemporary work with which I
am acquainted, unless it be _A Discourse of the Second Sight_, by
the Rev. Mr. John Frazer, minister of Tiree and Coll. There were,
doubtless, other parsons busy with these topics; and the minister of
Rerrick informs me that several MSS. by Mr. Telfair, author of the
tract already quoted, were only dispersed about 1877. Examples of
these clerical psychical researchers may be found in C. K. Sharpe’s
prefatory notice to Law’s _Memorials_ (Edinburgh, 1818). Such an
one is the Rev. Robert Knox, who writes from Cavers to the Rev. Mr.
Wyllie on the case of Sir George Maxwell of Pollock. He dare not
attribute the mediumship of Janet Douglas “positively to an evil
cause.... _It is our ignorance of any natural agent_ that makes us
impute the effects to evil spirits” (_Memorials_, p. lxxv). Moreover,
Lord Reay writes as if his “parson” were still alive in 1699,
whereas Mr. Kirk “went to his own herd” in 1692. “I am promised the
acquaintance of this man, of which I am very covetous.” Lord Reay was
at Durness, and may not have heard of the mishap which carried the
minister of Aberfoyle into Fairyland. It may be added that Dr. Hickes
writes to Mr. Pepys about neolithic arrow heads as “a subject of near
alliance to that of the Second Sight, and of witchcraft, which is
akin to them both.” He also speaks of “a very tragical, but authentic
story told me by the Duke of Lauderdale, which happened in the family
of Sir John Dalrymple, Laird of Stair, and then Lord President. His
Grace had no sooner told it me, but my Lord President coming into
the room, he desired my Lord to tell it himself, which, altering his
countenance, he did with a very melancholick air; but it is so long
since that I dare not trust my memory with relating the particulars
of it” (June 19, 1700).
Dr. Hickes calls the first Lord Stair “John,” Scott calls him
“James.” There can be no doubt that Dr. Hickes refers to the woful
tale of the bride of Lammermoor, who died on September 12, 1669.
Law, in his _Memorials_, says she “was harled through the house”—by
spirits, he means. This “harling” or tossing about of a patient,
probably epileptic, we have noticed in many of the old stories,
as in the modern instance of “Mr. H.” Now, in his Introduction to
the _Bride of Lammermoor_, Scott gives all the authorities at his
command: Law, Symson’s _Elegie_, and Hamilton of Whitelaw’s _Satire_,
which avers that Satan seized the bride and “threw the bridegroom
from the nuptial bed.” Sir Walter was unacquainted with Dr. Hickes’
hint, which actually produces the bride’s own father as evidence
for a story which was plainly regarded as supernatural. It is most
unlucky that Dr. Hickes distrusted his memory. However, it is
something to feel assured that “a memorable story” was accepted at
the time by the family of the bride, and was known to Lauderdale.[40]
Lauderdale himself, by the way, was a psychical researcher, and
accommodated Richard Baxter with some accounts of haunted houses,
published in his _World of Spirits_. One story of a haunted house,
where a spectral hand appeared, he gives on the authority of “the
Rev. James Sharp,” afterwards the famous Archbishop. Lauderdale
inspected the famed Loudun nuns, and saw only “wanton wenches singing
baudy songs in French.” His letter to Mr. Baxter is dated March 12,
1659. His best haunted house is of the Epworth type.
_Printed by_ BALLANTYNE, HANSON & CO.
_Edinburgh and London_