the boat, spear in hand and the long rope from its slender shaft coiled
at his feet. He peered intently into the water as the boat moved slowly
along. Presently every muscle of him was set: he bent backward for a
cast, pointed his spear with steady hands to a spot in the river, and
quick as a flash it pierced the water until its ten-foot shaft was seen
no more. As quickly was it recovered by Tim's active hands catching the
flying line to haul it in; and on its prongs squirmed a monstrous fish
of the sucker tribe,--a red-horse,--pinned through and through by his
unerring aim.
Shoal and eddy, swirl and silent pool, yielded good sport and harvest,
as haunts of bass and salmon were entered and passed, until the inviting
mouth of Little Sandy Creek suggested rest for the boatmen and a stroll
for the fishers. A neat hotel, clean and well kept for so wild a region,
harbors lumbermen, rivermen, and those who love the rod and gun. There
are many such attractive centres along the banks of Elk, with charming
camping-grounds, where neighboring hospitality abounds, and chickens,
eggs, milk, corn, and bacon are abundant and cheap, and the finest
bass-and other fishing possible, from Queen's Shoal--four miles away--to
the old dam above Charleston. Above Queen's Shoal the region increases
in wildness and attractiveness for traveller or sportsman. Trout in
plenty find homes in the mountain-tributaries of Upper Elk; deer abound,
and all manner of smaller game. Where nature does her best work, man is
apt to do but little. Nature farms the Elk country.
Bright moonlight, the early morning after the sun is up, and from a
couple of hours after mid-day until the mountain-shadows strike the
water in the evening, are the best times to troll for bass. If so
minded, they will rise to a fly at such times in the rapids; but no
allurement excepting the troll will bring them to the surface in still
water. When the river is rising, or the water is clouded with mud or
drift, bass scorn all surface-diet; but the live minnow or crawfish,
hellgramite or fish-worm, will capture them on trout-line or hook
attached to the soul-absorbing bob. A clothes-line wire cable, furnished
with well-assorted hooks baited with cotton, dough, and cheese well
mixed together, and stretched in eddy-water when the river is muddy,
will give fine reward in carp, white perch, catfish, turtles, garfish,
and sweet revenge on the bait-stealing guana.
After nooning, lunch, and a quiet loaf, the party sped homeward with the
current, handling rods and trolls as salmon and bass demanded lively
attention. Shooting a rapid, and out into a deep pool at its foot, the
Doctor's boat struck a snag, and he, having a resisting power equal to
that of a billiard-ball, put his heels where his head had been, and
disappeared under the water, to pop up again instantly, sputtering and
spitting, like a jug full of yeast with a corn-cob stopper.
"Oh, Hickey! Whoop!" exclaimed Martha, as she went off in wild screams
of laughter. "Kin you swim?" she asked, with the coolness of the
mountain-maiden she was.
"No, no," sputtered the Doctor.
"I reckon you'll tow good. Jest gimme your han', an' keep your feet
down, an' me an' Alec 'ill tow you ashore to dreen. Hit's like you're
purty wet."
He was soon landed by the stalwart Martha and Alec, and, while he
attitudinized for draining, the Professor amused himself with taking an
instantaneous photograph.
"By gum! he mought hev drownded," said Tim Price to the Professor. "The
Doctor hain't a good shape fer towin', but he floats higher than any
craft of his length I ever seed on Elk River."
Just as the golden light of evening cast its sheen upon the river the
camp-tents came in sight, where a group of natives stood waiting the
arrival of the fishers to "hear what luck they'd hed."
Colonel Bangem and Bess carried off equal honors in greatest
count,--sixty-two bass and five salmon each. Martha, with her
five-pounder, was weight champion. Mrs. Bangem had the only blue pike.
The Professor claimed that, besides his twoscore fish, he had
illustrations enough for a comic annual; and the Doctor asserted that he
knew more about bass than any of them, for he had been down where they
lived, and was of the opinion that he had swallowed a couple.
Bess Bangem said to the Professor, as they went up the bank together, "I
had a great mind to count you in with my fish, to beat father; but I
caught you long ago, so it would not have been fair."
TOBE HODGE.
ON A NOBLE CHARACTER MARRED BY LITTLENESS.
As Moscow's splendors trench on narrow lanes,
The wonder, brimming every traveller's eyes,
To disappointment's sudden darkness wanes
At finding meanness near such grandeur lies.
O human city! built on Moscow's plan,
Thy great and little touch each other so,
Let me forbear, and, as an erring man,
Make my approaches wisely, from below,
Hasting through all the narrow and the base
Before I stand where all is high and vast:
After the dark, let glory light my face,
Thy shining greatness break upon me _last_.
CHARLOTTE FISKE BATES.
THE SCOTTISH CROFTERS.
It is hard to dispel the halo which poetry and romance have thrown about
the Scottish Highlander and see him simply as he appears in every-day
life. And indeed, all fiction aside, there is in his history and
character much that is most admirable and noble. On many a terrible
battle-field his courage has been unsurpassed. His brave and tireless
struggle for existence where both climate and soil are unfriendly is
equally worthy of respect. Then, too, his sterling honesty and
independence in speech and action and his high moral and religious
qualities combine to make him a valuable citizen.
Such considerations account in part for the interest which has been
excited in England by the claims of the Scottish crofters. There are,
however, other reasons why so much attention has of late been given to
their complaints. Their poverty and hardships have long been known in
England. The reports made by the Emigration Commissioners in 1841 and by
Sir John McNeil a few years later contain accounts of miserably small
and unproductive holdings, of wretched hovels for dwellings, of lack of
enterprise and interest in making improvements, of curtailment of
pasture, of high rents and insecurity of tenure, very similar to those
found on the pages of the report of the late Royal Commission. While in
this interval the condition of the crofters has but slightly, if at all,
improved, there has been a very considerable improvement in the
condition of the middle and lower classes of the people in other parts
of Scotland and in England. The masses of the people have better houses,
better food and clothing, while with the development of the school
system and the newspaper press general intelligence has greatly
increased. The accounts of the poverty and wretchedness of the crofters
now reach the public much more quickly and make a much deeper impression
on all classes than they did forty years ago. While these small farmers
are not numerous,--there are probably not more than four thousand
families in need of relief,--many of their kinsmen elsewhere have
acquired wealth and influence and have been able to plead their cause
with good effect. In this country "The Scottish Land League" has issued
in "The Cry of the Crofter" an eloquent plea for help to carry on the
agitation to a successful issue.
Another reason for the increased attention that has lately been given to
these claims is found in the rapidly-growing tendency to concede to the
landlord fewer and fewer and to the tenant more and more rights in the
land. The recent extension of the suffrage, giving votes to nearly two
millions of agricultural and other laborers, leads politicians to go as
far as possible in favoring new legislation in the interest of tenants
and laborers. The crofters' case has therefore come to be of special
interest as a part of the general land question which has of late
received so much attention from the English press and Parliament, and
which is pretty certain to be prominent for several years to come.
Those who are familiar only with the relations existing between landlord
and tenant in this country are naturally surprised to find the crofter
demanding that his landlord shall (1) give him the use of more land,
(2) reduce his rent, (3) pay him on leaving his holding for all his
improvements, and (4) not accept in his stead another tenant, even
though the latter may be anxious to take the holding at a higher figure
or turn him out for any other reason. In addition to all this, the
crofters demand that the government shall advance them money to enable
them to build suitable houses and improve and stock their farms. An
American tenant who should make such demands would be considered insane.
No such view of the crofters' claims, however, is taken in England and
Scotland.
What, then, are the grounds upon which these extensive claims are based?
Why should the crofter claim a right to have his holding enlarged and to
have the land at a lower rent than some one else may be willing to pay?
The reasons are to be found partly in his history, traditions, and
circumstances, and partly in the present tendency of the legislation and
discussions relating to the ownership and occupation of land.
Under the old clan system, to which the crofter is accustomed to trace
his claims, the land was owned by the chief and clansmen in common, and
allotments and reallotments were made from time to time to individual
clansmen, each of whom had a right to some portion of the land, while
the commons were very extensive. Rent or service was paid to the chief,
who had more or less control over the clan lands and often possessed an
estate in severalty, with many personal dependants. In many cases the
power of the chief was great and tyrannical, and many of the clansmen
were in a somewhat servile condition; but the more influential clansmen
seem sometimes to have retained permanent possession of their
allotments. Long ago sub-letting became common, and hard services were
often exacted of the sub-tenants, whose lot was frequently a most
unhappy one. The modern cottar, as well as the squatter, had his
representative in the dependant of the chief, or clansman, or in the
outlaw or vagrant member of another clan who came to build his rude
cabin wherever he could find a sheltered and unoccupied spot. No doubt
many of the sub-tenants, even where they held originally by base and
uncertain services and at the will of their superior, came in time, like
the English copyholder, to have a generally-recognized right to the
permanent possession of their holdings, while custom tended to fix the
character and quantity of their services. The population was not
numerous, and it was probably not difficult for every man to secure a
plot of land of some sort.
The crofters of to-day have lost for the most part the traditions of the
drawbacks and hardships of this ancient system, with its oppressive
services, to which many of their ancestors were subject, and have
commonly retained only the tradition of the right which every clansman
had to some portion of the clan lands. In 1745 the clan organizations
were abolished and the chiefs transformed into landlords and invested
with the fee-simple of the land. But, while changes were gradually made
on some estates in the direction of conformity to the English system,
most of the old customary rights of the people continued to be
recognized. The tenant was commonly allowed to occupy his holding from
year to year without interruption. Money rent gradually took the place
of service or rent in kind, but the amount exacted does not seem to have
been often increased arbitrarily. The rights of common, which were often
of great value, were respected.
The descendants and successors, however, of the old Scotch lairds did
not always display the same regard for prescriptive rights and usages.
In some cases the extravagance and bankruptcy of the old owners caused
the titles to pass to Englishmen, while in others the inheritors of the
estates were more and more inclined to insist upon their legal rights
and to introduce in the management of their property rules similar to
those in use in England. Early in the present century sheep-farming was
found to be profitable, and many large areas of glen and mountain were
cleared of the greater part of their population and converted into
sheep-farms. Many of the mountainous parts of Scotland are of little use
for agricultural purposes. Formerly the crofters used large tracts as
summer pastures for their small herds of inferior stock. By and by the
proprietors found that large droves of better breeds of sheep could be
kept on these mountain-pastures. The crofters were too poor to undertake
the management of the large sheep-farms into which it was apparently
most profitable to divide these mountain-lands, and sheep-farmers from
the south became the tenants. By introducing sheep-farming on a large
scale the landlords were able, they claimed, to use hundreds of
thousands of acres which before were of comparatively little value. The
large flocks of sheep could not, however, be kept without having the
lower slopes of the mountains on which to winter. It was these slopes
that the crofters commonly used for pasture, below which, in the straths
and glens, were their holdings and dwellings. The ruins of cottages, or
patches of green here and there where cottages stood, mark the sites of
many little holdings from which the crofters and their families were
turned out many years ago in order to make room for sheep-farms. The
proprietors sometimes recognized the rights of these native tenants, and
gave them new holdings in exchange for the old ones. The new crofts were
often nearer the sea, where the land was less favorable for grazing and
where the rights of common were less valuable, but the occupants had
better opportunities for supplementing their incomes from the land by
fishing and by gathering sea-weed for kelp, from which iodine was made.
There were, however, great numbers who were not supplied with new
crofts, but turned away from their old homes and left to shift for
themselves. Some of these, too poor to go elsewhere, built rude huts
wherever they could find a convenient spot, and thus increased the ranks
of the squatters. Others were allowed to share the already too small
holdings of their more fortunate brethren, while others, again, found
their way to the lowlands and cities of the south or to America. The
traditions of the hardships and sufferings endured by some of these
evicted crofters are still kept alive in the prosperous homes of their
children and grandchildren on this side of the Atlantic. The process of
clearing off the crofters went on for many years. In 1849 Hugh Miller,
in trying to arouse public sentiment against it, declared that, "while
the law is banishing its tens for terms of seven and fourteen
years,--the penalty of deep-dyed crimes,--irresponsible and infatuated
power is banishing its thousands for no crime whatever."
Lately, owing to foreign competition and the deterioration of the land
that has been used for many years as sheep-pastures, sheep-farming has
become much less profitable than formerly, and many large tenants have
in consequence given up their farms. The enthusiasm for deer-hunting
has, however, increased with the increase of wealth and leisure among
Englishmen, and immense tracts, amounting altogether to nearly two
millions of acres, have been turned into deer-forests, yielding, as a
rule, a slightly higher rent than was paid by the crofters and
sheep-farmers. Much of this land is either unfit for agricultural
purposes or could not at present be cultivated with profit. Some of it,
however, is fertile, or well suited for grazing, and greatly coveted by
the crofters. The deer and other game often destroy or injure the crops
of the adjoining holdings, and thus add to the troubles of the occupants
and increase their indignation at the land's being used to raise sheep
and "vermin" instead of men. Most Americans have had intimations of this
feeling through the accounts of the hostility that has been shown to our
countryman, Mr. Winans, whose deer-forest is said to cover two hundred
square miles. While evictions are much less common than they were two or
three generations ago, there has all along been a disposition on the
part of the proprietors to enclose in their sheep-farms and deer-forests
lands that were formerly tilled or used as commons by the crofters and
cottars. In comparison with the crofter of to-day the sub-tenant of a
hundred years ago had, as a rule, more land for tillage, a far wider
range of pasture for his stock, and "greater freedom in regard to the
natural produce of the river and moor."
Many of the crofters belong to families which have lived on the same
holdings for generations. It is a common experience everywhere that
long-continued use begets and fosters the feeling of ownership. This is
especially true when, as in the crofter's case, there is so much in the
history and traditions of the people and the property that tends to
establish a right of possession. Besides, the crofter, or one of his
ancestors, has in most cases built the house and made other
improvements: sometimes he has reclaimed the land itself and changed a
barren waste into a garden. The labor and money which he and his
ancestors have expended in improving the place seem to him to give him
an additional right to occupy it always. It is his holding and his home,
the home of his fathers and of his family. While he may be unable to
resist the power of his landlord, and may have no legal security for his
rights and interests, he regards the curtailment of his privileges or
the increase of his rent as unjust, and eviction as a terrible outrage.
"The extermination of the Highlanders," says one of their kinsmen, "has
been carried on for many years as systematically and persistently as
that of the North-American Indians.... Who can withhold sympathy as
whole families have turned to take a last look at the heavens red with
their burning homes? The poor people shed no tears, for there was in
their hearts that which stifled such signs of emotion: they were
absorbed in despair. They were forced away from that which was dear to
their hearts, and their patriotism was treated with contemptuous
mockery.... There are various ways in which the crime of murder is
perpetrated. There are killings which are effected by the unjust and
cruel denying of lands to our fellow-creatures to enable them to obtain
food and raiment."
The feeling of the crofters in regard to increase of rent and eviction
is very similar to that of the Irish tenantry. Very recently Mr. Parnell
uttered sentiments which both would accept as their own. "I trust," he
said, "that when any individual feels disposed to violate the divine
commandment by taking, under such circumstances, that which does not
belong to him, he will feel within him the promptings of patriotism and
religion, and that he will turn away from the temptation. Let him
remember that he is doing a great injustice to his country and his
class,--that though he may perhaps benefit materially for a while, yet
that ill-gotten gains will not prosper." Where crofters have been
evicted, or have had their privileges curtailed or their rent raised,
they and their descendants do not soon forget the grievance. Claims have
recently been made for lands which the crofters have not occupied for
two or three generations.
The Scotch landlords are not, as a rule, cruel or unjust. On the
contrary, some of them are exceedingly kind and generous to their
tenants, and have spent large sums of money in making improvements which
add greatly to the prosperity and comfort of those who live on their
estates. Many of them recognize the right of their tenants to occupy
their holdings without interruption so long as the rent is paid
regularly. The natural tendency, however, to insist upon their legal
rights and to make the most they can out of their estates has led to not
a few cases of hardship and injustice. A few such instances in a
community are talked over for years, and often seriously interfere with
the contentment and industry of many families. The traditions and
recollections of the many evictions which have occurred during this
century have often caused the motives of the best landlords to be
suspected and their most benevolent acts to be misunderstood by their
tenants. The crofter system has been an extremely bad one in many
respects. There cannot be much interest in making improvements where the
tenant must build the houses, fences, stables, etc., but has no
guarantee that he will not be turned out of his holding or have his rent
so increased as practically to compel him to leave the place. The
kindness and humanity of the landlords have in many instances mitigated
the worst evils of the system; but, while human nature remains as it is,
no matter how just and generous individual landlords may be, general
prosperity and contentment are impossible under the present
arrangements. The discontent and discouragement caused by the action of
the less kind and considerate landlords and agents frequently extend to
crofters who have no just grounds of complaint, and troubles and
hardships resulting from idleness or improvidence or other causes are
often attributed to the injustice of the laws or the cruelty of the
landlords.
The poverty of the crofter often renders his condition deplorable. His
holding and right of common have been curtailed by the landlord, or he
has sub-divided them among his sons or kinsmen, until it would be
impossible for the produce of the soil to sustain the population, even
if no rent whatever were charged. Some years ago he was able to increase
his income by gathering sea-weed for kelp; but latterly, since iodine
can be obtained more cheaply from other sources, the demand for this
product has ceased. In some places the fishing is valuable, enabling him
to supply his family with food for a part of the year, and bringing him
money besides. He is, however, often too poor to provide the necessary
boats and nets, while in many places the absence of good harbors and
landings is a most serious drawback to the fishing industry. Sometimes
he supplements his income by spending a few months of the year in the
low country and obtaining work there. In most cases, however, a large
part of his income must be derived from the land. If there were plenty
of employment to be had, the little holding would do very well as a
garden, and the stock which he could keep on the common would add
greatly to his comfort. As things now are, he must look chiefly to the
land both for his subsistence and his rent, and, with an unfruitful soil
and an unfriendly climate, he is often on the verge of want.