A.D. 1691-1702.
BRITISH SOVEREIGN:--William III., 1688-1703.
Negotiations with the Highland chiefs--Massacre of Glencoe
--Master of Stair--King William--Subsequent enquiry--State
of Highlands during William’s reign--Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat.
During 1690 and 1691 the Jacobites caused the government much trouble
and anxiety by their ceaseless plotting to get up an insurrection,
in which they were to be assisted by supplies from France. Many
men, professedly loyal to King William, gave, from various motives,
their secret countenance to these attempts; and the Highlanders
especially proved a galling and distracting thorn in the side of the
government. As early as 1690, Lord Tarbet, (subsequently Earl of
Cromarty,) proposed a scheme for the quieting of the Highlands, which
Lord Breadalbane offered to carry into execution; but it was at the
time abandoned. In 1691, however, negotiations were again renewed,
and, as has been seen, Breadalbane was intrusted with a sum of money
to distribute among the chiefs, or rather to buy up the claims which
Argyle and other superiors had over their feudal vassals, and which
was the real cause of the strife and dissatisfaction existing in the
Highlands. The Secretary of State, Sir John Dalrymple, known as the
Master of Stair, son of the Earl of Stair, appears latterly to have
been at the bottom of the scheme, and was certainly most anxious that
it should be successfully and speedily carried out, having at first
apparently no thought of resorting to measures of cruel severity.
[Illustration: First Earl of Breadalbane.
From Original Painting in possession of Lady Elizabeth Pringle.]
Not much appears to have resulted from the meeting which Breadalbane
had with the chiefs at Achallader; indeed, he showed very little
of an earnest desire for conciliation, as his threatening conduct
induced Alexander Macdonald, or MacIan, of Glencoe, to leave the
meeting abruptly for his own safety. Between Breadalbane, who was
a Campbell, and Macdonald much bad blood appears to have existed;
indeed, nothing but the bitterest hatred was cherished by the whole
tribe of the Macdonalds to the Campbells, as the latter had from
time to time, oftener by foul than by fair means, ousted the former
from their once extensive possessions. The Macdonalds of Glencoe
especially, still considered the lands and property of the Campbells
as their own, and without hesitation supplied their wants out of
the numerous herds of the latter. It was some recent raid of this
sort which roused the wrath of Breadalbane; and on poor Macdonald’s
head lighted all the blame and the punishment of the ineffectual
negotiation. What became of the money has never been clearly
ascertained; but much can be inferred from Breadalbane’s answer
when asked afterwards by Lord Nottingham to account for it, “The
money is spent, the Highlands are quiet, and this is the only way of
accounting among friends.”
Like many of his contemporaries, Breadalbane attached himself
openly to King William’s government only because it was for the
time the winning side; while at the same time he professed secretly
to be attached to the interest of the exiled King James. He told
the Highland chiefs that in urging them to enter into terms with
the government, he had their own interests and those of King James
at heart; for there being then “no other appearance of relief, he
thought they could not do better than sue for a cessation, which
would be a breathing to them, and give them time to represent their
circumstances to King James.”[636] A contemporary characterises him
as being “cunning as a fox; wise as a serpent; but as slippery as an
eel. No government can trust him but where his own private interest
is in view.”[637]
As the chiefs did not seem in any hurry to come to terms, a
proclamation was issued, in August 1691, requiring them to take the
oath of allegiance before the 1st of January 1692, threatening all
those who did not comply with “letters of fire and sword.” This had
the proper effect, as, one by one, the chiefs swore fealty to the
government, Macdonald of Glencoe, from pride or some other reason,
being the last to comply with the terms of the proclamation. The
difficulty in getting the chiefs to come to terms, and thus allowing
the government to pursue its other schemes without anxiety, seems
at last to have irritated Sir John Dalrymple so much against them,
that latterly he eagerly desired that some, and especially the
various tribes of Macdonalds, might hold out beyond the time, in
order that an example might be made of them by putting into execution
the penalty attached to the non-fulfilment of the terms of the
proclamation. In a letter to Breadalbane of Dec. 2d, he thinks “the
clan Donald must be rooted out and Lochiel,” and is doubtful whether
the money “had been better employed to settle the Highlands, or to
ravage them.” In another written on the following day he mentions
with approval Breadalbane’s “mauling scheme,” artfully rousing the
latter’s indignation by speaking of the chiefs’ ungratefulness to
him, using at the same time the significant phrase _delenda est
Carthago_. He and Breadalbane seemed however likely to be cheated of
their vengeance, for even the obstinate and hated Mac Ian himself,
after holding out to the very last day, hastened to fulfil the
requirements of the proclamation, and thus place himself beyond the
power of the strong arm of the law.
On the 31st of December, 1691, Glencoe made his way to Fort-William,
and presented himself to Colonel Hill the governor, asking him
to administer the required oath of allegiance. The Colonel,
however, declined to act, on the ground, that according to the
proclamation, the civil magistrate alone could administer them.
Glencoe remonstrated with Hill on account of the exigency of the
case, as there was not any magistrate whom he could reach before
the expiration of that day, but Hill persisted in asserting that
it was out of his power to act in the matter. He, however advised
Glencoe to proceed instantly to Inverary, giving him at the same
time a letter to Sir Colin Campbell of Ardkinglass, sheriff of
Argyleshire, begging him to receive Glencoe as “a lost sheep,” and
to administer to him the necessary oaths. Hill also gave Glencoe a
letter of protection, and an assurance that no proceedings should be
instituted against him under the proclamation, till he should have an
opportunity of laying his case before the king or the privy council.
Glencoe left Fort-William immediately, and so great was his anxiety
to reach Inverary with as little delay as possible, that although
his way lay through mountains almost impassable, and although the
country was deeply covered with snow, he proceeded on his journey
without even stopping to see his family, though he passed within half
a mile of his own house. On arriving at Inverary, Sir Colin Campbell
was absent, and he had to wait three days till his return, Sir Colin
having been prevented from reaching Inverary sooner, on account of
the badness of the weather. As the time allowed by the proclamation
for taking the oaths had expired, Sir Colin declined at first to
swear Glencoe, alleging that it would be of no use to take the
oaths; but Glencoe having first importuned him with tears to receive
from him the oath of allegiance, and having thereafter threatened
to protest against the sheriff should he refuse to act, Sir Colin
yielded, and administered the oaths to Glencoe and his attendants
on the 6th of January. Glencoe, thereupon, returned home in perfect
reliance that having done his utmost to comply with the injunction of
the government, he was free from danger.
Shortly after this, Campbell transmitted to Colin Campbell,
sheriff-clerk of Argyle, who was then in Edinburgh, the certificate
of Glencoe’s oath on the same paper with other certificates, sending
at the same time the letter which he had received from Hill. Campbell
showed this paper with Hill’s letter to several privy councillors,
among whom was the Earl of Stair, all of whom were of opinion
that the certificate could not be received without a warrant from
the king. Instead, however, of laying the matter before the privy
council, or informing Glencoe of the rejection of the certificate,
that he might petition the king, Campbell gave in the paper to
the clerks of the council with Glencoe’s certificate “delete and
obliterate.”
Whether this was done at the instigation of Secretary Dalrymple, it
is impossible to say; but it is not improbable that this man--who,
a few weeks before, had exulted[638] that as the winter was the
only season in which the Highlanders could not escape, they could
easily be destroyed “in the cold long nights”--was not an indifferent
spectator to Campbell’s proceedings. In fact, it appears that the
secretary contemplated the total extirpation of the clans, for,
in a letter to Sir Thomas Livingston, commander of the forces in
Scotland, dated January 7th, he says, “You know in general that these
troops posted at Inverness and Inverlochie, will be ordered to take
in the house of Innergarie, and to destroy entirely the country of
Lochaber, Lochiel’s lands, Keppoch’s, Glengarie’s, and Glencoe,” and
he adds, “I assure you your power shall be full enough, and I hope
the soldiers will not trouble the government with prisoners.” The
Macdonalds were chiefly marked out by him for destruction, and after
saying, in a letter of the 9th, that he could have wished that they
“had not divided” on the question of taking the oath of indemnity, he
expresses his regret to find that Keppoch and Glencoe were safe. When
he heard two days after from Argyle, that Glencoe had not managed to
take the oaths within the time prescribed, he expressed a joy which
might be called fiendish, and set himself busily to take proper
advantage of the opportunity.[639] _Delenda est Carthago._
That no time might be lost in enforcing the penalties in the
proclamation, now that the time allowed for taking the oath of
allegiance had expired, instructions of rather an equivocal nature,
signed and countersigned by the king on the 11th of January, were
sent down by young Stair to Sir Thomas Livingston, enclosed in
a letter from the secretary of same date. By the instructions,
Livingston was ordered “to march the troops against the rebels who
had not taken the benefit of the indemnity, and to destroy them by
fire and sword;” but lest such a course might render them desperate,
he was _allowed_ to “give terms and quarters, but in this manner
only, that chieftains and heritors, or leaders, be prisoners of war,
their lives only safe, and all other things in mercy, they taking the
oath of allegiance, and the community taking the oath of allegiance,
and rendering their arms, and submitting to the government, are to
have quarters, and indemnity for their lives and fortunes, and to
be protected from the soldiers.” As a hint to Livingston how to act
under the discretionary power with which these instructions vested
him, Dalrymple says in his letter containing them, “I have no great
kindness to Keppoch nor Glencoe, and it is well that people are in
mercy, and then just now my Lord Argyle tells me that Glencoe hath
not taken the oath, at which I rejoice. It is a great work of charity
to be exact in rooting out that damnable sect, the worst of the
Highlands.”
The purport of this letter could not be misunderstood; but lest
Livingston might not feel disposed to imbrue his hands in the blood
of Glencoe and his people, additional instructions bearing the
date (in Stair’s handwriting) of January 16th, and also signed and
countersigned by King William, were despatched to Livingston by the
Master of Stair, ordering him to extirpate the whole clan. In the
letter containing these instructions, Dalrymple informs Livingston
that “the king does not at all incline to receive any after the diet
but in mercy,” but he artfully adds, “but for a just example of
vengeance, I entreat the thieving tribe of Glencoe may be rooted out
to purpose.” Lest, however, Livingston might hesitate, a duplicate
of these additional instructions[640] was sent at the same time by
Secretary Dalrymple to Colonel Hill, the governor of Fort-William,
with a letter of an import similar to that sent to Livingston. From
the following extract it would appear that not only the Earl of
Breadalbane, but also the Earl of Argyle, was privy to this infamous
transaction. “The Earls of Argyle and Breadalbane have promised that
they (the Macdonalds of Glencoe) shall have no retreat in their
bounds, the passes to Rannoch would be secured, and the hazard
certified to the laird of Weems to reset them; in that case Argyle’s
detachment with a party that may be posted in Island Stalker must cut
them off.”
Preparatory to putting the butchering warrant in execution, a party
of Argyle’s regiment, to the number of 120 men, under the command
of Captain Campbell of Glenlyon, was ordered to proceed to Glencoe,
and take up their quarters there, about the end of January or
beginning of February. On approaching the Glen, they were met by
John Macdonald, the elder son of the chief, at the head of about
20 men, who demanded from Campbell the reason of his coming into a
peaceful country with a military force; Glenlyon and two subalterns
who were with him explained that they came as friends, and that
their sole object was to obtain suitable quarters, where they could
conveniently collect the arrears of cess and hearth-money,--a new
tax laid on by the Scottish parliament in 1690,--in proof of which,
Lieutenant Lindsay produced the instructions of Colonel Hill to that
effect. They thereupon received a hearty welcome, and were hospitably
entertained by Glencoe and his people till the fatal morning of the
massacre. Indeed, so familiar was Glenlyon, that scarcely a day
passed that he did not visit the house of Alexander Macdonald, the
younger son of the chief, who was married to Glenlyon’s niece, the
sister of Rob Roy, and take his “morning drink,” agreeably to the
most approved practice of Highland hospitality.
If Secretary Dalrymple imagined that Livingston was disinclined to
follow his instructions he was mistaken, for immediately on receipt
of them he wrote Lieutenant-colonel Hamilton, who had been fixed upon
by the secretary to be the executioner, expressing his satisfaction
that Glencoe had not taken the oath within the period prescribed, and
urging him, if he wished to approve himself to the government, to
execute his commission with the utmost rigour, and “not to trouble
the government with prisoners.” In the meantime, the Master of Stair
was taking every precaution that the deed should be done suddenly
and effectively, and accordingly, on the 13th of January he wrote
two letters, one to Livingston, and the other to Hill, urging them
on. Addressing the former, he says, “I am glad Glencoe did not come
in within the time prefixed; I hope what is done there may be in
earnest, since the rest are not in a condition to draw together help.
I think to harry (plunder) their cattle and burn their houses is but
to render them desperate lawless men to rob their neighbours, but
I believe you will be satisfied, it were a great advantage to the
nation that thieving tribe were rooted out and cut off; it must be
quietly done, otherwise they will make shift for both their men and
their cattle.” And in his letter to Hill he says, “Pray, when the
thing concerning Glencoe is resolved, let it be secret and sudden,
otherwise the men will shift you, and better not meddle with them
than not to do it to purpose, to cut off that nest of robbers who
have fallen in the mercy of the law, now when there is force and
opportunity, whereby the king’s justice will be as conspicuous and
useful as his clemency to others. I apprehend the storm is so great
that for some time you can do little, but so soon as possible I know
you will be at work, for these false people will do nothing, but as
they see you in a condition to do with them.”
In pursuance of these fresh instructions from the secretary, Hill, on
the 12th of February, sent orders to Hamilton, forthwith to execute
the fatal commission. Accordingly, on the same day, Hamilton directed
Major Robert Duncanson of Argyle’s regiment to proceed immediately
with a detachment of that regiment to Glencoe, so as to reach the
post which had been assigned him by five o’clock the following
morning, at which hour Hamilton promised to reach another post with
a party of Hill’s regiment. Whether Duncanson, who appears to have
been a Campbell,[641] was averse to take an active personal part in
the bloody tragedy about to be enacted, is a question that cannot
now be solved; but it may have been from some repugnance to act in
person that immediately on receipt of Hamilton’s order, he despatched
another order from himself to Captain Campbell of Glenlyon, then
living in Glencoe, with instructions to fall upon the Macdonalds
precisely at five o’clock the following morning, and put all to the
sword under seventy years of age.[642]
Glenlyon appears to have been a man equal to any kind of loathsome
work, especially against a Macdonald; one who
“Could smile, and murder while he smiled.”
With this sanguinary order in his pocket, and with his mind made up
unhesitatingly and rigorously to execute it, he did not hesitate
to spend the eve of the massacre playing at cards with John and
Alexander Macdonald, the sons of the chief, to wish them good night
at parting, and to accept an invitation from Glencoe himself to dine
with him the following day. Little suspecting the intended butchery,
Glencoe and his sons retired to rest at their usual hour; but early
in the morning, while the preparations for the intended massacre
were going on, John Macdonald, the elder son of the chief, hearing
the sound of voices about his house, grew alarmed, and jumping out
of bed threw on his clothes and went to Inverriggen, where Glenlyon
was quartered, to ascertain the cause of the unusual bustle which had
interrupted his nocturnal slumbers. To his great surprise he found
the soldiers all in motion, as if preparing for some enterprise,
which induced him to inquire at Captain Campbell the object of
these extraordinary preparations at such an early hour. The anxiety
with which young Macdonald pressed his question, indicating a
secret distrust on his part, Campbell endeavoured by professions of
friendship to lull his suspicions, and pretended that his sole design
was to march against some of Glengarry’s men. As John Macdonald, the
younger son of Glencoe, was married to Glenlyon’s niece, that crafty
knave referred to his connexion with the family of Glencoe, and put
it to the young man, whether, if he intended any thing hostile to
the clan, he would not have provided for the safety of his niece and
her husband. Macdonald, apparently satisfied with this explanation,
returned home and retired again to rest, but he had not been long
in bed when his servant, who, apprehensive of the real intentions
of Glenlyon and his party, had prevented Macdonald from sleeping,
informed him of the approach of a party of men towards the house.
Jumping immediately out of bed he ran to the door, and perceiving a
body of about 20 soldiers with muskets and fixed bayonets coming in
the direction of his house, he fled to a hill in the neighbourhood,
where he was joined by his brother Alexander, who had escaped from
the scene of carnage, after being wakened from sleep by his servant.
The massacre commenced about five o’clock in the morning at
three different places at once. Glenlyon, with a barbarity which
fortunately for society has few parallels, undertook to butcher his
own hospitable landlord and the other inhabitants of Inverriggen,
where he and a party of his men were quartered, and despatched
Lieutenant Lindsay with another party of soldiers to Glencoe’s
house to cut off the unsuspecting chief. Under the pretence of a
friendly visit, he and his party obtained admission into the house.
Glencoe was in bed, and while in the act of rising to receive his
cruel visitors, was basely shot at by two of the soldiers, and fell
lifeless into the arms of his wife. The lady in the extremity of her
anguish leaped out of bed and put on her clothes, but the ruffians
stripped her naked, pulled the rings off her fingers with their
teeth, and treated her so cruelly that she died the following day.
The party also killed two men whom they found in the house, and
wounded a third named Duncan Don, who came occasionally to Glencoe
with letters from Braemar.
While the butchery was going on in Glencoe’s house, Glenlyon was
busily doing his bloody work at Inverriggen, where his own host was
shot by his order. Here the party seized nine men, whom they first
bound hand and foot, after which they shot them one by one. Glenlyon
was desirous of saving the life of a young man about twenty years
of age, but one Captain Drummond shot him dead. The same officer,
impelled by a thirst for blood, ran his dagger through the body of
a boy who had grasped Campbell by the legs and was supplicating for
mercy.
[Illustration: Glencoe.]
A third party under the command of one Sergeant Barker, which was
quartered in the village of Auchnaion, fired upon a body of nine
men whom they observed in a house in the village sitting before a
fire. Among these was the laird of Auchintriaten, who was killed on
the spot, along with four more of the party. This gentleman had at
the time a protection in his pocket from Colonel Hill, which he
had received three months before. The remainder of the party in the
house, two or three of whom were wounded, escaped by the back of the
house, with the exception of a brother of Auchintriaten, who having
been seized by Barker, requested him as a favour not to despatch him
in the house but to kill him without. The sergeant consented, on
account of having shared his generous hospitality; but when brought
out he threw his plaid, which he had kept loose, over the faces of
the soldiers who were appointed to shoot him, and thus escaped.
Besides the slaughter at these three places, there were some
persons dragged from their beds and murdered in other parts of
the Glen, among whom was an old man of eighty years of age; in
all, 38 persons were slaughtered. The whole male population under
70 years of age, amounting to 200, would in all likelihood have
been cut off, if, fortunately for them, a party of 400 men under
Lieutenant-colonel Hamilton, who was principally charged with the
execution of the sanguinary warrant, had not been prevented by the
severity of the weather from reaching the Glen till eleven o’clock,
six hours after the slaughter, by which time the whole surviving
male inhabitants, warned of their danger and of the fate of their
chief and other sufferers, had fled to the hills. Ignorant of this
latter circumstance, Hamilton, on arriving at the pass, appointed
several parties to proceed to different parts of the Glen, with
orders to take no prisoners, but to kill all the men that came in
their way. They had not, however, proceeded far when they fell in
with Major Duncanson’s party, by whom they were informed of the
events of the morning, and who told them that as the survivors had
escaped to the hills, they had nothing to do but to burn the houses,
and carry off the cattle. They accordingly set fire to the houses,
and having collected the cattle and effects in the Glen, carried
them to Inverlochy, where they were divided among the officers of
the garrison. That Hamilton would have executed his commission to
the very letter, is evident from the fact, that an old man, above
seventy, the only remaining male inhabitant of the desolate vale they
fell in with, was put to death by his orders.
After the destruction of the houses, a heart-rending scene ensued.
Ejected from their dwellings by the devouring element, aged matrons,
women with child, and mothers, with infants at their breasts
and followed by children on foot, clinging to them with all the
solicitude and anxiety of helplessness, were to be seen wending their
way, almost in a state of nudity, towards the mountains in quest of
some friendly hovel, beneath whose roof they might seek shelter from
the pitiless tempest and deplore their unhappy fate. But as there
were no houses within the distance of several miles, and as these
could only be reached by crossing mountains deeply covered with snow,
a great number of these unhappy beings, overcome by fatigue, cold,
and hunger, dropt down and perished miserably among the snow.
While this brutal massacre struck terror into the hearts of the
Jacobite chiefs, and thus so far served the immediate object of the
government, it was highly prejudicial to King William. In every
quarter, even at court, the account of the massacre was received at
first with incredulity, and then with horror and indignation; and
the Jacobite party did not fail to turn the affair to good account
against the government, by exaggerating, both at home and abroad, the
barbarous details. The odium of the nation rose to such a pitch, that
had the exiled monarch appeared at the head of a few thousand men, he
would, probably, have succeeded in regaining his crown. The ministry,
and even King William, grew alarmed, and to pacify the people he
dismissed the Master of Stair from his councils, and appointed a
commission of inquiry to investigate the affair.
As for the Master of Stair, at whose door the chief blame of the
infamous transaction was laid by the commission of inquiry, and who
is popularly considered to have been a heartless and bloodthirsty
wretch, he could not understand the indignant astonishment expressed
on all hands at what he considered a most patriotic, beneficial,
and in every respect highly commendable proceeding. He considered
that he had done his ungrateful country excellent service in doing a
little to root out a band of pestilential banditti, whom he regarded
in as bad a light as the Italian government of the present day does
the unscrupulous robbers who infest the country, or as the American
government did the bloodthirsty Indians who harassed the frontiers.
Letters of “fire and sword” against the Highlanders were as common,
in the days of the Stewarts, as warrants for the apprehension of
house-breakers or forgers are at the present day. They were looked
upon as semi-civilized aborigines, characterised by such names as
“rebellious and barbarous thieves, limmers, sorners,” &c.; and the
killing of a Highlandman was thought no more of than the killing
of a “nigger” was in the slave-states of America. In various acts
of the privy council of Scotland, the clan Gregor is denounced in
the above terms, and was visited with all the terrors of “fire
and sword.” “Their habitations were destroyed. They were hunted
down like wild beasts. Their very name was proscribed.”[643] We
have already referred to, in its proper place, a mandate from King
James V. in 1583, against the clan Chattan, in which he charges his
lieges to invade the clan “to their utter destruction by slaughter,
burning, drowning, and otherways; and leave no creature living of
that clan, except priests, women, and bairns.” Even Captain Burt,
in the beginning of the next century, writes of the Highlanders as
if they were an interesting race of semi-barbarians, many of whom
would cut a man’s throat for the mere sake of keeping their hands in
practice.[644] In a letter of the 5th March, 1692, after referring
to the universal talk in London about the transaction, Dalrymple
says, “All I regret is, that any of the sort got away; and there is a
necessity to prosecute them to the utmost.” Again, writing to Colonel
Hill in April of the same year, he tells him that “as for the people
of Glencoe, when you do your duty in a thing so necessary to rid
the country of thieving, you need not trouble yourself to take the
pains to vindicate yourself. When you do right, you need fear nobody.
All that can be said is, that, in the execution, it was neither so
full nor so fair as might have been.” Indeed we think that any one
who examines into the matter with unbiassed and cool mind, which
is difficult, cannot fail to conclude that neither private spite
nor heartless bloodthirstiness actuated him in bringing about the
transaction; but that he sincerely thought he was doing his country a
service in taking the only effectual means of putting down a public
pest and a hindrance to progress.
Had the clan been proceeded against in open and legitimate warfare,
resulting in its utter extinction, the affair might have occupied
no more than a short paragraph in this and other histories. There
can be no doubt that what gives the deed its nefarious stamp, is the
fiendishly deliberate and deceitful way in which it was accomplished,
in violation of laws of hospitality which are respected even by
cut-throat Arabs. And after all it was a blunder.
As to whether King William knew the full significance of the order
which he signed, and what was the extent of his knowledge of the
circumstances, are points which can never be ascertained. It is mere
meaningless declamation to talk of it as a foul and indelible blot on
his character and reign. “The best that can be done for the cause of
truth, is to give the facts abundantly and accurately. The character
of the revolution king is one of the questions which political
passion and partizanship have not yet let go, so that reason may take
it up. And with those who believe that, by his very act of heading
the revolution which drove forth the Stewarts, he was the man to
order and urge on the murder of an interesting and loyal clan, it
would be quite useless to discuss the question on the ground of
rational probabilities.”[645]
Though the nation had long desired an inquiry into this barbarous
affair, it was not until the 29th of April, 1695, upwards of three
years after the massacre, that a commission was granted. A commission
had indeed been issued in 1693 appointing the Duke of Hamilton and
others to examine into the affair, but this was never acted upon. The
Marquis of Tweeddale, lord high chancellor of Scotland, and the other
commissioners now appointed, accordingly entered upon the inquiry,
and, after examining witnesses and documents, drew up a report and
transmitted it to his majesty. The commissioners appear to have
executed their task, on the whole, with great fairness, although they
put the very best construction on William’s orders, and threw the
whole blame of the massacre upon Secretary Dalrymple.
The report of the commissioners was laid before the parliament of
Scotland on the 24th of June, which decided that the execution of the
Glencoe-men was a murder, resolved _nemine contradicente_, that the
instructions contained in the warrant of the 16th January, 1692, did
not authorise the massacre. After various sittings on the subject,
“the committee for the security of the kingdom” was appointed to draw
up an address to the king on the subject of the massacre, which being
submitted to parliament on the 10th of July, was voted and approved
of.
No active measures in the way of punishing either principals or
subordinates, however, were taken in consequence of the findings of
the commission and the recommendations of parliament, except that
Breadalbane, who they found had laid himself open to a charge of
high treason, was imprisoned for a few days in Edinburgh castle.
A curious and interesting incident came out during the sitting of
the commission, tending to show that Breadalbane was conscious of
a very large share of guilt, and was fully aware of the heinous
and nefarious character of the bloody transaction. Some days after
the slaughter, a person sent by Breadalbane’s steward waited upon
Glencoe’s sons, and told them that if they would declare that his
lordship had no concern in the slaughter, they might be assured that
the earl would procure their “remission and restitution.”
As the surviving Macdonalds, who on their humble petition and promise
of good behaviour were allowed to return to the glen, had been
reduced to great poverty and distress by the destruction of their
property, and as they had conducted themselves with great moderation
under their misfortunes, the estates solicited his majesty to order
reparation to be made to them for the losses they had sustained in
their properties. Whether the “royal charity and compassion” invoked
by the estates in behalf of these unfortunate people were ever
exercised does not appear; but it is highly probable, that this part
of the address was as little heeded as the rest.[646] In fact, the
whole matter was hushed up, and it now lives in the page of history
as a sad and somewhat inexplicable blunder, which has rendered the
memories of those who contrived it and those who executed it, for
ever infamous.[647]
These measures of the government, conciliatory and threatening, seem
to have had the effect for the time of suppressing open hostility at
least among the Highlanders; but from the nature of that people, and
the method in which government treated them, we can readily believe
that their obedience was none of the heartiest, and that they would
be glad any moment to join in an attempt to oust King William and
restore King James. During the whole of William’s reign his peace
of mind was being continually disturbed by rumours and discoveries
of plots, and by threats of a hostile descent on this country from
France. In all these the Highland chiefs had their fair share, and
were ready to receive with open arms any hostile expedition which
might be fortunate enough to effect a landing on their coasts.
The stirring events of the last fifty years, in which the Highlanders
played a conspicuous part, appear to have been the means of drawing
their attention somewhat away from their hereditary clan-quarrels,
and thus rendering their destructive internal strifes less frequent.
But now that there was no external outlet for their belligerent
propensities, they appear again to have resumed their old clan feuds.
“To be at peace, unless they were disarmed and overawed, was not in
their nature; and neither the law nor the military power of the
nation was then on a scale sufficient to have accomplished these
ends. We even find those chiefs who had ingratiated themselves with
the government, obtaining, though not so readily as formerly, the
writs known by the savage name of ‘letters of fire and sword’ against
their enemies. These were licenses for civil war, giving the sanction
of government aid and encouragement to one side in the conflict. They
authorised the favoured clan to burn, waste, and slay, far and wide,
within the territory of their enemies, setting forth--such were the
words of style used by the clerks of the privy council who prepared
these terrible documents--‘that whatever slaughter, mutilation,
blood, fire-raising, or other violence’ may be done by the persons
holding the letters, shall be held ‘laudable, good, and warrantable
service to his majesty and his government.’ There is little doubt
that the readiness with which these warrants were issued in earlier
times, arose from the view that it was a good thing to encourage the
Highlanders in slaying each other, and doubtless, even for a few
years after such an event as Glencoe, such a feeling would linger
in the usual official quarters. Though it was professed that no one
could obtain letters of fire and sword but a litigant who could
not enforce his just claims, it would be generally a vain task to
examine the relative merits of the two sides, expecting to find one
of them in the right. Any mitigation which the horrors of such a
system may have received in later times, would be from the garrison
of Fort-William being associated in arms with the holders of the
letters.”[648]
The materials for the internal history of the Highlands at this
period are scanty; doubtless there were many petty strifes carried
on between hostile clans, and many cattle-lifting raids made by the
Highland borderers upon their lowland neighbours, but no records of
these appear to have been kept.
Shortly after the Glencoe massacre, a scheme appears to have
been proposed to the king by Breadalbane[649] for utilizing the
Highlanders “in case of any insurrection at home, or invasion from
abroad.” The gist of it was that the Highland chiefs should be
ordered to raise a body of 4,000 men, who would be so disciplined
that they would be ready to be called out when required, and who
were to be commanded by “some principal man in the Highlands,” who
would have the pay of a general officer. This “principal man,”
Breadalbane doubtless meant to be himself, as he suggests that the
_second_ in command should be Lochiel, who he said was ambitious to
serve his majesty, and was a Protestant. Forty subordinate officers
were to be appointed, Breadalbane wisely suggesting that these
should be of Highland extraction, and that the soldiers themselves
should be allowed to use their own apparel, their own arms, and to
be disciplined after their own fashion. As will be afterwards seen,
government appears to have acted on this or some similar proposal,
and organized a few independent Highland companies. We give below the
number of men which, according to Breadalbane’s estimate, each of the
chiefs to which the proposal referred could raise. It is probably
considerably below the number of men capable of bearing arms, who
were at the command of the various chiefs named.[650]
It is about this time that the famous Robert Macgregor, better known
as Rob Roy, first emerges into notice. The details of his life will
be found in the account of the Clan Macgregor, in Part Second of this
work.
During this reign, and shortly after the hushing-up of the Glencoe
affair, there came into prominence another character, destined to
play a far more important part in the history of the Highlands
and of the country generally, than Rob Roy, whom he resembled in
the unscrupulous means he took to attain his ends, but whose rude
but genuine sense of honour and sincerity he appears to have been
entirely devoid of. This was the notorious Simon Fraser, so well
known afterwards as Lord Lovat. He was born, according to some
authorities, in the year 1670, but according to himself in 1676,
and was the second son of Thomas Fraser, styled of Beaufort, near
Inverness, fourth son of Hugh, ninth Lord Lovat. Simon’s mother was
dame Sybilla Macleod, daughter of the chief of the Macleods. He was
educated at King’s College, Aberdeen, where he is said highly to have
distinguished himself, and to have taken the degree of Master of
Arts.[651] “One can easily believe that Simon, with his brain ever at
work, and his ambition ever on the stretch, would let no one outstrip
him.... His subsequent full and free use of the French indicates an
aptitude for languages seldom equalled, and his tone of writing and
speaking was that of a scholar, always when he thought fit that it
should be so.”[652] In 1695, he was induced to leave the university,
just as he was about to enter upon the study of law, and accept a
company in a regiment raised for the service of King William, by Lord
Murray, son of the Marquis of Athole, whose daughter was married to
the then Lord Lovat, Simon’s cousin. Simon, who pretended the most
inviolable loyalty to the exiled King James, gives as his excuse
for accepting this commission, that it was only that “he might
have a regiment well trained and accoutred to join King James in a
descent he had promised to make in the ensuing summer.” While in Lord
Murray’s regiment, he, in 1696, entered into a plan for surprising
Edinburgh castle, and holding it in the interest of James, but this
was stifled by the decisive victory at La Hogue.
In 1696, Simon accompanied his cousin Lord Lovat, who appears to have
been of a “contracted understanding,” and Lord Murray, to London,
and while there, endeavoured to worm himself into the colonelcy of
his regiment, but was checkmated by Murray, whom, with the house of
Athole, he thenceforth regarded as his enemy.
Lord Lovat died in September 1696, immediately after his return from
London, on which Thomas of Beaufort assumed the family title, and
Simon that of Master of Lovat. To render his claims indisputable,
Simon paid his addresses to the daughter of the late lord, who had
assumed the title of baroness of Lovat, and having prevailed on
her to consent to elope with him, would have carried his design of
marrying her into execution, had not their mutual confident, Fraser
of Tenechiel, after conducting the young lady forth one night in
such precipitate haste that she is said to have walked barefooted,
failed in his trust, and restored her to her mother. The heiress was
then removed out of the reach of Simon’s artifices by her uncle,
the Marquis of Athole, to his stronghold at Dunkeld. Here it was
determined that to put an end to dispute, she should be married to
the son of Lord Saltoun, the head of a branch of the Fraser family
in Aberdeenshire. As Simon saw in this match the ruin of all his
hopes, he determined at all hazards to prevent it. As Saltoun and
Lord Mungo Murray were returning, October, 1697, from Castle Dounie,
the residence of the late lord’s widow, they were met at the wood of
Bunchrew, near Inverness, by Simon and his followers, and immediately
disarmed and carried to Fanellan, a house of Lord Lovat’s, before
the windows of which a threatening gallows was erected. They were
detained here about a week, when, on a report that Lord Murray and
the red coats were coming against him, Captain Fraser sent the
_fiery cross_ and _coronach_ through the country of his clan, and
immediately had at his command a body of 500 armed men. With this
small army, Fraser, accompanied by his prisoners, proceeded to Castle
Dounie, of which they took possession, sentinels being placed in all
the rooms, particularly Lady Lovat’s. The prisoners, after being
detained for some time in the Island of Angus in the Beauly river,
were dismissed.
Burton[653] very justly remarks, that the whole of these wild acts
were evidently the result of a series of impulses. What followed
appears to have been equally unpremeditated and the result of pure
impulse. Simon determined to atone to himself for the loss of the
daughter by forcibly wedding the mother, whom he himself describes
as a widow “old enough to be his mother, dwarfish in her person, and
deformed in her shape.”[654] For this purpose her three waiting maids
were carried by force out of the room, and about two in the morning
one of them was brought back and found her lady “sitting on the
floor, her hair dishevelled, her head reclining backwards on the bed,
Donald Beaton pulling off the lady’s shoes, and the Captain holding
burning feathers and aqua-vitae to her nose, her ladyship being in a
swoon.” A mock marriage was performed between Simon and Lady Lovat,
by a wretched minister of the name of Munro, and the lady’s clothes
having been violently pulled off her, her stays being cut off with a
dirk, she was tossed into the bed, to have the marriage consummated
with violence. Notwithstanding that the bagpipes were kept playing
in the next room, the poor lady’s cries were heard outside the
house.[655] In the morning the lady was found to be so stupified with
the brutal treatment she had received that she could not recognise
her dearest friends.
These violent proceedings caused much consternation in the country,
and the Athole family immediately set about to obtain redress, or
rather revenge. Letters of fire and sword and of intercommuning
were passed against the whole of the Frasers, and the Marquis
of Tulliebardine organised a force to carry these threats into
execution. “On the whole, the force brought against him cannot have
been very large; but in Simon’s own history of his conflicts and
escapes, the whole affair assumes the aspect of a very considerable
campaign, in which his enemies, spoken of as ‘the several regiments
of cavalry, infantry, and dragoons,’ are always defeated and baffled
in an unaccountable manner by some handful of Frasers.”[656]
There does not appear to have been any downright skirmish, the
only approach to such a thing being a meeting that took place at
Stratherrick between the Frasers and the Athole-men under the two
Lords Murray, in which the latter threw themselves on the mercy of
Simon, who made them, after the manner of the ancient Romans, pass
through the yoke, and at the same time swear by a fearful oath never
again to enter the Lovat territories.
In June, 1698, proceedings were commenced in the court of justiciary
against Fraser and his accomplices, and in September they were
condemned, in their absence, to be executed as traitors.
In 1699, died old Fraser of Beaufort, at the house of his
brother-in-law Macleod of Dunvegan Castle in Skye, and his son
thenceforth assumed the title of Lord Lovat. He appears for some
time to have led a wandering life, subsisting on pillage and the
occasional contributions of the attached mountaineers.[657] Tired
of this kind of life, he, at the recommendation of Argyle, who had
endeavoured to secure favour for him at head-quarters, sued for a
pardon, which King William granted for all his proceedings except the
rape. He was willing to stand trial on this last head, and for this
purpose appeared in Edinburgh with a small army of 100 followers as
witnesses; but as the majority of the judges were prejudiced against
him, he found it prudent again to take refuge in his mountains. He
was outlawed, and finding his enemies too powerful for him, he fled
to France in 1702, and offered his services to King James.
These details show, that amid the growing civilization and rapid
progress of the country generally, the Highlanders were yet as
barbarous and lawless as ever; the clans still cherishing the same
devotion to their chiefs, and the same readiness, in defiance of law,
to enter into an exterminating mutual strife. The government appears
to have given up in despair all hopes of making the Highlanders
amenable to the ordinary law of the country, or of rooting out from
among them those ancient customs so inconsistent with the spirit of
the British constitution. All it apparently aimed at was to confine
the lawless and belligerent propensities of these troublesome Celts
to their own country, and prevent them from taking a form that
would be injurious to the civilized Lowlanders and the interests of
the existing government generally. “From old experience in dealing
with the Highlanders, government had learned a policy which suited
temporary purposes at all events, however little it tended to the
general pacification and civilisation of the people. This was, not
to trust entirely to a Lowland government force, but to arm one clan
against another. It seemed a crafty device for the extermination of
these troublesome tribes, and a real practical adaptation of Swift’s
paradoxical project for abolishing pauperism, by making the poor
feed upon each other. But practised as it had been for centuries,
down from the celebrated battle of the antagonist clans on the Inch
of Perth, yet it never seemed to weaken the strength or abate the
ferocity of these warlike vagrants, but rather seemed to nourish
their thirst of blood, to make arms and warfare more familiar
and indispensable, and to add every year to the terrors of this
formidable people, who, in the very bosom of fast civilizing Europe,
were as little under the control of enlightened social institutions,
and as completely savage in their habits, as the Bosgesman of the
East, or the Black-foot Indian of the West.”[658]
FOOTNOTES:
[636] Carstares’ _Papers_, p. 138.
[637] _Memoirs of Mackay’s Secret Services_, p. 199. Quoted by Burton.
[638] Letters to Lieutenant-colonel Hamilton, &c. 1st and 3d Dec.
1691.
[639] Burton’s _Scotland_, 1689-1748, vol. i. p. 160.
[640] These instructions are as follow:
WILLIAM R. 16th January, 1692.
1. The copy of the paper given by Macdonald of Aughtera to you
has been shown us. We did formerly grant passes to Buchan and
Cannon, and we do authorize and allow you to grant passes to
them, and ten servants to each of them, to come freely and safely
to Leith; from that to be transported to the Netherlands before
the 15th of March next, to go from thence where they please,
without any stop or trouble.
2. We doe allow you to receive the submissions of Glengarry and
those with him upon their taking the oath of allegiance and
delivering up the house of Invergarry; to be safe as to their
lives, but as to their estates to depend upon our mercy.
3. In case you find that the house of Invergarry cannot probably
be taken in this season of the year, with the artillery and
provision you can bring there; in that case we leave it to your
discretion to give Glengarry the assurance of entire indemnity
for life and fortune, upon delivering of the house and arms,
and taking the oath of allegiance. In this you are to act as
you find the circumstances of the affair do require; but it
were much better that those who have not taken the benefit of
our indemnity, in the terms within the diet prefixt by our
proclamation, should be obliged to render upon mercy. The taking
the oath of allegiance is indispensable, others having already
taken it.
4. If M’Ean of Glencoe and that tribe can be well separated
from the rest, it will be a proper vindication of the public
justice to extirpate that set of thieves. The double of these
instructions is only communicated to Sir Thomas Livingston.
W. REX
[641] See note at p. 165, vol. i. of Burton’s _Scotland_, 1689-1748.
[642] Colonel HILL’S Order to Lieut.-Col. JAMES HAMILTON.
“Fort William, 12th Feb., 1692.
“SIR,
“You are, with 400 of my regiment, and the 400 of my Lord Argyle’s
regiment under the command of Major Duncanson, to march straight
to Glenco, and there put in due execution the orders you have
received from the commander-in-chief. Given under my hand at Fort
William, the 12th February 1692.
“J. HILL.”
“_To Lieut.-Col. James Hamilton._”
Order from Lieut.-Col. HAMILTON, to Major ROBERT DUNCANSON.
“Ballechylls, 12th Feb., 1692.
“SIR,
“Persuant to the commander-in-chief and my colonel’s order to me
for putting in execution the King’s commands against those rebels
of Glenco, wherein you with the party of the Earl of Argyle’s
regiment under your command, are to be concerned; you are
therefore forthwith to order your affair so, as that the several
posts already assigned you be by you and your several detachments
faln in activeness precisely by five of the clock to-morrow
morning, being Saturday; at which time I will endeavour the same
with those appointed from this regiment from the other places.
It will be most necessary you secure well those avenues on the
south side, that the old fox, nor none of his cubbs get away. The
orders are, that none be spared of the sword, nor the government
troubled with prisoners; which is all until I see you from,
“Sir,
“Your most humble Servant,
“JAMES HAMILTOUNE.”
“Please to order a guard to secure the ferry, and boats there;
and the boats must be all on this side the ferry after your men
are over.
“For their Majesty’s service.
“_To Major Robert Duncanson of the
Earl of Argyle’s Regt._”
Order from Major DUNCANSON to Captain ROBERT CAMPBELL of Glenlyon.
“12th Feb., 1692.
“SIR,
“You are hereby ordered to fall upon the rebells the Macdonalds of
Glenco, and put all to the sword under seventy. You are to have
a special care that the old fox and his sons do not escape your
hands; you are to secure all the avenues that no man escape. This
you are to put in execution at five of the clock precisely; and
by that time, or very shortly after it, I will strive to be at
you with a stronger party. If I do not come to you at five, you
are not to tarry for me but to fall on. This is by the king’s
speciall commands, for the good and safety of the countrey, that
these miscreants be cut off, root and branch. See that this be
put in execution without fear or favour, or you may expect to be
dealt with as one not true to king or government, nor as man fit
to carry commission in the king’s service. Expecting you will not
fail in the fulfilling hereof, as you love yourself, I subscribe
this with my hand at Ballychylls, the 12th February, 1692.
“ROBERT DUNCANSON.”
[643] _Maitland Club_, vol. containing Papers on the Condition of the
Highlands, 1686-1696. Preface.
[644] _Letters from a Gentleman in the North._
[645] Burton’s _Scotland_, 1689-1748, vol. i. p. 174.
[646] The following extraordinary anecdote is given by General
Stewart (_Sketches_, vol. i.) in reference to the punishment which,
in the opinion of the Highlanders, awaits the descendants of the
oppressor. “The belief that punishment of the cruelty, oppression,
or misconduct of an individual, descended as a curse on his children
to the third and fourth generation, was not confined to the common
people. All ranks were influenced by it, believing that if the
curse did not fall upon the first, or second generation, it would
inevitably descend upon the succeeding. The late Colonel Campbell
of Glenlyon retained this belief through a course of thirty years’
intercourse with the world, as an officer of the 42d regiment, and
of marines. He was grandson of the laird of Glenlyon, who commanded
the military at the massacre of Glencoe; and who lived in the laird
of Glencoe’s house, where he and his men were hospitably received
as friends, and entertained a fortnight before the execution of his
orders. He was playing at cards with the family when the first shot
was fired, and the murderous scene commenced. Colonel Campbell was an
additional captain in the 42d regiment in 1748, and was put on half
pay. He then entered the marines, and in 1762 was major, with the
brevet rank of lieutenant-colonel, and commanded 800 of his corps at
the Havannah. In 1771, he was ordered to superintend the execution of
the sentence of a court-martial on a soldier of marines, condemned to
be shot. A reprieve was sent, but the whole ceremony of the execution
was to proceed until the criminal was upon his knees, with a cap
over his eyes, prepared to receive the volley. It was then he was to
be informed of his pardon. No person was to be told previously, and
Colonel Campbell was directed not to inform even the firing party,
who were warned that the signal to fire would be the waving of a
white handkerchief by the commanding officer. When all was prepared,
and the clergyman had left the prisoner on his knees, in momentary
expectation of his fate, and the firing party were looking with
intense attention for the signal, Colonel Campbell put his hand into
his pocket for the reprieve, and in pulling out the packet the white
handkerchief accompanied it, and catching the eyes of the party, they
fired, and the unfortunate prisoner was shot dead.
“The paper dropped through Colonel Campbell’s fingers, and clapping
his hand to his forehead, he exclaimed, ‘The curse of God and of
Glencoe is here, I am an unfortunate ruined man.’ He desired the
soldiers to be sent to the barracks, instantly quitted the parade,
and soon afterwards retired from the service. This retirement was
not the result of any reflection or reprimand on account of this
unfortunate affair, as it was known to be entirely accidental. The
impression on his mind, however, was never effaced. Nor is the
massacre and the judgment which the people believe has fallen on the
descendants of the principal actors in this tragedy, effaced from
their recollection. They carefully note, that while the family of the
unfortunate gentleman who suffered is still entire, and his estate
preserved in direct male succession to his posterity, this is not the
case with the family, posterity, and estates, of those who were the
principals, promoters, and actors in this black affair.”
[647] Report of Commission on Glencoe: Carstare’s _State Papers_:
_Gallienus Redivivus_: Dalrymple’s _Memoirs_ and Appendix: _Papers on
the Condition of the Highlands_ in Maitland Club.
[648] Burton’s _Scotland_, 1689-1748, vol. i., pp. 175, 176.
[649] Dalrymple’s Appendix, vol. ii., part ii. p. 217.
[650] List of chieftains to which the proposals relate:--
Men.
The Earl of Seaforth, 200
The Viscount of Tarbat, 50
The Lord Lovat, 150
The Earl of Sutherland, 100
The Lord Reay, 50
The Laird of Ballingoun, 100
The Laird of Fouls, 50
The Laird of Straglasse, 20
The Laird of Glenmoriston, 30
The Laird of M’Intosh, 100
M’Pherson of Clunie,
The Laird of Kilravock, 150
The Land of Grant, 200
The Laird of Balindaloch, 20
The Duke of Gordon, 300
The Earl of Mar, 200
The Marquis of Atholl, 300
The Laird of Ashintullie, 30
The Laird of Weem, 50
The Laird of Garntully, 50
The Laird of Strowan, 20
The Earl of Perth, 150
The Earl of Murray, 100
The Earl of Monteath, 100
The Marquis of Montrose, 150
The Laird of Luss, 50
The Laird of Macfarlane, 30
The Earl of Argyle, 500
The Earl of Breadalbane, 250
The Laird of Calder, 100
The Laird of M’Lean, 100
The Laird of Lochiel, 150
The Captain of Clanronald, 100
Sir Donald M’Donald, of Sleat, 100
The Laird of M’Leod, 100
The Laird of Glengary, 100
The Laird of M’Finzone, 30
M’Donald of Keppoch, 50
The Laird of Appin, 50
The Tutor of Appin, 30
The Laird of Lochbuy, 30
[651] Anderson’s _History of the Frazers_, p. 128
[652] Burton’s _Lord Lovat_, p. 9.
[653] _Lovat_, p. 27.
[654] _Memoirs_, p. 62.
[655] Pitcairn’s _Trials_, p. 89. Anderson’s _Fraser Family_, p. 121.
[656] Burton’s _Lovat_, p. 38.
[657] Anderson, 130.
[658] Burton’s _Life of Lord Lovat_, p. 36.