Page:EB1911 - Volume 24.djvu/475

HISTORY] as guilty of “an attempt to jostle Christ out of his church.” For this and other severe censures of his brethren, Mr Erskine would not apologize: he had “delivered the utterance given to him by the Lord”: his was the very attitude of the preachers who thundered against James VI. Mr Erskine was rebuked in the Assembly of 1733; he protested with three friends: they were deprived of their charges; they vowed that they were “the True Presbyterian Covenanted Church of Scotland,” and had the power of the keys. They constituted themselves a presbytery, and maintained that the covenants were perpetually binding. The Assembly went as far as was possible in offers of reconciliation, but the seceders were irreconcilable, and were deposed in 1740. In 1744 they made the “Taking of the Covenants” a term of ministerial and Christian communion. It is impossible here to follow the schisms which split the seceding body within itself: the Erskines themselves were handed over to Satan; their very families adopted opposite factions: there were “Burghers” and “Anti-Burghers,” “New Lights” and “Old Lights”; besides the sects which in the 19th century merged in United Presbyterians, and merged themselves later with the Free Church of the Disruption, itself the parent of a small protesting body, popularly styled “The Wee Frees” (see ). The whole movement, intended as a return to the kirk of Knox and Melville and the Covenanters, was a not unneeded protest against the sleepy “moderation,” and want of spiritual enthusiasm, which invaded the established kirk in the latter part of the 18th century, a period in which she possessed such distinguished writers as John Home, author of the drama of Douglas, Robertson, the historian, and Dr Carlyle, whose amusing autobiography draws a perfect portrait of an amiable and highly educated “Moderate” and man of the world. Naturally the opposite party, whether seceders, or “High Flyers,” as they were called, within the church, had most influence with the populace, so that “the Trew Universal Kirk” of Scotland was broken into several communions, differing but slightly in accepted doctrines, and not at all in mode of worship. Their tendency has been centripetal, and all the “Free Churches” are agreed in their views concerning the prolonged existence of “the Auld Kirk.” The Episcopalians, in this period, were nearly as much perturbed as the Presbyterians, by questions as to the election of bishops in relation to their exiled king, and by the introduction of ritualism in the shape of “the usages.” They passed through much persecution, in consequence of the rising of 1745, but, after the death of their King Charles, they became as loyal as any other religious body, managing their own affairs with no more turmoil than is caused by the coexistence of the Anglican and the Laudian prayer-books, with their different forms of the communion service.

As to civil matters, the country was troubled by riots against the Malt Tax, but the clans submitted to a very superficial

disarmament; companies of highlanders were employed to preserve order and check cattle-raiding; and one of these, “The Black Watch” (the Forty-Second), greatly distinguished itself at the battle of Fontenoy. Wade drove his military roads through the highlands, and, poor as the country still was, the city of Glasgow throve on the tobacco and sugar trade with America and the West Indies. Yet Duncan Forbes of Culloden, president of the Court of Session, after the outbreak of the war with Spain, reported amazing scarcity of money in the country, and strenuously advised legislative checks on the taste for tea, which naturally diminished the profits of the excise on more generous beverages. The fact is that as English companies for foreign trade had long been in chartered existence, Scotsmen and Scottish capital had no profitable outlets, while agriculture was conducted on slovenly medieval or prehistoric methods; and only the linen trade of the country was really flourishing. Thus, except in the case of the west coast trade with the colonies, Scotland had reaped little commercial benefit from the Union, and the loss of business caused by the abolition of the parliament, and the rush of noble families to London, was severely felt in Edinburgh. Yet there existed no dangerous political dissatisfaction. Though the chief

religions of the highlanders, the Episcopalian and Catholic forms, were depressed by persecution, and priests were few, the clans had long been accustomed to lack of religious functions and did not feel the want. But the hereditable jurisdictions and feudal powers, as of calling out tenants by the fiery cross and punishing the peaceful by burning their cottages, had never been abolished; the chief's will was law, and if the chiefs headed a rising, their clansmen would follow them, willingly or “forced out.” They formed a remarkable militia, trained to the use of arms; wonderfully mobile and rapid on the march and dauntlessly courageous.

The years 1737-1739 saw the germs of civil war beginning to take active life. Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat, an aged intriguer,

conceived discontent against the government for the loss of his independent company, and began to intrigue with France and with James in Rome. In the same year a young Tweedside laird, Murray of Broughton, visited Rome, fell in love with Prince Charles, then a handsome, wayward, stalwart and ambitious lad, with “a body made for war,” and, returning home, Murray practically succeeded to the duties once performed by Lockhart of Carnwath, as Jacobite agent and organizer.

In 1738 the waning power of Walpole and the approaching war with Spain caused Forbes of Culloden to propose the raising of four or five highland regiments for foreign service. Walpole, urged by Lord Islay, brother of Argyll, is said to have approved, but nothing was done. The declaration of war with Spain and the certainty of war with France promised to the Jacobites good fishing in turbid waters; and they entertained futile hopes of enlisting Argyll with his potent clan. Walpole entered into communication with James, who saw through the manœuvre, and in 1741 a Jacobite association was formed, which included Lovat and Lochiel. Their agent was Drummond (Macgregor really) of Balhaldie, who in 1741-1743 dealt with the English Jacobites, and persuaded France that they were powerful and eager. In fact the Scots were feebly organized, and the English Jacobites were not organized at all. Says Murray, “there was not the least ground for encouragement,” but, thanks to Balhaldie, Louis XV. began to mobilize an invading force in November 1743. Balhaldie carried to James in Rome an invitation for Prince Charles to go to France, a verbal invitation, which James reluctantly accepted. Cardinal Tencin was not in the secret, and by the time Charles made his way to Paris in January 1744, James clearly perceived the duplicity of France. The Scottish Jacobites were left in ignorance of the French attempt to land in the mouth of the Thames (February-March 1744), an effort frustrated by a disastrous tempest, and by the slackness of the English conspirators.

Prince Charles was left in neglect and obscurity; till, unchecked by Murray, relying on hasty Jacobite promises brought by him, and encouraged by the French victory of Fontenoy, he started with seven companions for the west highland coast on the 21st of July 1745. His landing at Borradale on the 5th of August brought a few enthusiastic Macdonalds about him; from a sense of honour Lochiel joined with the Camerons. Keppoch and Clanranald would not desert a prince with a reward of £30,000 on his head, but Macleod and Sleat held aloof; and Lovat wrecked the adventure by his doubts and delays. None the less a small ill-armed force of some 2000 men marched south; Cope did not oppose them, but evaded them and went to Inverness, leaving open the road to Edinburgh. At Perth Charles was joined by a skilled soldier, Lord George Murray, brother of the Whig duke of Atholl, a pardoned veteran who had been out in 1715 and 1719.

But Lord George's previous dealings with Cope inspired in Charles a distrust-which was to prove fatal. Charles entered Edinburgh unopposed on the 16th of September, made his quarters in Holyrood, and on the 21st of September routed Cope at Prestonpans. But he had not the force to invade England, or to take the castle, and waited, collecting recruits and money, and encouraged by empty promises from France, till, as he wrote to James (26th of October), “I shall have one decisive