| Year 1604.
This trial, and the subsequent proceedings, relating to the clan
Gregor, afford the most characteristic evidence of the barbarous state
of the Highlands in those times, of the lawless manners of the people,
and despicable imbecillity of the executive arm.
The crimes with which the prisoner was charged, resemble more the
outrage and desolation of war, than the guilt of a felon. He was
accused of having conspired the destruction of the name Colquhoun, its
friends and allies, and the plunder of the lands of Luss; Of
having, on the 7th February preceeding, invaded the lands of Sir
Alexander Colquhoun of Luss, with a body of 400 men, composed partly of
his own clan, and of the clan Cameron, and of lawless thieves and
robbers, equipped in arms, and drawn up on the field of Lennox, in
battle array; Of having fought with Sir Alexander, who, being
authorised by a Warrant from the Privy Council, had convocated his
friends and followers to resist this lawless host; Of having
killed about 140 of Sir Alexander's men **, most
of them in cold blood after they were made prisoners; Of
having carried off 80 horses, 600 cows, and 800 sheep; And
of burning houses, corn yards ***, &c..
A Jury of Landed gentlemen of most respectable family sat upon the
prisoner.
They were:
Sir Thomas Stewart of Gairntullie,
Colin Campbell of Glenurchie,
Alexander Menzies of Weyme,
Robert Robertson of Strowan,
John Napier Siar of Merchiston,
Thomas Fallusdaill, Burgess of Dumbarton,
John Hering of Lethendie,
William Stewart, Captain of Dumbarton,
Harie Drummond of Blair,
Charles Blair of that Ilk elder, Chancellor of the Jury.
John Blair younger of that Ilk,
John Graham of Knockdonaine,
Moyses Wallace, Burgess of Edinburgh,
Sir Robert Crichton of Cluny,
Robert Robertson of Faskallie.
One of these persons, indeed, Thomas Fallusdaill,
Burgess of Dumbarton, ought to have been kept far aloof from this
jury. He was the special confident and adviser of the Laird of Luss;
and it was in consequence of his suggestion that the Laird made the parade
before His Majesty, at Stirling, with the bloody shirts, stained with the
gore of his followers.
The Jury unanimously convicted the prisoner, who, in
consequence of the verdict, was condemned to be hanged and quartered at
the Cross of Edinburgh, his limbs to be stuck up in the chief towns, and
his whole estate, heritable and moveable, to be forfeited.
Four of the Laird of MacGregor's followers, who stood
trial along with him, were convicted and condemned to the same punishment,
eleven on the 17th of February, and six on the 1st of March; and many
pages of the criminal record are engrossed with the trials of the
MacGregors.
It became the object of national attention to break this
lawless confederacy, of which the object was pointed revenge and
indiscriminate plunder, supported by uniform contempt of the Laws, and
resistance to the Magistrates. A statute was passed in the
year 1633****, ordaining , that the whole of the
Clan MacGregor which should be within the realm on the 15th of March
thereafter, should appear before the Privy Council, and give surety for
their good behaviour; That each of the clan on arriving at the
sixteenth year of his age, should appear before the Privy Council on the
24th of July, and find surety as above required; That
the surname of MacGregor should be abolished, and the individuals adopt
some other; That no minister should baptise a child, or clerk
or notary subscribe a bond, or other security, under the name of MacGregor,
under pain of deprivation.
This Act was rescinded at the
restoration; But it seems probable that the MacGregors
had aggrivated the outrages of a disorderly life by the unpardonable crime
of Jacobitism - The Act rescissory was annulled, and that against the
MacGregors revived, in the first parliament of William and Mary. -
Within these few years, however, the state of manners and of government
rendered it proper that this act of proscription should be abolished
forever. The Highlanders, about the same period, were gratified in
certain other trifles for entering with zeal into the service of the State
when others conspired its ruin.
Finally, the forfeited estates were restored to the
heirs of the persons who were attainted for being concerned in the
rebellion 1745; a measure which would have been still more generally
grateful, could government have bestowed a like degree of favour on the
representatives of those noble families, the descendants of those
illustrious ancestors, who undoubtedly were much more innocent, much more
excusable, in being concerned in the rebellion 1715. |
®