William Pitt and the Great War by John Holland Rose (e book reader for pc .TXT) 📖

number smaller than that of the electors of the

city of Westminster. This singular system was defended chiefly on the

ground of the turbulence of the national character. Even in 1831 a

Scottish member declared that Scots could never assemble without drawing

blood; and one of their champions, Lord Cockburn, made the quaint

admission: "The Scots are bad mobbers. They are too serious at it. They

never joke, and they throw stones." It did not occur to that generation

that the cure for this bloodthirsty seriousness was frequent public

meetings, not no meetings at all. That a high-spirited people should so

long have remained in political childhood seems incredible, until we

remember that a borough election like that of Westminster was absolutely

unknown in the whole course of Scottish history. Further, it was

notorious that the 45 Scottish members were the most obedient group of

placemen in the House of Commons; and their docility had increased under

the bountiful sway of Henry Dundas, whose control of patronage sufficed

to keep the Caledonian squad close to heel.

 

This political apathy was now to end. The men of Edinburgh, Glasgow, and

Dundee began to discuss the "Rights of Man," and to follow the lead

given by the London Corresponding Society. Thus, on 3rd October 1792,

Lieutenant-Colonel William Dalrymple presided over the first meeting of

"The Associated Friends of the Constitution and of the People," held at

Glasgow. Resolutions were passed in favour of an equal representation of

the people in Parliament, shorter Parliaments, and co-operation with

"the Friends of the People" in London. The entrance and annual

subscriptions were fixed at sixpence and one shilling. Thomas Muir of

Huntershill, an able young advocate, was appointed Vice-President. Other

Societies were soon formed, and on 11th December there assembled at

Edinburgh a General Convention of Delegates from the Societies of the

Friends of the People throughout Scotland. Its proceedings were orderly,

beginning and ending with prayer. Resolutions were passed deprecating

violence whether in language or action; and the presence either of Lord

Daer or Colonel Dalrymple in the chair showed that some, at least, of

the gentry were for Reform. This was exceptional. A little later the

gentlemen of several towns and counties asserted their loyalty in

flamboyant petitions; and the farmers of Dalkeith district at their

meeting added to their loyal toasts the following: "May we have no fox

in our fold or greys (wild oats) in our corn."[286] Sir Kenneth

Mackenzie on 3rd January 1793 informed William Pulteney that in the

North the towns were thoroughly loyal, with the exception of Perth and

Dundee, where certain ministers and writers led the people astray.[287]

 

Nevertheless, the authorities, notably the Lord Advocate, Robert Dundas,

took alarm; and on 2nd January 1793 Thomas Muir was brought before the

deputy-sheriff of Midlothian. Muir was a man of highly interesting

personality. The son of a Glasgow tradesman, he had shown marked

abilities at school and at the University, whence, owing to his advanced

opinions, he was forced to migrate to Edinburgh. There, in his

twenty-seventh year, he soon became a leader of the Scottish Reformers,

his sincerity, eloquence, and enthusiasm everywhere arousing keen

interest. Had his good sense been equal to his abilities, he might have

gone far; but events soon showed him to be tactless and headstrong. He

went far beyond the rest of the delegates assembled at Edinburgh,

namely, in bringing forward, despite the reluctance of the Convention,

an Address from the Society of United Irishmen in Dublin. Their conduct

much alarmed the authorities at Dublin Castle, who adopted stringent

precautions. Muir should therefore have seen, what his colleagues did

see, that any plan of co-operation was certain to irritate Government.

Nevertheless he persisted in bringing before the Convention the Irish

Address, which strongly pointed out the need of common action in the

struggle for Reform and urged both peoples to persevere "until we have

planted the flag of freedom on the summit, and are at once victorious

and secure." Further, the authorities accused Muir of circulating

Paine's writings and other pamphlets, including "A Dialogue between the

Governors and the Governed," which contained such sentences as these:

"The law is the general will--a new order." "Nations cannot revolt;

tyrants are the only rebels." "We will live without tyrants, without

impostors (priests)."[288] The writings were probably seditious in their

tendency;[289] but the evidence that he circulated them was of the

flimsiest character.[290]

 

Unfortunately, Muir left the country, though in no clandestine manner,

while legal proceedings were pending. After a short stay in London he

proceeded to Paris, in order (as he said at his trial) to try to

persuade the French democrats to spare the life of Louis XVI. The

credibility of this statement is lessened by the fact that he arrived in

Paris only the evening before the King's execution and remained there

long after that tragedy.[291] A letter from a Scot in Paris, James

Smith, to a friend in Glasgow, which the postal authorities opened,

stated that the writer met Muir in a _café_ of the Palais Royal; that

Muir did not hear of his indictment till the evening of 8th February,

and would return to face his trial, though he was loth to leave France,

as he had made "valuable and dear connections." "Mr. Christie advised

me," adds the writer, "to make some little proficiency in the language

before I begin to think of beginning to do anything."[292] Now, as a

clique of Britons in Paris had not long before drunk the toast of "The

coming Convention of Great Britain and Ireland," Government naturally

connected the efforts of Muir with this republican propaganda. His next

doings increased this suspicion. He left France on an American ship

which landed him at Belfast; he stayed there a few days, and landed at

Stranraer on 31st July, only to be arrested, along with his books and

papers, and sent to Edinburgh.

 

The ensuing trial, held on 30th and 31st August, aroused intense

interest, owing to the eloquence of Muir and the unscrupulous zeal of

the Scottish authorities in ensuring his conviction. They packed the

jury with men who belonged to a loyal Association; and it is said that

the Lord Justice Clerk, McQueen of Braxfield, welcomed one of them with

the words: "Come awa', Maister Horner, come awa', and help us to hang

ane of thae daamed scoondrels." The trial itself bristled with

irregularities; and Muir, who rejected the proffered help of Erskine and

conducted his own defence, fastened on them so effectively, that at the

conclusion of his final speech the Court resounded with applause. All

was in vain. The jury found him guilty, whereupon the Court of

Justiciary pronounced sentence of transportation for fourteen

years.[293]

 

Admiration of the virtues and courage of Muir must not blind us to the

fact that his conduct had been most provocative. His visit to Paris, on

the scarcely credible pretext that he went thither to save the King's

life, his connection with the United Irishmen, and his stay in Belfast,

told against him. Robert Dundas, in informing his uncle, Henry Dundas,

of his arrest, added: "I have little doubt that, tho' he avows his

intention of coming home to have been a view to stand trial, [that] he

is an emissary from France or the disaffected in Ireland."[294] The Scot

who first advocated common action with the Irish malcontents should have

paid good heed to his steps. Muir did not do so. Accordingly, though the

direct evidence at the trial told in his favour, the circumstantial

evidence weighed heavily against him.[295] At such a time men's actions

count for more than their words. It was the visit to Paris and the

dealings with the United Irishmen, far more than biassed witnesses and

the bullying of Braxfield, which led to the condemnation of this

talented youth. For his arrest occurred at the time when terror was the

order of the day at Paris, and when the issue of an inflammatory address

at Dundee spread panic in official circles.

 

Before adverting to this matter, we may note that Muir settled down by

no means unhappily at Sydney, and bought a farm which he named

Huntershill, after his birthplace. It is now a suburb of Sydney. A

letter from the infant settlement, published in the "Gentleman's

Magazine" of March 1797, describes him and the other Scottish

"martyrs"--Skirving, Margarot, and Gerrald--as treated indulgently by

the authorities, who allotted to them convicts to till their lands.

Shortly afterwards Muir escaped, and, after exciting experiences, in

which he was wounded, made his way to France. In Paris, early in 1798,

he published some articles on the United Irishmen, which Wolfe Tone and

other Irish patriots deemed most harmful to their cause. They therefore

remonstrated with him, but received the reply that he knew Ireland as

well as they did, and had the confidence of the United Irishmen as much

as they had. Wolfe Tone says of him: "Of all the vain obstinate

blockheads that ever I met I never saw his equal."[296] Fortunately for

his associates, Muir retired into the provinces and died in the year

1799.

 

Dundee played a leading part in the democratic agitation. Its

population, consisting largely of poor weavers, suffered severely in the

year 1793 from dearness of food and scarcity of fuel. On this mass of

needy operatives the doctrines of Paine fell like a spark on tinder.

Dundee became the chief focus of discontent in Scotland. A Tree of

Liberty was planted in Belmont Grounds; bread riots were of frequent

occurrence; and Dundas was burnt in effigy. In the Home Office Archives

is a statement that a local tradesman named Wyllie generously supplied

the waistcoat and breeches: "they was of satin."[297] In July 1793 there

appeared an "Address to the People," dated "Berean Meeting House,

Dundee," which painted the Government in the darkest colours, and

contained these assertions: "You are plunged into war by a wicked

Ministry and a compliant Parliament, who seem careless and unconcerned

for your interest, the end and design of which is almost too horrid to

relate, the destruction of a whole people merely because they will be

free.... Your treasure is wasting fast: the blood of your brethren is

pouring out, and all this to form chains for a free people and

eventually to rivet them on yourselves." On 1st August 1793 a

Government agent found the MS. from which this placard was printed in

the house of a liquor-seller in Edinburgh. It was in the writing of a

minister, Palmer: so were two letters referring to it.[298] Robert

Dundas therefore sent to have Palmer arrested. In mentioning this fact

to Henry Dundas, he added that Palmer was "the most dangerous rebel in

Scotland." It transpired in the course of the trial that the address was

originally written by a weaver named Mealmaker, and that Palmer re-wrote

it, toning down some expressions which he thought too strong. Mealmaker

was a witness at the trial, but was not allowed directly to incriminate

himself. The authorities preferred to strike at Palmer, a man of parts,

educated at Eton and Cambridge, who latterly had officiated as Unitarian

Minister at Montrose and Dundee. Doubtless these facts as well as his

association with the Scottish Friends of Liberty brought on him a

sentence of five years' transportation.[299]

 

If the authorities hoped to crush the Scottish movement by these

severities they were disappointed; for it throve on them. A spy, "J.

B.," who regularly supplied Robert Dundas with reports about the

Edinburgh club, wrote on 14th September 1793 that the sentence on Palmer

had given new life to the Association; for, after a time of decline in

the early summer, more than 200 now attended its meetings. On 28th

October he stated that nearly all the Scottish clubs had revived.

Dunlop, Lord Provost of Glasgow, also declared that discontent made

progress every day; that the soldiery were corrupted, and that there was

an urgent need of barracks.[300] Indignation also ran high at London.

Evan Nepean wrote to Robert Dundas: "There is a devil of a stir here

about Muir and Palmer." Braxfield's address to the jury was thus

parodied in the "Morning Chronicle" of 4th March 1794:

 

    I am bound by the law, while I sit in this place,

    To say in plain terms what I think of this case.

    My opinion is this, and you're bound to pursue it,

    The defendants are guilty, and I'll make them rue it.

 

Nevertheless, as another Convention had met at Edinburgh, Robert Dundas

wrote to his uncle on 2nd November 1793 strongly deprecating any

mitigation of the sentences. It was therefore in vain that the Earl of

Lauderdale, Grey, and Sheridan interviewed the Home Secretary and

pointed out that the offence of "leasing-making," or verbal sedition,

was punishable in Scots law only with banishment, not with forcible

detention at the Antipodes.[301] Henry Dundas informed his nephew on

16th November that he would refer the whole question back to the Court

of Justiciary, and if it defended the verdict "scientifically" and in

full detail, he would "carry the sentence into execution and meet the

clamour in