Chapter XXVII: A.d. 1716-1737 (2)

“The fortifications and additional barracks, which, by your majesty’s
commands were to be erected at Inverness and Killyhuimen, are the
only part of your majesty’s instructions which I have not been able
to put in execution. There were no persons in that part of the
Highlands of sufficient credit or knowledge to contract for a work
of so extensive a nature. The stone must be cut out of the quarries;
nor could the timber be provided sooner than by sending to Norway to
purchase it; and, although the materials had been ready and at hand,
the excessive rains, that fell during the whole summer season, must
have rendered it impossible to have carried on the work. I have,
however, contracted for the necessary repairs of the old castle at
Inverness, which I am promised will be finished before next winter.

“I humbly beg leave to observe to your majesty, that nothing has
contributed more to the success of my endeavours in disarming the
Highlanders, and reducing the vassals of the late Earl of Seafield to
your obedience, than the power your majesty was pleased to grant me
of receiving the submissions of persons attainted of high treason.
They were dispersed in different parts of the Highlands, without the
least apprehension of being betrayed or molested by their countrymen,
and, for their safety and protection, must have contributed all they
were able to encourage the use of arms, and to infect the minds of
those people on whose protection they depended. In this situation,
they were proper instruments, and always ready to be employed in
promoting the interest of the Pretender, or any other foreign power
they thought capable of contributing to a change in that government
to which they had forfeited their lives, and from whom they expected
no favour. The greatest part of them were drawn into the rebellion
at the instigation of their superiors, and, in my humble opinion,
have continued their disaffection, rather from despair than any real
dislike to your majesty’s government; for it was no sooner known that
your majesty had empowered me to receive the submissions of those
who repented of their crimes, and were willing and desirous for the
future to live peaceably under your mild and moderate government,
but applications were made to me from several of them to intercede
with your majesty on their behalf, declaring their readiness to
abandon the Pretender’s party, and to pay a dutiful obedience to your
majesty; to which I answered, that I should be ready to intercede in
their favour, when I was farther convinced of the sincerity of their
promises; that it would soon come to their turn to be summoned to
bring in their arms; and, when they had paid that first mark of their
obedience, by peaceably surrendering them, I should thereby be better
justified in receiving their submissions, and in recommending them to
your majesty’s mercy and clemency.

“As soon as their respective clans had delivered up their arms,
several of these attainted persons came to me at different times and
places to render their submissions to your majesty. They laid down
their swords on the ground, expressed their sorrow and concern for
having made use of them in opposition to your majesty; and promised a
peaceful and dutiful obedience for the remaining part of their lives.
They afterwards sent me their several letters of submission, copies
of which I transmitted to your majesty’s principal secretary of state.

“I made use of the proper arguments to convince them of their past
folly and rashness, and gave them hopes of obtaining pardon from your
majesty’s gracious and merciful disposition; but, being a stranger
both to their persons and character, I required they would procure
gentlemen of unquestioned zeal to your majesty’s government, who
would write to me in their favour, and in some measure be answerable
for their future conduct--which was accordingly done.

“When the news came that your majesty was graciously pleased to
accept their submission, and had given the proper orders for
preparing their pardons, it was received with great joy and
satisfaction throughout the Highlands, which occasioned the Jacobites
at Edinburgh to say, (by way of reproach,) that I had not only
defrauded the Highlanders of their arms, but had also debauched them
from their loyalty and allegiance.”[758]

Barracks were built at Inverness, a fort erected at Fort-Augustus, and at various places over the country small towers or forts, each capable of containing a small number of soldiers.

Wade at the same time received letters of submission from a considerable number of chiefs and other troublesome Highlanders who were lying under the taint of high treason. These were expressed in terms of excessive humility and contrition, and were full of the strongest promises of future good behaviour. Wade seems, as Burton[759] remarks, “to have known so little of the people as to believe in their sincerity. Yet the contemporary correspondence of the Jacobites indicates, what subsequent events confirmed, that the Highlanders, with the inscrutable diplomatic cunning peculiar to their race, had overreached the military negotiator, and committed a quantity of effective arms to places of concealment.”[760]

One of the greatest services rendered by Wade to the government, and that for which he is chiefly known to posterity, was the construction of roads through the Highlands, in order to facilitate the march of troops, and open up a communication between the various garrisons. Previous to this the only substitutes for roads existing in the Highlands were the rude tracts, sometimes scarcely distinguishable from the surrounding waste, made by many generations of Highlanders and their cattle over mountains, through bogs, across rapid rivers, skirting giddy precipices, and perfectly bewildering and fraught with danger to any but natives. Captain Burt, one of the engineers engaged in Wade’s expedition, gives in his _Letters_ many graphic descriptions of the difficulties and dangers attendant on travelling in the Highlands before the making of these new roads. “The old ways,” he says, “(for roads I shall not call them,) consisted chiefly of stony moors, bogs, rugged, rapid fords, declivities of hills, entangling woods, and giddy precipices.”[761] As a specimen of what the traveller might expect in his progress among the mountains, we give the following incident which occurred to Burt in one of his own journeys.[762] “There was nothing remarkable afterwards, till I came near the top of the hill; where there was a seeming plain, of about 150 yards, between me and the summit.

“No sooner was I upon the edge of it, but my guide desired me to alight; and then I perceived it was a bog, or peat-moss, as they call it.

“I had experience enough of these deceitful surfaces to order that the horses should be led in separate parts, lest, if one broke the turf, the other, treading in his steps, might sink.

“The horse I used to ride having little weight but his own, went on pretty successfully; only now and then breaking the surface a little; but the other, that carried my portmanteau, and being not quite so nimble, was much in danger, till near the further end, and there he sank. But it luckily happened to be in a part where his long legs went to the bottom, which is generally hard gravel, or rock; but he was in almost up to the back.

“By this time my own (for distinction) was quite free of the bog, and being frighted, stood very tamely by himself; which he would not have done at another time. In the mean while we were forced to wait at a distance, while the other was flouncing and throwing the dirt about him; for there was no means of coming near him to ease him of the heavy burden he had upon his loins, by which he was sometimes in danger to be turned upon his back, when he rose to break the bog before him. But, in about a quarter of an hour, he got out, bedaubed with the slough, shaking with fear, and his head and neck all over in a foam.

“As for myself, I was harassed on this slough, by winding about from place to place, to find such tufts as were within my stride or leap, in my heavy boots with high heels; which, by my spring, when the little hillocks were too far asunder, broke the turf, and then I threw myself down toward the next protuberance; but to my guide it seemed nothing; he was light of body, shod with flat _brogues_, wide in the soles, and accustomed to a particular step, suited to the occasion.

“This hill was about three quarters of a mile over, and had but a short descent on the further side, rough, indeed, but not remarkable in this country. I had now five computed miles to go before I came to my first asylum,--that is, five Scots miles, which, as in the north of England, are longer than yours as three is to two; and, if the difficulty of the way were to be taken into account, it might well be called fifteen. This, except about three quarters of a mile of heathy ground, pretty free from stones and rocks, consisted of stony moors, almost impracticable for a horse with his rider, and likewise of rocky way, where we were obliged to dismount, and sometimes climb, and otherwhile slide down. But what vexed me most of all, they called it a road; and yet I must confess it was preferable to a boggy way. The great difficulty was to wind about with the horses, and find such places as they could possibly be got over.”

Wade went vigorously to work in the construction of his roads, selecting from the regular troops and Highland companies 500 men, who were put on extra pay while at the work of road-making. Notwithstanding the many difficulties to be encountered, the inexperience of the workmen, and the inferior tools then at their command for such a purpose, the undertaking was satisfactorily accomplished in about ten years. A Scottish gentleman, who visited the Highlands in 1737, found the roads completed, and was surprised by the improvements which he found to have arisen from them, amongst which he gratefully notes the existence of civilized places for the entertainment of travellers. Formerly the only apologies for hostelries in the Highlands were wretched huts, often with only one apartment, swarming with lively insects, the atmosphere solid with smoke, and the fragile walls pierced here and there with holes large enough to admit a man’s head. Now, however, these were replaced by small but substantial inns built of stone, located at distances of about ten miles from each other along the new roads. The standard breadth of the roads was sixteen feet, although where possible they were made wider, and were carried on in straight lines, unless where this was impracticable.

Wade’s main road, commencing at Perth, went by Dunkeld and Blair-Athole to Dalnacardoch, where it was joined by another from Stirling by Crieff, through Glenalmond, to Aberfeldy, where it crossed the Tay, on what was then considered a magnificent bridge of five arches. From Dalnacardoch the road goes on to Dalwhinny, where it again branches into two, one branch proceeding towards the north-west through Garva Moor, and over the Corryarrick mountain to Fort-Augustus, the other striking almost due north to Ruthven in Badenoch, and thence by Delmagary to Inverness. Another road, along the shores of Lochs Ness and Lochy, joined the latter place with the strongholds of Fort-Augustus and Fort-William. One of the most difficult parts of the undertaking was the crossing of the lofty Corryarrick, the road having to be carried up the south side of the mountain by a series of about fifteen zigzags. The entire length of road constructed measured about 250 miles.

Although these roads were doubtless of considerable advantage in a military point of view, they appear to have been of very little use in developing the commercial resources of the country. “They were indeed truly military roads--laid down by a practical soldier, and destined for warlike purposes--with scarcely any view towards the ends for which free and peaceful citizens open up a system of internal transit.”[763] They appear to have been regarded with suspicion and dislike by all classes of the Highlanders. The chiefs, according to Burt,[764] complained that in time of peace they opened up their country to strangers, who would be likely to weaken the attachment of their vassals, and that in time of war they laid their fastnesses open to the enemy. The bridges, especially, they said would render the people effeminate, and less fit to ford the rivers in other places where there were no such means of crossing. The middle class again objected to them because, their horses being unshod,--and necessarily so on account of the places where they had to find pasture--the gravel would soon whet away their hoofs, and thus render them unserviceable. “The lowest class, who, many of them, at some times cannot compass a pair of shoes for themselves, allege that the gravel is intolerable to their naked feet; and the complaint has extended to their thin brogues.” For these reasons, allied no doubt to obstinacy and hatred of innovation and government interference, many of the Highlanders, despising the new roads, continued to walk in the wretched ways of their fathers.

Although the Chevalier still had many adherents in the south of Scotland, yet, as they were narrowly watched by the government, it was considered inexpedient and unsafe to correspond with them on the subject of the Spanish expedition. In the state of uncertainty in which they were thus kept, they wisely abstained from committing themselves, and when Marischal landed they were quite unprepared to render him any assistance, and unanimously resolved not to move in any shape till a rising should take place in England in favour of the Chevalier.

As many inconveniences had arisen from a want of co-operation among the friends of the Chevalier in the south of Scotland, Mr. Lockhart, in concert with the Bishop of Edinburgh, proposed to James that the Earls of Eglinton and Wigton, Lord Balmerino, the Bishop of Edinburgh, (the head of the nonjuring clergy,) Mr. Paterson of Preston-hall, and Captain Straiton, should be appointed commissioners or trustees for transacting his affairs in Scotland. This proposal on the whole was well received by the Chevalier, who, however, probably influenced by the jealous schemers who surrounded him, did not sanction the formation of a regularly organized authoritative commission. Writing to Lockhart in February, 1721, he says, “to appoint a certain number of persons for this effect by commission, is by no means, at this time, advisable, because of the inconveniences it might draw, sooner or later, upon the persons concern’d; since it could not but be expected that the present government would, at long run, be inform’d of such a paper which, by its nature, must be known to a great number of people; besides, that many who might be most fit to discharge such a trust might, with reason, not be fond of having their names exposed in such a matter; while, on the other hand, numbers might be disobliged for not having a share where it is not possible all can be concerned; but I think all these inconveniences may be obviated, the intent of the proposal comply’d with, and equal advantages drawn from it if the persons named below, or some of them, would meet and consult together for the intents above-mention’d. The persons you propose I entirely approve, to wit, the Earls of Eglinton and Wigton, Lord Balmerino, the Bishop of Edinburgh, Mr. Paterson and Captain Straiton, to whom I would have added Mr. Harry Maul, Sir John Erskine, Lord Dun, Pourie and Glengary.”[765]

Mr. Lockhart acquainted the different persons, therein named, of its contents, and all of them undertook to execute the trust reposed in them; but as they judged it advisable to conceal the powers they had received from their friends, they requested Mr. Lockhart, when their advice was wanted, to communicate with them individually, and having collected their sentiments, to give the necessary instructions with due caution.

In June 1721, a treaty of peace was signed at Madrid between Great Britain and Spain, and at the same time a defensive alliance was entered into between Great Britain, France, and Spain. As the two last were the only powers from whom the “Pretender” could expect any effectual aid in support of his pretensions, his long-wished-for restoration seemed now to be hopeless, and King George secure, as he imagined, from foreign invasion and domestic plots, made preparations for visiting his German dominions, and actually appointed a regency to act in his absence. But early in the year 1722, a discovery was made, on information received by the king from the regent of France, that the Jacobites were busy in a new conspiracy against the government. It appeared that the Chevalier de St. George, who was at Rome, was to sail from Porto-Longone for Spain, under the protection of three Spanish men-of-war, and there to wait the resolutions of his friends.[766] In following the clue given by the Duke of Orleans, it was ascertained that all the letters, in relation to the conspiracy, were carried to Mr. George Kelly, an Irish clergyman, who despatched them to their different destinations. The insurrection was to have taken place during the king’s absence in Hanover; but his majesty having deferred his journey in consequence of the discovery of the plot, the conspirators resolved to postpone their attempt till the dissolution of parliament.

The conspirators, finding they were watched by government, became extremely cautious, and the ministers, desirous of getting hold of the treasonable correspondence, ordered Kelly, the principal agent, to be arrested. He was accordingly apprehended, but not until he had, by keeping his assailants at bay with his sword, succeeded in burning the greater part of his papers. Although the papers which were seized from Kelly, and others which had been intercepted by government, bore evident marks of a conspiracy, yet it became very difficult, from the fictitious names used in them, to trace out the guilty persons. “We are in trace of several things very material,” observes Robert Walpole in a letter to his brother, in reference to this discovery, “but we fox-hunters know that we do not always find every fox that we cross upon.” Among other persons who were arrested on suspicion, were the Duke of Norfolk, Lords North and Grey, Strafford, and Orrery, Atterbury, Bishop of Rochester, and Sir Harry Goring.

To check the threatened insurrection, a camp was immediately formed in Hyde-park, and all military officers were ordered to repair to their respective regiments. Lieutenant-general Macartney was despatched to Ireland to bring over some troops from that kingdom, and the states of Holland were requested to have their auxiliary troops in readiness for embarkation. These preparations, and the many rumours which prevailed respecting the extent of the conspiracy, affected public credit, and a run took place upon the bank, but the panic soon subsided, and public confidence was restored.

Of all the persons seized of any note, the Bishop of Rochester was the only individual against whom a charge could plausibly be maintained. He was equally noted for his high literary attainments and a warm attachment to the exploded dogma of passive obedience. He had written Sacheverel’s defence _con amore_, and he had carried his partisanship for the house of Stuart so far, that, according to Lord Harcourt, he offered, upon the death of Queen Anne, to proclaim the Chevalier de St. George at Charing-cross in his lawn sleeves, and when his proposal was declined, he is said to have exclaimed, “Never was a better cause lost for want of spirit.”

After an examination before the privy-council, the bishop was committed to the Tower on a charge of high treason. The committal of the bishop was highly resented by the clergy, who considered it an outrage upon the Church of England and the Episcopal order, and they gave full vent to their feelings by offering up public prayers for his health in all the churches and chapels of London and Westminster.

The new parliament met in the month of October, and the first thing the king did was to announce, by a speech from the throne, the nature of the conspiracy. A bill for suspending the _habeas corpus_ act for a whole year was immediately brought into the house of lords, but as the period of suspension was double of any suspension hitherto known, it met with some opposition. In the commons, however, the opposition was so violent, that Mr. Robert Walpole found himself necessitated to invent a story of a design to seize the bank and the exchequer, and to proclaim the “Pretender” on the royal exchange. This ridiculous tale, uttered with the greatest confidence, alarmed the commons, and they passed the bill.

As the Catholics were supposed to be chiefly concerned in the conspiracy, a bill was introduced into the house of commons for raising £100,000 upon the real and personal estates of all “papists,” or persons educated in the Catholic religion, towards defraying the expenses incurred by the late rebellion and disorders. This bill being justly regarded as a species of persecution, was warmly opposed by some members, but it was sent up to the house of lords along with another bill, obliging all persons, being “papists,” in Scotland, and all persons in Great Britain refusing or neglecting to take the oaths appointed for the king’s person and government, to register their names and real estates. As might have been anticipated, both bills were passed without amendments, and received the royal assent.

Atterbury was brought up for trial on the 9th of May, 1723, and sentenced to banishment under pain of death if he should ever return. He quitted the kingdom in June, and after a short stay at Brussels, finally settled in Paris. It is said that when crossing over to Calais he met Lord Bolingbroke, then on his way to England, whom he thus addressed with a smile, “My lord, you and I are exchanged!”

The return of this extraordinary person to England gave rise to much speculation, and many conjectures were hazarded as to the reasons which had induced Walpole to promote the return of a man whose impeachment he had himself moved; but the mystery has been cleared up by papers which have since met the public eye. From these it appears that several years before his appearance in England, Bolingbroke had completely broken with the Stuarts in consequence of his deprivation of the seals. It seems that the Earl of Mar and the duke had a violent difference with regard to the conduct of the expedition in 1715; and Mar, to revenge himself upon his rival, prevailed upon the Duke of Ormond to report in presence of the Chevalier de St. George certain abusive expressions which Bolingbroke, when in a state of intoxication, had uttered in disparagement of his master. The Chevalier, highly exasperated at Bolingbroke, sent for the seals, at which his lordship was so incensed that when the queen mother attempted to reconcile them, Bolingbroke said that he wished his arm might rot off if ever he drew his sword or employed his pen in the service of the Stuarts. He, thereupon, proffered his services to King George, and offered to do any thing but betray the secrets of his friends. This offer was followed by the celebrated letter to Sir William Wyndham, in which he dissuaded the Tories from placing any reliance on the Pretender, and exposed the exiled family to ridicule and contempt; but his overtures were rejected by the government, and when an act of indemnity was hinted at, Walpole expressed in the strongest terms his indignation at the very idea of such a measure. Bolingbroke, however, persevered; and Walpole having been softened by the entreaties of the Duchess of Kendal, one of the mistresses of the king, to whom Bolingbroke made a present of £11,000, he procured a pardon. In April, 1725, a bill was brought into the house of lords for restoring to Bolingbroke his family estate, which, after some opposition, passed both houses.

Upon the passing of the disarming act, some of the Highland chiefs held a meeting at Paris, at which they resolved to apply to the Chevalier de St. George, to know whether, in his opinion, they should submit to the new law. James returned an answer under cover to the restless Atterbury, in which he advised the chiefs rather to submit than run the risk of ruining their followers; but the bishop thought proper to keep up the letter, and having sent off an express to Rome, James was induced to write another letter altogether different from the first, requiring them to resist, by force, the intended attempt of the government to disarm the Highlanders. Meanwhile, the chiefs were apprised of James’s original sentiments by a correspondent at Rome, and of the letter which had been sent to Atterbury’s care. Unaware of this circumstance, the bishop, on receipt of the second letter, convened the chiefs, and communicated to them its contents; but these being so completely at variance with the information of their correspondent, they insisted upon seeing the first letter, but Atterbury refused in the most positive terms to exhibit it, and insisted upon compliance with the injunctions contained in the second letter. They, thereupon, desired to know what support they were to receive in men, money, and arms; but the bishop told them, that unless they resolved to go to Scotland and take up arms, he would give them no further information than this, that they would be assisted by a certain foreign power, whose name he was not at liberty to mention.[767] The chiefs, dissatisfied with the conduct of the bishop, refused to pledge themselves as required, and retired.

The great preparations made to carry the disarming act into effect, indicated a dread, on the part of the government, that the Highlanders would not deliver up their arms without a struggle. The Chevalier de St. George, deceived as it would appear by the representations of Atterbury, resolved to support the Highlanders, to the effect at least of enabling them to obtain favourable terms from the government. “I find,” says James, in a letter[768] to Mr. Lockhart, “they (the Highlanders) are of opinion that nothing less than utter ruin is designed for them, and those on this side are persuaded that the English government will meet with the greatest difficulties in executing their projects, and that the clans will unanimously agree to oppose them to the last, and if thereby circumstances will allow them to do nothing for my service, that they will still, by a capitulation, be able to procure better terms to themselves than they can propose by leaving themselves at the government’s mercy, and delivering up their arms; and, if so, I am resolved, and I think I owe it to them, to do all in my power to support them, and the distance I am at has obliged me to give my orders accordingly; and nothing in my power shall be wanting to enable them to keep their ground against the government, at least till they can procure good terms for themselves, though, at the same time, I must inform you that the opposition they propose to make may prove of the greatest advantage to my interest, considering the hopes I have of foreign assistance, which, perhaps, you may hear of even before you receive this letter. I should not have ventured to call the Highlanders together, without a certainty of their being supported, but the great probability there is of it makes me not at all sorry they should take the resolution of defending themselves, and not delivering up their arms, which would have rendered them, in a great measure, useless to their countrie; and as the designs of the government are represented to me, the laying down of their arms is only to be the forerunner of other methods, that are to be taken to extirpate their race for ever. They are certainly in the right to make the government buy their slavery at as dear a rate as they can. The distance I am at (Rome), and the imperfect accounts I have had of this law, (for disarming the Highlanders,) have been very unlucky; however, the orders I have sent to France I hope will not come too late, and I can answer for the diligence in the execution of them, which is all I can say to you at present from hence.”

A few days after the receipt of this letter, Mr. Lockhart went to Edinburgh, where he found the Duke of Hamilton and the Earl of Kincardine, two of James’s “trustees,” to whom he showed the letter, and requested their opinion as to the proposed attempt to resist the contemplated measures of the government. These noblemen considered that the attempt would be rash as well as fatal,--that the idea of obtaining better terms by a temporary resistance, was vain, unless the Highlanders succeed in defeating the government; but that if they failed, the utter extirpation of their race would certainly follow;--that the Highlanders being a body of men of such high value, as well in relation to the interests of the exiled family, as to those of the kingdom, it was by no means reasonable to hazard them upon an uncertainty, for though they should give up their arms, it would be easier to provide them afterwards with others, when their services were required, than to repair the loss of their persons;--that with regard to foreign assistance, as such undertakings were liable to many accidents, and as the best formed designs often turned out abortive, it was by no means advisable to hazard the Highlanders, who were hated by the government, upon the expectancy of such aid; and that if such foreign powers as could, and were willing to assist, would inquire into the true state of affairs in Scotland, they would find that wherever a feasible attempt should be made by them to restore the exiled family, the Scots would be ready to declare themselves.

This opinion was communicated by Mr. Lockhart to James,[769] and he informed him at the same time that a person of distinction, who had been sent by the Highland Jacobite chiefs to obtain intelligence and advice, had arrived in Edinburgh _incognito_, and had informed Kincardine that the Highlanders had resolved to make a show of submission, by giving up part of their arms under the pretence of delivering up the whole, while their intention was to retain and conceal the best and greater part of them. Kincardine, without giving any opinion on the subject, recommended to the gentleman in question, as foreign assistance might be speedily expected, the expediency of putting off the delivery as long as possible, and that as four or five weeks would be consumed before the forms required by the act could be complied with, they should retain their arms till the expiration of that period.

The advice given by Hamilton and Eglinton coincided with the view which James, upon being made acquainted with the resolution of the chief at Paris, had adopted; and in a letter written to Mr. Lockhart by Colonel Hay, whom he had appointed his secretary of state, and raised to the peerage under the title of Earl of Inverness, he signified his approbation of the advice given by his friends, which he said was entirely agreeable to his own sentiments from the beginning. He stated, moreover, that the orders he had given to assist the Highlanders were only conditional, and in the event only that they themselves should have resolved to oppose the government, and that if the Bishop of Rochester had pressed any of the chiefs at Paris to go to arms, it was more with a view to discover a correspondence which he suspected one of them had carried on independent of the others, than with any real design to induce them to order their followers to make opposition, as that was to have depended as much upon the chiefs at home as upon those abroad.[770]

When James ascertained that the Highlanders were resolved to submit, he withdrew the orders he had given for assisting them, and despatched a trusty messenger to the Highlands to acquaint them of his readiness to support them when a proper occasion offered, and to collect information as to the state of the country. Allan Cameron, the messenger in question, arrived in the Highlands in August, and visited the heads of the clans in the interest of James, to whom he delivered the message with which he had been intrusted. It is said that General Wade was aware of his arrival, but it does not appear that any measures were taken to apprehend him. After four months’ residence in the Highlands, Cameron ventured on a journey to Edinburgh, where, in the beginning of the year 1726, he held frequent conferences with the Duke of Hamilton, the Earl of Kincardine, and Lockhart of Carnwath, on the subject of his mission and the state of affairs, but nothing of importance was resolved upon at these meetings, and Cameron departed for the continent early in February.

About this time an event occurred, which, while it tended to create factions amongst the adherents of James, made many of them keep either altogether aloof from any direct management in his affairs, or abstain from entering into any plan of co-operation for his restoration. This was the dismissal of Mar from his post as minister of James at Paris, on the suspicion that he had betrayed the secrets of his master to the British government. From his situation he was intimately acquainted with all the Chevalier’s affairs, and knew the name of every person of any note in the three kingdoms who had taken an interest in the restoration of the exiled family, with many of whom he himself had corresponded. The removal, therefore, of such a person from the Jacobite councils could not fail to excite uneasy apprehensions in the minds of those who had intrusted him with their confidence, and to make them extremely cautious in again committing themselves by any act, which, if discovered, would place them in jeopardy. To this feeling may be ascribed the great reserve which for several years subsequent to this occurrence the Jacobites observed in their foreign relations, and the want of unity of action which formed so remarkable a characteristic in their subsequent proceedings. As this affair forms an important link in the historical chain which connects the events of the year 1715 with those of 1745, a short account of it is necessary.

During a temporary confinement at Geneva, Mar had obtained a sum of money, whether solicited or not does not appear, from the Earl of Stair, the British ambassador at Paris, without the knowledge of James. In a narrative afterwards drawn up by Mar in his own justification, he states, that being in great straits he received this money as a loan from the earl, who was his old friend; but Colonel Hay, in a letter to Mr. Lockhart of the 8th of September, 1725, states that Mar had no occasion for such a loan, as “the king” remitted him considerable supplies to Geneva, where his expense would be trifling, as he was entertained by the town.[771] This matter might have been overlooked, but he, soon thereafter, accepted a pension of £2,000 from the government, over and above the sum of £1,500 which his countess and daughter actually then received by way of jointure and aliment out of the produce of his estate. Mar states that before he agreed to receive this pension he took the advice of General Dillon, a zealous supporter of the interests of the Stuarts, whom he had been accustomed to consult in all matters of importance, and that the general advised him to accept of the offer, as by refusing it the government might stop his lady’s jointure, and that his estate would be sold and lost for ever to his family; and that as he had been released from his confinement at Geneva on condition that he should not act or take any part against the government of Great Britain during his abode in France, and should return when required to Geneva, that government might insist on his being sent back to Geneva, whence he had been allowed to go to the waters of Bourbon for his health. Mar communicated the proposal also to James, who at once sanctioned his acceptance of the pension, and assured him that his sentiments in regard to him remained unaltered. Notwithstanding this assurance, however, there is every reason to believe that James, not without good grounds, had begun to suspect his fidelity; and as he could clearly perceive that Mar had already taken his resolution to close with the government, he might consider it his wisest policy to conceal his displeasure, and not to break at once with a man who had so much in his power to injure him and his friends.

Having thus succeeded in their advances to Mar, the government, on receiving information of the conspiracy in which Atterbury was concerned, sent a gentleman to Paris in May, 1722, with a letter to Mar from Lord Carteret. This gentleman received instructions to sound Mar as to his knowledge of the intended plot. On arriving at Paris, the messenger, (who, it is understood, was Colonel Churchill,) sent a letter to Mar requesting a private interview. Dillon was present when this letter was delivered, and on reading it, Mar says he showed it to Dillon, upon which it was arranged that Mar should instantly call upon the person who had written the letter, and that Dillon should remain in the house till Mar’s return, when the object and nature of the interview would be communicated to him. On Mar’s return he and Dillon consulted together, and they both thought that the incident was a lucky one, as it afforded Mar an opportunity of doing James’s affairs a good service by leading the government off the true scent, and thereby prevent further inquiries. They thereupon drew up a letter with that view, to be sent by Mar in answer to Carteret’s communication, which being approved of by another person in the confidence of the Chevalier, was sent by Mar to the bearer of Carteret’s letter. Mar immediately sent an account of the affair to James and the Duke of Ormond, and shortly received a letter from the former, dated 8th June, 1722, in which he expressed himself entirely satisfied with the course pursued by Mar on the occasion. To justify himself still farther, Mar states, that among the vouchers of his exculpation, there was the copy of another letter from James, written by him to one of his agents at Paris, wherein he justifies and approves of Mar’s conduct, and expresses his regret for the aspersions which had been cast upon the earl about the plot.

Though James thus continued to profess his usual confidence in Mar’s integrity, he had, ever since he became acquainted with his pecuniary obligations to Stair, resolved to withdraw that confidence from him by degrees, and in such a manner as might not be prejudicial to the adherents of the exiled family in Great Britain. But Mar, who, as James observed,[772] had put himself under such engagements that he could not any longer serve him in a public manner, and who, from the nature of these engagements, should have declined all knowledge of James’s secrets, continued to meddle with his affairs as formerly, by taking the direction and management of those intrusted to Dillon, the confidential agent of James and the English Jacobites. In this way was Mar enabled for several years, when distrusted by James, to compel him in a manner to keep on good terms with him. From the natural timidity of James, and his anxiety to avoid an open breach with Mar, it is difficult to say how long matters might have remained in this awkward state, had not the attention of the Scottish Jacobites been drawn to Mar’s pension by the report of the parliamentary committee concerning the conspiracy; and the representations of the Bishop of Rochester respecting Mar’s conduct, shortly after his arrival in France, brought matters to a crisis. In the letter last referred to, James thus intimates to Mr. Lockhart the final dismissal of Mar. “I have been always unwilling to mention Mar, but I find myself indispensably engaged at present to let my Scots friends know that I have withdrawn my confidence entirely from him, as I shall be obliged to do from all who may be any ways influenced by him. This conduct is founded on the strongest and most urgent necessity in which my regard to my faithful subjects and servants have the greatest share. What is here said of Mar is not with a view of its being made public, there being no occasion for that, since, many years ago, he put himself under such engagements that he could not serve me in a public manner, neither has he been publicly employ’d by me.”

The charges made by Atterbury against Mar were, _1mo_, That about the time he, the bishop, was sent prisoner to the Tower, Mar had written him a letter which was the cause of his banishment. _2do_, That he had betrayed the secrets of the Chevalier de St. George to the British government, and had entered into a correspondence with them. _3tio_, That he had advised the Chevalier to resign his right to the crown for a pension; and lastly, that without consulting James, he drew up and presented a memorial to the Duke of Orleans, containing a plan, which, under the pretence of restoring him, would, if acted upon, have rendered his restoration for ever impracticable.

To understand the nature of the last charge against Mar, that he laid the scheme before the Regent of France with a design to ruin James, Mar refers to the plan itself for his justification. The expulsion of the Stuarts from the British throne had been always looked upon by the French court as an event which, by dividing the nation into rival factions, would enable France to humble and weaken an ancient and formidable rival. To encourage the Jacobites and Tories in their opposition to the new dynasty, and to embroil the nation in a civil war, the French ministry repeatedly promised to aid them in any attempts they might make to overturn the government; but true to the line of policy they had laid down for themselves, of allowing the opposing parties in the state to weaken each other’s strength in their contest for ascendency, they sided with the weaker party only to prolong the struggle, in the hope that, by thus keeping alive the spirit of discontent, France might be enabled to extend her power, and carry into effect her designs of conquest.

To remove the objections which such a policy opposed to the restoration of James, Mar proposed that, upon such event taking place, Scotland and Ireland should be restored to their ancient state of independence, and protected in their trade, and thereby enabled, as they would be inclined, to support “the king in such a manner as he’d be under no necessity of entering into measures contrary to his inclinations to gratify the caprices, and allay the factions of his English subjects.”[773] He also proposed that a certain number of French forces should remain in Britain after James was restored, till he had modelled and established the government on this footing, and that 5,000 Scots and as many Irish troops should be lent to the French king, to be kept by him in pay for a certain number of years. Mar was fully aware that such a scheme would be highly unpopular in England, on which account he says, that although he had long ago formed it, he took no steps therein during the life of Cardinal Dubois, whom he knew to be particularly attached to the existing government of Britain; but that obstacle being removed, he laid it before the regent of France, who, he says, he had reason to believe, received it with approbation, as he sealed it up, and addressed it to the Duke of Bourbon, and recommended it to his care. To excuse himself for laying the scheme before the Duke of Orleans without the Chevalier’s knowledge, he states that he did so to prevent James, in case of the scheme being discovered, being blamed by those who, for particular reasons, would be displeased at it; but that immediately after the delivery he acquainted James thereof, and sent him a copy of it, and at the same time represented to him the absolute necessity of keeping it secret. Notwithstanding this injunction, Colonel Hay sent a copy of it to the Bishop of Rochester, and Mar attributes the bad feeling which Atterbury afterwards displayed towards him, to the proposal he made for restoring Scotland to her independence.

The memorial was presented by Mar to the Duke of Orleans in September, 1723; but so little secrecy was observed, that, in the month of January following, a statement appeared in the public newspapers, that a certain peer, then in Paris, had laid a plan before the regent for restoring the exiled family. Though the British government must have been aware, or at all events must have suspected, after such a notification, that Mar was the author of the scheme, his pension was still continued, and they even favoured him still more by allowing the family estate, which was exposed to sale, to fall again into the hands of the family on favourable terms.

On reviewing the whole circumstances of Mar’s conduct, evolved by Atterbury’s charges, it must be admitted that his justification is far from being complete. From the position in which he placed himself as a debtor of Stair, and a pensioner of the British government, he could no longer be trusted with safety by his Jacobite colleagues, and as he had come under an obligation, as a condition of his pension, not to act in behalf of the Stuarts, he was bound in honour to have abstained from all farther interference in their affairs; but for reasons only known to himself, he continued to act as if no alteration of his relations with the exiled family had taken place since he was first intrusted by them. Selfish in his disposition, and regardless whether the Chevalier de St. George, or the Elector of Hanover wore the crown, provided his ambition was gratified, it is probable, that, without harbouring any intention to betray, he wished to preserve an appearance of promoting the interests of the Stuarts, in order that the compact which he had entered into with the British government, might, in the event of a restoration of that family, form no bar to his advancement under a new order of things; but whatever were his views or motives, his design, if he entertained any such as has been supposed, was frustrated by his disgrace in 1725.

The breach with Mar was looked upon by some of the Jacobites as a rash act on the part of the Chevalier, and they considered that he had been sacrificed to gratify Colonel Hay, between whom and Mar an irreconcilable difference had for some time existed. This opinion had a pernicious influence upon the councils of the Chevalier, and to the rupture with Mar may be attributed the _denouement_ of an unhappy difference between James and his consort, which, for a time, fixed the attention of all the European courts.

In the year 1720 the Chevalier de St. George had espoused the Princess Clementina, granddaughter of John Sobieski, king of Poland, who had born him two sons, viz. Charles Edward, celebrated for his exploits in 1745, and Henry Benedict, afterwards known as Cardinal York.[774] Prince Charles was placed under the tuition of one Mrs. Sheldon, who, it is said, obtained a complete ascendency over the Princess Clementina. As alleged by the partisans of Colonel Hay, she was entirely devoted to Mar, and served him as a spy in the family. To counteract the rising influence of Hay, she is represented to have incited the princess against him to such a degree, as to render the whole household a scene of constant disturbance. But whatever may have been the conduct of Mrs. Sheldon, there is good reason for believing that the cause of irritation proceeded entirely from the behaviour of Hay and his lady, who appear not to have treated the princess with the respect due to her rank, and who, from the sway they appear to have had over the mind of her husband, indulged in liberties which did not become them.

To relieve herself from the indignities which she alleged she suffered, the princess resolved to retire into a convent, of which resolution the Chevalier first received notice from a confidante of the princess, who also informed him that nothing but the dismissal of Colonel Hay from his service would induce her to alter her resolution. The princess afterwards personally notified her determination to her husband, who remonstrated with her upon the impropriety of a step which would prejudice them in the eyes of their friends, and make their enemies triumph; but she remained inflexible.

Finding the Chevalier fully determined to retain Colonel Hay in his service, the princess made preparations for carrying her resolution into effect; and, accordingly, on the morning of Thursday, the 15th of November, 1725, under the pretence of taking an airing in her carriage, she drove off to the convent of St. Cecilia, at Rome, into which she retired, without taking any notice of a long letter, by way of remonstrance, which her husband had written her on the 11th.[775]

The Chevalier was anxious that his friends should form a favourable opinion of the course he had adopted in resisting the demand of his wife; and, accordingly, on the morning after her departure, he assembled all his household, and explained to them fully the different steps he had taken to prevent the extraordinary proceeding of the princess. He also entered into a justification of his own conduct, and concluded by assuring them that it should be his principal care to educate his two sons in such a manner as might contribute one day to the happiness of the people he expected to govern. With the same view, he immediately despatched copies of the memoir, and of the two letters he had written to the princess, to Mr. Lockhart, to be shown to his friends in Scotland; but as the memoir and letters had been made public, copies of them were publicly hawked through the streets of London and Edinburgh, with a scurrilous introduction, several weeks before Mr. Lockhart received his communication. This was done apparently with the approbation of the government, as the magistrates of Edinburgh compelled the porters of the city to cry the papers through the streets.[776] At first, the Jacobites imagined that these documents were forgeries got up by the government, to make the Jacobite cause contemptible in the eyes of the people; but they were soon undeceived, and great was their consternation when they found that the papers in question were genuine.