Chapter XXVII: A.d. 1716-1737 (3)

The court of Rome seemed to approve of the Chevalier’s conduct in refusing to remove Hay; but when it was understood that the removal of Murray, the young princes’ governor, was considered by their mother even of more importance than the dismissal of Hay, the pope sent a message to James, intimating that if Murray were removed and Mrs. Sheldon restored to favour, a reconciliation might be effected with the princess,--that, however, he would not insist on Mrs. Sheldon being taken back, but that he could not approve of nor consent to Murray being about the prince. The Chevalier did not relish such interference, and returned for answer, that he had no occasion for the pope’s advice, and that he did not consider his consent necessary in an affair which related to the private concerns of his family. As James was the pensioner of his holiness, the answer may be considered rather uncourteous, but the Chevalier looked upon such meddling as an insult which his dignity could not brook. The pope, however, renewed his application to bring about a reconciliation, and with such earnestness, that James became so uneasy as to express a wish to retire from his dominions.[777] By the efforts, however, it is believed, of the princess’s friends, aided by the repeated remonstrances of a respectable portion of the Jacobites, the Chevalier at length reluctantly dismissed Hay from his service. According to Mr. Lockhart, Hay and his wife had obtained such a complete ascendency over the Chevalier, that they had the direction of all matters, whether public or domestic, and taking advantage of the confidence which he reposed in them, they instilled into his mind unfavourable impressions of his best friends. By insinuating that the princess, and every person that did not truckle to them, were factious, and that their complaints against the colonel and his lady proceeded from a feeling of disrespect to himself, his temper became by degrees soured towards his wife. To escape from the insolence of these favourites, the princess, as has been seen, embraced, for a time, a conventual life; and while some of the Chevalier’s adherents, who had lost their estates in his service, left his court in disgust, others were ordered away. It was currently reported at the time that Mrs. Hay was the king’s mistress, and that jealousy on the part of the Princess Clementina was the cause of the rupture; the princess herself in her letters distinctly speaks of Mrs. Hay as “the king’s mistress,” although persons who had ample opportunities of observation could observe no impropriety. The pertinacity with which James clung to his unworthy favourites tended greatly to injure his affairs.[778]

The death of George I., which took place on Sunday, the 11th June, 1727, while on his journey to Hanover, raised anew the hopes of the Chevalier. He was at Bologna when this intelligence reached him, and so anxious was he to be nearer England to watch the progress of events, and to be ready to avail himself of the services of his friends in Britain to effect his restoration, that he left Bologna privately for Lorraine, the day after the news was brought him, although the princess, who had just left the convent, by the advice of her friends, was at the time on her way from Rome to Bologna to join him. The journey of the princess being publicly known, the Chevalier availed himself of the circumstance to conceal his real design, by giving out that he had left Bologna to meet her. On arriving at Nancy, the Chevalier despatched couriers to Vienna, Madrid, and Paris, announcing the object of his journey, and at the same time sent a messenger with a letter to Mr. Lockhart, who, in consequence of a warrant being issued by the British government for his apprehension, had a few months before taken refuge on the continent, and was then residing at Liege. Although he expected no assistance from any foreign power, still, he says, “the present conjuncture appears so favourable in all its circumstances that had I only consulted my own inclinations, I should certainly out of hand have crossed the seas, and seen at any rate what I could do for my own and my subjects’ delivery; but as on this occasion I act for them as well as myself, and cannot hope without their concurrence to succeed in what I may undertake in our mutual behalf, I find myself under the necessity of making no further steps without their advice.

“’Tis true the disadvantages I lie under are great and many; I have but a small stock of money, scarce sufficient to transport what few arms I have and what officers I may get to follow me on this occasion. I’m sensible that it is next to impossible that a concert should be established amongst my friends at home, such as would be sufficient for a rising in arms in my favour before my arrival, and by what is said before, the little hopes of foreign assistance will be sufficiently seen; but with all this, many arguments may be brought to authorise an undertaking which at first sight might appear rash.... All put together it must be concluded that if the present conjuncture is slip’d, it cannot be expected that we ever can have so favorable a one for acting by ourselves, and that we run the risk of allowing the general affairs of Europe to be less favorable to us than they are at present; so that whatever is not absolutely desperate ought certainly to be undertaken, and the sooner the better.

“I desire therefore you may think seriously on this matter, and let me have your opinion as soon as possible, and if my going into England be not adviseable, whether my going to the Highlands of Scotland might not be found proper.” To this letter is appended the following postscript in James’s own handwriting. “The contents of this will show you the confidence I have in you, and I expect you will let me know by the bearer, (Allan Cameron,) your advice and opinion, particularly on this important occasion.”[779]

From Cameron Mr. Lockhart was surprised to learn that the Chevalier, notwithstanding his certainty that he could look for no foreign aid, and that his friends, both in Scotland and England, had made no preparations to receive him, was not only inclined, but seemed even resolved, to repair to the Highlands of Scotland, and there raise the standard of insurrection, and that Colonel Hay, whom he had so lately discarded, was one of his counsellors on the occasion. As Cameron, who had visited the Highlands some time before, and was well aware of the almost insuperable difficulties which opposed themselves to the contemplated step, seemed to approve of the Chevalier’s design, Mr. Lockhart expressed his wonder that one who knew the state of the Highlands so well, and the determination generally of the Highlanders not to take the field again till they saw England actually engaged, could advise his master to risk his person, and expose the country and his friends to certain destruction. He observed, that there were indeed some persons who would venture their all in any attempt headed by the Chevalier in person, but as matters then stood, the number of such persons would be few, and that the great majority of those that might be expected to join him would consist of idle persons, actuated solely by the hopes of plunder, who would abandon him eventually to the mercy of the government troops that would be poured into the Highlands, and that, under the pretence of punishing the few who had taken up arms, they would ravage the country and cut off the inhabitants, for doing which the government only wanted such a handle.

In accordance with these sentiments, Mr. Lockhart represented in his answer to the Chevalier’s letter, that the design he contemplated was one of the greatest importance, and though it was very proper for him to put himself in a condition to avail himself of any favourable circumstances that might occur, yet that appearances did not warrant such expectations,--that the people of England seemed to have forgot all the grievances under which they had laboured during the late reign, in hope of a better order of things, and that until they found themselves disappointed, he could expect nothing from them,--that with regard to such of the people of Scotland as were favourably disposed, they could not possibly do any thing without being previously provided with many material things they stood in need of, and that before these could be supplied, many difficulties had to be surmounted and much time would be lost, during which preparations would be made on all hands to crush them,--that although it would be of advantage to strike a blow before the government had time to strengthen itself at home and abroad, yet the attempt was not advisable without necessary precautions and provisions to insure its success, as without these such an attempt would be desperate, and might ruin the cause for ever,--that no man living would be happier than he (Mr. Lockhart) to see the dawning of a fair day, but when every point of the compass was black and cloudy, he could not but dread very bad weather, and such as could give no encouragement to a traveller to proceed on his voyage, and might prove the utter ruin of himself and attendants.[780] This judicious advice was not thrown away upon the Chevalier, who at once laid aside his design of going to Scotland, and retired to Avignon, where he proposed to reside under the protection of the pope; but his stay at Avignon was short, being obliged to leave that place in consequence, it is believed, of the representations of the French government to the court of Rome. He returned to Italy.

FOOTNOTES:

[745] _Annals of the 2d year of George I._, p. 248.

[746] _State Trials_, vol. xv.

[747] “It is painful to see on the lists, the many Highland names followed with the word ‘labourer,’ indicating that they belonged to the humblest class. Too implicit obedience had been the weakness, instead of rebellion being the crime, of these men; and in many instances they had been forced into the service for which they were punished, as absolutely as the French conscript or the British pressed seaman.”--Burton’s _Scotland_ (1689-1747), vol. ii. p. 211.

[748] Mem. de Berwick, tome ii.

[749] Mr. Stanhope to Mr. Doddington, March 13th, 1716.

[750] _Lockhart Papers_, vol. ii. p. 7.

[751] Lockhart, vol. ii. p. 19.

[752] See for the information in these paragraphs the appendices to Jamieson’s edition of Burt’s _Letters_.

[753] Burt’s _Letters_, vol. ii. pp. 277, 278.

[754] Lovat himself commanded one of these companies, and appears to have felt pretty sore at the loss of it.

[755] Burt’s _Letters_, vol. ii. pp. 273, 274.

[756] Idem, pp. 278, 279.

[757] “The companies were six in number: three distinguished by the name of large companies, consisted of 100 men each; and three smaller companies, of 70 men each. The former were commanded by captains, and the latter by captain-lieutenants, each commanding officer being, as the name implies, independent of the others. To each company, great and small, was attached the same number of subalterns, viz. two lieutenants and one ensign.”

[758] Burt’s _Letters_, vol. ii. pp. 303-314.

[759] _Scotland_ (1689-1747), vol. ii. p. 247.

[760] Among Wade’s correspondents were Robert Stewart of Appin, Alexander Macdonald of Glencoe, Grant, Laird of Glenmorison, the Laird of Mackinnon, Robert Campbell, _alias_ Macgregor (the notorious Rob Roy), Lord Ogilvy. “No doubt,” writes Lockhart to the Pretender, “the government will be at pains to magnify and spread abroad their success in disarming the Highlanders, but depend on’t, it’s all a jest; for few or no swords or pistols are or will be surrendered, and only such of their fire-arms as are of no value.”--Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 195.

[761] Letter xxvi., p. 191, vol. ii.

[762] Letter xvi.

[763] Burton (1689-1747), vol. ii. p. 256.

[764] _Letters_, vol. ii. p. 220.

[765] Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 29.

[766] Robert Walpole to his brother Horace, May 1722. Coxe.

[767] Abstract of a letter from one of the Highland chiefs at Paris to Mr. John Macleod, advocate, dated the end of June, 1725. Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. pp. 192-3.

[768] Dated 23d June, 1725. Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 169.

[769] Letter from Mr. Lockhart to the Chevalier, 25th July, 1725. Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 186.

[770] Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 218.

[771] Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 177-206.

[772] Letter to Mr. Lockhart, 31st August, 1724. Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 131.

[773] Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 183.

[774] The Prince was born on 31st December 1720,--the Cardinal on 6th March, 1725.

[775] This letter, and a previous one, dated 9th November, are published among the Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 246.

[776] Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. pp. 242-261, 360.

[777] Letters from the Chevalier to Mr. Lockhart, 3d Dec. 1725, and 19th Jan. 1726, vol. ii. pp. 253-256.

[778] Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 339.

[779] Idem, p. 356.

[780] Lockhart _Papers_, vol. ii. p. 360.