Domestic annals of Scotland : $b from the revolution to the rebellion of 1745Chambers, Robert
History
Domestic annals of Scotland : $b from the revolution to the rebellion of 1745
Chambers, Robert
Scotland -- History -- 1689-1745
Still unsatisfied with what he had gained, Irving came, in March 1694,
with Roderick Forbes, younger of Brux, whom he had brought over to his
views, and made a personal attack upon Leas, as he was innocently sowing
his diminished acres. ‘Tying his hands behind his back, [Irving] brought
him off the ground, and carried him prisoner like a malefactor to his
house.’ While they were there preparing papers which they were to force
him to subscribe, Leas ‘did endeavour to shake his hands lowse of their
bonds; but Mr Robert Irving came and ordered the cords to be more
severely drawn, which accordingly was done.’ He was detained in that
condition ‘till he was almost dead,’ and so was compelled to sign a
renunciation of his tack, and also a disposition of the seed he had
sown.
On a complaint from Leas coming before the Privy Council, Irving and
young Brux did not appear; for which reason they were denounced rebels.
Afterwards (June 16, 1698), they came forward with a petition for a
suspension of the decreet, alleging that they had come to the court, but
were prevented from appearing by accident. ‘It was the petitioners’
misfortune,’ they said, ‘that the time of the said calling they were
gone down to the close, and the macers not having called over the
window, or they not having heard, Maister Leas himself craved [that] the
letters might be found orderly proceeded.’ On this petition, the decreet
was suspended.
In August 1697, we are regaled with an example of female ‘bangstrie’ in
an elevated grade of society. It was represented to the Privy Council
that the wife of Lumsden of Innergellie, in Fife—we may presume, under
some supposed legal claim—came at midnight of the 22d July, with John
and Agnes Harper, and a few other persons, to the house of Ellieston, in
Linlithgowshire—ostensibly the property of the Earl of Rutherglen—which
was fast locked; and there, having brought ladders with them, they
scaled the house, and violently broke open the windows, at which they
[Sidenote: 1696.] entered; after which they broke open the doors. Having
thus taken forcible possession of the mansion, they brought cattle,
which they turned loose, to eat whatever fodder the place afforded.
On the petition of the Earl of Rutherglen, this affair came before the
Council, when, the accused lady not appearing, the Lords gave orders
that she and her servants should be cast out of the house of Ellieston,
and that John and Agnes Harper should pay a hundred pounds Scots as
damages, and to be confined (if caught) until that sum was paid.[193]
[Sidenote: 1697.]
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account