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
The Earl of Kintore, who had been made Knight Marischal of Scotland at
the Restoration, and afterwards raised to the peerage for his service in
saving the regalia from the English in 1651, was still living.[321] He
petitioned the Privy Council at this date on account of a pamphlet
published by Sir William Ogilvie of Barras, in which his concern in the
preservation of the regalia was unduly depreciated. His lordship gives a
long recital on the subject, from which it after all appears that his
share of the business was confined to his discommending obedience to
[Sidenote: 1702.] be paid to a state order for sending out the regalia
from Dunnottar Castle—in which case it was likely they might have been
taken—and afterwards doing what he could to put the English on a false
scent, by representing the regalia as carried to the king at Paris. He
denounces the pamphlet as an endeavour ‘to rob him of his just merit and
honour, and likewise to belie his majesty’s patents in his favour,’ and
he craved due punishment. Sir William, being laid up with sickness at
Montrose, was unable to appear in his own defence, and the Council,
accordingly, without hesitation, ordered the offensive brochure to be
publicly burnt at the Cross of Edinburgh by the common hangman.
David Ogilvie, younger of Barras, was soon after fined in a hundred
pounds for his concern in this so-called libel.[322]
There is something unaccountable in the determination evinced at various
periods to assign the glory of the preservation of the regalia to the
Earl of Kintore, the grand fact of the case being that these sacred
relics were saved by the dexterity and courage of the unpretending
woman—Mrs Grainger—the minister’s wife of Kineff, who, by means of her
servant, got them carried out of Dunnottar Castle through the
beleaguering lines of the English, and kept them in secrecy under ground
for eight years. See under March 1652.
[Sidenote: AUG.]
The arrangements of the Post-office, as established by the act of 1695,
were found to be not duly observed, in as far as common carriers
presumed to carry letters in tracts where post-offices were erected,
‘besides such as relate to goods sent or to be returned to them.’ A very
strict proclamation was now issued against this practice, and forbidding
all who were not noblemen or gentlemen’s servants to ‘carry, receive, or
deliver any letters where post-offices are erected.’
Inviolability of letters at the Post-office was not yet held in respect
as a principle. In July 1701, two letters from Brussels, ‘having the
cross upon the back of them,’ had come with proper addresses under cover
to the Edinburgh postmaster. He ‘was surprised with them,’ and brought
them to the Lord Advocate, who, however, on opening them, found they
were ‘of no value, being only on private business;’ wherefore he ordered
them to be delivered by the postmaster to the persons to whom they were
directed.
[Sidenote: 1702.]
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