In short, it has been so much a habit of the Shetlander's life to fish for his landlord, that he is only now discovering that there is anything strange or anomalous in it. This man, William Stewart, to whom Mr. Sievwright wrote, had lived in Whalsay, as I have already shown, under what appears to have been a still more disadvantageous and servile tenure. He is a fair specimen of the average peasant of such a district as Yell. It is evident that men who have been brought up in such habits, and with the tradition among them of a still more subservient time in the past, are prepared not only to submit to extreme oppression on the part of their proprietors, or those to whom their proprietors hand them over, but also to become easily subjected to the influence of merchants who possess no avowed control over them. CASE OF ROBERT MOUAT AT MOUL An instance of the abuse to which the system is liable in the hands of an unscrupulous tacksman, is afforded by the case of Robert Mouat, who held, until two years ago, a tack of the estate of Mr. Bruce of Simbister, in Sandwick parish. A number of witnesses came forward to testify to the thraldom of the tenantry, and the injustice which they had suffered under his rule. The evidence against Mouat was certainly given with such freedom, I might say with such an earnestness of hatred, as was not displayed towards any merchant or tacksman who is still in the country. After making allowance for exaggeration, it is certain that the state of Coningsburgh during the seventeen years of his rule must have been very distressing. Every tenant on the ground was bound to sell to him not only his fish, but all the saleable produce of his farm. Money could not be got from him, according to one witness, either at settlement or during the season. The witness John Halcrow, who is much less vehement in his language than some others, says: