We come now to a very serious and important passage in the records of
the great fortress, namely, the rebellion of “the Forty-five.” The
Scotch were, as we have seen, largely in sympathy with the exiled
family. In 1743 a Highland regiment, distinguished for its good order
and discipline, mutinied on being ordered to Flanders. They declared
that they had received a promise that they should not be sent abroad
where they would very likely be brought into warfare with their
Jacobite friends. A hundred and nine of them laid down their arms and
marched away. Three regiments of dragoons were sent to bring them back;
they were sent to the Tower; three were shot, and the others sent to
the plantations. This cruel measure produced a most bitter feeling
through Scotland, and rendered comparatively easy a fresh endeavour of
the Stuarts to re-establish themselves. Twenty years of calm had passed
when Charles Edward, “the Young Pretender,” landed in Inverness-shire
in July, 1745. His adventures are nowhere better told than in
_Waverley._ He defeated Cope at Prestonpans, marched into England as
far as Derby, retreated, was crushed by the Duke of Cumberland at
Culloden on April 8, 1746, and the hopes of the Stuarts were at an end
for ever. He, as we know, made his escape, but the “rebel lords” who
had thrown in their lot with him were brought to the Tower, which had
seen no political prisoners for more than twenty years. William Boyd
was fourth Earl of Kilmarnock; William Murray, Marquis of Tullibardine,
son of the Duke of Atholl, had been pardoned after taking part in
the “15”; he now brought a great number of Atholl men at this second
rising, gave himself up after Culloden, quite worn out, though he
was only fifty-eight; he died in the Tower in a few days. Arthur
Elphinstone, sixth Baron Balmerino, had also been pardoned after the
“15,” but joined the fresh rebellion, hid himself after Culloden, but
was betrayed. There were also Charles Radcliffe, a younger brother of
the Earl of Derwentwater, who had perished in 1715, and a few others
of little mark. Horace Walpole, writing to Sir Horace Mann, gives a
striking account of the trial of the three lords in Westminster Hall.
Kilmarnock and Cromarty pleaded guilty, Balmerino not guilty, but he
was condemned by the unanimous vote of the peers. He was evidently a
man of high character; “the brave, noble old fellow,” Walpole calls
him. His calmness, courage, piety in his last days, had a profound
effect upon all who were with him. Cromarty was afterwards pardoned.
The _Gentleman’s Magazine_ for 1745 gives full details of the execution
of the other two on Tower Hill. They died with firm courage. Radcliffe
also died on the same scaffold. Somewhat later followed another
execution; Simon Fraser, Lord Lovat, an utterly unscrupulous political
intriguer, and a man whose disreputable life reads like a bad novel. He
had what was probably a unique experience, in having been a prisoner
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