ministers of a holy and peaceful religion, to stamp with public approval, a prince, whose malignant cruelty made him loathed by his contemporaries, and whose revolting predilections, unless we ascribe them to a diseased brain, are not only a slur upon the age which tolerated them, but a disgrace to the higher instincts of our common nature?

So utterly corrupt, however, were the ruling classes in Scotland, that such crimes seem hardly to have excited indignation. The sufferers were refractory subjects, and against them every thing was lawful. The usual torture, which was called the torture of the boots, was to place. the leg in a frame, into which wedges were driven, until the bones were broken.75 But when James visited Scotland, an opinion began to grow up, that this was too lenient, and that other means must be devised. The spirit which he communicated to his subordinates, animated his immediate successors, and, in 1684, during his absence, a new instrument was introduced, termed the thumbikins. This was composed of small steel screws, arranged with such diabolical art, that not only the thumb, but also the whole hand, could be compressed by them, producing pain more exquisite than any hitherto known, and having, moreover, the advantage of not endangering life; so that the torture could be frequently repeated on the same person.76

Shields (A Hind let loose, p. 186) describes the boots, as "a cruel engine of iron, whereby, with wedges, the leg is tortured until the marrow come out of the bone." Compare Naphtali, or the Wrestlings of the Church of Scotland, 1667, p. 268: "the extraordinary compression both of flesh, sinews, and bones, by the force of timber wedges and hammer."

In 1684, Carstairs was subjected to this torture. See his own account, in a letter printed in Wodrow's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 96-100. He writes (p. 99): "After this communing, the king's smith was called in, to bring in a new instrument to torture by the thumbkins, that had never been used before. For whereas the former was only to screw on two pieces of iron above and below with finger and thumb, these were made to turn about the screw with the whole hand. And under this torture, I continued near an hour and a half." See also the case of Spence, in the same year, in Burnet's History of his own Time, vol. ii. p. 418. "Little screws of steel were made use of, that screwed the thumbs with so exquisite a torment, that he sunk under this; for Lord Perth told him, they would screw every joint of his whole body, one after another, till he

After this, little more need be said.77 From the mere mention of such things, the mind recoils with disgust. The reader of the history of that time, sickens and faints at the contrivances by which these abject creatures sought to stifle public opinion, and to ruin, for ever, a gallant and high-spirited people. But now, as before, they laboured in vain. More yet was, however, to be borne. The short reign of James II. was ushered in by an act of singular barbarity. A few weeks after this bad man came to the throne, all the children in Annandale and Nithsdale, between the ages of six and ten, were seized by the soldiers, separated from their parents, and threatened with immediate death.78 The next step was, to banish, by wholesale, large numbers of adults, who were shipped off to unhealthy settlements; many of the men first losing their ears, and the women being branded,

took the oath." Laing (History of Scotland, vol. iv. p. 143) says, "the thumbikins; small screws of steel that compressed the thumb and the whole hand with an exquisite torture; an invention brought by Drummond and Dalziel from Russia." For other notices, see Fountainhall's Notes of Scottish Affairs from 1680 till 1701, Edinburgh, 4to, 1822, pp. 41, 97, 101; Bower's History of the University of Edinburgh, vol. ii. p. 30; Crookshank's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 192; A Cloud of Witnesses for the Royal Prerogatives of Jesus Christ, edit. Glasgow, 1779, p. 371; and Life of Walter Smith, p. 85, in the second volume of Walker's Biographia Presbyteriana, Edinburgh, 1827.

"In 1684, the Scotish nation was in the most distressing and pitiable situation that can be imagined." "The state of society had now become such, that, in Edinburgh, attention to ordinary business was neglected, and every one was jealous of his neighbour." Bower's History of the University of Edinburgh, vol. i. p. 307.

78 Upon the 10th of March, all freeholders, heritors, and gentlemen in Nithsdale and Annandale, and, I suppose, in most other shires of the kingdom, but I name those as being the scene of the severities now used, were summoned to attend the king's standard; and the militia in the several shires were raised. Wherever Claverhouse came, he resolved upon narrow and universal work. He used to set his horse upon the hills and eminences, and that in different parties, that none might escape; and there his foot went through the lower, marshy, and mossy places, where the horse could not do so well. The shire he parcelled out in so many divisions, and six or eight miles square would be taken in at once. In every division, the whole inhabitants, men and women, young and old, without distinction, were all driven into one convenient place.' "All the children in the division were gathered together by themselves, under ten years, and above six years of age, and a party of soldiers were drawn out before them. Then they were bid pray, for they were going to be shot. Some of them would answer, Sir, we cannot pray." "At other times, they treated them

some on the hand, some on the cheek.79 Those, however, who remained behind, were equal to the emergency, and were ready to do what remained to be done, In 1688, as in 1642, the Scotch people and the English people united against their common oppressor, who saved himself by sudden and ignominious flight. He was a coward as well as a despot, and from him there was no further danger. The bishops, indeed, loved him; but they were an insignificant body, and had enough to do to look to themselves. His only powerful friends were the Highlanders. That barbarous race thought, with regret, of those bygone days when the government had not only allowed them, but had ordered them, to plunder and oppress their southern neighbours. For this purpose, Charles II. had availed himself of their services; and it could hardly be doubted, that if the Stuart dynasty were restored, they would be again employed, and would again enrich themselves by pillaging the Lowlanders.80 War was their chief amusement; it was also their livelihood; and it was the only thing that they understood.81 Besides this, the mere fact that James no

most inhumanly, threatening them with death, and at some little distance would fire pistols without ball in their face. Some of the poor children were frighted almost out of their wits, and others of them stood all out with a courage perfectly above their age. These accounts are so far out of

the ordinary way of mankind, that I would not have insert them, had I not before me several informations agreeing in all these circumstances, written at this time by people who knew the truth of them." Wodrow's History of the Church of Scotland, vol. iv. pp. 255, 256.

79"Numbers were transported to Jamaica, Barbadoes, and the North American settlements; but the women were not unfrequently burnt in the cheek, and the ears of the men were lopt off, to prevent, or to detect, their return." Laing's History of Scotland, vol. iv. p. 162. "Great multitudes banished." Wodrow's History of the Church, vol. iv. p. 211. In July 1685, "the men are ordered to have their ears cropt, and the women to be marked in their hand." p. 217. "To have the following stigma and mark, that they may be known as banished persons if they shall return to this kingdom, viz. that the men have one of their ears cut off by the hand of the hangman, and that the women be burnt by the same hand on the cheek with a burned iron." p. 218. These are extracts from the proceedings of the privy-council.

James II. favoured the Highland clans." Note in Fountainhall's Scottish Affairs from 1680 till 1701, p. 100. He could hardly do otherwise. The alliance was natural, and ready-made for him.

Except robbing, which, however, in one form or other, is always a

longer possessed authority, wonderfully increased their loyalty towards him. The Highlanders flourished by rapine, and traded in anarchy.82 They, therefore, hated any government which was strong enough to punish crime; and the Stuarts being now far away, this nation of thieves loved them with an ardour which nothing but their absence could have caused. From William III., they feared restraint; but the exiled prince could do them no hurt, and would look on their excesses as the natural result of their zeal. Not that they cared about the principle of monarchical succession, or speculated on the doctrine of divine right. The only succession that interested them, was that of their chiefs. Their only notion of right, was to do what those chiefs commanded. Being miserably poor,84 they, in raising a rebellion,

part of war. In this, they were very apt. Burnet (History of his own Time, vol. i. p. 67) pithily describes them as "good at robbing;" aud Burton (Lives of Lovat and Forbes, p. 47) says, "To steal even vestments was considerably more creditable than to make them." Otherwise, they were completely absorbed by their passion for war. See Thomson's Memoirs of the Jacobites, vol. ii. pp. 175, 176, London, 1845.

82 66 Revenge was accounted a duty, the destruction of a neighbour a meritorious exploit, and rapine an honourable employment." Browne's History of the Highlands, vol. iv. p. 395. "The spirit of rivalry between the clans kept up a taste for hostility, and converted rapine into a service of honour." Thomson's Memoirs of the Jacobites, vol. ii. p. 229.

83 Hence, looking, as they did, merely at the physical qualities of individuals, the appearance of the Pretender in 1715 disgusted them, notwithstanding his splendid lineage. See some excellent remarks in Burton's History of Scotland from 1689 to 1748, London, 1853, vol. ii. pp. 198, 199. At p. 383, Mr. Burton justly observes, that "those who really knew the Highlanders were aware that the followers were no more innate supporters of King James's claim to the throne of Britain, than of Maria Theresa's to the throne of Hungary. They went with the policy of the head of the clan, whatever that might be; and though upwards of half a century's advocacy of the exiled house" (this refers to the last rebellion in 1745) “had made Jacobitism appear a political creed in some clans, it was among the followers, high and low, little better than a nomenclature, which might be changed with circumstances." Since Robertson, Mr. Burton and Mr. Chambers are, I will venture to say, the two writers who have taken the most accurate and comprehensive views of the history of Scotland. Robertson's History stops short where the most important period begins; and his materials were scanty. But what he effected with those materials was wonderful. To my mind, his History of Scotland is much the greatest of his works.

8 A curious description of their appearance, given by the Derby Mercury in 1746 (in Thomson's Memoirs of the Jacobites, vol. iii. p. 115), may be compared with the more general statement in Anderson's Prize Essay on the

risked nothing except their lives, of which, in that state of society, men are always reckless. If they failed, they encountered a speedy, and, as they deemed it, an honourable death. If they succeeded, they gained fame and wealth. In either case, they were sure of many enjoyments. They were sure of being able, for a time at least, to indulge in pillage and murder, and to practise, without restraint, those excesses which they regarded as the choicest guerdon of a soldier's career.

So far, therefore, from wondering at the rebellions of 1715 and 1745,85 the only wonder is, that they did not break out sooner, and that they were not better supported. In 1745, when the sudden appearance of the rebels struck England with terror, and when they penetrated even to the heart of the kingdom, their numbers, even at their height, including Lowland and English recruits, never reached six thousand men. The ordinary amount was five thousand;86 and they cared so little about the cause for which they professed to fight, that, in 1715, when they numbered much stronger than in 1745, they refused to enter England, and make head

Highlands, Edinburgh, 1827, p. 128. "Cattle were the main resources of the tribe-the acquisition of these the great object of their hostile forrays. The precarious crops gave them wherewithal to bake their oaten cakes, or distil their ale or whisky. When these failed, the crowded population suffered every extreme of misery and want. At one time in particular, in Sutherland, they were compelled to subsist on broth made of nettles, thickened with a little oatmeal. At another, those who had cattle, to have recourse to the expedient of bleeding them, and mixing the blood with oatmeal, which they afterwards cut into slices and fried."

85 Several writers erroneously term them " unnatural." See, for instance, Rae's History of the Rebellion, London, 1746, pp. 158, 169; and Home's History of the Rebellion, London, 1802, 4to, p. 347.

"When the rebels began their march to the southward, they were not 6000 men complete." Home's History of the Rebellion in the Year 1745, 4to, p. 137. At Stirling, the army, "after the junction was made, amounted to somewhat more than 9000 men, the greatest number that Charles ever had under his command." p. 164. But the actual invaders of England were much fewer. "The number of the rebels when they began their march into England was a few above 5000 foot, with about 500 on horseback." Home, p. 331. Browne (History of the Highlands, vol. iii. p. 140) says: "When mustered at Carlisle, the prince's army amounted only to about 4500 men; and Lord George Murray states that, at Derby, "we were not above five thousand fighting men, if so many.' Jacobite Memoirs of the Rebellion of 1745, edited by Robert Chambers, Edinburgh, 1834, p. 54.