This book, written by Christopher N. Johnston K.C. LL.D., who was Sheriff of Perth and was later to become Lord Sands, was published in 1916. The book covers the Blaw family of Culross, a nearby village on the north bank of the Forth. Two of the family are looked at in particular, John Blaw of Castlehill, and Robert Blaw, a Covenanter of the same family. John has a particular and unique tie to Clackmannanshire and Clackmannan in particular, due to having murdered a man in the village. This book covers that story in great detail. There are copious footnotes included in this story.
John Blaw of Castlehill
Jacobite and Criminal
John Blaw of Castlehill
Jacobite and Criminal
CHRISTOPHER N. JOHNSTON
K.C., LL.D.
SHERIFF OF PERTH
1916
PREFACE.
No romance gathers round the story of the murder of William Cairns, Farmer, Nether Kinnedder, Saline, by John Blaw of Castlehill, Culross, in a Clackmannan inn on 4th September 1767. But the crime has never been forgotten. Its tradition has come down and still hangs about Dunimarle, as Castlehill is now called. The evidence at the trial was not reported in the press, as that was not usual in those days, and a certain mystery has always surrounded the crime. But the full story was recorded in the books of Justiciary, where it has lain undisturbed for a century and a half. In resuscitating it - by permission of Mr Crole, K.C., Clerk of Justiciary, and with the help of his Depute, Mr Slight - I have incidentally found some unfamiliar things which illustrate the customs of the past. The record of the trial affords a vivid illustration of the procedure of the Courts in which Braxfield, Kames, and Eskgrove administered stern justice in the latter half of the eighteenth century. To make that picture complete, the record is given of the whole of the proceedings at the Justice Ayre at Stirling when Blaw was condemned, although this includes another short case which does not concern Blaw's crime.
If there is no romance about Blaw's crime, that quality is not absent from his Jacobite adventures, to which a chapter is devoted. Though incidentally referred to here and there, this curious episode of the '45 has never hitherto, so far as I am aware, been explored.
In the Appendix some account is given of the remarkable family from which Blaw came, and, in particular, of a Covenanting member of that family, some of whose manuscripts are in my possession.
As the notes contain a good deal of biographical and genealogical information, a full index of names is given.
Mr David B. Morris, Town Clerk, Stirling, has kindly supplied me with local information from old records.
John Blaw of Castlehill : Jacobite and Criminal.
CHAPTER I.
JOHN BLAW AT HOME.
JOHN BLAW was the proprietor of the small estate of Castlehill in the parish of Culross and county of Perth (now in Fife) from 1710 to 1767. His father was George Blaw of Castlehill, and his mother was his father's second wife, Isobel Hay, daughter of John Hay of Paris, county of Perth, and grand-daughter of Hugh Moncrieff of Tippermalloch - both old families. The date of Blaw's birth is uncertain. According to newspaper report he was "about seventy-five years" of age at the date of his execution in 1767. This would place his birth about 1692. On the other hand, he is said to have been a class-fellow of Lord Kames, who was born in 1696. The birth of a son to Blaw's father and mother of the name of John is not in the Culross register. A son named George was baptised upon 20th March 1695. The father left no son of the name of George when he died in 1710. It is possible, even perhaps probable, that there was some mistake in the register about the name.*
* Some colour is given to this by the fact that in deeds John Blaw is described as only son, not "only surviving son," of George Blaw.
Curiously enough, John Blaw was sometimes called George even in official documents, as for example the warrant for his arrest as a Jacobite in 1745. There is no doubt however that John was his name, for he signed as John, was served heir as John, and was tried and hanged as John.
The estate of Castlehill, which originally was part of the Culross Abbey lands, had been in the Blaw family for some two hundred years. Some account of this remarkable family is given in Appendix I.
Culross from the Forth.
In the seventeenth century John Blaw's great-grandfather and grandfather, Allan and John Blaw, had been successively for long periods among the leading men of the district - justices and elders, though as Castlehill lay just beyond the burgh boundaries they were not burgesses, and therefore not bailies or members of the Town Council of Culross.
George, John's father, seems not to have been so prominent, and an entry in the Culross register of births suggests that his morals were not immaculate. Upon his death in 1710 John appears to have been his only surviving child, although in addition to the doubtful "George" noticed above, a daughter Isobel was born in 1698. His younger brother James survived him for forty-nine years, and built up a business reputation in Belfast. Some particulars of him will be found in Appendix III.
Castlehill lies immediately west of the town of Culross, on the banks of the Forth, from which the ground rises very abruptly to the terrace height upon which the Castle stands. The Castle is a very old one, indeed tradition associates it with Macduff, the Thane of Fife.
The site is one of the finest in the south of Scotland, and commands a magnificent prospect east, west, and south. The ancient Castle had fallen to ruins before Blaw's time.
It appears from the marriage contract of George Blaw at his first marriage in 1689 that there were then two houses, the "old hall" of Castlehill, and the new. There was, however, a rebuilding in the end of the eighteenth century and another after 1835, so Blaw's house has disappeared, although part of the walls may be incorporated in the handsome modern castle. A ruined building a short distance to the west is probably the "old hall" of the 1689 deed.
In 1720-1722 John Blaw was involved in trouble with the Kirk-session and Presbytery over two scandals implicating two females and involving the birth of three children, two of whom were twins. Blaw was contumacious, refused to appear, and even threatened the Kirk-session officer with violence. The civil power was resorted to, and the record winds up with a letter from the Duke of Atholl, Sheriff of Perthshire, that he will put the law in force against Blaw. But what comes of it does not appear.
John Blaw married Anne Dundas, a member of a junior branch of the old family of Dundas of Dundas. Her father was William Dundas of Kincavil, in Linlithgowshire. He married Elizabeth Elphinstone, who through her father was the representative of the Elphinstones of Calder Hall, and through her mother was heiress of the Bruces of Airth.
The participation of William Dundas in the affair of 1715 led to the loss of the estate of Airth, but seemingly he was not ruined, for in 1720 he purchased the estate of Blair, in the parish of Culross. He had several sons who served with distinction in the English and Dutch services. His daughter Anne is stated in pedigrees (probably because her husband was hanged) to have died unmarried. But she undoubtedly married John Blaw of Castlehill, and she died at Alloa in 1802 at a great age, having survived all her own issue.
The marriage was not a happy one. Blaw appears to have been an unprosperous, unsatisfactory man, and perhaps he was given to drink. Of two episodes which are to his discredit there is public record.
The first is from the Records of the Kirk-session of Culross.
17 July 1738.
The Session having under their serious consideration a complaint made to them by Jean Dewar on the ground of Castlehill*
* Probably a feuar or small tenant.
bearing that there are two sons of John Blaw's of Castlehill who ly in her house and that they are altogether destitute of anything to live upon and that they are a very heavy burden on the neighbourhood and destitute of education and that their Father will not contribute nor give anything towards their maintenance and schooling although he be in the full possession of his estate they agree that a proper letter be wrote to Mr Alexander Boswell,** Advocate, to draw a bill to the Lords of Session thereanent and recommend to the Magistrates to concur in signing the letter and appoint Colonel Erskine and Clerk Halkerston*** to meet with Castlehill and to acquaint him with the Session's intention to the end he may prevent the ingiving of the Bill.
** Afterwards Lord Auchinleck, and the father of "Bozzy." He had a local connection, as his mother was Lady Elizabeth Bruce, daughter of Alexander, second Earl of Kincardine.
*** Mr John Halkerston was Town Clerk.
1 August 1738.
Colonel Erskine and Clerk Halkerston in consequence of the former minute of the date 17 July report that they discoursed Castlehill in the terms of the former minute and acquainted him with the Session's resolution thereon : and that he advanced he had maintained the children till January last and the reason he gave for not continuing to do so was that his whole rents for the last year were evicted by creditors : besides that the Lords of Session had granted an aliment for his wife and children upon their friend's application in virtue of which he conceived her bound to aliment them and added that he had no money at the time to maintain them upon which the Colonel offered to advance meal and other necessaries for their present subsistence till such time as some course may be taken upon for their maintenance and education a part of which the Colonel has already advanced and given into the hands of Jean Dewar for the ends foresaid upon the faith of Castlehill's promise that he should reimburse the Colonel : and in case against, the first of November next proper measures be not taken for their maintenance and education the Session will do what's proper.
It appears from these minutes that there had been proceedings in the Court of Session in connection with the relations of Blaw and his wife, and apparently she had some sort of judicial separation. "Their friend" referred to was probably a member of the Dundas family. The Colonel Erskine who plays a creditable part in the episode was Colonel John Erskine of Carnock, called "the Black Colonel," a noted character in his day, and the father of John Erskine, the celebrated institutional writer in law.
The story is illustrative of the paternal solicitude of the kirk-session of these days for the care and education of the children of the parish. The incident is not recorded further. Apparently a modus vivendi was discovered. But that John Blaw was not without affection for his children may be gathered from a letter of his kinsman, Dr Blaw, in London in 1747, where it is stated that John Blaw, who had been released from prison there, is sorry to leave London without seeing his son, who is on a voyage to India, and will not be back for some time.
The other melancholy record of Blaw is from Morrison's 'Dictionary of Decisions of the Court of Session.'*
* Case of Blaw v. Geddes and others, 1754. Mor. 7610.
It appears that Blaw's wife was living separate from him in 1753 as in 1738, and that she had a judicial decree in her favour for a certain alimentary allowance. As this was not punctually paid she was obliged to use execution to enforce payment. This cost her some £13, 15s. Scots. For this sum she raised an action against her husband before the Justices of the Peace of the Culross district of the Shire of Perth. Blaw resisted this action on the grounds that his wife could not sue an action without his consent (a somewhat unreasonable plea where the action was against himself), and that in any view the case was not one within the jurisdiction of the Justices of Peace.
The Justices however disregarded these pleas and granted the wife's crave, which required Blaw to be imprisoned if he did not pay within fifteen days. He did not pay, and he was duly put in jail. Thereupon Blaw brought an action for wrongful imprisonment against Robert Geddes and the other Justices, in which he insisted that the Justices had no general jurisdiction in civil debts, and even if they had they had no power to commit to prison. The defence of the Justices was that what they had done was in accordance with the common practice of the Justices of this shire, and in many other shires, and that the practice was founded upon public utility.
In the Court of Session the judge of first instance decided the case in Blaw's favour, but upon an appeal to the whole Court -
"The Lords found that the Justices did wrong in granting warrant for warding (i.e. imprisonment) but in respect that the pursuer does not now insist and that the Justices were in practice of granting warding they assoilzie."
The report of the case suggests that the result must have been a compromise. Erskine cites this case in his Institutes, and he must have done so with interest, as he knew both Blaw and Geddes well. Notwithstanding the severity of attitude suggested by these reports, the relations of Blaw and his wife seem not to have been altogether broken. A daughter, afterwards Mrs Begbie, seems to have been born after the judicial separation.
John Blaw appears to have been in bad financial circumstances all his days. Shortly after he came of age he borrowed money which he was never able to repay. When he was in prison in London as a Jacobite he was hard pressed for money. Shortly before his death his creditors had taken proceedings against him. When he was on trial for his life he was unable to produce the funds to employ counsel, and he had to seek the assistance of the Court to assign counsel to him. According to tradition Blaw was a man of very violent temper. These two circumstances, poverty and temper, may so far account for his unhappy domestic relations.
CHAPTER II.
JOHN BLAW AS A JACOBITE.
JOHN BLAW was a Jacobite. There is no trace of this leaning in the earlier history of his family. The Blaws of Culross appear generally to have been Presbyterians and Covenanters. Robert Blaw the Covenanter was on intimate terms with his cousins, the father and grandfather of John Blaw. Both the grandfather and the great-grandfather were elders of the parish church. The father married as his first wife Jeannet Blaw the Covenanter's daughter, and accepted the ministrations of the extreme Covenanter Fraser of Brea. A clue to Blaw's Jacobitism might be found in his marriage with Anne Dundas, whose father lost his estate of Airth through participation in the affair of 1715. But the relations between Blaw and his wife seem not to have been happy, so this clue is imperfect. The Erskines of Mar at Alloa were the only Jacobites of influence in the neighbourhood of Culross, but no trace of intercourse between them and Blaw has been found.
In the winter of 1744-45 Blaw was sent by the Duke of Perth, as the Jacobites called him, on a secret mission to Prince Charles Edward at Paris. The only known connection between Blaw and the gallant and chivalrous Duke of Perth was that both were Perthshire lairds.
In January 1744 Prince Charles travelled secretly, and without the ostensible permission of the French Court, from Rome to Paris, where he had a somewhat doubtful reception. He succeeded however in inducing the French Court, in February 1744, to place at his disposal a considerable army under Marshal Saxe for the invasion of England. The Prince and Saxe embarked for England, but adverse winds drove back the ships and ruined the expedition. The French government was only half-hearted in the matter, and declined to renew their assistance, the French troops being needed for the campaign in the Low Countries. Louis XV. had very little of Louis XIV.'s sympathy with the exiled Stuarts. Under treaty with Britain that family had for a number of years been banished from France. The war into which Britain and France had now drifted might have abrogated that arrangement. But Prussia and other Protestant States of Germany with which France was in alliance had no sympathy with the Stuart claims, and urged upon Louis not to dissipate his forces by encouraging them, but to concentrate his resources upon the campaign in his own frontiers. Charles, however, was not easily discouraged, and for nearly a year and a half after the abortive expedition he remained in or near Paris plotting to obtain assistance from France, or in default to do something without such assistance.
It was in these circumstances that the Duke of Perth sent John Blaw on a mission to the Prince in Paris in February 1745.
The mission is explained in two long letters of Prince Charles to his father the Chevalier, who was in Rome, dated 7th and 14th March 1745. The Duke desired that a supply of broadswords should be sent to Scotland, but that they should be unmounted, as the French mounting did not suit the Highlanders. The Prince urges his father to pawn all the Prince's jewels to buy these swords. Other parts of Perth's message through Blaw were that Perth proposed to buy a ship to carry messages to France, that he had a scheme for capturing Edinburgh and another castle, and that he knew where there was a sum of money that could be laid hold upon when the time of action came. Blaw was instructed by the Prince with four commissions :
(1) a verbal message to the Scottish Jacobites about the King of France's attitude, the prospect of supplies, the need for money, etc. ;
(2) a letter to Murray of Broughton about some missing letters ;
(3) a letter to Perth about the broadswords, which are called books - "that the Prince sends him as many books of that kind he desires as he can at present, and that he won't fail to send the remainder as soon as possible, for it is better to send them in little parcels than all at once;"
(4) an arrangement about a cypher was made between the Prince and Blaw. The Prince's letters to his father about Blaw's visit are printed in Murray of Broughton's 'Memorials' (Scot. His. Soc., vol. 27, pp.390-3). Blaw's name, however, is there spelt Blan ; and the identity of the messenger from the Duke of Perth mentioned by the Prince with Blaw of Castlehill, who was involved in the subsequent incidents in Edinburgh referred to by Murray of Broughton, seems to have escaped observation.
Blaw furnished a written account of this expedition to Bishop Forbes, who incorporated it in 'The Lyon in Mourning.'
COPY OF A NARRATIVE OF THE NEGOCIATION OF JOHN BLAW OF CASTLEHILL IN FRANCE TAKEN FROM THE ORIGINAL IN THE HANDWRITING OF THE SAID JOHN BLAW.
1745. John Blaw of Castlehill was sent by the Duke of Perth^ to France to Charles, Prince of Wales to let him know the situation of his affairs in Scotland and those who would espouse his interest in that country amongst whom the Laird of Macleod was of the number. I choose to mention him because of his behaviour afterwards so nottarly known to the world.* I left Scotland the week of Christmas and about 24 days after I arrived in Paris about Candlemas (new style) 1745 where I met with the Prince and delivered my credentials.**
^ The young Earl (Stuart, Duke) of Perth was then in Scotland conspiring to assist a descent of Charles upon the country. He was under suspicion, and was watched. His brother, Lord John Drummond, was in France commanding Scots in the French service.
* After the '45 Macleod was regarded with execration by all Jacobites as one who, having agreed to join, drew back and afterwards encouraged the betrayal of the Prince.
** Upon 14th March 1745 the Prince writes to the Chevalier :
"The Prince has seen the messenger several times and have at last agreed what to say to him whose name is Blaw."
He kept me there about six weeks during which time the then Minister of France*** having got intelligence that there was a Scots gentleman that had come to the Prince he caus'd Sir Hector Maclean **** write me to come to Versailles that he the Minister wanted to see me. Upon receipt of Sir Hector's letter I went and acquainted the Prince of the matter who desired me to go and acquaint him what passed when I returned. Accordingly I went at the hour that was appointed me by the minister which was seven o'clock at night. This was about the middle of February 1745.
*** According to a note from Professor Firth of Oxford, the Minister was probably either d'Argenson or Marshal de Noailles. Mr Arthur Hassall of Christ Church favours d'Argenson, and I agree. D'Argenson was at this time Foreign Minister, which office Noailles had resigned in 1744. Had Blaw met a distinguished soldier like the old Marshal he would probably have named him or designated him otherwise than as "Minister of France." Rene Louis, Marquis d'Argenson (1696-1757), was Foreign Minister to Louis XV. from 1744 to 1747. He was a distinguished publicist and man of letters. Of him Voltaire said that he was worthy to be Secretary of State in the Republic of Plato. His brother, Marc Pierre, Conte d'Argenson, a distinguished soldier, was Secretary of State for War in 1745. He is another possibility, but I think the Secretary of Foreign Affairs more likely to have been concerned with the interview, and also more likely to have been described as the Minister of France.
**** Sir Hector Maclean, 5th Baronet of Morvern, belonged to a family devoted to the Stuart cause. His father, Sir John, fought at Killiecrankie and Sheriff Muir. After suffering two years' imprisonment in the Tower Sir Hector was released under the Act of Grace in 1747. He was one of the prisoners on whose behalf Prince Charles specially sought the good offices of the King of France with the English Government. Sir Hector died at Rome in 1750.
I had along with me my Lord Semple* who introduced me to the Minister and then we had the honour of at least one hour's audience relating to all the affairs of Europe as they then stood as well as of our own. In the course of our conversation my Lord Semple demanded in his master's name 10,000 workmen** for England and the Minister asked me how many we wanted for Scotland.
* Francis (titular, Stuart) Lord Sempill was the representative of the Chevalier at Paris (see Murray of Broughton's Memorials,' p. 42). His requirement of 10,000 men for England is consistent with his strong opposition to such an unsupported descent as was made upon Scotland.
** i.e., soldiers. Blaw slips into the use of the word the conspirators used in correspondence.
I made answer very readily if the above number was sent for England, Scotland could do their own affairs themselves but if they had 2000 or 3000 to spare we should take them but if not we could do without them. He the Minister then told my Lord and me that had we made our demand two months sooner we could have got them but that at present there was not one regiment in France but what had their operations assigned them for the inshewing campaign.***
*** The War of the Austrian Succession was now raging. The French were preparing to invade Flanders under Saxe and Italy under Mallebois.
Upon which I made answer that if they answered the present demand that they would have England immediately upon their side which would enable France to do with the Empress**** what they pleased.
**** Maria Theresa, Queen of Hungary, whose husband claimed the German Imperial throne.
The Minister was for some time silent without ever giving a return. Then I told the Minister that I was shortly to set out again for Scotland and I wanted to know what I should say to the King my Master's friends when I returned how far his most Christian Majesty would do in that affair. Upon which the Minister left us a little and went into the nixt room where his Most Christian Majesty was^ and when he returned directing his discourse to me - That I might assure my Master's friends in Scotland that his Most Christian Majesty should give the men now demanded against the moneth of October nixt if the campaign was any way successful in France.
^ For diplomatic or other reasons, Prince Charles Edward throughout this period was denied any audience with Louis, who, it is said, did not meet him until after the '45. This throws some light upon features of this meeting at the Palace. If the King did not receive the Prince, he could hardly grant personal audience to his emissaries.
And how successful they were the annals of Europe will testify.* The truth of the above narration, I can go to death with.
* This was the year of Fontenoy and other French successes.
Sometime about the beginning of March I left Paris for my return and difficulty enough I had to get back again to Holland having both armies** to go through as I had come through them in my going to Paris in time of war is a task I would not undertake again. But by the providence of God I in a manner miraculously escaped falling in bad hands and got safe back to Scotland and delivered my answer to the Duke of Perth about the first of May (new style) but was unfortunately taken prisoner the 5th of June along with Sir Hector and wee were both carried up to London where wee were detained for nigh two years and a half*** in different prisons.
** The French army, on the one side, under Saxe, and the allied army of England, Austria, and Holland were now facing each other in Flanders.
*** There is some exaggeration here. Blaw was liberated on bail after twenty-one months' imprisonment. He was, however, about two years and a half absent from Scotland before
he returned with an indemnity that freed him altogether.
Some moneths of that time I was thrown amongst the thieves and pickpockets in Newgate in double irons the marks of which I carry about with me to this day and not one farthing I had from the government for my subsistence tho I was a state prisoner all the time, and was at last dismissed without ever bringing me to trial or to tell me for what they so used me.
O the blest liberty and Property of England.****
**** This is a good illustration of the inborn British faith in legality. According to his own showing, Blaw was a rebel. If brought to trial he might, if the truth had come out, have been hanged, drawn, and quartered. He was not brought to trial, but, after being detained some time without trial, he was released under a general amnesty which obliterated his capital Offence. Accordingly he was deeply wronged !
The original in Blaw's handwriting of the foregoing remarkable document was in the possession of Bishop Forbes in 1760. Whether it exists now one does not know. It is of the flesh which clothes the bones of history. The rankling protest against the treachery of McLeod and of France, the long journey of the middle-aged untravelled Scot to Paris, his meeting with the Prince he had never seen, the language and the spirit of fervid loyalty, the strange interview with the Minister of France at Versailles, the adventurous journey across France and the Low Countries through two armies whose languages were strange, the limbs scarred by the chains he had worn among the thieves of Newgate for his King's cause, unliterary, though not illiterate according to the standard of the time, the statement is a masterpiece of graphic and nervous narrative.
Some particulars in regard to Blaw's return from France and his arrest are given by Murray of Broughton in his Journals. In May 1745 Murray, who was in Edinburgh, was informed of Blaw's return from France. He was uneasy, he says, about Blaw's being seen in Edinburgh lest any of the Government servants should learn of his visit to France and have him secured. Whilst Murray was considering how he could communicate with Blaw, he received a visit from Blaw himself. Blaw told Murray of his expedition, and also explained to him a scheme to seize the Castle of Edinburgh,* and he also stated that he was waiting in Edinburgh for Sir Hector Maclean, whom he had left in Holland and expected by the first ship.
* The governor of the Castle was Blaw's fellow-parishioner, the venerable General George Preston of the Valleyfield family. The scheme to seize the Castle was communicated by Perth to the Prince through Blaw.
Murray pointed out to Blaw the danger of his being seen in Edinburgh, and begged him if he had any regard either for his own personal safety or the King's interest, to leave Edinburgh and to go to the country and keep out of the way until suspicion had subsided. This Blaw promised to do, and he left Edinburgh next morning.
Lured back, however, by the prospect of meeting his friend Sir Hector Maclean, Blaw returned to Edinburgh, and he was found in Sir Hector's company by Murray, much to the latter's dismay. The consequences which Murray dreaded from Blaw's imprudence were not slow to follow. Upon 5th June Sir Hector Maclean, John Blaw, and Lachlan McLean, Sir Hector's servant, were apprehended in the Canongate on suspicion of being in the French service and of enlisting men there. After several hours' examination by the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor-General** and some officers, they were committed, Sir Hector to the Castle, Blaw to the city Tolbooth, and Lachlan McLean to that of the Canongate - apparently three degrees of importance or dignity.
** Robert Craigie of Glendoick was Lord Advocate and Robert Dundas of Arniston was Solicitor-General. Both after wards held the office of Lord President of the Court of Session.
The credit of Blaw's arrest was claimed by George Durie of Grange, claimant to the Rutherford peerage, who in a petition to King George II. sets forth that he did "upon the fifth of June last caus apprehend Sir Hector Maclean and George Blair (sic) of Castlehill by 3 O'clock in the morning being informed they were to set out by four o'clock for the Highlands of Scotland in order to raise all the clans they could influence to rise in an open rebellion against Your Majesty in favour of a Popish Pretender."***
*** 'Lyon in Mourning,' vol.i. p.319. This George Durie appears to have been a very preposterous person. He petitions the king to make him a peer of Great Britain, and he reminds the king that he has the honour to be a remote relation, being descended from a niece of James II. of Scotland.
This story receives some confirmation from Murray of Broughton, who states that "his (Maclean's) misfortune was chiefly owing to his landlord blabbing to that worthless wretch Rutherford of Drury (sic) who gave the information against him." There is no reason, however, to suppose that Sir Hector and Blaw were about to set out next morning at four o'clock to send the Fiery Cross round the Highlands. Murray regards these arrests as a great blow to the Prince's cause.****
**** Murray's 'Memorials,' Sc. H. S., p.133.
Maclean was to have gone to the Highlands and kept the threads of negotiation and conspiracy in his hands. According to Murray his influence was such that he might have been able to hold McLeod committed to the Prince's side.
Extract from the Record of the Tolbooth, 5th June 1745.
George Blaw of Castlehill incarcerate upon the following warrand by Robert Craigie Esq. His Majesty's Advocate and one of the Justices of the Peace of the County of Midlothian.
Whereas there is just reason to suspect that George Blaw of Castlehill lately arrived from France and now in custody of a messenger in the Canongate is guilty of high treason these are therefore authorising and requiring you to commit the said George Blaw Prisoner to the Tolbooth of Edinburgh for suspition of high treason there to be detain'd till he is delivered by due course of law.
Given at Edinburgh the fifth day of June 1745 years.
(Signed) ROB. CRAIGIE.
To Messengers at Arms, Constables and other officers of the law and to the keeper of the Tolbooth of Edinburgh.
The warrant, it will be noted, is signed by Robert Craigie,* the Lord Advocate, not as such, for the Lord Advocate is not a Magistrate, but as one of the Justices of the Peace for Midlothian.
* It is a curious coincidence that the warrant for the release from the Tolbooth of Edinburgh of Robert Blaw the Covenanter (see <infra>, p. 132) and the warrant for the incarceration of John Blaw the Jacobite were both signed by the proprietor for the time being of Glendoick, Perthshire.
Blaw was already in custody when the warrant was signed, which tallies with Durie's statement that he was arrested at 3 A.M. on the morning of 5th June. The charge, suspicion of high treason, was a serious one, and the arrests were treated as important and report thereof must have been immediately sent to London, for upon 11th June a special messenger was despatched from Whitehall with warrants signed by the Marquis of Tweeddale, Secretary of State, to bring Sir Hector and Blaw before him in London.
The Record of the Tolbooth proceeds:-
18th June 1745. - George Blaw de-signed as above was liberate by the following order.
John Marquis of Tweedale* Earl of Gifford Viscount of Walden and Lord Hay of Vester one of the Lords of His Majesty's most Honourable Privy Councill and Principall Secretary of State. These are in His Majesty's name and authority to authorise and require you to deliver the body of George Blaw Prisoner in your custody on suspicion of high treason to the Bearer William Haite one of His Majesty's messengers in ordinary in order to his being brought before me to be examined and further dealt with according to law. And in so doing this shall be your warrand.
Given at Whitehall the 11th day of June 1745 in the nineteenth year of His Majesty's reign.
(Signed) TWEEDALE.
To the Keeper of the Tolbooth of Edinburgh or his Depute.
* John, fourth Marquis of Tweeddale, was the Secretary of State for Scotland, an office which was abolished in 1746, so that he was the last to hold it. He was also the last to hold the office of extraordinary Lord of Session.
Edinburgh, the 18th June 1745.
I acknowledge to have received in pursuance of the above authority the body of George Blaw from the Keeper of the Edinburgh Tolbooth.
Per me,
(Signed) WM. HAITE.
As appears from the foregoing, Blaw was despatched as a prisoner to London upon 18th June. There he underwent a long examination before Tweeddale, and thereafter he was committed to prison, where he was detained without trial, a course perhaps justifiable during a rebellion. The 'Caledonian Mercury' of 25th September 1745 thus records the incident:-
The same day (Sept. 19) John Bleau of Castlehill Esq. was committed to Newgate after long examination by the Marquis of Tweeddale His Majesty's Principal Secretary of State for the Kingdom of Scotland.
Prince Charles was at Holyrood by this time, and the battle of Prestonpans was fought just two days later.
Blaw was liberated on bail upon 28th February 1747. His kinsman, Dr James Blaw, upon whom he called, found that he "looks better and lustier than ever I saw him."
"Perhaps I shall give him a little money," writes Dr Blaw, "but will never lend him any."*
* Letter, Dr Blaw to James Johnston.
He remained for some time in London, and he was still there upon 18th November 1747.**
** Letter, Dr Blaw to John Dalgleish.
Under the Act of Indemnity of that year he was relieved of all further proceedings.
Blaw was in Leith on 4th January 1748, when he visited the Rev. Mr Forbes and showed him what purported to be a copy of the notorious letter from McLeod to McDonald of Kingsburgh urging the latter to betray the Prince.***
*** 'Lyon in Mourning,' vol. ii. p.1. According to Kingsburgh the copies of this letter in circulation were not true copies, but were copies of what somebody to whom he had shown the letter had written down from memory. The original was "still worse."
Blaw's son Charles was also concerned in the rebellion. He appears to have been in France at the same time as his father, for in the autumn of 1745 he landed at Montrose or some neighbouring town with the reinforcements brought to the Prince by Lord John Drummond, brother of the Duke of Perth. This force joined the Prince at Stirling on his return from Derby, and took part in the battle of Falkirk. Charles Blaw was a prisoner when his name was included in the list of local rebels by the Supervisor of Excise at Dunfermline. Where he was taken prisoner and how it fared with him as such have not been ascertained. Nor is anything more known of him except that he seems to have predeceased his father.*
* According to a manuscript note of quite recent date in the Lyon Office, Charles Blaw was never heard of again after being made prisoner. The authority for this statement is not known, and it seems improbable. It seems clear from his sister Mrs Begbie's letters that he was known to be dead in 1775.
The Jacobite mission of John Blaw is a curious episode in the strange story of the '45.
Castlehill sounds pretentious, but after all it was a very small estate. Blaw's grandfather and his father mixed freely with the merchant and tradesmen society of a small town, and these were the associations of John Blaw's youth. Nor does he seem to have bettered himself and his family fortunes. Much the reverse. He was apparently a neglectful father, an unsatisfactory husband, a defaulting debtor, and in deep poverty. It is not likely that he knew French or had ever been beyond Scotland before. A very unlikely person this seems to be sent on a secret mission to Prince Charles at Paris, to interview the Minister of Louis at Versailles, and to find his way safely through two Continental armies. There is no reason, however, to doubt the substantial truth of Blaw's narrative, which is corroborated both by the Prince and by Murray. Nevertheless one would have expected to find a man of Blaw's upbringing and surroundings standing at the byre door at Castlehill discoursing with the hind the probable date of calving of the brown cow rather than to find him seated in the Palace of Versailles discoursing with the Minister of France the policy of the Queen of Hungary.
CHAPTER III.
JOHN BLAW AS A CRIMINAL.
IN the latter half of the eighteenth century Clackmannan - to judge by the Old Statistical Account - was rather a mean and unsavoury village. The population in 1794 was only 639. There was a dunghill at every door. An old court-house and tolbooth or jail stood in the middle of the street. There were a few bakers' and grocers' shops, an inn, and a dozen of tippling houses - a circumstance, says the Account, "not very favourable to the morals of the people." The Account goes on -
"Clackmannan has two fairs in the year, one in June and the other in September called Bartholemew's Fair, where horses, black cattle, coarse linen, and woolen cloth, and all kinds of hardware and haberdashery goods were exposed. Formerly this last was a great market for wool, brought from the south country: of late years, however, very small quantities of that article have been brought to it."
In the year 1767 the last day of the autumn or Bartholomew's Fair was Friday 4th September. On that day John Blaw came to the fair from Castlehill, Culross, seven miles from Clackmannan on the coast road to Fife; and William Cairns came from Nether Kinnedder, which is a like distance from Clackmannan on the then inland Fife road. Neither was destined to return home alive. John Blaw was now upwards of seventy years of age and in poor financial circumstances. One of his sons, Charles, seems to have died, and the other, John, was abroad. His daughter was in Belfast apparently visiting her Irish relations. Whether his wife was now living with him does not appear.
William Cairns, who was accompanied to Clackmannan by his son John, was somewhat younger than Blaw. He was a farmer on the farm of Kinnedder Mains or home farm. At this time Nether Kinnedder belonged to a family of the name of Haly. Later it was the property of William Erskine, Sir Walter Scott's bosom friend, who took from it his judicial title of Lord Kinnedder. The Cairns family seems to have been of a well-to-do farmer class, for one of them, William, a son of William, senior, and elder brother of John, married Ann Oliphant of the Upper Kinnedder family. Mr Rupert Sackville Gwynne, M.P. for the Eastbourne Division of Sussex, is a descendant of this marriage.
The story of what took place in the ale-house is confused and contradictory in detail, and where discrepancies occur the witnesses are not, so far as the record shows, examined and cross-examined with a view to explain them. In the kitchen there was a narrow table in a recess towards a back window. When people were seated at the table the wall was apparently close behind them on either side. Blaw and the two Cairns and two other men of no importance, Cowie and Alison, were drinking at this table. Whether Blaw came in with the two Cairns or was there before them, or came in after them and joined them, is not clear, for we get all three stories. Alison quitted the party, and so afterwards did Cowie, the latter apparently because words were rising between Blaw and the two Cairns. Blaw was next to the window on one side of the table. Apparently (though again there is flat contradiction) young Cairns was opposite him, and the father, William Cairns, on the side of the table next Blaw. The quarrel waxed warm, and in the course of it John Cairns noticed that Blaw was fumbling in his pocket, and conjectured that he was feeling for money to pay for the drink. Next he noticed that Blaw had both hands under the table (doubtless opening the knife). A moment later Blaw sprang to his feet, and leaning across the table, stabbed John Cairns in the breast, just under the left nipple, with a penknife. John Cairns, without rising, leant back against the wall, shouting that he was stabbed ("sticket"). His father sprang up exclaiming something about stabbing his bairn before his eyes. Just as William Cairns was rising, Blaw, who was standing beside him, stabbed him low in the breast. William Cairns, who did not notice his own wound, seized Blaw and pulled him to the ground, the knife slipping from Blaw's hand and going under the table. Apparently Blaw groped about to recover it, whilst William Cairns ran to the fireplace and seized a "rack," or iron rest, with which to attack Blaw. Mrs Henderson, however, the wife of the innkeeper, now intervened, and got the rack out of Cairns's hand, saying there was to be no more murder in her house. Cairns then attacked Blaw on the ground, belabouring him with his hands. But Henderson, the innkeeper, who had come in, bade him desist, which he did, saying that he might very well do so, as he felt that he had been stabbed himself. Meanwhile, young Cairns had risen and was shouting for a doctor. William Cairns, when he and Blaw were separated, staggered from the kitchen into the shop and then out of the door, but he turned back again into the house, where he was put to bed, and rapidly becoming weaker, he died about seven o'clock, an hour after he had been stabbed. Dr Haig, from Alloa, was there ten minutes before he died, but he was past aid. The cause of death was probably internal hemorrhage.
After the scuffle, Blaw made no attempt to escape, but sat at the table until he was arrested by Meiklejohn, a constable (though not a policeman or whole-time officer of the law in the modern sense), who took him to the Clackmannan Tolbooth. The same evening Blaw was brought before Lord Kennet, the nearest available magistrate, before whom he made a declaration. The knife was found under the table. It is a small penknife, and it is still after 148 years among the papers and productions in the case in the Justiciary Office, Edinburgh. This knife is so small that it could hardly be regarded as a "lethal" weapon. The handle seems barely three inches long, and it must have been difficult to stab with it, as there could not be a proper grip with the hand, and the handle must have been held firmly between finger and thumb. This probably accounts for the cut on Blaw's thumb, which must have slightly overreached the handle.
According to the standard of the time, Blaw was rightly convicted of murder upon the evidence as that is recorded. Whether in the same circumstances he would now in Scotland be convicted of murder is doubtful. Recent experience is against such convictions in the case of stabbing in a quarrel. There are two factors upon which the result would mainly depend.
(1) Whether the jury would take the evidence of previous malice as seriously as appears have been done in this case?
(2) What impression the accused would make in telling his own story in the witness-box, as he would do now? It would have been a good opportunity, when there were so many discrepancies in the Prosecutor's evidence.
Blaw may have been adequately defended, and the record may fail to show it, but, as the record stands, he was not adequately defended according to the standards of the present day. The recording of evidence in long - hand is exceedingly prejudicial to effective cross - examination. It gives the witness too much time, but this is not the worst. It is not only now and again that even effective cross - examination scores a point, and the cross-examiner before a judge who has to make long-hand notes is in this dilemma, that he provokes irritation all round if he insists upon everything going down, whilst he weakens his position if he has constantly to admit that the answer he gets is worthless and need not go down in the notes.
The successful attempt on the part of the Crown to prove previous malice by Blaw against his victim suggests an interesting question in psychology. The evidence was directed to show that Blaw had entertained and expressed murderous intentions in regard to both father and son Cairns. The theory under which this evidence is led is that it shows that the murder was deliberate. I believe that the idea was unfounded in this particular case, as it is in many similar cases. I recall the case of a man whom I unsuccessfully defended a few years ago in Glasgow on a charge of murdering his paramour. I do not believe that the man was an intentional murderer, although he did the woman to death with brutal violence in a drunken fury. The Crown sought to show, and apparently satisfied the jury, that the crime was deliberate, by evidence to the effect that in previous drunken fits the accused had uttered threats against the woman and declared that he would swing for her and so forth. On the other hand, it appeared that after these threats and before the crime the parties had been on the most friendly terms when they were both sober. I do not believe that when they were on this footing the accused had any intention of doing harm to the woman, whatever he might have said in his cups. So in the present case, the parties appear to have been at all events on speaking terms, and I do not believe that Blaw went to the fair or entered the inn with any deliberate intention of stabbing Cairns. This does not, however, imply that there is no connection between the threats and the deed. There is, indeed, a double connection. The threats uttered, probably in the cups, are evidence of a rancorous ferocity of temper when in that state, and the entertainment of these savage thoughts breeds a familiarity with the idea which makes the deed come easy.
A few years ago I had a correspondence with the late Sir Henry Littlejohn upon a cognate question. A young man in a fairly good position induced a young woman to whom he was engaged to come to Edinburgh to make arrangements for the wedding. He went about with her all day cheerful and interested in purchases. Afterwards he cut her throat and his own in a Princes Street Hotel. The evidence negatived the idea that there was a sudden insane impulse. He had the idea in his mind before. On the other hand, it seemed inconceivable that the idea was fixed and present in his mind during the cheerful day's shopping and eating. Sir Henry was interested in this line of inquiry and consulted the late Sir Thomas Clouston on the matter. But even with that assistance he could not give any very satisfactory explanation.
There is no local knowledge or tradition as to the site of Henderson's alehouse, and the building has probably been demolished. But I have discovered one curious local tradition of the crime. The Rev. Dr Irvine Robertson of Clackmannan writes me -
"There is an old retired blacksmith, Robert Drysdale, whose father and grandfather had the business successively before him. Drysdale's father used to tell him that his (Drysdale's) grand-father remembered when a man from Culross who owned an orchard there came to Clackmannan in search of a man who had been robbing his orchard, that the Culross man sharpened his knife upon a grindstone at the smiddy door and then went into the town of Clackmannan, found the thief, quarrelled with him, and stabbed him. But the present Drysdale cannot remember the name of the persons concerned or the spot where the stabbing took place."
It is interesting to be able to compare a genuine tradition with the authentic facts. The tradition is 148 years old, but involves only two transmissions. The man from Culross, the robbery of the orchard, the knife, and the stabbing, are all in accordance with the facts. On the other hand, the tradition seems to convey an erroneous impression that Blaw came in hot blood to avenge the robbing of his orchard. The grievance, it is clear from the particulars at the trial, was of some standing. The sharpening of the knife is doubtful. Very likely Blaw sometimes sharpened his knife at the smithy and he may have done so on this very day. But for reasons indicated above it is doubtful whether he had any intention to use it against Cairns before he met him.*
* The knife had been recently sharpened at Stirling.
If the case furnishes an interesting example of tradition, it also affords a curious illustration of the danger that may lurk behind the acceptance of an apparently trustworthy contemporary record. Clackmannan is only thirty miles from Edinburgh, and the crime was committed on a Friday. Yet on the Wednesday following the 'Edinburgh Evening Courant' could get no nearer accuracy than as follows :-
"We are told from Clackmannan of a most melancholy affair that happened there the end of last week. It happened to be the time of their annual fair, which occasioned a resort of people to the place, among others a man of that neighbourhood who on some business had occasion to be in company with a father and son of the name of Richardson. In the course of their business they unhappily differed, which occasioned high words and which ended in the death of both the Richardsons, the younger of whom the gentleman stabbed with a large knife and immediately afterwards execute the same vengeance on the father, who at the stroke ran to the support of the son. The father died immediately, the son, we are told, two days afterwards. The alarm was immediately given, but it was some time before the murderer could be secured. He stood at bay with the weapon in his hand dyed in blood : and it required a military force before he could be taken. He was immediately conveyed to Stirling Castle."
CHAPTER IV.
THE STIRLING JUSTICE AYRE.
BLAW'S crime was committed on 4th September 1767, and the Criminal Letters on which he was tried are dated at Edinburgh upon 10th September - a Sunday having intervened. He was brought to trial at Stirling Circuit Court upon 28th September. This seems extremely expeditious for such a trial even according to modern standards, with vastly increased facilities for communication. It would require, according to present-day rules and practice, that the precognition of witnesses scattered over a rural district should be completed and reported to Edinburgh, and the indictment be prepared, revised, printed, signed, and served, all within a week of the crime. It could be done, but it would be unlikely in such a case that it would be done. The following account of the proceedings at this Circuit Court of Justiciary is taken from the records of the Court :-
CURIA ITINERIS JUSTICIARII S.D.N. REGIS, Tenta in Praetorio* Burgi de Stirling, vigesimo quinto die Septembris Millesimo Septingentesimo sexagesimo septimo. Per Honorabiles Viros Thomam Miller de Barskimming** Dominum Justiciarium Clericum, & Henricum Home de Kames** unum ex Commissionariis Justiciariæ S.D.N. Regis.
Curia legitime afirmata.***
Present. - The Sheriff Depute of Stirling & Clackmannan.****
The Sheriff Substitute of Kinross.*****
The List of Assysors for this District being called over, they all answered to their names, excepting those for whom relevant causes were offered and sustained.
There was a Petition presented for John Blaw of Castlehill,
Humbly shewing (Here record the Petition).^
The Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kames one of the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, Having considered the foregoing Petition Recommend to Mr John Munro^^ & Mr Alexander
Abercromby,^^^ Advocates, to assist the Petitioner in conducting his Defence upon his trial.
(Signed) THO. MILLER, I.P.D.
* The Court appears to have been held in the Burgh Court-room in Broad Street. In Hogg's case, tried before Blaw's, it is stated that the jury retired to the Council Chamber - i.e., the room where the Town Council was in use to meet. The Prison and the County Buildings, including the Sheriff Court, were behind the Burgh Buildings.
** See Appendix IV.
*** The Court having been duly constituted and "fenced." The ceremony consists of prayer by a city minister and a proclamation by the macer.
**** Then, as now, the Sheriffs were required to attend at the Spring and Autumn circuits. The Sheriff Depute of Stirling and Clackmannan at this time was George Cokburne (so spelt in his commission, although in the records of the Sheriff Court it is Cokburn) of the Ormiston family. The salary was £150 per annum. In 1768 Cokburne succeeded his uncle in the estate of Gleneagles, when he assumed the name of Haldane. In 1770 he resigned the office of Sheriff, and he died in 1779. His only surviving son died in the same year, and the property of Gleneagles then passed to the Cameperdown family, relations through female descent.
***** The Sheriff Substitute of Kinross was Mr James Stewart, a local Writer. He represented the Sheriff Depute of Fife and Kinross, who for some reason was absent.
^ The Petition, which was to have Counsel assigned to him owing to his want of means, is not engrossed in the record.
^^ Mr John Monro of Auchinbowie (b. 1725), son of Mr Alex. Monro, Professor of Anatomy, Edinburgh, was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates in 1753. The only public office which he appears to have held was that of Procurator-Fiscal to the Court of Admiralty. He married (1757) Sophie, eldest daughter of Archibald Inglis of Auchindinny, by whom he had two daughters. He died in 1789. General Sir Charles Monro is descended from his brother.
^^ Alexander Abercromby was a mere fledgling, for he had only been admitted to the Bar in 1766 at the age of twenty-one. He was the fourth son of George Abercromby of Tullibody, and he was a brother of the celebrated Sir Ralph Abercromby, and a brother-in-law of Lord Kennet, who married his sister. His mother, a Dundas of Manor, was a kinswoman of Mrs John Blaw, and as contemporary correspondence shows, his brothers were on very intimate terms with her brothers, the Dundases of Blair. Alexander Abercromby was himself appointed Sheriff of Stirling and Clackmannan in 1770, and he resigned that office in 1780 to become Advocate Depute. Nowadays it would be equally unheard of for a man to be a Sheriff at twenty-five, and for a Sheriff to resign to become an Advocate Depute. Abercromby became a Judge of the Supreme Court in 1792, and he died in 1795. His portrait in the Parliament Hall is a fine specimen of an early Raeburn.
There being no depending for this Dyet of Court - the Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kames Continue the Court & whole Dyets thereof till to-morrow at Eleven o'clock forenoon, & Ordain parties Assysors Witnesses & all concerned then to attend each under the pains of law.
CURIA ITINERIS JUSTICIARII S.D.N. REGIS, Tenta in Prætorio Burgi de Stirling vigesimo sexto die Septembris Millesimo Septingentesimo sexagesimo Septimo. Per Honorabilum Virum Henricum Home de Kames unum ex Commissionariis Justiciarie S.D.N. Regis.
Curia legitime affirmata.
Lord Justice Clerk was not present at this Dyet of Court. (Intd.) R. A.*
Present. - The Sheriffs ut supra.
Intran. James Hogg, Butcher in Falkirk present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling, - Pannel.
Indicted & accused at the instance of James Montgomery,** Esqr. His Majesty's Advocate for His Majesty's interest, for the crime of Theft of cattle*** in manner mentioned in the Criminal Letters raised thereanent, Bearing that whereas
(Here record the Lybel.)
The said Criminal Letters being read over in open Court - The Pannel was asked whether he was guilty or not guilty of the crimes charged agt. him and he acknowledged he is guilty and that the facts contained in the Indictment are true.
(Signed) JAMES HOG.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
The Advocate Depute declared that he restricted the Lybel to an arbitrary punishment^ and insisted agt. the Pannel only to that extent.
(Signed) COSMO GORDON, A.D.^^
* Robert Auld, Depute Clerk of Justiciary, was Clerk to this Court.
** James William Montgomery (1721-1803) was admitted to the Bar 1743, Sheriff of Peebles 1748, Solicitor-General 1760, Lord Advocate 1766, M.P. Dumfries Burghs 1766-8, Peeblesshire 1768-1801, a Baronet 1801. Montgomery's name is familiar to all lawyers in connection with the "Montgomery" Act of 1770, under which improvements of entailed estates became chargeable against the estate. He was a great agriculturist and rural economist. His Baronetcy is now held by his great-grandson, Basil Graham Montgomery, Bart. of Kinross.
^ James Hogg (the defendant (Pannel) of the above case) had stolen two cows.
^^ That is, any form of punishment the Court saw fit to inflict short of death. The offence was capital, unless the Public Prosecutor restricted the pains of law. It was very common in these days for a prisoner to plead guilty on the understanding that if he did so the Prosecutor would restrict the pains. The formality of restricting the pains is still necessary in the case of conviction of murderous assault under the Act 10 Geo. IV. c. 38.
^^^ The Advocate Depute, or Public Prosecutor, was Cosmo Gordon of Cluny. He was admitted advocate in 1758. From 1774-7 he was M.P. for Nairnshire. In the latter year he was appointed a Baron of Exchequer. From 1782 to 1787 he was Rector of Marischal College, Aberdeen. He died in 1800.
The Lord Kames one of the Lords Commrs. of Justiciary Having considered the Criminal Lybel raised and pursued at the instance of James Montgomery, Esqr. His Majesty's Advocate for His Majesty's interest, against James Hogg, Butcher, Falkirk, present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling, Pannel with the confession now emitted by him in presence of the Court, Finds the Lybel as now restricted by the Advocate Depute, relevant to infer an arbitrary punishment, and Remitts the panel with the Lybel as found relevant, and his said Confession to the knowledge of an Assyse.*
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
The Lord Kames proceeded to name the following persons** to pass upon the Assyse of the Pannel -
Capt. Robert Haldane of Airthray.
Sir James Stirling of Glorat.
Charles Stirling of Keirfield.
John Hamilton of Dowan.
Richard Allan of Bardowie.
David Findlay of Bogside.
Robert Walker of Stepmiln.
William Don of Seabegs.
Henry Cowbrugh of Elrick.
Patrick Salmon of Balquhatston.
James Black of North Bankhead.
John Kincaid of Crossrig.
John Dick of Campstone.
Robert Banks Mercht. in Stirling.
Capt. James Scotland of Easter Dollarbeg.
Who being all lawfully sworn and no objection in the contrary -
The Advocate Depute for Probation adduced the Confession of the Pannel & desired the same might be read judicially in presence of the Court and Jury. Which being done the Pannell judicially acknowledged his Confession formerly emitted in presence of the Court and Jury.
The Lord Kames Ordains the Assyse instantly to enclose in the Council Chamber and to return their Verdict so soon as ready, the Court being to sit till their return.
The Jury being returned into Court returned the following Verdict -
* i.e., a jury. At this time the case went to a jury even if the accused pled guilty.
** At this time the jury of 15 was chosen by the judges from a list of 45 names served upon the accused a fortnight before. The jury so selected was presented 5 by 5 to the accused, who was asked if he had any objection against any one. If he stated an objection, he had to make good the grounds stated. There was not at this time any right of peremptory challenge.
At Stirling the Twenty sixth day of September One thousand seven hundred and sixty seven years -
The above Assyse being inclosed made choice of Sir James Stirling of Glorat to be their Chancellor and of Charles Stirling of Keirfield to be their Clerk, and having considered the criminal Lybel raised and pursued at the instance of James Montgomery, Esqr. His Majesty's Advocate for His Majesty's interest against James Hogg, Butcher in Falkirk, present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling Pannel, with the Interlocutor on the relevancy thereof pronounced by the Lord Kames, one of the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary, and the judicial confession of the said James Hogg now adhered to by him in their presence, they all in one voice find the Pannel guilty of the crime libelled IN Witness Whereof their said Chancellor and Clerk have subscribed these presents in their name & by their appointment.
(Signed) JA. STIRLING, Chan.
(Signed) CHA. STIRLING, Clerk.
After reading and recording of which Verdict -
The Lord Kames superseded pronouncing sentence thereon till Monday next the Twenty eight instant,* at Nine o'clock in the morning, Continued the Dyet agt. the Pannel till that time & ordained him in the meantime to be carried back to Prison; Also Continued the Court and whole other Dyets till that time, And ordained parties, assysors, witnesses & all concerned then to attend each under the pains of law.
* The trial of Blaw took place on the Monday, and at the close of that day's proceedings Hogg's case was again adjourned to the following day, when it was disposed of.
CURIA ITINERIS JUSTICIARII S.D.N. REGIS, Tenta in Prætorio Burgi de Stirling, vigesimo octavo die Septembris Millesimo Septingentesimo sexagesimo septimo. Per Honorabiles Viros Dominum Justiciarium Clericum & Home de Kames unum ex Commissionariis Justiciariæ S.D.N. Regis.
Curia legitime affirmata.
Present. - Sheriff Depute of Stirling and Clackmannan.
The Sheriff Subt. of Kinross.
Intram John Blaw of Castlehill, present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling. -Pannel.
Indicted & accused at the instance of James Montgomery, Esqr. His Majesty's Advocate for His Majesty's interest for the crime of Murder in manner mentioned in the Criminal Letters raised thereanent, Bearing that Whereas by the Laws of God and the Law and practice of this & every other well governed Realm Murder or the wilfully bereaving any person of his life is a crime of a heinous nature and severely punishable, Yet True It is and of verity, that the said John Blaw has presumed to commit and has been guilty Actor or Art and Part of the foresaid crime of Murder, In so far as he the said John Blaw having conceived a deadly malice and ill will against William Cairns, Tenant in Nether Kinnedar, and happening to be in company with the said William Cairns & John Cairns second son to the said William Cairns in the house of John Henderson, Merchant and Vintner in Clackmannan in the Parish and Shire of Clackmannan, upon Friday the Fourth day of September current, or one or other of the days of that month or of August immediately preceding, and he the said John Blaw having then and there, without any provocation, stabbed or wounded with a penknife or other sharp instrument the said John Cairns, the said William Cairns quarrelled the said John Blaw for thus wounding his son, Whereupon the said John Blaw, without further provocation, did wilfully and maliciously wound or stab the said William Cairns in the breast with a pen knife or other sharp instrument of which wound the said William Cairns died in less than an hour thereafter, whereby the said John Blaw is guilty of the crime of Murder. And the said John Blaw having been upon the said fourth day of September current brought before the Honourable Robert Bruce of Kennet Esqr., one of the Senators of the College of Justice, one of Our Justices of the Peace in the Shire of Clackmannan at Clackmannan, the said John Blaw did then and there emitt a Declaration tending to show his guilt in the premises, which Declaration signed by the said John Blaw and Robert Bruce, Esqr. together with the pen knife Wherewith the aforesaid murder was committed are to be used as evidence against the said John Blaw upon his trial and for that purpose shall be lodged in the hands of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Justiciary before which he is to be tried that he may see the same. AT LEAST, time and place foresaid, the said William Cairns was barbarously murdered by being stabbed in the breast with a pen knife or other sharp instrument, and the said John Blaw is guilty thereof, Actor or Art and Part of the said Murder; ALL WHICH or Part thereof, or that the said John Blaw is guilty Actor or Art and Part, being found proven by the Verdict of Assize In presence of the Lord Justice General Justice Clerk and Commissioners of Justiciary in a Circuit Court of Justiciary to be held by them or any one or more of their number within the Burgh of Stirling upon the Twenty eighth day of September Instant he ought to be punished with the pains of law to deterr others from committing the like crimes in all time to come.*
The said Criminal Letters being read over in presence of the pannel, and he being askt if he was guilty or not guilty of the crime charged in the lybel, he denied his being guilty.
Pror. for the Prosecutor,
Mr COSMO GORDON,
Advocate Depute.
Pror. in Defence,
Mr JOHN MUNRO,
Advocate.
Mr John Munro for the Pannell repeated his signed defences** and represented he admitted the lybell was formall and relevant But pleaded that even supposing the death of William Cairns had been occasioned by the Pannell the same had happened in self defence for that at the time lybelled the said William Cairns and John Cairns his son had officiously intruded themselves into the Pannell's company and the Pannell having chalanged the Father for a fraud committed by him in a bargain of oats he had bought from the Pannel some time ago and the son for having robbed his orchard he was assaulted by both of them with their staves and endeavoured to defend himself the best he could. Whether in this scuffle the said William Cairns received any wound or in what manner he received that wound the Pannell cannot say but alledged that the assault made by them upon the Pannell will justify his conduct even admitting that William Cairns death was the consequence of it and craved to be allowed a proof in exculpation.
Mr Cosmo Gordon, Advocate Depute, answered*** that the relevancy of the lybell being admitted it was unnecessary for him to say anything and therefore he should only observe that the self defence now pleaded for the Pannell is evidently insufficient to elide the lybell for even supposing the Pannel's tale to be true yet the event has shown that his self defence exceeded the moderamen inculpate tutelae and is therefore punishable But he was sorry to think that the matter would come out otherways upon prooff and that it would appear Mr Blaw the Pannel had begun the assault upon the Cairnses without any previous provocation on their part in consequence of a groundless resentment previously conceived against them and which with unrelenting malice he had long fostered in his breast till it broke out in the bloody outrage committed by him first upon the son and more particularly upon the father. He therefore craved the Lords would find the lybell relevant and admit it to prooff.
The Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kames, one of the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary having considered the Criminal Lybel raised and pursued at the instance of James Montgomery, Esqr. His Majesty's Advocate for His Majesty's interest against John Blaw of Castlehill present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling, Pannel, with the foregoing debate, Find the Lybel relevant to infer the pains of law But Allow the Pannel to prove all facts and circumstances that may tend to exculpate him or to alleviate his guilt and Remit the Pannel with the lybel as found relevant to the knowledge of an Assise.
(Signed) THO. MILLER, I.P.D.
* The Criminal Letters were signed by Robert Auld, the Depute Clerk of Justiciary.
** This refers apparently to the Declaration. There is no trace of any other defences.
*** No such statement by the Prosecutor as is here recorded would now be allowed at this stage.
The Lords proceeded to make choice of the following persons* to pass upon the Assise of the Pannel.
* Most of the place-names in the list of jurors can still be found in directories, but with the single exception of Glorat, the surnames respectively associated therewith seem to have changed. "of" does not necessarily mean "proprietor of." The person so designated seems in some cases to have been only a tenant.
Sir James Stirling of Glorat.^
Robert Haldane of Airthray.^^
John Hamilton of Dowan.
Richard Allan of Bardowie.
David Findlay of Bogside.
Robert Walker Of Stepmiln.
Williarn Don of Seabegs.
Henry Cowbrough of Elrick.
Patrick Salmon of Balwhatston.
John Kincaid of Crossrig.
Robert Banks mercht. in Stirling.
Capt. James Scotland of Easter Dollarbeg.
Simon Drysdale of Wester Sheardale.
John Carmichael fewar in Millack.
John Scotland portioner of Kilduff.
who being all lawfully sworn and no objection to the contrary - The Advocate Depute proceeded to adduce the following witnesses for proving his Lybel. -
^ Sir James Stirling, 3rd Baronet of Glorat, died in 1771 s. p. His widow married the judge James Erskine, Lord Barjarg.
^^ Robert Haldane of Gleneagles and Airthray died s. p. on 1st January 1768, and he was succeeded in Gleneagles by his nephew, George Cokburne, Sheriff of Stirling and Clackmannan, who took the name Of Haldane, and in Airthrey by his nephew James Haldane, great-grandfather of Viscount Haldane. James Haldane sold Airthray to the Abercrombys.
JAMES ALEXANDER,* Sheriff Substitute of Clackmannanshire, married & aged fourty years and upwards, solemnly sworn, purged of malice and partial councill,** and interrogate Depones - That upon day the Eight of Sept. curt. when employed in the course of his duty in taking a precognition relative to the death of William Cairns, he received a pen knife from Robert Micklejohn, Constable, which he put under a paper cover which he sealed up and marked with his own handwriting and which being now produced to him and opened by authority of the Court he depones that the paper cover is the same which he sealed up and marked as above and that the pen knife therein contained is the same which he received from the Constable and enclosed in the said cover as above mentioned, And further depones that the same marks of blood which now appear upon the knife were upon it when he received it from the Constable, and being interrogate on behalf of the pannell what account the Constable gave him the Deponent of the above knife, Depones that he told the Deponent that he received it from John Henderson, Innkeeper in Clackmannan, and that he was then told by some of the witnesses whom he was then precognoscing that the knife was found about Ten o'clock at night below a table in the room where William Cairns, his son and the Pannell had been in company the day that William Cairns received his wound, but cannot recollect the name of the witness who gave him the above information.
causa scientiae Patet*** and this is truth as he shall answer to God.
(Signed) J A. ALEXANDER.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
* James Alexander, a Writer in Alloa, was Sheriff-Substitute of Clackmannan.
** The witness was questioned as to whether he had any prejudice, malice, or interest in the matter.
*** A witness who deponed to certain facts was supposed to be interrogated as to how he knew these facts. But generally his own narrative disclosed the source of information. In these circumstances it was customary to insert in the deposition the words "causa scientiæ patet" just to show that this consideration had not been overlooked. It seems absurd, however, to have required the witness, who generally knew no Latin, to subscribe his name to this declaration.
DAVID WARDLAW,^ younger of Craighouse. Aged fourty years or thereby. Married. Purged of malice and partial councill, and the knife mentioned in the foregoing deposition being shown to him - Depones That he saw it formerly in the hands of Robert Micklejohn the Constable who told him that John Henderson's servant had found it the night of the scuffle between the Pannell and the Cairnes in John Henderson's kitchen. That the Tuesday thereafter he saw the pen knife a second time when Mr Alexander was taking the precognition and that he saw the said Alexander rap it up in a piece of paper on which he put sale.^^ That on the Thursday next thereafter the sale was opened by Mr Alexander and the knife shown to one James Rae, Barber and Wigmaker in Kincardine and saw it again sealed up as formerly, and a paper being shown him believes it to be the same in which the pen knife was last wrapt up. Depones when the knife was first shown him it appeared to be bloody as at present. Causa scientiæ Patet, and this is truth as he shall answer to God. One word in the third line, four words in the eight and two words in the Ninth line of this Deposition delete before signing.
(Signed) D. A. WARDLAW.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
^ David Wardlaw was the son of Sir Henry Wardlaw, eleventh Baronet of Pitreavie, to whom he succeeded in the Baronetcy. His grandmother, a Rolland, brought the small property of Craighouse to the family. It is not clear why he was following the knife about the country, but he was a neighbour of Cairns, and may have been looking after that interest as an avenger of blood. The Wardlaw Baronetcy has passed very often to collaterals. Although David had five sons only one survived him, and he again left but one daughter, who died childless as the wife of Andrew Clarke of Comrie.
^^ Seal.
WILLIAM PHILP,* Indweller in Blairburn of Castlehill, agt. whom it was objected for the Pannell that he had used words expressive of the strongest malice and ill-will agt. the Pannell sufficient to disqualify him for being a witness in this cause, of which he was ready to bring prooff, and craved to be allowed to bring such prooff.
The Lords, before Answer, Allow the Pannell to adduce witnesses for proving the expressions implying malice & ill-will agt. the Pannell which had been uttered by the said William Philp.
(Signed) THO. MILLER, I.P.D
* Although this witness was admitted, he appears to have been an officious and truculent person. There were grounds for receiving with caution his evidence, which was not immaterial.
ROBERT MICKLEJOHN, Brewer in Alloa, one of the Constables of Clackmannan Shire. Aged fourty years or thereby. Married. Purged of malice and partial councill. Depones - Negative as to any expressions of malice used by Philp towards the pannell but Depones that when he was carrying the Pannell from Clackmannan to the Prison of this place the Pannell complained that he was too straitly bound, upon which the Deponent agreed to relieve him by slackening the ropes, upon which Philp, who had come up with them upon the Road, said that it was more than they could be answerable for, upon which some altercation ensued William Philp and the party who had the custody of the Prisoner in the course of which Philp threatened to beat the party if they gave the relieve proposed to Mr Blaw, but that the Deponent having the charge of the Prisoner paid no regard to these threatenings and said to Philp he knew no business he had to do these. Causa scientiæ Patet and this is truth as he shall answer to God.
(Signed) ROBERT MICKLEJOHN.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
ROBERT LINDSAY, Jaylor of the Tolbooth of Clackmannan. Married and aged fifty seven years or thereby. Sworn and purged of malice and Partiall Councill & Interrogate Depones - Nihil Novit as to the points presently on prooff.
The Pannell having no more witnesses to adduce on this matter -
The Lords Repell the objection made to the witness and allow him to be adduced.
(Signed) THO. MILLER, I.P.D.
The said William Philp, married and aged fourty years or thereby, sworn and purged of malice and partiall councill & interrogate Depones - That he has known the Pannell ever since he remembers. That he was also well acquainted with the deceased William Cairns Tenant in Kinether and that he has at different times and upon different occasions heard the Pannell say that he would be upsides with the said William Cairns, And further depones that about five months ago the Pannell came out of the house of Robert Spittall within one house of the Deponent's and seemed to be in a great rage, but the Deponent did not know the occasion thereof and in passing the Deponent's door he heard the Pannell say that he would garr the said William Cairns or his son John Cairns sleep in their shoes But upon recollection Depones that he understood the above threatening to extend both to the Father & son, And Depones that he does not know in what company the Pannell had been in in the house of Robert Spittall nor does he know the occasion of the rage in which he appeared to be at the time of uttering the above expression. Causa Scientiae Patet and this is the truth as he shall answer to God.
(Signed) WILLIAM PHILP.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
GEORGE LAW, Maltman and Brewer in Culross, aged fourty years or thereby sworn examined and interrogate on oath and purged of malice and partial councill. Depones that above a twelve month ago he heard the Pannell complain that Willm. Cairns, Tenant in Kinether and his son John Cairns had cheated him of his corn and that William's servants had stole his fruit, and that they deserved a prick and that if they had been in France they would have been hanged. That upon Mr Blaw's saying that they deserved a prick the Deponent said that he hoped Mr Blaw had not such a great love to Willim Cairns and his son John that he would Dee for them. Causa scientiæ Patet and this is the truth as he shall answer to God. Two words in the seventh line delete before signing.
(Signed) GEO. LAW.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
JOHN HUNTER, Cuttler in Stirling, widower and aged fifty years or thereby, sworn, purged of malice and partiall councill & interrogate, Depones - That some more than a year ago he made a blade to a Pen knife for Mr Blaw the Pannell, and the knife referred to in the lybell & in the former Depositions being shown to him, Depones that the blade of the knife now shown him is of his making and he discovers his own mark upon it but he cannot depone whether it is the same blade he made for the Pannell, nor can he recollect whether the handle of the knife now shown to him is the handle to which he fixed the blade made by him for Mr Blaw as above, And further depones that he sharped a pen knife for the Pannell above three months ago and he is sure that knife had a blade which he had made himself, and further adds that he never made any knife for the Pannell except the one above deponed on. Causa scientiæ Patet and this is the truth as he shall answer to God. Seven words in the seventh line & four words in the eighth line of this Deposition delete before signing.
(Signed) JOHN HUNTER.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
HELEN CORSTORPHIN, spouse to John Henderson, Innkeeper in Clackmannan, married and aged fifty years or thereby, sworn, purged of malice and partial councill & interrogate, Depones - That upon the Fair Day of Clackmannan being the last, the Pannell with Willm. Cairns & his son John came into the Deponent's husband's house and retired to a window off the kitchen where she was sitting but did not see them there, that she carried a dram to them, & some time after retiring she heard Castlehill the Pannell say to Willm. Cairns that he had cheated him in prooffing his corn and to John his son that he had stole fruit out of the orchard calling him at the same time a young rascall. That a little time thereafter the said John came running and saying Good God I am sticked and his father William followed him saying that he has murdered my Bairn before my eyes upon which he flew to a rack* to use it against Castlehill as the Deponent supposes, the Pannel being then lying upon the ground near the hearth stone but that the Deponent laying hold of it crying that there should be no more murder in her house William Cairns gave it up to her. Depones that she saw the blood gushing out at John's breast. That she did not see Willm. Cairns again till she heard a cry that a man was lying dead in the shop upon which going to the shop she saw William Cairns just expiring. Depones that there was no person in the window when she carried the dram but the three persons above mentioned — Blaw, William and John Cairns. Depones that she saw no person in company but these three nor saw any person go in to them at the time John Cairns received his wound or before. Depones that after taking the rack as aforesaid from William Cairns that she in great confusion ran to another place of the house and then went to the shop as aforesaid when she heard the cry of murder. Depones that when John came out as aforesaid crying that he was sticked there were in the kitchen the servant maids Elizabeth Donaldson & Euphan Hazzels and being interrogate on behalf of the Pannell depones that she does not know William Cairns age but that certainly he was younger than the Pannell. Causa scientiæ Patet & this is the truth as she shall answer to God.
(Signed) HELLEN CORSTORPHEN.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
* A rest for fire-irons.
JEAN DONALDSON, servt. to John Henderson, Innkeeper in Clackmannan, & twenty years or thereby, sworn, purged of malice and partiall councill & interrogate, Depones - That upon the last fair Day at Clackmannan she saw the Pannell and the deceast William Cairns and his son John in her Master's house betwixt five and six in the afternoon. That they were sitting at a back window of the kitchen & near the fire. That they were sitting at a table, the Pannell uppermost upon one side, John Cairns below him, & Willm. Cairns on the other side of the table. That there was no other person in company with them. That some high words arose amongst them & she heard the Pannell say that Willm. Cairns had cheated him of his corn and that his men had robbed his orchard. That one or other of the Cairnses said that he was a liar and in a little time after she saw the Pannell make a push with his hand at John Cairns breast but saw no knife in his hand, upon which John Cairns who was then sitting started back and cried out Good Lord I am sticked. That at the time the Pannell gave the above blow he was standing close by John Cairns & presently John Cairns after crying out as above came from the place where he was sitting to another window, opened his breast and she saw the blood gushing out of the wound. That William Cairns the father hearing his son's cry, got up and said oftner than once to the Pannell that he had killed his son, and having laid hold of the Pannell he pulled him to the ground upon that side of the table where the Pannell was standing and presently run to the fireside and laid hold of a rack but Helen Corstorphin the Deponents Mistress seized the rack saying, For the love of God commit no more murder in my house for there has been enough already. Whereupon William Cairns quitted the rax to her Mistress. That she the Deponent attended John Cairns who had been wounded as above and neither saw nor heard anything more that passed between the Pannell and William Cairns, but in a very little space of time after she heard a woman come into the kitchen and cry that there was a man lying dead in the shop. That the Deponent immediately went into the shop, and saw William Cairns lying upon the ground like a dying man. That his breast was opened and she saw the wound below the stomach, but saw no blood coming from it. That he was carried to her Master's bed and died as she thinks in less than an hour. Depones that that same night as she thinks about ten o'clock she found a pen knife all bloody lying on the floor on that side of the table where the Pannell satt, which she delivered to Thos. Henderson her Master's son, and the knife referred to in the lybell and in the former depositions being shown to her Depones that it is the same knife which she found on the floor as above. Causa scientiae Patet & this is truth as she shall answer to God. Three words in the Twenty second line of the first page of this Deposition delete. And further Depones that when the woman came in saying that there was a man dead in the shop the Pannell was in the kitchen sitting at the table first described. And this is also truth as she shall answer to God. And Depones she cannot write.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
EUPHAM HAZZELS, Indweller in Clackmannan, aged fourty four, unmarried, purged of malice and partial counsel, sworn and interrogate, Depones that on the last fair Day of Clackmannan she saw Mr Blaw the Pannel come into the house of Mr Henderson, her Master along wt. William and John Cairns. That they went to the back window of the kitchen where there was a table, Blaw taking the upmost seat on the one side, William Cairns immediately below him and John upon a chair at the foot of the table. That she saw the Pannel Blaw put his hand into his pocket as if to take out money for paying the reckoning, that she saw him stretch out his arm towards John and his hand plaid bout upon John's breast upon which John turned about and cried he was sticked; That William the father starting up cried to Blaw that he had sticked his son, that she saw Blaw thrust his knife into William's breast and saw distinctly the point of the knife, upon which William flew to Blaw and brought him down to the ground ; upon which occasion the knife flew out of his hand & Blaw groped about to find the knife again. That William Cairns run to the chimney and took up a Racks in order to fell Blaw, but that the stroke was prevented and the Racks taken out of his hand she does not know by whom. That in a little time after hearing that William Cairns was dead in the shop she went there and found him expiring and saw him afterwards when he was dead. That the fray begun about Six o'clock & William was at his rest about seven, meaning that he was dead. Depones that the pen knife was found under the said table by Jean Donaldson a former witness and was delivered by her to Thomas Henderson, her Master's son, who carried it to the shop to his father ; and the pen knife formerly mentioned being shown to her, Depones that it is the same that she saw in the hand of the said Jean Donaldson that night. Causa scientiæ patet and this is truth as she shall answer to God. And Depones she cannot write. And also Depones that Mrs Henderson was in the kitchen along with the Deponent when the facts above mentioned happened. And this is also truth.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
JAMES COWIE, Gardner in Alloa. Aged fourty & upwards, married, purged of malice and partial council, sworn and interrogate Depones that upon the day libelled he was in the house of John Henderson, Innkeeper in Clackmannan in company with the Prisoner and Robert Alison of Blairingon, that they were joined by William and John Cairns and drunk some liquor at a window upon the backside of the kitchen. That Robert Alison left the company & some words arising betwixt the Pannell and the two Cairnses, the Deponent left their company and went to the opposite side of the kitchen. That he did not hear what words passed among them; But in a very little time he saw John Cairns come out from the place where he had been sitting and cry out that he had been stabbed by Castlehill & that he was gone, and immediately after he heard William Cairns the father say to the Pannell, have you murdered my son in my own presence. And several people having come in betwixt the Dept. and the place where the Pannel & William Cairns were, he saw Castlehill lying upon the ground but did not see who threw him down. That in about five or six minutes after he saw the pannel upon ground, he the Deponent having gone out of the house, he saw William Cairns come out of the shop door and heard him say that Castlehill had stabbed his son and himself also, upon which he immediately turned into the shop and the Deponent went away and saw no more of the matter. And further Depones that when he was in the company the pannel was uppermost upon one side of the table, William Cairns next to him on the same side, that the Deponent was uppermost upon the opposite side & John Cairns below him, and that when the Dept. left the company John Cairns sat up to the Deponent's place opposite Castlehill ; and that it was a narrow table where they sate. Further Depones that when the Dept. left the company he heard the Pannel say to John Cairns the son, that he had cheated him of some teind corn that he had bought of him, which Cairns denied ; But having retired about this time to the opposite side of the kitchen, he did not hear the conversation definitely. Causa scientiæ patet and this is truth as he shall answer to God.
(Signed) JAMES COWIE.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
JOHN HENDERSON, Innkeeper in Clackmannan, married, & aged fourty years or thereby, sworn, purged of malice and partial councill & interrogate, Depones - That in the afternoon of the last fair day of Clackmannan upon a call from his wife he came into his kitchen and saw John Cairns standing before the fire complaining that Castlehill had stabed him. That the Deponent seeing him blooding sett him down upon a chair. That immediately the Deponent's wife called him to redd the Pannell and William Cairns for fear of more mischief. That he saw the Pannell on the ground and William Cairns with his hands beating him on the head. That the Deponent begged Cairns to forbear and Cairns said that he behoved to forbear for he was finding now that he was stabed as well as his son which he was not sensible of when he received the wound. That William Cairns going out of the kitchen the Deponent soon thereafter heard a cry that he was dying in the shop. That the Deponent saw him in that state and saw him afterwards dead. Depones that William Cairns lived about an hour after he told the Deponent that he was stabed. That a pen knife was found below the table where the scuffle happened which was delivered to him and by him to Robert Micklejohn the Constable and the pen knife mentioned in the foregoing depositions being shown to him says that it is extremely like that which he delivered to Robert Micklejohn and which was bloody when it came into his hand. Depones that till the pannel was apprehended and carried to prison he satt Closs to the corner where the scuffle happened and that it would have been impossible for him to made his escape because of the multitudes that rushed into the room and remained about the door. Causa scientiæ patet and this is the truth as he shall answer to God.
(Signed) JOHN HENDERSON.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
JOHN CAIRNS,* son to the said William Cairns deceast, aged twenty two years or thereby, unmarried, sworn, purged of malice and partiall councill and interrogate, Depones - That upon the afternoon of the day libelled he went into the house of John Henderson with his father and some other company. That they satt down at a table at the back window of the kitchen. That the Pannell came into the company and satt down above Willm. Cairns upon the same side of the table, Willm. having arisen to let him pass. That after the rest of the company had left them the Deponent satt upon the other side of the table opposite to the Pannell. That soon after they were thus together the Pannell addressing himself to his father and him called them scundralls, and said they had cheated him of some corn. The Deponent said it was a lie, and some further words passed betwixt them upon which he observed the Pannell put his hand in his pocket as if to take out money, and saw him work with something with both his hands under the table, and afterwards bow down his head towards his hands, but he suspecting no evil took no further notice of what he was about, nor did he see any knife in his hand, but in a moment after he made a push with his hand at the Deponent and wounded him with a pen knife in the body, upon which he the Deponent lay back upon the wall, but still kept his seat. That the Pannell rose and was standing when he gave the Deponent the above stab, and the Deponent immediately cried out that he was sticked. Upon which his, the Deponent's father, said to the Pannell You scoundrall have you sticked my Bairn, and started to his feet, and thereupon the Pannell made a push at the Deponent's father with the pen knife which he then saw in the Pannel's hand, and that this stab was given just when his father was getting up. That the Deponent after receiving his wound came out into the kitchen and cried for a Surgeon for that he would blood to death. That the Deponent's wound was below his left pap and by the loss of blood and the confusion he was in he observed no more of what passed betwixt his father and the Pannell but knows that his father died that night. Causa scientiæ Patet and this is truth as he shall answer to God. Two words of the twenty third line of this page delete before signing.
(Signed) JOHN CAIRNS.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
*John Cairns seems to have made a very rapid recovery having regard to the severity of his wound.
ANNE ROBIN, Spouse to John Hogg, Sailor in Clackmannan, aged thirty years. Purged of malice and partial council, sworn & interrogate, Depones That last fair day of Clackmannan she saw William Cairns in John Henderson's kitchen calling for a Surgeon saying that he was sticked by the Pannel. That he showed the Dept. his wound which was below the slote of his breast, adding at the same time that his son was worse than he. That William Cairns went into the shop and the Dept. saw him a little after with his eyes shut & expiring. Causa scientiæ patet, and this is truth as she shall answer to God.
(Signed) ANN ROBIN.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
JAMES HAIG,* Surgeon in Alloa, aged Thirty years, married. Purged of malice and partial council, sworn & interrogate, Depones - That upon the evening of the Fourth of September last being the Fair day of Clackmannan he was called to the house of John Henderson to visit William and John Cairns. That he found that William Cairns had received a wound as with a small sharp instrument in his breast. That he was then expiring & died in about ten minutes after he entered the house and as well from the observations he took that night as next morning upon opening the wound he is of opinion that he died of the aforesaid wound. Causa scientiae Patet and this is truth as he shall answer to God.
(Signed) JAS. HAIG.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
* Dr James Haig was the son of John Haig, merchant in Alloa, and was born in 1719, which shows him to have been 48 at the time of the trial, though his age is stated as 30, a bad guess of the Clerk. He served for 24 years as a surgeon in the navy, but having married his cousin Janet Pearson, he settled in Alloa in 1763. There he practised his profession until his death in 1786. The medical tradition of his family has been unbroken since he qualified in 1739, and it is now represented by Dr Haig Ferguson of Edinburgh and Colonel Patrick B. Haig, I.M.S.
JOHN PATON,** Surgeon in Torry, aged twenty & upwards, unmarried, Purged of malice and partial council, sworn & interrogate, Depones conform to the preceding witness James Haig in omnibus.
(Signed) JOHN PATON.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
** Dr John Paton of Durham House, Newmills, was long a practitioner in the Parish of Torryburn. A daughter married Mr James Dalgleish of West Grange, grand-uncle of the present laird, in 1813. Another daughter who died at Durham House in 1862 is still remembered.
ROBERT BRUCE of Kennett*** one of the Senators of the College of Justice. Married & aged fourty years or thereby,**** sworn, purged of malice and partial council & interrogate, Depones - That upon Friday the fourth day of Sept. curt. an Information was given to the Deponent setting furth that the Pannel had wounded William and John Cairns that day and that William Cairns was dead of the wound he had received and craving a Warrant to incarcerate the Pannel. That thereupon the Deponent granted warrant for bringing the Pannel before him which was done and the Deponent having examined him upon the facts sett furth in the said Information the Pannel emitted the Declaration mentioned in the lybell and subscribed the same and did so voluntarily and freely and appeared of sound judgement at the time. That the said Declaration was wrote by Henry Robertson, factor to Sir Lawrence Dundas, and is subscribed by the Deponent as the Judge who took the same and the Declaration now produced to the Deponent is the Declaration taken by him as aforesaid and is now again subscribed by the Deponent & Lord Justice Clerk. Causa scientiæ Patet and this is truth as he shall answer to God. Three words in the eighteenth line of the Deposition delete before signing.
(Signed) ROBERT BRUCE.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
*** Robert Bruce of Kennet, born 1718, passed as an advocate in 1743. In 1759 he succeeded his father-in-law, George Abercromby, as professor of international law in the University of Edinburgh, and in the following year he became Sheriff of Stirling and Clackmannan. In 1764 he was raised to the Bench of the Court of Session, and in 1769 he became also a judge of the Justiciary Court. He died in 1785. His reputation was that of a careful and painstaking rather than of a brilliant lawyer. Lord Kennet married a daughter of George Abercromby of Tullibody, and he was brother-in-law of Alexander Abercromby, who was assigned as one of Blaw's Counsel and was afterwards Lord of Session, and of General Sir Ralph Abercromby. Through his mother, Mary Balfour, daughter of the fourth Lord Burleigh, Lord Kennet inherited the claim now recognised in favour of his descendants to the barony of Balfour of Burleigh.
**** He was 49.
HENRY ROBERTSON, Factor to Sir Lawrence Dundas^ of West Kerse at Clackmannan, unmarried and aged twenty five years or thereby sworn, purged of malice and partial council & interrogate, and the Declaration mentd. in the foregoing deposition being shown to him, Depones - That it is his hand writing, that the Pannel appeared to be in his senses, and that it was emitted by him freely and voluntarily & without any compulsion. Causa scientiæ Patet. And this truth as he shall answer to God.
(Signed) HENRY ROBERTSON.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
^ Sir Laurence Dundas of Kerse, the founder of the Zetland family, was a brother-in-Jaw of Lord Kennet, having married his sister Margaret. He was Commissary General and Contractor to the army. He amassed a large fortune and acquired property in many counties, including Clackmannanshire. As a Burgh monger he possessed great influence though not personally prominent.
The said Declaration was then read in presence of the Court & Jury & is as follows :-
Clackmannan, 4th September 1767.
In presence of Robert Bruce of Kennet Esquire One of the Senators of the College of Justice and one of His Majesty's Justices of the Peace for the County of Clackmannan, Compeared John Blaw of Castlehill and being interrogate concerning the facts sett forth in the within petition and information Declares that about two years ago William and John Cairns mentioned in the petition did purchase some unthreshed victual from the Declarant which belonged to him as the third and tiend of some land belonging to the Declarant
and which third and tiend was paid to him as the rent thereof and for which the said William and John Cairns were to pay to the Declarant a certain price p. Boll as the same should measure when threshed. That the said John Cairns when the Declarant was absent caused his servants secrete some of the unthreshed victual and thereby defrauded the Declarant. That the Declarant having afterwards got information of this intended to have prosecuted the saids William and John Cairns before the Sheriff of Fife for this fraud but has not yet brought the said action. That the Declarant also had information that the said John Cairns was guilty of breaking his fruit orchard at Castlehill and carrying off loads of fruit from the same. That after the Declarant was informed of being thus defrauded and cheated by William and John Cairns he never chused to be in company with them. That when he was this day about his own lawfull affairs in this place and in the house of John Henderson who keeps a public house here the said William and John Cairns came into the room where the Declarant was and thrust themselves into his company whereupon the Declarant desired them to be gone but in place of their going away they attacked the Declarant with impudent language and offered to strike him with their staves but no stroke with the staves hitt the Declarant as he defended himself from them. That the Declarant drew out a pen-knife in order to defend himself but the Declarant does not know whether or not he wounded either the said William or John Cairns with the said knife, and the Declarant showed his right hand to the Judge examinator and witnesses present at the examination upon which there was blood and a cutt upon the point of his thumb which had the appearance of being done with a knife. And the Declarant declares that he received the said cutt in the scuffle and when defending himself from the attack which the said William and John Cairns made upon him. And declares that the said William and John Cairns had no weapon in their hands except their staves when they attacked the Declarant as above mentioned. Declares that he has not now the pen knife above mentioned nor does he know what became of it and for anything he knows William and John Cairns may have wrested it from him and given him the cutt in his thumb therewith. And this he declares to be truth. In Witness whereof the said John Blaw has subscribed this declaration consisting of this and the two preceding pages written by Henry Robertson, factor for Sir Lawrence Dundas Bart. at Craigrie before these witnesses Robert Micklejohn, fewar in Clackmannan and John Maal, Cupar in Clackmannan and Cornelius Sharp, Coalier in Clackmannan and the said Henry Robertson.
(Signed) JOHN BLAW.
(Signed) ROBERT BRUCE.
(Signed) Henry Robertson, Witness.
(Signed) Corneli. Sharp.
(Signed) Robert Micklejohn, Witness.
(Signed) John Mald, Witness.
ROBERT MICKLEJOHN, Brewer in Alloa, a former Deponent Being again interrogate Depnes - That as a Constable* he carried the Pannell to the Prison of Clackmannan and presently after returned to the house of John Henderson and having been informed that Willm. Cairns was dead he again returned to the Prison and told the Pannel of what he had heard and also added that John Cairns the son was fast following to all appearance. Upon which the Pannel said It was the more pity that they were not both one way. And the pen knife mentd. in the lybell & former depositions being shown to him, he depones that he received that knife upon the night that Willm. Cairns died from John Henderson's servant maid in presence of her Master and by his order. That he kept it in his custody for four days and afterwards delivered it to James Alexander, Sheriff-Subt. of Clackmannan. Causa scientiæ Patet & this is truth as he shall answer to God. Five words of the fourth line of this Deposition delete before signing.
(Signed) ROBERT MEIKLEJOHN.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
* There were no regular police in these days. The Constables were appointed by the Justices under the Act 1661, c. 38, and were paid by fines.
The Advocate Depute having declared he finished his proof & rested it upon the evidence of the foregoing witnesses, And the Pannel having declared he had no exculpatory proof to adduce : ** - The Lord Justice and Lord Kames Ordain the Assyse instantly to enclose in this place & to return their Verdict in the same place at Eight o'clock this evening ; the whole fifteen Assysors then to attend under the pains of law, Continue the Dyet against the Pannel & whole other Dyets of Court till that time, & Ordain partys, assysors, witnesses and all concerned then to attend each under the pains of law and the Pannel in the meantime to be carried back to Prison.***
CURIA JUSTICIARII ITINERIS S.D.N.
Ad horam octavam post meridianam.
REGIS, Tenta in Prætorio Burgi de Stirling vigesimo octavo die Septembris Millesimo Septingentesimo Sexagesimo Septimo, Per Honorabiles Viros Thomam Miller de Barskimming Dominum Justiciarium Clericum and Henricum Home de Kames unum ex Commissionariis Justiciariæ S.D.N. Regis.
** There is no trace in the record of speeches by Counsel or of summing up by the bench, but it does not follow that these were not made, as they do not form a necessary part of the official record.
*** It appears that the Court formally adjourned when the jury were to deliberate, and was constituted de novo when it reassembled at eight O'clock. This is not in accordance with modern practice. The Judge may go to his retiring room, but in theory the Court is sitting waiting for the verdict. It may be noticed that whereas when Hogg's case went to the jury they were directed to go to the Council Chamber, in Blaw's case they were apparently to remain where they were. The Court, not the jury, retired.
Curia legitime affirmata.
Present. - The Sheriffs ut supra.
Intran. John Blaw of Castlehill, prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling.-pannel.
Indicted and accused as in the last Sederunt.
The persons who passed upon the Assyse of the Pannel returned the following verdict:-
At Stirling the Twenty eighth day of September One thousand seven hundred and sixty seven years.
The above Assyse having enclosed made choice of Sir James Stirling of Glorat to be their Chancellor and of Robt. Banks, mercht. in Stirling to be their Clerk, And having considered the Criminal Letters raised and pursued at the instance of James Montgomery Esquire His Majesty's Advocate for His Majesty's interest against John Blaw of Castlehill, present Prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling pannel with the Interlocutor on the relevancy thereof pronounced by the Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kames one of the Lords Commrs. of Justiciary, with the depositions of the witnesses adduced by the Prosecutor for proving his lybel, they all in one voice find the Pannel guilty of the crime libelled. In witness whereof their said Chancellor and Clerk have subscribed these Presents in their name and by their appointment.
(Signed) J A. STIRLING, Chancellor.
(Signed) ROBERT BANKS, Clerk.
The Lords supersede pronouncing sentence on the foregoing Verdict till to-morrow at one o'clock afternoon,* continue the Dyet agt. the Pannel till that time, & Ordain him in the mean time to be carried back to Prison ; Continue the whole other Dyets of Court till that time and Ordain all concerned then to attend each under the Pains of Law.
* It is not clear why sentence was not passed at once, as only one possible sentence could follow. The Murder Act of 1751 requires sentence to be pronounced at once after the verdict is returned. It may be simply that the verdict and sentence took some time to write out, and that the judges wanted to get away, and had none of the sense of horror and desire to get it over that now obtains on such an occasion. It may be that time was wanted to ascertain a suitable day for execution and get the names of doctors for the dissection, but Of course all this could have been done beforehand had the matter caused as much anxiety as it would in the present day.
CURIA ITINERIS JUSTICIARII S.D.N. REGIS, Tenta in Prætorio Burgi de Stirling vigesimo nono die mensis Septembris Millesimo Septingentesimo sexagesimo septimo Per Honorabiles Viros Thomam Miller de Barskimming Dominum Justiciarium Clericum & Henricum Home de Kames unum ex Commissionariis Justiciariæ S.D.N. Regis.
Curia legitime affirmata.
Present.- The Sheriffs at supra.
Intran. JOHN BLAW of Castlehill, present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling, - Pannel.
Indicted and accused at the instance of His Majesty's Advocate for His Majesty's interest for the crime of murder in manner mentioned in the former Sederunts.
The Verdict of Assyse returned against the said John Blaw, Pannel, being read over in presence of the Court & Pannel,-
The Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kames* one of the Lords Commissioners of Justiciary having considered the Verdict of Assyse dated and returned the Twenty eight day of September current against the said John Blaw of Castlehill, Pannel, Whereby the Assyse have all in one voice found him guilty of the crime of Murder libelled, In respect of the said verdict and Adjudge the said John Blaw, Pannel, to be carried from the Bar back to the Tolbooth of Stirling and there in terms of the Act of Parliament made in the Twenty fifth year of the reign of His late Majesty King George the Second entitled an Act for the better preventing the horrid crime of Murder, to be detained and fed on bread and water** only till Friday the Thirtieth day of October*** next to come and upon that day to be taken furth of the said Tolbooth & carried to the common place of execution of the said Burgh of Stirling, And then and there betwixt the hours of Two and Four o'clock in the afternoon, to be hanged by the neck by the hands of the common executioner upon a gibbet until he be dead, and Ordain his body to be delivered to Dr Walter Stirling & Dr Robert Graham, Physicians in Stirling or either of them to be by them publickly dissected & anatomised in terms of the foresaid Act;**** And Ordain all his moveable goods and gear to be escheat and inbrought to His Majesty's use, which is pronounced for Doom.
(Signed) THO. MILLER.
(Signed) HENRY HOME.
Recd. the dead warrand.
"HENRY JAFFRAY."*****
* According to Charles (see infra, p. 95), the sentence upon Blaw was pronounced by Lord Kames ; but this record is not contemporary, and is doubtful. In these days, according to Hume ('Crimes,' ii. 472), an ordinary sentence was read over by the Clerk and repeated to the prisoner by one of the macers of the court, and this seems to have been done at this circuit when Hogg was sentenced (infra, p. 90). In capital cases the sentence was repeated, not by the macer but by the executioner or dempster (from Doom sentence). This procedure was abolished by Act of Adjournal in 1773, which provided that the presiding judge should pronounce sentence. This was subsequent to Blaw's trial, but it may be that a new practice was creeping in before the Act of Adjournal.
** Bread and Water. - This was in terms of the Murder Act, 1751, sect. 8. Nothing better illustrates the increased sense in recent years of the sanctity of life and the dread character of a sentence of death than the humane treatment of those appointed to die. Among all nations down to very recent times aggravations of the punishment of death were in ordinary practice. Among the Romans scourging was a regular preliminary of execution.
*** This was the earliest possible day, for under the law then in force an interval of thirty days was required south of the Forth and forty days north of the Forth, in order to allow time for a Crown respite (11 Geo. 11. c. 26, sect. 10). The distinction is still observed, although the periods have been shortened to from fifteen to twenty-one days south of the Forth and from twenty to twenty-seven north. In practice the maximum period is now always allowed.
**** According to law at this time (25 Geo. 11. c. 38, sect. 5), the body had to be dissected by a surgeon before burial. An alternative regarded as more terrible was to direct the body to be hung publicly in chains until it rotted away. This was actually ordered in a case at Perth at the Spring Circuit of this same year, when two men were sentenced to be executed and hung in chains for murder and robbery on the North Inch. Another aggravation of the sentence of which there is instance as late as Blaw's time was to order the right hand to be struck off by the executioner before hanging.
***** Henry Jaffray was Provost of the burgh. The magistrates were, and are still, responsible for carrying out the death sentence.
Intran. James Hogg, Butcher in Falkirk, present prisoner in the Tolbooth of Stirling, Pannel.
Indicted and accused as in the former Sederunt. The Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kames having considered the Verdict of Assyse dated and returned the Twenty sixth day of September current against the said James Hogg, Pannel, Whereby the Assyse all in one voice find the Pannel guilty of the crime libelled, In respect of the said Verdict, the said Lords, by the mouth of Andrew Murison, Macer of Court, Decern and Adjudge the said James Hogg to be carried from the bar back to the Tolbooth of Stirling there to be detained till Friday the Sixteenth day of October next and upon that day to be taken furth of the said Tolbooth and carried to the Publick Market place of the said Burgh betwixt the hours of Twelve midday & Two o'clock in the afternoon, and there to be whipt by the hands of the common executioner receiving sixty stripes^ upon his naked back and thereafter to be recommitted prisoner to the said Tolbooth there to be detained till an opportunity offer for transporting him to one or other of His Majesty's Plantations in America^^ to which the said Lords Decern and Adjudge him to be banished for the space of seven years and when such opportunity offers Grant Warrant to and Ordain the Magistrates of Stirling and Keepers of their Tolbooth to deliver him over to the Sheriff Depute of Stirlingshire or his Substitute who is ordained to receive and transmit him under a sure guard till he is brought to the next adjacent shire, the Sheriff Depute or Substitute whereof is ordained upon proper notice to attend receive & transmit him under the like sure guard till he is brought to the next adjacent Shire & so from Sheriff to Sheriff till he is brought to the port or place where the ship for transporting him lies and there the Magistrates of the place or Keepers of their Prison are ordained to receive incarcerate & detain him and deliver him over to any ship master, merchant or other person who shall find sufficient caution & surety acted in the Books of Adjournal under the penalty of Ten pounds Sterling that he shall transport and land him in one or other of the said Plantations & report a certificate of his being so landed under the hand of the proper officer of the said Plantations within twelve months after the date of the Bail Bond to be granted for that effect; And upon such Merchant Ship master or other person finding caution as aforesaid the said Lords agreeable to an Act of Parliament of the Sixth year of the Reign of His present Majesty Convey transfer and make over the said James Hogg to the use of the person so finding Caution & his heirs and assignees so as he or they may have a property & interest in the service of the said James Hogg for the said space of seven years, With certification to the said James Hogg if he shall ever return to or be found in Scotland at any time within the said space of Seven years after his being delivered over as aforesaid he shall be apprehended and imprisoned in the next sure prison and thereafter transmitted under a sure guard till he is brought to and incarcerated in the Tolbooth of Stirling, the Magistrates whereof and Keepers of their Tolbooth are ordained to receive him and detain him, and upon the first Market day after his incarceration to cause him be taken furth of the said Tolbooth & whipt at the Publick Market place of the said Burgh of Stirling by the hands of the common executioner receiving sixty stripes upon his naked back at the usual time of day (and when such opportunity offers) (sic) And to recommit him to the said Tolbooth there to be detained till an opportunity offer for retransporting him, And when such opportunity offers, Grant Warrant and Ordain the Magistrates of Stirling & Keepers of their Tolbooth & Sheriffs respectively to deliver him over for retransportation in manner before directed ; And so oft as he shall return to or be found in Scotland at any time during the said Seven years, the said Lords Ordain him as oft to be apprehended transmitted imprisoned whipt & again transported in the way and manner before directed, ay and while his Seven years Banishment at one time shall be completed, And for these purposes Grant warrant to all proper Officers of the Law.
(Signed) THO. MILLER, I.P.D.
Received by me, Town Clerk, one Extract of this judgement.
"Jo. McGIBBON."^^^
^ This was not extraordinary severity in these days. A few days later the same judges, at Glasgow, sentenced a man to receive one hundred lashes for a murderous assault.
^^ The elaboration of the directions which were necessary for the carrying out of such a sentence is curious.
^^^ McGibbon was Town Clerk of Stirling. The Town Clerk acknowledges the receipt of an extract of this sentence, whilst Jaffray, the Provost, acknowledges receipt of Blaw's death warrant.
The Sheriffs were called up & Proclamation was made that if any person or persons had any information or complaint to exhibit agt. them the same would then be received, and none being offered they were discharged with the thanks of the Court.
The Lords Continued the Court & whole Dyets of Court till tomorrow the 30th inst & ordained all concerned then to attend each under the pains of Law.
CURIA ITINERIS JUSTICIARII S.D.N. REGIS, Tenta in Prætorio Burgi de Stirling Trigesimo die Septembris Milesimo Septingentesimo Sexagesimo septimo Per Honorabiles Viros Thomam Miller de Barskimming Dominum Justiciarium Clericum & Henricum Home de Kames Unum ex Commissionariis Justiciariæ S.D.N. Regis.
Curia legitime affirmata.
Present.—The Sheriffs ut supra.
This being the Sixth day* of the Ayre & no Business depending before the Court -
The Lord Justice Clerk and Lord Kames by the mouth of Andrew Murison, Macer of Court, declared the Justice Ayre at this place ended.
Such is the official record of the Circuit Court at Stirling at which John Blaw was tried and condemned. George Charles, the author of the 'History of the Transactions in Scotland 1715-6 and 1745-6,' published in 1817, was a bookseller in Alloa, and must have been the depository of a comparatively recent tradition in regard to Blaw. He states (vol.2, p10.)
Lord Kames before passing the awful sentence was observed to shed tears,** and when addressing the prisoner said that what made the task the more painful was that they had been class-fellows. Blaw complained of the shortness of the time allowed him to live, to which the judge replied that the time given was long, very long, compared to that which he gave, and that the Court could not by any means alter the time specified.
* Including Sunday. The court had to remain for five lawful days in the circuit town whether there was business or not.
** The tears, however, do not consist well with what happened at the trial of Matthew Hay for murder at Ayr in 1780. When the verdict of guilty was returned, Kames, who had played chess with Hay, remarked from the Bench, "That's checkmate to you, Matthew." Cockburn ('Journals,' 1856 ed. P.117) vouches for the truth of this story, which he had from his father-in-law, Lord Hermand, who was present in Court as Counsel, and from many others. Lockhart, in his 'Life Of Scott,' attributed the mot to Braxfield, which Cockburn says is quite a mistake.
This story has probably some foundation. But Kames was never at school, and it is not clear that he ever attended University classes, so the class-fellow detail is doubtful. It is not unlikely, however, that he may have known Blaw as a lad in Edinburgh. Blaw had probably more than the village education of Culross.
There is no reference to the trial and execution of Blaw in the Minutes of the Town Council of Stirling, but Mr David B. Morris, Town Clerk of the Burgh, has kindly supplied to me a note of the following entries in the Treasurer's accounts referable to the Circuit Court at which Blaw was tried, and to his execution.
1767 Sept. 25 Paid John Rankin for cleaning the street - 1s.
1767 Sept. 25 William Jaffray meeting the Lords - 2s.
1767 Sept. 25 Wordie & Douglas ringing the Bells - 6s 8d.
1767 Sept. 25 One Pair of Stockings for Rankin - 3s.
1767 Officers meeting the Lords - 6s.
1767 Oct. 16 Paid Rankin for wheeping Cowstealer - 1s.
1767 Dec. 19 Paid to Staffman during his confinement before and after Mr Blaw's Execution per Magistrates verbal orders - 10s.
Rankin was town officer. The street surely cannot have been very dirty if one shilling's worth of cleaning made it fit for the Lords. Apparently Rankin had clothes which would serve for the occasion, except the stockings. The undated item probably refers to "meeting the Lords" on days other than of their arrival. The staffman was the hangman. The nature of the payment to him is obscure.* The "Mr" Blaw is curious. A landed man, though a murderer, is respectfully referred to. On 29th September the Lord Justice Clerk, Captain James Scotland of Easter Dollarbeg, one of the Jurors, and John Cochrane, eldest son of the Earl of Dundonald, were admitted honorary burgesses of Stirling. Kames was already an honorary burgess.
* The staffman or hangman was a regularly appointed official of the Burgh, with a free house in St John Street, free clothes, and a regular wage of 3s. 6d. per week. He had also right to exact the full of a "caup" or bowl of corn from each farmer on market day. The hangman's "caup" is still preserved at Stirling.
CHAPTER V.
AFTER THE TRIAL.
JOHN BLAW was executed at Stirling upon 30th October 1767 in conformity with his sentence. The place of execution in Stirling was in Broad Street, opposite the old Town House. The County Buildings and the prison lay behind the old Town House.
The following notice of the execution of Blaw appears in the 'Edinburgh Evening Courant' of 31st October 1767. As the execution took place in the open street of Stirling, and this is all that is said about it, the journalists of the day cannot be accused of pandering to morbid curiosity by too much wealth of detail.
"Yesterday John Blaw of Castlehill was executed at Stirling pursuant to a sentence of the Justiciary Court held there last Circuit for the murder of William Cairns, farmer, near Saline, in the County of Stirling. The Minister of the Established Church, who waited on Mr Blaw from the time the sentence of death was passed on him till his execution, begs leave to assure the publick that his behaviour during his confinement was decent and suited to his situation, that he walked with great composure to the place of execution, and declared that he died in the belief of the Christian religion and disclaimed anything by way of speech which might be published in his name."
There are similar notices of the execution in the 'Caledonian Mercury' and the 'Scots Magazine.' The latter states that Blaw was about seventy-five years of age. He was probably a year or two younger. The parochial charge Of Stirling is a collegiate one, and the minister who attended upon Blaw cannot be identified. But in the withholding of his name in all these papers there is a reticence or delicacy which would not now be observed by the Press.
The following letter was addressed to John Blaw by his daughter Jean, afterwards Mrs Begbie, then a girl in her teens, on a visit to her father's relations, the Blows, in Belfast. The letter was probably found in Blaw's pocket after his execution, as it is among the papers of John Dalgleish of West Grange, who as one of his nearest male relations in Scotland very likely arranged the burial. The terms of the letter might suggest that it was written after Blaw's conviction, but the date is 28th September 1767, the day his trial began. His daughter seems to take his conviction and execution as matters of certainty.
"MY DEAR UNHAPPY FATHER,
Let me entreat and beg that this dismal and fatal accident may be the means of saving your immortal soul. Sir, I am not able to write to you but I will pray to Almighty God to forgive you and to receive you in mercy. Do not despair for God's mercy is much greater than any crime you commit and ask forgiveness through the merits of our blessed Saviour and you will surely find it.
Oh sir, if you be able give me the comfort if possible to know by your own Hand that you have made up your peace with God and give me your blessing. Send what you write to my dear Mama and she will send it to me. May the eternal God of Heaven be your comfort. Oh my dear Father trust in that God through Christ and you will be forgiven. May Almighty God support you is the prayer of
Your unhappy daughter
JEAN BLAW."
BELFAST, September 28th 1767.
It seems unlikely that Blaw's body was publicly dissected before burial as prescribed by law. As will be shown presently, there was a popular notion that he was resuscitated. This would have been impossible after dissection, and if he had been dissected the story could hardly have obtained currency. There was no medical school at Stirling. The surgeons had, so far as appears, nothing to gain from the gruesome task committed to them, and there was no means of compelling them to perform it.
It seems likely that either to save themselves trouble or from kindness or for a consideration they declined to take the body and dissect it, and accordingly it was handed over to Blaw's relations or friends for burial at Culross. Shortly after the execution of Blaw it came to be rumoured in Culross that he had not really perished but had been resuscitated, and that a dummy had been placed in a coffin, brought to Culross, and buried at the West Church. Blaw, it was said, had escaped to Holland. This tradition still persisted down to within living memory.^ On the other hand, there is a counter-story that to satisfy Blaw's wife as to his death his body was exhumed and the buckles from his shoes were brought to her. The shoes, according to this tradition, were to be seen long afterwards lying beside the grave, nobody daring or caring to touch them.
^ The writer has heard the story from a man who had known people who remembered John Blaw and his execution. According to his account there was a contrivance with the connivance of the executioner by which the rope was so adjusted that it did not throttle Blaw.
Blaw was probably duly executed and buried in the West Churchyard, Culross, in 1767. It is undoubted, however, that a story as to his resuscitation was current, and it is not improbable that the story of the exhumation is true. No more can be said upon the matter. He may have been resuscitated, but this is improbable, and not supported by any evidence other than a contemporary rumour.
John Blaw had three children. Charles, who was made prisoner in the '45, appears to have predeceased him. John appears to have been abroad at the time of his father's death, and he died without returning to Scotland.* Jean married Patrick Begbie, a ship's purser in the East India service, who became factor to Sir Charles, and afterwards to Sir Robert Preston of Valleyfield, and who appears to have been a man of some force of character, and a very violent temper. They had two children, a daughter who died young, and a son who died in India in 1801, when quite a youth. Mrs Begbie predeceased her son by a year or two.
* Upon 25th December 1775, Mrs Begbie writes to James Dalgleish of West Grange :
"We have got accounts that my Brother John was well about three years ago so that we have reason to hope he is still in life. The accounts I got of my Brother from Jamaica was that he died on the coast of Guinea the end of seventy or beginning of seventy one, and Captain Ralph Dundas saw my brother in Turk's Islands in the West Indies Jany. seventy three. He was then very well had been one voyage at the coast of Guinea and was then going back. So that I hope in God he will not be long of being home. Captain Dundas is son of Mr Ralph Dundas Merchant in Edinburgh." This is the latest which has been traced in regard to John Blaw. He never returned, and his death must have been proved in 1804, when his kinsman Daniel Blaw was served heir to his father.
John Blaw's widow, Ann Dundas, appears to have resided after her husband's death at a house in Blairburn, a small hamlet or suburb of Culross, at the water side, near Castlehill. She had some house property in Culross, and had some succession through the Dundasses. She died at Alloa upon 23rd February 1802. She must have been a great age, as she had a son who was of military age in 1745. On young Begbie's death the property passed after some litigation to John Blaw's cousin, Daniel Blaw of Belfast, who, dying in 1810, left it to his granddaughter, Mrs Mary Ann Burdon (née Sinclair). In 1821 Mrs Burdon sold the property to Lord Keith, by whom again, in 1835, it was sold to Mrs Sharpe Erskine, the last Erskine of Torrie, who adopted for the property the ancient name of Dunimarle. Mrs Sharpe Erskine greatly added to the house, and constructed a terrace overlooking the Firth. She also laid out a showy avenue to the north, a mile long, upon a narrow strip of land acquired for the purpose. The verdict of a shrewd old lady of the time, familiar with broad acres and modest dwellings, was that Dunimarle was now like a baron of beef upon a dessert plate. On her death in 1872 Mrs Sharpe Erskine left the place for the endowment of an episcopal chapel which she had built upon the grounds, and as a public show place and museum of works of art and curios. After all, however, perhaps the most curious thing about the place is the story which has here been told of John Blaw.
Dunimarle Castle
APPENDIX I.
THE BLAW FAMILY.
FROM the year 1500, or perhaps earlier, down to about 1800, the name of Blaw was familiar in Culross. This old town on the northern shores the Firth of Forth seems to have been the seat of the family in Scotland. They were numerous there, and if an occasional one is to be found elsewhere in Scotland during the seventeenth or eighteenth century he probably came from Culross, even though this cannot now be traced. According to local tradition, which seems to have been believed by members of the family two hundred years ago, the origin of the Blaw family was Dutch. In the late middle ages there was a considerable trade between the East of Scotland, and in particular the Firth of Forth and the Low Countries, and the Blaws may thus have found their way to Scotland.
The name is said to be derived from the Dutch Blauw, blue, and it is found in Holland as a name both in that form and as Blaeu and Blaeuw. In the seventeenth century the Blaeus or Blaews of Amsterdam were famous publishers.
In Nisbet's 'Heraldry' the arms of Blaw are thus described :
"Azure a saltier argent and on a chief or three cushions gules."
Translated into non-technical language this signifies a St Andrew's Cross upon a blue ground, surmounted by a golden band, with three red cushions upon it. This is very like the arms of the Johnstons, and Nisbet remarks :
"It is said that the first of the name was Johnston, who killed a man with a blow, for which, being obliged to abscond and change his name, he took that of Blaw."
This improbable story is, however, more likely to be the consequence than the cause of the similarity of arms. The strangeness of the name in Scotland seems often to have caused mistakes in regard to it. Thus it appears in public documents as Blair, Blae, Black, Blow, Blawe, Bleau, and Blaeu. The Culross Blaws, down to 1700, all invariably spelt their own name Blaw. The men were good penmen. The women generally could not write, or pretended so, when a deed had to be executed. A Sarah Blaw, born about 1590, could sign her name. Otherwise there seems to be no female writing among them until late in the seventeenth century.
The Blaw family seem never to have obtained great wealth or large possessions or influence beyond that which appertained to the magistracy of Culross. They spread out in the town, and members of the family entered into different trades, not only dignified ones, like that of maltman or girdle -smith, but even the more plebeian ones of tailor and baker. Nevertheless a certain distinction seems always to have attached to the family in all its branches. A Blaw was not a mean person, whatever his calling. The "blue blood of the Blaws" carried its own patent of gentility with it. To this day Blaw descent is still cherished as a source of satisfaction by those who claim it. The earliest records which have been found of the family of Blaw at Culross are two deeds both of the year 1516. One of these is a precept of sasine preserved in the Advocates' Library in favour of Gilbert Blaw in a tenement and garden in Culross, granted by Thomas, Archdeacon of Moray, Papal Pronotary, and Commendator of the Abbey of Culross.* This deed mentions among the boundaries the lands of John and Alexander Blaw. The other deed of 1516, which is in the writer's own possession, is a notarial copy of a decree arbitral by four arbiters appointed by the said John and Alexander to divide the property at Culross, bequeathed to them by their father, Robert Blaw. As this Robert was dead before 1516, and had been established at Culross as an owner of property and head of a family, it would appear that he must have been there before 1500. Further, one of the arbiters was Gilbert Blaw. Presumably, therefore, Gilbert was not a brother of John and Alexander, and if he was a relative more remote, as a cousin, this seems to carry the Blaws a generation back beyond Robert. The two chief branches of the family were the Blaws of Castlehill and the Blaws of Westkirk.
* Since the above was in type the writer has learned, by the courtesy of Mr R. K. Hannay, that the Charter on which this precept proceeds is in the possession of Mr Erskine Beveridge, Dunfermline.
THE BLAWS OF CASTLEHILL.
In 1543 James Blaw had a charter of the lands of Castlehill from William Colville, the Commendator, and John Colville, the Abbot of the Abbey of Culross. This charter was ratified by Crown Charter in 1586, when apparently the original grantee, James, was still alive. Although the names of earlier Blaws in Culross are known, their relationship to this first Blaw of Castlehill has not been ascertained. James Blaw died in 1594. Between this charter of 1543 and the execution of John Blaw in 1767 there were only five transmissions of the property, in each case from father to son. After the death of John Blaw the property was held without formal title by his daughter, Mrs Begbie, and her son Patrick until 1801, when the latter, who had survived his mother, died. A litigation ensued between his father, Mr Begbie, and Daniel Blaw, a Belfast cousin of John Blaw, and his heir-at-law. The latter was eventually successful, but he seems never to have fully entered into possession. He died in 1810, bequeathing the property to his granddaughter, Mrs Sinclair, by whom it was sold in 1821. In one way or another the name of every child of a Blaw of Castlehill can be traced. The original James Blaw of Castlehill has many descendants through females. The Blaw family of Belfast are descendants through males. The only Other possible male descent is through Robert Blaw, son of James, 2nd of Castlehill, born in the last decade of the sixteenth century.
The West Kirk of Culross is the old Parish Church. But it has not been used for public worship since the Reformation, or perhaps even earlier, the Abbey Church having been found more convenient and in better repair. A small wing, however, attached to the ruin of the West Church, is known traditionally as Blaw's Aisle.
It appears from the Register of Testaments at Edinburgh that by his will, dated in 1594, James Blaw of Castlehill directs that he shall be buried in Blaw's Aisle, West Kirk, Cuiross. Probably his forebears were buried there, and as he was then an old man, this seems again to carry the Blaws back as people of some local consequence to at least the beginning of the sixteenth century. A stone with the arms of Blaw of Castlehill is built into the wall of Blaw's Aisle.
TESTAMENT OF JAMES BLAW OF CASTLE HILL, 1594.
(This testament is recorded in the Edinburgh Commissary Books. I have modernised the spelling and eliminated the contractions. The testament throws curious and interesting light upon rural economy in the sixteenth century;)
The testament testamentar and Inventory of the goods gear sums of money and debts pertaining to the late James Blaw, elder, of Castlehill within the parish of Culross and Sheriffdom of Perth the time of his decease who deceased upon the second day of November the year of God 1594 faithfully made and given up by himself* & subscribed with his hand at Castlehill the 24th day October the year of God foresaid before these witnesses James Blaw his son, John Christie, Robert Bennet, Archibald (?) Blaw and James Primrose Notary Public with others divers.
In the first the said James Blaw Elder of Castlehill had the goods gear sums of money and debts of the avail and prices after following pertaining to him as his own proper goods and gear the time of his decease foresaid viz - Item in the barn and barn yard of Castlehill 16 bolls oats price of the boll with the fodder £4 sum £64 : Item more there 12 bolls bear, price of the boll with the fodder £5 sum £60; Item more there 6 bolls peas and beans price of the boll with the fodder £4 sum £24; Item more in the said barn and barn yard 4 bolls wheat, price of the boll with the fodder 8 merks, sum 32 merks: Item one "halkit"** cow with calf price thereof £8: Item a brown cow with calf price £8: Item two queys of three year old whereof one black and the other brown, price of the piece or head 8 merks sum 16 merks; Item a black "halkit" stot of two years old price £4; Item a young ox of 4 years old price £10: Item eight sheep price of the piece or head two merks sum 16 merks: Item given up by the Executors in ready money £8, 14s.; Item in utencils & domiciles (furniture) with the habiliments of his body besides the heirship estimated to £20 money : Sum of the Inventory 4249, 7s. 4d.
* It was not uncommon at this time for a person in anticipation of his decease not merely to prepare a will but also to make up an inventory of his own estate.
** This word, which does not occur in Jamieson's 'Scottish Dictionary,' means speckled or brindled. Mr Crabb Watt, K.C., mentions that he has heard it used in this sense in Kincardineshire.
Follows the debts owing to the dead.
Item. There was owing to the said late James Blaw, elder, of Castlehill by Robert Blaw his sum for his farms (rents) of Quhon (?) and Blak fald of the crop and year of God 1594 six bolls one firlot malt, price of the boll £6 sum £37, 10s. ; Item by David Anderson for his farms in anno 1593 resting owing six firlots malt at 8 merks the boll sum £8 ; For the which Alexander Coustown burgess of Culross became acted caution for him: Item more by the said David Anderson of silver £2 10s. ; Item more by him for his farms (rents) in anno 1594 four bolls malt at £6 the boll sum ; Item more by the said David Anderson for his kain fowls of sundry years bye past 8 poultry price of the piece 2 shillings sum 16 shillings; Item by Robert Cor for the farms (rents) of the acres occupied by him in anno 1594 three bolls malt at £6 the boll sum £18 ; Item by Robert Sands for his farms (rents) in anno 1594 one boll malt price £6 and one boll meal price £4 sum £10 ; Item by James Meldrum in Culross for his Whitsunday terms maill in anno 1594 49 shillings & 6 pence ; Item by John Christie son to Robert Christie 52 shillings; Item James McCapie three firlots malt in anno 1593 at 8 merks the boll sum £4 : Item given up by the Executors owing by Robert Blaw in Culross "Ad resten of ane merris pce" (? To resting owing of a mare's price) £6.
Sum of the debts owing to the dead £115, 17s. 6d.
Sum of the Inventory without the debts £365, 4s. 10d.
No division.
Whereof the quot^ is compounded for £10.
^ The quot was the duty levied on confirmation of the testament. It ought to have been one-twentieth of the net moveable estate. Here, however, the debts are not returned and deducted, and it is compounded for a round sum.
Follows the dead's legacy and latter will.
At Castlehill the 24th day of October the year of God 1594 the which day James Blaw, elder, of Castlehill being sick in body and bed fast yet perfect and whole in spirit and mind made his legacy and latter will as after follows viz. In the first he commends his soul to God assuring himself of salvation in the merits and death of Christ Jesus and when God shall call on him he ordains his body be honorably buried in the West Kirk of Culross called Blaw's aisle* and leave and nominates Robert Bennet and Robert Blaw his two executors and intromitters with his goods and gear to dispone upon his goods and gear to his bairns: To wit Jonet, Marioun, Margaret Katherene Blaw at the sight of John Blaw and James Primrose to put all matters to point in case any question shall arise among his said bairns, or the said James Blaw and his younger brother, Item the plenishing of the house the heirship being set aside** and the second part being given to Robert Blaw the rest to be distributed among the bairns at the sight of the men foresaid John Blaw, James Blaw and James Primrose: Item to Jonet Blaw a "halkit" cow with calf: Item to Marioun Blaw a brown cow with calf: Item to Margaret Blaw a black quey of three years old : Item to Katie Logane*** a brown quey of three years old : Item to Katherene Blaw an ox of four years old price £8 : Item a halkit stott of two years old to Allane Blaw his grandson**** : Item eight sheep whereof two to Archibald (?) Blaw***** :
* This reads as if the church was called Blaw's aisle, but the language is eliptical. Blaw's aisle seems to have been a small annexe to the church. The arms of Blaw are still to be seen on a stone in the wall.
** The heirship was the best of every article of furnishing. This went with the lands. Apparently a second best lot was here set aside for the younger son.
*** This comes in oddly among the bequests to daughters. Possibly the daughter Katherine, who is treated differently from the others below, had married a Logan, and this was a granddaughter.
**** This was an odd legacy for an infant. But it did him no harm, as he lived for nearly 80 years after it.
***** This seems to have been a collateral relation. The other six sheep seem not to have been specially bequeathed.
Item he ordains 12 bolls bear or the price thereof to be taken and given of the first and of the whole victual to Jonet Marioun and Margaret Blaw his daughters and the whole rest of the victual bear wheat peas beans and oats to be equally put among the whole four daughters every one of the four daughters to have alike thereof the said 12 bolls bear being deducted : Item - There is owing to the said James by James Meldrum in Culross for the maill of the house he occupies for Whitsunday anno 1594-49/6 and leaving to Martinmas the said James rests owing £4 which maills he leaves to Robert Blaw his son, Robert Christie, John Christie his father^ 52/ which he leaves to Agnes Christie his sister : Item - This was done day year and place foresaid before the witnesses above specified.
Sic subscribitur JAMES BLAW.
James Blaw, witness. John Christie, Robert Bennet, David Fergus, witness.
James Primrose, Notary, witness.
We Mr Prestoun^^ &c. and gives and commits the intromissions with the same to the said Robert Bennet and Robert Blaw executors testamentary to the said late James Blaw reserving count to be made by them thereof as accords of the law and they being sworn have made payment and have found caution as an Act made thereupon bears.
^ There is some blunder or obscurity here. This debt is referred to in the Inventory. Due by one of the male Christies, it was left to a female member of their family.
^^ The Commissary Depute.
THE BLAWS OF WEST KIRK.
It has generally been assumed by writers who have noticed the Blaw family that the Blaws of Castlehill were the oldest and leading stock, but this is doubtful. The Blaws of West Kirk can be traced back to Robert, who died before 1516. The Castlehill Blaws cannot be carried so far back with certainty. Alexander Blaw, son of Robert and brother of John, had a charter from the Commendator of the Abbey of certain property in Culross in 1525, being his share in the division above mentioned. In 1536 the Commendator granted to Alexander Blaw, his wife Maye Patersoun, and his son John, a lease of the lands of VVest Kirk. This was followed in 1546 by a charter of all these lands, both those in the charter of 1525 and those in the lease. Other charters followed, and three of them were ratified by a Crown charter in 1587. The lands of West Kirk lay near the West Kirk, the old Parish Church of Culross. They do not appear to have been of very great extent, and apparently the family resided in their town property in the burgh of Culross, where they took an active part in public life. About the end of the sixteenth century Sir George Bruce of Carnock and John Blaw of West Kirk appear to have been the leading men in local matters at Culross, and they were both constantly upon the local bench. A few years later Edward Blaw, a younger son of John's, seems to have occupied a somewhat similar position. In 1630 he represented Culross in the Parliament of Scotland. About the middle of the seventeenth century the West Kirk family seem to have fallen into bad circumstances. James Blaw sold West Kirk about the end of the forties, and in the fifties his son John seems to have been obliged to part with the burgh properties, owing to his deceased father's debts. This family has not been traced further down than the seventeenth century, towards the close of which they are lost sight of.
The family of Blaw was extremely numerous in Culross, particularly in the middle of the seventeenth century, but it is probable that they all came from the same stock. It is doubtful if there was any branch from that stock other than those of Castlehill and West Kirk. Of the many Blaws who are mentioned in one place or another between 1550 and 1650 there are very few who cannot be traced either to Alexander Blaw, first of West Kirk, or James Blaw, first of Castlehill. The Culross baptismal records are not complete, but, such as they are, for the period from 1640 to 1700 they show that no fewer than seventy Blaw children were baptised. The only family that compares with them in numbers is the Primroses. During the first twenty years fourteen Blaw sons were registered as against two daughters. Perhaps daughters were not so carefully registered. In any case the large number of sons, forty-one for the whole period, makes it very remarkable how the name has died out. In the latter part of the seventeenth century and the early part of the eighteenth century the Blaws spread far beyond Culross. Blaws are to be found in London, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Belfast, Kelso, Alloa, and Kirkwall. The Blows of Belfast are, as pointed out below, descendants of one of the Blaws of Castlehill. But so far as has been ascertained the name is not now to be found in Scotland. Blow is not an uncommon name in England, but except in the case of the Belfast family it is not, it is thought, a corruption of Blaw. An occasional Blew, too, is found in England. The explanation generally given of the failure of a name is that every family where there are daughters only, or daughters only marry, is a dead end so far as concerns the transmission of the name. This is true, but if it operated as a general rule all names would disappear, whilst if its operation is accidental it is difficult to account for its making a sweep of a name numerously borne.
A Culross Blaw who deserves special note is Robert Blaw, girdlesmith, the Covenanter (Appendix II.). Another who may be mentioned was the Covenanter's nephew Dr James Blaw (1687-1748), a London surgeon, who spelt his name Bleau. The story of a voyage to Guinea, in which he was captured by pirates, is still worth reading.*
* 'Account of some Parts of Guinea,' by Captain William Snelgrave. 1734. In Advocates' Library, Edinburgh.
An untraced Blaw was Robert Blaw, one of the masters of the High School of Edinburgh in the reign of Charles II., and the author of a number of educational works. According to Principal Hill, he was a spy of the Government in London.
The noble families of Primrose of Rosebery and Bruce of Elgin have both Blaw descent. It is commonly stated in genealogies that they are descended from Archibald Primrose of Burnbrae and Margaret Blaw, daughter of a Blaw of Castlehill. This, however, as shown in Paul's 'Douglas Peerage,' is a mistake. The Primrose and Bruce ancestors were David Primrose, Burgess of Culross, and Jonet Blaw. The 'Douglas Peerage' attributes Jonet doubtfully to the Castlehill family. But the first Blaw of Castlehill was James Blaw of the 1543 charter. This James Blaw, as appears from his testament in the Edinburgh Register, had four daughters, the eldest of whom was Jonet, and he divides his goods among them, not mentioning husbands. Now Jonet Blaw, who married David Primrose, had a son who was married in 1574. It is not then likely that she was the daughter of a man who died in 1594, and whose eldest son was getting his family in that decade. It seems more likely that Jonet Blaw, who married David Primrose, was a daughter of Alexander Blaw, or John or Gilbert, of the 1516 deeds. Her daughter Eupham Primrose married the celebrated Sir George Bruce of Carnock, ancestor of the Earls of Elgin and Kincardine. The Primrose family, which was said to have come from a farm of that name in East Fife, was at this time very numerous in and about Culross. The Burnbrae family of Primrose kept alive the name in the district down to the nineteenth century.
APPENDIX II.
ROBERT BLAW, THE COVENANTER.
THERE was a considerable body of Covenanters in Culross, as is shown both by local records and by the minutes of the Privy Council. The Earl of Kincardine, chief man of the district, husband of the fair Veronica Van Sommelsdyk, was in some sympathy with this party. One of the stoutest of the Culross Covenanters was Robert Blaw, maltman, sometime Bailie of the Burgh, and nephew of Allan Blaw of Castlehill. The Burgh records of Culross contain the following entry with reference to Robert Blaw :-
1 January 1668.
The qlk day the said bailleis and counsell, taking to consideration that wheras thair was ain ordour laitlie sent to this burgh be Sir Peter Wedderburne,* clerk of his Majesties Secret Counsell in Scotland for subscryving of the declaratione and sending over the sarnyne be the saids bailleis to Edinburg against the fyft of January instant ; and in regard Robert Blaw ane of the present bailleis of this burghe had for the present refused to subscryve the said declaratione: Thairfor the saids bailleis and counsell have not only suspendit the said Robert Blaw baillie from executing the office of magistracie or as counsellar within this burghe ay and qll till he subscryve the said declaration but also hes convict and decernit him in ane unlaw of one hundrethc punds Scottis for refusing to subscryve the declarationc aforesaid.
* Sir Peter Wedderburne of Gosford, Knight, father of Sir Peter Wedderburne Halkett of Pitfirrane.
The declaration which Blaw refused to sign made no direct reference to either Presbytery or Episcopacy. The obnoxious paragraph was the assertion of the King's supremacy in the church.
Apparently matters quieted down for a time, but in 1674 further troubles began to threaten Blaw. It appears that in that year he, along with twenty other Culross people, was denounced as a fugitive for failing to appear before a committee of the Privy Council at Stirling to answer "for conventicles and such like disorders." This denunciation does not appear to have been immediately followed up, and indeed in 1675 Blaw appears to have been Dean of Guild. But upon 28th December 1676, under the order of the Earl of Linlithgow, then commanding the troops in Scotland, he was apprehended by a Captain Inglis and carried prisoner to Linlithgow.^
A fortnight later he was removed to Edinburgh Tolbooth, where he was detained until 15th March 1680, when he was set at liberty.
There are several references to this case in the records of the Privy Council.
^ This was not the only raid upon Culross. On one occasion a Captain Buchan apprehended eighteen persons at a Conventicle there. - 'Privy Council,' vol. v. p.181.
22 February 1677.
The Lords of His Majesty's Privy Council having considered the libel pursued at the instance of His Majesty's Advocate against Robert Blae (sic) late Baillie of Culross and William Gray^^ Girdlemaker there who were formerly declared for not compearing before the Commissioners of Council met at Stirling upon the day of to have answered for keeping of conventicles, withdrawing from the public ordinances in their own parish kirks, and other disorders libelled every day since the 24th of March 1674 and thereupon being apprehended and imprisoned in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh and having considered their own confessions acknowledging themselves to be constant withdrawers and keepers of conventicles frequently as they have had occasion but refusing to give oath thereupon or to engage to refrain conventicles and live orderly hereafter: the said lords have therefore fined and fine the said Robert Blae in the sum of two thousand merks and the said William Gray in the sum of two hundred merks and ordain them to continue in prison until they make payment of the said fines and sign the band against conventicles ordaining further His Majesty's Solicitor to do exact diligence for raising these fines: and appoint three hundred merks of the said fine to be given to Captain Inglis and the party who apprehended the said Robert Blae to be received and distributed at the sight of the Earl of Linlithgow and five hundred merks to be paid to Mr David Johnstoun^^^ minister at Moffat a distressed minister and ordain the said William Gray his fine to be paid to the relict of Mr Patrick Wemyss^^^^ a suffering minister.
^^ Also a Culross man. The Grays were a respectable middle-class family there.
^^^ The records of the Privy Council suggest that David Johnston, minister of Moffat, was a person in chronic financial difficulties who had some influence with the Council, or at all events with Archbishop Sharp. He was probably a son of George Johnston, minister of Orphir, in Orkney, who was deposed by the General Assembly of 1650 for siding with Montrose, for in one of the grants to David the sufferings of his father are referred to as one of the grounds. The father's record suggests that, like the son, he was an importunate person, for he held five successive charges before 1650 - Westerkirk, Linton, Sanquhar, Kirkwall, and Orphir.
^^^^ David Wemyss was minister of Hoy, and subsequently of Ladykirk, in Orkney. Along with most of the Orkney ministers, he was deposed by the General Assembly of 1650 for siding with Montrose, and thereafter he appears to have lived in Edinburgh in poor circumstances. After the Restoration he obtained pecuniary assistance from Parliament. He died in Edinburgh in 1663. Ilis widow, said to have been a daughter of Archbishop Gledstanis, seems to have been befriended by Archbishop Sharp, who was present at the Council which disposed of Blaw's case. This was not the only occasion on which Mrs Wemyss obtained a grant.
Archbishop Sharp was present at the Council which sentenced Blaw. It has been stated somewhere that Robert was implicated in the Archbishop's murder. But at the time of the murder Blaw was undoubtedly a prisoner in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh.
Upon 6th April 1679 the Council approved the following report of a Committee :-
Having considered the petition of William Page and Robert Blae prisoners who are fined the one in one thousand pounds and the other in two thousand merks for conventicles it is our opinion that your lordships may remit them to the treasury for some modification in regard of their great poverty.
At a meeting of the Council upon 18th December 1679, at which James, Duke of York, was present, a report of a Committee upon the condition of the prisoners in the Tolbooths of Edinburgh and Canongate was presented. In regard to Robert Blaw the recommendation was as follows :-
It is our opinion that Robert Blaw prisoner in the Tolbooth of Edinburgh upon the account of Conventicles for the space of three years and fined in two thousand merks upon that account which is far above his ability to pay be liberated upon finding caution to re-enter in prison or appear before the Council whenever he shall be called under the penalty of two thousand merks and that it be recommended to the Lords of the Treasury to mitigate his fine.
This recommendation, however, was not approved of by the Council, which approved of all the recommendations of the Committee in regard to prisoners -
except in so far as concerns Robert Blaw whose case the Council remits to the Lords of Treasury as to his fine to do therein as they shall think fit.
The meaning of this would appear to be that whilst the Council were willing that the Treasury should review the amount of Blaw's fine, he was not to be liberated until the matter was settled. There are, it is thought, grounds for the conjecture that some person in authority entertained of Blaw the hope which Felix entertained of Paul, that money would be given.
Upon the 27th January 1680 Blaw's case was again before a meeting of Council at which the Duke of York was again present.
Supplication by Robert Blaw in Culross as follows -
His poor condition has often been represented to the Council as being fined in the sum of 2000 merks for his alleged presence at some conventicles and he has been in prison for above three years and upon a representation to the Lords of the Committee they made a favourable report and a just account of his condition "as being fined far above all he is worth in the world and that such a sentence would in effect be rather a forefaulture and a perpetual imprisonment than a fine." He therefore craves that the Council "for Christ's sake would compassionate the sad condition of the supplicant, his poor wife, and numerous family, and would recommend the same to the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury to discharge the said fine and in the meantime to grant warrant to set the prisoner at liberty on caution to appear when called : otherwise to appoint some aliment for the petitioner's necessary entertainment any credit he had by his long imprisonment being quite broken and the Petitioner is willing to enact himself to live orderly in time coming." The Lords recommend his condition to the Commissioners of Treasury to remit or mitigate the fine in regard to his poverty and long imprisonment and in case of difficulty to represent his case to the King's Majesty if they find cause for the same.
There is no mention in the records of the Privy Council of Blaw's actual release, which took place in March 1680. His family papers cast doubt upon the statements in the Minutes of the Privy Council as to his extreme poverty, for they show him to have been a man of property and substance. The Warrant or Extract from the Treasury Minute authorising Blaw's release has been handed down in his family. It bears as follows :-
EDINBURGH, Fourth of May 1680.
The which day the reference under written recommended by the Lords of His Majesty's Privy Council to the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury was presented whereof the tenor follows - "Anent a petition presented by Robert Blaw in Culross shewing that whereas (then follows a copy nearly word for word of the Privy Council Minute above quoted) which reference above contained being heard and considered by the Lords Commissioners of His Majesty's Treasury and that the above named Robert Blaw has found caution to appear before the Lords of Council when called for and that he shall not be at any field conventicles under the penalty of five hundred merks Scots toties quoties have therefore ordained and hereby ordain the keeper of the Tolbooth of Edinburgh to set at liberty the person of the said Robert Blaw and whereas his fine imposed upon him cannot be discharged without His Majesty's warrant Sir William Sharp* His Majesty's Cash keeper is hereby ordained not to trouble or molest him for the same for all which this shall be a sufficient warrant to the said Sir William and to the Master of the said Tolbooth.
Extracted by THOMAS MURRAY** Clk.
* Sir William Sharp of Scotscraig, son of Archbishop Sharp.
** Sir Thomas Murray of Glendoick, Lord Clerk Register and Lord of Session.
A copy of the warrant was made by the Clerk to the prison, and both principal and copy are among Blaw's papers.^ The copy has a docquet -
This is an exact double of the principal warrant by me James Cameron^^ Clerk to the Tolbooth of Edinburgh.
J. CAMERON Clk.
There can be little doubt that money passed upon Blaw's release. That this went beyond the fees which at the time greased all official transactions cannot with certainty be affirmed. But probably in any event money found its way into the hands of Sir Thomas Murray, the Lord Clerk Register, who was a kinsman of Lady Lauderdale, and is said to have shared with her the emoluments of the office which he owed to the Lauderdale influence.
Upon his release Blaw returned to Culross and to his second wife, from whom after ten weeks of marriage he had been separated for upwards of three years. He appears to have resumed business and soon afterwards to have been in good circumstances.
^ One would have supposed that the keeper of the prison would have retained the Extract for his own protection. It is of course possible that Blaw obtained it at a later date as a relic.
^^ James Cameron, Sub-keeper and Clerk of the Tolbooth of Edinburgh.
The Family Record above referred to is a curious document. It is written in a neat but small and crabbed hand on a folio sheet which may have been the leaf of a Bible.* On the back of the sheet James Blaw (or Bleau, as he spells his name), surgeon of London, nephew of the Covenanter, has written some particulars of his own family. Interesting features in the Covenanter's record are the use of the words "was removed" for "died" , the exact specification of hours of domestic events ; the irrelevant but striking introduction of the imprisonment incident; and his statement in his own words of what he conceived himself to have been imprisoned for - viz., "hearing Presbyterian ministers preach." The record is as follows :-
Upon the tenth day off Appryll 1657 Robert Blaw and Jonnett Douglas was married by Mr. William Oliphant** in Dunnferling being Fryday.
Upon the twenty eight off October J M VI C & sixtie James Blaw*** our eldest sonne was borne and baptisscd the sam day by Mr. Mt Mathew Fleeming**** born at six hours in the morning.
* He bought a new quarto Bible (still in existence) after his release from prison. The fly-leaf may have been taken from a predecessor which may have gone to pieces.
** William Oliphant became minister of the second charge, Dunfermline, in 1645, and he died there in 1662. He belonged to the more extreme Covenanting party.
*** Upon 17th January 1702, three days before his death, Robert Blaw by deed made over all his real estate to "Mr. James Blaw Doctor of physick my eldest lawful son." In August of the following year, however, Robert Blaw, the youngest son, was served heir direct to his father in his lands. James Blaw therefore never made up a title, and must have died without issue soon after his father. Nothing is known of him or of the sphere of his medical practice.
**** Matthew Fleming became minister of the first charge, Culross, in 1656. He appears to have been a Presbyterian without a very stiff backbone. At the Diocesan Synod of Fife on 2nd Oct. 1667, "The two ministers of Culross Mr. Flymen and Mr. Edmiston were found recusants in not coming to the said Synod and in like manner some brethern were appointed to confer with them" (Lamont's Diary,' p.201). In the following year, on 1st April, at a meeting of the same Synod, The Lord Archbishop declared that he had keepit a visitation at Dunfermling and that he had upon good grounds deposed Mr. Robert Edmiston minister of Culross. As for Master Matthew Fleming his colleige the Archbishop delayit to preceed again him seeing ther wer some hopes of gaining him and for that end Messrs Walter Bruce, William Peirson, John Shaw, are appointed to tell him that he is noticed that he has not joyned with his brethern of the Presbitry" (Synod Records). It seems curious that the specific complaint against these Presbyterians was that they did not attend Synods and Presbyteries. In Woodrow's list there is a "C" after Mr Fleming's name, meaning that he was confined to his parish as a result of these proceedings. Subsequently, in 1673, he was allowed to draw both stipends (Privy Council, iv. 48), but he either resigned or was removed prior to 1676, when John Burnett was inducted to the first charge at Culross.
Upon the seventh January J M VIC & sixtie three Thomas Blaw^ our second sonne was borne betwix four and five houres in the morning and baptissed upon the eleventh day by Mr. Robert Edmonstoune^^ and upon the first March 1663 he was removed.
^ He appears to have predeceased his father, but nothing is known of him. [However the paragraph above clearly states that he died at just short of two months old.]
^^ Robert Edmonstone became minister of the second charge at Culross in 1649. He belonged to the Covenanting party, and he was deposed by Archbishop Sharp in 1667. He died at East Grange, in Culross parish, in 1683.
Upon the fyfth of September J M VI C & sixtie four Jonnett Blaw our eldest* daughter was borne at twelve hours forenoon and baptised upon the eleventh day of September by Mr. Robert Edmonstoune.
Upon the nynteenth December J M VI C & sixtie six Robert Blaw our thrid sonne was borne being Wedneseday at 8 houres at nyght and baptissed the 25 day by Mr. Robert Edmonstoune. Upon the 7 Appryll 1669 he was removed.
Upon the fourth of October J M VI C & sixtie nyn our fourth sonne Robert Blaw** was born being Monday betwix nyn and ten houres in the forenoon and was baptissed on the seventeen of the sayd moneth being the Lords day*** by Mr. Mathew Fleeming.
* She was their only daughter. Apparently more were looked for.
** It was a common practice at this time, and down to the close of the eighteenth century, where a child had died, to give another child the same name. There are instances of three children of the same name in a family. To us this seems a strange practice to have obtained among people who cherished such a vivid and realistic belief in the resurrection of the dead.
*** The baptism being on "the Lord's day" does not imply that it was in church. Although baptism in church was prescribed by the law of the Church, in practice it seems at this time to have been administered in private before two witnesses whose names are inserted in the Register. For many years Allan Blaw of Castlehill seems to have acted as one of the witnesses for the whole Blaw tribe. In the Culross Register of births at the end of 1700 there is an entry as follows :-
Here it is to be noted that no more persons are to be insert as Witnesses of the baptism of children in regard children now are not baptised privately but publickly before the whole congregation.
Upon the last of June 1671 Margrett Smyth^ my Mother was removed and buried upon the first of July. Her age was suppossed to be about sixtie nyne.
Upon the aughteen of june J M VI C seventie three my wyfe Joanett Douglas was removed being Wednesday about seven o'clock at night having gone with chyld seven months her age about thirtie aught years.
Upon the third of August J M VI C & seventy four years my Father^^ was removed about four o'clock in the morning, his age was supposed to be eightie four years.
Upon the twelf of October J M VI C & seventy six Robert Blaw and Elizabeth Blaw was married in Ormistoun^^^ by Mr. John Sinclair.^^^^
^ This was the wife of James Blaw, Culross, whose death is noted in the next entry but one. At this time married women always bore their maiden name, and always signed by it.
^^ This was James Blaw, "Baxter," Culross, younger brother of Allan Blaw of Castlehill, who died 2nd May 1670. In the Culross register Allan Blaw is described as aged seventy or thereby at his death. But this was certainly an under-estimate, as Allan is mentioned in the will of his grandfather, James Elaw, who died in 1594 ('Edinburgh Testaments.' See p.116).
^^^ Matthew Fleming had now ceased to be minister of Culross, and probably the parties resorted to Ormiston in order to find a minister after their own persuasion. Elizabeth Blaw was no doubt a relative of her husband, though at the time of the marriage she was resident in Edinburgh. Intermarriage among the Blaws was not infrequent.
^^^^ John Sinclair, who had been a regent in St Leonard's College, St Andrews, became minister of Ormiston in 1647. He belonged to the Covenanting party, but he seems not to have been completely expelled from his charge until 1682. He laboured thereafter for some time both as a teacher and a preacher in Holland, where he died in 1687. Meantime, in 1684, he had been denounced by the Privy Council as a rebel, and his goods forfeited for alleged treasonable sermons in Holland.
Upon the 28 December 1676 Robert Blaw was carried prisoner to Lithgow Tolbooth and continued theer 15 dayes and from theer to Edinburgh Tolbooth and continued theer to 15 March 1680 yrs for hearing presbiterian ministers preach.
Upon the 14 November 1689 George Blaw* and Jonnett Blaw was married by Mr. Frasser.**
Upon the 23 of December 1690 Jonnett Blaw spouss to George Blaw departed this lyf having travelled with chyld 5 dayes and then was removed.
Upon the 18 February 1691 Elizabeth Blaw my spouss was removed.
Upon the 8 off Jully 1691 Robert Blaw and Elizabeth Sands*** was married in Edinburgh by Mr. Thomas Douglas**** minister.
* This was George Blaw of Castlehill, father of John Blaw. In the 'Scottish Antiquary,' 1894, p.65, it is stated that George Blaw married Jonet Blaw, daughter of Robert Blaw, girdlesmith, born in 1661 ; and that John Blaw of Castlehill and James Blaw of Belfast were issue of the marriage. This is a triple mistake. There was a Jonet Blaw, a daughter of Robert Blaw, girdlesmith, born in 1661. But the lady who married George Blaw was the daughter of Robert Blaw the Covenanter, who was a maltman, not a girdlesmith, and she was born in 1664 as recorded above. The mother of John Blaw was not Jonet Blaw, but George's second wife, Isobella Hay, and James Blaw of Belfast was a brother, not a son, of George Blaw. The contract of marriage between George Blaw and Jeannet (so she spells her name) Blaw is curious. The lady, if she survives her husband, is to have annually 24 bolls of victual, 16 bear, and 8 oatmeal, the liferent of certain lands, "that house in Castlehill commonly called the old Hall with the chamber new built thereto with the old yeard of Castlehill," also "ane cow sumbered and wintered in the Towne of Castlehill" also "hir elding as peattes and toores wind and brought home to hir for hir awine ffyre" (i.e., her fuel as peats and turfs secured and brought home to her for her own fire). On the other hand the Covenanter settles 2000 merks and some property on his daughter. His circumstances must surely have improved, for 2000 merks was the fine he was said to be utterly unable to pay. Poor Jeannet! the anxious provisions on her behalf went for nothing. It is to the credit of her husband that though she lived for more than a year and a day after marriage he returned the dowry to her father. George's son John, however, tried to revive the matter when he was a Jacobite prisoner in London in 1746, but the deeds showed it to have been finally settled.
** In Mr Fraser, Blaw must now have had a minister after his own heart. James Fraser of Brea was a Covenanter of heroic type. He was the eldest son of Sir James Fraser of Brea, Ross-shire, and he was a grandson of the sixth Lord Lovat, and a grand-nephew of the Bonnie Earl of Moray. Between 1677 and 1684 he was imprisoned at least four times, and he spent two years and a half on the Bass Rock, six months in Blackness Castle, and six months in Newgate. He became minister of Culross in 1689, formally resigned, though apparently continuing to still discharge some duty, in 1696, and died in Edinburgh in 1699. Fraser was a scholar, and some works of his have been published. His theology is said to have been a curious blend of Calvinism and universalism.
*** One is disappointed in one's Covenanter when one compares the date of the third marriage with the date of the second wife's decease. Elizabeth Sands was a Culross woman. People of this name had been for 200 years small proprietors in the parish of Culross.
**** Thomas Douglas was a leader and one of the most daring among the Covenanting divines. Apparently he at one time held a charge in London, but when troubles broke out he came to Scotland. He was denounced as a rebel, and a price was set upon his head, but he was never caught. After the Revolution he became minister of Wamphray in Dumfriesshire, where he died in 1695. He may perhaps have been a relative of Blaw's first wife.
Upon the 28 Sept. 1699 Catherine Blaw was removed and Upon the 3 October 1699 Euphan Blaw^ was removed.
Such is the quaint domestic record of the old Covenanter. After his release from prison he seems, as already stated, to have been fairly prosperous. His designation changes from maltman to merchant or meal merchant. In 1698-9 he is again a Bailie of Culross. He died upon 20th January 1702. The family whose entry into the world he so laboriously recorded appears to have been short-lived and unfruitful, for on the death of his son Robert in Guinea in 1716 there were no descendants of his father to take his possessions, which accordingly passed to nephews and nieces of the Covenanter. The latter's widow, Elizabeth Sands, died in 1716.
Besides two Bibles, Robert Blaw left 63 volumes, whereof 39 were in English, 16 in Latin, 4 in Greek, 3 in Hebrew, and 1 in French. Naturally the collection has a strong flavour of theology. Withal there is a certain catholicity of taste, for the 'Iliad' and the 'Odyssey' keep company in the list with the 'Pilgrim's Progress' and the 'Confession of Faith.'
^ It does not appear who those relatives were, or why they were noted here. Robert Blaw had a sister Euphan, who married John Moultray ; he had also a niece of that name.
APPENDIX III.
THE BLOWS OF BELFAST.
UNDER date 6th December 1688, in the Culross Register, appears the marriage of Patrick Neill to Agnes Blaw, daughter of John Blaw of Castlehill. This marriage had consequences important to the industry of Belfast. The bride, Agnes Blaw, was just eighteen, for the register shows her birth in 1670. The bridegroom was a young Glasgow printer. In 1694, or it may have been a year or two earlier, Neill went to Belfast. He was accompanied by his brother-in-law, James Blaw, who was born in 1676, and cannot therefore have been more than eighteen years of age when he went to Belfast. Neill, with the assistance of James Blaw, who was known in Ireland as Blow, began a stationer's business and started a printing press. There has been much discussion as to the foundation of this business, and as to when and where the Bible was first printed in Ireland. A good deal of material upon the subject will be found in Benn's 'History of Belfast' and in the 'Dictionary of National Biography' under Blow, James ; and it has often figured in newspaper and magazine controversy. It seems fairly clear that prints by Neill were issued in 1694, that a metrical version of the Psalms was printed in 1700, and that by 1714 Bibles were issued, which, if not printed in Belfast, were made up there and issued under Blow's name; and that early in that century Bibles were printed by Blow in co-operation with George Grierson, the King's Printer, who had a patent for the purpose. The matter, however, need not be here pursued.
Why James Blaw changed his name to Blow is not known, unless it was owing to an idea that Blaw was a Scotticism of the English word. Neill died in 1705, appointing his "brother Blow" one of his executors. As has been seen, he married James Blaw's sister, and according to a pedigree in the 'Scottish Antiquary,' vol. 8, p.65 (very inaccurate in some of its details), the relationship seems to have been a double one, for the name of James Blaw's wife is given as Abigail Neill. James Blaw, who died in 1759, and his son Daniel, who died in 1810, aged ninety or upwards, carried on for upwards of a century an honourable and successful printing business in Belfast, and their names must always have a first place among the founders of this industry in Ireland.
The death in 1801 of young Begbie, last surviving descendant of John Blaw, last of Castlehill, brought the Belfast Blows into relationship with Culross after a elapse of more than a hundred years. In 1709 George Blaw of Castlehill executed an entail of that property in favour of (1) his son John and the heirs of his body, and (2) his brother James Blaw, stationer in Belfast, and the heirs of his body. George Blaw died in 1710. His son John was then a minor, but when he came to man's estate, instead of making up a title to the property under the entail as heir to his father, he made up a title as heir to his grand-father. This was a device to try and get rid of the entail, probably because he wanted to borrow money,as he very soon began to do. The next heir, his uncle James, was absent in Ireland and knew nothing about it. As John possessed under this title for forty years his device was successful. But after John Blaw's execution neither his surviving son, his daughter, Mrs Begbie, nor her son, Patrick Begbie, made up any title to the property. Accordingly, when the last-named died, Daniel Blaw was entitled to it irrespective of the entail as heir-at-law of his cousin, John Blaw. Mr Begbie, however, who had married John Blaw's only daughter, claimed the property. The ground of his claim was that he had shortly after John Blaw's execution acquired certain rights of creditors, which now through lapse of time without redemption gave him a valid title. A keen litigation followed, but eventually in 1808 the Court of Session decided in favour of Daniel Blaw. Begbie, however, had still a right to payment of his debt as a creditor, and Daniel Blaw did not live to obtain full possession. He died in 1810. According to Benn, he was ninety-two, but his age was stated in the Court of Session in 1807 as eighty-seven.
Daniel Blaw had sons who it appears were interested in papermaking business in Belfast, but for some reason he did not bequeath his interest in Castlehill to them. He had a daughter, Charlotte, married to John Burden. This daughter had a son who disappeared, and to this son, whom failing, to his sister, Mary Ann Burden, wife of Captain Sinclair, said to be of Thurso, Castlehill was bequeathed. In 1821 Mrs Sinclair sold Castlehill to Lord Keith. Daniel Blow was only fifth in descent from James Blaw, who had a charter of Castlehill in 1543 - a very slow descent. The male representation of the family was carried down through Daniel Blow's sons, and there are still Blows in Belfast.
APPENDIX IV.
THE JUDGES AT THE TRIAL.
THE presiding judges at the trial of John Blaw were Lord Justice Clerk Miller of Glenlee and Lord Kames (Henry Home). Both were eminent lawyers. Lord Kames was also a vigorous thinker and a voluminous writer upon many topics.
Lord Justice Clerk Miller of Barskimming and Glenlee, second son of William Miller, Writer to the Signet, was born in 1717, and admitted Advocate in 1742. In 1748 he was appointed Steward Depute of Kirkcudbright, and in the same year he was elected joint Town Clerk of Glasgow. On being appointed Solicitor of Excise in 1755, he resigned office as Steward or Sheriff of Kirkcudbright. Both appointments, Town Clerk of Glasgow and Solicitor of Excise, now sound extraordinary for a practising advocate. In 1759 he became Solicitor-General in succession to Andrew Pringle, Lord Alemore, and in the following year he succeeded Dundas of Arniston as Lord Advocate. In 1761 he was returned to Parliament for the Dumfries Burghs. On the death, in 1766, of Sir Gilbert Elliot of Minto, Miller was appointed Lord Justice Clerk. After a long term of this office, in 1788 he succeeded Robert Dundas of Arniston as Lord President of the Court of Session, when he was made a baronet. He died in the following year. On the first meeting of the Court thereafter (Oct. 1789), Lord Hailes said -
I am called upon to intimate to your Lordships that Sir Thomas Miller, the President of the Court, is dead. Long did I know him and well, and I could descant largely in his commendation. But sitting where I now do I am not at liberty to speak aught which might have the appearance of the partialities of private friendship. This much, however, I must be allowed to say, for in this your Lordships will add your united testimony to mine, that in the discharge of his duty he was assiduous and patient, that he treated the bench with becoming respect, and the gentlemen at the bar with that civility which is their due.
Probably Lord Hailes meant to be kind and complimentary in his reference to his deceased colleague, and apparently "Brunton and Haig," who have preserved the passage, deemed him successful. But the encomium, especially the last sentence, seems a good illustration of damning with faint praise. Lord Glenlee, Lord President Miller's son, was appointed a Judge in 1795, and he sat on the bench for the portentous time of forty-five years. There are people now alive who have seen him, yet he sat on the bench with Monboddo, Braxfield, and Eskgrove.
Henry Home, Lord Kames, son of George Home of Kames, in the county of Berwick, was born in 1696, and after being destined to be a Writer to the Signet, changed his mind and passed advocate in 1723. He appears to have had no university education, and such culture and erudition as he possessed were self-acquired. He was appointed a Lord of Session in 1752, in succession to Patrick Campbell, Lord Monzie, and in 1763 he became also a Lord of Justiciary.
Lord Bacon was a great man in the eyes of all the centuries. Kames was hardly a great man even in his own century, yet there was a curious superficial resemblance between the two men. Both were eminent lawyers, both endeavoured to take all knowledge for their own, both were voluminous writers on many and varied matters, speculative and practical, and both were keenly interested in physical science and experiment, and in rural economy. Kames' many works are little studied now, but they were a creditable contribution to contemporary literature, and they show him to have been a man of great versatility and mental activity. His most enduring monument, however, are the fertile fields that once lay under Blair Drummond Moss. Kames sent the moss down the Forth, where even to our own day it lay black along the shores of the Upper Firth. He had acquired the Blair Drummond property through his wife Agatha, daughter of James Drummond of Blair Drummond, and he was the ancestor of the Home Drummond family.
As a criminal judge Kames had a reputation for severity, and his tongue was deemed coarse even in his own day. According to his biographers -
He attended his duty in the Court almost to the close of his existence, and at his last appearance he took a separate and affectionate farewell of each of his brethren. He survived that period only about eight days, and died on 27th December 1782, in the 87th year of his age. (Brunton and Haig, 'Senators of the College of Justice.')
There is no record of the terms of affection in which Kames addressed each colleague individually, but their touching and affectionate character may perhaps be gauged from the record of his final collective farewell as he shuffled out of the robing room : "Fare ye a' well, ye bitches."
