Illustrative of harshness, I am requested to produce the case of Janet and Christina Ross, who succeeded their brother as tenants. In November 1877, one of the sisters attended, as usual, to pay the rent, but the factor, instead of accepting of the rent, told her that they were to be removed from their lot. After making fruitless attempts to get the factor to accept of her rent, she left the money on the table. The factor returned the money by one of their neighbours; but expecting to keep possession, they refused it. Shortly afterwards officers were sent to evict them. Instead of that being done in the ordinary way, they were shut up in a compartment of their dwelling-house till the other compartments and their barn were levelled to the ground, and their stock driven away to the hill. In this houseless condition, and their crop exposed on the field, they were visited by the ground officer, who saw clearly that they could not live without some shelter from the snow storm. A kind neighbour was applied to, and this man took them into his house for three weeks, after which time they were turned back to their old place, to live in one end of the byre which was left standing; and the ground officer, so as to make them more comfortable in their miserable situation, levelled down some manure that happened to be in the byre at the time. All this was done in the presence of three witnesses, who are ready to prove how these creatures were dealt with. As one of these creatures, on a certain occasion, applied to Mr Peacock for relief, the Rev. Mr M'Kay, who happened to be present, asked Mr Peacock if the Duke was aware of how these creatures were abused. Mr Peacock replied that the whole affair was carried out according to the Duke's instructions.
— ALEXANDER BAIN, witness; ALEXANDER GUNN, witness.'
Showing posts with label sutherland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label sutherland. Show all posts
Sunday, 19 December 2010
Clearances: Rogart - Alexander Bain
—' The special Grievances of Alexander Bain, Tenant, Carry.—
My uncle George M'Kenzie, on being evicted from Strath-Carnaig, got the lot I now occupy which is situated in the tenants' pasture on the south side of Strathfleet. The lot is high and cold, and very much exposed to the north storm. I was adopted and brought up by my uncle, and his constant kindness induced me to devote as much as possible of my time to the improving of his lot, and by my own labour I reclaimed seven acres of moorland. After my uncle's death I expected to succeed him as tenant, but on account of some rent arrears left by my uncle, I was refused possession unless I would pay these arrears, which I considered illegal and unjust, consequently I was summonsed; and having occasion to be away on a certain day about the middle of July 1877, on my returning home in the evening I found my delicate wife, with my weak and numerous family, and all my furniture, turned out to the field, and all the doors locked. My first endeavour was to kindle a fire and cook a meal for my family, which 1 had to do in an earthen bank, and under drenching rain. I made several applications to get possession, but without success. At last the Duke and his factor came to the place, and stood in the hut I rudely built for protection. When his Grace was leaving I asked, what was to become of me now with my delicate wife and weak family. His Grace's reply was, " You are entirely in Mr Peacock's hands, and attend at the office Tuesday first." When I got there I was told the old story, viz., that I would get no settlement unless I would agree to pay the arrears of rent, and that in future the rent of my lot would be £9, 14s. instead of £ 3 , 7s. 6d., my uncle's rent. However, my rent was reduced to £6, but I had to pay the arrears, which I still feel a burden.
My uncle George M'Kenzie, on being evicted from Strath-Carnaig, got the lot I now occupy which is situated in the tenants' pasture on the south side of Strathfleet. The lot is high and cold, and very much exposed to the north storm. I was adopted and brought up by my uncle, and his constant kindness induced me to devote as much as possible of my time to the improving of his lot, and by my own labour I reclaimed seven acres of moorland. After my uncle's death I expected to succeed him as tenant, but on account of some rent arrears left by my uncle, I was refused possession unless I would pay these arrears, which I considered illegal and unjust, consequently I was summonsed; and having occasion to be away on a certain day about the middle of July 1877, on my returning home in the evening I found my delicate wife, with my weak and numerous family, and all my furniture, turned out to the field, and all the doors locked. My first endeavour was to kindle a fire and cook a meal for my family, which 1 had to do in an earthen bank, and under drenching rain. I made several applications to get possession, but without success. At last the Duke and his factor came to the place, and stood in the hut I rudely built for protection. When his Grace was leaving I asked, what was to become of me now with my delicate wife and weak family. His Grace's reply was, " You are entirely in Mr Peacock's hands, and attend at the office Tuesday first." When I got there I was told the old story, viz., that I would get no settlement unless I would agree to pay the arrears of rent, and that in future the rent of my lot would be £9, 14s. instead of £ 3 , 7s. 6d., my uncle's rent. However, my rent was reduced to £6, but I had to pay the arrears, which I still feel a burden.
Sunday, 28 November 2010
The Year of Burning
I quote from Wikipedia on the background to this statue, which was erected near Helmsdale in 2007:
[It] commemorates the people who were cleared from the area by landowners and left their homeland to begin new lives overseas. The statue, which depicts a family leaving their home, stands at the mouth of the Strath of Kildonan, and was funded by Dennis Macleod, a Canadian mining millionaire of Scottish descent. An identical 10 ft-high bronze "Exiles" statue has also been set up on the banks of the Red River at Winnipeg, the city founded by those who left Scotland for Canada.
Mr Macleod has said that the statues celebrate the achievements made by Scots who went to Canada. Well, I would be quite happy to acknowledge the fact that some of the Scots did go on to do great things. But those having departed Helmsdale, and that's what we're talking about, certainly did not do well. I am going through the Napier Commission's Report, which was sitting at Helmsdale on 6 October 1883. The answers to questions 38252 and 38253 actually serve to negate the reasoning for the erection of the statue.
38252. Then you stated that the expatriated people, some of them, found their way to America, where they experienced a worse fate. What ground have you for believing that the emigrants generally experienced a worse fate ?
—The fate of my great-grandfather's family. My great-grandfather's family, except himself, all went out in Lord Selkirk's expedition to the Red River. My grandfather was married before he went out, and I have seen in my grandfather's house and my father's house a pile of correspondence describing the vicissitudes they underwent. They were left exposed on the north coast, and they had to find their way from Hudson's Bay to the Red River settlement; and they were exposed to the rigours of a lengthened winter, and, to crown all, the Indians came in and killed some of them, and the rest fled over the winter's snow to Canada. Only seven or eight managed to survive and settle in Canada afterwards.
38253. Are there many evicted families from this part of the country who cast in their lot with Lord Selkirk's settlement ?
—Yes, and that accounts for the difference between those who settled here and those who were in Kildouan before.
38254. Mr Fraser-Mackintosh.
—Had Lord Selkirk a settlement called Kildonan?
—Yes, and it is called Kildonan to this day. It is near Winnipeg. Fort Garry was the principal town in the old Red River settlement, and it has now become Winnipeg. You will see an account of it in the book called The Great Lone Land, by General Butler.
Saturday, 6 November 2010
Clearances: Assynt
I copy part of the evidence given to the Napier Commission at Lochinver, on the west coast of northern Scotland, in July 1883. Assynt, the area surrounding Lochinver, was owned by the Duke of Sutherland, and his name continues to be cursed by many. I am not in a position to give a balanced view of the issue - but the actions perpetrated in his name do not do the Duchy of Sutherland any favours whatsoever.
John Mackenzie, Clashmore, was accused of being a ring-leader in a case of preventing what was regarded as an encroachment of the rights of the neighbourhood by Mr David Humphrey, and in face of every evidence to his innocence, he was sentenced to lose his croft, and he is now a pauper invalid and a burden to his neighbours. Donald Macleod, Clashmore, came in for the vengeance of the same power in connection remotely with the resistance offered to Mr Humphrey, when cutting off part of the Baffin pasture, when some boys went to obstruct the work. On this, Mr M'Iver ran to catch two boys assumed to have been obstructing the work, reaching a house, the boys got out of Mr M'Iver's sight, and he rushed into the house, supposing they had entered. There was a very sick woman who had been taken out of bed and placed on a shake-down at the fireside, Mr M' Iver went on, however, searching for the boys, and tossing things about, and so frightened the woman that her death shortly afterwards took place. The boys not being there, were not found, and Mr M'Iver, as soon as he came out, dashed at two small boys at play. The boys who were about nine years of age, and knowing of no offence, did not think of running from the factor, remained to be caught. Mr M'Iver, seized one of them by the throat, and kneeling down held his captive to the ground, insisting that he should tell the names of the persons engaged in the obstruction. Hugh Macleod, the boy's brother, seeing this, remonstrated with the factor, who now persisted, demanding the father's name. Hugh took hold of the factor's hand and told him to let go, but as Mr M'Iver held on, and the boy being in great danger, Hugh now took hold of the hand that was throttling the boy. On this, the factor's two sons and Mackay came. The factor said Hugh had struck him, but so little evidence was there for this, that an attempt was made to get Hugh to criminate himself. After this one of them came with a paper for Hugh to sign, which paper proved to be a declaration that he was guilty of striking the factor. He was told if he would sign this declaration, the factor would be his friend, and he would get anything he wanted ever after. But Hugh refused, saying he would have the factor prosecuted. The result was, that the father Donald had to emigrate with all his family, excepting Hugh, who had a little shop in which he carried on some business. The avenger did not rest satisfied with what he had done to the father. Hugh was about as offensive to him as Mordecai was to Haman. Taking advantage of Hugh's absence, his shop and his groceries, which he left carefully in boxes, were attacked by order of the factor, and when he returned he found the house broken into, and the boxes of goods smashed and damaged to a ruinous degree, and the house, which was built at the family's expense, except the roofing, was levelled to the ground shortly afterwards, and the timber handed to another man. John Mackenzie, son of Donald, an old, respectable man of 70, equally without foundation accused of the same offence, and deprived of his croft, which had come down to him from his forefathers. He went all the way to Lairg, then to Dunrobin, and not finding the Duke there, he went to Tarbert; but after travelling in all 160 miles, his efforts were in vain. The belief was, that the persistent hostility on the part of some of the officials was at the root of this. Humphrey said to John one day
—"You are bending to the grave,"
—"Yes," said John, "but see you are not bending with the weight of the evil you are doing to the widow and orphan."
John Mackenzie, Clashmore, was accused of being a ring-leader in a case of preventing what was regarded as an encroachment of the rights of the neighbourhood by Mr David Humphrey, and in face of every evidence to his innocence, he was sentenced to lose his croft, and he is now a pauper invalid and a burden to his neighbours. Donald Macleod, Clashmore, came in for the vengeance of the same power in connection remotely with the resistance offered to Mr Humphrey, when cutting off part of the Baffin pasture, when some boys went to obstruct the work. On this, Mr M'Iver ran to catch two boys assumed to have been obstructing the work, reaching a house, the boys got out of Mr M'Iver's sight, and he rushed into the house, supposing they had entered. There was a very sick woman who had been taken out of bed and placed on a shake-down at the fireside, Mr M' Iver went on, however, searching for the boys, and tossing things about, and so frightened the woman that her death shortly afterwards took place. The boys not being there, were not found, and Mr M'Iver, as soon as he came out, dashed at two small boys at play. The boys who were about nine years of age, and knowing of no offence, did not think of running from the factor, remained to be caught. Mr M'Iver, seized one of them by the throat, and kneeling down held his captive to the ground, insisting that he should tell the names of the persons engaged in the obstruction. Hugh Macleod, the boy's brother, seeing this, remonstrated with the factor, who now persisted, demanding the father's name. Hugh took hold of the factor's hand and told him to let go, but as Mr M'Iver held on, and the boy being in great danger, Hugh now took hold of the hand that was throttling the boy. On this, the factor's two sons and Mackay came. The factor said Hugh had struck him, but so little evidence was there for this, that an attempt was made to get Hugh to criminate himself. After this one of them came with a paper for Hugh to sign, which paper proved to be a declaration that he was guilty of striking the factor. He was told if he would sign this declaration, the factor would be his friend, and he would get anything he wanted ever after. But Hugh refused, saying he would have the factor prosecuted. The result was, that the father Donald had to emigrate with all his family, excepting Hugh, who had a little shop in which he carried on some business. The avenger did not rest satisfied with what he had done to the father. Hugh was about as offensive to him as Mordecai was to Haman. Taking advantage of Hugh's absence, his shop and his groceries, which he left carefully in boxes, were attacked by order of the factor, and when he returned he found the house broken into, and the boxes of goods smashed and damaged to a ruinous degree, and the house, which was built at the family's expense, except the roofing, was levelled to the ground shortly afterwards, and the timber handed to another man. John Mackenzie, son of Donald, an old, respectable man of 70, equally without foundation accused of the same offence, and deprived of his croft, which had come down to him from his forefathers. He went all the way to Lairg, then to Dunrobin, and not finding the Duke there, he went to Tarbert; but after travelling in all 160 miles, his efforts were in vain. The belief was, that the persistent hostility on the part of some of the officials was at the root of this. Humphrey said to John one day
—"You are bending to the grave,"
—"Yes," said John, "but see you are not bending with the weight of the evil you are doing to the widow and orphan."
Tuesday, 19 October 2010
Clearances: Strathnaver
I'm currently transcribing the Napier Report for Sutherland (the far north of Scotland), which carries some harrowing evidence. Angus Mackay, a 22-year old student of divinity, is being interrogated.
You say you are used and abused by the officials of the estate. Will you be good enough to mention instances of abuse?
I will give you a few specimens. The first case is one of Angus Gordon, tenant, Aird. In 1879 a road was made through Angus Gordon's croft while a large piece was taken from him at the lower end and a lime storing-house built upon it. The tenant was promised surface damages as his corn was partly destroyed, and a reduction of rent, but on making his demands when paying his rent he was only laughed at, and told that they would get plenty men to take his croft if he was not pleased with it. As he had roused the ire of the officials they gave permission to the vessels carrying lime into the river, to use for ballast the stones of the dyke fencing in Gordon's lot at the lower end. The dyke was pulled down accordingly, and now his croft is exposed to damage from his neighbours' cattle; and next year his rent was raised eighteen shillings—that was when the general rise was made on the rent —but he went to the Duke and the rent was reduced again.
Another instance is the case of one Christina Mackay, Beathag. She was an old woman and permitted James Thomson, her brother-in-law, to live in an end of her house, but, as the factor was at enmity with this man, he evicted Christina before the term, and sent the ground officer round the district forbidding the people upon pain of eviction to give her shelter in their houses. The public broke open the door of her house and she went in again and stayed till the term, when she was formally to be evicted upon a warrant. The thing preyed upon her mind so much that when the day of final eviction came she died about twelve o'clock, broken hearted, the ground officer and sheriff officer being then within half a mile of her house on their way to evict her.
You say you are used and abused by the officials of the estate. Will you be good enough to mention instances of abuse?
I will give you a few specimens. The first case is one of Angus Gordon, tenant, Aird. In 1879 a road was made through Angus Gordon's croft while a large piece was taken from him at the lower end and a lime storing-house built upon it. The tenant was promised surface damages as his corn was partly destroyed, and a reduction of rent, but on making his demands when paying his rent he was only laughed at, and told that they would get plenty men to take his croft if he was not pleased with it. As he had roused the ire of the officials they gave permission to the vessels carrying lime into the river, to use for ballast the stones of the dyke fencing in Gordon's lot at the lower end. The dyke was pulled down accordingly, and now his croft is exposed to damage from his neighbours' cattle; and next year his rent was raised eighteen shillings—that was when the general rise was made on the rent —but he went to the Duke and the rent was reduced again.
Another instance is the case of one Christina Mackay, Beathag. She was an old woman and permitted James Thomson, her brother-in-law, to live in an end of her house, but, as the factor was at enmity with this man, he evicted Christina before the term, and sent the ground officer round the district forbidding the people upon pain of eviction to give her shelter in their houses. The public broke open the door of her house and she went in again and stayed till the term, when she was formally to be evicted upon a warrant. The thing preyed upon her mind so much that when the day of final eviction came she died about twelve o'clock, broken hearted, the ground officer and sheriff officer being then within half a mile of her house on their way to evict her.
Tuesday, 24 July 2007
This statue, entitled Exiles, was unveiled by First Minister Alex Salmond yesterday, at Helmsdale on the east Sutherland coast. It shows a family, leaving their homes for a new life overseas. Helmsdale lies at the mouth of the Strath of Kildonan, one of many valleys in Sutherland cleared of their residents in the 19th century. The full background story can be read here.
Whilst I applaud the efforts of Mr Macleod (who initiated the project) to keep the memory of the Clearances alive, I somehow find the positive gloss being cast on this appalling episode in Scotland’s history very, very difficult to stomach. Particularly, bearing in mind Mr Salmond’s political hue, I would have expected to hear rather stronger language than “deplorable”.
Thousands of people were forced by means fair and foul to leave their homes - the practice of burning the thatch over people’s heads is well documented. The Isle of Skye, 35 miles south of here, has been the scene of some atrocious evictions. Late last year, the assertion was being made that the Isle of Lewis had suffered relatively lightly under the Clearances. Well, I couldn’t disagree more.
The below map shows the district of Eishken and the 27 villages which used to be there until 1820.
They were all cleared, mostly to other places within Lewis. But still a forcible eviction.
I agree that the people who were cleared out of northern Scotland did make a contribution in the areas where they settled. But I think it is a stinging indictment that their contribution was not appreciated in their homecountry, and I am waiting for the First Minister to say something about that too.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)