Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
[ocr errors]

State of the Barometer in inches and decimals, and of Farenheit's TherMometer in the open air, taken in the morning before fun-rife, and ac noon; and the quantity of rain-water fallen, in inches and decimals, from the 31st of December 1787, to the 30th of January 1788, near thefbat «f Arthur's Seat.

[table][graphic]

EDINBURGH MAGAZINE,

O R,

LITERARY MISCELLANY.

VIEWS IN SCOTLAND.

B A L G 0 N I E CASTLE.

BA L G O NIE, one of the seats of the Earl of Levtn, is pleasantly situated on the banks of the river Leven in the county of Fife. It came into the possession of the family near 20O years ago ; since which, time, the apartments on the North and East sides of the Court have been added. There is no account, nor even tradition with respect to the antiquity of the Tower: It is, however, a noble edifice, and one of the most compleat that is to be met with perhaps in any country. It forms an oblong square, of 60 feet by 50; with walls 90 feet high and 7 feet thick: and the situation is rendered stronger, on account of the building being placed within a Roman entrenchment; part of which, an angle and two sides, is still remaining. This Castle stands on the top of a bank, about 50 feet above the level of the rivets The Castle-Green, (a fine field of 10 acres,) a garden of 14 acres inclosed by a wall 12 feet high, with other level grounds, altogether forming a beautiful rich plain of considerable extent, arc planted in a stile much more magnificent than was commonly used in early times.

7o tie Publisher os the Edinburgh Magazin?. S I R,

YOUR Correspondent in your Ma- Mary's firm friends, and adherents to>

gazine of September last, now a- her in her greatest troubles. Is there*

gain in your Magazine of December, not reason from thence to suspect, thac

makes his appearance with a new attack their names have been foisted into this

on Mr Whiukcr, on which, in my turn, paper, which they never saw? But let

Isend you the few following strictures: us hear the fact, which is this, that the

The bond of association upon Queen above noblemen, and others present in

Mary's forced resignation of the Crown, Parliament, " {olemaly pmte/Ied, at the

with the list of subscriptions subjoined "time of voting, that they consentit to

to it, "there is the strongest reason to think, (fays Mr Whitaker) has passed "through the hands of forgery, and '• that forgery has been busy in enlar** ging its list of subscribers." See the Bond and List, Anderson, vol. II.

P-23'' ...

The two subscriptions following

Murray's are the Earls of ,Huntly and Argyle; both of those noblemen, known to be of the number of Queen

"na hurt of the Queens Majesties per"sen, estait roial, nor crown, farther "than hir Hiencss waid apprievehir"self, being at libertie, nor waid voit in "ony thing concerning hir Graces ho"nor nor lyfe,but plandyopponit tham"selves in the contrare, hmubeit thaj "have eausit insert uther says in thair "pretendit ailes, and will suffer in na "wayes thair clarkis to giff forth the "forsaidprotestatiouns'*.'' This paper

Cat. Lib. Col. C. r. folio Jo 1. Good. II. 169*

[ocr errors]

is signed by Lords Boyd, Herris, Living (Tone, &c. the Queen's Commissioners 16th Oct. 1565 j was preseatit to Queen Elisabeth's Commissioners, and was never contradicted. Was Mt Whitaker rash in suspecting, after this public protestation, that many names were foisted into this false list, without authority, and in defiance of truth? Your Correspondent does not chuse to touch upon this point. He cautiously gives, it a go-by. Let us now go on to Lord Carleill's subscription in the above list: it stands thus; Michael Lord Carleyll, -with my band at the pen. Al. Hay, Notarius.—It is to be remarked, ilia: this famous bond and list mentions only the year {1567), but has no-particular date of the day and month when subscribed, nor witnesses to the subscriptions. Michael, Lord Carleyll, it appears could riot write his name. He touched the

?en; so we must take Alexander Hay lotarius's own subscription for this. Is this noted person's veracity to be depended upon ? niger est, hutte lu RomaTie eaveto I He was a most active tool of Murray's. He was clerk to his secret council. He compiled the famous act of council asserting the pretended letters of the Queen to Both'•well, (which first owed their birth to that very council) xohtsubscrivit by the Queen, when in their very next appearance before the Parliament they liad no substribtion. The famous confession of N. Hubert, who could neither write his name, nor probably read -write, is signed by this active and useful notary. May we not suspect every thing that comes from such contaminated hands?

Let us now consider Mr Whitaker's •rgumtnt:

Michael Lord Carsyle, is a subscriber to the bond 1567 on Queen Mary's 'resignation. On the authority of Sir 'Robert Douglas's Peerage, James .Lord Carlyle is mentioned by him as one of the subscribers to the bond of -association in favour of Queen Mary, IB the following year 1560, upon hor

escape from Lochleven. For this Dbtjglas quotes no less than two authorities. First, a MS. in the Advocates Library: and, second, Crawford's Pea age, who quotes a charter of King James VI. of the lands of Torthorald, in favour of Michael Lord Cailyle, who is there designed, Fratertt sVxrt-s Jacob: Domini Carlyle.

According to both these authors, James precedes Michael, who suceeded to James as Frater et Hxret in the barony of Torthorald.

But, fays your Correspondent, this charter in favour of Michael, as brother and heir to James, is all imaginary; for he has searched the register of charters under the great seal, from the year 153610 1588, and he caa find no such charter as the above.

He must be extremely anxious indeed to settle this important point, if he thinks it so; and therefore I scruple not to give him a little further trouble, as I certainly mall not take it my self. Crawford is an inaccurate writer, but he is no forger. When he quotes a writing in ipfiffiniis verbis, as he does the above, and concerning a family now extinct, where he had no interest to induce him to deceive, I incline to bcliere him, as Sir R. Douglas did. One mistake, however, he probably did make. It is not usual in a charter to design the grantee as Heir, or by the degree of corsanguinity to his predecessor. But when the succession is taken up by the service or return of an inquest, then the degree of relationship to the predecessor is particularly mentioned in the retour, or return of the inquest, on which follows the King's precept. Crawford probably, for I only make a conjecture, misquotes the word carta in place of retornatns. In the Records, the Writing, if worth the searching for, may possibly be found, or perhaps not; as I believe the records of special] retours do not go so ser back as IJ29, the date quoted by Crawford. Your Correspondent concludes with an air of triumph on the MS. quoted by Doughs containing the

bond*

Further Remarks on Whitaker'/ Vindication ofQAAzrf. J

fcond of association of the Mobility in Earl of Huntly, Hew Earl of Eglinikvonrs of the Queen in May 1568, the last in the list of which is Carleil. "But what may suq>rise Mr Whitaker, "fays he, no christian name is affixed to it." The inference from his whole paper, he concludes, is, thanhe authenticity of the public instrument IJ67 remains unslwk.cn. I beg leave to differ from your Correspondent. Waving, for a moment, the invincible objection to the subscriptions of the Earls ef Argyle and Huntly, which he has suppressed, the subscription of the last bond, simply Carleil, shews that it could not be the signature of Michael, who could not write his name only two* or three months before, when Alexander Hay, notary, signed for him. But the MS. of the bond of May 1588 will not decide this point, it beats to be only a copy made from the original bond which is in the Paper-office at London, and the copy plainly appears to be very inaccurate in taking down the subscriptions: for example, the list begins, Archbaid Earl of Argyle, George

ton, David Earl of Crawford. But the writer of this copy, probably tiring of taking down the christian names, after the above four Peers leaves out the christian names of all the other Peers, and of Lord Carlyle among the rest. To decide therefore this ques* tion, which your Correspondent thinks of such importance, he must have recourse to the original bond and list in the paper-office.

As he concludes his paper with a salutary admonition to Mr Whitaker* to take heed on what|ground he stands, I (hall venture, in my turn, to give a piece of advice to your Correspondents which is, that,—when he means leri» oufly to consult his adversely, and support his own cause, by establishing the authenticity os the bond and list 1567, he will fairly take in the whole argument; the principal part of which ha has left out, to wit, the objections of Mr Whitaker to the signatures of the Earls of Huntly and Argyle. I am, Sir, Sec.

To the Pu SIR,

AS in consequence of the labours os Mr Whitaker, every thing concerning Mary Queen of Scots has become interesting,your readers will learn ■with pleasure,that" in November 1561 •* she went to bed about nine, and thereu fire in April she would be in bed "before tin" Volume iii. p. 334.

Every accurate author writes syllogistically, although without the pomp and pageantry offyllogisrns.

The argument, at full length, funs thus:

"She who goes to bed about nine "in November, would be in bed before

n, ten in April. But Queen Mary

** went to bed about nine in Novem■" her ;—ErgoRic imuld be in bed be*• fore Win April."

As to the major proposition, /'/ re

BUSHU.

quires no proof, because it is plain that (he who goes to bed about nine in November would be in bed before ten in April.

The minor is thus proved, " on the "16th November 1561 Queen Mary "was'aw* in bed about nine o'clock;" Keith, p. 204.

When we have well secured the ma'jor and the minor points, ergo, must o» bey its rulers.

Indeed should it happen, that, at some given time, between November and April, Queen Mary was not in bed even at midnight; ergo might take heart, and fay, that major and minor put words in her mouth which had never entered into her imagination, and she might demand a new trial by syllogism, I WD, &C,,

Moderjt Modern "History os Boxing.

[ocr errors]

HIS science, peculiarly English, which, though fashionable, is not yet licensed, and affords an instance of the repugnance that may for a time subsist between the laws and the manners of a nation, was once as regular an exhibition, as we now sec at any of the places of publick amusement, the theatres alone excepted. It was encouraged by the first ranks of the nobility, patronized by the first subject in the realm, and tolerated by the magistrates. Before the establishment of Broughton's amphitheatre, a Booth Tims ere.ted at Tottenham Court, in which the proprietor; Mr George Taylor, invited the professors of the art to display their skill, and the publick to ■ be present at its exhibition. The bruisers then had the reward due to their prowess, in a division of the entrance monev, which sometimes was an hundred, or an hundred and fifty pounds. The general mode of Jharing was for two thirds to go to the winning champion, while the Tenjaining third was the right of the loser; though* sometimes, by an express argreement of the parties, the conqueror and the vanquished shared alike: which is tq be the rule in the approaching fight between Humphreys and Mendoza.

We have lately seen in some of the papers, an Advertisement Extraordinary, as a satire on the present rage for this gymnastiek exercise; but how little extraordinary it would have appeared about half a century ago, we may judge from the following advertisements, which are taken from a news-paper of those tirflcs.

November 22, 1742.

"This is to acquaint all true lovers of manhood, that at the Great Booth, Tottenham-Court, to morrow, being the 23d instant, it is believed there .will be one of the most severe Boxing Matches that has been fought for many years between Richard Hawes Backmaker, and

Thomas Smallwood, fqrjol.

"The known hardiness and intr# pidity of these two men will render it needless tosayanything in their praise.

u Gentlemen are desired to comesoon, for as this battle has been deferred a fortnight, at the particular desire of several Noblemen and Gendemcn, a full house is early expected.

"There will be several bye-battles, as usual, particularly one between tho noted Buckhorle and Harry Grey, for two guineas; and a good day's diversion may be depended on. '*

Daily Advertiseri April 26. 1742.

"At the Great Booth, at Tottenham-Court, on Wednesday next, the 28th instant, will be a Trial of Manhood between the following champions:

"Whereas I, William Willis, (commonly known by the name of the Fighting Quaker) having fought Mr Smallwood abont twelve months since, and held him the tightest to it, and bruised and battered him more than any one he ever encountered, though I had the ill fortune to be beat by an accidental fall; the said Smallwood, flashed with the success blind fortune then gave him, and the weak attempts of a sew vain Irishmen and boys that have of late fought him for a minute or two, makes him think himself unconquerable: to convince him os the falsity os which, I invite him to fight me for ten pounds, at the time and. place above-mentioned, when I doubt not but I shall prove what I have asserted, by pegs, darts, hard blows, falls and ci ols buttocks.

William Willis."

"I, Thomas Smallwood, known for my intrepid manhood and hravery 00 and off the stage, accept the challenge of this puffing Quaker, and will shew him that he is led by a false spirit, that means him no other good than that he should be chastised for offering to take upon him the arm of flesh."

Thomas Smallwood."
Nate*

« ZurückWeiter »