Cite Preigee f Pe a teeta ne ove io. : ’ ee ene m2 oh . \ tA i, Tes ere ve PS hea ene ‘ae nat phe it are He eA S, tere SP os ae ri lt ol Ss Bore Pe ee ES kate : a re Lee reg 7 ; ‘ ; - wines Sa ket EE ee OW aE NEA BSS a 5 kak 8 ; we octrs ; odes ‘3 ae > a ¢ . a or Baca? he erty ans ee y ; : : oak teh coke ant mer yee abe : “y a Motte . are < - * ~ ie ah ee of as > OF o Shoes one aS ~ smh FR > OS oss fo Naty 4 . ; 4 Ose R oa.: 3 ES oy PIP HEME eS VATE ; Ooch aereee a. Ne das ewhetnah baka hw thin fein canctia | stp Somiel serra es aCe Danse otellet ain ahs cath Phew & es at ree = 3 “ ee G8, PROS Sg ef TREY GS Se Br ocand pares) ore eee ee ap pp yetgt ¢ 7 arf eh gm tN EL A eT DUMFRIESSHIRE AND GALLOWAY NATURAL HISTORY & ANTIQUARIAN SOCIETY FOUNDED 20th NOVEMBER, 15862. ikwNSACTIONS AND Owe Newer Or PROCEEDINGS 1916-18. QD ‘ ¢ ) THIRD SERIES, VOLUME V, >>> >, EDITORS: rR Ca eiDeanp Mes G. W. SHIRLEY: DUMFRIES Published by the Council of the Society. 1918. Oitice-Bearers, 1916-1018. President. Hoeu S. Grapstone of Capenoch, Thornhill, Dumfriesshire F.RS.E.. F.Z.S., M.B.0.U., F.S.A.(Scot.). Hon. Vice-Presidents. S. Arnott, F.R.H.S., Sunnymead, Maxwelltown. Wiui1am Dickre, Merlewood, Maxwelltown. Rey. S Duntop, Edinburgh. G. F. Scorr E1uiot, F.R.G.S., F.L.S., Drumwhill. Mossdale. Dr J. W. Martin, Charterhall, Newbridge, Dumfries. Dr J. Maxwett Ross, Duntrune, Maxwelltown. Joun RutHerrorn of Jardington, Dumfries. Vice-Presidents. James Davipson, F.I.C., F.S.A.(Scot.), Summerville, Maxwelltown T. A. Hauumpay, Parkhurst, Edinburgh Road, Dumfries. G. Mactzop Stewart, Catherine Street, Dumfries. ALEXANDER TURNER, Glen Sorrel, Maxwelltown. Hon. Secretary. G. W. Surrey, Ewart Public Library, Dumfries. Hon. Interim Secretary. James Frerr. Hillhead, Bankend Road, Dumfries. Editors of Transactions. R. C. Retp, Mouswald Place, and Mrs G. W. SuHirtey. Hon. Treasurer. M. H. M‘Kerrow, 43 Buccleuch Street, Dumfries. Hon. Librarian. G. Macrzx0p STEWART. Hon. Departmental Curators. Antiquities—J ames FLETT. Coins and Tokens—Jamers Davipson, Summerville. Maxwelltown. Natural History—Dr J. W. Marrtrn, Charterhall. Geology—Rosert Watuiacr, Durham Villa. Herbarium—Miss Hannay, Langlands, and Dr W. Semptr, Mile Ash. Members of Council. ‘The President ; Vice-Presidents ; Secretary; Treasurer; Librarian ; Departmental Curators; and Miss M. Cartyie AirKen, Messrs J. THomas Henperson, Bertram M‘Gowan, J. P. Miniiean, JoHN M‘Burniz, R. C. Rem, F. W. Micure, Mrs Matuews and Miss Gorpon, CONTENTS. 1916-17. PAGE Office-Bearers wie ee dee wp PW ee ry = 3 Annual Meeting ae ae con 9 Animal ie eaileeeaeo Sir Flerbertl Masel: Bare. ae 9 1h The Ruthwell Cross in its Relation to other Mion araencs of the Early Christian Age—W. G. Collingwood . 34 Sheriff Court Book of Dumfries (1537-38)—Sir Philip Flemmalion Grierson : ts oe ae jae tet) The Provosts of Pangaea: 1. C Reid fa = nee yoo JNK) Characteristics of Alpine Plants—Provost S. Arnott ... sou TANG) Halldykes and the Herries Family—David C. Herries ... soo dlls Primitive Marriage—Rev. S. Dunlop _... oak ae sax Ip Crae Lane and its Vegetation—-Miss I. Wilson, M.A. ... eee The Etymology of Lane—The Editors... oh APH The Lower Nith in its Relation to Flooding and TEN ReTnOn Robert Wallace ... 128 The Early History of the Exptl a Kees Phitip Eicuniion Grierson soo UBS The Lost Stone of Rerkmadrine= Rey G. Pp. Robertson con ais) Note on the Kirkmadrine Stone—W. G. Collingwood ... son lal Weather and Nature Notes—J. Rutherford... Bee soo dale Rainfall Records—Andrew Watt ... ey. sh ee son aap) Abstract of Accounts (1916) ee oe: sist ae joo lay! 1917-18. Annual Meeting aoe ae an oe sto, days) Comparative Archeology, its Meng and Methods—Robert NMiumninoseMnD as Hy SeAL. 2. ae 156 Some irecrations on the Occurrence of fe Hee Pipiens in 1917 —Rev. James Aiken, M.A. ... a soo lis? Carlyle at Craigenputtock—D. A. W deca M. nN re 187 Some Documents Relating to the Parish of Glinec inh Philip Hamilton Grierson : i" 137 The Petrol Motor in Warfare—A. C. Denmem a 211 Andrew Heron and his Kinsfolk—Lieut.-Col. Bonhenn Rae M.D. ee pee: at as a x BBE ie eel Weather Notes—J. Rutherford ... ve ae ee ae 223 Two Ornithological Notes--R. C. Reid ... : Seo. Five Strathclyde and Galloway Charters—Rev. ‘Fr. W. “Ra Age, MBAR HR bE S aye ee sea i ee S05 sen El Obituary ae ice Sue ane See Se a2 hee Pak Exhibits Ae a Jas ae ao Be aor 266 Purchases Ny. ts ies tie bef ar en sop, PASS Presentations aR ae. aoe se ane als Abstract of Accounts (1917) .. be ae: oe , ne 2h oP ben wa me fe ins at ike lak ah a EDITORIAL NOTE. During the continued absence of Mr G. W. Shirley on active service this volume has been seen through the press by Mr R. C. Reid and Mrs Shirley, who regret that, owing to the difficulties which at present beset all publication, several valu- able papers have had to be held over to the next volume. The Society has to express its obligations to the Society of Antiquaries, Edinburgh, Dr Robert Munro, and Mr W. G. Collingwood for the loan of a number of blocks used to illus- trate this volume. The Society is also indebted to the Cumberland and West- morland Antiquarian and Archeological Society for permis- sion to reprint the Rev. F. W. Ragg’s paper on ‘‘ Strathclyde and Galloway Charters,’’ and for the use of certain type in connection therewith. The Editors will be glad to receive any information that may assist them in compiling a Roll of Honour of the Society. It must be understood that as each contributor has seen the proof of his paper the Society does not hold itself respon- sible for the accuracy of the data given therein. Members working on local Natural History and Archeo- logical subjects should communicate with the Hon. Interim Secretary. Papers may be submitted at any time, preference being given to original work on local subjects. Enquiries regarding the purchase of Transactions and payment of subscriptions should be made to the Hon. Trea- surer, Mr M. H. M‘Kerrow, 43 Buccleuch Street, Dumfries. Exchanges, Presentations, and Exhibits should be sent to the Hon. Interim Secretary, Ewart Public Library, Dum- fries. PROCEEDINGS AND | RANSACTIONS OF THE Dumfriesshire and Galloway Natural History & Antiquarian Society. Se SL OaN 1916-177. 17th November, 1916. Annual Meeting. The Annual General Meeting of the Society was held at 7.15 p-m.—Mr G. M‘Leod Stewart in the chair. Minutes of previous meeting were read and approved of. Apologies for absence were read from the Hon. President, Mr lush Gladstone; Mr Charles Ralston, Mr J. C. R. Macdonald, Mr James Flett, Colonel Thorburn, and Mr R. C Reid. Mr M. H. M‘Kerrow, the Hon. Treasurer, reported that he had in hand £45 4s 7d, which would be exhausted on pay- ment of printing of the Transactions now in the press. Mr G. M‘Leod Stewart, Hon. Librarian, gave an exhaus- tive report on the additions to the Library by exchange and by presentation. Mr R. C. Reid, who was editing the volume of Trans- actions for the past session, wrote explaining that the book - was in the printers’ hands and would be ready shortly. The Interim Secretary gave a resumé of the meetings throughout the past session. It was agreed that the various office-bearers be continued without change for another session, with the addition of Mr J. C. R. Macdonald to the Council. 10 ANNUAL MEETING. Provost Arnott moved that the hour of meeting be now changed to 7.30. This was seconded by ex-Provost Turner and carried. Votes of thanks were accorded to the office-bearers for their services. Animal Intelligence. By Sir HERBERT MaxweELL, Bart. I am afraid that when you have heard what I have to say to you to-night you will complain that I have done no better service than to lead you into a labyrinth and leave you to find your own way out of it. I am far—very far—from claiming to have struck a fresh clue to the delimitation of instinct and reason. All I propose is to review some of the more sug- gestive points in the evidence collected by many careful ob- servers and to indicate the direction in which scientific opinion seems to tend. The problem has resolved itself into three main branches :— 1. Are animals, other than man, born, and do they continue through life unconscious automata? 2. If they are conscious, are their consciousness and in- telligence the physical product of certain chemical and organic changes taking place in the growth of the eggs, embryo, or young creature, and therefore spon- taneous in the sense that muscle, bone, and blood develop by the spontaneous multiplication of cells? 3. Is the conscious intelligence exoteric? In other words, is it the consequence of an external and superior man- date or suggestion, acting upon a suitable physical receptacle? 1.—Are animals born, and do they remain unconscious automata ? Nobody who has systematically watched the behaviour of the young of birds and other animals is likely long to enter- tain the belief that, even if they are hatched or born as ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 11 unconscious automata, they continue so for more than a very brief period—that they are, as it were, delicate and ingenious pieces of clockwork, performing with regularity those func- tions for which they are designed and adapted, so long as they are regularly wound up, i.e., fed. Experience, whereof the effects are manifest in every animal sufficiently highly organised for man to interpret its behaviour, and which may exist in the grades of life so low as to baffle human scrutiny— experience, I say, and instruction, whereof very few, if any, vertebrate animals are insusceptibie,! are undoubtedly agents upon animal behaviour predicating a mental process such as could be implanted in no mere machine. To take a very homely illustration: no amount of repeated battering will prevent a humming top bumping itself against furniture and other obstacles when it is set spinning; but one recognises the effect of experience upon the conduct of animals so low in the scale of life that it is difficult to believe that any sentient creature can be totally devoid of conscious volition. In 1873 Dr Mobius reported to the Society of Natural Science for Schleswig-Holstein some observations by Herr Amtsberg of Straisund on the behaviour of a large pike. Being confined in an aquarium, this fish wrought such havoc among other fish in the same tank that Herr Amtsberg caused it to be separated from them by a sheet of plate-glass. Thereafter, every time the pike made a dash at one of its neighbours, it received a severe blow on the nose. The pre- datory instinct was so strong that it took three months to convince the pike that every attempt upon the life of these small fish resulted in pain to itself. Thereafter it let them alone, even when, after six months, the glass partition was removed. Experience had taught it that these particular fish could not be attacked with impunity, whereupon its in- telligence came into play to control its predatory instinct, 1 It is a popular belief that guinea pigs are not susceptible to instruction, and evince no recognition of one human being as more familiar than another. Probably this is no more than sheer asser- tion, founded on the phlegmatic behaviour of the animal in cap- tivity, and not put to the test of experiment. 12 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. although, when new fish were put into the tank, it went for them at once. Animals higher in the scale than pike, which rank low in the class of fishes, show more precocity in profiting by experience, even when deprived of the advantage of parental example and guidance. To some chicks reared in an incu- bator Mr Lloyd Morgan threw caterpillars of the cinnabar moth. These larve are conspicuously marked with yellow and black rings, and have a flavour most distasteful to birds. The inexperienced chicks seized them greedily, but dropped them at once, wiping their bills in disgust, and seldom could be induced to touch them a second time. Next day brown loopers and green cabbage-moth caterpillars were put before the little birds. ‘‘ These were approached with some suspicion, but pre- sently one chick ran off with a looper and was followed by others, one of which stole and ate it. In a few minutes all the caterpillars were cleared off. Later in the day they were given some more of these edible caterpillars, which were eaten freely; and then some cinnabar larvee. One chick ran, but checked himself, and, without touching the caterpillar, wiped his bill—a memory of the nasty taste being apparently suggested by association at the sight of the yellow and black caterpillar. Another seized one and dropped it at once. A third subsequently approached a cinnabar as it crawled along, gave the danger note, and ran off.’’2 Now in these instances the superior precocity in turning experience to advantage shown by very young chickens over M. Amtsberg’s pike may be accounted for, not only by the greater mental capacity of the higher vertebrate, but by the keener physical sense of the warm-blooded animal. Instances like these might be cited in abundance to dis- prove the hypothesis that fishes and birds are unconscious automata. More perplexing are those displays of effective consciousness and caution which, if founded on experience, indicate that experience must have been congenitally trans- mitted. 2 Habit and Instinct, by C. Lloyd Morgan, page 41. 9 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. ils I went a-fishing one day in the Mimram, a pretty little chalk stream in Hertfordshire. From a little fishing-house on the bank I noticed several trout rising in a reach of the stream meandering through a meadow below. I made ready to approach them with all the craft I could muster. There happened to be three or four cart-horse colts careering about in the meadow, thundering along the water edge close to the rising trout, which showed not the slightest alarm or inten- tion of desisting from the capture of ephemeride. My host’s keeper, solicitous for my comfort, sent a tiny maiden of some seven or eight summers to drive away the colts. This she did effectively, but her appearance on the bank made every trout quit the surface and flee for shelter. In fisherman’s parlance, she had ‘‘ put them down.’’ Now, these trout, of mature age, no doubt had acquired enough experience to fight shy of an angler and all his works, and, though fearless of cart horses, would be apt to scuttle off at the first gleam of his rod. But how came they to recognise this child as an immature specimen of Homo sapiens? Neither anglers nor poachers are in the habit of plying their calling in pinafore and petticoats. She can scarcely have been an unfamiliar apparition to the trout, for her father’s house was close at hand, and she must have played many times upon that flowery marge. If the trout recognised her, they could not associate her with any experience of hurt or harm. On the other hand, it is still more difficult to account for their recog- nising this child as belonging to a hostile species and the cart horses to a harmless one through intelligence imparted by or inherited from other fish. One cannot assign limits to the measure of warning and instruction which animals can convey to the young that they rear; but trout undertake no parental cares. They shed their ova in the shallows, and, long before these are hatched into sentient creatures, the parents have dropped back into the deeper waters, and if ever they meet their own offspring in after life are very apt to regard them as legitimate food. It was written of old :—‘‘ The fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air; upon all that moveth upon the earth, and a 14 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. upon all the fishes of the sea;’’ and this, in truth, has come to pass. Nevertheless, judging from Mr Lloyd Morgan’s observations of the chicks of domestic fowls, wild ducks, pheasants, partridges, moorhens, and plovers reared in an incubator, the dread of man, as such, is neither innate nor congenital in highly organised animals. Neither does it pre- cede man into parts of the earth whither he has not previously penetrated, witness the confidence, sadly misplaced as a rule, shown in him by penguins and other birds in polar regions. until they got to know him better. In weak species, however, the instinct of concealment does seem to be inborn and congenital, for Mr W. H. Hudson has recorded that, when he had the egg of a jacana (Parra jacana) in the palm of his hand, “ all at once the cracked shell parted, and at the same moment the young bird leaped from my hand and fell into the water. . . . I soon saw that my assistance was not required, for, immedi- ately on dropping into the water, it . . . swam rapidly to a small mound, and, escaping from the water, concealed itself in the grass, lying close and perfectly motionless, like a young plover.’’§ Mr Lloyd Morgan could detect little sign of shrinking from his hand in plovers newly hatched in an incubator, although ‘“‘ they lay in the drawer with bill on the ground and outstretched neck in a well-known protective attitude.’’ Other birds evinced some instinctive shrinking at first, which passed away almost immediately, so that all the species ‘“ would run to my hands after a very short time, nestle down between them, and poke out their little heads confidingly between my fingers.’’ From this it appears that, while the protective instinct is congenital and automatic, the specific dread of man is purely imitative or imparted, or both. Of all the groups of creatures mentioned in the above- quoted text from Genesis, none have more cause to entertain dread not only of man, but of all other living creatures more powerful than themselves, than fishes. However exhilarat- 3 The Naturalist in La Plata, page 112. ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 15 ing life on the ocean wave may be, life under the waves is one continual frenzied struggle to devour or to escape being devoured. Few, indeed, and feeble are vegetarian feeders in the sea; almost every marine animal divides its time between pursuit of and flight from its neighbours. Nevertheless, deeply as the habit of fear must be ingrained in the nature of these creatures, some of them profit very readily from reassuring experience, and exhibit a degree of mental recep- tivity which removes them very far from the category of sentient automata. The cod, for instance, occupies a somewhat higher place in the animated scale than the aforesaid Mimram trout, yet there is hardly any creature, not even the herring, which runs so poor a chance of finishing his natural term of life. A very moderate-sized mother cod will be delivered of about one million eggs in a single accouchement. If one per thou- sand of these were to produce a codling that should attain maturity there would soon be room for very few other fishes in the North Atlantic. But the cod casts its million ova adrift in the ocean to be carried hither and thither by the currents, and the chances against any one ovum, larval fly, or codling escaping the rapacity of other predacious animals must be many thousands to one. One might suppose that heredity and experience would have combined to render the habit of fear and suspicion ineradicable in the survivors. But that is not so. The cod is amenable to confidential inter- course with man, who is certainly not the least formidable of its enemies. In the extreme south-west of Scotland, where the attenuated promontory ending in the Mull of Galloway pro- jects far into St. George’s Channel, there is a remarkable rock basin, partly natural and partly hewn out of the cliff, into which the tide flows through an iron grating. This is the Logan fish pond, where for many generations it has been the custom to imprison fish taken in the open sea, especially cod, to be fattened for the table. If you look quietly over the enclosing wall on the landward side you will see a cir- cular basin about thirty feet in diameter, fringed with alge, and so deep that the bottom cannot be seen through the 16 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. clear, green water. No sign of life is visible, save perhaps a few coalfish or pollack-whiting cruising recklessly round the narrow limits, or two or three sea perch routing among the seaweed. But the sound of the key turning in the door lock and of the keeper’s feet upon the wooden stair rouses the pond into vehement turmoil. Great brown forms arise from the depths; broad tail fins lash the surface, and gaping mouths appear in all directions. Experience has taught these codfish to associate the sound of the keeper’s key and footfall with meal-times, and so lulled their natural dread of man that they will eagerly take food from his hand. Some years ago (I know not whether the same may be witnessed now) the aged lady who acted as keeper had imparted further in- struction to one or more of these fish. One, at all events, a great cod of about 12 Ib. weight, suffered her to "ft him out of the water in her arms and place him in her lap, there to receive a meal of mussels or soft crab shoved into his gullet with a wooden spoon. Truly, one could hardly imagine a performance more at variance with the instincts and habits of a pelagic fish. However fully convinced one may be that the lower animals are endowed with conscious and volitional energy, it can hardly be questioned that many of their most definite and characteristic actions are performed in compliance with a motor impulse independent of consciousness or volition; and this not only in extreme youth but at all periods of maturity. To select an example first from juvenile behaviour—the homely proverb, ‘‘ It’s an ill bird that fouls its own nest,”’ is derived from the cleanly habits of nestlings. Mr Lloyd Morgan received a spotted fly-catcher, about a day old, with eyes not yet open. .. . . It was placed in a small chip box lined with cotton-wool, and kept in a corner of the incu- bator drawer. So soon as it had taken a morsel or two of food at intervals of about thirty to forty minutes, it would energetically thrust its hindquarters over the-edge of the box and void its excrement. Jays and other young nestlings also show this instinctive procedure. It would be grotesque to credit a blind nestling with conscious and deliberate hygienic precaution. We ride airily out of the difficulty by pronounc- ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 17 ” ing it to bea“ provision of Nature ’’ that young birds should act in this way for the safety of their own health. I have, indeed, heard this behaviour on the part of young herons described as a deliberately defensive measure. If one climbs a tree in a heronry and approaches a nest containing young birds, they poke their posteriors over the side and discharge a copious and malodorous volley upon the intruder. Such action has all the appearance of design; but it is almost cer- tainly no more than the natural automatic action of young herons undergoing visceral disturbance through fear or ex- _ citement. That is an example of very simple functional activity un- consciously performed; but it can hardly be doubted that some of the most complex and delicate performances of .animals very far down in the animated scale are unconsciously discharged, or at least undertaken under a mandate with which they automatically comply. The silkworm once only, and at an immature stage of existence, spins an elaborate cocoon wihch no amount of practice could improve. The evidence of design is not to be mistaken; but who can suspect the builder to be also the architect? At a given period of its growth the motor nerves of this sluggish larva set in action machinery specialised to work up material which has been unconsciously stored. The action is wholly independent of the creature’s volition. It must spin, whether it would or no, and it can exercise no discretion in the style or shape of its cocoon. In the case of spiders, we have the action of an adult creature instead of a larva; yet the process seems to be none the less independent of volition. The design is so much more ambitious than the silkworm’s, the structure so much more beautiful and complex, and so closely in accord with the principles of human engineering that one has more difficulty in dissociating it from the independent ingenuity and con- scious skill of the worker. Yet the common garden spider (Epeira diadema) probably acts unconsciously in setting about to spin her web. She (for it is only the female that’ spins) does not reflect before setting in motion the mechanism which she has inherited from a remote ancestry, though she must 18 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. exercise some discretion, involving a mental process, in the choice of a site for her web. She does not gaze with hungry longing upon the flies disporting themselves in the sunshine, speculating how, being wingless, she can capture those tooth- some, flying creatures. Indeed, it is probable that she cannot see them, for the visual powers of spinning, as distinguished from hunting, spiders are believed to be very feeble, being compensated for by an extraordinary refinement of the sense of touch. She simply sets to work to apply the specialised mechanism and material with which she is endowed to the purpose for which they are co-ordinated. Although cut off by the period spent as an egg in a cocoon from all parental instruction or example, she is at no loss for a plan. Innate functional impulse, which is probably the right definition of what we term ‘‘ instinct,’’ co-ordinate with certain specialised organs, directs the creature to the unconscious performance of certain definite acts without previous practice or experience. First the foundations are laid, in the shape of lines enclosing the area to be occupied by the web. From this circumfer- ence the radii or stays are drawn to the centre, whence the spider works outwards, stepping from stay to stay and laying down a thread in a wide spiral to act as scaffolding for the finished structure. Finally, having arrived at the limits of the operative net, she retraces her steps, working inwards in a much closer spiral, laying the transverse threads at the proper distance, and devouring, as she goes, the original scaffolding threads which enabled her to perform the work. If it is ditficult to dissociate such a consummate piece of engineering from the operation of a keen intellect, still more so is it to regard the infinitely greater complexity of the snares produced by certain other spiders as the mere product of functional automatism. Nevertheless, that seems to be the true explanation. If the spider’s web were the outcome of the creature’s individual ingenuity and intelligence there certainly would be manifest some variation in the design among millions of webs by different individuals of the same species—some imperfection in first attempts. No such varia- tion—no such imperfection—can be detected. There is no ‘““°prentice hand ’’ among spiders. The first web of the ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 19 spider is of normal design and perfect construction. Destroy it, and the creature will execute another of exactly the same design, no better and no worse adapted for the capture of passing flies. Very different is human performance directed by personal intelligence. Suppose that the child of a herring fisher or a rabbit-catcher had been left an orphan at five years old and removed from the scene of his father’s industry to the care of some relatives in Glasgow. Circumstances prevail to bring him back to his birthplace as a young man and to make it expedient that he should earn a living by the same industry as his father did. Motor or functional co-ordination will not help him much, for he can neither swim like a herring nor burrow like a rabbit. He sets his intelligence to work, seek- ing instruction from adepts in the craft, and then he must obtain suitable apparatus which he could not himself con- struct, in the use of which he will certainly be very unskilful at first. Even so, he has to avail himself of the example of contemporary fishers and trappers, who are themselves in- debted for success to the accumulated experience and pro- gressive inventions of by-gone generations. But the net spread yesterday on your rosebush by Epeira is of precisely the same design as those which her ancestors suspended in the primeval forest when our ancestors were spearing salmon with bone harpoons and shooting deer with flint-tipped arrows. The instinctively functional habits of those strange gal- linaceous fowls, the Megapodida—the mound-birds or brush- turkeys of Australasia—are so complex as to seem necessarily to imply intelligence putting experience to practical use. Primarily, no doubt, their domestic economy may be due to the functional activity of certain highly specialised organs, but they have anticipated human ingenuity by the construction of vast incubators, those of some species being co-operative. Several hens of the Australian Megapodius tumulus combine to form a mound of earth and green foliage, which they scrape together with their huge feet, walking backwards through the forest and kicking the stuff behind them. It is recorded that one such mound measured rs0 feet in circum- 20 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. ference. It is stated that this was not the work of one season, but that fresh material was added each spring before a fresh laying took place. The Megapodius is a bird no bigger than an ordinary fowl; but the Australian brush- turkey (Tallegallus Lathami) is nearly as big as a turkey. I have had the advantage of seeing these birds and examining their work in the Duke of Bedford’s woods at Woburn Abbey. Mr Savile-Kent speaks of the Tallegallus as nesting co-operatively ; but the four or five mounds which I saw at Woburn seemed each to be appropriated to a separate pair. Having piled together a mass of vegetable matter, the hen lays her eggs therein, which are then buried in fresh material, and left to be hatched by the heat engendered by fermentation of the decaying leaves. | Nor does she lay them in the ordinary sense of the word, on-their sides. If she did, and neglected to turn them every day, they would assuredly be addled. Forasmuch as she has not the faintest intention of re-visiting the eggs, they are contrived of a peculiar elon- gated shape, like a soda-water bottle without the neck, and are set on end in the material of the mound. The chicks are hatched in due time, and are often so fully fledged on escaping from the shell as to be able to take flight at once and are able to find without guidance the food suitable for their needs. Hence there is no more possibility of the young birds acting upon instruction or in imitation of their parents than there is in the case of young spiders, seeing that the old birds evade the labour of personal incubation and guidance of the chicks. “ Yet,” says Mr Savile-Kent, ‘‘ the mound-constructing in- stinct is so strongly ingrained by heredity that young birds taken fresh from the nest and confined under favourable conditions have at once commenced to construct mounds after the characteristic manner of their tribe.’’* In doing so, no doubt these young and inexperienced creatures are acting — under a stimulus communicated from the lower brain centres along the efferent nerves to legs and feet congenitally de- veloped and highly specialised for a peculiar function. So far the birds may be regarded as unconsciously exercising 4 The Naturalist in Australia, page 338. ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 21 innate proclivity, which, like other idiosyncrasies, attains its highest activity at the season of reproduction. When the adult Megapode combines for the first time with others of its species to construct and stock the incubating mound it is obeying the law, or at least complying with the habit, which has become binding upon its kind. Its acquaintance with the obligation may be considered functionally instinctive ; but it involves a performance of unusual complexity. Com- pliance with an established custom is comparatively easy to understand—at all events, it may appear to be so—but specu- lation goes adrift in attempting to explain how the custom became established. No matter how big the feet and power- ful the shanks of the primeval Megapode may have been— no matter how much unconscious satisfaction it may have derived from exercising these organs in piling mounds—how did it hit upon the labour-saving secret that fermenting vegetable substance would supply heat enough to bring the eggs to the hatching? Ordinary evolutional analogy seems to provide no key to fit these complicated wards, neither is one tempted to credit the fowl with knowledge that fermen- tation generates heat. It is possible that, seeing how prone all gallinaceous fowls are to scraping, the original Mega- podes may have so excelled in that activity as to have thrown together a fortuitous heap of rubbish, which generated a perceptible heat, thereby tempting them to deposit therein their eggs. It is well known that mother birds of most genera never leave the nest during the period of incubation for so long a period as shall expose the eggs to chill. Their absence, in our climate at least, is always exceedingly brief. So the Megapode may have found by experience that she could safely leave her eggs in the rubbish mound for a much longer period than in an ordinary nest; until at last, finding the irksome duty of personal incubation to be superfluous, she abandoned the practice. It will be observed that this hypothesis assigns to the mother Megapode a high degree of intelligent observation and sagacious application of experience. It may be com- pared with the discovery made long since by human mothers that the substitution of the bottle for the breast in rearing 22 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. their babes exempted them from the necessity of foregoing social pleasures and from close attendance in the nursery. But the human mother has been careful to transmit the discovery to posterity. The enigma remains how successive generations of Megapodes are able to put the experience of their progenitors into practice, seeing that the mother birds not only evade the tedium of personal incubation, but entirely neglect the education, instruction, and nurture of their young; which, fortunately for ourselves, human mothers have not learnt to do. From the examples given above, chosen almost at ran- dom from thousands of others which present themselves to every observer of nature, some material may be gathered for an answer to the first question propounded above. It is an answer very far from authoritative, explicit, or final, consisting mainly of a summary of what is probable. It must consist, indeed, of no more than this,-that all animals arrive at birth endowed with congenital automatism co- ordinate with a specific inherited organic mechanism, ready to discharge certain functions without the intervention of conscious volition. But part of the inherited mechanism consists, at least in animals above the lowest grades, of an apparatus fitted to receive external impressions conveyed along the afferent or incoming nerve-currents, and to respond to them by transmitting energy along the efferent or out- going nerve-currents. In short, these animals are supplied with an intellectual and volitional equipment which, however long it may remain ineffective after birth, is capable of and destined for various ranges of energy and complexity, and differs only in degree and development from the human organ of intelligence. Animals may be judged as coming into the world as sentient but unconscious automata, but with mental machinery ready to respond in a greater or lesser measure to experience. ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 93 2. Are the consciousness and intelligence of animals the physical product of chemical and organic changes taking place in the growth of the egg, embryo, or larva, and therefore spontaneous in the sense that muscle, bone, and blood develop by the spontaneous multiplication of cells ? “Tf,” says Mr Lloyd Morgan in his fascinating treatise on Habit and Instinct—“‘ if on the one hand it cannot be said without extravagance that an egg is endowed with con- sciousness, and if, on the other hand, it cannot be said with- out extravagance that the day-old chick is an unconscious automaton, there must be some intervening moment at which this consciousness has its origin. When is this, and how does it arise? If we attempt to answer this question with anything like thoroughness, we shall open up the further question—From what does consciousness take its origin? And this would lead to a difficult and, for most of us, not ‘very interesting discussion.’’ Be it interesting to many or few, herein lies enfolded the secret hitherto most jealously -guarded from human scrutiny—an enigma to which no student of nature can be indifferent. None but a physiologist —which, of course, I have not the slightest pretence to be— need presume to offer any help to its solution; but any intel- lect of moderate training may derive advantage from recog- nising and examining the nicety of the problem. Modern lawyers have pronounced that, from the moment of concep- tion, the human embryo has the nature and rights of a distinct being—of a citizen—and accordingly the law deals with one who procures abortion as a criminal. Plato and Aristotle sanctioned the current opinion of their day that ** it was but a part of the mother, and that she had the same right to destroy it as to cauterise a tumour upon her body.’’® Between these two extreme opinions perhaps lies the truth, namely, that at a certain stage of development the foetus in one of the higher animals acquires individual, probably sentient, though still unconscious, automatism. This is 5 Lecky’s Huropean Morals, i., 94 (ed. 1869). 24 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. hardly a suitable place for the discussion of a theme of this kind. Let us take a bird’s egg, as more convenient to handle. Consciousness may seem too big a term to connote the chick’s sensation of imprisonment within the shell, and its impulse to escape, as indicated by hammering and cheeping ; though it might pass without comment as explanatory of the action of the adult hen, thrusting her neck vigorously through the bars of the coop and straining for liberty. But Mr Hudson has observed concerning several species of birds in widely separated orders that, before the shell of the egg was cracked, the chick within, hammering and “‘ cheeping ”’ in its attempt to get out, would cease instantly and lie per- fectly still when the parent bird sounded the note of danger, but would resume operations when she uttered a reassuring note.® From this it appears that the consciousness of the un- hatched chick is sufficiently active to exchange oral com- munications with a mother outside the shell. In fact, the chick has been born before it is hatched, and it is suggested that it must be regarded as sentient and conscious from the moment it pierces the air-chamber within the egg and becomes a lung-breathing creature. The young of gallinaceous and certain other fowls dis- play upon hatching a much more precocious intelligence than other nestlings. They are able to run at once, the Mega- podes, as aforesaid, being actually able to fly at once and cater for themselves. Their motor organs are so well developed as to respond immediately to their congenital automatism; whereas those birds which are hatched blind, and depend upon food being brought to the nest by their parents, acquire the power of locomotion slowly and more 6 Naturalist in La Plata, p. 90. Mr Lloyd Morgan has dis- tinguished at least six notes of different significance uttered by domestic chicks, namely, the gentle ‘‘ piping,’’ expressive of con- tentment ; a further low note, expressive of enjoyment; the danger note of warning; the plaintive ‘‘ cheeping,’’ expressive of want; a sharp squeak of irritation; and, lastly, a shrill cry of distress, as when a chick gets separated from the rest of the brood. ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 25 or less awkwardly. Similar want of uniformity prevails among mammals. Horses, deer, sheep, and cattle are born with some power of locomotion, with sight, hearing, etc., in active operation, and with mental powers in exercise. The rabbit is born blind, and, though sentient, scarcely conscious for ten or twelve days after birth; a period corresponding to about a year of the human span of life. Puppies and kittens also are born blind and helpless; and man, though born with open eyes, remains helpless and dubiously con- scious for many months. Again, certain animals which in an early stage of exist- ence may possess a dim power of reflection, and exercise volition in locomotion and the quest for food, pass through a subsequent comatose and unconscious phase. Thus a caterpillar falling into the middle of a road sets off at top speed for the nearest verdure. A few weeks later it loses all power of locomotion, and perhaps all consciousness, although the motor nerves of the chrysalis cause muscular movements when it is touched. The chrysalis of the death’s- head moth (Acherontia atropos) squeaks audibly when handled. It seems, then, impossible to indicate precisely the period of existence when consciousness begins. Although the lion cub is born with legs and eyes, the eaglet with wings, these legs, eyes, and wings cannot be put to use for long afterwards; but the foal in the strawyard, the plover on the moor, exercise both legs and eyes from the first. The common Mayfly (Ephemera danica) spends three years as an unlovely larva, living in mud, swallowing much and match- ing the mud in colour. At the end of this obscure, not to say obscene, period of probation, after passing through 7 In the Personal Reminiscences of Sir Frederick Pollock, vol. ll., pp. 188-9, the following incredible passage occurs :—‘‘ Dugald Stewart was once asked what was the earliest thing he could remember. He said it was being left alone by his nurse in his cradle and resolving to tell of her as soon as he could speak.’’ My sole object in quoting this is to give an example of the kind of uncritical rubbish has to be cleared away before any progress can be made in penetrating the supersensory mystery. 26 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. several trivial, yet critical, phases, it suddenly appears as a delicate, exquisitely graceful winged creature, endowed with magnificent power of flight, which it puts to immediate use without the preliminary of a trial trip. It baffles our sense of purpose to understand why all the tedious and ignoble years of preparation should not be the preface to prolonged exercise of perfected faculties. The pathetic truth is that the Mayfly seldom survives a second or third sunrise after becoming a perfect insect. Flight, love, reproduction, and death—all are enacted within the space of a few hours. The surface of the water will be thickly strewn with the wreckage of the pretty creatures that rose from its depths but yester- day; for eleven months to come it may be that not a single Mayfly will dance in the glade that was so lately dim with a mist of them. Seeing, then, how irregular is the period that elapses between the birth of animals and their attaining control of the motor faculties, it may be understood that similar uncer- tainty must surround the question how soon the brain, or its equivalent in the lowest grades, supplies any creature with consciousness or intelligence. From the precocity of in- stinctive activities, such as was exhibited by Mr Hudson’s young jacana, there may be inferred a corresponding for- wardness in the birth of intelligence, because animals which are soonest thrown upon their own resources must be readiest to exercise their wits or disappear from the scene of life. The growth of the organ of intelligence may be assumed to be spontaneous and its powers and functions congenital ; but it does not seem certain, as is popularly supposed, that the cardinal difference between the mental powers of man and those of the lower animals is that the first are capable of indefinite range, whereas the second are stationary within fixed limits. It is possible sometimes to note a forward movement in the intelligence of individuals very low in the organic scale, with corresponding effect upon the habits of the race. Perhaps in no creatures are the habits and actions more rigidly stereotyped than they are in bees; yet the ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 27 following instance of novel behaviour on the part of humble bees seems to indicate progressive intelligence. It is many years since I first noticed that the blossoms of the blue sage (Salvia patens) in my garden in Scotland had all been bitten across the throat just above the stiff calyx. Upon examining flowers of the same species in a Berkshire garden, I found that they were intact, though there were plenty of humble bees about, and so were those in a Scottish garden not twenty miles from my own. Now this sage is a native of Mexico, and possesses a beautiful structure to secure cross-fertilisation. The beak of a hum- ming-bird or the proboscis of a moth, inserted into the tube of the flower, presses on a lever which causes the anthers to descend from their position in the upper lobe of the corolla in such a manner as to deposit upon the bird’s head or insect’s back a mass of yellow pollen, part of which is sure to adhere to the stigma of the next flower visited. The honey glands of the sage are very productive, but the tube of the flower is narrow and difficult, prohibiting the passage of our substantial bumble bees. My suspicion fell upon these as the burglars, although they were equally plentiful in all the three gardens referred to, and the flowers had only been injured in one of them, because I had already observed that the bumbles treated the long spurs of yellow toadflax in similar unscrupulous fashion. My suspicion was con- firmed by detecting a bumble in the act upon a blue salvia. It may be objected that, after all, here is evidence, not so much of intelligence as of a keen scent for honey and a sharp pair of jaws. Quite so; but then why has the practice not become universal in the bees of all gardens? Moreover, in the summer of 1902, I found that the bumbles in my own garden had improved upon their earlier practice. For several years, the incision was made at the front of the throat of the flower, where the diameter of the tube is greatest. It seems to have dawned upon the bees that the shortest way is the best, because now they invariably bite through the side of the tube where the diameter is smallest. Yet in all the years that have elapsed since the introduction of the blue sage from Mexico, it is only some bumble bees 28 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. that have devised a summary access to the honey-glands, and of these bees, only a few have discovered the easiest method of entrance. Moreover, each generation of bees has to make the discovery for itself, for no bumble bee survives the winter to impart instruction to the coming generation, 3,—Is the conscious intelligence exoteric? In other words, is it the consequence of external and superior mandate or suggestion, acting upon a suitable physical recep- tacle ? This question leads upon ground upon which the light of scientific evidence has scarcely fallen as yet. In those remarkable chapters of the Book of Job, the 38th and three following ones, wherein the Lord answers Job out of the whirlwind, there is a great deal of reference to matter most interesting to the zoologist. They should be read, for lucidity, in the Revised Version :— ‘The wing of the ostrich rejoiceth. But are her pinions and feathers kindly (or like the stork’s)? For she leaveth her eggs on the earth, And warmeth them in the dust, And forgetteth that the foot may crush them, Or that the wild beast may trample them. She is hardened against her young ones, as if they were not hers; Though her labours be in vain, she is without fear; Because God hath deprived her of wisdom. Neither hath He imparted to her understanding.® Here the author of life is considered naturally as the source of consciousness, nor is any other source likely to suggest itself to one who feels that there must be a design- ing, controlling, and directing head of the universe. To expunge that factor from our speculations only lands us in darker perplexity. Yet of the nature of that Controlling Head, ‘‘ whom no man hath seen or can see,’’ and of the means whereby He may communicate mandates or inspire 8 Job xxxix., 13-17. 5 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 29 intelligence, we have nothing in the shape of evidence.9 Wherefore it may seem idle to propound a question to which no answer can be forthcoming. Howbeit, man’s curiosity is insatiable; a systematic and resolute attempt has been undertaken to fathom the abyss of supersensory phenomena. The late Mr Frederick Myers applied a disciplined intellect to the collation and analysis of hyperphysical experience. He was no dreamy enthusiast, subordinating his critical faculties to prepossession or emotional preconception; he was an advanced and erudite evolutionist, versed in the limita- tions of scientific inquiry, and applying its method to the elucidation of matters which most men of science dismiss either as illusory or outside and beyond the range of re- search. Few have been found so daring as to follow Mr Myers over the threshold of his laboratory, or even to grasp the reality of the enigma to which he addressed himself— not venturing to hope for a solution, only to detect a path which might lead to one; nevertheless, none who is con- scious, however dimly, of the presence of a psychical pro- blem, or who has speculated, however inconsequently, upon the phenomena of sympathy, suggestion, will, trance, and automatism, can fail to perceive in Mr Myers’s posthumous volumes! the direction in which advance must be made, if the road is not inexorably barred to human penetration. The inquiry is concentrated upon the spiritual part of the human animal. ‘‘ Human personality, as it has de- veloped from lowly ancestors, has become differentiated into two phases: one of them mainly adapted to material or planetary; the other to spiritual or cosmic operation;’’ and he proceeds upon the assumption that the first is the “ self,’’ of which every human being, from the West Australian savage to the veriest mondaine, is conscious; and that the second is a subliminal self, withdrawn from normal con- sciousness, below or behind the natural man or woman, distinct from the workaday intellect, and beyond the control 9 Doctrine—plenty of it; dogma—enough and to spare; but of evidence in the strict sense, not a jot. 10 Human Personality and its Survival of Bodily Death (2 vols.). 30 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. of the will except so far as the individual may deliberately suppress its monitions.1! Now, I have neither the wish nor the power to pronounce whether Mr Myers’s conclusions are soundly deduced from accumulated and well-sifted evidence, or whether they should be dismissed as plausible and seduc- tive hypothesis. But I will go so far as to suggest that, supposing Mr Myers to have touched a clue which may lead to proof of the existence of a subliminal self—the receptacle of the spirit of man—and that this spirit, as has been firmly believed by many persons in all ages, is sensible of and obedient to the promptings, injunctions, and warnings of an external power, further research may identify in creatures lower than man a subliminal self, similar in function and relation, though inferior in range, to that of man. Herein might be traced to their source the compliance of all animals with the rules which regulate their behaviour and habits; the secret impulse which causes the chaffinch to adhere, generation after generation, to one type of nest and the rook to another; and the impalpable currents of affection, fear, hate, and other psychical forces, which act independently of the intellect. It is difficult to explain the co-operative instinct of dog's as the mere outcome of co-ordinate, congenital activities. Through what avenue has a dog derived a sociable impulse so inveterate that, even when it is segregated from its own kind and adopts man as a comrade, it can do nothing alone? There are depraved dogs which will go hunting and marauding alone, but they are very rare; and perhaps are acting under some perverse suggestion that has found its way to their subliminal conscience. As a.rule, dogs will only hunt in couples, in packs, or singly when associated with a human master or mistress. From the stateliest deerhound to the puniest lap- dog, none will take exercise alone; provide an acceptable human companion, and the dog will travel all day. And sup- pose that it should ever be proved that dogs act according to 11 The most primitive races act in the belief that there is part of a man’s being beyond his body and his mind. Some of them dread suddenly rousing a person from his sleep, lest his soul be wandering, and, being unable to return in time, death should ensue immediately. ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 31 the mandate imposed upon their kind by a superior power, conveyed through a channel hitherto inscrutable, how could animals lower than dogs—hermit crabs, for example—be de- clared incapable of receiving similar supersensory stimulus ? In justice to Mr Myers’ memory, let it be said plainly that he never lent himself to any such hypothesis. On the con- trary, his whole treatise is confined to human personality, and, among human beings, only the elect, as it were; those who have begun to realise their latent privileges. He compares the process of supersensory development to the primitive stages of animal evolution, when the pigment spot on the skin of some rudimentary organism first became sensitised to light, and the creature received a novel sensation. The frontier between human beings and other creatures can only be drawn dogmatically and, so to speak, irrationally. Their characteristics and actions blend imperceptibly. Rather than accept Mr Myers’ exclusive doctrine, it is easier for minds accustomed to ponder upon the behaviour of animals to be frankly teleological, and to admit the probability of a Supreme Being and His invisible ministers communicating decrees through a medium of which none is more than dimly and speculatively conscious. Assuming a First Cause, instinctive activities in the lower animals may be regarded as the comparatively simple and intelligible results of forces initiated by him, acting unerringly in prescribed directions by means of co-ordinate organs modified by evolution. It is in accordance with the plan of nature that, in their performance of instinctive activities, certain insects should unconsciously take an indispensable part in the fertilisation of flowers specially adapted to take advan- tage of their visits. An extreme instance infinitely more he- wildering presents itself when the preservation of the race of both insect and plant depends upon the insect acting with as much circumspection and precision as could be shown by a human cultivator. Such is the well-known behaviour of the yucca moth (Pronuba vucasella). This insect haunts ex- clusively the flowers of the yucca, and, collecting pollen from one blossom, kneads it into a pellet which she carries by means of specially enlarged palps in her flight to another flower. 32 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. Here she pierces the pistil and deposits her eggs among the ovules or unfertilised seeds, and then swiftly runs to the top of the pistil and pushes the pollen-pellet into the wide mouth of the stigma. Observe, that without this interchange of offices between insect and plant, the race of each would cease to exist. It has been proved that the ovules cannot be fertilised unless pollen, preferably from another blossom, is intentionally inserted into the funnel of the stigma; if they were not so fertilised they would afford no food for the grubs of the ministering moth. When all goes well, the grubs eat about half the ovules, leaving a hundred or so to ripen as seeds, and to perpetuate the herb which is essential to the existence of the moth. It is difficult to recognise merely sentient automatism in the means by which this inter-depend- ence of host and guest is maintained, the action closely re- sembles that of effective consciousness. Yet if it be extrava- gant to attribute to the moth an understanding of vegetable physiology, what is left but to speculate upon the source whence the race of Pronuba derives the impulse directing each individual female moth to go through the very same complex performance? ‘‘ Amid the mysteries,’’ wrote Herbert Spencer, ‘‘ that become the more mysterious the more they are thought about, there will remain the one absolute certainty, that we are ever in the presence of an infinite and eternal energy, from which all things proceed.”’ ; Among those who have devoted their lives to probing the enigma of animal intelligence, none has done so with mere scrupulous industry in experiment and vigilant research than the late Henri Fabre. His years were prolonged so far hevond the usual span that it was his privilege, through reiterated »bservation, to check, recast, and, in some cases, to revoke his earlier impressions and conclusions. Focussing all his pene- (rating wits upon the insect world, he not only placed on record a detailed description of the routine behaviour of many genera and species, but also submitted to intense scrutiny the actions of individuals when placed in unfamiliar environment and abnormal circumstance. Fabre’s opportunity for this study was so favourable and prolonged—he turned it to such ad- mirable purpose by scientific method and untiring patience, 4 ANIMAL INTELLIGENCE. 33 that I am tempted to wind up this vaguely speculative paper by quoting a few sentences from his ‘‘ Memoires Entomo- logiques *’ :— ‘* Facts speak so loudly that I do not hesitate to translate their evidence as I understand it. In msect mentality we have to distinguish two very different domains. One of these is instinct properly so-called, the unconscious impulse that pre- sides over the most wonderful part of what the creature achieves. . . ._ It is instinct alone that makes the mother build for a family which she will never see; that counsels the storing of provisions for the unknown offspring; that directs the sting towards the nerve-centres of the prey and skilfully paralyses it, so that the game may keep fresh; that instigates, in fine, a host of actions wherein shrewd reason and consum- mate science would have their part, were the creature acting through discernment. This faculty is perfect of its kind from the outset, otherwise the insect would have no posterity. It is not free nor conscious in its practice any more than is the faculty of the stomach for digestion or that of the heart for pulsation. . . . But pure instinct, if it stood alone, would leave the insect unarmed in the perpetual conflict of circum- stance. No two moments in time are identical; though the background remains the same, the details change; the unex- pected rises on every side. In this bewildering confusion, a guide is needed to seek, accept, refuse, and select. . . This guide the insect undoubtedly possesses to a very manifest degree. It is the second province of its mentality. Here it is conscious and capable of improvement by experience. | dare not speak of this rudimentary faculty as_ intelligence, which is too exalted a title. I will call it discernment. : So long as we confound acts of pure instinct and acts of dis- cernment under the same head we shall fall back into those endless discussions which embitter controversy without bringing us one step nearer the solution of the problem. Is the insect conscious of what it does? Yes and no. No, if its action is in the province of instinct; yes, if the action is in that of discernment.’’!® 12 Bramble Bees and Others, by J. Henri Fabre, translated by A. Texeira de Mattos. 1915. 34 THe RuUTHWELL CROSS. 30th December, 1916. Chairman—Sir James CricHton-Browne, F.R.S., LL.D. The Ruthwell Cross in its Relation to other Monuments of the Early Christian Age. By W. G. CoLLInGwoop. The Ruthwell Cross (Fig. 1) is unique, as a design never exactly repeated; but it is only one of a class of monuments which must be studied together if any single example is to be understood at all. In this paper an attempt is made to con- dense the history of these monuments into a few pages, and to find the place of the Ruthwell Cross in the series. The illustrations, except Figs. 3, 29, 31, and 33, are from drawings by the writer, in some cases restoring fragments to suggest their original place in the design; for without such restoration fragments are meaningless. The blocks of Figs. 9, 18, 20, 22, 23, 26, 27, 29, 32, and 34 have been kindly lent by the Yorkshire Archeological Society ; those of Figs. 17 and 30 by the Thoresby Society ; those of Figs. 11, 12, 24, 28, 31, 33, and 36 by the Cumberland and Westmorland Antiquarian Society ; and those forming Fig. 3 by the Dean and Chapter of Durham, through Mr Thos. Caldcleugh. For these loans thanks are returned. Stones bearing the sign of the cross were not unknown abroad in the early Christian age, but there is no instance of the free-armed and ornamented cross-shaped monument until we come to the series now to be discussed. In Britain, pre- Anglian cross-marked monuments are represented by the rough Chi-Rho stones of Penmachno (North Wales), Whithorn, and Kirkmadrine, 5th to 7th centuries a.p. At Maughold, Isle of Man, are forms connecting these with Anglian monuments; but if they are really the parents of the tall cross, links to com- plete the evidence are wanting. In the north there were no skilled stone-carvers (after the Romans had gone) until the building of decorated churches by St. Wilfrid and Benedict Biscop—St. Andrew’s, Hexham, THE RUTHWELL CROSS. oe begun 672; St. Peter’s, Monkwearmouth, 675; St. Paul’s, Jarrow, consecrated 684. The cross set up by King Oswald at Heavenfield in 635 was of wood (Bede, H.E., iii., 2), per- haps suggested by the crosses of Columban Iona, where Oswald was educated (according to Skene, Celtic Scotland, ii., 154; and Adamnan, i., 1, seems to support the statement). At the time the crosses now seen at Iona had not been made; those mentioned by Adamnan appear to have been wooden, like all the early missionaries’ crosses. But these, and especi- ” ally Oswald’s ‘‘ sig-becun,’’ standard of victory, are likely to have beer imitated in stone, when stone-carving became pos- sible by the importation of craftsmen in 672 and later. Ameng the relics of St. Wilfrid’s Church at Hexham are parts of a slab (one piece at Hexham, two at Durham) carved with naked figures, animals and scrolls. I follow Professor Lethaby’s example (Arch@ol, Journ., 1xx., 157) in trying to restore these together, though my attempt comes out dif- ferent, owing to a difference in measurements (Fig. 2). Com- mendatore Rivoira thinks this slab a work of Wilfrid’s time (Lomb. Arch., English edition, 11., 143); to me it looks like Roman work from Corstopitum, whence Wilfrid’s builders took other stones. But it seems to show that decorative carving was used in the church. Its style, distantly derived from such work as the Ara Pacis Auguste of B.c. 15, 1s fol- lowed in the Hunter relief at Jarrow; and this slab, or other such, may have served as the first suggestion for the use of figure-scrolls in Anglian art. Some years, however, must have passed between the in- troduction of this kind of ornament into ecclesiastical work in Northumbria and the invention of the tall cross, to which it was applied. That the work was finely executed from the beginning—and we have no rude or tentative examples leading up to it—seems to show that it was, at first, some architect’s fortunate idea, upon which trained carvers were employed. The remains and their distribution indicate two early centres, one at Hexham and one more to the east; and the invention was probably made towards the close of the 7th century. The motives of patterns and the use of the chisel were imported, but not the general design of the cross as such; no foreign 36 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. workmen could have brought these designs ready-made from abroad, for no such crosses are known in. early Continental art. The Hexham school is represented by the famous Acca Cross (Fig. 3), now at Durham, but almost certainly the grave- stone of bishop Acca, who was buried at Hexham in 740 between ‘‘ two crosses of stone, ornamented with admirable carving,’’ as Symeon of Durham says (Hist. Reg., 740). Rivoira, who has upset many early dates formerly given to our relics, is ef opinion that this cross may be of the middle of the 8th century (Lomb. Arch., ii., 143). Its design is already on the way to a florid development of the simple Hexham motives, seen in the shaft now at the Spital, Hexham (Fig. 4), which is much more severe in treatment, and looks like an earlier work. But on one side it bears a Crucifixion, not unlike that at Ruth- well, which has been thought to mark a later period. Now, there are over twenty crucifixes on crosses of the 9th and 1oth centuries in Northumbria, showing that the subject became common, in very various forms of treatment of drapery and attitude. But the same variety is seen in still earlier work— e.g., 7th century Syrian bronze, fully draped (figured in Forrer, Reallexikon, p. 428); 7th or 6th century silver reliquary from Birka, Sweden, rudely ‘‘ stylised,’’ apparently with loin-cloth (ibid., p. 877); 6th century Monza, full tunic; 6th century Achmim, Egypt, nimbed figure between sun and moon, long drapery (ibid., p. 427); 6th century gold brooch, Rosenberg collection at Karlsruhe, nimbed figure between sun and moon and two thieves, full drapery (ibid., p. 427); 5th century, Sta. Sabina, Rome, naked figure with loin-cloth; 5th or 6th cen- tury, ivory box in the British Museum, naked figure nimbed, with loin-cloth (ibid., p. 427); early classic gem, British Museum, naked figure with loin-cloth on a T-cross (ibid., p- 427). These suggest that there is nothing impossible in dating the Hexham and Ruthwell crucifixes to the 8th century. The style of art arising at some other centre than Hexham, perhaps at one of Benedict’s foundations, is represented by a group of crosses in county Durham and north Yorkshire, probably contemporary with the earlier Hexham work. They connect with St. Cuthbert’s coffin, now at Durham, and pre- THE RUTHWELL CROSS. 37 sumably made in 698, bearing chisel-sketches of saints and angels with runic and Roman lettering of the type which may be assigned to the period. These figures are less elabo- rate than the carvings on stone, which could be carried farther in the way of finish; but they show the same subjects and the same feeling as can be seen on a shaft at St. Andrew’s, Auck- land (Fig. 5). And together with the angels, and saints AND(reas) and PA(ulu)S, this shaft bears scrolls of leaves and fruit, with animals and an archer, all very carefully drawn and executed, without the ready-made conventions of a fully developed style. It looks like a rather early work of its kind. At Croft, near Darlington, a cross-shaft (Fig. 6) shows animal scrolls on two sides, and on the third a very dainty leaf scroll; but on the fourth, a plait ingeniously woven of one continuous thread into an elaborate pattern. Now just as the scrolls are from foreign art, so are these plaits; they were common to the ornament of the period throughout Christen- dom. But they changed from age to age, and their changes as seen in Italian architectural carving supply means for checking the development in Britain. A few instances, given in Fig. 7, with Rivoira’s dating, will show how the simple braids of Roman ornament, imitated in stone-reliefs in the sixth century in Ravenna work, became more elaborate in the plait of about 737 at Cividale (Lomb. Arch., i., 102), formed, like the Croft plait, of one continuous strap. About that time a second member is seen, making an easier design, in the Valpolicella figure-of-8 threaded on an open twist (ibid., i., 144); and the surface-covering in linked squares at Toscanella, commoner in the goth century, is dated by Rivoira as early as 739 (ibid., i., 126). Entering the 9th century, we find the contrast of rectilinear and curved forms at Cattaro, 809 (ibid., i., 157), and at St. Apollinare in Classe, Ravenna (ibid., i., 139); that is to say, the design, as an intellectual feat, is sim- plified and greater picturesque effect is gained at a small ex- pense. In the 11th century we have plaits of many members —easy to draw, as compared with the early entanglements of continuous cords or straps—at Montefiascone (ibid., i., 212), and the repetition at St. Ambrogio, Milan, of ring-knots 38 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. (i., 205, 233-4)—a very easy pattern, though requiring neat- ness and skill to draw with regularity. This development of plaits only follows the usual course of art history—simple motives; ingenious elaboration; and then devices to give rich effect with saving of intellectual labour. The first step in labour-saving was to introduce the second member in a plait, which in Italy was known by the middle of the 8th century. Now, allowing time for the arrival of fresh ideas in Britain by the import of decorated objects and the observations of travellers, we get an independent means of dating design in our island. The continuous plaits of the finest Anglian crosses must be roughly of the first half of the 8th century; the plaits imitating them, but of two mem- bers, of the second half of that century. Angular plaits and freer treatment come into use during the goth, and the ring- knot and other easy devices in the roth and 11th centuries. None of the fine figured crosses we class as Anglian bear the later kind of plaits; none of those we class as Viking Age bear the elaborated symmetrical plaits of the Anglian. The Croft continuous plait is of early 8th century type; the Bewcastle two-member plait is of late 8th century type. And the analogy of the Ruthwell Cross to Bewcastle Cross suggests a similar date. Hackness Cross (Fig. 8) is inscribed in memory of an Abbess Ethelburga; which of three named in history is not certain (see Searle, 4.-S. Bps., Kings, and Nobles, pp. 282-3, and his references). But it must have been made in the Anglian age, because the nunnery, founded 680, was burnt by the Danes in 869, and not restored until after the Norman Conquest. The Normans would not have dedicated a cross to an Anglo-Saxon saint with such words as ‘‘ May thy houses [nunneries] ever be mindful and love thee, most loving mother. Holy Abbess Ethelburga, pray for us!’’ The cross is therefore pre-Danish, and its severe scroll and continuous plait suggest the middle of the 8th century. Of about this time there is a coin of King Eadberht (737-758) with’ a beast grotesquely kicking up its hind-leg. It may have had some significance; but the same idea is repeated on the shortest of the crosses at Ilkley Church (Fig. THE RUTHWELL CROSS. 39 g), as Mr George Benson, of York, first pointed out to me. This shaft bears also a saint with a book and other figures of animals of imaginary but graceful forms, which seem to be a later, but not very much later, development of the beasts of Auckland and Croft. This stone, therefore, I should place rather late in the 8th century. A cross-shaft with similar beasts can be put together from fragments at Aldborough Museum and Cundall, as Mr G. W. Haswell, of Chester, first observed. The restored part of the shaft is 8 feet high; there was at least one panel beneath, and the whole makes a very fine monument, though the human figures are too defaced to be explained. Among the beasts of the graceful Anglian type, monstrosities, but still drawn with some notion of animal form, is one reaching down its head between its forepaws to bite at berries. Later on, we find at Collingham a stone (Fig. 26) with a beast in the same attitude, but drawn in a style and associated with ornament of the oth century; it is a survival of this Aldborough motive, because the meaning of the action is lost—the beast at Collingham has no berries to bite. The Aldborough shaft is therefore earlier, and no doubt of the 8th century, but late in that century, by the loose design of the plaits. The ‘‘ impost capitals ’’ of the architecture to the figure-panels are in the shape of which Rivoira (Lomb. Arch., passim) gives examples of the 5th and 6th centuries ranging from Jerusalem to Grenoble; the fashion seems to have died out during the period in which Anglian crosses were made; and the appearance of these capitals ’’ on a cross adds a reason for dating it to the Anglian age. To take another line of evidence. The Ormside Cup in the York Museum bears on its sides (Fig. 11) bird-scrolls like those of Croft and other Anglian crosses. The base (Fig. 12) has been roughly patched; but the rim has been carefully repaired, after damage, with work which Mr E. Thurlow Leeds, F.S.A., of the Ashmolean Museum, Oxford, has shown to be of the period about goo a.p. (Liverpool Annals of Archeol., March, 1911). This means that it was old by that time, and consequently a work of the Anglian age. Its pat- terns, seen on crosses, fix them to that period. The bosses and ae impost 40 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. knots of the base are those of the Northallerton Cross (Fig. 13), which bears also scrolls, developed from the Hexham Spital type, and two unusual motives—a key-pattern and a chevron border. The chevron is seen also in crossheads at Ripon and Carlisle, and in the very beautiful ‘‘ Loaves and Fishes ’’ cross at Hornby, in North Lancashire (Fig. 14), with a bit of inscription in Anglian minuscules, and rather late Anglian plaits, but no scroll-work. One of the finest Yorkshire crosses was that at Otley (Fig. 15, restored from four fragments). It combines most of the motives so far noticed; and what remains of the group of the monk kneeling before the angel holding a cross (the foot of which is seen) is beautifully carved. The scroll-work is fine and bold, derived from Hexham, but developed, as it would be, towards the end of the 8th century. We have already collected enough examples—though these are a very small part of the whole mass of remains— to show that Northumbria in the 8th century was the home of a considerable school of decorative art. To form such a school there must be circumstances favourable to their work. If the picture usually drawn of Anglian history is true—Rivoira sums it as “‘ discord, revolt, and slaughter; fire, pestilence, famine ’’ (Lomb, Arch., ii., 155)—how could the favouring cir- cumstances be found? Closer knowledge of the period shows that it was really an age of peace and plenty, following an era of great activity in the 7th century. The few wars were mainly victorious, and the troubles of the royal families—for late in the 8th century there were two rival dynasties—do not seem to have affected the people in general. There were court intrigues and faction fights between the retainers of the royal houses; but the real ruler of the people was the Church, and its organisation con- tinued unbroken. The Church was patron of the arts, espe- cially of monumental sculpture. Many of the sites where crosses of this age are found are known to have been abbeys; and as persons of importance were usually buried at abbeys, it is probable that all Anglian crosses were set up as memorials at some kind of religious house. And the activity THE RUTHWELL CROSS. 41 and culture of the Church in that period can be seen in its literature. The 8th century began with Bede and ended with Alcuin. The school of York was the greatest ‘‘ university ’’ in Europe; it supplied books to Charlemagne’s library and taught theology, letters, and law before the schools of Paris and Bologna had arisen. It sent missionaries to pagan Ger- many. It eclipsed even Iona, the most venerable of early schools in the West. In native poetry the century produced work of great in- terest and variety. Beowulf ‘‘ may have been composed as early as the middle of the 7th century, but was written down perhaps some 50 years later, . . its original language was the Anglian, i.e., the Northern variety of the Anglo-Saxon speech ’’ (Professor Sedgefield, Beowulf, xliii). The Christ of Cynewulf is a still more wonderful production. ‘‘ Critics are at one in placing the ‘ floruit ’ of its poet during the second half of the eighth century ’’ (Professor Gollancz, Cynewulf’s Re RtISi XXi1.). Now, one of Cynewulf’s poems—for The Dream of the Cross is the introduction to his Elene, a poem on the dis- covery of the true cross by St. Helena—is quoted on the - Ruthwell Cross. This shows that the cross-designers were people of culture, and English by nationality ; they were aware of the association of the two arts of sculpture and literature ; they practised, or at least patronised, both. And it gives evidence of the date of the cross; for the poem must have been in its fresh vogue when it was thought worthy of illus- tration in stone. Before the time when doubt was thrown by Signor Rivoira and Professor Cook upon the old dating of the Bew- castle and Ruthwell crosses, most of us accepted the idea that they were both of the period of King Ecgfrith; for the Bew- castle cross seemed to state that ‘‘ in the first year of King Ecgfrith ’’ (670-71) it was erected. We owe a great debt to both these scholars for re-opening the question. The date must now be shifted, but I suggest that the later part of the eighth century satisfies the requirements in both cases. On the Bewcastle Cross (Fig. 16) the Falconer would be 42 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. possible after about 750 (Prof. A. S. Cook, Date of the R. and B. Crosses, pp. 63-64). The sun-dial was known, though not so common as it became on church doors in the 11th century ; there was one at Housesteads Roman fort (now in Chesters Museum) which might even have been visible to people of the time. The chequers are unusual, in ornament of this age, but not without some parallels; panels divided up into squares: are seen in the Gospels of MacRegol, Durrow, and Treves (Westwood, Min. and Ornts., pl. 4, 16, 20), and the Book of Durrow has a panel of crosslets, set in lines coloured alter- nately (ibid., pl. 6), recalling the crosslets at Irton (Fig. 24), alternately raised and sunk. The draught-board (A.-S., Tefl, from tabula) was known; part of one was found in a hoard of about 200 A.D. at Vimose in Denmark, and is now in the Copenhagen Museum. Moreover, true chequers like those of Bewcastle are actually seen on a stone, formerly a monument or ornament at Hexham Church, now taken to Durham (Stuart, Sc. Stones of Scotland, i1., pl. xciv., 1; Durham Cath. Lib. Cat., No. x., p. 65); ard this, whether of Roman or Anglian origin, must have been known to the Bewcastle designer. These considerations suggest that an experiment in design was made at Bewcastle; and, considering the variety and fer- tility of Anglian art, this would not be surprising. We have already seen the chevron in Figs. 13 and 14, notwithstanding the common belief that it was much later; but we find no acanthus at Bewcastle and Ruthwell, and the names in the inscriptions show no Danish and Norman forms. The whole design is in the spirit and style of other Anglian crosses. The figure-drawing is fine in its way, but not finer than that of Otley or Easby (Fig. 17) on a stone which bears also scrolls and plaits, and perhaps could be built up with other stones still in the walls of the church to make a fairly complete cross (Fig. 18), sharply contrasting in its grace and refinement with the very different style of the 1oth century as seen in the example from Ellerburn given along with it. If there is any reason in the rule about pluits which we have discussed, these symmetrical, two-member plaits are of the second half of the 8th century. The scrolls are not the THE RUTHWELL Cross. 43 Hexham scrolls of the Spital (Fig. 4), nor even the more advanced scrolls of the Acca cross (Fig. 3); but they seem to be of Hexham origin, further developed; and the nearness of Bewcastle to Hexham suggests a possible influence. But if so, and if the names can be still read as referring to Alchfrith and his contemporaries of a century earlier, we have the ex- planation from Hackness, where a cross seems to have been put up, not as the gravestone of Abbess Ethelburga, but some time—probably a long time—after her death, as a memorial. The runes of Bewcastle and Ruthwell have been well dis- cussed by Messrs Forbes and Dickins (Burlington Magazine, April, 1914), with the conclusion that they are 8th century. As to the argument drawn from the word ungget on the Ruthwell Cross, Professor Cook (op. cit., 35/247) sums it in these words :—‘‘ The evidence favours a late period rather than an earlier, (1) because the only other occurrence of the word is in a text with late spellings, (2) because -et, the ending in both examples of the word, seems late, as if due to lack of - stress, and (3) because the sculptor makes two blunders in one word, showing perhaps that it was specially unfamiliar when he worked.’’ In Fig. 1 I give the word enlarged, near its place on the shaft. The blunder is apparent; the materials for deciding the point are slight ; whatever weight it may carry must be balanced against the evidence in the opposite scale. Any traces of a wheel to the head of Ruthwell Cross I have been unable to find on the original, after careful search. The ‘‘ three cuts ’’ mentioned by Dr King Hewison are below the point where a Celtic wheel would spring ; they are damage to the slightly projecting offset of the base of the head, which is still seen on the west side, but effaced in the view from the east. This offset is common in rather later Anglian cross- heads, probably originating in the ‘‘ eaves ’’ or dripstore moulding given to the head when it was affixed as a separate stone, to prevent rain from driving in and frost from prising off the head; from cross-heads re-used for building we often find this offset and the lateral arms knocked off. The restorer who inserted the present cross-arms did not quite understand the construction of a head of this type, and has given one pair of cusps too many. Fig. 1 shows the usual construction, 44 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. which I think is also more graceful; and the style of the missing arms may have been more like those shewn in Fig. 19; at any rate, the archer was probably shooting at a bird (or beast) in the panel at which he aims. - Under the St. John I think we can read ‘* ADORAMUS IN(itium) ET F(ine)M,’’ recalling the formula of the lately re- discovered stone at Kirkmadrine and others. The sketch of the loose fragment (to twice the scale of the cross) is added, because it looks like an ornamented door-jamb of the late Anglian period, and tempts the suggestion that there was a stone church here, perhaps rather later than the cross. The place was not called ‘‘ Ruthwell ’’ in those days; it is a Viking Age name; and this makes the search for records of any forn- dation by no means easy. But Ruthwell was not chen in the Scotland of that age; it was in the land of the Cumbri, which had been annexed by the Northumbrian Angles. In 750, King Eadberht, whose coin has been mentioned, took Kyle from the Strathclyde Britons (Bedae continuatio), and on August ist, 756, he and Aengus, King of Picts, in alliance entered Dumbarton (Symeon Durh., Hist. Reg., 756). Though the conquering army met with some disaster ten days later, the Northum- brians did not relax their hold on the south-west of what is now Scotland; there is no trace of any return of the Cumbri to power (Skene, Celt. Scot., i., 296), nor of any great move of Celts against Angles, until Kenneth MacAlpin, a century later, invaded ‘‘ Saxonia’’—the Lowlands—and _ burnt Dunbar and Melrose. Even later (Sym. Durh., Hist. Recap., 854) Lindisfarne diocese included Melrose, Edinburgh, and Abercorn; and in the west, the last Anglian bishop of Whit- horn held his post until 802, the year in which Iona was first burnt by Vikings, and no doubt the whole coast threatened. In view of this 8th century settlement of Angles through- out the Lowlands, we should expect many traces of their presence beside the Ruthwell Cross. | These traces exist. They have been illustrated in Stuart’s Sculptured Stones and Romilly Allen’s Early Christian Monuments, but I do not know that they have been clearly disentangled from the rude stones of earlier age and the Celtic and Scandinavian monu- THE RUTHWELL Cross. 45 ments of later period. These remains lie along or near the Roman roads in most cases, as do the earlier monuments in England, for the Roman roads were the ordinary routes of travel through a country then chiefly wild. Following the east coast, we find Anglian stones at Coldingham and Aber- lady; along the road from Redesdale over the Cheviots, the fine work of Jedburgh, and decadent Anglian at Lasswade and Abercorn. By the road north from Carlisle, at Hoddom there was an abbey very rich in monuments—the stone now at Edinburgh seems to connect with the early 9th century style of Heysham, near Lancaster, and in Fig. 19 I attempt to restore three crosses from the photograph in Early Christian Monts. of Scotland of fragments at Knockhill. At Thornhill are late Anglian stones, some from Closeburn and Glencairn, and at Cairn in Ayrshire is another. These shew that the Ruthwell Cross does not stand alone, though it happens to have been preserved while others have been ruined. But in order to show reasons for giving so early a date to this Cross, we must pursue the history a little further, illustrating the styles of the later periods to which it has sometimes been attributed. Early in the ninth century the political and social decad- ence of Northumbria began to set in; and the crosses showing Anglian tradition still unbroken, but degenerating, seem to find their place between 800 and 867, when the Danes in- vaded. After that, there was a period of transition until the Anglo-Danish or Viking Age style began to find itself, about 925. During the 11th century influences from the South of England modified the Viking art; and when the Norman con- quest was complete the old monuments were thought, as the Norman abbot Paul of St. Alban’s (1077-1088) called them, ‘‘ rudes et idiotae,’’ and often broken up to be built into new church walls, from which many have been recovered. Fig. 20 represents the shaft at Collingham with the Apostles, drawn in the style of 9th century Anglo-Saxon book illustration. Fig. 21 gives the parts of three shafts in Halton church, near Lancaster; the first rather debased from Otley (Fig. 15), but repeating the motive of a figure kneeling before an angel, who here holds a tablet or Book of Remembrance. 46 THe RuTHWELL Cross. This is repeated, still further debased, in the next shaft, which also repeats the seated saint, with a curious blunder in confusing the cross he holds with the fold in his drapery below it. The third shaft bears an archer, with late Anglian ornament, and figure-groups—Christ healing a woman and the Three Children in the Furnace—in the drawing of an age when the classical models were not entirely forgotten, but. were not so closely followed as at Bewcastle and Ruthwell. The same style is seen in the Madonna shaft at Dewsbury (Fig. 22); the Virgin and Child are already portrayed on St. Cuthbert’s coffin; the Loaves and Fishes at Hornby; and here we have the Miracle at Cana, with a scroll .bviously derived, but debased, from Hexham. The tendency in scroll-design was naturally to nake it looser in wide panels, and stiffer in running patterns; to lose _ its early naturalism and to make both plant-form and animal- form less graceful and more “‘ stylised.’’ This is seen in the second shaft at Ilkley church (Fig. 23) and in the perfectly preserved cross at Irton, Cumberland (Fig. 24). This had an inscription in which Anglian runes could formerly be read: one of its plaits resembles one at Bewcastle with the double-bead of the strap interwoven; its key-pattern recalls Northallerton; its chequers, in which plain squares are re- placed by crosslets, show an attempt to improve upon the Bewcastle chequers. But we cannot, on that account, take it out of the Northumbrian series, into which it fits as a 9th century work. The Irton stiff scroll, still further tightened and stiffened, appears in the tallest Ilkley cross (Fig. 25), now carrying a head (from Middleton Hall, formerly at Ilkley church), which is of the period, if not the original head to this shaft. The attempt to vary the scrolls shows the striving for new and more piquant effect, characteristic of decadence; the figures are very conventional, though finely decorative, already a long way from Ruthwell and Bewcastle. This cross must be of about the middle of the 9th century, not long before the Danish invasion of 867. It has been supposed that the Danes would have de- stroyed the Ruthwell cross, if it had existed in their day. THE RUTHWELL Cross. 47 They certainly destroyed, in their first onslaught, the abbeys and churches of central and east Yorkshire and County Durham; but the Archbishop of York found a secure refuge no farther away than Addingham, in Wharfedale, until the time, only twelve years after the first invasion, when the Danes elected a Christian king. Meanwhile, in 875-6 they raided Northumberland, burnt Carlisle, and marched through Dum- friesshire, no doubt by the Roman road, to attack the Strath- clyders and the Picts of Galloway; but they made no stay in these parts, for in 876 Halfdan dealt out the lands of North- umbria (i.e., part of Yorkshire and Durham) to his followers, and they thenceforth continued ploughing and tilling them, as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle says. In the raid to the north- west most likely they sacked Hoddom, but probably passed Ruthwell, off the main line, unnoticed. Early raids, like Robert Bruce’s in Cumberland, kept pretty closely to the roads, and did not spread out widely over the country. Now, when the Danes settled down and continued ploughing and tilling, they very soon adopted the manners and religion of che country. They must have required monu- ments for their dead, when they were once converted. They did not, like the Normans, bring in a ready-made art of masonry, though they had their own style in wood-carving (e.g., the grotesque figures in the Tune ship, dated by Dr Haakon Schetelig to about this time, Tuneskibet, Kristiania, 1917, p. 10) and metal-work. Any monuments they set up must have been made by such Anglian workmen as remained (for the Angles were not exterminated, though the best work- men seem to have left the country; there are traces of their emigration to the Pictish North), gradually assimilating Danish and Scandinavian taste, and creating the art of the Viking Age. And even monuments to Angles under Danish rule must have approximated more and more to Danish ideas of art. For example, the cross at Collingham to Erswith (the false reading ‘‘ Onswini’’ has obscured the dating) shows scroll-work debased into straps (Fig 26) and beasts which, though Anglian in origin, are becoming roth century dragons. 48 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. The one with its head down we have already noticed in con- nection with the Cundall-Aldborough shaft. This is obvi- ously a post-Anglian but pre-Viking Age work, and of the late gth century. At Kirkby Wharfe (Fig. 27) is a cross with late, expanded arms to the head; this expansion went on till at Whithorn we find the arm-ends nearly meeting, and thus forming a wheel. The arrangement of plaits in the centre of the head to side a was repeated through south-west Yorkshire, and car- ried to the Isle of Man, where it was adopted by that remark- able artist, Gaut Bjarnarson. The step-pattern and TILT, the ring in the plait of side c, the basket-plait and joined triquetrae, are all what became common in the roth century ; but the figures of SS. Mary and John beside the cross are of Anglian tradition. |The cross is transitional between late Anglian and Viking, and of about goo a.p. The same mixture of forms is seen in the shaft at Urswick-in-Furness (Fig. 28), which ‘‘ Tunwini set up in memory of Toroeotred (? Torhtred),’’ as the inscription in early runes states. Across the late rude figures is written “‘ Lyl this wo(rhte?) ’’—Lyl wrought this (?)—and the scroll, with its grotesque figures, birds and beasts, shows the Anglian tradition far gone in decay. It cannot be 12th century, for we know the history of Urswick after Domesday Book, and no such names occur. It must be of about goo A.D. or a little later. The stone found by Mr George Benson at St. Mary Bishophill Junior, York, built into the early Norman fabric (Fig. 29), shows the scroll turning into the ‘‘ snake-sling ’’ of the Viking Age; the berries dropped off and treated as pellets, and the leaves becoming snakes’ heads. In the 1oth century basket-plait a snake is inserted. The well-known Lancaster cross-head in the British Museum is another example, a little further developed, of the same transition, though its early runes record a purely Anglian name, Cynibald, son of Cuth- bert. The change in style was conditioned by period, not by race. In the Leeds cross (i'ig. 30) we have the debased Anglian scroll (6, 8), the plaits of the 10th century (16, 20), grotesque THE RUTHWELL CROSS. 49 evangelists (5, 13, 15), perhaps copied from an Irish book (the first trace, so far, of Celtic art in England), and the legend of Wayland Smith (21, 25) already portrayed on the North- umbrian Franks casket in the British Museum, a work of the 8th or goth century, and retold in the Vélundarkvida, the earliest poem of the Edda, dating to about goo. This cross, dating to about 920, 1s fully discussed in Vol. xxii. of the Thoresby Society’s Miscellanea. After this, in Northumbria, the Viking Age style formed such monuments as those at Dearham, Cumberland (Fig. 31), Stonegrave, Yorkshire (Fig. 32), and Gosforth, Cumberland (Fig. 33). The last, beautiful in its spiry proportions (144 feet high) and interesting in its illustration.of the Edda poem known as the Véluspd, current at the close of the roth cen- tury, is identical in style with stones recovered from the 12th century foundations of Gosforth church, and must therefore be considerably older than the church; it must be of about 1000 A.D. The style of these crosses was the style of the period in the North; any cross raised at Ruthwell in this age by North country people must have been of this type, which was carried to the countries in touch with Viking Age North- umbria and produced their 11th century designs. But in the South of England the older traditions derived from Northumbria lingered, developing into forms different from 8th and oth century Anglian. In stones of the Wilt- shire group, there are at Britford rings in the plait, not earlier than 1oth century; at Ramsbury, rings and roth century dragons; at Bradford-on-Avon, key-patterns of the 11th cen- tury, and Rivoira dates the architecture to about 1066-1086. The scrolls of Ramsbury are not volutes, but series of rings, unlike any Anglian scrolls, but like some Italian 11th century ornament. Now, if St. Dunstan, a Wessex man, designed Ruthwell Cross, he would have illustrated the style of his age; he could only have planned Ruthwell Cross, as we see it, by going back on the progress of art for two centuries and find- ing models in the North of England. What was being done in the time of King Knut in the North is shown by the Nunburnholme shaft (Fig. 34); the hands holding the arches are of the Viking Age; the local Jar] 50 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. in his helmet, sitting on a stool, is of that time; but the she- centaur with an imp clinging to her back looks like the reminiscence of a motive from Roman sculpture seen abroad. Of Edward the Confessor’s period we have the Halton shaft (Fig. 35), imitating, with a difference, some of the features of earlier crosses at the same place (Fig. 21), but illustrating the story of Sigurd the V6lsung and Regin the smith,-a legend which became popular in the 11th century, and is also illustrated upon Manx stones. After this, the making of tall crosses as memorials appears to have passed out of fashion in Northumbria; the art had already moved away to Wales, Man, Scotland, and Ireland, where it grew into the well-known Celtic forms. And if runes are used in this period, they are the later Scandinavian runes, not those of early Anglian type. Finally, on the Bridekirk font (Fig. 36) of the late 12th century late runes record Richard, the carver; and the ornament is strikingly different from that of Ruthwell. The Anglian series (to sum up my argument) includes a considerable number of monuments, ranging geographically from the Humber to the Forth; that is to say, co-extensive with the 7th and 8th century Anglian kingdom. The group is not well known except to the few who have studied it, and still awaits full illustration and description. No wonder then that foreign critics have overlooked its character as a dis- tinctive school of art. But most English students recognise that it is marked off from Anglo-Danish or Anglo-Norse work by the complete absence of “‘ snake-slings,’’ of basket-plait and other simple plaits, of late runes, and of the sketchy handling of stone-carving in the Viking Age; it is d'stin- guished from 12th century sculpture by its more restrained design, by the absence of acanthus in all forms, by a much less laboured technique, and by the inscriptions, which con- tain no Danish or Norman names. Anglian ornament, as all who are accustomed to design must observe, has a style of its own. It is based on scrolls, plaits, and figures derivable from Roman and Italian sources, earlier or contemporary, and develops along the lines of development in Italy. Some few motives (sun-dial, chequers, chevrons), which have been THE RUTHWELL CROSS. 5 thought to be later, can be classed as experimental, and were borrowed from existing models. The principal motives are seen in some contemporary local work, as the Ormside Cup, St. Cuthbert’s coffin and coins. Certain Anglian monuments (as Hackness, Urswick) can be shown on historical grounds to be earlier than the Danish conquest. Others have been taken from Norman walls, where they were used as building material; the style by then being extinct. No Anglian frag- ments are known at abbey or church sites which were first founded after the Norman conquest. As to typological development, I have tried to shew that the Anglian cross must have been designed, late in the 7th century, from materials accessible in the Tyne and Wear valleys; that it travelled in every direction, during the 8th century, throughout the area then Northumbrian; that in the gth century its art followed the decadence of the nation, and at the Danish conquest passed naturally through transitional forms, providing material for the design of the Viking Age in Britain and influencing styles of art abroad. Against all this there stands the linguistic argument, which suggests a later development. The difficulty is not unique ; for example, in Manx monuments, typologists like Dr Schetelig seem to date changes about a century earlier than Philologists like Dr Brate. The typologist is tempted to believe that his materials are the more complete and his method not less scientific; but no doubt the antinomy is one which is not insoluble. In the middle of the 12th century an artist designing a cross at Ruthwell, if he were English or continental, would have illustrated the newer art of his time. A Scot would have elaborated the interlacing and key-pattern of such stones as the famous cross-slab at Nigg, or carved the figures of St. Andrews. A Manxman would have made a Norse cross; and an Irishman, one of the colossal Monasterboice type. None of these would have gone back to the old Northumbrian art and literature, reproducing them with exactitude. There are medizval forgeries of charters, and modern reconstructions of antiquities; but if the history of monumental art was as we have traced it, the Ruthwell Cross cannot be a “‘ fake ’’ of by THE RUTHWELL CROSS. the 12th, or even the roth, century. It takes its place in the Anglian series, a little later than we formerly supposed, but still in the same period. Why it was set up, to whom, or in memory of what event is a question that might perhaps be answered if we knew something of Dumfriesshire in the 8th century, under the Kings Alchred and Elfwald the pious (765-788) and Bishop Cynewulf of Lindisfarne (740-780). But the chronicles and the Cross are silent on this point, and too many guesses have been made already by those who have attempted to assign monuments to the persons we know in history. P.S.—Since the above was in the printers’ hands Profes- sor Albert S. Cook has kindly sent me his review of Bishop Browne’s book on ‘‘ The Ancient Cross Shafts of Bewcastle and Ruthwell’’ (Modern Language Notes, Johns Hopkins Press, June, 1917, pp. 354-366), and I wish to affirm my respectful agreement with the methods of research formulated by Professor Cook, while differing from him in conclusions. ‘“ These crosses,’’ he repeats on p. 361 from a previous paper, ‘““must be dated by ecclesiastical stone sculpture whose approximate period is beyond reasonable doubt.’’ Certainly ! Anglian ornament has no true analogy in the twelfth century, but close parallels in Italian details of the eighth and ninth. The argument from language cannot be denied; but as the Northumbrian dialect underwent changes earlier than the West Saxon (zbid., pp. 356-357), I ask whether the materials existing are sufficient to prove that these changes did not begin before the Danish invasion. And, finally, I beg those who discuss the two better known monuments to study the rest. The problem of Ruthwell and Bewcastle is not solved by a theory which fails to explain the great series as a whole. THE RUTHWELL Cross. 53 eetee, EIST) \GNAHT HIS YOLWATYS-OLUSS- SCSPAVLVS ‘f m ral Pa) SAT EEVETT UBSIYI + FONE Fragment from the churchyard Tue RuTHWELL CROSS. : eS eS =F =F 23 ~ = (Ee = Saco Ne — “Sp RS F —_ is 2. Restoration of Fragments : — (a) at Hexham Church ; (b and c) now at Durham. THE RUTHWELL CROSS fer gh see ama?) MUP EUAATPAT NR peor e T == TN og fae ee nti tie ie ’ ee 3. The Acca Cross: drawn by W. G. Footitt. 56 THE RUTHWELL CROSS. Gt lh SB & ' NE Sr 3 Wet Zoos & tet aS gx 5 N Zs IN 6 <§ \ iN ES PERT VELECQE ALLELES Cross-shaft at St. Andrew’s, Auckland. 5. 4. Cross-shaft at the Spital, Hexham. 5% ie OROSS: m THE RUTHWI : wy ‘CZ =. © UU CAML WYLZ; aS SS “WOVSUILIVG reou ¢ Jo. ID ye qUSUIBeI IWeYS “9 A M We SLAY Seen = ss = = SSS We \ > = = SS IS yp md 58 THe RuTHWELL Cross. SA Valpolicella \ ciborium ,712-740 EXE , il \€ San Pietro, Toscanella, - ges l= E = sas] dated by Riveira 739; ace a MP la (pattern common in gth cent.) Cattaro (Ravenna or Comacine work) 80g. S. Apollinare in Classe, . cabhorium, 9th cent. Sant’Ambrogio PS Milan, 11th cent. AOI OAS Romeciagened 7. Plaits in Italian Church Architecture dated by Comm. Rivoira. = fe iy ‘4s Bo YN Ae ee SSAGESE TS . (North) THE RUTHWELL CROSS. 59 eon lB 4 2 * é 4 ta 4 “ Le J 4 Io : 3 aS é PtP PAE RAL |” = VR (A > yo if mance n® ~ e7 en er ae = 86 tae + ame nwasvaanran SSQUSAN Sas Se oF 5 c wt t's FS, Jo rh RR erst Tr > ee FIVIILINN ‘pasIaTaIS ILKL&Y CH.. 23. The Second Cross-shaft at likley. RUTHWELL CROSS. THE wat — en a ee. ae agit was val || 24. Cross at Irton (Cumberland). “ t™~- CROSS. RUTHWELL 4 Tut WER Y IL SSS SSS aft \. << RS: LOSS SO San N\ \ Ss NW, \" \\ I 3\ Dy the head from Middleton with 25. The Tallest Cross at Ilkley Church, Hall, 76 THE RUTHWELL Cross. THT Sy een uibMmiiM tat ir] I iP : iit SSN SS i lay Thieninn > oT] 0 4) COLLINGHAM. f SSS SSS" \ =} E> LIP Sz iy t™~ l~ LiGROSS: e UTHWI R THI i ’ ' ! ' ‘ 1 ’ ’ ' ' ‘ ‘ ----55. ites p PIR an BY ARO - ’ i ‘ross, Urswick-in-Furness. on 8. The ** Tunwini ») LL CROSS. THE RuTHWI fe “WOSPEAL “AL Sq “070 “yuoX ‘rorunge [piydoystg Arey “49 4e quow Seay SSOL) “6G THE RUTHWELL CROSS. 79 BS Ww hinges, Gof Pye” | A shin fo -? i & lS xs ws - A PP ZN a 2 7 " . . NY ‘ io | an { . ¥/ 4 Some ‘Ff 7 oF ely iif, SEAN BA; ‘ UG) Ly, S Lipa ' Log 209. Cross-shaft at Leeds Parish Church, 80 We ate Rey. ss at Dearham (Cumberland). 31. Cro Drawn by the | F.S.A. Calverley. S. RUTHWELL Cross. ‘THE STONEGRAVE (Cumberland). W.S. Calverley. at Gosforth 33 Cross 32. Cross at Stonegrave (Yorks.). Drawn by the Rev. 82 THE RurHWELL CFOSS. en LMM Hin He Hiatal \ i yy ang (a i! {hy AW See) TEN oe f \ gers the MeL IBA Walling sme Ae il oa io Bh wil) 7 CREEL A &: i Hi! Hh 1 fil 1 ; Btn) |), yosemite Hl | ae TUNA Hany i | Nd) er Ke Hl i, | | i] Waitt I | iH | iil hin | il i} WT | | \ Ul 34. Cross-shaft at Nunburnholme (Yorks.). 83 ‘THe RUTHWELL CROSS. ate ° SEE SESE. SESS, ( *SOUBT] ) “OI, eA “Tye (lle ., Ma y ; YYZ e (if. ys SSO.1) (a3 pumsis ,, ou] 4 Daten eae 84 THe RuTHWELL CROSS. 36. The Font, Bridekirk (Cumberland). EARLY SHERIFF CourRT Book oF DUMFRIES. 85 12th January, 1917. Chairman—G. M‘LrEop Stewart, V.P. Sheriff Court Book of Dumfries (2nd October, 1537- 3lst July, 1538), By Sir Puitie J. HAamittTon-GRIERSON. Me INTRODUCTION. This short legal fragment, which is preserved in H.M. Register House, Edinburgh, consists of seven folios, and contains a record of proceedings in court from 2nd October, 1537, to 25th June, 1538. It will be observed that with the exception of the court held on the former date in the Tolbooth of Dumfries, all the courts were held at Penpont. The head burgh of a sheriffdom was the place where the Sheriff Court of right ought to be held, unless inveterate custom had sanc- tioned its holding elsewhere. Such at least was the rule in later times. But earlier the courts had been more ambula- tory. Thus we find an Aberdeen Sheriff Court held at the Standing Staines of Huntlie,? and from an Ayr Sheriff Court Book® of the sixteenth century we learn that the court was held on lands the title to which was in dispute. Again, on 30th January, 1481-82, a decree pronounced in a court held at Penpont by Robert Crechtoun of Sanquhar, Sheriff of Dum- fries, narrates the consent of the parties and their affirmation of the day and place as lawful. The difficulty in the present case arises from the fact that the session of the court at Penpont occurred not once only, 1 Karl of Hyndford v. The Burgh of Hamilton, 1740, Mor. Dict., 3104; cp. Innes v. Innes, 1622, ib. 3101. 2 Records of the Sheriff Court of Aberdeenshire, ed. by D. Little- john, Aberdeen, 1904 (New Spalding Club), i., 153. 3 MS. in H.M. Reg. House, Edinburgh. 4 Hist. MSS. Com. XV. Report, London, 1897, App., pt. viii., p. 48, No. 96. 86 Earty SuerirF Court Book or DuMmFRIEs. but on several occasions spread over a period of six months, and that several of the cases heard before it did not arise at the instance of persons or in regard to matters belonging to that place or the surrounding district, but were concerned with questions connected with lands in Annandale and persons resident there. There was, so far as I have been able to dis- cover, no public event such as a visitation of the plague or the occurrence of an English incursion to account for the change of venue. At the same time it is not to be forgotten that many cases and many jurors came from Glencairn and other parishes in the neighbourhood of Penpont, and that the Sheriff-Depute, who frequently acted in disposing of the business of the court, held the lands of Bellibocht in Glencairn, and may have resided in that parish. In order to make the contents of our Sheriff Court Book intelligible, we propose to give a short account of civil procedure in the Scots Sheriff Courts in the early sixteenth century, so far as that procedure is referred to in cases which the book contains. It is to be kept in view that the authorities upon which we rely are concerned with the practice of the Baron Courts rather than with that of the Sheriff Courts. But as the Sheriff Court was truly the King’s Baron Court,® what holds true of the regulations of the Baron Court may be regarded as applicable, at least in great measure, to the early Sheriff Court. As early as the reign of David I. Scotland was divided into sheriffdoms, and the Sheriff acted as the King’s minister in the execution of Crown writs and in the conduct of legal proceedings, civil and criminal. The Sheriff’s was thus a delegated jurisdiction, and the Sheriff’s Court was the King’s Court. It was, as we have seen, the King’s Baron Court, at the head courts of which all freeholders were bound to attend. Those who were bound by the terms of their infeftments to give suit—i.e., attendance at the King’s Court—only might appear by their suitors or proxies; while those who were bound to give suit and presence were required to attend in 5 See my article ‘‘ The Suitors of the Sheriff Court,’ The Scot. Hist. Review, xiv., 2; Erskine, Inst., i., 4, 2. New Sect a tn fell ee aid EarRLy SHERIFF CourT Book or DUMFRIES. 87 person. It is quite true that the latter also appointed suitors, but this appointment did not free them from the burden of coming to court. It served rather the purpose of bringing to court a body of men who were skilled in law and legal pro- cedure to act as jurors and assessors. These suitors had to prove in examination their knowledge and capacity before they were admitted to office, and appear to have advised the freeholders and the judge both as to law and practice. Neither the Sheriff nor his deputes were trained lawyers; they sum- moned the court and presided over it, but they did not make its judgments. The selection of the jurors was determined by considerations of position and character and of acquaintance with the facts and circumstances of the matter upon which their verdict was sought, rather than in respect of their legal acquirements. And, accordingly, the advice of the suitors who had at least some legal experience was necessary, and ought to have been welcome. While the terms of the decision to be given were being discussed, the Sheriff retired ; and when these had been settled he was recalled, and the decision was pronounced by one of his suitors called the deemster. If either of the parties was dissatisfied with it, he was required, if he would make his dissatisfaction effectual, to give instant expression to it. He was bound, to use the words of the Scots version of the Quoniam Attachiamenta, to ‘‘ say againe it ’’ before “‘ he turn his taes quhere his heills stude, reason for gainsaying it.’ The statute, 1429, c. 6,8 varied the provision by enacting ‘‘ qua sa wil false a domme sal nocht remufe oute of the place that he standis in quhen the domme is gevin na zit be avisit na spek with na man quhil the domme be agayne callit that salbe within the tyme that a man may gang esily xl payss and that to be comptit efter the considera- cione of the Juge and the courte.’’ The formula in use was: ““ This dome is false, stynkand, and rottin in the self and ” and to give at least one 6 See the article ‘‘ The Suitors of the Sheriff Court,”’ cited above. 7 Quon. Attach., c. 9; Fol. Acts, i., 649; Skene’s Scots Version, Om ie 8 Fol. Acts, ii., 18. 88 EarLy SHERIFF Court Book oF DUMFRIES. therto I streik a borch and that I will preiff.’”’® Later the formula was changed to : ‘‘I am grattumly hurt and injurit be the said dome, therfore I appele and find ane borcht in the officiaris hand of the court to pursue the said appelatione con- formand to the law made of before.’’!° We find early notices regarding the Sheriff’s clerk and his sergeant or officer, of whom the former was entitled to two shillings out of every fine, and the latter to a colpindach™ or thirty pence.!2 It was the business of the Sheriff’s clerk to call the suits—i.e., the names of the lands in respect of which suit or suit and presence was due’—and to enter the names of those for which no appearance was made, so that fines might be imposed upon the absentees. In the case of our Sheriff Court Book these lists have not been made out, although we find the note—‘‘ sutis callit. Court lachfully affermit. Absentes sequuntur.’’!4 In civil cases the proceedings were initiated by the King’s brieve or letter addressed to a judge directing him to try by a jury the points stated in it.45 These brieves have been de- scribed as ‘‘ the foundation of all civil process of old;’’6 and were framed to cover such a variety of matters that every class 9 St. 1429, c. 6; Fol. Acts, ii., 18; Frag. Coll., ce. 8; Fol. Acts, ae 4s 10 St. 15th March, 1503-4, c. 51; St. 20th March, 1508-4, c. 46; Fol. Acts, ii., 246, 254. 11 A young cow (Skene, De Verb. Sign, s.v. ‘‘ colpindach ’’). 12 Leges Malc. Makken, ec. 7; Fol. Acts, i., 710. 13 See the article, ‘‘The Suitors of the Sheriff Court,’’ cited above. 14 See Fol. 7. In the Sheriff Court Books of Aberdeen, Fife, Linlithgow, &c., these lists are given in extenso. 15 See Skene, op. cit. s.v., ‘‘ Breve;’’ Balfour, Practicks, Edin- burgh, 1754, pp. 418 ff.; Stair, Tust., iv., 8, 4-18; Ersk., Iust., iv., 1, 3; Innes, Lectures on Scotch Legal Antiquities, Edinburgh, 1872; pp. 230 ff. An enumeration of brieves will be found in the Index to the Folio Acts. See also the list in F. Pollock and F. W. Maitland, The History of English Law before the time of Edward I., Cambridge, 1898, ii., 565 ff. Examples of brieves will be found in the Folio Acts, i., 89 ff., 657 ff. 16 Innes, op. cit., p. 231. — EARLY SHERIFF Court Book or DUMFRIES. 589 of litigation was embraced by them.!” They ran in a fixed form, which, according to a statue of 1491,!8 might not be varied under pain of nullity. Some of them were styled ““retourable,’’ because the verdict upon them was returned to the chancery by the judge to whom they were directed ; while those which were not retourable served as the initiation of actions against special defenders to be insisted on before the judge to whom they were addressed. It may be that, as in England,! a brieve was not indispensable where the subject of the action was of trifling value or amount; and it is not unlikely that, as Kames suggests,”° the Sheriffs, without any statutory warrant, modelled their procedure upon that of the Lords of the Session?!—a usurpation of jurisdiction which, as it met a public need, may have gradually received the sanction of custom.” Where the matter of the suit was one of civil debt or contract, or related to moveables, the first step was to attach the goods of the defender until he found security that he would appear and answer to the complaint ;% and the complainer was also required to find security that he would insist in his action.“4. The summons was then served on the defender, who might excuse” himself thrice, on finding a cautioner in support 17 Td. ab., p. 223. 18 ¢.5; Fol. Acts, i1., 224. 19 Pollock and Maitland, op. cit., i., 553 f. It was only where a personal action related to a sum reaching or exceeding 40s that a brieve was necessary. 20 Kames, ‘‘ History of Brieves,’’ Historical Law Tracts, Edin- burgh, 1758, ii., p. 14. He observes that ‘‘a Court, which has often tried cases by a delegated jurisdiction, loses sight in time of its warrant, and ventures to try such cases by its own authority.” 21 An enactment of 1457 (c., 2; Fol. Acts, ii., 47-8) invested the lords of the session with an independent jurisdiction in actions for debt. 22 Kames, loc. cit. 23 Quon. Attach., c., 1; Fol. Acts, i., 647. 24 Stat. Reg., Alexandri II., ¢., ii; Fol. Acts, i., 402; Balfour, op. cit., pp. 290, 311. 25~Absence on the King’s service, or at a public fair, or by reason of “‘ bed-evil and infirmitie’’ (‘‘infirmitas lecti’’) was ad- 90 EarLY SHERIFF CourT Book or DUMFRIES. of each excuse; and in respect of each failure to appear. “a distress or poynd ”’ (‘‘ districcio ’’) was taken to be entered at each court until the fourth court. If the defender appeared at the fourth court and established the validity of his excuses, he escaped fine; but if he failed to appear in person or by proxy, he was liable to be fined for each default, to pay the complainer’s expenses,” and ‘‘ tine his principall action and his defence against the partie him followand.’’*” The only other point on which it seems necessary to say a word is the practice of warranty, which plays an important part in early court procedure. We find in our Sheriff Court Book that at a court held on 25th June, 1538, Andrew Howat (called David Howat in the subsequent entries) claimed a black horse in the possession of Wat Gurlaw, and that Gurlaw found Herbert Cunynghame as security that he would enter it—i.e., subject it to whatever the court might determine regarding it. At the next court held on 16th July, 1538, Gurlaw entered the horse and also his warrand, Robert Kirkpatrick, and Kirk- mitted as the only valid excuse (‘‘essonzie,’ ‘‘ essoign,’’ ‘‘essonium ’’) in proceedings under a brieve of right within Burgh (Quon. Attach., c., 40; Fol. Acts, i., 655). Other excuses were sometimes accepted (see Regiam Maj., i., 7; Fol. Acts, i., 599; Balfour, op. cit., pp. 344 f., 349). Excuses had no place in pro- ceedings following on a brieve of mortancestry (Quon. Attach., ¢., 35; Fol. Acts, i., 654); or in a brieve of distress for debt, because in that case it was directed in the brieve that, on proof by the creditor, the debt should be paid at once (Quon. Attach., ¢., 84; Fol. Acts, 1., 653) ; or in recognosing novel disseisin (Reg. Mag., ii., 32; Fol. Acts, i., 631); or in an inquest or assize between two persons (Quon. Attach., c., 47; Fol. Acts, i., 657; Regiam Ma)j., -iv., ¢., al; Fol. Acts, i., 640). As to their admission in disputes between majors and minors, see Regiam Maj., iii., 26, 27; Fol. Acts, 1., 629. 26 Muon. Attach., c., 3; Fol. Acts, i., 648. It is to be observed that in proceedings following on a brieve of right, e.g., where the subject of complaint was that the complainer’s lands were withheld from him, the course of the action differed somewhat from what is stated in the text. It was only after persistent default by the defender to appear in response to repeated summonses that the lands were finally adjudged to the complainer (see Regiam Mai., i., 5; Fol. Acts, i., 598; ep. Balfour, op. cit., p. 310). 27 Skene’s Collection, ‘‘ The Forme and Maner of Baron. Cotrts,”’ cap. 24. ; : Earty SHERIFF Court Book or DUMFRIES. 91 patrick offered to produce his warrand at the next court, and found Thom Maxwell as security that he would then and there enter the horse and his warrand. At the next court held on 30th July, 1538, Kirkpatrick enters Robin Kirkhat as his war- rand to the court as the third court, and finds Maxwell as security that he will enter the horse or else the warrand at the next court as the fourth court and ‘‘ court perempter.’’ The explanation of these elaborate proceedings is this : When a man claimed a certain article in another’s possession on the ground that it was his own property, the possessor might either allege that the article was his and that he could produce a warrand to speak to the fact, or he might admit that it was not his but that he had it on loan or for safe-keeping or on hire or in security or on some such title. If he averred that the thing claimed really belonged to a third party, the latter was summoned to appear, and the possessor was required to find security that he would enter in court the thing claimed. If the third party obeyed the summons and stated that the article was his, the possessor was free of the claim, and the true owner took his place as defender, and was bound to make good to the possessor any loss which he had sustained. Where the subject of the claim was land, if the warrand did not appear and the possessor lost his action, he could sue the warrand for a portion of land equivalent to that from which he had been evicted.22 The warrand might call his warrand, and the latter might call his warrand, who enjoyed a similar right ;39 and while the warrands were being discussed the prin- cipal action slept.44 Each warrand could excuse himself thrice. 2 23 Regiam Maj., i., 15; Vol. Acts, i., 602 f.; Quon. Attach., c., 6; Fol. Acts, i., 648. 29 Regiam Maj., i., 20; Fol. Acts, i., 604. 50 Regiam Maj., i., 22; iii., 11; Fol. Acts, i., 604, 625. See Quon. Attach., c., 6; Fol. Acts, i., 648; Balfour, op. cit., pp. 317, 324, 326. 31 Balfour, op. cit., p. 326. 32 Regiam Maj., i., 20; iv., 387; Fol. Acts, i., 604, 638. ' a2 EARLY SHERIFF CourRT Book oF DUMFRIES. IO SHERIFF CourRT Book OF DUMFRIES (2ND OCTOBER, 1537- 2rST JULY, 1538): fol. 2] The Sherif Court of Drumfres, haldin in ye tolbuyt of ye samyn be ane honorable man Niniane Crechtoune of bella- byt, sherif wardir, the secund dai of ye monetht of October, in ye zer of god Imycxxxvii zeris—Sutis callit. Court lacht- fully afferrmnit, absentis amerciit. Inquisitio. The lard of closburne, the lard of kyrkmychell, Jhone Creichtoune, Master George dalzell, Jhone Cunynghame of birkshaw, Lard of dalquhat, lard of creachane, Alexander cottis, alexander kirkpatrik, oswald cunynghame, Andro wilson, Barthole Smart, lard of Inglistoun, James crechtoun, petir macquhone. The samyn day Jhone gordoun & Jhone greirsone are chargit in plane court to compeir in ye nixt sherif court to heir & see cognitioun tane eftir ye form and tenor of our souerane Lordis lettres purchest be ye said Jhone gordoun aganis ye said Jhone greirsone. The samyn day all accionis movit betwix ye lard of Kyrk- mychell and all uthir glencorss are continuit to ye nixt court wt consent of bait ye parteis and warrant to keep ye samyn eftir ye forme and tenor of ye preceptis institit upone of befoir. The samyn day Jhone reir and thomas gordoun for hymself and Katherin greir are compromittit to stand and abyde at ye decrete, consale, sentence arbitrale, and finale deliverance of ye lard of craigdarroh & symon cunynghame for the part of the said thomas and katherin, & of cuthbert greyr and robert greir for ye part of ye said Jhone greir and george cunynghame oursman anentis all accionis movit betwix yame all tyme bygane to yis day, & in speciale anentis ye spuylze of certane brekanis spuilzeit of ye said Jhonnis ground, quhilkis Jugis and oursman hes tane apoune yame ye saidis actionis, and sall meit ffor to decide ye samyn at-castelpharne ye xii day of October instant, and deliuer and decerne yr upone fourty dais yreftir. Earty SHERIFF Court Book or DUMFRIES. 93 The samyn day oswald cunynghame is boundin souertie to thomas amwligane yat justice salbe minsterit to him of John makclwne in ye barone court of glencarne of ane ox acclamit be ye said thomas of ye said John and yat upon tiisday ye nynt day of October nixt tocum. Ye samyn day David younger is in amerciament of ye court for falt of entre as he yat was latfully attechit to William Wilsoun chalaner. Dome gevin be rob Lowrie. fol. 3] The samyn day the lard of craigdalroc forespeker for scharp in ye accioun and causs movit for marioune maxwell aganis hym protestit yat geif ye said marioune producit nocht hir previs at ye nixt court, as ye ferd court, yat ye said scharp mycht be dischargit of his clame. The sherif court of Drumfres haldin at penpunt ye vi day of ye monet of November ye zer of God Imyexxxvii zeiris be Niniane Crechtoun and Edward Jhonstoun deput. Sutis callit. Court latfully affermit, absentis amerciit. Inquisitio. Lard of Lag, lard of Kyrkmychell, lard of Ross, Johne charteris, Johne crechtoun, Master George Dalzell, archibald Douglas, Jhone cunynghame of birkshaw, lard of creachane, cuthbert fergussoun, lard of Croglyne, Robert Charteris, Jhone Maxwell, petir Macquahen, alexander cottis. The samyn day Jhone Gordoun hes renuncit ye accioun and process of law movit in ye consistory be hym aganis Jhone greirsone anentis ye clame of xi ky & oxin acclamit be him of ye said John greyr. The samyn day Jhone gordoun of ye park of yat ane pt. & Jhone greirsone on yat uthir part are compromittit, bund, and oblist to stand and abyde at ye decreitt, consale, sentence arbitrale, and finale deliverance of ye lard of holm for ye part of ye said Jhone Gordoun, Gilbert Greir in penphillane for ye part of ye said Johne greir, and Niniane crechtoun oursman, anentis all questions, quareles, and debaitis movit betwix yame all tyme bygane, and in speciale anentis ye clame of xi ky & oxin acclamit be ye said Jhone gordoun upon ye said Jhone greir, and sall meit at Castelpharne upon thurisday ye xv day 94 EARLY SHERIFF CourT Book OF DUMFRIES. of November next tocum and deliver yrintill within xx days yaireftir. The samyn day the lard of Kirkmychell hes producit ye Kingis lettres in ane accioun & causs movit be hym aganis ye glencorss and ye saidis glencorss hes allegit ye actioun advo- catit afore ye lordis and thairfor yai acht not to answer, quhairfor ye sherif wt ye consent of bayt ye pteis hes continuit ye said actionis to ye nixt court. The samyn day it is assignit to thomas M‘Cubbin to compeir in ye nixt court to bring thom gordoun quhilk he allegis is his warand of ye occupacioun of ye v sh. landis of craigleriane to answer to Thom Momersoun chalanir for ye wrangus occupacioun of ye samyn and failzeand yrof to answer to ye said Thom Momersoun chalanir as law will. fol. 4] The samyn day thom momersoun offerit hym to preif lauchfully at ye nixt court yat he had in assedacioun of ye thre rudis of land quhilk thom gordoun allegit he occupit wrangusly. The sherif court of drumfres haldin at penpont ye xx day of december in anno xxxvii be niniane crechtoun of bellebot, sherif wardor. Sutis callit. court Jachfully affermit. absentis amerciit. . me Inquisitio. Lard of Inglistoun, Jhone cunynghame of birkshaw, Lard of newtoun, gilbert greir in craignie, gilbert Wilsone, master george dalzell, Robert charteris, Johne crechtoun, Robert dalzell, petir makquhene, John crechtoun in blakadie, thom crechtoun, Robert greyr. The samyn day cristiane amuligane hes constitut creat & ordanit gilbert greirsoun and Sir thomas greirsone or any ané of yame hir procurators to wyn or tyne in all hir accionis movit or to be movit in ye sherif court, & promittit, ratif., &c. The samyn day it is assignit to William Jhonstoun to bring his warand to ye nixt court for ye wrangus haldin and intrometting wt ane gray meyr acclamit be matho broune to pertene to him as his propir geir, and failzeing’ of ye said warand to answer to ye said matho his chalener. ee Earty SHERIFF CourT Book or DuMERIES. 95 The samyn day Jhone clerk alias amwligane and thom clerk ar in amerciament of yis court for falt of entre as yai yat wes lachfully attechit to William fergussoun chalener ffor ye spuilzeing of kow. Dome gevin be andro makcron. The samyn day andro portar offerit hym to preiff lachfully at ye nixt court yat paite glesseld promittit to pay him xxvii s. ix d. yat he wes in awin to thom greyr bastard ye tyme of his decess and yat becauss ye said Andro has ye Kingis gift yrof. The samyn day all actionis movit betwix thom gordoun and thom momersoun ar continuit with consent of bait ye pteis unto Witsounday nixt tocum. The samyn day Johne gracy and thom wilsoun are com- promittit, bund, and oblist to stand and abyde at ye decrete, _ Gonsale, sentence arbitrale, & finale deliverance of yir personis underwrittin yt is to say of Gilbert Wilsone for ye said thomas wilsone & of Johne Wilsone for ye part of ye said Johne gracy and of andro Wilsone oursman anentis all questionis fol. 5) and quereles indoit betwix yame, and sall meit yair- upone all in ane voce at ye kirk of tynrone ye xii day eftir zuile and deliver yairuntill betwix yat day and candelmas day yeftir followand. The samyn day in ye accioun and causs movit betwix matho gledstanis of Kelwod of yat ane part and Margaret Jardyng lady of Kelwod upon yat uthir pt. anentis ye terss of v crovinsworthe of land acclamit be ye said Margaret, the Inquest above written decernis and deliveris all in ane voce the said mathow to brouk ye said lands and ye said Margaret to have na terss yof, and yat becauss ye said mathow hes producit chartir and sasing of ye samyn maid to hym for liferent be umqule thomas gledstanis his father, and wes in possessioun yrof befoir ye decess of umquhile Johne gledstanis hir husband. The sherif court of drumfres haldin at penpont ye xxviii day of Januar ye zer of god Imvexxxvii zeris be Niniane crechtoun of bellebot sherif wardor. Sutis callit. absentis amerciit. Inquisitio. Lard of Closburn, lard of Lag, lard auchingassill, Johne 96 EarLy SHERIFF Court Book OF DUMFRIES. Crechtoun, Master George dalzell, Johne maxwell, John charteris, andro kirkpatrik, lard of craufurdtoun, John cunynghame of birkshaw, cuthbert fergussoun, lard of ross, Johne cunynghame, lard of creachane, Alexander Cottis. The samyn day the accioun movit be ye lard of blakmyr aganis ye lard of ballagane is continuit to ye nixt court wt consent of bayt ye parteis. The samyn day gilbert greir hes dischargit ye process led in ye consistory aganis andro portar anentis ye clame of xxii Lib. or ony pt. yairof acclamit apone ye said Andro be ye said gilbert. The samyn day it is assignit to andro portar to acquiit hym lachfully at ye nixt court yat he acht nocht to unquhile nichell thomsoun ye tyme of his decess xxii Lib. or ony pt. yairof and failzeand yrof to answer gilbert greir and ye said nichell wiff. The samyn day Jhone clerk alias amwligane is in amercia- ment of yis court for falt of entre as he yat wes lachfully attechit to Willeam fergussoun chalantir for ye spuilze of certain zowis. Dome gevin be Johne connell. The samyn day pait corssoun hes renuncit ye process led in ye consistory be hym aganis Johne Greyr, &c. fol. 6] The samyn day William Jhonstoun hes producit Jhon Jonstoun for his warand of ye meir acclamit be Mathow broune, and ye said Johne hes allegit Nicholl Jonstoun to be his warand, and it is assignit to him to produce his warand ye said Nicholl & ye said meyr and to do ye samyn Edward Jonstoun is boundin souerte. The sherif court of drumfres haldin at penpont the ferd day of June in anno xxxviii be Johne Crechtoun & Edward Jonstoun sherif deputis. Sutis callit. Court lachfully affer- mit. Absentis amerciit. Inquisitio. Johne greirsone of ye lag, Johne matland of achingassell, andro Roresoun of bardennot, thomas fergussoun of craigdat, william kyrkpatrik of kirkmychell, archibald douglas, andro j EARLY SHERIFF CourRT Book or DuMERIES. 97 4 kirkpatrik, thom wilsone of Crogline, John edgar, John douglas, thom greyr, petir greyr, gilbert greir in camling. The samyn day harbert Maxwell is in amerciament of yis court for falt of entres as he yat found his lands and gudis borcht to follow and pursew ane fenss maid upone saml brovne guidis. Dome gevin be Johne connell. The samyn day Alex brovne is dischargit of harbert maxwell chalener quhill he be newly attechit. The sherif court of Drumfres haldin at penpont ye xxv day of June anno xxxviii be niniane crechtoun of bellebot, sherif wardor. Sutis callit. court lachfully affermit. Ab- sentis amerciit. ° Inquisitio. John greirsone of lag, Andro crechtoun, Johne crechtoun of Kirkpatrik, Robert charteris, Johne cunynghame of birk- shaw, master George dalzell, cuthbert fergussoun, John edzer of Inglistoun, Andro crechtoun, alexander cottis, petir dennoune of creachane, Roger charteris, John wrycht, Johne erechtoun of burngranis, John patersoun. The samyn day the laird of aldgart maxwell is in amercia- ment of yis court for falt of presens. Dome gevin be rob Lowrie. The samyn day Herbert cunynghame is becumin souertie to Wat Gurlaw to entyr ane blak horss, chalanit be andro Howat or ellis his warand quhilk horss is prisit to xix s. fol. 7] The sherif court of Drumfres haldin in penpont the xvi day of July in anno xxxviii be Johne crechtoun & edward Jonstoun, sherif deputis. Court lachfully affermit. | Sutis callit. Absentes sequuntur. The samyn day Watt Gurlaw hais enterit ane blak horss challentit be david Howat and his warand Roddie Kyrk- patrik, and ye said Roddie hais allegit ane warand and desyris _ ye nixt court to produce hys warand and hais fund Thom Maxwell in Drumfres borcht for hym yat he sall enter ye said horss & his warand at ye nixt court or ellis incur ye danger and price yrof. 95 EARLY SHERIFF CouRT Book OF DUMFRIES. The samyn day ‘ye sherif deputis hes continuit all actionis to ye nixt court in ye same effect yin as yis day. The sherif court of Drumfres haldin at penpont ye penul- timate day of July be John Crechtoun & Edward Jonstoun sherif deputis. Sutis callit. Court lachfully affermit. absentes subsequuntur. The samyn day Roddie Kyrkpatrik hes enterit his warand Robin Kirkhat for ye blak horss chalentit be David Howat to ye court as ye thryd court, and ye said robert has allegit ane warand & hais fund thom Maxwell borcht to entir ye horss or ellis ye warand at ye nixt court as ye ferd court & court perempter. iD Ele Notes REGARDING THE PERSONS MENTIONED IN THE SHERIFF CouRT Book. It may be of some interest to endeavour to identify some, at all events, of the persons who are mentioned in our Sheriff Court Book. Three Sheriff-Deputes are mentioned—John Crichton, Edward Johnstone, and Ninian Crichton of Bellibocht, who is styled ‘‘ Sheriff Wardir.’’ It seems probable that the first and third were Crichtons of Kirkpatrick. On 30th January, 1481-82, Edward Crichton of Kirkpatrick served on an assize ;*5 and on 1oth August, 1484, we find a Crown charter, confirming a charter of the lands of Bellebeth and others, by Sir Robert Crichton of Kirkpatrick in favour of his son Edward. Edward’s heir was his son Robert,® and his son John is mentioned in 1543 and 1547.%6 In 1525 Ninian was tutor to Robert, Lord Sanquhar ;56@ and it was owing to a deadly feud between him and James Douglas of Drumlanrig 53 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, Pt. viii., 48. 34 R.M:S.,:ii., 1594. ' 35 R.M.S., ii., 2490. 56 Charters in H.M. Register House, Edinburgh, 1818, 1896. 36a Act. Dom. Conc., xxxvi., fol. 48. EARLY SHERIFF CouRT Book OF DUMFRIES. 99 that Edward Johnston, burgess of Dumfries, was made a Sheriff-Depute in 1531. The feud had its origin in the slaugh- ter of one of Drumlanrig’s retainers by some of Ninian’s people; and Drumlanrig applied to the lords of Council for exemption, on behalf of himself, his kinsmen and servants, from appearing before Ninian and his deputes in their capacity of judges. Accordingly the lords, with consent of parties, appointed Johnstone to act in all cases in which Drumlanrig or those related to him were concerned.*” We come now to the jurors. The laird of Closeburn was Thomas Kirkpatrick. Of this member of a well-known family little seems to be ascertainable.5”* We find a Crown charter, dated 12th May, 1538, in favour of Thomas, son and heir of Sir Thomas Kirkpatrick of Closeburn deceased, of the lands of Auchinleck and Newtown in the barony of Tibbers and sheriffdom of Dumfries. The laird of Kirkmichael was William Kirkpatrick, whose father, Sir Alexander Kirkpatrick, had an interesting history. On 2nd October, 1484, King James III. granted to Alexander Kirkpatrick and his heirs the lands of Kirkmichael and others as a reward for his great services in battle against the Duke of Albany, James, Earl of Douglas, and other rebels, and especially for his capture of the said Earl.°® According to David Hume of Godscroft,*® Earl Douglas was in 1483 taken prisoner at the battle of Burnswark by Alexander, a brother of the laird of Closeburn. This Alexander had been one of his own attendants, and on the Earl’s surrender to him, kept him until he saw the King and obtained from him the Earl’s life. The King gave Kirkpatrick the £50 land of 37 Act. Dom. Cone. et Sess., 1i1., fol. 184; Act. Dom. Conc., xlii., fol. 91. 37a In 1525 Thomas was a pupil, his tutor being John Kirk- patrick of Alisland. He seems to have been brought up, firstly, by Robert, Lord Sanquhar, and on his decease by Ninian Crichton of Bellibocht (Act. Dom. Conc., xxxvi., fol. 6). 38 R.M.S., iii., 1788. 39 R.M.S., ii., 1603. 40 The History of the House and Race of Douglas and Angus, Edinburgh, 1748, i., 380. 100 EaRLY SHERIFF CouRT Book OF DUMFRIES. Kirkmichael, which, says Hume, “is possesst by his heirs until this day.’” He was knighted, and was alive in 1532." Apparently Robert, his eldest son, the husband of Marion Maxwell,42 predeceased him.4* He died before 23rd July, 1537, the date of a charter in favour of his son and heir, William.4 The John Crichton next mentioned is probably John Crichton of Kirkpatrick, who is referred to as a juror at the court held on 25th June, 1538, and of whose family we have already spoken. Master George Dalzell served as a juror at many of the courts. So far we have been unable to obtain any further information regarding him. John Cunynghame of Birkshaw was probably connected with the family of the Earl of Glencairn. We find references to Philip Cunynghame of Birkshaw in 1497, 1514, and 1520,” and to Andrew Cunynghame of Birkshaw in 1518.46 John Cunynghame died before 26th August, 1547—the date of an instrument of sasine in favour of his relict, Marjorie Cunyng- hame.*” He had two sons, Andrew and Robert, and was apparently succeeded by the former.*8 We find several later notices regarding this family—an instrument of sasine in favour of Nicolas, daughter of James Grierson of Capenoch, and spouse of Robert, son of Cuthbert Cunynghame of Birk- 41 R.M.S., iti., 1204. 42 She subsequently married Roger Gordon of Crago (see refer- ences in next note). 43 See two instruments dated respectively 21st October, 1534, and 20th August, 1538 (Sir Marc. Carruthers Prot. Bk. (1531-61), fols. 20, 32; R.M.S., iv., 2317). 44 R.M.S., iii., 1948. But see ib., iv., 2317. me 45 Lag Charter Chest, 44, 84; Fraser, Scotts of Buccleugh, ii., % Charters in H.M. Register House, Edinburgh, 870. He was tutor testamentary of William Cunynghame of Cunynghameheid. 47 Herbert Cunyngham, Prot. Bk. (1541-50), 65, printed in the Trans. of the D. and G. N. H. and A. Society (1913-14). 48 Tb., 37, 66, 78. EARLY SHERIFF CourRT Book or DUMFRIES. 101 shaw, dated 31st December, 1664 ;49 another such instrument dated 8th November, 1708, in favour of John, Robert’s son; and yet another, dated 19th November, 1709,°! of half the lands of Birkshaw, in favour of James Grierson of Capenoch by John Cunyngham2, with consent of his wife, Agnes Kirk. The laird of Dalquhat was probably either the Malcolm M‘Gachane of Dalquhat who served as juror in 1505 and 1520, or Alexander M‘Gachane of Dalquhat who acted in the same capacity in 1544.°% We find notices of several lairds of Dalquhat of this name :—Archibald in 1566,54 James in 1614, John in 1648 ;°6 and on 30th March, 1743, Robert was served heir to his father, Robert M‘Gachen of Dalquhat.*7 The laird of Creachane was Petir Dennoune. We find a charter of the time of King Robert I. in favour of Adam or Allan Dennun of the lands of Calsehogill.°8 On 30th January, 1481-2, John of Dennen of Creochane served on an inquést ;°9 and in a precept of sasine dated 4th March, 1498-99, John Dynnone of Creochane and his son Peter are referred to.69 On 24th November, 1511, Peter had letters of license from King James IV. to sell his 50s worth of land of Glencors and Dalquhargzeane in the parish of Closeburn to Drumlan- 49 Recorded 3rd January, 1665 (Gen. Reg. of Sasines). 50 Recorded 20th November, 1708 (Dumfries Part. Reg. of Sasines). 51 Recorded 24th November, 1709 (Dumfries Part. Reg. of Sasines). 52 Lag Charter Chest, 48, 84. 53 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., p. 19. 54 Herbert Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1566-69), 12, printed in the Trans. of the D. and G. N. H. and A. Soc. (1914-15); Reg. of Privy Council, xiv., 300. 55 Lag Charter Chest, 188. See also a bond dated 28th October, 1601 (Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., p. 69). 56 MS. Reg. of the Comm. of Estates, under date 14th October, 1648; H.M. Reg. House, Edinburgh. 57 Services of Heirs. 588 R.M.S., i., App. ii., 302. 59 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., p. 48. 60 In the possession of Thomas Yule, Esq., W.S. 102 EarLy SHERIFF Court Book OF DUMFRIES. rig ;6! and he is mentioned in 1520, 1545, 1546, and 1549.6 In 1566 he, his wife Christina Grierson, and his son Peter are referred to. Alexander Cottis seems to have been a parishioner of Glencairn.4 As to Alexander Kirkpatrick, Oswald Cunyng- hame, and Andrew Wilson we have no information. ’ Barthole Smart is mentioned as a parishioner of Glen- cairn on 20th February, 1546-7. A person of that name is frequently designated as being ‘‘ in Marquhryne.’’® It seems that he was a merchant in Glencairn, and had obtained a charter of the 24 nerkland of Marquhirn from the Earl of Glencairn in 1585.®7 The laird of Ingliston was John Edzer. On 30th January, 1481-82, Uchtre Edgar of Ingliston served on an inquest ;® and won February 21st, 1498-99, he was decerned to pay to the King and his Treasurer #40, in whicn he was bound for Cuthbert Greresone as surety that the latter would not vex nor _ trouble Margaret Akinzeane, relict of Donald Greresone, in the peaceable enjoy- ment of the merkland of Kere called Penmarte.®? On 2oth January, 1514-15, Agnes Langmure, with consent of her husband, Nicholas Edzar of Ingliston, granted a charter of certain lands in the county of Renfrew ;’° and it seems probable that John” was the next proprietor. We learn that in 1546 ‘ 61 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., p. 65.” 62 Lag Charter Chest, 84; H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1541-1550), 22, 79, 80, 81; Charters in H.M. Reg. House, Edinburgh, 1398. 63 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1566-69), 11. 64 Charters in H.M. Reg. House, Edinburgh, 1392. 65 Tbidem. 66 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1541-50), 37. See Lag Charter Chest, 143, 144. 87 See Smart v. Glencairn, 8th March, 1619, Acts and Decreets, eclxxxvili., fol. 87. 68 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., p. 48. 69 Act. Dom. Conc., ii., 332. 10 R.M.S., ii., 153. 71 In our Court Book he is styled ‘‘ of Ingliston ’’ in the list of jurors at the court held on 25th June, 1538 (fol. 6). EARLY SHERIFF CourRT BooK OF DUMERIES. 103 some portion of the lands of Ingliston were in possession of John Edzar. His wife was Isabella Fergusson, and he had three sons—Uchtred, whose wife was Elizabeth Roreson, and Cuthbert and John.” It is stated in a notice of 1560 that John was in possession of the five merkland of Ingliston ;% and he or his son John were jurors on assizes in 1607 and 1615.54 It seems probable that the lands passed shortly thereafter from the Edgar family. Of James Crichton and Peter Macquhone we know nothing. The laird of Lag was John Grierson, the son of Roger Grierson of Lag, who fell at Flodden, and Agnes, called by some writers Janet, daughter of James Douglas of Drum- lanrig by Janet, daughter of David Scott of Buccleugh. He died before roth July, 1559, having been twice married— firstly, to Nicolas Herys, by whom he had a son William, who succeeded him, and two daughters, Nicolas, who mar- ried John Charteris of Amisfield, and Jonet, who married John, son and heir apparent of John Schaw of Haly. He married, secondly, Egidia, daughter of Sir John Kennedy of Culzean, by whom he had four sons—Roger, who eventually succeeded to the family estates, John, Thomas, and Roger, and two daughters—Elizabeth, who married James Lindsay of Barcloy, and Agnes, who married Archibald, son and heir of John M‘Brayr of Almagill. The laird of Ross was Roger Kirkpatrick. We find a reference under date 4th May, 1536, to him and his wife Katherine,” a sister of Thomas Kirkpatrick of Eliesland.” He died before 8th November, 1548, as Katherine is then 72 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1541-50), 39, 58, 93; id., Prot. Bk. (1566469), 37, 38. 73 Reg. of the Privy Council, xiv., 300. 73a R.M.S., vii., 320, 1258. 74 Perhaps she was born of the second marriage. 7 Charters in H.M. Reg. House, Edinburgh, 1125. 76 Tb., 1687; see 1688, 16896. 104 EARLY SHERIFF Court Book or DUMFRIES. referred to as his relict,’7 and was succeeded by his son Roger. We have no information with regard to Archibald Douglas or Cuthbert Fergusson. The laird of Croglin was Thomas Wilson. The earliest notice of this family known to us is a memorandum dated 2nd. May, 1537, recording that the procurator for Thomas Wilson and Marion Kirkpatrick, executors of the late John Wilson of Croglin, indemnify Bartholomew Smart in regard to a certain payment.” Thomas Wilson married Agnes Grierson, relict of John Gordon of Blakat.80 She was pro- bably his second wife and sister of Gilbert Grierson of Dalton, whose son Gilbert married Croglin’s daughter about the year TGR. Of Robert Charteris and John Maxwell we know nothing. The laird of Newtoun was Thomas Padzeane. He is mentioned as a witness in 1534, 1538, 1567, and 1568.85 On t1th September, 1605, Roger Paidzeane, his son, was served his heir ;84 and on 12th May, 1621, John Pedzeane was served heir to his father, Roger.® John married Elizabeth Dalzell ;% and it seems to have been he who married as his second wife Elizabeth Kirko, relict of Thomas Grierson of Barjarg.8? Gilbert Greir in Craignie appears to have been a tenant of the lands. On 3rd October, 1520, Roger Grierson of Craignie served on an assize ;°8 and in an instrument dated 29th May, 7 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1541-50), 49. 7% Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., p. 54. 79 Sir Marc Carruthers, Prot. Bk. (1531-61), fol. 30. 80 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1541-50), 69, 84. 81 Dalton Charter Chest, 14, 25, 31. 82 Sir Mare Carruthers, Prot. Bk. (1531-61), fols. 20, 32. 85 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1566-69), 40, 74. 84 Inquis. Spec., Dumfries, 30. 85 Tb., 106. 86 See an instrument of sasine dated 17th July and recorded 20th August, 1621 (Dumfries Particular Reg. of Sasines). 87 See an instrument of sasine dated 6th and recorded 8th April, 1642 (Dumfries Particular Reg. of Sasines). 88 Lag Charter Chest, 84. EarRLy SHERIFF CouRT Book OF DuMERIES. 105 1528, Gilbert Grierson in Craignie is referred to as tutor of John Grierson of Lag.8 In 1531 and 1548 he is mentioned as a witness.” John Crichton in Blakadie—Perhaps the designation refers to. “‘ Blakadie lie Kirkland de Sanquhar.’’% As to Robert Charteris, Robert Dalzell, Thomas Crichton, and Robert Greyr we know nothing. The laird of Auchingassell was John Maitland. On 23rd August, 1369, George of Dunbarre, Earl of March, granted to John Mantalent, the husband of Agnes, the Earl’s sister, and to Robert, their son, and to Robert’s heirs, the lands of the barony of Tybris, including inter alia the lands of Auchyn- gasylle, excepting the castle of Tybris with Dalgarnok.% On 11th October, 1401, King Robert III. granted a charter of the lands of Tybrys to Robert Mantalent, knight.% On 3rd January, 1450-51, William Maitland of Thirlstane granted a charter of certain lands to his brother James and Giles Skrymgeowre, his wife ;% and on 11th May, 1506, James was returned as heir to his father, Robert Maitland in Achingas- sell, and other lands. On 21st July, 1510, James granted a bond in favour of Drumlanrig ;® and on 25th August, 1526, letters of respite were granted by King James V. to John, son and heir apparent of James.% On 25th April, 1541, the King granted a charter of the castle and mote of Tibris to his well- beloved esquire, John Maitland of Achingassell.%” We have no information regarding John Maxwell, John Charteris, and Andrew Kirkpatrick. Crawfordton belonged to a branch of the Crichton family ; 89 Charters in H.M. Reg. House, Edinburgh, 1026. 9 Lag Charter Chest, 89, 100. , 91 Inquis. Spec., Dumfries, 48. 9 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., p. 32. 93 Tb., p. 33. %a Tbidem. 4 Tb., 34. 95 Tb., p. 14. % Tbidem. % R.M.S., iii., 2342. 106 EarRLy SHERIFF CouRT Book OF DUMFRIES. but we are unable to say with certainty what was the name of the laird at the date of our Sheriff Court Book. On 5th March, 1471-72, Alexander of Crechton of Crawfordstoun served on an inquest. On 11th May, 1506, Robert Crichton of Crawfordton acted in a like capacity ;!0 and in 1546 John Crichton of Crawfordton was a witness.!0! Andrew Crichton of Crawfordton is mentioned in an instrument dated 2oth February, 1546-47 19 and on 6th April, 1549, sasine of the fourteen merkland of Crawfordton and Stewarton was given to John, Andrew’s son and apparent heir.!% John’s wife was Christina, daughter of William Cunynghame of Craiganis.1 On 13th April, 1609, John’s son, likewise John, was returned as heir of his father and Andrew, his grandfather ; and on 28th June, 1614, James Crichton of Crawfordton and his son James were witnesses.!0 On 3rd December, 1628, John was served heir to his father, James.4&7 He married Marion, daughter of Stephen Laurie of Maxwelton and Marion Cor- sane, and relict of William Brown of Ingliston, minister of Glencairn.1% John Crichton had five daughters, but no son; and on oth July, 1647, he granted a disposition of the lands of Crawfordton to John, son of William Brown mentioned above, on condition that he should marry one of his daughters.1% % Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., 35; Lag Charter Chest, 16. 99 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viii., 35. 100 [b., p. 34. 101 R.M.S., iii., 3201. 102 Oharters in H.M. Reg. House, Edinburgh, 1392. 105 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1541-50), 75 104 Tb., 83. 105 Inquis. Gen., 416, 417. John’s daughter Marion married William Grierson of Kirkbride (see an instrument dated 4th and recorded 30th November, 1619, Dumfries Particular Bae of Sasines). 106 Lag Charter Chest, 187. 107 Inquis. Gen., 1454. 108 The marriage contract was dated 19th August, 1643. See an instrument dated 9th and recorded 16th September, 1643 (Dumfries Particular Reg. of Sasines). 108 Laing Charters, 2377 EARLY SHERIFF CourT Book or DuMERIEsS. 107 On gth October, 1655, Brown entered into an obligation to marry John Crichton’s daughter Agnes, and to assume the Crichton name and arms.!° Brown was retoured heir to his father on 2nd June, 1656,!" and on 18th June, 1657, his father- in-law disponed to him and his wife the eight merkland of Crawfordton and the six merkland of Stewarton in liferent, and to his son, John Brown, in fee, on condition that he assumed the name and arms of Crichton." From an instru- ment dated 4th May, 1652,!"5 we learn that of John Crichton’s five daughters, Barbara married James Elliot, brother of Gil- bert Elliot of Stobs. She had, it seems, been previously married to Robert Maxwell, younger of Portrack.1!4 Margaret married, firstly, William Gledstanis, minister of New Abbey, and, secondly, James Moir, minister of Troqueer.4 Janet married John Elliot; Elizabeth remained unmarried; and and Agnes married, as we have seen, Brown of Ingliston. We have no information regarding John Cunynghame. The laird of Bardennoch was Andrew Roreson. In 1472 Alexander Roreson of Bardennoch served on two assizes ;16 and on 16th August, 1507, the King confirmed a charter dated on 13th of that month and year of the 2} merkland of Barbwye, in the parish of Glencairn, in favour of Andrew Roreson of Bardennoch.!!” Andrew is mentioned in 1509 and 1539; and on 3rd December, 1545, he, Andrew his elder son, and a 110 Tb., 2474. M1 Jb., 2487. 12 Tb., 2499. 113 Recorded 22nd May, 16838 (Dumfries Particular Reg. of Sasines). 114 See an instrument dated Ist and recorded 8th May, 1652 (Dumfries Particular Reg. of Sasines). 115 Gen. Reg. of Hornings, 7th August, 1666; Gen. Reg. of Inhibitions, 24th January, 1670. 116 Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report, App., Pt. viil., 35; Lag Charter Chest, 16. 117 R.M.S., ii., 3122. 118 R.M.S., ii., 8377; iti., 2029. In 1524 Lochinvar was delated of the slaughter of Gilbert Roreson of Bardannoch (Act. Dom. Conc., MK Ole TON!) 108 EarLy SHERIFF CourT Book or DUMFRIES. younger son Gilbert, are referred to.18 It may be that Eliza- beth Roreson, wife of Uchtred Edgar, son and heir apparent of John Edgar of Ingliston, was his daughter. On rith June, 1549, Andrew Rereson, junior, is mentioned as tutor of Bardennoch ;!2! and we find an instrument of sasine dated 5th July, 1566, of the five merkland of Bardennoch and the £3 38 4d land of Creichane in favour of Thomas, Andrew’s son.!22 Douglas of Drumlanrig having obtained the gift of the ward and marriage of the two daughters of Simon Car- ruthers of Mouswald, deceased, and having established their title to their father’s lands, entered into an agreement in terms of which Thomas Roreson of Bardennoch married the elder daughter, she disponing to Drumlanrig half of the lands and barony of Mouswald. Drumlanrig proposed a similar arrange- ment for her sister Marion. She, however, declined to accede to the proposal, and rather than submit, threw herself over the tower of Comlongon Castle, “‘ thairthrow wilfullie breking of her awin craig and banis quhairof she deit.1% In 1581 Thomas Roreson was charged with treason, in that he had committed the crime of coining and circulating false money to the extent of two thousand merks in the year 1573. The following persons were summoned as witnesses :—Cuthbert Cunynghame in Castelfarne, John Setlingtoune of Stanehous, John Kirkchaugh of Wogrie (Bogrie), John Welsch of Coles- toun, George Greirsoun of Balmacurane (Dalmacurane), Robert Greirsoun in Inglistoun, Malcolm Fergussone in Cadzeloch (Caitloch), Edward Crechtoun in Gordounestoune, Quintigerne M‘Adam in Knokingaroch, and Edward Fergus- soune in Over Inglistoun. In the absence of the accused, the 119 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1541-50), 35. 120 Tb., 39. 121 [b., 79. 122 H. Anderson, Prot. Bk. (1566-69), 18. On 10th July, 1563, Thomas was served heir to his father, Andrew (Inquis. Spec., Dum- fries, 6). 123 W. Fraser, The Annandale Family Book, Edinburgh, 1894, i., pp. xxxi. ff.; J. J. Reid, ‘‘ Barony of Mouswald and Barons: A Page of Border History,” Proc. of Soc. of Antiquaries of Scotland (1888-89), xxiii., pp. 24-79; see R.M.S., iv., 1440. ' Ear.Ly SHERIFF CoURT Book OF DUMFRIES. 109 Court of Parliament found him guilty of treason, and ordered confiscation of his property moveable and immoveable, and his person to underlie the pain of treason and last punishment appointed by the laws of the realm.14 Thomas was succeeded by his son Andrew, who is referred to in 1588 and 1607.1 He married Grissell Grierson, relict of William Kirkhaugh of Chappell. !%6 The laird of Craigdarroch was Thomas Fergusson.) We have no information regarding John Douglas and Thomas and Peter Greyr. Gilbert Greir in Camling seems to have been a tenant of the laird of Lag.1¥8 Of Andrew Crichton, Roger Charteris, John Wrycht, John Crichton of Burngranis, and John Paterson we know nothing. At Fol. 3 of our Sheriff Court Book there is a notice of an action between the laird of Kirkmichael and ‘* ye Glencorss.”’ This notice is explained by certain entries belonging to the year 1537 in the ‘‘ Acta Dominorum Concilii,’’!°8 which refers to an action by John and Archibald Glencors, tenants of the land of Glendenholme against John Glencors of that Ik and the laird of Kirkmichael in order to ascertain who it was of the two last-mentioned who was legally entitled to the rents. At Fol. 4 Sir Thomas Grierson is mentioned. He was minister of Penpont, and brother of Gilbert Grierson in Camling. At Fol. 5 Matthew Gledstanis of Kelwod and Margaret Jardyng, lady of Kelwod, are mentioned. This family is fully dealt with by Mr R. C. Reid in the notes to his recent edition of Edgar’s History of Dumfries. 124 Fol. Acts., iii., 204-6; ep. R.M.S., v., 284. 13 R.M.S., vi., 69; 1968. 126 See an instrument of sasine dated and recorded 2nd January. 1620 (Dumfries Particular Reg. of Sasines), in her favour. 127 See Records of the Clan and Name of Fergusson, Ferguson, and Fergus, ed. by James Ferguson and Robert Menzies Fergusson, Edinburgh, 1895, pp. 386-7. 128 See Lag Charter Chest, 106, 118-122. 129 ix., fol. 102; xi., fol. 112. 110 EARLY SHERIFF CourT Book OF DUMFRIES. At the same folio the laird of Blakmyr and the laird of Ballagane are mentioned. Fergus Amuligane of Blakmyr and Duncan Hunter of Ballagan served on an inquest on 22nd April, 1505.20 The latter family is frequently mentioned. The Provosts of Lincluden. By R. C. REtp. This paper forms Part I. of a History of the Collegiate Church of Lincluden, and will be published when that work has been completed. 9th February, 1917. Chairman—ALEXANDER TURNER, V.P. Characteristics of Alpine Plants. By Provost S. Arnott, F.H.S. Some difficulty exists in classifying what may be called Alpine plants. Horticulturally, plants which are of dwarf stature have been grouped under this title, whether natives of mountains or lowlands. I do not intend, however, in these notes to adopt this broad classification, but to deal alone with the subjects which are to be found on the higher ranges of the European Alps. Even this restriction gives rise to some difference of opinion and difficulty, as authorities on the sub- ject disagree regarding the elevation at which the plants may justifiably be classed as Alpine, rather than sub-Alpine. This. is of but little consequence, however, as the line of demarca- tion is not a hard and fast one. Roughly speaking, we may take an altitude of 5000 feet as a fair basis, and discuss the plants above that as revealing the characteristic features of the true Alpine. 130 Lag Charter Chest, 48. See Hist. MSS. Comm. XV. Report,. App., Pt. viii., 35. CHARACTERISTICS OF ALPINE PLANTS. 111 The subject of the origin of the Alpine flora is not free from doubt. The general theory—that of Charles Darwin, Sir Joseph Hooker, and other scientists—may be concisely given as follows :—The flora of Europe and North America in the Miocene and Pliocene periods were practically similar. The Alpine regions had their own flora, and in the far north there was also what is called the ancient Arctic flora. This was, of course, previous to the Ice Age. With the advent of the Ice Age these floras had gradually to take up their quarters further and further southward. Therefore the ancient Arctic flora migrated into Canada and the United States and into Europe. In Europe the southward trend of the Miocene flora was checked by the Alps and other mountains. This flora, coming against the glaciated Alps, became almost extinct. A few plants, however, survived. As the glacial area extended, the ancient Alpines were driven into the Lowlands, where they became associated with the ancient Arctic flora. As the glaciation decreased again some of the ancient Arctic, as well as some of the ancient Alpine plants, ascended the mountains and originated the present Alpine flora. This theory, however, has found able opponents, and some of these urge that Central Asia was the original home of the Alpine plants, and it is known that a plant grown in the Arctic region presents many differences from one from the Alps. This statement is desirable as an introduction to the subject. One of the most marked characteristics of Alpine plants is that of their early flowering. The reason for this habit is an obvious one, which, however, the uninitiated are apt to overlook. It is, of course, due to the fact that the plants have to make provision for their reproduction by means of seeds within a very short period. Their revival from their winter’s rest, their flowering, the formation and ripening of their seeds, and the dispersal of these must be completed within a brief period of the short summer of these high alti- tudes. Some of the seeds, indeed, have to find a suitable 112 CHARACTERISTICS OF ALPINE PLANTS. resting place before the early winters set in, and may even germinate before that time. Their pre-winter germination is not common, but to make up for this it is remarkable how rapidly the seeds ger- minate with the melting of the snow: In cultivation in this country it has frequently been observed what rapid germi- nation takes place after a fall of snow. It can thus be emphasised that the main factor in the early flowering of these plants is due to the necessity of their reproduction being provided for within a short season. With some of the bulbous plants, such as certain Col- chicums, which flower late, the danger of injury to the future of the race is guarded against by the fact that the seed vessels, like the leaves, are not produced until spring, but are snug beneath the surface, only emerging to ripen when risk of destruction from winter’s rudeness has passed away. We now come to the question of the preservation of the plants from the severe conditions they have to sustain. When they are shrouded in snow during the winter there is little danger. That snowy covering is a screen far more effective than any which man can provide, unless at a cost and by means which cannot be provided in the economy of nature. There are, however, plants which have to exist on bare, wind-swept slopes, where snow cannot lie for long, and where they are exposed to conditions of the utmost hardship. These are protected in the same way as others are screened from injury by the equally trying conditions of periods of drought and brilliant sunshine. In many plants the leaves are covered with hairs or even protected by felt-like coatings, which ward off the extremes of cold and heat in the most effectual way. These protections are of most avail in summer, and many plants which could not, even with these contrivances, withstand the wintry conditions of these wind- swept slopes can be guarded against the trials of summer in their own habitats by these contrivances. Some are densely covered, and others have these protections less patent to the observer. An example of a plant with almost the maximum of such protection is the well-known Edelweiss. Many of the Saxifrages possess almost the minimum of this protec- CHARACTERISTICS OF ALPINE PLANTS. 113 tion. It consists in their case of a number of hairs, which retain a “‘ layer,’’ if we may employ that term, of air, which prevents rapid evaporation and undue strain upon the stomata or pores of the leaves. It is exceedingly interesting to observe how, even in cultivation, this feature becomes more developed when leaves are exposed to the sun. Some plants of these Saxifrages will show a small supply of hairs when in the shade, and a greatly increased number in sunny places. For shelter against the parching heat of strong sunshine it would hardly be expected that the Sempervivums, or Houseleeks, would require any such arrangement, but certain species are fully provided with hairs, in some cases only along the thin leaf-margins, but in others all over the leaves, and in a few species this is still further supplemented by a cob- web-like arrangement of hair stretched across the rosette in the most delightful way. This brings us to the fleshy or succulent nature of the leaves of many of these plants. This provides a store of moisture, on which the plants can draw during drought, and is very apparent among the Sempervivums and Sedums. It may be mentioned, however, that such arrangements as those remarked upon for protection against drought are not pecu- liar to Alpines, but are common among plants exposed to excessive drought at certain times. Another method of protection is that afforded by a floury “or mealy substance, which clothes the leaves—generally the lower surface—and frequently the stems and bracts of certain flowers. This serves in some measure as a screen against the strain on the plant caused by the refraction of the sun on the snow about the plants. I am not aware, however, if this question has been as fully considered as one might ex- ‘pect, and I have a measure of doubt as to the reason of this powdery arrangement. A marked characteristic of the Alpine plants is the scale- like coverings which shield the stomata of certain subjects. Some plants, such as the Alpen Rose—Rhododendron ferru- gineum—have a brown, rust-like appearance underneath the leaves. This is composed of a series of scales covering the 114 CHARACTERISTICS OF ALPINE PLANTS. stomata or pores, which are on the under surface of the leaves alone, and preventing excessive respiration. Another point which has been frequently remarked upon is the intense brilliancy of the flowers—a brilliancy which is not so apparent in cultivation—and is doubtless the product of the pure air and undimmed sunshine the plants enjoy in their season. This brilliant colouring has the effect of attracting many insects, which, in their search for honey and pollen, convey the latter from flower to flower or assist in the process of fertilisation in many flowers which are self- fertilised. Some interesting speculations have been evoked by the question as to which colours were most attractive to the insects, but I must say that the conclusion that red flowers are the most frequented is not borne out by flowers in cul- tivation. A pronounced characteristic of Alpines is that of pro- ducing a dense, tufted habit of growth, with short stems and spreading roots. By the former habit the plants are less ex- posed to fierce winds and are less liable to exhaustion. The roots are of a kind which will enable the plants to draw their nourishment from a wide area. Many of them penetrate far into gravel and loose soil; while others, with what are known as tap roots, push far down into the crevices of the rocks and draw their nourishment from sources untouched by drought or heat. Such are some of the characteristics of these charming plants, the products of trial and adversity. When or how they were originally produced lies beyond mortal ken. It is sufficient, perhaps, for us that they are part of that great plan which is ever revealing fresh facts to its study by man- kind. In this, as in so many other branches of learning, we are like children gathering pebbles by the seashore; but we return from our search for knowledge ever more conscious of our ignorance and more and more realising how much there is to learn in Nature’s works and ways. HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY. 115 Halldykes and the Herries Family. By Davin C. HErRRIEs. On high ground a mile or so north-east of Lockerbie stands the plain little whitewashed house of Halldykes, flanked on either side by its stables and byre, with a weather- beaten avenue of beech trees stretching away in front. Now a mere farmhouse, it was once larger, with a wing on each side; on the sill of the window over the porch is cut R.H. mpccxxtl. M.J.—the date of its building and the initials of its then owners, Robert Herries and his wife, Mary Johnstone. A room to the right of the porch is handsomely panelled in oak, and over it is another, also oak panelled, the windows of which command a wide view southward, ranging from Birrenswark Hill on the left to Criffel on the right with Skiddaw in between in the far distance. Halldykes once formed part of a property called Little Hutton, the history of which from 1644 to 1803 it is proposed to relate here, with the help of an inventory of its title deeds made in 1751, the Edinburgh General and Dumfries Particular Registers of Sasines, and other evidence.! According to the inventory of 1751,? the Steel family of Brierhill obtained in 1644 from James (Murray), 2nd Earl of Annandale, a charter (following upon a contract of wadset) of the 10 pound land of Little Hutton,’ ‘‘ comprehending therein the 9 merk land of Halldykes and Hutton Hills and the 6 merk land of Fulldoo-s,’’ in the parish of Dryfesdale and 1 All unpublished family papers quoted here—such as the in- ventory, a rent-roll, etc., etc.—are in the possession of Mr R. S. Herries of St. Julians, Kent, the present writer’s brother. 2 See, too, R.M.S., 1634-1651, No. 1564. 3 Little Hutton belonged in 1632 to John, 7th Lord Herries, and probably was included in a Crown grant of the 20 pound land of Hutton in Annandale, on his resignation, to Sir Richard Murray in 1633. On Sir Richard’s death Hutton passed to certain nieces of his, and on their resignation in 1643 to their cousin, James, 2nd Earl of Annandale, from whom ‘he Steels derived their right to Little Hutton in 1644. (Sec #.M.S., 1620-1633, No. 2121; 1634-1651, Nos. 441, 1450; Dumfries Retours, Nos. 163, 164.) 116 HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY. Stewartry of Annandale. The Earl reserved a right of re- version on payment of 7500 merks, and about the same time granted to the Steels a discharge of a feu duty of £10 10s Scots. On 30th May, 1654, the Steels and a creditor of theirs, Ronald Brown, portioner of Leitfeild, made a disposition of the same property in favour of Mr Robert Herries, minister of Dryfesdale, and Janet Mackison, his spouse, in life rent, and of their son, Robert Herries, in fee, subject to the reversion and the ‘‘ hazard ’’ of the feu duty above mentioned. Sasine in their favour followed on 24th July, and was registered at Dumfries on 30th August, 1654. The minister+ and his wife disponed their rights in the property in favour of their son, Robert Herries, on 24th August, 1660. James, 2nd Earl of Annandale, died in 1658, when his earldom became extinct, while his viscounty of Stormont and his right of reversion over Little Hutton passed to David (Murray), 2nd Lord Balvaird, and on his death to his son, David, 5th Viscount Stormont,® with whom in order to termi- 4 Robert Herries was minister of Dryfesdale from 1616 till his death, which took place at the age of 80 on 10th May, 1662, accord- ing to his tombstone, carved with two armorial shields, in Dryfes- dale Old Kirkyard. On 8th January, 1642, he was served heir- general to his father, William Herries, burgess of Edinburgh, who died in 1598, appointing in his will (confirmed at Edinburgh, 24th January, 1598/9) overseers for his son Robert and council givers for his wife, Katherine Bankes (for whom see R.P.C. vi., p. 521). Among his debtors were Robert Herries of Mabie and his son Richard and others of his own name. His son, the minister, married Janet Mackison at South Leith on 10th September, 1618 (Scott’s Fasti, L., pt. ii., p. 647). A notarial instrument shows that on 4th Novem- ber, 1670, she personally at Halldykes put her son Robert into pos- session of her household goods there, as well as her corn and live stock. Besides Robert, she had an elder son, Mr William Herries of Harthat, or Hartwood, in Annandale, who died in 1658. One of his daughters, Katherine, married John Herries of Mabie, and her brother, Francis Herries of Hartwood, and his son William after him, became possessed of Mabie for a short time by purchase from John Herries’s creditors. (For pedigrees of the Herrieses of Hart- wood and Halldykes, see Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, 4th Series, iv., pp. 272, 301, 378; v., 40, 118, 119.) 5 This Lord Stormont’s second son, James Murray, was created by the Pretender in 1721 Earl of Dunbar, Viscount Drumcairn, and HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY. 117 nate the reversion Robert Herries, son of the minister, entered into a contract of feu on 18th December, 1701. Stormont therein undertook to grant the Little Hutton property to Robert himself in life rent, and to his son, William Herries, and his heirs in fee, without any manner of reversion, redemp- tion, or regress, to be held by them of himself and his succes- sors by payment of a yearly feu duty of £440 Scots (£3 6s 8d in English money), and by giving personal attendance on horse- back to himself and his successors within the country of Annandale when called, in suitable order and at their own expense. Further, the property was to be thirled to the mill of Tundergarth, or, in other words, all corn grown on it was to be ground at that mill. A charter of Stormont to the same effect bears the same date, by virtue of which Herries and his son had sasine of the property on 2nd January, which was registered at Edinburgh on 28th February, 1702. Probably the attendance on horseback was not meant to be called for, though in his younger days Robert Herries might have been a champion worth having, for he was ready to quarrel and handy with sword and pistol. He was im- prisoned for a few weeks in 1667 for using both weapons against James Murray, messenger, and his party, who were trying to execute letters of poinding against Adam Newall, ‘“‘ chamberlain to the Earl of Southesque ;’’® and Newall in his turn entered into a bond of caution at Halldykes, the 2nd July, 1674, that ‘* Robert Herries of Halldyckis ’’ would not trouble Lord Hadykes (Ruvigny’s Jacobite Peerage, p. 44, where a note ex- plains that Hadykes is Halldykes, ‘‘ pronounced Ha’dykes,’’ near Lockerbie). Stormont’s fourth son was the famous Karl of Mans- field. 6 Scottish Hist. Soc., xlviii., pp. 223, 224, 230. Adam Newall, who lived at Hoddom Castle, then belonging to Lord Southesk, died in 1688. His testament, confirmed at Dumfries, 12th March, 1684, shows that his widow, Sarah Herries, was daughter of ‘ Janet Makesoune’’ (see Footnote 4), and sister-german ef this Robert Herries. Both she and her brother, Robert Herries, were accused before the Privy Council by Lord Southesk in December, 1683, of concealing papers that had been in Newall’s hands as “‘ factor and chamberlane’’ to the Southesk estates. (See R.P.C., 3rd Series, vili., pp. 301-2.) 118 HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY. or injure Andrew Murray of Brockelrig, or his family, tenants, or servants. Robert Herries had also in 1674 a quarrel on hand with James Carlyle of Boytath.’. He married Jane, daughter of William Irving of Cove (son of Jeffrey Irving of Robgill and grandson of Edward Irving of Bonshaw), the marriage contract being dated at Cove the 13th December, 1670.8 William Herries, the son infefted with him in the property in 1702, died before the 5th August, 1703, when his brother Robert was served his heir. This Robert had sasine of ihe property, the 12th July (registered at Edinburgh the 9th August), 1704, by virtue of a precept of Clare Constat by Lord Stormont in his favour as brother-german and heir of William, eldest son of the late Robert Herries of Halldykes, dated the 1oth May, 1704. His initials, with those of his wife, appear on the present house at Halldykes, as has been related already. His grandson, Robert, the last Herries owner of Halldykes, in some MS. notes about his family describes him, on the authority of his own father, as a ‘‘ dapper little man, a perfect gentleman, who never stirred without bearing his sword by his side.’’ He continues :—‘‘ How he contrived to bring up his large family seems quite wonderful, . . . all his daugh- ters appear to have had a tolerable education, and the hand- writing of all his sons was remarkably good, as various papers in my possession show.’’ These notes say that he was living’ in 1724, when he “‘ charged his estate as provision for each of his younger sons.’’ He died before 21st June, 1728, when Lord Stormont issued a precept of Clave Constat for infefting William Herries in the Little Hutton estate, as eldest son and heir of Robert Herries of Halldykes. The consequent sasine did not take place till the 23rd October, 1735, and it was registered at Dumfries on the following 15th December. William Herries is said to have ruined himself by extra- vagant devotion to sport. At anyrate, according to the in- ventory, he made a disposition of the Little Hutton property 7 R.P.C., 3rd Series, iv., pp. 607, 612, 666. 8 Colonel J. B. Irving’s Book of the Irvings, p. 50. HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY. 119 in favour of John Goldie of Craigmuie® and others as trustees for his creditors, which was dated the 2nd January and regis- tered in the Sheriff Court Books of Dumfries, the 26th Sep- tember, 1751. The property was put up to auction at Dumfries the 22nd October, 1751, and it was on this occasion that the inventory of its title deeds, so often referred to, was made and signed by Mr Goldie for the use of the purchaser. This purchaser, as a ‘* docquete ’’ at the end of the inven- tory shows, was Robert Herries, the next younger brother of William Herries,’ the seller. He was born about 1710, and began life as a merchant at Dumfries, being admitted a bur- gess there the 1st February, 1731. In 1738 he was on the Jury (see Crockett’s Scott Originals, p. 410) at the trial at 9 Some time Commissary of Dumfries (see ‘ Goldie-Scot,’’ Burke’s Landed Gentry, 1914). 10 William Herries died at Rosebank, a house on the Halldykes property, on 24th September, 1777, and was buried in the Old Kirk- yard of Dryfesdale with his first wife, Katherine, daughter of John Henderson of Broadholm, in Annandale (for her family see Miscellanea Genealogica et Heraldica, 5th Series, i., p. 173). Their eldest son, Sir Robert Herries, a London banker, knighted in 1774, was M.P. for the Dumfries Burghs from 1780 to 1784, and died in 1815. His second wife, a daughter of the Rev. F. H. Foote, of Charlton Place, near Canterbury, by a sister of Sir Horace Mann, the friend of Horace Walpole, was well known as a “ blue-stocking ”’ hostess in London. Sir Robert’s next younger brother, Charles Herries, was known to contemporary Londoners as Colonel of the Light Horse Volunteers of London and Westminster, which num- bered among its privates a Prime Minister (Spencer Perceval) and other statesmen and distinguished persons. On his death in 1819 the regiment gave Colonel Herries a military funeral in Westminster Abbey, and placed a monument to his memory there. His eldest son, the Right Hon. John Charles Herries, the Tory statesman, died in 1855, and his eldest son, Sir Charles Herries, Chairman of the Inland Revenue Board, in 1883. The Right Hon. J. C. Herries had a brother, General Sir William Herries, who died in 1857, and the present lineal male heir of William Herries and his wife, Katherine Henderson, is Sir William’s grandson, William Herbert Herries, eldest son of Herbert Crompton Herries, and brother of the present writer. He has sat in the New Zealand House of Representatives since 1896, and was Minister for Railways and Native Affairs in the Cabinet formed by the Right Hon. F. W. Massey in 1912, which offices he continues to hold in the Coalition Cabinet formed by the same Prime Minister for war purposes in 1915. 120 HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY, Dumfries for infanticide of Isobel Walker, upon whose case, and the devotion of her sister Helen, Scott founded his Heart of Midlothian. According to the Autobiography of Dr Alexander Carlyle, minister of Inveresk, he did not pros- per at Dumfries, and eventually settled at Rotterdam. Here he succeeded well enough to be able to retire from busi- ness early in life and buy Halldykes.11_ Some accounts of his have been preserved, which show that he farmed part of the land himself, for an entry of 31st December, 1770, states that £34 5s had been received for ‘‘ potatoes and milk sold this year, besides maintaining the family and 10 servants.’’ In 1757 he built new stables, and in 1764 a chaise and harness cost £42, and two bay horses £32 11s. Probably he found coun- try life less to his liking than he had expected, for at the end of 1771 he departed for London with his family to begin a second business career as “‘ acting partner’ in a bank that his nephew, Sir Robert Herries (see Footnote 10), had just started in St. James’s Street. For this post he was “‘ ex- tremely well qualified,’’ according to Sir William Forbes of Pitsligo, another partner in that concern. He died in London at his house in King Street, near the Bank, the 3rd October, 1791, in his 82nd year. He had married in 1747 ce 11 Sir William Forbes’s Memoirs of a Banking House, p. 17, where the seller of Halldykes is wrongly called John, instead of William Herries. 12 Tbid., p. 30. 13 Gentlemen’s Magazine, 1791, July-December, p. 972. In 1747 this Robert Herries matriculated his arms (the old Herries three sable herissons on a silver field, with a crescent in the centre for his difference) and crest, and is described in the Lyon Register as ‘‘second son of the deceast Robert Herries of Haldykes, who was son to Robert Herries of Haldykes, who was son to Mr Robert Herries, minister of the Gospel at Drysdale, and younger son of the last Lord Herries.’”’ To this a note was added in 1824 pointing out that the minister was really son of William Herries, of Edinburgh (see Footnote 4). In 1789 Robert’s nephew, William Herries, of Brussels, matriculated his arms with due difference, and is described in the same register as ‘‘ brother of Sir Robert Herries (see Footnote 10) . . . and third son of William Herries of Halldykes by his lady Katherine, eldest daughter of John Henderson of Broadholme. which last William was parternally descended from the ancient and respectable family of the Lords Herries,’’ etc. HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY. 121 Isabella, daughter of Sir Thomas Kirkpatrick of Closeburn, (3rd) Bart. She died the 47th October, 1777, at the age of 47. He was succeeded in the possession of Halldykes by his son Robert, who, though born there the 31st October, 1767,'4 never lived at the place in later life. He was for some time the head of the bank in St. James’s Street, but retired from business in 1815. He died at his house of Glenlyn, at Lyn- mouth, North Devon, the 27th October, 1845. He never married, and by selling the Halldykes property in portions from 1801 to 1803 had ended the family connection with that place, though not with Dumfriesshire, for his cousin, Sir Robert Herries (see Footnote 10), had inherited in 1800 a place called Greskin, in the parish of Moffat, from a distant kinsman, Michael Herries of Spottes. On Sir Robert’s death Greskin passed to his nephew, the Right Hon. J. C. Herries, who sold it about 1850. A “‘rentall’’ of the Halldykes estate, signed like the in- ventory above mentioned by Mr Goldie, gives the names of the farms and their tenants in 1751 as follows :—The Mains of Halldykes, Christopher Armstrong ; the Byresteads, James Henderson ; the Buss, William Muir ; the Fulldoors and Rough Park, John Johnston; the Miln Mailing, Thomas Mundal; Catchhall and Parkhouse, John Mundal; Sloda Hill, Andrew and Hendlay Chalmers; and the Upper Mains, John Johnston and Thomas Mathison. The total yearly rental was £120 tos 8d, paid mostly in cash but partly in ‘‘ kain’’ fowls and work done for the landlord. The rent of the Byresteads, for instance, was 411 and the teind £1, and to this sum of £12 was added igs 2d, the value of eight kain fowls, priced at 4d each, and of so many days of carting of peat and turf and leading of corn and hay and so on. On some of the farms this ‘‘ work money ”’ had been commuted for cash payments, but kain fowls were due from all. These figures suggest that 14 His father’s accounts show that on lst November, 1767, he paid 2s for an ‘‘ Express to Closeburn to announce the birth of my son,’’ and £2 2s to the midwife. In October, 1770, he paid £2 2s to ‘‘Dr Clapperton for inoculating my son,’’ and £3 3s ‘‘and a watch ’’ to ‘‘ Mr Yorstoun, surgeon, for attending him.”’ 122 HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FAMILY. tradition may have done injustice to William Herries, the seller of the place in 1751. In these days no great extrava- gance would be required to come to grief on a rent-roll of £120, burdened with charges for the support of younger brothers. Mr H. G. Graham, however, in his Social Life in Scotland, says that in the first half of the 18th century a laird was considered well off with a rent-roll of £100 or even £80 a year. The accounts of Robert Herries show that he gave £2700 for the property in 1751. In the next fifty years this price was more than trebled, and the rental more than doubled. A memorandum by the Robert Herries who sold the place in the early rgth century gives the prices he obtained and the rent- roll at that time as follows :— Farms. Acreage. Rent. Purchasers. Prices. Sloda Hill .. 357 2 32 £57 Nov., 1801, William Stewart .... £1550 ' Byresteads.. 93 1 3 40 July, 1802, David Johnstone .. 1100 Rosebank .. 128 3 1 52 10s March, 1802, Thomas Henderson 2200 Mains bo. ay? PA eh 80 : 5 Catchhall .. 57 2 14 35 April, 1803, Thomas Beattie .. 4300 785 acres. £264 10s £9150 _ The number of farms was less than in 1751, so possibly some had been thrown together. Advertisements of sale show that the 785 acres were Scots acres, equivalent to about 1000 English acres. The tenants in 1801, in addition to rent, paid. ‘“‘ Land Tax, Bridge, Rogue [a police rate] and Road Money, and School Salary.’’ Both in 1751 and 1801 the landlord had to pay out of his rent the feu duty of £43 6s 8d to the Superior of the lands and £7 towards the minister’s stipend. Of this. last sum £6 rgs 5d was paid in cash and the rest in kind, ‘4 bolls, 1 firlot, 3 pecks, and 34 lippies Half Meal.”’ 7 Half Bear Old houses are apt to gather legends about them. One such concerning Halldykes, so far as the present writer is aware, appears for the first time in print as a ‘‘ Border Rhyme ”’ in Tait’s Edinburgh Magazine, for July, 1845. The story is that at a convivial meeting of local gentry at Lockerbie Herbert Herries of Halldykes grossly insulted and struck his brother Hugh, after a quarrel as to which was the favoured of a certain lady. Herbert on his way home to Halldykes. HALLDYKES AND THE HERRIES FaMILy. 123 was waylaid and murdered at Hurkell-burn by Hugh, who, after announcing to another brother, Charles Herries, that he had just made him a laird, disappeared for ever from Annan- dale. The ghost of Herbert is still supposed to haunt the place of his murder. So much for rhyme, but the prosaic Sasine Registers know of no Herbert or Charles Herries as owners of Halldykes, and only record one succession (except by pur- chase in 1751) of brother to brother, when Robert was infefted in the lands in succession to William Herries in 1704. As has been stated already, Robert Herries, the last of the name to own the place, wrote down a few notes about the family con- nection with Halldykes, and these are silent about this tragedy. Though he never lived at Halldykes after his child- hood, yet he says that he had heard his father speak of his father and his manner of life there, and in later life he was often in the neighbourhood on visits to his mother’s relation, General Kirkpatrick Sharpe of Hoddom Castle. It seems, therefore, incredible that he should not have heard the story if it was current in his time, and still more incredible that if he knew of it he should not think it worth mentioning. Pro- bably the tale was the invention of the anonymous rhymster of the Edinburgh Magazine. A more pleasing legend relates that in 1745 a company of the Highland followers of Prince Charles Edward on their march southward by Lockerbie visited Halldykes, but only found there the lady of the house, Katherine Henderson, the wife of William Herries, who is said to have been on the Hanoverian side. She, by her agreeable manners, so won their goodwill that in compliment to her they forebore from all acts of rapine or violence, only exacting in return a promise that the child she was expecting should, if a boy, be named Charles in honour of their Prince. About this story, too, the notes of Robert Herries are silent, and it can only be said that Mrs Herries’s second son, born about this time, certainly was called Charles (see Footnote to). 124 PRIMITIVE MARRIAGE. Primitive Marriage. By the Rev. S. DuNLop. [This valuable anthropological lecture dealt fully with the classification into which scientists divide the early forms of marriage. The data on which the lecture was based were almost all drawn from savage life, the lecturer following in the main the conclusions of Tylor and other authorities. The Editors regret that, owing to the limitations of space, a full resumé of the lecture cannot be given. | 8th March, 1917. © Chairman—WILLIAM Dickig, V.P. Crae Lane and its Vegetation. By Miss I. Wirson, M.A. The view towards Crae Lane from New-Galloway Station is across a stretch of uneven rocky moorland. Ina V-shaped depression it lies with Duchrae Bank on its right, sloping to meet Banks o’ Dee Hill. Centrally, at the mouth of the valley lies a wooded knoll, Holland Isle, beyond which, rising from Woodhall Loch, Crae Hill is seen, higher still Tormollan Hill. Circling Tormollan Hill and emerging from Lochen- breck is the Kenick Burn, which enters Woodhall Loch from the south. Crae Lane, known also as Woodhall Lane and Grenoch Lane, emerges from Woodhall Loch and flows in a northern direction through a valley, where every wifding | reveals an added beauty, eve:y gap is filled by some satisfying view of distant hill or nearer wooded knoll. In length, as the crow flies, Crae Lane is hardly a mile, its height above sea level being 200 feet. It will already be understood that ‘‘ lane ’’ here refers toa waterway. In Galloway it is the name frequently applied to a slow, winding waterway passing through bog or marsh CRAE LANE AND ITS VEGETATION. 125 land, the most famous being the Cooran Lane of the Raiders, a waterway entering the Dee near Loch Dee. In times of flood the Dee, which normally keeps straightly on its way across the mouth of the valley, sends a strong current round Holland Isle joining Crae Lane slant- wise, and, both by its somewhat contrary tendency up the valley, and also by stemming back the not inconsiderable volume coming down, causes high floods, when the valley is in great part submerged. We may divide the lane into three botanical regions— the still watercourse, the alluvial water-meadows, and the tree-covered slopes with coarser soil and whinstone rock. Common reeds and purple loosestrife characterise the water- course, bent grass the meadows, and coppices of birch, alder, oak, spruce, and pine the slopes. At the head of the valley is Duchrae Farm, the birth- place of S. R. Crockett. Around this spot he loved to weave his fancies; its floral riches are constantly referred to, justi- fying a more detailed account. On Duchrae Bank the Levellers, revolutionists against land-enclosure, are said to have made their last armed resistance to authority; while, crossing from Crae to Lochenbreck, Robert Burns was in- spired to composed ‘‘ Scots Wha Ha’e.”’ The plants, a list of which is now given, have been brought to school by the children and others, in their vary- ing seasons. Further observation of this mile will add greatly to the list, which is meanwhile very incomplete, but sufficient to indicate wealth of flowering plants. Firstly, growing in the watercourse may be found ranunculus flammula, r. aquatilis, nuphar luteum, nymphaea alba; potentilla comarum; lythrum salicaria; cnanthe crocata; iris pseudacorus; potamogeton natans; lemna minor; lobelia dortmanna; menyanthes trifoliata; arundo phragmites. Secondly, in the water-meadows may be found ranun- culus acris, r. ficaria, thalictrum minus, caltha palustris, trollius europaeus ; cardamine amara, c, pratensis, c. hirsuta; viola palustris, v. canina, v. tricolor; polygala vulgaris ; ~lychnis flos cuculi; potentilla tormentilla; parnassia palustris ; 126 CrRAE LANE AND ITS VEGETATION. “i drosera rotundifolia; hydrocotyle vulgare; carum verticil- latum ; jasione montana ; carduus palustris ; achillea ptarmica, a. millefolium; gnaphalium uliginosum; senecio aquatica; myosotis palustris ; pedicularis palustris ; mentha aquatica ; pinguicula vulgaris; myrica gale; orchis mascula, 0, macu- lata, o. latifolia; narthecium ossifragum ; juncus communis ; lusula campestris; eriophorum vaginatum; carex pulicaris, c. caespitosa, c. praecox ; c. grostis alba. Thirdly, in the woods and by the wayside are found draba verna, capsella bursa pastoris, lepidium smithii ; helianthemum vulgare; lychnis diurna; cerastium; stellaria holostea, s. graminea; sagina procumbens; hypericum per- foratum, h. pulchrum, h. quadrangulum; alchemilla arven- sis, a. vulgaris; geranium robertianum; oxalis acetosella; ilex aquifolium; trifolium pratense, t. repens; lotus cornicu- latus; lathyrus pratensis; prunus spinosa; fragara vesca; rosa canina ; epilobium parviflorum ; sanicula europea; meum ; viburnum opulus; lonicera periclymenum; galium saxatile, g, verum, g. aparine; asperula odorata; valeriana officinale > arctium lappa; centaurea nigra; heraclium spondylium ; carduus arvensis; senecio jacobea; lapsana communis ; hypochaeris radicata; hieracium murorum ; campanula rotun- difolia; erica tetralix; calluna vulgaris; myosotis arvensis ; m. versicolor; scrophularia nodosa; veronica officinalis, v. chamaedrys; euphrasia officinalis; rhinanthus crista galli; melampyrum pratense; prunella vulgaris; teucrium scoro- donium; ajuga; lysimachia nemorum; primula vulgaris ; persicaria aviculare; rumex acetosa, rv. acquaticus; rumex obtusifolius ; mercurialis perennis ; salix caprea, s. viminalis ; allium ursinum ; lugula sylvatica; scilla nutans ; anthoxantum odoratum; dactylis glomerata. Authorities : A List of Flowering Plants of Diuinfriesoie and Galloway, James M‘Andrew; British Flora, Bentham and Hooker. ETYMOLOGY OF LANE. ily ~J The Etymology of Lane. By the Epirors. The term lane, signifying a narrow deep rivulet or watercourse, appears to be confined almost entirely to Galloway, where it is of frequent occurrence. Jamieson in his Dictionary mentions that it is also to be found in Lanark- shire. In the district between Loch Dee and Loch Doon the term abounds—the Gala Lane, Cooran Lane, Carrick Lane, Eglin Lane, Carsphairn Lane, Tunskeen Lane, Balloch Lane—and others might be multiplied. In the parish of Mochrum is the village now called Elrig, but before it was endowed with a telegraph station it was always called the Lane of Mochrum, from a lane or narrow brook which, run- ning out of Elrig Loch, runs along behind the houses. The etymology of the term is obscure. The English lane, a narrow way, is the Anglo-Saxon ldne or lone, the latter form being preserved in the Lowland Scots, loan and loaning: Skeat, who remains the dominant authority on English etymology, pronounced lane to be of unknown origin, perhaps allied to the Icelandic lon, an inlet, a sea loch, laena; a hollow place, a vale. In this he is supported by Jamieson, who does not, however, say from what Icelandic word it is derived. His dictionary, invaluable as a record of phrase, is untrustworthy in etymology, for he did not always distinguish between words derived from each other and those of common descent. If the term be of Icelandic or Norse origin (and Mr W. G. Collingwood points out that there is an Icelandic word, leyningr, a hollow way), it is strange that it should for the most part occur in remote and inland parts where Norse influence was least likely to be felt or leave any permanent impression. In Cumberland, where Norse influence was un- doubted, there is no such word as lane. A narrow road is a lowning, or in the southern part of the district a loan. J. D. Johnston, in his Place Names of Scotland, p. 165, mentions a Gaelic word, lean, a swamp; and Mr Collingwood suggests that lane as a sluggish stream, if one can risk a 128 EtTymMouocy oF LANE. guess without knowing the history of the word, looks rather like the same thing. Mr Bradley, in the New English Dic- tionary, s.v. Lane, gives at the end of the article, “‘ 5. Sc. A sluggish stream of water ; also the smooth part of a stream ”’ (perhaps a different word)—1825-80, in Jamieson. 1891— Daily News, 2nd July—‘‘. . . here a loch and there a lane or sullen deep stream.’’ 1897—Crockett, Lad’s Love, X¥XV., 253-—‘‘. . . sluggish, peaty lane.’’ The N.E.D. derives lane, a narrow way, from the Old English lane, and Sir Herbert Maxwell is of opinion that the word, both in English and Lowland Scots usage, indicates a narrow passage, whether for persons and cattle (in English) or for water (in Scots). However obscure its etymology, the word in Scots sig- nifies a narrow sluggish burn, flowing as outlet or passage from a loch. The Lower Nith in its Relation to Fiooding and Navigation. By RoBert WALLACE, The rivers flowing into the Western Seas of Britain are shorter than those travelling eastward, yet their proximity to Atlantic trade routes may give them a greater commercial value, notwithstanding their smaller volume. Of these western rivers the Clyde is the largest in Sire land, and the Nith second. If the English coast be included, only the Mersey and the Severn are of greater volume. While the Nith is only fourth in size, yet it is of greater age than the Clyde or the Mersey, and probably also of the Severn. Of the oldest rivers born during the Eocene uplift, the Nith is certainly the largest. A stream that has been flowing uninterruptedly for a prolonged period of time may be expected to have swept its channel clear of all obstructions, making the shape and size of the valley to be in proportion to the volume of the stream. This would remove a prolific cause of flooding, and give a free passage for navigation through the estuary. The Nith THE Lower NITH. 129 has both the age and the volume necessary to produce a large and deep valley, but unfortunately it is harassed with burdens unexplained and mysterious. Its floods are famous, and its record in this respect is as bad as the long, tortuous streams crawling towards the east coast. In navigation there is no comparison between it and the larger rivers, Clyde or Mersey, while much smaller streams, like the Annan and the Urr, outrival it. Navigation is now only practicable to Kingholm Quay, six miles upstream; and a hurried discharge is impera- tive in order to escape a fortnight’s delay for full tides. Boats entering the county town are only a memory of the last generation. DuMFRIES BasIN. This ancient basin of New Red Sandstones stretches from the Solway north to Auldgirth. It is of horse-shoe shape, with steep valley walls on the western side. It embraces the whole central valley of Lower Nithsdale and the desolate valley of Lochar Moss on the east, and that of the Crook’s Pow on the west. The Red Sandstones of this basin are intercalated with bands of hard breccia. Gradually the softer sandstones have been removed, leaving the breccia to weather out in the form of prominent ridges, such as the Craigs, Chapelhill, Carruchan, and Goldielea. The intervening hollows are now occupied by the Nith, the Crook’s Pow, and the Cargen Pow. The central stream traverses at least three distinct types of valley formation in its course from Auldgirth through the burghs to the Solway. 1. As it traverses the parishes of Kirkmahoe and Holy- wood it meanders gently through a wide fertile plain of low gradient. 2. At the Castledykes bend, south of Dumfries, both valley and central flood plain are absent. The river is here entrenched—presenting an entirely new aspect. 3. At Glencaple the valley is V-shaped, with steep sides and a flat floor. NitH oF THREE DIFFERENT AGES. If we assume that the deep gorge at Blackwood is a true 130 THE LowER NITH. index of the tremendous erosive power of the river in cutting this narrow passage through the hard greywacke rock, then we must admit that the width and depth of the valley will be graded according to the size of the stream and the length of time it has been at work. The hills of Pennyland are over 1000 feet above sea level, while the river bed is 100 feet; this gives a gap goo feet deep. Assuming that the ancient river has been no larger than the present one, such a vast amount of rock cutting would require an enormous period of time. When the river encountered the soft sandstones of the New Red Basin its valley walls were corroded to a greater degree than the harder rock upstream. Hence at Duncow to Cow- hill the valley is two or three miles wide, with a flat bottom and flaring sides. The shape is different from that of the Blackwood gap, but the amount of work done bears the same proportion in both cases to the length of time at work. A cross section at both points gives profiles of a valley of a mature age. Down stream the Nith is augmented by the Cluden and other tributaries; yet at Castledykes it can only show an excavation of the breccia band to the extent of 15 feet. Evidently the river has not had the necessary time to grade its channel; it is a creature of yesterday. The work of gradation is just in its infancy. The third type is best seen a little south of Glencaple. The hills behind Kenneth Bank are nearly 300 feet high. This gives a gap of about one-third of the Blackwood gorge of goo feet produced by a stream greatly enlarged by tribu- taries. The Glencaple gap is evidently deeper than it seems. The valley walls on both sides of the river are steep, and the flood plain of mud which lies in the centre is nearly a mile wide. If the same angle of slope of the valley sides be ex- tended downward below the flood plain until they meet in the centre, another 150 feet of valley presently beneath sea level would give a total valley excavation of 450 feet. It is evident that the Glencaple gap, although of great age, is very much younger than the matured Duncow to Cowhill trough. It is no true index of the age of the Nith, but it suggests a younger life having been engrafted into older surrounding. The valley is a misfit. THE Lower NITH. 131 PROBLEM OF THE LocHar Moss. This valley begins north of Locharbriggs, and widens rapidly as it nears the sea. The Lochar rivulet meanders about in an aimless fashion through a vast wilderness of peat. The valley walls at Bankend are from three to four miles apart, and represent an immense valley excavation out of all proportion to the tiny stream passing through. Clearly this is an exaggerated misfit. Rivers Lost oR CAPTURED. The whole story of river development in Nithsdale and Galloway is extremely important. The path of the Nith in its earliest stages is clearly chiselled on the hills of to-day. Some tributaries have been beheaded, others captured, not many miles from the burgh two rivers are entirely lost. We are concerned, however, in this short paper with obstacles to stream development that are of recent date. The most practical way to arrive at a definite decision is to find out (1) what were the geographical conditions of this basin previous to the interruption by glaciers during the Ice Age; (2) what has happened to this area since the dispersal of the glaciers. OSCILLATIONS OF SEA LEVEL. All authorities are agreed that during the last two or three ages there have been several elevations and depressions of the land throughout Southern and Western Scotland. J. W. Gregory is of opinion that an elevation of land took place in Pliocene times of 800 to 1000 feet. This uplift would connect the Outer and Inner Hebrides with the mainland of Scotland. Ireland would be joined to England and Wales, and the tract now covered by the Irish Channel would be a long, broad valley or trough. Probably the Nith and other Galloway streams discharged into the Solway river, which flowed along the plain of the Irish Channel and entered the sea at the south of Ireland. One thing at least is certain, that rivers would cut deeply into the elevated land, and still be considerably above the sea level of that age. Borings in the Clyde district prove the existence of a 132 Tue Lower Nivu. buried river valley 300 feet below sea level. Another bore near Barrow-in-Furness gives a depth of 450 feet before the bed of the old valley is touched. The pre-glacial valley of the Mersey is 160 feet deep. At Bo’ness, on the river Forth, the ancient river channel is now 570 feet below present sea level. After the Pliocene uplift a gradual subsidence of land took place. It was continued into glacial times, and in this district reached its maximum when the shore line stood 100 feet higher than the present sea level. Along the rocky headlands of Galloway the waves cut out a rock platform at an elevation of 100 feet, while in the estuaries a beach was deposited at the same elevation. About this time the glacia- tion of Southern Scotland was at its greatest. Galloway ice was travelling eastward over the Nithsdale valley. As the ice-fields decreased in size an elevation of land took place, and the shore line receded until it reached the 50 feet contour line. There was sufficient pause at this height to form another estuarine beach. During the formation of this 50 feet beach the glaciers were greatly reduced in size. They were confined to valleys, and their moraine deposits on the outlying plains tend in the same direction as that of the valley from which they emerge. Since that time the eleva- tion of the land has been continuous, with the exception of a slight pause producing another marine terrace at 25 feet. PRE-GLACIAL NITH. The uplift in the Pliocene Age would enable the rivers to cut very deeply into the land. The goo feet gap at Black- wood would give some idea of the size of the valley further down stream. The soft sandstones of Lower Nithsdale would be more easily eroded, and the result would probably be a wide trough, but the amount of erosion would be greater in Caerlaverock than at Blackwood. The pre-glacial Nith valley must have been both large and deep. Bores near the mouth of the Lochar give a depth of 200 feet before rock is touched. The valley walls are at least three miles apart; they dip below the old beach of the Lochar at Bank- end at a sharp gradient, and point conclusively te a buried valley of large dimensions. No. 1 bore at the Arrol-Johnston Lan THE Lower NITuH. 138 Works, Heathhall, gives a buried channel 105 feet deep; No. 2 bore, too feet. The works are built upon the 50 feet beach, and probably cover the bed of the Pliocene Nith, which was at least 55 feet below present sea level. RAISED BEACHES OF KIRKMAHOE. The depression of land in early glacial times to the 100 feet level would bring the sea up to Dalswinton, and cause the formation there of an estuarine terrace, which was immediately covered with glacial moraines as the sea re- treated. During the formation of the 50 feet beach all pre- glacial channels were silted up near the shore line. This beach extends from Sandbed and Carzield past Kirkton and Carnsalloch to Heathhall. Not only was the old channel through Kirkmahoe deeply buried, but the Nith glaciers deposited large moraines at Carzield and Carnsalloch, and effectually barred the passage of the river. THE New NIrTH. The river had now to find for itself a new path to the sea, and its course was governed wholly by the movement of the glaciers or the arrangement of their deposits. The line of least resistance pointed south, but the glaciers of the Cluden valley coalesced at an angle with those of the Black- wood valley. The junction took place at Dalscone, and between the two sets of ridges the waters of the impounded Nith got through with difficulty. South of the burghs the Galloway ice travelling over the Maxwelltown plain deposited long drums of moraine debris from Corbelly to Castledykes. Again the river squeezed through the breach in the barrier and escaped. CARNSALLOCH FLOODS. The Dalscone barrier is a glacial drum of sand and gravel. Since the river began its new course it has trun- cated the ridge on the Holywood side, and cut down 15 to 20 feet. While it was lowering its channel at Dalscone, it was compelled up stream to work in a lateral direction, hence the very large holms of Carnsalloch and Duncow. 134 THE Lower NITH. They are the results of tremendous floods due to the ob- struction of the barrier. Across these plains the river has worked incessantly for thousands of years endeavouring to right the wrong of a former age. FLOODING OF DUMFRIES. Although the Nith has been augmented by the Cluden Water, it has not accomplished so much vertical cutting at Castledykes as at Dalscoue. Three new features meet us :-— (1) A broad band of very hard rock crossing the channel; (2) a sharp elbow turn giving the rock a greater power of resistance; (3) the presence of tides. The band of breccia is probably a spur descending from the Craigs. It is continued along the western side of the river to the Caul, and protects the Troqueer bank from erosion. This has caused the Nith to impinge upon the Dumfries bank, cutting downwards 30 feet, and forming the flood plains of Dock Park, Whitesands, and Greensands. This sad spectacle of destruction has continued since the days of Neolithic man, and will continue until we wake up to the necessity of assisting the river to adapt the size of its channel to the great volume of flood water stored up in the winter’s snow throughout the Southern Uplands. GLENCAPLE RIVER. South of the Castledykes the Nith enters into an old valley extending to the Solway. The tributary valley of Crook’s Pow enters the trunk valley near Kelton, and widens it considerably in that neighbourhood. The Glencaple valley assumes its true proportion just below the village. Its valley walls at Kenneth Bank and Kirkconnel are very steep, and if extended downward below the present merse they would produce a V-shaped valley extending more than too feet beneath sea level. Undoubtedly the Glencaple river was of considerable age when the Pliocene uplift took place. This elevation gave it new life and power to lower its bed in agree- ment with the original Nith in the Lochar valley. During the 100 feet and 50 feet submergence the river was drowned. At the pause of the 25 feet beach the silting process began. THE LOWER NITH. 135 The first or oldest portion remaining is that of Kirkconnel Moss. EXCAVATING THE BURIED VALLEY. Ever since the new Nith entered this old small valley with its buried bottom it has been seeking to adjust itself to its environment. From Kingholm onwards the valley is large enough to accommodate its captured river, but its silted floor is a serious obstacle to navigation. The entry of the Cargen Pow, Crook’s Pow, and other streams on the western side of the valley has destroyed the balance of power and driven the river Nith towards the eastern bank. In the work of down- ward erosion it has encountered the hard spurs of the Nether- wood and Chapelhill ridge. © In several places the river is resting upon a shelf in the eastern valley wall, particularly so at Kingholm Quay, where a continued elevation of land may in a few years hang up the dock beyond the reach of tides. Naturally the situation is at its worst at Kelton Ford, where the valley is at its widest. A comparison of the wide channel at Kelton and the narrower one at Glencaple is very sugges- tive. Not only must the channel be narrowed and so assisted to scour its own passage, but the entry of the tributaries must be regulated. They meander over a long flood plain of low gradient. They carry in suspension a very large amount of peaty material. | When entering the broad river, calmed down by the rising tide, the tributaries are unable to continue their load, and a deposit in the stream takes place. A REJUVENATED NITH. The capture of the Nith by the Glencaple river gives us the great practical advantage of a master stream in a valley of young and robust age. The legacy bequeathed us by the glaciers of the Ice Age is that of an elevated river to Dumfries, which implies a swifter passage from the burgh to the Solway. These are the great assets upon the right use of which depends our suc- cess or failure in the treatment of the noble stream. The present obstacles to its free, uninterrupted passage are of an accidental and temporary nature, and it rests upon the genius 136 THE Lower NITH. of man to assist the river to aggrade her channel without delay. The ultimate cure is a simple problem of engineering skill, based upon a true conception of the progress of river development and a right interpretation of the history of the past. The Early History of the Farish of Keir. By Sir P. HAmMILTon-GRIERSON. This valuable paper has had to be omitted owing to lack of space. It is hoped that it will appear as a chapter in the History of the Grierson Family, which its author has in pre- paration. The Lost Stone of Kirkmadrine. By the Rev. G. PuHiLip ROBERTSON. Seven miles south of Stranraer, on the north-west corner of the Bay of Luce, is the village of Sandhead, and two miles west of it is the old churchyard of Kirkmadryne. In the middle of the churchyard stands a church restored to what it was seven centuries ago. It is not used now for worship, but is the burial place of the Ardwell family. Abutting on the outside, at the west end, is an arched recess. In this alcove is a collection of sculptured stones found in the district. The most interesting by far are stones with sculpture and inscriptions that are early monuments of Christianity. ‘‘ Nowhere in Great Britain is there a Christian record so ancient ’’ as the carving on these blocks. These stones are illustrated and described in the Report of the Ancient Monuments Commission on Wigtownshire, pp. 154-156. The largest are two monoliths, about seven feet high, over a foot wide, and three to four inches thick. On the top line of the slightly shorter, more massive block was A ET Q (Alpha and Omega, the T being ligatured). When the casts were taken by Sir James Simpson in 1861 for the Edinburgh THE Lost STONE OF KIRKMADRINE. 137 Antiquarian Museum, the Q was there and the T. Both are now frayed away. Below is the monogram cross of Constantine. This combination of A et Q with the mono- gram is common in early Christian times, but in this form it is found only here in the United Kingdom. The form of the monogram fixes a date. It is said that by the end of the sixth century the combination of A et Q with the monogram ceases to be found on sculptured monuments in the west of Europe. The monogram in the circle—a Greek cross with the Greek letter ‘‘ r’’ ligatured on to the upper limb—the Chi-Rho monogram—underwent changes. The Greek ‘‘ r ”’ (P) was modified to the Latin R, and by and by dropped, leaving only a cross in the circle and no monogram. This simple cross is not found before 500 a.p. The carving of the four monograms on these stones assigns their date to 450-550. All four have the ligatured ‘‘r ’”’ R, not Greek P. Below the circle there are six lines of inscription cut in good Latin capital letters, nine or ten in a line. The letter- ing has suffered less from the effects of time than have the formula and monogram. The fifty-six letters are distinct enough. The only question here is, was there another at the end of line four? It seems as if a small chip had been knocked off after the inscription was cut. There is a slight indication of at least one other letter in that line. If so, what was it? The letters are, as in ancient MSS, not spaced into words. Up to this part there is no question what are the words. The. inscription reads :—Hic Jacent Sancti et prae cipui sacerdotes ID ES. T is supplied, making id est. But this is said to be unheard of in epigraphy. A more commonly received idea now is, that the word, however it was written, indicated the name of the man buried there, as did the words following. In that case there are three com- memorated—Ides, Viventius, Mavorious. They were sacerdotes. That did not then always imply in Latin form, what now is suggested when we translate sacerdotes by priest. Writers of the period make it synonymous with episcopus. But that could not then have the same connotation as bishop has tous. Kirkmadrine could not have had at that time four 138 Tue Lost STONE OF KIRKMADRINE. or five bishops, successive or contemporaneous, like the Bishop of Galloway. They are called praecipui. This may be a mark of rank, or indication of character—eminent men in a position in which they were praecipui; or it is such a word of praise as was coming to be common on tombs. ‘The other large stone has a very short inscription. At the top is the monogram in a smaller circle than is on the other stone, without the A et Q. The monogram is only on the front of this stone, while it is also on the back of the other. Below, in the middle of the line, is the letter S, followed by ET, then below in a line Floren, and in another line tius. The letters are cut much more rudely here than in the other. It seems as if the two were meant to be read together, and to mark the last resting place of at least five men. They were likely inserted in a cairn. The formula, monogram, and inscription on the first stone do not take up three feet, while it is nearly seven feet in height. Very likely the cairn was piled above the grave, and piety set up this monument of devotion. But the circumstances of their erection are as much un- known as what befell them for a thousand years. Little is known of the church and the place. One infers that the four monograms would add to the sanctity of these stones in the eyes of the contemporaries of Bede and their successors. In the twelfth century church building was regarded by the magnates of Galloway as a great means by which they could obtain grace from God. This led to the erection of a new place of worship at Kirkmadrine. Perchance the reverence called forth by these sacred memorials led the builders to add beauty to strength in the building erected. They brought stone from Cumberland that could, as the native stone could not, be moulded and dressed into arch and pillars. About that time old districts were sub-divided into parishes, often named after, because put under the protec- tion of, saints. Draichan or Dryne, the patron of this parish, was one of the minor saints, and one wonders if it is owing to his being so little known that this parish is called indif- “ysinquipy ‘satenbyuy Jo Ajoloog 949 Jo Uolsstued puly Aq paonpoiday "€ “ON T Id ‘FO "2u03g Ne Se , JULI puny tN SUISSIIN OUL—' SG oVUld “SOU0IG OUUIPVUIYATYy V1, OYJ JO SOULMBIC, S,ppoOy, I{— |] 4°] gq SA leet NSO A SAIYOMW HA S7\ Meni Sa G\ Salo HSaoOy Sido Adda Sros Sao Vlora L wrrige & eee C~ yy mage Vo Gg ry PE Fes Ty 5 ELS 6S AS SD ONE RE PENIS ES THe Lost STONE OF KIRKMADRINE. 139 ferently Kirkmadrine and Jaskerton. Jaskerton was the name of the estate in which it stands, the manor house one and a half miles distant. For over a thousand years men gaihered to worship God on this spot, hallowed by the dus: of these early missionaries of Christ, perchance martyrs, commemorated by these stones. Worship ceased being held there about the era of the Covenants. There was a church here at the Reformation, and Protestant worship held for some years. It is said that the first incumbent—a scion of a well-known Wigtownshire family—was the only Protestant minister in the Presbytery of Stranraer that had been a Roman Catholic priest. Though the church was no longer used for worship, men around brought their dead to lie under its shadow. The building crumbled, and the whole place fell into neglect. The first reference thereafter I know of to these stones is in 1822, and it is by a Mr Todd. He was a schoolmaster in the parish adjoining on the south, Kirkaiden (Maiden- kirk). His sympathies and interests were wider than an ordinary pedagogue’s, and this led him to make a drawing of these three stones, which was afterwards of great use. The next known about them locally is that some twenty years later two of them were turned into gate posts. The churchyard is in the middle of fields, and cattle strayed over the graves. This was felt to be unseemly, and it was arranged that the minister lately ordained in the parish— Rev. Robert M‘Neil, father of the late Rev. C. M‘Neil, once of St. George’s United Free Church, Dumfries—should preach at Kirkmadrine, and that a collection should be taken to erect a dyke round the graveyard to keep out the cattle. This was done, and these two stones utilised as gate posts. Was the reverence paid to the ground an act of irreverence to the stones? Let it be forgiven, for men knew not then what we think nor they did. Soon after this Sir Arthur Mitchell brought their exist- ence to the knowledge of the antiquarian world; but by this time the smaller thick stone had disappeared. In 1872 Sir John Lubbock scheduled the two gate-posts in his Monu- 140 i THE Lost STONE OF KIRKMADRINE. ments Bill, and in 1889 they were Staced in a recess, and taken charge of by H.M. Board of Works. The missing stone was found by accident in October of last year. Visitors to the district have remarked on the strange pillars for posts to gates seen here and there in the Rhinns. They are like miniature corn stacks, some six feet high and eleven feet in circumference. The gate ma on a batt fastened into a stone in the pillar. On such a batt the gate of my manse swings. The iron having broken, it was found necessary to take out the former stone, and put in another with a new iron batt. It was found that the stone ran all the diameter of the pillar, and when ' it was got out and the new put in, there was a huge gap to fill up. The mason naturally thought the best way was to use the former stone for that purpose. It seemed an ordinary stone, so he commenced to break it. Fortunately it was not lying _to his mind, and he turned it over. Then, being an intelli- gent man, he saw to his dismay what he was trying to break. He was greatly relieved when we found it was the blank end that was broken, that the upper inscribed part was only cleft in two, and that the two parts fitted in perfectly, scarcely a particle being awanting. The stone has been cemented, under the care of the architect of H.M. Board of Works, and will soon be placed alongside the other two larger stones, hardly a whit worse. This stone is about three feet long, nine inches broad, and nine inches thick. The monogram is the same as on the other two. It is three inches from the top, and eight inches in diameter. One inch lower is the inscription, Initium et Finis, in two lines of letters, 14 to 14 inch in size. The M of initium is either frayed, or, more likely, as in some other cases, intentionally made like an R. The circle and inscrip- tion take up about thirteen inches, leaving three inches blank at the top and twenty inches below. The Chi-Rho monogram of which there are four specimens at Kirkmadrine, is found on a boundary (?) stone at Whithorn, and nowhere else in Scotland. Is that owing to the masons brought from France by Ninian to build Whithorn? But that question may, never be answered, any more than why the inscription was made THE Lost Stone oF KIRKMADRINE. 141 to run over two stones, why a third was added, why there was put in Latin on the third stone a translation of the Greek formula on the first. ee ‘ Mi aT! eo 25— SS a = Note on the Kirkmadrine Stone. By W. G. CoLLINGwoob. This stone was described in Proc. Soc. Ant. Scot., ix., p- 569, with an illustration, and mentioned in Romilly Allen’s Early Christian Monuments, Scot., p. 495. As the date, 450 to 550, is a good deal later than St. Ninian’s actual building, It may be safer to say that the use of the Chi-Rho monogram was brought in from Gaul through the intercourse of the Church in Galloway with its parent Church of St. Martin’s. It need not have been imported by the masons of Candida Casa, for they were probably dead by the time the earliest of the Kirkmadrine stones stood on cairns. Moreover, the Chi-Rho is found in the early British Church in Wales. A very well known example is the Carau- sius stone at Penmachno (plate 3, fig. 1, from Westwood, * Lapidarium Wallie, pl. 79), in which the lettering is 5th or 142 Tue Lost STONE OF KIRKMADRINE. 6th century. . That inscription says that Carausius “‘ lies here in this cairn ’’—which justifies the suggestion that the Kirkmadrine stones stood in cairns. A different form of Chi-Rho in Wales is at Trawsfynydd, Merioneth (fig. 2, from Westwood, pl. 77), also a burial in a cairn and a similar inscription, with the addition that the man was a Christian—‘‘ Pxianus ’’ for ‘‘ Xpianus.’’ In the Isle of Man the Chi-Rho is found on a stone at Maughold (Kermode, Manx Crosses, pl. x. and Ixvi.), which has two monogrammed crosslets (fig. 3) under a circular head. But this Maughold stone has lettering of the 8th or gth cen- tury, though the form of the monogram is like those of Kirk- madrine. It is evident that this form remained in use for a long period, and that it is derived from the ‘‘ Carausius ”’ form, which in its turn is a simplification of the early mono- gram, shown on a medal of Theodosius (about 390) as the X and P simply intersecting. The lettering of this Kirkmadrine stone is later than that of the other Kirkmadrine inscriptions. It seems to have minuscule U and M, and the uncial N, somewhat like our H, common in the 8th century. The ligatured ET is the regular thing in Welsh 5th to 7th or 8th century inscriptions, an old tradition common to all the British Church. There- fore, perhaps, one might suggest the late 7th century as the earliest date of this stone. Now, anyone can see what a splendid problem this sets. The data are :— 1. St. Ninian died about 428. 2. Viventius and Mavorius, late 5th century (by the lettering). 3. Florentius, 6th century (by the lettering). 4. Initium et finis, late 7th century or early 8th. 5- Maughold stone—shewing Whithorn influence, 8th to gth century; compare also another Maughold stone, apparently of the same pericd, with Anglian runes and an Anglian name inscribed (Kermode, Manx Crosses, pl. x). 6. Anglian Bishopric of Whithorn begins about 730 and ends about 802. a 3 THE Lost STONE OF KIRKMADRINE. 143 7. The later Whithorn crosses, beginning in the oth century. We seem to have here, in spite of the total blank in history, evidence of the continuation of the Church in Gallo- way, past the time when the Northumbrian Angles settled there and started their own Bishopric, right into the Viking Age; a Church, by its monuments, allied in its earlier history to that in Wales, and still perhaps to be re-discovered by (1) further finds of stones, and possibly early types of cell- chapels; (2) a better understanding of Welsh hagiology. There is work for the D. and G. N. H. and A. Society. Extracts from Weather and other Nature Notes taken at Jardington during 1916. By J. RUTHERFORD. JANUARY. New-Year’s Day was very stormy, with heavy rains, high wind, and heavy flood on the Cluden. The weather through- out the month was very changeable. There was rather high wind on several days. Ona number of mornings it was quite like spring, particularly so on the last five days, when the singing of birds was heard on every side. The wind was mostly from the west and south-west. The rainfall (which was well distributed over the month) was above the average, and the highest recorded here in January since 1904. The most remarkable feature of the month was the high temperature, being about 6 degrees above the mean for 48 years as recorded in Glasgow University Observatory. My record does not extend so far back. It may be interesting to compare the temperature record here with that of Glasgow, and to observe how little difference there is between them :— Jardington. Glasgow. Daily mean maximum... 49.68 deg. 48.5 _ Daily mean minimum... 38.68 deg. 40.4 Daily mean for month 44.18 deg. 44.6 144 WEATHER AND NATURE NOTES. The mean daily temperature for January during the last five years was 37.8 deg. It is noteworthy that the coldest November on record, viz., 1915, should be followed by the warmest January, and that the mean temperature of the two months was just about normal, whilst the intervening month of December was just normal. First Snowdrop was hanging its head on the 11th, 8 days earlier than 1915 ; Hazel came into bloom on the 28th, 23 days earlier than 1915. Mavis first heard on the 27th. FEBRUARY. During the first eleven days the weather was mild and very changeable—very similar to that of January, but lower temperature. The fields were quite green and spring-like, and several early flowers were almost ready for bursting into bloom. Cold, changeable, wintry weather followed, and all vegetable growth was suddenly checked. The fields lost their verdure and became blanched and bare. Till the 17th the wind was south and south-west. On the 18th a cold, bitter, barren, north-easterly wind set in, which continued till the end of the month. There were heavy snow and sleet showers on several days. The 16th was a very stormy day, with high wind and heavy sleet and hail showers. We had a trace of snow on several days, but during a good part of the month the distant hills were covered. Dog Mercury came into bloom on the rst; Yellow Crocus on the ioth; Dandelion on the roth; Coltsfoot on the 21st. The daily mean temperature was 6.5 degrees colder than January. Marcu. This month came in with a very cold north-east - wind, and the distant hills covered with snow. With the exception of the 16th and 17th, cold, barren, wintry weather continued till the end, with the wind principally from the east and north- east. Although there was no intense frost, yet there were only six days without frost on the grass. The daily mean temperature was 5.6 degrees colder than January. WEATHER AND Nature NOTES. 145 Lesser Periwinkle came into bloom on the 16th; Wood Anemone on the 23rd; Daffodil on the 31st. First heard the crows busy about their nests at Newton on the 4th. First heard the nesting note of the Peewit on the 16th. Corn sowing began on the 22nd. APRIL. Came in with an ideal.spring morning—a west wind and the birds singing all around. But this was a very dis- appointing sample of what was to follow. On the morning of the 2nd there was a heavy white frost, and the thermometer on the grass showed 1o degrees. A cold, barren wind, mostly from the west and north-west, prevailed till the 15th, which then changed to an easterly direction, where it continued during the remainder of the month. From the 16th there was no frost, and although the wind was easterly the absence of frost and the rain which fell on the 16th and 17th made conditions more favourable for vegetable growth, and during _ the last week we were surrounded with beauty in the rich verdure of the fields, the bursting bud, and opening flowers. First Primrose in bloom on an open bank (where I ‘always note it) on the rith, 15 days later than 1915; Sweet Violet on the 11th; Flowering Currant on the 13th; Jargon- elle Pear on the 14th; Sloe on the 21st; Dog Violet on the 22nd. ; First Sandpiper seen on the river on the 4th; first Wasp flying in the open on the sth; first Swallows on the 24th; Willow Wren on the 27th; Small White Butterfly on the 28th ; first heard the Cuckoo on the 27th. May. The “‘ merry’? month came in with a north-east wind, and several degrees colder than the last six days of April; a nice bright morning, plenty of May dew. Heard the birds begin their cheery music about 3.30 in the morning. Although the temperature of the month was fully two degrees below normal, and the distant Moffat hills were covered with snow on the 7th, yet vegetable growth made rapid progress, and by the 2oth the fields and trees were very beautiful, and 146 WEATHER AND NATURE NOTES. we could not help being charmed with our natural surround- ing and exclaiming, ‘‘ What a beautiful world in which we have been privileged to spend our probationary course !’’ and wondering what kind of conditions will prevail in the life which is to come. Cuckoo Flower came into bloom on the 8th; “‘ Blen- heim ’’ Apple on the roth; Garden Strawberry on the 15th; Wild Hyacinth on the 17th; Eyebright on the 17th; Chestnut on the 19th; Hawthorn on the 27th. We had an unusual number of Bumble Bees (Bombus terristris) and an extraordinary large number of Queen Wasps (Vespa vulgaris), which were very annoying, and people were looking forward with some alarm as to what extent the nuisance might reach in the summer and autumn if everyone was fertile and became the parent of a family of wasps. But during June and July they gradually decreased in number, and by the end of July there was hardly a wasp to be seen. What became of them I do not know, but during the summer and autumn there were very few nests about here. This singular occurrence of such a large number of Queen Wasps in the spring, and followed by few nests, has been noted in some previous years. The great number that had hibernated and survived the winter had either been unfertile, or weather conditions had been unfavourable for the development of the eggs and the production of young. JUNE. Rain fell cvery day till the 11th. From the 16th till the 21st the weather was rather cold and unseasonable, and on the night of the 13th there was some frost on the grass. Turnips came away rather slowly after sowing, but were ready for hoeing about the usual time under favourable weather conditions. Corn gave promise of being a good crop. There was a good deal of thunder, which no doubt had a beneficial influence on vegetable growth. The flowers of the month came into bloom about their usual time—Ox-eye Daisy on the 6th: Herb Bennet came into bloom on the 11th; Wild Rose on the 14th; Harebell on the 23rd. WEATHER AND NATURE NOTES. 147 The mean daily temperature was the lowest for June during the last six years, with the exception of 1913. JULY: The first fortnight prolonged the low temperature record of June, with rather wet and changeable weather. From the 8th till the 17th there was fairly good, haymaking weather, when a good deal of ryegrass was secured. From the 17th till the end there was generally bright, dry, and warm weather, very favourable for haymaking. Ryegrass and meadows were good crops. Grass was very plentiful: Corn first seen ragging on the 1st. The wind was mostly from the west, with a few days easterly. The rainfall was heavy. There was no exceedingly warm weather, such as we have often had in previous months of July. Thunder was heard on three days. Got the first dish of ripe Strawberries on the 14th; Honeysuckle first seen in bloom on the 12th; Knapweed on the 26th. Meadow Brown Butterfly first seen on the 2rst. AUGUST. For the greater part this was a month of excellent summer weather, with about normal temperature. By the 14th most of the hay in this immediate locality was in stack. Harvesting began on the 19th, four days later than in 1915. On good land in good condition there were heavy crops. By the end of the month there was a good deal in stack. On the 16th and 18th there was a good deal of thunder; on the 24th and 25th there were heavy thunder rains—2.58 inches fell during those two days, being two-thirds of the total for the month. This caused a considerable flood on the Cluden. In former years, a flood any time between the 1st and the middle of August was looked for, and was called the Lammas flood. SEPTEMBER. Fine weather continued throughout the month, with temperature a little above normal. There was a low rainfall, a variable wind, and high barometer. By the end the most of the corn on neighbouring farms was in the stackyard. 148 WEATHER AND NATURE NOTES. OCTOBER. A very dry September was followed by a very wet Octo- ber. With the exceptions of 1903 and 1909, this was the wettest October during the last 23 years. Rain, less or more, fell on nearly every day, the total being 7.81 inches. There were some high winds, and occasional frost at night. The barometer record of the month was in keeping with the ‘inclement weather experienced. On the evening of the 3oth the reading was 28.8 inches. On only eleven days did it rise to 30 inches. There was sunshine at 9 a.m. on 13 days. The daily mean temperature in the shade was 44.53 degrees; this is about 4 degrees below normal. There were several very stormy days, with heavy rain and high wind. There was thunder, with heavy thunder showers, on the 7th. Near the end of the month there were a few fine mild autumn days. We heard of several farms in this district where the harvest was not finished in September, but the weather of October was such that nothing could be done, and the stooks were in a bad state. Potato lifting was also much hindered by the stormy weather and the wet state of the ground. The crop turned out very disappointing. Not only was the crop light, but there was a great deal more disease than we have had for many years. It was noticed that the shaws of some varieties went down very early, before the tubers were matured. The reports from most of the districts throughout the country confirm the opinion that the crop is far below the normal. The last swallow seen was on the 15th, fifteen days later than in 1915. The leaving or the swallows was rather unusual and interesting. Large flocks went away about the beginning of the month; a few were seen daily until the 4th; no more were seen for several days. Then a number returned again on a few evenings; then they were not seen again for several days. A number were again seen on the. 15th. The reason for their being absent for several days and again returning I do not know. NOVEMBER. From the ist till the 1oth there was some rather stormy weather, with thunder and heavy rain. The direction of the ee QE ES —————— WEATHER AND Nature NOTEs. 149 wind was various. From this till the 22nd there was mode- rately. good November weather, when the greater portion of the potatoes here was got up, but the ground was wet and not very suitable for potato work. A good portion of the turnip >rop was secured during the month. This crop was also below the average in bulk on neighbouring farms. From the 22nd till the 29th there was a good deal of wet and stormy weather. The last day was very fine and mild, quite like spring. There was not sufficient drought during the month to enable anything ‘to be done by way of securing the corn which was going to waste in the stooks in many parts of the country. The temperature of the month was exceptionally high— the daily mean being 44.25 degrees. This was 9.07 degrees above that of November, 1915. There was very little frost— a few degrees were registered in the screen on eight nights. At the end of the month the fields were very green. ) In 1455 Thomas Fergusson was the laird of Craigdarroch. He married Elizabeth, daughter of John 1 Abstract, No. 2. £ Abstract, No. 2. See also Nos. 39 and 46. 2% Edinburgh, 1895. A supplementary volume was published four years later. 2 Records, cit. supr. cit., pp. 377, 405-6. 206 Some DOocuUMENTS RELATING TO GLENCAIRN. Menzies of Enach, and had a son named Matthew.’ We hear of Thomas and his wife in 1461,4 and we find an instrument of sasine dated 26th April, 1475, by Matthew Fergusson, laird of Craigdarroch.6 On 3oth April, 1483, John, son and heir of Matthew, was infeft in the lands of Craigdarroch and Jarburghe ;® and we learn that his wife was Elizabeth Douglas.* We find instruments in favour of John Fergusson of Craigdarroch dated in 15088 and 1513; and in July of the latter year a charter of the lands Caitloch was granted in favour of his son Thomas.12 John was witness to an instru- ment dated 20th May, 1514;!! and on 3rd November, 1514, Thomas, his son, was infeft as his father’s heir in the lands of Jarburgh and Drummakcallane.” There seems to have existed a deadly feud between the Douglases of Drumlanrig and the Crichtons of Sanquhar, and in this the lairds of Craigdarroch became involved as ad- herents of the former. On 16th December, 1510, we find supplication craving that John Fergusson of Craigdarroch should be ordained to produce letters purchased by him anent the giving of security by John Crichton of Hertwod as one of the complices of Robert Crichton of Kirkpatrick, then at the horn for the slaughter of Alexander and Robert Fergus- son; and in September, 1512, William Douglas of Drum- lanrig, John Fergusson of Craigdarroch, Thomas Fergusson, his son, and their complices, accused as art and part of the 5 Precept of Sasine dated 21st March, 1454-55. Abstract No. 1. 4 Instrument dated 24th July, 1461. Abstract No. 3. 5 Abstract No. 6. 6 Two instruments dated 30th April, 1483. Abstracts Nos. 7 and 8. See also No. 9. 7 Instrument dated 15th February, 1489-90. Abstract No. 10- 8 Abstracts, Nos. 19, 20, 21, 22. 9 Abstracts, Nos. 31, 32. 10 Abstract, No. 30. See No. 9. 11 Abstract, No. 39. 12 Abstract, No. 41. See Nos. 42, 43, 44, 45, 46. 13 Acta Dom. Conc., xxi., fol. 10. SoME DocuMENtTS RELATING TO GLENCAIRN. 20% slaughter of Robert Crichton of Kirkpatrick, were discharged because the said Robert was a rebel at the horn, Fergy and Robin Fergusson being, however, exempted from the dis- charge.4 This case has a special interest, as it illustrates the view which the old law took of the position of the outlaw. It shows—and there are other authorities to the same effect*— that no process could be maintained for the slaughter of one at the horn, whether for civil or criminal cause. In 1587 the King, with the advice of Parliament, consulted the lords of council and session ‘‘ anent slauchter of partiis at the horn;’’!6 and in 1612 it was enacted that the fact that the person slain was at the horn for civil cause should be no defence for the man who slew him. In the old days the relatives of the outlaw were forbidden to ‘‘ ressett, supple, or manteine or do favors to [him] under pane of deid and con- fiscatioun of ’’ their moveable property. The next entry in regard to the feud to which we have referred relates to an arrangement come to in 1513 by which Sir William Douglas and Crichton were not to be summoned 14 Pitcairn, Criminal Trials, i., 79; Transcript of MS., ‘‘ Curia Jtincris Justiciarie,’’ under date September 24th, vol. iii., pp. 298 ff. (H.M. Register House, Edinburgh). Robert Crichton’s widow was Gelis Greresoun. On 14th December, 1512, she made an unsuccess- ful application for terce out of certain lands (Act. Dom. Conc., xxiv., fol. 84). 1s Hume, Commentaries on the Law of Scotland regarding Crimes ; Edinburgh, 1844, i., 187 f. and note. 16 St., 1587, c. 26; Fol. Acts, i1., 448. Wf St., 1612, ec. 3; Fol. Acts, iv., 471. See also St., 1649, c. 96, and 1661, c. 217; Fol. Acts, vi., pt. ti., 173; vii, 203. By the last of these Acts it was provided that homicide committed ‘‘in the persute of denunced or declared Rebells for capital crimes or of such who assist and defend the rebells and masterfull depradators by armes and by force oppose the persute and apprehending of them which shall happen to fall out in tyme comeing, nor any of them, shall not be punished by death.’’ ecp., F. Pollock and P. W. Maitland, The History of the English Law before the time of Edward I., 2nd ed., Cambridge, 1898, 11., 449. 18 St., 1540, c. 96, and 1592, c. 65; Fol. Acts, ii., 372; 1i., 574. 208 SomE DocuMENtTS RELATING TO GLENCAIRN. to one another’s courts, and Craigdarroch was exempted from Crichton’s jurisdiction.19 On 27th February, 1515-16, James Douglas of Drum- langrig sought exemption for himself and his men, tenants and servants, from the jurisdiction of Robert, Lord Crichton of Sanquhar, Sheriff of Dumfries. He alleged that Lord ‘Crichton had purchased a commission to hold a ‘* court of -quera,’’ and had summoned him and his retainers to appear for their destruction, Lord Crichton being at mortal enmity with him and them, and therefore a “‘ suspect judge.’’ The lords of council continued the case to a later date, and mean- while granted exemption.2° A year later-—on 106th February, 1516-17—the case came again before the lords. Drumlanrig repeated his averments, and added that his father had been exempted from the jurisdiction of Lord Crichton’s father, _and that since their decease the old enmity had continued, mainly on account of the slaughter at Edinburgh hy Lord -Crichton’s people of his son, James Douglas. The lords granted exemption and ordained that Wauch of Shawis and John of Menzies of Castlehill should be deputes to minister justice to Drumlanrig and his men, and should hold courts in what place within the sheriffdom they thought convenient.” We may be permitted to venture on a short digression and ask—what was a court of “‘ quera?’’ By an enactment -of 1475,” it was provided that ‘‘ Becauss there has bene ane abusione of law vsit in tymes bigane be shireffis, stewartis, bailzeis and utheris officiaris in the haldin of courtis of guerra ‘to the grete hereschip and skathe of our souereine lordis liegis and of his awin hienes in his Justice Aris quhilkis ar spylt be the said guerra courtis, It is statut and ordanit that in tyme to cum thar be na courtis of guerra haldin be na maner -of persons under the pane of punicione as for a man slaer and a Refare of his gudis and vsurpare of the Kingis autorite.”’ 19 Acta Dom. Conc., xxv., 177, 195. Sir William died the day -atter Flodden. 20 Ib., xxvii., fol. 190. 4 Ib., fol. xxix., fol. 12. 22 St.. 1475, c. 11; Fol. Acts, ii., 112. Some DocuMENTS RELATING TO GLENCAIRN. POY Skene® admits that he knew nothing of the special juris- diction of these courts. He cites a passage from the Book of the Feus—* Si ministrales alicujus domini inter se guerram habuerint, comes sive judex, in cujus regimine ean fecerint, per leges et judicia ex ratione prosequatur ’’—and adds, ‘“ quhilk forme of courtes being particular justice courtes, was prejudicial to the jurisdiction of the justice and his. deputes, and grievous to the lieges of this realme ‘s Sir George Mackenzie,™ in his observations on the statute, says of those courts that they seem to have been courts of neighbour-feud and riots. ‘*‘ Guerra’’ means “ war ”’ or ‘* feud.’’248 and is sometimes spelled ‘‘ querra;’’?> and of this ‘“quera ’’ may be a mis-spelled form. On 2nd April, 1517, Drumlanrig complained that Lord Crichton had broken lawburrows by setting upon Drum- lanrig’s servants, debarring Craigdarroch and Fergus Fer- gusson of the Neiss from the parish church, and by the slaughter of one of Drumlanrig’s servants. Crichton was acquitted, save as to the last count, which was remitted to the next justice Ayre. On ioth July, 1518, Lord Crichton was summoned by Drumlanrig to hear and see him and Thomas Fergusson of Craigdarroch, his kinsmen, servants, and partakers exempted from his lordship’s jurisdiction on account of the mortal enmity occasioned by the slaughter of Thomas Fergusson’s father.% At a later date Ninian Crichton of Bellibocht, tutor26* of Robert, Lord Crichton of Sanquhar, and sheriff wardour of Dumfriesshire, seems to have taken up the quarrel. In 1524 2 De verb. significatione, s.v. Gverra. 24 Works, Edinburgh, 1714, i., 217. 24a In a question as to a right to teinds between the abbeys of Melrose and Kelso we read of ‘‘ dissensiones et querras inter dictos abbates’’ (Liber Sancte Marie de Melros, 11., 577). 25 See Ducange, s.v., ‘“Guerra,’”’ ‘‘ Querra.”’ 25a Act. Dom. Conc., xxix., fol. 187. % Act. Dom. Conc., xxxi., fol. 128. %a Tb., xxxiv., fol. 84. 210 Some DocuMENTS RELATING 70 GLENCAIRN. he and Drumlanrig, each for himself, his kin, friends, and servants bound themselves, having touched the Holy Gospels, to abide in all causes between them by the decision of certain arbiters.» But in 1532 the feud seems to have been re- kindled by the slaughter of Thomas Wilson, one of Drum- lanrig’s servants, committed by Ninian and his household. An arrangement was come to, and sanctioned by the lords of council, by which Edward Johnston, burgess of Dumfries, should act as Ninian’s depute in all matters regarding Drum- lanrig and his retainers. This, however, was disregarded by Ninian, who fined Thomas Fergusson of Craigdarroch, and summoned him and others to appear before him in the Sheriff Court of Dumfries. The lords of council decreed that John- ston should act as previously agreed. Shortly before the beginning of this feud—about 1508— Thomas had married a daughter of Lord Crichton.2" He was succeeded by his son Robert, who had married Janet Cunyng- hame, daughter of the Earl of Glencairn, about 1534,” and who was served heir to his father on 28th February, 1563-64.29 He appears to have married secondly Geillis Maxwell, who died on 8th August, 1584.% She is not mentioned in the Craigdarroch papers. He died on 16th July, 1587,°! and was succeeded by his son John.‘ John’s first wife, Agnes Kirk- patrick, is not noticed in the Craigdarroch papers. She died on 19th May, 1572, survived by four children, John, Robert, 26b Tb., xxxiv., fol. 89. 2c [b., xliii., fol. 91; Act. Dom. Conc. et Sess., ii., fol. 184. Ninian Crichton died between 1545 and 1547 (Reg. of Acts and Decreets, iii., fol. 444; Act. Dom. Conc. et Sess., xxiv., fol. 51). He was survived by a son David and a natural son George, of whom the latter succeeded his father and brother (Ib., xxv., fol. 166). 27 Records, ut supr. cit., p. 386. 28 Ibidem. 23 Ib., p. 378. 50 Her will is recorded 7th December, 1594 (Edinburgh Comm.). 51 His will is recorded 30th April, 1588 (Edinburgh Comm.). 52 Records, ut supr. cit., p. 878. An instrument of Reversion by Robert’s son, Edward, is dated 18th June, 1571 (Lag Charter Chest, No. 1384). SoME DocuMEN’s. RELATING TO GLENEAIRN. 2a Barbara, and Elizabeth.5 John is said to have married secondly, as we suppose, Margaret, daughter of Lord Carn- wath. Robert Fergusson was infeft as heir to his father on 5th September, 1612. For the subsequent history of the family reference may be made to the Records, so often cited. 25th January, 1918. Chairman—Provost S. Arnorr, V.P. Three valuable papers were read at this meeting—The Science of Fresh Water Lakes, by Mr W. H. Armistead; Some Plant Notes, by the Chairman; and Reminiscences of the Stewartry, by Mr C. Marriott, M.A. It is to be regretted that the Editors have not at their disposal sufficient space to do justice to these papers, which are held over to the next volume. 22nd February, 1918. Chairman—Mr A. ‘TuRNER, V.P. The Petrol Motor in Warfare. By Mr A. C. PENMAN. [This absorbing lecture on a topic of general public interest was illustrated with lantern slides. A verbatim report appeared in the Dumfries Standard of February 23rd and 27th and March 6th. | 33 Her will is recorded 29th September, 1579 (Hdinburgh Comm.). 34 Records, ut supr. cit., p. 336. 212 ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. Andrew Heron and his Kinsfolk. By B. M. H. Rocers, M.D., Lieut.-Colonel R.A.M.C. (T.F.). The Heron family had lived in the neighbourhood of Newton-Stewart for over 300 years before Andrew Heron was born at Kirrouchtree, the house where his ancestors had lived since they came to Scotland. Burke traces their ancestry to a Norman adventurer from Caen named ‘‘ Hairuns,’’ who came with William the Con- queror and settled down in Northumberland. Readers of Walter Scott will remember that James IV. of Scotland passed the night before the battle of Flodden at Ford Castle, the home of the English Herons. How the family came to Scotland is told as follows :— In the early part of the 14th century a certain Gerald Heron, sorely wounded in a border fight in the neighbourhood of Newton-Stewart, was carried to the home of the M‘Lurg, in view of a possible good ransom, and incidentally to be nursed back to health by the laird’s daughter. In due time this being accomplished, he very properly and romantically mar- ried his nurse and received the property of Kirrouchtree as his marriage portion from his father-in-law. Lewis,” in his Topo- graphical History of Scotland, states that it was a Miss M‘Kre who showed her skill as a nurse and brought the estate into the family ; the name of the lady is immaterial. It is from a long line of Herons that Andrew is descended. Of many of these there is little known beyond names, a few dates of succession to various properties, and the names of wives. Indeed, much confusion is caused by the frequent repetition of the same Christian name, and it becomes very dificult to distinguish between the many Andrews and Patricks, these two names being the ones that they most favoured. One peculiarity seems common to all, viz., a judi- cious selection of a wife who would add to the family acres, for Cumloden, Machremore,! Kirrouchtree, perhaps Bargally, as well as others which it is now impossible to identify, came through a wife to the Herons. So that by the time we reach Andrew Heron’s father, Patrick, large tracts of land and rich ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. 213 farms were their heritage, and for the time and locality they must have been wealthy. Andrew Heron was the third son of Andrew Heron of Kirrouchtree, in which house he was born about 1660. Whether his father found the estate too large, or to avoid the death duties of the time, cannot be stated, but he made a pre-mortem distribution of some of his property; to Andrew he gave Bargally and Dalaish Cairns,'4 while Kirrouchtree and his other properties were to go to his eldest son, Patrick, at his death. Andrew, however, did not live at Bargally, which, as will be shown later, was not then a very attractive residence, but continued even after his marriage to Mary Graham of Flori- ston to reside in his father’s house. No doubt his assistance in the rearing of cattle and driving them to the Border towns (for Patrick: was a very successful breeder)* was useful at home. But when M‘Kie of Larg died, he took a ‘‘ tack of the Mains ’’ or home farm at Larg and moved there, no doubt to carry on farming and possibly cattle breeding on his own account. Larg is shown on the Ordnance map as ‘“‘ Large Tower or Castle of Larg,’’ and there is still to be seen the remains of a ‘‘ Peel Tower ”’ ina field near what, I think, can be identified as the farm or ‘* Mains.”’ In this humble cottage, for it is little more (though no worse or better than many more about there), Andrew and his first wife lived and their five eldest children were born. It is from their third son that I trace my connection with the Heron family. For seven years they lived in this house, but ‘“ meeting with much disturbance from the heirs of entail as representatives of Larg’s estate anent the possession,’’* they decided to remove to their own property and went to Bargally on May 15th, 1691. Bargally (I use throughout the spelling of the Ordnance map) is situated on the east bank of the Palnure Burn, a tributary of the river Cree. On three sides, north, west, and east, the ground rises rapidly, particularly on the east, form- ing the bare hills of Cairnsmore of Fleet, the highest point of which is marked 2331 feet. The banks of the stream are 214 ANDREW HERON AND HIS KAINSFOLK. steep, and the waters rapid, and except where the house is built, within thirty yards of the highest part of the bank at Bargally, there is little available land for cultivation. From a botanist’s point of view or the agriculturist’s the place is a very favourable one, as it is well sheltered from the north and east and well open to the south. In a privately printed book on the Rogers family, my cousin, Julian Rogers, thus describes the character of Andrew Heron :_—_11‘* He was a born botanist and a man of refined and elegant tastes, but, unfortunately for his future happiness, he had all the weaknesses which generally accompany the eesthetic temperament. He was the creature of his impulses, unrestrained by consideration of prudence in the indulgence of his hobbies, and totally devoid of capacity for the manage- ment of his own affairs, though ready enough to advise otheis. Add to this a singular guilelessness of disposition and a mind easily dominated by a will stronger than his own, and what follows will not be difficult to understand.’’ It must be con- fessed that he showed little of the business acumen which characterised many of his ancestors or even near relations. He had expectations from his father, but even before his father’s death he began planting his garden and building his new house on a scale far beyond his means, with the not un- natural result that in the latter part of his life he was in sore straits for money and involved himself in difficulties which resulted in litigation after his death and the impoverishment of his branch of the family. Andrew Heron moved into Bargally, as we have seen, on May 15th, 1691, but the then existing house being small and inconvenient, he only remained there for the summer. Records‘ say he built the centre portion of the present house in 1695 (or 1694), the architect being a ‘‘ Mr Hawkins, an Englishman ;’’ but before even he had made a decent house for his wife and children he began his garden, for in 1693 he built the ‘‘ side of the close where the stables are,’’ and in 1695 the “‘ great orchard dyke ”’ or wall garden, as well as the entry gate. In the same year he began to stock his garden “with an excellent collection of fruit,’’? doubtless the first step of his horticultural enterprise. His father dying in this Beech tree at Bargally (1916). See p. 228. ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. 215 year, he inherited a farm about two miles further up the burn called Dalaish Cairns, and he also rented for thirteen years some land from the Barony of Bardrockwood,) ‘‘ which was very convenient, it adjoining his estate.’’ In 1696 he built the pigeon house.* All these still exist, as well as the sun- dial in the wall garden, on which is engraved the initials SA ae The reputation of Andrew Heron as a gardener rests on the statements made in three books on horticulture, viz., Loudon’s Arboretum et Fructicetum Brittanicum,! published in 1844; Robert Maxwell’s Practical Husbandry,® 1757; and Bradley’s Treatise on Husbandry,? 1726. Loudon states that Andrew planted all the lower part of the valley in which Bargally stands. ‘‘ The splendid quercus ilex and noble beeches which you saw in 1831 are but the miserable relics of the magnificent forest which once rose between Bargally house and the river Palnure.’’!® When he wrote the garden and orchard had been a grass field for forty years, ‘‘ but some variegated hollies, now large trees, still remain to mark the different divisions of the garden.’’ He ‘also quotes a local resident who purchased a trunk of silver fir, which, after being cut up, yielded boards 26 inches wide, as evidence of the size that the trees had grown to. Lady Heron-Maxwell, writing to Loudon, stated that Andrew after twenty-one years’ work had ‘‘ well stocked (the garden) with all kinds of fine trees and rare fruits, both stone and core; some portion stocked with fine flowers, and he had the green- house stocked with oranges and lemons, pomegranates, passion flowers, citron trees, oleanders, myrtles, and many others.’’ That Andrew Heron’s fame was far spread is shown by a tale given of a visit of his to London. He “‘ very much astonished the principal gardener, to whom he was a stranger, with the botanical knowledge he displayed. The gardener having shown him an exotic, which he felt confident the visitor had never seen, he exclaimed, on Mr Heron naming it:—‘ Then, sir, you must be either the devil or Andrew Heron of Bargally.’ ”’ Of the garden little more can be said, for no family record makes the smallest reference to it; it might as well have not 216 AxnpREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. existed for all it tells.18 But the cupidity of Andrew Heron’s nephew, who now reigned at Kirrouchtree, had been excited by the ‘‘ Paradise ’’ as it was called, and his uncle’s lack of business methods and extravagance in planting afforded Patrick an opportunity of getting hold of this Naboth’s vine- yard. i Patrick Heron of Kirrouchtree, Andrew’s brother, fell sick and died in February, 1695,° and Patrick II. reigned in his stead. Andrew’s extravagance on his house and garden had resulted in his getting into low water financially, and to relieve his pressing needs he in an evil moment applied to his nephew for a loan of money.” It would take too long to give an account of the numerous deeds and mortgages made by the astute Patrick II. to obtain good security, and perhaps to get hold of the estate of his uncle. It will suffice to say that each ‘ one was done ‘‘ without the intervention of any man of busi- ness ’’ to indicate that they may have been not all above board, but each successive one screwed down the wretched Andrew further, and made the ultimate possession of the estate more certain for Patrick. Andrew had quarrelled with his eldest son, as will be told later, and for certain reasons he left Bargally to his third son in return for a promise of a sum of money to be advanced to meet the importunities of the nephew. This son was a Captain Patrick Heron, and, in the event of his death, the estate of Bargally was to go to his second son, another Andrew, whom we will know as Dr Andrew Heron. Though Captain Patrick entered into an obligation to pay his father’s debt, he appears to have entirely ignored his promise, hardly a high principled action, however much he may have distrusted his cousin’s honesty. So matters stood till 1740, when poor Andrew died, no doubt worried to death by the troubles he had caused by his’ own folly. He was buried in the grounds, about twenty yards from the house, on the south-east side, in a stone tomb orna- mented with a small representation of a skull.!7_ The tomb is now surrounded by a shrubbery, and much overgrown with creepers. On this tomb is engraved his own initials and those of his second wife, Elizabeth Dunbar. 2 r “2 “ ate . + = ane . Before narrating the story of the great litigation over the ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. eA Bargally estate, a few words must be given about Andrew's wives and family. As told previously, he married as a yours man Mary Graham of Floriston. She died in 1706, and he ‘finding an inconvenience in keeping house in a state of widowhood (!) married in April, 1708, Elizabeth Dunbar, the relict of John M‘Kie, his cousin german.’"4 M*‘Kerlie says ' Margaret, relict of John M‘Kie of Larg.”2 In a certain legal document Andrew Heron speaks of ‘* Elizabeth Dun- bar, my spouse,’’ and *‘ E. ID.’’ are the initials on the tomb referred to above. M/‘Kerlie was wrong, for the lady was Elizabeth, daughter of John Dunbar of Machermore, and widow of John M‘Kie of Palgown. Her son by her first marriage was grandfather of James M‘Kie, who eventually purchased Bargally. By his first wife Andrew had seven children. The eldest, se Andrew, is described as ‘‘ inattentive and full of pleasure ”’ and very proficient in music.4 He quarrelled with his father over his marriage with Elizabeth, daughter of Sir William Maxwell, first Baronet of Monreith, and died in Ireland from an accidental overdose of opium given in jest in 1730, aged 46.4. The second son, William, died at Bargally in 1708, aged 24. He is described as a ‘‘ considerable merchant in London,’’ which is improbable at his age. Patrick, the third son, obtained an Ensigney in Lord Mark Kerr’s regiment at Portsmouth,® and there he met and married Ann Vining,’ a daughter of John Vining, a rich merchant of that town. After living at Lymington for some years, he went to Canada as a Captain.’ I have in my possession many papers relating to him; perhaps, in these times of war, the most interesting are those which tell of his defence against the French of a block- house at Canceau in Nova Scotia, his capitulation in 1744, and his release in the following year.6 His wife having died, he married a second time, but she, when returning to England a widow, was drowned in a shipwreck.4| The date of his departure to Canada is unknown, but it was probably about 1730, but before he left he had many sons and daughters, only two of whom need be mentioned as taking part in the history of the Bargally estate. His eldest son (born at Vicar’s Hill, Lymington, Hants, in 1713) was called after his grandfather, 218 ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. John Vining, and went into business with his cousin, John Vining Reade, in Portsmouth.’ Andrew Heron in the dis- position of his property passed over this grandchild, as he, John V. Heron, was amply provided for by his maternal grand- father, the rich old merchant of Portsmouth. The second son of the Captain was Dr Andrew Heron, “a physician of London.” It was to this grandson that the Bargally estate was to come should Captain P. Heron predecease his father. At the time of Andrew Heron’s death the situation was as follows :—His eldest son, with whom he had quarrelled, had died, leaving an only daughter. His second son was also dead: while the third was with his regiment in Canada. His wife also was dead. What had become of his other chil- dren does not now concern us in telling the story of the great litigation. All persons therefore who knew, or might have known, anything about Andrew Heron’s money difficulties and the loans from his nephew were either dead or far removed. This gave the astute Patrick II. of Kirrouchtree the opportunity he had so long looked and patiently waited for. Without more to do he took over to his own use Bar- eally and his uncle’s effects, and remained in undisputed pos- session for twelve years.’ No doubt after such a lengthy period of time he flattered himself that no trouble was likely to arise from his cousin’s sons, who lived in Portsmouth or London. But there appears to have been a lurking suspicion in the mind of John Vining Heron that things were not quite straight, and at the subsequent trial he stated that he recalled a letter of his father’s, Captain Patrick Heron, asking him to look after the estate when his grandfather died, *‘ for he would find it worth his while.’’ Why he waited twelve years to do that he did not explain, nor does it seem very probable that the Captain ever wrote in this strain, as he must have known that Andrew of Bargally had expressly left John Vining out of his will. As heir at law, John V. Heron had come into possession of certain papers after his father’s death about 1748, and thus discovered at least some of the transactions between his grandfather and his cousin at Kirrouchtree. This appears to have been enough for him, and he commenced an action against his cousin of Kirrouchtree to recover Bargally ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. 219 and the personal estate of his grandfather, which Patrick of Kirrouchtree had appropriated to his own use. The proceed- ings in the Court of Session took some years before a decision was arrived at, but in the end John Vining Heron succeeded in his action, his preferential title being declared and an account ordered to be taken of Mr Heron’s debt, setting off against it the receipts for rents and the sale of timber and otherwise. ‘Thus Bargally passed from the owners of Kirrouchtree back again to the descendants of Anarew Heron, but even this was not allowed to be the end of the troubles that seemed to beset the place. Though John Vining Heron had got the estate, it will be seen from what has gone before that, legally, he had as little right to it as his cousin Patrick, for Andrew had left it to the second son of the Captain. Dr Andrew Heron, the person to whom it legally belonged, appears to have been quite ignprant of all that was going on behind the scenes, and acakpted the fact that his brother was the lawful owner. But after some time certain rumours reached him, arousing a suspicion that material facts were being kept back, and so sure did he feel of his ground that he began an action against his brother. John pleaded that he was not in possession of any document to show that his brother had been nominated es heir, but ‘* from circumstances ’’ believed that his grand- father intended to settle the estate on his younger brother in return for the money that their father had promised to advance, but as this had never been done a certain “‘ tailzie’’ of 1715 stood good, which supported his claim to the estate. oe John, on being pressed as to what the ‘‘ circumstances ”’ were, refused to “* discover any suggestion to his prejudice,”’ rather a damaging admission. Dr Andrew, after a diligent search, discovered a disposition of 1728, which, the judges decided, established his right to Bargally, and a decision was given in his favour in 1764. His brother John, who had now joined forces with his cousin of Kirrouchtree to resist his brother's claim (perhaps in itself a transaction open to criti- cism), appealed, and got the decision reversed in 1766, only 220 ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. again for it to be given in Dr Andrew’s favour by the House of Lords in 1770. * Before the actions were over both Patrick I. and his son Patrick Il. of Kirrouchtree were dead, and the whole cost of the litigation as well as the repayments of the rents and revenues of Bargally fell on Patrick I1I., who now held sway at the ancient home. Dr Andrew Heron took up his residence at Bargally, ut after twelve years he tired of it and sold it to Mr William Hanney in 1783, and went to live in Edinburgh, where he died two years later. The new owner says Loudon was ‘ scarce of cash,’’ and cut down in 1791 the wood of Bargally, ‘including many of the fine trees that had been introduced and planted by Andrew Heron.’’ Thus ended the glories of Bargally and its renowned garden. Later on Hanney sold the place to James M‘Kie of Pol- gown, in the hands of whose descendants it still remains. It would be interesting if there existed even a letter, still more so a picture, of Andrew Heron. If there is such I. do not know of it; I have never seen his handwriting, and can form no fancy of his appearance. Of a person who was so well known in his time there is singularly little gossip, though there is one tale in Scott’s Guy Mannering in which the hero is indubitably Andrew Heron. In the “‘ additional notes ”’ to that novel the prototype of Meg Merrilies is said to have been Flora Marshall, one of the seventeen wives that Willie married. This Willie Marshall, more commonly known as the King of the Gipsies of the Western Lowlands, was in his youth little better than a highwayman, and in that capacity attacked ‘‘ the Laird of Bargally.’’ In the scuffle Willie lost his bonnet, and the Laird his purse. A respectable farmer coming along picked up the cap and put it on his head, but Bargally meeting him and recognising the cap had him arrested and charged with highway robbery. At the trial matters were going badly for the farmer, when Willie pressed forward and placed the cap on his head, and said :—‘‘ Look at me, sir, and tell me, by the oath you have sworn, am I not the man who robbed you between Carsphairn and Dalmellington ?”’ Bargally replied :—‘‘ By heaven! you are the very man,” ANDREW HERON AND HIS IKINSFOLK. AN | which seems so to have shaken the evidence that the farmer was acquitted. While Willie was thus laudibly engaged in getting an innocent man off, his wife stole the hood off the judge’s gown, for which little offence she was deported to New England, from whence she never returned. I cannot end this brief account of my ancestor without a reference to the labours and indefatigable industry of my cousin, the late Julian Rogers, without whose researches the writing of this paper could never have been accomplished. For the last twenty years of his life he had made it his hobby to investigate all matters connected with our family, and par- ticularly with the Herons. His discovery of the report of the lawsuit in the Library of Lincoln’s Inn enabled him to com- plete that part of our ancestry, supported by the family docu- ments, in the discovery of which I had had my modest share. NOTES. 1 Loudon’s Arboretum et Fructicetum Brittanicum. 1844. 2 M‘Kerlie’s Landowners of Galloway. 3 Lincoln’s Inn Library, Heron v. Heron. 4 MS. lent by the late Mrs Gee, daughter of Captain Basil Heron, R.E. 5 MS. lent by Dr M‘Kie of Newton-Stewart. 6 War Office records. 7 Numerous family Bibles. 8 Maxwell’s Practical Husbandman. 1757. 9 Bradley's Treatise on Husbandry and Gardening. 1726. 10 Seott’s Guy Mannering. Ul Julian Rogers, A History of Our Family. (Privately printed.) 12 Lewis’ Topographical History of Ncotland. 13 A part of Camlodane certainly belonged to the Herons, but there does not appear to be any evidence to show that Machermore also belonged to them. Prior to 1487, Thomas Heron, the first recorded member of the family, owned Camlodane-Maklurg as well as Kirrouchtrie (R.M.S., 1424/1513-1702). Machermore, which must not be confounded with a four merkland of that name near Glenluce, belonging to the M‘Kies, was owned by the family of M‘Dowall in 1490, and probably earlier. There is nothing to show that Machermore ever formed part of Kirrouchtrie, as suggested by M‘Kerle. 222 ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. 14 In 1682 the farms of Bargally and Dallaish Cairns, valued at £120, were owned by John Maxwell of Drumcoltran (see old Valuation Rolls). At what date they were sold by him is not clear, but they may have been bought from him by Patrick Heron on the occasion of Andrew’s first marriage, and given him as a marriage portion. Dallaish is quite distinct from Dallaish Cairns. In 1682 the former belonged to Patrick Murdoch of Comlodane, and does not ever appear to have been owned by the Herons. The two farms lie on different sides of the Palnure Burn. 15 The six merklands of Bardrockwood, Bardrockhead, or Bar- drocht (the earliest form), first figure in record as in possession of the Mure family. Alexander Mure of Bardrocht is referred to in 1471 (Acta. Dom. Aud., 19), and was in conflict with M‘Clellane of Bomby in 1476 concerning the lands of Bardroched (ibid., 50). Mure was dead by 1492, in May of which year his daughter and heiress, Elizabeth, sold to Bomby this property as well as Glenturk, Carslae, etc. (22.M.N., ii., 2138). Eight years later Glenturk, etc.., was sold by Bomby to Robert, son of John, Lord Carlisle, and was then described as in the Lordship of Bardrochwood (ibid., 2799). But when that Lordship was created is not known. For over 100. years Bardrochwood belonged to the M‘Clellanes of Bomby, though in 1511 William M‘Clellane obtained license to sell it (R.S.S., i., 2308). But in 1622 Sir Robert M‘Clellane, being in financial diff- culties, resigned it in favour of David Arnott of Chapell, under reversion of 3000 merks (R.MW.S., 1620/33, 639). Bomby’s difficul- ties soon got worse. In 1624 the lands of Bomby, Bardrockwood, and others were apprised for debt by John, heir ot Colonel Sir Robert Henryson of Tunygask (ibid., 660), and in 1635 Bardrock- wood was again apprised by David Ramsay ot Torbene (R.MW.S.. 1634/51, 301). By 1642 Henryson’s apprisement was got rid of, and Bardrockwood incorporated in the newly-erected Barony of Karkeudbright (ibid., 1049). The following year Thomas, Lord Korkeudbright, finally parted with it in favour of Colonel William Stewart, son of Alexander Stewart of Clarie (ibid., 1499). In 1698 it passed to Colonel Wiliam Maxwell on his marriage to Nicolas Stewart, great-granddaughter of the Colonel. 16 Loudon must be wrong. The house stands quite close to the Palnure Burn, and there is no room for a forest there. He must refer to lower down the valley. Some of the beeches referred to are still standing, and a photograph of one of the finest is repro- duced in the text. W” At the east end of the tomb on the slab that closes the en- trance is engraved the skull with the inscription: —‘‘ This tomb was erected a.p. 1729 by Andrew Heron of Bargaly, and repaired by John M‘Rie of Bargaly, 1829.’ At the west end is the brief inscription :—‘‘ We dy hopeing and our ashes receive life—1730.” 18 If the glories of the Bargally of Andrew Heron have passed ANDREW HERON AND HIS KINSFOLK. 225 away with the cutting of the timber which he planted, a new Bar- gally has at least taken its place. The house has in recent times been enlarged and a new approach made to it. The garden, one of the features of the property, speaks for itself, and is an object of great beauty and interest. Most of the woods in the vicinity are copse-wood, cut over at intervals of fifteen years or so, but fine trees are always left standing. Mr G. M. Stewart, in October, 1917, made the following measurements of trees at Bargally, giving the circumference three feet above the ground : — 2 Beeches—16 ft. 8 in. and 14 ft. 6 in. 2 Spanish Chestnuts—-12 ft. 10 in. and 12 ft. 9 in. 2 Horse Chestnuts—12 ft. 10 in. and 10 ft. 9 in. 2 Auraucarias Imbricata—7 ft. 7 in. and 7 ft. 1 Pinus Insignis—13 ft 2 in. 1 Wellingtonia—13 ft. 6 in. With the exception of the beeches, the above were probably all planted after Andrew Heron’s time. 22nd March, 1918. (Cinaiiconein— Mike WS AN. IBDN, Wolee Weather and Other Notes taken at Jardington during 1917. By J]. RuTHERFORD. JANUARY. The mild weather of the closing days of 1916 was con- tinued during the first three days of the New Year, the daily mean temperature being 51.7 deg. From the 3rd there was continued mild frost till the end of the month. The daily mean temperature was 33.92 deg., which was about 5.5 deg. lower than the mean of the preceding six years. It is note- worthy that the low temperature was not the result of any intensely cold period, but of a continued moderate cold. There was a slight fall of snow on four days. There were 16 days on which no rain fell, as compared with four in January, 1916. Total rainfall, 1.58 in.; that of January, 1916, being 5.09. The rainfall of this month was one of the three lowest records for January during the last 23 years. The wind was principally from an easterly direction, which is 224 \WEATHER AND OTHER NOTES. very unusual for this month, and was piercingly cold on a number of days. I EBRUARY. The mild frost experienced through January was con- The return of moister weather on the tinued till the 17th. 17th brought to an end an unusual protracted winter The usual rainfall from January 1rth till February drought. This year during that period it was 17th is about 4 inches. about one-twentieth that amount. From the 17th until the end mild genial weather continued. The wind was prin- cipally from a northward or easterly direction. On many days it was so calm that it was difficult to determine its direction. Snowdrop hanging its head on the 1st, being 20 days later than in 1916. Heard the cheery song of the Water Ousel on the gth, and that of the Song Thrush on the 26th, which was 24 days later than 1916. MARCH. Wintry weather prevailed during the month, with the exception of the first three days and two or three near the end, which were mild and more spring-like. During the middle portion of the month the fields were very grey and barren, without a trace of green. There were bitter cold east winds from the 4th till the roth. There was a slight fall of snow on five days, and frost on 26. Hazel came into bloom on the tst, 32 days later than in 1916; Coltsfoot on the 15th, 23 days later; Wood Anemone on the 30th, 7 days later. First heard the nesting note of the Peewit on the 16th, was about the same time as in 1916. The daily mean temperature was 38:01 deg., being the lowest March record during the last seven years. APRIL. April came in with a cold north-east wind, a wintry morning, with about three inches of snow on the ground. Cold, barren winds prevailed until the 16th. From this until the end the weather was milder, but of a mixed type of spring and winter days. There were no genial April showers, and WEATHER AND OTHER NOTES. Ds little vegetable growth. Snow fell on six days. On _ the early morning of the 11th there was a fall of twelve inches here, which was the heaviest fall of the year, and remarkably heavy for April. Sowing oats, which generally begins in March, was not commenced until well into the month. The severe weather of March and April caused a heavy death rate amongst ewes and lambs. Flowers came into bloom about 14 days later than in 1916—Lesser Celandine on the 18th; Dandelion, 19th; Lesser Periwinkle, 20th; Primrose and Sweet Violet, on the 21st; Flowering Currant, 28th; Dog Violet, on 29th. First Swallow seen on the 26th. Daily mean temperature, 41.56 deg., which is about five degrees below the mean of the last seven years. May. \ fine sunny morning, with abundance of May dew and birds in song, introduced the merry month. There was no rain from the 17th of April till the 11th of May; the land was very dry, and very little growth. From this date sufficient refreshing rain fell, when the fields immediately assumed their wonted beauty and vigorous growth. By the end of the month there was plenty of grass, and every prospect of a good crop of hay and oats. There was little frost. “Temperature was normal. Jargonelle Pear came into bloom on the ist; Black- thorn, the 6th; Cuckoo Flower, 12th; Blenheim Apple, 13th; Chestnut, 22nd; Garden Strawberry, 22nd; Speed- well, 25th; Hawthorn, 29th; Ox-eye, 31st. Saw the first Small White Butterfiv on the 2nd. First heard the Cuckoo on the 2nd. JUNE. This was a fine warm, sunny month, there being sun- Shine at G'a.m. on\-20 days. -On: the x1th ‘and’ r2th the temperature in the shade reached 80 deg. There was no frost, and all crops did well, except turnips on some soils, where a good deal of sowing over had to be done. On 226 WEATHER AND OTHER NOTES. other soils they came away rapidly, and were soon ready for the hoe. Daily mean temperature was about normal. Yellow-rattle came into bloom on the 5th; Purple Orchis, 7th; large Valerian, 8th; Dog Rose, 17th; Hairbell, 30th. First worker Wasp seen on the 30th ; very late. JuLy. There was an absolute drought from the 26th of June ‘until the 15th of this month, when just a trace of rain fell on three days, and the progress of all crops was considerably checked in consequence. On the 18th 1.29 in. of rain fell This was followed by a fine genial warmth, and sufficient mois- ture to maintain a vigorous growth. Ryegrass and early meadow hay were secured in fine condition. First dish of ripe strawberries was gathered on the rst. Corn ragging on the 5th. Knapweed came into bloom on the 17th. Meadow Brown Butterfly first seen on the rst. Daily mean temperature normal. AUGUST. No rain fell from the 30th of July until, the 8th of this month, and crops were beginning to suffer. From this date rain fell on most days until the end. This had a most bene- cial effect on crops and pastures, but made harvest work < tedious process. There was thunder, with heavy rains, on several days. Cutting oats began on the 2oth. Butterflies plentiful; Wasps very scarce. The lowest reading of the barometer during the year occurred on the 28th, when it reached 28.95 inches. This is an unusually low summer record. SEPTEMBER. After the 12th the weather was very broken, and harvest work made slow progress. There was also a difficulty in getting labour; and men supplied from the Army were in many cases very unsatisfactory, many of whom had never worked in a harvest field before. Swallows were gathering into flocks preparing for their migratory journey about the Sth. The last swallow seen was on the 1st of October. WEATHER AND OTHER NOTES. 227 Rainfall, 3.51 inches, as compared with 1.76 in. in 1916. Temperature normal. OCTOBER. Early winter weather came with this month. On the 6th Queensberry and other distant hills had a covering of snow. We had a light covering on the mornings of the 27th and 29th. During the whole month the weather was cold and wintry, unsettled and unseasonable, with heavy gales of wind and floods. On the 25th a number of trees in the neighbourhood were blown down, and roads _ blocked. On the evening of the 21st about half-an-hour after sunset there was rather a striking phenomenon: the whole of the sky had a greyish covering of cloud, which in a short time changed to a light purple. This abnormal colour, which continued for about five minutes, was reflected on the ground, when everything was tinted with red. Very stormy weather followed for several days. At the beginning of tlie month a considerable quantity of oats in the district was un- secured and a good deal remained in the fields at the end. Potato lifting was considerably hindered by bad weather. This crop turned out very satisfactory as to bulk, and almost free from disease. The rainfall of the month, 6.35 inches, was exceeded on only five occasions during the last twenty-five years. The daily mean temperature was 5 deg. below normal. Burns speaks of ** chill November’s surly blast ’? making ‘“ fields and forests bare,’’ but the frosts and blasts of this October, to a great extent, denuded the woods of their beautiful autumn foliage. NOVEMBER. With the exception of a rather high wind on several days and a cold stormy snap from the 24th till the 27th, the weather of this month was very mild, and had a number of very fine autumn days. ”? form as ‘‘ in bosco ’’ and ‘‘ in plano, descriptions, but with. much addition sometimes, as in Huctred’s charter which follows. One of Edward the Con- ae fessor’s to St. Peter of York has ‘* on wude and on felde, on mede and on watere.’’ Another of the same King to St. Peter also! has ‘‘ on wude and on felde be strande and be lande on ” straete and of straete and on eallan thingan ’’ where the jingic shows that the formula was meant as an easy expression {to include all classes. If therefore ‘‘on weald, on freyd and on heyninga ’’ is to have the same comprehensiveness, which seems to be intended, ‘‘freyd’’ being the ancient word for wood, and ‘‘ heyninga ’’ being connected with Old Norse ae hegna, to hedge, from which comes “‘ to hayn”’ and “‘ hayne.”’ an enclosure in MS. Lincoln A, i., 17 (Halliwell, Dictionary of Archaic and Provincial Words) and giving the suggestion ‘“ enclosures *’ for heyninga; there is left to correspond with ‘weald ’’ the Scandinavian voéllr, and this would include uplands, open mountain-sides and their wooded glens; an unusual meaning for Anglo-Saxon, but not very different from ” the later term ‘‘ forest ’’ in such districts as Martindale, for example. Next as to the possibility of distinguishing between the peculiarities of the lost original and the alterations which the thirteenth century scribe may have made. He would keep to the sense so far as he understood it, for the reason already given—the validity of the document. Of the two letters which did not come into use in Latin words in charters and were going out of use in English at that time, he has made mistakes in one, not throughout, however—p (w) : the other pb (th) had was the after fusion of different tongues which caused this in terms in ordinary usage. 12 Thorpe, Dipl., 368; 414. a ve ile So. "CIN ‘Weasen “A ‘160 Aq coud ‘NALUVHD S,NIALVdSOF) tay] Wag uo et OvAGne Aur fait Sey UAE Nin 3 2, id. EU Ba go aspal Spy AG i STS ge: 49 : a RHEE UNG ; ‘spe +A? sy L pgs © pig At 5 A GaeA; fe: “Poyycid es . Aq at RA! oy onl{g pen, a B ma — ee ee ep Bl yivloy wry — or yl} vryoulfes wp anghine yg ox hs Dom Syssa pets nd ge cop ry May ay Sane oy 22 fg aang godess bar ee 8 pe alee yon ks L nly gh dou Ne Bs beh et] 904 PARA WR Ds ae WU o TLE YG aa mf 4 yl = se yer ay gyre yy) | aon 28 yt an UDQWsA york vo unit > Bp py > vaguely & Gayrng agulos aq ong Upmaby wrgy > Lo PAAUedndy WO Qa iba pet ve fowaiie: ree lags Ory Watt aap vA ae Upuyyy wo sf od of peucg. meq wo woul rn | ar UO SH IDLY eg spogesy 4 Jo) 4 Lbs Pratl BAW J Avo RO wh aasjquant| And that it was after “‘ gegyfen ” _appears to me plain by the words ‘‘ to hem ”’ which follow. I have looked through very many pages of Anglo-Saxon to itry and discover instances of “‘ gifan ”’ oe oe ’ -or after “* gegyfen. being followed by The result of this search, which has included looking through many charters, has been to discover the, lollowing law :—Gifan, forgifan (grant), sellan (give), unnan (bequeath), and geunnan (concede) are followed by the dative of the persons to whom the gift 1s made—as is the case lower down in the charter “‘ gyfene Thore,’’ but when the grant is to a place for the sake of the people therein to or into follows, as it does in such an expression as ‘‘ into the hands of.’ Thus “ic forgyfe . . . to paere halgan stowe aet Scireburnan ’’ (Thorpe, 124), I grant to the holy place at Shireburn. When it is to a church or a monastery it is also into that follows, as ‘in Thorpe, pp. 191, 230, ‘‘ see biscop gesealde pa hida into paere cyricean ’’ (gave the hides [land] to the church). But ” to. 16 The alternative is that this 7 is parasitic, which Mr Plummer ssuggests, but I think less likely. STRATHCLYDE AND GALLOWAY CHARTERS. 245. when the saint to whom the church or monastery was dedi- cated is named as the receiver, the dative returns, as in Thorpe, 368, ‘‘ ic habbe gegyfen Criste & Sancte Petre into West- minster.’’? It does this also when the community of the reli- gious house is mentioned, as Thorpe, p. 477, ** agefe pam hywum,’’ and 579, ‘‘ ic geann p[et] land pam hirede et Cristes cyrcean ’’—the family or household. These examples are of different ages and from different parts of the country, and there are plenty more, and in one and the same charter may be found at times instances of the different constructions. ‘‘ To hem ”’ then cannot belong to gegyfen,’’ but must belong to the words which succeed them. And this use of “‘ to ’’ is but an expansion of the way in which it is used in ‘‘ to Shauk to Wafyr, to poll Wadoen & to bek Troyte,’’ which mark the limits of the district within which and towards which the freedom was granted—its boun- daries; while “‘ peo weald at Caldebek ’’ was within that region, and has the subtle distinction that therefore ‘* to ’’ is not affixed to it. Breaking the ‘“‘ grid to hem ”’’ (in regard to him) was breaking it in his direction—towards him, in regard to him, and is a kindred use of ‘* to.”’ The two words by which I supply the omission after ‘““ gegyfen ’’ are ‘‘ p[zt] he,’’ and take up no space which would disturb the line, i.e., they might very easily have been left out. ‘‘ Ne ghar brech,’’ as it is, could not have been written by one to whom Anglo-Saxon was his native tongue. The words evidently take the place of ‘‘ nahwar’’ or ““ nahwaer brece ”’ (subjunctive) : the ch can hardly be a mis- take for the indicative singular ending p in this case. And this seems to me to suggest that the writer of the original deed was one who was of Keltic or mixed race, and only knew Anglo-Saxon (in a dialect) as an acquired tongue. There is nothing extraordinary in this in such a district.!” ‘“ Gyrth,”’ spelt with th instead of d or p, is another anomaly. But grid, which it represents, was a Norse word, and it is noticeable that all the Norse and some Keltic words. SB ae ce 17 Though I quote from Thorpe only, I have consulted charters in Kemble’s Cod. Dipl., but the quotations from Thorpe seemed sufficient. All tell the same tale. 246 STRATHCLYDE AND GALLOWAY CHARTERS. in the charter which have that combination th in them are not spelt with either p ord, but have th separate letters—Thorfynn, for example, and Thore and Wyberth and Kunyth. Waldeof had become naturalised amongst the Anglo-Danes. This seems to show that the th had a different sound, probably harder and stronger, and the different spelling cannot have belonged to the thirteenth century copy, but to the original. ‘““Gyrth ’’ has also the transposition of the vowel and liquid which entered into several place-names in Westmorland, where we find Mebrun and Meburn, Clibron and Cliburn. ‘“ Seo gyrth dyyle ’’ has other anomalies; “ grid”’ in Anglo- Saxon is neuter and ‘‘ seo ’’ feminine; ‘‘ peo,’’ the usual form for ‘* pe ’’ in this charter, would have done, but the confusion of genders as well as of cases is quite explainable. ‘“*Gecydet ”’ is not the usual form, which is ‘‘ gecyded,’’ but it reminds one e.g., bobbit for and, moreover, it is used in the charter of William of ae of the Scottish termination ‘‘ it’’ for ed bobbed Normandy already quoted (Thorpe, 438). For Jadayyick® (different from ‘‘ pyylk ’’ in the end of the charter) I can enly suggest a fusion of pe (which) and ilca (the same, which same). JIk still remains in Scotland, and the Lindisfarne St. Matthew xxvii, 10, has “‘ pa ilco for ‘‘ those,’’ which would be an antecedent, it is true, but “* pe” and ‘f per” are used in Anglo-Saxon for antecedent and relative. ” ‘“ Cefrelyce ’’ is a difficulty which appears to show that the thirteenth century scribe nodded for a moment. The ‘“ ce ’’ can only replace ‘‘ swa,’’ and can only have been pos- sible after the practice was begun of sounding c soft before e.® This may have caused the slipping out of c at the end of ‘* Combresc,’’ and quite possibly the double c at the end of the adjectives (“‘ freondlycc,’’ etc., instead of ce) to keep the hard sound. We must not be too particular in all instances in pouncing on Gospatrik’s grammar. Here he means the adjective ““ freely ’’ to apply to the receiver of the grant, but he uses it as if it applied to the giver. ‘‘ Welkynn ”’ answers to the ‘* Anglo-Saxon ‘* wolcnum,’’ but this would be rightly dative 18 This had begun in the tenth century. See the New English Dict. under C. i STRATHCLYDE AND GALLOWAY CHARTERS. 247 plural (the clouds or skies), and shows perhaps in the e a remnant of an old vowel-change of the plural; and ‘‘ peo y must be the indeclinabie ‘‘ ‘“‘deoronder ’ prise. The next sentence is characteristically Anglo-Saxon, pe,’’ not a feminine demonstrative ; ’ for ‘‘dewrunder "’ again need excite no sur- except for the ** hwylc ’’ having the termination -un, which could only be used in a tongue imperfectly acquired. A parallel to the phrase is in a charter of Eadward the Confessor, Thorpe, 391, ‘‘ and loc hwile bisceop darofer byd pat hit beo him under peod '’ (and look each bishop that is over it that he have it remain subject to him). ‘““ Byn par ”’ isso extraordinary that something must have been omitted, and the easiest correction and the most natural is the insertion of the relative ‘‘ pe’’ (who, which), which also would occupy the space apparently left, easily, and allows “by,’’ t.e., byn, as in the preceding instances in the charter, to be a part of the verb to be all through: 1.e., ‘‘ byn ”’ for (Sf ” beon, and sets “‘ bydann ’’ right. “ JOUM dey ese cclsecciiecc.« 262 Balmakane, lands of .. 193, 194, 201, 205 SAN DOME aT S Ole tas fefercteie stat foleis clsiciels 107 Bardanoch, lands of 188, 189, 195, 201, 204 Barbour, John; Barbour, Sir John, HOLE eed canoer on Sp EAS eno dOsoonorhn 190 Sino ey LAG CH Bea pacppcecseceuen 193 Bardrockwood, barony of ...... 215, 222 Bargally, 213, 214, 215, 216, 217, 218, 219, 220, 222 AON COUNES IN. rcisete cle-ccee ia a\steleleiaterevotele 86 Banteneehoeen de... c.ecsecemctes esas 262 Babys SOM GOWN ce. ce ewes ene cies 268 Beauchamp, Roger de; Grecia, his wife 259 PRECLONC IU Ke OL ele ici aie ctor jeieie'e a: alsiele 20 IBGeCHEVE COMIRINIDCLS) (feni- (csi e sec eejeisie 169 Bell in Goukaburren, William ...... 205 Bellipocht., lands of 22. .....2..2- 86, 98 Benboye, lands of ...........+.0+e+- 198 BEUSOM eae Ws osc oe cuininae snaetGe aes 48° IBEIclay eA TCHIDHIG, -. scyadsteeiccinacecs 195 Bermton (Bermeton, Berrington), PONTE GE Watts c.:Seiisea crane haves 231, 232 Birds: Water Ousel, 224; Song Thrush, 224-228; Peewit, 224; Swallow, 225, 226; Cuckoo, 225; Platycercus Eximius; Turdus Merula .......... Blackaddie (Sanquhar), lands of .... Boet, Agnes; Thomas Boyd, Mr Christopher 195,. 197, 198, 199, 200, 202 BAIN Lenn Ste Ole tere aces taclcn stes slvle cet 190" Pee Cr enon eperatetstttstccecaic, claves, a°eveig amie oe 190 [oy tvehlaiye ROU Geos ae See EScOO EEE enee 128 Brochs, distribution of in Scotland, 167; structural features of, 168; ot Mousa, 168; in Shetland ........ 168 Broustare Nbomas: ercteccmccscsecicentee 189 Brown, Samuel, 97; Alexander, 97; of Ingliston, John, 106; of Ingliston, William, 106; Ronald, portioner of Leitfield, 116; in Apilgirth, Nicol, 204; in Cleuchheids, John, his son .. 204 Browne, Bishop, 51; Matthew .... 94, 96 ISTMMESO Ms Gamal: Giese crcisleveresisteferers rele 259 Brus, Edward de, 255; Robert de .... 254 BRC RICK eLOMGL «vat-ecorelersisieleioiste(oiale’jey0:0 109 Hudson, Mr W. H. . 14 and note, 24 and note, 26 275 Hunter of Ballagan, Duncan, 96, 110; Duncan, 191; Thomas .... 192, 199, 200 Huntingdon, David Earl of .......... 262 Huntlie, standing staines of Ireby, Cristina de Enyine; Jane; OF COME) cemcaseaecs «cre 118 Jarburgh, lands of, 189, 190, 193, 195, 201, 205, 206. Jardine, Margaret, Lady Kelwod, 95, HOSES Irena LH TTSSs eiviand inewrste aisle ereleres 205 Jaskerton, see Kirkmadrine. Johnstone, Mary, of Halldykes ...... 115 Johnston, J. D., 127; of Pettyname, Herbert, 200; Kentigern, 204; Lord of Lochwood, James, 204; Edward, burgess of Dumfries, 210; John, in INA Olinp sae sei cicee racine cieelie eee 267 Johnstoun, Edward, 93, 96, 97, 98, 99; William, 94; John, 96; William, 96; GIO i sree se cteveseccshrersioetere ioe’ ais ovavelannacche 96 Kear liol, miley (eh <2 .ch.cicie es cieieclein siee 254 Keir, Early History of the Parish of (Sir P. Hamilton-Grierson) ........ 1356 Kelso;nGeorcer: ROM dst sy. <1sc1 11,010 000.0 200 Kennedy, Egidia; of Culzean, Sir John 103 RO MITE DI eeiane otcass iiss tucveve isletereie sous 241, 246 Ban GACH ONIAS: GO) Sesiciewcivieoiieserele nee 259 EOL SAI TNE 8 eccpoxsreloteyaccsvessve sisi tlevsneseter ae 191 MAINE STATICS Ole Macsetelsictaryaists oyeretrsieseiete 269 King David I., 86; James IV., 212; Cnut, 237, 243; Duncan, 253; Eadgar ; MACDEGM! =) 105 UA, UGK Oi Ggouadegoccavoaocsocs> 95 Unwritten records, evidence of .... 162 Veteripont, Robert de, 261; John dC, sccsinceanasacweasteeeeere eee 261, 262 Mary, PNR MOM Soosccsossoosvoss< 217 Vitrified forts, 170; geographical dis- tribution Of -a 255 Whithorn, bishopric of .............. 142 Wigton, Adam de .............. 259, 260 279 WANT AINE te ciaiz:oisiclers clere tersterseiave ee Ae le are 241, 247 William, clerk of Lochmaben ........ 250 William, son of Reinbold ............ 250 Wilson, Andro, 92, 95, 102; Mr D. A., M.A., 187; Sir Daniel, 176; Miss J., 124; of Croglin, Thomas, 93, 97, 104; John, 104; in Marginane, George; 204); Thomas’ 2...-6-.0 <0 Wilsoun, William, 93; Gilbert, 94, 95; Thomas; John Woodhall Lane, Woyd, George see Crae Lane. WIDVCR bse ON) s:csceeele sentesieaacan 97, DWAVIDOLDIN, vay :s:accicteia statstecenis.eevneieereiste 241, HAVEING (a BadeBorcaoodaceosocanaanoncne Yorkshire Archeological Society .... Young, James, notary, 193, 199; UMTS; HOLMEN SGacedaooddooUsAGe 198, MOUNT MD AVIGu re \citsctetonterte ac cieeleet YANUOROy INET EAE Comcsnancoutncceey Printed by Thos. Hunter, Watson & Co., Ltd., Dumtries 109 241 202 8 01299 2533 , TTT