weeks. It had been employed in some preliminary skirmishes on the Minutes of the late Commissionthe object being for each party to try its strength and determine its future course. But now the promoters of the measure deemed it right to bring its general principle to a decisive issue. Shall there be an Union on any possible terms?—such was the question raised by a vote to be taken on the 4th of November upon the first Article, with the understanding (in their own words) "that if the other articles of the Union be not adjusted by the Parliament then the agreeing to and approving of the first shall be of no effect." There ensued a great debate well worthy the solemn occasion. Seton of Pitmedden, one of the Commission, spoke a well-reasoned essay in support of the measure. Against it the Duke of Hamilton delivered a spirited harangue. We may conclude that Argyle and Mar and many others would not be wanting. But beyond all doubt the palm of oratory was borne off by Lord Belhaven. That nobleman then fifty years of age7 was of Revolution principles, and had commanded a troop of horse for King William at the battle of Killiecrankie. Bluff and burly of aspect-looking like a butcher as his adversaries said-and with little or no experience of public speaking-he rose undauntedly to the height of this great argument. He was sustained by an inward and impelling sense of right, by the consciousness that he was pursuing no selfish object nor underhand intrigue, by the conviction, however unfounded, that his country was now on the brink of dishonor and of ruin. Mr. Burton (Hist. of Scotland, | very accurate Peerage of Scotland vol. i. p. 450) describes him at the gives the exact date of his birth as time of his speech as "the young July 8, 1656. Lord Belhaven." But Douglas's His speech against the whole scheme of Union, carefully elaborated, was among the most striking and successful that the record of Parliament displays. It is worthy of note that this speech while intended to produce, and in fact producing, a strong popular effect, abounds with refined and classical allusions which do not seem well adapted to the lower classes. Its gloomy prophecies however are within the reach of all. With these the orator sets out. He has thirteen paragraphs, each worked out with artistic skill, to show how the divers ranks and classes in Scotland would suffer from an Union if it passed; and each commencing "I think I see." Of these paragraphs here follow (with one exception) the four last. "I think I see the honest industrious tradesman loaded with new taxes and impositions, disappointed of the equivalents, drinking water in the place of ale, eating his saltless pottage, petitioning for encouragement to his manufactories and answered by counterpetitions. I think I see the laborious ploughman with his corn spoiling upon his hands for want of sale, cursing the day of his birth, dreading the expense of his burial, and uncertain whether to marry or do worse. -I think I see the incurable difficulties of the landed men, fettered under the golden chain of equivalents, their pretty daughters petitioning for want of husbands, and their sons for want of employments.-But above all, my Lord, I think I see our ancient mother Caledonia, like Cæsar sitting in the midst of our Senate, ruefully looking round about her, covering herself with her Royal garment, attending the fatal blow, and breathing out her last with a ET TU QUOQUE MI FILI! In another part of his speech Lord Belhaven exclaims: "We may bruise this Hydra of division, and crush this cockatrice's egg. Our neighbours in England are not yet fitted for any such thing. They are not under the afflicting hand of Providence as we are. Their circumstances are great and glorious; their Treaties are prudently managed both abroad and at home; their Generals brave and valorous, their armies successful and victorious, their trophies and laurels memorable and surprising . . and above all, these vast riches, the sinews of war, and without which all the glorious success had proved abortive. It is quite otherwise with us, my Lord. We are an obscure poor people, though formerly of better account; removed to a remote corner of the world, without name and without alliances, our posts mean and precarious. . . . What hinders us then, my Lord, to lay aside our divisions, to unite cordially and heartily together in our present circumstances, when our all is at stake? Hannibal, my Lord, is at our gates; Hannibal is come within our gates; Hannibal is come the length of this Table; he is at the foot of this Throne; he will demolish this Throne if we take no notice; he will seize upon these Regalia; he will take them as our SPOLIA OPIMA; and whip us out of this House never to return again. For the love of God then, my Lord; for the safety and welfare of our ancient kingdom, whose sad circumstances I hope we shall convert into prosperity and happiness!" To this noble piece of declamation there was no counter-argument at the time attempted. Only after a pause the veteran Marchmont rose up, and said amidst laughter and cheering: "My Lord, I have heard a long speech and a very terrible one, but I think a short answer will suffice and it may be given in these words: Behold he dreamed ; but lo! when he awoke, he found it was a dream.'" The division that ensued, like most other divisions in our Parliamentary annals, seemed to be scarcely at all affected by the preceding eloquence. There were 116 votes in favor of the Article and 83 against it. Hence we see that the Flying Squadron, of which the force is given by one of its chiefs as 24,8 held at the outset the fate of the measure in its hands. But although the speech of Lord Belhaven might not convince nor eyen charm his audience it was far otherwise with his readers. The speech was immediately printed and reprinted in thousands of copies. It flew from mouth to mouth and from hand to hand. Scarce any broad-sheet that did not reproduce some passages. Chiming in as it did with many noble sentiments and also with some narrow prejudices, it made a lasting impression upon the Scottish people; and is to be ranked as one main cause of the unpopularity into which shortly afterwards the Act of Union fell. Up to this time the opponents of the Union had prevailed upon one point only, which the Ministerial party did not care to risk the displeasure of the Kirk by gainsaying. This was the appointment of a solemn fast in expiation of the sins of the land. The day of fasting and humiliation was held accordingly on Thursday the 7th of November; and among the sermons then delivered were some which upbraided the chosen people for lukewarmness. This was especially the case at Glasgow the stronghold of the Cameronians. One zealous preacher closed his discourse with the words, "Wherefore up and be valiant for the city of our God.” The drum was beat in the back-streets that very afternoon. Next day it grew to a riot, when the mob assailed and broke open the Provost's house, while the 8 Earl of Marchmont to Lord Somers, Nov. 9, 1706. Provost himself, as we are told, with infinite prudence "retired for a while out of town, not knowing what the issue of these things might be."9 The rioters were however satisfied with compelling signatures to an Address against the Union. On the morrow they quietly dispersed, and the Provost who had fled to Edinburgh came home again. Timidity in high places produced the usual fruits. Within a few days there was a renewal of the riot, this time fiercer than the last. The Provost on this occasion hid himself in a bed, which seems to have been by far the fittest place for him; and then he fled to Edinburgh for the second time. For some time the rabble were masters of the streets. They challenged every man they met with the question: "Are you for the Union ?" and no man durst avow it but at great peril. Nevertheless the outrages committed were extremely few, and not a drop of blood was shed. . In a few other places also there were some attempts at disturbance, but far slighter than at Glasgow, and by no means such as to imply as yet any general aversion to the pending measure. Even in the accounts of Glasgow there is reason to suspect some exaggeration. Both parties had a motive for it: the Tories to enhance the popularity of their opposition; the Whigs to excuse the pusillanimity of their magistrates. In the meantime the Commission of the General Assembly of the Church, which was sitting at Edinburgh, sent in petitions to the Parliament, praying that there De Foe's History of the Union, | ceedingly beloved." He might have part iii. p. 61. The author goes on completed the character by a line to praise this Provost, Mr. Aird, from Dryden: most highly as "an honest, sober, discreet gentleman, who was ex "And ever, save in time of need, at hand." |